COORDOl REVISED 21 MAY 93 PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESS EXPECTATION WORKSHEET CONCEPT - Do you have a program planning and budgeting process? - Are you satisfied with the process? - What are your expectations of a program planning and budgeting process? -How long has the process been in place? MAJOR PLAYERS - What role should the Board play in planning and budgeting? - What role should the administration play in planning and budgeting? - What role should the school staff play in planning and budgeting? - What role should the public play in planning and budgeting? - What roles should the unions play in planning and budgeting? - Are there other players in planning and budgeting? What are their roles? ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING - Who should be responsible for the planning piece, the budget piece, and pulling them together? - How many people work on the planning piece as a regular assignment? - Who is your chief planner? Background? - Who should be responsible for monitoring the deseg plan compliance? - Do you have a PRE shop? - Where should the planning unit organizationally located? - What should be the functions of the planning unit? PROGRAM COORDINATION - What should the plan cycle be? - How do you coordinate/control the planning and budgeting process? - What type of project status reporting should be available? NEEDS ASSESSMENT - Do you perform regular needs assessments? - What kinds of perceptual (surveys) processes should be used to develop the needs assessment phase? - What kind of empirical (data) processes should be used to develop the needs assessment phase? - Who should be in charge of the needs assessment?- Who should provide input into the needs assessment? - What should be the timeframe of the needs assessment? When? How long? - What should be the output of the needs assessment? - What should the output look like? GOALS AND OBJECTIVES - Do you have well defined goals in writing? - What process should be used to develop your goals and objectives? - What input should be used to determine the goals and objectives? Needs assessment? - Who should be involved with the goals and objective process? -What should be the timeframe of developing the goals and objectives? When? How long? - What should be the output of the process? RESOURCES IDENTIFICATION/SERVICE INVENTORY -Do you perform a regular program inventory and assess its effectiveness? - What process should be used to develop the inventory? - What input should be used to develop the resources/service inventory?- What should be the output of the process? - Who should be involved with the identification process? - What should be the timeframe for doing resource identification/service inventory? When? How long? PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT - Do you set up the plan and the budget based on programs? How do you define the program? - What kind of formal process should be used for developing a new program or major modification of an existing program? - How should you incorporate the desegregation plan requirements into your planning process? - How should you bring in program evaluation to assess continued need for a program? - What input should be used to develop or modify programs? - Who should be involved with the development process? - What should be the output of the process? - What should be the timeframe for doing program development/modification? When? How long?RESOURCE ALLOCATION - What is your budget process? How is resource allocation determined? - Who should be involved in the process? - What input should be used to allocate resources? - Is there a formula for allocating resources? -How should priorities be determined? -How should reductions be handled? -How should outyear projections be handled and documented? - How should plan and budget be linked? -How should you link the budget and the desegregation plan requirements? - What should be the timeframe for resource allocation? When? How long? - What should be the output of the process? PROGRAM EVALUATION - What kind of program evaluation do you have? - What input should be used for program evaluations?- Do you perform a regular staffing analysis? How is it used? - Do you perform a regular capacity analysis? How is it used? -Who should be involved in the process? - What should be the output of the process? How is it used? - Should management regularly review the evaluation material? What do they do with it? -How are program managers held accountable for progress or lack of same? - How are budget managers held accountable for progress or lack of same? - What should be the time frame for program evaluation? When? How long? PLAN/BUDGET FORMAT - Do you have a comprehensive planning document? - What should the plan look like? - What input should be used for plan development? - How should the plan be modified? - How should those modifications be carried forward? - How should outyear program/budget projections be displayed?- Who should be involved in preparing the plan? - Who should be the keeper of the plan? - What should be the timeframe for preparing the plan? When? How long? PUBLIC INFORMATION/PARTICIPATION - What should be the input for the process? - Who should be involved in the process? - What is the best vehicle for input from outside the system? - How would you communicate the completed plan and progress reporting to the public? -How would you communicate the process to the staff? - How would you communicate the completed plan and progress reporting to the employees? - What should be the timeframe for public input? When? How long? PROGRESS REPORTING - Is there regular progress reporting during the year? What kind? Frequency? - What should be the input for the process?- What should be the output of the process? -Who should be involved in the process? - Who should be the keeper of the process? - Are the resulting reports regularly reviewed with the responsible parties? - Are the responsible parties held accountable? - Who gets the reporting, and what do they do with it?DEFINITIONS A CONCPT04 REVISED 02 SEP 93 LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT TERM AND DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS TERM DEFINITIONS. The following definitions are provided for general guidance, and will be used throughout the Program Planning and Budgeting Process. Program. A program is an composed of a group or series of established plan of operation, related activities which are carried out to serve a specific area of identified need. is a major undertaking by the district to fulfill executive, and/or legal requirements. A program statutory. methods of implementing goals and objectives. Programs are the district's Programs will be a basis for work progress and fiscal reporting and monitoring. Program Description. Generally, program descriptions do not currently exist on most programs, and will have to be written, program description should include at least three parts: A Purpose. A one or two sentence statement of what the program is designed to accomplish. Scope and Content. activities that A general description of the are to be undertaken to achieve the purpose. description program. This of section the might also administrative include structure a 1 of brief the Participants/Beneficiaries. A specific statement of how many and what kind of persons will be affected by the program during one fiscal year. Program Goal. A program goal is a broad guiding statement and should describe the overall aim(s), purpose{s), or ambition(s) of the specific program. It is ageneral and enduring statement of purpose that expresses the district's fundamental intentions and provides guidelines for planning the future development of the program. What is the program trying to accomplish? must have at least one goal, but may have several. Each program Obj actives. Program objectives present explicitly the desired impact the program should have on a problem. They should provide detail to the goals. .They tell in specific, measurable terms what is to be accomplished to implement adopted goals. statement should: (A) tell what is to be achieved
The objective (B) tell when the achievement is to be realized
(C) tell how the achievement of the objective will be measured. least one objective, but may have several. Each program goal must have at Strategies. Strategies are the jobs. tasks, efforts, oractions undertaken in a program accomplishment of the objective. which contributes to the intermediate steps, A strategy is a combination of and produces a distinct end product - not These intermediate processes which only support other strategies. end products should be measurable or quantifiable where possible, showing how the objective is to be achieved. Each objective must have at least one strategy, but may have several. Evaluation Criteria. Evaluation criteria are statements which specify the end product of an objective or strategy and establish measurable levels for the product. These end products should be of performance measurable These showing how the objective or or quantifiable where possible, strategy is to be achieved. The criteria should measure, if possible, the relative impact of the results on the problem which the objective or strategy is designed tc cclvc. If a strategy or objective cannot be measured in terms to solve. of impact, the measurement can be stated in terms of the level (or volume) of strategy provided and/or the number of persons served. Each strategy must have at least one evaluation criteria, but may have several.DEFINITIONS B PROGRAM PAGE DATA ELEMENTS DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS. Page. Each program will have one of these Extensive program narrative will carry-over onto a cover pages. second page. The form is set up on diskette to allow for this carry-over, so you do not have to get everything on one page. Program Seq #. Each program will be sequence number by the district planner. assigned a unique The purpose of this sequence number is to establish a reference for placing programs in order within assembled, the planning document. When the document IS programs are arranged in this sequence. The program sequence number will help facilitate look-up since there is front-to-back page numbering. no This element should be field
it should not change during the year. a static Revision Date. document was last changed. This date is the actual date this program This date will be entered by the person making the change each time the document is changed. this date will change at performance reporting. least quarterly with As a minimum, the regular Program Name. The district planner established name of the program in this field. will place the Name consistency will eliminate confusion, so try to use the designated name on all documents. change during the year. This element should be, a static field
it should not Program Code. This is a unique accounting code which will link budget and expenditures to the associated program. The code will be assigned by Financial Services prior to the beginning of each fiscal year, and all expenditures during the year should use this program code. should not change during the year. This element should be a static field
it Primary Leader. The Primary Leader is the cabinet-level associate responsible for the management and operation of this program. This person should have the authority to ensure all necessary actions are taken to make the program successful, person is responsible for the correctness and timeliness planning document and all subsequent reporting. This of the Secondary Leader. The Secondary Leader is the associate who is back-up to the Primary, and will function in that capacity in the absence of the Primary. Program Description. above, must be placed in this field. The program description. as defined static field
it should not change during the year. This element should be a District Goal Support. Each program must directly support oneor more district goals. If more than one district goal, the appropriate district goals should be listed in descending priority District goals will be established by. the Board. order. element should be a static field
year. This it should not change during the Program Goal. placed in this field, but may have several. The program goal, as defined above, must be sequentially. Each program must have at least one goal, Each goal should be numbered and listed not change during the year. This element should be a static field
it should Plan Reference. Specific plan and page references will be listed in this section for those programs directly cited in one of the desegregation plans. L= LRSD InterDistrict Plan. Desegregation Plan. The format should be L23 or 113-20. 1 = This element will be left blank if the program is not directly cited in one of the desegregation plans. This element should be a static field
it should not change during the year, unless by Court Order. FY Program Budget. The total budgeted dollars appropriate fiscal year will be shown in this element. for the The number will be the total for the program code, and will be supplied by Financial Services at the beginning of the fiscal year. element will change only if the budget changes. This FTE. This element reflects the Full Time Equivalents (FTE) budgeted for this program (at the program code level). The number will be the total for the program code, and will be supplied by Financial Services at the beginning of the fiscal year. element will change only if the budget changes. This lst/2nd/3rd/4th Qtr Expend. quarter will be entered The actual expenditures for each quarterly reporting process. into the appropriate field during the Financial Services will provide the information, but the Primary Leader is responsible for entering the information onto the form. Once entered, these fields should entered. remain static unless an error is detected. YTD Expenditures. actual expenditures at the program level. This field is the year-to-date total of departments with expenditures against this program. This will include all Financial Services will provide the information once each quarter is closed, but the Primary Leader is responsible for entering the information onto the form. unless an error is detected. Once entered, these fields should remain static Related Function Codes. This field identifies all function- level accounting codes which combine to make the complete program budget. Each program will have at least one function code, but may have several. ... . ... Each four digit code should be listed sequentially with one space between them.DEFINITIONS C OBJECTIVE PAGE DATA ELEMENTS DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS. Page. This is the relating to the "program". the field. sequential page numoer tor all pages number is automatically placed in Thi number for program Program Seq #. page. This This should be the objectives back to the number will link major program. same all number as separate on the program Revision Date. document was last changed. This date is the actual date this document was last changed. This date will be entered by the making the change each time the document is changed, this date will change at least quarterly with performance reporting. that on the program ! person As a minimum, ... 