I received JUL 1 4 1994 Little Rock School District Office of Desegregation Monitoring Outsourcing Student Transportation June, 1994 A Business CaseLittle Rock School District Outsourcing of Student Transportation Business Case Executive Summary One of the key issues facing the LRSD today is how to best handle the ever increasing demand for educational dollars while at the same time controlling and/or reducing the District's transportation costs and improving transportation operations and safety. It is often difficult to determine precisely the source of most of the problems within the current transportation system, but it suffices that an extraordinary amount of time has been spent by the Administration in recent months to achieve this end. In fact, a study was requested by the Board for the specific purpose of determining the processes whereby work is accomplished, and making any recommendations to the District for handling any shortcomings uncovered by this research. In their assessment. Coopers and Lybrand, the national accounting firm selected for the work, noted that although several areas were looked at in terms of whether or not they contributed to the successful accomplishment of the District's mission, pupil transportation stood out prominently as a liability. Parent complaints with our student transportation system have become voluminous as a result of poor on-time performance which has occurred because of an aging fleet, increasing accidents, and increasing absenteeism. The current fleet of buses numbers 281. The expected useful life of a gas engine bus is 100,000 miles. The fleet has 128 gas engine buses with over 100,000 miles on them. In the last 3 years, no money has been budgeted for replacement of buses. This circumstance alone has increased the cost and time devoted to maintenance. At times, as many as 51 buses have been out of service for repairs. As major repairs become increasingly more frequent, both labor and parts/materials costs are expected to rise proportionately higher in each succeeding year. In 1993, the District spent $480,804, in 1994 it spent $745,245, and in 1995 it is predicted to reach over $1 million. This escalation in vehicle maintenance costs is consistent with the out-of-service rate, and relates back to the level of performance. With the exception of periods immediately succeeding holidays or extended times of non-service, the District averages approximately 40 out-of-service buses per day. This represents 14% of the entire fleet of 281 vehicles. Since the District has a 10% spare bus ratio, the net result is an insufficient number of vehicles available for service. A reasonable expectation is for no more than 5% of the vehicles to be out-of-service for corrective or preventative maintenance during peak operational periods. Another common performance indicator associated with vehicle maintenance is "wrecker experience". In 1993, the District spent $14,390 for 160 wrecker calls. By comparison $25,945 has been spent for 291 wrecker calls to date in 1994. It is predicted that $37,800 will be spent for over 400 calls in the coming year. A more acceptable number for a fleet of this size would be an average wrecker experience of about five per month or 60 per year.Outsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 2 The District has a daily driver absentee rate of 23% . This translates to 48 drivers who are unavailable for service daily. The result of this high level of absenteeism is poor route performance, increased student discipline concerns, and inordinately high costs for drivers re-routed to pick up missed students. The bottom line is that the current operation is, more often than not, besieged with problems stemming from extreme driver absenteeism and the seemingly liberal use of employee sick leave provisions. (Note: the PCSSD currently has no employer sponsored sick leave provision for Bus Drivers and subsequently has many fewer problems in this regard) 1. 2. 3. The alternative solutions considered are listed below: Change nothing. This will not address the problem and will cause costs to grow annually
Follaio industry standards for equipment replacement, personnel, etc. including a strict schedule for replacing the fleet. This will have a dramatic impact on the current and future budgets. The first year increase to the budget is approximately $800,000. This solution does not maintain reasonable costs. The reasonableness of this alternative is questionable since a $7 million dollar gap exists in the current budget. Outsource the student transportation system to a private concern. Research requested by the Board of Directors indicates that this alternative addresses all aspects of the problem. It includes a budget savings of approximately $1 million dollars over the next three years. Several strategies have been discussed in recent months, but perhaps none is as practicable an idea as that of outsourcing. It is believed that through outsourcing, the District will realize a considerable cost savings and significantly improve the level of service provided to its students and patrons. Though a primary motivation for considering outsourcing is to capture cost savings, it is worth mentioning that other tangible benefits such as reasonable and predictable fleet replacement, lowered driver absenteeism, improved vehicle maintenance, and reduced vehicle accident rate will also be realized. An appreciable improvement in these areas will lead to significantly fewer problems and complaints, as well as establish a more stable and reliable transportation system for future LRSD needs. Alternative 3 is recommended. By the opening of school for 1994-95, on-time performance will increase and parent complaints will decrease while reducing the cost of the student transportation system. This transportation proposal supports the school district goals relating to reducing costs and improving service. The following is a list of the criteria to be used in determining whether or not the problem is solved when this solution is implemented: 1. Parent satisfaction will increase as indicated by a reduction in the number of complaints
07/14/94 0C_OUTOutsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 3 2. Currently employed drivers will maintain their jobs and benefits
3. 4. 5. 6. Buses will be on-time more often than they are now
Accidents decrease
The number of buses out-of-service for repairs will decrease
The cost of student transportation for the next three years will be less that that projected by LRSD
and, 7. A schedule for replacement of equipment will be strictly followed. It is critical that the decision be made before July 15th so it may be implemented by the opening of school for 1994-95. If this solution is to be implemented, patrons will need to know as soon as the Board of Directors approves. Awareness must be generated in the community, staff must be notified of the change, and a number of other tasks as noted in the timeline included must be addressed. No additional costs for personnel are necessary to implement this proposal. No one will lose his or her job, however. A savings of 1 million dollars is the estimated benefit over the next three years under this plan. The District will maintain the special education routes and a smaller maintenance facility already available. Even with these costs, outsourcing will reduce overall costs. The money currently allocated will be used to pay for outsourcing. Implementation of this proposal creates a cost-reducing strategy for the 1994-95 budget The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation daily. ______________________Milestone______________________ 1. Proposal presented to the LRSD Board of Directors for approval___________________________________________ 2. Notice to employees Date 7/14/94 Person Williams 3. Include this as a budget reduction strategy 4. Recruitment of current employees 5. Recruitment of new employees 6. Inventory property 7. Finalize contract 8. Relocate Safety and Security Department 9. Property transfer and occupancy________ 10. Complete bus routes__________________ 11. Retrain current employees_____________ 12. Train new employees__________________ 13. Notify patrons________________________ 14. Begin delivery of replacement equipment 15. Complete driver orientation and dry runs 7/15/94 7/15/94 7/18/94 7/18/94 7/21/94 7/21/94 7/2^1/94 7/22/94 7/29/94 8/1/94 8/1/94 8/1/94 8/10/94 8/15/94 Hurley Milhollen Contractor Contractor Neal Williams Neal, Eaton Neal, Milhollen Montgomery Contractor Contractor Wagner Contractor Contractor 07/14/94 BC_OU1Outsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 4 Background One of the key issues facing the LRSD today is how to best handle the ever increasing demand for educational dollars while at the same time controlling and/or reducing the District's transportation costs and improving transportation operations and safety. It is often difficult to determine precisely the source of most of the problems within the current transportation system, but it suffices that an extraordinary amount of time has been spent by the Administration in recent months to achieve this end. In fact, a study was requested by the Board for the specific purpose of determining the processes whereby work is accomplished, and making any recommendations to the District for handling any shortcomings uncovered by this research. In their assessment. Coopers and Lybrand, the national accounting firm selected for the work, noted that although several areas were looked at in terms of whether or not they contributed to the successful accomplishment of the District's mission, pupil transportation stood out prominently as a liability. The District expends an inordinate amount of time and energy focusing on Support Services such as transportation. Educational issues often take a back seat to transportation operations because of the time required to respond to these concerns. Often these issues are the focus of media attention which results in poor public relations. The District's transportation operations have frequently been in the media this year. In fact, it was the lead article on the front page of the November 7, 1993 Arkansas Democrat Gazette. Many of these stories have revolved around labor and safety issues and poor operational performance. The accuracy and voracity of the stories is not as important as the resulting poor public perception of the operations, and the fact that these "crises" are draining management's attention away from the primary goal of educating children. Service in the Little Rock School District has been the subject of much debate. According to a recent study only 69% of the buses are "on-time." At present the district is not employing the best "state-of-the-market techniques" for managing and providing student transportation services. The Little Rock School District is facing a $7.2 million budget deficit for the 94-95 academic year. Management in the Transportation Department is concerned that the fleet is aging and a large proportion of it must be replaced. For the last several years, the District has been unable to meet its targeted goal of replacing 10% of its buses per year. As a result replacing the aged fleet now represents a prodigious capital expense which the District virtually cannot incur in a single budget year. To return to an acceptable fleet replacement cycle, the District would have to expend approximately $1 million per year over the next six years. or/iv^ 0c_ouTOutsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 5 Problem Definition Parent complaints with our student transportation system have become voluminous as a result of poor on-time performance which has occurred because of an aging fleet, increasing accidents, and increasing absenteeism. The current fleet of buses numbers 281. The expected useful life of a gas engine bus is 100,000 miles. The fleet has 128 gas engine buses with over 100,000 miles on them. In the last 3 years, no money has been budgeted for replacement of buses. This circumstance alone has increased the cost and time devoted to maintenance. At times, as many as 51 buses have been out of service for repairs. To bring the fleet up-to-date requires a replacement schedule that meets certain criteria. The standards we have used are based on type of engine and miles of use. Those parameters require that buses used to service the District be replaced as follows: Gasoline powered buses: Any such bus that exceeds seven years of age or 100,000 miles at the start of any school year. Diesel powered buses: Any such bus that exceeds 10 years of age or 150,000 miles at the beginning of any school year. Using these parameters, along with the fleet's current mileage as of the close of school in June, 1994, a replacement schedule for the District's current vehicles School Year 1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 2003-2004 Buses 128 29 22 18 10 1 25 was established. Listed here is the number of buses that will need to be replaced prior to the start of each Replacement Schedule of Buses Based on 1994 Fleet & RFP Standard corresponding school year. Fundamental to the success of District 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 128 +$900,000 in 1994-95 to meet standard transportation operation is improving the level of service in the ^rea of vehicle 94-95 29 22 18 10 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 1 0 99- 2000 School Year 0 2000- 2001 2001- 2002 0 2002- 25 a 2003- 2003 . 2004 a fleet of 281 buses with only eight mechanics. maintenance. Because of the age and condition for the existing fleet it has become necessary to add additional maintenance staff and to service the older high mileage buses much more frequently. The District currently services The workload has increased dramatically over previous years because heavy maintenance previously covered under 07/14/94 BC.OUT Outsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 6 warranty must now be performed in-house. In fact, a recent study of the operation conducted by Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc. yielded this finding: The high ratio of one maintenance person to 44 vehicles is unsatisfactory. With many of these vehicles having over 100,000 miles on them, the need for quality preventative maintenance is crucial. ThLs is not presently possible and Mr. Viner and his staff are doing an excellent job of keeping the fleet running. Add to this the fact that no new buses are being bought this year, the situation is going to become more difficult to manage. Mr. Viner recently had one mechanic resign citing stress and the heavy maintenance workload as the reason. A replacement has not yet been hired, but even with this individual replaced, the bus vs. mechanic ratio is not consistent with national standards. As major repairs become increasingly more frequent, both labor and parts/materials costs are expected to rise proportionately higher in each succeeding year. In 1993, the District spent $480,804, in 1994 it spent $745,245, and in 1995 it is predicted to reach over $1 million. This escalation in vehicle maintenance costs is consistent with the out-of-service rate, and relates back to the level of performance. With the exception of periods immediately succeeding holidays or extended times of non-service, the District averages approximately 40 out-of-service buses per day. This represents 14% of the entire fleet of 281 vehicles. Since the District has a 10% spare bus ratio, the net result is an insufficient number of vehicles available for service. A reasonable expectation is for no more than 5% of the vehicles to be out-of-service for corrective or preventative maintenance during peak operational periods. Parts/Materials/Supplies $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Another common performance indicator associated with vehicle maintenance is "wrecker experience". In 1993, the District spent $14,390 for 160 wrecker calls. By comparison $25,945 has been spent for 291 wrecker calls to date in 1994. It is predicted that $37,800 will be spent for over 400 calls in the coming year. A more acceptable number for a fleet of this size would be an average wrecker experience of about five per month or 60 per year. 07/14/94 BC_OVr Outsourcing Student t ransportation Business Case 7 Wrecker Experienc $40,000 $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 299 400 160 60 I 60 1992-93 1994-95 M LRSD Wrecker Calls 1993-94 Normal Wrecker Calls Several factors are used in determining performance levels for transportation services. One of the leading indicators of poor performance is driver absenteeism. Because unwarranted absenteeism harms the program for children, wastes the District's scarce resources, and works an undue hardship on employees who maintain good attendance records, it is considered to be a causal factor, and a fairly accurate indicator of the unsatisfactory performance level of the current operation. The District has a daily driver absentee rate of 23% . This translates to 48 drivers who are unavailable for service daily. The result of this high level of absenteeism is poor route performance, increased student discipline concerns, and inordinately high costs for drivers re-routed to pick up missed students. The bottom line is that the current operation is, more often than not, besieged with problems stemming from extreme driver absenteeism and the seemingly liberal use of employee sick leave provisions. (Note: the PCSSD currently has no employer sponsored sick leave provision for Bus Drivers and subsequently has many fewer problems in this regard) Vehicle accident rate is commonly used as the indicator when assessing the level of safe operation of the driver, the conditions in which operations are performed, and Quality of Perftmiance Accidents per Million Miles the condition of the vehicles operated. Preventable accidents harm students and others, waste financial resources, and lead to unnecessary down-time for equipment In 1993, tite District had 68 such accidents while logging over 3.9 million miles
