Background 4. SFMP 2011 Revisions 5. Phase 1 6. Phase 2 6. Actual Costs versus Estimated Costs 7. SFMP Cost Assumptions 8

(1)

New Orleans

Public School Facilities Update

June 2013

(2)

New Orleans Public School Facilities Update 2

Highlights

Hurricane Katrina provided New Orleans with a

historic opportunity to rebuild its public school

facilities. The School Facilities Master Plan

(SFMP), adopted by the Orleans Parish School

Board (OPSB) and the state Board of Elementary

and Secondary Education (BESE) in 2008 and

revised in 2011, establishes a blueprint for

renovating and rebuilding crumbling school

facilities. The $1.8 billion lump sum settlement

awarded by the Federal Emergency Management

Agency (FEMA) coupled with funding from the

community development block grants (CDBG)

program, insurance proceeds, New Market Tax

Credits (NMTC) and State Historic Tax Credits,

and external grants allow OPSB and RSD to

complete the SFMP; the stated mission is to

ensure that

all New Orleans public school students

attend a school in a new, renovated, or

refurbished school.

By the start of the 2013-‐14 school year, OPSB

and RSD have completed 16 major capital

projects, with 27 more projects expected to be

under construction and 27 in the design phase.

Approximately 40 percent of the 50,000 seats

the city will need by 2017 are completed or

under construction; 49 percent are in design,

and 11 percent are in the planning stages.

Yet, the SFMP has cost significantly more than

originally estimated. The budgets for projects,

both under construction and completed, have

exceeded their original budgets by 24 percent on

average. Unanticipated cost increases threaten

the completion of the plan. Continuous review of

the costs and revenue projections, the scope and

scale of the projects, and the educational

program needs are essential to ensure efficient

and equitable implementation of the plan.

Two independent volunteer committees are in

place to serve as advisory bodies and support

the implementation of the SFMP. The Master

Plan Oversight Committee (MPOC) is responsible

for providing independent, expert oversight and

must continue to look at the plan broadly,

focusing on efficiencies and maximizing the

impact of available funding. The Blue Ribbon

Capital Investment Commission is charged with

creating a strategy for securing long-‐term capital

investment and a maintenance plan, a critically

important focus for the central authorities. There

is no dedicated funding for such purposes. These

volunteer structures provide the community the

best way to protect the broader public interest in

this complex undertaking.

The Scott S. Cowen Institute for Public Education Initiatives at Tulane University provides an objective voice on what is taking place in public education in New Orleans – particularly in the areas of accountability, finance, facilities, and governance. We speak to education leaders, policymakers, the media, and the public by

disseminating pertinent data and research. This New Orleans Public School Facilities Update provides an account of the progress underway in re-building, renovating, and refurbishing public school facilities in the city, where 80 percent of the city was flooded and most of our school buildings damaged or destroyed in 2005. In this report, we update costs, budgets, and anticipated funding for the remainder of the work in the School Facilities Master Plan (SFMP). The purpose is to give the community a current look at the accomplishments and challenges that New Orleans still faces in this colossal and crucial public works project.

(4)

4

School Facilities Master Plan for

Orleans Parish

Background

Even before the storm, school facilities in New Orleans were in need of rehabilitation. Many school buildings in New Orleans were among the oldest in the nation. Almost half (46 percent) of public school buildings in New Orleans were built before 1945; 44 percent were built between 1945 and 1975, with a median construction date of 1939.i_{Suffering from} decades of deferred maintenance and neglect, many schools were in disrepair or had numerous safety code violations prior to the storm.ii_{Hurricane Katrina} caused considerably more damage to the aging building stock.

On August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast. New Orleans and the schools that served the community’s 65,000 children suffered severe storm damage and massive flooding due to multiple levee failures. Public schools in New Orleans experienced over $800 million in damages due to flood, wind, mold, termites, vandalism, and theft as a result of the disaster.iii

In an effort to rehabilitate public school facilities after the storm, the Orleans Parish School Board (OPSB), the Recovery School District (RSD), and the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) jointly committed to develop and implement a School Facilities Master Plan (SFMP) to guide future school construction and renovation in Orleans Parish. The schools facilities planning process began in August 2007.

The SFMP was released in August 2008. The plan called for rebuilding and renovating 67 elementary schools and 17 high schools and “land-‐banking,” or closing, 52 campuses.iv_{OPSB approved the SFMP on} November 6, 2008; days later, BESE approved the plan.

The 10-‐year plan, which was organized into six phases, proposed to pare down the number of public school buildings to 84 rebuilt or renovated schools based on enrollment projection. The plan was estimated to cost approximately $2 billion. Phase 1 was expected to be fully funded with $750 million

from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program.v_{According to the 2008} Master Plan, “Other funding sources would be

required to finance the additional phases and to adequately maintain buildings in the future.”vi

To remain current, the plan was to be reviewed and adjusted annually based on revenue and cost estimates every two years based on demographic studies and every five years based on education program trends.vii

Prior to the creation of the SFMP, school officials recognized the need to quickly open schools to accommodate students as they returned to the city. The Quick Start Initiative included five RSD schools, one in each of New Orleans’ five city council districts, and a sixth school added by OPSB. Construction crews began demolition in December 2007, marking the first wave of school construction in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina.viii

In August 2010, FEMA awarded OPSB and RSD a final lump sum settlement of $1.8 billion. The settlement resulted in a single, lump sum grant rather than through a complicated building-‐by-‐building

assessment process.ix_{The lump sum allows OPSB and} RSD to combine funds from all losses to build a portfolio of school buildings that meets the needs of the city rather than simply replacing what was there before.