1 the regular The date on this page may be different from more frequenffy^should change Program Name. Thi should be the same name as page. This name is a further link back to the Including the name on this page prevents the the program name. on the program major program. need to refer back for Program Code. This should be the same code(s) as on the program page. is a link back to the major program. Including the code(s) on this page prevents the need to refer back for the program code. This code(s) Primary Leader. program page. Including this to refer back for the leader This should be the same person as on the name on this page prevents the need 's name. Secondary Leader. This name that name on the program page. objectives, the Secondary Leader supporting objectives. will generally be the same as However, if a program has several may be different for those Program Goal. . Include only one of the program goals from the program page in this field. For each orooram ooa1 For each program goal listed on tho program page, there will be at least ^isrec on the one objective page. Plan Reference Page listed for each objective and strategy is desegregation plan related, SlIctivT objective or strategy is found. If the objective or strategy is not related to a desegregation plan urt Order, list whatever source was used. Each reference should correspond to the appropriate strategy. Number. Source references strategy. should be If the objective or list the specific plan and or strategy is found, strategy is not related to be numbered to source was used. or the Objectives. program goal. List all of the objectives required to satisfy Objectives should be listed ' ' in bold face.Wording not taken from a desegregation plan bold fsce within psirenthGses. least one objective, but or court order should Each program goal must have at may have Spacing between several. objectives should allow for all supporting strategics should be numbered sequential 1v nnrter Q n r' Vl rv 1 seguentially under each goal. Objectives Strategies. the related objective. Wording not taken from List all of the strategies reguired to satisfy Strategies should be listed in bold face a desegregation plan within parentheses, least strategy, but may have numbered sequentially under each be in bold face or court order should one Each objective must have several. obj ective. at Strategies should be Beginning Date This is the actual date this particular the following format- "" Stated yet, leave this field blank. activity began. This the actual date this If an activity has not Completion Date, activity was completed. This is the actual date this . - For consistency, entered m following format
activity has been started but not in the on the percent of started, leave this field blank. Responsibility. particular all dates should be MM/DD/YY, 07/22/93. If an completed, give your best guess completwn (75%). If the activity has not 07/22/93. This If the is the name of the . , . . J- uiit name j. wit., ensuring this activity is accomplished. individual tasked Criteria. hist at least one evaluation criteria for each strateev. Include the specific measure of s^c^Js Should be listed in bold face desegregation plan within parentheses. strategy. Evaluation criteria List specific of taken from a face numbered to Each Wording not or court order should be in bold evaluation criteria should be correspond to the appropriate strategy, numbered sequentially under each strategy. and should beRECEIVED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION NOV 3 1993 Office of Desegregation Monitoring LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF vs. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS INTERVENORS LRSD'S 1993-94 FIRST QUARTER STATUS REPORT The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District ("LRSD" or "District"), for its status report for the first quarter of the 1993-94 school year, states: 1. By order dated June 15, 1993, this Court notified the LRSD and other parties to this litigation that hearings would be held on July 7 and July 8, 1993, to review budget matters concerning the LRSD and Pulaski County Special School District ("PCSSD"). However, prior to the hearing, the LRSD was instructed to submit certain information as specified by the Court. 2 . In particular. this Court instructed the LRSD to implement a budgeting process that would yield a budget reflecting the District's careful planning for meeting its Desegregation Plan provisions over the full span of the settlement agreement. Accordingly, the LRSD was instructed, among other things, to submit by July 30, 1993, a written plan for the long-range planning and budgeting process to be used in developing the 1994-95 budget. The Order contained detailed and specific instructions regarding the information to be included in the written plan and, thereby. i necessitated the development of a comprehensive budgeting and planning process. 3. The LRSD, thereafter, implemented steps and procedures to allow it to comply with the requirements of the June 15 order. The Court had earlier appointed a person to work with the LRSD, at LRSD's expense, to prepare a budget document that would make it possible for the Court to monitor the myriad of programs that the LRSD agreed to conduct through its desegregation settlement plan. That order was filed on or about February 23, 1993. Pursuant to the February, 1993 order, a budget specialist was selected by the Court to assist the LRSD, while reporting to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring ("O.D.M."). 4. Representatives of the LRSD conferred with the budget specialist and representatives of O.D.M. in early July, 1993. At that time, the LRSD was advised that the budget specialist had reviewed the order of this Court and developed a draft paper detailing how many of the requirements of the order could be satisfied. Attached hereto as Exhibit "1 II is a true and accurate copy of the draft program planning and budget process document as prepared by the budget specialist. 5. Working from Exhibit "1," the LRSD worked to develop the program budgeting and planning document filed by it on July 29, 1993. Attached hereto as Exhibit "2" is a true and accurate copy of a memorandum providing a chronology of the actions taken to develop the document. 6. By order dated July 9, 1993, this Court, among other things, gave notice that hearings on the revised budget of the LRSD) would be held on August 12 and 13, 1993. During the hearing, LRSD presented testimony outlining the process used to develop the long- range program planning and budget document which had been filed on July 29. In particular, the Court, having examined the document. sought to determine whether the LRSD was aware of the responsibilities and commitments made by way of the document. Following the hearing, the Court issued an order on August 26, 1993, wherein it commended the LRSD for initiating, with the help of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, budgeting and long-range planning processes. However, in order to allow it to closely monitor the on-going budgeting and planning processes and their impact on desegregation, the Court ordered the LRSD to submit on a monthly basis, a copy of any project management tool used by the District to guide, monitor and control the development and implementation of its planning and budgeting process. The LRSD has endeavored to comply with this requirement, although it must continue to fine tune that process. 7. Since the submission of the program budget and planning document, the LRSD has been taking steps to inservice those District Administrators, staff and employees who will be involved in the process of reporting or in-putting information into the quarterly program planning and budgeting status report. The Court- appointed budget specialist has been of invaluable assistance in that endeavor. Attached hereto as Exhibits "3" and are "4 , " memoranda from the budget specialist to various LRSD administrators and representatives. Exhibit II 3" was the transmittal memo for the listing of all programs in the District directly related to thedesegregation plan. Exhibit II 4" provides general instructions to support the program budget document, basic definitions needed to facilitate the desegregation programs and a description of the data elements contained in the document. The memo also provided information concerning the computer diskettes which would be used by each person in putting information into the program budget document. 8. Following extensive development. training, and implementation activities, the LRSD received information from the various persons reporting the status of activities and achievements for the first quarter of the 1993-94 school year. However, due to the comprehensiveness of the process, as well as its newness to the LRSD, fine tuning was, and still is, necessary to ensure that the document becomes a useful tool in the budgetary process. 9. Attached hereto as Exhibit "5" is a true and accurate copy of the District's first quarter status report generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Little Rock School District, submits its status report for the first quarter of the 1993-94 school year in accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting process. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE AND CLARK 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR (501) 376-2011 72205Attorneys for Plaintiff, Little Rock School District Jerry L. Malone Bar No. I. D. 85096 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing LRSD's First Quarter Status Report for the 1993-94 school year has been mailed on this 3rd day of November, 1993, by First Class Mail, postage pre-paid upon the following: Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey & Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon & Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachelle First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown, (Hand-Delivered) Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESS DRAFT CONCEPT PAPER PROPOSAL BY BILL MOONEY JUNE 29, 1993 Exhibit "1 IILRSD PLANNING AND BUDGRING FROCKS A Organization and Staffinsr X J B Prograj, Coordination Broad-kased Input and Participation a Needs AssessHent C Prograj, Inventory D Goals and Ol^ectives E Prograj, Developnent r Budgeting G PpograR Budget BccuMent H Monitoring and Reporting I ProyriH valuation 4 L Des tart cycleCONCPTOl REVISED 29 JUN 93 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESS CONCEPT PAPER GENERAL CONCEPT A. Purpose. Given the complexity of present and future problems facing the district, it is absolutely essential that the best decision-making processes be in operation negotiate these troubled times. if we are to A comprehensive program planning and budgeting process would improve the chances that our limited revenue would be allocated rationally and would have maximum impact on achieving the goals of the district. By linking program objectives and program expenditures we can see more clearly if our money is being well-spent. B. Description. In this process, we will do the following: 1. Determine the needs of the district, including legal obligations under the desegregation and settlement plans. 2. Define our goals and objectives. 3. Define our programs to achieve those objectives, including those required by the desegregation plans. 4. Measure our performance and expenditures. 5. Prepare information for corrective decision-making.A. ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING 1. Purpose. This sub-process deals with the designation of an organizational structure and the assignment of staff responsibilities for carrying out the planning and budgeting This designation and assignment should be in activities. writing, and should be disseminated to all district employees. 2. Players. Cabinet is in a direct support role. The Superintendent has the lead, and the 3. Input. Look at the job requirements and at the personnel resources available, and make best choice. 4. Description. Organization is the process of establishing lines of authority and assigning responsibility for work tasks to accomplish the objectives of the district. Staffing refers to the skills and background required of the assigned personnel to carry out the various planning activities described by the process. The Superintendent must designate a chief planner who will be responsible for developing and coordinating the planning and budgeting process. This designated planner and staff should be familiar with professional planning concepts and techniques. The designated planner would ensure that the process is followed, provide technical assistance, coordinate the process, prepare the document, collect reports, and advise the Superintendent and Board. The designated planner should also be responsible for ensuring all requirements from the desegregation plans and court orders are integrated into the planning process. 5. Output. The output is an organization chart, lines of authority, tasking assignment, and general timeframes for the process to be operational. 6. Timeframe. must be designated on front end. The first step in the process. The planner Once done, this sub-process will be revisited annually (preferably in early May) to make sure we are in the best configuration.B. NEEDS ASSESSMENT 1. Purpose. In the needs assessment sub-process, the problems of the student/parent are identified. Teacher/administrator problems which are barriers to service delivery are also identified. ft need II from It want II or II desire". We must be able to distinguish 2. Players. needs assessment process. The designated planner will coordinate the The Superintendent will provide the leadership and direction for the process. The Cabinet will be responsible for directing the staff in the collection of assessment information. The Superintendent and the Cabinet will be the decision-makers for identifying the needs. 3. Input. The data on the accepted planning factors and proportional allocation formula (enrollment projections, staffing criteria, capacity study, material allocations formula, other data) must be collected first. Other needs assessment techniques must be selected and implemented. It is critical that the desegregation plans and court orders be reduced to legal requirements which can be II hard coded II until justification can be made to change them. into the needs assessment 4. Description. Utilizing a combination of perceptual and empirical instruments, a range of input information and collected data would be analyzed to determine the needs of the students. parents, teachers, and administrators. The perceptual instruments might include various surveys, samplings, and hearings. The currently used Community Forums and District Dialogues would be used as the foundation of the perceptual instruments, and would be built on with possibly a selected mail survey. All perceptual issues identified must be crystallized into hard issues and cranked into the planning and budgeting The empirical instruments might include data on the process. accepted planning factors, the proportional allocation factors, various needs indicators (economic patterns, employment patterns, education patterns, family patterns, etc.), and review of other data. The desegregation plans and court orders will be dissected, and requirements will be extracted for incorporation into the needs assessment. The data will be massaged and converted into a listing on data. If needs", keyed back to supporting 5. Output. The output of the needs assessment is a list of needs/problems, the description of the needs/problem, and supporting information on the needs/problem. These will be inputs to our goals and objectives determination, and will subsequently be the basis of programs. 6. Timeframe. The needs assessment sub-process should begin in May with data collection. September. Surveys should be completed by An initial needs listing should be drafted byThe final listing October
