Business cases

RECEfVFo OCT 2 4 1995 Office of ^^^^d^egation ^omioring LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASE ALTERNATIVES TO IMPROVE CUSTODIAL/GROUNDS & MAINTENANCE SERVICE c August 24, 1995LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS CASE ALTERNATIVES TO IMPROVE CUSTODIAUGROUNDS & MAINTENANCE SER VICE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Aging facilities, limited resources and the need to prioritize assets are all conunon problems faced by school districts. Our specific challenge is how to keep our need in balance and provide adequate, safe and suitable facilities to meet our educational needs and do it a reasonable cost. The situation that the Little Rock School District faces, with regard to its facilities and custodial program, is not unlike that of most other school districts in the United States. Support Services functions have often had their budgets reduced to support academic programs. The emergence on the market of firms who specialize in school district support management have certainly added a boost to the overall appearance and professionalism of the way school districts conduct their support programs. Many of these firms offer programs that allow school districts to leverage limited resources in ways not available to districts to improve the overall quality of service in custodial and maintenance functions. The history particular to the Little Rock School District shows a school system which has expanded over the last twelve (12) years, but not kept up with the finances necessary to support this expansion. The backlog of maintenance and repair in the Little Rock School District are projects beyond the capability of the in-house work force or a small management company to complete. Committing the district at this time to reorganizing our assets commensurate with our financial and physical abilities is a prudent management step. It is necessary to reassess our programs and assets on a continual basis to ensure that they are meeting the districts educational goals. Outside influences regarding the way that the Little Rock School District does business, such as the Desegregation Plan, expanding State and Federal laws, monitoring groups and parent committees all play a role in analyzing this problem.The administration recommends forming a partnership with a firm which will provide the expertise to allow the district to better utilize its assets and will add the additional resources necessary to meet the objective of cleaner, safer schools utilizing existing available funds. Forming a partnership with a management firm would give this district a boost in resources and capital investment and would jump start the custodial and maintenance program. PROBLEM DEFINITION The Little Rock School District has a need to improve the appearance and overall visual condition and cleanliness of its facilities so as to enhance its recruitment and educational programs and to minimize long term damage due to neglect or non repair. BACKGROUND The Custodial and Grounds aspects of the Maintenance Program of the Little Rock School District are duties which are assigned the custodial staff of the various facilities. The custodians receive technical assistance in broad terms from the Plant Services Department but work directly for the individual principals. There is a long history of actions that have been taken regarding custodial service in this District which must be closely examined. Another major aspect of the Plant Services Department is the Maintenance and Repair Program. The Maintenance and Repair Program also has undergone significant changes in the last several years which are additionally provided as general background information. Each of these two (2) subjects will be addressed individually. Custodial and Grounds In 1986, the Little Rock School District had approximately 216 full time equivalent positions to maintain its custodial mission. This was an average of one (1) FTE per each 11,672 square feet. During that year, the Administration proposed to the Board a Plan to use an outside contractor to perform the cleaning duties of the Little Rock School District. It was estimated that the District could save over $250,000 annually by using a contract cleaning service. The proposal was not approved
however, the Board instead charged the Plant Services Department with making cuts in custodial staffing, supplies and training to save $250,000 annually. The custodial staff reduction was achieved and a partial formula for staffing was adopted as a guideline for future staff planning. The full time equivalents rose to one (1) custodian for each 17,700 square feet or approximately 200 custodians. A plan known as the Omaha Formula was considered the most plausible and was applied generally throughout the District
however, certain exceptions were made in Magnet and Incentive 2Schools. The plan also called for the custodial staff of each facility to report directly to an on-site supervisor, normally the principal. It was this on-site supervisor that made the final selection for hiring replacements and handled disciplinary action and recommended termination. In order to provide assistance to the on-site supervisors in managing custodial activities, the Plant Services Department employed four (4) custodial supervisors and recommended a custodial manager. Except dtiring summer months when the on-site supervisor was absent from the building, the custodial supervisors were not responsible for direct supervision of the custodial staff, but rather provided technical assistance, training, inspections, job site assistance, recommendations to the on-site supervisor and general persormel management functions. This program was recommended in the draft Desegregation Plan
however, budget cuts in 1989 precluded this entire process from being implemented. Custodial supervisors were hired but the custodial manager to oversee the program and provide general technical expertise in custodial matters was never funded. To supplement absences in custodial staffing during the normal school year, a substitute program was implemented whereby the District would hire individuals
pay them at minimum wage and with minimum training would be assigned to the schools to assist the custodial staff. This proved to be very costly, both in dollars and in resources and was modified in December of 1991 when the Plant Services Department instituted a custodial position request procedure and a substitute custodial program. The substitute custodial program deleted another $250,000 from the custodial training program so that these funds could be used for higher district priorities. It established a priority system whereby substitutes would be pulled from a minimum pool of 25 custodians and sent to schools on a priority basis. Additionally it provided the six (6) temporary personnel to augment the ground capabilities of the Plant Services Department to compensate for the lack of training, expertise and abilities of the substitute custodians to do grounds work. The procedure was put in place in 1992. In August of 1992, during the beginning of the budget cycle for the following year, $220,000 was cut from the Plant Services Departftients custodial budget. It should be mentioned that a complete analysis was done at that time of the entire custodial program by the department. It was determined that over staffing against the Omaha Formula and leveling the staff to meet the needs of that formula would save approximately $150,000. This redistribution of custodial assets had previously been recommended by the Little Rock School District Curriculum Review (1990) which recommended equitable staffing among all schools. However, to meet the remaining goal of $220,000, additional cuts came by not filling custodial supervisory vacancies. As a result, the four (4) custodial supervisors were reduced to three (3). The remaining savings came from custodial supplies. In October of 1992, custodial supervisory responsibilities were realigned so as to ensure all schools and administrative buildings were covered to a minimum degree. In August of 1993, after testimony was given in court to these procedures, an evaluation was done of the custodial reductions of 1992 and recommendations were made to the superintendent to make adjustments. A Business Case was written and submitted and certain adjustments were made to the Omaha Formula throughout the district. The evaluation was provided to the Federal 3Court in January of 1993, along with a history of staff changes from 1991 through 1993. In 1993 and 1994, due to further staff reductions, two (2) of the three (3) remaining custodial supervisors were deleted. This left a staff of one (1) custodial supervisor, whose primary concern was to manage the Substitute Custodial Program with very limited training and custodial advising. New requirements, such as HAZMAT training and asbestos training has been picked up by the Plant Services Department and have fallen under the job description of the Environmental Coordinator. General overall training of the custodial staff has fallen tremendously due to the result of budget cuts in the supervisory functions to administer this program. The present situation is that custodians work for the principals, as has been the case since 1986. The Plant Services Department provides only minimal training and assistance due to the lack of management personnel. From the program initiated in 1991, where the Plant Services Department had full responsibility for training, scheduling and technical assistance, we have a program now where this is only provided on a minimal basis. Grounds allocations have been made, such that immediate responsibility close into the building is the responsibility of the custodial staff and the mowing of major areas and open fields, to include athletic fields, is the responsibility of Plant Services. Maintenance and Repair Throughout this budget cutting scenario from 1986 to the present time, the maintenance side of the program has had to adjust constantly to decreasing resources. Prior to 1986 and the transfer of the southwest Little Rock schools from PCSSD, the ratio of maintenance workers to square foot responsibility was 1:48,000. When the schools were transferred to LRSD control the ratio changed to 1:72,500 sf. At the time the transfer occurred, no additional manpower was given to the maintenance department to compensate for this additional workload. The installation of an Energy Management Program in 1988 to monitor facilities energy consumption, the installation of an automated maintenance management program in 1991 to keep track of costs, scheduled work and assisting in the prioritization of work has helped the maintenance program make some improvements. The establishment of priorities for all work assigned to the Plant Services Department which was put in place in early 1992, has aided in ensuring that the work necessary for the health safety and operational support of ongoing programs is accomplished and that work necessary to support new programs is prioritized against the needs of the new program and long range and deferred work is treated appropriately as funds become available. Budget cuts in the maintenance program over the last: five (5) years have amoimted to over $750,000. Part of this has been offset by a better utilization of the energy monitoring system, which has allowed the district to save over $450,000 in the last five (5) years. This money was not directed back into the maintenance program to offset the loss of normal budget cuts, but rather into the general pool and used by the administration against all of the Little Rock school District priorities. 4Supplementing the custodial effort at the schools, there are twelve (12) building engineers at: the larger secondary schools and administration buildings to assist in doing minor maintenance. The building engineers work for the principals arid receive supplies and technical support from the Plant Services Department. The overall condition of our schools indicates an array of buildings that generally meet minimal needs of our academic program. However, there is need for improvement. Conelating this background to our problem definition gives rise to the questions on how to enhance our facilities and to sustain our maintenance and custodial operations with diminishing resources. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Leading up to this business case, the administration made contact with several providers of management firms to learn of the benefits of their programs. Information was secured from firms which provide management services in custodial and maintenance areas by issuing a request for information in early 1995. This request for information was responded to by three (3) companies. A committee reviewed the three (3) proposals and agreed that discussions would be held with ServiceMaster to determine whether or not management plan could be put together in such a way that management services could be secured and funded from increased productivity. The end result would be a more organized and systematic support system of custodial and maintenance services to our schools. Information regarding comments and analysis dealing with management services were derived over a three (3) month period with ServiceMaster during May through July. Four (4) different alternatives have been considered. Alternative Number One - Do Nothing. Doing nothing must be considered an alternative. It implies that the cunent situation would remain as is and that forces impacting this alternative, such as reductions or enhancements in FTEs, supplies, equipment would be subject to the normal budget process of the District. The Custodial & Maintenance Program would fall in line with all other District priorities, and funds would be appropriated based on budget needs. The budget would not allow for enhancements in the Custodial or Maintenance Programs, but sustain them at the current level. Alternative Number Two - Add Resources/Reorganization. Additional resources are assuredly needed by the custodial and maintenance staff to enhance our facilities. But simply adding resources will not suffice, A cursory review of our program indicates that most of these resources are needed not in additional personnel, but in equipment, training and programs that could raise the stature and expertise of our custodial staff. Additional resources would most assuredly have to be made in the area of custodial supervisors and a custodial manager. The implications of