Atlanta Public Schools Atlanta Public Schools Capacity Study and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
atlanta public schools atlanta public schools capacity
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Atlanta Public Schools Atlanta Public Schools Capacity Study and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Oct 02, 2022 381 likes •762 views

C APACITY S TUDY 2011 Atlanta Public Schools Atlanta Public Schools Capacity Study and Facilities Plan SRT 4 Community Meeting: y g Wednesday, November 30, 2011 North Atlanta High School C APACITY S TUDY 2011 Tonights Agenda T i h A

slide-1
SLIDE 1

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Atlanta Public Schools Atlanta Public Schools Capacity Study and Facilities Plan

SRT 4 Community Meeting: y g Wednesday, November 30, 2011 North Atlanta High School

slide-2
SLIDE 2

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

T i h ’ A d Tonight’s Agenda

  • Consultant Presentation

– Provide an update on the Study process – Describe the rationale behind the Options presented

  • Demographic forces impacting enrollment
  • Demographic forces impacting enrollment
  • Key capacity issues impacting SRT 4
  • How to interpret the maps

genda

How to interpret the maps

  • Review the detailed maps and provide your input

– Ask questions of the consultant team

Ag

Ask questions of the consultant team – Provide your written comments on the forms provided

  • Rank and record your thoughts and observations

related to the Options presented

  • Suggest refinements or additional considerations
slide-3
SLIDE 3

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Study Status Update Study Status Update

slide-4
SLIDE 4

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Phase I: Data Collection/Modeling

s

Phase II: Alternatives Analysis Tonight begins the process of

y Process y Process

Phase III: Implementation Strategies vetting Options and developing “preferred“ implementation

Study Study

Submit Report: to the Superintendent and brief the School Board on findings implementation strategies to present to the Superintendent f S h l g Post Completion: Superintendent considers

  • f Schools

Post Completion: Superintendent considers findings & makes recommendations to the School Board

slide-5
SLIDE 5

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Public Input Process Public Input Process

  • On‐line demographics survey

– 4,250 responses received through November 23 4,250 responses received through November 23 – Paper version added in October to broaden response rate

  • 600+ paper survey returns are now being processed

cess cess

– On line survey will remain active for another week – Results will be used to help narrow/refine range of i d ibl ddi i l b

nput Pro nput Pro

  • ptions and possibly suggest additional concepts to be

explored before making study recommendations

  • Community meeting input

Public In Public In

Community meeting input

– You will be given an opportunity to respond in writing to the Options presented tonight – Responses will be tabulated and reported in January with the study recommendations

slide-6
SLIDE 6

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

P bli I P D Public Input Process to Date

  • Focus group meetings with SRT representatives

Focus group meetings with SRT representatives

– Held October 16 to 20 – Representative participation

  • cess
  • cess

– Discussed strengths, weaknesses, opportunities & threats impacting local schools id d h l i h ifi i f i

nput Pro nput Pro

– Provided the consultant team with specific information regarding local school and neighborhood conditions, local issues and parental concerns

Public In Public In

p – Discussed pros/cons of potential concepts to be evaluated

slide-7
SLIDE 7

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Focus Group Summary

  • Some schools have perhaps grown too large – further

expansion on some existing sites is not an option

  • The quality of facilities, use of technology and

mary mary

educational delivery vary across neighborhood schools

– The perception of academic inequality/poor performance levels in some schools is worse than reality

  • up Summ
  • up Summ

levels in some schools is worse than reality – Schools with diverse student populations consider that characteristic to be a strength

Focus Gro Focus Gro

  • Some schools have less physical capacity and can

effectively hold fewer students than planning

F

estimates indicate

slide-8
SLIDE 8

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

F G S Focus Group Summary

  • Evaluate the option to create a new elementary

school at Sutton MS.

  • Avoid creating larger attendance zones and

transporting children to schools further from their

  • neighborhoods. Avoid creating oddly shaped or

gerrymandered attendance zones just to achieve gerrymandered attendance zones just to achieve enrollment balance.

