Business Cases Proposed, Additional Business Cases-1996-97 (revised)

BUSINESS CASES PROPOSED Additional Business Cases - 1996-97 (Revised - April 29, 1996) RECEIVE^ APR 2 9 1996 Office of Desejregalion MoniwrinyT BUSINESS CASES . ADMINISTRATIVE ANNEX RELOCATION - (SAVINGS) X- ADMINISTRATIVE REORGANIZATION - (SAVINGS) . ADULT EDUCATION RELOCATION - (SAVINGS) 1 . CONSOLIDATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS-HOME INSTRUCTION PROGRAM FOR PRESCHOOL YOUNGSTERS LRSD FOUR-YEAR OLD PROGRAM - (SAVINGS) x- ^Jq . EXPANSION OF THE ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL TO INCLUDE HIGH SCHOOL - (ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES) . INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER RELOCATED TO ISH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - (SAVINGS) /. OUTSOURCING COURIER SERVICES - (SAVINGS) . OUTSOURCING SPECIAL NEEDS TRANSPORTATION - (SAVINGS >(. REDUCE ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTS - (SAVINGS) SIX PERIOD DAY VERSUS SEVEN PERIOD DAY - (SAVINGS
. STAGGERED STARTING TIMES - (SAVINGS) ,^ . STUDENT ASSIGNMENT RELOCATION - (SAVINGS) . TRUANCY REDUCTION - (SAVINGS)I I ' I J BUSINESS CASE ADMINISTRATIVE ANNEX RELOCATION1. BUSINESS CASE: BACKGROUND: ADMINISTRATION ANNEX RELOCATION The Administration Annex houses various support activities of the Little Rock School District. located approximately two (2) The building is blocks from the Administration Building at 100 South Arch Street. facility with no parking and no excess acreage. It is a 26,273 square foot appears to be a renovated warehouse. The facility It is four (4) stories with no windows and approximately 60 to 70 percent utilized and the fourth floor is entirely used for storage. a drab appearance due to the lack of natural light. The facility presents The location two (2) blocks from the Administration Building is not germane to the operation of this facility. that do not It consists of independent offices functions require daily contact with other administrative in the Administration Building and can therefore be considered for relocation should space become available. In 1980, the Little Rock School District Board of Education excessed this building and deemed it not necessary for School District operations
however, the building has been in constant use since that time. for sale at anytime. The building has not been sold but may be considered The personnel of the Administration Annex would be considered prime candidates to be relocated to any school within the Little Rock School District that might be considered for closure providing that it has sufficient square footage to meet their needs. Their functions can operate quite effectively from anywhere within the District. 2 . PROBLEM DEFINITION
The problem is to consider whether we should include the personnel from the Annex relocations. in any current 3. ANALYSIS alternatives: OF 1) ALTERNATIVES
Basically, we have two (2) Leave the personnel at the Annex Building where they are presently located until such time as a better facility could be found or a long range plan complied or 2) consider relocating them with personnel to be relocated during the summer of 1996 . ALTERNATIVE NUMBER ONE LEAVE THE PERSONNEL AT THE ANNEX: Leaving the personnel in the Annex Building seems a prudent move at this point in time. They are fully operational and appear to be content with their surroundings. Although it is not the most attractive or most operational building within the district. it does meet the office needs of the personnel that are located there. ALTERNATIVE TWO CONSIDER RELOCATING THE PERSONNEL IN THE ANNEX BUILDING: Relocating the personnel from the Annex at this point may be extremely difficult. The relocation of the Instructional Resource Center from Sixth and Ringo to the Ish Building will be extremely tight and there is no space left in Ish for any other functions. other than those associated with the Instructional Resource Center. While the possibility of additional space may be available at Oakhurst Elementary School with the movement of Adult 1 *Education from Eastside, the amount of space needed has not been determined. Should additional space become available at that school, it is conceivable that smaller offices from the Annex could be relocated. which has over However, a primary concern is Special Education building. fifty (50) people and occupies most of that This is a function that requires direct public access and must be in a location that is readily accessible to meet the publics needs. While Oakhurst may be considered as a possible location, the size of the building will not permit Adult Education and Special Education to occupy the building at the same time. 4. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Annex Building not be considered for relocation at this time. As schools become available within the Little Rock School District, careful consideration could then be given to relocating the personnel in the Annex to a better location. 5. OBJECTIVE
The objective of this recommendation is to leave things relatively status quo and to limit the disruption to the Little Rock School District because of the moves that have already been planned for this summer. It could be considered a positive move if a school building is vacated within the District. Most assuredly, being in a building with one or two levels, adequate parking and natural light would be a better situation than they are presently in. 6. IMPACT ANALYSIS
The movement of any organization is expected to have a limited negative impact due to the disruption of services until they are fully restored at their required operational level. The personnel in the Annex are all tied in some way to the Desegregation Plan
however, their physical location fosters, nor detracts from the Desegregation Plan. 7. RESOURCE ANALYSIS
There will. of course. be a relocation impact on the staff, but, it would appear that bettering the office situation of these people would result in a more positive attitude and better operational surroundings. With regard to general District resources, it is conceivable that the Annex could possibly be sold but this can not be determined until a market analysis is completely made. At the present time, the vacancy rate in downtown Little Rock is between eight (8) and twelve (12) percent
warehouse space is slightly lower. There is a possibility that the Annex could be sold as general warehouse space to a downtown agency. 8. FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS
The force field analysis has not been done because we have not seriously considered relocating this facility
therefore, the aspects of personnel who may be in favor, or against, this move have not been determined.9. GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION
It would be recommended that the Annex personnel stay where they are presently located for the time being, and that no consideration be made to move them during the summer of 1996. When, and if. a facility plan is put together for administrative buildings and administrative offices, that the annex personnel be considered for relocation as space becomes identified. dce/apl/bcaseaarBUSINESS CASE ADMINISTRATIVE REORGANIZATIONBUSINESS CASE ADULT EDUCATION RELOCATION1. BUSINESS CASE: ADULT EDUCATION RELOCATION BACKGROUND - The Adult Education Program is presently located at Eastside Junior High School on Scott Street. It has been in that location for a number of years. In 1983, the Little Rock School District excessed that property and deemed it sellable. Although this has not been actively pursued, recent interest has indicated that some agency may be preparing an offer to secure that property
therefore, consideration should be given to relocate the Consideration has been given over the Adult Education Program. years, and was approved by the Board in 1995, to relocate Adult Education and to proceed with the selling of Eastside. While Eastside Junior High School may be adequate at the present time to meet the needs of Adult Education, future educational programs have yet to be determined and therefore their impact on the building can not be ascertained at this time. C ' ' Current requirements regarding maintenance are high and the necessity to eventually adapt it to ADA standards, to meet the needs of our disabled adult students, must be considered this next year. 2 . PROBLEM DEFINITION - The problem that we are facing is the consideration of relocating Adult Education to a facility which better meets their needs and capitalizes on vacant space within the Little Rock School District. 3 . ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES - Essentially, there are three (3) alternatives available to consider: in the current facility. 1) Allow the agency to remain While this is a viable alternative, the for that facility and the backlog of maintenance and repair necessity to determine new work regarding Americans with disabilities and the remote possibility of expanded programs must be taken into consideration. undetermined, academic ie: Adult Educations 2) Relocate the facility yet requirements are essentially administrative and classroom space
therefore, the relocation into a school would be considered most appropriate. A primary concern would be the location of that school and the ease with which that school can meet the needs of the adults that it serves. Consideration could be given to considering Adult Education relocation into facilities if facilities close due to the implementation of any long range planning. Relocate into ' At the present time, the Little Rock 3) existing vacant facilities. School District has one facility which is vacant, Oakhurst Elementary School (Ish Elementary School has been identified as the new home for the Instructional Resource Center). On the surface. On the surface. Oakhurst may appear to be a building that is not in much better shape than Eastside, but it does possess a more centralized location, has the capability of being more readily adapted for ADA standards and appears to meet the general requirements of the Adult Education Program. In addition, it would assist in vacating Eastside and would allow us to proceed with a more aggressive plan to sell that property.1 While two of the alternatives deal with relocations, the only advantage to alternative three is the fact that it is a move that could possibly occur during the summer of 1996 due to the vacancy of Oakhurst Elementary School. 4. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that serious consideration be given to relocating Adult Education into Oakhurst Elementary School. 5. OBJECTIVE - The objective of this recommendation is purely one of financial initiatives. It is expected that the operating cost of Adult Education and Oakhurst will not be appreciably different from that at Eastside. Additionally, certain renovations will have to be made to Oakhurst to make the facility adaptable for the Adult Education Program and to improve certain structural elements of the building so as to insure the safety and comfort of its inhabitants. However, it will assist the Districts financial planning through the disposal of excess property which is not deemed necessary for its operational needs. It should be noted that Eastside also houses the HIPPY Program and the Truancy Center. Each of these are being considered separately for moves within the Little Rock School District and as of this point in time, final destinations for those programs have not been identified, made. But, considerations are being 6. Adult IMPACT ANALYSIS - The most concern should be the impact on the Education Program. Preliminary discussions with the Supervisor and staff indicate that the general location of the facility will meet their needs. until 10:00 at night. Bus transportation, operating is within two (2) blocks of the facility. Adequate parking is available and the classrooms are of sufficient size to accommodate all academic programs. The area is more residential and appears to be more settled than that of the present location. Discussions with the Director indicate that the program can be relocated easily into Oakhurst Elementary School. The Adult Education Program services a wide range of people throughout the Little Rock area and it is not considered a major element of the Districts desegregation plan and should not require any coordination with parties regarding change elements of the plan. The writer knows of no Court Orders that outline any stipulations with regard to Adult Education and, in general, it is not felt that undue risks are being taken in relocating this program. 7. RESOURCE ANALYSIS There will. of course. be a relocation but it appears that most impact on the staff of the facility, personnel drive to this facility so therefore transportation is not Other than the fact that people may be deemed a detriment. resistant to move, it is felt that the facility will meet the needs Financially, Oakhurst will of the personnel running the program. operate at the same approximate cost as Eastside. will not be completely filled by the Adult Education Program, consideration is being given to moving other agencies into the While Oakhurst building which will maximize the facility and bring the per capita cost down.8. FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS At the present time, preliminary indications are that some members of the faculty are opposed to the move while others support it. The general relocation into a facility with which the staff will have the opportunity to input their needs into minor renovations at the building will hopefully go far in easing the burden of relocating this program. 9. GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION - It is expected that Adult Education could be moved during the month of June 1996. Preliminary planning has already begun. Floor layouts are being drafted at this time, communication plans and surveys are being taken, the building has been assessed for repairs and construction, and instructions will soon be given to the staff on packing and relocating. dce/apl/bcaseaepBUSINESS CASE CONSOL IDATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIO. JS - HOME INSTRUCTION PROGRAM FOR PRESCHOOL YOUNGSTERS LRSD FOUR-YEAR OLD PROGRAMLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CONSOLIDATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters LRSD Four-Year Old Program April 19, 1996 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Little Rock School District (LRSD) provides educational services for four-year old children through the Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY) and the school based Four-Year Old Program. Each program operates as a desegregation strategy. HIPPY is a home based developmentally appropriate intervention program which recognizes the mother as the first significant teacher of the child. HIPPY assists mothers in preparing their children to be ready for kindergarten. The LRSD Four-Year Old Program provides school based instruction delivered by certified teachers. The classes are located at schools that have been difficult to segregate. The students are prepared to enter kindergarten. During this time of financial crisis all budget reduction strategies must be reviewed. Savings can be realized by consolidating the administrative functions of the Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters and the Little Rock School District Four-Year Old Program. The estimated savings could be $23,720.76 or $57,056.58 depending on the option selected.A. BACKGROUND The Little Rock School District (LRSD) provides educational services for four-year old children through the Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY) and the school based Four-Year Old program. Each program operates as a desegregation strategy. HIPPY is a home based developmentally appropriate intervention program which recognizes the mother as the first significant teacher of the child. HIPPY assists mothers in preparing their children to be ready for kindergarten. The LRSD Four-Year old program provides school based instruction delivered by certified teachers. The classes are located at school that have been difficult to segregate. The students are prepared to enter kindergarten. B. PROBLEM DEFINITION There is a need to reduce spending within the Little Rock School District. Therefore, some programs have been identified for possible merger. HIPPY and the LRSD Four-Year Old program were reviewed to determine if the administrative functions could be combined for cost savings and management efficiency. C. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES The District must now decide if it will continue the of the LRSD Four-Year Old Program and HIPPY. The alternatives at this time are: separate management functions 1. Make no changes The current management cost for the LRSD Four-Year Old Program i lie on -n..-_ . o ------------ vudi lui iiic rour-iear uia rrogram is $70,335.82. This amount is the total salaiy cost for one (1) coordinator. No secretary is assigned to this department. L ___ L _______ desegregation budget. (See attached reorganization chart for details.) This cost is charged to the The current management cost for HIPPY is $99,797. Because of budget reductions for the 1995-96 school year, the two coordinator positions which total $48,441.52 are currently funded through Federal Programs. The remaining $51,355.86, which is part of the desegregation budget, supports one (1) supervisor at $31,313.15 and one (1) secretary at $20,042.71. (See organizational chart for details.) one 12. Consolidate Administrative Functions a. Assign the Early Childhood Coordinator the administrative responsibilities for HIPPY and the LRSD Four-Year Old Program. In order to maintain HIPPY at its current level of servicing 249 families, the Early Childhood Coordinator may need to supervise 4 home visitors in addition to assuming the administrative duties. ESTIMATED SAVINGS: HIPPY Supervisor (1.0) less HIPPY training cost for Early Childhood Coordinator $24,220.76 500.00 $23,720.76 b. Assign HIPPY supervisor the administrative responsibilities for the LRSD Four-Year Old Program and HIPPY. The Early Childhood Education Coordinator position requires an Arkansas teachers certificate, K-6 and a masters degree. The current HIPPY supervisor does not hold an Arkansas teachers certificate. An Arkansas teachers certificate is not required to occupy the HIPPY supervisor position. The current HIPPY supervisor would need to obtain an Arkansas teacher s certificate and a masters degree. Since responsibilities would include supervision of the Kindergarten program. Early Prevention of School Failure (EPSF) training would be required for the current HIPPY supervisor. ESTIMATED SAVINGS: Early Childhood Coordinator less training cost for ESPF $73,335.82 350.00 $72,985.82 This does not appear to be a viable option at this time. c. Reassign Early Childhood Coordinator to an elementary school Reassign HIPPY Supervisor to a HIPPY Coordinator position. Hire a person to supervise HIPPY and Four- Year Old Program at a lesser salary. principal position. 2a D. A number of elementary principalship vacancies occur each year. Since the current Early Childhood Coordinator has served as a principal, consideration could be given to reassigning the coordinator to an elementary principalship. The District could hire a person with less administrative experience at a lesser salary. ESTIMATED SAVINGS: (1) Early Childhood Coordinator less salary for new coordinator at lower rate of pay less cost for HIPPY and EPSF training (2) HIPPY Supervisor (1.0) OBJECTIVES $73,335.82 40,000.00 (estimate) 33,335.82 850.00 $32,485.82 $24,220.76 $57,056.58 The objective of the business case is to identify means to reduce spending with the Little Rock School District. A merging of HIPPY and the Four-Year Old Program will save the District money during the current financial crisis. EVALUATION CRITERIA The merger of the HIPPY and Four-Year Old Program administrative functionswill be determined a success if actual expenses are reduced and service of both programs are maintained at the current level. EXPECTED BENEFITS The Districts financial condition will improve and greater administrative efficiency will be evident. E. IMPACT ANALYSIS No modification of the Desegregation Plan would be required. Some persons may believe that the administrative functions of the two programs are to broad for one person to manage effectively. 3'^e District can reap some savings from combining the administration functions of the two programs. F. RESOURCE ANALYSIS a. Assign Early Childhood Coordinator as manager of both programs ESTIMATED SAVINGS: HIPPY Supervisor position less HIPPY training cost for Early Childhood Coordinator $24,220.76 500.00 $23,720.76 b. Assign HIPPY Supervisor as manager of both programs ESTIMATED SAVINGS: Early Childhood Coordinator position less training cost for EPSF $73,335.82 350.00 $72,985.82 This does not appear to be a viable option at this time. c. Reassign HIPPY Supervisor and Early Childhood Coordinator - Hire person to manage both programs at a lesser salary. ESTIMATED SAVINGS: (1) Early Childhood Coordinator less salary for new coordinator at lower pay rate $73,335.82 less cost for HIPPY training and EPSF training 40,000.00 (estimate) $33,335.82 850.00 $32,485.82 (2) HIPPY Supervisor position $24.220.76 $56,706.58 4G. FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS The primary supporters of a merger of HIPPY and the Four-Year Old Program will be persons who believe the District has too many administrators and that the District can "streamline" its operations and become more efficient. The primary detractors will be persons who believe that the uniqueness and complexity of HIPPY and the Four-Year Old Program requires the attention of an administration assigned exclusively to each program. GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES 1. 2. 3. ACTIVITY COMPLETION DATE RESPONSIBLE PERSON Identify administrative option Make reassignments Identify appropriate inservice needs 05/23/96 07/01/96 05/23/96 Superintendent/ Board of Directors Director of Human Resources Director of Staff Development 5COORDINATOR OF EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION RESPONSIBILITIES '^'^t IJ i>i- i. ^^HWS 8i1 I a SUPERVISOR OF HIPPY PROGRAM 4X0^ MOO>3!<f: U2r' W. i** I?' iS*:) Xi WttO Ml?Mi
il- i..s., iS#! BUSINESS CASE EXPANSION OF THE ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL TO INCLUDE HIGH SCHOOLI.RSI)-PR()P-7 WPS~4 Page I Little Rock Alternative School 800 Apperson Street, Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Business Case Expansion of the Alternative School to Include High School Executive Summary Background Problem Definition Analysis of Alternatives I 1 Recommendations Objective Impact Analysis Resources Analysis Typical Schedule General Implementation Plan|.RSI)-PR( )P-7 WPS-1.3/96 Page 2 Executive Summary
The Little Rock School District's alternative school serves only junior high schools (grades 7-8-9) in the district. There is no alternative school for elementary- or senior high schools. The Inter-district Desegregation Plan (April 29, 1992) requires the parties to "Develop (an) alternative school for students in need of intervention . " The Little Rock School District's alternative school has had a capacity of sixty students since its opening. During the last quarter of the 1995-96 school year two significant improvements were made to expand the number of students served. Today we can serve seventy-two students in grades 7, 8, and 9 This limitation is based on the number of faculty and staff. Eight certified teachers assigned twelve students each for five periods and one planning period can serve seventy-two students plus a class of self-contained special education students. With the eleven classrooms presently in use, six classrooms available for future use, each certified teacher having one planning period per day, and a maximum student-teacher ratio of twelve students per class the maximum num.b er ofr' s.t udents_ _abLIle. to be s-e-r-v-e-d- aott rosnnae. bhiutnnHdrrae/d4 rpieprrcrepnntt cmanpaarciittyv uw/onunlldd hbee sveevveenwtyO^-- tivo junior hieh, five special etlucation. and sixt)-ft>ur senior hieh for a total of one hundred thirty-seven Considerations
Students who are not successful at the regular school setting, in spite of interventions, require an-a-b-n--o-r-m---a-l- -a-m--o--u-n--t- -o--f- e--a-ch school's resources Stuaents who are disruptive in the reuular school setting damage the educational environment for the rest of the students. Serving students, who are not successful at the regular school setting, will improve the educational outcomes of both the alternative school student and the regular school students Expanding the maximum number of students able to be served in the facility at Apperson 1 Modify the junior high school program to include the same number of students but from the middle level (grades 6, 7, and 8) and hiring six more teachers and support staff to serve the high schools (crades 9, 10, 11, and 12). The six classrooms that are needed are available. This would almost double the capacity from seventy-two students to one-hundred forty-one students 3. Expand services to the senior students by having one half day classes and a supervised career program for jobs the other half of the day. In that way, capacity could be increased by sixty-four more 1/2 rime students. Z Expanding the maximum number of students able to be served by providing services at more than one facility in the Little Rock District. Other campus's could be Ish Elementary School and Metro or other unused buildings owned by the school district. Expanding the alternative services to include elementary programs (grades 1 through 5) Expanding the alternative services by creating alternative classrooms at each regular school. Recommendation Due to the critical need for alternative services to include elementary and senior high children and the limitations in the budget and fimding, I recommend an immediate expansion of the alternative program by including four semor high grade classes with a school-job/work-study prograin. This would incr^se the maximum capacitv of the facilitv to serve about sixth-four senior high school students in a work-study program. This recommendation would require an immediate search for four qu^ified teachers, one instructional aide, and one qualified work-study supervisor. This expansion is the least expensive of the other alternatives due to the ability to expand without an increase in admimstrative support. Further expansion, beyond this recommendation, would require additional admimstrative support, such as, attendance secretary, instructional aids, security officer, and assistant pnncipa LRSl)-PR()P-7 WPS-i/S/96 Page ? Positive: Negative: Personnel: Impact Analysis Better support for junior and senior high school students' specialized needs Fewer disruptions at the regular school setting. More students being offered specialized alternative services. Public perception improvement concerning importance of alternative services Disparity improvement required by the desegregation plan. Increased budget and funding required for teachers salaries. Increased funding required for classroom furniture. Increased risk of security and discipline problems at the alternative school. Resources Analysis 1) Four teachers (Secondary English/History/Math/Science) 2) One Work-study supervisor 3) One instructional aide 4.0 FTE 1.0 FTE 1.0 FTE bI.RSI)-PR()P-7 WPS-l/3/96 Page 4 Background
