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