Analysis of 2016 Round 1 School Choice - Denver Public …schoolchoice.dpsk12.org/.../07/...Choice-Analysis.pdfDenver Public Schools. Purpose & Table of Contents 2 Purpose To provide

Analysis of 2016 Round 1 School Choice

June 2016

Denver Public Schools

Purpose & Table of Contents

2

Purpose

To provide a summary analysis of the result from the first round of School Choice. This includes

looking at participation rates, the number of seats offered, and the results in terms of students

matching with their preferred choices.

This document is intended to give audiences an overview of the process and helps guide district

leadership on programmatic or enrollment system decisions intended to improve family outcomes.

Table of Contents

Round 1 School Choice Participation Analysis: Slides 6 to 15

Seat Offer Analysis: Slides 16 to 22

Round 1 Choice Match Rates Analysis: Slides 23 to 39

Executive Summary

3

Participation

School Choice participation rates for Denver-resident transition students were strong:

- 88% participation for Kinder

- 87% for 6th grade

- 73% for 9th grade

Seat Offer

High quality seats are being utilized at a higher rate: 92% of the Blue/Green SPF rating seats were

filled versus 61% of the Yellow/Orange/Red seats

However, we still do not have enough high quality seats as 66% of participants selected a school with

a Blue or Green SPF rating as their first choice, while only 60% of the seats available met that criteria

Seat offer is more limited in regions like the Far Northeast. A more limited seat offer increases the

expected seat utilization, including utilization of lower quality seats (Yellow/Orange/Red)

Match Rates

The rates at which students were enrolled in their first choice of schools were up:

- 86% of kindergarteners were placed in their first-choice school (+3%)

- 80% of sixth-graders received their first choice (+7%)

- 87% of ninth-graders were enrolled their first choice (+9%)

There are two drivers of a high first choice placement rate: 1) larger offer of quality seats and 2) seat

demand diversification across different schools.

Definitions

Participant:= A participant is a student who submitted a choice form. An “Enrollment Zone Participant”

is a zone resident who selected at least one school choice within his enrollment zone.

Transition student/applicant:= A transition student is a student that does not rolls automatically to the

next grade in current or another school. Most commonly they are applying to Kinder, 6th, and 9th grade.

(ECE-4 applicants usually do not automatically from ECE-3, but they are not K-12). A transition

participant is a student/applicant that is both in transition and submitted a choice form.

Participation rate:= It is calculated by dividing the number of participants in transition, by the number of

transition participants plus the number of transition students within our line of sight who did not

participate. Transition students are usually applying to Kinder, 6th or 9th grade.

– Identifying kindergarten non-participants is challenging because DPS only has line of sight to

students who are currently enrolled in an ECE program in DPS to serve as the denominator for this

calculation. In contrast, 6th and 9th grade rates are easier due to students being in DPS already

for 5th and 8th grade.

Match rate:= Percentage of applicants (usually referring to transition students) that got their X preferred

choice. 1st choice match rate is the percentage that got their 1st choice., 1st and 2nd choice match rate is

the percentage that got their 1st or 2nd choice, etc.

Within-zone 1st choice placement rate:= The percentage of times, an enrollment zone student (usually

referring to transition students) got his/her first choice, when this choice was with-in the zone.

4

Overview of analysis

5

Participation Offer Match

First we analyze

the demand of

choice

1

Then, we

analyze the seat

supply

2

Finally, we analyze

how are we serving

our students’

choices

3


6


First we analyze

the demand of

choice

1

Then, we

analyze the seat

supply

2

Finally, we analyze

how are we serving

our students’

choices

3

Kinder, 6th and 9th grades are the “traditional” transition grades that students

apply to, but there are exceptions…

7

Current

Grade

Applying to

GradeWho is a transition

student?Exceptions

EC-3 EC-4 Most of studentsEC-3 that roll automatically to EC-4. E.g., Valdez, Ana Maria Sandoval,

Denison, Gilpin, Hallet, Lincoln Elementary, Rocky Mountain Prep Creekside

EC-4 Kinder Most of studentsEC-4 that roll automatically to Kinder. E.g., the above, Academy 360, Highline

Academy, Rocky Mountain Prep Southwest, REACH.

Kinder 1st Almost none Some ADK Programs. E.g., Knight, Edison, Gust, Palmer, Stedman.

1st 2nd None

2nd 3rd None

3rd 4th None

4th 5th None

5th 6th Most of students

K-8/K-12 programs that roll automatically such as Denver Language School,

Wyatt, Omar Blair, Grant Ranch, Cesar Chavez Academy, etc.; EC-6

Montessori schools such as Denison and Gilpin; 5-8 KIPP schools like KIPP

Sunshine Peak Academy and KIPP Montbello College Prep; elementary

schools rolling automatically to a middle school like DCIS at Ford.

