{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1138","title":"Magnet Review Committee: Budget","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":null,"dc_date":["1998/1999"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational statistics","Magnet schools"],"dcterms_title":["Magnet Review Committee: Budget"],"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/1138"],"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  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nMagnet Review Co1111nittee 1900 North Main Street  Su ite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 Donna Grady Creer Executive Director  ,,{,,, ,,._,p.4 - (50 11 753 -0156 December 1, 1998 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was est Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes i schools, as well as recruitment for the six original maI rr,agnet s,,d1Qols. The Magnet Review Committee is al fli=fo-M transfer students between Little Rock School [ School District and is allocateq an annual budget of$ three districts contriouting $25,000 each fiscal year, \\/\\ the ADE. \\_l:!l-1 ..,0hu1\"\"? h'/ \u0026lt;- ..nl, ,(c -\np\u0026lt;J \u0026lt;1--f- ~A~~ rlt{JJ. Ct1~c c~u ~L ~ c__ lh1-P-J-\u0026lt;.d vl~t_ tr 1) Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this S 150,000 budget. ,/.,\u0026lt; \" 2) Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved (Jr  .'~- (_, by the MRC on August 6, 1998.  _,\\kl r 1 , '\\~ I 3) To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the )o ,.,1 J k i\nr- \\. initial allocation. o.:t of:,( ~ 4) Increases in cost of services has caused us to predict a deficit spending or a ~J--} Y. -1J reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. \\--\n, t ''~( ~J~\nqi~1\nd' 5) The MRC, by formal motion and vote, approved the increase at its ':,\"' ~ , \u0026lt;''\nJ' _:\n, . \\\"'.... October 22, 1998 meeting. I'-- \"' r\n., ~ ~ ,. O'- 0\\ / ' .i\\ We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount allocated. For your ~ c, review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. ',, At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increase :r-om- 000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share b $~33.33-- 0 to $30,833.33) a,J.JM, .......... ~,e the State's MRC budget contribution , 00 ($75,000, plus dcitt-io1r7,,5I0 0). he $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted a n or the Magnet Review Committee. t ~ '\n,- \\ {'( /\\ 1\\.-.\u0026lt;- ~ I',\u0026gt; \\_.~ 1P Ov ..,\\' '?J' '- e\u0026gt; ,J,,u-J .,J \\..'~ \\ t , - _..\\, l\\C. 1 .Jg (, ., f ,\"'v\\Q ~ ~ \\ 0\\\" tie ~ \\\\ ,,,\u0026lt; \"'7 , .. 1lt\"\"' r t.,JY' 0~..1. .,...-7).:, '  :.\\-\"-t.l\u0026lt;r \" X-,,-. \\j:)\\ ~('I .. \u0026lt;'~\\\\J \\ ~'I t't r'j .,- V- ~.! (.,,... ti/ tr\u0026gt;~ J.. \\\\ ... --J~ ~ , D' I'\\ o\u0026lt; \\ic' I ,~, \\ .,, ,..l -,- \\ ~, \\\\\"\" i- \" \"\\ '-- - \u0026lt;\u0026gt;J' I \\\" (2 I 1 Q \\ I ~\\--,..- ~ Magnet Review Co1111nittee Donna Grady Creer Executive Director December 1, 1998 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 RECEIVED The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court DEC 1 1998 Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 72201 OfflCE OF DESEGRESAT!ON MONITORING (501) 753-0150 1 ,\n(\\~~i I Dear Judge Wright: ,  \\ '7 '1, r\" \\A,l As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in Jul'l.J:-~ ~ .-'\\ Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is charged--wifnthe responsibility of ,,,, monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet / \"\nschools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict i\" tY: rr:iagnet scb.g.oJs. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of 0 ., tr fl:.:fo-M transfer students between Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special ~-rY l School District and is allocat~_g. an annual budget of $150,000. That amount is funded by the \\'i l\" three districts contriouting $25,000 each fiscal year, with the remaining $75,000 coming fr om,.,\\~~7\\i'~ . the ADE. \\_B'/ wh~11,7  /4' b .1,,,v' t- ,. o' L,, l) Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this S 150,000 budget. , ~J~ 1 v'c~ / 2) Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved C} (1'-' t?...,.~ by the MRC on August 6, 1998:  -\\~'( r r{ 1 t 3) To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the\n\u0026gt;c, 1 c. / ~ i\n,i'-:\ninitial allocation . .. or~JoJ,{ .n ~ 4) Increases in cost of services has caused us to predict a deficit spending or a ,\nh:?-\n,,\\-,.1  .v o' /. :.Y reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. t\u0026gt; ~\n:\u0026gt;'\n1:\n~.:-J\nqi~1\n 5) The MRC, by formal motion and vote, approved the increase at its '\n.,\"' t--~ !\"ii , (\\ J ~:\n \\t--c..... October 22, 1998 meeting. ,,f ,-\n, ,,.,_ 0 -- ~ ~o'- o\\\" \" \u0026lt;',,~ (} We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount allocated. For your i :\n,\nreview, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. - l. t\" .-:,\u0026lt;- At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increase~em-$-l-SQ,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share b'f-:l._~33 .33 Oto $30,833.33) a e the State's MRC budget contribution ~, 00 ($75,000, plus deiHo- 1~7,5I0 0). he $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted a n or the Magnet Review Committee. i L,, '\n. h~~ .\\:1--... ~ r-.\"\n--J_A 1 ? ..,\\ \\\\c:_./ ri')_-, (, \"l -i7~0 (--- .,., \\ f I ,rl'/ '' ,,,0 -A fl' ~ \" ~  ~.,) ti...., t:. ..i.1-~\"' ,,~ :+() , . :)'-,...~ ~('vr,.. . \\1-:,_\"r~-1~ . tf N~\\ re! ~~'(.,,,.. 1il~J\u0026lt;..: u--? :.. \\\\\\'-- f ~ . ,.9' f'i''\" o\u0026lt; \\ r-/'\u0026amp; ~\\ ~ ,, t' \\ ~ \\\\ --1~  \\'\u0026gt;..,i' ?'- \u0026lt;?. 'e  1,7 Q \\~ . ~J\\\\\" ... I / If you or the parties should need any additional information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely, ~~II. Ch  erson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sml Attachment EXPENDITURES FRINGE BENEFITS Includes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, Health Insurance and Dental 1997-98 ACTUAL 14,173 \"In the approved budget, this figure was _ , ? v input at a lower rate, due to the anticipated '{ ,_. \\ i-' ~ . changes in teacher retirement, insurance, '- t-  \\ ...._..,, t.. 1..! L, etc. The new figure most accurately _.,. r' -\n-- . , . -:\n, \" 1 -' ref/eds the costs for this line item. u--\\-.. 11 C 1 PROFESSIONAL \u0026amp; TECHNICAL SERVICES Utilization of persons or organizations to provide\nr,ecializeq_ser.vices.Jhis category includes costs 6f the lnterdistrict Magnet S..cbQQJ.s...E'lClluation.Aru:w.olReport, and the month! travel allowance orovided to the xecutive Director oflhe Magnet Review Committee. \"Because of additional professional services required as a result of providing updated recruiting ~oo/s (e.g., bq,churr\ns. ra~ ~ ... etc./ and the website mqstec ad design which re/led changes in magnet schools, including new principals, updated curriculum, and the middle school transition, an increase in this line item is expeded MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT \u0026amp; VEHICLES l l,868 1,532 1998-99 APPROVED 12,800 12,000 1,400 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT  20,900 :/ 1s,ooo , _:.1,soo --------~f1 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, t_tie R~OAes5y~te~ and the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC Office. \"Because of contract cost increases since the equipment ls over ten years old, an increase in expenses is ex eded _ _ -__ _ RENTAL OF LAND AND BUILDING Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1, 188.00 (1,296 square feet) and will remain that amount. 14,256 I 14,256 SAME EXPENDITURES (Continued) TRAVEL OUT OF DISTRICT This line item is used to send MRC members to the International Magnet Schools of 1997-98 ACTUAL 6,012 America Conference and the NCSO 1 '? ~ :'\u0026gt; Conference each year. r~~I~  C)~..,. .x_\\,' ftn order to decrease line items in the - .. c-7 -\ni_c u approVi udget,.l[J!.vel was one item ~\n:Jj' ~~ 1: whic as lowered m iffort to remain tt. ,-r.' within t e , VO total. Now, Donna ' Grady Creer has been e eded MSA President-Elect, this, in turn, will require her to attend Board meetings several times a year. Although some of the cost is borne by the MSA, the amount for travel out of the distrid has been increased to a requested figure as shown. \u0026lt;=_____ - POSTAGE Includes postage necessary to respond to parent inquiries, bulk mailings for recruitment purposes, and all other mailouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is requested. TELEPHONE Includes monthly billings and long distance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. The MRC Office has been using a *butldingowned* FAX machine and paying a *per page rate. A new FAX machine has recently been purchased and expenses are expeded to decrease in the FAX line item. However, the Internet access has been added and the costs will again go up in this catego,y. oil p.f- ~ or- ~I .__, P1 -1 (. ,,, '1- \u0026lt; r 1,575 3,921 Page 2 1998-99 1998-99 APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT ' 3,500 *6,000 2,500 SAME 3,500 *4,000 EXPENDITURES (Continued) ADVERTISING The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to the original interdistrid magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. In recent years, the interdistrid magnets have also looked to the MRC for recruitment assistance. With new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transitioa-.Jgking place, a reconfiguration roll advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers, videos'dnd any other materials requiring modtfication is necessary 1997-98 ACTUAL 31,502 Poge 3 1998-99 1998-99 APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT 23,595 *35,000 PRINTING AND BINDING 2,700 1,200 *4,000 This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as a~ation , I ?. forms, are handled by outside agencies. r  J ~r .  Again, this amount has been increased to handle large pro/eds related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. OTHER PURCHASED SERVICES 3,700 I Includes any outside help necessary to finish ,..\n... t\\\"- .It , gjob fgc the. M\"-C Office. This will also incluae v ,-\n, ,\n\", catering services, etc., when necessary. 1  1 Due to increased meeting adivities, Magnet fair expenses, and all other recruitment f undions, this amount has been increased 2,000 f :' . ,., I - *4,000 SUPPLIES Materials nee ssary for the operation of the Mag t Review Committee Office. This is a cootrgolled line item and can be ~ -t held to buagete'a figures. ~~/)-\\ yl \\0 '\n,i f ~ .j--h\"- , I\"'-:\n, ).\".., ,....1--': ~~c..- l ~jO\\..:) PERIODICALS ~Q. o+h~~ Used to purchase media materials of interest to the MRC and its adivities (e.g., Education Week. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Arkansas Times. Magnet Schools of America materials!. Also includes MSA yearly membership fee to obtain a reduced rate for the MSA Conference in the spring. *The amount requested has been increased slightly in order to expand ./ our subscription access to more education periodicals. CAPITAL OUTLAY This category is used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. 1,217 572 1998-99 APPROVED 1,500 500 500 Page 4 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT SAME *595 *5.000 ,, c-t'i ' J '-'f ,~ ~' I I,,. ' I *With the approved 7998-99 budget in August, .- \\ 1--, .. ~ ~. - ,o the MRC was planning not to make any ma\nor _\\ ::i \\ -r-'\u0026lt; , -st\" 1 ,.:y , { tJ purchases for the office. However, the copy ~i-....( 1 .('\\-::,'\" X\\) ~i-\n( 1 ~' ~ ,,, machine is over ten years old, and the telephone __.,., , ..) ~ l c- r~ SJ! 7 1 system is also. Consequently, some expenses , -::. ~ :\u0026gt;  --\n~ Ii,, are anticipated for this category \\ ' .\\-:)  ,. ,\u0026gt;~' TOTAL BUDGET FIGURES SALARIES 79,251 70 749 .. 150,000 114,251 70 749 185,000 . ,, \\\"\\cl NOTE: Salary increases will be determined later in the year, after final negotiations are I I complet~d, and distrid salary increases are established. At that time, it will be ~ J' - / ermined if, and how much, an increase can be incorporated into the budget. \\ ,.. u' ~,v vt... ~! h ... y 7J'\nf'J')V-l- .,,~ r_ w,./-/v \n0t\u0026gt;- ) l(r-D -=,.- ? .,.-\\h.,. ,,~\\l -~~- u,)1.J4/Y\\. ,R{'r- --.....~.J~\"  /.1.,1\".\\' '\n)\"\"\u0026gt; ' 1(j ./\"if'' ~ 1,10 0(j-\n, Magnet Review Co1nn1ittee Donna Grady Creer Executive Director December l, 1998 1900 orth Main Street Suite l Ol North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 RECEIVE The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court DEC 1 1998 Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 OlflCEOF DESEGREGATION rroRI Little Rock, AR 7220 l Dear Judge Wright: 501 758-01 SU As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, 1987 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet schools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict magnet schools. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of M-to-M transfer students between Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District and is allocated an annual budget of $150,000. That amount is funded by the three districts contributing $25,000 each fiscal year, with the remaining $75,000 coming from the ADE. l) Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this $150,000 budget. 2) Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved by the MRC on August 6, 1998. 3) To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the initial allocation. 4) Increases in cost of services has caused us to predict a deficit spending or a reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. 5) The MRC, by formal motion and vote, approved the increase at its October 22, 1998 meeting. We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount allocated. For your review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increased from $150,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share by $5,833.33 (from $25,000 to $30,833.33) and make the State's MRC budget contribution $92,500 ($75,000, plus the additional $17,500). The $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted amount for the Magnet Review Committee. . . . The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- December 1, 1998 If you or the parties should need any additional information, I will be happy lo provide ii. Sincerely, ~~II. Ch  erson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sml Attachment cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - ODM EXPENDITURES 1997-98 l 998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT FRINGE BENEFITS 14,173 12,800 * 20,900 Includes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, Health Insurance and Dental *In the approved budget, this figure was input at a lower rote, due to the anticipated changes in teacher retirement, insurance, etc. The new figure most accurately ref/eds the costs for this line item. PROFESSIONAL \u0026amp; TECHNICAL SERVICES l l ,868 12,000 * 15,000 Utilization of persons or organizations to provide specialized services. This category includes costs of the lnterdistrict Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and the monthly travel allowance provided to the Executive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. *Because of additional professional services required as a result of providing updated recruiting tools /e.g ., brochures, radio/TV ads, etc./ and the website master ad design which reflect changes in magnet schools, including new principals, updated curriculum, and the middle school transition, an increase in this line item is expected MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT \u0026amp; VEHICLES 1,532 1,400 *l,500 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, the phone system and the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC Office. *Because of contract cost increases since the equipment is over ten years old, an increase in expenses is expected RENTAL OF LAND AND BUILDING 14,256 14,256 SAME Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1,188.00 (1,296 square feet) and will remain that amount. EXPENDITURES (Continued) TRAVEL OUT OF DISTRICT This line item is used to send MRC members to the International Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference each year. *In order to decrease line items in the approved budget, travel was one item which was lowered in an effort to remain within the $150,000 total. Now, Donna Grady Creer has been eleded MSA President-Elect\nthis, in turn, will require her to attend Board meetings several times a year. Although some of the cost is borne by the MSA, the amount for travel out of the dis/rid has been increased to a requested figure as shown. POSTAGE Includes postage necessary to respond to parent inquiries, bulk mailings for recruitment purposes, and all other mailouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is requested. TELEPHONE Includes monthly billings and long distance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. *The MRC Office has been using a *buildingowned' FAX machine and paying a 'per page' rate. A new FAX machine has recently been purchased and expenses are expected to decrease in the FAX line item. However, the Internet access has been added and the costs will again go up in this category Page 2 1997-98 l 998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT 6,012 3,500 *6,000 1,575 2,500 SAME 3,921 3,500 *4,000 EXPENDITURES (Continued) Page 3 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT ADVERTISING 31 ,502 23,595 *35,000 The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to the original interdistrict magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. In recent years, the interdistrict magnets have also looked to the MRC for recruitment assistance. *With new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transition taking place, a reconfiguration of all advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers, videos and any other materials requiring modification is necessary. PRINTING AND BINDING 2,700 1,200 *4,000 This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as application forms, are handled by outside agencies. *Again, this amount has been increased to handle large projects related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. OTHER PURCHASED SERVICES 3,700 2,000 *4,000 Includes any outside help necessary to finish a job for the MRC Office. This will also include catering services, etc., when necessary. *Due to increased meeting activ1Yies, Magnet Fair expenses, and all other recruitment functions, this amount has been increased EXPENDITURES (Continued) Page 4 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT SUPPLIES 1,217 1,500 SAME Materials necessary for the operation of the Magnet Review Committee Office. This is a controlled line item and can be held to budgeted figures. PERIODICALS 572 500 595 Used to purchase media materials of interest to the MRC and its activities (e.g ., Education Week. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Arkansas Times. Magnet Schools of America materials). Also includes MSA yearly membership fee to obtain a reduced rate for the MSA Conference in the spring. ~The amount requested has been increased slightly in order to expand our subscription access to more education periodicals. CAPITAL OUTLAY -0- 500 *5,000 This category is used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. ~with the approved 1998-99 budget in August, the MRC was planning not to make any maior purchases for the office. However, the copy machine is over ten years old, and the telephone system is also. Consequently, some expenses are anticipated for this category TOTAL BUDGET FIGURES 79,251 114,251 SALARIES 70 749 70 749 150,000 185,000 NOTE: Salary increases will be determined later in the year, after final negotiations are completed. and district salary increases are established. At that time, it will be determined if, and how much, an increase can be incorporated into the budget.  - I ., Magnet Review Co1111nittee Donna Grady Creer Executive Director December l, 1998 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 RECEIVED The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court DEC 1 1998 Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 7220 l Dear Judge Wright: OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MON!TORlNG As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, ] 987 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet 7-- schools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict #'\" t)A-magnet schools. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of 0 111 _ I' , M-fo-M transfer students between Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special .r v School District and is allocated an annual budget of $150,000. That amount is funded by the -\u0026gt; bl,,,. three districts contriouting $25,000 each fiscal year, with the remaining $75,000 coming from f\n\\J the ADE. , 1 / }. Ir ~ c' l) ct'.., 2) 4) Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this S 150,000 budget. Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved by the MRC on August 6, 1998. To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the initial allocation. Increases in cost of services has caused us to predict a deficit spending or a reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. The MRC, by formal motion and vote, approved the increase at its October 22, 1998 meeting. r For your At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increase from $150,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share b $5,833.33 (frorn $25.,000 to $30,833.33) and make the State's MRC budget contribution $92,500 ($75,000, plus Hie additional 17,500)/ he $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted amount for the Magnet Review Committee. fl 1 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- December l, 1998 If you or the arties should need any additional information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely, ~~II, Ch  erson Magnet Review Committee SM/OGC:sml Attachment cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - ODM EXPENDITURES 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT FRINGE BENEFITS 14,173 12,800  20,900 Includes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, ~ Health Insurance and Dental *In the approved budget, this figure was input at a lower rate, due to the anticipated changes in teacher retirement, insurance, etc. The new figure most accurately ref/eds the costs for this line item. PROFESSIONAL \u0026amp; TECHNICAL SERVICES l l ,868 12,000  15,000 Utilization of persons or organizations to provide specialized services. This category includes costs of the lnterdistrict Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and the monthly travel allowance provided to the Executive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. *Because of additional professional services required as a result of providing updated recruiting tools (e.g., br_gg:w[.es, radj,gtJJ(_ ads, etc.) and the website..aJQ~ ad design which reffed changes in magnet schools, 0 including new principals, updated curriculum, and the middle school transition, an increase in this line item is expeded MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT \u0026amp; VEHICLES 1,532 1,400 *l ,500 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, the phone system and -\\ \u0026amp; )I the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC ~ Office. t J \"- (' ~ 0 ~ :\nt *Because of contract cost increases since I 7 \"' the equipment is over ten years old, an increase in expenses is expeded RENTAL OF LAND AND BUILDING 14,256 14,256 SAME Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1,188.00 (1,296 square feet) and will remain that amount. EXPENDITURES (Continued) TRAVEL OUT OF DISTRICT This line item is used to send MRC members to the International Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference each year. *In order to decrease line items in the approved budget, travel was one item which was lowered in an..effort to remain within the $150,000 total Now, Donna Grady Creer has been eleded MSA President-fled\nthis, in turn, will require her to attend Board meetings several times a year. Although some of the cost is borne by the MSA, the amount for travel out of the distrid has been increased to a requested figure as shown. POSTAGE Includes postage necessary to respond to parent inquiries, bulk mailings for recruitment purposes, and all other mailouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is requested. TELEPHONE Includes monthly billings and long distance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. *The MRC Office has been using a 'bu11dingowned' FAX machine and paying a \"per page' rate. A new FAX machine has recently been purchased and expenses are expeded to decrease in the FAX line item. However, the Internet access has been added and the costs will again go up in this category. Page 2 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ACTUAL APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT 6,012 3,500 6,000 1,575 2,500 SAME 3,921 3,500 EXPENDITURES (Continued) ADVERTISING The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to the original interdistrid magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. In recent years, the interdistrid magnets have also looked to the MRC for recruitment assistance. *With new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transition taking place, a reconfiguration of all advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers, videos and any other materials requiring modification is necessary. PRINTING AND BINDING This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as application forms, are handled by outside agencies. *Again, this amount has been increased to handle large projeds related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. OTHER PURCHASED SERVICES Includes any outside help necessary to finish a job for the MRC Office. This will also include catering services, etc., when necessary. *Due to increased meeting adivities, Magnet fair expenses, and all other recruitment fundions, this amount has been increased 1997-98 ACTUAL 31,502 2,700 3,700 Page 3 1998-99 1998-99 APPROVED REVISED AMOUNT 23,595 *35,000 1,200 *4,000 2,000 *4,000 EXPENDITURES (Continued) SUPPLIES Materials nes ssary for the operation of the Magnet Review Committee Office. This is a controlled line item and can be held to budgetea figures. PERIODICALS Used to purchase media materials of interest to the MRC and its adivities (e.g., Education Week. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Arkansas Times. Magnet Schools of America materials). Also includes MSA yearly membership fee to obtain a reduced rate for the MSA Conference in the spring. *The amount requested has been ~ 1 increased slightly in order to ex122IJ.d our subscription access to more eaucation periodicals. CAPITAL OUTLAY This category is used for any maior expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. *With the approved 7998-99 budget in August, the MRC was planning not to make any ma\n'or purchases for the office. However, the copy machine is over ten years old, and the telephone system is also. Consequently, some expenses are anticipated for this category. 1997-98 ACTUAL 1,217 572 TOTAL BUDGET FIGURES SALARIES 1998-99 APPROVED 1,500 500 500 79,251 70 749 150,000 Page 4 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT SAME *595 *5.000 114,251 70 749 185,000 Magnet Revieiv Cinn1nittee 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 Donna Grady Creer Executive Director January 6, 1999  -The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 7220 l Dear Judge Wright: On Thursday, October 22, 1998, the Magnet Review Committee voted to adopt a y~a.d.L budget increase from $150,000 to $185,000. Four votes were in favor of the increase, with ffiese votes being cast by the State of Arkansas (~ve-~ ,  uo.d0cb.QQLDistrict, and the Joshua lntervenors. North Little Rock School o  t i om voting, anafhePtilaski County Special School District representativ was a sent. sis our custom, each Magne____ Review Committe_e me_mber discussed this issue wI I eir party. We are confident tho~ party supports this action. ~\n,.~~ .::vrf=/...-1- -(hp 7\nr)\"/,..~\u0026lt;.\n,-\"\", As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, 1987 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet schools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict magnet schools. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of M-to-M transfer students between Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District and is allocated an annual budget of $150,000. That amount is funded by the three districts, with each district contributing one-sixth ($25,000) of the total amount and the State providing the additional three-sixths, or one-half ($75,000). (7 /.J, ~ l'v 11\n,C' :} '',,,,~ 2) Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this $150,000 budget. Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved / \\ ~-.Y ,-?' ( }, .... by the MRC on August 6, 1998. ,\n.)- --\\ -\\ -'\":7.31 / ,V ...,,c....., ? .I,\\'/ J :') (iv\\./ /\\\"I\" Y ~ L,- / x 41 /.(t r.,t' C /X. To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the initial allocation. Increases in cost of services have caused us to predict a deficit spending or a /\\/.)? reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. \\I \\\"' '1\n\"' J ?-l 1 .. / We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount indicated. For your '\" ,J ~ review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. r---\\\"-' \\' VJ _,\n-7-l,Q v {,./'5 \\'( \\ At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increased from $150,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share by $5,833.33 (from $25,000 to $30,833.33) and make the State's MRC budget The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- January 6, 1999 contribution $92,500 ($75,000, plus the additional $17,500). The $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted amount for the Magnet Review Committee. If you should need any additional information, I will be happy to provide it.  . Sincerely, ~ .  Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sml Attachment cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - ODM ~~-f,F/'\"'-:1-- , I -,--, ( N\" i. ~ . ._ C'V L-//\\ .. ' A.~r 197Y l\\f?il.ov~o -\u0026amp;,J+ ~ . }.__\"'-~~ y, L '~ .:e'\" 1,,+ EXPENDITURES FRINGE BENEFITS Includes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, Health Insurance and Dental 7 J /, j 'In the approved budget, this figure I  l'  7 was Input at a lo ale, due lo the l) ' 11 1-', }.\u0026gt; T anlicipat anges  teacher , I J retirement, ,n urance, etc. The new -, , ~ figure most accurately reflects the costs for this line item. PROFESSIONAL \u0026amp; TECHNICAL SERVICES Utilization of persons or organizations to provide specialized services. This category includes costs of the lnterdistrict Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and the monthly travel allowance provided to the Executive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. Because addilio 1 1 ~ professional services required /2! J..i as a res uh of providing updated P' \\ ?7 v recruiting tools /e.g., creative layout 4 ,,. \"\\ and design for brochures, l? )\"' .J( radio/TV ads, etcJ and the ,-r _:\n'' Website master ad design which , \\ \\' -\n,  .:71 . reflect changes in magnet schools, v-?' 1 '/ ,\n---'\" induding new principals, updated ? \\ curriculum, and the middle school \\ \\ transition, an increase in this line item is expected. MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT \u0026amp; VEHICLES This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, the phone system and the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC Office. Because of contrad cost increases since the equipment is over ten years old, an increase in expenses Is expected. ~ fil.!.QQfI 9,500 11,800 1,600 1997-98 ~ 16,925.68 733.45 1998-99 fil1QQ.E! 12,000 1,400 1s.ooo 1.650 MRC ExPENDINRES IContinuedl RENTAL OF LAND AND BUILDING Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1,188.0011,296 square feetl and will remain that amount. TRAVEL OUT OF DISTRICT This line item is used to send MRC members lo the International Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference eoyea~r. ch 1 1 -The revised amou .1 ~ '\"' \"~' ' to bring travel fund ~ 1 1997-98 budgeted amount. e,, POSTAGE ~I-,, \"\"'l ),\\ \\ \"-, \\ Includes postage necessary to ~0 ~ r\u0026lt;'~~~ respond to parent inquiries, bulk ,,..,v rJ' mailings for recruitment purposes, 1 \\ 1..._ ... t '\\--:- and all other mailouts as necessary ' _  1_\n\\\"?' \\~'. for the operation of the MRC office. 1\\Y-J.. .,, ', vv\\\"- No change in amount is requested . {' TELEPHONE Includes monthly billings and long distance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. -The Internet access has been added to the MRC's computer system. and the teleph0Relremmt1nicalion costswHl-g\u0026amp;- up ir:, this rolegery_ ..J- ---J2,_,\" ,s, D D\u0026lt;.J j) r -...,, ~ .. rt---r-t\u0026gt; ~of'o,... --fi-1 I\n:, 1997-98 fil.LQfilI 14,256 6,000 2,000 3,500 J 997-98 ~ 14,256 7,984.05 2,492.25 1998-99 .fil.!.QQfl 14,256 3,500 2,500 Page 2 1998-99 ID'.filQ AMOUNT 14,256 6,000 2,500 MRC EXPENDITURES IContinuedl ADVERTISING   The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. With new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transition taking place, a reconfiguration of all advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers, videos and any other materials requiring modification is necessary. PRINTING AND BINDING This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs. such as application forms for magnet schools for enrollment, are handled by outside agencies. Again, this amount has been increased to handle large proiecls related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. 1997-98 fil!QfilI 23,600 2,800 1997-98 AfJ!m 1998-99 BUDGET Page 3 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT 25,658 .35 23,595 36,900 ~__./ .... ) L-,,7 (\n? \"\\01~ ~ r GYI I, (' I l ~/o 2,560 .25 l.200 3.200 _____.__/ .e\n./ ,, \u0026lt;\" ,._ MRC EXPENDITURES !Continued! CAPITAL OUTlAY This category is used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. TOTAL EXPENDITURES SALARIES TOTALS 1997-98 filLOOEI 1997-98 ACTUAL 733.45 1998-99 BUDGET 500 Page 5 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT 3,700 81,972 96,437.77 79,251 114,251  68,028 70,749.00 70 749 70 749 150,000 167, 186.77-f, 150,000 185,000 ~ ,.\n-: I V h ' , l-- ... ., -,, 1,, e- :\nr,o''\": 1- -', /,N'/1. /l)C' 'o !?' '1,- NOTE: ,  r , I ( ~ .,. ,, , ' Salary increases will be determined later in the year, ofter final negotiations ore _. :\\J   \u0026lt;\n,( completed, and district salary increases ore established. At that time, it will be determined if, and how much, on increase con be incorporated into the budget. Donna Grady Creer Executive Director January 6, 1999 Magnet Review Committee 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 7220 l Dear Judge Wright: (501) 758-0156 On Thursday, October 22, 1998, the Magnet Review Committee voted to adopt a yearly budget increase from $150,000 to $185,000. Four votes were in favor of the increase, with these votes being cast by the State of Arkansas (two votes), Little Rock School District, and the Joshua lntervenors. North Little Rock School District abstained from voting, and the Pulaski County Special School District representative was absent. As is our custom, each Magnet Review Committee member discussed this issue with their party. We are confident that each party supports this action. As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, 1987 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evaluating and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet schools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict magnet schools. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of M-to-M transfer students between Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District and is allocated an annual budget of $150,000. That amount is funded by the three districts, with each district contributing one-sixth ($25,000) of the total amount and the State providing the additional three-sixths, or one-half ($75,000). l I Since its inception, the MRC has operated within this $150,000 budget. 21 Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved by the MRC on August 6, 1998. 3) To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within the initial allocation. 41 Increases in cost of services have caused us to predict a deficit spending or a reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount indicated. For your review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. At this time, we respectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increased from $150,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share by $5,833.33 (from $25,000 to $30,833.33) and make the State's MRC budget t!.F ... ....1. .J.... ~ The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- January 6, 1999 contribution $92,500 ($75,000, plus the additional $17,500). The $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 23% increase in the budgeted amount for the Magnet Review Committee. If you should need any additional information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely, ~ .  Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sml Attachment cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - ODM EXPENDITURES 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET REVISED AMOUNT FRINGE BENEFITS 9,500 14,173.16 12,800 *20,819.94 Includes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, Heatth Insurance and Dental \"In the approved budget, this figure was Input at a lower rate, due to the anticipated changes in teacher retirement, insurance, etc. The new figure most accurately reflects the costs for this line item. PROFESSIONAL \u0026amp; TECHNICAL SERVICES 11,800 16,925.68 12,000 *15,000 Utilization of persons or organizations to provide specialized services. This category includes costs of the lnterdistrict Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and the monthly travel allowance provided to the Executive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. \"Because of additional professional services required as a result of providing updated recruiting tools /e.g., creative layout and design for brochures, radio/TY ads, etc./ and the Website master ad design which reffed changes in magnet schools, including new principals, updated curriculum, and the middle school transition, an increase in this line item is expeded. MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT \u0026amp; VEHICLES 1,600 733.45 1,400 *1,650 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, the phone system and the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC Office. \"Because of contrad cost increases since the equipment is over ten years old, an increase in expenses is expeded. MRC EXPENDITURES IContinuedl Poge2 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET REVISED AMOUNT RENTAL OF LAND AND BUILDING 14,256 14,256 14,256 14,256 Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1,188 .0011,296 square feetl and will remain that amount. TRAVEL OUT OF DISTRICT 6,000 7,984.05 3,500 6,000 This line item is used to send MRC members to the International Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference each year. \"The revised amount is requested to bring travel funds bock to the 7997-98 budgeted amount. POSTAGE 2,000 2,492.25 2,500 2,500 Includes postage necessary to respond to parent inquiries, bulk mailings for recruitment purposes, and all other mailouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is requested. TELEPHONE 3,500 3,418 .31 3,500 4,225 Includes monthly billings and long distance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. \"The Internet access hos been added to the MRC's computer system, and the telephone/communication costs will go up in this category. MRC EXPENDITURES IContinuedl Page 3 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET REVISED AMOUNT ADVERTISING 23,600 25,658 .35 23,595 36,900 The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. \"With new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transition taking place, a reconfiguration of all advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers, videos and any other materials requiring modification is necessary. PRINTING AND BINDING 2,800 2,560.25 1,200 3.200 This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as application forms for magnet schools for enroll-ment, are handled by outside agencies. \"Again, this amount has been increased to handle large pro/eds related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. MRC EXPENDITURES (Continuedl Page 4 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET REVISED AMOUNT OTHER PURCHASED SERVICES 3,000 5,025.68 2,000 *4,000 Includes any outside help necessary to finish a job for the MRC Office. This will also include the cost for our fiscal agent. *Due to increased meeting adivifies, Magnet Fair expenses, all other recruitment fundions, and contrad labor for incidental jobs, this amount has been increased from the 1991-98 budget. SUPPLIES 1,800 1,872.36 1,500 1.405.06 Materials necessary for the operation of the Magnet Review Committee Office. PERIODICALS 616 604.78 500 595 Used to purchase media of interest to the MRC and its activities (e.g., Education Week, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Arkansas Times, Magnet Schools of America materials). Also includes MSA yearly membership fee to obtain a reduced rote for the MSA Conference in the spring. *The amount requested hos been adjusted to keep in line with the 1991-98 adual expenses. MRC EXPENDITURES IConlinuedl 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET CAP1T AL OUTLAY 1,500 733.45 500 This category is used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. \"With the approved 1998-99 budget in August, the MRC was planning not to make any major purchases for the office. The copy machine and the telephone system are over ten years old. Some expenses are anticipated for this category. TOTAL EXPENDITURES 81 ,972 96,437.77 79,251 SALARIES 68.028 70 749.00 70 749 TOTALS 150,000 167,186.77 150,000 NOTE: Salary increases will be determined later in the year, after final negotiations ore completed, and district salary increases ore established. At that time, it will be determined if, and how much, an increase can be incorporated into the budget. Page 5 1998-99 REVISED AMOUNT *3,700 114,251 70 749 185,000 Background Issues ODM Review of the MRC Budget Proposal Dated January 6, 1999 As explained in the MRC's cover letter, the MRC's office budget has been $150,000 since its inception, an amount ordered by the Court long years ago. The MRC is asking for a bigger budget ($185,000) to cover cost increases that have been rising and accumulating each year. While we believe the MRC does need more money, we'd like to see some changes in the budget and the budgeting process, which we' ll explain below. The MRC has never presented its office budget to the Court for annual approval. Rather, the MRC staff has reconfigured the dollar allotments within its budget every year, but always within the bottom-line $150,000. (The staff has carried over any money left from one year to the next in order to meet rising expenses while not disturbing the $150,000 bottom line.) Annual budget review and approval has been a function of the parties' representatives who comprise the MRC. Before the MRC submitted its final January 1999 version of its proposed 1998-99 budget, ODM worked with the MRC to refine the document, pointing out what we saw as problems and suggesting improvements. Our goal was that the MRC budget ultimately be: 1. clearly presented 2. easily understandable and defensible 3. aligned with the MRC's genuine financial needs for the year 4. a reflection of past expenditures and anticipated needs, rather than budgeting on past budget (the nefarious \"budgeting on budget\") The proposed budget was evidently prepared by the MRC Executive Director and her assistant, who don't have much experience or expertise in budget preparation. While they were willing to listen to our suggestions and adopted a few of them, they declined to make others, as explained below. We still believe the budget could be improved considerably. As submitted, the document isn 't clear, contains some budgeting on budget, and prompts many questions, which we will also point out below. It is important to understand the overriding concern of the MRC members that is driving their budget strategy: the committee does not want to risk changing, on an annual basis, the MRC budget total and thus the amounts contributed by the parties and the State. They fear that yearly budgetary changes could result in an increased budget total, thus providing an opening for the parties (especially the State) to raise objections and cause trouble. So this budget has been constructed (and padded) to cover an extended period of time, at least five years. Nevertheless, the budget document is labeled and offered as that for 1998-99. The MRC realizes that its budget must be offered and approved by its members on an annual basis, but the MRC doesn't intend to change the budgetary bottom line every year. 1 Document Critique In a nutshell, the MRC's strategy is to change the budget total this one time and stick to the new status quo for as many years as possible, thus minimizing the potential for making waves with the parties every year. We don't think this is the most useful or even honest way to construct a budget.  An amwal budget should be a tool, based on identified needs, for allotting adequate appropriations and guiding corresponding expenditures for one year's time. As needs and costs change, a budget must be realigned accordingly.  We don't object to a reasonable amount of cushion in a budget to provide flexibility and cover unexpected expenses, but an annual budget is just that: it has only a 12- month life span, because circumstances can change quickly and unexpectedly. Too much padding or number juggling destroys the budget's effectiveness as a planning and spending guide.  If the tvlRC inflates its budget to take care of outlying years in addition to the current 12 months, it will be taking in more money than it really needs, causing the parties to appropriate money they shouldn't have to. The tvlRC has no history of returning unspent monies to the parties who appropriate it, as does ODM. Yet, we do know that the tvlRC has squirreled away any unspent amounts to cover overspending as it occurs.  Some expenditures will probably rise each year (such as staff salaries, for example) but others could decline. Locking into a long-term budget removes some of the tvlRC's responsibility for managing public money in response to ongoing changes in circumstances and needs. The MRC is about to run out of money and overspend its budget or reduce its activities\nit needs a ruling as soon as possible. The cover letter, signed by MRC Chair Sadie Mitchell, admits that the NLRSD representative abstained from voting to approve the budget and the PCSSD representative was absent. Yet the Chair asserts confidence that each party supports the budget proposal. With one abstention and one absentee (one-third of the possible vote total), where does this confidence come from? The MRC approved the 1998-99 budget for the same old $150,000 last August, yet only five months later has made this request for more money. The appeal demonstrates that a budget designed to last for years at a time doesn't fit with the changing shortterm needs that obviously occur. (It probably also demonstrates that the MRC waited until it got into a tight financial corner to make its case for more money, perhaps hoping that a looming crisis - deficit spending or a reduction in services- would be sufficient to get a budget increase from the parties.) The Expenditures section presents many puzzles:  Fringe Benefits: The increase between 1997-98 Actual and 1998-99 Revised is 47%. This huge leap needs to be explained in terms of the salaries that are indicated later in the document. 2  Professional and Technical Services: The notation explains that additional professional services will be required, but the requested 1998-99 Revised amount ($15,000) is less than what was actually spent in 1997-98 ($16,925.68). This isn't sensible budgeting.  Maintenance of Equipment and Vehicles: The increase between what was spent in 1997-98 ($733.45) and that anticipated in 1998-99 ($1650) is 125%, a huge jump. Our contracts at ODM haven't fluctuated much (if any) due to equipment age. The notes claim that MRC equipment is over ten years old. In our book, that means the equipment is not only obsolete, it's about to break down. The Capital Outlay category does address the need for equipment purchases or upgrades, and provides for a significant sum. So why increase this category if you're going to buy new equipment? This is actually an example of budgeting on budget.  Travel Out of District: Travel in 1997-98 was almost $2000 more than revised for 1998-99. Yet the notes give no hint as to why this cutback is reasonable in light of past expenditures.  Postage: The amount allotted for postage remains unchanged and in line with the I 997-98 actual expenditures. Yet postage rates have increased. Moreover, we would expect that MRC mailings would increase in line with its new \"updated recruiting tools,\" some of which were necessitated by the LRSD's change to middle schools.  Telephone: The jump between the 1997-98 Actual and 1998-99 Revised is $806.67, which would allow more than $67.00 per month for Internet fees (which is what the notes say drove the increase.) That's an unrealistically high amount.  Advertising: The increase between 1997-98 Actual and 1998-99 Revised is $11 ,241.65, or 44%. This may be perfectly realistic, but how did they calculate the odd number of $36,900 (for 1998-99)?  Other Purchased Services: The amount spent in 1997-98 is over $ 1000 greater than in the revised budget for 1998-99. Yet notations cite increased meeting activities. This is another example of budgeting on budget rather than on expenditures and projected needs.  Supplies: The amount spent for supplies in 1997-98 was very near the budgeted amount, but the odd figure budgeted for 1998-99 ($1405 . 06) is almost $4 70 less than the previous year. How could they be sure they could cut supplies by 25% and arrive at this revised figure with such specificity?  Periodicals: The notes indicate that this line item for 1998-99 has been revised to be consistent with that of 1997-98, which was $604.78. How did they arrive at the odd new number ($595)?  Capital Outlay: This category as used here should really be entitled Equipment, as the Capital Outlay category is quite broad and Equipment is much more specific, according to the State's guidelines. evertheless, what's most significant here is that the revised numbers for 1998-99 reflect an increase of $3000 above the actual expenditures of 1997-98. Notes explain the increase will provide for replacing old equipment. Fine, but then the Maintenance category above surely doesn't warrant a 125% increase. 3 Potential Options  Salaries: Compensation for staff is expressed in a lump sum. It might be informative to indicate each employee's salary as ODM does. Further, a note explains that any salary increases will be determined later in the year. If salaries are indeed increased, where will the budget be modified to accommodate the raises?  Totals: The document indicates that the 1997-98 budget was $150,000, yet the amount actually spent that year was $167,186. Whence the money to cover the overspending? The document doesn't explain that the overspending was financed by carryover from previous years. Do they intend to persist in this pattern? 1. Approve the revised 1998-99 budget as submitted, but order the MRC to develop future budgets based on past expenditures and anticipated annual expenses. Order the state to pay 50% of the projected total and each district to pay 16.66%, as has been the practice. While this option would enable the MRC to most quickly get its cash flow problem under control, the districts have advanced the MRC some money, so it isn't in imminent danger of overdrawing its bank account. or 2. Order the MRC to submit within 10 (?) days a 1998-99 budget that is based on previous expenditures and anticipated annual expenses, instead of the flat amount of $185,000, along with justifications for each category. In any event, we think that it could be helpful for them to be required to model their budget format on that of ODM. We've spent so much time developing an easy-tounderstand budget and the parties are all used to it. It would be easy for the MRC to emulate our budget format to save them time and grief We will be glad to help them to get their revisions done quickly. 4 MAY-10-99 MON 13:28 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 01 FILED U.S DISTRICT COURT ASTRN DISTRICT ARAANSAS IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION MAY' t O 1999 JAM~~W. M\\COAMACK. CLERK By: M , ~ U [\\ M ~ [\\,,...,- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRJCTNo. 1, et al., Defendants. .tvfRS . LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, * *   *       * *  DI\n!' ci't:RII. No. LR-C-82-866 NATURE SAVER'\" FAX MEMO 01616 Dale l~ies  10 To Ii tJ ~ 'l.,.o t,..,,J From Co /Oeot. Co Phone# Phone, Fax\n'] 1,,-/.,, ..- ()1,, ITTi F .. , : . '----~--------------- KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al ., Intervenors, *  ORDER Before the Court is the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") to increase the MRC office budget from $150,000 per year to $185,000 per year effective with the 1998-99 school year. The proposal now under consideration was communicated to the Court by the chair of the MRC in a letter dated January 6, 1999 (attached). After reviewing the matter, the Court is inclined to approve the request. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals established the MRC in 1987 to supervise the operations of the six magnet schools in the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"). The District Court later allocated $150,000 per year to fund the operations of the MRC and its office. The MAY-10-99 MON 13:29 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 5013246576 P. 02 --::.., Court determined that the State of Arkansas, through the Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\"), should pay $75,000 of that allocation and each of the three Pulaski County school districts should pay $25,000. The MRC has never presented its office budget to the Court for annual approval\ninstead, the MRC staff has reconfigured line item allocations each year to total $150,000 and the MRC members have approved that budget each year. In the letter submission. the MRC chair explained that, over the years, normal inflation in the price of goods and services has strained the committee's $150,000 budget. Additionally, notes accompanying the budget explain that the restructuring of LRSD schools to accommodate the middle school initiative has required some substantial changes in the magnet schools. These changes necessitate an increase in advertising and recruitment costs, because brochures and other recruitment materials must be redesigned, printed, and distributed. The MRC further requests that the budget increase to $185,000 be shared by the ADE and the three districts in the same proportions as in the past, increasing the state's share (which is one-half) to $92,500 and each district's share (which is one-sixth) to $30,833.33. The letter submission asserts that four MRC members voted for the increase, one abstained, and one was absent. In August of 1998. the MRC approved a budget for the 1998-99 school year for the usual total of $150,000 in an apparent failure to foresee the need for increases in the same year. The need for additional funds to flow quickly to the MRC leads the Court to believe the request for a budget increase to $185,000 for 1998-99 should be approved. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to approve MRC's request for an increase in its 1998- 99 budget from $150,000 to $1-85,0{)0. The Court will allow the parties until and including May 2 MAY-10-99 MON 13:29 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 03 24, I 999, in which to object to MRC's request. Should no objections be filed within the time allowed, the Court will enter an Order providing that within one week. each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the l 998-99 MRC budget and the expanded 1998-99 .\\'fRC budget hereby approved. IT IS SO ORDERED iliis /~ day of ,-:: 1999. m,~ ~ru7:r\"T UNITED STATES DISTRlCT COURT 3 NAY-10-99 NON 13:29 Donna Grady Creer Ex8C\\lllve Oi1'9C!or January 6, 1999 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 . - - . .... .., , Magtte0t  Review . Committee 1900 North Main Street Suite 101 North Little Rock, Ark.ansas 72114 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: P. 04 (501 ) 758-0156 On Thursday, Odober 22, 1998, the Magnet Review Committee voted to adopt o yearly budget increase from $150,000 to $185,000. Four votes were In favor of the increase, with these voles being cost by the State of Arkansas (two votes), Little Rock SChocl District, and the Joshua lntervenors. North Little Rock SChool District abstained from voting. and the Pulaski t Coun1y Speclal School District representative was absent. As is our custom, each Magnet ~ Review Committee member d'ISCUSSed this Issue with their party. We are confident that each party supports this action.  As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, 1987 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The Committee Is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evoluottng and recommending changes in the actual operation of magnet sthools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine inferdlstrict magnet school$. The Magnet RevieW Committee is also responsible for recruitment of M-to-M transfer students between Little Rock school District and Pulaski County Special school Distric\nt and is allocated\" annuQI budget of S 150,000. That amount iS funded by the three districts, with each distrkt contributing one-sixth ($25,000) of the total amount and the State providing the odditional three.sixths, or one-half ($75,000). 11 Since its Inception, the MRC has operoted within this $150,000 budget. 21 Fiscal Year 1998-99 budget in the amount of S 150,000 was approved by the MRC on August 6, 1998. ~) To this point, the MRC has contained expenditures to remain within lhe .J~\"-!al allocation. 41 fnaeases in cost of services hove caused us to predict a deficit spending or a reduction in services for the 1998-99 fiscal year. We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase In the amount indicated. For your review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an increase. At this time, we rQspectfully request that the Magnet Review Committee Office budget be increased from $150,000 to S 185,000. This action would increase each dis1rid's proportional shore by $5,833.33 (from $25,000 to $30,833.331 and make the State's MRC budget MAY-10-99 MON 13:30 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 05 The Honorable 5usan Webber Wright -2- January 6, 1999 contribution $92,500 {$75,000, plus the additional $17,500). The $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 231 increose ln the budgeted amount for the Magnet RevieW CommitteQ. If you should need ony addltlonol information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely, die , Magnet Review Committee SM/0GC:sml A1tochment CC: Ann Brown, ~deral Monitor - ODM =1 .-. ,-:, i NAY-10-99 NON 13:32 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 5013246576 P. 01 EXPE~QITIJ~ES 1997-98 ]997-98 ~ illUi ~ ~ ~ ~ AMOUNT FRINGE BENEFITS 9,500 14,173.16 12.800 20.819.94 lndudes Sodol Security, Medicare, Teacher Reflfemenl, life Insurance, HQOl1h Insurance and Deotal rn the approved budge!, this flg11re was Input at a lower rate. dlle to the anfkipoled dlanges In teocJ,er retirement, lnsvronce. etc. 111a new l!gvre most occurafe/y relled.s the costs for this line Item. PROFES~IQI:::l~ !Ii TECHl::ll~ ~~Vl,E,:i 11,800 16,925.68 12,000 15,000 Utilization of persons or organfzolfons to provide sp@dalized services. This category Includes costs of the lnterdislricl Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and 1he monlhly travel allowance prO'lk:ied to the ElcflCUtive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. Because of additional professional services required as a re.suh of providing updated recruiting lr\u0026gt;Cls /e.g., creative layout and design for brochures. rad/o/TY ads, etcJ and the WebSJte mos/er ad design which reflect changes In mognet schools. indudlng new principals. updated currlcvltJm. and the middle school transition, on Increase in this fine item is expected. M~NTENAN'E QE fQUIPMENT i VEHICLES 1,600 733.45 l.400 1,650 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier. the phone system and !he ISM Personal Typing System in the MR.C Office. Because of con/rad cos! increases since the equipment is o.-er ten years old, an increase In expenses is expected. NAY-10-99 NON 13:33 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 501 3246576 P. 01 MRC ExPENOOURE5 tContlnuedl Poge 2 1997.95 1991-96 li2.l-li )998-99 .au.Q!ill AQ!.!AL lill.O!'ill 1ill'!ili:2 ~Q!..!t:il RENTAL OF lAl':IIJ 61':!IJ ~~IL~ 14,256 14,256 14,256 14,256 Monthly rent for the MRC Office is Sl, 188.0011,296 square feel! and wiO remain !hot amount, TRAVEL Q!.!I Qf ~IEIQ 6.000 7,984.05 3,500 6.000 This rine item is used to send MRC members to the lntemo1lono1 Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference each year. The revised amount Is requested to bring !ravel funds bock to the 1997-98 blldgeled amount. PQSTAGE 2,000 2,492.25 2,500 2.500 lndudes postage necessary to respond to porent Inquiries. bulk maihngs for recruitment purposes, and oil other mollouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is reques1ed. re_~PHONE 3.500 3,418.31 3,500 4,225 lndudes rnonthly btlllngs and long dls1ance charges, Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. The Internet access hos been added to the MRC's CO/\"fl/Wfer system, and the telephone/communication costs will go up in this category. NAY-10-99 NON 13:33 SUSAN W WRIGHT MRC ExPENDmJRE5 IContinuedl ~QVERTISING The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students lo magnet schools and M-lo-M transfer. wlftl new pr!l'lcfpals in place in seYeral of the magnet scho\u0026lt;\nls, new CUff/aJ/um informahon fo be distribuled, and the middle schools trons,lion toking piece. a reconfiguration of ol odYerlising brochures, M-ro-M flyers, videos and any other materials requiring modific:ation is necessary. PRINTING AND BINDING This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though lhe MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as application forms for mognet schools for @nrol\\. menl, ore handled by outside agencies. Again, this amount hos bean increased ro handle large pro\nects related To advertising the changes in Ifie schools' make-vp, new principals, and Cllrric/Jlum changes. ill2=il ~ 23,600 2,800 FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 02 Poge3 .l.2.2Z.:2a ~ 1998-99 ~ ~ REV15ED ~Q!..!~ 25,658.35 23,595 36.900 2,560.25 1,200 3.200 MAY-10-99 MON 13:34 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 5013246576 P. 03 MRC EX?ENomJRES fConttnuedl Poge4 ~ 1997.98 1998-99 ill:..2.2 ~ ~ BUDGET ~ ~9!.!t::il OTHER PUR~HA5EC ~f\u0026amp;Yl!:~ 3,000 5,025.68 2,000 \"4,000 lndudes any outside help necessary to finish o lob for the MRC Office. This w,N also include the cos! for our fiscal agent. aue to Increased meeting octM/les, Mognel Fair expenses.. oH other recruitment functions. ond con/rod lobar for inddental\nobs, fhis amount hos been increased from the 1997-98 budge/. SUPPt.lES 1,800 1,872.36 1,500 1,405.06 Materials necessary for the operation of the Mognet Re1ew Commlt1ee Office. PERIQPICALS 616 604.78 500 595 Used to purchase media of interest to the MRC and its octiv~ies fe.g~ Education Week. Arkansas Democraf-Oa.zi:lt~ Arkansas rimes, Magnet Sd'loots of Amerlco moterlolsl. Also indudes MSA yearly membership fee to obloin o reduced rote for the rwsA Conference In the spnng. \"The amcvnt reqve$led hos been od/vsfed lo keep /fl Hne WJ/h the 1997-98 octuol expenses. MAY-10-99 MON 13:34 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 MRC EXf'ENDITURES IConttnuedl .l.22Z:il 1997-98 1998-92 IDJ.000 ~ ~ CAP!r AL QUJlAY l,500 733.45 500 This category ls used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. wn11 the approved 1998-99 budget in August. the MRC ww- plonnlng nol lo make any ma\no, purchases for the office. The copy madline and the telephone ~fem are c.-er fen yecrs o . Some expensas are anflclpaled for !his colegory. TOTAL EXPENDITURES 81,972 96,437 .77 79,251 SALARIES .2...Ql. 70,74900 ~ TOTALS 150.000 167,186.77 150,000 NOTE: Salary increases wiU be determined later In the year, after final negolio1ions ore completed, and distrld solory lncreoses ore established. At tha1 time, it will be determined if. and how much, on Increase can be incorporated in1o the budget. P. 04 PogeS ]996-99 REVISED AMQUt:i! 3,700 114.251 70749 185,000 MAY 11 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. 1, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER No. LR-C-82-866 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS MAY 1 0 1999 JAMES1W. M\\CORMACK, CLERK By: \\ . , ~ U I\\ M D J\"\\.-,' OEP CLERK Before the Court is the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") to increase the MRC office budget from $150,000 per year to $185,000 per year effective with the 1998-99 school year. The proposal now under consideration was communicated to the Court by the chair of the MRC in a letter dated January 6, 1999 (attached). After reviewing the matter, the Court is inclined to approve the request. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals established the MRC in 1987 to supervise the operations of the six magnet schools in the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"). The District Court later allocated $150,000 per year to fund the operations of the MRC and its office. The 3261 Court determined that the State of Arkansas, through the Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\"), should pay $75,000 of that allocation and each of the three Pulaski County school districts should pay $25,000. The MRC has never presented its office budget to the Court for annual approval\ninstead, the MRC staff has reconfigured line item allocations each year to total $150,000 and the MRC members have approved that budget each year. In the letter submission, the MRC chair explained that, over the years, normal inflation in the price of goods and services has strained the committee's $150,000 budget. Additionally, notes accompanying the budget explain that the restructuring of LRSD schools to accommodate the middle school initiative has required some substantial changes in the magnet schools. These changes necessitate an increase in advertising and recruitment costs, because brochures and other recruitment materials must be redesigned, printed, and distributed. The MRC further requests that the budget increase to $185,000 be shared by the ADE and the three districts in the same proportions as in the past, increasing the state's share (which is one-half) to $92,500 and each district's share (which is one-sixth) to $30,833.33. The letter submission asserts that four MRC members voted for the increase, one abstained, and one was absent. In August of 1998, the MRC approved a budget for the 1998-99 school year for the usual total of $150,000 in an apparent failure to foresee the need for increases in the same year. The need for additional funds to flow quickly to the MRC leads the Court to believe the request for a budget increase to $185,000 for 1998-99 should be approved. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to approve MRC's request for an increase in its 1998- 99 budget from $150,000 to $185,000. The Court will allow the parties until and including May 2 24, 1999, in which to object to MRC's request. Should no objections be filed within the time allowed, the Court will enter an Order providing that within one week, each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the 1998-99 MRC budget and the expanded 1998-99 MRC budget hereby approved. IT IS SC ORDERED this\n/--day of 1/ 1999. ~~ ~FJU G --,, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT fHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET 1H XMPUA~ WOH \u0026lt;llf 58 ANDIOR ?8(1) FA0P )N !:J-I - ev .vt:' ~ 3 Donna Grady Creer Executive Director January 6, 1999 1900 North Main Street  Suite 101 North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock. AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: (501) 758--0156 On Thursday, October 22, 1998, the Magnet Review Committee voted to adopt a yearJy budget increase from $150,000 to $185,000. Four votes were in favor of the increase, wltti\" these votes being cast by the State of Arkansas (two votes), Little Rock School District, and11lie Joshua lntervenors. North Little Roek School District abstained from voting, and the Pulas f County Special School District representative-was absent. As is our custom, each Magnet Review Committee member discussed this issue with their party. We are confident that ~a party supports this action. As you know, the Magnet Review Committee was established in July, 1987 by the Efghth Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis. The-Committee is charged with the responsibility of monitoring, evaluating and recommending cha~ in the actual operation of mag,,.t : \"\" schools, as well as recruitment for the six original magnet schools and nine interdistrict magnet schools. The Magnet Review Committee is also responsible for recruitment of:  M-to-M transfer students between little Rock School Oistcid and Pulaski County Special . School District and is allocated an annual budget of $150\n000. lhat amount ls funded-by the  three districts, with each district contributing one-sixth ($25,000) of the total amount ana ttfe  State providing the additional three-sixths, or one-half ($75,000). 1) 2) 3) 4) Since its Inception, the MRC. has operated within this $150,000 budget. Fiscal Year t99~-99 budget in the amount of $150,000 was approved . ~ . bythe MR on August 6, 1998. . , . ' To t~is point, fhe MRC has contained expenditures to remain Within the  :  , [.Nial allocation, \"'  ~ ~ in cost of services have caused us to-predict a deficit spending ar a ,- rEJd':JdiQn Jn serv~es for the 1998-99 fiscal year.  - : We, therefore, are seeking your approval for an increase in the amount indicated. ror your review, we have attached data which speaks to the need for an i\"'crease. , , At this time, we respectfully request that the Mognet Review Committee Office budget be_:-.:increased from $150,000 to $185,000. This action would increase each district's proportional share by $5,833.33 (from $25,000 to $30,833.33) and make the St~e's MRC qudg~t . _   The Honorable SUSon Webber Wright -2- January 6, 1999 contribution $92,500 ($75,000, plus the additional $17,500). The $35,000 additional funding request reflects a 231. lnaease in the budgeted amount for the Magnet Review Committee. If you should need any adcfrtional information, I will be happy to provide it. Sincerely, d~/f Magnet Review Committee SM/OGC:sml Attachment cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - OOM EXPE~DITURES ]997-98 ]997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ~ ~ ~ ~ AMQ!.!NT FRINGE BENEFTTS 9,500 14,173.16 12,800 20,819.94 lndudes Social Security, Medicare, Teacher Retirement, Life Insurance, Health Insurance and Dental tn the approved budget, this figure was Input at a lower rate. due to the anticipated changes in teacher retirement, insurance, etc. The new figure rr,ost accurately reflects me costs for this line item. PRQF5SIQNAL ~ TE!:t:JNICAL SE~~!:ES 11,800 16,925.68 12,000 *15,000 Utilization of persons or organizations to provide specialized services. This category indudes costs of the lnterdistrict Magnet Schools Evaluation Annual Report, and the monthly travel allowance provided to the Executive Director of the Magnet Review Committee. Because of additional professional services required as a resuh of providing updated recruiting tools /e.g., creative layout and design for brochures, radio/TV ads, etcJ and the Website master ad design which reflect changes in magnet schools, including new principals, updated curriculum, and the middle school transition, an increase in this line item is expected. MAINTENAN~E OF EQ!.!IPMENT ~ VEHICL5 1,600 733.45 1,400 *l,650 This covers the costs of service contracts for the office copier, the phone system and the IBM Personal Typing System in the MRC Office. \"Because of contrad cost increases since the equipment is over ten years old, an increase in expenses is expeded. MRC ExPENOOURB {Continued! Page2 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 B.U.QQfI ~ 6.U.QQ.EI ~ AMQ!.!NT RENTAL QF LANO ANQ 6!.!ILQ!t:::IQ 14,256 14,256 14,256 14,256 Monthly rent for the MRC Office is $1,188.0011.296 square feet! and will remain that amount. TRAVEL OUT QF DISTRICT 6,000 7,984.05 3,500 6,000 This line item is used to send MRC members to the International Magnet Schools of America Conference and the NCSD Conference each year. The rerised amount is requested to bring travel funds bade to the 1991-98 budgeted amount. PQSTAGE 2,000 2.492.25 2,500 2,500 lndudes postage necessary to respond to parent inquiries. bulk mailings for recruitment purposes, and all other mailouts as necessary for the operation of the MRC office. No change in amount is requested. TELEPHQNE 3,500 3,418.31 3,500 4.225 Includes monthly billings and long distance charges. Internet access monthly charges, and FAX expenses. The Internet access has been added to the MRC's computer system. and the telephone/communication costs wil go up in this category. MRC EXPENDITURES IContinuedl Page3 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ~ ~ fil.!QQfI R.EYIS.fQ AMOUNT ADVERTI~ING 23,600 25,658 .35 23,595 36,900 The MRC is charged with the responsibility for recruiting students to magnet schools and M-to-M transfer. with new principals in place in several of the magnet schools, new curriculum information to be distributed, and the middle schools transition taking place, a reconfiguration of all advertising brochures, M-to-M flyers. videos and any other materials requiring modification is necessary. PRINTING ANQ BINQ!NG 2,800 2,560.25 1,200 3,200 This category ties in with advertising expense. Even though the MRC Office copies whatever possible, voluminous jobs, such as application forms for magnet schools for enroll-ment, ore handled by outside agencies. *Again, this amount has been increased to handle large projects related to advertising the changes in the schools' make-up, new principals, and curriculum changes. MRC EXPENOOURES IConttnuedl Page4 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 1998-99 ~ ~ 6.1.!00EI IDfilQ AMQ!.!NT QTHER PUR!:\nHASEQ ~ERVl!:\nES 3,000 5,025.68 2,000 4,000 lndudes any outside help necessary to finish a job for the MRC Office. This will also include the cost for our fiscal agent. *Due to increased meeting adMties, Magnet Fair expenses, all other recruitment fundions, and contrad labor for incidental jobs, this amount has been increased from the 1997-98 budget. S!.!PPLIES 1,800 1,872.36 1,500 1,405.06 Materials necessary for the operation of the Magnet Review Committee Office. PERIODICALS 616 604.78 500 595 Used to purchase media of interest to the MRC and its activities le.g .. Education Week. Arkansas Democrot-Goz~tt~. Arkansas Times. Magnet Schools of America materials). Also includes MSA yearly membership fee to obtain a reduced rote for the MSA Conference in the spring. *The amount requested has been adjusted to keep in line with the 1997-98 actual expenses.    MRC ExPf NDITURES IConttnuedl 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 6.1.J.QQE! ~ fil.!OOfI CAPIT Al OUll.AY 1,500 733 .45 500 This category is used for any major expense for equipment for the MRC Office, such as a copier, computer, or office furniture. ~with the approved 1998-99 budget in August, the MRC was planning not to make any major purchases for the off,ce. The copy machine and the telephone system are over ten years old. Some expenses are anticipated for this category. TOT AL EXPENOOURES 81,972 96,437.77 79,251 SALARIES ~ 7Q,749.00 7Q 749 TOTALS 150,000 167.186.77 150,000 NOTE: Salary increases will be determined later in the year, after final negotiations are completed, and district salary increases are established. At that time, it will be determined if, and how much, an increase can be incorporated into the budget. Pages 1998-99 RfY!S..EQ AMO!,!NT 3,700 114,251 70,749 185,000 IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. 1, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER No. LR-C-82-866 By Order dated May 10, 1999 [doc.#3261], this Court informed the parties that it was inclined to approve the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") to increase the MRC office budget from $150,000 per year to $185,000 per year effective with the 1998-99 school year. 1 The Court allowed the parties a period of time in which to object to MRC' s request, and stated that should no objections be filed within the time allowed, the Court would enter an Order providing that within one week, each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that 1 The proposal was communicated to the Court by the chair of the MRC in a letter dated January 6, 1999, which was attached to the Order. represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the 1998-99 MRC budget and the expanded 1998-99 MRC budget hereby approved. The time for objecting to MRC's request has passed with no objections being filed. Accordingly, MRC's request is granted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that within one week of the date of entry of this Order, each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the 1998-99 MRC budget and the expanded 1998- 99 MRC budget hereby approved. Dated this L/l ~y of ~ 1999. ~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT TrilS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN ::~oMPL)i\nCE WITH RULE 58 A(/OR 79(a) FRCP ON Of 1.f,/1'7 BY~  7 2 IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, VS. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. 1, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors, * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER No. LR-C-82-866 By Order dated May 10, 1999 [ doc.#3261 ], this Court informed the parties that it was inclined to approve the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") to increase the MRC office budget from $150,000 per year to $185,000 per year effective with the 1998-99 school year. 1 The Court allowed the parties a period of time in which to object to MRC's request, and stated that should no objections be filed within the time allowed, the Court would enter an Order providing that within one week, each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that 1 The proposal was communicated to the Court by the chair of the MRC in a lener dated January 6, 1999, which was anached to the Order. represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the 1998-99 MRC budget and the expanded 1998-99 MRC budget hereby approved. The time for objecting to MRC's request has passed with no objections being filed. Accordingly, MRC's request is granted. IT IS THEREFORE ORDEREO that within one week of the date of entry of this Order, each of the parties is to pay the MRC the amount of money that represents the difference between what the parties have already paid for the 1998-99 MRC budget and the expanded. 1998- 99 MRC budget hereby approved. Dated this [/j__ ~ay of ~ 1999. ~JV~)~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT -:-~is DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN ~OMP[)/Ji\nIA/ITH RULE 58 ArJOR79(a)FRCP ON 6\n~~ BY ~  2 (!: Ji,,,,.,...,._ Magnet Review Conz,nittee 1920 North Main Street, Suite 1 01  North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 (501) 758-0156 {Phone} (501) 758-5366 {Fax} magnet@magnetschool.com {E -mail} June 30, 1999 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U. S. District Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 7220 l Dear Judge Wright: RECEI 0 .. :,:.:. 1 lS99 OFF!aEGF tl!SEGREGATION MONITORING At its June 22, 1999 special-called meeting, the Magnet Review Committee, by formal motion and 4-0 vote (North Little Rock and Joshua lntervenors representatives were not present), approved the interdistrict magnet schools' actual budget for the six original magnet schools for the 1998-99 school year (Draft l). FINAL 1998-99 STIPULATED ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS BUDGET. The total amount budgeted, $20,146,910, is based on a per pupil expenditure of $5,127 .00, calculated from an average third-quarter enrollment of 3,929 .86 students. This budget reflects an increase of $473.00 per student over the 1997-98 budget, with the third year of the five-year proposed program improvement plan included. This final 1998-99 budget reflects actual figures and takes into account the variables (teacher retirement and health insurance changes) that were uncertain when the proposed budget was submitted in June, 1998. As you know, in correspondence dated May 7, 1999, the Magnet Review Committee requested a change in the magnet school grade configurations beginning with the 1999- 2000 school year. As described in that May 7, 1999 letter, tl:le changes result in an additional 132 magnet school seats. At its June 22, 1999 meeting, the Magnet Review Committee approved the proposed budget for the l 999-2000 school year for the six original magnet schools which reflected costs associated with the additio~al seats (Draft 1). PROPOSED 1999-2000 STIPULATED ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS BUDGET: The total proposed budget for the 1999-2000 school year is $22, 941 ,363, which results in a per-pupil expenditure of $5,648 and an increase of $521 .00 per student over the 1998-99 actual budget. Salary negotiations are in progress, and it should be noted that these negotiations may have an impact on the 1999-2000 proposed budget. It is the intention of the Magnet Review CommitteE, therefore, to submit this budget with the recognition that some flexibility rnay be necessary. The Magnet Review Committee respectfully requests the Court's review and approval of the l 998-99 finalized budget, as well as the proposed 1999-2000 budget, both att ached herewith. \"Pursue the Po.,, ihilitin of ,\\ta KIi i' / School 1: nro/1111111I \" . . ' The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- June 30, 1999 The Magnet Review Committee is committed to maintaining the existing quality of the original magnet schools. We will continue to work with the host district as we exercise stringent oversight of the magnet schools' budget in an effort to achieve and ensure efficient management and cost containment to the greatest extent possible. Sincerely, ~ Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sl Attachments - Actual 1998-99 Original Magnet Schools Budget (Draft l) Proposed 1999-2000 Original Magnet Schools Budget (Draft l) cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - Office of Desegregation Monitoring - 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT 1) \\ SUMMARY FOR MAGNET SCHOOLS CERTIFIED 01 Principal STAFF 02 Asst. Pnn. 03 Specialists 04 Counselors 05 Media Spec. 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 07 Music 08 Foreign Lang. 09 Vocational 10 Special Education 11 Gifted 12 Classroom 13 Substitutes 14 Other-Kinderqarten TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY SUPPORT 15 Secretaries STAFF 16 Nurses 17 Custodians 18 Information Services 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 20 Other-Aides 21 Fringe Beneflts(20) TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY TOTAL (10-20) PURCHASED 22 Ut1lit1es SERVICES 23 Travel (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other TOTAL (30) MATERIALS 26 Pnnc1pal's Office SUPPLIES 27 Reqular Classroom (40) 28 Media 29 Other TOTAL (40) CAPITAL 30 Equipment OUTLAY 31 Bu1ld1ng Repair, etc. (50) 32 Other TOTAL (50) OTHER 33 Dues and Fees (60) 34 Other TOTAL (60) TOTAL (30-60) TOTAL (10-60) TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) GRAND TOTAL 97-98 97-98 ,,.  \"''\\,. 97 98, F.T'.E\nBudger  :::::: .. ?f\\'Actua_l \",.\"\"\"'  6.0 $376,587 10.0 $488,462 39.2 $1,343,119 12.4 $505,887 6.5 $253,085 1.0 $26,065 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 12.6 $343,817 8.7 $289,709 5.4 $199,275 177.9 $6,147,115 0.0 $165,000 13.0 $425,964 292.7 $10,564,086 20.0 $407,495 5.4 $163,262 29.0 $356,470 1.0 $22,415 6.0 $133,806 37.0 $285,102 xxxxxxxx $3,090, 046 98 4 $4,458,595 xxxxxxxx $15,022,681 $617,803 $27,000 $0 )0000000( $156,919 xxxxxxxx $801,722 )0000000( $2,500 xxxxxxxx $574,289 XXX)OOO()( $35,450 XXlOO(X)O( $17,632 xxxxxxxx $629,871 xxxxxxxx $281,692 xxxxxxxx $0 $0 $281,692 $11 ,213 xxxxxxxx $0 xxxxxxxx $11,213 xxxxxxxx $1 ,724,498 391.1 $16,747,179 XXlOO(X)O( $1,412,026 xxxxxx $18,159,205 D JUL 1 1999 OffiCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITOat $379,403 $486,343 $1 ,364,146 $505,804 $247,844 $26,065 $0 $0 $344,417 $302,121 $199,275 $6,202,291 $127,946 $425,964 $10,611 ,619 $408,913 $163,742 $366,991 $22,416 $169,737 $312,321 $3,070,261 $4,514,381 $15,125,999 $559,062 $37,886 $0 $142,241 $739,1 88 $0 $462,324 $42,498 $17,721 $522,543 $334,791 $0 $0 $334,791 $32,049 $0 $32,049 $1 ,628,571 $16,754,570 $1 ,404,824 $18,159,395 98-99 / .,,,, ... .,,,., 98-99 ,:,,\u0026gt; ,, 'FlT\nE\n) t.,}.Prowsedt 6.0 $405,002 10,0 $538,313 40.2 $1,573,736 12.4 $562,628 6.5 $285,649 1.0 $29,673 0.0 $0 0.0 $0 12.6 $362,514 8.7 $358,938 5.4 $224,300 177.9 $6,850,936 0.0 $130,000 13.0 $507,181 293.7 $11,828,870 20.0 $442,653 5.4 $199,997 29.0 ,$453,656 1.0 $49,635 6.0 $173,752 37.0 $364,471 )0000000( $3,601,089 98.4 $5,285,254 $17,114,123 $607,657 $46,000 $0 $164,009 )(XX)OO()()( $817,666 XXX)O(XXX $1 ,500 \u0026gt;0000000\u0026lt; $510,244 )OOOO(XXX $43,250 $26,700 $58,~ ,694 XXX)O(XXX $412,097 XXiOOOOO( $0 $0 $412,097 $21,900 $0 XXX)O(XXX $21,900 XXX)O(XXX $1,833,357 392.1 $18,947,481 xxxxxxxx $1 ,199,429 xxxxxx $20,146,910 Line Item Costs - 1 \u0026lt;  Budget ./\\. ?ft:tK\n..-.,..\n..., ... .,.. ....., .. , .:.::: fi'frl\n{p~iiW F \\:: ..... :::?}: ::j:/::\n:::::/::~ : 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $33,837 $26,635 $37,366 Other Obiects $0 $0 $0 Indirect Costs $1,284,189 $1,284,189 $1,075,563 Vocational $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 Athletics  $40,500 $40,500 $33,000 Gifted Programs $500 $500 $500 Plant Services $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 Reading $500 $500 $500 Science $0 $0 $0 Enqlish $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 Special Education $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $0 $0 $0 xx:xxxx $0 $0 $0 xx:xxxx $0 $0 $0 Tofal Line Items $1 ,412,026 $1,404,824 $1,199,429 Per Pupi!Cost/ 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT1} 97-98 97-98 .,r .\" ,\n,97-98 \" . V 98c..99} \" 98-99){ :I Booker Magnet School F.T.E. Budget )? /,:/ Acttiar ..:\"':'-  f'/LE/ \"'\u0026gt;-, Pro.pos~cl}\".:. CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $61 ,582 $61 ,582 1.0 $67,173 STAFF 02 Asst Pr1n 1.0 $43,757 $44,246 1.0 $56,872 03 Specialists 7.0 $268,408 $270,556 7.0 $293,535 04 Counselors 2.0 $76,155 $76,071 2.0 $85,862 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $42,653 $42,653 1.0 $46,975 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 1.0 $26,065 $26,065 1.0 $29,673 07 Music 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 10 Specia l Education 1.3 $55,624 $55,624 1.3 $61 ,889 11 Gifted 1.0 $39,594 $39,594 1.0 $44,121 12 Classroom 30.2 $1,042,379 $1,067,326 30.2 $1,144,112 13 Substitutes 0.0 $30,000 $17,666 0.0 $21 ,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 4.0 $105,300 $105,300 4.0 $146,338 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 49.5 $1,791,516 $1,806,681 49.5 $1,997,549 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 2.0 $39,821 $40,661 2.0 $42,999 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $33,050 $33,530 1.0 $36,169 17 Custodians 4.0 $53,033 $58,134 4.0 $61 ,704 18 I nformat1on Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 0.0 . $0 $0 0.0 $0 20 Other-Aides 7.0 $56,973 $58,696 7.0 $68,802 21 Fringe Benef1ts(20) $519,779 $517,153 $589,205 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 14.2 $706,392 $711 ,910 14.2 $807,152 TOTAL (10-20) $2,497,909 $2,518,591 $2,804,701 PURCHASED 22 Util1t1es $81,480 $75,300 $74,250 SERVICES 23 Travel $2,000 $10,143 $10,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other $13,350 $19,065 $28,584 TOTAL (30) $96,830 $104,508 $112,834 MATERIALS, 26 Pnnc1pal's Office SUPPLIES 27 Re\u0026lt;:iular Classroom $105,498 $75,760 $72,000 (40) 28 Media $5,250 $6,038 $5,500 29 Other $3,372 $3,453 $5,000 TOTAL (40) $114,120 $85,251 $83,500 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $65,760 $78,372 $77, 833 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. $0 $0 -- $0 (50) 32 Other TOTAL (50) $65,760 $78,372 $77, 833 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees $250 $2,655 $1 ,000 (60) 34 Other TOTAL (60) $250 $2,655 $1,000 TOTAL (30-60) $276,960 $270,786 $275,1 67 TOTAL (10-60) 63.7 $2,774,869 $2,789,377 63.7 $3,079,868 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $217,370 $213,446 $186,314 I GRANO TOTAL xxxxxx $2,992,238 $3,002,823 xxxxx.x $3,266,181 Line Item Costs. - . . .,., .. B u_dget .,,.. .. ,.,.,.,.,.,.,. ::\n-::. .. -:-.-:,::..-:-:-: i/i,\\ : 'efciiio.~~4it Booker ' '/? \u0026gt;} /} : ,:j 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $8,357 $4,434 $10,686 Other Objects Indirect Costs $205,499 $205,499 $172,114 Vocational $0 $0 $0 Athletics $0 $0 $0 Gifted Programs $153 $153 $153 Plant Services $2,400 $2,400 $2,400 Reading $80 $80 $80 Science $0 $0 $0 English $240 $240 $240 Special Education $640 $640 $640 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Lrne Items $217,370 $213,446 $186,314 Per Pupfl Cost 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 624.39 624.39 630.43 Total Costs $2,992,238 $3,002,823 $3,266,181 1998--99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT1} 97-98 97 98 \\/c,  c ,\"' .. ,.97-98' . . \u0026gt; .. ,-98~9!\nh, \u0026gt;}C::C:t\\98'-99\\f\\c:  Carver Magnet School F.T.E. Budqet Actual F.T.E\n,.,. .. . Proi:\u0026gt;os\"ed CERTIFIED 01 Pnnc1pal 1.0 $57,650 $57,650 1.0 $63,061 STAFF 02 Asst. Prrn 1.0 $45,496 $45,496 1.0 $53,026 03 Speci alists 8.0 $285,971 $285,886 8.0 $315,292 04 Counselors 2.0 $70,795 $70,795 2.0 $74,292 05 Media Spec. 1.5 $54,248 $54,248 1.5 $61,288 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 07 Music 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 10 Special Education 1.5 $50,773 $50,773 1.5 $56,857 11 Gifted 1.4 $48,976 $48,976 1.4 $55,762 12 Classroom 24.3 $694,929 $723,844 24.3 $828,825 13 Substitutes 0.0 $25,000 $16,739 0.0 $20,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 4.0 $128,706 $128,706 4.0 $145,675 TOTAL CERTI FIED SALARY 44.7 $1 ,462,545 $1,483,113 44.7 $1,674,077 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 3.0 $48,392 $48,392 3.0 $60,537 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $24,383 $24,383 1.0 $28,366 17 Custodians 4.0 $43,692 $43,462 4.0 $71,278 18 Information Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 20 Other-Aides 11 .0 $87,419 $87,718 11 .0 $112,097 21 Fringe Benefits(20) $456,456 $449,541 $544,184 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 19.2 $664,078 $657,231 19.2 $824,735 TOTAL (10-20) $2,126,623 $2,140,345 $2,498,812 PURCHASED 22 Ut1l1t1es $81 ,653 $72,098 $83,707 SERVICES 23 Travel $9,000 $7 ,676 $10,000 , (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other $8,560 $8,147 $1i,915 TOTAL (30) $99,213 $87,921 $106,622 MATERIALS 26 Pnnc1pal's Office SUPPLIES 27 Regula r Classroom $57,660 $71 ,813 $57,800 (40) 28 Media $5,500 $9,651 $10,000 29 Other $3,600 $2,725 $3,200 TOTAL (40) $66,760 $84.189 $71 ,000 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $56,167 $35,442 $36,430 OUTLAY 31 Buildinq Repai r, etc XII I .... (50) 32 Other ,. . TOTAL (50) I $56,167 $35,442 $36,430 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees $4,000 $8,287 $8,000 (60) 34 other TOTAL (60) $4,000 $8,287 $8,000 TOTAL (30-60) $226,140 $215,839 $222,052 TOTAL (10-60) 63.9 $2,352,763 $2,356,184 63.9 $2.720,864 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $217,167 $217,159 $183,238 GRAND TOTAL xxxxxx SZ,569,930 $2,573,343 xxxxxx $2,904,102 Line Item Costs - Budget Actual Proposed Carver . 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $13,390 $13,382 $12,010 Other Objects Indirect Costs $200,352 $200,352 $167,803 Vocational $0 $0 $0 Athletics $0 $0 $0 Gifted Programs $149 $149 $149 Plant Services $2,340 $2,340 $2,340 Reading $78 $78 $78 Science $0 $0 $0 English $234 $234 $234 Special Education $624 $624 $624 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $217,167 $217,159 $183,238 Per Pupil Cost 1997-98 1997-98 (( , 1998~99 .. 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 608.75 608.75 616.33 Total Costs $2,569,930 $2,573,343 $2,904,102 Per Pupil Cost $4\n222 y$4\n221   .. / $4:112 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT1} 97-98 97-98 \\/ ,, ,.,/'97-98 ?,, . 98-99:, . ./\\::-,,.sa-99'\\'c\u0026lt;\\ . Gibbs Magnet School F.T.E. B Udctet)/.00:,  / 00c\u0026lt;Actua1c :,:,F,LE/ :):) Proo6$t'!c\nf ? CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $50,354 $53,170 1.0 $62,256 STAFF 02 Asst Pr1n 1.0 $58,119 $55,200 1.0 $48,518 03 Specialists 5.8 $169,956 $170,916 6.8 $230,842 04 Counselors 1.0 $43,567 $43,567 1.0 $48,507 OS Media Spec. 1.0 $43,696 $43,569 1.0 $49,766 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 07 Music 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang . 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 10 Special Education 1.5 $50,753 $58,247 1.5 $74,622 11 Gifted 1.0 $31,047 $31,047 1.0 $35, 111 12 Classroom 15.0 $485,954 $477,552 15.0 $522,415 13 Substitutes 0.0 $14,000 $7,009 0.0 $14,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 2.0 $67,312 $67,312 2.0 $76,237 TOTAL CERTIFIEb SALARY 29.3 $1 ,014,757 $1,007,589 30.3 $1,162,334 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 1.4 $22,339 $22,260 1.4 $29,288 STAFF 16 Nurses 0.8 $14,569 $14,569 0.8 $32,457 17 Custodians 3.0 $40,097 $39,684 3.0 $45,642 18 Information Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Para professionals-Other 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 20 Other-Aides 5.6 $40,499 $47,870 5.6 $36,188 .. 21 Fringe Benefits(20) $303,473 $307,216 $369,681 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 11 .0 $424,712 $435,335 11.0 $521,529 TOTAL (10-20) $1,439,470 $1,442,923 $1 ,683,863 PURCHASED 22 Utilities $39,439 $36,305 .... ,.,..,.-,, $38,201 SERVICES 23 Travel $2,000 $9,268 :.-...\n.. $8,500  ,' (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other $3,985 $5,957 $Hi,824 TOTAL {30) yy $45,424 $51,530 $62,525 MATERIALS, 26 Pnnc1pal's Office $1,000 $0 $1,000 SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom $49,625 $35,821 $39,1 41 (40) 28 Media $3,500 $2,510 $3,000 29 Other $1,260 $1 ,488 $3,000 TOTAL (40) $55,385 $39,820 $46,141 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $62,059 $65,272 $183,040 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc. (50) 32 Other TOTAL (50) $62,059 $65,272 $183,040 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees $1,000 $4,493 $1,000 {60) 34 Other ~ TOTAL (60) $1 ,000 $4,493 $1,000 TOTAL (30-60) $163,868 $161 ,115 $292,706 TOTAL {10-60) 40.3 $1,603,338 $1 ,604,038 41 .3 $1,976,569 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - {SECOND PAGE) $106,558 $106,558 $89,919 GRAND TOTAL xxxxxx $1 ,709,895 $1,710,596 xxxxx:x $2,066,488 Line Item Costs - / :: : .. /.Budge( ? .\n::::::\n:::::.:::'.:'11 ,,-.:\"' : \"'/ !  - '::':'c'i::  t tirc$~t~~~ l Gibbs\\ ::., .~ \u0026lt;\u0026lt; ,,,::rtt 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $540 $540 $835 Other Objects Indirect Costs $104,236 $104,236 $87,302 Vocational $0 $0 $0 Athletics $0 $0 $0 Gifted Programs $78 $78 $78 Plant Services $1,218 $1,218 $1,218 Reading $41 $41 $41 Science $0 $0 $0 English $122 $122 $122 Special Education $325 $325 $325 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $106,558 $106,558 $89,919 3rd Qtr ADM or Proj 316.71 316.71 324.80 Total Costs $1,709,895 $1,710,596 $2,066,488 . Pe?'\"piJpi(1\nost..- :. -:::::,:::::,:,:::\\\\ik)? .//\\kit . ,.~ ,.,., ,,.,.,.,,,.,.,,,.,.,.,.,  ,,\"'\"'\"'' ~- n, :,:,:,::::::::::,:\n:::::::::::::,:,i,_p,\n.,.9~:: 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT1) 97-98 97-98 '\". '\u0026gt; \"' \" -i':97-98'''' 'i 9\u0026amp;\n'9m: :::::.:. ,,\u0026gt; 98-9'9 ,i'i/i Willi ams Magnet School F.T.E. Budget /}' Actual \"\". it ,,,F\nT\nE} .. , .  ,. Proposed.\\,, .. CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $66,662 $66,662 1.0 $72,770 STAFF 02 Asst Pnn 1.0 $44,837 $44,837 1.0 $47,761 03 Specialists 5.0 $201,181 $201,181 5.0 $223,133 04 Counselors 1.4 $51 ,530 $51,530 1.4 $57,763 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $31 ,151 $26,038 1.0 $36,985 06 Art-Perf./P rod. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 07 Music 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 10 Special Education 1.1 $39,220 $44,138 1.1 $50,456 11 Gifted 2.0 $79,658 $79,658 2.0 $89,246 12 Classroom 20.0 $703,555 $703,414 20.0 $807,642 13 Substitutes 0.0 $20,000 $12,980 0.0 $20,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 3.0 $124,646 $124,646 3.0 $138,931 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 35.5 $1 ,362,442 $1,355,084 35.5 $1 ,544,686 SUPPORT 15 Secretanes 2.6 $47,016 $47,016 2.6 $53,584 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $39,749 $39,749 1.0 $44,854 17 Custodians 4.0 $47,750 $53, 006 4.0 $55,662 18 Information Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 20 Other-Aides 9.0 $31 ,968 $43,637 9.0 $62,177 21 Fringe Benef1ts(20) $397,919 $393,877 , $472,966 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 16.8 $568,138 $581 ,020 16.8 $697,515 TOTAL (10-20) $1 ,930,580 $1,936,104 $2,242,201 PURCHASED 22 Utilities $54,789 $49,789 ._._.,\n'.:.:::--.-.. $50,168 SERVICES 23 Travel $3,000 $4,233 $3,500 , (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements 25 Other $6,000 $4,267 .. $6,329 TOTAL (30) - $63, 789 $58,290 )()O()OOO(X $59,997 MATERIALS 26 Princ1pal's Office XXXXXXl\u0026lt;X SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom $66,090 $72,633 )OO()OO(XX $62,608 (40) 28 Media $5,000 $4,662 $5,000 29 Other xxxxxxxx $1,400 $1 ,502 $2,500 TOTAL (40) xxxxxxxx $72, 490 $78,797 )(XX)()(X)()( $70,108 CAPITAL 30 Equipment . $34,480 $32,834 $34,400 OUTLAY 31 Bu1ld1ng Repair, etc. XXXlOO\u0026lt;)()( (50) 32 Other $0 $0 )OO()O(X)O( $0 TOTAL (50) xxxxxxxx $34,480 $32,834 xxxxxxxx $34,400 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees xxxxxxxx $800 $3,315 XXXlOOO\u0026lt;X $3,900 (60) 34 Other )0000000( .. TOTAL (60) xxxxxxxx $800 $3,315 xxxxxxxx $3,900 TOTAL (30-60) )0000000( $171,559 $173,235 $168,405 TOTAL (10-60) 52.3 $2,1 02, 138 $2,109,339 52.3 $2,4 10,606 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $172,794 $164,394 $146,494 GRAND TOTAL xxxx:xx $2,274,932 $2,273,733 x:xxxxx .$2,557,100 Line Item Costs - w111iains.\u0026lt; 1997-98 1997-98 Stipends $8,400 $0 $8,358 Other Objects Indirect Costs $161,631 $161,631 $135,373 Vocational $0 $0 $0 Athletics $0 $0 $0 Gifted Programs $120 $120 $120 Plant Services $1,888 $1,888 $1,888 Reading $63 $63 $63 Science $0 $0 $0 English $189 $189 $189 Special Education $503 $503 $503 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items $172,794 $164,394 $146,494 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 491.10 491.10 486.93 Total Costs $2,274,932 $2,273,733 $2,557,100 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(DRAFT 1) 97-98 97-98  .  . 97 -98 \" ...  98~99 \n,:?, .. :,:,98~S9)/t., Mann Magnet School F\nT.E. Budget: . ?'.\n:: \\\n\\\\. Actual \\ .......... . / F,T,E~\\ .tt,,,,.Pr.6.6Q~cj:.:.,) CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $68,177 $68,177 1.0 $67,313 STAFF 02 Asst. Prin. 3.0 $134,985 $134,985 3.0 $150,847 03 Specialists 3.6 $94,123 $120,390 3.6 $137,303 04 Counselors 3.0 $122,979 $122,980 3.0 $138,140 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $44,702 $44,702 1.0 $49,770 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 07 MUSIC 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 5.6 $149,318 $149,686 5.6 $161,424 10 Special Education 1.3 $36,600 $36,600 1.3 $44,557 11 Gifted 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 12 Classroom 47.8 $1,605,497 $1 ,609,447 47.8 $1,736,395 13 Substitutes 00 $36,000 $36,915 0.0 $30,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 0.0 $0 $0 0,0 $0 TOTAL CERTIFlffi SALARY 66.3 $2,292,381 $2,323,881 66.3 $2,515,749 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 5.0 $98,328 $98,328 5.0 $111,209 STAFF 16 Nurses 1.0 $34,864 $34,864 1.0 $38,901 17 Custodians 6.0 $64,058 $66,190 6.0 $87,118 18 Information Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 1.0 $33,763 $33,087 1.0 $25,957 20 Other-Aides 2.4 $37,240 $41,005 2.4 $46,059 21 Fringe Benef1ts(20) $657,749 $653,559 $738,034 TOT AL SUPPORT SALARY 15.6 $929,738 $930,770 15.6 $1 ,055,550 TOTAL (10-20) xxxxxxx:x $3,222,119 $3,254,651 $3,571,299 PURCHASED 22 Utilities $169,276 $143,189 $158,629 SERVICES 23 Travel $4,000 $2,1 24 $7,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements $0 $0 $0 25 Other ... $61,474 $64,787 $58,878 TOTAL (30) $234,750 $210,100 $22,4,507 MATERIALS, 26 Princ1pal's Office $1,000 $0 $0 SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom $129,299 $112,426 $119,615 (40) 28 Media \" $7,000 $10,227 .... $10,550 29 Other $3,000 $3,128 $5,000 TOTAL (40) $140,299 $125,780 $135,165 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $19,790 $25,448 $16,450 OUTLAY 31 Building Repair, etc $0 $0 $0 (50) 32 Other TOTAL (50) $19,790 $25,448 $16,450 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees $1,500 $6,678 $4,000 (60) 34 Other TOTAL (60) $1,500 $6,678 $4,000 TOTAL (30-60) $396,339 $368,005 $380,122 TOTAL (10-60) 81 .9 $3,618,458 $3,622,656 81.9 $3,951 ,421 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $339,350 $339,350 $286,111 GRAND TOTAL xxxxxx $3,957,807 $3,962,006 xxxxxx. $4,237,532 Line Item Costs - Budget Actual Proposed Mann 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $3,1 50 $3,150 $1 ,672 Other Objects Indirect Costs $296,283 $296,283 $248,150 Vocational $15,480 $15,480 $15,480 Athletics $19,592 $19,592 $15,964 Gifted Programs $0 $0 $0 Plant Services $3,461 $3,461 $3,461 Reading $115 $115 $115 Science $0 $0 $0 English $346 $346 $346 Special Education $923 $923 $923 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items  $339,350 $339,350 $286, 111 Per Pupil Cost ,., 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj. 900.23 900.23 889.83 Total Costs $3,957,807 $3,962,006 $4,237,532 Per Pupil Cost $4,396 .- 1998-99 BUDGET PROPOSAL(ORAFT1) \\l7J.l8  ?,-\u0026lt; \u0026gt;i 97-98 i!Jt\u0026gt;?r r: tt.n,.gsJ::: {}\\}  98:-99/ ?}i\\:98f9$ i?}J): Parkview Magnet School F.T\nE\n:  ,. Budget\\) ::: . {\\:t: A-cttlat tt\u0026gt;  Jffl\\E~ : { Pf6Whlic[ ) CERTIFIED 01 Principal 1.0 $72,162 $72,162 1.0 $72,429 STAFF 02 Asst Prin. 3.0 $161 ,268 $161 ,579 3.0 $181,289 03 Speciali sts 9.8 $323,480 $315,218 9.8 $373,632 04 Counselors 3.0 $140,860 $140,860 3.0 $158,064 05 Media Spec. 1.0 $36,635 $36,635 1.0 $40,866 06 Art-Perf./Prod. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 07 Music 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 08 Foreign Lang. 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 09 Vocational 7.0 $194,499 $194,730 7.0 $201 ,089 10 Special Education 2.0 $56,739 $56,739 2.0 $70,559 11 Gifted 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 12 Classroom 40.6 $1,614,801 $1 ,620,709 40.6 $1,811 ,547 13 Substitutes 0.0 $40,000 $36,638 0.0 $25,000 14 Other-Kindergarten 0.0 $0 $0 0.0 $0 TOTAL CERTIFIED SALARY 67.4 $2,640,444 $2,635,271 67.4 $2,934,474 SUPPORT 15 Secretaries 6.0 $151,599 $152,256 6.0 $145,036 STAFF 16 Nurses 0.6 $16,648 $16,648 0.6 $19,250 17 Custodians 8.0 . $107,841 $106,515 8.0 $132,253 18 Information Services 0.2 $3,736 $3,736 0.2 $8,273 19 Paraprofessionals-Other 5.0 $100,043 $136,650 5.0 $147,795 20 Other-Aides 2.0 $31,002 $33,395 2.0 $39,149 21 Fringe Benefits(20) $754,670 $748,915 $887,018 TOTAL SUPPORT SALARY 21 .8 $1,165,538 $1 ,198,115 21.8 $1 ,378,773 TOT AL ( 10-20) $3,805, 982 $3,833,385 $4,313,247 PURCHASED 22 Utilities $191,166 $182,381 \" $202,702 SERVICES 23 Travel $7,000 $4,441 ,.,.,,,,., .... ,,., -.. - $7,000 (30) 24 Maintenance Agreements $0 $0 $0 25 Other $63,550 $40,018 :i:.:.a I.\n~,_ $41,480 TOTAL (30) $261,716 $226,840 -  $25~, 182 MATERIALS, 26 Princ1pal's Office $500 $0 $500 SUPPLIES 27 Regular Classroom $166,117 $93,871 ~ $159,080 (40) 28 Media $9,200 $9,410 $8,200 29 Other $5,000 $5,425 $8,000 TOTAL (40) r $180,817 $108,706 $175,780 CAPITAL 30 Equipment $43,437 $97,423 $63,944 OUTLAY 31 Bu1ld1ng Repair, etc. (50) 32 Other TOTAL (50) r $43,437 $97,423 $63,944 OTHER 33 Dues and Fees $3,663 $6,621 $4,000 (60) 34 Other TOTAL (60) $3,663 $6,621 ' \" $4,000 TOTAL (30-60) $489,633 $439,590 $494,906 TOTAL (10-60) 89.2 $4,295,614 $4,272,976 89.2 $4,808,154 TOTAL LINE ITEMS - (SECOND PAGE) $358,787 $363,918 $307,353 GRAND TOTAL xxxxxx $4,654,401 $4,636,894 xxxxxx $5,1.15,507 Line Item Costs - /\\\u0026gt;: :\": .-,,\".Budget: .,,:,:.:. . . :,,,,: 1:::::,? :-''.-:\"' .. _. -- ,,:-::,:, :: :: rH=lt$i\u0026amp;~t JJ Parkview:\"', \u0026gt;.  , \u0026lt;tt 1997-98 1997-98 1998-99 Stipends $0 $5,130 $3,805 Other Objects Indirect Costs $316, 189 $3 16,189 $264,821 Vocational  $16, 520 $16,520 $16,520 Athletics $20,908 $20,908 $1 7,036 Gifted Programs $0 $0 $0 Plant Services $3,693 $3,693 $3,693 Reading $123 $123 $123 Science $0 $0 $0 English $369 $369 $369 Special Education $985 $985 $985 xxxxxx xxxxxx Total Line Items  $358 ,787 $363,918 $307,353 3rd Qtr. ADM or Proj . 960.71 960. 71 981.54 Total Costs $4,654,401 $4,636,894 $5,115,507 OCT-18-99 HON 11:11 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 5013246576 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COLTRT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LIT1LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, vs. * * No. LR-C-82-866 P. 01 fjLED U.S. DIST~ICT COURT EASTE:R OISTRJCT ARKANSAS ocr t s 1999 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., Defendants, * * * * Post-It\"' brand fax transmittal memo 7671 1-!RS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, * * * : TD Co. Ocpt. From Co. Phone KATHERINE Th1GHT, et al., Intervenors. * ---------------- ORDER Before the Court is the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") for approval of the interdistrict magnet schools' final budget for the 1998-1999 school year. The YIB.C communicated the final budget to the Court in a letter dated June 30, 1999 (attached) The etter also contains a proposed budget for the 1999-2000 school year\nhowever, the Court will address the proposed budget in a separate Order. The Court will allow the parties to and including 10 days from entry of this Order to object to :MRC's final budget for 1998-1999. Should no objections be filed within the time aUowed, the Court will enter an Order approving the budget . .--ft'- IT IS SO ORDERED THIS /j DAY OF OCTOBER, 1999 CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT rHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN CO~PUAN~zwr~~ 56 ANDIOA 79(\u0026gt; FRCP ')llf / (j, I 5L . l!!V __ .tt::::: OCT-18-99 MON 11:11 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 M agli.t!9t Review C om.[~1ittee 1920 North Main Street, Suite 101  North little Rock, Arkansas 72114 (501) 758-0156 {Phone} (501) 758-5366 {Fax} magnet@magnetschool.com {E-mail} June 30, 1999 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright Judge, U. S. District Cour1 Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capi1ol Suite 302 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Judge Wright: At its June 22, -1999 special-called meeting, the Magnet Review Committee. by formal motion and 4-0 vote (North Little Rock and Joshua lntervenors representatives were not present), approved the interdistrict magnet schools' actual budget for the six original magnet schools for the 1998-99 school year !Draft 1). FINAL 1998-99 STIPULATED ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS BUDGET: P. 02 The total amount budgeted, 520,146,910, is based on a per pupil expenditure of $5,127.00, calculated from an overage third-quarter enrollment of 3,929 .86 students. This budget reflects an increase of 5473.00 per student over the 1997-98 budget. with the third year of the five-year proposed program improvement pion included. This final 1998-99 budget reflects actual figures and takes into account the variables (teacher retirement and health insurance changes) that were uncertain when the proposed budget was submitted in June, 1998. As you know, in correspondence dated Moy 7, 1999, the Magnet Review Committee requested a change in the magnet school grade configurations beginning with the 1999- 2000 school year As described in that May 7, 1999 letter, the changes result in on additional 132 magnet school seats. At its June 22, 1999 meeting, the Magnet Review Committee approved the proposed budget for the 1999-2000 school year for the six original magnet schools which reflected costs associated with the additional seats (Draft ll. PROPOSED 1999-2000 STIPULATED ORIGINAL MAGNET SCHOOLS BUDGET\nThe total proposed budget for the 1999-2000 school year is $22,941,363, which results in o per-pupil expenditure of 55,648 and an increase of $521.00 per student over the 1998-99 actual budget. Salary negotiations ore in progress, and it should be noted that these negotiations may have an impact on the 1999-2000 proposed budget. It is the intention of the Magnet Review Committee, therefore, to submit this budget with the recognition that some flexibility may be necessary. The Magnet Review Committee respectfully requQsts the Court's review and approval of the 1998-99 finalized budget, as well as the proposed 1999-2000 budget, both attoched herewith. \"Pursue the Possibilities of,\",lagnet School Enrollment\" OCT-18-99 MON 11:12 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NQ 5013246576 P. 03 The Honorable Susan Webber Wright -2- June 30, 1999 The Magnet Review Committee is committed to maintaining !he existing quality of the original magnet schools. We will continue to work with the host district as we exercise stringent oversight of the magnet schools' budget in an effort to achieve and ensure efficient management and cost containment to the greatest extent possible. Sincerely, ~, . ~..--- Sadie Mitchell, Chairperson Magnet Review Committee SM/DGC:sl Attachments - Adual 1998-99 Orlginal Magnet Schools Budget (Draft 1) Proposed 1999-2000 Original Magnet Schools Budget (Draft l) cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor - Office of Desegregation Monitoring OCT-18-99 MON tt:13 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 04 IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COL1RT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LIT1LE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * Plaintllf: * VS. * No. LR-C-82-866 * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL * DISTRICT NO. I, et al., * Defendants, *  :MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., * Inteivenors, *  KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., * Intervenors. * :MEMO TO THE FILE FNLED us OIST/~ICT ccu\n.r EASTERN OIS'f\"RICT ARXANSAS 0('.-, t A I\"\"\" Jv f ~ r\"'J\"J'j JAMES 8'1: ----~~~JJL Defendant Pulaski County Special School District (PCS SD) requested an informal inchambers conference [docket no. 3291]. The Court granted PCSSD's request and held a conference on September 22, 1999, with all parties present. Accordingly, the Court requests that the Clerk make the necessary docket entry to remove PCSSD's request from the pending motions' list. Dated this 14th da of October, 1999 o-Jo Baldwin Law Clerk to Judge Wright f IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION 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, * * KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., * Intervenors. * ORDER FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS NOV 2 'l. 1999 JAME~VV.M:!MACK,ClERK By: \\J ,~U f\\ M V f'---- oep CLERK IV NOV 2 3 1999 OiRCEOf Before the Court is the request of the Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") for approval of the interdistrict magnet schools' final budget for the 1998-1999 school year. 1 Without objection, the Court hereby approves the budget as submitted. ,J IT IS SO ORDERED THIS Jib DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1999 QZ~,~2 'tttfjgF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 The MRC communicated the final budget to the Court in a letter dated June 30, 1999. For a copy of the letter, see docket no. 3303, attachment.\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 Resources.\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\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_672","title":"Management audit","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":null,"dc_date":["1998/1999"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","School management and organization","School employees","School facilities"],"dcterms_title":["Management audit"],"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/672"],"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\n  \n\nreceived OCT 3 0 1998 Office of DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK FOR OUR PURUC SCHOOLS October 29, 1998 IMPORTANT INVITATION TO: Ann Brown FROM: Odies Wilson, HI / President of the Little Rock Alliance For Our Public Schools SUBJECT: Invitation To Attend Public Input Session Regarding Our Schools Wednesday, November 4,1998 Drop By Anytime Between 4 p.m. - 8 p.m. Martin Luther King Elementary School 907 Martin Luther King Blvd. As you know, the Alliance is working in partnership with the Little Rock School District with a consulting firm to study the management and financial practices of our school district. The firm, MGT of America, will have a team of professionals visiting Little Rock on the evening of November 4*. You should have already been contacted to arrange a one-on-one interview with a member of the MGT Team. We want you to also feel free to attend the public input session. MGTs goal is to talk to as many people as possible about our school district. By hearing from as many people as possible, they will better understand the positive strides that have been made in recent years and months, as well as the unique challenges facing our district. I especially want to invite you to participate in the open forum being held at Martin Luther King Elementary School from 4:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m. on Wednesday, November 4*. It will not be necessary for you to attend the full, four-hour event. Time constraints will not allow the MGT team to visit with you extensively one-on-one at the open forum, but please plan to stay for as long as you like. The format for the forum will allow you to drop by.at any time during the four- hour event and contribute your thoughts and perspective to the team from MGT. Feel free to also invite any other guests who have comments they would like to share with MGT regarding the Little Rock School District. Thank you in advance for responding to this special invitation. We value your opinion and want you to be able to share them with the team from MGT. Please make every effort to drop by Martin Luther King School next Wednesday evening. Without your participation, the MGT team will not have the benefit of your insight as they work on a series of recommendations to help us plan for the bright future of our district and its students. I hope to see you next Wednesday evening. You will consider your attendance time well spent. 523 Louisiana Street  Lafayette Building  Suite 175  Little Rock  Arkansas  72201 Phone (501) 370-9300 . Fax (501) 375-877403/25/1999 23:31 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 01/01 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 sevann@lrsdadm.lrsd.kl 2.ar.us For Immediate Release March 25,1999 For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 Management Study Presented to LRSD A six-month management study of the Little Rock School District is complete, and results of the study were submitted to the LRSD Board of Education attonight s (Thursday) public meeting. The purpose of the study was to identify specific areas of the districts management structure and operations which could be improved and to provide a thorough review of the districts financial condition. The study was commissioned by a coalition of local entities, including the LRSD, the Little Rock Alliance For Our Public Schools, Fifty for the Future, and the Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce. The coalition hired MGT of America to conduct the study and report its findings to the community. Dr. Linda Recio of MGT of America outlined for the LRSD Board the scope of its work and presented copies of its 500 page report. Recio encouraged the Board to read the report prior to her return visit with the Board in May. at which time she will respond to questions that Board members may have. Superintendent Les Gamine notes that many changes have been underway during the time that MGT consultants have been surveying staff and community leaders, gathering data, and developing its report Even as we embrace the management study results and recommendations,\" Gamine says, we recognize that our district has been in the process of significant program changes since the study began. We realize that these changes in our curriculum, campus leadership initiative and middle school transition, just to name a few, tt must be considered as we review the recommendations.' Some of the recommendations address the districts organizational structure and suggest numerous changes in personnel alignment. Gamine says ttiat organizational changes can be accomplished through attrition including retirements and normal mobility of staff. The report also concludes that the district needs additional financial support from the community in order to maintain adequate school facilities. Gamine suggests a period of two to three months for review of the recommendations and establishment of a timeline for implementation. MGT \\ bfC- O f J C.0rnjile.4t, /\u0026gt;ook lc.\u0026lt;i A MANAGEMENT STUDY OF THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Final Report March 25,1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1 } 1.1 1.2 Study Methodology......................................................... Current Environment in the Little Rock School District 1-3 1-5 2.0 BACKGROUND ON THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT. .2-1 2.1 2.2 2.3 Historical Background and Future of Desegregation.... Current Environment of the Little Rock School District. Current Central Office Structure..................................... ...2-1 ...2-6 .2-14 3.0 COMPARISONS TO OTHER SCHOOL DISTRICTS 3-1 1 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Community and Enrollment Characteristics Central Office Staffing................................... Central Office Organizational Structure..... District Income and Expenditures................ ...3-2 ...3-5 .3-10 .3-48 4.0 SURVEY RESULTS 4-1 5.0 6.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 Central Office Administrator Survey Results............................ Principal Survey Results............................................................. Teacher Survey Results.............................................................. Comparison of Central Office Administrators, Principals, and Teachers Surveys........................................................................ Comparison of Little Rock School District (LRSD) Responses to Other School Systems............................................................ EFFECTIVENESS OF THE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 Superintendents Office................................................................ Division of School Services........................................................... Division of Instruction..................................................................... Operations Division........................................................................ Impediments to Implementation of Chapter Recommendations ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION ...4-1 ...4-7 .4-12 .4-16 .4-29 .5-1 ...5-3 .5-10 .5-15 .5-30 .5-35 6-1 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 Financial Management and Organization.... Budget Processes and Financial Reporting Assessment of Revenues and Tax Data.... Assessment of Operating Costs................... Assessment of Fund Balance...................... ...6-1 ...6-8 6-28 6-69 6-94i TABLE OF CONTENTS 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 PAGE ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (Continued) 6.6 6.7 6.8 Assessment of Asset Management, Debt, Internal Controls, and Accounting Processes...................................................................... Obstacles which Impede Implementation of Chapter Recommendations............................................................................ Chapter Summary.............................................................................. FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, AND REPAIR 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 Introduction..................................................................... Funding for New Construction...................................... Funding for Maintenance and Repair.......................... Obstacles Which Impede Implementation of Chapter Recommendations......................................................... ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9 Technology Plan........................................................................ Technology Committee............................................................. Staffing....................................................................................... Infrastructure.............................................................................. Hardware.................................................................................... Staff Development.................................................................... Technical Support...................................................................... Obstacles to Implementation of Chapter Recommendations Year 2000 (Y2K) Compliance................................................... NEW INSTRUCTIONAL INITIATIVES 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 Honors and Enrichment...................................................................... Improving Mathematics Achievement................................................ Early Childhood Initiatives: Four-Year Old, Headstart, and HIPPY Reading/Language Arts..................................................................... English as a Second Language........................................................ Alternative Education: The New Accelerated Learning Center.... Computer Literacy................................................................................ Summary, Commendation, and Recommendation.......................... Obstacles Which Impede Implementation of Chapter Recommendations............................................................................... APPENDICES Appendix A: Appendix B: Survey Instruments Survey Results 6-99 6-115 6-116 ,7-1 ...7-1 ...7-4 .7-21 .7-25 8-1 ...8-1 ...8-5 ...8-8 .8-10 .8-11 ,8-17 .8-23 8-27 8-30 9-1 ...9-4 ...9-9 ,9-14 ,9-17 .9-22 .9-26 .9-30 9-32 9-35 1EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 i I 1 J 1 1EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overview In a positive spirit of cooperation, in Fall 1998 the Little Rock Alliance For Our Public Schools assembled a Coalition including the Little Rock School District (LRSD), Fifty for the Future, Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce, and others. The Coalition was charged with moving the LRSD forward to improve the quality of education for all children served by the district, and, in an effort to do so, called for a management study and an evaluation of the school districts current financial position. The Coalition stated that results of the study would be used to demonstrate to the community the need for further and continuing support of public education in the Little Rock community, and build on the positive momentum gained as the result of being released from court supervision through implementation of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. In October 1998, MGT of America, Inc., was awarded the contract to conduct the management study of the Little Rock School District (LRSD). The spirit of collaboration and mutual support between the Little Rock business community and the Little Rock School District was clearly evident throughout the duration of the study. Unlike other communities, where declining student enrollments and the need to provide greater fiscal resources to urban school districts, have caused Chambers of Commerce and business leaders to focus their support on suburban public or private local educational agencies, the Little Rock business community is placing its financial and human resources, and above all its confidence, in support of this urban school district. This esprit de corp and partnership are characteristics that the Little Rock community can be proud and ones which should be emulated in other urban communities throughout this country. It is within this environment that MGT was engaged to address the specific education issues identified by the Coalition. The Little Rock School District enrolls approximately 25,000 students in grades K-12, operates 50 school facilities, and employs about 3,800 people. The LRSDs budget is approximately $164 million. As a public school system, the LRSD is governed by an elected Board of Directors, and is administered by a Superintendent who directs an organizational stnjcture that consists of four major divisions: Instruction, Schools, Administrative Services, and Operations. Located in the heart of Arkansass largest city, the district is experiencing many of the same challenges and opportunities facing other urban school districts in the country including decaying facilities, shrinking resources, and increasing demands for varied approaches to teaching students to be productive members of society. Given these common difficulties and opportunities of urban school districts, as well as other challenges unique to the Little Rock School District, the MGT review team found a generally well run school district. However, there are significant opportunities to improve management, instructional delivery, communication with internal and external stakeholders, and financial stability. Many innovative and exemplary programs exist within the Little Rock School District. The consulting team found repeated examples of dedicated and hard-working MGT of America, Inc. Page IExecutive Summary employees who often must deal with diminishing resources and increasingly complex demands. Charge for the ManaQement Study  I The current study was authorized and paid for by both the Little Rock Alliance for Our Public Schools and the Little Rock School District, and both organizations participated in discussions to determine the scope of the study. As stated in the Request for Proposals (RFP), the purpose of the management study was to complete a comprehensive review in the following areas:  the management structure of the Little Rock School District\n the appropriateness of the number, type, and utilization of positions\n the organization's effectiveness in attaining district goals\n a comparison of the current management structure, staffing pattern, and utilization of personnel with other comparable urban school districts\n the current financial position\nI  the adequacy of current and projected revenue to meet district initiatives in the areas of facilities, technology, and instmctional initiatives\nand  the factors which might impede achievement of district initiatives. The study was completed within a five-month time period with a final report submitted in March 1999. The calendar for the management study is shown in Exhibit 1. Methodology for the Management Study . MGT consultants began research for this project in October 1998. Several methods were used to gather and analyze new and existing data for the management study and these methods are summarized below. A major component of the study was the input provided by LRSD administrators, teachers, business leaders, parents, and students. The first step in the study included a review of an extensive set of previous reports, records, documents, and data. This information was used as a starting point for collecting data during the diagnostic review and on-site work. In recent years, the Little Rock School District has had several studies conducted of its operations. One of the most significant, the 1996 A Plan for Success prepared by the Little Rock Alliance For Our Public Schools, called for the LRSD to strive for a high quality, integrated education system with strong community support. Several recommendations were provided to the district by the Alliance to increase student enrollment, secure stability in its leadership, and improve facilities. A second report. Plain Talk, prepared by the University of Arkansas at Little Rock in 1997 also presented recommendations to improve the Little Rock School District, MGT of America, Inc. Page IIExecutive Summary 1 1 ( including converting from junior high schools to middle schools, focusing on discipline, and implementing a systematic plan for school facilities improvements. Each of these reports, as well as those prepared by the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, provided valuable information to the consultant team as we addressed the issues which provided the framework for the current study. t Employee Surveys To secure input from central office administrators, principals, and teachers prior to beginning the on-site review by the entire team, the MGT team prepared and disseminated three different survey instruments. Through anonymous surveys, central office administrators, principals, and teachers were given the opportunity to express their views about the management and operations of the Little Rock School District. The survey instruments for each respondent group were similar in format and content to provide a baseline database for determining how the opinions and perceptions of central office administrators, principals, and teachers varied. Diagnostic Review 1 During the week of November 2-6, 1998, four MGT staff members conducted the diagnostic review. Interviews were completed in group settings with representatives of various organizations, and with individuals, including members of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors and senior staff. Visits were also made to several campuses in the district. Formal On-Site Review 1 During the week of December 7-11, 1998, MGT conducted the formal on-site review with a team of six professionals. As part of our on-site study, we examined the following:  Central Office Management and Structure  Financial Management  Funding for Facilities Use and Management  Funding for Administrative and Instructional Technology  Funding for Instructional Initiatives under the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan Our systematic assessment of the Little Rock School District included the use of MGTs Guidelines for Conducting Management and Performance Audits of School Districts. Following our collection and analysis of existing data and new information, we tailored our guidelines to reflect local policies and administrative procedures, the unique conditions of the Little Rock School District and the input of Board and Alliance members, central office administrators, principals, staff, and teachers. Our on-site study included meetings with appropriate central office and school-level staff, and reviews of documentation provided by these individuals. 1 During the on-site phase of the study, we interviewed principals, teachers, counselors, and support staff in about one-fourth of the schools in the Little Rock School District. Over 100 campus-level employees were interviewed by members of the MGT team during our intensive on-site visits (November 2-6, 1998 and December 7-11, 1998). In addition, about 50 individuals in the Little Rock business community (including members MGT of America, Inc. Page III? I i s f j I 1 Executive Summary of the Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce. Fifty tor the Future, and the Little Rock Alliance For Our Public Schools) were interviewed as part of the study by one or more members of the MGT team. Major Findings and Recommendations by Area Some of the more significant changes recommended in the report are summarized below by study area. It is important to recognize that, as changes are implemented, the central focus should continue to remain on improvements for student learning in classrooms of the Little Rock School District. AREA I: EFFECTIVENESS OF THE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION Reorganize the management structure of the Little Rock School District to improve internal communications and the operational focus of the district. One of the areas studied during the management review of the LRSD was the overall management structure of the district to determine if it was organized in a way that promoted the most effective and efficient use of district resources. At the onset of the study, it became clear that the current management structure was a result of district efforts to deal with budget cuts and the corresponding need to downsize, the need to reassign responsibilities because of downsizing and superintendent turnovers, and the continued struggle to minimize costs. Today, the district organization resembles a fragmented structure created by new initiatives, budget cuts, and the changes in administration. Although LRSD has many good programs, promoted innovative efforts, and received grants and recognition from a number of outside educational sources, the current organizational structure does not provide the focus necessary to maximize the district's resources and energy. The thrust of the proposed reorganization plan is to realign responsibilities to match resources. The reorganization plan would allow the district to concentrate on its goal to improve student performance by focusing its organizational resources in a more effective and efficient way. The new organizational structure should help the district refocus its resources to improve student performance while achieving operational efficiencies. The current central office management team consists of four divisions which cover a wide-range of instructional and operational duties. Under the proposed organizational structure, there would be three divisions and a more formal approach to managing educational and non- instructional support services. In addition, a position of Chief Financial Officer would be created and report directly to the Superintendent. The creation of a Chief Financial Officer's position underscores the importance of sound and effective financial management within the Little Rock School District. Separating the financial functions from the other operational functions provides MGT of America, Inc. Page IvExecutive Summary a clearer focus for fiscal priorities. The position of Chief Financial Officer should be responsible for planning and implementing policy-level initiatives within financial services. This position should also be responsible for financial compliance issues relating to the revised desegregation plan. AREA II: ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION 1 Public confidence must be restored in the financial management of the Little Rock School District. To achieve this goal and strengthen the financial condition of the district, the LRSD should establish a realistic fund balance\nidentify potentially new or increased revenue sources\nstreamline operational practices and responsibilities\nredistribute resources, including personnel\nbalance revenue and expenditures\nexamine bargaining contracts and district-level operational unit budgets for potential cost reductions or avoidance\neliminate outdated operational practices such as automatic step increases\nimplement more efficient and effective fiscal policies, procedures, and practices\nenhance the utilization of collaborative partnerships\nand implement an action plan for a voter-approved millage increase. The Request For Proposals (RFP) called for a management study and an evaluation of n the school districts current financial position.' The RFP asked the consultant to \"1 analyze the current financial position of the school district and to also examine the adequacy of the districts current and projected budget to fund new instructional initiatives, expand and support instructional technology, provide for maintenance and repair of current facilities, and initiate new construction for the future. The LRSDs financial position is, at a minimum, severely strained. Several major activities compound the financial clarity and stability for both the short-term and longterm. The timely implementation of the 1998-2003 Strategic Plan by the school district is an important step towards establishing a foundation for the long-term financial stability. MGTs recommendations create an emphasis on processes and end results, and promote sound financial management by strengthening or creating policies, practices, procedures, and partnerships. Revenues and expenditures are constantly subjected to changes beyond local direct control. The state funding formula is revised as tax rolls change, the number of students in average daily membership fluctuates, and other factors are modified making the amount of state funding a moving target. In an attempt to achieve some level of fiscal structural balance, constant re-eValuation and monitoring, as well as high-level support, are needed on a continuous basis. These unstable and unpredictable conditions, supported by the impact of the desegregation funding issues, are compelling reasons for immediate action. The 1998-99 fiscal status of the district is of concern based on the extensive use of budget deferrals and the composition of these deferrals. The first quarter ADM projections for the current school year and additional state dollars added to the base MGT of America, Inc. Page v1 i Executive Summary J should allow the LRSD to adequately achieve its balanced budget objective for the year. Nonetheless, it is important that the tax revenue projections and step increase expenditure projections be reconfirmed to avoid any end of the year negative deficit. The LRSD is in a position to create its own fiscal destiny if it is prepared to seriously consider and effectively implement MGT recommendations. At the time of the release of this report, the LRSD found it had been successful in the state STRS lawsuit\nhowever, the district had still not heard on the state loan forgiveness pursuit. With the addition of these revenues, the financial stability of the district is reasonably sound provided MGTs recommendations are implemented within the timelines outlined. Nonetheless, it is important that the district renegotiate a more fiscally sound commitment with the teachers union for expected settlement revenues. AREA III: FUNDING FOR FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, AND REPAIR Develop a long-range facility plan and a millage campaign, and submit it to the voters no later than Fall 2000 to correct facility deficiencies. In addition, increase the budget for maintenance operations, and target additional funding for preventive maintenance. Through an overall review of the Facilities Planning and Maintenance Departments in the Little Rock School District, several issues were identified. The current condition of school facilities is a major concern of school staff, parents, and the community. A sample review of school facilities identified significant moisture problems, a lack of preventive maintenance, numerous mechanical system breakdowns, roof leaks at a number of facilities, and a lack of an adequate infrastnjcture to support educational technology. A preventive maintenance program has been initiated, but is not adequately funded in the district. The Little Rock School District is currently spending less than the regional averages on maintenance and operations even though the amount of square footage per custodian is relatively low. The recent decision to move ninth grade students from middle schools to high schools will require facility improvements that have not yet been fully identified. The change to a middle school program will cause overcrowding in some LRSD high schools. With the proposed change, the utilization rate at LRSD high schools will likely require school administrators to utilize teaching spaces during teachers preparation hours and the elimination of courses with low enrollments. A thorough examination is needed of the overcrowding that will occur at high schools due to the change in grade level structure to middle schools, and recommendations for change should be included in the long-range facility plan. MGT of America, Inc. Page vlExecutive Summary 1 The facilities study conducted by 3D\\lntemational in 1995 (which recommended the closure of seven schools) was based on an assumption that student enrollment would continue to decline\nthis has not occurred. Nonetheless, the 1995 facilities study has not been updated. A review of selected schools is necessary in order to determine whether to upgrade and/or replace portions of the facilities, in some schools we observed, it may likely be more cost-efficient to replace rather than renovate. The review will need to be based on the condition of the facility as reported in the 1995 study, any changes that have occurred, and each schools ability to support its current or proposed educational programs. Detailed cost estimates will need to be included. k These data, along with the capacity needs as discussed above, will form the basis for the first phase of the long-range facilities plan and should lead to a millage referendum no later than Fall 2000. In addition, the long-range plan should identify the remaining facilities needs (and corresponding updated cost estimates) for a future Phase Two millage no later than Fall 2002. As the district focuses on these bond issues, it must recognize that community involvement in planning for facility needs in the Little Rock School District is minimal. A plan to promote public approval of facilities improvement needs is critical, and provides another opportunity for public involvement in the Little Rock public schools. { AREA IV: FUNDING FOR NEW INSTRUCTIONAL INITIATIVES I Prepare a budget document for 1999-2000 and organize the budget to reflect the financial commitment to the district's new and ongoing instructional initiatives. All initiatives which are brought to, and approved by, the LRSD Board of Directors have attached budget statements, with projected district and external revenues specified. In January 1998, the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan for the Little Rock School District (LRSD) mandated that certain instructional initiatives take place to: J .....comply with the Constitution, to remedy the effects of past discrimination by LRSD against African-American students, to ensure that no person is discriminated against on the basis of race, color, or ethnicity in the operation of LRSD and to provide an equal educational opportunity for all students attending LRSD schools. 