What is a Master Plan?
Bringing data together from every corner of the district to understand the big picture and what we are hoping to accomplish with this Facilities Master Plan.
Bringing data together from every corner of the district to understand the big picture and what we are hoping to accomplish with this Facilities Master Plan.
Forging communities of compassionate learners, innovators, and leaders for a better future.
Our Community empowers learners through empathetic relationships and relevant experiences for well-rounded readiness in our multicultural world.
Collaboration
Perseverance
Engagement
Empathy
Inclusive Equity
To ensure that the District is addressing the specific needs of its students, the SAUSD has engaged with its communities to develop a Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP). Through this wide engagement of participants, the District has established the following goals:
GOAL #1: STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
The SAUSD will design, develop, and deliver high quality, flexible, Innovative, culturally responsive, standards-based core curriculum and Instruction and tiered supports that empower ALL students to exhibit self-efficacy, and to be active global citizens, effective collaborators and communicators and solve real world problems.
GOAL #2: FAMILY AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
The SAUSD will design, develop, and deliver a multi-tiered system of services and supports that promote family, staff, and community as active partners In preparing ALL students for college and career readiness and future life success.
GOAL #3: SOCIAL EMOTIONAL WELLNESS
The SAUSD community (staff and community partners) will provide students with resources and multi-tiered support to meet their Individual social-emotional, mental health, behavioral and physical well-being.
GOAL #4: ORGANIZATIONAL EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS
The SAUSD will create systems which improve efficiency and implement solutions with a high level of customer service and professionalism in order to support the educational programs of the District.
LCAP ACTION 4.03: Future Ready Learning and Work Environments
FACILITIES: Continually improved and well-maintained future-ready indoor and outdoor spaces and facilities will ensure clean, healthy, safe, and secure facilities and high-quality, cutting edge learning and work environments.
Founded in 1888, the Santa Ana Unified School District is the largest school district in Orange County and the 15th largest school district in California. The district serves approximately 38,000 students with extensive school facilities:
The Santa Ana Unified School District commissioned Davis Demographics & Planning (DDP) to prepare a District-wide forecast of projected enrollment base on student residence. The most recent study covers student enrollment projections over a seven-year period based on fall 2023 student counts. Five unique factors go into the calculation of the projections:
With only a few exceptions, the following projections illustrate a steady historic and projected decline in student enrollments at all grade levels across the district:
Starting in September 2023, the Planning & Design staff used multiple platforms to share the FMP Update Process and identify priorities. Surveys, Thought Exchanges, Student Feedback Sessions, and presentations proceeded for over six months. Each effort strengthened the other actions to promote and gather valuable input needed for the plan development. Decisions were made by observing and analyzing existing school sites with input from extensive community engagement.
Mass e-mail distribution seeking community participation was followed by the sharing of physical posters at the main offices at all school sites. The posters contained information about the survey and thought exchange, including QR codes and direct website addresses. Planning & Design staff contacted all school sites to schedule Presentations during the General Parent Meeting or School Site Council Meeting. Planning & Design staff prepared the presentation, which contained information on FMP Update and other community outreach efforts to promote increased participation.
Multiple meetings were scheduled with the professional consultants to develop a thriving community survey. The FMP Update process supported customized questions for the community's feedback. The team developed a follow-up community survey to reconfirm the information gathered. With multiple consultations, the district's research and evaluation team helped to create a successful thought exchange platform. Careful selection of the right question was the key to allowing the community to provide their input freely.
To effectively complete the Student feedback sessions, the Planning & Design team sought collaboration and assistance from the Extended Learning Opportunity Programs (ELOP) and the Family and Community Engagement (FACE). Planning & Design staff met with ELOP and FACE staff to ensure consistent distribution of information utilizing set protocol gathering students' input. After the facilitated discussion, the staff leading the session invited students to vote using a limited number of stickers per student and share their thoughts. Student feedback sessions also collected numerous pages of written comments from students.
Community Outreach Process included:
THOUGHT EXCHANGE
Participants (660) + Ratings (7,375)
42% (219) Parent/Guardian/Caretaker
13% (67) Certificated Employee
5% (25) Classified Employee
2% (9) Administrator
35% (184) Student
2% (8) Former Student
2% (8) Community Member
0% (2) Other
(138) Not answered
TOP THEMES & KEYWORDS
COMMUNITY SURVEY
Participants - Phase 1 (2,603)
44% (1148) Parent/Guardian
17% (444) Employee
35% (900) Current Student
3% (66) Former Student
1% (20) Community Member
1% (25) Other
Participants - Phase 2 (775)
52.1% (404) Parent/Guardian
45% (349) Staff
2.8% (22) Other
TOP THEMES:
STUDENT FEEDBACK SESSIONS
Participants (Approx. 1,588)
OUTCOME
TOP THEMES (VOTES)
See the results from our in-person sessions with parents, students, and community members. Each person was asked to rate what they viewed as a top priority for their facility.
View insights from our District-wide online community survey. Each person was asked to rank their priorities and the current quality of this priority at their school.
View insights from our District-wide online feedback survey.