the final listing must incorporate the results from the Community Forums and District Dialogues, should be published in December.c. PROGRAM INVENTORY 1. Purpose. This sub-process will identify all of the current programs and services being delivered and will consider their effectiveness. Ineffective programs can be targeted for modification or elimination. " will be pointed out. Gaps and duplications in programs Resources, both inside and outside of the district, which can be utilized will be identified. 2. Players. The Superintendent would provide overall direction, and the Board would review the findings. The Cabinet and staff would collect all the basic data and prepare the data into documents for use in goal setting and program development. The designated planner would play a coordinating role. 3. Input. Current program documents, program evaluations, and various surveys would provide the baseline input data. The desegregation plans and court orders would be reviewed to ensure coverage. 4. Description. This sub-process is mainly a data collection and data manipulation activity in support of other sub-processes. The first phase of this sub-process is to inventory all existing programs to make sure all we are doing is included. - - This inventory would include a program definition. Program evaluations would be used to flag those programs which are failing to meet current goals and objectives. Staff would begin to compare the current programs with the preliminary needs to identify and flag gaps and duplications. It is most important that programs required under the desegregation plans and court orders be verified and status checked during this sub-process. Surveys would be used to identify all resources which can be used to address identified needs
this would become a bank". tl resources 5. Output. This sub-process would identify the programs and resources available to address the needs identified. The Program Inventory report would be generated, and this status of current programs would be utilized in the Goals and Objectives subprocess, the Program Development sub-process, and the Budgeting sub-process. 6. Timeframe. This sub-process would run concurrently with the Needs Assessment sub-process and the Goals and Objective sub- process. It must be completed before the Goals and Objective sub-process can be completed. completed in August. It would be started in May, and beD. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 1. Purpose. The subprocess of setting goals and objectives is designed to establish a vision/mission for the district which would guide all actions by the administration. Supporting goals and objectives further define what the district wants to accomplish for the year, and any activity or expenditure which does not further satisfaction of these goals and objectives should be discarded. 2. Players. Setting the vision/mission and goals would be the purview of the Board and the Superintendent. They would receive assistance and support from the Cabinet members, and the Cabinet members would subsequently define objectives for programs which will satisfy the accepted goals. would coordinate the sub-process. The designated planner 3. Input. The Board and Superintendent should utilize the needs listing generated by the needs assessment sub-process and the program resources generated by the program inventory. 4. Description. vision/mission of the district. The first step is to define the The vision/mission will establish the general value beliefs and educational purposes of the school organization. Given the direction, the needs, and the available services, the Board and Superintendent can determine what goals are consistent with the vision and are realistic with respect to accomplishment. Planning assumptions must be defined which will provide staff with more specific directions and considerations on how to proceed with programming and budgeting. Guidelines for the planning factors (staffing) and the proportional allocation formulas should be established/reviewed. Priorities must be established which will guide staff in program development, and which will be used to help allocate funding and resources during the budgeting sub-process. The latter phase of this sub-process is characterized by the Cabinet working with staff to establish program objectives and evaluation criteria for each program in the district. items. 5. Output. The output of this sub-process consists of two First is the Goals Statement by the Board. This includes the written vision statement, the written goals, the written planning assumptions, and the written priorities. The initial calendar for the FY 93-94 planning and budgeting cycle should be published. This should all be in one document signed by the Board and the Superintendent. Second is the development of the specific program objectives and evaluation criteria for each program, and these will be incorporated into the planning and budgeting document. 6. Timeframe. This sub-process is dependent on the Needs Assessment sub-process and the Program Inventory sub-process, but will run concurrently with them. A preliminary goals statementshould be set by the Board during a planning session in June/July which will also establish the process and calendar for planning and budgeting for the coming year. ~ ----- The final Goals Statement should be issued in October. Program objectives and evaluation criteria should be established by November.E. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT 1. Purpose. This sub-process is the decision-making stage where the results of all previous sub-processes are considered in an effort to develop new programs or modify current programs to meet the needs addressed by the defined goals. This is where we decide what we want to do and how we want to do it. This is where 2. Players. The key players are the Superintendent, the Cabinet, and the staff. The role of the Superintendent is to provide leadership and guidance to ensure the goals are satisfied with the best possible programs. The Cabinet's role is to educate the administrative and school staff, and provide direction to those staff in developing and implementing creative, effective, and efficient programs. The designated planner is in a coordinating and monitoring role, and serve as the process advisor to the Superintendent. 3. Input. The sub-process will use the output of the Needs Assessment sub-process, the Program Inventory sub-process, and the Goals and Objectives sub-process. 4. Description. This sub-process is the point at which the district defines what programs will be provided. New programs may have to be developed to address newly identified needs fill gaps. Current programs may have to be modified to or successfully meet objectives. eliminated. Some programs may have to be The Cabinet should outline the tasking and provide direction to the staff. The best results will be obtained by allowing the staff to develop or modify the programs, and roll them up to the Cabinet. Decisions will have to be made on what programs will be provided, what the definition of the program will be, and what activities will be necessary to deliver the program. Since programs are selected to meet assessed needs, this is also a crucial time for designing the framework for program evaluation. The last step in this sub-process should be a final check to ensure all requirements from the desegregation plans and the court orders have been provided for by the program lineup. 5. Output. At this point, all of the elements of a good program planning document have been completed
vision, goals, programs, program definition, program objectives, activities, and evaluation criteria. This material will be used for budget development, and will be directly input into the program planning and budgeting document. 6. Timefrajne. This sub-process may run somewhat concurrent with the Goals and Objectives sub-process, but cannot be finished until the Goals and Objectives sub-process has been completed. This sub-process should start in September, and be completed in early February.F. BUDGETING 1. Purpose. The Budgeting sub-process is the resource allocation function. Money and other resources are allocated to the programs identified in the Program Development sub-process to address the needs identified in the Needs Assessment subprocess . 2. Players. The Board is the ultimate decision-making authority on the budget. The Superintendent is the leader of the sub-process by ensuring a balanced budget meeting the needs and goals of the students and parents is presented to the Board. The Cabinet is deeply involved in programmatic decisions and matching the budget dollars to the programs. The Business Manager will coordinate the budget preparation, and the designated planner will ensure the planning and budgeting pieces come together. The budget managers will provide input into the sub-process, rolling the budget up to the next level, budget information. The Controller will produce the 3. Input. Many sources of information will be used in this sub-process: needs assessment information, planning factors, proportional allocation factors, previous expenditures, program requirements, public input, desegregation plan and court order requirements. 4. Description. Budgeting involves allocating money and assigning personnel and facilities to effect the programs and goals set in the previous steps. As a result of the allocations made, some changes in developed programs may be necessary, programs define both current year operations and planning The assumptions for the future. The budget should continue with this by projecting a multi-year revenue and expense picture based on these assumptions. formulas should be reviewed each year, fiscal allocations should be consistent. Planning factors and proportional allocation Planning priorities and Maximum input should be solicited from staff and parents regarding allocations. budget issue and major addition/change/deletion should be Each supported with a written business case outlining the decisionmaking process. Each identified program must be separately coded for expenditure collection so that programs may be monitored by performance and cost throughout the fiscal year. 5. Output. In one sense, the allocation of resources in the Budgeting sub-process ends the planning phase and begins the implementation phase. The output is a multi-dimensional budget document which will be used to satisfy the traditional budgeting and accounting requirements, with a program planning and budgeting component which will link the programs and budget allocations. 6. Timeframe. Nov... financial forecasts for next and out-yearsNov..review planning factors and proportional allocation formula results Decsubmission of budget requests by budget managers Feb complete budget development Mar. Mar. revise financial forecast finalize add/change/deletes and business Apr tentative budget to board Jul.Adopt budget Augsubmit to state casesG. PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT 1. Purpose. The primary purpose of preparing the program budget document (Program Operations Plan) is to develop rational planning and effective resource allocation. The document should provide a road map for getting from needed and required programs, through funding, to the destination of the related goal. 2. Players. The The Board will review the plan in relationship to the stated goals, and give final approval of the plan. Superintendent provides overall guidance for the development of the plan. The Cabinet members provide all the program information for their respective areas. The Business Manager provides the financial numbers that match the programs. The designated planner puts together the work plan and coordinates the documentation into the final product. on work. 3. Input. The initial program budgeting document is built the results of the "deseg audit It and the program definition The program budget document resulting from this cycle will incorporate this initial document but will be the synthesis of all previous key outputs
the needs assessment, the program inventory, the goals and objectives, new program definitions, and budget allocations. 4. Description. Although the preparation of the program budget document is not usually considered part of the planning process, it is included here as the culmination and documentation of the other planning sub-processes. aspects must be mutually supportive. The planning and budgeting We want the plan to be a useful and living document which can satisfy several purposes and be readily changed as the environment changes. While the planning module should remain fixed for the year, the format should be used to facilitate regular monitoring and reporting. An example of some things which might be included in the plan would be: an introduction about the plan
planning process description
identification of the needs of the district and a description of how those needs were identified
description and objectives of the programs
activities/strategies on how the programs will operate
evaluation criteria of the programs
analysis of the needs in relation to the available funding
budget allocations for the programs
description of how the plan will be impacted
description of how the goals will be impacted
