FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, those who are most knowledgeable about the factors relevant to boundary discussions are a mix of current and former parents. The BRAC process is designed to select a group of current parents who may or may not be very knowledgeable and can be led down the desired path by FCPS staff and Thru Consulting. Of course, some are sharp and will challenge them and ask the right questions, but a lot of them seem unlikely to do much more than make sure they aren’t personally affected in what they’d consider a negative way.

That’s not intended as an insult, just a reminder that folks shouldn’t assume that what comes out of the BRAC process reflects the best possible thinking on the topic. People who’ve been largely sidelined should absolutely continue to monitor these proposals and challenge those they believe are ill-advised.

Agree. I follow this forum because I became interested during earlier boundary studies. I do post on this thread because I see similarities of earlier efforts. I understand some of the decisions and was a close observer of the 2008 study when I saw how politics (specifically the South Lakes PTA) could drive the results. Watching the SB meetings at that time when so many parents who had kids affected stood up to respectfully request that South Lakes switch to AP, was enlightening to me. The SB ignored those requests which were heartfelt. Another meeting for the community had SB members sitting with their backs to the attendees.
That boundary "study" we predetermined and I believe this one is, as well. Just look at the way they selected the BRAC committee. The groups selected are comprised mostly of activists. The selection of the pyramid reps--intended to give the appearance of a lack of bias--is just the opposite. The parents from my pyramid come from the same neighborhood school. I've no idea if they have children in the high school or not. The fact that they applied, would indicate that they do have a specific interest.

One thing I learned is that almost everyone wants to stay put. I cannot speak to the elementary schools across the county as there are too many to understand. However, no high school is going to continue to be overcrowded (maybe McLean and Centreville). And, no high school has too small a membership to offer a rigorous course selection.

I do not understand why we are going through this. It is not good for the students, their families, or the community, And, it will cost money we do not have.

They can talk about efficiency, but any time a change is made there will be a domino effect that makes it less efficient for others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The capacity of WESTFIELD vs. enrollment is under that of Oakton's.

If you look at a map, it’s pretty obvious — shifting some neighborhoods could totally help balance things out. Franklin Farm, for example, would make a ton of sense to go to Westfield. A lot of the neighborhoods right around Franklin Farm already feed into Westfield anyway, so it’s not like it would be some big, out-of-the-way move.

It wouldn’t fix everything overnight, but freeing up space at Oakton would make a real difference. Just feels like an easy option that’s sitting right there.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. Why move kids in Franklin Farm from one school 9 miles away to another school 9 miles away (especially one that would require them getting on 28 and crossing 50 during rush hour, hahahaha, you clearly don't live here) when there are two other high schools both of which are even closer than Westfields. If you're moving my kids anywhere, you are moving them to Chantilly which is 3.5 miles away from my house, not another school that will take even LONGER to get to in the mornings.

You will be iced out of Chantilly because there's many more kids who are closer to that school than you are. One reason why I didn't buy in Franklin Farms or Franklin Glen, Oak Hill area for that matter. That whole area could easily be transferred to Westfield and it's not even that crazy because as PP said there are surrounding neighborhoods even further away already going to Westfield.

I'm confused about who you think is going to fill up Oakton if we're moving all the Crossfield and Navy kids to Westfield? Oakton is newly renovated and is not overcapacity. Who else would you put there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The capacity of WESTFIELD vs. enrollment is under that of Oakton's.

If you look at a map, it’s pretty obvious — shifting some neighborhoods could totally help balance things out. Franklin Farm, for example, would make a ton of sense to go to Westfield. A lot of the neighborhoods right around Franklin Farm already feed into Westfield anyway, so it’s not like it would be some big, out-of-the-way move.

