© CHPS 2007

National CHPS – A Resource for States, Districts and School Building Committees

Donald FudgeNational Collaborative Spokesperson

From the Northeast High Performance Schools Exchange

School Building Construction – the Opportunity

Aging buildings or the need for new buildings

Failing or failed buildings

Health concerns

Research on how facilities affect learning

The increasing cost of construction – first cost

The increasing cost of energy - operations

And, the increasing cost of maintaining buildings - operations

School Building Construction – the Basics

Fundamental – facilities affect learning

Best for kids

Best for the community – fiscally conservative and financially sound

best for the environment

“Why can’t we build them like we used to?”…when lowest cost was not the object and schools were the foundation of the community

The Impetus for Change – 1990- 2007

Global warming and climate change

Energy costs

Societal Benefit Charges - incentives to reduce energy usage – carbon emissions – school-specific programs

New technologies

Early Responses

USGBC releases LEED

School districts and cities develop initiatives for schools and public facilities

California – aggressive state energy efficiency initiatives

The California utilities form a collaborative (CHPS) to focus on schools CHPS is a 501(c)3 Not-For-Profit Organization dedicated to building a new generation

of high performance schools. board of directors with representatives from state agencies, design professional

firms, school districts, manufacturers and contractors. Membership organization since 2005 with over 100 members

The California Collaborative Response

LEED as the creative base

Energy efficiency incentives as a driver to design above code buildings – reduce first cost

Schools not a traditional commercial building so adjustment was made– The population – three to nineteen year olds– The programs – seven hours of learning/concentration– The school schedule and calendar– Joint use by the community– Operations and maintenance needs– Local control and funding – capital and operating– Relocatable classrooms as a fact of life

The Best Practices Manuals

Response in Other States

• Maine – legislation to reduce energy usage by 20% from ASHRAE 90.1- 2001 in state-funded buildings

– Department of Education chooses New Buildings Institute Benchmark for Maine Schools for prescriptive standards

• Washington – design state-funded buildings to LEED - Silver

– Office Of Public School Instruction (OPSI) buys CA

license and adapts to meet WA codes and regulation

– Required for schools

• Massachusetts Renewable Energy Trust - Green Schools Initiative buys license from CA and writes CHPS MA

– Portions incorporated into Massachusetts School Building Authority regulations

Response in Other States

• New York – Executive Order to reduce energy use – New York Energy Research and Development

Authority (NYSERDA) buys license from CA, writes CHPS NY and turns over to NY State Education Department

• Northeast HPS Exchange (utilities and education departments) buys license for CA for CT, ME, NH, RI, VT and writes CHPS NE

– RI incorporates CHPS NE into School Construction Regulations

State Incentives to Design to CHPS

• CA – Proposition 1D $100 million for CHPS Verified schools

• MA – an additional 1.5% reimbursement for 30 points, 2% additional for 34 points; grants from MTC for renewable technology systems

• ME – design grants and energy efficiency technology grants from Efficiency Maine

• NY – incentives and rebates from NYSERDA

• NH – additional 3% reimbursement for meeting CHPS NE

• RI – 2% additional reimbursement of 40% above code and 4% if 50% above

NY-CHPS Version 1.1High Performance Schools Guidelines

An Appendix of the New York State Education Department

Manual of Planning Standards

Prepared with Support from:New York State

Energy Research and Development Authority

Prepared in Cooperation with:

The Collaborative for High Performance Schools, Inc.

June 2006

The Core Criteria – Basic to all Licensees

Summary of CHPS Point Allocation

18%

6%

23%

14%

24%

15% Sustainable SitesPolicy & Operations

IEQ

Materials

Energy

Water

Sustainable Sites

Orientation for Daylighting, winds, shade Stormwater Treatment &

Reduction Site Selection - SmartGrowth Transportation Reduced Footprint Joint Use of Facilities / Parks Cool Roofs

The Core Criteria

Energy Efficiency Exceeding state building energy code or ASHRAE 90.1 -2001/2004 by 10-30% up to 50% Renewable Energy – technologies or purchase Energy Management Systems Natural Ventilation Commissioning

CHPS Project: Conley Caraballo HS, ATI Architects & Engineers .

The Core Criteria

Indoor Environmental Quality Standard 55 - HVAC Ventilation & Filter Requirements

Thermal Displacement Ventilation

Low – Emitting Materials

Chemical & Pollutant Source Control

Construction IAQ Requirements

Acoustics – Standard 53

Daylighting

Electric Lighting – high efficacy

– ICLS

View Windows CHPS Project: Kenilworth Source: Quattrocchi Kwok Architects

The Core Criteria

Water Efficiency Water Use Baseline

Reduce water use - internal Reducing Potable Water Use for Landscaping & Indoors Reduce Sewage Conveyance from Toilets and Urinals

CHPS Project: Maywood Academy Source: WLC Architects

The Core Criteria

Material Selection Storage and Collection of Recyclables

Construction Waste Management Material Selection

Recycled Content Rapidly Renewable Organically Grown Certified Wood EPP Salvaged Reused

CHPS Project: Maywood Academy, WLC Architects

The Core Criteria

Policy and Operations CHPS District Resolution

Using the schools’ high performance features as teaching tools.

