{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1374","title":"Proceedings: ''Pulaski County School District,'' Volume II","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1998-06-30"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School board members","School integration","School management and organization","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Pulaski County School District,'' Volume II"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1374"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["239 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1335","title":"Proceedings: ''Pulaski County School District,'' Volume II, condensed version","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1998-06-30"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School board members","School integration","School management and organization","Education--Evaluation","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Pulaski County School District,'' Volume II, condensed version"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1335"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["12 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1365","title":"Proceedings: ''Pulaski County School District,'' Volume I","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1998-06-29"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School board members","School integration","School management and organization","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Pulaski County School District,'' Volume I"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1365"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["210 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1342","title":"Proceedings: ''Pulaski County School District, Volume I,'' condenced version","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1998-06-29"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School board members","School integration","School management and organization","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Pulaski County School District, Volume I,'' condenced version"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1342"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["119 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1682","title":"Court filings concerning ODM report, ''Racial Composition of the Certified Staff in the Secondary Schools and the Administrations in the Central Office of the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)'', ODM budget for 1997-98 and 1998-99, motion for attorneys' fees, prejudgment interest, and postjudgment interest as respects the pooling issue, and the process for assessing the equitable allocation of district resources","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1998-06"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Little Rock School District","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School integration","School employees","School administrators","Education, Secondary"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning ODM report, ''Racial Composition of the Certified Staff in the Secondary Schools and the Administrations in the Central Office of the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)'', ODM budget for 1997-98 and 1998-99, motion for attorneys' fees, prejudgment interest, and postjudgment interest as respects the pooling issue, and the process for assessing the equitable allocation of district resources"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1682"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Monitoring report, ''Racial Composition of the Certified Staff in the Secondary Schools and the Administrations in the Central Office of the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)''; District Court, order; District Court, Office of Desegregation Monitoring budget for 1997-98 and 1998-99; District Court, notice of process for assessing the equitable allocation of resources; District Court, order; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) motion for summary judgment as to the Little Rock School District (LRSD); District Court, brief in support of Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) motion for summary judgment as to the Little Rock School District (LRSD); District Court, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) statement of material and undisputed facts; District Court, affidavit of Donald Stewart; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education project management tool; District Court, objection to proposed Office of Desegregation Monitoring budget and motion for enlargement of time; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's response to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) objection to proposed Office of Desegregation Monitoring budget and motion for enlargement of time; District Court, order; District Court, Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) response to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion for attorneys' fees, prejudgment interest, and postjudgment interest as respects the pooling issue  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS JUN O 31998 JAMES W McCORMACK, CLERK  B RACIAL COMPOSIDON OF~ DEP. CLERK CERTIFIED STAFF IN THE SECONDARY SCHOOLS AND THE ADMINISTRATORS IN THE CENTRAL OFFICE OF THE Ann S.Brown -., Federal Monitor PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT June 3, 1998 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Horace R. Smith Associate Monitor a-,~- , FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARl\u003cANSAS IN THE UNITED STATESTIISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION ,JUN O 8 1998 JAMES r McCQRMACK, CLERK By: \\_ ' ~ \\,L ) y'--1...::::-.. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., Defendants, MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors. * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER No. LR-C-82-866 OEP CLER!( '--. RECEIVED JUN 9 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITOR/NB The Court has received the proposed 1998-99 budget for the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. See attached letter and budget document. The parties may file any objections to the proposed budget within fifteen (15) calendar days from the entry of this Order. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS ,f ji'aay of June 1998. ~ n:~~$ UNITED ST ATES DISTRIC JUDGE rHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITtl-,RULE 58 AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ON ~/S/2~ ~-~~---- Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas - ------'----- ---- - Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor June 4, 1998 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas  Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 The ODM budget for two years, 1997-98 and 1998-99, is attached for the parties' review and your approval. Although the budget is for two years, its format follows that of previous years, including annotation to explain revenue calculations; budget category definitions; budgeted and actual expenses by category for 1996-97; budgeted and estimated expenditures by category for 1997-98; and budgeted expenditures by category for 1998-99. Note that the 1997-98 budget is slightly less than that of the previous year, and that the 1998-99 budget is only a 2. 9% increase over that of each of the previous two years. Salary increases for ODM staff are 3.29% per year, which is the prevailing annual experience step increase on the three local districts' salary scales. Again, I have chosen not to accept an increase in salary. We have contained our expenditures such that they are below the projected annual budgets. As is our practice, we credit that difference proportionately to each of the school districts according to their pro-rated contributions to our annual budgets. If you or the parties should need any additional information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown - OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING 1997-98 AND 1998-99 BUDGETS I REVENUE 1996-97 1996-97 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET ESTIMATED BUDGET State of Arkansas 200,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 200,000.00 LRSD 223,889.00 223,889.00 206,811 .00 206,811 .00 218,671 .00 Credit (see note below) 19,197.00 19,197.00 37,265.00 37,265.00 35,083.00 NLRSD 80,121.00 80,121 .00 74,917.00 74,917.00 80,765.00 Credit (see note below) 6,870.00 6,870.130 13,500.00 13,500.00 12,958.00 PCSSD 184,831.00 184,831 .00 167,958.00 167,958.00 175,935.00 Credit (see note below) 15,848.00 15,848.00 30,265.00 30,265.00 28,227.00 Interest 6,404.29 6,400.00 \"'' c: ::{\" '2 '' {: ;;;::: ::,,,=: :{?: t :::::JidijffiiboJH:: :t:'i~trni ;i ::t:lliij;lti:ltl I:i::: :i;:: :~atliii!rio :: 1::1.~l[~IJ1ti l Note: Evel'f budget cycle, ODM credits each district a pro rata proportion of the 411spent amount of the previous year's budget. We apply this amount toward the current budget allocation. See annotated budget. EXPENDITURES 1996-97 1996-97 1997-98 1997-98 1998-9~1 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET ESTIMATED BUDGE - Communications 7,870.00 8,433.41 8,500.00 9,172.00 9,180.00 Dues and Fees 3,300.00 3,785.00 3,800.00 3,210.00 3,300.00 Equipment 14,1 59.00 14,143.75 785.00 780.00 6,339.00 Food Services 250.00 129.00 200.00 149.00 200.00 Management Services 3,000.00 0.00 1,500.00 0.00 1,500.00 Periodicals 500.00 350.91 400.00 390.00 400.00 Printinq and Bindinq 6,000.00 5,449.33 6,000.00 4,689.00 6,000.00 Prof. and Tech. Services 28,497.00 2,861 .25 26,497.00 1,308.00 26,497.00 Rent 48,417.00 48,417.00 49,883.00 49,883.00 50,917.00 Repairs and Maintenance 1,500.00 897.59 1,500.00 460.00 1,500.00 Resource Library 500.00 579.26 500.00 115.00 500.00 Salaries 468,904.00 450,464.40 481 ,145.00 455,145.00 492,614.00 Benefits 120,109.00 96,948.15 122,436.00 114,285.00 125,122.00 Staff Development 1,000.00 996.50 1,000 00 1,243.00 1,000.00 Suoolies 7,750.00 7,481 .16 7,750.00 7,634.00 7,750.00 Travel 19,000.00 14,373.96 18,000.00 11 ,565.00 18,000.00 Insurance 820.00 820.00 820.00 820.00 - :;.:,:,:::.:::::;:,::::'.::::::-::: ,:,:::::=::::::::::::::::::: ;.:,=::,:::::::;::::::::::=:::::::::::::::::::::::::::c:::=: ::::::t~dltl:!a::: t::ii~IB~I\\I : ANNOTATED ODM BUDGET FOR 1997-98 AND 1998-99 'REVENUE - The Court's Interim Order of June 27, 1989 required that: ... [T]he amount previously ordered for the Pulaski County Educational Cooperative (Co-op) [$200,000.00] shall be applied toward the budget of the office of the Metropolitan Supervisor... The balance of the budget will be apportioned among the school districts on a per pupil basis ... Eighth Circuit Order of December 12, 1990: .. . [T]he office previously known as the Office of the Metropolitan Supervisor will be reconstituted as the Office of Desegregation Monitoring ... 1997-98 Budget: 10/1/97 'It of Total 1997-98 Budget 1996-97 Credit (Budget 1997-98 Budget Enrollment Enrollment Allocation  not spent) Pavment LRSD 24,985 45.99 244,076.00 37,265.00 206 811.00 NLRSD 9,053 16.66 88,417.00 13,500.00 74,917.00 PCSSD 20,295 37.35 198,223.00 30,265.00 167,958.00 State of AR 200,000.00 200 000.00 Total 54,333 100.00 730,716.00 81 ,030.00 649,686.00 1998-99 Budget 10/1/98 'lo of Total 1998-99 Budget 1997-98 Estimated Credit 1998-99 Estimated Enrollment Enrollment Allocation IBudoet not soentl Budoet Pavment LRSD 24,886 46.00 253,754.00 35,083.00 218,671 .00 NLRSD 9,192 16.99 93,723.00 12,958.00 80 765.00 PCSSD 20,024 37.01 204,162.00 28,227.00 175,935.00 State of AR 200,000.00 200,000.00 Total 54,102 100.00 751 ,639.00 76,268.00 675,371 .00 Note: Because the 1998-99 budget is being filed before the current year expenditures are finalized, the 1997-98 credit and the 1998-99 budget payment are estimated. After the close of the 1997-98 year, we will notify each district of the exact amount due for their share of ODM's 1998-99 budget, incorporating each district's exact credt Described below is the step-by-step process, reflected in the charts above, that we used to determine each district 's contribution to ODM's budgets: 1. The State of Arkansas' contribution ($200,000.00) is subtracted from ODM's total budget. 2. Based on the previous year's October l enrollment, the districts are charged their pro rata share of ODM's budget (minus the state's contribution). 3. Each district is credited with its pro rata share (or estimated share) of ODM's unspent budget for the previous year. 4. Each district contributes that sum to ODM' s budget or, if the credit has been estimated, each district will be notified at the close of the current fiscal year of the exact amount due for their share of ODM' s budget. Page 2 EXPENDITURES Note: Definitions of expense categories are based on the Arkansas School Financial Accounting Manual. The estimated expenditures for 1997-98 are based on eleven months of actual expenditures. Communications: Services provided by persons or businesses to assist in transmitting and receiving messages or information. This category includes telephone services as well as postage machine rental and postage. _ 1996-97 Budget 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted Expenditures Amount 7,870.00 8,433.41 8,500.00 1997-98 Estimated Excenditures 9,172.00 1998-99 Budgeted Amount 9,180.00 Expenditures that exceeded the 1997-98 budget were due to adding a phone line for Internet communications and upgrading to an electronic postage meter, as required by the U.S. Postal Service. Dues and Fees: Expenditures or assessment for membership in professional or other organizations or associations or payments to a paying agent for services provided, such as conference registration fees. 1996-97 Budaet 3,300.00 1996-97 Exoenditures 3.785.00 1997-98 Budgeted Amount 3.800.00 1997-98 Estimated Exoenditures 3,210.00 1998-99 Budgeted Amount 3.300.00 Equipment: Expenditures for the initial, additional, and replacement items or equipment, such as furniture and machinery. 1996-97 Budqet 14,159.00 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted Expenditures Amount 14,143.75 785.00 1997-98 Estimated Expenditures 780.00 1998-99 Budgeted Amount 6.339.00 To store the voluminous records that have accumulated in the desegregation_ case and ODM operations, we will use CD's to preserve and catalog them. Therefore, we will purchase a high volume scanner and two new computers, one with a CD read-and-write drive, and the appropriate software. We also plan to replace our aging fax machine with a plain paper fax. Page 3 Food Services: Expenditures for food or preparation and serving of food, which may include catering. 1996-97 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted 1997-98 Estimated 1998-99 Budgeted Budaet Expenditures Amount Expenditures Amount 250.00 129.00 200.00 149.00 200.00 Management Services: Services performed by persons qualified to assist management either in the broad policy area or in general operations. This category includes consultants, individually or as a team, to assist the chief executive in conference or through systematic studies. 1996-97 Bud et 3,000.00 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted Ex enditures Amount 0.00 1,500.00 1997-98 Estimated Ex nditures 0.00 1998-99 Budgeted Amount 1,500.00 Periodicals: Expenditures for periodicals and newspapers for general use. A periodical is any publication appearing at regular intervals of less than a year and continuing for an indefinite period. 1996-97 Bud et 500.00 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted Ex enditures Amount 350.91 400.00 1997-98 Estimated Ex enditures 390.00 1998-99 Budgeted Amount 400.00 Printing and Binding: Expenditures for job printing and binding, usually according to specifications. This includes the design and printing of forms as well as printing and binding publications. 1996-97 Bud et 6,000.00 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted Ex enditures Amount 5 449.33 6,000.00 1997-98 Estimated Ex enditures 4,689.00 1998-99 Budgeted Amount 6,000.00 Note: We are able to maintain the cost of this budget item because of in-house printing. Page 4 Salaries: Salaries are the amounts paid to employees who are considered to be in positions of a permanent or temporary nature. 1996-97 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted 1997-98 Estimated 1998-99 Budgeted Budget Expendrtures Amount Expenditures Amount 468,904.00 450,464.40 481 ,145.00 455,145.00 492.614.00 Most of the salary changes between 1996-97 and 1997-98 and _between 1997-98 and 1998-99 reflect a 3.29% increase, which is comparable to the annual step increase in the three Pulaski County school districts. Exceptions are noted below. Salaries: Name of Employee 1998-87 Salary 1997-88 Salary 1998-89 Salary Ann Brown 1 104,164.00  104,164.00 104,164.00 Melissa Guldin 2 45,490.00 46,987.00 48,533.00 Gene Jones 3 47,815.00 49,312.00 50,858.00 Norman Marshall 56,863.00 58,734.00 60,666.00 Marqie Powell 56,863.00 58,734.00 60,666.00 Horace Smith 56,863.00 58,734.00 60,666.00 Research Associate4 26,000.00 26,000.00 26,000.00 Polly Ramer 42,683.00 44,087.00 45,537.00 Linda Bryant 23,669.00 24,448.00 25,252.00 Jackie Banks 5 8,494.00 9,945.00 10,272.00 Total 468,904.00 481 ,145.00 492,614.00 1 Ann Brown declined to accept a salary increase for both 1997-98 and 1998-99. 2Melissa Guldin works 4/5 time. 3Gene Jones works 4/5 time. Gene elected to receive payment for annual insurance premiums in lieu of the insurance benefits and his salary reflects that decision. 4Position not filled. 5The job responsibilities for Jackie Banks, who works 3/5 time, increased during 1997-98; her salary reflects those additional responsibilities. Page 6 Benefits: Benefits are the amounts paid in behalf of employees and not included in the gross salary, but are over and above. Such payments are fringe benefit payments. 1996-97 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted 1997-98 Estimated 1998-99 Budgeted Budaet Excenditures Amount Excenditures Amount 120.109.00 96,948.15 122,436.00 114,285.00 125,122.00 Below is a breakdown by category of each employee's 1997-98 budgeted fringe benefits: - Name Travel Social Retire- Hospital- Life Dental Hospital Short Total Allowance Security ment ization Ins. lndemnitv Tenn Benefits Brown 1,800.00 5,777.28 12,715.68 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 22,617.60 Guldin 1,200.00 3,686.31 5,782.44 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 12,993.39 Jones 960.00 3,845.81 6,032.64 10,838.45 Marshall 1,200.00 4,584.95 7,048.08 1968.00 . 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 15,157.67 Powell 1,200.00 4,584.95 7,048.08 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 15,157.67 Smith 1,200.00 4,584.95 7,048.08 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 15,157.67 Research 600.00 2,034.90 3,192.00 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 8,151 .54 Ramer 3,372.66 5,290.44 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 10,98T74 Brvant 1,870.27 2,933.76 1968.00 27.60 188.64 60.96 62.88 7,112.11 Banks 760.79 1.193.40 1968.00 27.60 188.64 60.96 62.88 4,262.27 Total 8,160.00 35,102.87 58,284.60 17,712.00 364.32 1,697.76 548.64 565.92 122.436.11 Below is a breakdown by category of each employee's 1998-99 budgeted fringe benefits: Name Travel Social Retire- Hospital- Life Dental Hospital Short Total Allowance Securitv ment ization Ins. lndemnitv Tenn Benefl1s Brown 1,800.00 5.777.28 12,715.68 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 22,617.60 Guldin 1,200.00 3,804.58 5,967.96 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 13,297.18 Jones 960.00 3,964.08 6.218.16 11 ,142.24 Marshall 1,200.00 4,732.75 7,423.92 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 15,681 .31 Powell 1,200.00 4,732.75 7,423.92 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 15,681 .31 Smith 1,200.00 4,732.75 7,423.92 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 15,681 .31 Research 600.00 2,034.90 3,192.00 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 8,151 .54 Ramer 3,483.58 5,464.44 1968.00 44.16 188.64 60.96 62.88 11 ,272.66 Brvant 1,931.77 3,030.24 1968.00 27.60 188.64 60.96 62.88 7,270.09 Banks 785.80 1,232.64 1968.00 27.60 188.64 60.96 62.88 4,326.52 Total 8,160.00 35.980.24 60,092.88 17 712.00 364.32 1,697.76 548.64 565.92 125,121 .76 Page 7 . ' ' .. Staff Development: Services performed by persons ,qualified to assist in enhancing the quality of the operation. 1996-97 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted 1997-98 Estimated 1998-99 Budgeted Budqet Expend~ures Amount Expenditures Amount 1,000.00 996.50 1,000.00 1,243.00 1,000.00 Supplies: Expenditures for all supplies for the operation, including freight and cartage. Amounts paid for material items of an expendable nature that are consumed, worn out, or deteriorated in use or items that lose their identity through fabrication or incorporation into different or more complex units or substances. 1996-97 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted 1997-98 Estimated 1998-98 Budgeted BudQet Expenditures Amount Expend~ures Amount 7,750.00 7,481 .16 7,750.00 7,634.00 7,750.00 Travel: Expenditure for transportation, meals, hotel, and other expenses associated with traveling or business. Payments for per diem in lieu of reimbursements for subsistence ( room and board) also are charged here. 1996-97 Bud et 19,000.00 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted Ex end~ures Amount 14,373.96 18,000.00 1997-98 Estimated Ex end~ures 11 ,565.00 1997-98 Budgeted Amount 18,000.00 Insurance: Expenditures for all types of insurance coverage such as property, liability, fidelity, as well as the costs of judgments. 1996-97 1996-97 1997-98 Budgeted 1997-98 Estimated 1998-99 Budget BudQet Expenditures/ Amount Expenditures Amount 820.00 820 .. 00 820.00 820.00 On our auditor's recommendation, we purchased insurance on the furnishings and equipment in our office. Page 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL NOTICE OF PROCESS FOR ASSESSING THE EQUITABLE ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES RECEIVED JUN 9 199B OfflCE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INT ERVEN ORS INTERVENORS The Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") for its Notice of Process for Assessing the Equitable Allocation of Resources states: 1. Section 2.9.1 of LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated January 16, 1997 (\"Revised Plan\") provides: Within sixty (60) days of the district court's approval of this Revised Plan, LRSD, after consultation with Joshua, will develop a process or standard for assessing the equitable allocation of resources. 2. In compliance with Section 2.9.1, LRSD, after consultation with Joshua, has developed a process for assessing the equitable allocation of resources. LRSD, working with Joshua and the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"ODM\"), shall: (a) Identify the resources the District will assess for equitable allocation; f:-~.001 (b) Develop a standard or standards for assessing the extent to which those resources are being distributed on an equitable basis; (c) Assess the allocation of resources based on the standard or standards developed; and, (d) Report the results of the assessment to ODM and Joshua. 3. This process will be completed on a timeline consistent with the issuance of a final report within 180 days of this Court's approval of the Revised Plan as pr?vided in Section 2.9.2 of the Revised Plan. 4. In the above process, LRSD shall consult with the one or both of the desegregation experts retained by LRSD in compliance with Section 2 . 1. 1 of the Revised Plan . Joshua has approved LRSD I s - retention of Terrance Roberts, one of the original \"Little Rock Nine,\" and Steven Ross, a professor at the University of Memphis, to assist LRSD in development of the programs, policies and procedures required by the Revised Plan. r:lhomolfendlcyllnd\\des-pld.001 Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK First Commercial Bldg., Suite 2000 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 BY: 2 Christopher Hell John C. Fendley, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by depositing a copy of same in the United States mail on this 9th day of June, 1998. Mr. John w. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Travis Creed Roachell Law Firm First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown - HAND DELIVERED Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham street Little Rock, AR 72201 . Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Hell John c. Fendley, 3 RECEIVED JUN I 6 1998 - OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * Plaintiff, * vs. * No. LR-C-82-866 * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL * DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., * Defendants, * * MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., * Intervenors, * * KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., * Intervenors. * ORDER F!LJ2D U.S. OISTI I;cr COURT EASTi:RN 0IS1 .I.ICT ARKANSAS ,JUN 151998 JAt1ES W] Mc!MACK, CLERK 8y: '\\r , ~ \\t /\\ QC:, Qr-._ DEP C!.E~t - ' By previous Order entered on June 8, 1998, this Court indicated that it had received the proposed 1998-99 budget for the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and directed the parties to file any objections\u003e the proposed budget within fifteen (15) calendar days from the entry of the Court's Order. That Order should have indicated that this Court received the Office of Desegregation Monitoring's proposed budget for the years 1998-2000. The parties have to and including June 23, 1998 in which to file any objections to the proposed budget. ....,--(l\\_ IT IS SO ORDERED THIS /5 day of June 1998. fHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN .:;QMPUANCE WiTHJtULE 58 AND/OR 79(a) FRCP :\u003eN (zl(s-/'l K' BY ~..- - ---- 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KA THERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. PCSSD MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO THE LRSD PCSSD for its motion states: JUN 2 2 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS 1. Pursuant to the pooling agreement and previous orders of this Court, the LRSD owes the PCSSD interest of $96,899.62 calculated at six (6) percent. 2. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement and previous orders of this Court and the Court of Appeals, LRSD owes the PCSSD $1,324,063.28 pursuant to the pooling agreement including the last two school years. After deducting the pooling sums owed the LRSD, the net sum due PCSSD is $1,291,103.52. 3. Appended to this motion as Exhibit \"A\" is the worksheet utilized by Dr. Stewart to calculate the interest and depicting the pooling funds owed the PCSSD. The pooling calculations were performed precisely as they have been performed in the past. 4. Requests and demands made to the LRSD to pay over these sums have proven unsuccessful. WHEREFORE, PCSSD prays for an order of this Court directing the LRSD to immediately pay over the sums set forth above. Respectfully submitted: WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 200 West Capitol Ave., Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 By ~ , -- ~ ~ M. Sal')1 el nes 111 \"('Z-6060) Attor,neys fo Pula\u0026 County Special School District CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On June /1 , 1998, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. mail on the following. Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Bldg., Ste. 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 nes, Ill 2 ----- 06/18191 INTEREST COMPUTATION ON M-to-M POOLING FUNDS 08/18198 PRE ORDER INTEREST  LRSO - . -  . . BEG. DATE ENO DATE DUE TO INTEREST INTEREST TOTAL ouE ORO.QATE LRSO RATE EARNED P\u0026I - .. 01/15192 0?/3Q~ 1.116 47!5.83 .. . .. POST O. RDER INTERE~.T  LRSO - ... --. 07/31/96 ~L30/98 $116 47!5.83 6.00% S13 -383.55  . TOTALS .. $118 47!5.83 $13,383.55 $1~,859.38 PRE ORDE.. R INTERES'.f'_ PCSSO  -- . -- .  BEG. DATE ENO DATE CUETO INTEREST INTEREST TOTAL QUE ORD. DATE PCSSD ... RATE EARNED .. . Pll . . --- -- 01/15193 0713019G $150,-472.~~  -- - ... 01/15194 07/30/96 $103,378.01 01/15/96 07/30/96 $207.920.13 .. ... . . 01/16/96 07/30/96 .. -~72,4Q4.11 -  BAL. or:,, 07/30/96 s73:4~.40 $0.00    . POST .O. R... O~R INTEREST - PCSSO -- 01/15/97 07/29/97 $436,200.10 6.00% $13,982.30 -- 07/31/96 . . 07/29/97 $73',26'.40 ... 8.00% $43,81.C.~ .... - PAIi;) . 07/29(97 1$34!52M.~ .. IS19 951.65 :-=-\u003e-. BALQ.N 07/29/97 S82!5170.(M s.,7 8'!.12 l~_TEREST EARNED AmR PAV ON 07/29197 - - 07/30/97 06/30/98 $825,170.04 6.1~% $,45, 4-40.87 - -  . 01/15198 .. . 06/30/98 $498.893.2-4 . 8.00% S13,613... 63 . TOTA L OUE PCSS[ ... $1 324.063.28 S96 8i9.62 $1 .420.962.90 NET DUE PCS$0 06/30/98 $1.291.103.52 -  .  - . EXHIBIT I A '--- IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUN 2 2 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITOR!~~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PCSSD MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO THE LRSD In affirming this Court's last pooling order, the Court of Appeals noted: \"The district court's interpretation of paragraph \"O\" is an acceptable one: it is just, it will promote voluntary interdistrict transfers to interdistrict schools, and it will provide a financial incentive to both districts to receive M-to-M transfer students. 109 F.3d 514 at 516.\" In affirming this Court's order for essentially the reasons stated in this Court's last opinion, the Court of Appeals quoted the finding of this Court that: [F]or each school year, the amount of LRSD's and PCSSD's financial contribution to the pool is calculated in accordance with Paragraph O of the Settlement Agreement. [There is no dispute as to the methodology for calculating these amounts.] The total amount of funds in the pool for a given year is then divided by the total number of M-to-M students in the interdistrict schools in both districts to arrive at an equalized, per-student dollar amount for educating them in the interdistrict schools. For each school district, the equalized per-student dollar amount is then multiplied by the number of M-to-M stude11ts hosted by that district in its interdistrict schools to determine the amount of the pooled funds to which each district is entitled. ' Id. at 515-516. The PCSSD has calculated its entitlement in accordance with the foregoing language. Respectfully submitted: WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 200 West Capitol Ave., Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 By__t,~~~::s,_~~=-------, I (76060) ski County Special School CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On June I~ . 1998, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. mail on the following. Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Bldg., Ste. 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVE.~ JUN 2 2 1998 OfflCE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS PCSSD STATEMENT OF MATERIAL AND UNDISPUTED FACTS 1. The worksheet appended to the motion as Exhibit \"A\" accurately calculates the post-order interest due the PCSSD. 2. Exhibit \"A\" accurately calculates the pooling sums due the PCSSD from the LRSD including the last two school years. Respectfully submitted: WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 200 West Capitol Ave., Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 B-~A~~::::s._...::::;,.4-1--___ _ Special School CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On June /'7 , 1998, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. mail on the following. Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown QOM Heritage West Bldg., Ste. 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 ones, Ill u 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KA THERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. AFFIDAVIT OF DR. DONALD STEWART PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS My name is Don Stewart and I have testified on numerous occasions in this case. Attached to the motion for summary judgment as Exhibit \"A\" is a worksheet that I prepared. The worksheet was prepared in accordance with the methodology I have consistently applied regarding the pooling issue and was done pursuant to the methodology described by this Court in its order July 29, 1997. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF PULASKI SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, on this 19th day of June. 1998. My Commission Expires: ~ ~c ~o )--. :1-~ Notary Public =t CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On June /f , 1998, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. mail on the following. Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, PA 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown QOM Heritage West Bldg., Ste. 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JUL 1 1998 WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORJNG PLAINTIFF . v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of ADE's Project Management Tool for June, 1998. Respectfully Submitted, WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General eyGeneral 323 Center Street, Suite 200 .Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 . (501) 682-2007 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education RECEIVED JUN 21./ 1998 - OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORltJ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. OBJECTION TO PROPOSED ODM BUDGET AND MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME fJNIMO!INOW NOl1V93HS3S30 ~o 3a1:1:10 866i  "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_63","title":"Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["1998-05","1998-06","1998-07","1998-08","1998-09"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring","School integration--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Project managers--Implements"],"dcterms_title":["Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/63"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nLittle Rock School District, plaintiff vs. Pulaski County Special School District, defendant.\nIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED JUN 1 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITILE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of ADE's Project Management Tool for May, 1998. Respectfully Submitted, WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION CEIVE 1 N 1 1998 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINT! OFFICE OF .GREGATIOf. MONITORING V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KA THERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the AD E's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 !liiW1if~il~~\n~\n~~lillli1:f ~!~1i~iiaiil~11i~~!*illli\"-11 ~m~igg 15 ! B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) 8. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 {3.~$~C:,.pf.\\]h~inf Pmi~UP.h~v~ilijtil~itAP.d1I~9\u0026amp;1$..$.aDm~:%o.s.~lgp[ij{ijffS.b ~f l$?t.#~1e..ttc5. P.rlfii?#if. ~m4itm~D.Jit C. Process and distribute State MFPA. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Alf(pffl l$ss(tjistt\\$~llK~ f$.1ijfe. ~qQ~l1i~lf9QfQtjJ6.{tff tY $.7/.g w.~f~i? fqllows\nLRSO\n$34\n538,824 N.R.$ C\u0026gt;:m i.1~t~?-,~ BCSSDf $45i4J614~1' The\nallo\\ijierifsbf $tijteEqLlaliiali6fiF\n\"qridi/jg \u0026lt;%(tbJ~t$.df.qf f)1$il~$ ij(iA.150\\$0} t$~8, ... ~tlfo~~Jip pe.Qqdic adju~tfuent{/ y.,if\n~.f9./l9w.fo bR$Pt l*g.~??,~ .... NLRSOf $24.\\$5.8}5.\u0026amp;P pcsso }$5$(583,$~8 D. Determine the number of Magnet students residing in each District and attending a Magnet School. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 ~is:~ ~~'.8f ~~i~~~iij!@m 1111f\u0026amp;it\\1J Abt\n~ijfi$T~rn:dat@P.nl$.Qi d$.$\u0026amp;.fqf BM 2 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as ordered by the Court. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 F. Calculate state aid due the LRSD based upon the Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 ~~.Er9 .. 99:Jn:~ jqfpfffi~t!eci !x~ni~)'.g\\ !6i APi~Jf~lglJijJ~q:~J~Pdl~Q}j~$$Jgf 6 ~7/fJ~R~tlPjtmfp$fiqqi:.@igj$.tmgf.\\J${ G. Process and distribute state aid for Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 ornrnt5.0ti46$t9.r ty:~11$a: ijf':Apf.lUjo\nJ$$$:Jqt~1.a. :$z~~e.\u0026amp;.:ez1J: 1\n4:Hptm~m s~lcu I~!~~ ~! AprJC~o. 1~$$\\fof FY: $.t.!~ w~{'i$?: $Q$.i:Z@4%$9~fri.VJQ p~ffij1 ijqjq$tfugrj~'.$., H. Calculate the amount of M-to-M incentive money to which each school district is entitled. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 3 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) H. Calculate the amount of M-to-M incentive money to which each school district is entitled. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Calculated for FY 97/98, subject to periodic adjustments. I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, September - June. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 P.1iVltiill!PhfpflSY $.[lQS. ~{,Apf\\I!~tmct$.~mw~fe.t The. ~Hi:ifrn~mi1 ~~Ic$Ql~t~a:t. pf:FY\n$71$$\\~f AtWl itm: :fi ~ae.i j~jijpt :t6 Pind!. ~~lU(ffigQfsf:w~I~t .~RsPt\n~\n~\\pl9 . . NL'.8$0h$1\\p$.Zi\\3~$ P.$$R S $\n$.O$i2$P J. Districts submit an estimated Magnet and M-to-M transportation budget to ADE. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, December of each year. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In September 1997, the Magnet and M-to-M transportation budgets for FY 97/98 were submitted to the ADE by the Districts. K. Reginald Wilson notifies General Finance to pay districts for first two-thirds of the Districts' proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 4 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) K. Reginald Wilson notifies General Finance to pay districts for first two-thirds of the Districts' proposed budget. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In January 1998, General Finance was notified to pay the second one-third payments for FY 97/98 to the Districts. It should be noted that the Transportation Coordinator is currently performing this function. L. ADE pays districts for first two-thirds of their proposed budget. M. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In January 1998, General Finance made the second one-third payments to the Districts for their FY 97 /98 transportation budget. At April 1998, the following had been paid for FY 97/98: LRSD - $2,039,722.66 NLRSD - $283,392.00 PCSSD - $1,073,082.00 ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In August 1997, the ADE transportation coordinator reviewed each district's Magnet and M-to-M transportation costs for FY 96/97. N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as stated in Exhibit A of the Implementation Plan. 5 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In FY 94/95, the State purchased 52 buses at a cost of $1,799,431 which were added to or replaced existing Magnet and M-to-M buses in the Districts. The buses were distributed to the Districts as follows: LRSD - 32\nNLRSD - 6\nand PCSSD-14. The ADE purchased 64 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $2,334,800 in FY 95/96. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 45\nNLRSD - 7\nand PCSSD - 12. In May 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $646,400. In July 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $624,879. 0 . Process and distribute compensatory education payments to LRSD as required by page 23 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 and January 1, of each school year through January 1, 1999. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 96/97. P. Process and distribute additional payments in lieu of formula to LRSD as required by page 24 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. 6 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) Q. Process and distribute payments to PCSSD as required by Page 28 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1994. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Final payment was distributed July 1994. R. Upon loan request by LRSD accompanied by a promissory note, the ADE makes loans to LRSD. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing through July 1, 1999. See Settlement Agreement page 24. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 w~,:i~~~i~t!i~,~~gjggJiii18r~ii11i~,~APf!hl!f~pifl.tjg#i\\!t!B!WRS.:g S. Process and distribute payments in lieu of formula to PCSSD required by page 29 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. T. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to NLRSD as required by page 31 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 of each school year through June 30, 1996. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. 7 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) u. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 97 /98. V. Process and distribute payments for Office of Desegregation Monitoring. 1. Projected Ending Date Not applicable. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 97 /98. 8 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. 1. Projected Ending Date January 15, 1995 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In May 1995, monitors completed the unannounced visits of schools in Pulaski County. The monitoring process involved a qualitative process of document reviews, interviews, and observations. The monitoring focused on progress made since the announced monitoring visits. In June 1995, monitoring data from unannounced visits was included in the July Semiannual Report. Twenty-five per cent of all classrooms were visited, and all of the schools in Pulaski County were monitored. All principals were interviewed to determine any additional progress since the announced visits. The July 1995 Monitoring Report was reviewed by the ADE administrative team, the Arkansas State Board of Education, and the Districts and filed with the Court. The report was formatted in accordance with the Allen Letter. In October 1995, a common terminology was developed by principals from the Districts and the Lead Planning and Desegregation staff to facilitate the monitoring process. The announced monitoring visits began on November 14, 1995 and were completed on January 26, 1996. Copies of the preliminary Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the ADE administrative team and the State Board of Education in January 1996. A report on the current status of the Cycle 5 schools in the ECOE process and their school improvement plans was filed with the Court on February 1, 1996. The unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1996 and ended on May 10, 1996. 9 11. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and the data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The Districts provided data on enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Districts and the ADE Desegregation Monitoring staff developed a definition for instructional programs. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996 with copies distributed to the parties. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996 and concluded in December 1996. In January 1997, presentations were made to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties to review the draft Semiannual Monitoring Report. The monitoring instrument and process were evaluated for their usefulness in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on achievement disparities. In February 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed. Unannounced monitoring visits began on February 3, 1997 and concluded in May 1997. In March 1997, letters were sent to the Districts regarding data requirements for the July 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and the additional discipline data element that was requested by the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Desegregation data collection workshops were conducted in the Districts from March 28, 1997 to April 7, 1997. A meeting was conducted on April 3, 1997 to finalize plans for the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report. Onsite visits were made to Cycle 1 schools who did not submit accurate and timely data on discipline, M-to-M transfers, and policy. The July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were finalized in June 1997. In July 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were filed with the court, and the ADE sponsored a School Improvement Conference. On July 10, 1997, copies of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were made available to the Districts for their review prior to filing it with the Court. 10 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) In August 1997, procedures and schedules were organized for the monitoring of the Cycle 2 schools in FY 97/98. A Desegregation Monitoring and School Improvement Workshop for the Districts was held on September 10, 1997 to discuss monitoring expectations, instruments, data collection and school improvement visits. On October 9, 1997, a planning meeting was held with the desegregation monitoring staff to discuss deadlines, responsibilities, and strategic planning issues regarding the Semiannual Monitoring Report. Reminder letters were sent to the Cycle 2 principals outlining the data collection deadlines and availability of technical assistance. In October and November 1997, technical assistance visits were conducted, and announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 2 schools were completed. In December 1997 and January 1998, technical assistance visits were conducted regarding team visits, technical review recommendations, and consensus building. Copies of the infusion document and perceptual surveys were provided to schools in the ECOE process. The February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report was submitted for review and approval to the State Board of Education, the Director, the Administrative Team, the Attorney General's Office, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process, external team visits and finalizing school improvement plans. On February 18, 1998, the representatives of all parties met to discuss possible revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. Additional meetings will be scheduled. Unannounced monitoring visits were conducted in March 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process and external team visits. 11 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) In April 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were conducted, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. fj1:\nJXri\n:1~fiI~\niJltiffllllliili ~rnj9r:in.ua1 ... M.9nitp{ing _ R~P?.rt. tq 9$v~Jpp Pf9PP$gq Jrjqqjfi.ijqp$.@tP. .AP!\n.'.$ monitoring and  reporting q_bligahorisJ 12 Ill. A PETITION FOR ELECTION FOR LRSD WILL BE SUPPORTED SHOULD A MILLAGE BE REQUIRED A. Monitor court pleadings to determine if LRSD has petitioned the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Ongoing. All Court pleadings are monitored monthly. B. Draft and file appropriate pleadings if LRSD petitions the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 To date, no action has been taken by the LRSD. 13 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION A. Using a collaborative approach, immediately identify those laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date December, 1994 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. B. Conduct a review within ADE of existing legislation and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. C. Request of the other parties to the Settlement Agreement that they identify laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. D. Submit proposals to the State Board of Education for repeal of those regulations that are confirmed to be impediments to desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for th is item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. 14 IV. REPEAL ST A TUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 A committee within the ADE was formed in May 1995 to review and collect data on existing legislation and regulations identified by the parties as impediments to desegregation. The committee researched the Districts' concerns to determine if any of the rules, regulations, or legislation cited impede desegregation. The legislation cited by the Districts regarding loss funding and worker's compensation were not reviewed because they had already been litigated. In September 1995, the committee reviewed the following statutes, acts, and regulations: Act 113 of 1993\nADE Director's Communication 93-205\nAct 145 of 1989\nADE Director's Memo 91-67\nADE Program Standards Eligibility Criteria for Special Education\nArkansas Codes 6-18-206, 6-20-307, 6-20-319, and 6-17- 1506. In October 1995, the individual reports prepared by committee members in their areas of expertise and the data used to support their conclusions were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. A report was prepared and submitted to the State Board of Education in July 1996. The report concluded that none of the items reviewed impeded desegregation. As of February 3, 1997, no laws or regulations have been determined to impede desegregation efforts. Any new education laws enacted during the Arkansas 81 st Legislative Session will be reviewed at the close of the legislative session to ensure that they do not impede desegregation. In April 1997, copies of all laws passed during the 1997 Regular Session of the 81st General Assembly were requested from the office of the ADE Liaison to the Legislature for distribution to the Districts for their input and review of possible impediments to their desegregation efforts. In August 1997, a meeting to review the statutes passed in the prior legislative session was scheduled for September 9, 1997. 15 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) On September 9, 1997, a meeting was held to discuss the review of the statutes passed in the prior legislative session and new ADE regulations. The Districts will be contacted in writing for their input regarding any new laws or regulations that they feel may impede desegregation. Additionally, the Districts will be asked to review their regulations to ensure that they do not impede their desegregation efforts. The committee will convene on December 1, 1997 to review their findings and finalize their report to the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. In October 1997, the Districts were asked to review new regulations and statutes for impediments to their desegregation efforts, and advise the ADE, in writing, if they feel a regulation or statute may impede their desegregation efforts. In October 1997, the Districts were requested to advise the ADE, in writing, no later than November 1, 1997 of any new law that might impede their desegregation efforts. As of November 12, 1997, no written responses were received from the Districts. The ADE concludes that the Districts do not feel that any new law negatively impacts their desegregation efforts. The committee met on December 1, 1997 to discuss their findings regarding statutes and regulations that may impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. The committee concluded that there were no laws or regulations that impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. It was decided that the committee chair would prepare a report of the committee's findings for the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. 16 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES A. Through a preamble to the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The preamble was contained in the Implementation Plan filed with the Court on March 15, 1994. 8. Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Ongoing C. Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement by actions taken by ADE in response to monitoring results. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Ongoing D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 17 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 At each regular monthly meeting of the State Board of Education, the Board is provided copies of the most recent Project Management Tool (PMT) and an executive summary of the PMT for their review and approval. Only activities that are in addition to the Board's monthly review of the PMT are detailed below. In May 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the total number of schools visited during the monitoring phase and the data collection process. Suggestions were presented to the State Board of Education on how recommendations could be presented in the monitoring reports. In June 1995, an update on the status of the pending Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the State Board of Education. In July 1995, the July Semiannual Monitoring Report was reviewed by the State Board of Education. On August 14, 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the need to increase minority participation in the teacher scholarship program and provided tentative monitoring dates to facilitate reporting requests by the ADE administrative team and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In September 1995, the State Board of Education was advised of a change in the PMT from a table format to a narrative format. The Board was also briefed about a meeting with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring regarding the PMT. In October 1995, the State Board of Education was updated on monitoring timelines. The Board was also informed of a meeting with the parties regarding a review of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and the monitoring process, and the progress of the test validation study. In November 1995, a report was made to the State Board of Education regarding the monitoring schedule and a meeting with the parties concerning the development of a common terminology for monitoring purposes. In December 1995, the State Board of Education was updated regarding announced monitoring visits. In January 1996, copies of the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the State Board of Education. 18 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) During the months of February 1996 through May 1996, the PMT report was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. In June 1996, the State Board of Education was updated on the status of the bias review study. In July 1996, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the Court, the parties, ODM, the State Board of Education, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In August 1996, the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team were provided with copies of the test validation study prepared by Dr. Paul Williams. During the months of September 1996 through December 1996, the PMT was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. On January 13, 1997, a presentation was made to the State Board of Education regarding the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report, and copies of the report and its executive summary were distributed to all Board members. The Project Management Tool and its executive summary were addrP.ssed at the February 10, 1997 State Board of Education meeting regarding the AD E's progress in fulfilling their obligations as set forth in the Implementation Plan. In March 1997, the State Board of Education was notified that historical information in the PMT had been summarized at the direction of the Assistant Attorney General in order to reduce the size and increase the clarity of the report. The Board was updated on the Pulaski County Desegregation Case and reviewed the Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by the Court on February 18, 1997 in response to the Districts' motion for summary judgment on the issue of state funding for teacher retirement matching contributions. During the months of April 1997 through June 1997, the PMT was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. 19 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) The State Board of Education received copies of the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and executive summary at the July Board meeting. The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on August 4, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. A special report regarding a historical review of the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement and the ADE's role and monitoring obligations were presented to the State Board of Education on September 8, 1997. Additionally, the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Board for their review. In October 1997, a special draft report regarding disparity in achievement was submitted to the State Board Chairman and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In November 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on November 3, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. In December 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. In January 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and discussed ODM's report on the ADE's monitoring activities and instructed the Director to meet with the parties to discuss revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. In February 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and discussed the February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. In March 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary and was provided an update regarding proposed revisions to the monitoring process. In April 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. 20 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) iill!