6th 7th Almost noneEC-6 Montessori schools such as Denison, Gilpin, Maria Sandoval, Lincoln

Elementary

7th 8th None A closing school such as Pioneer Chapter in 2016-17

8th 9th Most of students*Middle schools rolling automatically to a high school. E.g., DSST middle

schools, West Leadership MS, Strive Prep – Lake, etc. K-12 programs like

Escuela Tlatelolco and RMSEL

9th 10th None

10th 11th Almost none A 8th-10th grade program like ACE Community School

11th 12th None

12th N/A None


*About 84% of 5th graders and 65% of 8th graders in October 2015

22,419 23,066 22,729

24,98822,958

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

Total Number of Round 1 Participants by Year

8

There was a decline in participation by 8% (2,030 students) compared to last year

Decline in participation driven by two facts:

– Fewer students *had* to participate given simplified rules (all current students can remain, rolling rules)

– Fewer kids trying to trade up from non-transition grades

Key Observations


The number of non-transition grade level students that participated in choice

dropped 23% (1,232 students)

9

GradeParticipants

2015-16

Participants

2016-17

Year Over

Year Change% Change

EC 4,443 4,281 -162 -4%

Kinder 5,392 5,440 48 1%

1st 1,144 757 -387 -34%

2nd 695 490 -205 -29%

3rd 677 486 -191 -28%

4th 579 388 -191 -33%

5th 569 459 -110 -19%

6th 5,365 5,560 195 4%

7th 684 532 -152 -22%

8th 574 383 -191 -33%

9th 3,957 3,562 -395 -10%

10th 484 333 -151 -31%

11th 292 192 -100 -34%

12th 133 95 -38 -29%

Total 24,988 22,958 -2,030 -8%

The Number of 2016-17 Participants Compared to 2015-16

The number of non-transition grade level students

submitting choice dropped back 23% (1,232 students)

towards prior levels, possibly due to increased

satisfaction and reduced confusion.

Online “unnecessary applicants” were automatically

screened out (students who do not need to apply

because they are already enrolled in or

automatically roll to their first choice program). This

reduced unnecessary applications from 2,998 to

2,917 (3% reduction).

There was a 10% reduction in the participants for 9th

grade because additional middle school programs

automatically rolled into high school programs,

decreasing the number of students who *had* to

participate in choice.

1

1

1

2

2

1

3

3


We had fewer participants for 9th grade as roll rules are being simplified

Fewer 8th grade students *had* to apply as new roll rules were put in place:

This mirrors what we already do in many district-run schools (e.g., Denver School of the Arts MS,

Denver Center for International Studies MS)

Further opportunities exist to simplify roll rules:

– Martin Luther King Jr. Early College MS 8th grade 162* students rolling to Martin Luther King Jr.

Early College HS

– Bruce Randolph School MS 8th grade 137* students rolling to Bruce Randolph School HS

– 5th grade students in K-8 schools roll automatically, unless they have fewer middle school seats

10

*Number of students provided here are based on October Count 2015 for 8th graders at the current school

8th Grade Students From: Roll to 9th Grade at:Number of Affected

Students*

KIPP Montbello College Prep KIPP Montbello Collegiate HS 114

KIPP Sunshine Peak Academy KIPP Denver Collegiate HS 95

Strive Prep Lake and Sunnyside Strive Prep Excel 232

DSST Byers DSST Byers HS 150

Total: 591


The overall 2016-17 participation of transition students for Kinder, 6th and 9th

grades was 84% vs. 81% in 2015-16

11

81%86%

75%81%

88% 87%

73%84%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Kinder 6th 9th Kinder, 6th and 9th

Choice Participation Rates for Transition Students by Transition Grade

2015-16 2016-17

Identifying kindergarten non-participants is challenging because DPS only has line of sight to students who are currently

enrolled in an ECE program in DPS.

Lower participation for 9th grade reflects the facts that there are only two high school enrollment zones and fewer choices

(as High School programs are larger).

Key Observations


The overall participation for middle school enrollment zones was 92% vs.

74% for the boundary schools*

12

Far Northeast MS

EZ: 94%

Greater Park Hill

Stapleton MS EZ:

96%

Near

North

East

MS EZ:

93%

West

MS EZ:

92%

Northwe

st MS

EZ: 90%

Southwest

MS EZ:

87%

Lake

MS EZ:

86%

Near North East and Northwest middle school enrollment zones were implemented this year.

Participation in enrollment zones is higher as students and families do not have one boundary school with a guaranteed seat

but rather a guaranteed seat among a group of schools.

Key Observations

Morey:

88%

Grant:

87%

Merril:

81%

Hill: 75%

Hamilton:

51%

Enrollment Zone

Boundary School

Enrollment Zone

Implemented 2016-17

*Place, Grant Ranch and Denver Green School are K-8 schools, where 5th graders roll to 6th without

applying. Only students that want to leave the school apply. Therefore, the rates are not considered here


Progress has been done reducing the number of non-participants for Kinder

13

1,111 Kinder Non-Participants in 2015-16

This only captures Kinder non-participants who are known to DPS because they attended or applied for an EC program.

