Recently, the Department of Education (DOE) sent two reports to school districts in the state of Florida; Annual Energy Costs Report (Attachment #4) and Annual Plant Maintenance and Operations Report (Attachment #5).  Even though the information for all districts in Florida are listed, the DOE does not "rank" districts, rather distributes with districts listed alphabetically for cost comparison only.  To make the comparisons easier, the reports have been sorted in various ways (Attachments #1, #2 and #3) as described below:

• Square Feet Per (Capital Outlay FTE):  Attachment #1 - For convenience, the spreadsheet has been sorted by square feet per Capital Outlay FTE (COFTE).  Note that Hillsborough County has fewer square feet per COFTE (students for whom we have to provide a seat) than any other district in the state.  This is due to the fact that we do not build unnecessary square footage in our new facilities and we have minimal ancillary facilities that do not house students.  This has an impact on both energy costs and operation and maintenance costs.
• Maintenance and Operations Cost Information:  Attachment #2 - This report is sorted by total maintenance and operations costs per COFTE.  Since districts receive almost all of the allocated capital dollars based upon the number of students served, not the square footage in Florida Inventory School Houses (FISH), it is appropriate to compare costs in this manner.  Hillsborough has the lowest cost per COFTE in the state, with the exception of Indian River.
• Energy Costs:  Attachment #3 - This report is sorted by total energy costs per COFTE, lowest to the highest dollars spent.  Again, costs per student is the best way to measure this since the majority of the Part 1 dollars used to fund energy is generated by the student count.  Hillsborough operates in the top 15% (most efficient) of all Florida school districts.  Hillsborough operates and maintains schools at comparatively low costs   which can be attributed to long term planning, energy conservation initiatives, and continual evaluation of the organizational structure of the Maintenance Department.