IAC tells Appropriations Committee Maryland school buildings face widening backlog, $134 million shortfall for high‑priority projects

At a briefing to the Appropriations Committee, Alex Donahue, executive director of the Interagency Commission on School Construction (IAC), told legislators that Maryland’s public school facilities are aging and that available state and local capital funding will not close the resulting repair and replacement gap.

Donahue said Maryland’s PreK–12 system serves nearly 900,000 students in about 1,400 school buildings totaling roughly 142,000,000 gross square feet, and that the statewide average facility age has risen to about 31 years. “The most recent assessment cycle found [a] average depletion level of 52.66%,” Donahue said, using the industry metric known as the facility condition index, or FCI.

The nut graf: the IAC warned that rising construction costs, aging buildings and new program demands — including Pre‑K expansion under the statewide blueprint and state decarbonization goals — are producing a multi‑billion‑dollar need that current annual capital spending will not meet. The IAC cited a statutory fiscal‑year funding target of $450 million for FY26 (set in prior legislation) and said the anticipated capital improvement program portion is about $314 million, leaving roughly $134 million in higher‑priority projects unfunded under that scenario.

Key facts and figures presented to the committee

- Replacement value and backlog: Donahue said the replacement value for Maryland’s school facilities is about $70 billion. He told the committee that, because many buildings were constructed during a past building bulge (late 1960s–1970s), the state now faces a “bulge” in capital needs as those buildings age.

- Condition measures: Donahue gave the average FCI as 52.66% and said about 81% of facilities statewide are at 45% FCI or higher — a range where “things are visibly in need of repair,” according to the metric the IAC uses.

- Cost and purchasing power: The IAC reported construction costs roughly doubled since 2012 and have risen at about three times the rate of the consumer price index since 2003, reducing the purchasing power of state and local capital budgets and prompting local education agencies (LEAs) to defer maintenance.

- Scale of added investment needed: To bring the statewide average condition to an optimal mid‑30% FCI, Donahue said the state and local governments would need roughly an additional $500 million a year over 20 years to eliminate the backlog built up over the prior two decades.

- Pre‑K expansion: The IAC said roughly eight pre‑K expansion projects were submitted this year for state support and estimated the state is about 300 classrooms short to meet the blueprint’s expectations; the IAC estimated an incremental state liability for pre‑K expansion of about $186 million, depending on how and where districts add seats.

- Decarbonization: Donahue said decarbonization is the “fuzziest” need because there are not yet statewide standards for measuring progress. The IAC is working with the Maryland Energy Administration to develop scoping, scenarios and cost estimates over the next 18–24 months.

Funding picture and obligations

Donahue briefed the committee on the legislative funding targets and recent appropriations: he said the FY26 statutory target is $450 million in total state capital support, with the CIP portion at roughly $314 million and the remainder assigned to programs with statutory minimums. Even with recent increases and the Build to Learn program’s infusion of funds, he said the IAC expects a gap of about $134 million in unmet high‑priority projects under current assumptions. He also noted that the IAC is carrying a little over $500 million in future obligations — approved awards that will be paid out over the multi‑year draw schedules of large projects.

Questions from delegates and IAC responses

- Safe routes and indoor air quality: Delegate Solomon asked about implementation of pedestrian‑safety (safe‑routes) plans for new buildings and about indoor air quality. Donahue said school districts are submitting safe‑routes plans for new projects and that he had “no concerns to report” about that process. On indoor air quality, he said in‑depth testing requires resources the state and the IAC do not currently have; the IAC has created a system to collect district data and is working to improve its granularity.

- Timing of state disbursements: Committee members asked about the IAC’s schedule for releasing funds and whether the statutory timing is outdated. Donahue said the IAC is exploring a smoother approach to align state releases with local approval timelines and expects to bring proposals that would require statutory adjustments.

- Pre‑K readiness: A delegate described classroom‑readiness concerns reported in Harford County and asked whether adding Pre‑K classrooms would address readiness. Donahue and other IAC speakers emphasized that the IAC’s work is construction‑specific; programmatic readiness is a separate issue for districts and educators to address.

Safety anecdote

Donahue described a recent maintenance‑assessment visit in which an IAC assessor and district staff “walked into a boiler room and smelled gas.” He said staff evacuated the school, called BGE, had the leak shut off and the school returned to service within hours, with no injuries — an example he cited of the assessment program’s safety value.

No formal actions or votes were taken during the briefing; the IAC presented information and answered committee questions. Donahue told the committee he could provide additional data on request and that the IAC will continue working with the department of budget and management and presiding officers as appropriations progress.

Ending: The IAC characterized the briefing as an informational update intended to give appropriators a more complete picture of statewide capital need, the near‑term fiscal gap for high‑priority projects and emerging requirements for Pre‑K expansion and decarbonization work. The agency said it will return with more detailed analyses and potential statutory language if changes to funding disbursement timelines are proposed.