– In October 2015, there were 7,126 Kinder students at DPS, and 1,646 (23%) were not known to DPS during Choice

Round 1 2015-16

The Southwest continues to be an area of opportunity, but progress has been made.

Key Observations

663 Kinder Non-Participants in 2016-17

*Non-participants are transition students that did not summited a choice form


The new middle school enrollment zones have helped reducing the number of

non-participants for 6th grade

14

760 6th Grade Non-Participants in 2015-16

The implementation of the new Northwest and Near North East middle school enrollment zones increased the

participation of the region. The Southwest region also saw improvements.

Opportunities persist in the Southeast region. However, for families living in the Hampden neighborhood options are very

limited due to only Hamilton MS in the area.

Key Observations

730 6th Grade Non-

Participants and

Enrollment Zones

Implemented in 2016-17


Nort-

west

MS EZ

NNE

MS EZ


The number of non-participants for 9th grade is affected by the number of

choices students have

15

1,104 9th Grade Non-Participants in 2015-16

Progress was done in the Northwest region; however, there is only one large high school in the are (North)

There are still opportunities in the Southwest region; nevertheless, the majority of non-participants reside in the A.

Lincoln boundary.

Key Observations

1,091 9th Grade Non-

Participants in 2016-17




16


First we analyze

the demand of

choice

1

Then, we

analyze the seat

supply

2

Finally, we analyze

how are we serving

our students’

choices

3

92% of the Blue/Green seats were filled versus 61% of the Yellow/Orange/Red

seats

17

If we didn’t’ have choice, all different SPF seats would be 80% full (the overall utilization). However, blue seats are utilized

at a 99% and green seats at a 89%.

– Choice has let us move 1,300 students into green and blue seats.

Key Observations

*Schools that opened in 2014-15 or later do not have a SPF

**Seat filled by ANY student

3,123

7,530

3,1793,494

1,468 1,500

3,114

6,684

2,418 2,592

651 726

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

Distinguished MeetsExpectations

No Rating* Accredited OnWatch

Accredited OnPriority Watch

Accredited OnProbation

2016-17 Seat Offer for Transition Students in Grades Kinder, 6th and 9th vs. Number of Filled Seats**

Seat Offer for Transition Students in GradesKinder, 6th and 9thNumber of Filled Seats**

99% Utilization

89% Utilization

76% Utilization

74% Utilization

44% Utilization

48% Utilization

Seat offer:

20,294

Filled seats:

16,185

80% Utilization


Overall

There is a positive relationship between a higher SPF and the utilization of the

seat offer

18

The relationship between a the SPF color mid-point and the utilization of the seat offer is shown by the dotted line: the

higher the SPF, the higher the expected utilization of the seat offer.

Key Observations


Distinguished (80-100%)Meets Expectations (51-79%)

Accredited on Watch (40-50%)

Accredited on Priority Watch (34-39%)

Accredited on Probation (up to 33%)

R² = 0.8419

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Tra

nsit

ion

Seat

Off

er

uti

lizati

on

SPF 2014 Points %

Utilization of Transition Seat Offers vs. SPF Mid Point %

R² = 0.4386

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Tra

ns

itio

n S

ea

t O

ffe

r U

tili

za

tio

n

SPF 2014 Points %

Utilization of Transition Seat Offers vs. School SPF* Points % 2014

Once we analyze this relationship at the school program level, deviations can

occur …

19

The dashed black line in the graph represents the “expected” utilization at a given SPF level (points %):

– Above the line we observe higher utilization than expected, and below the line lower utilization than expected.

Key Observations



Higher

utilization,

lower SPFLower

utilization,

higher

SPF

Noel Community Arts School MS

Martin Luther King Jr. Early College MS

STRIVE Prep - Montbello

Florida Pitt-Waller ECE-8 School

DSST: Green Valley Ranch MS

STRIVE Prep - GVR

R² = 0.5529

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Tra

ns

itio

n S

ea

t O

ffe

r u

tili

za

tio

n

SPF 2014 Points %

Utilization of Transition Seat Offers vs. School SPF* Points % 2014: FNE MS

In the case of FNE Middle Schools, the utilization is higher than expected …

20

When offer is more constrained, as in the case of the middle schools in the Far Northeast (FNE) region, the expected

utilization line shifts up, i.e., higher utilization a given SPF level

The gap between the original All District line and the FNE MS line is a little more pronounced in lower SPF levels, with an

utilization about 8% higher than expected for a bad performing school.

Key Observations



Shifted up

utilization in

about 8%

FNE MS

All district

In the case of SE Elementary Schools, some schools have less utilization than

expected …

21

The All District and Southeast (SE) expected utilization lines are closer in this case. McKinley-Thatcher and McMeen have

considerable lower utilization than expected as the offer of good seat is greater in the region.

