Request-for-Proposals-for-New-Schools_-Chicago-Public-Schools

  Chicago Public Schools Request for Proposals for New Schools 1      Table of Contents I.  Opportunity for Every Student in Every Neighborhood   4  II.  Charter School Structure   4  Table I:  Charter School Structure   4  III.  Priority School Models   5  IV. Priority Communities  . 6  Table 2: Priority Communities 2014‐2015 and 2015‐2016  . 7  Map 1: Priority Communities – Elementary Schools   8  Map 2: Priority Communities – High Schools   9  V. Proposal Evaluation Process Overview   10  Table 3: Process Timeline  . 10  Two‐tiered Submission   11  Completeness Check   12  Review of Tier 1 Proposals   12  Capacity Interviews   13  Parent and Community Engagement and Input   13  Review of Tier 2 Proposals   14  Facility Plan Review   14  Public Hearing   14  Board Decisions   15  Execution of School Agreement   15  VI. Design Team Track Record and Capacity   16  Replication Criteria for Current Chicago Operators  . 16  Table 4: Replication Criteria for Current Chicago Operators   16  Track Record for National Operators   18  Track Record for New Operators   18  Design Team Capacity   18  VII. Proposal Requirements   19  Table 5: Proposal Requirements for New and National Operators   19  VIII. Completion and Submission of Proposal   19  Important Proposal Resources  . 19  Format for Answering Questions   19  Submission Instructions  . 20  VIII. Additional Information   21  Resources . 21  Important Notes about the 2013 RFP Process  . 21  2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page of 52   Publicly Posting Proposals   21  Ethics Policy for Applicants  . 22  Contact Information  . 22  IX. General Proposal Sections   23  Executive Summary   23  Section 1: Parent and Community Need, Engagement, and Support in Targeted Community   24  Section 2: Academic Capacity  . 25  Section 3: Operational Capacity   32  Section 4: Economic Soundness   35  Section 5: Existing Charter Management Organizations (MOs)  . 37  X. Completeness Checklist   40  Appendix I: Request for Proposals for New Schools 2013 Elementary School Priority  Communities  . 43  ALBANY IRVING   44  ASHBURN  . 45  BELMONT‐CRAGIN (North of Grand Ave)   46  CHICAGO LAWN (West of Kedzie Ave.)   47  MCKINLEY PARK   48  MIDWAY (South of 51st St.)   49  PILSEN – LITTLE VILLAGE (West of Western Ave.)   50  REED ‐ DUNNING   51  SAUGANASH   52    2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page of 52   2013 Chicago Public Schools Request for Proposals for New Schools I Opportunity for Every Student in Every Neighborhood At Chicago Public Schools (CPS), our vision is that every student in every neighborhood will be engaged in a rigorous, well-rounded instructional program and will graduate prepared for success in college, career, and life To achieve this ambitious goal, we have identified several key strategic initiatives This Request for Proposals (“RFP”) to identify new high-quality school options represents one of these key initiatives The District is seeking teachers, administrators, national education management organizations,1 current school leadership teams, and non-profit institutions from Chicago and nationwide to respond to this RFP with proposals that demonstrate the capacity to run high-quality, new schools New schools should embody the five pillars that CPS believes will help increase graduation rates, academic preparedness for college and career, entry into college, military, or employment, and persistence and success in college and employment: 1) High standards, rigorous curriculum, and powerful instruction, 2) Systems of support that meet student needs, 3) Engaged and empowered families and community, 4) Committed and effective teachers leaders, and staff, and 5) Sound fiscal, operational, and accountability systems II Charter School Structure The Illinois Charter School Law requires Chicago Public Schools to hold an annual process to accept and review proposals for new charter schools (105 ILCS 5/27A-8 (c)) While the District remains agnostic to school type in its search for new high quality school options, the District is currently exploring opportunities to expand high quality district schools options outside of this RFP As such, the RFP is seeking proposals from operators who wish to open charter schools Charter schools are independently operated schools that are authorized by CPS under Illinois Charter Schools Law These schools are funded and monitored by the District, but can exercise autonomy over many studentrelated policies Charter schools are governed by school-selected Boards of Directors and operate under contractual agreements with the District; typically these contracts are for five-year terms Table I: Charter School Structure CHARTER Curriculum School Calendar and Schedule Must meet District Standards as specified in Charter School Agreement; may have the option of participating in CPS initiatives Must meet applicable Illinois State minimums                                                               For the purposes of this RFP, an MO is any organization, regardless of for- or non-profit status, that will enter into a contract with the proposed school’s board to provide educational or school management services The MO may be an Educational Management Organization (EMO) or Charter Management Organization (CMO) 