Operations Update Nita Mensia-Joseph, Chief Operations Officer - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Operations Update Nita Mensia-Joseph, Chief Operations Officer Atonja Allen, Senior Planning Administrator Dr. Calvin Frye, Director of Transportation Presented to the School Board * November 12, 2019

Overview ● School capacities and enrollment projection accuracy ● Transportation updates ○ Understanding the challenges and recommendations to resolve the issues ○ Answers to questions from the last Board meeting 2

CAPACITY UPDATE

Evolution of CAPACITY EVALUATION VDOE Capacity Worksheets In-House Excel Worksheets VDOE Capacity Worksheets (w/SOQ PTR) Design Capacity updated with Building Capacity = total # of Design Capacity established for all future completion of renovations and analysis with review of architectural floor plans classrooms x 23 (based on replacement of schools “CorelDraw” building diagrams) for all buildings; metric for long-term planning functions Program Capacity established as Functional Capacity removed metric for long-term planning Program Capacity established with calculation regular classrooms for SPED, PreK purposes; reflects actual (effective) and ESOL of DOE designated Permanent Spaces and utilization of buildings as benchmarked Non-Capacity Spaces Utilization Factors applied at against annual enrollment Per DOE, Utilization Factor applied at HS level Secondary level 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 In-House Excel Worksheets (ES & MS) and VDOE Capacity Worksheets VDOE Capacity Worksheets (HS) Design Capacity for HS adjusted to remove gym Building Capacity = total # of classrooms x 23 (based capacity based on TDHS example (room sq.ft review on building diagrams) compared to VDOE Appendix D matrix) Functional Capacity removed regular classrooms for Annual Program Capacity with School Inventory SPED, PreK and ESOL worksheets to document room-by-room use year-over-year. (Measure for utilization monitoring) Utilization Factors (various) applied at Secondary level

2019-20 Enrollment & Capacity Summary School Level 09/30/2019 Design Enrollment as 2019-20 SY Enrollment as Enrollment Capacity % Design Program % Program Capacity Capacity Capacity (see map link below) (see map link below) Elementary (PK-5) 28,477 32,320 88% 29,712 96% Middle (6-8) 14,780 15,186 97% 14,763 100% High (9-12) 19,308 21,358 90% 20,687 93% Total (excluding 62,565 68,864 91% 65,162 96% Regional Schools) 2019-20 School Capacity and Enrollment Full Report

Future Plans & Potential Impact CHANGE IN CCPS REPORTING Sample Zoning Case proposing 610 dwelling units: ● Maximum potential impact based on approved housing units in the County’s Approved Housing Pipeline Database (1st Qtr 2019) in current school attendance zones ● Construction phasing and/or projected completion of future housing units not yet provided ● Approved residential rezonings not yet approved by site plan/subdivision review are not included in this analysis 6

Enrollment Projection Accuracy There are several factors over time that influence enrollment projection accuracy. For example: ● New housing growth ● In-out migration data ● New school construction and influx of students in the attendance zones (“lives-with” enrollment) ● Demographic changes ● Kindergarten enrollment - live birth data Overall, enrollment projections for the district fall within what is considered acceptable levels based on industry standards; however, projections show a higher degree of “variability” for elementary and high schools. Unless the gaps in the County’s housing database are resolved, the following concerns remain with respect to long-range growth and new-school forecasting: ❖ An increase in the “variability” of projection accuracy A horizon that is reasonably accurate only out to ~2 to 3 year time frame ❖ 7

Enrollment Projection Comparison ● Actual Enrollment is the annual September 30th snapshot ● CCPS Projections prepared using Cohort Survival Ratio Methodology ● PK Enrollment included to show total enrollment; these data are a fixed value based on program funding and slots available and are not included in the K-12 Cohort Survival Ratio Methodology 8

