1

Fairfax County Public Schools – Facilities Planning Advisory Council Annual Report

Executive Summary and List of Recommendations

School Year 2016-2017

The School Board established the Facilities Planning Advisory Council (FPAC) in September 2010 to “advise and inform the staff and School Board in the development of comprehensive, long term plans for facilities needs in the most effective and efficient way.” The FPAC charge from the School Board for school year 2016-2017 is:

"Continue to build on work in the following areas:

• identifying emerging capacity issues and proposing possible solutions; where capacity enhancements are needed for schools not being renovated, proposing how those be incorporated into the CIP cash flow;

• updating the content of the Strategic Facilities Plan to be included in the Facilities Comprehensive Plan; work with staff to continue to develop the Facilities Comprehensive Plan;

• review the effectiveness of the facilities-related energy savings and green initiatives; and

• consider ways to bring attention to the FPAC recommendation for increased bond funding for the school system."

The majority of this Annual Report focuses on FPAC activities related to carrying out the charge. Significant findings and recommendations in each area of the charge are provided in the body of the report. Detailed reports that explain the background and reasoning underlying the recommendations are provided as attachments. The report also contains the results of FPAC's investigation into several additional areas: maintenance of school facilities, an update on Tysons development’s impact on schools, and a review of previous FPAC recommendations. Finally, the report provides information about meetings, community outreach, membership, and the year ahead. The report contains 15 recommendations, of which the most significant are that:

FCPS specifically designate the site where Hutchison Elementary School is located as the site for the new western high school in the next CIP, and include the western high school in the 2019 school bond referendum.

Beginning with the 2019-2023 CIP, the actual capital requirements for additional capacity and renovations be quantified to demonstrate that the annual bond debt limit of $155 million/year imposed by the Board of Supervisors is inadequate to meet FCPS’ needs, and to illustrate the need to increase that current limitation on capital spending.

FCPS develop a proactive facilities maintenance program, to include assessing the facilities, identifying most critical maintenance requirements, quantifying the backlog of deferred maintenance, and developing and funding resource requirements to carry out the program.

FCPS conduct a facility impact assessment, including transportation costs, and a cost-benefit analysis to determine how special programs, for example, foreign language immersion, advanced academic program, and music programs, should best be provided to optimize program outcomes consistent with facilities impact, transportation, and other costs. Such an assessment should consider whether a program should be undertaken, continued, discontinued, expanded or re-organized.

A generally prioritized list of all 15 recommendations, with references to the body of the report follows.

2

1. FPAC recommends that the School Board: • Declare that a new high school is required in the western part of the County • Designate the FCPS-owned 38-acre site where Hutchison Elementary School is located as

the site for the new high school • Recognize that opening a new high school will require significant boundary changes and

potential pyramid re-alignments • Include funding for the new high school in the 2019 school bond referendum. (See

recommendation 1, p. 5)

2. FPAC recommends that FCPS provide for the new western high school in the next CIP, and: • Project the necessary funding stream, to begin immediately following the 2019 bond

referendum • Minimize boundary adjustments in the areas likely to be impacted by the opening of the new

high school to those required in the short term to accommodate student enrollment • Delay actions to achieve pyramid alignment • Develop a plan to accommodate Hutchison attendance area elementary students. (See

recommendation 2, p. 5)

3. FPAC recommends that, beginning with the 2019-2023 CIP, the actual capital requirements for additional capacity and renovations be quantified to demonstrate that the annual bond debt limit of $155 million/year imposed by the Board of Supervisors is inadequate, and to illustrate the need to increase that current limitation on capital spending. (See recommendation 9, p. 7)

4. FPAC recommends that FCPS develop a proactive facilities maintenance program, to include: • Continuing with the high-level facilities inspection to establish the order in which more in-

depth inspections should occur and to develop overall budgetary requirements. • Implementing a systematic review process to inspect all facilities over a five-year period, or

20% of facilities each year. This effort will allow FCPS to have regular assessments on their schools, identify specific projects, and allow the Board and staff to ensure most urgent requirements are being addressed in a timely manner.

• Calculating the total facilities deferred maintenance backlog to understand the financial impact on capital projects detailed in the CIP.

• Developing a backlog reduction spending plan equal to 1% of the current replacement value, or $62 million/year, to align with industry standards. If this is not affordable, determine the amount of funds necessary to keep the backlog from increasing year over year, and fund at least that amount.

• Developing a resourcing plan to allow facilities maintenance program funds to grow proportional to increases in square footage, and to reflect standard inflation rates or another benchmark rate that is chosen.

• Developing a resourcing plan, indexed to total square footage of facilities, to increase the facilities maintenance staff by at least 264 FTE (either contract or FCPS employees) over a seven-year period, or 37 FTE per year. Reassess progress each year until the ratio of preventive maintenance to reactive maintenance is roughly 6 to 1. (See recommendation 12, p. 9)

5. FPAC recommends that FCPS conduct a facility impact assessment, including transportation

costs, and a cost-benefit analysis to determine how special programs, for example, foreign language immersion, advanced academic program, and music programs, should best be provided to optimize program outcomes consistent with facilities impact, transportation, and other costs. Such an assessment should consider whether a program should be undertaken, continued, discontinued, expanded or re-organized. (See recommendation 14, p. 10)

6. FPAC recommends that the 2012 Strategic Facilities Plan (SFP) stand as a document of record without modification, and that the Guidelines in the SFP be incorporated, as approved by the School Board, into the CIP, with the Facilities Comprehensive Plan eventually taking the place of both documents. (See recommendation 4, p. 6)

3

7. FPAC recommends that its annual charge for the School Year 2017-2018 include continuing to work with staff on the Facilities Comprehensive Plan, particularly in identifying long-term solutions and incorporating them into the CIP. (See recommendation 5, p. 6)

8. FPAC recommends that, since the CIP and the budget are sent to the County at approximately the same time, FCPS should either ensure the enrollment projections are the same or clearly explain why they differ. (See recommendation 11, p. 8)

9. FPAC recommends that FCPS continue to closely monitor both in-migration of students from outside the County and movement of current students within the County as residential areas (e.g., Silver Line corridor, Tysons area, Embark/Richmond Highway corridor) are developed and populated to gain insight on the number of additional students entering the system. (See recommendation 3, p. 6)

10. FPAC recommends that Facilities Management staff update the School Board with the latest performance metrics of the Cenergistic energy conservation contract at the earliest possible time. (See recommendation 6, p. 7)

11. FPAC recommends that Facilities Management staff provide a total cost analysis of the Energy

Star programs to determine the actual savings that result from them and to advise as to whether any of these organic savings programs are compensable to Cenergistic as part of their energy conservation contract. (See recommendation 7, p. 7)

12. FPAC recommends that FCPS do more to get the word out about the Get2Green program and

be sure it is available to as many students who wish to participate in the program as possible. (See recommendation 8, p. 7)

13. FPAC recommends that the School Board’s liaisons to the County Planning Commission Schools Committee request that the work plan (described later in this report) be expanded to include streamlining the zoning and review approval process for FCPS facilities to, at a minimum, bring it in line with facility and land use requirements of other County organizations (e.g., the Fairfax County Park Authority). (See recommendation 13, p. 9)

14. FPAC recommends that the School Board request that the Board of Supervisors provide the bond premiums obtained from the sale of school bonds to FCPS to address capital requirements. (See recommendation 10, p. 8)

15. FPAC recommends that analysis of prior recommendations be included in our annual charge for the School Year 2017-2018. (See recommendation 15, p. 11)

4

Facilities Planning Advisory Council

School Year 2016-2017

Annual Report

The Facilities Planning Advisory Council (FPAC), established in September 2010, is an advisory council to the School Board and serves to advise and inform the Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) staff and School Board in the development of comprehensive, long-term plans for facilities needs in the most effective and efficient way. This report provides our response to FPAC’s Annual Charge from the School Board; discusses additional areas of research; reports on our meetings, community outreach and membership; suggests areas to be included in the 2017-2018 Annual Charge; and incudes fifteen (15) recommendations. I. RESPONSE TO FPAC'S ANNUAL CHARGE

The FPAC charge from the School Board for school year 2016-2017 is:

"Continue to build on work in the following areas:

• identifying emerging capacity issues and proposing possible solutions; where capacity enhancements are needed for schools not being renovated, proposing how those be incorporated into the CIP cash flow;

• updating the content of the Strategic Facilities Plan to be included in the Facilities Comprehensive Plan; work with staff to continue to develop the Facilities Comprehensive Plan;

• review the effectiveness of the facilities-related energy savings and green initiatives; and

• consider ways to bring attention to the FPAC recommendation for increased bond funding for the school system."