The settlement included almost $700 million that was used to fund the Quick Start Initiative and portions of Phase 1 of the SFMP. Of the $1.8 FEMA settlement, $400 million went to OPSB and $1.4 billion to RSD. This amount did not include the funds

QUICK START INITIATIVE

RSD schools

Andrew Wilson Elementary (renovation) Fannie C. Williams Elementary (renovation) L.B. Landry High School (new construction) Lake Area High School (new construction) Langston Hughes Elementary (new construction)

OPSB schools

(5)

from the content replacement settlement, CDBG, or other insurance proceeds.

SFMP 2011 Revisions

School officials are required to review demographic data that guides the SFMP every two years1_{and to} adjust the plan accordingly. The review process considers projected enrollment, demographic studies from each planning district, and an estimate of the number of public schools or school organizations that will be needed in 2017. To determine need, officials consider land use patterns, updates to major public and private housing developments, and general progress in the city’s recovery. After considering the plan’s scope, revenues and costs projections,

amendments to the original SFMP were proposed in July 2011.

The amended plan received considerable community feedback; OPSB and RSD joined with planning

experts to revise the proposed amendments. Based on this input, re-‐evaluation of the space needs of school programs, and deliberate development of plans to save funds, revisions were made to ensure that all public school students in New Orleans will be educated in an environment that is “safe and dry.” After revisions, all phases of the amended SFMP, at a cost of approximately $1.8 billion, were expected to be fully funded.2

The proposed changes condensed the original six phases of the plan into two phases of new

construction, renovations, and refurbishments. The revised plan increased the number of funded projects in Phase 2 from 23 to 52 facilities.

1_{The review period was set at}_{two rather than five years because}

ongoing changes due to Katrina recovery and Housing Authority of New Orleans (HANO) redevelopment.

2_{Prior to the 2011 amendments, the original 2008 SFMP} included $420 million in unfunded projects.

In addition, the revisions resulted in a projected savings and included additional revenues of

approximately $242 million. Cost-‐savings outlined in the revised plan totaled more than $139.1 million through building redesign, revised labor cost

assumptions, and use of design prototypes. Revenue of more than $102.5 million was added by reallocated Restart funding, applying insurance proceeds to the plan, and with proposals to leverage funding to secure New Market Tax Credits (NMTC) and State Historic Tax Credits.

The goal of the October 2011 revisions was to expand the plan’s impact to benefit every child and every public school in New Orleans. Based on re-‐

assessments, the revised plan would include a total of 82 school buildings to house 88 school organizations. The revised plan provides adequate seats to meet the 2017 enrollment projection, which was estimated at 120 percent of the 2011 public school enrollment, or approximately 47,000 public school students. 3 Projects were prioritized based on the greatest need; in the October 2011 revisions, portable or temporary classrooms were to be replaced with permanent construction as soon as feasible.4_{OPSB and RSD} revised the SFMP such that all facilities would be at least refurbished or repaired to make them

sustainable; occupied facilities would be funded in Phase 2 as refurbishments. Facilities classified as the

3_{In December 2012, enrollment projections were reviewed and} the plan adjusted to accommodate 50,000 public school students in 2017.

4_{The prioritization of projects has been subject to logistical} constraints at times.

October 2011 Revisions to the amended SFMP • Assessment of Capacity Needs

o Projected enrollment of 46,962 students o Neighborhood demographics

o Projected schools or school organizations at 88, including those with unique

programmatic focuses • Assessment of Program Needs

o What types of buildings meet the needs of the various school types

• Assessment of Available Revenues • Assessment of Project Priorities

The October 2011 revisions articulated a shift in the mission of the SFMP:

All New Orleans public school students attend school in

a new, renovated, or refurbished school.

(6)

6 least sustainable were prioritized in rank order for

renovation or new constriction in the revised plan.

Phases of the Revised Master Plan

Phase 1

As of March 2013, Phase 1 of the SFMP is projected to cost a total of $775 million. Phase 1 has a total of 28 projects, including 17 new schools, eight renovations, one refurbishment, and two additions.5_Thirteen projects have been completed, and the schools are occupied.x_{Ten projects are under construction, three} are in procurement, and two are in the design phase. Phase 1 is well under way and the last new

construction project of Phase 1, Booker T. Washington High School, is currently in design.xi

5_{Phase 1 includes a new health clinic at Eleanor McMain High} School funded by a federal Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) grant.

As of March 2013, OPSB has $168 million in open contracts for projects in Phase 1 of the SFMP. The total change orders on Phase 1 projects accounts for 1.7 percent ($2.6 million) of the total open Phase 1 construction contracts.xii

As of March 2013, RSD has $249 million in open contracts for projects in Phase 1. Total change orders on RSD Phase 1 projects accounts for 2.3 percent ($5.1 million) of total open construction contracts.

Phase 2

As of March 2013, Phase 2 of the SFMP as amended is estimated to cost a total of $737 million, based on preliminary cost projections—four projects are in procurement, 26 are in the design phase, and 27 are in the planning stage or have not been submitted for

$5,260,278

$70,757,223

$88,069,956

$40,764,304

Value of Projects: OPSB Phase 1

Design Procurement Construc6on Complete

$55,681,675 $78,680,233

$136,560,689 $303,024,437

Value of Projects: RSD Phase 1

Design Procurement Construc6on Complete Building Definitions

New Construction – to design and build a new building

Renovation – a complete re-construction of the building from the interior, gutting the building to the studs and rebuilding

Refurbishment – to secure the exterior envelope of the building by repairing or replacing the following systems where necessary: windows, doors, roofs, and masonry

Mothballing (Site Preservation) – to protect the building from further deterioration, vandalism, and to comply with the US Department of Interior standards

Bridge Building – to use a building to house students until repair or replacement of a particular building are complete

Source: March 2013 Program Update, OPSB & RSD Phase 1 Projects, Jacobs/CSRS

(7)

design. Phase 2 includes 41 elementary schools and 16 high schools, with new (16), renovated (9) and refurbished schools (32). An outline of the two SFMP phases, including original budgets, projected budgets and project status, can be found in Appendix A. OPSB has $8.7 million in open contracts for the Phase 2 capital program projects; RSD has $25 million in open contracts.

