Author(s): David Seaward, Max Liboiron

Institution: New York University

Admin Dept(s): Sustainability Office

Keyword(s): Assessment, Coordination and Planning, Investment, Public Engagement

Publication Date: June, 2011

Paper Type: Non-thesis Undergraduate Student Research

This document compares New York University’s Green Grants program with twelve similar campus sustainability granting programs within the United States. It has been prepared as part of an internal review of NYU’s Green Grants program and thus reflects NYU’s particular values, but is also designed to be useful for established, new and under-developed similar programs. Programs vary widely in terms of their intent, selection process, budgets, and campus populations. Despite these differences, NYU’s Green Grants program is clearly one of the most established, robust and accessible programs in the nation.

On the whole, student-initiated programs tend to be more restrictive than programs instituted by administrations in terms of which campus members are eligible for funding. Programs that fund all campus members typically fund about three times the quantity of projects per year than programs that fund only students. Larger program budgets tend to award a similar number of, but more expensive, projects than programs with smaller budgets. There is a wide range of expertise among programs’ selection committees, ranging from eleven to a hundred percent, but there is no correlation between expertise on the adjudication committee and selectivity in terms of project funding rate.

Programs that provide the most assistance, extensions and require frequent reporting are associated with lower rates of completion, but other data suggests that their projects may be larger, more complex and considered complete only when a diverse set of requirements are fulfilled, like quantifiable measurements and extensive final reports. There is strong evidence that smaller grants have a higher rate of completion, proportional to grant size. All programs award funding to students, but the inclusion or exclusion of faculty and staff does not appear to influence completion rates.

Download the full text of this paper

Contact Person:
Please log in to view contact information.