2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page of 52   School Funding Student-Based Budgeting2 Illinois Teacher Certification 50% of teachers must be certified; all special needs teachers must be certified3 NCLB Compliance If Title I funding will be used, teachers in Title I schools are required to meet NCLB standards Principal Requirements None Special Education Must follow IDEA, Illinois Special Education Regulations, and ISBE and CPS Special Education Policies and Procedures Policies for Student Conduct Policies must comply with Illinois Charter Schools Law and other applicable laws Chicago Teachers Union Teacher Pension Fund Principals, Teachers and Staff Employed by: Employee Compensation Governance Incorporation III School is not subject to CTU collective bargaining agreement Certified teachers in pension fund; others covered by Social Security Charter School Board or sub-contracted management organization Determined by school operator Governing Board Incorporation as a nonprofit in Illinois required Priority School Models The RFP is intended to identify high quality schools that accelerate academic outcomes for the targeted student population In addition to high quality traditional elementary and high school models, the 2013 RFP also seeks to open school models that meet identified programmatic needs for CPS students (see below) However, these models are not meant to exclude proposals that reflect other school models The RFP is intended to give operators the opportunity to flexibly explore promising practices that may ultimately be shared with other schools The following priority models address programmatic needs identified throughout the District:  Next Generation School models leverage technology in personalized, blended learning environments by combining the best aspects of place-based and online learning with more personalized, mastery-based approaches to improve outcomes for students Next Generation                                                               Student Based Budgeting (SBB) is allocated to schools based on their number of general education students and funds core instruction for general education Outside of the SBB formula, schools will have additional allocations made for SGSA, Title I, Special Education, District Priority Spending, and Non-Instructional Services Please note that in accordance with charter school law (105 ILCS 5/27A-10) at least 75% of the instructional staff at a charter school must be certified by the beginning of the fourth year of the school’s operation.  2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page of 52      Academic school models may incorporate the following design principles of personalized learning related to instruction:  o Student-centered: designed to meet the diverse learning needs of each student every day  o High expectations: committed to ensuring that every student will meet clearly defined, rigorous standards that will prepare them for success in college and career  o Blended instruction: optimizes teacher and technology-delivered instruction in group and individual work  o Student ownership: empowers students with skills, information, and tools they need to manage their own learning4  Note: For Next Generation School models, CPS recommends that at least 50% of each student’s instructional time be delivered in a brick-and-mortar setting (For more information on Next Generation Learning Models, please see the following link: http://nextgenlearning.org/breakthrough-grants )  Arts-Integration models infuse fine arts education into the curricula The emphasis is on fostering creativity and critical thinking through visual and/ or performing arts Implementation of this model goes beyond offering arts courses as electives or extracurricular courses In an Arts-Integration model teachers incorporate arts into core subjects such as math, reading, and science Often the classroom teachers will collaborate with arts specialists to implement this design in their classrooms Dual Language models consistently and strategically use two languages (generally English and a partner language) for instruction, learning, and communication The overarching goal of dual language education is for graduates to speak, read, and write well in two languages; perform academic course work in both languages; and develop positive understandings, behaviors, and attitudes about their own and other cultures Dual Language education programs are unique in that they can serve both ELLs and native English speakers in the same program, and continue to serve ELLs even after they have demonstrated proficiency in English Humanities - Focused models place special emphasis on humanities and social sciences as the cornerstone of the curricula IV Priority Communities Chicago Public Schools seeks to open new schools in communities that are experiencing overcrowding Overcrowded communities across the city have wide-ranging educational needs, community assets, and student populations When proposing a community in which to locate a new school, operators should provide detailed and thoughtful explanations of how their proposed school will meet the unique needs of that particular community and student body                                                               Design principles cited from the Next Generation Learning Challenge Wave IV Grant Announcement, found at the following link: http://nextgenlearning.org/breakthrough-grants   2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page of 52   Table 2: Priority Communities 2014‐2015 and 2015‐2016 CPS is encouraging applicants to submit new school proposals to open in communities that need additional high-quality options to help alleviate overcrowding.