Adjustments to the Master Plan

The initial cost projections for the Master Plan were developed in mid-‐ to late-‐2008. As with any multi-‐ year construction master plan, the budgets for individual projects are only estimates. It is not uncommon for the budgets of construction projects, especially renovations or refurbishments, to increase throughout the life cycle of the project. Because such changes have a major impact on the ability to

complete the plan with currently available funds, the SFMP is to be periodically reassessed and updated.

In assessing the feasibility of completing the Master Plan on time, on budget, and with existing revenues, two things must be considered:

• The actual costs of projects that have been completed or are under way should be compared to estimated costs in the current plan.

• The assumptions that support projected costs of future projects should be re-‐evaluated.

Actual Costs versus Estimated Costs

As of March 2013, the latest budget estimates for Phase 1 projects are significantly higher than the original budgets. However, Phase 2 projections are slightly below original estimates (see Appendix A).

Projected Budgets as Compared to Original Cost Estimates6

Projected budgets for Phase 1

and 2 facilities (2013) $1,511,802,000 Original cost estimates for

these same projects (2010, 2011, 2012)

$1,375,159,000

Difference $136,643,000 According to the project updates,xiii_{the plan,} including schools that are in the planning, design, procurement, construction phases, and those that have been completed, will cost $1.512 billion. The sum of the original cost estimates for these schools as presented in the 2011 revised SFMP and the 2010, 2011 and 2012 quarterly reports is $1.375 billion.

The average project contingency for SFMP projects with estimated budgets over $200,000 is 8.2 percent (see Appendix D). SFMP contingency budgets are set before projects go out to bid. Industry standards range from 10-‐20 percent. Officials contend that it is

6_{These figures include all projects that are listed in the SFMP} Revised Amendments in all stages—complete, in construction, out to bid, or in design—except for the Military Maritime High School. Not included in these figures are minor stabilizations, demolitions, costs associated with temporary swing space, and mothballing projects. See Appendix A for details.

The following 13 new or completely renovated schools are already open:

Recovery School District

§ William J. Guste Elementary School § Langston Hughes Elementary School § Andrew Wilson Elementary School § Lake Area High School

§ L.B. Landry High School

§ Joseph A. Craig Elementary School § Jean Baptiste de Bienville Elementary

School

§ Parkview Elementary School

§ Lawrence D. Crocker Elementary School § Fannie C. Williams Elementary School § Carter G. Woodson Elementary School Orleans Parish School Board

§ Mahalia Jackson Early Childhood Center § Edward Hynes Elementary School

Construction budgets include an allowance for contingencies, the unexpected costs occurring during construction. Amounts are based on prior construction experience and expected difficulties

(8)

8 not uncommon for average project costs to increase

10 percent after a bid has been accepted.xiv

For completed projects or those in construction, the most recent Phase 1 cost projections are 24 percent more than the preliminary cost estimates, even after contingency allotments are exhausted. If all projects under the SFMP follow the 24 percent overage pattern, future budgets may amount to nearly $1.667 billion compared to the currently budgeted $1.52 billion.

Although RSD and OPSB officials have noted that current bids are coming in higher than expected,xv projected budgets of Phase 2 refurbishments are 20.8 percent lower than their original estimated budgets (See Appendix A).

The decreased costs in Phase 2, according to officials, are due in part because the original project scope of many refurbishments included unnecessary

upgrades. For example, windows that were originally planned for replacement are now scheduled to be repaired. However, because few of the Phase 2 refurbishments are in procurement, these projected savings may be premature until bids have been accepted.

SFMP Cost Assumptions

In addition to assessing actual costs, officials considered the assumptions that support projected costs of future projects and revised the plan

accordingly.

Changes in construction costs due to market conditions and inflationary pressures on the cost of materials and labor have the potential to have significant impacts on the project costs in the SFMP

over the long run.

Recent major construction projects in New Orleans may have contributed to increased costs. For example, the 2011 SFMP revisions were based on construction costs of $200 to 210 per square foot; in 2013, these costs increased to $250 per square foot, approximately 20 percent. Because of fluctuations in costs over the span of the ten-‐year Master Plan, annual reviews and adjustments are necessary.

Additional Funding Sources

To fully fund the SFMP, OPSB and RSD are pursuing other sources of revenue. The districts secured funding from Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) and are seeking funding from insurance proceeds, external grants, State Historic Tax Credits, and New Market Tax Credits (NMTC). For example, OPSB and RSD recently worked together to close a NMTC transaction to secure additional funds for the SFMP.

