facilities task force a review of options and considerations
DESCRIPTION
Facilities Task Force A Review of Options and Considerations. February 16, 2011 . Tonight’s Agenda. Facilities Task Force. Review Assets and Challenges From Last Meeting Review Necessary Assumptions Look at Possible Considerations Take The Next Step. Table 1 – Assets Table 1 – Challenges. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Facilities Task ForceA Review of Options and
ConsiderationsFebruary 16, 2011
Facilities Task Force
Tonight’s AgendaReview Assets and Challenges From Last Meeting
Review Necessary Assumptions
Look at Possible Considerations
Take The Next Step
Facilities Task Force
Table 1 – Assets Table 1 – Challenges*Strength of curriculum
offerings *Community has high
expectations of our educational system*Fairly conservative/fiscally
soundMiddle School focused on kidsMeeting very diverse student
population needsFacilities in good condition
*Class sizesChanging demographicsCurrent building floor plans do not
lend to high scheduling efficiencyCurrent older facilities not
designed to support 2011 technology
Facilities Task Force
Table 2 – Assets Table 2 – Challenges*Increasing Enrollment*Community Partnerships
- U of M FellowshipGraduation rates increasingPositive public perception of School
BoardAll day KindergartenInvestments in science education –
MS, HSChoices in curriculumSuccess 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 populationHistorical perception of class
size/space utilizationResources spread across four
elementary schools
Facilities Task Force
Table 3 – Assets Table 3 – Challenges*District Finances good
- Low debt- Good financial management
Hormel Foundation -Corporate supportStaff Development options
-Masters program (= higher quality education for kids)
Strong PSEOAfter school/extra-curricular
activities
*Larger class sizes*Facilities outdatedLow district family income –
Free/reduced lunch %ELL/cultural differencesHigh Sped Ed numbersEmerging/promising teaching
methodologies do not fit current spacesSpaces not conducive to how
we want to educate our kids
Facilities Task Force
Table 4 – Assets Table 4 – Challenges*Hormel Foundation
support*Kindergarten centerScience labsCurriculumCommunity involvement
*Unfunded mandates*Income gap vs. state
averageAchievement
gap-socio/economic status
Space constraintsFootball program
Facilities Task Force
Table 5 – Assets Table 5 – Challenges*High quality staff*All day kindergarten
centerParent involvement @
elementaryReading & math centers @
elementaryMiddle School Team modelNeighborhood elementary
schoolsNew labs @ MS & HSCommunity Partnerships
*Access & security @ sites*Class sizes*Elementary & MS spacePick-up & drop-off @ sitesLack of new labs @ elementariesPotential schedule changesParent involvement @ secondaryRoom sizesBathrooms @ kindergarten
centerCreating a sense of community
@ secondary with students (Owatonna
example)
Facilities Task Force
Table 6 – Assets Table 6 – Challenges*Programming –strong,
student centered programming*Community –
CollaborationFamily supportPartnerships
Increasing enrollmentHigh quality programmingComprehensive programmingSupportive communityStrong partnerships
*Building – age, capacity, infrastructure, energy
efficiency*$$ - state funding,
mandates Aging buildings
Space for programmingState fundingMandatesInfrastructure – TechnologyRate of change – knowledgeSpaceDiversity – changing
demographics
Facilities Task Force
Table 6 – Assets Table 6 – ChallengesAll-day everyday KindergartenEarly childhood programmingStudent support systemsFamily support systemsSpecialized programming- SPED, GT, ELL, InterventionSuccess CoachesALCEarly interventionInnovative Middle School Science, teaming, Fine Arts,
College ReadinessAHS – Teaming, retaining
studentsGlobal learningInvolved parentsDiversity – changing
demographics
SecurityEnergy inefficienciesParkingGreen spaceClass sizeIncreasing enrollment
Austin Public Schools Strategic Roadmap
Mission Statement
Engaging & empowering ALL learners for life
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
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
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
Assumptions
Middle K/High Migration EnrollmentActual Enrollment 2010/2011 – 4,399Projected Enrollment 2014/2015 –
4,870Projected Enrollment 2019/2020 –
5,311
Assumptions
Woodson Kindergarten Center
Enrollment 2010/11 – 355
Enrollment Capacity – 352Projected High Point – 419 (13/14)Difference - (67)
Assumptions
Elementary Schools
Enrollment 2010/11 – 1,838
Enrollment Capacity – 1,746Projected High Point – 2,032 (18/19)Difference - (286)
Assumptions
Ellis Middle School
Enrollment 2010/11 – 943
Enrollment Capacity – 975Projected High Point – 1,321 (18/19)Difference - (346)
Assumptions
Austin High School
Enrollment 2010/11 – 1,263
Enrollment Capacity – 1,550Projected High Point – 1,587 (19/20)Difference - (37)
Assumptions
* Program Needs and Innovations* Demographic and Socioeconomic Factors* Site Constraints* Building Space Limitations* Tax Impact
Considerations
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
Demographic and Socioeconomic Factors
Racially Segregated Attendance Areas Socioeconomically isolated Attendance Areas Growth Areas Within the Community/School
District
Site Constraints
State Site Requirements Existing Site Limitations Vacant Buildings on Potential Sites Availability of Potential Vacant Sites Possible Partnerships to Acquire Sites
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
Tax Impact
Public Tolerance for a Tax Increase $20 Million Available for Construction with No Tax
Increase
Their World Has Changed
Next Steps
Dream! Do Not Limit Yourself Generate Potential Solutions and Evaluate How
They Fit With our Considerations Create Questions You Need Answers To