~lli~\\~i~illf ijfgpfg~fa~1rn r~vlw~a ijfifJ ilit?.f .v114:m:1:g\u0026amp;11t1ina. 21 Vl. REMEDIATION A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 During May 1995, team visits to Cycle 4 schools were conducted, and plans were developed for reviewing the Cycle 5 schools. In June 1995, the current Extended COE packet was reviewed, and enhancements to the Extended COE packet were prepared. In July 1995, year end reports were finalized by the Pulaski County field service specialists, and plans were finalized for reviewing the draft improvement plans of the Cycle 5 schools. In August 1995, Phase I - Cycle 5 school improvement plans were reviewed. Plans were developed for meeting with the Districts to discuss plans for Phase II - Cycle 1 schools of Extended COE, and a school improvement conference was conducted in Hot Springs. The technical review visits for the FY 95/96 year and the documentation process were also discussed. In October 1995, two computer programs, the Effective Schools Planner and the Effective Schools Research Assistant, were ordered for review, and the first draft of a monitoring checklist for Extended COE was developed. Through the Extended COE process, the field service representatives provided technical assistance based on the needs identified within the Districts from the data gathered. In November 1995, ADE personnel discussed and planned for the FY 95/96 monitoring, and onsite visits were conducted to prepare schools for the FY 95/96 team visits. Technical review visits continued in the Districts. In December 1995, announced monitoring and technical assistance visits were conducted in the Districts. At December 31 , 1995, approximately 59% of the schools in the Districts had been monitored. Technical review visits were conducted during January 1996. In February 1996, announced monitoring visits and midyear monitoring reports were completed, and the field service specialists prepared for the spring NCA/COE peer team visits. 22 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) In March 1996, unannounced monitoring visits of Cycle 5 schools commenced, and two-day peer team visits of Cycle 5 schools were conducted. Two-day team visit materials, team lists and reports were prepared. Technical assistance was provided to schools in final preparation for team visits and to schools needing any school improvement information. In April and May 1996, the unannounced monitoring visits were completed. The unannounced monitoring forms were reviewed and included in the July monitoring report. The two-day peer team visits were completed, and annual COE monitoring reports were prepared. In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits of the Cycle 5 schools were completed, and the data was analyzed. The Districts identified enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996, and copies were distributed to the parties. During August 1996, meetings were held with the Districts to discuss the monitoring requirements. Technical assistance meetings with Cycle 1 schools were planned for 96/97. The Districts were requested to record discipline data in accordance with the Allen Letter. In September 1996, recommendations regarding the ADE monitoring schedule for Cycle 1 schools and content layouts of the semiannual report were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. Training materials were developed and schedules outlined for Cycle 1 schools. In October 1996, technical assistance needs were identified and addressed to prepare each school for their team visits. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996. 23 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) In December 1996, the announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools were completed, and technical assistance needs were identified from school site visits. In January 1997, the ECOE monitoring section identified technical assistance needs of the Cycle 1 schools, and the data was reviewed when the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, the State Board of Education, and the parties. In February 1997, field service specialists prepared for the peer team visits of the Cycle 1 schools. NCA accreditation reports were presented to the NCA Committee, and NCA reports were prepared for presentation at the April NCA meeting in Chicago. From March to May 1997, 111 visits were made to schools or central offices to work with principals, ECOE steering committees, and designated district personnel concerning school improvement planning. A workshop was conducted on Learning Styles for Geyer Springs Elementary School. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 15-17, 1997. The conference included information on the process of continuous school improvement, results of the first five years of COE, connecting the mission with the school improvement plan, and improving academic performance. Technical assistance needs were evaluated for the FY 97/98 school year in August 1997. From October 1997 to February 1998, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives. Technical assistance was provided to the Districts through meetings with the ECOE steering committees, assistance in analyzing perceptual surveys, and by providing samples of school improvement plans, Gold File catalogs, and web site addresses to schools visited . Additional technical assistance was provided to the Districts through discussions with the ECOE committees and chairs about the process. In November 1997, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives in conjunction with the announced monitoring visits. Workshops on brainstorming and consensus building and asking strategic questions were held in January and February 1998. 24 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) In March 1998, the field service representatives conducted ECOE team visits and prepared materials for the NCA workshop. Technical assistance was provided in workshops on the ECOE process and team visits. In April 1998, technical assistance was provided on the ECOE process and academically distressed schools. 1n:M~Yil:$.~~j:Jg~o/~ll$.$!.$W.h~wij'$''pfpy.m~a.gfitbiifG.OS :pr.q,ijii.l!nJgijffi vt,tw!fij#po~yft~m 8. Identify available resources for providing technical assistance for the specific condition, or circumstances of need, considering resources within ADE and the Districts, and also resources available from outside sources and experts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. C. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 An updated ERIC Search was conducted on May 15, 1995 to locate research on evaluating compensatory education programs. The ADE received the updated ERIC disc that covered material through March 1995. In August 1995, a new ERIC disc arrived, and an updated search was conducted. These articles were reviewed. 25 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) C. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) An ERIC search was conducted in September 30, 1996 to identify current research dealing with the evaluation of compensatory education programs, and the articles were reviewed. An ERIC search was conducted in April 1997 to identify current research on compensatory education programs and sent to the Cycle 1 principals and the field service specialists for their use. D. Identify and research technical resources available to ADE and the Districts through programs and organizations such as the Desegregation Assistance Center in San Antonio, Texas. 1. Projected Ending Date Summer 1994 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. E. Solicit, obtain, and use available resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 26 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 From March 1995 through July 1995, technical assistance and resources were obtained from the following sources: the Southwest Regional Cooperative\nUALR regarding training for monitors\nODM on a project management software\nADHE regarding data review and display\nand Phi Delta Kappa, the Desegregation Assistance Center and the Dawson Cooperative regarding perceptual surveys. Technical assistance was received on the Microsoft Project software in November 1995, and a draft of the PMT report using the new software package was presented to the ADE administrative team for review. In December 1995, a data manager was hired permanently to provide technical assistance with computer software and hardware. In October 1996, the field service specialists conducted workshops in the Districts to address their technical assistance needs and provided assistance for upcoming team visits. In November and December 1996, the field service specialists addressed technical assistance needs of the schools in the Districts as they were identified and continued to provide technical assistance for the upcoming team visits. In January 1997, a draft of the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties. The ECOE monitoring section of the report included information that identified technical assistance needs and resources available to the Cycle 1 schools. Technical assistance was provided during the January 29-31, 1997 Title I MidWinter Conference. The conference emphasized creating a learning community by building capacity schools to better serve all children and empowering parents to acquire additional skills and knowledge to better support the education of their children. In February 1997, three ADE employees attended the Southeast Regional Conference on Educating Black Children. Participants received training from national experts who outlined specific steps that promote and improve the education of black children. 27 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) On March 6-9, 1997, three members of the ADE's Technical Assistance Section attended the National Committee for School Desegregation Conference. The participants received training in strategies for Excellence and Equity: Empowerment and Training for the Future. Specific information was received regarding the current status of court-ordered desegregation, unitary status, and resegregation and distributed to the Districts and ADE personnel. The field service specialists attended workshops in March on ACT testing and school improvement to identify technical assistance resources available to the Districts and the ADE that will facilitate desegregation efforts. ADE personnel attended the Eighth Annual Conference on Middle Level Education in Arkansas presented by the Arkansas Association of Middle Level Education on April 6-8, 1997. The theme of the conference was Sailing Toward New Horizons. In May 1997, the field service specialists attended the NCA annual conference and an inservice session with Mutiu Fagbayi. An Implementation Oversight Committee member participated in the Consolidated COE Plan inservice training. In June and July 1997, field service staff attended an SAT-9 testing workshop and participated in the three-day School Improvement Conference held in Hot Springs. The conference provided the Districts with information on the COE school improvement process, technical assistance on monitoring and assessing achievement, availability of technology for the classroom teacher, and teaching strateg ies for successful student achievement. In August 1997, field service personnel attended the ASCD Statewide Conference and the AAEA Administrators Conference. On August 18, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held and presentations were made on the Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) program and the Schools of the 21st Century program. In September 1997, technical assistance was provided to the Cycle 2 principals on data collection for onsite and offsite monitoring. ADE personnel attended the Region VI Desegregation Conference in October 1997. Current desegregation and educational equity cases and unitary status issues were the primary focus of the conference. 28 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) On October 14, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held in Paragould to enable members to observe a 21st Century school and a school that incorporates traditional and multi-age classes in its curriculum. In November 1997, the field service representatives attended the Governor's Partnership Workshop to discuss how to tie the committee's activities with the ECOE process. In March 1998, the field service representatives attended a school improvement conference and conducted workshops on team building and ECOE team visits. Staff development seminars on Using Data to Sharpen the Focus on Student Achievement are scheduled for March 23, 1998 and March 27, 1998 for the Districts. In April 1998, the Districts participated in an ADE seminar to aid them in evaluating and improving student achievement. 29 VII. TEST VALIDATION A. 8. Using a collaborative approach, the ADE will select and contract with an independent bias review service or expert to evaluate the Stanford 8, or other monitoring instruments used to measure disparities in academic achievement between black students and white students. 1. Projected Ending Date March, 1995 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 On March 29, 1995, letters were sent to four national experts about conducting a test bias validation of the Stanford Achievement Test, Eighth Edition, Form K (SAT-8). Dr. Paul Williams, Deputy Director of Educational Testing Service (ETS), contacted the ADE in April of 1995 concerning the proposal for validating the SAT-8 test. The ADE requested that Dr. Williams conduct a validity study of test items used in the SA T-8. Dr. Williams submitted a final proposal for his services. The ADE Bias Review Test Committee met Friday, July 7, 1995, and approved Dr. William's contract proposal. The final contract was forwarded to Dr. Williams for his signature. The contract was signed in August 1995, thereby, completing this goal. By April 1994, establish a bias review committee to oversee the bias review process, and invite representatives of the Districts and parties to meet with the bias review committee. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Complete. ADE established a Bias Review Committee in April 1994. In accordance with the Implementation Plan, representatives from the Districts and the parties were invited to attend and participate in this and all meetings of the Bias Review Committee. 30 VII. TEST VALIDATION (Continued) C. Upon completion of test validation procedures by the bias review service or expert, the ADE will adopt and use a validated test as a monitoring instrument. 1. Projected Ending Date March 1995 and ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Dr. Paul Williams met with the staff of the Psychological Corporation to review their methods and procedures. In August 1995, he met with the staff at Georgia State University to review the statistical methods that would be used in the analysis. Dr. Williams reported difficulty with the bias-review study in receiving the names of the bias panel and the complete SAT-8 data set from the Psychological Corporation. Dr. Williams submitted an invoice totaling $8,961 for Task I activities of the SAT-8 validity study for partial fulfillment of the test validation study. On December 6, 1995, a contract extension for Dr. Williams was reviewed by the Legislative Council. In January 1996, he indicated that he was in the final stages of the test validation, and the ADE was presented a draft report in March 1996. In May 1996, Dr. Williams stated that the wrong data sets were sent to him by the Psychological Corporation resulting in Task 3 having to be redone. A new draft of the final report was received by the ADE in July 1996. In August 1996, copies of the test validation report were provided to the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team for their review. On September 10, 1996, the LRSD notified the ADE that they had reviewed the test validation report and would like to meet with the ADE to discuss the report. The ADE Director indicated that he would schedule a meeting with the LRSD to discuss the report. In October 1996, historical files and data were provided to the ADE Director, the ADE Assistant Director for Technical Services, and the ADE Assistant Director for Planning and Curriculum for their review in preparation for a meeting with the LRSD regarding the validity study. 31 VII. TEST VALIDATION (Continued) C. Upon completion of test validation procedures by the bias review service or expert, the ADE will adopt and use a validated test as a monitoring instrument. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) Test validation procedures by the expert have been completed. A recommendation was drafted proposing the use of the SAT-8 by the ADE as the validated test for monitoring. The ADE is presently working to arrange a meeting with the Administration of the LRSD to discuss the test validation study. Effective September 22, 1997, the State Board of Education hired a new Director of the General Education Division, which should allow the ADE to move forward in this matter. In October 1997, the GED Director was updated on the history of the test validation process to provide the Director with background information in preparation for a meeting with the LRSD. In February 1998, ADE staff met with senior staff members to discuss the test validation and appropriate test scores for consideration by the LRSD. The ADE Director met with the Superintendent of the LRSD to discuss test validation issues. 32 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING A. Through an interactive process with representatives of desegregating districts, identify in-service training needs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VIII.D. of this report. B. Develop in-service training programs to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. C. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VIII.D. of this report. Implement in-service training programs to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section VIII.D. of this report. 0 . Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 33 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In April 1995, the Tri-District Staff Development Committee were provided an overview of the Scott Alternative Learning Center's operation and met with students and staff. In May 1995, the Districts were in the process of self-assessment and planning for fall staff development. The Districts worked on staff development to be incorporated into their fall 95/96 preschool calendars. The uniqueness of each district's needs and their schools was considered in the planning by utilizing the results of needs assessment instruments. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on September 13, 1995 to plan for an ADE administered Classroom Management grant. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on September 19, 1995 to finalize the Classroom Management grant proposal. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on October 24, 1995 to discuss program and staff development evaluation models that might be available to the Districts. On November 15, 1995, the ADE met with an ODM representative to discuss the progress the ADE had made in attaining the objectives outlined in the Implementation Plan with regard to inservice training. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on November 21, 1995 to discuss upcoming training events and various NLR programs that focus on nonacademic needs. A new program consisting of placing a graduate student of social work, a field supervisor, and a DHS worker in the district at no cost to the district was discussed. Additionally, NLR provided an overview of their program for credit deficient students. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on December 19, 1995 to discuss infonnation dealing with ways to broaden the perspective of multicultural education. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on January 17, 1996 to discuss proposed changes in the standards regarding media centers and NLRSD's staff development strategic planning committee. The committee reviewed a video on diversity produced by the Arkansas Elementary Principals Association. 34 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on February 21, 1996 to discuss the implications of budget cuts on staff development programs and PCSSD's request for unitary status for their staff development program. They also discussed the need for computer literacy, technology training, and acquisition of hardware and software by the Districts. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on March 27, 1996 to discuss available resources concerning sexual harassment. ADE regulations in relation to staff members attending professional association conferences as well as the district staff development and potential sites for training seminars were also discussed. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on April 30, 1996 to discuss the reconfiguring of Jacksonville Junior High, PCSSD professional development schedules, and APSCN on-line timelines. A tour of the Washington Magnet school was also conducted. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee received a demonstration of UALR's Baum Decision Support Center's capabilities regarding consensus and planning on May 29, 1996. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee did not meet during September, October, and November 1996 because of scheduling conflicts and the extended medical leave of the ADE liaison. On December 18, 1996, the Tri-District Staff Development Commlttee met to discuss the linkage between the Implementation Plan, staff development, and student achievement. On January 21, 1997, the Tri-District Staff Development Committee met and discussed sharing middle school strategies and the Districts' training catalogs. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on February 25, 1997 to discuss their current staff development programs and an overview of the relationship of their current programs with their desegregation plans. 35 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on March 26, 1997 to observe the Great Expectations Program. The principal and mentor teachers provided information on the components and philosophy of the program, and students demonstrated selected components. The PCSSD may adopt the program for selected schools in their district. The committee was provided with an update of pertinent information on resources available to the Districts. The committee decided that the ADE liaison to the committee would gather documentation of completed staff development directly from the Districts, instead of the Districts providing this information at the committee meetings. New information on teacher licensure and rules and regulations was shared with the Tri-District Staff Development Committee at their April 1997 meeting. A report was presented to the committee on information from the Arkansas Council for Social Studies about an October 1997 meeting on integrated curriculum. The Districts will provide principal retreats this summer as a part of their staff development. The PCSSD will sponsor a renowned speaker on strategies to serve at risk youth in August 1997 in which the committee is invited to attend. The LRSD shared survey results from a pilot administration to four teachers in each district. The survey found the sample to be strong in content but lacking in context and process. Plans to address these needs will be developed. In another survey to certified and non-certified LRSD staff, stress management was the major concern. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on May 14, 1997 to participate in a teleconference with the five 1996 awardees of the National Awards Program for Model for Professional Development. The PCSSD shared their summer and fall staff development catalog with the members. The committee will reconvene in the fall of the 97 /98 school year. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee is scheduled to meet on September 30, 1997 to discuss collaborative actions for FY 97/98. 36 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on September 30, 1997 to discuss their staff development for the 1997 /1998 school year. The PCSSD had a pre-school in-service for the faculty, and the LRSD conducted a Principals Academy with an expert on the math and science initiative which lasted several days. The NLRSD is providing staff development by satellite. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on October 28, 1997. The LRSD and NLRSD shared some of their staff development course offerings with the committee, and the PCSSD discussed ways of optimizing opportunities for staff development with specific emphasis on the junior high school conflict resolution training. In November 1997, the Lead Planner provided technical assistance to Central High School staff regarding data disaggregation, test score analysis and ways to improve student achievement. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on November 25, 1997 to discuss the Standards for Staff Development. The LRSD will begin providing technology training to their employees in January by utilizing business teachers. Additionally, they discussed a collaborative venture of the Districts involving a workshop from Chicago on a program called \"Great Expectations.\" The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on December 16, 1997 to discuss technology plans, strategies for obtaining information currently being provided to the education cooperatives, scheduling of Arkansas history, and the development of a comprehensive list of locations available for staff development. Members agreed to bring information on available locations to the January meeting and have set a tentative completion date for the project of May 1998. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on January 27, 1998 to share information for developing a comprehensive list of locations available for staff development. The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on February 24, 1998 to work on the development of the list of locations available for staff development. The committee also discussed the meeting on student achievement sponsored by the ADE for the Districts, principals' staff development in the Districts and emphasis on improving achievement as reflected on the SAT-9. 37 VIII. IN-SERVICE TRAINING (Continued) D. Evaluate in-service training programs developed and executed to address in-service training needs of desegregating districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) The Tri-District Staff Development Committee met on March 19, 1998 to discuss the math and science grant received by the LRSD, the Districts' in-service calendars for August, TESA and Student-Team Learning trainers, and team building for staff. The ADE Deputy Director is scheduled to discuss ways the committee can strengthen their relationship with the regional cooperatives at their May meeting. 38 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS A. Facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. 1. Projected Ending Dates (See dates on individual key activities) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 A staff member of the ADE's certification department attended all of the college career days in FY 94/95 in Arkansas and one out-of-state. In FY 95/96, ADE certification staff members attended career and job fairs at the following colleges and universities: Philander Smith College\nUAM\nHSU\nATU\nUCA\nASU\nUA-Pine Bluff\nUA-Fayetteville\nHarding University\nSAU\nand Jackson State. ADE certification staff met with representatives from the Districts to ensure they were aware that ADE personnel were available to provide assistance in recruitment and certification of minority teacher candidates. A job fair was conducted at the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff on December 4 , 1996. The Districts were advised of the ADE's availability for providing assistance in recruitment and certification. tn February 1997, ADE certification staff members attended teacher job fairs at Henderson State University, Arkansas Tech University, and University of Central Arkansas to facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. ADE certification staff members attended teacher job fairs at Harding University, UA-Fayetteville, UA-Pine Bluff, and ASU in April 1997 to facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. From April 16, 1997 through May 6, 1997, ADE certification staff members attended teacher job fairs at Philander Smith College and SAU to facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. Additionally, ADE staff attended an out-of-state teacher job fair at Jackson State University at Jackson, Mississippi. Recruitment activities were suspended for the summer, but they will resume in the later part of September for FY 97 /98. On September 25, 1997, the ADE's Professional Licensure Supervisor attended a career day job fair at Philander Smith College to provide support to the Districts in recruiting teachers. 39 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS (Continued) A. Facilitate communication between the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) On November 6, 1997, the Professional Licensure Supervisor attended a career day job fair at the University of the Ozarks in order to facilitate the Districts' recruitment efforts. Recruitment activities will resume in February 1998. Representatives of the ADE's Professional Licensure Unit attended job fairs at Arkansas Technical University, UCA, ASU and the University of Memphis from February 26, 1998 through March 12, 1998. A representative from the ADE's Professional Licensure Unit attended job fairs at UA-Fayetteville and Harding University on March 30, 1998 and April 2, 1998, respectively. f3ijpf~~~h~#.tiY~~ Jrqrf\\ Jq~\np!:j' Rr9.m~~(pq~f\ng,~p~qr,~ pm~~p~~{(lRP- f~Ri ijfpfilJl6X!