Key Observations



McKinley-ThatcherPlace Bridge Academy

Ellis

Denver Green School

McMeen

Samuels

Holm

Rocky Mountain Prep …Lowry

Southmoor Stephen Knight

C3

Steele

Bromwell

University Park

Carson

Highline Academy Southeast

Bradley International School

Lincoln

Asbury

Slavens K-8 School

Steck

R² = 0.3094

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Tra

ns

itio

n S

ea

t O

ffe

r u

tili

za

tio

n

SPF 2014 Points %

Utilization of Transition Seat Offers vs. School SPF* Points % 2014: SE ES

SE ES

All district

Lower

utilization than

expected

4% 4%3% 4%

13% 16%

14%15%

38%41%

28%19%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% 1st Choice % of Seat OffersDistinguished Meets Expectations No Rating

Accredited On Watch Accredited On Priority Watch Accredited On Probation

However, we still do not have enough high quality seats…

22


** 1st Choice distribution ONLY for transition participants

1

2

66% of participants selected a school with a

blue or green SPF rating as their first choice

while only 60% of the seats available met

that criteria

1

2

About 14% of families are taking a chance

and selecting schools that do not have an

SPF rating*, with the hope that when these

schools are rated, they will be high

performing



23


First we analyze

the demand of

choice

1

Then, we

analyze the seat

supply

2

Finally, we analyze

how are we serving

our students’

choices

3

83%

73%

78% 78%

86%

80%

87%

84%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

Kinder 6th 9th Kinder, 6th and 9th

2016-17 vs 2015-16 First Choice Match Rate for Participant Transition Students (for Kinder, 6th and 9th grades)

2015-16 2016-17

84% of participant Denver students in transition received their top choice

school in transition grades K, 6th, and 9th

A higher percentages of transition participants were assigned their top choice than last year in Kinder, 6th and 9th grades.

– Additional supply of new schools with track records (Bear Valley, Strive Kepner, Kepner Beacon, DSST Henry,

McAuliffe @ Manual).

– DPS better assigning additional students in Round 1 instead of calling off the waitlist over the summer due to

analyses of matriculation.

24

Key Observations


93% of participant Denver students in transition received their first or

second choice in transition grades K, 6th, and 9th

We include match rates for choices 1 to 5 (each participant can make up to 5 choices).

25

2016-17 Round 1 Results by Preference Selection for Transition

Participants, by Transition Grade

Grade1st

Choice

1st or 2nd

Choice

1st -3rd

Choice

1st -4th

Choice

1st -5th

Choice

Kinder 86% 93% 96% 97% 98%

6th 80% 91% 95% 96% 97%

9th 87% 95% 97% 98% 98%

Total 84% 93% 96% 97% 97%


*See the Appendix for the corresponding rates in 2015-16

While 84% of transition participants for Kinder, 6th and 9th grades were assigned the their first choice, 93% of

participants were assigned to their first OR second choice. Only 3% did not get any of their 5 choices (and were

defaulted to their boundary school or enrollment zone).

For 9th grade, 87% of transition participants got their first choice and 95% got their first or second choices. Only

2% of 9th graders did not get any of their 5 choices.

1

1

2

2

3

3

For students in enrollment zones, we could measure a match rate with their

preferred school choices WITHIN THEIR ZONE…

26

The universe (denominator) would be a enrollment zone resident who chose a zone school for any

choice, i.e., enrollment zone participants

They could be assigned to schools outside their enrollment zone ONLY if it was a better choice to other

school in their zone

– First zone choice or better:= students who got into the best choice that was a zone school *or*

something they preferred.

Example: Joey lives in Stapleton and he made the following choices (in zone choice in blue)

– Choice 1: DSA

– Choice 2: McAuliffe Best in-zone choice

– Choice 3: DCIS

– Choice 4: Bill Roberts Second best in-zone choice

– Choice 5: Skinner

OUTCOME #1: If he gets into DSA or McAuliffe,

we would say he got into his first zone choice

or better.

OUTCOME #2: If he gets into DCIS or

Roberts, we say he got into his second zone

choice or better.

OUTCOME #3: If he gets into Skinner, we say he got into something better than his

third zone choice (because presumable, he liked Skinner better than any other school

in his zone, and his third zone choice would have come after Skinner)

OUTCOME #4: If he gets defaulted to the zone, we say he didn’t get any of his choices.


85% of enrollment zone participant students in transition were placed in

their top school in the zone (or better) for Kinder

Far Southeast enrollment zone had a perfect in-zone first choice match, meaning that everyone got their top choice

within the enrollment zone (or better out of the zone).

27

2016-17 Round 1 Results by In-Zone (Or Better) Preference

Selection for Transition Enrollment Zone Participants, Kinder

Enrollment Zone1st

Choice

1st or 2nd

Choice

1st -3rd

Choice

1st -4th

Choice

1st -5th

Choice

Far Southeast 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Stapleton

Elementary79% 92% 97% 99% 99%

Elementary

Enrollment Zones85% 94% 98% 99% 99%


1

79% of the students in the Stapleton Elementary enrollment zone were assigned to their top choice within

the zone (or better out of the zone), and 92% got their first or second top in-zone choices.

1

2

2


their top school in the zone (or better) for 6th grade

All the middle school enrollment zones, with the exception of Far Northeast and West, got a perfect (or almost

perfect ) first choice match within the zone (or better out of the zone).