  • Consider alternative grade configurations including
  • Consider alternative grade configurations, including

K‐5 models in place of primary centers, 5th/6th grade, K‐8 configurations, etc. in some locations g , g , where it may make sense.

slide-9
SLIDE 9

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Remaining Study Process Remaining Study Process

  • We will combine, analyze & report input from tonight’s

session PLUS the demographic survey & focus groups

s s

session, PLUS the demographic survey & focus groups

  • We will consider that input in narrowing options down

to two recommended implementation strategies

y Process y Process

to two recommended implementation strategies

– Incorporate/refine the best elements of the 4 Options – Test additional scenarios for localized areas that may

the Study the Study

Test additional scenarios for localized areas that may emerge from these meetings

  • Calculate/report the financial implications of the two

t Steps in t Steps in

recommended strategies

  • Hold a second round of community meetings in

Next Next

January before finalizing recommendations and reporting findings to the Superintendent

slide-10
SLIDE 10

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Summary of Key Issues Impacting the Atlanta Public Schools Atlanta Public Schools and SRT 4

slide-11
SLIDE 11

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

U d t d E ll t F t Updated Enrollment Forecasts

  • Revised forecasts for each school and grade level have been

d d d d d f h i 2010 i

y

updated and extended from the previous 2010 estimates

  • These updated forecasts:

– Reflect 2010 Census data Summary Summary Reflect 2010 Census data – Incorporate final first quarter FTE student attendance figures for all APS schools, including charters Include revised student address data for students attending traditional Forecast S Forecast S – Include revised student address data for students attending traditional APS schools, charter schools, private schools and home schooled

  • Forecasts are extended to the 2021‐22 school year
  • llment F
  • llment F

– Provides 2 additional forecast years

  • These revised enrollment forecasts are based on

Enro Enro

existing attendance zone boundaries

slide-12
SLIDE 12

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

K i bl i ti APS ll t Key variables impacting APS enrollment

  • Enrollment bubble started in the past decade will be moving

h h h iddl & hi h h l d

y

through the middle & high school grades

  • Substantially lower housing starts – greater influence of resale

market turnover and households aging in place

Summary Summary

market turnover and households aging in place

  • More renter households delaying home ownership and having

school‐aged children

Forecast S Forecast S

  • Less out‐migration of families with school‐aged children to

suburban counties

  • Higher retention of students progressing through high school
  • llment F
  • llment F
  • Higher retention of students progressing through high school

(dropout/exit rates are declining)

  • Access to private school alternatives will be limited by the

Enro Enro

economy and a finite supply of available private school seats

slide-13
SLIDE 13

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Di t i t id ll t f t District‐wide enrollment forecast

35,000

APS Enrollment Trends & Forecasts (Including Charter Schools)

20,000 25,000 30,000 llment 5,000 10,000 15,000 Total Enrol

Trends Forecast Q1‐2011 A l Forecast Summary Elementary Middle High TOTAL

2005‐06 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 2015‐16 2016‐17 2017‐18 2018‐19 2019‐20 2020‐21 2021‐22 Elementary Schools Middle Schools High Schools

Actual Forecast Summary Current SRT Enrollment 27,424 10,610 11,957 49,991 2005 ‐ 11 Enrollment Change 3,127 12.9% 478 4.7% (810) ‐6.3% 2,795 5.9% Forecast Peak Enrollment 29,288 12,146 14,092 55,526 Forecast Change: 2011 to Peak Year 1,864 6.8% 1,536 14.5% 2,135 17.9% 4,169 8.3% Peak Enrollment Year 2018‐19 Elementary Middle High TOTAL 2016‐17 2019‐20 2021‐22 2021‐22 Forecast Enrollment 26,765 11,989 14,092 52,846 Forecast Change: Current to 2021‐22 (659) ‐2.4% 1,379 13.0% 2,135 17.9% 2,855 5.7%

slide-14
SLIDE 14

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

SRT Elementary School Enrollment Forecasts SRT Elementary School Enrollment Forecasts

(Updated to reflect 2010 Census Results)

slide-15
SLIDE 15

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

SRT Middle School Enrollment Forecasts SRT Middle School Enrollment Forecasts

(Updated to reflect 2010 Census Results)

Middl S h l E ll T d & F b SRT (I l di Ch S h l )

3 500 4,000 4,500 5,000

Middle School Enrollment Trends & Forecasts by SRT (Including Charter Schools)

1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 Total Enrollment 500 1,000 2005‐06 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 2015‐16 2016‐17 2017‐18 2018‐19 2019‐20 2020‐21 2021‐22 SRT 1 SRT 2 SRT 3 SRT 4