~f $rr\\Im\nQql(~g~/AQ ijQi:.f.J:facthE?:~l42.Pl.l?Dijio.iAPfi!!1$.g?k B. Beginning in 1994, by May and November of each year, Districts will supply to the ADE information about shortages of teachers by grade and subject area. 1. Projected Ending Dates Ongoing, as stated. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Letters were sent in May, August, and December 1995 to the Districts requesting information regarding teaching positions available by grade and subject areas. In May and November 1996, the Human Resources offices of the Districts were requested to provide information regarding teaching positions available by grade and subject area. The ADE sent follow-up letters requesting information from the Districts regarding teacher shortages in February 1997. The NLRSD and the PCSSD indicated that they expect teacher shortages in the areas of Special Education, Mathematics, the Sciences, Foreign Language, English as a Second Language and Gifted and Talented Education. On May 20, 1997, information was requested from the Districts regarding teacher shortages. Follow-up letters were sent in July 1997. 40 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS (Continued) C. D. Beginning in 1994, by May and December of each year, request information from colleges and universities about the numbers and types of minority-teacher graduates. 1. Projected Ending Dates Ongoing, as stated. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In May and December 1995, letters were sent to all Deans and Certifying Officers of Institutions of Higher Education in Arkansas requesting information on minority teacher graduates. Letters were sent to all Deans and Certifying Officers of Institutions of Higher Education in Arkansas in May and November 1996 requesting information on minority teacher graduates. In May and December 1997, letters were sent to all Arkansas colleges and universities with teacher education programs requesting minority teacher graduate information. C?riM~Y 14?11~~Il~fief~ ~~r~ ~~nf,g ~ltAr~~r~~~ SC?H~~~!~q#ipN'.~r~m~~ili t~?t5..t~fJv?t,fipfit?tniX\\iil:iWijffitibJm1ntit9t.?..nttJt~4wn~:inr\u0026amp;rm\u0026amp;tlm Within 30 days of receiving data from colleges and universities provide the Districts data on teacher openings to the colleges and universities on minority graduates to the Districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In June 1995 and January 1996, ADE sent the information received from Arkansas colleges and universities on minority teacher education graduates to the Districts. In July 1996 and January 1997, ADE sent the information received from Deans and Certifying Officers on minority teacher education graduates to the Districts. On February 3, 1997, a list of minority teacher graduates from the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville was forwarded to the Districts as an addendum to the list of graduates compiled on January 16, 1997. 41 IX. RECRUITMENT OF MINORITY TEACHERS (Continued) D. Within 30 days of receiving data from colleges and universities provide the Districts data on teacher openings to the colleges and universities on minority graduates to the Districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) The ADE provided the Districts with the Minority Teacher Graduate Report compiled from the minority teacher graduate information received from Arkansas colleges and universities in July 1997 and January 1998. E. Each November, ADE will request information from the Districts on the effectiveness of ADE's minority recruitment assistance, including an assessment of the minority teacher candidates' database. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 On November 30, 1994, letters were sent to the Districts requesting feedback on the effectiveness of the ADE's minority recruitment assistance. Follow-up letters were sent on March 17, 1995 since no responses had been received. Additional follow-up letters were sent to the Districts in August 1995 because the ADE had received no responses from the Districts. A planning and evaluation meeting was scheduled on January 11, 1996 with representatives from the Districts. The Districts did not attend the meeting. In February 1997, letters were sent to the Districts requesting feedback on the effectiveness of ADE's minority recruitment assistance. The NLRSD and the PCSSD submitted favorable evaluations concerning the effectiveness of the ADE's recruitment assistance efforts. The ADE did not received any information from the LRSD regarding this matter. 42 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES A. Assist ADHE in identifying, analyzing, addressing and eliminating racial disparities in the allocation of scholarships. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section X.D. of this report. B. Representatives of the ADE and the ADHE will work together, review ADHE's available data to identify racial disparities in allocation of scholarships. C. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section X.D. of this report. Using its knowledge about public schools, teacher education and certification, and through a collaborative effort with the Districts, ADE will analyze racial disparities in ADHE scholarship allocations. ADE will report its findings, conclusions, and recommendations about racial disparities in allocating scholarships to ADHE. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section X.D. of this report. D. Working with the ADHE, the ADE will use its relationships in the public education institutional settings to assist implementation of measures designed to reduce racial disparities in allocation of scholarships. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 43 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) D. Working with the ADHE, the ADE will use its relationships in the public education institutional settings to assist implementation of measures designed to reduce racial disparities in allocation of scholarships. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In April 1995, ADE met with representatives of ADHE concerning identification and analysis of possible disparities in scholarship allocations. In June 1995, a collaborative effort was made between the ADE and ADHE to enhance the rate at which minorities were applying for the 1995 teacher scholarships with special emphasis on the areas of science, math, and foreign language through a direct mail program. In July 1995, representatives from the ADE and the Districts met to review the scholarship applications. The Implementation Committee on Financial Assistance to Minority Teacher Candidates discussed ways to increase minority awareness of the scholarships available for minority teacher applicants. The committee agreed to meet quarterly to identify, analyze, and address eliminating racial disparities in scholarships. The committee met in December 1995 to discuss the distribution of scholarships for the 95/96 school year. The committee meets on a continuous basis to review scholarship distributions and discuss ways of improving the pool of applicants for minority teacher scholarships as detailed further in Section X.E. of this report. E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 During the May 1995 Legislative session, Acts 188, 189 and 259 regarding scholarships were passed. A meeting to monitor and analyze the distribution of scholarships for the 95/96 school year was held on December 15, 1995. 44 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) The committee met on June 7, 1996 to review the scholarship applications for minority teacher candidates for the 96/97 school year. Representatives from the ADHE stated that the ADHE expected to have the resources to fund: 56 scholarships under the Emergency Secondary Education Loan Program\n100 scholarships under the Minority Teacher Scholars Program\nand 13 scholarships under the Minority Masters Fellows Program. The committee also discussed ways of increasing the scholarship applicant pools, and a recommendation was made to make scholarships available to part-time students. In September 1996, a proposal was submitted to the Assistant to the Director for Legislative Services recommending the Legislature offer minority teacher scholarships to part-time students. The committee met on October 23, 1996 to review the scholarships awarded for the 96/97 school year. The following scholarships were funded: 60 scholarships totaling $144,266 for the Emergency Secondary Education Loan Program\n20 scholarships totaling $107,500 for the Minority Masters Fellows Program\n109 scholarships totaling $505,093 for the Minority Teacher Scholars Program\nand 258 students in the Freshman/Sophomore Minority Grant Program received scholarships totaling $374,000. In March 1997, information on minority teacher scholarships and how to apply was provided to the Districts and Arkansas colleges and universities. The Districts were informed of ADHE's scholarship promotional efforts and legislative updates. The next meeting of the committee will be in September 1997. On April 8, 1997, notifications were sent to all Arkansas colleges and universities on the Minority Teacher Scholars Program reminding them that the deadline for receiving applications was June 1, 1997. This information was also provided to the Districts. The Minority Teacher Scholarship Committee will meet on October 9, 1997 to discuss the scholarships awarded for FY 97/98. 45 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) The Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee met on October 9, 1997 to discuss the scholarships awarded for FY 97/98. The ADHE Assistant Coordinator for Student Financial Aid provided a comprehensive presentation on scholarships awarded for the 97/98 school year. There were 235 scholarships awarded in the Freshman/Sophomore Minority Scholarship program totaling $344,988. The Emergency Secondary Education Loan program awarded 52 scholarships for a total of $119,370. There were 83 scholarships for $403,520 awarded in the Minority Teachers Scholars program. The Minority Masters Fellows program awarded 20 scholarships for a total of $73,750. The ADHE representative indicated that during the 1997 regular legislative session legislation was passed to allow hispanics and asians to participate in the minority scholarship programs. It was stated that the average GPA for minority teacher scholarship recipients had increased to 3.13, and that the dollars awarded in the Minority Masters Fellows program were down from last year because most of the recipients were part-time students. The committee discussed numerous avenues that might be utilized to inform minority applicants of scholarships available. Communication with the faculty of Arkansas colleges and universities regarding the availability of scholarships was discussed as a way of informing teaching students of possible resources available to them. The next quarterly meeting of the Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee will be February 19, 1998. The quarterly meeting of the Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee scheduled for February was canceled since only the NLRSD and an ADE representative were present at the scheduled meeting place. The meeting has not been rescheduled at this time. The Minority Teacher Scholarship meeting was rescheduled for March 26, 1998. 46 X. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO MINORITY TEACHER CANDIDATES (Continued) E. Monitor the allocation of scholarships to minority students by the ADHE\nevaluate the impacts of new approaches and new legislation on an ongoing basis. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) The Minority Teacher Scholarship Recruitment Committee met on March 26, 1998. The committee was updated on the requirements and application packets were distributed for the Emergency Secondary Education Loan Program (ESELP), Minority Teacher Scholars Program (MTSP), and Minority Masters Fellows Program (MMFP). The deadline for applications was April 1, 1998 for the ESELP and June 1, 1998 for the MTSP and MMFP. The scholarships will be awarded in July 1998. A committee member requested that ADHE send scholarship applications to the schools as well as the district offices to ensure that their teachers and students were apprised of the scholarships available. It was suggested that the colleges submit prospective graduate information for use by the Districts no later than April since the Districts begin the interview process of Spring graduates in May. The ADE Implementation Plan currently requires that the ADE request information on minority teacher graduates in May, and then it is distributed to the Districts in June or July. A representative from the ADE Teacher Licensure Unit was present at the meeting and stated that the ADE would try to accommodate the Districts with this request, but she cautioned that colleges and universities are reluctant to provide tentative graduate information. The next committee meeting is scheduled for July 30, 1998 at the NLRSD offices. 47 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF A. Administer the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan developed by the ADE staff and Board of Education and officially adopted by the Board of Education (see Exhibit B for the ADE's Minority Recruitment Plan with specific objectives and timelines). 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The Minority Recruitment Committee met on April 14, 1995. New committee members were assigned tasks and goals to increase the effectiveness of the Minority Recruitment Plan. At the Minority Recruitment Committee meeting on May 18, 1995, the committee was divided into four working sub-teams to update the annual plan. Each team focused on one of the four goals in the Minority Recruitment Plan and monitored specific task completions. From June to October 1995, subcommittees met and worked on monitoring the progress of the ADE in accomplishing the tasks outlined in the Minority Recruitment Plan. In September 1995, the ADE reached an agreement with the Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (ASSI) for conducting an audit of the Minority Recruitment Plan. The committee reviewed the recommendations and comments for updating the plan at the November 1995 meeting and reviewed the final draft at the December meeting. The ASSl's audit findings were presented to the committee on January 16, 1996. It was determined during the initial review that the files were incomplete to the extent that an accurate audit was not possible. The auditor met with the committee in March 1996 to review the additional documentation in the files. The auditor prepared the final report in April 1996 indicating that of the 89 actions contained in the Minority Recruitment Plan, 74 of the items had been completed, nine were in progress, and six had not been started. The audit stated that of the 22 items in Goal 1, 15 were completed, one was in progress, and six had not been started. Goal 2 contained 14 items, 13 of which were completed and one in progress. Goal 3 consisted of 30 items with 29 items completed and one in progress. Goal 4 consisted of 23 items with 17 items completed and six in progress. 4 8 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) A. Administer the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan developed by the ADE staff and Board of Education and officially adopted by the Board of Education (see Exhibit B for the ADE's Minority Recruitment Plan with specific goals, objectives and timelines). (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) The Minority Recruitment Committee met on June 6, 1996 to discuss updates and revisions addressed in the audit and the new racial/gender report on Grades 21 and above. Since the completion of the audit, Goals 2.3.4 and 3.3.8 were completed, and a list of recommendations for retention activities was written. Also, a random sample of ADE employees was asked to fill out questionnaires, but only a limited number were returned. In August 1996, the Minority Recruitment Committee met and discussed the actions necessary to complete Goals 1 and 4 contained in the Minority Recruitment Plan. At the September 1996 meeting, the committee was updated on the progress of all four goals in the Minority Recruitment Plan. The committee heard an analysis of application and hiring practices and discussed the relevance of the data. Suggestions made by the State Board of Education regarding the Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet were discussed at the February 1996 meeting of the Minority Recruitment Committee. Goal 1 of the Minority Recruitment Plan will be completed when the employee tracking sheet is finalized. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on March 14, 1997 and March 27, 1997 to discuss the draft Revised Minority Recruitment Plan and progress toward completing Goal 4. The committee passed a motion to omit Section 1.1 from Goal 1 of the draft revised plan. Additionally, the committee suggested that communication be made an integral part of each goal of the revised plan. The committee discussed the need for professional training programs, incentives for educational opportunities, and upward mobility for all staff within the ADE. In an effort to complete Goal 4, a representative from the ADE communication section presented development costs for media materials to the committee. Additionally, a representative from the ADE MIS section discussed the possibility of using the network to disseminate information to employees. It was suggested that the committee continue to receive assistance from MIS ori the orientation video. 49 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) A. Administer the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan developed by the ADE staff and Board of Education and officially adopted by the Board of Education (see Exhibit B for the ADE's Minority Recruitment Plan with specific goals, objectives and timelines). (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) In an effort to represent all sections within the ADE, the committee recommended that representatives from the ADE communication and MIS sections be added as members to the committee. Currently, neither section is represented on the committee. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on April 18, 1997 to discuss the need to revise the action steps for each of the committee's four goals. The committee decided to schedule a two-day retreat in an effort to review all goals and actions. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on May 19, 1997 to discuss the agenda for the annual retreat and revisions to the action plan emphasizing recruitment and retention at all grade levels. A two-day annual retreat was held on June 18-19, 1997 at the Teacher Retirement Building. The retreat facilitated the revision of the Minority Recruitment Committee's action plan for their four goals. Dr. Gary Chamberlain, UALR faculty member, served as the facilitator. The revised plan was distributed to the Minority Recruitment Committee at their July 18, 1997 meeting for final approval before it is submitted to the administrative team and the State Board of Education. The Minority Recruitment Committee meeting scheduled for September 12, 1997 was rescheduled for September 30, 1997 due to members scheduling conflicts. The meeting will be reported in the November PMT. The Minority Recruitment Committee met with the ADE Deputy Director in November 1997 to provide him with a copy of the revised plan and receive his input on the plan. The revised Minority Recruitment Committee (MRC) plan was approved at the December 1997 State Board of Education meeting. The MRC met in January 1998 to discuss the implementation of the revised MRC plan. Reports and documentation of progress in completing the components of each goal will be reported at the next meeting. 50 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) 8. Monitor minority representation at all levels of ADE and assess the effectiveness of the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 As of August 1995, the ADE had hired or transferred 38 employees in Grades 21 and above in the General Education Division. This group was composed of 11 black females, 5 black males, 16 white females, 4 white males, 1 other female, and 1 other male. The racial composition of the these employees was 52.6 percent non-minority and 47.4 percent minority. As of October 1995, there were 161 filled positions in the GED in Grades 21 and above. There were 27 minorities or 22.9 percent in Grades 21 and above. An analysis on Goal 1 regarding application and hiring practices was presented at the September 1996 meeting. Samples of graphs and tables for presenting the data were distributed at the meeting. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on December 13, 1996 to discuss the latest draft of the ADE Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet. The committee recommended various fonnat changes including the addition of a table of contents and an executive summary. The committee met on January 17, 1997 to continue the discussion on the draft ADE Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet. The Assistant Director for Planning and Curriculum agreed with all but three of the committee's recommendations for the employee tracking sheet. He requested that the committee continue discussions on this matter. The Minority Recruitment Committee met on February 14, 1997 to discuss the status of the Employee Tracking Data Check Sheet. The committee also discussed the lack of minority employees in some areas and the loss of several minority employees and the possibility of revising the new Minority Recruitment Plan. The committee received information on Arkansas pupil enrollment by race at their March 14, 1997 meeting. Arkansas enrollment figures for October 1, 1996 revealed that 73.7% of all students are white, 23.4% are black, 1.8% are hispanic, 0.7% are asian, and 0.4% are native american. 51 XI. MINORITY RECRUITMENT OF ADE STAFF (Continued) B. Monitor minority representation at all levels of ADE and assess the effectiveness of the ADE Minority Recruitment Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) To assess the effectiveness of the action steps for each goal, agenda items were developed for the committee's June retreat. The committee recommended that invitations be sent to Senator Beebe, Julie Cullen, Gene Wilhoit, and all State Board members. At the May 1997 Minority Recruitment Committee meeting, the committee discussed reviewing the most recent quarterly hiring and retention report and revisions to the action plan at the annual retreat. Discussions during the July retreat focused on the current plan, the original purpose of the plan, and necessary changes with input provided by committee members and speakers from the Arkansas Department of Higher Education, Employment Securities, and the ADE. At the January 1998 MRC meeting, it was decided that the chair and secretary would prepare a report on minority representation within each unit and section and present it to the committee at the next meeting. 52 XII. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION A. Improve the effectiveness of the ADE's existing rules, regulations, and site evaluation form for assessing the desegregation impacts of school construction between school districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section XII.C. of this report. 8. Review existing rules, regulations and site evaluation forms and their application to school construction projects within districts and between districts. C. 1. Projected Ending Date October 1994 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section XII.C. of this report. Amend the rules, regulations and site evaluation forms as they apply to all districts contiguous to the three Pulaski County school districts to assure that the school construction analysis specifically addresses the impacts on racial balances of individual school sites within the three districts. 1. Projected Ending Date October 1994 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 ADE's School Site Selection Committee met on April 21, 1995 to revise the proposed rules and regulations. The proposed rules and regulations were presented to the State Board of Education on May 8, 1995. The Board voted to table the decision on public comment until the proposed rules and regulations were reviewed by the Attorney General's Office. The Attorney General's Office reviewed the revised school construction draft and provided a letter of approval. 53 XII. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION (Continued) C. Amend the rules, regulations and site evaluation forms as they apply to all districts contiguous to the three Pulaski County school districts to assure that the school construction analysis specifically addresses the impacts on racial balances of individual school sites within the three districts. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) On June 12, 1995, the State Board of Education voted to place the revised School Site Approval rules and regulations for public comment. The hearing was held on June 19, 1995 in the ADE Auditorium, and a copy of the revised draft was sent to all school districts in an ADE Director's Memo. Proposed rules and regulations underwent a third revision and were presented to the Board in July 1995 with a request for final approval. The revised rules and regulations were approved by the State Board of Education on July 10, 1995. On August 3, 1995, the proposed School Site Approval rules and regulations were reviewed by the Legislative Council. Due to questions raised by the staff attorney for the Legislative Council, the council voted to defer review until their next meeting so that additional information could be obtained to resolve the questioned items. The proposed School Site Approval rules and regulations were reviewed by the Legislative Council on September 7, 1995 and went into effect on September 8, 1995. Goal completed. No additional reporting required. 54 XIII. ASSIST PCSSD A. Determine if the PCSSD wants and needs assistance in lowering the cost of Black History course offerings to its certified staff. 1. Projected Ending Date April, 1994 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 A letter was mailed to the desegregation director of the PCSSD on March 16, 1995 regarding offering assistance in facilitating a special arrangement with colleges and universities for reducing the cost of a black history course offering to the PCSSD certified staff. In a letter dated April 3, 1995, the PCSSD responded that their staff development director was working with UALR to develop the black history course offerings. No additional assistance was requested of the ADE. Goal completed as of June 1995. 8 . If PCSSD wants assistance, communicate with local colleges and universities to facilitate the Black History course offerings to PCSSD teachers at the lower costs possible. 1. Projected Ending Date September 1994 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 UALR informed the ADE that they had contacted PCSSD regarding their willingness to provide non-credit black history studies for the PCSSD. UALR indicated that as of November 11 , 1994 they had received no response from the PCSSD. Two universities offered assistance in providing teachers in the PCSSD a black history course. The ADE had not received requests for any assistance with the facilitation of a black history course in the PCSSD as of February 27, 1995. On April 3, 1995, the PCSSD informed ADE that its staff development director was working with UALR to develop the black history course offering. No additional assistance was requested of the ADE. 55 XIV. SCA TIERED SITE HOUSING A. Through Executive Branch communication procedures, ADE will inquire about State land holdings in Pulaski County and about the availability of State land holdings for use as building sites for scattered-site housing. 1. Projected Ending Date Not applicable. 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The ADE had previously inquired about State land holdings in Pulaski County and about availability of State land holdings for use as building sites for scattered site housing. All materials were distributed to the appropriate district representatives. There has been no contact with the PCSSD on Scattered Site Housing since July 1995. Goal completed . No additional reporting required. 