studenthouse.dkThe association behind Student & Innovation House

Detail 02 · the funding

Students raised 52.5 million to rebuild their own house.

CBS bought the building for 30 million. The rebuild the students had to fund themselves. Over eighteen months the steering group raised DKK 52.5 million from six foundations — and discovered along the way that the 2013 budget no longer held.

Raised in grants
DKK 52.5m
Incl. the CBS purchase
DKK 82.5m
Foundations
6
First commitment
2015
2013 budget
DKK 55.3m
Recalculated to Q3 2018
DKK 75.7m

The funding strategy

Solbjerg Plads, 7 March 2013

The building was transferred into Freja Ejendomme on 1 January 2013 and put up for sale around 1 February. Five weeks later there was a confidential strategy paper. It is not a wish list: every foundation had been read, assessed against its own purpose, ranked in order of priority and assigned to a named person.

How the paper was built

Each foundation got four columns. This was not research for its own sake — the columns decided what the application to that particular foundation should emphasise.

ColumnPurposeThe foundation’s own stated purpose, quoted — and what the project should therefore stress to it
ColumnNoteWhat the foundation does not support, earlier grants, the size of its capital, and whether it likes to go in with others
ColumnOwnerOne named student per foundation — no shared responsibility
ColumnContactA concrete way in, and meetings arranged. Confidential, and not reproduced here

Priority order and ownership

The order was set in advance. The right-hand column is what actually happened — as the archive shows it today.

No.
Foundation
Owner
Outcome
01
Velux Fondene
Christian
The strategy targeted the Velux Foundations and a rooflight project. The DKK 19.5m grant came from Villum Fonden — a different foundation in the same family
02
Industriens Fond
Anne Marie
Not among the six building partners
03
Augustinus Fonden
Christian
Positive commitment March 2016 · DKK 5.0m
04
Oticon Fonden
Anne Marie
Not among the six building partners
05
Realdania
Anne Marie
Still in dialogue in 2016 · did not grant
06
FrederiksbergFonden
Christian
Set aside DKK 1.0m in December 2015

The reserve list

Nine foundations sat under the heading “not yet prioritised”, most with empty fields. One of them went on to give seven million.

Knud Højgaards Fond — gave DKK 7.0mA.P. Møller FondenCarlsbergfondetTipsmidlerneOtto Mønsteds FondLundbeckfondenBG FondenKirkefondenC.W. Obel Fonden

The plan that was not followed

The aim in 2013 was for the foundations to pay for both the purchase and the rebuild, after which the building would be handed to CBS for nothing. CBS would then cover running costs, while an independent organisation had use of the premises.

It went differently: CBS bought the building itself for DKK 30m in December 2014, and the foundations funded the rebuild. The independent organisation did become real — first as an association, later as Station Fonden.

The strategy paper is confidential and is not held publicly in the archive. The names of foundation directors, contact details and the internal assessments of each foundation are left out here.

The commitments

Status November 2016

Six foundations and CBS. The amounts are those the steering group reported to the foundations in November 2016.

Own funding, CBS
DKK 30.0m
Purchase of the building at Howitzvej 30
Villum Fonden
DKK 19.5m
Base rebuild · project number 0008718
Nordea-fonden
DKK 19.5m
Granted 25 June 2015 · case number 02-2015-0838
Knud Højgaards Fond
DKK 7.0m
DKK 5.0m first · raised by 2.0m in December 2015 · file no. 47.750
Augustinus Fonden
DKK 5.0m
Positive commitment in March 2016 · application number 15-4826
FrederiksbergFonden
DKK 1.0m
Set aside 10 December 2015 · case number 2015-133-U
Weimanns Fond
DKK 0.5m
Earmarked for outdoor landscaping
Total
DKK 82.5m
Of which DKK 52.5m in grants for the rebuild

The 2014 budget

Main items

The project worked from this budget for a long time. Two items stood as options, to be built only if the funding stretched that far.

Purchase of the building
30,000,000
CBS
Standard rebuild
53,835,309
Lifting of easements
1,350,000
Installing bicycle racks
100,000
Outdoor landscaping
500,000
Weimanns Fond
Option: basement conversion
12,379,322
Option
Option: roofing over the courtyard
15,898,125
Option
Total
114,062,756

When the budget was stress-tested

November 2016

The original budget was drawn up in the summer of 2013 by Rønnow Arkitekter and Bascon. Three years later it was reviewed item by item with the client adviser and CBS Campus Development.

Step 01Missing items foundNecessary budget items that had been left out had to be added.
Step 02Prices checkedEvery item recalculated against V&S Prisdata and benchmarks from comparable projects.
Step 03Indexed to 2018Indexed to the centre of gravity for delivery in Q3 2018.
ResultDKK 55.3m → 75.7mThe base rebuild excluding the purchase of the building, at 2018 prices.

The calculations showed that a reduced scope of the base project — without the options — could be delivered within the commitments already in hand. The steering group judged that a reduced building programme would still support the core activities of the house.

What was postponed

The steering group’s decision

To keep the project within the commitments secured, three sub-tasks were set aside — with the option of carrying them out later if new funds came in.

PostponedNew heating installationCould be carried out later with additional funding.
PostponedFurnitureCould be carried out later with additional funding.
PostponedNew ventilation systemCould be carried out later with additional funding.

The hunt that continued

Applications in 2016

With the recalculated budget, the students stepped up the search for the remaining money.

DSEBAage og Johanne Louis-Hansens FondHempel FondenSalling FondeneRealdania — in dialogue

Earlier that year, Realdania and FrederiksbergFonden were the two outstanding answers that were to cover the remaining DKK 11.3m of the original budget.

What a funding pack looked like

The application pack

The material for the foundations was not a letter. It was a pack the students built themselves — and followed up with written status reports and joint meetings.

Part 01The project descriptionVision, purpose, and the role of the house for students across institutions.
Part 02The budgetCapital costs for the rebuild and for each sub-project.
Part 03The scheduleThree phases: funding, approval and authorisation, building project.
Part 04The illustrationsVisualisations of the rooms, so the foundation could picture the house.

After the joint meeting with the foundations in October 2015, the steering group sent regular status reports on funding, progress, press and budget. The reports were signed on the steering group’s behalf by Christian Refshauge.

Living Learning Lab

Appendix to the applications

The ambition reached beyond a sustainable rebuild: the house was to work as a living laboratory, with the building itself as the object of study.

Work track 01Smart technology vs. smarter peopleThe role of technology set against user behaviour.
Work track 02Agitating architectureArchitecture that provokes and disrupts habits.
Work track 03Technology building bridgesTechnology as a connection between people, and between the house and the city.

Organisational development

After the rebuild

Once the house was finished, the funding shifted focus from bricks to organisation. The 2020 opening speech thanks Tuborgfondet, Otto Mønsteds Fond and DSEB for the support that made it possible to experiment and fail along the way.

TuborgfondetDSEBOtto Mønsteds Fondand others — to be added
Load capacity cost money too: an engineering report from February 2018 showed that the 1920 floor slabs carried only 200 kg/m², and selected square metres had to be reinforced. The cost of that reinforcement is missing — send it and it goes in here. The figures elsewhere on this page are as reported in November 2016. Missing: the final funding position after 2016, the answers that came back from DSEB, Louis-Hansen, Hempel, Salling and Realdania, and whether the postponed items were later carried out.