1. Update to 2007 Facilities Assessment and Current Proposal Board of Trustees Workshop June 21, 2012 Photos of students and a lab/classroom setting

2. Agenda 2  Background  Process  Findings  Proposal

3. Parsons Team National experts + local knowledge  Parsons Planning & Assessment  MGT of America Educational Suitability  Natex Architects * One-line Drawings  Bovay Engineers * Assessment  CBIC * Assessment  Marshall Engineering * Assessment  PGAL Assessment  One World Strategy Group * Communications * M/WBE Firm 3

4. Background: Scope of Work Phase 1 of HISD Facility Master Plan  Update 2007 Facility Database  Gather Community Input  Identify Schools to Assess  Propose Facility Improvements  Develop Budget Proposal 4

5. Background: Overview of Previous Facilities Programs 5 1998: Rebuild 2002 Designed to relieve overcrowding and address fire and life- safety issues 2002: Rebuild HISD Focused on replacement of obsolete facilities and technology upgrades 2007: HISD Bond Proposal 2007 Proposed to enhance security at all schools, improve science labs, replace obsolete facilities, and improve schools not covered in past programs

6. Background: Overview of Previous Facilities Programs 6

7. Background: HISD Facilities by Age 7

8. Background: HISD Schools Built by Decade and Level 8 Baby Boomers Growth of the Suburbs Rebuild Houston Significant Focus on Primary Schools

9. Background: Current Situation  Earlier facility improvement efforts focused on the ELEMENTARY LEVEL  Commitment to maintain and improve neighborhood schools at the SECONDARY SCHOOL LEVEL  Need to match facilities to PORTFOLIO of PROGRAMS 9

10. Agenda 10  Background  Process  Solicit Community Input  Review and Align Standards  Review Capacity Data  Conduct Assessments  Findings  Proposal

11. Putting the Pieces Together 11 Solicit School Community Input Review Enrollment Projections, Capacity and Utilization Review and Align Educational Suitability and Technology Standards Conduct Facility Assessments

12. Solicit School Community Input  GOAL : Broad-based participation at each site  PROCESS:  ALL schools invited to provide input  Principals sent “Packet” to facilitate school community input  Tool available for more than 6 weeks  Sign-in sheets  Group information  Ensure that every voice is recorded 12 Community

13. Solicit School Community Input  Data Gathering Tool - Example  Q2. What is your level of satisfaction with the overall physical condition of the buildings at your school?  Satisfied  Somewhat satisfied  Dissatisfied  Q3. Please explain why you are satisfied or dissatisfied 13 Community

14. Solicit School Community Input  RESULTS: 14 95% response rate 237 schools and 3,302 participants Q2: What is your level of satisfaction with the overall physical condition of the buildings at your school? Satisfied 19% Somewhat satisfied32% Dissatisfied48% Community

15. Solicit School Community Input  RESULTS: 15 Q3. Please explain why you are: Satisfied: “We have a brand new school that is beautiful.” Somewhat satisfied : “ The new building looks nice, but the old building needs a lot of renovations.” Dissatisfied : “There are water leaks and there is constant repair on the same issues.” Community

16. Solicit School Community Input  RESULTS WILL BE USED FOR:  Developing priorities and Proposal:  HISD Maintenance Department Planning  Capital Improvement Planning  Long-Range Facility Master Planning 16 Community

17. Review and Align Educational Suitability and Technology Standards  GOAL : Understand current and future district goals  PROCESS :  Conduct focus groups and interviews with HISD experts  Apply national experience/TEA Standards  Align Assessment Tool to existing HISD Educational Specifications  Create Educational Suitability and Technology Assessment Tools 17 Standards

18. Review and Align Educational Suitability and Technology Standards  Assessment Tool  Learning Environment  Room Size  Location  Storage and Equipment  Technology 18 Standards

19. Review Enrollment Projections, Capacity and Utilization  Gather HISD demographics and enrollment data  Evaluate current utilization rates: permanent spaces  Examine future utilization scenarios  Effect of Improved Facilities  Program Offerings  Community Changes  Enrollment Growth / Decline 19 Utilization

20. Conduct Facility Assessments  GOAL : Use existing information and gather new data to identify current facility needs  PROCESS :  Conduct Desktop Modeling Activity  Update scores based on changes since 2007  Develop Composite Score for each school  Conduct Field Assessments  Validate current conditions  Update data and drawings 20 Assessment