The significant findings and recommendations in each of these areas are provided below. Detailed reports that explain the background and reasoning underlying the recommendations are provided as attachments.

A. EMERGING CAPACITY ISSUES

Significant Findings: The FY 2018-22 CIP adroitly identifies major emerging capacity issues and proposed solutions. In addressing this topic, FPAC examined possible changes in anticipated enrollment that differed from expectations that informed the CIP, and solutions that might be considered. The greatest sources of uncertainty in FCPS enrollment patterns are in the County Development Centers, such as Embark in the Richmond Highway corridor, Tysons, and the Silver Line corridor. Massive development in these areas is making it difficult to anticipate with confidence the public school enrollment growth. Moreover, developers are beginning to revise the mix of new construction to increase the residential component and decrease the commercial component, particularly in the Silver Line corridor. FPAC also is uncertain how much of the population growth in these areas will come from elsewhere in the County, rather than from outside the County. This is critical because in-county migration would cause enrollment shifts county-wide, rather than merely within these growth areas. In order to address the capacity needs driven by the multiple Development Centers, the following are required:

5

• Several new elementary schools: the additional school to be built on the McNair site; a school near the Silver Line stations in the westernmost area of the County; a school in the Oakton area; and the new school already planned for the Embark Richmond Highway corridor;

• Capacity enhancements at several high schools; and • A new high school on the Hutchison Elementary School site.

All of these are included in the list of 2017 School Bond Projects, except for the new high school. For several years, the CIP has included an un-sited and unfunded new high school in the western part of the County. As discussed in Attachment 1, the need is now clearly evident. FCPS staff has searched for affordable and appropriate land parcels in the western part of the County, but the lack of open space and the prohibitive cost of purchasing a site, has convinced FPAC that the only feasible solution is to use the 38-acre Hutchison Elementary School site to construct the new high school. FPAC proposes that planning money for the new western high school be included in the 2019 bond, with construction money included in the 2021 bond. This new school would relieve overcrowding in Region 5 and provide for the inevitable growth along the Silver Line and Route 28 corridors. The impact of a new western high school will be felt throughout the County as high school boundaries are adjusted to include the new school and provide relief for surrounding schools. There is likely to be a "domino effect" from west to east and north to south as capacity becomes available in schools that share a boundary with the new high school. Many high school boundaries are likely to change, and with them boundaries for feeder middle and elementary schools. Therefore, FPAC recommends that FCPS should minimize boundary adjustments in the near future, and, for those immediately needed, should make adjustments with the future in mind. FCPS and FPAC should begin planning for the effects of the new high school, and future CIP documents and the Comprehensive Facilities Plan should reflect those plans. The County Development Centers are likely to place an additional strain on the school system as developers recently have begun to modify the mix of construction to increase residential and decrease commercial projects. The three areas that are currently projected to have the most impact, and the order in which significant student yield is expected are:

• The Silver Line corridor, where the first development area is projected to yield 1700 students; • The Tysons area, where student yields are being estimated as building types are defined;

and, • The Embark/Richmond Highway Corridor, where an overall population increase of 5,400 is

estimated. This growth, in combination with many schools already being over-crowded, will place an additional burden on facilities. FCPS has several ways to deal with over-crowded schools: add permanent capacity, add temporary capacity, move programs, and/or change school boundaries. Until such time as the boundary and pyramid impacts of the new high school are more clearly known, it is prudent to limit the number and extent of boundary changes. Instead, over-crowding at specific schools should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The detailed reports are provided as Attachments 1 and 2. Recommendations: 1. FPAC recommends that the School Board:

• Declare that a new high school is required in the western part of the County • Designate the FCPS-owned 38-acre site where Hutchison Elementary School is located as

the site for the new high school • Recognize that opening a new high school will require significant boundary changes and

potential pyramid re-alignments • Include funding for the new high school in the 2019 school bond referendum.

2. FPAC recommends that FCPS provide for the new western high school in the next CIP, and:

6

• Project the necessary funding stream, to begin immediately following the 2019 bond referendum

• Minimize boundary adjustments in the areas likely to be impacted by the opening of the new high school to those required in the short term to accommodate student enrollment

• Delay actions to achieve pyramid alignment • Develop a plan to accommodate Hutchison attendance area elementary students.

3. FPAC recommends that FCPS continue to closely monitor both in-migration of students from

outside the County and movement of current students within the County as residential areas (e.g., Silver Line corridor, Tysons area, Embark/Richmond Highway corridor) are developed and populated to gain insight on the number of additional students entering the system.

B. FACILITIES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND UPDATING THE STRATEGIC FACILITIES PLAN Significant Findings: In a previous report, FPAC recommended that a Facilities Comprehensive Plan (defined in the School Board's Strategic Governance Manual) be developed to include content from the Strategic Facilities Plan and the CIP; that such a document be published on a bi-annual basis; and that only the documents required by the County be submitted annually for the County CIP. We are pleased that the current CIP is a significant step in this direction. It reorganizes information into 'static' sections that contain guidelines and processes and change little from year to year, and sections that are updated annually to reflect changing conditions in FCPS enrollment and facility use. New information, such as the maps of all FCPS facilities and properties, has also been included based on our previous recommendations.

Ultimately, the Facilities Comprehensive Plan will be comprised of a set of interactive web-based documents and information sources that can be easily accessed by the public and updated as needed. Then, each year, the portion of the planning documents required by the County for its CIP may be extracted, approved by the School Board and sent forward. FPAC will continue to work with FCPS staff to develop the Facilities Comprehensive Plan, address long-term facilities solutions, and set funding priorities. A more in-depth report on the Strategic Facilities Plan is provided as Attachment 3. Recommendations: 4. FPAC recommends that the 2012 Strategic Facilities Plan (SFP) stand as a document of record

without modification, and that the Guidelines in the SFP be incorporated, as approved by the School Board, into the CIP, with the Facilities Comprehensive Plan eventually taking the place of both documents.

5. FPAC recommends that its annual charge for the School Year 2017-2018 include continuing to work with staff on the Facilities Comprehensive Plan, particularly in identifying long-term solutions and incorporating them into the CIP.

C. ENERGY SAVINGS AND GREEN INITIATIVES

Charge: Review the effectiveness of the facilities-related energy savings and green initiatives. Significant Findings: To its credit, FCPS has many energy savings and green initiatives underway. FPAC recognizes the importance of energy savings and green initiatives to FCPS in both its operational budget and its capital spending plan. With as much space that FCPS maintains, the potential savings from effective initiatives is significant. However, while many of these initiatives can lead to considerable savings, these programs require a good deal of oversight to ensure their success. As such, FPAC spent this

7

past year learning about the various programs FCPS has underway and hopes to receive the associated metrics over the next school year to include in next year’s Annual Report. A more in-depth report on the Energy Savings and Green Initiatives is provided as Attachment 4. Recommendations: 6. FPAC recommends that Facilities Management staff update the School Board with the latest

performance metrics of the Cenergistic energy conservation contract at the earliest possible time.

7. FPAC recommends that Facilities Management staff provide a total cost analysis of these Energy Star programs to determine the actual savings that result from them and to advise as to whether any of these organic savings programs are compensable to Cenergistic as part of their energy conservation contract.

8. FPAC recommends that FCPS do more to get the word out about the Get2Green program and

be sure it is available to as many students who wish to participate in the program as possible. D. INCREASING SCHOOL BOND FUNDING

Charge: Consider ways to bring attention to the FPAC recommendation for increased bond funding for the school system. Significant Findings: Since the 2016 FPAC Annual Report, which included an Appendix detailing our assessment of potential latitude the County has for increasing bond limits, little has changed. The following statement was included in the County's FY 2018 advertised budget presentation, dated Feb 14, 2017: "As directed by the Board [of Supervisors], staff reviewed debt capacity as it relates to an increase in FCPS bond sales.

• Given lack of funding to support the debt service associated with a sales limit change and projected debt ratio impact, no adjustment in $275 million annual sales limit is recommended.

• Staff will continue to analyze and will review again next year."