cleanliness goes well beyond maintaining clean floors and clean bathrooms. Our need to maintain facilities that are safe from airborne diseases, rodents, insects, and to support indoor air quality programs coupled with laws requiring training and protection in hazardous material handling, asbestos and chemicals, 5and the need to understand new cleaning methods and materials on the market make additional resources mandatory regardless of which alternative is chosen. Reorganization would consist of realigning the custodial staff, the infusion of trained managers to run this program, the realignment of building engineer assets to make the grounds and preventive maintenance programs more effective, and a plan to coordinate all the different functions. This can be done initially out of personnel assets presently assigned to the district, but would require the addition of a number of managers at an approximate cost of $160,000 and at least $300,000 in capital equipment. However, a considerable amount of time would have to be given to the Plant Services Department to put together a viable reorganization plan to ensure that all facets of the custodial and maintenance program could be supported. It is estimated that this would take approximately two months to study and analyze, and another 12 -24 months to implement. The biggest disadvantage to this option in addition to the need for more resources and time for implementation is that there are no guarantees of success. Alternative Number Three - Contract Out. Contracting out normally refers to the situation where a company, expert in a specific area, comes into an organization and takes over all aspects of that function to include personnel. It would mean that a company would provide all levels of management of not only the subject area, such as custodial and maintenance, but areas such as engineering, financial supplies, etc. Employees would be members of that firm and not of the school district, and the school district would pay a set amount each year for this contract. Contract management can bring to a district a large and fast infusion of equipment and expert training, which is needed to jump start a program. However, the pay back is usually costly and over a long period of time, such that the management firm can amortize their costs. Many times when a district buys a "Management Package" it is forced to buy the entire package to include elements of the program that they may already be providing to be able to get the portions of the programs that they actually want. Alternative Number Four- Professional Management Services. In this concept our school district would enter into a partnership with a firm that would agree to provide the resources and expertise that is unavailable to the district due to budget constraints. By combining the skills and abilities of district staff with the technology and resources of an experienced provider of professional management services, we would be able to improve the delivery of custodial and maintenance services without having to spend any additional dollars. The aforementioned three month study and discussion with ServiceMaster has led to a specific management plan which has been custom designed to achieve district objectives of better maintained schools, employment procedures and practices continued (Employees will continue to work for LRSD with existing wages and benefits), and no increase in current fiscal year budget. An appendix of additional information has been provided as an attachment to this business case. 6Advantages Cleaner and better maintained schools Faster implementation of resources Better coordination of custodial and maintenance services Provides for additional capital investment Provides for training of LRSD personnel Disadvantages Perception that LRSD management cannot provide cleaner schools without outside assistance Possibility of conflict over ServiceMaster recommendations RECOMMENDATION It is the recommendation of administration to choose alternative four (4) which is to form a partnership with ServiceMaster which will allow Plant Services to reorganize and regroup its assets and add the additional resources necessary to meet the objectives of cleaner and safer schools. This envisioned five-year contract (which will contain a 90-day cancellation clause) program will help the district to compensate for decreases in resources over the years, and provide a tailored program to meet LRSD needs. The most significant difference from previous attempts at improvements is that the cost and length of time factors that limited our success in the past will be removed as obstacles through the partnership with ServiceMaster. This course of action can be implemented much more quickly, with greater impact and less cost than the other alternatives. OBJECTIVE OF RECOMMENDATION The overriding objective of this recommendation is to improve the overall appearance of school site environment by maintaining cleaner and safer school buildings without increasing current budgetary resources. It is believed that the implementation of the above recommendation will provide the LRSD the most cost effective method of achieving the stated objective. IMPACT ANALYSIS The facility services program of custodial and maintenance can have both a positive and negative impact on this districts image and ability to perform its primary mission. A 7well executed custodial and maintenance program that results in better looking facilities with groomed and manicured grounds and better maintained buildings could foster new enrollment and the expansion of the Little Rock School District. Needless to say, the further detriment of the maintenance program could have the exact opposite effect. RESOURCE ANALYSIS In summary, the district will pay approximately $700,000 for management fees and $300,000 for equipment and supplies to ServiceMaster annually. The fees will be funded through productivity improvement savings and reductions in positions by attrition over time. No employees will be laid off. If Savings do not occur, ServiceMaster fees will be deferred until savings are produced. The attached financial summary provides additional information relating to fees. FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS Attractive, well maintained facilities would obviously be accepted by all of the Little Rock School District students and staff and the general public. We must strive to make our schools acceptable to the people that we serve and it must be done, in part, by making them visually appealing, safe and as well maintained as our resources will allow. There is no known contingent that would object to the betterment of our schools. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Should this recommendation be approved, it is expected that implementation would take place on or about October 1, 1995. 8APPENDIX Appendix A ServiceMaster Proposal Appendix B Program Overview Appendix C Financial Analysis Appendix D ServiceMaster OverviewAppendix A ServiceMaster ProposalService Master Proposal To Little Rock School DistrictServices Provided To LRSD EHRBRE i bi * iin 111 r r 1111 rii rii v bcm* b ri!ri!RiriBiRaBiBMBaBaiBaiKBHasB>naaMRaBaiMM Management Services Systems approach to maintaining buildings Technical expertise Administrative Services Training of LRSD personnel Capital investment Cleaner & better maintained schoolsAnnualized Cost To District m unmminiiiiiHiiiiiHiiiHiiUHiuiBiniiiPUMniniiMflu $700,000 management fees $300,000 Materials & SuppliesCost Will Be Paid BY Productivity improvement savings Position reductions over time through attrition 21 FTE Custodians 14 FTE Building Engineers/others Substitutes If savings do not occur, ServiceMaster fees will be deferred until savings are produced Potential for savings in excess of SM feesContract Requirements nonBBnraaBBBHHBBNnnHBinflHaMM imnunoiKimnBmaHmiMHiwamsBvmanmwviiBaevflmiMM Will include maximum LRSD expenditures LRSD will not pay fees to SM that will cause the district to exceed current budget Expenditure amounts will be defined in terms of function & object codes Service Standards Provision for 90-day termination of contract if standards are not met No payment of deferred feesBsesme tiiannMwiiiiTmismiiiiuruHriiiiiitiiaiMiiiijnBiiHiiiniwiatMa Board Action Requested Authorize the district administration to enter into contract Negotiation with ServiceMaster. Once mutual agreement has been reached regarding terms, the Board will be asked to authorize the execution of the contract.Appendix B Program OverviewPROGRAM OVERVIEW GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROGRAM A. Professional Management Services for Little Rock School District By Whom ServiceMaster is the leading provider of Professional Management Service to the education industry, serving in over 520 school and universities worldwide. ServiceMaster has reached this position through personal individualized service to education executives. Program Concept Little Rock School District and ServiceMaster have an opportunity to work together in a new and unique way. The education industry is facing new and most challenging times. We are both being asked to provide a higher standard of quality, with greater customer focus, and to do so at a lower cost. To accomplish these objectives, we are proposing a new, more effective organizational structure and a unique combination of the School District and ServiceMaster resources. The success of this program depends on Little Rock School District and ServiceMasters people working closely together. This proposal describes a new relationship between us in which we will work together to increase the effectiveness of all services, merging them into a single, responsive service organization. ServiceMasters resources are very significant, and our commitment to the success of this program at Little Rock School District is complete. By combining ServiceMasters systems, technical resources, and resident department management leadership with the skills and abilities of Little Rock School District people, we will: * significantly improve and maintain quality levels as measured by formal quality assessment procedures.< provide the Little Rock School District a return on investment projected to be in excess of $2 million dollars over the life our Agreement. be responsive and accountable to your administration, to your teachers, and to your students. Together, we will apply good sound common sense and business judgment to all decisions affecting our entire responsibility. Your decision to join with us in this venture is one which reflects your agreement that together we can accomplish more and accomplish it faster. We look forward to working with you to begin this exciting new program. B. Program Benefits Our objective is to work in the shadow of your School District supporting Administration in every way possible to achieve its goals and objectives. The Administrative team will benefit from: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) A quality level of service much higher than previously experienced, achieved through the latest developments in process engineering, productivity improvements, and Human Resource Development techniques. The addition of a professional supporting management team headed by high caliber, highly motivated managers, able leaders of personnel. They will also have a true understanding of the education community, facilities management, and modem engineering practices. Additional levels of supporting management through an operational backup team consisting of a Director of Operations, Customer Support Representative and Vice President for Operations, as well as a Technical Support Team consisting of Technical Specialists, Process Engineers and others. Greater management control over the Maintenance Department while reducing your time involved in the day-to-day operation of the department. Establishment of a climate of meaningful motivation to the employees that will challenge them in their job for achievement, responsibility, growth, earned recognition and the work itself through initial and continuous training and development programs.6) Improved employee morale through enlightened management and supervisory practices, assistance to administration in reflecting the basic safety and social needs to these employees, for identifying with the School District, for belonging. They, in turn, will be recognized as being part of the education team. 7) Positive feedback from customers (students, teachers, community and staff) generated from the impact of the ServiceMaster Professional Management Program. 8) Flexibility to meet the changing needs of your School District. 9) Protection of your investment in the buildings accomplished through the technical back-up and research, laboratory, and manufacturing facilities of the ServiceMaster organization together with the consulting support of ServiceMaster Professional Engineers, Chemists, Bacteriologists and Training Specialists whenever needed (see organization chart). 10) Thoughtful and careful coordination of Environmental Service duties and personnel with other District personnel and departments improving both communications and harmony of operation throughout the District. 11) Reduced equipment maintenance and replacement costs accomplished through the implementation of the systematic "Computenance Plus" Preventive and Corrective Maintenance Program. 12) Minimized risks to students, employees and staff throughout the District accomplished through the implementation of a Casualty Prevention and Control Program. 13) A performance oriented program. 14) Protection of m^jor pieces of capital equipment is realized through ServiceMasters Guaranteed Equipment Life Program. 15) Minimized Liability, Improved Service, and Reduced Costs - Is realized through the establishment of ServiceMasters in-house Maintenance Management System. 16) Provision of a program which fully complies with. Federal, State and Local Regulatory Agencies.ServiceMasters record of service in and long-standing relationship with the education marketplace makes us uniquely qualified to assess the management of support services at Little Rock School District and to propose solutions. A team of ServiceMaster professionals spent firam 2-4 weeks surveying the District. During the on-site survey process our engineering teams assessed your needs by reviewing the cost of payrolls, purchased services, supplies, utilities and capital expenditures. We toured every building inspecting cleaning surfaces, mechanical equipment, ventilation systems, roofing systems and grounds conditions. Interviews were held with administrators, principals, staff, and those involved with related functions. Safety, training, quality control, and operational methods were thoroughly reviewed. With great care and detail an implementation plan has been specifically and uniquely prepared for the Little Rock School District. Features of the program can be classified into six (6) major categories. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Leadership and Organization Education and Development Technology and Systems Corporate Resources Total Quality Management Financial Performance Following is a brief outline of these sections and features provided as a ready reference overview. 1) Leadership and Organization Integral to the success of ServiceMaster programs is the full-time involvement of professional ServiceMaster managers in the organization. Our managers are trained extensively in processes and procedures, labor relations, management skills, financial skills, and human relations. ServiceMaster Will Provide
