1
21st Century School Fund
Testimony
Board of Education Capital Budget Reallocation Hearing
September 9, 2004
REALLIGN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
The Board of Education approved the Capital Improvement Plan for 05-10. However, the Board may realign the budget at any time.
Over the past five years Board has supported a fine Master Plan with a good community process. This plan has never been aligned with a realistic strategic budgeting plan. Now is the time.
DCPS FACILITIES IN CRISIS
DCPS has spent or encumbered about one billion dollars on construction and planning for the 26 schools in tiers 0, .5, 1 and 2from 2000 through 2010. We have been allotted $715 million for building projects in this current budget, spread out from 2005-2010.
- Five years after we identified one billion dollars worth of deficiencies in our schools, but we have modernized or replaced only8 schools since 2000.
- We have so far provided new facilities for about 2770 students out of a student population of 65100: less than 3%. Only 5% of our 152 schools have been completely modernized.
- Averaging 2 schools per year since the start of the program in 2000, at this rate, replacing or modernizing all our schools will take 75 years.
Schools CompletedNumber of Students (2003-2004)
Barnard338
Cleveland209
Kelly Miller400 (est.)
Key234
Miner508
Noyes194
Randle Highlands493
McKinley Tech400 (est.)
Total:2776
97% OF OUR STUDENTS REMAIN IN SUB-STANDARD CONDITIONS
During roughly this same period:
- Only 7% of the schools have had interior renovations (i.e. paint, carpet replacement, etc.);
- Only 18% have had windows replaced;
- Less than half have had bathroom repairs.
We cannot in good conscience continue to plan to have so many of our students in such rapidly deteriorating sub-standard conditions.
We have over 22 open plan schools that are inherently difficult for teaching yet not one of our projects to date has attempted to enclose an open plan school.
Furthermore, during this Master Planning process, we have substantially ignored the capital needs of DC’s growing charter school population.
COMPLEX, EXPENSIVE, TIME CONSUMING PROJECTS
The scope of the replacements and modernizations accomplished so far has been driven by an industry geared to maximize projects. It is focused on total replacements and gut modernizations rather than modest and less expensive renovations.
Our new schools have been late and over budget, in part because of our uncritical reliance on the Army Corps of Engineers for project management and procurement (now being phased out) and in part because OFM has not been able to develop sufficient capacity to manage projects effectively in-house.
EXCESS CAPACITY EXACERBATED
In a system with excess space, we have added student capacity to almost all of the new and planned projects- - in a system that is loosing population. We have added two large new and very expensive schools: McKinley and Kelly Miller. These larger schools cannot compete with smaller charter schools. We have no plans to institute a school bus system, so consolidation and closing possibilities are limited.
COST OVERRUNS
We have added to the budgets of almost all the projects and even so, spending has exceeded the budget more often than not. Budget approval has been project by project, with little sense of the accumulating total. For instance, 6 million for the School Without Walls public/private partnership was approved without knowing where the money would come from.
SCALE BACK PROJECT SCOPE; PLAN PROJECTS IN PHASES
The current Capital Improvement Program replicates many of these planning mistakes. We have to step aside immediately and drastically scale back the scope of the elevenprojects coming on line now. Any money spent on new projects tomorrow has ramifications for all the other schools for the next five or six years. That means anything that does not have a contract awarded today: all tier .5. tier1 and tier 2A projects.
Whole school modernizations should be completed in phases. This means going back to the schools already planned and designed and creating phased improvements. This can be done in such a way as to improve the school, but not leave so many others with so little.
Scale back the Scope:
1
21st Century School Fund
Testimony
Board of Education Capital Budget Reallocation Hearing
September 9, 2004
Phelps High School “Program”
Birney Elementary School
H.D. Cooke Elementary School
Hardy Middle School
Sousa Middle School
Thomas Elementary School
Walker Jones Elementary School
Woodson High School
Turner Elementary School
Deal Jr. High School
MacFarland Middle School
1
21st Century School Fund
Testimony
Board of Education Capital Budget Reallocation Hearing
September 9, 2004
NEEDS-BASED PRIORITIES FOR MODERNIZATIONS
In reallocating the Capital Improvement Plan, we have to hold to needs-based planning:
- needs of the building - - the most neglected buildings first;
- needs of the students - - lowest performing first;
- needs of the community - - lowest socio-economic indices first.
A project’s ability to leverage other enhancements should also be considered; educational assets; neighborhood assets; financial assets (partnerships).
SET HIGH PRIORITY ON GETTIING EVERY SCHOOL IN GOOD REPAIR
These are relatively easy improvements that have the most immediate impact on the classroom: painting, carpet, windows, lighting, bathrooms, tended green space, enjoyable playground equipment; reasonable parking, indoor air quality. Old schools require more and better maintenance than new schools. Thorough, regular cleaning is essential; we have to increase our custodial staff.
MAKE EDUCATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS
Eliminate open plan spaces; improve exterior play space; make ADA modifications for special education; identify instructional priorities such as career tech, science, music, art, teacher planning, and libraries and plan small projects to accommodate these needs incrementally.