(Slide 39, retrieved from: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dmb/fy2018/advertised/fy2018-advertised-cex-budget-presentation.pdf) FCPS depends on County staff analysis and recommendations to the Board of Supervisors (BOS) regarding increases to the bond funding limits. FPAC believes that, if the CIP provided an accurate, dollar amount presentation of the actual facilities funding needs, then the argument for an increase would be well supported. The School Board and FCPS should continue to work with the county executive and financial staff, as well as making a stronger case via the CIP, to achieve a higher funding level. As currently adopted, the CIP is actually a spending plan documenting how FCPS intends to use the $155 million per year in bond funding that is capped by the Board of Supervisors for its capital improvement program. The capital needs of the school system, as determined by the extraordinary (and increasing) length of time buildings await renovation, go well beyond that current limitation. Therefore, the CIP does not represent the "requirements," as it states, but only is a best-fit of the needs into an externally-capped budget. In future CIPs, we recommend that the actual capital requirements for additional capacity and renovations be quantified to demonstrate this point, and to illustrate the impact of the current limitation on capital spending. One method by which FCPS could receive additional funds without impacting the bond limit is by having the BOS provide to FCPS the bond premiums obtained from the sale of school bonds; presently they are retained by the County.

8

Recommendations:

9. FPAC recommends that, beginning with the 2019-2023 CIP, the actual capital requirements for additional capacity and renovations be quantified to demonstrate that the annual bond debt limit of $155 million/year imposed by the Board of Supervisors is inadequate, and to illustrate the need to increase that current limitation on capital spending.

10. FPAC recommends that the School Board request that the Board of Supervisors provide the bond premiums obtained from the sale of school bonds to FCPS to address capital requirements.

II. ADDITIONAL AREAS OF RESEARCH

A. THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Significant Findings: FPAC very much agrees with the CIP focus on high school pyramids, and the concept of providing the full range of academic and student services within each pyramid. While major changes in boundaries and/or pyramid alignments need to take into consideration the new high school, some work in this area should continue in the interim until the new boundaries are established. The most compelling aspect of the CIP as a planning document is the high level of uncertainty about the future. There is no way to accurately predict economic and demographic changes that may occur in 5, 10 or even 15 years. Therefore, FCPS must remain flexible in its longer-range planning.

• For example, the five-year projected growth in the total student population is about 3,400. This represents an average increase of just 700 students per year. Given the current statistics about net migration, birth-to-kindergarten ratio, and large cohorts aging out of the system, these numbers seem reasonable. However, we have not, in recent years, experienced a five-year period of such slow growth. FPAC is confident that the Facilities staff will keep a very close watch on the numbers and trends and will adjust projections accordingly.

• Similarly, no one can project with any certainty the size or timing of student yield from newly urbanized Development Centers across the county, like the Tysons area, areas affected by the extension of the Metro Silver Line, and areas that will develop as a result of Embark in the southern part of the County.

One area of concern is that the projected enrollment figures used to develop the annual FCPS operating budget differ significantly from the projected enrollment figures used to develop the CIP. Since the CIP and the budget are sent forward to the County at approximately the same time, FPAC recommends that FCPS either use one set of figures or clearly explain why they differ. Recommendation: 11. FPAC recommends that, since the CIP and the budget are sent to the County at approximately

the same time, FCPS should either ensure the enrollment projections are the same or clearly explain why they differ.

B. MAINTENANCE OF FCPS FACILITIES

Significant Findings:

Using the 21st Century School Fund report as a guide, FPAC encourages FCPS to develop metrics used in industry to determine the amount of financial risk associated with its facilities. Well-maintained facilities are a key factor in maximizing educational outcomes, such as increased test scores and better teacher recruitment and retention. FPAC believes that school maintenance is significantly underfunded, causing increased degradation of major building systems and higher total cost of ownership to taxpayers.

9

A more in-depth report on maintenance of school facilities is provided as Attachment 5. Recommendation: 12. FPAC recommends that FCPS develop a proactive facilities maintenance program, to include:

• Continuing with the high-level facilities inspection to establish the order in which more in-depth inspections should occur and to develop overall budgetary requirements.

• Implementing a systematic review process to inspect all facilities over a five-year period, or 20% of facilities each year. This effort will allow FCPS to have regular assessments on their schools, identify specific projects, and allow the Board and staff to ensure most urgent requirements are being addressed in a timely manner.

• Calculating the total facilities deferred maintenance backlog to understand the financial impact on capital projects detailed in the CIP.

• Developing a backlog reduction spending plan equal to 1% of the current replacement value, or $62 million/year, to align with industry standards. If this is not affordable, determine the amount of funds necessary to keep the backlog from increasing year over year, and fund at least that amount.

• Developing a resourcing plan to allow facilities maintenance program funds to grow proportional to increases in square footage, and to reflect standard inflation rates or another benchmark rate that is chosen.

• Developing a resourcing plan, indexed to total square footage of facilities, to increase the facilities maintenance staff by at least 264 FTE (either contract or FCPS employees) over a seven-year period, or 37 FTE per year. Reassess progress each year until the ratio of preventive maintenance to reactive maintenance is roughly 6 to 1.

C. RELATIONSHIP WITH THE COUNTY Significant Findings: From insights gained over the past several years, it has become clear to FPAC that, although the relationship between the Fairfax County Department of Planning and Zoning and FCPS has improved, there is still much that needs to be done. For example, the length of time it takes to obtain reviews and approvals severely restricts FCPS' ability to quickly respond to changing needs. Recommendation: 13. FPAC recommends that the School Board’s liaisons to the County Planning Commission Schools

Committee request that the work plan (described later in this report) be expanded to include streamlining the zoning and review approval process for FCPS facilities to, at a minimum, bring the process in line with facility and land use requirements of other County organizations (e.g., the Park Authority).

D. PROGRAM IMPACT AND EVALUATION Significant Findings: FPAC recognizes that programs and program evaluation are well beyond the scope of its charter, but programs have a huge impact on school assignments, as evidenced by the very high percentage of students who do not attend their "base" school. For example, there is one elementary school with students from 65 other "base" schools. Periodic reviews of whether the programs are producing the desired results can aid decision-making on whether to continue, expand or discontinue those programs. A cost-benefit analysis that includes facility and transportation costs can also inform decisions about whether new programs should be introduced.

10

Recommendation: 14. FPAC recommends that FCPS conduct a facility impact assessment, including transportation

costs, and a cost-benefit analysis to determine how special programs, for example, foreign language immersion, advanced academic program, and music programs, should best be provided to optimize program outcomes consistent with facilities impact, transportation, and other costs. Such an assessment should consider whether a program should be undertaken, continued, discontinued, expanded or re-organized.

E. INVESTIGATION OF LUNCH TIMES As a result of many anecdotal reports over the past few years, FPAC investigated whether the limitations of cafeteria space and lunch lines were creating a situation where some students had lunch times as early as 9:30 a.m. Based on review of posted meal times for sampled schools across the county, no such examples were found. The typical high school in FCPS, for example, provides four 30-minute lunch sessions, roughly between 11:30 am and 1:30 pm. What is more difficult to ascertain, however, is how enrollment challenges impact cafeteria crowding and flow, and how much time children have to eat after moving through the lunch line. FPAC would like to continue conversations with Food and Nutrition Services on these matters in the future.

F. UPDATE ON TYSONS DEVELOPMENT IMPACT Regarding the plan for the Tysons area, FPAC was particularly focused on school size and attendance areas, future school locations, and the concept of busing children in what is described as a "walkable" community. We updated the analysis included in our last Annual Report with information obtained during our meeting with the County as well as the latest Progress Report from 2016. What the County Comprehensive Plan foresees as solutions to the need for middle and high school seats may not mesh with the current and projected overcrowding of schools in that area or with stated FCPS school size targets. For example, the Plan assumes we can "expand one of the existing high schools in the area" to meet the needs of the 806 projected new high school students. Another example is that the Comp Plan Amendments currently under consideration increase the capacity of elementary schools from 900 to 950 students, middle schools from 1,250 to 1,350 students, and high schools from 2,000 to 2,500 students. It is not clear to FPAC whether this is consistent with current FCPS policies. The updated analysis is included as Attachment 6.

G. FOLLOW-UP WITH INSTRUCTIONAL SERVICES At our May 2016 meeting, Sloan Presidio gave an Instructional Services (IS) presentation to FPAC on classroom space requirements in older facilities and for special programs. A follow-up with IS revealed that the focus was on minor building modifications, which have been communicated to Facilities Services. FCPS could benefit from an articulated vision from IS on the future direction of instructional design and the related facilities requirements. H. STATUS OF PREVIOUS FPAC RECOMMENDATIONS Significant Findings:

Since FPAC’s first Annual Report was delivered to the School Board in 2011, FPAC made a total of 54 recommendations. Some of these have been implemented, some have been partially implemented, some have been overcome by events, and some remain to be implemented. Over the same period, there have been several personnel changes in the facilities and planning staff and FCPS has migrated to a new website. All of this has impacted our ability to analyze the outcome of each recommendation. We have collected all of the recommendations into a spreadsheet, and it has become evident that it will take some dedicated time and effort to adequately analyze the recommendations and determine which, if any, FPAC would put forward for staff and School Board re-consideration.