* CPS encourages applicants who wish to open elementary schools to locate in the following communities (please see Map – Elementary Schools immediately below):          Albany Irving Ashburn Belmont Cragin (North of Grand Ave) Chicago Lawn (West of Kedzie Ave.) McKinley Park Midway (South of 51st St.) Little Village (West of Western Ave.) Reed-Dunning Sauganash CPS encourages applicants who wish to open high schools to locate in the following communities (please see Map – High Schools immediately below):  Southwest Side (bounded by the area west of Western Avenue, South of the Stevenson Expressway, and the city limits)  Northwest Side (bounded by the area beginning at Fullerton and the western city limit, east to Western, and north to the city limit) *See Appendix I of this document for individual priority community maps and information on student demographics CPS encourages all charter school applicants who wish to open schools to identify independent facilities Regardless of where applicants propose to locate, all applicants for the 2013 RFP must address how their proposed school will directly benefit the students and families in the unique community(ies) that they seek to serve It is the responsibility of a successful new school to actively draw on local assets and contribute to the life of the community in which they locate Successful applicants must demonstrate strong ties to the particular community in which their proposed school will be located and provide evidence of parent and community demand and support (for more information, see the Parent and Community Input and Engagement Section section below) Partnerships with parents, communityand faith-based organizations, local residents, and other stakeholders are a valued component of the new school development process Prioritizing community engagement enables new school developers to effectively provide the most comprehensive and relevant educational opportunities to their respective student populations 2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page of 52   Map 1: Priority Communities – Elementary Schools   2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page of 52   Map 2: Priority Communities – High Schools   2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page of 52   V Proposal Evaluation Process Overview Since the original Illinois Charter School Law was enacted in 1997, CPS has managed a rigorous process to evaluate and approve proposals for new schools The 2013 RFP process is designed to identify new or replicate or expand existing high-quality school options The evaluation process is overseen by the Office of New Schools, whose mission is to help ensure equitable access to high-quality schools that will prepare students for college, career, and life Guiding Principles CPS has identified four guiding principles for the 2013 RFP evaluation process: I II III IV Set clear guidelines and criteria for opening, replicating, or expanding high-quality school models Grant new schools only to applicants who meet the evaluation standards The District is committed to replicating proven educational models As such, applicants must demonstrate, through existing school data or Design Team5 experience, that their proposed school has driven academic growth among comparable student populations, including students with disabilities, English Language Learners, and students in temporary living situations Engage parents and communities in a meaningful and authentic way in the proposal planning, evaluation, and approval process The District seeks to open new schools in priority areas where additional facility capacity is required to help alleviate overcrowding (105 ILCS 5/27A-4(b)) As such, the District highly encourages operators to propose to locate in priority communities Table 3: Process Timeline6 The 2013 RFP utilizes an evaluation process based on national principles and standards for quality authorizing This annual process for requesting and reviewing proposals has been continuously revised based on the lessons learned over the District’s more than 15 years of school authorizing experience (105 ILCS 5/27A-8 (c)) As required by Law (105 ILCS 5/27A-7.10), the District is obligated to authorize only quality applications that meet identified educational needs and to decline to approve weak or inadequate applications As such, the evaluation process is rigorous; only proposals demonstrating the qualities identified in our evaluation criteria are recommended to the Board for authorization Each stage of the process is detailed below Dates Request for Proposals August 12 Preliminary RFP Released to All Applicants                                                              A Design Team includes, but is not limited to: school founders, school leaders, school board members, and community members participating in the school’s design and development The Office of New Schools reserves the right to change this timeline at any point throughout the process Changes to the timeline will be