It wouldn’t fix everything overnight, but freeing up space at Oakton would make a real difference. Just feels like an easy option that’s sitting right there.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. Why move kids in Franklin Farm from one school 9 miles away to another school 9 miles away (especially one that would require them getting on 28 and crossing 50 during rush hour, hahahaha, you clearly don't live here) when there are two other high schools both of which are even closer than Westfields. If you're moving my kids anywhere, you are moving them to Chantilly which is 3.5 miles away from my house, not another school that will take even LONGER to get to in the mornings.

You will be iced out of Chantilly because there's many more kids who are closer to that school than you are. One reason why I didn't buy in Franklin Farms or Franklin Glen, Oak Hill area for that matter. That whole area could easily be transferred to Westfield and it's not even that crazy because as PP said there are surrounding neighborhoods even further away already going to Westfield.

I'm confused about who you think is going to fill up Oakton if we're moving all the Crossfield and Navy kids to Westfield? Oakton is newly renovated and is not overcapacity. Who else would you put there?

And, Westfield is not underenrolled--in fact it is pretty crowded. In addition, there is a LOT of new construction in Westfield boundary that is VERY close to Westfield and unlikely to be sent elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Westfield has 2700 students already. Isn't it already one of the largest HS? Why are you trying to move more kids there?

Yes, only West Springfield, Chantilly and Lake Braddock have more students than Westfield. Westfield has never been renovated. When it opened in the late 90s, it was already over the 2500 student design/building capacity--they had to put trailers in the parking lots-- so they added modular classrooms to the original building. The common areas (cafeteria, gym, halls, bathrooms) were not expanded. It is crowded now at 2700 and there is a lot of new construction in-zone. Re-zoning additional existing neighborhoods to Westfield would not make sense.

Presumably they would move kids from Westfield to Herndon.

There are new housing developments in Westfield zone--very close to Westfield-some are right by the Sully government center.

And, some are very expensive--close to Loudoun border, but in Westfield school district.

No all the new developments are townhomes and condo. Not expensive SFHs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Westfield has 2700 students already. Isn't it already one of the largest HS? Why are you trying to move more kids there?

Yes, only West Springfield, Chantilly and Lake Braddock have more students than Westfield. Westfield has never been renovated. When it opened in the late 90s, it was already over the 2500 student design/building capacity--they had to put trailers in the parking lots-- so they added modular classrooms to the original building. The common areas (cafeteria, gym, halls, bathrooms) were not expanded. It is crowded now at 2700 and there is a lot of new construction in-zone. Re-zoning additional existing neighborhoods to Westfield would not make sense.

Presumably they would move kids from Westfield to Herndon.

There are new housing developments in Westfield zone--very close to Westfield-some are right by the Sully government center.

And, some are very expensive--close to Loudoun border, but in Westfield school district.

No all the new developments are townhomes and condo. Not expensive SFHs.

Look again. There are some very expensive large homes off Pleasant Valley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, those who are most knowledgeable about the factors relevant to boundary discussions are a mix of current and former parents. The BRAC process is designed to select a group of current parents who may or may not be very knowledgeable and can be led down the desired path by FCPS staff and Thru Consulting. Of course, some are sharp and will challenge them and ask the right questions, but a lot of them seem unlikely to do much more than make sure they aren’t personally affected in what they’d consider a negative way.

That’s not intended as an insult, just a reminder that folks shouldn’t assume that what comes out of the BRAC process reflects the best possible thinking on the topic. People who’ve been largely sidelined should absolutely continue to monitor these proposals and challenge those they believe are ill-advised.

Agree. I follow this forum because I became interested during earlier boundary studies. I do post on this thread because I see similarities of earlier efforts. I understand some of the decisions and was a close observer of the 2008 study when I saw how politics (specifically the South Lakes PTA) could drive the results. Watching the SB meetings at that time when so many parents who had kids affected stood up to respectfully request that South Lakes switch to AP, was enlightening to me. The SB ignored those requests which were heartfelt. Another meeting for the community had SB members sitting with their backs to the attendees.
That boundary "study" we predetermined and I believe this one is, as well. Just look at the way they selected the BRAC committee. The groups selected are comprised mostly of activists. The selection of the pyramid reps--intended to give the appearance of a lack of bias--is just the opposite. The parents from my pyramid come from the same neighborhood school. I've no idea if they have children in the high school or not. The fact that they applied, would indicate that they do have a specific interest.

