2012 bond premium reserve allocation follow-up...

2012 Bond Premium Reserve Allocation – Follow-up to

Staff Recommendations

December 12, 2014

BOC Premium Reserve Follow-up

Category Staff Recommended

Prioritization*

Additional Need Evaluated

& Presented

Maintenance $8.3M $8.2M

Technology $7.0M $8.1M+

Capacity Expansion/

Renovation $18.1M $22.0M

Total $33.4M* $38.3M+

• During the November 21st BOC working session and December 3rd Public

Comment session we have collected various questions on the

recommendations that are aggregated here

Capacity Process Overview

- 2 -

Maintenance Technology

Facility Maintenance: Stage Curtains

- 3 -

Question: The current recommendations include replacements for stage curtains at three schools:

Bromwell, Brown and Newlon. There was a request for additional information on the cost for stage

curtain replacement

Response: Stage curtain replacement will require replacement of the rigging, equipment, and other

safety upgrades as well as replacement of the curtains, valances, etc. The estimate of $128,400

per replacement is based on actual quotes received from vendors for similar replacements

Capacity Process Overview Maintenance Technology

Facility Maintenance: Water Quality

- 4 -

Question: In the 2012 CPAC there was a significant amount of water quality need. Question as to why

there are no water projects current recommended

Response: The 2012 GOB included a number of galvanized piping projects: • Cole – 2014 (some additional work to complete in 2015)

• Fairview – 2014

• Moore – 2014

• Morey – 2014

• Smiley – 2014

• Edison – 2015

• Lake – 2015

• Schenck – 2015

• Steele – 2015

• Hill – 2015

• Garden Place – 2015

• Park Hill – 2015

• Pioneer – 2015

• Valverde – 2016

• Rishel – 2016

• Beach Court – 2016

• Fairmont – 2016

• University Park – 2016

• Skinner – 2016

• South – 2014 [CDE BEST Funded]

If we add the next schools in line, Mitchell and Whiteman, we will be at 22 schools, about ¼ of the

schools with this need. At these schools there is some water discoloration but there are no imminent

health issues. They ended up below the line in 2012 due to prioritization and remain there in our current

recommendations due to criticality. This bond addresses 20 schools and hopefully in future bonds all

schools with galvanized piping will be fitted with copper.


Facility Maintenance: Turf Fields

- 5 -

Question: What is the current state/approach in DPS to building turf fields?

Response:

DPS currently has 11 Artificial Turfs Fields:

• North

• South

• West

• East

• Jefferson

• Kennedy

• Abe Lincoln

• Washington

• Manuel

• Evie Dennis

• Montbello

Each are showing wear and tear normal to their operation.

Current fields are constructed utilizing crumb rubber, which typically comes from ground-up tires, but

there are other sources as well. Facility Management recommends that any new artificial turf fields

considered being built are constructed with an alternative composition of crumb rubber products until

more research is completed. The newer products available may increase the overall costs of the

fields. The EPA has not completed their evaluations on the rubber sub-surface crumb rubber particles

historically used in Artificial Turf Fields, so no reliable research data exists at this time. In the

meantime, it is recommended that DPS utilize the newer options of crumb rubber sources until more

information is know on current materials.


Tech: Classroom Technology

- 6 -

Question:

• What precisely are the funds for? Chromebook carts, teacher laptops, chromebooks, and Ipads are

mentioned?

• What is the school minimum configuration (and does it vary by Elementary, Middle, and High School?

• What is the current status of achieving the minimum configuration?

Response: Please reference following slides



Bond and Mill Levy Spend Scenarios

Schools have received Mill Levy (recurring) and Bond (non-recurring) technology funds since 1998.

Device replacement cycle should be every 4 years.

Estimating $600/device, if schools used all of their Bond and ML funds (2011-2015) to purchase only

student devices, they could have achieved at best a 2:1 student to device ratio.

– This does not account for replacement of teacher devices. We have over 6000 District teachers.

– Purchases of projectors, smart boards, clickers, etc. would increase the student:device ratio

- 7 -

Source Project / Use Amount Notes

2012 Bond Classroom Technology 10,100,000$ Allocated to schools on a per pupil funding basis of $125

2008 Bond Classroom Technology 10,011,000$ Allocated to schools on a per pupil funding basis of $125

2008 Bond Teacher Laptops 2,625,000$ Oct '10-Nov '12, 4,892 teacher laptops distributed, schools

advised to budget for replacement cycles.