5 At the time of MGTs December on-site visit, the Little Rock School District had a draft strategic plan in place  A Vision for the Future, Strategic Plan, 1998-2003. When adopted, this plan will replace the 1996-2001 Strategic Plan. The draft plan clearly calls for a systemic approach to all instructional, school governance, and district financial and organizational management initiatives. MGT of America, Inc. Page vllExecutive Summary I The first strategy area listed in the plan calls for a redesign of the educational system, its organizational structure and decision-making processes, to best achieve the mission and objectives of the Strategic Plan, as well as the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 9 I The Division of Instruction has developed a 1998-99 Work Plan which combines the required programs and initiatives from the Revised Desegregation Plan with the systemic efforts called for in the LRSD Strategic Plan. There are approximately three dozen specific projects assigned to approximately 30 professionals and support staff members assigned to the Division of Instruction and individuals from outside the division. In addition to these professionals and support staff members, the Arkansas Department of Education is identified as sharing some responsibility for approximately seven of the task areas. The project list combines new and ongoing initiatives. The central question in the current study is about the adequacy of the district's current and projected budget to fund new instructional initiatives under the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. In order to answer this question, specific initiatives cited in the Strategic Plan and the Work Plan were analyzed and are extensively described in our report. These initiatives include: 1  Honors and Enrichment  Math Achievement  Computer Literacy  Early Childhood Initiatives  Reading/Language Arts  English as a Second Language  Alternative Education ] There is an enormous and well-coordinated effort being extended within the Division of Instmction to implement the instructional requirements of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. The requirements of the Plan have been woven into the district's long-range Strategic Plan and into the LRSDs short-term Action Plans. Optimism and commitment characterized each interview held within the Division of Instruction. There is optimism that planning is going on, and the Board and Cabinet-level support for that planning  support is focused in the same and the right direction. There is genuine commitment to each students success, and a high confidence in the leadership of both the Superintendent and the Associate Superintendent for Instruction. i In order to fully answer the question about adequate funding, it is necessary to understand very specifically, how many of the existing dollars in the LRSD budget will be dedicated to the new initiatives underway. Since the LRSD had not revised its budget since the development of the January 1998 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, this was extremely difficult to determine. I The Superintendent and Cabinet need to update and supplement the summary document contained in the 1998-99 Budget Book, in Section X, \"Desegregation,\" The document should identify the revenues and financial sources for all LRSD work plan items, including, but not limited to, the requirements of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, since these items have been embedded into the Strategies, Action Plans, and Work Plans. Each department should realign its resources around central categories of projects defined by the Cabinet. The fulfillment of this recommendation will MGT of America, Inc. Page vlllExecutive Summary 1 allow for stronger financial planning to support each initiative. When the new work plans are developed, there must be budget information provided to indicate the financial support and source for the initiative. In the future, the Superintendent should require each department to prepare a detailed budget to accompany any request for an ongoing or new initiative. Budget information should be routinely included as part of any request to the LRSD Board of Directors. k. AREA V: FUNDING FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY 1 Create a Technology Advisory Committee and empower this group with the responsibility of monitoring and providing guidance for all technology operations in the Little Rock School District. A procedure for allocating funds that will achieve technological equity among schools should be implemented and a minimum level of technology established that each LRSD school must possess. I 1 1 1 In Spring 1997, the Superintendent formed a Technology Work Team and charged this group with the responsibility of developing a plan for technology use in the Little Rock School District. This team represented a cross-section of LRSD stakeholders, including a member of the Board of Directors\nschool personnel\ndistrict technology, procurement, research and evaluation staff\na corporate representative\na representative from higher education\nand a representative from the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. The team did extensive research on planning for technology, including gathering technology plans from other districts, consulting with colleagues around the country about planning for technology, and searching the Internet for information on planning. The Technology Work Teams effort was completed in August 1997 when the Technology Plan was finalized. Since the Technology Work Team no longer exists, there is no group of stakeholders to provide guidance and advice on the districts various technology initiatives. i 1 The LRSD has had great difficulty filling the vacant technology positions. Although the Director of Information Services had made several attempts to hire a new programmer, he has had no success. On three different occasions, the director has advertised the position in major newspapers\nhowever, not one application has been generated by these advertisements. While there have been several local applicants, no one has been qualified. This experience, in addition to the fact that LRSD has lost a few technical specialists to local corporations, suggests that the salaries being offered for these technical positions are not competitive. In almost any school district, schools possess varying amounts of technology resources. Often this disparity in resources amounts to an equity problem. Given the large number of schools in LRSD, it is not surprising that a number of schools lag well behind the technology leaders. In fact, interviews with both district and school personnel confirmed MGT of America, Inc. Page lxExecutive Summary that several schools are behind their peers in terms of technology implementation and use. 1 The Revised Desegregation and Education Plan specifically addresses technological equity. Among the district's obligations cited in Section 2: Obligations, is Subsection 2.9 that reads as follows: LRSD shall Implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to ensure equitable allocation and/or reallocation of financial, technological, and educational resources to LRSD schools. One strategy employed by some school districts to address this problem is to establish a baseline or minimum level of technology that every school should acquire. Although the Technology Plan describes a standard for a set of model technology schools, it does not specify a minimum level of technology that should be available in every school. However, establishing a minimum level of technology in schools alone will not achieve the equity that is called for in the Desegregation Plan. The district must proactively pursue this goal by placing technology as a high priority, particularly in terms of funding. A recommended strategy is to allocate funds directly to those schools who are at the T lower end of the technology scale, incorporating the following: i This strategy should be accomplished by  establish a baseline standard for technology that every school should implement: 1  annually evaluate the schools to determine the extent to which they exceed, meet, or fall below the baseline standard\nand  provide funding to those who fall below the baseline standard by the greatest margin (e.g., the LRSD might choose to provide $30,000 directly to each of the five schools with the lowest rating, in comparison to the baseline). Establishing a baseline for technology is an excellent strategy for providing schools with an indication of the minimum level of technology needed to have a significant impact on learning. This baseline helps to assure equity in two ways:  it sets levels of technology implementation for every school, thereby, ensuring that every student will attend a school that provides him/her with access to technology: and I  it equalizes the budget process by giving a clear vision of the funding needed to reach the baseline for each school. One caution regarding establishing the baseline is that schools may conclude that, once they have achieved the baseline level, they will be satisfied and curtail efforts for further expansion. In fact, the baseline should be viewed as an acceptable level, but not the ideal level. Schools should be encouraged to go beyond the baseline. MGT of America, Inc. Page XExecutive Summary J 1 t The LRSD does not have an effective and efficient approach for replacing computer equipment. An equipment replacement policy is a critical component of a carefully planned and implemented technology program. Such a policy provides guidance to district and school personnel regarding when to replace existing hardware, how to conduct the acquisition process, and what should be done with the equipment being replaced. In January 1999, MGT submitted a letter with Year 2000 (Y2K) compliance recommendations to Superintendent Carnine. Because of the urgent nature of the Year 2000 compliance recommendations, MGT determined that it was necessary to forward these recommendation prior to submission of the final report. This letter is included in our report. Marketing of the Little Rock School District There is one area, which we were not directly required to address, but which the Alliance appropriately recommended in 1996 in A Plan for Success, and which the Little Rock business community has endorsed. This critical issue involves the aggressive marketing of the Little Rock School District. The marketing of a school district is a rather recent phenomenon in public education in America. School systems that have embraced the concept, through strong public relations departments, media support, and partnerships with the community, have augmented student enrollment. And, as the Alliance appropriately recognizes, increased student enrollment is directly linked to increased financial resources for the school district. 1 J Subsequent to the 1996 release of A Plan for Success, in May 1998 a proposed Communications and Marketing Plan for Little Rock School District was developed by a Little Rock public relations firm, Pittman/Portis Communications. j The proposed Communications and Marketing Plan has nine major objectives which, if accomplished, will provide the vehicle to implement the Alliances recommendation to market the Little Rock School District. J Included among the major initiatives are conducting ongoing market research to receive feedback from students and families, using the research results to improve the district, creating a new image for the LRSD that focuses on its strengths and offers those strengths to its students, establishing a more aggressive approach to marketing the district to prospective families, and actively scheduling the LRSD leadership to meet regularly with different segments of the Little Rock community in order to effectively communicate the activities of the Little Rock School District. I Unfortunately, at the time of MGTs study, over six months after the proposed Communications and Marketing Plan was developed, the Plans objectives had not been adopted nor funded by the LRSD Board of Directors and the Superintendent. We strongly encourage the leadership of the Little Rock School District to embrace this plan and aggressively market the Little Rock School District. In so doing, the district will support the efforts of the Little Rock Alliance For Our Public Schools and the recommendations which follow in this management study. MGT of America, Inc. Page xl1 Executive Summary 1 The Importance of Implementation I The full report contains findings and recommendations resulting from an in-depth study of various district areas and practices as stated in the Request for Proposals. The implementation of report recommendations may require the Little Rock School District to carefully reconsider some long-held practices. MGT recommends that the Little Rock School District, in the same positive cooperative spirit that was the catalyst for the study, develop a plan to proceed with the implementation of the recommendations and establish a system to monitor subsequent progress. Implementation and ensuing results simply will not occur without the commitment of the LRSD Board of Directors, district administrators, the Little Rock Alliance for Our Public Schools, teachers, administrators, and the community. Should the district choose not to implement an MGT recommendation, it is critical that the district seek an alternative solution to address the problem or inefficiency. This action will provide the public with the confidence that Little Rock School District intends to be accountable for a quality education for each student enrolled in the district. j As reflected in the executive summary and contained in the full report, significant opportunities are presented to improve management, instructional delivery, communication with internal and external stakeholders, financial stability, and ultimately to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Little Rock School District and its ability to educate all district students. MGT of America, Inc. Page xllExecutive Summary EXHIBIT 1 TIMELINE FOR MANAGEMENT STUDY OF THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ACTIVITY October 15, 1998 Met with school system and Alliance officials to revise work plan and timelines. November 1998  Collected and analyzed existing and comparative data available from the school system and state agencies.  Produced profile tables.  Designed tailor-made, written surveys for administrators, principals, and teachers.  Conducted central office administrators, teachers, and principals surveys.  Analyzed survey data and information collected. I J November 2-6, 1998 Visited the Little Rock School District to: 1 I 1 4 i  I \u0026lt; J December 7-11,1998 December 1998 January 1999 February 12,1999 March 1.1999 March 1-24,1999 J March 25, 1999 MGT of America, Inc.  conduct diagnostic review  collect existing data from system  interview Board members  interview administrative and support staff  conduct public hearing Conducted formal on-site review. Requested additional data from the school district. Prepared the draft report. Submitted preliminary findings and recommendations. Submitted draft work paper findings for technical review. Reviewed draft report, made revisions, and prepared final report. Issued final report and presented to the LRSD Board of Directors. Page xlilDate: To: From: Re: March 30, 1999 All isociates Viewing the LRSD Management Audit Attached are various parts of the recently released LRSD management audit. I regret to report that the superintendent wasnt very keen on sharing this document with us for reasons he did not express. At our next full staff meeting. Ill share what few comments he did give me on the audit. A complete copy of this hefty tome is in our library for anyone who wants to read the whole thing. Each of you has a copy of the Executive Summary and some other sections of the report, which Ive distributed more or less according to your particular area of interest or expertise. Heres how were going to eat this elephant: Read what youve been given, noting findings, comments, and recommendations that you think are (1) significant for the entire staff to be aware of and (2) which we also may want to somehow factor into our LRSD report thats currently underway. (A review of the entire Executive Summary isnt your individual responsibility, just the areas in it that relate to your other report sections.) I cant be more definitive on what you may uncover thats significant and might therefore be a candidate for factoring into our report or at least further investigation, because I havent read any of the audit and have only the vaguest idea whats in there. Just use your best judgment. The report subsections are pretty broad and cover a number of topics that apply to different staff members expertise. This appears to be especially true in section 9 of the audit. Within the separate sections youve been given, if you find a subtopic you know can be better analyzed by another associate by virtue of his or her experience, expertise, or interest, feel free to make trade-offs. (For example: Margie, youre responsible for Section 9, but youll want to give parts to your colleagues, such as ESL to Horace, ECE to Melissa, etc. Skip, the finance section is very lengthy, so youre free to rope in extra help if you want it.) Im not as concerned with who does what as I am about getting this document digested, so please be generous in helping each other out. Just let Polly know about any trading so she can keep a current listing of whos doing what. Underlining, highlighting, and writing in the margins of these documents is fine, as these are your copies to mark up. After youve completed your review, write up a brief, informal, in-house summary of the key points you noted, by section or subsection as appropriate. Include any observations you have about the relevance the section or subsection may have to our report and any recommendations you have about some sort of subsequent action we might need to take, such as additional research for our report or adding a topic to the report. Polly will compile the summaries, observations, and recommendations into one document to share with all of us. The deadline for getting your stuff to Polly is no later than Friday, April 9. Assignments are as follows: Section 1: Section 2: Section 3\nSection 4\nSection 5: Margie Melissa Gene Horace Gene Section 6: Section 7: Section 8: Section 9: Appendix: Skip Melissa Skip Margie Horace (a cursory review will suffice)04/06/1999 09:55 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 01/01 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: Fax: (501)324-2020 (501)324-2032 DATE: April 6,1999 TO: Central Arkansas Media Cynthia Howell, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette FROM: Suellen Vann, Director of Communications SUBJECT: Board Work Session/Spedal Board Meeting MESSAGE: The Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors will have a work session and a special board meeting this afternoon in conjunction with its regular agenda meeting (the agenda meeting this month was moved from Thursday until this evening. The work session will include discussions of facility needs, the MGT study. Board goals, the district mid-term report, and establishment of an educational foundation. The special board meeting will be an executive session on a personnel matter. The meetings will begin at 5\n00 p.m. in the Board Room of the LRSD Administration Building, 810 West Markham. # Pages (including cover) 1 To Fax # An Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge i REVIEW OF THE LRSD MANAGEMENT AUDIT SECTION 1 - Introductlow Margie After reading the sections assigned to me, except for some budget data, I found no new information concerning my assigned sections. I have completed my editing of the Associates  LRSD revised plan report, and find that the audit report reflects much of what has already been written by the Associates. This section contains the time line for the management study which was completed on schedule (March 25, 1999). MGT lists the sources used to make the report, such as: Board policies and minutes, compliance reports, ODM reports, school improvement plans, and the like. Two reports made by outside agencies: A Plan for Success, by the Little Rock Alliance For Our Schools, and Plain Talk, released by UALR, were also used as resources. According to the authors of this study, MGT interviewed over 100 campus-level employees, as well as members of the business community, and members of the central office staff. The report does not indicate how the interviewees were chosen or how many were interviewed on each level, such as elementary-level vs. secondary-level employees. The report reflects high praise for the spirit of cooperation between the LR business community and the school district. Additionally, the report cites several initiatives recommended in the LR Alliance report were already underway. The district had a new Board, a new superintendent, and a fairly good relationship between the superintendent and board members. The report indicates that one initiative recommended in A Plan For Success, the marketing of the LRSD, had not been adopted nor funded by the LRSD. The MGT report strongly recommends that the district embrace the marketing plan and aggressively market the LRSD. SECTION 2 - Background on the LRSD Melissa This section consists of the following subsections: 2.1 Historical Background and future of Desegregation\n2.2 Current Environment of the LRSD\n2.3 Current Central Office Structure. A brief summary of each section follows. 2.1 Historical Background and the Future of Desegregation This section begins with reference to the history of desegregation in the LRSD and speaks to the district having struggled vrith lawsuit after lawsuit. It mentions that an end may be at hand to the friction bom of integration... The MGT study seems to praise the lack of over-prescription found in the revised plan. Page 1This section contains an erroneous conclusion: This recognition should eventually lead to an end to all desegregation busing and allow students to attend the school of their choice , either a neighborhood school or one of the several different incentive, interdistrict, or magnet schools. The new assignment plan should end involuntary busing, but it will not enable students to attend the school of their choice. Choices are more limited under the new plan than the old. A large portion of the section consists of excerpts from the Revised Desegregation and Education plan. The section concludes with a brief description of ODM and the Joshua Intervenors. 2.2 Current Environment of the LRSD This section contains historic, demographic, and financial data regarding the LRSD. Much of their data is taken from the UALR Plain Talk. I found nothing especially new or noteworthy in this section. Page 2-12 contains some outdated or incorrect data where it mentions that some schools will become ninth grade only for a time. Page 2-14 also contains some confusing language regarding the Pay and Classification Study currently being conducted by the district. This section talks about creating a policy for over maximum and under maximum employees. I do not know what this means, nor does it make sense. 2.3 Current Central Office Structure This lengthy section is a collection of organizational charts for the central office and departments within the LRSD administration. Each group of charts is accompanied by a brief narrative that defines the responsibilities of the department and its director. Once again, I found some errors or omissions. The ombudsman position does not appear on the carts, but the narrative makes reference to the task of filling the position in the future. It appears that all information gathering by MGT stopped some time in late November or early December, and they made no real effort to update their findings to include changes made after that time. The section on the Reading/Language Arts Department includes one error and one mystery. The error involves the selection of textbooks. The report states that the director is responsible for selecting mathematics and science textbooks rather than reading and language arts (pg. 2-41). The mystery deals with the staff assigned to the reading department. The MGT chart on page 2-42 lists a reading troubleshooter position, which they say is shared with UALR. No such position exits. What the district docs have is an ESL specialist from UALR who conducts inservice training for the ESL tutors and visits the schools to assist teachers in tailoring instruction to meet the special needs of LEP students. In addition to the large collection of organizational charts, this subsection concludes with a chart that illustrates a total of the central office staff by division. The divisional chart does not include principals, school-based staff, food service workers, or the IRC building staff such as aides, security officer, and custodians. That chart is reproduced below. Page 2LRSD Central Office Staff Count by Division Position/Division Superintendent Special Assistant Special Assistant, Labor Relations Communications Technoloqy Administrative Services Division School Services Division Instructional Division Operations Division TOTAL Professional and Technical 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 20.0 26.0 7.0 92.0 61.0 212.0 Clerical and Labor 2.0 0.0 1.0 2.5 1.0 12.5 7.0 29.0 60.0 115.0 SECTION 3 - Comparisons to Other School Districts Gene Section 3 is a comparison of the LRSD with Caddo Parish School District (Shreveport, La.) Richmond City School District (Richmond, Va.) and the Savannah-Chatham County School District (Savannah, Ga.). School districts in Jackson, Mississippi and Columbia, South Carolina declined to be compared. MGT made no recommendations in this section. Salient Points of the Comparison with other Districts  District enrollments vary from 24,000 (LRSD) to 48,000 (Caddo Parish) and average 34,000.  African-American student percentages range from a low of 48% (Savannah) to a high of 77% (Richmond) and average 61%. The black percentage enrollment of each district is substantially higher than the black percentage population of the community served by each district. The LRSD has a lower percentage of students in poverty (21%) than any of the comparison districts and 8 percentage points lower than the average of 29%. LRSD has a lower student to building-level-administrator ratio than the comparison districts and lower than the national average ratio. The student to classroom teacher ratio ranked in the middle of the comparison districts but two students per teacher below the national average. Salaries of most employee classifications were lower in LRSD than in the comparison districts. LRSD has 12 positions with superintendent in the title, plus the superintendent. Caddo has three, Richmond has four, and Savannah has eight. With revenue of $5,417 per student, LRSD is in the middle of the comparison districts in revenue per student with Caddo being lowest at $4,021 and Richmond highest at $6,569. Expenditures per student reflected a comparison similar to the revenue comparison. Page 3SECTION 4- Survey Results Horace Background and Organization During October of 1998, MGT of America administered written surveys to LRSD central office administrators, building administrators and teachers. MGT surveyed all of the central administrators and principals, but only a random sample of teachers. The survey results are initially organized according to the three job categories surveyed. The consultants then compared the three group results and finally compared the LRSD results in each job category to a composite of 26 districts in which they have conducted surveys over the last six years. Summary of Key Points 4.1 Central Administration\n25 of 29 surveys returned (86% rate)  100% of the administrators rated the superintendents work as an educational leader as good or excellent.  While 84% of the administrators felt that principals cared about students needs, only 56% of them rated the principals work as educational leaders as good or excellent.  Administrators had a low opinion of parental efforts related to helping their children do better in school\nwith 68% rating parental efforts as fair or poor. Most administrators (83%) felt that teacher and staff promotions and pay increases are not based on individual performance. The top five programs most administrators indicated needed major improvement were Instructional Technology, Plant Maintenance, Administrative Technology, Custodial Services, and Personnel Recruitment. Food Services, Law Enforcement, Purchasing, Strategic Planning, Financial Management, and Community Relations all received combined adequate or outstanding ratings from more than 75% of the administrators. 4.2 Principals: 101 surveys disseminated and 67 returned (66% return rate) Principals were concerned with facilities. Forty-six percent of principals indicated that they did not believe that there is sufficient space and facilities to support instructional programs. In reference to the superintendent, 82% rated him as good or excellent as an educational leader. Most principals (91%) felt that teacher promotions and pay increases are not based on individual performance. The top five programs most principals indicated needed major improvement were Plant Maintenance, Instructional Technology, Pupil Transportation, Custodial Services, and Facilities Planning. The principals rated Law Enforcement, Food Service, Strategic Planning, and Staff Development as adequate to outstanding. 4.3 Teachers: 488 surveys distributed and 212 returned (43% return rate) While 49% ofthe teachers rated the superintendents work as an educational leader as good or excellent, 44% rated is work in this area as fair or poor. Page 4Only 42% of the teachers felt that their schools were safe and secure from crime and 33% dont think that their schools are safe. Only 24% of teachers rated parents participation in school activities as good or excellent. Only 36% of teachers believe that workloads are equitably distributed among teachers and staff. Like the central administrators and principals, 84% of the teachers indicated that teachers are not promoted or paid more based on individual performance and 65% indicated that the same was true for staff. The top five programs that teachers indicated were in need of improvement were Budgeting, Plant Maintenance, Instructional Technology, Curriculum Planning, and Custodial Services. The program with the highest combined adequate to outstanding rating was Staff Development. 4.4 Administration, Principal, and Teacher Survey Results Compared Teachers were the least optimistic about conditions in LRSD and central office administrators were the most optimistic. Generally, central office administrators and principals held similar attitudes while teacher attitudes were less optimistic. Teachers were less supportive and evenly divided in their assessments of the superintendents performance. By a 3\n1 ratio, all three groups indicated that schools are not kept in good condition. None of the groups had positive views of parent involvement in school activities and organization.  All survey groups were dissatisfied with the manner in which teacher and staff promotion and pay increases are allotted. Teachers are not overly impressed with any of the districts programs or functions\nwith only staff development receiving a combined outstanding or excellent rating of over 50%. However, 64% of central office administrators indicated that staff development needed major improvement. 4.5 Comparison of LRSD to Other School Districts The LRSD central administrations attitudes were generally less optimistic than that of their counterparts in other MGT districts. However, their opinions about the board and superintendent were significantly higher than the composite of other districts. The central administration viewed the performance of their principals and teachers less positively than administrators in other districts. Overall, the LRSD responses are comparable to those of their counterpart districts. Observations The MGT survey results are not particularly enlightening. I dont feel that the district will discover anything that was not already known. As with the districts ovm climate surveys, the point is not how much information is collected, it is how that information is used to bring about changes. Page 5The return rate for the principals was pathetic. Only 66% of them returned the surveys. I just assumed that participation was mandatory since the district had commissioned the study. Another observation I have is that only 25% of the teachers who returned surveys were African-American in a district that has a considerably higher percentage of African-American teachers. While the survey did not reveal anything striking or new, I do feel that one of the most significant results had to do with promotion and pay. High percentages of all three surveyed groups felt that promotion and pay were not tied to performance. I would think that this finding might have some bearing on how the district develops more equitable promotion policies and practices. SECTION 5 - Effectiveness of the Management Structure and Organization Gene Section 5 is an analysis of the effectiveness of the management structure of LRSD including the superintendents office and the four divisions of district-wide services. Salient Points of Management Structure Section Reduce the number of divisions from 4 to 3 by eliminating the division of administrative sei-vices and assigning the functions to others. MGT may have made this recommendation without knowing the historical significance of the administrative services division regarding the desegregation case. Because MGT gives short shrift to the desegregation case in general, their recommendation here may be another signal of their general disdain for the relationship of LRSD to the continuing desegregation case. Either way, ODM should support continuation of the administrative services division as a primary proponent of desegregation of LRSD. Create a position of chieffinancial officer so that the functions offinancial services report to the superintendent. ODM doesnt have a dog in this hunt but 1 suspect this recommendation is a standard one for MGT. Given the personnel presently in place in LRSD, I prefer the existing structure where the chief financial officer reports to an associate superintendent. Move the internal auditor to report directly to the board. ODM should support this recommendation and promote increased vigilance on the part of the auditor. Realign the instructional division into four major sections: NSF, early childhood/elementary, middle school, and high school. Move staff development into human resources. This recommendation is apparently based on MGTs druthers. I am not aware of research or experience that recommends this alignment of duties for a curriculum department. Neither do know of any reason for ODM to oppose it. Page 6 Create another assistant superintendents position in the school semces division to relieve the associate superintendent of the seventeen schools the position now supervises directly. The existing structure in school services is awkward and unwieldy, so ODM should support this recommendation or one similar to it. MGT recommends in another section that the instructional division be subgrouped around elementary, middle, and high school curriculum. It may be that school services should be divided similarly. MGT makes a host of other recommendations related to administrative structure that range from movement of functions to downgrading positions. My thought is that many of these arrangements are based personal preferences or personnel quirks or strengths. MGT may have gone too far. SECTION 6 - Assessment of Financial Condition Skip In my opinion this section of the report has so many flaws and errors, any suggestions that the authors made that might have value will be lost due to the total lack of credibility. I dont intend to list all of the specifics but just enough to illustrate my concerns. Recommendation 6-1 Transfer the responsibility for fringe benefits and leave reporting from Financial Services Department to the Human Resources Department, (page 6-4j The report goes on to suggest the existing 1.5 FTE positions assigned to handling these tasks be transferred from Financial Services to Human Resources. Comment: The authors have apparently mixed the tasks of developing employee benefits with the tasks of paying for them. Recommendation 6-1 Recommends transferring the responsibility from Workers Compensation from Financial Services to the Director of Safety and Security who is responsible for Risk Management, (page 6-4) Also relating to Workers Compensation, on page 6-84 the LRSD is commended for its reduced level of workers compensation costs at a time such costs are rising in many organizations. Comment\nSeveral years ago, the districts went to a state-wide averaging and the cost for each district is determined by the state-wide average. So if one district were to reduce their claims and another were to have a great increase in claims, each would only pay the state-wide average. Recommendation 6-8 Utilize the Association of School Business Officials Meritorious Budget Award as a goal to become the basis for achieving excellence in budget format, presentation, and improved fiscal accountability and budgetary communication with the community, (page 6-21) Page 7Comment: Previous consultants recommended another budget award program. This whole section appears to be straight boilerplate and I feel this approach is directed toward creating a pretty budget for award purposes rather than a functional and practical budget. The authors do state that: The time required to pursue this endeavor is considerable for the Financial Services staff. I just dont feel any efforts devoted to this recommendation has short or long term value. Recommendation 6-9 This recommendation is directed the magnet school budget and it appears the authors dont understand the relationship that the two other districts and ADE have with the overall magnet school budget and funding, (page 6-23) The authors devoted a sub section number 6.3 to the Assessment of Revenues and Tax Data. Comments: This section is filled with charts, tables, and graphs trying to explain the sources of revenue for LRSD. It is apparent to me through these pictures and narratives of explanation, the authors just dont have any idea of the complexity of school funding. The authors state the percentage of tax collected in an exhibit conflicts with the districts methodology. The authors state that this exhibit shows a five-year average of 95.3 percent in tax collections while the district indicates a collection rate of 92 percent. They seem confused by this difference. The answer lies in the fact that the amount of tax collected by the county on behalf of the LRSD is reduced by a known percentage the county charges as a collection fee. The amount LRSD receives is the amount of the total collected less the county collection fee and that is the amount shown as revenue by the LRSD. In Section 6.4 entitled Assessment of Operating Costs, the report refers to national profiles to compare LRSD with other districts. This section compares the current budgets for transportation, maintenance and operations, central and business services, classroom instruction, and other expenditures. The Cooper-Lybrand study several years ago and the methodology they use for evaluating expenditures appears to be the most realistic Ive studied. The Cooper-Lybrand method places past expenditures and budget items into a better defined and measurable set of groups such as school building administration versus central office administration, etc. The problem that 1 discovered after spending many hours and days developing an analysis of how LRSD expenditures within the Cooper-Lybrand system, only one other school district (Omaha, Nebraska) were using this system Although, more school districts were starting to use the system, no history was available to provide a comparison between districts of like-size. Based on my experiences, my feeling is that the comparisons made by MGT are not valid and should be taken with a grain of salt. Conclusions In my opinion, the MGT audit report on the Assessment of Financial Condition for LRSD is badly misleading and indicate to me the members of the audit team didnt spend enough time looking below the surface to investigate in-depth the information they gathered. Although there is, in my opinion, much that should have been said about the budgeting and control processes that now exist in LRSD, this report did not establish enough credibility to make any difference in the way LRSD does business. Page 8SECTION 7 - Facilities, Construction, Maintenance, and Repair Melissa This section consists of four subsections: 7.1 Introduction, which identifies some major issues: 7.2 Funding and New Construction: 7.3 Funding for Maintenance and Repair\n7.4 Obstacles which Impede Implementation of Chapter Recommendations. 7.1 Introduction After their review of the facihties services and maintenance departments of the LRSD, MGT identified the following six issues: The current condition of schools is a major concern for staff\", parent, and the community. The movement of ninth graders to the high schools wUl require facUity improvement which have not yet been fully identified. Community involvement in planning for facihty needs is minimal. The district lacks a fully-funded preventive maintenance program The continued enrollment decline projected by 3D/Intemational has not come to pass. A plan for public approval of facilities improvement needs is critical. This section also includes the organizational chart for the faculties department and describes elements of the 1995 FacUities Study conducted by 3D/Intemational. 7.2 Funding for New Construction This subsection includes information on capacities and facility utilization. In a chart designed to show percentage of facihty utilization, MGT uses two types of capacity figures. The use the capacities taken from the 3D/Intemational study as well as some figures based on 100 square feet per elementary student. 125 feet per junior high student, and 150 feet per high school student. As far as I know, this is the first time this particular measure has been used. One of the conclusions that the report draws is that the secondary schools lack adequate support facilities (cafeteria, halls, restrooms, and the like). The report also indicates that the high schools wUl suffer significant overcrowding as a result of the ninth grade reorganization. This subsection includes the recommendations summarized below\nConduct a through study of overcrowding at the high school level and include recommendations for change in the long-range facilities plan. Include a review of the middle school design implications within the discussion of long-term facilities needs. Continue with the plan to build the two new elementary schools, but the district should not reuse Mitchell and Garland faculties. Update the 1995 faculties study for all operating schools that received very low scores regarding quality of their facilities. Complete a long-rang facility plan (after the facility update is finished) and millage campaign, and submit it to the voters no later than fall 2000. Create a Facilities Planning Department within the current Facilities Department. Page 9Each of the recommendations is followed by implementation strategies and timeline. While some of these recommendations are very commonsensical, others will be more problematic. Updating the facilities study and planning for facilities needs related to middle school conversion are essential. The recommendation not to re-use Garland or Mitchell is contrary to the plan and to promises already made to the community. Of course, it is possible the MGT only meant for the district not to re-use the building as elementary schools. Who knows? The subject of a millage campaign for facilities needs has obviously been under consideration for some time, but the district needs to do some serious analysis of whether such a campaign has any chance of success. I wonder about the creation of a Facilities Planning Department. The cost estimates that MGT included seem low and they show the same dollar cost for five years. I think it is highly unlikely that no cost increase would occur from year to year. If the district passed a millage and actually had the money to upgrade facilities, this department would probably help ensure well-executed projects. It is possible that some of the existing staff (such as the construction supervisors) could be used for one or more of these positions. 7.3 Funding for Maintenance and Repairs This section includes the organizational chart for the maintenance department\na comparison of maintenance expenditures with national and regional averages\nand a comparison of custodial square footage to national and regional averages. LRSD custodians are responsible for fewer square feet than the regional or national average. Despite a larger than average custodial staff, the district spends less per square foot on maintenance than the national and regional average. MGT attributed this to a lower than average spending on suppUes and equipment. The study recommended: Increase the budget for maintenance and operations, and target additional funding for preventive maintenance. MGT gave a cost estimate of $150,000 per year to accomplish this recommendation. They recommended adding four preventive maintenance staff and gradually reducing the number of custodians to the regional average (a reduction of ten positions). 7.4 Obstacles Which Impede Implementation of Chapter Recommendations As the name of the subsection states, this final portion of the facilities chapter examines some of the opposition that could arise to impede implementation of the MGT recommendations. The most interesting part of the subsection is the step by step outline for gaining voter approval for school facility issues :  Develop strong public relations program Pre-plan, study, and analyze Study district historical data Survey your community Develop election campaign strategy Conduct special voter registration Develop targeted election materials, tools, and techniques Page 10Identify the yes vote Plan election day strategy Debrief and evaluate I dont think that any of these recommendations are especially revolutionary or groundbreaking, but they should give the district a bit more focus as they pursue a millage, which they seem determined to do. SECTION 8 - Administrative and Instructional Technology Skip Most of this report repeated the information provided to them through the Technology Task Force report. It appears that much of the verbiage in this section was boiler-plate stating things like: all districts should etc... What the report did provide was Section 8.8 Obstacles to Implementation of Chapter Recommendations that did have value and should be considered very carefully prior to approaching the community for an increase in millage or bonds. The report states that the main obstacle to the successful implementation to the technology plan is money. This point is brought out in most of the nine recommendations in the report. Unfortunately they had no substantive suggestions to overcome this very major obstacle. SECTION 9 - New Instructional Initiatives Margie 9.1 Honors and Enrichment (Horace) Summary of Key Points  In the LRSD, opportunities to do even basic coursework in the arts is very limited, outside of the magnet schools. The LRSD Strategic Plan, Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, and National Science Foundation Grant all place emphasis on removing racial barriers to participation in advanced courses. There is a K-12 Talent Development Committee in place and is chaired by the Associate Superintendent for Instruction. MGT identified direct relationships among the deseg plan, NSF, and the Strategic Plan. Starting in 1999-2000, the layer of honors/enriched courses between regular courses and students eligible for pre-AP and advanced placement coursework will no longer exist. The Board adopted new admission criteria for advanced work. Any student with a grade of at least C in a prior pre-AP or AP course can enroll in the next level without special permission. AVID is compatible with the LRSD vision and objectives and the outcomes mentioned in the desegregation plan.  At the time of the study, the district had not allotted any money for AVID beyond the $7500 for planning in 1998-99. Page 11Observations MGT captured all aspects of the districts efforts to increase minority participation in advanced courses. The study findings mirror my findings for that segment of the ODM report. Although the MGT study did not raise it as serious concern, beyond the NSF grant, the district has very little funding to effectively accomplish its goals for minority participation. The study did not reflect whether the district had a contingency plan in lieu of an adequate level of support for a program such as AVID. 9.2 Improving Mathematics Achievement (Melissa) While this subsection presents the information regarding mathematics in a different format than that we used for our report. It does not include any new information. It features an elaborate chart showing the close relationship between the Revised Plan and the NSF Grant. We also pointed out this close correlation, as well as giving the history that makes the interrelatedness inevitable. 9.3 Early Childhood Initiatives: Four-Year-Oid, Headstart (sic), and HIPPY (Melissa) This section contains errors that seem emblematic of those made throughout the report. In reading the sections that I have been given, it seems that the people from MGT did a sloppy job. They seem to make many enors that result from accepting the first answer they stumbled upon. It seems only fitting that they would misspell Head Start, a well know federal program. This subsection of the report includes less than a page of narrative and two charts. The first exhibit shows the number of children served in the various programs. The second exhibit deals with funding for the programs. The second exhibit (9-13) indicates that the information it summarizes was furnished by the Division of Instruction. I spoke to Pat Price about the chart, and she said that she had not provided any financial information. Exhibit 9-13 indicates that both HIPPY and the four-year-old program receive substantial funds from desegregation funds. As you know the Settlement money ended with the 1996-97 school year. In that year, LRSD received its final payment of around $600,000. Contrary to these facts, MGT shows over 3 million of desegregation funds supporting early childhood programs. I called Pat Price and she had no idea what had prompted MGT to report desegregation funds. She also indicated that the amount of money they reported for the early childhood program was higher than any figures with which she was familiar. 9.4 Reading/Language Arts (Horace) Summary of Key Points  MGT surfaced several on-going initiatives in the Reading/Language Arts area. Among the districts involvements were the states Smart Start Initiative, the development of criterion- referenced tests in reading, revision of the Reading/Language Arts curriculum, reorganization of Page 12 the Title I program and staff, and alignment of the early childhood program with the K-3 literacy program. Tangible evidence in the form of committee reports, plans, and curricular materials of a strong correlation between the districts Reading/Language Arts initiatives and the goals established by the desegregation plan.  At the time of the MGT study, no specific funds had been earmarked for the initiatives. Observations The information provided by the MGT study reflects our findings regarding the districts Reading/Language Arts initiatives. The study did a good job of briefly outlining and complimenting the district on the tremendous amount of work that has been done in less than a year. However, the study did not examine whether the timelines the district had established for implementation of the initiatives was viable\nparticularly since they did point out that at the time of the study funding was still in question. 9.5 English as a Second Language (ESL) (Horace) Summary of Key Points The number of ESL students in the LRSD is 602\nan increase of 59% since the 1993-94 school year. As of June 1998, students with limited English proficiency represented 49 different languages. Those involved with the Newcomer Center schools believe that there is no overall ESL program in the LRSD. Rather, there is a total immersion experience, where students are fully mainstreamed, with tutoring support twice a week.  A clear need exists for additional support for the ESL students at Hall High School The study indicated that current and future funding for ESL to be inadequate to meet the needs of the students. Observations The MGT study did not surface information that the district didnt already have access to about its ESL population and its level of effectiveness in meeting their needs. The good news may be that the study in conjunction with the upcoming OCR investigation may finally wake the administration up the need to effectively serve ESL students. Some of the plans the district presently has to improve ESL services reflect some of the observations and recommendations made by the secondary schools work group I served on a couple of years ago. Much of the problem with the district doing an adequate job in meeting the needs of its limited-English speaking population has less to do with analysis and planning and more to do with will. Gene Parker is well aware of the student needs and has developed workable plans to begin to address them. However, up to this point the central administration has lacked the will and attentiveness to support and fund ESL programs. Also, the second tier of administrators who could help and support Gene in terms of policies and resources have been ignorant of the size and needs of the districts population of students for whom English is a second language. The district central administration has failed to comprehend the growth rate of this population and the districts legal obligations to them. Page 139.6 Alternative Education (Margie) This section simply describes the Accelerated Learning Center (ACC - yes, this is what its called), and the proposed Residential Alternative Elementary School, which I cover in my team report. The MGT report praises the LRSD for both initiatives as clear indications of the districts commitments to create a range of services and schooling options for students. The ACC was given a budget of $828,706. Funds were drawn from reserved funds, as this was not a budgeted item. The district has not identified any funds beyond 1998-99 to maintain or expand the ACC. The residential charter school received a $94,000 grant from the U. S. Dept. Of Education for each of two implementation years. The district estimates cost of $1.2 million annually to operate the school. Charter school costs 1999-2000 $1,200,000. $94,000 grant funds $1,106,000 estimated cost to the district first 2 years of implementation Since 1999-2000 budget had not been completed when this report was submitted, no funds had been assigned to this initiative. 9.7 Computer Literacy (Skip) The report focuses on the requirement of all 6\" grade students to take basic keyboarding for one semester starting in 1999-2000. The authors state that there has not been any specific decision made about funding for the new initiative, yet they continue to state that funding for this initiative which begins in 1999-2000 is not adequate. The summary offers that during the time of the study, work had not begun on the actual planning for the 1999-2000 budget. The middle school proposed technology standards details expectations for three different strands of technology for the three middle school grades. It would appear that in order to implement the methods to achieve these standards in a timely fashion, more planning should have taken place than what the auditors were able to discover. 9.8 Summary, Commendation, and Recommendation (Margie) Prepare a budget document for 1999-2000 which is organized to reflect the financial commitment to the districts new and ongoing instructional initiatives. Ensure that all initiative which are brought to and approved by the Board of Directors have detailed budge statements, with projected district and external revenues specified. The Superintendent and Cabinet need to update and supplement the summary document contained in the 1998-99 Budget Book. The Superintendent should require each department to prepare a detailed budget to accompany any requests for ongoing or new initiatives. This should be a routine procedure. Page 14If the school board enacts a requirement for all students taking honors and enrichment classes to take AP exams, then funding for this initiative should appear in the expenditure side of the budget, even though expenses may be offset by students scoring 3 or better. The LRSD should replace lost desegregation funds for the HIPPY Program. Both alternative learning centers need permanent funding. 9.9 Obstacles Which Impede Implementation of Chapter Recommendations (Margie) 1. The decision-making process and the authority of the Campus Leadership teams have not been carefully connected. 2. Funding for staff development in not centralized within the Instructional Division nor with the budget for the staff development department. Additionally, funding is not in the school budgets either, rather the funds are dispersed throughout various departments. 3. The PRE department needs a clear priority list of program initiatives to evaluate. 4. No clear relationship exists between the mandated time lines of the science curriculum, and reading and math criterion-referenced tests to the Revised Desegregation Plans requirement of thematic instruction for grades K-5, and the board-approved program component of thematic learning for grades 6-8. 5. At the K-4 level, classroom teachers have several obstacles: developing new skills in 4 content areas over the next 4 years\nwriting and re-writing lesson plans in all these areas\ntrying different teaching strategies, getting coaching help for each initiative\nand, being successful with the students. 6. Each teacher in K-4 classrooms needs a very specific 4 to 5 year growth plan which will allow that teacher to be accountable for all he or she is responsible to do. 7. A great number of the initiative mentioned above depend on the districts guidance counselors. Counselors must have a long-range, ongoing plan of professional development and clear measurable expectations for their participation in each initiative. 8. Teachers are receiving mix messages when success is determined by a students achievement on a multiple choice test. 9. The contract between the LRSD and the LRCTA must evolve to reflect the language contained in the Revised Desegregation Plan. Page 15! j BESEGREGATIOHMONiroWHB RECm'ieO Jl 2 3 1939 UFHGE OF WORK PLAN FOR MGT RECOMMENDATIONS 1999-2000 INTRODUCTION 1999-2000 WORK PLAN FOR MGT RECOMMENDATIONS I. Management and Organization The first four recommendations essentially deal with administrative organizational structure of the school district. The superintendent recommends that we transition the structure of the organization based on the progress that the district makes in becoming Unitary. We have created in a very short time a series of strategies to ensure that the district will have obtained compliance with the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Based on that knowledge, and as you review a companion staffing recommendation, we will in a reasonable amount of time (1999-2002) succeed in obtaining similar efficiencies in both organization and cost abatement. And finally, we recommend that we advertise and hire a CFO, Internal Auditor and Coordinator for a Charter School. Note staffing recommendations. II. Assessment of Financial Condition Please note that we have already completed eight requirements of the fifty which MGT offered for the districts consideration. We have established a very aggressive timeline to adopt or adapt the other recommendations. We have, on several occasions, made the CFO and Internal Auditor central in the implementation of the recommendations. There are also several strategies which are dependent on the State of Arkansas changing the accounting system which is currently scheduled for the 2000-2001.Page 2 in. Facilities Construction, Maintenance and Repair As you review the eight MGT recommendations, please be reminded that the study concluded that the District should plan and proceed with a millage campaign. There are significant planning recommendations that we are capable of performing once the Board acts to confirm the 1999-2000 Critical Performance Priorities, including the call for a Millage and Bond Issue during the 1999-2000 school year. We would expect the Board to include as part of their decision making the plans which would satisfy the recommendations ofthe MGT Study. IV. Administrative and Instructional Technology The nine recommendations of the MGT study are exceptionally timely, as we see technology as an integral part of the instructional and operational future of the school district. Much of the discussion and debate will be completed through the work of an expanded technology advisory committee, whose recommendations will play an important part in the deliberations of the school board as they plan for the future of the school district. V. New Instructional Initiatives The one recommendation in this area will be part of the new state accounting system and the program budgeting system which we have previously discussed with the Board. We also expect by the time we will implement this recommendation an upgrade in compiler software will be operational. This will give campuses and divisional personnel enhanced capabilities for more efficient and effective decision making.1999-2000 WORK PLAN FOR MGT RECOMMENDATIONS EFFECTIVENESS OF THE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION Major Tasks/Activities\\^xivyJ or' -h\"* i. \u0026gt; Timelin^/, Completion Date if- Responsibility Evidence of Success 1. Reduce the number of divisions in the central office from four to three. Eliminate the Division of Administrative Services, including the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services and the respective Administrative Assistant, and realign the central office administrative positions to create a more focused approach to managing educational and non- instructional support services. 2. Greate a second Assistant Superintendent for Elementary Schools and realign the Division of School Services to incorporate the departments transferred from the Division of Administrative Services. 3. Realign the organizational structure of the Division of Instruction to provide a comprehensive approach that focuses on curriculum and instruction. 4. Reorganize the Departments of Elementary, Middle and High School Gurriculum Programs. 5. Greate a position of Ghief Financial OfTicer to report directly to the Superintendent and move the Internal Auditor under the Board of Directors. 1999-2002 August 1999 2002 August 1999 Leslie V. Gamine Bonnie Lesley (Leslie V. Gamine) Bonnie Lesley (Leslie V. Gamine) Leslie V. Gamine A phased organizational plan will be presented that will restructure the administration of tlie district over a three-year period. Board confirmation Transition beginning by___organization chart change 2002 Board confirmation Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 2 ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION  /Activities Tjmelin^ * ) Completion* S, 'Date',\n?' Responsibility Evidence of Success 7^ A 1. Transfer the responsibility for fringe benefits and leave reporting from the Financial Services Department to the Human Resources Department. July 1999 Richard Hurley (Mark Milhollen) Completed 2. Transfer responsibility for Workers Compensation from the Financial Services Department to the Director of Safety and Security who is responsible for risk management. July 1999 Bobby Jones (Mark Milhollen) Completed 3. Transfer the responsibility for submission of the Superintendents Quarterly Average Daily Membership Report to the Arkansas Department of Education from Financial Services to the Department of Planning, Research and Evaluation. 1999-2000 (Jan. 2000) Junious Babbs Mark Milhollen John Ruffins Kathy Lease Leslie V. Camine This area is currently under study and a recommendation will be made in January 2000 4. Transfer responsibility for fixed assets and accounts payable from the Procurement Department to the Financial Services Department. NO The system is currently operational and there does not appear to be any savings or efficiency accomplished by the recommended transfer. 5. Establish formal performance standards and key benchmark indicators for monitoring, and develop a procedures manual for the Financial Services Department. 1999-2000 Mark Milhollen Jean Ring CFO lA Manual completion 6. Revise and strengthen existing Board policy and administrative procedures for budgeting, and incorporate in the overall fiscal management policy and procedures. 1999-2000 (October 99) Linda Young Austin Mark Milhollen CFO lA Board confirmation Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 3 ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (continued) Ni 4? - Mai i Major Tasks/Activities Tiiuelin^ Completion, Date Responsibility, Evidence of Success at- 7. Review current budget practices, in concert with development of a fiscal management policy and procedures, to develop the necessary background data to make changes that improve operational efficiency and effectiveness to restore credibility and the confidence of the community. 1999-2000 CFO Leslie V. Camine Suellen Vann Report to community and Board 8. Utilize the Association of School Business Officials Meritorious Budget Award as a goal to become the basis for achieving excellence in budget format, presentation, and improved fiscal accountability and budgetary communication with the community. 2000-2001 ADE Mark Milhollen Jean Ring CFO lA Report to community and award granted. State will change accounting system in 2000-2001. 9. Revise method of displaying the Magnet School Budget within the approved budget document from an overall line item object only format to incorporate operational unit bre^downs by site, and an overall executive summary of highlights which should include the use of charts and graphs for better understanding of the budget by the community and the Board of Directors. May 1999 Mark Milhollen Jean Ring Completed 10. Coordinate districtwide budget and fiscal management staff development needs to include the Board of Directors, operational unit administrators, key accounting and bookkeeping staff, bargaining group representatives. Budget Committee members, when established, and other key stakeholders. 1999-2000 Mark Milhollen CFO Plan developed and operational with named groups. Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 4 ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (continued) SSptjf, yw K. .a Major Tasks/Activities Timeline/* Completion\" Responsibility Evidence of Success 11. Revise the budget projection criteria and standardize the use of five-year projections. 1999-2000 Mark Milhollen CFO Board confirmation 12. Incorporate the use of a districtwide Budget Committee to assist in the development of the 1999-2000 budget. 1999-2000 CFO Committee convened 13. Revise the districts internal budget handbook for operational units to be more comprehensive and self- explanatory. 1999-2000 (January) ADE Mark Milhollen CFO lA Completed handbook 14. Implement a comprehensive district-level operational unit budgetary review by the Budget Committee in a series of workshops with the LRSD Board of Directors. 1999-2000 CFO Budget committee Plan approved by Board 15. Realign available dollars within existing revenue sources to match expenditure obligations. 1999-2000 Mark Milhollen Leslie Carnine Board Board confirmation 16. Allocate the SIRS lawsuit settlement dollars to satisfy previously negotiated bargaining agreement commitments and place the balance of the funds into an unreserved fund balance to establish a first step towards a realistic fund balance. 1999 (May) Mark Milhollen Leslie V. Carnine Completed through 1997-98 budget year. 17. Reconsider estimated revenue from the local tax revenue projection. NO Changes in tax collection, etc., make the issue moot. Not consistent with state law. Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 5 ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (continued) Major Tasks/Activities Jimeline/  Completion Date TT Responsibility Evidence of Success 18. Utilize any increase in revenue, due to the state base per student adjustment or district growth in ADM for the first quarter, to restore the enrollment adjustment defenal of $347,125 at school sites and place the balance into unreserved fund balance. 19. Form partnerships with each of the top ten taxpayers. 20. Reconcile tax collection calculation methodology and develop a strategy for communication with the public. 21. Research other state Medicaid programs and consider utilizing the services of a national consultant to evaluate the possibility of pursuing state law changes that would enhance the opportunity for the LRSD to receive more Medicaid revenue. 22. Update the current rental charges for facilities by adjusting for a CPI increase as reflected in Exhibit 6- 26. 23. Generate advertising revenue from educational-related advertising on the LRSD owned bus fleet and vehicles. February 1999 Mark Milhollen Completed Board confirmation 1999-2000 (January) 1999-2000 (February 00) 1998-99 1999-2000 1999-2000 Debbie Milam Suellen Vann CFO Leslie V. Camine Suellen Vann Mark Milhollen CFO lA Patty Kohler Mark Milhollen Vic Anderson Vic Anderson Suellen Vann CFO Recognition plan operational Communication strategy implemented Completed - contracted through ADE Board confirmation Board confirmation Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 6 ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION .(continued) '   Major Tasks/Activities 'Jj Timeline/^ Coupletiqnt Date Responsibility ' . W\n. ' Evidence of Success 24. Annually review the current practice of outsourcing the transportation function utilizing a cost benefit analysis approach in an effort to contain or reduce costs, and justify the continuation of this outsourcing practice. 