School Facilities Master Plan Costs Update

Total Phase 1 Original Budgets Projected Budgets Percent Change

New Schools $451,899,227 $553,602,246 22.51%

Renovations $176,134,726 $221,504,759 25.76%

Total $628,033,953 $775,107,005 23.42%

Total Phase 2 Original Budgets Projected Budgets Percent Change

New Schools $366,354,988 $385,583,816 5.25%

Full Renovations $236,011,730 $236,465,275 0.19%

Refurbished/Renovations $144,758,476 $114,645,931 -‐20.80%

Total $747,125,194 $736,695,022 -‐1.40%

Source: March 2013 Program Update; SFMP Revised Amendments Oct 2011; and Quarterly Reports from 2010 Q1, 2011 Q3, and 2012 Q4, 2013 Q1

Additional Funding Sources

Community Development Block Grant - federal program providing communities with resources to address a wide range of unique community development needs.

Louisiana Historic Tax Credits – a direct dollar for dollar reduction in tax liability

New Market Tax Credits – a tax credit program initiated in 2000 by the US Department of the Treasury, which equals 39 percent of costs

(9)

In addition, the 2011-‐revised SFMP recommended creating a pool of charter school matching funds to utilize the $2.6 million allotment from Harrah’s Casino proceeds. Through this competitive program, schools could receive matching grants to cover capital improvements.

When the revised SFMP amendments were approved in October 2011, these additional sources of revenue were projected to total $244 million. Based on current projections, however, the estimates have been revised and additional revenues are expected to total only $169 million, according to RSD and OPSB officials.

In addition to the alternative sources of revenue, OPSB raised $79 million in interest-‐free Qualified School Construction Bonds on behalf of OPSB and RSD students. OPSB officials have stated that these funds will be used to fund the SFMP, if needed, or to upgrade some facilities that are currently considered refurbishments.xvi

This additional funding would eliminate the shortfall between projected budgets ($1.511 billion) and total funding ($1.437 billion), however if projects continue to follow the 24 percent cost overrun pattern

experienced by projects that are completed or in construction, the difference could be $210 million. (See appendix B for SFMP funding details.)

Accountability and Support

Master Plan Oversight Committee

OPSB and BESE passed resolutions in December 2008 and January 2009, respectively, to create the Master

Plan Oversight Committee (MPOC) to monitor project budgets and funding, explore project efficiencies, and review demographic changes. The MPOC’s oversight responsibilities include:

• To review the annual capital budget

• To review progress and implementation of the SFMP

• To review changes to Master Plan

• To review building life-‐cycle costs and cost trends • To suggest ways that capital projects may

decrease operating costs

• To review demographic changes and compare them to the projections in the SFMP and recommend adjustments accordingly

Five members of the MPOC are nominated by local associations and institutions and are approved by OPSB and BESE. The nominating organizations were selected to ensure the committee members reflect the needs of the community and have the skills necessary to make recommendations to the master plan. MPOC meetings are subject to the Louisiana open meetings law. See Appendix C for more information.

The MPOC met regularly until 2011; the last meeting of the initial membership was held in September 2011. In October 2012, efforts were made to re-‐ convene the group. New members were nominated and approved. The MPOC met, for the first time in over a year, in May 2013. The committee includes: • Dr. Alexandra Stroud, Tulane University nominee • Dr. Andre Perry, Urban League nominee

• Jim Alack, American Institute of Public Accountants nominee

• Michael Siegel, New Orleans Business Council nominee

• Nolan Marshall Jr., OPSB representative • Kira Orange Jones, BESE representative

A nominee from the local chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors has not been named. In addition to the nominated members, Nolan Marshall, and Kira Orange-‐Jones serve on the committee as representatives of OPSB and BESE respectively.

Firmly committed to the mission to serve all students, OPSB and RSD will conduct continuous

review of costs and revenues.

It is likely that the scope of the School Facilities Master Plan will need to be amended and additional

funds will need to be raised throughout the implementation of the plan.

(10)

10

Blue Ribbon Capital Investment Commission

Public schools in New Orleans and throughout Louisiana struggle to find revenue to pay for facility maintenance.7_{Unlike many other states, Louisiana} has no dedicated funding stream for facility

maintenance and capital investments.

For public schools, the cost of construction and renovation provides a good estimate of the replacement cost of school buildings at plan

completion. As a general guideline, industry experts recommend spending two to four percent of the total replacement cost on maintenance annually to

maintain public buildings.xvii_{Given an estimated total} value of $2.0 billion, public schools in New Orleans would need to budget between $40 million and $80 million per year to adequately maintain the new or newly renovated facilities. Based on the 2017 public school student population of 50,000, the estimated cost of the long-‐term maintenance of school facilities is $786 to $1,572 per pupil. Without a dedicated capital maintenance fund, districts and schools would be required to either use a portion of their Minimum Foundation Program funding or raise funds locally. When the revised amendments to the SFMP were approved in October 2011, the OPSB and RSD agreed to appoint a Blue Ribbon Capital Investment

Commission to make recommendations on a long-‐

7_{Long-‐term facility maintenance does not include custodial and} janitorial services, pest control, or grounds-‐keeping but does include repairing building elements that break, making routine preventative maintenance, and replacing key building systems regularly (roofs, waterproofing, painting, plumbing, HVAC, etc.)

term capital investment and maintenance strategy for school facilities in New Orleans. The commission was also tasked with making recommendations for funding needed to bring the stabilization projects up to the Master Plan standard.

The boards agreed to appoint seven members from New Orleans with expertise in education, finance, infrastructure, law, and public-‐private partnerships to serve on the commission.

In March 2012, OPSB and RSD announced the members of the commission:

§ Maureen Clary, Corporate Realty

§ Paul Flower, Woodward Design Build

§ Charline Gipson, Davillier Law Group § Todd Francis, FFC Capital

§ Elie Khoury, KFK Group

§ Greg Rattler, JP Morgan Chase § Tim Ryan, retired UNO President

In order to protect facilities construction projects from fraud, RSD contracted with the City of New Orleans Office of Inspector General (OIG) to monitor RSD construction projects in June. The $1.2 million three-year contract with OIG was ended in June 2013. The remainder of the funds will be used for oversight performance by the Louisiana Legislative Auditors and the Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness.

