huntley school district 158 presentation on leggee elementary boundary change

8/9/2019 Huntley School District 158 presentation on Leggee Elementary boundary change

1/43

Boundary Change Update

Consolidated School District 158

Board of Education MeetingFebruary 19, 2015


2/43

Topics to Be Covered

• Guiding principles for boundary decisions

• DecisionInsite’s services

•

Why we have to look at our boundaries again• Potential scenarios (3)

• Administrative recommendation

•

Next steps


3/43

Guiding Principles

• Alleviate the capacity issues at Leggee

• Provide for equitable classroom use in all buildings (RTIrooms, special education rooms, music rooms, etc.), when

possible• Find a solution that will serve us for several years, with

the understanding that a return to explosive growth inour communities may force a reexamination in the future

•

Minimize the impact on children and families by phasingin changes over three years so that children near the exitgrades of 2nd and 5th can stay at Leggee if they desire


4/43


5/43

!

Professionally Developed Enrollment Projections!

Two ten-year district-wide and school-by-grade enrollment projections" Conservative" Moderate

" Addresses intra and inter-district transfers

Professionally Developed School Boundaries with

Geographic Enrollment Projections! Professionally developed boundaries based on district identified goals

" Balance school enrollments and create space in anticipation of new housinggrowth

" Support high academic achievement for all students

! Two ten-year district-wide and school-by-grade geographic projections" Conservative" Moderate

Tony Ferruzzo – Senior Consultant! Provides support to school districts nationwide as they create a process to

reconfigure school boundaries, utilizing DI tools. A former math teacher, principal,district administrator, and founding principal for two new high schools. As aneducator, he has experienced the practical effects of sound and not-so-soundboundary decisions.

DecisionInsite’s Key Services


6/43

Enrollment ProjectionsDecisionInsite staff develop enrollment projections based on two criticalfactors: the student and school data supplied by the school district and themathematical formulas that DI staff apply to these data. Projectionsfundamentally look at recent history as reflected in the student data andassume that past patterns and trends will continue into the future.

Four major factors are used by DI staff to drive district‐wide studentenrollment projections:• Recent kindergarten enrollment trends•

Changes in the grade level cohorts of students served as they move acrossthe years

• Changes in out of district enrollment

•

Changes in the number of dwelling units within the district.

District‐wide projections are disaggregated to school projections based on thehistorical patterns of:• School draw rates, and•

School‐to‐school transfers.


7/43

Residential Development Research

DecisionInsite staff predict the impact of residential development on districtenrollment based on three factors: 1) proposed new dwelling units in thedistrict, 2) the student generation rate for each dwelling unit type, and 3) thegrade level distribution of newly generated students.•

Dwelling Units New dwelling units are of three types: Single Family Detached, Single Family

Attached, and Multifamily. DI staff contact developers for informationregarding their annual plans for occupancy of new dwelling units.•

Student Generation Student generation rates are determined for each dwelling type for eachlevel: elementary school, middle school, and high school. Student generationrates are based on similar dwelling types where they exist; otherwise, adefault generation rate is used.

•

Grade Level Distribution For each elementary school, middle school, and high school level, studentsgenerated by new dwelling units are distributed across grade levels. Thesepercentages are based on historical patterns where they exist; otherwise,default percentages are used.


8/43

New Developments

TALAMORE

CONLEY RD

LIONS

CHASE

CONSERVANCY

PROJECT

THE COVES

TERRACE LAKES

LAKES OF

BOULDER RIDGE

GREENSHIRE


9/43

Residential Closings from New DevelopmentProposed Dwelling Units Closing by Oct of Year indicated - (CnsldtdSD158_15Mod)

ProjectName Type 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Conley Road Single Unit Detached 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 100ConservancyProject

Single Unit Detached 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 100 100 0

Greenshire Single Unit Detached 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lakes of BoulderRidge

Single Unit Attached 20 20 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lakes of Boulder

Ridge Single Unit Detached 8 9 9 10 0 0 0 0 0 0Lions Chase Single Unit Detached 20 20 20 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

Talamore Single Unit Attached 20 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 100

Talamore Single Unit Detached 120 30 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 100

Terrace Lakes Single Unit Detached 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

The Coves Single Unit Attached 11 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

The Coves Single Unit Detached 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Multi-family: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Single Unit Attached: 51 31 8 0 0 100 100 100 100 100

Single Unit Detached: 230 63 29 113 100 200 200 200 300 200

Total: 281 94 37 113 100 300 300 300 400 300


10/43

Students Generated from New Development

K-12 Students Generated by Dwell ing Unit Project - (CnsldtdSD158_15Mod)

Dwelling Units 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Conley Road (Martin) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 125

Conservancy Project (Conley) 0 0 0 47 101 161 227 299 375 406

Greenshire (Martin) 5 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 8

Lakes of Boulder Ridge (Conley) 2 5 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

