The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.
I ' Little Rock School District Position Paper on Desegregation Obligations Table of Contents Executive Summary 1. Purpose of Position Paper 2. Background 3. Response Groupings and Definitions of Tenns 4. Results of Audit and Interviews 5. Position on 'Not Begun' Items 6. Internal Enhancements 7. Conclusions May 8, 1996 This report was prepared by the LRSD administrative team of Brady Gadberry, Sterling Ingram, Dr. Ed Jackson, Deana Keathley, Dr. Patty Kohler, Dr. Russ Mayo, Leon Modeste, Ken Savage, and Marvin Schwartz. 1 3 4 8 11 13 15 16 Little Rock School District, 810 West Markham, Little Rock, AR 72201 #501-324-2000 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED sw EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS ~ WESTERN DIVISION U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. LR-C-82-866 JAMES W McCORMACK, CLERK By: PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL -------,---- DE P. CLERK DEFENDANTS INT ERVEN ORS INTERVENORS SPECIAL STATUS REPORT For its special status report, the Little Rock School District states: 1. The Little Rock School District has recently reviewed the status of its compliance with its desegregation obligations and determined that the district is in substantial compliance with those obligations. The attached "Little Rock School District Position Paper On Desegregation Obligations" describes the process used by LRSD to determine its compliance and reports the conclusion that LRSD has implemented 96.3 percent of its desegregation obligations. Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Street Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 376-2011 r1.stopher Helle Bar No. 81083 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing Special Status Report has been served on the following by depositing copy of same in the United States mail on this 8th day of May, 1996: Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell and Streett First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown - HAND DELIVERED Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT POSITION p APER ON OESEGREGA TION OBLIGA TIONS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FINDINGS THE DISTRICT IS IN SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH ITS DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS. THIS IS BASED ON IMPLEMENTATION OF 96.3% OF ITS OBLIGATIONS. SOME OF THE GOALS OF THE PLAN HA VE NOT BEEN ACHIEVED AND ARE NOT LIKELY TO BE ACHIEVED TIIROUGH THE CURRENT OBLIGATIONS. RECOMMENDATIONS RECOGNITION OF THE DISTRICT'S SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE SHOULD BE MADE BY THE COURT. OBLIGATIONS WHERE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE HAS BEEN ACHIEVED SHOULD BE RELEASED FROM COURT SUPERVISION. OBLIGATIONS WHICH DO NOT MEET THE NEEDS OF STUDENTS SHOULD BE REVISED. REVISED OBLIGATIONS SHOULD BE MODELED ON ACTION ITEMS IN THE RECENTLY COMPLETED STRATEGIC PLAN. Page 1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1. PURPOSE OF POSITION PAPER Assess District's performance m meeting desegregation obligations. Inform the public of status of these accomplishments. Prove good faith effort in achieving substantial compliance. 2. BACKGROUND The District has accepted desegregation obligations as a binding contract. Desegregation obligations are reviewed through regular updates of the Program Budget Document. A LRSD obligations audit identified more than 2,000 items and published the listing as the Abbreviated Summary. Scan sheets were developed for each item and completed by District staff. Compilation of scan sheet responses provided the overall status for this report. 3. RESPONSE GROUPINGS AND DEFINITION OF TERMS Responses to the scan sheets were grouped to match program names. Responses within each program name were sorted to identify total items in compliance and items not yet begun. Page2 POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS 4. RESULTS OF AUDIT AND INTERVIEWS Final assessment of the audit showed substantial compliance with all desegregation obligations. This is based on implementation of 96.3% of those items. The interview process allowed comprehensive review of all evidence supporting implementation of obligations. 5. PosmoN ON NoT BEGUN ITEMS Obligations identified as Not Begun reveal barriers to effective implementation such as unrealistic expectations. The obligations modification process lags behind current implementation plans. 6. INTERNAL ENHANCEMENTS An automated PBD will show new patterns of completion, allowing assessment of obligations by individual items and by schools. The automated process increases overall accountability toward fulfillment of the obligations. LITTLE RocK SCHOOL D1sTR1cT POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS 1. Purpose of Position Paper The daily operation of the Little Rock School District is centered on providing the public with the highest quality education available in Arkansas and the nation. With an October 1995 enrollment of 24,922 students and the employment of . 