Constructing a Self Funded Program Takes More Than Dollars & Cents

By: Scott Burke; Originally published in Techniques Magazine, February 2012.

Whether you are an educator in Maine, California, or anywhere in between, it is more than likely safe to say that funding, or lack thereof, is a real dilemma in quality educational programming. The cost of teacher resources, engaging projects that inspire students, and spiraling technological upgrades exemplify competing needs in a constant battle for limited financial assets. Furthermore, in recent years, a lack of FTE monies has led to larger class sizes, fewer class offerings, and in some instances complete cuts to non-essential programs and electives. The battle for money is nothing new; however, how we choose to leverage this limited resource allows for an incredible opportunity for innovation, collaboration, and the awakening of a new era of entrepreneurial spirit.

As a follow-up to the October 2011 issue of Techniques, I contributed an article titled Alignment with the Common Core Standards: A 21st century how-to Model for Successful CTE programs. This article explained how I partnered with my mathematics teaching partner, Tom Moore, to create a program called Geometry in Construction at Loveland High School (LHS) in Loveland, Colorado. The article outlined three organizing principles central to the success of the program:

1) Community building
2) Contextualized math instruction and delivery
3) Appropriate, authentic, CTE driven capstone project

After seven years, we know our multi-faceted model works for not only our school but for many other schools around the country.

In October I mentioned strategic ways we have leveraged our limited funding to create a “self-funded” program. Creating such a program takes time, vision, dedication, and an ability to question and evaluate each portion of a program with the intent to continuously strive for ways to improve. We do this not because it is easy, but rather, because it is needed. In this article we offer proven techniques and show how creating a self-funded program is more than just dollars and cents.

Engaging the Community
Eight years ago, while attending a meeting, one of the long time committee members humorously voiced concerns about the practical implications of our construction programs. He went on to poke fun at each individual construction program at each high school for requiring students to make salad tongs, cutting boards, and mantle clocks. These requirements, he complained, had not changed since his own children attended high school a decade earlier. He asked us the following questions:
1) What employable skills will the kids gain by doing these same projects year after year?
2) Where can the students be employed after high school knowing how to make salad tongs, cutting boards, or mantle clocks?
As the teachers sat and listened, you could feel the tension building. I bet if you were a mind reader, you would have probably heard the teachers thinking:

• What does this guy know?
• I would like to see him do better with the equipment and funding I have.
• If he thinks he can do better, then maybe he should come and do my job.

I left the meeting feeling hurt and devalued. Later, I realized that this committee member had a really valuable point of view. Perhaps, the reason I felt hurt was because the committee member was really asking, “What service are you providing to our community?” He asked the very questions I myself needed to ask to move toward a brighter and more secure future for CTE. These same questions were some of the guiding reflections that eventually led to a new era of CTE at LHS with the start of Geometry in Construction. Fast forward to the present and now we have some tips about creative funding.

Tip #1: Community Engagement
Mutually beneficial partnerships: A central factor for generating funding involves engaging the community in meaningful ways. After the inaugural year of the program we began to collaborate with local non-profit organizations such as Habitat for Humanity and Interfaith Hospitality Network. These mutually beneficial partnerships allow for each group to meet their respective goals. Additionally, through these partnerships, Geometry in Construction continues to network with new and different community members who are happy to support us. This support can come in a variety of forms including: positive public relations, where our partners talk about the benefits of Geometry in Construction with other community members; volunteer work with our students; and often times, through donations.

Conduit for Donations: In large part, community members want to give and support the children of their communities. However, they rarely get the opportunity to give back in creative ways. Furthermore, schools are really good about asking for money, but this is the one thing that most community members have in limited quantities. Instead of money, however, there have been many businesses willing and happy to donate to our cause. Geometry in Construction survives on a budget that relies on approximately 25% donations of which the vast majority comes in the form of materials, tools, and services.

