Transcript Update to 2007 Facilities Assessment and Current Proposal ()

Board of Trustees Workshop
Update to 2007 Facilities Assessment and
Current Proposal
Photos of students and a
lab/classroom setting
June 21, 2012
Agenda




Background
Process
Findings
Proposal
2
Parsons Team
National experts + local knowledge








Parsons
MGT of America
Natex Architects *
Bovay Engineers *
CBIC *
Marshall Engineering *
PGAL
One World Strategy Group *
Planning & Assessment
Educational Suitability
One-line Drawings
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Assessment
Communications
* M/WBE Firm
3
Background: Scope of Work
Phase 1 of HISD Facility Master Plan
 Update 2007 Facility Database
 Gather Community Input
 Identify Schools to Assess
 Propose Facility Improvements
 Develop Budget Proposal
4
Background: Overview of Previous Facilities Programs
1998: Rebuild 2002
Designed to relieve overcrowding and address fire and lifesafety issues
2002: Rebuild HISD
Focused on replacement of obsolete facilities and
technology upgrades
2007: HISD Bond Proposal 2007
Proposed to enhance security at all schools, improve
science labs, replace obsolete facilities, and improve
schools not covered in past programs
5
Background: Overview of Previous Facilities Programs
6
Background: HISD Facilities by Age
7
Background: HISD Schools Built by Decade and Level
40
Baby
Boomers
35
Rebuild Houston
30
25
Significant Focus
on Primary
Schools
Growth of the
Suburbs
20
Elementary
Middle
High
15
Other
10
2011-2012
2001-2010
1991-2000
1981-1990
1971-1980
1961-1970
1951-1960
1941-1950
1931-1940
1921-1930
0
1910-1920
5
8
Background: Current Situation
 Earlier facility improvement efforts focused
on the ELEMENTARY LEVEL
 Commitment to maintain and improve
neighborhood schools at the SECONDARY
SCHOOL LEVEL
 Need to match facilities to PORTFOLIO of
PROGRAMS
9
 Background
 Process
 Solicit Community
Input
 Review and Align
Standards
 Review Capacity
Data
 Conduct
Assessments
Agenda
 Findings
 Proposal
10
Putting the Pieces Together
Solicit School
Community Input
Review and Align
Educational
Suitability and
Technology
Standards
Conduct Facility
Assessments
Review Enrollment
Projections, Capacity
and Utilization
11
Solicit School Community Input
 GOAL:
Community
Broad-based participation at each site
 PROCESS:
 ALL schools invited to provide input
 Principals sent “Packet” to facilitate school
community input
 Tool available for more than 6 weeks
 Sign-in sheets
 Group information
 Ensure that every voice is recorded
12
Solicit School Community Input
Community
 Data Gathering Tool - Example
 Q2. What is your level of satisfaction with the overall
physical condition of the buildings at your school?
 Satisfied
 Somewhat satisfied
 Dissatisfied
 Q3. Please explain why you are satisfied or
dissatisfied
13
Solicit School Community Input
Community
 RESULTS:
95% response rate
237 schools and 3,302 participants
Q2: What is your level of satisfaction with the
overall physical condition of the buildings at your
school?
•Satisfied
19%
•Somewhat satisfied
32%
•Dissatisfied
48%
14
Solicit School Community Input
Community
 RESULTS:
Q3. Please explain why you are:
Satisfied: “We have a brand new school that is
beautiful.”
Somewhat satisfied : “The new building looks nice,
but the old building needs a lot of renovations.”
Dissatisfied : “There are water leaks and there is
constant repair on the same issues.”
15
Solicit School Community Input
Community
 RESULTS WILL BE USED FOR:
 Developing priorities and Proposal:
 HISD Maintenance Department Planning
 Capital Improvement Planning
 Long-Range Facility Master Planning
16
Review and Align Educational Suitability and
Technology Standards
 GOAL:
Standards
Understand current and future district goals
 PROCESS:
 Conduct focus groups and interviews with HISD
experts
 Apply national experience/TEA Standards
 Align Assessment Tool to existing HISD
Educational Specifications
 Create Educational Suitability and Technology
Assessment Tools
17
Review and Align Educational Suitability and
Technology Standards
Standards
 Assessment Tool
 Learning Environment
 Room Size
 Location
 Storage and Equipment
 Technology
18
Review Enrollment Projections, Capacity
and Utilization
Utilization
 Gather HISD demographics and
enrollment data
 Evaluate current utilization rates: permanent spaces
 Examine future utilization scenarios
 Effect of Improved Facilities
 Program Offerings
 Community Changes
 Enrollment Growth / Decline
19
Conduct Facility Assessments
Assessment
 GOAL:
Use existing information and gather new
data to identify current facility needs
 PROCESS:
 Conduct Desktop Modeling Activity
 Update scores based on changes since 2007
 Develop Composite Score for each school
 Conduct Field Assessments
 Validate current conditions
 Update data and drawings
20
Conduct Facility Assessments
Assessment
.
 Desktop Composite Score - Examples
School Name
Score
Weighting
Formula
School A
School B
School C
Condition
Score
Suitability and
Technology
Composite
Score
50%
50%
100%
50
37
82
72
63
92
61
50
87
21
Conduct Field Assessments
Assessment
3 Areas of Review:
 Condition
 Educational Suitability
 Technology Readiness
Site Visit Process
 Interview Principal and Plant Operators
 Walk the buildings and site
22
Agenda
 Background
 Process
 Findings
 School Community
Findings
 Educational
Suitability and
Technology
Findings
 Facility Themes
 Proposal
23
FINDINGS: School Community Input (N= 3,302)
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
Satisfied
40.0%
Somewhat
Satisfied
Dissatisfied
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Elem.
Middle
High
Other
24
FINDINGS: School Community Input
Issue
Condition
Repairs
Needed
Most Frequently Identified
HVAC
Plumbing
Educational
General
Suitability
Restrooms
Classrooms
Improvements
Safety Issues Parent/Bus
Parking
Technology
Parking
Gym and
Athletics
Auditorium/
Stage
Multiple
Building
Entrances Configuration
25
FINDINGS: Educational Suitability Review
 General classrooms, Tech labs, and special
education rooms do not meet current
standards
 Traffic and parking are a problem
 Schools are not designed for easy
supervision and control of entrances
 Lack of storage
26
FINDINGS: Technology Readiness Review
 Electrical service is insufficient in older
schools
 Schools lack video distribution systems
 Communications / IT equipment is housed
inappropriately
 Equipment is not up to date
 HOWEVER, with recent work, network
connectivity and performance are greatly
improved
27
Themes
 High schools are “due”
 Reinvest in neighborhoods
 Match facility to program
 “Build it and they will come”
 Finish last phase of earlier projects
 Maintain our heritage into the future
 Provide technology upgrades
 Revitalize appearance and capabilities
28
Agenda