3,513 people, the tasks required to provide that quality education are quite numerous. Effective coordination of those tasks and public accountability for their implementation are some of the criteria by which the District should be measured. The numerous obligations approved for the District by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals have resulted in a lengthy and highly detailed document containing more than 2,000 obligations or specific tasks. Additionally, the LRSD Desegregation Plan is one of several plans approved by the Court for Pulaski County public school districts. The District commits significant personnel and financial resources to implementation and reporting of desegregation obligations. Some of these resources could be used more effectively to meet student educational needs. The primary purpose of this position paper is to assess District progress in meeting desegregation obligations. Secondary purposes of this position paper follow in logical sequence. To assure accountability by the District in response to desegregation obligations, this paper will identify the status of those accomplishments. It will show which Page3 obligations the District has fully or partially accomplished, and it will show the results from those actions. The overall intent of this paper is to prove a good faith response by the LRSD to the complex task of meeting desegregation obligations. Further, this paper will address those obligations which the District has not fulfilled, and it will give an account for those nonaccomplishments. In some cases, an appropriate response to the obligation was not possible. In other cases, a response was possible but not attempted because circumstances made the effort unfeasible. Finally, this paper will provide an update on District efforts to meet reasonable obligations where progress is lacking. More specifically, the overall intent of this paper is to prove a good faith response by the LRSD to the complex task of meeting desegregation requirements. It is the goal of the LRSD to meet the educational needs of all its students. In the process of meeting those needs, the District seeks to achieve unitary status or release from Court jurisdiction. We believe an objective reading of this position paper will advance that effort and better serve the interests of Little Rock students and all citizens of the community. LITTLE RocK SCHOOL D1sTR1cT POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS 2. Background The desegregation obligations currently in place for the LRSD have evolved from legal actions and court supervision of Pulaski County school districts that began in the early 1980s. These obligations derive from the consent decrees the District has entered into with several parties, including: North Little Rock School District Pulaski County Special School District Knight Intervenors Joshua Intervenors State of Arkansas (no longer current) In 1993, an audit of desegregation obligations was undertaken by LRSD attorneys at the Friday Law Firm. After review by District management, the obligations listing was filed with the court. The District's response to all desegregation obligations has been to accept them as a binding contract. As a whole, this imposes a weighty burden on the District. Finances for instructional programs have been diverted toward legal fees, and an administrative capacity for the development of creative instruction has been dissipated in time spent in the legal process or in preparation of desegregation-related documents. These impositions have limited the District's ability to meet the needs of a diverse student population. A reporting process used by the District to update the Court on progress Page4 toward obligations is key to the assessment and conclusions reached in this position paper. This process is the Program Budget Document (PBD). An explanation of the development and implementation of the PBD will help identify the reporting burden and the tendency for duplication imposed by the system. The PBD was developed to monitor progress on all obligations. The document identifies every obligation relating to the case and provides essential information to track relevant activity. The District's response to the desegregation obligations has been to accept them as a binding contract. The PBD is updated quarterly with information provided by the primary leaders to reflect progress. However, many items on the PBD are repeated yearly or are part of a continuous process. These can include items such as principals writing school profiles or District Equity Monitors visiting schools. Such items are never completed in themselves, but reports are required within the year to show how much of the task has been accomplished. Conversely, some items are maintained on the PBD and addressed even after they have been completed. (This weakness in the PBD design has been corrected in the new automated version. See Section 7. Internal Enhancements). LITTLE RocK SCHOOL D1sTRICT The LRSD process for reporting to the Court is centered on updates of the obligations and activities contained in the PBD. One barrier to the PBD reporting process, however, is the lack of a quantifiable assessment which clearly shows how well the District has done in meeting all its obligations. The original version of the PBD did not provide a numerical or percentage summary. As