and major issues for the future. A Cabinet member will be assigned as the responsible primary leader for every identified program, would also be assigned. A secondary leader The primary leader is tasked with ensuring the program meets its objectives, coordinating the required activities or strategies, and the preparation and submission of regular reporting. 5. Output. The program budget document will be the output.This document will become the basis for follow-on monitoring and reporting, and will become the guide for any interim decisionmaking activity. 6. Timeframe. Development of the document should begin around December, and should be completed in conjunction with the completion of the tentative budget in April.H. MONITORING AND REPORTING 1. Purpose. This sub-process should be designed to provide decision-makers with a regular flow of information on the district's progress toward accomplishing its stated goals and objectives. The reporting should be designed to satisfy both internal requirements as well as the reporting requirements under the desegregation plans. 2. Players . The Board and the Superintendent would be the recipients of the reporting for oversight and decision-making. The designated planner would coordinate the sub-process and prepare the composite report. The Business Manager would supply the matching financial information by program. The Cabinet and staff would prepare all reporting documents falling within their area of responsibility. 3. Input. The program budget document (Program Operations Plan) would be the basis for the monitoring and reporting, and would establish the format and design. Cabinet members will provide performance reports from which the designated planner can prepare the composite report, from the Business Manager. Financial information would come 4. Description. Extending the format and content of the program budget document (Program Operations Plan), a sub-process of regular monitoring and reporting would be established immediately. By using the same format, we can reduce the production overhead of the reporting as well as satisfying all parties. ease of function. The reporting mechanism would be set up on diskette for The sub-process would merge both program performance and expenditure reporting on a quarterly basis. The Board could choose to review in depth a certain program at each Board meeting, but still have performance reporting information on all programs. Programs with poor performance or expenditure problems could be addressed with corrective action during the year rather than after the year is complete. Such a process would also facilitate modification of both the program plan and the desegregation plans. Additionally, performance history will be built as a matter of regular business rather than a situational special effort. We would have a comprehensive listing of all the good things we have done, in addition to the bad, and take some credit along with the blame. 5. Output. A quarterly composite progress report on all identified programs within the district, supported with expenditure information. Would be an extension of the program budget document (Program Operations Plan). 6. Timeframe. Work on the sub-process would begin immediately, with the first set of actual reports generated in early October covering the period July/August/September. quarter reports would be due in January, April, and July. PriorI. PROGRAM EVALUATION 1. Purpose. we are doing. This sub-process is where we find out how well Program evaluation will provide us an assessment of the program's performance for decision-making purposes, will tell us if our program is meeting the stated objectives and having the impact intended. We can go one step further with a It program analysis which would tell us whether the program should be cut or improved, and the best options for achieving the latter. 2. Players. The Board and the Superintendent are the recipients of the evaluations, and will use them in determining direction and resource allocation. The designated planner would coordinate the sub-process and be the keeper of the documentation. The Business Manager would supply the supporting financial information. The Cabinet and staff would prepare all reporting documents falling within their area of responsibility. 3. Input. General directions and targets from the Board
specific targets from Superintendent. Program planning information, including evaluation criteria and program objectives will be used in developing the evaluations. 4. Description. At least during the first year of the planning and budgeting process, there should be two, concurrent and parallel program evaluation components working
a regular evaluation component and a fl fast-track fl evaluation component. into each program. The regular program evaluation component would be built As programs are put in place, they would contain program objectives and evaluation criteria. Evaluation would continue to get better as we improve our ability to develop and monitor evaluation criteria. Special or more detailed evaluations might be directed by the Superintendent with the intent of looking deeply into a programs workings. Since little or no program evaluation of the regular type is in operation at this time, information is needed upon which to base critical near-term decisions. information need, tf fast-track fl To address this designated programs which might be suspect. evaluations should be performed on identified for "fast-track Programs should be if they have high impact on the goals and direction of the district. If ff fast-track fl Some possible candidates for evaluations might be as follows: incentive school operations, school closing, student assignment process, construction of Stephen, outsourcing support services, special evaluations from this year. Utilizing the program evaluation information, business cases would be prepared for decision-making in the areas of program modification, program development, and program elimination. 5. Output. Specific program evaluations. used as input into the next planning cycle as well as These would be input intof business cases for making modifications in resource allocation or totally eliminating the program. 6. Timeframe. This sub-process should begin after the Board defines district goals in July, and should continue until input time into the Program Inventory sub-process. "Fast-track" evaluations might continue until the initial decision point in the Budgeting sub-process, in January.J. BROAD-BASED INPUT AND PARTICIPATION 1. Purpose. Broad-based education, participation, re and comment provide an opportunity for persons outside the review immediate planning process organization to assist in preparing the plan
and to review and comment on the plan, the planning process and decisions such as those that affect the allocation of resources. 2. Players. The Board and the Superintendent should provide direction on the type and extent to which broad-based input and participation should be utilized in the various sub-processes. This should be done at the initial summer planning session. Communications Director, working closely with the designated planner, should develop an input and participation plan and implement it in conjunction with the efforts of the designated planner. The 3. Input. Direction from the Board and Superintendent. 4. Description. This sub-process is one in which we seek to get maximum input and participation from as many informed sources as possible, both inside and outside of the district organization. There should be a plan, developed and coordinated by the Communications Director with assistance from the designated planner, for obtaining input and participation from other sources for each of the sub-processes. participation, the better the buy-in on the back side. The more front-end We should take every opportunity to use information to educate the general public and removed staff on the planning and budgeting process and the contents of the Program Budget Document. There are a number of possible input sources which might be called upon to participate in one or more of the sub- processes. A partial list follows: the Community Forums and District Dialogues for needs assessment, the building coordinating committees, the budget committee, the Magnet Review Committee, the bi-racial committee, the PTA, the ODM, and Joshua. The Communications Director should identify those sources which would be most appropriate for each sub-process, and work with the designated planner on building the best input mechanism. 5. Output. Each source would have a different method of providing participation and input into each of the sub-processes. Thus, the output would vary depending on the situation. 6. Timeframe. Since some form of broad-based input and participation might be solicited in each sub-process. process would be ongoing. this subK. PROGRAM COORDINATION 1. Purpose. The planning and budgeting effort must be closely coordinated so as to maximize the use of available resources in meeting the needs of the students and parents, minimize of duplication and gaps in programs, and ensure all district efforts are aimed at the district goals. 2. Players. The designated planner is the leader in this sub-process, and must be a close advisor to the Board and Superintendent. The designated planner must keep the Board and the Superintendent informed as to what is being done and where stand relative to achieving our goals. we The Board and the Superintendent must exercise oversight authority on the process and allocate resources accordingly. Additionally, the Superintendent must support the designated planner and ensure all district staff are aggressively working on the completion of the plan. 3. Input. Superintendent. District goals, direction from the Board and 4. Description. Program Coordination is a key activity which relates to all other activities. Each of the planning activities such as needs assessment, program development and budgeting would be coordinated with similar activities in the other sub-processes. Since there would be many participants in the entire process, it is most critical that all of the pieces fit together and support each other. This coordination is achieved by having a designated planner who will develop project plans for the overall process and each sub-process, monitor the progress against those project plans, and provide progress reporting back to the Board and Superintendent. The designated planner is there to make sure everything happens on time, not necessarily to do it. 5. Output. Project plans and status reports. part of the regular monitoring and reporting sub-process. Should be a 6. Timeframe. A start to finish sub-process. Ongoing.L. RESTART CYCLE 1. Purpose. The program planning and budgeting cycle is a continuous process, and would be the heart of the way we manage the business of the district. Once the cycle for one fiscal year is complete, the next cycle begins
in fact, there is actually some overlap.CONCPT02 REVISED 29 JUN 93 PROPOSED PLANNING AND BUDGET CALENDAR JULY 1993 - Designate planner and job responsibilities - Board/Cabinet workshop on planning and budgeting
tentative district goals defined, identify It targets, fast-track" evaluation define guidelines on broad-based input, design planning and budgeting calendar - Proposed planning factors and proportional allocation formulas identified, published, and data collection begins - Planning and budget calendar published - Begin development of the monitoring and reporting procedures - Begin Program Inventory using "deseg audit" as baseline - Begin II fast-track It evaluations AUGUST 1993 - Complete Program Inventory - Complete monitoring and reporting procedures, and issue instructions - Board reviews planning factors and proportional allocation formulas Continue tt fast-track II evaluations SEPTEMBER 1993 - Complete needs assessment surveys Continue It fast-track It - Begin Program Development evaluations OCTOBER 1993 - Needs listing finalized - Board approves planning factors and proportional allocation formulas - Enrollment statistics and projections published - First quarter FY93-94 cycle monitoring and evaluation report published - Board issues final Goals Statement - Continue Program Development Continue tt fast-track tt evaluations - Begin Community Forum input on programs and budgets - Begin District Dialogues input on programs and budgets NOVEMBER 1993 - Board issues directions and assumptions for budgetpreparation - Initial financial forecasts prepared - Base budgets and budget instructions generated and distributed Program objectives and evaluation criteria finalized each program for - Review planning factors and proportional allocation formula results Continue If fast-track fl evaluations - Continue Program Development - Continue Community Forum input on programs and budgets - Continue District Dialogues input on programs and budgets - Continue Community Forum input on programs and budgets DECEMBER 1993 Complete District Dialogues input on programs and budgets - Complete Community Forum input on programs and budgets - Complete needs assessment listing - Budget managers submit budget requests Continue If fast-track fl evaluations - Continue Program Development - Begin developing program budget document (Program Operations Plan) JANUARY 1994 - Complete "fast-track evaluations Second quarter FY93-94 cycle monitoring and evaluation report published - Continue developing the Program Budget Document - Continue budget request review and budget development - Continue Program Development Begin identification of major budget issues and development of business cases FEBRUARY 1994 - Complete program development - Complete budget development and business case development - Continue developing the program budget document (Program Operations Plan) MARCH 1994 - Revise financial forecasts - Revise the program budget document (Program Operations Plan) Finalize budget issue recommendations and business each issue - Feedback to all input participants case onAPRIL 1994 Complete the program budget document (Program Operations Plan) - Revise budget - Board workshop on budget - Submit tentative budget to Board - Certified personnel reduction deadline - Third quarter FY93-94 cycle monitoring and evaluation report published MAY 1994 - Revise budget - Non-certified personnel reduction deadline - Board workshop on budget - Board approves tentative budget - Reassess planning organization for FY94-95 cycle - Begin FY94-95 cycle needs assessment - Begin program inventory for FY94-95 cycle JUNE 1994 - Revise to final budget - Court hearing on budget - Continue FY94-95 cycle needs assessment - Continue FY94-95 cycle program inventory JULY 1994 - Board adopts final budget - Fourth quarter FY93-94 cycle monitoring and evaluation report published - FY94-95 cycle Board workshop on planning and budgeting - Continue FY94-95 cycle needs assessment - Continue FY94-95 cycle program inventory AUGUST 1994 - Complete FY94-95 cycle program inventory - Submit final budget to State - Board reviews planning factors and proportional allocation formulas for FY94-95 cycle - Continue FY94-95 cycle needs assessmentLRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM OPERATIONS PLAN Program Seq #
Page: 1 Program Name: Revision Date: Program Code: Program Description: District Goal Support Program Objective: Primary Leaden Secondary Leader. Plan References: FY Program Budget YTD Expenditures: 1st Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend:LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM OPERATIONS PLAN Page: 2 Program Seq #: Program Name: Program Code: Program Objective: Primary Leader. Secondary Leader. Revision Date: Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Plan Target Responsibility Evaluation CriteriaLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND EVALUATION DEPARTMENT Date: August 11, 1993 Estelle Matthis, Interim Superintendent From: Sterling Ingram^ Director Planning, Research and Evaluation Re: Planning and Budget Document Chronology- What follow
