2. FACILITIES TASKFORCE RECOMMENDATIONS
David Rosenberg, Operations Officer
May 15, 2017

3. A B C D E F overview IPS Successes Taskforce Timeline
City & IPS Historical Context
Indianapolis Trends
School Enrollment Trends A B C D E F

4. IPS successes
Increased graduation rates from 68.3% in SY 2012–13 to 77% in SY 2015–16
Implemented 3Es with 95% of seniors being employed, enlisted or enrolled
Expanded district’s racial equity work to more pilot schools
Opened Newcomer Program to immigrant families to assist with assimilation
Academic
Disposed of seven properties, with two pending, for $17M in revenue
Streamlined warehouse processes to increase efficiencies, saving $100K/year
Increased automation for optimizing bus routes, outsourcing teacher management system and contracting fleet management and maintenance
Operational
Reduced administrative costs and invested $22.2M in employee compensation
Reduced per-pupil spending on administrative functions by 31%
Saved $2.6M annually through reorganization of seven divisions
Implemented Student-Based Budgeting
Financial

5. historical context
city of Indianapolis

6. Indianapolis’ shifting demographics
city of Indianapolis

7. IPS historical enrollment
timeline: policy impacts
Number of Students
Facilities milestone

8. IPS High School Enrollment Snapshot: 1968–69
historical context
IPS High School Enrollment Snapshot: 1968–69
IPS High Schools
School
Built
Enrollment 1
Arlington
1961
3,171 2
Arsenal Tech
1912
5,302 3
Broad Ripple
1923
1,641 4
Crispus Attucks
1929
2,011 5
E. Manual
1953
2,557 6
George Washington
1927
2,084 7
H.E. Wood
1,692 8
Northwest
1963
1,739 9
Shortridge
2,760 10
T.C. Howe
1937
2,215 11
John Marshall
1968
1434
Total SY
26,107

9. IPS Secondary Schools SY 2017–18
historical context
IPS Secondary Schools SY 2017–18
IPS High Schools
Projected*
2017–18 Enrollment
School
Capacity 1
Arlington
2,175
690 2
Arsenal Tech
3,000
1,808 3
Broad Ripple
2,400
666 4
Crispus Attucks
1,375
699 5
George Washington
1,900
403 6
Northwest
2,125
739 7
Shortridge
1,475
347 8
John Marshall* 9
T.C. Howe* 10
Manual*
Total
14,450
5,352*
37%

10. Projected* SY 2017–18 enrollment distribution among 7 high schools
need for action
high school utilization vs. capacity
Projected* SY 2017–18 enrollment distribution among 7 high schools
Arlington
690*/2,175 = 32%
Arsenal Tech
1,808*/3,000 = 60%
Broad Ripple
666*/2,400 = 28%
Crispus Attucks
699*/1,375 = 51%
George Washington
403*/1,900 = 21%
Northwest
739*/2,125 = 35%
Shortridge
347*/1,475 = 24%

11. NOT RECOMMENDED (shown for illustration purposes only):
need for action
simulation
NOT RECOMMENDED (shown for illustration purposes only):
Projected* 5,352 IPS high school students could fit in just 3 schools
Arsenal Tech
3,000*/3,000 = 100%
Arlington
2,175*/2,175 = 100%
Crispus Attucks
177*/1,375 = 13%
Note: This depiction only serves to further describe building utilization. It does not take into account the following critical factors for determining school locations: geography, academic programming/proposed academies, facilities & amenities, community resources, etc.

