Loading...
2/27/2018 - Regular Board Meeting THAMES VALLEY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD REGULAR MEETING 2018 February 27, 7:00 P.M. BOARD ROOM, EDUCATION CENTRE The Board met in regular session on 2018 February 27 in the Board Room at the Education Centre, meeting in public session at 7:00 p.m. The following were in attendance: TRUSTEES ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS J. Bennett R. Campbell C. Goodall G. Hart P. Jaffe S. Kim (-8:25) Regrets M. Reid (Chair) J. Skinner N. Lavdas B. McKinnon A. Morell S. Polhill P. Schuyler R. Tisdale J. Todd R. Tisdale T. Kennedy L. Elliott V. Nielsen J. Pratt C. Beal S. Builder A. Canham R. Culhane M. Deman D. Macpherson S. Mark S. Powell P. Sydor B. Williams C. Glaser R. Hoffman (-8:45) B. Keast D. Kettle J. Marlborough (-7:35) B. Moore L. Munro J. Rake (-7:40) T. Testa 1. CALL TO ORDER Board Vice-Chair A. Morell called the meeting to order at 7:00 and acknowledged the traditional territory on which the Board meeting is held. 2/3. O CANADA The appreciation of the Board was extended to Montcalm S.S. for their performance and to Conductor B. Davidson for leading in the playing of O Canada and two musical selections. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved on motion of Trustee R. Tisdale, seconded by Trustee P. Jaffe. 5. OFFICIAL RECORD B. Williams, Supervisor, Corporate Services, read the following official record into the minutes: “We regret to record the death of Teresa Bartley, a student at H. B. Beal Secondary School on February 8, Avery Kernaghan, a student at Caradoc Public School on February 10 and Brett Verslype, a teacher at Saunders Secondary School on February 13, 2018.” 6. RECOGNITIONS a. United Way J. Marlborough and J. Rake, 2017 Campaign United Way Co-Chairs, recognized the United Way Committee and over 200 site champions across the Thames Valley for leading another successful United Way campaign. Fundraising events were highlighted. A total of $307,258.00 was raised during the United Way Campaign this year. J. Cahill, Director of Development, United Way Elgin Middlesex extended her appreciation to all volunteers that made the campaign a success. 2018 February 27…2 7. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST - None 8. CHAIR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS - None 9. DIRECTOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS Director Elliott announced the retirement of Associate Director V. Nielsen, effective September 1, 2018. Director Elliott highlighted the professional achievements of V. Nielsen. V. Nielsen extended appreciation to TVDSB Trustees and colleagues. Director Elliott announced the appointment of Superintendent R. Culhane to the position of Associate Director of Learning Support Services, effective September 1, 2018. R. Culhane’s professional achievements were noted. 10. PUBLIC INPUT – None 11. MINUTES OF THE 2018 JANUARY 23 REGULAR BOARD MEETING, 2018 JANUARY 30 AND 2018 FEBRUARY 7 SPECIAL BOARD MEETING. a. Confirmation of Minutes The minutes of the Regular Board Meeting of 2018 January 23 were adopted on motion of Trustee R. Tisdale, seconded by Trustee G. Hart and CARRIED. The minutes of the Regular Board Meeting of 2018 January 20 were adopted on motion of Trustee R. Tisdale, seconded by Trustee G. Hart and CARRIED. The minutes of 2018 February 7 were adopted on motion of Trustee C. Goodall, seconded by Trustee R. Tisdale and CARRIED. b. Business Arising from the Minutes In reference to the minutes of 2018 January 30, agenda item #11b. The following recommendation was moved by Trustee R. Tisdale, seconded by Trustee J. Bennett and CARRIED: THAT the Executive Compensation Program for Ontario’s Publically Funded School Boards for the Thames Valley District School Board be approved. 12. STUDENT TRUSTEES’ UPDATE Student Trustees N. Lavdas and S. Kim provided the Student Trustees’ Update highlighting key activities in February and provided a summary of the Student Advisory Council meeting. The next meeting is scheduled for 2018 April 5. S. Kim noted planning for the Student Leadership Conference is underway. 13. REPORTS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION a. Attendance Area Review – French Immersion Elgin County Superintendent D. Macpherson presented for approval the recommendations of the Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review (item #13.a). D. Macpherson provided an update on public delegation received in February. Administration responded to questions of clarification. The following recommendation was moved by Trustee J. Todd, seconded by Trustee S. Polhill and CARRIED: THAT a new single track SK to grade 7 French Immersion Public School open at 45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas, effective 2018 July 1. A poll vote was conducted. POLL VOTE: 2018 February 27…3 YEA: Trustees J. Todd, S. Polhill, J. Bennett, R. Campbell, C. Goodall, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, B. McKinnon, P. Schuyler, R. Tisdale, A. Morell NAY: NIL Absent: Trustees M. Reid, J. Skinner Student Trustee N. Lavdas – YEA Student Trustee S. Kim - YEA The following recommendations were moved by Trustee Jaffe, seconded by Trustee Tisdale and CARRIED: THAT the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Spart a Line, St. Thomas, attendance area for SK to grade 7 French Immersion program be approved, as per Figure 01, with the exclusion of area A, effective 2018 July 1. THAT the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area for SK to grade 7 French Immersion be approved, as per Figure 02, effective 2018 July 1. THAT the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area for grade 8 French Immersion be approved, as per Figure 03, effective for the 2018 - 2019 school year only. THAT the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School Extended French Immersion attendance area be approved as per Figure 04, not including Area A, effective 2018 July 1. THAT Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School and the new Fren ch Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta line, St Thomas, school models be expanded to grade 8, effective 2019 July 01. THAT the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta line, St Thomas, attendance area for SK to grade 8 Fre nch Immersion be expanded to include Area A as shown on Figure 01, upon the opening of the new Belmont Public School. THAT the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area for Extended French Immersion be expanded to include Area A as shown on Figure 04, upon the opening of the new Belmont Public School. THAT the French Immersion attendance area for Princess Anne French Immersion Public School, Princess Elizabeth Public School be adjusted to exclude Area A as shown on Figure 01, upon the opening of the new Belmont Public School. THAT the Extended French Immersion attendance area for Princess Elizabeth Public School and Louise Arbour French Immersion Public School be adjusted to exclude Area A as shown on Figure 04 upon the opening of the new Belmont Public School. THAT a Naming Committee be established to provide input regarding the naming of the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta line, St Thomas. THAT Transition Committees be established for the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta line, St Thomas and Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School based on the proposed attendance areas. 2018 February 27…4 THAT New Sarum Public School, located at 9473 Belmont Road, St. Thomas, be declared surplus and offered up for disposition, upon the opening of the new Southeast St. Thomas and new Belmont Public Schools. A poll vote was conducted. POLL VOTE: YEA: Trustees J. Todd, S. Polhill, R. Campbell, C. Goodall, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, P. Schuyler, R. Tisdale, A. Morell NAY: Trustees J. Bennett, B. McKinnon Absent: Trustees M. Reid, J. Skinner Student Trustee N. Lavdas - YEA Student Trustee S. Kim - YEA The following recommendation as moved by Trustee R. Tisdale, seconded by Trustee S. Polhill and CARRIED: THAT students residing in Area A of Figure 01 be permitted to attend the new French Immersion school for French Immersion programming or Pierre Elliot Trudeau F.I. Public School for Extended French Immersion programming effective 2018 July 01, with the understanding that transportation will not be provided until such time as a new Belmont School is opened. b. 2017-2018 Thames Valley District School Board Enrolment Versus Capacity Summary Superintendent S. Mark presented the 2017-2018 Thames Valley District School Board Enrolment Versus Capacity Summary Report. Information was provided on the accommodation capacity of each school in TVDSB as of October 31, 2017. Similar statistical information was provided for the previous year for comparison purposes. Also provided was the list of elementary and secondary schools with 200 empty pupil places or less than 60% capacity for 2 consecutive years. Administration responded to questions of clarification. c. 2017-2018 Revised Estimates Contingency Fund C. Beal presented for approval the proposed budget allocation for the 2017-2018 Contingency Fund (one-time projects). It was noted items listed with a price of “TBD” will be presented at a later date. Questions of clarification were addressed by Administration. The following recommendation was moved by Trustee R. Tisdale, seconded by Trustee P. Jaffe and CARRIED: THAT the allocation of an additional budget of $1,522,000 in 2017-2018 to the one- time projects as outlined below be approved:  Additional Physical Education Support in the amount of $88,000  Tech Renewal Funds in the amount of $275,000  Windows 10 and MS Office Suite Training in the amount of $100,000  Professional Development - training and speakers for Business Services in the amount of $10,000  Business Services casual salaries and benefits to support current workload pressures in the amount of $125,000.  Consulting fees for implementation of on-going projects in Business Services in the amount of $100,000 2018 February 27…5  Training of additional staff to deliver the new International Baccalaureate program in the amount of $30,000  Replacement of obsolete network switches in schools in the amount of $299,000.  Further advancement of electronic data collection and reporting functionality during the board's budget development process in the amount of $225,000.  Consultation feeds for the review and re-design of space at the Education Centre in the amount of $250,000  Strong Start to Reading in the amount of $20,000. 14. REPORTS FROM BOARD COMMITTEES a. Policy Working Committee Report, 2018 January 23 Trustee Bennett referred to the written report of the Policy Working Committee (Item 14.a) provided to the Trustees in advance of the meeting. The following recommendation was moved by Trustee J. Bennett, seconded by Trustee C. Goodall and CARRIED: THAT the Equity and Inclusive Education Policy be approved. b. Program and School Services Advisory Committee Report, 2018 February 6 Trustee J. Bennett referred to the written report of the Program and School Se rvices Advisory Committee (Item 14.b) provided to the Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations. c. Thames Valley Parent Involvement Committee, 2018 February 8 Trustee R. Tisdale referred to the written report of the Thames Valley Parent Involvement Committee (item #14.c) provided to Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations. d. Audit Committee Report, 2018 February 13 Trustee R. Tisdale referred to the written report of the Audit Committee (Item #14.d) provided to Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations. e. Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee Report, 2018 February 13 Trustee C. Goodall referred to the written report of the Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee (Item 14.e) provided to the Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations. f. Chair’s Committee Report, 2018 February 20 Trustee C. Goodall referred to the written report of the Chair’s Committee (Item 14.f) provided to the Trustees in advance of the meeting. There were no recommendations. g. Policy Working Committee, Interim Report, 2018 February 27 Trustee J. Bennett reported the Policy Working Committee met 2018 February 27. The following policies and procedures were posted for 60 days of public input: Community Use of Buildings, Facilities and Equipment (Rental Permits) and Supporting Students with Prevalent Medical/Health Conditions in Schools. The following recommendation was moved by Trustee J. Bennett, seconded by Trustee P. Jaffe and CARRIED: THAT the Naming of Schools Policy be approved. h. Committee of the Whole, In-Camera Report, 2018 February 27 2018 February 27…6 Trustee A. Morell advised the Committee of the Whole met in-camera from 5:05 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The committee discussed confidential legal, negotiation and personal matters. The following recommendation was moved by Trustee A. Morell, seconded by Trustee J. Bennett and CARRIED: THAT the motions approved at the in-camera session of 2018 February 27 related to negotiations and personal matters be approved. 15. TRUSTEE UPDATES FROM EXTERNAL COMMITTEES a. Ontario Public School Boards’ Association (OPSBA) Update Trustee R. Tisdale reported the next Western Regional meeting is scheduled for 2018 April 7 at Bluewater. The 2017-2018 Keyworks of OBPSA document is now available. b. Thames Valley Education Foundation (TVEF) Trustee R. Tisdale reported the TVEF Annual General Meeting was held at Clarke Road S.S. Highlights of the AGM were noted including the recognition of staff and volunteers that have worked closely with TVEF. 16. COMMUNICATIONS a. ETFO Thames Valley Teacher Local, 2018 January 18 – Provided for information. b. Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation District 11, 2018 January 18 – Provided for information. c. Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, 2018 January 24 – Provided for information. 17. NOTICE OF MOTION – none 18. MOTION – NOTICE OF WHICH HAS BEEN GIVEN The following recommendation was moved by Trustee R. Tisdale, seconded by P. Jaffe and CARRIED: THAT the vote made on 2017 December 19 regarding the proposed increase to the Facility Services department’s permanent staffing complement in the form of a 1.0 FTE Project Coordinator and 2.0 FTE Project Supervisors be RECONSIDERED. The following recommendation was moved by R. Tisdale, seconded by C. Goodall and CARRIED: THAT the Board approves an increase to the Facility Services department’s permanent staffing complement in the form of a 1.0 FTE Project Coordinator and 2.0 FTE Project Supervisors. 19. ADDITIONAL ITEMS – none 20. QUESTIONS/COMMENTS BY MEMBERS Trustee R. Tisdale provided an update on the Toonie Tuesday activities and events held in support of the Thames Valley Education Foundation’s Caring Fund. TVDSB Staff were recognized for their payroll contributions the amount of $31,000. Administration answered questions of clarification regarding the student transition plans at Port Stanley P.S. Associate Director Pratt reported renovations and improvements to Port Stanley P.S. will be funded through Board supported capital and school renewal dollars. A report will come to the 2018 March 27 Board meeting for Trustee approval. 2018 February 27…7 21. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m. on motion of Trustee S. Polhill, seconded by Trustee P. Jaffe and CARRIED. Confirmed: Vice-Chair 2018 February 27…8 SUMMARY OF APPROVED RECOMMENDATIONS OF 2018 February 27 THAT the Executive Compensation Program for Ontario’s Publically Funded School Boards for the Thames Valley District School Board be approved. THAT a new single track SK to grade 7 French Immersion Public School open at 45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas, effective 2018 July 1. THAT the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas, attendance area for SK to grade 7 French Immersion program be approved, as per Figure 01, with the exclusion of a rea A, effective 2018 July 1. THAT the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area for SK to grade 7 French Immersion be approved, as per Figure 02, effective 2018 July 1. THAT the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area for grade 8 French Immersion be approved, as per Figure 03, effective for the 2018 - 2019 school year only. THAT the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School Extended French Immersion attendance area be approved as per Figure 04, not including Area A, effective 2018 July 1. THAT Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School and the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta line, St Thomas, school models be expanded to grade 8, effective 2019 July 01. THAT the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta line, St Thomas, attendance area for SK to grade 8 French Immersion be expanded to include Area A as shown on Figure 01, upon the opening of the new Belmont Public School. THAT the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area for Extended French Immersion be expanded to include Area A as shown on Figure 04, upon the opening of the new Belmont Public School. THAT the French Immersion attendance area for Princess Anne French Immersion Public School, Princess Elizabeth Public School be adjusted to exclude Area A as shown on Figure 01, upon the opening of the new Belmont Public School. THAT the Extended French Immersion attendance area for Princess Elizabeth Public School and Louise Arbour French Immersion Public School be adjusted to exclude Area A as shown on Figure 04 upon the opening of the new Belmont Public School. THAT a Naming Committee be established to provide input regarding the naming of the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta line, St Thomas. THAT Transition Committees be established for the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta line, St Thomas and Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School based on the proposed attendance areas. 2018 February 27…9 THAT New Sarum Public School, located at 9473 Belmont Road, St. Thomas, be declared surplus and offered up for disposition, upon the opening of the new Southeast St. Thomas and new Belmont Public Schools. THAT students residing in Area A of figure 01 be permitted to attend the new French Immersion school for French Immersion programming or Pierre Elliot Trudeau F.I. Public School for Extended French Immersion programming effective 2018 July 01, with the understanding that transportation will not be provided until such time as a new Belmont School is opened. THAT the allocation of an additional budget of $1,522,000 in 2017 -2018 to the one- time projects as outlined below be approved be approved:  Additional Physical Education Support in the amount of $88,000  Technology Renewal Funds in the amount of $275,000  Windows 10 and MS Office Suite Training in the amount of $100,000  Professional Development - training and speakers for Business Services in the amount of $10,000  Business Services casual salaries and benefits to support current workload pressures in the amount of $125,000.  Consulting fees in the amount of $100,000  Training of additional staff to deliver the new International Baccalaureate program in the amount of $30,000  Replacement of obsolete network switches in schools in the amount of $299,000.  Further advancement of electronic data collection and reporting functionality during the board's budget development process in the amount of $225,000.  Review and re-design of space at the Education Centre in the amount of $250,000  Strong Start to Reading in the amount of $20,000 . THAT the Naming of Schools Policy be approved. THAT the motions approved at the in-camera session of 2018 February 27 related to negotiations and personal matters be approved. We build each student’s tomorrow, every day  Date of Meeting, 2018 February 27 2018 January 23 Item #: REPORT TO: ☒ PUBLIC ☐ IN-CAMERA ☐ Administrative Council ☐ Program and School Services Advisory Committee ☐ Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee ☒ Board ☐ Policy Working Committee TITLE OF REPORT: Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review (2017) Senior Administration Final Report. PRESENTED BY: Don Macpherson, Superintendent of Student Achievement Susan Mark, Superintendent of Facility Services and Capital Planning Jim McKenzie, Superintendent of Facility Services and Capital Planning – Acting Brooke Moore, Planning Coordinator PRESENTED FOR: ☒ Approval ☐ Information ☐ Advice Recommendation(s): 1. That a new single track SK to grade 7 French Immersion Public School open at 45885 Sparta Line,  St. Thomas, effective 2018 July 01.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   2. That the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas,  attendance area for SK to grade 7 French Immersion program be approved, as per Figure 01,  effective 2018 July 01.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   3. That the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area for SK to grade 7  French Immersion be approved, as per Figure 02, effective 2018 July 01.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   4. That the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area for grade 8 French  Immersion be approved, as per Figure 03, effective for the 2018‐2019 school year only.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   5. That the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School Extended French Immersion  attendance area be approved as per Figure 04, not including Area A, effective 2018 July 01.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   6. That Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School and the new French Immersion Public  School, located at 45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas, school models be expanded to grade 8, effective  2019 July 01.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   7. That the new French Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas,  attendance area for SK to grade 8 French Immersion be expanded to include Area A of as shown  on Figure 01, upon the opening of the new Belmont Public School.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27         8. That the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area for Extended  French Immersion be expanded to include Area A as shown on Figure 04, upon the opening of the  new Belmont Public School.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   9. That the French Immersion attendance areas for Princess Anne French Immersion Public School ,  Princess Elizabeth Public School be adjusted to exclude Area A as shown on Figure 01, upon the  opening of the new Belmont Public School.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   10. That the Extended French Immersion attendance areas for Princess Elizabeth Public School and  Louise Arbour French Immersion Public School be adjusted to exclude Area A as shown on Figure  04, upon the opening of the new Belmont Public School.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   11. That a Naming Committee be established to provide input regarding the naming of the new French  Immersion Public School, located at 45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   12. That Transition Committees be established for the new French Immersion Public School, located at  45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas and Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School based on  the proposed attendance areas.   DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   13. That New Sarum Public School, located at 9473 Belmont Road, St. Thomas, be declared surplus  and offered up for disposition, upon the opening of new Southeast St. Thomas and new Belmont  Public Schools.  DEFERRED TO 2018 FEBRUARY 27   14. That the decisions for the preceding recommendations be deferred to 2018 February 27, in order  to allow the Board to receive Public Delegation on 2018 February 7.  APPROVED 2018 JANUARY 23   15. That the school‐level committees of Port Stanley Public School French Immersion and Pierre Elliott  Trudeau French Immersion Public School be disbanded.  APPROVED 2018 JANUARY 23     Purpose: To provide results of, and recommendations from,the public consultation component of the 2017 Elgin  County French Immersion Attendance Area Review (AAR).    Content: On 2017 September 26, Senior Administration presented to the Board,the Initial Elgin County French  Immersion Attendance Area Review Report.  The Board approved Senior Administration to conduct an  Attendance Area Review for the Elementary French Immersion Program serving Elgin County. This approval  followed the 2017 May 23 Board motion:    That an Attendance Area Review be conducted during the 2017‐18 school year, for the creation of  a French Immersion Public School located at Sparta Public School effective 2018 July, 01.    Senior Administration did undertake the review as approved; following the process established within the  Attendance Area Review Procedure 4015c.              We build each student’s tomorrow, every day    Background   Currently the Elgin County French Immersion program serves the community through a SK ‐ grade 6  program provided at Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School, and a grade 7‐8 and Extended‐ French program at Port Stanley Public School. The grade 7 and 8 French Immersion and Extended French  Immersion programs were moved to Port Stanley Public School in 2016 as an interim measure in response  to capacity issues at Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School. The Board committed to  establishing a second French Immersion public school within Elgin County as soon as a second facility could  be secured through the Pupil Accommodation Review process. That process concluded in the spring of 2017  following the Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review ‐01 (or EPAR‐01) which resulted in the closure of   Sparta Public School as an English track elementary school and the viability of use as an elementary French  Immersion school as early as 2018 July 01.      Attendance Area Review   Consistent with the AAR procedure, school level committees were struck and were provided with three  options to consider including the senior administrations preferred option.  The community was encouraged  to explore and bring forward any additional options that they deemed as viable. Four analysis parameters  were used to determine the viability of options under consideration, these included:  a.  sustainability with respect to enrolment projections and school utilization  b.      equity of access to programming for all TVDSB students   c.      opportunity to improve student learning   d.     maximize the effectiveness of the student transportation system.    These parameters are described in detail on page 4 of the attached Initial Attendance Area Review Report  (Appendix A).    For each of the options provided, existing and Board approved English track school attendance areas were  utilized.   Option 1 (Senior Administration Preferred Option).   In option 1 all of the French Immersion students within the City of St. Thomas English track schools with the  exception of Locke's Public School and the proposed new SE St. Thomas Public School would attend Pierre  Elliott Trudeau FI Public School for French Immersion programs. In addition, French Immersion students  from Aldborough, Dunwich‐Dutton and Southwold Public Schools would attend Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS.  Students from the remaining schools, including Locke's Public School and the proposed new SE St. Thomas  Public School would attend the new French Immersion School for French Immersion programs.    Option 2  In option 2, all of the French Immersion students within St. Thomas with the exception of those attending  the proposed new SE St. Thomas Public School would attend Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI Public School for  French Immersion programs. Students attending schools located outside of St. Thomas and the proposed  new SE St. Thomas Public School would attend the new French Immersion School for French Immersion  programs.    