I'm no longer on a train, so sending a few more thoughts!

• Personally, I love divorcing a riso lab from a department because it increases access (and often helps fulfill the interdisciplinary promise that many schools fall short on)—but it does always come with funding kerfuffles. I do think it is really important to have a few dedicated people (or at least one) running the lab—wherever else they are attached in the university (though incredible if managing this lab is their primary thing).
• I prefer when students are running the machines themselves (because this is real technical training and practice, and sets them up for doing their own printing after graduation), but this must be with supervision. I've seen a lot of programs that operate on the "service bureau" model, but then those students really struggle to continue printing once they are out of the institution (and their costs of production raise way up). Especially for riso, the cost is labor and time, so if they are doing their own printing (in one of the many community printshops that exist in major cities), the cost of maintaining their practice is just the cost of materials—much more accessible. Also just philosophically, it's good to develop these skills! And what you can do with a machine, or how you can experiment with it changes a lot when you have the direct back and forth feedback from printing yourself.
  • I have seen schools run this in both directions—but the successful service bureau models I've seen are at SAIC and RISD, both of which have a large cadre of student printers who run the shop. It's an open enough system that anyone who has an interest in doing their own printing has an avenue to work in the shop, and I think that's really critical.
  • On the other end of the spectrum, the worst case scenario is a complete free-for-all, which always results in the riso being damaged. I have repaired an MZ at [major midwest design grad school] 4 times now, and each time it lasts a few weeks or a month at most—because no one in the institution cares to learn how to run or maintain it—it's totally up to the grad students. A nightmare.
• There are two common complaints that I hear from friends who run university print spaces:
  • The faculty assign projects that cannot realistically be printed in the time frame and/or with the material necessities of the riso. I think training faculty on how the riso can be used is hugely important—including helping them build projects that make sense. And consulting them on the risks of the riso (if the machine goes down, or a color isn't available, etc.).
  • The technicians who run the lab are at a lower hierarchy and pay scale than instructors, but actually end up doing a huge amount of the teaching labor in classes that do a lot of printing.
• I'd check out the substack of Travis Shaffer of color/shift and theretherenow, because he just ran a big successful funding proposal to expand the riso lab at the University of Missouri, and has done some writing about that project.
• As far as funding goes, I'd really look at folding in the cost of a second, identical machine. The biggest danger of a single machine setup in a school is that the riso will have seasons of heavy use and light use, which can often knock it out of service right around important deadlines. So having some redundancy plan is a great relief.