Farming for new contributors? Host an Event: On an annual basis, approximately 200 students go through Geometry in Construction. These students and their families provide a new opportunity to gain support and future donations. One of the ways we do this is to host community/parent build days. The annual Barn Raising is one example where we erect all of the walls on the subfloor of the house. This event always takes place on a Saturday in the fall and is attended by 80-100 participants and their families. We coordinate the event to include music, food, and fun. On multiple occasions, local reporters have attended these events and given us free advertisement because Geometry in Construction becomes a feature on the local television broadcast and in newspapers. Often times, following these news blitzes, we receive an outpouring of support from the community asking for how they can help support Geometry in Construction. In sum, the first idea for creative funding stems from building relationships within the community, finding avenues to get the word out about your program, and creating opportunities for community members to donate.

Idea #2: Do More with Less
Doing more with less seems to be the mantra as of late. In order to create change, educators must begin to critically analyze each and every component of what we have traditionally done. To do this, we suggest using traditional funding streams, like Carl Perkins, and making time to do additional grant writing.

Through the development of Geometry in Construction, for example, we were compelled to find creative ways to incorporate and blend both the curriculums of math and construction. We walked in the other person’s shoes to learn the nuances of each discipline. This exploration allowed us to discover that Tom with his math degree and experience was able to apply for an applied vocational math credential through Perkins Funding. Once the state approved his credential, the school district regained a portion of Tom’s salary for every section of Geometry in Construction he taught. This is similar to how my construction credential brings a portion of my salary back to the district, and very similar to how a portion of other CTE teachers’ credentials bring salaries back to the school district. Although this structure may vary from state to state, it has proven to be a valuable source of funding resources for the Geometry in Construction program. In short, it would be financially smart for the math teacher of contextualized curriculum to get an applied vocational math credential.

Additionally, we write and collaborate on a number of grants. We initially applied for a Tech Prep grant to get the program started. Upon receiving the grant we placed a request to the district for a one-time gift of $30,000.00 to be used for the purchase of building materials. The district approved this request with the understanding that we were never allowed to ask for additional funding to keep the program alive. Since then, we have turned this initial investment into 6 houses and over 1,000 student participants. Furthermore, the public relations blitz that transpired allowed for the district to be painted in a very positive light in the community and build allies and more resources from which to pull.

Idea #3: Saving FTE
Full-Time Teacher Equivalency (FTE) is a valuable component in education that many teachers may feel they have no control or influence over. Through our model of contextualization, we have discovered that we actually do have some control over FTE. When you break it down, it is a relatively simple process.

In most high schools, including LHS, high failure rates in math classes are common and major problems. We have collaborated with some schools that have reported math failure rates as high as 50%. These high failure rates translate to high repeater rates. This has resulted in some school districts doing some of the following:

• Water down the math content so students pass enough classes to graduate
• Double kids up on math classes where electives are removed so students enroll in multiple periods of math
• Offer math credit for a number of different classes including physical education, art, and CTE

The issue with all three of these alleged solutions is that none enable students to continue on into higher levels of math. Unfortunately, this may handicap students for life and possible career options.

As we developed our model, one unique component is the team taught approach we utilize. This team approach, coupled with all of the previously mentioned characteristics of the program, creates a new level of student engagement where students are excited about what they are doing. When students are highly engaged and excited about class, we have found that they are more likely to work and study harder. The unexpected byproduct of this is a drastic decrease in the failure and repeater situation some schools are facing. When students do not repeat the same classes over and over again, this ultimately translates to a larger pool of FTE to be spread out through all academic disciplines as opposed to only core academic classes.

Conclusion
Creating a self-funded program takes so much more than just focusing on the financial aspects of dollars and cents. Engaging the community, doing more with less, and saving FTE are all components we utilize to create a free standing program that withstands the ups and downs of school funding. Although three tips have been outlined here, we hope this article encourages you to consider new and innovative ideas to fund your programs! For more information about other opportunities for funding, or if you would like to know more about the Geometry in Construction program, please visit our website at www.geometryinconstruction.org and feel free to contact us by email or phone.