The Tri-County Alternative School began approximately three years prior to the opening of the Little Rock Alternative School, "Alternative Learning Center." Late tn the 1990-91 school year Ms. Othello Faison became the first principal. During April 1992, the Office of Desegregation Monitoring evaluated the alternative schools of each of the three districts in Pulaski County. Their findings included: "To develop and provide sound and effective alternative education programs. . . (each district) should understand what the term 'alternative education' means. Dr. Raymond Mosely, a consultant with the Iowa Department of Education stated, ------------J---------------" There are many alternative education is a perspective, not a procedure or program. other ways to become educated. There are other types of environments and structures. Teaching strategies, expectations, services, and programs must contribute to increase the chances for academic achievement. Alternative schools include magnet schools, vocational schools, and other continuation schools. Continuation schools are those that provide another option for the dropout, potential dropout, suspended student, and other students who are not successful at the regular school setting. These schools are expected to provide less competitiveness and more individualized strategies. The typical reasons to assign students to an alternative school include: ** ** * ** excessive absenteeism failure or retention ** ** ** poor grades low math and reading scores low self-esteem suspension feelings of rejection, isolation, insecurity, or alienation lack of motivation ** lack of cooperation ** The alternative school is nontraditional by nature. Intervention strategies are in flux. Learning styles and modes must be reevaluated often. The alternative constant flux. Learning styles ana moaes musi uc iccvaiuaitu uiivu, school staff must be flexible and open to change. Each situation is unique and requires Dr. Kenneth Clark, A noted expert on at-risk students, reminds us that specialized care. 1----------------------- . . our future society depends on our ability to break the cycle of nsk. Experts agree that there is often resistance to institutional change
however, it is just that change that can bring us closer to the answers. The Little Rock School District's alternative school serves only junior high schools (grades 7-8-9) in the district. There is no alternative school for elementory or senior high schools. The Inter-district Desegregation Plan (Apnl 29, 1992) requires the parties to "Develop (an) alternative school for students in need of intervention . . . If The Little Rock School District's alternative school has had a capacity of sixty students since its opening. During the last quarter of the 1995-96 school year two significant improvements were made to expand the number of students served. Today we can serve seventy-two students in grades 7, 8, and 9. This limitation is based on the number of faculty and staff. Eight certified teachers assigned ttvelve students each forI.RSI)-PR()P-7 WTS-t/3/% Page: 5 five periods and one planning period can serve seventy-two students plus a class of self- contained special education students. The facility at Apperson Street has twenty-four classrooms, a library, and a cafetorium. Several of the classrooms are used for other purposes. Room Number Rooms 1 to 4 Rooms 5 and 6 Rooms 7 and 8 Room 9 Room 10 Room 11 Room 12 Room 13 Room 14 Room 15 Room 16 Room 17 Room 18 Room 19 Room 20 Room 21 Room 22 Room 23 Room 24 Purpose__________ Classrooms Security Offices Main Office Level Zero English Reading/Custodian Computer Room Math Social studies Science Health Ninth Grade Class Teachers' Lounge Hearing Office Special Education Orientation Woodshop Level One Weight Room Classroom Available Not Available Not Available In use In use Not available In use In use In use In use In use In use Not available Not available In use In use Available In use Available In use 1 1 1 1 1 1 Not avail Available 2 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I Totals n 6 7 With the eleven classrooms presently in use, six classrooms available for future use, each certified teacher having one planning period per day, and a maximum studentteacher ratio of twelve students per class the maximum number of students able to be served at one hundred percent capacity would be iunivr high, .five special education, and xixty-four seni high for a total of one hundred (hirtv-seven (J4U Problem Definition: The number of students in our district junior and senior high schools requiring alternative services exceeds the maximum capacity of the seventy-two students presently being served at the alternative school due to faculty/staff limitations. Limits on budgets and funding restrict the district from maximum use of the alternative school. Considerations: Students who are not successful at the regular school setting, in spite of interventions, require an abnormal amount of each school s resources. Students who are disruptive in the regular school setting damage the educational environment for the rest of the students. Serving students, who are not successful at the regular school setting, will improve the educational outcomes of both the alternative school student and the regular school students.l.KSl)-PK()P-7 WPS-4/3/% Page 6 Analysis of Alternatives: In order to serve the required number of students who qualify for alternative school services, expansion of the present program is necessary to include sixth grade and senior high school. Expansion can be achieved in several ways. ** Expanding the maximum number of students able to be served in the facility' at Apperson Street. 1. Modify the junior high school program to include the same number of students but from the middle level (grades 6, 7, and 8) and hiring six more teachers and support staff to serve the high schools (grades 9,10, 11, and 12). The six classrooms that are needed are available. This would almost double the capacity from seventy-two students to one-hundred forty-one students. 3. Expand services to the senior students by having one half day classes and a supervised career program for jobs the other half of the day. In that way, capacity could be increased by sixty-four more 1/2 time students. ** Expanding the maximum number of students able to be served by providing services at more than one facility in the Little Rock District. Other campus's could be Ish Elementary School and Metro or other unused buildings owned by the school district. Expanding the alternative services to include elementary programs (grades 1 ** through 5). Expanding the alternative services by creating alternative classrooms at each regular school. Recommendations: Due to the critical need for alternative services to include elementary' and senior high children and the limitations in the budget and funding, 1 recommend an immediate expansion of the alternative program by including four senior high grade classes with a school-job/work-study program. This would increase the maximum capacity of the facility to serve about sixth-four senior high school students in a work-study program. This recommendation would require an immediate search for four qualified teachers, one instructional aide, and one qualified work-study supervisor. This expansion is the least ive of the other alternatives due to the ability to expand without an increase in expensive ot the other aitemarives uuc lu me auu.ij uv -------- 77 administrative support. Further expansion, beyond this recommendation, would require additional administrative support, such as, attendance secretary, instructional aids. security officer, and assistant principal. Objective: to According to the desegregation program description, "The Alternative Learning Center (ALC) provides the support (academic, educational, and social) necessary to students so that students can return to their regular school setting and function effectively. The student population at ALC consists of "at-nsk youngsters those who are at compulsory attendance age and are experiencing difficulties m school because ofLRSI)-PR( >P-7 WPS-J/.V96 Page 7 poor attendance, or other dysfunctional situations which seriously impede the student's objective is to insure alternative educational services are II ability to succeed.," our aiiemauvc cuuoauunai ativiwo available for all students who are in need of services. Therefore, our goal is to AOThave to turn down students who need our services and are recommended for services by the junior or senior high principals and the Little Rock School District Alternative Screening Committee. ** Goal: To provide an appropriate educational environment for senior high students who are not having success at the regular classroom setting aM have been recommended by their principal and the LRSD Alternative Screening Committee for alternative services. ** Evaluation Criteria: Report bi-weekly student enrollment by grade level, race. and gender w'ith a comparative analysis between enrollments prior to this expansion and enrollments after this expansion. **jExpectedBenefits: Additional students will be offered alternative services hi^^ificipals will be able to devote more attention to the educational Junior^hign principals will be able to devote more attention to me eaucaiionai improvements at their schools instead of the management of the disruptions, interruptions, and frustrations caused by the at-risk children who are now being served by the alternative school. Teachers will be able to provide better services for the remaining students without the pressures and frustrations of interruptive and disruptive behaviors. Impact Analysis: Positive: ** ** ** ** ** Negative: ** ** Better support for junior and senior high school students specialized needs. Fewer disruptions at the regular school setting. More students being offered specialized alternative services. Public perception improvement concerning importance of alternative services Disparity improvement required by the desegregation plan. Increased budget and funding required for teachers salaries. Increased funding required for classroom furniture. Increased risk of security and discipline problems at the alternative school. Resources Analysis: Personnel: Furniture
1) Four teachers (Secondar>' English/History/Math/Science)4.0 FTE 2) One Work-study supervisor 0 FTE 3) One instructional aide FTE 1) Classrooms 1,2, 3, and 4. Ten student desks and one teacher's desk for each room. One round table with four chairs for each room. One booth style desk and chair for each room for time out. 2j Media Center: Nine round tables and fortt' chairs.I,RS1)-PR( )P-7 WPS-J3M. Page K FURNITURE TOTALS STUDENT DESKS 40 RND TABLES 13 CHAIRS 56 BOOTHS TEACH DESK 4 4 Resources: 1) Books