12. need for action
This is an average of 2,373 students per high school
In SY 1968–69, IPS had 26,107 high school students at 11 high schools
This is an average of 764* students per high school
Projected* for SY 2017–18, IPS will have 5,352 high school students at 7 high schools
In the last 53 years, IPS has 20,755 fewer high school students but will only own 1 fewer high school
Time to act is now

13. Combined relevant Taskforce experience of 223 years
purpose
IPS Strategic Plan 2.4
IPS will establish a facilities utilization committee to recommend strategic opportunities for supporting programmatic needs and student achievement
Internal
David Rosenberg, Operations
Tricia Frye, Planning
Paul Riley, Facilities
Doug Kowalski, Risk Management
Weston Young, Finance
Greg Newlin, Innovation Office
LaTonya Keaton, Finance
Joe Gramelspacher, Superintendent’s Office
External
Jeff Bennett, Mayor’s Office
Adrienne Slash, Leadership Indianapolis
Mark Sausser, Faegre Baker Daniels
Ezra Burdix, DTM Real Estate
Nate Lichti, Illinois Facilities Fund (IFF)
Bill Taft, Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC)
Brad Bobich, CEI Engineering
Maury Plambeck, Indianapolis Neighborhood Resource Center
House in
district facility
- outside of LEA
Initiated by existing district school
- within LEA
Initiated by district leadership
- within LEA
Launch of new school
- within LEA
Combined relevant Taskforce experience of 223 years

14. taskforce guiding statements
The Taskforce adhered to a finite role of reviewing demographic trends, citywide historical data, facilities, operational costs, academic models, revenues, community development, etc.
The Administration will make a final proposal in June, 2017 that will consider the Taskforce recommendation along with academic programming and data, community feedback and several other criteria.
Ensure the best possible learning environment for all students
Create opportunities to collocate facilities
and sell unnecessary buildings
Maximize the use of the district’s
high school facilities
Develop a reuse plan for any building no
longer needed by the district
Safeguard taxpayer dollars by
reducing operations, utilities, insurance
and overhead costs to push more
funding to classrooms
Account for costs associated with
transportation, IT, food service
and other building operations

15. taskforce considerations
general
Academic models
Parking
Utilization rates
Athletic facilities
Deferred maintenance
Reuse of buildings
Utility and operational costs
Outstanding bonds
Transportation costs/run times
Competing districts and charters

16. taskforce considerations
instructional opportunities
Additional personnel from the high school support teams being located in each building, streamlining scheduling and allowing more time in each school to support students
More funding per school for intervention, along with more afterschool and weekend tutoring opportunities
Increased ability for teachers to teach more classes and have more time for prep, in-depth interactions with students and professional development
More course offerings at each school, especially for Honors and AP courses
Better ability to improve the teaching talent pool due to increased staffing availability

17. taskforce considerations
safety and cost
SY 2017–18 projection of 37% utilization rate
Capacity
Spend $6,234,804 annually to operate underutilized facilities
Facility Operations
Projected to spend $6,236,185 annually to transport students to 7 high schools
Transportation
IPS has sold 7 buildings for just over $3M in revenue, while creating savings of over $200,000 in annual operational costs
Sale of SCIPS ($12M) & Mallory ($1.65M) is currently pending
Real Estate

18. timeline April April/May June July/August September
Taskforce releases report and identifies how many high school facilities IPS should operate based upon demographic trends, facilities, operational and programming costs, etc.
April
Board conducts 5 community meetings for feedback on the report, concerns, questions and ideas
April/May
Administration makes recommendation based on Taskforce Report, community feedback, academic programming and several other criteria that names school(s) and possibly other building(s) to close
Administration proposes high school Choice/assignment model
Administration proposes academic programs to implement at high schools
Administration and Taskforce identify reuse options at high school(s) slated to close
June
Board meeting at high school(s) slated to close and public comment
July/August
Board votes on final recommendations
September

19. housing & development trends

20. school enrollment trends

21. taskforce recommendation
IPS should operate with 4 high schools for SY 2018–19
Reinvest savings into the classroom to continue increasing student achievement and attracting the best talent.
ERS projects a minimum savings of $4M annually on redundant administrative functions.
Operations projects savings of $3M annually on utilities and maintenance.
IPS expects student growth in elementary programs, but will not experience an increase in high school population in the next 10 years.
Demographic and school trends in Indianapolis, both historical and current, do not project an increase of high school students.
Growth in the high school population will likely be in Innovation schools that operate outside of a traditional, large high school building.
4 high schools will accommodate the current enrollment projections as well as any changes based on increasing population or takeover schools.
No existing academies or programs will be closed.