*At the time of the release of this report, the nature of the relationship between the OIG and RSD had not been clarified to the public and the OIG had not yet released its audit on the RSD’s construction oversight practices.

Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program

The Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program provides a vehicle for increasing the participation of minority business enterprises in the implementation of the SFMP. OPSB and RSD have established goals for the

participation of DBEs.

The main objectives of the DBE program are to ensure that small DBEs can compete fairly for federally funded

projects. To be certified as a DBE, a firm must be a small business owned by “socially and economically

disadvantaged individuals,” which includes women and minorities.

In addition to removing some of the barriers that may affect participation of DBEs in federally-assisted contracts, the program assists in business development so they can compete successfully outside the DBE program.

Since the implementation of the DBE program, DBE participation rates have improved for RSD projects: 14 percent on new/major construction projects, up from 10 percent, and 40 percent on minor projects, up from 22 percent. DBE participation rates for OPSB projects are between 20 and 25 percent. The RSD goal for DBE participation is 25 percent. The OPSB goal for DBE participation is 35 percent.

(11)

Accomplishments and Challenges

The SFMP establishes a blueprint for renovating and rebuilding crumbling school facilities. The $1.8 billion lump sum settlement awarded by FEMA has provided the means to complete the Master Plan and provide every public school student with a new, renovated, or refurbished school building.

Since the SFMP was first adopted, much has been accomplished.

• The revised SFMP proposes to “serve every child and every school in New Orleans.” Cost savings associated with changes in project scope and scale along with increased revenue from NMTC’s and external grants have made it possible to expand the plan’s impact.

• Approximately 21 percent of the 50,000 seats needed to serve all public schools students in Orleans Parish in 2017 are expected to be completed by August 2013. Approximately 40 percent are expected to be under construction; 33 percent are expected to be in design, and 6 percent are expected to be in the planning stage. By the start of the 2013-‐14 school year, OPSB and RSD will have completed 16 major capital

projects, with 27 more projects expected to be under construction and 27 in the design phase. • OSPB and RSD have collaborated to close the first

NMTC transaction, making future NMTC transactions more likely, which have the potential to amount to $40 million in additional revenue for the SFMP.

• OPSB and RSD have reported improved rates of Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) participation. OPSB and RSD have mede internal commitments to the program.

• The Master Plan Oversight Committee (MPOC) has reconvened after 18 months.

Despite the progress that has been made, OPSB and RSD continue to face challenges as they implement the plan.

• Thus far, the SFMP has cost significantly more than originally estimated. The aggregate budget for all projects in Phases 1 and 2 has exceeded the original budget by $137 million. While such changes are not completely unanticipated, the increases should be accounted for in future estimates to maintain the the city-‐wide impact called for in the 2011 revised SFMP.

• Long-‐term maintenance costs and the lack of sustained facilities funding present hurdles to the sustainability of quality school facilities in New Orleans. Adequate funding for maintenance is New Orleans Public School Building Authority

In 2008, the SFMP called for the creation of “an independent New Orleans School Building

Authority” to develop and manage school facilities. The Authority would be responsible for providing oversight to all building construction, renovation, and refurbishment projects. In addition, the Authority would be responsible for leasing public school facilities to respective school boards and charter organizations, as well as for building maintenance and upkeep.

The SFMP suggested that the new Authority be structured as a new non-profit organization or quasi-governmental body consisting of a private-public partnership. As a bonding authority, the new organization would be responsible for all aspects of managing and maintaining public school buildings in New Orleans. To date, no steps have been taken to create such an independent School Building Authority in New Orleans.

Many states have a State Public School Building Authority (SPSBA) and many local school districts are creating independent building authorities to manage capital projects. For example, the New York City School Construction Authority (SCA) was established in 1988 to build new public schools and manage the design, construction, and renovation of the city’s public school buildings.

(12)

12 essential for preserving the quality of the new

and newly renovated or refurbished buidlings completed under the SFMP. It is important that stakeholders consider possible ways to secure this revenue.

• The Blue Ribbon Capital Investment Commission is charged with creating a strategy to fund long-‐ term capital investments and maintenance. Although the commission has discussed the creation of an independent Public School Building Authority, no implementation has begun.

Recommendations

In order to ensure that every public school student benefits from a new, renovated, or refurbished school building, project costs and anticipated revenues must be closely monitored. In 2008, the SFMP called for the creation of the MPOC to review and support to the implementation of the plan. The 2011 revised SFMP included a recommendation to create a Blue Ribbon Capital Investment Commission. These two independent oversight committees play an important role in plan accountability.

In the eighteenth-‐month period that the MPOC did not meet, cost overages have become more apparent. It is critical that this volunteer body meet regularly to review costs and revenues, project scope and scale, and educational program needs to ensure efficient and equitable implementation of the plan.

Public schools in New Orleans will require future capital investment beyond funding outlined in the SFMP and a strategy for long-‐term maintenance. The Blue Ribbon Capital Investment Commission was

appointed to generate recommendations to secure funding for sustaining the high quality of public school facilities. The findings of this commission have not been released. It is important that the community be informed of the proposed strategies, since long-‐ term solutions will certainly require state, local, and community support.

OPSB and RSD must continue to work together to secure alternative funding required to complete the SFMP. The scope and scale of the ten-‐year plan makes it difficult to manage and implement.