2008 Bond Classroom Technology -

Innovation Grants

1,000,000$ Grants awarded to 13 schools/3 special ed programs per

application process

2008 Bond Supplemental

Assessment Tech Grant

1,000,000$ Grants awarded to 86 schools per application process

2012 ML* recurring

Devices and/or staff 4,000,000$ Allocated to schools on a $45 per pupil basis, 40% spent on

FTEs and 60% on devices in 2013-2014 SY

1998 ML* recurring

Devices and/or staff 2,000,000$ Allocated to schools on a $22 per pupil basis, 40% spent on

FTEs and 60% on devices in 2013-2014 SY

# of Students '98 Mill Levy '12 Mill Levy '12 Bond 2012-2015 Device Totals Student:Device Ratio

Large School 700 9,240$ 18,900$ 87,500$ 333 2:1

Medium School 500 6,600$ 13,500$ 62,500$ 238 2:1

Small School 350 4,620$ 9,450$ 43,750$ 167 2:1


Requirements & Recommendations

The minimum device configuration necessary is that each school mush have enough devices to support

online testing of the school‟s largest grade at the same time.1 This is the same for Elementary, Middle,

and High Schools.

We recommend all schools outfit each classroom with a digital projector, document camera, and

speakers and/or interactive white board.

DPS has not yet set a target student:device ratio as an instructional standard.

Current Inventory Summary – Aging Desktop Computers and Laptops2

Based on available school inventory data, ~ ½ of District computers and laptops are over 3 years old,

with over ¼ over 5 years old.

While the majority of laptops are less than three years old, the majority of computers are over 5 years old

and are due for replacement with an appropriate device.


Instructional Technology

- 8 -

1 Exceptions apply for K-8 and 6-12 schools which will be

required to test two grade levels concurrently 2 Computers & Laptops comprise 66% of device inventory

included in this analysis



Instructional Technology

User : Device Ratios

Student and Teacher : Computer and Laptop ratios across schools show a small % with ratios of less

than 2:1. About half of the schools in our inventory show ratios between 2:1 and 4:1, and more than 1/3

with ratios greater than 4:1.

Inventory data shows that schools have used ML and Bond funds to purchase devices for teachers and

students.

While device ratios are low for some schools, there is room to address aging devices and user : device

ratios for many schools.

- 9 -


Tech: Mobile Device Management

- 10 -

Question:

• What is this specifically for?

• Is this for IPADs, chromebooks, or both?

Response: Please reference word document: DPS Mobile Device Management_Dec2014


Capacity: School Expansion Fund (1 of 2)

- 11 -

Question:

• Provide more description of what has been funded from this fund in the 2012 Bond

Response:


2013 Projects Subtotal Description

ASHLEY $50,000 Facility modifications to support turn-around school efforts.

Compassion Road $478,100 Renovation of previous school facility including paint, modification of open work space and offices into classrooms, upgrade wireless and wired infrastructure, directional signage, security features including access control system and cameras.

DSST Stapleton $82,017 Create new classroom to accommodate new Special Education center program

Excel move to Lalo Delgado Campus

$140,000 Facility modifications to increase separation and security on shared campus to introduce third school to campus.

Fairmont $29,072 Modify previous middle school classrooms into elementary school classrooms, remove lockers.

FFE for 27 schools $2,792,329 Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment for schools modifying grade structure or phasing in.

GALS at Del Pueblo $103,000 Closing of several open plan classrooms.

Gilpin $122,856 Facility modifications to accommodate Montessori secondary program - included new paint in classrooms, directional signage, lockers, creation of an office space, and creation of open student work area.

JUSTICE HS $900,000 Renovation of private leased facility at 300 E. 9th to accommodate alternative high school.

Manual $42,000 Facility modifications to accommodate professional development center, displaced from Del Pueblo.

Merrill C3 PH 2 $63,612 Modifications to facility to accommodate growing shared campus.

Montbello $505,000 Facility modifications of Montbello Campus included the following: Relocation of PUSH Academy to CAE; Add additional classroom capacity for phase-In of NCAS and DCIS grades 8 and 11; Renovate office space; Branding & paint

Montbello $5,000 Traffic study.

MONTCLAIR $12,744 Removal of 1/2 walls to create additional classroom capacity.

Noel $268,000 Facility modifications of Middle School to meet the educational requirements of KIPP (5-8) and CPA (9-12) as they built out including adding additional classroom capacity, creation of MI and MIS rooms for CPA; New computer lab for KIPP; HVAC upgrades for Center Program "Cool Down" rooms; branding.

PLACE ANNEX $33,025 Facility modifications to accommodate additional students on shared campus.

Remington $543,103 Modification of elementary school facility to serve middle school students, and updating of facility for 21st century learning.

Samsonite $768,382 Modifications of open plan child care oriented space (~1/4 of facility) to become appropriate for K-12 education.

Smedley $101,000 FFE and building modifications to accommodate DDES.

West Phase II $204,051 Modifications of facility to accommodate growth of shared campus. Included updating of some older spaces.