A. B. A full-time, on-site, resident ServiceMaster management team which will be integrated carefully with the current management team to maximize existing skills. A proposed organization that would include the appropriate number of full-time equivalent custodial/grounds personnel, and full-time equivalent maintenance personnel, and clerical personnel, all of whom will remain employees of Little Rock School District.2) c. Continuous Management Development Programs held on-site, regionally, and nationally. Education and Development Much of the success of ServiceMaster programs is due to our ongoing commitment to provide the very best training, education, and development programs for the employees we are privileged to lead. ServiceMaster Would Provide: A. One-on-one training programs to be accomplished with all department staff and documented as such every six (6) months. B. Alternating with the above training, audiovisual reinforcement training accomplished semi-annually. C. Monthly group meetings with all staff containing discussion on informational/motivational topics. These would include special guest speakers and would be designed to encourage the staff as an important part of the school family. D. Special annual programs such as "Pride Day," "Open House," and "Award of Excellence" held to help build pride and professionalism among the staff. E. Special career development opportunities to include development in maintenance skills and technology, G.E.D. certification, and similar programs to help staff members enrich their lives and further their careers. F. Certification seminars held regionally on such topics as carpet care, gym floor care, athletic turf, track maintenance, and playground equipment. G. Leadership development programs for those expressing the interest and talent to advance to leadership roles. H. Job descriptions, standards of performance, and performance evaluation tools implemented and utilized as a regular part of operations. 1. Risk management and safety programs for all personnel. These would include required training courses for "Right to Know" and Asbestos Safety. J. Specific Recruitment Strategies for reducing turnover and absenteeism and improving performance.3) Technology and Systems Effective management of the custodial, maintenance, and grounds functions of a district requires an ongoing program of research and development. New technology, innovative techniques, and effective procedures and methods are constantly being developed by ServiceMaster to meet the challenges presented by todays education environment. ServiceMaster Would Provide: A. Maintenance 1. A fully computerized state-of-the-art maintenance program. 2. Preventive maintenance for all electrical and mechanical systems. 3. Casualty prevention and control programs for all equipment and buildings. 4. Life expectancy reports for all electrical and mechanical equipment. 5. Formalized maintenance summaries to include schedules, actions completed, cost analysis, and productivity reports. 6. Establishment of a complete cost accounting system for maintenance activities including parts, labor, and services. 7. Monitoring of all correctivd maintenance activities structuring and planning tasks. 8. Provision of a complete technical reference library concerning methods and skills. 9. Computerization of work order processes and systems. 10. Tracking of all minor construction activities to include parts, services, and labor costs. 11. Provision of employee education and training as required under the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act. 12. A program designed to alert the school to any potential problems related to lead in drinking water and possible solutions.13. A program designed to expose any potential hazards related to underground storage tanks and recommendations regarding actions required to meet EPA standards. 14. Education for the maintenance staff on the potential dangers of Radon Gas, and recommendations regarding necessary actions to reduce any potential health risks. B. Custodial 1. New special and patented custodial chemicals for all building locations and processes. 2. New state-of-the-art ServiceMaster patented custodial equipment providing greater efficiency and productivity. 3. A complete technical library of custodial processes and procedures on-site for department use. 4. Documented standardized cleaning schedules developed and utilized for each building and situation. 5. Proven ServiceMaster processes for all job tasks put into place and documented as such. 6. New ServiceMaster developments in cleaning technology to each school as appropriate. C. Grounds Provisions 1. Implementation of standardized grounds care procedures for all grounds functions. 2. Structure and planning for all grounds-care tasks to include pruning, fertilization, pesticide, herbicide, and fungicide application. 3. Planned balanced mowing routines. 4. Regular inspections of playground equipment. 5. A complete library of grounds care procedures and reference materials. 6. Inclusion of specified new grounds equipment.D. Energy Management 1. Implementation of a comprehensive operational energy management program. 2. Produce monthly analysis, by school, of energy cost and consumption. 3. Assist Administration in the analysis of existing energy management system to enhance energy control. 4. More efficient plant system that reduces energy consumption. 5. Through our energy shared-savings program we have over $100 million to invest in state-of-the-art energy efficient units to replace your outdated and inefficient systems. 4) Corporate Resources Perhaps the greatest benefits provided by ServiceMaster is the addition of resources and support far greater than anything otherwise available to the District. Nowhere else can the District find the extensive experience, proven record of performance, and vast corporate resources provided by ServiceMaster. ServiceMaster Would Provide: A. An implementation team during the initial phases of the program accomplishing indexing of equipment, initial training, schedules, gener^ program installation, and other tasks related to the start of services. B. Additional management support by Director of Operations and Customer Support Representative visits, monthly or more frequently, if necessary. These visits insure program completeness and effectiveness. C. Engineering teams and individual engineers providing ongoing consulting support in the area of Plant Operations and Maintenance. D. ServiceMaster Systems Managers providing ongoing consulting support in the area of custodial services. E. Grounds specialists with expertise in turf management providing grounds consulting and on-site support.F. The corporate resources of ServiceMaster made available to the school to include Research and Development laboratories. G. National discount programs on a wide range of maintenance, custodial and grounds products and services. H. Immediate information resources through 1-800-SM-KNOWS. 5) Total Quality Management ServiceMaster Quality Assurance/Quality Management Programs are of importance to the District in that they provide assurance that the quality standards promised are the quality standards delivered. Scheduled inspections are designed to guarantee that acceptable levels of department quality are reached and maintained. These inspections provide for positive learning experiences and recognition for work done well, resulting in heightened morale. ServiceMaster Would Provide: A. Daily supervisor inspections made on-site by the supervisor at the facility. B. Maintenance daily rounds logs and routines established and documented. C. Weekly inspections of quality taken by the resident manager in the company of a school designee. D. Monthly meetings with school Administration to insure proper program direction. E. Quarterly inspections taken by the ServiceMaster Customer Support Representative with findings reported to Administration. F. Teacher interviews conducted with approximately 10% of the teachers each month to assess program effectiveness. G. Annually a formal report to the Little Rock School District detailing accomplishments for the past year. H. Long-term benefits in extended building and equipment life.6) Financial Comparison ServiceMasters contract amount will guarantee to the District the cost of management, school labor, custodial equipment, custodial supplies, training and materials, etc., whUe providing assurance of quality performance throughout the operation. ServiceMaster Would Provide: A. An investment in new labor efficient custodial equipment. B. An investment annually in custodial supplies and materials. C. An investment in grounds equipment. D. Potential replacement of some electromechanical equipment and grounds equipment. E. Long-term benefits in extended building and equipment life. F. A program to guarantee the life of major capital equipment by agreement to pay the financial penalty for premature failure. G. Total Maintenance and Custodial Program projected to be budget-neutral in the first full year of implementation. Long-term savings or the return on investment over the life of the agreement is projected to be greater than $2 million. A complete financial analysis is attached.ServiceMaster Management Team for Little Rock School District Corporate Support Bacteriologist Education and Training Regulatory Compliance 1-800-SM-KNOWS Little Rock School District Administration Operational Support Vice President Director of Operations Coordinating Manager Customer Support Representative zXssistant Director Custodial Director * Systems Manager Assistant Director Principals * Responsible for coordination of training, computer systems, preventive maintenance, regulatory compliance, operational energy management, level I maintenance, grounds, and customer support. Appendix C Financial AnalysisFINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF SERVICEMASTER PROGRAM AMOUNT Management Team Custodial System Grounds Equipment Computerization Salaries and Benefits Capital Equipment is Annualized ($106,389) Annualized Amount Includes Hardware, Software, Customer Programming, and Support $332,188 265,584 22,600 11,163 Vehicles (4) Direct Investment 30,000 Indirect Invesment Profit and Taxes TOTAL Special Project Personnel Specialty Training Seminars Relocation Expense for Managers Start-up and Implementation Personnel Travel and Staff Expenses Safety Programs In-service Programs Motivational Programs Recruitment Strategies Program Customer Service Hot-line (1-800-SMKNOWS) Divisional Education Support Division Manager Area Operations Manager Vice President of Operations Audit and Control Direct Expense Total Labor Relations Education and Training Program Support Insurance Process Engineering Equipment Research and Development Chemical Research and Development Systems Research and Development Quality Control Finance Control Program Improvement Clerical Support Legal Support Service Administration Plant and Facilities Overhead Indirect Expense Total 259,417 122,945 140.011 Sl,183,908FINANCIAL ANALYSIS - FOOTNOTES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT (1) Non-budgeted but utilized amount for substitutes. (2) Amount spent on custodial supplies developed from information provided by Plant Services and Procurement. (3) Line item #. (4) Line item #. (5) Salary for custodial supervisor. (6) Amount estimated that is spent on disposable supplies such as tissue and trash can liners not provided as part of custodial system. (7) Analysis of ServiceMaster program amount provided separately.Appendix D ServiceMaster OverviewServiceMaster Overview Number of K-12 School Districts Currently Served Number of Employees ... 