After first aligning on shared Guiding Principles, the Declining Enrollment Advisory Committee (DEAC) is proposing three Criteria to identify elementary and middle schools that are potential candidates for consolidation. These criteria are subject to a series of Equity Guardrails that are designed to protect the best interests of our students and staff; the Criteria must not be applied without also applying the Equity Guardrails – both are essential. The committee believes that the elementary and middle schools identified by applying these Criteria and Equity Guardrails form a starting point for applying a process to foster local-level collaboration and decision-making around whether and how to proceed with consolidation. This review workflow – of applying Criteria and Equity Guardrails and implementing a process for potential candidate schools – should occur every two years at a regular cadence.

We note that the DEAC is not responsible for developing the process in detail; however during discussions, the committee did identify numerous considerations that would inform the development of the consolidation process. These are provided in the Process Considerations section below.

A number of Guiding Principles emerged as the Declining Enrollment Advisory Committee considered how best to approach school consolidation. As a community we should strive to:

• Focus on creating quality schools with robust, quality programming that supports our students, families, staff and the community.
• Equitably apply the criteria outlined in this document across all school governance models.
• Continue to support schools where viable and consider consolidation as the last option.  We do not recommend closure, but rather that schools are always considered to be consolidated.
• Actively encourage families to remain in DPS.
• Ensure that equity for all students is centered by honoring current laws and guidelines for serving multilingual learners, students with exceptionalities, and other unique needs, including the Modified Consent Decree, special education and 504 guidelines, and student support programs.
• Ensure a fair and empowering process for local communities and leaders to plan and implement school consolidations.

We propose three criteria for identifying elementary and middle schools that are potential candidates for consolidation. Criteria 1 and Criteria 2 only apply to district-run schools. Criteria 3 only applies to charter schools because state law does not allow districts to consider enrollment in charter renewals. These criteria are applied independently – any school identified by one or more of these criteria is considered a potential candidate for consolidation.  

Note that this set of potential candidates must then be further refined by applying the Equity Guardrails in the next section. This is an important step as the Equity Guardrails ensure the process for identifying schools aligns with our guiding principles.

What – Criteria 1 identifies district schools with critically low enrollment that are unable to provide quality programming without budget assistance or external sources of funding.

Why – We want to ensure that all district schools are proportionally funded to provide quality services and programming for all our students

How – Any district elementary or middle school with fewer than 215 students (not including ECE students)  is considered a potential candidate for consolidation with neighboring schools. Consolidation decisions should ensure that students have safe walking routes/transportation options to schools.

Commentary – The district provides budget assistance to schools with fewer than 215 students.  This results in an inequitable, disproportionate distribution of funding. Instead, budget assistance should be prioritized for schools (particularly small schools in the 215-350 student range) needing support for centrally/state/federally mandated programs (e.g. Modified Consent Decree programming and Special Education centers).

Although some schools under 215 have been able to operate without budget assistance due to fundraising and non-competitive grant funding, the committee believes that this may unduly privilege schools in higher-socioeconomic areas and therefore the enrollment of 215 is the most equitable measure. 

What – Criteria 2 proactively identifies district schools that are declining in enrollment before they enter a state of critically low enrollment.

Why – We want to preserve existing programming and proactively avoid schools getting to a state of critically low enrollment.

How – Any district elementary or middle school with fewer than 275 students and projecting an approximately 8-10% reduction over the next 2 years is considered a potential candidate for consolidation with neighboring schools. Consolidation decisions should ensure that students have safe walking routes/transportation options to schools.

Commentary – Schools that are approaching critically low enrollment end up having to make difficult decisions about their programming and services. We want to proactively preserve these existing programs by encouraging schools with declining enrollment to consider consolidation before they need to make unsustainable cuts and/or receive disproportionate funding.

What – Criteria 3 identifies charter schools that are failing to remain financially solvent.

Why – We want to ensure financial accountability for all schools, regardless of size, to protect programming and foster equity.

How – Any charter elementary or middle school that is not financially solvent for two or more years, and identified as “high risk”, according to their Financial Performance Framework, is considered a potential candidate for consolidation or closure.

As part of the body of evidence at renewal, the authorizing unit in DPS can consider an elementary or middle-grades charter school potentially eligible for non-renewal (closure) or consolidation if:

• The charter school has been rated as “high risk” overall on its two most recent Financial Performance Frameworks (FPFs); and
• The charter school has been operating under a financial Notice of Concern during its most recent fiscal year; and 
• The charter school has been rated as “high risk” on the enrollment sub-section of its two most recent FPFs.

Commentary

Financial solvency is understood to refer to the school meeting the expectations in its Financial Performance Framework (FPF). A review of the FPF for charter schools should occur at the same cadence as the review of district schools in order to ensure equity. Additional refinement and clarification of this Criteria will be negotiated in collaboration with the Charter Collaborative Council.

The three criteria described above generate an initial list of schools that are potential candidates for consolidation. This set of candidates must be further refined, however, to ensure that consolidation is equitable and in the best interest of our students, staff and communities.

To that end, all of the following Equity Guardrails must be satisfied when making decisions about which schools to include as potential candidates for consolidation. We group these Equity Guardrails thematically:

These programming Equity Guardrails are about ensuring our diverse communities are provided with adequate, quality education programs:

• We must protect our Multilingual/Transitional and Native Language Instruction (TNLI) education services and abide by the Modified Consent Decree; therefore schools that offer these services must continue to offer them once consolidated.