is a chronology of the development of the Program Planning and Budget Document. 1. Board Meeting July 9, 1993 7:00 p.m. Draft of Bill Mooney's document distributed to Board and Others 5. 6. July 13-16, 1993 July 21, 1993 July 23, 1993 July 26, 1993 July 28, 1993 Review of Mooney's document. Initial LRSD document drafted Discussed contents of document E. Matthis, B. Gadberry, M. Milhollen, M. Parker, J. Malone, B. Mooney, S. Ingram Work session to refine calendar, tasks and responsible persons. E. Matthis, B. Gadberry, M. Milhollen, M. Parker, J. Malone, S. Ingram Work session to discuss rewrite of LRSD document. Sent copy of document to Board for review prior to the July 28, 1993 meeting. Draft discussed with Board. Walked through the document that the Board would be familiar with the Planning/Budgeting Process. so To: 2 . 3 . 4 . 7 . July 29, 1993 Minor changes made to draft as a result of the Board meeting. Document filed with the Court. bjg cc: Jerry Malone Exhibit "2 IISTPR0G13 Date: July 19,1993 From: Estelle Matthis Brady Gadberry Sterling Ingram Mark Milhollen Marie Parker Jeanette Wagner Bill Mooney Program Identification and Coding Attached is your copy of the final version of the Program Identification Worksheet. sequence order and in program code sequence. I have provided the listing in plan No further action is required at this time. We will be using these listings to ensure program coverage when we start work on the program budget document. It For your information, am also working on a listing of other" programs in the district not directly related to the desegregation plan. This draft listing covers the rest of the services in the district, approximately 150 It $100,000,000. These will be addressed later. programs for over To: Sub j : I If you have any questions, or if I can help you in any way, just give me a call. Exhibit "3"c CORR25 Date: September 2, 1993 To: Estelle Matthis Sterling Ingram Dennis Glasgow Larry Robertson Margaret Gremillion Brady Gadberry Arma Hart Jeanette Wagner Mark Milhollen Jerry Malone From: Bill Mooney Subj: Completion of the Program Budget Documents Sterling and I have been working on some documentation to support the Program Budget Document, and we think this will help you in your task of loading your initial program data. If you will look at these two documents prior to loading your data, you should have far fewer problems. Attached is a document entitled "LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT TERM AND DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS." This document provides some basic definitions you will need as you work with both the desegregation programs and the non-desegregation programs in the next phase of the project. It also provides a description of every data element field on both pages of the Program Budget Document (PBD), including what should go into those fields. The diskette is built using WordPerfect. You will find three files on the diskette
INSTRUCT, PROGBUD.DOC, and TABLEJFRM. File INSTRUCT contains a complete set of typing and formatting instructions for your clerical staff. This file should be read before opening the other two. If you run into problems, please ask for help. It is very important that you pass on this information to all program people who will be working with the PBD. If you have questions, let us know. The PBD you are creating today will be used for quarterly reporting for the rest of the year. Therefore, maximum happiness will result from maximum communication and understanding. Exhibit 4CONCPT04 REVISED 02 SEP 93 LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT TERM AND DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS TERM DEFINITIONS. The following definitions are provided for general guidance, and will be used throughout the Program Planning and Budgeting Process. Program. A program is an established plan of operation, composed of a group or series of related activities which are carried out to serve a specific area of identified need. A program is a major undertaking by the district to fulfill statutory, executive, and/or legal requirements. methods of implementing goals and objectives. Programs are the district's Programs will be a basis for work progress and fiscal reporting and monitoring. Program Description. Generally, program descriptions do not currently exist on most programs, and will have to be written, program description should include at least three parts: A - Purpose. A one or two sentence statement of what the program is designed to accomplish. Scope and Content. A general description of the activities that are to be undertaken to achieve the purpose. description program. This of section might also the administrative include structure a J of brief the - Participants/Beneficiaries. A specific statement of how many and what kind of persons will be affected by the program during one fiscal year. Program Goal. A program goal is a broad guiding statement and should describe the overall aim(s), purpose(s), or ambition(s) of the specific program. It is a general and enduring statement of purpose that expresses the district's fundamental intentions and provides guidelines for planning the future development of the s program. What is the program trying to accomplish? must have at least one goal, but may have several. Each program Objectives. Program objectives present explicitly the desired impact the program should have on a problem. detail to the goals. They should provide They tell in specific, measurable teirms what is to be accomplished to implement adopted goals. The objective statement should: (A) tell what is to be achieved
(B) tell when the achievement is to be realized
(C) tell how the achievement of the objective will be measured. least one objective, but may have several. Each program goal must have at Strategies. Strategies are the jobs. tasks, efforts, oractions undertaken in a program accomplishment of the objective. which contributes to the A strategy is a combination of intermediate steps, and produces a distinct end product - not These intermediate processes which only support other strategies. end products should be measurable or guantifiable where possible, showing how the objective is to be achieved. Each objective must have at least one strategy, but may have several. Evaluation Criteria. Evaluation criteria are statements which specify the end product of an objective or strategy and establish measurable levels of performance for the product. These end products should be measurable or guantifiable where possible, showing how the objective or strategy is to be achieved. The criteria should measure, if possible, the relative impact of the results on the problem which the objective or strategy is designed to solve. If a strategy or objective cannot be measured in terms of impact, the measurement can be stated in terms of the level (or volume) of strategy provided and/or the number of persons served. Each strategy must have at least one evaluation criteria, but may have several.PROGRAM PAGE DATA ELEMENTS DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS. Page. Each program will have one of these Extensive program narrative will carry-over onto cover pages. a second page. The form is set up on diskette to allow for this carry-over, do not have to get everything on one page. so you Program Seq #. Each program will be sequence number by the district planner. assigned a unique The purpose of this sequence number is to establish a reference for placing programs in order within the planning document. When the assembled, programs are arranged in this sequence. document is The program sequence number will help facilitate look-up since there is no front-to-back page numbering. field
it should not change during the year. This element should be a static Revision Date. document was last changed. This date is the actual date this program This date will be entered by the person making the change each time the document is changed. this date will change at As a minimum, performance reporting. least quarterly with the regular Program Name. The district planner established name of the program in this field. will place the Name consistency will eliminate confusion, so try to use the designated name on all documents. change during the year. This element should be a static field
it should not Program Code. This is a unique accounting code which will link budget and expenditures to the associated program. The code will be assigned by Financial Services prior to the beginning of each fiscal year, and all expenditures during the year should use this program code. should not change during the year. This element should be a static field
it Primary Leader. The Primary Leader is the cabinet-level associate responsible for the management and operation of this program. This person should have the authority to ensure all necessary actions are taken to make the program successful. This person is responsible for the correctness and timeliness of the planning document and all subsequent reporting. Secondary Leader. The Secondary Leader is the associate who is back-up to the Primary, and will function in that capacity in the absence of the Primary. Program Description. above, must be placed in this field. The program description. as defined static field
it should not change during the year. This element should be a District Goal Support. Each program must directly support oneor more district goals. If more than one district goal, the appropriate district goals should be listed in descending priority order. District goals will be established by the Board. -- order This element should be a static field
it should not change during the year. Program Goal, placed in this field, but may have several. The program goal, as defined above, must be sequentially. Each program must have at least one goal. Each goal should be numbered and listed not change during the year. This element should be a static field
it should Plan Reference. Specific plan and page references will be listed in this section for those programs directly cited in one of the desegregation plans. L= InterDistrict Plan. LRSD Desegregation Plan. The format should be L23 or 113-20. 1 = This element will be left blank if the program is not directly cited in one of the desegregation plans. This element should be a static field
it should not change during the year, unless by Court Order. FY Program Budget. The total budgeted dollars for the appropriate fiscal year will be shown in this element. The number will be the total for the program code, and will be supplied by Financial Services at the beginning of the fiscal year, element will change only if the budget changes. This FTE. This element reflects the Full Time Equivalents (FTE) budgeted for this program (at the program code level). The number will be the total for the program code, and will be supplied by Financial Services at the beginning of the fiscal year, element will change only if the budget changes. This lst/2nd/3rd/4th Qtr Expend. The actual expenditures for each quarter will be entered into the appropriate field during the quarterly reporting process. Financial Services will provide the information, but the Primary Leader is responsible for entering the information onto the form. remain static unless an error is detected. Once entered, these fields should YTD Expenditures. actual expenditures at the program level. This field is the year-to-date total of departments with expenditures against this program. This will include all Financial Services will provide the information once each quarter is closed, but the Primary Leader is responsible for entering the information onto the form. unless an error is detected. Once entered, these fields should remain static Related Function Codes. This field identifies all function- level accounting codes which combine to make the complete program budget. Each program will have at least one function code, but may have several. with one space between them. Each four digit code should be listed sequentiallyWording not taken from a desegregation plan or court order should be in bold face within parentheses. Each program goal must have at least one objective, but may have several. Spacing between objectives should allow for all supporting strategies. Objectives should be numbered sequentially under each goal. Strategies. List all of the strategies required to satisfy the related objective. Strategies should be listed in bold face. Wording not taken from a desegregation plan or court order should be in bold face within parentheses. Each objective must have at least one strategy, but may have several. numbered sequentially under each objective. Strategies should be Beginning Date. activity began. This is the actual date this particular For consistency, all dates should be entered in the following format
MM/DD/YY, 07/22/93. stated yet, leave this field blank. If an activity has not Completion Date, activity was completed. entered in the following format
This is the actual date this particular For consistency, all dates should be MM/DD/YY, 07/22/93. If an activity has been started but not completed, give your best guess on the percent of completion (75%). started, leave this field blank. If the activity has not Responsibility. This is the name of the individual tasked with ensuring this activity is accomplished. Evaluation Criteria. for each strategy. List at least one evaluation criteria Include the specific measure of Evaluation criteria should be listed in bold face. success. Wording not taken from a desegregation plan or court order should be in bold face within parentheses. Each evaluation criteria should be numbered to correspond to the appropriate strategy, and should be numbered sequentially under each strategy.OBJECTIVE PAGE DATA ELEMENTS DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS. Page. This is the relating to the the field. (t program". sequential page number for all pages This number is automatically placed in Program Seq #. This should be the same number as program page. This number will link all on the objectives back to the major program. separate program Revision Date. document was last changed. This date is the actual date this program This date will be entered by the person making the change each time the document is changed. this date will change at As a minimum, least quarterly with the regular performance reporting. The date on this page may be different from that on the program page since this objective page should change more frequently. Program Name. page. This name This should be the same name as on the program is a further link back to the major program. Including the name on this page prevents the need to refer back for the program name. Program Code. This should be the same code(s) as on the program page. This code(s) is a link back to the major program. Including the code(s) on this page prevents the need to refer back for the program code. Primary Leader. program page. This should be the same person as on the Including this name on this page prevents the need to refer back for the leader 's name. Secondary Leader. that name on the program page. This name will generally be the same as objectives, However, if a program has several supporting objectives. the Secondary Leader may be different for those Program Goal. program page in this field. Include only one of the program goals from the For each program goal listed on the program page, there will be at least one objective page. Plan Reference Page Number. listed for each objective and strategy. Source references should be If the objective or strategy is desegregation plan related, list the specific plan and page upon which this objective or strategy is found. If the objective or strategy is not related to a desegregation plan or Court Order, list whatever source was used. be numbered to correspond to the appropriate strategy. Each reference should Objectives. the program goal. List all of the objectives required to satisfy Objectives should be listed in bold face.xT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUEffi^ lW61 z 93 j FEB 1 11994 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WESTERN DIVISION-' Office o' Oesegtegat'on Monitor'''' %FEB-7 PK5:29 PU) a LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT JAMES W. HCCORHACK.CLE U.S. DISTRICT COURT. AK U' BY. VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PLAINTIFF DEPUTY CLERK PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS LRSD^S 1993-94 SECOND QUARTER STATUS REPORT The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District ("LRSD" or "District"), for its status report for the second quarter of the 1993-94 school year, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the District's second quarter status report generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. 