Option 3  In option 3, students attending St. Thomas schools with the exception of those attending the proposed new  SE St. Thomas Public School and Mitchell Hepburn Public School would attend Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI  Public School for French Immersion programs. In addition students attending Aldborough, Dunwich‐Dutton  and Southwold Public Schools would attend Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI Public School for French Immersion  programs. All other students including those attending the proposed new SE St. Thomas Public School and  Mitchell Hepburn Public School would attend Sparta Public School the new French Immersion School for  French Immersion programs.    Each of these options is detailed on pages 9 – 14, including maps and enrolment projections, within the  attached Initial Attendance Area Review Report (Appendix A).      School Communities Input – Attendance Areas  As outlined in the reports from the school level committees, both Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI Public School and  Port Stanley Public School groups considered these options and other options, some of which aligned with  the English track school boundaries and others that did not. The committees held public input meetings at  their schools and gathered data from the community through surveys. The full reports have been attached  as Appendix C ‐ Port Stanley Public School Attendance Area Review Committee Final Report and Appendix D  ‐ Pierre Elliott Trudeau Attendance Area Review Final Report.  Each report summarizes their committee’s  data and puts forth recommendations and a preferred solution.    The Port Stanley PS Committee report indicated preferences for options 1 or 3. Those who attended the  information meeting preferred option 3 while of those surveyed  17 of 29 respondents, preferred option 1,  7 of 29 respondents preferred option 3.  This community placed a high priority on keeping the current  grade 7 group together at Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI Public School for their grade 8 year.     Following the school level information meeting the Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS committee also surveyed  their community on the three options provided and five additional options. While there is not consensus,  there is a strong preference for option 1 and this school community also desired to keep the grade 7 cohort  together at Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI Public School for their grade 8 year.       School Communities Input ‐ Preferred Location Of The New FI Public School  As part of the Attendance Area Review public consultation process, school communities were also asked for  their thoughts about the New Sarum PS site as an alternative location for the new FI school should it  become available.     Of those Port Stanley parents surveyed 13 responded to this question 11 of which preferred to keep the  Sparta Public School site as the permanent solution. The Port Stanley committee report is attached as  Appendix C for further details.      The Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI Public School community preferred the Sparta Public School site based on the  uncertainties of securing the New Sarum PS site, an additional move for the students and concern about  Sparta PS not having improvements if it is still seen viewed as a temporary solution. The Pierre Elliott  Trudeau FI PS school level committee report is attached as Appendix D for further details.    Senior Administration would like to support both school communities input by utilizing the Sparta Public  School site as the new French Immersion Public School location.  As well, recommend that New Sarum  Public School be declared surplus, pending Ministry of Education approval and upon the opening of the new  St. Thomas Public School and the new Belmont Public School.      Senior Administration Recommendations  Senior Administration’s preferred proposed attendance areas remains Option 1 with two modifications:   delaying the adjustment of the “Area A”, until the opening of the new Belmont Public School  (proposed 2020‐2021)    grade 8 cohort to remain together for graduation.      The first modification involves delaying the adjustment of the area identified as “Area A” until the opening  of the new Belmont Public School (proposed 2020‐2021) which is dependent upon Ministry of Education  approval and funding.  This postponement would align with the re‐designation of the English track schools  (River Heights, Northdale Central and Westminster Central) in Area A to new Belmont Public School  following the Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review ‐01 and as approved by the Board 2017 May 23.  This area is currently designated to Princess Elizabeth PS French Immersion and Extended French, Princess  Anne FI PS, and Louise Arbour FI PS for Extended French.     The second modification supports the community feedback of allowing the 2018‐19 grade 8 cohort to  remain together for graduation.      New Frenc The new F the 2018‐2 would ope additional       Pierre Ellio Pierre Ellio 2019 whic School wo and also b Pierre Ellio 93% for th       The follow         0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Sp 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 We buil ch Immersion P French Immers 2019 school ye en with a utiliz  enrolment.   ott Trudeau Fre ott Trudeau Fre ch would then  ould accommod become the loc ott Trudeau FI  he first year an wing Figures 01 Propo in Spa parta Capacity H Capaci ld each stud Public School  sion School wo ear and then ex ation of 72% fo ench Immersio ench Immersio be expanded t date all of the  cation for the E Public School w d thereafter h 1‐06 illustrate S sed Enrolmen arta ‐SK‐7 FI  Historical Communit Propo Pierre Elliott ity Historical C dent’s tomor uld be located xpand to includ or the first yea on Public Schoo on Public Schoo to include grad grade 8 French Extended Frenc would be able  ave some spac Senior Adminis 72% nt and Capacit for 2018‐19 a ty French Immer 93% osed Enrolme t Trudeau FI P Community Fre rrow, every  d at the Sparta  de grade 8 as o ar and increase ol   ol would have  de 8 as of 2019 h Immersion st ch Immersion  to accommod ce available for strations propo 80% ty for the New and SK‐8 FI for rsion Extended  93% ent and Capac PS ‐SK‐8 FI and ench Immersion day  Public School  of 2019‐2020.  e thereafter wi a new SK – 7 a 9‐2020. Pierre E tudents for the program for El date these prog r additional en osed recomme 76% w French Imm r 2019‐20 and French Immersion 85% city for  d Extended FI Extended French site and open   The new FI Pu th space availa attendance are Elliott Trudeau e 2018‐2019 sc lgin County.  In grams with a u nrolment.   endations.  mersion PS  d beyond  English Track En I  h Immersion as a SK – 7 for  ublic School  able for    ea for 2018‐ u FI Public  chool year  n 2018‐19,  tilization of    75% rolment 85%     Figure 01 – Thomas          – Proposed atttendance area    for the new FFrench Immerssion Public Schhool, located at 45885 Spartaa Line, St.    Figure 02 –       – Proposed Fre We buil ench Immersio   ld each stud on attendance  dent’s tomor area for Pierr rrow, every  e Elliott Trude day  eau French Immmersion Publicc School         Figure 03 ‐ School for  ‐ Proposed gra the 2018‐2019 ade 8 French Im 9 school year o   mmersion atte only  endance area ffor Pierre Elliottt Trudeau Freench Immersioon Public      Figure 04 – School          – Proposed Ext We buil tended French   ld each stud h Immersion at dent’s tomor ttendance area rrow, every  a for Pierre Ell day  liott Trudeau FFrench Immerssion Public        Figure 05 – adjustmen – Upon the op nts to Princess  ening of new B Anne French I   Belmont Publi Immersion Pub c School, the p blic School and proposed Area d Princess Eliza a A French Imm abeth Public S mersion attend School  dance area    Figure 06 – attendanc – Upon the op e area adjustm We buil ening of new B ments to Louis ld each stud Belmont Publi e Arbour Fren dent’s tomor c School, the p ch Immersion  rrow, every  proposed Area Public School  day  a A Extended F and Princess E French Immers Elizabeth Publ sion  ic School  Public Input  The public has been invited to provide feedback on this report and the proposed changes to the Board of  Trustees through the public delegation process, on 2018 February 07.  Further information and submission  can be found on the Board website under Seeking Public Input or at https://www.tvdsb.ca/en/our‐ board/public‐input.aspx      Proposed Implementation Schedule  Year Date Action 2018 February 07 Public Delegation to the Board  February 27 Debate and decision of the Board   March  System Consolidation Committee –FI coordination begins   March Transition Committees are formed and begin meeting   March/April Naming Committee is formed for the new FI school and begins meeting   July 01 Attendance area changes in effect –new/alterations  Extended FI program relocated to P.E. Trudeau FI PS   September 01 P.E. Trudeau FI PS:   ‐ school model change to SK – grade 7 (2018‐2019 only)    ‐ Extended FI program    ‐ All grade 8 FI students accommodated at  P.E. Trudeau FI PS    (2018‐19 only) New FI PS in Sparta:     ‐ opens as SK – grade 7 (2018‐2019 only)  2019 July 01 P.E. Trudeau and New FI schools become SK – grade 8  2020 July 01 Upon the opening of the new Belmont PS, Area A attendance area  adjustments, in effect – the New FI PS, P.E. Trudeau FI PS, Princess Anne  FI PS, Princess Elizabeth PS and Louise Arbour FI PS    System Consolidation Committee  A System Consolidation Committee will monitor the implementation of the approved recommendations.   This on‐going System Committee convenes monthly for the coordination of services associated with  modifications to pupil accommodation which may include new schools, additions, renovations, closures  and other facility enhancement initiatives of the Board.  The TVDSB System Consolidation Committee is  comprised of representative from Senior Administration, Director’s Services, Learning Support Services,  Facility Services, Human Resource Services, Financial Services and Southwestern Ontario Student  Transportation Services (STS).    Transition Committee  A Transition Committee will be formed for each school involved to establish activities to ensure a smooth  transition for students and to provide input to Senior Administration regarding memorabilia and resources  provided by parent groups contained within the current schools.  Membership of the Transition  Committee includes the current school administrators and parent representation from each school.     Students will be engaged as active participants in school‐based transition activities to support them in  feeling comfortable transitioning to a new school environment.      Naming Committee  A Naming Committee will be established in order to give consideration to naming a new school or re‐ naming an existing school, as per the Naming of Schools Policy and Procedure (No. 2016) of the Board.   Community input will be received and considered by the Naming Committee.  The Naming Committee  shall recommend their choice of school name to the Board for consideration.      Senior administration would like to extend their appreciation and thanks to the school level committees  for their work and their leadership in the attendance area review process.  More broadly, thanks are also  extended to the entire Elgin County French Immersion community for their participation in the process.      We build each student’s tomorrow, every day  Cost/Savings: N/A  Timeline: As noted in the report.  Communications: A letter will be sent home to the parents and guardians of French Immersion students regarding the Board  decision and will indicate next steps in the process.    The attendance areas will be updated, as per the Board decisions, on the Board’s website in Find a School,  for the 2018‐19 school year.    Appendices: A.  Initial Attendance Area Review Report (2017 September 26‐Revised 2017 October 20) B.  TVDSB Attendance Area Review Procedure (4015c)  C.  Port Stanley Public School Attendance Area Review Committee Final Report  D.  Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI Public School Attendance Area Review Committee Final report   Form Revised: January 2016  Relation to Commitments:  ☒ Putting students first. ☒ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities.  ☒ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms. ☒ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable.  ☐ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments. ☐ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation.  ☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care.    * Revised: 2017 September 27 We build each student’s tomorrow, every day Date of Meeting: 2017 September 26 Item #: 14a. REPORT TO: ☐ Administrative Council ☐ Program and School Services Advisory Committee ☐ Policy Working Committee ☐ Planning and Priorities Advisory Council ☒ Board ☒ PUBLIC ☐ IN-CAMERA TITLE OF REPORT: ELGIN COUNTY FRENCH IMMERSION ATTENDANCE AREA REVIEW (2017) PRESENTED BY: Jim McKenzie, Superintendent, Facility Services & Capital Planning Don Macpherson, Superintendent of Student Achievement PRESENTED FOR: ☒ Approval ☐ Information ☐ Advice Recommendation(s): That the Board authorize Senior Administration to conduct an Attendance Area Review for the Elementary French Immersion Program serving the County of Elgin. Purpose: On 2017 May 23, through the Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review - 01, the Board approved: That an Attendance Area Review be conducted during the 2017-18 school year, for the creation of a French Immersion Public School located at Sparta Public School, effective 2018 July 01. In accordance with the TVDSB Attendance Area Review Procedure (4015c), this report includes timelines for the proposed Attendance Area Review, an appended planning report which contains several attendance area options including Senior Administration’s preferred option, and timelines for implementation. Content: BACKGROUND INFORMATION The popularity of the elementary French Immersion (FI) program in Elgin County has increased steadily since Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS opened as a single-track FI school in 2009. In 2014-15, the school had an enrolment of 778, an OTG capacity of 530, and a utilization of 147%. There were 7 portables and a 6-unit portapak located on site. As status quo was not an option, and there were no closed schools to convert to FI use, an interim accommodation solution was required. This pressure eventually necessitated the Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review (2015) to create an interim accommodation plan for French Immersion. The FI Attendance Area Review (AAR) consisted of School Committee representatives from Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS and Port Stanley PS. Six different accommodation options were presented to, and reviewed by, the School AAR Committees and shared with each School community. The School AAR Committees submitted reports, by 2015 November 12, providing input on their preferred option. The Senior Administrative Recommendation for the Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review report was presented to the Board on 2015 November 24. The School AAR Committees and the public had the opportunity to give input to the Board regarding Senior Administration’s report on 2015 December 15. After careful consideration of all information presented by Senior Administration, feedback from the School AAR Committees and school communities involved in the * Revised: 2017 September 27 We build each student’s tomorrow, every day Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review, and public input, the Board approved the following motions (2016 January 12): That the grade structure at Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School become senior kindergarten to grade 6 French Immersion, effective 2016 July 01. That the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area be approved, as per Figure 01, effective 2016 July 01. That Port Stanley Public School become an interim dual track school offering both junior kindergarten to grade 8 in English and grades 7 to 8 in French Immersion and Extended French Immersion, effective 2016 July 01. That the Port Stanley Public School French Immersion and Extended French Immersion attendance area be approved, as per Figure 02, effective 2016 July 01. During the 2016-17 school year, the TVDSB conducted the Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review - 01 (EPAR-01) involving 10 Elgin County schools. Following the EPAR process, the Board approved the closure of South Dorchester, Springfield, and Westminster Central Public Schools, and declared them surplus to Board use. In addition to directing Administration to conduct an Attendance Area Review, the Board approved the closure of New Sarum and Sparta Public Schools as English track schools, but did not declare them surplus to Board use. Relevant to this French Immersion Attendance Area Review, the Board also approved: That the grade 7 and 8 French Immersion and Extended French Immersion program be relocated from Port Stanley Public School, to either Sparta Public School or Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School, effective 2018 July 01, as per the decision of the Board following a French Immersion Attendance Area Review. This Attendance Area Review will focus on options for new SK-8 attendance areas for both Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS and a new FI elementary school for the French Immersion program and the location of the Extended French Immersion program at one of these schools. Feedback from the FI school communities will also be gathered regarding their preferred location for the new FI elementary school. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT In connection with the most recently organized Annual Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Meeting held, pursuant to TVDSB’s Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Opportunities Procedure (4015b), TVDSB has not received any communication regarding the proposed FI Attendance Area Review from listed Community Organizations. The Annual Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Meeting for the County of Elgin was held on 2017 June 15, at 9:30am-11:30am, in the Board Room at the TVDSB Education Centre located at 1250 Dundas St., in London. The presenter’s package from the 2017 Community Planning and Facility Collaboration meeting, which includes the meeting agenda, PowerPoint presentation and meeting minutes, can be found on the TVDSB Planning Services website. * Revised: 2017 September 27 We build each student’s tomorrow, every day PROPOSED AAR TIMELINE In accordance with the Attendance Area Review Procedure (4015c), the chart below outlines the key dates for important events related to the proposed Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review, such as Report presentations and Meeting dates. DATE ITEM 2017 SEP 26 Initial Attendance Area Review Report presented to the Board 2017 SEP 27 Meeting with Principals of respective AAR Schools 2017 OCT 06 Attendance Area Review Committee (AARC) is formed 2017 OCT 24 AARC Meeting 2017 NOV 06 School-Level Meeting 2017 DEC 19 2018 JAN 23 Final Attendance Area Review Report presented to the Board 2018 JAN 08 2018 FEB 07 Public Delegation Meeting 2018 JAN 23 2018 FEB 27 Decision of Board on Final Attendance Area Review Report PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE YEAR TIMING ACTION 2018 JUL 01 New attendance area in effect for the new French Immersion school to be located at the Sparta PS facility 2018 SEP 01 New French Immersion school opens 2020 SEP 01 Possible relocation of the new French Immersion school en masse to the New Sarum PS facility (Depends on feedback received from the FI School Community identifying their preferred location for the new FI school and the final decision of the Board) Cost/Savings: N/A Timeline: As indicated above. Communications: The School AAR Committees’ final report(s), containing School Community input, will be submitted to the Planning Department via email by 2017 December 11. The public will be invited to provide feedback on this report and the proposed changes to the Board of Trustees, through the public delegation process on 2018 February 07. A letter will be sent home to French Immersion parents and students and posted on the Board’s website following the Board decision. Appendices: Appendix A: Planning Report – Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review (2017) Form Revised 2017 August 23 * Revised: 2017 September 27 We build each student’s tomorrow, every day Relation to Commitments: ☒ Putting students first. ☐ Actively engaging our students, staff, families and communities ☐ Recognizing and encouraging leadership in all its forms ☒ Being inclusive, fair, and equitable ☐ Ensuring safe, positive learning and working environments ☒ Inspiring new ideas and promoting innovation. ☒ Taking responsibility for the students and resources entrusted to our care   T 2       Thames Val 2017 SEPTEM ley District  MBER   School Board  * Revised: 2017 October 20 Page 1 of 18 *Revised: 2017 October 20 ELGIN COUNTY FRENCH IMMERSION ATTENDANCE AREA REVIEW (2017)  INTRODUCTION   In the Thames Valley District School Board (TVDSB), schools with low enrolment and French Immersion (FI)  accommodation in Elgin County have been identified as priorities of the Board.  On May 23, 2017, following an  Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review (EPAR‐01), the Board approved the closure of five elementary schools,  ensured Port Stanley PS will be sustainable through an English track attendance area adjustment and redirected  the FI programs to the closed Sparta PS site effective September 2018.  Senior Administration now believes the  Board has the opportunity to resolve the second priority in Elgin County, the FI accommodation issue by utilizing  one of these closed schools.    In the Ministry of Education’s Memo 2015: B12 – Request for 2015 Capital Priorities Business Cases, the Ministry  states that “programs related to only addressing an accommodation pressure of a specialized or alternative  program such as French Immersion” are not eligible for capital priorities funding.  This means the Ministry  expects school boards to find other ways to address FI accommodation challenges.  At the time this memo was  released, the TVDSB had no closed schools eligible to relieve the FI accommodation pressure in Elgin County.      As of 2015‐16, utilization at the 21 elementary schools located within Elgin County ranged from 29% at Port  Stanley PS to 141% at Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS.  Enrolment at Port Stanley PS was 94 and 751 at Pierre Elliott  Trudeau FI PS.  At schools with less than 100% capacity, there were 1,597 empty pupil spaces.      An immediate interim solution was required for both Port Stanley PS and Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS.  Following  an Attendance Area Review in 2015, the Board approved the relocation of the intermediate FI and extended FI  programs to Port Stanley PS beginning in 2016‐17 as an interim solution to the FI accommodation pressure.  As  of 2016‐17, utilization at Port Stanley PS (now dual‐track) increased to 80% with addition of the intermediate FI  programs and decreased at Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS (now SK‐6 FI) to 109%.    The following chart outlines the 2016‐17 enrolment, capacity and the projected enrolment of the schools  involved in the proposed attendance area review.    Attendance Area  2016 ‐ 2017  Projected  Enrolment1,2,3  OTG Enrolment Percent  Capacity Spaces  (+/‐)  Portables/  Portapak  2017‐ 2018  2021‐ 2022  2025‐ 2026  Schools within Study Area                  Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS 530 578 109% ‐48 6 562 518 525  Port Stanley PS 317 254 80%  63 0 317 525 514  Notes:  1 Enrolment projections include development  2 Enrolment includes Board decision for the Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review – 01  3 Enrolment includes Status Quo for French Immersion Programming    Three options have been examined in this report as possible solutions to the ongoing French Immersion  accommodation challenges in Elgin County.  The enrolment analysis was conducted using the Canadian Census  data, Live birth data, Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) data, Active Municipal Development  plans, School Planning Software (SPS Plus) and the use of historical enrolment and student yields resulting in the  update of TVDSB’s enrolment projections.  Page 2 of 18 *Revised: 2017 October 20 As per the Board Attendance Area Review Procedure (4015c), Senior Administration has recommended an  option for the School Community and the Board to consider.  The recommended option would ensure that the  TVDSB meets the needs of the students today and into the future by providing appropriate program space for  the projected number of students.    French Immersion Program in Elgin County ‐ Background  The French Immersion student population has grown significantly in the Board and specifically in Elgin County  since the opening of Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS in 2009.    In 2012‐13, the TVDSB began its Board‐wide French Immersion (FI) program accommodation study that  examined all schools, both Elementary and Secondary, offering the French Immersion or Extended French  Immersion programs.  On December 17, 2013, the Board approved over 30 recommendations to resolve FI  program inequity, address accommodation pressure and realign attendance areas.    Because of the FI Accommodation Plan, the Board was able to create Louise Arbour FI PS (SK‐8) through the  conversion of Sir George Ross SS, which replaced Huron Heights FI PS and addressed FI accommodation pressure  and lack of capacity in North London.  West Oaks FI PS (formerly Westfield PS (JK‐6) English track school) became  SK‐8 and received an addition and renovations.  Extended FI attendance areas were created for Louise Arbour  and in preparation of the program opening at JS Buchannan and Roch Carrier FI schools.  Attendance areas were  reconfigured utilizing English track attendance areas in order to deal with accommodation pressure and to  harmonize enrolment with capacity.    Originally, the plan to alleviate some of the accommodation pressure at Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS was to adjust  the attendance area and add a small addition for accommodation.  Based on feedback received from the Elgin  County French Immersion community on Senior Administration’s recommendation to designate western Elgin  (Aldborough and Dunwich Dutton) schools to J.S. Buchanan FI PS in Strathroy, the Board did not approve the  recommendation.    The continued enrolment pressure at Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS created a need for an Attendance Area Review  (AAR) for the French Immersion program.  On May 12, 2015, Senior Administration requested permission to  conduct the Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review.  The report outlined options for the  accommodation of French Immersion students in Elgin County.  The options presented were for a temporary  solution, as the need in the County of Elgin would require a second French Immersion public school to  accommodate the growth of the French Immersion program.  As an interim solution, and after public  consultation, the Board approved the following recommendations on 2016 January 12:     That the grade structure at Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School become senior  kindergarten to grade 6 French Immersion, effective 2016 July 07 01  That the Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion Public School attendance area be approved, as per  Figure 01, effective 2016 July 01  That Port Stanley Public School become an interim dual track school offering both junior kindergarten to  grade 8 in English and grades 7 to 8 in French Immersion and Extended French Immersion, effective 2016  July 01  That the Port Stanley Public School French Immersion and Extended French Immersion attendance area  be approved, as per Figure 02, effective 2016 July 01  Page 3 of 18 *Revised: 2017 October 20 A map of Current Elementary English Track and French Immersion/Extended French attendance areas has been  attached as Appendix A.    Since that time, the TVDSB has conducted an Elementary Pupil Accommodation Review (EPAR‐01) for many  English track schools in Elgin County.  EPAR‐01 was conducted during the 2016‐17 school year to address  declining enrolment in rural communities and extensive growth in Southeast St. Thomas.      