District-wide Planning Study February 23, 2015 Dis istrict-wide - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

District-wide Planning Study February 23, 2015

Dis istrict-wide Pla lanning Study February ry 23, , 2015 Dr. David Zerbe Charles W. Watters James R Thompson AIA Superintendent Senior Research President Associate Methacton School Pennsylvania Economy Thompson Associates District League Architects and Planners

Agenda • History • Core Values, Assumptions and Considerations • Major Issues Facing the District • Enrollment Projections • Capacity Report • Options for Consideration • Superintendent’s Recommendation • Public Comments

History • March 2014 Finance Committee Discussion • April 2014 Study Approval • January 20, 2015 Enrollment Report Presented • February 3, 2015 Capacity Report Presented • February 23 & 25, 2015 Public Hearing

Core Values and Assumptions • Focus on what is best for all students • Maintain focus on educational excellence • Adhere to historical classroom size practices • Process going forward must include community participation • Make decisions with consideration for the future of our district

Considerations • Our Children • Our Families • Our Staff • Our Community • Our Operations • Our Finances • Our Future

Major Issues Facing the District • 96% of annual budget is fixed • PSERS (retirement system) • Medical costs • Pending capital (building) improvements • Revenues remain flat

Methacton Highlights • In 2013-2014, Methacton High School obtained the 2 nd highest SPP score among Montgomery County high schools. • In 2015, Methacton High School ranked 18 th highest SAT scores in the state. • In their first year of competition, Methacton High School's Technology Student Association teams qualified to compete in the national Test of Engineering Aptitude, Mathematics, and Science problem solving and oral competition. The teams went on to obtain a ranking of 6 th in the nation!

Methacton Highlights • 7 students obtained perfect scores on the SAT over the past 10 years. • Class of 2014 earned scholarship and grant money in excess of $16.4 million to further their education. • In 2013-2014, Methacton High School captured 6 PAC- 10 Championships and 3 District 1 titles. A single school year accomplishment unprecedented in school history. • In 2014, Methacton tied for 3 rd most recognized National Merit Scholars in the state of Pennsylvania – including private schools .

Current Status Enrollment 2007/2008 – 2014/2015 5,600 5,469 5,500 5,400 5,332 5,310 5,289 5,300 5,200 5,161 5,085 5,100 5,042 4,974 5,000 4,900 7 year decline of 495 4,800 students 4,700 2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 2013/2014 2014/2015

Agenda (continued) • Enrollment Projections • Capacity Report • Options for Consideration • Superintendent’s Recommendation • Public Comments

• PEL is a recognized leader in this area of research. • PEL is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that since 1936 has been helping state and local governments. • PEL has undertaken more than 175 school district studies. (representative sample) • East Penn School District – April 2014 • Radnor Township School District – January 2014 • Tredyffrin-Easttown School District – January 2014 • Abington School District – December 2013 • Norristown Area School District – February 2013 • Council Rock School District – February 2013 • Souderton Area School District – March 2012

• James R. Thompson AIA • President of Thompson Associates Architects and Planners • MArch Carnegie Mellon University • Architect for over 100 schools • Educational Planner for 16 PA School Districts including: • Upper St. Clair SD • State College Area SD • Easton Area SD • School District of Springfield Township • School District of Cheltenham Township • Marple-Newtown SD

Capacity and Options • Introduction • Current Status • Future Options • 7 Options

Current Status Current Enrollment Grades K to 4 • Arrowhead: 295 • Woodland: 299 • 59% of 500 capacity • 60% of 500 capacity • 8 full-size classrooms • 7 full-size classrooms • Worcester: 367 • Audubon: 433 • 73% of 500 capacity • 87% of 500 capacity • 7 full-size classrooms • 5 full-size classrooms Total Enrollment = 1,733 • Eagleville: 356 69% of 2,500 school capacity • 71% of 500 capacity Data above reflects 10/1/2014 • 6 full-size classrooms Full-size classrooms=Special Education/Pupil Services Data by building reflects 11/21/2014