25. Establish a national and local comparative benchmark series of school districts and organizations. 26. Establish a task force to review cost accounting software options for purchase and implementation within the next two years. 27. Initiate bargaining strategies to discontinue the practice of automatic step increases and remain in compliance with existing state salary schedule and funding formula requirements. 28. Initiate a thorough review and analysis of existing bargaining contract language and practices. 29. Update and recalculate the five-year revenue and expenditures projections provided to the Board of Directors. 30. Incorporate an analysis of selected expense objects as part of the formal budget document. 1999-2000 (October 99) Vic Anderson Darral Paradis Mike Martello Board confirmation 1999-2000 (November 99) 2000-2001 1998-99 1999-2000 (January 00) 1999-2000 (February 00) 2000-2001 Mark Milhollen CFO Jean Ring lA CFO Mark Milhollen Brady Gadberry Brady Gadberry Richard Hurley Mark Milhollen Jean Ring CFO lA Mark Milhollen CFO lA Presented to Board and community Report presented to Board Current Bargaining issue Plan developed to renew contract and presented to Board for their consideration. Board confirmation Board confirmation (Note ADE changes) Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 7 ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (continued) Major Tasks/Activities j-StS'.SS 31. Establish a positive and negative threshold for expenditure control purposes. 32. Implement a light duty loss control program to continue to reduce workers compensation costs. 33. Explore the cost benefit possibility of handling legal services in-house with a staff attorney. 34. Analyze all professional technical expenditures (e.g., physical therapists, speech pathologists, training consultants) for potential savings through consolidation or elimination of limited use services. 35. Establish a method to account for al! staff development costs regardless of operational unit or object for the expense. 36. Implement specific and strict guidelines to all operational units for overtime accountability authorization and documentation in compliance with Fair labor Standards Act (FLSA) requirements. .Timeline/ Completion 'Date 1999-2000 1999-2000 2001-2002 1999-2000 1999-2000 1999-2000 Responsibility Mark Milhollen CFO lA Bobby Jones Dick Hurley Leslie V. Gamine Board of Education CFO Patty Kohler Bonnie Lesley Mark Milhollen Dick Hurley Bonnie Lesley Marion Woods Kathy Lease lA CFO Vic Anderson Brady Gadberry Mark Milhollen Dick Hurley lA Evidence of Success iS Board confirmation Board confirmation Develop standards for word attendance and punctuality. Board review based on unitary status achievement Report presented to Board for consideration 1999-2000 budget 1999-2000 budget Revise regulations on overtime usage. Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 8 ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (continued) Major Tasks/Activities  a-' A  Timeline/ Completion Date Responsibility Evidence of Success \\ 37. Reduce stipends for car allowances by 35 percent and review all stipend practices for other potential cost savings. 1999-2000 Dick Hurley Brady Gadberry CFO 38. Revise the current formal budget format to include a separate section on incentive school budget analysis. 1999-2000 budget Mark Milhollen CFO lA Board confirmation 39. Incorporate language within the revised fiscal policy to establish a benchmark minimum of five percent of expenditures for an emergency unreserved fund balance. 1999-2000 (October 99) CFO Mark Milhollen Leslie V. Carnine Board confirmation 40. Establish an immediate minimum of one percent fund balance base from any new available revenue not currently budgeted in the approved 1998-99 budget. 1999-2000 Mark Milhollen 1999-2000 budget Board confirmation 41. Distribute combined personnel and payroll cutoff paperwork timelines as well as formal payroll dates throughout the LRSD. 1999-2000 Suellen Vann Mark Milhollen Publication of calendars completed. 42. Develop a priority list of technology enhancements for the areas of Financial Services, Human Resources, Risk Management, Procurement and other operational areas to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of existing manual or outdated computer applications. 1999-2000 Darrel Paradis Vic Anderson Mark Milhollen CFO Richard Hurley Bobby Jones John Ruffins Plan confirmed by Board Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 9 ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (continued) Jis' Major Tasks/Activities Timeline/ * Completion pate*- * Responsibility Evidence of Success 43. Develop an action plan for implementation of a voter- approved millage increase for both operational needs and capital outlay needs. 1999-2000 Leslie V. Camine Board of Education Millage election 44. Revise current policy and practice related to sick and annual leave to provide the leave at the end of each month and eliminate the practice of advancing excess sick leave. 45. Enter into an exclusive vending contract for all vending services in the LRSD. 46. Develop an investment policy. 47. Negotiate sweep bank account services with a local financial institution. 48. Implement the use of a PC-supported formal cash flow forecasting process. 49. Require inventory and property control accountability to become part of every operational unit managers performance evaluation. NO 1999-2000 1999-2000 (October 99) 1999-2000 1999-2000 1999-2000 Contrary to Attorney Generals Opinion CFO Vic Anderson Darral Paradis Mark Milhollen Mark Milhollen CFO Mark Milhollen CFO Mark Milhollen Associate Superintendents Report received by Board Board confirmation Board confirmation Board confirmation Board confirmation Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 10 ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (continued) J Major Tasks/Activities 50. Revise signature control requirements for the Cafeteria and Activity fund accounts. Timeline/ Completion Date 1999-2000 (October 99) Responsibility Mark Milhollen Evidence of Success Board confirmation Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 11 FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR t Maj or. Tasks/Act ivities 1 Timeline/.^^ \"  f 7?^ Completion^ Date^ 3* Responsibility Evidence of Success 1. Conduct a thorough examination of the overcrowding that will occur at high schools due to the change in grade level structure and include recommendations for changes in the long-range facility plan. 1998-99 Vic Anderson Junious Babbs Completed Long range facilities plan to be part of bond issue. 2. Include a review of the middle school design implications within the discussion of long-term facility needs. 1999-2000 (November 99) Marian Lacey Sadie Mitchell Bonnie Lesley Junious Babbs Vic Anderson Linda Young Austin Board confirmation and bond election. 3. Continue with plans to construct two new elementary schools, one to replace Garland and Mitchell and the other in the West Little Rock area. 1998-99 Stephens 1999-01 West LR Vic Anderson Leslie V. Camine Stephens School has been bid and will be constructed. Plans for the new school will be included in the millage campaign.____________________ 4. Establish a policy on the use of temporary facilities that will provide the criteria for need and establish limits on the total amount of temporary space at a particular facility. 1999-2000 (November) Vic Anderson Junious Babbs Doug Eaton Board confirmation 5. Update the 1995 facilities evaluation study for all operating schools that fall in the lowest two categories. 1999-2000 (November) Vic Anderson Leslie V. Camine Doug Eaton Board confirmation 6. Complete a long-range facility plan (upon completion of the facility update study) and a millage campaign, and submit it to the voters no later than Fall 2000 to correct the deficiencies. 1999-2000 (February/ March 2000) Leslie V. Camine Board Board confirmaiton Bond election Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 12 FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR (continued)  Major Tasks/Activities Timeline/ Completion 1 I Datef\n^''^ \u0026lt;-j! t f . Responsibility j'' Evidence of Success 7. Create a facilities planning department within the current facilities department. 1999-2000 (January 00) Vic Anderson Doug Eaton Board confirmation 8. Increase the budget for maintenance and operations, and target the additional funding for preventive maintenance. 2000-2001 Vic Anderson Mark Milhollen CFO Leslie V. Carnine Millage campaign Board confirmation Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 13 ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY Major Tasks/Activities 1. Establish a Technology Advisory Committee and empower this committee with monitoring and providing guidance on all technology operations in the LRSD. 2. Conduct a study of the salaries offered by LRSD for programmer positions to determine the degree to which they are competitive with the salaries offered by other employers in Little Rock and surrounding areas. 3. Establish a minimum level of technology that each LRSD school should possess. 4. Implement a procedure of allocating funds that will achieve technological equity among schools. 5. Develop an equipment replacement policy. 6. Provide annual funding for the replacement of equipment. 7. Review various strategies for delivering staff development and devise new creative approaches to address the significant need for enhanced training for teachers. Timeline/ Completion Date . 1999-2000 (October) 1999-2000 (December) 1999-2000 (January 00) 1999-2000 (February 00) Responsibility John Ruffins Lucy Neal Leslie V. Gamine Richard Hurley John Ruffins Technology Advisory Committee John Ruffins Lucy Neal J. Babbs CFO M. Milhollen Technology Advisory Committee Bonnie Lesley Kathy Lease Marion Woods John Ruffins Lucy Neal Evidence of Success Board confinnation Board confinnation Confinnation by Technology Advisory Committee and Board consistent with the equitable allocation of resources plan. Board confirmation Draft July 19991999-2000 Work Plan for MGT Recommendations Page 14 ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY (continued) Major Tasks/Activities Timelin^ Completion Date Responsibility Evidence of Success 8. Place technology education specialists In every school in the district as specified in the districts Technology Plan. 1999-2000 (May) Technology Advisory Committee Plan for technology specialist assistance for every school and technical support. Board confinnation 9. Analyze, select, and implement some combination of strategies that, when fully operational, will provide an adequate level of technical support to LRSD schools and administrative offices. 1999-2000 (May) Technology Advisory Committee CFO Lucy Neal John Ruffins Board confirmation NEW INSTRUCTIONAL INITIATIVES 3' i Major-Taslcs/Activities uw ji It 1 . Timeline/, tpiripleilibn * Date Responsibility ' Evidence of Success' 1. Prepare a budget document for 1999-2000 which is organized to reflect the financial commitment to the districts new and ongoing instructional initiatives. Ensure that all initiatives that are brought to and approved by the Board of Directors have detailed budget statements, with projected district and external revenues specified. 2000-2001 CFO Bonnie Lesley Mark Milhollen Leon Adams Board approval of 2000-01 budget. Draft July 1999Arkansas Democrat \"^(fjazeltc  FRIDAY, OCTOBER 23, 1998  Florida consultant to put LR schools to test In unanimous vote, School Board agrees to split $144,000 cost of study with businessmen BY CYNTl IIA I lOWISLL ARKANSAS OLMtX l\u0026lt;Al-( iAZI. I 11\nThe Little Rock School Board voted unanimously Thursday to join city business leaders in financing a $144,00(1 management and financial study of the school district as a way to strengthen public confidence in district operations. . The district will pay $72,000 to MGT of America Inc., an educational management consultant company based in Tallahassee, Fla.  Fifty for the Future, a group of senior central Arkansas business leaders, is contributing the other $72,000 to the Little Rock Alliance for Our Public Schools for the study.  In June, alliance members suggested the management and financial audit to the School Board and pledged to raise half the cost if the board would agree to the proposal. The district and the alliance are partners in the resulting contract with MGT.  This is an exciting project that will really chart the course for our district, Odies Wilson, alliance president, told the School Board, lie said the study will give educators, parents and community members a common starting point in their efforts to identify and meet student needs. MGT is to complete its study by mid-March, when it will present recommendations for improvement based on its local findings and its knowledge of operations in other school systems similar to Little Rock in size and resources. Linda Recio, an MGT senior partner, will coordinate the study. The company has already scheduled an open house from 4-8 p.m. Wednesday at Martin Luther King Magnet Flemcntaiy School, 907 Martin Luther King Blvd., to collect commendations, recommendations and concerns about the districts management structure. A suiwcy will be distributed to teachers and administrators to solicit the same type of information. Company officials also arc planning to meet with School Board members and others over the next few weeks. The company will examine whether the district's organizational design and individual administrators duties arc conducive to meeting district goals. It also will look at the number and types of positions in the district. in addition, it will review the districts finances and budget to sec if they support the instructional program, the recently revised desegregation plan, building maintenance, expanded technology and construction of new schools. Also Thursday, the School Board approved program standards for the middle schools for grades six through eight that will replace the city's eight junior highs beginning next August. The standards establish the academic subjects to be taught, including visual and performing arts, foreign languages, health and physical education. They call for organizing staffs al the schools into teams that will be assigned common groups of students. The school will also, feature flexible school-day schedules, integrated lessons, school-based decision- inaking and teachers trained specifically for middle- school work. School district administrators gave board members progress re- i ports on efforts to redraw school i attendance zones for next year to create more neighborhood schools and on plans to open a new Stephens Elementary School and adjacent city community center by August 2000. The board is expected to meet again in early November to get a more complete report on the costs and design for the new school at 18th and Valentine streets, which will house more than 640 students. The proposed school attendance zones are still being scrutinized, Superintendent Les Car- nine said. Should further changes be necessary, affected parents will be notified, he said. Parents of students who now attend school outside tlieir proposed attendance zone will be surveyed in early November about whether they want their children to attend their current school, their neighborhood school or otli- er schools next fall.\n FRIDAY, MARCH 26, 'XX schools get favorable rating in finance study ' BY CYNTHIA HOWELL AllKANSAS UI.MIK HAl.liAZIJ ir ' ', A' Florida-based consulting firin' liircd last year to do a man- '. agemcnt and financial study of tlic  Little Rock School District pre- . sented its completed report, in-  eluding 72 recoinmendations for , iniprovemeiiL to the School Board .. on Thursday. Dr. Linda Rocio, senior partner .  in MGT of America, Inc., of Talla-  hassee, told the board that the vo- .  luminous audit found that the ur-  ban  school district is generally well run. '\n.' -Ilowever, there are significant ' \"'opportunities to improve manage- inent, instructional delivciy, com-   munication with internal and external stakeholders and financial  ^laljility, she said. 'About two-thirds of the recom- inepdations in tire report  wliich '.coiitains nine chapters and is sev- \nei\nal hundred pages in length  deal with the financial inanage- inent of the system. . 'i Recommendations include a \\ .call for property tax increases, no '. ^atec than September 2000, to fi- .hpngc as much as $05 million in renovations and expansions to district buildings. . Still other recommendations call for an updated study on dis- trict facilities in light of teclmolo- gy needs as well as the planned sliift to middle schools and high school\nthree. 'it!'- four grades instead of \"iRecio also rcconnnended ap- r pointinent of a chief financial officer and an internal auditor to re- port-dircctly to the school hoard, '. 'aild a review of district contract .' 'negotiating practices that would : eliminate outdated\" practices 'outdated' such as automatic annual pay increases to employees for their ad- ditidnal year of experience. '. LThe report calls for slreamlin- \\ing\"the districts top adininistra-  live,'\nstaff. Tlie reorganization 'should reduce the districts four .ijmiii divisions to three, by elimi- ^^Tpg the existing administrative '.Scfiiccs division and assigning du- ztlefi in that section to other divi- Sijbns. The administrative division ^dj^ntly includes school assign- \"Dnjjht, desegregation, and persou- l^iJieCduties. \" *'Tiic report suggests alternative revenue sources and recommends that'the district become more ag- .^essive in marketing itself to the public.' ftccio will return in May after boili'd members have had an opportunity to review the report and ,.iti [ecommendations. -iTlie $144,000 study was jointly commissioned last October by the School Board and the Little Rock Alliance for Our Public Schools, with' support from tire Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce :^nd Fifty for the Future. AI ArlcinsasDciuoGrdt T^OjiazeUv )  SUNDAY, APRIL 25. 1999 LR School District seeing finances sag, firms audit says Study suggests seeking tax increase, reconsideiing benefits to bolster funds BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS OEMOCRAT-OAZE'n E Financial conditions in the Little Rock School District are strained at best, according to a study of the districts financial and management operations. MGT of America, Inc., a Tallahassee. Fla., company, attributed tlie districts financial peril to the depletion of state desegregation funds and expenditures that exceed revenues. The MGT audit made 49 recommendations on how the states largest school district might bolster its financial health. Those proposals include asking voters for a tax increase, realigning expenditures to match revenues, building reserve funds, strengthening financial policies and reconsidering some longstanding employee benefits. MGT was hired last fall by a coalition of Little Rock organizations  including the district, the Little Rock  Alliance for Our Public Schools, Fifty For the Future and the Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce  to do Uie six-month, $144,000 audit The district paid half the fee. Besides a comprehensive review of district financial practices, the audit team headed by Dr. Linda Recio also evaluated and made recommendations about facilities, instructional programs, community relations, the administrative organization and technology systems, including preparation for the 2000 conversion of computer systems. Superintendent Les Gamine and his staff arc reviewing Uie study. Tlipy will give In llip Srhnol Hinnl probably in July, a detailed plan and. time line for responding to most rec- . . -  --------------- ommendations. However, a few of phasing in a reserve fund equal the proposed changes might be put to at least 5 percent of expenditures into place sooner. Gamine said last fw coping with emergencies.  \"  ........................... Still otlier recommendations call week. Others might be phased in. and still otlieis modified or rejected. Im very open to doing some things, Gamine said. I think tlie staff is, too. It's just a matter of work--------.--------.------------------------- vancing sick and aimual leave to em- ing tlirough tliem over a period of ployees, and reconsidering the longtime. The report is pretty solid.\" standing practice of giving automatic Gamine said tlie auditore assessment of tlie districts financial condition was no surprise but a confirmation of what district officials have said. District officials are in die very earliest stages of plamiing a campaign for a voter-approved tax increase to support tlie schools, paitic- ularly some construction and renovation needs. The MGT auditors noted that the district got the last of its total ^3 million in state desegregation payments in 1996-97 and, Uiis year, drew | the final $3 million available from a j employee groups. $20 million low-interest loan from The existing teaching contract the state. Tlie district will not have to repay the loan if it can show that standanlized test scores of black students are witliin 90 percent of tlie scores of white students. District officials say they believe the district ha.s met that goal, but Ilie state has not yet confinned it There is currently no revenue source in siglit tliat will begin to compensate for tlie loss of these fund sources. the auditors said. To offset tlie loss of desegregation money, the district has taken 'UiPir p 1 Audit  Continued from Page 1B money from its reseivcs to meet its expenses, they said. One scenario described by the auditors puts the district into a $1.1 million deficit by the end of the 1999-2000 school year and an $11 million hole by 2003. Those project- --------------------: , ' , . . ed deficits should be eased some- ^Quent superintendent changes in what by tlie recent $12 niillion state veal's resulted in insta- Feimbursement to the district for shortfalls in teacher retirement and health insurance payments. The re- imbui-scmcnl was not included in tlie initial calculations. Regardless of the [state reim- bursementj it is crucial tliat fiscal, bargaining and budgetary practices do not continue in a 'business as usual posture, die study said. Kecomniendations call for balancing revenues and expenditures for strengUieiiing board policies on budgeting, seeking a tax increase by late 2000, revising Uic practices of ad- pay increases for employee longevity. Tlie concept of automatic step increases is no longer as popular given todays environment of customer- based decision-making with accountability for results,\" the auditors said. Tliis practice clearly presents a liigli fiscal risk to tlie district.\" Auditois recommended an overall review of tlie districts contracts with its employees, pointing out tliat the district is not required by law to continue collective bargaining witli permits teachers to resign and take up to three years to be re-employed at the same salary and retain sick leave. The auditors suggested tliat provision be reconsidered. They also suggested Uiat the district curb overtime costs tliat increased 314 percent to $287,000 in 1998. Car allowances to employees should be reduced by 35 percent and payments of stipends belter controlled, auditor's said. Other suggestions in the study call for fonning partnerships with citys lop 10 taxpayers, updating current rental charges for district properties. and generating revenue from educational related advertising on district-owned buses and vehicles. The MGT study suggested extensive changes in tlie districts administrative structure, needed because bilily in the oiganizalional stiucLurc, 1 This poipetual change has ere- I ated a dysfunctional infrastructure with inefficiencies, duplication of , services, duplicative positions with overlapping responsibilities and a fragmented functional structure,\" auditore said. The {iroposed changes call for reducing divisions within the district from four to tliree. That can be accomplished by dismantling the existing administrative services division, currently headed by Associate Superintendent Junious Babbs. The sections witliin tlie administrative seivices division  dese\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   \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_577","title":"Marketing","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":null,"dc_date":["1998"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Finance"],"dcterms_title":["Marketing"],"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/577"],"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  \n\nT Pittman/ portis COMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC RELATIONS MEDIA RELATIONS ISSUES MANAGEMENT i 1 J A Proposed Communications and Marketing Plan for the Little Rock School District 1 J May 1998 Prepared by: Pittman/Portis Comraunications 1021 West Second Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 372-3001 s ) U 1 I 1021 WEST SECOND STREET  LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201  501 -372-3001 FAX 50 1 -374-0049Situation Analysis The Little Rock School District has been involved tn federal court desegregation litigation since 1957 and for more than a decade has been subject to active federal court supervision. While opinions about the effectiveness and outcome of the court- supervised desegregation plan have differed, the revised desegregation plan offers a clear opportunity for designing and implementing new communications and marketing ideas for the Little Rock School District. Among the groups that will be able to take advantage of this opportunity are: 1. The Little Rock School Board and LRSD administrators, who should realize expanded opportunities to make decisions based on the contents of the plan. 2. The parent community, which should see an opportunity to end confusion and increase its participation in local school decisions. 3. The Districts teachers, who should feel an increased sense of unity. With the Federal Court's recent approval of the Revised Plan, it is the intent of the Little Rock School District to develop a comprehensive communications plan that moves the school district forward and creates a more favorable image with its constituents. Pittman/Portis Communications recommends the implementation of a coordinated and proactive public relations and marketing plan. Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 21 i Mission of the Little Rock School District 1 1 The mission of the Little Rock School District is to equip all students with the skills and knowledge to realize their aspirations, think critically and independently, learn continuously and face the future as productive, contributing citizens. This is accomplished through open access to a diverse, innovative and challenging curriculum in a secure environment with a staff dedicated to excellence and empowered with the trust and support of our community. Program Goal of LRSD Public Communications Campaign 1 LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to promote and encourage parental and community involvement and support tn the operation of LRSD and the education of LRSD student. (Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, 1998) 1 t* LRSD shall establish a parent and community relations linkage system to facilitate parental and community involvement in LRSD schools and the operation of LRSD. (Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, 1998) f V J 1 5 I J Target Audiences  Parents of students enrolled tn the Little Rock School District  Parents of students enrolled tn private schools  Parents of pre-school age students  Little Rock teachers and staff  Business and community leadership  Little Rocks residential and commercial Realtors  Central Arkansas Media/Arkansas media  All Little Rock residents and taxpayers 1 i J Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 3I Institutional Objectives I J Objective 1 1 i To retain children and families currently enrolled in the Little Rock School District and build confidence and support among the children and families it serves. . J I 1 I 1 1 J 1 1 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Objective 5' To effectively market the Little Rock School District in order that it may recruit new children and families to the district. To design and implement effective external communications that build public trust, confidence and community pride in the LRSD. To facilitate improved relations with the media as a tool for stability tn the district. To facilitate improved understanding among all LRSD employees. Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 4 J1  Communications Objectives ) Objective 1 Conduct ongoing market research to receive feedback from students and families. Use the research results to improve the district. Objective 2 1 I J Create a new image for the district that focuses on its strengths and offer those strengths to its students. Objective 3 1 Establish a Communications Advisory Committee to provide professional advice and resources in communications and marketing activities. Objective 4 Establish Marketing Teams within each school building. 1 Objective 5 Communicate regularly with LRSD families. 1 Objective 6 Establish regular and timely communications with all LRSD employees. 3 Objective 7 Establish a more aggressive approach to marketing the district to prospective families. Objective 8 J Develop and maintain relationships with the Central Arkansas news media. I Objective 9 Actively schedule LRSD leadership to meet regularly with different segments of the Little Rock community in order to effectively communicate the activities of the Little Rock School District. 3 1 I 4 Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 5 1 1 Objective 1 Conduct on-going market research to actively solicit feedback from current and prospective students/families. Use research results to evaluate and improve the current system. Background: 1 ! I Since 1991, the Little Rock School District has continued to see students and families depart the public school system. Naturally, as LRSDs enrollment has declined, enrollment has increased at the citys private schools and in public schools in surrounding communities such as Conway, Cabot, Benton and Bryant. 1 As enrollment has declined, LRSD has not allocated sufficient funds to evaluate customer satisfaction/dissatisfaction or monitor public perception of the educational programs and services offered. Without qualitative or quantitative data, it is impossible to accurately assess overall public perception including the reasons for enrollment decline. 1 Research is a vital part of the public relations planning process. It teUs you what's really going on. It allows you to establish benchmarks that can be used to measure the effectiveness of the program. Now is the time to dedicate adequate resources so that the district can seek reliable feedback from those it serves, those it no longer serves, and those who have made a decision not to enroll their children tn the district. Formal research means addressing the critical issues of performance, productivity, and perception. Only formal research can uncover solid information that can provide criteria for making decisions. J 1 The following strategies Eire proposed in an effort to monitor opinions and perceptions from the following target audiences:  families currently enrolled tn the Little Rock School District.  families currently enrolled tn private schools.  Little Rock residents/taxpayers without school-age students.  teachers, staff and administrators in the school district 4 ! Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD\nPage 6 JThe opinions of these audiences are critical to the successful future of the Little Rock School District. i Action Strategies: i J J 1. 2. Conduct Focus Group Interviews with the following target audiences:  parents of LRSD elementary students.  parents of LRSD junior hlgh/senlor high students. Seek to obtain the following information:  Why did they choose to enroll their children in LRSD?  Are they satisfied with the educational programs and services offered? Ask for specifics.  Is there room for improvement? Ask for specifics.  What conditions would cause you to leave LRSD?  What would you tell a newcomer to Little Rock about your experience with LRSD?  Have their children ever been enrolled in private schools or public schools outside Little Rock? If so, how do they compare the educational experiences? BUDGET: $5,875.00 (See Attached Proposal) 1 Conduct Public Opinion PoU by telephone with 400 Little Rock citizens who are registered voters. Seek to obtain statistically valid Information on these subjects:  Pubhc perception of the Little Rock School District  Public support for a possible millage increase. BUDGET: $5,900.00 Conununlcations and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 71 Objective 2 Create a new image for LRSD that focuses on the strengths it possesses and offers to its students. Action Strategies: T t I 1. Create a new LRSD logo I J An organizations logo serves as its most identifiable tool and often establishes an Immediate and forceful perception about that organization and its components. Because the current logo has been tn existence for at least 14 years, it is time to develop a new logo that will enhance the Districts image. 1 1 The logo must symbolically communicate the following:  excellence,  quality education,  stability in resources, and  a willingness to embrace diversity. BUDGET: $1,000.00 - $1,500.00 2. Develop a consistent message in all district communications that projects the strengths LRSD possesses and offers to its students. These strengths include: i I J  diversity among students, teachers, staff and administration that builds a solid foundation for productive interaction and relationships throughout ones adult life. 1 I Communications and Marketing Pian/LRSD: Page 8i  delivery of quality educational programs.  abundance of resources not available tn other schools and districts. s i  enhanced choice for specific academic focus.  a safe and secure environment where district staff and students are able to teach and learn. J  technological opportunities to establish competency for life and work tn the 21st Centuiy.   community partnerships that provide educational opportunities and resources available nowhere else in Arkansas. 11 1 i I i T ! Commuiilcations and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 9I ( 1 I Objective 3 Establish a LRSD Communications Advisory Committee that provides professional advice for and additional resources to all communications and marketing activities. 1 ( Action Strategies: I J 1. 2. Define the purpose and role of the LRSD Communications Advisory Committee. Committee responsibilities should include: I ] I 1 '  provide advice and resources for all print and broadcast materials\n support the media relations effort of LRSD\n assist tn developing effective market research methods\n provide feedback and professional cormsel as it relates to crisis communications\n provide professional cormsel and resources as the district seeks to empower school building leadership by providing the tools they need to create effective communication and marketing plans for their individual school building.  sheire professional tools and resources on an as-needed basis. Recruit communications professionals from the Little Rock business community to serve a minimum of one-year. 1 Six to ten professionals should be Invited by LRSD Superintendent Les Camine to serve a minimum of one year and attend regularly scheduled meetings to address the communications needs of the District. ] ] Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 101 I I J J 1 Potential members should possess:  a desire to see Little Rocks public schools succeed tn accomplishing their objective to provide superior educational programs and effectively communicate that to all its audiences.  a commitment to the role of public education.  a commitment to community service.  communications skills and resources that can be shared tn order to help LRSD meet its communications objectives. J 3. Assemble the Communications Advisory Committee regularly to review on-going communications projects with the intent of - seeking thoughtful and professional advice. 1 1 I j Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 11 J3  ) I J Objective 4 In an effort to establish a more customer-friendly environment and creative marketing approaches, LRSD will encourage the establishment of Marketing Teams within each school building through the leadership of the building principals and the Little Rock PTA Council. ! -J Action Strategies: ] 1. 2. 3. Develop a theme to be used tn all LRSD marketing and recruitment efforts. A suggested theme: \"An Individual Approach To A World Of Knowledge.\" I 1 Produce a LRSD Marketing Guide to be used by the local building Marketing Teams. The guide win address and provide the following information and resources:  Defines the role LRSD employees play tn serving thetr customers (students/families) and marketing and communicating with prospective customers\n Provides recommendations for organizing local building Marketing Teams, including the prospective make-up of the local team.  Provides sample plans of work and resources that would enable the teams to effectively cany out a proactive marketing and communications plan for the school families they serve and the prospective families who express an interest in their school. 1 1 BUDGET: Labor/graphic design and printing expenses 1 Provide professional training to all local Marketing Teams. Trainers should include district staff and marketing professionals from the Little Rock business community. J BUDGET: To be determined based on project needs and potential costs of consulting services. Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 12 ,J4. Provide communications support to those schools that require assistance (i.e. developing school Fact Sheets). 5. 1 i Develop an LRSD employee newsletter that focuses on the essential elements of customer service and marketing to prospective customers. The newsletter should be distributed four times per year and include information such as new marketing ideas and opportunities, success stories and so forth. J BUDGET: Review existing LRSD employee newsletter budget for labor, printing, graphic design, etc. 6. 3 1 1 - Establish an incentive program for LRSD schools and employees who play an active and creative role in marketing Little Rocks public schools. Establish a committee of building principals, teachers and parents that will establish incentive awards and recognition for the schools and district employees who meet marketing objectives as they relate to recruiting new school families. 7. 1 Seek the services of interns from central Arkansas colleges and universities, supervised by LRSDs Communications Department, who can enhance communications support to local school buildings. BUDGET: $500 stipend/per student per semester 3  1 J Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 131 1 1 1 .J 1 ] 1 1 I i I i J i 1 J Objective 5 Communicate regularly with LRSD families and potential families. Action Strategies: 1. 2. Use the Districts Internet presence as a communications tool.  Send postcards to parents Informing them of the LRSD tntemet home page address.  Configure the home page to make it easy for parents/families to communicate easily and swiftly with the administration via the Internet.  Build an address database of parent/family e-mail addresses that will enable the District to communicate instantaneously with large groups of parents on matters requiring Immediate attention or action.  Consider the establishment of a Ustserve capability that can automatically distribute longer communications via the Internet to anyone who subscribes to the list.  Send out e-mail bulletins from the Superintendent at least once a month to parents/families on the e-mail address database. BUDGET POSTCARD: $1,025.17 for postage TOTAL (See Attached proposal) $845 for handling $1.500 printing $3,370.17 Use direct mail (postcards) to communicate directly with parents/famihes about district functions such as individual school meetings, changes tn policy, and so forth. BUDGET: $3,370.17 Conmuuilcations and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 141 J 3. 4. Four times a year establish phone banks composed of staff, administration and district/community volunteers to answer questions on any subject phoned in during well-publicized Call Your Kids School nights. 1 I Coordinate with the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette to allow Dr. Camine to write a periodic op-ed column tn which he wUl give a state of the schools report. ..J I 5. Establish Dr. Camine as a resource for the regularly scheduled KATV television feature, First Class, which carries good news reports about the schools. 6. 3 1 The Communications staff will make arrangements for Dr. Camine to serve as a regular guest on radio talk shows. Dr. Camine should be positioned to talk about education in general and the Little Rock schools in particular. I 7. 1 Improve the way the Districts cable television channel is used, including more effective programming, graphics and so forth, to make it a resource that parents/families actively seek out as an authoritative, reliable and vital source of information about their childrens education. BUDGET: to be determined by LRSD 1 1 1 ] 1 J Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 151 1 1 J 3 3 3 3 : 7 ! J Objective 6 Establish regular and timely communications will all LRSD employees. Action Strategies: 1. 2. 3. 4. Prepare a weekly staff update to be faxed to each school building. Building principals will be responsible for copying and distributing to all staff. Department managers tn administrative offices will be responsible for copying and distributing to administrative staff. Arrange for the superintendent and other senior persoimel to periodically visit with school building personnel. Rather than creating a new organization, institute a new element to the \"Key Communicators\" role. Have Key Communicators also serve tn an advisory capacity to the administration regarding issues of LRSD employee communications. Consider writing and distributing a Communications Inventory Survey that asks district personnel to comment on current communication strategies and provide ideas for future communication efforts. Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 161 Objective 7 Establish a more aggressive approach to marketing the district to prospective families. Action Strategies: 1 f 1. 2. Rename the Office of Student Assignment. This name conjures up negative perceptions that families have no control over where thetr children will attend school. Its name implies that students are M j assigned to school buildings by employees of this office. This sets up with prospective families a barrier to effective commimication about the real benefits of a Little Rock School ' District education. ] 1 Names to consider include:  Student and Family Services  Office of Student Enrollment  Recruitment and Enrollment Office 1 a J  1 Develop marketing brochures that target prospective students/families as weU as families of students who are moving to a higher level (junior high/middle school or senior high school). All marketing brochures should include registration forms. Separate marketing brochures should be produced for (1) (2) (3) elementary schools and programs, junior high/middle school programs, and senior high programs. j Brochures should highlight the overall programs and provide a capsule description of the individual school buildings. Whenever possible, the brochures should highlight those programs and services that are not offered by private schools or suburban public schools. J Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 17i 1 t These brochures should be used by and distributed to:  building principals and Marketing Teams for use in school building recruitment efforts.  recruitment representatives from the Office of Student Assignment.  local Chamber of Commerce representatives for use tn economic development activities.  residential Realtors in the Little Rock area who have contact with newcomers to the city\n posted to the LRSD web site. 1 BUDGET: \" Graphic Design: Printing/15,000 count: 8 Page, four color, 4x9 8 Page, four color, 81/2 x 11 (See attached proposal) $3,500 - $5,000 $ 5,452.00 $ 8.903.00 3. 1 In order to give all print communications (brochures, ads, etc.) and possibly web page graphics a new and fresh look, LRSD should update its photo library with new photographs that focus on the primary themes established in Objective 2 (diversity, quality educational programs, abundance of resources, enhanced choice, and technological opportunities). I BUDGET: $ 2,000 for 3 days with free-lance photographer, supplies, processing and duplication of photos. This is at editorial rate vs. commercial rate. I 1 1 \"I J 4. Encourage the partnership with the Little Rock Alliance for Public Schools and the Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce in terms of their sponsorship and coordination of the \"Show 'n Tell' event. Seek additional support for this community-wide open house event from the building's Marketing Teams. n Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 18j 5. Produce a print and broadcast advertising campaign that focuses on the strengths of Little Rock's public schools and seeks to actively market LRSD to prospective families. Coordinate the advertising campaign with the \"Show 'n Tell\" event and LRSD registration. J BUDGET:  Print advertising campaign:  Radio campaign: (See attached proposal) $ 27,500 - $35,000 $ 52,500 - $ 65,500 I 6. Although extensive television advertising is cost prohibitive, there may be a way to have a presence on this medium. Specifically, here are the action steps that might allow this: 1 1 !  Approach potential corporate sponsors that are current television advertisers.  Solicit help  not tn terms of cash, but instead, tn terms of donated television time.  LRSD would produce 3 to 4 television commercials that are :15 tn length (NOTE: A local TV station could be approached to provide production)  Ask the corporate sponsors to run thetr : 15 commercials, backed by a LRSD :15 commercial, this totaling the cost of a standard :30 commercial. (NOTE: Several advertisers already own and run :15 commercials about their business: others might be persuaded to create one or two as part of this sponsorship program).  The corporate sponsor would simply be given copies of the LRSD spots and would produce them Into thetr own spots.  The corporate sponsor's media schedule would be placed as usual, and the LRSD would recognize the sponsor for thetr contribution tn the appropriate way. 1 J Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 191 J 1 1. Develop an initiative to make the residential and commercial Realtors of Little Rock into a powerful ally for growth and support of the Little Rock School District:  Maintain and provide to area Realtors informative brochtues about the Districts strengths and resources.  Communicate to Realtors the up-to-date capabilities now offered on the LRSD web site. Make certain they have the necessary information to refer prospective District patrons to the web site.  Arrange for Dr. Camine to serve as the main speaker at least once a year before the Little Rock Board of Realtors.  Arrange for local Realtors to participate in formal school tours so they may become more familiar with the educational opportunities offered. T i J J 1 i Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 201 I I Objective 8 Develop and maintain one-on-one relationships with the Central Arkansas news media that fosters open communicatinns and creates a better imderstanding of the districts educational programs and opportunities. 1 Action Strategies: 1 J 1. 1 mA 2. 3. 4. 1 Begin immediately a scheduled round of meetings with all Central Arkansas media outlets. These should be conducted with Dr. Gamine sitting down (either at the LRSD offices or at the offices of the individual media outlets) with the top decision makers at each outlet as well as every reporter who deals with education topics regularly. The meetings can be spaced to accommodate Dr. Gamines schedule but the whole series should be completed as soon as possible to introduce Dr. Gamine to the media. The meetings will be presented as background, off-the-record sessions in which Dr. Ccimlne win candidly answer all questions presented to him, but which win not generate articles directly (although they could lead to the development of articles later). 1 Develop a schedule of regular news briefings for the media that cover education tn Little Rock. These need not take the form of a formal news conference, but should be an opportunity for the media representatives to ask questions in a relaxed atmosphere with Dr. Gamine and a rotating series of LRSD administrators. I Gonsider delivering a Monday-morning e-mail briefing to all media representatives outlining what will be taking place tn the District that week that could prove of interest to the media. Recruit a local web site development expert to develop a portion of the site that the media can use as a resource for background 1 Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 21 Ji I 1 1 information about the district, the individual schools, policy and regulations, upcoming events and the Uke. The site also should be configured in such a way that the media can submit e-mail inquiries and have them answered expeditiously. The web site also should have a special subsection devoted to information from Dr. Camine to the media and public. 5. Develop an organized program of shooting B-roU video footage (non-nzirrated scenes) from various schools and classrooms to be used by the broadcast media to illustrate stories about the good things happening in the Little Rock School District. - BUDGET: $1,900 per day (filming and editing) 1 3 1  I Conununlcations and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 22J 1 I J ] 1 1 i I i J I I Objective 9 Actively schedule LRSD leadership to meet regularly with different segments of the Little Rock comTnunity in order to effectively communicate the activities of the district. Action Strategies: 1. 2. 3. \"Leadership\" can include LRSD senior administrators, board members, and others who represent the district well in an ambassador position. Communications staff should regularly provide talking points to be ' distributed to those who actively communicate with area communiiy groups. Community groups to target should include, but not be limited to, the following:  Little Rock City Board and Education Commission  Pulaski County Quorum Court  Little Rock's State House and Senate delegation  Rotary, Kiawanis, Lion's, and other civic clubs  Neighborhood Organizations  Leadership Roundtable  Fifty for the Future  Little Rock Chamber of Commerce  Little Rock Alliance for our Public Schools Communications and Marketing Plan/LRSD: Page 23 I! i i .J J ! I Price Quote: 1 1 Qualitative Research I f I J 1 11 1 t ] 1 J I 1 1 1 J ] 1 rriPR-2\u0026amp;-1990 13146 P.02 1  I FROM: Staqr Pittman Pitti^ Portia Donna Creighton Decision Research, Inc. ftnii-jeGa' Sbiy wi eiJ' i.waidi ta DATE: March 20, 1998 5 I i RE\nProposal for Qualitative Research LOGY: J Three fixua groups, seating 12-15 and lasting one hour, will be conducted in Litde Rock, AR. These group will consist of one group each: parents of Elementary students, parents of Junior High students and parents of High School students. A list of prospectivn participants will be supplied by the client for rrcn tiring purposes. nimTABu:: ] Two (2) weeks lead tiine is desirable to allow ample time for recruitment and Held set-up. With signed authori2atioa of prqect confinnation, implementation can begin. I PyPGET: I $5,875 i 10% + client food (Includea screening questionnaire and discussion guide design, facility rental, hostesses, recruitment, respondent refreshments, project coordination, field direction, audio and videotaping, briefing and debriefing sessions, moderation and report) 1 J 1 i TOTAL P.a2 1 1 1 . J r J Price Quote: 1 I Postcard Mailing to LRSD Families 1 I 3,3 i r 1 I 1 i ! 1 J I 1 J .c- w cyd Schuh Company, Inc. noTCraaantf.  ute* Rodt. ar 72303 Rwnm 301.374-2332 ' ooPCT/cowyamnqi p QUOTATION FOR:_______ Pittman \u0026amp; Poirtia Attn : Stacy Pittman 1021 W. 2nd Little Rock, AR 72201 RBFHHgWCS Esc. Postage t $1,025.17 LR SCHOOL POST CARD Sxpiration Data: 04-18-98 Salaspaxaon\nGreg McMahon Quantity Deacription Setup Price w/setup 22,000 Data Processing Load Tape/Standardize Layout Provided Postal Code Merge/Purge by Household 15,012 Data Processing Non-Profit Sort Best Rate-Automation Print 4-up Cheshire list Permit 15,012 Machine Arfr-paB-j ng Apply Cheshire Labels Apply 4-up Cheshire Ledsels Postcard Mail Sort-LSC Provided Mail Non-Profit 25.00 25.00 25.00 $300.00 $175.12 $370.28 TOTAL: $845.40 1 I subject to final confirmation upon raeaipt o client supplied * iata, artwork, and/cr materials. Ark. sales tax (if applicable) additional. 3If Lloyd Schuh Company, Inc. 22O7CamaRa. * UtM Roe*. AR 73209 101.374.3133 QuoTs/caNroDfld^^ SSWWSB .J QUOTATION FOR\n_______ Pittman a Portia Attn\nStacy Pittman 1021 W. 2nd Little Rock, AR 72201 RBPBRSNCB Eat. Poataga t $1,502.38 HOME \u0026amp; SCHOOL CONNECTION Expiration Date: 04-18-98 Salesparson\nGreg McMahon Quantity Description Setup Price w/getup 22,000 Data Procaaaing Load Tape/Standardize Postal Coda Sort Best Rate-Automation Print 4-up Cheshire list Permit 22,000 Machine Addressing Apply Cheshire Labels Apply 4-up Cheshire Labels L^el Self-Mailer Apply 1 Tads Mail Sort-LSC Provided Mail Non-Profit 25.00 50.00 $410.00 $996.00 5SV !  1 1 1 TOTM.\niWftS'.' SSR^-1 I ya ritrw $1,406.00 1 Ml pricing gubject to final confirmation upon receipt of client supplied data, artwork, and/or materials. Ark. sales tax (if applicable) additional. !'XI 1 1 J ..j J Price Quote: 1 ] Printing Expenses for Brochures and Reports I JMAR 20 ' 90 0t:04PM ARKANSAS SRAPHICS ' p.2 .A i ! J DATE: PROPOSAL FOR: ] 1 .1 1 1 .XL-*. L ' 03/20/98 CJS.W Attn: Spencer May JOB DESCRIPTION: Stacy Quota 8 page + Cover SIZE: 4x9 NEGATIVES: PROOFS: STOCK: BINDERY: TURNAROUND: ADDITIONAL: PRESSWORK: Ink coion: Bleed: BILLING TERMS: QUANTITY AND PRICE: Olak Blualina, Mxcchprise 100# Snamal Taxc acoza, crim, old,\n\u0026amp; aeicch 10 Daya 4 c/p 2/a Taa Hat 30 13,000- $5,452.00 800 Soud: Gaines/P.O. Box 34080  Linle Rocle. Arlrar.9 779n?_dnan . \u0026lt;ni.i7k.aa:x xs^v \u0026lt;n,.77\u0026gt;C77\u0026lt;7MPR 20 ' 90 0i:04P!1 ARKANSAS CRPPHICS IC4 i WHra  ' '-J t-t r: J DATE: 03/20/98 1 PROPOSAL FOR: CJW Atta: Spancar Hay JOB DESCRIPTION: I SIZE: NEGATIVES: PROOFS: Scacy Quota 8 page Covar 8i X II Olak I Bluslinst KaCchpxint STOCK: 100# Snanal TaxC BINDERY: acors, Crla, fold, \u0026amp; acicch 1 TURNAROUND: 10 Days I J ADDITIONAL: 1 PRESSWORK: lok coion: z!^ Ht Bleed: Yas BILLING TERMS: HsC 30 I QUANirTY AiND PRICE: 15,000- $8,903.00  1 ( 100 South Giines/P.O. Box 34080  Little Roclc. Arkxnsii 71203-4080  *01-376.8435 FAY \u0026lt;01.774-7^*^n J Price Quote: Print Advertising Campaign 1 j -4   1 -J ] ] 1 1 JMfiR 590 13:55 FH CJRU aai 7s 4341 .Vj 1 rcss^:. St'-'- iaff . .ajc Cranford Johnson Robinson W\u0026lt; r' FAX TRANSMTITAL SHEET Date 3/5/^ To: Stacy Pittmany PittmanJPortis Phone: EA2Q_ 372-3001 371^1049 J From:Grey Harrison Number of pages including this sheet J, Time Sent 1:QQ PM Operator Our FAX number is (501) 975-4241 Telephone (501) 975-6251 / Direct (501) 975-7272 Capitol Center f 303 West Capitol Avenue / Little Rock. Arkansas 72201-3593 COMMENTS: 1 I i Estimated Costs for Little Rock School District j Arkansas Democrat Gazette - 4 column x 10\" ads, B\u0026amp;W 2 insertions per week (SundayiWednesday pick-up) Metro Section (Pulaski, Saline, Lonoke, PauDcner, White \u0026amp; Jefferson Counties) 8 weeks total (4 meeks in July 1998\n4 weeks m January 1999) Estimatod Cost: S27^ - $35,000 T1 Radio - Pre^corded spots (:30 or :60) 200  250 A28-^ GBPS weekly (approx. 20-25 spots per week on 5 stations) 8 weeks total (4 weeks in July 1998\n4 weeks in January 1999) Estimated Cost: $52,500 - $65,500 1 Vm on my way to the dentist, hut Ill call you hack when I return to explain things. Greg Harrison ton irrrcd OCT? itott A UTTLEROCK JT^ \\ I liance: FOR OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS October 22, 1998 Fax Memo TO: Little Rock Alliance For Our Public Schools Marketing Team Member FROM: Alma Williams SLUJECT\nUpcoming Marketing Team Meeting on 10/27 at 12 Noon. Make plans to attend our next Little Rock Alliance For Our Public Schools Marketing Team Meeting on this coming Tuesday, October 27 at noon at the Little Rock School District Administration Buildings Board Room located at 810 West Markham. A brown bag luncheon with a presentation of the Little Rock School Districts plan for Middle Schools will be the starting point for this meeting. Suellen Vann of the LRSD will detail how the district.is implementing the middle school concept while also addressing questions and concerns. This bring-your-own-bag luncheon will provide the opportunity to listen and learn. Immediately following this presentation, we will re-convene to discuss how the Alliance Marketing Team can support the Middle School plan as well as a proposed Communications and Marketing Plan for the Little Rock School District. Please RSVP by calling the Alliance office at 370-9300. 523 Louisiana Street  LaFayette Building  Suite 175  Little Rock  Arkansas  72201 Phone (501) 370-9300 . Fax (501) 375-8774 lO/IOd TO:t?T 86, 53 ^30 8T09-t7Z-t0S-T:X5J 33d3WWO3 30 33aWbH0 31I I Making Your School THE School of Choice I Principals Institute-1998 I W Todays Outcomes o Better understand why we need to market our schools o Review how and why parents choose a school o Assess internal marketing need I- o Understand image and how to control it J I* Public relations is developing relationships which change 1'^ attitudes that bring about desired behaviors. 11 Patrick Jackson Past President, FRSA 1t All institutions live or die by public opinion. K- b- Janies Tolley Former Vice President. Public Affairs Chrysler Corporation fell !* We re not tbe only game in town! S' 3 .I o private, for-Dront schools o private, non-profit schools o home schools o charter schools few Tbe Diffusion Process Iwitli an examnle al haw a param aelects a schaall o Awareness - finils a listing of all the possible choices - public \u0026amp; private - in the neighborhood\nreads about the schools in the newspaper\nbuilds a list of possible schools 217 I I The Diffusion Process twMi an example al hew a parent selects a schaall % Ul .1 l\u0026gt; o inters-obtains brochures, annual reports, and other written materials on each of the schools\nselects a smaller number which still seem to be possibilities I* The Diffusion Process Iwitli an example al haw a parent selects a schaall  o Evaluation - talks to friends who have children in those schools and asks about the strengths and weaknesses of all\neliminates a few more because of these conversations w The Diffusion Process (with an example al haw a parent selects a schaall k I \u0026gt; o Trial - visits classrooms of schools still considering\ntalks to the principals\nasks questions of the teachers about specific interests  I 3The Diffusion Process (with an example al hew a parent ulectt a schawl] I o flfloptlon - selects a school based on total input and enrolls the child \u0026gt; I I* Why do parents seiect a particuiar schooi? Criteria most cited by parents when choosing a new schooi o academically solid, but not so rigorous as to intimidate tbeir children o accredited o competitive in academic test scores o recognized for excellence o above-average expenditures on pupil expenditures o above-average teacher salaries o above-average library and media services o small class sizes IScheelMatchl 4^.l^H What do parents want? w ? I I* o each child to Ieam as much as he or she is capable of learning o a friendly, protective, yet stimulating learning environment I \u0026gt; Q prompt civil and understandable answers to their questions I o their kids to be happy  Characteristics of a Customer- FriendiySchooi I?  6 o responsiveness o flexibility o two-way communication o shared decision-making o accountability r' o adequate resources o individual recognition in K Total Quaiity Management Theory o build a quality product Ip o sell it at a fair price b \u0026gt; o give good, prompt service when something goeswrong bl o be pleasant to the consumer \u0026lt;: ,1- I 5Marketing VS. Selling \u0026gt; When selling, you've . already determined I i|* the nature of the product or service lil* that you're offering. When marketing, you create and adapt the product to meet the needs of your consumers. I I h \u0026gt; Internal Marketing... I \u0026gt; What it is and why its important I- I I I I Sharpen your schools image! The 4 Ps of Image\nI oPrice/value oPrograms oPlaces oPeople 6r Visitors must report to the office. I i Welcome! We re glad you're here! Please come to the office and introduce yourself! I I I Please let our office staff welcome you to the building! I' \u0026gt; Sharpen your schools image! I.. I I I I\nSi \u0026gt; The 4 Ps of Image: oPrice/value oPrograms oPlaces oPeople PPP = Positive Picture Phrasing Si I Si I 6^ I I Students Management Certified personnel Lounge Costs Learners Leadership Instructional start Workroom Investment t\n7Internal Marketing Sample Employee Self-Assessment Why do you work in our school? Passion for what I do Only job I could get Close to home I look forward to coming to work every day. Strongly agree Strongly disagree I feel that I make a difference every day. Strongly agree Strongly disagree I could contribute more to the students in my school by (fill in the blank)________________________________________ I plan to help my school/department this year by (fill in the blank)_________________________________________I hl Simple Ideas for...Principals o speak Simply\nforget educational iargon o view every contact - Dy phone, computer, in person - as an opportunity to build support o put something positive on every childs report card I I o reconsider school signs o print school pluses on a small card and have laminated\npass out to everyone Great School Public Relations Ideas I\" te- o Key Communicators - identify opinion leaders and build them into a team which understands and supports your school and communicates that suppoil o Know Whafs Right - brainstorm with your entire staff What's Right with Our School. Then, put that information on paper. 3 More Great School Public \u0026lt; Relations Ideas * Jr te: 5^ o let people see for themselves - plan and implement a Principal for a Day, Student for a Day, or Teacher for a Day program. Get people Into your school. o Use your well-read publications - dont start new publications. Put your important information into those that people already read. 8bl s Constructive PR is planned\n1^' r r r i\u0026gt; destructive PR lust happens. 9STUDENTS - ESTABLISHING A RAPPORT Public Relations The bottom line in education is, and always will be, children. As such, the most important of all school public relations is the relationship between the children and the staff and faculty who serve them. We need to continually focus upon what we can do to create a school and classroom environment where children feel good about themselves and their role in the educational process. Some sure fire ways of building rapport with the children in your classroom and school are listed below: Welcome students back to school in the fall by calling them on the phone or sending them a card or letter. Accentuate the positive. Taking the time to give a student a little extra attention may seem like an insignificant act. However, for some students, your pat on the back, the supportive comment, or the simple sticker on the paper may be their only source of positive feedback on that day. Invite a student to eat lunch with you once a week. This is an opportunity for both you and the child to get to know each other in an informal setting. Be available to your students, and let them know you are there if they need you. A good teacher is not only a good instructor but also serves in the capacity of a counselor, advisor, confidant, and a trusted friend. Dont be afraid to enjoy yourself and let your students know how you feel about what it is you do. The teacher sets the feeling tone for the classroom. Students are very perceptive, and will reflect the attitudes modeled by the classroom teacher. Give students an opportunity to develop leadership qualities by assigning such classroom responsibilities as monitors, tutors, and officers. Get to know each of your students as well as you can. What are their likes and dislikes? ...academic strengths? ...hobbies? ...home backgrounds? ...goals and aspirations? Remember that you are capable of making mistakes. Listen to children as they explain their concerns. When appropriate, be willing to change a decision or conclusion. Have a sense of humor. While what we do is very important, it does not always have to be serious. Kids of today have enough problems of their own to worry about. Dont take out your personal frustrations on your students. Dont forget that respect is not something a teacher gets\nit is earned - every single day of our professional lives. BUILDING A RELATIONSHIP WITH PARENTS  Public Relations Parents have a need to develop a relationship with the teachers to whom they entrust their children on a daily basis. Teachers have a need to get to know parents in order to better serve students. For the purpose of more effective instruction, and in order to develop meaningful relationships with parents, schools need to have good public relations programs. Some suggestions for building a positive rapport with parents follow: Get parents into the classroom by using them as resource people. Let them explain a hobby, skill, or interest. Increase parental contact. Positive contacts are especially appreciated by parents. Commit yourself to making one positive parent contact per week. Parents are more approachable regarding a concern if theyve had previous positive experiences with the school. Invite parents to after-school and weekend activities. Develop a list of activities which parents can do at home to support their childs educational program. Create an award for families that complete these activities. Send home letters to parents on a regular basis. These informal letters should let parents know what is happening in your class, current goals and objectives, and student achievements. Be open with parents regarding problems and concerns. Encourage parents to express their concerns so that you can deal with them and prevent the concerns from growing out of control. - Use parent volunteers in the classroom as tutors, to correct papers, assist on field trips, read to students, or work with small groups. - Let parents know that you value their input and suggestions. - Homework is the most consistent communication between the school and the home. Make sure homework is meaningful and clear. Let parents know they can contact you at home to clarify questions they might have regarding an assignment. Invite parents to observe classes, eat lunch with their child, or share morning coffee with you. Personal contact is an extremely important step in building a meaningful relationship. Always take the opportunity to let parents know you appreciate their efforts to support their children's educational endeavors.RECOGNITION, PROJECTS, ACTIVITIES fc\nPublic Relations Classroom projects and all-school activities promote involvement, increase motivation, and foster an interdisciplinary instructional approach. These activities are also excellent opportunities for positive public relations. They involve parents and community members, and also give the local media chances to feature classrooms, schools, and students. The following smorgasbord of ideas offers a wide variety of classroom projects, all-school activities, and means of recognizing students. Student Recognition Classroom Projects All-School Activities Newcomer Corrunittee -Greets new students and orientates them to the school. Student of the Week - Post pictures of the child and display items that are special to her/him. Invite parents into the class and for lunch during the week. Birthday Ribbons Happygrams Post student work. Make sure every child has something displayed which reflects success. Citizenship Awards Perfect Attendance Awards Positive phone calls to parents Quarterly Awards Assembly - The goal is for every child to be recognized for something during the course of the year. Science Fair - Students research and demonstrate a simple scientific concept. Display at an open house for the parents. Leisure Reading Club Student Book of Great Works - Have a book on you desk in which students can enter accomplishments of which they are proud. Sleepover/Pajama Party at the school, perhaps a campout, even at the teachers house. What a great way to get to know your students! Parents/Grandparents Day Lunch with the teacher Classroom newspaper Activity Day - Bowling, walking, rollerskating, cross country skiing, bicycling Pet Show Popcorn sales one day per week during lunch hour Brotherhood Week World Peace Week Wellness Activities Day American Education Week Artist-In-Residence School themes or slogans Cross-Grade Pals - Students in the primary grades are buddied\" with students in the intermediate grades. Students read to each other, exchange letters, and share other activities during the school year. Talent Show - Schedule it for the winter months, and combine it with a chili supper Walk younger children home during the first month of school to meet their parents. If they ride a bus, ride the bus with them. - Brown Bag Lunches - Invite parents to speak on areas of interest to kids during lunch hour. School Spirit Day - Students wear clothes in the school colors and/or with the school logo on it Honor Roll Catch Them Being Good - Pass out tickets or coupons redeemable for incentives when you see a student modeling appropriate behavior. Class breakfast Secret Pals at Christmastime, Easter, May Day Have a picnic in the park in May Celebrate the schools birthdayTELEPHONE TECHNIQUES Public Relations Phone calls are a vital link to the home and to the public, and can be your most effective means of developing a positive relationship with parents and community members. Following are some suggestions for insuring that the image you project over the telephone is both positive and professional: 1. 2. 3. 4. Answer the phone as promptly as possible. Upon answering, identify yourself and the school you represent. Be pleasant. Nobody wants to talk to a school or the teacher\n people want to talk to other people. A cheerful greeting and a warm tone of voice let the caller know they are dealing with someone capable of being friendly, helpful, and understanding. All callers, whether parents or concerned citizen, should be treated with the highest respect, and should never be considered as interruptions. Listen carefully to what the caller has to say. Your ability to concentrate on what the caller is saying and to maintain an attentive and helpful manner is even more critical when the caller has a problem or concern. In such situations your role should be to assist the caller and to help in solving the problem rather than making excuses or employing other defensive strategies. When calling a parent about a concern, be aware that such a call can be very uncomfortable for the parent. Be empathetic, state the concern, and avoid being judgemental. Let the parent know how you will handle the concern and how they can support you. Parents are less likely to be defensive if they perceive you as someone who cares about their child and who is trying to work with them to help their child succeed in school. 