{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1089","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2005-09"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Curricula","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1089"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["56 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nAgenda RECEIVED OCT 2 6 2005 OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting OFFICE OF DESEG. MONITORING .I . ,, -::o m 4 C: ,I z31: ,\u0026gt; 1::0 I-\u0026lt; I-.,  C: I,..Zn... -~ I Z :en\n= I io n Im \u0026gt;c I~ ,- ~~\n:::l m  ::0 '\u0026lt;II ~ .,m::0 !?~ D- :-:0, \"'S!! \")::O\nim .,n - 0 5., Czl n =. ~ z \u0026lt;II I. 11. Ill. IV. V. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS October 27, 2005 5:30 p.m. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Partners in Education - New Partnerships Carver Magnet Elementary with Raytheon Aircra'ft Company Otter Creek Elementary with Meyer Stagecoach Florist C. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) D. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A. Remarks from Board Members B. Review of Annual Report C. Student Assignment Report D. Budget Update E. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects F. Internal Auditors Report G. Technology Update APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes Regular Meeting - 09-22-0S Special Meeting - 09-14-0S Special Meeting - 10-13-0S ,  \"0 -\na m  !:: )ii: ,z ,\u0026gt; ,'\n-a\u0026lt; '.,, ,- zC: )0 - - -~ \u0026gt;z = (I) := E\nE noo ,m )C : C: n~ ~ ..... ~ ~\n=1 ~m ~ill .. ~ !?~ -\na !l- ., I\n!a! .::,imo -,o 5 C) i,:Z ~ =l z~ (I) !II \"0  ~ z m\na (I) z m C C: 0  - z~ f)\na m IS:\na \n,,: ,'\".,', '~ ' ii: 0 =l N m z (I) October 27, 2005 Page2 VI. BOARD POLICY AND REGULATIONS REVIEW A. AD: Mission Statement B. First Reading: AC - Nondiscrimination First Reading: ACD - Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Religion First Reading: ACH - Anti-Harrassment C. Second Reading: Policy GBK - Staff Concerns, Complaints and Grievances, with Regulations GBK-R D. DKC-R: Regulations for Out of Area Travel, Travel Expense Authorization, Reimbursement and Travel Limits VII. HUMAN RESOURCES A. Personnel Changes VIII. FINANCE \u0026amp; SUPPORT SERVICES A. Property Easement: J. A. Fair High School B. Property Easement: Gibbs Elementary School C. Donations of Property D. Financial Report IX. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions X. STUDENT AND/OR EMPLOYEE HEARINGS XI. ADJOURNMENT , \"ti --m\na .c ) !I: ,\u0026gt;\u0026gt;Z ,'\n-\u0026lt;a ,'- zC\"T':I )0 -t \" lS \u0026gt;z ~ u, I. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS/ wi:1 ~nui: Tn n, ri:i:Tl: Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. PARTNERS IN EDUCATION C. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: October 27, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Partners in Education BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District Partners in Education program is designed to develop strong relationships between the community and our schools. The partnership process encourages businesses, community agencies and private organizations to join with individual schools to enhance and support educational programs. Each partnership utilizes the resources of both the school and the business for their mutual benefit. RATIONALE: The following schools and businesses have completed the requirements necessary to establish a partnership and are actively working together to accomplish their objectives. FUNDING: Not applicable. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the board approve the following partnerships: Carver Magnet Elementary School and Raytheon Aircraft Company Otter Creek Elementary School and Meyer Stagecoach Florist PREPARED BY: Debbie Milam, ViPS Coordinator !=' a, C: 8 !!l C: ~ m r\u0026gt;\na m '~\na ,':.\"~:.o,': 'ii: 0 =I f\n:j z Cl) RAYTHEON AIRCRAFT COMPANY 2400 Grundfest Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Raytheon Aircraft Company Partnership with George Washington Carver Magnet School Little Rock, Arkansas 2005 Partnership Activities I. Career Day - March 19, 2005 A. RAC's Chief Pilot spoke to four 2nd grade classes 1. Presentation entitled \"Planes Come in Many Shapes - How a Plane Flies\" 2. Gave each student a brochure about RAC planes and a frisbee 11. Mentoring Program A. Volunteers from RAC 1. Provide support to teachers and administrators as requested 2. Provide support/services to students as identified 3. Provide motivational speakers for students Ill. Book donation A. RAC's Women's Net\\vork Initiative group will donate books. Carver's Literacy Coach will present proposals for group to consider. IV. Tour of Company A. 5 th grade students will tour RAC facility 8. RAC will provide a pizza lunch for students V. Safety Presentation A. RAC Safety Engineer will speak to students LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CARVER MAGNET SCHOOL Carver Magnet Partnership Activities with Raytheon Aircraft Company 2005-2006 1. Display of winning Invent America, Science and Math Fair projects at Raytheon. Carver specialists, Kim Washington and Suellen DiMassimo would set up and take down after contact to Arti Vanzandt.) 2. Birthday cards sent to Raytheon employees produced by Carver students during art chasses. (Raytheon to get birthday list to Erik Brown, Art Specialist.) 3. Invitations to Raytheon for classroom readers during VIPS Reading Day and Read Across America. (Carver contacts, Lori Watts and Karen Sebourn, Media Specialists) 4. Campus Leadership Representative from Raytheon. We would appreciate one of our contacts attending our four meetings per year. We will get at least a week's notice. This is an advisor activity.) 5. Building of a relationship between Raytheon team members and our Young Astronauts Specialist, Ed Scott, for further support. 6. Raytheon speakers for Career Week. (Contact\nCounselor, Tracye Thomason) Phone 447-4000 Littie Rock. Arkansas 72202 r\u0026gt; ~ C: C m :!i ~ czi ii: m :!i !=' a, C: 8 !!l C: ~ m r\u0026gt; ill ' I\nEa\n,,\n') \"' ~...,  ii: C\") =i l\nl z \"' Partnership Proposal Meyer Stagecoach Florist and Otter Creek Elementary Meyer Stagecoach Florist commits to the following partnership activities:  Provide a floral centerpiece each month to be used in the cafeteria for Super Citizens' and Peacemakers' Table of Honor. A drawing will be held and one of the students being recognized will win the centerpiece to take home.  Assist with other school activities throughout the school year when possible. Otter Creek Elementary commits to the following partnership activities:  Provide artwork for the florist  Provide choir to perform on holidays and/or special occasions  Acknowledge Meyer Stagecoach Florist as a Partner in Education  Invite the partner to school events and volunteer recognition events LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: October 27, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Annual Board Meeting BACKGROUND: The Arkansas Department of Education rules which govern Standards for Accreditation require that public school districts hold a public meeting prior to November 15 of each year to review and discuss its annual report detailing progress toward accomplishing its district's program objectives, accreditation standards, and proposals to correct deficiencies. Additionally, all accreditation and evaluation studies and reports shall be discussed. A brief review of the highlights from our annual report will be presented at the October Board Meeting. RATIONALE: To comply with 7.03.3 of the rules governing Standards for Accreditation. FUNDING: None required. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend the Board accept this report. PREPARED BY: Suellen Vann, Communications Director Joseph Mittiga, Governmental/Legislative/Public Affairs Officer :n .z.... m 0~ n~ 3\u0026gt; 0 C:  0 =I 0\no en ~ ..... m C') :z: z  -\u0026lt;\no m ~ r\u0026gt; !!l C: C =g ~..... \u0026gt;  en n en 1z5 :I: m !i !:I a, C: 8 !!l C: ~ m LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: October 27, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed. D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: 2005 - 2006 Student Enrollment Report BACKGROUND: The district's official October 1, 2005 enrollment report was submitted to the Arkansas Department of Education on Thursday, October 20, 2005. The report reflects an increase of 656 students in grades P4 - 12, with the total 2005-2006 count being 26,524. Last year (2004-05) at this same time enrollment stood at 25,868. RATIONALE: The October 1, 2005 Enrollment Report is an annual report due to the Arkansas Department of Education. The LRSD Office of Information Services, Student Registration and individual schools work together to compile the information submitted to ADE. FUNDING: The District has the potential of an increase in funding, from the ADE, when the first two quarter average of the 2005 - 2006 school year is compared with the average daily attendance of the 2004 - 2005 school year. ATTACHMENT: A comparison of the October 1, 2005 - 2006 and October 1, 2004 - 2005 is provided for your review. PREPARED BY: Dr. Linda Watson, Senior Director of Student Services :n .z.... m 0~ n j!: 3 \u0026gt; ,ooC =i !6 \"' :\u0026lt; g ...... z m ~ m ~ !\" n 0 z ~ ~ n.... . i5 z 00 z 0 1-0cUl5 HIGH SCHOOLS B w CENTRAL 1273 1033 FAIR 1006 127 HALL 1083 151 MCCLEUAN TT9 50 PARKVIEW 559 496 ACC 109 18 ALC 193 5 FELDER 32 2 ALT. AGENCIES 26 12 SUB TOTAL 5060 1894 MIDDLE SCHOOLS CLOVERDALE 491 27 DUNBAR 531 218 FOREST HEIGHTS 531 121 HENDERSON 503 65 MABELVALE 519 TT MANN 429 365 PULASKI HEIGHTS 411 307 SOUTHWEST 419 19 ALC 80 5 FELDER 2 1 ALT. AGENCIES 12 8 SUB TOTAL 3928 1213 ELEMENTARY BALE 273 23 BASELINE 219 17 BOOKER 324 253 BRADY 332 40 CARVER 290 211 CHICOT 418 34 CLOVERDALE 85 7 DODD 162 80 FAJRPARK 86 38 FOREST PARK 81 309 FRANKLIN 427 10 FULBRIGHT 152 445 GEYER SPRINGS 301 15 GIBBS 158 117 JEFFERSON 142 294 KING 409 .187 MABELVALE 257 50 MCDERMOTT 296 115 MEAOOWCLIFF 289 42 MITCHELL dosed OTTERCREEK 374 154 PULASKI HEIGHTS 152 167 RIGHTSELL 178 4 ROCKEFELLER 358 107 ROMINE 290 28 STEPHENS 527 11 TERRY 375 185 WAKEFIELD 366 20 WASHINGTON 516 78 WATSON 419 7 WESTERN HILLS 220 48 WILLIAMS 233 177 WILSON 242 15 WOODRUFF 219 17 ALT. AGENCIES 8 33 SUBTOTAL 9178 3338 GRAND TOTAL 18166 6445 10-21-05 LRSD OFFICIAL ENROLLMENT 2005-06 vs. 2004-05 1-0cUM 0 TOTAL %BLK B 116 2422 53% 1125 36 1169 86% 897 155 1389 78% 1103 35 864 90% 849 74 1129 49% 565 2 129 8,4'1, 112 2 200 96% 164 1 35 91% 0 38 70% 29 421 7375 69% 48-44 118 636 TT% 560 62 811 65% 453 24 676 79'4 533 62 630 80% 518 17 613 85% 515 56 850 50% 439 16 734 56% 404 22 460 91% 466 2 87 92'4 TT 0 3 67% 1 22 59'4 27 380 5522 71% 3992 38 334 82% 262 60 296 74% 235 30 607 53% 323 22 394 8-4% 248 32 533 54% 260 112 564 74% 392 21 113 75% 276 47 289 56% 141 6 130 66% 141 17 407 20% 71 3 440 97% 373 36 633 24% 144 17 333 90% 263 22 297 53% 164 6 442 32% 155 23 619 66% 363 31 338 76% 205 47 458 65% 253 32 363 80% 272 150 52 580 64% 314 15 334 45% 140 2 184 97% 262 12 4TT 75% 306 47 365 79% 245 9 547 96% 473 96 656 57% 307 105 491 74% 353 50 644 80% 427 32 458 91% 439 18 286 TT% 206 50 460 51% 240 19 276 88% 255 2 238 92% 215 1 42 19% 16 1112 13628 67% 8889 1913 26524 68% 17725 w 0 TOTAL %BLK 981 97 2203 51% 125 36 1058 85% 184 177 1464 75% 51 25 925 92% 465 78 1108 51% 18 6 136 82% 12 2 178 92% 17 2 48 60% 1853 423 7120 68% 24 98 682 82% 223 71 747 61% 133 22 688 TT% 57 55 630 82% 102 17 634 81% 368 66 873 52% 295 9 708 57% 15 12 493 94% 6 0 83 93% 13 0 40 68% 1236 350 5578 72% 26 31 319 82% 25 31 291 81% 253 29 605 53% 48 22 318 78% 204 32 496 52% 44 100 536 73% 17 67 360 TT% TT 43 261 54% 37 9 187 75% 270 20 361 20% 9 5 387 96% 381 29 554 26% 15 21 299 88% 120 26 310 53% 268 6 429 36% 211 33 607 60% 37 15 257 80% 102 51 406 62% 49 28 349 78% 5 1 156 96% 162 35 511 60% 137 9 286 49% 0 0 262 100% 126 21 453 67% 27 49 321 76% 15 11 499 95% 189 81 577 53% 12 86 451 78% 74 62 563 76% 11 6 456 96% 43 13 262 79% 172 49 461 52% 16 14 285 89% 18 2 235 91% 42 2 60 27% 3242 1039 13170 68% 6331 1812 25868 68% LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: October 27, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: October 2005 Construction Report - Bond Projects BACKGROUND: The media center expansion at Carver and the remodeling of Meadowcliff have been completed. I hope you have had an opportunity to see the finished products because you will be impressed. The demolition of Cloverdale Elementary School has begun and will be completed by the end of November. The attached report shows six (6) new projects that are being funded by the sale of QZAB Bonds for $2,189,175. The projects, identified as priority by the LRSD Maintenance Department because of the number of service calls for, equipment failures, replaced inadequate heating and air conditioning equipment in those six schools. RATIONALE: Monthly reports are submitted to the Board to keep members up-to-date on construction projects in the District. FUNDING: Bond Funds RECOMMENDATION: Report item\nno action necessary. PREPARED BY: Bill Goodman, District Engineer ~ .... m 0 :,: z  -\u0026lt; :D m ~ Facility Name Central Media ~dale Elementary Gibbs Henderson Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. WITTiams CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD OCTOBER 27, 2005 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION I Project Description I Cost I t::st. t,\nompletJOn Date Roof $85,000 Dec-05 - - Demolition - $520,750 - Nov-05 Addition - $705,670 - Dec-05 Skylight Replacement - $319,000 - Nov-05 HVAC (QZAB) $220,0QQ__ Nov-05 - Site Work - $6,QQQ__ O-ct-05 Drainage Repair $29,200 Nov-05 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - FALL/ WINTER 2005-06 Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I Est. compIetIon Date J. A. Fair Sewer Line $82,900 Unknown -- -- Rightsell Renovation $2,494,000 Unknown BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I t:st. t,\nompIeuon Date Administration Annex Electrical Upgrade $9,166 Unknown Alternative Learning Center Electrical Upgrade - - $2,696 Unknown Booker HVAC (QZAB) --- - - - $239,56~ - - Unknown Booker Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown - - - Brady Metal Roof - $250,000 Unknown Central HVAC (QZAB) $919.~ Unknown f-- - - - - Chicot Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown I- - - - Child Nutrition Renovation $6,500 Unknown f----- -- -- - -- Dunbar HVAC (QZAB) - $278,800 Unknown Fair Park HVAC (QZAB) $79,480 Unknown f----- - - - ~tHeights Remodel $1,547,~ - Unknown Fulbright Addition/Traffic Planning -- -- $2,500- Unknown --- -- Henderson Renovation -- -- $450,000 Summer 2006 Mann HVAC (QZAB) -- $382,400 Unknown --- -- Mitchell Renovation $2,212,493 Unknown Pulaski Hgts. MS Energy monitoring system installation - Unknown Unknown Terry Addition Planning $2,500 Unknown BOND PROJECTS NOT YET STARTED I I I est. t,\nompIeuon Facilitv Name Project Descriotion Cost Date Administration Annex ADA Adaptations $32,351 Unknown Adult Education ADA Adaptations -- $248.~-- Unknown --- - -- - - -- Structural Repairs $53,918 Unknown - ~ative Learning Center ADA Adaptations $43,134 Unknown --- ~-- Roof Repairs -- $26,959 Unknown Restroom Renovation $37,742 Unknown -- Booker ADA Adaptations -- $107,835 Spring 2006 Cashion Building ADA Adaptations -- $21 ,567 Unknown Dodd Restroom Renovation $26,959 Unknown Facility Services ADA Adaptations - $32,351 Unknown Install Water Meters at Cooling Towers $4,313 Unknown I-Emergency Lighting Replacement $80,876 Unknown ~ - Land Purchase - Booker $100,000 Unknown - - - - --- Fulbright Renovate Restrooms $10,784 Unknown - -- -- ADA Adaptations $21 ,567 Unknown Garland - - - - - Renovation - $900,000 Partially Complete ADA Adaptations $188,711 Unknown - ----- Geyer Springs Replace Restroom Stalls $4,313 Unknown - ADA Adaptations $21,567 Unknown Facility Name Henderson IRC McDermott Quigley Rockefeller CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD OCTOBER 27, 2005 BOND PROJECTS NOT YET STARTED I Project Description I Cost I _ADA Adaptations _ $70,091._ ADA Adaptations _ $21 ,567 _ Restroom Renovation _ $21 ,567 Restroom Renovation _ $32,350 Restroom Upgrades $53,918 DressingRoom Renovation - $37,742 ADA Adaptations = $26,959 - Interior Renovation $16,175 Transportation - Laid~ ADA Adaptations - $32,351 - West Little Rock School New School - $11 ,782,638 - Facility Name Administration Administration Administration Administration Administration Annex Alternative Learning Ctr. Alternative Learning Ctr. Badgett Badgett Bale Bale Bale Bale Baseline !3ooker Booker Booker Booker Booker Booker Brady Brady __ Brady Carver Central Carver BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I Project Description I Cost I Asbestos abatement _ $380,495 ~ sh air system ___ $55,000 Flre alarm - $32,350 - HVA-C -_- ___ ~= $70,000 _ Energy monitoring system installation Energy monitoring system installation Energy efficient light~-Partial asbestos abatement Fire alarm -aassroom addition/renovatfon Energy monitoring system Partial roof replacement HVAC-- Renovation Gym Roof --A- DA Rest rooms Energy efficient lighting Energy monitoring s- y-s~te_m_i_n-st-allation -,-Asbestos abatement Fire alarm ------- Addition/renovation ~ergy efficient lighting-- - Asbestos abatement $15,160 $82,000 $237,237 $18,250 $2,244,524 $269,587 $664,587 $953,520 $48,525 $25,000 $170,295 $23,710 $10,900 $34,501 $973,621 $80,593 $345,072 Energy monitoring system installation ____ $14,480 Renovation - Interior $10,200,266 Media Center Expansion Parking lot HVAC Renovation - Band Area $167,490 $111 ,742 $225,000 Carver Central Central Central Parking Central/Quigley Central/Quigley Central/Quigley Central -=--Reflecting Pond _ $57,561 $174,000 Central Central Central Central Chicot Chicot Cloverdale Elem. Student parking Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electncal repair Athletic Field Improvement -Irr~igati-on~ Sys~tem ------- - - -- Purchase land for school - ------------- Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations Ceiling and wall repair Fire Alarm System Design/Installation Front landing tile repair Drainage Sound Attenuation Energy efficient lighting $265,000 $38,000 $14,500 Unknown $2,000,000 $24,000 $80,876 $22,470 $64,700 $43,134 $132,678 Est. Completion Date Unknown Unknown -- Unknown Unknown -- Unknown U-nknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Est. Completion Date Mar-03 Aug-03 Aug-03 Nov-04 ~y-02 Oct-01 Dec-01 Jul-01 Aug-02 Dec-02 Mar-02 Dec-01 ~g-01 Aug-04 Oct-04 --- - Aug-~ Apr-01 Oct-01 Feb-02 - Mar-02 Nov-04 - - Sep-02 Aug-02 May-01 - Sep-05 Oct-05 Aug-03 Dec-04 Sep-04 Aug-03 ~g-03 Aug-03 - Aug-03 !ID Dec-02 Dec-02 Oct-01 Aug-01 Aug-01 Aug-04 Jul-04 Jul-01 2 Facility Name Cloverdale MS Cloverdale MS Dodd Dodd Dodd Dodd Dunbar Facilities Service Facility Services Fair Park Fair Park Fair Park Fair Park Fair Park Fair Park J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair Forest Park Forest Park Forest Park Forest Park Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Franklin Geyer Springs Gibbs Gibbs Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson IRC Jefferson Jefferson Laidlaw Mablevale Elem Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD OCTOBER 27, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I Project Description I Cost Energy efficient lighting $189,743 Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $1 ,393,822 Fire Alarm Upgrade $9,200 Energy efficient lighting $90,665 Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile $156,299 Replace roof top HVAC $215,570 Renovation/addition $6,149,023 Interior renovation $84,672 Fire alarm $12,000 Remodel $799,000 Parking Lot $185,000 Roof $245,784 HVAC renovation/fire alarm $315,956 Energy efficient lighting $90,162 Asbestos abatement-ceiling $59,310 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music room addition $3,155,640 Energy efficient lighting $277,594 Press box $10,784 Security cameras $12,500 Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Irrigation System $14,000 Roof repairs $391 ,871 Restrooms $152,881 Replace window units w/central HVAC $485,258 Diagonal parking $111 ,742 Energy efficient lighting $119,788 Energy efficient lighting $134,463 Energy monitoring system installation $11 ,950 Replace roof top HVAC units $107,835 Parking lot $140,,000 Roof repairs $200,000 Renovation $2,511 ,736 Roof Repair $161 ,752 Energy efficient lighting $76,447 Energy monitoring system installation $11 ,770 Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $8,637,709 Asbestos abatement $168,222 Energy efficient lighting $42,931 Infrastructure improvements $93,657 Energy efficient lighting $296,707 Intercom Security cameras $10,600 Lockers $43,854 Energy efficient lighting $193,679 Roof replacement gym $107,835 Asbestos abatement Phase I $500,000 Asbestos abatement Phase 2 $250,000 Energy efficient lighting $109,136 Asbestos abatement $43,639 Renovation \u0026amp; fire alarm $1 ,630,000 Parking lot $269,588 Fire Alarm Upgrade $12,000 Energy monitoring system installation $12,150 Replace HVAC units $300,000 I Est. Completion Date Jul-01 Nov-02 Oct-04 Aug-01 Jul-01 Aug-02 Nov-04 Mar-01 Aug-03 Aug-05 Aug-05 May-05 Apr-02 Aug-01 Aug-01 Aug-04 - Apr-01 Nov-00 Jun-01 Jul-03 Jul-03 Aug-03 Aug-05 Nov-03 Aug-03 May-01 Jun-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Mar-03 Jun-04 Apr-01 Jul-01 Sep-03 Aug-01 Jul-01 Aug-01 Apr-01 Feb-01 Jun-01 Dec-04 Jul-01 May-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Jul-02 Oct-01 Nov-02 Jul-01 Oct-04 Aug-01 Aua-02 3 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD OCTOBER 27, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facili Name Proect Descri tion Mabelvale Elem. Asbestos Abatement Mabelvale Elem. Energy efficient lighting Mabelvale MS Renovate bleachers Mabelvale MS Renovation Mann Partial Replacement Mann ~phalt walks Mann Walkway canopies Mann Boiler replacement Mann Fencing Mann Partial demolition/portable classrooms McClellan -Parking Lot Overlay McClellan Athletic Field Improvement McClellan Irrigation System -- McClellan Security cameras McClellan Energy efficient lighting McClellan Stadium stands repair McClellan Intercom McClellan Classroom Addition McDermott Fire Alarm Upgrade McDermott Energy efficient lighting McDermott Replace roof top HVAC units Meadowcliff Fire alarm __ Meadowcliff Asbestos abatement Meadowcliff Engergy efficient lighting Meadowcliff Remodel Metropolitan Replace cooling tower Metropolitan Replace shop vent system Metropolitan Energy monitoring system installation Mitchell -- ~ilding Remediation Mitchell Energy efficient lighting __ Mitchell Energy monitoring system installation Mitchell Asbestos abatement - - Oakhurst (Adult Education) New Windows Oakhurst HVAC renovation Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Parkview Energy monitoring s stem installation Energy efficient lighting Asbestos abatement Parking lot 6 classroom addition Parking Improvements Addition -- Parkview HVAC controls Parkview Roof replacement __ __ Parkview Exterior lights __ _ Parkview HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls Parkview Locker replacement Parkview Energy efficient lighting __ Procurement Energy monitoring system installation Procurement 7=Tre alarm Pulaski Heights Elem/Middle Cafeteria Ceiling Pulaski Hei hts Elem/Middle Replace Ent Doors Cost $107,000 $106,598 $134,793 $6,851 ,621 $11 ,500,000 The total $1 .8 million is what has been used so far on the projects listed completed for Mann. - -- $65,000 $38,000 $14,750 - $36,300 _ $303,614 $235,000 $46,000 $2,155,622 $7,700 $79,411 $476,000 $16,175 $253,412 $88,297 $365,600 $37,203 $20,000 $17,~ $165,000 $103,642 $16,695 $13,000 $215,000 $237,237 $10,695 $81,828 $10,000 $138,029 $888,778 $142,541 $2,121,226 $210,000 $273,877 $10,784 $301 ,938 $120,000 $315,000 $5,290 $25,000 $33,378 $13,990 Est. Completion Date Aug-02 Dec-02 Aug-01 Mar-04 Apr-04 Dec-01 Dec-01 Oct-01 Sep-01 Aug-01 ~r-05 Jul-03 Jul-03 Jun-01 May-01 Aug-01 Feb-02 Jul-04 Sep-04 Feb-01 --- Aug-02 Jul-01 Aug-02 Dec-02 Oct-05 Dec-00 ~y-01 Aug-01 Jul-04 Apr-01 Jul-01 Jul-01 Aug-05 Aug-01 May-01 ~pr-01 Aug-02 Aug-0~ Oct-02 Aug-03 Dec-04 Jun-02 Sep-01 Nov-00 Aug-01 Aug-01 Jun-01 Jun-02 Au -03 Aug-05 Au -05 4 :n .z... m\n,, Dz ~n ,i!=. .o. \u0026lt;c= =l 0\n,, Cl) CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD OCTOBER 27, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Project Description I Cost Pulaski Heights Elementary Clean Exterior Walls $98,660 --- Pulaski Hgts. Elem Renovation $1 ,193,259 Pulaski Hgts. Elem Move playground $17,000 Pulaski Hgts. MS Renovation $3,755,041 Rightsell Energy efficient lighting - $84,898 Rockefeller Energy efficient lighting $137,004 Rockefeller Replace roof top HVAC $539,175 Rockefeller . Parking addition $111 ,742 Romine Asbestos abatement $10,000 Romine Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675 Scott Field Track Renovations $289,056 Security IT ransportation Bus cameras $22,500 Southwest New Corridor Ceiling $300,000 Southwest Addition $2,000,000 Southwest Asbestos abatement $28,138 Southwest New roof $690,000 Southwest Energy efficient lighting $168,719 Southwest Drainage I street widening $250,000 Student Assignment Energy monitoring system installation $4,830 Student Assignment Fire alarm $9,000 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation $275,000 Tech Ctr/ Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II $3,679,000 Technology Upgrade Upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data Terry Energy efficient lighting $73,850 Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking $83,484 Terry Media Center addition $704,932 Wakefield Rebuild $5,300,000 Wakefield Security cameras $8,000 Wakefield Energy efficient lighting $74,776 Wakefield Demolition/Asbestos Abatement $200,000 Washington Fire Alarm Upgrade $11 1600 Washington Security cameras $7,900 Washington Energy efficient lighting $165,281 Watson Energy monitoring system installation $8,530 Watson Asbestos abatement $182,241 Watson Energy efficient lighting $106,868 Watson Asbestos abatement $10,000 Watson Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $800,000 Western Hills Electrical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC $622,160 Western Hills Fire Alarm Upgrade $8,400 Western Hills ADA Rest rooms $25,000 Western Hills Asbestos abatement $191,946 Western Hills Intercom $7,100 Western Hills Energy efficient lighting $106,000 Williams Renovation $2,106,492 Williams Parking expansions $183,717 Williams Energy efficient lighting $122,719 Wilson HVAC for Cafeteria $56,000 Wilson Renovation/expansion $1 ,263,876 Wilson Parking Expansion $110,000 Woodruff Parking addition $175,000 Woodruff Renovation $246,419 I Est. c..\nompIetIon Date Sep-05 Nov-04 Dec-02 Nov-04 Apr-01 - Mar-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Apr-02 Mar-03 May-05 Jun-01 Aug-05 Nov-04 Aug-00 Oct-03 Jan-02 -- Aug-03 Aug-02 Aug-03 Dec-01 Jun-04 - Nov-02 Feb-01 A~g-02 Sep-02 Dec-04 Jun-01 Feb-01 Nov-02 -Oct--04 Jun-01 Apr-01 -- Jul-01 Aug-01 - Aug-01 - Aug-02 - Aug-0~ Aug-05 -- Oct-04 - ~ug-04 Aug-02 Dec-01 Jul-01 -- Mar-04 Dec-03 Jun-01 Mar-05 --- Feb-04 ---- _!\\ug-__ Aug-05 Auq-02 5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: October 27, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Board Auditor Report BACKGROUND: Monthly report to School Board. RATIONALE: Summary report of activities. FUNDING: No changes. RECOMMENDATION: None. PREPARED BY: Sandy Becker !1:1 Date: To: From: Re: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS October 27, 2005 Board of Directors Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Audit Report- October This is the seventy-second communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with two high schools, two middle school and two elementary schools to resolve financial issues in their activity and related funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. b) The AAB has forwarded a Booster Club Guidelines Package to be included in official publications of the District after review. Board Policy and Regulation a) The routing of Professional Leave and Travel Requests is being worked on to make the process more efficient and to prepare for the process being automated to improve documentation and provide information for decision making. Technology a) Monitoring technology plans and technology meetings to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. b) Working with Procurement on the use ofbarcode scanners for checking and updating inventory records. This is being done to help more quickly update and check electronic equipment records at the various sites. a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of Nuts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. Provided training with the Arkansas PT A on financials controls and financial preventive maintenance. Audit Report - October 2005 Page 2 of2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) d) e) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring combined payroll and human resources issues for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Assisting schools to track and reconcile Teacher School Supply Funds. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Served as District coordinator of United Way's Day of Caring (April 17, 2005. Eleven schools participated. Sharefest is scheduled for October 29, 2005. Assisting LRSD PT A's in financial process training. Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-447-1115. My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 October 27, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Technology Report BACKGROUND: Since the last Board meeting the following technology activities took place:  Technology Plan Revision Committee has started the process of revising the district's technology plan. The plan will be coming to the board in February 2006.  Implementation of Edline, the program that allows parents to view grades, has begun on the middle school level. Teachers at Mabelvale Middle are being trained by district technology staff.  The computer refresh program has continued at designated district sites. RATIONALE: To implement the LRSD Technology Plan 2003 - 2006 FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board accept this report. PREPARED BY: John Ruffins, Director, Computer Information Services Lucy Neal, Coordinator, Technology and Media Services LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: October 27, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Policy Review: AD - Mission Statement BACKGROUND: The Board conducts periodic reviews of policies and regulations to ensure that these regulatory directives remain current and complete. Board member Tony Rose requested a review of Policy AD, which consists of the Mission Statement adopted in September 1998. The current mission statement was in effect at the time the LRSD 2003-2008 Strategic Plan was developed. RATIONALE: To ensure consistency between official Board policy and other documents used to administer the District's programs, projects, goals and objectives. FUNDING: No funding required. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Strategic Planning committee take into consideration the board authorized version of the mission statement and adopt it as the mission statement for strategic planning purposes. PREPARED BY: Roy G. Brooks ~ ::c \u0026gt;c: ~!\n,o\n,o ~m zzc~: m\n,o r-n m \"' .. si .n,:_,, nZ n\u0026gt; s:z nO em \"'\"\" I en - C: ~~ ..\n,o ii-\u0026lt; !II LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: AD LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the Little Rock School District is to equip all students with the skills and knowledge to realize their aspirations, think critically and independently, learn continuously, and face the future as productive contributing citizens. This mission is accomplished through open access to a diverse, innovative and challenging curriculum in a secure environment with a staff dedicated to excellence and empowered with the trust and support of our community. Adopted: September 24, 1998 DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 October 27, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Policy Review and Proposed Revisions BACKGROUND: The Board conducts periodic reviews of policies and regulations to ensure that these regulatory directives remain current and complete. Board member Tony Rose requested a review of specific policies and has suggested updates as follows: Policy AC - Nondiscrimination The current policy AC, Nondiscrimination, was adopted in September 1998. The proposed revision of this policy changes the term \"sex\" to \"gender and sexual orientation.\" The changes are indicated on the first reading proposal attached. Policy ACD - Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Religion Policy ACD, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Religion, was adopted by the Board in September 1998. The proposed revision of this policy replaces the language of the entire policy, emphasizing the Board's commitment to nondiscrimination based on religious beliefs. Policy ACH - Anti-Harrassment The current policy ACH, Anti-harassment, consists of language that should be considered as regulatory administrative directives. The proposed revision separates the policy from the directives. RATIONALE: To ensure that the Board's policies and regulations remain up-to-date and accurate. FUNDING: No funding required. ~ :z: \u0026gt; C: -~ rilz\nID\nID ~m z~ z C: m\nc r- (\") m u, ..~ n:., nZ-n\u0026gt; i:z \"(\") ,:m .. go I u, - C: ~~ ..\nID 5 .... !I' c- RECOMMENDATION: The administration recommends approval on first reading of Policies AC, ACD, and ACH. PREPARED BY: Roy G. Brooks LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: AC NONDISCRIMINATION The commitment of the Little Rock School District to the most fundamental principles of academic freedom, equality of opportunity, and human dignity requires that decisions involving students and employees be based on individual merit and be free from discrimination in all its forms. It is the policy of the Board of Education that there will be no discrimination because of race, color, religion, ~. gender, sexual orientation, age, national origin, or handicap/disability in the placement, instruction, and guidance of pupils\nthe employment, assignment, training, or promotion of personnel\nthe provision and maintenance of physical supplies and equipment\nthe development and implementation of the curriculum, including the activities program\nand in all matters relating to the instruction, supervision, administration and Board policy development. Revised: Adopted: September 24, 1998 Legal References: Title VI and Title VII, Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title I and Title 11, Civil Rights Act of 1991 Equal Pay Act of 1963 Executive Order 11246 of 1995 Title IX, Education Amendments of 1972 and regulations, 34 C.F .R. part 104 Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Sections 503 and 504 Section 504, 34 C.F.R. part 104 Americans with Disabilities Act, 1990 Vietnam-era Veterans Readjustment Act, 1974 Age Discrimination Act, 1975 Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 1967 Arkansas General Laws Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 1997 Cross References: Board of Education Policies ACA, ACB, ACC, ACD, ACE, ACF ~ :c \u0026gt; C:  ~\nl::z\nio\n,o ism z is z C: ,m-\n,no m Cl) .. ~ .n,:_., nZ n\u0026gt; i::z nO ..:m -\u0026lt;l!o I Cl) - C: ~~ ..\nlll ii-\u0026lt; ~ Cl) m\ni::: m :!:\nC LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ACD NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION Tho First Amendment to tho United States of America's Constitution requires that public schools remain religiously neutral. All students, staff, and faculty have tho right to choose or not to choose their own religion and thoro will bo no discrimination of any kind based upon an individual's religion. It is the policy of the Board of Education that no student, faculty, or staff in the Little Rock School District will, on the basis of religious belief, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any District educational program, activity, or employment. Revised: Adopted: September 24, 1998 Legal References: See Code AC Cross Reference: Board of Education Policy AC LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE : ACH ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICY It is the policy of the District to maintain a learning environment that is free from harassment. The District prohibits any and all forms of harassment because of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, national origin, religion, or disability or protected activity (i.e. opposing unlawful harassment or discrimination or participating in an investigation. Any such conduct will result in disciplinary action and notification to the proper authorities. It will be a violation of District policy for any student, teacher, administrator, or other school personnel of the District to harass a student through conduct of a sexual nature, or regarding race, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, national origin, religion, disability, or protected activity as defined by this policy. It will also be a violation of District policy for any teacher, administrator or other school personnel of the District to tolerate sexual harassment or harassment because of a student's race, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, national origin, religion, disability or protected activity as defined by this policy, by a student, teacher, administrator, other school personnel, or by any third parties who are participating in, observing, or otherwise engaged in activities, including sports events and other extracurricular activities, under the auspices of the District. For the purpose of this policy, the \"school personnel\" includes school Board of Education members, school employees, agents, volunteers, contractors, or persons subject to the supervision and control of the District. The District will act to promptly investigate all complaints, either formal or informal, verbal or written, of harassment because of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, national origin, religion, disability or protected activity to promptly take appropriate action to protect individuals from further harassment\nand, if it determines that unlawful harassment occurred, to promptly and appropriately discipline any student, teacher, administrator or other school personnel who is found to have violated this policy, and/or to take other appropriate action reasonably calculated to end the harassment. fl ~ :r \u0026gt;. Cf\n:\nllz\n:o~ ~lS z C: m\n:o r-n m en .. ~ .n,:_., ~~ 1:z nO a:m -\u0026lt;IIO I en - C: ~~ .. ::0 ii-\u0026lt; LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ACH continued This policy will be broadly interpreted as evidence of the District's commitment to equality of opportunity, human dignity, diversity, and academic freedom. No person will retaliate or threaten retaliation against another person for reporting, testifying or otherwise participating in any investigation, or proceeding relating to a complaint of harassment. Revised: Adopted: July 23, 2001 Legal References: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, 1965, 42 U.S.C.  2000d Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C.  1681 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C.  794 Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C.  12134 Cross References: Student Handbooks and Personnel Handbook 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ACH-R Anti-Harassment Regulation PROCEDURE FOR COMPLAINTS OF HARASSMENT These regulations are intended to protect the rights of students, employees, administrators, the Board of Education and visitors on District property and to outline procedures, which will be followed in the event harassment occurs on District property or at an event sponsored by the District. The following definitions will be used for the purpose of enforcing the AntiHarassment Policy, ACH. DEFINITIONS Racial or Color Harassment Racial or color harassment includes unwelcome verbal, written or physical conduct, directed at the characteristics of a person's race or color, such as nicknames emphasizing stereotypes, racial slurs, comments on manner of speaking and negative references to racial customs. Sexual Harassment Sexual harassment consists of unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, sexually motivated physical conduct or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature. It also includes conduct that is not sexual in nature but that is engaged in because of the gender of the victim. It includes condact that is also criminal in nature such as rape, sexual assault, stalking, and similar offenses. Under federal law, sexual harassment is prohibited regardless of the sex of the harasser, i.e., sexual harassment may occur even if the harasser and the person being harassed are the same sex. Sexual Orientation Harassment Harassment on the basis of sexual orientation is unwelcome verbal, written or physical conduct, directed at the characteristics of a person's sexual orientation, such as negative name-calling and imitating mannerisms. Marital Status Harassment Harassment on the basis of marital status is unwelcome verbal, written or physical conduct, directed at the characteristics of a person's marital status, such as comments regarding pregnancy or being an unwed mother or father. ~ ::c \u0026gt; C: - ~ ~z\n,a\n,a lS m zlS z C: m\n,o r-n m \"' ~ \":., n-Z n\u0026gt; i::z nO ,:m \"'\"\" I UI - C: ~~ \na i6--\u0026lt; ?I ~ \"m' I: mz C' tL \u0026lt;- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ACH-R (continued) National Origin Harassment Harassment on the basis of national origin is unwelcome verbal, written or physical conduct, directed at the characteristics of a person's national origin, such as negative comments regarding surnames, manner of speaking, customs, language, or ethnic slurs. Religious Harassment Harassment on the basis of religion or creed is unwelcome verbal, written or physical conduct, directed at the characteristics of a person's religion or creed, such as derogatory comments regarding surnames, religious tradition, or religious clothing, or religious slurs, or graffiti. Disability Harassment Harassment based on a person's disabling mental or physical condition and includes any unwelcome verbal, written or physical conduct, directed at the characteristics of a person's disabling condition, such as imitating manner of speech or movement, or interference with necessary equipment. REPORTING PROCEDURES Any person who feels he/she is being harassed may wish to consider informing the offending person that the behavior is inappropriate and not appreciated. Oftentimes, this is all that is required to stop the harassing behavior. You are not, however, required to take this step prior to filing a complaint.  Any student, District personnel, or visitor who believes he/she has been the victim of harassment by a student, teacher, administrator or other school personnel of the District, or by any other person who is participating in, observing, or otherwise engaged in activities, including extracurricular activities, under the auspices of the District, is encouraged to immediately report the alleged acts to the building principal. If the principal is the perpetrator of the harassment, the report of the incident will be made to the appropriate Assistant Superintendent, Associate Superintendent for School Services or the Director of Human Resources. Any teacher, administrator or other school official who has knowledge of or receives notice that a student or visitor has or may have been the victim of harassment by a student, teacher, administrator, or other school district personnel is required to immediately report the alleged act(s) to the building principal unless the principal is the perpetrator. If the harassment involves the 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ACH-R (continued) principal, the incident will be reported to the appropriate Assistant Superintendent or Associate Superintendent for School Services. Upon receipt of the report, the principal, Assistant Superintendent or Associate Superintendent will notify Safety and Security personnel to conduct an investigation of the allegation. A third party may be involved in the investigation. The parent of the student (victim) will be notified immediately, unless after consultation with the student, it is determined not to be in the best interest of the student. If the alleged harassment is committed by a student, the student's parent/guardian will be notified that an investigation is being conducted. Complaints will be kept confidential to the extent possible. A prompt, thorough and impartial investigation will be conducted of all complaints of violation of this policy. Upon completion of the investigation, a written report will be submitted to the principal, Assistant Superintendent, or Associate Superintendent. The report will include a determination as to whether the allegations have been substantiated as factual and whether they appear to have violated District policy and/or law. Notification of the outcome of the investigation will be sent to all parties involved. If the allegation is substantiated, the District will take immediate and appropriate corrective action, including the following: 1. a student will receive a disciplinary sanctioned as outlined in the Student Handbook, and/or notification to the proper authorities. 2. a staff member will receive a disciplinary sanction as outlined in the Employee Handbook and/or the proper authorities will be notified. 3. a report of the incident regarding a visitor who committed an act while on District property or at an event sponsored by the District, will be referred to the proper legal authorities. 3 ..~ :,, ,.-z n\u0026gt; .i:,::nz z:m -lllo I Cl\u0026gt; ,\".'.C,,: \"i3 \na a .... C f, c\n' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ACH-R (continued) Notwithstanding this policy, employees may file a charge of discrimination with the U.S. EEOC. Employers who wish to file a charge must do so within 180 days of the last act of alleged harassment. Revised: Adopted: July 23, 2001 Legal References: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, 1965, 42 U.S.C.  2000d Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C.  1681 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C.  794 Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C.  12134 Cross References: Student Handbook and Personnel Handbook 4 DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 September 22, 2005 Board of Directors Larry Berkley President, Board of Directors SUBJECT: Policy Revision: GBK and Regulations: GBK-R BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors periodically reviews policies and regulations which provide the district's administration a clear line of authority for operating the district in an efficient and effective manner. A review of Policy GBK, Staff Concerns/Complaints/Grievances and the accompanying regulations, GBK-R, are modeled after Act 1357 as amended by the Arkansas Legislature in 2003. These documents describe the process an employee must use in resolving work-related grievances. A copy of Act 1357 is attached for your information. The policy and accompanying regulations in their present form do not clearly encourage employees to adhere to the board approved process. School Board members are also part of the grievance process and our obligations also must be more clearly defined. In addition, Policy GBK does not strongly communicate that the Board will not tolerate reprisal or retaliation directed at employees who follow the appropriate process and policy in resolving disputes with the district or its' administrators. RATIONALE: Policies should be clear and concise and offer specific directives to staff and administration. The revision of GBK and GBK-R prescribes a more thorough process for resolving employee grievances and protects employees from retaliation. FUNDING: This policy revision carries no financial implications. 8 z ?\n0 z u, ~ ::c \u0026gt; C: f: ~z\no ill ~~ zc: m\no r-n m u, RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board adopt on second reading the revisions to Policy GBK. Although not required by board policy, endorsement of regulations GBK-R is also recommended as identified in the attached documents as underlined text. PREPARED BY: Larry Berkley President, Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: GBK STAFF CONCERNS/COMPLAINTS/GRIEVANCES It is the policy of the Board of Education to have written grievance procedures which will result in encouraging employees to express themselves on subjects concerning condition of employment, in fostering a better understanding of policies, and in ensuring all employees that their questions and concerns are considered fairly(,) and rapidly(,). (and without reprisals .) It is the expressed intent of the Board of Education that there shall be no reprisals or retaliation of any kind made, nor will any be tolerated, against any employee who exercises his or her rights under this policy. \"Grievance\" will mean any concern related to personnel (policies)~ (or) salary .. federal or state laws and regulations, or terms or conditions of employment raised by an employee. \"Employee\" will mean a person employed by the District under a written contract. The specific processes and provisions applicable to grievance procedures are outlined in the Grievances/Concerns/Complaints regulation, GBK-R. The Board of Education encourages an employee to resolve a grievance or any other issue through the chain of command process prescribed by this policy and regulation or by a negotiated agreement. Revised: Adopted: November 18, 1999 References: Board of Education Regulation GBK-R Legal Reference: AC.A. 6-17-208 8 ~ iz5 \"' .. ~ ,n.:_,, .,,z n\u0026gt; 11:z nO z:m -\u0026lt;IIO I en '- C: :~ ..\na 5 .... C: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: GBK-R GRIEVANCE/CONCERNS/COMPLAINTS Purpose Some groups of employees are covered by grievance procedures defined in their respective negotiated agreement. For those employees not covered by a negotiated agreement the following process will apply. Communication and discussion can resolve the majority of questions and problems that cause difficulties between the employer and employee. When resolution is not reached rapidly, the employer and the staff member may proceed to effect resolution in writing as defined in this procedure. The purpose of the resolution procedures is to secure, at the lowest possible level, equitable solutions consistent with the legal standards of \"due process,\" to problems that may from time to time arise. The purpose is to (obtain better understanding of policies, to) encourage employees to express themselves more effectively on subjects concerning conditions of employment, and to ensure to all employees that their questions and problems are considered fairly, rapidly and without reprisals. Documents and Confidentiality All documents, communications and records dealing with the processing of a grievance will be filed separately from the personnel files of the participants and will be destroyed three years after the last official entry. All parties will hold the resolution proceedings in confidentiality at all levels.  Normally, the resolution process should be conducted at times that do not interfere with the assigned duties. Process \"Grievance\" means any concern related to personnel policy, salary, federal or state laws(,) and regulations, or terms or conditions of employment, raised by an employee. \"Employee\" means a person employed by a school district under a written contract. The first step in the procedure is to seek an informal resolution between the employee and the immediate supervisor. If the grievance is not resolved at the informal phase, the grievance is to be committed to writing and sent to the applicable supervisor within five calendar days of the incident resulting in the grievance. The employee will immediately thereafter schedule a meeting with the appropriate supervisor to discuss the complaint and resolutions sought. The parties should act in good faith to expedite the process. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: GBK-R Upon request, the applicable supervisor will schedule a meeting with the grievant within five workdays of receipt of the written grievance. If the problem is not resolved in the meeting held with the supervisor, and the employee indicates a desire to pursue further, a written request must be submitted within five workdays for an appeal to the Office of the Superintendent or designee. Appeals The appeal will be heard in the Office of the Superintendent/designee within ten workdays of the request for an appeal. An employee who has not been satisfied with the answer at the Superintendent's level may request that the grievance be submitted to the Board of Education. The request will include a written statement setting forth the issue(s) to be reviewed by the Board of Education and is to be addressed to the President of the Board c/o Superintendent's Office. Other Provisions An employee seeking to resolve a grievance as defined above is required to use the terms and conditions of their negotiated agreement for resolution of grievances. Employees not covered by a negotiated agreement are bound by the provisions of this policy. In either case, the responsibility for ensuring that the prescribed due process is adhered to and will not be circumvented is shared at all levels of the district, up to and including the Board of Education. Employees who have begun or who are considering initiating a grievance procedure either under the terms of this policy or under the terms of a negotiated agreement are prohibited from undertaking any action that seeks to circumvent the prescribed process. Specifically, employees are prohibited from conveying or causing the conveyance of information about their grievance to members of the Board of Education prior to completing the chain of command process prescribed by this policy or their negotiated agreement. Employees must be aware that receipt of such information by a member of the Board may be cause for that Board member to recuse him/herself from an employee grievance hearing. Likewise, members of the Board of Education, by definition of their role in the process, must refrain from any involvement in an employee grievance until the process formally reaches the Board as prescribed in this policy or a negotiated agreement. Members of the Board should always encourage an employee to resolve a grievance or any other issue through the chain of command process prescribed by this policy or by a negotiated agreement. Date: August 5, 2005 Legal Reference: Act 1357 of 2003 f\u0026gt; 8 z ?. 0z u, .. ~ n:,, ~-z n\u0026gt; i::z nO a:m ... go I u, '--C ~~ \n10 ii ... l 2 3 4 Stricken language would be deleted from and underlined language would be added to the law as it existed prior to this session of the General Assembly. State of Arkansas 84th General Assembly Regular Session, 2003 Act 1357 of 2003 SENATE BILL 913 5 By: Senators Wilkins, Broadway 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 For An Act To Be Entitled AN ACT TO AMEND ARKANSAS CODE 6-17-208 TO PROVIDE FOR PROCEDURES TO THE GRIEVANCE LAW\nAND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. Subtitle AN ACT TO AMEND ARKANSAS CODE 6-17-208 TO PROVIDE FOR PROCEDURES TO THE GRIEVANCE LAW. 19 BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS: 20 21 22 23 SECTION 1. Arkansas Code 6-17-208 is amended to read as follows: 6-17-208. Grievance procedure. (a)(l) It is the public policy of the State of Arkansas that~ 24 ill~ Each school district shall have a written 25 grievance procedure which provides for an orderly method of resolving 26 concerns raised by an employee at the lowest possible administrative level 27 and in a clear and timely manner for both partiesj 28 29 30 31 (B) All school employees shall have the right to file grievances and have those grievances heard. A group of employees who have the same grievance may file a group grievance. (2)(A) \"Grievance\" means any concern related to personnel 32 palieies er salary policy, salary, federal or state laws and regulations, or 33 terms or conditions of employment, raised by an employee\nand 34 (B) \"Employee\" means a person employed by a school 35 district under a written contract. 36 (b)(l) The grievance policy shall at least include the following 11111!1111111111111111111111111~ 03082003LDH0835.JMB291 1 2 As Engrossed: S3/27/03 provisions: S8913 (A) A procedure for resolving the matter informally with 3 the employee's immediate supervisor\n4 (B) A procedure to appeal in writing an unsatisfactorily 5 resolved grievance from the immediate supervisor to the superintendent of 6 schools or his or her designee\n7 (C)(i) A procedure to appeal in writing an 8 unsatisfactorily resolved grievance from the superintendent or his or her 9 designee to the school board at the next regularly scheduled school board 10 11 12 13 14 meeting unless both parties have agreed to a different date. (ii) The hearing shall be open or closed at the discretion of the employee. (iii) If the hearing is open, the parent or guardian of any student under the age of eighteen (18) years who gives testimony may 15 elect to have the student's testimony given in a closed session\nand 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 (D) The right of all parties to be represented by a person of his or her own choosing, at least at the sehool aoaFa lm,rel but not by a member of a party's immediate family at any level of the procedure. (2)(A) The determination by the principal, superintendent, or their designees that the concern expressed by the employee is not a grievance may be appealed to the school board for a final decision. (B) At the hearing, the employee shall have an adequate 23 opportunity to present the grievanceT but no less than ninety (90) minutes, 24 and both parties shall have the opportunity to present and question 25 witnesses. 26 27 28 29 30 (c) The grievance policy shall be adopted in accordance with this subchapter and other applicable policies of the district. (d) There shall be no reprisals of any kind against any individual who exercises his or her rights under this act. (e) Nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring a school 31 district to enter into an agreement recognizing an organization for the 32 purpose of negotiating personnel policies, salaries, and educational matters 33 of mutual concern. 34 35 Is I Wilkins 36 APPROVED: 4/15/2003 2 03082003LDH0835.JMB291 r\u0026gt; g z ~ 0z U\u0026gt;\n!ii :c \u0026gt; C: - ~\ni,:z\no\no ig m zig zc: m\no r-n m U\u0026gt; ..~ .n. :-., .,,z n\u0026gt; i:::z nn z:m -IIIO I U\u0026gt; '-- C: .,-.:i n\n3 ..\no 5--1 !D ~ U\u0026gt; m ii: m :5 DATE: October 27, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Education FROM: Roy Brooks, Ed.D Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: DKC-R - Regulations for Implementing Policy DKC - Out of Area Travel Travel Expense Authorization / Reimbursement / Travel Limits BACKGROUND: The Board of Education periodically reviews policies and regulations which provide the district's administration a clear line of authority for operating the district in an efficient and effective manner. A review of Policy DKC-R Travel Expense Authorization / Reimbursement / Travel Limits describes the process an employee must use when traveling on school business. Key changes are the addition of travel limitations, credit card one day hotel charge directions, identification of travel coordinators, and due dates for professional leave forms. These changes are recommended to make the travel process more cost efficient and timely. RATIONALE: This revised policy will enhance operational efficiency and monitor professional leave during instructional time that impacts student achievement. FUNDING: This policy revision carries no financial obligations. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board accept the revisions to Policy DKC-R. New text is underlined. Eliminated text is marked through. PREPARED BY: Hugh Hattabaugh, Deputy Superintendent Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Linda Austin, Grants Coordinator Valerie Hudson, Executive Assistant ~ :c  C: . f\n~z\n,,\n,, ism z is zc: m\n,, r-o m tn ~ n:., -z n  s:z nO z:m \"'\"\" .' . tCn: ~~ \n,J i5 ... !D C t.. ' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: DKC-R TRAVEL EXPENSE AUTHORIZATION/ REIMBURSEMENT/ TRAVEL LIMITS Travel will be for necessary school business purposes. Prior approval for all travel, including prepaid expenses, will be obtained before any expenses are incurred. Economical and reasonable modes of transportation, lodging, and other expenditures in accordance with the purpose of the travel must be used. A copy of the full agenda for the conference or training will be provided with the request for travel and request for professional leave. To insure that maximum impact can be achieved, the following regulations apply to all out-of-district travel. Out-of-district travel will be defined as being outside Pulaski County, AR. Travel Limits A maximum of two out of state trips per year apply to all District staff. Additional travel may be authorized if travel expenses are funded through a non-District related source and the travel is approved as being in the best interest of the District. When additional travel is required due to the job responsibilities, travel beyond the maximum may be approved by request of their supervisor and approval of the superintendent or their designee. Travel by the superintendent is addressed in Board Policy CBG. In state travel will be approved only for necessary and reasonable school business. Travel Day The travel day will begin at 6:00 a.m., include breakfast, lunch, dinner and one night's lodging, and will end the following morning at 6:00 a.m. Request for reimbursement of expenses incurred in less than full travel days must reflect a reasonable allocation based on the expense limits directed herein for a full travel day. Meal costs will be prorated by one half for that travel day if travel begins after 2:00 p.m. and for a return time prior to 2:00 p.m. Meals and Incidental Costs Meals costs will be determined by the last accepted federal per diem schedule. An electronic copy will be available in the Teachers Lounge section of the District webpaqe. Partial days meal cost will be determined by the departure and return time as indicated in the above section. Meals included in the cost of registration will be deducted from the per diem amount as follows: breakfast (20%), lunch (30%), and dinner (50%). No deductions will be made for continental breakfasts. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: DKC-R (continued) Lodging Expenses The District will reimburse actual lodging expense incurred in travel for the District. Lodging will be reimbursed only for the days of the conference attended plus night(s) required based on the conference schedule. Economical and reasonable lodging in accordance with the purpose of the travel must be used. Reimbursement for lodging expenses will require lodging receipts that indicate the employee has paid for the lodging. Receipts from personal cred it cards will not be accepted unless accompanied by the receipt from the lodging establishment. If the rate for lodging exceeds the federal maximum for lodging, a justification must be provided (i.e. no local travel costs between hotel and conference hotel\nlegitimate safety concerns\nor room sharing to reduce cost). Travelers are encouraged to use cost saving initiatives such as appropriate sharing of rooms, car pooling and like arrangements. Using District Pro-Card for Travel After the travel form has been approved, go to your principal/ director and request to use the site's main Pro-Card (usually the principal 's / director's) to do the following: a. Secure a hotel reservation\nb. Purchase airline tickets on-line (use website of your choosing, or online service, etc). Do not use any on-line service that requires you to enter your card number to find a rate)\nc. Book airfare or obtain the estimated cost of airfare using a local travel agency\nhowever, employees are encouraged to book tickets using available on-line services. d. Pay for registration fees\ne. Purchase transportation tickets for multiple persons from same location traveling to same destination. If amount is expected to exceed $1,000 contact Procurement. f. Individual employees cannot use the Pro-Card to pay for the following~ 1. Hotel room\n2. Meals\n3. Auto rental\n4. Incidental expenses. You will receive an expense check to pay for these items that have been approved on your travel form. If an issue arises regarding a one day deposit on lodging, contact Procurement for assistance. 2 .!=.=,' z \u0026gt;z (\") ~ en ~ ::c \u0026gt; C: . ~\nllz\no~ ~ is z C: m\no r-n m en C E, t. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: DKC-R (continued) Travel Coordinator Any individual identified as a travel coordinator by Procurement that regularly handles multiple employees travel may in coordination with Procurement propose cost saving options associated with group travel. Procurement identifies travel coordinators as individuals who regularly handle travel for multiple employees. Travel coordinators may propose cost saving options associated with group travel. Such options will require written approval of the Chief Financial Officer. Travel to Destination The District will reimburse travel expenses to the maximum limit for point-to-point costs for coach fare on common carriers. Receipts or ticket stubs are required for reimbursement of common carrier costs. If an employee chooses to use a personal automobile, reimbursement will not exceed the current per mile rate approved by the District or point-to-point coach fare, whichever is less. When more than one employee travels to the same location in a personal automobile, mileage will be reimbursed only to the employee whose personal automobile is used. When automobiles are used for transportation to a destination, car pooling for multiple attendees is recommended. Mileage requests may be denied when the best interest of the District is not met after taking into account the circumstances of the request. Local Travel at Destination Actual reasonable expenses of local travel by common carriers at the destination will be reimbursed. Mass transit or taxi fare does not require receipts if all local travel claimed for the trip is less than thirty dollars. Receipts are required if the claim is over thirty dollars. Automobile Rentals - At Destination Automobiles will not be rented at District expense without prior approval of the superintendent or his / her designee and in no case without documentation, in advance, that automobile rental will be less expensive to the District than the cost of public transportation to meeting, conferences, etc. Reimbursement is conditioned upon advance authority as well as receipts from the leasing agency. Automobile Rentals - Travel to Destination If an employee chooses to rent a vehicle to travel to an approved destination, the employee will only be reimbursed the lesser of common carrier coach rates or round trip map mileage to and from the destination. If a vehicle is rented for multiple attendees, 3 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: DKC-R (continued) the limit for reimbursement will be the lesser of common carrier coach rates for two employees or round trip map mileage to and from the destination for two employees. The approval or disapproval level will be at least at the equivalency level of an associate superintendent for this type of arrangement. Reasonableness must be documented. Advance Request for Professional Leave and Travel The fif6t two forms listed below must be submitted at least thirty days prior to travel if an advance is requested. If there is no District expense for this trip or no advance required the deadline will be three weeks prior to the trip. The third form should be filled out only when multiple attendees from the same location or area are attending the same ew\u0026lt;ent. If an employee has not sent in documentation for the advanced funds within sixty days, payroll deduction will be made for the non-documented advance that has not been reimbursed.  Request for Absence for Professional Meetings - to be completed and submitted in accordance with the instructions on that form. This request must be submitted three weeks prior to the desired leave.  Travel Authorization - Advance I Actual Cost - to be submitted in accordance with the instructions on that form. Non-travel items will not be included on advances or reimbursed with travel. Registrations and common carrier expenses (to and from the destination) should be paid by separate check to the vendor unless you used your district Pro-Card.  Trav-e! 81:Jmmary for SGhoo! When multiple attendees from tho same area or school are going to tho same educational e.iont. A tra11ol summar,i will bo prepared by tho administrator of that school or area and sent with tho other documents. No employee will be reimbursed for out-of-district travel unless the required forms are submitted and approved in advance by the area supervisor, funding source manager (if required) and financial services. These forms must cover the entire cost of travel, the total days absence requested, be accompanied by the full agenda of the conference or event to be attended, and be delivered together for approval. Requests for travel will be completed in a timely manner to avoid registration penalties, and to obtain good rates for hotels, airlines, registration, etc. No travel will be paid from any source for which the required forms have not been completed and approved. Revised: March 24, 2005 Date: May 25, 2000 4 8 z !'\n0z \"' .!=.,' z \u0026gt;z n \u0026gt;,... \"' ~ :c \u0026gt;c: -~ ~z ::Ojill ~~ z C: m\na r-n m \"' ,, ~ :,, .,,-z ,,\u0026gt; i,,: :nz z:m \"\"\"\" I en '- C: :~ \na ii-\u0026lt; Request for Absence for Professional Meetings Name _____________________ _ Title ________________ _ School/ Department ______________________________________ _ Conference Name ------------------- Conference Date(s) ____________ _ Departure Date __________  AM  PM Return to Duty Date _________ 0 AM O PM SECTION I: ALL PERSONNEL  YES ONO  NIA I. This is the only state conference I will be attending this year.  YES  NO  NIA 2. This is the only national conference I will be attending this year.  YES  NO  NIA 3. My choice of airfare/ hotel was based on the moderate price range offered.  YES  NO  NIA 4. A plan has been developed to maximize coverage of sessions by all attendees for the benefit of my department and the District. (Auach conference agenda and plan)  YES ONO  NIA 5. Appropriate personal or vacation leave has been requested for pre or post conference stay.  YES ONO  NIA 6. This job-specific travel is based on my job performance responsibilities.  YES ONO  NIA 7. Request that expenses be paid by the District. If Yes, complete Travel Authorization form.  YES ONO  NIA 8. This travel will be covered by my site operating budget. If No, indicate the source of funds SEC'TIO:\\ II: l\\\"STRl 'C'TIO\\\"AL STAFF D YES D NO ON/A 9. A substitute will be requested for this absence. 0 YES ONO  N/A 10. Does extra duty pay apply? If Yes, list date(s): _______________ _ D YES ONO O N/A 11. Attendance at this conference/seminar is linked to a school-wide staff development goal that is related to the ASCIP, disparities or professional development plans. 12. Teachers requesting expenses and who will be chaperoning students should check: No. of students chaperoned___ 0 Will use personal vehicle O Will use transpgrtation other than personal vehicle 13. 1f you have answered No to any of the above questions, please provide an explanation: Please note the following:  Departments will rotate attendance of staff yearly with the expectation that returning attendees share information as a requirement of attendance.  Use of IDEA I Title funds, will be limited with a priority placed on school-based instructional staff funding for staff development. I understand that this travel is related to my professional responsibilities, must be approved by the principal, administrator or associate superintendent. In addition, I understand that this travel and expenses should be paid for by the association / organization and that temporary duty leave will be granted, with approval ofmy supervisor, for my attendance at this conference/ seminar. I certify to the best of my knowledge the above information is correct and understand that all information is subject to state and internal auditors.  Approved Signature of Teacher or Other Employee Date 0 Disapproved Signature of Principal or Immediate Supervisor - (In-State Travel) Date Associate Superintendent - (Out of State Travel only) Date I/you have any questions, contact Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor, at 447-1115. Travel Authorization - Advance/ Actual Cost Name/ Title ______________ _ School/ Dept. ________ _ Date __ _ Conference Name ________________ _ Conference Date(s) _________ _ Conference Location __________________________ (Attach copy of agenda) Departure Date ________ Time ____ _ Return Date ________ Time ___ _ Dates Covered: (Write dates in table below) ~ stJt, .': \\*\u0026lt;',M- ,-,. \"Ill C !' , w. TH F ' SA SU M :ru . w . ' TH i -,F -\"'1 ,SA\n!:'. Method of Travel: D Air D Personal Vehicle D Carpool with other D Other __________ _ Registration Amount $ __________ _ Cost of Airfare or other Transportation $ _______ _ Requisition# for Registration _________ _ Requisition# for Carrier ____________ _ Expenses Advance Actual Difference Mileage ___ _ Miles @ ___ Per Mile $ ___ _ $ ____ _ $ ___ _ Meals/ Per Diem: # of Days _______ _ $ ___ _ $ ___ _ $ ___ _ Lodging: (Attach original itemized receipt) # of Nights__ Room Rate __ Tax% __ _ $ ____ _ $ ____ _ $ ___ _ Other Expenses: (Taxi, etc.) ________ _ $ ___ _ $ ____ _ $ ___ _ Total Expenses $ __ _ $ __ _ $ __ _ Total Due: $ ______ _ D To Traveler D From Traveler SF FUNCT , OPUNIT OBJ I Requestee Supervisor Overall Supervisor Funding Source Mgr. Financial Services Approval of Travel and/ or Advance Date __ _ Date __ _ Date __ _ Date __ _ Date __ _ Approval of Actual Costs Date __ _ Date __ _ Date __ _ Date. __ _ Date. __ _ 8 z ~ iz5 \"' ~ ::c ,.. C: ~! m :a~ ~lS zc: ,m.. .:.a, m \"' \"'5!! n:., ~z n\u0026gt; 11:z n\u0026lt;\"\u0026gt; z:m ... go I c,, '- C: ~~  :0 ij .... DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 October 27, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Personnel Changes BACKGROUND: None RATIONALE: To staff allocated positions within the District FUNDING: Operating Fund RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A. C.A. 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) consecutive years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 19, 2005 for regular schools are considered intern teachers. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 8, 2005 for EYE are considered intern teachers. bf~ PREPARED BY: David E. Hartz, Senior Director of Human Resources 8\n0z fJ\u0026gt; .~,, z  z n ~ fJ\u0026gt; ?\u0026lt; n 5 fJ\u0026gt; z Cl\na m I fJ\u0026gt; .. ,, ~ :., ~z n  ,s,: nz z:m ... go I fJ\u0026gt; .. C: :~ ..\na :6 ... Personnel Changes Page2 September 22, 2005 NAME START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Resignations/Terminations Certified Em~lo)lees Adams, Bernard Alternative Learning/ 9-18-95 Reason: Personal RIGHTS ELL 8-10-05 Bryant, Michael Science/ 7-17-02 Reason: Accepted another J. A FAIR 8-2-05 position Gall, Janet Elementary II/ 8-22-88 Reason: Leaving the city ROMINE 9-16-05 Gangluff, Tracey Speech Pathology/ 8-9-04 Reason: Leaving the city CHICOT 9-16-05 Goodman, Tamara Elementary V/ 2-24-03 Reason: Accepted another KING 8-1-05 position Kinslow, Nancy 4Yr Old/ 8-12-99 Reason: Health Reasons CHICOT 10-14-05 Mccorkle, Frances Elementary V/ 8-15-94 Reason: Retired ROCKEFELLER 9-8-05 McMurray, Victor Social Studies/ 8-27-8ii Reason: None given CENTRAL 8-2-05 Miller, Bruce Algebra 1/ 10-1-86 Reason: None given CENTRAL 8-1-05 Paige, Jr. Willie Assistant Principal (.57)/ 8-28-68 Reason: None Given MCCLELLAN 8-29-05 Peyton, Chanda English/ 2-2-00 Reason: Accepted another HENDERSON 8-4-05 position Tarpley, Glynda Special Education/ 8-14-95 Reason: Personal TERRY 9-20-05 Walther, Tammy English/ 8-13-98 Reason: Returning to school J. A FAIR 8-2-05 SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 1-17 48196.00 TCH925 4-09 42662.00 TCH10 2-17 49217.00 TCH925 62-12 50928.00 SPE925 1-17 47715.00 TCH925 6-14 51845.00 4YR925 6-18 56209.00 TCH925 4-19 54561 .00 TCH925 4-19 54561.00 TCH925 66-20 72864.00 ADC10 5-06 40756.00 TCH925 6-18 56209.00 SPE925 4-07 40351 .00 TCH925 Personnel Changes Page 3 September 22, 2005 fl 8 z \u0026gt;..... START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL 0z NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY u, New Certified Employees Bisbee, Donanne Art/ 8-16-05 1-05 33673.00 J. A. FAIR TCH925 annual 33146.86 prorated Boyd, Debbye General Science/ 8-11-05 2-17 49705.00 ALC TCH925 .!=.,' z Brakefield, Vance Band/ 8-11-05 4-04 37069.00 \u0026gt;z n PARKVIEW TCH925 \u0026gt;,... u, Bruhl, Rita Elementary I/ 8-22-05 2-04 34021 .00 ROMINE TCH925 annual 32780.00 prorated Burns, Josiah Elementary Ill/ 8-17-05 3-08 39976.00 ?\u0026lt; n KING TCH925 annual ,... 0 u, 39338.02 z C) prorated\n,\n, m Coleman, Donna Special Education/ 8-17-05 6-06 42556.00 i u, SOUTHWEST SPE925 annual 41669.42 prorated Daneshvar, Tamara Spanish/ 8-11-05 1-01 30190.00 CENTRAL TCH925 ~ Tl :.,, - Davis, Judith Special Education/ 8-11-05 5-05 39798.00 ~~ s:z Tl 0 FOREST HEIGHTS SPE925 a:m \"I \"'u\"\", '-C Dongmo, Annick Math II/ 8-11-05 4-01 34747.00 :~ \n,\nJ MCCLELLAN TCH925 5 ..... Germany, Pamela Music/ 8-24-05 6-20 58812.00 RIGHTSELU TCH925 annual WASHINGTON 56055.19 prorated Green, Raefani English/ 8-11-05 1-01 30190.00 !J:I ~ CENTRAL TCH925 u, m !I: m :5 t.. Personnel Changes Page4 September 22, 2005 NAME Grubb, Kelly Hays, Mark Hill, Natasha Hunter, Broderick Jeffus, Brandon Johnson, Harvey Madden, Sammye Mayberry, Kimberly McDonald, Thomas McMillan, Tashenia McNeil!, Janie START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Kindergarten/ 8-18-05 DODD Science/ 8-11-05 MABELVALE MIDDLE English/ 8-11-05 CLOVERDALE MIDDLE Elementary V/ 10-12-05 OTTER CREEK Physics/ 8-11-05 MCCLELLAN Electronics/ 8-3-05 METRO Mathematics/ 8-11-05 FELDER Typing/ 8-22-05 MABELVALE MIDDLE Social Studies/ 8-15-05 FELDER Business Education/ 8-5-05 MCCLELLAN Algebra I/ 8-11-05 CENTRAL SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 1-01 30040.00 K925 annual 29403.80 prorated 1-02 30770.00 TCH925 1-03 31351.00 TCH925 1-09 38318.00 TCH925 annual 29736.36 prorated 4-01 34747.00 TCH925 1-12 43107.28 VOC10 annual 41801.00 prorated 2-12 43311 .00 TCH925 1-01 30190.00 TCH925 annual 29246.56 prorated 4-01 34747.00 TCH925 annual 34385.05 prorated 1-04 33359.00 TCH950 4-18 46446.00 TCH925 Personnel Changes Page 5 September 22, 2005 f\u0026gt; 8 z .\u0026gt;... START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL 0 z NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY \"' Mitchell, Mary Kindergarten/ 10-11-05 4-18 53326.00 GEYER SPRINGS K925 annual 41660.94 prorated Moye, Randall American History/ 8-17-05 1-16 46446.00 MCCLELLAN TCH925 annual 45478.37 prorated !.=.,' Perkins, Michael Physical Education/ 8-2-05 4-06 42469.50 z \u0026gt;z PULASKI HEIGHTS TCH925 C')  MIDDLE ,... \"' Priebe, Kurtis Algebra 1/ 8-11-05 3-01 33209.00 MCCLELLAN TCH925 Robinson, Renee Physics/ 8-17-05 4-07 40553.00 CENTRAL TCH925 annual ?\u0026lt; 39708.15 C,..'.) 0 prorated \"z' C)\na Scruggs, Clare Arkansas History/ 8-11-05 4-01 34747.00 m J. A. FAIR TCH925 I \"' Sharlow, Alan Band/ 8-11-05 1-5 33673.00 MCCLELLAN TCH925 Sherlin, Phillip Science/ 9-12-05 1-01 30190.00 MABELVALE MIDDLE TCH925 annual .. ~ 26887.97 ,, :., - prorated :.n, \u0026gt;z a::z ., C') z: m Staley, Jerry Art/ 8-11-05 4-18 53326.00 -\u0026lt;Do I (I) '- C: PULASKI HEIGHTS TCH925 :~ MIDDLE/DUNBAR \na ii .... Stewart, Sherrie World History/ 8-11-05 1-01 30190.00 CENTRAL TCH925 Weaver, Nellieann English/ 8-11-05 1-01 30190.00 SOUTHWEST TCH925 !I\" Wingfield, Elizabeth English/ 8-22-05 1-04 32512.00 ~ PULASKI HEIGHTS annual \"m' :I: MIDDLE 31326.67 m !\nprorated C Personnel Changes Page6 September 22, 2005 NAME POSITION / SCHOOL START DATE/ SALARY END DATE CLASS Resignations/Terminations Non-Certified Employees Anderson, Almarie Instructional Aide/ 3-13-03 33-16 Reason: Accepted another CHICOT 9-27-05 INA925 position Armstead, Victoria Secretary/ 4-11-88 39-20 Reason: Deceased ACC-METRO 10-14-05 CLK10 Bonds, Dorothy Child Nutrition/ 8-12-03 7-06 Reason: None given ROCKEFELLER 8-29-05 FSH650 Carter, John CARE/ 2-28-05 3-17 Reason: None given CARE 9-30-05 CARE Clark, Phyllis Child Nutrition/ 3-10-04 3-01 Reason: None given MANN 9-12-05 FSH550 Davis, Doris Bus Monitor/ 10-15-85 1-10 Reason: Resigned without TRANSPORTATION 9-19-05 BUSMON notice Dobbins, Malinda Instructional Aide/ 8-16-04 33-16 Reason: Accepted another FOREST HEIGHTS 8-8-05 INA925 position Ghant, Natlyn CARE/ 8-19-05 3-05 Reason: Resigned without CARE 10-04-05 CARE notice Green, James Custodian/ 9-27-04 36-07 Reason: Terminated CENTRAL 10-28-05 CUS12 (misconduct)-No appeal pending Hardman, Melissa Instructional Aide/ 2-7-05 33-16 Reason: None given FOREST HEIGHTS 8-10-05 INA925 Hart, Andrew Custodian/ 1-20-99 31-10 Reason: Deceased MABEL VALE 8-22-05 CUS925 ELEMENTARY Haynes, Danielle Instructional Aide/ 10-23-00 33-13 Reason: Accepted another WOODRUFF 10-26-05 INA925 position ANNUAL SALARY 16109.00 32544.00 11111 .00 10.36 per hour 9350.00 14107.00 16109.00 8.38 per hour 20184.00 16109.00 14897.00 14735.00 Personnel Changes Page7 September 22, 2005 r, 8 z ?\nSTART DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL i5 z NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY \"' Lewis, Johnetta CARE/ 8-29-05 2-03 7.85 Reason: None given CARE 10-2-05 CARE per hour Mays, Barbara Custodian/ 8-21-94 31-14 16781 .00 Reason: Job Abandonment KING 8-15-05 CUS928 Millen, Shirley Child Nutrition/ 2-11-91 3-14 9933.00 Reason: None given WAKEFIELD 10-20-05 FSH550 !.=.,' Murphy, Demetria Custodian/ 8-13-04 31-01 11379.00 z \u0026gt;z Reason: None given MCCLELLAN 4-19-05 CUS928 0 ,\u0026gt;- \"' Ricks, Anjanette Instructional Aide/ 2-13-05 33-16 16109.00 Reason: Personal ALC 8-17-05 INA925 Roberts, Caroline Child Nutrition/ 9-20-02 7-02 11111 .00 Reason: Job Abandonment FRANKLIN 8-8-05 FSH650 ?