Historic Preservation: Cost to Restore Historic Properties at Historically Black Colleges and Universities
Released: 1998-02-27T00:00:00

Letter

Background

The Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, defined an HBCU as a school that, among other things, was established before 1964 and is accredited or pre-accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association. The official list of schools that qualify as HBCUs is published in 34 C.F.R. 608.2(b). A map depicting the locations of the 103 HBCUs and a list of schools by state is in appendix II.

HBCUs may have historic properties and may have them listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 authorized the National Register of Historic Places, the official list of the nation’s districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. The National Register, administered by NPS, is part of a program to identify, evaluate, and protect the nation’s cultural resources.

Properties may be nominated for inclusion on the National Register by states and federal agencies. State nominations, which may be prepared by local citizens, are submitted to a state review board, which makes an approval/disapproval recommendation to the state historic preservation officer (SHPO). If the SHPO approves the nomination, it is forwarded to NPS to be considered for listing. If the nomination is approved by NPS, the property is officially entered on the National Register.

In addition to their role in the nomination process, the SHPOs are responsible for surveying and evaluating properties within their states that they believe are eligible for the National Register. The National Register’s criteria for evaluating properties include a determination that the property is significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture and that it possesses integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. In addition, at least one of the following must be present for the property to be considered historic: (1) have an association with historic events or activities; (2) have an association with the lives of people significant in the nation’s past; (3) have distinct characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; be the work of a master; have high artistic values; or be a significant, distinguishable entity; or (4) have yielded, or may likely yield, information important about prehistory or history. In addition, the property generally has to be 50 years of age or more.

The National Historic Preservation Act also established a program to provide matching grants to the states and other entities for the preservation and protection of properties on the National Register. Since the act went into effect in 1966, NPS has provided $4.3 million in grants appropriated by the Congress to HBCUs for restoring historic properties. In addition, the Congress authorized $29 million under the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to fund the restoration of historic properties at selected HBCUs. As of December 1, 1997, $4 million has been appropriated for this purpose. Historic properties that are either on the National Register or have been determined eligible for listing on the National Register as a result of SHPO surveys are eligible for federal grant assistance under the National Historic Preservation Act or the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996.

Over 700 Historic Properties Are Located at HBCUs

Most of the 712 historic properties are at a small number of HBCUs and are mostly buildings rather than structures, sites, or objects. About half of the historic properties identified are already on the National Register of Historic Places. The other half are either eligible for the National Register on the basis of SHPO surveys or considered historic by the HBCUs.

Most of the Historic Properties Are at a Small Number of HBCUs

About 66 percent of the 712 properties identified in our survey were located at 28 schools, each having 10 or more properties. Seventeen schools had no historic properties. These were mostly schools that were created or relocated to other campuses less than 50 years ago and thus were schools that did not have properties eligible to be considered as historic. Table 1 groups the schools according to how many historic properties they reported and shows the number and percentage of the total properties each group had.

Buildings Are the Most Common Type of Property

Historic properties are classified as buildings, structures, sites, or objects. A building may be, for example, a dormitory, gymnasium, house, chapel, or other construction created principally to shelter any form of human activity. A structure is distinguished from a building in that it is used for purposes other than human shelter, for example, a tower, smokestack, or gazebo. A site refers to a location of a significant event or historic occupation or activity where the location itself possesses the historic, cultural, or archeological value. Examples of sites include courtyards, gardens, and cemeteries. Objects are primarily artistic in nature or are relatively small in scale and simply constructed, such as a sculpture, bell, monument, or statue. The photos in figure 1 show examples of these types of properties.

On the basis of our survey, 94.4 percent of the historic properties at the HBCUs were buildings. The remaining 5.6 percent were structures, sites, or objects. Figure 2 shows the type of properties and percentage of each type.

About Half of the Historic Properties Are on the National Register

Of the 712 properties respondents identified, 323, or 45.4 percent, were listed on the National Register. These properties have been evaluated and approved for listing by NPS in accordance with the established National Register criteria. Of the remaining properties, 206, or 28.9 percent, were identified through surveys and evaluations completed by the SHPOs but had not yet been nominated to the National Register. The remaining 183 properties, or 25.7 percent, were identified by the schools as historic but were not on the National Register and had not been surveyed or assessed by the SHPOs. In the schools’ opinion, these properties would be eligible for the National Register if they were surveyed and assessed by a SHPO and nominated to the National Register. Figure 3 shows the percentage and number of properties listed on the National Register, surveyed and assessed by the SHPOs, or identified by the schools as historic but not included in either of the other two categories.