2. Since the filing of the first quarter status report, the LRSD has continued to meet with and utilize the services of the Court-appointed budget specialist. In that regard, a careful review has been made of the District's desegregation programs as well as its non-desegregation programs. The process of determining all non-desegregation programs is nearly complete and will be used in the District's decisionmaking process regarding the budget. Second Quarter Status Report February 7, 1994 Page 2 An effort IS being made to reconcile the various components. It is presently believed that this will be complete by the time the third quarter status report is filed. If so, the nondesegregation programs will be merged into the District's budgeting process. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its status report for the second quarter of the 1993-94 school year in accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting process. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT By Je^Try L. Maldhe^^ Bar No. I. D. 85096 ' 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing LRSD's Second Quarter Status Report for the 1993-94 school year has been mailed by First Class Mail, postage pre-paid on February 8, 1994, upon the following, except as otherwise indicated: Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey & Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon & Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite Little Rock, AR 504 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown Heritage West Building Suite 520 201 East Markham Street (Hand-delivered on 2/7/94 pursuant to the order of the Court) Little Rock, AR 72201 Jerry L. Malone RECEIVED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION MAY 1 3 1994 Office of Desegregation Monitoring LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS LRSD^S 1993-94 THIRD QUARTER STATUS REPORT The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District ("LRSD" or "District"), for its status report for the third quarter of the 1993-94 school year, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the District's third quarter status report of desegregation programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. As evident, the report is much larger than either the first quarter or second quarter status reports. This is because more achievements are listed and also because the document was not printed on both sides of each page. Due to copy machine difficulties, the LRSD Printer was not able to generate two-sided copies. The cut of the paper during its manufacturing process and the moisture absorbed by the paper from the atmosphere were the primary causes of those difficulties. In fact, outside copy outlets were having similar experiences.LRSD's 1993-94 Third Quarter Status Report May 13, 1994 Page 2 2. The status report of desegregation programs has been split into two (2) volumes, as explained in the narrative of the document. However, because of copy/binding difficulties, each volume has also been split into two (2) separate booklets. Thus, volume I has the beginning documents in the first book. The remaining programs under Volume I are continued in a second book. The same is true with Volume II. 3. This report is also larger because additional desegregation obligations have been included. The various phases of the Desegregation Audit enabled the District to identify all of its obligations, compare those compiled through the Audit with those already included in the District's Program Budget Document (First and Second Quarter, 1993-94), determine the redundancies and omissions, and then merge the omitted items into this report. Achievements related to these newly included obligations will be included in future status reports. See memo attached hereto as Exhibit 2. 4. At the suggestion of the Court-appointed Budget Specialist, certain "clean-up" modifications were made. Those modifications are outlined in the memo and documents attached hereto as Exhibit 3. 5. The process of determining all non-desegregation programs is complete, and a true and accurate copy of the District's year-to- date status report of those programs is attached hereto as Exhibit 4. Beginning with the fourth quarter status report, quarterly nondesegregation expenditures will be reflected.LRSD's 1993-94 Third Quarter Status Report May 13, 1994 Page 3 WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its status report for the third quarter of the 1993-94 school year in accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting process. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ry L. Malone Bar No. I. D. 85096CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing LRSD's Third Quarter Status Report for the 1993-94 school year has been Hand-Delivered on May 13, 1994, upon the following: Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey & Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon & Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite Little Rock, AR 504 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown Heritage West Building Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Jerry L. Malone EXHIBIT 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 Date: May 11, 1994 To: Program Managers From: Sterling Ingram
Associate to the Deputy SuperJ^itendent Robert Cl Planning/ ers. Director ^search and Evaluation Through: Estelle Matth' Deputy Superintendent Re: Program Budget Document Included on your diskette are additional desegregation This inclusion was necessary to be certain that have identified all of our desegregation obligations. The additional obligations were identified through a comparison between the Desegregation Audit and the Program Budget Document (PBD). The obligations may include expanded program description language, program goals, program objectives, strategies, evaluation criteria. obligations. and we your diskette. These additional items are underlined on We ask that you do the following: 1. Please review the program description to ensure that the description is consistent with the program goals, objectives, strategies, and evaluation criteria. 2. Develop strategies and evaluation criteria for additional , These items should be listed parenthetically. objectives. 3. For added strategies, develop evaluation criteria and report achievements, where possible. 4 . Develop a separate numerical list of the additional evaluation criteria. Example: 1.1, 2.1, 3.2, 4.2, etc. At the end of the fourth reporting period, please forward these lists by program name to the Planning, Research and Evaluation office. PRE staff will input the reference column information, should review all additions with your primary leader. You The refinement process continues. . . If, in your opinion, any of the additions have been added in the wrong place, Clowers at 324-2120. call Dr.EXHIBIT 3 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 324-2124 Date: May 11, 1994 To: Jerry Malone, Attorney From: Sterling Ingram,Associate to the Deputy Superintendent Re: Program Budget Document, May Submission At the suggestion of our budget specialist. Bill Mooney, a review of the desegregation and regular non-desegregation program budget documents was conducted. Participants included Mark Milhollen, Bill Mooney, and Sterling Ingram. Our "clean-up" work is reflected on the third quarter report. Attached is a description of the major modifications. The third quarter report includes desegregation and non-desegregation programs. bjg cc: Mark Milhollen Robert Glowers Marjorie BassaPROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT MODIFICATIONS The Third Quarter Status Report Program Plarming and Budget Document for Desegregation cites the following modifications in the sequence numbers, goal/objective adjustments, and/or other program planmng information for individual program budget documents. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. In-School Suspension, Program Sequence #12, Program Code #27 Modification: Alternative Learning Center (Program Sequence #16) has been merged with In-School Suspensions objectives and goals. Contingency, Program Sequence #31, Program Code #49 Modification: Addition to the Program Budget Document Report. (A new program). Commitment to Desegregation/Leadership, Program Sequence #28, Program Code #35 Modification: Sequence # was changed from 19 to 28. Modification: Prejudice Reduction (Program Sequence #28) has been merged into Commitment to Desegregation/Leadership as an objective. Summer Learning Program - JTPA, Program Sequence #30, Program Code #77 Modification: ASSET (Program Sequence #31) and Special Programs (Program Sequence #32) were merged into the program description, goals, objectives, and strategies of Summer Learning Program - JTPA Extended Day/Week, Program Sequence #47, Program Code #57 Modification: Homework Centers (Program Sequence #49), Homework Hotline (Program Sequence #51), Extended Week (program Sequence #60) were merged into the program description, goals, objectives, and strategies of Extended Day/Week. Modification: The program name. Extended Day, was changed to Extended Day/Week. Staffing, Program Sequence #61, Program Code #72 Modification: Permanent Substitute (Program Sequence #58) was merged into the program description, goals, objectives, and strategies of StaffingPBD Modifications Page 2 7. Other Incentive School Academic Activities, Program Sequence #64, Program Code #75 8. Modification: Peer Tutors/Retired Mentors (program Sequence #52) and Themes (no program sequence #) were merged into the program description, goals, objectives, and strategies of Incentive School Academic Programs. King Interdistrict School, Program Sequence #76, Program Code #49 Modification: Kings budget information is removed and is reflected hereafter in M-to-M Magnets (Program Sequence #82, Program Code #18). 9. Parkview Science Magnet, Program Sequence #81 Modification: Parkview Science Magnet is merged into the goals/objectives of Original Magnets (Program Sequence #80, Program Code #14). 10. McClellan Community School, Program Sequence #15, Program Code #26 Modification: Note added to read the FTEs are included in a separate fund and are not charged against the operating budget. 11. Non-desegregation programs will include related funding function codes which identify and track specific program components.f HUd IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUlWsrE^fg^WCT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION By
___ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF dep VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS clerk clerk LRSD^S 1993-94 FOURTH QUARTER STATUS REPORT The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District ("LRSD" or "District") , for its status report for the fourth quarter of the 1993-94 school year, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the District's fourth quarter status report of desegregation programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. 2. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and accurate copy of the District's fourth quarter status report of non-desegregation programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its desegregation and non-desegregation status reports for the fourth quarter of the 1993-94 school year in accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting process.LRSD's 1993-94 Fourth Quarter Status Report August 15, 1994 Page 2 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Jerry L. Malone Bar No. I. D. 85096 r CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing LRSD's Fourth Quarter Status Report for the 1993-94 school year has been Hand-Delivered on August 15, 1994, upon the following: Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey & Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon & Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite Little Rock, AR 504 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown Heritage West Building Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Jerry L. Malone IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS J ( LRSD's 1994-95 FIRST QUARTER STATUS REPORT The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District ("LRSD" or "District"), for its status report for the first quarter of the 1994-95 school year, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the District's first quarter status report of desegreqation programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. 2. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and accurate copy of the District's first quarter status report of non-desegregation programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its desegregation and non-desegregation status reports for the first quarter of the 1994-95 school year in accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting process. LRSD's 1994-95 First Quarter Status Report November 18, 1994 Page 2 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT B Jerry L. Malone Bar No. I. D. 85096 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing LRSD's First Quarter Status Report for the 1994-95 school year has been Hand-Delivered on November 18, 1994, upon the following
Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey & Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon & Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite Little Rock, AR 504 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown Heritage West Building Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Jerry L. Malone p''' 4
LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING, RESEARCH AND EVALUATION DEPARTMENT DATE: January 5, 1995 TO: Bill Mooney, Office of Desegregation Monitoring JAN I 3 1995 FROM: Robert Glowers, Director Office of Desegregation Monito: in RE: Desegregation/Non-Desegregation Extended Program Evaluations Below is a listing of the Desegregation/Non-Desegregation programs that were selected for an extended evaluation. They are listed by program sequence number and program names. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. SEQ # 2 Program Name 4-Year-0 Id SEQ # 15 14 3 227 23 24/23 33 231 07 207 213 215 01 228 Academic Incentive Academic Support Communication Services Computerized Transportation Contingencies Data Processing Facilities Family Life/New Futures Federal Programs Gifted and Talented Guidance Services Health Services HIPPY Human Resource Services 13 226 222 223 224 79 78 25/225 203 05 21 204 08 Program Name McClellan Community School New Futures Planning & Evaluation Plant Services Pupil Transport Purchasing Services Rockefeller Early Childhood Romine Interdistrict School Safety and Security Services Special Education Special Education/Learning Staff Development Vocational Education Vocational Educationcr FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1922-19941 ROBERT V. LIGHT. P.A. WILLIAM H. SUTTON, P.A. JAMES W. MOORE BYRON M. EISEMAN, JR.. P.A. JOE 0. BELL, P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS, P.A. JAMES A. BUTTRY, P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY, P.A. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS. JR.. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT. P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. PAUL 8. BENHAM III. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKL1FF NISBET. JR.. P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. MEREDITH P, CATLETT. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL III. P.A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. WALTER A. PAULSON II. P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN. P.A. RICHARD 0. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH 8. HURST. JR.. P.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY, P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P.A. ROBERT S. SHAFER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III. P.A. THOMAS N. ROSE. P.A. MICHAEL S. MOORE. P.A. DIANE 5. MACKEY, b.a WALTER M. EBEL III, P.A. A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-201 1 FAX NO. 501-376-2147 May 19, 1995 MAY I 9 1995 Office of Desegregation Monitoring KEVIN A. CRASS. P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL. JR.. P.A. CLYDE TAB- TURNER. P.A. CALVIN J. HALL. P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P.A. JERRY L. MALONE. P A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH, JR.. P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER. JR.. P A. H. CHARLES GSCHWENO. JR.. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT. P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH. P.A. GUY ALTON WADE. P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER. P.A. J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID 0. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE ANDREW T. TURNER DAVID M. GRAF CARLA G. SPAINHOUR JOHN C. FENOLEY. JR. ALLISON GRAVES JONANN C. ROOSEVELT R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY D. TAYLOR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN BETTY J. OEMORY COUNSEL WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELDREDGE. JR-, P.A. e.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY, P.A. WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR.. P.A. WRlTEft-S OineCT NO. (501) 370-1 553 Hand-Delivered Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR Mrs. Ann Brown Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street 72206 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey & Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue 72201 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon & Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Third Quarter Status Report Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown: Enclosed please find the LRSD's Third Quarter Status Report for the 1994-95 school year filed pursuant to the Order of the Court. ( l^r/cd I'j Thank you for your attention to this matter. ^Sinoe-rely, Jerry L. Malone LRSD Attorney diana\pcssd\sta(us.ltrGentlemen and Mrs. Brown May 19, 1995 Page 2 JLM/dtw Enclosure cc (w/enc) : Dr. Henry P. Williams Mrs. Estelle Matthis d iana\pcxsd\s tatus. lirIN t
UNITED STATES EISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS . No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL MAY 1 9 1995 INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS Office of Desegregation Monitoring LRSDs 1994-95 THIRD QUARTER STATUS REPORT The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District ("LRSD" or "District"), for its Status Report for the third quarter of the 1994-95 school year, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 (Volumes I and II) is a true and accurate copy of the District's Third Quarter Status Report of Desegregation Programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. 2 . Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and accurate copy of the District's Third Quarter Status Reporc of Non-desegregation Programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its Desegregation and Non-desegregation Status Reports for the third d iana\pcssd\sutus.3rd -1-quarter of 1994-55 school year accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting pr cess. Respectfully submitted, dianiMJcssdMtaaa.Jrd FRIDAY, ELDREDGE Attorneys at Law 04 CLARK 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas (501) 376-2011 72201-3493 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Jerry L. Malone Ear I. D. No. 35056 -2-CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE , -erry L. Malone, do hereby certify mat a copy of the foregoing LRSD's Third Quarter Status Report f r the 1994-S5 school year has been hand-delivered on May /f1995, upon the following: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. Attorneys at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 diana\pcssd\sunis.3rd Mr. Samuel M. Jones, WRIGHT, III LINDSEY & JENNINGS Attorneys at Law 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. Attorneys at Law 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell ROACHELL & STREETT Attorneys at Law First Federal Plaza, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown Attorney at Law Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Jerry L. Malone -3-: ) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION re 4 1995 Cffio3 ot Dessgragsiicri wicnaOi':ng LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS I LRSD's 1994-95 SECOND QUARTER STATUS REPORT The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District ("LRSD" or "District"), for its status report for the second quarter of the 1994-95 school year, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the District's second quarter status report of desegregation programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. 2 . Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and accurate copy of the District's second quarter status report of non-desegregation programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its desegregation and non-desegregation status reports for the second quarter of the 1994-95 school year in accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting process.LRSD's 1994-95 Second Quarter Status Report February 24, 1995 Page 2 FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT By. Jerry L. Malone Bar No. I. D. 85096 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that LRSD's Second Quarter Status Report for the 1994-95 school year has been Hand-Delivered on February 24, 1995, upon the following: copy of the foregoing Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey & Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon & Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite Little Rock, AR 504 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown Heritage West Building Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 a Jerry L. Malone FRIDAY, ELDREDGE &. CLARK <3C i HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1 922-1 9941 ROBERT V. LIGHT, P A. WILLIAM H. SUTTON. P.A. JAMES W. MOORE BYRON M. EISEMAN. JR.. P.A. JOE D. BELL. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS, P.A. JAMES A. BUTTHY. P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY, P.A. H.T. LARZELERE, P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS. JR.. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT. P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM Hi. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR., P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS, P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM, P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON, P.A. MEREDITH P. CATLETT, P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL Hl. P.A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. WALTER A. PAULSON II. P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN. P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST. JR., P.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY, P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P.A. ROBERT S. SHAFER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III, P.A. THOMAS N . ROSE. P. A . MICHAEL S. MOORE. P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY, P.A. WALTER M. EBEL HI. P.A. A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-201 1 FAX NO. 501-376-2147 August 17, AUG 2 2 1995 Office of OesegregaUon Moniiomg 1995 FILED KEVIN A. CRASS. P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL. JR.. P.A. CLYDE -TAB- TURNER. P.A. CALVIN J. HALL. P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER, P.A. JERRY L. MALONE. P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY, P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH. JR.. P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER, JR.. P.A. H. CHARLES GSCHWEND. JR.. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT. P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER. P-A. JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH, P.A. GUY ALTON WADE, P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER. P.A. J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID D. WILSON JEFFREY H . MOORE ANDREW T. TURNER DAVID M. GRAF CARLA G. SPAINHOUR JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR. ALLISON GRAVES JONANN C. ROOSEVELT R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY D. TAYLOR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN BETTY J. DEMORY JAMES W. McCOfiMACK. CLERK By
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ COUNSEL WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELDREDGE. JR.. P.A. B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY. P.A. WILLIAM L. PATTON, JR.. P.A. WAITER'S DIRECT NO. {5011 370-1 553 V Mftsaa. AUG 1 7 OEP CUAK Hand-Delivered Mr, John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR Mrs. Ann Brown Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street 72206 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey & Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon & Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown: Fourth Quarter Status Report C JI Re : Enclosed please find the LRSD's Fourth Quarter Status Report for the 1994-95 school year filed pursuant to the Order of the Court. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, erry L. LRSD Attorney diana\pcssd\5iaius.lu I Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown August 17, 1995 Page 2 JLM/dtw Enclosure cc (w/enc): Dr. Henry P. Williams (1 iana\pcsd\staatt. 1 irr RSCEiVSO fxj--/ FILED AUG 2'd 1995 Office of Desegregation Monitoring IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION -V? district court SASTIRN OISTRICTARKANSAR AUG 1 7 1995 JAMES W. McCORMACK. CLERK By
______________ OEP CLEliK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS LRSDs 1994-95 FOURTH QUARTER STATUS REPORT The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District ("LRSD" or "District"), for its Status Report for the fourth quarter of the 1994-95 school year, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 (Volumes I and II) is a true and accurate copy of the District's Fourth Quarter Status Report of Desegregation Programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. 2 . Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and accurate copy of the District's Fourth Quarter Status Report of Non-desegregation Programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its Desegregation and Non-desegregation Status Reports for the fourth d iana\pcssd\sutus .4th -1-J quarter of the 1994-95 school year in accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting process. Respectfully submitted, FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK Attorneys at Law 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas (501) 376-2011 72201-3493 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT diara\pcssd\sanB.4th Jerry L. Malone Bar I. D. No. 85096 -2- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing LRSD's Fourth Quarter Status Report for the 1994-95 school year has been hand-delivered on August , 1995, upon the following: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. Attorneys at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Samuel M. Jones, III WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS Attorneys at Law 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. Attorneys at Law 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell ROACHELL & STREETT Attorneys at Law First Federal Plaza, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown Attorney at Law Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Jerry L. Malone (J iana\pcssd\sutus .4ih -3- RECEIVED FILED NOV 2 2 1995 Office of Desefiregation Monitcnng IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION hOV 2 1 1995 JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK DEP CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS LRSDs 1995-96 FIRST QUARTER STATUS REPORT The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District {"LRSD or H District"), for its Status Report for the first quarter of the 1995-96 school year, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 (Volumes I and II) is a true and accurate copy of the District's First Quarter Status Report of Desegregation Programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. 2 . Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and accurate copy of the District's First Quarter Status Report of Non-desegregation Programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its Desegregation and Non-desegregation Status Reports for the first dtana\pcssd\saius. Isi -1-quarter of the 1995-96 school year in accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting process. Respectfully submitted, FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK Attorneys at Law 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas (501) 376-2011 72201-3493 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Bar I. D. No. 85096 d iana\pcssd\s taius. 