sacred heart and st. jerome schools accommodation review committee (arc) final report
DESCRIPTION
Sacred Heart and St. Jerome Schools Accommodation Review Committee (ARC) Final Report NCDSB Board of Trustees Public Meeting October 27 , 2012 Sacred Heart School. Background. At the NCDSB Board of Trustees meeting held on May, 18, 2011, the following motion was passed : - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Sacred Heart and St. Jerome Schools Accommodation
Review Committee (ARC)
Final ReportNCDSB Board of Trustees
Public Meeting October 27, 2012
Sacred Heart School
Background
At the NCDSB Board of Trustees meeting held on May, 18, 2011, the following motion was passed:
BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Northeastern Catholic District School Board place the following schools under Pupil Accommodation Review for the 2011-2012 school year: St. Jerome and Sacred Heart School in Kirkland Lake.
Resolution: 11-97
Representing St. Jerome School
Karen MacGregor - Principal
Tracy Lalande - Teacher Rep
Caroline Harvey - Non-Teaching Staff Rep
Melissa Burnside – Catholic School
Advisory Council Member (Chair, CSC)
Stephanie Sinclair – Parent Representative
Andra Pettenuzzo – Parent Representative
Susan Berlingeri – Parish Representative
Accommodation Review Committee members
Representing Sacred Heart Catholic School
Cheryl Ricco - Principal
Julia Spadetto - Teacher Rep (on leave)
Kimberley Walker-Hausel - Non-Teaching Staff Rep
Glenna Hesketh – Catholic School Advisory Council
Member
Susan Berlingeri – Catholic School Advisory Council
Member
Accommodation Review Committee members
Representing Central Office
Glenn Sheculski – Director of Education
(Chair of ARC)
Mary-Lou Pollon – Manager of Financial
Services
Robert Landry – Manager of Plant
Andrew Marks - Community Relations
Officer
Accommodation Review Committee members
ARC Communication• Media Releases/Advisories as to dates and times of all Public/Working Committee meetings;• Posting of dates and times of all Public/Working Committee meetings on Board Website;• Accommodation Review Committee link created on Board Website;• ARC Email Address and Feedback form created on Board Website;• ARC Voicemail created for feedback;• Feedback forms provided at all Public and Working Committee meetings.
Process of Public InputWorking Committee meetings were held on:
• Monday, April 2, 2012 @ 6:30 pm – Sacred Heart Catholic School
• Wednesday, April 11, 2012 @ 6:30 pm – Sacred Heart Catholic School
• Tuesday, May 1, 2012 @ 6:30 pm – St. Jerome School• Tuesday, June 12, 2012 @ 5:00 pm – Sacred Heart Catholic
School• Wednesday, September 12, 2012 @ 6:30 pm – Sacred Heart
Catholic School• Tuesday, September 18, 2012 (following 4th Public Meeting) –
Sacred Heart Catholic School
Process of Public Input
Public meetings were held on:
• Tuesday, April 17, 2012 – 1st Public Meeting @ St. Jerome School
• Tuesday, May 15, 2012 – 2nd Public Meeting @ Sacred Heart Catholic School
• Tuesday, June 19, 2012 – 3rd Public Meeting @ St. Jerome School
• Tuesday, September 18, 2012 – 4th Public Meeting @ Sacred Heart Catholic School
ARC Customized School Valuation Framework
Assessment of the following four considerations about the school(s) being reviewed:
• value to the student• value to the community• value to the school board• value to the local economy
Quantitative Data – Sacred Heart
Category ValueVALUE TO THE STUDENTS 36.77 out of 55 pointsVALUE TO THE BOARD 13.71 out of 25 pointsVALUE TO THE COMMUNITY
7.50 out of 15 points
VALUE TO THE LOCAL ECONOMY
3.75 out of 5 points
Total 61.73 out of 100 points
Quantitative Data – St. Jerome
Category ValueVALUE TO THE STUDENTS 36.75 out of 55 pointsVALUE TO THE BOARD 13.20 out of 25 pointsVALUE TO THE COMMUNITY
8.40 out of 15 points
VALUE TO THE LOCAL ECONOMY
3.75 out of 5 points
Total 62.10 out of 100 points
Quantitative Data
Please note that the value of each of the schools is relatively the same because:• The Board provides a level of education that is
standard across its region;• Both schools offer English and French Immersion
streams;• Both schools have not been identified as prohibitive
to repair;• Both schools are operating below capacity but
above 50% capacity.
ARC Considerations
In considering all of the accommodation options, thefollowing was taken into account:• Kirkland Lake was projected to have an increase in
population due to economic development trends;• The uniqueness of the JK to Grade 3 and Grades 4 to 8
structures of the schools;• The two schools have been well maintained with recent
renovations;• The schools operate within the expenditure levels of the
funding guidelines;• The current financial restraints within the Ontario
Ministry of Education.
As of the 4th ARC Working Committee Meeting, the options were narrowed down to three:
• Status quo • Amalgamate two schools into one in a brand new
building – Dual Track JK to Grade 8. • Addition and renovation to one of the existing schools
(based on research as to best location) – Dual Track JK to Grade 8.
ARC Options
The ARC believes that this report reflects itsrecommendations on the best approach to enable theBoard to continue to provide quality Catholic education to its students in Kirkland Lake.After much deliberation, the ARC Working Committeerecommends to the Board of Trustees of theNortheastern Catholic District School Board thatSacred Heart Catholic and St. Jerome Schools remainas Status Quo.
ARC Recommended Option
• Board to make its decision regarding the
school accommodations at the November
Board Meeting (Wednesday, November
28, 2012).• Principals to advise families and staff
in writing of the Board decision within
one week.
ARC Timelines