Search

The Foundation for California Community Colleges (FCCC) is a non-profit foundation whose mission is to support the California Community College (CCC) system and to save the CCC money. FCCC is the official auxiliary to the Board of Governors, the Chancellor's office, and the system of 108 colleges of the CCC. This document provides details on the CCCs, FCCC, and FCCC's facilities program, "facilitybuys.com." Consistent with the CCC system priorities, the primary goals of FCCC are to (1) generate and provide substantial financial and in-kind support to the CCC system; (2) substantially reduce operational, equipment, and other costs for the CCC through establishing and maintaining a Higher Education Cooperative Purchase Consortium, facilitating private sector partnerships, and assisting in the development of partnerships between CCC colleges/districts and businesses/industries; (3) partner with and provide support to the local CCC foundations and the Network of NCCCFs; and (4) promote and support programs that increase access to and improve effectiveness of the CCCs, especially in the areas of technology, access, and competency. By pooling the negotiating and purchasing power and collective knowledge of the individual CCCs, districts, and a number of other institutions of higher education and K-12, FCCC has been able to save approximately $4 million for the CCCs during the first year of the program. (NB)

This paper asserts that one part of a comprehensive control system for school construction projects is a citizen oversight committee. It suggests that citizen oversight committees are a cost-effective and politically important method for supplementing a school board in its monitoring and oversight functions. Inaddition, the committee acts as a means of engaging the public to increase accountability, meeting the public's desire to ensure taxpayer dollars are used effectively, efficiently, and equitably. The paper provides information on the advantages associated with having a citizen oversight committee as well as lessons and promising practices on how to develop and implement a committee. Ten districts with citizen oversight committees in place we reinterviewed to determine promising practices that are most effective in fulfilling the responsibilities and achieving the advantages of an oversight committee. (EV)

This series of articles examines the condition of public schools and public school construction in Florida's Miami and Dade Counties. To prepare the series, the Miami Herald studied thousands of pages of construction records, correspondence, school district reports, and accounting statements over 15 years. It analyzed state and national construction costs, school enrollment reports for Florida's 67 school districts, growth rates, and census data. More than 200 people completed interviews, and reporters and photographers made about 25 visits to schools. The Herald obtained school district databases detailing construction costs and schedules, contractor and architect information, contractor defaults, construction charges, and life-safety violations. The construction analysis of new schools, additions, renovations, and repairs was based on over 1,200 projects, totaling $1.6 billion, completed since 1988.(SM)

This report documents the findings of an in-depth study of selected historic schools in the Columbus Public School district in an effort to demonstrate that the renovation of such buildings can achieve a high standard of educational adequacy for a cost that is less than new construction. It includes conceptual design solutions and a budget analysis of each of four schools (Avondale Elementary, Burroughs Elementary, Starling Middle, and East High). It presents conceptual floor plans for each building, showing how the program needs are met within the existing building plus new construction. It also contains architectural renderings to provide visualization of how the finished building could look, with examples of both exeterior and interior images. Also presented are the cost estimates for these conceptual plans, which demonstrated in all four cases that these results could be achieved at a cost that is less than the cost of demolishing the old and building new. (EV)

Weighing the pros and cons of renovating a historic neighborhood school or building a new one takes preservation "know-how," experience, and creativity. The potential for renovation is routinely dismissed without full consideration of the facts and long-term implications. Central to this decision-making process is the feasibility study, often conducted by an architectural consultant hired by a school district. A feasibility study of the issues involved in renovation is the only tested way to evaluate the fit of an old building tocontemporary educational uses. In its most basic form, a feasibility study helpsestablish if renovation of a historic school is possible, practical, and whether it canmeet the proposed educational needs. Not simply a cost-benefit analysis, a feasibility study evaluates technology needs and barriers, scheduling to complete aschool construction project from start to finish, options and alternatives, andpotential implications of decisions to the surrounding neighborhood and community.The included feasibility study checklist can help identify the factors involved in making the best decision and assuring that a feasibility study for an historic neighborhood school is fair, objective, and reasonable. It will also assist in identifying "warning signs," questions to ask, and knowing what to look for when challenging the results and projected cost estimates of a feasibility study. (EV)

