Anonymous wrote:It would be very interesting to compare renovation costs across sectors. For example how much was spend to make DCI into its current state? And what DCPS school is of a similar size and building vintage? I don't know the answers.

Ballou High School is so over-the-top nice that it's featured on an architect's web site

https://perkinswill.com/project/ballou-senior-high-school/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The city spends about $2,000 less per child in charters than in DCPS. For a school with 1,000 kids, that's $20 million less each year. You can hire a lot of teachers for $20 million.

Wow. After a long and sometimes informative discussion of this, you've come here to spew a basic talking point that has been thoroughly critiqued in this very thread.

Oh you mean all the lies spread by WTU? Stop.

Everyone can see it with their own eyes. Take Latin, 2nd Street. One of the crown jewels of the education system in DC. Though it's one of the very best schools in the city, and though it has a wait list that's a mile long, the building looks like it hasn't been touched since 1960 and the teachers are paid a fraction of what those in DCPS make. Why? Because it's a charter so the city starves it of money. Meanwhile, a mile away is Roosevelt High School, which the city has spend a quarter BILLION dollars renovating and it's still a dumpster fire that hardly anyone who is eligible wants to attend. But it's still lavishly funded because, unlike Latin, it's DCPS.

Funny you would say that about a school that just did a massive renovation for the Cooper building. Maybe that's where the money went.

Are actually this dumb? The Cooper building replaced a temporary space that was even worse than the building on 2nd Street. You think that if there's a high school that hasn't been touched in generations, and its middle school is even worse, the school only gets to renovate one of them?

It would be very interesting to compare renovation costs across sectors. For example how much was spend to make DCI into its current state? And what DCPS school is of a similar size and building vintage? I don't know the answers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The city spends about $2,000 less per child in charters than in DCPS. For a school with 1,000 kids, that's $20 million less each year. You can hire a lot of teachers for $20 million.

Wow. After a long and sometimes informative discussion of this, you've come here to spew a basic talking point that has been thoroughly critiqued in this very thread.

Oh you mean all the lies spread by WTU? Stop.

Everyone can see it with their own eyes. Take Latin, 2nd Street. One of the crown jewels of the education system in DC. Though it's one of the very best schools in the city, and though it has a wait list that's a mile long, the building looks like it hasn't been touched since 1960 and the teachers are paid a fraction of what those in DCPS make. Why? Because it's a charter so the city starves it of money. Meanwhile, a mile away is Roosevelt High School, which the city has spend a quarter BILLION dollars renovating and it's still a dumpster fire that hardly anyone who is eligible wants to attend. But it's still lavishly funded because, unlike Latin, it's DCPS.

Funny you would say that about a school that just did a massive renovation for the Cooper building. Maybe that's where the money went.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The city spends about $2,000 less per child in charters than in DCPS. For a school with 1,000 kids, that's $20 million less each year. You can hire a lot of teachers for $20 million.

Wow. After a long and sometimes informative discussion of this, you've come here to spew a basic talking point that has been thoroughly critiqued in this very thread.

Oh you mean all the lies spread by WTU? Stop.

Everyone can see it with their own eyes. Take Latin, 2nd Street. One of the crown jewels of the education system in DC. Though it's one of the very best schools in the city, and though it has a wait list that's a mile long, the building looks like it hasn't been touched since 1960 and the teachers are paid a fraction of what those in DCPS make. Why? Because it's a charter so the city starves it of money. Meanwhile, a mile away is Roosevelt High School, which the city has spend a quarter BILLION dollars renovating and it's still a dumpster fire that hardly anyone who is eligible wants to attend. But it's still lavishly funded because, unlike Latin, it's DCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The city spends about $2,000 less per child in charters than in DCPS. For a school with 1,000 kids, that's $20 million less each year. You can hire a lot of teachers for $20 million.

Wow. After a long and sometimes informative discussion of this, you've come here to spew a basic talking point that has been thoroughly critiqued in this very thread.

Oh you mean all the lies spread by WTU? Stop.

I actually meant the part about Early Stages funding, since you asked. Any thoughts on that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The city spends about $2,000 less per child in charters than in DCPS. For a school with 1,000 kids, that's $20 million less each year. You can hire a lot of teachers for $20 million.

Wow. After a long and sometimes informative discussion of this, you've come here to spew a basic talking point that has been thoroughly critiqued in this very thread.

Oh you mean all the lies spread by WTU? Stop.

Anonymous wrote:The city spends about $2,000 less per child in charters than in DCPS. For a school with 1,000 kids, that's $20 million less each year. You can hire a lot of teachers for $20 million.

Wow. After a long and sometimes informative discussion of this, you've come here to spew a basic talking point that has been thoroughly critiqued in this very thread.