Identified by schools, not on the National Register and not surveyed by SHPOs (183)

HBCUs Estimate That About Three-Quarters of a Billion Dollars Is Needed to Restore Historic Properties

The schools estimated that the restoration of the 712 historic properties would cost about $755 million. Most of the estimated restoration cost comes from fewer than half of the schools, and about half of the cost is for properties listed on the National Register. Schools have funds set aside to cover less than a tenth of the estimated restoration costs.

Most of the Cost to Restore Properties at HBCUs Is Concentrated at Less Than Half of the Schools

In their estimates of the cost to restore the 712 historic properties—which totaled $755 million—the schools provided a wide range of figures for individual properties. The wide range can be attributed to (1) whether a property was recently restored and the condition of those not restored and (2) the size of the area needing restoration. Over 90 percent of the total cost ($681.2 million) was associated with 44 of the schools. The cost to restore all the properties at each of these schools ranged from $5 million to over $20 million. Table 2 shows the number and percentage of schools that fall within various cost ranges and the total costs and percentage of total costs within those ranges.

As shown in table 2, 18 of the 103 schools did not have any restoration costs associated with the historic properties. Of these, 17 had no properties, and therefore, no cost. One school had two properties and, as both of them had been recently renovated, no additional funds for restoration were needed, according to the school. Some of the 85 schools with properties having restoration costs also had one or more properties that the schools estimated had no restoration costs. The reasons given by these schools for not identifying any costs included that (1) the property had been recently restored and no additional funds were needed and (2) the property did not need any restoration. For the most part, properties that did not need any restoration were buildings.

Most Restoration Costs Are for Properties Either Listed on or Eligible for the National Register of Historic Places

Of the estimated $755 million needed to restore the 712 properties, $356.7 million was for properties listed on the National Register; $239.1 million was for properties eligible for the National Register on the basis of SHPO surveys and assessments; and $159.2 million was for properties identified by the schools as historic but not included in either of the previous two categories. It should be noted that properties that are not listed on the National Register and that have not been surveyed by the SHPO and assessed to be eligible for listing on the National Register currently are not eligible for federal grant assistance under existing legislation. Therefore, $595.8 million of the $755 million is currently eligible for federal grant assistance. Figure 4 shows the restoration costs of properties by category.

Identified by schools, not on the National Register and not surveyed by SHPOs ($159.2)

Some Funds Have Been Set Aside for Restoration

Of the estimated $755 million needed to restore the properties, 36 schools reported that $60.4 million, about 8 percent, had already been set aside to pay the restoration costs for specific properties. As shown in figure 5, of the total set aside, $22.3 million, or 36.9 percent, was from federal sources; $23.8 million, or 39.3 percent, was from state funding sources; and $11.1 million, or 18.4 percent, was from private funding sources. The remaining $3.2 million, or 5.3 percent, was from sources such as a university fund.

The $60.4 million set aside was for the restoration of 58 properties at 36 schools. For 32 of these properties, the amount of the set-aside was the full amount needed to cover the total estimated restoration costs. For the remaining 26 properties, the set-aside covered a portion of the total restoration costs.

Cost-Per-Square-Foot Was the Most Common Method Used to Calculate Restoration Costs

The schools used different, but common, methods to calculate restoration costs. These methods were an original feasibility report, an updated feasibility report, a contractor’s quotation or proposal, a cost-estimating guidebook, a cost-per-square-foot calculation, and a Consumer Price Index inflator. If the schools used other methods, we asked them to explain what they were. An original or updated feasibility report is typically prepared by an architectural or engineering firm and generally describes what is feasible to restore and how much the work would cost. A contractor’s quotation or proposal is an estimate prepared by a contractor to restore a property for the stated price or bid. A cost-estimating guidebook is a reference guide prepared by the architectural engineering industry that gives probable restoration costs by the type of work to be done, such as roof repair, and the materials used. The cost-per-square-foot method uses the industry’s average restoration cost for a locality multiplied by the number of square feet that need to be restored. A Consumer Price Index inflator is a percentage increase each year based on the inflation rate; this method is used to adjust estimates that have already been prepared.