On May 23, 2017, the Board made final decisions regarding EPAR‐01 recommendations.  A map of the Current  and EPAR‐01 Board Approved Attendance Areas has been attached as Appendix B.  The Board approved that  Sparta PS close and that the students from Sparta PS be permanently designated to Port Stanley PS.  With the  implementation of Sparta PS students relocating to Port Stanley PS, the Port Stanley PS facility will no longer  have the capacity to accommodate the French Immersion program.  Senior Administration was also directed to  conduct an Attendance Area Review for a FI school at the Sparta Public School site in the 2017‐18 school year.   The Board approved the following recommendations:   That Sparta Public School, located at 45885 Sparta Line, St. Thomas, close effective 2018 June 30  That the Port Stanley Public School new attendance area be approved as per Figure 03, effective 2018  July 01  That an Attendance Area Review be conducted during the 2017‐18 school year, for the creation of a  French Immersion Public School located at Sparta Public School, effective 2018 July 01  That the grade 7 and 8 French Immersion and Extended French Immersion program be relocated from  Port Stanley Public School, to either Sparta Public School or Pierre Elliott Trudeau French Immersion  Public School, effective 2018 July 01, as per the decision of the Board following a French Immersion  Attendance Area Review    Preferred Location for the New FI School Facility  Senior Administration is pleased to be able to create a second French Immersion school in Elgin County.  There  are two schools that Senior Administration could support as the location for the new elementary French  Immersion school in Elgin County:  Sparta PS (available 2018‐19) and New Sarum PS (available 2020‐21).  As part  of the AAR process, Senior Administration is requesting feedback from the FI School Community for their  preference of the most suitable location for this new FI school.    The availability of these schools for conversion to French Immersion is a result of the Board decisions for EPAR‐ 01 to close the English track program and permanently accommodate the students from these schools in other  English track facilities.  Neither New Sarum PS, nor Sparta PS have been declared surplus by the Board.  A  summary of facility data for each of the schools is detailed below:    School Name Site Construction  Build Years  OTG Building 5‐Yr Renewal  Costs (2015)  Replacement  Value (2015)  FCI  (2015) (acres) (ft²) (m²)  New Sarum PS 12.35 1966 257 32,595   3,028    $    3,464,094    $   6,049,829  75%  Sparta PS 4.94 1967, 1974 305 26,974   2,506    $    2,785,120    $   7,027,386  65%    The EPAR‐01 School Information Profiles (2015‐16 data) are attached to this report for further information on  each facility, as Appendix C ‐ New Sarum PS and Appendix D ‐ Sparta PS.    Page 4 of 18 *Revised: 2017 October 20 If New Sarum PS was chosen as the preferred school, Sparta PS would be utilized effective 2018‐19, until New  Sarum PS became available in 2020‐21.  The availability of New Sarum PS is contingent upon the Board receiving  Ministry of Education Capital funding for the New Belmont PS and Southeast St. Thomas PS.      Based on feedback gathered from the public consultation process of the AAR, Senior Administration will make a  recommendation to the Board.  Ultimately, the decision on the preferred location for the new elementary FI  school will be made by the Board.      DEVELOPMENT OF NEW FI ATTENDANCE AREAS   ANALYSIS PARAMETERS   Senior Administration has identified the following parameters to be used in the development and the analysis of  possible options for the elementary French Immersion attendance areas:     A. Sustainability with respect to enrolment projections and school utilization  School enrolment must be balanced between the two schools ‐ enrolment cannot be low at one school and  high at the other school.  The projected enrolment must support a sustained optimal utilization of the  proposed school’s existing permanent capacity.  A healthy utilization for any elementary school would range  from 80‐90%.  A better distribution of students and the higher utilization of schools would be the goal of any  attendance area review.    From a program perspective, small grade cohorts can create challenges for organizing classes that meet  Ministry class‐size caps or targets and averages, and can result in multi‐grade classes.  This can also result in  other operational challenges such as teachers having fewer opportunities for team teaching and  collaboration, fewer teachers being available for supervision and reduced offerings of extra‐curricular  activities.  As a minimum, one class per grade or an enrolment of approximately 200 students would be  considered viable.  TVDSB considers a healthy school enrolment to be approximately 400 students, or two  classes per grade, to allow for greater program and operational opportunities.    Historical data indicates that certain English track feeder schools have a higher number of students that  choose the FI program than other schools.  Sustainability can be maintained if high enrolment and low  enrolment feeder schools are balanced for both new FI attendance areas.      B. Equity of access to programming for all TVDSB students  Historically, the TVDSB preferred model for elementary French Immersion is SK‐8 single‐track.  The SK‐8  model allows leadership opportunities for older students, minimizes transitions, and also helps to keep  cohorts and siblings together.  Single‐track French Immersion school environments provide a more  immersive experience for students, not only in the classroom, but also during announcements, physical  education, library resources and additional extracurricular opportunities.  As SK‐8 single‐track FI, both  schools would then be able to maximize resources for French programming.  The preferred option would  result in each of the FI school communities having a single‐track SK‐8 FI school.    C. Opportunity to improve student learning  Enrolment from attendance areas must create a healthy enrolment and sustainable number of students at  each school in order to maximize both staff and student resources.  Enrolment that is either too low or too  high can impede this student learning objective.  Resolution of FI accommodation will allow the Board to  provide stability of program and stability for students for the long‐term.    Page 5 of 18 *Revised: 2017 October 20 D. Maximize effectiveness of student transportation system  Under the current scenario, depending on the age of the students, a family could have multiple times for  pick‐up at the same bus stop as their children may be attending two different schools for FI programming.   Moving to a single‐track SK‐8 solution will resolve this problem in that families with students at various  grade levels will all attend the same school and ride the same bus.    The Board understood that the interim solution decision would result in transportation for the FI program  being increased for a short period of time.  One objective of this AAR is to reduce or at least maintain  existing ride times for students.  Another objective would be to improve the cost effectiveness of bus runs  by reducing the overall distance travelled or the number of busses required.    UTILIZATION OF ENGLISH TRACK ATTENDANCE AREAS It has been the past practise of the Board to utilize English track attendance areas when creating or adjusting  French Immersion attendance areas.      The rationale for this practise is as follows:   Allows clarity for the parents, school administration, and the public   Students are able to transition with peers from English track K1 and K2 to the FI school   Allows for increased accuracy with the coordination of software programs and development of  enrolment projections, staffing allocations and transportation runs/routes    In order to minimize the transition for students and to allow for the sustainability of the French Immersion  program, Senior Administration has utilized the Board approved attendance areas resulting from EPAR‐01.    Senior Administration has included the breakdown of the October 31, 2016 French Immersion students by  English track feeder school attendance areas in the following chart.  This will allow for a greater understanding  of the existing breakdown of students and the rationale used in the development of the preferred option, as  well as the other options identified in this report.  A detailed map identifying the English track existing  attendance areas and approved attendance areas has been attached as Appendix E.       Page 6 of 18 *Revised: 2017 October 20   SK‐8 FI Student Count By English Track Feeder School Attendance Areas  English Track   Attendance Areas October 31, 2016 EPAR‐01 Board  Approved  Aldborough PS 17 17  Davenport PS / McGregor PS 19 19  Dunwich‐Dutton PS 12 12  Elgin Court PS 107 107  Forest Park PS 61 61  John Wise PS 98 98  June Rose Callwood PS 38 38  Locke's PS 100 100  Mitchell Hepburn PS 80 67  New Sarum PS 19 N/A  Port Burwell PS <9 <9  Port Stanley PS 16 46  River Heights PS / Northdale Central PS 0 0  SE St. Thomas Holding Zone   (at Port Stanley) <9 N/A  South Dorchester PS 12 N/A  Southwold PS 64 64  Sparta PS 30 N/A  Springfield PS 12 N/A  Straffordville PS <9 <9  Summers' Corners PS 10 12  Westminster Central PS <9 N/A  New Southeast St. Thomas PS N/A 35  New Belmont PS N/A 24  Total FI Students 707 707  Grade 7‐8 Extended FI Student Count By Program Attendance Area  Attendance Area October 31, 2016 EPAR‐01 Board  Approved  Port Stanley Extended FI 24 24  Total Extended FI Students 24 24  Total FI and  Extended FI Students 731 731  *Student counts below 9 (<9) have been supressed to ensure student confidentiality    Note:  EPAR‐01 approved motions designated a small portion of the current River Heights, Northdale Central and  Westminster Central attendance areas to the New Belmont PS therefore those schools have been included in the  student count above.  The FI SK‐8 students in these schools are currently designated to Princess Anne FI PS and  Princess Elizabeth PS in London.  C E   E     CURRENT S Existing Atten Existing Frenc Pier Aldborough  Dunwich‐Du Elgin Court P Forest Park P John Wise PS June Rose Ca Mitchell Hep Southwold P SITUATION ndance Areas ch Immersion re Elliott Tru PS  tton PS  PS  PS  S  allwood PS  pburn PS  PS  N (2016‐17 s  n School desig deau FI PS (S Davenport P Locke’s PS  McGregor P Port Burwel Port Stanley Southwold P Straffordvill Summers’ C   P 7)  gnation (by E K ‐6)  PS  PS  l PS  y PS  PS  e PS  Corners PS  age 7 of 18 English track f P Aldboroug Dunwich‐D Elgin Court Forest Par John Wise  June Rose  Mitchell H Southwold feeder schoo Port Stanley P gh PS  Dutton PS  t PS  rk PS   PS  Callwood PS epburn PS  d PS  *Rev ol)  PS (7‐8 / Ext 7 Davenpor Locke’s PS McGregor Port Burw Port Stanl Southwol Straffordv Summers vised: 2017 O 7‐8)  rt PS  S  r PS  well PS  ley PS  d PS  ville PS  ’ Corners PS October 20 E   E Existing Enrol Existing Param Parameters  A. Sustain projecti B. Equity o   C. Opport learning D. Maximi transpo 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 C E lment and Ca meter Analys ability ‐ enrol ions and scho of access to p unity to impr g  ze effectiven ortation syste Capacity Capacity nglish Track Enr apacity Charts sis  lment  ool utilization programming  ove student  ess of studen m  Pierre E y Po rolment P s  Pierre Trude    Y Y nt  106%  103% lliott Trudea Historical Comm 87%  161%  ort Stanley P Extended F Historical C age 8 of 18 e Elliott  eau FI PS P No  Yes  Yes  No  au FI PS ‐Sta munity PS ‐Status Q rench Immersio Community Port Stanley P No  No  Yes  No  97%  atus Quo French Im 178%  Quo on Frenc *Rev PS  mmersion ch Immersion vised: 2017 O 99%  188%  October 20 O P   O   OPTION 1   Proposed Att Option 1: SK‐8 Pierre Ellio Aldborough  Dunwich‐Du Elgin Court P Forest Park P John Wise PS June Rose Ca Mitchell Hep Southwold P endance Are 8 French Imm tt Trudeau FI PS  tton PS  PS  PS  S  allwood Ps  pburn PS  PS  as  mersion Scho I PS New Daven Locke McGre Port B Port S South Straffo Summ New S New B P ol designatio w French Imm nport PS  ’s PS  egor PS  Burwell PS  Stanley PS  wold PS  ordville PS  mers’ Corners  SE St. Thomas Belmont PS  age 9 of 18 on (by English mersion PS  PS  s PS  h track feeder *Rev r school)  vised: 2017 O October 20 O   O Option 1: Enr Option 1: Par Parameters  A. Sustaina projecti B. Equity o   C. Opportu learning D. Maximi transpo 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 olment and C ameter Analy ability ‐ enrol ions and scho of access to p unity to impr g  ze effectiven ortation syste Capacity Sparta Capacity English Track En Capacity Char ysis  ment  ool utilization  rogramming  ove student  ess of studen m  Pie Historical Comm N nrolment Pa rts  Pierre Trudea Y  Y Y nt Y 93%  erre Elliott T munity Fre 80%/95% New French I Extende Historic age 10 of 18 e Elliott  au FI PS  Yes  Yes  Yes  Yes  Trudeau FI PS ench Immersion   Immersion P ed French Imme al Community New FI PS Yes  Yes  Yes  Yes  85%  S Extended  76%/90%  PS rsion *Rev French Immersi French Immers New Sarum Cap vised: 2017 O 85%  on 75%/89%  ion pacity October 20 O P   O OPTION 2  Proposed Att Option 2: SK‐8 Pierre Ellio Elgin Court P Forest Park P John Wise PS June Rose Ca Locke’s PS  Mitchell Hep endance Are 8 French Imm tt Trudeau FI PS  PS  S  allwood Ps  pburn PS  as  mersion Scho I PS New Aldbo Daven Dunw McGr Port B Port S South Straffo Summ New S New B Pa ol designatio w French Imm orough PS  nport PS  wich‐Dutton P egor PS  Burwell PS  Stanley PS  hwold PS  ordville PS  mers’ Corners  SE St. Thomas Belmont PS  age 11 of 18 on (by English mersion PS  S  PS  s PS  h track feeder *Rev r school)  vised: 2017 O October 20 O   O Option 2: Enr Option 2: Par Parameters  A. Sustain projecti B. Equity o   C. Opport learning D. Maximi transpo 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 S E olment and C ameter Analy ability ‐ enrol ions and scho of access to p unity to impr g  ze effectiven ortation syste Capacity parta Capacity nglish Track Enr Capacity Char ysis  lment  ool utilization programming  ove student  ess of studen m  P Historical Comm N rolment Pa rts  Pierr Trude   Y  Y nt  97%  Pierre Elliott  munity Fre 72%/86% New French I Extended F Historical C age 12 of 18 re Elliott  eau FI PS  Yes  Yes  No  No  Trudeau FI  ench Immersion   Immersion P French Immersio Community New FI PS No  No  No  No  89%  PS Extended  65%/77%  PS on Frenc New  *Rev French Immersi ch Immersion Sarum Capacity vised: 2017 O 90%  on 65%/77%  y October 20 O P   O OPTION 3  Proposed Att Option 3: SK‐8 Pierre Ellio Aldborough  Dunwich‐Du Elgin Court P Forest Park P John Wise PS June Rose Ca Locke’s PS  Southwold P endance Are 8 French Imm tt Trudeau FI PS  tton PS  PS  PS  S  allwood Ps  PS  as  mersion Scho I PS New Daven Locke McGre Mitch Port B Port S South Straffo Summ New S New B Pa ol designatio w French Imm nport PS  ’s PS  egor PS  ell Hepburn P Burwell PS  Stanley PS  wold PS  ordville PS  mers’ Corners  SE St. Thomas Belmont PS  age 13 of 18 on (by English mersion PS  PS  PS  s PS  h track feeder *Rev r school)  vised: 2017 O October 20 O O Option 3: Enr Option 3: Par Parameters  A. Sustain projecti B. Equity o   C. Opport learning D. Maximi transpo 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 S E olment and C ameter Analy ability ‐ enrol ions and scho of access to p unity to impr g  ze effectiven ortation syste Capacity parta Capacity nglish Track Enr Capacity Char ysis  lment  ool utilization programming  ove student  ess of studen m  P Historical Comm N rolment Pa rts  Pierre Trude   Y  Y Y nt Y 100% ierre Elliott  munity Fre 68%/81% ew French I Extended F Historical C age 14 of 18 e Elliott  eau FI PS  Yes  Yes  Yes  Yes  Trudeau FI P ench Immersion   mmersion P French Immersio Community New FI PS No  No  No  Yes  96%  PS Extended  58%/69%  PS on Frenc New  *Rev French Immersi ch Immersion Sarum Capacity vised: 2017 O 97%  on 55%/66%  y October 20 S T a F It   F   A SENIOR ADM Three options accommodati French Immer t is the only o For compariso      Parameters  A. Sustaina and scho B. Equity o    C. Opportu learning D. Maximiz transpo A. Sustainab School en high at th enrolmen A healthy   The follow different f MINISTRATIO s have been e on challenge rsion attenda option that sa on purposes,  ability ‐ enrolm ool utilization of access to pr unity to impro g  ze effectivene rtation system bility with res nrolment mus e other schoo nt to support a utilization fo wing graphs il facility option New  Sarum  33% 257 PET and ON PREFERR examined in t s in Elgin Cou ance areas as  atisfies all the the following ment project n  rogramming  ove student  ess of student m  spect to enro st be balanced ol.  The goal o a sustained o or an element llustrate the p ns.     PET   67% 530  New Sarum Pa RED OPTION his report as unty.  Senior A the most viab e parameters g chart identif E PET FI P ions  No Yes Yes t No lment projec d between th of the three o optimal utiliza tary school w percentage a m age 15 of 18 N – RATIONA possible solu Administratio ble solution f examined.    fies the param xisting  T  PS  PSPS   F o No  s No  s Yes  o No  ctions and sch e two school options prese ation of the p ould range fr nd OTG capac ALE  tions to the o on recommen for resolving t meter inform Option 1  PET  FI PS  New  FI PS Yes Yes  Yes Yes  Yes Yes  Yes Yes  hool utilizatio s ‐ enrolment nted in this r roposed scho rom 80‐90%.  city available Spart 37% 30 PET *Rev ongoing Frenc nds Option 1 f the FI accomm mation for eac Option 2 PET  FI PS  Ne FI  Yes N Yes N No N No N on  t cannot be lo eport was for ool’s existing     for the FI pro PET 63% 5 ta  05 T and Sparta vised: 2017 O ch Immersion for the eleme modation cha h option:    2 Optio ew   PS  PET  FI PS  o Yes  o Yes  o Yes  o Yes  ow at one sch r the projecte permanent c ogram with th T   530 a October 20 n  entary  allenges.   on 3  New  FI PS  No  No  No  Yes  hool and  ed  apacity.   he two    Page 16 of 18 *Revised: 2017 October 20 In order for an option to be viable, it must maximize school utilization.  Enrolment from the proposed  attendance areas must be proportionate to the capacities of the receiving school facilities.  Small grade  cohorts create challenges for organizing classes to meet Ministry class‐size caps and averages, and can result  in multi‐grade classes.  As well, operational challenges such as teachers having fewer opportunities for team  teaching and collaboration, fewer teachers being available for supervision and reduced offerings of extra‐ curricular activities are results of schools with enrolment that has dropped too low.  To be considered viable,  options must provide for a minimum of approximately 200 students, while 400 students is considered  healthy and would allow for greater program and operational opportunities.  Enrolment projections and  utilization breakdown by option can be found in Appendix F.     The attendance areas proposed in Option 1 provides long‐term sustainability for both schools and would  allow for greater program and operational opportunities.  With the combination of using residential areas in  decline with areas of development, enrolment at Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS and the new FI school remain  within a healthy margin of 491 to 450 students at PET, and 244 to 229 students at the new FI school.  The  utilization at PET would range between 84‐93%.  Depending on the location, the utilization for the new FI  school would range between 74‐80% (Sparta PS site) or between 88‐94% (New Sarum PS site).      Both Option 2 and Option 3 proposed attendance areas fail to achieve the objective of balancing students  with the available capacity.  In Option 2, the new FI school enrolment drops to below the 200 threshold of  students and the utilization at PET increases to 89‐97%, which is above the targeted healthy utilization  range.  Both schools would experience challenges operationally and in program delivery.  In Option 3, the  new FI school enrolment drops well below the 200 threshold of students and the utilization at PET exceeds  95%.  As with Option 2, Option 3 would also see both schools experiencing challenges operationally and in  program delivery.    B. Equity of access to programming for all TVDSB students  All options presented within this report meet the TVDSB historically preferred model for elementary French  Immersion of SK‐8 single‐track.  By balancing the attendance areas geographically, opportunity for access to  the FI program for all feeder schools will be maintained.  Balancing enrolment across the two schools and  within their existing capacities will also provide a more wholesome immersive experience at each school.    By the east and west apportioning of the attendance areas in Option 1 and Option 3, access to the FI  program would remain consistent with what is currently offered.  Option 2 creates a city and a county  attendance area thereby impeding the equitable access to programming for county students.    C. Opportunity to improve student learning   Enrolment from attendance areas must create a healthy enrolment and sustainable number of students at  each school in order to maximize both staff and student resources.  Enrolment that is either too low or too  high will impede this student learning objective.    While all three options will create the opportunity to improve student learning by implementing the SK‐8  school model, all options will not do so equally.  The attendance areas proposed in Option 1 and Option 3  are similar and would allow for greater program and operational opportunities to improve student learning  because of long‐term sustainability for both schools.    Option 2 proposed attendance areas would result in both schools experiencing challenges operationally and  in program delivery by failing to achieve the objective of balancing students with the available capacity.   Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI PS enrolment would increase past the healthy margin and would not relieve  D program a pressures operation English tra   D. Maximize One objec objective  or the num   Transport elementa (STS) dete the munic establishe time of im they do n   Exemption STS has a  assessme most curr Eligibility    Maximum The maxim the bus 30     Bus route scenario d to be 10‐2 a student  distance o think abo the bus st efficient a       and operation s.  The enrolm nal challenges ack schools a e effectivenes ctive of this A would be to  mber of buss tation eligibili ry school site ermines dista cipal road and es a transport mplementatio ot qualify for ns to Distance process to de nt is complet rent “on the g Criteria is ava m Length of a  mum length o 0 minutes or  es are planned due to the un 20 minutes lo is attending  over larger at ut how long i tops to pick u as possible to nal challenge ment in Option s similar to wh nd identified  ss of student  AAR is to redu improve the  es required.   ity is based o e qualify for sc nce measure d walkway ne tation bounda on.  Families a r bus service.  e Based Eligib etermine if an ted by STS sta ground” cond ailable online Bus Ride  of a bus ride i less.   d using curren ncertainty of w ong.  County b a specialty pr tendance are t would take  p students.  W  minimize the Pa s the school i n 2 drops belo hat has been  by the Board transportati uce or at least cost effective n distance; st chool bus ser ments using  etwork.  Once ary in its plan are responsib bility Criteria n Exemption t aff approxima ditions are con  at www.myb n TVDSB is 70 nt student da where actual  bus routes are rogram ride t eas.  A good r to travel from When STS do e amount of t age 17 of 18 is currently ex ow the viable experienced  d as priorities  on system   t maintain exi eness of bus r tudents who r rvice. Southw Geographic In e the school b nning softwar le for determ to Distance B ately 4 month nsidered.  Inf bigyellowbus. 0 minutes on ata, so it can b future stude e longer beca imes may be  ule of thumb m School A to es annual rou time students xperiencing w e margin and  at Port Stanl  to correct.     isting ride tim runs by reduc reside greate western Ontar nformation S board approve re and develo mining how a s Based Eligibilit hs before the  formation on  .ca.  e way.  88% o be difficult to nts will live.   ause of the ge longer becau b to estimate  o School B in t ute planning,  s spend in tra *Rev with the exist would create ey and Westm   mes for stude cing the overa er than 1.6 km rio Student Tr oftware (GIS) es the school ops a transpor student will g ty Criteria is w start of the s Exemptions t of students o o predict actu Generally, ur eography, usu use they are t a potential ch the family ca they try to m ansit each day vised: 2017 O ing accommo e program an minster Cent nts.  Another all distance tr ms away from ransportation ) based softw  attendance a rtation solutio get to/from sc warranted.  T chool year so to Distance B n STS service   al times in a p rban bus rout ually 25‐35 m traveling a gre hange in ride  r and then co make routes a y.  October 20 odation  d  ral  r  ravelled  m an  n Services  ware and  area, STS  on at the  chool if  The  o that the  Based   are on  planning  es tend  minutes.  If  eater  time is to  onsider  s  Page 18 of 18 *Revised: 2017 October 20 Notification of Eligibility  STS posts transportation eligibility for the following school year by mid‐April at www.mybigyellowbus.ca.  This provides families time to plan well in advance of the coming school year.  Parents/guardians will be  notified by letter regarding transportation eligibility by mid‐May and received log in information for parent  portals.    The TVDSB will be requesting a high‐level analysis from STS regarding the three options provided.  The  information received from STS will be shared with the School AAR Committees and will be included in the  Final Report to the Board.    SENIOR ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION  Following the analysis of the options presented for the elementary French Immersion attendance areas, Senior  Administration recommends Option 1 as the most viable solution to the FI accommodation challenges.    School boards are primarily funded on a per‐student basis through Ministry of Education grants.  Boards, and  therefore schools, lose funding as their enrolment declines or if Boards continue to retain low enrolment  schools.  As this funding decreases, the costs of maintaining empty pupil places increases.  The TVDSB must  respond to the reality of the current funding model if we are to continue to operate schools in a sustainable  manner.  Small schools are more expensive to operate than larger schools.  However, school size does not affect  the Board’s continuing priority to offer the best educational experiences to all students.  The focus for the  TVDSB must be on what is in the best interests of all students, their learning needs and aspirations, and their  future in a world that is changing.      Senior Administration’s preferred option, as outlined in this report, will ensure that the TVDSB meets the needs  of our students today and into the future by providing a solution that achieves sustained harmonization of FI  student enrolment with the available capacity in our FI schools.    IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE  YEAR TIMING ACTION  2018 JUL 01 New attendance area in effect for the new French Immersion  school to be located at the Sparta PS facility  2018 SEP 01 New French Immersion school opens   2020 SEP 01 Possible relocation of the new French Immersion school on mass en  masse to the New Sarum PS facility (Depends on feedback received  from the FI School Community identifying their preferred location  for the new FI school and the final decision of the Board)    SCHOOL COMMUNITY FEEDBACK  The goal of any Attendance Area Review is public consultation and community input.  Senior Administration will  carefully consider any attendance area options brought forth by the School AAR Committees, provided they  meet the parameters identified in this report.  In this review, Senior Administration is also seeking input from  the elementary FI program community as to their preference for the location of the New FI school, at either  Sparta PS or New Sarum PS.  Based on feedback gathered from the public consultation process of the AAR,  Senior Administration will make final recommendations to the Board.  Ultimately, the decision on the  attendance areas and the preferred location for the new elementary FI school will be made by the Board.  