STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
F. PHILIP HANDY,
Chairman
T. WILLARD FAIR,
Vice Chairman
Members
DONNA G. CALLAWAY
JULIA L. JOHNSON
ROBERTO MARTÍNEZ
PHOEBE RAULERSON
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
John L. Winn
Commissioner of Education
LINDA K. TAYLOR
CONTACT PERSON:
NAME: Alex
Carswell
PHONE: (850)
245-9239
SUNCOM: 205-9239
COEFO: 06-02
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE:
August 24, 2005
TO:
District School Superintendents
FROM:
Spessard Boatright
SUBJECT:
Educational Plant Surveys and Exceptions
This memo clarifies the role of the Department of Education (DOE) with regard to the educational plant
survey, the use of student enrollment (COHORT) projections for planning new schools, and exceptions to
the statutory provisions for the educational plant survey processes.
Two long-standing misconceptions exist regarding DOE’s control over a local school district’s
construction plans. First, some districts believe that they cannot build a new school with state or local
millage funds until all schools are filled to capacity. Second, some districts believe that the only planning
they can do for new schools is through use of the Department’s projections for student enrollment. Both
perceptions are wrong.
The following summary of existing statutes identifies the provisions for alternative measures:
•
Per Section 1013.01(8), F.S., “Educational plant survey” means a systematic study ... and the
determination of future needs ... for each student based on projected capital outlay FTEs (COFTE)
approved by the Department of Education.
•
Section 1013.03(10)(a), F.S., requires the Office of Educational Facilities (OEF) to review and
validate surveys ... and recommend to the Commissioner of Education, for approval, surveys that
meet the requirements of the statute.
•
Section 1013.32, F.S., provides for an exception to the recommendations in the educational plant
survey.
•
Section 1013.33(3)(a), F.S., provides for a process by which each local government and the district
school board agree and base their plans on consistent projections of the amount, type, and distribution
of population growth and student enrollment.
SPESSARD BOATRIGHT
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
325 W. Gaines Street • Suite 1054 • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0400 • (850) 245-0494 •
www.fldoe.org
District School Superintendents
August 24, 2005
Page Two
The statutory provisions require DOE/OEF to “review and validate” districts’ surveys. Conducting the
educational plant survey is the responsibility of the school district. The Commissioner approves those
surveys that meet statutory requirements.
The educational plant survey is supposed to be a systematic study, and it should represent an accurate
picture of the district’s needs based on empirical evidence; further, the needs are to be based on
projections of student enrollment that are approved by DOE.
While the Department makes projections for COFTE, these forecasts use common criteria for all districts
and may not reflect all the measures and demographic data that a district may use to determine its future
school needs. For example, a local school board may be aware of certain potential growth patterns, such
as the development of a new industry that could attract a significant population boom within the district
during the next five years, that create a need to plan for more schools than might be recommended based
on DOE student projections. In such cases, an exception to the survey recommendations is warranted.
If a school board determines that it would be advantageous to the educational system, or that it would
result in substantial savings to use an alternate method of determining an issue that impacts the
educational plant survey (e.g., locally developed cohort projections for student enrollment, or excessive
travel time and costs to use available classroom space somewhere in the district) then the board must
present to the Commissioner of Education for approval a full statement detailing all the facts of the
locally-developed cohort to include the local projections by level (i.e., K-3, 4-8, and 9-12).
When extraordinary demographic events are anticipated, based on the best collaborative projections of the
district and local planning agencies, the district has both the right and obligation to plan according to the
locally identified needs. The process for using locally determined student enrollment projections is
established as an exception to the educational plant survey. Whenever substantiated local demographics
indicate a higher volume of student population growth than projections made by DOE, the district may
use its own COFTE projections. However, for official planning purposes of the state, DOE will only use
the official state projections, even though the district may use its own locally developed student
projections. Once a survey is completed and approved, if circumstances change, the survey can and
should be updated to reflect those changes.
If a district chooses to pursue the use of local cohort projections for survey planning, it should work with
the local growth management staff to determine what the potential future cohort projections should be.
Potential impacts and decisions will necessitate coordination between the school board and other local
governmental agencies for, among other things, traffic control, utilities, and infrastructure needs.
School board approval and agreement between the board and local planning agencies will benefit the
district and help solidify acceptance of the need to use alternative cohort projections. The educational
plant survey must be supported with valid reasoning and identifiable future needs. NOTE: an exception to
certain educational plant survey recommendations is not a waiver from compliance with the requirements
of statutory provisions; an exception simply authorizes certain discretions for local planning purposes.
District School Superintendents
August 24, 2005
Page Three
No additional funding is generated by using local planning numbers for student projections. Funding is
based on actual enrollment; therefore, any planning for new construction must take into account the
revenue sources that will become available to the district. While using local projections may result in a
survey recommendation for more schools, it will not result in more state money or increased local millage
to the district for construction.
Attached is a suggested form that your district may wish to use.
SB:ni
cc: Educational Facilities Planners
Attachment