Welcome to the Manchester School District dashboard—a communication tool used to help understand the current conditions of the Manchester School District’s buildings and guide decisions during the master planning process. This dashboard provides an overview of the school district (2022-2023 school year), along with individual school master plan data, building assessment reports, and various visualizations created to help convey the information. This tool will be used alongside other valuable resources and expertise to help the master planning team achieve the key goals as outlined in the long-term facilities plan.
Educational and Facilities Assessment (E+FA) Approach - Led by architects, engineers, and educational planners from SMMA and its consultants, and in partnership with each school principal, the team conducted both a facility assessment (to take inventory of the building layout and condition) and an educational assessment (to determine the adequacy of spaces for the educational programs offered) in each building. The following report outlines the team organization, methodology and approach taken to assess the Manchester Public School portfolio over the Spring and Summer of 2023.
Categories and criteria were strategically selected for assessment based on stated objectives, past experience, and nature of the Manchester School District portfolio of buildings. Ultimately, the E+FA team created a customized “Manchester School District methodology” which encompassed approximately 75 areas of criteria, organized either facility or site categories that examined physical components, as well as community components.
Facilities varying in terms of age, design, construction methods, and materials were reviewed to determine the condition of the district’s portfolio. Building assessments were performed to determine existing components and/or systems’ conditions at a specific point in time. The resulting information was then used to guide recommendations regarding maintenance, renovation, and/or replacement. The assessment team conducted visual inspections to observe signs of deterioration. No exploratory demolition, removing finishes, or viewing above ceilings was conducted. Areas that were hard to reach, off limits, or obscured by other systems that prohibited view of the some building components were not assessed. Systems and categories that were assessed included:
The facility assessment building evaluations used a quintile classification hierarchy as defined below:
Roof Membrane:
Apparent condition status noted for the roofing material and flashings. Note any obvious deterioration.
Existing Photovoltaics:
Yes / No: Criteria noted. However, presence or absence of photovoltaic did not impact overall building condition.
Space for Solar:
Yes/No; Comments, if applicable. Evaluation of whether roof space exists for solar (if there are relatively flat areas for possible future solar panels). Note that the roof structure was not evaluated for structural capacity of future PV panels. Criteria noted; however, presence or absence of photovoltaic panels did not impact overall building condition.
Façade:
Description of apparent condition and materials of the exterior walls. Observations of any spalling or disintegration of brick or concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls and the condition of the mortar. Notes if there is any obvious movement or structural cracking, and if there is failure, the percentage of failure. With prefabricated panel system facades, notes the types and apparent conditions of attachment systems, panel material, and whether there is deterioration of the surface or caulking or movement in the panels.
Windows:
Description of types and apparent conditions of exterior windows. Considers whether most windows appear to be in good working condition, if windows are transparent or translucent, and if they are single or double-paned.
Boilers (Mechanical):
Review of fuel sources and apparent conditions of boilers.
Boilers (Plumbing):
Observation of heating media (e.g. water or steam) of boilers.
Heating Distribution Systems:
Evaluation of type and apparent conditions of piping, type, and apparent corrosion.
Building Envelope Thermal Performance:
eview of the existing drawings of envelope elements (exterior walls, roof, foundations and slabs). Notes presence of vestibules at building entrances for temperature control.
Interior Finishes:
Evaluation of types and conditions of interior wall, flooring, and ceiling finishes.
Rooftop HVAC Equipment:
Review of type and apparent condition of roof top units (RTUs), exhaust fans, and air conditioning equipment, if present.
HVAC Controls:
Review of types of thermostats and type and apparent condition of Building Management System (BMS) if present.
Kitchen Equipment and Systems (Architectural):
Evaluation of adequacy and apparent condition of kitchen equipment.
Kitchen Equipment and Systems (Plumbing):
Observation of gas kitchen appliances. Observation of apparent condition of kitchen plumbing fixtures, and whether there are separate sinks for handwashing and dishwashing, per health and plumbing codes. Notes if proper fire suppression system exists where required.
Kitchen Equipment and Systems (Electrical):
Observation of electrical kitchen appliances.