Geometry in Construction in Syracuse, Indiana

In northwest Indiana you will find the town of Syracuse, home to Geometry in Construction Hoosier style. Wawasee High School is a 9 - 12 comprehensive school with approximately 960 students. Teachers, Jamie McAdams (construction) and Kem Zolman (math) launched 2 sections of Geometry in Construction this past fall. What follows is a question/answer session.

What is your authentic project? We are building a 12 X 36 one bedroom camping cabin on a trailer frame. We are going for the cabin look with an all wood interior, metal roof, laminate floor, lighting fixtures that use antlers, etc. We drew up the plans ourselves. What is unique is that we are having spray-in foam insulation, making the cabin more energy efficient. The cabinets are being built by Tyler, an independent study senior at our high school. He will be attending school next year in Vermont for cabinet and furniture making.

What do you plan to do with the cabin? The cabin has been pre-sold to a local campground. They are using the cabins as summer rentals and for living quarters for campground management. We charge 15% over the cost of the materials. The cost is estimated between $19,000 - $20,000. The campground owner wants one a year for the next 5 years.

Tell a little bit about your classes? We have a morning section and an afternoon section. Each class has about 18 students. Most of them are sophmores, however we do have a few freshman. About 20% are girls.

Tell about the benefits to you? It is nice to work with another adult and not be alone. Seeing the connections between Geometry and Construction is enjoyable. There is less grading for me as a construction teacher but I spend my time doing other things like ordering materials, etc.

What schedule are you on? We are on a trimester schedule which was the first adaptation that needed to be made. Most schools have the kids all year, we only have them the first and third 12 weeks. Last year we did not have a full Geometry in Construction class, but we built our first cabin. This year, it is so much easier now that we have a regular Geometry in Construction class.

What has been the toughest? Keeping everyone and everything organized. In addition, learning the other teacher’s subject matter.

What is the goal of the course? We wanted to give students a taste of construction. Hopefully some will continue into our Building Trades Program with Ed Waltz. Ed has been extremely helpful in getting us to the place we are at.

What do the students think? The kids enjoy getting out to build and seeing the geometry and construction ties. The estimate is that the students’ geometry grades are about 5% higher than the traditional classes on the final test at the end of the first trimester which is encouraging.

What else would you like to tell people? “It is a great program and the week long training is the best workshop that I have ever attended”.

Jamie welcomes you to visit Wawasee High School. You can call 574.457.9153 or email at jmcadams@wawasee.k12.in.us

Kidify Part 3: Holding Kids Accountable

In the final installment of Kidifying Your Class, we want to encourage Geometry in Construction teachers to continue to research ways to hold students accountable for tasks that you have assigned. There is no “magic bullet” for this and it is not for the faint of heart. Teachers openly confess that it is easier to let the student fail than to encourage him/her to work. Before you give up, here are 2 reminders.

From the geometry side of class, homework is still an important task. For some students, grades do not motivate and they will not do the homework just because of grades. These students do not feel the need to complete the homework, then they fall behind and score low on assessments. We made a decision during our first year of Geometry in Construction not to allow this attitude to continue without a fight. The decision was to build a “Penalty Box” for students not doing their geometry homework. During the geometry class, the construction teacher is responsible to check each student’s completion rate of the previous night’s homework. If that rate is below 70%, the construction teacher assigns the student to the penalty box during the construction portion of the class. In the penalty box, students must complete the past geometry assignment as well as the next one in order to get out of the box. Why the construction teacher? The math teacher is already the “bad teacher” just because of what they teach. This is the time when the construction teacher becomes the “bad guy”. Plus this also allows the students to see the math and construction teacher as a unified front. Note the penalty box is nothing but an area on the job site that is reserved for doing math homework. It is amazing how much the homework completion rate improves when students don’t get to go build but instead is held accountable for homework. Our typical homework completion rate is 90%+.