n n nnn n nn n n nn nnnnn n n n nnnnnn n nnn n n n n n n n n nnnnnnn n nnnn n n nn nnn n nn n n n nn n n n n n nn n nn n nnnnn n n n n n n n n n n n n Sparta PS Lambeth PS Locke's PS McGregor PS Westfield PS John Wise PS Southwold PS Davenport PS New Sarum PS Aldborough PS South Ridge PS Springfield PS Port Burwell PS Mosa Central PS Port Stanley PS Ekcoe Central PS Dunwich-Dutton PS Straffordville PS South Dorchester PS Summers' Corners PS Westminster Central PS HWY 401HWY 3LONGWOODS RDTALBOT LINEFINGAL LINEI O N A R D JOHN WISE L I N E PLANK RDHWY402 U N I O N R D RON MCNEI L L I N E C U R R I E R D DUFF LINEAVON DRT H A M E S R D 3RD LINEGLENDON DRCALTON LIN E LYONS LINE F U R N I V A L R D PLANK L INE DEXTER LIN E PUTNAM RDCULLODEN LINEM E L B O U R N E R D IMPERIAL RDCOUNTY RD 55HWY 4QUAKERRDBELMONT RDPROUSE RDELGIN RDFERGUSON L I N E HERIT A G ELINECARRIAGE RDNOVA SCOTI A L I N EHACIENDA RDM I L L R D SPARTA LINE D U N D O N A L D R D RICHMOND RDEDEN LI N E FAIRVIEW RDHA G ERT Y R D TALBOT TR AIL D U A R T R D MUNCEYRDD U N B O R O U G H R DNAUVOO RDCULLODEN RDSUNSETRDHIGHBURY AVE SELM LINEPARKHOUSE DRPRESSEY RD GLENCOLIN L I N E SHACKLETON LINEGLANWORTH DR STALKER LINEWILTON GROVE RD WELLINGTONRDSPIONEER LINEHWY 19L I T T L E W OODDR EXETER RD WELLINGTON RDCALVERT DRDINGMAN DR BROWNSVILLE RD G R A H A M R D LAK E S H O R E R DJOHNSTON LINELAK E S H O R E L I N E SCOTLAND DR RIVE R R D WESTCHESTER BRNESPRINGFIELD RDMAIN STMCDOUGALL LINEWONDERLAND RD SC L A C H A N R D QUEENS LINE MUIRKIRK LINE M O R R I S O N R DCONCESSION DRSIMPSON RD CAESAR RD SOUTHMINSTER BRNE PIGRAM LINEEAST RDAPPIN RDSOUTHDEL ST CARR RDROSS STHWY 401IMPERIAL RDPIONEER LINEHW Y 4 0 2 S U N S E T R D HWY 3 G R A H A M R D Current Elementary English Track & French Immersion/Extended French Attendance Areas ® 0 10 205Kilometers Current as of 2017 SeptemberData Source: © 2016 Queens Printer. City of London, City of St Thomas, Oxford County, Middlesex County, Elgin County, Municipality of Central Elgin, 2016, All rights reserved.© Teranet Enterprises Inc. and it suppliers. All rights reserved. Not a plan of survey.This boundary map has been prepared to provide a general description of the attendance area for the above school(s). Current Princess Anne FI PS/Louise Arbour EXT FIAttendance Area Current Princess Elizabeth PS FI/EXTFI Attendance Area Current Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI K2-6/ Port Stanley 7-8 FI/EXT FIAttendance Area Current French ImmersionAttendance Areas Princess Elizabeth PS(FI/EXT FI) Princess Anne FI PS/LouiseArbour EXT FI Pierre Elliott Trudeau FI K2-6/Port Stanley 7-8 FI/EXT FI Aldborough PS Davenport PS/McGregor PS Dunwich-Dutton PS Elgin Court PS Forest Park PS John Wise PS June Rose Callwood PS Locke's PS Mitchell Hepburn PS New Sarum PS Northdale Central PS/RiverHeights PS Port Burwell PS Port Stanley PS South Dorchester PS Southeast St.ThomasHolding at Port Stanley PS Southwold PS Sparta PS Springfield PS Straffordville PS Summers' Corners PS Westminster Central PS n n n n n n n n ForestPark PS ElginCourt PS Locke's PS J.R.Callwood PS Southwold PS JohnWise PS P.E.TrudeauFI PS MitchellHepburn PS1ST AVETALBOT ST S U NSET D R ELM LINE JOHN WISE LINEWI L SONAVESTG E O RGESTFAIRVIEWAVEELM ST BURWELLRDS EDGEWARE RD FAIRVIEW RDSUNSETRD HWY 3 HIGHBURY AVEEDWARD STWELLINGTONRD FINGAL LINERON MCNEIL LINE DALEWOOD RDCENTENNIAL RD0 2.5 51.25 Kilometers ® Current Attendance Areas APPENDIX A n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n nn n n n n n n n n n n n nnn n n n n n n n n n n n n n n nn n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n nn n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n PortStanley PS Springfield PS NewSarum PS WestminsterCentral PS Summers' Corners PS McGregor PSDavenport PS Sparta PS NorthdaleCentral PS SouthDorchester PS RiverHeights PS MitchellHepburn PSWONDERLAND RD S V E T E R A N S ME MO R I A L P K Y J A LNABLVDHI GHBURYAVENCOMMISSIONERS RD WHYDE PARK RD RIVERSID E D R GLADSTONE DR WILTON GROVE RDREBECCA RD TA L BOT ST RICHMOND S T K IN G S T P O N DMI LLSRDPULLEY RDDONNYBROOK DRSHAW RD COMMISSIONERSRDE OXFORD S T W ALLEN STFRUIT RIDGE LINE RON MCNEIL LINE GLENCOLIN LINE KINGSTWEXETER RD HURON ST WHITTAKER RDADELA IDE ST N K INGSTECENTRE ST FANSHAW E P A R K R D W 1 5TH L INE KESWICK RD GREY ST COLLEGE LINE UNION RD SUNSETDR2 5TH L INE RIVER RD NISSOUR I RD S O U T H D A L E R D W 3RD LINEELM LINE CULLODENLI NEELMSTCA E S A R RDSOVER EIGNRDBRADISHRDWESTDEL BRNE C A T H E R I N E S TWONDERLAND RD N BELL ST CRUML IN S IDERD BELMONTRDWESTERN RD 19TH LINE CLARK RD EW IL L S IE B R N E SUNNINGD A L E R D W ROBERTS LINE SOUTHDALE LINE IN G E R S O L L S T S RD 60WONDERLAND RD BUIS LINE BRADLEY AVE MURRAY RDRICHMOND RDHIGHBURYAVEHWY 3CLARKE RD PACK RD ME L L OR R D DEXTER LINE EDWARD ST LONGWOOD S R D PAGE ST BUSH LINEOXFORD S T E GLANWORTH DR YORKE LINE SPRINGWATERRD7TH AVE CHALET LINE P L E A S A N T VA L L E Y L I N E PIGRAM L INE RD 68 HAMILTON RD PRESSEY LINE OSTRANDER RD FAIRVIEW RDSPRINGER HILL RD4TH LINEWESTCHESTER BRNERD 64 FORD RD KILALLY R D IO N A R D CLINTON LIN E THOMAS RDCOON RD3 7 THL I NELITTLE CHU R C H D R C RE A MERYRDPURPLE H I L L RD HARRIETSVILLE DR SUNNINGD A L E R D E HACIENDA RDFINGAL LINERD 62 WESTMINSTER DR DINGMAN DR HWY 4 MANNING DR SCOTLAND DR SPARTA LINE CURRY RDMAPLETON LINE THOMSON LINE DUNDAS S T BOXALL RDSOUTHMINS T E R B R N E GOUDY RDAIRPORT RD S H A R O N R D ROGERS RDWHARNCLIFFE RD SHWY 402 ON E I D A R D NOVA SCOTIA LINE JOHN WISE LINE MUNROLINEWESTDELST KARN RDTRUMAN LINE MARION S T BEACHVILLE RDROBINSON RD TALBOT LINERIEGERRDC R O S S L E Y H U N T E R L IN E LYONS LINE RD 58 PROUSE RDHERITAGE RD 9 MILE RD BROUWERS LINEHIGHBURY AVE S LITTLEWOO D D R WELLINGTON RDI MPERIALRDRD 66PARSON RD WHITE OAK RDHARRY WHITE DR FORBES RDPEDE RDBRADY RDELGIN RDBOT RDPUTNAM RD EVELYN D R OLDVI CTORI ARDWELLINGTONRDSHWY 401 NEWELL RDDALEWOODRDCALTON LINE DANIEL RD YARMOUTHCENTRERDFANSHAW E P A R K R D E SMITH RDR D 7 4 MORTENSENRDROBINS HILL R D BELLS RD WYTON D R HUNT RD VIENNA LINE 1 7 T HL I NEDALBY RD 2 7 THL I NE2 1ST L INE LEWIS RDDORCHESTER RD 35TH L INE EMPEY RD 3 3RD L INE 3 1S T L INE ORR DR J A M ESTOWN LINE DOAN DR WAL L A C E L I N E MIDDLERIVERRDQUAKER RDLAKE LINE SUNSETRD5 PO INTS RDCENTENNIAL RDMOUNT ELGIN RD SPRINGFIELD RDPRESSEY RD8 MILE RD 2 9TH L INE ANGER RDHOBSON RDCOOK RD HELKAA LINEWOODHULL RD TRAFALG A R S T MOSSLEY DR BREEN RD CRAMPTON DR AVON DR CENTURY LINE WILSON LINE CONSERVATION LINE 1 3TH L INE EDGEWARE LINE BU R W E L L R D MI L L R D LY L E R D EBENEZER RD SAWMILL RDDECKER DR10 MILE RD WALKER RDCOLONELTALBOTRDLONGHURST LINEBLIND LINECAT T L INEBEGG RDMCBETH RDCOBBLE H I L LS RD MEDWAY R D GORE RD FERGUSON LINE SCOTCH LINE SALFORD RD CARTER RDM A R T Y N LINECHERRY H I L L RD HAWKINS RD 2 3 RDL I NEBROWNSVILLE RD THOMPSON DR CROMARTY DR BARNUMS GULLY LINE 0 7.5 153.75 Kilometers Current & EPAR-01 Board Approved Attendance Areas Current as of 2017 SeptemberData Source: © 2016 Queens Printer. City of London, City of St Thomas, Oxford County, Middlesex County, Elgin County, Municipality of Central Elgin, 2016, All rights reserved.© Teranet Enterprises Inc. and it suppliers. All rights reserved. Not a plan of survey.This boundary map has been prepared to provide a general description of the attendance/development area(s) for the above school(s). n n n n ForestPark PS ElginCourt PS MitchellHepburn PS MARY ST EWELLINGTON ST A XFORD PKY CENTENNIAL AVEPARK AVEFAIRVIEWAVELEGER AVE RAVEN AVE ELM ST CHESTNUT ST HIGHVIEW DRAIREY AVE SAUVEAVERICERD1ST AVET A L B O T S T BAILEY AVESTOKESRDCOULTER AVEHWY 3 FOREST AVE HIGHSTLAWTON ST LOCUST ST CENTENNIAL RDSTEELE ST NEAL AVEERIE ST MANORRDELM LINE DAVID DR S IN C L A IR A V E SOUTHDALE LINE St.Thomas 0 1 20.5 Kilometers Approved New SE St.Thomas PS Attendance Area ApprovedMitchell Hepburn PSAttendance Area ApprovedPort Stanley PSAttendance Area ® Approved New Belmont PS Attendance Area Approved Port Stanley PS Attendance Area ApprovedRiver Heights PS/Northdale Central PS Attendance Area Approved New SE St.Thomas PS Attendance Area Approved Summers' Corners PS Attendance Area Board Approved Attendance AreasCurrent Elementary Attendance AreasMcGregor PS/Davenport PSMitchell Hepburn PSNew Sarum PSPort Stanley PSRiver Heights PS/Northdale Central PSSouth Dorchester PSSoutheast St.Thomas Holding at Port Stanley PSSparta PSSpringfield PSSummers' Corners PSWestminster Central PS ® APPENDIX B SCHOOL INFORMATION PROFILE NEW SARUM PUBLIC SCHOOL 2015-16 ADDRESS: 9473 BELMONT ROAD, RR3, ST. THOMAS N5P 3S7 APPENDIX C SECTION A SCHOOL OVERVIEW Current Attendance Area APPENDIX C SECTION A SCHOOL OVERVIEW Criteria New Sarum PS Board Average Size of the school site (acres) 12.35 7.26 Year original school was built 1969 1977 Building area (square feet) 32,595.27 44,701.66 Portable classrooms (2015-16) 2 2.86 Year addition(s) built Not applicable Grade Configuration JK-8 Criteria New Sarum PS Board Average On-The-Ground (OTG) Capacity (2015-16) 257 444 Student Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Enrolment: Official 2015 October 31 250.00 385.00 Utilization factor 97.28% 87.17% Excess or Shortage (-) of Pupil Places 7.00 -58.59 Number of Holding Zone students (if any) 0 Number of out of area students 9 General Profile Distance (km) to 5 closest TVDSB Elementary Schools 7.98 Forest Park 8.13 Davenport 8.72 McGregor 8.93 J.R. Callwood 9.06 P.E. Trudeau FI APPENDIX C 216 3 Number of Students who are Eligible for Transportation Number of Students who are Not Eligible for Transportation Transportation – Length of bus ride New Sarum PS Board Shortest 1.00 min 1.00 min Longest 59.00 min 71.00 min Average 19.00 min 16.00 min Percentage of Students Transported to School 99% Number of Buses Required 6 Distance - Proximity of Students to existing school New Sarum PS Board Shortest 0.02 km 0.01 km Longest 13.39 km 67.08 km Average 5.24 km 2.45 km SECTION A SCHOOL OVERVIEW Transportation Costs Regular Home to School $148,132 Specialized $105,225 Total $253,357 Transportation APPENDIX C *Information based on 2015 October 31 Year JK SK Gr1 Gr2 Gr3 Gr4 Gr5 Gr6 Gr7 Gr8 SE FTE 2011 30 17 24 20 31 24 39 34 30 30 16 295 2012 22 26 17 22 24 29 25 36 34 26 13 274 2013 30 27 21 15 19 25 24 25 36 36 15 273 2014 26 31 30 16 16 25 27 24 24 35 13 267 2015 23 25 30 25 19 18 25 27 27 24 7 250 2016 23 27 24 33 21 17 20 28 24 27 6 250 2017 22 24 27 24 33 22 19 22 28 24 6 251 2018 24 23 24 26 23 33 23 20 21 28 6 251 2019 24 25 23 23 26 24 35 24 19 21 6 250 2020 24 25 25 22 23 26 25 38 24 19 6 257 2021 24 25 25 24 22 23 28 26 37 24 6 264 2022 24 25 25 24 24 22 25 30 26 37 6 268 2023 25 25 25 24 24 24 24 26 29 26 6 258 2024 25 26 25 24 24 24 26 25 26 29 6 260 2025 25 26 26 24 24 24 26 27 25 26 6 259 STATUS QUO - GRADES JK-8 - New Sarum PS Regular Track and Special Education Enrolment SECTION B STUDENT AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROFILE New Sarum PS Enrolment APPENDIX C JK SK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 12 13 25 2 11 12 23 3 11 8 19 4 19 19 5 17 17 6 19 19 7 18 18 8 25 25 9 27 27 10 3 4 X 7 11 27 27 12 24 24 23 25 30 25 19 18 25 27 30 28 250 Enrolment By Grade (Student Count)Spec. Ed. School Organization Class Total Class Number 2015-16* Staffing Allocation (FTE) New Sarum PS Principal 1.00 Vice-Principals 0.50 Secretaries 1.00 Teachers at the School 16.16 Self-Contained Special Education Teachers 1.19 Teacher-Librarians 0.38 English as a Second Language (ESL) Teachers 0.30 Native as a Second Language (NSL) Teachers 0.00 Learning Support Teachers (LST) 1.50 Early Childhood Educators (ECE) 2.00 Educational Assistants (EA) 6.00 Custodial 2.25 Total 32.283 SECTION B STUDENT AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROFILE Availability of Extra-Curricular Activities Inter-School Sports? YES Intramural Sports? YES School Clubs? YES Programming and Course Offering for 2015-2016 New Sarum PS serves a population of 250 students from kindergarten to grade 8. There are 11 standard classes and one specialized class. Specialized Service offerings at New Sarum PS There is one Transitions/Mental Health class at New Sarum PS New Sarum PS Enrolment APPENDIX C ft² ft² Kindergarten Classroom 2 1,445 2,890 26 52 Standard Classroom 8 838 6,700 23 184 Art Room - - 23 - Science Room - - 23 - Music Vocal - - 23 - Computer Lab Resource + Library - 23 - Technical / Vocational - - 23 - Special Education Area 1 828 828 9 9 General Arts / Musical Instrumental 1 828 828 Resource Room - Loaded (400-699 sf) 1 451 451 12 12 Seminar Rooms - Unloaded (<400 sf) 1 268 268 - Gymnasium Area and Stage 1 3,546 3,546 - Change Rooms 2 325 650 - Activity / General Purpose Room - - - Learning Commons (formerly Library) 1 1,238 1,238 - 17,399 257 Total GFA and OTG of Instructional Area OTGInstructional Space #Size Floor Area Load ft² ft² Main Office & Reception 663 Staff Room and Teacher Work Rooms 746 Servery 145 Custodial Areas 556 Meeting Room 25 Academic Storage 677 Washrooms 1,512 Gymnasium Storage 483 Chair Storage (in Gymnasium) - Mechanical Spaces 1,083 5,890 23,289 39.96% 9,306 32,595 Total Square Feet 32,595 Gross Up Added Operational Space Per Pupil Floor Area Total Operational Area Total Operational and Instructional Gross Floor Area SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE Calculated Area per Pupil by OTG Calculated Area per Pupil by Enrolment 126.83 130.38 Facilities Space Template APPENDIX C Barrier Free Accessibility Checklist Item Y/N Minimum number of pedestrian entrances required to be barrier free N Designated parking space Y Accessibility signs N Path of travel to the main entrance door.N Designated entrances N Designated Wheelchair Spaces and Adaptable seating N/A Assistive listening devices N Path of travel to all floors/elevations. Including stages.N Surface finish of ramps and stairs N Passenger Elevating Devices N Fire alarm system with strobe and audible signals N Drinking Fountains N Universal washroom N Designed Student Drop off/Pick up Area No. of Buses Yes/No Assessment Note Yes/No 6 Yes Good. Fire route utilized.No Designated School Bus Bays / Loading Zones 4,021 sq. ft. Hard Surface Play Area 35,5382 sq. ft. Green Space Play Area Standard BF Total Staff FTE Required Plus/ Minus % of Standard 51 0 51 32.28 42.28 8.72 120.62% Number of Existing Parking Spaces TVDSB Parking Standard: Staff +10 No.Types 7 Baseball backstopS (2), Soccer (3), Basketball court (3) Playground equipment (4) and FDK playyard, sandboxes (2) and long jump pits (2). Playing fields Other site amenities SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE Facility Profile APPENDIX C Project Description Total Asbestos Report - O.Reg. 278/05 999$ Boys Change Room Renovation 16,582$ Replace Roof A,B 450,032$ Asbestos Abatement 1,216$ Supply and install barrier free ramp and curb cut.8,294$ Barrier Free Washroom Reno 49,218$ Roof Moisture Survey 3,810$ Masonry Repairs - Chimney and Pilasters 49,176$ HVAC unit removals 895$ Designated Substance Report 173$ Replace exterior doors.1,138$ Install Mitsubishi A/C for room 102 Phase 1 5,976$ Replace exterior doors.50,947$ Demolition of Annex Building 92,570$ Install Controls for Mitsubishi Split Rm 102 1,013$ Add receptacle to BF Washroom.303$ Boiler Vent Replacement 27,373$ Upper Gym Metal Siding over Masonry 11,232$ Replace VAT with VCT 33,608$ Phase 1 AODA Compliance Review 378$ New Sarum PS Total 804,932$ 10 Year Repair History Financial Analysis of School* Cost ($) Cost per Student ($) Board Average per Student ($) Cost of Administration 237,912.00 951.65 612.00 Cost of Facility Services 149,668.00 598.67 774.84 Cost of Information Technology 11,246.00 44.98 29.22 Total 398,826.00 1,595.30 1,416.06 SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE 48,917.74 Cost($) Cost per Sq. Ft.($) Board Average per Sq. Ft. Cost per Student ($) Board Average per Student ($) 48,917.74 1.50 1.55 195.67 214.40 Facility Condition Index 28% Provincial Average 37% Board Average 50% PAR Average 75% New Sarum PS Replacement Value of the School $6,049,829 Financial Profile * Board Average for Administration and Information Technology is based on the Elementary Panel * Board Average for Facility Services is based on all schools operated by the Board ** Included in above Facility Services costs APPENDIX C Five Year Renewal Needs Cost Priority Action Year Year Renewal Requirement $ 376,054 Urgent 2015 Hot Water Boilers Renewal $ 149,760 Urgent 2015 Main Switchboards - Main Disconnect Renewal $ 156,000 Urgent 2015 Fire Alarm Systems Renewal $ 338,998 Urgent 2015 Site Civil/Mechanical Utilities Renewal $ 10,400 Urgent 2015 Study - Replacement - G30 - Site Civil/Mechanical Utilities - Beyond Rated Useful Life $ 50,544 High 2015 Major Repair [Exterior Walls - Original Building] $ 140,400 High 2015 Exterior Windows - Original Building Renewal $ 17,472 High 2015 Exterior Doors - Original Building Renewal $ 124,800 High 2015 Partitions - Original Building - Moveable Partitiion Renewal $ 29,952 High 2015 Interior Doors - Original Building Renewal $ 35,880 High 2015 Classroom Sinks Renewal $ 156,000 High 2015 Plumbing Fixtures - Washroom Fixtures Renewal $ 186,451 High 2015 Domestic Water Distribution - Piping System Renewal $ 10,400 High 2015 Study - Replacement - D2020 Domestic Water Distribution - Piping System - Beyond Rated Useful Life $ 12,480 High 2015 Domestic Water Distribution - Water Storage Tanks Renewal $ 186,451 High 2015 Sanitary Waste Renewal $ 10,400 High 2015 Study - Replacement - D2030 Sanitary Waste - Beyond Rated Useful Life $ 10,400 High 2015 Auxiliary Equipment - Stack & Breaching Renewal $ 74,880 High 2015 Exhaust Systems Renewal $ 224,640 High 2015 Air Handling Units Renewal $ 54,912 High 2015 Fan Coil Units Renewal $ 249,600 High 2015 Controls & Instrumentation Renewal $ 23,920 High 2015 Lighting Equipment - Exterior Lighting - Wall Mounted Renewal $ 20,800 High 2015 Lighting Equipment - Exit Lighting/Exit Signs Renewal $ 10,400 High 2015 Study - Replacement - D502001 Branch Wiring - Cabling, Raceways & Bus Ducts - Beyond Rated Useful Life $ 491,556 High 2015 Branch Wiring - Cabling, Raceways & Bus Ducts Renewal $ 140,400 High 2015 Public Address Systems Renewal $ 91,520 High 2015 Roadways - Site Renewal $ 34,320 High 2017 Fencing & Gates Renewal $ 10,400 High 2015 Study - Replacement - G40 - Aboveground Utilities - Beyond Rated Useful Life $ 33,904 High 2015 Aboveground Utilities Renewal $ 3,464,094 SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE TVDSB Five Year Renewal Needs Project Description Total Asbestos Repairs $ 1,738 Library Renovation $ 19,543 Window Replacement - Phase 2 $ 393,085 Designated Substance Report $ 173 Barrier Free Washroom Renovation $ 31,015 Roof Moisture Survey $ 4,086 1971 Steel Joist review $ 5,540 Supply and install ceiling lift $ 10,475 Anthes Joist Investigation $ 8,485 Chimney Removal $ 9,605 WIFI installation $ 4,781 Roof Scan $ 4,495 Replace VAT Flooring $ 89,680 Phase 1 AODA Compliance Review $ 490 Replace Boilers and Pumps $ 260,434 Exterior Lighting upgrades $ 1,188 Davenport PS Total $ 844,813 APPENDIX C SECTION D MUNICIPALITY AND COMMUNITY USE PROFILE Land Use and Zoning APPENDIX C Demographics within the New Sarum PS Attendance Area New Sarum PS is a JK - 8 school within the community of New Sarum just east of St. Thomas. The school accommodates students within the urban area of Eastwood, and the rural areas of New Sarum and Orwell within the Municipality of Central Elgin. The school also accommodates students from the hamlet of Kingsmill Corner within the Township of Malahide. Many rural students residing outside these communities also attend New Sarum PS. Within the attendance area of New Sarum PS, Statistics Canada indicates that from 2001 to 2006 the total population increased by 13%. From 2006 to 2011 the population increased again by 3%. Although the total population had increased the population of elementary school aged children (4 to 13 year olds) has decreased. The decrease from 2001 to 2006 was by 4% and another 9% decrease from 2006 to 2011. SECTION D MUNICIPALITY AND COMMUNITY USE PROFILE Demographic Data for New Sarum PS Yrs 0 - 3 Yrs 4 - 13 Yrs 14 - 18 OVER 18 Females 25-44 Occupied Dwellings Total Population Total Elem Sec 150 490 207 2107 454 1036 2954 2.8 0.47 0.20 Yrs 0 - 3 Yrs 4 - 13 Yrs 14 - 18 OVER 18 Females 25-44 Occupied Dwellings Total Population Total Elem Sec 147 473 283 2427 448 1188 3330 2.8 0.40 0.24 Yrs 0 - 3 Yrs 4 - 13 Yrs 14 - 18 OVER 18 Females 25-44 Occupied Dwellings Total Population Total Elem Sec 158 432 245 2601 435 1263 3436 2.7 0.34 0.19 Source: Statistics Canada 2001, 2006, 2011 Census 2001 Census -AGE COHORTS AND DWELLINGS Person Per Unit 2006 Census -AGE COHORTS AND DWELLINGS Person Per Unit 2011 Census -AGE COHORTS AND DWELLINGS Person Per Unit APPENDIX C Growth and Development There is no significant residential growth within the attendance area of New Sarum PS. As well, the municipalities have no current plans to service any of the rural communities within the attendance area of New Sarum PS. Although the Eastwood subdivision is labelled as an Urban Settlement area in the Central Elgin Official, the area is completely built out. SECTION D MUNICIPALITY AND COMMUNITY USE PROFILE Residential Development APPENDIX C YES Were Community Use of School costs fully recoverable? YES YMCA of St.Thomas-Elgin $500.00 Yes Were Before and After school programs or services (e.g., child care) avaiable at this school Name of Child Care Provider Revenue from the Before and After school programs Were before and after school programs cost fully recoverable Number of permits Booked hours per year Total revenue YES 3 20 $ 142.80 Was the School building used by community groups through Community Use of Schools? School Building Use: Number of permits Booked hours per year Total revenue NO 0 0 $ - Were School Grounds used by community groups through Community Use of Schools? School Grounds Use: N Y N N Y Y N Y N N/A N/A Air Conditioning Compartmenta- lization Dedicated Washroom Space Existing Community Use Existing Collaboration Suitable Vacant Space Parking Barrier-Free Accessibility Municipal Services Site Size Dedicated Access to Space Collaboration Suitability SECTION D MUNICIPALITY AND COMMUNITY USE PROFILE Community Use Profile APPENDIX C SCHOOL INFORMATION PROFILE SPARTA PUBLIC SCHOOL 2015-16 ADDRESS: 45885 SPARTA LINE, RR4, ST. THOMAS, N5P 3S8 APPENDIX D SECTION A SCHOOL OVERVIEW Current Attendance Area APPENDIX D SECTION A SCHOOL OVERVIEW Criteria Sparta PS Board Average Size of the school site (acres) 4.94 7.26 Year original school was built 1967 1977 Building area (square feet) 26,974.36 44,701.66 Portable classrooms (2015-16) 0 2.86 Year addition(s) built 1974 Grade Configuration JK-8 Criteria Sparta PS Board Average On-The-Ground (OTG) Capacity (2015-16) 305 444 Student Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Enrolment: Official 2015 October 31 242.00 385.00 Utilization factor 79.34% 87.17% Excess or Shortage (-) of Pupil Places 63.00 58.59 Number of Holding Zone students (if any) 0 Number of out of area students 0 General Profile Distance (km) to 5 closest TVDSB Elementary Schools 10.85 New Sarum 11.99 Mitchell. Hepburn 13.02 Port Stanley 14.13 Forest Park 14.21 P.E. Trudeau FI APPENDIX D 248 0 Number of Students who are Eligible for Transportation Number of Students who are Not Eligible for Transportation Transportation Length of bus ride Sparta PS Board Shortest 1.00 min 1.00 min Longest 43.00 min 71.00 min Average 17.00 min 16.00 min Percentage of Students Transported to School 100% Number of Buses Required 6 Distance - Proximity of Students to existing school Sparta PS Board Shortest 0.48 km 0.01 km Longest 13.52 km 67.08 km Average 6.92 km 2.45 km Transportation Costs Regular Home to School $162,434 Specialized $48,015 Total $210,449 SECTION A SCHOOL OVERVIEW General Profile APPENDIX D *Information based on 2015 October 31 Year JK SK Gr1 Gr2 Gr3 Gr4 Gr5 Gr6 Gr7 Gr8 SE FTE 2011 25 26 23 27 29 30 31 31 31 38 0 291 2012 22 21 28 24 27 29 31 27 31 35 0 275 2013 21 22 21 31 25 26 26 26 24 31 0 253 2014 20 21 21 24 31 25 24 24 24 25 0 239 2015 19 21 24 23 27 33 26 24 22 23 0 242 2016 19 21 22 24 26 27 33 23 24 22 0 241 2017 20 19 22 24 25 27 27 32 21 24 0 241 2018 22 20 20 24 25 25 26 26 29 21 0 238 2019 22 22 21 21 24 25 25 25 23 29 0 237 2020 22 22 23 23 22 24 25 24 23 23 0 231 2021 22 22 23 25 23 22 24 23 21 23 0 228 2022 22 22 23 25 25 23 22 23 21 21 0 227 2023 22 22 22 25 25 26 23 21 21 21 0 228 2024 21 22 22 24 25 26 25 22 19 21 0 227 2025 21 21 22 24 25 25 25 24 20 19 0 226 STATUS QUO - GRADES JK-8 - Sparta PS Regular Track Enrolment SECTION B STUDENT AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROFILE Sparta PS Enrolment APPENDIX D JK SK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 10 11 21 2 9 10 19 3 13 10 23 4 11 8 19 5 5 15 20 6 12 9 21 7 24 6 30 8 20 10 30 9 14 15 29 10 7 23 30 TOTAL 19 21 24 23 27 33 26 24 22 23 242 Class Number Enrolment By Grade (Student Count)Spec. Ed. Class Total School Organization 2015-16* Staffing Allocation (FTE) Sparta PS Principal 1.00 Vice-Principals 0.00 Secretaries 1.00 Teachers at the School 13.08 Self-Contained Special Education Teachers 0.00 Teacher-Librarians 0.38 English as a Second Language (ESL) Teachers 0.10 Native as a Second Language (NSL) Teachers 0.00 Learning Support Teachers (LST) 0.80 Early Childhood Educators (ECE) 2.00 Educational Assistants (EA) 3.50 Custodial 1.75 Total 23.61 SECTION B STUDENT AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROFILE Availability of Extra-Curricular Activities Inter-School Sports? YES Intramural Sports? YES School Clubs? YES Programming and Course Offering for 2015-2016 Sparta PS serves a population of 242 students from kindergarten to grade 8. There are 10 standard classes. Specialized Service offerings at Sparta PS There are no specialized service offerings at Sparta PS. School Organization and Staffing APPENDIX D ft² ft² Kindergarten Classroom 2 1,016 2,031 26 52 Standard Classroom 11 831 9,144 23 253 Art Room - - 23 - Science Room - - 23 - Music Vocal - - 23 - Computer Lab in Library - 23 - Technical / Vocational - - 23 - Special Education Area - - 9 - General Arts / Musical Instrumental 1 828 828 - Resource Room - Loaded (400-699 sf) - - 12 - Seminar Rooms - Unloaded (<400 sf) - - Gymnasium Area and Stage 1 2,534 2,534 - Change Rooms 2 183 367 - Activity / General Purpose Room - - - Learning Commons (formerly Library) 1 1,378 1,378 - 16,281 305 Total GFA and OTG of Instructional Area OTGInstructional Space #Size Floor Area Load ft² ft² Main Office & Reception 276 Staff Room and Teacher Work Rooms 394 Servery 81 Custodial Areas 435 Meeting Room - Academic Storage 105 Washrooms 1,213 Gymnasium Storage 184 Chair Storage (in Gymnasium) - Mechanical Spaces 473 3,161 19,442 38.74% 7,532 26,974 Total Square Feet 26,974 Gross Up Added Operational Space Per Pupil Floor Area Total Operational Area Total Operational and Instructional Gross Floor Area SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE Calculated Area per Pupil by OTG Calculated Area per Pupil by Enrolment 88.44 111.46 Facilities Space Template APPENDIX D Barrier Free Accessibility Checklist Item Y/N Minimum number of pedestrian entrances required to be barrier free N Designated parking space Y Accessibility signs Y Path of travel to the main entrance door.N Designated entrances Y Designated Wheelchair Spaces and Adaptable seating N/A Assistive listening devices N Path of travel to all floors/elevations. Including stages.N Surface finish of ramps and stairs N/A Passenger Elevating Devices N Fire alarm system with strobe and audible signals Y Drinking Fountains N Universal washroom Y Designed Student Drop off/Pick up Area No. of Buses Yes/No Assessment Note Yes/No 6 Yes Good. Fire route utilized.No Designated School Bus Bays / Loading Zones 23,639 sq. ft Hard Surface Play Area 223,528 sq. ft. Green Space Play Area No.Types 8 Basketball courts (3),Soccer fields (3) Baseball backstops (2) Playground equipment (7) and sand box (1), Outdoor Classroom/ greening project? Playing fields Other site amenities Standard BF Total Staff FTE Required Plus/ Minus % of Standard 29 0 29 23.61 33.61 -4.61 86.28% Number of Existing Parking Spaces TVDSB Parking Standard: Staff +10 SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE Facility Profile APPENDIX D Project Description Total Asbestos Report - O.Reg. 278/05 660$ Renovate Storage Room 754$ Window Replacement 182,081$ Asbestos Abatement 1,092$ Moisture Survey 3,567$ Designated Substance Report 173$ Construct BF Washroom 58,222$ Barrier Free ramp.2,401$ Roof Moisture Survey 4,495$ Boiler Vent Replacement 24,866$ Natural Gas metering- Phase 1 3,156$ Replace VAT with new VCT 48,951$ Phase 1 AODA Compliance Review 378$ Natural gas metering- Phase 2 4,452$ Sparta PS Total 335,248$ 10 Year Repair History Financial Analysis of School* Cost ($) Cost per Student ($) Board Average per Student ($) Cost of Administration 179,970.00 743.68 612.00 Cost of Facility Services 167,808.00 693.42 774.84 Cost of Information Technology 11,246.00 46.47 29.22 Total 359,024.00 1,483.57 1,416.02 SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE School Utility Costs** Cost($) Cost per Sq. Ft.