28


Selection for Transition Enrollment Zone Participants, 6th Grade

Enrollment Zone1st

Choice

1st or 2nd

Choice

1st -3rd

Choice

1st -4th

Choice

1st -5th

Choice

Far Northeast MS 73% 88% 94% 96% 97%

Greater Park Hill

Stapleton MS100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Lake MS 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Near North East MS 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Northwest 99% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Southwest MS 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

West MS 81% 95% 97% 98% 98%

MS Enrollment Zones 88% 96% 98% 98% 99%


1

However, whereas 95% of the participants in the West MS enrollment zone got their first or second

choices within the zone, only 88% did in the Far Northeast MS zone.

1

2

2

2


their top school in the zone (or better) for 9th grade

29


Selection for Transition Enrollment Zone Participants, 9th Grade

Enrollment Zone1st

Choice

1st or 2nd

Choice

1st -3rd

Choice

1st -4th

Choice

1st -5th

Choice

Far Northeast HS 71% 90% 97% 98% 98%

West HS 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

HS Enrollment

Zones73% 91% 97% 98% 98%


West HS enrollment zone had a perfect in-zone first choice match, meaning that everyone got their top choice within

their enrollment zone (or better out of the zone).

71% of the students in Far Northeast HS enrollment zone were assigned to their top choice within the zone

(or better out of the zone), and 90% got their first or second top in-zone choices.1

2

1

2

The ratio of seat offers to applicants and the diversification of school

program demand affect 1st choice placement rates

30


First Choice Placement Rate

Ratio of seat

offers to

applicants

High quality

seats across

diverse

programs

The ratio of seat offers to applicants refers to how large is the offer. However, if the demand is concentrated in few seats,

a large aggregate offer may not be enough for everyone getting their top choice.

The perception of high quality across diverse programs helps to spread the demand.

Students who select their boundary school as first choice are always accepted (i.e., placed in their first choice). However,

students living in a enrollment zone may not be accepted to their first choice with-in their zone.

– Within-zone 1st choice placement rate:= The percentage of times, an enrollment zone student (usually referring to

transition students) got his/her first choice, when this choice was with-in the zone.

Key Observations

These are examples of how the ratio of seat offers to applicants and the

spread of demand affect 1st choice placement rates

31


Plenty of seats and demand is

spread across many programs:

Best match

Diverse demand

Ratio o

f seats

Just enough seats and demand is


Good match

Just enough seats and demand

is concentrated in one or few

programs:

Poor match

Plenty of seats but demand is

concentrated in one or few

programs:

Good match

Ex. NW MS Ex. NNE MS

Ex. SW MSEx. FNE MS

+

+

-

-

In the Northwest MS Enrollment Zone, demand is concentrated in one

program, but they had a Within-Zone 1st Choice Placement Rate of 98%*

32


From the 264 transition 6th grade participants residing in the Northwest MS zone, 135 (51% of

Northwest 6th grade participants and 74% of those choosing their 1st choice within the zone) chose

Skinner, whereas 44 chose Strive Prep – Sunnyside (17% and 24%, respectively).

However, everyone who applied to Skinner was accepted, since their seat offer is very large.

Within-Zone 1st Choice Placement Rate of 98%*.



Best match

Diverse demand

Ra

tio

of se

ats


is spread across many

programs:

Good match

Just enough seats and

demand is concentrated in

one or few programs:

Poor match



programs:

Good match


Ex. SW MSEx. FNE MS

Higher ratio of

seats

Lower demand

diversity

Key Observations

+

+-

-

*Three students could not get into Bryant Webster (K-8), where 5th grade students roll to 6th grade.

Result

29% of transition 6th grade participants residing in Far Northeast MS zone

did not get their first choice even if it was within the zone

33


From the 986 transition 6th grade participants residing in the Far Northeast MS zone, 801 (81%) chose a

program in the zone as their first choice. There are 10 different MS programs in the zone, the most

popular being DSST GVR with 291 zone students choosing it as their top choice or 36% of first choices

within the zone, followed by Strive Prep GVR (92 students and 11%, respectively).

However, the capacity at popular schools was not enough: in DSST GVR 168 FNE students that selected

the school as their first choice were waitlisted and 26 in Strive Prep GVR. Other programs in this group

are KIPP (21 first choice in-zone students waitlisted), Greenwood (14), Omar Blair (2), and DCIS (1).

Within-Zone 1st Choice Placement Rate of 71%.



Best match

Diverse demand

Ra

tio

of se

ats



programs:

Good match




Poor match



programs:

Good match


Ex. SW MSEx. FNE MS

Lower ratio of

seats

Lower demand

diversity

Key Observations

+

+-

-

Result

All transition 6th grade participant residing in Near North East MS zone got

her/his first choice if within the zone

34


From the 375 transition 6th grade participants residing in the Near North East MS zone, 261 (70%)

chose a program in the zone as their first choice. 94 of these students (36% of first choices within the

zone) selected Bruce Randolph, 93 (36%) selected DSST: Cole, and 69 selected McAuliffe at Manual

(26%). 5 students selected Whittier, which is a K-8 that rolls to MS.