TOTAL $7,243,290

Capacity: School Expansion Fund (2 of 2)

- 12 -

Question:

• Provide more description of what has been funded from this fund in the 2012 Bond

Response:


2014 Projects Subtotal Description

400 S ZUNI $30,000 Due diligence and design for potential new facility.

C3 at Merrill $240,500 Modifications to facility to accommodate growing shared campus

CAE PUSH PH II $960,000 Modifications to new purchased facility to create high school and CTE campus.

EXCEL ACADEMY DESIGN

$31,968 Due diligence and design for potential new facility.

FFE for 23 schools $1,532,970 Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment for schools modifying grade structure or phasing in.

JFK RENOVATION $185,438 Facility modifications to create a CTE program.

KEPNER MS PREP $22,000 Facility modifications to create space suitable for shared campus.

NOEL RENOVATION $89,946 Creation of additional classrooms to provide additional secondary capacity in FNE.

OAKLAND RENOVATION

$187,700 Modification of elementary school to accommodate turn-around school program.

PRAISE CHURCH ARCHITECT STUDY

$5,000 Due diligence and design for potential new facility.

RISHEL PLAYFIELD $50,000 Modifications to Rishel Campus field to create regulation soccer field.

SAMSONITE TENANT IMPROVMENTS

$87,052 Facility modifications to further serve the shared campus expansion.

SMILEY RENOVATION $150,000 Facility modifications to accommodate McAuliffe on campus.

SE ANNEX PH2 $106,351 Facility Modification of newly acquired sf on Annex Campus to serve elementary students.

STRIVE @ NORTH $170,815 Facility modifications to serve full high school in former CTE building. Scope included creation of a high school science lab, adding lockers, and art sink installation.

TOTAL $3,849,740

Capacity: Summit Academy

- 13 -

Year Enrollment FRLPct MinorityPct ELLPct SPEDPct SPF

PointsPct SPF Rating

2010-11 131 77.1% 93.1% 21.4% 17.6% 21.1% Accredited On Probation




2014-15 263 TBD TBD

Question: What are the academic and enrollment trends at Summit?

Response:


Capacity: KIPP

- 14 -

Question:

• Who owns the land for KIPP Sunshine Peak expansion?

Response: Denver Public Schools owns the land for the KIPP Sunshine Peak expansion. KIPP

owns the current modular buildings.


Capacity: HS at Sandoval Campus

- 15 -

Question:

• List of HS features at Sandoval Campus and comparison with other HS

Response:

HS at Sandoval Campus:

Current Phase I + Recommendation

Evie Dennis Phase I (Multi-school campus, opened with 150 DSST

students, 150 SOAR students and 300

students from MLK)

Projected Students 900-1000 1200-1300

# of Classrooms 42 58

Art/Music/Tech

Rooms

Yes Yes

Square Feet 131,959 on 40 acres 101,097 on 35 acres

Cafeteria Warming Kitchen

Up to 360 for lunch

Full-Service Kitchen

572 for lunch

Performance Space Yes in cafeteria

332 seating for performance

Yes in cafeteria

286 seating for performance

CHSAA Gym Yes Yes

Bleacher Seats 800 650

CHSAA Fields MP Field, Track, Baseball, Softball, Tennis MP Field, Track, Baseball, Softball,

½ Soccer

Committed Budget $42.5M* Total budget of $48M for full build-out.

Phase I opened in fall 2010


Internal Draft *DPS also paid ~$3.9 million for the land where the Sandoval campus is located

Capacity: HS at Sandoval Campus

- 16 -

Question:

• It would appear that the compromise addition will alter the master plan for the site including the

commons building and parking. How does the compromise addition affect the Master Plan for the

site? Would any of the this compromise be undone in the future?

During the meeting, staff plans to present the recommendation in addition to alternatives and will

discuss how each relates to the master plan.

• On page 30 of the 11/21/14 BOC presentation, the “Sandoval Campus full building 3” is listed at $14

million. Is building 3 the commons building as conceived in the bond or something else? In earlier

discussions the shortfall for the commons building was reported as less than $10 million. Please

define what this building is and what the $14 million includes?

During the meeting, staff plans to present the recommendation in addition to alternatives and will

discuss how each relates to the master plan. The building shortfall figures previously note did not

provide a complete picture of the cost of the additional building at that time.


NNE Stapleton/Northfield Campus

Future Phases

# SLCs

4 additional

Tennis

Courts

Add Athletic Lockers,

Weight and Aerobic Rooms

CommonsArt, Music,

Cafeteria &

Kitchen

Repurpose Core

Admin & Support

Expand Bleachers

to 1600

Phasing Legend

Phase 1

Repurpose

Future Phases


- 17 -

Gym East Option A – Art/Music

$4.76M

Vocal

Instrumental Music

2D Art

3D Art

Associated Effects

Recovers temp Music and

temp Art spaces from

Academic Building


Note - this option utilizes the originally designed locker, weight, and aerobics rooms.

