2020 Bond Planning

​

Maintenance Sub-Committee

Meeting #5

Agenda

​

• Virtual Meeting Protocol
• Decisions
• Voting Process
• Review: Code Compliance and General Renovation
• Review, Discuss, and Vote: Heat Mitigation
• Review, Discuss, and Vote: Critical Maintenance
• Potential Scenario Planning - Funding Reductions

Virtual Meeting Protocol

• All participants will be muted during presentation slides

​

• During discussion slides, all CPAC members will be unmuted for open dialogue

​

• CPAC member votes will be collected using Google forms

3

3

Meeting Schedule

4

Proposed allocations for 2020

5

Options Presented

6

Heat Mitigation:

• Prioritization Method
• Classroom or Classroom +

​

Critical Maintenance:

• All System or MEP Focus

​

Maintenance Overall Spend:

• 10% reduction of funds

​

Voting Process

Guidelines for Today’s Vote:

• Votes will be counted via Google Form survey
• Links emailed to Subcommittee members
• Each decision will have different forms
• Please have email accessible
• Population of email address on form will act as electronic signature
• Majority rule decision-making
• Weighted Scoring will be used for Heat Mitigation prioritization
• 4 options available

​

​

​

​

7

Review Categories and Projects

8

Review of Code and General Renovation

Code Requirements

Total Funds Required (non-negotiable): $66M

​

Projects* Include:

• ADA Upgrades ($1.8 M)
• Elevator Updates and New Installations ($7.0 M)
• Fall Protection ($1.8 M)
• Equipment Requiring Accessibility Upgrades ($0.88 M)
• Fire Alarm and Sprinkler Updates ($28.4 M)
• Retrofit of Radio Emergency System ($9.7 M)
• Health and Environmental Code ($16.5 M)

​

* Code upgrades will touch every district school

​

10

General Renovation

• The General Renovation sub-group is responsible for addressing existing building deficiencies at DPS facilities. This request primarily includes Interior surfaces, finishes, and building structures.

​

• This category of projects will support renovations to DPS facilities by updating existing deteriorated building conditions.

​

• This General Renovation package represents a concerted effort to move toward a more proactive (i.e. less reactive) state of operations for Facilities Management

​

• The project scopes may represent renovations to portions of systems at select locations.

​

• The major categories of renovations prioritized include
• Floors
• Lavoratories
• Locker rooms
• Paint

11

General Renovation Breakdown

* there are 5 schools with multiple projects

12

Review of Heat Mitigation

More ways to prioritize our funds

Data for Ashley Elementary

*For more information on quartiles, see appendix

• Cooling all 55 buildings would cost a minimum of $262 million (classroom only)
• Restrictions are:
• Limited funding
• Experienced labor and material resources are limited and in high demand
• Construction window limited to summers only

14

Composite Ranking uses the temperature study, as well as other factors:

Or:

​

Use just results from the temperature study:

4 + 1.09 + .83 = 5.92

Top quartile* 83% 7th

Temperature Ranking = 12th

Option 1

Option 2

More ways to prioritize our funds

Data for Ashley Elementary

*For more information on quartiles, see appendix

15

Weighted Composite uses the same variables but emphasizes Equity index :

Use the Equity Index only:

1.09 x 3 + 4 + .83 = 8.10

Top quartile* 83% 9th

Equity Only Ranking = 22nd

Option 3

Option 4

• Equity Index weighting has been increased threefold

Comparisons

16

*Includes the 1,633 students at North, which already has cooling in many classrooms

• Across all rankings, $130 million would fund cooling for approximately 20 buildings for Classroom + or approximately 24 buildings for Classroom Only

Top 20 buildings

17

Additional costs for Classroom Only

• If we decide for Classroom Only today, there will be a time in the future when we will go back to each of the 24 buildings to cool the remainder of the spaces
• There are additional costs this will incur, mostly due to engineering and mobilizing at each of the 24 sites twice.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

• Which will total an estimated additional $17.6 million for 24 buildings if we do Classroom Only now.
• This does not include the cost of inflation

18

Discussion and Vote

on Heat Mitigation Prioritization

(Composite vs. Temperature Only vs. Weighted Composite vs. Equity Only)

