Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
DPI Model <br /> Historically, projections made by State DPI have been low when compared to <br /> actual student membership growth. Figures 12 and 13 compare the 1998 DPI <br /> projections for the past three years with actual membership numbers for both <br /> districts. While the Task Force discussed this model, it was not highly <br /> recommended. <br /> Figure 12. Comparison of DPI Projections and Final ADM <br /> CHCCS <br /> 10,000 <br /> 9616 <br /> 9,000 8984 <br /> 8,000 <br /> 7,000 <br /> 1919 99 Op <br /> 99 '00 <br /> --*--Oct'98 DPI Projection Final, <br /> Figure 13. Comparison of DPI Projections and Final ADM <br /> OCs <br /> 6,500 <br /> 6254 <br /> ' 6188 <br /> 6075 <br /> 6298 <br /> 6,000 <br /> ,4. <br /> 5,500 <br /> 190 99 00 <br /> 99 O� o7 <br /> tOct'98 DPI Projection Final I <br /> Student Generation Report <br /> The County recently contracted with Tischler and Associates to update its School <br /> Impact Fee/Student Generation Report. While the Tischler method projects future <br /> student population numbers based on an Average Daily Membership (ADM) basis, <br /> this methodology is sound and can be applied to membership numbers as well. <br /> The Task Force agreed that this model is one that can be used in making <br /> projections. This model takes population statistics, housing starts, and student <br /> membership into account. In addition, this methodology projects student <br /> 22 <br />