One thing I learned is that almost everyone wants to stay put. I cannot speak to the elementary schools across the county as there are too many to understand. However, no high school is going to continue to be overcrowded (maybe McLean and Centreville). And, no high school has too small a membership to offer a rigorous course selection.

I do not understand why we are going through this. It is not good for the students, their families, or the community, And, it will cost money we do not have.

They can talk about efficiency, but any time a change is made there will be a domino effect that makes it less efficient for others.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, those who are most knowledgeable about the factors relevant to boundary discussions are a mix of current and former parents. The BRAC process is designed to select a group of current parents who may or may not be very knowledgeable and can be led down the desired path by FCPS staff and Thru Consulting. Of course, some are sharp and will challenge them and ask the right questions, but a lot of them seem unlikely to do much more than make sure they aren’t personally affected in what they’d consider a negative way.

That’s not intended as an insult, just a reminder that folks shouldn’t assume that what comes out of the BRAC process reflects the best possible thinking on the topic. People who’ve been largely sidelined should absolutely continue to monitor these proposals and challenge those they believe are ill-advised.

Agree. I follow this forum because I became interested during earlier boundary studies. I do post on this thread because I see similarities of earlier efforts. I understand some of the decisions and was a close observer of the 2008 study when I saw how politics (specifically the South Lakes PTA) could drive the results. Watching the SB meetings at that time when so many parents who had kids affected stood up to respectfully request that South Lakes switch to AP, was enlightening to me. The SB ignored those requests which were heartfelt. Another meeting for the community had SB members sitting with their backs to the attendees.
That boundary "study" we predetermined and I believe this one is, as well. Just look at the way they selected the BRAC committee. The groups selected are comprised mostly of activists. The selection of the pyramid reps--intended to give the appearance of a lack of bias--is just the opposite. The parents from my pyramid come from the same neighborhood school. I've no idea if they have children in the high school or not. The fact that they applied, would indicate that they do have a specific interest.

One thing I learned is that almost everyone wants to stay put. I cannot speak to the elementary schools across the county as there are too many to understand. However, no high school is going to continue to be overcrowded (maybe McLean and Centreville). And, no high school has too small a membership to offer a rigorous course selection.

I do not understand why we are going through this. It is not good for the students, their families, or the community, And, it will cost money we do not have.

They can talk about efficiency, but any time a change is made there will be a domino effect that makes it less efficient for others.

+2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Westfield has 2700 students already. Isn't it already one of the largest HS? Why are you trying to move more kids there?

Yes, only West Springfield, Chantilly and Lake Braddock have more students than Westfield. Westfield has never been renovated. When it opened in the late 90s, it was already over the 2500 student design/building capacity--they had to put trailers in the parking lots-- so they added modular classrooms to the original building. The common areas (cafeteria, gym, halls, bathrooms) were not expanded. It is crowded now at 2700 and there is a lot of new construction in-zone. Re-zoning additional existing neighborhoods to Westfield would not make sense.

Presumably they would move kids from Westfield to Herndon.

There are new housing developments in Westfield zone--very close to Westfield-some are right by the Sully government center.

And, some are very expensive--close to Loudoun border, but in Westfield school district.

No all the new developments are townhomes and condo. Not expensive SFHs.

Look again. There are some very expensive large homes off Pleasant Valley.

What new development?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Westfield has 2700 students already. Isn't it already one of the largest HS? Why are you trying to move more kids there?

Yes, only West Springfield, Chantilly and Lake Braddock have more students than Westfield. Westfield has never been renovated. When it opened in the late 90s, it was already over the 2500 student design/building capacity--they had to put trailers in the parking lots-- so they added modular classrooms to the original building. The common areas (cafeteria, gym, halls, bathrooms) were not expanded. It is crowded now at 2700 and there is a lot of new construction in-zone. Re-zoning additional existing neighborhoods to Westfield would not make sense.