Accountability is no less important on the construction side of the class. Students need to know very clearly what is expected of them at the end of the period. For us, we use something called an “Employability Card”. Each group of students receive a small card with the task that they need to accomplish by the end of class. This task must be specific and doable. For example, “installing windows” is not specific enough. However, modifying to say “install the kitchen window” becomes doable and more importantly, measurable. The group of students at the end of the hour must report in to the construction or math teacher, show their progress (or lack thereof), and summarize how and who worked. Students do an initial grading of themselves and the system is set so that typically, students can not earn more than a “C”. However, the teacher can over ride the grade so that the students can receive a higher grade. Students must verbally justify their accomplishments by showing what they worked on during the period. Also, teachers can help insure that there is no “bullying” of students to get an undeserved grade. We have seen schools use this model without the teacher time at the end....it was a failure. Students need that face time with a teacher to learn what accountability is and to understand how to improve. Teachers must be comfortable with “grading” the end product of what the students actually accomplished. Note that many times math teachers do not like this role. They would prefer black and white “answers”. However, when done right, you can increase production as the year progresses.

Obviously, there are many ways to keep kids accountable including structuring Cooperative Groups correctly (see article Quick and Dirty Checklist for Cooperative Groups, March 2010), parental communication, developing strong student relationships, and other ways. What is important is that we as teachers use as many tools as possible to keep students engaged in their learning.

Roseville, California's Version of Geometry in Construction

You might notice something a little different if you visit the math department at Roseville High School this year. On any given day, you’re just as likely to find a student in a hardhat, swinging a hammer, as you are to find them with a textbook and a calculator. If so, you can be pretty certain you have stumbled into the RHS Geometry in Construction program.

This fully contextualized approach to Geometry, blends college preparatory Geometry with traditional Construction Technology in a collaborative learning environment. The course is designed to add relevance to mathematics, increase understanding of geometric standards while increasing the scope and rigor of Career Technical Education.

Students enrolled in the courses will apply the lessons learned in the classroom and on the job-site as they build a 656 square foot, Factory Built House on the campus at Roseville High School. Students will work on all phases of construction, including framing, plumbing, HVAC, electrical, drywall, painting and carpentry. Professional partners in industry will help train students as they work throughout the year.

Geometry in Construction at RHS began to take shape when former Assistant Principal, Nancy Veilleux, found the website of the original “Geometry in Construction” in Loveland, CO and approached Industrial and Technology Department member and teacher, Jeff Bailey. Intrigued by the idea, Bailey formed an exploratory committee that included Geometry teacher, Tyson Maytanes, and made the trip to see the program first hand. The Colorado program, created by Tom Moore (Math) and Scott Burke (ITE) is in it’s fifth year of contextualization and was completing a house for Habitat for Humanity during the team’s visit. The RHS team returned from Colorado and began the work to bring the program to Roseville High School for the 2011 Fall Semester.

Preparing the class for the school year was no easy task; with a checklist that included Board approval, fundraising, registration, plan development and recruitment of industry partners, as well as a fun filled week of instructor training in sunny Clovis, CA.

Nearly two months into the school year and the class, and project, is in full swing. Students have completed the first Unit Test on surface area and are gearing up for the second on Volume, Slope and the properties of triangles. Students are finding the geometry
rigorous and challenging, but with the construction component driving instruction, the instructor’s have yet to hear that ever present student question, “Why do we have to learn this.”

On the construction side of class, students have completed scale models of the house they will be building, out of Balsa wood. Framing on the actual structure began at the beginning of the month and the classes have nearly completed the floor system and walls of the house.

In addition, Career Technical Education at Roseville High School received a huge shot in the arm this month when the Sierra College STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) Initiative awarded a sub-grant to Roseville High School Geometry in Construction in the amount of $12,000.