19

• Weighted scoring will be used
• 5 points for 1st choice
• 3 points for 2nd choice
• 1 point for 3rd choice
• 0 points for 4th choice

Vote Results

20

Total Scores

​

​

40

​

​

10

​

​

27

​

​

13

21

Discussion and Vote on Heat Mitigation Cooling Level

(Classroom only vs. Classroom +)

22

Vote Results

23

Review of Critical Maintenance

Critical Maintenance Option Review

Option #1: Mechanical, Electrical, & Plumbing (MEP) Focus

• Focuses on deficiencies that are typically more expensive to repair/replace, are more likely to close a building if they fail, require higher design cost and time, and have a greater lead time for components.
• Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing systems have significant needs and costs so proactively addressing these deficiencies reduces risk of failure and any resulting emergency situation for maintenance teams.
• More holistic improvements at the system level which allows for greater economies of scale and consistency within a building.

25

Critical Maintenance Option Review

Option #2: All Systems

• Focuses on addressing all critical deficiencies from any system at a property included in the Base List, providing more holistic improvements to DPS properties.
• Interior, Shell, and Site/Civil system issues will not be left to be handled by maintenance teams.
• More critical issues addressed at each property.

26

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option #1: Mechanical, Electrical, & Plumbing (MEP) Focus

27

Advantages and Disadvantages

Option #2: All Systems

28

Option Comparison

29

Discussion and Vote on Critical Maintenance

30

Vote Results

31

Finalized Maintenance Package Recommendation

32

Vote Results

33

Pandemic Funding Reduction Scenario: Prioritization Approach & Options

34

Context

• Board may consider smaller bond ask due to economic impact of pandemic
• Preparing for potential 10% reduction across all CPAC groups to give the Board options to consider
• We are not recommending any reductions from Code requirements

​

35

General Renovation

• The proposed reduction to the general renovation bucket would have the following impact
• Reduce the scope of work for all paint projects targeted
• Projects currently receiving the largest sums would receive the largest cuts
• Project scopes at a significantly lower percent
• Changes outlined below

​

​

36

Heat Mitigation

• A 10% reduction to the Heat Mitigation bucket would reduce the bucket size from $130 million to $117 million
• Sabin and Denison would be removed from the list
• Brings buildings total to 18

37

Critical Maintenance: Scenario Planning

Option #1: Mechanical, Electrical, & Plumbing (MEP) Focus

Using Building Condition Index (BCI) as the primary means of prioritization, a 10% reduction to the Critical Maintenance bucket would have the following impact on Option #1: MEP Systems Focus:

• Bucket size decreases from $134 million to $120 million
• Projected Project Costs decrease from $131,968,243 to $120,660,681
• Buildings Impacted decreases from 136 to 74

​

​

​

​

​

38

Reduced Allocations by Category

39

*Total bucket not reduced by 10% due to no reduction in Code

Thank you!

Appendix

41

BOND OVERSIGHT PRIORITIZATION RUBRIC

42

Each committee member used the following rubric to score all projects prior to deliberation. Categories are weighted based on the committee’s discussion of priorities.

Approach to Equity

Equity Index

43

As prioritization was evaluated, we considered a method to evaluate district-wide equity and equality through an Equity Index that defines a baseline for ALL schools/programs with greater rigor beyond family income.

Student Equity-  Providing the resources that students need for success. For measuring student equity, we used the following index:

School % High Poverty + %English Learner + %SPED +%Volatility

District Average % High Poverty + %English Learner + %SPED +%Volatility

​

This is in line with how DPS allocates student-based funding.

​

What is the Data?

• District average Equity Index (EI) is 1.0
• You can read an EI of 1.1 as that school having 10% above average population of students with greater needs. An EI of 0.7 indicates that school has 30% smaller than average population of harder-to-serve students.

​

Equity Index:

44

45

46

47

Critical Maintenance: Scenario Planning

Option #2: All Systems

Using Property Condition Index (PCI) as the primary means of prioritization, a 10% reduction to the Critical Maintenance bucket would have the following impact on Option #2: All Systems Focus:

• Bucket size decreases from $134 million to $120 million
• Projected Project Costs decrease from $131,550,259 to $120,673,791
• Buildings Impacted decreases from 126 to 76

​

​

​

​

​

48