One teacher's editions of each subject, each grade level (12). One classroom set for each subject (32). 3) Copy machine Available for high school staffs use. TYPICAL SCHEDULE Class Anive land? 3and4 Study Lunch 1 and2 3and4 Study/End lOA lOB 8:30 8:40 10:00 11:20 12:10 Work-Study Program. Work-Study Program 12:10 12:40 2:00 3:20/3:45 IOC lOD 8:30 8:40 10:00 11:20 12:10 Work-Study Program. Work-Study Program 12:10 12:40 2:00 3:20/3:45 1 lA 1 IB 8:30 8:40 10:00 11:20 12:10 Work-Study Program. Work-Study Program 12:10 12:40 2:00 3:20/3:45 12A 12B 8:30 8:40 10:00 11:20 12:10 Work-Study Program. Work-Study Program 12:10 12:40 2:00 3:20/3:45 General Implementation Plan: Milestones Timeline Tasking 1. Approval of Proposal Immediate School Board 2. Advertise for Personnel 4 Secondary Teachers 1 Instructional Aide 1 Work-Study Supervisor April 96 Human Resources 3. Order Furniture and Resource Materials May 96 Procurement 4. Paint Classrooms and Prepare for Class June 96 Plant Services 5. Interviews Complete July 96 Principal 6. Personnel in Place August 96 Human Resources 7. Evaluation of Proposal Objectives Quarterly 1996-97 Principal BUSINESS CASE INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER RELOCATED TO ISH ELEMENTARY SCHOOLSUBJECT: COST CUTTING PROPOSAL FISCAL YEAR 1996 Introduction - It is recommended that the following be considered as a cost cutting measure to be implemented in the budget process and subsequently the 1996 budget. Proposal - It is proposed that the Instructional Resource Center, presently located in the Parkin Building at 6th and Ringo, be relocated to Ish Elementary School during the summer of 1996. Background - Lee School at Ringo in 1993. The Instructional Resource Center was relocated from 12 th and Cedar to the Parkin Building at 6th and This was due to the deteriorated condition of the Parkin Building is leased by the Little Rock Lee School. The Parkin Buildxng is leasec ny one School District for an amaual rental of $88,800.00 per year utilities and parking. The present lease is for 24,000 square feet - - feet is offxce space and the of which approximately 13,000_square yATPa4n4Tig 11,000 square feet xs unfinished warehousing space. Ish Elementary School became vacant in until a final decision was reached by the courts, school presently houses the relocated chxldren 1993 and remained vacant The elementary from Chicot ii^meZtaSy S^ool, but it is anticipated that they will vacate t^t space in March of 1996. regard to Ish Elementary School. No future plans have been developed with Requests have been received from at xeaso iive (5) different agScies desiring to occupy the Ish Elem^tary School. Each of these esencies ale sot Little Both Scbool_Distritt ag^ties^and ]Lease either part or all of the building. It is would desire to lease this building at an ___________ hopes that the Little Rock School District would absorb most of the operating costs. least five the Ish Elementary School. have requested to anticipated that they extremely low rate in Problem Definition assist the Little It is - The problem is to institute measures that will Rock School District in cutting its operating costs in 1996 and future years. - There are basically two (2) alternatives Analysis of Center
1) allow . the to remain in its present location. with regard to the Instructional Resource Center If we were to select this alternatxve, the present operating cost This expected to be $127,112.00. the rental of additional for 1996 for the Parkin Lease xs 1995 rental of $88,800.00, and the estxmated utilxty costs of is based on the ---- $35^000 00 ^^It ie howevS^ anticipated that the rent may go up by $35,000.00. It xs, nowepercent in 1996. While the Center located at 6 th and Ringo is It ie, as much as three While the Instructional Resource convenient to the general operation of the Little Rock SchoolPage Two Continued District, the annual cost of over $127,000.00 may not warrant its remaining in that facility
2) relocating the Instructional Resource Center to Little Rock School District space. The recommendation to relocate the Instructional Resource Center to a building presently owned by the Little Rock School District is to the rental cost presently incurred by the The operating cost of Ish Elementary School _ the in space. principally offset DXStZSrXCtZa Vxxc ----------- last two (2) years has only averaged. $16,000.00 for utilities. Maintenance costs have averaged approximately $24,000.00 per With an anticipated cost next year of Ish at approximately $40,000.00, it would appear save as much $87,000.00 next year. However, there would be a one time cost associated with the relocation to cover such items as moving costs, rewiring of the facility for to include packaging and relocation, computers telephone relocation. Reconrnendation - Instructional Resource Center Elementary School. operating Ish to It is recommended that the District relocate the from the Parkin Building to Ish The Parkin Building is approximately 24,000 square feet. Elementary School, although subdivided into rooms, tc_^_r Ish totals 31,800 In addition, parking without the additional lease is ______ J A a square feet. -------- . . - . approximately the same at both locations. parking lot during meetings and in Little Rock School District owns While Ish However, consideration to expanding the service instruction can be done, as ----- ------- 17 immediately adjacent to Ish Clementa^
Jchool^ Elementary School may not appear to be^ as^ r _ property centrally located as the piSZn Balding, trav^l ti^oughout Little Rock to this facility _ 25 minutes from any location make it easily reachable within 20 in the City. Estimating the one time cost least give us year and a savings of _ _ These monies of approximately $35,000.00 would at approximately $50,000.00 savings during the first approxiiuduc eon.non.00 in. 'approximately of $85,000.00 to $90,000.00 in future years. operational short falls. could be used to offset current Objective - The objective of this proposal is_two.fold. reduce the operating costs^of decreasing its overhead presently owned by the Little future plans have been developed. The objective 1) To the Little Rock School District by and 2) by better utilizing space that is Rock School District for which no made to retaining the presence of the in the community surrounding Ish Consideration must also be^ Thi^^building has been constantly occupied Elementary School-------recently became vacant during the This since the middle ^^50's School'. The relocation of the construction of King Eiemenuairy t-he facilitv in October children from Chicot Elementary School into the facility in October the building occupiec. of 1993 has again made School. The permanentPage Three Continued relocation into this facility of the Instructional Resource Center positive step by the surrounding would most assuredly be seen as a . the local government as being an ----- cne loccxx future plans for its closed community and ---- _ Rock school District to have Little facilities. Analysis The Ish Ipproiimateiy'vToOO square feet larger a. M A I K^fiOlXZ initiative of the Elementary School Facility is than the facility presently The ability for t-ViA Instructional Resource Center. ... . -------d- xsh Elementary School will not them to tneir----------------------*n isn j subdivided into in any y =^.,^P:yi?^aiSatiorin sl^ent^Tr School. The Classrooms as this was by the additional 7,000 square subdivision of rooms will be f_ y instructional Resource feet Which will allow .JjTw at all he coSined in the sane he need as a school huildins in the being used by 1 conduct their operations in in any way be subdivided into The future. Resource Analysis There is no specific items with regard to that present staffing of the Kesourcf^ r identify staiimg o- resource ly- ^Vtrict wouS be^responsible for the relocation Little Rock School District School to Chicot School children from Chicot ^,.^.nt relocation June of 1996. of both the----------- upon its completion in March i- Instructional Resource Center in of the Implementation Plan January, 1996 month so as to - A tentative time line follows: A tentative decision must be made this 'proceed with preliminary planning. J . During this period of time we would February and March building, plan the the Instructional Center ... determine how complete the move and allow personnel to they can operate During the building, plan the Resource look at their organization in the new facility. * -n iQQfi - During this period of time, April, 1996 - During finalize that we would prepare During it is hopeful we and any contracts necessary to support the move. May, 1996 anything materials telephones in May, we we would make the placement of orders for _ we woux aeeomplish the move, such as necessary support computers and "'^^o.lble'conotru^ction. Additionally and any ci cut intent the Parkin Building. would make to for support construction. not to renew would make the lease atPage Four Continued 1996 - It is anticipated that upon June, 1396 - It xs the school that the Instructional Resource the closure of Center would Ish Elementary School, completed within a one month period. move to This move can easily be DCE/apl/ccpircBUSINESS CASE OUTSOURCING OF COURIER SERVICESBH BUSINESS CASE OUTSOURCING MAIL COURIER SERVICE CURRENTLY HANDLED BY THE PROCUREMENT AND MATERIALS MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Procurement and Materials Management Department currently has a mail and courier service section consisting of two vehicles and two drivers. Intra-district mail is collected and sorted daily for next day delivery. In addition, correspondence going to out-of-district destinations is picked up daily and metered at the central administration building for deposit to the main U.S. Postal Office the same day. Limited, on call special delivery, pick up, and messenger service is also provided as time and available vehicle cargo space allow, as well as video distribution and A/V equipment pick up and delivery for Media/Library Services. The intent of this business case is to determine the efficiency and/or economy of continuing this service in-house versus outsourcing the service to a private company. This analysis is in response to a request by the LRSD Board for potential areas of savings that could be realized by the District. There are only two alternatives considered: One alternative is to do nothing and continue performing the service in-house. This alternative is not recommended because of the increasing overhead costs each year in terms of labor (salary and benefits) and equipment maintenance expenses. The other alternative is to contract with a private provider of this type service and take advantage of the savings available due to the efficiencies inherent in a contract with a firm that specializes in this work. This outsourcing alternative is recommended. The only negative aspect is the displacement of two employees, one of whom has indicated that he will be leaving the District soon anyway. The savings by adopting this recommendation are two (2) FTEs in the Procurement Department and approximately $43, 700 each year starting with the first annual contract. 1 April 26, 1996A. BACKGROUND The Procurement Department has provided the internal mail distribution and courier service for the District since 1964. Up until 1987, this was accomplished with one employee and one mail van. In order to maintain the same level of daily service, an additional driver and van were added after the 1987 annexation. At this time the two couriers deliver and pick up mail/distribution each day at each District facility plus ODM, State Department of Education and the CTA offices. In addition to mail items, they also pick up and deliver, as space on the van allows, media related equipment and videos for the Library Services office. The feasibility of outsourcing this service to a private contractor was investigated on a couple of occasions in years past but never seriously considered. Previously, there was essentially only one courier service operating in Little Rock (SunBelt). Also, the savings achieved by contracting out were not very significant during previous evaluations. The District is searching for areas in which economies can be achieved. Contracting with a private courier company can result in a savings while maintaining a satisfactory level of service. B. PROBLEM DEFINITION The Districts current financial situation places a responsibility on all departments to operate as efficiently and cost effectively as possible to provide required services at an acceptable level. The mail courier service currently provided in-house has been at an acceptable performance level, however, the cost for this service is excessive when compared to having a private company perform the same work. There are now numerous established private companies in the Little Rock area that provide mail courier service, and a substantial savings opportunity is possible. The costs associated with performing this fimction have escalated in recent years due to the overhead of owmng and operating vehicles dedicated to a single purpose and the salaries paid the employees performing this task. Both employees have performed satisfactorily over the years but this longevity has resulted in salary increases that represent compensation considerably greater than what a private company would pay for the same work. The vehicles currently being used for this service are: 1) a 1988 Ford Van with an odometer reading of 138,825 miles and 2) a 1993 Ford Van with an odometer reading of 49,000 miles. If the in-house mail service is to continue, a new van will need to be purchased to replace the 1988 van as it has had numerous mechanical problems over the past two years. The estimated cost to replace this van is $17,000. 2If the District were to choose outsourcing, two FTEs would be eliminated. One employee is graduating from college in May and is expected to leave the District. The other employee has been with the District for eight years and would be offered an option to accept another position within the District in accordance with policy. In addition, the warehouse manager devotes roughly 1/3 of his time to helping with the mail courier effort. As a result of outsourcing, this would free him to handle other warehouse management responsibilities. However, the warehouse manager would be required to coordinate and supervise the activities of the contracted service provider. C. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES These alternatives were generated during 1996-97 Support Services staff budget meetings where possible areas of saving were discussed. There are only two alternatives considered, (1) continue the services as is, or (2) contracting out. The Procurement Office also had preliminary discussions with a private company concerning the methods used by courier service companies and the associated costs. Alternatives 1. Continue providing the service in house: The level of service currently provided has worked relatively well for several years. The timing for a change is convenient in that one employee is anticipated to leave soon after receiving his college degree. The other employee, who also acts as the Assistant Warehouse Manager, would need to be placed in another comparable position, if possible. The current system is, of course, reasonably responsive to emergency or on-call courier requirements. However, some on-call deliveries could be eliminated with better scheduling and discipline. It is sometimes too easy to pick up the phone and call for an emergency pickup or delivery, rather than wait for the regular scheduled service. There is the tendency not to associate cost to those resources owned/operated in-house. The primary disadvantage for continuing the current service in-house is the associated annual cost to the District for providing the service: Both labor costs and the increasing expenses associated with owning and maintaining the mail vans, make outsourcing attractive from the standpoint of cost versus benefits derived from providing this routine service. The dollars below reflect 1995-96 annualized cost: Salaries (current including benefits for two employees) Vehicle Maintenance and Depreciation Fuel Vehicle Insurance (premium cost plus average one claim per year) Mail Handling Supplies TOTAL $69,128 5,806 5,159 2,260 1.275 $83.628 This alternative is least desirable in that this administrative function can be accomplished more economically by contracting out to a private courier service. 32. Outsourcing the service to a private company: The level of service would be expected to be at or better than currently received. In addition, a private contractor could provide: a. More flexibility fEfFiciency) by furnishing more personnel and vehicles during the busy school year and less during the summer. Vehicles are radio-equipped and could be reached at all times to expeditiously handle emergency or on-call requirements. b. Reduced management (Efficiency & Economy)- The District would be required only to monitor the contract for compliance rather than conduct the day to day activities, allowing the Supply Center Manager to expend more time on his Supply Center Management responsibilities, thereby eliminating the need for an Assistant Warehouse Manager. (One of the mail drivers fills in at this position part time or as needed.) c The same service at a lower cost (Economy) by providing necessary personnel, vehicles, insurance, and management to meet the requirements of the District. The efficiencies inherent to a company whose existence depends upon fast, courteous service, are evident when comparing outsourcing against performing this function in-house. Cost estimates obtained fi'om a local company currently providing service to the City of Little Rock for the past six years were obtained and are estimated based on the delivery service presently performed by the District couriers: Monthly Charge for daily pickup and delivery to schools including handling of U.S. postal mail Per Delivery rate for extra deliveries over and above routine service Assuming the District has a requirement for 25 additional deliveries per month the annualized cost would be ($7 rate x 25 avg. deliveries x 12 months) Annualized cost for routine service ($3,150 x 12 months) Total expected annualized outsourcing cost $3,150 $7 per delivery $2,100 37,800 $39,900 D. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the District outsource the mail/courier service currently provided by the Procurement and Materials Management Department. The expected annual cost savings of $43,728 ($83,628 - $39,900) is the primary consideration. 4E. OBJECTIVE The objective of this recommendation is to help the District reduce costs while assuring the same and/or better level of service currently provided. The efficient and cost effective delivery/mailing of intemal/extemal correspondence is essential to the operations of the District. Implementation of this recommendation supports LRSD Goals relating to reducing costs and improving service. The successful contractors performance will be evaluated annually by the Procurement and Materials Management Department. Some of the criteria used in this assessment will be: 1. 2. 3. School/Dept. satisfaction as measured by the number of complaints received. Timeliness of extra service deliveries. Response time to District requests. 4. Adherence to cost as stated in the contractors proposal. 5 Reduction in LRSD management involvement in daily mail operations. The expected benefits of this recommendation will be an immediate cost savings realized by the district in current and future years. In addition, the level of service will be equal to or better than that cunently provided. The recipients of these benefits will be all District schools/departments. F. IMPACT ANALYSIS The positive impact of this recommendation will be the cost savings and reduced management time required. The negative impact will be employee reaction to outsourcing and the resulting displacement of one employee. Implementation of this plan will not impact the desegregation plan g.r .court orders, There should be no disruption of service during transitioning to a contracted courier service. The recent outsourcing efforts by the District in other areas should not adversely affect the implementation of this recommendation in that it involves only minimal employee impact. Any potential negative reaction in converting to a contracted courier service can be minimized by careful coordination and implementation of the change-over. There is no nsLto the District if this recommendation is not accepted. The Procurement Department will continue the service in-house. 5Timins: It is recommended that an RFP be prepared with a contract awarded and service to begin July 1, 1996. The transition should not be difficult
however, in order to reduce a hurried start-up by the successful contractor, a contract should be signed by June 15, 1996. G. RESOURCE ANALYSIS Personnel The recommendation is expected to reduce the FTEs in the Procurement Department by two (2) positions. Financial A yearly savings of $43,728 is expected. The costs obtained from the contractor are conservative
therefore, actual savings could be greater. A Request for Proposal would be prepared by the Procurement Department. H. FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS The primary supporters of this recommendation will be patrons and taxpayers of the District and the administration. Those most opposed to this recommendation will be the employees impacted and those generally opposed to outsourcing District services for whatever reason their personal agenda may dictate. L GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The following milestones for implementing this recommendation are suggested and will be monitored by the Director, Procurement and Materials Management: Milestone Date Business Case Approved April 1996 Respotisible Person LRSD CabinetZBoard Prepare RFP May 1, 1996 Neal, Procurement Director Proposals Submitted May 15, 1996 Neal, Procurement Director Proposal Evaluated May 22, 1996 Neal, Procurement Director Award Made May 24, 1996 Neal, Procurement Director Notice to Employees June 1, 1996 Hurley, Human Resources Director Contract Negotiated and Completed Contractor Begins Operations June 15, 1996 July 1, 1996 Neal, Procurement Director Neal, Procurement Director 6BUSINESS :ase OUTSOURCING SPECIAL NEEDS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMOutsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 1 Outsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Executive Summary The most expensive part of student transportation is transportation services for special needs students. Curb-to-curb service, smaller capacity buses, bus aides/monitors, special equipment, extra driver training, and restrictions on ride time are some of the components contributing to these higher costs. Medically fragile students require even greater resources. The intent of this business case is to explain the current issues confronting the district related to transporting special needs students. Parents, teachers and others are concerned that the transportation service provided by the District for special needs students may neither be safe nor meet the needs of each student. Over half (58%) of the buses in the fleet are over seven years old. Of the 18 lift buses in the fleet, 12 are over seven years old. These buses often have mechanical breakdowns which create problems in getting students to school or home in a timely manner. The recommendation of this business case is to outsource the system to a private contractor. The goal statement is
To provide special needs students with a safe, reliable, and cost effective transportation system. This proposal supports the districts strategic plan in the areas of safety and meeting the needs of individual students. The following is a list of criteria to be used in determining whether or not the problem is solved when this solution is implemented
1. 2. The District will successfully defend the transportation system against the current and future lawsuits related to special needs transportation. Driver satisfaction will increase by a reduction in the number of complaints from drivers about the equipment. 3. Buses will be on time. 4. Accidents will decrease. 5. 6. The number of buses out-of-service for repairs will decrease. A schedule for replacement will be strictly followed.Outsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 2 All students will have safe, reliable and appropriate service to meet their needs. Outsourcing will bring stability to the transportation system, costs can be identified and contained, and effective training will be provided to all staff. The risk of not implementing this solution is increasing parental complaints, continued driver dissatisfaction, equipment failure, and the lack of the ability to respond to student needs. The risks of implementing this solution are the unfounded presumptions that the costs will be greater than calculated and people will lose their jobs. Transition will strain current management because of the short period of time available when considering the activities associated with the start up of the school year. It is critical that the decision be made before June 1 so personnel can be notified of the elimination of administrative and other positions within the timelines of the law and contracts. If outsourcing is to be implemented, patrons will need to know when the Board of Directors approves. Awareness must be generated in the community, staff must be notified of the change, and a number of other tasks as noted in the timeline included must be addressed. No additional costs for personnel are necessary to implement this proposal. Some long time District administrators will be displaced. At least $100,000 can be saved from the current proposed transportation budget for 1996-97. There is a real possibility of additional savings depending upon the selected proposal. The old buses can be replaced on a strict schedule which should reduce the number of late buses due to breakdowns.Outsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 3 The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Manager of Support Services. Milestone_________________________________________ 1. Establish a transportation steering committee________ 2. Write request for proposal (RFP)__________________ 3. Steering committee review RFP____________________ 4. RFP mailed to potential contractors________________ 5. RFP information session for potential contractors 6, Proposals submitted_______________________ 7, Proposals screened by steering committee___________ 8. Recommended proposal presented to the LRSD Board of Directors for approval_________________________ 9, Notice to employees_____________________________ 10, Include this as a budget reduction strategy__________ 11. Recruitment of current employees_________________ 12. Recruitment of new employees_______________ 13. Inventory property________________ 14. Finalize contract__________________ 15. Property transfer and occupancy__________________ 16. Complete initial bus routes __________________ 17. Retrain current employees_______________________ 18. Notify patrons_________________ 19. Begin delivery of replacement equipment___________ 20. Complete driver/aide/monitor orientation and dry runs Date 4/17/96 4/26/96 4/29/96 5/1/96 5/15/96 5/22/96 5/23/96 5/23/96 5/24/96 5/24/96 6/4/96 6/4/96 6/26/96 6/27/96 6/30/96 8/8/96 8/1/96 8/1/96 8/12/96 8/16/96 Person Smith, Neal Neal, Cheatham Committee Neal Neal, Cheatham Contractors Neal Williams Hurley Milhollen Contractor Contractor Neal Neal, Attorneys Neal, Milhollen Contractor Contractor Vann, Smith Contractor ContractorOutsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 4 Background: Current situation: Everything has a cost. The per student