Generally, the most comprehensive methods of estimating restoration costs would be an original or updated feasibility report, followed by a contractor’s quotation or proposal. The cost-estimating guidebook, cost-per-square-foot, and Consumer Price Index inflator methods are generally less accurate because they represent guidance, or averages, rather than estimates on specific properties. Even though an original or updated feasibility report is most likely to be more accurate, some of the schools we visited stated that the cost of paying architect or engineering firms or contractors to provide such estimates was prohibitive and that the estimates could not be completed in the time necessary to respond to our survey. As a result, some schools used other methods, such as the cost-per-square-foot method, to avoid incurring excessive costs and still meet our survey deadline. It should be pointed out that estimating the amount of restoration and preservation needed can be a very complex undertaking. As a result, estimates, even those done by professionals under the best of circumstances, cannot be exact. Many restoration problems, particularly those involving major repairs or renovations, are not visible to the naked eye and may not be uncovered until the restoration actually takes place. In addition, cost estimates to restore and preserve properties are just that, estimates, and are subject to revisions until the work is completed.

We asked the schools to identify whether one or a combination of methods was used in calculating their estimates. Of the 673 properties that had restoration costs (39 properties had none), 474 had estimates made using a single method, such as the cost-per-square-foot method. For 199 properties, a combination of methods was used. As shown in figure 6, the cost-per-square-foot method was the predominant single method used. (24) (43) (55) (23) (304) (0) (25)

Methods and number of times used When more than one method was used, many different combinations occurred. These included, for example, using (1) an original feasibility study estimate with a Consumer Price Index inflator; (2) a cost-estimating guidebook with a Consumer Price Index inflator; and (3) a contractor’s quotation with a cost-estimating guidebook and cost-per-square-foot calculations.

School Officials Prepared Most of the Restoration Cost Estimates

We asked the schools to identify whether the preparers of their cost estimates were (1) outside architect/engineering firms, (2) in-house architects/engineers, (3) contractors, (4) school building/maintenance supervisors, or (5) other types of individuals or firms. Typically outside architect/engineering firms prepare original and updated feasibility reports, contractors prepare quotations or proposals, and in-house architects/engineers or building/maintenance supervisors prepare estimates using the guidebooks and cost-per-square-foot method. All of these types of preparers can and will use the Consumer Price Index inflator to adjust previous cost estimates.

As shown in figure 7, the estimates of the restoration costs were primarily prepared by in-house architects/engineers, followed by outside architect/engineering firms and in-house building/maintenance supervisors.

Observations

The information in this report represents the most comprehensive data collected to date on the number of historic properties at HBCUs and the estimated costs to restore those properties. However, the cost estimates presented in this report are based on self-reported data and are subject to limitations. Furthermore, as previously pointed out, estimating the amount of restoration and preservation needed can be a very complex undertaking. As a result, estimates, even those done by professionals under the best of circumstances, cannot be exact. However, these data are a useful starting point for determining the total restoration requirements at HBCUs.

Agency Comments

We provided copies of a draft of this report to the Department of the Interior for its review and comment. The Department commented that highly significant properties on the campuses of historically black colleges and universities are important national historic treasures worthy of care and attention. The Department, however, noted that the magnitude of the repair cost estimates reported by the schools is substantial in terms of the limited level of appropriations available from the Historic Preservation Fund for matching grants to state historic preservation officers and Indian tribes, and the grants available to historically black colleges and universities pursuant to section 507 of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996. The Department also pointed out that funding for increased appropriations for grants to historically black colleges and universities would be subject to authorization and the budgetary controls imposed under the Omnibus Budget Enforcement Act of 1990, as amended. We agree with the Department that there are budgetary limitations that must be addressed when considering the restoration of historic properties at the schools.

The Department concurred with our discussion of the methodologies used by the schools in estimating the cost to restore historic properties. It noted that the restoration cost estimates may include some work that would not conform to the Secretary’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties—such as sandblasting brick, which would cause the degeneration of the historic materials and appearance. Thus, not all work included in the estimates may be eligible for federal assistance. The Department agreed that the cost of preservation work on historic properties can escalate beyond initial estimates because the need for some major repairs may not be uncovered until the restoration actually begins. Interior’s comments and our responses are in appendix IV.

Scope and Methodology

Our study included all HBCUs defined under the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, and listed in 34 C.F.R. 608.2(b). As of June 1, 1997, there were 103 such schools. To gather background data and to develop and pretest a standardized data collection instrument (survey) for our study, we visited 12 HBCUs in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia.

To determine the number of historic properties on the campuses of the 103 HBCUs, we used three sources. First, we obtained a list of historic properties on the National Register of Historic Places from NPS, including properties (buildings, structures, sites, and objects) within historic districts on the National Register and properties that contribute to the historic significance of the districts.