Trends Forecast Q1‐2011 Actual Forecast Summary Current SRT Enrollment 3,435 1,737 2,444 2,994 2005 ‐ 11 Enrollment Change (139) ‐3.9% (93) ‐5.1% 240 10.9% 470 18.6% Forecast Peak Enrollment 3,638 1,778 3,094 4,023 F t Ch 2011 t P k Y 203 5 9% 41 2 4% 650 26 6% 1 029 34 4% SRT 4 SRT 1 SRT 2 SRT 3 Forecast Change: 2011 to Peak Year 203 5.9% 41 2.4% 650 26.6% 1,029 34.4% Peak Enrollment Year 2021‐22 Forecast Enrollment 3,322 1,555 3,094 4,018 Forecast Change: Current to 2021‐22 (113) ‐3.3% (182) ‐10.5% 650 26.6% 1,024 34.2% 2013‐14 2012‐13 2021‐22 2020‐21

slide-16
SLIDE 16

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

SRT High School Enrollment Forecasts SRT High School Enrollment Forecasts

(Updated to reflect 2010 Census Results)

Hi h S h l E ll T d & F b SRT (I l di Ch S h l )

3 000 3,500 4,000 4,500

High School Enrollment Trends & Forecasts by SRT (Including Charter Schools)

1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 Total Enrollment 500 1,000 2005‐06 2006‐07 2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 2015‐16 2016‐17 2017‐18 2018‐19 2019‐20 2020‐21 2021‐22 SRT 1 SRT 2 SRT 3 SRT 4

Trends Forecast Q1‐2011 Actual Forecast Summary Current SRT Enrollment 3,457 2,361 3,110 3,029 2005 ‐ 11 Enrollment Change (831) ‐19.4% 458 24.1% 204 7.0% (641) ‐17.5% Forecast Peak Enrollment 3,807 2,493 3,421 4,497 F t Ch 2011 t P k Y 350 10 1% 132 5 6% 311 10 0% 1 468 48 5% SRT 1 SRT 2 SRT 3 SRT 4 Forecast Change: 2011 to Peak Year 350 10.1% 132 5.6% 311 10.0% 1,468 48.5% Peak Enrollment Year 2021‐22 Forecast Enrollment 3,748 2,426 3,421 4,497 Forecast Change: Current to 2021‐22 291 8.4% 65 2.8% 311 10.0% 1,468 48.5% 2021‐22 2016‐17 2013‐14 2021‐22

slide-17
SLIDE 17

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

SRT 4 Enrollment Forecasts

SRT 4 Enrollment Trends and Forecasts (Including Charter Schools)

SRT 4 Enrollment Forecasts

(Updated to reflect 2010 Census Results)

7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 t

SRT 4 Enrollment Trends and Forecasts (Including Charter Schools)

3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 Total Enrollmen

Trends Forecast Q1‐2011 Actual

1,000 2,000 2005‐06 06‐07 07‐08 08‐09 09‐10 10‐11 2011‐12 12‐13 13‐14 14‐15 15‐16 16‐17 17‐18 18‐19 19‐20 20‐21 21‐22 Elementary Schools Middle Schools High Schools

Forecast Summary Current SRT Enrollment 8,263 2,994 3,029 2005 ‐ 11 Enrollment Change 1,479 21.8% 470 18.6% (641) ‐17.5% Forecast Peak Enrollment 9,248 4,023 4,497 Elementary Schools Middle Schools High Schools

y g

Growth of nearly 3,500 students Nearly 1,500 additional

Forecast Change: 2011 to Peak Year 985 11.9% 1,029 34.4% 1,468 48.5% Peak Enrollment Year 2021‐22 Forecast Enrollment 8,570 4,018 4,497 Forecast Change: Current to 2021‐22 307 3.7% 1,024 34.2% 1,468 48.5% 2016‐17 2020‐21 2021‐22

students forecast at all grade levels. additional High School students.

slide-18
SLIDE 18

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Key SRT 4 Challenges Key SRT 4 Challenges

  • Solve existing ES, MS and HS overcrowding

d f d ll hif

  • Accommodate forecasted enrollment shifts

– The planned new NAHS, and the transfer of Sutton MS to the existing NAHS will probably not provide enough capacity to existing NAHS will probably not provide enough capacity to accommodate forecasted enrollment peaks – Existing schools are becoming too large & sites are too

Issues

constrained to provide much relief through further on‐site expansion – Enrollment growth cannot be accommodated without

SRT

– Enrollment growth cannot be accommodated without redistricting some population to the southern portion of SRT 4

  • Attendance zones with projected enrollment declines

and under‐enrolled schools also need to be addressed

slide-19
SLIDE 19

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

S ifi S h l I Specific School Impacts

Forecast Peak Current Peak Peak Projected School Crowding Conditions 2011‐12 Forecast Planning Enrollment Peak

If no action is taken….