Every transition 6th grade participant residing in the zone got hers/his first choice if it was within the

zone. Popular top-choice programs outside the zone include STRIVE Prep - Sunnyside (22 students),

DSST: Stapleton (14), and Moore (10).




Best match

Diverse demand

Ra

tio

of se

ats



programs:

Good match




Poor match



programs:

Good match


Ex. SW MSEx. FNE MS

Higher ratio of

seats

Higher demand

diversity

Key Observations

+

+-

-

Result

All the transition 6th grade participants residing in the Southwest MS zone

choosing a program in the zone as their first choice were successfully placed

35


From the 399 transition 6th grade participants residing in the Southwest MS zone, only 174 (44%) chose a

program in the zone as their first choice. The most popular being Bear Valley (102 students, 59% first

choice in zone), followed by DSST: Henry (50, 29%), and STRIVE Prep – Federal (22, 13%). Also popular

is Kunsmiller (51 students).

All the Southwest MS zone students choosing one of the programs above as their first choice were placed

successfully. Popular top-choice programs outside the zone include: DSST: College View (115 students),

Grant Ranch (13), and STRIVE Prep – Westwood (10).




Best match

Diverse demand

Ra

tio

of se

ats



programs:

Good match



programs:

Good match


Ex. SW MS

Lower ratio of

seats

Higher demand

diversity

Key Observations

+

+-

-




Poor match

Ex. FNE MS

Result

In aggregate, there are enough seats for the transition applicants for EC,

Kinder, 6th and 9th grades

A ratio of seats to applicants greater than 1.0 means that there are more seats available than there are students. Note

that in all grades DPS has adequate aggregate capacity to meet enrollment needs.

36

Key Observations

*Includes non-participant transition students

4,805

7,961

6,4215,912

3,987

5,467 5,700

3,953

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

EC Kinder 6th 9th

2016-17 Transition Seat Offer vs. Number of Denver Applicants* in EC and Transition Grades Kinder, 6th and 9th

Seat Offers Denver Transition Applicants

1.2 seats

for every

transition

applicant*

1.4 seats

for every

transition

applicant*

1.1 seats

for every

transition

applicant*

1.4 seats

for every

transition

applicant*

Ratio of seats Participation Offer Match

Transition seat offers and zone applicants ratio, and Within-Zone 1st Choice

Placement Rate vary across enrollment zones for transition 6th grade students

West MS EZ has a ratio closer to 1; however, 133 zone students making 1st choice to: DSST College View MS (9), KIPP

Sunshine Peak MS (50, school starts at 5th grade), and STRIVE Prep – Westwood (74) were waitlisted

37

Far Northeast MS EZ: 0.82

/ 71% placement

Greater Park Hill

Stapleton MS EZ: 1.36

/100% placement

Near North

East MS EZ:

1.10 / 100%

placement

West MS EZ: 0.92 /

77% placement

Northwest

MS EZ: 1.19

/ 98%

placement

Southwest MS

EZ: 1.00 /

100%

placement

Lake MS

EZ: 0.75 /

100%

placement

Name of EZ: Seats to

Zone Transition

Applicants Ratio /

Within-zone 1st Choice

Placements Rate

Ratio of seats Participation Offer Match

*See the Appendix for the corresponding maps for elementary and high school enrollment zones

1

2

3

Lake MS EZ has a low ratio; however, more than half of the zone transition 6th grade students applied to a first choice out of

the zone (most commonly to Skinner, DCIS, GALS, West Generation and West Leadership Academy).

Far Northeast has a low seats/applicants ratio and 29% of the zone transition 6th grade students that applied to their 1st

choice in the zone, did not get it.

1

2

3

We could answer the question: What percentage of first choices (of a given grade level) is concentrated in

the most demanded X programs?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Cu

mu

lati

ve

% o

f F

irs

t C

ho

ice

s

Number of School Programs

Cumulative Percentage of First Choice Selections vs. Number of Programs (From Highest to Lowest Demand) – 9th Grade

We could measure if the demand of seats has diversified by analyzing the

concentration of top choices

38

44%

5

In the graph above, 44% of participants applying to 9th grade had their first choice concentrated in just 5 programs

during 2016-17 Choice Round 1.

Key Observations

Diverse Demand Participation Offer Match

Top school program choices for 6th and 9th grades applicants have diversified

39

Diversification of choices improves match rates, as fewer students are “competing” for the same seats.

Note that the match rate is also affected by the ratio between the seat offer and number of applicants.

Key Observations

Half of the 1st choices were

concentrated in the top 14 programs

(out of 58**) in 2016-17 vs. in the top

12 programs in 2015-17.

6th Grade

Half of the 1st choices were

concentrated in the top 6 programs

(out of 36**) in 2016-17 vs. in the top 5

programs in 2015-17.

