The mental health crisis among university students is gradually increasing, from psychological fatigue, burnout, and anxiety to suicide, forcing universities to integrate a mental health focus in sustainable campus planning. Mental health can be influenced, either alleviated or exacerbated, by the academic environment. Campus Sustainability Assessment Tools (CSATs) provided various indicators, but few include spatial indicators related to mental health. To bridge this gap, it is essential to understand the influence of spatial aspects on students’ psychological well-being. Identifying environmental stressors and spatial qualities and translating them into indicators that can be consistently defined and evaluated is relevant. This study aims to address the gap in CSATs regarding students' mental health and to develop spatial indicators for universities to embed mental health. The goal is to propose spatial indicators that allow universities to evaluate and measure the relationship between the built campus environment and mental health. A comparative analysis was conducted on ten CSAT frameworks and two related frameworks, including the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the Circular Economy (CE), with a focus on identifying and evaluating existing assessments. In parallel, a review was conducted to analyze key psychological stressors and interventions in the academic environment for university students' mental health. This included formulating spatial indicators that describe, quantify, and assess the relationship to psychological outcomes. Findings show that existing CSATs prioritize curriculum and teaching approaches, and research includes scholarship, social network, and operational aspects. However, only the Sustainability Tool for Auditing Universities' Curricula in Higher Education (STAUNCH) and Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System (STARS) explicitly reference mental health. Apart from STAUNCH and UI GreenMetric, which include indicators of biodiversity and green space ratio, respectively, nearly all frameworks focus on nonphysical, conceptual metrics. The identification of spatial indicators is linked to specific design attributes—such as natural light, spatial openness, and access to nature—that promise reduced stress and enhanced emotional well-being. Key findings related to the study’s spatial indicators propose a three-part indicator set: 1. Psycho-spatial indicators (e.g., light, acoustic, and visual comfort, finishing material, accessibility, air quality, layout). 2. Socio-spatial indicators (e.g., communal area, visibility, accessibility, safety, interconnection). 3. Restorative spatial indicators (e.g., naturalness, spatiality, safety and security, privacy-public balance). Universities must focus on preserving students’ mental health by improving their physical environments, especially because supporting and fostering mental health is no longer optional. Understanding the tangible ways in which space impacts mental health enables universities to define clear, measurable criteria for improvement. These findings offer a practical foundation for evaluating existing environments and guiding future design interventions. A three-part indicator set will be developed and applied through a mixedmethod case study approach, implemented in two existing campuses, and it will be examined in depth via on-site observations, structured interviews, and student surveys to capture both measurable data and lived experiences. The framework aims to articulate the connection between spatial design and mental health and to establish a methodology for identifying, defining, and assessing these indicators across different university settings.