Transcript Update on Capacity Utilization Process Arlington Public Schools September 24, 2009 Process Overview to Date • May – August: Stakeholder meetings with – Parents and.

Update on Capacity
Utilization Process
Arlington Public Schools
September 24, 2009
Process Overview to Date
• May – August: Stakeholder meetings with
– Parents and citizens (FAC P/C Subcommittee)
– Principals & Staff
• August 27 Board Work Session
– Clarify direction to consultant
• September
– MGT of America hired as consultant team
– Data gathering begins
– MGT meets with FAC P/CS
– MGT begins tours and interviews
Overview of Fall Process
• October
– Complete school tours and interviews
– Data analysis
– Development of options
– Meeting with community
• November
– MGT makes final report to APS
– Superintendent recommends short-term and/or
long-term options
• December
– Board action on short-term and/or long-term
options
MGT of America – An Introduction
Your Team :
Dr. Bill Carnes – Partner-in-Charge
Dan Schmidt, JD – Project Director
Dr. Ed Humble
Dodds Cromwell, AIA
Lynda Fender
MGT and Schmidt have teamed for
projects in:
- St. Louis Public Schools, MO
- State of Colorado
- Rapid City Area Schools, SD
- Fort Wayne Community Schools, IN
- MSD of Decatur Township, IN
- The Public Schools of Brookline, MA
- Smyth County Public Schools, VA
- Vigo County School Corporation, IN
- Porter Township Schools, IN
- Fresno Unified School District, CA
- State of Wyoming
- Citrus County Public Schools, FL
- Boulder Public Schools, CO
- Anne Arundel Public Schools, MD
- Indianapolis Public Schools, IN
MGT of America has offices in:
Olympia, WA
Sacramento, CA
Austin, TX
Tallahassee, FL
Washington, D.C.
Schmidt Associates :
an Indiana-based facility planning,
design, and construction
management firm
Your Study – The Process
Task
Project Initiation
Input Gathering
Facility Tours
Data Analysis
Options
Development
Final Report
Preparation
Wk of Wk of Wk of Wk of Wk of Wk of Wk of Wk of Wk of Wk of
9/7
9/14
9/21
9/28
10/5 10/12 10/19 10/26 11/2
11/9
Consultant Scope of Work
1. An evaluation of current methods and estimates of
calculating capacities and projecting enrollments;
2. An analysis of space utilization at our elementary and
secondary schools and associated short-term and
long-term recommendations for better using space
within or among our buildings; and
3. Identification of opportunities and recommendations
for increasing permanent capacity at individual
schools (including feasibility, scope and cost) for
consideration in the upcoming CIP planning process.
General Guidance from
8/27/09 Work Session
• No boundary or admissions policies decisions to effect
2010-11 school year
• Include both elementary and secondary schools in
study
• December 2009 recommendations will frame further
conversations for systematic, long-term approach; may
also include short-term actions to manage crowding for
September 2010 (relocatables, room conversions,
program moves, class size)
Consultant – Projections/Capacity
• Evaluation of Enrollment Projection
Methodology
–Consider impact of housing developments
on projections
–New perspective on generation factors
–Consider providing a “choice” pattern
analysis
Consultant – Projections/Capacity
• Evaluation of Capacity Calculation Methodologies
– Determine if an equitable standard (not
necessarily the same) is being applied in
determining capacity
– Assess the functional capacity of schools
based on size of common areas
– Determine when schools reach a “tipping point”
as related to increased capacity due to class
size increases, converted spaces, or use of
relocatables on site
– Look at impact of moving to a 6/7 model at
secondary schools
– Consider adding relocatable capacity as a
column in utilization table
Consultant – Short and Long-Term Options
• Options Discussed in Previous Forums
– Increase the recommended maximum class
size(s) for one or more grade levels
– Add relocatable classrooms to increase capacity
– Convert interior space to increase capacity
– Consider adding and/or moving programs to
increase capacity and develop criteria for making
decisions about when and where to move
programs
– Consider boundary changes
– Build new capacity at APS or County sites
(Langston, Reed, Wilson, other APS/County
buildings)
– Consolidate PreK Programs
Consultant – Short and Long-Term Options
• Provide New and Alternative Solutions
– Include combination of small neighborhood
boundary/”forced choice”
– Examine current transfer policies
– Examine options to control enrollment (student
address verification and limiting employee tuition
benefit for non-County residents)
– Examine flexible schedule/locations for high
school students
– Consider transportation system efficiencies and
alternatives
Consultant – Additional Guidance
– Define problem (criteria and tipping point)
– Consider new capacity with an understanding
of limited financial climate and a focus on
using existing buildings; consider
public/private partnerships with County
partners and others at Wilson and Career
Center and possibly other sites
Web Page
Information and materials related to
process:
http://www.apsva.us/elemcapacity
In addition, the web page has an e-mail
option for comments and suggestions.
Update on Capacity
Utilization Process
Arlington Public Schools
September 24, 2009