Agenda Item
2. Student Assignment Project (SAP) Updates ~ Updated 1.21.2026
Summary: Presented by: Triscilla Weaver, Ph.D., Chief of Access & Opportunity, Division of Access & Opportunity,
Ms. Sarita Smith, Executive Director of Student Assignment Project, Division of Access & Opportunity and
Mr. Tracy Richter, Vice President of Planning Services, Hoar Program Management, LLC.
DeKalb County
School District
SAP Update
(Scenarios and Metrics)
January 21, 2026 | Board Retreat
Presented By Dr. Weaver, Tracy Richter and
Sarita Smith 1
The Current Situation
2
Historical Context
While enrollment has declined,
Estimated capacity has increased.
Capacity
David – add historical
context
Enrollment
3
DCSD Students by Home Address, Change 2011-2025
Since 2011, student residency
patterns have changed
substantially.
• Some clusters are sending
many more students to DCSD
schools.
• Some clusters are sending
fewer students to DCSD
schools.
• Very few clusters have minor
boundary changes.
4
4
Excess
Independent Actions
Seats by Board District
Total
Board Total
Available
District Utilization
Seats
District 1 89.7% 1,545 • More than 50% of available
seats are in Districts 3 and 5
District 2 92.2% 931
• Includes capacity for
District 3 59.2% 7,530 additions and new
construction currently in
District 4 93.3% 942 progress
District 5 69.2% 5,542
District 6 71.1% 4,597
District 7 73.7% 4,063
Total 76.9% 25,150
5
The Opportunity
6
SAP Vision
To reimagine DCSD by considering buildings,
boundaries, and programs holistically, using data, and
reviewing every 5 years to align with E-SPLOST.
This comprehensive planning process will help
position ALL students upon graduation to Enroll,
Employ, engage in Entrepreneurship, or Enlist.
7
Five Reasons Why
Declining Student Consolidated Resources
Enrollment and
Underutilized Schools
More Efficient Transportation
School Building Need Routes and Bus Savings
Significant Repairs and
Improvements
Severely Over and Under Capacity Schools
8
Examples of Possible Improved Student Outcomes
• Improved support for diverse learner needs through more
intentional differentiation and targeted interventions.
• Enhanced access to instructional and student-support resources as
balanced capacity allows schools to more effectively utilize spaces,
staff, and materials.
• Increased investment in educators and specialized staff, expanding
academic, social-emotional, and behavioral supports for students.
• Reduced student commute times with schools located closer to
home, leading to less time on buses and more time for learning,
rest, and family engagement.
• Greater instructional continuity as educators spend less time
traveling between sites and more time engaged directly in
classrooms supporting students.
9 9
Educational Efficiency
10
Capital Cost Avoidance
Average Building Repair Cost by Grade Level
• Reducing the number of facilities that DCSD operates as
school allows the district to avoid the costs of maintaining
these buildings
• Dollars can be reprioritized to high priority projects
Average Building
Grade Level
Repair Cost (2030)
Elementary $ 6,709,158
Middle $ 12,967,781
High $ 20,186,492
11
Operational Cost Avoidance
When the district operates fewer schools, administrative
overhead costs reduce. The number of teachers remains
relatively consistent regardless of the number of facilities;
the cost avoidance is realized through administrative and
other non-instructional staff.
o This staff can reduce over time through natural
attrition.
o The potential cost avoidance can range from $1M to
$3M per school per year. Elementary closures
would be closer to $1M and middle and high school
closures would be closer to $3M.
o Dollars can be reallocated for additional
instructional staff.
12
Educational Efficiency
Below Minimum Program State Funding Elementary School
Enrollment ≤ 450:
Fully Funded District Subsidized
Half Media Specialist Guidance
Principal Half Nurse Assistant Principal
"The goal of District funds is program
enhancement over program
Art Teacher Music Teacher P.E. Teacher
subsidy."
*Example Only
13
Educational Efficiency
Minimum Program State Funding Elementary School
Enrollment ≥ 450:
Fully Funded District Subsidized
Principal Half Half Nurse Music Teacher P.E. Teacher
Assistant Principal
Media Specialist Art Teacher Guidance
*Example Only
14
Development of Scenarios
15
Development of Scenarios
Parameters used to develop scenarios
o Proximity of facility locations to student centers
o Proximity of facilities to other facilities
o Educational Adequacy (includes capacity)
o Cascading to use our best buildings with the most capacity
o Recent investment in facilities
Important Consideration
o When thinking geographically, everything is impacted by
everything else. This means when you take a school offline,
you need to re-evaluate the impacts on the entire system.
16
16
Scenario Considerations - Cascading
ES
Cascading Use Defined:
Thirty years ago, district growth was concentrated in the southern
region, and facilities were built to accommodate that demand. Today,
ES growth has shifted to the northern region. Implementing a cascading
approach in the south allows the district to maintain a strong and
flexible portfolio of buildings while remaining responsive to future
demographic or programmatic changes.
Former
Middle Cascading use also supports long-term planning for future growth and
School creates opportunities for a more dynamic and engaging school
experience, particularly for elementary and middle school students.
Middle Schools Converted
to Elementaries
Former
High
School Changes will be implemented gradually over 6-8 years
High Schools Converted connected to the long-range facility plan.
to Middle
17
Facility Planning (Scenario) Evaluation Metrics
Proximity
• Distance to Neighboring Schools
(Facility to
Facility)
• Capacity
Buildings • Adequacy
• Condition
• Forecasted Utilization
Enrollment • Forecasted Students within 1 mile
(ES) and 1.5 mile (MS & HS)
18
Community Input, Timeline,
and Next Steps
19
Timeline
20
Next Steps & Internal and External Feedback
Month HPM Facilitated Community Meetings Board Meeting SAP Committee Meetings
Jan N/A 1.12.26 1.14.26
1.21.26 Board retreat Process metrics and initial
scenarios
Feb 1 in-person & Virtual (noon) 2.9.26 2.11.26 (6-9 pm)
2.23.26- - 2.26.26 Use metrics to process
N/C/SE/SW scenarios
Mar 1 in-person & Virtual (noon) 3.9.26 Embedded in community
3.23.26 - 3.26.26 meetings
N/C/SE/SW
Apr Area Meetings Focused on 4.20.26 Embedded in community
Underrepresented Communities meetings
-Led by AS and EA teams
May Last round 5.11.26 TBD (before May 11th)
Review board and
community feedback and
next steps (Fall 26)
Consistent Messaging Is Key
21
Phases of The Project – SAP, HPM, and DCSD Operations
Sep 2024 – Fall 2026
• Intentional and consistent SAP Committee Engagement
Sep 2025 – Jan 2026
• SAP’s engagement, work, and guidance shared with DCSD planning and HPM to develop scenarios
Jan 2026 – May 2026
• HPM will lead and facilitate the building scenario iterative community engagement process
May 2026 – Aug 2026
• HPM, DCSD Planning, and SAP Leadership will develop boundary and program placement options
Sep 2026 – Nov 2026
• SAP will reconvene to review the boundary and program placement options and analyze through our metrics
• HPM will lead and facilitate the boundary and program placement options iterative community engagement
process
Dec 2026 - SAP Final options shared with the Board for action
22
23