Control Chart of Enrollment Projection Percent Differences Upper and lower limits (+/- 3 standard deviations) - when breached - signal that a significant change influencing projection accuracy has occurred. Under-projected Warning limits (+/- 2 standard deviations - Proj < Act not shown) indicate that there is a the potential that a significant change may be occurring Why is this important: Provides the limits where a projection percentage difference is outside what Over-projected would normally be expected. Proj > Act From a budget perspective, it provides the basis for estimating any potential revenue overstatement. 3s = ~1.9% or ~1200 students 2s = ~1.3% or ~800 students 9

Planning - Student Projection Accuracy K-5 K-5 projection control limits fall outside of the preferred accuracy range of 2%

Planning - Student Projection Accuracy - MS Middle school projection control limits fall just at the limits of the preferred level of accuracy

Planning - Student Projection Accuracy - HS High School projection control limits fall just outside the preferred limits of accuracy.

Future Enrollment Projections ● CCPS enrollment projections are prepared using the Cohort Survival Ratio (CSR) Methodology, the standard method used by school planners throughout the country. ● The CSR Methodology incorporates live births, historical enrollments, and housing data. ● Projected enrollments are most accurate for division-wide totals (K-12) and for school-level totals (elementary, middle, and high). ● Refinement to current components of projection methodology (including new housing estimates, impact of length of ownership, affordability, and in-out migration, among other analyses) would be helpful to develop more accurate individual school projections. ● County approved housing data and estimates -- unless housing data gaps are resolved -- will also increase/contribute to the “variability” of student-enrollment projection accuracy. ● Research conducted by Statistical Forecasting LLC and RLS Demographics reveals that the predictive ability of the CSR Methodology can range from 1-2 years or as many as 7 years but may not be the optimal method for long-range forecasts. 13

TRANSPORTATION

Challenges and Recommendations 1. Driver shortage a. Short term - $0.75 per hour increase in driver pay - as proposed in Schedule B b. Long term proposal - i. Address the salary compression to retain experienced drivers ii. Look at other opportunities for our drivers during their off season 2. Inadequate funding a. Address adequate funding as a result of program growth and infrastructure improvements b. Ex. CBG, general student enrollment growth, SPED, trips, and additional technology require adequate funding 15

Challenges and Recommendations 3. Feeder pattern stress a. Adjust some school start times to improve feeder-pattern alignment and bus balancing b. Ex. Tomahawk Creek, Grange Hall, Cosby cannot have the same start times 4. Office staff efficiency a. Short term - automate transportation side of time/attendance b. Long term - automate payroll side and address “pay by exception” versus pay by actual time worked 5. Staff (driver and office staff) development/training a. Additional safety training and defensive driving classes for existing drivers b. Additional training staff to provide services c. Training for office staff on all software systems to eliminate silos 16

Root Cause of Most Issues - Staffing Driver Stats Actions Planned or Underway ● Routes in FY2020 ~500 ● Training compensation to now include ● Total drivers needed including attending learners’ CDL preparation substitute drivers = 533 course ● Drivers under contract: 462 ● Plans to developing a survey tool to ● Shortage learn what it would actually take to ○ 38 drivers make the position attractive to other ○ 33 substitute drivers CDL drivers that currently do not drive ● Training a school bus ○ Drivers in the pipeline - 8 ○ Transferred to area offices week of 10/28 - 2 17

Arrival and Departure Times Late Morning Arrivals Late Afternoon Departures ● 49% of buses are departing later than 10 min ● ~1280 AM routes total, of which 6% arrive after the bell (10/1 through 10/25) after the tardy bell ● Standardization efforts for departure ○ ES - 7.0%* procedure ○ MS - 3.5%* ○ Created best-practice guidelines ○ HS - 5.8%* ○ Shared with principals on Oct. 24 ● 83 routes originally planned as second wave, of which 7%** arrive after tardy bell ● 21 second-wave routes have been eliminated to date * Available Data 9/3/19 - 10/25/19 (Source VEO Reports) **Based on available data 9/3/19 - 10/25/19 from VEO; Substitutes could 18 not be identified as 2nd-Wave buses and thus are not included(n=1706)