in 1994, there were 54 preventable accidents with the fleet traveling just over 4.3 million miles. That translates into 17.4 accidents per million miles and 12.5 accidents million miles respectively. per By contrast, the prospective contractor has an record established, documented safety of only 8.8 preventable 07/14/M BC_OUr Outsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 8 accidents per million miles. Typically, a high vehicle accident rate manifests in increases for both Workers Compensation and Property and Casualty insurance costs. Analysis of three previous years claims for Workers Compensation indicates an extreme upward trend in the frequency of claims and the cost per claim to the District. In 1992 there were 31 Workers Compensation claims processed for the Transportation Department at a cost of $66,439. In 1993 there were 42 claims processed at a cost of $169,587, and by March of 1994, there had been some 45 claims totaling $57,662. Bus driver claims account for 65% of all claims by district employees. The composite data indicates an urgent need for improved driver training and the initiation of a vigorous and sustained safety awareness program. That has not been possible in LRSD because of the elimination of supervisory/training position by budget cuts. Regarding these same issues, the Gallagher study referred to previously provided the following recommendations: 93-12-22. The Director of Transportation should develop, implement and manage an aggressive Loss Prevention Program. Supervisors and employees must be held accountable for their actions. Fair, Swift and appropriate discipline or corrective measures must be taken to handle unsatisfactory conditions prior to them becoming uncontrollable. 93-12-23. No driver should be allowed to operate a vehicle without first, having been trained in defensive driving. AU drivers should after initial training, attend annual defensive driving training including, hands-on evaluations. While the foregoing factors taken individually do not threaten the collapse of transportation, taken together, these signs reveal a dysfunctional system. Consider the comments of the Coopers & Lybrand staff in their findings at the transportation terminal: Coopers & Lybrand spent two days talking with customers and employees of the Little Rock School District's Transportation Department. While almost aU of the people we talked to spoke favorably of the department's operation relative to the constraints placed upon it, aU indicated a concern that something needed to be done to ensure that things didn't get worse. All interviewees, customers and employees alike, expressed a concern that the department was beginning to show signs of stress, like cracks in a dam, and many were fearful of the department's future. It is C&L's opinion that these concerns and signs are real. We also feel that these symptoms reflect the fact that the current mode of operation was conceived long ago without any vision of the desegregated , inner city environment in which the department now operates. What is frightening is that the interwoven complexities of this environment combined with the bankrupt methods of the past have created a semi-self defeating situation that cannot be escaped without vigorous redesign of the process. Analysis of Alternatives Solutions were discussed with a committee representing parents, principals, support staff, and administrators in the LRSD. Upon careful consideration, several 07/14/94 K.OUTOutsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 9 aspects of the problem emerged. These must be addressed to have a viable solution to the problem. They are parent complaints, on-time performance, aging fleet. increasing accidents, increasing absenteeism, and costs. 1. 2. 3. The alternative solutions considered are listed below: Change nothing. This will not address the problem and will cause costs to grow annually
Follow industry standards for equipment replacement, personnel, etc. including a strict schedule for replacing the fleet. This will have a dramatic impact on the current and future budgets. The first year increase to the budget is approximately $800,000. This solution does not maintain reasonable costs. The reasonableness of this alternative is questionable since a $7 million dollar gap exists in the current budget. Outsource the student transportation system to a private concern. Research requested by the Board of Directors indicates that this alternative addresses all aspects of the problem. It includes a budget savings of approximately $1 million dollars over the next three years. Several strategies have been discussed in recent months, but perhaps none is as practicable an idea as that of outsourcing. It is believed that through outsourcing, the District will realize a considerable cost savings and significantly improve the level of service provided to its students and patrons. Though a primary motivation for considering outsourcing is to capture cost savings, it is worth mentioning that other tangible benefits such as reasonable and predictable fleet replacement, lowered driver absenteeism, improved vehicle maintenance, and reduced vehicle accident rate will also be realized. An appreciable improvement in these areas will lead to significantly fewer problems and complaints, as well as establish a more stable and reliable transportation system for future LRSD needs. Recotnmendation Alternative 3 is recommended. 3. Outsource the student transportation system to a private concern. Research requested by the Board of Directors indicates that this alternative addresses all aspects of the problem. It includes a budget savings of approximately $1 million dollars over the next three years. Proposals have been requested from private sector transportation companies on this alternative. Of the responses received, only Mayflower Contract Services, Inc. proposed to contract the LRSD student transportation system as specified. Details appear in the proposal submitted by the contractor. 07/14/94 BC_OUrOutsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 10 Objective By the opening of school for 1994-95, on-time performance will increase and parent complaints will decrease while reducing the cost of the student transportation system. This transportation proposal supports the school district goals relating to reducing costs and improving service. The following is a list of the criteria to be used in determining whether or not the problem is solved when this solution is implemented: 1. Parent satisfaction will increase as indicated by a reduction in the number of complaints
2. Currently employed drivers will maintain their jobs and benefits
3. Buses will be on-time more often than they are now
4. Accidents decrease
5. The number of buses out-of-service for repairs will decrease
6. The cost of student transportation for the next three years will be less that that projected by LRSD
and, 7. A schedule for replacement of equipment will be strictly followed. Impact Analysis The district is aware of the concern that exists among the bus drivers. The concern expressed has focused on job security. Those who have appeared in protest are those who will remain with the district anyway. The district will maintain special education routes and therefore about 80 drivers. The proposal for outsourcing requires that those currently employed by the LRSD be employed by the contractor. Negatives 1. The transition to a private contractor will require extra time for district administrators to turn over the operation which will no doubt have unpredictable inconveniences
2. Bus driver reaction will be strong against the decision for fear of the loss of their jobs
Positives 1. Parent satisfaction will increase as indicated by a reduction in the number of complaints
2. Currently employed drivers will maintain their jobs and benefits
07/14/94 BC.OUrOutsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 11 3. Buses will be on-time more often than they are now
4. Accidents will decrease
5. The number of buses out-of-service decrease
for repairs will 6. The cost of student transportation for the next three years will be less that that projected by LRSD
and, 7. A schedule for replacement of equipment will be strictly followed providing students with badly needed new buses. Quality of Performance Bus Availability, Driver Absenteeism, Not-on-Time Buses 30% 2S% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Risks The risks of not implementing this solution is increasing costs to the district, increasing complaints by patrons, and a generally poor image of the district's transportation system. The risks of implementation of this solution are the unfounded presumptions that the costs will be greater than calculated and people will lose their jobs. Transition will strain our current management capability given the delays in implementation of outsourcing when considering increased activities associated with the start up of the school year. Timing It is critical that the decision be made before July 15th so it may be implemented by the opening of school for 1994-95. If this solution is to be implemented, patrons will need to know as soon as the Board of Directors approves. Awareness must be generated in the community, staff must be notified of the change, and a number of other tasks as noted in the timeline included must be addressed. Resources Anu lysis Personnel No additional costs for personnel are necessary to implement this proposal. No one will lose his or her job, however. 07/14/94 8C_OUT Outsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 12 Financial A savings of 1 million dollars is the estimated benefit over the next three years under this plan. The District will maintain the special education routes and a smaller V Three Year Bottom Line Cost Comparison LRSD V. Contractor LRSD Contractor -$1,018,614 savings over 3 years $10,000,000 T $9,000,000 $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,562,449 $6,463,981 $7,327,775 $6,997,680 $7,760,438 >7,170,387 F $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 94-95 95-96 96-97 School Year maintenance facility already available. Even with these costs, outsourcing will reduce overall costs (See Attachment 1). Revenue Source The money currently, allocated will be used to pay for outsourcing. Implementation of this proposal creates a cost-reducing strategy for the 1994-95 budget. Force Field Analysis Primary supporters of this proposal will be those directly affected by the solution patrons and administrators within the District The Board of Directors and administration of the school district are well aware of the improvement this solution will bring for student service and cost savings. KJXJTOutsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 13 Those most opposed to the solution will be bus drivers who fear losing their jobs and those who fear private sector managing public sector services. The negative reaction may be reduced by keeping everyone informed as the decision is made and implemented. The strongest statement in favor of outsourcing is that costs will be reduced while improving service. General Implementation Plan The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation daily. Milestone 1. Proposal presented to the LRSD Board of Directors for approval 2. Notice to employees 3. Include this as a budget reduction strategy 4. Recruitment of current employees 5. Recruitment of new employees 6. Inventory property 7. Finalize contract 8. Relocate Safety and Security Department 9. Property transfer and occupancy 10. Complete bus routes 11. Retrain current employees 12. Train new employees 13. Notify patrons 14. Begin delivery of replacement equipment 15. Complete driver orientation and dry runs Date 7/14/94 7/15/94 7/15/94 7/18/94 7/18/94 7/21/94 7/21/94 7/21/94 7/22/94 7/29/94 8/1/94 8/1/94 8/1/94 8/10/94 8/15/94 Person Williams Hurley Milhollen Contractor Contractor Neal Williams Neal, Eaton Neal, Milhollen Montgomery Contractor Contractor Wagner Contractor Contractor Jz/IVM SC_OUTOutsourcing Student Transportation Business Case 14 Attachmetit 1 Comparison of LRSD costs to Mayflower Contract Services, Inc. Costs EXPENSE CATEGORY Salaries Fringe Benefits Purchased Services Materials /Supplies Capital Outlay Other Objects SUBTOTAL Budget Yr 1994-95 3,679,789 800,604 676,500 964,664 11,000 1,000 6,133,557 Budget Yr 1995-96 3,790,183 809,049 686,648 984,041 11,000 1,000 6,281,921 Budget Yr 1996-97 3,985,519 852,142 700,381 1,003,722 11,000 1,000 6,553,764 TOTAL 11,455,491 2,461,795 2,063,529 2,952,427 33,000 3,000 18,969,242 Fleet Insurance Workers Compensation Fleet Disposal Bus Payment SUBTOTAL 512,680 236,473 537,000 522,933 243,565 533,392 251,357 1,286,153 1,155,391 1,921,889 1,317,297 2,102,046 1,569,005 731,395 537,000 2,472,688 5,310,088 TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE 7,419,710 8,203,810 8,655,810 24,279,330 Mayflower Proposal Special Education TOTAL 6,463,981 857,261 7,321,242 6,997,680 876,035 7,873,715 7,170,387 895,372 8,065,759 20,632,048 2,628,668 23,260,716 SAVINGS 98,468 330,095 590,051 1,018,614 Regular/M-to-M Special Ed______ TOTAL 6,562,449 857,261 7,419,710 7,327,775 876,035 8,203,810 7,760,438 895,372 8,655,810 21,650,662 2,628,668 24,279,330 0C.OUTDate: December 2, 1994 To: Judge Wright Promt m Brown Subject Informal Review of the LRSD November 16, 1994 Filing: Transportation Business Case, Incentive School Spanish Program, and Incentive School Theme Implementation. My staff and 1 have reviewed the submissions which the LRSD made last month to satisfy requirements of your October 24, 1994 Order. Our brief, very informal, and private assessment of each document follows below in three separate sections. If you should want us to write up a formal review, we will be happy to do so. 1. Transportation Business Case This case satisfies the mandate that the district provide a business case to explain how it will spend the $1.3 million which it appropriated for transportation in the 1994-95 budget. Both Bill and Melissa spent some time reviewing rough drafts of this business case with Russ Mayo (its author), posing questions and suggesting changes. Russ took some of those suggestions, but not all. For example, we suggested that the district think long-range and expand the business case to encompass transportation needs beyond the current school year. Other than the chart showing an extended bus replacement schedule, the proposal doesnt include such long-term planning. The business case only covers a solution and expenditures for the current budget year, 1994-95. Overall, the business case is acceptable. While several areas could be improved, it is better than most cases prepared by the LRSD. The case is weak in its alternative analysis, because it doesnt really address the pros and cons of each alternative identified, much less determine the cost and impact. It is obvious that this case was prepared after the failure of the outsourcing move, and as a justification of the only remaining option available at the time. \2. Incentive School Spanish Program. Overall, the information in this report is poorly presented and appears to have been slapped together hastily. The shoddy report would matter little, if the Spanish program itself had any merit. This filing is just the latest installment in the districts attempt to shirk the commitments in its desegregation plan. The comments below are organized by the report page number and section. Page 1: (II) Rightsell did not begin any type of program until after the October 24, 1994 order. The report asserts that the principals believe the existing program, included in this document, is a way to provide meaningful foreign language experiences to their students." Unfortunately the report in sum does not convince us that children are receiving quality, meaningful foreign language instruction. Pages 1-2: (III) The days and times Spanish is offered varies among the schools, as does the total amount of instruction the students receive. At Franklin and Rockefeller, the amount of instructional time is "at the discretion of the teacher" and unspecified, although Rockefeller also adds 45 minutes once a week during extended day for both primary and intermediate students. Mitchell and Rightsell students get a 1.5 hour block once a week, and Garland students get 1/2 hour three times a week. Page 2: (IV) The report appears to be cobbled together from several sources (perhaps separate reports from each incentive school principal?). The summaries of the types of instruction offered at each school vary widely, from a comprehensive description of the satellite program in use at Garland to a terse sentence regarding the extended day program at Mitchell. Page 3: (V) Whoever wrote this report has no concept of the meaning of FTE. The district reports that at least one FTE is assigned to Spanish instruction at each incentive school. The report indicates that sixteen FTEs teach Spanish at Rockefeller. The author is quite confused. He or she has listed the number of persons involved in delivering instruction as an FTE when it is clear from the other documentation that no teacher in the incentive schools spends the equivalent of full-time employment teaching Spanish. Even at Franklin, the teacher assigned to the immersion class spends only a portion of the school day instructing in Spanish. (Vll) The descriptions of the language labs are inadequate and unenlightening. After reading the vague mumbo jumbo offered as a description of how the labs are used to reinforce instruction, you can almost hear the LRSD administration sing, "How I Love to Dance the Little Sidestep." 