Some schools will not be able to accommodate

g g (>95% of Design Capacity) Enrollment Enrollment Capacity Change Utilization Sutton MS 1,309 2,072 880 763 235% Rivers 635 885 528 250 168% North Atlanta HS 1,302 2,405 1,500 1,103 160%

forecasted enrollment peaks at various points during the forecast, requiring consideration

Garden Hills 693 846 682 153 124% Sarah Smith (K‐2 & 3‐5) 1,094 1,274 1,144 180 111% Bolton 511 784 792 273 99% Morris Brandon (K‐1 & 2‐5) 1,188 1,291 1,320 103 98% Boyd 392 493 506 101 97%

requiring consideration

  • f other future options.

Some schools are

Boyd 392 493 506 101 97% Forecasted Severe Current Peak 2011‐22 Projected School Underutilization 2011‐12 Forecast Planning Enrollment 2021 (<60% of Design Capacity) Enrollment Enrollment Capacity Change Utilization

currently under‐ enrolled and are forecast to serve even fewer students over the

White 258 203 660 (55) 31% Forest Hills 248 248 625 ‐ 40% Usher 359 324 792 (35) 41% Douglass HS 1,019 804 1,950 (215) 41% Grove Park 377 326 638 (51) 51%

fewer students over the next decade.

Grove Park 377 326 638 (51) 51% Harper Archer MS 540 508 968 (32) 52% CS King MS/HS 706 959 1,750 253 55%

slide-20
SLIDE 20

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Options Analysis Process and Mapping Outputs

slide-21
SLIDE 21

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Options Analysis Guidelines

  • Objectives

Options Analysis Guidelines

is

– Balance current building utilization to 80% to 90% of planning capacity where possible

  • Recommend school consolidation/closures in areas where

s Analysi Recommend school consolidation/closures in areas where forecasted enrollment does not support multiple schools

  • Provide added capacity for growth in zones which are projected to

experience further enrollment increases Options experience further enrollment increases

  • Propose boundaries that will be functional for 10 years if possible

– Attempt to assign students closest to their homes – Attempt to avoid splitting neighborhoods – Insure student safety and transportation efficiency by using major geographic features as boundaries – Attempt to maximize/keep feeder concept in tact

slide-22
SLIDE 22

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

SRT 4 C i Addi i SRT 4 Capacity Additions

  • The following additions to capacity are reflected in

the Draft Options for SRT 4

– Additions to MS & HS capacity are likely to be unavoidable d ll h

is

– Options test ways to accommodate ES enrollment with existing school expansions only, a new school only, or both – New ES & MS locations were assumed for purposes of

s Analysi

New ES & MS locations were assumed for purposes of testing impacts on surrounding attendance zones

Actions Impacting SRT 4 Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Planning Assumptions

Options

SRT 4 Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 New Schools New North Atlanta HS 1,800 seats 1,800 seats 1,800 seats 1,800 seats New North Atlanta MS 936 seats 936 seats 936 seats 936 seats New North Atlanta ES 648 seats 648 seats New North Atlanta ES 648 seats 648 seats School Expansions Morris Brandon ES Add 154 seats Add 154 seats Add 154 seats Rivers ES 648 Total Seats 648 Total Seats 648 Total Seats

slide-23
SLIDE 23

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

C E l d P id C i R li f

  • Redistricting and consolidation

Concepts Explored to Provide Capacity Relief

g

  • New construction based on SPLOST planning
  • Alternative grade configurations

is

Alternative grade configurations

  • Develop options that accommodate forecasted

enrollment growth over the next decade

s Analysi

enrollment growth over the next decade

  • Planning based on resident APS population with

the assumption that some level of transfer

Options

the assumption that some level of transfer activity will continue

Th l i id li bli h d f hi The planning guidelines established for this process limit the array of workable solutions

slide-24
SLIDE 24

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

H t I t t M f DRAFT O ti How to Interpret Maps of DRAFT Options

  • Schools are symbolized based on ES,

MS, and HS

  • Elementary Schools are green squares

ddl h l l

is

  • Middle Schools are orange triangles
  • High Schools are red stars
  • Current school attendance ones are

s Analysi

  • Current school attendance zones are

shown as a red/white dashed outline

  • The proposed Option zones are shown

Options

  • The proposed Option zones are shown

as the colored zones

– Attendance zone changes are indicated Attendance zone changes are indicated when the red/white dashed lines do not follow the colored backgrounds

slide-25
SLIDE 25

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

ption 1 RT 4 – Op pshot : SR Snap

slide-26
SLIDE 26

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

School Capacities

GIS Analysis Tools GIS Analysis Tools

GIS tools and address level data provide current school attendance distributions for APS students at any

is

for APS students at any level of geography. With this capability we can:

s Analysi

Count all students living within a particular geography, identify the schools they attend and