Second, in conjunction with NPS, we contacted each of the 22 SHPOs in whose jurisdictions the 103 HBCUs were located. NPS sent a letter to each of the 22 SHPOs explaining the nature of our study and provided them with lists of the HBCUs in their states as well as the historic properties in the National Register database. NPS also provided us with each SHPO contact. We asked each of the SHPOs to verify the National Register list as of June 1, 1997, or to submit corrected information. NPS used the SHPOs’ information to update the National Register as warranted. We also asked each SHPO to provide a list of properties at each HBCU that would be eligible for the National Register as a result of the surveys and evaluations that the SHPO conducted at the HBCUs prior to June 1, 1997, but that had not been nominated.

Third, we sent each of the 103 HBCUs a survey that included (1) a list of its properties that the SHPO had verified were on the National Register and (2) a list of its properties that the SHPO had told us were eligible for the National Register on the basis of its surveys and evaluations. We asked each HBCU to verify the existence of these properties, to delete properties that no longer existed or that the school never or no longer owned, and to add properties that the school believed met the criteria to be eligible for the National Register. Because the data from the SHPOs were as of June 1, 1997, we asked the schools to provide their data as of June 1, 1997. A copy of the survey sent to each of the 103 HBCUs is in appendix III.

To determine the estimated restoration costs for the historic properties, we asked each HBCU to provide a cost estimate to restore each property identified. We requested that the estimate include only capital improvement costs and not normal day-to-day operating and maintenance costs. We also requested that the capital improvement costs include only costs after June 1, 1997. In other words, if an HBCU was restoring a property, expenditures prior to June 1, 1997, were not to be included in the estimate. Each HBCU decided on the extent of restoration needed in making its estimates.

We did not independently verify the accuracy of the cost estimates the HBCUs submitted. We did, however, ask the schools to provide information on the methods they used to estimate the costs, such as whether the estimates were based on feasibility studies, contractors’ bids, or cost-per-square-foot calculations. We also asked the schools to provide the names and credentials of the preparers of the cost estimates, such as whether the preparers were professional architect/engineering firms, contractors, or school building/maintenance supervisors. We conducted our study from April 1997 through January 1998 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Some of the historic property data and all of the estimated cost data for the restoration and preservation of the historic properties presented in this report are based on self-reported data from the HBCUs. The accuracy of the results contained in this report is affected by the extent to which the respondents accurately reported the number of historic properties at their schools and the estimated costs to restore and preserve these properties. Also, according to NPS officials, the estimates may include costs for work that does not meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, particularly if the individuals preparing the estimates are not familiar with those standards.

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce its contents earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days from the date of this letter. At that time, we will send copies to the Secretary of the Interior; the Secretary of Education; the Director, National Park Service; and the Director, Office of Management and Budget. We will also make copies available to others upon request.

Please call me at (202) 512-3841 if you or your staff have any questions. Major contributors to this report are listed in appendix V.

Number of Historic Properties and Estimated Total Restoration Cost at Each Historically Black College and University, as of June 1, 1997

(continued) (continued) (continued)

A cost of $0 means that the property was restored prior to June 1, 1997. A “ ” in the cost column means that, because there were zero properties owned, there was no associated cost of restoration.

Locations of the 103 Historically Black Colleges and Universities, as of June 1, 1997

Survey Sent to Each of the 103 Historically Black Colleges and Universities

Section 1. According to the National Register of Historic Places, the properties listed in the table below are on your campus and are listed on the National Register as of June 1, 1997. (b) (c) (d)

Is the property owned and/or still existing?

How was the estimate calculated?

Principal preparer of latest cost estimate.

Estimated total cost to preserve & restore. Please provide only the estimated cost to be spent after 6/1/97. Please provide only capital expenditure costs and not operating and maintenance costs.

1=Yes, both owned and still exists (Enter 1 below, then complete b, c, and d of this section) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2=Yes, both owned and exists, but will be destroyed 3= Never or no longer owned, but still exists 4= No longer exists (Please describe what happened to the property)

Of the total cost estimated below, specify the source and amount of funds, if any, that have been set aside from each source.

1=Original feasibility report 2=Updated feasibility report 3=Actual contractor quotations or contractor proposals 4=Cost estimating guidebook 5=Cost per square foot 6=Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflator 7=Other (specify below) a. Name b. Title c. Telephone number d. Credentials of preparer (Enter code listed below) 1=Outside architect/engineering firm 2=In-house or school architect/engineer 3=Contractor - other than architect/ engineering firm 4=School building/maintenance supervisor 5=Other (Specify) (If 2, 3 or 4, then enter code below and STOP Do not complete columns b, c and d for these properties)

Total cost to preserve & restore (in thousands) : $_______,_______,000 (Check all that apply) ____ (Enter code)

Funds set aside to preserve & restore from: (If none, enter 0.) d. _____ (Enter code from above)

Section 2. The properties listed in the table below are not listed on the National Register as of June 1, 1997, but are structures that a State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) has assessed and identified as being eligible for listing but has not yet been listed on the Register. (b) (c) (d)

Is the property owned and/or still existing?