Presumably they would move kids from Westfield to Herndon.

There are new housing developments in Westfield zone--very close to Westfield-some are right by the Sully government center.

And, some are very expensive--close to Loudoun border, but in Westfield school district.

No all the new developments are townhomes and condo. Not expensive SFHs.

Look again. There are some very expensive large homes off Pleasant Valley.

What new development?

Looks like it has not yet been built. Fairfax Manor Dr off of Herndon Ave. Not many homes, but VERY expensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, those who are most knowledgeable about the factors relevant to boundary discussions are a mix of current and former parents. The BRAC process is designed to select a group of current parents who may or may not be very knowledgeable and can be led down the desired path by FCPS staff and Thru Consulting. Of course, some are sharp and will challenge them and ask the right questions, but a lot of them seem unlikely to do much more than make sure they aren’t personally affected in what they’d consider a negative way.

That’s not intended as an insult, just a reminder that folks shouldn’t assume that what comes out of the BRAC process reflects the best possible thinking on the topic. People who’ve been largely sidelined should absolutely continue to monitor these proposals and challenge those they believe are ill-advised.

Agree. I follow this forum because I became interested during earlier boundary studies. I do post on this thread because I see similarities of earlier efforts. I understand some of the decisions and was a close observer of the 2008 study when I saw how politics (specifically the South Lakes PTA) could drive the results. Watching the SB meetings at that time when so many parents who had kids affected stood up to respectfully request that South Lakes switch to AP, was enlightening to me. The SB ignored those requests which were heartfelt. Another meeting for the community had SB members sitting with their backs to the attendees.
That boundary "study" we predetermined and I believe this one is, as well. Just look at the way they selected the BRAC committee. The groups selected are comprised mostly of activists. The selection of the pyramid reps--intended to give the appearance of a lack of bias--is just the opposite. The parents from my pyramid come from the same neighborhood school. I've no idea if they have children in the high school or not. The fact that they applied, would indicate that they do have a specific interest.

One thing I learned is that almost everyone wants to stay put. I cannot speak to the elementary schools across the county as there are too many to understand. However, no high school is going to continue to be overcrowded (maybe McLean and Centreville). And, no high school has too small a membership to offer a rigorous course selection.

I do not understand why we are going through this. It is not good for the students, their families, or the community, And, it will cost money we do not have.

They can talk about efficiency, but any time a change is made there will be a domino effect that makes it less efficient for others.

In my quick cursory review of the members, I found at least four that live in neighborhoods that are much closer to a different high school than they are zoned for. Hm maybe those people have ulterior motives for joining the BRAc?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, those who are most knowledgeable about the factors relevant to boundary discussions are a mix of current and former parents. The BRAC process is designed to select a group of current parents who may or may not be very knowledgeable and can be led down the desired path by FCPS staff and Thru Consulting. Of course, some are sharp and will challenge them and ask the right questions, but a lot of them seem unlikely to do much more than make sure they aren’t personally affected in what they’d consider a negative way.

That’s not intended as an insult, just a reminder that folks shouldn’t assume that what comes out of the BRAC process reflects the best possible thinking on the topic. People who’ve been largely sidelined should absolutely continue to monitor these proposals and challenge those they believe are ill-advised.

Agree. I follow this forum because I became interested during earlier boundary studies. I do post on this thread because I see similarities of earlier efforts. I understand some of the decisions and was a close observer of the 2008 study when I saw how politics (specifically the South Lakes PTA) could drive the results. Watching the SB meetings at that time when so many parents who had kids affected stood up to respectfully request that South Lakes switch to AP, was enlightening to me. The SB ignored those requests which were heartfelt. Another meeting for the community had SB members sitting with their backs to the attendees.
That boundary "study" we predetermined and I believe this one is, as well. Just look at the way they selected the BRAC committee. The groups selected are comprised mostly of activists. The selection of the pyramid reps--intended to give the appearance of a lack of bias--is just the opposite. The parents from my pyramid come from the same neighborhood school. I've no idea if they have children in the high school or not. The fact that they applied, would indicate that they do have a specific interest.