Natural Gas Distribution System:
Review of apparent condition of the natural gas system, how it enters the building and is distributed, and of shut-off valves.
Generator:
Review of type of generator, type of fuel source, and apparent condition if one is present.
Elevator:
Evaluation of apparent condition of elevator if present.
Ventilation Distribution Systems:
Review of locations and apparent condition of fans, ductwork, duct grilles, and other ventilation components.
Electrical Services:
Apparent condition status noted. Review of available capacity, location and appearance of electrical service and meter age.
Existing Photovoltaics:
Yes/No; Criteria noted. However, presence or absence of photovoltaic did not impact overall building condition.
Life Safety:
Security:
Entry Sequence: Observes if schools have only a camera/buzzer system at their main entrance or whether the main building entrance is adjacent or near the main office. (Adjacency/proximity of main office to main entrance allows for direct observation of the entire person, as well as control of their movements)
Lighting Quality / Control:
Observed (not measured) light levels at the working surface, type of light fixtures and whether they provide an even dispersion and control of light for general academic tasks as well as for use of technology. Apparent condition, locations, and lighting uniformity are noted.
Toilets and Fixtures:
Review of locations and apparent conditions of fixtures. Notes the maintenance and cleanliness of fixtures and flow of fixtures.
Plumbing Distribution Systems:
Review of piping type, apparent corrosion, and equipment, including presence or absence of water heater & back-flow preventer.
ADA / Accessibility (Architecture):
Observes whether the facility is compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 standards. Evaluates adequacy and conditions of ramps, lifts, and elevators and whether every occupiable space in the facility can be accessed by anyone with a disability. Other considerations include compliancy of building elements such as clearances and door hardware.
ADA / Accessibility (Plumbing):
Evaluation of whether toilet facilities and plumbing fixtures are ADA-compliant.
Hazardous Materials:
The hazardous materials consultant reviewed the current AHERA documents provided by the District. A field visit was performed to confirm all known and suspected hazardous materials existing on site. The finding were generally consistent with the District’s AHERA Management Plans and any additional suspect hazardous materials were noted.
Structural Systems:
The assessment team conducted visual inspections to observe signs of deterioration. No exploratory demolition, removing finishes, or viewing above ceilings was conducted. Areas that were hard to reach, off limits, or obscured by other systems that prohibited view of the structure were not assessed. Each of the criteria listed below is considered as it relates to the structural elements of the building.
A “Yes” comment in the assessment indicates that we observed signs of deterioration. A “Not Observed” comment in the assessment indicates that we either did not observe any distress in the structural element or were not able to observe the element due to the aforementioned limitations, and this does preclude an unobserved area from distress.
The Community Assessment: Building Evaluation included several categories including historical value, emergency shelter status, and use of community and school within/without the buildings. Historical value reviewed the historic inventory and register status of the building. Because schools are often the largest structure in a neighborhood, the City has designated certain facilities as emergency shelters. Additionally, several schools are directly connected to community centers or utilize adjacent neighborhood facilities for athletics and enrichment. Whether the community utilized the building after hours or on weekends was also considered.
New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources (DHR) Status:
Yes/No; Comment, if applicable. Criteria will inform opportunities and constraints for modifying the existing building to meet changing physical demands for a 21st century learning environment.
Inventory of Historic Assets:
Yes/No; Comment, if applicable. Notes whether the building is listed on any inventory of historic assets. Criteria will inform opportunities and constraints for modifying the existing building to meet changing physical demands for a 21st century learning environment.
State Register of Historic Places:
Yes/No; Comment, if applicable. Notes whether the building is listed on a state Register of Historic Places. Criteria will inform opportunities and constraints for modifying the existing building to meet changing physical demands for a 21st century learning environment.
Locally Designated Historic District:
Yes/No; Comment, if applicable. Notes whether the building is within a local historic district. Criteria will inform opportunities and constraints for modifying the existing building to meet changing physical demands for a 21st century learning environment.
Emergency Shelter:
Yes/No; Comment, if applicable. Criteria noted and considered as part of the overall community building score. A designation by the city does not certify compliance for all state and federal requirements for the designation.