21. Conduct Facility Assessments.  Desktop Composite Score - Examples 21 School Name Condition Score Suitability and Technology Composite Score Score Weighting Formula 50% 100% School A 507261 School B 376350 School C 829287 Assessment

22. Conduct Field Assessments 3 Areas of Review :  Condition  Educational Suitability  Technology Readiness Site Visit Process  Interview Principal and Plant Operators  Walk the buildings and site 22 Assessment

23. Agenda 23  Background  Process  Findings  School Community Findings  Educational Suitability and Technology Findings  Facility Themes  Proposal

24. FINDINGS: School Community Input (N= 3,302) 24

25. FINDINGS: School Community Input 25 IssueMost Frequently Identified Condition Repairs Needed HVACPlumbingTechnologyParking Educational Suitability Improvements Restrooms General Classrooms Gym and Athletics Auditorium/ Stage Safety IssuesParent/BusParking Multiple Entrances Building Configuration

26. FINDINGS: Educational Suitability Review  General classrooms, Tech labs, and special education rooms do not meet current standards  Traffic and parking are a problem  Schools are not designed for easy supervision and control of entrances  Lack of storage 26

27. FINDINGS: Technology Readiness Review  Electrical service is insufficient in older schools  Schools lack video distribution systems  Communications / IT equipment is housed inappropriately  Equipment is not up to date  HOWEVER, with recent work, network connectivity and performance are greatly improved 27

28. Themes  High schools are “due”  Reinvest in neighborhoods  Match facility to program  “Build it and they will come”  Finish last phase of earlier projects  Maintain our heritage into the future  Provide technology upgrades  Revitalize appearance and capabilities 28

29. Agenda 29  Background  Process  Findings  Proposal

30. Proposal 30 High School Focus :  Replace existing schools  Replace Inadequate Facilities  Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate  Build New Schools  Renovate

31. Proposal 31 K-8: Facilities Match Program Middle School Needs Elementary School Needs District-wide Needs

32. High School Focus: Replacements: $577,067,000 32 Furr High School High School for Performing and Visual Arts Lee High School Madison High School Sharpstown High School Sterling High School Washington High School Yates High School

33. High School Focus: Replace Inadequate Facilities: $353,696,000 33 Bellaire High School Lamar High School Sam Houston High School Westbury High School

34. High School Focus: Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate : $258,953,000 34 Austin High School Eastwood Academy Milby High School Waltrip High School Worthing High School

35. High School Focus: New Schools: $27,000,000 35 North Early College High School South Early College High School

36. High School Focus: Renovations: $61,125,000 36 Davis High School DeBakey High School Jones High School Jordan High School Kashmere High School Scarborough High School Sharpstown International High School Young Men’s College Prep Young Women’s College Prep

37. K-8: Facilities Match Program: $120,732,000 37 Garden Oaks Elementary School Pilgrim Academy Wharton Dual Language School K-8: Completion Mandarin Chinese Language Immersion Magnet School at Gordon K-8: Replacement

38. Middle Schools: Meeting Needs: $73,950,000 38 Dowling Middle School Middle School: Replacement Grady Middle School Middle School: Addition

39. Elementary Schools: Replacements: $126,248,000 39 Askew Elementary School Condit Elementary School Kelso Elementary School MacGregor Elementary School Parker Elementary School

40. Elementary Schools: Meeting Needs: $67,347,000 40 Smith, K. Elementary School Elementary School: Renovation and Addition Elementary School: New New Elementary School Location: TBD Elementary School: Replace Inadequate Facilities and Renovate Tijarena Elementary School

41. District-Wide Needs: $224,675,000 41 Safety and Security Improvements Technology Improvements: Equipment and Infrastructure Restroom Renovations: Middle Schools Athletic Improvements: Field Houses Land Acquisitions

42. Proposal Summary 42 High School Focus$1,277,841,000 K-8: Facilities Match Program$120,732,000 Middle Schools: Meeting Needs$73,950,000 Elementary Schools: Meeting Needs$193,595,000 District-wide Needs$224,675,000 Grand Total$1,890,793,000

43. Questions Thank you 43