Nearly three-quarters of higher education institutions say space optimization is a top priority for the next two years. But when asked how they measure campus space usage today, only 17% describe their visibility as very clear or centralized. Another 44% call it "somewhat clear." The remaining 39% are working with limited visibility or none at all, according to Planon's Higher Education Benchmark Report.
Put plainly: 83% of institutions are making space decisions without a complete picture of the space they're deciding about. And "somewhat clear" visibility carries its own unique risk. It's visibility that feels sufficient, until a decision depends on data that different departments can’t agree on.
A 57-point gap between ambition and reality
The gap between 74% of institutions prioritizing space optimization and 17% of institutions claiming that they have enough visibility is massive – 57% of institutions surveyed. That's a 57-point gap between where institutions want to go and what their data can support. They have the ambition to reach their space optimization goals, but they don’t have the systems needed to act.
If you're deciding on space strategy without a clear understanding of your space utilization, you are part of the norm. But that doesn't make those decisions any less costly. Every semester that your actual space usage is unclear, you are still committing budget, embarking on renovation plans, and making long-term facilities decisions with guesswork dressed up as strategy.
Space data collection is falling short
The problem isn't that institutions don't collect any space data. It's that the data they collect isn’t enough to answer the questions they're now asking it.
One survey respondent put it this way: "We simply get snapshots in time, without the comprehensive data needed."
Based on data from Planon’s latest report, most institutions rely on outdated data collection: Annual space surveys, manual headcounts, spreadsheets someone updates when they remember to. These methods were built for a slower, lower-stakes era of facilities and space planning; one where "good enough" data was good enough. These methods weren't built to answer the questions you're facing today: Which buildings are genuinely underutilized? Where can you consolidate without disrupting academic operations? What will next semester's enrollment shifts do to your space needs?
Snapshot data can't answer those questions with confidence. By the time it's compiled, it is already outdated.
What closing the gap requires
Higher ed institutions operate millions of square feet every day. Real estate & facilities stakeholders need to replace point-in-time counts with a continuous, centralized view that updates alongside changes in their campus.
With continuous real data, leaders across space, facilities, and academic affairs can be aligned as they make campus-impacting decisions. They can see utilization patterns as they emerge, not months after the fact. And they can walk into budget and planning conversations with evidence instead of estimates.
For example, that might look like knowing in real time that a lecture hall is running at 40% capacity before signing off on a renovation, or catching a shift in classroom demand a full semester before it turns into a scheduling crisis. These decisions cannot be easily made with sporadic data, but are empowered with centralized and ongoing data on campus usage.
You don't need a bigger space planning team to get there. You need visibility that doesn't depend on someone manually stitching it together.
The institutions that close this gap first won't just have better facilities data. They'll be the ones making space decisions with confidence while everyone else is still working from last year's snapshot.
Curious how your institution compares? Planon's Higher Education Benchmark Report breaks down where US and Canadian colleges and universities stand on space visibility, facilities operations, cross-team alignment, and financial planning, and what it takes to close the gaps between their goals and their reality.