56 XV. STANDARDIZED TEST SELECTION TO DETERMINE LRSD LOAN FORGIVENESS A. Meet with and propose to the representatives of the LRSD that the current Stanford 8 standardized test, following a bias-free validation study, be used to measure the District's progress toward meeting the loan forgiveness thresholds of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date May 1994 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 On April 21, 1995, a letter was sent to the LRSD Superintendent suggesting meeting dates to discuss the variables which affect student achievement. On May 1, 1995, the ADE Director was advised of the need to discuss the selection of the SAT-8 to measure the LRSD's progress toward meeting the loan forgiveness threshold of the Settlement Agreement. On May 21 , 1995, the ADE staff discussed the status of the selection of the test relevant to the ADE's Implementation Plan. The Variables Committee, a subcommittee of the Test Selection Committee, received evaluations on the relationship of the various types of scores that could be used on the SAT-8 Test. The Variables Committee recommended using the state-adopted norm referenced test to determine the achievement levels of black and white students. Based on the evaluations, they indicated that scaled scores or raw scores would appear to be the better metrics to use for this purpose. The recommendation from the Variables Committee was submitted to the Test Selection Committee and the ADE Director on July 28, 1995. Until the test validation has been completed, no additional progress can occur on this objective. For the progress being made on the test validation process see Section VII. of this report. In August 1996, copies of the test validation report were provided to the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team. Additionally, the LRSD Director of Planning, Research and Evaluation was provided a copy of the test validation report. 57 XV. STANDARDIZED TEST SELECTION TO DETERMINE LRSD LOAN FORGIVENESS (Continued) A. Meet with and propose to the representatives of the LRSD that the current Stanford 8 standardized test, following a bias-free validation study, be used to measure the Districts' progress toward meeting the loan forgiveness thresholds of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) On September 10, 1996, the LRSD notified the ADE that the district had reviewed the test validation report and would like to meet with the ADE to discuss the report. The Director of the ADE indicated that he would schedule a meeting with the LRSD to discuss the report. In October 1996, historical files and data were provided to the Director of the ADE, ADE Assistant Director of Technical Assistance, and ADE Assistant Director of Planning and Curriculum for their review in preparation for the meeting with the LRSD regarding the validity study. In February 1997, a memorandum was sent to the Assistant Directors of Technical Assistance and Planning and Curriculum which summarized the test validation and variables subcommittee work and outlined the next step of formalizing an agreement with the LRSD on the use of the SAT-8 and the choice of raw or scaled scores as the metric. Effective September 22, 1997, the State Board of Education hired a new Director of the General Education Division, which should allow ADE to move forward in this matter. In October 1997, the GED Director was updated on the history of the test validation process to provide the Director with background information in preparation for a meeting with the LRSD. In February 1998, ADE staff met with senior staff members to discuss the test validation and appropriate test scores for consideration by the LRSD. 58 XVI. MONITOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS A. Fully implement the Extended COE Improvement Plan Process in all schools in the three Pulaski County school districts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section XVI.D. of this report. 8. Conduct the Extended COE School Improvement Plan peer review process in 20% of the schools each year (every school every five years) and provide peer review team recommendations to the schools reviewed. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section XVI.D. of this report. C. Receive from all schools, annual reports on progress toward meeting recommendations of School Improvement Plans. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 The information for this item is detailed under Section XVI.D. of this report. D. Follow-up and assist schools that have difficulty realizing their school improvement objectives. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In June 1995, ADE personnel reviewed the Extended COE packet and prepared for holistic reviews of the Cycle 5 schools. 59 XVI. MONITOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS (Continued) D. Follow-up and assist schools that have difficulty realizing their school improvement objectives. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 In July 1995, year-end reports were finalized by the field service specialists. Plans to review the draft Cycle 5 school improvement plans, and plans for technical review visits in the 95/96 school year were discussed. In August 1995, holistic reviews of the Cycle 5 school improvement plans were conducted. A school improvement conference was conducted. In October 1995, computer programs used by Effective Schools proponents were ordered for review, and a draft monitoring checklist for ECOE was developed. In November 1995, two meetings were held to plan for 95/96 monitoring. Onsite visits were conducted to prepare schools for the FY 95/96 team visits, and technical review visits continued in the Districts. In December 1995, technical assistance visits were conducted, and monitoring occurred in all schools in the Districts. Technical review visits continued. In February 1996, announced monitoring visits in the Districts were completed. The field service specialists completed the midyear monitoring reports and prepared for the spring NCA/COE peer team visits. In March 1996, unannounced visits and peer team two-day visits of Cycle 5 schools were conducted. Written reports of two-day team visits were prepared, and field service specialists provided assistance to schools on their school improvement plans. In April and May 1996, unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and monitoring fonns were scanned for inclusion in the July monitoring report. Team visits were completed, and the annual COE monitoring reports were prepared. In June 1996, the data from the announced and unannounced monitoring visits of the Cycle 5 schools was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed with the Court, and copies were distributed to the parties. All Cycle 5 school improvement plans were monitored. Team visit reports were included in the Semiannual Monitoring Report. In August 1996, meetings were held with the Districts regarding announced monitoring requirements. Technical assistance meetings with Cycle 1 schools were planned for 96/97. The Districts were requested to record discipline data in accordance with the Allen Letter. 60 XVI. MONITOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS (Continued) D. Follow-up and assist schools that have difficulty realizing their school improvement objectives. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) In September 1996, recommendations on the monitoring schedule and content layouts of the semiannual report were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. Training materials were developed with tentative training schedules outlined for Cycle 1 schools. In October 1996, a meeting was held with the Districts to identify, update, and modify the schools in Cycles 1 - 5. Monitoring packets for the Cycle 1 schools were presented during the Principal's Monitoring Workshops. Technical assistance continued to be provided to the Cycle 1 schools regarding their school improvement goals through December 1996. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996 and were completed in December 1996. The ECOE monitoring reports on the Cycle 1 school improvement plans were included in the Semiannual Monitoring Report and presented to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties in January 1997. In February 1997, the field service specialists prepared for the spring peer team visits of the Cycle 1 schools and the annual NCA reports. From February through August 1997, technical assistance was provided as progress reports were evaluated and when specific requests were made. The NLRSD Cycle 1 ECOE team visits were completed in March 1997. Cycle 5 schools submitted their progress reports from their FY 95/96 team visits, and the outcomes will be reviewed and compiled for inclusion in the PMT after all have been received. Team visits were completed in April 1997 for the PCSSD. The LRSD prepared for their team visits, and Cycle 5 school progress reports were received. An expanded team meeting of Team V was held on April 7, 1997 to provide training for monitoring activities and evaluating school improvement plans during team visits. A presentation was made on Act 338 of 1991. 61 XVI. MONITOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS (Continued) D. Follow-up and assist schools that have difficulty realizing their school improvement objectives. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) ECOE team visits were scheduled, and all Cycle 1 peer team external visits were conducted as of May 1997. As of June 1997, all Cycle 1 schools had their ECOE team reports provided to them for their review, and information was mailed to the Cycle 5 schools regarding their progress reports. The July 15-17, 1997 School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs and emphasized the COE school improvement process. The conference focused on Phase II of COE and the need for the continuation of school improvement. The field service specialists provided technical assistance throughout the conference on school improvement activities and plans and answered questions from delegates. As of August 1997, dates for the ECOE team visits of the Cycle 2 schools were established for FY 97 /98, and progress reports were in the final stages. Technical assistance was provided to the Cycle 2 principals at the Desegregation Monitoring and School Improvement Workshop held on September 10, 1997. In October 1997, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted along with the announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 2 schools. The field service representatives discussed the ECOE process with principals, ECOE steering committees, and faculty and worked with teachers on analyzing perceptual surveys. Additionally, the need for a database on achievement was emphasized, and guidance was provided on school improvement plans. In November 1997, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted along with the announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 2 schools. In November 1997, the field service representatives attended the Governor's Partnership Workshop to discuss how to tie the committee's activities with the ECOE process. Technical assistance visits were also conducted, and copies of the infusion document and perceptual surveys were provided to schools in the ECOE process. In December 1997, technical assistance visits were conducted regarding the school improvement process and consensus building. Additionally, the infusion document and perceptual surveys were provided to schools in the ECOE process. 62 XVI. MONITOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS (Continued) D. Follow-up and assist schools that have difficulty realizing their school improvement objectives. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) Unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1998, and technical assistance visits were conducted on the school improvement process, finalizing school improvement plans, and external team visits. Unannounced monitoring visits were conducted in March 1998, and technical assistance was given regarding the ECOE team visits, team building, and the school improvement process. Unannounced monitoring visits continued in April 1998, and technical assistance was provided to the Districts regarding the ECOE process. g.n~noPf.\\2~~ rnAmt~ur~:vr~1t~ wfti sPmi?!lt~2 :,n fx1ijx 1gg~\n11ng:1~nn1.~1. ~$$ista:ttc$ w~tpt. yicJ.~oJ0JtW#.Oi$.ttit$f~$ri:ltM tne:1\n001\nPt \u0026amp;e$$* 63 XVII. DATA COLLECTION A. Through the School Improvement Plan annual reporting and monitoring process, collect, analyze and monitor data required in the May 31, 1989 Monitoring Plan. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 Data was collected in May 1995 from all schools during the unannounced visits. Information that was unavailable during the announced visits was collected during the unannounced monitoring visits. In June 1995, data was collected from the Districts and analyzed for inclusion in the July Semiannual Monitoring Report. In July 1995, data from perceptual surveys was reviewed. In August 1995, the data elements to be reviewed and the data collection process for FY 95/96 were articulated to the Districts. In September 1995, the data collection format for the 95/96 school year was distributed to the Districts. Financial information for FY 93/94 and FY 94/95 was requested from the Districts, and principals were given inservice training regarding FY 95/96 monitoring. The Districts provided fourth quarter data on discipline, testing, nonpromotes, and budget for inclusion in the February 1996 Semiannual Monitoring Report. A workshop to develop a common terminology for monitoring purposes was conducted on October 17, 1995 with the Districts. The workshop identified the data available in the Districts to fulfill the requirements of the Allen Letter's 14 elements. The group correlated the data elements to the five monitoring forms. Monitoring data was verified for inclusion in the February Semiannual Monitoring Report. Data on nonpromotes was analyzed for inclusion in the February Semiannual Monitoring Report. Announced monitoring visits began on November 14, 1995. The preliminary February Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were presented to the ADE administrative team and the State Board of Education. Announced monitoring visits were completed on January 26, 1996. Unannounced monitoring visits began in late February 1996 for the Cycle 5 schools in the Districts and were completed in April 1996. 64 XVII. DATA COLLECTION (Continued) A. Through the School Improvement Plan annual reporting and monitoring process, collect, analyze and monitor data required in the May 31, 1989 Monitoring Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) A supplemental report to the February 1, 1996 Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed with the Court on April 8, 1996. Data requests for information were forwarded to the Districts. Information was reviewed, analyzed, and formatted for inclusion in the July Semiannual Monitoring Report. The data received from the Districts was analyzed and reviewed. Instructional program reporting was clarified after the Districts and ADE desegregation staff collaboratively established a definition. All data collected for the July 1996 Semiannual Report was disaggregated, analyzed, and displayed in color graphic form for reporting. In August 1996, the Districts were provided with the monitoring requirements and expectations for the 96/97 school year. In September 1996, monitoring formats were revised. Technical assistance was provided to the LRSD on data collection and formatting of certified staffing data. Monitoring packets for the Cycle 1 schools were developed in October 1996 and presented during the Principal's Monitoring Workshops. In November and December 1996, data was received, reviewed, and formatted for the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was finalized in January 1997 and presented to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee of the Arkansas General Assembly, and the parties. In February 1997, the format for the July 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was developed, and Cycle 1 SAT-9 test data was obtained from the ADE's Assessment Section. In March 1997, data forms were sent to the Districts to assist with the submission of information for the July Semiannual Monitoring Report. Data was also collected through existing reports submitted for the annual report. 65 XVII. DATA COLLECTION (Continued) A. Through the School Improvement Plan annual reporting and monitoring process, collect, analyze and monitor data required in the May 31 , 1989 Monitoring Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) In April 1997, the Districts were notified that the deadline for data collection submission was April 24, 1997. As of May 14, 1997, all data was received from the Districts. In June 1997, the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were finalized and presented to the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee on June 25, 1997. In July 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were filed with the Court and copies were distributed to the State Board of Education and the parties. In August and September 1997, data requirements for the February 1998 monitoring report were provided to the Districts. In October 1997, the financial information requested for inclusion in the February 1998 monitoring report was received from the Districts. In November 1997, the data requested from the Cycle 2 schools was received. The Desegregation Monitoring staff began the data analysis process in accordance with established ADE guidelines and procedures. In December 1997, the draft February 1998 monitoring report was prepared for review by the Administrative Team and the Attorney General's Office. The February 1998 monitoring report was completed in accordance with the Allen Letter, Implementation Plan, and ADE reporting guidelines and format. On January 23, 1998, district representatives were provided copies of the report to verify data accuracy and evaluate the effectiveness of the announced monitoring visits. On February 18, 1998, the representatives of all parties met to discuss possible revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. Additional meetings will be scheduled. The February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed with the Court on February 2, 1998. 66 XVII. DATA COLLECTION (Continued) A. Through the School Improvement Plan annual reporting and monitoring process, collect, analyze and monitor data required in the May 31, 1989 Monitoring Plan. (Continued) 2. Actual as of May 30, 1998 (Continued) During unannounced monitoring visits, the Districts were reminded of the data elements that would be reviewed and collected. In April 1998, the Cycle 2 schools were advised of the data collection items that will need to be reported to the Desegregation Monitoring Unit for inclusion in the July 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. 67 XVIII. WORK WITH THE PARTIES AND ODM TO DEVELOP PROPOSED REVISIONS TO ADE'S MONITORING AND REPORTING OBLIGATIONS li[lill1~1~ililil!llllllllll11!llill\\ll,1~rlW.i11\u0026amp;11:1111lr.tr.1~1I ffi\u0026amp;.iittQ.fiog:!~ddlr.ffiftfb!lfi!WIU.ftlJ rn Af\not1~atmi.moe1:P.nia1r:mwilHfiP.fi~ntiuvJi mm.1 artwqtillt#tUtttiir:a.riif!t]61 :t~!.l~~~i:f ~~~!f J!i\\ilW-'116.wn,filJI1fui:1a.s mlfitliiil$.tm~::m,imgi:m:gtt\u0026amp;n1: m on M~Y 1 ~\ni-8\nlb~)Qgqr( inteti!ili~OiPrdff f.fflf\u0026amp;vifig\\ltii@Pe fJt,J !9-ijJiglffpijJ P nU=ta!ij\\y i~~~:~m,~fihY~i: M211~Rfinij B~Rrf~p:Jh~tf~ ~Q:~Hl'rJ9tk iii ffii'Rift1~~\\ln4 ~t?M:fil d~v~Jqp pfqpb$)iid r\u0026amp;vts.itis ffi lb~ A'.Df\n'-((m4mtoog ~hdt~PQffi)\nig QPUQ'fflffi$} onM\ny 1.a:1wij\n1ftters were tent tOtf\\e t5aftle~ loggeiting atf~ewotktarturIB~ra,sgJisRms ~t~a~,-~!il~iHftfj!~~~,11B\n~r~t~Y~i~f.t,1ir~:1\n0:e.rAJg}pfg,yjit~Jqj~ii.,.t!be 68 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Timothy Gauger, certify that on May 29, 1998, I caused a copy of the foregoing document to be served by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated: M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Oark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 ~I:\n~~ Timothya~ RECE1,,~ t , - IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUL I 1998 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFF . v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of ADE' s Project Management Tool for June, 1998. Respectfully Submitted, WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General Assistant Att ey General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education IN THE UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 C. Process and distribute State MFPA. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 QnMey\"~9'a~:amrioufl'QnroIID~te ,~cfuaJ1~a)J~nc1ingJ.or~v~1J.9,8  .WeWas @i_ow'fil p~sc:r~!?a7'4Is\n9f1'~ .. NL~~D,\n,,$22,192\nZ2.4 BQD_]l_t~ss~:Z30 D. Determine the number of Magnet students residing in each District and attending a Magnet School. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 rnrsearon!tiie:Tnrofma1,on':\navaifa6ie\n?fne':'Aoi=-?carca1area\"1at~rv1~1~fa'rtwE\\7. ~JJfil3:~]J~Pll2~P.!-t@~'~:~!iusi~]f~n=-=\n.'-.=n\"~-=\"'-'=s!Yz~m=\"\"~\"----l\u0026amp;l-l 2 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as ordered by the Court. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 F. Calculate state aid due the LRSD based upon the Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 G. Process and distribute state aid for Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 pisJn15Vt10,n~] tof~B11[9.1i98~~t\n:M~y J:3T\nt9'~is] ff?i~a:\ni~:J(fi] 1\"'94 f~~e~il[~.I~.t.Mav\n3j\n~\n199A8} for~\nFY~97/98: ~a'$! $8,'9,05,76~'.ffli !Jee. 9c\nfJys~r:mmJ~] H. Calculate the amount of M-to-M incentive money to which each school district is entitled. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 3 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) H. Calculate the amount of M-to-M incentive money to which each school district is entitled. (Continued) 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 Calculated for FY 97/98, subject to periodic adjustments. I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, September - June. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 oisfnou\"ffo\"s\"Yor:f'y2911~rs'\"aTtv1a,,.3\"1~{{f99irwe\"re'1  -\"\"\"\"\u0026gt;\"~\"\"'\"\"_.,,,.  .ru~~~,\u0026amp;\nM,,x~\u0026gt;..A\u0026gt;..-\u0026gt;\u0026lt; ... .....,.-\"\"\"..,Y~ .... ,.-,,...,nn,,,,.~- \"\"\"\"-\"il tRS~$3...,.26a~s-32l ~...,,,.%-1 .. ,\n:'\u0026lt;!\"' \u0026gt; i ' ~ J ~ ..... ~ NL8$P ... r.,$1,3,~2,6JQ, P.\u0026amp;.$.Q~ $~~\n~ TI.2l ~fie~ Ufm~nt~~-9M.~teiJT1\u0026amp;.:EYIDa~c:M~~tn 9Qs:~ J\n ~iooic pdjus1ments, w,ec_e\nJ. Districts submit an estimated Magnet and M-to-M transportation budget to ADE. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, December of each year. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 In September 1997, the Magnet and M-to-M transportation budgets for FY 97/98 were submitted to the ADE by the Districts. K. Reginald Wilson notifies General Finance to pay districts for first two-thirds of the Districts' proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 4 -  I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) K. Reginald Wilson notifies General Finance to pay districts for first two-thirds of the Districts' proposed budget. (Continued) 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 In January 1998, General Finance was notified to pay the second one-third payments for FY 97/98 to the Districts. It should be noted that the Transportation Coordinator is currently performing this function. L. ADE pays districts for first two-thirds of their proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 In January 1998, General Finance made the second one-third payments to the Districts for their FY 97/98 transportation budget. At April 1998, the following had been paid for FY 97/98: LRSD - $2,039,722.66 NLRSD- $283,392.00 PCSSD- $1,073,082.00 M. ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 In August 1997, the ADE transportation coordinator reviewed each district's Magnet and M-to-M transportation costs for FY 96/97. N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as stated in Exhibit A of the Implementation Plan. 5 _I._ FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 In FY 94/95, the State purchased 52 buses at a cost of $1,799,431 which were added to or replaced existing Magnet and M-to-M buses in the Districts. The buses were distributed to the Districts as follows: LRSD - 32\nNLRSD - 6\nand PCSSD - 14. The ADE purchased 64 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $2,334,800 in FY 95/96. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 45\nNLRSD - 7\nand PCSSD- 12. In May 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $646,400. In July 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $624,879. 0. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to LRSD as required by page 23 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 and January 1, of each school year through January 1, 1999. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 96/97. P. Process and distribute additional payments in lieu of formula to LRSD as required by page 24 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. 6 _I._\n. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) Q. Process and distribute payments to PCSSD as required by Page 28 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1994. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 Final payment was distributed July 1994. R. Upon loan request by LRSD accompanied by a promissory note, the ADE makes loans to LRSD. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing through July 1, 1999. See Settlement Agreement page 24. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 the'.C\"R-$'tfr~ceiyect $2,000\n900 i6 p.prI(:fggs: 6.?~of .ttii~'rep,2rting jlat~~~:c8s6 h-as_:re-ceivea $17,.9g_q:\n9@.in 1.2.@ .pr9cfids.- S. Process and distribute payments in lieu of formula to PCSSD required by page 29 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. T. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to NLRSD as required by page 31 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 of each school year through June 30, 1996. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. 7 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) U. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 97/98. V. Process and distribute payments for Office of Desegregation Monitoring. 1. Projected Ending Date Not applicable. 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 97/98. 8 11. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. 1. Projected Ending Date January 15, 1995 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 In May 1995, monitors completed the unannounced visits of schools in Pulaski County. The monitoring process involved a qualitative process of document reviews, interviews, and observations. The monitoring focused on progress made since the announced monitoring visits. In June 1995, monitoring data from unannounced visits was included in the July Semiannual Report. Twenty-five per cent of all classrooms were visited, and all of the schools in Pulaski County were monitored. All principals were interviewed to determine any additional progress since the announced visits. The July 1995 Monitoring Report was reviewed by the ADE administrative team, the Arkansas State Board of Education, and the Districts and filed with the Court. The report was formatted in accordance with the Allen Letter. In October 1995, a common terminology was developed by principals from the Districts and the Lead Planning and Desegregation staff to facilitate the monitoring process. The announced monitoring visits began on November 14, 1995 and were completed on January 26, 1996. Copies of the preliminary Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the ADE administrative team and the State Board of Education in January 1996. A report on the current status of the Cycle 5 schools in the ECOE process and their school improvement plans was filed with the Court on February 1, 1996. The unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1996 and ended on May 10, 1996. 9 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of June 30, 1998 (Continued) In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and the data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The Districts provided data on enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Districts and the ADE Desegregation Monitoring staff developed a defini\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1701","title":"Court filings concerning ADE's July 1998 semiannual monitoring report","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1998-05"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Arkansas. Department of Education","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Education and state","School management and organization","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning ADE's July 1998 semiannual monitoring report"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1701"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["43 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) motion for relief from its obligation to file its July 1998 semiannual monitoring report; District Court, brief in support of Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) motion for relief from its obligation to file its July 1998 semiannual monitoring report; District Court, Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) response to Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) motion for relief from its obligation to file its July 1998 semiannual monitorinig report; District Court, order; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED MAY 6 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONffORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO .. 