The funding, which is awarded through a state program designed to develop strong partnerships in STEM from the Jr. High through the Community College level, will be essential in helping Roseville High School program meet their goals in the first year. The grant will also help RHS further strengthen the partnership between students, and the strong STEM programs that exist right in their own back-yard, at Sierra’s Rocklin campus.

In addition to better preparing RHS students for Post-Secondary education through excellence in Math, the GIC program seeks to introduce students to the highly skilled careers that exist in the commercial and residential building industry and other careers that utilize mathematics. The program also works to actively increase non-traditional (female) enrollment in Career and Technical Education programs and increase their ranks in the high skills/ high pay job market.

A special thank you to Jeff Bailey for allowing us to reprint this article from their newsletter "Nuts and Bolts".

Kidify” (kid-if-i) Strategies for running a “kid friendly” construction site and program Part 2

Making your class friendly to your students sometimes requires you to rethink how you have done things in the past. Last month we addressed the selection of an appropriate capstone project. This month we continue to explain two more tips we use to make kid friendly lessons for the Geometry in Construction program.

Safety

When we discuss how we teach safety of tool usage, we always end up stepping on the toes of many die-hard industrial technology teachers. Safety training is a must. Good teaching practice and legal responsibilities require safety to be addressed. However, do we use the best possible methods for all, students and teachers?

Many CTE teachers do all of the safety training for the entire year in the first few weeks. In fact, many CTE teachers proudly wear the badge “all my kids must complete the training before they can do anything in the shop”. Typically, this safety training is not the most exciting topic for students and you can risk turning the students off early in the school year. Most importantly, these same students that learned safety in September must remember how to safely use a power tool in February for the first time. We made a decision to change when we teach the safety standards.

When we reinvented ourselves with the creation of Geometry in Construction, each and every piece of the class went through an examination of best practices. In this process we went to a “Just in Time Safety Training Model.” Yes, we still do safety training and yes, we still meet legal requirements. What changed? We teach the safety standards of each tool just before the students are to use them. This insures that the safety of the tool is fresh in the students mind. Additionally, we adhere to a “challenge by choice” philosophy. This allows students the ability to opt out of learning any specific tool. The only consequence is that they will need to use a hand tool instead. There are a few students each year that initially opt out of some of the power tools. However as time goes on, and they see other peers using the tools safely, most will request to be trained in the use of the particular tool they have been avoiding.

Over the years, we have found this method to be far superior to the established method of safety training where we would teach the safety of a router in August but the tool was not used until April. Thus far, we have been successful....no major injuries in the 5 years of doing Geometry in Construction. An added benefit is that we are able to engage students in fun learning of the construction discipline sooner which is a desired outcome.


Choosing the Right Tools

We begin with using hand tools as most CTE programs do. However once we progress to power tools, choosing the right tools that your students use is far more important than most teachers realize. We believe choosing kid friendly tools is one of the ways that we have been successful in increasing female enrollment to 51% in our construction class.

There are 2 tools that we strongly recommend teachers of Geometry in Construction consider. First, the use of a palm nailer is suggested. It is a tool that is used to drive nails. It does not shoot nails (no worry about nail guns). The palm nailer runs off of your air compressor, costs $80, and takes 60 seconds of instruction. What it allows is of great value. This tool creates a level playing field among all students, regardless of gender. It allows students with no hammer and nail experience, to be successful in the first stages of building, framing of the house. For those of you that believe students must use a hammer to do “real construction”, rest assured we have never had a student use a palm nailer all year. The compressor and hose becomes more of a chore as the year progresses. Initially we set up the compressor. As time goes by, we require students to do this. This encourages them to naturally wean themselves off of the tool and use a hammer at the pace they are comfortable with.