The development of the District-Wide Facilities Master Plan reflects the identification of several high-level strategic priorities that influenced the overall planning of each campus:
Tier 1
Student Safety + Security + Academics
Tier 2
Student Support + Outdoor Play
Tier 3
Admin+ Athletics + Parking
Tier 4
Specialty Facilities
The District also outlined the following description of four areas of focus from which to prioritize projects incorporated in the Facilities Master Plan. The following priorities were also considered as criteria from which to evaluate the Facilities Master Plan, sequence major projects, and begin consideration of various financing strategies:
The State Modernization Program provides State funds on a 60/40 State and local share basis for improvements that educationally and functionally improve existing school facilities. Projects eligible under this program include Americans with Disability Act improvements and modifications such as air conditioning, plumbing, lighting, electrical systems, and interior finishes.
Consists of the improvement of schools to support program investments and repurpose underutilized spaces for current needs.
Includes replacing or improving building systems such as HVAC, plumbing, electrical, etc.
Modernize or expand facilities to improve the overall safe, effective, well-maintained, learning environments on par with other peer schools.
The ultimate decision on prioritization of individual projects and campus improvements can be influenced by various circumstances affecting individual campuses as well as district-wide issues and concerns.
The development of a long-range master plan for each of the District’s campuses is a comprehensive effort of assessment, analysis and design that addresses the programmatic, operational and maintenance needs identified for each school. This analysis and resulting documentation illustrates the renovation, modernization, expansion and reconfiguration of each campus as required to address the long-term needs identified.
The critical initial step in the planning process was the identification of District-wide goals for each campus, project facts influencing the practical planning options for each campus and needs associated with educational programs and facilities. To confirm these factors, the design team conducted a collaborative process engaging the District and site staff for each school.
District Participants
Educational Specifications Focus Group Attendees
Jon Baker, FAIA, LEED AP — Principal Architect — DLR Group
Richard Nowicki, AIA — Principal Architect — DLR Group
Brian Leonard, AIA — Principle Architect — DLR Group
Buddy Gessel, AIA, LEED AP — Principle Architect — DLR Group
Scott Moreland. AIA — Sr. Associate Architect — DLR Group
Daniel Moskop, AIA LEED AP — Sr. Associate Architect — DLR Group
Josh Sanabria — Web & Data Analysis — GoArchitect
To accomplish this analysis, current on-going projects within the District must be considered so that the resulting master plan is coordinated with current planning efforts. These include coordination of master planning with current on-going campus modernizations, Portable-to-Permanent (P2P) projects, and school relocations, consolidations, and grade-level reconfigurations.
Additionally, several important District planning documents were reviewed to ensure that the priorities identified in each have been incorporated into the final master plans. These reference documents include:
The master planning process was conducted through a multi-step process intended to address critical aspects of educational planning and its impact on facilities and the efficient and relevant design of the District’s campuses.
Program Confirmation
Review of the recently completed District-wide educational specifications to confirm critical educational priorities and program information. A review and validation of these criteria were addressed with the District leadership and principal of each campus.
This program confirmation meeting with the site principal was valuable in the ultimate planning process to ensure that the facilities on each campus can accommodate the District’s program goals.
Facility Condition Assessment
Review and analysis of as-built plans and the recently completed comprehensive assessment of each campus provided excellent data regarding facility needs. A visual assessment was conducted on each campus to review and validate the data provided.
Additionally, campus condition assessment meetings with the site principal and Facilities Planning staff allowed the design team to confirm needs identified in the prior reports and any additional needs.
Campus Site Planning
All relevant data, programming and facility needs identified were compiled into conceptual planning studies for each campus that were vetted with District leadership and site principals.
From this iterative process of collaborative planning, a final campus master plan was developed for each campus, identifying potential new facilities as well as the need for reconfiguration or modernization of existing facilities as needs suggested.
Conceptual Cost Estimating
The implementation of the Facilities Master Plan requires the development of conceptual estimates of probable construction and development costs for each campus. This information includes target value costs for building and site development based on current market costs and escalated to a probable timeframe for construction.
Soft costs are in addition to construction costs and cover District project management costs such as State agency approval fees (e.g. DSA), engineering, testing, inspection, furniture and equipment, etc. which are outside of the typical construction contract. These costs are included based on the District’s historical project delivery cost data to provide an overall projected Project Cost Budget for each campus.
The scope of work identified for the renovation/expansion of each campus is categorized and budgeted based on the following descriptions:
Minor Modernization
General modernization of existing buildings and spaces is based on the ongoing use of spaces consistent with their current uses and includes the following areas of work:
Major Modernization
More extensive renovation of spaces to include all minor modernization work with additional renovation/reconfiguration or adaptive reuse of spaces to accommodate new/different uses. The additional level of work beyond minor modernization may include the following:
New Construction
Scope addresses all construction that increases the building SF of the campus. These include the following:
Site Improvements
Scope addresses renovation and expansion of playgrounds, fields, parking lots, and site entry enhancements including the following general areas of work:
Non-Construction Soft Costs
These are project development costs that are beyond those associated with direct construction. These include the following:
This facilities master plan is intended to guide the long-term capital improvement projects throughout the District. The concepts developed for each campus are the result of careful analysis of the GOALS, FACTS and NEEDS of each school and attempts to provide a solution that is directly responsive to those factors. Detailed design of each project will occur at a future date upon establishment of project funding sources and will be addressed by the District, site staff and design team selected for each site.
The existing configuration of each site and its proposed transformation concept is illustrated on the following pages.
Santa Ana Unified School District
Facilities Master Plan