1, et al. ADE'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM ITS DEFENDANTS OBLIGATION TO FILE ITS JULY, 1998 SEMIANNUAL MONITORING REPORT The Arkansas Department of Education hereby moves the Court for an order relieving ADE of its obligation to file a July 1, 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report so that ADE can concentrate its resources toward developing proposed modifications of its monitoring and reporting obligations. The motion is made on the following grounds: I. ADE believes that its monitoring and reporting obligations, as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, the \"Allen Letter,\" ADE' s Implementation Plan, and this Court's orders, can and should be modified so as to better assist the parties in their efforts to comply with their desegregation obligations and provide quality education in the public schools in Pulaski County. 2. With the approval of the State Board of Education, ADE is committed to working with the Districts, the Joshua and Knight Intervenors, and ODM to develop proposed modifications of ADE' s monitoring and reporting obligations that can be presented to this Court later this year for the Court's approval. 1 - 3. Over the next two months ADE personnel will be expending a substantial amount of time producing, reviewing, and finalizing ADE's July, 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. ADE believes that the time, energy and other resources that would be expended to complete the July report can be more productively directed toward working with the parties and ODM to develop proposed modifications to ADE' s current monitoring and reporting responsibilities. 4. Should this motion be granted, ADE will keep the Court apprised of its activities and progress toward developing proposed modifications via ADE' s Project Management Tools, which are currently filed by ADE on the last business day of each month. 5. ADE is authorized to state that PCSSD and NLRSD do not object to the relief sought in this motion. Counsel for LRSD, Joshua and Knight were contacted concerning this motion but have not, as of the time this motion is sent for filing, indicated whether they would object to the relief ADE seeks. WHEREFORE, ADE respectfully requests that the Court enter an order relieving ADE of its obligation to file the July, 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. 2 Respectfully Submitted, WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General Assistant A ey General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorneys for Arkansas Department of Education CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Timothy Gauger, certify that on May 5, 1998, I caused a copy of the foregoing document to be served by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated: M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Plaza 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Oark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 3 IN THE UNITED STA TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION MAY 6 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONrrORING LIITLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ADE'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM ITS DEFENDANTS OBLIGATION TO FILE ITS JULY, 1998 SEMIANNUAL MONITORING REPORT Both this Court and the Eighth Circuit have approved modifications to the parties' obligations under the Settlement Agreement and Settlement Plans when changed circumstances and conditions have so warranted. See, e.g., Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, 56 F.3d 904, 914 (8th Cir. 1998) (approving LRSD's closure of Ish incentive school); see also this Court's order entered April 10, 1998 (approving, in the alternative, LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan as a modification of LRSD's 1990 plan). However, this Court has made it clear that any modifications of the parties' desegregation obligations must be first developed by the parties and then submitted to this Court for approval. ADE believes that its current monitoring and reporting obligations, as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, the so-called \"Allen Letter,\"1 ADE' s Implementation Plan, 1 In this motion, the \"Allen Letter\" refers to a letter to the parties (copied to Judge Woods) dated May 31, 1989, from William Allen (then outside counsel for the State Board of Education), which included a plan for monitoring . 1 and the orders of this Court, can and should be modified. Oearly, circumstances and conditions in this case have changed materially since mid-1989. The Allen Letter was drafted nearly nine years ago, and even then it was contemplated that the monitoring plan would need to be modified in the future as circumstances changed.2 Further, among other things, since 1989 the Districts have been released from this Court's supervision over some aspects of their desegregation plans, this Court recently approved LRSD's Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, PCSSD's motion for \"unitary status\" is pending before this Court, and many of ADE's specific funding obligations to the Districts have either been completed or are in their final stages.3 The Eighth Circuit \"stated early on that the passage of time would necessitate modifications in the desegregation plans.\" LRSD v. PCSSD, supra, 56 F.3d at 914 (citing Appeal of Little - Rock School District, 949 F.2d 253, 254 (8th Cir. 1991). In December of 1996 this Court granted LRSD' s motion for a \"plan development period\" to enable the LRSD to devote more of its resources toward working with the parties to develop proposed modifications to its desegregation plan. As a result, LRSD compensatory education programs in the Districts. In its order dated December IO, 1993, this Court found that the \"Allen Letter'' set forth ADE's monitoring obligations under the Settlement Agreement. 2 In the Allen Letter, which was drafted and submitted far in advance of the Eighth Circuit's opinion approving the Settlement Agreement, vacating the order establishing the Office of Metropolitan Supervisor, and ordering the establishment of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, Mr. Allen noted that ADE \"anticipate[d] that the . . . plan may be modified after receiving [the parties'] comments and after [ADE] learn[ ed] more about the monitoring role that will be undertaken by [the Metropolitan Supervisor].\" 3 For example, compensatory education payments to LRSD under VI.A.(l) of the Settlement will end in January ofnext year; payments in lieu of formula guarantees to LRSD under Vl.A.(2) ended in July of 1995; payments to PCSSD under VIl.2.(a) and (b) of the Settlement ended in July of 1994 and 1995, respectively; and compensatory education payments to NLRSD under VIII.B. and C. of the Settlement ended at the close of the 1996-97 school year. 2 was able to work with the parties to successfully produce a revised plan that this Court approved last month. ADE, with the approval of the State Board of Education, is committed to working with all parties to this case to develop proposed modifications to its monitoring and reporting obligations that can be presented to this Court for approval later this year. However, during the next two months ADE will be expending a substantial amount of time and resources to produce, review, and finalize the July, 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. ADE believes that it and the parties to this case would benefit from a \"hiatus\" on the production of the July, 1998 report (analogous to LRSD' s \"plan development period\") during which the time, energy and other resources that would be expended to complete the July report could be more productively directed toward working with the parties and ODM to develop proposed modifications to ADE' s current monitoring and reporting responsibilities. Accordingly, ADE respectfully requests that the Court relieve it of its obligation to serve and file the July, 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. 3 By: Respectfully Submitted, WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General TIMO . G G R #95019 Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Timothy Gauger, certify that on May 5, 1998, I caused a copy of the foregoing document to be served by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated: M.SamuelJones,III Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Oark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon\u0026Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 --z:-~ Tim.0th Gau er 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL MAY l 2 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT'S RESPONSE TO ADE'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM ITS OBLIGATION TO FILE ITS JULY, 1998 SEMIANNUAL MONITORING REPORT For its response, the Little Rock School District (LRSD) - states that it has no objection to ADE's motion. Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Street Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 376-2011 Byb~~~~~~-;t;,.~~c._- r1.stopher Helle Bar No. 81083 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing Little Rock School District's Response to ADE's Motion For Relief From Its Obligation to File Its July, 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report has been served on the following by depositing copy of same in the United states mail on this 8th day of May, 1998. Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones . WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS  2200 Nations Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 3400 TCBY Tower 425 Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown - HAND DELIVERED Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 General 2 RECEIVED MAY 1 9 1998 OFFlCE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STA TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * Plaintiff, * vs. * No. LR-C-82-866 * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL * DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., * Defendants, * * MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., * Intervenors, * * KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., * Intervenors. * ORDER Before the Court is the Arkansas Department of Education's (\"ADE\") motion requesting relief from its obligation to file its July 1998 semiannual monitoring report. The ADE states in its motion that its monitoring and reporting obligations, as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, the\" Allen Letter,\" the ADE's Implementation Plan, and this Court's Orders, can and should be modified so as to better assist the parties in their efforts to comply with their desegregation obligations and provide quality education in the public schools in Pulaski County. If this Court should grant the ADE relief from its obligation to file its July 1998 semiannual monitoring report, the ADE, with approval of the State Board of Education, has committed to working with the Districts, the Joshua and Knight Intervenors, and the Office of Desegregation Mopitoring (\"ODM\") to develop p~oposed modifications to the ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. The ADE suggests that the proposed modifications then be presented to this Court later this year for the Court's approval. The ADE has stated that it will keep this 1 5 5 Court apprised of its activities and its progress towards developing the proposed modifications via the ADE's Project Management Tools, which are currently filed by the ADE on the last business day of each month. This Court grants the ADE's motion relieving the ADE of its obligation to file a July 1, 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. During the time period in which the ADE would be preparing its July 1 Report, the ADE shall work with the Districts, the Joshua and Knight Intervenors, and the ODM to develop proposed modifications to the ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. The ADE should keep this Court apprised of its activities and progress regarding the proposed modifications via the ADE's Project Management Tools. 11\\_ IT IS SO ORDERED THIS / g' day of May 1998. / fHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN ~OM~CE,T'fULE58AND/?~~FRCP ,N t g_ 71 BY _ _j/L~.~------' ' 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED JUN 1 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUN1Y SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.1, et al. DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of ADE' s Project Management Tool for May, 1998. Li=dc:l ; n I ;b.,..~\"1 Abt : fy-~1cd ~en\"~\"\"}. t.octl \".ftbo .. f-() Respectfully Submitted, WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education RECEIVED IN THE UNITED STA TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JI_;,\\) 1 1998 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL OFFICE OF PLAINTIFlfifGREGATION MONITOR/MS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KA THERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. - IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2.  Actual as of May 30, 1998 ~~t~~~iRa~~~,~~l~~i; i~~~~~t.~Ngl~1iaif lt.a~~tl~uff.~f.B~r.cur~te.:~a0e. B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June.  This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources. "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1415","title":"Report: ''Secondary Schools Facilities in the Pulaski County Special School District,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1998-04-30"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education, Secondary","School facilities","School buildings"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Secondary Schools Facilities in the Pulaski County Special School District,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1415"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["187 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1679","title":"Court filings concerning PCSSD's March 24 plan, ADE project management tool, and ODM ''Secondary School Facilities in the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)'' report","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1998-04"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Joshua Intervenors","Arkansas. Department of Education","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School integration","School facilities","School buildings","Education, Secondary","School improvement programs","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning PCSSD's March 24 plan, ADE project management tool, and ODM ''Secondary School Facilities in the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)'' report"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1679"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["48 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, motion for enlargement of time; District Court, two orders; District Court, joint motion of Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) and Joshua for approval of Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) March 24 plan; District Court, memorandum brief in support of joint motion of Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) and Joshua for approval of Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) plan; District Court, memorandum opinion and order; District Court, two orders; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Monitoring report, ''Secondary School Facilities in the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)''  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.   t' IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. V. NO. LRC-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. MQJIQN EQB ENLARGEMENT Of IIME PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS On March 24, 1998, this Court ordered PCSSD and Joshua to submit, within ten days, the agreed amendment to the PCSSD Desegregation Plan together with a joint motion, brief in support and proposed notice. The parties desire an enlargement of time to comply with the Court's Order until and including April 9, 1998. WHEREFORE, Joshua and the PCSSD pray for an enlargement of time until and Including April 9, 1998 within which to comply with the Court's directive. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings, LLP 200 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 c00d THEJOSHUAINTERVENORS John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 S. Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 dll SEIN I NH3.f '8 '.!-.3S@ I 7 'lH':l I ~M \u003e t CERTIFICATE OF EBYICE On April ___(_ ~_, 1998, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. Mail to each of the following: Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell \u0026 Street 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Janes 425 West Capltol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Bldg., Ste. 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 00d 2 dll S':JN I tlN3f '8 ' X3SCTN I 7 ' lH':J I df~ RECEIVED FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT AP.KANSAS APR 8 1998 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION APR O 71998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING JA~AES ! M~MACK, C~ERK By. ~ ) c}_ ~ D!:P CL.fR.~ ' UTILE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT,  Plaintiff,  vs.  No. LR-C-82-866  PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL  DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., * Defendants,   MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al.,  lntervenors,   KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al.,  Intervenors.  ORDEB. Before the Court is a motion filed by the Pulaski County Special School District  (\"PCSSD\") and the Joshua Intervenors (\"Joshua\") requesting a continuance to and including April 9, 1998 in which to file their agreed proposed Revised PCSSD Desegregation Plan, in addition to a joint motion and brief in support requesting that the Court approve the proposed Revised Plan and a notice regarding the proposed Revised Plan.  This Court grants the parties' request. The PCSSD and Joshua have to and including April 9, 1998 in which to file these documents and pleadings. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 7~ day of April 1998. rHIS DOCUMENT ENTER COMP~ce T RuJ~e c:g,0OcRK7er SHEET IN ON  7/ 8 l!Y 7Z1-:: 9(a) FRCP FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT APR 8 199,9 EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS OFFICE OF DESE6REGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION APR O 7 1998 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * JA~ES W. ~~ORMACK, CLERK By.. 'L 'QI ,u D 41 V'-:a DEP CI.ERll Plaintiff, * vs. * No. LR-C-82-866 * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL * DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., * Defendants, * * MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., * Intervenors, * * KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., * Intervenors. * ORDER Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a reply filed by Ms. Hafeeza Majeed on April 6, 1998 on - behalf of Toe Fact-Finding Committee for the Little Rock School Desegregation Plan--Is It Working for African-American Youth?\" Ms. Majeed filed this reply in response to Mr. John Walker's letter regarding Ms. Majeed's initial objection to the proposed January 16 Revised LRSD Desegregation Plan. 1 The Clerk is hereby directed to serve the parties involved in this case with copies of this Order and attached Exhibit A. 2 By separate Order, the Court will inform the parties how the   Court will proceed in regard to Ms. Majeed's latest filing. 1 See Docket No. 3130 for a copy of Ms. Majeed's initial objection. See Docket No. 3135 for Mr. Walker's response to Ms. Majeed's objection. 2 The Clerk should also send copies to the following individuals: Mr. Markton Cole Ms. Hafeeza B. Majeed 7320 S. Ridgeland Ave. 2A 8505 Holmes, #174. .. Chicago, Illinois 60649 Kansas City, Missouri 64131 ; . i IT IS SO ORDERED TiilS  day of April 1998. fHIS DOCUMENT E1.JTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN ;~~ t'$RULE s:;N~(a) FRCP - . ,, \\. 2 .. ,. . ' . ~:' : \" : April 6, 1998 TO: FROM: ;-;:: ,. :l rr.: --..... U~- -~ - . _ ) ... .'?  :.. . I'~., , . 1. I l I  , _ _ EAs, .:Hr, c:, ie:~ -\u003c, ~.'-: .. ,1r The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -'..' .. l.-f  ' :_;,:s,\\s Federal Judge Eastern District of Arlamsas, Western Di~ U 6 [SJ J/l.~:1:::~ ,., i i~l'.C'R . \" The Fact-Findina Conmiittee for the Little Rock S:choortiisTtfor ,,\\,,.._, /(, CCRK D~H,,-.,-in ftllBl h It w~ Pw MHv1B1Amm,1m Ym;f,91'' THROUGH: Hafeeza B. Majeed, Cbairpenon RE; LITI'LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Judge Wright: V: LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUN1Y SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NOTICE (EXHIBIT C, JANU'ARY 16 REVISED DESEGREGATION PLAN'') The following open letter to Little Rock School District students.parents. and friends. is also a formal request desiring your approval: \"OPEN LETTER JO 11IE UITLI ROCK COMMUNITY\" \"Thank yor/' to the maoy friends and supporters ofThe Fa.rt-Finding Committee with whom I met and enjoyed talkin! to during the weekend. A special iha:nk yor/\u003e to those who supported our efforts with your signatures. AB promised to you, the following request to the Honorable Susan Webber Wright has been submitted in your behalf 1. We, the 1D1dersigned, recognize that we are represented in the Joshua Class, as defined by the attached \"Notice.'' (Exhibit C. LRSD January 16 Revised ..,. . 3. Plan)  We agree that we were provided a copy of the ~otice .. by the Fact-Finding Committee, represented by Ms. HafeezaB. Majeed. We agree, like several others who chose not place their signatures, that we have not been informed about the information contained in the attached \"Notice'' regarding the proposed Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. We believe that the responsibility for BIDlOIDlcing this information to the cormmmity should rest with ColDlSel for Joshua, Attorney Jolm W. Walker, as well as with the LR.SD Board ofDirectors, as designated in the \"Notice.\" We ~e that we have not been informed by the Little Rock School District regarding information contained in the \"Notice.'' Therefore, we respectfully request that you delay your approval or disapproval of the Revised LR.SD Desegregation and Education Plan, pending the following:  Court's Exhibit A 1. Counsel for the Joshua Class, Attorney John W. Walker, should schedule a fonnal hearing to adequately iofonn the Joshua Cius about the Revised LRSD Desesregation and Education Piao. This hearing shall be scheduled at a time conducive to the schedules of working parentl. 2. The hearing shall be attended by a representative fi-om The Fact-Finding Committee, a representative from the LRSD , a represeotative :from ODM. and the Joshua Class. 3. Io sight of the fact that many persons who are defined as \"Joshua\" have not been afforded adequate and timely information regarding the Revised LRSD Desegregation and Education Plan; we request that the LRSD anno1mce an extended deadline to receive written objections to the Piao. The Fact-Finding Committee prayermlly seeks yow approval of this request that represents the concerns ofLRSD Pareots, students, aod friends who were interviewed by our representative, Ms. Hafeeza B. Majeed, during the weekend. Again, ''thank yoli' :from The Fact-Finding Committee. and we shall continue to \"Fight For Our Children.\" Respectfully,  J L ~ 1f. fr[a1u,f Hafee:1-~*ed, Chairperson f' cc: All Signees ColDlSel for Joshua Class LRSD ODM Attachments ---------- - - --- -- - - - ---- ---- - ------ - -- - -  .. - - -------- - - --  --- - - . . . -  - - - . . - ---- EDWARD L. WRIGHT ( 1003-1 071) ROBERT S. LINOSEY ( 1013- 1001) ISAAC A. SCOTT,_./R . JOHN G. LILE GORDON S. RATHER, JR. TERRY L. MATHEWS DAVID M. POWELL ROGER A. GLASGOW C. DOUGLAS BUFORD , JR. PATRICK J. GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS, JR. JOHN R. TISDALE KATHLYN GRAVES M. SAMUEL JONES Ill JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY Ill LEE J. MULOROW-N. M. NORTON EDGAR J. TYLER CHARLES C. PRICE CHARLES T. COLEMAN JAMES J. GLOVER EDWIN L. LOWTHER, JR. CHARLES L. SCHLUMBERGER SAMMYE L. TAYLOR WALTER E. MAY GREGORY T . JONES H. KEITH MORRISON BETTINA E. BROWNSTEIN WALTER McSPAODEN WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE 2200 llTTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX (501) 379-0442 OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS RONALD A. MAY M. TODD WOOD April 9, 1998 ROGER 0 . ROWE NANCY BELLHOUSE MAY JOHN 0 . DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY KIMBERLY WOOD TUCKER RAY F. COX, JR . HARRY S. HURST . JR . TROY A. PRICE PATRICIA A. SIEVERS JAMES M. MOODY, JR . KATHRYN A. PRYOR J. MARK DAVIS CLAIRE SHOWS HANCOCK KEVIN W. KENNEDY JERRY J. SALLINGS FRED M. PERKINS Ill WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL 0. BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY M. ROBINSON BETSY MEACHAM AINSLEY H. LANG KYLE R. WILSON C. TAD BOHANNON DON S. McKINNEY MICHELE SIMMONS ALLGOOD KRISTI M. MOODY J. CHARLES DOUGHERTY M. SEAN HATCH PHYLLIS M. McKENZIE ELISA MASTERSON WHITE Honorable Susan Webber Wright United States District Judge 600 W. Capitol, Room 302 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 HAND DELIVERED Re: LRSD v. PCSSD, et al. Dear Judge Wright: APR 1 0 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Enclosed are copies of each of the items you directed the PCSSD and Joshua to prepare as regards the amendment to the PCSSD Plan. I have retained the originals for the moment as they do not bear Mr. Walker's signature. Mr. Walker has indicated some doubt about his execution of these documents and I am simply submitting copies so as to comply with the Court's deadline as best I can. By copy of this letter to Mr. Walker, I am asking him to communicate his current position .~o the Court. MSJ/jhs Enclosures Cordially yours, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP Jon~_,/ I I I cc: Counsel of record (w/encl.) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. RECE!VED APR 1 0 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS INTERVENOR$ INTERVENORS JOINT MOTION OF PCSSD AND JOSHUA FOR APPROVAL OF PCSSD'S MARCH 24 PLAN Defendant Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\") and the Joshua - lntervenors (\"Joshua\") for their Joint Motion for Approval of PCSSD's March 24, 1998 Plan state: 1. Joshua and PCSSD move for tentative and, ultimately, final approval of PCSSD's March 24, 1998 Plan (attached hereto as Exhibit \"A\"). 2. On October 14, 1997, PCSSD filed its Petition seeking release from federal court jurisdiction (the Petition). Prior to the start of the hearing on the Petition, PCSSD and Joshua engaged in extensive negotiations in an effort to develop an amended plan which both parties could support. Those negotiations resulted in PCSSD's March 24, 1998 Plan. The PCSSD Board of Directors approved the Plan on March 23, 1998 and authorized submission of the Plan to this Court for approval. 3. PCSSD and Joshua stipulate to the following facts in support of this tit Motion: a. That the record in this case supports modification of PCSSD's desegregation obligations; b. That the March 24, 1998 Plan is an appropriate modification of PCSSD's desegregation obligations. c. That the March 24, 1998 Plan is constitutional, workable and fair to Joshua class members; and, d. That, upon approval of the Plan, the PCSSD should be dismissed as a party to this case except as respects its financial claims arising under the settlement agreement. 4. PCSSD and Joshua recognize that their compromise and settlement should not be approved by this Court without notice to Joshua class members. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e). Accordingly, PCSSD and Joshua propose dissemination of the notice attached hereto as Exhibit B. This notice shall be published no less than thirty (30) days before a deadline established by this Court for Joshua class members to submit written objections to approval of the March 24, 1998 Plan. PCSSD shall bear all costs associated with publication of the notice. PCSSD shall cause the notice to be published in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette; shall print and distribute copies of the notice to teachers; and shall prominently post the notice at all schools. 5. PCSSD and Joshua have prepared for the Court's consideration an Order (attached hereto) granting the relief sought in this Motion. WHEREFORE, PCSSD and Joshua pray that this Court tentatively approve PCSSD's March 24, 1998 Plan, pending the filing of objections filed by Joshua class members; that the notice attached hereto as Exhibit B be published at least thirty (30) 2 days bef~re the deadline for Joshua class members to submit written objections; and that this Court finally approve PCSSD's March 24, 1998 Plan upon consideration of any objections filed by Joshua class members. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings, LLP 200 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 By: 3 THEJOSHUAINTERVENORS John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 S. Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 By: _________ _ John W. Walker CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On April ___ , 1998, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. Mail to each of the following: Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell \u0026 Street 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Bldg., Ste. 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 M. Samuel Jones, Ill 4 Section 1: Pulaski County Special School District Plan Dated March 24, 1998 Prior Agreements and Orders. RECEIVED APR 1 0 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING 1. This Plan, which is a \"Desegregation and Education Plan,\" shall supersede and extinguish all prior agreeme:nts and orders in Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, U.S.D.C. No. LR-C-82-866, and all consolidated cases related to the desegregation of the Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\") with the following exceptions: a. The Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Settlement Agreement as revised on September 28, 1989 ( \"Settlement Agreement\"); b. The Magnet School Stipulation dated February 27, 1987; c. Order dated September 3, 1986, pertaining to the Magnet Review Committee; d. The M-to-M Stipulation dated August 26, 1986; e. The Interdistrict Plan; and f. Orders of the district court and court of appeals interpreting or enforcing sections a. through d. above to the extent not inconsistent with this Plan. SECTION 2: Obligations. 2.1. PCSSD shall in good faith exercise its best efforts to - comply with the Constitution, to remedy the effects of past EXHIBIT 1 I A APR 1 0 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. MEMORANDUM BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS JOINT MOTION OF PCSSD AND JOSHUA FOR APPROVAL OF PCSSD'S PLAN This motion is brought pursuant to the amendment provision of the Pulaski County Special School Distirict permanent Desegregation Plan dated April 29, 1992, as well as Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist. No. 1., 56 F.3d 904, 914 (8th Cir. 1995); Appeal of the Little Rock Sch. Dist., 949 F .2d 253 (8th Cir. 1991 ); Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist. No. 1, 921 F.2d 1371 (8th Cir. 1990). PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings, LLP 200 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 THEJOSHUAINTERVENORS John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 S. Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 By: _________ _ John W. Walker CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On April ___ , 1998, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. Mail to each of the following: Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell \u0026 Street 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Bldg., Ste. 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 little Rock, Arkansas 72201 M. Samuel Jones, Ill 2 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STAff.S DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, * * * * vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL * DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., * Defendants, * * MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., * Intervenors, * * KA IBERINE KNIGHT, et al., * Intervenors. * No. LR-C-82-866 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER FBLED US. ulS T;;:1cT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT AR!\u003cANSAS APR 1 0 1998 Before the Court are the initial joint motion and the renewed joint motion filed by the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") and the Joshua Intervenors (\"Joshua\") requesting that this Court approve the LRSD's proposed Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated January 16, 1998 (\"LRSD Proposed Revised Plan\" or \"proposed Plan\").1 L Approval of the Proposed Plan After evaluating the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan, this Court hereby grants the joint motions filed by the LRSD and Joshua and hereby approves the proposed Plan. 1 Docket Nos. 3107 and 3136. 1 A. In 1990, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals approved the current version ofLRSD Desegregation and Education Plan or the 1990 Plan. In 1996, after the LRSD had operated under the 1990 Plan for six (6) years, this Court scheduled a series of hearings to gather evidence upon which to evaluate the success of the 1990 Plan, along with the settlement plans of the other districts, and the desegregation remedies endorsed therein. 2 At that time, even though the Court had withdrawn supervision over certain aspects of the 1990 Plan, there remained portions of that Plan which were of concern to the Court. Therefore, the Court called expert witnesses to testify, and invited the parties to call other expert witnesses to testify, regarding desegregation remedies in general in an attempt to aid the Court and the parties in evaluating the effectiveness of the 1990 Plan. Those evidentiary hearings were held in May of 1996.3 At those hearings and on several other occasions, the Court has noted that the parties themselves must develop and present for Court approval any proposed modifications to the desegregation and education plans under which they operate. In December of 1996, the LRSD requested and this Court approved a \"plan development period\" in which the LRSD could concentrate its efforts on developing such modifications to the 1990 Plan, in an attempt to 2 Docket No. 2631. 3 The following expert witnesses testified: (1) Herbert J. Walberg, Ph.D., then a Professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago . See Docket No. 2692. (2) David J. Armor, Ph.D., then a Research Professor at George Mason University in the Institute of Public Policy. See Docket Nos. 2693, 2694. (3) Gary Orfield, Ph.D., then a Professor of Education and Social Policy at Harvard University and the Director of The Harvard Project on School Desegregation. See Docket No. 2768. 2 improve education and desegregation within the district. Some time during this period, the LRSD commenced negotiations with Joshua regarding modifications to the 1990 Plan. As a result of those negotiations, the LRSD and Joshua agreed upon the provisions included in the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan currently before the Court. B. The LRSD and Joshua have agreed that, if approved, the proposed Plan: shall supersede and extinguish all prior agreements and orders in the Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, U.S .D.C. No. LR-C-82-866, and all consolidated cases related to the desegregation of the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") with the following exceptions: a. The Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Settlement Agreement as revised on September 28, 1989 (\"Settlement Agreement\"); b. The Magnet School Stipulation dated February 27, 1987; c. Order dated September 3, 1986, pertaining to the Magnet Review Committee; d. The M-to-M Stipulation dated August 26, 1986; and, e. Orders of the district court and court of appeals interpreting and enforcing sections a. through d. above to the extent not inconsistent with this Revised Plan. 5 Based upon this provision, this Court considers the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan an entirely new consent decree or settlement agreement between the LRSD and Joshua. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that because the law strongly favors settlements, courts should hospitably receive them, especially in cases such as this in which the parties have engaged in protracted, highly divisive litigation and in which any lasting solution necessarily depends upon the good faith and cooperation of all of the parties. Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Spec. Sch. Dist., 921 F.2d 1371, 1383 (811, Cir. 1990). When evaluating a settlement agreement, \"O]udges should not substitute their own 4 Docket No. 2901. 5 Docket No. 3107, Exhibit A, at 1. 3 judgment as to optimal settlement terms for the judgment of the litigants and their counsel.\" 921 F.2d at 1385 (quoting Armstrong v. Board of Sch. Dirs. of the City of Milwaukee, 616 F.2d 305, 315 (7111 Cir. 1980)). The district court must consider the proposal as submitted by the parties. \"Of course, the district court may suggest modifications but ultimately, it must consider the proposal as a whole and as submitted. Approval must then be given or withheld.\" Id. at 1383 ( quoting Officers for Justice v. Civil Serv. Comm 'n of the City and County of San Francisco, 688 F.2d 615, 630 (91h Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1217 (1983)). Although settlement agreements carry with them a presumption of acceptability, id at 1385, a district court need not automatically approve every settlement agreement the parties submit, id at 13 83 . A court has a strong interest in not involving itself, along with the prestige of the law, in  an ongoing equitable decree which is either manifestly unworkable or plainly unconstitutional on its face. In addition, this is a class action, and courts are not obliged (indeed, they are not pennitted) to approve settlements that are unfair to class members, or negotiated by inadequate class representatives. Id. at 1383 . \"[B]efore a settlement agreement may be rejected because it initiates or authorizes a clearly illegal or unconstitutional practice, prior judicial decisions must have found that practice to be illegal or unconstitutional as a general rule.\" Id at 1385 (quoting Armstrong, 616 F.2d at 321). In the area of desegregation law, the Supreme Court has detennined that the Constitution does not of its own force forbid all-African-American schools. Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd of Educ., 402 U.S. 1, 26 (1971). The Constitution of its own force also does not require any particular racial percentage in various schools in the districts. Milliken v. Bradley, 418 U.S. 717, 740-41 (1974). Furthermore, the Constitution of its own force does not demand that all students 4 regardless of race satisfy national achievement norms. Missouri v. Jenkins, 515 U.S. 70, 100-01 (1995). Obviously, parties in a desegregation case may and indeed should agree to eliminate the effects of prior de Jure segregation to the extent practicable. However, the details of such efforts are not specifically dictated by the Constitution. Even if the court is uncertain that the means proposed in the settlement agreement will succeed in integrating the district or concerned that the lack of sufficient detail in the settlement agreement may impede successful implementation, such concerns alone do not render the settlement agreement unconstitutional on its face, especially when the parties to the settlement agreement have consented to continued monitoring. 921 F.2d at 1385-86. This Court has carefully reviewed the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan as jointly submitted by the LRSD and Joshua and concludes that the Revised Plan is not manifestly unworkable or plainly unconstitutional on its face. The parties have consented to continued monitoring by this Court. Although the Court acknowledges that the Revised Plan will present new challenges in regard to monitoring, these anticipated challenges do not render the Revised Plan unworkable or plainly unconstitutional. Therefore, this Court concludes that the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan should be and hereby is approved. C. In the alternative, if this Court were to consider the proposed Plan as simply a modification of the 1990 Plan, this Court would approve the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan. A party seeking modification of a consent decree \"must establish that a significant change in facts or law warrants revision of the decree.\" Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail, 502 U.S. 367, 393 (1992). If the moving party meets this burden, the District Court 5 must then detennine \"whether the proposed modification is suitably tailored to the changed circumstance.\" Id. at 39 1. The modification \"must not create or perpetuate a constitutional violation,\" nor \"strive to rewrite a consent decree so that it confonns to the constitutional floor.\" Id. Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist. , 56 F.3d 905, 914 (8th Cir. 1995). This Court concludes, after reviewing the circumstances of this case and the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan, that this standard for modifying a consent decree has been satisfied. Based upon the voluminous Court record generated by this case since the 1990 Plan was instituted and based upon the conclusions which may be drawn from the evidentiary hearings conducted by this Court in May of 1996, this Court concludes that circumstances and conditions have changed which warrant modifying the 1990 Plan. Specifically, there are certain aspects of the 1990 Plan that have been successfully implemented by the LRSD. Some areas of the 1990 - Plan have been so successfully implemented that this Court has withdrawn supervision over those areas. However, there are other stated goals in the 1990 Plan which have not been achieved. Evidence in the record tends to indicate that the LRSD has put forth minimal effort to achieve certain of these stated goals. More importantly, however, there are certain goals in the 1990 Plan which are out of date for the current situation that exists in the LRSD6 and other specific, rigid goals in the 1990 Plan which expert testimony indicates may never be met, regardless of the amount of effort and good faith put forth by the LRSD. 7 Therefore, the 1990 Plan warrants 6 For example, the sections of the 1990 Plan regarding Student Assignment and Facilities are out of date with regard to the current situation that exists in the LRSD. 7 Specifically, the goals in the 1990 Plan regarding achievement disparity may never be met, regardless of the effort put forth by the LRSD. See the testimony of Dr. Walberg, Docket No. 2692, at 17-25; Dr. Armor, Docket No. 2693, at 18-39; and Dr. Orfield, Docket No. 2768, at 25-31. 6 - -- - - - modification. Furthermore, this Court concludes that the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan furthers the original purpose of the decree in a more efficient way, without upsetting the basic agreement between the parties. The LRSD Proposed Revised Plan is suitably tailored to the changed circumstances, does not create or perpetuate a constitutional violation, and has not been rewritten to conform only to the constitutional floor. Therefore, this Court concludes that the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan should be approved. D. Having approved the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan, this Court notes that once a modification to a consent decree or a decree itself has been approved by the Court, its terms, . including the details, become binding on the parties. 921 F.2d at 1384. Although at this time the - Court does not anticipate the need for further modification, the Court does wish to clarify that if progress under this Revised Plan is clearly insufficient or if certain sections of the Revised Plan should prove to be unworkable, the parties may again apply for a modification of the Revised Plan. Consent decrees partake of the nature of contracts, as well as of judicial action, and parties seeking to change them bear an extremely heavy burden. They are not, however, immutable in any absolute sense, and extraordinary circumstances can arise that would enable the District Court, within its discretion, to consider modifications. Id. at 1387. II. Objections to the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan By previous Order, this Court directed the LRSD to provide notice of the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan and set March 13, 1998 as the deadline for receiving objections to the 7 - proposed Plan from individual members of the Joshua Class and from other parties to the litigation. 8 Dr. Leslie V. Carnine, Superintendent of the LRSD, submitted an affidavit indicating that the LRSD had complied with the Court's Order regarding notice of the proposed Plan. 9 A. The Court notes that although the other school districts and parties in this case were not involved in the negotiations which produced this proposed Plan, those parties were given notice of the proposed Plan and of their ability to object. 10 None of those parties have filed an objection with this Court to the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan. B. On the last day for filing objections, Mr. Markton Cole, on behalf of \"The FactFinding Committee for the LRSD Desegregation Plan--Is It Working For African-American Youthr (\"Fact-Finding Committee\"), filed several documents which he characterized as an objection to the proposed Plan. 11 The documents which Mr. Cole filed included a letter from Ms. Hafeeza Majeed, the Chairperson of the Fact-Finding Committee, and a report initially submitted by the Fact-Finding Committee to the Court on September 20, 1996. In response to the documents filed by Mr. Cole, Mr. John Walker, counsel for Joshua, filed a letter essentially requesting that this Court strike the documents and not consider the 8 Docket No. 3114. 9 Docket No. 3131. 10 Docket No. 3114. 11 Docket No. 3130. 8 - documents an objection to the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan. 12 Mr. Walker claims inter alia: (1) that the documents filed by Mr. Cole and Ms. Majeed had been previously submitted to and considered by this Court; (2) that the documents pertained to the LRSD Desegregation and Education Plan entered into by the LRSD and Joshua in 1990 (\"the 1990 Plan\"), not the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan currently before the Court; and (3) that Mr. Cole and Ms. Majeed lack legal standing to object because they are not residents of the LRSD and do not otherwise allege that either they or their own children will be harmed by the LRSD Proposed Revised Plan. This Court agrees with Mr. Walker's assertions and hereby strikes the documents filed by Mr. Cole on behalf of the Fact-Finding Committee and Ms. Majeed. Specifically, the Fact-Finding Committee report filed by Mr. Cole was previously submitted to this Court in September  "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1450","title":"Report: ''Disciplinary Sanctions in the Pulaski County Special School District,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1998-03-18"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School discipline","School integration","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Disciplinary Sanctions in the Pulaski County Special School District,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1450"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["67 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1695","title":"Court filings concerning exhibit and witness lists, affidavit of Leslie V. Carnine, ODM ''Disciplinary Sanctions in the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)'', and LRSD's revised desegregation and education plan","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)","Walker, John W."],"dc_date":["1998-03"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Joshua Intervenors","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Little Rock School District","Arkansas. Department of Education","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Education--Finance","School management and organization","School integration","School discipline","School facilities","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning exhibit and witness lists, affidavit of Leslie V. Carnine, ODM ''Disciplinary Sanctions in the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)'', and LRSD's revised desegregation and education plan"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1695"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["71 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, Joshua's exhibit list for March 24, 1998, hearing; District Court, Joshua's witness list for March 24, 1998, hearing; District Court, Joshua's supplemental exhibit list for March 24, 1998, hearing; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) witness and exhibit list; District Court, supplemental responses to the Joshua intervenors' interrogatories and requests for production to the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD); District Court, notice of filing, Little Rock School District (LRSD), affidavit of Leslie V. Carnine; District Court, order; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Monitoring report, ''Disciplinary Sanctions in the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD)''; District Court, order; District Court, renewed joint motion for approval of Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) revised desegregation and education plan; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. ATTORNEY AT LAW 1723 BROADWAY MAR 9 1QGP lv ...., v LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72206 TELEPHONE (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 OFFlCE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER JR. ENCLOSURE MEMORANDUM DATE: March 6, 1998 TO: Sam Jones, Esq. Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Steve Jones, Esq. . Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones, P.A. A ~oo Capitol Towers ~apitol \u0026 Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller, Esq. Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, AR 72201 FROM: John W. Walker Richard Roachell, Esq. Roachell \u0026 Streett 401 W. Capitol Ave. Suite 504 Little Rock, AR Ms. Ann Brown, Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: LRSD, et al. v. PCSSD, et al.; NO. LR-C-82-866 ENCLOSURES: JOSHUA'S EXHIBIT LIST FOR MARCH 24, 1998 HEARING JOSHUA'S WITNESS LIST FOR MARCH 24, 1998 HEARING IF ANY OF THE ABOVE LISTED DOCUMENT(S) ARE NOT ENCLOSED, PLEA.SE CALL THE A.BOVE NUMBER. THANK YOU. --:;_ _----------- .,._ RECE,rlED - MAR 9 i998 OfflCE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION .--, -  - ~ ..J -i _ , ' ! LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, NO. 1, ET AL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS JOSHUA'S EXHIBIT LIST FOR MARCH 24, 1998 HEARING The Joshua Intervenors submits the documents as exhibits for the hearing scheduled herein for the week of March 24, 1998: 1. PCSSD assessments and evaluations of programs 2. PCSSD academic achievement statistics from 1993 to present . 3. PCSSD discipline statistics from 1992 to present 4. PCSSD recruitment report from 1994 to present 5. PCSSD staff development reports from 1994 to present 6. PCSSD gifted and talented reports from 1994 to present 7. PCSSD extracurricular activities including athletic and nonathletic programs reports from 1994 to present 8. ODM report on Achievement Disparity dated 6/21/95 9. 1998 ODM report on Racial Balance 10. 1998 ODM report on Discipline 11. ODM Report on Staffing dated 9/15/95 12. Excerpts of testimony from Gary Orfield dated May 30, 1996 13. PCCSD reports on Racial Isolation from 1994 to present 14. PCSSD reports 15. PCSSD Discipline Management system 16. PCSSD reports on In-School Suspension and Saturday School 17. PCSSD reports on Pupil Personnel Committee regarding expulsion recommendations 18. PCSSD reports on multicultural education frdm 1994 to present 19. PCSSD reports on special education from 1994 to present 20. UALR reports of PCSSD programs on academic achievement 21. PCSSD reports from the Office of Desegregation from 1994 to present 22. Report of Billy Bowles and Charles Green re: Robinson High School dated November 11, 1996 . 23. ODM Recommmendations regarding Robinson High School 24. Photographs of racial epitah on PCSSD school bus 25. Diagram of racial epitahs on PCSSD property 26 . Excerpts of Deposition Testimony of Bobby Lester 27. Excerpts of Deposition Testimony Bobby Altom 28. Excerpts of Deposition Testimony of Billy Bowles 29. Excerpts of Deposition Testimony of Eddie Collins 30. Excerpts of Deposition Testimony of Charles Green 31. Excerpts of Deposition Testimony of Tommie Anthony 32. Excerpts of Deposition Testimony of Gary Miller By: Respectfully submitted, JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 ( 374-3758 CERT I FI CAT I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing pleading has been served upon all counsel of record, by placing a copy of the same in the United States Mail with sufficient postage prepaid, on this 6th day of March, 1998. RECEIVED ' MAR 9 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Ey: - - -----=----=--,- ...,..~ -~, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT v...: :'  .._ _.: ,. .. \\ EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, NO. 1, ET AL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS JOSHUA'S WITNESS LIST FOR MARCH 24, 1998 HEARING The Joshua Intervenors submits the following persons as witnesses for the hearing scheduled herein for the week of March 24, 1998: 1. Bobby Lester, Superintendent of Schools 2. Billy Bowles, Asst. Supt. for Desegregation 3. Eddie Collins, Asst. Supt. for Pupil Personnel 4. Bobby Altom, Asst. Supt. for Instruction 5. Gary Miller, Asst. Supt for Personnel 6. Charles Green, Director of Secondary Education 7. Sarah Womble, Director of Elementary Education 8. Tommie sue Anthony, Coordinator of Talented and Gifted 9. Brenda Bowles, Coordinator of Multicultural Education 10. Martha Asti, Director of Special Education 11. Ruth Hertz, Director of Desegregation 12. Jerry Welch, Coordinator of Student Hearings 13. Doug Ask, Director of Staff Development 14. Mildred Tatum, Member of Board of Education 15. Gwendolyn Williams, Member of Board of Education 16. Georgia Norris, Pupil Personnel Specialist 17. Ann Clem, Pupil Personnel Specialist 18. Bill Barnes, Principal - Mills High School 19. Michael Nellums, Asst. Principal - Mills High School 20. Charles Green, Principal - Jacksonville Middle School 21. _____ Wilson, Asst. Principal - Jacksonville Middle 22. Florine Boone, Asst. Pricnipal Robinson Jr. High 23. Joy Plant, Asst. Principal - Robinson High School 24. Phil Clark, Asst. Principal - Jacksonville 25. Georgia Norris, Pupil Personnel Specialist 26. Dinah Withers, parent 27. Derrick Withers, student 28. Christopher Withers 2 9. Mr. ______ Withers 30. Earnestine Morgan, parent . 31. Antwine Wilson, student 32. Quentin Bailey, parent 33. Emory Moore, parent 34. Emmanuel Moore, student 35. Keith Straughan, Principal - Robinson Jr. 36. Linda Nuggent 37. Sue Martin, Principal, Adkins Elementary 38. Brenda Allen, Principal - Oak Grove High School 39. Coach Steve Adair - Oak Grove High School 40. Linda Clark, parent 41. Ashley Tate, parent 42. James Wiley, parent 43. Jamaal Wiley, parent 44. Marcia Warren 45. Bernice Hooks 540. Marcia Warren 46 . Sharon Patten, parent 47. Coach Wayne Davenport, Robinson High School 48. Peggy Flowers, parent 49. Lakia Watkins, student 50. Lawrence Stewart, parent 51. Lawrence Stewart, Jr., student 52. Janie Lawson, parent 53. Robin Wakefield, parent 54. Velma Moore, parent 55. Lisa Little, parent 56. Mary Anderson, parent -57. James Guy, parent 58. Kim Guy, parent 59. Stephanie Nichols, student 60. Melanie Nichols, student 61. Barbara Trotter, parent 62. Ashley Bush, student 63. Sue Clark, Prinicipal - Sylvan Hills Junior High 64. Charles Ferriter, Asst. Principal - Sylvan Hills High 65. Verna Finney, parent 66. Chris Bolden, parent 67. Mansell Twillle, Asst. Principal - Sylvan Hills Junior 68. Teresa Young, parent 69. Herman Lee, parent 70. Cathy Lee, parent 71. Anita Straw, parent 72. Michael Woods, parent 73. Bertha Farmer, parent 74. Joyce Lowrey, parent 75. Jackie Robinson, parent 76. Gary Parson, Principal - Jacksonville High School 77. Doug Ask, Coordinator of Staff Development 78. Jo Wilcox, Coordinator of Extracurricular Activities 79. Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation Monitoring 80. Margie Powell, Office of Desegregation Monitoring 81. Horace Smith, Office of Desegreation Monitoring 82. Gene Jones, Office of Desegregation Monitoring 83. Melissa Gauldin, Office of Desegregation Monitoring . 