Lions Chase (Leggee) 12 25 38 42 44 46 47 49 51 52

Talamore (Leggee) 78 103 107 111 115 211 315 421 530 640

Terrace Lakes (Conley) 5 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 10 10

The Coves (Conley) 42 49 51 53 55 58 60 62 63 64

!"#$% '($)$ *+,-$.) /.$ 0+,+1/23$ 4.", 5$/. #" 5$/.6


11/43

##

2014-15 Elementary Enrollment Projections

Grade 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

K 607 634 626 622 628 629 639 649 660 677 688

1 661 632 648 637 637 644 654 665 674 690 702

2 674 676 635 649 643 644 661 670 680 697 707

3 741 685 675 634 652 648 658 674 684 701 711

4 731 757 692 680 642 658 663 673 688 705 716

5 797 741 760 692 684 645 670 674 685 705 716

Totals: 4,211 4,125 4,036 3,914 3,886 3,868 3,945 4,005 4,071 4,175 4,240

Capacity: 4,435 4,435 4,435 4,435 4,435 4,435 4,435 4,435 4,435 4,435 4,435

OpenSeats:

224 310 399 521 549 567 490 430 364 260 195


12/43

#$

Leggee Enrollment Projections

Leggee

Grade 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

K 187 196 199 200 200 198 205 212 219 226 233

1 181 198 201 202 202 202 209 216 222 229 237

2 196 190 200 202 202 202 211 217 224 231 238

K-2

Totals 564 584 600 604 604 602 625 645 665 686 708

3 214 202 185 208 208 209 218 227 234 242 249

4 180 222 205 187 208 208 218 226 235 243 250

5 208 187 225 206 187 208 215 224 233 242 249

3-5 Totals 602 611 615 601 603 625 651 677 702 727 748

Totals: 1166 1195 1215 1205 1207 1227 1276 1322 1367 1413 1456

Capacity: 849 849 849 849 849 849 849 849 849 849 849

OpenSeats:

-317 -346 -366 -356 -358 -378 -427 -473 -518 -564 -607


13/43

#%

Mackeben and Conley Enrollment Projections

Mackeben

Grade 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

K 150 160 156 154 160 165 170 175 181 186 185

1 189 163 169 164 167 174 179 184 189 194 193

2 185 195 164 169 170 174 181 186 191 196 195

Totals: 524 518 489 487 497 513 530 545 561 576 573

Capacity: 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672 672

Open Seats: 148 154 183 185 175 159 142 127 111 96 99

Conley

Grade 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

3 201 190 190 160 171 172 176 182 187 192 191

4 217 206 191 193 169 180 180 184 190 195 195

5 236 220 207 191 198 173 184 185 189 195 195

Totals: 654 616 588 544 538 525 540 551 566 582 581

Capacity: 754 754 754 754 754 754 754 754 754 754 754

Open Seats: 100 138 166 210 216 229 214 203 188 172 173


14/43

#&

Chesak and Martin Enrollment ProjectionsChesak

Grade 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

K 270 278 271 268 268 266 264 262 260 265 2691 291 271 278 271 268 268 266 264 263 267 272

2 293 291 271 278 271 268 268 267 265 269 274

Totals: 854 840 820 817 807 802 798 793 788 801 815

Capacity: 912 912 912 912 912 912 912 912 912 912 912

Open

Seats: 58 72 92 95 105 110 114 119 124 111 97

Martin

Grade 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

3 326 293 300 266 273 267 264 265 263 267 271

4 334 329 296 300 265 270 265 263 263 267 271

5 353 334 328 295 299 264 271 265 263 268 272

Totals: 1013 956 924 861 837 801 800 793 789 802 814

Capacity: 1248 1248 1248 1248 1248 1248 1248 1248 1248 1248 1248

OpenSeats:

235 292 324 387 411 447 448 455 459 446 434


15/43

#!

2014-15 Middle School Enrollment Projections

Consolidated District 158 Moderate Enrollment Projections

Grade 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

6 751 764 742 757 799 737 755 685 674 636 654 652 659 674

7 727 742 757 762 769 804 741 759 686 681 643 660 662 669

8 672 724 739 774 773 775 810 745 760 692 687 648 669 671

Totals: 2150 2230 2238 2293 2341 2316 2306 2189 2120 2009 1984 1960 1990 2014

Pct Chg: 3.7% 0.4% 2.5% 2.1% -1.1% -0.4% -5.1% -3.2% -5.2% -1.2% -1.2% 1.5% 1.2%

Capacity: 2385 2385 2385 2385 2385 2385 2385 2385 2385 2385 2385 2385 2385 2385

Open Seats: 235 155 147 92 44 69 79 196 265 376 401 425 395 371


16/43

#'

