Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Enrollment Forecast topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

District demographer: lower birth rates and falling kindergarten capture rate will shrink Wenatchee enrollment

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A consultant told the Wenatchee School District board March 25 that declining birth counts and a lower kindergarten capture rate are expected to reduce resident student enrollment by about 1.5% next year and roughly 11% by 2029, and she described the data and methods behind the district's five‑ to seven‑year forecast.

A demographic presentation to the Wenatchee School District board on March 25 warned that lower birth rates and a falling kindergarten capture rate are forecast to shrink the district’s resident student population over the coming years.

Marcy Horner, a consultant with MGT who presented the analysis, said the forecast uses student data provided by the district (snapshot dated Oct. 1, 2024), historical trends, birth counts from the Washington State Department of Health and residential development research. “Resident student population is expected to decline just, by 1.5% next year. Projections indicate a total loss of 11% in, by 2029,” Horner said.

Horner showed the underlying drivers: a lower kindergarten capture rate (she cited a recent observed capture rate near 76%, down from prior years around 80%), falling birth counts (an example drop from 572 births to 501 births five years prior to a given kindergarten cohort), and variations in mobility and grade‑to‑grade retention. She said those changes, taken together, can translate into losses of dozens of students per grade. “When we talk about what how many students you might gain from a development...if you have a hundred [homes]...it’s 33 across K through 12 across 3 years, as opposed to losing 71 in 1 grade level,” she said.

Horner provided several numeric summaries that the board requested to inform budget and facilities planning: the report’s resident student forecast totaled about 6,544 K‑12 resident students on the base year matrix; the district’s total student count for the year presented was 7,095, a decline of 63 students from the prior year; and the forecast incorporated 509 housing units in active projects (87% described as apartments) in four elementary attendance areas.

She described student yield assumptions used for residential development modeling and said those yield factors are reanalyzed annually. Horner said her team contacts city and county planning records, reviews meeting notes, conducts site drives and uses aerial imagery to confirm whether developments have ground activity; only projects with sufficient approval or observable ground movement are included in the forecast, she said. Projects without sufficient evidence are kept on a watch list and can be incorporated in later forecasts when approvals or construction begin.

Board members raised questions on methodology and on whether to include projected economic development that lacks current approvals. Board Director Martin asked whether the model accounted for longer‑term infrastructure changes that might enable development in Sunnyslope or Malaga; Horner replied that the consultant team will include only approved/ground‑moving developments unless the board prefers a scenario that explicitly models additional speculative growth.

Why it matters: The forecast figures inform staffing, facility planning and budget assumptions. Board members and district finance staff said they will use the analysis in preparing the coming year’s budget and capital planning work.

The board had no formal vote on the forecast itself; it thanked Horner for the presentation and discussed next steps for incorporating the analysis into district planning.