The second tool that we recommend is a battery circular saw instead of a corded circular saw. It is lighter, with less chances of kick back, and much easier to manage. This is extremely important to those students that have not physically matured, whether that be female students or your smaller freshman boys. The lighter saw is much less intimidating than the heavier, louder corded saw. Numerous students have told us that the battery saw was much more friendly and easier to use than the corded circular saw. Also, wehave been told by several construction teachers that they do not allow battery saws because “the battery power saw is not used in real construction”. “Students must learn how to use a worm drive saw if they are taking my class”. Is that truly a nonnegotiable item in your curriculum? Once again, I would have to ask, “If your program is not growing in female enrollment, should you consider different ways of reaching the under represented populations?”


Next month we will look at holding students accountable in the geometry classroom and on the construction site. In addition, we will look at the accountability of the teachers to each other in a team teaching partnership.

“Kidify” [kid-ə-fī]

Strategies for running a “kid friendly” construction site and program. Part 1
One of the challenges in running a program like Geometry in Construction has always been, how do you “kidify” difficult construction tasks to make them kid-friendly? Those of you who have ventured on this journey to adopt all or portions of this model may be able to relate. Sometimes what seems rather basic and simple may take 14, 15, or 16-year olds an incredibly long time to figure out and complete. Situations like this can arise frequently in a program of this magnitude, which in turn can potentially lead to frustration for all parties involved. Over the next three issues of the Weather Report we will suggest proven strategies that we have developed, tested, and continue to use daily to keep our projects moving along. Although each of these strategies is shared during our trainings, we offer a refresher here. Whether you are completing your fifth house like us or are still in the preliminary planning stages, these strategies may help to alleviate many of the frustrations that arise in order to optimize the amount of success, efficiency, and enthusiasm in the program.

Appropriate Capstone Project Selection
“Kidifying” the program must begin at the very beginning of the program and should be a goal of everyone involved. Whether you are a seasoned teacher, general contractor, or engineer, remember these two facts above all else:

1. Unless student’s math scores increase, no one cares that you build a house. This vital link is the one thing that gets school districts excited about this program. Additionally, this is the only thing that helps combat against shrinking budgets that exist in almost all school districts nationwide.

2. No one likes to finish others’ unfinished business. Students continue in the program for a multitude of reasons. However, almost all students get excited about the building of the house. Speaking from experience, carrying one cohort’s project over to another leads to a general lack of enthusiasm and negatively impacts student performance. Furthermore, every school that has attempted to replicate the program by taking two years to complete one project has seen:

• Decline of student enrollment and interest
• Lack of school district support
• Disengagement of community involvement

If leveraged constructively, this is the element that keeps traditionally underachieving students engaged in the math and also creates a platform for the community to rally around the program.

Hence, selecting an appropriately sized capstone project is of the utmost importance. The following criteria is a good gauge based on approximate square footage and total program student enrollment:

Class size = 30-40 students…………..………………150-200 square foot structure
Class size = 40-80 students…………..………………200-700 square foot structure
Class size = 80-120 students…………..………..…..700-1100 square foot structure
Class size = 120 + students…………..………………1100 + square foot structure

In an effort to increase the success rate of schools wishing to replicate the program, our 2011 summer trainings will include plans for a smaller initial capstone project. The suggested project will be approximately 9’x18’ and will be intended for schools wishing to pilot the project with an initial enrollment of 30-40 students. Over the last year we have had many schools requesting a more accessible project. This is our answer to this call.

In the next issue of The Weather Report, we will include strategies for kidifying that address:

• Creation and maintenance of a unified teaching team
• Establishment of clear expectations and achievable student goals
• Instructor Preparedness and its impact upon kid-friendly planning
• Tool accessibility and Safety

Forming Partnerships with Habitat for Humanity at the Local Community Level

Forming partnerships with non-profits provides many positive outcomes for your school district and your students. The benefits are worth the work and time. For our district the benefits include knowing that the house is “sold” before we build. The district also enjoys the positive PR that Geometry in Construction generates in the community by building for a non-profit. This is especially important during tight budget times. In addition, the partnership provides students with a greater sense of purpose. Our students realize they are not just doing another school project, but instead they are providing a home to a family that does not currently have one. Remember success on the job site translates to more success in the geometry classroom.

