Folks - the facility plan, especially the projections, is going to be used to inform the upcoming boundary review.
It isn’t supposed to fix overcrowding. That isn’t in their purview.

It is to say if nothing changes beyond what has been approved today, this is what will happen.

They have upped the enrollment projections on a range of schools. Any other changes?

A new MFP has been posted:

https://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/DC_MFP_2019_Feb%2021_Final_compressed.pdf

Hot take: Wilson 2027 projection is now over 2,300, was 2,100.

The 2027 projection for Key has been raised to 580 from 527 in the original. The projection for Mann has been raised to 555 from 501.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t know about overcrowding but there are still schools on other parts of the city in dismal, unrenovated conditions (unusable bathrooms, hVAC problems and the like).

It is connected because if DCPS decides to use Old Hardy it would need renovations, which depletes resources for other projects. There is only so much to go around in any given period of time, especially now that the city is running a deficit for the first time in a decade.

Right now there is $50 million in the budget to add permanent capacity to replace trailers at Key and Stoddert. That money would be better shifting some of those students to Old Hardy and spiffing the building a bit. It starts getting really expensive to add capacity to buildings like Key and Stoddert that are already maxed out.

Is old Hardy walkable for the students at Key and Stoddert?

There are guidelines for how far any children can be from their IB middle.

Old Hardy is within the current Key boundaries. For 40 years it was an elementary school, when it closed its territory was split among Key, Mann, Stoddert and Hyde.

1/2 mile? That’s a nutty recommendation for a MS. I think the 0.5 mile requirement applies only to ES

Stoddart to today’s Hardy is 0.9 mile. And that’s the closest feeder school to Hardy. No way in hell is that rule of thumb being followed at the MS level.

The guidelines are from the last boundary review. DCPS has adopted everything in this section of the guidelines. Looks like it is 1/2 mile, which is consistent with the way that the common lottery determines whether a student can get proximity preference to another elementary school. See page 12 (excerpted below)

Walking and Public Transit to Public Schools

Throughout this process, the Advisory Committee, parents, and community members expressed a strong desire to locate and sustain DCPS zoned elementary schools that can be reached safely by walking. The Committee developed a deeper understanding for the varying walkability and transportation issues across the city. It was clear that we could not measure the ease of walking and transportation based solely on distance, but that geographic barriers, public transit routes, and the safety of the neighborhood are also important factors to consider.

Where a community is geographically isolated, the Committee recommends that a small school be considered in order to ensure equity in access to walkable schools. When this is not feasible, the committee seeks to relieve the transportation burden placed on parents, students, and families and find ways to better support transportation to school, which is currently the responsibility of families, not the district, except in the case of students who receive special education services. Currently, all students have access to free Metrobus transportation to and from school, and subsidized Metrorail.

In many school districts where walkability is the exception rather than the organizing principle of the system, transportation is provided by the school district. The Advisory Committee and many of the participants in the public discussions believe that the District of Columbia is in the fortunate position of never having fully dismantled its walkable system of schools and strongly encourages the District to retain walk zones for elementary schools of roughly a half mile. The Committee acknowledges that the enrollment patterns are complex and that even after re-commissioning some geographically isolated schools there will still be some students and families who will have greater travel burdens than others. However, to address the limitations of the current and proposed student assignment system, boundaries and feeder pathways, the Advisory Committee makes the following recommendations:

Recommendation 31: Provide students who live greater than a half mile walking distance from their zoned DCPS elementary school with a proximity priority for out-of-zone placement to a DCPS elementary school that is a half mile or less walking distance from their home.

Recommendation 32: Provide parents or guardians of PK3 through 5th grade students residing one mile or greater walking distance from their zoned DCPS school with free passage on Metrobus to accompany the elementary grade student to their zoned school.

Recommendation 33: Provide free passage on Metrorail to 9th through 12th grade students for travel to and from a public school.

Recommendation 34: DME shall work with Metro, Metro Police, Metropolitan Police Department
(MPD), DC Department of Transportation, and public school parents and students to review bus
routes and other Safe Routes to School services and ensure that bus routes and services are
maximized to support safe and efficient public school travel by DCPS and public charter school
students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t know about overcrowding but there are still schools on other parts of the city in dismal, unrenovated conditions (unusable bathrooms, hVAC problems and the like).

It is connected because if DCPS decides to use Old Hardy it would need renovations, which depletes resources for other projects. There is only so much to go around in any given period of time, especially now that the city is running a deficit for the first time in a decade.

Right now there is $50 million in the budget to add permanent capacity to replace trailers at Key and Stoddert. That money would be better shifting some of those students to Old Hardy and spiffing the building a bit. It starts getting really expensive to add capacity to buildings like Key and Stoddert that are already maxed out.

Is old Hardy walkable for the students at Key and Stoddert?

There are guidelines for how far any children can be from their IB middle.

Can you share the guidelines? Are they DCPS or some other thing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t know about overcrowding but there are still schools on other parts of the city in dismal, unrenovated conditions (unusable bathrooms, hVAC problems and the like).

It is connected because if DCPS decides to use Old Hardy it would need renovations, which depletes resources for other projects. There is only so much to go around in any given period of time, especially now that the city is running a deficit for the first time in a decade.

Right now there is $50 million in the budget to add permanent capacity to replace trailers at Key and Stoddert. That money would be better shifting some of those students to Old Hardy and spiffing the building a bit. It starts getting really expensive to add capacity to buildings like Key and Stoddert that are already maxed out.