We must protect and provide Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) for all students; therefore schools that offer special education programs, particularly Center programs, must continue to offer them once consolidated.

These geographic Equity Guardrails are about ensuring our diverse communities have safe, local access to schools:

• Students must have safe access to an Early Childhood Education (ECE) program; therefore the district must ensure that ECE students can be served within a reasonable distance from their assigned boundary school.
• Students must have safe walking routes/transportation options to schools; therefore the district must ensure that students in consolidating schools continue to have a safe walking route/transportation option to school.
• Students should have a safe, productive classroom experience; therefore consolidation should not result in inadequate space for providing the educational programs agreed upon by the community.
• Schools should be set up for future success and growth; therefore there should be capacity for schools to grow in enrollment.

These Equity Guardrails are about ensuring schools in different communities and contexts are treated equitably:

• Schools serving communities experiencing poverty must not be penalized; therefore (for district schools) fundraising cannot count towards financial solvency.
• Schools that are gradually opening will need time to grow and stabilize; therefore these schools should not be considered for consolidation so long as they are within approximately 10% of their enrollment goals for each grade.
• There should be no inequities due to different student populations and community needs; therefore school performance should not be a factor under consideration for consolidation.
• We want to minimize disruption to communities already impacted by poverty, transiency, language needs, or special education needs; therefore so long as facilities are similar, the less impacted school should be the one to consolidate.

The Criteria and Equity Guardrails listed in this document help generate and refine a list of elementary and middle schools that are potential candidates for consolidation. We believe this forms an equitable starting point from which to pursue a Process that is centered on the communities that will be impacted by any consolidation decision. While the Declining Enrollment Advisory Committee has not been tasked with defining this Process, it has naturally come up repeatedly as we consider how to apply these Criteria and Equity Guardrails most equitably.

We believe that this follow-on Process should strive to foster a sense of local shared ownership; and that it should seek to leverage the context and wisdom of local leaders and communities.  We believe this can be accomplished by forming a Steering Committee composed of local school leaders and community members from schools that are potential candidates for consolidation and their neighboring schools. This local Steering Committee would then be empowered and enabled by the district to collaborate on a Consolidation Plan.  

This plan would be the product of a process that incorporates community and school input.  There should be support for gathering input from all families enrolled at the schools being consolidated. Moreover the process for selecting the Steering Committee should ensure equal representation from schools; membership that reflects the demographics of the schools being consolidated; and equal representation of the key stakeholders.

We believe that these Steering Committees will have the local context, creativity and incentives necessary to best serve our students. With that said, we want to call out a number of ideas and considerations that have emerged in the Declining Enrollment Advisory Committee as we envision these conversations unfolding:

• Adjusting School Models – Consolidation can include mergers of elementary and middle schools into a K-8; or middle and high schools into a 6-12. Similarly, a K-8 school that is a potential candidate for consolidation could consider joining separate K-5 and 6-8 schools.
• Collective Bargaining – Positions in the new consolidated school should be guaranteed for employees of the identified schools for consolidation. There should be Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) with all bargaining units, Collaborative Council and boards as applicable. There should be staffing processes and MOUs for consolidating district-run and charter schools.
• Consent Decree and MLE Programming – Ensuring the Modified Consent Decree is satisfied must be understood as a key factor in any decision making about school consolidation.
• Consolidation Radius – The Steering Committee should feel empowered to expand the set of schools being considered for consolidation based on their understanding of local context.
• Facilitating the Transition – There should be two years for consolidation with the Principal on Special Assignment and/or Teacher on Special Assignment in order to manage the logistics of the transition separate from leading the school.
• Identifying Facilities – Schools could be consolidated into a building based on facility readiness, and we should strive for consolidated schools to be in the best condition possible once the consolidation occurs. If facilities are similar, we believe that – as a matter of equity – schools that serve the largest FRL student population should house the newly consolidated school. 
• Preserving Programming – Where feasible, schools that are consolidating should plan to provide the different models and special programs that were provided in each of the schools undergoing consolidation. Special programs can include special instructional models such as Montessori, Dual Language, STEM/STEAM focus, etc.; Community/Family Supports such as Food for Thought, Discovery Link, etc.; Supplemental Instructional Supports such as Math Fellows, City Year, etc.; and Institutional Partnerships such as Teacher Preparation Programs, etc.
• Preserving Unique Programming That Depends on Facilities – A school that has unique programming would not have priority to house a consolidating school, however all efforts should be made to ensure the program is maintained. If the facilities are equitable and the school with the unique program has facilities that enable that program, then consolidation into that school should be considered.
• School Choice – When schools are consolidated, students will be opted-in to the newly consolidated schools and will still have the option to choice-out using the standard School Choice process. The district should consider prioritizing the choice preferences of families in consolidating schools.
• School Missions and Visions – Consolidation provides an opportunity for the new consolidated school to craft a mission and vision tailored to its new student body.  Planning and preparation for this should be done through a joint community process.
• Timeline – Steering Committees should be given adequate time to help the community process and plan for any consolidation. A year of preparation followed by a year of implementation could be feasible.