KEEP THE PROJECT ORDER
The order of the projects was determined in an open, community process. There is no need to change the order (as OFM has been done by rearranging Tier 2 into 2A, 2B and 2C, and dropping Ross, Slowe and Smothers completely). Rather, it is crucial that the projects be phased so that the scope of projects is drastically cut back and modernizations proceed in phases.
DON’T TEAR DOWN SOLID BUILDINGS
We must not tear down any more solid buildings. Despite the example of McKinley, it is less expensive to renovate than to build new. The examples provided by Barnard and Pattersonare critical - - as is the example of the historic Dunbar which was demolished. This is the lesson for Birney and Woodson, and possibly for Thomas, Turner and Walker-Jones.
A DIFFICULT BUT NECESSARY TASK
To reallocate this budget in the next few months will be difficult and it will bear costs because it will take time and we will have to set aside planning and design work. But the costs of design are minimal when compared to the cost of construction and the human costs associated from our failure to put most of our students in decent space.
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
Phelps Program: Phelps High School was closed several years ago and its programs merged primarily into Spingarn. Although career programs are fundamental to the renaissance of DCPS’s high schools, the feasibility plans for this 18.5 million must be closely scrutinized.
Birney Elementary School: Birney should not be torn down and replaced. It needs to be renovated. We don’t need a bigger school, just a better school. If plans for Birney were scaled back, the schools around Birney might receive badly interior renovations and windows.
H.D. Cooke Elementary School: The plan is to spend more on this elementary school than we have planned for Hardy Middle School. The project is too large for the constricted site, involves extensive excavation, and adds students to a school that has steadily lost population. It also adds clinic space in an area where there are already four child and family centered clinics within five short blocks. This design needs to be revisited immediately; Cooke students are already in swing space`.
Hardy Middle School: Plans for Hardy include extensive additions to add classrooms and a large gymnasium. The extra classrooms accommodate the Fillmore Arts Center, a beloved elementary school program thatwas stuffed into Hardy when the Control Board sold its building. Fillmore has been struggling since to capture enough students to sustain its programs - - programs that could be more efficiently and effectively supplied to the students who are currently bused to Hardy through their own school-based art classes. Without Fillmore, the Hardy renovation would be greatly simplified.
Hardy is a middle school; it currently has two practice-size gyms (one is now un-useable); they are more appropriate for a middle school gym program than the planned large, exhibition style gymthat comes with two large locker rooms. The site is cramped at present; the large gym would exacerbate this problem.
Without these two expensive components, there would be sufficient money available to thoroughly renovate Hardy’s large auditorium - - something that is badly needed and not in the present scope of work.
Sousa Middle School: Because of its historic significance, Sousa may present a special case. However, plans to increase the student population should be examined. Sousa (and Kelly Miller) might more appropriately be structured as small high schools if the feeder schools were refurbished and structured as K-8 schools.
Thomas Elementary School: There are currently almost 400 students at Thomas; the new school is planned for 500; the old school is to be demolished when the new school is rebuilt. Although this may be appropriate, the lessons of Barnard would argue that the plan be closely examined before going forward.
Walker-Jones Elementary School: Walker Jones Elementary school and RH Terrell Jr. High are on adjacent parcels of land. Both need to be renovated. Both schools must be planned together. Current plans call for construction of a new Walker-Jones, and then to master-plan the RH Terrell site. More efficient land use, a different grade configuration (Pre-K -8?) or a building partnership may well be possible here. Construction should not start on Walker-Jones until Terrell is fully planned in conjunction with it.
Wheatly Elementary School: This project may be entirely reasonable but its budgeted $19 million indicates a need to examine the scope of the project if this is still possible as contracting goes forward.
Woodson High School: Woodson is the newest of DC’s high schools; in the 1998 evaluation of all schools it was rated the most educationally appropriate and in “good” condition; it houses one of the only public pools in Wards 7 and 8. With a $57 million dollar price tag, we simply can’t afford to tear this building down. It may not fit into the neighborhood architecturally, but it is DC’s best high school building. Some refurbishment and repairs are clearly required, but Ward 7 would be better served if most of the $57 million went into the surrounding feeder schools. Woodson will have to stand out for its educational programs; not its physical grace.
Turner Elementary School: This is another tear-down in conjunction with a planned housing development. The efficacy of the new design should be carefully compared against the savings possible in a renovation.Turner has jumped the queue, moving from the bottom to the top of tier 2.
Deal Jr. High: Deal has jumped ahead,moving ahead of Anacostia and Cardozo high schools. In the last seven years it has received bathroom repairs, interior repairs and renovations including new hall lighting, and a roof replacement in addition to asbestos abatement. Although Deal has two spacious practice gyms that are entirely appropriate for a middle school, plans call for a large new gymnasium. This renovation should be planned again in conjunction with Wilson High School so that both schools can coordinate facilities.
MacFarland Middle School: The Macfarland renovation should be master-planned with the renovation of Roosevelt High School which is adjacent and with which it shares parking and athletic fields.
Nancy Huvendick
21st Century School Fund
1816 12th St., NW, 4th Floor
At the Thurgood Marshall Center
Washington, DC 20009
202-745-3745
202-745-1713 fax