costs of transporting students with special needs are higher than for regular student transportation. Curb-to-curb service, smaller capacity buses, bus aides/monitors, special equipment, extra driver training, and restrictions on ride time are some of the components contributing to these higher costs. Medically fragile students require even greater resources. The number of medically fragile students is increasing because of the improvements in medical technology. It is impossible to meet the needs of individual children and have a very efficient program. Every attempt is made to serve special needs students in the least restrictive environment such as on the regular buses. At this time during the 1994-95 school year 395 special needs students and 60 Alternative Learning Center (ALC) students rode special needs buses. This year 450 students are currently assigned for special transportation. The district transports 40 students to the Arkansas Schools for the Blind and Deaf. Also, 80 ALC students are transported this year. The Districts special needs transportation operation was in the media on September 25, 1995 when a parent padlocked the gates to the bus terminal. Later that parent and other individuals filed a lawsuit against the district which included charges related to the transportation of special needs students. Even though the district s equipment and personnel meet all state and federal requirements, issues related to labor unrest, safety and poor service continue to plague the district concerning special needs transportation. The maintenance of the fleet is done by contract with Laidlaw Transit. Two mechanics are assigned to do routine and emergency service. Breakdowns continue to be a problem due to the age of the fleet. Background information: Prior to this year, the day-to-day operations of the regular transportation and special needs transportation were intermingled. There was no clear delineation of services and no clear way to determine actual costs by program. Special needs drivers and aides received very little specialized training. The 1995-96 state funding for transportation was based on the number of buses used and the number of students transported in 1994-95. At this time there is no money earmarked for transportation under the new formula. What had been used in the past was folded into the new formula. Of the $1,600,000 in regular transportation aid this year, only $36,000 was included for the increased costs related to transporting special needsOutsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 students. The district does receive funding from the settlement for all costs incurred for transportation related to the M-to-M and Magnet programs which is estimated to exceed 2.1 million dollars for 1995-96. s The laws and regulations impacting special needs students continue to change. The students Individual Education Plan (lEP) determines when the student is to be transported and if special accommodations are needed such as a monitor or aide assigned to assist the student. More options are available to students with lEPs and specialized service is often required such as transportation home at noon because the student is attending for a half day rather than the whole day. Problem Definition: Problem Statement: Parents, teachers and others are concerned that the transportation service provided by the District for special needs students may neither be safe nor meet the needs of each student. Considerations: The Districts financial situation places a strain on all departments to operate efficiently to provide the students with an acceptable level of service. Special needs transportation is more expensive than regular transportation. Specialized equipment is needed for medically fragile students. The district can contract with other agencies or parents to provide some of these services but not having the appropriate equipment is not an acceptable reason for not providing transportation if it is part of the students lEP. The Districts special needs fleet is aging. There are 52 buses of which 18 have lifts and locks for wheel chairs. Only five buses use diesel fuel. Year # of Buses # of Lifts 83 1 1 84 0 0 85 4 2 86 16 9 87 8 0 88 0 0 89 1 1 90 11 0 91 6 0 92 2 2 93 0 0 94 0 0 95 3 3 The district has used the following criteria for replacing buses in the past
Gasoline powered buses: Any such bus that exceeds eight years of age or 120,000 miles at the start of any school year. Diesel powered buses: Any bus that exceeds 10 years of age or 160,000 miles at the beginning of any school year.Outsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 6 Thirty buses are more than seven years old. It normally takes seven to eight months to get buses once the order is placed. If buses are ordered in April, they should arrive in December or January. Driver performance is another consideration. One of the concerns regularly expressed by drivers is the need for new equipment. Drivers are frustrated when their buses are not available due to mechanical problems and students can become confused when their bus is changed. Good equipment that is well maintained can contribute to improved service. Analysis of Alternatives: Process: A committee of administrators, parents, teachers, and drivers was formed in the fall of 1995 before the lawsuit was filed to work on solutions to perceived problems within the special needs section of the transportation department. The group identified the need for new buses and better training as solutions to most of the concerns. Identification: Alternative solutions are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Change nothing. This will not address the problem and will cause costs to grow annually as the fleet ages and training is not maintained when the staff has turnover. Follow industry standards for equipment replacement, personnel, etc. including a strict schedule for replacing the fleet. This is the most expensive alternative. The district would continue to manage the system. Buses would be replaced on schedule. This would impact the current and future budgets. Phase in the industry standards over a five year period of time. This alternative would have a modest cost and would lead to stabilizing costs over an extended period of time. The district would have more flexibility to respond to the changing state and federal laws as well as student needs. The district would continue to manage the system. Consolidate special needs transportation in all Pulaski County Districts. Getting an agreement on this would be a major challenge. Outsource the special needs transportation to another public agency. The local agencies that provide specialized transportation cannot meet the current community demands for services and do not have the resources and equipment to meet the districts transportation needs.Outsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 7 6. Outsource the special needs transportation to a private concern. This alternative would provide cost containment and more recent equipment. The district would monitor the contract for compliance rather than conduct the day-to-day activities of the system. Recommendation : Action recommended to address the problem: Outsource the special needs transportation system to a private concern. Rationale: The costs of special needs transportation continues to rise. Outsourcing can assist the District in containing the costs. Other factors include a reasonable and predictable fleet replacement, lower driver absenteeism, improved vehicle maintenance , and reduced vehicle accident rate will be realized. These improvements will lead to significantly fewer problems and complaints, as well as establish more stable and reliable special needs transportation system for the future LRSD needs. Objective: Objective of the recommendation: To provide special needs students with a safe, reliable, and cost effective transportation system. Goal support: This recommendation will support the recently adopted strategic plan as follows: Strategy 10 We will develop and implement plans to restore public confidence in the safety and security of our schools. Strategy 8 We will construct a delivery system that allows us to plan and implement individualized educational goals for all LRSD students that does not predetermine or limit options at an early age. The safety of students on special needs buses is one of the major concerns of everyone. Providing appropriate transportation to enable students to access programs identified in each students lEP is a goal of the transportation department.Outsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 8 Evaluation criteria: 1. 2. The District will successfully defend the transportation system against the current and future lawsuits related to special needs transportation. Driver satisfaction will increase by a reduction in the number of complaints from drivers about the equipment. 3. Buses will be on time 4. Accidents will decrease. 5. The number of buses out-of-service for repairs will decrease. 6. A schedule for replacement will be strictly followed. Expected Benefits: The students will have safe, reliable and appropriate service to meet their needs. Outsourcing will bring stability to the transportation system, costs can be identified and contained, and effective training will be provided to all staff. Impact Analysis: Positives: 1. The District will successfully defend the transportation system against the current and future lawsuits related to special needs 2. Driver satisfaction will increase by a reduction in the number of complaints from drivers about the equipment. 3. Buses will be on time. 4. Accidents will decrease. 5. The number of buses out-of-service for repairs will decrease. 6. A schedule for replacement will be strictly followed. 7. Currently employed drivers/aides will maintain their jobs.Outsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 9 Negatives: 1. Current employees may oppose change. 2. Some parents may express concern related to change. 3. At least four long time non-certified administrators will be displaced. Desegregation Plan: This recommendation has no impact on the Desegregation Plan. Court Orders: This recommendation addresses issues raised in the cunent lawsuit. Political factors: The union will likely oppose efforts to privatize the special needs transportation. Risks: The risk of not implementing this solution is increasing parental complaints, continued driver dissatisfaction, equipment failure, and the lack of the ability to respond to student needs. The risks of implementing this solution are the unfounded presumptions that the costs will be greater than calculated and people will lose their jobs. Transition will strain current management because of the short period of time available when considering the activities associated with the start up of the school year. Timing: It is critical that the decision be made before June 1 so personnel can be notified of the elimination of administrative and other positions. If outsourcing is to be implemented, patrons will need to know when the Board of Directors approves. Awareness must be generated in the community, staff must be notified of the change, and a number of other tasks as noted in the timeline included must be addressed.Outsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 10 Resources Analysis: Personnel Analysis: No additional costs for personnel are necessary to implement this proposal. Some long time District administrators will be displaced. Financial Analysis: At least $ 100,000 can be saved from the current proposed transportation budget for 1996-97. There is a real possibility of additional savings depending upon the selected proposal. The old buses can be replaced on a strict schedule which should reduce the number of late buses due to breakdowns. Force Field Analysis: Forces For: Supporters of this proposal include administrators within the District and patrons because of the improved services for students. The Board of Directors and administration of the district are aware of the financial benefits to the district of this solution. Forces Against: Those most opposed to the solution will be bus drivers/aides/monitors who fear losing their jobs and those who fear private sector managing public sector services.Outsourcing Special Needs Transportation System Business Case 4/19/96 11 Implementation Plan: The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Manager of Support Services. _____________________Milestone____________________ 1. Establish a transportation steering committee________ 2, Write request for proposal (RFP)__________________ 3 Steering committee review RFP___________________ 4, RFP mailed to potential contractors________________ 5, RFP information session for potential contractors 6, Proposals submitted_____________________________ 7. Proposals screened by steering committee___________ 8. Recommended proposal presented to the LRSD Board of Directors for approval_________________________ 9. Notice to employees_____________________________ 10. Include this as a budget reduction strategy__________ 11. Recruitment of current employees_________________ 12. Recruitment of new employees___________________ 13. Inventory property_____________________________ 14. Finalize