Now that we are building for Habitat for Humanity at our school, we will share some of the things we have learned through our experience. It is hoped that if you partner with your local Habitat, you can learn from our experience and shorten the implementation process.

It is extremely important to know that each of the over 1500 United States Habitat Affiliates are independently run with its own governing board. Each affiliate coordinates all aspects of Habitat home building in its local area and must raise the money needed to build a home. So, when someone says “this is the way Habitat does it”, know that it is a generalization not a requirement. This may mean that your local Habitat may not be interested in a partnership due to their requirements, but the requirements at the Habitat in the community next door may be different and they may be eager to partner with you.

Developing partnerships require time: time for you to figure out how to meet the non-profit requirements, time to bring school district administration on board, and time for the non-profit to process the ideas through their board. For us, our first non-profit partnership, Interfaith Hospitality Network (AKA Family Promise in other parts of the U.S.), was relatively quick to partner with us. They partnered with us after the first year. They quickly “adopted” us because they are a smaller non-profit with less red tape. On the other hand, to get our local Habitat for Humanity to partner was a 5 year process. But do not be discouraged. A school in South Dakota was able to partner with their local Habitat during their first year of implementation.

Do not be surprised if your Habitat takes a “wait and see” attitude. They may not believe that you and your students are capable of building a quality house. They may need to see a smaller “cabin” built in order to believe what your students are capable of building. Understand that your structure need not be perfect because Habitat is use to working with volunteers who are not professionals. Invite your Habitat board to visit your “cabin” and your students. Let them see what you can produce. We found it very important to state that you do not want to change what they are doing but “to add capacity and come alongside of their successful programs”. They need to understand that you want to enable them to build an additional house each year, not to replace what they are already doing. Another avenue to consider is to invite the State Level Habitat for Humanity Office. Every state has an office that coordinates all state affiliates. Remember the state office does not control local affiliates but supplies support. We approached the state office and were received with open arms as another possible partnership that could increase capacity of local affiliates.

Habitats have tight budgets and they do not receive money from the International office in Georgia. They may or may not be able to front the cost of building materials for a partnership with you. The school in South Dakota was able to have their local Habitat buy the entire material package. On the other hand, we do not get the entire building package up front, only the materials that Habitat gets donated. We purchase the materials as we go and then sell the home at the end of the year for the cost of the program (no profit). We can include costs such as t-shirts and tool replacement.

A myth that exists is that the Habitat families are given the home. That is not true. They purchase the home for the cost of the land and materials. The cost savings for the families is due to the decrease labor cost and a no interest mortgage. The labor costs can approach $0 when extensive use of volunteers are used or there may be a small labor cost if certain systems of the new home are contracted out to professionals. When the home is sold to the family, and a zero interest mortgage is signed, the mortgage is typically held by the local Habitat. Because the local Habitat owes the mortgage, they do not recoup the money for the new home materials right away (usually it takes 20 years). The money for the land and materials is slowly returned month by month in the form of a mortgage payment. So, when the Habitat decides to build another house, they must fundraise the money for the land and materials again.

Habitat for Humanity does receive donations but probably not as much as you would think. Donations vary by region and by the time of the year. Donations can include the lumber package, paint, floor coverings, door knobs, plumbing fixtures, foam insulation board, etc. Here is one way that schools can be an attractive option for Habitats. If you are networking with the local community, often times you can get other donations such as roofing, windows, siding, drywall, HVAC, doors, etc. When you reduce the cost to build the home, both your program and Habitats purchase cost can benefit (pending what you negotiate with Habitat). Also, Habitat may be able to include you in grants or you may be able to do the same for them. So far, Habitat has directed us into 2 grant applications.

