The Missing Piece in Higher Ed’s Crisis Response: Facilities Management
Higher education in Canada is facing a financial crisis. Institutions are scrambling to close budget gaps, adjust to new international student realities, and find efficiencies wherever possible. The Academica Group’s recent national survey captured these sector-wide challenges in stark detail.
Yet, there’s one glaring omission from the conversation: Facilities Management (FM). Out of nearly 700 decision-makers surveyed, only three were from FM. That’s 0.4% representation for the department responsible for managing the most significant physical and financial asset base on any campus. In contrast, senior administrators, student services, and academic leadership dominated the responses. The built environment—the spaces where learning, research, and student life happen—was an afterthought.
Yet, there’s one glaring omission from the conversation: Facilities Management (FM). Out of nearly 700 decision-makers surveyed, only three were from FM. That’s 0.4% representation for the department responsible for managing the most significant physical and financial asset base on any campus. In contrast, senior administrators, student services, and academic leadership dominated the responses. The built environment—the spaces where learning, research, and student life happen—was an afterthought.
Ignoring Facilities Is a Strategic Mistake
If institutions are serious about tackling financial pressures, student housing challenges, and long-term sustainability, they cannot afford to sideline FM. Facilities leaders bring a unique perspective that higher ed leadership must integrate into decision-making:
- Strengths: FM can drive cost savings through space utilization strategies, energy efficiency projects, and preventative maintenance—far more effective than emergency budget cuts.
- Weaknesses: Deferred maintenance is a ticking time bomb. Every dollar “saved” by cutting FM budgets today becomes a far more significant expense tomorrow when assets fail.
- Opportunities: A strategic approach to campus footprint management, hybrid learning spaces, and sustainable infrastructure investments can create long-term financial resilience.
- Threats: Space mismanagement, failing infrastructure, and hasty campus closures risk harming student experience, recruitment, and reputation—at a time when institutions can least afford it .
Crisis Management Without FM? A Flawed Approach.
The report highlights that institutions are closing buildings, cutting maintenance, and pausing capital projects to save money. But without FM at the table, these are reactive, short-term decisions that could create long-term damage:
|
|
Facilities Budgets Are Not Small—Why Aren’t FM Leaders at the Table?
Facilities operating costs typically account for 10% to 20% of total institutional spending, making them one of the most significant budgetary line items. Yet, FM leaders were nearly absent from this national discussion. Institutions are making financial decisions without input from those who manage the most significant physical assets, which is a fundamental oversight.
- Well-maintained facilities enhance student satisfaction, academic performance, and institutional reputation.
- Strategic FM practices can improve financial health by reducing operational costs and increasing efficiency.
- Deferred maintenance backlogs increase long-term costs and create future financial instability.
Facilities Leaders Must Be Heard
Higher education needs to shift from treating FM as an operational afterthought to recognizing it as a strategic enabler.
|
To sector leaders: Are you engaging your FM team in crisis response planning? If not, you’re likely missing crucial insights that could make or break your financial strategy. To my FM colleagues: We must advocate for our seat at the table. Our expertise is not just about keeping the lights on—it’s about ensuring institutions make the right long-term decisions. |