contract_______________________________ 15. Property transfer and occupancy__________________ 16. Complete initial bus routes_______________________ 11. Retrain current employees_______________________ 18. Notify patrons_________________________________ 19. Begin delivery of replacement equipment___________ 20. Complete driver/aide/monitor orientation and dry runs Date 4/17/96 4/26/96 4/29/96 5/1/96 5/15/96 5/22/96 5/23/96 5/23/96 5/24/96 5/24/96 6/4/96 6/4/96 6/26/96 6/27/96 6/30/96 8/8/96 8/1/96 8/1/96 8/12/96 8/16/96 Person Smith, Neal Neal, Cheatham Committee Neal Neal, Cheatham Contractors Neal Williams Hurley_______ Milhollen_____ Contractor Contractor Neal Neal, Attorneys Neal, Milhollen Contractor Contractor Vann, Smith Contractor Contractori BUSINESS CASE REDUCE ADMINISTRATIVE CONTRACTSBUSINESS CASE SIX PERIOD DAY VERSUS SEVEN PERIOD DAYBUSINESS CASE STAGGERED STARTING TIMES( staggered Start Times Business Case 4/19/96 Staggered Start Times Executive Summary: One of the budget cutting strategies used by many school districts across the United States is staggered opening and closing times. This strategy allows the same bus to pick up and deliver students to several schools instead of just one or two schools. Currently the elementary schools open at 7:50 A.M. and close at 2:35 P.M. and most secondary schools open at either 8:45 A.M. and 8:50 A.M. and close at 3:45 P.M. The intent of this business case is discuss the budget impact of staggering school starting and closing times. The District has limited resources to spend on student transportation. The average number of students per bus run living more than two miles from their assigned school is 43. This is a 66% utilization rate. Some of the vacant seats are used for courtesy stops for students living within two miles of their assigned schools. Based on the 1995-96 contract, the average cost per student per day is $1.86. The average cost per student for a year is $331.08 just to go to and from school. There are 11,513 students assigned to regular buses and 2221 students assigned to magnet buses. The goal statement is
To increase the utilization rate of regular buses from 66% to 85% for home to school transportation during the 1996-97 school year. This proposal supports the districts strategic plan in the area of financial stability. The following is a list of criteria to be used to determine if the goal is met: 1. 2. The utilization rate for regular buses will increase to at least 85%. The district budget will be reduced by at least $267,000. The risks of staggering opening/closing times include complaints from parents and staff about the time changes, reduced number of seats available for courtesy stops, and possible student management problems on buses. The risk of not implementing this recommendation is the lost opportunity to reduce the budget by $267,000.Staggered Start Times Business Case 4/19/96 2 The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Manager of Support Services. Milestone_______________________________ 1 Determine the schedule for staggered starts. 2. Notify principals. Date 5-3-96 5-3-96 3 Notify public.__________________________ 4. Notify parents as students register for school of the official opening and closing times of the school. 5-3-96 August 1996 Person Williams Gremillion, Mitchell, Anderson Vann Student Assignment, Principalsstaggered Start Times Business Case 4/19/96 3 Background: Current Situation: All Little Rock elementary schools are scheduled to begin at 7:50 A M. and close at 2:35 P.M. The junior highs are scheduled to begin at 8:45 A.M. and close at 3:45 P.M. The senior high schools are scheduled to begin at 8:50 A.M. and close at 3:45 P.M. except for Parkview and Metropolitan. Parkview opens at 8:41 A M. and closes at 3:45 P.M. Metropolitan opens at 8:40 A.M. and closes at 3:27 P.M. with student exchanges scheduled at lunchtime. The average number of students per bus run living more than two miles from their assigned school is 43. This is a 66% utilization rate. Some of the vacant seats are used for courtesy stops for students living within two miles of their assigned schools. Based on the 1995-96 contract, the average cost per student per day is $1.86. The average cost per student for a year is $331.08 just to go to and from school. There are 11,513 students assigned to regular buses and 2221 students assigned to magnet buses. Board policy EEAB states Insofar as educational requirements permit, school schedules will be adjusted to allow maximum utilization of each bus. More buses are required to support the elementary schools than the secondary schools. When there is less than 55 minutes between the opening and closing times of the two runs, it is difficult to match an elementary school with a secondary school for efficiency. During the 1995 -96 school year, Booker and Carver students were scheduled on the same buses. Once the bugs were resolved, this seems to work. If these schools had been routed separately, an additional six buses on the first run would have been required. Background information: When the district annexed the 14 county schools and went to the controlled choice student assignment plan, the transportation department grew to support the changes. A three run system (Each driver/bus had three different runs.) was initiated because of the limited number of buses available and the personnel costs involved in a two run system. As part of the desegregation plan, the district went back to a two run system. Each bus now has an elementary run and a secondary run. In many neighborhoods only one or two students are assigned to any one school and several buses enter the neighborhood. The district regularly receives complaints from patrons concerning the number of buses entering neighborhoods.staggered Start Times Business Case 4/19/96 4 Problem Definition: Problem statement: The District has limited resources to spend on student transportation. Considerations: The number of buses that must be used to transport students to and from home is based on the guidelines, policies, practices and procedures established by the school district. Changes in the current parameters can result in savings or additional costs. The practice of every school having its own buses for regular transportation results in more buses being used than would be used if students from the same or nearby neighborhoods rode the same bus to different schools. Analysis of Alternatives: Process: A committee of drivers and administrators investigated this option during the 1994-95 school year and recommended that the Booker and Carver runs be combined to see if this option was feasible. This pilot reduced the number of buses needed by six. Identification: 1. Change nothing. The cost of student transportation for the 1996-97 will be as reflected in the initial budget. 2. Consolidate runs without changing opening/closing times. This may work with one or two schools but the savings would be limited. This would be a change from current practice. 3. Change opening/closing times and consolidate some runs. This would allow all possible consolidations to be considered. The savings for the District would be at least $267,000 to the proposed budget. Recommendation: Action Recommended: Alternative three should be selected for the 1996-97 school year. The savings of at least $267,000 can help to balance the districts budget.staggered Start Times Business Case 4/19/96 5 Rationale: The spacing of start times would allow students who are going to different schools to ride the same bus to and from the same neighborhood. This recommendation would result in better utilization of the buses. Objective: Objective of the recommendation: To increase the utilization rate of regular buses from 66% to 85% for home to school transportation during the 1996-97 school year. Goal Support: This recommendation will support the recently adopted strategic plan as follows
Strategy 9 We will develop and implement plans to establish financial stability and achieve the strategic objectives of the district. If the cost of student transportation can be reduced by staggering the opening and closing times of schools, then the savings can be used to balance the budget with fewer cuts. Evaluation criteria: 1. The utilization rate for regular buses will increase to at least 85%. 2. The district budget will be reduced by at least $267,000. Expected Benefits: 1. Reduce the number of buses required to transport students. 2. Reduce the number of buses going into one neighborhood. 3. Maintain or reduce number of late buses. 4. Reduce the number of drivers/monitors required. Istaggered Start Times Business Case 4/19/96 6 Impact Analysis: Program: Negatives: 1. Fewer students within the two-mile walk zone will be given courtesy stops. 2. Teacher report times at different schools would vary. Teacher assignments between schools would need to be adjusted to be sure that instructional time is not lost. 3. Seat assignments and student behavior would require coordination among various school administrators. Positives: 1. Reduce the number of buses required to transport students. 2. Reduce the number of buses going into one neighborhood. 3. Maintain or reduce number of late buses. 4. Reduce the number of drivers/monitors required. Desegregation Plan: There is no impact on the desegregation plan because the transportation system is still a two run system. The staggered time allows more than one school to be served by one bus run. Court Orders: There are no court orders that this recommendation will impact. Political factors: Parents may be concerned about combining students from different schools on the same bus and the change in school times. These concerns can be reduced by keeping everyone informed as the decision is made and implemented.staggered Start Times Business Case 4/19/96 7 Risks: The risks of staggering opening/closing times include complaints from parents and staff about the time changes, reduced number of seats available for courtesy stops, and possible student management problems on buses. The risk of not implementing this recommendation is the lost opportunity to reduce the budget by $267,000. Timing: The parents and staff need to be informed as soon as possible concerning changes in opening and closing time. This decision must be made by July 1 in order for bus routing to be completed by August 1. Resource Analysis: Personnel Analysis: No additional staff is required to implement this recommendation. The opening and closing times are a consideration when staff is shared between buildings. Financial Analysis: The implementation of this recommendation will reduce the transportation budget by $267,000. If this savings is projected over the five years the total will be $1,335,000. Force Field Analysis: Forces For: Patrons who are concerned about the number of buses in the neighborhood, the Advisory Committee for Financial Stability, private day cares that pick up students after school, and the Director of Transportation will support this recommendation because it improves the efficient operations of the fleet. Forces Against: School personnel may be concerned about the change in time and its impact on their personal lives. Some parents may be concerned because students from other schools may be on the bus with their students.staggered Start Times Business Case 4/19/96 8 Implementation Plan: Milestone T 1 Determine the schedule for staggered starts. 2. Notify principals. 3. Notify public. ______________ 4. Notify parents as students register for school of the official opening and closing times of the school. Date 5-3-96 5-3-96 5-3-96 August 1996 Person Williams Gremillion, Mitchell, Anderson Vann______ Student Assignment, PrincipalsBU -INESS CASE STI DENT ASSIGNMENT RELOCATION1. BUSINESS CASE
STUDENT ASSIGNMENT RELOCATION BACKGROUND - The Student Assignment Office is presently located at the Cashion Building at 501 Sherman. It is approximately 6,418 square feet sitting on one This is a newly renovated facility and houses only the offices of the Associate (1) acre of land. Superintendent for Desegregation the of Student Assignment. Its separate from administrative functions lends itself to easy access by parents and students of and Office location all the Little Rock School District. The location across the street from the new Post Office makes it relatively easy to find within The building lacks for nothing, space is considered the City. _ _ adequate to meet the needs of their operation and the building appears to be well maintained. in the parking lot and along side streets. There is also a small area which can be considered for expansion of this facility should There is adequate parking the need arise. 2 . PROBLEM DEFINITION - We have been requested to look at the possibility of relocating Student Assignment and selling this building. 3 . ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES There are basically two alternatives: 1) relocate the facility. Leave the facility where it is and 2) (2) to ALTERNATIVE ONE - LEAVE THE FACILITY WHERE IT IS PRESENTLY LOCATED: This building was specifically purchased in 1989 and renovated in 1990 for the purposes of drawing together the functions necessary to support the student enrollment program. Portions of that program were previously located at the Administration Building