11

Recommendation: 15. FPAC recommends that analysis of prior recommendations be included in our annual charge

for the School Year 2017-2018. III. MEETINGS

A. FPAC BUSINESS MEETINGS

FPAC business meetings were held monthly September through June, with the December meeting cancelled due to weather, and two meetings held in May. We have been fortunate to hear from a variety of FCPS departments, several of which had not spoken with FPAC previously. Highlights of our monthly meetings are as follows:

• At our September 2016 meeting, FPAC re-elected the following slate of officers: Karen Hogan (at-large member), Chair; Daniel Aminoff (Mason District), Vice Chair; and Charles Hookey (Braddock District), Secretary.

• At our November 2016 meeting, Rodney Taylor, FCPS Director of Food and Nutrition Services, discussed the programs being implemented, and reported that there are currently no facility issues impacting the delivery of food and nutrition services.

• Also at the November meeting, Jeff Platenberg, Assistant Superintendent, Department of Facilities and Transportation Services, reported on the School Board Work Session of October 24, where Fairfax County planners discussed the Development Centers and outlined areas where significant growth is expected, and the Board discussed the urbanization of the County and the importance of working with the County on mixed use (school and community use) facilities.

• At our March 2017 meeting, William Curran, FCPS Activities and Athletic Programs Director, discussed the facility-related needs of those programs. While the current facilities needs are met, there are some areas where improvements could be made, such as: a regular, planned artificial turf management program, improved field lighting control, additional stadium restrooms, an indoor track facility, and adequate reimbursement for community use.

• At our April 2017 meeting, Mike Coughlin, FCPS Facilities Management Director, discussed the facilities management program and funding stream. The discussion informed our findings and recommendations in the area of maintenance, as reported in Attachment 5.

• At our May 16, 2017 meeting, Facilities Planning Staff Coordinator Jessica Gillis and Planner Brian Schoester gave an update about EMBARK. The discussion included activity and plans for other County Development Centers as well.

• Several of our meetings were dedicated to gaining a deeper understanding of various facility-related processes: the geo-coded enrollment and projection systems and processes and the information that is becoming available; the timeline and activities related to the school bond referendum process; the new Virginia proffers legislation; options available for accommodating over-crowding and identification of areas where additional schools are needed; and the County Comprehensive Plan Amendment process.

• FCPS staff and members of the community have attended and contributed to several of our meetings this year. We especially appreciate the regular participation and open sharing on the part of Kevin Sneed and Aimee Holleb of the Department of Facilities and Transportation Services.

FPAC meetings are held from 7-9 p.m. in Room 5050, as shown in the schedule on our website, https://www.fcps.edu/committee/facilities-planning-advisory-council

B. RETREAT

FPAC held an all-day retreat on February 25, 2017 at Marshall High School. The keynote speaker for the retreat was James Whitaker, who specializes in facilities asset management and has researched the impact of school facilities on the learning environment and outcomes. Highlights of his points were:

12

• After the obvious (roof, lighting, HVAC) and the not-so-obvious (acoustics, glare, space utilization) are inspected, evaluated, and “maintained”, air quality has probably the most impact on cognitive function. Student exposure to “out-of-bounds” levels of CO2 and VOCs (volatile organic compounds) have a detrimental effect on student performance.

• The Facility Condition Index (FCI) and Facility Needs Index (FNI) are two industry standards used to measure the aforementioned conditions. Combined with a Space Requirements Index (Ed Specs, etc.) these measurements should provide a pretty good picture of the facilities.

• The challenges are that the time and money for such assessments is often diluted and/or deferred, the establishment of a base line for such measurements is arguably arbitrary, and measuring outcomes is an historically weak area.

• While there is evidence that facilities conditions have a measurable impact on learning outcomes, the results of studies are just emerging and more controlled studies are under way.

. FCPS has policies and procedures for inspecting and maintaining facilities in the areas discussed; however, budget and personnel limitations are often limiting factors in complete implementation. As a result of our discussion, FPAC hosted Mike Coughlan, FCPS Director of Facilities Management, at our April 2017 meeting. Findings and recommendations related to facility maintenance are provided as Attachment 5.

C. MEETINGS WITH SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS

Individual FPAC members met with their School Board members to gain insights on various areas of interest. School Board members are encouraged to call upon their FPAC representative as needed.

D. SCHOOL BOARD WORK SESSIONS

FPAC members have attended all of the facilities-related Work Sessions held during this school year, to gain insight on Board members' issues and concerns.

E. FAIRFAX COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SCHOOLS COMMITTEE

Schools Committee/School Board Working Group. At its February 8, 2017 meeting, the Fairfax County Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend to the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors (Adopted on February 14, 2017) the work plan developed and proposed by its Schools Committee/School Board Working Group. This group included the members of the Planning Commission Schools Committee, School Board Members Evans and Corbett-Sanders, and staff from FCPS Facilities Planning and the Public Facilities Branch of the Department of Planning and Zoning. The work group met on January 18th, January 25th and February 7th, 2017. The work plan addresses the land use priorities identified during the joint retreat held on June 14, 2016, by the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors and the Fairfax County School Board. The final work plan includes six recommend topics to address priorities identified by the Board of Supervisors and the School Board. The topics are:

• Projection Methodologies • School Proffers • Impact of Development on Schools • School Planning and Economic Development • Equity and Access to Schools and Facilities

The Schools Committee - School Board Working Group anticipates presenting their findings to the Board of Supervisors on each topic they address. The Group will also identify potential next steps,

13

as appropriate. These may include suggested changes to policies, procedures, ordinances, or plans. The Executive Summary of the work plan is at: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/planning/pdf/schools_committee_work_plan_exec_summary_-_final.pdf County Comprehensive Plan Amendment. In addition to School Board members Evans and Corbett-Sanders and FCPS Facilities leadership, FPAC attended and provided input at the Planning Commission Schools’ Committee meetings to revise locational and character criteria for public school facilities in the Public Facilities section of the Policy Plan element of the County’s Comprehensive Plan. The amendment, as adopted by the Board of Supervisors in November 2016, more fully described in the Attachment, allows:

• Vertical schools to be compatible with the higher densities, mix of uses, and pedestrian and transit accessibility

• Different levels of schools to be co-located on a site • Co-location of schools with other public use facilities, such as public libraries and recreation

centers • Adaptive re-use of existing buildings, including buildings designed for commercial use.

The Policy Plan including the adopted amendments can be found at: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpz/comprehensiveplan/adoptedtext/2013_p-07.pdf F. FY 2018 BUDGET TASK FORCE

FPAC Vice Chairman Dan Aminoff (Mason) was appointed by At Large School Board member Ryan McElveen to serve on the FY 2018 Budget Task Force. The Budget Task Force held 3 meetings and delivered its recommendations to Acting Superintendent Lockard on January 18,. Mr. Aminoff was able to provide a facilities perspective to the operational side of the budget, which included such topics as community use, boundary adjustments, re-purposing existing facilities and deferred maintenance.

IV. COMMUNITY OUTREACH

A. COMMUNITY TIME

FPAC allots time on its agenda for community members to provide input. This school year, we have received input from several community members and observers have attended most of our meetings. FPAC encourages and receives community input via the Community Time on our agenda for business meetings, via email, from School Board members, and at a wide variety of community meetings. In the fall we heard a request that community members beyond the school community be included in both school planning and communications about changes – to include adjacent homeowners and community associations.

B. WEB PRESENCE

FPAC continues its outreach to the broader Fairfax community through our public website at: https://www.fcps.edu/committee/facilities-planning-advisory-council The meeting schedules, agendas and minutes are located on the website along with other pertinent documents. FPAC has an FCPS email account (FPAC@fcps.edu) which is monitored by the three FPAC officers.

V. REPORTS

In addition to our Annual Report, FPAC also delivered a Semi-Annual Report to the School Board on February 16, 2017, at a Work Session that included a discussion of various topics with Board members. Minutes of FPAC monthly meetings are posted to the FPAC website.