84. Norman W. Marshall, Office of Desegregation Monitoring 85. Dr. Steve Ross, Joshua expert witness 86. Michael Anderson, Director of Safety and Security 87. Michael Dobson 88. Richard Rowland 89. Charity Smith, ADE 90. Frank Anthony, ADE Joshua also reserves the right to call any witnesses listed on the list of the defendant, Pulaski county Special School District. Respectfully submitted, John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little R ck, -~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby state that a copy of the fore~~ing was been hand delivered to all counsel of record on this \u0026ffe day of March, 1998. IN THE .UN!TED STATES DISTRICT COUrtT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANS.ll.S \\JESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. LR-C-82-865 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, NO . l, ET AL. DEFENDANTS MRS . LORE~ JOSHUA, ET AL. !NTERVENORS :\\ . .:..THERINE KNIGHT , ET AL. ::::Jfl'ERVEHORS JOSHUA'S SUPPLEMENTAL EXHIBIT LIST POR MARCH 2-1..t 19S8 HEARING The Joshua I ntervenors s~brnits the following supplenental documen~s as e xh ibits for the hearing scheduled herein for the week of Earch 24 , 1998 : 1. Curriculum Vitae of Dr . Stave Ross 2. Excerpt s oi Dep::,si-c2.on test ir::.:::-11y of ;::: a ,.,,- i ,j .::..r::,cr 3 . Excerpts of Deposition te.s-:: L-:10ny of Hs~be~i:. Walbe1g 4. ?CSSD a~s~ers to Jos ~~a Inte~rogator~ss 5. PCSSD B~dgets for 199~ to present 6 . PCU 0072 0 7. PCU 1 8. PCU 14-16 9 . ?CU :36 -54 10. PCSSD School Profiles for 1994-95 school year 11. PCTJ ~04 12 . PCG 7 2 1 - 72 2 13. PCSSD TAG Facilitators from 1992 to present 14. PCSSD Advanced Classes and AP Enrollment for 1992 to present 15. ?CSSD Discipline reports dated 1992 to present 16 . PCSSD Special Education Monitoring Reports ~rom 1996 to present Joshua f~r~ter reserves the rights to adopt any exhibit submitted by the defenda~ts, Pulaski County Special School District. ?espectfully sub~i~tad, CERrIFICATE OF SE_R\\TICE I do hereby s~ate that a cop7 cf the foregc!~g was been delievered via ~acs ~~ il~ tc all c cc~sel cf reccrd c~ ~~is Stj of March, 19 98 . day ----- - ----- ------------ SC 137-1 -:11:3':' l,iHLk EF- LHld FI PM John W Walker, P.A. 1 723 Broadwqy Little Rock, AR 72206 (501) 374-3758 Fax: (501) 374-4187 Ffu--X TRA\"/\\lSMISSION COVER SHEET .Date: To: . . -.. Fax: 371- 0 !0V Re: Sender: YOU SHOULD F.ECEIVE ]._ PAGE(S), INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLF-ASE C4LL (501) 374-3758. The informAtion conta..ined in this facsimile message is attorney privileged and. co:.fidential informa.t.ion intended on:y for the u.se cf th: individual or entity urned above. If 6e re.s.der cf this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to delive: it to the l.ntended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution o:- copy.ng of this cowmunicatlon is strictly prohibited. If you have received this commtL\":ication in error, please immediate noti~; us by t.::lephMe, and return the original message to us at the above address via the U.S. Pest.al Sen,ice. Thank you. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. V. NO. LR-C-82 - 866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. PCSSD'S WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LIST RECE,IED MAR q 1998 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The PCSSD submits the following as its exhibit and witness list: , EXHIBIT LIST 1. 1989 Releases (attached to Settlement Agreement) 2. ODM Racial Balance Reports 3 . Charts from PCSSD Petition for Release From Federal Court Supervision. 4. Staff Development Data 5. Charts pertaining to cheerleading, drill team, student government, Beta Club, and National Honor Society. 6. Affirmative Action Reports 7. Discipline Reports 8. Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline i . 9. Secondary Education Report 10. Counselor's Reports 11. Special Education Reports 12. Gifted and Talented Reports 13. Athletic Reports 14. Non-Athletic Reports 15. Biracial Committee Minutes 16. PCSSD Desegregation Plan 17. Interdistrict Desegregation Plan 18. PCU 1039 (Minority AP student recruitment). 19. PCU 1040 (Social Studies Advanced Placement Recommendation Notice). 20. PCU 1041 (Social Studies Advanced Placement Recommendation Followup Student Conference form). 21. The Special Master's Interim Findings and Recommendations concerning PCSSD geography and demographics , dated August 19, 1988, as previously transmitted to the Court on January 20, 1994. WITNESS LIST 1. Bobby Lester, Superintendent, PCSSD; 2. Bill Bowles, Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation, PCSSD; 3 . Eddie Collins, Assistant Superintendent for Pupil Personnel Services, PCSSD; 2 4. Dr. Bobby Altom, Assistant Superintendent for Instruction; 5. Gary Miller, Assistant Superintendent for Personnel; 6. Don Stewart, Assistant Superintendent for Business Affairs; 7. Ed Hogan, Assistant Superintendent for Support Services; 8. Charles Green, Director of Secondary Education; 9. Tommie Sue Anthony, Director of Gifted and Talented Programs; 10. Martha Kay Asti, Director of Special Education; 11. Brenda Bowles, Coordinator of Multi-Cultural Education. WITNESSES VIA PREVIOUS TESTIMONY 12. 1988 Testimony of Ed Hogan, docket No. 1059-A, dated June 16, 1988, page Nos. 6 through 213; and docket No. 1060 -A, dated June 17, 1988, page Nos. 6 through 162. 13. Douglas A. Ask, Docket No. 2540, testimony beginning at page 95. 14 . Bill Bowles, by recent deposition not yet transcribed. 15. Dr. Bobby Altom, by recent deposition not yet transcribed (including previous testimony given in open court in this case, the docket reference for which we have not yet located) . 3 16. Eddie Collins, by recent deposition not yet transcribed, 17. Charles Green, by recent deposition not yet transcribed. 18. Tommie Sue Anthony, by recent deposition not yet transcribed. 19. Brenda Bowles, by recent deposition not yet transcribed. 20. Dr. Herbert Walberg, Docket No. 2662A (hearing held May 13-15, 1996), transcript filed with the Clerk as Docket No. 2692) 21. Dr. David Armor, Docket No. 2662B (hearing held May 13-15, 1996), transcript filed with the Clerk as Docket Nos. 2693-94). PCSSD reserves the right to use any exhibit or witness referred to or used by the Joshua Intervenors. WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 4 , - . CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On March __ f __ , 1998, a copy of the foregoing was served by hand delivery to Mr. Walker and by U.S. Mail on the remainder of the service list: Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02173 John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 5 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Bldg., Ste. 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. V. NO. LR-C-82 - 866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS . LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. RECEIV~i MAR 1 8 1998 OFFICE OF . DESEGREGATION MONITOR/NG PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSES TO THE JOSHUA INTERVENOR$' INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION TO THE PCSSD (FEBRUARY 1998) The PCSSD for its supplemental responses to the Joshua Intervenors' Interrogatories and requests for production to the PCSSD states the following: INTERROGATORY NO. 3: If any of the persons identified in the answer to interrogatory No . 1 are expert witnesses, please state: (a) (b) (c) all opinions to be expressed by each expert; the basis and the reason for each opinion; all data or other information considered by the witness in forming such opinion. Please include in responding to this interrogatory each (i) employee of the PCSSD to give testimony as an expert, and (ii) any expert to \"te.stify\" by reliance on previous testimony in 1 this case (although intervenors do not concede the appropriateness of reliance on such testimony where there was no opportunity for normal discovery). SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: As previously stated in response to Interrogatory No. 3, it is possible that Dr. Altom may be called to testify concerning achievement disparity. His opinion, the bases for them, and some of the information considered by him is set forth in his deposition. Some of the reference/research materials used by Dr. Altom in formulating his opinion are as follows: Title Lies My Teacher Told Me The Promised Land American Slavery Warriors Don't Cry Crusaders in the Courts Civil Rights and Civil Wrongs The Content of Our Character The Closing Door Stepping Over the Color Line Beyond the Classroom Forced Justice America in Black and White The End of Racism Outcome Equity in Education Dismantling Desegregation Good Intentions are Not Enough Inside American Education Race 2 Author James Loewen Nicholas Leman Peter Kolchin Melba Beal Jack Greenberg Harry Ashmore Shelby Steele Gary Orield \u0026 Carol Ashkimaze Amy Wells, Robert Crain Laurence Steinberg David Armor Stephan \u0026 Abigail Thernstrom Dinesh D'Souza Robert Berne, Lawrence Picus Gary Orfield, Susan Eaton Katherine Kersten Thomas Sowell Studs Terkel I i I  I I I Statistics. Research Measurement Resource(s) Authors Gerald W. Bracey R. L. Linn, N.E. Gronlund Gilbert Sax WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 By '-,?1~ M. ,s-\u0026muel;Jone ~(76060) ~ for PCSSD CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On March --/ 7- -, 1998, a copy of the foregoing was serv ed by hand delivery to Mr. Walker and by U. S. Mail on the remainder of the service list: Robert Pressman 22 Locust Avenue Lexington, MA 02173 John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr . Richard Roachell Roachell \u0026 Street 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 3 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Bldg . , Ste. 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 , III IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL Mi\\R l 8 iS~B Q(-f\\CEOF DESEGREGATIOK MOKllORlNG DEFENDANTS J;NTERVENORS INTERVENORS NOTICE OF FILING The Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") hereby gives notice ~f the filing of the Affidavit of Dr. Leslie v. Carnine related to LRSD's compliance with the notice requirements of the District Court's Order entered January 30, 1998. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people ~X depositing a copy of same in the United States mail on this _rL_ day of 414fd...lk,,, , 1998. Mr. John w. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 425 w. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Travis Creed Roachell Law Firm First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown - HAND DELIVERED Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 nc. Fendley, Jr; IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL AFFIDAVIT DEFENDANTS INT ERVEN ORS INTERVENORS I, Dr. Leslie V. Carnine, being first sworn, state under oath as follows: 1. I am the Superintendent of the Little Rock School - District. 2. I have reviewed the district court's order of January 30, 1998 which directs the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") to publish notice to the class of Joshua-Intervenors (\"Joshua\") of the pending motion by the LRSD and Joshua for approval of the LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan dated January 16, 1998. 3. LRSD has complied with the notice publication requirements of the district court's order of January 30, 1998. 4. Copies of the notice were made and distributed to all LRSD teachers on February 13, 1998. 5. The notice was posted in all LRSD schools beginning on February 11, 1998. 6. The notice was broadcast on LRSD' s cable channel on February 13, 18 and 24 and on March 2 and 9, 1998. 7. Attached as Exhibit A to my affidavit is a true and correct copy of proof of publication of the notice in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette on February 8, 21 and 28 and on March 7, 1998. Further affiant sayeth not. STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF PULASKI ) ) ss. ) Dr. LslV. Carnine Superintendent Little Rock School District DATE: ___.3_ -_t,_-~'1~r:....-____ SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, a Notary Public, on this day of March, 1998. My Comi~s1on Expires: .. 8-1-j{Jo'f 2 Arkana Democrat ~Q5azettc STATEj)'IENT OF LEGAL ADVERTISING Date :=to a..,,.._J__ ~ , ' 9 9 g Remit To; In Account With: Little Rock Newspapers, Inc. P.O. Box 2221 Little Rock, Ark. 72203 To Insure Proper Credit Refer To No ________________ _ Please remit yellow copy with payment .. Invoice No._ 5 '--f ~ 9 AD COPY 3~ Lines at _L_lLl ( ') \u0026 . ----- on the following dates: ____________ _ ~-J, Total Charge - Please Remit do solemnly swear that I am the legal billing clerk of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, a daily newspaper printed and published in said County, State ef Arkansas; that I was so related to this publicatioi:i at and during the publication qf the annexed legal advertisement in the matter of_ ___ _ ____________________ L/L-( -~d::-i ( Q ( Q pending in the _______ Court, in said County, and at the dates of the several publications of said advertisement stated above, and that during said periods and at said dates, said newspaper was printed and had a bona fide circulation in said County; that said newspaper had been regularly printed and published in said County, and had a bona fide circulation therein for the period of one month brf.ore the date of the first publication of s~id adv~rtisement; and that said ~d.ver.; iscmeut was ~uolished in ti1c regular daily issues of said newspaper at s~c1icu above. Subscrib~d and sworn to before me this) day oft 'rr\\.c~ ,1~2 -~__L._--~~- OFFICIAL SEAl VICKI A. MCBRIDE NOTARY PUBLIC. AR.rANSAs PULASKI COUNTY MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 04-15-2006 Notary Puhl ic    C0 en -en  : . WllElHTEOSTATES .  .  DISTRICT COURT . ; - ....  E.ASTcRN OISTRICT  \u003e OF AOONSAS ..  .. WESTERN DIVISlON Um:E  ROCX\" SCHOOl DISTRICT. PI..AINTIFF ~- (  Ul~-866 PUtASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SC/iOOl DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL OE FENOliNTS MRS. tORENE JOSHUA; ET AL INTERVENORS KAJliERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS .   - NOTICE . TOJ\u003etE JOSHUA ClASS;  All 'PAST. PRESEHT ANO FUTURE .81.ACK OR AfRICAH.AMERICAN PUPILS WHO RESIDE IN PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS. ANO WHQ. ATTEND, HAVE ATTENOEO, Will: ATTENO. OR WHO ARE EUGleLE., WERE EUGl8lE OR Will BE ELK.IBLE TO ATTEND THE PU8UC SCHOOLS OF ONE OF THE THREE PUtASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS (UTllE ROCK. NORlH UT nE POCK OR PUI.ASKJ COUNTY!. THEIR PARENTS ANO/OR NEXT FRIENDS WHO CLAIM, HAVE CLAIMED. OR MAY CLAIM THAT THEY HAVE BEEN DENIED EOUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS. OR WHO Cl.AIM. HAVE CLAlMEO OR MAY. CLAIM THAT THEY HAVE BEEN OR' WILL BE THE VICTIMS Of RACE DISGAIMINA TlON IN EOUCA TlON SY. ONE OR MORE OF THE THREE PUl:ASl\u003cl COUNTY SCHOOL OISTRICJS Al:llOR BY THE STA TE Of AR~ arises cu defforts ,. nrq.. ii. 1956 to desegregate Ille~ . Rodi.: Nof1h Utllt Rodi and Naski Coanrr sd'oal dis1rids. In 1989 a SIi ilem1I - radled and apprOl'ld \"' wlich Ille Ult Rodi Sdl00I Oislrid (1.RSO'.) ~ 10 inplemenl lhe !UeIiSdiO\u0026 a~id Plan aPndla nI.l le Olnn- ~ 26. 1 . UISD submiUld ri = Yisect. . apprc r,al aonld LRESdOu'csa Rliotn- Ptaif dated ember 18. 1997. Fcl-lowi, g mnission. LASO and canel fer Jilt Josl'ua ~ (lwerlalt 'Jasllla1 enaaQld \"' el1enSNe Mgl)! lnonul an edoi1 10 dMIOp a rMed 1)1311 ).nic:11 ball, p3l1ies a:iuld SIJIIP0II. Those 118g0lialians resulted ii LRSO's Al!'lised Oesegregaticn and Educalion Plan-dated Jaooa,y 16. 1998 (\"~ 16.A!Med Ptan1,  Clo Januaiy 21, 1997, LASO and Jona filed a jcint request with lhe United  Slates Oisllid Court fer flt Easteni OisliCI ol Arkansas. Ille Hantfabll -Susan Wtib!t Wr91, lar ap, proval ti Ille J3lllll'f 16 ReviMd Plan. Tllc Jrua,y 16 Re'tised Plan baicaly pro:,ideS folows:  -~ ~: Prior Ageements and Or dets:  The:~ 16 Revised Plan wl rtpiace !ht amn1 LASO dese\u003c7egalian !)Ian., !ht lnrimtt ~ Piao-and al exiAng ~ and OlUrt\"oraets wilt1 some exceplians. It wil ~ no did on lhe Sepcern1Jer 21. 1989 . .setllemelt ~ -lhe Ma9- net Sdloal S1i1xmon daled Fellru3ly 2?,)987; lhe (Blrict COlll'I onlef dated ~ 3. {986, pet13r'ling 10 lhe Mq,et, Rt'liew Conrnittee; and. lhe IA-it\u003e-M ~ daled AuC)ust 2E.' 1986. ' Section 2: Otiigalions. LASO's basic ~ obligallons' tlfflain ~ ,. __ lllder lbr;Jaooa,y 16 AMed Plan as lllder Ille amnl ~ plal. The ollliJa1lals ate dea,ty and simply staled and ctNfif Mt'/ asped ol SCll00I ~ - The J3ll,aiy 16 Rl'fised l?tan .irldudes an r,en srong9f c:ommitmtfil 10 an equiCablt disrilution ol lacii11y ),y race. educalion and ezperiencir: .. .')lfp,gh some specifics n inculect; lhe' Jaroaty 16 Revised Plan conltf1'. 911h !hal ~ Ille lr1/1Si1ion ptriocl ~ dis1rid wil idenlily a/ld/Ol de- , Yei011' prog,wns. policies and ~  dw9I relalld IO HCII ollliga1ion. MU pen .setec1ed by lhe dis1ricl and a,\u003eptCIYld _by Joshua w,I assist Ille disn:I ~: ___ . '~ ~ (i/itiiiiiiic~,:mal \"' ltis process. Sealon 3; S1udenC AssicJwnenlS, Under 111t Jaooar, 16 llMld Plan. .,..~movtslromracillt.anca IO quality ecilc:alion. CMnJ 1111 ltrm ol lhe plan. ...,.,..., and ,... lm'igaMy libded lfell t1sWcllI0I cl1 0 alClen:d-a.n c,a. .-,,,.. hoed sd'oals with II many ol llmt neicfblrhoad sd'oals beina ..,.. !llled II p!1dical. Higll scnoal alllllaain zones may be rlli'awn 111 adWtt racial balanca wid'iil pu Of ni- 1111 lllerly P1rt11QJt p0l1IS flall Ill perter1agl ol AiicAmerican ... dents lcr hql sd'oals II I whale and. 10 lhe U1llnl praa,allle. fflli1llin a consislenl leeder paaem. V~ nlradislncl nnsl.s w,I a:intirlll 10 be alowtd I.Im NIis siNar IO !ht 116 111151Udeltassqvnertplan. The sa,dent wqrner'II plan also provides IOr Ille affifflion ol al U1SO ' ~ hql sd'oals 10 middle sdl00ls Jar grades six. - and eigtt a. cause ol capacily lrnllalionl  LRSO's Higll Sdloais. lhe aJnYtlSDI ID rridlll sa100ls may ~ lht aealion ol lllO IW11II grade scnools. Fc,ally. Ille Jaruary 16 AIYist Plan alls for Ille ainslruaion ol at least IIIO new aiea elementary sd1cois. one ii wes1 Lilllt Rod\u003c and one  Ille  ol !ht lormet Stepnens scllaal. When lhe new Stephens Elementa,y opens. one  Ol men Ille lncenM Sdloals wil be dosed. Seoon : lnlenislrid Sdloals. i lnferdaic:I sd'oals wil Cllf1lirue Ill : ~111ht'(dd:lhtlnlenis-l ~Adlievement The Jnlaly 16 Rl'lised Plan is loundld on a. belief lhal llf0'li:ing .,. err S1Udelt a quu1y edUCalion is ll1t j 111051 piomisr,g means ID lhe lq-tlrm deseqregalion ol LASO. It 0Ullines UISO's 1lasic sraiegy 1or 11\\uing a  S1Udents reaM a quality eclJcatiaa.  . indules an ur1y clildl00d dJCllion ' prt)113111.11Med~ ' ans am:wn lffl!)llasimg lhe prima-ry gr1deS. a rl'lised malhtmalics a,. ri:wn,anabmaMeciJCllianpn,grarn and pnntJI and CXlffll1Uily nvclYefflenl prt)l13l1I. MtfM ~ piece ol lht SIUdtnl achilMmel1  lion is a \u003cXllege scnolal!lip progra,n lar al studenlS who attend raa4y idenli6- ablt elemenWy sd1cois. Seoon 6: LRSD Compiance Pro- ~ wil ~ a ~ siYe ~ ~ ID ensure l subslanlialy ccmplies widl i1s desagr.gation ollligalicns and i1s Olher legal andet'ic:alobliQalions. . Sedion 7: Plan Mocillca1ion Pro-  Q!SS. The .Jaruaty 16 Re'lised Plan ndudes a pt0CeSS fer plan mocific3lion designed IO !date CXl0!)ffl1ion and disaxnge itigillion. LASO wil S1irni1 proposed plan mocilicalionl ID lhe ofl. \" panes wno wl hM an eSlabislled time lr3lne lor oomments and su,pslions. LASO wil !hen submil i1s ,_ ' mended plan modi6calion lar aut ap, prova. Pat1in would gane,aly be pnlholld lrom   issues belare .. dis1ricl CIJUtl ~ M1g .. c:ommenl period. ~~~~ r,g ~~~~ow:- . ganllng _,,...,_ yeaIrIs-. I  The plan establishes a process lar adffl! ing QlfflPlianca issues again desqled 10 ldlart C00!)ttalion and m- Cllln9' itigalion. Al ~ issues wil l'nl be subniatd Ill LASO. I no ageornen1 is readied. !he issue wil : be subnit1ed 10 OOM lar lacililalion. Only i OOM's ettons ii lacililating an aq,eemn Iii would lht issut be subnilted Ill lhe dislriclaut larresolueion. Seoon 9: T em1. The tenn ol Ille Rl'lised Oesegr lion and Educalion Plan wil be !hrN sctoa1 years begiming !he 1998-99 sd'oal yea, and enor-,q on Ille lasl day ol classes ol Ille ~1 sdl00I yeat. Fedefal court supervision wil end ii !NI time, and Ille dislricl wil rn#II IO local conllOI. Sedion 10: Transition. Thi 1997-98 SChool yea, and 1he 1n1 - ol lhe 1998-99 SChool ye wil be a rnitioA period in ptlpllllion ~ ~llalioll ol Ille Jaooa,y Section 11: ~ Stalus. I LASO subslanlialy metlS its obligalior, s l6idef lhe Jnwy 16 Rl'fised Plan. U1SO wil be inwy at lhe condusicll ol its llml and released from aut SllllMlion. The al\u003eowe is nol intended 10 be I U, dllailed-... of !ht RIIIIIY 16 flMtd Plan. The Jniary 16 RMld Pal. along with lhe amnt U1SO 0.. ~ Plan and lnletdislrict 0.. SIIJegation Plan. will be made MialJlt IO Josbla dass members cuinQ ~ business hotn ii LASO's aorrwilnM olbs al 810 W. Mar1lharn, UlltRodl.Arkwas. The purpose ol llis noCica is 10 advise Jos/111 dass membets ol lhe J3lllll'f 16 Revised \"'-1 and 10 rjve '- an appotmiy Ill show cause Ol III pivwidt - objeclions which ~ ,ol,y Ill nary 16 Rftised Plan shoud nol be ilj)plOYtd by lhe Dislrict Cotrt. Joslm Cius membets hM ,  lll'!.l t,e !~li',y of Marth, 1998 ID lit - Cl0rllMU Ol objeaions wifl lk. James McConnidl. U.S. Oislrid CCIII Oedt. U.S. Ccu1nouse, 600 W. ~ I.JIit Rock. Mansas 72201. Al Joslm class membets will be ll0lrd by lhe Dislrict Court's decision IJlllllMl!IOlrejec:!irq lhe~ 16 Al'listd  Plan. Absenl good cause --. there will be no heamg on whether flt J3lllll'f 16 Revised Plan shoud bl approved. ~. hs Hoict l)ffMdes Jona class nwnbtrs their Olly opporu,ity Ill olljed Ill ~oval \u003cJI lht Jnwy 16 Revised UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT, EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARl\u003cANSAS. WESTERN DIVISION \u0026166578 IN THE UNITED STA TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION UTILE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * Plaintiff, * vs. * No. LR-C-82-866 * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL * FILED U.S . DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS MAR t 7 1998 DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., * RECEIVED Defendants, * * MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., * MAR 1 8 1998 Intervenors, * * OFFICE OF KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., * DESEGREGATION MONITORING Intervenors. * ORDER By prior Order, 1 this Court set March 13, 1998 as the deadline for receiving objections regarding the January 16 Revised Plan. Attached hereto as Exhi "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_52","title":"Arkansas Department of Education's Desegregation Monitoring Report","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["1998-02-01"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Pulaski County (Ark.)--History--20th century","Education--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","School integration","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Arkansas Department of Education's Desegregation Monitoring Report"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/52"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nFile of Ann Brown, federal monitor\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "}],"pages":{"current_page":57,"next_page":58,"prev_page":56,"total_pages":155,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":672,"total_count":1850,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":1843},{"value":"Sound","hits":4},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":3}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)","hits":289},{"value":"Arkansas. Department of Education","hits":220},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":179},{"value":"Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","hits":69},{"value":"United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit","hits":30},{"value":"North Little Rock School District","hits":12},{"value":"Bushman Court Reporting","hits":11},{"value":"Walker, John W.","hits":6},{"value":"Joshua Intervenors","hits":5},{"value":"Arkanasas State University. Office of Educational Research and Services","hits":4},{"value":"Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators","hits":4}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"Education--Arkansas","hits":1745},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":1244},{"value":"Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","hits":1207},{"value":"Education--Evaluation","hits":886},{"value":"Educational law and legislation","hits":721},{"value":"Educational planning","hits":690},{"value":"School integration","hits":604},{"value":"School management and organization","hits":601},{"value":"Educational statistics","hits":560},{"value":"Education--Finance","hits":474},{"value":"School improvement programs","hits":417}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Springer, Joy C.","hits":6},{"value":"Walker, John W.","hits":3},{"value":"Heller, Christopher","hits":2},{"value":"Wright, Susan Webber, 1948-","hits":2},{"value":"Armor, David","hits":1},{"value":"Eddington, Ramsey","hits":1},{"value":"Intervenors, Joshua","hits":1},{"value":"Intervenors, Knight","hits":1},{"value":"Jones, Sam","hits":1},{"value":"Jones, Stephen W.","hits":1},{"value":"Joshua, Lorene","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":6},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":1849},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":1836},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":1799},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":1539},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, North Little Rock, 34.76954, -92.26709","hits":10},{"value":"United States, Missouri, 38.25031, -92.50046","hits":5},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Maumelle, 34.86676, -92.40432","hits":4},{"value":"United States, Missouri, Saint Louis City County, Saint Louis, 38.65588, -90.30928","hits":3},{"value":"United States, Kansas, 38.50029, -98.50063","hits":2},{"value":"United States, New York, 43.00035, -75.4999","hits":2},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Chicot County, 33.26725, -91.29397","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Arkansas","hits":1836},{"value":"Missouri","hits":5},{"value":"Kansas","hits":2},{"value":"Massachusetts","hits":2},{"value":"New York","hits":2},{"value":"Connecticut","hits":1},{"value":"Illinois","hits":1},{"value":"Maryland","hits":1},{"value":"Michigan","hits":1},{"value":"Ohio","hits":1},{"value":"Oklahoma","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1994","hits":385},{"value":"1995","hits":376},{"value":"1996","hits":334},{"value":"1993","hits":312},{"value":"1992","hits":292},{"value":"1999","hits":273},{"value":"1997","hits":268},{"value":"1991","hits":255},{"value":"2001","hits":252},{"value":"2000","hits":251},{"value":"1998","hits":245},{"value":"2002","hits":182},{"value":"1990","hits":173},{"value":"2003","hits":164},{"value":"2004","hits":148},{"value":"1989","hits":134},{"value":"2005","hits":119},{"value":"2006","hits":86},{"value":"2011","hits":62},{"value":"2010","hits":60},{"value":"2007","hits":57},{"value":"1988","hits":51},{"value":"2008","hits":47},{"value":"2009","hits":47},{"value":"1987","hits":35},{"value":"1986","hits":30},{"value":"2012","hits":30},{"value":"1984","hits":27},{"value":"1985","hits":23},{"value":"2013","hits":19},{"value":"1983","hits":16},{"value":"1982","hits":15},{"value":"1980","hits":13},{"value":"1981","hits":13},{"value":"1974","hits":12},{"value":"1975","hits":12},{"value":"1976","hits":12},{"value":"1977","hits":12},{"value":"1978","hits":12},{"value":"1979","hits":12},{"value":"1973","hits":11},{"value":"2014","hits":11},{"value":"1967","hits":9},{"value":"1968","hits":9},{"value":"1969","hits":9},{"value":"1970","hits":9},{"value":"1971","hits":9},{"value":"1972","hits":9},{"value":"1954","hits":8},{"value":"1966","hits":8},{"value":"1950","hits":7},{"value":"1951","hits":7},{"value":"1952","hits":7},{"value":"1953","hits":7},{"value":"1955","hits":7},{"value":"1956","hits":7},{"value":"1957","hits":7},{"value":"1958","hits":7},{"value":"1959","hits":7},{"value":"1960","hits":7},{"value":"1961","hits":7},{"value":"1962","hits":7},{"value":"1963","hits":7},{"value":"1964","hits":7},{"value":"1965","hits":7},{"value":"2017","hits":6},{"value":"2015","hits":5},{"value":"2016","hits":5},{"value":"2018","hits":5},{"value":"2019","hits":5},{"value":"2020","hits":5},{"value":"2021","hits":5},{"value":"2022","hits":5},{"value":"2023","hits":5},{"value":"2024","hits":5}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"1950","max":"2024","count":5114,"missing":0},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":904},{"value":"reports","hits":255},{"value":"judicial records","hits":232},{"value":"legal documents","hits":207},{"value":"exhibition (associated concept)","hits":67},{"value":"project management","hits":62},{"value":"budgets","hits":38},{"value":"correspondence","hits":23},{"value":"handbooks","hits":20},{"value":"agendas (administrative records)","hits":17},{"value":"handbills","hits":16}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":1850}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Office of Desegregation Management","hits":1850}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":1850}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":1850}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":1850}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}