The city spends about $2,000 less per child in charters than in DCPS. For a school with 1,000 kids, that's $20 million less each year. You can hire a lot of teachers for $20 million.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The idea was that charters wanted to be separate, to have autonomy, and were willing to give up certain economies of scale in order to do so. But it often feels like they want separateness when it serves them and not when it doesn't. And they can't have it both ways.

We'd save millions of dollars each year if we shut down a few low-performing charters. The kids could go to nearby schools that are not any worse. Then everyone can have a raise.

It really, really grates on me that they are constantly hating on the WTU but when the WTU does all the work (and takes the political blowback) to obtain a pay increase, charters show up with their hands out.

This is all nonsense (and curiously maudlin). This was never "the idea." Charter schools were authorized by Congress because DCPS was seen as a failure. Congress wanted to give families in DC a choice between the two systems. People have been voting with their feet, and charters have been stealing market share from DCPS for decades. It's only a matter of time before most kids in this city go to charters, again because parents think it's the better option for their kids. Given that, it makes no sense for the city to actively discriminate against children whose families made a choice Congress said they were free to make. Obviously, all kids should have an equal educational opportunity.

It's shameful how the city discriminates against kids who go to charter schools.

Anonymous wrote:Okay, so DCPS modernizes according to the PACE prioritization, which is a law. It's not simply whatever DCPS decides. And the funding is appropriated. DCPS can't just decide to spend tons of money on renovations and say ha ha, we're sticking it to the charters. That's not how it works.

The PACE ranking takes into account enrollment, but also future enrollment projections, current facility condition, and attempts to spread funding around among wards and feeder patterns. As well as considering how much funding each school has received for construction recently. Frankly I think this is a much better process than a blunt, short-sighted current-year per pupil formula.

Exactly. DCPS has to take into consideration future enrollment and trends, and frankly it does so poorly. Taking the Coolidge example, the community argued at the time DCPS was being too conservative with estimates for both Coolidge and Wells and wouldn't you know it less than 10 years in and both schools are at or over capacity, with Coolidge being one of the fastest growing schools in the city and the feeder schools continuing to grow. The same thing is happening with the Whittier modernization.

Charters can leave their current address. They can find new space like nearby Mary McLeod Bethune did. Whittier cannot just find a new space or its over capacity school. And Whittier cannot cap its inbound students. Bethune can absolutely work within the confines of its space. This is just one comparison.

Comparing the building needs of the two different school types is asinine because they are so different.

And to the person who said charters are not businesses, they are. Like it or not they are businesses in education. BASIS is basically a franchisor for education. If you think that works and is good, fine, I'm not here to argue the value. But it has a just under $200M annual revenue with over $8M in net. That's a very different model than a public school system.

Okay, so DCPS modernizes according to the PACE prioritization, which is a law. It's not simply whatever DCPS decides. And the funding is appropriated. DCPS can't just decide to spend tons of money on renovations and say ha ha, we're sticking it to the charters. That's not how it works.

The PACE ranking takes into account enrollment, but also future enrollment projections, current facility condition, and attempts to spread funding around among wards and feeder patterns. As well as considering how much funding each school has received for construction recently. Frankly I think this is a much better process than a blunt, short-sighted current-year per pupil formula.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The difference in the facilities budget does feel unfair (DCPS school renovations are funded through the Capital Budget and DGS, while charters have limited funding through the schools budget, which is why we see these insane renovations for DCPS schools but charter schools feel more modest.)

Only a handful of DCPS schools have gotten "insane renovations," and those were politically driven.

Most DCPS buildings suck, and when they do get renovated, it is at minimal quality. Then they don't get maintained.

You want to rely on DGS for your facilities? We'd be happy to trade places on that one.

Not even close to accurate. Full lost here. https://dgs.dc.gov/dgs-projects/completed-dgs-school-projects. Including...
Benjamin Banneker Academic HS (2021)
Duke Ellington School of the Arts (2017)
Roosevelt High School (2016)
Coolidge High School (2019)
Bard High School Early College DC (2023)
MacArthur High School (2023)
Eliot-Hine Middle School (2020)
MacFarland Middle School (2018)
Marie Reed Elementary/Education Campus (2017)
Alice Deal Middle School (2022)
Bancroft Elementary (2018)
Eaton Elementary (2022)
Lafayette Elementary (2016)
Murch Elementary (2018)
Van Ness Elementary (2015-2017)
Maury Elementary (2019)
Kimball Elementary (2020)
Garfield Elementary (2024)
Smothers Elementary (2023)
J.O. Wilson Elementary (2026)
Tubman Elementary (2026)
Malcolm X @ Green Elementary (2026)
Thomas Elementary (2027-8)

Have you seen Coolidge? It's over capacity and they were forced to keep the old facade. You seem to be unhappy about literally every renovation.