370 Over 30,000ServiceMaster The Company Pursuing quality and exceIlencc...Treating people with dignity and pridc...Being driven by service to our customers...Growing profitably...these are all part of the goals and objectives of ServiceMaster. ServiceMaster continues to expand our technical resources and customer base in an atmosphere that fosters innovation, creativity and development. Long before the concept of "total quality management" was fervently discussed among businesses and learning institutions, ServiceMaster had committed itself to the objective of "Pursuing Excellence." In the early 197O's, Kenneth T. Wessner, then Chairman of the Board of Directors, wrote: " Our company accqjts the responsibility to continually seek better methods to render current and new services to its' customers at a better value. Our trademarks and service marks stand for excellence...The pursuit of excellence is a never-ending process, the continuing search for a better way. It requires a strong commitment and an understanding that a job, a career life itself is never completed, but is in a continual stage of change and growth." It is this philosophy that has continued to guide management and support employees. By listening to customers' needs and remaining focused on the business of providing quality services, ServiceMaster has grown from a small mothproofing business in the early 194O's to a $3.0 billion international company that provides a network of services to consumers, businesses, health care systems and education customers. In 1962, at the request of hospital administrators, the first Housekeeping Management Support Program was introduced. Based on findings from the American Hospital Association, health care professionals and additional research, ServiceMaster designed a program to improve overall cleanliness while reducing costs and management burdens. I In 1971, through a series of discussions with school administrators, the company learned of the unique demands and challenges encoimtered in maintaining school buildings and groimds. As a result, a separate division of the company was started in order to better focus on the specific concerns of educators. Now, over 20 years later, ServiceMaster education resources include four specific divisions nationwide, staffed with operations, sales and support professionals dedicated to handle all aspects of school and college facilities management. In addition, corporate resources are committed to technical research and development, management and support employee training, motivational program development, and hiring professionals with expertise in the education market. ServiceMaster The Company (continued): Today, as the world's leading provider of support management services to education customers, ServiceMaster continues to serve our first education customer as well as 500 additional colleges, universities and school districts. ServiceMaster is the only company in the world that can provide maintenance, custodial, groimds, energy management, food service, pest control, capital retrofit and asbestos programs all through a single source provider.ServiceMaster Sponsored Programs ServiceMaster continues to demonstrate our education commitment by providing corporate sponsorship and leadership support to a number of different education organizations and programs including: The AASA National Superintendent of the Year Program ServiceMaster is proud to have initiated, fimded and developed, along with the American Association of School Administrators, this prestigious program. The National Superintendent of the Year recognizes and honors the important contribution that superintendents of America's public schools make to our youth and the preservation of our society. Education Research and Development Institute (ERDI) ERDI is a unique organization whose goal is to bring together iimovative leadership in education and business from around the country. Initiated, funded and developed by ServiceMaster, ERDI provides a "think tank" atmosphere for Fortune 500 companies.... a forum for progressive educators to share and exchange ideas, and funding for education research and development. Flag of Learning and Liberty -The Flag of Learning and Liberty, developed in 1985 by the National School Public Relations Association (NSPRA), symbolizes the link between education and the American democratic way of life. ServiceMaster continues to provide funding and support to promote this important education symbol. ASBO International Eagle Service Award Program - The Eagle Service Award was developed by ServiceMaster and the Association of School Business Officials International to recognize business officials who demonstrate outstanding service to their school, community and the profession. In addition, ServiceMaster was named as one of President Bush's 1,000 Points of Light for providing the opportunity and funding for over 200 ServiceMaster employees to mentor elementary students. ServiceMaster also provides funding and support for the Council of Great City Schools and sponsors over 100 student scholarships nationwide. / REFERENCE School District Name of Client: Richardson Independent School District Location: Richardson, Texas Services Provided: Maintenance, Custodial, Grounds, Technology Management Employees on payroll of: District Contract Start Date: October 1990 Total Square Feet/Sites: 5,008,318 sq. ft./63 Buildings Students: 33,000 Contact Personfsl/Phone: Mr. Vernon Johnson, Superintendent Mr. Jack Huffman*, Director of Physical Plant Services 214/301-3333 * Reference Contact ServiceMASTER REFERENCE School District Name of Client: Polk County Schools Location: Bartow, Florida Services Provided: Custodial Management Employees on payroll of: District Contract Start Date: November 1986 Total Square Feet/Sites: 7,828,000 sq. ft./109 Buildings Students: 68,000 Contact Person(s)/Phone: Dr. John A. Stewart, Superintendent Mr. Denny Dunn*, Deputy Superintendent 813/534-0500 * Reference Contact ServiceMASTER / REFERENCE School District Name of Client: Memphis City Schools Location: Memphis, Tennessee Services Provided: Custodial, Maintenance, Grounds Management, Energy Employees on payroll of: District Contract Start Date: June 1993 Total Square Feet/Sites: 16,000,000 sq. ft? 1,884 Acres Students: 106,000 Contact PersonfsJ/Phone: Dr. Gerry House, Superintendent 901/325-5444 ServiceMASTER. REFERENCE School District Name of Client: Kansas City Missouri School District Location: Kansas City, Missouri Services Provided: Maintenance, Custodial, Grounds Management Employees on payroll of: District Contract Start Date: August 1991 Total Square Feet/Sites: 7,629,101 sq. ft./102 Buildings Students: 35,000 Contact Person(s)/Phone: Dr. Walter Marks, Superintendent Mr. William M. Threatt*, Associate Superintendent 816/871-7814 * Reference Contact ServiceMASTER I REFERENCE School District Name of Client
District of Columbia Public Schools Location
Washington, D.C. Services Provided
Custodial, Preventive Maintenance Management Employees on payroll of
District Contract Start Date
January 1993 Total Square Feet/Sites
14,000,000 sq. ft? 198 Buildings Students
81,000 Contact PersonfsJ/Phone
Dr. Franklin Smith, Superintendent Mr. William McAfee*, Director of Facilities Management Division 202/724-4222 * Reference Contact ServiceMASTER. B4112802 08/09/1400 LRSD BUDGET ACTION SUMMARY FY 95-96 This document is an ODM staff working paper which contains the following material: 1. Chart of Business Cases. This is a listing of all business cases known by ODM, and contains a cumulative summary of actions taken by the LRSD on those business cases. 2. Chart of Shortfall Strategies. This is a listing of all shortfall strategies known by ODM, and contains a cumulative summary of actions taken by the LRSD on those strategies. If a shortfall strategy had a business case prepared, then the strategy was moved into the Chart of Business Cases. 3. Chart of Budget Issues. This is a listing of budget related issues that should be addressed somewhere in the LRSD budget. 4. Mooneys Brainstorming List of Possible Cost Cutting Measures. This is an informal brainstorming list of possible measures for cutting the budget or improving services. We have not determined the feasibility of the items, nor have we run cost/benefits. The menu is made up of things that might be considered with no judgement made on value. These items in no way should be construed as ODMs position, recommendation, or suggestion. NOTE: Please help keep this paper updated by letting Mooney know of budget actions or suggested changes. 1LRSD CHART OF BUSINESS CASES BUDGET FY 95-96 NOTE: The items in bold print headings are active. The items with regular print headings are not active. 1. Academic Progress Incentive Grant. * * * * * * * * * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 14, Academic Incentive. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence #14 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Gremillion and Mitchell. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 14, Academic Incentive, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. APIG and Focused Activities deletions. Would require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $445,000. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. Magness wanted to know why the district can cut this program in light of the Court Order. Williams says a plan modification will be required. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $445,000. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of $445,000. 3/31/95 Technical assistance meeting. Smith and Mooney meet with Matthis and Ingram to discuss the technical aspects of a proposed modification to the business case. 4/3/95 Court Submission. Revised business case reduced the savings from $455,00 down to $290,000. * 4/6/95 Board Work Session. General discussion of revised business case. No action taken. * * 4/10/95 LRSD Budget Hearing. Detailed testimony by Matthis concerning the business case. No action taken. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved continuing APIGS/FA and funded it at $20 per student for each area elementary school. The approved cost is now approximately $171,000, making the savings approximately $274,000. LRSD estimates savings as $261,000 on the summary table from the Board meeting. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the program 25 * modifications for a savings of $261,100. A new business case was submitted with the budget document. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program modifications for a savings of $261,100. Academic Support Program. 2. 3. 4. 5. * * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 03, Academic Support. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence # 03 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Glasgow, Parker, and Adams. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 03, Academic Support, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Was not included in this package, which would indicate this is a dead proposal. Data Processing. * * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 23 and 24, Data Processing. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting. Williams indicates he wants to give Beason some time on the job before considering Outsourcing data processing services. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout on tentative business cases. Program sequence # 24 and 230, will be prepared by Beason. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Becomes feeder for # 33. District Wide Facilities Study (School Closings). * * * * * * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 33, Facilities. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows District wide Facilities Study (program sequence # in error) will have a business case. It will be prepared by Mayo. 1/27/95 Arkansas Democrat Gazette article. Article quotes Mayo as saying that Badgett and Fair Park are at the top of a possible closing list. Mayo says closing both would save $900,000. 1/31/95 Community meeting held at Fair Park to discuss recommended closure. 2/7/95 Community meeting held at Badgett of discuss recommended closure. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Becomes feeder for # 22 and # 23. Pupil Transportation Services. * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 223, Pupil Transport. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 3* * 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout on tentative business cases. Program sequence # 223, will be prepared by Cheatham. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Becomes feeder for # 25. 6. Family Life Education/New Futures. * * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 231, Family Life/New Futures. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence # 231 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Young and Carson. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 231, Family Life/New Futures, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Assign FLE teaching responsibilities to * nurses, counselors and science teachers, modification. Savings of $77,000. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. Would not require a Deseg Plan * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration * * list, and savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $77,000. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of $77,000. * 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved the business case as submitted by the * * superintendent. Savings at $77,000. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects a savings of $77,000. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program modifications for a savings of $77,000. 7. New Futures. * * * * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 13, New Futures. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence # 13 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Young. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 13 New Futures, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Implement Language Arts Plus in lieu of Learning Foundations