One thing I learned is that almost everyone wants to stay put. I cannot speak to the elementary schools across the county as there are too many to understand. However, no high school is going to continue to be overcrowded (maybe McLean and Centreville). And, no high school has too small a membership to offer a rigorous course selection.

I do not understand why we are going through this. It is not good for the students, their families, or the community, And, it will cost money we do not have.

They can talk about efficiency, but any time a change is made there will be a domino effect that makes it less efficient for others.

In my quick cursory review of the members, I found at least four that live in neighborhoods that are much closer to a different high school than they are zoned for. Hm maybe those people have ulterior motives for joining the BRAc?

Yeah, it really needs to be each elementary school. The fact that they pull a couple from each pyramid means it’s meaningless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, those who are most knowledgeable about the factors relevant to boundary discussions are a mix of current and former parents. The BRAC process is designed to select a group of current parents who may or may not be very knowledgeable and can be led down the desired path by FCPS staff and Thru Consulting. Of course, some are sharp and will challenge them and ask the right questions, but a lot of them seem unlikely to do much more than make sure they aren’t personally affected in what they’d consider a negative way.

That’s not intended as an insult, just a reminder that folks shouldn’t assume that what comes out of the BRAC process reflects the best possible thinking on the topic. People who’ve been largely sidelined should absolutely continue to monitor these proposals and challenge those they believe are ill-advised.

Agree. I follow this forum because I became interested during earlier boundary studies. I do post on this thread because I see similarities of earlier efforts. I understand some of the decisions and was a close observer of the 2008 study when I saw how politics (specifically the South Lakes PTA) could drive the results. Watching the SB meetings at that time when so many parents who had kids affected stood up to respectfully request that South Lakes switch to AP, was enlightening to me. The SB ignored those requests which were heartfelt. Another meeting for the community had SB members sitting with their backs to the attendees.
That boundary "study" we predetermined and I believe this one is, as well. Just look at the way they selected the BRAC committee. The groups selected are comprised mostly of activists. The selection of the pyramid reps--intended to give the appearance of a lack of bias--is just the opposite. The parents from my pyramid come from the same neighborhood school. I've no idea if they have children in the high school or not. The fact that they applied, would indicate that they do have a specific interest.

One thing I learned is that almost everyone wants to stay put. I cannot speak to the elementary schools across the county as there are too many to understand. However, no high school is going to continue to be overcrowded (maybe McLean and Centreville). And, no high school has too small a membership to offer a rigorous course selection.

I do not understand why we are going through this. It is not good for the students, their families, or the community, And, it will cost money we do not have.

They can talk about efficiency, but any time a change is made there will be a domino effect that makes it less efficient for others.

In my quick cursory review of the members, I found at least four that live in neighborhoods that are much closer to a different high school than they are zoned for. Hm maybe those people have ulterior motives for joining the BRAc?

Yeah, it really needs to be each elementary school. The fact that they pull a couple from each pyramid means it’s meaningless.

They'd say it would be too unwieldy to have that many BRAC members, and they might not be wrong, but the flip side is that folks should insist that there be separate community meetings later for every pyramid, where parents from each ES that feeds into a MS and HS in the pyramid have a chance to express their views.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Westfield has 2700 students already. Isn't it already one of the largest HS? Why are you trying to move more kids there?

Yes, only West Springfield, Chantilly and Lake Braddock have more students than Westfield. Westfield has never been renovated. When it opened in the late 90s, it was already over the 2500 student design/building capacity--they had to put trailers in the parking lots-- so they added modular classrooms to the original building. The common areas (cafeteria, gym, halls, bathrooms) were not expanded. It is crowded now at 2700 and there is a lot of new construction in-zone. Re-zoning additional existing neighborhoods to Westfield would not make sense.