Periodic Assessment of Env. Conditions –

EPA Healthy SEAT, IAQ Tools for Schools

Environmental Education

Equipment Performance

Low Emission Buses

Maintenance Plan

Green Power

The Core Criteria

The Key is Integrated Design

Adaptations based on state realities, codes and regulations – more stringent than core only

• CHPS NY – IAQ, O&M, • CHPS NE – IAQ, Vapor Barriers• CHPS WA – linked to LEED• VT – bio-mass heating• CHPS MA - IAQ

Project Type 1: New School

Project Type 2: New Building on an Existing Campus

Project Type 3: Major Modernization

CHPS Project: Alder Creek, Lionakis Beaumont Design Group Inc.

Projects eligible to participate

A National Collaborative is formed

• Two day “visioning Conference in February– Collaborate?– Formalize?

• Decision: formalize• Named committees:

– Technical– Governance– Image and Branding

• Met with CHPS – September 28• Moving forward together• Leverage resources

A National Collaborative to support states and districts

• National web site• Materials – Best Practices plus state

educational materials• Technical advice – legislation,

incentives, roll out• Case studies – with a template to

provide consistent information

A National Collaborative to support design professionals

• Best Practice Manuals – state updates, CA updates

• Technical Questions

• Outline of state regulations from state to state

• Case studies – cost, efficiency measures, innovations, solutions

A National Collaborative to Leverage Resources to Develop Tools

• CPS Verified – third party verification as an option for states or districts

Leveraging Resources to Develop Tools

• Post-occupancy Performance Tool– Energy efficiency – Health –student and teacher– Student performance– Maintenance and operations

What worked and what did not

Leveraging Resources to Develop Tools

• Facility Manager and maintenance personnel certification process

– Critical to maintaining high performance– Combination of course work, projects,

exams

To maintain the building as designed

Leveraging Resources to Develop Tools

Criteria for Retrofitting Buildings– Capital improvement plans with integrated

components– Asset protection planning– Multi-year plan leading to CHPS Verified status

(and state incentives)

Next Steps of the National Collaborative

• Finalize organization• Complete business plan• Demonstrate value to potential

members– State education department deliverables– Advanced information on technologies

and Criteria– Materials for sales force– Presentations to sales force

What isa High Performance School?

Healthy

Thermally, visually and acoustically comfortable

Efficient use of energy, materials and water

Easy to maintain and operate

Commissioned

Environmentally responsive

A teaching tool

Safe and secure

A community resource

Stimulating architecture

What are thebenefits of high performance building?

Heightened student performance

Reduced operating costs

Better student & teacher health

Increased Average Daily Attendance

Improved teacher satisfaction & retention

Reduced liability exposure

Reduced indoor & outdoor environmental impact

Eligible for financial incentives

CHPS Project: Chartwell

Picture Courtesy of EHDD Architecture

CHPS is an established and nationally respected high performance school rating program with a 7 year track record.

CHPS is designed for use in California and has school targeted tools and resources.

CHPS Serves School Environments: Addresses Acoustics, Indoor Air Quality, Daylighting, Electric Lighting and using Schools as Teaching Tools.

CHPS Project: Maywood Academy, LAUSD, WLC Architects, Inc.

CHPS offers educational trainings, workshops and technology charettes for schools districts and their design teams.

CHPS offers a comprehensive high performance Best Practices Manual.

Why States and School Districts Choose

CHPS

Estimated first cost is from 0-5% of construction cost and incentives can reduce by 1-3%. Over time the operating cost reduction is predicted to be 8-10 times the incremental cost

Cost varies greatly with: High performance features chosen (CHPS Points Claimed) Local climates Local markets Experience

How much does high performance

cost and what will the incentives cover?

Hard vs. Soft Costs

Hard costs (i.e.. high performance HVAC and lighting systems) should be minimal or close to nothing and usually have a short return on investment.

Soft costs (i.e.. commissioning, energy analysis, adapting to new techniques and technology) have some cost premium, however may mean the difference between superior and inadequate performance.

“WHY ISN’T MY SCHOOL A HIGH PERFORMANCE SCHOOL?”

For state information contact

• CHPS CA: Charles Eley charles@chps.netKristin Heinen kristin@chps.net

• CHPS WA: Patricia Jatczak patricia.jatczak@k12.wa.us• CHPS MA: Sam Nutter nutter@masstech.org• CHIPS NY: Carl Thurnau cthurnau@mail.nysed.gov• CHIPS NE: Carolyn Sarno csarno@neep.org

Don Fudge dfudge@neep.org• Maine: Scott Brown scott.brown@maine.gov• New Hampshire: Ed Murdough

emurdough@ed.state.nh.us• Rhode Island: Joseph Da Silva

Joseph.dasilva @ride.ri.us• Vermont: Cathy Hilgendorf cathy.hilgendorf@state.vt.us

Links to Resources

• http://www.chps.net

• http://www.neep.org/hpse

• http://www.masstech.org