\u0026lt; Schultz, Barbara Instructional Aide/ 9-1-01 33-17 16595.00 ,0- Reason: Deceased MABELVALE MIDDLE 8-9-05 INA925 0 !!? z C) Scott, Frank Custodian 3-22-04 31-03 12085.00 \"m' ~ Reason: Personal BALE 10-6-05 CUS925 :\",'\n\"' Seawood, Ruth CARE/ 3-18-02 1-06 7.74 Reason: Returning to school CARE 9-15-05 CARE per hour Skinner, Melva Instructional Aide/ 8-13-01 33-13 14735.00 Reason: Personal FOREST HEIGHTS 8-1-05 INA925 ~ .., Smith, Beverly CARE/ 9-2-05 2-05 8.18 z \u0026gt;z Reason: None given CARE 9-26-05 CARE per hour 0 m \"\"\"' Swanigan, Shirley CARE/ 1-13-97 1-08 8.05 C.,,: Reason: None given CARE 9-30-05 CARE per hour ~ ~ Thomas, Anthony Custodian/ 8-27-02 31-05 16380.00 Reason: Failure to report MCCLELLAN 7-1-05 MAINT after hired Vick, Jo Ella Instructional Aide/ 10-13-89 33-10 13459.00 Reason: None given FOREST PARK 9-30-05 INA925 !JI ~ Walter, Minnie Instructional Aide/ 4-3-00 33-11 13875.00 \"m' ~ Reason: None given RIGHTSELL 8-10-05 INA925 m 3 c-\nIC \u0026lt; Personnel Changes Pages September 22, 2005 NAME Whaley, Billy Reason: Leaving the city Allen, Tracy Annamraju, Sivakamini Backus, Rebecca Bailey, Ada Bailey, Pamela Balfour, Belinda Barber, Jimmy Bealer, Carol Blackmon, Lonzell Brandon, Rita POSITION / SCHOOL Maintenance/ FACILITY SERVICES START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL END DATE CLASS SALARY 9-7-82 10-15-05 52-20 47976.00 MAINT New Non-Certified Employees Security Officer/ 9-2-05 36-10 15463.00 ALC SOFR9 annual 14358.50 prorated Instructional Aide/ 8-11-05 33-16 16109.00 FOREST HEIGHTS INA925 MIDDLE Nurse/ 8-11-05 52-09 34548.00 FOREST HEIGHTS NURSES CARE/ 9-12-05 2-05 8.18 CARE CARE per hour Instructional Aide/ 8-11-05 33-16 16109.00 J. A. FAIR INA925 Child Nutrition/ 8-31-05 3-01 9350.00 HALL FSH550 annual 8847.31 prorated Security Officer/ 9-2-05 36-16 18491.00 HALL SOFR9 annual 17170.21 prorated Instructional Aide/ 9-26-05 33-16 11759.57 TERRY INA925 annual 9789.05 prorated CARE/ 9-12-05 2-04 8.01 CARE CARE per hour Instructional Aide/ 8-28-05 33-03 13889.00 ROCKEFELLER INA12 annual 11643.12 prorated Personnel Changes Page9 September 22, 2005 !\"' 8 z ~ START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL i5 z NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY Ul Brown, Cynthia Instructional Aide/ 8-19-05 33-18 17094.00 FELDER INA925 annual 16539.60 prorated Brown, Dewayne Custodian (.5)/ 9-6-05 31-01 5689.50 MABEL VALE CUS925 annual ELEMENTARY 4947.39 !=' prorated .., z \u0026gt;z (\") Brown, Edmonda Media Clerk/ 9-16-05 31-06 16872.00 \u0026gt;,... FELDER CLK925 annual Ul 14628.38 prorated Butler, Carolyn Instructional Aide/ 8-19-05 33-16 16109.00 FOREST HEIGHTS INA925 annual 15586.55 ?\u0026lt; prorated (,.\".). 0 Ul z Butler, Kamarious Instructional Aide/ 10-6-05 33-16 16109.00 C) :,0 m CHICOT INA925 annual i 12953.80 Ul prorated Butler, Tiffani Instructional Aide/ 9-28-05 33-16 16109.00 TERRY INA925 annual 13409.65 prorated ,, ~ :., - Cogshell, Joy Instructional Aide/ 8-19-05 33-09 13070.00 ~~ II: z FELDER INA925 annual ,, (\") z:m ... go 12646.11 I Ul '- C: prorated :~  :,O :5 .... Coleman, Sharon Child Nutrition/ 8-22-05 3-01 9350.00 WASHINGTON FSH550 annual 9249.46 prorated Criswell, Chasina Instructional Aide/ 9-1-05 33-07 12307.00 ROCKEFELLER INA12 annual ?I 11309.14 ~ Ul prorated m ii:: m ~ Personnel Changes Page 10 September 22, 2005 NAME Davis, Jennifer Davis, Sandra Duty, Rochelle Garrison, Dontornice Glasper, Nancy Glenn, James Gooden, Shamekia Gonzalez, Luis Grafals, Vera Harvell, Lola START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Instructional Aide/ 9-1-05 ROCKEFELLER Security Officer/ 9-2-05 J. A. FAIR Instructional Aide/ 8-19-05 FELDER Instructional Aide/ 8-17-05 FOREST HEIGHTS CARE/ 9-12-05 CARE Security Officer/ 9-2-0q WILSON Security Officer/ 9-2-05 CLOVERDALE MIDDLE Security Officer/ 9-2-05 HALL Instructional Aide/ 9-19-05 OTTER CREEK CARE/ 9-12-05 CARE SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 33-09 16603.00 INA12 annual 13707.31 prorated 36-10 15463.00 SOFR9 annual 14358.50 prorated 33-16 16109.00 INA925 annual 15586.55 prorated 33-04 11253.00 INA925 annual 11009.69 prorated 1-02 7.13 CARE per hour 36-10 15463.00 SOFR9 annual 14358.50 prorated 36-10 15463.00 SOFR9 annual 14358.50 prorated 36-11 15929.00 SOFR9 annual 14791.00 prorated 33-04 7539.51 INA925 annual 6479.90 prorated 2-08 8.64 CARE per hour Personnel Changes Page 11 September 22, 2005 p g .\u0026gt;z.. . START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL i5 z CLASS SALARY U\u0026gt; NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Hawkins, Tony Security Officer/ 9-2-05 36-10 15463.00 CENTRAL SOFR9 annual 14358.50 prorated Higgins, Judy Assistant Registrar/ 8-2-05 39-12 25632.00 HALL CLK10 p Hines, Terry Security Officer/ 9-2-05 36-10 15463.00 .., z \u0026gt; FULBRIGHT SOFR9 annual z n 14358.50 \u0026gt;,... U\u0026gt; prorated Hunter, Roshuanda Custodian/ 8-17-05 31-01 11379.00 MCCLELLAN CUS928 annual 11255.32 prorated ?\u0026lt; n lstifan, Najat Instructional Aide/ 8-28-05 33-09 16603.00 ,... 0 !!? ROCKEFELLER INA12 annual z c:, 13918.26\no m prorated I\n,,: U\u0026gt; Jackson, Jeffery Custodian/ 8-3-0~ 31-04 12453.00 CENTRAL CUS928 Jackson, Mary Instructional Aide/ 8-19-05 33-04 11253.00 FELDER INA925 annual 10888.04 .. ~ prorated ,, :.., ~,, z\u0026gt; 1,, :nz Joiner, Lawrence Custodian/ 8-13-05 31-01 13616.00 zm -\u0026lt;!lo DUNBAR CUS925 annual I U\u0026gt; :... C: 6808.00 :~ ..\no prorated :6 .... Jones, Angela Child Nutrition/ 9-9-05 3-01 9350.00 ROCKEFELLER FSH550 annual 8495.43 prorated Lopez, Miguel Security Officer/ 9-2-05 36-10 15463.00 !JI CLOVERDALE SOFR9 annual ~ U\u0026gt; m MIDDLE 14358.50\na: m prorated !!'\nr Personnel Changes Page 12 September 22, 2005 NAME Leech, Cynthia Lewis, Alice Luster, Porchia McClendon, Marcus Mosby, Lashaun Murphy, Marc Murray, Danette Norfleet, Floyd Nuoffer, Mary START DATE/ POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE Child Nutrition/ 8-25-05 BRADY Child Nutrition/ 9-19-05 OTTER CREEK Instructional Aide/ 8-19-05 J. A. FAIR CARE/ 9-26-05 CARE Security Officer/ 9-2-05 PARKVIEW Custodian/ 8-18-0? METRO Guidance Secretary/ 8-15-05 PARKVIEW Security Officer/ 9-2-05 J. A. FAIR Secretary/ 9-12-05 FELDER SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 3-01 9350.00 FSH550 annual 9098.66 prorated 3-01 9350.00 FSH550 annual 8193.82 prorated 33-06 16109.00 INA925 annual 15586.55 prorated 2-02 7.70 CARE per hour 36-16 18491.00 SOFR9 annual 17170.21 prorated 31-01 14532.00 CUS12 annual 12491 .34 prorated 38-12 24876.00 CLK10 annual 23773.12 prorated 36-16 18491 .00 SOFR9 annual 17170.21 prorated 39-12 25632.00 CLK10 annual 22096.55 prorated Personnel Changes Page 13 September 22, 2005 ~ 8 z ?\nSTART DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL 0 z CLASS SALARY \"' NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Palos, Matilde Child Nutrition/ 9-28-05 3-01 9350.00 BASELINE FSH550 annual 7942.47 prorated Parker, James Security Officer/ 9-2-05 36-10 15463.00 WAKEFIELD SOFR9 annual 14358.50 !=' prorated .., z \u0026gt;z C\") Piggee, LaQuinton Custodian/ 9-19-05 31-01 11379.00 \u0026gt;,... PULASKI HEIGHTS CUS928 annual \"' ELEMENTARY 9894.78 prorated Riley, Janice Child Nutrition/ 9-28-05 3-01 9350.00 FRANKLIN FSH550 annual 7942.47 ?\u0026lt; C\") prorated ,... 0 !!! z C) Romes, Robert Custodian/ 8-15-05 31-01 11379.00\na m METRO CUS928 ~\n,,: \"' Shirrill, Annette Nurse(.5)/ 9-16-0? 52-08 13411.20 WILSON NURSES annual 11664.95 prorated Simmons, Gregory Instructional Aide/ 8-11-05 33-16 16109.00 .. si! ALC INA925 ,, :., rn -z ,, \u0026gt; a::z ,, C\") Stewart, Eddie Security Officer/ 9-2-05 36-16 18491.00 zm ... go HENDERSON SOFR9 annual I rn .... C: 17170.21 ~~ prorated \na\n6 .... Turner, Edward Custodian/ 9-15-05 31-01 14532.00 STEPHENS CUS12 annual 11440.09 prorated Ward, Angela Instructional Aide/ 8-19-05 33-16 16109.00 !I' TERRY INA925 annual \"~' m 15586.55 ii: m prorated :: C Personnel Changes Page 14 September 22, 2005 NAME Wells, Barbara White, Renetta White, Tremmel Wilborn, Cynthia Young, Monica START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Custodian/ 9-6-05 CENTRAL Child Nutrition/ 8-31-05 HALL Instructional Aide/ 9-16-05 KING Nurse/ 9-26-05 GEYER SPRINGS/ WOODRUFF Instructional Aide/ 10-5-05 FRANKLIN SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 31-01 11379.00 CUS928 annual 10575.05 prorated 3-01 9350.00 FSH550 annual 8847.31 prorated 33-04 11253.00 INA925 annual 9732.32 prorated 52-08 33528.00 NURSES annual 28114.62 prorated 33-16 16109.00 INA925 annual 13432.55 prorated DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 October 27, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Property Easement: J. A. Fair BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District is undertaking a project to relocate the sanitary system at J. A. Fair High School from its present connection-point on Dodd Road to one that is closer and within the confines of the city streets immediately south of the school. In order for this connection to be allowed, an easement must be attained from Kenwood Estates, Inc. RATIONALE: The Little Rock School District presently operates a pumping station at J. A. Fair High School that pumps sewage approximately one-half mile to the city main. Recently another main has been relocated south of the school in the Kenwood Estates area. It is possible for us to connect to this main, eventually abandon the pumping station and the one-half mile of line that we now have, and provide much better service to the Little Rock School District. FUNDING: This project will be funded out of the bond funds for J. A. Fair High School. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board approve the attached easement and allow the administration to proceed. PREPARED BY: Douglas Eaton, Director of School Construction 8 z ?\n0z \"' ,,\u0026gt;..\u0026lt;.. .\u0026gt; \u0026lt; c:z: 5~ c::o ~z I: C) m.z.. . \"' !II ~ \"m' I: m ~ C' RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT (CORPORATION) KNOW ALL ME BY THESE PRESENTS: THAT Kenwood Estates , Inc . , GRANTOR, a corporation organized under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Arkansas , by its _________________ , and ______________ duly authorized by proper resolution of its Board of Directors, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars($~, and other valuable consideration paid by the Linle Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged , do hereby, subject to prior recorded mortgages and easements, if any, grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, for the use and benefit of the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee, GRANTEE, and unto its successors and assigns forever, the following described easements: 1. A PERMANENT RIGHT, PRIVILEGE AND EASEMENT for the purpose of permitting the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee and the Little Rock Wastewater Utility to clear and keep clear the surface of the right-of-way and to (a) lay, construct, operate , maintain , repair, replace, reconstruct, test, inspect and add sewer mains and sewer lines whether on or more, and without the payment of additional compensation therefore\n(b) keeping the easement clear of all buildings and other improvements of any kind\nand (c) having the right to free ingress and egress across adjacent land of the GRANTOR(S) to the lands hereinafter described. Subject to prior easement of record and except as hereinafter stated, the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee shall have the exclusive use of this right-of-way and easement\nand the GRANTOR may hereinafter use the surface of the easement for any purpose not inconsistent with the rights hereby conveyed, but may not place a building, footing, wall, structure, or other improvement upon the right-of-way except that, after the initial sewer construction is completed , the GRANTOR may pave the easement surface and may use it for driveways, walks, or parking areas. The GRANTOR may permit other utility service to cross this easement at approximately right angles, but only if such utilities first comply with whatever specifications the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Comminee and the Little Rock Wastewater Utility may designate at the time for the protection of its own facilities. This permanent easement shall be upon the following described lands situated in Pulaski County, Arkansas, to-wit: SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT Part of Lots 17 and 18, Kenwood Estates Subdivision - Phase 2, in the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas, being more particularly described as follows\nThe East 7.5 feet of Lot 17 and the West 7.5 feet of Lot 18 of the said Kenwood Estates Subdivision - Phase 2, in the City of Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas, said easement being a total width of 15 feet and containing 1,834 square feet more or less. 2. A TEMPORARY RIGHT, PRIVILEGE AND EASEMENT for the purpose of permitting the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee and the Little Rock Wastewater Utility to remove all timber and obsrruciions therefrom and to make excavations, store excavated material s, tool s. supplies and equipment and provide working space. This temporary easement shall begin when the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee and the Little Rock Wastewater Utility commence the initial work on the permanent easement and shall terminate one year after that date or when that work is completed, whichever is earlier. This temporary easement shall be upon the following described lands situated in Pulaski County, Arkansas, to-wit: None (Intentionally left blank). Upon completion of the initial or any subsequent work by the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee, the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee shall backfill and thoroughly compact all excavations to minimize settling and shall level the surface over its excavations and pipelines, remove all excess ex...:avated m:nerials and debris and leave the premises in a clean sanitary condition. If the initial or any subsequent work by the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee damages any fence, curb or paved surface upon the rights-of-way, the Little Rock Sanitary Sewer Committee, an its expense, shall repair or replace the damaged portion with materials of like quality and as nearly possible to its prior condition. The execution of this easement does not give the GRANTOR the right to connect to or receive service from any sewer or wastewater facility\nthe right to make connections and receive service shall be subject to the rules, regulations, policies or ordinances in effect at the time of application. To have and to hold said easements, rights and privileges unto the GRANTEE, and unto its successors and assigns forever, for the purposes aforesaid. And GRANTOR(S) covenants with GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, that subject to prior recorded mortgages and easements, if any, it will forever warrant and defend the title to said easements and rights against the claims of all persons whomsoever and that GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, shall have at al! times the quiet use and enjoyment of said easements and rights. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the name of the GRANTOR is hereunto affixed by its and its seal affixed by it's ________________ , this _______ day of -------- 2005. By: ATTEST: (Corporate Sea!) ?\u0026lt; n 5 en z C)\no I en C\" STATE OF ARKANSAS ) COUNTY OF PULASKJ ) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT On this day personally appeared before the undersigned, a Notary Public within and for the County and State aforesaid, duly qualified, commissioned and acting, -----------------, and --------------- to me well known, who stated that they were the ______________ and _________________ ,of _______________ _ , a corporation, and were duly authorized in their respective capacities to execute the foregoing easement for and in the name and behalf of said corporation, and further stated and acknowledged that they had so signed, executed and delivered said easement for the consideration, uses and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. WITNESS my hand and official seal on this ____ day of _______ _ 2005 Notary Public My Commission Expires: (SEAL) . , I I I I . n~ sc r \nc-.~: ~ 1.\nt~~ I 105 / '\n '::: ..... I 1:21 cs \"' 'J I\u0026gt; 0 \" 107 to (1ml L1-r n ... -s:- f\u0026lt;.o\u0026lt;'.....,:. :Sc::1-1,ool, Q 1:S1K1C..T ?_-___ :X A. FA1R.. H1(QH Sc..1'4.oc.L... -z _ _ 0 C ~ 108 g C \" 109 g 0 \" 110 1 1 1 0 C i?. 2C 112 c=- \"~L N-T=-\n: 1/: \" !PON PltlS  3 JTS YnH f'OU:r ~1E .!.$UR~G iO\nC Vt L07 u~.::s ..:.NC CL.R.\n~ \"' DISTAN:5 Sn'ji\\'N :t'~iiO OSTA~:~.:~s 5 F?OR CF C~OSt.JR C NJ \\.'::n1.:u_,\n? .\\C 7 T:--!ER:: IS :. lC TT ALJ.:.\n:::r-sr TC S7'?.~ t,C, P:,r'.7,,J,~ ct T~IS 0 ~0=::~:Y ,s ~:.),:.:.-:, wlTMn, ~r--:~ '.CC ::::.~ =-_ =~vfJ:,~y .:..s Si\n0','TM O!\"i Tr\n fLV~J-.,~~. ?LOGU C'Jur.:4~ r ~~c. F:..C INSUR.:..r-,.:E WCNr' t.1:...c r\n:,r. LiTTL:'.: ~-::CK,\n.\n:,:.:1:.:.:: t F\":r':M C0~1~.1Ur\nJi)' c.\nh_ # C:OC 131 CJ:3\n:_ CC- 1 ], ~:,: l '-------------------------- =i\n.RT (\\~ Tr S\\{l / t, SWl IJ Qt\" s:::-:Dtl ~'. T--.-\n, r-:3-'1\\, C01J , T''. ,:.~r:ArlSft3 MC'\u0026lt;[ P.1KiiCU~P.~ r C':S,:ii:E: .\\:: 3E:~liHtlf1G ,\n- i,-::: ttCRTMw::5- :c:2, .. ~\n(\nt _u\nl. !\\~,.,. .. ,cue :: ~~3:.1\\~ s1cr-i. 0 :-1..:..s~ i.:. A.t1 :..oc111ct. o Tt-1 c:r( (F u-_: P..., .A~Y.:./'JS.:.S\nfH :1\"4:E tJC8'-T''50\"W. 15 G\\J ~ iC .\nPGl!li Ut1 7r: R,Vt-C -Cr\"-'t,'\nY UH or o.:.-~1c, 0.CC:CG R~i.:..C. 3~HiV JG o\n:: r':  C~r,C[?:..1t1 ~H::F:OF. T-t~ i:::: r~: :.-cJ .i.:~ E .\n_JtiG :,11[ :::_:.~ ~ ~. '(,). t L,M[. 215.J) r\nT'\"'EN:E N:.:='='J.!''[ ::J1'fT1tJt,\n1 ..... (. A .. on:. :!Si RiVHT- OF\" - WA.Y Ufl[ , 7:?9.17 r.. TO~ ?Crtr Or.. Tr-[ f l\\-,~ T ... C:: S1 / 2 til/2 SWi/ 5t/i/.\n, s..:.,c s~:::T1()M 2i , Tr,E~l:::~ s.\n:-.:. L.Jt.C :..:.10 NJrHH Lit,. 73\n33 fi , Tt4U .. c:: sa:-0~ '. :,\",,_ I:! ~ -: !r-~\n~~ ~a~~o45#E. 500 FT Tt-K ,r.~ \".0'\":'\"'')(\n' I~ ...... : rrr, 8 z !:\n0z \"' ,\u0026gt;..\u0026lt;. \u0026gt;\u0026lt;  - c :c 5~ c\n,:, ~z :I: C'l m\"' z .... !lD DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 October 27, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Property Easement: Gibbs Elementary School BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District is undertaking an expansion program at Gibbs Elementary School. In order to complete this project, an easement must be granted to Entergy Arkansas, Inc., to locate a transformer on our property to meet the needs of the facility. RATIONALE: In order to provide an updated service to meet the existing and future needs of Gibbs Elementary School, a new transformer must be located on site. Entergy has requested that we grant them an easement to locate this transformer that will give them access for repairs when necessary. The easement will be as shown on the attached drawing. FUNDING: The funding for this project will be covered by the LRSD bond funds allocated to Gibbs Elementary School. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board approve the attached easement to Entergy Arkansas, Inc., for this project. PREPARED BY: Douglas Eaton, Director of School Construction :\u0026gt;\u0026lt;- \u0026gt;\u0026lt; \u0026gt;\" c:c 5~ c\n,:, ~z\nI: C'l mu, z -\u0026lt; ST A TE OF ARKA SAS COUNTY or, PULASKI Line/ProJect lden11fica11on: WR  22366 RIGHT-OF-WAY INSTRUME T ENTERGY ARKANSAS, I C. KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT: ________________ , Grantor(s), acting ind1v1dually, and for, and on behalf of, my/our heir , successors, assigns and any other person claiming the ownership to the property hereinafter described, collectively \"Grantor\", for and in consideration of one dollar, in hand paid, and other good and valuable considerauon, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, assign, convey unto and warrant and defend Entergy Arkansas, Inc., and its uccessor and assigns, collectively \"Grantee\", a right-of-way, servitude and easement JO feet in width, for the location. construcuon, reconstruction, improvements, repairs, operation, inspection, patrol, replacement and maintenance of electric power and communication facilities, or the removal thereof, now or in the future, including, but not necessarily limited to, poles, cross arm , insulators, wires, cables, conduits, hardware, transformers, switches, guy wires. anchors and other equipment, structures, material and appurtenances, now or hereafter used, useful or desired in connection therewith by Grantee over, across, under or on that land of Grantor in the County of Pulaski, State of Arkansas described as follows, to-wit: See attached description Together with the right of ingre sand egress to and from said right-of-way across the adjoining land of the Grantor and the nght to attach wires and cables of any other party to Grantee's facilities. Unless otherwise herein specifically provided, the center line of the electric power and communication lines initially constructed on this right-of-way shall be the center line of said right-of-way. Grantee shall have the full and continuing right to clear and keep clear vegetation within or growing into said rightof- way and the further right to remove or modify from time to time trees, limbs, and/or vegetation outside the said right of way which Grantee considers a hazard to any of its electric power or communications facilities or a hazard to the rendering of adequate and dependable service to Grantor or any of Grantee's customers, by use of a variety of methods used in the vegetation management industry. Grantor shall not construct or permit the construction of any structure, obstruction or other hazard within the said right-of-way, including but not limited to, house, barn, garage, shed, pond, pool or well, excepting only Grantor's fence(s) and Grantee's facilities. Grantor shall not construct or permit the construction of any buildings or other structures on land adjoining said right-of-way in violation of the minimum clearances from the lines and facilities of Grantee, as provided in the National Electrical Safety Code. Grantor, if husband and wife, do hereby release and relinquish all of our rights of curtesy, dower, and homestead to the said right-of-way. 1Rc, U-1/16/%-EAIJ E00193 04/96 I ' WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has executed this Right-of-Way Instrument on this _ da1 of GRA TOR: ACKNOWLEDGME T ST ATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF ______________ _ BE IT REMEMBERED that on th1 day come before me the undersigned, a otary Public, within and for the county and state aforesaid, duly commissioned, and acting _________ to me well known as the Grantor 111 the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that had executed the same for the consideration, uses and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. The above-signed person(s) acknowledged that _________ freely and voluntarily released and relinquished all rights of dower homestead and/or curtesy in the above described easement. W11ness my hand and seal as such otary Public this __ day of ___________ , 2004. Commission Expires ____ _ otary Public !SEAL] 1Re1 . 0-1/1\u0026lt;,/%-EAI) E00193 04/96 8 ! lz5 u, !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z n\n!! u, ?\u0026lt; n 5 u, z C) ::a i u, EASEME T DESCRIPTIO Part of Block 280 of the Original City of Little Rock, Arkansas, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the orthwest comer of said Block 280\nthence along the Easterly rightof- way line of Cross Street, South 0932'27\" West 57.30 feet to the POI T OF BEGI 11 G\nthence South 8027'33\" East 13.00 feet\nthence South 0932'27\" West 15.00 feet\nthence North 8027'33\" West 13.00 feet to a point on the Easterly right-ofway line of Cross Street\nthence along said right-of-way line orth 0932'27\" East 15.00 feet to the POI T OF BEGI I G, containing 195.0 square feet, more or less. I vz REBAR/ FOUND / \\ w l\u0026gt; 0 1 STORY BRICK BUILDING FF 345.98 APASvtHPGH ALT\\ r----_ I I ---r-::::-r N ~ BASKETBALL GOAL I 04~ ASPHALT CLos'D\\ .// PAVING _/ ------ ------ ' I FF f/1 347.30 I \"\"'' FF 350.00 1 STORY BRICK BUILDING ----11: W, PLAYGROUN !.:.I, z z\u0026gt; C') ~ Cl) ?\u0026lt; n 5 Cl\u0026gt; z C) i Cl\u0026gt; DATE: TO: October 27, 2005 Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District receives donations from businesses and individuals on a regular basis. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District that donations are not formally accepted until they are approved by the Board of Directors. RATIONALE: District policy states that, in order to maintain the centralized fixed asset property accounting system, all property donation requests are forwarded to the Director of Procurement. The Procurement Department forwards the requests, along with the appropriate recommendations, to the Board of Directors for acceptance and approval. In order for proper recognition and appreciation to be conveyed to the donor, donor's name and current mailing address should be included in the donation memo. FUNDING: None RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the attached donation requests be approved and accepted in accordance with the policies of the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District. PREPARED BY: .if'oarral Paradis, Director of Procurement ~ ~Gwen Caraway, Fixed Asset Property Manager !=' -n z \u0026gt;z C') ~ tJ\u0026gt; ?\u0026lt; C') 5 tJ\u0026gt; z C)\nJO m i tJ\u0026gt; i!!! )(   o::c 5~ C:\nJO ~z 31::C) m\u0026lt;J\u0026gt; .z. . DONATIONS School/Department Item Donor Bale Elementary School $1,000.00 check UALR Children International to be used for student incentives Central High School $100.00 cash to the Rita Cunningham Troubadours/Debate Club Central High School $3,000.00 cash Cheryl Miller on behalf of towards the purchase RCF Corporation of a laminator for the Ninth Grade Academy Lab Central High School $400.00 cash to the Dr. Randal Hundley Troubadours/Debate Club Central High School $100.00 cash to the John Parke Troubadours/Debate Club Chicot Elementary School supplies valued The 39er's Class of St. School at approximately James United Methodist $250.00 Church J. A. Fair High School $288.77 check for paint Otter Creek Assembly of and labor for painting God Church the baseball dug-outs Forest Heights Middle Chairs, valued at $825.00, Arkansas Capitol Corporation School for the conference room Forest Heights Middle Musical instruments Mr. Douglas Braswell of School valued at $1 ,200.00 Easy Cash Pawn Shop Forest Park Elementary Funds totaling $48,926.88 Forest Park PT A School to be distributed for the programs outlined in the attached letter from the PTA School/Department Item Donor Fulbright Elementary $966.43 cash to be Fulbright PTA School used to purchase a Dell computer Fulbright Elementary $200.00 cash for Sam Storthz Ill School volunteer expenses for the Reading Buddies Fulbright Elementary Printer, valued at $157.00, Bob Derryberry School for the Health room Fulbright Elementary Safety signs and rubber Mr. \u0026amp; Mrs. Thomas H. Rains School safety mats valued at of the Federal Highway $1,661.58 Administration and Valerie .~., and Jay McDaniel z \u0026gt;z n \u0026gt;,.... UI BALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL To: D\" lal Paradis, Procurement Director From.~ . arbara Anderson, Principal Datet eptember 23, 2005 Re: Donation Bale Elementary received a check in the amount of $1000.00 from UALR Children International as an incentive for completing student projects during the last school year. The money has been deposited in our school activity account to be used for student's incentives. It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with LRSD policies. We are grateful to this organization for their support of our students and their families. RECEIVED SEP 2 6 2005 6501 West 32llll Street  Phone 501-447-3600  Fax 501-447-3601  Little Rock, Arkansas 72204 .Cittfe 'Rock Centra{ J{ifJfi Scfioo{ 1500 Soutli Park Street .ittfe 'Rock, .'Arkansas 72202 'Phone 501-447-1400 :fax 501-447-1401 DATE: 9/28/2005 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCURl\nMENT FROM: NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL1f-vUt\nf fAvC~t '-- SUBJECT: DONATION  Rita Cunningham of 5424 Southwood Road, Little Rock, AR 72205 graciously donated $100 to the Troubadours/Debate Club. It is my recommendation that this donation be. accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. RECEIVED SEP 2 9 2005 pR O CURE f,\nEfJ T ?\u0026lt; (') 0 u, z C) XI I u, :\u0026gt;\u0026lt;- \u0026gt;\u0026lt; \u0026gt;. o::i: 5~ C XI ~z :I: C) mu, ~ Litt{e 'Rock Centra{ J-figfi Scfioo{ 1500 Soutfi Park Street Litt{e 'Rock, .. 'Arkansas 72202 'Phone 501-447-1400 ]'ax 501-447-1401 DATE: 9/1/2005 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCU~ME~\n:,. . _ . FROM: NA CYROUSSEAU,PRINCIPAL~~ SUBJECT: DO ATIO , V O Cheryl Miller on behalf of RCF Corporation at 5 Shackleford Plaza, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72211, generously donated $3,000 towards the purchase of a laminator to be utilized in the lab of our Ninth Grade Academy. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted m accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. RECEiVED SEP 6 2o05 w PROCUREMENT Littfe 'Rock Centra{ J-fi/Jfi Scfioo{ 1500 Soutfi 'Park Street Litt{e 'Rock, .Jlrkansas 72202 Pfione 501-447-1400 ]\"ax 501-447-1401 DATE: 9/28/2005 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT FROM: NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL ~.,,, SUBJECT: DONATION Dr. Randal Hundley of 5515 Country Club Boulevard, Little Rock, AR 72207, very graciously donated $400 to the Troubadours/Debate Club. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. RECEIVED SEP 2 9 2005 PROCUREf.J1EtJT Littfe 'Rock Centra[ Jfigfi Scfioo[ 1500 Soutli 'Park Street Litt{e 'Rock, .Jlrkansas 72202 Plione 501-447-1400 :fax 501-447-1401 DATE: 9/28/2005 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT FROM: NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL ~ SUBJECT: DONATION John Parke of 60 Sherrill Road, Little Rock, AR 72202 graciously donated $100 to the Troubadours/Debate Club. It is my recommendation that this ~onation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. RECEIVED SEP 2 9 2005 PROCUR~c ~.../.\\ .,I. '.f... Jr CHICOT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL To: Darral Paradis, Procurement Director From: Jane Harkey, Princip~ Date: Sept. 23, 2005 Re: Donation \\ The 39er's Class of St. James United Methodist Church has donated approximately $250 worth of school supplies to the students of Chicot. We are extremely appreciative of their generosity. It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with LRSD policies. The 39er's Class St. James United Methodist Church 321 Pleasant Valley Dr. Little Rock, AR 72212 111 00 Chicot Road Phone (501) 447-7000 Fax (501) 447-7001 Mabelvale . Arkansas 72103 ~ \u0026gt;\u0026lt; \u0026gt;\" C :C t ! C::,, ~z 31:C'l mu, .z.. . J. A. Fair Magnet High School Science and Technology Systems 13420 David 0. Dodd Road Little Rock, AR 72210 Phone 501-447-1700 . Fax 5-1-448-/701 To: Darrell Paradis, Director of Procurement From: Randy Rutherford, Princip~ Re: Donation Date: September 21 , 2005 I would like to recommend that the following donation to J. A. Fair High School be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. A check in the amount of $288. 77 for paint and labor in painting the baseball dug-outs. Otter Creek Assembly of God Church P. 0 . Box 30190 Little Rock, AR 72260 RECEIVED SEP 2 2 2005 PROCU~\n,J .'  '.\nu!,..-.\nii.. .. FOREST HEIGHTS MIDDLE SCHOOL To: From: Date: RE: Darrell Paradis p Dr. Debbie Price D October 4, 2005 Donation Forest Heights is pleased to accept the generous donation of chairs for our conference room from Arkansas Capitol Corporation. The chairs are valued at $825.00. Please accept this donation in accordance with Board policy. Mr. Jay Wisener Executive Vice President of Arkansas Capitol 200 East Commerce Little Rock, AR 72201 RECEIVED OCT 5 2005 PRO C: : :~ ~. !\nEfJ T 5901 Evergreen Street  Phone (501) 447-2700  Fax (501} 447-2701  Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 ?\u0026lt; n,.. 0 U\u0026gt; z C) i U\u0026gt; FOREST HEIGHTS MIDDLE SCHOOL To: Darryl Paradis From: Dr. Debbie Price Date: October 4, 2005 Re: Donations oP Forest Heights is pleased to accept the generous donation of musical instruments from Mr. Douglas Braswell from Easy Cash Pawn. The instruments are valued at $1,200. Please accept this donation in accordance with Board policy. Mr. Douglas Braswell Easy Cash 8601 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72205 RECEIVED OCT 5 2005 5901 Evergreen Street  Phone (501) 447-2700  Fax (501) 447-2701  Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 FOREST PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL To: Darral Paradis, Director Procurement Department From: Theresa J. Courtney-Ketcher, Principal Date: September 22, 2005 Subject: Forest Park PTA Donations Darral, The Forest Park PTA has donated items totaling $48,926.88 to the school. Attached you will see an itemized statement in the form of a letter from the PTA. I recommend that these donated items be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. Attachment TCK/pac ------  1\\ECE\\\\JEO\n)tr i 2 2ons 1600 North Tyler Street  (501) Phone 447-4500  Fax (501) 447-4501  Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 ?\u0026lt; (\") 5 !!? z C)\no I U\u0026gt; FOREST PARK ELEMENTARY PTA September 6, 2005 Theresa Courtney-Ketcher Principal Forest Park Elementary School 1600 N. Tyler Street Little Rock, AR 72207 RE: Donations Dear Mrs. Courtney-Ketcher, The Forest Park Elementary PTA has donated $48,926.88 to the school for the following: Staff Appreciation Principal's Discretionary Fund Classroom Supplies, Instruction and Maintenance Art Instruction \u0026amp; Materials Computer Maintenance Grounds Expense Space Camp Spanish Instruction \u0026amp; Materials Student Recognition Accelerated Reader Program Parental Involvement Field Day Fifth Grade Graduation Student Recruitment Please contact me if you have any questions. ~~9J'Mb1tl[~ Janis P. Thibault PTA Treasurer cc: Melanie Fox, Martha Hill, Christy Clark $2,236.79 $1,000.00 $12,168.35 $2,255.39 $9,445.35 $2,000.00 $13,371.05 $2631.75 $1,437.63 $719.26 $1,661.31 RECEIVED \\)tr 2 2 2005 Fulbright Elementary Memo To: From: Darral Paradis, Director Of Procurement Deborah Mitchell, Principal CC: Date: September 28, 2005 Re: Donations to Fulbright Elementary The Fulbright PTA, 300 Pleasant Valley Drive, Little Rock, Arkansas 72212, has generously donated $966.43 for a Dell computer for our website. Sam Storthz Ill, 810 N University Avenue, Little Rock, AR 72205 has donated $200 for volunteer expenses for Reading Buddies, our canine-assisted literacy intervention program. Bob Derryberry, 6800 Waterview Pl., Sherwood, AR 72120, has donated a Printer valued at $157 to our health room. It is recommended that these donations be approved with thanks in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District board of Directors. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, -t~J-cuA J1u7fiJdL Deborah Mitchell Principal DM:lam RECE\\VED \\)tr 2 9 2005 -.... - Fulbright Elementary Memo ( To: Darral Paradis, Director Of Procurement- From: Deborah Mitchell, Principal CC: Date: September 1 , 2005 Re: Donations to Fulbright Elementary Mr. and Mrs. Thomas H. Rains, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Office Bldg Room 3128, 700 West Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, AR 72201, and Valerie and Jay McDaniel, 1800 Sawgrass Drive, Little Rock, AR 72212, have generously donated Safety Signs and rubber safety mats valued at $1,661.58. It is recommended that these donations be approved with thanks in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ~~w~ Deborah Mitchell Principal DM:lam LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: October 27, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Financial Reports BACKGROUND: Financial reporting is designed to keep the Board of Directors up-to-date regarding the District's current financial condition. Financial reports are submitted monthly to the Board for review and approval. RATIONALE: September 2005 financial reports are submitted for the Board's review and approval. FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the September 2005 financial reports as submitted. PREPARED BY: Jean A. Ring, Director Finance and Accounting LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES ANO CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 ANO 2005 APPROVED RECEIPTS % APPROVED RECEIPTS % 2004/05 09/30/04 COLLECTED 2005/06 09/30/05 COLLECTED REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 61,436,691 12,467,263 20.29% 67,268,610 13,829,345 20.56% DELINQUENT TAXES 12,135,000 986,045 8.13% 9,200,000 989,051 10.75% 40% PULLBACK 31,250,000 0.00% 33,000,000 0.00% EXCESS TREASURER'S FEE 205,000 0.00% 210,000 0.00% DEPOSITORY INTEREST 155,000 0.00% 145,000 0.00% REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES 185,000 0.00% 204,000 0.00% MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS 485,000 13,590 2.80% 365,000 45,766 12.54% INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 245,000 82,243 33.57% 750,000 265,233 35.36% ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 215,000 48,071 22.36% 195,000 56,182 28.81% TOTAL 106,311 ,691 13,597,212 12.79% 111,337,610 15,185,577 13.64% REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL 22,000 5,644 25.65% 21,500 5,021 23.35% TOTAL 22,000 5,644 25.65% 21,500 5,021 23.35% REVENUE- STATE SOURCES EQUALIZATION FUNDING 65,082,694 11 ,852,204 18.21% 66,095,1 55 11 ,749,284 17.78% ALTERNATIVE LEARNING 1,927,250 481 ,812 25.00% 1,100,000 0.00% ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS 193,739 0.00% 200,000 0.00% NATL SCHL LUNCH STUDENT FUNDING 6,498,240 1,181,498 18.18% 6,877,920 1,250,530 18.18% PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 1,141 ,165 1,141,165 100.00% 953,144 953,144 100.00% SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS{STRS/HEAL TH) 8,275,000 1,387,526 16.77% 8,200,000 1,333,980 16.27% VOCATIONAL 1,350,000 195,052 14.45% 1,785,000 214,600 12.02% HANDICAPPED CHILDREN 2,100,000 0.00% 2,425,000 132,581 5.47% EARLY CHILDHOOD 5,542,510 1,430,540 25.81% 4,000,000 1,341,500 33.54% TRANSPORTATION 4,125,000 1,325,044 32.12% 4,252,900 0.00% M TO M TRANSFERS 4,575,000 414,913 9.07% 4,100,000 0.00% ADULT EDUCATION 934,380 109,000 11.67% 926,543 111,615 12.05% AT RISK FUNDING 395,000 9,400 2.38% 10,000 0.00% TAP PROGRAM 382,903 7,645 2.00% 288,623 142,623 49.41% TOTAL 102,522,882 19,535,799 19.06% 101 ,214,285 17,229,857 17.02% REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES TRANSFER FROM CAP PROJ FUND 770,000 0.00% 770,000 0.00% TRANSFER FROM OTHER FUNDS 1,295,000 8,416 0.65% 1,370,524 0.00% TRANSFER FROM MAGNET FUND 1,849,008 0.00% 2,194,000 0.00% TOTAL 3,914,008 8,416 0.22% 4,334,524 0 0.00% TOTAL REVENUE OPERATING 212,770,581 33,147,071 15.58% 216,907,919 32,420,456 14.95% REVENUE - OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 22,887,794 1,972,536 8.62% 20,152,896 897,433 4.45% DEDICATED M \u0026amp; 0 4,500,000 57,924 1.29% 4,784,200 43,067 0.90% MAGNET SCHOOLS 27,964,934 2,191,329 7.84% 28,849,578 1,274,413 4.42% CHARTER SCHOOL 1,340,000 350,000 26.12% TOTAL 55,352,728 4,221 ,789 7.63% 55,126,674 2,564,913 4.65% TOTAL REVENUE 268,123,309 37,368,860 13.94% 272,034,593 34,985,370 12.86% LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 AND 2005 APPROVED EXPENDED % APPROVED EXPENDED % 2004/05 09/30/04 EXPENDED 2005/06 09/30/05 EXPENDED EXPENSES SALARIES 117,324,912 14,828,817 12.64% 122,589,665 20,206,775 16.48% BENEFITS 36,185,811 4,383,568 12.11% 35,925,642 5,784,395 16.10% PURCHASED SERVICES 20,959,918 2,682,273 12.80% 22,438,191 2,985,497 13.31% MATERIALS \u0026amp; SUPPLIES 8,725,914 1,850,893 21 .21% 10,128,394 2,653,710 26.20% CAPITAL OUTLAY 2,760,600 283,330 10.26% 2,473,965 272,044 11.00% OTHER OBJ\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1051","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2005-08"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Curricula","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1051"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["48 apges"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nI. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL C :cza w ~ u-, c:::, Q: \u0026gt; c:::, u..c::z\u0026gt;: c-..... O::::E - 0 ~~ w ....... C\\l !\n~ -~ 0 ci... ffi ~ w UJ a: Cl) ffi -~ a: ~ Cl Q C) ~ ~ ~ C/lu ~ ~ ts ~ ~ ~ -..J 11. PROCEDURAL MATTERS/ WELCOME TO GUESTS .~s ~ ~ ... ~ ~u g) -~ Q 'ci ~ ~ CXl Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. PARTNERS IN EDUCATION C. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS D. LR C.T .A. I. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS September 22, 2005 5:30 p.m. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A Administration of the Oath of Office, Newly Elected Board Members Zone 1 and Zone 5 B. Call to Order C. Roll Call II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS A Welcome to Guests 111. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A Superintendent's Citations B. Partners in Education - New Partnerships - Fulbright Elementary School and Coldwell Banker Advantage Realty - Gibbs Magnet Elementary School and Twin City Bank - Broadway - Otter Creek Elementary School and Edward Jones Investments of Otter Creek C. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) D. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A Remarks from Board Members B. Student Assignment Report C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update G. Update: Textbook Allocations 0  'O ~~ -\u0026lt;- Oil: oz ~~ m-\u0026lt;\no..,\n- oCz: o,.. n-\u0026lt; ,.. i5 oz ,,\u0026gt;.... \"' ?' 'O\nz ~ z m g n ~ iz5 Regular Board Meeting September 22, 2005 Page2 V. APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Election of Officers B. Minutes Regular Meeting - 08-25-05 Special Meeting- 08-31-05 Special Meeting - 09-08-05 VI. EDUCATIONAL SERVICES A. Special Education: Focus Group Recommendations VII. SCHOOL SERVICES A. Cloverdale Elementary School @ Badgett Student Reassignment Plan VIII. HUMAN RESOURCES A. First Reading: Policy GBK - Staff Concerns, Complaints and Grievances, with Regulations GBK-R B. Personnel Changes IX. FINANCE \u0026amp; SUPPORT SERVICES A. Rightsell Elementary School B. Land Use Agreement: LRSD / LR Boys \u0026amp; Girls Club C. Donations of Property D. Financial Report X. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions XI. STUDENT HEARING XII. ADJOURNMENT 0 \u0026gt;\n-\n,0o ~~ -\u0026lt;- Oil: oz el~ m-\u0026lt;\n,o.., -c:\n,oz o.....o... r-o oz ~ en\n,o \u0026gt;m (I) c3 C:\n,o ~ .... 0~ ~ m .\u0026gt;... oo oC\u0026gt; zZ en~ 0z en 0\n,o m 0 ~\n,o r-\n,\u0026lt;\n,::, VJ 0\"T1 =--~ :,.i,i.,: :. ~ VJ I. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS/ WELCOME TO GUESTS Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. PARTNERS IN EDUCATION C. REMARKS FROM Cl\"TIZENS D. LR C.T .A. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: September 22, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Partners in Education BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District Partners in Education program is designed to develop strong relationships between the community and our schools. The partnership process encourages businesses, community agencies and private organizations to join with individual schools to enhance and support educational programs. Each partnership utilizes the resources of both the school and the business for their mutual benefit. RATIONALE: The following schools and businesses have completed the requirements necessary to establish a partnership and are actively working together to accomplish their objectives. FUNDING: Not applicable. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the board approve the following partnerships: Fulbright Elementary School and Coldwell Banker Advantage Realty Gibbs Magnet Elementary School and Twin City Bank-Broadway Otter Creek Elementary School and Edward Jones Investments of Otter Creek PREPARED BY: Debbie Milam, ViPS Coordinator !\" .z... m ~ 'ff! ~ 0 ::::i 0 :,\n, u, ~ ~ ~ Partnership Proposal Coldwell Banker Advantage Realty and Fulbright Elementary School Coldwell Banker Advantage Realty commits to the following partnership activities:  Develop volunteer opportunities for agents  Support the Spring Supper and sil~nt auction  Provide information on public school options to clients  Host a teacher appreciation luncheon or dinner  Provide Russell the mascot on first day of school  Provide career day speaker(s)  Drop school/district information into ad header  Take photos with Russell as a fundraiser Fulbright Elementary School commits to the following partnership activities:  Provide student artwork for display in Coldwell Banker's reception area  Provide the joy choir to perform at special events  Acknowledge Coldwell Banker as a Partner in Education  Invite Coldwell Banker to school events Partnership Proposal Twin City Bank-Broadway and Gibbs Elementary School Twin City Bank-Broadway commits to the following partnership activities:  Sponsor Red Ribbon Week.  Count change collected through fundraisers.  Arrange for penny, Nick and Buck to make appearances at school functions.  Recruit employees to read to the students and listen to the students read.  Job shadowing.  Provide speakers for topics such as economics, saving money, etc.  Provide other assistance when needed. Gibbs Elementary commits to the following partnership activities:  Provide artwork for display in the bank's lobby  Provide choir to perform on holidays and special occasions.  Acknowledge Twin City Bank-Broadway Branch as a Partner in Education.  Invite the bank to school events.  Work with the bank on community service projects. !\"' \"m' c~  \"' r-\n,:\n,au, n-.. :'-,'.\"i' n :::\n,:\nm % (J) PARTNER-IN-EDUCATION CONTRACT EDWARD JONES INVESTMENTS OF OTTER CREEK ' AND OTTERCREEK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Otter Creek Elementary School, along with its staff and students, are pleased to enter into a partnership with the Edward Jones Company. As part of our willingness to become involved, all parties commit to the following activities: Edward Jones Company:  Will host a \"Staff Appreciation Lunch\" once a quarter.  WilJ provide a guest speaker for Career Day.  Will provide volunteers to assist students as tutors/mentors.  Will assist with other activities/projects at Otter Creek as needed and when possible.  Will encourage other community organizations and businesses to become active participants in volunteer activities at Otter Creek. Otter Creek Elementary:  Will provide students' artwork for display in the Edward Jones' office.  WilJ provide seasonal choir performances for the Edward Jones' office.  Will acknowledge our Partner's participation through our newsletters and school programs throughout the school year. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: September 22, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: September 2005 Construction Report - Bond Projects BACKGROUND: As you know, the Bond construction program started during the summer of 2000. Most of the construction projects shown on the Bond Project List have been completed or the money has been obligated. Eighty-eight percent (88%) of the Bond money for construction has been spent or obligated, leaving a total of $15,300,000 available to do the remaining projects originally approved with the 2000 millage election, including the new West Little Rock School. We will keep you apprised of future decisions that will become necessary as we move through the final phase of construction. RATIONALE: Monthly reports are submitted to the Board to keep members up-to-date on construction projects in the District. FUNDING: Bond Funds RECOMMENDATION: Report item\nno action necessary. PREPARED BY: Bill Goodman, District Engineer !I' !I: z C...:. m en :\" .... m (\") :%: z\nC: -0 0 ?\nm Facility Name Carver Gibbs Henderson Meadowcliff CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION Project Description Cost Media Center Expansion $167,490 Addition I $705,670 Skylight Replacement $319,ooo I Remodel $365,600 t:.st. c.\nompIet1on Date Dec-05 --- Dec-05 Nov-05 Sep-05 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - FALL 2005 Est. completIon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Central Media Roof $85,000 Unknown Cloverdale Elementary Demolition $520,750 I Nov-05 J. A. Fair 1Sewer Line $82,900 Nov-05 Rightsell I Renovation $2,494,000 Unknown Williams Drainage Repair I $29,200 Dec-05 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED t:.st. 1_\nompIeuon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Booker Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown Brady Metal Roof $250,000 Unknown Chicot Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown Child Nutrition Renovation $6,500 Unk-no-wn Forest Heights Remodel $1 ,547,000 Unknow-n Mabelvale Elem. I Site Work $6,000 Unknown Mitchell Renovation $2,212,493 I Unknown -- Pulaski Hqts. MS Energy monitoring system installation Unknown Unknown BOND PROJECTS NOT YET STARTED c:si. 1.,ompIetIon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Administration Annex ADA Adaptations $32,351 Unknown I Electrical Upgrade I $9,166 1 Unknown --- --- Adult Education ADA Adaptations $248,020 . Un-kno-wn Structural Repairs I $53,918 Unknown -- Alternative Learning Center ADA Adaptations $43,134 Unknown Electrical Upgrade -- $2,696 I Unknown Roof Repairs ~ $26,959 Unknown -- Restroom Renovation $37,742 Unknown Booker ADA Adaptations $107,835 Spring 2006 -- Cashion Building !ADA Adaptations $21 ,5~ Unknown : Restroom Renovation -- Dodd $26,959 . Unknown --- Facility Services_ _ ADA Adaptations $32,351 Unknown -- -- Install Water Meters at Cooling Towers $4,313 Unknown ~ Emergency Lighting Replacement $80,876 Unknown -- -- - -- Land Purchase - Booker $100,000 Unknown -- -- - Fulbright - - Renovate Restrooms $10,784 Unknown ADA Adaptations $21 ,567 Unknown -  Renovation --- - Garland -- -- $900,000 Partially Complete ADA Adaptations $188,711 Unknown ---- Geyer Springs ~R eplace Restroom Stalls $4,313 - Unknown -- .. ___A DA Adaptations $21 ,567 Unknown -- ~ Henderson Renovation $450,000 Summer 2006 - --- - A DA Adaptations - $70,093- Unknown - -- -- IRC - ADA Adaptations - $21 ,567 Unknown ~ - Restroom Renovation $21,567 Unknown - - - McDermott Restroom Renovation $32,350 Unknown -- - - ~ Quigley - Restroom Upgrades $53,918 Unknown Dressing Room Renovation $37,742 Unknown ----- --------- -- Facility Name Rockefeller Transportation - Laidlaw West Little Rock School CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 BOND PROJECTS NOT YET STARTED Project Description I Cost I ADA Adaptations $26,959 I Interior Renovation I $16,175 I ADA Adaptations I $32,351 I New School $11,782,638 I BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name Project Description I Cost I Administration Asbestos abatement $380,495 Administration I Fresh air system $55,000 Administration 1Fire alarm $32,350 I Administration HVAC $70,000 I Administration Annex Energy monitoring system installation ~lternative Learning Ctr. Energy monitoring system installation - $15,160 I Alternative Learning Ctr. I Energy efficient lighting $82,000 Badgett 'Partial asbestos abatement $237,237 I Fire alarm - Badgett $18,250 Bale\nClassroom addition/renovation I $2,244,524 I Bale Energy monitoring system I Bale Partial roof replacement I - $269,587 Bale IHVAC $664,587 Baseline Renovation $953,520 Booker Gym Roof $48,525 Booker ADA Rest rooms $25,000 I Energy efficient lighting -+-- Booker $170,295 Booker Energy monitoring system installation $23,710 I Booker Asbestos abatement -- $10,900 - Booker Fire alarm $34,501 - ---- -~ I - Brady Addition/renovation I $973,621 Brady 1Energy efficient lighting $80,593 Brady Asbestos abatement $345,072 Carver Energy monitoring system installation $14,480 I Central Renovation - Interior $10,200,266  Carver Parking lot $111,742 Central HVAC Renovation - Band Area $225,000 Central Reflecting Pond $57,561 -- Student parking --- -- Central Parking -L $174,000 I Central/Quigley -- I stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair -+--- $265,000 Central/Quigley -- Athletic Field Improvement _j__ $38,000 Central/Quigley - Irrigation System --- --l-- $14,500 Central Purchase land for school __...._ Unknown Central - Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations $2,000,000 Ceiling and wall repair Central - ~.ooo - - Central Fire Alarm System Design/Installation ~-- $80,876 Central Front landing tile repair $22,470 -.-Drainage - Chicot $64,700 -- - Chicot - Sound Attenuation - $43,134 ~ Cloverdale Elem. Energy efficient lighting $132,678 -- - - Cloverdale MS Energy efficient lighting - - $189,743 Cloverdale MS Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $1,393,822 . Est. Completion Date Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Est. Completion Date Mar-03 Aug-03 Aug-03 Nov-04 May-02 Oct-01 Dec-01 - - Jul-01 -- Aug-02 Dec-02 Mar-02 Dec-01 Aug-01 - Aug-04 Oct-04 --- ~-04 Apr-0_!_ Oct-01 Feb-02 --- - - M-a-r-02 Nov-04 -- Sep-02 Aug-02 May-01 - - - Sep-05 Aug-03 Dec-04 -- Sep-04 Aug-03 Aug-03 Aug-03 Aug-03 Dec-02 - Dec-02 - - - Oct-01 - Aug-01 Aug-01 Aug-04 Jul-04 Jul-01 Jul-01 - - Nov-02 Dodd - Fire Alarm Upgrade ---,- $9,200 - Oct-04 Energy efficient lighting - $90,665 - - - Dodd Aug-01 2 !IJ E z C: m-\u0026lt; \"' :\"' -\u0026lt; ~ ::c % 0  C...,: 0 ~ m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I I Est. Completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Dodd Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile $156,299 Jul-01 Dodd I Replace roof top HVAC I $215,570 Aug-02 Dunbar Renovation/addition $6,149,023 Nov-04 Facilities Service 1 Interior renovation $84,672 Mar-01 Facility Services ,Fire alarm $12,000 Aug-03 Fair Park I Remodel $799,000 Aug-05 Fair Park Parking Lot $185,000 . Aug-05 ---- Fair Park I Roof $245,784 I May-05 Fair Park I HVAC renovation/fire alarm $315,956 '. Apr-02 Fair Park I Energy efficient lighting $90,162 Aug-01 Fair Park I Asbestos abatement-ceiling I $59,310 I Aug-01 J. A. Fair 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music 1 room addition $3,155,640 Aug~04 J. A. Fair 'Energy efficient lighting $277,594 Apr-01 J. A. Fair Press box $10,784 Nov-00 J. A. Fair Security cameras I $12,5oc5'T-- Jun-01 J. A. Fair Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Jul-03 J. A. Fair Irrigation System _L_ $14,000 Jul-03 J. A.' Fair I Roof repairs I $391,871i Aug-03 Forest Park I Restrooms $152,881 Aug-05 -- Forest Park  Replace window units w/central HVAC $485,258 Nov-03 -- ----- Forest Park - J Diagonal parking j_ ~.742 I __ Aug-03 Forest Park Energy efficient lighting $119,788 May-01 Fulbright Energy efficient lighting - r- $134,463 -- Jun-01 Fulbright IE nergy monitoring system installation $11,9~ -- i= Aug-01 Fulbright Replace roof top HVAC units $107,835 -- Aug-02 Fulbrig_l2_!__ _ Parking lot $140,000 Sep-02 --Roof repairs -1-- -- Fulbright - - $200,000 Oct-02 1 Renovation I $2,511,736 1 -- -- Franklin Mar-03 -- -- - - Geyer Springs . Roof Repair $161,752 1 Jun-04 -- j Energy efficient light~ I Gibbs $76,447 Apr-01 -- -- ---'--- Gibbs Energy monitoring system installation $11 ,77'L__ Jul-01 Hall Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $8,637,709 Sep-03 -- - - Hall - Asbestos abatement - $168,222 Aug-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting $42,931 Jul-01 - - Hall Infrastructure improvements $93,657 Aug-01 - - ------ $296,7~ -- Hall - Energy efficient lighting I Apr-01 Hall Intercom Feb-01 - -- I -+-- - Hall - - Security cameras $10,600 Jun-01 ~---1- $43,854 -- Henderson Lockers Dec-04 ---- -- Henderson Energy efficient lighting I $193,679 Jul-01 - -- -- Henderson Roof replacement gym I $107,835 ------ May-01 Henderson Asbestos abatement Phase I $500~ -- Aug-01 Asbestos abatement Phase 2 - Henderson - $250,000- Aug-02 Energy efficient lighti~ + $109,136 - IRC Jul-02 Jefferson Asbestos abatemeiit T $43,639 - Oci-01 Renovation \u0026amp; fire alarm - I $1,630,000 - - Jefferson Nov-02 - Parking lot -- -- - Laidlaw - - $269,588- Jul-01 -+ - Mablevale Elem Fire Alarm Upgrade $12,000 Oct-04 + Mabelvale Elem. Energy monitoring system installation $12,150 Aug-01 - - Mabelvale Elem. Replace HVAC units $300,000 Auq-02 3 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name Project Description I Cost Mabelvale Elem. Asbestos Abatement $107,000 Mabelvale Elem. I Energy efficient lighting I $106,598 I Mabelvale MS I Renovate bleachers i $134,793 Mabelvale MS Renovation I $6,851,621 Mann Partial Replacement $11,500,000 . Mann Asphalt walks The total $1.8 million Mann Walkway canopies ~ is what has been Mann Boiler replacement used so far on the Mann Fencing I projects listed Mann Partial demolition/portable classrooms 1completed for Mann. McClellan Parking Lot Overlay I $65,000 McClellan Athletic Field Improvement I $38,000 McClellan Irrigation System I $14,750 McClellan Security cameras I $36,300 McClellan -- I Energy efficient lighting I $303,614 McClellan Stadium stands repair I $235,000 I McClellan Intercom I $46,000 McClellan 'Classroom Addition I $2,155,622 McDermott Fire Alarm Upgrade I $7,700 McDermott Energy efficient lighting ! $79,411 McDermott Replace roof top HVAC units i $476,000 I Me-adowcliff Fire alarm +- $16,175 -Meado-wc-liff Asbestos abatement $253,412 M-eadowcliff IE ngergy efficient lighting I -_$88,297 1 Metropolitan Replace cooling tower I $37,203 Metropo~ 1 Replace shop vent system _ ~0.000 Metropolitan  Energy monitoring system installation I $17,145 Mitchell Building Remediation ---- ! $165,000 I Mitchell !Energy efficient lighting I $103,642 Mitchell Energy monitoring system installation $16,695 Mitchell Asbestos abatement $13,000 - Oakhurst (Adult Education) New Windows $215,000 Oakhurst HVAC renovation $237,237 Otter Creek Energy monitoring system installation $10,695 Otter Creek Energy efficient lighting -- $81,828 O-tter Creek -- Asbestos abatement $10,000 Otter Creek IP arking lot $138,029 I --+-- Otter Creek 6 classroom addition - $888,778 Otter Creek Parking Improvements $142,54-1 - -- -- -- ---- ~ Parkview Addition $2,121,226 -- - -- - -- Parkview HVAC controls $210,000 -- Parkview Roof replacement $273,877 - $10,784 - Parkview Exterior lights -- .. $301,938 - Parkview HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls -- Parkview Locker replacement $120,000 Energy efficient lighting -- ~ Parkview $315,000 Procurement Energy monitoring system installation --$5,290 -Fire alarm - - $25,000 - Procurement -- Pulaski Heights Elem/Middle - Cafeteria Ceiling $33,378  --- Pulaski HeiQhts Elem/Middle Replace Entry Doors $13,990 Est. Completion Date Aug-02 Dec-02 Aug-01 Mar-04 Apr-04 Dec-01 Dec-01 Oct-01 Sep-01 Aug-01 Apr-05 Jul-03 Jul-03 Jun-01 May-01 Aug-01 Feb-02 Jul-04 Sep-04 Feb-01 Aug-02 -Ju-l-01 Aug-02 Dec-02 - Dec-00 May-01 -~ Aug-01 Jul-04 Apr-01 Jul-01 - Jul-01 Aug-05 Aug-01 May-01 Apr-01 Aug-02 Aug-02 Oct-02 Aug-03 Dec-04 Jun-02 Sep-01 Nov-00 Aug-01 Aug-01 Jun-01 Jun-02 Aug-03 Aug-05 AuQ-05 4 !D !I: z C: -m\u0026lt; Ul\nn -\u0026lt; ~ :x: % 0  .C.,: 0 ?. m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I I Est. completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Pulaski Heights Elementary Clean Exterior Walls $98,660 Sep-05 Pulaski Hgts. Elem 1 Renovation $1,193,259 I Nov-04 Pulaski Hgts. Elem Move playground I $17,ooo I Dec-02 Pulaski Hgts. MS Renovation - I $3,755,041 I Nov-04 Rightsell Energy efficient lighting $84,898 Apr-01 Rockefeller 1 Energy efficient lighting $137,004  Mar-01 Rockefeller iR eplace roof top HVA C - I $539,175 I Aug~ Rockefeller IP arking addition I $111,742 I Aug-02 Romine ,Asbestos abatement $10,000 : Apr-02 --- Romine Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675 Mar-03 Scott Field\nTrack Renovations I $289,056 May-05 SecurityrTransportation 1 Bus cameras I $22,500 Jun-01 Southwest 1 New Corridor Ceiling I $300,000 I Aug-05 Southwest Addition $2,000,000 Nov-04 Southwest Asbestos abatement $28,138 Aug-00 Southwest New roof $690,000 Oct-03 Southwest Energy efficient lighting $168,719 Jan-02 Southwest 1 Drainage / street widening $250,000 I Aug-03 Student Assignment 1Energy monitoring system installation I $4,830 I Aug-02 Student Assignment\nFire alarm I $9,ooo I Aug-03 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation I $275,000 : Dec-01 -- Tech Ctr/ Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II I $3,679,000 Jun=64 -- Technology Upgrade Upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data Nov-02 Energy efficient lig~ $73,850 -- - Terry - Feb-01 $83,4~ -- Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking - Aug-02 Terry Media Center add~ I $704,932 + Sep-02 Wakefield Rebuild - $5,300,000 Dec-04 Wakefield Security cameras --- $8,000 --- Jun-01 W-akefield Energy efficient lighting $74,776 Feb-01 I Demolition/Asbestos Abatement --+ - $200,oooT ------ Wakefield I Nov-02 I Fire Alarm Upgrade I - $11,600 -+- -- Washington Oct-04 --=- -- --l- -- Washington Security cameras $7,900 Jun-01 Washington Energy efficient lighting j__ $165,281- Apr-01 Watson Energy monitoring system installation I $8,5~ - Jul-01 --- -- I $182,24'1 -- Watson Asbestos abatement Aug-01 1 Energy efficient lighting - + Watson $106,868 Aug-01 Asbestos abateme_n_t -- - $10,00~ - Watson Aug-02 f- --- Major renovation \u0026amp; addition - Watson $800,000 Aug-02 -- - Western Hills Electrical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC $622,160 Aug-05 -- - ~ Western Hills Fire Alarm Upgrade $8,400 Oct-04 --- -- - Western Hills ADA Rest rooms _,__ $25,000 Aug-04 f- -- Western Hills Asbestos abatement $191,946 Aug-02 -- -- - - Western Hills - Intercom -- - + $7,100 Dec-01 We-stern Hills Energy efficient light~ - J $106,000 Jul-01 Williams Renovation $2,106,492 Mar-04 - - - - - Williams Parking expansions $183,717 Dec-03 -- -- - - + Williams - Energy efficient lighting $122,719 Jun-01 + ~ Wilson HVAC for Cafeteria $56,000 Mar-05 -- - - Wilson Renovation/expansion $1,263,876 Feb-04 -- - Wilson Parking Expansion - - $110,000 + Aug-03 Woodruff Parking addition --- - - _._ $175,000 Aug-05 -- Woodruff _,_Renovation $246,419 Aug-02 5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: September 22, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Board Auditor Report BACKGROUND: Monthly report to School Board. RATIONALE: Summary report of activities. FUNDING: No changes. RECOMMENDATION: None. PREPARED BY: Sandy Becker !I\"\nii:: z .C..: m U\u0026gt; \u0026gt;~ . m enO -,:, C mC\"l C\"l  :\n--\u0026lt; r-0 mZ o\u0026gt; C: ,- C\"l en \u0026gt;m .... :,0 0 ?i zm en :.n.. ~ :zr: 0 i C,,: 0 ?\nm Date: To: From: Re: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS September 22, 2005 Board of Directors Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Audit Report - September This is the seventy-first communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with two high schools, two middle school and two elementary schools to resolve financial issues in their activity and related funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. b) The AAB has forwarded a Booster Club Guidelines Package to be included in official publications of the District after review. Board Policy and Regulation a) The Out of District Travel regulation is being reviewed. b) The routing of Professional Leave and Travel Requests is being worked on to make the process more efficient and to prepare for the process being automated to improve documentation and provide information for decision making. Technology a) Monitoring technology plans and technology meetings to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. b) Facilitating technology upgrade in cooperation with the English Department for Yearbook and Newspaper production staff in LRSD high schools to improve access to tools needed for students and staff. Training a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of Nuts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. Provided training with the Arkansas PTA on financials controls and financial preventive maintenance. ----- -- - - Audit Report - September 2005 Page 2 of2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) d) e) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring combined payroll and human resources issues for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Assisting schools to track and reconcile Teacher School Supply Funds. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Served as District coordinator of United Way's Day of Caring (April I 7, 2005. Eleven schools participated. Sharefest is scheduled for October 29, 2005. Assisting LRSD PT A's in financial process training. Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-447-1 I 15. My e-mail is sandy.beckcr@lrsd.org. !XI I: z c:: -m\u0026lt; en ~ . m e-n., co:: mn n  \u0026gt;= r-0 mZ oc:: \u0026gt;,- n en  m -\u0026lt;\nIJ (5$ zn m \"' DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 September 22, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools Special Education In November of 2004, a group of special education instructors, representing the interests of Little Rock School District special education teachers, brought to the Board a series of concerns regarding special education issues and the delivery of instructional services to LRSD students with special needs. At the Board's direction, a special task force was formed which included the Associate Superintendent for Educational Services, Jhe Special Education Director and Staff, the CT A Executive Director and President, and a representative sample of special education teachers. The task force began monthly meetings in December of 2004 and examined the needs of special education students through the following topics:  Professional Development  Instructional Materials  Communication  Technology  Compliance  Working Conditions RATIONALE: From the outset, the goal of the task force was to develop ways of improving services to special needs students. The task force found that by modifying a number of practices currently in place and by instituting others, the concerns brought to the Board on behalf of the special needs students could be dramatically reduced and the special needs student could be better served. The task force recommendations are detailed in the accompanying report. FUNDING: Funds generated as a result of the reorganization of the District along with federal entitlement dollars will be allocated to support the implementation of the recommendations. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board approve the task force report. PREPARED BY: Barbara Barnes, Dr. Olivine Roberts, and Special Education Focus Group Representatives ?l \"ti m\n,:, ~ z z ,m... n ::c ~ C\u0026gt; m V, ?\u0026lt; ?\u0026gt; i :,:,\u0026gt; ci ~ :cm .... po ~~ ,--c m c3 ,...\n,:, ~ .... m v, zm -\u0026lt;\n,:, ~s -\u0026lt; ~ V, \u0026gt; z C C: V, m ~ ~ m l!l\n.z.. . -- Department of Exceptional Children - CT A Focus Group Recommendations !Professional Development 1. Coordinate and facilitate an August professional development activity for new teachers regarding portfolio regulations and pacing. 2. Provide joint training for paraprofessionals and assigned teachers. 3. Create a joint committee of teachers and DEC staff to address training needs and to design a system for assessing the need for and the implementation of professional development. 4. Offer appropriate professional development for general education and special education teachers, plus administrators. I Instructional Materials 1. Provide a catalog of instructional materials and resources available through the DEC. 2. Where appropriate, special education teachers will receive the same books and instructional materials as regular education teachers. 3. Provide supplemental materials/supplies as indicated by the IEP team, in a timely manner. I Communication 1. Create a quarterly DEC newsletter (hard copy or email) to address issues, identify needed information, and include a calendar of upcoming events (i.e. ADE Special Show, annual review meetings, etc.) 2. Create a school calendar to show what is required from staff for that school year. 3. Notify the administrator/teacher of a student returning to his/her zone school in a timely manner to ensure a smooth transition for the student and staff. 4. Provide teachers with all the necessary paperwork, specialized equipment, and professional development before a student is placed in their classroom, when possible. 5. Provide monthly opportunities for special education staff to meet before or after school without pay. 6. Develop a listserv for teachers/staff to use to communicate with each other. I Technology 1. Create a DEC website by the end of the 2006-2007 school year. 2. Provide district-wide professional development for special needs technology. 3. Provide modifications of existing management system for Grade Quick or Ed Line for special education. 4. Assure that special education teachers have computer work stations with Internet access in their classrooms. 5. Provide updated technology as necessary. 6. Develop a district level assistive technology committee (special education teacher, SLP, OT/PT, etc.) to address assessment needs for technology. I Compliance 1. Create an e-file for the district required DEC forms. The district required forms could be completed electronically and forwarded to DEC. 2. Collaborate with Technology Department in the creation of program that allows for forms to be completed electronically. 3. Provide a two-week notice of deadlines for reports by the DEC, except when ADE provides shorter notice. 4. Review all district forms for redundant and unnecessary information. 5. Hold every special education teacher accountable for the accuracy of his/her due process folders. 6. Create a more efficient way of tracking students' due process folders from school to school. (NOTE: No LRSD staff shall remove a due process folder without signing out in the area where all due process files are located.) 7. Reconstruction of a missing due process folder will occur within fifteen days by the IEP team and DEC. 8. Review mental health services and supports for students in order to ensure appropriate placement. 9. Provide a pacing document and guidelines aligned with the curriculum for portfolio completion. 10. Establish a district wide protocol for better distribution of IEP's in order to improve the scheduling of special education students prior to the end of each school year. 11 . Teachers will provide their principals with an itinerary for students in CBI classes prior to leaving the school. 12. Review all classroom facilities, storage, and accessibility needs to ensure compliance with state and federal mandated guidelines. 13. Purchase current Special Education Automation Software (SEAS) program for each special education staff. 14. The school team (principal, teachers, counselors, and other appropriate personnel) will place students in the self-contained classroom at the building level. I Working Conditions 1. Paraprofessionals assigned to special education assist in special education services only. (Paraprofessionals should not be pulled from their regularly assigned duties\nparaprofessionals assigned to one student should be pulled only in the event of the absence of their assigned student - assigned to special education only.) 2. Investigate the possibility of instituting differential pay/increase for paraprofessionals. 3. Develop a paraprofessional sub pool to serve in special education classes. 4. Conduct a feasibility study by the end of the 2006-2007 school year to determine the need for more self-contained classrooms and to address transportation issues with the CBI program. 5. Use District vehicles for fieldtrips and other outings. 6. Ensure new teachers receive start-up equipment and materials. 7. Redefine the role and job description of special education department chairs. 2 C')V, ,-n O:J: ~8 :,o,Ov, \u0026gt;m r\n~ mr\n,-m ~V\u0026gt; .!J,,l m :,0 ~ z z ,m... n :J: \u0026gt;z C') m V\u0026gt; !Jl \u0026gt; z 0 C V\u0026gt; m \u0026gt; C') ~ m E m .z... . 8. Provide teachers with one release day per semester to work on portfolios and/or annual reviews. These days must be used prior to March. 9. Ensure a duty free lunch and preparation period for special education teachers, as outlined in the PN Agreement. I Additional Recommendations 1. Engage teachers in the District's review of the ALC program. 2. Increase involvement of District in state and national activities regarding Special Education. 3. School-level Special Education departments will periodically review class options for special education students. 3 DATE: TO: FROM: September 22, 2005 Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Cloverdale Elementary School at Badgett Student Reassignment Plan BACKGROUND: Cloverdale Elementary School, built in 1959, was transferred by court order from the Pulaski County Special School District to the Little Rock School District during the 1987- 1988 school year. The school is single-story and shares a campus with Cloverdale Middle School. The elementary school was built on land considered poor for construction. The combination of the soil and techniques used in construction caused the structural beams supporting the school's floor to erode. A structural study completed in 2004 determined that structural failure is occurring and that the building is slowly sinking. In the spring of 2005, the Board approved plans to relocate Cloverdale Elementary students at the former Badgett Elementary building and to tear down the school. Cloverdale Elementary had a capacity of 448 students. In October 2004 enrollment was 360. Following the announcement that Cloverdale students would be relocated to Badgett for the 2005-2006 school year, parents began requesting Transfer No Transportation (TNT) transfers to other LRSD schools. By August 18, 2005, TNT transfers had been granted to 144 Cloverdale ES students. In addition, other students were reassigned out of Cloverdale because they moved away from the attendance zone. accepted seats at magnet schools, requested assignment to Pulaski County Special School District on Minority to Majority (M to M) transfers or were attending Cloverdale on TNT transfers and requested a return to their attendance zone school. On August 26, 2005, only 111 Cloverdale ES students were registered and attending school at Badgett. By September 6, 2005, registration had risen to only 119. An inventory reveals that there are enough vacant seats to accommodate K-1 students at Watson Elementary and !.J,,' m\n:o is z z m..... (\") ::c \u0026gt;z C) m (/) !J' r\n:: z C C: (/) m ~ ill m ~ ='i p g z ~ iz5 (/) 0 .-,n, .~,, m ~ grades 2-3 at Mabelvale Elementary. Parents of grade 4-5 students will be able to select from available seats in other schools in southwestern part of the district. RATIONALE: The continued operation of low enrollment schools and the resulting fiscal inefficiency has been a concern in the district for several years. The Cloverdale at Badgett Elementary School qualifies as a low enrollment school. FUNDING: Reassignment of the Cloverdale at Badgett students presents no additional cost to the Little Rock School District. RECOMMENDATION: It is not financially prudent for the district to continue operating Cloverdale at Badgett with its low enrollment. The students should be reassigned to Watson, Mabelvale and other southwest elementary schools. A timeline for notifying students, parents, teachers and school staff about reassignment and the options that are available has been developed. In addition, a special task force appointed by the Superintendent will examine the future of Cloverdale Elementary School. The task force report will become part of the Superintendent's recommendation on Cloverdale which will be brought to the Board before the end of the calendar year. PREPARED BY: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: September 22, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Larry Berkley President, Board of Directors SUBJECT: Policy GBK Staff Concerns/Complaints/Grievances BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors periodically reviews polices and regulations which provide the district's administration a clear line of authority for operating the district in an efficient and effective manner. A review of Policy GBK Staff Concerns/Complaints/Grievances and the accompanying Policy GBK-R, both of which are modeled after Act 1357 amended by the Arkansas Legislature in 2003, describes the process an employee must use in resolving a work-related grievance. A copy of Act 1357 is attached. However, the policy, and its companion regulations in their present forms, does not clearly encourage employees to adhere to the process. School Board members are also part of the grievance process and our obligations also must be more clearly defined. In addition, Policy GBK does not strongly communicate that the Board will not tolerate reprisal or retaliation directed at employees who make use of the policy. RATIONALE: Policies should be clear and concise and offer specific directives to staff and administration. The revision of GBK and GBK-R prescribes a more thorough process for resolving employee grievances and protects employees from retaliation. FUNDING: This policy revision carries no financial implications. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board adopt on first reading the revisions to Policy GBK and Policy GBK-R. New text is underlined text. Eliminated text is marked in (parentheses). PREPARED BY: Joseph Mittiga Government/Public Affairs Officer .?.,' m ~ z~ z ,m... n ::r:: \u0026gt;z C\u0026gt; m U) ?' \u0026gt; z C C U) m \u0026gt; C\u0026gt; ~ m m !I: m ~ 8 z ~ i5 z U) ..0.. ,, jg ~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: GBK STAFF CONCERNS/COMPLAINTS/GRIEVANCES It is the policy of the Board of Education to have written grievance procedures which will result in encouraging employees to express themselves on subjects concerning condition of employment, in fostering a better understanding of policies, and in ensuring all employees that their questions and concerns are considered fairly(,) and rapidly(,). (and without reprisals.) It is the expressed intent of the Board of Education that there shall be no reprisals or retaliation of any kind made, nor will any be tolerated, against any employee who exercises his or her rights under this policy. \"Grievance\" will mean any concern related to personnel (policies)~ (or) salary.,_ federal or state laws and regulations. or terms or conditions of employment raised by an employee. \"Employee\" will mean a person employed by the District under a written contract. The specific processes and provisions applicable to grievance procedures are outlined in the Grievances/Concerns/Complaints regulation. GBK-R. The Board of Education encourages an employee to resolve a grievance or any other issue through the chain of command process prescribed by this policy and regulation or by a negotiated agreement. Revised : Adopted: November 18, 1999 References: Board of Education Regulation GBK-R Legal Reference: AC.A. 6-17-208 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: GBK-R GRIEVANCE/CONCERNS/COMPLAINTS Purpose Some groups of employees are covered by grievance procedures defined in their respective negotiated agreement. For those employees not covered by a negotiated agreement the following process will apply. Communication and discussion can resolve the majority of questions and problems that cause difficulties between the employer and employee. When resolution is not reached rapidly, the employer and the staff member may proceed to effect resolution in writing as defined in this procedure. The purpose of the resolution procedures is to secure, at the lowest possible level, equitable solutions consistent with the legal standards of \"due process,\" to problems that may from time to time arise. The purpose is to (obtain better understanding of policies, to) encourage employees to express themselves more effectively on subjects concerning conditions of employment, and to ensure to all employees that their questions and problems are considered fairly, rapidly and without reprisals. Documents and Confidentiality All documents, communications and records dealing with the processing of a grievance will be filed separately from the personnel files of the participants and will be destroyed three years after the last official entry. All parties will hold the resolution proceedings in confidentiality at all levels. Normally, the resolution process should be conducted at times that do not interfere with the assigned duties. Process \"Grievance\" means any concern related to personnel policy, salary, federal or state laws(,) and regulations, or terms or conditions of employment, raised by an employee. \"Employee\" means a person employed by a school district under a written contract. The first step in the procedure is to seek an informal resolution between the employee and the immediate supervisor. If the grievance is not resolved at the informal phase, the grievance is to be committed to writing and sent to the applicable supervisor within five calendar days of the incident resulting in the grievance. The employee will immediately thereafter schedule a meeting with the appropriate supervisor to discuss the complaint and resolutions sought. The parties should act in good faith to expedite the process. .!J.,I m i\"s' z z ,m- (\") ::r:: ~ C\u0026gt; m V, !JI r\nz C C V, m \u0026gt; C\u0026gt; \"m' m\nIC m ::i 8 z ~ iz5 V, 0.... ,, ~.., m s LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: GBK-R Upon request, the applicable supervisor will schedule a meeting with the grievant within five workdays of receipt of the written grievance. If the problem is not resolved in the meeting held with the supervisor, and the employee indicates a desire to pursue further, a written request must be submitted within five workdays for an appeal to the Office of the Superintendent or designee. Appeals The appeal will be heard in the Office of the SuperintendenUdesignee within ten workdays of the request for an appeal. An employee who has not been satisfied with the answer at the Superintendent's level may request that the grievance be submitted to the Board of Education. The request will include a written statement setting forth the issue(s) to be reviewed by the Board of Education and is to be addressed to the President of the Board c/o Superintendent's Office. Other Provisions An employee seeking to resolve a grievance as defined above is required to use the terms and conditions of their negotiated agreement for resolution of grievances. Employees not covered by a negotiated agreement are bound by the provisions of this policy. In either case, the responsibility for ensuring that the prescribed due process is adhered to and will not be circumvented is shared at all levels of the district, up to and including the Board of Education. Employees who have begun or who are considering initiating a grievance procedure either under the terms of this policy or under the terms of a negotiated agreement are prohibited from undertaking any action that seeks to circumvent the prescribed process. Specifically, employees are prohibited from conveying or causing the conveyance of information about their grievance to members of the Board of Education prior to completing the chain of command process prescribed by this policy or their negotiated agreement. Employees must be aware that receipt of such information by a member of the Board may be cause for that Board member to recuse him/herself from an employee grievance hearing. Likewise, members of the Board of Education, by definition of their role in the process, must refrain from any involvement in an employee grievance until the process formally reaches the Board as prescribed in this policy or a negotiated agreement. Members of the Board should always encourage an employee to resolve a grievance or any other issue through the chain of command process prescribed by this policy or by a negotiated agreement. Date: August 5, 2005 Legal Reference: Act 1357 of 2003 1 2 3 4 Stricken language would be deleted from and underlined language would be added to the law as it existed prior to this session of the General Assembly. State of Arkansas 84th General Assembly Regular Session, 2003 Act 1357 of 2003 SENATE BILL 913 5 By: Senators Wilkins, Broadway 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 For An Act To Be Entitled AN ACT TO AMEND ARKANSAS CODE 6-17-208 TO PROVIDE FOR PROCEDURES TO THE GRIEVANCE LAW\nAND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. Subtitle AN ACT TO AMEND ARKANSAS CODE 6-17-208 TO PROVIDE FOR PROCEDURES TO THE GRIEVANCE LAW. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS: SECTION 1. Arkansas Code 6-17-208 is amended to read as follows: 6-17-208. Grievance procedure. (a)(l) It is the public policy of the State of Arkansas that~ ill eaeh Each school district shall have a written grievance procedure which provides for an orderly method of resolving concerns raised by an employee at the lowest possible administrative level and in a clear and timely manner for both parties\n(B) All school employees shall have the right to file grievances and have those grievances heard. A group of employees who have the same grievance may file a group grievance. (2)(A) \"Grievance\" means any concern related to personnel pelieies er salary policy, salary, federal or state laws and regulations, or terms or conditions of employment, raised by an employee\nand (B) \"Employee\" means a person employed by a school district under a written contract. (b) ( 1) The grievance policy shall at least include the following lllll!llllllllllllll rnllllllllll 03082003LDH0835.JMB291 .!,I,' m :ID ~ zz ,m- (\") ::c ~ C) m U\u0026gt; !I' 8 z ~ iz5 U\u0026gt; 0 ~ .,, ~ ~ s As Engrossed: S3/27/03 1 provisions: 2 (A) A procedure for resolving the matter informally with 3 the employee's innnediate supervisor\n4 (B) A procedure to appeal in writing an unsatisfactorily 5 resolved grievance from the innnediate supervisor to the superintendent of 6 schools or his or her designee\n7 (C)(i) A procedure to appeal in writing an 8 unsatisfactorily resolved grievance from the superintendent or his or her 9 designee to the school board at the next regularly scheduled school board 10 meeting unless both parties have agreed to a different date. 11 (ii) The hearing shall be open or closed at the 12 discretion of the employee. S8913 13 (iii) If the hearing is open, the parent or guardian 14 of any student under the age of eighteen (18) years who gives testimony may 15 elect to have the student's testimony given in a closed session\nand 16 (D) The right of all parties to be represented by a person 17 of his or her own choosing, at least at the seheel beard le..,.el but not by a 18 member of a party's immediate family at any level of the procedure. 19 (2)(A) The determination by the principal, superintendent, or 20 their designees that the concern expressed by the employee is not a grievance 21 may be appealed to the school board for a final decision. 22 (B) At the hearing, the employee shall have an adequate 23 opportunity to present the grievanceT but no less than ninety (90) minutes, 24 and both parties shall have the opportunity to present and question 25 witnesses. 26 (c) The grievance policy shall be adopted in accordance with this 27 subchapter and other applicable policies of the district. 28 (d) There shall be no reprisals of any kind against any individual who 29 exercises his or her rights under this act. 30 (e) Nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring a school 31 district to enter into an agreement recognizing an organization for the 32 purpose of negotiating personnel policies, salaries, and educational matters 33 of mutual concern. 34 35 36 Isl Wilkins 2 APPROVED: 4/15/2003 03082003LDH0835.JMB291 DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 September 22, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Personnel Changes BACKGROUND: None RATIONALE: To staff allocated positions within the District FUNDING: Operating Fund RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.CA 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) consecutive years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 19, 2005 for regular schools are considered intern teachers. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 8, 2005 for EYE are co~pidered intern teachers. ~tlf PREPARED BY: David E. Hartz, Senior Director of Human Resources ?' r\nz C C: \u0026lt;n m \u0026gt; c\n,\n,\n, m m .z~. . p g z ~ c5 z \u0026lt;n 0 -n \"'0 ~ ~ Personnel Changes Page2 September 22, 2005 NAME START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE ResignationsfTerminations Certified Employees Berryman, Sara Elementary I/ 8-9-00 Reason: Accepted another KING 8-5-05 position New Certified Employees Harrison, Lauren Reading Recovery/ 8-18-05 WAKEFIELD Jacob, Melissa Special Education (.5)/ 8-11-05 FOREST PARK Keogh, Ruth Reading Recovery/ 8-11-05 BOOKER Mitchell, Avis Elementary I/ 8-1-05 STEPHENS Stevenson, Carolyn Counselor/ 8-11-05 CHICOT SALARY CLASS 4-05 TCH925 6-10 TCH925 4-07 SPE925 4-18 TCH925 1-02 TCH925 4-13 TCH925 ResignationsfTerminations Non-Certified Employees Andrews, Robert Maintenance/ 3-9-05 49-07 Reason: Resigned without FACILITY SERVICES 8-22-05 MAINT notice Baggett, Emily CARE/ 8-21-03 1-03 Reason: Position Eliminated CARE 8-1-05 CARE Bealer, Dechandra Instructional Aide/ 10-11-04 33-09 Reason: None Given GIBBS 8-26-05 INA925 Bonds, Dorothy CARE/ 9-2-03 1-07 Reason: None Given CARE 8-1-05 CARE ANNUAL SALARY 38041 .00 46966.00 annual 45742.07 prorated 20175.50 53061 .00 30617.00 47284.00 29760.00 7.28 per hour 13070.00 7.89 per hour Personnel Changes Pagel September 22, 2005 .!=.,' z  z 0 .\u0026gt;.... START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL\n,o m NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY c3 ~ Broyles, Paris CARE/ 9-2-03 3-06 8.54 Reason: None Given CARE 8-1-05 CARE per hour Carbo, Haywood Custodian/ 8-23-04 31-07 17388.00 Reason: Health STEPHENS 8-19-05 CUS12 Carter, Noda CARE/ 2-3-03 1-03 7.28 Reason: None Given CARE 8-1-05 CARE per hour ~?-\u0026lt; u....i..O.... c:0 Dunlap, Linda CARE/ 8-23-01 3-08 8.85 c!!! mzcz, Reason: None Given CARE 8-1-05 CARE per hour .....\n,o :cm ~~ Eichelberger, Rita Instructional Aide/ 9-8-04 33-16 16109.00 ~~ Reason: Leaving the city BOOKER 9-1-05 INA925 ~.., - Haggans, Monica CARE/ 8-9-04 1-02 7.13 . z\n,o  Reason: None Given CARE 8-1-05 CARE per hour i\n'i~ :cm ..... po Harvell, Lola CARE/ 8-19-04 3-08 8.85 ~,...~..., m\ng Reason: None Given CARE 8-1-05 CARE per hour .-\n,a ~ ..... m UI zm Henry, Melanie Instructional Aide/ 1-6-03 16595.00 -,\n,o 33-17  \u0026lt; ~~ Reason: None Given BRADY 6-6-05 INA925 UI Hill, Carolyn CARE/ 8-15-95 1-12 8.68 Reason: None Given CARE 8-1-05 CARE per hour Hill, Rhonda CARE/ 9-15-03 1-06 7.74 !I' Reason: None Given CARE 8-1-03 CARE per hour  z C C: Jones, Emma CARE/ 4-23-02 1-06 7.74 UI m Reason: None Given CARE 8-1-05 CARE per hour  C,\n,o m m ii: Jones 111, William CARE/ 9-2-03 3-06 8 54 m z.... . Reason: None Given CARE 8-1-05 CARE per hour Logan, Ira Nurses/ 11-03-04 52-08 33528.00 Reason: Accepted another FRANKLIN 6-06-05 NURSES p C position 0 z ..... c5 Madden, Andrea Child Nutrition/ 9-27-04 7-01 11050.00 z UI Reason: None Given WILLIAMS 6-6-05 FSH650 .0.... ,, jg McKinney, Mary Instructional Aide/ 8-11-04 33-16 16109.00 ..., m Reason: None Given OTTER CREEK 9-16-05 INA925 ~ Personnel Changes Page4 September 22, 2005 NAME Moser, Matthew Reason: Resigned without notice Perry, Mary Reason: None Given Reed, Kelly Reason: None Given Roberson, Shannon Reason: Resigned without notice Robinson, Kamesha Reason: None Given Shelton, Annie Reason: None Given Smith, Mary Reason: Retired Vick, Jo Reason: None Given Woods, Andrea Reason: None Given Bailey, Robbie Burgess, Leonard Burris, Tammy START DATE/ POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE Security Officer/ 1-4-05 MCCLELLAN 8-16-05 Instructional Aide/ 10-5-90 WILLIAMS 8-25-05 CARE/ 8-30-04 CARE 8-1-05 Instructional Aide/ 8-11-04 JEFFERSON 8-10-05 CARE/ 1-24-05 CARE 8-1-05 CARE/ 4-7-03 CARE 8-1-05 Custodian/ 4-1-74 ROCKEFELLER 8-25-05 CARE/ 8-15-03 CARE 8-1-05 Bus Driver/ 8-14-00 TRANSPORTATION 8-16-05 New Non-Certified Employees Child Nutrition/ 8-17-05 FOREST PARK Bus Driver/ 8-17-05 TRANSPORTATION Instructional Aide/ 8-16-05 FULBRIGHT SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 36-10 15463.00 SOFR9 33-13 14735.00 INA925 3-17 10.36 CARE per hour 33-13 14735.00 INA925 2-03 7.85 CARE per hour 1-05 7.56 CARE per hour 31-20 25632.00 CUS12 1-07 7.89 CARE per hour 3-09 15316.00 BUSDRV 3-01 9350.00 FSH550 2-01 9481 .00 BUSDRV 33-09 13070.00 INA925 annual 12858.00 prorated Personnel Changes Page5 September 22, 2005 !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z n ,\u0026gt;- START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL\n,, m NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY\n:g ~ Cobb, Helen Secretary/ 8-22-05 39-12 25632.00 TERRY CLK10 annual 23864.28 prorated Davis, Ebony CARE/ 9-6-05 3-03 8.06 CARE CARE per hour\n!:5 ?\u0026lt; u,n Fields, Janice CARE/ .... ,- 8-19-05 1-08 8.05 c:0 C!!! CARE CARE per hour mz ZC) \"\"'\n,, :cm Ghant, Natalyn CARE/ 8-19-05 3-05 8.38 ! f\n~~ CARE CARE per hour ~ Green, Michael Security Officer/ 9-2-05 36-10 15463.00 .., \u0026gt;. z- OTTER CREEK SOFR9 annual\n,,\u0026gt; i5 ~ 14358.50 :cm .... II\" prorated ~,-~.., m\n:g Griffith, Keysha CARE/ 8-29-05 3-17 10.36 ~~ CARE CARE per hour mui zm --\u0026lt;\n,J \u0026gt;\u0026lt; ~~ Harris, Jacqueline Instructional Aide/ 8-17-05 33-06 11946.00 U) FULBRIGHT IN925 annual 11687.71 prorated Harrison, Jami CARE/ 8-19-05 1-08 8.85 !%1 CARE CARE per hour r\nz C C: Harton, Lanna Instructional Aide/ 8-16-05 33-09 13070.00 U) m \u0026gt; FULBRIGHT INA925 annual C)\n,, m 12858.00 m I: prorated m .z.. . Hearn, Tonya CARE/ 8-29-05 2-04 8.01 CARE CARE per hour Occupational 8-18-05 47976.00 f) Hill, Kyla 60-12 C 0 Therapist/ AN925 annual z ~ SPECIAL PROGRAMS 46762.62 ~ prorated z U) .0... ,,\n,, .0. , m ~ Personnel Changes Page 6 September 22, 2005 NAME Hunter, Kourtney Johnson, Adelras Johnson, Charles Johnson, Helen Johnson, Nikol Jones, Millie Kelley, Dorothy Lewis, Kimberly Leblanc, Emmitt Long, Carmen Marion, Rose START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Instructional Aide/ 8-16-05 CHICOT Instructional Aide/ BRADY 8-15-05 Instructional Aide/ 8-22-05 CHICOT Child Nutrition/ 8-17-05 KING Instructional Aide/ 8-18-05 FULBRIGHT CARE/ 8-19-05 CARE Instructional Aide/ 8-18-05 MABEL VALE ELEMENTARY Instructional Aide/ 9-6-05 BRADY CARE/ 8-19-05 CARE Occupational 8-16-05 TherapisV SPECIAL PROGRAMS CARE/ 8-19-05 CARE SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 33-04 11253.00 INA925 annual 11070.52 prorated 33-16 16109.00 INA925 annual 15934.85 prorated 33-16 16109.00 INA925 annual 15934.85 prorated 3-01 9350.00 FSH550 33-14 15179.00 INA925 annual 14766.76 prorated 2-13 9.41 CARE per hour 33-09 13070.00 INA925 annual 12716.76 prorated 33-17 16595.00 INA925 annual 15070.05 prorated 1-03 7.85 CARE per hour 60-12 47976.00 AN925 annual 47226.38 prorated 3-09 9.00 CARE per hour Personnel Changes Page7 September 22, 2005 !=' \"Tl z \u0026gt;z n ,- START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL\na m NAME POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY c3 ~ McDonald, Gladys CARE/ 8-29-05 3-06 8.54 CARE CARE per hour Mosby, Jimmy Instructional Aide/ 8-11-05 33-04 11253.00 Washington INA925 Pearson, Rosalyn CARE/ 8-29-05 2-05 8.18 CARE CARE per hour ~?\u0026lt; u,n Powell, Lisa Instructional Aide/ 8-18-05 33-03 10934.00 .... ,- c:O O!!! BRADY INA925 annual mz zc, 10638.49 .....\na :Cm prorated ~~ ~~ Reed.Shonda CARE/ 8-19-05 1-05 7.56 ?\u0026lt; CARE CARE per hour \"Tl \u0026gt;. z-\na\u0026gt; Rose, Clayton CARE/ 8-19-05 2-01 7.55 i5 ~ :cm ..... QO CARE CARE per hour ~ ~ ,- .., m c3 Rose, Jason CARE/ 8-19-05 2-01 7.55 ,..\na ~ .... CARE CARE per hour mu, zm .....\na \u0026gt;\u0026lt; ~~ \"' Saine, Liltiunna CARE/ 8-19-05 2-08 8.64 CARE CARE per hour Shelton, Sharon Instructional Aide/ 8-19-05 33-16 16109.00 FAIR PARK INA925 annual !JI 15586.55 r\nz prorated 0 C: \"m' \u0026gt; Sims, Katina CARE/ 8-29-05 2-03 7.85 C)\na CARE CARE per hour m m s: m .z... . Sims, Lakisha Instructional Aide/ 8-19-05 33-16 16109.00 MEADOWCLIFF INA925 annual 15586.55 p prorated 8 z Sitton, Tanya Occupational 9-9-05 60-07 41328.00 ~ i5 Therapist/ AN925 annual z \"' 0 SPECIAL PROGRAMS 37023.00 .\".T,l prorated\na .0. , m\nPersonnel Changes Pages September 22, 2005 NAME Smith, Beverly Spearmon, Kimberly Stewart, Dale Taylor, Katherine Thomas, Arik Thomas, Lavette Tippitt, Sharella Williams, Keena Wingfield, Jennifer Wright, Lona START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CARE/ 9-2-05 CARE Instructional Aide/ 8-18-05 BRADY Custodian/ CHICOT 8-23-05 Instructional Aide/ 8-19-05 MEADOWCLIFF CARE/ 8-19-05 CARE CARE/ 8-19-05 CARE CARE/ CARE 8-19-05 CARE/ CARE 8-19-05 Occupational Therapist/ 8-29-05 SPECIAL PROGRAMS CARE/ CARE 8-19-05 SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 2-05 8.18 CARE per hour 33-07 12307.00 INA925 annual 11974.38 prorated 31-01 14532.00 annual 12305.82 prorated 33-04 11253.00 INA925 annual 10888.04 prorated 2-08 8.64 CARE per hour 3-09 9.00 CARE per hour 2-02 7.70 CARE per hour 1-06 8.33 CARE per hour 60-05 38928.00 AN925 annual 36495.00 prorated 1-08 8.05 CARE per hour DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 September 22, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of Assistant Principal for Southwest Middle BACKGROUND: To provide leadership to students and staff of Southwest Middle. RATIONALE: To fill the position being vacated by Andrew Bennett. FUNDING: District Operating Budget RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Mr. David Bernard, to the position of Assistant Principal at Southwest. Mr. Bernard's resume and a job description are attached for your review. J.)l-~' PREPARED BY: David E. Hartz, Senior Director of Human Resources !\" i\nz 0 C: (JI m ~\n,\n, m m :I: m ~ 8 z ?\niz5 (JI .0. , -0 ~  I 1  I I ,,, ,: I I. ,, 'H il OB.JECTIVE A challenging administrative position in a growth-oriented school district. EDUCATION MED SCHOOL LEADERSHIP Wilmington College B.S. HEAL TH \u0026amp; PHYSICAL EDU CA TIO Delaware State University NCATE Accredited School Praxis I Taken and Passed Graduated Magna Cum Laude 2002-04 New Castle, Deluwure 1998-200 I Dover, Delmwr\u0026lt;' CORRESPO DENCE SUB-COURSE, MP1004 CIVIL DISTURBA CE PLA 'I G The Army Institute for Professional Development MAJOR: PHYSICAL EDUCATION Southwestern Christian College MAJOR: SOCIOLOGY l nfrersity ufSowhwestern Louisianu L11f, 11 , 1/(' I II/' '\"'''' F:MPLOYMENT Garland Alternative Learning Center Little Ruck Schuul District Li11le Rock. Arku11sus Taught Physical Education 6-8 Grade Acting Assistant Administrator (4 th marking period 2005 School Year) McClellan Magnet High School Little Ruck School District Little Ruck. Arka11sas Assistant Varsity Football Coach Offensive Line/Linebacker Coach Immaculate Conception Catholic School 7000 JFK Blvd-North Little Ruck. AR 72116 (501) 1135-077 I Taught Physical Education Grades K-8, Head Football Coach SUMMER SCHOOL HEALTH TEACHER Caesur Rudney High Schou! Cuesar Rudney School District Taught 9th Grade Health HEAD SOFTBALL COACH Fred Fifer J1J Middle Schou! Cuesur Rudney School District Februar~ 2005-Prcsent March 2005-Present July 2004-February 2005 Sl 1MMER 2003 Camden, Delaware Fm. 2004-MA Y 2004 Cu111cle11. Delmn1re Responsible for designing practices, supervising assistant coache . developing student-athletes ph: ically. mentally. and socially. :\u0026gt;\u0026lt;- .\u0026gt;\u0026lt; e..n.. ,n.. . c:O O!!? mz Zc, \"\"'::a :Cm ~~ ~~ !X'  z 0 C: en m \u0026gt; C) :,:, m m ~ z --\u0026lt; 8 z ~ ~z en 0.. , \"D ~ \"D m ~ HF.AD FOOTBALL COAC\"II Freel Filer 111 Middle School ( 'aesur Rod11ey Schou/ Disrricr Mi\\ Y 2003-M,\\ Y 2004 Camden, Delaware Responsible for designing practices. supervising assistant coaches. developing student-athletes physically. mentally. and socially. ASSIST A T GIRLS' BASKETBALL COACH Fred Fifer IJJ Middle School Caesar Rodney School Districr ASSIST A T SOFTBALL COACH Fred Fifer III Middle School Cuesar Rodney School District Hitting and infield coach HEALTH \u0026amp; PHYSICAL EDUCATION TEACHER Fred Fifer IJJ Middle School Caesar Rodney School District JAN. 200 I -MAY 2004 Camden, Delawure OCT. 200 I -FEB. 2004 Camden, Delaware JUL. 2001-M/\\Y 2004 Camden, Delaware Responsible for teaching 61 \" grade Life Skills and Physical Education. Developed the school's Peer Leader Program. Served on the District's Developmental Arts Council, which dealt with curriculum development and installation in the District. Developed the District's 61 Grade Health Curriculum. Helped develop the school's Adult Mentoring Program and responsible for the planning and implementation of the school's Red Ribbon Week Program. Served as Vice-President for Health from 2002-2003 and Vice-President for Sport during 2004 for the state of Delaware's Professional Health \u0026amp; Physical Education organization. ASSIST A T VARSITY FOOTBALL COACH Milford High School Milford School District Offensive. Defensive Line Coach J u . 2001-M,'\\Y 2003 Milford. Delall'are SOFTBAl,I, I NSTRl lCTOR De/u,rttn! State L,'11iPersi1_, , \\\"utionul ro11th Sports l'rogn1111 (l'ffSI') Responsible for teaching softba ll to students ages 8- 18 . STUDENT ACCOUNTS CUSTOMER SERVICE Delm1'tlre Stale Universiry Sl v1\"11.R 2001 Don!r. DC'lmrure MAY 1998-JAN. 2001 Dover. Delaware tudent worker responsible for third party billing. registration. and student billing inquiries. SOFTBALL STATISTICIAN Deluware Stale University Responsible for taking statistics during NCAA softball games. ASSISTANT VARSITY FOOTBALL COACH Smyrna High School Smyrna School District Defensive Line/Running Backs Coach H EAD FOOTBALL COACH East Anchorage High School Anchorage School District AUG. 1999-MA Y 2000 Dover, Delaware JUL. 1998-MA Y 1999 Smyrna, Delm1are J A . 1996-FU~. 1997 Anchorage. Alaska Responsible for the school's 3 level football program (freshman. junior varsi~ \u0026amp; varsit~) and supervised 7 assistant coaches. BRANCH MA 'AGER OCT. 1991-Fl ll. 1997 Boys \u0026amp; Girls Clubs of Greater Anchorage ,.J nchornge. Alo  Managed Branch Operations  Recruitment/Training of Professional and Volunteer Staff  Development of Branch Level Budget  Development and Implementation of Branch Level Fund-raiser  De\\'clopment of Regional Award Winning Program ( ' treet Beat \u0026amp; In the Field) ~ ?\u0026lt; .,,n -4r c:0 0111 mz ~~ :Z:m ii .?.\u0026lt;,\n,-z\n::o\u0026gt; ci ~ :z:m .... \"\" ~~ r-c m\n:3 r::o ~ .... mu, zm -\u0026lt;::O ~~ -\u0026lt;m Ill ASSIST.\\NT FOOTBALL COACH East Anchorage High Schuol . /11choraKe School District Defensive Linc Coach SR. INSTRUCTOR M,,, 1995-L\\ 1\\. 19% MA v 1990-Ocr. I 991 Buys and Girls Clubs uf Greater A11chora1-\ne Anchorage. Alaska Responsible for organizing. planning. and implementing activities for the clubs drop in program. (l\\ges 8-1 8) FIRE SUPPORT SPECIALIST (13F) United States Army MAY 1987-FEH. 1990 Plotted and located enemy targets by using maps. compasses. and binoculars Called and adjusted fire on targets PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHlPS ational Health \u0026amp; Fitness Association National Association for Sport and Physical Education American Alliance for Health, Physical Education. Recreation and Dance Kappa Delta Pi. International Educational Honor Society  National Education Association CERT\\FlCATIO S Delaware K-12 Teacher of Physical Education Delaware K-12 Teacher of Health Education Delaware Secondary Administrator Dela,,are Middle Level Teacher Arkansas Physical Education/Wellness/LEI (P-8 \u0026amp; 7-12) Arkansas Building Administrator (312: grades P-8 \u0026amp; 313: grades 7-12) Certified CPR/First AID Instructor (Certified through EM afet: erv1ces) Anchoruge. Alaska PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 August 15, 2005 PLEASE POST The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year. POSITION: Assistant Principal - Southwest Middle School QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Master's degree or higher with eligibility for Arkansas certification as an Elementary/Middle School Assistant Principal. 2. At least three (3) years successful experience as a teacher and/or administrator in an urban school district. 3. Knowledge of the District's desegregation plan. 4. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality desegregated education. 5. Knowledge of high school curriculum\nof current educational theory and practice\nof cultural, socioeconomic, ethnic, and gender differences. 6. The ability to apply this knowledge when working with faculty, students, parents, administrators, community members, and support staff to design school programs and curriculum. 7. Commitment to staff development demonstrated by a willingness to initiate, participate in, monitor, and maintain in-service activities. 8. Demonstrates the conviction that all children can and will learn in the Little Rock School District. 9. Evidence of successful experience with parent and staff involvement in decision making. 10. Evidence of successful experience in dealing with students' problems. 11. Strong interpersonal skills. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INITIAL SCREENING INTERVIEW. JOB GOAL: To relieve the Principal of such impediments as prevents him/her from fulfilling chief responsibilities of promoting the educational well-being of each student in the school, and to demonstrate the capacity to perform the responsibilities of an assistant principal. !.=.,' z  z n \u0026gt; r- Rl c8 ~ !%' ~ C C: \"m' ~\n,:, m m E .zm.. f\" 8 z ~ iz5 \"' .0... ,, ~.., m ~ ACCOUNT ABILITY: Reports Directly to the Principal ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS/ RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Assists the Principal in the management of his/her school, and serves as an advisor to the Principal, Assistant Superintendent-Secondary Schools and Associate Superintendent on matters pertaining to administration and program implementation in that school.  2. Serves on such advisory groups and task forces as assigned by the Principal, Assistant Superintendent-Secondary Schools and Associate Superintendent. 3. Assists with the process whereby school-level educational programs needs are identified. Alerts the Principal, Assistant Superintendent-Secondary Schools and Associate Superintendent regarding needed logistical and consultative support in order to accomplish this task. 4. Works with staff and patrons to determine educational program priorities and goals for his/her school. 5. Assists in the development of educational programs and the plan for implementing them on the school level. 6. Assumes responsibility for encouraging and involving community, staff and where appropriate, students in decision making about educational program development and implementation at the building level. 7. Assists the Principal in developing and conducting aggressive recruitment campaigns. 8. Cooperates in conducting safety inspections and safety drill activities. 9. Works with the Principal in the preparation of the student handbook. 10. Assists in the administration of school rules regarding attendance. 11 . Assists the Principal in the general administration of the school. 12. Assumes responsibility for coordinating custodial, transportation, cafeteria, and other responsibilities. 13. Supervises conduct within the school, and oversees disciplinary action. 14. Requisitions supplies and equipment, conducting inventories, maintain records, and checking on receipts of such materials. 15. Performs such other responsibilities as the principal may assign. SALARY AND TERMS: PA Yl 0 - Grade 65 - $40,116 - $70,728, Ten and one-half (10.5) month 210 days, plus benefit package NOTE: Precise placement within the salary range will be determined based upon education and experience. EVALUATION: Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with provisions of the Board's Policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. APPLICATION DEADLINE: August 26, 2005, or any time later until a satisfactory applicant is recommended and approved. SEND RESUMES/INQUIRES: David E. Hartz - Senior Director HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Little Rock School District 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone 501-447-1100 Fax 501-447-1162 NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITION DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. \u0026gt; z 0 c:: en m ~\nc Hl ii: m ~ f\u0026gt; g z ~ iz5 cn .0. , -0 ~ -0 s DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 September 22, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Rightsell Elementary School BACKGROUND: A complete executive summary report dated August 26, 2005, provided a detailed analysis of the enrollment and renovation estimates for Rightsell Elementary School. The official enrollment at Rightsell for the 2004-2005 school year was 262 students\nby comparison, the total enrollment as of August 26, 2005, was 190 students. In summary, the Rightsell facility is unable to meet current educational standards without extensive and costly repairs and renovations. In the spring of 2005, a committee of district administrative staff developed a plan to temporarily educate the students assigned to Rightsell at Badgett Elementary School so that renovation and remediation projects could proceed. After additional review, it was determined that sufficient numbers of vacant seats were available at other schools located near Rightsell, and the students were therefore relocated to Washington Elementary School. It should be noted that Washington Elementary School has a capacity of approximately 900. The total number of students now attending school at the Washington site is 821 : 631 Washington students and 190 Rightsell students. Meetings were held with Rightsell parents, community members, teachers and staff on June 28, 2005, and again on August 30, 2005. Rightsell parents have been assured that their children will continue to receive a high quality education this year, and in upcoming years in the LRSD. RATIONALE: The operation of low enrollment schools has been a concern in the District for several years. In May of 2000 the Board of Directors adopted Policy FBG--Closing of Schools, that allows for closure to be considered based on factors such as excessive cost of operation due to enrollment and excessive cost of renovation and repair due to the age !D  z 0 C CJ\u0026gt; m \u0026gt; C)\no m m I:: m ~ !\"' g z ~ c5 z CJ\u0026gt; .0. , \"ti ~ \"ti m ~ and physical condition of the facility. Schools in similar situations, such as Garland, Badgett, lsh, Fair Park (recently converted to the Early Childhood Center) and Mitchell, were closed because of low enrollment coupled with high operational and renovation costs. The detailed circumstances and conditions that lead the administration to make a recommendation to close Rightsell Elementary School at the conclusion of the 2005- 2006 school year were provided to you in an executive report attached to the August 26, 2005, edition of the Snapshot. FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: It is not financially prudent to renovate Rightsell Elementary School. The administration recommends that Rightsell Elementary be closed and the students currently assigned to Rightsell Elementary at Washington be reassigned effective at the beginning of the 2006-07 school year. The closure of Rightsell will allow students to attend newer schools and will not negatively impact their education. The administration further recommends that the district work with the community to develop other options for utilizing this facility in the future. PREPARED BY: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: FBC CLOSING OF SCHOOLS A school will be considered for closure based on a recommendation from the administration to the Board of Education or the recommendation may originate from the Board. Consideration for closure will be based on the following factors: excessive cost of operation due to enrollment, excessive cost of renovation and repair due to the age and physical condition of the facility, inability of the district to deliver the required curriculum in the facility, and any applicable federal court orders. A decision to close a school will be made by the Board of Education. Prior to any decision to close a school, there will be open discussion of the prospect of closure with the community in which the school is located. A public announcement of the proposal to close a school will precede the closing date by at least twelve months, except in cases of extreme emergency. Adopted: May 25, 2000 \u0026gt;:\u0026lt;- \u0026gt;.\u0026lt; c-\u0026lt;n ,nc: O CCI\u0026gt; ~z -\u0026lt; Cl ::i::\n,o ~m ~! Zr \u0026gt; z C C: Cl\u0026gt; m ~\n,o m m !IC m ~ ~ \u0026gt; ~ 0 C: ~ !IC m z -\u0026lt; 8 z ?\nc5 z Cl\u0026gt; ..0.. ,, .e.,l m ~ RIGHTSELL ELEMENTARY STUDENT ATTENDANCE ZONE ANALYSIS \u0026amp; REASSIGNMENT OPTIONS The Rightsell proposed attendance zone and reassignment analysis is depicted in the following tables: Students Who: (a) Reside in the Rightsell Attendance Zone, Pre-K - 4th Grade (b) Reside in Rightsell Attendance Zone and Attend Other Elementary Schools. (c) Attend Rightsell but do not live in Rightsell Attendance Zone (K thru 4) Currently 162 elementary-age students (Pre-K through 4th grade) live in the Rightsell Attendance Zone (see Attachment Table: A). Sixty nine (69) of these students presently attend another elementary school through choice options and would remain in their current school for the 2006-2007 school year (see Attachment Table: BJ. As of September 14, 2005, Rightsell Elementary School has a student population of 186\n28 of those students are in the 5th grade and will move into middle school for the 2006- 07 school year. The Washington Elementary School complex currently houses a total of 829 students\n186 Rightsell Elementary students and 643 students Washington Elementary School students. A total of 158 Pre-K through 4th grade students currently attend Rightsell Elementary School\n93 from the Rightsell attendance zone and 65 from out-of-zone. The sixty-five (65) students would be reassigned to their attendance zone schools for 2006-2007 school year (see Attachment Table: CJ. A total 162 students who reside in the Rightsell Attendance Zone would be impacted by the reassignments. Naturally, all students are provided choice options through magnet school placements, Transfer/ No Transportation {TNT) or Majority to Minority (M to M) transfers through established procedures provided by the Student Registration Office. With the majority of Rightsell students presently attending Washington Elementary, the disruption to students and parents should be minimal. The administration will recommend dividing the Rightsell Attendance Zone utilizing Wright Avenue / 1th Street as the zone boundary. This will result in thirty (30) students who reside north of Wright Avenue/ 17th Street to be assigned to King Elementary School\n132 students who reside south of Wright Avenue / 1 ih Street would be reassigned to Washington Elementary School. kU13dOHd :10 SNOllVNOO ':) Little Rock School District Rightsell Attendance Zone 2006 - 2007 Elementary Students Who Reside in the Rightsell Attendance Zone (P4 - 4th Grade) RIGHTSELL Grade Level Zone Blocks P4 K 1 2 434 1 2 1 435 2 1 1 448 3 2 1 449 3 8 2 450 1 0 1 454 1 3 3 455 1 2 5 456 3 6 6 464 4 4 2 Total 19 28 22 Table: A 1N3W33H~V 3S0 ONYl a 1N3WNHnorov 11x 0 2 1 6 7 5 2 5 5 33 3 2 1 3 4 3 4 4 0 5 26 \"'INIHV3H 1N3001S 'IX IHVW3H ~NISOl:\u0026gt; 'X 4 3 1 3 4 6 5 8 0 4 34 Total 9 8 13 27 18 21 22 20 24 162 1HOd3H 1111:\u0026gt;NVNl:I a Little Rock School District Rightsell Attendance Zone Study 2006-2007 Reside in Rightsell Attendance Zone and Attend Other Elementary Schools Rlghtsell Zone Current School Grade Level Total Blocks P4 K 1 2 3 4 FOREST PARK 1 1 FRANKLIN 1 1 KING 1 1 0434 MCDERMOTT 1 1 WASHINGTON 1 1 WILLIAMS 1 1 Subtotal 1 0 0 0 2 3 6 FAIR PARK 1 1 Home School 1 1 0435 JEFFERSON 1 1 KING 1 1 ROCKEFELLER 1 2 3 Subtotal 2 0 1 2 1 1 7 ALT AGENCY 1 1 BALE 1 1 GIBBS 1 1 0448 KING 1 1 STEPHENS 1 1 WASHINGTON 1 1 Subtotal 3 0 0 0 2 1 6 BALE 1 1 2 CARVER 1 1 0449 CRYSTAL HILL 1 1 1 3 FAIR PARK 3 3 GIBBS 1 1 Subtotal 3 0 1 2 1 3 10 CHICOT 1 1 0450 STEPHENS 1 1 WASHINGTON 1 1 Subtotal 1 0 1 0 0 1 3 CARVER 1 1 2 GIBBS 1 1 JEFFERSON 1 1 0454 KING 1 1 OUTSIDE DIST. 1 1 STEPHENS 1 1 WASHINGTON 1 1 Subtotal 1 2 0 2 1 2 8 BOOKER 2 1 3 GIBBS 1 1 JEFFERSON 1 1 0455 KING 1 1 ROCKEFELLER 1 1 2 4 WASHINGTON 1 1 Subtotal 1 0 2 2 2 4 11 BOOKER 2 2 CARVER 1 1 GIBBS 1 1 2 0456 KING 1 1 2 OUTSIDE DIST. 1 1 2 WASHINGTON 1 1 Subtotal 3 2 4 1 0 0 10 BOOKER 1 1 FAIR PARK 1 1 FRANKLIN 1 1 0464 KING 1 1 WASHINGTON 2 2 WILLIAMS 1 1 WOODRUFF 1 1 Subtotal 4 1 0 0 1 2 8 Grand Total 19 5 9 9 10 17 69 Table: B Little Rock School District Rightsell Study 2005-2006 Students Attending Rightsell not living in Rightsell Attendance Zone (K thru 4) Grade Attendance Zone School K 1 2 3 4 Total OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT 3 1 1 2 7 BALE 1 1 1 1 4 CLOVERDALE ELEM 1 1 1 3 FRANKLIN 2 1 3 GEYER SPRINGS 1 1 KING 1 2 2 5 PULASKI HEIGHTS ELEM 1 1 ROCKEFELLER 5 3 4 1 2 15 - STEPHENS 1 2 3 TERRY 1 1 WASHINGTON 8 3 5 2 3 21 WATSON 1 1 Total 20 14 12 12 7 65 Table: C ..,, z \u0026gt; , z n ,\u0026gt;- ~ el ~ :\u0026gt;\u0026lt;- \u0026gt;.\u0026lt; v...,. ,nc: O C v, mz Zc, \"\"'::a :Cm ~~ z2:!\n-a r ~ \u0026gt; ~ 0 C: ~ ~ zm .... p C 0 z ~ ~z V, ..0.., ,, .e.,: m ~ DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 September 22, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Land-use Agreement Little Rock School District/Little Rock Boys and Girls Club BACKGROUND: The 2000 millage program identified a need for additional parking at Woodruff Elementary School. Recently, the opportunity presented itself to partner with the Little Rock Boys and Girls Club to develop property owned by them to meet the parking needs of both the elementary school and Lamar Porter Baseball Field. RATIONALE: Negotiations between the Little Rock School District and the Little Rock Boys and Girls Club provided an agreement for the joint-use of property located on the southwest corner of Johnson and th Streets upon which a parking lot has been constructed according to current City standards. The parking lot will be available for use by both Woodruff Elementary School and the Little Rock Boys and Girls Club at Lamar Porter Baseball Field. The attached agreement provides for cost-sharing in the initial development of the property and a prorated share dealing with maintenance and upkeep for a period of 25 years beginning in 2005. FUNDING: Bond funds for this project were approved by the Board of Directors as a part of the 2000 millage appropriation. On-going maintenance and repairs will be funded by the Dedicated Millage Fund. ,\u0026gt;.\u0026lt;. .\u0026gt; \u0026lt; rn n .... re: 0 om mz Zc, \"\"'\nc :\u0026gt;::m ~f\n!!\nc rz - ~ \u0026gt; E 0 C: ~ ii: .mz.. . r\u0026gt; 0 0 z ?\n0z u, 0.. , \"ti i3 \"ti ~ RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Little Rock School District Board of Directors approve the agreement with the Little Rock Boys and Girls Club as attached. PREPARED BY: Douglas Eaton, Director School Construction PARKING LOT LEASE, MAINTENANCE AND USE AGREEMENT THIS PARKING LOT LEASE, MAINTENANCE AND USE AGREEMENT (\"Lease\") is made and entered into this _ _ day of ____ , 2005 by and between the LITTLE ROCK BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB, a non-profit corporation whose mailing address is 16 I 6 West Yd Street, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (the \"B\u0026amp;G Club~') and the LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, a State of Arkansas public school district, whose mailing address is 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (\"LRSD\"). WITNESS ETH: WHEREAS, B\u0026amp;G Club is the owner of certain real property located in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas on the  comer of ih and Johnson Streets (being approximately .25 acres, more or less) upon which a basic parking lot is located, said property being more particularly described on the site plan attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit \"A\" (the \"Parking Lot\")\nWHEREAS, the Parking Lot is located across the street from and in the immediate vicinity of the Lamar Porter Field, which is owned and operated by B\u0026amp;G Club, and across the street from and in the immediate vicinity of the campus of Woodruff Elementary School, which is owned and operated by LRSD\nWHEREAS, the Parking Lot has been recently paved by the B\u0026amp;G Club, but was not completed in full compliance with certain City of Little Rock Codes and Ordinances\nWHEREAS, the Parking Lot is primarily utilized by B\u0026amp;G Club during the summer months for sporting events at Lamar Porter Field, but is not used by B\u0026amp;G Club as frequently during the months commonly associated with the public school year\nWHEREAS, LRSD desires to make available more parking for its faculty , administration, employees, parents of students, and invitees\nwhich use would be primarily during school hours during the public school year and during certain evenings for meetings and events at Woodruff Elementary School\nWHEREAS, the parties hereto hereby recognize and acknowledge the benefits of sharing the use of the Parking Lot\nand WHEREAS, LRSD proposes to make certain upgrades, alterations, and modifications to the Parking Lot (as set forth below) and provide certain other consideration in exchange for the right to use the Parking Lot. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises set forth above and other good and valuable consideration, including the consideration recited hereinbelow, ~ .C\u0026gt;.. . 0 C ~ :I: zm ..... the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby expressly acknowledged by both of the parties hereto, the parties hereto hereby agree as follows: 1. TERM. The term of this Lease shall be for a period of twenty-five (25) years, beginning on the date hereof, and expiring ______ , 2030. 2. RENT: As monetary rent for the use of the Parking Lot, LRSD shall pay to B\u0026amp;G Club as of the date hereof, in full in advance, Twenty-Five and No/ 100 Dollars ($25.00), representing a rental amount of One and No/100 Dollars ($1.00) per year during the Term hereof (the \"Monetary Consideration\"). The Monetary Consideration shall be in addition to the Infrastructure Consideration, as such term is defined hereinafter. In addition to the Monetary Consideration given by LRSD for the use of the Parking Lot, LRSD also agrees to make certain \"Infrastructure Improvements\" (as such term is defined hereinafter) to the Parking Lot. The monetary value of the Infrastructure Improvements, as well as the planning, design, and labor therefore shall be known as the \"Infrastructure Consideration,\" 3. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. LRSD agrees to plan, design, perform, and be responsible for the costs of labor and materials to install the following improvements at the Parking Lot: - striping for parking spaces (approximately 32 spaces total)\n- curbing\n- landscaping\n- fencing along the western boundary of the Parking Lot\n- concrete drive area\n- ADA curb-cuts\nand - drainage. All such improvements to the Parking Lot as above described are general!) identified on the site plan attached hereto and incorporated herein by thi referenc~ a~ Exhibit\" A\" (the \"Infrastructure Improvements\"). B\u0026amp;G Club hereby expressly consents to LRSD placing appropriate, cuswmar~ parking lot signage on the Parking Lot to indicate that the Parking Lot ma) be util izcu by LRSD, its faculty , administration, employees , parents of students, and invitee~ . LRSD agrees to complete the installation of the Infrastructure Improvements within two hundred seventy (270) days after any and all approvals of such Infrastructure Improvements are obtained from the City of Little Rock, Arkansas . 2 4. MAINTENANCE. Once the Infrastructure Improvements are made and the Parking Lot becomes usable by the parties hereto, B\u0026amp;G Club and LRSD agree that each shall be equally responsible (on a 50/50 basis) for the costs, labor, and materials necessary to maintain and repair the Parking Lot on a day-to-day basis, including, but not limited to, such items as re-striping, re-surfacing, repairs to potholes or cracks, and repairs to curbing, drainage, fencing, or lighting\nprovided, however, any typical clean up or repair of damage to the Parking Lot which is caused by the sole and direct actions of the users of the Parking Lot associated with either B\u0026amp;G Club or LRSD shall be borne by B\u0026amp;G Club or LRSD, as the case may be [for example, if cans, bottles, or other trash are left on the Parking Lot following an event at which invitees of either B\u0026amp;G Club or LRSD are using the Parking Lot, B\u0026amp;G Club or LRSD, as the case may be, shall be responsible for the clean up of the Parking Lot, or, during any such event, damage is caused to a portion of the Parking Lot by the invitees of either B\u0026amp;G Club or LRSD, B\u0026amp;G Club or LRSD, as the case may be, shall be responsible for the necessary repairs or replacements for the damage caused). 5. COMMON USE OF PARKING LOT. The parties hereto hereby expressly acknowledge and agree that each party shall have the right of use of the Parking Lot, and that neither party's use shall be exclusive\nprovided, however, each party recognizes, acknowledges, and agrees that B\u0026amp;G Club will most often utilize the Parking Lot during summer months for sporting events held at Lamar Porter Field and LRSD will most often utilize the Parking Lot during public school year months for dayto- day school classes and events. Each party hereto agrees to cooperate in good faith so as to avoid interference with the other party's use of the Parking Lot during the expected times of use by such other party. In the case of unexpected events and the need for use of the Parking Lot by one or the other party beyond such expected uses as set forth herein, the party planning to use the Parking Lot shall use its best, reasonable, good faith efforts to provide advance notice to the other party. 6. UTILITIES. B\u0026amp;G Club shall be responsible for the prompt and full payment, as and when due, of any and all utilities charged to the Parking Lot, including but not limited to electricity and lighting. 7. TAXES. B\u0026amp;G Club shall pay all ad valorem taxes, assessments and other taxes of any kind whatsoever due to improvement districts or governmental bodies which may be levied, assessed or charged against the Parking Lot, or any improvements at any time situated thereon. 8. WARRANTIES OF TITLE. B\u0026amp;G Club hereby warrants and covenants with and unto LRSD that it has an absolute and indefeasible title to the Parking Lot, and that B\u0026amp;G Club will, during the Term hereof and the full performance by LRSD of LRSD 's obligations and covenants hereunder, defend the same and hold harmless LRSD against the lawful claims of any and all persons whomsoever with respect to the 3 ~?\u0026lt; U...I. ,n... C: 0 CUI mz ~~ :Cm ~~ ~=! r g z ~ iz3 UI .0... ,, jg ~ title thereto. Upon performance of its obligations hereunder, LRSD will be entitled to the quiet enjoyment of the Parking Lot, subject only to B\u0026amp;G Club's rights to use the Parking Lot in accordance with the terms hereof. 9. SIGNS AND ADVERTISING. Any sign displayed on any part of the outside of any improvement shall be for identification only, and not in the nature of advertising. 10. INSURANCE\nINDEMNITY AGAINST DAMAGE OR INJURY. LRSD agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless B\u0026amp;G Club against any claim, expense, loss or liability to the extent the same is caused by the direct action or inaction of LRSD, LRSD's agents, servants, employees, faculty, administration, students, parents of students, and invitees. B\u0026amp; G Club agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless LRSD against any claim, expense, loss or liability to the extent the same is caused by the direct action or inaction of B\u0026amp;G Club, B\u0026amp;G Club's agents, servants, employees, coaches , administration, B\u0026amp;G Club members , parents of B\u0026amp;G Club members, and invitees. B\u0026amp;G Club agrees to keep and maintain at all times during the term hereof, in full force and effect insurance against third party liability by reason of B\u0026amp;G Club's use or occupancy of the Parking Lot with an aggregate limit of liability thereunder of not less than $1,500,000.00, and B\u0026amp;G Club shall require that LRSD be named an additional insured in such policies, and shall be entitled to receive thirty (30) days prior written notice of any cancellation or non-renewal of such policy. 11. DEFAULT. LRSD or B\u0026amp;G Club shall be in default under the provi-sions of this Lease upon LRSD's or B\u0026amp;G Club's failure to keep or perform any of the covenants on such party's part herein to be kept or performed and such failure continues more than sixty (60) days after notice thereof given by the non-breaching party to the breaching party outlining the specific default by the breaching party and the actions necessary to cure said default\nprovided, however, that if the default is not reasonably susceptible of cure within said sixty (60) days, such breaching party will not be in default if within said sixty (60) days period it commences and continuously and diligently pursues a cure of such default until cured. 12. REMEDIES IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT. In the event of a default by either party hereto, during the term hereof, such non-breaching party may, at it's option, declare this Lease thereupon terminated by written notice to the other party. 13. WAIVER OF SUBROGATIO . B\u0026amp;G Club and LRSD and all parties claiming under them hereby mutually release and discharge each other from all claims and liabilities covered by insurance in connection with the Parking Lot, regardles of the cause of the damage or loss. 4 14. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING. LRSD shall not assign this Lease, nor sublet the Parking Lot or any part thereof, without the prior written consent of B\u0026amp;G Club. which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 15. CONDEMNATION. In the event all or any part of the Parking Lot should be subjected to eminent domain proceedings, and if pursuant thereto an amount of the Parking Lot shall be condemned so as to render the residue inadequate for LRSD 's purposes as herein set forth, LRSD shall have the option to terminate and cancel this Lease by giving written notice of such intention to B\u0026amp;G Club. If any such taking shall not render the residue of the Parking Lot wholly inadequate for LRSD  s purposes as herein set forth, LRSD's rentals hereunder shall be reduced in the proportion which the value of the Parking Lot taken bears to the whole value of the Parking Lot with any improvements thereon. In any such condemnation proceedings , all damages allocable to full fee simple ownership of the Parking Lot shall be payable to B\u0026amp;G Club, and any damages for loss of leasehold interest, including the unamortized portion of the value involved in such condemnation of any non-removable improvement or fixture placed on the Parking Lot by LRSD with B\u0026amp;G Club's approval, shall be payable to LRSD to the extent same would have been amortized over the term hereof. 16. BINDING EFFECT. This Lease shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto, their respective successors, legal representatives, and assigns, except as expressly limited otherwise herein. 17. TIME OF ESSENCE. The time of the making of the payments and of the keeping of the covenants herein are of the essence of this agreement and the parties hereto so agree. 18. NOTICES. Any notice called for or permitted under the terms hereof may be given in writing and sent by ordinary mail, a reputable overnight courier, to the last address of the party to whom the notice is to be given, as designated by such party in writing. The parties hereto hereby establish their notice addresses, as of the date hereof. as the addresses set forth in the introductory paragraph hereof. 19. GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. This Lease shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the internal laws of the State of Arkansas. The parties hereto hereby expressly acknowledge and agree that the courts of Pulaski County, Arkansas shall be the proper venue for any dispute arising hereunder . 20. RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL. If, during the Term hereof, B\u0026amp;G Club ,h.tll receive a written, bona fide offer to purchase the Parking Lot from a third party bona fide purchaser, which offer B\u0026amp;G Club would otherwise be willing to accept (a \"Third Party Offer .. ). B\u0026amp;G Club shall notify LRSD in writing of such Third Party Offer, including a copy of th1.: Tlurd Party Offer (the \"B\u0026amp;G Club Notice\"). LRSD shall have the right of first refusal to purchase the Parking Lot for a period of twenty (20) days from the date of actual receipt ofthe.B\u0026amp;G Club Notice on the same terms as set forth in the Third Party Offer (\"'Right of First Refusal\"). 1 f LRSD elects to exercise its Right offirst Refusal during such twenty (20) day period, LRSD 5 ~ \u0026gt; .C.. . 0 C ~ :I: mz -\u0026lt; shall notify B\u0026amp;G Club in writing that LRSD will purchase the Parking Lot on the same terms as set fo rth in the Third Party Offer. In the event that LRSD shall fail to exercise its Right of First Refusal within such twenty (20) day period following LRSD's actual receipt of the B\u0026amp;G Club Notice. the Right ofFirst Refusal shall automatically expire at the conclusion of such twenty (20) day period. LRSD's failure to exercise its Right of First Refusal shall not affect its lease rights hereunder. (Signatures Conmined on Following Page.) 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands below on the day and year first above written. LITTLE ROCK BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB, a nonprofit corporation Title: clu LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, a public school district By: (Print name) (Signature) Title: 7 ~  C ls C ~ :mI: .z. . NOl!S: 1. AU. NEW PARl\u0026lt;INO AAAS AN\u0026gt; Dfl\\B ARE. DElJNEAlE\u0026gt; Vl11H CURB Nm CUTltR.. 2. DCISllNO PAVEMENT, CURBS Nm WALKS NOT 'THIN PUN PA~ ARE.\u0026gt;S SH\u0026lt;\u0026gt;-. SHALL BE REMO'.fD. lHE ARE.A DRESSED Vl11H 1tlPS0L AND SEEDED OR SOOOED M OH:CTm ON PLAN. SPEQAL CONSTRUCTION NOlE: ACCESS 10 1l PARl\u0026lt;ltC LOT SHALL BE OPEN Nm UNOBSTRUCTED AT n END Of EAat W0AI\u0026lt; DAY. AA.AS Of Nf'f PAVEMENT REMOVAL OR EXCAVATION SHALL BE PROPR.Y BARRICADED~ INAO\\RTENT ENlRY BY 'tatCU:S lRA~ AL.ONO EmiER 7TH STREET OR JOtHiON SfflEET OR YflHIN lHE PARl\u0026lt;ltC LOT. _.,. .-..r.. .~,.,,: ..: ~-.-~-,-- ..rd.L -\"~- =.......-...~. , .. LMI .... AIIIJllllla EXHIBIT A 2 WIOTMOltANMil.SWALE WITH 2: 1 SIOE 9'-0PES CUT TO EXISTING ORAJ.IAG otTCH TOSOUTHWE5l VEAIFV ONNERSMIP OR EASEJ.aEHT PAIOA TO COH9TIUX:1'0H The Parking Lot PROPOSED LEGfNP _,. CURI LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT WOODRUFF ELEMENTARY LAMAR PARKING F-,...,.F--l SITE PLAN -- g .......... lml . 41.l.l . anna-. DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 September 22, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District receives donations from businesses and individuals on a regular basis. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District that donations are not formally accepted until they are approved by the Board of Directors. RATIONALE: District policy states that, in order to maintain the centralized fixed asset property accounting system, all property donation requests are forwarded to the Director of Procurement. The Procurement Department forwards the requests, along with the appropriate recommendations, to the Board of Directors for acceptance and approval. In order for proper recognition and appreciation to be conveyed to the donor, donor's name and current mailing address should be included in the donation memo. FUNDING: None RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the attached donation requests be approved and accepted in accordance with the policies of the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District. PREPARED BY: ~rral Paradis, Director of Procurement v~:en Caraway, Fixed Asset Property Manager ~ .C\u0026gt;. . 0 C ~ :I: z.m. . DONATIONS School/Department Item Donor Central High School $100.00 cash to be Jahn M. Oraha used to purchase tee-shirts Central High School $300.00 cash to the Mr. Gregg Heming on Cheerleading squad behalf of The Peabody Little Rock Chicot Elementary A check in the amount Ms. Stella Phillips School of $125.00 to be used for school uniforms Chicot Elementary A check in the amount UALR Children International School of $1,000.00 to be used for playground enhancement Mabelvale Elementary Contribution of goods and Johnson Controls, Inc. in School services in the amount of conjunction with the $27,075.00 over a period Performance Contract with of time. Goods and the District and funded services valued at through Qualified Zone approximately $5,668.00 Academy Bonds to be contributed during 2005-06 school year. Mann Arts/Science $300.00 cash for general Dr. Stephanie F. Gardner Magnet Middle School support of the school Pulaski Heights $500.00 cash to be used The Hillcrest Residents Elementary School to purchase school Association in honor of supplies for needy Mr. Robin Borne', retiring families Board member Pulaski Heights Wrought iron fence, Pulaski Heights PT A Elementary School valued at $21,000.00, surrounding the playground on the Colonial Court and Pine Street sides. Western Hills Student violin valued Ms. Beth Hill Elementary School $200.00 to be used by students School/Department LRSD Adult Education Center $750.00 Literacy grant to be used to purchase basic literacy textbooks and materials Donor Ms. Renita Thompson, Personnel Manager, Wal-Mart Store #126 \u0026gt;:\u0026lt;- .\u0026gt;\u0026lt; u..,.C..\"..\u0026gt;. c:O CUI mz zc\n, ...\na \"'m i! zr  ..itt{e 1wck Centra{ :f{itJli Sclioo{ 1500 Soutfi 'Park Street Litt{e 'Rock, .'Arkansas 72202 Plione 501-447-1400 :fax 501-447-1401 DATE: 8/9/2005 - - - -- TO: DARR.!\\L PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT FROM: NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL ~~ SUBJECT: DONATION Jahn M. Oraha of 3011 W. Markham Street, Little Rock, AR 72205, graciously donated $100 to our school for tee-shirts. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. Litt{e 'Rock Centra{ Jfi/Jli Sclioo{ 1500 Soutli 'Park Street Litt{e 'Rock, .. 'Arkansas 72202 'Pfione 501-447-1400 jax 501-447-1401 DATE: 8/9/2005 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT FROM: NANCY ROUSSEAU, P~NCIP AL J}V,,1.,, L./.J.t{j_J~.1 SUBJECT: DONATION Gregg Herning on behalf of The Peabody Little Rock at Three Statehouse Plaza, Little Rock, AR 72201, generously donated $300 to our cheerleaders. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. i .\n. -. ~ . .' .....~.. ... ,.~ : . ~ . CHICOT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL To: Darral Paradis, Procuremecr ctor From: Jane Harkey, Principal Date: August 9, 2005 Re: Donation ./ Chicot has received a $125 check from Ms. Stella Phillips to be used for school uniforms. It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with LRSD policies. We are grateful for the support of community members like Ms. Phillips. Ms. Stella J. Phillips 3700 Cantrell Rd., Apt. 304 Little Rock, AR 72202 1 100 Chico Road Phone (501) 4.17-7000  Fax 50' ..!..!7-7QQ  AUG 11 2U05 , CHICOT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL To: Darral Paradis, Procureme7~~ From: Jane Harkey, Principal .  f1 Date: August 9, 2005  Re: Donation I Chicot Elementary has received a $1000 check from UALR Children International as an incentive for completing student projects. Per our Campus Leadership Team vote, it will  be used to enhance our playground. It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with LRSD policies. We are grateful for the assistance that UALR Children International provides our students and families. UALR Children International 2510 Fair Park Little Rock, AR 72204 RECEIVED AUG 11 2005 111 00 Chicot Road Phone (501) 447-7000 Fax (501) 447 -7001 Mabelvale. Arkansas 72103 PROCUREMENT \u0026amp; MATERIALS MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 1800 East 6th Street  Little Rock, AR 72202  (501) 447-2260  Fax: (501) 447-2261 DATE: TO: September 1 , 2005 Board of Directors FROM: ~I Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Management THROUGH: Roy G. Brooks, Ed. D., Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donation Johnson Controls, Inc. has agreed to contribute $27,075.00 in goods and services to Mabelvale Elementary School. The contribution will continue over a period of time, beginning with the 2005-06 school year, until the total contribution is met. This contribution will be made in conjunction with the Performance Contract between Johnson Controls and the Little Rock School District that is being funded through Qualified Zone Academy Bonds. Goods and services, valued at approximately $5,668.00 as outlined in the attachment, will be contributed during the 2005-06 school year for Parts I and II of the proposed plan. The donor's mailing address is: Johnson Controls, Inc., Attn: Melanie A Hayes, Account Executive, 10801 Executive Center Drive, Suite 103, Little Rock, AR 72211. It is recommended that this donation request be approved in accordance with the policies of the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District. Thank you. August 12, 2005 Mr. Darian Smith, Principal Mabelvale Elementary School 9401 Mabelvale Cut-Off Mabelvale, Arkansas 72103 ' ~HNSON CO~LS 10801 Executive Center Drive Suite 103 Little Rock, Arkansas 72211 (501) 537-2741 RE: Johnson Controls, Inc. - Private Contribution - QZAB Project Plan Summary Dear Mr. Smith, Thank you so much for your time and Ms. Cargill's time during the past weeks in working to develop an appropriate contribution for Johnson Controls, Inc. to make to Mabelvale Elementary School in conjunction with the Performance Contract between Johnson Controls and the Little Rock School District that is being funded through Qualified Zone Academy Bonds. As we have discussed, this contribution must meet 10% of the value of the improvements being installed at Mabelvale Elementary School under the Performance Contract. The contribution, totaling $27,075.00, will be made through goods and services over a period time beginning with the 2005/2006 school year and continuing until the total contribution is met. It is currently anticipated that an annual contribution will be made through the 2014/2015 school year. In conjunction with the proposed plan, our point of contact at Mabelvale Elementary School will be Ms. Kathleen Cargill. Based upon our discussion, we are proposing the following contributi0n plan for your review and acceptance. ~?\u0026lt; ....,. ,,nc: 0 cm\"z' ~~ :Cm ~~ zr - Part I Support of Mabelvale Elementary Schools' Mission to Improve Student Achievement in Math. In support of this effort, Johnson Controls will provide the following for the 2005/2006 school year: Goods/Services Cost per Item Total Everyday Math Counts Kits- One Per Grade 6 Total @ $175.00 ea. $1,050.00 Level Today's Math Student Workbooks 90 Total(@ $7.00 ea. $630.00 Today's Math-Teacher Training 12 Total(@ $50.00 ea. $600.00 Today's Math-Game Kits 12 Total @$120.00 ea. $1,440.00 Part I Total $3,720.00 I have spoken with Kathleen and she will provide us with the vendor and ordering information on the items so that we can expedite these purchases. We will order and deliver these items to you at Mabelvale Elementary School. Kathleen will obtain an invoice for JCI from LRSD for the Teacher Training component. I Part II Igniting Creative Energy Challenge Competition A. National ICE Challenge Johnson Controls will support Mabelvale Elementary School in their participation in the National Energy Foundation's \"ICE Challenge.\" (Igniting Creative Energy). This is an annual competition sponsored and funded through an educational grant by Johnson Controls, Inc. with additional support from the United States Energy Association and administered by National Energy Foundation. The ICE Challenge was developed to increase awareness among students of the growing energy crisis which has brought the impact of our energy choices closer to home. The Igniting Creative Energy Challenge asks students to use their creative talents to communicate their energy ideas and actions. The Challenge is an educational competition designed to encourage students to learn more about energy and the environment. Student entries should reflect the theme \"Igniting Creative Energy\" (ICE) and demonstrate an understanding of what an individual, family or group can do to make a difference in their home or community. Students can express their ideas in the form of documented science projects, stories, books, artwork, photographs, music, video or website projects, or via any other format. Page 2 of4 Johnson Controls, Inc. Mabelvale Elementary School QZAB Contribution Plan 8/12/2005 Each year four national grand prize winners are chosen. In past years, competition winners have received trips for themselves and a parent or guardian to the Olympics in Salt Lake City and to Hawaii. Entries are due in February of each year and winners announced mid-to-late March. Winners also participate in the National Energy Efficiency Forum in Washington D.C., held during June, where they share their Challenge entries and ideas with government and energy leaders. B. Mabe/vale ICE Challenge Johnson Controls' Little Rock Office employees will conduct a competition for Mabelvale Elementary Students in an adaptation of the national competition offering Mabelvale students additional opportunities for prizes and recognition. A total of six prizes will be awarded to Mabelvale ICE Challenge winners. One student from each grade level, (K through 5), who's work best exemplifies the Challenge criteria, will receive a $50 savings bond. Johnson Controls will present an overview of the competition and timetable for entries to Mabelvale Staff in October 2005. Entries will be due in January 2006. Winning submissions will be announced in early February and all entries will be forwarded on to compete in the national ICE Challenge competition. Kick-Off for ICE Challenge. Dari Scott with the National Energy Foundation in Utah will assist Johnson Controls, Inc. in the Mabelvale Elementary School Kick-Off for the ICE challenge. We will work with you and Ms. Cargill on an appropriate date in early October to host the contest Kick-Off at Mabelvale. Estimated Value of Contribution in Goods and Services for Part II of the contribution: Goods/Services Cost Per Item Total ICE Challenge Kick-Off One-Time School-Wide Assembly $1,000.00 Awards for Winnders 6 Total Savings Bonds (@ $50.00 ea. $300.00 JCI \u0026amp; NEF Volunteer Time* 2 JCI - 1 NEF 3 Total @ 12 hours ea. $648.00 (@$18.00/hour * Part II Total $1,948.00 Please Note: $18.00 per hour is the estimated VIPs rate for the 2005/2006 school year. We will use the actual rate to calculate the total volunteer contribution at the end of the 2005/2006 school year. I 2005/2006 - Estimated Contribution Total for Plan Parts I \u0026amp; II - $5,668.00 At the conclusion of the 2005/2006 school year, Johnson Controls shall provide a letter to LRSD and Mabelvale Elementary School certifying the actual amount contributed for the 2005/2006 school year. Page 3 of4 Johnson Controls, Inc. Mabelvale Elementary School QZAB Contribution Plan 8/12/2005 ~ .C\u0026gt;. . 0 c:: ~ :I: .zm.. Understanding that the needs of the school are dynamic and may vary from year to year, in all future years, Johnson Controls will work with the Principal ofMabelvale Elementary School to develop a contribution plan for that school year that will best meet the challenges and mission of the school. Each year, we will document the current year's plan in August and provide a letter certifying the actual contribution made for that in June. Mr. Smith , we at Johnson Controls are looking forward to our partner relationship with the students and staff ofMabelvale Elementary School. We appreciate the opportunity to work with your school in this capacity and look forward to assisting you and Ms. Cargill to measurably improve your student's performance in Math! Sincerely, Melanie A. Hayes Account Executive Johnson Controls, Inc. Little Rock, Arkansas (501) 537-2741 direct ( 501) 231-4869 cell (501) 224-4216 fax cc: Ms. Kathleen Cargill, Mabelvale Elementary School If you are in agreement, with the proposed plan, please indicate your acceptance by signing in the space below. Darian Smith, Principal, Mabelvale Elementary School ______ ,2005 Date Page4 of4 Johnson Controls, Inc. Mabelvale Elementary School QZAB Contribution Plan 8/12/2005 HORACE MANN ARTS/SCIENCE MAGNET MIDDLE SCHOOL TO: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement ~FROM: DATE: RE: James Fullerton, Principal August9,2005 Donation to Horace Mann Arts/Science Magnet Middle School Dr. Stephanie F. Gardner, 13201 Ridgehaven Road, Little Rock, AR 72211, has generously donated $300.00 for the general support of Horace Mann Arts/Science Magnet Middle School. It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. Thank you for your consideration. 1000 East Roosevelt Road  Phone (501) 447-3100  Fax (501) 447-3101  Little Rock , Arkansas 72206 :\u0026gt;\u0026lt;- .\u0026gt; \u0026lt; .c...n. rnc O ccn mz Zc, ....\n:a :Cm ~~ 2!!\n:a rz - ~ \u0026gt; ~ 0 \u0026lt;= ~\nr: m .z... . PULASKI HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TO: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement FROM: Lillie Carter, Principal b DATE: August 10, 2005 RE: Donation The Hillcrest Residents Association in honor of Mr. Robin Borne', retiring board member wishes to make a cash donation to Pulaski Heights Elementary in the amount of $500.00. These funds will be used to purchase school supplies for needy families during the 2005-06 school year. It is recommended that this generous donation be approved with thanks in accordance with the policies of the board. c: Dr. Sadie Mitchell Associate Superintendent RECE~VEO AUG 15 2o05 319 North Pine Street  Phone 447-5900  Fax 447-5901  Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 Sep - 02 - 05 08 : 51A tRil PULASKI HEIGH1$ ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ~ 001..01~ TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Darral Paraclis, Director of Procurement Lillie Qlrter f'rincipal /v August30,l005 Donation The Pulaski Heights ~.T.J\\\u0026amp; llas generously donated a wrought iron fence to th~ school. It is absolutely beautiful and enhances the appealJ:lnce of our playground on the Colonial Court and P\nne Street sides. The value of this donation is $21,000 JO. It is recommended that is cHonation be approved in accordance with the poli~ of the board. P . 02 ~ 1 a Nr, rt h P ino \"trc,r, t  f\"'hl'H'\\~ ,147.r.\nQI) ( .  1\n1x 447-5901  Little Rock. Ark:insas 72205 WESTERN HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL  DATE: August 11, 2005 TO: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement FROM: Scott Morgan, Principal SUBJECT: Donation Beth Hill of#2 Shepherd Hills Court, Little Rock, AR 72223-1977, very graciously donated a student violin valued at $200.00 for students at Western Hills Elementary School. It is my recommendation that this contribution be accepted in accordance with the donation policies of the Little Rock School District.\n~..\n~ ~. ~:\n, ' .. ~\\ . -~ !\n,.'. ..  .. 4901 Western Hills  Phone (501) 447-6900  Fax (501) 447-6901  Little Rock, Arkansas 72204 ADULT EDUCATION CENTER 4800 WEST 26m STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72204 447-1850  FAX: 447-1851 TO: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement FROM: ~ulette H. Martin, Coordinator DATE: August 25, 2005 SUBJECT: Donation Ms. Renita Thompson, personnel manager of Wal-Mart Store #126 at 700 South Bowman Road, has generously donated a $750 Literacy grant to the Little Rock Adult Education Center to purchase basic literacy textbooks/materials. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the donation policies of the Little Rock School District. RECE!.VEQ AUG 2 6 2005 'A.n I11divid11a!Approach to a World of Knowledge\" LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: September 22, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: July and August 2005 Financial Reports BACKGROUND: Financial reporting is designed to keep the Board of Directors up-to-date regarding the District's current financial condition. Financial reports are submitted monthly to the Board for review and approval. RATIONALE: July and August 2005 financial reports will not be submitted this month due primarily to the annual report submission to the ADE. FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: No action at this time. PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen Chief Financial Officer ,\u0026gt;..\u0026lt;. .\u0026gt; \u0026lt; U...). ,(\") c::: O CU\u0026gt; mz Zc, \"\"\"\n:o :Cm ~f\n: \u0026lt;!!\n:o zr - ~  ~ 0 C: !:1 31: mz ....\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1093","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2005-07"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Curricula","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1093"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["390 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nRECEIVED JUL 2 8 2005 OFFICE OF Agenda DESEGREGATION MONITORING Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting JULY2005 OFFICE OF DESEG. MONITORING n\u0026gt; .,, i==~ -\u0026lt; C 03: oz :o\u0026gt; O:tl m-\u0026lt; :ti-., :- oCz: on r--\u0026lt; r- 0 nz \u0026gt;r- \"' r- ==.,, m:O r- 0 on om 3: 0 m c: .... ~ 0 rC) 3: C: \u0026gt; ~~ -\u0026lt;m cn\no \"' :ti \u0026gt;. m.,, \"'O .C,,: :-t\u0026lt;i\n-t~ n:o =i~ ~o -c, Oz Zen-\u0026lt; 0 z \"' !D ~ ::!l z m :ti \"z' m 0 C: n \u0026gt; -\u0026lt; 0 z f) :ti m 3: \u0026gt; !:J ~ r-\"' ~~ -\u0026lt; 0 \u0026gt; 3: n :::\nF:. m z \"' I. 11. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests REGULAR MEETING JULY 28, 2005 5:30 P.M. 111. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Partners in Education - New Partnerships C. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) D. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A. Remarks from Board Members B. CARE Program Update C. Student Assignment Report D. Budget Update E. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects F. Internal Auditors Report G. Technology Update V. APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A Minutes: Regular Meeting - 06-23-05 Special Meeting - 06-29-05 (,\".). ., i- :,0 rm --\u0026lt; C 03: oz :,a\u0026gt; O::ID m-\u0026lt; :,a.., :- ,oCz: on r- ... ~o \u0026gt;~ rr- ::i\n-,:, m::ID r- 0 (\")(\") om 3: 0 .m.. c: ~ 0 re, 3: c:,. ~::l --\u0026lt;m \"':,0 \"' :,0 .\u0026gt; m.., \u0026lt;no .C...,.: .:\",.0.' ('\")\nij :::\nm -\u0026gt;-'.\"o' - C, Oz_z \"' ... 0 z \"' !JI ~ z~ m :,0 \"z' m 0 C: (\") .\u0026gt;.. 0 z fl :,0 m 3: \u0026gt; ~~ r- \"' .~.. o~ \u0026gt; 3: (\") :::\nN zm \"' Regular Board Meeting July 28, 2005 Page 2 VI. EDUCATIONAL SERVICES A. Handbook for Pre-K / Early Childhood Program VII. SCHOOL SERVICES A. Revision of Policy IJOA Field Trips with Regulations IJOA-R VIII. HUMAN RESOURCES A. Personnel Changes IX. FINANCE \u0026amp; SUPPORT SERVICES A. Second Reading: Policy FA - New Facilities Development Goal B. Consulting Contract Tech Services C. Property Donation - Mabelvale D. Request for Grant Proposal Authority E. Donations of Property F. Financial Report X. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions XI. ADJOURNMENT n )\u0026gt;-., ~~ --\u0026lt; C 03: oz ::a\u0026gt; o::a ,m.,-..\u0026lt;, -c: :o:onz r--\u0026lt; ~~ )\u0026gt;u, r r ~.., rm-0\"' nn om\ni:o m c: .... ~ 0,- C)\ni: C:)\u0026gt; ~ =l --\u0026lt;m U\u0026gt; \"U\u0026gt;' \u0026gt;. m\"..', U\u0026gt;o .C., :.\"..'. ~ U\u0026gt; n:i3 =i m )\u0026gt;O --\u0026lt;0 ofi ZU\u0026gt; .... 0 z U\u0026gt; !\" ~ .\"..'. z m \"U\u0026gt;' z m 0 C: n ~ 0 z PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS / WELCOME TO GUESTS Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. PARTNERS IN EDUCATION C. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS 0. LRCTA DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 July 28, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Partners in Education BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District Partners in Education program is designed to develop strong relationships between the community and our schools. The partnership process encourages businesses, community agencies and private organizations to join with individual schools to enhance and support educational programs. Each partnership utilizes the resources of both the school and the business for their mutual benefit. RATIONALE: The following schools and businesses have completed the requirements necessary to establish a partnership and are actively working together to accomplish their objectives. FUNDING: Not applicable. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the board approve the following partnerships: Woodruff Elementary School and EDS Metropolitan Career and Technical Center and Arkansas Baptist Church PREPARED BY: Debbie Milam, ViPS Coordinator \"m'\"m' \"D \"D 00 .\"..'.\"...'. U) U) -n)\u0026gt; ::Oz Oo\nc n CD 0 o\nc \u0026gt; 3: \"'c Oz 3: 0 m\u0026gt; 3: --\u0026lt; ~o :,:,Z U) U) !\" n \u0026gt; \"m' \"D 0 ' C) ~ 3: C \"D 0 \u0026gt; m--\u0026lt; r\u0026gt; U) --\u0026lt; cc  o ccm cZ o--\u0026lt; C) \u0026gt; mu, --\u0026lt; U) cc5 \"DZ 0 3: \u0026gt;m --\u0026lt;z m--\u0026lt; \"m' \"D 0 ::!I rn n 0 z ~ \"' C n --\u0026lt; 0 z \"m' \"D :-\u0026lt; r\u0026gt; \"m' 3: \u0026gt; ~~ ,.... U) \"' -n ~~ \u0026gt;3: n :::\nN m z U) Partners in Education Proposal Woodruff Elementary School and EDS EDS commits to the following partnership activities:  Mentoring  Reading for ViPS Reading Day  A birthday table of treats each month  Student recognition certificates for assemblies  Thanksgiving turkeys for selected families in need  Christmas gifts and food for selected families in need  Career day speakers  Other activities as requested Woodruff Elementary School commits to the following partnership activities:  Student artwork  Acknowledgement of EDS as a Partner in Education  Student performances when feasible  Opportunities for EDS employees to become involved in public education Partnership Between Arkansas Baptist College and Metropolitan Career and Technical Center The Metropolitan Career and Technical Center will: 1. Recognize Arkansas Baptist College as a partner in education on the school's website under the Metropolitan sub link and in the monthly newsletter distributed to parents and students throughout the LRSD district. 2. Recognize Arkansas Baptist College as a partner in education at the next Little Rock School Board Meeting. 3. Display plaque received at Little Rock School Board meeting recognizing the Partnership with Arkansas Baptist College in the central office at Metropolitan Career and Technical Center. 4. Metropolitan Career and Technical Center will identify qualified students who meet the requirements under the articulation agreement and refer them to Arkansas Baptist College and the Criminal Justice Program. 5. Arrange field trips for students and/or parents to tour Arkansas Baptist College. 6. Provide opportunities for Arkansas Baptist College representatives to demonstrate the degree programs relative to Criminal Justice. 7. Provide a display for Arkansas Baptist College to recruit potential student trainees and parents to review during \"Open House\", Parent and Advisory Board Day and Job Fair/College day activities. Arkansas Baptist College will: 1. Provide a representative to serve on the Advisory Council to Metropolitan Career and Technical Center's various articulated programs in order to provide guidance and strategic planning support regarding the enhancement of the school's curriculum, recruitment policies and marketing of programs. 2. Provide technical assistance in the classroom by providing speakers to come to come out and speak on various topics relative to the Criminal Justice field. 3. Provide and opportunity for field trips and visiting the campus. 4. Provide assistance with annual Skills USA Competition in Hot Springs. .:m,:,O m.\n,o, co .::.O..\n.o. enen 'Tl\u0026gt; ::Oz Co 3:n a, 0 o\nr: \u0026gt;\nr: ::0 C: Oz\nr: n m\u0026gt; 3: ... ~6\noZ en en !II (\") \u0026gt; ::0 .m,, ::0 0 c\n) ~ 3: .C,,: 0 .\u0026gt;.. m 0 .e.n. 0 C:  0 ~~ o--\u0026lt; C\u0026gt;\u0026gt; men ... en -C,: ,cz'i 0 3: \u0026gt;m --\u0026lt;z m--\u0026lt; ::0 .m,, 0 ::!l rn (\") 0 z .e.n. ::0 C: .(.\".) 5 z ::0 m ~ 0 ::0 m 3: \u0026gt; ~~ ,-en ~ ~ ...a \u0026gt; 3: (\") :::\nmN z en DATE: July 28, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: CARE Program Final Report- June 2005 BACKGROUND: The CARE Program began on August 25, 1980 with service to 13 schools. The current program serves 1500 of LRSD students in 21 elementary schools. The CARE Program is a non-profit, self-supporting program of child care provided for elementary students and parents of the Little Rock School District. The program operates before and after school and all day on most school holidays. The CARE Program provides a structured program of creative activities and recreation in a nurturing environment. Varied group and independent activities are planned according to the students' ages and interests. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' REQUEST: The LRSD Board of Directors requested information regarding the CARE Program through June 2005. A more detailed report is attached for your review. 2004-05 School Year TOTAL INCOME EXPENDITURES Personnel \u0026amp; Indirect Costs Supplies END OF YEAR BALANCE PREPARED BY: $1 ,513,922.68 1,067,944.35 21 ,561 ,41 424,416.92 Dr. Linda Watson, Senior Director of Student Services Martha Rogers, Coordinator, CARE Program r\u0026gt; en --\u0026lt; C C:  C ~~ c--\u0026lt; c,\u0026gt; men --\u0026lt; en C:Q -oz c\ni: \u0026gt;m --\u0026lt;z m--\u0026lt;\n:o .m.,, 0 ~ !\" C') 0 z en --\u0026lt;\n:o C: C') --\u0026lt; 0z\n:o .m,..,., :n \u0026gt; C: C ::\n0\n:o en\n:o m..,, 0\n:o --\u0026lt; CARE Program End of Year 2004/05 School Year (As of 7-1-05) INCOME: Beginning Balance 2004/05 Registration Fees Monthly/Part-time/Drop In Fees Late Payment Fees $ Holiday/Long Day Fees/Extra Day Fees TOTAL INCOME EXPENDITURES: Personnel: (Payroll through July Summer Payroll) Indirect Costs: (ONCE YEARLY CHARGE) Food Service-Projected Equipment \u0026amp; Repairs Refunds Training Advertising endofyearbudget 2004-05.doc 349,139.71 35,650.00 1,067,442.93 28,875.00 32,815.04 1,513,922.68 920,673.75 9,082.74 120,890.00 6,692.57 5,033.15 964.54 1,666.60 Motion Picture Licensing 1,248.50 OHS Licensing 1,550.00 Miscellaneous: 142.70 SUBTOTAL OF EXPENDITURES 1,067,944.35 Supplies: Consumable: 14,385.75 Postage: 3,637.78 Printing: 3,087.78 SUBTOTAL OF SUPPLIES 21,561.41 TOTAL EXPENDITURES: 1,089,505.76 END OF YEAR BALANCE: 424,416.92 endofyearbudget 2004-05.doc p m--\u0026lt; (\") :,: z ,0- 0 C) -\u0026lt; C: \"C' \u0026gt; m--\u0026lt; ~ \u0026gt;::o . 0\ni:: C: -Z-Z-\u0026lt; c.... :z-mm U\u0026gt;\ni:: \u0026gt; =1 m ::0 u, fl u, cc--\u0026lt;:  C a, m C: z c--\u0026lt; c,\u0026gt; mU\u0026gt; --\u0026lt; u, C: c'i -.,z c\ni:: \u0026gt;m m--\u0026lt;-z\n::0 m \"0 ' ::0 --\u0026lt; rn (\") 0 z u, --\u0026lt; ::0 C: (\") --\u0026lt; 5 z ::0 m ~ :\" \u0026gt; C: C ::. 0 ::0 u, ::0 m \"0 ' ::0 --\u0026lt; PAYROLL TOTALS 2004-2005 I I - -- I MONTH TOTAL SALARY SALARY TEACHER INS PUBLIC FICA FICA BALANCE ADM ' STAFF RETIRE ADM RETIRE ADM STAFF 1 I I - AUGUST $ 11 ,~~.06 $ 9,!0989 $ 1.275.40 I $ 861.03 I $ 673.74 $ 11 ,920.06 SEPT $ 63,146.61 $ 19,406.35 $ 31 ,307 .75 $ 6,731 .63 $ 1,811 .36 $ 85.15 I $ 1,440.94 $ 2,363.43 $ 63,146.61 OCT $ 92,175.:!_? . $ 19,236.91 $ 55,446.90 $ 9,936.13 $ ! ,798.58 $ 124 98 $ 1,519.50 $ 4,112.12 $ 92,175.12 -- NOV 1$ 8I,986.26 $ 17,880.91 $ 53 ,319.79 $ 9,497.80 $ 1,798.58 $ 122.51 $ 1,522.28 $ 3,844 39 $ 87,986 .26 DEC $ 96,158.40 $ 21 ,492.99 $ 56,489.06 $ 10,336.41 $ 1,798.58 $ 161 .97 $ 1,319 07 $ 4,560.32 $ 96,158.40 JAN ,~ 55,513 .96 $ 10,296.47 $ 34,835.48 $ 5,993.49 $ 902.58 $ 83.15 $ 753.24 $ 2,649.55 $ 55,513.96 FEB $ 90,063 .67 $ 17,862.81 , $ 55 ,121 .87 $ 9,653.82 $ 1,805.16 $ 138.04 $ 1,428 09 $ 4,053.88 $ 90,063.67 MAR $ 92,584.82 $ 19,950.92 $ 55,181.03 $ 9,859.I9 $ 1,805 .16 $ 143.56 $ 1,470.98 $ 4,173.38 $ 92,584.82 APRIL $ 9~~?