posted on the ONS website (http://cps.edu/NewSchools/Pages/Process.aspx) and sent to existing applicants via email 2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 10 of 52   ii iii iv v Cities served Grade levels served Unique school themes or models in the organization’s portfolio Type of schools in the portfolio (e.g charter, contract, private, etc.) Attach the following information on each school/campus that the organization currently operates or has operated:  School information (Note: Please present information in a manner that enables reviewers to match with the student demographics provided in Section 2.2.b.) o School name o City o Year opened o Grades at capacity o Current grades o Current enrollment b Growth Rate and Rationale: Please describe the organization’s proposed scope of growth over the next years in Chicago and in any other locations (number of schools, locations, opening years, proposed five-year enrollment projections, and type of schools) What is the rationale for the proposed growth strategy and for expansion into Chicago? Please list any other proposals that are pending with other authorizers or have been recently approved to open new schools; cite the number of schools/campuses requested in each proposal c Model Non-Negotiables: What are the key non-negotiables (i.e the key school design components, policies, practices, etc that underlie school culture and academic outcomes) of your school model? Discuss any school-level autonomies in implementing the educational plan d Readiness to Replicate: What academic, financial, and operational metrics the organization and its Board of Directors use to determine readiness for replication? How would the organization’s growth strategy be modified if these benchmarks were not met? 5.2 Historical Performance a Interventions: Please explain any past performance that has not met the organization’s expectations How was the underperformance diagnosed, how were appropriate intervention(s) determined, and how were/are the interventions (being) implemented? What are the key areas in which existing schools/campuses need to improve, and what are the priorities to drive further success? 5.3 Organizational Capacity a Organization Charts and Decision-Making Authority: Provide an organizational chart illustrating the vision for the organization in five years 5.4 Facilities and Finances a Financing: Describe your financing approach to facility acquisition and/or construction b Contingency Plans: Identify contingency plans if the desired facility strategy is not achieved 2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 38 of 52   c Project Management: Describe the organization’s capacity and experience in managing these strategies, including required renovation 5.5 Risk Management a Risk Management: What are the greatest anticipated risks to achieving the organization’s desired outcomes over the next years? How will the organization develop capacity to mitigate anticipated risks? 2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 39 of 52   X Completeness Checklist In addition to responding to all of the required questions, applicants should be sure to include the following attachments in their proposal appendix Please review the submission instructions for additional information about how to properly submit full proposals Application Component  Applicant  Check    Registration Form    Executive Summary  Section I. Parent and Community Need, Engagement, and Support in  Targeted Community (Attachments for this section to be compiled in Parent and Community   Engagement and Support attachment.)  1.1. Parent and Community    Engagement/Need in Targeted  Community  1.2. Evidence of Parent and  Parent and Community Engagement    Community Support in Targeted  and Support Attachment  Community  1.3. Future Plans for Parent and    Community Engagement and  Partnerships  Section 2. Academic Capacity    2.1 Mission, Vision and Culture  Policies for promotion, graduation, and    student discipline  2.2 Design Team Experience and  Resumes of all Design Team Members    Demonstrated Track Record in  (labeled with individual’s affiliation with  Driving Academic Success  proposed school)    Demographic Data (Note: only new  operators and existing national  operators):   Free‐ and reduced‐price lunch    African American, Hispanic,  Caucasian, Asian American, and  other       English Language Learners   Students with Individual  Education Plans    Students in Temporary Living  Situations    CPS student demographics in  proposed targeted communities  2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Reviewer  Check                  Page 40 of 52   List of all previous authorizers (Note:  only for existing national operators)  State or district report cards, vendor reports, or other verifiable sources of data demonstrating academic track record  2.3 Educational Goals and  Assessment Plan  2.4 Curriculum and Instruction    3.3 Management Organizations        Job descriptions for instructional  leadership team      NA      Course scope and sequence by subject  for each grade   Curriculum map and/ or pacing plan Timeline         Completed ISBE Special Education  Certification form  Proposed school calendar Daily schedule Sample teacher and student schedules 5-year school staffing model School-level organizational chart (include lines of