Virginia Senate Joint Resolution No. 400 requested the Department of Education (DOE) to study the feasibility of the commonwealth providing model school design plans for elementary, middle, and high schools. The resolution further requested input from school divisions and other interested persons. As a result of this request, a sample of school division superintendents, educational facility planners employed by school divisions, architects, and engineers were surveyed relative to their positions on the feasibility of providing such plans.The survey asked about the feasibility of providing such plans, whether or not the commonwealth should do it, and the possibility such plans might have for providing economies for school divisions. In addition, the respondents were asked about the impact model plans might have on community involvement in the planning process. The use of prototype school building plans also was investigated. The results of the survey indicated that there was not a clear picture on the use of model school plans. The superintendents and educational planners believed such plans might be feasible and useful, but the architects and engineers thought differently. The majority of all group respondents believed model school plans developed by the state would not fit the educational needs of a school division. Further, there was some concern that if such plans were used, community involvement in the planning process might be limited. (Appendices contain school divisions surveyed, survey instruments, comments, DOE facilities cost data, recommended prototypical space programs, and Resolution No. 400.) (EV)

This report presents case studies illustrating successful public-private financing of school construction. The efforts occurred in Canada, Florida, South Carolina, New York, the District of Columbia, and Texas. The case studies are offered to encourage policy makers in Virginia to consider such an approach to meet the state's school construction needs. The report concludes that public-private development has shown dramatic results in terms of time saved, money saved, final product, and completion of projects that traditional financing could not support. (EV)

This document consists of two papers. The first, titled "Good Classroom Acoustics Is a Good Investment," identifies and estimates some of the costs for good acoustics in new school construction. It also identifies and estimates some previously unrecognized economic benefits of good acoustics, as well as some of the hidden costs of marginal or poor acoustics. Costs and benefits are compared using recent economic data from the United States. Results suggest that the economic benefits of good acoustics far outweigh its costs. Therefore, a case can be made that good classroom acoustics is a good economic investment. The second paper, "The Impact of Classroom Acoustics on Scholastic Achievement," reviews speech communication criteria and studies that have linked scholastic performance with acoustical noise or reverberation. Some studies link aircraft noise with delayed language acquisition, reading deficiencies, reduced motivation, and long-term recall of learned material. Others link ground transportation noise with reduced academic achievement. Aside from reduced speech intelligibility, little data were found to gauge the impact on learning achievement from heating, ventilating, and air conditioning noise; from the noises of students interacting in cooperative learning environments; or from reverberation. Despite their incomplete nature, some useful inferences can be drawn from these studies. For example, evidence for cumulative impact of poor acoustics on scholastic achievement suggests that good acoustics be made a high priority for children in lower grades. (EV)

This report summarizes data collected from all responding departments with school construction facilities budget responsibility in 49 of the 50 sates (Wyoming excluded). Each of the 49 states was asked to participate in the update of the survey, which was last compiled in 1999. Data are presented in two formats. The first is broken into categories describing the background of school construction issues, school funding programs, key policy questions, and a list of states with legal challenges to school construction programs, both current and resolved. The second is a collection of data for each individual state. In this section there is information on these issues: administering agency; current appropriate; dedicated revenue; funding sources; local matching requirement and related funding source; eligibility criteria; priority factors; specific criteria; and recent or pending legal actions and outcomes. The report includes data from 45 states, 36 of which are currently operating state funded school construction programs. Nine states do not currently have such programs. Six states have established a new agency to oversee school construction in the state, and 10 states have established formulas for determining the amount of state funding each school district receives. Four states require the governor and the state legislature to approve all school construction projects before state funding is made available, and 11 states subsidize, reimburse, or match local funding for construction projects. (SLD)