Options

schools they attend and the numbers involved Estimate the number of current APS students th t ld b ff t d that would be affected by a particular boundary adjustment Quickly test multiple y p

  • ptions and rule out

those that don’t work

slide-27
SLIDE 27

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

School Capacities

How technology is used How technology is used

Case Study – Rivers ES: SRT 4 elementary

is

schools are overcrowded Expansions are planned at several buildings in the SRT

s Analysi

the SRT New elementary is planned Need to rezone students

Options

to balance overcrowding and accommodate the new school

slide-28
SLIDE 28

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

School Capacities

How technology is used How technology is used

Case Study – Rivers ES: Starting point is count

is

students living in the zone currently Rivers has capacity for 528 students 525 live in

s Analysi

528 students, 525 live in the zone. Demographic study shows growth is expected.

Options

New school location is in the current Rivers zone

slide-29
SLIDE 29

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

School Capacities

How technology is used How technology is used

Case Study – Rivers ES: Adjacent schools need

is

immediate relief (Brandon , Garden Hills, Sarah Smith) Create zone that

s Analysi

Create zone that provides relief to adjacent zones and still effectively use Rivers ES.

Options

New zones are created based on neighborhood lines, and relieve Brandon Garden Hills Brandon, Garden Hills, and Sarah Smith ES. New ES zone is created to relieve area schools’ d d current and expected

  • vercrowding
slide-30
SLIDE 30

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

DRAFT O i M ( i d) DRAFT Options Maps (continued)

  • Keeping the feeder concept in mind, the options

Keeping the feeder concept in mind, the options have been developed as groups

– For instance, Elementary, Middle, and High School

is

Option 1 are all related – Options are organized by HS feeder groups

s Analysi

  • We will be available at the maps to help assist in

explaining the options

Options

slide-31
SLIDE 31

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

slide-32
SLIDE 32

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

slide-33
SLIDE 33

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

Please focus on the big picture Please focus on the big picture…

  • The Study objective is to provide long‐term solutions

f ll APS d j f i l h l for all APS students, not just a few particular schools

– Alternatives evaluated for one school also impact surrounding schools surrounding schools

  • These options are still drafts

– It is likely that one or more hybrids which combine the

Process

It is likely that one or more hybrids which combine the positive elements of the Options presented tonight, will emerge as study recommendations

Input

  • Taking no action would also have negative financial &

educational consequences to the School District

F ili dd d d d d ll d h l – Failing to address over‐crowded and under‐enrolled schools could be even more harmful to students in the long run

slide-34
SLIDE 34

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

C i F db k i K ! Constructive Feedback is Key!

  • The purpose of these community meetings is to

gather constructive input on the options presented

– The most helpful information you can provide is in the details For instance identify roads or areas that you

  • details. For instance, identify roads or areas that you

recommend changed rather than being opposed a particular attendance zone

Process

– The Options are complicated and take time to understand

  • It is important for us to receive accurate, measurable

Input

  • feedback. We are giving everyone the opportunity to

provide written comments that we will analyze.

It i t ibl t th i i f i th – It is not possible to measure the opinion of everyone in the room from verbal comments in an open Q&A format

slide-35
SLIDE 35

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

T i h ’ I P Tonight’s Input Process

  • Now is your opportunity to review the wall maps and

fill out a comment form

  • Copies of the updated enrollment forecasts, maps,

Process

tonight’s presentation and the on‐line version of the comment form will be posted on the APS website no later than Monday of next week

Input

later than Monday of next week

  • Three ways to record your feedback and comments

Fill out and turn in the form tonight – Fill out and turn in the form tonight – Return the paper version to your school for collection or mail it to the address on the form by the indicated deadline – Fill out the on line version

slide-36
SLIDE 36

CAPACITY STUDY 2011

School Capacities

Thank you for participating

To correspond with APS about this study To correspond with APS about this study via e‐mail, please send your comments to:

apsdemographicstudy@atlantapublicschools us apsdemographicstudy@atlantapublicschools.us