2The district has offered no information to give the reader a picture of how the language labs enhance instruction. Could this be because the labs and the instruction continue to be virtually non-existent? The submission also uses the term "FLES approach". The acronym FLES is never spelled out, nor is the approach defined, so we have no idea what it means. (Vlll) All of the incentive schools restrict Spanish instruction to selected grade levels. Franklin and Mitchell are the worst offenders, offering Spanish only at the first grade. None of e schools provide Spanish instruction for children in Idndergarten or the program for four-year- olds. Page 4: (IX) (X) (XI) At 176 participants. Garland claims the highest number of students taking Spanish. The totals drop markedly for the other schools, down to only 14 students at Rightsell. While only first graders at Franklin and Mitchell receive Spanish instruction, no first graders are involved in the program at Garland and Rockefeller. This section dealing with the learning objectives is unrealistic. Given the limited amount of time devoted to instruction in Spanish, it is unlikely that students will develop "skills in listening, speaking, reading, and writing the Spanish language." The second objective listed is so esoteric that we wonder if it was included only to show off an obscure vocabulaiy word. According to item two, students will "become familiar with Spanish syllabaries." It is incomprehensible that the anonymous author of this report would be aware of the word "syllabaries" and be unaware that the plural of medium is media (listed as mediums on page 3). This entire section is pretty weak also. A couple of the schools (Mitchell and Franklin) worked Total Physical Response into their blurb, but most of the information offered does not begin to address the requirements from e court order. None of the schools mention any interaction with native speakers, and any ties to the LRSD curriculum are very tenuous. Page 5: The final page of the report includes quite a bit of information on the Spanish immersion program offered in one first grade class at Franklin. The report claims that the immersion program has been fully implemented. We were going to make an unannounced site visit there on Wednesday, November 30, 1994, but tragically, the principals teenage son committed suicide, so we have postponed our visit until after the first of the year. 'We will withhold comment on the immersion program for now, and furnish a written surrimary of our findings within a few days of the visit. Our preliminary information on the program is that it is very poor and far from being fully implemented. 33. Incentive School Theme Implementation This submission is sadly inadequate in addressing the questions posed by the Court in the October order. The descriptions of programs are vague and dont provide any new information beyond what we had gained through our 1993-94 incentive school monitoring visits. If their "update" is accurate, our report is still timely. Franklin 1. The Communications Technology theme is poorly defined. The reader is told that the theme is "the science of utilizing tools, machines, materials, and processes for the purpose of communicating." (p. 1). That definition has no meaning as it relates to what actually students do. No examples were provided. 2. There is no specific description of how the theme concepts have been integrated into the curriculum. 3. On page 2, the Franklin theme is described as "operable" (like a cancer!), but there is an indication that full implementation is not complete. No implementation timeline is provided, as requested by the Court. The excuse given for slowed implementation is that this is the first full year of employment for the theme specialist
however, this is not the first theme specialist to hold the position since implementation began two years ago. Garland 1. The Garland summary describes computer-based instruction. The report does not specify how Garlands approach differs significantly from other schools which use computers as learning tools. 2. The full Garland theme is "Multimedia Technology and Educational Research," but the theme description provides no mention of educational research. 3. Garlands theme is described as needing to be phased in due to high costs. A specific timeline isnt provided as requested by the Court, nor are the anticipated costs which make a phase-in necessaiy. 4. Full implementation of the theme is to occur in phases "pending the outcome of initial phase' (p. 4). The submission does not explain what this means. 11 Mitchell 1. If the description is accurate, the Creative Dramatics theme is not an integrated part of e curriculum. The specialty teachers (art, music, physical education) are the vehicles for delivering the theme. Based on this description, full theme integration is not occurring at Mitchell. 42. The theme is described as "operable" (new favorite word at LRSD?), but needing refinement. No indication is given as to the type of refinement that will be necessary and the timeline is missing. Rightsell 1. Rightsells theme description is the only one which highlights the role of the classroom teacher in infusing the curriculum. By the way. Rightsell was the only incentive school to supply an infused curriculum guide during our 1993-94 monitoring visit. 2. The explanation of the mass media component of the theme is quite weak. 3. With the recent installation of closed-circuit wiring for closed-circuit television, it appears that theme implementation is complete. Rockefeller 1. It is our conviction that computers are a tool, not a legitimate theme. We see very little in the Rockefeller description to convince us that the school is actually emphasizing computer science." While Rockefeller may have more classroom-based computers than the average, we havent observed any new skills or uses that set the school apart from other schools which are effectively using computers as an instructional tool. 2. Rockefeller is the only incentive school at which, the report states, theme implementation is complete. 507/18/94 09:17 501 324 2032 L R School Dlst ES 002/002 i' ODM CJ^ hy
r/. Little Rock School District NEWS RELEASE July 18,1994 For more information: Dina Teague, 324-2020 SPECIAL BOARD VW 4Ji Sai :DULED The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District wiU hold a special meeting this evening at 5:00 p, Markham. 'm. in the administration building at 810 W. Board members will receive a business case on transportation outsourcing. The Board will also meet with parents from Williams Basic Skills Magnet Elementary School. ### 810 West Markham .B4081701 1030/08/24 TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT VISIT INTRODUCTION * Thanks for the time. * I have put some questions together. I know you are new and many not have all the answers. That's ok I don't know much about school bus transportation, so foi^ive dumb questions GENERAL What have you done to get ready for school opening Monday? Routing has been completed, and the last minute changes are being added. Should be completed in time. Courtesy stops are already in the system. Drivers have been hired, and have completed in-service. 96% bus availability as of Friday morning. * What is your overall assessment? * Wliat are the weak areas? Getting enough bus drivers onboard. Getting enough buses running. Position control match to the budget was a joke. Had to spend a lot of time correcting the position control to find out who was in a slot and who had gone. Monthly Manpower report stopped in January, so no adjustments until at least that far back. Cheatam wants to look at how the extra runs are allocated to drivers
a few of them get all the good stuff. She wants to look at the "distribution of the Wealth." She would also like to change from piece work pay to hourly pay. \ - What major problems do you anticipate? 1Breakdowns. The buses are getting old, and will breakdown. * Wliat are the strong areas? Cheatham has feedback that says this was the best in-service the drivers have ever had. Everyone seem to think she is reasonable. - What areas do you have greatest confidence? ************************************************************************* ROUTING * Take me through the process of setting up new routes for the year. Jayne Agnes is the main routing person. She is really excited about her job and being able to expand the use of the system. One of the main benefits of having Mayo there was his being able to walk through things with us. There were several technology issues where passing a tape vice hardcopy would speed things up. He initiated action on them right there. Step 1. Transportation gets a tape from data processing of certain data elements of the student database. The first tape is generated in the early spring (F/M/A). The second tape is generated in May/June, and this is the tape which is actually used for routing. Step 2. Once the routing tape is loaded at Transportation, they run the Batch Census Edit. This is just a student name and address match routine which verifies the student file, and generates an exception report. This report is worked through most of the summer on constant clean-up. Step 3. From the report the student records are actually corrected. Step 4. Once the record is clean and entered into the system, the student shows up on the map as a "white' square. Step 5. The operator then looks for the white squares and assigns a stop. If there is not an existing stop within the range, then the operator creates a new stop. From this stop generation, the operator then ties into routes. This process takes about a month since it involves numerous human decisions. Step 6. Once the regular Little Rock students have been worked from the tape, then M- to-M's are worked
then changes to assigned stops
then wants. New registrations are also worked in here. New registrations are written up on a form and then keyed into the student file at student assignment. The form is then sent to Transportation where the data is re-keyed into the Ecotran system. NOTE: we are working on data transfer here this exchange. Step 7. Once all the routing is done, the routes are printed and distributed. This has to take place before driver training can be completed. A major problem appears to be that Transportation does not have online access to the student database. Therefore, they do not have the capability to look up students in the system for researching problems. This really limits them. Cheatham is trying to get that fixed. 2* Wlien was this routing completed? The major part of the routing was completed over a week ago and before the driver training. Changes and some new registrations are still being worked. They really cannot complete the routing until the August registration results are loaded into the system and transferred. How are registration changes cranked into the routing? All changes, registration and otherwise, are keyed into the system manually from forms mailed over from student assignment. Prior to school starting, Jane was getting about 50-1- forms a day. It was obvious to Mayo and Mooney that this student update data was being entered into the student file by student assignment and then re-keyed by Transportation. Data Processing could cut a tape of the file after updating by Student Assignment, pass the new copy to Transportation, which could upload the new file into the Ecotrans system. This would save time, re-keying, and errors. - Wlten is that done? As soon after registration as possible. The August registration holds up the processing. What is the status of the student address base? Special education student information comes from that unit, and is still passed across manually on forms. - When was it last updated? The Transportation file was updated with the student file information by a June tape containing May data. There has been no updated data added during the June/Present timeframe. The best data they have on Little Rock kids is spring data. - What is the accuracy? Not very good. There has been no updated data added during the June/Present timeframe. The best data they have on Little Rock kids is spring data. * Last update from Ecotran MapNet. - When was the last update? (30 days) It was in the spring, and that was a software upgrade. They are at a deadend due to hardware constraints. They expressed a need for a hardware upgrade. - Did you just add stops, or did Ecotrans re-route? 3LRSD actually can do the routing from their terminal. LRSD personnel have learned a lot of new functions from the system. * Are the routing reports generated here, or at Ecotran? The routing reports are generated at the LRSD. Ecotran does not do much for them anymore, except the training. - When did you get them? (2 weeks) About a week ago. - Wliat are in the reports? Not using many of the features of Ecotran. It can do a lot more than they have used it for in the past. Jane has learned some new things just this week. Cheatam wants to send her to school on the system after things settle down. When were the stop locations identified? See steps above. When were students assigned to stop locations? See steps above. How do you tell the drivers about their routes? They start getting routing sheets at the in-service the week before school. All drivers are required to make at least one practice run prior to school starting on Monday. * How do you get the word to parents about their kids' stop? Mail out. * How do you handle special stop requests? They are worked into the routing after the regular stops/routing is set up. Courtesy stops are set up, if possible. There is one bus that is all courtesy stops due to the neighborhood and traffic patterns. Athletic events are arranged separately by the coaches. Field trips are arranged separately by the teachers. The special runs are parcelled out to the regular drivers, if possible. * Wliat percent of drivers have completed practice runs? Almost all had completed at least one practice run by Friday morning. Some were still going to make the run on Saturday and Sunday. Transportation was going to be open for them. 4All drivers are required to make at least one practice run prior to Monday school start. Many drivers have made more than one practice run. They can make as many as they want. All will complete the practice by Monday. They have to make the run forward and backwards. The routing sheets only print in the forward direction
the drivers have to read the routing sheet backwards for the afternoon trip. Routes were bid on Tuesday before the opening of school. Will now be bid each nine weeks in order to add some stability. - What was your target? 100% - Why the difference? * Are their any major route blockages? Six or seven
nothing major. They have identified a few problems, but they are fixing them now. Some drivers have come back from practice and made some suggestions on swapping stops between routes for better function. - Where? Asher and Cantrell. No mention made of the 3rd street overpass being out. Mooney uses it as an example. How many routes will you service? 314 regular, 45 M-to-M, and some special ed.
359+ * How many runs will you make? Runs and routes are the same to them. Wliat is your longest run? 26+ miles
M-to-M across the county. * When is your first pickup in the morning? 0614 - Wlien is your last arrival in morning? 0900 - When is your last regular drop in the afternoon? 1900, not counting some specials and late events. 5Last year they had one student that was an M-to-M from the county that was playing football on a road trip. They had to have a single bus for this one kid, and the bus did not get back to the barn until 0400. ***************************************************************** BUSES * Buses Mainly gas. Some getting changed out to diesel. They have 128 buses that are over the 120k mile cycle for replacement. The outsourcing contractor was going to replace these with newer buses, but now they are stuck with them. - How many total in your fleet? 281 - How many required for the day? 260, not counting special requests. - What will you have available Monday? Will have sufficient buses. 12 are in the shop now, meaning 96% availability for the fleet. That is pretty good. What is the status of your communications equipment? Ok for Monday, but needs some long term work. Cheatham is looking into tying into the new city system (a $4M system). If they can do that, there will be some hardware changes required, but have many other valuable features...911, MEMS both direct. Replacement buses - How many did you replace this year? Only replacements were the state buses for M-to-M. No regular buses were replaced. - Do you have any on order? - What impact will the Ward fire have on you? 6DRIVERS * How many drivers on your allowance? The allowance is 331. About 300 is a good average to have onboard. They currently have 290 hired. Need to add about 30 more to the pool. Rock bottom minimum is 260
same as the buses required for the day. - How many required for the day? 260-1- - How many do you have onboard? 290 What kind of training have the drivers had this summer? They had a two day in-service last week. The in-service covers the following: personnel work changes, policies and procedures, updating license, new drivers get defensive driving workshop, first aid, special ed students, emergencies. All drivers are required to take the defensive driving course sometime during the year
new hires must take it at the orientation inservice. All drivers must attend this session. - How many have been trained? All will get it. - What kind of follow-up training do you have for those that have not been trained? They have supervisors for OJT, and there are some follow-up in-service during the year. Defensive driving is a good example. - What kind of training has been provided on discipline on the buses? Covered in the in-service during small group workshops. - Did the drivers provide any input into the training? Yes they have done some. They asked for and will get more information on the radios, and will get more of the "How to Win" seminar. Have the drivers provided any input into problem solution? Yes. Remember the routing problems. They have also turned in several additional suggestions to Cheatham on how to improve operations and attendance. She has told them at orientation that she will look at them. She may or may not implement the suggestions. She has told them the items selected for implementation would have to be no cost. Some of the suggestions: re-bidding every 9 weeks for stability
looking at about 75 route \ 7substitutes
attendance
using vending machine money for "pride" efforts
handling special runs. - Have they had the opportunity? They have the opportunity, but there is no formal system for suggestions or a suggestion review process. They simply write them up and turn them in. What is the morale of the drivers? Cheatham and Jane think the morale is pretty good. ******************************************************************* MECHANICS * How many mechanics on your allowance? 8 on allowance. They are going to run a split shift for the first time. This way they will have a mechanic in the shop as long as they have a regular run on the road. - How many are onboard? 8 onboard - What about the chieP New guy in the job
promoted. Retired Army master sergeant. - When will you be full staffed? Current - What is the morale? Seems good right now. 96% availability of fleet. * $300K for mechanics - Wlten do you anticipate getting help from that money? Waiting on approval from the Court. Will gets some parts, 2 mechanics, and some helpers. * What kind of Preventive Maintenance System do you have? They have maintenance log sheets which are all manual. The mechanic makes an entry on the bus, what was done, and what parts were used. This log sheet may have several bus jobs on the same sheet. There is no form, just notes by the mechanic. Maybe 20 words max. 8They kind of keep a running parts inventory in the mind off of these log sheets
you know about how many you used and how many you had so the rest should be there
nothing formal. Each bus has something of a manual maintenance history file in the file cabinet. Based on the log sheets. No formal PMS system. They kind of know when they need to be done. The state requires two general maintenance cycles each year for each bus. They just kind of do them. Maintenance notes are given to the shop by the drivers if they think something needs to be done on the bus. - Is it automated? Nothing is automated. This is a major problem. Montgomery and Cheatham have identified the software needed, but will have to find the money and time to make it happen. - What kind of reports are generated? No reports are generated. The raw data is on the log sheets, and is not extracted. Strictly in a react mode, and based totally on the recall of the mechanics. - What is your greatest maintenance problem? Springs
fixed during the summer. Brakes
on the road breakdowns. - Are you up to date? 96 % availability posted on sheet of paper each day at the window in the maintenance shop. The first sign of tracking objectives in the district. Just started that this month. What is your anticipated percent of on-road breakdowns for Monday? Don't think they will have many on Monday. Should have about 15% by Thursday. What is your plan for handling on-road breakdowns? Mainly anticipate brake problems. Will send out a replacement bus, and the mechanic/helper will try to nurse the wounded bus back to the barn. What kind of wrecker service do you operate? Contracted. Very big expense. About $90 a pop. * Wliat kind of breakdown data do you maintain? None. Only in their minds. - What do you do with it? 9 \MANAGEMENT * What kind of service do you provide for extracurricular activities? Athletics, field trips, extended day, etc. These are set up outside of the regular schedule. They are requested from various parties, and are worked into the load. They try to give the extra runs to those drivers that want the money. Extra runs require the driver as well as a dispatcher in the office in case of trouble. Very expensive. Remember the example of the single football player at 0400. M-to-M rule of thumb
5 or more get a bus, less than 5 ride in cabs. - How is that worked into your regular schedule? - How do you plan for that? - What kind of volume do you have? There are about 150 bus loads a day covering all of the special runs, including all of the above and extended day. - Have you been given information indicating more or less load than last year? - Wliat measurements do you keep? None What is the impact of extended day? No decision has been made by the administration regarding the extended day cuts. Transportation is still waiting to hear. The extended day program will not start until next month, so there is still some time. - How is that worked into your regular schedule? - How do you plan for that? - What kind of volume do you have? - Have you been given information indicating more or less load than last year? - What measurements do you keep? * How are you planning to handle the 9 days of early release this year? 10No decision has been made by the administration. NOTE: I did not sense there was any affirmative action on this. - When did you get a heads-up on this? What kind of ridership data do you keep? Very little. Only assignments. No real ridership data is kept or worked up. Ecotran has a reporting capability, but the district has never used it. They can not measure the impact on black/white. NOTE
they could copy the race code from the student database, read it into Ecotran files, and prepare reports like "average miles for black students and average miles per white student" etc. - How do you measure impact on black/white kids? What security issues are facing you on Monday? At the shop, the main security problem is tracking and accounting for parts. Pilferage, not wholesale theft. On the buses, the main security problems are security around the bus stops and fights on the bus. - What measures will you take? How do you handle checkers/spotter? These are the supervisors, not additional staff. There are five driver supervisors, and they all have other duties. While the buses are on the road, anywhere from 3-5 supervisors will go out and monitor their schools, if they don't have anything else that is critical to work on (Jayne Agnes also does Ecotran routing). They have been grouped by school since last January. - How many do you have? - What sample do you hit? What does the Transportation Department need most in order to be successful this year? Technology upgrades and some people help. 11Little Rock School District September 30, 1994 RECEIVED SEP 3 0 1994 Office of Desegregation bion.ioring Mrs. Ann S. Brown Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: Enclosed are the answers to the questions you asked and the materials you requested in your letter to me dated September 13, 1994. If you have any questions concerning these responses, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely yours. Mary Cheatham 'J 'ftr4 _ T^rvt.c-'/'/c. ( i -4 e efurel, < / - - Cl/nrr> erci'e/ - ><<<. /"'c- . ^ii'hLr 5J Jo I, 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)824-2000 Questions From Ann Brown September 30, 1994 1. Describe the LRSD's bus driver training program objectives, content, and schedule which the district routinely follows, or at least followed in preparation for this school year. A. Obj ective: 1. To provide certified drivers that meet the requirements to drive school bus in Arkansas. a To provide defensive driving training for every school bus driver in the Little Rock School District at least once a year. B. Content: Classroom preparation that teaches the nation's and state's laws 2 . 1. pertaining to a Commercial Driver's License (CDL). 2 . Classroom preparation that teaches Defensive Driving and skills needed to drive safely and defensively. 3 . On the road driver training driving an obstacle course. and C. Schedule: 1. CDL classes are held weekly for new hires. filled, Once classes the positions will be held are as needed to fill vacant positions. 2 . Defensive driving classes are taught on days school is not in session for drivers. New drivers are scheduled for the first class after they get their CDL's. 2 . Attach a copy of the curriculum and handouts w^iich accompany the training. 2The curricula materials for the CDL course and the Defensive Driving course are in Binders 1 and 2. 3 . List the names of the trainers and their training background or other relative training qualifications. Currently two individuals are primarily responsible for the training of drivers as extra duty. Their main duties are as drivers. A business case is currently being prepared to add 3.3 positions dedicated training. to driver A. Roy G. Burnley 1. Arkansas Department of Education certificate as an Instructor for the Beginning School Bus Driver Training Program Defensive Driver Course from A-1 2 . Thompson Driving School 3 . Served as Drivers Trainer for 1991- 92 school year and the position was eliminated the following year due to budget cuts. B. Virgil "Smokey" Jones 1. Over 10 years experience as a school bus driver 2 . Defensive Driver Course Thompson Driving School from A-1 3 . Served as Drivers Trainer for 1991- 92 school year and the position was eliminated the following year due to budget cuts. 4 . Indicate the number of drivers who received training and the date that they completed the training program. A roster of employees with a Commercial Driver License (CDL) are listed on the rosters in Binder 3. Since August of 1994 approximately 100 individuals have received CDL training. Not all individuals who were trained were- hired for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to. accepted another job, decided to 35 . 6 . 7. move, or stated the job was too stressful. Approximately 40 individuals have received Defensive Driving training. Additional Defensive Driving training and CDL classes will be conducted during the year as time and resources permit. List the number of drivers who have not received training and the date by which these drivers will have been trained
explain why any drivers have not completed training. All drivers have Commercial Driver's Licenses (CDL). Since the Driver Trainer positions were eliminated, all training has been on a part time basis. no Defensive Driving classes have Until this year, been offered. Approximately 250 drivers will need Defensive Driving during the school year. students do not attend school. Training is offered on days that When the additional positions for training are approved, a formal schedule for Defensive Driving will be established and followed. Describe the kind of follow-up training you provide for those who miss initial pre-service training sessions. An individual can not drive a bus until he/she has a CDL. If he/she misses any classes, he/she must attend the next class that is held to qualify to take the CDL test. The training that was conducted August 10 and August 11, 1994 included a brief first aid introduction. dealing with student discipline. sessions bus evacuations from smoke filled buses, and discussions concerning department practices and procedures. Classes on bus evacuations are included in the Defensive Driving training. Additional classes dealing with student discipline will be offered by the district Staff Development Department during the school year, time. A schedule has not been developed at this Explain the district's rationale for not participating in ADE'S summer activities. training program and subsequent training The LRSD administration recommended that student transportation services be out sourced for the 1994-95 school year. All resources of the Transportation Department were focused on this project in June 1994. Since the administration did not anticipate operating the major portion of transportation system for the following year, no one was sent to participate in the ADE's summer training program or the training activities completed at the conference. \ 48 . Describe any plans for future participation in ADE's training programs. The administration plans for the Transportation Department to be represented in all future ADE's training programs related to student transportation. 9. Name who IS presently responsible for overseeing safety training and supervision
include the job description(s) for the individual(s). Mary Jane Cheatham IS currently responsible for 10. overseeing safety training and supervision. description for the Director included in Binder 4. of Transportation The j ob IS Describe the consequences (sanctions and remedial instruction) given drivers who commit safety violations. The Transportation Practices and Procedures (Pink book) contains the consequences for safety violations. Pages 9 16 and page 10, paragraph D, address many of the safety violations and the consequences. If a driver is involved in an accident or is reported by the public as driving unsafely he/she will be counseled by his/her supervisor and/or the Director of Transportation. The driver may be required to attend the next Defensive Driving training. discipline that Drivers are subject to progressive can include a recommendation for immediate termination based upon the severity of the safety violation and/or number of safety violations. 5Date: October 4, 1994 To: Melissa and Bill From: Subject: Information from LRSD Transportation Dept. Attached are Mary jane Cheathamss responses to my September letter to her. Bill, please look over the materials while Melissa is in Oklahoma and then pass them on to her. Then the two of you put your heads together to see if you find that this information brings up additional questions or indicates problem areas. If so, let me know and then plan to discuss those points with Mary jane and/or Spence Holder as appropriate or necessaiy. Frankly, the primary purpose of my letter to Maiy jane (other than tattling on the wrong-way driver) was to obliquely exert some pressure on the district to participate in the State training. Mary Jane has told me that she plans to do just that. Melissa, please follow up to see that her plans become reality. Thanks.Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM To: Bill Mooney, Assistant Monitor, ODM From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: October 28,1994 Subject: Transportation Business Case Attached you will find the Transportation Business Case promised. Please call me at 324-2408 if you have any questions. ij V
-aw OCT 2 8 1994 Ciiica Ct Desegregation Monitoring C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Mary Jane Cheatham, Director of Transportation Mark MUlhollen, Acting Manager of Support ServicesLittle Rock School District Improving Student Transportation October, 1994 A Business Case 'S 1 i- :\STOP' ZE Addition Modification Deletion Y-------------------- J I (X4< Little Rock School District Improving Student Transportation Business Case Executive Summary The intent of this business case is to explain the current transportation problems which resulted from an aging fleet and reduced personnel. Unfortunately, the cost of remedies proposed here is only a beginning. It will not fix the problem for the long term. For example, the new buses proposed will not arrive until the spring of 1995. Then too few will arrive to impact the long-term need. The personnel proposed can be hired immediately but will have continuous impact on the budgets from year to year, if this solution continues to be used. Additionally, large sums of money will have to be included in each succeeding budget to replace buses. A detailed explanation of the transportation problem follows with a temporary solution for this budget year. The cost to the district will be $1.3 million. Replacement buses will cost $1 million and additional personnel will cost approximately $0.3 million. Below is an itemized list of costs: Quan. Position 3.3 Trainers Cost^ Quan.^ Item Cost 4 Mechanics 4 Helpers 1.5 Clerks $87,100 $115,200 $62,400 $21,600 33 Buses $990,000 Total $286,300 Total $990,000 The money will come from the state desegregation loan fund. The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. Milestone 1. Proposal presented to the LRSD Board of Directors and approved 2. Advertise for mechanics and trainers Date 7/14/94 9/1/94 Person Williams Hurley Includes benefits 2 Depends on whether or not we lease-purchase or purchase outrightimproving Student Transportation Business Cuse 2 4. 5. Review specifications with Assoc. Supt. Place order for new buses 6, Employ mechanics and trainers 7. Begin training for current employees 8. Begin receiving replacement equipment 9. Evaluate solution based on outcomes anticipated 10/3/94 10/14/94 10/3/94 10/24/94 5/1/95 6/30/95 Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Background Introduction One of the most expensive enterprises undertaken by the district is the student transportation system. Its problems and costs continue to grow. Recognition of this came this past school year when a number of incidents attracted public attention. Budget cuts in recent years resulted in reduced money for personnel and for the purchase of new buses. The lack of a bus replacement program coupled with reduced spending has had a compounding affect. The intent of this business case is to explain the current transportation problems which resulted from an aging fleet and reduced personnel. Unfortunately, the cost of remedies proposed here is only a beginning. It will not fix the problem for the long term. For example, the new buses proposed will not arrive until the spring of 1995. Then too few will arrive to impact the long-term need. The personnel proposed can be hired immediately but will have continuous impact on the budgets from year to year, if this solution continues to be used. Additionally, large sums of money will have to be included in each succeeding budget to replace buses. A detailed explanation of the transportation problem follows with a temporary solution for this budget year. History Determining the source of the problem and generating solutions has taken an extraordinary amount of time for the Administration in recent months, j^dditionally, the Board requested a study of support services in the district to determine the level of efficiency within each area. Coopers and Lybrand, a national accounting firm, conducted the study and returned recommendations to the Board. In their report, they identified the pupil transportation system as the area in greatest need of much attention. So concerned were they that they recommended that the district look seriously at permitting a private contractor to operate the transportation system if it proved economically beneficial.Improving Student Transportation Business Case 3 The District expends an inordinate amount of time and energy focusing on transportation. The urgent concerns of transportation limit attention on educational issues. Often transportation problems draw media attention which results in poor public relations. The District's transportation operations have frequently been in the media. In fact, it was the lead article on the front page of the November 7, 1993 Arkansas Democrat Gazette. Many of these stories have revolved around labor and safety issues and poor service. The accuracy of the stories is not as important as the resulting poor public perception of the system, and the fact that these "crises" are draining management's attention away from the primary goal of educating children. Problem Definition Parent complaints with our student transportation system have become voluminous as a result of poor on-time performance which has occurred because of an aging fleet and driver performance. In this proposal, the notion of an aging fleet is supported by statistics of the number of buses with excessive miles, the increasing costs of repairs, the increasing need for mechanics, and the increasing calls for wrecker service. Concern about poor driver performance is supported by statistics on driver absenteeism, the preventable accident rate, and high workmen compensation claims. All comparisons are made between standards acceptable to contractors in the industry and standards of LRSD. Aging Fleet To bring the aging fleet up-to-date requires a replacement schedule that meets certain criteria. The standards we have used are based on engine type and miles of use. Those parameters require that buses be replaced as follows: Gasoline powered buses: Any such bus that exceeds seven years of age or 100,000 miles at the start of any school year. Diesel powered buses: Any such bus that exceeds 10 years of age or 150,000 miles at the beginning of any school year. Based on equipment inventoried at the close of school in June, 1994, the replacement schedule should look like Figure 2. The shaded area gives a historical perspective on buses purchased prior to this school year. The replacement schedule begins at the line marked 1994-95. However, new buses for 1994-95 will not be received until School Year 1990-1991 1991-1992 1992-1993 1993-1994 1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 2003-2004 Figure 1 Buses 48 6 27 0 128 29 22 18 10 1 25 oC.ouLImproving Student Transportation Business Case 4 the spring of that school year and this quantity cannot be ordered with the current money. Only approximately 33 buses may be purchased with this proposal. The chart shows the number of buses that must be replaced prior to the start of each corresponding school year. Because of the age and condition of the existing fleet maintenance costs have increased. This has created a need for additional mechanics. In fact, a recent study of the operation conducted by Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc. yielded this finding: The high ratio of one maintenance person to 44 vehicles is unsatisfactory. With many of these vehicles having over 100,000 miles on them, the need for quality preventative maintenance is crucial. This is not presently possible and Mr. Viner and his staff are doing an excellent job of keeping the fleet running. Add to this the fact that no new buses are being bought this year, the situation is going to become more difficult to manage. Mr. Viner recently had one mechanic resign citing stress and the heavy maintenance workload as the reason. A replacement has not yet been hired, but even with this individual replaced, the bus vs.( mechanic ratio is not consistent with national standards. As major repairs become more frequent, the cost of labor and parts is expected to rise in each succeeding year. In 1992-93, the District spent $480,804, in 1993-94 it spent Wrecker Experience $745,245, and in 1994-95 it is predicted to reach over $1 million. This escalation in vehicle maintenance costs correlates with the out-of-service rate and impacts the 600 460 - 400 - 360 - 300 260 - 200 -- 160 -- 100 -- 60 - ri LRSD industry 400 0 160 1992-93 299 ^9 II + 1993-94 1994-96 quality of performance. With the exception of periods immediately succeeding holidays or extended times of non-service. the District averages Figure 2 approximately 30 out-of-service buses per day out of a fleet of 281 buses. A reasonable expectation is for no more than 13 of the vehicles to be out-of-service for corrective or preventative maintenance during peak operational periods. \ , Another common performance indicator associated with vehicle maintenance is "wrecker experience". In 1993, the District spent $14,390 for 160 wrecker calls. By comparison $25,945 has been spent for 291 wrecker calls to date in 1994. It is predicted that $37,800 will be spent for over 400 calls in the 1994-95 school year. A more acceptable number for a fleet of this size is 60 calls per year. Driver Performance Several factors are used to reflect driver performance. One of the leading indicators of poor performance is driver absenteeism. Because absenteeism 10/25/M 6C_SUS Improving Student Transportation Business Case 5 inconveniences students, wastes the District's scarce resources, and works an undue hardship on employees who maintain good attendance records, it is considered to be a causal factor, and an accurate indicator of the unsatisfactory performance of the current svstem. In the spring of 1994, the District had a daily driver absentee rate of 23% . The result of this high level of absenteeism was poor route performance. increased student discipline concerns, and inordinately high costs for drivers re-routed to pick up missed students. More often than not, the transportation system is besieged by problems stemming from driver absenteeism and the seemingly liberal use of employee sick leave provisions. (Note: the PCSSD currently has no employer Driver Performance Absenteeism 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Absent Figure 3 sponsored sick leave provision for bus drivers and seems to have fewer problems.) Vehicle accident rate is another indicator of driver performance {Figure 4). Accidents harm students and others, waste financial resources, and lead to unnecessary down-time for equipment. Preventable accidents are an even more interesting statistic since they are a result of driver error. In 1992-93, the District had 68 such accidents while logging over 3.9 million miles
in 1993-94, there were 54 preventable accidents with the fleet traveling just over 4.3 million miles. That translates into 17.4 accidents per million miles and 12.5 accidents per million miles respectively. Though the two year trend is downward, it exceeds the standards of contractors in the industry Figure 4 considerably. By contrast, private contractors average a record of only 8.8 preventable accidents per million miles. Contractors have a better accident rate because of a continuous training program. Typically, a high vehicle accident rate causes increases in both Workers Compensation and Property and Casualty insurance costs. Analysis of claims for three previous years for Workers Compensation indicates an upward trend in claims and cost per claim. In 1991-92 there were 31 Workers Compensation Improving Student Transportation Business Case 6 claims processed for the Transportation Department In 1992-93 there were 42 claims processed, and by March of 1994, there had been some 45 claims. Bus driver claims account for 65% of all claims by district employees for the past five vears. These data indicate an urgent need for improved driver training and the initiation of a vigorous safety awareness program. That has not been possible in LRSD because of the elimination of supervisory and training positions by budget cuts. Regarding these same issues, the Gallagher study provided the following recommendations: 93-12-22. The Director of Transportation should develop, implement and manage an aggressive Loss Prevention Program. Supervisors and employees must be held accountable for their actions. Fair, swift and appropriate discipline or corrective measures must be taken to handle unsatisfactory conditions prior to them becoming uncontrollable. 93-12-23. No driver should be allowed to operate a vehicle without first, having been trained in defensive driving. All drivers should after initial training, attend annual defensive driving training including, hands-on evaluations. While the foregoing factors taken individually do not threaten the collapse of transportation, taken together, these signs reveal a dysfunctional system. Consider the comments of the Coopers & Lybrand staff in their findings at the transportation terminal: Coopers & Lybrand spent two days talking with customers and employees of the Little Rock School District's Transportation Department. While almost all of the people we talked to spoke favorably of the department's operation relative to the constraints placed upon it, aU indicated a concern that something needed to be done to ensure that things did not get worse. All interviewees, customers and employees alike, expressed a concern that the department was beginning to show signs of stress, like cracks in a dam, and many were fearful of the department's future. It is C&L's opinion that these concerns and signs are real. We also feel that these symptoms reflect the fact that the current mode of operation was conceived long ago without any vision of the desegregated , inner city environment in which the department now operates. What is frightening is that the interwoven complexities of this environment combined with the bankrupt methods of the past have created a semi-self defeating situation that cannot be escaped without vigorous redesign of the process. Atialysis of Altentatives ] Solutions were discussed with a committee representing parents, principals, support staff, and administrators in the LRSD last summer. Upon careful consideration, several aspects of the problem emerged. These must be addressed to have a viable solution to the problem. They are parent complaints, on-time performance, aging fleet, increasing accidents, increasing absenteeism, and costs. Though the committee favored outsourcing as the alternative of choice, that idea failed when placed before the Board of Directors for lack of a vote. iO/28/J4 BC.SUSImproving Student Transportation Business Case / The alternative solutions considered are listed below: 1. Change nothing. This will not address the problem and will cause costs to grow annually as the fleet ages and driver training is not maintained because of 2. turnover.
Follow industry standards for equipment replacement, personnel, etc. including a strict schedule for replacing the fleet. The district would continue to operate the system. Ordered buses will not arrive until the spring of Figure 5 1995. This will have a dramatic impact on the current and future budgets. The first year increase to the budget is approximately million. $1.3 Figure 5 illustrates the comparison between existing positions in the district and the number needed. The intent is to match the industry in training positions, mechanics, and preventive maintenance positions. The need for buses was illustrated earlier. One million of this money will be used to purchase new buses and $.3 million will be used to increase personnel. 3. Turn over the M-M portion of the system to the Arkansas Department of Education. This would reduce costs for LRSD but increase coordination problems. 4. Consolidate transportation in all Pulaski County Districts. Getting agreement on this would be a major challenge. 5. Outsource the student transportation system to a private concern. Research requested by the Board of Directors indicates that this alternative addresses all aspects of the problem. It includes a budget savings of approximately $1 million dollars over the next three years. The Board of Directors did not approve this alternative when brought before them in July of 1994. Several strategies have been discussed in recent months, but perhaps none is as practicable an idea as that of outsourcing. It is believed that through outsourcing, the District will realize a considerable cost savings and significantly improve the level of service provided to its students and patrons. iu/:S/M K.SUS Improving Student Transportation Business Case 8 Though a primary motivation for considering outsourcing is to save costs, it is worth mentioning that other tangible benefits such as reasonable and predictable fleet replacement, lowered driver absenteeism, improved vehicle maintenance, and reduced vehicle accident rate will also be realized. An appreciable improvement in these areas will lead to significantly fewer problems and complaints, as well as establish a more stable and reliable transportation system for future LRSD needs. Recmtimetidation Alternative 2 is recommended to temporarily address the immediate problem. 2. Follow industry standards for equipment replacement, personnel, etc. including a strict schedule for replacing the fleet. This will have a dramatic impact on the current and future budgets. The first year increase to the budget is approximately $1.3 million. Objective By the second semester of school for 1994-95, on-time performance will increase and parent complaints will decrease. This transportation proposal supports the school district goals relating to improving service to students. The following is a list of the criteria to be used in determining whether or not the problem is reduced when this solution is implemented: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Parent satisfaction will increase as indicated by a reduction in the number of complaints
Buses will be on-time more often than they are now
Accidents will decrease
The number of buses out-of-service for repairs will decrease
A schedule for replacement of equipment will be followed for this y^ar. Impact Analysis The primary impact will be on a budget that is austere. Negatives 1. Seven to eight months will be necessary before new buses can be delivered
and, 2. Time will be required in hiring and training new personnel, thus delaying the solution.Improving Student Transportation Business Case 9 3. The budget must increase in future years to accommodate these needs. Positives 1. Parent satisfaction will increase as indicated bv a reduction in the number of 2. 3. 4. 5. complaints
Buses will be on-time more often than they are now
Accidents will decrease
The number of buses out-of-service for repairs will decrease
A schedule for replacement of equipment will be followed for this year. Risks The risks of not implementing this temporary fix is increasing costs to the district, increasing complaints by patrons, and a generally poor image of the district's transportation system. The desegregation plan will be impacted negatively. The risks of implementation of this temporary fix is that it may appear to be too little too late. The problem is greater than can be addressed by this particular solution. Timing It is critical that the decision be made before the budget is final for 1994-95. If this solution is to be implemented, buses must be ordered and personnel recruited as soon as possible. Resources Analysis Personnel Several trainers and additional mechanics are necessary to implement this proposal. Financial The cost to the district will be $1.3 million. Replacement buses will cost $1 million and additional personnel will cost approximately $0.3 million. Below is an itemized list of costs: .U/2S/M gC.3U5Improving Student Transportation Business Case 10 Timing It is critical that the decision be made before the budget is final for 1994-95. If this solution is to be implemented, buses must be ordered and personnel recruited as soon as possible. Resources Analysis Personnel Several trainers and additional mechanics are necessary to implement this proposal. Financial The cost to the district will be $1.3 million. Replacement buses will cost $1 million and additional personnel will cost approximately $0.3 million. Below is an itemized list of costs: Quan. Position 3.3 Trainers Cost^ Item Cost 4 Mechanics 4 Helpers 1.5 Clerks $87,100 $115,200 $62,400 $21,600 33 Buses $990,000 Total $286,300 Total $990,000 Revenue Source The money will come from the state desegregation loan fund. Force Field Analysis Primary supporters of this proposal will be those directly affected by the solution patrons and administrators within the District. The Board of Directors and 3 Includes benefits 4 Depends on whether or not we lease-purchase or purchase outright lO/MZ* K.KBImproving Student I ransportation Business Case 11 General Implementation Plan The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. Milestone Date Person 1. Proposal presented to the LRSD Board of Directors and approved 7/14/94 Williams 2. Advertise for mechanics and trainers 3. Determine specifications for new buses 4. Review specifications with Assoc. Supt. 5. Place order for new buses 6. Employ mechanics and trainers 7. Begin training for current employees 8, Begin receiving replacement equipment 9. Evaluate solution based on outcomes anticipated 9/1/94 9/1/94 10/3/94 10/14/94 10/3/94 10/24/94 5/1/95 6/30/95 Hurley Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham .m/S/94 K.BUSI 1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK ARKANSAS 72202 / - October 31, 1994 Mr. Bill Mooney ODM Little Rock Arkansas 72202 Dear Bill: Due to an error there were two pages in the LRSD Transportation Business Case with wrong calculations. Please replace pages 1 and 10 with the enclosed copies. Thank you for your help! Sincerely, Russ Mayo Associate Superintendent for Desegregation RM:dk Enclosure: (2) \ f s ooa h o - g *. x, (' i '. .'-
l.
. /i < I / V I f iiSPu I I. n i
.. J s J O -I o U} ns I G aIoI 00 'n, J2'.-i..t IVbM DZX.<L.<^ ^01 i- CC\,KhcL^-l-y~y Cl ~l j^t^O I BaSi BBa IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION NOV 1 6 1994 Oifice or Dosegreg
n.! ng LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. 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 NOTICE OF FILING The Little Rock School District hereby gives notice of the filing of the following documents which are related to the district court order dated October 24, 1994: 1. Incentive School Spanish Program. 2. Incentive School Theme Implementation. 3 . Improving Student Transportation - A Business Case. Respectfully submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT \ FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Street Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 376-2011 By* Christopher Hei Bar No. 81083 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Filing has been served on the following people by depositing copy of same in the United States mail on this 16th day of November, 1994. Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell and Streett First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Hand Delivered Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Elizabeth Boyter Arkansas Dept, of Education 4 State Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 Christopher 2 Little Rock School District Improving Student Transportation Business Case Executive Summary The intent of this business case is to explain the current transportation problems which resulted from an aging fleet and reduced personnel. Unfortunately, the cost of remedies proposed here is only a beginning. It will not fix the problem for the long term. For example, the new buses proposed will not arrive until the spring of 1995. Then too few will arrive to impact the long-term need. The personnel proposed can be hired immediately but will have continuous impact on the budgets from year to year, if this solution continues to be used. Additionally, large sums of money wiU have to be included in each succeeding budget to replace buses. A detailed explanation of the transportation problem follows with a temporary solution for this budget year. The cost to the district will be $1.3 million. Replacement buses will cost $1 million and additional personnel will cost approximately $0.3 million. Below is an itemized list of costs: Quan. Position Cost^ Qtian.^ Item 3.3 1.5 Trainers Mechanics Helpers Qerks $87,100 $115,200 $62,400 $21,600 33 Buses Cost ''$990,000 4 4 Total $286,300 Total $990,000 The money wiU come from the state desegregation Ioan fund. The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. T Milestone 1. Proposal presented to the LRSD Board of Directors and approved 2. Advertise for mechanics and trainers Date 7/14/94 9/1/94 Person Williams Hurley 1 2 Includes benefits Depends on whether or not we lease-purchase or purchase outright.Improving Student Transportation Business Case 2 4. 5. Review specifications with Assoc. Supt. Place order for new buses 6. Employ mechanics and trainers 7. Begin training for current employees 8. Begin receiving replacement equipment 9. Evaluate solution based on outcomes anticipated 10/3/94 10/14/94 10/3/94 10/24/94 5/1/95 6/30/95 Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Background Introduction One of the most expensive enterprises undertaken by the district is the student transportation system. Its problems and costs continue to grow. Recognition of this came this past school year when a number of incidents attracted public attention. Budget cuts in recent years resulted in reduced money for personnel and for the purchase of new buses. The lack of a bus replacement program coupled with reduced spending has had a compounding affect The intent of this business case is to explain the current transportation problems which resulted from an aging fleet and reduced personnel. Unfortunately, the cost of remedies proposed here is only a beginning. It will not fix the problem for the long term. For example, the new buses proposed will not arrive until the spring of 1995. Then too few will arrive to impact the long-term need. The personnel proposed can be hired immediately but will have continuous impact on the budgets from year to year, if this solution continues to be used. Additionally, large sums of money will have to be included in each succeeding budget to replace buses. A detailed explanation of the transportation problem follows with a temporary solution for this budget year. History Determining the source of the problem and generating solutions has taken an extraordinary amount of time for the Administration in recent months. Additionally, the Board requested a study of support services in the district to determine the level of efficiency within each area. Coopers and Lybrand, a national accounting firm, conducted the study and returned recommendations to the Board. In their report, they identified the pupil transportation system as the area in greatest need of much attention. So concerned were they that they recommended that the district look seriously at permitting a private contractor to operate the transportation svstem if it proved economically beneficial. -tJfItuprovitig Student Transportation Business Case The District expends an inordinate amount of time and energy focusing on transportation. The urgent concerns of transportation limit attention on educational issues. Often transportation problems draw media attention which results in poor public relations. The District's transportation operations have frequently been in the media. In fact, it was the lead article on the front page of the November 7, 1993 Arkansas Democrat Gazette. Many of these stories have revolved around labor and safety issues and poor service. The accuracy of the stories is not as important as the resulting poor public perception of the system, and the fact that these "crises" draining management's attention away from the primary goal of educating children. I Problem Definition are Parent complaints with our student transportation system have become voluminous as a result of poor on-time performance which has occurred because of an aging fleet and driver performance. In this proposal, the notion of an aging fleet is supported by statistics of the number of buses with excessive miles, the increasing costs of repairs, the increasing need for mechanics, and the increasing calls for wrecker service. Concern about poor driver performance is supported by statistics on driver absenteeism, the preventable accident rate, and high workmen compensation claims. All comparisons are made between standards acceptable to contractors in the industry and standards of LRSD. Aging Rest To bring the aging fleet up-to-date requires a replacement schedule that meets certain criteria. The standards we have used are based on engine type and miles of use. Those parameters require that buses be replaced as follows: Gasoline powered buses: Any such bus that exceeds seven years of age or 100,000 miles at the start of any school year. Diesel powered buses: Any such bus that exceeds 10 years of age or 150,000 miles at the beginning of any school year. Based on equipment inventoried at the close of school in June, 1994, the replacement schedule should look like Figure 1. The shaded area gives a historical perspective \ Schooi Year Buses on buses purchased prior to this school year. The replacement schedule begins at the line marked 1994-95. However, new buses for 1994-95 will not be received until 1990-1991 1991-1992 1992-1993 1993-1994 1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 2003-2004 48 6 27 0 128 29 22 18 10 1 25 Figure 1hnproving Student Transportation Business Case 4 the spring of that school year and this quantity cannot be ordered with the current money. Only approximately 33 buses may be purchased with this proposal. The chart shows the number of buses that must be replaced prior to the start of each corresponding school year. Because of the age and condition of the existing fleet maintenance costs have increased. This has created a need for additional mechanics. In fact, a recent studv of the operation conducted by Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc. yielded this finding: The high ratio of one maintenance person to -W vehicles is unsatisfactorv. With many of these vehicles having over 100,000 miles on them, the need for quality preventative maintenance is crudai. This is not presently possible and Mr. Viner and his staff are doing an excellent job of keeping the fleet running. Add to this the fact that no new buses are being bought this year, the situation is going to become more difficult to manage. Ivlr. Viner recently had one mechanic resign citing stress and the heavy maintenance workload as the reason. A replacement has not yet been hired, but even with this individual replaced, the bus vs. mechanic ratio is not consistent with national standards. As major repairs become more frequent, the cost of labor and parts is expected to rise in each succeeding year. In 1992-93, the District spent $480,804, in 1993-94 it spent Wrecker Experience $745,245, and in 1994-95 it is predicted to reach over $1 million. This escalation in vehicle maintenance costs correlates with the out-of-service rate and impacts the 500 460 -- 400 -- 360 -- 300 - 260 - 200 - 160 1 100 I 60 1 9 0 I LRSD Industry 400 quality of performance, exception of periods With the immediately succeeding holidays or extended times of 160 60 + 299 1993-94 non-service, the District averages 60 1992-93 1994-96 Figure 2 approximately 30 out-of-service buses per day out of a fleet of 281 buses. A reasonable expectation is for no more than 13 of the vehicles to be out-of-service for corrective or preventative maintenance during peak operational periods. Another common performance indicator associated with vehicle maintenance is "wrecker experience". In 1993, the District spent $14,390 for 160 wrecker calls. By comparison $25,945 has been spent for 291 wrecker calls to date in 1994. It is predicted that $37,800 will be spent for over 400 calls in the 1994-95 school year, acceptable number for a fleet of this size is 60 calls per year. A more Driver Performance Several factors are used to reflect driver performance. One of the leading indicators of poor performance is driver absenteeism. Because absenteeism Improving Student Transportation Business Case 5 inconveniences students, wastes the District's scarce resources, and works an undue hardship on employees who maintain good attendance records, it is considered to be a causal factor, and an accurate indicator of the unsatisfactorv performance of the current system. In the spring of 1994, the District had a daily driver absentee rate of 23% . The result of this high level of absenteeism was poor route performance, increased student discipline concerns, and inordinately high costs for drivers re-routed to pick up missed students. More often than not, the transportation system is besieged by problems stemming from driver absenteeism and the seemingly liberal use of employee sick leave provisions. (Note: the PCSSD currently has no employer Driver Performance Absenteeism 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Absent Figure 3 sponsored sick leave provision for bus drivers and seems to have fewer problems.) Vehicle accident rate is another indicator of driver performance (Figure 4). Accidents harm students and others, waste financial resources, and lead to down-time for equipment Preventable accidents unnecessary are an even more interesting statistic since they are a result of driver error. In 1992-93, the District had 68 such accidents while logging over 3.9 million miles
in 1993-94, there were 54 preventable accidents with the fleet traveling just over 4.3 million miles. That translates into 17.4 accidents per million miles and 12.5 accidents per million miles respectively. Though the two year trend is downward, it exceeds the standards of contractors in the industry Figure 4 considerablv. By contrast, private contractors average a record of only 8.8 preventable accidents per million miles. Contractors have a better accident rate because of a continuous training program. Typically, a high vehicle accident rate causes increases in both Workers Compensation and Property and C^sualtv insurance costs. Analysis of claims for three previous years for Workers Compensation indicates an upward trend in claims and cost per claim. In 1991-92 there were 31 Workers Compensation Improving Student Transportation Business Case b claims processed for the Transportation Department. In 1992-93 there were 42 claims processed, and by March of 1^4, there had been some 45 claims. Bus driver claims account for 65% of all claims by district employees for the past five years. These data indicate an urgent need for improved driver training and the initiation of a vigorous safety awareness program. That has not been possible in LRSD because of the elimination of supervisory and training positions by budget cuts. Regarding these recommendations: same issues, the Gallagher study provided the following 93-12-22. The Director of Transportation should develop, implement and manage an aggressive Loss Prevention Program. Supervisors and employees must be held accountable for their actions. Fair, swift and appropriate discipline or corrective measures must be taken to handle unsatisfactory conditions prior to them becoming uncontrollable. 93-12-23. No driver should be allowed to operate a vehicle without first, having been trained in defensive driving. All drivers should after initial training, attend annual defensive driving training including, hands-on evaluations. While the foregoing factors taken individually do not threaten the collapse of transportation, taken together, these signs reveal a dysfunctional system. Consider the comments of the Coopers & Lybrand staff in their findings at the transportation terminal: Coopers & Lybrand spent two days talking with customers and employees of the Little Rock School District's Transportation Department. While almost all of the people we talked to spoke favorably of the department's operation relative to the constraints placed upon it, aU indicated a concern that something needed to be done to ensure that things did not get worse. AH interviewees, customers and employees alike, expressed a concern that the department was beginning to show signs of stress, hke cracks in a dam, and many were fearful of the department's future. It is C&L's opinion that these concerns and signs are real. We also feel that these symptoms reflect the fact that the current mode of operation was conceived long ago without any vision of the desegregated , inner city environment in which the department now operates. What is frightening is that the interwoven complexities of this environment combined with the bankrupt methods of the past have created a semi-self defeating situation that cannot be escaped without vigorous redesign of the process. Analysis of Alternatives Solutions were discussed with a committee representing parents, principals. support staff, and administrators in the LRSD last summer. Upon careful consideration, several aspects of the problem emerged. These must be addressed to have a viable solution to the problem. They are parent complaints, on-time performance, aging fleet, increasing accidents, increasing absenteeism, and costs. Though the committee favored outsourcing as the alternative of choice, that idea failed when placed before the Board of Directors for lack of a vote.Improving Student Transportation Business Case / The alternative solutions considered are listed below: 1. Change nothing. This will not address the problem and will cause costs to grow annually as the fleet ages and driver training is not maintained because of turnover.
2. Follow industry standards for equipment replacement, personnel, etc. including a strict schedule for replacing the fleet. The district would continue to operate the system. Ordered buses will not arrive until the spring of Figure 5 1995. This will have a dramatic- impact on the current and future budgets. The first vear increase to the budget is approximately million. Figure S1.3 5 illustrates the comparison between existing positions in the district and the number needed. The intent is to match the industry in training positions, mechanics, and preventive maintenance positions. The need for buses was illustrated 3. 4. 5. earlier. One million of this money will be used to purchase new buses and $.3 million will be used to increase personnel. Turn over the M-M portion of the system to the Arkansas Department of Education. This would reduce costs for LRSD but increase coordination problems. Consolidate transportation in all Pulaski County Districts. Getting agreement on this would be a major challenge. Outsource the student transportation system to a private concern. Research requested by the Board of Directors indicates that this alternative addresses all aspects of the problem. It includes a budget savings of approximately 51 million dollars over the next three years. The Board of Directors did not approve this alternative when brought before them in July of 1994. \ Several strategies have been discussed in recent months, but perhaps none is as practicable an idea as that of outsourcing. It is believed that through outsourcing, the District will realize a considerable cost savings and significantly improve the level of service provided to its students and patrons. improving Student Transportation Business Case 8 Though a primary motivation for considering outsourcing is to save costs, it is wordi mentioning that other tangible benefits such as reasonable and predictable fleet replacement, lowered driver absenteeism, improved vehicle maintenance, and reduced vehicle accident rate will also be realized. An appreciable improvement in these areas will lead to significantly fewer problems and complaints, as well as establish a more stable and reliable transportation system for future LRSD needs. Recomnietida tion Alternative 2 is recommended to temporarily address the immediate problem. 2. Follmv industry standards for equipment replacement, personnel, etc. including a strict scliedule for replacing the fleet. This will have a dramatic impact on the current and future budgets. The first year increase to the budget is approximately $1.3 million. Objective By the second semester of school for 1994-95, on-time performance uhll increase and parent complaints will decrease. This transportation proposal supports the school district goals relating to improving service to students. The following is a list of the criteria to be used in determining whether or not the problem is reduced when this solution is implemented: 1. 2. 3. Parent satisfaction will increase as indicated by a reduction in the number of complaints
Buses will be on-time more often than they are now
Accidents will decrease
4. The number of buses out-of-service for repairs will decrease
5. A schedule for replacement of equipment will be followed for this year. Impact Analysis The primary impact will be on a budget that is austere. Negatives 1. Seven to eight months w'ill be necessary before new buses can be delivered
and, 2. Time will be required in hiring and training new personnel, thus delaying the solution. V.i'.H'i SC.Vm.Improving Student Transportation Business Case y 3, The budget must increase in future years to accommodate these needs. Positives 1. 2. 3. 4. Parent satisfaction will increase as indicated by a reduction in the number of complaints
Buses will be on-time more often than they are now
Accidents will decrease
The number of buses out-of-service for repairs will decrease
5. A schedule for replacement of equipment will be followed for this year. Risks The risks of not implementing this temporary fix is increasing costs to the district, increasing complaints by patrons, and a generally poor image of the distncf s transportation system. The desegregation plan will be impacted negatively. The risks of implementation of this temporary fix is that it may appear to be too little too late. The problem is greater than can be addressed by this particular solution. Timing It is critical that the decision be made before the budget is final for 1994-95. If this solution is to be implemented, buses must be ordered and personnel recruited as soon as possible. Resources Analysis Personnel Several trainers and additional mechanics are necessary to implement this proposal. Financial The cost to the district will be S1.3 million. Replacement buses will cost SI million and additional personnel will cost approximately $0.3 million^ Below is an itemized list of costs:Improving Student Transportation Business Case 10 Timing It is'critical that the decision be made before the budget is final for 1994-95. If this solution is to be implemented, buses must be ordered and personnel recruited as soon as possible. Resources Analysis 1 Personnel Several trainers and additional mechanics are necessary to implement this proposal. Financial The cost to the district will be $1.3 million. Replacement buses will cost $1 million and additional personnel will cost approximately $0.3 million. Below is an itemized list of costs: Quan. Position 3.3 Trainers Cost^ Quan.* Item Cost 4 Mechanics 4 Helpers 1.5 Clerks $87,100 $115,200 $62,400 $21,600 33 Buses $990,000 Total $286,300 Total $990,000 Revenue Source The money will come from the state desegregation loan fund. Force Field Analysis 1 Primary supporters of this proposal will be those directly affected by the solution patrons and administrators within the District. The Board of Directors and 3 Includes benefits 4 Depends on whether or not we lease-purchase or purchase outright. a*Improving Student Transportation Business Case 11 I General Impletiientation Plan The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. 1. Milestone Proposal presented to the LRSD Board of Directors and approved 2. Advertise for mechanics and trainers 3. Determine specifications for new buses 4, Review specifications with Assoc. Supt. 5. Place order for new buses 6. Employ mechanics and trainers 7. Begin training for current employees 8. Begin receiving replacement equipment 9. Evaluate solution based on outcomes anticipated Date 7/14/94 9/1/94 9/1/94 10/3/94 10/14/94 10/3/94 10/24/94 5/1/95 6/30/95 Person Williams Hurley Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham Cheatham \FI Little Rock School District Procurement & Materials Manag ementDepartment 1800 East Sixth Street March 31, 1995 Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 RECHr-.F^ APR . 7 1995 Office of Desegregation Moniioi TO: Prospective Contractors Please find attached a Request for Proposal (RFP 95-014), inviting interested contractors to submit proposals to the Little Rock School District for the outsourcing of a portion of the student transportation service. The RFP consist of four (4) sections: !F:le. Section covers background information instructions, terms and conditions. I and the followed Section II is a sample contract or agreement that will be in developing the actual contract with the successful proposer. * Section III lists the factors used in detennining contractor qualification and a questionnaire soliciting various information upon which qualification judgements can be made. Section IV contains the forms to be filled in with the cost information that you project for performing the various busing activities. Sections I and II are bound separately. Sections III and IV are bound together in a loose-leaf facilitate removal and photo-copying, return portions of the RFP. manner to Sections III and IV are the 1800 East Sixth Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 (501) 324-2230 Fax: (501) 324-2233 Page 2 All proposals should be complete and carefully worded, Uxxd convey all of the information requested by the District, significant errors are found in the contractor's proposal, xj. the proposal fails to conform to the essential requirements of the RFP, the District, and the District alone, will judge whether the and must If or if variance is significant enough to reject or accept a proposal. Proposals are to be prepared simply and in a manner designed to provide the Districtwith a straight-forward presentation of the capability to satisfy the requirements of the RFP. Elaborate brochures and other promotional materials are not desired. promotional materials The District reserves the.right to reject any or all proposals and irregularities or formalities in the solicitation or . - * Award will be based upon those considerations which are in the best interest of the District and will be made to the responsible offerer whose proposal is judged to be the effective and economical for the purpose intended, according to the requirements and specifications stated in the Request for Proposal. any responses. responsive, to the according April 14, 1995. Please^note_that there will be a pre-proposal conference on Friday, We realize this is very short notice, but we are working under a very condensed schedule. Please direct your calls and correspondence to the undersigned at (501) 324-2230. Sincerely, Charles A. Neal Director of ProcurementVERIFICATION OF RECEIPT OF ADDENDUM #1 LRSD RFP 95-014, STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Date: 4/27/95 RSCn r7i! * TO: Vendor Addressed From: Charles A. Neal, Director, Procurement & Materials Management 2 d 1995 Subject: Addendum #1, RFP95-014, Student Transportation Services Offii oi Di\): Si-eg, lai Dnoneinformation is provided to you in response to questions received on P95-014. If more information is needed, please contact us promptly a timely response. in order to receive Document ID# Date Received 1. Fourteen (14) Questions & Answers dated April 25, 1995 (4 pages) 2. Current Routes Listed by Bus Number (9 pages) 3. Seniority List by Hire date (7 pages) NOTE: CLARIFICATION OF LRSD PROCEDURES FOR THE OPENING PROPOSALS SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO AN RFP: Pi^oposals will not be publicly opened. You may contact the Procurement office aim wc wll Identify those transportation firms submitting proposals. Other information will not be revealed until after the evaluation process is completed. Proposals will be taken under advisement upon opening, and apparent acceptable proposers will be contacted for further negotiations as needed. Please do not contact the evaluation team after submission of your proposals. They will contact you when and if necessary. I certify that the above ADDENDUM #1 OF and we to LRSD RFP95-014, Student Transportation O li LJVWKXVAIU XlCUlOUVlUl Services, which opens at 2
00 p,m, Central Time. Tuesday. May 9.199S has been received. Signature of Official Signing Proposal Date A Proposal may not be considered if this addendum is not signed and returned to the Procurement Department, either with opening time. your proposal or prior to proposalRFP 95-014, ADDENDUM #1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Page 2 of 4 DOCUMENT ID #1, QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS (continued) DATE: APRIL 25,1995 5. The number of students being served by taxicabs has dropped substantially from last year. What is the reason for this change and will it continue to reduce at this rate in ensuing years? Two events occurred that made possible the reduction of students in taxicabs. First, the state provided additional buses in 1994-95. Second, additional students were assigned to the more remote schools which made it cost effective to transport the students by bus. 6. Please explain the difference between the number of buses required for total service (205) on page 3, Section 1 and the number of drivers required (222 + 23 subs) on page 11, Section 1. Currently, not all authorized positions are filled. The difference between 222 and 205 is 17. This represents the number of vacancies, drivers on extended leave, and suspended drivers. Not all substitute positions are filled. Three substitute drivers have duties that are not related to the regular routes and seven (7) substitute positions are vacant. 7. Please list the number of staff and position/title of the staff that will be retained by the District for Special Education, contract monitoring, and scheduling. The following positions are expected to be maintained by the District: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. 1. J. 1 Director of Transportation 1 Shop Foreman 1 Executive Administrative Assistant 1 Operations Manager 1 Router/Supervisor 1 Special Education Supervisor/Dispatcher 1 Supervisor/Dispatcher 1 Payroll Clerk/Secretary 2 Mechanics 80 Drivers (Most Senior)RFP 95-014, ADDENDUM #1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Page 1 of 4 1. 2. 3. 4. DOCUMENT ID #1, QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS DATE: APRIL 25,1995 Is it correct to assume that the taxicab portion of the service will be part of the State Magnet/M-to-M block? Yes, the taxicab portion of the service is part of the State Magnet/M-to-M block. What are the current rates charged by taxicab providers? The current rate charged by the taxicab company are $1.00 per mile and $1.00 per pick-up and drop-off. Who are the current providers for taxicab service? Black and White Cab Company is the current vendor. What mandates in regard to liability insurance and driver training are required by the District for taxicab operators? The contract paragraphs are as follows: 4. The Black and White Cab Company will comply with all city, state, and federal ordinances and regulations applicable to the operation of a commercial cab system. 5. All drivers for the Black and White Cab Company will be safe, well- trained drivers and participate in regular safety meetings. All vehicles in the Black and White Cab Company system are safe and well maintained and conform to all applicable city, state or federal regulations pertaining to the transportation of the general public. 6. The Black and White Cab Company is responsible for appropriately insuring the vehicles, drivers, and student passengers that are subjects of this agreement.RFP 95-014, ADDENDUM #1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Page 3 of 4 DOCUMENT ID #1, QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS (continued) DATE: APRIL 25,1995 8. 9. 10. Is it correct to assume that the District will retain or offer employment to the most senior drivers, and all aides? How many full time subs will be retained by the District? Employment will be offered to the most senior employees regardless of whether or not they are classified as aides or drivers. All aides are required to have the same credentials as drivers and are qualified drivers. Therefore some individuals classified as aides will be part of the driver pool available for employment by the contractors. Eleven (11) full time substitutes are among the 80 most senior employees and will be retained by the District. Does the District pay Social Security for all employees? yes, the District pays 7.65% for Social Security for all drivers. How many video cameras boxes and video cameras does the District currently maintain? Are these utilized on all three blocks? If not, which blocks require the use of video cameras? Does the District have policies in regard to the application of video cameras? Will you share those policies? The District has 102 boxes currently installed. There are fourteen (14) 8mm cameras currently being used by the District. The boxes are installed in buses assigned to all three blocks and in Special Education buses. Since the use of cameras is a fairly new procedure for the District, no formal policy is currently in place to govern their use. The boxes are in the following buses: 3 4 5 8 11 12 16 17 21 26 27 29 30 36 46 49 51 54 56 60 61 63 64 65 70 71 91 95 121 124 125 127 128 129 133 135 136 137 138 139 140 143 144 145 147 148 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 160 161 163 167 177 178 179 180 181 185 186 189 191 200 201 202 206 207 209 210 211 213 216 217 219 220 222 223 228 229 230 231 233 234 239 240 258 261 ^63 267 268 276 277 281 2M 29M 34M 35M 63MRFP 95-014, ADDENDUM #1 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Page 4 of 4 DOCUMENT ID #1, QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS (continued) DATE: APRIL 25,1995 11. Will the contractor be permitted to utilize District owned radios? If so, what is the frequency and general condition of District owned radios? Are the radios under a maintenance agreement at this time? If so, who does the maintenance and what are the terms and costs? The contractor can use the District radios. The radios are in good condition. All new buses have new radios and the District replaced 75 radios this year. The frequencies used by the base station are 463.87500 and 468.87500. There is no maintenance agreement. 12. Will the District warrant Regulatory Compliance in regard to the facility, including underground storage tanks? Yes, the District will warrant its current facility to be in Regulatory Compliance. 13. What are the number of days of student transportation required annually for service? The state requires 178 days of student attendance. 14. What are the licensing costs for school bus driver certification? Please itemize. A. B. C. Arkansas CDL Application Arkansas CDL $20.00 $14.00 D. Defensive Driving - This is currently done within the Transportation Department at no cost to the driver. School Bus Driver Orientation required by the State is also done internally. 15. What are the unemployment rights of school bus drivers in Arkansas? Bus drivers will be entitled to unemployment during the period they are laid off by the District imtil their first day of work with the new contractor. The contractor is a private company and will be required to pay unemployment tax a per cent of payroll. The school bus drivers will be entitled to draw unemployment during the
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.