14

VI. MEMBERSHIP

Four of our members had terms that expired this year. We are very pleased that all four wished to continue working with FPAC and have been re-appointed for additional 3-year terms by the School Board. These members are: Jayant Reddy, Dranesville; Howard Perlstein, Hunter Mill; Daniel Aminoff, Mason, and David Phillips, At-Large.

VII. THE YEAR AHEAD AND ANNUAL CHARGE FOR 2017-18

FPAC plans to hold monthly business meetings from September 2017 through June 2018 to address the forthcoming annual charge, and

• FPAC will continue working with the staff to: o Expand the CIP to include long-range plans and evolve it into the Facilities

Comprehensive Plan; and o Determine FPAC's role in any emerging boundary scope or study activities.

• FPAC will seek and incorporate community input and comment, as appropriate. This is an area in which FPAC can be very effective at increasing communication and expanding options under consideration.

• FPAC will continue to address facilities-related issues and bring its recommendations to the School Board.

FPAC suggests that its 2017-2018 Annual Charge from the School Board include continuing to work with staff and build on our work in the following areas:

• Developing the long-range vision for FCPS school facilities, to be included in the CIP; • Developing a CIP that reflects the capacity and major maintenance requirements of FCPS

and demonstrates the impact of the current bond funding limits; • Further reviewing the effectiveness of the facilities-related energy savings and green

initiatives; and, • Analyzing the outcome of prior recommendations, re-presenting any that FPAC believes

should be adopted.

IN SUMMARY FPAC had a busy year and recognizes that there is a significant amount of information to be assimilated, that dedicated effort is required, and that there are many challenges to be met to develop recommendations on the efficient and effective long-term use of facilities resources to support the educational mission of the FCPS. We look forward to continuing our work with the School Board, the FCPS staff and the Fairfax community to address the issues with our public school facilities.

15

Facilities Planning Advisory Council Members

Member Name District Appointed Through

Charles Hookey (Secretary) Braddock 2019 Jayant Reddy Dranesville 2020 Howard Perlstein Hunter Mill 2020 Christopher Nuneviller Lee 2019 Daniel Aminoff (Vice Chairman) Mason 2020 Scott Higgins Mt. Vernon 2019 Kate Howarth Providence 2018 Ian Kelly Springfield 2018 Kristen Hyatt Sully 2018 David Phillips At-Large 2020 Melina Dugal At-Large 2018 Karen Hogan (Chairman) At-Large 2019 Allen Griffith Fairfax City 2018

16

Facilities Planning Advisory Council 2016 – 2017 Attendance

Member Name District 2016

13 Sep

4 Oct

1 Nov

2017

3 Jan

7 Feb

25 Feb

7 Mar

4 Apr

2 May

16 May

Charles Hookey Braddock x x x x x x x x x Adam Siegel Dranesville x x x x x x x x x x Howard Perlstein Hunter Mill x x x x x x x x x Chris Nuneviller Lee x x x x x x x x x x Daniel Aminoff Mason x x x x x x x x x x Scott Higgins Mt. Vernon x x x x x x x x Julie Herlands Providence x x x x x x x x x x Ian Kelly Springfield x x x x x x x x Kristen Hyatt Sully x x x x x x x x x Melina Duggal At-Large x x x x x x x x Karen Hogan At-Large x x x x x x x x x x David Phillips At-Large x x x x x x x x x Allen Griffith Fairfax City x x x x x x x x x x

x= Attended blank = Absent FPAC did not meet in December 2016, due to weather FPAC Retreat on Saturday 2-25-2017

18

ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT 1: Need for New High School ATTACHMENT 2: Emerging Capacity Issues ATTACHMENT 3: Facilities Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Facilities Plan ATTACHMENT 4: Energy Savings and Green Initiatives ATTACHMENT 5: Maintenance of School Facilities ATTACHMENT 6: Update on Tysons Development Impact, May 2017

19

ATTACHMENT 1 Need for New High School Charge: Identify emerging capacity issues and propose possible solutions, and also where capacity enhancements are needed for non-renovating schools and how to incorporate those into the CIP cash flow. Discussion and Findings: High School capacity is needed. As can be seen in the FCPS Capacity Balance Summary (CIP, p. 40) below, FCPS' major capacity problem is in high school capacity, with the five-year total capacity deficit projection showing the equivalent of an additional high school (-2,251).

Some of the high school capacity needs are currently being addressed. Additional capacity that will be created by funded projects is included in the Program Capacity figures for 2021-2022. Other projects to add capacity will be included in the 2017 and 2019 school bond referenda. Region 1: Herndon HS and Langley HS are being renovated; an addition is underway at South Lakes HS; Oakton HS is included on 2017 bond; an addition at Madison HS is projected for 2019 bond. Region 2: Annandale HS shows a 170 increase in capacity; Falls Church HS is on the 2017 bond; an addition at Stuart HS is on the 2017 bond. Region 3: An addition at West Potomac HS is on the 2017 bond. Region 4: West Springfield HS is being renovated. Region 5: Projected deficit of 662 seats. No renovations or additions included in 2017 bond.

20

The capacity problem may be even greater. The projections in the CIP are, in our estimation, very conservative, showing an average year-over-year growth of only 700 students, with a total increase by 2020 of 3,400 students. The County demographers are projecting a steady growth in population over the next 20 years. Their projections for 2020 are presented below (Demographic Reports 2016 Fairfax County Department of Neighborhood and Community Services, p. II-5, retrieved from: http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/demogrph/demrpts/report/fullrpt.pdf)

As shown in the table above, the total 2016 population between ages 5 and 19 is 220,552. The FCPS enrollment figure for 2016 is 187,202. This indicates that about 84.9% of the population in those age groups is enrolled in FCPS. Applying that same percentage to the County's 2020 projected population groups yields a projected enrollment of 193, 611 - or an increase of 6,409 over the 2016 FCPS enrollment. Therefore, if the ratio of school-age population to enrollment holds constant, in 2020 FCPS could see 3,000 more students than currently projected in the CIP. Such an increase would put pressure on FCPS at all levels, and would make the high school problem much worse. New Western High School is proposed. For several years the FCPS CIP has included a new high school in the western part of the County. As demonstrated above, the need is now clearly evident. FCPS has searched for appropriate land parcels and, with the lack of open space and high cost of real estate, it is also clear that FCPS should use the 38 acre parcel that Hutchison Elementary School currently resides on to construct the new high school. FPAC proposes that planning costs for the new western high school be included in the 2019 bond, with construction costs included in the 2021 bond. This new school would relieve overcrowding in Region 5 and provide for the planned growth long the Silver Line and Route 28 corridors. Since many high school attendance boundaries, and potentially pyramid alignments, will change as a result of the new school, a single new high school can provide relief to areas of the County that are overcrowded and have no land for a new high school and/or are getting to be too large, such as those in the Tysons area. Recommendations: FPAC recommends that the School Board:

• Declare that a new high school is required in the western part of the County • Designate the FCPS-owned 38-acre site where Hutchison Elementary School is located as

the site for the new high school • Recognize that opening that a new high school will require significant boundary changes and

potential pyramid re-alignments • Include funding for the new high school in the 2019 school bond referendum.

FPAC recommends that FCPS provide for the new western high school in the next CIP, and:

• Project the necessary funding stream, to begin immediately following the 2019 bond referendum

21

• Minimize boundary adjustments in the areas likely to be impacted by the opening of the new high school to those required in the short term to accommodate student enrollment

• Delay actions to achieve pyramid alignment • Develop a plan to accommodate Hutchison attendance area elementary students.