22. APPENDIX

23. historical context timeline: facilities & enrollment (1980s–90s)
Note: H.E. Wood closed in 1978
Facilities milestone

24. historical context timeline: facilities & enrollment (2000s)
2000:
Howe reopened as 7–12
(8,484 total IPS high school students)
George Washington reopened as middle school
2002:
George Washington transitioned to 6–12
(8,579 total IPS high school students)
2006:
Crispus Attucks transitioned to 6–12
(8,514 total IPS high school students)
2009:
Shortridge transitioned to 6–12
(8,085 total IPS high school students)
2008:
John Marshall transitioned to 7–12
(8,152 total IPS high school students)
2011:
Manual, Howe, Arlington and Emma Donnan entered Turnaround status
(7,217 total IPS high school students)
2015:
Tindley exits Arlington; IPS named Turnaround operator using Transformation Zone model
(5,834 total IPS high school students)
2016:
Grade reconfiguration in progress to eliminate community schools model (combination middle/high schools)
Facilities milestone

25. Projected* SY 2017–18 enrollment distribution among 7 high schools
need for action
Projected* SY 2017–18 enrollment distribution among 7 high schools

26. arlington high school Year Built: 1961 Capacity: 2,175 2017 Projected
Utilization Rate: 31.7%
Utility Costs
(monthly): $39,984
Everyday Costs
(monthly): $30,500
Transportation Costs
(annually): $553,650

27. arsenal technical high school
Year Built: 1912
Capacity: 3,000
2017 Projected
Utilization Rate: 60.3%
Utility Costs
(monthly): $108,298
Everyday Costs
(monthly): $71,241
Transportation Costs
(annually): $1,438,859

28. broad ripple magnet high school
Year Built: 1923
Capacity: 2,400
2017 Projected
Utilization Rate: 27.8%
Utility Costs
(monthly): $34,512
Everyday Costs
(monthly): $26,673
Transportation Costs
(annually): $1,102,482

29. crispus attucks magnet high school
Year Built: 1929
Capacity: 1,375
2017 Projected
Utilization Rate: 50.8%
Utility Costs
(monthly): $33,692
Everyday Costs
(monthly): $17,172
Transportation Costs
(annually): $1,218,028

30. george washington high school
Year Built: 1927
Capacity: 1,900
2017 Projected
Utilization Rate: 21.2%
Utility Costs
(monthly): $33,991
Everyday Costs
(monthly): $22,503
Transportation Costs
(annually): $646,766

31. northwest high school Year Built: 1963 Capacity: 2,125 2017 Projected
Utilization Rate: 34.8%
Utility Costs
(monthly): $35,202
Everyday Costs
(monthly): $31,935
Transportation Costs
(annually): $517,763

32. shortridge IB high school
Year Built: 1927
Capacity: 1,475
2017 Projected
Utilization Rate: 23.5%
Utility Costs
(monthly): $28,253
Everyday Costs
(monthly): $14,611
Transportation Costs
(annually): $758,637

33. projected enrollment: SY 2017–18
School
Enrollment
Capacity
Utilization %
Arlington
690
2,175
31.7%
Arsenal Tech
1,808
3,000
60.3%
Broad Ripple
666
2,400
27.8%
Crispus Attucks
699
1,375
50.8%
George Washington
403
1,900
21.2%
Northwest
739
2,125
34.8%
Shortridge
347
1,475
23.5%
Totals
5,352
14,450
37.0%

34. facility operations and transportation costs
School
Utility Costs (monthly)
Everyday Costs (monthly)
Transportation Costs (annually)
Arlington
$39,984
$30,500
$553,650
Arsenal Tech
$108,298
$71,241
$1,438,859
Broad Ripple
$34,512
$26,673
$1,102,482
Crispus Attucks
$33,692
$17,172
$1,218,028
George Washington
$33,991
$22,503
$646,766
Northwest
$35,202
$31,935
$517,763
Shortridge
$28,253
$14,611
$758,637
Totals (monthly)
$304,932
$214,635
Totals (annually)
$3,659,184
$2,575,620
$6,236,185