5. 6. 7. Use good voice control. - Speak directly into the mouthpiece. If the caller cant hear or understand you, s/he may become frustrated and discouraged. - Remember, a monotonous voice is perceived as boring, while a speaker who constantly changes inflection is perceived as flighty or insincere. Your inflection should convey an interested and helpful attitude. - Enunciate and articulate so that what you say is what people hear. Never put someone on hold without asking permission and explaining why it is necessary. Always thank the caller for waiting. If the caller will be on hold for an extended period of time, break in occasionally to let the caller know they have not been forgotten! If a callback is necessary, do so as soon as possible. People are very impressed with such attentiveness. On the other hand, getting back to people when you get around to it conveys a message of indifference on your part.= DEALING WITH NEGATIVE PEOPLE/COMPLAINTS = \u0026amp; Public Relations Even the best of educators will occasionally come under criticism from parents or community members. How you handle the negative feedback, whether or not the criticism is justified, will have a significant impact on how parents perceive you. There are guidelines that teachers can use to assist them in responding to negative parents, their concerns, and criticism. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Be open-minded. Consider the parents point of view. No matter how much professionalism, competency responsibility, or integrity you have, you are capable of making a mistake. Teachers need to accept the fact that they will occasionally make an error. Listen carefully, with the goal of fully understanding the concern. Let the parent talk while you listen. Interrupt only to clarify her/his point and confirm your understanding of it. Let the parent vent her/his concern. Such venting is not only therapeutic for the parent, but will give you the information you need to deal with the situation. Dont allow yourself to react emotionally to the parent. A negative response only serves to further alienate them. Talk only after thinking about what you can say to assist in the resolution of the concern. Remember always to be polite, honest, and open. Acknowledge your regret over the parents dissatisfaction. Express empathy for their inconvenience and/or problem. Let them know you will seek a solution to the problem. When the criticism is well-founded, respond to it. Take steps to insure that the source of criticism has been corrected. Respond quickly. The sooner the source of criticism has been addressed, the less the opportunity there is for the concern to mushroom. An irritated parent will become unnecessarily agitated if, upon reporting her/his concern, s/he is left with the impression that s/he has been ignored. Respond effectively. Seek a permanent, total solution to the problem. Try to end the discussion on a positive note. Inform the parent, in very specific terms, what you will be doing to resolve the issue. Follow up with a phone call or note to give the parent feedback on how you have followed through.GAINING SUPPORT FROM NON-PARENTS \u0026lt;4^ Public Relations All citizens help support schools and education through local, state, and/or federal taxes. Typically, a vast majority of the people in a school district do not have children in school. Educators are beginning to realize that it is essential for them to make the senior citizen, childless couples, and singles a priority audience. We must involve and educate the nonparents if we wish to gain their support for our schools and educational programs. Following are some suggestions and activities to help classroom teachers and schools reach out to this increasingly large and influential group: Involve the non-parent in the classroom/school. A bonding and support instinct is initiated when people are given opportunities to become a part of the program. Consider using non-parents to * serve as tutors and teachers helpers * help plan for special celebrations * read to primary students * share a craft, talent, or skill * work with students who have exceptional needs  be pen-pals to students * work in the IMC, computer lab, or office area * listen to children read stories or give book reports - Draw upon the knowledge, skills, and experience of non-parents when developing new programs and curriculum. One does not have to be an educator or parent to have something important to say about what needs to be taught in schools. Place non- parents on school committees (e.g., long term planning, curriculum, advisory, public relations). - Ask for the opinion and input of the non-parent. Survey them to find out what they think the strengths and needs of your school are. How do they feel the school could better serve the needs of the non-parents? - Unleash your best ambassadors, your students! Send them out to perform for area clubs and organizations. Let them visit the hospitals and retirement homes. Set aside a service day on which students volunteer to rake leaves and do small jobs for retired citizens. Or plan an Apprenticeship Day when students learn about a profession or occupation by spending the day at the worksite under the supervision of a non-parent. - Inform the non-parent. Send classroom newspapers and school newsletters to non- parents. Work with the local media to let the public know the significant and positive things which are happening in the schools. Once a month, invite non-parents to a morning coffee where information, questions, and concerns can be exchanged. - Acknowledge the non-parent. Have a special visitation day just for the non-parent. Give them a free lunch, a tour of the building, and an informative and/or entertaining school program. Get your class to adopt non-parents in the neighborhood, and hold special activities with them throughout the year. Issue Golden Age passes to senior citizens.\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   \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_604","title":"Ombudsman","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":null,"dc_date":["1998/2000"],"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","Education--Arkansas","School administrators","School management and organization","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Ombudsman"],"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/604"],"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  \n\nThe Office of Ombudsman was established during the 1998-1999 school term and the position filled by James L. Washington, who had been principal of Henderson Junior High from 1994-1998.\nJOHN W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374.4187 JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. received AUG 7 \" 1998 August 6, 1998 OTGEOf Mr. Junious Babbs Associate Superintendent Little Rock School District 501 Sherman Little Rock, AR 72202 Re: Job Description for Ombudsperson Dear Mr. Babbs: Mr. Walker asked that a share a copy of Joshuas draft of the job description for the Ombudsperson with you and Dr. Carnine. Enclosed is a copy of same. Please give me a call if you have questions. JCS/ Enclosure cc: Ms. Ann Brown Dr. Leslie Carnine Mr. Chris Heller Joshua Intervenors DRAFT JOB DESCRIPTION FOR THE POSITION OF OMBUDSPERSON POSITION: Ombudsperson for the Pulaski County School Desegregation Case QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Minimum of a Bachelors Degree. 2. At least five (5) years experience in management or supervisory capacity. 3. Must possess or be able to obtain an Arkansas Teachers Certificate. 4. making. Evidence of successful experience with parent and staff involvement in decision 5. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality desegregated education. REPORTS TO: Class counsel for the Joshua Intervenors will provide reports to the Superintendents of the Pulaski County school districts of Ombudspersons findings. SUPERVISES: Staff as may be designated by Joshua class counsel. JOB GOAL: To investigate and assist in the resolution of complaints about policies, procedures, practices of the Pulaski County school districts. The goal of the office of the Ombudsperson is to also assist the Pulaski County school districts with the task of ensuring that students and their parents and/or guardians are aware of their rights pursuant to district practices, policies and procedures, the student rights and responsibilities handbook, and all other applicable state and federal laws to ensure an equitable education to class members. The Ombudsperson will act as anadvocate on behalf of students and their parents and/or guardian involved in the discipline process, investigate parent and student complaints of race-based mistreatment and other complaints by students and parents relating to equitable access to and delivery of necessary educational opportunities and services being offered by the District. To this end, the Ombudsperson will work with District officials, students and parents to achieve equitable solutions. To communicate, assist and be available to help students and parents and/or guardians understand District educational philosophies, goals and objectives. JOB RESPONSIBILITIES: 1. To investigate and assist in the resolution of complaints regarding practices, policies, and/or procedures. 2. Attend discipline hearings on behalf of students and their parents and/or guardians to serve as an advocate regarding the discipline appeals process. 3. Attend administrative and/or teacher conferences on behalf of students and their parents and/or guardians to ensure proper educational needs and placement of students through proper assessment and other evaluations. 4. Attend Emergency Management Team conferences on behalf of students and/or their parents and/or guardians to ensure proper placement of students regarding their educational needs through proper assessment and other evaluations. 5. To investigate student and parent complaints of race, gender and disability-based mistreatment and attempt to mediate equitable resolutions. 6. To investigate student and parent and /or guardian complaints of race-based discrimination and attempt to achieve equitable solutions. 7. To provide summative quarterly reports to class counsel for the Joshua Intervenors outlining the relationship of the complaints to desegregation plan provisions, a summation of findings and conclusions and recommendations to remedy recurrence. 8. To provide written and/or oral reports to the Board of Directors regarding student and parent concerns. 9. Monitor all aspects of school operations. 10. Other duties as assigned by class counsel of the Joshua Intervenors.SALARY: Negotiable5013744107 UfiLKER LRU FIRM 847 P04Z0\u0026lt;1  17 '90 10: I I Attorney At Law . 1723 Broadway Little Rock. Arkansas tzzm Tslephone (501) 37.4^58 i FAX (601) 3744187 i J0H.X W. W.\\LSR RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN POSTER. UR, Via Facsimile - 324-2146 August 20, 1998 Dr. Leslie Carnine Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Carnine: I understand that Mr. Walker has already contacted you about my position as ombudsperson. School has started. I have started to receive telephone calls from parents and patrons of the District The first problem which I would like to bring to your attention for discussion is that of the elimination of the staff position of social worker at Rockefeller Incentive School. I refer to Rockefeller as an incentive school because the basic characteristics of the student population have not substantially changed since the approval of the revised plan. We believe that the social worker position is important and necessary for the school's ability to relate to community concerns and to the needs of the underprivileged children therein. The social worker position has been one which has bce.n regarded as successful for many years. It is my and Mr. Walkers understanding that programs that have been successRil in facilitating desegregation and remediating problems which are attributable to class status will be continued rather than eliminated. 1 would, therefore, like to visit with either you, Ms, Sadie Mitchell, Mr. Junious Babbs or the appropriate person who has responsibility for this area. Please let me hear from you as soon as possible. Sim JO OTua Josfiua Intervenors JCS/ cc: Mr. John W. Walker Mr. Julius Babbs Mr. Chris Heller 1 I02/10/1999 15:03 5013242090 lrsd human resourses RASE 02 Little Rock School District Job Description Job Title: Job Code\nDOT Code: Division: Department: Location: Reports To: Prepared By: Prepared Date: Approved By: Approved Date: FLSA Status: \"OMBUDSMAN\" Administrative Services Administrative Services Student Assignment Building Associate Superintendent - Administrative Services Associate Superintendent - Administrative Services 07/24/98 Director - Human Resources 10/22/98 Non-Exempt SUMMARY To serve as a student/parent advocate upon instances of conflict and/or concern within the student school experience while working to achieve equitable solution among all parties. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSTBIUTIES include the following. Other duties may be assigned. -Ensure that students are aware of their rights pursuant to the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook. -Act as an advocate on behalf of students involved in the discipline process. -Investigate parent and student complaints of race-based mistreatment and attempt to achieve equitable solutions. SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES This job has no supervisory responsibilities. QUALIFICATIONS To perform this job successfully, an individual must be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily. EDUCATION and/or EXPERIENCE Bachelors degree (B. A.) is preferred from four-year college or university\nor one to two years related experience and/or training\nor equivalent combination of education and experience. LANGUAGE SKILLS Ability to read and interpret documents such as policy manuals and procedure manuals. Ability to write routine reports and correspondence. Ability to speak effectively before groups of customers or employees of organization. MATHEMAHCAL SKILLS Ability to work with mathematical concepts such as probability and statistical inference, and fundamentals of plane and solid geometry and trigonometry. Ability to apply concepts such as Page 102/10/1999 15:03 5013242090 LRSD HUMAN RESOURStS PAGE 03 fractions, percentages, ratios, and proportions to practical situations. REASONING ABILITY Ability to define problems, collect data, establish facts, and draw valid conclusions. Ability to interpret an extensive variety of technical instructions in mathematical or diagram form and deal with several abstract and concrete variables. PHYSICAL demands The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is regularly required to talk or hear. WORK ENVIRONMENT The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perfoim the essential functions. The noise level in the work environment is usually quiet. Page 2Arkansas Democrat 7^(JjazcLk |  TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1998  Henderson principal named LR school district ombudsman BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS DEMOCRAWJAZETTE James L. Washington, principal at Henderson Junior High School since September 1994, will become the Little Rock School District's ombudsman, a new position required by the districts recently revised desegregation plan. Superintendent Les Carnine said Monday that as an ombudsman, Washington will serve as an advocate for parents and students who have problems or conflicts with the school district. Much of the ombudsmans work is expected to be done on behalf of parents and students who want to appeal disciplinary  actions. A committee of parents and teachers will be formed soon to interview candidates for Hendersons principal. The schools enrollment is 603 this year, down from 724 ItJit year. The committees recommendations will be forwarded to the superintendent, who will endorse one candidate to the School Board. Carnine said he hopes to complete the selection process by the School Boards Dec. 17 meeting, and no later than early 1999, in time for student pre-registration for the next school year. It is during pre-registration, Jan. 25 to Feb. 5, that parents select the schools their children will attend in 1999-2000. Henderson is one of eight Little Rock junior highs that will become a middle school for grades six through eight. Because sixth- and seventh- graders will be new to Henderson next year. Gamine said parents from Hendersons feeder elementary schools will be included on the candidate screening committec. The primary feeders for Henderson are Terry, McDermott and Romine elementary schools in west Little Rock. Carnine said a new principal may assume duties at Henderson as soon as the second semester starts in January, but that will depend on the new persons current responsibilities. Washington will delay assuming his new job until the new principal can take over. Washington is a longtime district employee who has worked in the student assignment office and as assistant principal at Hall High. He has experience at both the elementary and secondary school levels. Carnine described the job change as a lateral move for Washington and said his salary will not change. The ombudsmans position will be included in the district's department of pupil serx'ices, headed by Jo Evelyn Elston. In addition to acting as a parent and student advocate, the ombudsman should ensure that students are aware of their rights in tile district and should investigate and resolve complaints of racebased mislreatiuent. The revised desegiegation plan was negotiated by representatives of the school district and tlie families of black students who intervened in the districts 1982 desegregation lawsuit.5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 777 P02Z02 AUG 26 99 13:46 John w. Walker, p.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, .Arkansas 72206 Telephont (501) 374-3755 RLX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER RALPH W.ASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. August 26,1999 Via Fax Dr. Les Carnine, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Dr. Carnine: So that there will be no possibility of misunderstanding about the duties of the ombudsperson for the next school year I respectfully request a meeting with your top level administrative staff regardmg tlie subject including his budget, his relationship to other administrators and to Joshua and his reponing responsibilities. I request that you be in this meeting along with Dr. Linda Watson. Mr. Junious Babbs, Dr. Marion Lacy, Dr. Bonnie Lesley and Ms. Sadie Mitchell. It is our view that the position was effectively diminished in status and responsibility when Mr, James Washington made the negative report regarding Ms. Gayle Bradfords administration and treatment of black students. It is clear by his retraction letter that he was taking orders from higher * 11wlMwiO XlViil iXl^XXwX authority' and that he is not in a favored position in this district by the nature of the expectations of his job. I believe that it is important that he directly report to you, Dr. Carnine, rather than to Mr. Babbs, and that his work be as required by the plan. He is not an agent of the district per se\nrather, he is an agent of justice and fairness for the students, as you are, and he is paid by the district. He is an extension of you. This inquiry will also delve into the responsibility for the assistant superintendent for the district because his duties are also unclear. I suggest that we meet on September 8,1999 at 10:00 a.m. for a meeting that I expect to last between one and two hours. I also request that Mr. Chris Heller and Ms, Ann Brown be present along with Mr. James Washington. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, '. Walker JWW:lp To: James Washington Little Rock School District Fax Number: 5013242213 FAX BLAST TO ALL MEMBER OFFICES USOA FROM\nRuth Cooperrider Deputy and Legal Counsel, Iowa - Office of Citizens' Alde/Ombudsman Capitol Complex, 215 E. Seventh Street, Des Moines, Iowa 50319-0231 Phone: 515-281-3592: Fax: 515-242-6007 E-mail\nrcooper@leqis.state.ig.us I am the USOA's representative to an Ombudsman Committee of the American Bar Association (ABA) which has been working to develop recommendations regarding the establishment of ombudsman offices. (The latest USOA newsletter has an article about the Committee.) The Committee's work has focused on defining vrtio is an Ombudsman, including what are the essential characteristics of an Ornbudsman^The CdmwlgeeT8~gettingTdoaBTo~completing its-work on a-Resolution-and an accompanyjDg,.epoilthat-WiJI be submitted to the ABA'S House of Delegates. Action taken by the House of Delegates on these documents or issues becomes official ABA policy. The Resolution is attached. The full report is available at www.abanet.org/adminlaw/ombud^atlanta.html. The Committee is presently reviewing various concerns and issues, most of which relate to defining or describing \"independence and \"confidentiality\". These unfinished issues include: 1. Whether the Resolution by itself adequately set out the defining essential characteristics of an ombudsman. 2. should confidentiality be guaranteed in light of current requirements in laws on\nequal employment opportunity. Freedom of Information Act, archives and record-keeping requirements, anv other law or agency want to access the Ombudsman's confidential records? Relationships between the Ombudsman and the federal Inspector Generals\nwho has access to a) b) what between these two agencies. a) b) Placing the Ombudsman outside the entity under the Ombudsman's jurisdiction. Is it appropriate for an ombudsman to investigate those who appoint, confirm or have power to remove the ombudsman? c) d) e) 0 Ombudsman's access to information What are the ombudsman's fair procedures? Providing the ombudsman with independent counsel. Broad versus narrow jurisdiction and comment ,eelMdocumansaep.abtein P-dsentingourp^ionto 1) Do you------ to the three fundamental charactenstics of an ombudsman: independence, neutrality/impartiaiity and confidentiality? feel the report adequately supports the definition in communicabng a definition which might 2) Do you form the basis of US law? it this coming month? I NEED YOUR COMMENTS BY OCTOBER 13, 1999, 6:00 P.M. CDT. If you think something in either the Resolution or Report needs to be revised, please be specific and if possible, provide the suggested language change. You may respond to me by e-mail, fax, or postal mail.DRAFT RECOMMENDATION OF THE OMBUDSMAN COMMITTEE TO THE SECTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND REGULATORY PRACTICE AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association supports the use of ombudsmen in the public and private sectors and further recommends the following principles for the establishment of ombudsman offices, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association recommends that only those individuals meeting these principles may legitimately call themselves ombuds-men , n ombudsman is authorized by an entity to  (1) receive complaints and inquiries about, and to address, investigate, and examine alleged acts, omissions, improprieties, and systemic problems within the jurisdiction specified by the entity m the law or written policy establishing the ombudsman s office (2) exercise discretion to accept or decline to act on a complaint or inquiry (3) act on complaints and inquiries on the ombudsmans own initiative t J J via 1---- , 1  ul (4) operate by fair procedures to aid in the just resolution of a complaint or problem (5) resolve issues at the most appropriate level of the entity (6) function by such means as: (a) educating .  . , (b) developing, evaluating, and discussing options available to affected individuals (c) mediating (d) investigating (e) conducting an inquiry and report findings, and VC) WUUUVWUJ5 *A*i^v**x^ --------------------- 1 t V (f) making recommendations for the resolution of a complaint or problem to those persons who have the authority to act upon them. B. An ombudsman must be provided with these essential characteristics at a minimum to discharge the duties of the office effectively  (1) independence from control by any officer of the appointing entity or person who may be the subject of a complaint or inquiry in structure, function, and appearance (2) impartiality and neutrality, and (3) confidentiality. C. An ombudsman does not  (1) accept or provide notice to the entity of an alleged violation (2) make, change or set aside a law, policy or administrative decision (3) conduct an investigation that substitutes for determining rights in administrative or judicial proceedings (4) make binding decisions or determine rights, or (5) compel an entity or any person to implement the ombudsmans recommendations.Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 324-2014 Fax: (501) 324-2213 JAMES L. WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN Introduction Ombudsman Monthly Report August 1999 Of Webster defines ombudsman as, \"...one who investigates complaints and assists in achieving fair settlements.\" The word itself is Scandinavian in origin and generally refers to someone who is a representative, agent, or authorized person who safeguards and serves the interest of a particular group. Today, the position of ombudsman in its various forms (client ombudsman and consumer ombudsman, for example) has the reputation as a fair-minded, neutral and powerful source of assistance to those coping with bureaucracy. Building trust and credibility is vital to the success of any business. Most of the time, problems and concerns are resolved through the normal chain of command. However, there are times when problems are not addressed in a satisfactory manner. Unfortunately, the problem does not disappear. It may grow until it contaminates the entire business relationship. Providing the services of an ombudsman to work with the people involved in the business can effectively demonstrate the commitment to everyone in a fair and equitable manner. Ombudsmen are institutions that are involved in doing impartial investigations of citizens' complaints. An ombudsman receives the complaint and then conducts a thorough and dispassionate investigation searching for points of law and proper procedure and questioning whether the district may have done an injustice to a citizen. At the conclusion of an investigation, the ombudsman makes a recommendation about how the case should be resolved. Although the ombudsman does not have the power to reverse decisions, he should use whatever political powers available to try to enforce the recommendations. The function may occasionally involve mediation. The mission of the organizational ombudsman is to provide a confidential, neutral and informal process which facilitates fair and equitable resolutions to concerns that arise in the organization. In performing this mission, the ombudsman serves as an information and communication resource, upward feedback channel, advisor, dispute resolution expert, and change agent. While serving in this role, the ombudsman should adhere to the following list knows as The Standards of Practice: 1. Adhere to The Ombudsman Association Code of Ethics. 2. Base the practice on confidentiality. 2.1 An ombudsman should not use the names of individuals without permission. Ombudsman Monthly Report August 1999 Page 2 2.2 During the problem-solving process, the ombudsman may make known information as long as the identity of the individual contacting the office is not compromised, unless necessary. 2.3 Any data should be scrutinized carefully to safeguard the identity of each individual whose concerns are represented. 2.4 Publicity about the office conveys the confidential nature of the work of the ombudsman. 3. Assert that there is a privilege with respect to communications with the ombudsman and resist testifying in any formal process inside or outside the organization. 3.1 Communications between an ombudsman and others (made while the ombudsman is serving in that capacity) are considered privileged. Others cannot waive this privilege. 3.2 Do not serve in any additional function in the organization which would undermine . the privilege nature of our work (such as compliance of officer, arbitrator, etc.) 4. Exercise discretion whether to act upon a concern or an individual contacting the office. The ombudsman may initiate action on a problem he or she perceives directly 5. Are designated neutrals and remain independent of ordinary line and staff structures. No additional role (within the organization) which would compromise this neutrality. 5.1 The ombudsman strives for objectivity and impartiality. 5.2 The ombudsman has a responsibility to consider the concerns of all parties known to be involved in a dispute. 5.3 Do not serve as advocates for any person in a dispute within an organization\nhowever, do advocate for fair processes and their fair administration. 5.4 Help develop a range of responsibility options to resolve problems and facilitate discussion to identify the best options. When possible, help people develop new ways to solve problems themselves. 5.5 The ombudsman should exercise discretion before entering into any additional affiliations, roles or actions that may impact the neutrality of the function within the organization. 5.6 Do not make binding decisions, mandate policies or adjudicate issues for the organization.Ombudsman Monthly Report August 1999 Page 3 6. 6.1 6.2 7. 8. 9. 10. Remain an informal and off-the-record resource. Formal investigations - for the purpose of adjudication - should be done by others. In the event that the ombudsman accepts a request to conduct a formal investigation, a memo should be written to file noting this action as an exception to the ombudsman role. Such investigations should not be considered privileged. Do not act as agent for the organization and do not accept notice on behalf of the organization. Do always refer individuals to the appropriate place where formal notice can be made. Individuals should not be required to meet with the ombudsman. Al! interactions with the ombudsman should be voluntary. Foster communication about the philosophy and function of the ombudsman's office with the people to be serviced. Provide feedback on trends, issues, policies and practices without breaching fidentiality or anonymity. Identify new problems and provide support for responsible systems change. con- Keep professionally current and competent by pursuing continuing education and training relevant to the ombudsman profession. Endeavor to be worthy of the trust placed in the ombudsman. Activities and Complaint Summaries: 1. The ombudsman was contacted by a LRSD parent whose child attended Crystal Hill in the PCSSD. Her complaint was that the child has numerous sanctions although he has been diagnosed with a handicap. The parent indicated that she told the school about the handicap. The school was contacted. The parent was referred to the appropriate assistant superintendent in the PCSSD and advised of her rights by the LRSD ombudsman. 2. 3. 4. 5. The ombudsman was contacted by grandparents seeking help with establishing guardianship while the parents moved to another city. The assignment office was contacted and the process was completed. The assignment office The ombudsman initiated the development of the LRSD Dropout Prevention Plan with assistance from the district's coordinator. A former student contacted the ombudsman for assistance in asking a school transfer so that he can continue his education to become a teacher. The visit to the admission officer was productive. Regular contact is maintained by phone. It was explained The parent of a student who had been recommended for expulsion during the previous school term contacted the ombudsman for reinstatement procedures, that the student was not eligible for reinstatement for one calendar year.Ombudsman Monthly Report August 1999 Page 4 6. The parent of a Hall High School student contacted the ombudsman to discuss transfer options. The student was experiencing attendance problems. It was explained that his attendance records would transfer with him and that changing schools would not solve the problem. They were referred to the assistant principal to develop strategies to improve his attendance. 7. The parent of a Hall student contacted the ombudsman for assistance with ...e pu.ein or a nail siuaenT contacted the ombudsman for assistance with getting her son transferred to Central. The process was explained to the parent and she was referred to the Student Registration Office. 8. The ombudsman was contracted by a parent about a recent change in guardianship. As result of the change, the child has a new address that justifies a school change. process was explained and they were referred to the Student Registration Office. The 9. A Henderson parent contacted the ombudsman for information about the -------------- -------- ...u magnet program\nspecifically, the course differences between magnet and non-magnet students. I, , ...... Wfl IIWII JIUUCHI3. Her questions were answered and she was referred to the principai for more detailed information. 10. A Hall- parent contacted the ombudsman to complain about her son's grade change from A ZK A I I_b _ - - *__ I I  . fl. the last school term. Inquires were made and it was discovered that the grade should have been changed. The assistant superintendent was notified and the grade changed. was a The process 11. The ombudsman was contacted for assistance with respect to getting M-to-M transfers to Clinton elementary in the PCSSD and transportation for her grandchildren. was explained and she was referred to the Student Registration Office for service. 12. A parent contacted the ombudsman because she could not get a L children to Jefferson. The school was contacted and a stop was established. courtesy bus stop for her 13. The ombudsman was contacted with a complaint about not being assigned to the school of her choice, Rockefeller. The assignment process was explained and her questions Z* M fl zJ * answered. were 14. The parent of a Central student appealed the assignment because of problems with students charged with crimes in the community. Her request was denied. A meeting arranged with the principal and her fears were addressed. was 15. The ombudsman was contacted by the guardian of a octumy officer at Henderson had consensual sex during the 1997-98 school year. The officer was student who alleged that a security transferred to Fair. The student was seeking a transfer to Fair. The ombudsman met with the guardian and a meeting was scheduled with the authorities. The meeting did not take place. Instead, they took the student to school and alleged that he fathered her child DNA test results proved that he did not father the child. 16. The ombudsman initiated talks to re-establish the Future 500 scholarship program for African-American students in the LRSD. 17. Dr. Terrence Roberts met with the ombudsman to discuss the role of the ombudsman in the district.Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 324-2014 JAMES L. WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN wi.5o, Fax: (501) 324-2213 wV A ~sasatesBt RSCS5VED Ombudsman's Monthly Report September 1999 JAN 2 i 2CC0 Introduction GiTiGSuF The ombudsman is a designated neutral or impartial dispute resolution practitioner whose major function is to provide confidential and informal assistance to students, parents, and administrators. When providing assistance, an ombudsman uses a variety of skills which include counseling, mediation^ information fact-finding, and upward feedback mechanisms that offer a range of options to those who contact the office. The ombudsman functions outside the ordinary line management structure and has access to anyone in the organization, including the superintendent. The ombudsman has a long and honorable tradition as the means of protecting against abuse, bias, and other improper treatment or unfairness. The LRSD ombudsman follows in this tradition by identifying and bringing forth such issues in a confidential and neutral environment. Guided by the requirement of terms of reference for the function, he also follows the code of ethics and standards of practice of the ombudsman's association. Activities/Summary of Complaints: 1. 2. 3. A parent contacted the ombudsman requesting information with respect to accessing the four-year-old program at Brady. The process was explained and the parent left satisfied. The parent of two students from McClellan contacted the ombudsman to discuss how she can get them into the ACC. They have had attendance problems and the mother wanted information about mentors, jobs, and work permits. The information was provided. The students decided to return to regular high school. A student and an adult met wit the ombudsman to discuss power-of-attorney documents and how it would impact the child. After the conference, they went to the Student Registration Office for the documents.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - September 1999 Page 2 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The ombudsman met with the principal at Wakefield to discuss a student who transferred to Franklin. She reported that they might be victims of abuse. The principal at Franklin was notified and SCAN was contacted. The parent of students who were retained contacted the ombudsman to complain that the retentions were not justified. The principal was contacted and their situation was explained. There was no substance to the complaint. The ombudsman communicated findings to parent. The parent of a McClellan student contacted the ombudsman about the Youth Challenge Program. The phone number and a contact person were given to the parent. She felt that the program is what her child should attend rather than high school because of discipline problems. The ombudsman was contacted by the grandparent/guardian of a student who had been placed in an alternative education setting. She had some fears that were based on hearsay. She also requested assistance in getting him a job. The ombudsman calmed her fears by scheduling a visit to the school with the parent. Applications were also provided. A parent phoned to obtain information about assignment patterns and .information about Parkview. The Director of Student Registration provided the information. The ombudsman assisted the parent in the analysis. 9. A Pulaski Heights Elementary School parent phoned to request assistance in getting reimbursed for the student's electronic device that was confiscated .and then lost by school staff. She also complained about the lack of  supervision while students wait for the bus after school. The ombudsman served as mediator and assisted in accomplishing resolution. 10. The parent of a Henderson student phoned to complain about the process for assigning students to the magnet program. The ombudsman explained the process and recommended the parent visit with the principal and/or his designee for clarity and additional information. 11. The ombudsman made a follow-up phone call to the parent who requested Youth Challenge information. The student decided to remain in public school. 12. A parent asked for assistance in getting his child's bus stop moved to a corner closer to his home. The walk was acceptable. The Director of Transportation was contacted with the appropriate forms signed by the parent. He explained the situation. The parent was not satisfied.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - September 1999 Page 3 13. Two parents with children at Southwest complained about he assistant principal, teachers, and staff. Several meetings using \"shuffle diplomacy\" took place before both sides were asked to sit at the same table. Resolution was achieved. They withdrew their requests for M-to-M transfers. 14. A parent phoned to complain about the lack of books at Southwest. She also complained about the negative school atmosphere. The ombudsman visited with the principal and the school regularly. He immediately addressed the book issue. The ombudsman found no substance to the complain about the atmosphere. 15. The parent of children who transferred from Watson to Terry phoned the ombudsman for help with the bus stop. After completing the appropriate form, by phone, the stop was changed to an acceptable distance from the new address. 16. A parent from the Pulaski County School District phoned for assistance. After hearing his story, the parent was referred to the appropriate assistant superintendent in the PCSSD. 17. The parent of a student at Southwest who wanted to challenge his son's eligibility status for athletics because there was no written policy contacted the ombudsman. The student was eligible by AAA rules. There were several meetings between the parent and school administration. The students status did not change inspite of his circumstances. 18. The parent of a student at Henderson contacted the ombudsman because the child could not afford an instrument to play in the school band. The principal was contacted and offered recommendations to assist the parent. The student got the instrument. 19. The ombudsman was contacted by the parents of a student at McClellan who had been charged with disorderly contact at school. She was referred to Juvenile Court. The ombudsman went to the court on behalf of the student. The court ordered mediation and she was given probation. 20. A student at Washington was charged with possession of a weapon at school. The parent contacted the ombudsman for assistance. After attending the conference with the principal, the process was explained to the parent and student. The parent believed the process to be fair.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - September 1999 Page 4 21. The parent of a student at Central contacted the ombudsman about problems his child was experiencing at school. It was recommended that he contact the principal for assistance. 22. A grandparent of a Southwest student contacted the ombudsman because she believed that her child's bus stop was near the home of a known sex offender. The address and identity were confirmed by the ombudsman. The parent and ombudsman contacted Safety and Security then met with the principal. The stop was changed. 23. The parent of a Fair High School student contacted the ombudsman for help with her child who often leaves the campus without permission. She reported that the administration at school have been contacted and are aware of his behavior. She was referred to the juvenile authorities for FINS petition. 24. A parent at Henderson phoned for information about a school transfer because she was unhappy with the assignment. There were no other problems. She was encouraged to get involved with the school through the PTA and perhaps volunteer her time. Active participation will resolve any issues, concerns, or hearsay about the program. 25. The parent who wanted a bus stop moved visited the ombudsman for more information about the process for changing stops. His questions were answered. 26. A parent from the Pulaski County School District phoned about her child's problems. She was referred to the appropriate assistant superintendent in  her home district. 27. There was a follow-up phone call to the parent of the Southwest student whose stop was near the residence of a known sex offender. She reported no problems. 28. The parent of a student at Western Hills contacted the ombudsman's office for help in getting her child's bus stop moved closer to her home. It was explained that she lives within the two-mile radius and that stops provided are courtesy stops. The ombudsman contacted Laidlaw but the stop was not changed. 29. The parent of a student to soon be released from a center for troubled youth contacted the ombudsman for information. Her questions were answered and she was referred to her home school principal prior to placement to explain her situation.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - September 1999 Page 5 30. The lead counsel for Joshua was visited to discuss several complaints received by his office. They were noted. 31. The ombudsman appeared in court to testify on behalf of a student from Fair charged with disorderly contact. The student was placed on probation. 32. A community activist contacted the ombudsman with quotations about the job and the Joshua's role in the desegregation case. The role of the ombudsman was explained. Questions about Joshua were referred to the associate superintendent. 33. A parent from Mann contacted the ombudsman to complain about her daughter not being eligible to play football. The athletic director and AAA were contacted and the rules and rationale were explained to the parent. 34. A group of Parkview parents contacted the ombudsman for clarity with respect to working concessions at Quigley. The issue was who would collect . the receipts. They alleged that the athletic director told them that he would be responsible for their receipts. The athletic director was contacted and he met with the group to explain the process. 35. The parent of a student from Fair contacted the ombudsman to request assistance in getting a school transfer as the result of a fight her daughter had with other students. The assistant principal was contacted and he addressed the situation to the satisfaction of the parent. 36. The father of a King student contacted the ombudsman to ensure that the  school followed due process, suspension for threatening compromised. His son had been recommended for long-term another student. Due process was not 37. The ombudsman spoke at September. four PTA meetings during the month ofLittle Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 324-2014 Fax: (501) 324-2213 JAMES L WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN 'p Ombudsman's Monthly Report October 1999 JAN OfflCECF Introduction OESEGREttATiOJi MONITGRiNG The Office of the Ombudsman was established during the 1998-99 school term. He receives inquires and'complaints about the practices and services provided by the district. The ombudsman can investigate to determine if the district is being fair to the people it serves. The ombudsman is:  independent  responsible for making sure that practices and services of the district are fair, reasonable, appropriate and equitable  an officer of the district  able to conduct confidential investigations that are non-threatening and protect complainants against retribution  required to file regular reports The ombudsman is not:  an advocate for people  a defender of the actions of the district Who can complain? A student with parental participation, a teacher, and administrator, or anyone who feels that there has been unfair treatment that the ombudsman is authorized to investigate. Ombudsman Monthly Report October 1999 Page 2 What can the ombudsman do?  Advise you about what steps to take with the district  Refer you to available remedies.  Investigate your complaint.  Talk to anyone and see any documents or evidence a district staff member has in his/her possession.  Recommend that the district change a policy, practice, process, or guideline to make it fair.  Mediate a settlement or recommend a resolution. What can the ombudsman not do?  Make decisions for the district or reverse decisions it has made.  Reverse decisions of appeals. What can be investigated? A complaint that a decision\n Is unjust or oppressive  Discriminates against a person or group  Is unreasonable or arbitrary  Is based on wrong or irrelevant facts  Is based on the wrong interpretation of the policy. A complaint that an act:  Is done for an improper purpose  Is done negligently  Is done without adequate reasons. A complaint that a decision or act is unreasonably delayed. When you call the public body:  Have your questions and important facts ready.  Find out why and how the district made its decision  Make notes of your calls and the answers to your questions.  Ask about any review or appeal process you are entitled to.Ombudsman Monthly Report October 1999 Page 3 Complaint Summaries/Activities 1. The ombudsman transported a student to job interviews - Skate City and Schickel's Cleaners. His family is in great need of assistance. Social agency referrals were made. 2. A parent phoned to complain about an assistant principal's decision to suspend her from performing because of a fight she had before a football game. The process was fair and followed due process guidelines that were communicated to parent. 3. A parent contacted the ombudsman about his son who is in rehab for substance abuse. He is a former student from Hall. The young man was contacted and has regular meetings with the ombudsman as follow up. 4. The ombudsman met at McClellan with the Principal's Club as part of the intervention strategies for black males who are at-risk. Student rights were the topic of discussion. 5. A report was made at the monthly Biracial Committee meeting outlining the number of black and white families who have received services through the ombudsman's office. 6. A parent complaint about the principal's failure to follow due process when her daughter was suspended from McDermott. There was no substance to ' the complaint. The process was explained to the parent. 7. A Badgett parent and principal contacted the ombudsman's office to discuss the behavior problems of the male student. The ombudsman facilitated a meeting that led to an assessment conference for placement. 8. The ombudsman went to the home of a community activist to collect documents that she alleged are issues that the lead counsel for the Joshua Intervenors do not address. The documents were given to the lead counsel. The ombudsman does not engage in this type of activity. 9. The ombudsman made a home visit to assist the family with transportation. The student's brothers have been charged in a high profile murder case. He has been the victim of harassment. Discussed behavior alternatives to fighting.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - October 1999 Page 4 10. There was a follow-up visit at Badgett with the principal and the parents of the male student experiencing behavior problems to discuss sanctions. Original recommendation was modified, 11. The ombudsman arranged a meeting with the Director of the Division of Exceptional Student and the parent of a wheelchair bound student at Hall to discuss concerns about accessibility and participation. Concerns were noted. Plan of action developed. 12. Another meeting took place at Badgett involving the principal, counselor, teacher, and parent of the male student with behavior problems. The agreement was to initiate screening process. 13. The ombudsman, in his role as dropout prevention coordinator, provided training for teacher at Mann. 14. A parent contacted the ombudsman to discuss transfer options from area magnet (Washington) to King. Her options and process were explained. 15. The parent representative for a crossing guard at Meadowcliff was contacted with update on progress. The city is still trying to budget the money for the position. 16. A parent with a child receiving services at Southwest phoned to discuss her child's handicap. Charges are pending. The ombudsman explained how the conference should proceed and discussed the student's rights. 17. The ombudsman was contacted for additional assistance with having a courtesy bus stop added for her child at King. 18. An investigation was requested into the assignment process at Parkview. The allegations stated that preference was given to athletes and to students whose parents have influence. There was no evidence to support the complaint. 19. A foster parent contacted the ombudsman to assist in the reinstatement process. Agency representative met with the ombudsman and student. The process was discussed. The two were accompanied to the Alternative School and the student was permitted to re-enroll.James Washington Monthly Report - October 1999 Page 5 20. The parent of the child confined to a wheelchair at Hall was contacted with a progress report with respect to the school's efforts to accommodate her child. 21. The ombudsman held a group meeting for the \"Badgett Bunch.\" Appropriate behavior was the topic of discussion. 22. A Fair High School student was charge with disorderly conduct by the school's resource officer. The student has a handicap. The procedures wcr explained to the student and parent with respect to the school's procedures and those of the police officer. were 23. The parent representative from Meadowcliff contacted the ombudsman for an update with respect to the crossing guard. Still no word from City Hall. 24. A meeting was held with the parent of the student confined to a wheelchair at Hall for input into the accessibility issues that include getting on the stage for performances, drop-off and pickup area, and student parking. 25. A parent who lives within mile of Wakefield phoned for a courtesy stoo The ombudsman contacted Laidlaw with alternative routes and drove several routes from the home to the school. We were unable to assist the child within the guidelines of the transportation department. 26. There was a visit to the home of the Fair High School student with the disorderly conduct charge. A conference was held with the parent and student to discuss legal options and a plan of action in Municipal Court. 27. A parent (grandparent) contacted the ombudsman about an incident involving a staff person at Rockefeller's two years ago. The claim is that the ' ---------J J uy Vt J I IC CIO II i I Io LI IClL I child suffers emotionally as a result. The grandparent would like to know the outcome. 28. The principal at Central was notified of the pending investigation of the Mock Trial Team composition and selection process. 29. The Watershed Project was visited to get some cloths for a student in need at the Alternative School.James Washington Monthly Report - October 1999 Page 6 30. The Fair High School student with a disorderly conduct charge was contacted at home for her court appearance. He did not show for the meeting or court. 31. There was a visit to the Juvenile Court on behalf of the Southwest student with a disorderly conduct charge pending. The objective was to have the case moved to the court of a sympathetic judge. Plan was good and it worked. 32. 33. 34. A parent of a Rockefeller student complained about the fairness of her sanction for allegedly making a derogatory statement about a teacher. There was a meeting with the principal, assistant principal, counselor,'and teachers. The issue was resolved. Counseling will be provided if needed. A parent phoned about her son's sanction at Dunbar. The school did not violate due process procedures. This was communicated to the parent. A student was taken home from the Alternative School to avoid disruption. The parent and the ombudsman spoke with the child to calm him down. 35. The ombudsman served as an advocate during an EMT meeting for the student charged with disorderly conduct. The decision was to modify his sanction because there was a relationship between his behavior and his handicap. 36. The ombudsman met with the grandparent with concerns about the treatment of her grandson received at Rockefeller. Her issues were forward to the appropriate administrator who reported that he would meet with grandparent to answer her questions. 37. The ombudsman went to Municipal Court on behalf of the Fair student charged with disorderly conduct, the student failed to appear. A warrant was issued but it was explained that the charge would be dropped if the ombudsman can produce documentation about his being hospitalized. There was an effort to get those documents from the hospital. 38. The ombudsman visited the principal at Romine to clarify his role and answer questions. toJames Washington Monthly Report - October 1999 Page 7 39. The ombudsman went to Rockefeller to interview a student, at the parents request, about alleged mistreatment. The allegation was exaggerated. The situation was resolved. 40. A parent phoned to express her concern about the way her daughter was being treated at Henderson by a teacher. The principal was contacted and he addressed the concerns. 41. There was another visit to the hospital in an attempt to get documentation for the courts. Then, he went to the court to explain the student's status. 42. The ombudsman visited the home of the Wakefield student who lives in the walk zone in an attempt to find an acceptable route to walk. The route was established and the parent agreed. 43. There was a conference at the office of the lead counsel for Joshua to discuss several complaints received at his office. They were discussed and guidance for resolution was offered by the ombudsman. 44. there was a meeting at Rockefeller with the parent, administrators, counselor and teachers to resolve a dispute about alleged mistreatment and to address the child's potential problems. 45. The ombudsman met with the administrator responsible for transportation at . King to review the route sheets for a possible stop added for students who live within the walk zone. A stop was recommended. 46.The ombudsman met with the \"Badgett Bunch\" to work through some issues regarding their behavior. 47. A parent phoned to complain about her son's sanction after he made threat. There was a misunderstanding about the laws. The principal and parent came to an understanding. 48. The ombudsman met with the parent whose child faces disorderly conduct charged at Southwest to discuss a resolution. 49.There was an evaluation team meeting at Badgett for a student who may be eligible to receive additional services.Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 324-2014 JAMES L. WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN /J14. Fax: (501) 324-2213 cBIVso Introduction Ombudsman's Monthly Report - November 1999 -'ji\nUiiia ^tpigS^ JAN 2 i The ombudsman has the discretion to initiate action without waiting to receive a complaint or inquiry. The ombudsman also determines whether to accept or to act on a particular complaint or inquiry. This process is in contrast to the processes of the judiciary, mediators, or arbitrators. The ombudsman may determine that the complaint is without merit. Or, the ombudsman may receive a complaint or inquiry on a specific topic and conduct the inquiry on a broader or different.scope. The ombudsman may need access to all information relevant to a complaint or an inquiry so that the review is fair and credible. The ombudsman may make a formal or informal report of results and recommendations resulting from a review or investigation, in which case the ombudsman should:  consult with an individual or group prior to issuing a report critical of that individual or group, and will include their comments with the report\n 'communicate the outcome, conclusion or resolution of a complaint or an inquiry to the complainant and may also communicate with other concerned entities or individuals. The ombudsman uses the power of reason and persuasion to help resolve matters. Finally, the goal of the ombudsman's efforts is to provide an internal path to fairness and justice. Therefore, the ombudsman's quest is to seek the fair and just resolution of the matter undertaken.James Washington, Ombudsman Month Report - November 1999 Page 2 Complaint Summaries/Activities 1. 2. 3. On November 3\"*, the ombudsman received a complaint about the mock trial team at Central. The complaint was that the selection process favored white students whose parents work as lawyers, judges, etc. The principal acknowledged that the need to increase participation among black students exists. The school is developing strategies for improvement. Assistance is available from the Office of the Ombudsman. Jefferson Elementary has a no canned soda rule for lunch. A parent complained that the rule is not enforced for white students. The school was contacted. The rule is written in the school's handbook. The ombudsman visited the school and did not observe white students with canned sodas. The ombudsman visited the principal at Otter Creek Elementary to explain his role and to answer questions. 4. The ombudsman visited the principal at Geyer Springs Elementary to explain his role and to answer questions. 5. The ombudsman met with the principal and assistant principal at Southwest to follow-up with a handicapped student. There were several incidents reported about his behavior in the self-contained class. 6., There was a complaint reported by a parent at Bale Elementary. The parent reported that there was a serious incident and that a man that she did not know interviewed her daughter and that she was not notified. Because the incident involved a white student, she believed that the school attempting to cover the issue up. was The ombudsman discovered that the school followed the proper procedures. The mother was satisfied with the response. The principal had no knowledge of the incident. Efforts will be made to ensure parental notification in the future.James Washington Monthly Report - November 1999 Page 3 7. 8. 9. An ongoing dispute between Hall High School and a parent with a child who is confined to a wheelchair resulted in another meeting to discuss the school's efforts to comply with federal regulations. Progress has been made. It is anticipated that we will have addressed all of her issues by December 16. The grandparent of a former student has requested answers to an incident at Rockefeller involving her grandson and a food service worker. There was also an incident at Fair Park (all during the 1997-98 school year). Her request (written) was given to the Director of Labor Relations. No response as of today's date.  A parent complained about the lack of awards presented to black children in her son's class at Otter Creek Elementary. The principal was contacted and as a result of the conference, the parent was satisfied. 10. A Mabelvale Elementary School parent complained about the a appropriateness of halloween decorations in the schools. Some have frightened her child. The principal was contacted and the decorations in question were removed. The parent then complained about her perceived lack of concerns on the part of the school when her child was held out of school for ten consecutive days. It was the mother's decision not to send her child to school. She declined an offer to meet with the principal and the ombudsman for resolution. 11. The principal at Dunbar was visited to discuss the ombudsman's role and to answer questions. 12. The principal at Mabelvale Middle was visited to discuss a complaint about an assistant principal's alleged mistreatment of a student. The complaint had no substance. 13. A student was interviewed in response to his mother's complaint that his trial team supervising teacher made threatening remarks about whether he should attend band practice or team practice.James Washington Monthly Report - November 1999 Page 4 14. The lead counsel for the Joshua Intervenors was consulted about several calls. The ombudsman spoke with a parent about an issue at Romine. A meeting was scheduled with the principal. The principal was visited to discuss the complaint. The parent failed to attend the meeting. 15. The ombudsman had a session with the \"Badgett Bunch\" to discuss strategies to improve their reading skills. Activities were scheduled. 16. 17. 18. A parent phoned with questions about the magnet school assignment process. The ombudsman met with a representative from the Office of Civil Rights to discuss the job and activities. A parent contacted the ombudsman to complain about the lack of written guidelines that govern middle school athletics. He threatened to seek an injunction because his 6^ grade son was not permitted to participate in varsity athletics. He was told written guidelines exist. The athletic , director was contacted to respond to his specific concerns. 19. The aunt of a Henderson student phoned to express concerns about the principal's decision to change her class from regular to Pre-AP after a personal dispute with the teacher. The student was not able to achieve. The ombudsman intervened and the issues were resolved. She returned to . the regular class. 20. The \"Badgett Bunch\" was visited to discuss behavior issues at the school. 21. A parent phoned to complaint that due process was not followed when her child was suspended. The ombudsman reviewed the case and found no substance to the complaint.James Washington Monthly Report - November 1999 Page 5 22. The ombudsman contacted the Juvenile Court on behalf of a Southwest student with psychological and physical handicaps after he was charged by the school's Resource Officer. He was able to negotiate for mediation in lieu of a charge. The mediation was successful. No court charges were filed. 23. The principal at Bale was contacted about procedures ensuring parental notification when students are interviewed in her absence. 24. There was an lEP team meeting at Southwest for a student. The ombudsman served as an advocate for the fairness of the process. 25. There was a complaint from the guardian of a Western Hills student alleging that the teacher did not properly notify her about her child's decline in achievement at a meeting two weeks prior to interim reports. She also alleged that the teacher displayed inappropriate behavior in the classroom, ' and is guilty of making comments to her child that enforced her feelings about the teacher not liking her. The investigation confirmed the lack of notification. Other recommendations were made to resolve the issues. The school accepted the recommendations and they were implemented. Several meetings were required to resolve the issues. 26. The parent of a child confined to a wheelchair at Hall met with the Director of Plant Services for the purpose of resolving the parent's concerns. Resolution was achieved. 27. The ombudsman answered questions of concern at the NAACP meeting on November 13. Care was taken to ensure that only public known information was given. Confidentiality was maintained. 28. A parent phoned for information about transfer options.James Washington Monthly Report - November 1999 Page 6 29. The parents of a Dodd elementary student phoned to complain about the poor relationship between the home and their child's resource teacher. They also believe that the school and a staff member of the Division of Exceptional Children failed to act in their best interest. Several meetings were held and as a result, an acceptable recommendation was implemented. 30. A patron phoned for information about referral options to several social agencies for help with a foster child in our district. 31. The grandparents of a Western Hills student called to complain about letters being given to the parents of students asking for their written support to the ombudsman. As a result, their child has become the victim of harassment and threats of violence. An acceptable recommendation was implemented after the investigation. 3'2. The ombudsman volunteered to read at Terry Elementary School. Two books were read - wanted to start on No. 3. Ran out of time. 33. The ombudsman interviewed staff members with allegations of mistreatment of CBI students. The principal was present and contacted proper administrators and agencies. The teacher and staff members were interviewed by the principal and she outlined appropriate behavior. She reported that she will monitor the situation. 34. The ombudsman visited Hall to discuss the parking areas for busses with students confined to wheelchairs in response to a complaint about the inaccessibility. Parking for the handicapped was also reported to be inadequate. The complaints were found to be substantiated. The principal in cooperation with the Director of Plant Services initiated the proper correctives.James Washington Monthly Report - November 1999 Page 7 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. The ombudsman met with the principal to follow-up on the allegation of mistreatment of CBI students at Forest Heights. The ombudsman attempted to attend the Senate Interim Committee on Education. District responsibilities took priority - late for meeting. The ombudsman participated in the court-ordered mediation between the resource officer at Southwest and a student with multiple handicaps. There was an incident at the end of the session that motivated the ombudsman to make a change in placement recommendation for the student. The recommendation was approved. The ombudsman met with the grandparents of the Western Hills child to discuss the final report of his investigation. The ombudsman made follow-up visits to Southwest and Dodd. A guardian contacted the ombudsman for an answer to her request for information about her grandson. A parent phoned for information about transfer options. The ombudsman attended an intervention activity for black male students at McClellan. The ombudsman met with Western Hills grandparents to implement transfer process as a result of problems at school, note investigation There were complaints received about a McClellan teacher's use of a racial slur. Complainants were interviewed. The complaints were substantiated. Recommendations were given to the principal. 45. The school security officer at McClellan was consulted about gang note delivered to a student that may cause unrest among students. 46. A parent phoned to follow up on her complaint about due process at Otter Creek with respect to her daughter's suspension.James Washington Month Report - November 1999 Page 8 47. The aunt of a Henderson student filed a complaint about a personal conflict between the child's teacher, the parent, and herself. It was noted and communicated that the situation had been addressed. 48. 49. 50. 51. A staff member phoned regarding an expulsion recommendation for student at Metropolitan for assistance. Due process was followed. a There was a teem meeting for a Southwest student for a change in placement. The change was approved. There was a meeting to finalize the transfer process for a Western Hills student. Parents were accompanied to transfer school to assist in the enrollment. The principal at Bale requested assistance with a parent who had failed to cooperate in an effort to have her child assessed for resource assistance. The parent agreed to proceed. 52. A parent phoned for transfer assistance for his son from Mitchell. He alleges that the school has not responded to his request for help in stopping boys from fighting his son. The principal was contacted and supported the transfer request. The request was granted as a result of the ombudsman's support. 53. A copy of an investigation request was received from the Joshua's lead counsel. It was reported to the ombudsman by an associate superintendent that the incident had been reported to the proper authorities. 54. A complaint was given to the ombudsman by a guardian who wanted the bus stop changed to the front of her home. The process was explained. The parent accepted the information. 55. Laidlaw was contacted about a complaint stating that a bus is late more often than not.Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 324-2014 Fax: (501) 324-2032 JAMES L WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN \u0026lt;Otpig^ Introduction Ombudsman's Monthly Report December 1999 RECEIVED a JAi4 212080 The Essential Characteristics of the Ombudsman OfflCECF OESKREGATiQN MONITORING The original 1969 American Bar Association resolution contained characteristics there were deemed essential for the ombudsman. 