($) Board Average per Sq. Ft. Cost per Student ($) Board Average per Student ($) 33,221.29 1.42 1.55 137.28 214.40 Facility Condition Index 28% Provincial Average 37% Board Average 50% PAR Average 65% Sparta PS Replacement Value of the School $7,027,386 Financial Profile * Board Average for Administration and Information Technology is based on the Elementary Panel * Board Average for Facility Services is based on all schools operated by the Board ** Included in above Facility Services costs APPENDIX D Five Year Renewal Needs Cost Priority Action Year Year Renewal Requirement $ 582,400 Urgent 2015 Roof Coverings - All Sections Renewal $ 5,200 Urgent 2015 Study [Site Civil/Mechanical Utilities - Site] $ 520,000 Urgent 2015 Site Civil/Mechanical Utilities - Site Renewal $ 10,400 Urgent 2015 Septic Tanks - Site Renewal $ 5,200 Urgent 2015 .Study [Septic Tanks - Site] $ 5,200 High 2015 .Study [Structural Frame - Original Building] $ 52,000 High 2015 Structural Frame - Original Building Renewal $ 10,400 High 2015 Exterior Walls - Metal Panels Renewal $ 10,400 High 2015 Chimney Renewal $ 24,960 High 2015 Interior Doors - Interior Door Hardware - Original Building Renewal $ 83,200 High 2015 Interior Doors - Original Building Renewal $ 88,400 High 2015 Hot Water Boilers Renewal $ 88,400 High 2015 Hot Water Boilers Renewal $ 10,400 High 2015 Auxiliary Equipment - Chemical Feed System Renewal $ 15,600 High 2015 Auxiliary Equipment - HVAC Pumps Renewal $ 10,400 High 2015 Other Heat Generating Systems - Window Unit A/C Renewal $ 364,000 High 2015 Heating/Chilling water distribution systems Renewal $ 5,200 High 2015 Study - Heating Piping System $ 49,920 High 2015 Air Handling Units - Gym Supply Renewal $ 49,920 High 2015 Air Handling Units - Boiler Room Renewal $ 52,000 High 2015 Terminal & Package Units - Perimeter Radiators Renewal $ 249,600 High 2015 Controls & Instrumentation Renewal $ 10,400 High 2015 Lighting Equipment - Exterior Lighting Renewal $ 5,200 High 2015 Lighting Equipment - Exit Lighting Renewal $ 10,400 High 2015 Lighting Equipment - Emergency Lighting - Battery Back-ups Renewal $ 46,800 High 2015 Public Address Systems Renewal $ 72,800 High 2015 Roadways - Gravel Paved Renewal $ 88,400 High 2015 Parking Lots - Asphalt Paved (East Lot) & Gravel Paved (West Lot) Renewal $ 18,720 High 2015 Site Development - Chain Link Fencing & Barb Wire Fencing Renewal $ 239,200 High 2015 Site Development - Asphalt Paved Playing Field Renewal $ 2,785,120 SECTION C FACILITY AND SITE PROFILE TVDSB Five Year Renewal Needs Project Description Total Asbestos Repairs $ 1,738 Library Renovation $ 19,543 Window Replacement - Phase 2 $ 393,085 Designated Substance Report $ 173 Barrier Free Washroom Renovation $ 31,015 Roof Moisture Survey $ 4,086 1971 Steel Joist review $ 5,540 Supply and install ceiling lift $ 10,475 Anthes Joist Investigation $ 8,485 Chimney Removal $ 9,605 WIFI installation $ 4,781 Roof Scan $ 4,495 Replace VAT Flooring $ 89,680 Phase 1 AODA Compliance Review $ 490 Replace Boilers and Pumps $ 260,434 Exterior Lighting upgrades $ 1,188 Davenport PS Total $ 844,813 APPENDIX D SECTION D MUNICIPALITY AND COMMUNITY USE PROFILE Land Use and Zoning APPENDIX D Demographics for the Sparta PS Attendance Area Sparta PS is a JK - 8 school located just west of the Village of Sparta. The school accommodates students from the rural settlement areas of Sparta and Union in the Municipality of Central Elgin and the Village of Port Bruce in the Township of Malahide. Within the attendance area of Sparta PS, Statistics Canada indicates that the total population has remained relatively stable from 2001 to 2011 with a small decrease of 3%. The population of elementary school aged children (4 to 13 year olds) decreased by 8% from 2001 to 2006 and another 5% from 2006 to 2011. SECTION D MUNICIPALITY AND COMMUNITY USE PROFILE Demographic Data for Sparta PS Yrs 0 - 3 Yrs 4 - 13 Yrs 14 - 18 OVER 18 Females 25-44 Occupied Dwellings Total Population Total Elem Sec 137 502 292 2849 466 1318 3780 2.9 0.38 0.22 Yrs 0 - 3 Yrs 4 - 13 Yrs 14 - 18 OVER 18 Females 25-44 Occupied Dwellings Total Population Total Elem Sec 122 460 278 2831 415 1321 3691 2.8 0.35 0.21 Yrs 0 - 3 Yrs 4 - 13 Yrs 14 - 18 OVER 18 Females 25-44 Occupied Dwellings Total Population Total Elem Sec 140 436 258 2832 354 1316 3666 2.8 0.33 0.20 Source: Statistics Canada 2001, 2006, 2011 Census 2001 Census -AGE COHORTS AND DWELLINGS Person Per Unit 2006 Census -AGE COHORTS AND DWELLINGS Person Per Unit 2011 Census -AGE COHORTS AND DWELLINGS Person Per Unit APPENDIX D Growth and Development The potential for residential growth exists within some communities in Sparta PS's attendance area. Union has been designated by the Municipality of Central Elgin as an Urban Settlement area with unbuilt lands zoned residential within the settlement boundary. Although future growth within the community has been planned, sanitary sewage and municipal piped water services are still required. In the Malahide Official Plan, the Village of Port Bruce is designated as a recreational settlement with seasonal residents being encouraged. The Village of Port Bruce is serviced with municipal water but would require servicing for sanitary. Currently there are no significant residential developments within Sparta PS' attendance area. SECTION D MUNICIPALITY AND COMMUNITY USE PROFILE Residential Development APPENDIX D YES Were Community Use of School costs fully recoverable? YES YMCA St. Thomas-Elgin $500.00 Yes Were Before and After school programs or services (e.g., child care) avaiable at this school Name of Child Care Provider Revenue from the Before and After school programs Were before and after school programs cost fully recoverable Number of permits Booked hours per year Total revenue YES 1 21 $ 95.71 Was the School building used by community groups through Community Use of Schools? School Building Use: Number of permits Booked hours per year Total revenue NO 0 0 $ - Were School Grounds used by community groups through Community Use of Schools? School Grounds Use: Y Y Y N Y Y N Y N N/A N/A Air Conditioning Compartmenta- lization Dedicated Washroom Space Existing Community Use Existing Collaboration Suitable Vacant Space Parking Barrier-Free Accessibility Municipal Services Site Size Dedicated Access to Space Collaboration Suitability SECTION D MUNICIPALITY AND COMMUNITY USE PROFILE Community Use Profile APPENDIX D n n nnn n nn n n nn nnnnn n n n nnnnnn n nnn n n n n n n n n nnnnnnn n nnnn n n nn nnn n nn n n n nn n n n n n nn n nn n nnnnn n n n n n n n n n n n n Sparta PS Lambeth PS Locke's PS McGregor PS Westfield PS John Wise PS Southwold PS Davenport PS New Sarum PS Aldborough PS South Ridge PS Springfield PS Port Burwell PS Mosa Central PS Port Stanley PS Ekcoe Central PS Dunwich-Dutton PS Straffordville PS South Dorchester PS Summers' Corners PS Westminster Central PS HWY 401HWY 3LONGWOODS RDTALBOT LINEFINGAL LINEI O N A R D JOHN WISE L I N E PLANK RDHWY402 U N I O N R D RON MCNEI L L I N E C U R R I E R D DUFF LINEAVON DRT H A M E S R D 3RD LINEGLENDON DRCALTON LIN E LYONS LINE F U R N I V A L R D PLANK L INE DEXTER LIN E PUTNAM RDCULLODEN LINEM E L B O U R N E R D IMPERIAL RDCOUNTY RD 55HWY 4QUAKERRDBELMONT RDPROUSE RDELGIN RDFERGUSON L I N E HERIT A G ELINECARRIAGE RDNOVA SCOTI A L I N EHACIENDA RDM I L L R D SPARTA LINE D U N D O N A L D R D RICHMOND RDEDEN LI N E FAIRVIEW RDHA G ERT Y R D TALBOT TR AIL D U A R T R D MUNCEYRDD U N B O R O U G H R DNAUVOO RDCULLODEN RDSUNSETRDHIGHBURY AVE SELM LINEPARKHOUSE DRPRESSEY RD GLENCOLIN L I N E SHACKLETON LINEGLANWORTH DR STALKER LINEWILTON GROVE RD WELLINGTONRDSPIONEER LINEHWY 19L I T T L E W OODDR EXETER RD WELLINGTON RDCALVERT DRDINGMAN DR BROWNSVILLE RD G R A H A M R D LAK E S H O R E R DJOHNSTON LINELAK E S H O R E L I N E SCOTLAND DR RIVE R R D WESTCHESTER BRNESPRINGFIELD RDMAIN STMCDOUGALL LINEWONDERLAND RD SC L A C H A N R D QUEENS LINE MUIRKIRK LINE M O R R I S O N R DCONCESSION DRSIMPSON RD CAESAR RD SOUTHMINSTER BRNE PIGRAM LINEEAST RDAPPIN RDSOUTHDEL ST CARR RDROSS STHWY 401IMPERIAL RDPIONEER LINEHW Y 4 0 2 S U N S E T R D HWY 3 G R A H A M R D n n n n n n n n Approved New Belmont PSAttendance Area Approved NewSoutheast St.Thomas PSAttendance Area Approved Port Stanley PSAttendance Area Approved Mitchell Hepburn PSAttendance Area ForestPark PS ElginCourt PS Locke's PS J.R.Callwood PS Southwold PS JohnWise PS P.E.TrudeauFI PS MitchellHepburn PS1ST AVETALBOT ST S U NS ET D R ELM LINE JOHN WISE LINEWI L SONAVESTG E O RGESTFAIRVIEWAVEELM ST BURWELLRDS EDGEWARE RD FAIRVIEW RDSUNSETRD HWY 3 HIGHBURY AVEEDWARD STWELLINGTONRD FINGAL LINERON MCNEIL LINE DALEWOOD RDCENTENNIAL RDCurrent & EPAR-01 Board Approved English Track Attendance Areas ® 0 10 205Kilometers Current as of 2017 SeptemberData Source: © 2016 Queens Printer. City of London, City of St Thomas, Oxford County, Middlesex County, Elgin County, Municipality of Central Elgin, 2016, All rights reserved.© Teranet Enterprises Inc. and it suppliers. All rights reserved. Not a plan of survey.This boundary map has been prepared to provide a general description of the attendance area for the above school(s). Approved New Belmont PSAttendance Area Approved Summers' Corners PSAttendance Area Approved Port Stanley PSAttendance Area ® 0 2.5 51.25 Kilometers Approved EPAR-01Attendance Areas Current Attendance Areas Aldborough PS Davenport PS/McGregor PS Dunwich-Dutton PS Elgin Court PS Forest Park PS John Wise PS June Rose Callwood PS Locke's PS Mitchell Hepburn PS New Sarum PS Northdale Central PS/RiverHeights PS Port Burwell PS Port Stanley PS South Dorchester PS Southeast St.ThomasHolding at Port Stanley PS Southwold PS Sparta PS Springfield PS Straffordville PS Summers' Corners PS Westminster Central PS APPENDIX E Enrolment Projections and Utilization Breakdown ‐ Elgin County French Immersion OPTION 1 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 244 244 241 235 232 227 225 231 229 491 480 472 460 448 446 443 439 450 Utilization OTG New FI at Sparta 305 80% 80% 79% 77% 76% 74% 74% 76% 75% New FI at New Sarum 257 95% 95% 94% 91% 90% 88% 88% 90% 89% PET 530 93% 91% 89% 87% 85% 84% 84% 83% 85% OPTION 2 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 220 216 208 195 199 194 193 197 198 515 506 501 495 474 475 471 469 478 Utilization OTG New FI at Sparta 305 72% 71% 68% 64% 65% 64% 63% 65% 65% New FI at New Sarum 257 86% 84% 81% 76% 77% 75% 75% 77% 77% PET 530 97% 96% 95% 93% 89% 90% 89% 89% 90% OPTION 3 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 208 197 198 188 177 168 167 170 169 532 531 520 513 507 509 506 506 512 Utilization OTG New FI at Sparta 305 68% 65% 65% 62% 58% 55% 55% 56% 55% New FI at New Sarum 257 81% 77% 77% 73% 69% 65% 65% 66% 66% PET 530 100% 100% 98% 97% 96% 96% 95% 96% 97% New FI  PET  New FI  PET  Projected Enrolment New FI  PET  Projected Enrolment Projected Enrolment APPENDIX F Administered By Organizational Support Services Amendment Date(s) Thames Valley District School Board PROCEDURE Title ATTENDANCE AREA REVIEW Procedure No. 4015c Department Organizational Support Services Reference(s) Policy - Pupil Accommodation (4015) Procedure - Pupil Accommodation and Facility Organization (4015a) Procedure - Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Opportunities (4015b) Procedure - Holding Zones and Holding Schools (4015d) Effective Date 2016 March 29 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Thames Valley District School Board has an ongoing long-term accommodation planning process for its Schools and other facilities, which assesses: 1.1.1 student programs; 1.1.2 current enrolment and accommodation; 1.1.3 enrolment projections (which includes an analysis of historical enrolment, current and proposed residential development, and community trends); 1.1.4 renewal needs and facility condition; and 1.1.5 Ministry initiatives pertaining to facilities and accommodation. 1.2 It is through its accommodation planning processes that Thames Valley District School Board, among other matters, considers and addresses potential adjustments to existing Attendance Areas. 1.3 In this Procedure, references to: “TVDSB” mean the district school board formed under the Education Act (Ontario) and known as Thames Valley District School Board; “the Trustees” means the Board of Trustees of TVDSB as elected from time to time; “Trustee” means one of the Trustees; and, references to “TVDSB Senior Administration” and “TVDSB Administration” refer to the respective levels of administrative personnel of TVDSB. APPENDIX B Page 2 of 17 1.4 This Procedure has been developed to provide the framework for TVDSB’s Attendance Area Review Process in circumstances when TVDSB’s Senior Administration recommends adjustments to existing Attendance Area(s). Although the body of this Procedure describes the Attendance Area Review Process, attached as Schedule A to this Procedure, is a flow chart which provides a summary of the sequencing of the process. 2.0 DEFINITIONS 2.1 For purposes of this Procedure the following definitions will apply: 2.1.1 Attendance Area Review Committee (AARC): a committee established by TVDSB pursuant to section 5.0 of this Procedure. 2.1.2 AARC Meeting: has the meaning given in section 6.1 of this Procedure. 2.1.3 Attendance Area Review Process: the process described in this Procedure surrounding possible adjustments to Attendance Areas. The Attendance Area Review Process begins with the submission by TVDSB Senior Administration to the Trustees of an Initial Attendance Area Review Report containing one or more options to adjust and/or create new Attendance Areas. Assuming the Trustees approve continuing with an Attendance Area Review Process, the process ends when the Trustees make a final decision with respect to the Attendance Areas in question. 2.1.4 Attendance Area: an area defined by a geographic boundary which determines, in part, students’ designation to a particular School or program (e.g. French Immersion and Emphasis Technology), based on primary residence within that area. 2.1.5 Business Days: means a day other than a Saturday, Sunday, or statutory holiday in Ontario. 2.1.6 Chair’s Committee: a committee of the Trustees formed in accordance with TVDSB’s By-laws. 2.1.7 Community Organizations: means the person or entities in a Region where any of the Schools which are subject to an accommodation review are located, as identified in Schedule A to TVDSB’s Community Planni ng and Facility Collaboration Opportunities Procedure (as amended or replaced), and/or who are otherwise listed as being entitled to receive Notices (as defined in TVDSB’s Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Opportunities Procedure, as amended or replaced), from time to time. APPENDIX B Page 3 of 17 2.1.8 Final Attendance Area Review Report: has the meaning given in section 9.1.1 of this Procedure. 2.1.9 Holding School: is a School designated by the Trustees to accommodate students from one (1) or more Holding Zones. 2.1.10 Holding Zone: an area defined by a geographic boundary, within an Attendance Area (usually with high concentrations of new or imminent development), for which the Trustees have approved that students residing in it are to attend a specified School based on available capacity, until such time as long-term accommodation and related revised Attendance Areas can be established. 2.1.11 Initial Attendance Area Review Report: has the meaning given in section 4.1 of this Procedure. 2.1.12 Ministry: means the Ontario Ministry of Education. 2.1.13 Public Delegation Meeting: has the meaning given in section 9.3.1 of this Procedure. 2.1.14 Region: means the County of Elgin, including the City of St. Thomas, or the City of London, or the County of Middlesex, or the County of Oxford, depending upon where a School or group of Schools which are subject to an Attendance Area review are located. 2.1.15 School: a body of elementary school pupils or secondary school pupils organized by TVDSB as a unit for educational purposes. 2.1.16 School AARC Subcommittee: has the meaning given in section 7.1 of this Procedure. 2.1.17 School Community: means, with reference to a particular School, the students on the roll of that School, those students’ parents and/or guardians, and the School Council and the Home and School Association for that School. 2.1.18 School Day: a day other than a Saturday, Sunday, statutory holiday in Ontario, or School Holiday. 2.1.19 School Holidays: includes TVDSB’s summer break, winter break, March break and Easter Monday. 2.1.20 School-Level Meeting: has the meaning given in section 7.1 of this Procedure. APPENDIX B Page 4 of 17 3.0 EXEMPTIONS FROM ATTENDANCE AREA REVIEW PROCESS 3.1 The following outlines circumstances when TVDSB is not required to follow the Attendance Area Review Processes provided for in this Procedure: 3.1.1 when the Attendance Areas for the Schools in question are being addressed as part of an Accommodation Review Process which is being undertaken pursuant to TVDSB’s Pupil Accommodation and Facility Organization Procedure, as amended or replaced; 3.1.2 when the proposed amendment(s) to Attendance Area(s) will affect fewer than ten (10) students enrolled in the Schools in question. In such circumstances, the Trustees will have the authority to approve, amend or not approve the recommended options without TVDSB having to undertake the steps outlined in this Procedure. In such circumstances, TVDSB will inform the parents or guardians of the affected students, as well as the respective School principal(s), the chair of the respective School Council(s) and the President of the respective Home and School Association(s) of the approved amendments to the respective Attendance Area(s); 3.1.3 to change the location of any program, or part of a program, which does not have an associated Attendance Area which has been approved by the Trustees; 3.1.4 to change the location of any optional program, or part of an optional program, in either case operating as a School or within a School, and which has an associated Attendance Area which has been approved by the Trustees, so long as TVDSB Senior Administration has consulted with the parents and/or guardians of the students enrolled in that program in a manner which has been approved by the Trustees; or 3.1.5 when the proposed amendments do not affect any students enrolled in the applicable Schools at the time of the proposed amendment(s). 3.2 This Procedure does not apply to the use of facilities for alternate education, adult education and/or continuing education. 4.0 INITIAL ATTENDANCE AREA REVIEW REPORTS 4.1 The first step in an Attendance Area review occurs when TVDSB Administration provides a report (an “Initial Attendance Area Review Report”) to the Trustees containing one or more recommendation(s) to amend existing Attendance Area(s) for a group of Schools. The recommendations contained in an Initial APPENDIX B Page 5 of 17 Attendance Area Review Report will have supporting rationale. An Initial Attendance Area Review Report will also include: 4.1.1 current and proposed Attendance Area maps; 4.1.2 current enrolment and accommodation; 4.1.3 related enrolment projections; 4.1.4 current and proposed residential development, and community trends; 4.1.5 proposed timeline for implementation; 4.1.6 input received from Community Organizations within the affected Region(s) in connection with the most recently occurring annual meeting held pursuant to TVDSB’s Community Planning and Facility Collaboration Opportunities Procedure (as the same may be amended or replaced) and which relates to the Attendance Areas under review; and 4.1.7 the date scheduled for the respective AARC Meeting. 4.2 Initial Attendance Area Review Reports will be posted on TVDSB’s website prior to the date the report is to be presented to the Trustees. Should the Trustees decide to proceed with an Attendance Area review, the respective Initial Attendance Area Review Report will remain posted on TVDSB’s website until such time as the Final Attendance Area Review Report is posted on TVDSB’s website pursuant to section 9.1.1 below. 5.0 ATTENDANCE AREA REVIEW COMMITTEE ROLE AND FORMATION 5.1 If the Trustees approve proceeding with an Attendance Area review, an Attendance Area Review Committee will be established on the basis described in section 5.0 of this Procedure. The role of an Attendance Area Review Committee is to be the conduit for information between TVDSB and the School Communities for the Schools which are included in a particular Attendance Area review, which role is to be fulfilled on the basis described in this Procedure. Attendance Area Review Committees will neither be asked, nor entitled, to approve Initial Attendance Area Review Reports or Final Attendance Area Review Reports. 5.2 The membership of an Attendance Area Review Committee established for: 5.2.1 Elementary Schools will be comprised of: two (2) parents and/or guardians of students enrolled as full-time students for each of the divisions (i.e. early years, primary, junior and intermediate) of the Schools which are subject to the Attendance Area review; and, the chair of the School Councils (or their designate) and the President of the Home and School Associations (or their designate) for the Schools which are subject to the APPENDIX B Page 6 of 17 Attendance Area review. To the extent that a School which is subject to an Attendance Area review has twenty (20) or more self-identified First Nation, Métis or Inuit students enrolled as full-time students of such School, one (1) of the parents or guardians of such students will be entitled to be a member of such Attendance Area Review Committee. To the extent that a School which is subject to an Attendance Area review has twenty (20) or more students enrolled as full-time students from a Holding Zone, one (1) of the parents or guardians of such students will be entitled to be a member of such Attendance Area Review Committee; and 5.2.2 Secondary Schools will be comprised of: two (2) parents and/or guardians of students enrolled as full-time students in each of the grades of each of the Schools which are subject to the Attendance Area review; and, the chair of the School Councils (or their designate) and the President of the Home and School Associations (or their designate) for the Schools which are subject to the Attendance Area review. To the extent that a School which is subject to an Attendance Area review has twenty (20) or more self-identified First Nation, Métis or Inuit students enrolled as full-time students of such School, one (1) of the parents or guardians of such students will be entitled to be a member of such Attendance Area Review Committee. To the extent that a School which is subject to an Attendance Area review has twenty (20) or more students enrolled as full-time students from a Holding Zone, one (1) of the parents or guardians of such students will be entitled to be a member of such Attendance Area Review Committee. 5.3 No occasional, part-time or full-time TVDSB employee or Trustee may be a member of an Attendance Area Review Committee. If a member of an Attendance Area Review Committee becomes an occasional, part-time or full- time TVDSB employee or Trustee, such individual must resign from such Attendance Area Review Committee and will not be replaced. 5.4 The respective principal of each of the Schools which are the subject of an Initial Attendance Area Review Report will endeavour to enlist persons from the respective categories set out in section 5.2 above. As part of each of the respective principals’ efforts to enlist members, they will, within two (2) School Days of the Trustees’ decision to undertake an Attendance Area review: 5.4.1 inform the chair of the respective School Council and the President of the respective Home and School Association, via e-mail, of the membership recruitment objectives; 5.4.2 post notice of the membership enlistment objectives on the website for the respective School; and APPENDIX B Page 7 of 17 5.4.3 arrange for an explanation of the membership recruitment objectives to be sent home with the students of the respective School. 5.5 If the number of persons wishing to be members of an Attendance Area Review Committee exceeds the number of available spaces (determined on the basis set forth in section 5.2 above), the principal for the respective School will determine the identity of the various members by “picking names from a hat”. In the event that fewer persons are interested in being a member of an Attendance Area Review Committee than there are available spaces, that Attendance Area Review Committee will be formed with such smaller number of persons as are interested from each of the respective categories. The principals of the Schools which are subject to an Attendance Area review will use reasonable efforts to determine the membership of the respective Attendance Area Review Committee within ten (10) School Days of the Trustees’ decision to undertake an Attendance Area review. 5.6 If a member of an Attendance Area Review Committee resigns, they will not be replaced. For purposes of certainty, a member of an Attendance Review Committee will not be permitted to appoint or send a designate to represent them at any meetings. Despite the foregoing, as indicated in sections 5.2.1 and 5.2.2, the chair of a School Council and the President of a Home and School Association, in each case for a School which is subject to an Attendance Area Review, may designate an individual to serve, in their stead, on the applicable Attendance Area Review Committee. Any such appointment will, however, be for the entirety of the applicable Attendance Area Review process. 6.0 AARC MEETING 6.1 After the membership of an Attendance Area Review Committee has been determined, TVDSB will invite the members of the AARC to a meeting (an “AARC Meeting”), at which TVDSB Administration will: 6.1.1 review the overall Attendance Area Review Process and timelines; 6.1.2 review relevant information contained in this Procedure; 6.1.3 review the roles and responsibilities of the Attendance Area Review Committee members as envisioned by this Procedure; 6.1.4 present the applicable Initial Attendance Area Review Report; and 6.1.5 take questions of clarification on the roles and responsibilities of Attendance Area Review Committee members and on the Initial Attendance Area Review Report. APPENDIX B Page 8 of 17 6.2 An invitation to the respective AARC Meeting will be sent to the respective Attendance Area Review Committee members via e-mail and notice of the AARC Meeting will be posted on TVDSB’s website, at least ten (10) Business Days prior to the date scheduled for the AARC Meeting. AARC Meetings will be open to the public. 6.3 The AARC Meeting will be chaired by a member of TVDSB Senior Administration (or such other person as TVDSB’s Director of Education may designate). The AARC Meeting will occur on a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday (which is a School Day), between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. (local time). AARC Meetings will be subject to the protocols set out in Schedule B attached. 7.0 SCHOOL-LEVEL MEETINGS 7.1 Following an AARC Meeting, the AARC members representing a particular School (“School AARC Subcommittee”) will hold meetings (“School-Level Meetings”) with the School Community for the School those AARC members represent. The purpose of School-Level Meetings is to: provide the AARC School Subcommittees with an opportunity to share and explain to their respective School Community the information received by the AARC members at the respective AARC Meeting; and, obtain input from their respective School Community. Each School AARC Subcommittee is required to hold at least one (1) School-Level Meeting. Each School AARC Subcommittee will otherwise determine the number of School-Level Meetings they wish to hold. School-Level Meetings will be held at the respective School (or, in the event there is insufficient space, at such other TVDSB facility as the principal of the respective School may determine). 