I don't understand your point, and your reading comprehension needs work. DC spent $160 million on Coolidge. Are you disputing that dollar figure? Did you get confused about the discussion at hand? Low information posters try and dismiss DCPS's capital investments as trivial or minimal. Simply untrue. There are reasonable arguments about why and whether to fund charter facilities, but it is nonsense to try and dismiss that expenditure as irreverent or minor. Which was the point you completely missed.

But thanks for the update on the facade!

The $160 million also included building the new wing for Ida B Wells Middle School to share the building. It's $160 million for a campus that houses nearly 1600 students.

And they spend another $15 Million renovating the lunchroom. Your point is? I don't think you know. And I don't think you are making the point you think you are.

$175 million/1600 students = $109k/student. Current funding formula is @$15k/student. So over a 7 year period DCPS is funding 2x as much per student to Coolidge/Ida as against Charters. Even if you extend that useful life to 17 years, DCPS is funding 50% more per student than for charters.

You aren't grasping the discussion here. The point isn't that renovated schools suck or are all great. The point is that capital budgets for renos are significant. Which is why segregating facilities costs apart from capitated per student payments is illogical and unfair.

A point you actually helped me make! Thanks, friend.

And as has been explained to you, a per-pupil formula makes no sense in the DCPS context.

I'm really perplexed why you chose 17 years as the useful life.

Bolded is the crux of the argument. An argument you haven't actually made. Would love to hear it. Why would it not make sense for DCPS? Because they spend a lot of money? That's awfully circular.

And. I didn't. It was a typo. Intended to double 7 (and the math so illustrates).

Here is the argument I made on page 5 of this same thread:

"Honestly I'm fine with it. This stuff is maddeningly complex for a lay person and it's hard to understand what's "fair". But it's important to remember that DCPS schools don't have individual control over their locations. If their building is too big, they can't choose to move to something smaller or in a cheaper neighborhood like a charter can. If their building is old and in poor condition, they have to wait years for renovation and meanwhile put up with how difficult it is to get DGS to make any small improvements. Charters can decide locations and renovations according to their own needs, but DCPS makes those decisions at the Chancellor level based on the needs of the entire school system, not what's in the best interest of the school being renovated. And DCPS thinks in terms of long-term enrollment projections, like 10 or 20 or even 30 years in the future. Also, DCPS boundaries can change and schools don't have much control over it. So basically, DCPS building decision-making is not done by each school, it's driven by larger forces, and the current number of pupils at a DCPS school is only one factor among many. So to try and force it into a per-pupil funding model and pretend like each school gets to make their own choices doesn't really make sense for DCPS."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not look at the 2024 supplement to the MFP, Appendix 1 tab F. It shows that some schools have not been modernized in far more than 17 years. Barnard, for example, is getting an addition but its last real modernization was in 2003. Brightwood and Cleveland in 2004. Kelly Miller 2004. Malcolm X waited 19 years. Miner had a 21-year gap between renovations. So did Noyes. Oyster-Adams 23 years. So why choose 17 years as your divisor?

Last part first. As I explained, it was a typo. Should have said 14 years. And 14 was chosen to double the 7 that got us to $15k per student. Look at the math in my post - this is pretty and obvious.

Not sure what you are arguing in the rest of your post. Ok...and? DCPS hasn't modernized all schools. They have modernized many of them and spent a ton of money to do so; money that isn't part of the per student calculations. Which is the point here. not sure if I am responding to one person who doesn't get it or many of you.

there are 20 years so schools on that renovation list above and DC PS has over 100 schools.

Is 20% "many"?

PP here. "20 or so" not years

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not look at the 2024 supplement to the MFP, Appendix 1 tab F. It shows that some schools have not been modernized in far more than 17 years. Barnard, for example, is getting an addition but its last real modernization was in 2003. Brightwood and Cleveland in 2004. Kelly Miller 2004. Malcolm X waited 19 years. Miner had a 21-year gap between renovations. So did Noyes. Oyster-Adams 23 years. So why choose 17 years as your divisor?

Last part first. As I explained, it was a typo. Should have said 14 years. And 14 was chosen to double the 7 that got us to $15k per student. Look at the math in my post - this is pretty and obvious.

Not sure what you are arguing in the rest of your post. Ok...and? DCPS hasn't modernized all schools. They have modernized many of them and spent a ton of money to do so; money that isn't part of the per student calculations. Which is the point here. not sure if I am responding to one person who doesn't get it or many of you.

there are 20 years so schools on that renovation list above and DC PS has over 100 schools.

Is 20% "many"?