Presumably they would move kids from Westfield to Herndon.

There are new housing developments in Westfield zone--very close to Westfield-some are right by the Sully government center.

And, some are very expensive--close to Loudoun border, but in Westfield school district.

No all the new developments are townhomes and condo. Not expensive SFHs.

Look again. There are some very expensive large homes off Pleasant Valley.

What new development?

Looks like it has not yet been built. Fairfax Manor Dr off of Herndon Ave. Not many homes, but VERY expensive.

8 lots? Completely neglible.
May not have any public school kids in any of the eventsul 8 houses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Westfield has 2700 students already. Isn't it already one of the largest HS? Why are you trying to move more kids there?

Yes, only West Springfield, Chantilly and Lake Braddock have more students than Westfield. Westfield has never been renovated. When it opened in the late 90s, it was already over the 2500 student design/building capacity--they had to put trailers in the parking lots-- so they added modular classrooms to the original building. The common areas (cafeteria, gym, halls, bathrooms) were not expanded. It is crowded now at 2700 and there is a lot of new construction in-zone. Re-zoning additional existing neighborhoods to Westfield would not make sense.

Presumably they would move kids from Westfield to Herndon.

There are new housing developments in Westfield zone--very close to Westfield-some are right by the Sully government center.

And, some are very expensive--close to Loudoun border, but in Westfield school district.

No all the new developments are townhomes and condo. Not expensive SFHs.

Look again. There are some very expensive large homes off Pleasant Valley.

What new development?

Looks like it has not yet been built. Fairfax Manor Dr off of Herndon Ave. Not many homes, but VERY expensive.

8 lots? Completely neglible.
May not have any public school kids in any of the eventsul 8 houses.

Sure. But those developments across from Sully government and near Costco add up and they are going up now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The capacity of WESTFIELD vs. enrollment is under that of Oakton's.

If you look at a map, it’s pretty obvious — shifting some neighborhoods could totally help balance things out. Franklin Farm, for example, would make a ton of sense to go to Westfield. A lot of the neighborhoods right around Franklin Farm already feed into Westfield anyway, so it’s not like it would be some big, out-of-the-way move.

It wouldn’t fix everything overnight, but freeing up space at Oakton would make a real difference. Just feels like an easy option that’s sitting right there.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. Why move kids in Franklin Farm from one school 9 miles away to another school 9 miles away (especially one that would require them getting on 28 and crossing 50 during rush hour, hahahaha, you clearly don't live here) when there are two other high schools both of which are even closer than Westfields. If you're moving my kids anywhere, you are moving them to Chantilly which is 3.5 miles away from my house, not another school that will take even LONGER to get to in the mornings.

You will be iced out of Chantilly because there's many more kids who are closer to that school than you are. One reason why I didn't buy in Franklin Farms or Franklin Glen, Oak Hill area for that matter. That whole area could easily be transferred to Westfield and it's not even that crazy because as PP said there are surrounding neighborhoods even further away already going to Westfield.

I'm confused about who you think is going to fill up Oakton if we're moving all the Crossfield and Navy kids to Westfield? Oakton is newly renovated and is not overcapacity. Who else would you put there?

There is a guy who lives in the western part of the Falls Church HS district (apparently the Fairhill ES area outside the Beltway) obsessed about the fact that he's not zoned to Madison, Oakton, Woodson, or Fairfax instead. He posts on multiple forums about various redistricting scenarios that he thinks might increase the likehihood of his getting rezoned into Oakton in particular, but he doesn't know that much about some of the areas further west that he wants redistricted to make that more likely. Of course, since Falls Church is getting expanded now, he's fighting a losing battle.

He's also gotten into big fights with some Langley posters, which explains much of the venom directed towards Langley and Great Falls recently.