Another advantage that schools can provide to Habitats is another source of volunteers. Usually, Habitats can’t make use of volunteers younger than 16 on the job site (remember this again varies by the affiliate) because of insurance issues. Schools, on the other hand, are in the business of educating and insuring younger people. Some Habitats have money but lack the volunteer base to build homes. Other Habitats are struggling with an aging volunteer base and they want younger volunteers to join them in their mission. In addition, your program may attract another group of volunteers, they are called parents. Parents can often be used in the technical systems of the house as well as general labor. Currently, we are working through policies for Habitat members to volunteer with us. We especially want to encourage the family that is receiving the home to be part of Geometry in Construction. Our students benefit with the family’s involvement.

As you begin with development of a partnership with Habitat (or any other non-profit), consider what other value you can add to the house when you sell it. The design and engineering is donated by a local modular home factory and we have worked to find a civil engineer that will do the foundation design for no cost. We have found a modular home mover that will move and set the house on the foundation for free. Use your parents to locate some of these value added services. Perhaps you could find someone to do the concrete work, excavation, etc. Remember that the non-profit is looking at the complete house when they consider cost….any additional services that you are able to provide improves the bottom line for the non-profit and your partnership with them.

Another concern usually raised by Habitats is “Sweat Equity” performed by the receiving families. Each family that gets a Habitat home is required to work on their home or other Habitat homes. The number of hours varies but can range from 200-500 hours. Be prepared to help problem solve how the family can give those hours to the project. We are working to get them alongside our students. This may require a liability waiver or an additional insurance rider on the Habitat insurance policy. In addition, other options will be any site/foundation work, landscaping, final finish after the home is delivered, garage and porch additions. Note that we do not build garages. It is more cost effective for Habitat to build garages and porches on site.

There are no typical building requirements for Habitat. Each Habitat sets its own priorities. Each home is custom designed for the family. Items such as basements, roof pitch, garage and porch, number of bathrooms, hallway and door widths, energy saving requirements, and square footage are determined locally. Recommendations from the national office are trumped by local building codes, subdivision covenants, and the local board of directors. Recommendations* from Habitat of Humanity International include:

1. The living space provided—excluding stairwells (except to a basement) and exterior storage—should not exceed:
• 900 square feet for a two-bedroom house
• 1,070 square feet for a three-bedroom house
• 1,230 square feet for a four-bedroom house
2. The basic house should have only one bathroom and should be accessible to persons with disabilities. The bathroom may be compartmentalized for increased usefulness. Three-bedroom houses may have an additional half bath. Houses with four bedrooms, or five or more people, may have an additional full bathroom.
3. Families should have an opportunity to choose decorative finishes for their house whenever possible.
4. A budget may be established with a predetermined limit (e.g., $1,000) to allow the family to personalize their home with such features as appliances, fencing, shed, etc.
5. Each house should have a covered, primary entrance.
6. When feasible, at least one entrance to the house should be accessible to persons who have difficulty with mobility.
7. All passage doors, including the bathroom door, should be three feet (3') wide. Halls should be three feet and five inches (3' 5") wide from rough frame to rough frame. [Note: if there is a door in the hallway, the minimum width increases to three feet and seven inches (3' 7") from rough frame to rough frame.] These standards allow for simple access for persons with disabilities. Further adaptations may be needed if a family member is disabled.
8. Homes should not have garages or carports.
*Recommendations from Habitat for Humanity House Design Criteria

As you can tell from the length of this article, there are many aspects of the partnership that must be worked through. It is crucial for both groups (the school and the non-profit) to understand that this must be a win-win situation. If the school can’t recover cost or the non-profit can’t get housing at the right price then the partnership is doomed to failure. As a teacher, I always need to put heavy value on the service learning aspect for our students. Our kids find an incredible amount joy and value in being able to help others by doing something that is bigger than themselves.