Background
Process
Findings
Proposal
29
Proposal
High School Focus:
 Replace existing schools
 Replace Inadequate Facilities
 Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate
 Build New Schools
 Renovate
30
Proposal
K-8: Facilities Match Program
Middle School Needs
Elementary School Needs
District-wide Needs
31
High School Focus: Replacements: $577,067,000
Furr High School
High School for Performing and Visual Arts
Lee High School
Madison High School
Sharpstown High School
Sterling High School
Washington High School
Yates High School
32
High School Focus: Replace Inadequate Facilities: $353,696,000
Bellaire High School
Lamar High School
Sam Houston High School
Westbury High School
33
High School Focus:
Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate:
$258,953,000
Austin High School
Eastwood Academy
Milby High School
Waltrip High School
Worthing High School
34
High School Focus: New Schools: $27,000,000
North Early College High School
South Early College High School
35
High School Focus: Renovations: $61,125,000
Davis High School
DeBakey High School
Jones High School
Jordan High School
Kashmere High School
Scarborough High School
Sharpstown International High School
Young Men’s College Prep
Young Women’s College Prep
36
K-8: Facilities Match Program: $120,732,000
K-8: Completion
Garden Oaks Elementary School
Pilgrim Academy
Wharton Dual Language School
K-8: Replacement
Mandarin Chinese Language
Immersion Magnet School at Gordon
37
Middle Schools: Meeting Needs: $73,950,000
Middle School: Replacement
Dowling Middle School
Middle School: Addition
Grady Middle School
38
Elementary Schools: Replacements: $126,248,000
Askew Elementary School
Condit Elementary School
Kelso Elementary School
MacGregor Elementary School
Parker Elementary School
39
Elementary Schools: Meeting Needs: $67,347,000
Elementary School: Renovation and Addition
Smith, K. Elementary School
Elementary School: Replace Inadequate Facilities
and Renovate
Tijarena Elementary School
Elementary School: New
New Elementary School
Location: TBD
40
District-Wide Needs: $224,675,000
Safety and Security Improvements
Technology Improvements:
Equipment and Infrastructure
Restroom Renovations: Middle Schools
Athletic Improvements: Field Houses
Land Acquisitions
41
Proposal Summary
High School Focus
K-8: Facilities Match Program
Middle Schools: Meeting Needs
$1,277,841,000
$120,732,000
$73,950,000
Elementary Schools: Meeting Needs
$193,595,000
District-wide Needs
$224,675,000
Grand Total
$1,890,793,000
42
Questions
Thank you
43