return to 6 period day. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $669,900. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. Board deleted the Learning Foundations course in the New Futures Junior Highs. This seems to lay the foundation for elimination of the 7 period day. Savings of $669,900. 4* * * * * * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. Magness noted amount of savings dropped to $626,848. Difference is that this amount is based on actual salaries vice averages. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $626,848. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of $626,848. 4/10/95 LRSD Budget Hearing. Detailed testimony by Young concerning the business case. Mainly centered on cutting the 7th period. No action taken. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. Motion to accept the business case as submitted by the superintendent failed. No action taken. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. In response to the failed business case. New Futures funding of $626,848 added back into the Tentative Budget Document. No savings now reflected. 8. Four-Year-Old-Program. * * * * * * * * * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 02, 4-Year-Old. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence # 02 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Price. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 02, 4-Year-Old, for modification or deletion. 2/1/95 flyer to parents. The pre-registration material sent to parents around the first week of February contained a flyer on the 4-year-old program. The flyer said that due to projected budget cuts the program may not be available in many of the schools. The final decision will be made by the Board in the near future. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Eliminate program except at the Incentive Schools. Would require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $ 1,321,520. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. Many board members voice opposition. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness states that the Board does not want to cut the 4 year old program, and the administration should look elsewhere. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. This item has been dropped from consideration on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will not be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item shown as defened and on hold. Still shows possible savings of $1,321,520. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was included in the budget as a program cost of $1,321,520. 4/6/95 Board Work Session. Board formally approved leaving the program in the budget. No cuts will be made in the program. Now a dead issue. 5 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects no cuts and no savings. 9. Guidance Services, * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 213, Guidance Services. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence #213 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Elston. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 213, Guidance Services, for modification or deletion. * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Reduce positions but maintain Arkansas * Public School Accreditation Standards, modification. Savings of $125,268. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. Would not require a Deseg Plan * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration * * * * * list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $125,268. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of$125,268. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved the business case as submitted by the superintendent. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the cut and the savings of $125,268. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program modifications for a savings of $125,268. 10. Health Services. * * * * * * * * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 215, Health Services. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence #215 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Efird. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 215, Health Services, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Reduction in nursing positions while maintaining services. Cut 19 nurses from area schools. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $560,000. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. Many board members voice opposition. 2/24/95 Mooney meets with Riggs to discuss alternatives in health services. 2/24/95 Brown/Morgan/Mooney meet with Magness/Mayo to discuss alternatives in health services. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item has been dropped from 6* * * * consideration on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will not be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item shown as deferred and on hold. Still shows possible savings of $560,000. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was included in the budget as a program cost of $560,000. 4/6/95 Board Work Session. Board formally approved leaving health services in the budget. No cuts will be made in the program. Now a dead issue. Williams indicates the district is now working with the Dept of Health on some new ideas for health services. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects no cuts and no savings. 11. HIPPY. * * * * * * * * * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 01, HIPPY. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence #01 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Shead. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 01, HIPPY, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Eliminate HIPPY program except for parents within Incentive Schools. Would require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $185,828.18. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. Many board members voice opposition. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness requested some service numbers, asked about duplication of services, and possibilities of combining with other programs. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. Magness, Mitchell, and Pondexter voiced concerns about cutting this item. If cut, savings have been increased to $223,769. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $223,769. Also included an action deadline of 5/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of $223,769. 3/24/95 LRSD Budget Hearing. Williams says they are recommending the cut in the HIPPY program because of the deficit. The proposed cut is not final at this time, since the Board has not voted. Other programs can deliver this service. Matthis says HIPPY will remain in the incentive schools and schools in southwest Little Rock. Cuts will remove about 50% of the kids served. 4/6/95 Board Work Session. General discussion of the proposal. No action taken. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. A number of Board motions failed. No action taken. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the HIPPY 7expenditures added back at $223, 769, and now shows no savings. Removed from the actual list. 12. McClellan Community School. * * * * * * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 15, McClellan Community School. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence # 15 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Carter. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 15, McClellan Community School, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Deletion of program, with Business Department delivering the program. Would require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $170,000. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness asked questions about advisory board involvement. Williams directed Carter to go back to the advisory board for more input. * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. General discussion concerning involvement of the Advisory Council. Board wants more input from Advisory Council and additional information from the staff. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. * * * * * * * * 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $130,000. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of $130,000. 4/6/95 Board Work Session. General discussion of the proposal. No action taken. 4/10/95 LRSD Budget Hearing. Detailed testimony by Matthis concerning the business case. No action taken. Administration considering counter-proposal (business case) by the McClellan Advisory Board. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved the revised business case as submitted by the superintendent. The Community School will be funded at $40,000 (plus earnings of about $50,000), for a total savings of $130,000. 4/27/95 Special Board Meeting. General discussion on the business case developed by the Advisory Committee
the committee did what they were supposed to do. No action taken. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects savings still at $130,000. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program modifications for a savings of $130,000. 13. Staff Development. * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 8* * * 21, Staff Development. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODPvI/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence # 21 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Woods. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 21, Staff Development, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Was not included in this package, which would indicate that this is a dead proposal. 14. Substitute Teachers. * * * * * * * * * 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout on tentative business cases. Program sequence # NA, will be prepared by Gadberry and Hurley. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # none. Substitute Teachers, for modification or deletion. This item did not appear on the 1/5/95 Extended Evaluation List, but was on the 1/17/95 tentative business case list. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Place a cap on professional leave. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $50,000. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $50,000. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of $50,000. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved the business case as submitted by the superintendent. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the $50,000 savings. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program modifications for a savings of $50,000. IS. Vocational Education. * * * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 08 and 204, Vocational Education. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence # 08 and 204 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Green. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 08/204, Vocational Education, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Eliminate Exploring Industrial Technology education programs at two junior high schools
eliminate low demand courses. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $182,783.90. 9* * * 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. Magness noted the savings had been reduced to $98,462. Smith says this is the result of fine tuning. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $98,462. Also included an action deadline of ASAP. * 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of $98,462. * 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved the business case as submitted by the superintendent. * 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the $98,462 cut * and savings. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program modifications for a savings of $98,462. 16. Safety and Security, * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 25 and 225, Safety and Security Services. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence # 25 and 225 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Jones. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 25/225, Safety and Security, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Becomes a feeder for # 31. 17. Discipline Management. * * 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout on tentative business cases. Program sequence # NA, will be prepared by Mitchell, Robertson, Marshaleck. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Was not included in this package, which would indicate that this is a dead proposal. 18. Alternative Education. * * * * 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout on tentative business cases. Program sequence # NA, will be prepared by Elston, Anderson, and Glenn. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Pilot program of alternative classrooms at Southwest Junior High and Cloverdale Junior High. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Additional cost of $34,965. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the additional cost will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for an additional cost of $34,965. 10* 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was added to the budget for an additional * * cost of $34,965. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. No action taken. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the addition of $34,965. * 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program addition of $34,965. 19. Incentive School Program Modification. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 12/22/94 Project Management Tool, task 217. Develop business case for incentive schools program modifications for submitting to Superintendent and Council. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Revise staff configuration
improve staff efficiency. Would require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $607,250. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness requested more numbers and better justification. More general discussion. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. Magness noted the savings amount had been reduced to $608,250. The difference is cutting 38 vice 45 positions. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $608,250. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of $608,250. 3/31/95 Technical assistance meeting. Smith and Mooney meet with Matthis and Ingram to discuss the technical aspects of a proposed modification to the business case. 4/3/95 Court Submission. Revised business case reduced savings from $608,250 down to $211,250. Personnel cuts not as severe
from 45 FTE down to 10.5 FTE. 4/7/95 Court Submission. LRSD submits corrections to the revised business case. No change to the bottom line savings of $211,250. 4/10/95 LRSD Budget Hearing. Detailed testimony by Ingram on the business case. Detailed testimony by Brooks, Donovan, and Buchanan. No action taken. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved the revised business case as submitted by the superintendent. Savings at $211,250. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects savings still set * at $211,250. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program modifications for a savings of $211,250. 20. Middle School Concept. * * 12/22/94 Project Management Tool, task 218. Explore, gather, and assess data relative to the transition to the Middle School concept. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Was not included in this package, which would indicate this is a dead proposal. However, the 1/30/95 Project Management 11Tool indicates the district is 100% complete on exploring, gathering, and assessing data relative to such a transition. 21. Beacon School Concept. * * * * * * 11/11/94 letter from Williams to Brown. Letter indicates that planning has been completed and the district is moving ahead without the benefit of a business case. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Implement Beacon School concept at Cloverdale Junior High. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Additional cost of $12,000. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. The $12,000 is for custodial costs. Program would run year round. Gee suggests looking for a grant. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. Budget cost still shows $37,000. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the additional cost will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for an additional cost of $37,000. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was included in the budget for an additional cost of $37,000. * 4/6/95 Board Work Session. General discussion on proposal. No action taken. * * * * * 4/10/95. LRSD Budget Hearing. Brief discussion about the Beacon School concept in relation to the McClellan Community School business case and recommended cuts. No action taken. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. Williams says the amount can be lowered to $18,500 additional. The board tabled the addition. 4/27/95 Special Board Meeting. Since only about $20,000, Riggs suggests waiting on this issue until later in the year when the programs are about ready to start up