7.2 The principal of the respective School (or such other person(s) as TVDSB’s Director of Education may designate), will support the School AARC Subcommittee for that School by: 7.2.1 posting notice of all School-Level Meetings on that School’s website, at least five (5) Business Days prior to the date scheduled for the respective School-Level Meeting; 7.2.2 arranging for the availability of administrative support for purposes of note- taking for the School-Level Meetings; 7.2.3 posting the agenda for each School-Level Meeting on the website for the respective School and arranging for a copy of the respective agenda to be sent home with students of the respective School, in both cases at least two (2) Business Days prior to the date scheduled for the respective School-Level Meeting; APPENDIX B Page 9 of 17 7.2.4 arranging for space to be available for the School-Level Meetings; and 7.2.5 acting as a resource to the chair of the respective School AARC Subcommittee. 7.3 School-Level Meetings will be chaired by such member of the respective School AARC Subcommittee as is determined by a majority of the School AARC Subcommittee members prior to those meetings. School-Level Meetings will occur on a Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday (which is a School Day), between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. (local time). School-Level Meetings will be subject to the protocols set out in Schedule C attached. 7.4 The agenda for a first School-Level Meeting will typically involve: 7.4.1 calling the meeting to order and making introductions; 7.4.2 a member of the respective School AARC Subcommittee providing an explanation of the information received by the AARC at the AARC Meeting, including, the applicable Initial Attendance Area Review Report; 7.4.3 a question and answer period during which attendees will be entitled to ask members of the School AARC Subcommittee questions regarding the information made available to the AARC at the AARC Meeting; 7.4.4 a period devoted to obtaining feedback from the School Community on the Initial Attendance Area Review Report; 7.4.5 a determination of what, if any, additional information the School AARC Subcommittee may require from TVDSB Senior Administration regarding the Initial Attendance Area Review Report; 7.4.6 a discussion of the need for and timing of future School-Level Meetings for purposes of further discussion; and 7.4.7 adjournment. 7.5 School-Level Meetings held after a first School-Level Meeting, if any, would involve further discussions regarding the applicable Initial Attendance Area Review Report, with a view to enabling the School AARC Subcommittee to understand the views of the School Community on the Initial Attendance Area Review Report; and 7.6 To the extent that the majority of School AARC Subcommittee members decide they require additional information from TVDSB on anything contained in an Initial Attendance Area Review Report, they may request same via e-mail addressed to planning@tvdsb.on.ca. TVDSB will use reasonable efforts to APPENDIX B Page 10 of 17 provide such information, so long as it is pertinent to the matter and is readily available to TVDSB, on an internal basis, without undue demands on TVDSB’s resources. Such additional information will be provided, via e-mail, to all members of the respective AARC. All requests for additional information must be received within thirty-five (35) Business Days of the AARC Meeting. 7.7 The purpose of holding the School-Level Meetings and the production of the reports of the respective School AARC Subcommittees (as contemplated in section 8.0 below), in the manner contemplated by this Procedure, is to allow each School Community involved in an Attendance Area review to have an opportunity for input on the respective Initial Attendance Area Review Report. 7.8 School-Level Meetings must be completed within forty-five (45) Business Days of the respective AARC Meeting. 7.9 School AARC Subcommittees shall assist TVDSB Administration by requesting any required additional information as soon as possible after the respective scheduled School-Level Meetings. 8.0 REPORTS OF SCHOOL AARC SUBCOMMITTEE 8.1 One of the primary responsibilities of each School AARC Subcommittee is to prepare a written report on the School Community input received at their respective School-Level Meetings. Such written report is to be completed and submitted via e-mail addressed to planning@tvdsb.on.ca within fifty-five (55) Business Days of the AARC Meeting. An AARC School Subcommittee need not reach consensus as to the content of their written report and, if necessary, each member can prepare their own section to form part of such written report. In the event a School AARC Subcommittee elects not to submit a written report, the respective Attendance Area Review Process will proceed without such report. 9.0 COMPLETING THE ATTENDANCE AREA REVIEW 9.1 Final Attendance Area Review Reports 9.1.1 Within ninety (90) Business Days after an AARC Meeting, TVDSB Administration will prepare, for presentation to the Trustees, a final report (a “Final Attendance Area Review Report”), which will: contain such amendments, if any, to the respective Initial Attendance Area Review Report as TVDSB Administration may, in their discretion, determine are justified based on the input received from the respective School AARC Subcommittees; and, copies of all of the written reports received from the respective School AARC Committees. The Final Attendance Area Review Report will be: sent, via e-mail, to all members of the respective AARC; and, posted on TVDSB’s website. APPENDIX B Page 11 of 17 9.1.2 The dates scheduled for the respective Public Delegation Meeting and the meeting at which the Trustees are anticipated to make a decision on the Final Attendance Area Review Report will be included in the Final Attendance Area Review Report. The Final Attendance Area Review Report will: (a) advise parties wishing to make presentations to the Trustees at the applicable Public Delegation Meeting, that such parties are required to submit a presenter package in the manner described in section 2 of Schedule D attached; (b) include, as a schedule, the written reports submitted by the applicable School AARC Subcommittees; and (c) include TVDSB Senior Administration’s final recommendations on the respective Attendance Areas, together with a proposed timeline for implementation. 9.2 Final Report Presentation Meeting 9.2.1 After an AARC Meeting (and prior to the respective Public Delegation Meeting), TVDSB Administration will present the respective Final Attendance Area Review Report to the Trustees. Such presentation will be an agenda item at a meeting of the Trustees (and for purposes of this Procedure any such meeting will be referred to as a “Final Report Presentation Meeting”). 9.2.2 Trustees may ask TVDSB Senior Administration questions of clarification regarding a Final Attendance Area Review Report presented at a Final Report Presentation Meeting; however, there will be no debate with respect to, or vote on the respective Final Attendance Area Review Report at that time. The final decision of the Trustees on the recommendations in the Final Attendance Area Review Report will be made at a later meeting of the Trustees (see section 9.4 below). 9.3 Public Delegation Meeting 9.3.1 Not less than ten (10) Business Days after the applicable Final Attendance Area Review Report has been sent via e-mail to the members of the respective AARC and posted on TVDSB’s website, there will be an opportunity for members of the public to provide feedback to the Trustees on the Final Attendance Area Review Report, on the basis described in Schedule D attached. The meeting of the Trustees at which such opportunity to provide feedback is to occur is referred to as the “Public Delegation Meeting” in this Procedure. APPENDIX B Page 12 of 17 9.3.2 Notice of a Public Delegation Meeting will be included in the respective Final Attendance Area Review Report and posted on TVDSB’s website, at least ten (10) Business Days prior to the date scheduled for the respective Public Delegation Meeting. 9.3.3 Public Delegation Meetings will be subject to the rules and protocols set forth in Schedule D attached. 9.4 Trustees’ Decision 9.4.1 At a meeting of the Trustees following the applicable Public Delegation Meeting, the Trustees will reach a decision on the Final Attendance Area Review Report. 9.4.2 The Trustees have the authority to: approve the recommendation(s) contained in the Final Attendance Area Review Report; modify and approve one (1) or more of the recommendation(s) contained in the Final Attendance Area Review Report; defer making a decision; or, approve a different outcome or approach than that recommended. 9.4.3 The Trustees will endeavor, so long as circumstances permit, not to make their final decision regarding an Attendance Area review during TVDSB’s summer holiday period (typically from July 1 to the day after Labour Day). In no circumstances will the Trustees make a final decision regarding an Attendance Area review between September 1, and October 31, in a year in which a regular election under the Municipal Elections Act (Ontario) is to occur. 9.5 General Matters 9.5.1 If TVDSB amends any Attendance Area(s) in the circumstances described in section 3.1 above or pursuant to the Attendance Area Review Process outlined in this Procedure, TVDSB will have the authority to allow any student enrolled in a School at the time of the proposed amendment to an Attendance Area comes into effect to continue to attend such School, for so long as that student continues to reside at the address they did at the time of the amendment and until that student graduates from that School or otherwise ceases attending that School for their own reasons. In the event such an allowance is made, the provision of student transportation to any student(s) who are the subject of such an allowance, if applicable, will be determined by the Trustees at the time they make a decision on the applicable Attendance Area Report. APPENDIX B Page 13 of 17 10.0 IMPLEMENTATION 10.1 In the event that the Trustees approve amendments to the Attendance Areas for one (1) or more Schools, TVDSB will communicate the following information to the students and the parents/guardians of the students enrolled at the affected Schools: 10.1.1 timelines for implementation of the proposed amendments to the subject Attendance Areas, together with particulars on the amendments in question; 10.1.2 availability of School programs at the Schools in question and for which Attendance Areas have been adjusted; and 10.1.3 related transportation information. 10.2 TVDSB may also enlist parents/guardians from the affected Schools by establishing transition working groups to provide feedback, if applicable, on: 10.2.1 orientation events for students and staff; 10.2.2 the distribution of memorabilia and school equipment; 10.2.3 school spirit matters; and 10.2.4 School Council assets. APPENDIX B SCHEDULE A ATTENDANCE AREA REVIEW PROCESS TVDSB Administration submits an Initial Attendance Area Review Report to the Trustees (section 3.1). Trustees decide not to undertake an Attendance Area review. Process terminates. Trustees approve proceeding with an Attendance Area review (“Trustees Decision to Proceed”). Recruitment of AARC members (section 5.0). AARC Meeting (section 6.0). School-Level Meetings (section 7.0). Delivery of School AARC Subcommittee reports (section 8.0). Public Delegation Meeting (section 9.3). Final Attendance Area Review Report (section 9.1.1). Final Report Presentation Meeting (section 9.2). Decision of Trustees on Final Attendance Area Review Report (section 9.4). Implementation (section. 10.0). NOTES: 1.Capitalized terms used in this Schedule A have the respective meaning given in the body of the Procedure. 2.Section number references in this Schedule A are to the respective sections of the Procedure. 3.This Schedule A is intended to provide a general overview of the sequencing of the Attendance Area Review Process and is subject to the Procedure. TIMELINES FOR ATTENDANCE AREA REVIEW PROCESS: 1.Reasonable efforts to determine the membership of the Attendance Area Review Committee within ten (10) Business Days of the Trustees’ decision to undertake an Attendance Area review. 2.School-Level Meetings to be completed within forty-five (45) Business Days of the AARC Meeting. 3.Requests made by School AARC Subcommittees under section 7.6 of the Procedure must be received within thirty-five (35) Business Days of the AARC Meeting. 4.School AARC Subcommittees are to submit their reports on School Community input to planning@TVDSB.on.ca within fifty-five (55) Business Days of the AARC Meeting. 5.Within ninety (90) School Days after the AARC Meeting, TVDSB Administration to prepare a Final Attendance Area Review Report. 6.There must be at least ten (10) School Days between: the time a Final Attendance Area Review Report has been sent via e-mail to the members of the respective AARC and posted on TVDSB’s website; and, the date of the applicable Public Delegation Meeting. APPENDIX B SCHEDULE B AARC MEETING PROTOCOLS The following will apply to AARC Meetings contemplated in the Procedure to which this Schedule is attached: 1. The chair of the meeting (in this Schedule B, the “Chair”), will ensure that all presentations, questions and answers are directed through the Chair and that personal remarks and discourteous language are not permitted. The Chair may refuse to permit questions from any person who is or has been discourteous or disrespectful. Clarity and brevity are encouraged. The Chair may limit or exclude questions that fall outside the purposes of the meeting, are repetitive, irrelevant or immaterial. 2. Only members of the Attendance Area Review Committee may ask questions of clarification regarding the information presented by TVDSB, following the conclusion of TVDSB’s presentation. The Chair will determine the order of questions. 3. A person wising to make remarks or ask questions should raise their hand and wait to be recognized by the Chair. 4. The Chair may, in the Chair’s discretion, establish time limits or limit the number of questions to be asked by any person. 5. The Chair, in deciding a point of order or practice will, before declaring a decision, give reason for such decision. Any ruling of the Chair will be final. 6. Any person present at the meeting who does not adhere to the meeting protocols, disregards a decision of the Chair, or makes any disorderly noise or disturbance, may be ordered by the Chair to leave the meeting room for the remainder of the meeting. In the case of a refusal to do so, the Chair may order the removal of that person. 7. Media and the public may attend the meeting and sit in the public area. No media interviews or reporting will be allowed in the meeting room while the meeting is taking place. All members of the media are allowed to tape or video record meetings. Recordings should be done in a manner that does not interfere with the meeting. The Chair may make a determination that a recording is being done in an intrusive manner taking into consideration, but not limited to, brightness of lights, distance from the deliberations, size of the equipment and the general layout and functioning of the meeting room. If the Chair makes a determination that any recording is intrusive, the Chair may request an accommodation to avoid the interference with the meeting and if not complied with may request the individual to leave the meeting room. 8. All members of the media and any other person wishing to record the meeting, or any part of it, must advise the Chair or the secretary of the meeting of such individual’s presence and intention to record the meeting, or any part of it, prior to the commencement of the meeting. In such circumstances, the Chair will advise that the meeting is being recorded. APPENDIX B SCHEDULE C SCHOOL-LEVEL MEETING PROTOCOLS The following will apply to the School-Level Meetings contemplated in the Procedure to which this Schedule is attached: 1. The chair of the meeting (in this Schedule C, the “Chair”), will ensure that presentations, remarks, questions and answers are directed through the Chair and that personal remarks and discourteous language are not permitted. The Chair may refuse to permit remarks or questions from any person who is or has been discourteous or disrespectful. Clarity and brevity are encouraged. The Chair may limit or exclude remarks or questions that fall outside the purposes of the meeting, are repetitive, irrelevant or immaterial. 2. Members of the School Community or public wishing to make remarks or ask questions, should raise their hand and wait to be recognized by the Chair. 3. The Chair may, in the Chair’s discretion, establish time limits or limit the number of remarks or questions by any person. 4. The Chair, in deciding a point of order or practice will, before declaring a decision, give reason for such decision. Any ruling of the Chair will be final. 5. Any person present at the meeting who does not adhere to the meeting protocols, disregards a decision of the Chair, or makes any disorderly noise or disturbance, may be ordered by the Chair to leave the meeting room for the remainder of the meeting. In the case of a refusal to do so, the Chair may order the removal of that person. 6. Media and the public may attend the meeting and sit in the public area. No media interviews or reporting will be allowed in the meeting room while the meeting is taking place. All members of the media and public are allowed to tape or video record meetings. Recordings should be done in a manner that does not interfere with the meeting. The Chair may make a determination that a recording is being done in an intrusive manner taking into consideration, but not limited to, brightness of lights, distance from the deliberations, size of the equipment and the general layout and functioning of the meeting room. If the Chair makes a determination that any recording is intrusive, the Chair may request an accommodation to avoid the interference with the meeting and if not complied with may request the individual to leave the meeting room. 7. All members of the media and any other person wishing to record the meeting, or any part of it, must advise the Chair or the secretary of the meeting of such individual’s presence and intention to record the meeting, or any part of it, prior to the commencement of the meeting. In such circumstances, the Chair will advise that the meeting is being recorded. APPENDIX B SCHEDULE D PUBLIC DELEGATION MEETING PROTOCOLS 1. Individuals and groups will be limited to one presentation to the Trustees regarding a Final Attendance Area Review Report. 2. To appear before the Trustees, a presenter package, in the form available on TVDSB’s website must be submitted in accordance with the instructions appearing on TVDSB’s website prior to Public Delegation Meeting. 3. The Chair’s Committee will review the presenters’ packages received to ensure that the proposed presentations are germane to the applicable Attendance Area review and will determine the order and number of presentations. The Chair’s Committee will have the authority to disallow any presentation if they determine that the presentation is not germane to the applicable Attendance Area review or offends TVDSB values. 4. The Trustees will be advised of all presentation requests through the report of the Chair’s Committee. 5. Oral presentations will be a maximum of ten (10) minutes for an approved delegation representing a School Council, or a Home and School Association, in good standing and five (5) minutes for individuals or representatives of an organization/group. 6. Presentations should address the concerns identified in the respective presenters’ package. If the materials presented differ substantially from the written submission, the Chair has the right to rule the presentation out of order. 7. At the conclusion of each public presentation, the Trustees may ask questions of clarification. 8. Public Delegation Meetings will otherwise be conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of TVDSB’s By-laws. APPENDIX B Thames Valley District School Board Attendance Area Review Committee Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review Port Stanley Public School Report of Port Stanley Public School Attendance Area Review Subcommittee Subcommittee Members: Julie Meyers, Amanda Zavitz-Gocan, Katelyn Vey, Julie Looper Report Sections: 1) School-Level Meeting Summary 2) Grade 7/8 FI Parent Survey Results Summary 3) Overall Summary School Level Meeting date: November 6, 2017 Meeting location: Port Stanley Public School Meeting Co-Chairs- Amanda Zavitz, Julie Meyers In attendance: Jana Walters, Geoff Vantlees, Monique McGahan, Ralph Seelisch, Heather Kaufmann-Seelisch, Amanda Zavitz, Katelyn Vey, Donna Horton, Julie Meyers Section 1- School Level Meeting Summary Attendees were presented with the proposed attendance area options. In groups and individually, they worked to record their thoughts in terms of pros and cons for each of the presented options. They were encouraged to offer additional options if/as desired. The results of this meeting are as follows: Option 1 Pros  I like option 1  Music / art  Keep grade 8 students together – music program  Keep grade 7 cohort together for one year  Place grade 7 students together for graduation next year; host the graduation ceremony at Parkside  Room to grow  More central location  East / west split in Elgin county APPENDIX C Cons  Locke’s is geographically further than Mitchell Hepburn to the new school  How will teachers divide?  New Sarum means another move Option 2 There were no pros and the con for this option is the length of the bus ride for those living on the west side of St. Thomas Option 3 Pro is that Mitchell Hepburn is closer to Sparta and closer to New Sarum Other Suggestions  Keep current grade seven cohort together to PET for one year so they can graduate together  Have all grade eight students next year graduate together despite where they are – graduate at Parkside  72 students in total to keep together at one school for one year is reasonable and will recognize the emotional / social importance and stability, friends, one less move for this group of students  There will be one extra class at PET for one year  Not good to have 4 moves in 4 years – this would be considered a risk factor  The major concern of the parents is another transition, and the emotional impact of splitting the cohort for the grade 7 students going into grade 8 – this is an important year for students and not the time to be disrupting them more so than they are already being disrupted  Want the impact to be minimal – all students go back to their school (PET) that is familiar to them  Students reported to their parents that they want to stay with their friends Section 2- Grade 7/8 FI Parent Survey Results A survey was sent home with all students in the grade 7 and 8 French Immersion program, including those students in the 7/8 Extended French Immersion class. The survey was also posted online, and sent out via eNews as well as being posted on the school Facebook page. The results of the survey are as follows: Summary- There were 29 surveys completed. APPENDIX C Results regarding options are as follows: Prefer Option 1 – 17 Prefer Option 2 – 2 Prefer Option 3 – 7 Other - 3 Preference of keeping children together Keep grade 7 cohort together – 6 Keep grade 7 cohort together at PET next year – 21 Keep grade 7 cohort together at Sparta – 1 Keep grade 7 cohort together at Port Stanley – 1 13 people responded to the question regarding preference for Sparta or New Sarum: Remain at Sparta – 11 Move to New Sarum - 2 Comments on the survey were very similar to those made at the public meeting:  Multiple moves are negative for students  Splitting friends is a negative for students  Long bus rides are negative for students  Multiple transitions are too difficult for students  Concern expressed for the cohort of students who are currently in grade seven at Port Stanley public school. Section 3- Overall Summary Overall, those who participated in the Port Stanley public school French immersion Attendance Area Review meeting seemed to prefer option three out of the options provided by the School Board because Mitchell Hepburn is closer to the new French immersion public schools than Locke's. Option number one was deemed more acceptable than option number two. Option two was not preferred because of the distance that students from Dunwich and Dutton area would have to travel to attend the new French immersion public school. The primary thrust of the meeting was not a debate about what option was best out of the three options provided, but rather a concern for the current grade seven students attending Port Stanley public school. Under the current proposal from the Thames Valley District School Board, this particular cohort is about to face four moves within the timeframe of four years. They attended Pierre Elliot Trudeau French immersion public school in September 2016, they were moved to Port Stanley public school in September 2017. Under the proposed plan, they APPENDIX C would be moved to another school in September 2018 and then they would be go to a third school for high school in September 2019. This number of transitions is a major risk factor for mental health disruption and a threat to the emotional well-being of these children. There are 72 students currently attending Port Stanley public school in the grade seven French immersion program. Those in attendance at our French immersion Attendance Area Review meeting would like to see those students stay together as a cohort for their grade eight year. This would mean allowing a one-year exception wherein all those students currently attending grade seven would attend grade eight together at Pierre Elliot Trudeau French immersion school. This school has been proposed as the primary location because the movement back to P.E.T would not be emotionally challenging for this group of students. Parents who attended this meeting felt strongly that this cohort of students who are currently in grade seven should be able to share a grade eight graduation ceremony together. Those in attendance all felt that the kinship bonds and friendship ties of this cohort trump locational needs of new proposed French immersion public school. Finally, there was very little debate regarding the two proposed locations of the new French immersion public school. There was limited discussion regarding the fact that New Sarum would have a larger yard and would be a more central location; but the group of parents who attended the meeting was also concerned about further disruption to the children if they had to move to Sparta public school and then be moved again a few years later to New Sarum public school. That being said, this group was most concerned about keeping the cohorts of students together and the move would be less disruptive if all of the students from Sparta are moving as one large group to New Sarum. There was no conclusive agreement about support for this decision one way or another. The group in attendance acknowledged the pros and cons of both options. In addition to the meeting there were also 29 Surveys completed regarding the options put forth by the Board. The majority of people who completed the survey preferred option one, followed by option two. 27 out of the 29 people who returned the survey wanted to keep the current grade seven cohort together and the majority wanted those students to complete grade eight at Pierre Elliot Trudeau French immersion public school in St. Thomas. Only 13 out of 29 people reflected upon the option of having New Sarum as the final French immersion public school for Elgin Country. 