Community-Use Spaces:
Yes/No; Comment, if applicable. These were determined after speaking with school administration during site visits. Community spaces attached to schools were also considered. Criteria noted and considered as part of the overall community building score.
Building Suitability for School Use:
Yes/No; Comment, if applicable. Considered any major life-safety concerns for suitability. Criteria will inform opportunities and constraints for modifying the existing building.
Overall Community Building Rating:
This is a judgment on the part of the reviewer(s) that considers all aforementioned factors, as well as amenities located in proximity to school sites and access to public transportation.
The site assessment team performed evaluations at each school facility in the district’s portfolio. These evaluations considered the quality, condition, and capacity of the various exterior spaces of the facility. These spaces included: landscaped, educational, recreational, vehicular and pedestrian areas. This field effort was complimented by a study and research of the sites from web-based resources. The resulting information was then used to guide recommendations regarding maintenance, renovation, and/or replacement.
The diverse scope of site elements for schools varies in their relative impact to education and school operations. Priorities include elements that have large impacts to education and/or incur substantial impact to improve or repair.
The site evaluations were judged on a scale as defined below:
Parking & Vehicular Circulation:
Quality of vehicular area paving and quantity of parking spaces considered. This element may not be required if “Not Present”.
Ground Cover:
Presence and condition of landscaping, lawn areas, and any other non-hardscape areas. Ground cover evaluated for aesthetic value, shading, and functionality for outdoor gathering.
Fields:
Presence and apparent condition of athletic or play fields on the property.
Neighborhood Streets:
Connectivity to residential areas surrounding the site. Condition of adjacent/ off-site roadways, sidewalks, and accessible elements considered.
Drop-Off/Pick-Up Routes:
Segregation of buses, private vehicles, parking, and neighborhood traffic considered. Both on-site and off-site routes considered. This element may not be required if “Not Present”.
On-Site Walkways/Curbs/Sidewalks:
Quality of all pedestrian spaces considered.
ADA Accessibility:
Availability, location, and condition of accessible routes considered. The accessible routes connect building entrances, handicap parking, public streets, and site facilities. Accessibility is considered “Not Present” if there is no accessible building entrance.
Site Lighting:
Condition, location, and quantity of lighting considered.
Drainage:
Surface ponding, water quality structures, and condition of visible infrastructure considered.
Play Structures:
Evaluation of apparent condition of play structures and if they are appropriate for range of ages of students at a school, if present.
Walls and slopes:
Condition of retaining walls and stabilized slopes considered. This element may not be required if “Not Present”.
Fencing:
Condition of fencing and gates of various types considered. This element may not be required if “Not Present”.
Loading/ Utility Area:
Presence and condition of designated areas for drive-up access for maintenance and delivery purposes. This may include loading docks, overhead or double doors. Ease of access and security also considered.
Wetlands on site:
Yes/no; proximity of wetlands or natural resources to the site, which – if present – may add restrictions or regulatory challenges to site renovations or expansion.
Play Areas:
Presence, suitability, and physical condition of casual recreation and play for students. Play structures, surfacing, and courts considered. This element may not be required if “Not Present”.
Outdoor Classrooms:
Evaluation of apparent condition of outdoor classrooms or learning areas if present.
Environmental Justice Populations:
Review of designation of site and adjacent neighborhoods on the Social Vulnerability Index, per state GIS.
Feasibility of Building Expansion on the Current Site:
Evaluation of whether building is capable of appropriately expanding on its current site. Expansion can be horizontal, vertical, or infill, depending on the building’s configuration. Feasibility of expansion based on size of property, existing coverage, regulatory restrictions, and physical constraints such as topography and proximity to natural resources.
Feasibility of Site Expansion:
Evaluation of whether site expansion is possible, based on adjacent properties, and physical constraints, such as roads, proximity to protected lands, and easements.
The Community – Site assessment included the broad categories of transportation access and neighborhood elements. Transportation access considered the condition of the adjacent streets, the ability of students and adults to bicycle and walk to the school, and the accessibility of public transportation. Neighborhood elements considered the school’s proximity to community, civic, educational, commercial, and athletic facilities.