_7 33 $ 20 ,_592.97 $ 60,371 .72 $ 10,596 34 $ 1,805.16 $ 169.17 $ 1,518.50 $ 4,573 47 $ 99,627 33 MAY $ 96,408.14 $ 19,629.88 $ 58,732 .27 $ 10,167.72 $ 1,805.16 $ 182.23 $ 1,445 .01 $ 4,445.87 $ 96,408.14 JUNE $ 108,289.69 $ 20 ,592.81 $ 67 ,563 .70 $ 11 ,521.49 $ 1,805 .16 $ 167.38 $ 1,618.72 $ 5,020.43 $ 108,289.69 JULY $ 26,799.69 $ 20 ,592.99 $ 2,883 04 $ 1,805.16 $ 1,518.50 $ 26,799 69 I TOTAL $ 920,673 .75 $ 216,645 .90 $ 528 ,369 .57 $ 98,453.06 $ 19,801 67 $ 2.896 64 $ 14,710.07 $39,796.84 $ 920,673 Yo Approximate CARE Sito Staff Payroll Projection per School as of May 5, 2005 Totals through July, 2005 Number of Lead Aldeo Lead Aides Number of Aldeo Aldeo Total Staff CARE Sito Per School lveariv salarvl Per School (total veariv salaries\\ Per School Bale 1 $7 837.34 4 $15,795.72 5 Booker 1 $7,572.12 5 $24,067.38 6 Bradv 1 $5,299.06 3 $16 794.30 4 Carver 1 $6,694.58 2 $9930.62 3 Dodd 1 $5 263.46 2 $6 430.64 3 FalrPar1\u0026lt; 1 $5482.40 2 $11612.00 3 Forest Par1\u0026lt; 1 $5,456.00 6 $28,489.80 7 Franklin 1 $5,482.40 1 $5021.38 2 Full\u0026gt;riaht 1 $7,572.12 6 $30,137.06 7 Jefferson 1 $7 837.34 4 $18,048.72 5 Kina 1 $5,206.50 9 $41 ,548.76 10 McOenmott 1 $6,808.50 4 $21 271 .00 5 Meadowdlff 1 $5,790.34 2 $6139.22 3 Otter Creek 1 $7,837.34 2 $7,230.36 3 Pulaski Heklhts 1 $4 288.24 3 $16,851 .26 4 Rocketener 1 $5,206.50 7 $28,688.26 8 Romine 1 $7,572.12 2 $10,822.40 3 Terrv 1 $7,837.34 3 $14,895.00 4 Washlnaton 1 $5,530.46 4 $20 851 .08 5 WestemHlns 1 $5993.26 3 $11 ,920.66 4 Williams 1 $7 837.34 6 $26,821 .38 7 TOTALS 21 $134 402.76 80 $375 367.00 101 Actual AdministraH\"\" -~lrl- 04-05 -~~hnn/ Y-r Administration Suoervisor Coordinator Field Assistant Field Assistant Clerical Bookkeeper Bookkeeoer P\"\"\"\"' Bookk\"\"\"\"r TOTALS CARE Projected Salaries 05-06.xls UIOd3ll SllOllOOI/ -~ 'ld3ll NOll:lOlllSNO:l 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 TOTAL CARE PAYROLL 311/0dn 13oona o lllOd3ll lN31'1NVISSl/ lN3001S :i Total Salariea Total Salarieo for Per School June and Julv $23 633.06 $31 639.50 $22,093.36 $16 625.20 $13 694.10 $17 094.40 $33 945.80 $10 503.78 $37709.18 $25,888.06 $46,755.26 $28 079.50 $11 929.56 $15 067.70 $21 137.50 $33,894.78 $18,394.52 $22,732.34 $26,381.54 $17 913.92 $34 658.72 $509 789.78 $65,166.00 $41 828.00 26106.78 30260.00 26 412.00 32,544.00 22 452.60 $244 771 .39 186132.81 $920,673.75 - S3lnNll'l 'I/ Sll3lll/l'l 3NllNOOll 11 - - - 311/0dn AD010NH:l31 o Last Name First Name dministrative Office Staff Allen She'Ron Conrad Wendy Houchin Veda Moore Cathine Odle Vicki Rogers Martha Westbrook-Walton Annette CARE Staff Class 04-05 CARE Pay 04-05 $26, 106.78 $26,412.00 $22,452.60 $41,828.00 $32,544.00 $65, 168.00 $30,260.00 Bale Pager: 607-7522 CARE Phone: 447-3652 Office Phone: 447-3600 Davis Linda 1-7 $7.89 Henderson Keily 1-2 $7.13 Hollis Vera Lead 3-17 $10.36 Roland Rosemary 2-17 $10.01 Williams Marcey 1-6 $7.74 Booker Pager: 607-7521 CARE P110ne: 448-3878 Office Phone: 447-3800 Arnold Carolyn Lead 2-17 $10.01 Bush Shi-rley 1-8 $8.05 Dickerson Bobbie 1-7 $7.89 Fletcher Ruby 1-6 $7.74 Harris Vivian 1-7 $7.89 Brady Pager: 607-7520 CARE Phone: 447-3939 Office Phone: 447-3900 Enlow Karron 1-6 $7.74 Fields Alice Lead 3-10 $9.16 Howard Kathy 1-10 $8.36 Milam Lisa 1-4 $7.41 Woodley Linda 3-17 $10.36 7/26/2005 Hours Worked (before \u0026amp; after school - Individual hours may vary) 7.5 hrs/day 7.5 hrs/day 7.5 hrs/day 7.5 hrs/day 7.5 hrs/day 7.5 hrs/day 7.5 hrs/day .5 hrs/day - a.m. only 4.25 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 4.25 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 2.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.75 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 3 hrs/day - p.m. only 2 hrs/day - p.m. only 3 hrs/day - p.m. only 3 hrs/day p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 2.5 hrs/day - p.m. only I hr/day - a.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only Page 1 CARE Staff Last Name First Name Class 04-05 CARE Pay 04-05 Carver Pager: 607-7516 CARE Phone: 447-4073 Office Phone: 447-4000 Gibson Sanders Susan Patricia Lead 1-6 3-8 $7.74 $8.85 Winfrey Vearlean 1-17 $9.43 Dodd Pager: 607-7515 CARE Phone: 447-4345 Office Phone: 447-4300 Geeter Surratt Vanderpool Lula Barbara Milagros Lead Fair Park Pager: 607-7513 CARE Phone: 447-4435 Finley Montgomery Parent Felita Lucille Josephine Lead 4-1 $6.25 2-11 $9.10 1-6 $8.33 Office Phone: 447-4400 2-12 $9.26 1-17 $9.43 1-6 $7.74 Forest Park Pager: 607-7360 CARE Phone: 447-4540 Office Phone: 447-4500 Berry Gary Haggans McDonald Seawood Nancy Angela Monica James Ruthe 3-12 2-3 1-2 3-5 $9.43 $7.85 $7.13 $8.38 1-5 $7.56 Franklin Pager: CARE Phone: 447-4627 Office Phone: 447-4600 Hampton Henry Valda Sadie Lead Fulbright Pager: 607-7542 CARE Phone: 447-4762 Dixon Fritz Kenneth Terry Lead Jefferson Pager: 607-7538 CARE Phone: 447-5009 Humphrey Loistine Jones Valerie Pool Theresa Lead While Crystal 7/26/2005 H!Od3!l SMOllOOV -~ \"ld3!l NOll:lO!llSNO:\u0026gt; 3 2-12 $9.26 1-12 $8.68 Office Phone: 447-4700 3-9 $9.00 2-17 $10.01 Office Phone: 447-5000 1-8 1-6 3-17 1-5 $8.05 $7.74 $10.36 $7.56 31VOdn 13!\u0026gt;008 a l!l0d3!l 1N3WNDISSV 1N3001S :, Hours Worked (before \u0026amp; after school - individual hours may vary) S310NIW y S!l311VW 3NllNOO!l 'II 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 4 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 4.25 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 3 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 4 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 2.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 2.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 3 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 2.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3 hrs/day - p.m. only 3 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 3.25/hrs day - p.111. only Page 2 31VOdO AD010NH:\u0026gt;31 'D I . CARE Staff Last Name First Name Class 04-05 CARE Pay 04-05 King Pager: 607-7536 CARE Phone: 447-5185 Office Phone: 447-5100 Alford Anderson Carter Cartznes Davis Dilworth Jones Phillips Rhonda Diane John Jerome Arrysen Floyce William Frank Jeremiah Lead 3.9 1-3 3-17 2-2 2-1 3-11 3-6 1-4 $9.00 $7.28 $ I 0.36 $7.70 $7.55 $9.34 $8.54 $7.41 Sterley Pamela 1-2 $7. 13 McDermott Pager: 607-7534 CARE Phone: 447-5553 Office Phone: 447-5500 Alexander Jenkins McFee Mitchell Madie Christy Sarah Delisa Robinson Dorothy Lead -r,ieadowcliff Pager: CARE Phone: 447-5635 Bonds Dorothy 3-17 3-9 2-7 2-17 $10.36 $9.00 $8.48 $10.01 1-7 $7.89 Office Phone: 447-5600 1-7 $7.89 Conley Barnell Lead 2-17 $ I 0.0 I Otter Creek Pager: 607-7532 CARE Phone: 447-5837 Office Plwne: 447-5800 Aushn Dawson Walker Pulaski Heights Gordon Kendall Miller Tappin 7/26/2005 Shirley Bruce Whitney Lead 3-17 4-1 4-1 Pager: 607-7533 CARE Phone: 447-3285 Mary Evelyn Vanessa Ranita 3-9 1-6 2-17 1-4 $10.36 $6.25 $6.25 Office Phone: 447-5900 $9.00 $7.74 $10.01 $7.41 Hours Worked (before \u0026amp; after school  individual hours may vary) 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day p.m. only I hr/day - a.m. only 3.5 hrs/day p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 4.25 hrs/day - a.111. \u0026amp; p.rn. 3.5 hrs/day  p.m. only 4.25 hrs/day a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 3.5 hrs/day p.m. only 2.5 hrs/day  p.m. day 4.25 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 2.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day p.m. only 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3 hrs/day  a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 4.25 hrs/day a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 3.25 hrs/day - p.rn. only 3.25 hrs/day p.m. only 2.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 4.25 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 2.25 hrs/day p.m. only 3 hrs/day - p.m. only Page 3 CARE Staff Last Name First Name Class 04-05 CARE Pav 04-05 Rockefeller Pager: 607-7523 CARE Phone: 447-6290 Office Phone: 447-6200 Alexander Elizabeth 1-6 $7.74 Clark Shirley 1-6 $7.74 Dobbins Marie 1-6 $7.74 Gant-Watson Wonda 3-5 $8.38 Porter Hazel 1-5 $7.56 Robinson Onetha 2-4 $8.01 Sten house Brenda Lead 3-9 $9.00 Romine Pager: 607-7580 CARE Phone: 447-6358 Office Phone: 447-6300 Terry Bibbs Wilbon Williams Cynthia Cora Ardelia Lead Pager: 607-7559 CARE Phone: 447-6553 Miller Robinson Thompson Joyce Barbara Darkeita 2-17 $10.01 1-16 $9.28 1-17 $9.43 Office Phone: 447-6500 1-6 1-7 1-6 $7.74 $7.89 $7.74 Thompson Linda Lead 3-17 $ I 0.36 Washington Pager: 607-7557 CARE Phone: 447-6787 Office Phone: 447-6700 Croon Shelia 1-6 $7.74 Eskew Annette 2-6 $8.33 Gue Sammie 1-17 $9.43 Nellums Mary Lead 2-14 $9.56 Shavers Patricia 1-5 $7 .56 Westem Hills Pager: 607-7553 CARE Phone: 447-6912 Office Phone: 447-6900 Douglass Jones Madison Workman 7/26/2005 Sandra Mary R. Zora Helen HIOd3H SHOllanv -~ Lead 3-17 1-4 3-17 2-17 \"ld3H NOll:JOHlSNO:\u0026gt; 3 $10.36 $7.41 $10.36 $10.01 31VOdn 130008 a HIOd3H lN3WNDISSV 1N3001S :i Hours Worked (before \u0026amp; after school - Individual hours may vary) S3.LnNIW v SH3llVW 3NllNOOH r. 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 4.25 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. 3 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 4.25 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.111. 4.25 hrs/day - a.111. \u0026amp; p.111. 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 4.25 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.111. 3.25 hrs/day - p.111. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 2.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.111. only I hr/day - a.111. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only Page 4 31VOdn AD010NH:l31 o CARE Staff Last Name First Name Class 04-05 CARE Pav 04-05 Williams Pager: 607-7543 CARE Pirone: 447-7163 Office Phone: 447-7100 Akins Kharisty 2-1 $7.55 Kelley brew Carol 1-6 $7.74 Lynch Mary Ellen 1-7 $7.89 Ollison Yolanda 1-4 $7.41 Smith Sarah L. Lead 3-17 $10.36 7/26/2005 Hours Worked (before \u0026amp; after school - Individual hours may vary) 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 3 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.25 hrs/day - p.m. only 32.5 hrs/day - p.m. only 3.75 hrs/day - a.m. \u0026amp; p.m. Pages CARE PROGRAM ENROLLMENT/STAFF DATA 2000-2005 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 CARE Enrollment Number of Sites Number of Staff 1099 22 95 1100 21 100 1342 19 103 1460 22 103 CARE enrollment is the total number of students who were enrolled throughout the school year. C:\\Documents and Settings\\veda.houchin\\My Documents\\Marthas\\chart 04-05.doc 1507 21 100 !-'\u0026gt; .... m n :c z ,0- 0 C) -\u0026lt; C: \"'D 0 ~ m p .C..l.) 0 C:  o D\u0026gt; m C: z o-\u0026lt; C)  men -\u0026lt;\"' C: c'i \"'DZ o\nc  m -m\u0026lt;_z.\na m \"'D 0 .\n.a.. rn n 0 z !!l\na C: n... . 0 z\na m \"'D :-\u0026lt; '.Tl  C: 0 ~\na Cl)\na m \"'D 0 .\n.a.. June 2005 Enrollment by Sites CARE Program School List SCHOOL 4 YR KIND FIRST SECOND THIRD FOURTH FIFTH Totals 1 BALE 7 12 0 7 4 7 2 39 2 BOOKER 15 6 9 9 3 5 48 3 BRADY 6 7 3 2 5 2 4 29 4 CARVER 3 15 11 10 4 10 7 60 5 DODD 15 9 4 5 4 3 4 44 6 FAIR PARK 8 8 5 3 0 2 27 7 FOREST PARK 12 10 16 20 14 9 3 84 8 FRANKLIN 4 4 5 2 2 0 2 19 9 FULBRIGHT 11 11 15 10 16 9 10 82 10 JEFFERSON 12 11 13 12 12 7 8 75 11 KING 21 21 26 18 11 10 3 110 12 MCDERMOTT 8 15 4 9 6 9 5 56 13 MEADOWCLIFF 4 9 5 7 3 3 2 33 14 OTTER CREEK 6 12 9 13 4 7 7 58 15 PULASKI HEIGHTS 6 8 7 5 7 10 7 50 16 ROCKFELLER 18 10 10 9 2 4 8 61 17 ROMINE 8 8 8 3 4 2 34 18 TERRY 6 15 17 14 10 7 70 19 WASHINGTON 18 9 14 10 5 5 2 63 20 WESTERN HILLS 6 6 9 6 5 2 35 21 WILLIAMS 0 16 16 9 21 14 13 89 TOTAL 180 231 203 183 148 124 97 1166 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: July 28, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: July 2005 Construction Report - Bond Projects BACKGROUND: The bids for Rightsell were received by LRSD on May 25, 2005. The low bidders for the remodeling and the abatement of Rightsell had given LRSD until July 25, 2005 to award the contracts without any changes to their bid prices. LRSD has made another request to the contractors to extend their bid prices through August 31 . The remediation contractor agreed with this date. The building contractor for the remodeling agreed to September 30. The remodeling of Fair Park has been ongoing since the last day of school. The remodeling consists of necessary interior changes to fit the new Pre-Kindergarten program. The schedule is very ambitious and the contractor is working almost non-stop toward a completion date of August 1. Changes are being made to the driveway and drop off areas. These changes are on schedule and should be completed by August 1. The remodeling of student restrooms at Forest Park is being done this summer. The contractor is working toward completion by August 1. The demolition of Cloverdale Elementary School will be completed in October 2005. RATIONALE: Monthly reports are submitted to the Board to keep members up-to-date on construction projects in the District. FUNDING: Bond Funds RECOMMENDATION: Report item\nno action necessary. PREPARED BY: Bill Goodman, District Engineer ,.,.\u0026lt;..  m ,:c. c0 z\u0026lt;\"\u0026gt; o\u0026gt; D\u0026gt; :::! 00 oz ~\u0026gt; \"0 r- \"m.'e \u0026lt;n (\") :\u0026gt;\u0026lt;  \u0026gt;\u0026lt; ~~ m en (\") (\") 0 :c Zo Co \"m' ren \u0026gt;m C\nc ~~ .. m .:::: en 0 \u0026gt; :-,, \u0026gt; C 0 =l 0 \"\"'' \"m' \"0 0 ~ CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JULY 28, 2005 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION I t:st. c.\nompIetIon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Carver Media Center Expansion $167,490 Dec-05 Central Renovation - Interior - - ~ $10,200,26!3 -- Oct-05 -- -- ---- - Fair Park Remodel $799,000 Aug-0~ Fair Park Parking Lot - - - -- - - $185,00~ Aug-05 -- Forest Park Restrooms $152,881 Aug-05 Gibbs Addition - - $705,67_0_ _ Dec-05 - - Henderson -- Skylight Replacement - $319,000 Nov-05 Meadowcliff Remodel - $365,600 Sep-05 - - Oakhurst (Adult Education) New Windows $215,000 Aug-05 Pulaski Heights Elementary Clean Exterior Walls --1 $98,660 Aug-05 ---- Southwest New Corridor Ceiling I $300,000 Aug-05 Western Hills Electrical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC I $622,160 Aug-05 Woodruff Parking addition $175,000 AuQ-05 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - SUMMER/ FALL 2005 I Est. CompletIon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Cloverdale Elementary Demolition $520,750 Oct-05 -- Rightsell Renovation $2,494,000 Sep-06 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED I csr. t-ompIeuon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Booker Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown Chicot Electrical Upgrade I Unknown Unknown J. A. Fair Sewer Line ! $50,000 Unknown $1 ,547,000 -- - Forest Heights Remodel Unknown -- -- Mitchell Renovation $2,212,493 Unknown Pulaski Hgts. MS Energy monitoring system installation I Unknown Unknown Williams Drainage Repair $29,200 Unknown BOND PROJECTS NOT YET STARTED I est. t-ompIeuon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Administration Annex ADA Adaptations $32,351 , Unknown Electrical Upgrade $9,166 I Unknown Adult Education ADA Adaptations $248,020 I Unknown Structural Repairs $53,918 I Unknown Alternative Learning Center ADA Adaptations $43,134 I Unknown Electrical Upgra~ $2,696 I Unkno-wn Roof Repairs $26,959 . Unknown I Restroom Renovation I ~ 7,742 Unknown - Booker ADA Adaptations I $107,835 I Spring 2006 Cashion Building IADA Adaptations $21,567 Unknown Dodd Restroom Renovation $26,959 Unknown -- -- - -- Facility Services ~ 2,351 1 ADA Adaptations Unknown -- -- Install Water Meters at Cooling Towers $4,313 Unknown I Emergency Lighting Replacement $ao,a76 1 Unknown 1 Land Purchase - Booker --!...- $100,000 Unknown - Fulbright --1R enovate Restrooms $10,784 Unknown ADA Adaptations $21-\n\"s67-r--- - Unknown - Garland Renovation $900,000 Partially Complete - ADA Adaptations $188,711 Unknown Electrical Upgrade $6,988 I Unknown Geyer Springs Replace Restroom Stalls $4,313 Unknown ADA Adaptations $21,567 Unknown CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JULY 28, 2005 BOND PROJECTS NOT YET STARTED Facility Name I I Est. Completion Project Description Cost Date Henderson Renovate Office $10,784 Summer 2006 ---- --~A_D_A Adaptations - $70,0~ 1-IR_C _____ ADA Adaptations - -- --- - ~.5ITT Restroom Renovation ______ ==--- $21,567 - 1-M- a_b_e-lv-a-le_Ele_m_e_n-ta_ry ___E_ le-c-tr-ic_a_l -U-pgr_a_de__ $6,21 1 - - ~mott Restroom Renovation -----~- $32,350 - Quigley Restroom Upgrades______ -- $5f918 - ,- ~ -~-------~-D-re_s_s-in-g Room Renovation -- $37,742 __ _ Unknown Unknown Unknown Fall 2005 Unknown Unknown Unknown Rockefeller ADA Adaptati~ $26,~ - - -- Unknown Electrical Upgrade - ,. $1,618 1-------------------=,-------'- - --'- -- --- 1-------- -----~l_nte_rior Renovation ___ _ - _ $16, 17_5 ___ Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Transportation - Laidlaw ADA Adaptations --------,,-- $32,3_5_1 _ Transportation - LRSD Electrical Upgrade $1,294 West Little Rock School New School ---- --- $11,782,638 ,-- BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name Project Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date Administration Asbestos abatement Administration I Fresh air system - Administration Fire alarm -- ---- - -- --+- Administration HVAC $380,495 $55,000 $32,350 - $70,000~ - Administration Annex ----1-En-e-rg_y_m_on-itoring system installation - - Alternative Learning Ctr. I Energy monitoring system instattaiion $15,16oT Alternative Learning Ctr. Energy efficien_t_li=gh_t_in~g'------ __- _--=_-_- $82,000 - Badgett ___ !Partial asbestos abateme_n_t _________ $237,237 Badgett ___ I Fire alarm ---1-- _ $18,250 -- Bale Classroom addition/renovation $2,244,524 Mar-03 __ Aug-03 _ AUJJ-03 Nov-04 ~ay-02 Oct-01 Dec-01 Jul-01 __ Aug-02 Dec-02 Bale _______ Energy monitoring sy_st_e_m_ _____ Mar-02 --+---- -- --- Bale Partial roof replacement $269,587 I Dec-01 ,_B_a_le_ ________H_ V_A_C_ ___________ __, ___$6 6_4~,5_8_7-+- ___ Aug-01 Baseline Renovation $953,520 __ Aug-04 --r-----=--~ 1-B_o_oke_r_ ______- +G-__y,__m_Ro_o_f ________________$4_ 8,525 j Oct-04 Booker ADA Rest rooms $25,000 Aug-04 Booker Energy efficient lighting I $170,295 I Apr-01 1--------------t-~ ~---,--=-~'--------'------ B o o k er Energy monitoring system installation $23,710 Oct-01 Booker Asbestos abatement _ $10,900 Feb-02 Booker Fire alarm $34,501 Mar-02 Brady ________ _,_A_dd_itio_n_/re_n_o_va_t_io_n ________ ~ ___ $_9_73,621 Nov-04 Brady Energy efficient lighting $80,593 Sep-02 Brady Asbestos abatement $345,0n -- Aug-_92 Carver Energy monitoring system installation ~4,480 I May-01 Carver Parking lot -- $111,742 _ Aug-03 Central HVAC Renovation - Band Area $225,000 __ Dec-04 Central Reflecting Pond $57,561 Sep-04 Central Parking Student parking $174,000 1 Aug-03 Central/Quigley I Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair $265,000 I Aug-03 Central/Quigley I Athletic Field lmprov_em_e_n_t --~-------$-3-8-,0-0-0-+-- Aug-03 Central/Quigley irrigation System $14,~-- Aug-03 Central I Purchase land for school\nUnknown Dec-02 Central I Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations $2,000,000 ' Dec-02 2 !a' .... m n ::c z ,0- 0 C, -\u0026lt; .c.:,: C ~ m \u0026lt; ~\n:cc :,,,c:: zn c\u0026gt; a, :::! 00 oz ~.., ,)\u0026gt;- :x, en m,n\u0026lt; :,,: . \u0026gt;\u0026lt; en == men nn O::c Zo Co :x, rmen \u0026gt;m ~~ c, n .. m c\"' 0 )\u0026gt; '.\" )\u0026gt; c:: C ~ :x, en :x, .m., 0 :..x.,. Facility Name Central Central Central Chicot Chicot Cloverdale Elem. -- Cloverdale MS -- Cloverdale MS Dodd Dodd Dodd Dodd Dunbar Facilities Service Facility Services Fair Park --- Fair Park Fair Park Fair Park J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair -- J. A. Fair --- J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair Forest Park Forest Park Forest Park Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Fr-anklin Geyer Springs Gibbs Gibbs Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall -- Hall Hall --- Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JULY 28, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I I Est. Completion Project Description Cost Date Ceiling and wall repair $24,000 Oct-01 Fire Alarm System Design/Installation $80,~ - ---+- T Aug-Ql_ Front landing tile repair - $22,470 Aug__:Q_!_ Drainage $64,700 Aug-04 -- ~- -- Sound Attenuation $43,134 Jul-04 Energy efficient lighting ~ ----- $132,678 Jul-01 -- - Energy efficient lighting $189,743 Jul-01 -- $1,393,822 -- Major renovation \u0026amp; addition Nov-02 __Fire Alarm Upgrade --- r $9,200 Oct-04 - - Energy efficient lighting - $90,665 Aug-01 Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile $156,299 Jul-01 Replace roof top HVAC r $215,570 _ Aug-lg -+ Renovation/addition $6,149,023 Nov-04 Interior renovation - - -- $84,6~-- -- Mar-01 Fire alarm $12,000 Aug-03 -- - Roof $245,784 May-05 HVAC renovation/fire alarm $315,956 Apr-02 j Energy efficient lighting $90,162-- - Aug.:Q!_ - ~ Asbestos abatement-ceiling I --$59,310 Aug-01 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music room addition $3,155,640 Aug-04 -- -- - Energy efficient lighting $277,594 Apr-01 -- - Press box -- $10,784 Nov-00 --- Security earner~ __ $12,500 Jun-01 - IA thletic Field Improvement - ---$38,000 Jul-03 - Irrigation System $14,000 Jul-03 Roof repairs --- -- --$391,871 - - Aug-03 Replace window units w/central HVAC -- $485,258 Nov-03 Diagonal parking $111,742 I Aug-03 Energy efficient lighting $119,788 I May-01 Energy efficient lighting $134,463 Jun-01 Energy monitoring system installation $11,950 Aug-01 Replace roof top HVAC units $107,835 Aug-02 Parking lot $140,000 Sep-02 Roof repairs $200,000 Oct-02 Renovation $2,511,736 Mar-03 Roof Repair $161,752 I Jun-04 Energy efficient lighting I I $76,447 I Apr-01 1 Energy monitoring system installation I $11,770 Jul-01 $8,637,709 1 -- Major renovation \u0026amp; addition I Sep-03 1Asbestos abatement I $168,222 Aug-01 Energy efficient lighting I $42,931 I Jul-01 -- Infrastructure improvements I $93,657 I Aug-01 Energy efficient lighting I $296,707 Apr-01 1Intercom I Feb-01 'Security cameras_ _ : $10,600 . J-un-0-1 Lockers ! $43,854 Dec-04 Energy efficient lighting I $193,679 . Jul-01 I Roof replacement gym I $107,835 May-01 Asbestos abatement Phase I I $500,000 1 Aug-01 Asbestos abatement Phase 2 I $250,000 Aug-02 3 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JULY 28, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Est. Completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date -IRC- Energy efficient lighting $109,136 Jul-02 --- Jefferson Asbestos abatement $43,~ Oct-01 Jefferson -- R enovation \u0026amp; fire alarm $1,630,000 Nov-02 -- --- Laidlaw Parking lot $269,588 Jul-01 Mablevale Elem Fire Alarm Upgrade -m:ooo Oct-04 Energy monitoring system installation ~-- Mabelvale Elem. ~.150 Aug-Ql Mabelvale Elem. Replace HVAC units $300,000 Aug-02 -- Mabelvale Elem. Asbestos Abatement $107,000 Aug-02 r-- Mabelvale Elem. Energy efficient lighting - $106,598 Dec-02 Mabelvale MS Renovate bleachers $134,793 Aug-01 Mabelvale MS - IR enovation $6,851,621 Mar-04 Mann Partial Replacement $11,500,000 Apr-04 -- Mann 'Asphalt w.alks ,T he total $1.8 million Dec-01 Mann I walkway canopies Dec-01 -- __ --is what has been Mann Boiler replacement __, used so far on the I Oct-01 -- Mann Fencing projects listed Sep-01_ -- -- Mann Partial demolition/portable classrooms completed for Mann. Aug-Q.!_ - McClellan I Parking Lot Overlay I $65,000 Apr-05 - --- McClellan -- Athletic Field Improvement - $38,000 Jul-03 McClellan Irrigation System . $14,750 Jul-03 --- McClellan 1 Security cameras __ I $36,300 1 Jun-01 ---- McClellan _ ~rgy efficient lighting $303,614 May-01 -- -- - - McClellan Stadium stands repair $235,000 ~g-01 -- McClellan !Intercom $46,000 Feb-02 McClellan $2,155,622 -- Classroom Addition Jul-04 I-Fire Alarm Upgrade -- McDermott $7,700 Sep-04 I McDermott 1 Energy efficient lighting I $79,411 Feb-01 McDermott Replace roof top HVAC units $476,000 I Aug-0_ Meadowcliff Fire alarm $16,175 Jul-01 -- - Meadowcliff Asbestos abatement $253,412 1 Aug-02 Meadowcliff Engergy efficient lighting $88,297 Dec-02 Metropolitan Replace cooling tower $37,203 Dec-00 Metropolitan Replace shop vent system $20,000 May-01 Metropolitan Energy monitoring system installation $17,145 Aug-01 Mitchell I Building Remediation $165,000 I Jul-04 Mitchell Energy efficient lighting $103,642 Apr-01 Mitchell I Energy monitoring system installation I $16,695 Jul-01 I--- Mitchell 'Asbestos abatement I $13,000 Jul-01 Oakhurst HVAC renovation I $237,237 Aug-01 Otter Creek Energy monitoring system installation $10,695 May-01 Otter Creek Energy efficient lighting $81,828 Apr-01 --- Otter Creek )Asbestos abatement I $10,000 ~g~2 Otter Creek Parking lot I $138,029 j __ Aug~ Otter Creek 6 classroom addition $888,778 I Oct-02 Otter Creek Parking Improvements I $142,541 Aug-03 Parkview Addition $2,121,226 Dec-04 - Parkview HVAC controls I $210,000 Jun-02 Parkview I Roof replacement $273,877 -- Sep-01 -- Parkview I Exterior lights $10,784 I Nov-00 Parkview HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls $301,938 Aug-01 Parkview , Locker replacement $120,000 Aug-01 Parkview I Enerqy efficient liqhtinq $315,000 I Jun-01 4 p -m\u0026lt; (\") :,: z 0 r- 0 G') -\u0026lt; .c.:.:, CJ ~ m \u0026gt;\u0026lt; \"':= mu, nn 0:,: Zo Co ::0 rffl r,, \u0026gt; m ~~ G'\u0026gt;(\") .. m C en ,0. ',.T.l c:: CJ =l 0 ::0 \"' ::0 .m.., 0 ::0 -\u0026lt; CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JULY 28, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Est. Completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Procurement Energy monitoring system installation $5,290 Jun-02 -- ~ Procurement Fire alarm $25,000 Aug-03 --- Pulaski Heights Elem/Middle_ Cafeteria Ceiling - - - $33,378 Aug-05 Pulaski Heights~m/Middle Replace Entry Doors T $13,990 ~- -- t Aug-05 Pulaski Hgts. Elem Renovation - $1,193,259 Nov-04 - - Pulaski Hgts. Elem Move playground _J__ $17,000 Dec-02 Pulaski Hgts. MS Renovation-- -- $3,755,041 - -- --- Nov-04 Rightsell Energy efficient lighting-- T $84,898 Apr-01 -- - - Rockefeller Energy efficient lighting-- $137,004 Mar-01 -- -- Rockefeller Replace roof top HVAC $539,175 Aug-01 Rockefeller I Parking addition -- ~742 Aug-02 Romine $10,000 --- 'Asbestos abatement I ~r-02 --- Romine Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675-,----- Mar-03 Scott Field Track Renovations I $289,056 I May-05 Security/Transportation IB us cameras - $22,500 Jun-01 -- Southwest Addition $2,000,000 Nov-04 -- Southwest Asbestos abatement $28,138 I Aug-00 Southwest New roof --- $690,000 . Oct-03 -- Southwest Energy efficient lighting $168,719 Jan-02 Southwest Drainage / street widening $250,000  Aug-03 Student Assignment I Energy monitoring system installation I $4,830 Aug-02 Student Assignment Fire alarm $9,000 Aug-03 -Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation $275,000 -D-ec--01 Tech Ctr/ Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II $3,679,000 Jun-04 ------ Technology Upgrade I Upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data Nov-02 --- Terry  Energy efficient lighting I $73,850 Feb-01 ------- Terry 1 Driveway \u0026amp; Parking $83,484 - Aug-02 +----- - Terry Media Center addition I $704,932 Sep-02 Wakefield Rebuild I $5,300,000 Dec-04 Wakefield Security cameras $8,000 Jun-01 Wakefield Energy efficient lighting $74,776 Feb-01 Wakefield Demolition/ Asbestos Abatement I $200,000 Nov-02 Washington Fire Alarm Upgrade $11,600 Oct-04 Washington Security cameras $7,900 Jun-01 Washington Energy efficient lighting $165,281 Apr-01 Watson Energy monitoring system installation $8,530 Jul-01 Watson Asbestos abatement $182,241 Aug-01 Watson 'Energy efficient lighting $106,868 Aug-01 Watson Asbestos abatement $10,000 Aug-02 Watson Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $800,000 Aug-02 Western Hills  Fire Alarm Upgrade $8,400 _1 _ Oct-04 Western Hills ADA Rest rooms $25,000 - ~g-04 Western Hills Asbestos abatement $191,946 Aug-02 Western Hills Intercom $7,100 Dec-01 Western Hills 'Energy efficient lighting $106,000 Jul-01 -- Williams Renovation $2,106,492 . Mar-04 Williams Parking expansions I $183,717 j Dec-03 -- Williams __ ~gy effici~nt lighting I $122,719 Jun-01 -- Wilson HVAC for Cafeteria $56,000 Mar-05 Wilson Renovation/expansion $1,263,876 Feb-04 Wilson Parking Expansion $110,000 Aug-03 Woodruff I Renovation $246,419 AuQ-02 5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: July 28, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Board Auditor Report BACKGROUND: Monthly report to School Board. RATIONALE: Summary report of activities. FUNDING: No changes. RECOMMENDATION: None. PREPARED BY: Sandy Becker p m--\u0026lt; (\") :,: z 0,.. . 8 -\u0026lt; C \"D ~ m \u0026lt; :. m :,:0  c zO o  a,::! 00 oz 2!\n\u0026gt; \"D ,... :,:, en m\u0026lt; :',\n(\" )  \u0026lt; (I)\n= men (\") (\") 0:,: Zo Oo :,:, ,... men  m ~~ C) (\") .. m .::en 0  ~~ \"D m:i: :,:,c en 3: 0  zz ~~ ,- en oo :i:c :,:, Z(\") c, m men en Date: To: From: Re: July 28, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS Board of Directors Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Audit Report - July This is the sixty-ninth communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with one high school, one middle school and two elementary schools to resolve financial issues in their activity and related funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. b) The AAB has forwarded a Booster Club Guidelines Package to be included in official publications of the District after review. Board Policy and Regulation a) The amended Out of District Travel regulation is being implemented. Technology Training a) Monitoring technology plans and technology meetings to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. b) Facilitating technology upgrade in cooperation with the English Department for Yearbook and Newspaper production staff in LRSD high schools to improve access to tools needed for students and staff. a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of Nuts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. Audit Report - July 2005 Page 2 of2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) d) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring combined payroll and human resources issues for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Reviewing Teacher School Supply Fund Records for recommendations. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Served as District coordinator of United Way's Day of Caring (April 17, 2005. Eleven schools participated. Assisting LRSD PT A's in financial process training. Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-447-1115. My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. C: -0 0 \u0026gt;\n1 ~ .\u0026gt; m\" :i\nO \u0026gt; C: zn o\u0026gt; a,:::! oooz ~\u0026gt; -0 r\no U) m. \u0026lt; (\") :\u0026gt;\u0026lt;  e\u0026gt;n\u0026lt;~ m \"' (\")(\") 0:i: Zo Oo\no rm u, \u0026gt;m O\no z\u0026lt; c, n .. m Cu, g\ni-~ -0 m:i:\no C: U) !!: 0\u0026gt; zz ~~ r- U) no :i: C: \u0026gt;\no zo C) m m u, U) DATE: TO: FROM: July 28, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Technology Report BACKGROUND: Since the last Board meeting the following technology activities took place:  Training for Teachers has been on-going all summer at the Technology Center and other district sites. Teachers have received training on software programs such as - Project SOAR, Curriculum Mapper, Compass Odyssey, and more ...  The computer refresh program has continued at designated district sites.  Plans are in place to continue implementation of Edline - web-based Grade reporting to parents at the Middle School Level.  Computer Information Services has implemented a new web-based workorder/ project management tracking system called RADAR - RequestAssign- Develop-Apply-Review. RADAR will be used by the Dis::icts' Applications Group to track and manage data/report requests throughout the district. District staff will have the capability of entering their data requests via the web and automatically receive updates on the status of their requests via email.  Ten elementary schools are piloting software to assign students to classes electronically using an electronic scheduler for elementary schools. RATIONALE: To implement the LRSD Technology Plan 2003 - 2006 ,..,.\u0026lt;... . m ::z:C ,..c zn c\u0026gt; CD:::! 00 oz 2S )\u0026gt; 'ti,...\nJJU\u0026gt; m. \u0026lt;n :\u0026gt;\u0026lt;  \u0026gt;\u0026lt; CJ)?= mu, On O::z: Zo Co\nJJ,... mu, \u0026gt;m ~~ e\u0026gt;n .. m ctn 0 )\u0026gt;\n,\u0026gt;~ 'ti m:x:\nJJ C: tJ\u0026gt; 3: 0\u0026gt; zz ~~ ,... tJ\u0026gt; no ::z:c \u0026gt;\nJJ zo C\u0026gt; m men tJ\u0026gt; FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board accept this report. PREPARED BY: John Ruffins, Director, Computer Information Services Lucy Neal, Coordinator, Technology and Media Services LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: July 28, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Handbook for Parents of Pre-K Children Participating in the LRSD Early Childhood Program BACKGROUND: The Department of Early Childhood and Elementary Literacy convened a committee of early childhood teachers, principals, parents, and specialists to develop a Pre-K Parent Handbook. Several meetings were held to develop the content of the Handbook, and a draft version of the Handbook was sent to all LRSD Elementary Principals and Pre-K Teachers for their review. The attached handbook is the result of those efforts. RATIONALE: Currently the District does not have a formal district handbook regarding the preschool program. The purpose of the handbook will be to provide parents, teachers, and principals with clearly defined expectations regarding participation in the preschool (fouryear- old) program and policies and procedures for dealing with preschool issues. FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board adopt the Pre-K Parent Handbook as submitted. PREPARED BY: Krista Underwood, Director, Early Childhood !\" n 0 ~ ~ n =l m n :c (/) m \"\u0026lt;'\n::: f.,l, .\"0, ', m ~ C 0 z ~ i5 z \u0026gt;\u0026lt; ~~ nmn\"' 0 :c zo Co \"',... m\u0026gt;m\"' l ~ C)n .. m c\"' 0 \u0026gt; .~,, ~ m :c\n,:,c (/) 3:: 0\u0026gt; zz Z:,c ! rn no :C C \u0026gt;:,c Zn C) m mCJ\u0026gt; (/) Little Rock School District Pre-Kindergarten (4-Year-Old) Parent Handbook 2005-06 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Letter to Families .................................................................................... 3 Goals of the Program ............................................................................... 3 List of Pre-Kindergarten Schools .. .. .. .. . .. ................................................. .4 Enrollment Requirements .......................................................................... 5 Physical Examination and Immunization Requirements ..................................... 5 The Pre-Kindergarten Instructional Program ................................................. 6 Attendance .............................................................................................................. 7 Little Rock School District Discipline Policy .................................................... 7 Authorized Persons/Sign In and Sign Out. .................................................... 8 Illness of Children .................................................................................... 9 Medication at School. ............................................................................. 10 Appropriate Dress for School. .................................................................. 10 Outdoor Play ........................................................................................ 10 Emergency Drills ................................................................................... 10 Nap Time ............................................................................................ 10 School Breakfast and Lunch Program ....................................................... 10 Toileting .............................................................................................. 11 Parent Involvement. ............................................................................... 11 Parent/Teacher Conferences .................................................................... 11 Money Sent to School.............. .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . . .. . . . .. .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . .. ................... 11 Signature Page.............................. . ...................................................... 12 2 !l' n 0 .z... . ~ n ::l m n ::r:: en m ~\na\np ,,\no ,0, m\no ::\n! 0 0 z :!. 0 z !I: \u0026gt; ti! m ~ !:\n\u0026gt;\u0026lt; ~:== m en nn O::r:: zo Oo\norm en \u0026gt;m ~~ c, n .. m C en 0 \u0026gt; ,\n,,\u0026gt; ~ m::r::\no C: en !I: 0\u0026gt; zz ~~ r- en no ::r:: C: \u0026gt;\no Zn Cl m men en LETTER TO THE FAMILIES: WELCOME AND INTRODUCTION Welcome to the Little Rock School District (LRSD) Pre-Kindergarten (Pre-K) Program! We understand the tremendous trust you are placing in us to educate your children. Our well-trained staff is committed to ensuring that your children receive the best early learning experiences in the safest, most caring environment possible. The philosophy of the Little Rock School District Pre-Kindergarten Program is the following:  Every child deserves a safe, healthy, and secure environment.  All children can be successful learners.  The children, families, and school community should be treated with respect and honesty.  Learning should be relevant, meaningful, and developmentally appropriate.  Parents are a child's first and most important teacher.  Cooperation, collaboration, and teamwork are essential to meeting the District's Pre-K goals. The Little Rock School District offers the highest quality pre-school education available. It is the goal of the district's early childhood program to help each child achieve his/her maximum potential through a variety of experiences designed to promote a positive self-concept. A qualified and experienced staff provides a warm and supportive atmosphere which assures each child that he or she is secure and accepted. Classrooms are designed to provide a cheerful, healthy learning environment for growing, active children. PROGRAM GOALS The Little Rock School District Pre-Kindergarten Program is not a child care program, but a program designed to increase the readiness of the children for kindergarten with the ultimate goal of ensuring children's success in school. The goal will be accomplished through the following activities: 1. Provide preschool students with high quality, developmentally appropriate learning experiences designed to enhance kindergarten readiness. 2. Support parents in their role as a child's first and most important teacher by providing access to educational resources and information. 3. Ensure continuity and smooth transitions from home to early education and primary school. The learning environment of the Pre-Kindergarten Program is designed to provide students with a challenging, yet developmentally appropriate curriculum. The program components are aligned with the state standards adopted in the Arkansas Early Childhood Framework. Through the active learning process, children will construct their own knowledge\nlearn how to make decisions and plans\nseek and organize information. The role of the teacher is to guide students in their construction of knowledge - challenging them to make predictions, try new approaches, and solve their own problems. Please help us achieve these goals by getting your child to school on time everyday!! 3 School Bale Baseline Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbriqht Geyer Sorinas Jefferson King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell Rockefeller Romine Stephens Terrv Wakefield Washinaton Watson Western Hills Wilson Woodruff LIST OF PRE-KINDERGARTEN SCHOOLS Address Principal 6501 32na St. Barbara Anderson 3623 Baseline Rd. Eleanor Cox 7915 W. Markham Ada Keown 2100 East 6m Dianne Barksdale 11100 Chicot Jane Harkey 6500 Hinkson Rd. Frederick Fields 6423 Staoecoach Faith McLauahlin 616 N. Harrison TBA 1600 N. Tyler Theresa Ketcher 1701 S. Harrison Ethel Dunbar 300 Pleasant Valley Deborah Mitchell 5240 Mabelvale Pike Donna Hall 2600 N. McKinley Roberta Mannon 905 MLK Blvd. Tyrone Harris 9401 Mabelvale C/O TBA 1200 Reservoir Rd. Virainia Ashley 25 Sheraton Dr. Karen Carter 16000 Otter Creek Pkwy. Janis Tucker 319 N. Pine Lillie Carter 911 West 19m Eunice Thrasher 700 East 17\"' Anne Manaan 3400 Romine Rd. Lillie Scull 3700 West 18m Sharon Brooks 10800 Mara Lynn Becky Ramsey 75 Westminister Les Taylor 2700 Main Gwen Zeiqler 7000 Valley Dr. Mike Oliver 4901 Western Hills Scott Moraan 4015 Stannus Beverly Jones 3010 West 7m Janice Wilson Telephone 447-3600 447-3700 447-3900 447-4000 447-7000 447-4200 447-4300 447-4400 447-4500 447-4600 447-4700 447-4800 447-5000 447-5100 447-5400 447-5500 447-5600 447-5800 447-5900 447-6100 447-6200 447-6300 447-6400 447-6500 447-6600 447-6700 447-6800 447-6900 447-7200 447-7300 4 !\" n .0z.. . ~ n =l m n ::c (J) m :a \u0026lt;\n:=: p ..,, :a .0., , m ~ C 0 z ~ 0 z \u0026gt;\u0026lt; (/J ?= m\u0026lt;n nn O::c Zo Co :a ,... m\u0026lt;n \u0026gt;m ~~ C'ln .. m i= (J) g\n..,,,\u0026gt; ~ m::c :a C en 3: 0\u0026gt; zz ~~ ,....(J) no :cc \u0026gt; :a Zn C'lm m\u0026lt;n (J) ENROLLMENT REQUIREMENTS Applications for enrollment are accepted without regard to race, religion, color, sex or national origin. To apply for admission in a Pre-Kindergarten program, parents must contact the Little Rock School District Student Registration Office at 5th and Sherman (447-2950). If there is not an opening at the requested school, the child's name will be put on a waiting list. After receiving a notification letter of an opening, parents will need to follow the directives in the letter which will usually require notifying the Student Registration Office of acceptance or refusal of that PreKindergarten slot by an established deadline date. Upon acceptance, parents will visit the assigned school during student check-in and complete the necessary forms. The following is a list of the enrollment requirements: 1. A child must be 4 years of age on or before September 15th before entering the PreKindergarten Program. 2. In order for a child to attend class on the first day of Pre-Kindergarten, the school must have the following documents: a. Pupil Information Form b. Original Birth Certificate c. Social Security Number d. Health Screening Form (See explanation below.) e. Complete all required immunizations and provide records to the school nurse or school office. (See explanation below.) f. Permission for the child to receive emergency medical care at Arkansas Children's Hospital or a designated physician in case of an extreme medical emergency g. Information form designating persons who are allowed to pick up child from school h. Notarized custody declaration if applicable i. Updated physical or current physical The date used by the Little Rock School District for admittance to the Pre-Kindergarten Early Childhood Program is the same as that established by the State Department of Education for kindergarten eligibility. PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS AND IMMUNIZATIONS Little Rock School District Health Services require immunizations and physicals for students in the Pre-Kindergarten Program. It is mandatory that all students in the Pre-Kindergarten Program have a physical examination by their doctor or primary health care provider and submit the required Health Screening Form to the school office. In addition, Pre-K children must receive the required age-appropriate immunizations. Written proof of these immunizations must be presented before the child is admitted to school and each time the child receives additional immunizations. Children who have not met these requirements will not be allowed to attend school. Changes in immunizations must be reported to the office or school nurse. 5 THE PRE-K INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM Staffing. Every Pre-Kindergarten classroom is staffed with a certified early childhood education teacher and instructional assistant with Child Development Associate (CDA) Training. Classroom Size. Every Pre-Kindergarten classroom is limited to an enrollment of 20 children with a ratio of one adult to every ten children throughout the day with the exception of naptime. Before and After School Child Care. Child care is available at most schools before and after school from 7:00 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. Please check with your assigned school to see if this service is provided. Instruction. The Little Rock School District uses a learning center approach to help children become independent thinkers, self-confident eager learners and highly skilled individuals. This approach provides opportunity for children to engage in respectful interactions in a richly prepared environment with professionals available to help them develop socially, emotionally, academically, and physically. Some of the centers that are implemented in the classrooms are the following: Block Center - Blocks provide the basic muscle development skills and creativity necessary to solve problems. This center will give children the opportunity to explore, sort, make comparisons, and build structures. Dramatic Play Center - Dramatic play is used to help children develop social interaction as they explore new and different ways to play. A variety of props will be available for children to role play. Art/Music Centers - In these centers children's self-esteem is developed. When their forms of self-expression are accepted and appreciated, children feel good about themselves. Small muscle skills and eye-hand coordination are developed in these centers. Creativity is encouraged. Language Arts Center - In this center, children begin to understand that books are exciting \"friends\" that can be enjoyed. They begin to notice that letters are symbols for the words they say. They learn to tell stories and events in sequence. They learn to \"read\" pictures. The children are developing their listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills in this center. Manipulative Center - This center is one in which children work with activities that develop small muscle and eye-hand coordination. Putting a puzzle together involves problem solving and configuration (seeing the shape of things and how they fit together). In this center children learn how to work independently, classify objects, put materials together, and how to take them apart. Nature/Science/Math Center - This center is a DOING center rather than a \"look but don't touch\" center. The children develop the thinking process and sensory experiences. They develop concepts of shape, color, size, number, classifying, and sequencing. 6 !J' (\") .0z.. . ~ (\") =1 m (\") ::c u, m :,c\n\u0026lt;:: .f,l, :,c .0, , m ~ C 0 z .\u0026gt;... 5 z \u0026gt;\u0026lt; en := mu, (\") (\") O::c zo Co :,c ,mu, \u0026gt;m ~~ C) (\") .. m C \u0026lt;n 0 \u0026gt; .\n,s, -~ m::c :,c C: \u0026lt;n 3: 0\u0026gt; zz ~~ ,- u, no ::c C: \u0026gt;:,c Zc-, c, m m \u0026lt;n u, ATTENDANCE Teachers begin instruction at the beginning of the school day so it is imperative that students arrive on time. When students are tardy, they miss a portion of the instruction provided to the rest of the class. Students will be considered tardy ten minutes after the first bell rings. If a child must be absent, the following procedures will be used to report and monitor absences. 1. The parenUguardian is to notify the school attendance office by noon on the date when a student is absent. Failure to do so will result in the absence being recorded as unexcused unless the principal extends the verification period. 2. Full day or part day absences will be excused for personal illness, family emergency or an unusual cause acceptable to the principal of the school in which the student is enrolled. 3. When a student has three or more unexcused absences in any class during one semester, the school attendance secretary will notify the student's parenUguardian, or persons in loco parentis. Notice will be via telephone contact by the end of the school day in which the absence occurred or sent via regular mail no later than the following school day. Data from the student's Pupil Information Form will be used in the procedure. 4. When a student has six unexcused absences in any class during one semester, the school attendance secretary will again notify the student's parenUguardian of the number of absences. Also, the student's building-level administrator will schedule a conference with the student and his or her parenUguardian to discuss the student's absence pattern and its effects, together with appropriate interventions. The administrator will explain during the conference that dismissal will occur if the student receives 12 unexcused absences a semester. LRSD DISCIPLINE POLICY FOR CHILDREN IN THE PRE-K (FOUR-YEAR-OLD) PROGRAM Discipline in the Pre-Kindergarten Program will be appropriate to the child's level of understanding and be directed toward teaching the child acceptable behavior and self-control. Staff will offer guidance to a child needing redirection. With the help of a staff member, children will be offered appropriate choices so that in their developmental years they may determine what is right and wrong. If a child continues to have behavior problems, separating the child for \"time out\" may be necessary to resolve the difficulty. Time out is appropriate for children over 2 years of age. The period of time should equal the child's age\n(for example, 4 years of age should be 4 minutes). ParenUteacher conferences may be needed to determine if other circumstances are contributing to the situation and to develop a plan of action. Behavior management used by the Little Rock School District focuses on creative conflict resolution. This technique emphasizes children learning to resolve their own conflicts with each other and with adults in a positive manner. It is designed to increase the self-esteem of the children. 7 Disciplinary Steps: (Taken from The Student Conduct Code Section of the Little Rock School District Student Handbook) 1. Prevention - trying to keep the inappropriate behavior from happening 2. Redirection - encouraging another activity, role-play appropriate behavior 3. Conference with child 4. Time out in the classroom (age appropriate amount of time and supervised) 5. Contact a parent for a conference 6. Refer to the Pupil Services Team and/or Tri-District Early Intervention Team to develop a behavior management plan 7. Up to five (5) days removal from the program 8. If a behavior is dangerous and/or unhealthy for the child, another child and/or staff members, and after all efforts have been exhausted, the child will be dismissed from the program Parents will be kept fully informed as a child progresses through the disciplinary steps. They will be called immediately when a child exhibits dangerous or uncontrollable behavior, and disciplinary action will be taken to ensure the safety for all, which, as noted above, could be dismissal from the program. The administrator may choose a more severe penalty, at any time, based on the child's past behavior record and may reduce disciplinary actions when warranted. When disciplinary actions are imposed on a child, the parent/guardian will be notified. The District's discipline procedures meet the licensing requirements as set forth by Arkansas Department of Human Services, Division of Child Care and Early Childhood Education Licensing requirements. CORPORAL PUNISHMENT DISTRICT POLICY STATES THAT CORPORAL PUNISHMENT MAY NOT BE USED AS A DISCIPLINARY MEASURE IN THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PUBLIC SCHOOLS BY ANY TEACHER, ADMINISTRATOR, OR OTHER SCHOOL PERSONNEL. PARENTS/GUARDIANS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO ADMINISTER ANY FORM OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT ON SCHOOL GROUNDS. AUTHORIZED PERSONS/SIGN IN AND SIGN OUT 1. It is District and State policy that, upon arrival to school, the parent or guardian (or any designated adult or caregiver) must bring the children inside the school building to sign them in and make their presence known to the appropriate staff member. Parents must also come inside to sign their children out at the end of the school day, 2. The sign-in sheet is used to verify attendance and to ensure the child's safety. To remain in the program, a parent or designee must sign the child in and out. 3. It is important that the registering parent notify the school office in writing of persons authorized to pick up the child. A CHILD WILL BE ALLOWED TO LEAVE SCHOOL ONLY WITH AUTHORIZED PERSONS. Anyone picking up a child should be prepared to show proper identification before the child will be released. In the case of divorced parents, it is important that the registering parent indicate on the enrollment application 8 !X' (\"') 0.z. . ~ =1 m (\"') :c en m :c \u0026lt; ?- .~., :c 0.. , m :c ::\nl C 0 z ~ 0z\ni:: \u0026gt; CD m ~ !:\n\u0026gt;en\u0026lt;~ men (\"')(\"') O\n:c Zo Co :c rmen \u0026gt;m ~~ C) (\"') .. m i:: en g .~., ~ m :c :C C en\n: 0\u0026gt; zz ,~-~en no :C C \u0026gt; :c Z(\"') c, m men en who has legal custody and who may pick the child up from school. Legal documentation will be required as proof of custody. 4. Elementary-age siblings 4th grade and older may sign a Pre-Kindergarten student in/out only if a permission letter is signed by the parent/guardian and given to the school office by the parent/guardian. 5. Children should be picked up on time after school. If parents cannot pick up their children at the appropriate time, arrangements should be made for other transportation or after school care. No child will be released from the playground. Parents should accompany their children out of the building. Children should not be allowed to leave the building unattended. Children will need to be signed in/out for the CARE program, daycare pick-ups, car pools, and/or any method of transportation. Parent cooperation will help ensure the safety of all of the Pre-Kindergartne children. ILLNESS OF CHILDREN Children with these symptoms must be kept at home:  Temperature of 100.4 or over (for the safety of the child and others, it is required that the child be kept home until 24 hours after he/she is fever-free without the aide of fever-reducing medication).  Vomiting  Diarrhea  Symptoms of communicable disease If any of these occur, parents will be contacted to pick up their children immediately. MEDICATION AT SCHOOL Transporting Medication Between Home and School: Parents are responsible for getting medicine to and from school. Children will not be allowed to transport medicine at any time. Medication Permission: Parents must complete all required information on the LRSD permission form in order for the child to receive medicine at school. Medication Storage: Parents must take student medications to the nurse or office. Students are not allowed to keep medicine in the classroom, therefore, parents should never leave medications in backpacks. All medications will be locked in the office. The school nurse or office personnel will administer all medications. Teachers are not permitted to give medications. Over the counter medication will not be given longer than five days. Once-a-day medication and twice-a-day medications should be given at home. Please notify the office if medication requires refrigeration. Medication Time: It is important that each school establish routine times for medication administration. It is not possible to have a specific time for each child. Medication Containers: Medication must be in the prescription bottle or non-prescription original container with the original label. Medication is not to be sent in any other container or wrapper (e.g., Saran Wrap, aluminum foil, lunch box, etc.). 9 APPROPRIATE DRESS FOR SCHOOL Preschool is a very active place to learn. Children paint, glue, play in sand and water, and play outdoors daily weather permitting\ntherefore, sturdy, comfortable, washable clothes are necessary. This allows the children to become actively involved in all activities. Parents should make sure their children's clothes are easy to pull up and down for bathroom needs. Tennis shoes seem to work best for all activities. Flip-flops and clogs are not safe footwear for school. Children should always have a sweater or jacket available for cool days. Light clothing is necessary when it gets hot. The child 's name must be written on all clothes that the child can take off at school. (e.g., jackets, sweaters). In case of accidents, each child will need a complete change of clothing at school. OUTDOOR PLAY Outdoor play is required for one hour each day. Weather permitting, children will play outside every day with 32 being th~ temperature guideline. The wind chill factor is taken into consideration in the winter\nheat index for the summer. Please do not ask for exceptions. If a student is too sick to go outside, parents need to keep the child home. The schools do not have enough assistants to provide one-on-one supervision and the State has strict guidelines for the ratio of adults to children. No toys will be allowed at school, and bringing toy guns to school will result in dismissal. EMERGENCY DRILLS Emergency drills are held monthly to acquaint the children with evacuation procedures. This makes quite an impression on a few children the first time a drill is held, but children soon become accustomed to the sound and know just what to do. The Pre-Kindergarten Program is equipped with a fire alarm system and smoke detectors. Fire extinguishers are placed throughout the building. NAP TIME After lunch, a nap period is scheduled for all Pre-Kindergarten children. Parents should send one small stuffed animal for the child to cuddle during naptime, one crib sheet, and a large bath towel for the mat. To protect the child's health, the District provides a sanitized mat or cot. Towels and sheets for Pre-Kindergarten are sent home on Friday to be laundered and must be returned on Monday. SCHOOL BREAKFAST/LUNCH PROGRAM A breakfast and lunch for the Pre-Kindergarten students will be available at each school. Both meals will be served in the cafeteria. Breakfast and/or lunch must be paid in advance weekly or daily. Free and reduced lunch application forms may be obtained in the school office. Food will not be heated, so parents must pack food that is prepared to be eaten as is. If a hot lunch is desired, it is suggested that the child purchase a lunch prepared by food service. If the child brings his/her lunch to school, it is recommend that a nutritious lunch be sent. Please do not send candy, gum, or soft drinks. !\"' (\"') z.0.. . ~ (\"') ::1 m (\"') :I: en m ~\n:\n~ ..,,\n,::, .0., , m\n,::, ::\n! 0 0 z :. 0 z \u0026gt;\u0026lt; (I):= men \u0026lt;\"\u0026gt;n 0:I\nzo Co\n,::,r men \u0026gt;m ~~ c, n .. m c::::en 0 \u0026gt;\n..t,,\u0026gt; ~ m:I:\n,::,c en 3: 0\u0026gt; zz ~~ r en no :I:c \u0026gt;\n,::, Z(\"') Cl m men en TOILETING Students must be completely potty trained to participate in the Pre-Kindergarten Program. No diapering will be done by the staff. If a child has an accident, the parent will be notified. Pull-ups will only be accepted due to a medical condition accompanied by a doctor's statement. PARENT INVOLVEMENT Please read carefully any notes or letters that the child brings home from school. This keeps the lines of communication open so that parents know what is happening at school. Lunch is a great time to volunteer! The school encourages all parents to become involved in their children's early education environment by volunteering or visiting in the classroom. This time can be at the parent's convenience and should be arranged with the classroom teacher. Volunteering will enhance the parent-teacher relationship and familiarize parents with the program and the many rewards of working with young children. Parents must remember, however, that is it never appropriate for a parent to discipline other children in the program. Little Rock School District has very specific disciplinary guidelines that must be followed. PARENTffEACHERCONFERENCES Two conferences will be scheduled during the school year\nhowever, conferences between parents and teachers can be arranged at the request of either party whenever the need arises. Every effort will be made to schedule a time convenient for parents\nhowever, every effort will be made not to schedule conferences during instructional time. If parents have a concern about either the program or policies regarding the Pre-Kindergarten Program, they should use the following procedure to express their concern: 1. Contact the classroom teacher and ask that a conference be arranged. Discuss the problem or concern with the child 's classroom teacher. In most cases, the teacher will be able to either explain the situation to the satisfaction of the parent or will make the necessary changes to remedy the situation. 2. If parents still have concerns, they should contact the building principal. MONEY SENT TO SCHOOL Parents should send all money in a sealed envelope with your child's name, teacher's name, and purpose of the money listed on the outside of the envelope. 11 Dear Parent or Guardian: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Please sign and return this form to your child's teacher indicating that you have received and read this Handbook. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated. I have received and read the Little Rock School District Pre-K Parent Handbook. Parent Signature Date 12 !JI n 0 .z.. . ~ =1 mn ::c en m\no\n\u0026lt;:: fl -,:,\no 0 -,:, m ~ C 0 z ~ 0z 3C \u0026gt; CD m .,~..... \u0026gt;\u0026lt; (I):= men nn O::c zo Co\no,... men \u0026gt;m ~~ C)n . . m C en 0 \u0026gt;\nso~ -,:, m::c\no c:: en 3C 0\u0026gt; zz ~~ ,... en no ::cc:: \u0026gt;\no Zn C) m men en DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 July 28, 2005 LRSD Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools Revision of Policy IJOA and IJOA-R - Field Trips BACKGROUND: The LRSD Board of Directors endorses the use of field trips. A field trip can best be described as a living laboratory in which learning is acquired through active hands-on experience with the rich resources of the local community. Each school will be responsible for using the grade level curriculum map to identify and explain the content area that each field trip will support and how student learning will be assessed. Fields trips are to be exciting and offer a learning experience for children beyond the walls of the classroom into the vast community outside. They provide children with experiences that cannot be duplicated in the school but are nonetheless an integral part of school instruction. RATIONALE: Policy IJOA and IJOA-R have been revised to provide direction to building principals and classroom teachers when planning field trips for the 2005-2006 school year. Procedures for field trips are outlined in an effort to ensure that students are spending quality instructional time with the teacher in the classroom and on field trips. Principals and teachers will be accountable for organizing field trips in an effort to ensure that each opportunity is related to the district's curriculum and to ensure that the district policy and regulations are being adhered to. FUNDING: Individual School's Operating Budget RECOMMENDATION: The Board approved IJOA on first reading at their agenda meeting on July 14. The administration requests second reading and approval of Policy IJOA for implementation during the 2005-2006 school year. PREPARED BY: Dr. Sadie Mitchell, Associate Superintendent for Elementary Schools ?\" n .0z. . ~ n ~ m n :J: en m ~\n::\n~ \"0 \"0 ' \"0 m ~ C 0 z ~ 0 z !I: \u0026gt; \"m\" ~ rm !=' C) ~ ~ \"0 0 ' \"0 0 en \u0026gt;,.... ?\"~ \"0 m:J: ::oc en !I: 0\u0026gt; zz ~~ ,- en no :Cc \u0026gt;::o Zn c, m men en LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IJOA FIELD TRIPS The Little Rock School District Board of Education endorses the use of field trips for students. In light of the valuable contribution to a child's education, field trips should be preceded by good planning. Careful attention should be given to trip selection, pre-visit, preparation, appropriate follow up, and evaluation. Such efforts should ensure that students will have a successful educational experience. When considering a field trip, teachers are advised to first consult with their administrator regarding existing school board policies and follow the recommended procedures outlined in the regulation - lJOA -R: Field Trips. Adopted: July 22, 1999 Revised: 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IJOA-R FIELD TRIPS Responsibilities of Principals in the Field Trip Process It is the responsibility of the principal to ensure the planning, execution, and fulfillment of all financial obligations. By signing the required Request for Educational Field Trip form (Form 221 , revised 7/05), the principal is:  stating that the field trip is related to the curriculum standards and benchmarks appropriate for the grade level or course\n indicating that the teacher will make the actual arrangements at the site and describing the kind of transportation to be used\n stating that student safety and accessibility to the trip has been considered\nand  agreeing that a requisition form to pay for entrance fees, tickets, etc. will be submitted General Procedures All activities that involve any student leaving the campus for school-sanctioned activities are construed to be field trips and will fall within these guidelines whether or not district transportation or other transportation is used. 1. The Educational Services Division will support the schools in identifying and aligning the field trip to the curriculum. Using the grade level curriculum map, the teacher will identify and explain the content area that the field trip will support and how student learning will be assessed. 2. All field trips must be curriculum-related and must be accessible to all students. All students must be afforded the opportunity to go on the field trip(s). Hence, student participation in field trips must not be used for disciplinary purposes or sanctions. All regulations in the Little Rock School District Elementary and Secondary Handbook will be followed while on the field trip and in determining eligibility to participate. 3. Field trip requests must be made at least three (3) weeks prior to the date of the field trip. If this timeline is not adhered to, the request may be denied. Schools must cancel trips at least 24 hours prior to the scheduled pick-up time. Failure to do so will result in a one (1) hour regular rate penalty charge to be billed to the school. 3 !X' n .0z.. .\n:\n! n =1 m n :I: en m\na:, \u0026lt;\n=:\nf) .,,\na:, .0, , m ~ C 0 z ~ 0z\ni: \u0026gt; a, m ,~... m !=\" C)\n:\n! ..z.,. ,.\na:, .0, , 0 en \u0026gt;,... .\n,,,, ,~ m::I:\na:,c: en\nc 0\u0026gt; zz ~~ ,... en no :I: C: \u0026gt;\na:, Zn c, m men en LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IJOA-R (continued) 4. Because of the district's commitment to comply with the No Child Left Behind Act and remove schools from school improvement, it is critical for instructional time to be used wisely. Therefore, field trips will be limited to two (2) field trips per classroom on the elementary schools. Both elementary and secondary principals will submit a quarterly field trip report that will be monitored by the Associate Superintendents. No field trips should be approved during the week of any testing and after May 15th of each year unless approved by the Associate Superintendent for Elementary or Secondary Schools. 5. Since no funds have been centrally budgeted for field trips, each school is responsible for the funding of field trips, with the exception of those field trips, which are financed through special programs or curricular departments. 6. A supply of the Request for Educational Field Trip and the Field Trip Permission forms is available from the Supply Center by requisition . 7. Principals are to thoroughly check all field-trip requests forms to ensure that the required information is complete and correct prior to signing. Principals will be accountable for ensuring that all submitted field trip forms are complete and accurate and that all directives pertaining to field trips are followed. Prior to the field trip, the principal should submit a copy of each field trip form to the appropriate Associate Superintendent. 8. Written parental approval must be given in order for a student to be allowed to participate in a field trip. All documents involving parental approval must be kept on file at the school until the end of the academic year. 9. The Procurement Department will publish a list of approved charter bus companies and reminders of the timeline for requisitions. A purchase requisition must be completed if a charter bus will be the mode of transportation employed. 4 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IJOA-R (continued) 10. For trips out of the city, a seat assignment list is required. Students should be in their assigned seats during all travel time. 11. An employee of the District must be designated as the emergency contact person for any field trip, which is in progress before or after school hours. The teacher/ administrator conducting the field trip must have the phone number of this emergency contact person. The emergency contact person must have a copy of the field trip list and remain available until all students are returned to the school or their home. The teacher/administrator conducting the field trip and the principal must also have a copy of the list during the field trip. The teacher/administrator who is conducting the field trip will notify the emergency contact person when all students have been returned safely to school or to their homes. 12. If a charter bus is used for transporting students:  The vendor must be on the approved Procurement list.  Insurance certificates for approved charter bus companies are kept on file at Procurement.  Schools are to prepare a requisition, attach a copy of the Request for Educational Field Trip form, and forward to Procurement for purchase order processing.  All payments for charter buses will be via purchase orders. 13. If a private vehicle is used for the transportation of students:  Parents must give permission for their child to ride in a private vehicle.  Proof of insurance must be obtained. Such verification will be kept on file for the duration of the academic year. (A photocopy of the vehicle operator's insurance card showing current coverage will suffice.) The vehicle used for the trip and its driver must have the State's required Arkansas minimum automobile liability insurance coverage.  A seat belt must be available for every passenger and the driver.  The driver must be at least 21 years of age. 14.An appropriate number of chaperones will be secured to ensure student safety and to maintain proper discipline of the students. This ratio will vary by grade level and by the nature of the field trip. 5 !X' (\") 0 z -i ~ (\") ~ m (\") ::r: en m ~\n:\n.f.l,\no 0.. , m ~ 0 0 z ~ 0 z \u0026lt;:I C\u0026gt; ~ z .-.i,\no .0. , 0 en )\u0026gt; r- .\n.i,- ~ m::r:\noc en\n: 0 )\u0026gt; zz ~~ r- en no :cc )\u0026gt;\no Z(\") c, m men en LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IJOA-R (continued) Additional Considerations State law and issues of liability will be considered in planning and implementing field trips, whether curricular or for athletic events in which private vehicles are utilized. Conditions for the Use of District Vehicles 1. The District can provide transportation for field trips and activities if such field trips or activities are between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 1 :30 p.m. during the school day. Saturday and after-school-hour activities must be arranged via the Educational Field Trip Request form. LRSD buses will normally not be available for field trips on Sunday. 2. Arrangements for transportation for regularly-scheduled athletic events will be made with Laidlaw Transportation regarding the number of buses needed and the time when they are needed. 3. No stops will be made for the purpose of feeding students lunch unless previously requested on the Request for Educational Field Trip form. Financial Procedures for Field Trips When Using a LRSD (Laidlaw) Bus 1. Schools must identify the budget account(s) to charge for buses on the Request for Educational Field Trip form when LRSD bus or Laidlaw Transportation is used. If the cost is being split between several schools, all codes must be listed along with the percent allocation to each school. If no account(s) is provided, the request will not be approved and the form will be returned to the school. 2. Once the trip occurs, Laidlaw will bill the LRSD, and the Business Office will subsequently charge the cost of expenses to the budget code(s) provided on the Request for Educational Field Trip form. The Business Office will pay Laidlaw directly for the trip. 3. A copy of the paid invoice will be sent to the principal/department head that has control over the budget code(s) listed. This copy will be the notification of the amount(s) charged to the budget. 6 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IJOA-R (continued) Third-Party Funders of Field Trips 1. If a third party is paying for the field trip (PTA, etc.), schools must still provide the school budget code on the form. The school budget will be charged, and the school will then be responsible for collecting the amount due from the third party. When this amount is collected, the school must forward the check to the Business Office with instructions on which account(s) to credit. 2. The contract rate with Laidlaw for the year will apply. The time for rate calculations will be from the time the bus arrives at the school until the time the bus returns to be billed in 15-minute intervals. 3. If after a trip the principal/teacher has concerns about the service provided, the principal should call the LRSD liaison with Laidlaw who will then work with Laidlaw to resolve the issues and make necessary adjustments to the invoice. Once the school receives the copy of the Laidlaw invoice, the amount will have already been deducted from the budget code provided on the Request for Educational Field Trip form. Activity Fund When paying for buses using activity accounts, all of the regulations above apply, with the following exceptions: 1. The school should use the activity account code. 2. If a LRSD department is responsible (i.e ., Staff Development, Superintendent's Office), the form must be coded by the responsible department. 3. The school will receive a copy of the paid invoice showing the account code to be charged. 4. An Activity Fund Requisition must be completed and forwarded, along with a copy of the invoice to the Business Office. Date: October 21, 1999 Revised: 7 !l' n 0 .z.. . ~ n =l m n ::c Cl\u0026gt; m ::a \u0026lt;\n::: .f.l, ::a 0.. , m ~ C 0 z ~ 0z\nr: \u0026gt; a, m ,~... m !'=' C) ~ z..... ,. ::a .0. , 0 Cl\u0026gt; ,\u0026gt;...\n..s,o ~ m::c ::a \u0026lt;= Cl\u0026gt;\nr: 0\u0026gt; zz ~~ ,-Cl\u0026gt; no ::c \u0026lt;= \u0026gt;::ti Zn c, m men Cl\u0026gt; REQUEST FOR EDUCATIONAL FIELD TRIP Required for all students leaving campus for school activities Request must be made at least three (3) weeks before date of field trip. Date: _____ School: _________ Grade Level: _______ _ Teacher/Teachers making arrangements for the field trip Emergency Contact Person: _____________ Phone#: __________ _ Using the grade level curriculum map, identify and explain the content area that this field trip supports and how you will assess student learning. Date of Field Trip: ______ _ Destination(s) ______________ _ (including stops for lunch) Address(s): _______________ _ Means of Transportation: D LRSD Bus D Approved Charter Bus D Insured Private Car Time LEAVING School: _______ _ Time LOADING to Return: ___________ _ (9:00 a.m. earliest for LRSD Buses) (1 :30 p.m. latest for LRSD Buses) Number of students going on the field trip: ____ _ Number of Buses needed: _____ _ (Maximum capacity LRSD bus: 65) Request for sack lunches must be made to the Child Nutrition Manager two (2) weeks prior to the field trip. BUDGET CODE: ____________________________ _ Checklists (To be completed by the principal): Insurance verification obtained \u0026amp; on file Does this trip conflict with other scheduled events? Are any children being deprived of the trip because of economic issues? Requisition is attached (if applicable) YES NO 8 YES Field trip permission slips on file? __ Has student safety been considered and the school nurse notified? List of Participants to: Teacher/Administrator Emergency Contact Person (ECP) NO Professional leave requested (if applicable) __ _ Principal Date Copies should be distributed to the following: White Copy - Laidlaw Yellow Copy - Laidlaw Teacher/Administrator has ECP's Phone# Contact Teacher Pink Copy - Associate Superintendent Elementary/Secondary Schools Gold Copy - School 9 Date !\" n .0z.. . ~ n =l m n ::c V, m :,:, \u0026lt;\n::\nfl \"II :,:, 0 \"II m ~ 0 0 z ~ 0z !I:  a, m ,~... m ~ C) ~ .z.. . \"II :,:, 0 \"II 0 V, ,... ?\"~ \"II m::c :,:, C: V, !I: 0  zz ~~ ,... V, no ::c C: :,:, Zn c, m m v, V, Name of School Field Trip Permission Form LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ---------------- Contact Teacher ---------------- An educational field trip is planned for your child's class or group to visit ________ _ ______________ on ________________ _ (MONTH) (DAY) (YEAR) The pupils will be transported by: LRSD Bus D Insured Private Car D Approved Charter Bus D I, as parent or legal guardian, give permission for _________________ _ to go on this educational field trip. (SIGNATURE) (DATE) (PUPIL'S NAME) 10 Form #113 Reviewed 7 /05 DATE: TO: July 28, 2005 Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Personnel Changes BACKGROUND: None RATIONALE: To staff allocated positions within the District FUNDING: Operating Fund RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.C.A. 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) consecutive years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 19, 2005 for regular schools are considered intern teachers. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 8, 2005 for EYE are considered intern teachers. PREPARED BY: David E. HartPs~~r Director of Human Resources !II n .0z.. . $! n ::1 m n :c en m :\u0026gt;:\u0026gt;\n\u0026lt;:\n,, \"D :\u0026gt;:\u0026gt; 0 \"D m ~ C 0 z ~ 0z\ni::  m m ,~.. m !'=I C) $! z... . \"D :\u0026gt;:\u0026gt; 0 \"D 0 en ,.. Personnel Changes Page 2 July 28, 2005 NAME START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Resignations/Terminations Certified Emelolees Darr, Kimberly Elementary II/ 8-07-02 Reason : Accepted another OTTER CREEK 7-18-05 position Kennedy, Barbara Library Media 8-20-90 Reason: Leaving the city Specialist/ 8-01-05 DODD Scott, Glenda Elementary IV/ 8-11-04 Reason: Accepted another WILSON 7-11-05 position Skarda, Natalie Special Education/ 8-1-01 Reason: Accepted another CHICOT 7-1-05 position Tidball, Holly Music/ 8-11-04 Reason: Leaving the city RIGHTSELL 7-14-05 New Certified Emelolees Broadnax, Amy Elementary Ill/ 8-11-05 KING Grisham, Laura Art/ 8-11-05 OTTER CREEK Hill, Dorothy Elementary II/ 8-11-05 MEADOWCLIFF Kelley, Karen Elementary II/ 8-11-05 FRANKLIN Lewis, Casey 4 Yr Old/ 8-11-05 FRANKLIN Nickerson, Vickie Elementary I/ 8-11-05 MCDERMOTT SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 1-04 32350.00 TCH925 6-19 57364.00 LIB950 2-17 49217.00 TCH925 4-05 38041.00 SPE925 1-01 30040.00 TCH925 1-01 30040.00 TCH925 1-12 41593.00 TCH925 4-19 54561.00 TCH925 1-08 36972.00 TCH925 1-02 30617.00 4YR925 4-18 53061 .00 TCH925 Personnel Changes Page 3 July 28, 2005 NAME Romain, Kim Swann, Julie Van Alstyne, Vicki Wilson, Celeste POSITION / SCHOOL Elementary IV/ WAKEFIELD Elementary Ill/ WAKEFIELD Special Education/ CHICOT Elementary I/ FULBRIGHT Certified Promotions NONE Certified Transfers NONE START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL END DATE CLASS SALARY 8-11-05 1-01 30040.00 TCH925 8-11-05 1-03 31195.00 TCH925 8-11-05 1-10 39283.00 SPE925 8-11-05 1-01 30040.00 TCH925 Resignations/Terminations Non-Certified Employees Webb, Brenda Reason: Personal Young, Ossie Reason: Retired Hart-Grayson, Mary Nurse/ 9-28-04 52-8 33528.00 WILSON 6-06-05 NURSES Child Nutrition/ 8-15-90 3-14 9933.00 MABELVALE MIDDLE 6-06-05 FSH550 New Non-Certified Employees NONE Non-Certified Transfers Transferred from CLK 11 - Child Nutrition to CLK 10 - Child Nutrition !I' (\") 0 .z... . ~ (\") =l m (\") ::c U\u0026gt; m ~\n=\n.~., ::a .0. , m ~ 0 0 z ~ 0z 31:  ID m i m !=' C) ~ ..z.... ,. ::a .0. , 0 U\u0026gt; .... LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: July 28, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Second Reading - Board Policy FA: New Facilities Development Goal BACKGROUND: The promotion of buildings that are environmentally responsible is at the forefront of planning for energy and resource conservation at the local, state and national levels. The District is committed to contributing to the environmental and economic sustainability of our City and State. RATIONALE: In an effort to promote a positive effect on the City's environment and healthy places for students to learn and employees to work, the attached policy is presented for the Board's approval. New construction of District buildings will utilize sustainable design practices that will decrease the negative impact of buildings on the environment and occupant health while reducing operating and maintenance costs. FUNDING: Bond Account RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Board approve Policy FA as attached. PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen Chief Financial Officer f\u0026gt; 1 0 \"ti m ::0 :.1 0 0 ~ ::i 0 z 31: \u0026gt; CD m ,~.... m !'=I C) ~ .z.. . \"ti ::0 0 \"ti 0 U) ,\u0026gt;.... LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: FA New Facilities Development Goal The Board of Education is committed to promoting the conservation of energy and natural resources for new construction of District facilities. This approach will provide a positive effect on the City's environment and ensure healthy places for students to learn and employees to work. The promotion of buildings that are environmentally responsible is at the forefront of planning for energy and resource conservation at the local, state and national levels. The District will join in this effort through planning, designing, constructing and operating District-owned buildings and facilities by utilizing sustainable design practices that will decrease the negative impact of building on the environment and occupant health while reducing operating and maintenance costs. The District will adopt the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED-NC) rating system for new construction of District-owned facilities (or other nationally recognized rating system). Adopted: References: U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design system LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: FROM: July 28, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Contract Extension for Technology Services BACKGROUND: After the successful millage election in May 2000, the District began contracting for technology services for the development and implementation of the LRSD Technology Plan. In the beginning two consulting firms were under contract: ATS\u0026amp;R to address the physical infrastructure and EDS to work with District staff to create and implement a new technology plan. As technology projects have been completed, contracts for technology services have been reduced as shown in the chart below. The current District contract with Education Innovations - Sharon Dowdy which began in 2004 expired on June 30, 2005. Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 Total EDS 349,849 840,000 840,000 203,419 2,233,268 ATS\u0026amp;R 255,619 255,619 Education Innovations 77,937 79,500 157,437 605,468 840,000 840,000 203,419 77,937 79,500 2,646,324 RATIONALE: Discussions during last year's contract presentation process indicated that 2004-2005 could be the last year this service would be needed by the District. Several major events have caused a re-evaluation of our previous position. 1. Three of our most critical technology related contracts end either at 6/30/06 or 6/30/07 at which time new RFPs will have to be developed and responses evaluated. :.n., z )\u0026gt; z n \u0026gt;,... ::0 .m., 0 ~ ?\u0026lt; n 5 en z C'l ::0 m 3: )\u0026gt; ::0 .f.l, ::0 0.. , m ~ C 0 z ~ 0z 3: )\u0026gt; m m ,~... m !::I C'l ~ ..z.. ., ::0 0.. , 0 ,~... Those contracts include our wide area network lease\nlocal, long distance, and cellular phone service\nand telephone system maintenance. 2. Federal E-Rate processes and procedures are continually becoming more complex, making the securing of funds a much more technical and time consuming process. 3. The evaluation and implementation of an automated agenda management system is scheduled to begin in August 2005. Other factors that also should be considered: 1. Cost/Benefit The cost of entering into this contract is far outweighed by the amount of revenue received from E-Rate funds each year. Since the District began using a consultant to assist with E-Rate filings for 2001-2002, the amount of revenue funded for E-Rate projects has been over $ 1 million annually. The chart below shows the District's funding received since the inception of the program in 1998: E-Rate Funds Received Total E-Rate Funded 1998-2001 627,120 2001-2002 2,777,603 2002-2003 1,264,968 2003-2004 3,075,463 2004-2005 1,385,105 Total E-Rate Funded 2001 - 2005 8,503,139 2. Requests for Proposal (RFP) Writing technology-related RFPs requires a level of technical sophistication not currently required for routine operation of the District. A multi-million dollar telecommunications RFP must be developed and evaluated and contracts signed before E-Rate applications can be filed in January 2006. The current value of that contract is approximately $ 1.8 million annually. Other technology-related projects arise each year that are one-time projects requiring technical assistance. For example, during 2004-05 Ms. Dowdy helped write and evaluate the RFP for webbased access to student grades (Edline) and assisted in writing the RFP for online Board agenda software as well as conducting reference checks on potential vendors. The evaluation phase of the online agenda RFP is scheduled for August.  Future projects under consideration that will require outside technical assistance are:  District-wide document management system  Textbook inventory software  Applicant tracking  Centralized library management system  Expansion of media retrieval systems These potential projects, if funded, will require assistance in research and writing of technical specifications, conducting technical pre-bid conferences, coordinating vendor presentations, conducting reference checks, and conducting project coordination meetings. 3. Project Management For the most part, implementation of E-Rate projects is handled by LRSD staff. However, in some cases where a different level of technical expertise is required, the services of an independent project manager are needed. A current example would be the remaining two (2) complete Safari installations and final review and sign-off for six (6) more. To meet E-rate requirements those installations must be complete by September 30. We have also been funded for smaller video systems at four elementary schools that will be installed this year. 4. Current Staff Impact A portion of the work done by Education Innovations is of a technical nature requiring expertise that is not available in the District, while some components of the work could be done by District staff in Computer Information Services and Instructional Technology. However, a change of this magnitude will negatively impact the District's resources that are currently being focused on the support of our technology needs. The current staffing levels and responsibilities of the two departments impacted by this contract are outlined below. Computer Information Services Current staff: Director, 1 Operations Manager, 3 Operations Specialists (AS/400), 5 Applications Specialists, 1 Help Desk Specialist, 1 Systems Engineer (servers), 1 System Engineer (desktop), 1 Training Coordinator, 9 Computer Technicians, 1 Telephone Technician and .5 Secretary. This staff is responsible for:  Coordination and support of CIMS software running on IBM AS/400 system. All major hardware and software issues are escalated to the IT Director.  Coordination and support of data interface integration of electronic gradebook and web-based grade access for parents.  Coordination and support of all software initiatives including participation in the evaluation and approval process.  Implementation and support of District's server farm, including maintaining all user accounts and email in an active directory environment.  Coordinate all technology related software/hardware products used throughout the District.  Responsible for training all users on the District's Student Management system, including attendance, grading, transcripts, scheduling, and maintaining demographic data.  Support approximately 8,000 desktop computers District-wide, including overall approval and use of all desktop software.  Responsible for automation of all District cafeterias using BonAppetit software application. .:-,.n, z \u0026gt;z (\") ,\u0026gt;-\n,:, .m.,, 0 ~ ?\u0026lt; (\") ,- 0 en z C,\n,:, m\nc \u0026gt;\n,:, fl ..,,\n,:, .0., , m\n,:, ::\n1 0 0 z ~ 0z\nc \u0026gt; tD m ~ rm !=' C, .z~.. ..,,\n,:, .0., , 0 en ,\u0026gt;-  Support and maintain PBX phone system District-wide including, approximately 4,000 phone sets and voicemail for all employees. Instructional Technology Current staff: Coordinator, 3 instructional technology specialists, and .5 secretary. This staff is responsible for:  Coordination and support of library media program, including professional development of library staff, support of library automation system, development of library protocols, and monitoring of library resources  Implementation, training and support for the District's electronic gradebook and parent web access to student grades. There will be an expansion of 4 schools on the gradebook and 8 schools on parent web access in the 2005-2006 school year.  Development and implementation of technology training classes for teachers, including basic productivity tools and instructional software tools that are integrated into the curriculum  Coordination of training and monitoring of 25 sites that have Compass Learning software, working to ensure that the software is fully integrated with LRSD curriculum goals  Implementation, training and support for Safari video networks in 13 District sites.  Oversight of all E-rate applications, keeping current on program rule changes, preparing for audits and site visits, submitting documentation on review processes and appeals, and maintaining E-rate records  Coordination of the LRSD Technology Committee  Leadership of LRSD Technology Planning efforts 5. E-rate Comparison with Other Districts Arkansas districts were surveyed about their E-Rate application process, funding and use of consultants. The table below shows the result of that research. Arkansas Districts 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 Comments Fayetteville $137,700 $105,461 $143,742 $159,087 Do not use consultant. Apply only for telco services. Fort Smith $427,362 $178,933 $168,981 $146,265 Do not use consultant. Apply only for telco services. LRSD $2,777,603 $1,564,968 $3,075,463 $1 ,385,105 Apply for telco, internal connections, system maintenance. NLRSD $0 $0 $80,255 $66,825 Began using paid consultant in 2003-2004. PCSSD $0 $81 ,288 $88,422 $85,583 Do not use consultant. Do not apply for more because they don't have enough helo. Rogers $0 $0 $0 $0 Do not apply for e-rate funding. Springdale $47,017 $51,724 $68,068 $355,011 Do not use consultant. Texarkana, AR $0 $51 ,070 $75,370 $51 ,753 Apply only for telco. For 05-06 added staff so they could apply for more. FUNDING: The one (1) year request of $78,000 plus travel expenses will be funded by the Dedicated Maintenance and Operations fund. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board approve the attached Agreement for the 2005-2006 school year. PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen Chief Financial Officer '...\",' z z\u0026gt; n ,\u0026gt;-\n,o m \"D 0 ~ ?\u0026lt; ,n- 0 u, z C'l\n,o m 3: \u0026gt;\n,o fl \"D\n,o 0 \"D m\n,o ~ 0 0 z ~ 0 z 3: \u0026gt; ID m ~ rm !=' C'l ~ .z.. . \"D\n,o 0 \"D 0 u, \u0026gt;,- National Districts 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 Comments Indianapolis, IN $1,413,319 $993,123 $1,400,522 $1,494,124 Do not use consultant. Apply only for telco because process takes too much lime. Caddo Parish, $153,204 $2,056,389 $933,605 $539,599 Do not use consultant. LA Apply only for telco because process takes too much lime. Norfolk, VA $902,703 $682,786 $812,456 $979,572 Do not use consultant. Hired extra staff fore-rate. Chatham County, $48,821 $2,009,982 $1,794,221 $2,981 ,315 Do not use consultant. GA Muscogee County, $609,527 $747,105 $895,556 $393,059 Use a paid consultant for GA very larae contracts. 2. ASSUMED NAME CERTIFICATE FOR UNINCORPORATED BUSINESS OR PROFESSION The aasumed name under which the bu1i.aeaa or profeuional service i or i, to be conducted or rendered i t~i(.fA \u0026gt;..\n.:: \"- \"I:..\"'\"'-k~\\ \\.\\ \\, - '\n, BUSINESSADDRESS:.:,ty Culf11' = Wy1,,,, fa: 7':)t l \u0026lt;\"t~ The regislr\u0026amp;DI is: (Check oae 1111d fill iD appropriate blank,. Attach aclditiooal sbcell if 00\u0026lt;e111ary.)  A. An INDIVIDUAL: The full name and re,ideoce addreui, S Y',C... ,-c} :,, }) 0 rY J. i j C...c. //,' ('., C...-t. Nune .v lit. T.x  B. A PARTNERSHIP: The veatwc or partnenhip name is: ____________________ _ Tbe venture or partnership office add..ff:11 i1: ________________________ _ 1be full came of eachjoim venturer or general partner and hit residellcc addrcn ifhc ia an individual or ill office \u0026amp;ddrc11 if not an individual it: --------------------------------  C. An ESTA'Ir:: Thenamo of lheestate is: __________________________ _ The e1tate1' office, if any, it: The full name of each n:prc1catativc of the estate and bis rcaidcncc addre11 if be is an individual or ill office ~en if not an individual ia:  0 . A REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST: 'The name of the lnllt is: _______________ _ The addreH of the llult it: The full name of each tnistee manager and hi resideoce addreu if bo is an individual and it office addreu if not 11D indivi-dual is: ------------------------------------- Fi  E. A COMPANY OTiiER THAN A REAL ESTA'lr: INVESTMENI' TRUST, OR A CORPORAT IO~ The\"'~ ..\\...D, the com-pmy or corporati011 ii: g ~ \u0026lt;- The lt\u0026amp;te, country, or other jurisdictioa under tho law, of which it wu organiz.cd, iocmporatcd, or i SIIOC~ ~ office addrc11 U: ~ n~ ~ ~ ..,_ f..:\n.... ,I  C 4. The'burinc11 or profe11io.aal aervico that is or i.a to be CODducted or rendered in the county under 1lua usu.med name ii~ing or will be cooducte4\u0026lt;\u0026gt;r rendered u a: (Chock applicable ooo) CiY Proprictonbip  Limic,,d Partnership  Sole lnctitioaor  Real Estate InvestmeDI Trust  JoiDIVe\u0026lt;IIW-o  IoiDIStookComp1111y  General ParlDulbip 0 Some other !onn of unincorporated bu1ine11 orprofeuional usociation or entity: __________ _ To certify which, witoeu __ vY\\~-'-IY~------baod the ..:Jii_r~y ot __ L~Y~\"~e. ______ , 19 ::l.l SlGNATIJIU! (S) - Ji\n\\\u0026amp; CMd:::::t-- ~\u0026lt;-, w, ov /OlUOB'.23T{ n!ESTATEOPTEXAS } COUNI'YOP COLLIN BEFORBME, HELEN STARNES, _____-_ -_-_-_-_-_-:_~_-_-_-.,.-:_-_-_-_-.,.-------...,-=-..,.-_-_~c:o:U~N_T_Y-.-C_L_E_RK__,,.....----=--=--=--=--=----,-in-aod--fo_r_1\u0026amp;1.\n.._d_C_O_UD_l y_ a_od_ S_ ta_le-,-o-o-lbi-.-, \"Y personally appeared _.P=c.. ..6.. .o u r:.:..ia.,,_,,h _.s-='--.,. . ..c C.J\"\"\"\":..c...._....\u0026amp;... .....- e..1\u0026lt;Ju14-14-_________________ ----------------- biownto me to be i:e pcnao.___ wboae name~~--- subscribed . ., J,o..tho foregoing instrument. and acknowledged to mo that ~he __ executed the same for the putposcs therein expreued. Given under my hand and seal of office, Ibis !)_4't/... dsy of ~.,,., L 19 CJ\"/ ~N SIARNES, CUUNtY cr\ntmc- DEPUTY ,,,,,,u,u,,,,,,, NOTE: A ccrti!~~~~ and aolmowlcdged by eaob individual whosc name i.o re  to be 1tatcd therein or by hi repre, ,, ~l\"',\n,.'\"-,~)'l!i.4,and iD the cue of 1111y penooool 1111 individual the name of which is required to be staled therein. the~   exe~~ acknowledged under oath on behalf of such penon by its rcpreacmative or anomey in fact or by ij\"J!t\nq,j,, trustee manager, officer, or anyone bavina comparable authority, u the cue may be, of JU\u0026lt;:b pe~\\y  execii='tl ind acknowledged by an anomey iD fact aball include a ,tatemCDI that 111Cb allom\u0026lt;y iD fact ~ be~~   ~y his principal to eucute and acknowledge the same. :, H161Assumed ,e~~fr\"=~~ . ,,,,, ,,,,... ClklRev 3/11.8 7 :.n., z z\u0026gt; (\") \u0026gt;,.. ::0 m \"D 0 ~ ?'\u0026lt; ,(.\".) 0 en z C) ::0 m\nc \u0026gt; ::0 f\u0026gt; \"D ::0 0 \"D m ~ C 0 z ~ 0 z\nc \u0026gt; ID m ~ ,\u0026gt;.. m !=' C) ~ z --\u0026lt; \"D ~ \"D 0 en \u0026gt;,.. rn C 0 z ~ 0 z en 0.. , \"D ::0 0 \"D m ::0 AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACTED SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT FOR CONTRACTED SERVICES (this \"Agreement\") is made and entered into as of the 1st day of July, 2005, by and between the LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT (the \"District\") and Education Innovations -Sharon Dowdy (\"Contractor\"). A. The District desires for Contractor to provide the services described in the Statement of Work to be Performed section of this Agreement for the cost set forth in this Agreement and subject to the other terms and provisions of this Agreement. B. Contractor has represented to the District that it has the knowledge and expertise to perform the Services for the price specified in this Agreement. C. The District and Contractor desire to enter into this Agreement to set forth their agreements with respect to the services to be provided by Contractor as well as the compensation to be paid Contractor by the District. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the District and Contractor hereby agree as follows: 1. Statement of Work to be Performed - Contractor agrees to provide, in accordance with the highest professional standards of care, the services (the \"Services\"): Technology Related Request for Proposal Development  Develop Telecommunications RFP (WAN and phone service) in conjunction with LRSD Procurement staff  Develop additional technology related RFPs, including, but not limited to, PC specifications, network electronics, video PBX systems, cabling, etc.  Assist in evaluation of technology-related RFP's  Participate in Technology Committee meetings  Update LRSD Technology Plan as needed Online Automated Agenda Management System Project  Act as project manager for implementation of online automated agenda management system  Plan and facilitate regular meetings with project personnel including both LRSD staff and vendor team  Create implementation timelines with vendor and LRSD staff  Assist in preparation of materials lists and purchase orders for the system  Communicate with LRSD staff on all aspects of project implementation  Coordinate implementation schedule with vendor and LRSD staff  Monitor progress of implementation schedule and notify LRSD of any problems  Manage budget for project  Work with vendor on content of training sessions  Coordinate training schedule with LRSD staff  Monitor training sessions E-rate  Advise on types of E-rate filings that would benefit LRSD  Prepare all E-rate applications and submit to LRSD for review  Research and prepare documentation related to E-rate applications  Organize documentation for all E-rate related applications  Research and prepare correspondence related to E-rate Program Integrity and Selective Review requests  Research and prepare appeal documents  Do background research on FCC rules and orders related to E-rate  Assist LRSD vendors in all types of E-rate filings Media Retrieval Projects  Act as project manager for implementation of Safari system at 8 new sites  Plan and facilitate regular meetings with project personnel including both LRSD staff and vendor team  Create implementation timelines for each site working with vendor and LRSD construction managers  Assist in preparation of materials lists and purchase orders for the systems  Walk schools with vendor and LRSD construction managers to determine locations and technical needs of head end rooms  Communicate with principals on all aspects of project implementation  Coordinate implementation schedule with vendor and LRSD construction managers  Monitor progress of implementation schedule and notify LRSD of any problems  Manage budget for project  Work with vendor on content of training sessions  Coordinate training schedule with principals and staff  Monitor training sessions  Oversee maintenance service at 11 existing Safari sites 2 fl 0\"\"\"\" \"m\" \"..\".. -\u0026lt; C 0 z .).\u0026gt;.. 0 z 3: )\u0026gt; tD m r- \u0026lt; )\u0026gt; mr- :..n., z )\u0026gt; z n .\u0026gt;... \"m\" \"0\" ~ ?\u0026lt; n r- 0 (J) z C) \"m\" 3: )\u0026gt; \"\" !=' C) ~ .z.. . \"\"\"\" 0 \"0\" (J) )\u0026gt; r- !T1 C 0 z ~ 0z (J) .0.. , \"\"\"\" 0 \"m\" \"\" Other Possible RFP Development:  Human Resources Applicant Tracking System  District Wide Document Management System  Textbook Inventory System  Student ID System 2. Nature and Scope of Engagement - The District hereby retains Contractor to perform the Services and the District agrees to pay for the Services as provided in Section 4. The Contractor accepts the engagement to perform the Services and agrees to provide such services to the District, all as set forth herein. Contractor will not subcontract or otherwise engage subcontractors to perform the Services without prior written approval from the District. 3. Term -The term of this Agreement shall be July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006. 4. Compensation. Contractor will be paid a total of $78,000 for the Services payable in twelve installments of $6,500 in monthly arrears plus reimbursement of travel expenses directly attributable to perform LRSD work also billed monthly in arrears. When travel expenses are paid by Little Rock School District, the consultant will work exclusively on LRSD projects. 5. Independent Contractor - Contractor agrees that it is an independent contractor in performing the Services. As an independent contractor, Contractor's duties are limited as provided in this Agreement, and it does not have, and agrees it will not hold itself out as having, any authority to represent or obligate the District as an officer, employee or agent. 6. Indemnification and Legal Compliance - The Contractor shall at all times observe and fully comply with any and all Federal, State and local laws, statutes, orders, ordinances and regulations. Contractor agrees to save, hold harmless and to indemnify the District, its agents, employees, officers and board members against any and all liability, losses, claims or costs of whatsoever kind or nature relative to the performance of this Agreement or any occurrence or accident in connection with inadequate design, breach of contract, material failure, default or the performance of any work, services or products supplied pursuant to this Agreement. Further, Contractor shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the District, its agents, employees, officers and board members from any lawsuits, causes of action, claims, liabilities and damages, of any kind and nature, including but not limited to, attorneys' fees and costs, arising out of the performance of this Agreement whether attributable in whole or in part to any act, omission or negligence of the District, its agents or employees, including, but not limited to, any and all lawsuits, causes of action, claims, liabilities, and damages which the District, its agents or employees may sustain by reason of any failure of Contractor to indemnify as provided herein\nor any failure by Contractor to otherwise perform its obligations pursuant to this Agreement, or by reason of the injury to or death of any person or persons or the damage to, loss of use of or destruction of any property resulting from the work undertaken herein. 3 7. Conflict of Interest - Contractor represents and warrants that no director or employee of the District is in any manner interested directly or indirectly in this Agreement or in any of the expected profits which might arise from this Agreement. Contractor further represents and warrants that no attempt has been made to influence or gain favorable advantage by communicating directly or indirectly with any official of the District. 8. Civil Rights Act Compliance\nNo Discrimination- Contractor agrees that it will comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352) and all requirements imposed by or pursuant to the regulations of the Department of Education (34 C.F.R. Part 100) issued pursuant to that title. Contractor further agrees that it shall not discriminate against, or segregate, a person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, familial status, natioal origin, ancestry, disability or condition of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) or AIDS-related complex in carrying out its duties and obligations pursuant to this Agreement nor shall Contractor or any person claiming under or through Contractor establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation. In the event the District permits subcontracting under this Agreement, Contractor agrees to include provisions similar to the foregoing in any subcontracts entered into between Contractor and any Subcontractor. Contractor assures the District that it will immediately take any measures necessary to effectuate the foregoing provisions of this Agreement. Contractor further agrees to comply with all other applicable requirements of federal, state and local laws, ordinances or regulations regarding nondiscrimination in employment. 9. Termination - This Agreement may be terminated for cause by either party in the event a representation or warranty set forth herein is untrue in any material respect. This Agreement may also be terminated in the event there is any breach of a material provision of this Agreement which is not cured within ten ( 10) days following written notice to the defaulting party. Contractor's representations and warranties shall survive any termination of this Agreement. In the event of termination for cause, either party shall have all rights and remedies available under Arkansas law or applicable federal law. The District may also terminate without cause with 30 days written notice to the Contractor. In this case, the District will only be liable for pro-rata amounts and incurred travel due the Contractor through the date of termination. 10. Examination of Contractor Records - The District shall have access to and the right to examine any directly pertinent books, documents, papers and records of Contractor involving transactions relating to this Agreement at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement as well as for a period of three (3) years following the termination of this Agreement. 4 !=' G') z~ -\u0026lt; \"D\n,o 0 \"D 0 V, ,\u0026gt;- ~ .., z z\u0026gt; (\") ,\u0026gt;-\n,o m \"D 0\n,o -\u0026lt; 11. Miscellaneous - 11.1 Severability - If a court holds any part, term or provision of this Agreement to be unenforceable, the validity of the remaining portions shall not be affected, and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be construed and enforced as if this Agreement did not contain the objectionable part, term or prov1s1on. 11.2 Headings - The headings which appear in this Agreement have been inserted for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. They are not intended to, and shall not be deemed to define, limit or extend the scope or intent of any provision hereof. 11.3 Entire Agreement - This Agreement has been negotiated and prepared by the parties equally and shall not be construed as having been drafted by one party. When fully executed, it shall supercede any and all prior and existing Agreements, either oral or in writing. This Agreement (including any exhibits) contains the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. 11.4 Request for Qualifications/Request for Proposals - In the event there is a Request for Qualifications or Request for Proposals attached to this Agreement, such document shall be incorporated into this Agreement by reference. 11 .5 Amendments - Any amendment or modification of this Agreement must be made in writing and signed by the parties to this Agreement. 11 .6 Assignment - This Agreement is not assignable by either party without the prior consent of the other party. 11.7 Governing Law and Jurisdiction - The laws of the State of Arkansas shall govern the parties' rights and obligations under this Agreement. The parties agree that this Agreement was negotiated in the State of Arkansas and agree that any litigation arising out of this Agreement shall be brought in the State of Arkansas. 11.8 Attorneys' Fees and Costs - If any suit or other proceeding is instituted by either party pertaining to this Agreement or the obligations hereunder, the prevailing party, in addition to any other relief the court may award, shall be entitled to its costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys' fees. 11.9 Notice - Any notice, consent, request or other communication required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed given when either (i) 5 personally delivered to the intended recipient, or (ii) sent, by certified or registered mail, return-receipt requested, addressed to the intended recipient at the address specified below its signature on the signature page of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the date set forth above. THE DISTRICT: Little Rock School District By: (print) Name: Title: Director of Procurement Signature: Address for Notice: 1800 East Sixth Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 6 CONTRACTOR: Education Innovations By: (print) Name: __________ _ Title: _________ _ Signature: Address for Notice: !\"\" \"C\n:c 0 \"C m .\n.:.c. -\u0026lt; C 0 z .\u0026gt;... 0z 3:: \u0026gt; 0, m,.... \u0026lt;\u0026gt; ,.... m :..n., z z\u0026gt; n ,\u0026gt;....\n:c m \"C 0 ~ ?\u0026lt; ,n... . 0 u, z c\n,\n:c m 3:: \u0026gt; ~ c\n, ~ .z.. . \"C\n:c 0 \"C 0 u, ,\u0026gt;.... DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 July 28, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Property Donation BACKGROUND: The Ashley Company, a commercial real estate development corporation of North Little Rock, has made an offer to the Little School District in the form of a donation of 22.62 acres of vacant land valued at $305,000. This property is located at the Mabelvale Cut-off at Heinke Road immediately adjacent and adjoining properties owned by the Little Rock School District that house Mabelvale Elementary School. The property is presently owned by Conservative Development Company (CDC) whose representative is the Ashley Company of North Little Rock. RATIONALE: While in the process of securing permission to locate portable buildings at Mabelvale Elementary School, the Ashley Company was contacted\nand, as a result, offered the Little Rock School District approximately 23 acres of undeveloped property immediately to the north and east and adjoining Mabelvale Elementary School. The property is partially cleared but most is heavily wooded. The Ashley Company is making the donation on the part of the Conservative Development Company who desires to make this donation to the Little Rock School District. An appraisal of the property has been completed, and the value is shown to be $305,000. A title commitment has been secured from Beech Abstract, and additional transactions will take place to secure the title to this property once\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1036","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2005-06"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Curricula","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1036"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["81 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nFro Return ~ ~ Keep or Toss D [ Post-It\" 7668 03M 1993 Agenda RECEIVED JUN 2 ~ 2005 OfflCEOf DESEGREGATION MONIJORING Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting JUNE2005 0 \u0026gt;-o\n- ~ r- r-\u0026lt; Oll: oz jg~ !B::\n-\noCz: on r- ... r- i5 oz 'f!! \u0026lt;J) r- I. 11. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests REGULAR MEETING June 23, 2005 5:30 p.m. Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) C. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: V. A. Remarks from Board Members B. Student Assignment Report C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes: Regular Meeting I 05-26-05 Special Meeting I 06-09-05 n,. .., j- ~ r- r--\u0026lt;- 0~ 0~ !~ll~..,\n- aCz: on ,r.-.-.-~\u0026lt; n,..z,, ~ Regular Board Meeting June 23, 2005 Page 2 VI. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. A. Recommendations from the Nutrition and Physical Activity Advisory Committee (NPAAC) CURRICULUM \u0026amp; INSTRUCTION A. PRE / Quarterly Update Report B. 2005-06 Evaluation Agenda HUMAN RESOURCES A. Personnel Changes BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A. Proposed Budget for Annual School Election B. First Reading: Policy FA- New Facilities Development Goal C. Resolution for Leasing Authority D. Request for Breakfast and Lunch Meal Price Increase E. Consulting Agreement F. Donations of Property G. Financial Report CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions EMPLOYEE HEARINGS ADJOURNMENT :e \"0 mh\" 'g om\ni:C m\u0026lt;= b~ ~~ m::1 --\u0026lt;m \u0026lt;J\u0026gt;\ni:, ~ ,...~ \u0026lt;JIO C:\"' \"0--\u0026lt; ~~ =Im  n .... 8 c5 z z =I (JI_ 0 z (JI !l' \"m' ~ r\u0026gt; $! ,r-,\u0026lt;,.J,\u0026gt;, !:H~  31: n =I l\nl z (JI DATE: June 23, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRJCT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: June 2005 Construction Report - Bond Projects BACKGROUND: The planning for an addition to and the renovation of Forest Heights Middle School continues. The architect has been given a program (a list of items that the staff would like in the addition and remodeled areas) and is in the process of developing the costs, size and potential locations for the new building. Depending on available bond funds, a decision will be made soon regarding the staff requests. Several projects are being done this summer at Pulaski Heights Middle and Elementary Schools to enhance the appearance of the buildings. The outside brick walls of the Elementary School, auditorium and cafeteria are being cleaned and water-proofed . The front doors of the Elementary School are being replaced with new ones. A new ceiling will be installed in the cafeteria and all of the exposed steam piping and heating units will be removed . Another summer project is the . installation of new ceilings in the classrooms and corridors of Southwest Middle School which will improve the interior appearance of the building. When you drive by the school, it is obvious that the work recently completed has improved the exterior appearance of the school. In response to a request for information on projects not yet started, a new category has been added to the attached list entitled 'Bond Projects Not Yet Started .' RATIONALE: Monthly reports are submitted to the Board to keep members up-to-date on construction projects in the District. FUNDING: Bond Funds RECOMMENDATION: Report item\nno action necessary. PREPARED BY: Bill Goodman, District Engineer :n .... ~ ::c % 0 8 -\u0026lt; C: -c C ~ m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JUNE 23, 2005 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION I I I t:st. t.\nompIetIon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Carver ~ dia Center Expansion _ $167,490 Dec-05 Aug-05 __ Au~g-05 ~g-05 ~ ug-05 Dec-05 Central Renovation - Interior _____ $10,200,266 Fair Park Remodel $799,000 Fair Park Parking Lot ___ ____ _ __ $185,000 Forest Park Restr~oms ___ __ $152,881 Gibbs Addition __ ______ __ $705,670 -- - Oakhurst (Adult Education) New Windows ___ _ __ $215,000 -- ~ g-05 Pulaski Heights Elem/Middle Cafeteria Ceiling _ ___ $33,378 _ Aug-05 Pulaski Heights Elementary Clean Exterior Walls _ __ $98,660 - ~ g-05 ~ g-05 __ Aug-05 Aug-05 Aug-05 Pulaski Heights Elem/Middle I Replace Entry Doors ______ $13,990 Southwest I New Corridor Ceiling ____ $300,000 Western Hills IElectrical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC __ $622,160 Woodruff Parking addition $175,000 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - SUMMER/ FALL 2005 I I I t:st. t.\nompIetIon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Cloverdale Elementary Demolition _ _ __ $520,750 Aug-05 Henderson Skylight Replacement_ ___ $45,00-0~ Aug-05 Meadowcliff  Remodel_________ __ $164,150 Aug-05 Rightsell Renovation $2,494,000 ~ Q-05 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED I I I t:st. ~ompIe11on Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Booker Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown Chicot - -- Electrical Upgrade _-_-_-_-~ Unknown Forest H~ghts ====- Remodel ~ --- -- $1 ,547,000 -- - - -Un-known Unknown Mitchell Renovation -- - $2,212,493 - Unknown Pulaski Hgts. MS -- Energy monitoring system installation Unknown - Unknown BOND PROJECTS NOT YET STARTED Facility Name I Project Description I _Adm_inistration Anne_x_ ___ A,,,.D.._A_A.,-daptations -------~E_lectrical Upgrade Adult Education ADA Adaptations __ _ __ ----~S_tr_uctural Repairs -~ __ _ Alternative Learning Center ADA Adaptations ________ _ Electrical Upgrade Booker Cashion Building Dodd Roof Repairs .. Restroom Renovation ---~A_D_A Adaptations ____ A=-D_A Adaptations ______ _ Restroom Renovation I t:si. 1.,ompIeuon Cost Date __ $_3_2,351 Unknown $9,166-- Unknown -- $248,020 Unknown $53,918 Unknown $43,134 - Unknown - $2,696 - Unknown - $26,959 Unknown $37,742 Unknown $107,835 _ Spring 2006 $21,567 Unknown $26,959 Unknown -Fa-cility Services ADA Adaptations $32,351 Unknown ~ ___ ------~~_ _II_ ns_tall Water Metersa!Cooling Towers -.--- - $4,313 Unknown _______ E_m_ergency Lighting Replacem_e_nt _ Land Purchase - Booker Fulbright - Renovate Restroom-s -- ------ -- ~ ADA Adaptations Garland ~ovation -- --- ADA Adaptations ~trical Upgrade __ =~~---\n_- Geyer S~pr_in~g~s ______ R_e~p_lace Restroom Stalls ADA Adaptations I ~ 80,876 - Unknown - $100,000 - Unknown $10,784 Unknown $21 ,567 Unknown $900,000-----i=,artially Complete $188,711 Unknown $6,988 Unknown $4,3_13__ Unknown ----,-- -- $21 ,567 Unknown Facility Name Henderson IRC Mabelvale Elementary McDermott Quigley Rockefeller Transportation - Laidlaw Transportation - LRSD West Little Rock School CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JUNE 23, 2005 BOND PROJECTS NOT YET STARTED I Project Description I Cost I Renovate Office $10,784 ADA Adaptations $70,093 ADA Adaptations I I $21,567 I Restroom Renovation $21,567 I 1 Electrical Upgrade $6,211 I Restroom Renovation $32,350 1 Restroom Upgrades $53,918 I 'Dressing Room Renovation I $37,742 1ADA Adaptations $26,959 I Electrical Upgrade $1,618 I Interior Renovation $16,175 ADA Adaptations $32,351 Electrical Upgrade $1,294 1New School $11,782,638 Est. Completion Date Summer 2006 Unknown Unknown Unknown Fall 2005 Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown ---- Unknown - Unknown -- Unknown Unk-no-wn Unknown BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I I I Est. Completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Administration Asbestos abatement $380,495 Mar-03 Administration Fresh air system $55,000 Aug-03 Administration Fire alarm $32,350 Aug-03 Administration IHVAC - $70,000 Nov-04 --- Administration Annex Energy monitoring system installation May-02 -- --- Alternative Learning Ctr. ~ergy monitoring system installation $15,160 Oct-01 Alternative Learning Ctr. 1Energy efficient lighting $82,000 Dec-01 Badgett I Partial asbestos abatement $237,2~ -- - Jul-01 -- Badgett_ __ Fire alarm --$18~250 Aug-02 Bale --aassroom addition/renovation ~ $2,244,524 Dec-02 Bale I Energy monitoring system Mar-02 I- -- Bale Partial roof replacement - $269,5~ Dec-01 Bale HVAC $664,587 Aug-01 f- ~3,520 - Baselin-e --- Renovation ~ug-04 ~8,525 -- Booker Gym Roof Oct-04 - --$25,000- - Booker ADA Rest rooms Aug-04 -- --- - - -- Booker -- Energy efficient lighting $170,295 Apr-01 -- Energy monitoring system installation .. Booker --$- 23,710-=__ Oct-01 Booker Asbestos abatement $10,900 Feb-02 -- -- -- Booker Fire alarm $34,501 Mar-02 Brady Addition/renovation --- ---- $973,621- Nov-04 -- - Brady_ __ Energy efficient lighting -- - -+ $80,593 Sep-02 Brady Asbestos abatement $345,0~ Aug-02 --- -- $14,480 __ Carver Energy monitoring system installation May-01 -- Carver -- - Parking lot $111,742 - - Aug-03 Central HVAC Renovation - Band Area $225,000 Dec-04 -- Central Reflecting Pond $57,561 Sep-04 Central Parking -+- - Student parking $174,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair ~ $265,000 _ Aug-03 -- fentral/Q@ley .Athletic Field Improvement --- $38,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Irrigation System -- $14,500 - Aug-03 Central Purchase land for school Unknown Dec-02 ---- Central Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations $2,000,000 Dec-02 2 ~ \u0026gt;n  C: -.,\n,:\n,\n,:\n,\n,:\n, l!!o 0 C: C: ..... \u0026gt; C: ~:IC m QO j!!z -\u0026lt;!!! '.\" .... ~ :zc 0  C: ~ m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JUNE 23, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I I Est. Completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Central Ceiling and wall repair $24,000 Oct-01 Central Fire Alarm System Design/Installation $80,876 Aug-01 Central Front landing tile repair $22,470 Aug-01 Chicot Drainage $64,700 1 Aug-04 Chicot Sound Attenuation $43,134 Jul-04 ---------------- 1-c,C-lo_v_e_rd_a_le-----,-E---,l..e..,_m_._ ____ __E,,n-_erg.,=y_e--fc-f,i-ci_ent....I,~igch---t-ci-n_.g,~ __________- -$=-_132~,67_8--r-____- ---,- f-C_lo_v_e_rd_a_le_ M_S_ _____ ,_E_n_erg.,=y_e_ff_icie_n_t lig,\"-h-_ting\"-----------'--__$_ 1_89',7-_43~'------ Jul-01 Jul-01 ~C_lov_e_rd_a_le_ M_S_ _____ ,_M_a~jo_r_ren_o_vation\u0026amp;a_d_d_it_io_n_ ________$1_ ,39_3_,82_2--r-----N-ov-02 f-D_o_d_d ________ _,_F_ire_A_la_r~m~Upgrad_e ________ t------c,-$_9~,2_0_0-+-- Dodd I Energy efficient lighting $90,665 Oct-04 Aug-01 Dodd Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile $156,299 Jul-01 Dodd Replace roof top HVAC $215,570 Aug-02 Dunbar Renovation/addition $6,149,023 Nov-04 ------------1- F a c i Ii ties Service Interior renovation $84,672 Mar-01 --------- Aug-03 May-05 Facility Services Fire alarm $12,000 f-F-a-ir-P~a-rk_ _______ _,_R-oof -- ---- $245,784 ~r-02 Aug-01 - Aug-01 Fair Park HVAC renovation/fire alarm -----$-3-15,956 ---- Fair_P_a_rk ______ _,_E_n_ergyefficient lighting __ _-_:_-_ $90,162 - ~F_a_ir_P_a_rk_ _______ ,_A_s_bes_tos abatement-ceiling ____$_ 5_9,31 O_ 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music j J  A. Fair room addition $3,155,640 Aug-04 J. A. Fair Energy efficient lighting 1 $277,594 ----Apr-01 J. A. Fair Press box , $10,784 r Nov-00 J. A. Fair Security cameras 1 $12,500 - - - Jun-01 ---'-------------+! ----c--- J. A. Fair Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Jul-03 J. A. Fair Irrigation System $14,000 Jul-03 J. A. Fair Roof repairs --, - - $391,871 ~ -=-- Aug-03 Fores_t_P_a-rk_ ______R_ e_p-la-c~e-w- indow unitsw/centralH VAC l $485,258 Nov-03 Forest Park Diagonal parking 1 $111,742 --Aug-03 Fulbright Energyefficient lighting --- - $134:463 - - Jun-01 Forest Park Energy efficient lighting ~-$119 788 - May-01 Fulbright Energy monitoring system installation $11,950 _-_-_-_-_Aug-01 Fulbright - Replace roof top HVAC units I $107,835 - Aug-02 Fulbright Parking lot --- $140,000 Sep-02 Fulbright Roofrepairs ---r~--~- $200,000 - - Oct-02 Frank_lin_ -- - Renovation 1 $2,511,736 _ _ Mar-03 Geyer Springs Roof Repair ' $161,752 Jun-04 Energy efficient lighting -- -- $76,447 Apr-01 ------- Gibbs Gibbs ---------Energy monitoring s~tem installation __ _ $11 ,770 Jul-01 Hall Major renovation \u0026amp; addition '\" $8,637,709 Sep-03 ------ Asbestos abatement $168,222 Aug-01 Energy efficient lighting --=-- _ _:-=- $42,931 Jul-01 Hall Hall Hall ___In frastructure improvements __ $93,657 Aug-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting _____ _ $296,707 _ Apr-01 1H--a--ll -------- Intercom Feb-01 Hall - Henderson Henderson ---- Henderson Henders-on- ---- Henderson Security cameras ______ _ Lockers --------- Energy efficient lighting - Roof replacement gym Asbestos abatement Phase I Asbestos abatement Phase 2 $10,600 $43,854 $193,679 $107,835 $500,000 $250,000 Jun-01 Dec-04 Jul-01 May-01 Aug-0~ Aug-02 3 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JUNE 23, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I I I Est. Completion Project Description Cost Date ,_IR_C _________E_ ner~g~y_e_ff_ic_ie_n_t_~li g~h_ti~ng $109,136 Jul-02 Jefferson Asbestos abatement $43,639 Oct-01 ,_J_effer_s_o_n _______ R_enovation \u0026amp; fire alarm _____ _____ $1,630,000 Nov-02 Laidlaw !Parking lot $269,588 Jul-01 Mablevale Elem Fire Alarm Upgrade $12,000 Oct-04 Mabelvale Elem. Energy monitoring system installation $12,150 Aug-01 Mabelvale Elem. Replace HVAC units $300,000 _ Aug-02 Mabelvale Elem. Asbestos Abatement $107,000 Aug-02 Mabelvale Elem. I Energy efficient lighting __ $106,598 Dec-02 Mabelvale MS !Renovate bleachers $134,793 I Aug-01 Mabelvale MS Renovation $6,851,621 Mar-04 Mann Partial Replacement $11,500,000 Apr-04 1_M_a_n_n_ ________'A_s,p__h_a_lt wal_ks _________ The total $1_8 million I Dec-01 ,_M_a_n_n __________ W_a_lkw_a~y~ca_n_o~p_ie_s_ ________ is what has been Dec-01 ..,M._a_n_n_ ________ __,1B__o_ile_r_r_e,p_l_a_ce_ment _______ used so far on the Oct-01 ,_M_a_n_n ________ ___,F_encing~---- _______ projects listed Sep-01 Mann 'Partial demolition/portable classrooms completed for Mann. ' Aug-01 .,-----------+-----------'-- Mc CI e II an Parking Lot Overlay $65,000 Apr-05 McClellan Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Jul-03 McClellan 'Irrigation System $14,750 Jul-03 McClellan Security cameras $36,300 Jun-01 1_M_c_C_lel_la_n_ _______ _E:_n_e\n__r_g,'I-Ly-e':..f...fic:...i..e-'--n_t lighting $303,614 _____M ay-~ McClellan Stadium stands repair ___ - $235,0~ Aug-01 McCle~ - Intercom $46,000 _ _ Feb-02 McClellan Classroom Addition __ $2,155,622 __ Jul-04 McDermott Fire Alarm Upgrade _____ _ $7 ,700 Sep-04 McDermott Energy efficient lighting______ $79,411  Feb-01 McDermott Replace roof top HVAC units $476,000 Aug-02 Meadowcliff Fire alarm $16,175 __ ~ 1 Meadowcliff _ Asbestos abatement ------~-- $253,412 Aug-02 Meadowcliff ___E_ n_g,.,_er,g.,_y efficient lighting___ _ $88,297 Dec-02 Metrop_o_lit_a_n ______ ~ R_e~p_la_ce_c_ooling tower $37,203 ___ Dec-00 Metropolitan Replace shop vent system $20,000 _____ May-01 Metropolitan ~ nergy monitoring system installation $17,145 Aug-01 Mitchell Building Remediation $ 165,000 Jul-04 Mitchell IEnergy efficient lighting. _-_- =_-=__ ---$103,642 -- Apr-01 Mitchell Energy monitoring system installation $16,695~ - Jul-01 Mitch~ --- Asbestos abatement - - - ~ 3,000 --=== Jul-01 Oakhurst HVAC renovation __ $237,237 __ Aug-01 Otter Creek Energy monitoring system installation _ $10,695 __ May-01 Otter Creek _ Energy efficient lighting ___ _,_ _ $81 ,828 _ Apr-01 Otter Creek _ Asbestos abatement ___ + $10,000 _ _ Aug-02 Otter Creek Parking lot ________ + $138,029 __ _ Aug-02 Otter Creek 6 classroom addition ________ $888,778 Oct-02 Otter Creek 'Parking Improvements _____ $142,541 ___ Aug-03 Parkview __ ~ ddition _ ____ __ $2,121,226 Dec-04 Parkview HVAC controls ______ $210,000 Jun-02 Parkview ~of replacement_______ - $273,877- -- Sep-01 Parkview I Exterior ligh~ ____ __ ~ 0)84 _ _ Nov-00 arkview HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls $301 ,938 _ Aug-01 Parkview Locker replacement ___ ~ $120,000 _ Aug~ Parkview Energy efficient liqhtinq $315,600 Jun-01 4 ~ \u0026gt;nc -o\n:c\n:c\n:c C!!o De: C: r\u0026gt; C: ~\ns:: mg,o p!z -\u0026lt;l :,, ... Pl ::c z 0 8 -\u0026lt; C: -0 C ~ m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD JUNE 23, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I I I l::.st. c.\nompIetIon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date 1-P_ro_c_u_re_m_ en_t_ ____~ _E_ner__g,,~y_m_o_n_itor_in_g,,_s_y_stem installation _ _$\n_5-,'-2-_9_0_ _____Ju_ n_-0_2-1 Procurement Fire alarm $25,0_00~ ____A_u g\"'---03. Pulaski Hgts. Elem I Renovation - $1,193,2-59- -----No-v-0-4 , Pulaski Hgts. Elem Move playground ___ $17,000 Dec-02 \u0026gt;-P-u-la_s_ki H~g~t-s.-M- S----~I_R_e_n-ov~a-ti~o=n---- - $3,755,041 Nov-04 Rightsell Energy efficient lighting -- $84,898  Apr-01 -R--o'\"c'--ke_f_elle_r_ ______E_ n-er...g,,~y-e-ff-ic-ie_n_t _lig,\"-h-ting - ~ $137,004 - Mar-01 1-R_o_c_ke_f,elle_r_ ______R_ e.,p_la_ce_ ro_o_f_to.2p.. HVAC _ ::_ -$-'-5_3_9-'-'- 17_5_ ____A u,g,,_-_o-11 Rockefeller Parking addition $111,742 Aug-02 t-R_o_m_i-ne_ _______ 1 _A_s-be- s~tos abatement --- - $10,0_0_0 __ -----A~p~r--02-  Romine Major renovation \u0026amp; addition - $3,534,675 Mar-03 \u0026gt;-S_c_ott_F_ie-ld--------T-ra~c-k_R_e_n_o_vations - $289,056 May-05 -- -----~~ Security/Transportation Bus cameras $22,500 Jun-01 Southwest ---A-dd- i-tio_n_________ - - $2,000,000 - Nov-04 - Southwest Asbestos abatem_ent_ __ _ $28,138 _ Aug-00 Southwest New roof $690,000 Oct-03 Southwest Energy efficientlighting ====- ~ $168,719 Jan-02 Southwest 1Drainage / street widening__ _ $250,000 _-- Aug-03 Stude-nt_A_s_s-ig_n_m_e_n_t ____En_ e_r-gy~m-o-nitoring system installation _ $4,830_ _____A~ ug-.Q_2 Student Assignment 'Fire alarm __- -- $9,000 Aug-03 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation ..- $275,000 - - Dec-01 Tech Ctr/ Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II _ : fil79Jmo- Jun-04 Technology Upg~rad_e ___ ---=U~p=gra_d_e~p~hone system \u0026amp;_d_ata__ _ ___ Nov-02 Terry Energy efficient lighting __ _ $73,850 _ _ Fe_b_-01 Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking $83,484 Terry 1Media Center addition - $704,932 Wakefield Rebuild ------- - $5,300,000 ------ Wakefield Security cameras $8,000 Wakefield__ 'Energy efficient lighting $74,77El Wakefield -----D- e- molition/Asbestos Abateme~ - $200,000 Washington Fire Alarm Upgrade $11.~Aug- 02 Sep-02 Dec-04 Jun-01 Feb-01 Washington Security cameras $7,900 __ Nov-02 Oct-04 Jun-01 Apr-01 Jul-01 Washing~t_on _______ E_n_e_rg~y_e_fficient lighting Watson Energy monitoring system installation Watson - --Asbestos abatement ---- Watson Watson Watson --____ E_n_ergy efficient lighting Western Hills Western Hills vv'estern Hills Western Hills Western Hills Williams Williams Williams Wilson Wilson Wilson Woodruff Asbestos abatement Major renovation \u0026amp; addition ----- Fire Alarm Upgrade -,\n:oA Rest rooms Asbestos abatement Intercom Energy efficient lighting Renovation Parking expansions __ ~nergy efficient lighting HVAC for Cafeteria --- ---, Renovation/expansio_n ____ _ _ Parking Expansion Renovation $165,281 $8,530 $182,241 $106,868 $10,000 $800,000 $8,400 $25,000 $191,946 $7,100 $106,000 $2,106,492 $183,717 $122,719 $56,000 $1,263,876 $110,000 $246,419 ~ g-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 A~g-02 Oct-04 ----- - Aug-04 Aug-02 Dec-01 Jul-01 Mar-04 Dec-03 Jun-01 Mar-05 Feb-04 Aug-03 Aug-02 5 Vl. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES A. NPAAC RECOMMENDATIONS VII. CURRICULUM \u0026amp; INS] A. PRE/QUARTERL ~ E. INTERNAL AUDITORS REPORT F. TECHNOLOGY UPDATE V. ROUTINE tMTTERS A. MINUTES Date: June 23, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS To: Board of Directors @ From: Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Re: Audit Report - June This is the sixty-eighth communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with one high school, one middle school and two elementary schools to resolve financial issues in their activity funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. b) The AAB has forwarded a Booster Club Guidelines Package to be included in official publications of the District after review. Board Policy and Regulation a) The amended Out of District Travel regulation is being implemented. Technology a) Monitoring technology plans and technology meetings to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. b) Facilitating technology upgrade in cooperation with the English Department for Yearbook and ewspaper production staff in LRSD high schools to improve access to tools needed for students and staff. Training a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of uts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. .'..\".\" ~ ::c z 0 8 -\u0026lt; C.. , 0 :!!\nm Audit Report - June 2005 Page 2 of2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) issues. Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child utrition Staff. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring combined payroll and human resources issues for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Reviewing Teacher School Supply Fund Records for recommendations. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Served as District coordinator of United Way's Day of Caring (April 17, 2005. Eleven schools participated. Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-447-1115 . My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: June 23, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Board Auditor Report BACKGROUND: Monthly report to School Board. RATIONALE: Summary report of activities. FUNDING: No changes. RECOMMENDATION: None. PREPARED BY: Sandy Becker ~ \u0026gt;n  C: ..,\n,o\n,o\n,o C!!n oc: C:,.... \u0026gt; C: ~ll: m QO p! z -\u0026lt; !!l != ... DATE: TO: FROM: June 23, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Technology Report BACKGROUND: Since the last Board meeting the following technology activities took place:  Last month we reported that we had received over $ 1 million in e-rate funds for the 2003-2004 school year. All of the appeals that we filed on the 2003-2004 applications were upheld and fully funded.  This week it was announced that our 2004-2005 application for telecommunications services was funded in the amount of $ 1.2 million, bringing our total this year to $ 1.4 million. Because of e-rate funds, we receive a 73% discount on all services related to the wide area network, local, long distance, paging, and cellular phone service.  Our current Technology Plan covers the years 2003-2006. In order to meet state requirements for approval and to meet E-rate requirements the Technology Plan will have to be revised during the 2005-2006 school year. The new plan will have to be in draft form by the time we file our erate applications for 2006-2007 this December. It will have to be completed and approved by the Board in time for state submission in March 2006. Committees will be formed in August to begin the revision. RATIONALE: To implement the LRSD Technology Plan 2003 - 2006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board accept this report. PREPARED BY: Lucy Neal, Director, Technology and Media Services John Ruffins, Director, Computer Information Services -0 :r me ~~ % z\no ,m.. mis nc :c\"' ~n c\n, m m\"' \"' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: June 23, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Recommendations from the Nutrition and Physical Activity Advisory Committee (NPAAC) BACKGROUND: Act 1220 of 2003 was created to combat the crisis of childhood obesity and associated health problems. In the 2003-04 school year, 36.7% of LRSD students were identified as overweight or at risk of becoming overweight. Act 1220 requires each school district in Arkansas to convene a Nutrition and Physical Activity Advisory Committee by 2004 that includes members from school district governing boards, school administrators, food service personnel, teacher organizations, parents, students and professional groups from the community. Federal legislation was passed in 2004 requiring all school districts with a federally funded school meal program to establish a committee by 2006 to evaluate nutrition and physical education policies and to promote best practices. The LRSD Nutrition Physical Activity Advisory Committee (NPAAC) is charged to:  Annually assist schools in the assessment of each school campus utilizing the School Health index. Outcomes of this assessment will be incorporated into the school improvement plan.  Review and make recommendations to the local school board regarding all food and beverage contracts.  Maintain a list of non-food and healthy food alternatives for fundraisers.  Monitor in-service education for food service staff. RATIONALE: To support compliance with Act 1220, the NPAAC met monthly since August 2004 and put forward recommendations to promote the health of our students. When children's health, nutrition and exercise needs are met, they have the cognitive energy to learn and achieve. Sound nutrition and adequate physical activity are linked to academic achievement, self-esteem, mental health and school attendance - all leading to stronger .., :r m c: ~! z z\nD ,m...m~ (') C: ~ ~ ~~ m CJ) student performance. The LRSD Nutrition Physical Activity Advisory Committee is committed to creating health-promoting schools that support sound nutrition, physical activity and high academic achievement. We strongly support/endorse these recommendations and consider this the beginning of a long process. FUNDING: Funding is needed to meet the recommendations related to improving physical activity for elementary students in the following areas: 1. 2. Personnel FTE Salary - Certified Physical Education Teachers with Fringes 5 @ Total Staff Training Physical Education Aides (25@ 12 hours ea@ $13/hr ea) Child Nutrition Assistants (190@ 12 hours ea)@ 11/hr ea) $ $ Cost 50,000 250,000 3,900 $ 25,080 Legislation, from 2005, states all aides \u0026amp; assistants must have 12 hours of Staff Development annually. 3. Physical Education Curriculum (SPARK Curriculum) Sport, Play and Active Recreation for Kids Cost Curriculum Binders, K-2 \u0026amp; 3-5 Equipment Staff Development Total Grand Total $ 5,759 2,000 - 4,211 x 32 schools 5,198 $145,717.00 $424,697 Recommendations from NPAAC I. Fundraising Projects and Student Rewards Subcommittee 1. 2005-06 Fundraising projects, will achieve at least a 50/50 balance of healthy and less-healthy offerings. For single item fundraising sales, the sales Item must be healthy, for sales of multiple items, (e.g., sales from catalogs offering various products), at least 50% of the items must be either healthy items or non-food items. 2. Each secondary school shall appoint a staff person to monitor fundraisers by all school-related organizations or groups to ensure compliance with established guidelines. 3. Little Rock School District shall designate a representative to serve as a resource for schools in planning and coordinating fundraising activities and to serve as a liaison between the district and vendors to keep them informed of Little Rock School District policies related to fundraisers. 4. All schools are encouraged to sponsor fundraisers that promote physical activity. 5. For ongoing school \"activity fund\" sales, standard definitions, as published by the State Child Health Advisory Committee, for healthy concession stand items and serving sizes are consistent with those used for Little Rock School District vending machines and concession stands. (Table 1) 6. Unhealthy food and beverage items are not to be used as rewards in the classroom or school. The NPAAC will provide updated lists, to schools, annually of approved healthy food rewards\nplan and conduct a series of school-based inservice meetings for school staff, PT A groups, campus leadership teams and other groups on appropriate alternatives to unhealthy beverage/food rewards. II. Nutrition Subcommittee A. Allowable Foods and Portion Sizes 1. At the elementary level, only extra milk (flavored, 1 % or skim milk), 100% juice and water will be sold a la carte. The maximum size will be 8 ounces. A single purchase will be limited to only two of each 4 oz. item. 2. At the middle school level, only extra milk (flavored, 1%, or skim milk), water (fluoridated, caloric sweetener \u0026lt;10 calories), 100% juice and a whole fruit will be sold a la carte. A single purchase will be limited to one of each item. Vended a la carte items will be limited to 100% juices, flavored and unflavored waters and milk. The maximum size will be 12 ounces. 3. High School - A la carte items will include foods that meet the standards for all foods served as a part of a reimbursable meal. Other snack items shall meet the standard and portion size of Table 1 from the Child Health Advisory Committee and Company Vending Guidelines. A single purchase will be limited to one of each item. B. Menu Planning 1. Annually, Child Nutrition will conduct a written survey in selected elementary and secondary schools to solicit suggested menu items for the coming school year. The surveys will be compiled and evaluated for inclusion in the menu planning cycle. 2. The LRSD Child Nutrition Advisory Council will create a forum for receipt of recommendations for menu changes from parents and others through the P.T.A. Council. It is also recommended that parents be surveyed to provide suggested menu items during pre-school registration. The results and analysis of the surveys and recommendations will be submitted to CN for evaluation and inclusion in the menu planning cycle. C. Nutrition Education Nutrition education will be incorporated into the overall curriculum as well as in Health and Science programs in grades K - 6. Wellness and nutrition education should be integrated into the one semester required health course offered in grades 9 - 12 and in other related courses. D. Professional Development for Child Nutrition Professionals 1. The director will be responsible for providing a minimum of twelve hours of annual training to CN assistants, as recommended by the State Child Health Advisory Committee. A record documenting the required in-service training shall be maintained by the CN Director. 2. Each school manager will be required to provide a 30-minute in-service each month. Child Nutrition assistants will be paid their regular hourly rate. Ill. Physical Activity Subcommittee A. Certified Physical Education Teachers There are currently nine certified elementary physical education teachers in the Little Rock School District. To achieve compliance with ADE guidelines it is recommended that: 1. The LRSD incrementally increase the number of certified PE teachers, at the elementary level, based on the following schedule: School Year NewFTE Total Certified FTE 2005-06 5 14 2006-07 5 19 2007-08 5 24 2008-09 5 29 2009-10 3 32 B. Staff Development Provide required training for all paraprofessionals and volunteers who serve as PE teachers. Currently there are 25 paraprofessionals teaching Physical Education under the direction of the classroom teacher. C. Standardized Physical Education Curricula The Little Rock School District will adopt a standard PE curriculum for each organizational level beginning with the elementary level in the 2006-07 school year and the middle and high school levels in the 2007-08 school year. D. Form Multi-disciplinary Community Partnership Addressing and correcting problems related to physical inactivity cannot be limited to the regular school day. We recommend that the district establish a multi-disciplinary community partnership to develop a public awareness campaign that promotes physical activity as a part of family life extending beyond the school day by the beginning of the 2006-07 school year. This campaign would include informing parents of the importance of physical activity after school hours and establishing after school physical activity programs (in addition to athletics) in partnership with neighborhood organizations and groups. E. StudentfTeacher Ratio The student I teacher ratio for PE classes will be consistent as for other academic classes. F. Access to Activity All students are entitled to PE and recess. It is recommended that physical education and recess not be withheld or used as punishment. IV. Vending Subcommittee A. Vending Food \u0026amp; Beverage Sales For all food and beverages sold / vended via machines, school stores and concessions shall follow the recommendations of Act 1220 Child Health Advisory Committee (CHAC) with implementation of all recommendations starting in school year 2005-06: Nutrition Standards for Competitive Food follow allowable Foods and Portion Sizes in Table 1, with the following exceptions: i) Low-fat Milk will follow the FDA Food Labeling regulations and refer to 1 % and fat-free only. ii) Food/snack vending: ~35% of total calories from fat,~ 10% of calories from saturated and trans fat combined and ~ 35% of total weight from added sugar (if added sugar not on label use total sugar). B. Beverage Vending \u0026amp; Concession Contracts 1. In 2005-06, a 50/50 product mix in student accessible machines progressing to 75/25 in 2006-07 and reaching 100% healthy choices by 2007-08 school year. 2. 50/50 product mix for the athletic department, administration facilities and teacher lounges so as to be the same as in other District facilities. 3. 50/50 Product mix for after-hour concessions with the recommendation that individual schools consider moving to 100%. 4. Concessions and other fundraisers may sell bottled water with school name and/or mascot on the label. 5. Beverage container size limited to 12 oz. except water, which may be larger. 6. Sports beverages will be restricted to the immediate area of physical education facilities. 7. Student to beverage machine ratio will be flexible based on the discretion of the building principal (most of the principals and students at our presentations thought the 1 to 100 ratio was too much but would like some flexibility if their physical plant campus expanded). 8. All beverages sold in vending machines and concessions be priced equally so that cost is not an influence on student purchases. Recommendation We request Board approval to implement all no-cost recommendations provided by the Nutrition and Physical Advisory Committee for the 2005-06 school year. We further recommend that items requiring funding be considered for implementation as the Board reviews the budget anc\nl allocation of resources for the 2005-06 school year. Phase in of recommendations requiring additional personnel will be considered on a case-by-case basis and will require additional consideration by the administration and the Board of Directors. PREPARED BY: Margo Bushmiaer, Coordinator of Health Services, NPAAC Co-Chair Jo Evelyn Elston, Director of Pupil Services, NPAAC Member Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent Table 1. Elementary/Middle/Junior/Senior High School Allowable Competitive Foods - Maximum Portion Size List Competitive Food or Beverage Chips (regular) Chips (baked or no more than 7.5 grams of fat per ounce), crackers, popcorn, cereal, trail mix, nuts, seeds, dried fruit, ierkv. pretzels Cookies Cereal bars Bakery items (e.g., pastries, muffins, doughnuts) excluding items that count as two-bread components served/sold onJy at breakfast. i Frozen desserts, ice cream(no L___more than l O grams of fat) I r I Whole milk, flavored or unflavored Low-fat milk (2% or less) , flavored or unflavored Fruit Juices or blends of jui-:cs with 100% iuice Sweetened non-carbonated beverages(:S15g sugar/serving) Carbonated beverages (:S 15g sugar/serving) Fruit snacks fortified with vitamin C ~ I Water- non-carbonated, L unflavored Prepared, Ready-to-Serve Maximum Portion Size 1.25 ounces 1.5 ounces 1.5 ounces 2.5 ounces 3 ounces - - 4 ounces --- 8 ounces 8 ounces 16 ounces 12 ounces --  12 ounces 12 ounces 2.5 ounces Unlimited 7 i ~ . ne \"D\n:c\n:c\n:c l!!n Oere  e\n:c~ iri II\" f!!z -~\u0026lt;. ,!.!.l \"D ::c me\n:c~ ~z z::c mm r~ ne i\n~ Zm ~en en NAME Bushmiaer, Margo Co-Chair Wheeler, Gary Dr. Co-Chair NUTRITION McCoy, Morlin, Co-Chair Borne', Eliza Burton, Marvin Cherepski, Stevie Davenport, Christy Dudley, Joan Milam, Debbie PHYSICAL ACTIVITY Scogin, Annette, Co-Chair Lincoln, Lynn, Co-Chair Brown,Sandra,RN Elston, Jo Evelyn McDaniel, Veronica Hickman, Natasha, RN Tollette, Binky Weber, Judy PhD FUND RAISING \u0026amp; AW ARDS Barksdale, Diane, Co-Chair Cox, Dana PhD, RD Co-Chair Smith, Paula Walker Hynes, Stephanie LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 2004-2005 Nutrition Physical Activity Advisory Subcommittee Members Lists REPRESENTING PHONE Coordinator, Health Services 447-7482 UAMS, ACH \u0026amp; Parent, Central Hiw 364-1416 Director, Child Nutrition 447-2450 12th Grade Student, Central 664-2626 Principal, Henderson 447-2800 Nurse, King Magnet 447-5105 ADH, Central Region 280-4950 Parent, Forest Park Elem. 663-4602 Director, VIPS 447-2967 Assistant Director, Athletics 447-2063 ADH, Pulaski County Central Health Unit 280-3369 Baptist Health - Community Outreach 202-1961 Director, Pupil Services 447-7490 ADH, SW Unit 565-9311 ADH \u0026amp; Parent, Central 280-4957 Pfeifer Camp 821-3714 UAMS, ACH \u0026amp; Parent, Terry Elem \u0026amp; Dunbar M.S. 364-3382 Principal, Carver 447-4000 Parent, Williams Magnet Elem. 614-4355 Parent, Williams Magnet Elem. 223-8332 Administrative Supervisor, Child Nutrition 447-2468 June I, 2005 EMAIL ADDRESS margo. bushmiaerra)lrsd. orn wheelerva.rv\u0026lt;@uams.edu morlin.mccov1mlrsd.orn: eborne1msbc11:lobal.net marvin. burtonra)lrsd.org stevanna.cherenskira)lrsd.org cdavenoortra)healthvarkansas.com erikora)aristotle.net debra.milamra)lrsd.org annette.scoginra)lrsd.org llincolnra)healthvarkansas.com sandrabra)baotist-health.org io.elston(a)lrsd.orn vdawsonlmhealthvarkansas.com nhickmanlmhealthvarkansas.com binkvra)ofeifercamo.com weberiudithlra)uams.edu marv.barksdalera)lrsd.orn danacox97 ra)sbcglobal.net ovsmithra)arkansas.net Steohanie.walker.hvnra)lrsd.org VENDING Blaine, Barbara, Co-Chair Counselor, W estem Hills 447-6900 Gamer, Carole RD, Co-Chair UAMS, College of Public Health 526-6606 Buck, Larry Principal, McClellan High 447-2100 Edgerson, Pat Parent, Forest Heights Middle \u0026amp; Central High 686-7981 Hendrix, Julie UALR/ Children International / Health Services \u0026amp; Parent, PHMS 663-5541 Lacey, Marian Dr. Administration, Asst. Superintendent, Secondary 447-1000 Montgomery, Darrel L. Hometown Health Improvement Leader, ADH 280-4963 Wheeler, Gary Dr. Co-Chair UAMS, ACH \u0026amp; Parent, Central High 364-1416 BYLAWS Bushmiaer, Margo - Chair Coordinator, Health Services 447-7482 Hill, Martha P~ent, Forest Park 282-0202 831-3864 Walker Hynes, Stephanie Administrative Supervisor, Child Nutrition 447-2468 Oll:l313100H:\u0026gt;S MO:1130008 11 S3:\u0026gt;l,\\M3S SS3HIS08 xi S30H\\/H:l13HHOSM3d 11 S3:\u0026gt;MOOS3M NVl'IOH 11111 91KOOl \\/OH30\\/ HOll\\/01\\/i\\3 9 'O A 1M31M\\/00/3Md \"\\/ 'llSHI Y wn,n:\u0026gt;IMMn:\u0026gt; 1111 barbara.blaineln'llrsd.orn: GamerCaroleBr@uams.edu Larrv. buckr@lrsd.org oedgersonr@uams.edu JMHENDRIXr@ualr.edu rnarian.lacevr@lrsd.om dmontgomen:(a),healthxarkansas.com wheelernarvr@uams.edu margo.bushmiaerr@lrsd.org j frenchhill(a),aristotle.net Stenhanie. walker.h vn ln'l lrsd.org 1H3Wd013i\\30 S31ll11:\u0026gt;\\/:1 v:1 A:\u0026gt;111od :oHIO\\t3M u~ a DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 June 23, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Quarterly Update Report BACKGROUND: The third quarterly written update (June 1) by the Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) Department was completed in accordance with the District Court's 2004 Compliance Remedy (Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004, pp. 61-67). This report includes descriptions of research activities related to four step-2 evaluations currently being conducted by Ors. Steven Ross and James Catterall, and lists four proposed step- 2 evaluations to be completed by these researchers next school year. Dr. Ross' team has completed nearly all its observations of classes and its surveys of principals, teachers, students, and parents participating in Compasslearning, Reading Recovery, and SMART/THRIVE. Dr. Catterall is conducting interviews and surveys for the evaluation of Year-Round (Extended-Year) Education. Joshua and ODM along with other stakeholders took part in planning discussions for these evaluations. RATIONALE: The Court's remedy requires PRE to perform 8 \"step-2\" evaluations during this and next school years. FUNDING: Not Necessary RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board accept the Quarterly Update Report. DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 June 23, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: 2005-2006 Evaluation Agenda BACKGROUND: LRSD policy requires an annual Evaluation Agenda proposed to the Board of Directors outlining external evaluation activities with projected costs. During 2004-2005 PRE has engaged two outside consultants to evaluate four District programs. The 2005-2006 Evaluation Agenda consists of five external evaluations:  4 \"Step-2\" program evaluations mandated by Judge Wilson in 2004, and  1 non-mandated evaluation recommended by the PRE department RATIONALE: LRSD is complying with U. S. District Court's 2004 Compliance Remedy (Memorandum Opinion of June 30, 2004, pp. 61-67) to \"devise a comprehensive program assessment process\" which \"must be deeply embedded as a permanent part of LRSD's curriculum and instruction program.\" In December 2004, the Board of Directors approved this process. It provides for a range of educational program evaluations with respect to their scientific rigor and complexity, and it requires participation by LRSD stakeholders in the design and execution of evaluations. In the same Opinion, the Court ordered, \"During each of the next two academic school years (2004-05 and 2005-06), LRSD must hire one or more outside consultants to prepare four (4) formal step 2 evaluations.\" By \"step 2\" the court meant for evaluations to delve into underlying reasons for outcomes. The primary outcome that the Court directed the District to examine is the academic achievement of African-American students. The Opinion also instructs the PRE Department to cooperate with the outside consultants and encourages it to evaluate additional District programs. Court-Mandated Evaluations for 2005-2006: For step 2 evaluations in 2005-2006, Dr. Ross has identified four 2.7 programs, named on the following page. fl\n:c m ~ r .C...:. lz5 !='\n:c m D _mC: ztn n-t\n:c-., ~ l6 m 31: .~., ~ m .., :r me: ~~ z z\n:c mm r~ (\") C: ~~ 25 rn m tn 1. Arkansas A+ Schools Network, at Woodruff Elementary School, incorporates the arts in teaching language and mathematics. Projected Cost: $30,000 2. KnowledgePoints is a Supplemental Educational Service (SES) selected at Bale, Brady, Chicot, Wakefield, and Watson Elementary Schools and offered there as an after-school program. Projected Cost: $30,000 3. 21 st Century Learning Centers offer a broad array of out-of-school support services, programs, and activities designed to help students meet academic standards and to increase student achievement. Projected Cost: $30,000 4. Pre-kindergarten (PreK) literacy development will be evaluated in the 31 schools with classes for 4-year-old children. These young students participate in developmentally appropriate and fun lessons and activities intended to nurture essential language skills. Projected Cost: $50,000 Dr. Catterall will evaluate Arkansas A+, while Dr. Ross will evaluate KnowledgePoints, 21 st Century Learning Centers, and PreK literacy. Data for schools where these programs operated this year (2004-2005) are in the tables below. Additional schools may participate next year, particularly schools chosen per the school choice option of No Child Left Behind regulations. Schools in these tables which are on the Arkansas School Improvement List are so noted by an asterisk(*). Proposed Programs Evaluations 2005-2006 2004-2005 School Data Percent Percent of Number Number of Students Schools of of Students Eligible for Teachers Students African- Free/Reduced American Lunch A+ Woodruff* 21 235 91 86 Knowledge Points Bale* 27 319 82 86 Brady* 28 318 78 80 Chicot* 44 536 73 86 Wakefield* 29 451 78 92 Watson* 34 456 96 93 .21 st Century Community Learning Centers Mabelvale Middle* 57 634 81 75 McClellan* 75 925 92 56 Henderson* 60 630 82 70 Hall* 105 1464 75 52 *These schools are designated for School Improvement. LRSD Schools Offering PreK Classes for !%' Four-Year-Old Students .\u0026gt;., ~\" No. of No. of Max. Enroll- No. of Per cent ~~ School Teachers Aides Students ment AA! AA mz en Cl Bale* 2 1 40 38 32 84.2 o  ~c3 Baseline* 2 1 40 39 32 82.1 6~ Brady* 2 1 40 37 27 73.0 \"D c\"i 31:-\u0026lt; m.., Carver 1 0 20 20 NAt NA .z... \u0026gt; Chicot* 4 2 80 59 46 78.0 Cloverdale* 2 1 40 40 32 80.0 Dodd 2 1 40 36 22 61.1 Fair Park*0 2 1 40 37 28 75.7 Forest Park 2 1 40 40 2 5.0 Franklin* 3 2 60 55 52 94.5 fl :,:, Fulbright 2 1 40 40 8 20.0 m ~ Geyer Springs 2 1 40 36 35 97.2 r- c..:.:. Jefferson 2 1 40 40 5 12.5 l5 z M. L. King* 4 2 60 80 46 57.5\n::: Mabelvale 2 1 40 38 31 81.6 ~ (J) z McDermott 2 1 40 40 27 67.5 \"' Meadowcliff 2 1 40 40 35 87.5 Otter Creek 2 1 40 39 22 56.4 Pulaski Heights 1 0 20 20 6 30.0 !=' Rightsell 1 1 40 38 38 100.0 ill 0 Rockefeller* 2 1 40 39 24 61.5 c:: _m zcn Romine 2 1 40 39 31 79.5 n-\u0026lt; ~~ Stephens* 4 2 80 78 72 92.3 en:,:, m!I: Terry 2 1 40 35 18 51 .4 ~ Wakefield* 2 1 40 39 29 74.4 r- \"D :,:, Washington* 4 2 80 75 67 89.3 c\"i m Watson* 2 1 40 36 34 94.4 Western Hills 1 0 20 37 20 54.1 Wilson* 1 0 20 18 16 88.9 Woodruff* 2 0 40 36 32 88.9 .\u0026gt; ~,... t AA is \"African American\". NA is \"not available\". \"D % me: :,:,5': * These schools are designated for School Improvement. ~z z 0 In the 2005-2006 school year, Fair Park Elementary converts to a preK center with eight or z:,:, mm more classes\nwhile the other elementary schools keep their current preK capacity. r- ~ nc:: ~ ~ Zm ~(J) (J) Non-mandated Evaluations: In addition to four court-mandated studies, PRE recommends a fifth external evaluation that will focus on Magnet Schools and Schools with Specialty Magnet Programs. Projected Cost: $60,000 The proposed Magnet School evaluation includes the study and evaluation of 18 magnet schools and specialty magnet programs within the Little Rock School District -- six Stipulated Magnet Schools, four Magnet Schools Assistance Program (MSAP) Schools and eight Specialty Magnet Programs. Stipulated Magnet Schools and Themes - 2004-2005 Schools in this table which are designated for School Improvement are so noted by an asterisk (*). Percent of Percent of School Magnet School Students Eligible Students Theme African-American Free/Reduced Lunch1 Elementary Schools Booker Arts Magnet 53 63 Carver Basic Skills/Math-Science 52 53 International Studies/ 53 44 Gibbs Foreign Languages Williams Traditional Ma~inet 52 34 Middle Schools Mann Arts and Science 52 37 High Schools Parkview Arts and Science 51 22 Magnet Schools Assistance Program Schools and Themes - 2004-20052 Schools in this table which are desiqnated for School Improvement are so noted by an asterisk (*). School Percent of Percent of Magnet School Students Eligible Students Theme African-American Free/Reduced Lunch3 Middle Schools Cloverdale  Engineering, Multimedia \u0026amp; Economics 8.2 86 Mabelvale  Medical Studies, Environmental Science and 81 75 1 Per cent of students who are eligible for the federal free or reduced-price meals program is a crude indicator of family economic circumstances. 2 2004-2005 was the fourth and last year of MSAP funding for these four schools 3 Per cent of students who are eligible for the federal free or reduced-price meals program is a crude indicator of family economic circumstances. Information Technoloav High Schools J.A. Fair* Science and technology Systems 85 54 McClellan* Engineering, Multimedia and Business Finance 92 56 Special Magnet Program4 Themes - 2004-2005 Schools in this table which are desianated for School Improvement are so noted by an asterisk (*). Percent of Percent of School Magnet School Students Eligible Students Theme African-American Free/Reduced Lunch5 Elementary Schools International, High King Intensity Learning 60 55 Rockefeller Early Childhood 67 66 Computer Science and Romine Basic Skills (lnterdistrict) 76 76 Washington * Basic Skills Math-Science 76 80 MaQnet (lnterdistrict) Middle Schools Dunbar * Gifted and Talented, 61 57 International Studies Henderson * Health Science 82 70 HiQh Schools Central International Studies 51 28 Hall* University Studies 75 52 4 These Specialty Programs are special programs which these schools offer. 5 Per cent of students who are eligible for the federal free or reduced-price meals program is a crude indicator of family economic circumstances. ~\na m ~ r. e...:. z~ -0 :r m c: ~~ zz\na mm r- ~ C') C: :r\na \u0026gt;n Zm ~ en en All five external evaluations will seek to answer the following Primary Evaluation Question: Have the Programs been effective in improving students' academic achievement? How effective have they been among African-American students? To ensure that a full range of quantitative and qualitative data is collected, the evaluators will use a variety of data collection tools and activities. They are:  classroom observations and protocols  surveys of parents, teachers, and students  interviews of students, administrators, parents, teachers  focus groups  student work portfolios  district data, e.g., demographic data, standardized test scores  site- and district-generated program documents The evaluators will be required to adhere to Professional Standards for Program Evaluation and to provide a complete list of standards used. FUNDING: Total projected costs for five studies: $200,000 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board will approve the 2005-2006 Evaluation Agenda. DATE: TO: June 23, 2005 Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Personnel Changes BACKGROUND: None RATIONALE: To staff allocated positions within the District FUNDING: Operating Fund RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.CA 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) consecutive years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 19, 2004 for regular schools are considered intern teachers. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 9, 2004 for EYE are considered intern teachers. PREPARED BY: Beverly William~1nior Director of Human Resources !=' ~ 0 _mC: z en n--\u0026lt;\nJD\"T1 ~ ~ m !C ~\ng n m r,, n 0 z en C: ~ z Cl ~ ~ IT' 31: rr Personnel Changes Page 2 June 23, 2005 NAME START DATE/ POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE Resignations/Terminations Certified Employees Agnew, April Tutor/ 1-3-05 Reason: Contract ended WILSON 6-6-05 Akdamar, Lynn Elementary IV/ 1-18-05 Reason: Contract ended WAKEFIELD 6-6-05 Anders, Mika Writing/ 9-29-03 Reason: Contract ended MCCLELLAN 6-6-05 Austin, Lori Speech Pathology/ 1-18-05 Reason: Contract ended MABEL VALE 6-29-05 ELEMENTARY Austin, Robert Chemistry/ 11-08-04 Reason: Contract ended MCCLELLAN 6-6-05 Baker, Deborah Reading Recovery/ 9-13-04 Reason: Contract ended STEPHENS 6-29-05 Balmaz, Bettye Elementary II/ 9-9-04 Reason: Contract ended BOOKER 6-6-05 Banks, Cal American History/ 1-23-89 Reason: Contract ended MABELVALE MIDDLE 6-6-05 Beard, Willliam Social Studies/ 9-1-04 Reason: Contract ended MCCLELLAN 6-6-05 Bedell, Lisette Elementary V/ 8-11 -04 Reason: Returning to school WILSON 7-31-05 Boyd, Debbye General Science/ 9-14-04 Reason: Contract ended ADULT EDUCATION 6-6-05 Branch, Samuel Principal/ 7-26-93 Reason: Retired FAIR PARK 6-13-05 Brown, Lori Elementary V/ 1-3-05 Reason: Contract ended FRANKLIN 6-6-05 Brown, Stephen Special Education/ 8-30-04 Reason: Contract ended MABEL VALE 6-29-05 ELEMENTARY SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 1-01 30040.00 TCH925 1-01 30040.00 TCH925 3-06 37665.00 TCH925 62-06 42576.00 SPE925 4-10 43818.00 TCH925 2-07 37318.00 TCH925 5-20 57276.00 TCH925 1-05 33506.00 TCH925 5-01 36134.00 TCH925 1-05 33506.00 TCH925 2-16 477 17.00 TCH925 69-20 79692.00 ADC11X 4-13 47284.00 TCH925 4-01 34575.00 SPE925 Personnel Changes Page 3 June 23, 2005 !:D ~ \"T1 M ,. ~ START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL ~~ NAME POSITION / SCHOOL CLASS SALARY mz END DATE \"o'C'l ~~ 5r- Brown, Verlyn Tutor/ 8-11-04 1-10 39283.00 ~l\"i !:: -\u0026lt; Reason: Grantended FAIR PARK 6-6-05 TCH925 ~ .... Broyles, Tommy Examiner/ 10-25-04 61-15 54060.00 Reason: Contract ended HENDERSON 6-6-05 ADC105 Bryant, Sharon Title I/ 8-21-89 6-16 53898.00 Reason: Contract ended HENDERSON 6-6-05 TCH925 r\u0026gt;\na m Buck, Virginia Elementary Ill/ 1-23-89 3-18 51874.00 ~ r- C: Reason: Retired CARVER 6-6-05 TCH925 .... ~ ::: Burleson, Kimberly Elementary I/ 3-8-05 4-08 41507.00 ~ U\u0026gt; Reason: Contract ended MCDERMOTT 6-6-05 TCH925 z \"' Butcher, Angee Elementary Ill/ 1-3-05 4-18 53061 .00 Reason: Contract ended CLOVERDALE 6-29-05 TCH925 !=' ELEMENTARY ~ 0 C: _m Cain, Mary Elementary II/ 8-23-04 1-08 32350.00 ZU\u0026gt; n-\u0026lt; Reason: Contract ended WAKEFIELD 6-6-05 TCH925\na.., ~o \"'\na m!:: Caruth, Phyllis Mathematics/ 8-23-76 6-21 60020.00 ~ ~ Reason: Contract ended IRC 6-6-05 TCH10\na l\"i m Crader, Jason Tutor/ 2-14-05 1-01 30040 00 Reason: Contract ended BALE 6-6-05 TCH925 Crosby, Anne Speech Pathology/ 9-15-76 62-20 64668.00 Reason: Retired SOUTHWEST/ 6-6-05 SPE925 !'\" MCDERMOTT (') 0z U\u0026gt; C: Davis, Marjorie Math Coach/ 10-25-04 4-13 47284 00 !:\nz Reason: Contract ended CLOVERDALE 6-6-05 TCH925 ,C.'l MIDDLE C'l\na ~ ~ rr Debow, Bradley Instrumental Music/ 2-7-05 4-05 38041.00 Reason: Contract ended PARKVIEW 6-6-05 TCH925 '?\" Fakouri, Cathy Social Studies/ 8-12-99 4-19 54561.00 Ill Reason: Retired PULASKI HEIGHTS 6-6-05 TCH925 C: \u0026gt;\u0026lt; 8 MIDDLE m Ill .... C: -.,!!! oz\nam Farrar, Neoma Elementary II/ 1-18-05 1-01 30040.00 !1:1:l :c U\u0026gt; Reason: Contract ended CHICOT 6-6-05 TCH925 ~i mm i\n\"' !:'.l ~ Personnel Changes Page4 June 23, 2005 NAME Fikes, Leslie Reason: Leaving the city Francis, Deanna Reason: Personal Gault, Amy Reason: Contract ended Hamilton, Claudia Reason: Retired Hammond, Terri Reason: Retired Harrison, Brenda Reason: Contract ended Henry, Lauren Reason: Contract ended Hill, Dorothy Reason: Contract ended Holloman, Berlinda Reason: Contract ended Holmes, Jane Reason: Leaving the city Hooper, Ruth Reason: Contract ended Howse, Marion Reason: Contract ended Howard-Klein, Risie Reason: Contract ended Hudgens, Donna Reason: Leaving the city Hughes, Alicia Reason: Contract ended POSITION/ SCHOOL Elementary Ill/ ROMINE 4 Yr Old/ ROCKEFELLER Special Education/ STEPHENS Specialist/ CARVER Elementary V/ JEFFERSON Special Education/ WILSON Kindergarten/ CARVER Elementary II/ MEADOWCLIFF Elementary I/ BOOKER Elementary V/ WILLIAMS Music/ TERRY/FULBRIGHT Guidance Counselor/ VOCATIONAL EDUCATION Biology/ CENTRAL Kindergarten/ MABEL VALE ELEMENTARY Elementary IV/ CHICOT START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL END DATE CLASS SALARY 8-11-04 1-08 36972.