11 out of those 13 people stated that their preference was for Sparta Public School to remain the Elgin Country French immersion public school. Most of the comments on the surveys were similar to the comments presented at the meeting. Parents were overwhelmingly concerned about the negative impact several moves within such a short timeframe would have on students. APPENDIX C In summary, our Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review concluded that most parents would agree to options one or three and that the parents who participated are most concerned about the well-being of the students who will experience the largest number of transitions. If you have any questions or concerns, or would like further clarification, please feel free to contact me. Dr. Amanda Zavitz Co-chair of the Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review Port Stanley Public School Azavitzg@uwo.ca 519 633-3540 APPENDIX C 2017 Attendance Area Review Pierre Elliott Trudeau Subcommittee Report December 10, 2017 1 Executive Summary The AARC committee is made up of 7 parents from Pierre Elliott Trudeau, which were selected to be the liaison between the planning committee and the Pierre Elliott community. The committee held a meeting with the community on November 6, 2017 to share the options that were brought forward by the Thames Valley District School Board Senior Administration and to receive feedback from parents. Parents expressed concerns regarding the move, the location, and the options that were suggested. Parents had submitted some questions, shared their concerns, and a couple of parents had decided to create other options that they felt would better support the community. These options (8 in total) were compiled into a survey and sent out to the parent community. A copy of the survey is included in Appendix 2. Based on the final survey results, although there was no unanimous consensus, the original proposed option 1 received the most overall support by the community, and Sparta appeared to be the most popular choice for final destination (we believe this is because making 2 moves is not well supported by the community). 2 Committee Members Jessi Linn Davies, FDK Debbie Gandon, Primary Dawne Dopp, Primary Christa McMahon, Junior Travis Sandham, Junior - Not a contributor on report Melanie Power, PTA Chair Ken McLaughlin, School Council Chair APPENDIX D 3 Summary of Feedback from School Level Meeting At the school level meeting held November 6, 2017, we presented the options that the board had outlined for us, and allowed the parents time to discuss, in groups, and provide feedback. We also posted the feedback sheets (see Appendix 1) on the school website and the TVDSB Engage site, so that parents who didn’t attend the meeting could review the options on their own and provide feedback. Feedback response was quite low, however it did spark up some communication in the community regarding the presented options, the location of the move, and the possibility of moving twice. 3.1 Summary of Concerns Raised at School Level Meeting Many parents expressed some concerns around the move. With options 1 & 3, the community is concerned about bussing city children to the country. There is concern not only about the distance, but they are worried about segregating the youth from their community and neighbourhood. For some children there will be an increased time on the bus, so there is a concern around having the time to get them to extracurricular activities outside of the school. They are also worried about school involvement with parents and children, especially after school. Regarding the final location, in the initial feedback, New Sarum seemed to be the preferred location, however there was great concern expressed around moving twice, and the upgrades that would be done to the current facility, especially if it wasn’t the final destination. Parents are worried that Sparta will not get the necessary upgrades should it not be the final destination, and therefore the facility would not meet the required needs, beyond the bare minimum. They are worried that financially the TVDSB couldn’t afford, or that it wouldn’t make sense, to upgrade both facilities, should New Serum be the final destination. Many parents are worried that the results of the attendance area review will cause current families to take their children out of the French Immersion program or seek out alternate programs. 4 Survey Sent Home to Parents After the November 6 school community meeting, the community came back to us with alternate options on how the divide could be made. Once we reviewed this feedback and alternate options, we thought it was necessary to make the community aware of what other parents were thinking, and get the feedback from the entire community in terms of a survey sent to all parents. As a committee we put together a new survey with all of the options, the 3 provided by senior administration, along with 5 other options given to us by the community (we submitted the options for review by the planning committee, but had to get our survey out before we had received a response regarding the viability of each option.) The community had also expressed an option of keeping the grade 8’s together at Pierre Elliott Trudeau to graduate as group (in June 2019), so we also asked for feedback regarding that as an option. As a committee we felt that the community may have different opinions on the options they preferred depending on what the final location was going to be for the new FI school. In the survey given to the community we decided to ask what option they preferred depending on the final destination of the school. We also requested that the community provide us with their first and second choices. A copy of the Survey Sent Home can be found in Appendix 2 APPENDIX D 5 Final Results of Survey Sent Home The following is a breakdown and detailed analysis of survey results. 5.1 With SPARTA as the Final Destination: Total Number of Votes: 153 ● Option 1 was leader (30% of votes), Option 2 (20% of the votes) and Option 3 (14% of the votes) ● Options 4, 5, 6, 8 didn’t have significant support ● Option 7, the banana split, also had decent support at 12% of the votes ● Most popular first and second choice: o When you break the data down further, Option 1 was most popular first choice of most respondents (34 total). o Most popular second choice was close between Option 2 (15 votes for 2nd), Option 1 (12 votes for 2nd), and Option 3 (12 votes for 2nd) Complete survey results can be found in Appendix 3 5.2 With NEW SARUM as the Final Destination: Total Number of Votes: 121 ● Option 7, the banana split, had the most support with 21%, however, for most parents this was their second choice (18 votes) ● Options 1 and 2 were tied with 20% of votes each, however Option 1 had 22 votes as first choice and Option 2 had 16 votes as first choice ● Option 3 was close behind at 16% of votes ● Most popular first and second choice: o When you break the data down further, Option 1 was most popular first choice of most respondents (22 total). o Option 7 was the most popular second choice of most respondents (18 total). Complete survey results can be found in Appendix 3 APPENDIX D 5.3 With No Stated Preference of SPARTA or NEW SARUM as the Final Destination: Total Number of Votes: 26 ● There wasn’t a significant number of respondents (26) vs. Sparta as end school (153) and New Sarum (121) ● Option 1 was the leader (23% of votes) vs. Option 2 and Option 3 (both tied at 19% of votes) ● Most popular first and second choice: o When you break the data down further, Option 1 was most popular first choice of most respondents (5 total). o Option 3 was the most popular second choice of most respondents (4 total). Complete survey results can be found in Appendix 3 5.4 Regarding Keeping Grade 8 Class Together Yes = 135 Votes No = 22 Votes No Preference = 16 Votes Complete survey results can be found in Appendix 3 APPENDIX D 6 Final Summary Based on the final survey results, although there was no unanimous consensus, the original proposed option 1 received the most overall support by the community, and Sparta appeared to be the most popular choice for final destination (we believe this is because making 2 moves is not well supported by the community). Although Option 7 was deemed not viable by the planning committee, this option did receive the most votes with 21%, if New Sarum were to be the final destination. Majority of these votes consisted of 2nd choice votes (voting 2nd for both the school and the boundary). With Sparta as the final destination, it received 12% of the votes. Change is always difficult; however, the amount of change the French Immersion school community in Elgin County has gone through has been significant over the past few years. We would highly recommend that TVDSB listen to the concerns of the parents regarding the transition and investment into the final “new school”. It’s important that whatever the final outcome, that students within Elgin County have comparable and equitable access to the French Immersion program. Thank you, AAR Committee APPENDIX D Appendix 1 – FEEDBACK SHEETS APPENDIX D Appendix 2 – SURVEY SENT HOME TO PARENTS Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Area Review Pierre Elliott Trudeau, November 2017 We have received 5 alternate options suggested by members of the school community and would like to take a final survey of your preferred options. Please review the attached 8 options (which include the original TVDSB proposed options). They show which English track attendance areas would attend each school (options 7 & 8 are geographical boundaries, not based on English track school). The enrollment numbers (based on October 31, 2016 enrollment) and capacity for each school have been provided to help you understand the impact of each option. Keep in mind that enrollment needs to be balanced between the 2 schools. The last page is the survey where you can provide your first and second choice. Please return this page to the school by Wednesday November 29. Alternatively it can be emailed to TrudeauAARC@gmail.com. It has also been suggested that the current grade 7 students be allowed to remain together next year for grade 8 (most likely at Pierre Elliott Trudeau) so they can graduate with the cohort they have been with all through elementary school. The last question of the survey is to indicate your agreement with this. APPENDIX D Option 1 Original option Pierre Elliott Trudeau New FI School Aldborough 17 Davenport/McGregor 19 Dunwich-Dutton 12 Locke's 100 Elgin Court 107 Port Stanley 46 Forest Park 61 Summer's Corners 12 John Wise 98 SE St. Thomas 35 J.R Callwood 38 Belmont 24 Mitchell Hepburn 67 Port Burwell/Straffordville 7 Southwold 64 7/8 Extended 24 Total 488 Total 243 OTG 530 Sparta OTG 305 Capacity 92% Capacity 80% New Sarum OTG 257 Capacity 95% Option 2 Original option Pierre Elliott Trudeau New FI School Elgin Court 107 Aldborough 17 Forest Park 61 Davenport/McGregor 19 John Wise 98 Dunwich-Dutton 12 J.R Callwood 38 Port Stanley 46 Locke's 100 Southwold 64 Mitchell Hepburn 67 Summer's Corners 12 SE St. Thomas 35 Belmont 24 Port Burwell/Straffordville 7 7/8 Extended 24 Total 495 Total 236 OTG 530 Sparta OTG 305 Capacity 93% Capacity 77% New Sarum OTG 257 Capacity 92% APPENDIX D Option 3 Original option Pierre Elliott Trudeau New FI School Aldborough 17 Davenport/McGregor 19 Dunwich-Dutton 12 Mitchell Hepburn 67 Elgin Court 107 Port Stanley 46 Forest Park 61 Summer's Corners 12 John Wise 98 SE St. Thomas 35 J.R Callwood 38 Belmont 24 Locke's 100 Port Burwell/Straffordville 7 Southwold 64 7/8 Extended 24 Total 521 Total 210 OTG 530 Sparta OTG 305 Capacity 98% Capacity 69% New Sarum OTG 257 Capacity 82% APPENDIX D Option 4 This is a variation of option 1, switching Port Stanley and June Rose Callwood. Pierre Elliott Trudeau New FI School Aldborough 17 Davenport/McGregor 19 Dunwich-Dutton 12 Locke's 100 Elgin Court 107 J.R Callwood 38 Forest Park 61 Summer's Corners 12 John Wise 98 SE St. Thomas 35 Port Stanley 46 Belmont 24 Mitchell Hepburn 67 Port Burwell/Straffordville 7 Southwold 64 7/8 Extended 24 Total 496 Total 235 OTG 530 Sparta OTG 305 Capacity 94% Capacity 77% New Sarum OTG 257 Capacity 91% APPENDIX D Option 5 This is also a variation of option 1, moving Port Stanley to Pierre Elliott Trudeau and the 7/8 Extended program to the new FI school. Pierre Elliott Trudeau New FI School Aldborough 17 Davenport/McGregor 19 Dunwich-Dutton 12 Locke's 100 Elgin Court 107 Summer's Corners 12 Forest Park 61 SE St. Thomas 35 John Wise 98 Belmont 24 J.R Callwood 38 Port Burwell/Straffordville 7 Mitchell Hepburn 67 7/8 Extended 24 Southwold 64 Port Stanley 46 Total 510 Total 221 OTG 530 Sparta OTG 305 Capacity 96% Capacity 72% New Sarum OTG 257 Capacity 86% APPENDIX D Option 6 This is a variation of option 3, moving Southwold to the new FI school. Pierre Elliott Trudeau New FI School Aldborough 17 Davenport/McGregor 19 Dunwich-Dutton 12 Mitchell Hepburn 67 Elgin Court 107 Port Stanley 46 Forest Park 61 Southwold 64 John Wise 98 Summer's Corners 12 J.R Callwood 38 SE St. Thomas 35 Locke's 100 Belmont 24 7/8 Extended 24 Port Burwell/Straffordville 7 Total 457 Total 274 OTG 530 Sparta OTG 305 Capacity 86% Capacity 90% New Sarum OTG 257 Capacity 107% Option 7 This is an East/West boundary split (Banana Split!), using Fairview/Burwell/Highbury as a dividing line. Pierre Elliott Trudeau New FI School West of Fairview/Burwell/Highbury 496 East of Fairview/Burwell/Highbury 208 7/8 Extended 24 Total 496 Total 232 OTG 530 Sparta OTG 305 Capacity 94% Capacity 76% New Sarum OTG 257 Capacity 90% APPENDIX D Option 8 This is a North/South split using Elm St as a dividing line in the city. Counties would be separated by east or west of the city. Pierre Elliott Trudeau New FI School North of Elm and Aldborough/Dunwich- Dutton/Southwold South of Elm (including Port Stanley) Aldborough 17 Davenport/McGregor 19 Dunwich-Dutton 12 Summer's Corners 12 Southwold 64 Port Burwell/Straffordville 7 John Wise north of Elm 79 Port Stanley 46 Elgin Court north of Elm 10 John Wise south of Elm 19 Mitchell Hepburn north of Elm 37 Elgin Court south of Elm 97 SE St. Thomas 14 Mitchell Hepburn south of Elm 30 Locke's 100 SE St. Thomas 21 Forest Park 61 J.R Callwood 38 Belmont 24 7/8 Extended 24 Total 480 Total 251 OTG 530 Sparta OTG 305 Capacity 91% Capacity 82% New Sarum OTG 257 Capacity 98% APPENDIX D AAR Survey (Please return by November 29) Given the attached 8 options, please indicated your first and second choice (with a “1” and “2”) as your preferred options for attendance area and final school location. Please note – The new French Immersion school WILL be located at Sparta in 2018. If New Sarum is chosen as the final location, it will involve a move of the whole school community in 2020. Keeping the status quo and moving only once to New Sarum is NOT an option. □ Remain at Sparta with the following attendance area: __ Option 1 __ Option 2 __ Option 3 __ Option 4 __ Option 5 __ Option 6 __ Option 7 __ Option 8 □ Move to New Sarum with the following attendance area: __ Option 1 __ Option 2 __ Option 3 __ Option 4 __ Option 5 __ Option 6 __ Option 7 __ Option 8 Should the current grade 7 students remain together for grade 8 in 2018, regardless of boundary? □ YES □ NO APPENDIX D Appendix 3 – SURVEY RESULTS WITH SPARTA AS THE FINAL LOCATION APPENDIX D WITH NEW SARUM AS THE FINAL LOCATION APPENDIX D WITH NO END SCHOOL PREFERENCE KEEPING THE GRADE 8’S TOGETHER APPENDIX D REPORT OF THE POLICY WORKING COMMITTEE 2018 January 23 3:06 p.m. – 4:56 p.m. Member Attendance MEMBERS A. Morell (Chair) R. Tisdale J. Bennett M. Reid (ex-officio) (+3:36, -4:44) ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS L. Elliott (-3:07) B. Keast L. Munro (+4:26, -4:56) L. Abell (+3:08, -3:41) C. Yeo (+3:08, -3:41) S. Mark (+3:42, -4:03) B. Moore (+3:42, 4:03) R. Kuiper (+4:04, -4:25) C. Yeo (+3:08, -3:41) REGRETS C. Goodall 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – The agenda, as amended, was approved on motion. 2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared 3. COMMITTEE REPORT OF 2017 DECEMBER 19 AND 2018 JANUARY 23 TRACKING SHEET The tracking sheet was reviewed and amended. 4. NEW DRAFT POLICIES/PROCEDURES a. School Councils Policy and Procedure Superintendent R. Kuiper presented for approval the School Councils Policy and Procedure. R. Kuiper provided background information for the School Councils policy and procedure. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the School Councils Policy be posted for 60 days of public input. R. Kuiper reported Administration, Trustees and TVPIC were consulted and provided feedback during the drafting process for both the policy and the procedure. Suggested revisions to the procedure were captured by R. Kuiper. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the School Councils Procedure, as amended, be posted for 60 days of public input. 5. POLICY/PROCEDURES – REQUESTED FOR REVIEW BY COMMITTEE a. Community Use of Buildings, Facilities and Equipment Policy and Procedure Supervisor L. Abell and Manager C. Yeo presented for approval the Community Use of Buildings, Facilities and Equipment Policy and Procedure. L. Abell provided a summary of the recommended changes to the policy and procedure. Suggested revisions were captured by L. Abell. Discussion considered the use of authorized fireworks on school property, refreshment vehicles and issuing permits for the use of school buildings during the last two weeks of August. It was suggested permit users that have used authorized fireworks be contacted to provide additional feedback. The Community Use of Building, Facilities and Equipment Policy and Procedure will return to the Committee for additional review in February. b. Holding Zones and Holding Schools Procedure Superintendent S. Mark and Planning Coordinator B. Moore presented for information and discussion the Holding Zones and Holding Schools Procedure. S. Mark provided background information on the procedure and noted the Ministry is recommending changes that may require additional review of the procedure. Administration is not recommending any changes to the procedure at this time. Discussion considered the current use of holding zones within TVDSB. Trustees questioned the need to outline rural and non-rural holding zones separately. It was suggested the Holding Zones and Holding Schools Procedure return to a future Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee meeting to continue discussion with all Trustees. 6. EXISTING POLICIES/PROCEDURES UNDER REVISION a. Fundraising Projects for Schools Policy and Procedure Learning Supervisor L. Munro presented for approval the Fundraising Projects for Schools Policy and Procedure. L. Munro reported the Policy and Procedure were reviewed by Administrative Council, EIE and is returning to the Policy Working Committee. The changes to the Fundraising Projects for Schools Policy and procedure were summarized. Additional suggested revisions were captured by L. Munro. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the Fundraising Projects for Schools Policy and Procedure, as amended, be posted for 60 days of public input. b. Equity and Inclusive Education Policy L. Munro presented the revised Equity and Inclusive Education Policy. The policy was revised to align with the Ministry Policy on preventing discrimination based on Creed (2015). Minor revisions and housekeeping changes were made. The following recommendation was moved and CARRIED: THAT the Equity and Inclusive Education Policy be approved. c. Religious and Faith Based Accommodation of Students L. Munro presented the revised Religious and Creed-Based Accommodation of Students Procedure. This procedure was revised to align with the Ministry Policy on preventing discrimination based on Creed (2015) and Ontario’s Education Equity Action Plan (2017). L. Munro summarized the changes made to the policy and procedure. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the Religious and Creed-Based Accommodation of Students Procedure be posted for 60 days of public input. d. Home and School and Other Parent and Student Associations Policy R. Kuiper presented the revised Home & School Associations Policy and outlined the revisions made to the policy. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the Home & School Associations Policy be posted for 60 days of public input. e. School Councils – Conflict Resolution Process for Internal School Council Disputes Policy and Procedure R. Kuiper presented the School Councils – Conflict Resolution Process for Internal School Council Disputes Policy and Procedure. It is recommended the Policy and Procedure be rescinded. Committee members noted it is important that the public is aware which policies and procedures are recommended to be rescinded. Corporate Services will include the policies and procedures for rescinding with the School Councils Policy and Procedure (item #4.a) for public input. Following the approval process for the School Councils Policy and Procedure the policies and procedures listed below will return to the Policy Working Committee to be rescinded:  #3003 - School Councils Policy  #3007 - School Councils – Conflict Resolution Process for Internal School Disputes Policy  #3007a - School Councils – Conflict Resolution Process for Internal School Procedure  #3008 - School Council Parent Mem bers Policy f. School Councils – Parent Members - Discussed under item #6.e. 7. POLICIES/PROCEDURES FOLLOWING PUBLIC INPUT - None 8. POLICY/PROCEDURE REQUIRING ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION - None 9. OTHER BUSINESS a. Director Evaluation Review Process Procedure – Deferred until 2018 February 27. 10. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING The next meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, 2018 February 27 in the Governor Simcoe Room. 11. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned by motion at 4:56 p.m. RECOMMENDATIONS: THAT the Equity and Inclusive Education Policy be approved. ARLENE MORELL Committee Chairperson Administered By: Director’s Services Amendment Date(s): POLICY Title: EQUITY AND INCLUSIVE EDUCATION Policy No.: 2022 Effective Date: 2010 Sept 1 Department: Director’s Services Reference(s): - PPM No. 119 – Developing and Implementing Equity and Inclusive Education Policies in Ontario Schools - Procedure – Religious and Creed-Based Accommodations of Staff - Procedure – Religious and Creed-Based Accommodations of Students - Policy – Safe Schools - Procedure – Advertising and Distribution of Political/ Religious/ Sectarian/ Commercial and Non-Commercial Material in Schools - Policy – Harassment - Policy – Self-Identification for Aboriginal Students - Procedure – First Nations Language Instruction - Procedure – ESL/. ELD Teacher Staffing Allocations - Ontario Human Rights Commission’s Policy on Preventing Discrimination Based on Creed - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Constitution Act, 1982 - Ontario Human Rights Code It is the policy of the Board to commit to excellence in education and equitable educational outcomes for all students. The Thames Valley District School Board and its staff are committed to the elimination of discrimination as outlined in Ontario’s Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy and in PPM No. 119, “Developing and Implementing Eq uity and Inclusive Education Policies in Ontario Schools” (June 24, 2009). The Thames Valley District School Board believes that equity of opportunity and equity of access to all programs, services, and resources are critical to the well-being of those who serve the school system and to the achievement of successful outcomes by all those who are served. The Thames Valley District School Board recognizes that groups in our communities face systemic and individual biases that may be related t race, colour, culture, ethnicity, linguistic origin, disability, socio-economic class, age, ancestry, nationality, place of origin, religion, faith, sex, gender, sexual orientation, family status, and/or marital status. As the original peoples of Canaeda, First Nations, Metis, and Inuit communities face similar and unique biases. To the extent that the Thames Valley District School Board recognizes that these biases exist within the school system, it is committed to fairness, equity, and inclusive education as essential principles of the system. All Board policies, programs, operations, and practices will Equity and Inclusive Education Page 2 of 4 reflect these values. The Thames Valley District School Board will not tolerate discrimi nation or any expression of discrimination by members of our school communities. The Thames Valley District School Board values and welcomes the contributions of diverse community members in strengthening educational opportunities for all students and ensuring a respectful, supportive, and welcoming learning and working environment for all students and employees. 1.0 Definitions The Ministry of Education and the Thames Valley District School Board recognize the following definitions for the purposes of this policy: Diversity: The presence of a wide range of human qualities and attributes within a group, organization, or society. The dimensions of diversity include, but are not limited to, ancestry, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, language, physical and intellectual ability, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, ad socio-economic status. Equity: A condition or state of fair, inclusive and respectful treatment of all people. Equity does not mean treating people the same without regard for individual differences. Inclusive Education: Education that is based on the principles of acceptance and inclusion of all students. Students see themselves reflected in their curriculum, their physical surroundings, and the broader environment, in which diversity is honoured and all individuals are respected. 2.0 Areas of Focus 2.1 Thames Valley District School Board Policies, Programs, Guidelines, and Practices The Thames Valley District School Board is committed to incorporating the principles of equity and inclusive education into all aspects of its operations, structures, policies, programs, procedures, guidelines, and practices. The Thames Valley District School Board is committed to the removal of systemic barriers to improve student learning, close achievement gaps, and to ensure equitable opportunities for students and staff. 2.2 Shared and Committed Leadership The Thames Valley District School Board shall provide informed and committed leadership at all levels by assisting administrators, teachers, support staff, student leaders, trustees, and educational partners to develop the knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviours required to implement this policy. The Thames Valley District School Board is committed to building the capacity within leaders to improve student achievement and to close achievement gaps for students by identifying, addressing, removing, and preventing all forms of discrimination. Equity and Inclusive Education Page 3 of 4 2.3 School-Community Relationships The Thames Valley District School Board is committed to developing new relationships and building upon existing partnerships with diverse communities so that the perspectives and experiences of all students are recognized and valued. The Thames Valley District School Board recognizes that effective school-community partnerships enable representation and active parti cipation from diverse communities and ensure the inclusion of their perspectives and experiences to enhance educational opportunities and equitable decision making. 2.4 Inclusive Curriculum and Assessment Practices The Thames Valley District School Board is committed to implementing an inclusive curriculum through the development and review of resources, instruction, and assessment and evaluation practices, in order to identify and address discriminatory biases so that students may maximize their learning. Through the development and implementation of inclusive curriculum and assessment practices, staff will recognize and support students with diverse backgrounds and differing abilities. 2.5 Religious and Creed-based Accommodation The Thames Valley District School Board acknowledges each individual’s right to follow or not follow religious and/ or spiritual beliefs and practices free from discriminatory or harassing behavior and is committed to taking all reasonable steps to provide religious and creed-based accommodation to students and staff aligned with board policy. 2.6 School Climate and the Prevention of Discrimination and Harassment The Thames Valley District School Board is committed to the principle that every person within our district, as stated in board policy, is entitled to a respectful, positive, supportive learning and working environment, free from all forms of discrimination and harassment. 2.7 Professional Learning The Thames Valley District School Board is committed to providing staff and community partners with opportunities to acquire the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviours needed to identify, eliminate, and prevent discriminatory biases and systemic barriers. 