Facility Data & Information

The Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) School Building Authority (SBA) works with local education agencies (LEAs) to improve efficiencies in the design and construction of school facilities and reinvest associated savings directly back into the classroom.

RIDE engaged Jacobs and Cooperative Strategies to conduct a statewide facility condition assessment and master plan. These types of facility assessments are required by statute to be conducted once every five years for PK-12 public schools. The data collected during the facility condition assessment informs the statewide Recommended Action Plan.

The documents and data summarize the results of data collected during 2016 statewide assessment. The information provided is intended to for use in master planning efforts for the State and LEA’s. It is the goal for these reports to be amended as new information is provided to the SBA.

Facilities Map

Facilities Map

The Facilities Map provides information collected as part of the 2016 statewide condition assessment. Information collected and presented in the map include: current deficiencies, five year life cycle forecast, Facility Condition Index, and capacity and enrollment data. The data may be updated periodically as new information is provided to the SBA.

The School Building Authority (SBA) at the Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) has embarked on a statewide action planning process, which includes an educational space program assessment, a capacity analysis, a facility condition assessment, a five-year life cycle forecast, and enrollment projections.

The assessment data and enrollment projections are used to inform the statewide Recommended Action Plan and forecast future funding requirements. Strategically and effectively spending available facility funding provides the opportunity for student learning to occur in healthy, safe environments, while providing the potential for educational spaces to be updated to 21st century learning environments.

The data collected during the facility condition assessment, energy analysis, and demographics study provided the basis for the Rhode Island Recommended Action Plan. State regulation, industry best practices, and the current state of funding for public schools in Rhode Island provided guidance throughout the master planning process. The results of the iterative process resulted in an action plan to target high-value investment and other recommendations for the State to provide long term strategic funding and educational opportunities.

The enrollment projections for the School Building Authority at the Rhode Island Department of Education were developed using the cohort survival methodology and Cooperative Strategies custom enrollment projection software, S.T.E.P. (Student Trends & Enrollment Projections). Developed in collaboration with The Ohio State University, this custom software is based on industry best practices and the Project Team’s national experience with schools, school districts, and state agencies.

Enrollment projections were developed at the statewide level and by Local Education Agency (LEA) using the cohort survival methodology.

Demographics Summary Report

Because research and associated technologies advance at a rapid pace, it is beneficial to frequently fine-tune the learning environment to keep pace with emerging technology and methodology. In addition, studies have shown the condition of school facilities impacts student performance and attendance. Schools in better condition have better student behavior and more effective teaching1. Clean, quiet, safe, comfortable, and healthy learning environments are an important component of successful teaching and learning. To this end, facility condition assessment and master planning efforts help facility managers, districts, and states effectively use their limited resources to provide the best possible student learning outcomes.

The facility condition assessment contains detailed information associated with each building component, including the overall condition of school facilities, as well as life cycle forecasting information that attempts to identify future building and system needs. Other information collected during the educational program space assessment includes an inventory of facility features that support the mission of the schools.

Facilities Map

This School House Energy Report Card will introduce the assessment methodology, approach, findings, acknowledgement of participants/supporting entities and funding sources available to help pay for projects. The desired outcome of this effort is to reduce energy consumption to the point where renewable solar photovoltaic energy can satisfy the Rhode Island Public School’s demand for energy.

Schoolhouse Energy Report Card

Under Construction

Below is a list of terms commonly used terms from when conducting and reporting on the facilities condition assessment and master planning efforts.

  • Capacity: The capacity of a school reflects how many students the school’s physical facility can effectively serve. There are multiple methodologies that exist to calculate capacity. Our study reviewed three:
    • LEA Reported Capacity: LEA reported capacities were compiled from the 2013 Schoolhouse Report or from the LEA if a capacity was not provided in the 2013 Report.
    • Functional Capacity: An approach based on an inventory of all instructional spaces and their current use. This information was collected as part of the educational program space assessment.
    • Aspirational Capacity: Capacity calculated based on building size and designed to conform to the RI School Construction Regulations, which outline the allowed gross square feet per student at each school type.
  • Combined Five-Year Need: Combines the current educational program space deficiencies and condition repair costs with the five-year life cycle renewal forecast to indicate total statewide need. These figures exclude any expansion for classroom additions or new construction for additional enrollment growth.
  • Educational Program Space Assessment: A standards based approach that identifies the degree to which a school facility can adequately support the instructional mission and methods, based on the RI School Construction Regulations.
  • Deficiency Cost: Costs associated with bringing current systems and components back to a functional state as installed, but do not account for additional funds required to adapt facilities to current design standards.
  • Facility Condition Assessment: Evaluates the general health of physical facilities by identifying and prioritizing deficiencies and forecasting future life cycle needs.
  • Facility Condition Index: General indicator of a building’s health derived by dividing the total repair cost for a facility (including site and educational program space needs) by the total replacement cost for the facility. A facility with a higher FCI percentage has more need than one with a lower FCI.
  • Five Year Facility Condition Index: For planning purposes the total current deficiencies and the first five years of projected life cycle needs were combined to provide an understanding of current needs of a facility as well as the projected needs in the near future. Calculated by dividing the combined five-year need by the total replacement cost. Costs associated with new construction are not included in this calculation.
  • Life Cycle: Predicts future facility costs based on the expected remaining life of individual building systems. While a particular building component may not require immediate replacement, it is quite possible for it to reach its end of useful life before or during the commencement of a planned capital construction project. This results in additional costs, which must be accounted for in the planning process.
  • Utilization: Determined by dividing the current enrollment by the calculated capacity of a facility so that governing bodies can identify locations where severe under or over utilization exists.

Deficiencies were ranked according to five priority levels, with Priority 1 items being the most critical to address:

  • Priority 1 - Mission Critical Concerns: Deficiencies or conditions that may directly affect the school's ability to remain open or deliver the educational curriculum. These deficiencies typically relate to building safety, code compliance, severely damaged or failing building components, and other items that require near-term correction. An example of a Priority 1 deficiency is a fire alarm system replacement.
  • Priority 2 - Indirect Impact to Educational Mission: Items that may progress to a Priority 1 item if not addressed in the near term. Examples of Priority 2 deficiencies include inadequate roofing that could cause deterioration of integral building systems, and conditions affecting building envelopes, such as roof and window replacements.
  • Priority 3 - Short-Term Conditions: Deficiencies that are necessary to the school's mission but may not require immediate attention. These items should be considered necessary improvements required to maximize facility efficiency and usefulness. Examples of Priority 3 items include site improvements and plumbing deficiencies.
  • Priority 4 - Long-Term Requirements: Items or systems that may be considered improvements to the instructional environment. The improvements may be aesthetic or provide greater functionality. Examples include cabinets, finishes, paving, removal of abandoned equipment, and educational accommodations associated with special programs.
  • Priority 5 - Enhancements: Deficiencies aesthetic in nature or considered enhancements. Typical deficiencies in this priority include repainting, replacing carpet, improved signage, or other improvements to the facility environment.