This report describes a review conducted by the Massachusetts Office of the Inspector General on the construction of the Computer Science and Development Center at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. The office initiated the review after hearing concerns about the management of the project, including its delayed completion and substantial cost overruns. The review concluded that the design-build approach used in the building's construction did not produce the anticipated time savings and also fell short of the school's standards for quality in at least two significant ways. Following an executive summary and introduction, the bulk of the report details the review's findings. These are: (1) Although the state's Division of Capital Asset Management (DCAM) used a state statute on modular building procurement to avoid the usual design-bid-build process, the building is not a modular building; (2) Most delays and overruns were caused by factors under the contractor's (Suffolk's) control; (3) The design-build approach was not appropriate for the project; (4) Top DCAM management did not support efforts of DCAM project personnel to enforce contract requirements and maintain control over the project; and (5) Top DCAM management failed to conduct a rigorous assessment of the merits of Suffolk's $2.7 million claim. (An appendix contains a response letter from DCAM). (EV)

The purpose of this paper is to provide information regarding the financing of Georgia school facilities in the past, the current method of financing needed school facilities, and possible alternatives for providing the financing needed for school facilities in the future. The methods used and the level of state funding for school facilities in other states allow a comparison of Georgia's Capital Outlay Program to the capital outlay programs available in other states. The responsibility for financing school facilities in Georgia has been shared by the state and local boards of education, using both state and local revenue sources. An examination of the appropriate balance between state and local obligation for capital expenses is a focus of this paper. Additionally, since local school systems vary in their ability to finance school facilities with local revenue sources, alternative formulas are considered for taking that variation into account in the distribution of state capital outlay funds. (Appendices contain data tables and formulas.) (EV)

This issue paper discusses principles of good management of construction and some options Georgia may use in the future to manage school construction and control costs. The paper begins by providing some background on common forms of construction management and delivery. Then the paper discusses principles of good contracts. The background section concludes with some information on factors that influence the cost of construction once the design is complete and background on construction materials. The next section of the paper, "Current Conditions," looks at what school systems and the state are doing related to construction. The third section of the paper highlights specific findings about the construction process and the current state activities related to school construction. In the final section of the paper, various alternatives are presented related to construction materials and techniques, costs of construction, construction management and delivery, and contractual issues that could improve school construction in the state of Georgia. (EV)

This document presents a 50-state estimate of the need for school modernization in the United States along with recommendations. Key findings show the total funding need for public school modernization is $321.9 billion, and that total funding needed for public modernization varies dramatically across states, ranging from $50.7 billion (New York) to $333 million (Vermont). Recommendations offered for addressing the problem include some states using their current budget surpluses for immediate, productive investments in school modernization; more federal assistance to modernize; adequate funding for teacher education to take full advantage of technology; and state level need assessments and action planning. Appendices provide data tables, a school modernization needs assessment questionnaire, data collection matrixes for school modernization needs assessment, calculation of unmet funding need for education technology, descriptive statistics, and state assessments of school infrastructure and education technology and related materials. (Contains 62 references.) (GR)

In 1997, the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry implemented a change in its method of determining prevailing wage and benefit rates, resulting in a reduction in the legally required prevailing rates in many construction trades in much of the state. This report analyzes data to determine if this change in fact lowered the cost of public construction projects. It concludes that this claim is not supported. It asserts, for example, that data on public school construction costs show no strong evidence that Pennsylvania's lower prevailing wages and benefits reduced construction costs charged by contractors performing public works. The report also finds that lower prevailing minimum wages paid to workers have no measurable impact on public construction costs partly because wage declines lead to offsetting declines in productivity. (EV)

This document presents an analysis of the prevailing wage laws' impact on public school construction costs in Maryland. The document also provides a comparison of school construction costs of Mid-Atlantic states with prevailing wage laws as well as comparisons between Maryland jurisdictions with and without these laws. The discussion examines the extent to which local contractors have been harmed by unfair competition from outside contractors in the absence of prevailing wage requirements. Moreover, the document explores the extent to which the absence of prevailing wage rates in school construction impacts wages across the construction industry. Results show that there is no measurable or statistically significant increase in construction costs associated with prevailing wage regulations in the Mid-Atlantic States, nor do these regulations measurably affect school construction costs between jurisdictions with and without these laws in Maryland. Further, prevailing wage regulations appear to restrict the ability of urban contractors to win rural construction contracts. Yet, conversely, these regulations appear to encourage the award of urban jobs to rural contractors. Analysis shows construction workers earn a premium in prevailing wage jurisdictions over other nonagricultural workers. This premium ranges from 7 to 16 percent. (Contains 15 tables.) (GR)

