Update: Click here to download answers to Trustee questions (unedited)
Welcome to the FAQ section of the FMP website. Here you will find answers to key questions. Keep checking this page for updates.
- What is a Facility Master Plan?
The AISD Facility Master Plan (FMP) is a framework with the following three process components: 1) an FMP process; 2) annual information needed to inform the process; and 3) annual academic facilities recommendations. The administration is recommending the adoption of a comprehensive, long-term FMP process that would support the district’s long-term goals, including the Strategic Plan, as well as shorter term priorities, such as Board-identified priority initiatives, for each school year. Part of the FMP framework is to develop Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations (AAFR) in alignment with the annual budget planning process.
- Why is the district developing a Facility Master Plan? What are the goals of the plan?
While over the years the district has been touched by some facility planning influences, a formal Facility Master Plan has never been developed. The FMP process will allow for a flexible annual schedule to provide for yearly actions for on-going facility utilization and improvements.
The Administrative Recommendation for a Facility Master Plan follows the Board’s Priority Initiatives, and is in-line with our district goals, to ensure alignment to Strategic Plan goals:
- All students will perform at or above grade level.
- Achievement gaps among all student groups will be eliminated.
- All students will graduate ready for college, career, and life in a globally competitive economy.
- All schools will meet or exceed state accountability standards, and the district will meet federal standards while exceeding state standards.
- What are the Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations?
The Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations (AAFR) are the outcome of the FMP process. It reflects the intersection of academic expectation and operational needs to provide the yearly actions for on-going facility utilization and improvements. The process is designed to be flexible enough to respond to necessary changes in academic and operational needs so that adjustments to the allocation of resources can be incorporated each school year.
- What is the difference between the Facility Master Plan and Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations?
The FMP is a long-term framework that allows the district to provide increased academic achievement in suitable facilities. An Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations is one of the components of the Plan, and uses a list of academic expectations and operational needs to review each district’s facility. The AAFR is presented to the Board every fall for approval.
- What is the timeline for the 2011-2012 school year?
- On September 12, the Superintendent updated the Board on the process for developing an Administrative Recommendation for a Facility Master Plan. She will present the academic expectations and operational needs that shape the FMP process and how it informs the following year’s Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations.
- On September 26, the Superintendent will present to the Board the Administrative Recommendation for a Facility Master Plan.
- The Board is scheduled to vote on the FMP framework on November 21, and would vote on the Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations on December 12. After receiving Board approval in December, the district administration would begin planning and implementation for the coming school year.
- What is the timeline for subsequent school years?
The annual planning schedule will ensure timeliness and consistency for delivering the AAFR. The district will begin a public engagement process with families and community stakeholders in January of each year. Local and regional discussions will be held from February-May for principals, staff, families and community stakeholders to discuss and identify regional solutions within a district-wide context. From June to August, formal Board-approved committees and district-established advisory bodies will be consulted for further input. Based on availability of information and currently defined administrative deadlines, preparation of the AAFR by the administration will also begin in June of each year, and end with Board action in December. The recommendations approved in December are for the next academic school year.
- How was the Facility Master Plan process developed?
While over the years the district has been touched by some facility planning influences through the proposals from the Community Committee on Neighborhood and Schools, and the Family and Children’s Task Force, and, most recently, the Facility Master Plan Task Force (FMPTF), a formal Facility Master Plan has never been developed.
Under the current administration, a long-range facility master planning process was launched in November 2009, when the Board of Trustees directed the Superintendent to initiate this work. A ten-year planning horizon was identified as a timeline for the planning tool. From March 2010 to March 2011, the FMPTF worked on an FMP that was received by the Board on March 28, 2011. The Board then referred the plan to the Administration for development of an Administrative Response. The Board approved Facility Master Plan Next Steps, a timeline for key benchmarks, on May 23, 2011. On August 27, 2011, the Board identified draft School Year 2011-2012 Priority Initiatives. The Superintendent will present the FMP Administrative Recommendation at the September 26, 2011 Board meeting.