around 12/95. No action taken by the Board. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the addition of $18,500. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program addition of $18,500. 22. Badgett School Relocation. * * * * * * See feeder item #4. 1/27/95 Arkansas Democrat Gazette article. Article quotes Mayo as saying that Badgett and Fair Park are at the top of a possible closing list. Mayo says closing both would save $900,000. 2/7/95 Community meeting held at Badgett to discuss recommended closure. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Closing Badgett School. Would require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $523,000. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness asked questions about keeping all the students together in any move. Riggs supported the idea. 12* * * * * * * * * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. This item has been dropped from consideration on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will not be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item shown as deferred and on hold. Still shows possible savings of $523,000. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was included in the budget for an additional cost of $523,000. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. Motion to close Badgett failed. Funding will stay in the budget. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the school still open, with no savings in the budget. 6/15/95 Newspaper Article. Article reported that a 6/14/95 Special Board Meeting to vote on the closing of Badgett/Fair Park would be postponed. 6/22/95 Special Board Meeting. Board approved closing the school without discussion. The decision rescinded a Board vote in April that allowed the school to remain open. 7/3/95 LRSD Court Submission. Filed a revised business case and a motion to modify the desegregation plan in relation to closing the school. 7/7/95 Special Summit Meeting of the Parties. In striking this special deal among the parties, the Board (without formal vote) agreed to leave Badgett and Fair Park open for the next year. 23. Fair Park School Relocation. * * * * * * * * See feeder item #4. 1/27/95 Arkansas Democrat Gazette article. Article quotes Mayo as saying that Badgett and Fair Park are at the top of a possible closing list. Mayo says closing both would save $900,000. 1/31/95 Community meeting held at Fair Park to discuss recommended closure. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Closing Fair Park School. Would require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $637,000. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness requested the amount of money to repair Fair Park if it were kept open. Figures were not available. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. This item has been dropped from consideration on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will not be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item shown as deferred and on hold. Still shows possible savings of $637,000. Included an action deadline of 4/15/95. * 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was included in the budget for an additional * cost of $637,000. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. Motion to close Fair Park failed. Funding will stay in the budget. 13* * * * * 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the school remaining open, with no budget savings. 6/15/95 Newspaper Article. Article reported that a 6/14/95 Special Board Meeting to vote on the closing of Badgett/Fair Park would be postponed. 6/22/95 Special Board Meeting. Board approved closing the school without discussion. The decision rescinded a Board vote in April that allowed the school to remain open. 7/3/95 LRSD Court Submission. Filed a revised business case and a motion to modify the desegregation plan in relation to closing the school. 7/7/95 Special Summit Meeting of the Parties. In striking this special deal among the parties, the Board (without formal vote) agreed to leave Badgett and Fair Park open for the next year. 24. Elementary Music Teacher StafTing. * * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Revision of current elementary music teacher assignments. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $161,000. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration * * * * * list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $161,000. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of$161,000. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved the business case as submitted by the superintendent. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the cut and savings of $161,000. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program modifications for a savings of $161,000. 25. Improving Student Transportation. * * * * * See feeder item #5. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting. Williams says the LRSD is coming back with a recommendation to outsource transportation. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence # 223 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Cheatham. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 14, Pupil Transportation, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Outsourcing transportation. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $100,000. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. Some opposition, but not as much as last time. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness requested material from last year. Numerous 14 questions on the mechanics of outsourcing, but staff did not answer. * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration * * * * * * * list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $100,000. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of $100,000. 4/6/95 Board Work Session. Williams says RFP ready to go. No action taken. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. RFP issued on 4/7/95. The Board tabled the item. On hold. 4/27/95 Special Board Meeting. General discussion with numerous questions. Issue still tabled. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the item remaining deleted from the budget for a savings of $100,000. 6/15/95 Newspaper article. Article reported that a 6/14/95 Special Board Meeting to vote on outsourcing contract would be postponed. 6/22/95 Special Board Meeting. After a presentation by Laidlaw, the Board approved a * three year, $19,500,000 contract. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program modifications for a savings of $100,000, and the line item transfers for the outsourcing contract. 26. Parkview Commercial Art Class. * * * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Implement Commercial Arts I course to expand magnet arts program and satisfy state standards. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Savings of $0.00. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. Board approved this item. Unknown building renovations may be expensive. 27. Arkansas Crusades. * * * * * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Equipment and teacher training to support the Math, K-4, and Science Crusades. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Additional cost of $30,000. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. Will support about 30 teachers. Mostly for equipment at 50% match for implementation of programs. Have done this in the past. No evidence that it is successful at this point. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the additional costs will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item is still included in the proposal for an additional cost of $30,000. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was included in the budget for an additional cost of $30,000. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved the addition as submitted by the 15* * superintendent. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the addition of $30,000. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program addition of $30,000. 28. Mann Magnet Additional Clerical Position. * * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Provide assistance to bookkeeper and assistant principal. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Additional cost of $3,000. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. This item was dropped from the proposal. It was solved with staff realignment. It will be dropped from the proposed budget. 29. New Comers Center. * * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Designate selected schools to serve increasing needs of LEP students. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Additional cost of $52,117. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. Would have 4 centers at elementary schools, 2 centers at junior high schools, and 1 center at a senior high school. The funding is mainly for staff development for teachers. * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. The budget considerations list shows that the additional cost has been revised down to $12,117. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the additional costs will be reflected in the proposed budget. * 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the * proposal for an additional cost of $12,117. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was included in the budget for an additional cost of $12,117. * 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board tabled this issue. * * * 4/27/95 Special Board Meeting. The board approved the recommendation. Will add the $12,117. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the addition of $12,117. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program addition of $12,117. 30. Reading Recovery/Early Literacy Pilot Program. * * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Provide early intervention strategies to reduce later remediation. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Additional cost of $30,000. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. Would pilot reading recovery in grade 1. Funding is for training, materials, and supplies. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Gee asked questions about the number of students served. 16Magness clarified that the actual amount of new money required is really only $10,614, and not the full $30,000 cost. * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. This item is on the Budget * * * * * * Consideration list, and the additional cost will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for an additional cost of $10,614. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was included in the budget for an additional cost of $10,614. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board tabled this issue. 4/27/95 Special Board Meeting. Board approved the recommendation. Will add the $10,614. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the addition of $10,614. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program additions of$10,614. 31. Security Officers to Work on Safety and Security Issues. * * * * * * * * * See feeder item #16. Two additional security officers to deal with security related problems/issues. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Additional cost of $36,500. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. Officers would be used mainly in the bus areas. Outsourcing transportation would not impact this request. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Mitchell asked questions about the two officers that would be hired. Williams says they would be police officers that could fill in for the Resource Officers. Magness questions whether they are security officers or resource officers. Matthis says security officers. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the additional costs will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for an additional cost of $36,500. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was included in the budget for an additional cost of $36,500. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board tabled this issue. 4/27/95 Special Board Meeting. Board approved the recommendation. Will add the $36,500. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the addition of $36,500. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program additions of $36,500. 32. Social Studies Curriculum Revision. * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Form committee to revise Social Studies curriculum to correlate with new state frameworks