Expands East vs South and increases in total square foot.

- 18 -

Commons “Light” B – Café/Kitchen/Stage

$7.10M

Entry

Restrooms

Full Cafeteria – Seating

– Serving

– Full Kitchen

– Storage

Stage

Associated Effects

Frees temp

Cafeteria/Warming Kitchen

in the Gym for other uses

(i.e. Weight/Fitness area to

open up gym floor for

additional seating).


- 19 -

Commons “Light” C – Café/Kitchen/Stage/Drama

$9.20M

Entry

Restrooms


– Serving

– Full Kitchen

– Storage

Stage

Drama

Associated Effects

Frees temp







- 20 -

Commons “Light” D – Café/Kitchen/Stage/Drama/Music

$10.74M

Entry

Restrooms


– Serving

– Full Kitchen

– Storage

Stage

Drama

Music

Associated Effects

Frees temp






Recover Music space from

Academic Building


- 21 -

Commons “Light” E – Café/Kitchen/Stage/Drama/Inst/Vocal

$11.97M

Entry

Restrooms


– Serving

– Full Kitchen

– Storage

Stage

Drama

Instrumental Music

Vocal Music

Associated Effects

Frees temp






Recover Music space from

Academic Building


- 22 -

Overview

Premium Reserve Recommendations by Region

- 23 -

SE

(District* 1)

SW

(District 2)

NNE

(District 3)

FNE

(District 4)

NW

(District 5)

Maintenance $ 128,400 $ 2,286,835 $ 105,071 $ 1,950,000 $ 3,830,336

Technology** $ 490,496 $ 835,467 $ 435,136 $ 1,222,699 $ 696,202

Capacity $ - $ 9,000,000 $ - $ 4,000,000 $ 3,100,000

Total $ 618,896 $ 12,122,302 $ 540,208 $ 7,172,699 $ 7,626,537

District-wide Investments

Capacity: School Expansion Fund $2,000,000

Technology: Mobile Device Management Solution – Phase 1 $1,320,000

Technology: Instructional Management System Replacement $862,000

Technology: Infor S3 Payroll System Upgrade to v10 $1,150,000

Total $5,332,000

*Note: Board Districts reflect revised districts as adopted by the Board at the Oct 23rd, 2014 Board Meeting

**Assumes classroom tech „boost funds‟, school support personnel and electrical work will be distributed evenly across enrolled

students. May not be the case

Per the Bond Oversight Committee’s direction, an even distribution of premium funds across geographic

regions was not considered as a prioritization criteria


Overview

2012 GOB Investments by Region

- 24 -

SE

(District* 1)

SW

(District 2)

NNE

(District 3)

FNE

(District 4)

NW

(District 5)

Maintenance $34,562,017 $45,710,380 $16,675,167 $43,816,662 $70,767,510

Technology $5,989,108 $6,132,484 $5,837,428 $15,057,134 $7,736,850

Capacity $31,656,558 $22,093,428 $47,866,359 $122,662,554 $14,774,983

Total $72,207,683 $73,936,292 $70,378,954 $181,536,350 $93,279,343

Unallocated Bond Premium Reserve

$46,349,995

*Note: Board Districts reflect revised districts as adopted by the Board at the Oct 23rd, 2014 Board Meeting


Backup

Additional Technology Information

Premium Recommendations as presented November 21st

- 25 -

A Vision for Technology at DPS

DPS – Making Connections

http://vimeo.com/97279994

- 26 -



Backup

Additional Technology Information

Premium Recommendations as presented November 21st

- 27 -

Bond Oversight Prioritization Criteria

as adopted Nov 7

Capacity Process Overview

Overall, the projects that the Bond Oversight Committee recommend should be described with sufficient specificity and detail that the district can readily be held accountable for the proper and timely use of the funds allocated. More specifically, the Committee recommendations are based on projects aligning with these following key criteria: (not in prioritized order) • The project is necessary for the safe operation of a facility or other capital asset to meet health and

safety code compliance.

• The project is critical to the implementation of the ongoing instructional practices of the district.

• The project supports, leverages or enables the opportunity to attract other financial resources to support a district priority.

• The project enables a reduction in operating costs or leverages resources, thereby improving the long-term financial health of the district.

• The project supports the district’s technological infrastructure.

• The project fulfills commitments made to communities and taxpayers of the 2012 bond initiative.

• The project meets critical needs identified since the passage of the 2012 bond or of increased urgency since the 2012 bond.

• The project supports DPS’s shared core value of equity, as embodied in the goals of the Denver Plan 2020.

- 28 -

Maintenance Technology

2012 bond premium reserve allocation follow-up...

Documents