- What has been the historical involvement of the community in this process?
A citizen’s taskforce was created in March 2010 and created both a Task Force Report and Minority Report, which were accepted by the Board on March 28, 2011. The Board then directed the administration to develop an administrative response.
- What is being considered in developing the Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations?
The AAFR is rooted in academics—we are committed to maximizing graduation rates and academic success for ALL students across the district. In addition to evaluating the physical conditions of each facility, we are evaluating academic programs based upon the applicable Board priorities:
- Provide an enhanced portfolio of academic options;
- Develop academic achievement support strategies for special student populations; and
- Improve overall school and district climate for learning.
- When will the Facility Master Plan be final?
The FMP is a framework for evaluating all of the AISD facilities. The process is designed deliberately to be flexible enough to respond to necessary changes in academic expectations and operational needs so that adjustments to the allocation of resources can be incorporated accordingly each school year. However, once approved on November 21, it will be reviewed biannually if needed.
- What are the Board-identified Priority Initiatives? When were they developed?
The Board developed their priority initiatives for the 2011-2012 school year at their August 27, 2011 Board retreat. The initiatives for the current school year are:
- Explore/establish new delivery models to provide an enhanced portfolio of academic options with supporting facilities plan and budget scenarios;
- Refine human capital strategy to support and improve the new performance management model;
- Improve overall school/district climate for learning; and
- Develop academic achievement and support strategy for special populations through accelerated/differentiated instruction.
- How will the Facility Master Plan affect individual schools?
During the FMP process, all facilities being utilized by AISD will be evaluated on academic programs and operational criteria. The Recommendation that falls from the evaluation will contain specific actions for specific facilities, including schools. Possible changes that could occur to a particular school include program enhancements, co-locations (school within a school), repurposing, new academic programs, boundary changes, or facility closings. Depending upon the board-identified priority initiatives used to evaluate the facilities, the list of affected facilities may be large or small for any given review year.
- When will I know how my school will be affected?
Each fall, the administration will present the Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations to the Board of Trustees in alignment with the annual budget planning process. These recommendations will be created using family and community input, national best practices and updated data on demographics and growth trends.
- Define the “new delivery models for an enhanced portfolio of academic options”?
The new delivery models are the new ‘tool’s for learning. Some are expansions to existing programs, others are new to the district, and some are new delivery models for existing programs.
- What are “special populations”?
Special Populations are categories of students who have distinct learning needs as identified by specific TEA guidelines and district measures and therefore require specialized programming. Special populations include students in AISD who are identified as special education, dyslexic, 504, English Language Learners or Limited English Proficient - LEP), and gifted & talented or advanced placement.
- What are the facility assessment criteria? Who developed these criteria?
The facility assessment criterion considers quantitative and qualitative components. The criteria were developed by the district in order to yield an objective and consistent assessment of all facilities. The quantitative elements are:
- Percent permanent capacity;
- Percent of functional capacity;
- Facility condition;
- Academic performance;
- The Texas Comptroller’s Financial Allocation Study for Texas (FAST) rating;
- Cost per student; and
- Student movement.
The qualitative criteria accommodate factors that ultimately affect facility use. These include:
- Historical preservation;
- Special programs and/or academic portfolio of options;
- Equity and parity;
- Community needs;
- Proximity to “like” schools that affect planning decisions;
- Swing space capability; and
- Overflow capacity for surrounding over-capacity campuses.
- What data did you use to project the attendance zone population for 2015-2016?
The district contracts with a demographer to provide the annual census data. The data is then cross-referenced with information from the City of Austin’s demographer. By looking at current enrollment levels as well as population and growth trends, we can project probable, future attendance zone populations.
- How do you determine permanent versus functional capacity?