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-1-01 2-06 36163.00 6-6-05 TCH925 1-24-05 4-14 48439.00 6-29-05 SPE925 8-20-79 4-19 54561 .00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-24-87 6-21 60020.00 6-6-05 TCH925 9-2-04 2-16 47717.00 6-6-05 SPE925 10-4-04 1-01 30040.00 6-6-05 TCH925 10-4-05 4-18 53061 .00 6-6-05 TCH925 2-15-05 1-09 38127.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-11 -04 1-01 30040.00 6-8-05 TCH925 11 -10-04 2-16 47717.00 6-6-05 TCH925 9-9-03 6-21 60020.00 6-16-04 TCH950 8-18-05 4-09 42662.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-24-87 4-19 54561 .00 6-30-05 K925 10-6-04 1-09 38127 .00 6-6-05 TCH925 Personnel Changes Page 5 June 23, 2005 ?' - \"Tl M \u0026gt; ~ START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL ~~ NAME POSITION / SCHOOL CLASS SALARY mz END DATE en C'\u0026gt; c ~~ Hunt, Marietta Music/ 8-29-88 4-19 ........ 54561.00 or\n\"ti-\u0026lt; Reason: Retired FOREST PARK 6-6-05 TCH925 1:..., !::1\u0026gt; -t Jackson, Marion Kindergarten/ 11-20-74 1-17 47715.00 Reason: Retired ROMINE 6-6-05 K925 Joiner-Tatum, Anna Assistant Principal/ 8-3-87 64-20 68652.00 Reason: Retired TERRY 6-13-05 TCH925 f)\n,c m Jones, Frances Assistant 8-24-87 79-20 107424.00 ~.... Reason: Retired Superintendent/ 6-30-05 ADC12 C: -t i5 SCHOOL SERVICES z\n:: ~ Jones, Freddie Arkansas History/ 8-27-74 5-20 57276.00 en z Reason: Retired J. A. FAIR 5-27-05 TCH925 \"' Jones, Vance Elementary V/ 8-24-04 1-01 30040.00 Reason: Contract ended DODD 6-6-05 TCH925 p\n,c m 0 C: Kahler, Mary Lou Assistant Principal/ 8-24-87 64-20 68652.00 _m zen n-\u0026lt; Reason : Retired KING 6-13-05 ADC105\nJC\"TI ~o en\n,c ml: Key, Shawn Spanish I/ 1-18-05 4-05 39196.00 ~ Reason: Contract ended J. A. FAIR 6-6-05 TCH925\n\",tci n m King , Patricia Elementary I/ 11-30-87 2-17 49217.00 Reason: Retired ROMINE 6-6-05 TCH925 Lawrence, Ryan Spanish I/ 8-11-04 1-01 30040.00 Reason None Given MCCLELLAN 6-6-05 TCH925 !\" n 0 Lawson, Karen Art/ 8-31-93 4-11 44973.00 z en C: Reason: Contract ended HALL 6-6-05 TCH925 !::\nz C') \u0026gt; Lloyd, Anna Music/ 10-8-04 1-01 30040.00 C')\n,c Reason: Contract ended DODD 6-6-05 TCH925 m \"ii': \"' Madden, Carrie Kindergarten/ 8-11-04 1-02 30617.00 Reason: Leaving the city WATSON 8-3-05 K925 .,. a, Martinez, Diana Tutor/ 2-7-05 1-01 30040.00 c: x Reason: Contract ended BASELINE 6-6-05 TCH925 8  mm -t C: ...,g? oz McCoy, Morlin Director/ 9-18-95 75-19 92520.00\n,cm ~m Reason: Retired CHILD NUTRITION 6-30-05 ADC12 :r\"' ~~ mm In\"' !:l i5 Personnel Changes Page 6 June 23, 2005 NAME Miller, Monica Reason: None Given Mitchell, Avis Reason: Contract ended Moore, Julianna Reason: Personal Morgan, Keisha Reason: Leaving the city Nauden, Lou Ethel Reason: Retired Nickerson, Vickie Reason: Contract ended Nunez, Teresa Reason: Contract ended Ogren, Kathryn Reason: Contract ended Page, Taranah Reason: Contract ended Parr, Patricia Reason: Contract ended Phillips, Anna Reason: Retired Pinkard, Tawanna Reason: Contract ended Relford, Melvia Reason: Contract ended Rhines, Mico Reason: None Given Richardson , Joyce Reason: Contract ended POSITION/ SCHOOL Health/ HALL Elementary I/ STEPHENS Literacy Coach/ ROMINE Special Education/ MABELVALE MIDDLE Elementary I/ ROMINE Elementary I/ MCDERMOTT Mathematics/ HALL 4 Yr Old/ ROMINE Elementary V/ ROMINE Librarian/ STEPHENS Gifted and Talented/ ROMINE Mathematics/ HENDERSON Special Education/ CENTRAL Elementary II/ BOOKER Special Education/ HALL START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL END DATE CLASS SALARY 8-14-97 4-07 40351 .00 6-16-05 TCH10 8-23-04 1-01 30040.00 6-29-05 TCH925 8-20-93 4-12 46128.00 6-6-05 TCH11 2-3-03 2-07 37318.00 5-27-05 SPE925 8-13-01 6-21 60020.00 5-24-05 TCH925 3-25-05 4-18 53061.00 6-6-05 TCH925 4-7-05 4-10 43818.00 6-6-05 TCH925 10-08-04 1-01 30040.00 6-6-05 4YR925 9-27-04 1-02 30617.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-23-04 4-18 53061 .00 6-29-05 LIB950 8-24-87 6-21 60020.00 6-6-05 G\u0026amp;T925 2-3-97 1-01 30040.00 6-6-05 TCH925 1-18-05 1-05 33506.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-14-95 2-11 41940.00 6-6-05 TCH925 2-22-05 1-16 46215.00 6-6-05 SPE925 Personnel Changes Page 7 June 23, 2005 !ll .., ~.. \u0026gt; ~ START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL ~~ NAME POSITION / SCHOOL CLASS SALARY mz END DATE o\"'C'l ~\ng Ridley, Ronnie Physical Science/ 8-13-01 6-04 40034.00 5~ ~\u0026lt;\"5 :E:-\u0026lt; Reason: None Given CENTRAL 6-6-05 TCH925 m\"\" .z... \u0026gt; Rodgers, Annette 4 Yr Old/ 9-22-80 4-19 54561 .00 Reason: Retired WASHINGTON 6-6-05 4YR925 Robertson, Martha Elementary II/ 8-27-84 3-18 51874.00 Reason: Retired WESTERN HILLS 6-6-05 TCH925 f')\no m Rybard, Aleta English/ 8-16-93 1-04 32350.00 ~ r- Reason: Contract ended HENDERSON 6-6-05 TCH925 C....:. i5 ~ Sandel, Cathryn Gifted and Talented/ 1-10-05 4-03 35730.00 r- ~ Reason: Contract ended ROCKEFELLER 6-6-05 G\u0026amp;T925 \"' z r:, Scheffer, Casey Elementary Ill/ 8-25-04 1-01 30040.00 Reason: Contract ended CARVER 6-6-05 TCH925 !='\no m Signaigo, Katherine Tutor/ 2-10-05 1-01 30040.00 0 C: Reason: Contract ended BALE 6-6-05 TCH925 _m Z\u0026lt;I\u0026gt; o-t\n,o-., ~o Slater, Carolyn Physical Education/ 8-25-69 4-19 54561.00 \"'' Reason: Retired HENDERSON 6-6-05 TCH925 m! r- ~ ~ Smith, Donald Journalism/ 8-19-92 1-03 31195.00 m Reason: Contract ended MCCLELLAN 6-16-05 TCH10 Smith, Elizabeth Music/ 8-16-93 1-17 47715.00 Reason: Leaving the city JEFFERSON 6-6-05 TCH925 rn Smith, Tunza ESL/ 1-3-05 1-01 30040.00 (\") 0 Reason: Contract ended CLOVERDALE 6-29-05 TCH925 z \"C': ELEMENTARY !:\nz C'l \u0026gt; Smith, Jr., Vernon Principal/ 8-10-87 76-20 98220.00 C'l\no Reason: Retired HALL 6-30-05 ADC12 m l'T' 3C rr Smith, Zachary Elementary II/ 8-2-04 1-03 31195.00 Reason: Leaving the city MITCHELL 6-29-05 TCH925 .,. a, Spearman, Kara Speech Pathology/ 8-9-00 62-09 46572.00 c: x 8 Reason : Accepted another FULBRIGHT 6-8-05 SPE925 mtll .... C: position -.,!!? oz\nom !Ii gi Spears, Marsha Elementary I/ 1-3-05 1-02 30617 .00 :r\"' Reason: Contract ended CARVER 6-6-05 TCH925 ~~ mm fn\"' !:l i5 Personnel Changes Page 8 June 23, 2005 NAME Stanley, Charles Reason: Accepted another position Stephens, Lisa Reason: Accepted another position Sullivan, Martha Reason: Contract ended Thomas, Homer Reason: Contract ended Todd, Tracye Reason: Accepted another position Turner, Marilyn Reason: Retired Turner, Ressie Reason: Contract ended Walker, Sharon Reason: Contract ended Walls, Alyson Reason: Contract ended West, Talisha Reason: Leaving the city Van Alstyne, Vicki Reason: Contract ended Whitby, Jennie Reason: Contract ended Williams, Beverly Reason: Accepted another position POSITION / SCHOOL Music/ ROMINE Kindergarten/ STEPHENS 4 Yr Old/ RIGHTSELL Social Studies/ ALC English/ FOREST HEIGHTS Elementary Ill/ FAIR PARK English/ ALC Mathematics/ ALC Business Education/ PARKVIEW 4 Yr Old/ FAIR PARK Special Education/ FRANKLIN Kindergarten/ BRADY Senior Director/ HUMAN RESOURCES START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL END DATE CLASS SALARY 8-11-04 1-01 30040.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-1-00 1-09 38127 .00 6-29-05 K925 11-15-04 1-16 46215.00 6-6-05 4YR925 9-9-04 6-13 50432.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-17-02 4-03 35730.00 8-01-05 TCH925 8-23-68 6-21 60020.00 6-6-05 TCH925 11-02-04 2-03 32697.00 6-6-05 TCH925 9-13-04 4-05 38041.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-20-04 1-01 30040.00 6-7-05 TCH925 8-7-03 1-02 30617.00 6-6-05 TCH925 1-3-05 1-10 39283.00 6-6-05 SPE925 2-22-05 1-01 30040.00 6-6-05 K925 7-1-02 79-20 107424.00 6-30-05 ADC12 Personnel Changes Page9 June 23, 2005 !I\" \u0026gt;\"Tl -\"~ START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL ~~ mz CLASS SALARY NAME POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE enc, c ~ i3 New Certified Employees 6~ -.,i\"I ii:-\u0026lt; m..., .z... \u0026gt; NONE Resignations/Terminations Non-Certified Employees Brown, Dewayne Custodian/ 8-23-04 31-01 11379.00 Reason: Accepted another BALE 6-1-05 CUS925 r\u0026gt; \"m' position i..s.. C: Collins, Mabel Child Nutrition/ 8-12-03 1-02 8547 .00 .... i5 Reason: Retired ALC 6-6-05 FSH5 z\n: ~ en Cunningham, Shawntell CARE/ 8-28-00 2-04 8.01 z (Co Reason: Personal CARE 6-3-05 CARE per hour Dangerfield, Mary Child Nutrition/ 9-22-97 3-08 9667.00 !=' Reason: Personal PULASKI HEIGHTS 6-3-05 FSH550 \"' MIDDLE m 0 C: _m zn -etn Hamilton, Ronita CARE/ 9-13-04 1-08 8.05 ,,,..., ~o Reason: None Given CARE 6-3-05 CARE per hour en\n,::, mi Harris, Earnestine Child Nutrition/ 10-7-85 3-17 10077.00 .., \"n' Reason: Retired WASHINGTON 6-6-05 FSH550 m McDonald, Keri Instructional Aide/ 10-13-03 33-17 16595.00 Reason: Leaving the city JEFFERSON 6-7-05 INA925 Mondy, Lisa Security Officer/ 1-2-04 36-11 15929.00 !\"Tl Reason: None Given BALE 6-3-05 SOFR9 n 0 z en C: Moore, Regina Secretary/ 8-10-89 44-20 37788.00 ........ z Reason: Accepted another ESL 6-30-05 CLK12 C) \u0026gt; C) position \"m' rr :i:: Neal, Shellie Child Nutrition/ 10-6-03 3-15 7066.00 rr Reason: Retired WILSON 6-6-05 FSH4 Palmer, Gladys Custodian/ 8-11-03 31-03 12085.00 .,,. tXJ Reason: Job Abandonment CENTRAL 5-13-05 CUS928 C: 5\u0026lt; 8  m Dl .... C: Springer, Pamela Instructional Aide/ 11-27-00 33-11 13875.00 ...,!!! oz\n,::, rn Reason: Returning to school WILLIAMS 6-6-05 INA925 ~~ :z: gi ~~ m,n i\n\"' !:l i5 Personnel Changes Page 10 June 23, 2005 NAME Weeks, Peggy Reason: Retired Walker, Matthew Reason: Job Abandonment Wallace, Robert Reason: Retired Young, Valerie Reason: None Given Allen, Donald Brown, Denise Dalsanto, Judy Griffin, Beverly Hudson, Valerie Seahorn, Lora Spears, Anita Taylor, Blondell START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY Secretary/ 11-28-84 39-20 32544.00 WESTERN HILLS 8-1-05 CLK10 Custodian/ 9-3-03 31-03 12085.00 CENTRAL 5-13-05 CUS928 Maintenance/ 12-14-81 46-18 37788.00 FACILITY SERVICES 6-30-05 MAINT Instructional Aide/ 8-12-99 33-17 16595.00 MCCLELLAN 6-6-05 INA925 New Non-Certified Employees NONE Non-Certified Promotions Promoted from Security Supervisor Grade 55 to Security Supervisor Grade 57 Promoted from File Clerk Grade 43 to Administrative Assistant Grade 46 Promoted from Secretary Grade 42 to Secretary Grade 44 Promoted from Executive Assistant Grade 58 to Senior Executive Assistant Grade 60 Promoted from Coordinator Grade 54 to Executive Assistant Grade 57 Promoted from Secretary Grade 42 to Secretary Grade 44 Promoted from Administrative Assistant Grade 46 to Administrative Assistant Grade 56 Promoted from Secretary Grade 42 to Secretary Grade 46 DATE: TO: June 23, 2005 Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of Principal for Hall High School BACKGROUND: To provide leadership to students and staff of Hall High School. RATIONALE: To fill the position being vacated by Vernon Smith, Jr. FUNDING: District Operating Budget RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Mr. John Bacon, to the position of Principal at Hall High School. Mr. Bacon's resume and a job description are attached for your review. PREPARED BY: Beverly William~nior Director of Human Resources !J:l !=' ~ D _mC zcn n\no- .\u0026lt;., ~~ en\ns:: m~ ~ m JOHN BACON PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 1608 Pine Valley Road Little Rock, AR 72207 (501) 663-6153 Feb 1995-Present Little Rock School District Little Rock, AR Principal, Dunbar Gifted and Talented E duattwn/lntemational Studies Magnet Middk Schoo/, Ou! 2001-Present)  Provide strategic, operational, and instructional leadership for a middle school consisting of grades 6-8 with student enrollment of approximately 800 and an 80 member staff. Ass is tant Principal, Dunbar Gifted and Talented E duattwn/ International Studies Magnet Middk Schoo/, Ou! 1999-Jun 2001) Assistant Principal, Omerdalejunior Hiff\nAcademj0an]un 1999)  Managed student discipline referrals.  CDmpleted employee performance appraisals.  Served as a member of the campus leadership team  CDordinated building transportation and athletic programs. EAST Program Coordinator/Vocational Business Teacher, McClellan Business and TedmdugyMagnet Hirfa Schoo/, (Aug-Dec 1998)  Planned and facilitated the Environmental and Spatial Technology program  Instructed several computer applications courses.  Served as a member of the technology committee. Business Teacher, Pulaski Hei,rfats ]umar Hirfa (Aug 1996-Jun 1998)  Instructed courses in computer technology and career orientation.  Provided leadership for a team of related arts teachers.  Served as a member of the campus steering committee.  Provided assistance as a substitute building administrator. Intern/Long Term Substitute Teacher,]. A. Fair Hirfa Schoo/, OanJun 1996)  Taught courses in keyboarding applications and accounting. Substitute Teacher (Feb-Dec 1995)  Served as a substitute teacher at the secondary level. EDUCATION CERTIFICATION Gm-ently pursuing Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock, AR Graduate hours (21) in education for certification University of Central Arkansas, Conway, AR Master of Education in Secondary Education, May 1996 University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock, AR Master of Business Administration, May 1994 Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA Bachelor of Science in Public Administration, May 1992 University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR (cum laude) Arkansas secondary principal, secondary-bus\"Ine\ns education teacher, vocational endorsement, career orientation endorsement RELATED EXPERIENCES RELATED SKILLS  eru\n.ently sexving as 3rd Vice-President fo~ theLittle Rock PTA Council  Gm-ently setving as Chainnan of the Arkansas Commission for Coordination of Educational Efforts (since 2004)  Sexved as C.0-President of Little Rock School District Principals Roundtable (2003-2004)  Sexved as Assistant Principal for the Accelerated Learning Center 12th Grade Summer School program (summer 2000, summer 2001)  Participated as a teacher in the Little Rock School District Vital Link Program - a summer job shadowing program for sixth grade students (summers 1997, 1998, 1999)  Experienced at class instruction .md supetv1S1on within traditional schedule and flexible/block schedule  Assisted in the decision-making process for converting a junior high school to a middle school  Completed training program on the Fred Jones Model for Effective Oassroom Management r\u0026gt; :c rn .i..s.. .C..:. ~ z PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 May 11 , 2005 PLEASE POST The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year: POSITION: Principal - Hall High School OUALIFICA TIONS: 1. At least five (5) years ' successful teaching experience and/or administration. 2. A master's degree or higher, with eligibility for Arkansas certification as a secondary principal. 3. Knowledge of curriculum development and successful teaching methods. 4. Evidence of strong experience in dealing with student problems. 5. Evidence of ability to set priorities, supervise and train personnel and make appropriate decisions. 6. Evidence of ability to function as a member of an administrative team. 7. Evidence of ability to become a competent educational leader in both curriculum and instruction. 8. Evidence of ability to maintain accurate inventories, records and reports. 9. Evidence of successful experience with parent and staff involvement. 10. Evidence of strong skills in meeting and dealing with the public in a manner that will promote a positive image of the Little Rock School District. 11 . Evidence of strong commitment to quality integrated education. 12. Strong interpersonal skills. 13. Evidence of strong organizational skills. 14. Evidence of strong oral and written communication skills. 15. Demonstrates the conviction that all children can and will learn in the Little Rock School District. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INITIAL SCREENING INTERVIEW. JOB GOAL: To successfully plan, organize, implement, supervise, and evaluate the total operation of the school. ACCOUNTABILITY: Reports directly to Associate Superintendent - Secondary Education ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS/ RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Assumes responsibility for the management and monitoring of his/her school, and serves as the chief advisor to the Assistant Superintendent on matters pertaining to administration and program implementation in his/her school. 2. Implements the process whereby school-level educational program needs are identified, alerts Assistant Superintendent regarding needed logistical and consultative support in order to accomplish this task. 3. Works with staff and patrons to determine educational program priorities and goals for his/her school. 4. Oversees the development of educational programs and the plans for implementing them on the school level. 5. Seeks the necessary consultative and logistical support to assure effective educational program implementation. 6. Monitors program implementation in his/her school. 7. Works with supervisor and building staff to make the necessary changes. 8. Assumes responsibility for conducting the performance evaluation of assigned personnel. 9. Assumes responsibility for all record keeping and other administrative tasks normally assigned to the principal. I 0. Performs other duties as may be assigned. SALARY AND TERMS: Pay 01 - Grade 76 - $55,704 - $98,220 - Twelve (12) month, 250 day contract, plus benefit package. NOTE: Precise placement within the salary range will be determined based upon experience and education. EVALUATIO : Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with provisions of the Board's Policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. !='\n,\n:, m D _mC: z U) n--\u0026lt;\n,\n,-n ~~ U) !I: m~ .r., 2n:! m !\"Tl n 0 z U) C: ~ z Cl ~ ~ m 31: rr APPLICATION DEADLINE: May 30, 2005, or any time later until a satisfactory applicant is recommended and approved. SEND WRITTEN LETTERS OF INOUIRYTO: Beverly Williams - Director HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Little Rock School District 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone 501-447-1100 Fax 447-1162 NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITION DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. DATE: TO: June 23, 2005 Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of Assistant Principal for Martin Luther King Elementary BACKGROUND: To provide leadership to students and staff of Martin Luther King Elementary. RATIONALE: To fill the position being vacated by Mary Kahler. FUNDING: District Operating Budget RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Ms. Diane Rynders, to the position of Assistant Principal at Martin Luther King Elementary. Ms. Rynders' resume and a job description are attached for your review. PREPARED BY: Beverly Williams~ior Director of Human Resources ~ ::0 m D _mC: ~ !!l ::0\"T1 ~~ Ch ii: m~ ,- ~ m r\" (\") 0 z (JI C: !:\nz C\"l ~ ~ :I: rr Education : Certification: Employment: Diane Rynders 1212 Dortch Loop , North Little Rock, Arkansas 72117 501-590-0389 or 501-447-7474 MED - University of Arkansas at Little Rock Gifted and Talented MED - University of Arkansas at Little Rock Reading Specialist BSE - University of Arkansas at Fayetteville Elementary and Early Childhood Education K-6 Elementary Reading Specialist K-12 Gifted and Talented K-12 Elementary Principal Supervisor 1989- Present - Coordinator of Gifted Programs - LRSD 1985 - 1989 - Adjunct Instructor - UALR 1985 - 1989 - Supervisor of Gifted Programs - O.U.R. Co-op 1980 - 1984 - Fifth Grade Teacher - LRSD 1978 - 1980 - Second/Third Grade Teacher - Fort Campbell, KY Professional Experience: Odyssey of the Mind State Director AGATE State Conference Chair NAGC National Conference Chair Director of (7) AEGIS Residential Summer Programs for HS students Arkansas Governor's Academic Quiz Bowl Site Host Professional Organizations: Arkansans for Gifted and Talented Education (AGATE) AGATE Board of Directors AGATE Council of Educators Odyssey of the Mind Board of Directors National Association of Gifted Children Arkansas Assoc. of Gifted Educational Administrators Charter Member Awards: 1995 AGATE Martha Ann Jones Service Award 1990 AGATE Challenger Award 6/8/2005 Experience as LRSD Gifted Coordinator: As Gifted Coordinator in the LRSD, I hove supervised the 34 elementary gifted specialists and coordinated the elementary gifted program. I have been instrumental in the development of the gifted and talented curriculum and in the designing and implementation of a defensible identification process. I have provided and guided the gifted specialists through staff development in the areas of gifted and general education and have monitored gifted programs at the building level. I have established and successfully implemented the District Quiz Bowl Competitions, the Fifth Grade Challenges, and the District Wide Chess Tournament. I have also served on various LRSD curriculum teams/committees including school audits, professional development, and curriculum alignment/development. Curriculum Areas of Expertise:  Differentiation of Instruction  Constructivist Approach to Instruction  Instructional Strategies/Multiple Intelligences  Curriculum Alignment with District/State Standards  Portfolio Assessment  Integration of Technology in the Curriculum  Enrichment/Acceleration  Thematic Units/Essential Questions  Curriculum Mapping  Integration/Product Development through Instruction  Current Trends in Gifted Education References: Mable Donaldson, Supervisor, LRSD Gifted Programs Ann Biggers, Gifted and Talented Program Director, ADE Lauro Beth Arnold , Social Studies Grant Director, LRSD Kristen Laughlin, GT Specialist, Forest Park, LRSD Cynthia Collins, GT Specialist, Jefferson/McDermott, LRSD Personal : Married to Michael Rynders Two sons: Jonathan (18) and Nicholas (14) Arkansas Race for the Cure Survivor Parade Chairperson Past Youth Director , All Souls Church Past Boord of Directors , All Souls Church !1 .. .. : l  6/8/2005 rn (\") 0z (/) C !:\nz G'l ~\no m m 3: m PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 7220 I June I, 2005 PLEASE POST The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year. POSITION: Assistant l\n'rincipal - King Elementary OUALIFICA TIONS: 1. Master's degree (minimum) or higher with Arkansas License as an elementary principal. 2. At least three (3) years successful experience as a teacher and/or administrator in an urban school district. 3. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality desegregated education. 4. Knowledge of curriculum development and instruction. 5. The ability to apply this knowledge when working with faculty, students, parents, administrators, community members, and support staff. 6. Commitment to staff development demonstrated by a willingness to initiate, participate in, monitor, and maintain in-service activities. 7. Demonstrates the conviction that all children can and will learn in the Little Rock School District. 8. Evidence of successful experience with parent and staff involvement in decision making. 9. Evidence of successful experience in being a strong disciplinarian and conflict manager. I 0. Completion of State Evaluation Workshop. 11. Ability to evaluate instructional program and teacher effectiveness. 12. Ability to interpret policy, procedures and data. 13. Strong interpersonal skills. 14. Evidence of strong organizational skills. 15. Evidence of strong oral and written communication skills. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDE CE OF THESE OUALIFICATIO SIN THE INITIAL SCREENING INTERVIEW. JOB GOAL: To relieve the Principal of such impediments as prevents him/her from fulfilling chief responsibilities of promoting the educational well-being of each student in the school, and to demonstrate the capacity to perform the responsibilities of an assistant principal. ACCOUNTABILITY Reports Directly to the Principal ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS I RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Assumes responsibility of coordinating custodial, transportation, cafeteria, and other responsibilities. 2. Supervises conducts within the school, and oversees disciplinary procedures, keeping records of any disciplinary action. 3. Requisitions supplies and equipment, conducts inventories, maintains records, and checks on receipts for such materials. 4. Cooperates in conducting of safety inspection and safety drill activities. 5. Works with the principal in the preparation of the Parent/Student Handbook and the Staff handbook. 6. Assists in the administration of school rules regarding attendance. 7. Assists the principal in the general administration of the school. 8. Assumes the responsibility for conducting the performance evaluation of assigned personnel. 9. Assists in parent recruitment for the PT A and other parent involvement activities. 10. Support and participate in the unique year-round program for Stephens Elementary School and Recreation Center. 11. Attends staff meetings, serve on committees, and assumes responsibility for extracurricular activities as assigned by the principal. 12. Fosters collegiality and team building among staff members. 13. Communicates and promotes expectations for high-level performance to staff and students. 14. Makes commitment and time necessary for participation in district/school sponsored staff development and become computer literate. 15. Performs such other responsibilities as the principal may assign. fl\n,\n, m ~,... C: -\u0026lt; i5 z ,... ~ \"z' \"' !=' ~ D _mC: ~ ~\n,\n,-n ~ l6 \"'!I:: m~ .,...,.\n,\n, n m rn n 0 z \"C': !:j z C) l\n~ m 31: rr SALARY AND TERMS: Payl0 - Grade 64 - $38,928 - $68,652 - A ten and one-half (10.5) month contract (210 days), plus benefits package. NOTE: Precise placement within the salary range will be determined based upon education and experience. EVALUATION: Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with provisions of the Board's Policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. APPLICATION DEADLINE: June 1, 2005, or any time later until a satisfactory applicant is recommended and approved. SEND RESUMES/INQUIRES: Beverly Williams - Director HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Little Rock School District 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone 501-447-1100 Fax 501-447-1162 NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITION DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. DATE: TO: June 23, 2005 Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of Assistant Principal for Rockefeller Elementary BACKGROUND: To provide leadership to students and staff of Rockefeller Elementary. RATIONALE: To fill the position being vacated by Becky Ramsey. FUNDING: District Operating Budget RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Ms. Sandra Register, to the position of Assistant Principal at Rockefeller Elementary. Ms. Register's resume and a job description are attached for your review. PREPARED BY: Beverly William~nior Director of Human Resources !D ~ ::0 m ~..... .C...: ~z !=' ~ 0 _mC: z en n--\u0026lt; ::O\"TI ~~ en !I:: m~ ..... -0 ::0 n m Sandra L. Register # 6 Lisawood Court Little Rock, Arkansas 72227 501224-8105 CAREER OBJECTIVE To obtain employment in an elementasy administrative position where opportunities for professional development and advancement exist. EDUCATION Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education, Certification in Early Childhood, University of Arkansas Little Rock, August 1978. Master of Science in Early Childhood, University of Central Arkansas, August 1980. CAREER RELATED EXPERIENCE Student Teacher, Franklin Elementary School, Little Rock. Arkansas, Spring,. 1978. Math Lab Teacher, Williams Elementary School, Little Rock, Arkansas, 1978-1979. Taught math instruction to students in K-3rd grade. Math Lab Teacher, Jefferson Elementary School, Little Rock, Arkansas, 1979-1981. OTHER EXPERIENCE Kindergarten Teacher, Jefferson Elementary School, Little Rock, Arkansas, January 1979 to June 1995. Kindergarten Teacher, Hugh Goodwin Elementary School, El Dorado, Arkansas August 1995 to June 1998. Principal, Hugh Goodwin Elementary, El Dorado, Arkansas, September 2002 to January 2003. Principal, Retta Brown Elementary, El Dorado, Arkansas, July 1998 to June 2003. Second Grade Teacher, Terry Elementary, Little Rock, Arkansas, August 2003 to June 2004. Assistant Principal, Rockefeller Elementary School, Little Rock, Arkansas, August 2004- present. HONORS AND ACTIVITIES Delta Kappa Gamma Society Internacional, 1996-Present Arkansas Reading Association, 1995-Present Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, 1998-Present Arkansas Association of Elementary School Principals, 1998-Present REFERENCES WILL BE FURNISHED UPON REQUEST PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 May 5, 2005 PLEASE POST The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year. POSITION: Assistant Principals (2) -(1) Terry Elementary School ( 1) Rockefeller Elementary QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Master's degree (minimum) or higher with Arkansas License as an elementary principal. 2. At least three (3) years successful experience as a teacher and/or administrator in an urban school district. 3. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality desegregated education. 4. Knowledge of curriculum development and instruction. 5. The ability to apply this knowledge when working with faculty, students, parents, administrators, community members, and support staff. 6. Commitment to staff development demonstrated by a willingness to initiate, participate in, monitor, and maintain in-service activities. 7. Demonstrates the conviction that all children can and will learn in the Little Rock School District. 8. Evidence of successful experience with parent and staff involvement in decision making. 9. Evidence of successful experience in being a strong disciplinarian and conflict manager. 10. Completion of State Evaluation Workshop. 11. Ability to evaluate instructional program and teacher effectiveness. 12. Ability to interpret policy, procedures and data. 13. Strong interpersonal skills. 14. Evidence of strong organizational skills. 15. Evidence of strong oral and written communication skills. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INITIAL SCREENING INTERVIEW. f)\na m is ~_, i5 z r\"' ~ en z \"' JOB GOAL: To relieve the Principal of such impediments as prevents him/her from fulfilling chief responsibilities of promoting the educational well-being of each student in the school, and to demonstrate the capacity to perform the responsibilities of an assistant principal. ACCOUNT ABILITY Reports Directly to the Principal ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS/ RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Assumes responsibility of coordinating custodial, transportation, cafeteria, and other responsibilities. 2. Supervises conducts within the school, and oversees disciplinary procedures, keeping records of any disciplinary action. 3. Requisitions supplies and equipment, conducts inventories, maintains records, and checks on receipts for such materials. 4. Cooperates in conducting of safety inspection and safety drill activities. 5. Works with the principal in the preparation of the Parent/Student Handbook and the Staff handbook. 6. Assists in the administration of school rules regarding attendance. 7. Assists the principal in the general administration of the school. 8. Assumes the responsibility for conducting the performance evaluation of assigned personnel. 9. Assists in parent recruitment for the PTA and other parent involvement activities. 10. Support and participate in the unique year-round program for Stephens Elementary School and Recreation Center. 11. Attends staff meetings, serve on committees, and assumes responsibility for extracurricular activities as assigned by the principal. 12. Fosters collegiality and team building among staff members. 13. Communicates and promotes expectations for high-level performance to staff and students. 14. Makes commitment and time necessary for participation in district/school sponsored staff development and become computer literate. 15. Performs such other responsibilities as the principal may assign. SALARY AND TERMS: Payl0 - Grade 64 - $38,928 - $68,652 -A ten and one-half (10.5) month contract (210 days), plus benefits package. NOTE: Precise placement within the salary range will be determined based upon education and experience. EVALUATION: Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with provisions of the Board's Policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. APPLICATION DEADLINE: May 20, 2005, or any time later until a satisfactory applicant is recommended and approved. SEND RESUMES/INQUIRES: Beverly Williams - Director HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Little Rock School District 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone 501-447-1100 Fax 501-447-1162 NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITION DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis ofage, sex, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. !Jl r\u0026gt; :,0 m ,~.... C...:. ~ z !=' ~ 0 _mC: ~~ :,o-n ~~ (/)~ m~ .,....,. :,0 n m !Tl n 0 z (/) C: !:\nz Cl ~ ~ m :,,I.:. DATE: June 23, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of Assistant Principal for Terry Elementary BACKGROUND: To provide leadership to students and staff of Terry Elementary. RATIONALE: To fill the position being vacated by Anna Joiner-Tatum. FUNDING: District Operating Budget RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Ms. Eloise Booth, to the position of Assistant Principal at Terry Elementary. Ms. Booth's resume and a job description are attached for your review. PREPARED BY: Beverly Williams~:r Director of Human Resources Eloise Jeannette Booth 12606 Timber Hill Drive Little Roci\u0026lt;, Arkansas 72211 501-312-1317 eloise. booth@lrsd.org ===-================--==========-==-=--====--=-=------------- Experience: Little Rock School District- Little Rock, Arkansas Rockefeller Elementary- July 1999-2001 Stephens Elementary- July 2001-2004 Terry Elementary-October 2004-Preaent Camden-Fairview School District.Camden, Arkansas July 1986-1999 5th Grade Middle School Teacher, Assistant Principal, \u0026amp; Principal El Dorado School District 1979-1985 6th \u0026amp; 4th Grade Teacher Ouachita Area Development Corporation (YMCA)- Camden, Arkansas 1969-74 Payroll/Bookkeeper Education: Southern Arkansas University- Magnolia, Arkanaae Bachelor of Science, Elementary Education, 1979 Ouachita Baptist University-Arkadelphia, Arkansas 72193 Master of Science, Elementary Education, 1982 Henderson State University-Arkadelphia, Arkaneae 72193 Master of Science, Educational Administration and Supervision, 1985 rn n 0 z \"c:': !:j z Cl li ::,) m m ~ Certification: Arkansas Deparbnent of Education Professional Teaching Licenee Arkansas Department of Education Elementary Principal Certification Leardership: Camden-Fairview School District-HIPPY Board President.. Equity Committee, Camden City Planning Commission, International Paper Advisory Board, Kiwanae, COE Chair, ACSIP Team, Outstanding Young Women of America, Nominated Principal of the Year, District Discipline Committee, Leadership Adcademy. Rockefeller and Stephens Elementary- Administrative Team, Teacher and Staff Evaluations, School-Wide Discipline Committee, TAP Certification, Parent and Student Handbook, Supervision and Scheduling of Instructional Aides, Transportation (Bus) Coordinator, 504 Coordianator, ESL Training, EYE Intersession Director, Campus Leadership Tean References: Avallable upon Request PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 May 5, 2005 PLEASE POST The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year. POSITION: Assistant Principals (2) -(1) Terry Elementary School ( 1) Rockefeller Elementary QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Master's degree (minimum) or higher with Arkansas License as an elementary principal. 2. At least three (3) years successful experience as a teacher and/or administrator in an urban school district. 3. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality desegregated education. 4. Knowledge of curriculum development and instruction. 5. The ability to apply this knowledge when working with faculty, students, parents, administrators, community members, and support staff. 6. Commitment to staff development demonstrated by a willingness to initiate, participate in, monitor, and maintain in-service activities. 7. Demonstrates the conviction that all children can and will learn in the Little Rock School District. 8. Evidence of successful experiencewith parent and staff involvement in decision making. 9. Evidence of successful experience in being a strong disciplinarian and conflict manager. 10. Completion of State Evaluation Workshop. 11. Ability to evaluate instructional program and teacher effectiveness. 12. Ability to interpret policy, procedures and data. 13. Strong interpersonal skills. 14. Evidence of strong organizational skills. 15. Evidence of strong oral and written communication skills. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INITIAL SCREEN! G INTERVIEW. !='\n:c m 0 _mC zcn (\")-\u0026lt;\n:c-.. !j!\n!l5 \"m'!:j!1\n:! r- ~ m rn (\") 0z \"C ' !:j z Cl a\n:c ~ :ii: \"' JOB GOAL: To relieve the Principal of such impediments as prevents him/her from fulfilling chief responsibilities of promoting the educational well-being of each student in the school, and to demonstrate the capacity to perform the responsibilities of an assistant principal. ACCOUNTABILITY Reports Directly to the Principal ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS I RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Assumes responsibility of coordinating custodial, transportation, cafeteria, and other responsibilities. 2. Supervises conducts within the school, and oversees disciplinary procedures, keeping records of any disciplinary action. 3. Requisitions supplies and equipment, conducts inventories, maintains records, and checks on receipts for such materials. 4. Cooperates in conducting of safety inspection and safety drill activities. 5. Works with the principal in the preparation of the Parent/Student Handbook and the Staff handbook. 6. Assists in the administration of school rules regarding attendance. 7. Assists the principal in the general administration of the school. 8. Assumes the responsibility for conducting the performance evaluation of assigned personnel. 9. Assists in parent recruitment for the PT A and other parent involvement activities. 10. Support and participate in the unique year-round program for Stephens Elementary School and Recreation Center. 11. Attends staff meetings, serve on committees, and assumes responsibility for extracurricular activities as assigned by the principal. 12. Fosters collegiality and team building among staff members. 13. Communicates and promotes expectations for high-level performance to staff and students. 14. Makes commitment and time necessary for participation in district/school sponsored staff development and become computer literate. 15. Performs such other responsibilities as the principal may assign. SALARY AND TERMS: Payl 0 - Grade 64 - $38,928 - $68,652 -A ten and one-half (10.5) month contract (210 days), plus benefits package. NOTE: Precise placement within the salary range will be determined based upon education and experience. EVALUATION: Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with provisions of the Board's Policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. APPLICATION DEADLINE: May 20, 2005, or any time later until a satisfactory applicant is recommended and approved. SEND RESUMES/INQUIRES: Beverly Williams - Director HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Little Rock School District 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone 501-447-1100 Fax 501-447-1162 INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTIO PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITIO DOES OT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. !ll fl \"m' ~ re:..... \u0026lt;5 z !\"' n 0 z U\u0026gt; C: !:j z Cl ~ ~ m ~ DATE: June 23, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Proposed Budget for Annual School Election BACKGROUND: In order to satisfy various legal requirements concerning school elections, budget publication, and school tax rates, the Board of Directors must approve a proposed budget for the 2006-2007 school year together with a rate of tax levy sufficient to provide such funds. RATIONALE: The requirement for publication of the budget shall be discharged by the board of directors of each school district by publication of its budget one (1) time ... not less than sixty (60) days before the annual school election. (Ark. Code Ann .  6-13-622) FUNDING: Operating Budget RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the proposed budget of expenditures and tax levy for 2006-2007 as attached for publication in accordance with State law. PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen Chief Financial Officer !Tl n 0 z C/) C: !:\nz C) ~ Rl \"31': rr PROPOSED BUDGET OF EXPENDITURES TOGETHER WITH TAX LEVY FOR FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2006 TO AND INCLUDING JUNE 30, 2007 The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District No. 60-01 of Pulaski County, Arkansas in compliance with the requirements of Amendments No. 40 and No. 7 4 to the Constitution of the State of Arkansas and of Arkansas Code Ann.  6- 13-622 (1993 Repl.) has prepared, approved, and hereby makes public the proposed budget of expenditures together with a supporting tax rate as follows: 1. Salary Fund Expenditures 2. Instructional Expense 3. Maintenance \u0026amp; Operation Expense 4. Pupil Transportation Expense 5. Other Operating Expense 6. Non-bonded Debt Payment 7. Bonded Debt Payment 8. Building Fund Expense 9. Dedicated Maintenance \u0026amp; Operation $111,529,328.00 $ 25,881,109.00 $ 14,611,898.00 $ 14,396,284.00 $ 36,274,934.00 $ 655,000.00 $ 12,000,030.00 $ 12,000,000.00 $ 5,200,000.00 The total tax levy proposed includes 32.0 mills for the maintenance and operation of schools, 12.4 mills for debt service previously voted as a continuing levy pledged for the retirement of existing bonded indebtedness, and 2.0 mills for current expenditures/dedicated maintenance and operation expenditures. Surplus revenues produced each year by debt service millage may be used by the District for other purposes. The total proposed rate includes the uniform rate of tax to be collected on all taxable property in the State and remitted to the State Treasurer pursuant to Amendment No. 74 to the Arkansas Constitution to be used solely for maintenance and operation of schools in this District. The proposed rate includes no increases. Given this 23rd day of June, 2005. Little Rock School District No. 60-01 of Pulaski County Larry Berkley, President Katherine Mitchell, Secretary DATE: June 23, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: First Reading - Board Policy FA: New Facilities Development Goal BACKGROUND: The promotion of buildings that are environmentally responsible is at the forefront of planning for energy and resource conservation at the local, state and national levels. The District is committed to contributing to the environmental and economic sustainability of our City and State. RATIONALE: In an effort to promote a positive effect on the City's environment and healthy places for students to learn and employees to work, the attached policy is presented for the Board's approval. New construction of District buildings will utilize sustainable design practices that will decrease the negative impact of buildings on the environment and occupant health while reducing operating and maintenance costs. FUNDING: Bond Account RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Board approve Policy FA as attached. PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen Chief Financial Officer r\u0026gt; ~ ~ E.... iz5 8 z ~ 0z \"' ..0.. ,, ~ \"C IT' ::c LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: FA New Facilities Development Goal The Board of Education is committed to promoting the conservation of energy and natural resources for new construction of District facilities. This approach will provide a positive effect on the City's environment and ensure healthy places for students to learn and employees to work. The promotion of buildings that are environmentally responsible is at the forefront of planning for energy and resource conservation at the local, state and national levels. The District will join in this effort through planning, designing, constructing and operating District-owned buildings and facilities by utilizing sustair:,able design practices that will decrease the negative impact of building on the environment and occupant health while reducing operating and maintenance costs. The District will adopt the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED-NC) rating system for new construction of District-owned facilities (or other nationally recognized rating system). Adopted: References: U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design system DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 June 23, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Resolution for Leasing Authority BACKGROUND: Verizon Communications Corporation, in conjunction with Excell Communications, Inc., has requested that the Little Rock School District lease to them three small parcels of property at Central, Parkview, and McClellan High Schools for the sole purpose of erecting communications relay towers to support their telephone systems. The three tower-sites, shown on the attached drawings, are as follows: A. Central High School - inside the stadium wall near the seating area on the east side of Quigley Field. B. Parkview High School - approximately 150 feet west of the Performing Arts Building. C. McClellan High School - east of the football stadium and approximately 150 feet from the south property line. Each of these sites will support a 150-foot monopole. RATIONALE: The Little Rock School District has granted to Excell Communications, Inc., entry and testing agreements through which this corporation is testing the sites to determine their suitability for situating a monopole in these locations. The leasing of these properties has been coordinated with the school principals, and it has been determined that the sites will not impact any of the operations presently ongoing at the schools. Other private locations and school districts are entertaining similar leases to support this nationwide communication system. ~?\u0026lt; me-, :IC,-, a- o (/) 0-\u0026lt; z- m c, m\na :i::m ~~ !\"\" n 0 z (/) C: !:\nz C) l!i ~ 31: rr FUNDING: The proposed term of the leased property would be twenty-five years, consisting of a five-year initial term and four five-year extensions. The overall revenue of $1,213,628 to be received by the District consists of a monthly rent of $1 ,000 per site beginning at construction with 15% increases after each five-year term. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board approve the attached resolution allowing the Administration to enter into lease negotiations with Verizon Communications Corporation. PREPARED BY: Douglas Eaton, Director of Facility Services Mark D. Milhollen, Chief Financial Officer RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR LEASING AUTHORITY TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Arkansas Code Annotated Section 6-13-620 authorizes the board of directors for each school district to lease property as lessor\nand WHEREAS, Arkansas Code Annotated Section 6-21-108(c) requires that the execution of all contracts and conveyances and lease contracts shall be performed by the president and confirmed by the secretary of the school board when authorized by a resolution in writing and approved by a majority vote of the school board\nand WHEREAS, Verizon Wireless Tennessee Partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, has requested the school district to lease to Verizon wireless Tennessee Partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, real property at the Central International Studies High School, McClellan Magnet High School and Parkview Arts and Science Magnet High School locations for the purpose of locating towers and certain equipment that will facilitate wireless communications and other related transmissions\nand WHEREAS, the Little Rock School District will receive rent from Verizon Wireless Tennessee Partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, for such leases. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Little Rock School District Board of Directors that: The Administration is hereby authorized to enter into leases with Verizon Wireless Tennessee Partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, related to the Central International Studies High School, McClellan Magnet High School and Parkview Arts and Science Magnet High School locations. Given this 23rd day of June, 2005 Larry Berkley, President Katherine Mitchell, Secretary rn n 0 z en C: !:\nz Cl ~ ~ 3: IT' I lll ~-EXISTING STADIUM SEATING --- --- ~---- /1 \\\\ I EXISTING FOOTBALL FIELD \\ / ---- - EXISTING TRACK EXISTING STADIUM SEATING Ill D  EXISTING _/ BRICK BUILDING PROPOSED BRICK WALL TO MATCH EXISTING BRICK BUILDING ~ / ~ ~ - PROPOSED MONOPOLE CENTRAL HIGH NOT SCHOOL SITE TO SCALE EXISTING FOOTBALL FIELD PLAN EXISTING PROPERTY UNE/F'ENCf [7 - EXISTING STADIUM SEATING  EXISTING FOOTBALL flELD EXISTING - POWER PO!S PROPOSED. 75'x75' f1:NC0 COMPOUNQ PROPOSED NEW 150 MONOPOLE EXISTING STADIUM SEATING 75' o EXISTING PRACTICE FlflD _G-= _-- - - -- -=-=:::L.-==--=-=-=----=-=-=--==--==--===--===--==--==-===--==--==------'-----------_j U:13d0Md ~O SNOll VNOO '~ MCCLELLAN HIGH NOT SCHOOL TO SCALE SITE 3S\\/3H:\u0026gt;NI 311i33MlV lNlllOSNO:\u0026gt; 3 3:\u0026gt;IMd 7\\f3W HO~ 1S3003H o J\\f3H 33A07dW3 \"IX JVW3H ONIS07:\u0026gt; x PLAN lHOd3H 1'9'1:\u0026gt;NVNI~ o VERIZON PARKVIEW HIGH SCHOOL A LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NORTH QL__ ________ ___,, er: 1-------R_rv_E _____: i s\n0 - , er: I ' er: \u0026lt;{ co I' I I ' , ,' I' I I z I 0  / ,: UNPAV ED PARKING AREA -, r 0 l[) N    175' telco 8771.W2ah LTRLARRB HHGB67 DSA2124 ,7775' r PROPOSED NEW150' MONOPOLE NOTTO SCALE , , : I I I' I I I I : : I I I I 'I I I : 1 Ac i: cess lat 34 43 51.42 long -92 22 19.3 AMSL 410' I I I I ' I I I I I I Auditorium I I UNPAVED PARKING AREA CITY OF LITTLE ROCK PARKVIEW ARTS/SCIENCE MAGNET HIGH SCHOOL PHONE 501 447-2300 p arcel ID 44L-082-00-033-00 30ACRES athletic bldg n LRPVHSA G. FINANCIAL REPORT t: ~_f' . X. CLOSING REMAf XI. EMPLOYEE HEAi ,J :\ni D. REQUEST FOR MEAL PRICE INCREASE E. CONSULTING AGREEMI: F. DONATIONS Or PROPl:R r DATE: TO: FROM: June 23, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Request for Breakfast and Lunch Meal Price Increase BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District Child Nutrition Department supports the School Meals Program from funds received from the service of reimbursable meals. The prices for the meals claimed at the reduced rate are set by USDA, and the prices for the meals claimed in the full-paid category are set by the Board of Directors for the school district. The Child Nutrition Department works to operate basically as a self sufficient entity of the district. RATIONALE: For the Child Nutrition meals program to remain basically self supporting and continue to provide high quality service for our customers, the meal prices must be raised. Food and labor costs increase at a rate of 3% to 5% each year, and, for Child Nutrition, labor costs increased at a rate of 10% the past year. Traditionally, manufacturers pass on to the customer any economic impact that they are experiencing due to gas wars or food production restrictions and other variables. The USDA reimbursement rates for Child Nutrition programs are based on program costs exclusive of a fringe benefit package. The present funds to the program are not adequate for sufficiency and growth. We propose that the breakfast meal price is increased by $.25 at each level and that the lunch meal price is increased by $.50 at each level. For the 2005-2006 school year the meal prices will be as follows: BREAKFAST Elementary - $1.00 Secondary - 1.00 Adults - 1.25 LUNCH Elementary - $2.00 Secondary - 2.25 Adults - 2.75 The current meal prices for Little Rock School District Child Nutrition have been in effect since the 2002-2003 school year. ~ \u0026gt; 0 5 C:\n:o z\nc zm ..... FUNDING: At the present level of participation, the proposed price increases will generate approximately $340,000.00 additional revenue for the program. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Board approve the prepared meal prices for School year 2005- 2006. PREPARED BY: Morlin M. McCoy, Director of Child Nutrition Mark D. Milhollen, Chief Financial Officer DATE: TO: FROM: June 23, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: CONSUL TING AGREEMENT BACKGROUND: The Board approved the recommendations of the organizational audit on March 24, 2005, completing Phase I of the process to restructure the District's administration. Phase I recommendations are being implemented and administrative staff is being assigned to fill the vacancies and positions that will result in a more streamlined and efficient operation. RATIONALE: Phase II and 111 of the reorganization will provide the support systems necessary to ensure an efficient transition to the restructured operations. Technical assistance and support is required in order to affect the most orderly and effective use of our resources. Exhibit A of the proposed contract has been revised to take into consideration your input and comments. The exhibit provides specific details of services to be rendered by the consultants, Dr. Dennis Smith and Mr. Bob Klempen. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend approval to enter into the consulting agreement with Dr. Dennis Smith and Mr. Bob Klempen from July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006. FUNDING: Payment of consulting fees and expenses are specified in the attached agreement. PREPARED BY: Mark Milhollen, CFO ~ \u0026gt; C a C\nc z !I: zm --, CONSULTING AGREEMENT This CONSUL TING AGREEMENT (this \"Agreement\") is executed effective as of this 23rd day of June, 2005, by and between the Little Rock School District (the \"District\"), and Dr. Dennis Smith and Mr. Bob Klempen (collectively, the \"Consultant\"). W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, District oversees the operation of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas public school system\nWHEREAS, Consultant has significant experience and expertise in defining organizational structure, standardized protocols and procedures, governance and management, results-based strategic planning, performance and accountability systems, and issue resolution/ decision-making procedures focused on improving student achievement and will be based upon effective school practices for schools\nand WHEREAS, the District desires to retain the services of Consultant as a consultant and independent contractor to District to focus the District, the Board and administration on more effective use of resources, increased accountability, enhanced community perception, improved morale and increased student achievement, all upon the terms and conditions contained herein\nNOW, THEREFORE, in exchange for the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, agree as follows: 1. ENGAGEMENT. The District hereby engages Consultant as a consultant and independent contractor, and Consultant  hereby accepts such engagement, upon the terms and conditions contained herein. 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of one year beginning July 1, 2005, and ending June 30, 2006, subject to Paragraph 8 below. The foregoing notwithstanding, either party may terminate this Agreement on not less than 90 days prior written notice to the other party specifying the effective date of such termination. 3. CONSULTING SERVICES. During the term hereof, Consultant agrees to provide the consulting and advisory services to the District described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the \"Services\"), and, upon request, assist the District in the implementation and management of certain programs relating to the District's educational objectives. Consultant shall work with the District's Superintendent and other personnel and shall report to the District's Board of Education as needed. The exact nature of the Services shall be defined from time to time by the District and the Consultant. 4. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. In performing the services described herein, Consultant shall be an independent contractor and shall have no power or authority to bind District or to create any obligation or responsibility, express or implied, in the name or on behalf of the District. Consultant shall be solely responsible for payment of federal, state and local income taxes on all payments to him hereunder, and the District shall have no responsibility whatsoever therefor. 5. COMPENSATION. In consideration for the consulting and advisory services to be provided hereunder by the Consultant, the District agrees to pay the Consultant a total fee of$65,000 for services rendered from July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006. The Consultant will invoice the district each month, and the District shall pay such invoices within thirty (30) days. Consultant shall be responsible for paying Consultant's expenses incurred in performing the consulting and advisory services hereunder. The foregoing notwithstanding, the District will pay on behalf of Consultant ( or reimburse Consultant for) all reasonable expenses incurred by Consultant at the request of District in traveling to and from Little Rock, Arkansas, lodging and expenses incurred in connection with the Services\nprovided that such trip was approved in advance and the request for reimbursement is in accordance with the District's normal expense reimbursement policies. 6. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION. Consultant agrees that he will not, during or after the term of this Agreement, disclose, make public or otherwise utilize any proprietary or other confidential information relating to the District or its business, except as required by applicable law. Consultant shall deliver to the District no later than thirty (30) days after the date of termination of this Agreement all tangible forms of such information in his possession or control. 7. TERMINATION. (a) Consultant may, at his option, terminate this Agreement at any time upon ten ( 10) days prior written notice to the District if the District fails to make any payment hereunder to Consultant and such failure continues for a period of more than thirty (30) days following receipt of written notice of such default. (b) The District may terminate this Agreement upon ten (10) days prior written notice to Consultant if Consultant fails to perform his services hereunder in any material respect and such failure continues for a period of ten (10) days following receipt of such written notice from the District. (c) Upon termination of this Agreement, the District shall not be obligated to make any further payments to Consultant except amounts accrued, due and payable as of the date of termination. 2 ~ \u0026gt; ~ 0 C,,: z 3::: zm .... 8. MISCELLANEOUS. (a) Assignment. This Agreement and the rights, obligations and duties of the parties hereunder shall not be assignable or otherwise transferable without the prior written consent of each party. (b) Modification. No provision contained herein may be modified, amended or waived except by written agreement signed by the party to be bound thereby. ( c) Binding Effect and Benefit. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and shall be binding upon, the parties hereto, and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, personal representatives, successors and permitted assigns. (d) Headings and Captions. Subject headings and captions are included for convenience purposes only and shall not affect the interpretation of this Agreement. ( e) Notice. All notices, requests, demands and other communications permitted or required hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be deemed to have been duly given upon delivery if delivered in person, or on the date postmarked if mailed, registered or certified United States mail, postage prepaid as follows: If to Consultant, addressed or delivered in person to: Dennis M. Smith 2800 Park Place Laguna Beach, Ca. 92651 Ifto the District, addressed or delivered in person to: Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Attn: Dr. Roy Brooks, Superintendent Or to such other address as either party may designate by notice. (f) Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal or unenforceable, such determination shall not impair the enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions herein. 3 (g) Waiver. No waiver of a breach or violation of any provision of this Agreement shall operate or be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach or limit or restrict any right or remedy otherwise available. (h) Rights and Remedies Cumulative. The rights and remedies expressed herein are cumulative and not exclusive of any rights and remedies otherwise available. (i) Gender and Pronouns. Throughout this Agreement, the masculine shall include the feminine and neuter and the singular shall include the plural and vice versa as the context requires. G) Entire Agreement. This document constitutes the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes any and all other prior agreements, oral or written, with respect to the subject matter contained herein. (k) Governing Law. This Agreement shall be subject to and governed by the laws of the State of Arkansas. (1) No Joint Venture or Partnership, This Agreement shall not be considered to create any type of joint venture, partnership, or any other legal relationship between the parties in which either party shall share or be responsible for the debts or liabilities of the other party. 10. APPROVAL OF DISTRICT. The obligations of the District under this Agreement are expressly conditioned upon the ratification and approval of the Agreement by the Board of Education of the District. 4 ~ :,,. ~ 0 C:\no z le zm -\u0026lt; IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the day and year aforesaid. DISTRICT: Little Rock School District By: ___________ _ Dr. Roy Brooks, Superintendent CONSULTANT: Dr. Dennis Smith Robert Klempen Ratified and Approved by the Board of Education of the Little Rock School District at the meeting held the 23rd day of June, 2005 . 5 Exhibit A Services Covered:  Advise the Superintendent on operational best practices and related matters during implementation of the LRSD administrative restructuring\n Assist (Advise) the (Deputy) Superintendent and (Government/Legislative/Public Affairs Officer) executive level staff in developing (regarding their) roles and responsibilities that are consistent with the objectives of the LRSD administrative restructuring and which make a clear differentiation between line and staff authority\no Specifically, consult with the (Advise) the Associate Superintendents of Elementary and Secondary Education regarding their roles as direct \"line\" supervisor. to principals\no Consult with (Advise) the Associate Superintendent of Education Services, Senior Director of Human Resources and Chief Financial Officer/Support Services regarding their role. as support staff to schools and principals\n Prepare (Advise) executive staff ( district leaders,) selected by the Superintendent to assume leadership roles (designated as Project Managers on) for work projects assigned by the Superintendent, including staff training and development, performance accountability and evaluation, effective communication, governance and management and results based strategic planning\n Provide continuous feedback (on progress) to the Superintendent on the progress being made during (the) successive phases of the (implementation) administrative restructuring\n Review written communications regarding the implementation of the (LRSD reorganization) administrative restructuring as directed by the Superintendent\n (Consult with Human Resources executive staff and the school attorneys in the implementation of the organizational audit\n)  (Plan with the Superintendent\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1060","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2005-05"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Curricula","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1060"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["71 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nAgenda RECEIVED MAY 2 5 2005 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting CONGRATULATIONS GRADUATES! MAY2005 n ,.. -0 ~~ o--:\u0026lt;r-: oz\n,:,\u0026gt; ~ ~\n,:,-., -c\n,:,z o,- n..... ,- c5 nz ,)\u0026gt;- t/) ,- :IE\n= m -o n,- o\"' On !l::m mo -c !!l~ C ,- ~ ~ ~ ::l -om m\n,:, \"..',t_/) 0 \"~' ,z.. \u0026gt;m\"'  -0 t/lQ C\n,:, -0 ..... ..... t/) i-,\n,=.l .mn ::jg Oz z =l \"'o z t/) ~ \"m' ~ .n\n,\n:,,,: ,- t/)\n,:,-., n\n,:, --\u0026lt;0 \u0026gt;:r: n =l ~ z t/) I. 11. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A Call to Order B. Roll Call PROCEDURAL MATTERS A Welcome to Guests REGULAR MEETING May 26, 2005 5:30 p.m. B. Student Performance - Williams Magnet Elementary Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A Superintendent's Citations B. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) C. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: V. A. Remarks from Board Members B. Update: Legal Issues -Attorney Chris Heller C. Report: Racial \u0026amp; Cultural Diversity Commission - Mike Daugherty D. Report: Mitchell School Facility Committee - Mike Daugherty E. Update: Tri-District Charter School Application - Linda Watson F. Student Assignment Report G. Budget Update H. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects I. Internal Auditors Report J. Technology Update APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A Minutes: Regular Meeting - 04-28-05 Special Meeting - 05-12-05 B. Revision to Student Calendar, 2005-06 n \u0026gt;~ ~ ~ 0-\u0026lt;\n-c oz\no \u0026gt; 0\no m-\u0026lt; -\noc \":\"\noz ,o-n-\u0026lt; r-i5 nz \u0026gt;en F ::e\n::: m~ ,-\no no On\ncm mo - C: !!l~ C: ,- ~ ~ :!:\n:::l ~m m\no\no en -on -\n,:, ~ ,z..\no -\u0026gt;m~ enc C:\no ~ -\u0026lt; :-'f!! n\n,:, =l m \u0026gt;n ::!8 Oz z=l en i5 z en !I'\no m ~ n\no :,,\n,- en\nno\n\"o\" -\u0026lt;0 \u0026gt;\nc n =l N mz en Regular Board Meeting May 26, 2005 Page2 VI. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES A. Student Handbook Revisions, 2005-06 B. Homeless Education Continuation Grant VII. CURRICULUM \u0026amp; INSTRUCTION A. Report and Presentation: Measuring the Vision B. Grant Application: U.S. Department of Education Professional Development for Arts Educators C. Grant Application: U. S. Department of Education Teaching American History Program D. Grant Application: U. S. Department of Education Smaller Learning Communities Program VIII. SCHOOL SERVICES IX. X. A. Summer School / Credit Recovery Program for Secondary Schools HUMAN RESOURCES A. Personnel Changes BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A. Purchase of School Buses B. Consulting Agreement (for consideration of a suspension of the rules) C. Donations of Property D. Financial Report XI. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1 . Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions XII. EMPLOYEE HEARING XIII. ADJOURNMENT (') \u0026gt; -0 F....~,_ 0 3: oz\n:c\u0026gt; ~~\n:c \"Tl -c\n:cz o,... n..... ,... c5 oz \u0026gt;,,......V \u0026gt;\n:c \u0026gt;m  -0 V\u0026gt;O C\n:c -0 ..... :-'{!? n::c =1m \u0026gt;(') ::!8 Oz :z: =I \"'a z (/) ?' ~ ~ O\n:c  \"' ,-v,\n:c.,., n::c -tO \u0026gt;3: (') =I ~ :z: (/) PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS/ WELCOME / STUDENT PERFORMANL Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS C. LR CTA IV. REPORTS I COMMUNICATIONS A. BOARD MEMBERS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: May 26, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: UPDATE - TRI-DISTRICT ALTERNATIVE CHARTER SCHOOL BACKGROUND The Tri-District Charter School Committee is working to complete the application and is planning to present the document to the Arkansas Department of Education at their June or July Board Meeting. The school may have a late start\nhowever, everything should be in place by October 1, 2005. The committee members have viewed several sites and personnel from the Pulaski County Government are negotiating the lease agreement for the proposed site. The details regarding the facility have to be presented with the application. We have completed and/or agreed upon the following:  The letter of intent,  Approval by two of the school districts' boards (LR and NLR) to enter into a Tri-district Charter School agreement,  A facility, located at 8300 Geyer Springs Road,  The curriculum offerings and support services that will be similar to those offered at alternative learning environments, as mandated by the ADE,  Personnel and hiring procedures/practices (we will follow LRSD hiring practices), and  The funding for the program has been determined and the formula for the three school districts has been established. Committee members are finalizing the behavior modification programs and the discipline procedures. PREPARED BY: Linda Watson, Ed. D. :,, \"....'. C: 0~ CD~ C: ,,. 8(/l !:!l~ ~~ 0 IT ,,.z -1- m\n:c IT -.: C\n:c\n, r C :, (J\nt \" ~ C, !..... m (\") :c z 0  -\u0026lt; .C,,: ~ m DATE: May 26, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: May 2005 Construction Report - Bond Projects BACKGROUND: The bids for the remodeling of Rightsell Elementary will be received on Wednesday, May 25th . A verbal report on the costs will be presented at the Board meeting. This will be a busy summer for LRSD construction projects. As an example, interior remodeling and a new parking lot at Fair Park to convert this facility to early childhood development has to be completed by August 15th . The work cannot commence until school is out. The interior remodeling of Central High is to be completed this summer. Portable classrooms are being installed at several schools, and they must be ready to occupy by August 15th . As indicated on the attached report, there are many other projects underway as well. I will be glad to update you on any Bond construction matters at any time . You can call me at 447-1146. RATIONALE: Monthly reports are submitted to the Board to keep members up-to-date on construction projects in the District. FUNDING: Bond Funds RECOMMENDATION: Report item\nno action necessary. PREPARED BY: Bill Goodman, District Engineer !.... ~ ::c z 0  -\u0026lt; .C.,: 0 ?\n\"' !II\n:o \"\u0026lt;' in 5z .... 0 ...,u, o--\u0026lt; 0 C:\n~ .... ~ \"z' 0 \u0026gt; Facility Name Carver f- -- Central -Gib-bs - Oakhurst (Adult Educatio~) Western Hills CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD MAY 26, 2005 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION I Project Description I Cost Media Center Expansion $167,~90 Renovation - Interior -- ---- - -- . $10,200,266 -A-dd-ition --- $705,670 New Windows $215,000 -- Electrical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC $622,160 I t:st. compIetIon Date Dec-05 - Aug-05 Dec-05 Aug-05 - Aug-05 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - SUMMER/ FALL 2005 Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I t:st. compIetIon Date Fair Park - Remodel $799,000 Aug-05 - -Parking Lot -- . - - Fair Park - $185,000 __A ug-05 r Restrooms -- - - -Fo-rest Park $152,881 - ~g-05 Skylig~Replacement-- -- Henderson $45,000- Aug-05 -- -- -- - Meadowcliff Remodel $164,150 Aug-05 -- - Pulaski Heights Elem/Middle Cafeteria Ceiling --- $33,378 Aug-05 Pulaski Heights E~menl_ry Clean Exterior Walls $98,660 Aug-05 -- . Pulaski Heights Elem/Middle Replace Entry Doors $13,990 Aug-05 -- -- Rights ell Renovation $2,494,000 Aug-06 -So-uthwe-st - _N ew Corridor Ceiling $300,000 Aug-05 -- - -- - Woodruff Parking Lot $35,000 Aug-05 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I t:st. l\nompIeuon Date Booker Electrical Upgrade - - Unknown Unknown Chicot Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown goverdale ~ementary Addition $520,750 Unknown -- Forest Heights Rem-odel -- $1,547,000 Unknown Mitchell Renovation --+- $2,212,493 Unknown .!:_ulaski Hgt~ MS Energy monitoring system installation_ _ Unknown Unknown Woodruff Parking addition $193,777 Auq-05 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Proiect Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date Administration Asbestos abatement $380,495 Mar-03 Administration Fresh air system $55,000 Aug-03 Administration Fire alarm $32,350 Aug-03 Administration HVAC $70,000 Nov-04 Administration Annex Energy monitoring system installation May-02 Alternative Learning Ctr. -Energy monitoring system installation - $15,160 Oct-01 Alternative Learning Ctr. Energy efficient lighting $82,000 Dec-01 Badgett Partial asbestos abatement $237,237 Jul-01 -- --- - Badgett Fire alarm $18,250 Aug-02 - ~ lassroom addition/renovation - - + - Bale - $2,244,524 Dec-02 - -- Bale - - - Energy monitoring system Mar-02 Bale Partial roof replacement $269,587 Dec-01 Bale HVAC $664,587 Aug-01 Baseline Renovation - $953,520 Aug-04 Booker Gym Roof $48,525 Oct-04 - - - Booker -ADA Rest rooms $25,000 Aug-04 Booker Energy efficient lighting $170,295 Apr-01 - - Booker - Energy monitoring system installation $23,710 Oct-01 Booker Asbestos abatement $10,900 Feb-02 - - ~ Booker - Fire alarm ------ - - $34,501 Mar-02 Brady Addition/renovation - ~- $973,621 Nov-04 Brady Energy efficient lighting $80,593 Sep-02 Brady Asbestos abatement $345,072 Auq-02 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD MAY 26, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Carver Carver Central Central Facilit Name Proect Descri lion Energy monitoring system installation Parking lot =====- HVAC Renovation - Band Area Reflecting Pond C-e-n-tr_a_l Pa_r_k-ing ___ _ Studenfparking Central/Quigley Stadium light repa~\u0026amp; electrical repair Central/Quigley Athletic Field Improvement Central/Quigley Irrigation System _-_-_-_-__ ,C_e_ ntr_al ____-_--_-_+_- . P urchaseland for school Central Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations Central I Ceiling and wall repair Central Fire Alarm System Desig~lnstallation Central Front landing tile repair __ Chicot Draina~ Chi~ Sound Attenuation Cloverdale Elem. Energy efficient lighting Cloverdale MS Energy efficient lighting Cloverdale MS Major renovation \u0026amp; addition Dodd Fire Alarm Upgrade -- Dodd I EnergyefficTeriTTighting Dodd Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile Dodd Replace roof top HVAC - Dunbar Renovation/addition Facilities Service Interior renovation Facility Services Fire al~ Fair Park - Roof Fair Park HVAC renovation/fire alarm Fair Park Energy efficient lighting Fair Park Asbestos abatement-ceiling 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music J. A. Fair room addition J. A. Fair Energy efficient lighting J. A. Fair Press box -- J. A. Fair Security cameras J. A. Fair Athletic Field Improvement J. A. Fair Irrigation System J. A. Fair Roof repairs Forest Park Replace window units w/central HVAC Forest Park Diagonal parking Forest Park Energy efficient lighting Fulbright Energy efficient lighting Fulbright Energy monitoring system installation Fulbright - - -- Replace roof top HVAC units Fulbright Parking~ Fulbright Roof repairs Franklin Renovation Geyer Springs Gibbs Gibbs Hall Hall Hall Hall Hall - -- Roof Repair Energy efficient lighting Energy monitoring system installation Major renovation \u0026amp; addition Asbestos abatement Energy efficient lighting Infrastructure improvements Energy efficient lighting Cost $14,480 $111)\"42 $225,000 $57,561 $174,000 $265,000 $38,000 $14, 5.QQ_ Unknown $2,000,000 $24,000 $80,876 $22,470 $64,700 $43~4- $132,678 $189,743 $1 ,393,822 $9,200 $90,665 $156,299 $215,570 $6,149,023 $84,672 $12,000 $245,784 $315,956 $90,162 $59,310 $3,155,640 $277,594 $10,784 $12,500 $38,000 $14,000 $391 ,871 $485,258 $111 ,742 $119,788 $134,463 $11 ,950 $107,835 $140,000 $200,000 $2,511 ,736 $161 ,752 $76,447 $11 ,770 $8,637 ,709 $168,222 $42,931 $93,657 $296,707 Est. Completion Date May-01 Aug-03 Dec-04 Sep-04 Aug-03 Aug-03 Aug-03 Aug-03 Dec-02 Dec-02 Oct-01 Aug-01 Aug~1 Aug-04 Jul-04 Jul-01 Jul-01 Nov-02 Oct-04 Aug-01 Jul-01 Aug-02 Nov-04 Mar-01 Aug-03 May-05 Apr-_Q2 Aug-01 Aug-01 A~g-~ Apr-01 Nov-00 Jun-01 Jul-03 Jul-03 Aug-03 Nov-03 Aug-03 May-01 Jun-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Mar-03 Jun-04 Apr-01 Jul-01 Sep-03 Aug-01 Jul-01 Aug-01 A r-01 2 !-.... m (\") ::c z 0,- 8 -\u0026lt; .C., ~ m !I\"\nc m $ YI 0z .... 0 ,...,u, oo-c\u0026lt; ~~.... (\") \u0026gt; f\nz 0 \u0026gt; Facilit Name Hall Hall Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson IRC Jefferson -Jef-fers-on- - Laidlaw Mablevale Elem Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale MS Mabelvale MS Mann Mann Mann Mann Mann Mann McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McDermott McDermott McDermott Meadowcliff Meadowcliff Meadowcliff Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Mitchell Mitchell Mitchell Mitchell Oakhurst Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Parkview Parkview CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD MAY 26, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Proect Descri tion Cost Est. Completion Date Intercom Security cameras Lockers ----- Energy efficient lig~ Roof replacement gym-  Asbestos abatement Phase I Asbestos abatement Phase 2 Energy efficient lighting Asbestos abatement -~Renovation \u0026amp; fire alarm Parkin~ - Fire Alarm Upgrade _ Energy monitoring system installation Replace HVAC units _ Asbestos Abatement Energy efficient lighting_ Renovate bleachers Renovation Partial Replacement Asphalt walks __ Walkwa cano ies Boiler replacement Fencing Partial demolition/portable classrooms Parking Lot Overlay Athletic Field Improvement Irrigation System Security cameras Energy efficient lighting Stadium stands repair Inte-rcom- - Classroom Addition Fire Alarm Upgrade Energy efficient lighting Replace roof top HVAC units Fire alarm A-sbestos- abatement Engergy efficient lighting Replace cooling tower Replace shop vent system En_ergy monitoririg system installation Building Remediation Energy efficient lighting Energy monitoring system installation Asbestos abatement HVAC renovation Energy monitoring system installation Energy efficient lighting Asbestos abatement Parking lot 6 classroom addition Parking .!_!!provements Addition HVAC controls Feb-01 $10,600 Jun-01 $43,854 Dec-04 $193,679 Jul-01 $107,835 May-01 $500,000 Aug-01 $250,000 - Aug-02 $109,1~ Jul-02 $43,639 Oct-01 $1,630,000- Nov-02 ---- $269,588 Jul-01 $12,~ Oct-04 $12,1~ Aug-01 $300,000 Aug-02 $107,000 Aug-02 $106,598 Dec-02 $134,793 Aug-01 $6,851,621 Mar-04 $11,500,000 Apr-04 The total $1.8 million Dec-01 . is what has been used Dec-01 so far on the projects Oct-01 listed completed for Sep-01 Mann. Aug-01 $65,000 Apr-05 $38,000 Jul-03 $~750 Jul-03 $36,300 Jun-01 $303,614 May-01 $235,000- Aug-01 $46,000 Feb-02 $2,155,622 Jul-04 $7_,700 Sep-04 $79,411 Feb-01 $476,000 Aug-02 $16,175 Jul-01 $253,412 Aug-02 $88,297 Dec-02 $37,203 Dec-00 $20,000 May-01 $17,145 Aug-01 $165,000 Jul-04 $103,642 Apr-01 $16,695 Jul-01 $13,000 Jul-01 $237,237 Aug-01 $10,695 May-01 $81,828 Apr-01 $10,000 Aug-02 $138,029 Aug-02 $888,778 Oct-02 $142,541 Aug-03 $2,121,226 Dec-04 $210,000 Jun-02 3 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD MAY 26, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I I I Est. Completion Project Description Cost Date Parkview Roof replacement $273,877 Sep-01 1-P_a_rk_v_ie_w __ --_ -=- __Exterior lights __ _=: $10,784 - Nov-00 Parkview __ 1HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700~ ea controls _ $301,938 _ Aug-01 Parkview _ Locker replacement ___ __ _ $120,000 Aug-01 Parkview Energy efficient light~ __ ____ $315,000 Jun-01 Procurement Energy monitoring system installation $5,290 Jun-02 Procurement _-_ - - Fire al~ _ - = $25,000 _ Aug-03 Pulaski Hgts. Elem -Renovation-- $1 ,193,259 __ Nov-04 Pulaski Hgts. Elem I Move playground __ _ ____ $17,000 Dec-02 Pulaski Hgts. MS Renovation ------- _ $3,755,041 __ Nov-04 Rightsell Energy efficient lighting $84,898 Apr-01 Rockefeller ~ nergy efficient lighting $137,004 Mar-01 Rockefeller ~ - Replace rooftop HVAC _ - ----=-- $539,175 Aug-01 Rockefeller _ ~rking addition __ ___ $111,742 Aug-02 Romine Asbestos abatement $10,000 Apr-02 Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675 Mar-03 __ T rack Renovations -=---=--- __ _ $289,0~ -=- May-05 Romine Scott Field Security/Transportation Bus cameras ___ _ ___ $22,500 Jun-01 _S_ou_thw_est__ Addition __ ___ $2,000,000 Nov-04 Southwest Asbestos abatement_____ _____ $28,138 Aug-00 Southwest New roof ___ $690,000 Oct-03 ~~~:~:::: -----', ~cc-~\n~g:g:~~t~:~:i!~~:~ing - ----- :\n:~:~~\n~~:~~ ----- - --~- - Student Assignment Energy monitoring system installation $4,830 Aug-02 Student Assignment--= Fire alarm -- -=- $9.~ Aug-03 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation $275,000 Dec-01 Tech Ctr / Metro Renovation Technology Upgrade Addition/Renovation - Phase II --_- $3,679,000 ----:iun-04 Upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data ____ Nov-02 Terry Terry Terry Wakefield Wakefield Wakefield Wakefield Washington Washington Washington Watson Watson Watson Watson Watson Western Hills Western Hills Western Hills Western Hills Western Hills Williams Williams Williams Wilson Wilson Wilson Woodruff Energy efficient lighting --- $73,850 - Feb-01 Driveway \u0026amp; Parking - - - - $83,484 - Aug-02 Media Center addition -~ ~-- $704,932 - Sep-02 _____ ~Rebuild ___ $5,300,000 Dec-04 Security cameras $8,000 Jun-01 Energy efficient lighting - ~ $74,776 Feb-01 Demolition/Asbestos Abatement $200,000 Nov-02 Fire Alarm Upgrade -- $1 {600 Oct-04 Security cameras - -- $7,900 Jun-01 -==- Energy efficient lighting___ --=-- $165,281 Apr-01 Energy monitoring system installation __ $a\":53o Jul-01 Asbestos abatement _ ___ $182,241 Aug-01 Energy efficient lighting ___ $106,868 Aug-01 Asbestos abatement $10,000 Aug-02 - - - Major renovation \u0026amp; addition -- - - $800,000 Aug-02 -=_---:: Fire Alarm Upgrade _ - - ~ $8,400 Oct-04 ADA Rest rooms___ $25,000 Aug-04 Asbestos abatement___ _ -==-- $191 ,946 Aug-02 Intercom $7,100 Dec-01 Energy efficient lighting _ --=- - $106,000 Jul-01 _ _ _ Renovation ___ _ $2,106,492 Mar-04 Parking expansions ~ _ $183,717 Dec-03 Energy efficient light~ ___ $122,719 Jun-01 -HVAC for Cafeteria = _ $56,000 Mar-05 Renovation/expansion__ ~ $1 ,263,876 Feb-04 Parking Expansion __ $110,000 Aug-03 Renovation - $246,419 Aug-02 4 !