How was the estimate calculated?

Principal preparer of latest cost estimate.

Estimated total cost to preserve & restore. Please provide only the estimated cost to be spent after 6/1/97. Please provide only capital expenditure costs and not operating and maintenance costs.

1=Yes, both owned and still exists (Enter 1 below, then complete b, c, and d of this section) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2=Yes, both owned and exists, but will be destroyed 3= Never or no longer owned, but still exists 4= No longer exists (Please describe what happened to the property)

Of the total cost estimated below, specify the source and amount of funds, if any, that have been set aside from each source.

1=Original feasibility report 2=Updated feasibility report 3=Actual contractor quotations or contractor proposals 4=Cost estimating guidebook 5=Cost per square foot 6=Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflator 7=Other (specify below) a. Name b. Title c. Telephone number d. Credentials of preparer (Enter code listed below) (If 2, 3 or 4, then enter code below and STOP Do not complete columns b, c and d for these properties)

1=Outside architect/engineering firm 2=In-house or school architect/engineer 3=Contractor - other than architect/ engineering firm 4=School building/maintenance supervisor 5=Other (Specify)

Total cost to preserve & restore (in thousands) : $_______,_______,000 (Check all that apply) ____ (Enter code)

Funds set aside to preserve & restore from: (If none, enter 0.)

3. ___ 6. ___ d. _____ (Enter code from above)

Section 3. Please list any other properties that have not been identified in either Section 1 or 2. (b) (c) (d)

Is the property owned and/or still existing?

How was the estimate calculated?

Principal preparer of latest cost estimate.

Estimated total cost to preserve & restore. Please provide only the estimated cost to be spent after 6/1/97. Please provide only capital expenditure costs and not operating and maintenance costs.

1=Yes, both owned and still exists (Enter 1 below, then complete b, c, and d of this section) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2=Yes, both owned and exists, but will be destroyed 3= Never or no longer owned, but still exists 4= No longer exists (Please describe what happened to the property)

Of the total cost estimated below, specify the source and amount of funds, if any, that have been set aside from each source.

1=Original feasibility report 2=Updated feasibility report 3=Actual contractor quotations or contractor proposals 4=Cost estimating guidebook 5=Cost per square foot 6=Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflator 7=Other (specify below) a. Name b. Title c. Telephone number d. Credentials of preparer (Enter code listed below) (If 2, 3 or 4, then enter code below and STOP Do not complete columns b, c and d for these properties)

1=Outside architect/engineering firm 2=In-house or school architect/engineer 3=Contractor - other than architect/ engineering firm 4=School building/maintenance supervisor 5=Other (Specify)

Total cost to preserve & restore (in thousands) : $_______,_______,000 (Check all that apply) ____ (Enter code)

Funds set aside to preserve & restore from: (If none, enter 0.)

3. ___ 6. ___ d. _____ (Enter code from above)

Comments From the Department of the Interior

GAO’s Comments

The following are GAO’s comments on the Department of the Interior’s letter dated January 12, 1998. 1. We have referred to the National Register in the “Results in Brief” as “the” official list of properties as suggested. 2. We have revised footnote 1 changing “specific” to “individual” properties, correcting the spelling of “identify,” and changing the phrase “within the district” to “of the district.” 3. We added a sentence to footnote 2 that, according to the Department of the Interior, there currently are National Park Service-approved state historic preservation programs in all states. 4. We revised the text to add “location” and “feeling and association” to the criteria for evaluating properties as suggested. 5. We reworded the definition of a building as suggested. 6. We added text to the report to note that properties that are not listed on the National Register and have not been surveyed by state historic preservation officers and assessed to be eligible for listing on the National Register currently are not eligible for federal grant assistance under existing legislation. As a result, $595.8 million of the $755 million total estimated restoration cost is currently eligible for federal grant assistance. 7. We have made reference to the Department’s concurrence with our discussion of the historically black colleges and universities’ cost-estimating methodologies in the “Agency Comments” section in the body of the report.

Major Contributors to This Report

Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division, Washington, D.C.

Office of General Counsel

Doreen Feldman The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free. Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the following address, accompanied by a check or money order made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also. Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.

U.S. General Accounting Office P.O. Box 37050 Washington, DC 20013 Room 1100 700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW) U.S. General Accounting Office Washington, DC Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain these lists.