Consultants present educational specifications as Inglewood moves to K–8 reconfiguration

Consultants from Cobalt Flores Winters presented draft educational specifications and site analyses to the Inglewood Unified School District Facilities Advisory Committee, laying out how the district’s planned shift to K–8 configuration will change classroom counts, support spaces and site needs.

Emilio Flores, CEO of Cobalt Flores Winters, told the committee the specifications are “meant to be a rubric” that ties an educational program to facility design and that they must meet the minimums set under Title 5 of the state education code. The consultants proposed two illustrative TK–8 school models: a smaller model serving about 535 students (two classes per grade) and a larger model serving about 790 students (three classes per grade). Janet Cleaggel, head of educational services for the firm, walked members through the math: the 535‑student model requires roughly 26 classrooms and the larger model about 36 classrooms, while multi‑purpose room (MPR) sizing is driven by lunch scheduling and a 15 square‑feet‑per‑student planning metric that can push a gym/MPR to about 7,730 square feet for certain schools.

The consultants applied those specifications to two representative district sites. Bennett Q, with about 488 students on roughly 6.5 acres, falls short of the 15‑acre guideline and would need approximately seven additional classrooms to meet the smaller specification; the district is already constructing six new classrooms there. Sentinel has about 576 students on 5.8 acres and currently has classroom counts close to the 790‑student model, meaning it may function effectively as a larger K–8 despite limited acreage. The presenters cautioned that acreage, existing building footprints and specialized room types (science labs, VAPA rooms, special‑day classes) can change how a site ultimately conforms to a model.

Consultants emphasized that specialty programs and staffing models determine final room needs. “What the educational program dictates is what needs to be on site,” Cleaggel said, describing tradeoffs between single‑subject and multiple‑subject staffing, departmentalized classrooms for upper grades, and the placement of specialized special‑education classrooms. They also noted that mod/severe special‑education programs require larger, specialized spaces and will likely be placed at specific campuses rather than duplicated everywhere.

On implementation, presenters flagged regulatory and funding constraints. They said the Division of State Architect (DSA) reviews projects for ADA and fixture compliance and that, under state practice, modernization costing more than a threshold of replacement cost often triggers full replacement rather than retrofit. The consultants recommended the district use Proposition 2 (the statewide bond program) and other funding streams to generate more precise cost estimates and to prioritize projects once state and local funding availability is known.

The consultants described the master plan as a starting framework rather than a prescriptive design: it will inform future architectural design, community and teacher input sessions and staged project prioritization. The committee asked for follow‑up briefings on funding streams, DSA compliance implications, and timelines for sites already in construction.

Next steps: Cobalt Flores Winters will finalize findings and provide them to district staff in the coming weeks; the district will then engage architects and hold further community and teacher input sessions before final project designs are developed.