MAY 2014 ROCHESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS ENROLLMENT ANALYSIS ROCHESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS TEAMWORKS INTERNATIONAL

Transcription

1 ROCHESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS ENROLLMENT ANALYSIS MAY 2014 ROCHESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS TEAMWORKS INTERNATIONAL

2 ROCHESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS ROCHESTER, MN ENROLLMENT ANALYSIS 1 INTRODUCTION, METHODOLOGY & SUMMARY 7 APPENDIX 1 - HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENTS & CAPACITY UTILIZATION ESTIMATES FOR INDIVIDUAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 17 APPENDIX 2 - HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENTS & CAPACITY UTILIZATION ESTIMATES FOR INDIVIDUAL MIDDLE SCHOOLS 20 APPENDIX 3 - HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENTS & CAPACITY UTILIZATION ESTIMATES FOR INDIVIDUAL HIGH SCHOOLS & COMBINED SPECIAL SCHOOLS

3 1 INTRODUCTION & METHODOLGY This analysis reports historical and projected student enrollments for the entire Rochester Public School District, as well as for each individual school within the district. Special schools were combined into a single report. This analysis also reports capacity utilization figures for the entire district, as well as for each individual school. Historical enrollment data and building capacity data utilized in this report was obtained from the Rochester Public School District. Five-year enrollment projections for grades PK/EC and Kindergarten were derived by utilizing public birth data obtained from the Minnesota Department of Health. Projected enrollments for grades 1 through 12 were then calculated by employing a cohort survival methodology. With this method, survival ratios were calculated based on historical student enrollments by dividing the total number of students per grade in a given year by the total number of students in the preceding grade in the previous year. An average of long-term and short-term survival ratios was then utilized to project future 1 st through 12 th graders. In addition, five-year growth rates derived from age-specific U.S. Census data were factored into each projection for each elementary attendance area to reflect the unique demographic characteristics of each of these regions. Student enrollment projections were then calculated for each attendance area, and these figures were then combined to obtain enrollment projections for the entire district. Enrollment projections for newcomers were derived by extrapolating the current school-year figure forward. This was done because it is very difficult to estimate students who might be newcomers in the future due to their irregular historical numbers. Enrollment figures at special schools were derived by calculating their historical averages as a percent of the total overall student population, and projecting this formula forward. However, 12 th grade students at special schools were derived by taking short and long term annual growth rates and projecting them forward. This was done because there has been a steady growth of 12 th graders in special schools from the 2006/2007 school year to the current school year, especially at the ALC s. It is estimated that this growth trend will continue. SUMMARY Table 1 reflects the combined historical and projected figures for the following schools: Elementary Schools Bamber Valley Ben Franklin Montessori at Franklin Churchill Elton Hills Folwell Gage George Gibbs Harriet Bishop Hoover Jefferson Lincoln (K-8) Longfellow Pinewood Riverside Sunset Terrace Washington Middle Schools Friedell John Adams Kellogg Willow Creek High Schools Century John Marshall Mayo

4 2 In the current school year, there are 16,048 total students in grades PK/EC- 12 enrolled at one of the twenty-four schools listed above. If we break these figures down further, there are currently 8,067 students enrolled in grades PK/EC 5; 3,480 students enrolled in grades 6 8; and 4,501 students enrolled in grades Table 2 reflects total student enrollment figures for special schools in the district, as well as newcomers at the elementary, middle and high school levels. Table 3 reports total historical and combined enrollment projections for the district, and include enrollment totals from tables 1 and 2. As of March, 2014 the district is serving approximately 16,717 total students. This includes 8,067 students in grades PK/EC-5; 3,480 students in grades 6-8; and 4,501 students in grades There are an additional 165 students classified as newcomers that have not been assigned a specific grade level (114 in grades K-5 and 51 in grades 6-12). And finally, there are 504 total students who are enrolled either in special schools or in the Early Childhood (Birth 2) program. Appendices 1, 2, and 3 report historical and projected enrollment figures, as well as capacity utilization figures for each individual elementary, middle, and high school, respectively. In addition, combined historical and projected enrollment figures are reported for special schools in the district. Since school year , overall enrollment at the 24 school listed in table 1 has grown by 1.8%; however changes in enrollment were distributed unevenly across the different grade levels. Growth at the elementary level grew by 11.5%. Middle school saw a growth rate of 1.2%, while enrollment at the high school level declined by -11.6%. Five-year projections estimate that growth/decline will again vary widely across each grade level. Enrollment at the elementary level is expected to reverse prior trends and decline by -4.6% to 7,676 total students. However, enrollment projections at both the middle school and high school levels are expected to increase by 6.9% and 4.5%, respectively. Overall, the total student enrollment at these 24 schools is expected to remain relatively flat, increasing slightly by 0.4% to 16,101 total students by school year The swing in growth/decline rates at the different grade levels is most likely due to the fluctuation in the number of births in the region. The total number of births in a particular region is a strong indicator of future prekindergarten and kindergarten enrollment. Charts 1 and 2 reflect the total number of public births by school year beginning in and ending in (in this case a school year begins September 1 st and ends August 30 th of the following year). Here, we assume that children born in a particular school year will begin kindergarten 6 years later. For example, if a child was born in the school year, they would have begun kindergarten in the school year. In charts 1 and 2, the school year in which children are assumed to begin kindergarten is shown in parentheses along the horizontal axis of both charts. Chart 1 reports public births for the state of Minnesota, and chart 2 reflects the total number of public births in Olmsted County, the Rochester Public School District, and the city of Rochester. Within the state, public births peaked in school year when there were 62,015 births. Subsequent years saw a sharp decline in the number of births. Between and the total number of births declined by -17.6% to 51,104. School year saw a slight rebound from the previous year s low. Births in the Rochester Public School District grew steadily from until their peak in school year Between and , births in the district declined by -19.3%, however saw a slight rebound. These trends mirrored those seen in Olmsted County and the city of Rochester. This fluctuation in births had a significant impact on student enrollments in the district, and will most likely continue to do so in the near future. As births rose throughout the late 1990 s and early 2000 s, the school district experienced increasing enrollment at the elementary school level as the lag effect of these births eventually entered the public school system. Between school-year and the current school year, elementary schools in the district added an additional 832 elementary

