Austin

Independent School District

Facility Master Plan

Community Meeting #3

January 12
January and 2011
12-13, 13, 2011
Tonight’s Agenda
• Review FMP Process

•Educational Success

• Budget Realities

• Current Facility Inefficiencies

• Options Development

• Decision Criteria

• Proposed Preliminary Options

• Phasing Plan

• Feedback Instructions

January 12-13, 2011 2

 FMP Process Status

OCTOBER 12 – JANUARY 12-13 JANUARY 18 – FEBRUARY 14 FEBRUARY 15 – MARCH 28

JANUARY 8 FEBRUARY 14 MARCH 27

Task Force Task Force

Receives Task Force Board Takes
Generates Board Reviews Draft Task Force Action on
and Feedback Develops Draft of of Preliminary Finalizes Acceptance
Evaluates from Preliminary Recommendations Recommendations of Facility
Options Community Recommendations
Meeting #3 Master Plan

January 12-13, 2011 3

AISD’s Educational Success
• 2009 reading results from National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP) demonstrate that fourth and eighth grade reading scores
exceed those from Large Central Cities

• 65% of fourth graders tested scored at or above the basic level,

and 32% scored at or above proficient

• 71% of eighth graders tested scored at or above the basic level

and 30% scored at or above the proficient level

• SAT average scores are higher than State and National averages
2009 Average Score 2010 Average Score
AISD State Nation AISD State Nation
Verbal 502 486 501 500 484 501
Math 526 506 516 527 505 515
Writing 488 475 493 487 473 492
Total 1516 1467 1509 1514 1462 1509
January 12-13, 2011 4
Educational Success
 Investment in facilities in alignment with
2010-2015 Strategic Plan:

 Strategy #4 – align resources to accomplish

priorities within a balanced budget
4. 3 Manage taxpayer resources wisely by developing
tools and models to regularly monitor program
effectiveness, and by identifying and implementing
fiscal and operational efficiencies.

4.5 Develop and implement long-range plans for

facilities, transportation, libraries and technology
that align infrastructure with the district’s
educational plan.

4.7 Ensure efficiency and efficacy of existing facilities

before investing in new facilities

January 12-13, 2011 5

 Educational Success

 Educational Framework developed with community input

to guide the Facility Master Plan process
Planning Guidelines
A. Priorities for decision making and
optimal learning environments
B. Facility utilization alternatives
C. Transfer policies
Programmatic Considerations
A. School size
B. Grade configuration
C. Student assignment
D. Transportation
E. Fine Arts
F. Signature Programs
G. Magnet Schools
H. Athletic Programs
I. Career and Technical Programs
J. Pre-Kindergarten/Early
Childhood Programs
K. Student Services
L. Administrative Spaces

January 12-13, 2011 6

Budget Realities
Financial Landscape
• Local Revenue: residential property values are
declining
• State Revenue: State facing estimated $27B
shortfall – if the budget deficit is bridged by cutting
spending alone, education will be impacted
substantially
• Federal Stimulus Funds: $74 million over 2 years,
ends 2010/11

January 12-13, 2011 7

Budget Realities

FY 2010: AISD reduced its budget by $14.6 million

FY 2011: AISD will reduce its budget by $13.1 million

FY 2012: An estimated budget shortfall of $54.4

million for FY12, in order for AISD to continue
doing business as we do today

January 12-13, 2011 8

Current Facility Inefficiencies
Analysis of facilities shows significant inefficiencies.
 Utilization (Population/Permanent Capacity)
 Optimal Range = 85%-105%
 27 (25%) schools below 85%
 55 (50%) schools above 105%
 Portables
 108 portables at 27 schools with less than 85% utilization
 Facility Condition Index (FCI) Assessment
 1 facility above 65% FCI (Pease ES)
 2 facilities above 55% FCI (Wooten ES, Zilker ES)

Current inventory of regular elementary and secondary schools includes 112 schools.