12 These characteristics have been distilled here and applied. The core qualities are independence, impartiality and neutrality, and confidentiality. The characteristics are:  Functional autonomous  Operationally independent from administrative branch  Legally established  Investigative specialist  Administrative expert  Non-partisan   Client centered, not anti-administration  Accessible and visible  High status  Serves everyone Summary of Complaints and Activities: 1. The ombudsman received an anonymous complaint about the alternative room teacher at Brady. According to the complainant, some staff report that he is guilty of mistreating the children. The results of the subsequent investigation revealed that there was no substance to the complaint. 2. A parent contacted the ombudsman to complain about his son's grade depending on the class fundraiser. The principal was contacted. There was no evidence to support the allegation.Ombudsman Monthly Report December 1999 Page 2 3. The ombudsman was contacted on behalf of the parent of a student at Mann who had been charged with possession of a weapon on school property. He wanted to ensure that the process was followed. The administration was contacted and the case was reviewed. Due process was followed. 4. The guardian of a foster child contacted the ombudsman for payment assistance. DHS was contacted and visited on 3 occasions. The foster parent received her payment. 5. The aunt of a student at Rightsell phoned to complaint about an alleged comment made by the principal. The aunt was offended by the racial overtone of the comment. The principal was contacted and she explained that the comment was not spoken as explained by the aunt. The aunt refused to meet with the ombudsman and principal to mediate the dispute. 6s There was an EMT meeting at Badgett for a student experiencing behavior problems. The parent asked the ombudsman to serve as an advocate. 7. The ombudsman was contacted to assist the parents of a Dunbar student who had been recommended for long-term suspension for use of profanity directed at staff. The disciplinary recommendation was modified because of a mistake in the due process. 8. The parent of a Southwest student contacted the ombudsman to complain about the alleged mistreatment of the student during the process when her child was recommended for a long-term suspension. The school was contacted and it was confirmed that she was not mistreated. The ombudsman explained the process. The school modified the suspension and the child returned. 9. The ombudsman accompanied the student from Hall and his parent to the interview for a placement at the ACC. Questions were answered and circumstances were explained. He was admitted to the program. 10. The ombudsman attended a meeting at Mitchell to offer his services during their efforts to keep the school open. A brief presentation was made. 11. There was a follow-up meeting with the former Hall student to monitor his progress.Ombudsman Monthly Report December 1999 Page 3 12. A parent phoned to complain about cruel and unusual punishment at the Step-One Alternative School. The principal was contacted and steps were taken to ensure that there would not be a repeat of the incident. 13. The principal at Romine was visited to follow-up with a complaint from the previous month. Things are in order. 14. The employer of two students involved in a car accident was contacted and the situation was explained. Rather than terminate the students they were placed back on the payroll. 15. The ombudsman was inaccurate in a letter mailed to a parent explaining the outcome of a recent inquiry. Accurate information was forwarded to the parent after a conference with the principal. 16. There was a meeting at Dodd to review the findings of a recent inquiry. Present were the teacher and principal. 17. The ombudsman provided information about school ID pictures to a parent in heed for her child to get a job. 18. The parent of a Forest Heights student complained about unfair treatment. The parent reported that her child was punished for his role in a fight but nothing happened to the other students. The allegation was false. A behavior manifestation meeting has been scheduled for her child. 19. The principal at McDermott met with the ombudsman to discuss mentoring five of her male students who were having behavior problems at school. There are no males in their lives and she believes the ombudsman can fill a void that could result in an improvement. 20. The ombudsman met with parents at Badgett and then with the principal in an attempt to have them come together and discuss their issues. 21. An administrator at Hall asked the ombudsman to provide assistance for a student and parent who would like to attend the ACC. The director was contacted to schedule a meeting after the holidays.Ombudsman Monthly Report December 1999 Page 3 22. The counselor at Badgett was contacted to discuss the progress of the \"Badgett Bunch.\" 23. The ombudsman met with the parent at Hall for an on-site visit to verify accessibility for her child in a wheelchair. 24. The principal at Badgett was met to discuss the issues and a complaint from the parents of one of her students. 25. The ombudsman investigated a complaint that alleged that the counselor at Badgett choked a student. 26. The \"Badgett Bunch\" met with the ombudsman to follow-up on reading strategies and behavior goals.JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON XLARK BURNETTE AUSTIN PORTER. JR. John W. Walker, P.A. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 Deceived FEB 2 2 2000 OfflCECi- DBffiRE6AWHOSgJS Via Facsimile - 324-2281 February 18, 2000 Junious Babbs Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Babbs: J I have spoken with ?vlr. Billy Bowles of the Pulaski County Special School District and he has informed me that you all will be meeting sometime early next week to discuss whether Mr. James Washington may enter the Pulaski County School District to address complaints by m to m students from Little Rock. I also gleam from your letter to Mr. Walker dated February 17, 2000 that at this meeting you will be discussing the procedure for Mr. James Washington, the Little Rock ombudsman, to enter a PCCSD school. Mr. Bowles assured me that as it now stands, Mr. Washington can come to any Pulaski County school as a parent advocate if the parent so chooses him to do so. He further indicated, however, that Nir. Washington can not come into the Pulaski County as a Little Rock School District representative or ombudsman. I do not understand the latter statement by Mr. Bowles given the previous statement. As I recall both Districts plans, there is nothing in either plan regarding this, nor do I believe that allowing Mr. Washington to investigate complaints by Little Rock parents of mistreat in the County is contrary to each Districts commitment to cooperation and collaboration with one another. I look forward to hearing from you regarding the results of your meeting. Sincerely, /O (^y C. Springer On Behalf of Joshua Intervenors JCS/ cc: Mr. Billy Bowles Ms. Ann Brown Mr. James WashingtonLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72202 OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Junious C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent Phone: (501)324-2272 E-Mail: icbabbs@.stuasn.lrsd.kl2.ar.us February 28, 2000 RECEIVED MAR 2 2000 Mrs. Joy Springer 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 OffICEOF iWBEGATlQN MONITORING Dear Ms. Springer: In an attempt to follow up on prior communication, Mr. Billy Bowles, PCSSD Associate Superintendent of Desegregation, and I met this afternoon to review procedures on investigation of complaints and/or alleged raced based mistreatment. Recognizing the role of Mr. Janies Washington, LRSD Ombudsman, it was agreed on that as students transfer between districts, appropriate policy is then enacted within the receiving district. While attempting to work cooperatively through issues that develop, I was assured of commitment toward prompt and fair resolution of complaints and/or instances of race based mistreatment. PCSSD policy was acknowledged that included resolution through appropriate staff, Mr. Bowles and/or respective PCSSD officials. Taking into account good faith, collaboration and cooperation with one another, we all share concerns of student mistreatment and will continuously work to remedy such instances that will help to assure fair treatment for ALL students. Sincerely, Jimious C. Babbs cc: Billy Bowles Ann Brown James Washington LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 West Markham UttleRock, AR 72201 Phone: (501)324-2014 Fax: (501) 324-2260 a JAMES L. WASHINGTON OMBUDSMAN I. Initial Callers Ombudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 received SEP 6 2000 OfHCEOf oesesimojiiomG African/American Male 17 Female 153 White Male I 4 Other Male 1 Anonymous Female 4 Female 30 Male 0 Female 0 Out of District 10 Percentage of Callers by Race/Gender 80% 7 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 8% 70% 2% 0/Vrican/Mierican Male  African/American Female  White Male  White Female  Other Male 14% E1 Other Female  Anonymous Male 0% 0% 0% 2% 5%  Anonymous Female  Out-of-District 1 Ombudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 2 IL Information/Assistance Academics Agency Referrals Athletics Attendance Co-curricular Desegregation Case Discipline Extracurricular Guardianship Juvenile Court Magnet Program PCSSD Runaway Child Safety School Assignment/ Transfer Special Education Transportation 8 5 1 1 1 1 17 0 2 2 1 2 1 5 41 12 10 45 40 B Academics a Agency Referrals 35 30 5i5\u0026gt;J \\ 4 Tjl- 'V'''\" \"'  '................  .  Athletics  AtterxJance' 25 20 15 10 5 0 a Co-curricLdar M- B Desegregation Case w .X V-'X'sfcJ. -:,\nJ a Discipline j\u0026lt;HsS^Sw?WS i' SSj SB5 ' J'  Bctracurricular sa a Guardianship a Juvenile Court W1 . ______\n__i ,J 5*^ feij^A'eV^  Magnet R-ogram  PCSSD a Runaway Child  Safety  School Assignment/Transfer B Specal Education 1 a TransportationOmbudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 3 III. Complaints Substantiated Unsubstantiated 30 T 25 20 15 10 5 0 Academics Agency Referrals Athletics Co-curricular Discipline Extracurricular Guardianship Race Religion Safety School Assignment/ Transfer School Climate School Rules Special Education Staff Conduct Transportation Totals Elaine, AR -2 Hot Springs, AR - 2 PCSSD z 43^ z ja -6 1 0 2 1 5 1 0 2 1 0 4 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 5 9 13 1 43 3 1 6 4 24 0 66 j a Substantiated\na Unsubstantiated 4 z Z X s X*  z \u0026lt;3^ 5P' o'- O' 0 Z z .8^Ombudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 4 IV. Personnel Categories Principal Black Male 8 Black Female 8 White Male 4 White Female 14 Teacher Black Male 9 Black Female 8 White Male 2 White Female 12 StefL(Custodian, Secretary, Security Officer, etc.) Black Male 1 Black Female 2 White Male 0 White Female 0 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 *\u0026lt;v iii- L Black Male A 4s Black White Male Female 1 White Female E3 Principal  Teacher  Other StaffOmbudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 5 VIL Activities Agency Referrals Biracial Committee Circuit Court City Hall Conventions (National Ombudsman) Dropout Prevention Dr. Terrence Roberts Faculty Meetings Future 500 Scholarship Program Hearings Home Visits Intervention Activities Job Corps Advisory Board Joshua Intervenors Juvenile Court LULAC Mediation Meeting with Mitchell Parents Meetings with Principals Meetings/School Tours - Dir. Racial \u0026amp; Cultural Diversity Commission Municipal Court NAACP ODM Office of Civil Rights (Visit) Parent Conferences PCSSD PTA Meetings 1 3 2 3 1 4 1 1 1 5 6 11 2 16 7 3 7 1 83 3 4 4 3 1 243 3 4Ombudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 6 School Conferences (Parents \u0026amp; Staff) Senate Interim Committee Shadowing Experience Special Education Meetings Transported Students to Find Job Watershed Project 11 1 1 13 2 4\\ I Ombudsman Monthly Report Summaries August 1999 - June 2000 Page 7 f/ a Agency Referrals  Circuit Court a Conventions (National Ombudsman) a Or. Terrence Roberts a Future 500 Scholarship R'ogram  Home Visits a Job Corps Advisory Board a Juvenile Court a Mediation  Meetings w/R'incipals  Municipal Court  OOM a Parent Conferences  PTA Meetings a Senate Interim Committee a Special Education Meetings a Watershed Project a BIracial Committee  City Hall  Dropout R-evention  Faculty Meetings a Hearings a Internvention Activities a Joshua Intervenors BLULAC  Meetings w /Mtchell Parents  Meetings/School Tours - Dir. Racial \u0026amp; Cultural Diversity Commission  NAACP  Office of Civil Rights aPCSSD  School Conferences (Parents \u0026amp; Staff) a Shadow Ing Experience  Transported Students to Find Jobs5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 434 16:38 /r/t JOHN W. WALKER RALPH WASHINGTON MARK BURNETTE SHAWN CHILDS John w. Walker, P.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3768 FAX (501) 374-4187 RECEIVE Via Facsimile - 324-2146 October 3, 2000 OCT 3 . 2000 Dr Leslie Carnine Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 CffICEOF DESEBMlOfl MONITORINS Re: LRSD Ombudsperson - Section 2.5.3 of Revised Desegregation Plan Dear Dr Carnine: I am writing on behalf of all parents in the District who seek to obtain the services of the Districts ombudsman. This office has received at least two complaints in the last two weeks from parents stating that school district officials have refused to provide the ombudsman information necessary for him to investigate their respective complaints. Your revised plan contemplates that district officials would give full cooperation to the ombudsman to ensure equitable solutions to student and parent complaints. May I suggest that you and/or Mr. Babbs have a conference with Mr. Washington to determine whether he believes that he has had the full cooperation of district administrators in the last several weeks regarding his investigations. May 1 also suggest that he identify specific instances whereby he believes that he did not have the full cooperation of your staff persons. If asked to do so, 1 will be happy to share the instances that I am aware of. By copy of this letter to Mr. Washington, I am requesting that he share a copy of his job description with this office including any other administrative directives, district polices and procedures which guide him in the performance of his duties as ombudsman. Since 1 am charged with monitoring the Districts good faith plan implementation of its revised plan, would please share with this office all documentation which supports the premise that Mr Washington has the full cooperation of your staff when investigating student and parent complaints. Thank you for your cooperation.5013744187 WALKER LAW FIRM 434 P03/03 OCT 03 00 16:39 merely, Springer On Behalf of Joshua JCS/ cc\nMr. James Washington Mr. Junious Babbs Ms. Ann Brown Mr. Gus Taylor 10/06/2000 16:44 501-324-2281 LRSD SRO RASE 01/01/ Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT October 5, 2000 Mrs. Joy Springer 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Springer: complaintsthadisWaoffi'XlsSto^Melh^Omtud *regarding attempt to assist a parent to view th*, ci does reflect a void resulting ir a parent to view the students Individual Education Plan (lEP). PP-Pnate follow up ,p pa^ep records, improved clarity and understand^^! confidentiality of student enacted tdat wit, help to provide the Ombudsman with necessary , dfto fte s mJ  I _I. . t  , and in an are In response to requested information under separate cover. your attention however, we enJouradTtS'SfJ^ 70u refer\ninquiry. exists and seek continued The compliance philosophy is based performance responsibilities of the r-fully expected to comply. | assure Employees are with the provisions and philosophy of the Revis^erf n co^niitment to compliance sopny or the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. on internalizing the Revised Plan through the respective organizational divisions Sincerely, Leslie V. Carnine, Superintendent of Schools cc: Junious Sabbs Ann Brown Gus Taylor James Washington 810 West Markhatn Street * Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (SOI) J24-2012\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   \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_1267","title":"'Priorities, End of Year Report,'' Little Rock School District","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":null,"dc_date":["1998/1999"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational innovations","School employees","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["'Priorities, End of Year Report,'' Little Rock School District"],"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/1267"],"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":["211 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1301","title":"'Priorities, Mid-Year Report,'' Little Rock School District","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":null,"dc_date":["1998/1999"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational innovations","School administrators","School employees","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["'Priorities, Mid-Year Report,'' Little Rock School District"],"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/1301"],"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":["23 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_264","title":"Recommendations for Little Rock School District, Campus Leadership initiative and Campus Incentives","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":null,"dc_date":["1998/2001"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","School management and organization","Teachers","School administrators"],"dcterms_title":["Recommendations for Little Rock School District, Campus Leadership initiative and Campus Incentives"],"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/264"],"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\n  \n\nI Leadership Team Expectations I I Leadership team members are expected to: make a commitment to improve outcomes for all students make team goals a higher priority than personal goals share information, perceptions and feedback openly confront important issues directly make objective judgements based on facts display leadership in ways which contribute to the teams success respond constructively to other team members collaborate effectively with other team members demonstrate a unified commitment to team goals and strategies understand consensus building identify and communicate statement of purpose for campus leadership identify and implement strategies to attain goals identify needs for adequate time, ongoing development and support (training) communicate team goals and strategies to staff, students, administration, school board, parents, and communityOperations Division - Financial Priorities November Cluster Meetings Operations Division has developed the following Financial Priorities for the 1998-99 school year: 1. Complete and implement the recommendations from the Management Audit. 2. List, fund, and begin renovation and repair projects in all district facilities. 3. Design, fund and construct Stephens and new west Little Rock schools. Timeline extends into year 2000 for these projects. 4. Develop plans for occupation of Garland and Mitchell buildings after construction and opening of Stephens school. 5. Develop plans for the possible relocation of administrative office space. 6. Complete and implement plans for the transportation of students for the 1999-2000 school year to comply with the new student assignment zones and the middle school conversion. 7. Develop and implement safety and security building and program modifications for the 1999-2000 school year. 8. Provide funding, procurement, and installation of technology projects in ail district facilities as outlined in the districts technology plan. Time line extends into year 2000. 9. Develop, administer, and implement Quality Index for Operations Division departments.RECEIVED Draft' APR 2 0 1988 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CAMPUS LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE AND CAMPUS INCENTIVES A proposed District plan by the Campus Based Administrators and Teachers Submitted to the Board of Education April 20, 1998 Draft:0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Overview Summary of Campus Leadership System Components Policy Consideration Administration Policy Board of Directors Policy Wavier Incentive Plan Incentive Plan Parameter Technical Assistance Decision Making Parameter Background Information and Question and Answers - Campus Leadership Plan Response FormRecommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus Overview This is proposed in response to the Little Rock School District Strategic Plan, which called for a broad-based effort to move to a campus based leadership system. The effort was begun three years ago, but administrative changes delayed the development of a plan to promote participatory decision making in the district, particularly at the campus level. The intent was to assist the district in the development of district and campus plans that will result in improved student performance. The expected result of participatory decision making is improved student performance through\na. effective campus and district planning for the purpose of improved student performance\nb. improved community involvement in the school improvement process\nc. clearly established accountability parameters for student performance\nd. raised staff productivity and satisfaction\ne. improved communication and information flow\nf. consensus-based, effective decisions\ng- long-range commitment to implementation\nh. increased flexibility at the campus level in allocation of resources\nI. coordination of program components.Reconunendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus The proposed campus based leadership system is intended to drive fundamental changes in classroom teaching by helping the campuses and district focus on improved student achievement. The six basic components of campus-based leadership are: 1. 2. 3. Commitment to improved student achievement for all students. Improved student achievement will be based on established local goals for student performance. A system of incentives for student performance will be established, which will include multiple and alternative performance measures. Collaborative structure and process. Policies and procedures guide the establishment of district and campus level decision making to ensure representative collaboration of principals, teachers, other staff, parents, business partners, and community members. Decentralization Parameters The specific areas for implementation with respect to goal setting, classroom instruction, and campus organization are included. Deregulation avenues are provided to waive local policies and state regulations if they inhibit improved student performance. 4. Statement of Purpose of Participatory Decision-Making. The uniqueness of each campus related to its needs, and its decision making capacity to address those needs, are acknowledged in district policy and demonstrated through actual practice. 5. Adequate time, ongoing staff development and technical support. Sufficient time is allotted to allow for the development of skills and attitudes that will ensure effective campus based decision making. 6. Procedures for planning and evaluating student achievement goals and decision making process. Organizational and management procedures are established to guide the progress of participatory decision making in the district and on the individual campus. An evaluation process is developed and used to assess locally established performance goals and the effectiveness of committee and campus decision-making and further the impact of decision making on student performance.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus We acknowledge that planning and implementing these components of campus based decision making will require a re-conceptualization of the roles and responsibilities of board members, central office administrators, campus principals, teachers, support staff, parents, business partners, and community representatives. This strategy for school and instructional improvement with a strong incentive initiative will only succeed if it is carefully planned with relevant input from the stakeholders. The proposed campus leadership system is based on the concept of continuous improvement. Every campus can improve. Every campus is expected to show academic growth. Every school will benefit by reaching achievable standards. Summary of Campus Leadership System Components The basic components are: 1. 2. 3. 4. Board and administrative policy, which support a system of participatory decision making at the campus and district level. Identification of quality indicators and an incentive plan, which promotes increases in student performance. Staff development plans and technical assistance, which will support the implementation of the campus leadership system. The assistance will support the planning and technical support for continuous improvement at the campus and district level. Clear guidelines for participatory decision making. The parameters for decision making give guidance to the level and type of decision which is made at Federal/State/District levels, those which are better made at the campus/classroom level, and finally those which are collaborative.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus Policy Considerations The following is the recommended policy for implementation of the Campus Leadership Plan and participatory decision making: The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District believes that a fundamental responsibility of the school system is to support the sustained improvement of the schools. Site-based decision making provides each school with a framework to attain the Districts mission. Shared decision-making allows representation of administration, staff, students, parents, and patrons to provide more efficient use of time and energy. This facilitates a quality environment for students, a productive working environment for staff members, and increased opportunity for community involvement in our schools. To effect this belief, each school shall establish a campus team to improve performance of all student populations. This team will assist in the development and evaluation of campus goals and objectives through planning, budgeting, curriculum development, staff development, and staffing needs. Through consensus based decisions, the campus teams will support the Districts commitment to the sustained improvement of n schools. Administrative Policy Student achievement is the primary focus of the Little Rock School District. Each campus accepts the responsibility and challenge to provide equitable educational opportunities that ensure every student is successful. Therefore, each Little Rock School District campus is committed to establishing a campus team that will work collaboratively with the principal in the decision-making process to enhance student achievement. Membership. The membership for each campus team shall consist of\nCAMPUS TEAM MATRIX RECOMMENDED NUMBER OF POSITIONS 1 5-10 1 2 1 1 1 1 _______Principal_______ Certified Teachers Central Office Parent Business ______Community______ Non-certified School Staff Student POSITION TITLE Chairman Elected Invited/Appointed Appointed Appointed Appointed_____ Elected or appointed Elected or appointed MEMBERSHIP Required Required Required Required Required Required Optional Optional Note: Classroom teachers must be at least 60% of the faculty/staff/central office component.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus Nomination: The principal shall publish procedures to be utilized for the nomination and election of representatives to the campus team. The principal shall post the election procedure regulations and policy a minimum of ten days prior to the called election. The prescribed form must be used with elected representatives to the campus team. The form indicates their willingness to serve and shall be kept on file in the principals office. Election: The consent of each nominee shall be obtained before the persons name may appear on the secret ballot. Election of the campus team shall be completed by November 1. Election Procedures: The election of representatives to the campus team will be made by secret ballot. On the date of the election, ballots will be distributed to all eligible voters. The ballot will contain the names of all nominees according to their respective grouping and instructions on how each nominee may be chosen by voters. The principal and designated staff members will tabulate completed ballots. Term: Elected representatives shall serve staggered two-year terms. In the first election, 50% of the elected membership will serve a one-year term. Appointed representatives are not subject to term limitations, but rotation of appointed representatives is encouraged unless there are no other volunteers willing to participate. Vacancy: If a vacancy occurs among the elected representatives, nominations shall be solicited and an election held for the vacant position in the same manner as the annual election. If a vacancy occurs within 5 months of the end of a term, the principal may, but is not required to, fill the vacancy - elected or appointed. Appointed Members: The principal has discretionary privilege to appoint the parents, business leaders, community members, non-certified staff, and students. Appointed members have all the rights and responsibilities as elected members. Thirty days prior to the appointments in November, the principal shall communicate the process of receiving nominations or recommendations. If a vacancy occurs among the appointed representatives, another person will be selected to fill the vacant position. Meetings: The principal shall serve as chairman of the campus team, set its agenda, and shall schedule at least four (4) meetings per year. The agenda and minutes of the meetings will be posted and filed.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus Board of Directors Policy Waivers The Little Rock School District believes that the District or a campus team may apply for a waiver of a requirement or prohibition imposed by law or rule. The waiver must be in written form following the procedures designated by the Board. A waiver must include:  Identification of the statutory requirements for which a waiver is requested.  Description of why the waiver is needed and the goals that would be achieved if granted. a Descriptions of the measurement process that will be used if the waiver is granted and program is implemented.  Description of how the interested parties were notified of the waiver request. a Descriptions of federal, state, and district requirements to be waived. Restrictions: The district or campus team may not receive an exemption or waiver from requirements imposed by federal law or rule such as Goals 2000, Educate America Act, Elementary Secondary Education Act (ESEA), and School to Work Opportunities Act, or from a requirement or prohibition imposed by state law. Waiver Application: A waiver request application form may be obtained by the principal from the Associate Superintendent of Instruction. The principal is to enlist the review of the campus team and obtain consensus before the waiver is processed. The completed waiver must be submitted to the superintendent for review and processing. Requirements for a waiver by the state must follow regulations as described in the Submission and Approval section. A waiver application to be acted upon for the next academic year must be submitted to the District by , to the state by , and to the federal government by Submission and Approval: The application shall be submitted to the superintendent no later than the semester before the campus intends to take action. The superintendent will inform the principal of the action taken within thirty days. A waiver requiring the Arkansas Department of Education or the Arkansas State Board of Education action must be acted upon by the District Board before forwarding to the Arkansas Department of Education. District Board action should be consistent with state and federal guidelines.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus Incentive Plan The Cluster representatives recommend the following as the initial quality index for the Little Rock School District. Campus and district performance on the indicators shall be compared to established standards. The degree of change from one school year to the next on each indicator shall be considered. The indicators shall include: a. The results of assessment instruments aggregated by grade level and subject area b. Dropout rates c. Student attendance rates d. The percentage of students who have unconditional enrollment to an Arkansas institution of higher education e. The results of the American College Test (ACT) f. The percentage of graduating seniors who take the American College Test (ACT) g- Customer Service Index h. School Climate Index I. Any other indicator the LRSD Board adopts Performance on the indicators shall be based on information that is disaggregated with respect to race, ethnicity, gender, and socio-economic status. Performance shall be compared to state and local growth standards and comparable improvement. Comparable improvement is derived by measuring individual campuses and the District against a profile developed from a total urban data base that exhibits substantial equivalence of the characteristics of students served by the campus or District, including past academic performances, socio-economic status and ethnicity.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus Incentive Plan Parameters a. The award must be a group effort as opposed to individual. b. The award must be based on multiple criteria, with emphasis on increasing student achievement for all students. c. The award must be non-competitive in that every group that meets the designated criteria qualifies for the award. d. The plan should promote teamwork and collaboration. e. The criteria should have measurable results that are attainable and cannot be easily manipulated. f. Guidelines should be easily understood. g. The incentive program plan will be an exposition of Total Quality Schools philosophy. h. Rewards shall be of significant value to the division and campus. The proposed accountability system is intended to drive fundamental change in classroom teaching by helping schools focus on improved student achievement. The system is designed to encourage and support school improvement by:  Clearly establishing the Districts Goals for schools and students\na Creating an easy way to communicate to schools and the public how well a school is performing\na Recognizing and rewarding schools fortheir effectiveness in demonstrating growth in student achievement: and  Focusing attention, energy, and resources on those schools that need help improving student achievement.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus Technical Assistance The basic framework for staff development and technical assistance will be Total Quality Schools. The training components are categorized under four headings and sequences. 1. POLICIES/PARAMETERS, TEAMING, INCENTIVE AWARDS, AND TOTAL QUALITY SCHOOLS TOOLS Policy/Parameters would be taught in a joint session that would be more informational and less interactive. We would anticipate that this would be provided to the campus principals and district administrators in the summer of 1998. There would an informational session presented to the campus staff prior to the election of the campus teams in the fall of 1998. Further informational and training sessions would be scheduled and modified as needed after the initial evaluation had been completed. 2. TEAMING The areas to be reviewed and skills acquired would be empowerment, change process, consensus building, conflict resolution, needs assessment, data analysis, and the hows and whys of how teams produce high performance among students and staff. Training would be offered at multiple times based on the appointment and election of new team members. Initial training would be during the winter of 1998-99. 3. INCENTIVE PROGRAM The incentive program rewards campuses and divisions of the school district for improvement in the quality indicators. Note the listing of the indicators in the third component in this section. The session will deal with specific strategies that may be utilized to increase performance of the campus. The training will be first developed with campus and district staff and customized to be presented during the summer of 1999 to campus teams at the Cluster Meetings. Cluster meetings will be scheduled at the end of July for the campus teams to offer specific training based on the campus teams needs assessment. 4. TOTAL QUALITY SCHOOLS Training is envisioned to be provided to all staff of the school district based on four specific components. Little Rock School District bases the Quality Schooling Process on the beliefs that:Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus  Continuous improvement is the goal for which every campus and division strives.  Continuous training and education for all personnel must be provided.  Customer satisfaction is gained by conformance to customer requirements. a Decisions must be data driven. The training vtfould be developed initially with the district administrators and partnered with area businesses that had adopted the total quality precepts. We envision that the training would start with administrators and teams in the summer of 1999. Staff of the school district would begin in the fall of 1999 and continue through the next two years. Decision Making Parameters EXAMPLE - SBDM MATRIX: FUNCTION Curriculum Curriculum Resources DISTRICT/STATE Standards-based objectives on content \u0026amp; skills. Scope \u0026amp; sequence. Pre-K- 12, assessment framework, instructional strategies from research, thematic integration and project activities. Support and facilitate campus plans based on available resources COLLABORATION Monitor curriculum according to the following  Implementation  District resources  Assessment processes  Transitions among campuses and between levels  Action research on instructional strategies Define district and campus responsibilities for materials, resources and budget allocations. CAMPUS Recommend staff to develop curriculum. Recommend new programs and/or extensions of existing programs Use curriculum framework within which classroom teachers decide the following information:  Use of optional components  Use of enrichment objectives  Design of lesson plan content and activities  Use of assessments within district parameters (district, classroom \u0026amp; state)  Modification of curriculum for special needs students  Strategies for instructional delivery within district parameters Organize resources at campus for accessibility to staff and programs. Determine resources for campus plan involving district personnel as needed. ACCOUNTABILITYRecommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus Background Information and Question and Answers - Campus Leadership Plan 1. 2. 3. Why was the Campus Leadership system created? The Little Rock School District strategic plan was developed by a combination of staff and community, it was determined that site leadership was a reform movement which should be implemented. The plan is very inclusive based on the membership of not only staff, but parents, community members and business partners. The incentive plan is a positive form of campus accountability which places the emphasis on the group rather than individual. It is believed that rewarding improved student performance and empowering staff at the campuses will result in improved student performance. The overall plan is consistent with rewarding improvement based on the Total Quality precepts. Who developed the incentive system? The original philosophical basis of the plan was developed by Cluster A. The steering committee for the complete plan endorsed the recommended plan. A list of the schools and individuals is located on the last page of this monograph. What are the underlying beliefs of the proposed plan for participatory decision making? On the first page of this document there are listed the expected results of moving to a campus leadership plan for the purpose of increased student performance. As such, there is also a strong belief that continuous improvement and total quality performance are major aspects behind the plan. 4. How have participatory decision making systems and incentive systems improved student achievement in other districts? School districts in Tennessee, Kentucky, Maryland and Texas have all reported positive gains in student achievement. These states all have statewide plans and they are encouraged to add local incentives. There are other examples but we concentrated on these four states.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. There are several terms used to describe the campus decision making process. What are the differences? The term Campus Leadership is utilized by the Arkansas Leadership Academy to describe the empowerment process. The Arkansas Leadership Academy was established by the Arkansas Legislature. The terms of sitebased decision making, participatory decision making and campus leadership may be utilized interchangeably. The final document will utilize one term, exclusively. How was the membership of the campus team decided? There was a search of the literature regarding the composition of campus teams in various states. The committee felt that this would be the initial proposal but it could be made smaller or larger based on the evaluation after the implementation years. The committee wanted to be as inclusive as possible. How will the staff and the public be kept informed about this improvement initiative? The school district will report the degree of implementation annually as part of the District Report Card. Particular emphasis will be placed on improvement of the factors identified on the Quality Indicator Index. Campuses will make a similar report based on their individual initiatives and their specific report card. The results of the incentive plan and awards for progress will be reported annually at the beginning of the school year. How wiii the District measure growth? The District will be looking at the specific quality education indicators to measure a schools performance for incentive awards. The emphasis will be on improvement in student performance. We will look at the growth which occurred during the academic year. A student must be enrolled as of October 1 to be calculated in the growth index. Will special education students be part of the assessment? Yes, but we have not developed all the rules regarding required growth. We anticipate the special education students will be added the 2\"^ year of the plan.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Why are students not being considered part of the plan who are enrolled prior to October 1? Several of the district schools have extremely high mobility rates and many times we are testing students who have not been part of the Little Rock instructional program. The students will be tested, but will not be part of the accountability measure which qualifies the campus for an incentive award. What tests will be used to assess student achievement gains? The district will utilize the state norm referenced test as one of the measures. We also will utilize criterion reference assessments, which will indicate mastery of the basic and grade level skills. What are Criterion Referenced Tests (CRTs)? Criterion Referenced Tests (CRTs) are tests designed by textbook publishers and others to measure the degree in which a student has met previously established standards. The level of expectation is based on the grade level and by academic core subject. What are Norm Referenced Tests (NRTs)? Norm Referenced Tests compare the performance of Little Rock students to the performance of students nationally. The Stanford 9 is currently being used by the State for this purpose. Why are dropout rates and student attendance being included in the formula? Dropout rates and student attendance were selected, because of the consistent and accurate manner in which they are collected for each school. Although campuses do not have total control over these factors, data from research studies show that dropout rates decrease and attendance rates increase when appropriate classroom instruction and supportive school environment address the diverse needs of students. What other measures will be utilized? Arkansas has a very low college attendance rate. The emphasis on the ACT and college preparatory program will assist more of the districts young people to qualify for college entrance. This will also assist in preparing more of the district's students to qualify for higher level jobs in the future.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Why was School Climate and Customer Service indexes used? A positive school climate is directly related to the quality and amount of learning that takes place on the campus. We all are customers to some degree of the public education institution. Having knovi/ledge of the perceptions of the customers and particularly those who employ the districts students can be an excellent school improvement strategy. How can schools appeal decisions pertaining to their growth? An appeals process will be established that will enable campuses to appeal various issues to the Superintendent. Issues that could serve as the basis of the appeal might be: missing the award by a fraction\nschool grade-level reconfiguration\nhaving an extremely small number of students in a category, etc. Will schools be expected to demonstrate improvement? Each school will be expected to show growth. Schools whose achievement is below that of the expected norm will be placed on Warned Status and offered technical assistance. If improvement is not forthcoming the school will be placed on Probationary Status. Technical assistance with full evaluation of the school will be accomplished to assist the campus. Recognized educators will also be asked to consult with the campus staff. What happens if student achievement is still below expected norms and with little or no growth in student achievement? The school will be a candidate for reconstitution. Who will set the norms for expected improvement? A committee of teachers, parents, administrators and technical experts will establish reasonable standards for each of the areas identified by the Quality Indicator Index. Expected growth will also be calculated by identifying and quantifying the difference between where a school is currently with the expected standard for each area. The Board of Directors will have final authority to establish the standard and expected growth rate. Is the development of the campus leadership plan and the incentive plan finalized? This is a draft report and we anticipate additions and corrections to the current plan. The response form will be utilized to gain additional input prior to recommending the plan to the Board of Directors for approval. The plan calls for an in-depth evaluation to be completed after the 2*^ year of operation.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus Response Form Name: School (Name is not required) Gender: Male___Female_ Race: White Black__Hispanic__Asian Native American__Other___ Please indicate the primary group to which you belong or wish to be identified. Teacher___Other School Employee___Parent Student Business Representative___Community Citizen____ Note\nyou may give comments in the area below each question. Please be specific. 1. Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means the quality of education is very poor and 5 means the quality of education is excellent, how would you rate the quality of education in Little Rock Schools? Very Poor 1 2 3 4 5 Excellent Comments/Altematives (Please print) 2. Do you agree or disagree that the proposed plan for campus leadership/participatory decision making will encourage improvement in student achievement within the Little Rock School District? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Comments/Altematives (Please print)Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus 3. Do you agree or disagree that the recommended Quality indicators will fairly measure learning occurring in the school district? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Comments/Altematives (Please print) Agree 4. Do you agree or disagree that the recommended incentives will encourage improvement in student achievement in our schools? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Comments/Altematives (Please print) Agree 5. Do you agree or disagree that the recommended corrective action will help schools improve? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Comments/Altematives (Please print) Agree 6. Do you agree or disagree that every school should be expected to shovi/ continual growth? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Comments/Altematives (Please print) AgreeRecommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative and Campus 7. Do you agree or disagree that clear parameters for campus decision making should be part of the participatory decision making plan? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Cominents/Altematives (Please print) Agree 8. Do you agree or disagree that high priority should be given to the technical assistance and communication? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Comments/Altematives (Please print) Agree 9. And finally, what one comment concerning the proposed campus leadership / participatory decision making plan \u0026amp; proposed incentive system would you make? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Comments/Altematives (Please print) Agree Thank you for responding. Please return by May 8. 1998, to: Little Rock School District ATTN: Superintendents Office 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201Central Dunbar Henderson School Pulaski Heights Jr. Badgett Bale Forest Park Jefferson Mitchell Pulaski Heights ADMINISTRATION School Fair Mabelvale Jr. Southwest Booker Magnet Garland King Mabelvale Meadowcliff Otter Creek Wilson ADMINISTRATION CLUSTER A/TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Rudolph Howard Betsy Hall-Jones Linda Brown Julie Western James Washington Principal/Staff Representative Mona Briggs Wayne Knight Mary Golston Janice Gunderman Barbara Anderson Lisa Cunningham Virginia Ashley Janet Ghant Frances Cawthon Lucy Rhodes Lillie Scull Margaret Regnier Lillie Carter LauraBeth Arnold Marion Woods Patty Kohler Victor Anderson CLUSTER B/ACCOUNTABILITY William Broadnax Rosie Beyah Jim Fullerton/Pat Boykins Dorothy Jones Walter Marshaleck Principal/Staff Representative Cheryl Carson Vivian Dooley Lionel Ward Wanda Keith Tyrone Harris Ann Gregory Tab Phillips Marilyn Jacuzzi Jerry Worm Betsy Pruss Carolyn Teeter Janis Tucker Beverly Jones Susan West Sadie Mitchell Lucy Lyon Catherine Gill Gene Parker Dennis Glasgow Paulette MartinHall Forest Heights Brady Carver Magnet Fair Park Franklin Fulbright McDermott Romine Williams Magnet School ADMINISTRATION McClellan Cloverdale Jr. Chicot Cloverdale Eiem. Geyer Springs Rightsell Rockefeller Wakefield Washington Watson CLUSTER C/POLICIES Gayle Bradford Dennis Brant Vernon Smith Vincent Dodson Ada Keown Susanne Gamble Dianne Barksdale Linda Ammel Samuel Branch Ethel Dunbar Sheryl Jackson Mac Huffman Thelma Watson Mike Oliver Terese Klaus Sharon Davis Dianne Langley Mary Menking Nancy Morton Sadie Mitchell Marie McNeal Leon Adams Linda Young Principal/Staff Representative CLUSTER D/PARAMETERS (Business, Resources, Discipline) School ADMINISTRATION Jodie Carter Loretta Davenport Cassandra Norman Jack Jones Jane Harkey Barbara Williams Frederick Fields Tammi Dockett-Wilson Susan Beard Evelyn Stubblefield Sharon Brooks Delwin Smith Anne Mangan Dana Keller Mary Jane Cheatham Gail Washington Karen Buchanan Rose Barnes Theresa Courtney Kristen Laughlin Mable Donaldson Gene Parker Pat Price Brady Gadberry Linda Watson Dick Hurley Principal/Staff RepresentativeParkview Metropolitan ALC Mann Magnet Baseline Dodd Gibbs Magnet Terry Western Hills Woodruff School ADMINISTRATION CLUSTER E/PARAMETERS (Instruction) Principal/Staff Representative Junious Babbs Marcelline Can- Mike Peterson (did not attend 1 meeting) Johnny Neeley Tracey Montgomery Marian Lacey Bonnie Bumpers Eleanor Cox Cathy Koehler Faith Donovan Barbara Kennedy Felicia Hobbs Ann Hurd Nancy Mitchell Gwen Ziegler Margo Rowe Scott Morgan Ruth Schwerin Pat Higginbotham Linda Berman Victor Anderson Carol Green Patty Kohler Marion Shead-Jackson Dennis Glasgow Mark MilhollenLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE CAMPUS LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE NAME Mary Menking Junious Babbs Marion lacey Carol Green Patty Kohler Sadie Mitchell Mark Milhollen Gail Shelton Phillip Burch Doris Williams Patty Scherer Charles Foote Mary Zakrzewski Dennis Brant Betsy Hale-Jones Wayne Knight Willie Hinton ORGANIZATION LRSD_______________ Williams_____________ Parkview____________ Mann_______________ Central Office________ Central Office________ Central Office________ Central Office________ Rockefeller/Rightsell PIE PTA________________ Forest Park__________ Fulbright____________ Forest Heights Hall_________________ Central______________ Pulaski Heights Jr. High City of Little Rock TITLE Board Member Principal Principal Principal Supervisor Supervisor Supervisor Business Office Speech Therapist Advisory Committee President Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher Teacher DirectorLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EPS CODE: CAMPUS LEADERSHIP The Board of Education of the Little Rock School District believes that a fundamental responsibility of the school system is to support the sustained improvement of the schools. Site-based decision making provides each school with a framework to attain the Districts mission. Shared decision-making allows representation of administration, staff, students, parents, and patrons to provide more efficient use of time and energy. This facilitates a quality environment for students, a productive working environment for staff members, and increased opportunity for community involvement in our schools. To effect this belief, it is the policy of the Board of Education of the LRSD, that each school shall establish a campus leadership team to improve performance of all student populations. This team will assist in the development and evaluation of campus goals and objectives through planning, budgeting, curriculum development, staff development, and staffing needs. Through consensus based decisions, the campus teams will support the Districts commitment to the sustained improvement of schools.RE BED JUN 5- 1998 Little Rock School District 5 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MOMITORIMQ OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT June 4,1998 Dear Patron: The enclosed Campus Leadership Plan is the Districts attempt to develop a comprehensive strategy to promote improved student performance through a decentralized approach to decision making. We are utilizing the term Campus Leadership because of initiatives of the Arkansas Leadership Academy to promote shared decision making and empowering communities for improved student performance. The attached document is divided into five sections with a response form, which we hope you will complete and return by June 20\",1998. The first section, pages 1-8, provides an overview and basic policy for decentralized decision making. The plan has been developed by teachers, principals, and other administrators. The origin of the initiative was called for by the Little Rock School District Strategic Plan in 1995-96. The steering committee which edited their work also consisted of parents and community representatives. Campus Leadership Teams will be developed in the fall of 1998. The second section , pages 9-13, includes a rough draft of an incentive and accountability plan. We would anticipate that this portion of the plan would be completed during the fall of 1998. The Quality Index parallels the Arkansas Campus and District Report Card. The third section, pages 14-15, is an outline of the technical assistance which is envisioned to be a major communication and development program of the school district. If the process is to be a dynamic and growing program, the training and technical assistance must remain a major priority. The fourth section, pages 16-30, is the initial attempt to define the parameters for decision making and to provide for collaboration between the District and the individual campuses. This is noted as the initial effort\nas we become more familiar with the process, this particular section of the document will be refined every two years. The fifth section, pages 31-35, are several of the most often asked questions about the Campus Leadership Plan. If you have additional questions, Patty Kohler (324-2190) and Sadie Mitchell (324-2007) have been with this initiative from the inception with the Little Rock Strategic Plan. And finally, there is a short response form which we would appreciate your completing and returning by June 20, 1998. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Sincerely, Leaie V, irflTne Supe^tendent of Schools 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 824-2000  ' RECEIVED JUN 5 iggg OFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING VKaft:#4 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CAMPUS LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE AND CAMPUS INCENTIVES A proposed District plan by the Campus Based Administrators and Teachers Submitted to the Board of Education April 20, 1998TABLE OF CONTENTS Overview Campus Leadership System Summary of Campus Leadership Plan Components Board of Education Policy Consideration Campus Leadership Team Administrative Policy Planning and Decision Making Process Board of Education Policy Waivers Quality Index Incentive Plan Parameters Value Added Quality Index Technical Assistance PDM Matrix: Staff Development (Cluster D) PDM Matrix: (Cluster E) Background Information \u0026amp; Questions \u0026amp; Answers - Campus Leadership Plan Response Form PAGE 1 2 3 4 ' 4 6 8 9 10 11 14 16 21 31 36Overview This is proposed in response to the Little Rock School District Strategic Plan, which called for a broad-based effort to move to a campus based leadership system. The effort was begun three years ago, but administrative changes delayed the development of a plan to promote campus leadership in the District, particularly at the campus level. The intent was to assist the District in the development of District and campus plans that will result in improved student performance. The expected result of campus leadership is improved student performance through: a. effective campus and District planning for the purpose of improved student performance\nb. improved community involvement in the school improvement process\nc. clearly established accountability parameters for student performance\nd. raised staff productivity and satisfaction\ne. improved communication and information flow\nf. consensus-based, effective decisions\ng. long-range commitment to implementation\nh. increased flexibility at the campus level in allocation of resources\nI. coordination of program components.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 2 Campus Leadership System The proposed campus based leadership system is intended to drive fundamental changes in classroom teaching by helping the campuses and District focus on improved student achievement. The six basic components of campus-based leadership are: 1. Commitment to improved student achievement for all students. Improved student achievement will be based on established local goals for student performance. A system of incentives for student performance will be established, which will include multiple and alternative performance measures. 2. Collaborative structure and process. Policies and procedures guide the establishment of District and campus leadership to ensure representative collaboration of principals, teachers, other staff, parents, business partners, and community members. 3. Decentralization Parameters The specific areas for implementation with respect to goal setting, classroom instruction, and campus organization are included. Deregulation avenues are provided to waive local policies and state regulations if they inhibit improved student performance. 4. Statement of Purpose of Campus Leadership. The uniqueness of each campus related to its needs, and its decision making capacity to address those needs, are acknowledged in District policy and demonstrated through actual practice. 5. Adequate time, ongoing staff development and technical support. Sufficient time is allotted to allow for the development of skills and attitudes that will ensure effective campus leadership. 6. Procedures for planning and evaluating student achievement goals and decision making process.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 3 Organizational and management procedures are established to guide the progress of campus leadership in the District and on the individual campus. An evaluation process is developed and used to assess locally established performance goals and the effectiveness of committee and campus leadership and further the impact of decision making on student performance. We acknowledge that planning and implementing these components of campus leadership will require a re-conceptualization of the roles and responsibilities of board members, central office administrators, campus principals, teachers, support staff, parents, business partners, and community representatives. This strategy for school and instructional improvement with a strong incentive initiative will only succeed if it is carefully planned with relevant input from the stakeholders. The proposed campus leadership system is based on the concept of continuous improvement. Every campus can improve. Every campus is expected to show academic growth. Every school will benefit by reaching achievable standards. Summary of Campus Leadership Plan Components The plan components are: 1. 2. 3. 4. Board and administrative policy, which support a system of campus leadership at the campus and District level. Identification of quality indicators and an incentive plan, which promotes increases in student performance. Staff development plans and technical assistance, which will support the implementation of the campus leadership system. The assistance will support the planning and technical support for continuous improvement at the campus and District level. Clear guidelines for campus leadership. The parameters for decision making give guidance to the level and type of decision which is made at Federai/State/District levels, those which are better made at the campus/classroom level, and finally those which are collaborative.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 4 Board of Education Policy Consideration The following is the recommended policy for implementation of the Campus Leadership Plan and campus leadership: The Board of Education of the Little Rock School District believes that a fundamental responsibility of the school system is to support the sustained improvement of the schools. Site-based decision making provides each school with a framework to attain the Districts mission. Shared decision-making allows representation of administration, staff, students, parents, and patrons to provide more efficient use of time and energy. This facilitates a quality environment for students, a productive working environment for staff members, and increased opportunity for community involvement in our schools. To effect this belief, it is the policy of the Board of Education of the LRSD, that each school shall establish a campus leadership team to improve performance of all student populations. This team will assist in the development and evaluation of campus goals and objectives through planning, budgeting, curriculum development, staff development, and staffing needs. Through consensus based decisions, the campus teams will support the Districts commitment to the sustained improvement of schools. Campus Leadership Team Administrative Policy Student achievement is the primary focus of the Little Rock School District. Each campus accepts the responsibility and challenge to provide equitable educational opportunities that ensure every student is successful. Therefore, each Little Rock School District campus is committed to establishing a campus leadership team that will work collaboratively with the principal in the decision-making process to enhance student achievement. Membership: The membership for each campus team shall consist of\nCAMPUS TEAM MATRIX RECOMMENDED NUMBER OF POSITIONS 1 5-10 1 2 1 _1_ 1 1 _______Principal_______ Certified Teachers Central Office Parent Business ______Community______ Non-certified School Staff Student POSITION TITLE Chairman Elected Invited/Appointed Appointed Appointed _____Appointed_____ Elected or appointed Elected or appointed MEMBERSHIP Required Required Required Required Required Required Optional Optional Note: Classroom teachers must be at least 60% of the faculty/staff/central office component.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 5 Nomination: The principal shall publish procedures to be utilized for the nomination and election of representatives to the campus team. The principal shall post the election procedure regulations and policy a minimum of ten days prior to the called election. The prescribed form must be used with elected representatives to the campus team. The form indicates their willingness to serve and shall be kept on file in the principals office. Election: The consent of each nominee shall be obtained before the persons name may appear on the secret ballot. Election of the campus team shall be completed by November 1. Election Procedures: The election of representatives to the campus team will be made by secret ballot. On the date of the election, ballots will be distributed to all eligible voters. The ballot will contain the names of all nominees according to their respective grouping and instructions on how each nominee may be chosen by voters. The principal and designated staff members will tabulate completed ballots. Term: Elected representatives shall serve staggered two-year terms. In the first election, 50% of the elected membership will serve a one-year term. Elected representatives may serve two consecutive terms. Appointed representatives are not subject to term limitations, but rotation of appointed representatives is encouraged unless there are no other volunteers willing to participate. Vacancy: If a vacancy occurs among the elected representatives, nominations shall be solicited and an election held for the vacant position in the same manner as the annual election. If a vacancy occurs within 5 months of the end of a term, the principal may, but is not required to, fill the vacancy - elected or appointed. Appointed Members: The principal has discretionary privilege to appoint the parents, business leaders, community members, non-certified staff, and students. Appointed members have ail the rights and responsibilities as elected members. Thirty days prior to the appointments in November, the principal shall communicate the process of receiving nominations or recommendations. If a vacancy occurs among the appointed representatives, another person will be selected to fill the vacant position. Definitions: For the purposes of establishing the composition of campus teams: 1. 2. 3. A person who stands in parental relation to a student is considered a parent. A parent who is an employee of the District is not considered a representative of community members on the committee. Community members must reside in the District and must be at least 18 years of age.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 6 Meetings: The principal shall serve as chairman of the campus leadership team, set its agenda, and shall schedule at least four (4) meetings per year. The agenda and minutes of the meetings will be posted and filed. On an annual basis, each principal with the assistance of the campus leadership team shall review and revise the campus improvement plan (COE) for the purpose of improving student performance. The Board shall also ensure that an administrative policy is provided to clearly define the respective roles and responsibilities of the superintendent, central office staff, principals, teachers, and campus team members in the areas of: a. b. c. d. e. f. planning budgeting curriculum staffing patterns staff development school organization Planning and Decision Making Process Decision Making: In accordance with Board policy the campus team shall be involved in decisions in the areas of planning, budgeting, curriculum, staffing patterns, staff development and school organization, and serve in an advisory capacity to the principal. Procedures: Each campus shall maintain current policies and procedures to ensure that effective planning and site-based decision making occur at each campus to direct and support the improvement of student performance for all students. Process: The Board shall establish a procedure under which meetings are held regularly by campus teams that include representative professional staff, parents of students enrolled in the District, and community members. Campus teams shall include business representatives, without regard to whether a business representative resides in the District or whether the business the person represents is located in the District. Pian: Each school year the principal of each school campus, with the assistance of the campus team, shall develop, review and revise the campus improvement plan for the purpose of improving student performance for all student populations with respect to the academic quality indicators and any other appropriate performance measures for special populations.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 7 Staff Development: The campus team must approve the portions of the campus plan addressing campus staff development needs. Consultation by Principal: The principal shall regularly consult the campus team in the planning operation, supervision and evaluation of the campus education program. Public Meeting: The campus team shall hold at least one public meeting per year. The required meeting shall be held after receipt of the campus evaluation to discuss the performance on the performance objectives. District policy and campus procedures must be established to ensure that systematic communications measures are in place to periodically obtain broad-based community, parent, and staffing input, and to provide information to those persons regarding the recommendations of the campus team. Campus Level Plan: Each Campus Improvement Plan (COE) must: 1. Assess the academic achievement for each student in the school using the academic quality system. 2. Set the campus performance objectives based on the academic quality indicator system, including objectives for special needs populations. 3. Identify how the campus goals will be met for each student. 4. Determine the resources needed to implement the plan. 5. Identify the staff needed to implement the plan. 6. Set time lines for reaching the goals. 7. Measure progress toward the performance objectives periodically to ensure that the plan is resulting in academic achievement. 8. Include an annual report with results to be shared with the team, staff, parents and the appropriate assistant superintendent.