- m\u0026lt; C') :,: z 0  -\u0026lt; .C.,: 0 ~ m !I'\n%l ~ en 5z -\u0026lt; 0 N\u0026lt;J\u0026gt; 0-\u0026lt; 0 C: ~~ -\u0026lt; C') ~ z 0 \u0026gt; LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: May 26, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Board Auditor Report BACKGROUND: Monthly report to School Board. RATIONALE: Summary report of activities. FUNDING: No changes. RECOMMENDATION: None. PREPARED BY: Sandy Becker !II :I: 0 3m,..:. m \"\"m'' C C ~ 5 z C) ~ :z\n!.... m (\"'J :I: z 0  -\u0026lt; C \"0 C ?\nm !II :\u0026lt;l ~ \"5' .z.. . 0 ~~ oc i~.... (\"'J \u0026gt; i:\n:\nz C \u0026gt; LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS Date: May 26, 2005 To: Board of Directors From@sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Re: Audit Report - May This is the sixty-seventh communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with one high school, two middle school and two elementary schools to resolve financial issues in their activity funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. b) The AAB has forwarded a Booster Club Guidelines Package to be included in official publications of the District after review. Board Policy and Regulation a) The amended Out of District Travel regulation is being implemented. Technology Training a) Monitoring technology plans and technology meetings to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. b) Facilitating technology upgrade in cooperation with the English Department for Yearbook and Newspaper production staff in LRSD high schools to improve access to tools needed for students and staff. a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of uts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. Audit Report - May 2005 Page 2 of2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring combined payroll and human resources issues for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Reviewing Teacher School Supply Fund Records for recommendations. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Served as District coordinator of United Way's Day of Caring (April 17, 2005. Eleven schools participated. Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-447-1115 . My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. ~ :r 0 3: m rm rrnn m C C: n ?. 0 z G) ~ z\n!.... m n :r z ,0- 8 -\u0026lt; .C.,: ~ m ~\n%l ~ rn 0 .z.. . 0 NV, o-\u0026lt; 0 C: ~~.... n \u0026gt; f\nz C \u0026gt; DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 May 26, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Technology Report BACKGROUND: Since the last Board meeting the following technology activities took place:  The District received $1.1 million in E-rate funds for funding year 2003-04, last week.  This summer we plan to refresh computers in four middle schools.  The District technology staff are getting geared up for upcoming summer projects which will include: updating computers, computer moves, and telephone moves at designated district sites. RATIONALE: To implement the LRSD Technology Plan 2003 - 2006 FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board accept this report. PREPARED BY: Lucy Neal, Director, Technology and Media Services John Ruffins, Director, Computer Information Services !I'\nID ~ en z5 -\u0026lt; 0 N en 0-\u0026lt; 0 C: ~~ ~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: May 26, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Revision of the 2005-06 Student Calendar BACKGROUND: The Board approved the 2004-05 student calendar on March 24, 2005. Since that time, new K - 12 literacy and curriculum mapping programs have been adopted. There is a need to move two (2) staff development days to the beginning of the school year. RATIONALE: This minor adjustment to the calendar will ensure that ample training is provided to our staff to better service our schools and enhance the education of our students. This change will not affect either spring break or winter vacation. FUNDING: None RECOMMENDATION: The Administration is recommending the Board's approval of the attached revised student calendar for the 2005-06 school year. PREPARED BY: Beverly Williams, Director of Human Resources :I: 0 3: ,m... m en en m 0 c::: (\") ?\n0z C) ?\nz..__~ MONTH M T JULY AUGUST I 2 SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 3 4 :NOVEMBI R I DECEMBER JANUARY '06 2 3 FEBRUARY MARCH APR IL 3 4 MAY I 2 JUNE Legend * [] WV sv PC ST DAY LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT CALE DAR 2005-2006 w TH F M T w TH F M T I 4 5 6 7 8 11 12 SD SD SD SD 3 4 5 8 9 10 II 12 15 16 II I 2 5 6 7 8 9 12 13 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 SD SD 2 3 4 7 8 9 10 II 14 15 I 2 5 6 7 8 9 12 13 [861 - R H 4 5 6 9 10 11 12 13 16 17 I 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 I 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 1-l 17 18 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 11781 R I 2 5 7 7 8 9 12 13 1st Day Students H Holiday End Quarter SD Staff Development w TH F M 13 14 15 18 SD \\VD * 17 18 19 22 14 15 16 19 142] SD 19 20 21 24 16 17 18 21 WV 14 15 16 19 18 19 20 23 re 15 16 17 20 15 16 17 20 19 20 21 24 17 18 19 22 14 15 16 19 Winter Vacation R Record Days (one-half day for teachers) Spring Vacation TCD Total Contract Days (9.25 teachers) Parent Conference WD Non-student Work Day Student Days # Last Day Students T w 19 20 23 24 20 21 25 26 H 22 ')\"\u0026gt; -\" WV WV 20 21 24 25 21 22 21 22 25 26 23 24 20 21 REVISED FOR BOARD APPROVAL 5/12/05 WV WD ST SY PC TH F M T w TH F DAY H R 21 22 25 26 27 28 29 25 26 29 30 31 9 0 I re SD 22 23 26 27 28 29 30 19 I I 27 28 31 20 0 0 H H 24 25 28 29 30 17 3 0 WV WV H WV WV WV H 22 23 26 27 28 29 30 12 10 0 26 27 30 31 20 I 0.5 23 24 27 28 19 0 I [1331 SD SV sv sv sv SV 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 17 5 0 27 28 20 0 0 H 25 26 29 30 31 22 I 0 22 23 26 27 28 29 30 3 0 0.5 TOTALS 178 21 4 I STl!DE:-iTS DO NOT ATTEND ON THE DAYS SHADED ABO\\'E 1st Quarter = 42 student days 2nd Quarter = 44 student days 3rd Quarter = 4 7 student days 4th Quarter = 45 sludent days TOT AL = 178 STUDENT DAYS SD 5 I I 2 0 0 0 I 0 0 10 TCD 15 21 21 19 12 20.5 20 18 20 22 3.5 192 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: May 26, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: 2005 - 2005 Student Handbook Revisions BACKGROUND: The Student Handbook is revised yearly in an effort to update newly adopted District policies and comply with Arkansas State Standards and Statutes. Each school's committee, composed of students, teachers, administrators and parents, have been given an opportunity to review the handbook and submit recommendations for revision. The District-wide Student Handbook Committee reviewed the recommendations and is submitting them to the Superintendent and Board for their consideration. RATIONALE: The Student Handbook is the District's opportunity to inform parents of changes in policies and procedures regarding the students' code of conduct and academic requirements. FUNDING: Funding for the revision and production of the Student Handbook are budgeted on a yearly basis. RECOMMENDATION: The administration recommends Board approval of the attached recommendations for the revision of the 2005 -2006 Student Handbook. PREPARED BY: Linda Watson, Ed. D. Assistant Superintendent Student Discipline .,,\no O.., a.: , Ul Cl !!1 ~ Oz .z... ~\u0026gt; om\"\"\"\" ,\"-'?\u0026gt;5 0-\u0026lt; ~~ m  z -\u0026lt; DRAFT 2005-2006 STUDENT HANDBOOK REVISIONS The following information represents the recommendations for the revision of the 2005 - 2006 Student Handbook. The recommendations are presented in bold print in the text. Rule 10: Failure to Follow Bus Rules and Regulations All school rules and regulations governing student behavior apply to conduct on the school bus and at bus stops. If a student misbehaves on a bus or at a bus stop, he/she will receive a disciplinary sanction as it is outlined in the Student Handbook. NOT PERMITTED  Eating and drinking on the bus  Smoking  Playing radios, tape players or band instruments  Yelling at anyone on the bus or outside the bus  Throwing paper or any object on the floor of the bus or outside the window  Putting hands, arms or head out windows  Tampering with any of the bus safety devices  Defacing any part of a bus  Weapons Rule 16: Sexual Misconduct/Indecent Exposure Rule 16A. The act of deliberately showing private body parts/organs in a public place will not be tolerated. The student is required to participate in counseling sessions with a school counselor or administrator. (Arkansas Code 5-14-112) Kindergarten - Second Graders First Offense: Suspension: 2 days and Counseling with school counselor/administrator Second Offense: Suspension: 3-5 days and Counseling Third Offense: Suspension: 10 days and Counseling Third - Fifth Graders First Offense: Suspension: 2-4 days and Counseling Second Offense: Suspension: 5-10 days and Counseling Third Offense: Long-term suspension recommendation Rule 26A. Possession/Use of Paging Devices, Cellular Phones and/or Other Electronic Communication Devices The use or possession of a beeper or other electronic communication device (CD, MP3, DVD, IPODS, Cameras) on a school campus, a school bus or at a school-related activity, during the regular school day, is prohibited, except when they are required for medical reasons. Medical documentation must be on file with the student's administrator and school nurse. (Arkansas Codes 6-17-113 and 6-18-502) First Offense: Warning, confiscation of the device and parent conference. Second Offense: In-school suspension: 3 days Third Offense: Suspension: 5 days and probation (regular schedule schools) Suspension: 6 days and probation (block schedule schools) Fourth Offense: Long-term suspension recommendation Anti-Bullying Policy Bullying is defined as a pattern of behavior of one or more individuals intimidating one or more persons through verbal, physical, or emotional abuse\nwritten or electronically transmitted abusive messages\nor attacks on the property of another. Examples of bullying include, but are not limited to verbal taunts, name-calling and put downs, taking of money or possessions, and exclusion from peer groups within school. Bullying is prohibited while in school, on school property, in school vehicles, on school buses, at designated school bus stops, at school-sponsored activities, or at school sanctioned events. The Student Handbook will include all newly adopted or revised Board policies that pertain to students. .,,\n:c .O.,c_:, rn\" !!!~ Oz_z, ~\u0026gt; c\" m\" ~~ 5~ ~~ mz... .  ....n ~\n, ~~ z~ \u0026gt;\".,, !C .,, mr- '2n C\"l  \u0026gt; --\u0026lt; z i5 :CZ ~ -- 0 DATE: TO: FROM: May 26, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Homeless Education Continuation Grant Application Background: The Little Rock School District is required, by federal law, to provide academic, personal and familial support and assistance to homeless students enrolled in the Little Rock School District. During the 2004-05 school year, approximately 450 homeless students were identified and provided a range of services to remove all barriers to the immediate enrollment and academic success of these students. Through the federally funded McKinney-Vento Education for Homeless Children and Youth Grant, the Little Rock School District has received funding, through a competitive grant application process, to serve this target population. This proposal is a continuation application for year two funding in a three-year grant cycle. Supplemental funding is provided this program through Titles I, IV, and V to support district efforts in maintaining compliance. Goals and Objectives: 1. 2. 3. To support the academic achievement of homeless students by providing tutoring, supplemental instruction and enriched educational services to enable homeless students to meet or exceed state academic standards. To provide and maintain ongoing professional development and awareness activities to Little Rock School District personnel designed to heighten their sensitivity to and understanding of the rights and specific educational needs of homeless children and youth. To provide education and training to the parents/guardians of homeless students regarding available school and community resources, special programs and family support services relating to employment, transition housing, education and training and physical/mental health needs. ~\u0026lt; en:= C:. !!II::(\"\"') m:i::\n:oO -0 nr ill~ 0~ =l (\") ::Om Pl\"' ~ ~ 4. To eliminate all barriers to the enrollment and academic success of homeless students through coordination of transportation services, free nutrition services, provision of adequate clothing, school supplies, case management and other emergency services. Rationale: All local education agencies, who receive federal education funds are required to provide activities and services to homeless children and youth which include but are not limited to: 1) supplemental academic support\n2) expedited enrollment in school, including transportation\n3) immediate enrollment in free food services programs\nand 4) the development and maintenance of documented policies and procedures that ensure that homeless students have the same free and appropriate education services as provided to other children and youth. These services are needed to ensure that homeless students have an opportunity to meet the same challenging academic achievement standards to which all students are held. Funding: Grant Budget: $41 ,000 - No match required Recommendation: It is recommended that the board approve the submission of this grant application. Prepared By: Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent - Administrative Services Jo Evelyn Elston, Director - Pupil Services Department Assurances McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Funds The applicant, local educational agency (LEA), will assure with the acceptance of McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance funds, the following provisions as stated in H.R. 1, Public Law 107-110, as reauthorized by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)- 2001, Title X, Part C - Homeless Education, Subtitle B of Title Vil - McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistant Act of 2002: Education for Homeless Children and Youth (42 U.S.C. 11431 et seq.), Sections 721-726. LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY REQUIREMENTS l) SCHOOL SELECTION (A) According to a child or youth's best interest, the local educational agency of each homeless child or youth shall continue the child or youth's education in the \"school of origin\" [Section 722(g)(3)(A)], (1) for the duration of homelessness [Section 722(g)(3)(AXi)]\n(2) for the remainder of the academic year if becomes permanently housed during the academic year [Section 722(gX3XAXiXII)]\nand/or (3) for the following academic year if becomes homeless in between academic years (Section 722(g)(3)(A)(iXI)]. (B) In determining the best interests of the child or youth for purposes of making a school assignment under paragraph (A), consideration shall be given to a request made by a parent or guardian or youth regarding a school selection [Section 722(g)(3)(BXi)]. (C) The term \"school of origin\" means the school that the child or youth attended when permanently housed, or the school in which the child or youth was last enrolled [Section 722(g)(3XG)]. (D) The choice regarding placement shall be made regardless of whether a child or youth is living with the homeless parents or has been temporarily placed elsewhere [Section 722(gX3)(F)]. (E) In the case of an unaccompanied youth, the LEA homeless liaison must assist in placement/enrollment decisions, consider the youth's wishes, and provide notice to the youth of the right to appeal under the enrollment disputes provisions [Section 722(g)(3XBXiii)]. (F) If the LEA sends the child/youth to a school other than the school of origin or the school requested by the parent or guardian, the LEA must provide written explanation to the parent or guardian, including the right to appeal under the enrollment disputes provision [Section 722(gX3XB)(ii)]. 2) ENROLLMENT (A) The school selected shall immediately enroll the child/youth in school, even if the child or youth lacks records normally required for enrollment, such as previous academic records, immuniz.ation or medical records, proof of residency, lack of birth certificate, or other documentation, guardianship issues or uniform or dress code requirements [Section 722(g)(3)(C)(i)]. (B) The terms \"enroll\" and \"enrollment\" are defined to include attending classes and participating fully in school activities [Section 725(3)]. (C) The enrolling school shall immediately contact the last school attended to obtain relevant academic and other records [Section 722(g)(3)(C)(ii)]. (D) If a child or youth lacks immuniz.ations or immuniz.ation or medical records, the enrolling school shall refer parent/guardian to the LEA homeless liaison, who shall help obtain necessary immuniz.ations or immunization or medical records [Section 722(g)(3XCXiii)]. 6 ?\"\u0026lt; cen= :e\u0026lt;n :en m:,: :c 0 -n 0,- Rl ~ C :C =is\nan mm n\u0026lt;n 0 ~ ~ ,, :c .0. ,_a , ~ Cl !!l~ Oz Z-1 ~\u0026gt; C-,, m.,, ,~-~\u0026gt; 0-1 ~~ zm - -I (E) The McKinney-Vento Act does not prohibit LEAs from requiring parents or guardians to submit contact information [Section 722(g)(3)(H)]. 3) DISPUTE RESOLUTION (A) Local educational agencies shall follow the procedures for prompt resolution of disputes regarding the educational placement of homeless children and youth according to the McKinney-Vento plan submitted by the State [Section 722(g)(l)(C)]. (B) If a dispute arises over school selection or enrollment, the child/youth must be immediately admitted to the school in which he/she is seeking enrollment, pending resolution of the dispute [Section 722(g)(3)(E)(i)]. (C) The parent or guardian shall be provided with a written explanation and a copy sent to the Office of State Coordinator of the school's decision on the dispute, including the right to appeal [Section 722(g)(3)(E)(ii)). (D) The parent/guardian/youth shall be referred to the LEA homeless liaison, who will carry out the state's grievance procedure as expeditiously as possible after receiving notice of the dispute [Section 722(g)(3)(E)(iii)]. (E) An unaccompanied youth shall be assisted by the LEA homeless liaison to ensure that the youth is immediately enrolled in school pending resolution of the dispute [Section 722(g)(3)(E)(iv)]. (4) RECORDS Any record ordinarily kept by the school, including immunization or medical records, academic records, birth certificates, guardianship records, and evaluations for special services or programs of each homeless child or youth shall be maintained [Section 722(g)(3XD)] (A) so that the records are available, in a timely fashion, when a child or youth enters a new school or school district\nand (B) in a manner consistent with Section 444 of the General Education Provisions Act. (5) TRANSPORTATION The LEA shall adopt policies and practices to ensure that transportation is provided, at the request of the parent or guardian or in the case of an unaccompanied youth, at the request of the LEA homeless liaison [Section 722(g)(l)(J)(iii)]. (A) If the homeless student continues to live in the area served by the LEA in which the school of origin is located, that LEA shall provide or arrange transportation. (B) If the homeless student moves to an area served by another LEA, though continuing his/her education at the school of origin, the LEA of origin and the LEA in which the student is living must agree upon a method to apportion responsibility and costs for transportation to the school of origin. If the LEAs cannot agree upon such a method, the responsibility and costs must be shared equally. (C) LEAs shall provide services to homeless children and youth that are comparable to those received by other students in the school selected, including transportation [Sec.722(g)(4)]. (6) COMPARABLE SERVICES (A) Each homeless child or youth shall be provided services comparable to those received by other students in the school selected, including transportation services, and education services for which the students meet eligibility criteria\nsuch as services provided under Title I or similar State or local programs\nprograms for students with disabilities\nprograms for students with limited English proficiency\nvocational or technical programs\ngifted and talented programs\nschool nutrition programs [Section 722(g)(4)]\npublic preschool programs\nand local before- and after-school care programs. 7 (B) Children and youth who are homeless and attending any school in the LEA shall be eligible for services in a Targeted Assistance School Program [Section 115(b)(2)(E)]. (7) ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT STANDARDS Homeless children and youth shall have access to the education and other services they need to ensure that they have an opportunity to meet the same challenging State student academic achievement standards to which all students are held [Section 721 ( 4)]. (8) LEA HOMELESS LIAISON All LEAs shall designate an appropriate staff person, who may also be coordinator for other Federal programs, as a local educational agency (LEA) homeless liaison for homeless children and youth to perfonn duties described in paragraph 6(A) [Section 722(g)(1)(J)(ii)]. (A) The LEA homeless liaison shall assist unaccompanied youth in placement/enrollment decisions, including considering the youth's wishes in those decisions, and providing notice to the youth of the right to appeal such decisions under the enrollment disputes provisions [Section 722(g)(3)(B)(iii)]. (B) The LEA homeless liaison shall ensure that unaccompanied youth are immediately enrolled in school pending resolution of disputes that might arise over school enrollment or placement [Section 722(g)(3)(E)(iv)]. (C) The LEA homeless liaison shall assist children and youth who do not have immunizations, or immunization or medical records, to obtain necessary immunizations, or immunization or medical records [Section 722(g)(3)(C)(iii)]. (D) The LEA homeless liaison shall collaborate and coordinate with state coordinators and community and school personnel responsible for the provision of education and related services to homeless children and youth [Section 722(gX6XC)]. (9) SEGREGATION lt is the policy of the Congress that homelessness alone is not sufficient reason to separate students from the mainstream school environment [Section 721(3)]. (A) LEA shall adopt policies and practices to ensure that homeless children and youth are not segregated on the basis of their status as homeless or stigmatized [Section 722(g)(l)(J)(i)]. (B) The LEA application for McKinney-Vento funds shall include a description of these policies and procedures, consistent with the prohibition on segregation, and the implementation to ensure that activities carried out by the LEA will not isolate or stigmatize homeless children and youth [Section 723(b)(5)]. (C) Services provided with McKinney-Vento funds shall not replace the regular academic program and shall be designed to expand upon or improve services provided as part of the school's regular academic program [Section 723(a)(3)]. (10) AGENCY COORDINATION (A) Local educational agency (LEA) serving homeless children and youth and receiving a McKinney-Vento funds shall coordinate the provision of McKinney-Vento funded services with local social service agencies and other agencies or programs providing services to homeless children and youth and their families, including services and programs funded under the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act [Section 722(gXSXA)(i)]. (B) LEA receiving McKinney-Vento funds shall coordinate with other LEAs on interdistrict issues, such as transportation or transfer of school records [Section 722(g)(5)(A)(ii)]. (C) LEA homeless liaison duties include the collaboration and coordination with state coordinators and community and school personnel responsible for the provision of education and related services to homeless children and youth [Section 722(g)(6)(C)]. 8 \"'O\n,, .0,.,c,c rn C) ~?\nOz .z... ~\u0026gt; c-o m\"'O\n~ 5~ ii!~ m .. z -f DATE: . TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 May 26, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Measuring the Vision BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District's vision is to become the highest achieving urban school district in the nation. The Planning, Research, and Evaluation Department (PRE) has been asked to develop a plan and a process to measure progress towards achieving the vision. RATIONALE: PRE has developed an evaluation plan that will allow us to measure progress, over time, against three groups: 1. the eleven largest districts in Arkansas 2. a norm group of ten districts located outside of Arkansas that mirror our District's demographics and socio-economic levels but whose students are currently achieving at a much higher level 3. a group of ten of the highest performing districts in the country A timeline has been defined to show when data will be collected and reported. By the end of June, 2005, the following tasks will be completed:  gain support from school district personnel and community,  identify benchmarking partners,  determine data measures to be collected ,  collect baseline data from each district (2003-04 scores), and  notify each district of our intent to collect and compare data over time.\ni\u0026gt;\u0026lt; V, i= C: 3:VJ 3:C\"\u0026gt; m:,:\n_,ooO c-,r ill~ c:,\nJO =I :S\n,oC\"\u0026gt; mm C\") V, ~ ~ .,,\nJO .0. , a_, ~ C) !a~ Oz_z. ~\u0026gt; cm\"\"\"\" ~~ r\u0026gt; 0-\u0026lt; ~~ m  .z.. . By the end of September PRE staff will collect comparative data, analyze, and report the data to the Board of Directors, including determining where the school district is in relation to each group we are measuring against and making projections for gains within the next 1-3 years. See attached file for specific districts named within each group. FUNDING: Not Necessary Eleven Largest Districts in Arkansas District Little Rock Pulaski County Springdale Fort Smith Rogers Bentonville North Little Rock Conway Favetteville Cabot Brvant Norm Group District Little Rock Beaumont ISO Muscogee County Durham Chatham County Richmond County Clayton Indianapolis Portsmouth Norfolk City Caddo Parish McK.innev ISO Rockwall ISO Forsvth County Geor2ia wwo:i DNINMV31 M3ll'fflS NOllll:llldd\\f lN~D a State Enrollment Arkansas 23,225 Arkansas 17,364 Arkansas 14,384 Arkansas 12,854 Arkansas 12,755 Arkansas 9,165 Arkansas 8,722 Arkansas 8,424 Arkansas 8,195 Arkansas 8,061 Arkansas 6,589 State Enrollment Arkansas 23,225 Texas 20,612 Georgia 32,944 North Carolir 30,794 Georgia 34,554 Georgia 34,691 Georgia 49,594 Indiana 40,731 Virginia 15,977 Virginia 36,745 Louisiana 44,556 Texas 15.155 Texas 9 488 Geor2ia 20.407 O.lSIH Nlf:llM3Wlf DNIH:lV3.l '.NQlllf:llldd\\f lN~D :i Reading - 2003 Percent Proficient White Black 75.5% 32.4% 52.8% 30.6% 68.4% na 64.0% 32.4% no data no data no data no data 64.8% 29.4% 70.0% 36.5% 70.3% 56.4% 64.5% na 59.4% na Reading - 2003 Percent Proficient White Black 75.5% 32.4% 91.5% 71.0% 89.8% 75.5% 91.6% 69.7% 86.2% 69.3% 82.7% 72.3% 84.0% 77.4% 56.4% 40.6% 79.3% 60.4% 85.1% 65.5% 78.9% 39.1% 94% 81% 94% 84% 94% 88% 1N3Wd013A30 l'INOISS3~0Md '.NQl.llf:llldd\\f lN~D g Math - 2003 Percent Proficient White Black 65.5% 18.5% 47.6% 20.6% 64.9% na 59.7% 28.6% no data no data no data no data 51.0% 14.5% 65.1% 28.1% 73.9% 46.3% 64.2% na 57.4% na Math-2003 Percent Proficient White Black 65.5% 86.3% 82.7% 92.4% 76.7% 74.0% 75.4% 56.6% 80.3% 85.6% 78.7% 93% 91% 85% :3NNOSM3d \"If JnOS3M N'IWOH \"Xl 18.5% 60.0% 60.1% 73.2% 52.4% 56.0% 61.3% 39.5% 60.5% 69.2% 36.3% 74% 77% 84% Percent Enrollment White Black 25.2% 68.7% 57.3% 39.5% 63.2% 1.2% 59.0% 14.6% no data no data no data no data 38.2% 57.6% 74.4% 20.9% 79.7% 8.4% 96.2% 0.7% 94.4% 2.4% Percent Enrollment White Black 25.2% 68.7% 23.0% 63.8% 33.1% 60.0% 28.0% 58.9% 28.7% 65.7% 25.1% 69.9% 14.3% 69.6% 31.1% 57.9% 26.8% 71.3% 26.4% 68.6% 35.3% 62.9% 67% 8.90% 80% 4.80% 91% 0.60% AM3AO:l3M 1103M:) / M3WWns \"If S3:llAM3S lOOH:lS mi\\ Highest Performing Districts District State Brazosoort ISO Texas Carroll ISO Texas Coooell ISO Texas Cypress Fairbar ISO Texas Frisco ISO Texas Ft. Sam HoustonTexas Texas Grapevine-Colleyville ISO Texas Katy ISO Texas Lewisville ISO Texas McKinney ISO Texas Rockwall ISO Texas Forsyth County Georgia Georgia Enrollment 13,105 7,186 9,891 70,985 11,144 1,160 13,797 39,478 42,922 15,155 9,488 20,407 Reading - 2003 Percent Proficient White Black 93% 97% 94% 94% 95% 95% 94% 93% 93% 94% 94% 94% Math - 2003 Percent Proficient Percent Enrollment White Black White Black 82% 92% 78% 51 9.9 97% 96% 97% 92 1.8 85% 93% 78% 73 3.9 84% 93% 78% 54 10.6 89% 94% 85% 73 7.8 88% 89% 74% 41 36.6 84% 93% 79% 82 3.2 84% 93% 78% 67 6.2 84% 92% 76% 71 7.8 81% 93% 74% 67 8.9 84% 91% 77% 80 4.8 88% 85% 84% 91 0.6 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: May 26, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: US Department of Education- grant submission: Professional Development for Arts Educators BACKGROUND: The District proposes to submit a Professional Development for Arts Educators grant application to implement a high-quality professional development model program in elementary music and visual arts at high poverty elementary schools. The elementary schools to be included are: Franklin, Stephens, Baseline, Wakefield, Watson, Woodruff, Chicot, Wilson, Rightsell, Meadowcliff, Bale, Mabelvale, Cloverdale, Brady, Washington, Western Hills, Romine, Rockefeller, Dodd, McDermott, King, Otter Creek and Carver. The purpose of this program is to strengthen standards-based arts education programs and to help ensure that all students meet challenging State academic content standards and challenging State student academic achievement standards in the arts. This threeyear grant would begin in October 2005. RATIONALE: The LRSD Professional Development for Arts Educators proposal will include extensive professional development reflecting up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practices in the areas of music and visual arts as well as opportunities for the integration of arts across the curriculum. FUNDING: Year One - Year Two - Year Three - Total Request - $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $1,050,000 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the board approve submission of the Professional Development for Arts Educators proposal. PREPARED BY: Olivine Roberts, Associate Superintendent for Curriculum ?\u0026gt; \u0026lt; u,= C:. == (J) 3r:::n m:C\no 0 -n 0,- ~ ~ c::o ::is ::on mm nu, ~ ~ .\n,,\u0026gt;, .X C: a,\no C: nu, $:z ~~ Ou, .,,m ~~ :c n Om ,O-U\u0026gt; a, C: __.n ~\n, Q~ z~ G) \u0026gt; \u0026gt;-,, 3r:::.,, m ,- 2!! 1'i n\u0026gt; \u0026gt;--\u0026lt; z i5 :c z ~ -- 0 DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 May 26, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: US Department of Education - grant submission: Teaching American History Grant Program BACKGROUND: The U.S. Department of Education released a request for proposals for the Teaching American History Grant program. The purpose of the program is to raise student achievement by improving teachers' knowledge, understanding and appreciation of traditional American history. RATIONALE: Grant awards assist local educational agencies, in partnership with entities that have extensive content expertise, to develop, document, evaluate, and disseminate innovative, cohesive models of professional development. By helping teachers to develop a deeper understanding and appreciation of traditional American history as a separate subject matter within the core curriculum, the program will improve instruction and raise student achievement. The district will partner with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock Department of History, National History Day, and the Clinton Library. All LRSD teachers of American History will be involved in this grant initiative. FUNDING: Total Three Year Request $1,000,000 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the board approve submission of the Teaching American History proposal to the US Department of Education on June 14, 2005. PREPARED BY: Olivine Roberts, Associate Superintendent for Curriculum\ni\u0026gt;\u0026lt; u, = C:. 31::Y\u0026gt; 31::0 m::C\ncO -0 (') ,- ~ ~ o::c =I :$\ncC'\u0026gt; mm (') u, ~ ~ ?\u0026lt; ?\u0026gt;2 ril~\ncZ u,\nc om zu, zO ,m- :c,:, ?\u0026gt;x -c C: tD\nc C: (') u, i\nz m~ 0 u, ..,m ~~ ::,:0 Om ,0- u, tD C: \"' DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 May 26, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: US Department of Education - grant submission: Smaller Learning Communities Program BACKGROUND: The U.S. Department of Education released a request for proposals for the Smaller Learning Communities program. The purpose of the program is to raise the academic performance of all high school students and to secure the skills necessary for future success in postsecondary education and adult life. Students are encouraged to take more rigorous courses, especially in the areas of math and science. RATIONALE: Grant awards assist local educational agencies, in partnership with local high schools, to: 1) restructure the target schools into smaller learning communities based on students' career and academic interests to create a more personalized and supportive school environment\n2) improve overall academic achievement in reading and mathematics for all students and narrow the achievement gap that exists between minority and non-minority students\nand 3) enhance teacher capacity to incorporate research based instructional strategies into their daily teaching practices that engage student in learning through targeted, ongoing professional development and capacity building activities. The district will partner with the Southern Regional Educational Board, High Schools that Work, in the implementation of this program. This grant initiative will include Hall and Parkview High Schools. FUNDING: Total Five Year Request $1 ,600,000 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the board approve submission of the Smaller Learning Communities proposal to the US Department of Education on June 7, 2005. PREPARED BY: Olivine Roberts, Associate Superintendent for Curriculum =\"'\u0026lt; cni= C:\ni:cn 31:C\"\u0026gt; m::C\n_:coO c-,r- ~~ o::c =l :S ~ ~ c-,Cll ~ ~ ?\u0026lt; :\"'2 ~~\n:cZ Cll::0 om zcn zO m c: r- :c =\"'x \"D . C: a, :c C: (\")Cl) $: z ~~ Oen -nm f'l~ ::cC\"\u0026gt; Om ocn r-a, C: \"' 0 0 0 z ~ 6 z (/) DATE: TO: FROM: May 26, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Credit Recovery Program for Secondary Schools BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District supports the tenet that additional time and resources should be made available to students with needs that are not met during the regular school year. RATIONALE: There is a compelling need to continue to provide interventions aimed at removing the barriers of our low-performing students. To this end, a credit recovery program will be offered during a six (6) week summer session which is designed to assist our students in overcoming their learning challenges while developing their potential so that they may reach their educational goals and become productive and worthy citizens. FUNDING: In compliance with Arkansas Statute 6-16-702, districts offering summer school for the purpose of remediating student failures must provide the program free of charge to enrolled students who are eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. For the 2004-05 school year, in grades 6-12, the LRSD has 5,615 eligible for the free lunch program and 811 on the reduced-price lunch program. Costs to the district for tuition-free summer school for identified students are estimated at $289,000 for staff salaries and $9,180 for transportation for middle school students (stops throughout the city). Detailed costs will be available later. ?\u0026lt; ?\"2 ~ f\n0 z (J)\n0 om zrn zO me: ,.... :0 .!'.:\u0026gt;, z )\u0026gt; z (\") \u0026gt;,.... (J) .\n,,,,,.x C: CD :0 C: c-, en $: z ~~ Oen -nm en\no ~~ Om ,o... . en CD C: \"' RECOMMENDATION: I recommend approval of this program that will afford our low-performing students the opportunity to recover credits for failed classes. PREPARED BY: Dr. Marian Lacey, Assistant Superintend, Secondary Schools DATE: TO: FROM: May 26, 2005 Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Personnel Changes BACKGROUND: None RATIONALE: To staff allocated positions within the District FUNDING: Operating Fund RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.CA 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) consecutive years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 19, 2004 for regular schools are considered intern teachers. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 9, 2004 for EYE are considered intern teachers. PREPARED BY: Beverly Williams~ctor of Human Resources .!=.,' z \u0026gt;z (\"') \u0026gt;,.... en .?.\u0026gt;, \u0026gt;. \u0026lt; C: Dl\n,:, C: c-, en $:z m~ .O.,emn Q~ Om ,o.... en Dl C: \"' !JI (\"') 0 z en C: ~ z C\u0026gt; ~ ~ m lC mz 0 0 0 z ~ 0z (/J Personnel Changes Page 2 May 26, 2005 NAME START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Resignations!Terminations Certified Employees Anderson, Timothy Oral Communications/ 8-7-03 Reason: Leaving the city MCCLELLAN 4-27-05 Beggs, Melinda English/ 1-21-80 Reason: Retired CENTRAL 6-6-05 Belotti, Virginia Librarian/ 8-19-87 Reason: Retired CARVER 6-10-05 Biehslich, Lisa Art/ 8-13-02 Reason: Accepted another HALL 6-6-05 position Bolden, Alice Geography/ 8-22-88 Reason: Retired SOUTHWEST 6-6-05 Brandon, Barbara Reading/ 8-12-99 Reason: Retired SOUTHWEST 6-6-05 Briscoe, Ill Joseph Physical Science/ 8-24-87 Reason: Retired FOREST HEIGHTS 6-6-05 Carson, Leon English/ 8-24-92 Reason: Retired SOUTHWEST 6-6-05 Carson , Rene Lead Teacher/ 8-27-74 Reason: Retired SCIENCE 6-16-05 Comins, Ruth Spanish/ 9-5-00 Reason: Leaving the city DUNBAR 6-6-05 Daniel, Anita Math/ 8-11-04 Reason: Leaving the city MCCLELLAN 6-6-05 Davis, Dorothy Reading SpecialisU 9-7-71 Reason: Retired CLOVERDALE 6-6-05 MIDDLE Deaton, Betty Elementary V/ 8-24-87 Reason: Retired BASELINE 6-6-05 SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 1-02 30617.00 TCH925 4-18 53061.00 TCH925 2-17 49217.00 LIB950 1-03 31195.00 TCH925 1-17 47715.00 TCH925 5-19 55776.00 TCH925 6-21 60020.00 TCH925 5-19 55776.00 TCH10 6-21 60020.00 TCH105 1-05 33506.00 TCH925 1-06 34661.00 TCH925 6-21 60020.00 TCH925 2-17 49217.00 TCH925 Personnel Changes Page3 May 26, 2005 .!=.,' z START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL \u0026gt;z n CLASS SALARY NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE \u0026gt;,.... CJ) Doolittle, Heidi Elementary II/ 8-7-03 1-02 30617.00 Reason: Accepted another FRANKLIN 6-6-05 TCH925 position Duerkop, Melanie Lead Teacher/ 8-7-02 4-14 48439.00 Reason: Accepted another ENGLISH 6-6-05 TCH925 ~g~ position m~,..n.. ..,o ,-!!? oz -\u0026lt; Cl Dumas, Elaine Librarian/ 8-23-71 5-20 57276.00 ~~ Reason: Retired CENTRAL 6-7-05 LIB950 ::c~ ~~ ZCJ\u0026gt; Dyson, Carol Art/ 8-27-74 5-20 57276.00 Cl Reason: Retired WILLIAMS 6-6-05 TCH925 Eddings, Aminah Math/ 7-22-99 3-07 38820.00 Reason: Personal PULASKI HEIGHTS 6-6-05 TCH925 MIDDLE \u0026gt;\"\" .\u0026gt;\u0026lt; C: CD Ervin, Nickey Algebra 1/ 11-17-92 4-09 42662.00\n,o C: C\")CJ) Reason: Accepted another J. A. FAIR 6-6-05 TCH925 !\nz position ~~ OCJ\u0026gt; ..,m ~~ Fuller, Karonda Elementary Ill/ 8-11-04 4-01 34575.00 :en Om Reason: Going back to OTTER CREEK 6-6-05 TCH925 ,O...C. J\u0026gt; CD C: school \"' Gage, Mary English/ 9-21-77 6-21 60020.00 Reason: Retired HALL 6-6-05 TCH925 ?' Gilbert, Jean Special Education/ 1-3-66 4-19 54561 .00 n 0 Reason: Retired GEYER SPRINGS 6-6-05 SPE925 z CJ) ,C...:. --\u0026lt; z Gray, Carolyn Gifted and Talented/ 8-21-73 6-21 60020.00 Cl Reason: Retired FRANKLIN 6-6-05 G\u0026amp;T925 \u0026gt; Cl\n,o m m ~ Green, Christine American History/ 9-2-69 6-21 60020.00 m z Reason: Retired HALL 6-6-05 TCH925 Hendrickson, Tina Chemistry/ 8-9-00 6-05 41189.00 Reason: Accepted another PARKVIEW 6-6-05 TCH925 position 0 0 Henry, Sarah English/ 9-30-74  4-19 54561.00 0 z Reason: Retired PARKVIEW 6-6-05 TCH925 ~ 0 z CJ') Personnel Changes Page4 May 26, 2005 NAME Hiddleston, Steven Reason: Leaving the city Hollingsworth, Judy Reason: Retired Howard, Caroline Reason: Retired Johnson, Kristie Reason: Personal Johnson, Wondrue Reason: Retired Lacey, Marian Reason: Retired Lasker, Alberta Reason: Retired Leffingwell, Donald Reason: Personal Lewallen, Marilyn Reason: Retired Maher, Donna Reason: None given Mahnken, Susan Reason: Retired Mays, Romonda Reason: Personal McFadden, Charles Reason: Retired McFadden, Sandra Reason: Retired POSITION/ SCHOOL Science/ J. A. FAIR Elementary II/ CHICOT Business Education/ HALL Art/ J. A. Fair Guidance Counselor/ CENTRAL Assistant Superintendent/ ADMINISTRATION Special Education/ HALL Physics/ HALL Special Education/ PULASKI HEIGHTS MIDDLE Instrumental Music/ MABELVALE MIDDLE Reading/ BOOKER Home Economics/ CLOVERDALE MIDDLE Science/ CLOVERDALE MIDDLE Physical Education/ FOREST HEIGHTS START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL END DATE CLASS SALARY 8-11-04 4-05 38041.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-24-87 1-17 47715.00 6-6-05 TCH925 9-29-97 1-14 43904.00 6-7-05 TCH950 12-15-93 4-11 44973.00 6-6-05 TCH925 1-26-70 6-21 60020.00 6-16-05 CNL 10 8-27-74 79-20 107424.00 6-30-05 ADC12 10-07-87 4-19 54561 .00 4-15-05 SPE925 4-1-99 5-06 40756.00 6-6-05 TCH925 1-3-72 6-21 60020.00 5-26-05 SPE925 8-25-03 6-05 41189.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-20-79 6-21 60020.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-2-00 3-04 35354.00 6-6-05 TCH925 8-17-90 1-15 45059.00 6-6-05 TCH925 1-26-70 1-17 47715.00 6-6-05 TCH925 Personnel Changes Page 5 May 26, 2005 .~., z START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL \u0026gt;z (\") NAME POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY \u0026gt; r- \"' McGowan, Doris Elementary 1/ 8-24-87 5-20 57276.00 Reason: Retired GEYER SPRINGS 6-6-05 TCH925 McLennan, Ann Elementary Ill/ 8-24-87 4-19 54561.00 Reason: Retired BRADY 6-6-05 TCH925 ~g~ mC\"\u0026gt; Means, Barbara Title 1/ 8-24-87 6-18 56209.00 .3r,:: ,ro- Reason: Personal SOUTHWEST 6-23-05 TCH11 ro- z!!! -\u0026lt; C) Hi~ Moore, Joyce Special Education/ 8-15-94 4-17 51905.00 x~ i\no Reason: Retired HENDERSON 6-30-05 SPE925 -ZC\"/\u0026gt;' C) Mothershed Lucille Math/ 8-20-79 6-21 60020.00 Reason: Retired HENDERSON 6-6-05 TCH925 Mulkey, Mary Music/ 8-13-98 1-17 47715.00 Reason: Retired OTTER CREEK 6-6-05 TCH925 .\u0026gt;,, x . C: c:, Peyton, Emma Business Education/ 8-20-79 6-21 60020.00\no C: (\")(/) Reason: Retired CENTRAL 6-6-05 VOC105 $:z ~~ 0\"' Phillips, Tabitha Principal/ 8-14-78 69-20 79692.00 -nm !!l~ Reason: Retired MABEL VALE 6-29-05 ADC11X :z:(\") Om OV\u0026gt; ELEMENTARY r-c:, C: \"' Roachell, Richard Social Studies/ 8-12-03 1-02 30617.00 Reason: Personal ALC 6-6-05 TCH925 Robinson, Renee Journalism/ 9-13-99 4-06 39196.00 ~ Reason: Accepted another CENTRAL 6-6-05 TCH925 (\") 0 z position \"' C: r- -\u0026lt; z Scogin, Annette Assistant Director/ 7-22-03 56-14 45192.00 C) \u0026gt; Reason: Accepted another ATHLETICS 6-30-05 ADC105 C)\no m position m 3r:: m z Simpson, Angie 4 Yr. Old/ 8-22-88 3-18 51874.00 Reason: Retired GEYER SPRINGS 6-6-05 4YR925 Stewart, Shirley Physical Education/ 9-25-61 4-19 54561 .00 Reason: Retired PULASKI HEIGHTS 6-6-05 TCH925 0 MIDDLE 0 0 z Tankersley, Abby Elementary I/ 8-13-01 1-12 41593.00 )\u0026gt; -i Reason: Personal GIBBS 6-6-05 TCH925 5 z CJ) Personnel Changes Page 6 May 26, 2005 NAME Thomason, Marian Reason: Retired Tidmore, Jerome Reason: Retired Wade, Roy Reason: Retired Walker, Ella Reason: Retired Wilder, Barbara Reason: Retired Wittenburg, Amy Reason: Accepted another position Wilson, Priscilla Reason: Retired Winston, Jane Reason: Retired Zakrzewski, Merry Reason: Retired START DATE/ POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE Fine Arts/ 8-18-86 FOREST HEIGHTS 6-6-05 Math/ 8-7-90 MCCLELLAN 6-6-05 Assistant Principal 8-14-67 HALL 7-1-05 Assistant Principal 8-27-74 HALL 6-13-05 Algebra I/ 8-25-75 CENTRAL 6-6-05 Speech Pathology/ 8-12-99 FRANKLIN 6-6-05 Elementary Ill/ 8-20-90 CARVER 6-6-05 4 Yr. Old/ 1-27-75 FRANKLIN 6-7-05 Math/ 8-22-77 FOREST HEIGHTS 6-6-05 New Certified Employees NONE Resignations/Terminations Non-Certified Employees Agnew, Henrean Reason: Retired Bennett, Georgetta Reason: Job Abandonment Bus Driver/ TRANSPORTATION Instructional Aide/ ALC 11-18-98 6-3-05 8-17-98 5-10-05 SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 3-18 51874.00 TCH925 3-14 46908.00 TCH925 66-20 72864.00 ADC105 66-20 72864.00 ADC105 6-20 58520.00 TCH925 62-10 47976.00 SPE925 2-15 46561.00 TCH925 6-21 60020.00 4YR925 6-21 60020.00 TCH925 3-07 14368. 00 BUSDRV 33-11 13875.00 INA925 Personnel Changes Page 7 May 26, 2005 .~., z START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL \u0026gt;z (\") NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY ,\u0026gt;- CJ) Bolton, Mattie Custodian/ 2-3-92 31-15 17281.00 Reason: Job Abandonment M. L. KING 2-1-05 CUS928 Bracy, Saundra Assistant Registrar/ 8-8-03 39-02 19020.00 Reason: Leaving the city HALL 6-10-05 ~g~ Bryant, Rodney Instructional Aide/ 1-05-04 33-17 16595.00 m\u0026lt;\"\u0026gt; 31: ,- \"C 0 Reason: Accepted another CHICOT 5-20-05 INA925 ,- !!! oz -\u0026lt; C) position rn~ :r:~ Caradine, Charles Bus Driver/ 3-1-00 3-05 13466.00 ~_\n:\n,c:: ZCJ\u0026gt; Reason: Retired TRANSPORTATION 6-23-05 BUSDRV C) Curry, Virginia Instructional Aide/ 9-8-87 33-17 16595.00 Reason: Retired BOOKER 6-6-05 INA185 Dukes, Raynard Security Officer/ 2-2-03 36-11 15929.00 \u0026gt; Reason: None Given J. A. FAIR 5-10-05 SOFR9  \u0026gt;\u0026lt; \"C. C: a,\nc C: (\")CJ) Farmer, Dennis Custodian/ 1-10-05 31-07 13616.00 ~z Reason : Personal DUNBAR 4-6-05 CUS925 ~~ OCJ\u0026gt; ..,m CJ)\nc Faulkner, Janet Child Nutrition/ 11-1-04 3-01 9350.00 ~~ Om Reason: Personal WILLIAMS 4-25-05 FSH550 ,O-CJ\u0026gt; a, C: c,, Floyd, Betty Instructional Aide/ 9-6-90 33-17 16595.00 Reason: Deceased ALC 5-13-05 INA925 Givens, Vera CARE/ 2-21-05 3-15 10.05 !l' Reason : None Given CARE 4-22-05 CARE per hour (\") 0 z en C: Grimmett, Jeffrey Instructional Aide/ 8-21-00 33-12 14291.00 ,- --\u0026lt; Reason: Going back to J. A. FAIR 6-6-05 INA925 z C) school \u0026gt; C)\nc m m 31: Hudson, Harold Custodian/ 8-20-93 31-15 17281.00 mz Reason : Resigned without CENTRAL 4-7-05 CUS928 notice Hill, Joanna Bus Driver/ 8-28-78 3-11 16390.00 Reason : Retired TRANSPORTATION 6-3-05 BUSDRV ri Lem, Louie ROTC/ 12-1-88 51-20 46572.00 C 0 Reason: Retired PARKVIEW 6-30-05 AN12 z )\u0026gt; --\u0026lt; 6 z C/) Personnel Changes Page 8 May 26, 2005 NAME Mitchell, Kashunda Reason: None Given Murphy, Demetria Reason: Job Abandonment Parker, Michelle Reason: Personal Putt, Paulette Reason: Retired Qualls, Lynda Reason: Retired Robertson, Jr. Thomas Reason: Accepted another position Shaw, Elvan Reason: Terminated - no appeal pending Smith, Tammy Reason: Going back to school Steverson, Patrick Reason: Accepted another position Tolbert, William Reason: Leaving the city Tucker, Kelsey Reason: Personal Williams, Mary Reason: None Given Williams, Bertha Reason: None Given Wright, Lona Reason: Retired POSITION/ SCHOOL CARE/ CARE Custodian/ MCCLELLAN Child Nutrition/ FOREST PARK Bookkeeper/ VOCATIONAL EDUCATION Secretary/ MANN Air Force-ROTC/ CENTRAL Custodian/ FULBRIGHT Instructional Aide/ J. A. FAIR Custodian/ METROPOLITAN CARE/ CARE Instructional Aide/ BASELINE CARE/ CARE Custodian/ METROPOLITAN Instructional Aide/ OTTER CREEK START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL END DATE CLASS SALARY 1-24-05 2-02 7.70 4-26-05 CARE per hour 6-10-04 31-01 11379.00 4-19-05 CUS928 9-20-99 3-06 9575.00 4-19-05 FSH550 10-1-67 42-20 35592.00 6-13-05 CLK11 8-15-85 38-20 31596.00 6-10-05 CLK10 8-17-92 56-20 54060.00 6-15-05 AN10 9-9-02 31-05 12821 .00 5-19-05 CUS928 2-24-94 33-17 16595.00 6-6-05 INA925 8-4-04 31-01 11 379.00 4-19-05 CUS928 3-6-03 3-06 8.54 6-3-05 CARE per hour 8-20-97 33-15 15637.00 5-17-05 INA925 10-4-04 1-05 7.56 4-18-05 CARE per hour 9-9-91 31-01 14532.00 5-5-05 CUS12 1-3-01 33-11 13875.00 6-6-05 INA925 Personnel Changes Page 9 May 26, 2005 NAME Dawson, Bruce Gordon, Mary START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE New Non-Certified Employees CARE/ 4-22-05 CARE CARE/ 4-18-05 CARE SALARY CLASS 4-01 CARE 3-09 CARE ANNUAL SALARY 6.25 per hour 9.00 per hour ~g~ mn 3....,.1 ,:o' ~ oz -\u0026lt; C) Hl Rl %~ ~\nc ~\n,:: zcn C) \u0026gt;., , .\u0026gt;\u0026lt; CCD\nc C (\") (/) $:z m~ Ou, \"Tim ~~ %(\") Om o,-cn CD C \"' !Xl (\") 0 z (/) C !::\nz C) ~ Rl m lC zm ~ C 0 z ~ 6z CJ'\u0026gt; DATE: May 26, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of the Director of Professional Development BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors voted on March 24, 2005, to approve and accept the organizational audit report as submitted, and directed the Superintendent to move forward to implement the restructuring efforts. The audit recommendations will be used as a blueprint and changes will be made following Board policies, Arkansas law and established school district practices. RATIONALE: The position of Director of Professional Development is critical to the District as it begins planning for the professional development workshops for certified staff during the 2005- 06 school year. This individual will work with building level administrators to determine the needs of the District's staff in order to meet all educational goals. The Director will also advise the Senior Director of Curriculum regarding all professional training needs, trainers, schedules, and any new topics for professional training. FUNDING: This position will be funded from the District's operating budget according to the appropriate salary schedule. RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Dr. Lloyd Sain, to the position of Director of Professional Development. Dr. Sain's resume and a job description are attached for your review. PLEASE POST REVISED LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 April 18, 2005 PLEASE POST REVISED The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year. POSITION: Director - Professional Development OUALIFICA TIONS: 1. A valid Arkansas License as a Supervisor or Administrator or be eligible for same. 2. Master's Degree with special interest/experience in professional development. 3. Minimum of five (5) years successful teaching and supervisory experience. 4. Expertise and experience related to learning/thinking skills. 5. Mastery of effective teaching techniques. 6. Evidence of strong organizational skills. 7. Strong interpersonal skills. 8. Evidence of strong oral and written communication skills. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INITIAL SCREENING INTERVIEW. JOB GOAL: To provide the leadership and technical assistance to establish and maintain a Professional Development Component for LRSD in order to respond to the learning needs of its school population/staff (certified and non certified), Board of Directors and patrons. ACCOUNTABILITY: Reports Directly to Senior Director - Curriculum Job Titles which report directly to Director - Professional Development Coordinator( s) of Professional Development \"!\"x \"D. C: a, (\"\"') CC/:) ~z ~~ Ov, .,,m ~~ :en Om OV\u0026gt; r a, C: \"' !XI (\") 0 z C/) C: !:\nz Cl ~ ~ m 31: zm 0 C 0 z ~ 0 z VI ESSENTAIL FUNCTIONS I RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Assumes responsibility for planning, coordinating and successfully implementing ongoing professional development activities and programs in the Little Rock School District. 2. Plans, coordinates, and successfully implements customized training opportunities in the areas of instructional methods, use of data, assessment for learning, curricula, classroom management strategies, parent involvement, and parent education 3. Assists principals and others with building-level professional development needs and activities. 4. Conducts in-service sessions for specified groups of employees who must deal with special problems, (e.g., principals and assistant principals will participate in in-service sessions which address the problem of closing the achievement gap of students). 5. Continually investigates possible funding sources and other sources for Little Rock School District Professional Development and to work with area universities, state agencies, and foundations whenever possible and appropriate. 6. Develops, plans and directs a progress monitoring/ assessment system for determining the effectiveness of the district's professional development programs. 7. Keeps abreast of current trends and effective practices regarding pedagogy, assessment, and professional development at district, state and national levels. 8. Serves as the liaison between LRSD and the office of Professional Quality Enhancement at ADE. 9. Coordinates and manages the Aspiring Principals Program consistent with the Associate Superintendent's direction, district priorities and state regulations. 10. Directs, oversees and evaluates the performance of Professional Development staff members including their ability to service the needs ofLRSD. 11. Plans and directs a quality induction program for novice and new teachers to the district. 12. Manages all budgetary components of the Professional Development department. 13. Approves salary credit information for the LRSD employees, approves staff development proposals, administers professional advancement credit and equivalency clock hour systems, and maintains the information by schools on the computer. 14. Distributes combined salary credit and in-services information every nine weeks to all LRSD employees. 15. Serves on the Tri-District Council to improve the relations between the three districts. (North Little Rock, Pulaski County, and Little Rock) 16. Serves on the Professional Development Strategic Planning Council, the Arkansas Department of Education Committee, The National Professional Development Council Committee, and the State Professional Development Committee. 17. Organizes and provides leadership opportunities for district staff. 18. Secures grant money to enhance the Professional Development Department. 19. Performs other duties as may be assigned. SALARY AND TERMS\nPay0l - Grade 73 - $50,928 - $89,808 - Twelve month administration contract (250 days), plus benefits package. NOTE: Precise placement on the salary range will be determined based upon experience and education. EVALUATION: Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with provisions of the Board's Policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. APPLICATIO DEADLINE: April 25, 2005, or any time later until a satisfactory applicant is recommended and approved. SEND RESUMES/INQUIRES: Beverly Williams -Director Little Rock School District HUMAN RESOURCES 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone 501-447-1100 Fax 501-447-1162 NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITIO DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. ?\"x \"C  C CD\n,oc (\")\"' ~z ~~ Oen -nm ~~ :,:(\") Om o,...c n CD ,C,. 0 C 0 z ~ 0z Cl) Lloyd Sain, Jr., Ed.D Lsainjr@sbcglobal.net or Llovd.Sain@LRSD.org 2300 Rebsamen Park Road, Apt. A208 Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 H: (501) 280-0593 W: 501-447-1016 EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY:  To believe that effective leadership offers to its organization support, delegation, coaching, and direction as it appropriately creates, coordinates, monitors, and adjusts to the environment in achieving institutional effectiveness and reaching its vision.  To believe and promote that all children, despite their economic status or available resource, are capable of learning and achieving when appropriate systems, programs, and instructions are purposefully designed to meet their present needs and deficiencies. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: 1985 1989 1994 2001 University of Central Arkansas Conway, Arkansas B. S. E. Degree, English Education Special Education, minor Middle school certification University of Central Arkansas Graduate Studies: English \u0026amp; Writing Education, 39 hours Arkansas State University Jonesboro, Arkansas M. S. E. Degree, Curriculum \u0026amp; Instruction/ Administration \u0026amp; Supervision Endorsement University of Arkansas at Little Rock Little Rock, Arkansas Ed.D, Educational Administration \u0026amp; Supervision CERTIFICATION: Type: WORK EXPERIENCES: August 1985 - August 1993 January 1991 - May 1993 August 1993 - July 1996 January 1994 - 2003 July 1996 - July 1998 July 1998- June 2003 July 2003 - Present Secondary English, 7-12 Middle School certification Curriculum Specialist, K-12 Supervisor, K -12 Secondary Principal, 5-12 Administration Forrest City Middle School English Instructor, Gr. 7-8 Forrest City School District Adult Education Program Instructor Little Rock School District Central High School, Grade 10 Philander Smith College Department of English Adjunct Faculty Pulaski Heights Junior High School - Assistant Principal Alternative Learning Center Principal Coordinator of Leadership Development/Central Office PROFESSIONAL AND PUBLICATIONS CREDITS: Sain, L. (2003). Using From Rage to Hope: The principal's role in creating a school vision. Alternative Network Journal, 17, 30-31: 38-40. Sain. L. (2001). A comparison of pre-post student outcomes and perception after an intervention of a secondary alternative program disruptive students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Little Rock. .,,.x \"ti. C CD :,:,c nen ~z ~~ .O.,emn enn,:\n,:\n, s\no,...e n CD C \"' ~ n 0z en C ~ z C) \u0026gt; C) ~ m lC zm 0 C 0 z ~ 5z (J) DATE: May 26, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of the Director of Career and Alternative Education BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors voted on March 24, 2005, to approve and accept the organizational audit report as submitted, and directed the Superintendent to move forward to implement the restructuring efforts. The audit recommendations will be used as a blueprint and changes will be made following Board policies, Arkansas law and established school district practices. RATIONALE: The position of Director of Career and Alternative Education is critical to the District since the placement for students in the alternative classrooms for the 2005-06 school year has already begun and all career and vocational programs are being monitored. This individual will work with building level administrators and the student hearing officer to meet the placement needs of the District's students. The Director will also advise the Associate Superintendent for Secondary Education regarding career/ vocational needs as well as the needs of the alternative learning programs. FUNDING: This position will be funded from the District's operating budget according to the appropriate salary schedule. RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Ms. Carol Green, to the position of Director of Career and Alternative Education. Ms. Green's resume and a job description are attached for your review. PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 April 18, 2005 PLEASE POST The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year. POSITION: Director - Career/ Alternative Education OUALIFICA TIONS: 1. Master's degree or higher including eighteen ( 18) semester hours in vocational education in an approved vocational teacher education program. A valid Arkansas teaching license as a Vocational Administrator or School Administrator required. 2. Successful experience in teaching and administration of vocational education in an urban setting. 3. Evidence of strong commitment to quality and equity in student learning and vocational education. 4. Successful experience in dealing with students, parents, and staff in decision making and communication. 5. To develop, expand, and provide quality vocational and technical education programs to our students that will enable them upon graduation to be competitively employed. 6. Evidence of successful experience in developing and implementing Tech Prep program of studies. 7. Evidence of successful involvement of parents and staff in problem solving. 8. Evidence of successful experience with parent and staff involvement in decision making. 9. Evidence of successful experience in dealing with students' problems. 10. Strong interpersonal skills. 11. Evidence of strong organizational skills. 12. Evidence of strong oral and written communication skills. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INITIAL SCREENING INTERVIEW. .!=.\u0026gt;, z \u0026gt;z (\") \u0026gt; I\"'\" Cl)\n..,,, ,.x C: CD\n,:, C: (\")Cl) ~z ~~ 0 C/) ..,m Cl):\u0026gt;l (\") c5 Bm OCI\u0026gt; I\"'\" CD C: \"' 0 C 0 z ~ 6z (J) JOB GOAL: To Supervise the District's Alternative Education Programs. To provide students enrolled in the vocational education program with education and training of sufficient excellence to enable them upon graduation to enter the job market with entry-level skills, varied intellectual interests, and sufficient understanding and curiosity to continue their growth and maturation as a worker and as an individual. ACCOUNTABILITY: Reports Directly to Associate Superintendent - Secondary Education Job Titles which report directly to Director Career/ Alternative Education Coordinator of Alternative Leaming Center Coordinator Accelerated Leaming Coordinator Metropolitan Vo-Tech Coordinator of Adult Education ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS I RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Develops and supervises quality and technical education programs. 2. Assists the District in developing Tech prep program of studies. 3. Assists in developing and providing quality staff development activities for vocational and other support staff. 4. Assists in the development and/or revision of curriculum for vocational programs in the District. 5. Assists instructors and administrators in selecting state-of-art equipment, materials, and supplies for vocational education. 6. Knows and interprets local, state, and national trends, standards, guidelines, and policies pertaining to vocational education. 7. Assists in the work of Vocational Education Advisory Committees and with vocational student organizations. 8. Prepares proposals for vocational and technical education. 9. Develops plans for needed renovation/expansion of existing laboratories and/or classrooms in coordination with Plant Services and other appropriate departments/individuals. 10. Assists in recruiting and screening qualified applicants for teaching positions. 11. Evaluates the Coordinators of ALC, ACC, Metro Vo-Tech and Adult Education. 12. Provides leadership and oversight of Metropolitan High School and the alternative / diploma / GED programs in the District. 13. Advises the Coordinators on budgetary, disciplinary and personnel issues. 14. Collaborates with the Senior Director of Student Services and District principals when placing students in and out of an alternative learning environment. 15. Performs other duties as may be assigned. SALARY AND TERMS: Pay0l - Grade 76 - $55,704 - $98,220 Twelve (12) month contract, (250 days) plus benefits package. NOTE: Precise placement within the salary range will be determined based upon education and experience. EVALUATION: Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with provisions of the Board's Policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. APPLICATION DEADLINE: April 28, 2005, or any time later until a satisfactory applicant is recommended and approved. SEND RESUMES/INQUIRES: Beverly Williams - Director Little Rock School District HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone 501-447-1100 Fax 501-447-1162 NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTIO PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITION DOES OT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. ~ \u0026gt;\u0026lt; \"C . C Dl\n,c C nen ~z ~~ Oen -nm ~:l! :en Oiii oen r- 0:, C Cf' !XI C') 0 z en C ~ z C, ~ Rl m :!C zm 0 C 0 z ~ 0z Cl) CAREER OBJECTIVE: EDUCATION: Work Experience: CAROL B. GREEN 14200 Taylor Loop Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 (501) 868-5605 h (501) 447-1390 w carol.green@lrsd.org. To provide students enrolled in the career and technical programs of Little Rock School District with education and training of excellence that will enable them, upon graduation, to enter the job market with entry level skills, varied intellectual interests, and sufficient understanding and curiosity to continue their growth and maturation as a worker and as a productive citizen. Sweet Home High School - 1966 Philander Smith College 1970 - Bachelor of Science Major - Special Education for Mentally Handicapped Minor - Elementary Education University of Central Arkansas 1971- Master of Science in Education Special Education for the Physically Handicapped Additional Studies: George Peabody University- Nashville, Tennessee University of Arkansas at Fayetteville - Fayetteville, Ar Arkansas State University- Jonesboro, Ar Auburn University -Auburn, Alabama Areas of certification: Secondary Principal, Secondary Vocational Administration, Elementary Education, Special Education - Mentally and Physically Handicapped, Marketing Technology Education, and Assistant Director/Post Secondary Education Little Rock School District 1993- Present 1998-Present Director Career and Technical Education Area Center Director/Metropolitan Director/Principal Accelerated Learning Center (non-traditional education program) 1992- 1993 1992 Oan. - June) 1984- 1992 1973-1984 1971-1973 Interim Principal Metropolitan Area Center Supervisor Trade and Industrial Education Marketing Education Coordinator Central High Parkview Magnet High Vocational Evaluator Metropolitan Area Center Special Education Instructor Metropolitan High School ACTIVITIES/ MEMBERSHIPS (past and present):  National Skills USA Technical Quiz Bowl Committee  Commissioner -Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation  Private Industry Council/JTPA Member  The Centers - Board of Directors  Economic Development Council - Pulaski Enterprise Community  Board of Examiners for Arkansas Quality Award  Leadership Greater Little Rock Class XII - Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce  Southern Region Education Board Site Evaluator  Pocahontas Service Unit -Girl Scout Leader Troop #544  Central Arkansas Career Opportunities Committee  Mentor - University of Arkansas at Little Rock EDAS Administrative Intern  Arkansas Promise to Pulaski County Youth Program  Southwest Little Rock Community Coalition  Arkansas Association of Career Technical Education  Association for Career and Technical Education  Little Rock School District Technology Committee c:, .., z )\u0026gt; z (\") ,\u0026gt;- v,\n,,\u0026gt;, X. C: CD \"(')' CV:) $:z ~~ 0 V, ..,m V,\"' Oc5 Sm O,-V\u0026gt; CD C: U' ~ 0 C 0 z ~ 6z (/l REFERENCES:  Chairperson - Greater Second Baptist Church Board of Trustees  Resource Speaker - S.W.I.S.T.A.R Investment Partnership\nPLATO Learning Educational Software (state and national)\nMartin Luther King Celebration (local schools)  Panelist - City-wide Volunteer Planning Committee  New Futures Youth Career Development Policy Team  Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Incorporated  Greater Second Baptist Childcare Oversight Committee Dr. Marian G. Lacey, Assistant Superintendent School Services Division Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. J.C. Babbs, Associate Superintendent Administrative Services Little Rock School District 501 Sherman Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Dr. Katherine Mitchell Board of Directors Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Lee F. Griffith As ociate Director for Workforce Training Arkansa Department of Workforce Education #3 Capitol Mall Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dr. Curtis Ridout, Pastor Greater Second Baptist Church 5615 Geyer Springs Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 DATE: May 26, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of the Director of Maintenance and Operations BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors voted on March 24, 2005, to approve and accept the organizational audit report as submitted, and directed the Superintendent to move forward to implement the restructuring efforts. The audit recommendations will be used as a blueprint and changes will be made following Board policies, Arkansas law and established school district practices. RATIONALE: The position of Director of Maintenance and Operations is critical to the District as the District begins routine summer maintenance on all facilities. The Director will advise the Chief Financial Officer of any issues regarding this department. FUNDING: This position will be funded from the District's operating budget according to the appropriate salary schedule. RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Mr. Wayne Adams, to the position of Director Maintenance and Operations. Mr. Adams' resume and a job description are attached for your review. .!=.,' z )\u0026gt; z (\") \u0026gt; rt/)\n,,,x \"C. C a,\noc (\")(/) ~z ~~ Ov, \"Tim ~~ ::,:(\") Om .C-V\u0026gt; a, C u, PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 April 15, 2005 PLEASE POST The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year. POSITION: Director - Maintenance and Operations QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Engineering or related degree from accredited college or university. At least eight (8) to ten (10) years of experience in managing a complex maintenance organization. Experience may be considered in lieu of education. 2. Demonstrated knowledge of the principles of financial programming, planning, management, and maintenance and repair of physical facilities and real property. 3. Experience in a managerial capacity in a business, school, industry, or governmental agency. 4. Demonstrated ability in effective written and oral communications, computational skills, organizational tasks, budgeting, and solving problems related to maintenance, repair, construction and operations. 5. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality integrated education. 6. Evidence of successful experience with parental and staff involvement in decision making. 7. Experience in the utilization ofan automated internet-based, multi-site, work-order system. 8. Strong interpersonal skills. 9. Evidence of strong organizational skills. 10. Evidence of strong oral and written communication skills. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDE CE OF THESE OUALIFICATIO SIN THE INITIAL SCREENI G INTERVIEW. JOB GOAL: To maintain physical school facilities in a condition of operational excellence, cleanliness, and safety so that full educational use of them may be made at all times. ACCOUNTABILITY: Reports Directly to Chief Financial Officer Job Titles which report directly to the Director of Maintenance and Operations: Maintenance Supervisors Grounds Supervisors Custodial Managers ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS/ RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Responsible for overall coordination of comprehensive maintenance and repair programs for all physical facilities of the Little Rock School District. 2. Responsible for providing comprehensive cost analysis of school plant services expenditures, as a basis for budget projections, to the Chief Financial Officer on an annual basis for the Maintenance and Operations budgets. Is additionally responsible for the administration of budgets and allocated funds to the Director. 3. Responsible for developing programs to ensure the adequate inspection of all buildings, grounds, and installations to determine that high standards of workmanship and cleanliness are maintained. 4. Responsible for determining the maintenance, repair, grounds keeping, and custodial requirements for all schools and administrative buildings in the District. 5. Responsible to ensure that standards applicable to operations, maintenance, and repair are consistent with applicable laws and local codes. 6. Responsible for organizing and implementing a program of preventive maintenance commensurate with allocated resources and the requirements of all District equipment. 7. Responsible for developing programs and plans for dealing with emergency situations with regard to the operation and maintenance of all Little Rock School District facilities. 8. Responsible for overall coordination of special requirements affecting the operations of the Little Rock School District such as the Asbestos Program, Environmental Protection Agency Permit Programs, and Energy Conservation Program. 9. Responsible for the implementation and orientation and training programs of the proper operation and maintenance of school facilities for all Maintenance and Operations personnel and other personnel directed. Training covers such vital areas as asbestos training, new products, plant operations, and custodial operations. 10. Responsible to stay informed of the latest trends, developments and products in the areas of Maintenance and Operations and for developing programs to incorporate such trends as required. 11 . Responsible for preparing special reports, as requested, to the Administration and Board of Directors on all operational, repair, and maintenance matters as necessary. 12. Assists in the recruitment, employment, assignment, transfer, or dismissal of Maintenance and Operations personnel in accordance with applicable personnel policies. 13. Oversees a custodial support staff to provide technical assistance, manpower, and operational recommendations on custodial matters to school principals. Provides custodial direction only in cases of emergency as required and temporary summer cleaning crews organized to providing District-wide support. ,:, .,, z \u0026gt; ~ \u0026gt; r( J) .,..x -0  C: CD :,, C: (\")(J) $\nz ~~ Ou, .,,m tn:\u0026gt;l ~ Om .O- tn CD C: tft ~ (\") 0 z tJ\u0026gt; C: !::\nz Cl ~ Rl m :!I: zm r C 0 z ~ 0z (/) 14. Performs such other responsibilities as may be assigned. SALARY AND TERMS: Pay02 - Grade 75 - $54,060 - $95,328 Twelve (12) month contract, (250 days) plus benefits package. NOTE: Precise placement within the salary range will be determined based upon education and experience. EVALUATION: Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with provisions of the Board's Policy on Evaluation of Support Personnel. APPLICATION DEADLINE: April 25, 2005, or any time later until a satisfactory applicant is recommended and approved. SEND RESUMES/INQUIRES: Beverly Williams - Director Little Rock School District HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone 501-447-1100 Fax 501-447-1162 NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITION DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. MEMORANDUM FACILITY SERVICES DATE: April 19, 2005 TO: FROM: Beverly Williams, Director of Human Resources Wayne Adams, Facility Services Coordinator Professional Experience and Qualifications for the Position of Director of Maintenance and Operations SUBJ: Enclosed is a summary of my experience and qualifications in response to the posting for the position of Director of Maintenance and Operations. I am a professional in the area of facility operations with 34 years of experience in physical plant engineering, maintenance, and construction. I have over 22 years of experience with the Little Rock School District as Coordinator of Plant Services, which affords me a unique and comprehensive knowledge of all Little Rock School District sites and their mechanical support systems. I have 1 O years of direct experience in management of construction services. Enclosed is a detailed description of the specific responsibilities that I performed throughout my career. Also, I have enclosed several letters of recommendation and descriptions of achievements from individuals with whom I have had a professional relationship for many years and who have firsthand knowledge of my abilities and performance. In summary my experience, prior to being employed by the Little Rock School District in 1983, is as follows:  Arrow Automotive Corporation - Plant Engineering Manager  Ward Bus Manufacturing Corporation - Plant Engineering Manager  Metal Stamping Corporation - Plant Engineering and Quality Control Manager  Timex Corporation - Product Engineer/Camera Assembly  Westinghouse Corporation, Lamp Division - Chief of Quality Control  University of Arkansas GIT - Computer Programming  University of Arkansas at Little Rock - Major in Math/Minor in Chemistry \u0026amp; Physics .?.\u0026gt;, \u0026gt;. \u0026lt; C: a:, ::,:, C: C\")(/) ~z mra Ocn -nm cn::,J nc5 s1n o.-cn a:, C: \"' In addition to the above professional experience, I have voluntarily served the community in the following capacities:  Finance Committee - River Market Art Fest 2004, 2003.  Environmental Advisor - Christ Lutheran  Building Committee Advisor - Christ Lutheran appreciate this opportunity to continue to serve the Little Rock School District as Director of Maintenance and Operations. WA:cg DATE: May 26, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of the Director of Finance and Accounting BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors voted on March 24, 2005, to approve and accept the organizational audit report as submitted, and directed the Superintendent to move forward to implement the restructuring efforts. The audit recommendations will be used as a blueprint and changes will be made following Board policies, Arkansas law and established school district practices. RATIONALE: The position of Director of Finance and Accounting is critical to the District. This individual will work with the Chief Financial Officer in the preparation of the budget and oversee the routine payroll and accounting procedures of the District. The Director will advise the Chief Financial Officer regarding any issues in this department. FUNDING: This position will be funded from the District's operating budget according to the appropriate salary schedule. RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Ms. Jean Ring , to the position of Director of Finance and Accounting. Ms. Ring's resume and a job description are attached for your review. ~ \"T1 z \u0026gt;z (\") \u0026gt; r \u0026lt;J\u0026gt;\n,,-x \"ti  C CO :,:,c (\")\u0026lt;J\u0026gt; ~z ~~ CV\u0026gt; -nm !ll~ ::,:(\") Om CV\u0026gt; r co C \"' !D PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 April 15, 2005 PLEASE POST The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year. POSITION: Director - Finance and Accounting OUALIFICA TIO NS: 1. Bachelor's degree in Accounting required. 2. CPA required. 3. Experience with fund accounting. 4. Strong interpersonal skills. 5. Evidence of strong oral and written communication skills. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INITIAL SCREENING INTERVIEW. JOB GOAL: To administer the fiscal affairs of the district efficiently, expeditiously, and to the ultimate benefit of each individual student enrolled. ACCOUNTABILITY: Reports Directly to Chief Financial Officer ESSENTAIL FUNCTIONS/ RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Directs all financial accounting. 2. Oversees the preparation and recording of all disbursements of district funds 3. Recommends the purchase of and oversees the maintenance of accounting equipment. 4. Oversees the reconciliation of all bank accounts monthly. 5. Prepares all reports that are the result of the accounting function including required state and federal reports with the District auditors, both internal and external, and provides information to them as requested. 6. Reports to the Chief Financial Officer on the accounting affairs of the District and recommends changes and improvements as needed. 7. Oversees investment of available district funds. 8. Performs other duties as may be assigned. SALARY AND TERMS\nPay02 Grade 75 - $54,060 - $95,328 - Twelve month administration contract (250 days), plus benefits package and car allowance. NOTE: Precise placement on the salary range will be determined based upon experience and education. EVALUATION: Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with provisions of the Board's Policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. APPLICATION DEADLINE: April 25, 2005, or any time later until a satisfactory applicant is recommended and approved. SEND RESUMES/INQUIRES: Beverly Williams - Director Little Rock School District HUMAN RESOURCES 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone 501-447-1100 Fax 501-447-1162 NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITIO MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITIO DOES OT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. .