2.8 Accountability and Transparency Equity and Inclusive Education Page 4 of 4 The Thames Valley District School Board is committed to assessing and monitoring its progress in implementing the Equity and Inclusive Education Policy; to embedding its principles into all other Thames Valley District School Board policies, programs, guidelines, and practices; and t o communicating these results to our school communities, the Ministry of Education, the Board, and the public. The Equity and Inclusive Education Steering Committee will lead the annual review of the Equity and Inclusive Education Board Action Plan. REPORT OF THE PROGRAM & SCHOOL SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2018 February 6 6:03 p.m. – 7:58 p.m. Members: Trustees J. Bennett, R. Campbell, C. Goodall (by phone), B. McKinnon, A. Morell, S. Polhill, M. Reid, J. Skinner, G. Hart, P. Jaffe, P. Schuyler (+6:37); Student Trustees N. Lavdas, S. Kim, T. Kennedy Regrets: Trustees J. Todd, R. Tisdale Administration: L. Elliott (Director), V. Nielsen (Associate Director), B. Keast (Corporate Services), R. Culhane (Superintendent, +6:48), L. Kirkpatrick (Research and Assessment Services Associate, -6:48), D. Macpherson (Superintendent), P. McKenzie (Superintendent), L. Munro (Learning Supervisor, -6:48), B. Nielsen (Learning Supervisor, +6:48), A. Roth (Learning Coordinator, -7:08), C. Stager (Manager, -6:48), P. Sydor (Superintendent), S. McGahey-Albert (FNMI Education Advisor, +6:48), Guest: T. Bright (Ministry of Education) 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA – The agenda, as amended, was approved on motion. 2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared 3. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING – Provided for information 4. BUSINESS ARISING In response to a Trustee question V. Nielsen provided clarification regarding the Late Start Update (2017 December 5, item #10). V. Nielsen reported Oakridge S.S. has decided not to pursue the late start pilot. 5. URBAN PRIORITIES HIGH SCHOOLS (U.P.H.S.) INITITIAVE L. Munro introduced C. Stager and L. Kirkpatrick. A high level overview of the Urban Priorities High School Initiative was shared. The slides prepared for Trustees were reviewed. Trustees were invited to attend the a regional session with TVDSB UPHS schools on 2018 February 28. Administration responded to Trustee questions regarding program funding, the possibility of expanding some of the U.P.H.S projects to other schools and the specific criteria for schools to be selected as an Urban Priority High School. In response to Trustee questions, Administration advised on how schools not meeting the criteria of the funding, but with a need for similar programming may access other sources of funding . Data used to determine programming and initiatives successful at decreasing suspension rates and increasing graduation rates for at-risk students were described. In response to a Trustee question the difference between “at-risk” and “in-risk” was described. These terms are often used interchangeably. 6. GREENHOUSE ACADEMY D. Macpherson and A. Roth provided an overview of the Greenhouse Academy as an exemplary model of innovation in programming, experiential learning and community engagement. A. Roth described the Greenhouse Academy and the benefits offered by this program for students. Information was shared regarding Pathways and Work Internship programs, the increase of student skills, the overall experience and positive relationships students experienced and the possible expansion of the Greenhouse Academy within TVDSB. Administration noted transportation for the program is funded through Pathways. Trustees provided feedback with respect to the development of future experiential learning programs noting their excitement for the growth in this area for students in all areas of TVDSB. 7. INDIGENOUS ACTION PLAN 2017-2018 P. McKenzie, B. Nielsen and S. McGahey-Albert presented the Thames Valley District School Board’s Indigenous Action Plan. The plan was developed in coordination with Chippewa of the Thames, Oneida Nation of the Thames, Munsee Delaware Nation and the N’Amerind Friendship Centre. P. McKenzie, B. Nielsen and S. McGahey-Albert reviewed the slide deck. The presentation highlighted the ways in which the Indigenous Action plan will engage community voice, support students and educators and build awareness. The next steps for the Action Plan were outlined. Appreciation was extended to the FNMI team for their presentation and work. In response to a Trustee question, Administration provided a brief overview of the Indigenous Student Leadership meetings. Trustee Schuyler highlighted the need to ensure community awareness of available programming and resources. Administration reported a goal of the Indigenous Action Plan is to increase awareness of programming and resources available in schools for students, educators and the community. P. McKenzie noted there may be feedback from the community that administration is not receiving. P. McKenzie highlighted building trust and relationships are a key focus of the Action Plan. Trustees highlighted the work of the School Council at West Oaks F.I. A key focus at West Oaks F.I. is to learn more about and incorporate FNMI culture. 8. COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE UPDATES (STANDING ITEM) J. Bennett provided an update on the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Committee . The Safer Schools Act (City of London Staff Report, 2017 May 30, Bill 65) allows municipalities to set their own speed limits including speed limits within school zones. During the meeting the City of London indicated key stakeholders were asked for input. Administration was asked if they were consulted or asked to provide input. J. Bennett reported the City of London is looking at Planning for Supervised Consumption F acilities and Overdose Prevention Sites. The distance from schools was outlined in the report (300 meters). Discussion considered current City bylaws in this regard. 9. OTHER BUSINESS a. Strong Start R. Culhane provided a brief overview of the Strong Start program. A letter of interest was sent to elementary schools within TVDSB with many schools indicating their interest in starting the program in February. There is representation from all regions in TVDSB. Recruitment of volunteers will take place with training provided to all selected volunteers. A report with additional information will be provided at a future Program and School Services Advisory Committee meeting. 10. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS OF MEMBERS (STANDING ITEM) Discussion considered attendance at the Public Delegation Board Meeting on 2018 February 7. 11. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING The next meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, March 6 at 6:00 p.m., in the Board Room. 12. ADJOURNMENT On motion the meeting adjourned at 7:58 p.m. RECOMMENDATIONS: None J. Bennett Chairperson REPORT OF THE THAMES VALLEY PARENT INVOLVEMENT COMMITTEE 2018 February 8 6:34 p.m. to 8:47 p.m. MEMBERS ADMINISTRATION & OTHERS A. Willsher, Co-Chair L. Honsinger, Co-Chair R. Tisdale, Trustee R. Kuiper, Superintendent M. Bayes, Parent Member J. Bugorski, Parent Member K. Frisa, Parent Member A. Malcolm, Parent Member (+6:50) C. Rahman, Parent Member S. Vries, Parent Member A. Enriquez-Johnson, Community Member L. Gonzalez, Thames Valley Council of Home & School Associations B. Cumming, Secretary, Learning Support Services E. Fahmy, Parent Engagement Lead B. Keast, Assistant, Corporate Services Regrets: S. Doxtator, Parent Member J. Pollard, Parent Member J. Jacob, Community Member C. Cordes, Principal, Thames Valley Administrator’s Committee Elementary M. Flumerfelt, Principal, Thames Valley Secondary School Administrators’ Council 1. CALL TO ORDER Co-Chair L. Honsinger called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. in the Katherine Harley Room at the Education Centre in London. 2. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA The agenda was approved. 3. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared 4. MINUTES OF THE MEETING FROM 2018 JANUARY 11 - provided for information 5. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES OF 2018 JANUARY 11 - none 6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS a. 2016/2017 Draft Annual Report A. Willsher presented the draft annual report for 2016/2017. Included in the document is a submission from C. Cordes. The finalized report will go to the Board for approval. Suggested revisions were captured by L. Honsinger. Additional revisions can be submitted to the Co-Chairs. It was suggested the draft annual report be submitted to Communications to include on the final template. Prior to going to Board for approval the draft final annual report will be circulated by e- mail, by Corporate Services, for approval. b. TVPIC Volunteer Award A. Willsher described the TVPIC Volunteer Award and past processes for administering the award. It was suggested an award package be distributed to schools to encourage recognition of volunteers. Funds are available to schools for the purpose of engraving existing TVPIC Volunteer plaques currently housed in schools. Discussion considered current activities in schools that recognize volunteers and the possible funding options to support these events. L. Honsinger and A. Willsher will draft the award package and distribute to TVPIC members for feedback. Members expressed concerns that some School Councils may be unaware of TVPIC and TVPIC’s mandate. It was suggested communication between TVPIC Members, Schools and School Council Chairs needs improvement. It was suggested, at a future TVPIC meeting, members should discuss and review the goals and priorities of TVPIC. Members identified challenges with the new website. Committee members were encouraged to submit their recommendations for changes to the website to the Communications subcommittee. Co-Chairs L. Honsinger and A. Willsher stressed the importance of members joining and participating in TVPIC sub-committees. Discussion considered the impact of Administration and Member transition on TVPIC. The value of a Superintendent having parent engagement experience was highlighted. Trustee R. Tisdale encouraged members to bring forward recommendations. 7. MEMBER UPDATES FROM TVDSB REPRESENTATIVES (Standing Item) a. Director of Education/Delegate R. Kuiper provided an update regarding the Parent Engagement Review Committee and Strategic Priorities. The 2017-2019 Multi-Year Operational Plan was distributed and key points were highlighted. The Parent Engagement Review Committee is meeting again next week. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT Stacey Vries be appointed to the Parent Engagement Review Committee. As a follow up to a System-Wide volunteer recognition event (item #12, 2017 April 6), a Volunteer Recognition Committee will be struck to organize a System-Wide volunteer recognition event. b. Trustee R. Tisdale reported public input is being sought on the Strategic Priorities . Input is requested from parent members and community groups; interested parties can register online or through the Trustees Office for the public consultation sessions. The latest meeting took place on 2018 February 5 at Strathroy District Collegiate Institute. R. Tisdale noted five policies and procedures are posted on the TVDSB website for public input. 8. TVDSB ADMINISTRATION, TVCSA, and COMMUNITY REPORTS (STANDING ITEM) a. Thames Valley Administrators’ Committee – Elementary - None b. Thames Valley Secondary School Administrators’ Council - None c. Thames Valley Council of Home and School Associations L. Gonzalez referred to the written report distributed to members prior to the m eeting. The upcoming meeting dates for general membership meetings were outlined. L. Gonzalez reported planning for the 2018 OFHSA Conference and Annual Meeting has begun, the selected theme is: “What is Your Superpower?” More information will be released shortly. L. Gonzalez noted D. Pushor, an expert on family engagement and a Professor of Curriculum Studies in the College of Education at the University of Saskatchewan , is confirmed as the keynote speaker for the 2018 March 29, PRO Grant event which will be held in the Thames Room. The title of this event is Family Engagement: Building Capacity Together. d. Community Member Reports - None 9. REPORTS FROM MEMBERS ON TVPIC SUBCOMMITTEES (STANDING ITEM) a. Event Planning The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT an Event Planning Sub-Committee be struck with the following members: Melissa Bayes, Stacey Vries, Sue Doxtator, Adrian Willsher, Ana Enriquez-Johnson and Loretta Honsinger. b. Membership A membership update was provided. There are currently three vacancies for TVPIC Membership. There are three parent member vacancies: City of London – W ards 1, 11, 12, 14, City of London and Elgin County. A call for membership will go out in February with voting to take place in May for parent members for the 2018/2019 term. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the Membership subcommittee be confirmed with the following members: Laura Gonzalez, Alicia Malcolm, Adrian Willsher, L. Honsinger, Ruth Tisdale and Rose Anne Kuiper. c. Finance The financial report was provided in the agenda package. Outstanding expenses were described. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the Finance subcommittee be confirmed with the following members: Dana Parsons, Kristen Frisa, Adrian Willsher and Loretta Honsinger. d. Forming Subcommittees In January, a survey was sent to committee members. Members were asked to indicate their interest in sitting on TVPIC Subcommittees. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT a Communications subcommittee be struck with the following members: Kristen Frisa, Dana Parsons, Laura Gonzalez, Adrian Willsher and Ana Enriquez-Johnson. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the Parent Enhancement Fund subcommittee be struck with the following members: Melissa Bayes, Dana Parsons and Stacey Vries. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the Resources for School Councils subcommittee be confirmed with the following members: Laura Gonzalez, Melissa Bayes, Dana Parsons, Adrian Willsher and Loretta Honsinger. 10. REPORTS FROM MEMBERS REPRESENTING TVPIC ON OTHER COMMITTEES a. Active & Safe Routes to School – A. Willsher reported the Active & Safe Routes to School committee meets Tuesday afternoons. If members are interested in attending they are asked to contact A. Willsher or L. Honsigner. b. Think About It – None c. TVDSB Parent Engagement Steering Committee - None 11. TVDSB SUPPORT UPDATES (STANDING ITEM) a. Communications - None b. Parent Engagement Lead E. Fahmy reported a call-out for volunteers was issued for Strong Start to Reading. An overview of Strong Start to Reading was provided. There are seven schools that require additional volunteers. Interested volunteers are asked to contact E. Fahmy. An e -mail will be sent to TVPIC members by Corporate Services with additional information. At the request of the committee R. Kuiper will discuss the creation of a Facebook page for TVPIC with the Communications department. 12. CORRESPONDENCE (Standing Item) A. Willsher provided clarification in regards to communication received via e -mail. A board Employee cannot be a School Council Chair. An elementary school in London has requested resources. A. Willsher is following up with this request. An elementary School in London has enquired about holding a 50/50 draw. Finance has been consulted. Trustee Tisdale advised that games of chance are not recommended and that board fundraising policies and procedures need to be followed. In addition, all municipal, provincial and federal regulations must be followed for all fundraising. 13. OTHER BUSINESS a. 2018 May 10 Meeting Date The Award of Distinction is scheduled for 2018 May 10. Members will be polled to set a new meeting date for TVPIC. b. Parents Engaged in Education Conference The Parents Engaged in Education Conference is scheduled to take place on Sunday, March 4, 2018. An e-mail was sent out to members to determine interest in attending. The event is free to attend; TVPIC members may be reimbursed for mileage upon preapproval of the committee. The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT the following members be reimbursed for their mileage incurred while attending the Parents Engaged in Education Conference on Sunday, March 4, 2018: Adrian Willsher and Sue Doxtator. c. Vice-Chair The following motion was moved and CARRIED: THAT Melissa Bayes be appointed to the position of Vice-Chair for the period ending November 30, 2018. 14. FUTURE MEETING DATES, SPEAKERS AND LOCATION 2018 April 12, 6:30 p.m. 2018 May 10, 6:30 p.m. – conflict with Award of Distinction 2018 June 14, 6:30 p.m. All meetings will take place in the Katherine Harley Room at the TVDSB Education Centre in London. 15. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS  Fundraising FAQ’s (May 2014)  Copyright  Webinar (Future)  TVPIC Annual Report (2016 Sept. 8, item #5.e) 16. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m. by motion. RECOMMENDATIONS: None A. WILLSHER & L. HONSINGER CO-CHAIRS REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE 2018 February 13 3:35 p.m. - 4:45 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT M. Reid M. Laprise R. Tisdale (Chair) M. King Regrets: A. Morell ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS C. Beal J. Knight S. Macey C. O’Connor (+3:35, -4:11) L. Elliott B. Williams E. Grosvenor (+4:11, -4:40) 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved by motion. 3. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST - none declared 4. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING The minutes of the previous meeting were provided for information. 5. IN-CAMERA On motion, the Committee moved in camera at 3:35 p.m., reconvening in public session at 4:38 p.m. 6. SCHOOL AUDIT AND REVIEW SELECTIONS FOR THE 2018 YEAR Manager J. Knight and School Auditor E. Grosvenor presented for approval the proposed list of schools to have a school audit during the remainder of the 2018 calendar year. Information on the schedule and focus of the audits/reviews to be conducted were provided. The following recommendation was moved and carried: That the following schools be approved to have a School Audit conducted during the remainder of the 2018 calendar year: The schools presented for consideration were as follows:  East Oxford Central P.S.  John Wise P.S.  Lester B. Pearson School for the Arts  London South C.I.  North Meadows P.S.  Port Burwell P.S.  Rick Hansen P.S.  Southside P.S.  Sparta P.S.  Tecumseh P.S 7. ADDITION TO THE 2017-18 INTERNAL AUDIT PLAN R. Tisdale reported the Board of Trustees approved the funding for a Labour Relations Audit to be conducted in 2017-18. The following motion was moved and carried: That the 2017-18 Internal Audit Plan be revised to include the Labour Relations Audit. 8. ADDITIONAL ITEMS As a follow up to the previous meeting, R. Tisdale distributed the draft letter to the Minister of Education with a request that Boards be consulted before any action(s) on the audit recommendations are considered. It was agreed to send the letter. 9. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING The next meeting was scheduled for 2018 April 10. 10. ADJOURNMENT A motion to adjourn was approved at 4:45 p.m. RECOMMENDATIONS: None RUTH TISDALE Chairperson REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND PRIORITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2018 February 13 6:02 p.m. – 8:43 p.m. Members: Trustees J. Bennett, R. Campbell, C. Goodall (Chair), G. Hart, P. Jaffe, B. McKinnon, A. Morell (-7:37), S. Polhill, M. Reid, P. Schuyler, J. Skinner, R. Tisdale, J. Todd; Student Trustees S. Kim and N. Lavdas Regrets: Student Trustee T. Kennedy Administration: L. Elliott (Director), C. Beal (Superintendent), A. Canham (Superintendent), R. Culhane (Superintendent), J. Knight (Finance, -6:15), S. Macey (Manager, Finance), D. Macpherson (Superintendent), S. Mark (Superintendent), M. Moynihan (Superintendent), D. Munroe (Manager, Finance, -7:54), V. Nielsen (Superintendent), E. Ng (Finance, -7:54), S. Powell (Superintendent, +6:37), P. Sydor (Superintendent), B. Williams (Supervisor) Superintendents C. Beal and S. Mark welcomed and introduced the following new Managers: J. Pakulis, Manager of Payroll; C. Henriquez, Manager of Capital Projects; C. Yeo, Manager of Facility Services. 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved on motion. 2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared 3. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING – 2018 January 9– provided for information. 4. BUSINESS ARISING - none 5. IN CAMERA On motion, the committee moved in camera at 6:07 p.m., reconvening in public session at 6:15 p.m. 6. 2017-2018 REVISED ESTIMATES CONTINGENCY FUND C. Beal presented for discussion and feedback a proposed budget allocation from the 2017-2018 Contingency Fund for one-time projects. C. Beal advised the proposed list of items will be presented to Trustees for their consideration and approval at the 2018 February 27 Board meeting. In response to questions, it was noted those items not yet costed will be presented to Trustees at a later date. Questions of clarification were addressed by Administration. Discussion considered the potential allocation of unspent funds from the Contingency Fund. Administration was asked to look at needs in both elementary and secondary for supporting arts programming with the suggestion this be considered as a budget initiative. 7. 2017-2018 INTERIM FINANCIAL REPORT – 2017 NOVEMBER 30 C. Beal presented the Interim Financial Report for the three months ending 2017 November 30. The budgets and actual expenses for 2017-2018 as of 2017 November 30, including the impact of Revised Estimates filed with the Ministry of Education on 2017 December 15 were included in the report. C. Beal advised no risks were identified. S. Macey highlighted increased revenues and expenses primarily related to increased enrolment. It was noted increased enrolment is projected again for 2018-19. Questions of clarification were addressed by S. Macey. 2018 February 13…. 2 8. 2018-2019 BUDGET CALENDAR The calendar of budget agenda items for upcoming Board and Advisory meetings was reviewed. 9. STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND 2018-2019 BUDGET DISCUSSION Small group discussions considered the three draft Strategic Priorities and potential budget initiatives to be undertaken to enhance effectiveness in the three areas. Identified items will be reviewed and prioritized at the 2018 March 7 Program and School Services Advisory meeting. Those items identified as priorities by Trustees will be reviewed and costed for potential implementation. The shared document is available to Trustees for review prior to the March 7 meeting. L. Elliott advised senior team is following the same process. 10. OTHER BUSINESS - none 11. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS BY MEMBERS In response to a question, C. Beal advised on the reason for recirculating, to Principals, the existing STS policy pertaining to the restriction of large items on the school bus. There was a request that Trustees be included in future correspondence of this nature. S. Powell reported on the types of large items that may be restricted. In response to a question, the Trustees’ decision to use non-Board funds to support the installation of AEDs was confirmed. 12. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING The next meeting is scheduled for April 10, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. 13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS – no discussion 14. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the committee adjourned at 8:43 p.m. RECOMMENDATIONS: None C. GOODALL Committee Chair REPORT OF THE CHAIR’S COMMITTE 2018 February 20 12:08 p.m. – 2:08 p.m. MEMBERS J. Bennett A. Morell M. Reid (Chair) R. Tisdale (+12:15) C. Goodall (by phone, -1:57) ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS L. Elliott C. Glazer (+12:09, - 12:35) D. Macpherson (+1:35, -1:57) B. Williams S. Mark (+1:15, -1:57) 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved by motion. 2. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST – none declared 3. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE BOARD MEETING AGENDAS The in-camera and public Board meeting agendas of 2018 February 27 were reviewed and discussed. 4. CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence received from the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario regarding an all member survey of workplace violence across the province was received. The letter will be included on the 2018 February 27 Board meeting agenda. Correspondence from MPP Jeff Yurek to Chair Reid and Trustees regarding the Elgin Attendance Area Review was received. Correspondence will be shared with all trustees as outlined in item #7. 5. TECHNOLOGY ISSUES Communications Manager C. Glazer joined the meeting to address concerns experienced by Trustees related to the use of their devices. It was agreed to have an IT technician available to Trustees on Tuesday February 27, 4 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. in the Trustee conference room to answer questions, ensure devices have the appropriate updates installed, and address other issues as needed. It was suggested a similar session be scheduled every couple of weeks. Discussion considered the current use of devices; C. Glazer advised she will review the setup of devices. She also offered to follow up with Trustees regarding technology needs in advance of the next term of office. As per the Communications System Review, it was agreed to schedule a focus group with Trustees on March 6, 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. Additional information will be sent to Trustees. 6. HOLDING ZONES Superintendent S. Mark joined the meeting to discuss next steps with respect to holding zones/holding schools. Through discussion it was confirmed a report will come to the Planning and Priorities Advisory Committee. Information to be provided in the report was discussed and captured by S. Mark. With respect to the Board motion of 2017 November 28, it was confirmed an initial Attendance Area Review report for the Komoka/Kilworth area will be presented at the 2018 April 24 Board meeting. 7. RESPONSES TO COMMUNICATION WITH ELGIN COUNTY FRENCH IMMERSION ATTENDANCE REVIEW As per past practice, it was confirmed correspondence received concerning the Elgin County French Immersion Attendance Review will be acknowledged and forwarded for information to all Trustees. 8. GOVERNANCE – PROFESSIONAL LEARNING Discussion considered the scheduling of a 3-hour professional learning opportunity focused on governance. Potential facilitators and their qualifications were considered. The following motion was moved and carried: That a professional learning workshop on governance be scheduled. There was a suggestion that a session also be planned for Trustees following the 2018 Municipal election. 9. LAWSON LITERACY AWARDS The Lawson Literacy Awards event was scheduled for Tuesday June 5, 6 p.m. The Program and School Services Advisory Committee meeting was rescheduled to begin at 7 p.m. 10. JOINT MEETING WITH THE CITY OF LONDON The agenda for the 2018 March 1 meeting with the City of London was discussed. Trustees will be polled regarding additional items. 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION (Standing Item) - none 12. STRATEGIC PLANNING FOLLOW UP (Standing Item) The strategic planning community consultation sessions were discussed. 13. TRUSTEE TRANSITION/NEW TRUSTEE ORIENTATION (Standing Item) D. Giesbrecht will be asked to distribute the Student Trustee Handbook to the members of the Chair’s Committee. 14. UPCOMING EVENTS AND INITIATIVES - Student Trustee Debate and Election, April 26, 2018 - Award of Distinction, May 10, 2018 - TVDSB Student Leadership Conference, May 24, 2018 - International Certificate Program Graduation, May 31, 2018 - Lawson Literacy Awards, June 5, 2018 - Annual Retirement Reception, September 12, 2018 Municipal Meetings: - City of London, March 1, 2018 - Oxford County, March 29, 2018 - City of St. Thomas, March 29, 2018 - Elgin County, April 19, 2018 - Middlesex County, TBD 15. OTHER BUSINESS - none 16. DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING 2018 February 27,12:00 p.m. 17. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 2:08 p.m. by motion. RECOMMENDATIONS: None MATT REID Chairperson