5 3 students. Elementary school enrollment is projected to peak in , after which it will begin to decline as the district begins to experience the impact of declining births after Conversely, middle school and high school enrollments are projected to experience growth in the nearterm as the swelling current ranks of elementary students advance in grade level. The decline in births is not just limited to Rochester or the state of Minnesota. According to 2013 Census Bureau estimates, the United States has experienced the fewest births since 1998 and the lowest population gain in 35 years. U.S. births rates have been dropping since reaching an all-time high in 2007, and declines were reported among women of all ages and races. In Minnesota, the birth rate is close to being the lowest it s been in 100 years according to the Minnesota State Demographic Center. Children s Hospital in the Twin Cities, The University of Minnesota s Amplatz Children s Hospital, and hospital maternity units across the state have experienced significant declines in pediatric admissions in recent years. Most experts attribute this downward trend to the bad economy and the recession that technically lasted from December 2007 to June 2009, but whose impact reverberated well beyond The theory is that younger people with money worries, especially younger women, feel they can t afford to start a family or to add to it. Student enrollment at Rochester Public School is strongly tied to the total number of births in the region, which in turn, is strongly tied to the overall economy. In Rochester and the surrounding area, the Mayo Clinic forms the core of the regional economy. The Mayo Clinic is Minnesota s largest employer, providing jobs for more than 40,000 Minnesotan s, including over 33,000 in Rochester. Roughly 4% of the state of Minnesota s Gross Domestic Product is a direct result of Mayo s economic impact, and each year, the Mayo Clinic contributes approximately $1.5 billion in state and local taxes. In May, 2013 the Minnesota State Legislature passed an economic development project called Destination Medical Center (DMC). Under the new DMC initiative, Mayo Clinic is poised to expand dramatically, adding an additional 25,000 to 30,000 jobs over the next 20 years. Economic development and the multiplier effect surrounding DMC will also result in the creation of thousands of more jobs in the region. However, the project is still in its infancy, and is currently in the planning phases. As part of the legislation, the Destination Medical Center Corporation (DMCC) is required to develop a Master Development Plan, whose purpose is to identify planned and anticipated development projects surrounding the initiative. Once a plan is completed, public hearings must be held, and the city must approve the plan. Upon approval, the DMCC will set up medical center districts and subdistricts, and identify specific development projects that will occur within those districts. Rochester Public Schools will most certainly be impacted greatly by the DMC initiative. However, the timeline surrounding these events is uncertain. Thus, in the near-term, overall student enrollment at the Rochester Public School District are most likely going to be impacted by the number of births in the region. So long as the economic outlook continues to improve, the local birth rate could quickly rebound to pre-2008/2009 levels. In the long term, enrollment at the district will be greatly impacted by the implementation of the Destination Medical Center initiative.