This report represents the first effort by any public or private agency or organization to provide a comprehensive assessment of Tennessee's public infrastructure needs. Hundreds of local government officials and private citizens contributed information to this research. The main participants in the infrastructure inventory were the local governments being surveyed by the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, and the nine development districts that are contracted to conduct inventory surveys. The key participants were the various local governments and officials who determine infrastructure needs in each community across the state. The report is divided into two sections. The first part contains survey information on general infrastructure needs that was collected from local governments and other entities. The second part examines K-12 education infrastructure needs. All of the states 138 K-12 public school systems were surveyed. Results from the local-government surveys indicate that $13.7 billion is needed for infrastructure projects and improvements. These improvements included transportation projects, capital-improvement plans, mandated requirements, and water and waste-water accounts. The K-12 public education survey uncovered infrastructure needs totaling $2.5 billion. Needed improvements include basic repairs to bring all schools up to at least a "good" condition. Thirty-five appendices provide further information. (RJM)

This report summarizes survey data collected from responding Departments of Education in all 50 states concerning the planning and financing of public school facility design and construction. The survey was conducted as part of a study for the New Mexico Public School Capital Outlay Equity Task Force. It does not attempt to address every possible aspect of state school construction assistance programs. It does, however, provide an up-to-date summary of state programs. The survey results are displayed in two formats. The first is a state-by-state written summary, and the second is a pictorial display of data. Accompanying these exhibits are reference notes, as written by the state or compiled from supplemental materials, that further explain their responses to the survey. (EV)

The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) offers its own school district data in four areas: enrollment growth; seat capacity; school construction costs; and land acquisition. Also included are data on new school construction, property condemnations, and modernization projects over the past two decades. Appendices provide data on LAUSD enrollment growth and total expenditures by category for all funding in the 1990 through 1998 final budgets. (GR)

In 1997, the Congressional subcommittee responsible for oversight of schools in the District of Columbia asked for information regarding school roof repairs in the District. The subsequent report to that committee is presented. It focuses on the availability of funds to repair roofs, and it offers plans for roof repair in 1998. Although sufficient funding existed in the summer of 1997 to repair 10 schools, the District of Columbia's Public Schools division had not completed sufficient planning to begin the work. Contributing factors to the delay included the almost complete turnover in technical capital project staff during the school year and difficulty in securing bids. Repair costs exceeded estimates and reasons for this are provided. The average cost per square foot was about $20 with costs at individual schools ranging from about $4 to $77. Tables throughout the report summarize the work performed, cost per square foot, and other information for the roof work. Five appendixes offer further information on key dates related to fiscal year 1997 roof repairs, a typical District of Columbia school with multiple roof areas, comments from the General Services Administration, and other information. (Includes a glossary of technical terms.) (RJM)

This document contains information, photographs, and floor plans of many of Florida's new elementary through high school facilities occupied in 1998. Each entry lists the facility's type, building size, student capacity, and general structural information. Also provided is information on the facility's total construction cost; the architects and construction company used; special features of the facility; site development; and the interior components, including roofing, walls, floor finishes, electrical, heating and air conditioning, and plumbing. (GR)

The purpose of this audit was to determine whether New York City's School Construction Authority (SCA) followed its required procedures for awarding and monitoring contracts for construction work in New York City schools. It evaluated the adequacy of these procedures and surveyed school officials to determine their views about SCA work. The report finds that SCA's procedures for prequalification and requalification of contractors, selection of contractors, procedures for approving subcontractors, and controls over costs were often inadequate. More than a third of schools were dissatisfied with SCA work. The report includes recommendations for each of these areas. (Appendices contain a list of contract amounts, excerpts of the questionnaire sent to school principals, a list of schools that responded to the survey, and a list of major contributors to the report.) (EV)