Gr Grad ades es K K to 4 to 4 Enr Enrollment ollment vs vs Capa pacity city 2700 2500 2500 767 students @25/sec 2225 2225 2200 2200 2200 467 students @22/sec 1958 1958 1700 Upper Limit- 5 Schools with 4 Sections at 25 1733 1728 1721 Number of Students 1703 1701 Students 1644 1627 1610 Lower Limit- 5 Schools with 4 Sections at 22 1591 1590 1590 Students Upper Limit- Current Sections at 25 Students Lower Limit- Current Sections at 22 1200 Students Grades K to Four Enrollment 700 200 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25

Current Status Grades K to 4: School Condition and Major Needs Items of need on this slide are addressed through capital borrowing Arrowhead Audubon • Condition: Good/Fair • Condition: Good/Fair • $2 million in 3 to 5 years • $2 million in 3 to 5 years • +$10 million in 5 to 10 years • +$10 million in 5 to 10 years • ADA accessibility upgrades • Roof replacement • Mechanical / electrical upgrades • ADA accessibility upgrades • Masonry restoration • Mechanical / electrical upgrades • Window replacements • Masonry restoration • Modular classroom upgrades • Window replacements • Modular classroom upgrades

Current Status Grades K to 4: School Condition and Major Needs Items of need on this slide are addressed through annual operating budget Woodland Eagleville • Condition: New • Condition: New • Masonry repairs • Masonry repairs • Roof leaks • Library window leaks Worcester • Condition: Good • No major needs

Comb ombined ined Fifth Fifth an and Sixth d Sixth Gr Grad ade Enr e Enrollment ollment vs vs Capa pacity city 1100 41 sections X 25 students 1000 1025 1025 223 students 900 34 sections X 812 22 students 802 800 748 773 748 770 756 747 737 726 Number of Students 711 709 700 693 600 Upper Limit- 41 Sections at 25 Students 500 Lower Limit- 34 Sections at 22 Students Grades Five and Six Enrollmment 400 300 200 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25

Current Status Grades 5 to 6: School Condition and Major Needs Skyview • Condition: New • No major needs

Comb ombined ined Se Seven enth th an and Eighth d Eighth Gr Grad ade e Enr Enrollment ollment vs vs Capa pacity city 1200 1100 1105 1105 85% utilization = 328 students 972/.85= 1000 972 972 900 75% utilization = 195 students 805 800 794 Number of Students 777 767 763 749 742 740 731 720 700 703 600 Upper Limit- 1105 at 25 Students per section 500 Lower Limit- 972 at 22 Students per section Grades Seven and Eight Enrollment 400 300 200 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25

Current Status Grades 7 to 8: School Condition and Major Needs Arcola • Condition: Good • Masonry repairs • Mechanical / electrical upgrades Items of need on this slide are addressed through annual operating budget

Comb ombined ined Ninth Ninth thr throu ough gh Twelfth elfth Gr Grad ade e Enr Enrollment ollment vs vs Capa pacity city 2200 2000 1949 1949 85% utilization = 287 students 1800 1720 1720 75% utilization = 58 students 1662 1645 1616 1600 1591 1567 1565 1562 1555 1512 1505 1486 1400 Number of Students 1200 1000 Upper Limit- 1949 at 85% of 25 Students per section Lower Limit- 1720 at 75% of 22 Students 800 per section Grades Nine to Twelve Enrollment 600 400 200 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25

Current Status Grades 9 to 12: School Condition and Major Needs High School • Condition: Good • Mechanical / electrical upgrades • Masonry restoration • Upgrade modular classrooms Items of need on this slide are addressed through annual operating budget

Future Options Future Options : 7 Options • K-4 (3 Options) • K-5 (2 Options) • K-3 & 4-8 Skyview / Arcola • K-6 Neighborhood Elementary Schools

Future Options K-4 Option (1) – No Change Grade configuration K-4 / 5-6 / 7-8 / 9-12 Pros: AR K-4 • Maintains successful K-4 program AU • Recent 5-6 and 7-8 programs remain EV WD • Maintains same level of special education / pupil support services WR • Does not require grade re- 5-6 SV configuration • Does not require re-drawing AC 7-8 attendance lines HS 9-12

Future Options K-4 Option (1) – No Change Grade configuration K-4 / 5-6 / 7-8 / 9-12 Cons: AR • Does not address excess capacity at K-4 AU five elementary schools EV • Does not address excess capacity at WD Skyview / Arcola WR • Does not improve operational 5-6 efficiency SV • Significant capital improvements are AC 7-8 needed in next 3-5 and 5-10 years HS 9-12