Facilities Task Force A Review of Options and Considerations

1. Facilities Task ForceA Review of Options and Considerations February 16, 2011

2. Tonight’s Agenda Facilities Task Force • Review Assets and Challenges From Last Meeting • Review Necessary Assumptions • Look at Possible Considerations • Take The Next Step

3. Table 1 – AssetsTable 1 – Challenges *Strength of curriculum offerings *Community has high expectations of our educational system *Fairly conservative/fiscally sound Middle School focused on kids Meeting very diverse student population needs Facilities in good condition *Class sizes Changing demographics Current building floor plans do not lend to high scheduling efficiency Current older facilities not designed to support 2011 technology Facilities Task Force

4. Table 2 – AssetsTable 2 – Challenges *Increasing Enrollment *Community Partnerships - U of M Fellowship Graduation rates increasing Positive public perception of School Board All day Kindergarten Investments in science education – MS, HS Choices in curriculum Success Coaches *Negative publicity of educational mandates- - NCLB - AYP *Assumptions based on student demographics *Concerns in regards to spending (current economic situations) Space for special needs population Historical perception of class size/space utilization Resources spread across four elementary schools Facilities Task Force

5. Table 3 – AssetsTable 3 – Challenges *District Finances good - Low debt - Good financial management Hormel Foundation -Corporate support Staff Development options -Masters program (= higher quality education for kids) Strong PSEO After school/extra-curricular activities *Larger class sizes *Facilities outdated Low district family income – Free/reduced lunch % ELL/cultural differences High Sped Ed numbers Emerging/promising teaching methodologies do not fit current spaces Spaces not conducive to how we want to educate our kids Facilities Task Force

6. Table 4 – AssetsTable 4 – Challenges *Hormel Foundation support *Kindergarten center Science labs Curriculum Community involvement *Unfunded mandates *Income gap vs. state average Achievement gap-socio/economic status Space constraints Football program Facilities Task Force

7. Table 5 – AssetsTable 5 – Challenges *High quality staff *All day kindergarten center Parent involvement @ elementary Reading & math centers @ elementary Middle School Team model Neighborhood elementary schools New labs @ MS & HS Community Partnerships *Access & security @ sites *Class sizes *Elementary & MS space Pick-up & drop-off @ sites Lack of new labs @ elementaries Potential schedule changes Parent involvement @ secondary Room sizes Bathrooms @ kindergarten center Creating a sense of community @ secondary with students (Owatonna example) Facilities Task Force

8. Table 6 – AssetsTable 6 – Challenges *Programming –strong, student centered programming *Community – Collaboration Family support Partnerships Increasing enrollment High quality programming Comprehensive programming Supportive community Strong partnerships *Building – age, capacity, infrastructure, energy efficiency *$$ - state funding, mandates Aging buildings Space for programming State funding Mandates Infrastructure – Technology Rate of change – knowledge Space Diversity – changing demographics Facilities Task Force

9. Table 6 – AssetsTable 6 – Challenges All-day everyday Kindergarten Early childhood programming Student support systems Family support systems Specialized programming- SPED, GT, ELL, Intervention Success Coaches ALC Early intervention Innovative Middle School Science, teaming, Fine Arts, College Readiness AHS – Teaming, retaining students Global learning Involved parents Diversity – changing demographics Security Energy inefficiencies Parking Green space Class size Increasing enrollment Facilities Task Force

10. Assumptions Austin Public Schools Strategic RoadmapMission StatementEngaging & empowering ALL learners for life

11. Assumptions Austin Public Schools Strategic RoadmapCore ValuesHigh Expectations – of and from all people all the timeIntegrity – to have the courage to do what is right in the face of challengesFocus & Purpose - to operate with intentionInnovation - to support creative culture, processes and solutions

12. Assumptions Austin Public Schools Strategic RoadmapVision 2015 Statement*All students engaged in and achieving a meaningful educational journey for their future*Intentional instruction meeting the needs of each learner in all classrooms*Student needs, demographic growth and innovative programming driving district infrastructure*A safe, welcoming and enticing school environment for students, staff and families*Effective, engaged and satisfied employees*Partnership, engagement and open dialogue between all stakeholders*Financial stability and sound resource management

13. Assumptions Austin Public Schools Strategic RoadmapStrategic DirectionsA. Align district structures, systems and resources to assure college and workforce readiness for ALL studentsB. Purposefully deliver a guaranteed and viable curriculum and effective instructional practicesC. Develop a school culture and competency for ALL students, families and staff across ethnicity and income backgroundsD. Design, fund, implement and support technology as a critical asset for teaching and learningE. Develop a clear and shared understanding by the community of the district and the need for partnershipF. Align and efficiently manage district resources to student needs and demographic changes

14. Assumptions Middle K/High Migration Enrollment Actual Enrollment 2010/2011 – 4,399 Projected Enrollment 2014/2015 – 4,870 Projected Enrollment 2019/2020 – 5,311

15. Assumptions Woodson Kindergarten Center Enrollment 2010/11 – 355 Enrollment Capacity – 352 Projected High Point – 419 (13/14) Difference - (67)

16. Assumptions Elementary Schools Enrollment 2010/11 – 1,838 Enrollment Capacity – 1,746 Projected High Point – 2,032 (18/19) Difference - (286)

17. Assumptions Ellis Middle School Enrollment 2010/11 – 943 Enrollment Capacity – 975 Projected High Point – 1,321 (18/19) Difference - (346)

18. Assumptions Austin High School Enrollment 2010/11 – 1,263 Enrollment Capacity – 1,550 Projected High Point – 1,587 (19/20) Difference - (37)

19. Considerations * Program Needs and Innovations* Demographic and Socioeconomic Factors* Site Constraints* Building Space Limitations* Tax Impact

20. Program Needs and Innovations • Needs to Meet All State and Federal Mandates • Needs to Integrate with Current District Programs • Needs to be Innovative and 21st Century • Possibilities: • Grade Level Centers • Choice/Magnet Schools • Program Focus • STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math • Gifted and Talented • Fine Arts • 45/15 Balanced Calendar

21. Demographic and Socioeconomic Factors • Racially Segregated Attendance Areas • Socioeconomically isolated Attendance Areas • Growth Areas Within the Community/School District

22. Site Constraints • State Site Requirements • Existing Site Limitations • Vacant Buildings on Potential Sites • Availability of Potential Vacant Sites • Possible Partnerships to Acquire Sites

23. Building Space Limitations • Building Floor Plan – Gyms; Auditoriums; Cafeterias; Computer Labs; Libraries; Special Ed; Science Labs; Art Rooms; Music Rooms; Classrooms • Adequate Classroom and Special Area Size • Potential for Remodeling

24. Tax Impact • Public Tolerance for a Tax Increase • $20 Million Available for Construction with No Tax Increase

25. Their World Has Changed

26. Next Steps • Dream! Do Not Limit Yourself • Generate Potential Solutions and Evaluate How They Fit With our Considerations • Create Questions You Need Answers To