authority and reporting) Comprehensive job descriptions for all positions in staffing plan  Resumes for any identified candidates not serving on the Design Team   Professional development calendar Documents on teacher evaluation 2.5 Talent Management      Section 3: Operational Capacity  3.1 General Operations    3.2 Governance Model                           Application and registration forms Transportation plan Board calendar Board bylaws Proof of filing for 501(c) status Comprehensive organizational chart (including Board, MO, and network and/or school leadership) Resumes for proposed Board members Code of ethics policy Draft MO contract 2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools                        Page 41 of 52   (For Design Teams that are  Proposing to Contract with an MO  Only)      Section 4. Economic Soundness  4.1 School Budget 4.2 Financial Controls 4.3 Facilities MO’s three most recent audited financial statements, with the most recent audit report   MO’s most recently filed IRS Form 990, Form 1120S, or other federal tax return       Completed budget workbook in Excel   Listing of financial reports generated   Fiscal policies   Timeline for securing any proposed facility and completing necessary renovations   Detailed space requirements   The address and general description for any proposed independent facilities Section 5: Existing Management Organizations (MOs) 5.1 Vision and Theory of Change 5.2 Historical Performance 5.3 Organizational Capacity 5.4 Facilities and Finances 5.5 Risk Management         Summary of schools/campuses within MO’s portfolio   NA   NA   NA   NA     2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 42 of 52   Appendix I: Request for Proposals for New Schools 2013 Elementary School Priority Communities   CPS is highly encouraging operators to submit new school proposals to open in communities that are  overcrowded, which include the following:              Albany Irving Ashburn Belmont Cragin (North of Grand Ave) Chicago Lawn (West of Kedzie Ave.) McKinley Park Midway (South of 51st St.) Little Village (West of Western Ave.) Reed-Dunning Sauganash   Please note that for the purpose of the RFP, some of the priority communities are portions of a  larger planning zone as defined by CPS. As such, student demographics are reflective of the  entire community, not only the portion noted for the RFP.  2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 43 of 52   ALBANY IRVING The Albany Irving geographic area is located on the North Side of the city within the boundaries of West Devon Avenue, North Rogers Avenue, Edens Expressway, West Lawrence Avenue, North Cicero Avenue, and West Belmont Avenue The population, as reported by the 2010 U.S Census, is 50% Hispanic, 29% Caucasian, 14% Asian, and 4% African American The CPS student population attending schools in the area is 6.4% African American, 7.6% Asian, 16.9% Caucasian, 65.2% Hispanic, and 3.9% Other 84% of the students are eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch There are currently 32 schools in Albany‐Irving: 21 elementary schools, 3 middle schools, and 8 high schools Enrollment and Utilization trends: The current utilization rate of the area is 113%, with ten of its thirty‐ two schools categorized as overcrowded and its two middle schools underutilized   2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 44 of 52   ASHBURN The Ashburn geographic area is located on the Southwest Side of the city within the boundaries of 75th Street, Cicero Avenue, 87th Street, and Damen Avenue The population of Ashburn, as reported by the 2010 U.S Census, is 46% African American, 37% Hispanic, and 15% Caucasian The CPS student population attending schools in the area is 45.9% African American, 0.1% Asian, 2.3% Caucasian, 49.8% Hispanic, and 1.8% Other 94% of the students are eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch There are currently 11 schools in Ashburn: 8 elementary schools and 3 high schools Enrollment and Utilization trends: The current utilization rate is 98%, with three of its eleven schools categorized as overcrowded and four schools underutilized   2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 45 of 52   BELMONT‐CRAGIN (North of Grand Ave) The CPS priority community of Belmont‐Cragin (North of Grand Ave, as noted by the distinct color on the map below) is a geographic area located on the West Side of the city within the boundaries of West Belmont Avenue, North Kenton Avenue, West Grand Avenue, North Harlem Avenue The population of Belmont‐Cragin, as reported by the 2010 U.S Census, is 79% Hispanic, 15% Caucasian, 3% African American, and 2% Asian The CPS student population attending schools in the area is 9.3% African American, 0.9% Asian, 4.7% Caucasian, 83.1% Hispanic, and 2.0% Other 93% of the students are eligible for Free and reduced Lunch There are currently a total of seventeen schools: fourteen elementary schools, one middle school, and two high schools Enrollment and Utilization trends: The current utilization rate of the area is 108%, with five of its seventeen schools categorized as overcrowded and three schools underutilized   2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 46 of 52   CHICAGO LAWN (West of Kedzie Ave.) The CPS priority community of Chicago Lawn (West of Kedzie Ave., as noted by the distinct color in the