22

ATTACHMENT 2 Emerging Capacity Issues Charge: Identify emerging capacity issues and propose possible solutions, and also where capacity enhancements are needed for non-renovating schools and how to incorporate those into the CIP cash flow. Discussion: The adopted FY 2018-22 CIP adroitly identifies major emerging capacity issues and proposed solutions. In addressing this topic, FPAC examined possible changes in anticipated enrollment from expectations that informed the CIP, and solutions that might be considered. The greatest sources of uncertainty in FCPS enrollment patterns are in the County Development Centers, such as Embark in the Richmond Highway corridor, Tysons, and the Silver Line corridor. Massive development in these areas is making it difficult to anticipate with confidence the public school enrollment growth. Moreover, developers are beginning to revise the mix of new construction to increase the residential component and decrease the commercial component, particularly in the Silver Line corridor. FPAC also is uncertain how much of the population growth in these areas will come from elsewhere in the County, rather than from outside the County. This is critical because in-county migration would cause enrollment shifts county-wide, rather than merely within these growth areas. Since the FY 2018-22 CIP was approved, FCPS and FPAC have learned that a much greater share of the Silver Line corridor development is planned to be residential (vs. commercial) than previously projected. The expected student enrollment growth over the coming years for just one area is projected to be over 1,700 students, along with other growth that drives the requirement for the new high school and impacts several elementary schools, including new ones. Regarding Tysons Corner, not only is enrollment growth projected from new development, but also existing residential properties are producing a larger number of public school students than in the past. However, the trend is uncertain regarding the rate of enrollment growth in this area. FCPS facilities and planning personnel are tentatively projecting the need for, in addition to the above schools in the Silver Line corridor, boundary changes that would expand enrollment in schools projected to be under-capacity in the coming years. Facilities and planning personnel also are tentatively anticipating, to address Tysons Corner enrollment growth, renovating and reopening currently closed schools used for other purposes in Dunn Loring and/or Pimmit. In the instance that funding streams are unavailable to cover the cost of new schools, one alternative solution would be a much more substantial change in boundaries that would shift greater enrollment into northern FCPS schools projected to be otherwise significantly under-capacity. Strikingly, Cooper Middle School is projected to be at a paltry 62% capacity in 5 years, at the conclusion of an impending renovation that will increase capacity to 1,200 students; it has only just over 700 students currently. Langley High School, similarly, is projected to be at only 81% capacity at the conclusion of its current renovation. The CIP anticipates boundary changes that would move some Marshall and McLean High School pyramid students to the Langley pyramid. Any such boundary changes should take into consideration the impact on multiple boundary and pyramid changes resulting from the establishment of the high school in the western part of the County. Enrollment growth in the Silver Line corridor and Tysons Corner could result from residents who move into the County and from current residents who move within the County. Therefore it is important that FCPS monitor both to understand the impacts. Findings: The County Development Centers are likely to place an additional strain on the school system as developers recently have begun to modify the mix of construction to increase residential and decrease commercial projects. The three areas that are currently projected to have the most impact, and the order in which significant student yield is expected are:

23

• The Silver Line corridor, where the first development area is projected to yield 1700 students; • The Tysons area, where student yields are being estimated as building types are defined; and, • The Embark/Richmond Highway Corridor, where an overall population increase of 5,400 is

estimated. This growth, in combination with many schools already being over-crowded, will place an additional burden on the facilities. FCPS has several ways to deal with over-crowded schools: add permanent capacity, add temporary capacity, move programs, and/or change school boundaries. Until such time as the boundary and pyramid impacts of the new high school are more clearly known, it is prudent to limit the number and extent of boundary changes. Instead, over-crowding at specific schools should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis l. Recommendation: FPAC recommends that FCPS continue to closely monitor both in-migration of students from outside the County and movement of current students within the County as residential areas (e.g., Silver Line corridor, Tysons area, Embark/Richmond Highway corridor) are developed and populated to gain insight on the number of additional students entering the system.

24

ATTACHMENT 3 Facilities Comprehensive Plan and Strategic Facilities Plan Charge: Update the content of the Strategic Facilities Plan to be included in the Facilities Comprehensive Plan; work with staff to continue to develop the Facilities Comprehensive Plan. Discussion and Findings: The Strategic Facilities Plan (SFP) was prepared by the Facilities Planning Advisory Council (FPAC) and approved by the Fairfax County School Board in November 2012. It was the intent of this document to provide a framework for sound decision making, enable effective response to change, and reflect resident input combined with Fairfax Count Public Schools’ (FCPS) vision of the future. Four overarching themes for facilities planning and management included Communication, Capacity and Space Use, Operations and Maintenance, and Capital Improvement. At the time, FCPS faced extraordinary growth in its student population and the projected need was going to outstrip the available seats within five years. As it turned out, the lingering effects of the great Recession (Dec. 2007-Jun. 2009) and the federal budget sequestration (beginning Jan. 2013) had a significant local impact and the student population increase was less than forecast, averting an immediate crisis. However, the overall resiliency of the Washington DC metropolitan area and its attractiveness as an economic hub continue as growth indicators for FCPS, which still anticipates significant (if not extraordinary) growth. While overcrowding on some level is a constant reality, FPAC foreshadowed a crisis in the coming decade that would impact FCPS’ ability to provide and maintain school facilities in line with its stated mission to ensure that every child has access to high-quality education in a facility that is environmentally safe, secure, functionally efficient, and comfortable. Further, the SFP was to be reviewed annually for the first three years and updated as necessary by FPAC in conjunction with FCPS staff. The Guidelines established in the SFP continue to be relevant and help inform the work of FPAC and FCPS. While the SFP continues as a touchstone, formal annual reviews of the document have not been conducted by FPAC. Instead, the semi-annual and annual reports submitted by FPAC to the Board formed an ongoing, updated narrative of facility concerns. Summary: In response to the FPAC recommendation and subsequent charge from the School Board that the SFP be incorporated into a more comprehensive document, the Facilities Comprehensive Plan (FCP) is being developed. FPAC continues work with FCPS staff to merge the SFP and the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) documents, augmented with more comprehensive planning information about schools, to create the Facilities Comprehensive Plan. Recommendations: FPAC recommends that the 2012 SFP stand as a document of record without modification, and that the Guidelines in the SFP be incorporated, as approved by the School Board, into the CIP, with the Facilities Comprehensive Plan eventually taking the place of both documents. FPAC recommends that continuing work with staff on the Facilities Comprehensive Plan, particularly in identifying long-term solutions, be included in our annual charge for the coming school year.

25

ATTACHMENT 4 Energy Savings and Green Initiatives Charge: Review the effectiveness of the facilities-related energy savings and green initiatives. Discussion and Findings: FCPS has undertaken several facilities-related energy savings and green initiatives. Each is briefly discussed below. Cenergistic Energy Conservatio Contract. The most comprehensive and expensive of the initiatives is the contract with Cenergistic, Inc. On December 5, 2013, the School Board issued a no bid Energy Conservation contract to Cenergistic, Inc. The term of the contract is five (5) years starting on February 1, 2014 and ending on July 30, 2019. The contract requires FCPS to pay an annual software licensing fee and hire multiple Full Time energy specialists. Cenergistic also receives a “Performance Fee” based upon the total savings that the program achieves during the first five performance years of the contract. The performance fee is payable monthly in an amount equal to 50% multiplied by the total savings for that month, until the cumulative total gross savings reaches $20,000,000. After $20,000,000 of total gross savings, the fee is payable monthly in an amount equal to 40% multiplied by the total savings for each month. An initial Energy Conservation Program report was delivered to the School Board on July 13, 2015, for the period of February 2014 through April 2015. This report contained performance metrics showing that there had been significant energy conservation and the associated dollar savings. The presentation also detailed some future goals of the program. No subsequent reports on the Cenergistic Energy Conservation Program have been delivered to the School Board. In connection with our charge, FPAC requested an update to the Energy Conservation Program metrics several times. Unfortunately, the response from staff was that these metrics “are not produced or available.” FPAC must conclude that staff is not prepared to release the performance metrics publically. The only information available to us is the payments made to Cenergistic to date. However, given the multiple components of Cenergistic’s compensation, it is not possible to extrapolate the energy conservation savings from these figures. Energy Star Program. FCPS has also embarked on a program to have as many facilities as possible achieve the Energy Star rating. This includes, among other things, an “Energy Star Battle of the Buildings” contest where students and staff members become aware of saving energy, helping to save money, and lowering greenhouse gas emissions. This contest ended on April 30th. FCPS’s Energy Star efforts have been so successful that FCPS earned a 2017 Energy Star Partner of the Year award. Further, this past April, FCPS was recognized by the U.S. Environment Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Energy for its work in this area. In addition, Marshall High School was rated the number one K-12 School in EPA’s National Building Competition (Battle of the Buildings Bootcamp 2016) competing against 150 buildings to reduce its water use and protect the environment. FCPS ran its own Battle of the Buildings competition this past Spring where 47 participating schools competed. Final results for the competition will come later this summer once all the relevant utility bills are received by staff. Get2Green. On May 4, 2017, FCPS was named a 2017 U.S. Department of Education Green Ribbon School District Sustainability Awardee. The district was honored for its comprehensive Get2Green program and for achieving $10 million in energy savings during a two-year period. FCPS’s Get2Green environment stewardship program engages students in environmental action such as recycling, composting, building wildlife and native plant habitats, conserving energy, and growing food. The program maintains several dashboards that allow students to track their school’s energy usage amongst a number of categories. FCPS has more “Green Flag” schools (12, plus 4 schools with “Double Green Flags”) than any school district in the US. FCPS is also a charter member of the Green Schools Alliance District Collaborative, a group of 21 large school districts combining their collective power to support, green, more efficient solutions to environment sustainability. More information about Get2Green can be found on the program’s home page: http://get2green.fcps.edu/index.html

