Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Enrollment Demographics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Demographer warns short-term enrollment slowed; board told long-term outlook largely unchanged
Summary
A Population & Survey Analyst update for Lake Travis ISD showed tapering student growth driven by fewer young children in the district and slower new‑home occupancy; the update is intended to guide short‑term staffing and planning rather than reset long‑term facility decisions.
Stacy Dipperra, population and survey analyst with PASA, told the Lake Travis Independent School District board on Wednesday that short‑term enrollment projections have been tweaked but there is no major long‑term change to the district’s 10‑year forecast.
“This is not going to be the 30 or 40 or 60 minute presentation that you heard last year,” Dipperra said, adding that the update is an “off year” review designed to help the district with staffing and next‑year planning.
The presentation summarized three drivers behind the revised projection: (1) fewer young children currently living in the district relative to last projections, especially at the kindergarten level; (2) slowing new‑home occupancy and a lower number of students per newly built home than in prior years; and (3) timing changes to several multifamily and subdivision developments that push some housing units outside the current 9‑ to 10‑year projection window.
Dipperra said district enrollment rose by nearly 2,000 students between 2014 and the recent peak but that growth has tapered in the last five years because the district is nearing build‑out and because housing costs are increasingly prohibitive for the youngest families. She showed the district’s historical students‑per‑single‑family‑home ratios and said the district average of 0.41 students per single‑family home in 2023 is down from roughly 0.55–0.57 in 2018.
Board members and staff asked for clarifications and additional data points. Trustee Philip Davis pressed on whether the PASA model accounts for new private schools or rise of microschools if vouchers were enacted; Dipperra said the “low growth” scenario already folded in a degree of voucher risk and that the full study next year will model additional scenarios.
Trustees also asked whether the geocoded resident‑student maps could be extended to show students who live inside LTISD but attend other districts (and vice versa). Dipperra said TEA/PEIMS transfer data can be used but some transfer reports are not available until April; she said the demographers can geocode addresses if the district provides them.
The updated housing timing changes Dipperra cited include a six‑month delay for the Travis Club subdivision, division of Sweetwater multifamily phases (reducing near‑term units), and small reductions or timing shifts at other identified developments. She noted the RGK Ranch donation to conservation removes that parcel from the projection horizon but does not affect near‑term planning.
Why it matters: the update reduces the 10‑year enrollment projection by roughly 1,000 students compared with last year’s forecast and shifts expected timing of capacity pressures at some elementary campuses. Dipperra emphasized the update is primarily to inform next year’s staffing and utilization decisions rather than to change long‑range facility strategy.
What the board asked next: trustees requested TEA/Naviance/National Clearinghouse data and district counseling reporting to better track graduates’ postsecondary destinations; they also asked PASA to provide an expanded geocoding of resident addresses vs. enrollment outside LTISD once TEA snapshots are available.
The presentation closed with Dipperra offering to return for the full study next year and to provide the additional transfer and postsecondary tracking data the board requested.