New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources (DHR) Status
Inventory of Archeological Assets (Site Review):
Comment, if applicable. Criteria will inform opportunities and constraints for modifying the existing building. In some cases, data may not be available.
School Buses:
Review of types and numbers of school buses and bus queuing.
Accessible to Transit:
Building is located within 2 blocks (1000 feet) of at least 2 stops on bus lines of regular frequency (at least every 10 minutes, during rush hour and mid-afternoon). Criteria noted and considered as part of the overall community building score.
Bikeable:
Facility is considered bikeable if within 2 miles of multiple residential neighborhoods, without riding on busy streets that lack dedicated bike areas. Criteria noted and considered as part of the overall community building score.
Walkable:
Facility is considered walkable if within 1.4 miles of residential neighborhoods, with consistent sidewalks, and walking route does not require students to cross busy or dangerous streets (per district eligibility criteria).
Site suitability for school use?
Yes/No, Comment if applicable. Considers overall site conditions, overall community rating, and size of site.
Overall Building – Community Condition:
This is the professional judgment on the part of the reviewer(s), considering all aforementioned factors and with consideration of nearby neighborhood, community, educational, and athletic facilities. Criteria noted and considered as part of the overall community building score.
The quality of physical environments has direct impacts on educational outcomes. The EFE analysis considers both inherent building characteristics of physical appearance and condition, and introduced equipment (e.g., furniture and technology). These qualitative factors have a large impact on overall student performance, as they influence students’ comfort and ability to concentrate on tasks; teacher and student health and wellness; as well as absenteeism and retention.
Building environments also affect the overall educational effectiveness rating. Fixed elements, such as walls and windows, are components that are not easily remedied and may require extensive or invasive renovation. Other elements, such as furniture or finishes, can be more easily updated, replaced, or supplemented.
Fixed Building Elements
Repairing these fixed elements may require buildings to be unencumbered of students (i.e., vacant) for the duration of the work, depending on the upgrades required.
These considerations often consist of singular systems and can be repaired or replaced independent of other systems. They may change frequently with the evolving landscape of educational pedagogy and should support a building that can adapt flexibly at relatively low costs. These upgrades can be executed internally, by facilities personnel or with arranged contracts.
Building Originally Designed As: Over time, a school building may have modified the range of grades served. Knowing their original use quickly provides some insight into space types and building appointments.
Best Grade Configuration for this School Building:
A school building may be best suited for a different range of grades or use depending on the types, quantities, and sizes of spaces, as well as the existing site attributes, including:
Ventilation:
Fresh air is a critical component for health, wellness, and overall student performance. An even distribution of ventilated air is also important. Different ventilation systems (unit ventilators, central air ventilation, no mechanical ventilation) provide varying levels of outdoor air percentages and filtration. Observe whether mechanical ventilation is provided and what the apparent quality of the ventilation system is. Qualitative measurements are not taken, however visual, olfactory, and thermal observations are made.
Natural Daylighting:
Considered to be a better quality of light than artificial lighting. Evaluates the general quantity/quality of the natural light and note if most spaces have access to daylight.
Artificial Lighting Quality:
Observed (not measured) light level at the working surface. Type of light fixture and whether it provides an even dispersion of light for general academic tasks, and whether the fixture is dimmable, to accommodate use of technology.
Acoustical:
The proper balance between voice reinforcement and sound absorption impacts “speech intelligibility.” This includes both sound performance within the space, as well as sound coming from outside the space. Observe whether the space appears to have appropriate acoustical properties for teaching and learning.
Technology (Power):
There are enough electrical outlets to support a future technology-rich classroom/school and they are properly distributed throughout the space.
Technology (Wireless):
There are sufficient access points throughout the school to support a 1:1 technology environment and fiber optic wiring exists within the building The main distribution room (server room) is air-conditioned, to ensure system reliability.
Technology (Interactive):
Classrooms and other teaching spaces have working interactive technology, such as interactive marker boards and document cameras.
Furniture:
Different educational-delivery models can be reinforced by furniture type and flexibility. Ideal furniture is light and mobile enough to be easily re-arranged in multiple configurations. Furniture is ergonomic, comfortable, in good condition and promotes student collaboration.
