1. Update on Capacity Utilization Process Arlington Public Schools September 24, 2009

2. Process Overview to Date May – August: Stakeholder meetings with –Parents and citizens (FAC P/C Subcommittee) –Principals & Staff August 27 Board Work Session –Clarify direction to consultant September –MGT of America hired as consultant team –Data gathering begins –MGT meets with FAC P/CS –MGT begins tours and interviews

3. Overview of Fall Process October –Complete school tours and interviews –Data analysis –Development of options –Meeting with community November –MGT makes final report to APS –Superintendent recommends short-term and/or long-term options December –Board action on short-term and/or long-term options

4. MGT of America – An Introduction Your Team : Dr. Bill Carnes – Partner-in-Charge Dan Schmidt, JD – Project Director Dr. Ed Humble Dodds Cromwell, AIA Lynda Fender MGT of America has offices in: Olympia, WA Sacramento, CA Austin, TX Tallahassee, FL Washington, D.C. Schmidt Associates : an Indiana-based facility planning, design, and construction management firm MGT and Schmidt have teamed for projects in: - St. Louis Public Schools, MO - State of Colorado - Rapid City Area Schools, SD - Fort Wayne Community Schools, IN - MSD of Decatur Township, IN - The Public Schools of Brookline, MA - Smyth County Public Schools, VA - Vigo County School Corporation, IN - Porter Township Schools, IN - Fresno Unified School District, CA - State of Wyoming - Citrus County Public Schools, FL - Boulder Public Schools, CO - Anne Arundel Public Schools, MD - Indianapolis Public Schools, IN

5. Your Study – The Process Task Wk of 9/7 Wk of 9/14 Wk of 9/21 Wk of 9/28 Wk of 10/5 Wk of 10/12 Wk of 10/19 Wk of 10/26 Wk of 11/2 Wk of 11/9 Project Initiation Input Gathering Facility Tours Data Analysis Options Development Final Report Preparation

6. 1.An evaluation of current methods and estimates of calculating capacities and projecting enrollments; 2.An analysis of space utilization at our elementary and secondary schools and associated short-term and long-term recommendations for better using space within or among our buildings; and 3.Identification of opportunities and recommendations for increasing permanent capacity at individual schools (including feasibility, scope and cost) for consideration in the upcoming CIP planning process. Consultant Scope of Work

7. No boundary or admissions policies decisions to effect 2010-11 school yearNo boundary or admissions policies decisions to effect 2010-11 school year Include both elementary and secondary schools in studyInclude both elementary and secondary schools in study December 2009 recommendations will frame further conversations for systematic, long-term approach; may also include short-term actions to manage crowding for September 2010 (relocatables, room conversions, program moves, class size)December 2009 recommendations will frame further conversations for systematic, long-term approach; may also include short-term actions to manage crowding for September 2010 (relocatables, room conversions, program moves, class size) General Guidance from 8/27/09 Work Session

8. Consultant – Projections/Capacity Evaluation of Enrollment Projection Methodology –Consider impact of housing developments on projections –New perspective on generation factors –Consider providing a “choice” pattern analysis

9. Consultant – Projections/Capacity Evaluation of Capacity Calculation Methodologies –Determine if an equitable standard (not necessarily the same) is being applied in determining capacity –Assess the functional capacity of schools based on size of common areas –Determine when schools reach a “tipping point” as related to increased capacity due to class size increases, converted spaces, or use of relocatables on site –Look at impact of moving to a 6/7 model at secondary schools –Consider adding relocatable capacity as a column in utilization table

10. Consultant – Short and Long-Term Options Options Discussed in Previous Forums –Increase the recommended maximum class size(s) for one or more grade levels –Add relocatable classrooms to increase capacity –Convert interior space to increase capacity –Consider adding and/or moving programs to increase capacity and develop criteria for making decisions about when and where to move programs –Consider boundary changes –Build new capacity at APS or County sites (Langston, Reed, Wilson, other APS/County buildings) –Consolidate PreK Programs

11. Consultant – Short and Long-Term Options Provide New and Alternative Solutions –Include combination of small neighborhood boundary/”forced choice” –Examine current transfer policies –Examine options to control enrollment (student address verification and limiting employee tuition benefit for non-County residents) –Examine flexible schedule/locations for high school students –Consider transportation system efficiencies and alternatives

12. Consultant – Additional Guidance –Define problem (criteria and tipping point) –Consider new capacity with an understanding of limited financial climate and a focus on using existing buildings; consider public/private partnerships with County partners and others at Wilson and Career Center and possibly other sites

13. Information and materials related to process: http://www.apsva.us/elemcapacity In addition, the web page has an e-mail option for comments and suggestions. Web Page

14. Update on Capacity Utilization Process Arlington Public Schools September 24, 2009