Decentralization provides additional challenges. It is essential that OPSB and RSD continue to work together to execute the plan.

The 2011 adjustments to the plan and mission to serve every public school student and every public school building is commendable. In order to fulfill this mission, maintaining constant attentiveness to cost overages is critical. OPSB and RSD should call on the expertise and support provided by the MPOC and the Blue Ribbon Capital Investment Commission. New Orleans has a historic opportunity to build a system of high quality public school facilities. Thanks to the effort and diligence of OPSB and RSD officials, expert volunteers, and community members, a plan is being implemented that will ensure that all New Orleans public school students attend a school in a new, renovated, or refurbished school. Through hard work and collaboration, it can be done.

Status of the School Facilities Master Plan for Orleans Parish (estimated seats by August 2013) Source: MPOC 05/2013

(13)

Appendix

Appendix A: Overview of Master Plan Projects with Budgets and Status

Source: March 2013 Program Update; SFMP Revised Amendments Oct 2011; and Quarterly Reports from 2010 Q1, 2011 Q3, 2012 Q4, and 2013 Q1

Phase 1 New (17)

Project Description Original Budget Projected Budget Status*

Bienville ES $19,800,000 $21,568,552 Complete

Parkview ES $19,800,000 $23,835,290 Complete

Langston Hughes ES $29,915,546 $30,244,629 Complete Lake Area HS $38,923,536 $39,622,512 Complete Landry HS $56,530,760 $60,403,034 Complete Hynes ES $12,679,224 $25,768,942 Complete Crocker ES $19,487,880 $21,425,716 Complete Carter Woodson ES $19,800,000 $22,235,090 Complete Fannie C. Williams ES $19,800,000 $25,180,884 Complete Mildred Osborne ES $19,800,000 $23,972,720 In Construction Harte ES $23,442,534 $32,210,409 In Construction Little Woods ES $15,567,000 $25,255,308 In Construction North Kenilworth ES $22,695,671 $24,778,743 In Construction Phillis Wheatley ES $19,800,000 $27,809,140 In Construction Carver HS $39,600,000 $54,306,089 Procurement McDonogh 35 HS $50,613,759 $71,341,871 Procurement Edward Livingston HS $23,643,317 $23,643,317 Procurement

*Project Status Definitions: “complete” means the building is ready to be occupied, but may require finishing touches, often referred to as “punch list” items; “in construction” means construction work is underway; “procurement” means the district is in the project bidding process; “design” means the project is currently being planned and designed by an architect; and “planning” means the project has not started, but has been given an internal estimate.

Phase 1 Renovations (9)

Project Description Original Budget

Projected

Budget Status

Guste ES $2,840,872 $12,643,953 Complete

Joseph Craig ES $14,110,548 $15,899,637 Complete Andrew Wilson ES $27,381,787 $29,069,659 Complete Mahalia Jackson ES $14,730,000 $14,995,362 Complete William Frantz ES $20,974,087 $26,000,899 In Construction Charles J. Colton ES $15,567,000 $32,857,138 In Construction Audubon ES $12,409,796 $15,289,815 In Construction McMain HS (Stabilization and Gym) $12,975,643 $19,603,303 In Construction Booker T. Washington HS $55,144,993 $55,144,993 Design

(14)

14

Phase 2 New Schools (15)

Project Description Original Budget Projected Budget Status

Fisk Howard ES with Expansion

$25,836,647 $27,914,597 Procurement Lake Forest ES $22,567,408 $22,567,408 Design Dunbar ES $22,377,778 $22,377,778 Design Karr HS $30,512,616 $29,952,863 Design Lower 9th Ward HS

(Lawless)

$35,582,027 $32,406,567 Design NO East HS $23,453,718 $23,460,682 Design Bradley ES $22,567,408 $24,657,771 Design Morial ES $22,567,408 $25,417,080 Planning Bio District HS $23,453,718 $23,453,718 Planning New Algiers ES $22,567,408 $25,507,738 Planning Alexander ES $22,567,408 $25,507,738 Planning Abrams ES $22,567,408 $25,507,738 Planning Sherwood Forest ES $24,319,279 $25,507,738 Planning Behrman ES $22,567,408 $25,507,738 Planning Habans ES $22,847,349 $25,836,662 Planning

Phase 2: Full Renovations (10)

Project Description Original Budget Projected Budget Status

Drew ES $19,661,993 $19,661,993 Procurement McDonogh 42 ES $18,151,123 $18,151,401 Procurement Wright HS $24,807,734 $24,954,623 Design Douglass HS $36,300,941 $36,566,205 Design John McDonogh HS $34,242,249 $34,242,249 Planning Clark HS $20,228,400 $20,228,401 Planning Franklin ES $14,369,521 $14,369,521 Planning Live Oak ES $23,804,831 $23,825,388 Planning Lafayette ES $22,222,469 $22,243,025 Planning Tubman ES $22,222,469 $22,222,469 Planning

Phase 2: Refurbishments and Renovations (30)

Project Description

Original Budget

Projected

Budget Status

Allen ES $5,061,830 $1,215,007 Design Andrew Jackson ES $4,195,710 $1,336,787 Design Crossman ES $523,320 $486,741 Design Warren Easton HS $2,830,114 $2,830,114 Design

(15)