6 4 Table 1 - ROCHESTER PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K 1,250 1,227 1,297 1,322 1,315 1,262 1,326 1,380 1,334 1,315 1,279 1,118 1, ,198 1,281 1,248 1,321 1,339 1,312 1,293 1,343 1,404 1,357 1,340 1,302 1, ,149 1,181 1,232 1,251 1,310 1,289 1,312 1,282 1,326 1,385 1,338 1,319 1, ,180 1,146 1,197 1,210 1,208 1,307 1,265 1,285 1,262 1,307 1,359 1,313 1, ,157 1,168 1,152 1,188 1,179 1,201 1,317 1,240 1,275 1,254 1,299 1,347 1, ,119 1,167 1,182 1,134 1,172 1,156 1,184 1,298 1,225 1,255 1,235 1,280 1, ,189 1,136 1,166 1,186 1,132 1,168 1,166 1,172 1,196 1,218 1,200 1,252 1, ,122 1,185 1,118 1,149 1,169 1,112 1,174 1,147 1,162 1,186 1,208 1,190 1, ,127 1,129 1,175 1,090 1,125 1,144 1,115 1,161 1,138 1,153 1,177 1,199 1, ,440 1,394 1,418 1,324 1,232 1,168 1,192 1,166 1,226 1,241 1,267 1,291 1, ,314 1,205 1,180 1,179 1,234 1,148 1,177 1,162 1,107 1,164 1,179 1,204 1, ,202 1,208 1,151 1,123 1,104 1,170 1,098 1,128 1,106 1,054 1,108 1,122 1, ,133 1,122 1,100 1,087 1,066 1,105 1,092 1,045 1,066 1, ,048 1,061 Total PK/EC-12 15,745 15,727 15,767 15,716 15,765 15,757 15,939 16,048 16,040 16,146 16,193 16,169 16,153 Total K-12 15,580 15,549 15,616 15,564 15,585 15,542 15,711 15,809 15,827 15,935 15,987 15,985 15,961 PK/EC - 12 Capacity % TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Total PK/EC - 5 7,218 7,348 7,459 7,578 7,703 7,742 7,925 8,067 8,039 8,084 8,056 7,863 7,728 PK/EC - 5 Capacity % 79.9% 81.3% 82.6% 83.9% 85.3% 85.7% 87.7% 89.3% 89.0% 89.5% 89.2% 87.0% 85.5% Total 6-8 3,438 3,450 3,459 3,425 3,426 3,424 3,455 3,480 3,496 3,557 3,586 3,641 3, Capacity % TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Total ,089 4,929 4,849 4,713 4,636 4,591 4,559 4,501 4,505 4,505 4,551 4,665 4, Capacity % TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD *Target PK/EC - 12 Class Size Working Capacity - To Be Determined *Target PK/EC - 5 Class Size Working Capacity - 9,035 *Target 6-8 Class Size Working Capacity - To Be Determined *Target 9-12 Class Size Working Capacity - To Be Determined

7 5 TABLE 2 - TOTAL EC (BIRTH-2), NEWCOMERS, & OTHER SCHOOLS HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT EC (Birth - 2) Other Schools NC Elementary NC Middle NC High TABLE 3 - COMBINED ROCHESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT Combined Total 16,187 16,192 16,189 16,202 16,284 16,272 16,571 16,717 16,734 16,856 16,924 16,925 16,930

8 6 64,000 62,000 60,000 58,000 56,000 54,000 55,671 56,591 57,711 57,847 59,619 59,704 59,340 60,780 62,015 61,027 58,652 56,932 54,368 Births in Minnesota 52,000 Chart 1 51,104 51,284 50,000 Birth Year (Kindergarten Year) 2,200 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 2,063 2,062 2,011 1,966 1,956 1,841 1,799 1,746 1,769 1,751 1,660 1,667 1,697 1,608 1,634 1,436 1,495 1,480 1,514 1,562 1,475 1,376 1,363 1,317 1,626 1,619 1,587 Chart 2 2,134 1,784 1,668 2,012 1,994 1,915 1,719 1,694 1,706 1,648 1,605 1,589 1,556 1,439 1,373 1,780 1,520 1,438 Births in Olmsted County Births in School District Births in Rochester 1,000 Birth Year (Kindergarten Year)

9 7 APPENDIX 1 HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENTS & CAPACITY UTILIZATION ESTIMATES FOR INDIVIDUAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

10 8 BEN FRANKLIN HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 71.7% 74.4% 75.3% 85.6% 83.7% 86.5% 83.3% 89.5% 88.4% 89.3% 86.2% 86.8% 85.1% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (K - 5) MONTESSORI AT FRANKLIN HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT K Total Capacity % 93.8% 92.3% 90.4% 92.3% 93.3% 95.2% 96.6% 93.8% 91.3% 90.5% 88.7% 86.7% 85.5% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (K - 5) - 208

11 9 CHURCHILL HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 99.1% 107.9% 104.4% 115.4% 112.3% 110.1% 93.8% 92.1% 92.2% 96.7% 94.0% 88.0% 85.7% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (PK/EC - 2) HOOVER HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC Total Capacity % 82.2% 82.6% 75.7% 73.9% 83.3% 85.1% 94.6% 89.1% 78.5% 70.5% 71.4% 70.8% 74.7% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (PK/EC & 3-5) 276