26

EcoSchools. To date, 90 Fairfax County schools are registered as EcoSchools. One of those schools, Centreville Elementary, was named a 2017 Green Ribbon School, for its sustainability efforts. Centreville Elementary uses the environment as a primary vehicle for student learning, offering opportunities to solve real-world problems through creativity, collaboration, communication, and critical thinking. Students at the school are engaged in planning, constructing, using, and maintaining a wildlife habitat on school grounds that increases biodiversity, conserves water, minimizes the need for mowing, and serves as an outdoor classroom. Centreville Elementary has three outdoor classrooms, a walking trail, and a variety of gardens, one for each grade level. A green hour enables students to enjoy several hours of weekly outdoor education. Cool School Challenge. As part of the Cool School Challenge, sponsored by the National Wildlife Federation students conduct energy, water, waste biodiversity, health, habitats, food, and transportation audits, followed by action plans based on the results. They create public service announcements and youth-oriented TED-style talks on the environment, work on outdoor education lessons to share with teachers, meet with custodians and cafeteria managers, and work with the principal to gather information and get approval for new initiatives. Summary. FCPS has been very successful In implementing a number of energy saving and green initiatives. The one area that FPAC has concerns is in the management and execution of the contract with Cenergistics. As FPAC is unable to obtain information, it is suggested that the School Board review the cost and performance associated with that contract. Recommendations: FPAC recommends that staff update the School Board with the latest performance metrics of the Cenergistic energy conservation contract at the earliest possible time. FPAC recommends that staff provide a total cost analysis of the Energy Star programs to determine the actual savings that result from them and to advise as to whether any of these organic savings programs are compensable to Cenergistic as part of their energy conservation contract. FPAC recommends that FCPS do more to get the word out about the Get2Green program and be sure it is available to as many students who wish to participate in the program as possible.

27

ATTACHMENT 5 Maintenance of School Facilities Discussion: BACKGROUND: FPAC believes that proper stewardship of taxpayer-funded school buildings using industry standards and best practices will maximize student learning outcomes while minimizing total cost of ownership. FPAC recognizes that given the constrained fiscal environment, facilities may not be prioritized over other pressing needs and FPAC appreciates the complexity of the decisions made by the School Board and FCPS leadership to provide the best learning environment possible for our students, teachers, and staff to make FCPS one of the best school systems in the nation. To address shared concerns that were voiced by FPAC and FCPS staff, a small group of FPAC members used information from the 2016 report "State of Our Schools: America's K-12 Facilities" to perform a comparison of FCPS data to what is recommended by the 21st Century Schools Organization. "State of Our Schools: America's K-12 Facilities" is a joint publication of the 21st Century School Fund, Inc., U.S. Green Building Council, Inc., and the National Council on School Facilities. As outlined in the 21st Century Schools report Executive Summary on page 3, "A large and growing body of evidence demonstrates that school facilities have a direct impact on student learning, student and staff health, and school finances. But too many students attend school facilities that fall short of providing 21st century learning environments because essential maintenance and capital improvements are underfunded." In short, facilities matter. IMPACTS OF FACILITIES ON LEARNING OUTCOMES: FPAC members reviewed publically available studies that investigate the impact of school facilities on students and teachers. Below are selected studies that highlight the specific impacts of school condition, capacity and configuration on students and staff:

• There is a 4-9% difference in test scores between students in worst/best condition schools and a 5-9% difference between students in oldest/newest schools, as well as a 4% difference in graduation rates. (2008 Blincoe)

• The percentage of students passing SOLs in Virginia middle schools was 2.2-3.9% higher in English, mathematics, and science in standard buildings than substandard buildings. (2007 Bullock)

• Approximately 32-35% of schools indicated that there was at least one factor that interfered with their ability to deliver instruction to at least a moderate extent. (2007 Chaney & Lewis)

• Virginia teachers in schools in satisfactory conditions are significantly more likely to express positive attitudes about their classrooms than teachers in unsatisfactory buildings. (2009 Earthman & Lemasters)

• The condition of school facilities in Rural Texas has a measurable effect over and above socioeconomic conditions on student achievement and teacher experience/turnover. For every 10% reduction in the percent of portable facilities size per student, test scores increased by 11 points and for every 10% increase in deferred maintenance, average test scores decreased by .61 points. (2009 Sheets)

• Students are sensitive to school's ambiance and that the association of various aspects of the school's physical environment with student's problem behaviors is positive for all students. (2008 Kumar, O'Malley, Johnston)

Findings: BENCHMARKING FCPS FUNDING VS. RECOMMENDATIONS IN 21ST CENTURY SCHOOLS REPORT: It is important to emphasize that the overall condition of FCPS facilities is a factor in student learning outcomes, as well as teacher recruitment and retention. Further, the FPAC team felt it was important to benchmark total FCPS spending on facilities as compared to the 21st Century Schools

28

report. In the report, proposed national standards for school facilities are based on the building industry best practices. On page 22, the percentages are based on the percentages of the facilities current replacement value that should be invested annually to maintain school buildings in good condition. In 2017, FCPS schools have a current replacement value (CRV) of $6.2 billion. The report specifically recommends the following guidelines:

• 3% of CRV, an amount of $186million, on annual maintenance and operations such as cleaning, grounds keeping, routine and preventative maintenance, minor repairs, utilities and security.

• 2% of CRV, an amount of $124million, on periodic renewals for replacing key components that wear out such as roofs, windows, doors, boilers, etc.

• 1% of CRV, an amount of $62million, on as-needed alterations such as adding space for smaller classes, expanding early childhood, addressing environmental concerns, integrating technology, and improving safety and security.

• 1% of CRV, an amount of $62million, on systematic reduction on deferred maintenance. A comparison of spending recommended by the 21st Century Schools report to what is spent by FCPS yields the following analysis:

• 3% of $6.2B CRV on annual maintenance and operations is $186million per year. For the current school year, FCPS has $167million budgeted, or 2.7% of CRV.

• 2% of $6.2B CRV on major maintenance is $124million per year. For the current school year, FCPS has $23.1million budgeted, or 0.4% of CRV.

• 1% of $6.2B CRV on as-needed alterations is $62million per year. For the current school year, FCPS has $600thousand budgeted, or 0.0% of CRV.

• 1% of $6.2B CRV on systematic reduction on deferred maintenance is $62million per year. For the current school year, FCPS has $0 budgeted, or 0% of CRV.

The chart below demonstrates the shortfalls (shown in millions of dollars):

Using the 21st Century Schools report as a baseline, FCPS should spend $186M per year just to address major maintenance and as-needed alterations, but in FY 2017 it is budgeted to spend only $23.7 million, leaving a shortfall of $162.3 million. Some of these needs are addressed when a school is renovated. During renovation, the major systems are upgraded and alterations are made. However, each year, only a few schools are renovated, and major maintenance at other facilities is only minimally funded. .

$186

$124

$62 $62

$167

$23.10 $1 $0

MAINT. & OPS MAJOR MAINTENANCE ALTERATIONS REDUCE DEFERRED MAINT.