January 12-13, 2011 9

Options Development
A Community Commitment
 Task Force: parents, community members, teachers, and AISD staff,
 9 months of work and development
 94 total options reviewed by Task Force to date
 9 community engagement meetings provided critical feedback
A Community Approach
 Achieve District-wide facility efficiency through shared sacrifice
 Retain facilities for future use where consolidation is needed
 Retain instructional programs and distribute equitably – attract students to
their neighborhood schools
 Improve instructional programs district-wide
 Implement school-level transition plans
January 12-13, 2011 10
Options Development
Information/data considered by Task Force:

 Current condition of buildings (FCI)

 Educational adequacy of school facilities

 Current and proposed programs

 Current and projected population growth and decline

 Lease obligations, current and possible use of buildings,

and administrative facilities

January 12-13, 2011 11

Decision Criteria
 Educational Enhancement – meet the educational needs of all
students

 Efficient Space Utilization – optimum utilization range is

between 85 to 105 percent of permanent capacity

 Cost Savings – decrease M&O expenses or capital cost

avoidance of correcting building deficiencies and building
operating costs per student

 Community Impact – impact of change versus the gains

 Future Growth – account for future population

growth/decreases

 Facility Condition – Facility Condition Index rating

January 12-13, 2011 12
Proposed Preliminary Options
 Closure and Consolidation Options
 Close Joslin ES, reassign students to Sunset
Valley ES and adjust boundaries with Boone ES
and Cunningham ES
 Close Pease ES
 Closes Brooke ES and reassign students to
Allan ES and Zavala ES
 Close Ortega ES and reassign students to
Govalle ES
 Close Oak Springs ES and reassign students to
Blackshear ES
January 12-13, 2011 13
Proposed Preliminary Options
 Closure and Consolidation Options
 Close Sanchez ES and reassign students to New
ES, Zavala ES, and Metz ES. Adjust boundaries
for Travis Heights ES and Mathews ES
 Close Barton Hills ES and Zilker ES and reassign
students to Becker ES and Dawson ES
 Close Pearce MS and reassign students to
Garcia MS and Webb MS
 Total Annual M&O Savings = $11.2 M
 Capital Cost Avoidance = $66.3 M

January 12-13, 2011 14

Proposed Preliminary Options
 Boundary Options
 Realign boundaries between Maplewood ES
and Cambpell ES
 Realign boundaries between Akins HS and
Crockett HS
 Savings = $0
 Improves Efficiencies

January 12-13, 2011 15

Proposed Preliminary Options

 New Construction Options

 1 middle school
 1 high school
 3 elementary schools
 2008 Bond Program Undesignated
Elementary School be located in North
Central Austin to provide relief (in addition
to the approved 2004 Bond Program
north central elementary school)

January 12-13, 2011 16

Proposed Preliminary Options
 Immediate Efficiency Options
 Aggressive energy management program
 Four-day summer work week and shut down
during July
 Portable classroom reduction
 Centralized summer custodial program
 Hub transportation plan to magnet schools
 Savings = $2 M

January 12-13, 2011 17

Proposed Preliminary Options
 Efficiency/Revenue Options Requiring
Further Study
 Eliminate lease space
 Raise/lower thermostats in schools 4 degrees
 Central custodial supervision
 Consolidate maintenance functions
 Sell administrative facilities (CAC, Baker)
 Lease AISD space to outside entities
 Revise current rental policies

January 12-13, 2011 18

Phasing Plan

 Phased implementation will ensure coordination of plan

components over 10-year period

 First phase will include components that can be implemented

quickly and will make an immediate impact on operating
costs

 Phasing will be dependent upon the development of future

bond programs required to fund identified components

January 12-13, 2011 19

Feedback Instructions
WE WANT TO HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK –
please complete and return the comment sheet provided
to you as you arrived.

Comments may also be submitted by visiting

Facility Master Plan link at www.AustinISD.org.
All written comments will be included in a final public report.
All verbal comments will be videotaped and posted on the AISD website.

Click on the Facility Master Plan link at www.AustinISD.org

January 12-13, 2011 for comprehensive information. 20
 Next Steps

JANUARY 12-13 JANUARY 18- FEBRUARY 14 FEBRUARY 15- MARCH 28

FEBRUARY 14 MARCH 27

Task Force Board Takes

Task Force Action on
Receives Board Reviews Draft Task Force
Develops Draft of
Feedback from
Preliminary
of Preliminary Finalizes Acceptance
Community Recommendations Recommendations of Facility
Recommendations
Meeting #3 Master Plan

Click on the Facility Master Plan link at www.AustinISD.org

January 12-13, 2011 for comprehensive information. 21