This document contains information, photographs, and floor plans of many of Florida's new elementary through high school facilities occupied in 1997. Each entry lists the facility's type, building size, student capacity, and general structural information. Also provided is information on the facility's total construction cost; the architects and construction company used; special features of the facility; site development; and the interior components, including roofing, walls, floor finishes, electrical, heating and air conditioning, and plumbing. (GR)

With the increasing pace of school construction, knowing how much a school should cost can facilitate effective new-school planning. To help with this process, this document provides new-construction costs as figured for the State of Georgia. The estimates include costs per square foot for elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools, as well as extra expenses, such as additions to classrooms, media rooms and laboratories, and physical education facilities. Support areas, such as administrative suites, kitchens, cafeterias, and restrooms are likewise estimated. This document also discusses what educators can expect in the way of architect fees and contingencies, as well as estimated renovation costs of buildings varying widely in age. The construction of the physical plant must also be estimated and costs per square foot for roofing, heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning are supplied. (RJM)

The purpose of this study was to examine the current Arizona Construction practices and costs in order to provide quantitative and qualitative information to the Arizona Department of Education that will assist in making recommendations and projections for school facilities statewide. The data were taken from an in-depth study of new schools under construction during 1995-1996. Additional information was collected through telephone surveys with district staff, architects, and contractors involved in the projects. The sample was comprised of 28 schools. It was found that the cost of building a new school ranged from $2,680,055 to $14,962,270. The average square footage per student was 104, the average costs per sf was $83, and the average cost per student was $12,017. Architectural fees ranged from $1.19 per building sf to $6.68 per building sf. The critical condition of schools in the state, which was evaluated in an earlier study, was then compared to new construction and additions. Results indicate that 35 schools had critical needs, with many schools having some type of severe problem. Recommendations include selecting an architect on a project-by-project basis and ensuring that the contract bid out in the spring, one year prior to opening. (Contains 11 references, 13 figures, and 9 exhibits.) (RJM)

This document contains information, photographs, and floor plans of many of Florida's new elementary through high school facilities occupied in 1996. Each entry lists the facility's type, building size, student capacity, and general structural information. Also provided is information on the facility's total construction cost; the architects and construction company used; special features of the facility; site development; and the interior components, including roofing, walls, floor finishes, electrical, heating and air conditioning, and plumbing. (GR)

This report presents the findings of an educational plant survey for the University of North Florida (UNF) conducted April 17-19, 1995. It contains recommendations for the educational plants of the university for the period April 17, 1995 to June 30, 2000. Part 1 outlines the statutory foundations, procedural policies, and the cooperative process of the survey while section 2 provides an overview of the university, including its historical perspective, purpose, and mission. Section 3 presents an analysis of the student population, while section 4 lists the academic programs of the university. Section 5 contains an inventory of existing sites and buildings, while section 6 presents a plan for housing programs, students, personnel, and services through the year 2000. Section 7 presents an analysis of capital outlay finances, while section 8 contains recommendations for education plants. These include 33 specific recommendations for the UNF main campus and 5 general recommendations for the statewide university system. (MDM)

Nepal is one of the poorest countries in the world. In 1981 the Education for Rural Development in Seti Zone Project--more commonly known as the "Seti Project"--was part of the Nepalese government's effort to develop a system of basic education in that far western region of Nepal. The early success of the project provided the impetus for the development of the Primary Education Project, which is supported by the Work Bank/International Development Association. This publication is part of the UNESCO Principal Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (PROAP) series on innovations in primary school construction. The series focuses on how to get the most value for money invested in educational buildings. The experience of Nepal and its project Education for Rural Development in the Seti zone is an example of how people can contribute to their own development. The project is based on the premise that such self-development is mainly fueled by knowledge. Mobilizing community interest, maintaining community confidence, and creating technically satisfactory buildings is a major challenge for all participatory development programs. The report gives a chronological review of the work and describes the project's origins, the context for the building design, the management approach, the school-construction program planning, program implementation, and program achievements. A total of 27 illustrations, 2 maps, 3 figures, and 4 tables are included. (LMI)