Eisenhower HS $2,124,353 $1,764,308 Design Fortier (Lusher) HS $18,755,692 $13,726,913 Design Gentilly Terrace ES $2,260,087 $1,554,613 Design Lusher ES $4,751,620 $410,853 Design Martin Luther King Jr. ES $3,319,455 $796,347 Design Reed HS $3,561,447 $1,198,439 Design Green ES $5,017,221 $6,134,747 Design S. Williams ES $2,124,353 $967,147 Design Bauduit ES $3,378,621 $3,589,261 Design Laurel ES $6,852,185 $6,734,069 Design McDonogh 28 ES $3,312,368 $2,482,670 Design Wicker ES $1,064,201 $796,113 Design Marshall ES $5,088,147 $941,051 Design Harney ES $1,806,664 $350,312 Design Fischer ES $23,004,257 $25,927,734 Planning Ben Franklin HS $3,770,528 $3,770,528 Planning Rosenwald ES $847,587 $255,095 Planning O. Perry Walker HS $1,779,350 $2,279,057 Planning Bethune ES Addition $4,094,149 $264,287 Planning Nelson ES $2,773,713 $2,347,379 Planning McDonogh 7 ES $2,588,278 $4,044,403 Planning Schwarz HS $1,778,014 $1,603,186 Planning Village de L’est ES $2,557,501 $632,125 Planning Schaumburg ES $2,531,345 $243,417 Planning McDonogh 32 ES $22,308 $22,308 Planning Gaudet ES $22,984,058 $25,940,920 Planning

Summary Phase 1 Original Budgets Projected Budgets % Change

New Schools $ 451,899,227 $ 553,602,246 22.5% Renovations $ 176,134,726 $ 221,504,759 25.8% Total $ 628,033,953 $ 775,107,005 23.4%

Summary Phase 2 Original Budgets Projected Budgets % Change

New Schools $ 366,354,988 $ 385,583,816 5.2% Full Renovations $ 236,011,730 $ 236,465,275 0.2% Refurbishments/ Renovations $ 144,758,476 $ 114,645,931 -‐20.8% Total $ 747,125,194 $ 736,695,022 -‐1.4%

(16)

16

Budget Total

Original $ 1,375,159,147 Projected $ 1,511,802,027 Budgets following Phase 1 Pattern* $ 1,666,500,718 Total Original Budgets + 20% $ 1,650,190,976

*This figure is the sum of Phase 2 original budgets plus 24.3 percent and Phase 1 projected budgets, except that the projected budgets for phase 2 refurbishments/renovations was used instead of their original budgets.

(17)

Appendix B: Master Plan Funding Analysis

Source: SFMP Revised Amendments Oct 2011, Informal Master Plan Oversight Committee Meeting September 2012

Funding (October

2011) Phase 0 Quick Start Phase 1 Phase 2 Total Phase 1 & 2 Total

FEMA Permanent Construction $83,181,814 $184,273,287 $634,851,030 $633,136,564 $1,267,987,594 $1,535,442,695 Community Block Grant Funding (CDBG) $55,600,000 $56,530,000 $25,200,000 $81,730,000 $137,330,000 Insurance Proceeds (Less FEMA deductions) $60,000,000 $60,000,000 $60,000,000 Restart $18,900,000 $18,900,000 $18,900,000 State Historic Tax Credits $43,566,987 $43,566,987 $43,566,987 New Market Tax Credits $40,000,000 $40,000,000 $40,000,000 External Grants $8,732,000 $8,732,000 $8,732,000 Total $138,781,814 $184,273,287 $700,113,030 $820,803,551 $1,520,916,581 $1,843,971,682 Funding Updated (September 2012) Phase 2 Updated Total Phase 1 and 2 Updated Total Updated FEMA Permanent Construction $633,136,564 $1,267,987,594 $1,535,442,695 Community Block Grand

Funding (CDBG) $25,200,000 _$81,730,000 _$137,330,000 Insurance Proceeds (Less

FEMA deductions) $30,000,000 _$30,000,000 _$30,000,000 Restart $18,900,000 _$18,900,000 _$18,900,000 State Historic Tax Credits $20,000,000 _$20,000,000 _$20,000,000 New Market Tax Credits $10,000,000 _$10,000,000 _$10,000,000 External Grants _$8,732,000 _$8,732,000

Total $737,236,564 _{$1,437,349,594 $1,760,404,695}

(18)

18

Total Budgets from

Appendix A Budgets b/w Funding Difference

Difference b/w Funding

Updated Total Original Budgets $1,375,159,147 $145,757,434 $62,190,447

Total Projected Budgets $1,511,802,027 $9,114,554 -‐$74,452,433

Total Budgets following

Phase 1 Pattern* $1,666,500,718 -‐$145,584,137 -‐$229,151,124

Total Original Budgets +

20% $ 1,650,190,976 -‐$129,274,395 -‐$212,841,382

*This figure is the sum of Phase 2 original budgets plus 24.3 percent and Phase 1 projected budgets, except that the projected budgets for phase 2 refurbishments were used instead of their original budgets.

(19)

Appendix C: Master Plan Oversight Committee Membership & Meeting History

Source: Information here comes from www.OPSB.us, Orleans Parish School Board, and State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education meeting documents.