9th Grade

1stC

ho

ice

Ma

tch

Ra

teD

ive

rsif

ica

tio

n o

f

Ch

oic

e

*Showing difference in percent points between Choice 2016-17 and 2015-16

**Programs with a least one first choice

First choice

match rate was

up +7%*

Diverse Demand Participation Offer Match

First choice

match rate was

up +9%*

Appendix

40

Families are choosing higher performing schools

The proportion of applicants selecting a blue/green/unrated school increased to 80% in 2015 versus 76% in 2014.

Very few families list a low performing school #1, though families are assigned to those schools because of lack of

capacity in higher-performing schools.

41

29%

29%

28%

41%

38%

38%

3%

10%

14%

18%

15%

13%

4%

3%

3%

5%

5%

4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2014-15

2015-16

2016-17

1st Choice of Transition Participants in Kinder, 6th and 9th grades, by SPF Rating

Distinguished Meets No Rating Accredited on Watch Accredited on Priority Watch Accredited on Probation

Key Observations

89% of participant Denver students in transition received their first or

second choice in transition grades K, 6th, and 9th in 2015-16

We include match rates for choices 1 to 5 (each participant can make up to 5 choices).

While 78% of transition participants for Kinder, 6th and 9th grades were assigned the their first choice, 89% of

participants were assigned to their first OR second choice. 5% did not get any of their 5 choices (and were defaulted to

their boundary school or enrollment zone).

42

2015-16 Round 1 Results by Preference Selection for Transition

Participants, by Transition Grade

Key Observations

Grade1st

Choice

1st or 2nd

Choice

1st -3rd

Choice

1st -4th

Choice

1st -5th

Choice

Kinder 83% 91% 94% 95% 96%

6th 73% 86% 91% 93% 94%

9th 78% 91% 94% 96% 96%

Total 78% 89% 93% 94% 95%

The ratio of seat offer to applicants* varies by region

In aggregate, there are enough seats to meet district needs but when location is considered constraints are identified,

particularly in the Far Northeast

ECE seats tend to be more dispersed along the west side of the city.

43

ECE: 1.6

Kinder: 1.7

6th: 1.6

9tth: 1.2

ECE: 1.1

Kinder: 1.5

6th: 1.5

9th: 2.2

ECE: 1.1 Kinder 1.5

6th : 0.8 9th: 0.9

ECE: 0.9

Kinder: 1.2

6th: 0.9

9th: 1.4

ECE: 1.4

Kinder: 1.5

6th: 1.0

9th: 1.7

NorthwestNear Northeast

Far Northeast

SoutheastSouthwest

Key Observations

*Includes non-participant transition students

Ratio of Seats: Denver Applicants (ECE and in Transition Grade) by Region

How does transition seat offers and zone applicants ratio relate to Within-

Zone 1st Choice Placement Rate, for transition Kinder students?

Stapleton Elementary EZ has a ratio of seats/applicants of about 1; however, more than half of the 1st choices are

concentrated in Swigert (33%) and William Roberts (23%)

44

Stapleton

Elementary

EZ:1.0 / 80%

placement

Far Southeast

Elementary:

0.72 / 100%

placement


Zone Transition

Applicants Ratio /


Placements Rate

1

2

Southeast Elementary EZ has a low seats ratio; however, about 40% of the zone transition Kinder students applied to a

first choice out of the zone (most commonly to Bradley, Southmoor, and Highline).

1

2

How does transition seat offers and zone applicants ratio relate to Within-

Zone 1st Choice Placement Rate, for transition 9th grade students?

Far Northeast HS EZ has a ratio of seats/applicants just below 1. In addition, more than 50% applied as 1st choice to DSST:

GVR HS or Strive Prep – Rise HS

45

Far Northeast HS

EZ:0.9 / 65%

placement

West HS EZ:

0.48 / 100%

placement


Zone Transition

Applicants Ratio /


Placements Rate

1

2

West HS EZ has a low ratio; however, almost all zone transition 9th grade students had their 1st choice out of the zone (as

these students already opted out from West Leadership Academy MS and West Generations Academy MS, whose 8 th grade

students roll to the high schools)

1

2

Highest Demand Schools: Kindergarten

46

School NameSPF

Rating

Number of students

who listed each school

as their 1st preference

2016-17

Rank

2015-14

Rank

2014-13

Rank

Swigert International School 188 1 1 2

William (Bill) Roberts K-8 School 158 2 3 10

Escalante-Biggs Academy 143 3 2 1

Denver Language School 107 4 13 4

Odyssey School of Denver 105 5 17 26

Highline Academy Northeast 103 6 5 80

Isabella Bird Community School 98 7 6 21

High Tech Elementary School 97 8 29 76

Park Hill School 95 9 27 23

Stephen Knight Center for Early Education 94 10 4 6

Brown International Academy 94 10 10 7

Top 10 Requested Programs for 2015-2016:

School NameSPF

Rating

Non-boundary

students who listed

each school as their

1st preference and got

waitlisted

Non-boundary

students who listed



accepted

% Accepted

Highline Academy Northeast 31 72 70%

Polaris at Ebert Elementary School 30 20 40%

Denison Montessori School 30 55 65%

Downtown Denver Expeditionary School 26 42 62%

Stephen Knight Center for Early Education 24 67 74%

Carson Elementary School 24 2 8%

Academia Ana Maria Sandoval 22 46 68%

High Tech Elementary School 21 1 5%

Brown International Academy 20 18 47%

Southmoor Elementary School 20 0 0%

Kinder programs with most non-boundary students waitlisted, who listed the school as their 1st preference:

Highest Demand Schools: 6th Grade

47


School NameSPF

Rating

Number of students



2016-17

Rank

2015-14

Rank

2014-13

Rank

McAuliffe at Smiley 401 1 1 1

DSST: Green Valley Ranch MS 351 2 2 2

DSST: College View Middle School 245 3 6 7

Denver School of the Arts MS 203 4 5 4

DSST: Byers Middle School 199 5 7 11

Skinner Middle School 198 6 9 8

STRIVE Prep - Westwood 191 7 3 5

DSST: Stapleton Middle School 191 7 4 3

Kunsmiller Creative Arts MS 160 9 12 10

Hamilton Middle School 155 10 8 6

School NameSPF

Rating

Non-boundary

students who listed



waitlisted

Non-boundary

students who listed



accepted

% Accepted

DSST: College View Middle School 104 35 25%

Slavens K-8 School 60 77 56%

DSST: Byers Middle School 53 146 73%

McAuliffe at Smiley 45 20 31%

Farrell B. Howell ECE-8 School 41 13 24%

Denver Center for International Studies MS 34 117 77%

STRIVE Prep - Federal 32 46 59%

Merrill Middle School 31 43 58%

KIPP Sunshine Peak Academy 19 1 5%

STRIVE Prep - Westwood 18 8 31%

6th grade programs with most non-boundary students waitlisted, who listed the school as their 1st preference:

Highest Demand Schools: 9th Grade

48


School NameSPF

Rating

Number of students



2016-17

Rank

2015-14

Rank

2014-13

Rank

East High School 649 1 1 1

South High School 295 2 3 2

CEC Middle College of Denver 202 3 7 5

Northfield High School 197 4 2 N/A

Thomas Jefferson High School 184 5 4 5

George Washington High School 174 6 10 3

DSST: Green Valley Ranch High School 155 7 6 7

STRIVE Prep - SMART Academy 148 8 5 4

Martin Luther King Jr. Early College 145 9 8 9

John F. Kennedy High School 129 10 13 10

School NameSPF

Rating

Non-boundary

students who listed



waitlisted

Non-boundary

students who listed



accepted

% Accepted

CEC Middle College of Denver 83 119 59%

Northfield High School 50 89 64%

STRIVE Prep - SMART Academy 21 127 86%

East High School 18 393 96%

KIPP Denver Collegiate High School 16 38 70%

Denver Montessori Junior/Senior School 2 1 33%

DCIS at Montbello 1 0 0%

Noel Community Arts School 1 0 0%

Martin Luther King Jr. Early College 1 2 67%

9th grade programs with most non-boundary students waitlisted, who listed the school as their 1st preference:

Where did Pioneer Charter students selected and assign to?

49

SPF and School Name# 1st Preference

Requests

DSST: Cole Middle School 38

Bruce Randolph School MS 12

DSST: Cole High School 9

McAuliffe at Manual 8

East High School 8

DSST: Stapleton Middle School 4

Manual High School 4

Northfield High School 3

KIPP Montbello College Prep 2

Bruce Randolph School 2

*Totals only included for applicants to 6th to 9th grade. Rest rolls to University Prep – Steele.

SPF School Name#

Assigned



East High School 9

DSST: Cole High School 9


Manual High School 6

DSST: Stapleton Middle School 2

Bruce Randolph School 2

Venture Prep High School 2

STRIVE PREP - Excel 2

Top 10 Assigned SchoolsTop 10 First Choice Schools

Where did Barret students selected and assign to?

50

SPF and School Name# 1st Preference

Requests



Stedman Elementary School 3

Columbine Elementary School 2

University Prep - Steele 2


University Prep - Arapahoe 1

Bryant Webster Dual Language

ECE-8 School 1

Gilpin Montessori Public School 1

Teller Elementary 1

*Totals only included for applicants to Kinder and 6th grade. Rest rolls to Columbine.

SPF and School Name#

Assigned

Columbine Elementary School 7



Stedman Elementary School 5

University Prep - Steele 2


Smith Renaissance School 1

University Prep - Arapahoe 1

Bryant Webster Dual Language

ECE-8 School 1

Gilpin Montessori Public School 1

Top 10 Assigned SchoolsTop 10 First Choice Schools

Documents

Analysis of 2016 Round 1 School Choice - Denver Public …schoolchoice.dpsk12.org/.../07/...Choice-Analysis.pdfDenver Public Schools. Purpose & Table of Contents 2 Purpose To provide