FCPS 2017 Maintenance Budget vs. Recommended by 21st Century

Schools Report

21st Century Schools Recommendation FCPS 2017

29

The amounts shown in these figures would provide maintenance for the current inventory of buildings. As new buildings or additions to existing schools are added to the inventory, the CRV increases, along with related maintenance requirements. The cumulative effect of underfunding of facilities introduces substantial risks into the learning environment and degrades the ability of FCPS teachers and staff to deliver instruction to students across a spectrum of socio-economic backgrounds. In addition, FCPS could be operating at a higher total cost of ownership, which introduces an additional burden on the capital investment plan bond funds because schools may need to be renovated prematurely, while addressing capacity increases at the same time. Specifically, regarding annual maintenance and operations/periodic renewals: with underinvestment in routine and preventative maintenance, the overall facilities condition degrades more quickly, resulting in more expensive, urgent repairs that have the potential to impact school operations. Examples include: loss of power, heat, cooling, roof leaks, mold, etc. RISKS OF UNDERFUNDING MAINTENANCE: An analysis conducted by FPAC on the budget provided by the Office of Facilities Management (OFM) shows that, after adjusting for inflation, FCPS OFM has had a flat spending profile over the last several years. Over the same time period, FCPS had a net increase of 6.8% in square footage of its instructional facilities, resulting in an overall decrease in spending per square foot of facility space. The current level of resourcing causes staff to focus on reactive maintenance (RM) versus preventative maintenance (PM). Reacting to maintenance issues when they arise versus conducting preventative maintenance on a regular schedule increases overall maintenance costs significantly. FCPS is making an effort to shift toward more preventative maintenance. Based on information provided by FCPS staff, 15% of maintenance funds were spent on proactive preventative maintenance in 2014, while 85% of maintenance funds were spent on reactive maintenance. By 2016, the percentage spent on proactive maintenance increased to 21% of maintenance funds, with 79% going toward reactive maintenance. While this is viewed as a good news story for FCPS, there is much work to be done to change this situation. Past emphasis by Office of Facilities Management on preventative maintenance has resulted in clear benefits for FCPS. For example, increasing preventative maintenance reduced the number of emergency actions from 11% to 4%. This small change improved man-hour availability by thousands of hours, with the net effect of adding up to 10 full time equivalents. Industry rule of thumb guidance suggests that the optimal ratio of preventative maintenance to reactive maintenance is 6 to 1 (or 86% PM to 14% RM). Additionally, an independent professional assessment done in July 2012 revealed that OFM had a shortfall of 264 FTEs of front line maintenance staff. FPAC believes that improving maintenance staffing (either by contractor or employee personnel) across FCPS will, over time, result in a lower total cost of ownership, minimize emergency repairs that impact school operations, keep facilities conditions high to improve learning outcomes, and reduce the burden of accelerated degradation on to the CIP program and allow resources to be focused on capacity enhancements. REFERENCES: The sources cited above are included in the following reports: 21st Century School Fund - State of our Schools http://www.21csf.org/best-home/docuploads/pub/331_StateofOurSchools2016.pdf 21st Century School Fund - Research on the Impact of School Facilities on Students and Teachers http://www.21csf.org/csf-home/Documents/ResearchImpactSchoolFacilitiesFeb2010.pdf National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities - Do School Facilities Affect Academic Outcomes? http://www.ncef.org/pubs/outcomes.pdf

30

Recommendation: FPAC recommends that FCPS develop a proactive facilities maintenance program, to include:

• Continuing with the high-level facilities inspection to establish the order in which more in-depth inspections should occur and to develop overall budgetary requirements.

• Implementing a systematic review process to inspect all facilities over a five-year period, or 20% of facilities each year. This effort will allow FCPS to have regular assessments on their schools, identify specific projects, and allow the Board and staff to ensure most urgent requirements are being addressed in a timely manner.

• Calculating the total facilities deferred maintenance backlog to understand the financial impact on capital projects detailed in the CIP.

• Developing a backlog reduction spending plan equal to 1% of the current replacement value, or $62 million/year, to align with industry standards. If this is not affordable, determine the amount of funds necessary to keep the backlog from increasing year over year, and fund at least that amount.

• Developing a resourcing plan to allow facilities maintenance program funds to grow proportional to increases in square footage, and to reflect standard inflation rates or another benchmark rate that is chosen.

• Developing a resourcing plan, indexed to total square footage of facilities, to increase the facilities maintenance staff by at least 264 FTE (either contract or FCPS employees) over a seven-year period, or 37 FTE per year. Reassess progress each year until the ratio of preventive maintenance to reactive maintenance is roughly 6 to 1.

31

ATTACHMENT 6 Update on Tysons Development Impact, May 2017 FPAC completed research on the Tysons Corner area in order to understand how schools were accounted for in the future plans. In order to complete this research, members reviewed a variety of documents1 as well as met with Fairfax County Department of Planning and Zoning representatives Tracy Strunk, Acting Director, Zoning Evaluation Division and Bernie Suchicital, Senior Land Use Planner, Policy & Plan Development Branch, Major Findings: • Fairfax County is working to accommodate the future needs of students in Tysons Corner. The area is

primarily built-out and property values are very expensive, which makes it challenging. They are considering a variety of options including new schools in an urban format, expanding nearby existing schools, and potentially co-locating with other uses in the future. Schools do not seem to be as a high a priority as other facilities such as parks.

• In the short-term, they believe that nearby schools can accommodate all the growth in students. In the long-term, they will need additional elementary schools. They believe there is no need for additional middle or high schools.

• The county has started to track the number of students generated out of the new residential

developments. At this point, anecdotal evidence suggests that the projects (typically dense, small apartment units) have not attracted a large number of students.

• Projected students within the Comp Plan (from 2010) appear to be within the range of reasonable given the type of development that is expected and has been proposed to date.

• The 2010 Comp Plan projects 1,445 elementary students, 307 middle school students, and 806 new

high school students by 2050. • The 2010 Comp Plan calls for two new elementary schools, potentially utilizing Pimmit Hills as a new

elementary or middle school, and expanding surrounding middle and high schools to accommodate the projected need.

• One elementary school site has been dedicated. • It is not clear where the other elementary school would be located. • FPAC comment: It is not clear if existing near-by middle and high schools could be expanded to

accommodate the projected need, especially the high schools. • The Comp Plan Amendments currently under consideration increase the capacity of elementary

schools from 900-950 students, middle schools from 1,250 to 1,350 students, and high schools from 2,000 to 2,500 students. It is not clear to FPAC whether this is consistent with current FCPS policies.

• It is not clear to FPAC how the community can be “walkable” and yet bus students to the edge of the district for schools. There are limited options for a school site within the heart of Tysons.

1 Forecasts for Tysons Corner to 2050 prepared by George Mason University in September 2008; Fairfax County Comprehensive Plan, 2007 Edition, Tysons Corner Urban Center, Amended through 6-22-2010; Report to Board of Supervisors on Tysons, 2015; Draft Tysons Editorial Plan Text - September 11, 2015; and Tysons 2015-2016 Progress Report on the Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan, 2016.

32

Background Research: When creating the plan, projections created by GMU were utilized to determine the number of students likely to be generated by all of the new development in the Tysons Corner area. The plan is based upon 33,600 households being created by 2050. These households were projected to yield 2,621 students. This is a student generation rate of 0.078. FPAC research on Alexandria City and Arlington County suggests that this rate is reasonable. Alexandria generates 0.03 students in a 0-29 year-old high-rise apartment/condo and 0.101 students in 30+ year-old high-rise apartment/condos. Arlington generates 0.08 students in elevator apartments and 0.03 students in elevator condominiums. Schools in the area near Tysons Corner area were listed as potential locations to house future students. These schools are depicted on the following map. This map also includes schools not listed in the original Comp Plan, but listed in the 2013-2015 Amendments. These schools are farther from Tysons Corner than the original schools listed. Pimmit Hills Alternative High School was also listed as a potential location for a future school. With the exception of the new elementary school, all of the schools are on the outskirts of the Tysons Corner area or are outside of the planning boundaries. FPAC is concerned that this doesn’t lead to creating a “walkable” community. It was noted, however, that most students in the county are bused. If a new school was built at this time in Tysons, students would have to be bussed from out of the area to fill up the school as there are not currently enough elementary students in the area for a new school. Map Including Location of Schools Listed in Comp Plan as Serving Tysons

The Comp Plan suggests the need for two elementary schools, one by 2030 and the second by 2050. They project 555 new elementary students by 2030, and an additional 890 new elementary school students from 2030-2050. There is currently a new elementary school site (number 5 in the map above). The Arbor Row development was to dedicate land for the school (complete) and provide $600,000 for

33

school design. There are no concrete plans for the second elementary school site that would be needed between 2030 and 2050. The Comp Plan suggests the need to expand one of the surrounding middle schools by 2050 and/or utilize the Pimmit Hills Alternative School as a potential middle and/or elementary school. They project 370 new middle school students by 2050. The Comp Plan states the need to expand one of the existing high schools in the area to meet the needs of the 806 projected new high school students. It is not clear to FPAC whether the schools listed as close to Tysons Corner could be expanded to meet the projected need. Since McLean HS and Madison HS are very “land locked”, and Marshall HS and Langley HS are (just) completing major renewals, this may not be a completely reasonable plan or at least an element that may need the attention of FCPS planners. In addition, it should be noted that the Amendments under consideration increase the capacity of elementary schools from 900-950 students, middle schools from 1,250 to 1,350 students, and high schools from 2,000 to 2,500 students. It is not clear to FPAC whether this is consistent with current FCPS policies.