1 st -2-CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing LRSD's First Quarter Status Report for the 1995-96 school year has been hand-de live red on November , 1995, upon the following: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. Attorneys at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Samuel M. Jones, III WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS Attorneys at Law 2200 Worthen Bank Building i>e''t to* K a 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. Attorneys at Law 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets 211 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell ROACHELL & STREETT Attorneys at Law First Federal Plaza, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street _____ Little Rock, AR 722 ry L. Malone diana\pcssd\sutus. Isi -3-FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1922-19941 ROBERT V. LIGHT, P.A. A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS WILLIAM H. SUTTi JAMES W. MOORE ON. P.A. BYRON M. EISEMAN. JR., P.A. JOE D. BELL. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. JAMES A. BUTTRY. P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY, P.A. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR.. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT, P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON, P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM III. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS, P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET. JR.. P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. MEREDITH P. CATLETT. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL III. P.A. DONALD H. BACON, P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. WALTER A. PAULSON II, P.A. BARRY e. COPLIN. P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST, JR.. P.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY, P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER, P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH, P.A. ROBERT S. SHAFER, P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III. P.A. THOMAS N. ROSE, P.A. MICHAEL S. MOORE, P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY, P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-201 1 FAX NO. 501-376-2147 February 23, 1996 RECEIVF^ FEB 2 3 W96 4^^ Ottice ol Deseijregauon KEVIN A. CRASS, P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL, JR., P.A. CLYDE TAB" TURNER, P.A. CALVIN J. HALL. P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P.A. JERRY L. MALONE, P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY, P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH, JR., P.A. J. LEE BROWN, P.A. JAMES C. BAKER. JR., P.A. H. CHARLES GSCHWEND, JR., P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT, P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER, P.A. JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH. P.A. GUY ALTON WADE. P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER, P.A. J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID D. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE ANDREW T. TURNER DAVID M.GRAF CARLA G. SPAINHOUR JOHN C. FENDLEY, JR. ALLISON GRAVES JONANN C. ROOSEVELT R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY 0. TAYLOR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN BETTY J. DEMORY COUNSEL WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELDREDGE, JR., P.A. B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY, P.A. WILLIAM L. PATTON, JR., P.A. WRITER'S DIRECT NO. (501) 370-1553 Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. Attorneys at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas Mrs. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Mr. Sam Jones 72206 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS Attorneys at Law 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell ROACHELL LAW FIRM Attorneys at Law Lyon Building, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: LRSD V. PCSSD, et al Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown: Enclosed please find a copy of the LRSD's 1995-96 Second Quarter Status Report which was filed with the Court on Friday, February 23, 1996. By agreement, three copies of the above documents are being delivered to Mrs. Brown and two copies are being delivered to Mr. Walker. diana\pcssd\riling-S.ltrGentlemen and Mrs. Brown February 23, 1996 Page 2 Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Jerry L. Malone LRSD Attorney JLM/dtw Enclosures cc (w/enc): Dr. Henry P. Williams, LRSD Dr. Russ Mayo, LRSD Dr. Ed Jackson, LRSD diana\pcssd\fil ii^-5. Itr IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECESVPJ' FEB 2 3 1996 Office of Desegregation Monitoring LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS LRSDs 1995-96 SECOND QUARTER STATUS REPORT Ch'ld l' The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District ("LRSD" or "District"), for its Status Report for the second quarter of the 1995-96 school year, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 (Volumes I and II) is a true and accurate copy of the District's Second Quarter Status Report of Desegregation Programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. 2 . Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and accurate copy of the District's Second Quarter Status Report of Non-desegregation Programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its Desegregation and Non-desegregation Status Reports for the second diana\pcssd\sUtus. ist -1-quarter of the 1995-96 school year in accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting process. Respectfully submitted, FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK Attorneys at Law 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas (501) 376-2011 72201-3493 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Jerry L. Malone Bar I. D. No. 85096 diana\pcssd\sutus. 1 st -2- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing LRSD's Second Quarter Status Report for the 1995-96 school year has been delivered by U. S. Mail, postage prepaid. unless otherwise stated, on February 23, 1996, upon the following: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. (Hand-Delivered) Attorneys at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, TkR 72206 Mr. Samuel M. Jones, III WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS Attorneys at Law 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. Attorneys at Law 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell ROACHELL LAW FIRM Attorneys at Law Lyon Building, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street (Hand-Delivered) Little Rock, AR 72201 Jerry L. Malone diana\pcssd\sutus. 1st -3- FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK C: HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY (1 922-1 9941 ROBERT V. LIGHT, P.A. WILLIAM H. SUTTON. P.A. JAMES W. MOORE BYRON M. EISEMAN, JR., P.A. JOE 0. BELL. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS, P.A. JAMES A. BUTTRY, P.A. FREDERICK S. URSERY, P.A. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR., P.A. JAMES C. CLARK. JR., P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT, P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON, P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM Hi, P.A. LARRY W. BURKS, P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR., P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS, P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON, P.A. MEREDITH P. CATLETT. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON, P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL III, P.A. DONALD H. BACON, P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. WALTER A. PAULSON II. P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN, P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR, P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST, JR., P.A. ELIZABETH ROBBEN MURRAY, P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER, P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH, P.A. ROBERT S. SHAFER, P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III, P.A. THOMAS N. ROSE, P.A. MICHAEL S. MOORE, P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY, P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III, P.A. A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-2011 FAX NO. 501-376-2147 May 28, 1996 RECEIVED 'Dif. Ke J. MAY 2 8 1996 KEVIN A. CRASS, P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL, JR., P.A. CLYDE 'TAB' TURNER, P.A. CALVIN J. HALL. P.A. SCOTT J, LANCASTER, P.A. JERRY L. MALONE. P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH, JR.. P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER. JR.. P.A. H. CHARLES GSCHWEND. JR.. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT. P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH. P.A. GUY ALTON WADE. P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER, P.A. J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID D. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE ANDREW T. TURNER DAVID M.GRAF CARLA G. SPAINHOUR JOHN C. FENDLEY, JR. ALLISON GRAVES JONANN C. ROOSEVELT R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY D. TAYLOR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN BETTY J. DEMORY Office of Desegregation Monitoring COUNSEL WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELDREDGE, JR., P.A. B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY, P.A. WILLIAM L. PATTON, JR., P.A, WRITER'S DIRECT NO. (501) 370-1553 Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. Attorneys at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas Mrs. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street 72206 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS Attorneys at Law 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell ROACHELL LAW FIRM Attorneys at Law Lyon Building, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: LRSD V. PCSSD, et al Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown: Enclosed please find a copy of the LRSD's 1995-96 Third Quarter Status Report which was filed with the Court on Tuesday, May 28, 1996. By agreement, three copies of the above documents are being delivered to Mrs. Brown and two copies are being delivered to Mr. Walker. diana\p*ccc(\fiHng-6.ltrGentlemen and Mrs. Brown May 28, 1996 Page 2 Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Jerry L. Malone LRSD Attorney JLM:fm Enclosures cc (w/enc): Dr. Henry P. Williams, LRSD Dr. Russ Mayo, LRSD Dr. Ed Jackson, LRSD diana\psccd\fjling-6.ltrIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION FILED LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT S DISTRICT COURT MAY 2 8 1996 JAMEb . lllbuuiiiairtu.s ulERK By
..................................... PLAINTIFFDEP CLERK VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. Received DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. Office of d 8 199^ ^^segregation Monitoring, INTERVENORS INTERVENORS LRSDs 1995-96 THIRD OUARTOR ST^TtJSREPORT The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District ("LRSD" or "District"), for its Status Report for the third quarter of the 1995-96 school year, states: 1. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and accurate copy of the District's Third Quarter Status Report of Desegregation Programs generated through the court-mandated program planning and budgeting process as submitted by LRSD administrators. The LRSD has made changes to this document since the filing of the second quarter status report. Some background on these changes is contained in the preface to this document. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its Desegregation Status Reports for the third quarter of the 1995-96 school year in accordance with the District's program planning and budgeting process. diana\pcssd\status96 .Ist -1-A Respectfully submitted, FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK Attorneys at Law 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas (501) 376-2011 72201-3493 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Jerry L. Malone Bar I. D. No. 85096 diana\pcssd\status96.lst -2-i. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that copy of the foregoing LRSD's Third Quarter Status Report for the 1995-96 school year has been hand-delivered to the following persons on Tuesday, May 28, 1996: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. Attorneys at Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Samuel M. Jones, III WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS Attorneys at Law 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. Attorneys at Law 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell ROACHELL & STREETT Attorneys at Law First Federal Plaza, Suite 504 401 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR erry L. Malone diana\pcss(Astatus96.1st -3- aIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL ri' D DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL NOV 2 2 1956 INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL Offica of Desegregaw f
,or,INagPRVENORS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with this Court's Order of August 26, 1993, the Little Rock School District hereby gives notice of the filing of the Little Rock School District's 1996-97 First Quarter Status Report Program Planning and Budgeting Document for Desegregation Programs dated November 21, 1996. Respectfully submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 BY: 0. JMN C. 370-3323 FENDLEY, JR. ^9^182) f:\hcaK\EaiUeyUnd\ao(*fil. 112CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Filing has been served on the United States mail the following by depositing ail on this day of a copy of same in , 19^4
Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 (MAILED) Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 (MAILED) Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 (MAILED) Mr. Richard Roachell Mr. Travis Creed Roachell Law Firm First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 (MAILED) Ms. Ann Brown Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 (HAND DELIVERED) Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 (MAILED) j/OHN C. FENDLEY, JR. 6^ f:\hflDe\lca(Uey\lnd\oiX>fU.l 12 -2-LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1996-97 FIRST QUARTER STATUS REPORT PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING DOCUMENT FOR DESEGREGATION PROGRAMS a p 0, November 21,1996 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. NO. LR-C-82-86 I, 9 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL NOV 2 c J996 INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL Office Of Desegregation Mcnf
5Mi|ERVENORS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with this Court's Order of August 26, 1993, the Little Rock School District hereby gives notice of the filing of the Little Rock School District's 1995-96 Fourth Quarter Status Report Addendum Program Planning and Budgeting Document for Desegregation Programs November 21, 1996. Respectfully submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Little R
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.