revise curriculum guides. Would 17* not require a Deseg Plan modification. Additional cost of $13,200. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. General discussion. * 3/8/95 Board Work Session. Magness had questions. Williams dropped this item from the proposal. It will come out of Matthis budget. This item has been dropped from the Budget Consideration list, and the additional costs will not be reflected in the proposed budget. 33. Information Services. * * * * See feeder item #3. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting handout. Tentative business case list shows program sequence # 24 and 230 will have a business case. It will be prepared by Beason. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 24/230, Data Processing, for modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Convert district to a PC-based architecture with LANs. Multi-year project will lower costs in out-years. Would not require a Deseg Plan modification. Additional cost of $317,500. * 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Beason makes presentation. Cites significant technological problems. General discussion on costs. OMalley brings up outsourcing, but Williams says this year is not the time. Williams talks about the need for fiber optics. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration * list, and the additional costs will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for an additional cost of $317,500. * 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was included in the budget for an additional * * * * cost of $317,500. 4/6/95 Board Work Session. Williams pushes for the addition of funds based on being able to access archived documents from 7 years ago. No action taken. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved the business case and addition as submitted by the superintendent. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the addition of $317,500. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program addition of $317,500. 34. Cloverdale Junior High School. * * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Name change to academy, and other program changes. Case did not receive Do Pass from Superintendent. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness wanted to know why this was turned down. No one could remember. Magness wants more information. 35. Incentive School Principals, * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Pay increase and back pay for Incentive 18* School Principals. Case did not receive Do Pass from Superintendent. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness initiates a general discussion. 36. Rockefeller Incentive School Alternative Room Specialist. * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Add a teacher to be the alternative room * specialist. 1 FTE. Case did not receive Do Pass from Superintendent. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness initiates a general discussion. 37. Seventh Grade Expansion of the Alternative School. * 2/15/95 Business Case book to Board and ODM. Add two 7th grade classes. 4 FTEs and equipment. Case did not receive Do Pass from Superintendent. 38. Reduction in Administrators. * * * * * * Moved from strategy listing. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. This item was added to the budget considerations handout. It calls for a $300,000 reduction in administrative positions. Although not specific, Williams says he has identified some positions. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $300,000. Positions still identified. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of $300,000. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. Williams says he will propose cutting 10 or 12 positions in the central office, not at the building level. The Board tabled the issue awaiting additional information. 4/27/95 Special Board Meeting. Proposed savings increased from $300,000 to $400,000. Actual cut list has not been published at this time. Numerous rumors
no facts. Board passes the $400,000 cut without the specific cuts. * 4/29/95 Democrat Gazette article. Listed the cuts. Staff attorney plus secretary, $88,520. Deputy Superintendent, $93,969. Associate to the Deputy, $72,439. G/T Coordinator, $52,671. HIPPY Coordinators (2), $48,118. Plant Services * * * (EPA/const mgr), $49,127. Instructional Technology, $42,056. Math Supervisor, $55,942. Displaced principals, $125,288. Total cut package of $628,130. The $228,130 difference between the total and the approved cut amount of $400,000 would be additional new positions yet to be identified or approved. 5/17/95 Special Board Meeting. Meeting held to listen to patron pleas to retain (not cut) the G/T Coordinator position. No other administrative reductions were discussed. No action taken. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Cuts still at $400,000, but no description of the $228,130 for new positions. Business case included in the Tentative Budget Document. Business case undated. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. A newly modified business case was submitted with the 19Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the program modifications for a gross savings of $566,312
less a contingency add-back of $150,000, for a net savings of $416,312. 20LRSD CHART OF SHORTFALL STRATEGIES BUDGET FY 95-96 NOTE: The items in bold print headings are active. The items with regular print headings are not active. 1. Outsourcing other services. 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting. Williams indicates the LRSD is not looking at any other Outsourcing opportunities at this time. 2/9/95 Board agenda/special meeting. ServiceMaster makes a presentation on managing custodian, maintenance, and landscaping services. Representative says they can do it within the current budget, but no details given on how the dollars will be handled. Board does not take any action. ServiceMaster will provide more information. See item #13. 2. Clerical Support. 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 3. IRC - Staffing/Use. 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 4. Federal Programs. 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 07, Federal Programs. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 07, Federal Programs, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. 5. Staffing Efficiencies/RIF. 11/7/94 Board Work Session. * * * * * * * * * * * 6. New Futures/In-School Suspension. * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 7. Facilities Usage. 21* * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting. Mayo says the LRSD has completed a preliminary status report on the facilities study for input into the needs assessment. All area elementary schools were rated for possible closing. The top four are Badgett, Fair Park, Baseline, and Woodruff. A business case will be done on the closing recommendations. 8. Student Assessment. * * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # none. Student Assessment, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. 9. Fringe Benefit Package. * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 10. 11. 12. 13. Contract Lengths. * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. Pondexter initiates request for more information. Item becomes active after five months. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. No action was taken, and the budget reflects on change. Millage Election. * * * * * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. Pondexter urges the Board to consider going for a 5 mil tax increase. 4/13/95 Board agenda meeting. Board voted to put the subject of a millage election on the agenda for the next meeting. 5/11/95 Board Agenda Meeting. Board held general discussion on a possible millage election. Williams says they will need between 8 and 12 mils. 7/8/95 Newspaper Article. Board decided not to go for a millage increase this year. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. No action was taken, and the budget reflects on change. Spending Freeze. * * 11/7/94 Board Work Session. 1/26/95 Board meeting. Gee suggests a purchasing freeze as part of a freeze package (hiring, wage increase, purchasing, travel). Voted down by the Board. Custodian services
consulting by ServiceMaster. * * 1/17/95 Joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting. Williams says the district is coming forth with a recommendation on ServiceMaster serving as a consultant on custodian services. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session. ServiceMaster offices make 22presentation. Williams says district would have to bid the work, but could save about $600,000 per year going with ServiceMaster. * 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. No action was taken, and the budget reflects on change. 14. Communications Services. * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 227, Communications Services. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 227, Communications Services, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. 15. Computerized Transportation. * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 23, Computerized Transportation. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 23, Computerized Transportation, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. 16. Contingencies. * * * * * * * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 233, Contingencies. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 233, Contingencies, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/22/95 Board Work Session. Eliminating contingencies introduced in handout during meeting. Would save an estimated $1,000,000. No discussion. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the contingency amounts will be deleted from the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still eliminated from the proposal for a savings of $1,000,000. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of$l,000,000. 4/27/95 Special Board Meeting. Superintendent reminded the Board that they still must take action on this item. No action taken. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. The Tentative Budget Document does not reflect any contingency funds, thus saving the originally budgeted $1,000,000. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. The Final Budget Document does not reflect any contingency funds, thus saving the originally budgeted $1,000,000. 17. Gifted and Talented. * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 207, Gifted and Talented. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 23* * 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 207, Gifted and Talented, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. 18. Human Resource Services. * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 228, Human Resource Services. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 228, Human Resource Services, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. 19. Planning and Evaluation. * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 226, Planning and Evaluation. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 226, Planning and Evaluation, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. 20. Plant Services. * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 222, Plant Services. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 222, Plant Services, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. 21. Purchasing Services. * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 224, Purchasing Services. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 224, Purchasing Services, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. 22. Rockefeller Early Childhood. * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 79, Rockefeller Early Childhood. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 79, Rockefeller Early Childhood, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the 24business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. 23. Romine Interdistrict School. * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 78, Romine Interdistrict School. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 78, Romine Interdistrict School, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. Special Education. 24. 25. 26. n. * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 203, Special Education. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 203, Special Education, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. Special Education/Learning. * * * 1/5/95 Extended Program Evaluation list. Shows up on the evaluation list as Sequence # 05, Special Education/Learning. An extended program evaluation will be prepared. 1/26/95 Board meeting material. New Extended Evaluation list recommends sequence # 05, Special Education/Learning, for continuation without modification or deletion. 2/15/95 Business case Book to Board and ODM. This item was NOT included in the business case Book, which would tend to indicate this may be a dead issue. Freeze on Hiring. * 1/26/95 Board meeting. Gee suggests a hiring freeze as part of a freeze package (hiring, wage increase, purchasing, travel). Voted down by the Board. Freeze on Wage Increases. * 1/26/95 Board meeting. Gee suggests a wage increase freeze as part of a freeze package (hiring, wage increase, purchasing, travel). Voted down by the Board. 28. Freeze on Travel. * 1/26/95 Board meeting. Gee suggests a travel freeze as part of a freeze package (hiring, wage increase, purchasing, travel). Voted down by the Board. 29. Eliminate Purchase of Buses. * * 2/22/95 Board Work Session. Introduced in handout during meeting. Would save an estimated $1,000,000. No discussion. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. This item is on the Budget Consideration 25 * * * * list, and the additional costs will not be included in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still eliminated from the proposal for a savings of $1,000,000. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of$l,000,000, 4/27/95 Special Board Meeting. Superintendent reminded the Board that they still must take action on this item. No action taken. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Item still eliminated from the Tentative Budget Document for a svaings of $1,000,000. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. This may get confusing. The district was budgeted to spend $1,000,000 on buses during 94-95. The buses were not purchased, only ordered, in 94-95, so the money was not spent and was reflected in the year end carryover. The bus purchase will actually occurred in 95-96 so most of the money, about $991,000, is now added into this budget to pay for those previously orderd buses. Therefore, no savings are reflected. 30. Eliminate Increment for Employees. * * * * * * 2/22/95 Board Work Session. Introduced in handout during meeting. Would save an estimated $2,000,000. No discussion. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. Pondexter opposed to cutting or freezing pay. Savings reduced to $1,500,000. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the additional costs will not be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still eliminated from the proposal. Unable to determine the estimated savings since this item is lumped in with other items totaling $3,500,000. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings of$l,500,000. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects this as an item still under consideration at $1,500,000, but does not reflect any savings at this time. 6/15/95 Newspaper Article. An article in the Democrat Gazette stated that eliminating the increment was still being negotiated in the contract talks. 31. Shorten School Year by Two Days. * * * * 2/22/95 Board Work Session. Introduced in handout during meeting. Would save an estimated $750,000. No discussion. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. No discussion. Savings reduced to $702,000. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $702,000. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Two days were deleted from the budget for a savings of $702,000. 3/24/95 LRSD Budget Hearing. Williams says that cutting two days pay is for all 26 * * * * * employees, not just teachers. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. Gadberry says the cut would be from all employees of the district. The Board decided to wait to consider this item until after contract negotiations. 4/27/95 Special Board Meeting. Williams says the rules have changed on this proposal. Bus drivers, custodians, and security not affected. Administrators would take a 3 day cut, teachers would take a 2 day cut. Savings amount changed to $699,546. 5/17/95 Special Board Meeting. General discussion on proposal. Board awaiting Attorney Generals opinion on the number of hearings required. No action taken. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects a successful negotiation outcome with the savings of $699,546. 6/15/95 Newspaper article. An article in the Democrat Gazette stated that eliminating the increment was still being negotiated in the contract talks. 32. Move IRC to Fair Park. * * * * * * * 2/22/95 Board Work Session. Introduced in handout during meeting. Would save an estimated $161,800, but would also have a first year expense of $50,000 for utilities and $270,000 for renovations. This would result in a net first year cost of $158,200. Depends upon the closing of Fair Park School. No discussion. 2/28/95 Board Work Session. Magness asked what options were available for moving the IRC if Fair Park was left open. Williams says they need to look at the whole picture of school closings and usage. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. The preliminaiy decision to not close Fair Park precludes this move. This item has been dropped from the Budget Consideration list, and the savings and additional costs will not be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still shown as deferred and on hold. Shows a net savings of $111,800. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. $161,800 in savings was not shown in the budget since the decision has been defened on closing the school. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. Cant move the IRC if not closing down Fair Park. Pondexter wants information on moving the IRC to Oakhurst. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects no move and no savings. 33. Reduction in Debt Service if Stephens is not Rebuilt. * * 2/22/95 Board Work Session. Introduced in handout during meeting. Would save an estimated $300,000. No discussion. 3/8/95 Board Work Session. OMalley says building has not been dropped, only being delayed. This item is on the Budget Consideration list, and the savings will be reflected in the proposed budget. 3/16/95 Special Board Meeting and Work Session handout. Item still included in the proposal for a savings of $300,000. Also included an action deadline of 4/15/95. 27* 3/22/95 Proposed Budget, dated 3/14/95. Item was deleted from the budget for a savings * * * * of $300,000. 3/24/95 LRSD Budget Hearing. Williams says the rebuilding of Stephens has been delayed. No date has been set for when it will be rebuilt. 4/12/95 Board Work Session. The Board approved delaying the rebuilding of Stephens for the 95-96 school year. 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects the delay and the savings of $300,000. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. Final Budget Document reflects the delay and the svaings of $300,000. 34. Combine administration of the 4 Year Old Program and the HIPPY Program. * 2/22/95 Board Work Session. Suggested by Pondexter as an alternative cost savings measure. No commitment by the administration. 35. Green Factors. * * * 2/9/95 agenda/special Board meeting. The superintendent proposed spending about $105,000 (7 committees at $12,000-$ 15,000 each) for Green factors study committees. The money would come from the legal object code. Since the projected report delivery deadline is well within this fiscal year, all of the cost should accrue to the current year reducing the year end carry-over. No business case was prepared, thus no options were identified or analyzed. 2/23/95 Board Work Session. Board will not authorize the Green factor committees or the money to fund them until they have an on-the-record conference with Judge Wright. Deleting this action would avert spending about $105,000 in the current fiscal year for incentive payments proposed by the superintendent. 3/9/95 Court Conference. Judge says Green factors will not get you home in this case. The Plan is the law. 3/24/95 LRSD Budget Hearing. Williams says he recommended paying $100,000 to look at the factors. Would have paid out of the legal fees line item. Board did not approve the proposal. 36. Reduction in Administrators. * Moved to business case list. 37. Closing High School Kindergartens. * 4/19/95 Democrat Gazette article. At a Town Hall feedback meeting on 4/18/95, Williams said the district was now considering the closing of the high school based kindergarten programs. No business case has been prepared. No short fall strategy proposal. No discussion before the Board. 7/24/95 Final Budget Document. No action was taken, and the budget reflects on change. 2838. Utilities for IRC at Fair Park. * 5/26/95 Tentative Budget Document. Tentative Budget Document reflects a cost of $50,000, but shows no savings since this has not been approved by the Board. 29LRSD CHART OF BUDGET ISSUES BUDGET FY 95-96 1. Buses for transportation. According to the October, 1994, business case, the district will be 95 buses short on current year and will need 29 more to make their replacement schedule. Therefore, some buses should be added into the 95-96 budget as an expense item. The decision to outsource transportation makes this issue moot. 2. Appeal of M-to-M pooling. If the appeal is not heard by budget time, the pooling money must be added into the LRSD budget. Order was reversed. LRSD does not have any additional pooling money in the budget. The other pooling funds were never paid to PCSSD, but rather put in an escrow account for the winner of the case. 3. Workers Compensation. Court Order of 1/13/95 ruled in favor of the district. Additional money should be included in the budget. Based on ADE calculations of 4/14/95, the amount will be $167,111. 4. Loss Funding. Court Order of 1/13/95 ruled in favor of the district. Additional money should be included in the budget. Based on ADE calculations of 4/14/95, the amount will be $238,824 for FY93-94, and $472,718 for FY94-95
for a total payment of $711,542. 5, Arkansas Public School Computer Network Court Order of 1/13/95 ruled in favor of the district. According to the revised ADE calculations of 5/4/95, the money available to LRSD for computer related expenses would be $176,483. 6. Rebuilding Stephens School. Money to rebuild Stephens School should be included in the capital budget if plans are to move forward. Board made the decision to delay the rebuilding of Stephens. 7. Rebuilding Chicot School. Revenue and expense should be included in the budget to show any rebuilding, insurance revenue, and total building expense. At the agenda/special Board meeting of 2/9, the Board approved rebuilding Chicot with walls for an additional cost of $150,000 over the insurance. The money is in the bond fund. No business case was prepared. 8. Loan payback LRSD/ADE negotiations regarding achievement disparity and the loan payback. What is the status of the negotiations, and what contingency is being planned for the payback of the 30loan. 9. Facilities Study. The cost of the facilities study needs to be included in the budget. Some will be current year, but the final payoff will probably be in the next fiscal year. As of the joint ODM/LRSD staff meeting on 2/21/95, the facilities study is now in three phases: the first is due soon and will cover everything needed by the Judge
the second will be delivered on 8/15/95 and will cover what is needed by the District
the third will be due sometime after 8/15/95 and will be even more comprehensive than the second phase. 10. Magnet School budget. The calculations for the Magnet School budget need to be changed to reflect the changes pointed out by Bob. 11. Middle Schools. Check and annotate the budget for expenditures being added for middle schools. 12. ServiceMaster. At the agenda/special board meeting on 2/9/95, ServiceMaster made a presentation to take over the management of the districts custodian, maintenance, and landscaping services. It was projected that no additional costs would be required, however, nothing was mentioned on how the dollars would be handled. No business case was prepared. 13. Green factors. At the agenda/special board meeting on 2/9/95, the superintendent proposed spending about $105,000 (7 committees at $12k-$15k each) for Green factors study committees. The money would come from the legal object code. Since the projected report delivery deadline is well within this fiscal year, all of the cost should accrue to the current year reducing the year end carry-over. No business case was prepared. Locate and annotate expenditures for the Green Factor committees. Verify Board approval. No business case was prepared. Board action made this a dead issue. 14. Superintendent incentives. At the agenda/special board meeting on 2/9/95, Riggs proposed an incentive package for the superintendent. The cost of the package was not given. No business case was prepared. How the money will be handled was not discussed, but there were indications that the district wanted to pay it from the remainder of the deseg loan. Locate and annotate projected budget expenditures for incentive payments. The Board put this on hold for the year. 15. Beacon Schools. Check and annotate the budget for expenditures being added for beacon schools. A business case has been submitted for the additional funds, and the funds have been added to the Final Budget Document. 16. Great Expectations. Check and annotate the budget for expenditures being added for Great Expectations. 31No money was identified in either the Tentative or Final Budget Documents. 17. Outsourcing Transportation. If the district fails in the outsourcing attempt, what is the contingency plan and what will it cost? This is a done deal. 18. New Futures. Locate and annotate expenditures for the New Futures funded Board retreat and Strategic Planning effort. Identify the fiscal year. Identify follow-on expenses. New Futures cuts were added back into the budget. 19. Administrative Positions. The Board approved a $400,000 cut in administrators. The cuts recommended by Williams total $628,130. A difTerence of $228,130 has not been approved. Williams said that will be taken by the addition of new positions. No new positions have yet been identified. Those positions should have business cases, should be approved by the Board, and should be included in the tentative budget. The Final Budget Document had a revised business case with the following numbers
a gross savings of $566,312, with an add-back contingency of $150,000 and a net savings of $416,312. 32MOONEYS BRAINSTORMING LIST OF POSSIBLE COST CUTTING MEASURES Mooneys Brainstorming List of Possible Cost Cutting Measures. This is an informal brainstorming list of possible measures for cutting the budget or improving services. We have not determined the feasibility of the items, nor have we run cosuTienefits. The menu is made up of things that might be considered with no judgement made on value. These items in no way should be construed as ODMs position, recommendation, or suggestion. * * * * * * * * * * * * Performance based pay. Benchmark Cincinnati Public Schools plan for administrators. Negotiate with the union. Stipends. Stop advance payments on payroll
problems stopped and one-time windfall Salary evaluation and overall review Salary freeze
freeze administration first for buy-in Salary rollback. Reduce the number of school days. Reduce the hours of certain staff. Purge positions over $35,000. Freeze all hiring of replacements in non-teaching positions. Consolidate classes Purge all vacant positions from the budget * Car allowance. * Cellular phones. * Vacation days policy revision. * Review sick leave policy. * Cafeteria plan
better education and selling. * Revise travel reimbursement procedures and amounts. * Look at alternative health care plan with eye to maintain benefits at less cost
third party arrangements. * Employee suggestion program. * Get suggestions from transportation workers. * TQM initiatives. * Review monitoring functions of the parties for possible coordination/consolidation. * Review reporting generated by PRE. * All secretaries must demonstrate proficiency in WordPerfect and Excel. * Incentive program for attendance
preferably non-monetary 331 * Incentive program for accident free driving
both monetary and non-monetary * Six period day. * * * * * * * * Flatten administrative organization
remove some layers Get 10% to 15% from each administrative department General layoffrRIF Give transportation to someone else. Outsourcing
transportation, custodial, accounting, data processing, human resources, or all support services in a bundle. Serious program evaluation. Begin benchmarking campaign nation-wide to identify cost saving targets. Reorganize and downsize Federal Programs office. Bus driver recommendation to combine certain routes. * Lease purchase refinancing. Food Service transfer. * Insurance fund transfer. * Transfer of positions and expenses from operating funds to federal funds. * Settlement Loan draw-down. * Grants which would defray operating costs for programs. * Get computer company to volunteer training staff on PC's. * Combine AS400 operations into one. * Work with APSCN to find low cost, long term computer solution. * Implement the Finance Analysis Model immediately, and try to retro-fit for the last two years for possible cut analysis * Check actual expenditures against budgeted for targets of opportunity. * Control and crack down on substitutes. * Cut athletic programs. * Combine recruiting efforts (teacher, parent, VIPS, private school) * Increase Medicaid reimbursement for health services * No cost contract for all health services with A.C.H.
use Westside as chip. * Approach State about picking up the Medicaid match portion. * Social work reimbursement from DHS * Reject paying for th
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.