MUSC Institute of Psychiatry Study
Medical University of South Carolina’s Institute of Psychiatry was in need of improvements to the environment and functionality. Constrained by aging infrastructure and outdated design, the facility was not aligned with current behavioral health best practices or growing service demand. Overcrowding, a lack of private patient rooms, and patient agitation caused by environmental stressors within a building that showed signs of physical deterioration were a concern.
Solutions for an Outdated Facility Come with an FGI Assessment and Strategic Planning
Our healthcare planning team conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the MUSC Institute of Psychiatry that included:
- A detailed FGI compliance assessment
- Review of MUSC’s existing Facilities Condition Assessment and building documentation
- Onsite observations of system performance and patient flow
Key deficiencies such as undersized patient support spaces, outdated special systems on the geriatric floor, and non-compliant seclusion room placements were identified. Physical building reviews revealed envelope failure, aging infrastructure, and a need for elevator modernization.
To help MUSC determine the best course of action, our team developed two scenarios:
- Phased Renovation Option:
- Retains the existing facility footprint
- Brings building into FGI compliance, but reduces total beds from 108 to approximately 56
- Estimated cost: $40–50M
- Duration: 3–4 years across 4+ phases, requiring patient and staff relocation
- Higher disruption, but lower capital investment
- New Construction Option:
- 198,000 SF program with 128 private/semi-private beds, outpatient clinic, Crisis Stabilization Unit, and support space
- Fully FGI-compliant design supports growth and best practices
- Estimated cost: $155–200M (excluding site costs)
- Duration: 4–5 years
- Greater initial investment, but minimal impact on patient care and long-term value
Both scenarios included preliminary budgets and timelines to help MUSC evaluate feasibility and make an informed decision.
Options for a Future Behavioral Health Facility: Renovation Versus New Construction
The study provided MUSC leadership with a strategic comparison of renovation versus replacement. Each option was grounded in regulatory compliance, patient-centered care, and operational feasibility.
While the renovation scenario presented a lower upfront cost, the new construction option offered improved patient environments, increased capacity, and the ability to implement behavioral health design best practices. Additional due diligence will be required to finalize direction and ensure that the selected solution meets all regulatory and operational goals for the Institute of Psychiatry’s future.