map below) is a geographic area located on the Southwest Side of the city within the boundaries of West 58th Street, South Kedzie Avenue, 75th Street, South Cicero Avenue The population of Chicago Lawn, as reported by the 2010 U.S Census, is 49% African American, 45% Hispanic, and 4% Caucasian The CPS student population attending schools in the area is 70.3% Hispanic, 25.6% African American, 2.1% Other, 1.5% Caucasian, and 0.5% Asian 93% of the students are eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch There are currently a total of twelve schools: eleven elementary schools and one high school Enrollment and Utilization trends: The current utilization rate of the area is 104%, with four of its twelve schools categorized as underutilized and two schools overcrowded   2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 47 of 52   MCKINLEY PARK The McKinley Park geographic area is located on the Southwest Side of the city within the boundaries of 59th Street, Stevenson Expressway, and South Halsted Street The population of McKinley Park, as reported by the 2010 U.S Census, is 65% Hispanic, 17% Caucasian, 16% Asian, and 2% African American The CPS student population attending schools in the area is 90.6% Hispanic, 4.9% African American, 2.1% Caucasian, 1.4% Asian, and 1.0% Other 44% of the students are eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch There are currently a total of forty‐six schools: thirty‐five elementary schools, two middle schools, and nine high schools Enrollment and Utilization trends: The current utilization rate of the area is 116%, with fifteen of its forty‐six schools categorized as overcrowded and four schools underutilized           2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 48 of 52   MIDWAY (South of 51st St.) The CPS priority community of Midway (South of 51st St., as noted by the distinct color on the map below) is a geographic area located on the Southwest Side of the city within the boundaries of 65th Street, 51st Street, Harlem Avenue, and Cicero Street The population of Midway, as reported by the 2010 U.S Census, is 54% Caucasian, 39% Hispanic, 6% African American, and 1% Asian The CPS student population attending schools in the area is 65.8% Hispanic, 27.0% Caucasian,5.1% African American,1.5% Other, and 0.6% Asian 78% of the students are eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch There are currently a total of nine schools: eight elementary schools and one high school Enrollment and Utilization trends: The current utilization rate of the area is 117%, with four of its nine schools categorized as overcrowded and two schools underutilized 2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 49 of 52   PILSEN – LITTLE VILLAGE (West of Western Ave.) The CPS priority community of LITTLE VILLAGE (only the section West of Western, as shown by the distinct color below) is a geographic area located on the West Side of the city within the boundaries of Cicero Avenue, Ogden Avenue, Western Avenue and the Stevenson Expressway The population of Pilsen ‐ Little Village, as reported by the 2010 U.S Census, is 83% Hispanic, 13% African American, and 4% Caucasian The CPS student population attending schools in the area is 93.0% Hispanic, 4.8% African American, 1.2% Other, 0.7% Caucasian, and 0.2% Asian 94% of the students are eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch Enrollment and Utilization trends: The current utilization rate of the Pilsen‐Little Village area is 95%, with ten of its thirty‐eight schools categorized as underutilized and six schools overcrowded 2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 50 of 52   REED ‐ DUNNING The Reed‐Dunning geographic area is located on the Northwest Side of the city within the boundaries of West Belmont Avenue, North River North, North Austin, West Montrose, North Cumberland, and Dunning The population of Reed‐Dunning, as reported by the 2010 U.S Census, is 70% Caucasian, 24% Hispanic, 1% African American, and 1% Asian The CPS student population attending schools in the area is 44.6% Caucasian, 41.0% Hispanic, 5.4% African American, 4.7% Asian, and 4.3% Other 66% of the students are eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch There are currently a total of seven schools: six elementary schools and one high school Enrollment and Utilization trends: The current utilization rate of the area is 133%, with four of its seven schools categorized as overcrowded 2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 51 of 52   SAUGANASH The Sauganash geographic area is located on the Northwest Side of the city within the boundaries of West Lawrence Avenue, Canfield Avenue, West Touhy Avenue, West Devon Avenue, and Eden's Expressway The population of Sauganash, as reported by the 2010 U.S Census, is 78% Caucasian, 14% Hispanic, and 6% Asian The CPS student population attending schools in the area is 80.8% Hispanic, 8.7% Caucasian, 5.5% African American, 2.5% Asian, and 2.5% Other 44% of the students are eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch There are currently a total of fifteen schools: fourteen elementary schools and one high school Enrollment and Utilization trends: The current utilization rate of the area is 129%, with ten of its fifteen schools categorized as overcrowded 2013 Request for Proposals for New Schools Page 52 of 52