Members November 2009-‐September 2011:

§ Karl Clifford, appointed by Construction Masters, which is linked to the Associated Builders and Contractors § Karen Dwyer, appointed by the local chapter of the American Institute of Public Accountants

§ Jim Garvey, appointed by the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education

§ Louella Givens Harding, appointed by the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education § Paul Flower, appointed by the Business Council of New Orleans and the River Region § Rick Jones, appointed by the local university presidents (Last meeting January 2011) § Lourdes Moran, appointed by the Orleans Parish School Board

§ Nolan Rollins, appointed by the Urban League of Greater New Orleans (Last meeting January 2011) Meeting Dates: November 3, 2009 February 10, 2010 April 27, 2010 May 24, 2010 August 30, 2010 October 25, 2010 January 24, 2011 March 28, 2011 June 30, 2011 September 26, 2011 Canceled Meetings: June 22, 2010 June 30, 2010 September 28, 2010 November 30, 2010 May 26, 2011 November 28, 2011

Members as of February 2013:

§ James Alack, appointed by the American Institute of Certified Public Accounts

§ Kira Orange-‐Jones, appointed by the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education

§ Nolan Marshall Jr., appointed by the Orleans Parish School Board

§ Dr. Andre Perry, appointed by the Urban League of Greater New Orleans

§ Michael Siegel, appointed by the New Orleans Business Council

§ Dr. Alexandra Stroud, appointed by the local university presidents Meeting Dates: May 9, 2013 Canceled Meetings: N/A

(20)

20

Appendix D: Contingency Budgets for Projects with Budgets Over $200K

Source: 2012 Fourth Quarter Capital Projects Quarterly Report published for the Louisiana Department of Education. Note: included here are some projects that are not funded under the Master Plan.

District Project (over $200k, no demolition, _{no mothballing)}

Estimated Budget

Total Contingency %

RSD BAS Integration $229,369 $0 0.0%

RSD Baudult ES-‐ Refurbishment $3,569,712 $544,648 15.3% RSD Bell JH (Phase 1-‐ Roof) $2,140,855 $0 0.0% RSD Bell JH (Shoring) $1,256,095 $150,000 11.9% RSD Booker T. Washington-‐New Construction $55,144,993 $5,100,511 9.2% RSD Bradley ES -‐ New Construction $24,657,771 $1,395,723 5.7% RSD Carver HS -‐ New Construction $54,303,350 $4,936,668 9.1% RSD Colton -‐ Renovation $32,846,878 $3,061,378 9.3% RSD Crossman ES-‐ Refurbishment $460,742 $69,255 15.0% RSD Douglass HS-‐ Renovation $36,559,207 $4,765,618 13.0% RSD Drew ES-‐ Renovation $19,661,993 $2,235,802 11.4% RSD Dunbar ES-‐ New Construction $22,377,778 $1,361,520 6.1% RSD Eisenhower HS-‐ Refurbishment $1,738,309 $263,971 15.2% RSD Fisk-‐Howard ES-‐ New Construction $25,145,449 $1,808,556 7.2% RSD Frantz Renovation and Addition $24,675,669 $2,256,185 9.1% RSD Gentilly Terrace ES-‐ Refurbishment $1,528,614 $231,919 15.2% RSD Jackson ES-‐ Refurbishment $1,310,788 $198,653 15.2% RSD Jackson K-‐8 Solar Panels $250,000 $12,422 5.0% RSD John McDonogh HS (Bleachers) $323,463 $27,138 8.4% RSD Lawless HS-‐ New Construction $32,406,567 $2,946,052 9.1% RSD Little Woods -‐ New Construction $25,159,683 $1,198,080 4.8% RSD Livingston HS-‐ New Construction $23,643,317 $2,535,736 10.7% RSD Martin Luther King Jr. ES-‐ Refurbishment $766,159 $115,644 15.1% RSD McDonogh 28 ES-‐ Refurbishment $2,442,527 $373,880 15.3% RSD McDonogh 42 ES-‐ Renovation $18,151,123 $2,036,919 11.2% RSD Nelson ES-‐ Refurbishment $2,347,379 $0 0.0% RSD NO East HS at Abramson-‐ New Construction $23,453,718 $1,688,762 7.2% RSD Osborne -‐ New Construction $24,447,403 $1,164,162 4.8% RSD Reed HS-‐ Refurbishment $1,152,650 $174,523 15.1% RSD Sophie B Wright ES-‐ Renovaiton $24,815,434 $2,788,687 11.2% RSD Sylvanie Williams-‐ Refurbishment $936,959 $141,645 15.1% RSD Sylvanie Williams AHU $404,055 $52,703 13.0% RSD Wheatley -‐ New Construction $22,497,999 $5,280,820 23.5%

(21)

RSD Wicker ES-‐ Refurbishment $764,081 $115,328 15.1% OPSB Benjamin Franklin HS-‐ Stabilization $1,202,557 $0 0.0% OPSB Easton HS-‐ Refurbishment $2,830,114 $966,777 34.2% OPSB Easton HS (Window Replacement) $2,380,000 $0 0.0% OPSB Fortier (Lusher) HS-‐ Refurbishment $13,684,472 $0 0.0% OPSB Harte School -‐ New Construction $28,237,778 $2,599,178 9.2% OPSB Karr HS-‐ Gym Repair $282,372 $0 0.0% OPSB

Lake Forest School at Greater St.

Stephens $24,993,905 $930,001 3.7%

OPSB Lusher ES-‐ Refurbishment $282,372 $0 0.0% OPSB Mahalia Jackson-‐ Office Renovation $200,000 $6,842 3.4% OPSB McDonogh 35 (Phillips/Waters) $57,072,600 $5,188,418 9.1% OPSB

McDonogh 35 HS-‐ Stabilization

(Elevator) $2,282,372 $0 0.0%

OPSB McMain School-‐Gymnasium $15,239,662 $3,441,207 22.6% OPSB New Karr HS (JE Smith) $29,952,863 $1,625,855 5.4% OPSB New PK-‐8 at North Kenilworth Park $22,695,671 $0 0.0%

Contingency Budget Summary:

Average Average _RSD Average _OPSB

8.2% 8.7% 6.8%