a preliminary step toward overall assessment, the District began a comprehensive review in mid 1995 to identify every distinct obligation. The Abbreviated Summary, as the project came to be known, involved cross referencing items from the PBD and all legal documents. The audit identified 2,098 distinct obligations. A refining of the list yielded a final count of 2,008 obligations. Further, the Abbreviated Summary identified numerous inconsistencies such as POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS duplicative obligations (See Figure 1. Examples of Duplication among Desegregation Obligations) and obligations being implemented for which no legal reference could be located. Additionally, numerous legal documents had made separate contributions to the obligations by this time, each introducing additional requirements. Legal Documents Influencing Obligations 8th Circuit Court Orders District Court Orders lnterdistrict Plan LRSD Desegregation Plan Settlement Agreement Stipulations McClellan Plan Henderson Plan Court Transcripts Exhibit June 5, 1992 Monitoring Report Figure 1. Examples of Duplication among Desegregation Obligations Subject Abbreviated Text Original Legal ID#, Document Incentive 1. Make recommendations to the Board LR Deseg. Plan 1783 School 2. Make staff recommendations LR Deseg. Plan 1788 Staffing 3. Make staff recommendations for LR Deseg. Plan 1789 employment to the Board M-to-M 1. Develop recruitment plan with PCSSD for lnterdistrict Plan 1481 Transfers M-to-M transfers 2. Parties to promote M-to-M transfers lnterdistrict Plan 3154 1. ID numbers for obligations refer to listings in the Abbreviated Summary. Page 5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGA TIONS The assessment process chosen for the task was for the LRSD Division of Planning Research and Evaluation (PRE) to develop computer scan sheets relating to the status and evidence of all obligations. (See Figure 2. Obligations Scan Sheet) In 1995, a process was begun in which primary leaders answered six concise questions and sent the sheets back to PRE for compiling of responses. The scan sheets asked direct questions and gave multiple choice answers. The Primary Leaders had to identify if their obligations were a) not begun, b) completed, c) completed periodically, or d) continuous/never completed (See Figure 3. Response Categories for Scan Sheet Survey of Obligations). To assure accountability, they also had to identify the specific location where evidence concerning the obligation was kept and who was responsible for that evidence. The assessment process continued with a 1996 follow-up survey to address items that had been recently added as well as allow a figur~ 2. Obli'gatiof'ls Scan Sheet Questions relating to the evidence available for the above named obligation. 1. What is the status of the obligation? A) Not begun (If answer is A, do not complete the rest of the form.) B) Completed (ff answer is B, go to question # 2.) C) Completed Periodically (ff answer is C, go to question #3.) D) Continuous/Never Completed (ff answer is 0, go ta question #3.) 2. In what school year was the obligation completed? A) Priorto1992-93 (If answer is A, goto question # 4.) B) 1992-93 (ff answer is B, go to question# 4.) C) 1993-94 (ff answer is C, go ta question # 4.) D) 1994-95 (ff answer is D, go to question# 4.) 3. If the obligation is on-going, in what school year was the obligation first accomplished? A) Prior to 1992-93 B) 1992-93 C) 1993-94 D) 1994-95 4. In what form does the primary evidence for this obligation exist? A) Pamphlet or Publication B) Written Evaluation, Survey or Summary Report C) Bill or Requisition 0) Document (written agenda, sign--in sheet, notice of meeting, invnation, etc.) E) No evidence exists (ff answer is E, do not complete the rest of the form
however. explain why in AREA 2 an the back of this sheet.) 5. Location where primary evidence concerning this obligation is kept: A) School B) District Offices, LRSD Annex, IRC, Student Assignment C) Plant Services, Procuremen~ Food Services, Safety & Security, Transportation D) Adult Education 6. Who is the keeper of the primary evidence? A) Primary Leader B) Secondary Leader C) Person Responsible Signature: _ _ _ _ _________ Date: _ _____ _ Page6 I (!) 0@ j ' @. J.@
,J@) ,@ A . : ,, 0 , @_ . ,@ ~t .@, ... ~ . "',. @ .A .! ., B . ~ (E) I l'J 1 j (i) -1 IV I i I m I (!) . I '(r) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT second reporting on items previously identified as "not begun." The processing of scan sheets gave the District a clear and comprehensive understanding of the degree of compliance it had achieved regarding the identified obligations. The scan sheets gave the District a clear understanding of the degree of compliance it had achieved regarding the identified obligations. Progress since 1993 has resulted from the improved tracking accuracy of the original PBD. A recent upgrade to a computerized PBD process will further improve its accuracy. The audit of obligations and scan sheet surveys represent other distinct improvements in the District's overall response to desegregation obligations. POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS Figure 3. Response Categories for Scan Sheet Survey of Obligations CO - Completed. Items done once which need no repeating. Example: Motion granted for construction of cafeteria at Chicot Elementary. ID #1177, Court Order, 4/30.!93, Pg. 1 CP - Completed Periodically. Items which have repetitive schedules within fixed time frames. Example: Establish a summer school program. ID #1208, lnterdistrict Plan, 4129193, Pg. 13 NC - Continuous/Never Completed. Items which require on-going implementation. Example: Monitor the Desegregation Plan. ID #0936, LR Plan, 4129192, Pg. 28 NB - Not Begun. Items which have not been addressed. Example: Plan new junior high school construction. tD #1326, LR Plan, 4129192, Pg. 129 Page7 LITTLE RocK SCHOOL D1sTRICT POSITION p APER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS 3. Response Groupings and Definition of Terms To fully understand the information reflected on the scan sheets and to communicate those results to the public in a precise manner, certain groupings of responses were made. This process included three broad steps, summarized below and detailed in the remaining sections of this report. 1 The status of individual obligations were identified on the scan sheets as CO CP NC, or NB. , , 2 All obligations were categorized as CO orNB. 3 Overall response to desegregation requirements was identified as Substantial Compliance (SC). The process began by grouping the scan sheet responses into PBD Program Areas. In this manner, thousands of individual obligations and strategies were brought together under distinct program names. The process then gave abbreviated titles to the distinct categories of response as shown on the scan sheets. These abbreviations are presented in Figure 3, and examples of obligations for each category are provided. An additional category is represented with the letter A. This group includes obligations which were identified after the 1995 scan sheet survey. Examples of A items include: Pages Restore Gifted Coordinator to Budget, ID #5144,Court Transcript, 716/95, Pg. J Court Requires Long-Range Facilities Plan, JD #5127, Court Order, 2/8195, Pg. 2 All A items have been addressed in the follow up survey of February 1996, and their tally is included in the final results. As represented in Figure 4. Obligation Status - Grouping Process, the grouping process condensed five categories of responses into three. Each category represents total responses for that status and does not relate to specific programs or activities. For example, responses marked "completed" include those which are addressed periodically and those which are continuous/never completed or cyclical. These items are considered completed because the District has met all possible requirements for their fulfillment during the time frame or cycle. Final grouping of the responses culminated in the two categories, Completed (CO) or Not Begun {NB), represented in the next section of this report. In this manner, the District has been able to provide the most direct presentation of its substantial compliance with desegregation obligations. To assure the most accurate reporting possible, the District identified the legal definitions of the categories of response and other terms used when describing desegregation obligations. Many LITTLE RocK ScHooL D1sTR1CT of these terms have had their original meanings transformed through usage by the media, the public, and by educators who did not fully understand them in the proper context. As a legal document, however, the Plan requires a strict and consistent interpretation. POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS The following items are key terms2 in understanding desegregation obligations and the District's response. Obligation - a legal requirement that constrains to a course of action, an imperative for specific action. An 2 Definitions for terms were paraphrased from Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, 1991. Initial Survey Figure 4. Obligation Status - Grouping Process Response Grouping Page9 Results of Follow-up Preliminary Surveys Follow-up Survey Legend A Added after Initial Survey CO Completed CP Completed Periodically NC Never Completed/Continuous NB Not Begun SC Substantial Compliance L1TTLE RocK SCHOOL D1sTRICT obligation is something one is bound to do. It leaves no room for negotiation, compromise, or alternative. Example: LRSD will pay an increase of $52,604.09 in the ODM budget. ID #4113 . Court Order. 418194, Pg. J Recommendation - something which is offered or suggested as a favored action. A recommendation is worthy of acceptance, but there are no constraints upon its action. Recommendation refers to an action which is advisory in nature rather than one having a binding effect. Example: The following full time positions are recommended for each Incentive School. (20 positions are listed, including classroom teachers, counselors, etc.) LR Desegregation Plan. Incentive School Section, 4/2192, Pg. 190 Substantial Compliance: conformity with the essential requirements in fulfilling formal or official obligations of a contract or a statute. Being in substantial compliance means that you have done substantially all you were required to do to fulfill the obligation. The concept of "substantial compliance" is the primary assessment criteria for this report. Example: Establish six thematic interdistrict schools, ID #1479, lnterd1str1ct Plan, 4/29/92, Pg. 3 Good Faith Effort - an effort based on an honest belief, the absence of malice, and the absence of the design to Page 10 POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS defraud or seek advantage. Example: Provide Homework Hotlines. JD #1918, LR Desegregation Plan, 4/2/92, Pg. 180 Completion - something which is fully realized, which possesses all necessary parts. Completion means an action has been brought to an end or to an intended condition. With desired results achieved, no further action is necessary. Example: Install Rockefeller Elementary Heat/AC. ID # 1350, Monitoring Report, 615/92. Pg. 43 On-Going Obligations - certain items identified as obligations which need to be repeated on a regular basis. These "on-going obligations" can not be totally completed because further action is necessary throughout the term of the desegregation plans. The District considers itself in compliance with these items if it fulfills the necessary action within each scheduled reporting period. These items are represented in the CP ( completed periodically) or the NC (never completed) groups. Example: Maintain all school facilities for safe/operable condition. ID #950, LR Desegregation Plan, ,l/2/9192, Pg. J 29 LITTLE RocK ScHOOL D1sTRICT Results of the preliminary surveys showed the District m substantial compliance with its desegregation requirements. This was based on initial findings which showed implementation of 97. 5% of obligations. The need for evidence of compliance with obligations led to a final round of interviews. The intent of the interviews was to gain proof in addition to the scan sheets that all information was accurate. Interviews were conducted with all primary and secondary leaders and all persons responsible for implementation of the obligations. Evidence of all activities was reviewed by committees, and a new and more specific assessment was obtained. As illustrated in Figure 5. Results of the Interview Audit, the final number of obligations became 1,753. This was achieved by the removal of additional duplicates, recommendations, goals, and items which were identified as not obligations. The District is in substantial compliance with its desegregation requirements based on 96.3% implementation of its obligations. Of that group of 1,753 obligations, 96.3% or 1,689 were identified as being in substantial compliance. Partial compliance Page 11 POSITION p APER ON OESEGREGA TION OBLIGATIONS was achieved in 1.1 % or 19 obligations, and only 45 obligations or 2.6% of the total remained as Not Begun items. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS Figure 5. Results of Interview Audit ORIGINALLY IDENTIFIED OBLIGATIONS 2008 REVIEWED - NOT OBLIGATIONS 12 DUPLICATE OBLIGATIONS 224 RECOMMENDATIONS 9 GOALS 10 NET OBLIGATIONS AFTER AUDIT-~17~5""!""3 RELEASED FROM COURT SUPERVISION SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE COMPLETED ON-GOING PARTIAL COMPLIANCE NOT BEGUN SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE PARTIAL COMPLIANCE NOT BEGUN PARTIAL COMPLIANCE 1% 203 52 429 1005 19 45 1753 1689 19 45 1753 NOT BEGUN 3% SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE 96% Page 12 11 .6% 3.0% } 24.5% 57.3% 1.1% 2.6% 100.0% 96.3% 1.1% 2.6% 100.0% 96.3% Substantial Compliance LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT POSITION p APER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGA TI0NS 5. Position on 'Not Begun' Items As previously stated in this report , the District has identified desegregation obligations with a 'Not Begun' status. Analysis of those obligations showed that in some cases, the premise upon which the obligations were based was found to be flawed. In other areas, obligations were shown to be dependent on numerous factors outside the District's control. Accountability for the 'Not Begun' obligations is best represented through the following broad categories. Conditional Obligation: These items are dependent on external factors which have not been met, such as partnership relations with other organizations, receipt of grant funds, or other conditions outside District control. Example: Two obligations under the Library Media section of the Interdistrict Plan and cross referenced in the LRSD Desegregation Plan call for Utilization of TV Technology and Implement Utilization of Cable Channel 19. (m #1033, Interdistrict Plan, Pg. 34, 4129192) The Plan states these obligations will be done "if funded by a federal Star grant." The grant was not funded, therefore, the obligations were not begun. Unrealistic Expectation: These items are unfeasible or do not generate a sufficient return to justify the effort of implementation. This decision is based on District experience in the field and is a realistic response to items developed Page 13 as part of a 'wish list' by framers of the obligations. Example: The Incentive School Support Section of the LRSD Plan requires the District to meet at homes with groups of parents. cm #2049, LRSD Desegregation Plan, Pg. 210, 4/29/92) The District has found the effort to locate and coordinate a home-based meeting of parents is a time consuming and laborious process. This obligation does not address the reality that people must be invited into a home. They can not be mandated to offer that hospitality. Changed by Court Order: Changes in the LRSD Desegregation Plan by the Court, such as rulings from the bench and Court orders, have not been reflected as revised the language in the Plan. Example: Numerous items within the Focused Activity section of the LRSD Desegregation Plan have been superseded or redefined by a May 1, 1992 Court Order. On Appeal: The District is involved in an appeal process to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals regarding an obligation. In this instance, the obligation is not appropriately aligned with contemporary events. Example: A Court Order currently under appeal states that the LRSD will reimburse PCSSD $167,113 within 60 days of the order. cm #4111, Court order, Pg. 3, 3/16194) LITTLE RocK SCHOOL D1sTRICT Improperly Reported: Errors in reporting were discovered as a result of of the desegregation obligations scan sheets and audit. Example: An item erroneously reported as NB requires the LRSD to develop or enhance site-based management at designated schools. (ID #0501 , LRSD Desegregation Plan, Pg. 42, 4/29/92) The obligation is being implemented through staff development for principals, revision of District procedures, and enhanced principal accountability for programs. The implementation is being addressed through the Strategic Planning Action Team 8 and will continue through the 1996-97 school year. Not Begun: These are obligations which the District has not yet implemented. The District recognizes the validity of these obligations and intends to comply with them. Example: An obligation addressing the Incentive School Latin Program calls for the District to evaluate the elementary Latin Program. (ID #2021, LRSD Desegregation Plan, Pg. 164, 4/29/92) This will be done as soon as possible. Similarly, an obligation requires the District to form a media coalition that involves a series of meetings between the superintendents of the three school districts and representatives of the local media. cm #1555, Interdistrict Plan, Pg. 3, 4129/92) Scheduling for these meetings is currently being arranged. POSITION p APER ON OESEGREGA TION OBLIGA TIONS Page 14 LITTLE RocK ScHOOL D1sTR1cT POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS 6. Internal Enhancements The LRSD has completed a revision of the Program Budget Document (PBD) reporting process which will provide information in greater detail and with instant computer access. The computerized PBD will greatly enhance the District's ability to track on-going compliance with obligations. Staff inservice is underway for the recently designed program automation, which is expected to be implemented in the spring of 1996. An automated computer linkage will allow primary leaders to access the system and input directly to the LRSD mainframe AS400 system. Information will address activities done toward the fulfillment of obligations. The automation replaces a manual system where computer diskettes were submitted quarterly and updated reports printed. Another improvement in the system is the automated program's ability to identify responses to single items by individual schools and across the District. This will allow school-by-school reports on specific obligations, an option not previously available. If questioned about a specific obligation, the District has immediate access to its status at each setting. The system will also show patterns of completion and allow deactivation and storage of completed obligations. PBD automation will control the publishing of updates and changes to the obligations, thereby avoiding errors resulting from changing text or phrasing of obligations. Page 15 LITTLE RocK ScHooL D1sTR1cT Major accomplishments such as the identification of obligations and the implementation of a strategic planning process show the District is doing a good job of meeting its desegregation obligations. A 96.3% level of implementation affirms that achievement. The District should be recognized for its accomplishments and certain items should be released from further court supervision. The District should"be recognize'd 'folits ' accomplishments and i. r certain 'items released from 'further court supeNision. The District is accountable for its response to desegregation obligations, a response represented in this report. But it should not be held accountable for all of the goals of the Plan, some of which have proved to be unobtainable in this district or any other district in the country. The desegregation plans of the District have resulted in significant desegregation accomplishments. As we near the end of the six-year life of those plans, however, it is apparent that in some ways they have outlived their usefulness. The recently completed Strategic Plan, developed as a result of significant community input and involvement, should be used to guide decisions about LRSD's future. POSITION PAPER ON DESEGREGATION OBLIGATIONS Page 16
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources.
<dcterms_creator>Little Rock School District</dcterms_creator>