however, due to the congestion and large volume of public traffic udeiii-d, it was determined that the facility would be The Cashion Building was purchased and renovated to In addition, we have recently completed to enroll students relocated. meet the Districts needs. The image of computer wiring project to update student services. the Cashion Building and the location of Student Assignment presents a very positive image of the Little Rock School District --- . with a Cashion Building and the with new parents enrolling their students in our program, regard to selling the building, there are no guarantees that the building will sell at a cost that would be beneficial to the Little Rock School District. Our estimated renovation $550,000 dollars for that building, which included the purchase of the building and surrounding lands, means that we would have to sell the building for over $500,000 dollars just to recoup our original cost in 1990. Allowing for depreciation of the building, it is estimated that the cnn nnn t"n aonroximatelv $400,000 dollars but, I $500,000 could be reduced to approximately $400,000 dollars but, do not believe that this would be supported by any appraisal.To move Student Assignment and Desegregation without any long range plan to put them in a location that would better meet their operational needs is not a prudent consideration. However, it is considered an alternative for the purposes of this Business Case. ALTERNATIVE TWO RELOCATION: Determining the requirements of Student Assignments and their subsequent location within the City can began immediately if it is the desire to relocate that office. However, if the intended purpose is simply to relocate the Student Assignment Office in hopes of selling the facility for profit to subsidize our budget, without any thought whatsoever towards the cost incurred with relocating the facility, you can not present a true picture or viably weight the alternatives. time, At this point in since no requirements have been compiled with regard to Student Assignment and Desegregation and no preliminary plans have been made as to where this facility would relocate other than the possibility of a vacated school, comparison. it is difficult to make a cost 4. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Student Assignment and the Office of Desegregation stay where they are presently located in the Cashion Building on Sherman Street. 5. OBJECTIVE
financial one. The objective of this recommendation is purely a Because the new location is not known, the cost to relocate Student Assignments can not be determined at this time. Although, it is conceived that the relocation and renovation costs would, hopefully, not exceed the appraised or purchase price of that building, some cost savings could be realized
however, it can not be accurately determined. Because of the need of Student Assignment to present a very positive image, is essential to the overall academic programs of the Little Rock its location School District. 6. IMPACT ANALYSIS
The most important concern should be the impact of the general educational program and the ability of the District to present a positive image to the public, our need to continue on a year round basis, with minimal interruption, our recruiting program and our requirement to meet the needs of the parents to enroll their children. is possible to relocate Student Assignment should the decision be made, these are Though it the impacts that must be weighed carefully. 7. RESOURCE ANALYSIS
It will. of course, be an impact on the staff due to relocation. It can not be ascertained whether the long term operational cost of a relocation would be more or less than the present costs that are presently incurred. true picture of the resources necessary to recommendation to relocate is not available. Therefore, a support the8. FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS
A force field analysis has not been made
however, it can be assumed that some people will object to relocating Student Assignment for the sake of relocating them so that the building can be sold. overcome by placing them. if possible. But, hopefully, that could be in a location which is better suited for the overall needs of the School District. 9. GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION
If a decision is made to relocate Adult Education, occur this year. it would be further recommended that this not With the present turmoil that is expected this summer due to relocations of administrative and support staff, the additional move of the Student Assignment Office would have to be weighed carefully against the benefits. dce/apl/bcasesarBn BUSINESS CASE TRUANCY REDUCTION CENTER SKSnBusiness Case Truancy Reduction Center Program Executive Summary The LRSD Truancy Reduction Program opened for operation on November 1, 1993. Advocacy for the implementation of collaborative a from approach to school truancy reduction a group of concerned citizens composed of community leaders, youth services arose This group agency representatives, the LRPD and LRSD officials. developed a proposal that would take advantage of permissive legislation (Act 867 of 1989) that authorized school districts to partner with the local police department in implementing a joint truancy reduction plan. The collaborative, working with the LRSD Assistant Superintendent for secondary schools and the director of Pupil Services presented a proposal to the LRSD Board of Directors for its review and approval on October 28,1993. Approval was granted by the Board to A staff of three paid employees and a open the Center forthwith. pool of volunteers has operated the Truancy Reduction Center since its beginning in November, 1993. Effective January 4, 1994 the city of Little Rock passed nocturnal curfew ordinance restricting the presence of minors a on the streets. in public places or to be in or operate a vehicle between the hours of 10:00 p.m. & 5:00 a.ro. Sunday through Thursday or between 12:00 midnight & 5:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday. Monday through Friday. This Ordinance, number 16825, was amended January 3,_1995 to add a curfew for minors during normal school hours from 9:00 a.m. until 2:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Passage and enforcement of this ordinance has had a significant impact in reducing the number of children and youth being picked up for truancy this school year. Consequently, the need to continue to maintain the Truancy Center has been reduced. A. Background Prior to the amendment of the curfew ordinance effective January 17, rise. 17, 1995, the number of truants being picked-up by the LRPD and processed through the LRSD Truancy Reduction Center continued to _ The daytime curfew that makes it unlawful for school age children & youth to be on the streets or other public places during school hours has effectively reduced the number of youth being found on the streets between 9:00 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. During its first year of operation, the Truancy Reduction Center processed 460 truant students. The Center staff saw a 21% increase during the 199495 school year with 580 truant students being brought to the Center. However, the passage of Ordinance number 16564 as amended in & fewer students are being found on the January, 1995, fewerstreets during school hours. During the first semester of the 1995-96 school year, the number of truants picked up dropped to 113 students. When compared with the first semester of the 1994-95 school year, we have had a 26% decrease in the number of truants processed. Because of the success of the curfew in reducing the presence of truants in public places during school hours, the need to operate a fully staffed Truancy Center has been eliminated. B. Problem Definition Three full time staff and a pool of volunteers have effectively and efficiently operated the Truancy Center since it opened on November 1, 1993. school aged students in January, With the enactment of the daytime curfew law for 1995, the average number of students processed has dropped to between five and six youngsters per week. With an annual budget of $45,915.26. and the dwindling number of students being processed, the operation is no longer cost effective, expenses, a Because of the need to cut the District's operational more cost effective method for achieving our goal of Three alternatives were considered. reducing truancy is needed. The first one is to reduce staff by 50% and reassign supervision of the Center to the Director of Safety & Security, alternative is to continue the Center's operation as is. The second The third alternative is to eliminate all paid staff and have truant students who are picked up by the police delivered directly to the schools to which they are assigned. This alternative would eliminate the need for a paid staff and the overhead for the operation of a central processing point. local schools would be receiving truants. The responsible for processing them, contacting parents and providing the required follow-up. C. Analysis of Alternatives 1. Alternative one would maintain the Center's operation with fewer budgeted positions. Personnel would include a secretary and one Truancy investigator. The coordinator's position, would be eliminated and those functions transferred to the Director of Safety & Security. Estimated costs for this option are as follows: Personnel FTE Salctrv/cost Truancy Officer 1 Secretary 15,500.00 9,000.00 1 (2)Supplies Office Supplies & Copy machine use 1,500 Vehicle Expenses Gas, oil, maintenance 1,500 Total Cost $27,500.00 2 . Alternative two would maintain the current three budgeted positions and operating budget as shown below: Personnel (Including Fringes) FTE Salctrv/cost Truancy Center Coordinator 1 $26,405.00 Security Guard 1 17,004.00 Bus Driver 1 10,000.00 Sub-Total 53,409.00 Purchased Services Materials & Supplies 900.00 Copier Rental 133.00 Telephone Service 4 lines @ $150.00 ea (installation fee one time charge) 600.00 Wiring/Jacks- Harper 606.00 Recurring Yearly Charges 7/1 to 9/30 (3 months) 23.50 X 4 lines = 94.00 94.00 X 3 months = 284.00 10/1 to 6/30 (9 months) 10.85 X 4 lines = 43.40 43.40 X 9 months = 390.00 Sub Total 2,913.00 Annual Cost 56,322.00 (3)in view of the District's need to reduce operational Clsarly^ Xn wx x------- -.c------ costs, with personnel costs driving around 75-80% of the total District budget, consideration of eliminating or restructuring the program to achieve its goals at a lowered financial burden is within the Districts' long-term best interest. Tc mzir.tin th status quo is not a fiscally responsible option at this time. To maintain the Alternative three would continue the collaboration with the 3. LRPD in picking up students, a centralized processing point with paid staff. The truants would be taken directly to the assigned schools by the police officer and turned over to a building administrator. A copy of the release form would be sent to Pupil Services as a way to continue to track Each local school would be responsible in but operate without having truants being picked up. for scheduling and documenting the follow-up parent conferences. This arrangement would eliminate expenses, personnel or otherwise, while maintaining a commitment to truancy all operational reduction. Recommended changes would become effective with the beginning of the 1996-97 school year. D. Recommendation It is recommended that alternative three be adopted as a cost This recommendation is cost efficient since no cutting measure. budgetary expenditures are required. E. Objectives 1. To implement a cost effective procedure for compliance with Arkansas compulsory attendance laws. To reduce personnel and operational expenditures for Truancy Reduction by eliminating manpower operation. intensive 2. F. Impact Analysis the partnership with the LRPD in truancy prevention will be continued and the only change is in the reduction of operational expenses, no negative impact is foreseen. Tiffing A final decision of the Center's operation should be made in a timely manner so as to notify staff within contract negotiated timelines. Political Factors Closure of the Center may be perceived by commitment to truancy reduction. some as a lessened (4)G. Resource Analysis (1) Personnel required. Analysis: No personnel expenditures (2) Financial Analysis: be removed from 1996-97 LRSD budget. Operational expenditures would Force Field Analysis The primary supporters of this recommendation are those charged ...... - ------------'-I future with budget reduction responsibilities for 1996-97 and in years. Detractors to the recommendation may be citizen groups who They supported the Truancy Center's operation form its inception. may perceive this move as a sign of the District lessening its commitment to truancy reduction. as I. General Implementation Plan (1) May, 1996 - Notify Truancy Center personnel of changes in programs operation for the 1996-97 school year. (2) Inform Truancy Steering Committee & Little Rock Police Department of program's redirection. (3) Move appropriate. furnishings and supplies to storage as (5)
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 Resoources.