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 8 Board of Education Policy Waivers The Board of Education of the Little Rock School District believes that the District or a campus leadership team should have the option of applying for a waiver of a requirement or prohibition imposed by law or rule. It is the policy of the Board of Education of the LRSD to support the waiver process for local schools to seek relief from requirements or prohibition imposed by law or rule. The waiver must be in written form following the procedures outlined below.  Identification of the statutory requirements for which a waiver is requested.  Description of why the waiver is needed and the goals that would be achieved if granted. a Descriptions of the measurement process that will be used if the waiver is granted and program is implemented. a Description of how the interested parties were notified of the waiver request.  Descriptions of federal, state, and District requirements to be waived. Restrictions: The District or campus team may not receive an exemption or waiver from requirements imposed by federal law or rule such as Goals 2000, Educate America Act, Elementary Secondary Education Act (ESEA), and School to Work Opportunities Act, or from a requirement or prohibition imposed by state law. Waiver Application: A waiver request application form may be obtained by the principal from the Associate Superintendent of Instruction. The principal is to enlist the review of the campus team and obtain consensus before the waiver is processed. The completed waiver must be submitted to the superintendent for review and processing. Requirements for a waiver by the state must follow regulations as described in the Submission and Approval section. A waiver application to be acted upon for the next academic year must be submitted to the District by , to the state by , and to the federal government by Submission and Approval: The application shall be submitted to the superintendent no later than the semester before the campus intends to take action. The superintendent will inform the principal of the action taken within thirty days. A waiver requiring the Arkansas Department of Education or the Arkansas State Board of Education action must be acted upon by the District Board before forwarding to the Arkansas Department of Education. District Board action should be consistent with state and federal guidelines.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 9 Quality Index The committee members recommend that the Little Rock School District adopt a value-added quality index as the tool for managing a campus-based incentive plan. The value added quality index shall be comprised of specific indicators and corresponding measurements that collectively guide each school and the District toward a comnion goal of improving student achievement in accordance with specified standards. Adopting a standardized value added index would allow each campus to determine a reasonable and appropriate starting point for achieving the District goal, which will be defined as a growth standard. Based on where that starting point lies on the goals rubric, each campus will aim to achieve annual benchmarks so that appropriate and realistic progress is made toward achieving the District growth standards. The rubric will identify both an annual growth goal (AGG) which will serve as the benchmark and what constitutes minimum acceptable grovrth (MAG). The AGG and the MAG will provide the parameters for awarding incentives based on the total points accrued by each school after all indicators have been reviewed via the quantifiable results of each applicable measurement. The indicators shall include: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. Student achievement Dropout rates Student attendance Teacher attendance Customer service School climate Any additional indicator adopted by the LRSD Board. The results of the individual measurements that provide information about indicator performance shall be disaggregated by race, ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status. Measurement results will also be subjected to a weighted scale that takes into account the degree to which student mobility has impacted the measurement results on each campus. Consideration of mobility impact and other disaggregated data will ensure equitable distribution of incentives within a management system that is fair to all schools. The proposed value added quality index shall include a definition for each indicator and the corresponding measurements organized on a matrix that identifies grade level applicability and possible AGG and MAG incentive points.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 10 A school goals rubric divided into baseline quartiles with annual benchmarks and a growth standard shall also be included for each indicator. Total Annual Growth Goal and Minimum Acceptable Growth incentive points will determine each schools incentive eligibility on an overall incentive point scale. It is recommended that qualified statisticians assign incentive points to all AGG and MAG categories and that they design the rubric and incentive point scales to ensure the accuracy and validity of the proposed system. Incentive Plan Parameters a. b. c. d. The award must be a group effort as opposed to individual. The award must be based on multiple criteria, with emphasis on increasing student achievement for all students. The award must be non-competitive in that every group that meets the designated criteria qualifies for the award. The pian should promote teamwork and collaboration. e. The criteria should have measurable results that are attainable and f. g- h. cannot be easily manipulated. Guidelines should be easily understood. The incentive program plan will be an exposition of Total Quality Schools philosophy. Rewards shall be of significant value to the division and campus. The proposed accountability system is intended to drive fundamental change in classroom teaching by helping schools focus on improved student achievement. The system is designed to encourage and support school improvement by: a Clearly establishing the Districts Goals for schools and students\n Creating an easy way to communicate to schools and the public how well a school is performing\na Recognizing and rewarding schools for their effectiveness in demonstrating growth in student achievement\nand a Focusing attention, energy, and resources on those schools that need help improving student achievement.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 11 LRSD VALUE ADDED QUALITY INDEX The index that follows has been designed to visually illustrate the accountability process\nand, therefore, serves as a living index, subject to periodic review and modification. It will be analyzed by qualified statisticians to ensure fairness and validity before being implemented. INDICATOR Student Achievement ________________________________ DEFINmON___________________________________ Academic success as measured by standardized test scores, number of students selecting high level academic courses and advanced placement course, grade distributions, and grade point average (gpa). Farh of the following measurement results is evaluated based on current baseline in individual schools. Baseline data are categorized by percentage quartiles on rubric below. School goals are based on annual benchmarks under each baseline category. Incentive awards are based on minimum/maximum point scale below._____________________________________ ________________MEASUREMENTS_______________ 1. % of students scoring at readiness or above on EPSF posttest (includes high school kindergarten classes)______ 2. % of students in math and/or reading scoring on or above grade level as measured by first grade reading/math inventory posttest, fourth quarter District CRTs, and SAT-9 at grades 3, 5, 7, 8, and 10_________________ 3. % of total senior class taking the ACT prior to graduation__________________________________ 4. % of total senior class taking the ACT with a composite score of 21 or higher_______________________________ 5. % of students enrolled in higher level courses earning a semester grade of C\" or above______________________ K-6 7-9 10-12 INCENTIVE POINTS* X X X X X X X X 6. % of total student population enrolled in AP classes X 7. % of students scoring a 3 or better on AP exams______ 8. % of student population successfully completing college core courses and eligible for unconditional college admission________________________________________ X X STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT: SCHOOL GOALS RUBRIC 1998-2001 CURRENT BASELINE 3-YEAR GROWTH STANDARD BENCHMARKS* 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001_ 0 - 24% 25 - 49% 50-74% 20% 15% 10% 75 - 99% NonAdmatn growth rtgaired mag 3.3% 3.3% 3.3% agg 6.6% 6.6% 6.6% mag 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% agg 5% 5% 5% mag 1.65% 1.65% 1.65% JSS_ 3.3% 3.3% 3.3% * minimum acceptable growth = mag\nannual growth goal = agg INDICATOR Drop Out Rate ______________________________ DEFINITION_____________________________________ Percentage of students dropping out in Grades 7-12 from October of one school year through October of the next school vear Each of the following measurement results is evaluated based on current baseline in individual schools. Baseline data are categorized by percentage quartiles on rubnc below. School goals are based on annual benchmarks under each baseline cateeorx' Incentive awards are based on minimum/maximum point scale below.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 12 MEASUREMENTS K-6 7-9 X 10-12 X INCENTIVE POINTS* Annual Dropout Report X X Annual October 1 Enrollment Report DROP OUT RATE: SCHOOL GOALS RUBRIC 1998-2001 CURRENT DROPOUT RATE 3-YEAR GROWTH _______STANDARD_______ BENCHMARKS* 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001_______ 6 - 10% 2 - 5% 1% NonAibmuB - growth retmh-ed mag .65 .65 .65 agg 1.3 1.3 1.3 mag. .50 .50 .50 agg 1.0 1.0 1.0 INDICATOR Student Attendance _____________________________________DEFINITION____________ Student Average Daily Attendance divided by Average Daily Membership Each of the following measurement results is evaluated based on current baseline in individual schools. Baseline data are categorized by percentage quartiles on rubric below. School goals are based on annual benchmarks under each baseline category. Incentive awards are based on minimum/maximum point scale below._____________________________________ ________________MEASUREMENTS____________ Annual average of the four quarterly reports or annual report K-6 7-9 10-12 INCENTIVE POINTS* STUDENT ATTENDANCE: SCHOOL GOALS RUBRIC 1998-2001 CURRENT STUDENT ATTENDANCE RATE 3-YEAR GROWTH STANDARD BENCHMARKS* 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001__ 86 - 90% 91 -94% 95 - 100% 5% 1% NGiB^qrani' growth reqatrtd mag 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.6 1.6 1.6 mag .16 .16 .16 .33 .33 .33 X X X INDICATOR Teacher Attendance DEFINITION *Teacher Average Daily Attendance divided by 'Average Daily Membership *Teacher = anyone paid on the teacher salary schedule **Avera^e Daily Membership = total number of teachers during a 9.25 month teacher contract Each of the followmg measurement results is evaluated based on current baseline in individual schools. Baseline data are categorized by percentage quartiles on rubric below. School goals are based on annual benchmarks under each baseline category. Incentive awards are based on minimum/ma.ximum point scale below.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 13 ________________MEASUREMENTS________________ Teacher Attendance Report to be developed by Information Services and distributed quarterly K-6 7-9 I 10-12 INCENTIVE POINTS* TEACHER ATTENDANCE: SCHOOL GOALS RUBRIC 1998-2001 CURRENT TEACHER ATTENDANCE RATE 3-YEAR GROWTH STANDARD BENCHMARKS* 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001 88 - 92% 93 - 96% 97 - 100% 5% 1% mag .08 .08 .08 1.6 1.6 1.6 mag .16 .16 .16 agg .33 .33 .33 Nd ratnimBm growth rettahrtd X X X INDICATOR Customer Service DEFINITION Percentage of satisfactory responses for the business community in the Little Rock area. Each of the following measurement results is evaluated based on current baseline in individual schools. Baseline dau are categorized by percentage quartiles on rubric below. School goals are based on annual benchmarks under each baseline category. Incentive awards are based on minimum/maximum point scale below._____________________________________ _______________MEASUREMENTS Customer Service Surveys (will be designed)__________________ K-6 7-9 10-12 INCENTIVE POINTS* CUSTOMER SERVICE: SCHOOL GOALS RUBRIC 1998-2001 % OF SATISFACTORY RESPONSES 3-YEAR GROWTH STANDARD BENCHMARKS* 1998-1999 1999-2000 2000-2001 25 -49% 50 - 74% 75 - 99% 15% 10% Namtainam - growth rtqaired mag 2.5 2.5 2.5 agg 5.0 5.0 5.0 mag 1.65 1.65 1.65 ags. 3.3 3.3 3.3 X X X INDICATOR School Climate _____________________________________DEFINITION___________________________ School climate Is the perceptions, *behavior and motivations which effect academic success. *Expecied behavior is out of school suspension tree in accordance with the LRSD Policy. Each of the following measurement results is evaluated based on current baseline in individual schools. Baseline data are categorized by percentage quartiles on rubric below. School goals arc based on annual benchmarks under each baseline catceorv. Incentive awards are based on minimum/maximum point scale below._____________________________________ MEASUREMENTS COE Survey________________________________ Annually Measured by Quarterly Discipline Report VIPs Report________________________________ K-6 X X X --9 I 10-12 X X X X .X INCENTIVE POINTS*Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 14 Technical Assistance The basic framework for staff development and technical assistance will be Total Quality Schools. The training components are categorized under four headings and sequences. 1. POLICIES/PARAMETERS, TEAMING, INCENTIVE AWARDS, AND TOTAL QUALITY SCHOOLS TOOLS Policy/Parameters would be taught in a joint session that would be more informational and less interactive. We would anticipate that this would be provided to the campus principals and District administrators in the summer of 1998. There would an informational session presented to the campus staff prior to the election of the campus teams in the fall of 1998. Further informational and training sessions would be scheduled and modified as needed after the initial evaluation had been completed. 2. TEAMING The areas to be reviewed and skills acquired would be empowerment, change process, consensus building, conflict resolution, needs assessment, data analysis, and the hows and whys of how teams produce high performance among students and staff. Training would be offered at multiple times based on the appointment and election of new team members. Initial training would be during the winter of 1998-99. 3. INCENTIVE PROGRAM The incentive program rewards campuses and divisions of the school district for improvement based on quality indicators. Note the listing of the indicators in achievement gains in the third component in this section. The session will deal with specific strategies that may be utilized to increase campus performance. The training will be first developed with campus and District staff and customized to be presented during the summer of 1999 to campus teams at the Cluster Meetings. Cluster meetings will be scheduled at the end of July for the campus teams to offer specific training based on the campus teams needs assessment.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 15 4. TOTAL QUALITY SCHOOLS Training will be provided to all staff of the school district based on four specific components. Little Rock School District bases the Quality Schooling Process on the beliefs that:  Continuous improvement is the goal for which every campus and division strives.  Continuous training and education for all personnel must be provided.  Customer satisfaction is gained by conformance to customer requirements.  Decisions must be data driven. The training would be developed initially with the District administrators and partnered with area businesses that adopted the total quality precepts. We envision that the training would start with administrators and teams in the summer of 1999. Staff of the school district would begin in the fall of 1999 and continue through the next two years. FIRST YEAR - PLAN SECOND YEAR - DO Where are we going? How are we going to get there? Who will be trained? What do we want to accomplish? Organize teams Building teams Training the teams Sound Research Professional reading/collection Basic Education Stages of change Total Staff inservices Understanding and building consensus Quality check for success More technical assistance Compile notebooks________________ TQS Foundation for Leaders/teams Quality training Cadre of teams in each building Retreat for teams Data Driven Training for board members THIRD YEAR - STUDY FOURTH YEAR - ACT Study the results See if the theory works To fully implement the improvement Recommendations for continuous improvement Ongoing evaluationPDM Matrix - Cluster D Sub Group I o n 73 fC o o Stair Development OQ 5  3 - I ft 3 Bl o. 3-  FUNCTION District Staff Development DISTRICT  Communicate federal, state, and district guidelines to all campuses  Allocate resources  Provide training for professional, paraprofcssional, and substitute staff  Desegregation mandates  Quality Control  Communicate and plan calendar in a timely maimer  Ongoing staff development for ESP  Provide national staff development handbooks for all campuses COLLABORATION  Identify appropriate times for content area training for new teachers  Ongoing staff training  Permanently assigned substitutes assigned to same building to acconunodate campus needs for the school year  A. M. staff development monthly  Training and handbook provided for substitutes and new teachers CAMPUS  Waiver for staff development days for new campus programs ACCOUNTABILITY o c*. 3 s S- 3 = . I/l Z. U) ii d I 3 o fO s \u0026lt; o Campus Staff Development * increase communication throughout district among administrators/lcaders/ teachers  Quality control  Campus staff development plan will correlate with COE/SIP/Tcchnology planPDM Matrix - Cluster D Sub Group II -o n New Teacher Induction \u0026amp; Staffing FUNCTION New Teacher Acclimation DISTRICT Provide staff development to new teachers on LRSD curriculum. Allocate resources. Inform campus administrators of mentor and induction year requirements and concepts. COLLABORATION Plan implementation monitoring and evaluation. Confirm mentor teachers. Provide training and guidelines for mentor teachers. CAMPUS Instruct new teachers in all campus policies and procedures. ACCOUNTABILITY SlatTing Provide a qualified pool of applicants. Develop a date-specific timeline to ensure all staff are hired and in place in a timely manner. IJirc a pool of applicants Io be placed in openings as they occur. Benefits and salary administration. Fulfillment of legal and contractual requirements. Determine appropriate starring needs for program implementation, i.e., new hires, additional staff, and reconfiguration of teacher to pupil ratio in the primary grades. Identify need based on course offerings and student enrollment. Interview and recommend from qualified pool. Assign teachers in their area of certification. o o 'S 3 b ZiH I (fQ 8.8- c?. 2:5 n S O n I I * n o 3 a (APDM Matrix - Cluster I) Sub Group ill \"o n ire o 3 a FUNCTION Schedule Sl Calendar (District and Campus) DISTRICT/STATE Communicate State/District requirements and negotiate parameters. Schedule \u0026amp; Calendar Special Programs \u0026amp; Grouping COLLABORATION Compare and make sure calendars are compatible. CAMPUS Determine internal scheduling of staff and apply for district/state waiver of class or program requirements. ACCOUNTABILITY 73 o n o I ta CL CL CD 9 S' 3 (/) 3 5 C. on S a n I o c (A o' Q  \u0026lt; O (Z) Special Academic Programs (AP, G/T, Spec. Ed., ESL, Title I, Early Childhood) Interpret and communicate mandates (federal, state, local policy) and recommend policy revisions. Agree upon waivers that will enhance student achievement. Initiate waiver and policy revisions in collaboration with campus team. Grouping (Organizational) Interpret and communicate district guidelines/ philosophy. Agree upon any exceptions to District guidelines and philosophy. Utilize flexible iinplcmcnialion of grouping with guidelines.PDM Matrix - Cluster D \"X3 n Sub Group IV (kJ OQ a I a VO M Discipline rb o o I 2 m 3 p ex ex P FUNCTION DISCIPLINE DISTRICT/STATE Review Federal/Stale Mandates COLLABORATION CAMPUS ACCOUNTABILITY rt C. ^.2 3 Eslablish sludenl discipline policies and regulalions wilti slandardized componenis Review handbook revision and make recommendations Discuss and develop plan for disciplinary concerns Develop school-wide discipline plans Dcvclo|)/|)ost chissrooiii rules o 2. li I 1 3 o ra 2 o (A Cominiinicale policies Io DisIrici adminislralors Communicate policies Io patrons Coiniiiiiiiicnle policies Io slalT Teach and implement SRRH Io students Develop and implemenl Iraining for cerliricd/non- certifled stafT (i.e. sccurily, bus drivers, supervision aides, and subsliliile teachers I.RSD SlalT Dcvelopnicnl On-silc sl.-ifT dcvclopincitl Monilor and ensure compliance of policies Monilor and ensure compliance of policies Monilor and ensure compliance of policies Review and submit quarterly disciplinary dataFUNCTION PISTRICT/STATE Provide resources Io implement district-wide disciplinary plan A Alternatives Io suspensions B Student Assistance Program C. In-school Suspension D. Alternative Classrooms E. Alternative Learning Environments Provide Tinancial support for proactive school plans COLLABORATION Discuss and develop positive alternative learning solutions Io behavior problems Provide appropriate curriculum for specific needs relating to behavior problems District collaboration with campuses Io develop business partnerships CAMPUS Adhere Io established LRSD guidelines for administering disciplinary sanctions Tcacli/iiiiplciucnt behavior iiiodificalion and condicl management Develop proactive plan which provides incenlives/rewards for good behavior ACCOUNTABILITY T3 n (w S o M fT p o C! o p \u0026lt; D 1 g s' a o s TO a o o I rt 3 ex o g o' r* \u0026lt;/) O n (/tFUNCTION niSTRICT/STATE ( lIKItIClII.IIM Adopt curriculum to include the following components.  Standards- based objectives  K-12 scope and sequence  Assessment and Instruction framework to reflect national standards and best practices from research (hands-on science, ntath manipulatives and tlicmatlc instruction) PDM MATRIX - CLUSTER E COLLABORATION Serve on district committee to develop:  Standards- based objectives  K-12 scope and sequence  Assessment and Instruction framework Monitor curriculum In the following areas: * Implementatio n District resources Assessment processes Transitions among campuses and between levels Conduct action research on Instructional strategies and programs (Collect and analyze data and make decisions based on II at the building level CAMPUS accountability \"0 n BI UQ  Recommend stalT to develop curriculum. Recommend new programs and/or extensions of existing programs. Use curriculum framework within which classroom teacher decide the following Information:  Use of optional components  Use of enrichment objectives  Design of lesson plan content and activities  Use of assessments within district framework. \u0026gt; Modiflcallon of curriculum for special needs students  Strategies for Instructional delivery within district Damework. a p ex n a 5 Q n o I re 3 s o' 3 [n o IS n ft I a c \u0026lt;/\u0026gt; S' a 3 \u0026lt; (/\u0026gt; DFUNCTION niSTRIC'r/STA'I'E COLLABORATION CAMPUS ACCOUNTABILITY T3 n Curriculum Re.murces Support and facilitate campus plans based on available resources. Define district and campus responsibilities fur materials, resources, and budget allocations. Organize resources at campus for accesslblllly to staff and programs. Delertnine and use resources for campus plan, Involving district personnel as needed. p (fQ a c I T3 a o I 2 P Cl. CL P a s 3- 3 a   3 S S. CZ5 S a JS- O I a g S' n n 3 n (/)FUNCTION DISTRICT/STATE COLLABORATION CAMPUS ACCOUNTABILITY -0 n CD P  n 5 a bJ c n n o I Initruellonal Equity EstabliBh an equity fund. Review assesinient data and move resourcea/ataff to asalat where needed. Create plan to minimize atK-io-eeononilcea that effect achievement. r- 2 n 3 Ca (X ex 3. h: g -b o 3  C. t/l Cl I o U 5* o n 3  . \u0026lt; A (/\u0026gt;FUNCTION DISTRICT/STATE COLLABORATION CAMPUS accountability Data Ctdicclion Collect relevant data for diagnostic use for the campus and district.  Student Achievement  Drop out rales  Student attendance data  Teacher attendance data  Customer service Index  School Climate index Provide comparative data oh students, teachers, and Schools. Review/redefine district and campus goals to meet guidelines for data collection. Collect and analyze relevant diagnostics for: Utilization of data to support Individual Improvement plan. Develop plan to collect/revlew data on regular basis rather than annually. Provide current research information. Provide Staff Development on data collection. Individual students School District Planning, Research and Evaluation will work with Individual schools In data collection. Identify multiple data lources. Create time and climate that Is teacher friendly for collection. n p p W 3 ? r-  p 3. o 3- 3^ I I fl I *0 g 3 n a 3 70 a n o I a 3 O. P o 3 (/) o t/1 D n UiFUNCTION DISTRICT/STATE COLLABORATION CAMPUS ACCOUNTABILITV Data Use \u0026lt;6 Analysis Provide (ethnical aupport. Develop communication plan for campus \u0026amp; district. Involve total stalT lit data analysis and Inform students, parents, and constituents. Use data analysis to drive decision-making for teachers, students, and parents. Use diagnostic tools to evaluate student placement. n o ! pj p ~ 5 rt -3 T3 hi c \u0026lt;T) 3 P 3.  C?. 1 2 S- =\u0026gt; K. Ui S. (n a a \"s S' ?a s. t/l 5 D o I a s' o n 3 n UiFUNCTION DISTRICT/STATE COLLABORATION CAMPUS ACCOUNTABILITY Textbooks Coordinate process and adopt textbooks using approved list. Maintain budget for adopted materials. Create and maintain budget for supplemental materials to be distributed among all schools. Request waivers. Make recommendations for stalling textbook committees. Use multiple committees for: revlew/evaluation of textbooks assure cluster representation Maintain inventory. Consider supplemental resources where appropriate. T3 O .g o! O\\ (/\u0026gt; p o. o - 5' S' \u0026lt; a n I 3* O n 3 \u0026lt; a IZ) X n o o I (Ti CL o  o' XI t/i oFUNCTION Homework DISTRICT/STATE Provide support and resources for campus plan. COLLABORATION Use collected data as the basis for planning. Structure technical assistance and/or availahlc resources to promote continuous Improvement on each campus In student achievement. CAMPUS Structure work of staff and resources to assess Individual and categorical levels of Improvement. Emphasis Is on student achievement. ACCOUNTABILITY Tj n p (W n NJ I T3 C a o o I a 3 P ex O. P CD 2. 2. 2 3' 3 Ei. w a _ 3 5' f\" n I I S' o n 3 \u0026lt;5 t/iFUNCTION DISTRICT/STATE COLLABORATION CAMPUS ACCOUNTABILITY T3 n Grading Develop and follow district policy on grading. Establish district committees to recommend policy, guidelines, evaluation, data (lollccliort, report card!, etc. Interpret and maintain p\u0026lt;dicy at Ilie campus. p R oo on  n o I r~ n n 3 Provide for llexible conference limes Io keep parents abreast of student performance. Eiplore to Include explicit data on atudents' progress.  Review feasibility of mailing Interim reports. The mailing should be to the students that are academically distressed.  Ask parent Io give 3 stamps at the beginning of the program year for mailing purposes Develop a procedure on disiribullon and collection of Interim reports and report cards. StudenO return signed Interim reports. P O- P. P o S. ST. S 2 p' s. co Q n I a U s' o Q 3 \u0026lt;5 (/\u0026gt; aFUNCTION DISTRICT/STATE COLLABORATION CAMPUS ACCOUNTABILITY 7? P UQ c M3 w I n o o I Accountaliilily/Student Achievement Provide support and resources for campus plan. Use collected data as the basis for planning. Structure technical assistance and/or available resources to promote continuous Improvement on each campus In student achievement. Structure work of staff and resources to assess individual and categorical levels of improvement. Emphasis Is on student achievement. r 2 P ex O. P o ff. 2 3- 3 3. VI a - _ o' 3 \"S c- S' ?o S. CZl 5  n I a c tA 3* o O  a (AFUNCTION DISTRICT/STATE COLLABORATION CAMPUS ACCOUNTABILITY Waivers Request waivers from Arkansas Department of Education and/or applicable governmental entity. Consider campus requests for waivers. Assist in evaluation of waiver if and when waiver Is approved. Initiate and Justify requests for waivers which must pnivldc strategies that support evidence of student achievement. o n u (0 a I o O i5 /O a o o I 2 n 3 Q. a. p II I S' n \u0026lt;9 3 n CARecommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 31 Background Information and Question and Answers - Campus Leadership Plan 1. 2. 3. 4. Why was the Campus Leadership system created? The Little Rock School District strategic plan was developed by a combination of staff and community. It was determined that site leadership was a reform movement which should be implemented. The plan is very inclusive based on the membership of not only staff, but parents, community members and business partners. The incentive plan is a positive form of campus accountability which places the emphasis on the group rather than individual. It is believed that rewarding improved student performance and empowering staff at the campuses will result in improved student performance. The overall plan is consistent with rewarding improvement based on the Total Quality precepts. Who developed the incentive system? The original philosophical basis of the plan was developed by Cluster B. The steering committee for the complete plan endorsed the recommended plan. A list of the schools and individuals is located on the last page of this monograph. What are the underlying beliefs of the proposed plan for campus leadership? On the first page of this document there are listed the expected results of moving to a campus leadership plan for the purpose of increased student performance. As such, there is also a strong belief that continuous improvement and total quality performance are major aspects behind the plan. How have campus leadership systems and incentive systems improved student achievement in other districts? School districts in Tennessee, Kentucky, Maryland and Texas have all reported positive gains in student achievement. These states all have statewide plans and they are encouraged to add local incentives. There are other examples but we concentrated on these four states.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 32 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. There are several terms used to describe the campus decision making process. What are the differences? The term Campus Leadership is utilized by the Arkansas Leadership Academy to describe the empowerment process. The Arkansas Leadership Academy was established by the Arkansas Legislature. The terms of sitebased decision making, participatory decision making and campus leadership may be utilized interchangeably. The final document will utilize one term, Campus Leadership. How was the membership of the campus team decided? There was a search of the literature regarding the composition of campus teams in various states. The committee felt that this would be the initial proposal but it could be made smaller or larger based on the evaluation after the implementation years. The committee wanted to be as inclusive as possible. How will the staff and the public be kept informed about this improvement initiative? The school district will report the degree of implementation annually as part of the District Report Card. Particular emphasis will be placed on improvement of the factors identified on the Quality Indicator Index. Campuses will make a similar report based on their individual initiatives and their specific report card. The results of the incentive plan and awards for progress will be reported annually at the beginning of the school year. How will the District measure growth? The District will be looking at the specific quality education indicators to measure a schools performance for incentive awards. The emphasis will be on improvement in student performance. We will look at the growth which occurred during the academic year. A student must be enrolled as of October 1 to be calculated in the growth index. Will special education students be part of the assessment? Yes, but we have not developed all the rules regarding required growth. We anticipate the special education students will be added the 2*** year of the plan.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 33 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Why is the District considering mobility when measuring the growth of students: Research of student mobility maintains that: a) changing schools has a negative effect on an individual students learning\nand b) highly mobile student populations adversely affect overall school and District performance. As both the nation and the states address issues such as school choice, curriculum reform, and accountability systems for schools and districts, the impact of student mobility must be taken into account. Why are students not being considered part of the plan who are enrolled prior to October 1? Several of the District schools have extremely high mobility rates and many times we are testing students who have not been part of the Little Rock instructional program. The students will be tested, but will not be part of the accountability measure which qualifies the campus for an incentive award. What tests will be used to assess student achievement gains? The District will utilize the state norm referenced test as one of the measures. We also will utilize criterion reference assessments, which will indicate mastery of the basic and grade level skills. What are Criterion Referenced Tests (CRTs)? Criterion Referenced Tests (CRTs) are tests designed by textbook publishers and others to measure the degree in which a student has met previously established standards. The level of expectation is based on the grade level and by academic core subject. What are Norm Referenced Tests (NRTs)? Norm Referenced Tests compare the performance of Little Rock students to the performance of students nationally. The Stanford 9 is currently being used by the State for this purpose.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 34 15. 16. 17. 18. Why are dropout rates and student attendance being included in the formula? Dropout rates and student attendance were selected, because of the consistent and accurate manner in which they are collected for each school. Although campuses do not have total control over these factors, data from research studies show that dropout rates decrease and attendance rates increase when appropriate classroom instruction and supportive school environment address the diverse needs of students. What other measures will be utilized? Arkansas has a very low college attendance rate. The emphasis on the ACT and college preparatory program will assist more of the Districts young people to qualify for college entrance. This will also assist in preparing more of the Districts students to qualify for higher level jobs in the future. Why was School Climate and Customer Service indexes used? A positive school climate is directly related to the quality and amount of learning that takes place on the campus. We ail are customers to some degree of the public education institution. Having knowledge of the perceptions of the customers and particularly those who employ the Districts students can be an excellent school improvement strategy. Who are the customers or stakeholders? Essentially, everyone who is in any way connected with the school organization is a customer. Students and their parents are the most obvious customers, but they are not the only customers. A student is the customer of the education system, the individual school and individual teachers. The teachers, as well as all other staff members, and even volunteers are also customers. For example, a third grade teacher is the customer of a second grade teacher, or junior level courses and instructors are customers of prerequisite sophomore level courses and instructors. As well, a middle school is the customer of an elementary school and a high school is a customer of a middle school, just as business and community are customers of the entire school system.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 35 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. How can schools appeal decisions pertaining to their growth? An appeals process will be established that will enable campuses to appeal various issues to the Superintendent. Issues that could serve as the basis of the appeal might be: missing the award by a fraction\nschool grade-level reconfiguration\nhaving an extremely small number of students in a category, etc. Will schools be expected to demonstrate improvement? Each school will be expected to show growth. Schools whose achievement is below that of the expected norm will be placed on Warned Status and offered technical assistance. If improvement is not forthcoming the school will be placed on Probationary Status. Technical assistance with full evaluation of the school will be accomplished to assist the campus. Recognized educators will also be asked to consult with the campus staff. What happens if student achievement is still below expected norms and with little or no growth in student achievement? The school will be a candidate for reconstitution. Who will set the norms for expected improvement? A committee of teachers, parents, administrators and technical experts will establish reasonable standards for each of the areas identified by the Quality Indicator Index. Expected growth will also be calculated by identifying and quantifying the difference between where a school is currently with the expected standard for each area. The Board of Directors will have final authority to establish the standard and expected growth rate. Is the development of the campus leadership plan and the incentive plan finalized? This is a draft report and we anticipate additions and corrections to the current plan. The response form will be utilized to gain additional input prior to recommending the plan to the Board of Directors for approval. The plan calls for an in-depth evaluation to be completed after the 3\"* year of operation. When will the incentives be available for distribution to the schools? The first incentives will be distributed to schools during the 1999-2000 school year.Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 36 Campus Leadership Response Form Name: Gender. Male___Female^ School Race: White (Name is not required) Black__Hispanic__Asian___Native American__Other___ Please indicate the primary group to which you belong or wish to be identified. Teacher___Other School Employee___Parent Student Business Representative___Community Citizen____ Note\nyou may give comments in the area below each question. Please be specific. 1. Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means the quality of education is very poor and 5 means the quality of education is excellent, how would you rate the quality of education in Little Rock Schools? Very Poor 1 2 3 4 5 Excellent Comments/Altematives (Please print) 2. Do you agree or disagree that the proposed plan for campus leadership/participatory decision making will encourage improvement in student achievement within the Little Rock School District? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Comments/Altematives (Please print)Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 37 3. Do you agree or disagree that the recommended Quality indicators will fairly measure learning occurring in the school district? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Aeree Comments/Altematives (Please print) 4. Do you agree or disagree that the recommended incentives will encourage improvement in student achievement in our schools? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Comments/Altematives (Please print) 5. Do you agree or disagree that the recommended corrective action will help schools improve? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Comments/Altematives (Please print) 6. Do you agree or disagree that every school should be expected to show continual growth? Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 Agree Comments/Altematives (Please print)1 Recommendations for LRSD Campus Leadership Initiative/Campus Incentives Page 38 7. Do you agree or disagree that clear parameters for campus decision making should be part of the campus leadership plan? Disagree 4 5 2 1 J Comments/Altematives (Please print) Agree 8. Do you agree or disagree that high priority should be given to the technical assistance and communication? Disagree 4 5 2 1 3 Agree Comments/Altematives (Please print) 9. What one comment concerning the proposed campus leadership / participatory decision making plan \u0026amp; proposed incentive system would you make? Thank you for responding. Please return by June 20,1998, to: Little Rock School District ATTN\nSuperintendents Office 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201dr RECF Little Rock School District September 29, 1998 OCT 2 1998 OFFICE OF desegregation monitoring MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Mrs. Anne Brown, Desegration Monitoring Sadie Mitchell, Associate Superintendent - School Services SUBJECT: Campus Leadership Thank you and your staff for all you have done to help the Little Rock School District move toward the 21* Century. Your support is appreciated and needed at such a critical time in the Districts progress. In my new position. Associate Superintendent of School Services, I am responsible for the implementation of the Campus Leadership Initiative. The School Services Department is also chairing the following clusters: Cluster Cluster C Cluster E _________Title Quality Index - Attendance \u0026amp; At-Risk Campus Leadership - Planning and Campus Goals Time/Date November 17, 1998 1:30 - 3:30 p.m. November 18, 1998 1:30-3:30 p.m. We would be most appreciative if you could provide technical assistance from your staff on each committee. The next round of cluster meetings will start in November. If you will submit names to me prior to the meeting, I will personally contact each one of them. I look forward to hearing from you soon. Cc: Brady Gadberry, Special Assistant to the Superintendent Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent - Desegregation 810 West Markham street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)824-2000 J Little Rock School District November 16, 1998 Administrative Directive TO: All Principals FROM: SUBJECT: '^^Victor Anderson, Associate Superintendent, Operations C^Sadie Mitchell, Associate Superintendent, School Services Documentation of Involvement of Campus Leadership Team and School Community in the Development of New Work Project Lists During the November cluster meetings, principals will receive a memo from the Director of Facility Services requesting that schools review and revise lists of existing requests for new work for the school facility. This revised list will become the basis for projects for a millage campaign next fall. Review the existing lists carefully and delete any requests that are no longer desires. Add any requests for additions, modifications, or renovations to the school. These lists will not include requests for repairs. Those items that cannot be funded in the current fiscal year will be developed into another list at the Facility Services Department and will also be added to the list of projects for the millage campaign. The involvement of the Campus Leadership Team and representatives from your school community are critical to this task. Involve both groups in the discussions of which projects are to be included in the project list. Provide documentation to the Operations Division of the names of the individuals and their positions who participate in the decisions of which projects are to be included on the revised new work list. Be certain to include representatives from your PTA and from other support groups or organizations within your school community. If there is an active neighborhood association in your area, a representative from that group is also recommended for participation. At the high school level, student representatives are appropriate for participation. Return the revised new work lists to Mr. Eaton on or before December 14, 1998. Send the documentation of the participants in the project decisions to the Operations Division on the same date. Attachment C: Doug Eaton Frances Cawthon Marian Lacey 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 * / MEMORANDUM FACILITY SERVICES DIRECTORATE DATE: November 13,1998 TO: II Pnncip^l^nd Building Managers FROM: lOI IS . Eaton, Director of Facility Services SUBJ: New Work Lists Attached to this memorandum is a current listing of the new work projects that our records indicate we have received from your site. You are requested to review this listing, delete any items that you feel are no longer needed at the school, and submit work orders for any new work that you desire to be considered in new work planning sessions for possible funding the latter part of this year. New work consists of additions, modifications, or renovations to facilities that do not exist at this time, submitted at this time. Items needing repair or maintenance are not to be Please review your academic program to ensure that the facilities that you have meet the needs of your program now and in the future. These are the type projects that we are trying to identify as new work. Consideration should also be given support facilities such as driveways, parking lots, and play areas. You are requested to forward any new work requests to Facility Services by December 14, 1998. DCE/apl/newwork3Cl- received JUL 1 9 2000 OFRCEOF desegregation MOffiTORIHG LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Campus Leadership Institute 2000 Sessions I \u0026amp; II, July 24-28, 2000 *List of Participants School: MITCHELL Name of Participant Address (include city/zip) Phone Number Position (Principal, Teacher, Parent, Broker, Business Partner, etc.) Mr. Darian Smith Ms. Alice Bradberry Ms. Patricia Brooks Ms. Kimberly Potter Ms. Veta Flanagan Mr. Rickey Jackson Ms. Connie Whitfield Ms. Sue Walls 3909 Cobb Little Rock, Ar 72204 2106 Raintree, Bryant Ar. 72022 1701 Westpark Dr. Apt 21 Little Rock, Ar 72204______________________________ 15 Lendl Loop Little Rock, 72207 6305 Longwood Rd., Little Rock, 72207 3434 S. Battery Little Rock, 72206 3023 S. Battery, Little Rock, 72206 3300 Foxcroft Little Rock, 72227 *Maximum number on team including principal - 8 565-3961 847-6018 663-2431 614-6656 614-6656 374-2130 372-0693 224-7266 Principal Teacher Counselor Teacher Teacher Parent Community Broker01/03/2001 16: 05 5016716207 HALL HIGH PAGE 02 HALL HIGH SCHOOL 6700 H STREET little ROCK, AR 72205 VERNON SMITH, JR. PRINCIPAL (501) 671-6200 PHONE (501) 671-6207 FAX January 3,2001 Dear Mrs. Powell, T an exceUent job with our Campus Leadership Team. I realize that this  was not part of you regular duties, and you acceded this task on such short notice. Your service is greatly appreciated by the Campus Leadership Team and I am truly thankful for your assistance. me. Sincerely, Vernon Smith, Jr.MITCHELL ACADEMY RECEIVED 2000-2001  JUL 19 ZWO tXREE'QF SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN SUBMITTED BY DARIAN L. SMITHIntervention: Great Expectations of Arkansas Actions L Staff will attend the Great Expectations Summer Institute Person(s) Responsible Principal Staff Timeline July 2000 Resources x-i\nJ)i^trict {Budget Title 1 I APIG/Other BudgeG Budget J Parent Workshop/Conferences for students having behavioral difficulties The Family Support Team will meet weekly to identify students that need additional assistance. Institute a Friday Club Day to involve students in extra-curricular activities Implement the Getting Along piece of Success For All Staff will have a quarterly retreat/celebration gathering Principal Counselor Family Support Team Success For All Facilitator Principal Counselor Principal SFA Facilitator Principal Program Committee On-going On-going Bi-monthly August 2000 On-going Great Expectations Handbook GE Offices Parenting videos Speakers Success For All materials Staff SFA materialsSchool: Mitchell Academy School Improvement Plan Year: 2000-2001 Priority 3: Improve the overall climate of the school. Supporting Data: School Climate Survey Goal(s): . Reduce the number of send homes and out-of-school suspensions to 5 /o. Build better staff cohesiveness. One-Year Benchmark(s): In 1998-99 Mitchell Academy had a send home and out-of-school suspension rate of 8.1%. We shall reduce our suspension rate to 5%.Intervention: Hiring a Curriculum Specialist 'Actions i Personas) r Responsible Timeline Resources Develop a series of parent workshops to teach parents how to assist their children with schoolwork. Curriculum Specialist Counselor Family Support Team September 2000 February 2001 April 2001 V I  i -  i IRC Staff Current Research Videos District: Budget 1 Title 1 vfiudgct 1.-----L. $500 Provide students opportunities to respond to open-ended questions. Classroom teachers August 2000 - June 2001 TERC materials IRC Staff ACTAAP released items APIG/Othcr Budget  Implement the use of a daily math problem. Design schoolwide incentives for improvement. Monitor and make adjustments in the plan as necessary to ensure improvement before the April Benchmark examinations Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation, make adjustments for following year. Classroom teacher September 2000 - May 2001 IRC Staff Workbook Campus Leadership Team Principal Cuniculum Specialist Classroom teachers August 2000 Ongoing $500 i Campus Leadership Team June 2001School: Mitchell Academy School Improvement Plan Year: 2000-2001 Priority 2: Improve Student Achievement in Mathematics 83%ofthTfourth grade students scored at the below basic level on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. 130/0 of the fourth grade students scored at the basic level on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. 7% of the fifth grade students scored at or above the 50th percentile on the SAT9. HXm of the students will perform at or above the proficient level on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. 90% of the students will perform at or above the proficient level in Mathematics each semester on the District adopted CRTs. 65% of the students will perform at or above the 50th percentile in Mathematics on the SAT9. One-Year Benchmark(s): 1999-2000 Mitchell Academy shall improve 10 points so that at least In 14% of the students (4% - 1998-99 performance + 10% - required improvement - 14%) at or having 7 students out of a possible 43 students score at ZX proficiXf1X1 on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. This Benchmark will be achieved by or above the proficient level. In 2000-2001 Mitchell Academy shall improve 7 points so that at least required improvement = 14%) at or above the 50th percentUe on the SAT9. of a possible 46 students score at or above the 50th percentile on the SAT9. 14% of the students (7%- 2000-2001 performance + 7% -\nThis Benchmark will be achieved by having 7 students outBenchmark examinations. Conduct summative evaluation of the plans implementation, make adjustments for following year. Campus Leadership Team June 2001Intervention: Success For All Actions\nAssign tutors to the bottom 30% of first grade students. f Person (s) y Responsible  Principal SFA facilitator SFA tutor I Timeline  V\". Resources  t District  \u0026lt; J Budget Budget ,\niAPIG/Ofher I Biidgef\u0026gt; September 2000 - June 2001 SFA placement exam data Provide tutoring for an additional 100 students. Principal SFA facilitator Classroom teachers October 2000 - May 2001 VIPs Young Lawyers Association Develop a series of parent workshops to teach parents how to assist their children with schoolwork. Counselor Family Support Team SFA facilitator September 2000 February 2000 April 2000 IRC Staff Videos SFA Assessment $500 Implement cooperative learning strategies to encourage a linkage between teacher-directed instruction and child-centered learning. _____ Principal SFA facilitator August 2000 - June 2001 SFA Assessment Early Learning Manual Self-Assessment Checklist Enhance the implementation of the Success For All reading program through staff development_______ Principal SFA facilitator Ongoing IRC Staff Title 1 Provide students opportunities to be assessed on a bi-weekly basis using open-ended questions. Design schoolwide incentives for improvement. Monitor and make adjustments in the plan as necessary to ensure improvement before the April Classroom teachers August 2000 - June 2001 ACTAAP released items Campus Leadership Team August 2000 $500 Principal Classroom teachers OngoingSchool: Mitchell Academy School Improvement Plan Year: 2000-2001 Priority 1: Improve Student Achievement in Reading Supporting Data: tUp hplnw basic level on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. 52% of the fourth grade students scored at the below basic levei on uiv gia 35% of the fourth grade students scored at the basic level on the grade 4 Benchnrark Exam. 4% of the fifth grade students scored at or above the 50th percentile on the SAT9. Goal(s): 100% of the students will perform at or above the proficient level on the grade 4 Benchmark Exam. the District adopted CRTs. 90% of the students a perform at or above the profieient\" level in reading each semester on 65% of the students will perform at or above the 50th percentile in reading on the SAT9. One-Year Benchmark(s): p., students fl3% . 1998 -99 performance + 9% - having 10 students out of a possible 43 students score at or above the proficient level. having 'rXX of a possible 46 students score at or above the 50th percentlie.Arkansas Democrat .^(fjazclk  MONDAY, JUNE 22, 1998 LR student achievement plan put forth \u0026gt; BY CYNTHIA HOWELL   ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE\n-The Little Rock School Board will vote this week on a proposal to establish teams of staff, parents and community members to help improve student achievement. -ff adopted by the board, the tvvo-paragraph policy will be the first step in an effort to make schools more independent. Besides the campus leadership teams, the idea includes:  Training for staff and parents.  Quality indicators to evaluate J schools. Board  Continued from Page 18 administrators, principals teachers later in the month.  Rewards to schools where students progress beyond minimum levels,  Corrective measures if a school doesnt meet expectations. The Campus Leadership Initiative is similar to site-based management or shared decision-making plans, that have become a relatively common element of school reform across the country. We have never really made such a drastic change like this, Assistant Superintendent Sadie Mitchell said last week. Its important that people fully understand what our goal is, and that is to increase student achievemenL Teachers and parents will have a greater role in the success or failure of a school as a result of the initiative, Mitchell said. At the same time, central office administrators and principals will have to adjust to changes in their roles in tlie operation of a school. The School Board will vote for the first time on the formation of the leadership teams at its meeting 6 p.in. Thursday. [The teams] will assist in the development and evaluation of campus goals and objectives through planning, budgeting, curriculum development, staff development and staffing needs. the proposed policy says. Tlmough consensus-based decisions, the campus teams will support the districts commitment to the sustained improvement of schools. If the policy is approved on its first reading, the board would likely vote on the proposal a second time in July, which would make the policy official and enable the district to begin training about 200 See BOARD,Page 38 and The summer training will focus on team building, how to reach consensus. how to assess a schools needs and an introductory session on a system for efficient and effective operations. Each school should have a campus leadership team in place by Nov. 1, according to the proposed leadership initiative developed by administrators and teachers during the past several months. the recommendations of their teams. \"If they dont, what we will get is ineffective teams whose members wont want to work together and will consider this just anotlier case where the top is going to do what they want anyway, Mitchell said. That is not what we want. Its OK for parents and the community to be involved in schools, she added. A lot of times they can see the quality we are aspiring for much better than we can. Each team, which will meet at least four times a year. It will focus on the schools improvement plan. revising it if necessary and deciding how to accomplish its objectives, Each school will be evaluated based on indicators that include stu- dent achievement. attendance. dropouts. teacher attendance, customer sendee and school climate. Each school will be assigned points for progress made in each categoiy and rewarded if progress is sufficient. The School Board is being asked to include $225,000 in the 1998-99 budget for the incentive rewards. Mitchell said. The point system will be developed with the help of outside consultants, she added. Still to be decided is what will happen to schools that dont make acceptable progress. Mitchell said. The Campus Leadership Initia- Mitchell said. The work of the team  five, or site-based decision making, will likely include deciding what was first envisioned for Little Rock staff training and other resources in 1995 by a committee that helped are needed, setting time lines to develop the districts five-year reach goals and even obtaining strategic plan for operation, waivers from district and state regu- That strategic plan and the eflations if those regulations hinder forts to design a site-based manage- c u._.---1- ment plan were set aside for more For example, Mitchell said, a than a year because of a change in team might decide it w'ould be best superintendents and a concentra- to reduce the number of faculty po- tion on revising the school districts sitions by one or two and use sav- desegregation plan. , ings to purchase materials for an af- dents and noncertified staff members ter-school program for students The initiative, which is much broader and more detailed than the proposed policy to be considered this week, will be submitted for school board approval later this year. Five to 10 certified teachers will ef- be elMted by the school staff to serve the school from reaching its goals, on the leadership team at each ~ ............................. school The principal, who will be the team chairman, will appoint two parents, a business representative and a community member to the team. Stu- Mitchell said work resumed on also may become team members, ei- ther by election or appointment One Or a team may e.xpress concerns to a principal about the job performance central office administrator will of a staff member, ICtchell said, serve on the team to provide training the site-based management plan earlier this year with encouragement fi-om Superintendent Les Carand to serve as the schools liaison to the administration. Team members will serve two-year terms. The team will actually be an ad- Those kinds of things will come up, and they will be discussed.\" Mitchell said. Ultimately, it will be nine, who was out of his office this week and couldnt be reached for comment on the proposed policy. ------- Virtually eveiy principal and up to the principal to carry through teacher representatives from each , . , , ,\nWith the teacher, but I think there school assisted with the develop- visoty body to the school pnncipal. will be a little more fire power be- ment of the leadership initiative but Mitchell said the principals will hind the principal with a team and plans for staff and parent train- be strongly encouraged to consider pushing him on. ing, Mitchell saidArkansas Democrat W(?\u0026gt;azcllc  THURSDAY, JULY 29. 1999 LR school teams meet to set achievement goals Parents, teachers and staff gang up on problems BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS DrMCXTRAT-CAZErni schools went through the same exercises. Charged with improving student achievement at their schools, XU uciwccil Uia-teacher and parent members of cussions on aligning curriculum the Little Rock School Districts - The atmosphere Wednesday was lightliearted. In between disand student tests and on coping with different personality types, -- --------------------- educators and community mem-getner to set and meet school bers snacked on salsa, chips and goals.---------------------------------------------watermelon. new campus leadership teams are learning this week how to work to- On Wednesday, more than 200 They watched skits performed district employees, community by administrators and vied for members and parents who form door prizes of School District cof-the core of their school teams fee mugs and restaurant gift cer-gathered at the Greater Second tificates. They watched skits performed B a*p1t isrt Churc--h-- i-n-- -S-o--u-t-h--w---eBsty L Fitrtlieday, each school team Kock for the session that wont should have the skills and materi-conclude until Friday afternoon, als necessary to train the rest of Earlier this week, another group their teams and the school staff of 180 from district elementary See GOALS, Page 2B 3. Zl i\n. Arkansas Damocral-Gazelle/STEPHEN B. THORNTON Hall High ScIimI A^istant Principal Judy Zink (left) and tteeaacchheerrss aanrxdl pprriinncciippaallss VWVeeddnneessddaayy aafftteerrnnoooonn iinn LLiilllliiee RRoocckk,. leacher Joan Best (right) place a paper collage of hands in During an opening exercise, team members wrote personal the center of their table during a Iraining session for parents, teaching attributes and then combined them symbolically. Goals.  Continued Irom Page IB members who arent here, said Sadie Mitchell, associate superintendent for school services. \"And, each team will have established at least one example of a goal for tlieir school. Tliey will have identified the tasks that would go along with the goal, the staff members who are responsible for tlie tasks and they will have set time Jines for the (asks, and a budget.\" Mitchell cited team work done by Dodd Elementary School earlier this week as an example of the kinds of work all the teams will do. The Dodd team agreed that one of its goals for the year should focus on improving reading skills among students. To do tliat, the number of employees who have been trained in the states literacy program for elementary students should be increased by five. Victor Anderson, the districts associate superintendent for operations, told tlie crowd that in a school year in which middle schools are being established to replace junior highs and ninth-graders arc moving into the high schools, it will be the new campus leadership teams that will bring about the greatest degree of change in the day-to-day operations of the schools. The campus leadership plan is the districts effort to decentralize school management. The teams were formed in Noventber 1998 either through princi* pal appointment or through election. The teams advise the scliool principal on issues such as student achievement, curriculum, budgeting, use of staff and staff training. Each school will be responsible for meeting state and district accountability slandaixls that focus on student achievement, graduation rales and attendance, among /r is II teamwork issue. You can organize for success.   Les Camiiic other indicators. Schools that make progress toward the goals will be rewarded, while those that dont face state sanctions. The campus teams range in size from about 10 to as many as 22 at Central High, the districts largest school. The teams have met periodically since their formation but the Iraining sessions (his week are intended to help them focus on the issues that are must important for improving student achievement. Bonnie Ixcsiic, associate superintendent for instruction, told the group Wednesday that \"if you teach the kids the tested curriculum, they will do better. Leslie said it is important that the teams set and strive for goals that mailer. She warned that campus leadership teams have not always been successful, according to research, because some teams never gel beyond discussing park-teaching attributes and then combined them symbolically. ing problems or the color of paint to be used in tlie teacher's lounge. The kids' math scores wont improve that way,\" she said. Instead, the focus must be on curriculum. teacher training, instructional strategics and assessing student achievement, she said. Les Gamine, the district's superintendent, also addressed the (cams Wednesday, describing for them many of the districts accomplishments in 1998-99. Those included an increase in the number of students successfully completing upper-level math courses, a dramatic reduction in the number of students who wore expelled or suspended, a decline in the student drop-out rale, an increase in participation in athletics, and increases in parent and community involvement in the schools as re-flccted in volunteer hours. The state and district accountability standards will require further hnprovemcnls, he said. \"Youve got to plan for that gi'owlh.\" Gamine .said. It is eveiy- Ixxlys re.sjK)n.sibility. It is a teamwork issue. You can organize for success. Ive already shown you tliat the ball is rolling in your favor.\" This past year was a fabulous year and all the indicators for this coming year, which starts Aug. 24, point to an absolutely phenomenal year, he said. Everything is working for us if we can only grab it,\" he said. \"We've waited a long time in this district to rise back up on top. The job is a big one but weve got it going our way.\"\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   \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_968","title":"Report: ''School Monitoring Report,'' North Little Rock School District","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":null,"dc_date":["1998/1999"],"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--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School enrollment","School facilities","School principals","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''School Monitoring Report,'' North Little Rock School District"],"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/968"],"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  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\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   \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_768","title":"School lunch program","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":null,"dc_date":["1998/2005"],"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","Education--Arkansas","School management and organization","Student assistance programs","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["School lunch program"],"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/768"],"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  \n\n07/31/1998 11:17 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 01/03 COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 324-2020  FAX (501) 324-2023 www.lrsd.kl2.ar.us District Issues Information for Free and Reduced Price Meals FOR RELEASE AUGUST 1,1998 For more information: Zeomee Herts, 324-2020 The Little Rock School District today announces its policy for providing free and reduced price meals for children served under the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program. Each school and/or the central office has acopy of the policy, which may be reviewed by any interested party. The household size and income criteria identified below will be used to determine eligibility for free and reduced price benefits. Children from households whose income is at or below the levels shown are eligible for free or reduced price meals. Children who are members of food stamp households are automatically eligible for free meals. Foster children who are the legal responsibility of a welfare agency or court may also be eligible for benefits regardless of the income of the household with whom they reside. Eligibility for the foster child is based on the childs income. FREE MEALS REDUCED PRICE MEALS Household Size Annual 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10,465 14,105 17,745 21385 25,025 28,665 32305 35545 Monthly Weekly Household Size Annual ...873 1,176 1,479 1,783 2,086 2389 2,693 2,996 2(K 272 342 412 482 552 622 692 1, 2, 3. 4. 5, 6 7 8 14,893 20,073 25353 30,433 35,613 40,793 45,973 51,153 Monthly Weekly 1342 1,673 2,105 2,537 2,968 3,400 3,832 4363 287 387 486 586 685 785 885 984 For each additional household member add\nFor each additional household member add: +3,640 +304 +70 +5,180 +432 +100 Households that receive food stamps do not have to complete a school lunch or breakfast application. School officials will determine eligibility for free meals based on documentation obtained directly from the (more)07/31/1998 11:17 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 02/03 LRSD Free/Reduced Price Meals July 31,1998 Page 2 of 3 food stamp office that a child is a member of a household currently receiving food stamps. School officials will notify households of their eligibility and that the households must notify die school when tliey no longer receive food stamps Households who are notified of their eligibility but who do not want their children to receive free meals must contact the school. Food stamp households should complete an application if they are not notified oftheir eligibility by September 3,1998. AppHcation fonns are being distributed by the school with a letter informing households of the availability of free and reduced price meals for their children. Applications are also available at the principal s office in each school. To apply for free or reduced price meals, households must fill out the application and return it to the school. Applications may be submitted at any time during the school year. The information households provide on the application will be used for the purpose of determining eligibility and verification of data. Applications may be verified at any time during the school year by school officials. For school officials to determine eligibility for free and reduced price benefits, households receiving food stamps should only list their childs name and food stamp case number, and an adult household member must sign the application. Households who do not list a food stamp case number must list the names of all household members, the amount and source of the income received by each household member, and the social security number of the adult household member who signs the application. If the adult household member does not have a social security number, the adult household member must indicate that a social security number is not available. The application must be signed by an adult household member. Under the provisions of the free and reduced price policy, the Director of Child Nutrition and the principal of each school will review applications and determine eligibility. Parents or guardians dissatisfied with the ruling of the official may wish to discuss the decision with the determining official on an informal basis. Parents wishing to make a formal appeal for a hearing on the decision may make a request either orally or in writing to: Mrs. Jo Evelyn Elston, Director of Pupil Services Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 (501)324-2162 Households that list a food stamp case number must report when the household no longer receives these benefits. Other households approved for benefits based on income information must report (more)07/31/1998 11:17 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 03/03 LRSD Free/Reduced Price Meals July 31,1998 Page 3 of 3 increases in household income of over $50.00 per month or $600 per year or decreases in household size. Also, if a household member becomes unemployed or if the household size increases, the household should contact the school, Such changes may make the children of the household eligible for benefits if the households income falls at or below the levels shown. In the operation of the child feeding programs, no child will be discriminated against because of race, color, sex, national origin, age or disability. If you believe you have been discriminated against, write immediately to the Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250.07/29/1999 13:30 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 01/03 COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 324-2020  FAX (501) 324-2023 www.Irsd.kl2.ar.us District Issues Information for Free and Reduced Price Meals FOR RELEASE AUGUST 1,1999 For more information: Zeomee Herts, 324-2020 The Little Rock School District today announces its policy for providing free and reduced price meals for children served under the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program. Each school and/or the central office has acopy of the policy, which may be reviewed by any interested party. The household size and income criteria identified below will be used to determine eligibility for free and reduced price benefits. Children from households whose income is at or below the levels shown are eligible for free or reduced price meals. Children who are members of food stamp households are automatically eligible for free meals. Foster children who are the legal responsibility of a wetfrre agency or court may also be eligible for benefits regardless of the income of the household with whom they reside. Eligibility for the foster child is based on the childs income. FREE MEALS REDUCED PRICE MEALS Household Size Annua] 1 2 3 45 6 8 10,712 14378 18,044 21,710 25376 29,042 32,708 36374 Monthly Weekly Household Size Annual ...893 1,199 13(M 1,810 2,115 2,421 2,726 3,032 206 277 347 418 488 559 629 700 1. 2. 34 5. 6. 7 8. 15344 20,461 25,678 30395 36,112 41329 46346 51,763 Monthly Weddy 1371 1,706 2,140 2375 3,010 3,445 3,879 4314 294 394 494 595 695 795 896 996 For each additional household member add: For each additional household member add: +3,666 +306.... ... +71 +5^17 M35., +101 Households that receive food stamps do not have to complete a school lunch or breakfest application. School officials will determine eligibility for free meals based on documentation obtained directly from the (mce) 07/29/1999 13:30 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 02/03 LRSD Free/Reduced Price Meals July 30,1999 Page 2 of 3 food stamp oflBcelhat a child is a member of a household currently receiving food stands. School officials will notify households of their eligibility and that the households must notify the school when they no longer receive food stamps. Households who are notified of fiieir eligibility but who do not want their children to receive free meals must contact the school. Food stamp households should complete an application if they are not notifiedoftheir eligibility by Sqjtcmber 3,1999. Af^cahon fims are being distributed by the school with a letter infbnning households ofdie availability office and reduced price meals for their children. Applications are also available at the principals office in each school. To apply for free or reduced price meals, households must fill out the ^rplication and return it to the school. Applications may be submitted at any time during the school year. The information households provide on die application will be used for the purpose of determining eli^bili^ and verification of data. Applications may be verified at any time during the school year by school officials. For school officials to determine eligibility for free and reduced price benefits, households receiving food stamps should only list their childs name and food stamp case number, and an adult household member must sign the application. Households who do not list a food stamp case number must list the names of all household members, the amount and source of the income received by each household member, and the social security number of the adult household member who signs the application. If the adult household member does not have a social security number, the adult household member must indicate that a social security number is not available. The application must be signed by an adult household member. Under the provisions of the free and reduced price policy, the Director of Child Nutrition and the principal of each school will review applications and determine eligibility. Parents or guardians dissatisfied with the ruling of the official may wish to discuss foe decision with foe determining official on an informal basis. Parents wishing to make a formal appeal for a hearing on the decision may make a request either orally or in writing to: Mrs. Jo Evelyn Elston, Director of Pupil Services Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 (501)324-2162 Households that list a food stamp case number must report when the household no longer receives these benefits. Other households approved for benefits based on income information must report (more)07/29/1999 13:30 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 03/03 LRSD Free/Reduced Price Meals July 30,1999 Page 3 of 3 increases in household income of over $50,00 per month or $600 per year or decreases in household size. Also, if a household member becomes unemployed or if the household size increases, the household should contact the school. Such chaises may make the children of the household eligible for benefits if the households income falls at or below the levels shown. In the operation of the child feeding programs, no child will be discriminated against because of race, color, sex, national origin, age or disability. If you believe you have been discriminated against, write immediately to the Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250.08/01/2001 11:34 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 01/03 COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT 810 We,st Markham Street  Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 324-2020  FAX (501) 324-2023 www.lrsd.kl2-ar.us District Issues Information for Free and Reduced Price Meals FOR RELEASE AUGUST 1, 2001 For more information: Suellen Vann, 324-2020 The Little Rock School Di strict today announces its poUcy for providing fiee and reduced price meals for children served under the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program. Each school and/or the central office has a copy of the policy, which may be reviewed by any interested party- The household size and income criteria identified below will be used to determine eligibility for free and reduced price benefits. Children from households whose income is at or below the levels shown are eligible for free or reduced price meals. Children who are members of food stamp households are automatically eligible for free meals. Foster children who are the legal responsibility of a welfare agency or court may also be eligible for benefits regardless of the income of the household with whom they reside. Eligibility for the foster child is based on the childs income. FREE MEALS REDUCED PRICE MEALS Household Size Annual 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6, 7 8 11,167 ,. 15,093 ,. 19,019 , 22545, 26,871 , 30,797. 34,723. 38,649 . Monthly Weekly Household Size Annual .. 931. 1558. 1585 1,913 2540 2567 2,894 3521 215 291 366 442 517 593 668 744 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 678 15,892. 21,479, 27,066. 32,653 38240 43,827 .49,414 ,55,001 Monthly Weekly 1325 1,790. 2256 2.722 3.187 3653 4.118 4584 .306 ..414 ., 521 .,628 .,736 ..843 ..951 1,058 For each additional household member add\n+3526 +328 +76 For each additional household member add\n+5587 +466 +108 Households that receive food stamps do not have to complete a school lunch or breakfast application. School officials will determine eligibility for free meals based on documentation obtained directly from the (more) 08/01/2001 11:34 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PAGE 02/03 LRSD Free/Reduced Price Meals August 1, 2001 Page 2 of 3 food stamp office that a child is a member of a household currently recei ving food stamps. School officials will notify households of thcircli gibili ty and that the households must notify the school when they no longer receive food stamps. Households who are notified of their eligibility but who do not want their children to receive free meals must contact the school. Food stamp households should complete an application if they are not notified of their eligibility by September 4,2001. Application forms are being distributed by the school with a letter informing households of the availability of free and reduced price meals for their children. Applications are also available at the principals office in each school. To apply for free or reduced price meals, households must fill out the application and return it to the school. Applications may be submitted at any time during the school year. The information households provide on the application wi 11 be used for the purpose of determining eligibility and verification of data. Applications may be verified at any rime during the .school year by school officials. For school officials to determine eligibility for free and reduced price benefits, households receiving food stamps should only list their childs name and food stamp case number, and an adult household member must sign the application. Households who do not list a food stamp case number must list the names of all household members, the amount and source of the income received by each household member, and the social security number of the adult household member who signs the application. If the adult household member does not have a social security number, the adult household member must indicate that a social security number is not available. The application must be signed by an adult household member. Under the provisions of the free and reduced price policy, the Director of Child Nutrition and the principal of each school will review applications and determine eligibility. Parents or guardians dissatisfied with the ruling of the official may wish to discuss the decision with the determining official on an informal basis. Parents wishing to make a formal appeal for a hearing on the decision may make a request either orally or in writing to: Mrs. Jo Evelyn Elston, Director of Pupil Services Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 (501)324-2162 Households that list a food stamp case number must report when the household no longer receives these benefits. Other households approved for benefits based on income information must report increases in household income of over $50.00 per month or $600.00 per year or decreases in (more)08/01/2001 11:34 501-324-2023 LRSD COMMUNICATIONS PACE 03/03 LRSD Free/Reduced Price Meals August 1,2001 Page 3 of 3 household size. Also, if a household member becomes unemployed or if ihe household size increases, the household should contact the school. Such changes may make the children of the household eligible for benefits if the households income falls at or below the levels shown. \"In accordance with Federal law and U.S- Department of Argriculture policy, this institution is prohibited from discriminating on rhe basis of race, color, national orgin, .tex, age, or disability. To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington D.C. 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.\" JI II /IFree/Reduced Lunch Study 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 Enrollment Total F/R % of Enroll '' Black Enroll Black F/R H % of BlackE Non-B Enroll Non-B F/R # % of Non-B 25,231 12,013 48% 16,380 10,172 62% 8,851 1,841 21% \u0026lt;\u0026lt; 24,922 12,352 - 50% 16,564 10,609 64% 8,358 1,743 \u0026gt; 21% ' 24,986 12,644 51% 16,727 10,882 65% 8,259 1,762 - ' 21% 24,886 12,614 51% 16,664 10,825 65% 8,222 1,789 22% 25,070 13,335 53% 16,933 11,507 68% 8.137 1,828 22% 25,190 13,612 54%' 17,097 11,692 68% ,\u0026gt; 8,093 1,920 24%/ 25,525 13,789 - ' 54%y 17,417 11,864 . 68% X 8,108 1,925 \u0026gt; 24% Notes: Row 1 includes tor each school year the total October 1 enrollment. Row 2 includes the total number of students ehgible for free/reduced lunch. Row 3 includes the number of eligible free/reduced lunch students (row 2) divided by the total enrollment (row 1)the percent of the total enrollment that were eligible for the free/reduced lunch program bv rear. Row 4 includes the total number of black students enrolled for each school year, as of October 1. Row 5 includes the number of black students eligible for the free/reduced lunch program for each year. Row 6 includes the number of black students eligible for the free/reduced lunch program (row 3) divided by the total black enrollment (row 4)the percent of the total black enrollment who were eligible for the free/reduced lunch program for each year. Row 7 includes the total number of non-black students enrolled for each school vear. Row 8 includes the number of non-black students who were eligible for the free/reduced lunch program for each year. Row 9 includes the number of non-black students eligible for the free/reduced lunch program (row 8) divided by tlie total black enrollment for each year (row 7)the percent of the total enrollment of non-black students who were eligible for the free/reduced lunch program for each year. Break-out of Non-Blacks 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 White Hispanic Amer. Ind. Asian Other Total Non-B 1513 125 30 47 126 1841 1413 159 20 70 81 1743 1341 237 44 66 74 1762 1254 I 1258 301 43 66 125 1789 362 22 78 108 1828 1213 437 30 94 146 1920 1109 514 22 106 174 1925April 2 6. 2 0 0 2 i\nLR school lunches to rise by 25 cents ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE The price of all meals served to students and adults in the Little Rock School District will increase 25 cents starting next August. The Little Rock School Board approved the new pricing plan Thursday. Elementary school lunches for students will increase for the first time in four years, from $L25 to $1.50. Lunches in ^e middle and high schools will go from $1.50 to $1.75 for students. All adult lunches will go from $2 to $2.25. i-'i--'-X\nJune 24, 2 0 0 5 LR School Board approves increase for student meals ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE The price of a school lunch in the Little Rock School District will increase by 50 cents this coming school year, and breakfast prices will increase by 25 cents. The Little Rock School Board approved the increases Thursday on the recommendation of district staff who cited costs  including a 10 percent increase in labor costs this past year  as the reason for the price change. The districts Child Nutrition Department is self -supporting. The last increase in meal prices occurred in the 2002-03 school year. Student lunches will increase to $2 per student at the elementary schools in the 2005- 06 school year and $2.25 at the middle and high schools. Adult lunches will be $2.75. Breakfasts served to both elementary and secondary school students will be $1, and the cost to adults will be $L25. The price increases are expected to generate an additional $340,000 for the school district For the 2004-2005 school year, the district worked with a budget of about $277 million. The School Board for the Pulaski County Special School District earlier this month similarly approved a price increase for school lunches for the 2005- 506 school year from 1.50 to $L75 for students and from $2.50 to $2.75 for adults. Mike Harvey, director of student nutrition in that district, cited increases in the cost of milk and other foods, particularly beef, as well as increased fuel costs as reasons for the price changes. Harvey also cited Act 1220 of 2003, the student nutrition and physical activity act, that resulted in restrictions to the a la carte sales in the cafeterias, costing the district about $100,000. The county district last raised lunch prices in 1998-99. The new increase is expected to generate $250,000 in new income.\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   \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_1483","title":"\"Strategic Plan (1998 Update), District Information,'' Little Rock School District","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":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1998"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Education--Standards","Education--Finance","Education--Curricula","School enrollment","School management and organization","School improvement programs","School integration","Parents","Student activities","Student assistance programs","Educational innovations"],"dcterms_title":["\"Strategic Plan (1998 Update), District Information,'' Little Rock School District"],"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/1483"],"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":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["69 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_721","title":"SWAT visits","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":null,"dc_date":["1998/1999"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring","School facilities"],"dcterms_title":["SWAT visits"],"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/721"],"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  \n\nODM 1998 SWAT VISIT SCHEDULE SWAT VISIT TEAMS Team A - Margie and Gene Team B - Melissa and Horace North Little Rock School District Friday, August 21, 1998 Team A Team B 9:00 - 10:30 11:00-12:30 1:30-3:30 Amboy Elementary Lakewood Middle NLR High, East Campus Boone Park Elementary Lakewood Middle NLR High, East Campus Little Rock School District Tuesday - Thursday, August 25, 26, 27, 1998 Team A Team B Tuesday, Aug. 25 9:00-10:30 11:00- 12:30 1:30-3:00 Booker Elementary Wakefield Elementary Hall High Washington Elementary Rightsell Elementary Hall High Wednesday, Aug. 26 9:00 - 10:30 11:00- 12:30 Forest Heights Jr. Bale Elementary Mabelvale Jr. Otter Creek Elementary Pulaski County Special School District Tuesday - Thursday, September 1, 2,3,1998 Team A Team B Tuesday, Sept. 1 9:00-10:30 11:00- 12:30 Mills High Fuller Jr. Mills High Bates Elementary Wednesday, Sept. 2 9:00-10:30 11:00- 12:30 1:30-3:00 Clinton Elementary Harris Elementary Jacksonville Elementary Robinson Jr. Crystal Hill Elementary Oakbrook ElementarySWAT Revisit Schedule Melissa Wednesday, December 2 Bale Hall Robinson Jr. Thursday, December 3 Cloverdale El. Wakefield Bates Mills I Friday, December 4 Boone Park Lakewood Jr. Monday, December 7 Jacksonville El. OakbrookeMemo To: From: Staff Polly Subject: LRSD Meeting Date: August 19, 1998 The LRSD Tea Party is set for 9:30 a m. on Wednesday, September 2. Dr. Gamine, Dr. Bonnie Lesley, and Dr. Katherine Lease will be the ones from LRSD that attend. We have blocked a two- hour timeframe for this meeting. When Ann returns to work, we will discuss and finalize the agenda and plan the details of the meeting. The SWAT visits that were scheduled on September 2 will be done on Monday, August 31. Also, remember that the SWAT visits scheduled for Friday, August 21, have been rescheduled to Monday, August 24..K Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham. Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 CP^ September 21, 1998 Dr. Les Carnine, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Les: As I explained when we met on August 31, each fall as the school year gets underway, ODM monitors briefly and informally visit a few schools in all three districts. The observations we make at that time are in the same vein as those of parents, students, and staff as they enter the building to start the new year. That's why we pay attention to the aspects of a school that are most likely to initially impress those entering it, such as the condition of the grounds, building upkeep and cleanliness, displays and furnishings, student and staff conduct, and so forth. This year we dropped in on ten LRSD schools during the first full week of classes\nBale, Booker, Cloverdale, Otter Creek, Rightsell, Wakefield, and Washington Elementaries\nForest Heights and Mabelvale Junior Highs\nand Hall High School. A list of our observations about each school is attached. As I told you last month, overall we were favorably impressed with the condition of the buildings and the many fine preparations for the opening of school that we saw. We intend for these comments to give you, your administrators, and the principals of these buildings the benefit of our impressions. Therefore, as has been our custom, we will not publish or file these observations at this time, although we might eventually factor them into some aspect of a report. I hope the enclosed information is helpful. Please dont hesitate to call if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely yours, S. Brown Enc. cc: Sadie Mitchell Building principalsBale Elementary School We were pleased to note that: An attractive circle drive, decorated with shrubs and trees, led to the entryway. The playground offered shaded areas with appropriate climbing equipment and a basketball court. Despite long years of use, the corridors glistened from floor to ceiling. The small entryway and foyer were warmly and attractively furnished with benches, murals, student photographs, and decorative plants. A large display featuring color photographs of every student dominated one wall in the main area. Almost every wall in the corridors had a freshly painted mural with a multicultural or child- oriented theme. A large aquarium in the central corridor was very interesting. Cafeteria furnishings were clean and in good repair. Figurines added a warm touch to the shelf above the cafeteria serving line. A Welcome Students banner and other colorful banners hung from the metal rafters of the cafeteria, brightening the room considerably. Ceiling fans in the cafeteria helped air flow on the extremely hot day. Wet mats were in place in the kitchen area. The stage floor was clean and waxed. A curtain made from bed sheets and decorated with stars helped hide the cluttered stage. The media center was clean and inviting. The girls restroom was handicapped accessible and free of graffiti. The one boys restroom was well supplied and appeared to be clean, although smelly. The urinals and commodes were functional. We also noted some areas needing attention:  Four portable buildings housed music, speech, gifted and talented. Title I, and two small sixth grade classes.  Much of the playground was barren, rocky, and in need of sod.  The pavement for the basketball court was old and cracked.  The air quality in the corridors was stultifying.  Maneuverability in the kitchen was limited because of the small facility.  The kitchen restroom had no ventilation of any kind.  Serious tile damage in the kitchen area posed a safety hazard.  The cafeteria was cluttered with several boxes, pieces of furniture, and a freezer that lined the rooms walls.  Furniture and boxes containing clothes and other miscellaneous items were strewn about the stage.  The media center was far too small to effectively house a media program, but the media specialist was doing the best possible under the circumstances.  The stationary shelves in the media center allowed little opportunity for developing reading centers or interesting displays. The materials collection was packed into the shelving, leaving little room to develop the collection.  Faucets in a girls restroom were operational, but water pressure was poor.  In the girls restroom, one stall door was broken and all stalls lacked interior locks.  Some litter was scattered on the floor in the girls restroom, and the facility lacked paper towels.  Some students reported roaches in the girls restroom.  The boys restroom had a foul odor.Booker Magnet School We were pleased to note that:  The U.S. flag was properly displayed on the flagpole at the entrance to the school.  The schools mission statement was prominently displayed in several locations throughout the building.  The interior hallways and the office were filled with bright, colorful displays that enhanced the appearance of the school and announced Bookers Arts theme to any and all visitors. The hall walls were enlivened by a series of colorful murals painted by the schools art specialist. Artwork was also present in an area overlooking the gymnasium.  Evidence of the schools art theme was present throughout the building: a display near the front entrance celebrated the Artist of the Week, Vincent Van Gogh\nthe hallways were adorned with student artwork\nand each pod of classrooms and the individual hallways were named after famous artists and performers.  School rules (e g., pertaining to the cafeteria or playground) were posted and expressed as expectations rather than rules.  Floors throughout the building were clean and shiny.  Lockers had been painted an attractive, neutral color and were in good condition.  Most of the fountains throughout the building were clean and operating with adequate pressure.  The cafeteria, which had fully operating interior lighting and large banks of windows, was light and airy.  The cafeteria floors, tables, and seating were clean and in good condition.  The kitchen had adequate work space.  Two kitchen fire extinguishers were easily accessible in the event of an emergency.  The media center was large and attractive.  The floors in the boys restrooms were in good condition and clean. The basins, toilets, and urinals were functioning normally.  The boys restrooms were supplied with toilet paper and soap. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The exterior of the school had an unkempt appearance\na planter in front of the flagpole was weed-choked and unsightly\nthe schools entry was devoid of plantings that could enhance the appearance of the building.  The interior courtyards were unsightly: while the courtyard grass had been mowed, little had been done to beautify the area\npiles of grass clippings, broken limbs, and some discarded items filled the courtyards.  The girls restroom near the cafeteria was a mess: rolls of toilet paper were strewn on the floor\nthe entry area was very dark and cluttered with stored cleaning supplies and equipment. Further, the room did not have a handicapped accessible stall or soap dispensers, although a single bar of soap lay on a small shelf below one of the mirrors.  The boys restrooms were dimly lit, smelled excessively of urine, and lacked paper towels.Cloverdale Elementary School We were pleased to note that:  The campus was very attractive and the lawns had been mowed recently.  Healthy mature trees and shrubs accented the entry courtyard.  The breezeways connecting the various sections of the school were very clean.  The courtyard was neatly mowed and the shrubbery trimmed.  A covered sidewalk provided access from the main building to the schools one portable classroom.  The school was almost litter free.  The office, which was very neat and uncluttered, had attractive, color-coordinated bulletin boards that brightened the area.  Children were very orderly as they walked to the cafeteria for lunch.  The cafeteria was quite clean, considering that we visited mid-way through the lunch period.  Cafeteria floors were clean and shiny.  Attractive displays and bulletin boards decorated the media center.  The media center carpeting was clean and in good condition.  The girls restroom was clean and supplied with paper products.  The boys restroom was supplied with both toilet paper and paper towels, and the floor was clean and in good repair.  Posted in the boys restroom were signed Bathroom Pledges by which the signatories committed to practice proper restroom behavior and encourage others to do likewise. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flag was flying from the pole in front of the school.  The exterior trim paint was quite worn in some areas.  Much of the paint on metal surfaces (such as hand rails) had worn off.  The play area for four-year-olds was small and had only one climbing structure.  A section of bleachers, which faces the junior high practice field, sat on the main playground, creating a potentially dangerous area for the younger children who are naturally attracted to climbing.  Many classroom windows were dirty or covered with tape residue.  We noted a small amount of litter near the cafeteria.  Outside the main office, a large stack of boxed supplies detracted from the otherwise neat appearance of the entry.  The cafeteria was colorless and lacked any decoration, resulting in a banen, institutional look.  The school apparently did not allow children to converse during their lunch time as adults constantly chided children for talking. While none of the reprimanded children were being overly loud, nearly all the adults spoke loudly to the children. One lunchroom supervisor was especially harsh with the preschool class by instructing them to put your head down and close your mouth.  Some of the ceiling tiles in the media center showed signs of water damage.  The globes on display in the media center were out of date.Otter Creek Elementary School We were pleased to note that: The campus was mowed and litter free. Floors throughout the building were clean and shiny. While little student work was on display, the halls featured a variety of attractive teacher-made bulletin boards. The cafeteria was clean and spacious, and all tables and seating were spotless and in good repair. The large media center was neat, clean, attractive, and appeared ready for student use. An attractive bulletin board in the media center illustrated the awards children could earn with points awarded for their good behavior. The furnishings and carpet in the media center were in good condition. The girls restroom in the main hall was clean and odor free. In the boys restroom, all plumbing was functioning normally, and the common basin area had paper towels. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flag was flying.  A downspout near the main entry was causing a great deal of erosion.  Some classrooms lacked identifying room numbers.  Several areas of the hall ceilings were water stained and warped.  A grouping of large wooden cabinets, which appeared to be used to store materials for the afterschool CARE program, cluttered the hall near the cafeteria.  The girls restroom in the main hall lacked soap and had some floor tiles that were damaged or missing.f Rightsell Elementary Incentive School fVe were pleased to note that:  The exterior of the school was very attractive\nthe buildings dark red trim was in excellent condition.  The campus was neat and litter free.  The interior halls were bright and welcoming.  A striking mural enhanced a wall near the office, and colorful displays abounded.  The interior paint was in good condition, and the carpets were clean.  The schools Parent Center was fully furnished and in use during our visit.  The cafeteria floors were waxed, clean, and shiny, and the tables and seats were clean and in good condition.  The cafeteria and other areas of the building were decorated with inspirational posters and banners (such as Believe, Achieve, Succeed)  The media center was neat, clean, well stocked, and attractively appointed.  The boys restrooms contained paper towels and toilet paper, and all fixtures were functioning. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flag was flying from the flagpole.  The play area assigned to four-year-olds was very small and featured only one piece of climbing equipment.  An odor, which seemed to emanate from the workroom, caused the basement area to smell very foul.  The basement area had a severe leak that left the carpet soggy and malodorous.  The classroom adjoining the basement area had wet spots along the adjoining wall.  While fully supplied, the girls restroom in the basement had an unpleasant odor (as did the entire basement).  Some baseboards in the girls restroom were damaged or missing.  The linoleum flooring was ripped in the boys restroom on the second floor.Wakefield Elementary School We were pleased to note that: The playground offered good equipment for younger children and lots of shade trees. Several picnic tables had been recently added to a pleasant shaded area. The floors were clean and highly polished. A large display board, featuring color photographs of each class, dominated the entryway. The 4-6 building had several colorful wall murals. Large, brightly colored paper banners, identifying rooms and specialty areas, hung along the corridors. The cafeteria was clean and the furnishings were in good repair. Ceiling fans improved air circulation in the cafeteria. A beautiful, wood-beamed ceiling accentuated by decorative dropped lighting gave the cafeteria a very homey appearance. Cafeteria workers set the tables with eating utensils for the kindergarten students. The girls restrooms had adequate supplies of paper products, and all the stall doors had locks. The boys restrooms were supplied with paper products and soap, and the floors and tile work were clean. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The windows, which form much of the exterior walls, have aged shabbily.  The asphalt covering one of the two basketball courts was broken and dangerous.  A seriously eroded area between two buildings created an eyesore and a hazard for children.  The concrete walk in front of the 4-6 building was badly damaged.  Ventilation in the corridors was nonexistent.  Two double fountains were inoperable, one because it lacked knobs and the other because water pressure was too poor to create any flow.  A large panel was missing from the display case, leaving unsightly globs of mud-colored adhesive.  The 4-6 building was not handicapped accessible.  Several desks with attached chairs were lined up against one corridor wall.  The wooden blinds attached to the cafeterias serving window were badly broken and could not be closed after lunch. As a result, according to a cafeteria worker, students would sometimes crawl through the opening and get into the kitchen area.  The dishwasher was leaking and creating a safety hazard\nthe kitchen had no wet mats.  The stage floor was scratched and chipped.  Several pieces of classroom furniture and work equipment, such as a paper roll stand, were on the stage.  The media center was small and appeared to have been converted from a classroom.  Shelving and equipment was crowded into every nook and cranny in the media center, but the specialist had arranged enough seating to accommodate a full class.  The carpet in the media center had two tom ragged seams across the entire room.  Although litter-free, one girls restroom was marred by graffiti on the stall walls. Another girls restroom was clean, but contained several pieces of litter.  One girls restroom had a small piece of soap, and the other had none.  In the girls restrooms, sinks were badly chipped and stained, one ceiling panel was missing and others were chipped and gouged, the stalls contained no disposals for feminine hygiene products, the floor under one sink was wet (possibly from a leak), several floor tiles were missing, and the cinder block walls in one of the restrooms were damaged badly.  One boys restroom had an unpleasant odor.Washington Magnet Interdistrict Elementary School We were pleased to note that:  The playground included well-made climbing structures, two paved basketball courts, and good grassy areas.  A paved drive traversed the entire length of the back lawn, allowing furniture to be moved easily in and out of classrooms.  The corridors reflected the buildings recent construction and were clean and attractive throughout.  Natural light coming from sky lights located near the entryways created a pleasant atmosphere.  The hallways were clean and the floors were spotless.  Colorful display boards featured several different themes (such as the environment, math in art, and map reading) that served to educate the viewer.  Each classroom area had tack strips attached to the concrete block walls, providing an easy way to display student work. Lots of student work was visible, including art displays and test papers.  Specialty rooms (such as art and Student Improvement Program for Success [SIPS]), were distinguished by colorful banners hanging outside the door.  The cafeteria was clean and the furnishings were in good repair.  Mats were in front of the doors leading from the kitchen to the outside.  The kitchen area was very well ventilated and air conditioned.  The large room housing the media center included lots of attractive book shelves.  A large storage room adjacent to the media centers entry provided adequate storage for audio visual equipment.  The girls restrooms had plenty of paper products and handicapped accessible stalls that included two handrails.  One of the girls restrooms had a dispenser for feminine hygiene products.  The hand washing station located between the boys and girls restrooms had plenty of soap.  The boys restrooms were well supplied and functional. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The flagpole was bare.  The playground lacked adequate shade.  Some exit doors were not secure.  The drop-in ceiling tile showed water damage from a leaky roof.  Carts and boxes cluttered the aisles in the kitchen, creating a safety hazard.  The kitchen contained no wet mats.  The stage curtain was tom and faded, and the carpet covering the stage was worn, stained, and wrinkled.  Multiple carpet stains in the media center detracted from the beauty of the room and its furnishings.  In the girls restrooms, locks were broken on some stalls, and the disposals for feminine hygiene products were missing bottoms, making them unusable.  In some of the girls restrooms, lighting was very poor, a ceiling panel was missing and others were water-stained, and one handicapped accessible stall had a very sharp turn, making it difficult to maneuver in a wheelchair.  Two girls restrooms contained litter on the floors and in the sinks, and one restroom had no identifying sign on the door.  The boys restroom near the front entry was messy from recent use.Forest Heights Junior High School We were pleased to note that:  The exterior of the building was well tended and despite a very dry, hot summer, the ground plantings were in good condition.  The shaded courtyard where students gathered to sit at picnic tables and on benches was litter free.  The entryway and all corridor floors were polished to a high shine.  Waste baskets were placed at intervals along each corridor, and no litter was evident anywhere on the campus.  Concrete walls were attractive and lockers were in like-new condition.  Some exterior doors in the older building were decorated with colorful murals.  Stairways were well lit and wide enough for heavy traffic.  The buildings and classrooms were very quiet.  Fire extinguishers were highly visible and plentiful.  The cafeteria was spotless and the tables were in good repair.  Wide aisles in the kitchen facilitated traffic flow.  The gymnasium was old but well maintained and had handicapped seating available in the bleacher area.  The basketball court sparkled, and the locker rooms were clean and neat.  The media centers special lighting over the checkout desk and magazine section greeted visitors with a dramatic effect, almost like sunlight. The room had well-kept carpeting, educational displays, attractive furnishings, an eye-catching materials collection, and a computer work station that was on-line to the Internet.  The girls restrooms were exceptionally clean with no litter or graffiti\nthe sinks and faucets (including those in the older buildings) were in excellent condition\nthey had plenty of paper products available\nthe stall doors looked new\nand each restroom was handicapped accessible.  The boys restrooms in the main building were spic-and-span, well supplied, and furnished with mirrors that glistened. The boys restrooms in the older sections of the building were similarly clean, despite their age. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The raised planting beds were overgrown with weeds.  The older areas of the campus had serious soil and concrete erosion.  The courtyard where students gathered was banen from heavy traffic.  One stairwell window had a horizontal crack that ran the entire length of the casement.  The cinder block wall at the entrance to the cafeteria was badly soiled and stained, creating a very unsightly and unappealing appearance.  In the cafeteria, the stools were in poor condition and the ceiling tile was seriously water damaged.  In the kitchen, the wet areas lacked mats\nseveral floor tiles were chipped, cracked, or broken\nan oven was broken\nand a wheel was missing from a large milk cart, causing it to tip to one side.  The temperature in the gymnasium was near 100.  Some girls restrooms lacked soap and disposals for feminine hygiene products.  The ceiling in one girls restroom that was located in an older building was badly peeled and insulation was pulled from one section of a heating vent pipe.  One restroom had no identifying sign.Mabelvale Junior High School We were pleased to note that:  The campus was immaculate. Lawns surrounding the school and in the courtyard were neatly mowed, and the entry was accented by a planting bed filled with perennials and a blooming crape myrtle.  Breezeways featured plenty of lined trash cans, and the campus was litter free.  Both the state and national flags were properly displayed on the pole in front of the school.  The school secretary was very friendly and welcoming, and the principal was very helpful and exhibited a pleasant demeanor with both students and adults.  Class change was orderly and plenty of adults were present.  The lockers were in good condition and free of graffiti.  In the cafeteria, the tables and seating were clean and in good condition, the floors were waxed and clean, the ceiling tiles were in good repair, and all flourescent lights were functioning properly.  The cafeteria was a comfortable temperature despite the 100 outside temperature.  The kitchens temperature was moderated by several fans, including a large window-mounted fan.  Kitchen lighting was adequate, and both a sprinkler system and a hand-held fire extinguisher were present.  The library had recently been recarpeted with a neutral-colored carpet that was attractive and coordinated well with the existing furnishings and decor.  The gymnasium was very warm, but some relief was provided by a large fan and open doors.  Both the gymnasium floor and bleachers were in good condition.  The girls restroom we visited was bright, clean, odor free, and fully supplied, but it lacked soap dispensers, although bar soap was available.  All toilets, urinals, and basins were functioning properly in the boys restrooms, and all the floors were in good repair, clean, and free of litter.  The boys restrooms were stocked with paper products and were well ventilated to keep down heat and odor. We also noted some areas needing attention:  The campus included several portable classrooms, most of which were unsightly.  While all other parts of the school were connected by covered walkways, students had to walk unprotected to all the portable buildings.  The water fountain near the restrooms on the second level was not operable.  Sections of floor tile were missing at the both the entrance and exit to the cafeteria.  Possibly due to its recent renovation, the library did not appear ready for students to use.Hall High School We were pleased to note that:  The litter-fi-ee campus, which had been recently mowed, included a variety of blooming annuals, as well as shrubs and trees. Attractive picnic tables and benches were scattered around the courtyard areas.  In keeping with Halls role as an LRSD Newcomers Center for non-English speaking students, signs in the front foyer welcomed visitors in several languages. The Newcomers Center is conveniently located, and bulletin boards with multilingual themes are present in the corridors.  The front doors were spotless and looked as if they had just been painted.  The entry hall featured a well-maintained planter filled with tropical plants.  Staff members and security officers were present throughout the campus.  Security personnel were very respectful, firiendly, and helpful to both visitors and students.  The halls contained a variety of bright banners and bulletin boards, and one corridor included an excellent display featuring Native American art. A Cleanliness is Contagious sign encouraged students to join efforts to keep the building clean.  Floors throughout the building were clean and shiny.  All fountains were functioning with adequate water pressure.  Hallway intersections were labeled with arrows and numbers to help students find their way.  Cafeteria floors were polished and free of debris despite the lunch crowd being present. Furnishings were in good repair and clean, and several colorful wall murals brightened the room.  The serving personnel were very efficient and courteous.  The kitchen area was spacious, allowing easy movement during food preparation and serving times.  The design of the media center was attractive and provided opportunities for developing reading and specialty centers. Computer work stations were scattered around the large room. The carpeting and furniture were well maintained.  All aspects of the gymnasium featured the schools colors, from the walls to the bleachers.  An attractive mural of Native Americans on horseback, symbolic of the schools mascot (the Warriors) adorned part of one gymnasium wall.  The gyms playing surface was shiny and in excellent condition, and the bleachers were functional, free of graffiti, and in good repair.  The restroom in the girls locker room was clean and supplied with paper products.  The entire area in the boys locker room was immaculate. The restroom was supplied with paper products and all plumbing was functioning normally. The dressing area contained well-maintained lockers in the school colors.  The girls restrooms were very well lit and had colorful, well-maintained floor tiles, good ventilation and pleasant air quality, and plenty of soap and paper products.  The girls restroom in the math building was clean, odor-free, and fully supplied with paper products.  Boys restrooms were clean and well supplied. We also noted some areas needing attention:  No flags were displayed on the flagpole located on the east side of the building.  A large pile of discarded furniture was stacked behind the kitchen, apparently awaiting removal.  The ceiling tiles in the area adjacent to the cafeteria were water stained and warped.Hall High School Page 2 Some exterior doors were not secured. A wall in an alcove by the cafeteria had a diagonal crack approximately two feet long. Ceiling tiles in the 400 corridor had been vandalized. A large alcove by the serving area contained several pieces of equipment and supplies, creating a very unsightly view from the eating area. The ceiling plaster over the serving lines was peeling, creating a health hazard. In the kitchen, door plates were protruding in two entryways, several floor tiles were missing, and no wet mats were accessible. The bottom windows in the kitchen lacked screens\ntherefore, they could not be opened to improve air flow. In the girls locker room, several of the lockers were damaged and a strong pungent odor evident, even though no PE classes were being held on the day we examined the facility. The restroom in the boys locker room lacked stalls and soap. was  The girls restrooms contained some litter and graffiti. None of the stall doors had locks, and some stall doors had no exterior handles.  One of the girls restrooms was not handicapped accessible.  The girls restroom in the math building lacked soap, and the restroom in the girls locker room lacked a dispenser for feminine hygiene products.  One of the girls restrooms had wall tiles that contained several holes as a result of missing plumbing fixtures. In another, one side of a heating unit had broken away from the wall, making the unit appear to be slipping down the wall.  Two of the boys restrooms had been damaged to the extent that toilet seats and a stall door were missing.Date: November 24, 1998 To: Melissa From,!' Ann Re: Follow Up on SWAT Monitoring I need you to do a follow-up on some of the schools that were the subject of our first-of-the-year swats in August. I want to know the extent to which the schools have corrected the problems we noted early in the school year. Im particularly interested in the schools listed below, because they seemed to be the ones with the most problems that could be corrected without major undertakings (such as enlarging the media center, for example). If you have others you want to investigate, thats fine. You dont have to monitor the whole school\npay particular attention to the areas that the team rated as needing attention to determine whether or not improvements have been made. That list can serve as your monitoring guide, although you might also see other things that you want to comment on. Depending on what you uncover (really good or really bad), well discuss whether to write up your findings in some sort of follow-up communication to the superintendents. Regardless, let me have your written findings in a list format that follows that of the SWATs. Unless you get some unexpected action on your enrollment figures to put you back on that report, plan on giving me this information by December 11. Thanks very much. LRSD PCSSD NLRSD Bale Elementary Cloverdale Elementary Wakefield Elementary Hall High Bates Elementary Jacksonville Elementary Oakbrooke Elementary Robinson Junior High Mills High Boone Park Elementary Lakewood Middle SchoolDate: December 10, 1998 To: From Melissa Re: Swat Follow-up Thanks for your good work on the Swat follow up. Looks like the schools and districts made many improvements, but also a significant number of detractions remain. Im appalled by some of the indefensible adult behavior you noted, especially at Bates, environments. What despicable role models! Talk about negative learning I think we should send this information out. It shows that were keeping our eyes open, and it will alert the schools and superintendent to areas that need attention. Hopefully, the comments on adult behavior will get some action. I idly made some editing notes as I read your findings, although I know you werent writing a document for publication. Please make all needed changes and compose a draft letter that I can send to the superintendents with copies to the principals. Thanks very much. Memo To: Ann From: ( Melissa Subject: Follow-up to Swat Visits Date: December 10, 1998 Attached are copies of my findings regarding the schools due for follow-up visits. As you asked, this format mirrors the original. If we decide to send the information to the schools, I think that the format might need to be revised somewhat. Let me know what you think. Thanks!Bale Elementary School We were pleased to note that: Thecate and National flags were flying. The asphalt in the parking lot had been repaired. The exterior was neat, attractive, and litter-ffee. The interior of the school was clean and filled with attractive holiday decorations. An appealing display featuring a Christmas tree, wrapped presents, and toys brightened the spacious entry area. A large floor mat personalized with the school name also brightened the entry. The floors were clean and shiny, and the staff had clearly made the most of an older, rather plain building. The formerly cluttered areas of the stage and cafeteria had been cleared and now appeared neat and tidy. Students and staff were polite, friendly, and very orderly. We also noted some areas needing attention: While locks had been added to the stall doors in the girls restroom, the fittings were not properly aligned and the doors would not lock. Water pressure in the girls restroom was still poor. The boys restroom still had a very strong urine odor.Cloverdale Elementary School We were pleased to note that: The oflBce and the surrounding area were neat and uncluttered. An attractive bulletin board enhanced the appearance of the outer office. Most of the windowsjooked as if they had been washed since our last visit, but some tape residueandpaint gplash^ remained. Staff members wereln^dly to visitors. No flag was flying, but our follow-up visit took place on a rainy day when it would have been inappropriate to displayZL  We also noted some areas needing improvement: The front of the school was quite littered. No change had been made in the unadorned, institutional cafeteria. Throughout the school, we heard adults shouting at students who were going to and from lunch. In the cafeteria the adults routinely spoke very sharply to the children. These same adults would the^speak very pleasantly to other staff members or visitors. Conditions in the media center were unchanged. Although the space was neat and attractively decorated, the only globes were out of date. Playground conditions were unchanged.Wakefield Elementary School We were pleased to note that: Staff members were fiiendly and welcoming. Workers were in the process of removing the large quantity of recently fallen leaves that covered the grounds. What had formerly been unsightly, damaged display case had been replaced with a new, large bulletin board. New lettering proclaiming the school name had been applied to the exterior of the building. The broken dishwasher in the kitchen had been repaired. The stage floor was clean and usable^ but some furniture and paper rolls were stored around the perimeter. We also noted some areas that needed attention: The flag pole did not display either the state or national flag. The front walk and other areas of the campus were littered. The concrete slabs that anchor some of the basketball goals protruded several inches above the surrounding terrain. These rough concrete slabs pose both a tripping hazard and danger to anyone who might fall or be knocked down in that area. The broken wooden blinds in the cafeteria still had not been fixed. Nearly all of the problems noted with the facility in August still remain. The principal indicated that she had sent in work orders for each of the items mentioned in our earlier summary.Hall High School We were pleased to note that: Flags were flying in front of the school. A member of the security staff was stationed at the main entrance, monitoring the parking lot. All exterior doors, except the main entry were properly secured. The office staff were very friendly and welcoming. Staff and students throughout the school were fnendly and helpful. The overall impression of the school was very positive. The grounds were neat, and the interior was clean with shiny floors. The large pile of discarded furniture outside the cafeteria had been removed, and the area was spotless. The cluttered alcove near the cafeteria serving area had been cleared and the entire area looked neat. The peeling paint over the serving line had been scraped and workers had applied some type of opaque primer over the spots. We also noted some areas needing attention: The kitchen still lacked window screens. No repairs had been made to the damaged kitchen floor. The girls locker room was odor-fiee and relatively neat, but it suffered from some vandalism. Two of the five restroom stalls were missing doors, and one of the commodes was missing its seat. Restrooms throughout the school were clean, odor-free, and supplied with soap and paper towels. When we visited late in the day, some of the stalls lacked toilet paper. While the restrooms were not disreputable, many were showing their age. Few of the restroom stalls had locks.Bates Elementary School We were pleased to note that: The broken birdbath had been removed from the front lawn. Both the state and the national flags were flying. , -7 The exterior of the school was enhanced by large, healthy holly trees.  The office staff was fnendly and welcoming even though they were also involved in hosting a COE visit from ADE. More student work was on display than the last time we visited. We also noted some areas needing attention: Students were running and shouting in the hall after leaving the cafeteria. Conditions in the cafeteria had not changed since our earlier visits. One boys restroom lacked any type of identifying sign. Odor in several restrooms was still strong. The handicapped stall in one restroom was locked. We noted one teacher who was being terribly verbally abusive to her first grade students. The children had been running in the hall and two of the group were involved in some horseplay. The teacher screamed at the top of her lungs at the entire group. She yelled at the entire class in a loud and abusive voice and finally took two children to the office to call their parents. When she left for the office, she left the remainder of the children unattended. A monitor remained in the room with the class for about ten minutes until a group of older student helpers arrived.Jacksonville Elementary School We were pleased to note that: The grounds were neat and attractive. The entire school was very clean and attractively decorated with an international holiday theme. The stage was set for an upcoming play. The storage area behind the stage contained a variety of furniture and other items, neatly stored. While stall doors still lacked locks, the girls restrooms were clean, free of odor and litter, and supplied. Staff and students were very fnendly and welcoming toward visitors. We also noted some areas needing attention: Conditions in the kitchen were unchanged from our previous visit. The principal said that they have wet mats, but the mats were not visible because they were taken out and washed each day after lunch. The principal also indicated that she had the Fire Marshal return to the school, and that he assured her that the kitchen met their safety standards. A work order had been turned in regarding the garbage disposal, but it was not yet repaired.Oakbrooke Elementary School We were pleased to note that: The grounds were neat and free of debris. The school was attractively decorated with seasonal displays of student work. The gym area of the former Woodland Hills building was much neater than when we visited in August. The flaking paint in the hall had been scraped and repainted. Floor mats at each entry ensured that the floors remained clean and dry on a rainy day. While a portion of the third grade hall was still being used for storage and photocopying, the work area was quite neat. No flag was flying, but our follow-up visit took place on a rainy day when it would not have been appropriate to raise the flag. A new, large wall map had been added to the media center. We also noted some areas needing attention: One of the restrooms still lacked any identifying sign. While a new map had been purchased for the media center, the large globe displayed near it was out of date. Handrails were quite rusty. The mismatched floor tiles still marred an otherwise clean and shiny floor.Robinson Junior High School We were pleased to note that: The office door had been repainted The fallen tree and other organic debris noted in August had been removed. Qldtlhe courtyards were in the process of being raked. The principal and office staff were fnendly and welcoming. We also noted some areas needing attention: None of the other items noted as needing attention in the August report had been addressed. All the other deficiencies remained in virtually unchanged condition. As the principal notec^ many of the items on our list would require an investment by the PCSSD. One no-cost item was also ignored# -nee again, no flags were flying.Mills High School We were pleased to note that:  The public spaces appeared generally neat and attractive.  Work had obviously been done on the restrooms. The walls had been repainted as had the graffiti covered stall partitions. Girls restrooms were odor-free and supplied, but many stalls lacked a toilet paper dispenser.  The new computers in the media center were now available for Internet access.  Students were very fnendly, and students dining in the cafeteria were very well-behaved. The atmosphere in the cafeteria was relaxed and pleasant. After students concluded their meals, they engaged in a variety of activities including guitar playing, dominoes, and card games. Several staff members were on duty in the area. We also noted some areas that needed attention:  Other than some improvement to the restrooms, we noted little improvement in the deficiencies noted in the August report.  The kitchen floor remained in very poor condition. More tiles were missing than noted at the beginning of the school year. Kitchen staff reported that a worker tripped and fell in early October.  The areas around the dumpster continued to be littered and unsightly.  The unofficial smoking area located outside the auditorium^as a blight with discarded chairs, an old mop, and assorted other broken and rusting furnishings.  The faulty locking device on the folding bleachers has not been repaired.  While the new computers in the media center are no online with the Internet, they are not fully operational. Students cannot print from these terminals or use them for any task other than Internet access. The new file server has not yet been installed, and this limits the capability of the entire system of computers in the media center. Student demand for computer time far outweighs the available equipment.Boone Park Elementary School We were pleased to note that: \u0026gt; * t y if 3 The exterior of the school looked neat and attractive and was free of litter. The hallways were clean, bright, and well-lit. The entire interior of the building had recently been repainted in a cream and blue color scheme. The fresh, cream-colored hall walls really brightened the interior spaces. All classrooms had been labeled with both the teachers name and the room number. Students were quiet and orderly in the halls and the cafeteria. Restrooms were clean and supplied with the basics, except paper towels. Teachers stood just outside the restroom doors distributing paper towels to the children. The broken window in the auditorium door had been repaired. We also noted some areas that needed attention: e No flags were flying from the flag pole. Exit lights in the cafeteria remained unlit. V The wall-mounted cork strips in the halls were damaged and unsightly in some spots.Lakewood Middle School We -were pleased to note that: c The flags were properly displayed from the pole in front of the building. All exterior doors, except one, were locked. ' The entire campus was neat and free of litter. ' The interior of the school was neat, litter-free, and attractively decorated with student art and seasonal touches. ' Installation of the new elevator had been completed. The elevator blended beautifully with the existing building and looked as if it could have been original. Stairwells were uncluttered. Repairs to the girls restroom near the office had been completed. ' All restrooms were neat, supplied, and well-lit. We also noted some areas needing attention: ' While the school is very attractive and well-kept, it is about due for interior repainting. Many spots such as hand rails have worn, chipped paint.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United Stales District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 January 7, 1999 Les Carnine, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Les: As you know, at the beginning of each school year, ODM monitors make brief, informal visits to some schools in all three Pulaski County school districts. In September, I sent you the summaries of our visits to LRSD schools. In December we paid brief, unannounced, follow-up visits to a few of those same schools. We selected for follow-up those schools that had a number of deficiencies which the district could address without major building modifications. During the December visits, our monitoring concentrated on those areas we had noted as needing attention at the beginning of the school year. We also made note of any improvements we observed. We hope that the enclosed comments give you and your staff the benefit of our impressions. As has been our custom, we will not publish or file these observations at this time, although we might eventually include them in some aspect of a formal report. Please don t hesitate to call if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Enc. cc: Building principalsBale Elementary School IVe were pleased to note that:  The state and national flags were flying.  The asphalt in the parking lot, which had been riddled with potholes, had been repaired.  The exterior was neat, attractive, and litter-free.  The interior of the school was clean and filled with attractive holiday decorations.  An appealing display featuring a Christmas tree, wrapped presents, and toys brightened the spacious entry area.  A large floor mat personalized with the school name also brightened the entry.  The clean and shiny floors, a wealth of attractive displays, and brightly decorated classrooms indicated that the staff had made the most of an older, rather plain building.  The formerly cluttered areas of the stage and cafeteria had been cleared and now appeared neat and tidy.  Staff and students were polite, friendly, and very orderly. We also noted some areas that still had not been addressed:  While locks had been added to the stall doors in the girls restroom in the main hall, the fittings were not properly aligned and the doors would not lock.  Water pressure in the girls restroom was still poor.  The boys restroom still had a very strong urine odor. Cloverdale Elementary School IVe were pleased to note that:  The office and the surrounding area were neat and uncluttered. An attractive bulletin board enhanced the appearance of the outer office.  Most of the windows looked as if they had been washed since our last visit, but some tape residue and paint splashes remained.  Staff members were friendly to visitors.  No flag was flying, but our follow-up visit took place on a rainy day when it would have been inappropriate to display a flag. We also noted some areas that still had not been addressed:  The front of the school was quite littered.  No change had been made in the unadorned, institutional-looking cafeteria.  Throughout the school, we heard adults shouting at students who were going to and from lunch. In the cafeteria the adults routinely spoke very sharply to the children. These same adults would then speak very pleasantly to other staff members or visitors.  Although the space was neat and attractively decorated, ceiling tiles in the media center had not been replaced. The only globes were out of date.  Playground conditions were unchanged: play equipment for the four-year-olds was still limited, and bleachers still occupied one section of the larger play area.Wakefield Elementary School We M ere pleased to note that:  Staff members were friendly and welcoming.  Workers were in the process of removing the large quantity of recently fallen leaves that covered the grounds.  What had formerly been an unsightly, damaged display case had been replaced with a new, large bulletin board.  New lettering proclaiming the school name had been applied to the exterior of the building.  The broken dishwasher in the kitchen had been repaired.  The stage floor was clean and usable, but some furniture and paper rolls were stored around the perimeter. We also noted some areas that still had not been addressed:  The flag pole did not display either the state or national flag.  The front walk and other areas of the campus were littered.  The concrete slabs that anchor some of the basketball goals protruded several inches above the surrounding terrain. These rough concrete poses both a tripping hazard and danger to anyone who might fall or be knocked down in that area.  The broken wooden blinds in the cafeteria still had not been fixed.  Nearly all of the problems noted with the facility in August still remain: weathered walkways, the general disrepair and lack of handicapped access to the building serving grades 4-6, run-down restrooms, inoperable water fountains, and the like. The principal indicated that she had sent in work orders for each of the items noted in our earlier summary.Hall High School IVe were pleased to note that:  Both the state and national flags were flying in front of the school.  A member of the security staff was stationed at the main entrance, monitoring the parking lot.  All exterior doors, except the main entry, were properly secured.  The office staff were very friendly and welcoming.  Staff and students throughout the school were friendly and helpful.  Our overall impression of the school was very positive. The grounds were neat, and the interior was clean with shiny floors.  The large pile of discarded furniture outside the cafeteria had been removed, and the area was spotless.  The cluttered alcove near the cafeteria serving area had been cleared and the entire area looked neat.  The peeling paint over the serving line had been scraped and workers had applied some type of opaque primer over the spots. We also noted some areas that still had not been addressed:  The kitchen still lacked window screens.  No repairs had been made to the damaged kitchen floor.  The girls locker room was odor-free and relatively neat, but it suffered from some vandalism. Two of the five restroom stalls were missing doors, and one of the commodes was missing its seat.  Restrooms throughout the school were clean, odor-free, and supplied with soap and paper towels. When we visited late in the day, some of the stalls lacked toilet paper. While the restrooms were not disreputable, many were showing their age.  Few of the restroom stalls had locks.\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   \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_1502","title":"Testing: Benchmark Examination comparison, Little Rock School District, Primary, Grade 4","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":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1998/2000"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Standards","Educational statistics","Little Rock School District","Students","School management and organization","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Testing: Benchmark Examination comparison, Little Rock School District, Primary, Grade 4"],"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/1502"],"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":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["18 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":61,"next_page":62,"prev_page":60,"total_pages":155,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":720,"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}}]}}