Finishes:
Materials and conditions of the walls, floors and ceilings. Both physical and aesthetic conditions are considered.
Environment (Inviting/Stimulating/Comfortable):
Evaluates whether building is aesthetically pleasing and if it is a place where students and teachers feel comfortable and want to spend time in each day.
Adjacencies of Learning Environments:
Classrooms and other learning environments have a relationship to each other which promotes collaboration, communication, and other aspects of 21st century teaching and learning. Spaces promote interdisciplinary learning.
Outdoor Classrooms:
Students have access to outdoor classrooms or other outdoor learning opportunities to learn in different ways, sometimes involving nature and hands-on activities.
Playgrounds/Play Areas:
Description of play surface materials (hard or soft). Evaluates condition of on-site play structures and whether structures are age-appropriate to the school’s student population.
Accessibility:
Evaluates conditions of play areas, including the ground surface/material, and whether areas are accessible to children of various disabilities.
Play Fields:
Describes conditions of play fields, if present, and whether fields natural grass or synthetic turf/
Flexibility in Building Typology:
Evaluates whether the building can serve alternative grade levels or support a special needs-focused curriculum.
Educational Transformation to Support 21st Century Needs:
Evaluates if the building’s construction easily allows for renovations that may change room sizes, replace or upgrade mechanical and electrical systems, and accommodate alternative educational-delivery methods (e.g., project-based learning [PBL]). This can often be the largest difference between a modern steel-frame building and interior masonry-bearing wall construction.
Building as Swing Space:
Assuming the building is otherwise unoccupied, the ability to use the building for educational purposes for the temporary relocation of a school population during a period of renovation or construction.
Utilization Rate:
Description of the utilizations rate and if it is 85% or higher. For high schools, classroom utilization of 85% are considered at capacity. Rates higher than 85% show levels of overcapacity and overcrowding. Middle schools generally work to a utilization of 90% and elementary schools at near 100%.
The Educational Facility Effectiveness – Spaces (EFE-S) metric compares the sizes of educational spaces to the New Hampshire Code of Administrative Rules, Section Ed. 321 guidelines for 21st century teaching and learning in new capital projects. This quantitative analysis is important for establishing the level of adequacy of the existing spaces for educational delivery. It also indicates whether a facility is deficient/missing dedicated educational spaces normally found in buildings of its grade level and typology.
Primary considerations often affect core curriculum and include:
Secondary considerations may allow for district flexibility in programming and community resources outside the traditional building environment, and include:
Note: If a school has a special education program, its quantity of spaces will vary. Also, some substantially separate programs do not require full-size classrooms to be effective. For this reason, special education was considered differently than typical classroom spaces.
The educational facility effectiveness assessment for spaces used a quintile classification hierarchy as defined below:
Narratives
The team considered the long-term goals relative to each building’s capability of supporting Manchester School District’s educational vision for 21st century (next generation) learning and teaching.
Engaged Learning
Engaging with the curriculum, applying it to an authentic context. Making connections between content areas and values/curiosity and interest. Finding connections to the community and making a difference. Public and tangible products. There is selective and intentional engagement, and agency in how one keeps focused and takes breaks.
The following were criteria used for evaluating the levels of Engaged Learning at each school:
Differentiated Learning
Acknowledging different learning styles. Encouraging how to understand one’s self (self-knowledge). Flexibility that occurs within instruction, which also promotes flexibility in how students demonstrate learning.
The following were criteria used for evaluating the levels of Differentiated Learning at each school:
Cognitively Demanding Tasks/Programs
NH Code of Administrative Rules, Section Ed. 321 areas are based on current enrollment within school. Actual areas were determined by measuring CADD plans provided by Manchester School District. SMMA did not field-measure the buildings but verified general conformity with existing conditions by measuring spot values to determine the rough accuracy of CADD drawings. The design team reviewed the 2018 CMK Long-Range Facilities Plan, which informed some of the educational effectiveness ratings.
The following outlines the rating system used for evaluating the Overall Educational Facility Effectiveness:
