Update to 2007 Facilities Assessment and Current Proposal Board of Trustees Workshop June 21, 2012...

Update to 2007 Facilities Assessment and Current Proposal

Board of Trustees Workshop

June 21, 2012

Photos of students and a lab/classroom setting

Agenda

2

Background Process Findings Proposal

Parsons Team

National experts + local knowledge Parsons Planning & Assessment

MGT of America Educational Suitability

Natex Architects * One-line Drawings

Bovay Engineers * Assessment

CBIC * Assessment

Marshall Engineering * Assessment

PGAL Assessment

One World Strategy Group * Communications* M/WBE Firm

3

Background: Scope of Work

Phase 1 of HISD Facility Master Plan

Update 2007 Facility Database

Gather Community Input

Identify Schools to Assess

Propose Facility Improvements

Develop Budget Proposal

4

Background: Overview of Previous Facilities Programs

5

1998: Rebuild 2002 Designed to relieve overcrowding and address fire and life-safety issues

2002: Rebuild HISD Focused on replacement of obsolete facilities and technology upgrades

2007: HISD Bond Proposal 2007Proposed to enhance security at all schools, improve science labs, replace obsolete facilities, and improve schools not covered in past programs

Background: Overview of Previous Facilities Programs

6

Background: HISD Facilities by Age

7

Background: HISD Schools Built by Decade and Level

8

Baby Boomers

Growth of the Suburbs

Rebuild Houston

Significant Focus on Primary Schools

Background: Current Situation

Earlier facility improvement efforts focused on the ELEMENTARY LEVEL

Commitment to maintain and improve neighborhood schools at the SECONDARY SCHOOL LEVEL

Need to match facilities to PORTFOLIO of PROGRAMS

9

Agenda

10

Background Process

Solicit Community Input Review and Align Standards Review Capacity Data Conduct Assessments

Findings Proposal

Putting the Pieces Together

11

Solicit School Community Input


Review Enrollment Projections, Capacity

and Utilization

Review Enrollment Projections, Capacity

and Utilization

Review and Align Educational

Suitability and Technology Standards

Review and Align Educational

Suitability and Technology Standards

Conduct Facility Assessments


GOAL: Broad-based participation at each site

PROCESS: ALL schools invited to provide input Principals sent “Packet” to facilitate school

community input Tool available for more than 6 weeks Sign-in sheets Group information Ensure that every voice is recorded

12

Community


Data Gathering Tool - Example

Q2. What is your level of satisfaction with the overall physical condition of the buildings at your school?

Satisfied Somewhat satisfied Dissatisfied

Q3. Please explain why you are satisfied or

dissatisfied

13

Community


RESULTS:

14

95% response rate237 schools and 3,302 participants

Q2: What is your level of satisfaction with the overall physical condition of the buildings at your school?

•Satisfied 19%•Somewhat satisfied 32%•Dissatisfied 48%

Community


RESULTS:

15

Q3. Please explain why you are:

Satisfied: “We have a brand new school that is beautiful.”

Somewhat satisfied : “The new building looks nice, but the old building needs a lot of renovations.”

Dissatisfied : “There are water leaks and there is constant repair on the same issues.”

Community


RESULTS WILL BE USED FOR: Developing priorities and Proposal:

HISD Maintenance Department Planning Capital Improvement Planning Long-Range Facility Master Planning

16

Community

Review and Align Educational Suitability and Technology Standards

GOAL: Understand current and future district goals PROCESS:

Conduct focus groups and interviews with HISD experts Apply national experience/TEA Standards Align Assessment Tool to existing HISD Educational

Specifications Create Educational Suitability and Technology

Assessment Tools

17

Standards

Review and Align Educational Suitability and Technology Standards

Assessment Tool Learning Environment Room Size Location Storage and Equipment Technology

18

Standards

Review Enrollment Projections, Capacity and Utilization

Gather HISD demographics and

enrollment data Evaluate current utilization rates: permanent spaces Examine future utilization scenarios

Effect of Improved Facilities Program Offerings Community Changes Enrollment Growth / Decline

19

Utilization


GOAL: Use existing information and gather new data to identify current facility needs

PROCESS:

Conduct Desktop Modeling Activity Update scores based on changes since 2007 Develop Composite Score for each school

Conduct Field Assessments Validate current conditions Update data and drawings

20

Assessment


.

Desktop Composite Score - Examples

21

School Name ConditionScore

Suitability and Technology

Composite Score

Score Weighting Formula

50% 50% 100%

School A 50 72 61School B 37 63 50School C 82 92 87

Assessment

Conduct Field Assessments

3 Areas of Review: Condition Educational Suitability Technology Readiness

Site Visit Process Interview Principal and Plant Operators Walk the buildings and site

22

Assessment

Agenda

23

Background Process Findings

School Community Findings

Educational Suitability and Technology Findings

Facility Themes Proposal

FINDINGS: School Community Input (N= 3,302)

24

FINDINGS: School Community Input

25

Issue Most Frequently Identified

Condition Repairs Needed

HVAC Plumbing Technology Parking

Educational Suitability

ImprovementsRestrooms General

ClassroomsGym andAthletics

Auditorium/ Stage

Safety Issues Parent/Bus Parking Multiple Entrances

Building Configuration

FINDINGS: Educational Suitability Review

General classrooms, Tech labs, and special education rooms do not meet current standards

Traffic and parking are a problem

Schools are not designed for easy supervision and control of entrances

Lack of storage

26

FINDINGS: Technology Readiness Review

Electrical service is insufficient in older schools

Schools lack video distribution systems

Communications / IT equipment is housed inappropriately

Equipment is not up to date

HOWEVER, with recent work, network connectivity and performance are greatly improved

27

Themes

High schools are “due”

Reinvest in neighborhoods

Match facility to program

“Build it and they will come”

Finish last phase of earlier projects

Maintain our heritage into the future

Provide technology upgrades

Revitalize appearance and capabilities

28

Agenda

29

Background Process Findings Proposal

Proposal

30

High School Focus:

Replace existing schools

Replace Inadequate Facilities

Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate

Build New Schools

Renovate

Proposal

31

K-8: Facilities Match Program

Middle School Needs

Elementary School Needs

District-wide Needs

High School Focus: Replacements: $577,067,000

32

Furr High SchoolHigh School for Performing and Visual Arts

Lee High School

Madison High School

Sharpstown High School

Sterling High School

Washington High School

Yates High School

High School Focus: Replace Inadequate Facilities: $353,696,000

33

Bellaire High School

Lamar High School

Sam Houston High School

Westbury High School

High School Focus: Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate:

$258,953,000

34

Austin High School

Eastwood Academy

Milby High School

Waltrip High School

Worthing High School

High School Focus: New Schools: $27,000,000

35

North Early College High School

South Early College High School

High School Focus: Renovations: $61,125,000

36

Davis High School

DeBakey High School

Jones High School

Jordan High School

Kashmere High School

Scarborough High School

Sharpstown International High School

Young Men’s College Prep

Young Women’s College Prep

K-8: Facilities Match Program: $120,732,000

37

Garden Oaks Elementary School

Pilgrim Academy

Wharton Dual Language School

K-8: Completion

Mandarin Chinese Language Immersion Magnet School at Gordon

K-8: Replacement

Middle Schools: Meeting Needs: $73,950,000

38

Dowling Middle School

Middle School: Replacement

Grady Middle School

Middle School: Addition

Elementary Schools: Replacements: $126,248,000

39

Askew Elementary School

Condit Elementary School

Kelso Elementary School

MacGregor Elementary School

Parker Elementary School

Elementary Schools: Meeting Needs: $67,347,000

40

Smith, K. Elementary School

Elementary School: Renovation and Addition

Elementary School: New

New Elementary School

Location: TBD

Elementary School: Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate

Tijarena Elementary School

District-Wide Needs: $224,675,000

41

Safety and Security Improvements

Technology Improvements: Equipment and Infrastructure

Restroom Renovations: Middle Schools

Athletic Improvements: Field Houses

Land Acquisitions

Proposal Summary

42

High School Focus $1,277,841,000

K-8: Facilities Match Program $120,732,000

Middle Schools: Meeting Needs $73,950,000

Elementary Schools: Meeting Needs $193,595,000

District-wide Needs $224,675,000

Grand Total $1,890,793,000

Questions

Thank you

43

Update to 2007 Facilities Assessment and Current Proposal Board of Trustees Workshop June 21, 2012...

Documents

Transcript of Update to 2007 Facilities Assessment and Current Proposal Board of Trustees Workshop June 21, 2012...