For long-range planning, the percent of permanent capacity is calculated by dividing the number of students in the school’s attendance zone population by the number of students the school facility can accommodate, within its permanent building(s). While specific quantitative factors may exist at certain schools whereby portables may need to be counted as permanent classroom space, permanent capacity as utilized for these calculations does not include portable buildings.
For annual planning efforts, the percent of functional capacity is calculated by dividing the number of students enrolled at the school, taking into account all “in” and “out” student movement, by the number of students the school facility can accommodate within its permanent and portable building(s); and also taking into consideration all special programs available at the school that particular year that may reduce the number of classrooms available for instructional use.
- Explain the Facility Condition Index?
Facility condition is the state of repair of the school facility’s existing infrastructure. School facility condition takes into consideration all of the major facility systems from roofs and windows to electrical and mechanical systems. Although there is a cost associated with bringing every school facility in compliance with current codes and standards, these costs are not included in the FCI calculations.
- What is the Financial Allocation Study for Texas (FAST) rating? Who determines the FAST star rating?
The 2009 Legislature’s House Bill 3 directed the Texas Comptroller’s office to examine how schools and school districts spend their money, and how this spending translates into student achievement. In response, the Comptroller’s office created the Financial Allocation Study for Texas (FAST). This study includes many factors both in and outside school that influence the cost of education, some beyond the districts’ control. These factors include federal, local and state funding, academic progress, state accountability rating, drop-out rates, average class size, and district demographics.
- How do you determine “cost per student”?
The annual ‘expenditure per student’ value includes the costs of supporting various functional areas such as: instruction, student services, maintenance & operations, transportation, security, etc. Funding is derived from a number of revenue sources including federal, state and private grants. After considering all incoming revenue and outgoing expenditures, the total funds associated with a specific campus is divided by the number of students attending that campus representing, the ‘annual expenditure per student’.
- Will boundary lines be redrawn?
Boundary lines will be evaluated when the academic expectation and the operational needs of a facility indicate that a particular campus is not meeting the needs of the children and the Strategic Plan. Any proposed changes will be included in the Annual Facilities Recommendations.
- What schools are closing?
All facility recommendations are analyzed based upon the academic expectations and operational needs of each facility. The final facility recommendations will not be acted upon by the Board until December of each year, affecting facilities in the following academic year.
- How do you fund these programs?
Program funding will be determined in alignment with the district’s budget planning process. Once the Board of Trustees has approved the Annual Academic Facilities Recommendations, both public and private dollars will be evaluated to best meet the program deliverables. Programs are funded through the M&O fund while bricks and mortar are funded by bonds.
- Is there planning for future bond programs?
One request for action in the September 26th AFR is for the Board of Trustees to “appoint a Citizens’ Bond Advisory Committee to prepare recommendations on a proposed scope of work for a future bond program no later than the December 12th regular Board meeting.” An essential step in the District’s preparation for a proposed bond program is the establishment of a citizens’ bond advisory committee that is representative of the AISD community.
For example, the 2008 committee structure is described below:
- Charge of the Committee
- Review and analyze 2008 Bond Program information and recommendations provided by staff.
- Seek community input on the proposed scope of work to help prioritize and make recommendations to the Board of Trustees.
- If the 2008 Bond Program is ultimately adopted by the Board, assist the District in the communication of factual information to the community about the proposed scope of work.
- Committee Composition
- Members are to be nominated by Board members or the Superintendent based on community involvement and competence or knowledge of school facility issues.
- The committee will consist of a maximum of 21 members led by three chairs.
- In making their nominations board members should consider possible members who:
- represent the AISD geographically;
- represent the diversity of the AISD student population; and
- represent:
- parent/teacher organizations
- the financial community
- the development/architect/engineer/contractor communities
- the business community
- faith-based community; and
- neighborhood associations.
- Method of Selection for Committee Members
- Each Board member appoints two members;
- The Board President appoints a committee member and two tri-chairs; and
- The Superintendent appoints a committee member and one tri-chair.
- Charge of the Committee