Heineman and Marlowe

Enrollment Projections

Heineman

Grade 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

6 295 318 292 295 273 267 248 256 255 256 260

7 269 300 319 293 296 273 269 251 258 257 258

8 303 272 301 319 292 295 275 271 252 260 259

Totals: 867 890 912 907 861 835 792 778 765 773 777

Capacity: 867 867 867 867 867 867 867 867 867 867 867Open Seats: 0 -23 -45 -40 6 32 75 89 102 94 90

Marlowe

Grade 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

6 462 481 445 460 412 407 388 398 397 403 414

7 493 469 485 448 463 413 412 392 402 405 411

8 471 501 474 491 453 465 417 416 396 409 412

Totals: 1426 1451 1404 1399 1328 1285 1217 1206 1195 1217 1237

Capacity: 1518 1518 1518 1518 1518 1518 1518 1518 1518 1518 1518

Open Seats: 92 67 114 119 190 233 301 312 323 301 281


17/43

#(

Current Elementary School Boundaries


18/43

Current

Middle

SchoolBoundaries


19/43

Current

ElementaryBoundaries


20/43

Scenario 1



21/43

Current Elementary Boundaries

(Zoom)


22/43

Scenario 1 Elementary Boundaries

(Zoom)


23/43

Scenario 1

with

MiddleSchool

Boundaries


24/43

Scenario 1

with

Middle

SchoolBoundaries

Shaded


25/43


26/43

Current



27/43

Scenario 2



28/43


(Zoom)


29/43


(Zoom)


30/43

Scenario 2

with

MiddleSchool

Boundaries


31/43

Scenario 2

with

Middle

SchoolBoundaries

Shaded


32/43

%$

Pros

•

Moves fewer totalstudents than other

options

Cons

•

As drawn, does not provideenough immediate space relief

to Leggee Elementary School• Would require full

implementation in Year Onewithout phase-in

• Buses to Leggee mustcontinue to cross Route 47

Scenario 2 Impact

Total number of K-5 students moved by 2017:• Leggee to Mackeben/Conley 416 K-5 students


33/43

Current



34/43

Scenario 3



35/43


(Zoom)


36/43


(Zoom)


37/43

Scenario 3

with

Middle

School

Boundaries


38/43

Scenario 3

with

Middle

SchoolBoundaries

Shaded


39/43

%)

Pros• Provides immediate

space relief to LeggeeElementary School

Cons•

Creates noncontiguous boundary

areas, crisscrossing adjacentneighborhoods

• Would require splitting preschool

between Chesak and Martin• Divides Downtown Huntley

neighborhood• Creates more bus traffic across

Route 47•

Would require a more aggressivephase-in

Scenario 3 ImpactTotal number of K-5 students moved by 2017:

•

Leggee to Chesak/Martin 374 K-5 students• Leggee to Mackeben/Conley 77 K-5 students


40/43

&*

The following strategy is proposed for the transition into the newelementary school boundaries beginning fall 2015:

Elementary School Students

•

Require all students entering Kindergarten or 3

rd

grade infall 2015, and all new K-5 students to the district in fall2015 to enroll and attend elementary school based on theirresidence in the new elementary school boundaries.

• This will allow 2015-2016 1st and 2nd grade students and 4th

and 5th grade students to remain at their currentelementary school through 3rd grade or 5th grade.

Proposed Phase-in for Scenario 1*


41/43

Proposed Phase-in for Scenario 1*

Middle School Students

• Require all 6th grade students entering middle school

in fall 2018 and all new 7th and 8th grade studentsentering the district in fall 2018 to enroll and attendmiddle school based on their residence in the newmiddle school boundaries.

• Current middle school students will remain at theirschools. Middle school phase-in would begin schoolyear 2018-2019.

*Permit families, as space permits, to accelerate the phase-in ifthey wish to keep all children at the same elementary campus.*Scenarios 2 & 3 would require more aggressive phase-in


42/43

Administrative Recommendation

Scenario 1• Georgian Place and Huntley

East of 47/North of MainStreet move to the ReedRoad Campus.

•

Wing Pointe and HuntleyEast/South of Main Streetmove to the Square BarnRoad Campus.

• Middle School boundaryphase-in begins school year2018-2019 with exiting fifthgraders.

Pros• Creates a clean East-West

dividing line along Route 47

• Allows for three-year

phase-in while immediatelyfreeing needed space at

Leggee Elementary School•

Less bus travel across

Route 47 and railroadtracks


43/43

Next Steps

•

Open houses

– Monday, March 2, 4-6 p.m. at Leggee Elementary

– Tuesday, March 3, 6-8 p.m. at Leggee Elementary

•

We welcome public comment [email protected]

• Board of Education decision March 19

• Implementation begins in 2015-2016

huntley school district 158 presentation on leggee elementary boundary change

Documents