Is old Hardy walkable for the students at Key and Stoddert?

There are guidelines for how far any children can be from their IB middle.

Anonymous wrote:Don’t know about overcrowding but there are still schools on other parts of the city in dismal, unrenovated conditions (unusable bathrooms, hVAC problems and the like).

It is connected because if DCPS decides to use Old Hardy it would need renovations, which depletes resources for other projects. There is only so much to go around in any given period of time, especially now that the city is running a deficit for the first time in a decade.

Right now there is $50 million in the budget to add permanent capacity to replace trailers at Key and Stoddert. That money would be better shifting some of those students to Old Hardy and spiffing the building a bit. It starts getting really expensive to add capacity to buildings like Key and Stoddert that are already maxed out.

Don’t know about overcrowding but there are still schools on other parts of the city in dismal, unrenovated conditions (unusable bathrooms, hVAC problems and the like).

It is connected because if DCPS decides to use Old Hardy it would need renovations, which depletes resources for other projects. There is only so much to go around in any given period of time, especially now that the city is running a deficit for the first time in a decade.

Anonymous wrote:What you all don’t seem to realize is that the city, and the majority of the electorate, cares more about educational equity than overcrowding overcrowding. Doesn’t mean they like overcrowding, but the other issue is paramount.

Any solution you propose needs to address that in some way — or at least acknowledge that it is as much of a problem as overcrowding that also demands solutions. pairing solutions would help.

I am the previous poster, I thought the city had committed to do something about the overcrowding. Improving equity in outcomes is very important, - yes but I am not sure how minor capital works such as keeping Old Hardy shifts that down to those of lower socio economic status than that typically found in NW. Set asides are the usual tool that well meaning people like. Or is it just educational equity in terms of attending a school with with high performing kids, this is not an outcome.

If the school in SW where as overcrowded overcrowded as Deal and Wilson, would something have been done earlier?

What you all don’t seem to realize is that the city, and the majority of the electorate, cares more about educational equity than overcrowding overcrowding. Doesn’t mean they like overcrowding, but the other issue is paramount.

Any solution you propose needs to address that in some way — or at least acknowledge that it is as much of a problem as overcrowding that also demands solutions. pairing solutions would help.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The supporters of keeping Old Hardy public have been using it to bash DME and DCPS as well.

The school-by-school demographic projections are pretty alarming and it's pretty damning that nothing substantive is being planned.

You mean the neighborhood growth data for specific schools? I thought this was supposed to be about citywide facilities planning strategies for public and charter schools. The recommendations are more about changing how planning is done.

Those Old Hardy people keep forgetting they're part of a an entire city. Some 75% of public students don't attend in-boundary schools, including the roughly 50% of all public students in charters.

Ward 3 has the second smallest public enrollment after Ward 2. If a couple of language immersion or STEM charters open in Ward 3, those neighborhood school class sizes could plummet.

Wilson and feeders are overcrowded, we get it. That is and should be of concern from a safety perspective. Temporary measures can address that. Remember, using trailers has not negatively impacted achievement in Ward 3 at schools like Mann, Key, etc.

Ward 3's problems are different from and, in some ways, the opposite of those in the rest of the city. Different, but not more important.

It is true that school in the Wilson feeder pattern (which include schools in Wards 1, 2, and 4) have different problems with overcrowding. But portables are no longer the answer because in most places they don't have any place to put any more portables. They have maxed out the space. It is just silly to not use Old Hardy when DCPS owns the building. DCPS will have to do something, and everyone in the city (except maybe the Lab School) would better off if we used public resources that we, as taxpayers, already own, instead of spending money that we don't have to.

So what sensible solution helps with the Wilson and Deal overcrowding that The Old Hardy building could help with? They should just turn Hardy Middle into an Education Campus. Sned Bancroft to Cardozo middle or CHEC. People will rage, but problem solved.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The supporters of keeping Old Hardy public have been using it to bash DME and DCPS as well.

The school-by-school demographic projections are pretty alarming and it's pretty damning that nothing substantive is being planned.

You mean the neighborhood growth data for specific schools? I thought this was supposed to be about citywide facilities planning strategies for public and charter schools. The recommendations are more about changing how planning is done.

Those Old Hardy people keep forgetting they're part of a an entire city. Some 75% of public students don't attend in-boundary schools, including the roughly 50% of all public students in charters.

Ward 3 has the second smallest public enrollment after Ward 2. If a couple of language immersion or STEM charters open in Ward 3, those neighborhood school class sizes could plummet.

Wilson and feeders are overcrowded, we get it. That is and should be of concern from a safety perspective. Temporary measures can address that. Remember, using trailers has not negatively impacted achievement in Ward 3 at schools like Mann, Key, etc.

Ward 3's problems are different from and, in some ways, the opposite of those in the rest of the city. Different, but not more important.

It is true that school in the Wilson feeder pattern (which include schools in Wards 1, 2, and 4) have different problems with overcrowding. But portables are no longer the answer because in most places they don't have any place to put any more portables. They have maxed out the space. It is just silly to not use Old Hardy when DCPS owns the building. DCPS will have to do something, and everyone in the city (except maybe the Lab School) would be better off if we used public resources that we, as taxpayers, already own, instead of spending money that we don't have to.

That’s what they want you to believe