12 10 BAMBER VALLEY HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 103.4% 104.0% 108.5% 97.5% 99.8% 97.4% 91.3% 94.4% 94.7% 93.3% 93.6% 90.8% 90.5% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (ECSE/DHH - 5) 924 ELTON HILLS HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 72.7% 71.7% 74.3% 87.1% 82.3% 79.6% 88.7% 90.4% 91.3% 93.0% 90.8% 90.0% 88.1% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (K-5) 565

13 11 FOLWELL HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 82.8% 81.7% 78.8% 78.8% 81.7% 78.2% 83.6% 90.6% 88.6% 89.7% 92.1% 90.3% 85.8% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (K-5) GAGE HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 111.3% 106.9% 112.5% 82.5% 80.3% 76.1% 88.4% 89.4% 92.6% 96.9% 97.7% 97.5% 97.0% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (PK/EC - 5) - 742

14 12 GEORGE GIBBS HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT Grade PK/EC K Total Capacity % 76.0% 81.5% 89.2% 94.6% 91.8% 94.6% 93.9% 91.5% 86.8% 81.8% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (PK/EC - 5) HARRIET BISHOP HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 93.6% 98.3% 93.6% 85.2% 89.9% 85.0% 84.2% 88.9% 89.6% 92.9% 95.7% 94.8% 95.4% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (PK/EC - 5) - 533

15 13 JEFFERSON HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 83.2% 84.6% 87.8% 84.6% 77.0% 81.8% 89.2% 90.5% 87.2% 90.1% 93.5% 91.5% 87.6% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (K - 5) Includes 30 Seats Reserved for ASD Students LONGFELLOW HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 68.0% 71.0% 71.0% 76.3% 78.5% 76.6% 83.3% 85.5% 87.7% 89.1% 89.3% 86.1% 84.8% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (K-5) - 372

16 14 PINEWOOD HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 84.1% 90.9% 92.9% 71.2% 67.9% 67.0% 74.7% 71.4% 68.7% 70.1% 72.1% 70.7% 70.6% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (PK/EC - 5) RIVERSIDE HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K NC Total Capacity % 85.6% 84.1% 85.4% 72.8% 79.0% 78.7% 80.3% 94.0% 91.8% 90.9% 90.0% 86.3% 85.0% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (PK/EC - 5) - Includes 133 seats for Newcomers 787

17 15 SUNSET TERRACE HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 101.9% 108.8% 112.3% 83.8% 93.4% 99.6% 94.9% 93.3% 91.4% 89.3% 88.0% 86.8% 85.7% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (PK/EC - 5) WASHINGTON HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT PK/EC K Total Capacity % 90.2% 92.5% 92.8% 94.3% 91.2% 87.9% 89.4% 86.6% 90.7% 90.6% 90.0% 88.0% 86.9% 388 PK/EC Program Begins in School Year *Target Class Size Working Capacity (PK/EC - 5) -

18 16 LINCOLN HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT K Total Capacity % 66.1% 67.8% 69.6% 72.6% 76.3% 76.5% 78.1% 78.1% 77.6% 77.6% 76.8% 74.7% 74.2% *Target Class Size Working Capacity (K-8) - 540

19 17 APPENDIX 2 HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENTS & CAPACITY UTILIZATION ESTIMATES FOR INDIVIDUAL MIDDLE SCHOOLS

20 18 FRIEDELL HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT Total Capacity % TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD *Target Class Size Working Capacity - To Be Determined JOHN ADAMS HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT NC Total Capacity % TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD *Target Class Size Working Capacity - To Be Determined

21 19 KELLOGG HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT Total Capacity % TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD *Target Class Size Working Capacity - To Be Determined WILLOW CREEK HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT NC Total Capacity % TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD *Target Class Size Working Capacity - To Be Determined

22 20 APPENDIX 3 HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENTS & CAPACITY UTILIZATION ESTIMATES FOR INDIVIDUAL HIGH SCHOOLS & COMBINED SPECIAL SCHOOLS

23 21 CENTURY HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT NC Total Capacity % TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD *Target Class Size Working Capacity - To Be Determined JOHN MARSHALL HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT Total Capacity % TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD *Target Class Size Working Capacity - To Be Determined

24 22 MAYO HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT NC Total Capacity % TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD *Target Class Size Working Capacity - To Be Determined SPECIAL SCHOOLS* HISTORICAL & PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT Total *Includes historical and projected numbers for Bridge, Burr Oak Phoenix, ESC ALC, RAMS, ALC 306, ALC 316, TAP and TLC