~., z z\u0026gt; n \u0026gt;.... v, .,,. \u0026gt;\u0026lt; \"\"  C a,\noc (\"\") V, ~z ~~ Ov, ..,m V,\no n\ns\n5iii .O-V\u0026gt; a, C \"' 0 C 0 z ~ 0z (/l OBJECTIVE JEAN A.RING 4106 Sam Peck Road Little Rock, AR 72223 ( 501) 224-3425 Seeking a career in the accounting field that will provide increasing technical challenge and responsibility. EXPERIENCE Little Rock School District - Little Rock, Arkansas Assistant Manager, Financial Services 1986-Present Duties include managing district daily cash account positions in order to meet immediate needs while achieving optimal return on investment for funds that exceed current cash flow requirements. Responsibilities include: supervision of the accounts payable staff, scheduling daily accounts payable check runs, scheduling all payroll check runs, maintaining and balancing all files used in the preparation of all payroll tax and retirement reports, as well as the supervision of payroll clerks. Responsible for monthly reconciliation of all district bank statements, and balancing the general ledger. Duties also include assisting independent auditors by preparing financial statements and schedules for use in the annual district audit. Provides assistance to the Manager of Financial Services in the preparation of the annual budget, including submittal of budget and actual expenditures to the State of Arkansas. Responsibilities also include working with Software Vendors, Systems Analysts, and Information Services personnel in order to implement, maintain and upgrade District information systems resources. Thomas and Thomas, CPA - Little Rock, Arkansas Staff Accountant 1985-1986 Responsibilities include assisting in the coordination of the auditing and financial reporting for all major clients, as well as the supervision of assistant accountants and accounting clerks. Client industries have included: Governmental, Manufacturing, Telecommunications, Construction, School Districts and Automobile Dealerships. Thomas and Thomas, CPA - Little Rock, Arkansas Accounting Clerk 1983-1985 Responsibilities included assisting professional staff in accounting clerical functions such as preparation of client financial statements and tax returns with the assistance of electronic data processing. Bausch and Lomb, Inc - Pine Bluff, Arkansas Accounting Clerk 1980-1982 Responsibilities included preparation of financial statements, payroll and payroll tax reports and various receivable and payable functions. Responsible for billing under the state Medicaid contract. EDUCATIO Bachelor of Science in Business Administration - Major in Accounting, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, 5/85 Certified Public Accountant - Received designation, 9/87 I TERESTS, AND ACTIVITIES Member - Williams Magnet PT A - Good Citizen Committee Chairman Treasurer - Paiirs Sunday School Class, St James United Methodist Church Member - (past president) - Pi Beta Phi DATE: May 26, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of the Coordinator of Grants BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors voted on March 24, 2005, to approve and accept the organizational audit report as submitted, and directed the Superintendent to move forward to implement the restructuring efforts. The audit recommendations will be used as a blueprint and changes will be made following Board policies, Arkansas law and established school district practices. RATIONALE: The position of Coordinator of Grants is critical to the District as we continue to develop and write for discretionary grants to benefit the students, schools, and various programs of the District. This individual will also manage some of the entitlement programs. The Director will work with building administrators to help them address, via grant funds, the goals and objectives for their school. The Director will advise the Senior Director of Curriculum regarding all grant submissions. FUNDING: This position will be funded from the District's operating budget according to the appropriate salary schedule. RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Ms. Linda Austin, to the position of Coordinator of Grants. Ms. Austin 's resume and a job description are attached for your review. .!=.\u0026gt;, z z\u0026gt; (\") \u0026gt;,... (J) .?.,\u0026gt; .x C: CD :,:, C: (\") (J) $: z ~~ Ou, ..,m un,\n::,0\nSm ,O...U \u0026gt; CD C: \"' PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 April 15, 2005 PLEASE POST The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year. POSITION: Coordinator - Grants Manager QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Master's degree or higher. 2. At least five (5) years successful experience in education and/or social services. 3. Experience in education and administration. 4. Knowledge of the schools and District policy and procedures. 5. Knowledge of New Futures Initiative and all of its component parts. 6. Evidence of a strong commitment to quality desegregated education. 7. Strong interpersonal skills. 8. Evidence of strong organizational skills. 9. Evidence of strong oral and written communication skills. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INITIAL SCREENING INTERVIEW. JOB GOAL: Provides leadership and coordination of the District's grant writing activities and ensures their alignment with District priorities. ACCOUNTABILITY: Reports Directly to Associate Superintendent of Educational Services ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS/ RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Reports monthly the status of grant proposals and project. 2. Studies all federal legislation, projects, and programs for the possibilities and opportunities they offer for educational grants, entitlements, and allocations offered relevant to the needs of the District. 3. Informs, interprets, and recommends to the Associate Superintendent the effects of current and impending federal legislation. 4. Prepares and submits annually an application for federal funds, and coordinates and supervises all activities paid from these funds. 5. Writes/approves all federal project proposals and the filing of such applications for federal funding. 6. Assists the Associate Superintendent and the professional staff in planning wise utilization of funds available to schools through various federal programs. 7. Disseminates pertinent information about federal programs-grants, legislation, program progress-through correspondence and staff meetings. 8. Facilitates with professional staff--content area supervisors, coordinators, directors-the relevancy of curriculum content and the appropriateness of teaching strategies as related to program objectives and goals. 9. Coordinates the professional staff informative and summative evaluation of all federal programs funded through this office. 10. Complies and maintains written records and reports on results of all federal projects and disseminates this information, as appropriate, to other educational institutions, lay groups, the State Department of Education, and the U.S. Office of Education. 11. Facilitates the desegregation process in the assignment of staff in the area offederal programs. 12. Provides specific means to keep parent council members abreast of federal regulations, state guidelines, and local program activities. 13. Serves as a liaison between the school and other agencies on all possible federal funded projects of a joint community nature. 14. Prepares an annual report for the Board summarizing the evaluations offederally funded programs including those completed and those in progress. 15. Prepares and administers a budget for assigned departments. 16. Performs such other responsibilities as may be assigned. SALARY AND TERMS: Pay0l - Grade 72 - $49,428 - $87,168 Twelve (12) month contract, (250 days) plus benefits package. NOTE: Precise placement within the salary range will be determined based upon education and experience. EVALUATIO : Performance of this job will be evaluated annually in accordance with provisions of the Board's Policy on Evaluation of Professional Personnel. !.=.,' z \u0026gt;z C'l .\u0026gt;... u, .'.?, \".x C: c:,\ni:, C: C') u, ~z ~rn .0. ,mu, [ll~ ::cC'l Om .0.. . u, c:, C: \"' 0 C 0 z ~ 0z (/) APPLICATION DEADLINE: April 25, 2005, or any time later until a satisfactory applicant is recommended and approved. SEND RESUMES/INQUIRES: Beverly Williams - Director Little Rock School District HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT 810 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone 501-447-1100 Fax 501-447-1162 NOTE: INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE ABOVE POSITION MUST COMPLETE A VERY RIGOROUS SELECTION PROCESS. THEREFORE, BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL APPLIES FOR A POSITION DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT AN INTERVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED. The Little Rock School District is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Equity concerns may be addressed to the Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District not to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, national origin, or disability in its educational programs, activities or employment practices. EXPERIENCE 1999 - Present 2004 - Present 2002 - Present 2002 - Present 2001 - Present 1988 - 1999 1986 - 1988 1984 - 1987 1976 - 1978 1975 - 1976 1972 - 1975 Summer 1973 1971 - 1972 LINDA YOUNG AUSTIN 14108 BELLE POINTE DRIVE LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 (501) 225-5439 Director of Planning and Development, Little Rock School District Project Director, Smaller Learning Communities Grant Initiative/Central and Fair High Schools, Little Rock School District Project Director, Smaller Learning Communities Grant lnitiativeiHall and McClellan High Schools, Little Rock School District Project Director, 21 st CCLC grants/Hall, Woodruff, Henderson, McClellan and Mabelvale Middle, Little Rock School District Southern Regional Education Board District Coordinator, Little Rock School District New Futures Liaison/Director of Restructuring, Internal Facilitator, Strategic Planning, Little Rock School District, Little Rock, AR University of Arkansas at Little Rock Employed to redesign and coordinate the student teaching program Self-employed: Real Estate Development/Construction Management Specialization in historic renovation Pulaski Academy, Little Rock, AR Employed as Elementary Principal Pulaski Academy, Little Rock, AR Employed as a sixth grade teacher Pine Haven Elementary School, Bauxite, AR Employed as a sixth grade teacher. Assistant Director, University of Arkansas graduate summer reading practicum program. Washington Elementary School, Fayetteville, AR Employed as a sixth grade teacher. .!=.,' z \u0026gt;z C\") \u0026gt; r (J) ,\n,\u0026gt;, .X C CD\n,\n,c C\")(J) ?\nz ~ra O\u0026lt;J\u0026gt; -nm v,\n,\n, n\u0026lt; :c C\") Om O\u0026lt;J\u0026gt; r CD C \"' f) C 0 z ~ 5z (fl EDUCATION 1970- 1971 - Graduate Work: CIVIC ACTIVITIES University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR Degree: B.S.E. in elementary education with emphasis in business and social science University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR Degree: M.Ed. in elementary education with emphasis in reading 1972 - 1998, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, UALR, UCA\ncompleted 42 graduate hours in the areas of administration and curriculum Commission member: City of Little Rock Education Commission, 1994 - 1998 City of Little Rock Advisory Board for the Neighborhood Resource Center, 1997 - 1998 Parents for Public Schools, 1996 - 1998 Technical assistance to the Little Rock Chamber of Commerce and Boy Scouts of America to develop comprehensive youth leadership program for high risk youth, 1995 President, UALR Reading Auxiliary, 1984 - 1986 President, Arkansas Symphony Orchestra Guild, 1986 - 1987 Board of Directors, Arkansas Symphony Orchestra, 1986 - 1987 Board of Directors, Arkansas symphony Orchestra Guild, 1979 - 1987 Served as a member of the transition team for then Governor Bill Clinton, 1979- 1980 Volunteer and leadership positions with Boy Scouts of America Board of Directors, Jefferson PT A, 1986 - 1988 Board of Directors, Pulaski Heights Junior High PT A, 1993 - 1994 RECOGNITIONS Who's Who in American Education - 1993 Recipient of the 1990 Arkansas Juvenile Justice Recognition Award Volunteer in Public Schools Award LRSD, 1987 - 1988 Leadership of Greater Little Rock, Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS Board Member: Center for Middle Level Education, Research and Development University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR Founding Board Member: Arkansas Middle Level Association, Urban Representative 1989 - 1998 National Middle School Association Phi Delta Kappa Educational Association National Association of Secondary School principals 2 Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Charter member of the Arkansas Association of Elementary School Principals ADDITIONAL PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES Associate, Cambridge Group, International Strategic Planning Center, Montgomery, AL Fellow, Center for Leadership in School Reform, Louisville, KY Senior consultant, Center for Middle Level Education, University of Arkansas Fayetteville Editorial Board, MidSouth Journal of Middle Level Education Member, Southern Forum for Middle Level Education Presenter, Arkansas Department of Education, Comprehensive School Reform Statewide Technical Assistance Workshop 2004 Presenter, High Schools That Work Urban Council Meeting, 2003 Presenter, University of Arkansas's Summer Institute on Middle Level Education 1993 - 1998 Consultant/Developer, Philander Smith College, Middle School Course Sequence/Curriculum 2000 Presenter, National Middle School Association National Conference 1992 Presenter, regional conferences on change process, middle level reform, leadership, and building community school connections Participant in the New Futures Institute, Harvard University, Graduate School of Education Instructor, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Summer 11, 1998 - Middle School Methods\nAdolescent Development, Fall I, 1998. 3 .r:.:,, z \u0026gt; ~ \u0026gt; r( J)\n,-x -0  C: tD \"'C: (\")(J)\nz ~ ~ .O.\u0026lt;,mJ\u0026gt; (J)~ ~!} Om ,O--\u0026lt;J\u0026gt; to ,C,.:. p C 0 z ~ 0z CJ) DATE: May 26, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Appointment of the Coordinator of the Early Childhood Education Center BACKGROUND: The Board of Directors voted on March 24, 2005, to approve and accept the organizational audit report as submitted, and directed the Superintendent to move forward to implement the restructuring efforts. The audit recommendations will be used as a blueprint and changes will be made following Board policies, Arkansas law and established school district practices. RATIONALE: The position of Coordinator of the Early Childhood Education Center is critical to the District as preparation begins for opening the ECE center for the 2005-06 school year. This individual will work with parents, teachers, and students to create a state of the art learning and enrichment center for the District's youngest students. The Director will advise the Director of Early Childhood Education regarding all needs and programs as this Center grows. FUNDING: This position will be funded from the District's operating budget according to the appropriate salary schedule. RECOMMENDATION: I am pleased to appoint Ms. Judy Milam, to the position of Coordinator of the Early Childhood Education Center. Ms. Milam's resume and a job description are attached for your review. PLEASE POST LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 April 15, 2005 PLEASE POST The Little Rock School District is now accepting applications for the following position for the 2005-06 school year. POSITION: Coordinator - Fair Park Early Childhood Center OUALIFICA TIO NS: 1. Master's Degree or higher 2. Valid Arkansas Teaching License as an Elementary Principal 3. Knowledge of the Early Childhood State Program Standards, Early Childhood Framework and Benchmarks. 4. Evidence of Pre-K ELLA Training preferred. 5. Knowledge of early childhood development. 6. Knowledge of pedagogy and curriculum development appropriate for preschool education. 7. Evidence of strong experience in dealing with student problems and successful experience with parent and staff involvement. 8. Evidence of strong commitment to quality integrated education. 9. Strong interpersonal skills. 10. Evidence of strong organizational skills. 11. Evidence of strong oral and written communication skills. NOTE: APPLICANTS MUST BE PREPARED TO SHOW EVIDENCE OF THESE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE INITIAL SCREENING INTERVIEW. JOB GOAL: Responsible for providing administrative assistance to the Associate Superintendent of Secondary Education in the area of office administration in order to achieve the departmental goals. ACCOUNTABILITY: Reports Directly to the Director of Early Childhood ?\u0026gt; X \"ti . CID ~c ncn $:z ~~ Oen .,,m CJ)~ n c5 s1n ocn r ID C \"' !l' ~ C 0 z ::\n0z C/) ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS/ RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: 1. Assumes responsibility for the management and monitoring of the Fair Park Early Childhood Center, and serves as a chief advisor to the Director of Early Childhood on matters pertaining to administration and early childhood program implementation in the Center. 2. Serves on such advisory groups and task forces as assigned by the Director of Early Childhood. 3. Has a working knowledge of the Early Childhood Program Standards and Assurances. 4. Implements the process whereby Center needs are identified. Alerts the Director of Early Childhood regarding needed logistical and consultative support in order to accomplish this task. 5. Creates a learning community of children and adults that promotes optimal child development and healthy families\nestablishes a personal relationship with staff\nworks with staff to function as a professional learning community\nmaintains a personal relationship and familiarity with the children and parents\nworks with parents to promote cooperation and understanding of the program 6. Administers, plans and oversees implementation of instructional preschool activities which promote developmentally appropriate student learning according to established guidelines. 7. Coordinates and facilitates curriculum development for the program\nworks with PRE to develop procedures for evaluating new programs, strategies, procedures\ncollects pertinent data\nworks collaboratively with PRE to analyze the data and prepares an annual report of the research. 8. Maintains records of each child's growth\nensures the needs of individual children are met\nrefers children to support services within the community as needed. 9. Formulates and develops policies, procedures, rules regulations, programs and activities related to the Center's programs and services\ndevelops and implements plans for the personnel in areas related to special needs, recruiting students, selecting program staff and estimating and ordering needed equipment and supplies. 10. Assists in the development of the annual preliminary preschool budget\nanalyzes and reviews budgetary and financial data\ncontrols and authorizes expenditures in accordance with established limitations, maintains an inventory of all equipment, furniture and costly instructional items. 11. Trains and evaluations the performance of assigned staff\ninterviews and selects employees and recommends transfers, reassignment, termination and disciplinary actions. 12. Implements immediate and long-term objectives adopted by the Fair Park Advisory Committee and the Fair Park Early Childhood Center Leadership Team. 13. Establishes partnerships with program staff, family members, board members, community representatives, civic leaders, and other stakeholders to design and improve services for children and their families. 14. Communications with other administrators, personnel, departments and outside organizations to coordinate activities and programs, resolves issues and conflicts and exchanges information. 15. Advocates on behalf of high-quality services to meet the needs of children and their families\ncooperates with state and community organizations in providing information to the public on the need for research related to effectiveness of early childhood education for preparing children for school. 16. Maintains membership in professional organizations and associations related to early childhood. 17. Cooperates with the Center's Resource Facilitator and other agencies in the development and presentation of parent education and involvement workshops\nassists in organizing recruiting volunteers and speakers\nprepares and delivers oral presentations to\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1052","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2005-04"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1052"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["76 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nAgenda RECEIVED APR 2 t 2005 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting APRIL 2005 n\n)\u0026gt;-: :\"o\" r-m .... !:: o\n:\n0 2: ::0 )\u0026gt; o::o m-\u0026lt; ::o.,, -c: ~~ r- .... r-5 nz )\u0026gt; U\u0026gt; rr-- :e\n= m-o r- ::0 no On 3:m mo - C: ~ ! C: r- 0\n:: ml\u0026gt; ~=I -om m::o ::0 U\u0026gt; c3- ::o\n:: ~ n m !]) ~ z~ m ~ :r =\nen fl ::0 m f o::o  :,S r- en\n,a-,, -o:,:oO )\u0026gt; 3: 0 =\u0026lt; N m z U) I. II. 111. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS REGULAR BOARD MEETING April 28, 2005 PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests B. Student Performance - Stephens Elementary REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Partners in Education - New Partnerships C. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) D. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A. Remarks from Board Members B. Student Assignment Report C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update V. APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes Regular Meeting - 03-24-05 Special Meeting - 04-05-05 Special Meeting - 04-14-05 B. Board Meeting Dates, 2005-06 n i\u0026gt;-\":\"0 rm ..... !::: 03: oz :0 \u0026gt; 0 :0 m-\u0026lt; :0 .., -c:: :0 z on rr-ot nz \u0026gt;u, r r ~ := rm \":o\" no On 3:m mo -c:: ~H~ c::r 0 3: m\u0026gt; ~=l m\"\":mo :0 (I)\ng- :0 3: \u0026gt;z n m \u0026gt;~  \"\" \"c::' O ..,..:..0, :-'u, n\n:il =l m \u0026gt;n -tO O- Gz\"l z =l \"'o z (I) ?\u0026gt; \"\u0026gt;\" =l z m ~ :r 'ti Cl\u0026gt; f) :0 m ~ !='~ r\u0026lt;J\u0026gt; ::0\"T1 ~~ \u0026gt;3:: n =l mN z en Regular Board Meeting April 28, 2005 Page2 VI. SCHOOL SERVICES A. Elimination of the Sixth Grade Athletic Program B. Report: Mitchell School Update (Daugherty) VII. CURRICULUM \u0026amp; INSTRUCTION A. Report of Recommendations: Fair Park Early Childhood Center VIII. HUMAN RESOURCES A. Personnel Changes B. Update: Reorganization / Continuation of Services IX. BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A. Request for Right of Way and Easement Geyer Springs Elementary School B. Donations of Property C. Financial Report X. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions XI. ADJOURNMENT n )\u0026gt; \"b\n-\nJJ r-m ..... c 03: oz\nJJ )\u0026gt; 0\nJJ m-\u0026lt; :o..,, -c::: :oz on r- .....\n:\no \u0026gt;~ rr- :E\n::: m \"b r-\nJJ no On 3: m mo -c::: !!l~ c::: rem ,3.: ~=l \"b m m\n,:, :O\u0026lt;n\ng-\nJJ 3: )\u0026gt; z n m !\" \"b )\u0026gt; z~ m ~ :r '6 \u0026lt;n PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER I ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS/ WELCOME/ STUDENT PERFORMANCE Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. PARTNERSHIPS C. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS D. LRCTA LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: April 28, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Partners in Education BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District Partners in Education program is designed to develop strong relationships between the community and our schools. The partnership process encourages businesses, community agencies and private organizations to join with individual schools to enhance and support educational programs. Each partnership utilizes the resources of both the school and the business for their mutual benefit. RATIONALE: The following schools and businesses have completed the requirements necessary to establish a partnership and are actively working together to accomplish their objectives. FUNDING: Not applicable. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the board approve the following partnerships: Accelerated Learning Center and Carl Gray Henson Construction Company Accelerated Learning Center and Hurricane Golf and Country Club Metropolitan Career-Technical Center and Remington College Terry and Toys \"R\" Us Terry and Papa John's Pizza Terry and CiCi's Pizza PREPARED BY: Debbie Milam, ViPS Director !'.D rn -\u0026lt; C: 0 m z -\u0026lt; \u0026gt; rn Cl) cz5\ni: m z -\u0026lt; f) a, C: 0 G'l m -\u0026lt; .C.,: 0 ~ m f)\na m 5'= !='~ ,- Cl)\na.., l~ )\u0026gt;3: n :::\nN zm Cl) Partner-in-Education Agreement Between The Carl Gray Benson Construction Company And The Accelerated Learning Center The Accelerated Learning Center (ACC) will demonstrate its commitment as a partner-in-education with the Car) Gray Henson Construction Company in the following manner: 1. acknowledge the Carl Gray Henson Construction Company in each ACC Newsletter. 2. highlight the Carl Gray Henson Construction Company during the annual ACC Parents plus Partners Celebration Brunch. 3. identify qualified students for employment possibilities with the Carl Gray Henson Construction Company. 4. apprise the Carl Gray Henson Construction Company of all ACC educational programs. 5. recognize the Carl Gray Henson Construction Company at ACC's annual graduation ceremony. The Carl Gray Henson Construction Company will demonstrate its commitment as a partner-in-education with the Accelerated Learning Center in the following manner: l.recognize qualified ACC students for employment possibilities with the company 2. volunteer educational services on the ACC campus 3. contribute to the Carol Green Scholarship 4.donate refreshments for selected ACC programs 5.provide seminar speakers for ACC assemblies Partner-in-Education Agreement Between The Hurricane Golf and Country Club And The Accelerated Learning Center The Accelerated Learning Center (ACC) will demonstrate its commitment as a partner-in-education with the Hurricane Golf and Country Club in the following manner: l. acknowledge Hurricane Golf and Country Club as a partner-in-education in each ACC Newsletter 2. highlight Hurricane Golf and Country Club dw-ing the annual ACC Parents plus Partners Celebration Brunch. 3. identify qualified students for employment possibilities with Hurricane Golf and Country Club. 4. apprise Hurricane Golf and Country Club of all ACC educational programs. 5. recognize Hurricane Golf and Country Club at ACC's annual graduation ceremony. The Hurricane Golf and Country Club will demonstrate its commitment as a partner-in-education with the Accelerated Learning Center (ACC) in the following manner:  1. recognize qualified ACC students for employment possibilities 2. direct physical fitness initiatives on the ACC campus 3. contribute to the Carol Green Scholarship 4. donate refreshments for selected ACC programs 5. provide health related seminars/speakers for ACC Healthy School Initiatives ~ ~ C: C m z -\u0026lt; \u0026gt; CJ) CJ) G5 z s:: zm -\u0026lt; p CD C: C G\") m -\u0026lt; C: -c ~ m p\no m ~ !='~ ,-en\no.., ~ el \u0026gt;S:: C') :::\nN mz CJ) Partnership Between Remington College and Metropolitan Career and Technical Center The Metropolitan Career and Technical Center will: 1. Recognize Remington College as a Partner in Education on the Schools website under the Metropolitan sub link and in the monthly newsletter distributed to parents and students throughout the district. 2. Recognize Remington College as a Partner in Education at the next Little Rock school Board meeting. 3. Display plaque received at Little Rock School Board meeting recognizing the Partnership with Remington College in the central office at Metropolitan Career and Technical Center. 4. Metropolitan Career and Technical Center will identify qualified students who meet the requirements outlined in the articulation agreement and recommend them for this program. 5. Arrange field trips for students and or parents to tour Remington College to coordinated through the Director of Education and/or the Director of Admissions of Remington College. 6. Provide a display for Remington College to recruit potential students and parents to review during Open House, Parent or Advisory Board day and Job Fair. Remington College will: 1. Provide a representative to serve on the Advisory Council to Metropolitan Career and Technical Center's various articulated programs in order to provide guidance and strategic planning support regarding the enhancement of school's curriculum, recruitment policies and the marketing of programs. 2. Provide technical credit hours toward a degree area for students at Metropolitan Career and Technical Center who meet the articulation qualifications. 3. Provide an opportunity for field trips and visiting the campus. 4. Provide assistance with annual Skills USA Competition in Hot Springs. 5. Provide assistance with Open House at Metropolitan Career and Technical Center. Terry Elementary School and TOYS \"R\" US Partnership Proposal TOYS \"R\" US will contribute the following to the partnership:   Host a Terry PTA fundraising night at the store with refreshments and children's educational activities  Invite Terry parents to monthly educational events at the store  Provide bulletin board space for Terry's parent events and volunteer opportunities  Develop a newsletter and devote space for Terry information and student artwork  Provide in-kind donations for student recognition Terry will contribute the following to the partnership:  Participate in special events held at the store, such as the September 11th remembrance ceremony  Provide student artwork  Look for opportunities to invite TOYS \"R\" US employees to the school  Provide student artwork and school news for the store's bulletin board ?\" ~ C: C m .z.. . \u0026gt; en en G'i z\n: m .z.. . 0 a, C: C C\u0026gt; !:!l C: \"O ~ m Terry Elementary School and Papa John's Pizza Partnership Proposal Papa John's Pizza will contribute the following to the partnership:  Host a Terry PTA fundraising night once per month with 20% of net sales going to the PTA  Provide incentives for honor roll recipients or other student rewards  Serve as judges for student competitions and contests  Provide resource speakers during career week  Serve as a field trip site  Provide each teacher with a coupon for a free pizza during their birthday month  Provide door prizes to build parent involvement Terry will contribute the following to the partnership:  Provide students to perform for special events  Provide student artwork for display  Look for opportunities to invite Papa John's employees to the school Terry Elementary School and CiCi's Pizza Partnership Proposal CiCi's Pizza will contribute the following to the partnership:  Host a Terry PTA fundraising night once per month with 10% of net sales going to the PTA  Provide Super Star cards (free buffet pass) for honor roll recipients or other student rewards  Serve as judges for student competitions and contests  Provide resource speakers during career week  Serve as a field trip site  Provide each teacher with a teacher pass for one free buffet  Provide door prizes to build parent involvement Terry will contribute the following to the partnership:  Provide students to perform for special events  Provide student artwork for display or for customers' to-go boxes  Look for opportunities to invite CiCi's employees to the sch_ool \u0026gt;\n:o :,,m m-C ~ ~\n:o -\u0026lt;\n,\n~ \"-n'\no\n:\n:o\n: 0 C: 3:z o'\u0026gt;o\n\u0026gt;:-o\u0026lt;oOz Cl') !\"' Cl') -\u0026lt; C: 0 m z -\u0026lt; \u0026gt; Cl') Cl') ci z\n: m z -\u0026lt; 0 a, C: 0 C) !:!l C: -c, ~ m r\u0026gt;\n:o m ~ !='~ ,--Cl'l ~\na\n!~ n ::\n,::\nm z Cl') DATE: April 28, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: April 2005 Construction Report - Bond Projects BACKGROUND: I am pleased to report that on May 25th bids are scheduled to be received for the renovation of Rightsell Elementary. Based on this schedule, the building will be ready for occupancy by staff and students for the 2006-07 school year. The construction contract for the seven-classroom addition at Gibbs has been awarded. The bids for this work were above our projected cost estimate. The low bid illustrates what is taking place in the construction industry. The rising costs of oil and metal is resulting in a construction cost increase of one percent (1 % ) per month. Experts predict this trend will continue because of the growing economies of China and India which are putting pressure on oil and metals markets. If you need additional information or have any questions, please call me at 44 7-1146. RATIONALE: Monthly reports are submitted to the Board to keep members up-to-date on construction projects in the District. FUNDING: Bond Funds RECOMMENDATION: Report item\nno action necessary. PREPARED BY: Bill Goodman, District Engineer\n-r, ..... ~ :c z 0 r- 8 -\u0026lt; c:: \"C .~.... m ?'\n: m ...,..m.., gz V' G\"l a:~ ..... m en CONSTRUCTIONREPORTTOTHEBOARD APRIL 28, 2005 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION t:st completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Carver Media Center Expansion $1 67,490 Dec-05 Central -----~Ren_o_vation - Interior ___ -+- _!!Q,200,2~ ~ g-:OS Fair Park ______ _,_R_o_o_f _________ __j __ - ~245,784 - ~ ay-05 Gibbs Addition $705,670 I Dec-05 Oakhurst (Adult Education) New Win_d_ows ~----~ -1-- $215,000 Aug-05 Scott Field Track Renovations $289,056 May-05 Western Hiclcl-s------+E=1,.e...-ct-r-i,-ca...,l..,U...,..p...-g-r-a_d_e...\u0026amp;.,,__,H--,V...,.A- C~-----I- -- $622,1 60 Aug-05 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - SPRING/ SUMMER 2005 t:st. (\nompletIon Facilitv Name Project Description Cost Date Fair Park Remodel ------+--- $799,000 Aug-05 Forest Park Restrooms $152,881 ~ Aug-05 Henderson Skylight Replacement $45,000 Aug-05 Meadowcliff Remodel -- --- $164,150 Aug-05 Pulaski Heights Elem/Middle Cafeteria Ceiling ~ $33,378 Aug-05 Pulaski Heights Elementary Clean Exterior Walls - - -----+-- ~ 660 I A~g-05 Pulaski Heiqhts Elem/Middle Replace Entry Doors $13,990 Aug-05 Rightsell Renovation 1 $2,494,000  Aug-06 Southwest New Corridor Ceiling $300,000 I Auq-05 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED t:st. 1,.\nomp1euon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Booker Electrical Upgrade Unknow_n~I _ Chicot Electrical Upgrade __ f---__ U_n_k_n_o_w_n ___ _ Cloverdale Elementary Addition $520,750 , Unknown Unknown - Unknown Forest He~ig~h_ts_ ____ _ +R=em_od_e.,.I.. ________ $1 ,547,000 Mitchell Renovation -+----~$2,~2_12~,493-+: ___ _ Pulaski Hgts. MS !Energy monitoring system installa~ Unknown Woodruff ~ addition 1 $193,777 Unknown -- Unknown Unknown Aug-05 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Est. Completion Facllitv Name Proiect Description Cost Date Administration Asbestos abatement I $380,495 j Mar-03 Administration Fresh air system $55,000 1 Aug-03 Administration Fire alarm $32,350 Aug-03 Administration HVAC $70,000 Nov-04 Administration Annex Energy monitoring system installation May-02 Alternative Leaming Ctr. Energy monitoring system installation $15,160 Oct-01 Alternative Leaming Ctr. Energy efficient lighting $82,000 Dec-01 Badgett Partial asbestos abatement $237,237 Jul-01 Badgett Fire alarm $18,250 Aug-02 Bale Classroom addition/renovation $2,244,524 Dec-02 Bale Energy monitoring system Mar-02 Bale Partial roof replacement $269,587 Dec-01 Bale HVAC $664,587 Aug-01 Baseline Renovation $953,520 Aug-04 Booker Gym Roof $48,525 Oct-04 Booker ADA Rest rooms $25,000 Aug-04 1--Bo_oke_r_ ______- -+E_n_e-r'g\"y''--e_ffi1cie_n_t_lig,,_h_t1n,g,_ ______ ,_ ____$1 7_0~,2_9_5~--- _ Apr-01 Booker Energy monitoring system in-stallation ' $23,710 Oct-01 Booker Asbestos abatement $10,900 Feb-02 Booker Fire alarm $34,501 Mar-02 Brady Addition/renovation $973,621 Nov-04 Brady Energy efficient lighting $80,593 Sep-02 Brady Asbestos abatement $345,072 Auq-02 Facility Name Carver Carver Central Central Central Parking Central/Quig~y Cen_!!\"al/Quigley - Central/Quigley Central Central Central f--- Central Central Chicot Chicot Cloverdale Elem. Cloverdale MS Cloverdale MS Dodd Dodd Dodd Dodd Dunbar Facilities Service Facility Services Fair Park Fair Park Fair Park J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair Forest Park Forest Park Forest Park Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Fulbriqht Franklin Geyer Springs Gibbs Gibbs Hall Hall Hall Hall CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD APRIL 28, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Project Description Cost Energy monitoring system installation $14,480 Parking lot $111 ,742 I HVAC Renovation - Band Area $225,000 Reflecting Pond $57,561 Student parking $174,000 Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair $265,000 - Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 . Irrigation System $14,500 -, Purchase land for school Unknown Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations $2,000,000 Ceiling and wall repair $24,000 Fire Alarm System Design/Installation $80,876 Front landing tile repair $22,470 Drainage $64,700 Sound Attenuation I $43,134 Energy efficient lighting $132,678 . Energy efficient lighting $189,743 Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $1 ,393,822 Fire Alarm Upgrade $9,200 Energy efficient lighting $90,665 Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile $156,299 Replace roof top HVAC $215,570 Renovation/addition $6,149,023 I Interior renovation $84,672 Fire alarm i $12,000 IHVAC renovation/fire alarm $315,956 Energy efficient lighting $90,162 Asbestos abatement-ceiling $59,310 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music room addition $3,155,640 Energy efficient lighting $277,594 , Press box I $10,784 I Security cameras I $12,500 I Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Irrigation System $14,000 Roof repairs $391,871 Replace window units w/central HVAC $485,258 Diagonal parking $111 ,742 Energy efficient lighting $119,788 Energy efficient lighting $134,463 Energy monitoring system installation $11 ,950 Replace roof top HVAC units $107,835 Parking lot $140,000 Roof repairs $200,000 Renovation $2,511,736 Roof Repair $161,752 Energy efficient lighting $76,447 Energy monitoring system installation $11,770 Maior renovation \u0026amp; addition $8,637,709 Asbestos abatement $168,222 Energy efficient lighting $42,931 Energy efficient lighting $296,707 Est Completion Date May-01 Auq-03 - Dec-04 Sep-04 Aug-03 Aug-03 Aug-03 Aug-03 Dec-02 Dec-02 Oct-01 Aug~ Aug-01 Aug-04 Jul-04 Jul-01 Jul-01 Nov-02 Oct-04 Aug-01 Ju-l-01 Aug-02 Nov-04 Mar-01 Aug-03 Apr-02 _ Aug-01 Aug-01 Aug-04 Apr-01 Nov-00 Jun-01 Jul-03 Jul-03 Aug-03 Nov-03 Aug-03 May-01 Jun-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Mar-03 Jun-04 Apr-01 Jul-01 Sep-03 Aug-01 Jul-01 Aor-01 2 cl .... m (\") :r:: z ,0.. . 8 -\u0026lt; C: -u 0 .\u0026gt;... m\ni\u0026gt;s \"-'\u0026lt; \"n' :r:: :r:: Clo ~i2 Oen mm ~~ :r::n r- m ~en 0 en !T1 .z... m ~ ~ \u0026gt; C: C ~\nc Facility Name Hall Hall Hall ,H_e_nd_e r_son_ _ Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson IRC Jefferson Jefferson Laidlaw -Mablevale Elem Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale Elem. Mabelvale MS Mabelvale MS Mann -Mann Mann Mann Mann Mann McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McClellan McDennott McDennott McDermott . Meadowcliff Meadowcliff Meadowcliff Metropolitan Metropolitan Metropolitan Mitchell Mitchell Mitchell Mitchell Oakhurst Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek Otter Creek CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD APRIL 28, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Proiect Description Cost Infrastructure improvements -- $93,657 Intercom ~ Security cameras ' ---- $10,600 !Lockers $43,854 Energy efficient lighting $193,679 Roof replacement gym $107,835 I Asbestos abatement Phase I $500,000 I Asbestos abatement Phase 2 $250,000 Energy efficient lighting $109,136 Asbestos abatement I $43,639 Renovation \u0026amp; fire alarm ____ i-- $1 ,630,000 Parking lo_t __________ 1-- $269,588 Fire Alann Upgrade , $1 2,000 Energy monitoring system installation $12,150 I Replace HVAC units $300,000 i Est Completion Date Au..9:.Q.!_ Feb-01 Jun-01 ---De-c-0-4 Jul-01 May-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Jul-02 Oct-01 Nov-02 Jul-01 ~ -t--04 Aug-0_1_ 1 Aug-02 Asbestos Abatemen_t __ ~ $107,000+-- Aug-02 Energy efficient lighting $106,598 Dec-02 Renovate bleachers $134,793 Auq-01 Renovation $6,851 ,621 I Mar-04 Partial Replacement $11 ,500,000 Apr-04 Asphalt walks The total $1 .8 million Dec-01 Walkway canopies is what has been used Dec-01 Boiler replacement so far on the projects Oct-01 - Fencing listed completed for Sep-01 Partial demolition/portable classrooms Mann. Aug-01 Parking Lot Overlay $65,000 Apr-05 Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Jul-03 Irrigation System $14,750 - Jul-03 Security cameras $36,300 Jun-01 , Energy efficient lighting $303,614 May-01 Stadium stands repair $235,000 Aug-01 Intercom $46,000 Feb-02 Classroom Addition $2,155,622 Jul-04 Fire Alann Upgrade $7,700 Sep-04 Enerm1 efficient lighting $79,411 Feb-01 Replace roof top HVAC units $476,000 Aug-02 Fire alann $16,175 Jul-01 Asbestos abatement $253,412 Aug-02 Engergy efficient lighting $88,297 Dec-02 Replace cooling tower $37,203 Dec-00 Replace shop vent system $20,000 May-01 Energy monitoring system installation $17,145 Aug-01 Building Remediation $165,000 , Jul-04 Energy efficient lighting $103,642 Apr-01 Energy monitorinq system installation $16,695 Jul-01 Asbestos abatement $13,000 Jul-01 HV AC renovation $237,237 Aug-01 Energy monitoring system installation $10,695 May-01 Enerqy efficient liqhting I $81 ,828 Apr-01 Asbestos abatement $10,000 Aug-02 Parking lot $138,029 Aug-02 6 classroom addition $888,778 Oct-02 Parkinq lmorovements $142,541 Auq-03 3 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD APRIL 28, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Est. Completion Facility Name Proiect Description Cost Date Parkview Addition $2,121,226 Dec-04 Parkview HVAC controls $210,000 Jun-02 Parkview Roof replacement I $273,877 +-- Sep-01 Parkview Exterior lights $10,784 I Nov-00 Parkview HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls $301 ,938 Aug-01 Parkview Locker replacement $120,000 ' Aug-01 Parkview Energy efficient lighting $315,000 Jun-01 Procurement Energy monitoring system installation $5,290 Jun-02 I-Procurement Fire alarm $25,000 Aug-03 Pulaski Hgts. Elem Renovation I -- $1 ,193,259 Nov-04 Pulaski Hgts. Elem Move playground $17,000 I Dec-02 Pulaski Hqts. MS Renovation $3,755,041 j Nov-04 Rightsell Energy efficient lighting $84,898 Apr-01 Rockefeller - Energy efficient lighting $137,004 Mar-01 Rockefeller Replace roof top HV AC $539,175 ~ Rockefeller Parking addition $111 ,742 Aug-02 Romine Asbestos abatement I $10,000 ~ Romine 'Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675 I Mar-03 Security/Transportation Bus cameras $22,500 Jun-=o-f Southwest Addition $2,000,000  Nov-04 Southwest Asbestos abatement $28,138 I Aug-00 Southwest New roof $690,000 Oct-03 Southwest Energy efficient lighting $168,719 I Jan-02 Southwest Drainage / street widening $250,000 I Aug-03 Student Assignment !Energy monitoring system installation $4,830 Aug-02 Student Assignment Fire alarm $9,000 I Aug-03 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation $275,000 Dec-01 Tech Ctr / Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II $3,679,000 Jun-04 - Technology Upgrade Upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data Nov-02 Terry Energy efficient lighting $73,850 Feb-01 Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking $83,484 Aug-02 Terrv Media Center addition $704,932 Sep-02 Wakefield Rebuild $5,300,000 Dec-04 Wakefield Security cameras $8,000 Jun-01 Wakefield Energy efficient lighting $74,776 Feb-01 Wakefield Demolition/Asbestos Abatement $200,000 Nov-02 Washington Fire Alarm Upgrade $11 ,600 Oct-04 Washington Security cameras $7,900 Jun-01 Washinqton Energy efficient lighting $165,281 Apr-01 Watson Energy monitoring system installation $8,530 Jul-01 Watson Asbestos abatement $182,241 Aug-01 Watson Energy efficient lighting $106,868 Aug-01 Watson Asbestos abatement $10,000 Aug-02 Watson Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $800,000 Aug-02 Western Hills Fire Alarm Upgrade $8,400 Oct-04 Western Hills ADA Rest rooms $25,000 Aug-04 Western Hills Asbestos abatement - $191,946 Aug-02 Western Hills Intercom $7,100 Dec-01 Western Hills Energy efficient lighting $106,000 Jul-01 Williams Renovation $2,106,492 Mar-04 Williams Parking expansions $183,717 Dec-03 Williams Energy efficient lighting $122,719 Jun-01 Wilson HVAC for Cafeteria $56,000 Mar-05 Wilson Renovation/expansion $1,263,876 Feb-04 Wilson Parking Expansion $110,000 Aug-03 Woodruff Renovation $246,419 Aug-02 4 :n -I ~ :r z 0 r- 8 -\u0026lt; C: -c 0 ~ m !l' 3: m m \"-\u0026gt;-I gz 'i' c\n) a:~ -I m en ?\u0026gt; ~ .,, en -le-, :r :r c\n)Q ~~ o en mm ~~ :c (\") r-m ~ en n en Date: April 28, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS To: Board of Directors From(l,andy Becker, Internal Auditor Re: Audit Report - April This is the sixty-sixth communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with one high school, one middle school and two elementary schools to resolve financial issues in their activity funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. b) The AAB has forwarded a Booster Club Guidelines Package to be included in official publications of the District after review. Board Policy and Regulation a) The amended Out of District Travel regulation is being implemented. Technology Training a) Monitoring technology plans and technology meetings to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. b) Facilitating technology upgrade in cooperation with the English Department for Yearbook and Newspaper production staff in LRSD high schools to improve access to tools needed for students and staff. a) Served as a trainer for financ.ial portion of Nuts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. :n\n:: C\") :zc 0 5 G) -\u0026lt; C: -a 0 )\u0026gt; ..... m\n,,,s -at,c \"-,' :c :c G\"lO ~ ~ 0 en mm :!:.~ :c C\") r-m !:!)en n en !II !!: =. C\") :c rmr- ~ :c 8,... C: -a 0 :!:. m Audit Report - April 2005 Page 2 of2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and sman spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring combined payroll and human resources issues for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Reviewing Teacher School Supply Fund Records for recommendations. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Served as District coordinator of United Way's Day of Caring (April 17, 2005. Eleven schools participated. Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-447-1115. My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. DATE: April 28, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Technology Report BACKGROUND: Since the last Board meeting the following technology activities took place:  The Edline project expanded to include all high schools this month. The first round of teacher training has been held for all high school sites, including Metropolitan Career and Technical Center. Parent training is ongoing.  The Dana wireless carts that were purchased as part of a EETT grant have been incorporated into instruction at the two sites that were part of the grant: Henderson Middle School and Southwest Middle School. Projects that students have been involved in include preparation for ACT AAP with students using the wireless devices to do practice tests and beam answers to the teacher. They also used them for writing responses and beaming them to the printer.  The District will undergo an audit this month by the Universal Service Administrative Corporation, the group that administers the E-rate Program. The audit will include a site visit by representatives of USAC who will examine District e-rate policies, procedures, and record keeping. They will also interview staff at selected sites that have received e-rate funding. RATIONALE: To implement the LRSD Technology Plan 2003 - 2006 FUNDING: N/A\n\u0026gt; s .0..,. .in., ::i::::,: Cl 0 ~ ~ CU\u0026gt; mm ~~ ::i::.-, rm !:!l rJ\u0026gt; n U\u0026gt; lX'\nc: ::::\nn ::,: m r r U\u0026gt; n ::,: 8 r C: \"C C ~ m RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board accept this report. PREPARED BY: Lucy Neal, Director, Technology and Media Services John Ruffins, Director, Computer Information Services LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: April 28, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Elimination of Sixth Grade Athletics BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School Districted implemented the sixth grade athletic program when the transition was made from junior high schools to middle schools. The LRSD is the only District in the state that provides athletics for sixth grade students. RATIONALE: The Arkansas Activities Association does not regulate athletic programs until students enter the seventh grade. The Arkansas Department of Education requires football, basketball and track coaches to have a coaching endorsement to their license, effective at the seventh grade, as governed by the AAA. No credentials, certification or training are currently required for an employee to be a sixth grade coach. This could present a liability issue for us in case of accident or serious injury. Elimination of the sixth grade athletic program would provide additional time for our students to focus on the academic aspects of the transition to middle school. Youth athletic programs in football, basketball and soccer are provided by the City of Little Rock, the local YMCA, Girls and Boys Clubs, and other organizations, and are scheduled outside the school day. FUNDING: This recommendation will save approximately $80,000\n$40,000 from coaching stipends and $40,000 from transportation.  RECOMMENDATION: I recommend board approval to eliminate the sixth grade athletic program. PREPARED BY: Johnny Johnson, Director of Athletics Marian Lacey, Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Schools ~ C: \"tJ C ~ m Al 0\no C) \u0026gt;z ~ 0 z\n,,,, ?\u0026lt;\no a, 0 C: ~~ Im c, en men -\u0026lt; en mm\no\no enS \"t:10 c, m ~ en ~ 3: =l 0 :,: m rren 0 :,: 8 r-e: ~ m DATE: April 28, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Update: Mitchell School BACKGROUND: The committee to develop a recommendation for reuse of the Mitchell School facility has been meeting on a regular basis to review options and determine a suitable use for that facility. Dr. Micheal Daugherty has served as co-chair of this committee, along with staff members Dr. Sadie Mitchell and Dr. Linda Watson. Dr. Daugherty will provide a brief status report on the committee's work and recommendations. bjg ~ :i:: ?\u0026gt; ~ ~~ ~~ om zO zC:: m\n,, ,- n m \"' ?' c,:,: ~ m\n,, m 0 ~ \u0026gt;z ~ 5z ?\u0026gt; ?\u0026lt;\n,, a, 0 c:: :E ~ Im ~~ m-\u0026lt;m\"'\n,,\n,, r.,n, Sn c, m !\"\"' DATE: April 28, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Fair Park Early Childhood Center BACKGROUND: During the past few months, the LRSD Early Childhood Department has met with individual district personnel, the Fair Park Early Childhood Center Planning Team and Advisory Committee. The result of those discussions is The Big Picture - Fair Park Early Childhood Center, which details the plan for converting the Fair Park Elementary School into a high quality and effective early childhood education center. RATIONALE: Research on the effectiveness of preschool education for increasing children's success in school has shifted the national and state agendas toward providing increased opportunities for preschool education. LRSD has been a leader in the state in providing quality preschool education on a first come, first serve basis. The conversion of Fair Park Elementary into an early childhood center will increase the availability of preschool programming so that more children in the District will have access to a quality preschool education. FUNDING: The Fair Park Early Childhood Center will be funded with District funds and Arkansas Better Chance for School Success (ABCSS) grant funds. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board accept this report as presented. PREPARED BY: Krista Underwood, Director of Early Childhood and Elementary Literacy !l' c::: -c Cl ~ m Rl 0 el z\u0026gt; ~ 5 z ~?\u0026lt;\noo:, 0 c::: :E ~ ,m G) (I) -m\u0026lt; \"' (I) mm ~~ -c (') c\n,m !\"\"' !l' Cl 0 z ~ 5 z en DATE: April 28, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Personnel Changes BACKGROUND: None RATIONALE: To staff allocated positions within the District FUNDING: Operating Fund RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.C.A. 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) consecutive years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 19, 2004 for regular schools are considered intern teachers. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 9, 2004 for EYE are consider.ed intern teachers. PREPARED BY: Beverly Williamfoirector of Human Resources f) .., ~ zn \u0026gt; r( J) !\" C: --0 0 ~ m ill 0 ::c C'l \u0026gt;z ~ -I z6 !\" 0 0 z ~ 5 :z (J) Personnel Changes Page 2 March 24, 2005 NAME START DATE/ POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE Resignations/Tenninations Certified Employees Buettner, Sally 4 Yr Old/ 9-28-87 Reason: Retired CLOVERDALE 4-7-05 ELEMENTARY Hunter, Karen Gifted and Talented/ 8-04-04 Reason: No Reason Given STEPHENS 4-15-05 Wood, Mary Kindergarten/ 8-13-97 Reason: Terminated - No BRADY 4-1-05 Appeal Pending Mims, Richard Science/ 8-18-86 Reason: Deceased MANN 4-7-05 New Certified Employees Burleson, Kimberly Elementary I/ 3-8-05 MCDERMOTT Nickerson, Vickie Elementary I/ 3025-05 MCDERMOTT Nunez, Teresa Mathematics/ 4-7-05 HALL Resignations/Tenninations Non-Certified Employees Berg, Elizabeth Reason: None Given Care/ CARE 8-19-04 4-18-05 SALARY CLASS 2-17 4YR925 6-20 G\u0026amp;T925 1-08 K925 6-21 TCH925 4-08 TCH925 4-18 TCH925 4-10 TCH925 3-17 CARE ANNUAL SALARY 49217.00 58520.00 36972.00 60020.00 41507.00 annual 12538.57 prorated 53061 .00 annual 12436.17 prorated 43818.00 annual 9356.97 prorated 10.36 per hour Personnel Changes Page3 March 24, 2005 fl \"Tl z \u0026gt;z (\") \u0026gt; r START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL en NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY Dorsey, Betty Child Nutrition/ 9-11-04 3-01 9350.00 Reason: Accepted another CHILD NUTRITION 3-14-05 FSH550 position Draper, James Maintenance/ 9-8-04 40-01 19020.00 ~ ?\u0026lt; Reason: Leaving the city FACILITY SERVICES 3-18-05 MAINT \u0026gt;(\") 0 r- '--0 OS!! CZ Fairman, Carolyn Custodian/ 7-1-01 31-9 18456.00 ::oc\n, z::0 Reason: Resigned without STEPHENS 4-1-05 CUS12 ::m m\n: z\u0026gt; Notice --\u0026lt;::o \"en' Glover, Barbara Child Nutrition/ 8-25-82 2-16 17067.00 Reason: Retired CHILD NUTRITION 5-1-05 FSMGRS Golatt, Crystal Child Nutrition/ 8-12-03 3-05 9534.00 !l' Reason: Resigned without CHILD NUTRITION 2-18-05 FSH550 C \"tl 0 Notice \u0026gt;--\u0026lt; ~ ::0 Hayman, Kimberly Nurse/ 8-13-98 52-15 41328.00 m 0 ::0 Reason: Personal WAKEFIELD/BASELINE 4-30-05  NURSES G) \u0026gt;z N Hodge, Gracie Child Nutrition/ 8-16-01 3-04 9483.00 \u0026gt;--\u0026lt; 5 Reason: Health CHILD NUTRITION 4-5-05 FSH550 z Johnson, Linda Secretary/ 2-15-90 39-20 32544.00 Reason: Retired FOREST HEIGHTS 4-4-05 CLK10 Lovelace, Corey Bus Driver/ 1-24-05 2-04 11450.00 ?\"?\u0026lt; ::o en Reason: None Given TRANSPORTATION 3-17-05 BUSDRV o\u0026lt;= ::E~ ,m c, en Lyles, Eddie Care/ 2-21-05 3-03 8.06 men -\u0026lt; en Reason: None Given CARE 4-1-05 CARE per hour mm ::o::o en :s\n\"0 (\") c, m Quick, Theresa Care/ 9-15-03 3-17 10.36 VJ en Reason: None Given CARE 3-18-05 CARE per hour Robinson, Monique Bus Driver/ 4-5-04 3-02 11450.00 Reason: Returning back to TRANSPORTATION 1-24-05 BUSDRV school !\" 0 Smith, Ruby Child Nutrition/ 11-16-98 0 3-07 9626.00 z \u0026gt; Reason: Resigned without CHILD NUTRITION 3-03-05 FSH550 --\u0026lt; 5 Notice z \"' Personnel Changes Page4 March 24, 2005 NAME Spaight, Linda Reason: Personal Williams, Jimmy Reason : Resigned without Notice Williams, Monica Reason: Personal Ammons, Sandra Andrews, Robert Black, Charlotte Deckard, David Johnson, Gregory Marion, Rose Schoggen, Michael START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Instructional Aide/ 9-20-04 ROCKEFELLER 4-8-05 Custodian/ 8-15-02 FACILITY SERVICES 4-1-05 Instructional Aide/ 8-16-04 ROCKEFELLER 4-6-05 New Non-Certified Employees Child Nutrition/ 3-03-05 CHILD NUTRITION Painter/ 3-9-05 FACILITY SERVICES Secretary/ 2-28-05 FACILITY SERVICES Maintenance/ 3-9-05 FACILITY SERVICES Instructional Aide/ 3-2-05 SPECIAL EDUCATION Instructional Aide/ 4-5-05 WILLIAMS Maintenance/ 3-7-05 FACILITY SERVICES SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 33-09 16603.00 INA12 31-04 15900.00 CUS12 33-08 16109.00 INA12 3-01 6617.00 FSH4 annual 2230.04 prorated 49-07 29760.00 MAINT annual 9751 .15 prorated 42-08 24876.00 CLK12 annual 8891.85 prorated 51-07 31596.00 MAINT annual 10352.73 33-03 10934.00 INA925 annual 3605.26 prorated 33-16 10793.03 INA925 annual 2508.65 prorated 51-07 31596.00 MAINT annual 10621.63 prorated DATE: TO: FROM: April 28, 2004 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Update: Reorganization - Assignment of Responsibilities BACKGROUND: Dr. Mitchell requested a report regarding the fulfillment of duties and responsibilities for positions that have been eliminated from the district's organizational structure. As administrative and key staff positions are filled and as new assignments are made, duties and responsibilities will be assigned accordingly. I have asked Beverly Williams to present a brief overview and status report. Additional assignments of duties and responsibilities will be made as staff persons are identified to fill key positions. If you have any questions as we move through this process, please feel free to discuss with me. bjg .!\",\u0026gt;, z z\u0026gt; C\") \u0026gt; r Cl) ?\u0026gt; ?\u0026lt;\n,,a:r oC ::\n~ Im ~gi -\u0026lt; (/) mm\n,J\n,J Cl)$ ,, C\") rCn\u0026gt; (m/) !\"' C 0 z ~ 0 z V, DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 April 28, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Request for Right of Way and Easements Geyer Springs Elementary School BACKGROUND: The City of Little Rock is in the process of acquiring the necessary rights of ways and temporary construction easements needed for the widening of Mabelvale Pike. To support this project, the City has requested a permanent right-of-way and two types of easements: a drainage easement and a temporary easement to allow construction-access along the new street and drainage system. The temporary construction easement will be filled and graded to conform to the adjacent area and returned to the Little Rock School District upon completion of the project. RATIONALE: The Little Rock School District has long supported the initiatives of the City of Little Rock in maintaining its streets and sidewalks. This right-ofway and easements are in line with the policies and practices that have prevailed in the past. FUNDING: The offer of $4,500 made to the Little Rock School District is based on a fair-market-value appraisal made by a qualified real estate appraiser and reviewed and approved by the Arkansas Highway Department. There are no expenditures expected on the part of the Little Rock School District. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board give the Administration approval to enter into this right-of-way and temporary construction easement. PREPARED BY: Douglas Eaton, Director of Facility Services Attachments .~., z \u0026gt;z C'l ~ en !\" C 0 z .\u0026gt;... 5 z en JOB NAME: Mabelvale Pike - 57th Street Job Number: 060975, TRACT I 0 CONTRACT TO SELL REAL ESTATE FOR HIGHWAY PURPOSES (CONTROLLED ACCESS FACILITY) GRANTOR: Geyer Springs Elementary School Little Rock School District GRANTEE: CITY OF LITTLE ROCK 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 In CONSIDERATION of the benefits that will inure to the Grantor(s) and the public, and for the sum of $1,080. for a small portion of land and $3,420. for a Temporary Construction Easement, the undersigned does hereby give and grant City of Little Rock, upon the terms and conditions hereinafter stated, the right to purchase the following described real estate, save and except the oil and gas only therein and thereunder, situated in the County of Pulaski, State of Arkansas, to wit: See attached drawing and legal description PAYMENT DUE $$4,500. appraised value offered by the County of Pulaski for real estate, including damages, if any, to the remainder\nto be paid after approval of title and execution of a deed as hereinafter provided. WITINESS my hand and seal on this __ day of ____ ,2005. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS) ) COUNTY OF PULASKI ) On this ___ day of ____ , 2005, before me, a Notary Public duly commissioned, qualified and acting within and for said County and State, appeared in person the within named ________ to me personally well known, and stated that they were duly authorized to execute foregoing instrument, and further stated and acknowledged that they had so signed, executed and delivered said forgoing instrument for the consideration, uses and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal this _ day of ____ ,2003 Notary Public My commission expires: TRACTl.Q Geyer Springs Elementary School WARRANTY DEED ROW ONLY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that Little Rock School District, Grantor(s), duly authorized, for the sum of One thousand eighty dollars ($1,080.) and other valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the City of Little Rock Arkansas, Grantee, all of Grantor's right, title and interest in and to the following described lands in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas: LEGAL DESCRIPTION SEE ATTACHED DRAWING TO HA VE AND TO HOLD the same unto Grantee and unto its successors and assigns forever, with all appurtenances thereunto belonging. Grantor hereby covenants with Grantee that it will forever warrant and defend the title to said real property against any and all claims whatever. WITNESS our hands on this ___ day of ___ 2005. GRANTOR PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE LITTLE ROCK CITY ATTORNEY f) .,, z \u0026gt;z C) ~ (J) ~ 0 0 z ~ 5z (J) TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT Tract 10, Geyer Springs Elementary School KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that the Little Rock School District, Grantor, duly authorized to execute this deed, for the sum of Three thousand four hundred twenty dollars ($3,420.) and other valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, bargain, and convey unto City of Little Rock, Grantee, a temporary use of following described lands in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas: See attached legal description and drawing TO HA VE AND TO HOLD the same unto Grantee and unto its successors and assigns forever, with all appurtenances thereunto belongs. Grantor hereby covenants with Grantee, subject to the above limitations, that it will forever warrant and defend the title to said real property against all claims and encumbrances done or suffered by it. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has caused this Temporary Construction Easement to be signed as of this __ day of _______ , 2005 By: By: APPROVED BY THE OFFICE OF THE LITTLE ROCK CITY ATTORNEY PARCEL 10 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PART OF THE SW  SW  SECTION 19, T-1-N, R-12-W, LITTLE ROCK, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS: STARTING AT THE NW CORNER SW SW  SECTION 19\nTHENCE S 89.35'37\" E, 446.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING\nTHENCE N 0019'23\" E, 175.00 FEET\nTHENCE S 89.35'37\" E, 89.00 FEET\nTHENCE N 0019'23 E, 491.06 FEET\nTHENCE S 8935'37\" E, 211 .00 FEET\nTHENCE S 0019'23\" W, 671.30 FEET\nTHENCE N s93537 W, 300.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 156,667 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. BIGHT OF WAY BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY\nTHENCE N 0019'23\" E, 25.68 FEET\nTHENCE S s935'37\" E, 64.32 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE HAVING A 348.99 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A CHORD BEARING AND DISTANCE OF N 85'33'05\" E, 59.07 FEET\nTHENCE ON THE ARC OF SAID CURVE 59.14 FEET TO THE POINT OF TANGENCY\nTHENCE S 89.35'37\" E, 176.82 FEET\nTHENCE S 0019'23\" W, 30.68 FEET\nTHENCE sg35'37\" W, 300.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEmNNING CONTAINING 8764.53 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. PERMANENT EASEMENT THE NORTH 15.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 40.68 FEET, CONTAINING 3419.47 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. LESS \u0026amp; EXCEPT THE ABOVE DESCRIBED RIGHT -oF WAY. DEED REFERENCE NO DEED REFERENCE FOUND. DESCRIPTION TAKEN FROM ASSESSMENT RECORDS. CITY OF UTILE ROCK GEYER SPRINGS ROAD MABEL VALE PIKE - 57th STREET AMI ENGINEERING, INc.liill ENGINEERS  PLANNERS  SURVEYORS PHOTOGRAMMETRISTS 201 MARKHAM CEN-rrR DRIVE P.O. BOX 25937 /UTTTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72221 (501) 227-7117 FAX(501) 227-5755 s::::: )\u0026gt; tlJ rr, r \u0026lt; )\u0026gt; r rr, -u ~ f\"T1 30.66' I ~ ...,,\n. ..,. b 0 0 .0. , \"! .\".,\nll C\"l0' z I ~ NW CORNER SW SW SECTION 19, T-1-N, R-12-W 175.00' ~~ ... Zt-\nN Wz ~w 2~ a:cn W\u0026lt; 0.W I 5' 10' g c,\na, 1,,-.:..\".,.' 0, g\n.,, N00,9'23\"E -4-91.06' 671.30' ~ SCALE: 1 \"= 100' NOVO 7 2002 PARCEL 10 !\" C 0 z ~ 0 z (J) Campus Name Gey\u0026amp;l? $,w1f6 fu-d{. A Dist r ict Number Page _J__ of R__ Street Address 52.}HJ tfn,..avALE: ?u\u0026lt;E ------------ Date of Drawing _ / _ / _ ----- -- -- -- ------- - - __ __.-- - C. -- ------ ( I DATE: April 28, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District receives donations from businesses and individuals on a regular basis. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District that donations are not formally accepted until they are approved by the Board of Directors. RATIONALE: District policy states that, in order to maintain the centralized fixed asset property accounting system, all property donation requests are forwarded to the Director of Procurement. The Procurement Department forwards the requests, along with the appropriate recommendations, to the Board of Directors for acceptance and approval. In order for proper recognition and appreciation to be conveyed to the donor, donor's name and current mailing address should be included in the donation memo. FUNDING: None RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the attached donation requests be approved and accepted in accordance with the policies of the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District. PREPARED BY: ~arral Paradis, Director of Procurement ltJGwen Caraway, Fixed Asset Property Manager DONATIONS School/Department Item Donor Booker Arts Magnet Playground equipment, Booker Arts Magnet PTA Elementary School safety surfacing, and installation, valued at $20,492.58 Central High School Equipment, valued at Robin Kratzke $405.71, for use in AP Spanish classes J. A. Fair Magnet Several pallets of Mr. Jason Roy of Altech, Inc. High School decorative rock, valued at $1,500.00, for use on and around the outdoor classroom Geyer Springs $10,000.00 to be placed BFI Waste Services, Inc. Elementary School in a trust fund account at Metropolitan Bank for ten fifth grade students (Children of Promise) for college Pulaski Heights $500.00 cash to be used The Hillcrest Residents Middle School to refurbish the Parent Association (HRA) Center Rockefeller Elementary $5,000.00 cash to Rockefeller PTA School purchase \"Climbing Wall\" equipment for the gym to enhance the physical education program To: From: Subject: Date: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement Cheryl A. Carson, Principal, Booker Arts Magnet School Donation of Property March 16, 2005 Booker Arts Magnet School PT A has graciously donated playground equipment, safety surfacing, and installation of the equipment in the amount of $20, 492.58. I am requesting that this donation be accepted in accordance with Little Rock School District Policy. Thank you for your consideration of my request. MAR 16 2005 Pp)  J~~R :~ i :. nuu-.\n,! !::.....-\nn.\n.,, .... \"' DATE: TO: FROM: Little Rock Central High School 1500 South Park Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Phone 501-447-1400 Fax 501-447-1401 3/14/2005 SUBJECT: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR o7 ~~CUREMENT NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL-7 ltf,~ DONATIO - - - - ------------ Robin Kratzke of 14 Victoria Circle, Maumelle, AR 72113, very graciously donated equipment totaling $405.71. This equipment will be utilized in our AP Spanish classes. It is my recommendation that this be accepted in accordance with the donation policies of the Little Rock School District. MAR 16 2005 TO: FROM: DATE: J. A. FAIR MAGNET HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS 13420 David 0. Dodd Road Little Rock, AR 72210 Phone: 501-447-1700 Fax: 501-447-1701 Environmental Science * Information Science \u0026amp; Systems Engineering * Medical Science Drural Paradis, Director of Procurement ~sandra Norman, Principal March 30, 2005 RE: Donation to J. A. Fair Systems Magnet High School Mr. Jason Roy, Altech, Inc., P. 0. Box 6398, Texarkana, Arkansas 75505, has generously donated several pallets of decorative rock with a value of $1500.00 for use on and around the J. A. Fair Systems Magnet High School outdoor classroom. It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. RECEIVED MAR 31 2005 PR 0/\\l,'lHH~~~\n~.    A School of the Little Rock School District GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL To: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement Froml5/46onna Hall, Principal Date: March 24th , 2005 Subject: Donation BFI Waste Services, one of our Partners- in - Education, in conjunction with The Geyer Sprin~s Neighbor hood Association, is donating again this school year $10, 000 to ten of our 5 grade students, (Children of Promise), to be placed in a trust fund account for each of them with Metropolitan Banlc for college. We are so grateful and thanlcful for this generous donation for some of our students. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Little Rock School District. BFI- Waste Services Mr. Dale Stevener General Mana1er 1911 West 65 Street Little Rock, AR 72209 PULASKI HEIGHTS MIDDLE SCHOOL Date: To: From: Subject: March 11 , 2005 Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement Dr. Danfe( ~tehom, Principal Donation The Hillcrest Residents Association (HRA) has generously donated $500.00 for the purpose ofrefurbishing the Pulaski Heights Middle School Parent Center. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the donation policies of the Little Rock School District. RECE!Vt.D MAR 14 2005 PROCURE:::~~~ . ~ 401 North Pine Street  Phone (501) 447-3200  Fax (501) 447-3201  Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 f) .,, z \u0026gt;z n ~ V, ROCKEFELLER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL To: Mr. Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement From: ~nne Mangan, Principal, Rockefeller School Re: Donation from Rockefeller PTA Date: March 1 0, 2005 Rockefeller PTA would like to donate $5000.00 to Rockefeller School to purchase \"Climbing Wall\" equipment for the enhancement of the physical education program. The equipment will be placed on the gym wall and will be an exciting new way to challenge children and create interest in physical activity. We are grateful for this generous offer and would respectfully request approval from the board to accept the monetary gift. I recommend that this donation be accepted in accordance with Little Rock School District policy. If approved, please acknowledge acceptance and 'appreciation to: Rockefeller School PT A Mitzi Moore, President 700 East 1th Street Little Rock, AR 72206 RECEIVED MAR 14 2005 700 East 17th Street  Phone 447-6200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 April 28, 2005 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Financial Reports BACKGROUND: Financial reporting is designed to keep the Board of Directors up-to-date regarding the District's current financial condition. Financial reports are submitted monthly to the Board for review and approval. RATIONALE: March 2005 financial reports are submitted for the Board's review and approval. FUNDING: NIA RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the March 2005 financial reports as submitted. PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen Chief Financial Officer l.lTTl.E ROCK SCHOOL. DISTRICT COMBJNt:O STATEMENT OP REVENUES. EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2004 AND 2005 - APPROVED RECEIPTS % APPROVED RECEIPTS % 2003/04 03/31/04 COLLECTED 2004/05 03/31/05 COLLECTED REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 57,547,800 55,681,497 96.76% 61,436,691 61,968,610 100.87% DELINQUENT TAXES 10,100,000 10,644,676 105.39% 12,135,000 7,419,980 61.15% 40% PULLBACK 29,600,000 31,250,000 4,739 0.02% EXCESS TREASURER'S FEE 210,000 199,031 94.78% 205,000 205,692 100.34% DEPOSITORY INTEREST 180,000 135,184 75.10% 155,000 REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES 150,000 206,062 137.37% 185,000 203,569 110.04% MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS 380,000 254,808 67.05% 485,000 180,059 37.13% INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 200,000 155,316 77.66% 245,000 408,406 166.70% ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 240,000 189,155 78.81% 215,000 184,918 86.01% TOTAL 98,607,800 87,465.729 68.42% 106,311.691 70,575,974 66.39% REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL 21,000 11,594 55.21% 22,000 16,103 73.20% TOTAL 21,000 11,594.1 55.21% 22.000 16,1031 73.20% REVENUE- STATE SOURCES EQUALIZATION FUNDING 53,226,139 39,125,356 73.51% 65,082,694 49,341,256 75.81% ALTERNATIVE LEARNING 1,927,250 1,445,437 75.00% ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS 193,739 210,600 108.70% NATL SCHL LUNCH STUDENT FUNDING 6,498,240 4,865,384 74.87% PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 1,141,165 1,141,165 100.00% REIMBURSEMENT STRS/HEAL TH 8,300,000 4,723,348 56.91% 8,275,000 5,550,105 67.07% VOCATIONAL 1,400,000 993,438 70.96% 1,350,000 1,589,242 117.72% HANDICAPPED CHILDREN 1,675,000 969,461 57.88% 2,100,000 910,065 43.34% EARLY CHILDHOOD 273,358 202,301 74.01% 5,542,510 2,593,434 46.79% TRANSPORTATION 3,875,562 2,487,683 64.19% 4,125,000 2,655,757 64.38% INCENTIVE FUNDS - M TO M 3,900,000 2,312,167 59.29% 4,575,000 2,824,924 61 .75% ADULT EDUCATION 920,337 548,023 59.55% 934,380 566,740 60.65% POVERTY INDEX FUNDS 560,545 534,979 95.44% TAP PROGRAM 285,245 285,245 100.00% 382,903 304,941 79.64% AT RISK FUNDING 360,000 236,541 65.71% 395,000 9,400 2.38% TOTAb., _ - '  ?4.77$.187 52\n418,542 ,.70.-10% 102,522,882 74,008,450 72.19% ' REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES TRANSFER FROM CAP PROJ FUND 770,000 770,000 TRANSFER FROM OTHER FUNDS 1,350,000 180,868 13.40% 1,295,000 128,214 9.90% TRANSFER FROM MAGNET FUND 1,632,430 544,143 33.33% 1,849,008 616,336 33.33% \" TO]M \n,. XC. ',.\n\n,, x\u0026lt;i., . 3i752,430 , 725,011 ......... J9.S2!3/o i, 3,914,008 1~,il{iQ ' 19,02% ~At!RE\\IENUES:P~Tl~ ' wft . . 1t7A\u0026amp;Z,416t 120,'620.en r~ 68\n09%,.. 212,770,581 ,, 14.5,345,0?T]\n68.31% REVENUE - OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 24,075,790 15,366,005 63.82% 21,531,929 14,397,769 66.87% DEDICATED M \u0026amp; 0 4,000,000 2,449,984 61.25% 4,500,000 2,509,840 55.77% MAGNET SCHOOLS 24,689,351 11,600,006 27,964,934 14,845,097 53.08% ,,(@'\"~- \"''  'f~t~\nTu/'' th , l'52.7/35\\j41 it, ~415\nQ9..'f LC' ,. '\"' ,.,., ,996,863 JP' 31,752,706 ,ci!MMt  lf\u0026lt;'.itJALPRE!!YENUBili@T .,= ,, x= ~ - . - tP,W ff @',\n,:! * '229,92.2'\n$9 ~$0\n038(873\\llls ,,, l6$l26'1ft\\Nt~llilW~7\n444..I '\"IR,097478:iitm:\n1'\\66.39'% LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMSINEO STATEMf:NT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BAtANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2004 AAD 2005 APPROVED EXPENDED % APPROVED EXPENDED % 2003/04 03/31/04 EXPENDED 2004/05 03/31/05 EXPENDED EXPENSES SALARIES 100,684,982 63,436,899 63.01% 117,324,912 74,825,613 63.78% BENEFITS 26,483,772 16,510,443 62.34% 36,185,811 20,985,075 57.99% PURCHASED SERVICES 19,719,297 13,466,132 68.29% 20,959,918 12,927,478 61.68% MATERIALS \u0026amp; SUPPLIES 8,185,459 6,610,040 80.75% 8,725,914 6,316,699 72.39% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,575,580 805,976 51.15% 2,760,600 1,051,028 38.07% OTHER OBJECTS 8,384,567 2,991,574 35.68% 10,770,418 3,648,433 33.87% DEBT SERVICE 12.098,342 12.191,763 100.77% 12,474,809 12,038,749 96.50% TOTAL EXPENSES OPERATING 177,131,!leS 116,012,827 65.50% 209.202,382 131,793,076 63.00% EXPENSES-OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 26,056,193 12,143,681 46.61% 23,853,134 13,705,298 57.46% DEDICATED M \u0026amp; 0 4,000,000 2,771,767 69.29% 5,007,809 2,864,975 57.21% MAGNET SCHOOLS 24,689,351 14,261,356 57.76% 27,964,934 16,127,920 57.67% TOTAL 64,745.544 29,176,804 53.30% 56,825,877 32,698.193 57.54% TOTAL EXPENSES ., 231,877,543 145.189,631 62.6t% 266.028,259 164,491,269 61.83% INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE (1,954,984) 4,847,242 739,184 12,606,512 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; DED M \u0026amp; 0 3,558,580 3,558,580 4,005,957 4,005,957 OPERATING 9,026,855 9,026,855 6,531,706 6,531,706 ENDING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL. MAGNET \u0026amp; DED M \u0026amp; 0 1,578,177 3,797,771 1,176,943 3,060,470 OPERATING 9,052,274 13,634,905 10,099,905 20,083,707 TOTAL 10,630,451 17,432,676 11,276,848 23,144.rn\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2005 PROJECT BEG BALANCE INCOME TRANSFERS EXPENDITURES ENCUMBRANCES END BALANCE 07-01-04 2004-05 2004-05 2004-05 2004-05 03-31-05 $6,200,000 BOND ISSUE FAIR 17,956.90 2,900.00 15,056.90 MCCLELLAN 77,519.02 77,519.02 CLOVERDALE MIDDLE 396.12 396.12 CONTINGENCY 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 95,872.04 0.00 0.00 2,900.00 0.00 92,972.04 $136,268,560 BOND ISSUES ADMINISTRATION 11 ,586.46 80,000.00 76,900.67 14,685.79 NEW WORK PROJECTS 6,090,835.40 45,811.00 3,167,917.27 930,587.95 2,038,141.18 SECURITY PROJECTS 14,541 .25 14,541.25 LIGHTING PROJECTS 0.00 0.00 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 7,569,593.08 409,051.00 875,811.96 106,545.28 6,996,286.84 RENOVATION PROJECTS 12,752,856.34 127,854.00 6,243,999.59 689,421.24 5,947,289.51 TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES 1,569,424.27 1,143,377.19 925,841 .78 559,420.01 1,227,539.67 SUBTOTAL 28,008,836.80 1,143,377.19 662,716.00 11 ,290,471.27 2,285,974.48 16,238,484.24 REVENUES PROCEEDS-PROPERTY SALE 445,618.31 180,104.00 625,722.31 DUNBAR PROJECT 5,266.71 1,000.00 6,266.71 0.00 PROCEEDS-BOND SALES 14,773,544.18 (662,716.00) 14,110,828.18 PROCEEDS-QZAB SALE 1,293,820.97 1,293,820.97 INTEREST 5,037,437.95 706,005.30 5,743,443.25 SUBTOTAL 21,555,688.12 887,109.30 (662,716.00) 6,266.71 0.00 21,773,814.71 GRAND TOTAL ~li fifiD Jlifilifi i aaa~11fi.~li {!Jl,g ll ~lill !i3Z 9!1 i,~11~,liZ~.~II ~!I Jg~ iZ!! 1111 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ------ -- - ---- --iwND ISSUE PROJECT HISTOR_Y__ -- -- -- ----------- ------ THiw THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31 1 2005 1------r---- --- -- -- ~- -----~--~--- -- - -- ---------- 1------f--------- - -- -- ---1 -. ---t-- - - --- -- - -- 1------------ -f------- ------ - -- ---+----- ---~---- ----- -1--- -- --- -f-- --- - --- ---t------1------ - - --- --- --- - -- -- PROJECT - --~- --+-- -- -- - --- ------ -r-- ENDING ,...._ ___ _____ ...,_A_L_L_O_C_A_T_IO_N_S EXPENSE EXPENSE ~PENSE EXPEN~ EXPEN~ ENCUMBERED ---- --~ ALLOCATION PROJECT CATEGORIES THRU 03-31-05 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 1'Hifil 03-31-05 \"1'HRu 03-31-05 SUBTOTAL- ~ 31~ ~~- M=1~N~1s=T=AA - T~,o~N-------~7=6o~,-,,,~~:=~~-~~~~~~~ ~\n~~ ~= ,_N_E_W_WO_R_K_P_R_O_J_E_C_T_S __ -+-_3_8,_834_,223.86 443,467.00 4,589,606.29 11,671,442.1~~.993,062.06 ~ 167,917.27 _ 930,587.95 1 36,796,082.68 ~ ~8,141.18 SECURITY PROJECTS 265,814.17---:,:i3,930.47 . 109,609.73 27,732.73 0.00 0.00 251 ,272.93 14,541 .25 1L--IG_H_T_I_N_G_P_R_O_J_E_C_T_S_ ___ ,_ _4_, 8_62,-5-48~.-33-+-2-,641,482.131,832,392.06 ~ 9,661.38 -- 9,012.76 - - 0.00 - --0.00 4,862,548.33 - --0.00- MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 19,331,438.50 791,385.63 ----uf8,294.40 3,455,350.67-~2,887,763.72 ~5,811.96 - 106,545.28- 12,335,151 .66 6,996,286.84 ,..R.._E_N_O_V_A_T-IO_N_PR_O_J_E_C_T_S_ --+--5-1,-1-55- ,-60-2-.8-4-1-3- 9-7-6,-1-5.-34-+-4-, 119,045.21 15,666,239.90 18,091,992.05 - 6,243,999.59 689,421 .244 5,208,313.33 5,947,289.51 TECHNOLOGYUPG~ES 12,878,988.97 575~ 4,325,201.404,500,374.61--765,594.97 - 925,841 .78  559,420.01 - 11 ,651 ,449.30 - - 1,227,539.67 1--------- ---t--- - --- ------ -- -- -- --- ------ -- -- -- --- UNALLOCATED PROCEEDS 15,404,649.15 -- --- -- ------- --- -- --- - 15,404,649.15 t--- - --- ----- -------------- - 1-- ---+----- _,___ ---~-- - -----+--- ------------ TOTAL --\u0026gt;- 143,493,792.62 5,852,669.42 18,708,823.32 35,822,666.30- ~ .890,054.45 - 11 ,290,4i-1:27 2,285,974.48111,850,659.24 -~ 643, 133.39 1----------- ----- - -'----'-- --+-- --- --\u0026gt;--- ---'----+---'-- ----'--\"'----,- -- - ----- --- - 1-------------+----------- -- ------ --------- --~----- -- ----- -- - 1------ -------+--- --- ------- --- -- --- ----- --- -- - -- ----- --- ---- -- - -------- --- - ----- lN3WNMnorov 'IX S\u0026gt;IM\\IW3M DNISOl:\u0026gt; x 1----------- -----------LIT-T-LE- R-OC-K- S=CHO-O-L -DIS-T-RI-CT- -,---------- - SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS BY FUND FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2005 - ------------ ------------ ~------------+-------+---------+------+-------+------- -- --------+------+-------+- 1-------F-un-d ---+---P-ur-ch-as-e -+--Ma-tu-rit-y \"---+-In-st-itu-tio-n- -- Interest Rate Principal Date Date Operating 03-30-05 TFN Bank of America 2.550% Repo 14,100,000.00 Operating 03-15-05   05-02-05 Twin CityBa_n_k_ 3.160% ---C-D'----+--4-',-69- 7-'-.-52-7-.0- 6-i ,_O-'p_e_ra_tin~g_ ______- +-_0_3_-0_1_-05_ ___0_ 4_-15_-_05 __,. _ Twin City Bank 3.120% CD 4,300,000.00 Operating 03-01-05 _ 05-16-05 Twin City Bank 3.250% CD 3!..~. 00,Q00.00_ t-o-'p-e-ra_t.i,.n.. =g--------+- --=1.-2-_16-_04 _ 04-01-05_~-~ Twin City Bank __ -~ 2.750o/\n~_r--_-_- _C D_ __- _ _2 -',_60_0~,o_o_o.o_o-i Total Activity Fund Total Bond Account Bond Account Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund - Capital Projects Fund Capital Projects Fund Total - Deseg Plan Scholarship Total Rockefeller Scholarship Total 29, 197,527.06 -- -------+--------+-----+------+------ 03-30-05 03-07-05 03-15-05 01-10-05 ---- 01-31-05 08-17-04 08-02-04 03-15-05 02-15-05 03-16-05 . 12-09-04 - 01-10-05 - - ~ -- - - - Bank of America 2.430% 09-05-05 - - R~!ons 2.723%- -- Repo CD --- 1,050,000.00 1,050,000.00 400,000.00 TFN Bank of America 2.300% Repo 01-10-06 Metropolitan 2.400% CD 89Q,Q0Q.0Q l-------+-----'-----+-----+------+-----'-1,000,934.31 01-29-06 Bancorp South 2.750% CD ----- - --- 08-16-05 Twin City Bank 2.610% CD 08-02-05 Twin City Bank 3.030% CD 07-08-05 Bank of the Ozarks 3.370% CD 05-17-05 - Bank of America --2.620% CD TFN Bank of America 2.410% Repo ---- --+--------+------+----'---- - - - - 06-24-05 Bank of America 2.300% Treasury Bills - -- -- . - - - 06-28-05 Bank of America 2.520% Tr~a~ury Bills 2,139,266.38 11,000,000.00 4,500,000.00 10,480,189.75 4,569,535.22 5,960,000.00 40,939,925.66 784,994.04 784,994.04 254,947.86 254,947.86\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1413","title":"Report: ''Update of Discipline Sanctions and Compensatory Programs Aimed at Dropout Prevention in the North Little Rock School District,'' Office of Desegregation and Monitoring","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["2005-03-18"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","North Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational innovations","Educational statistics","School discipline","School improvement programs","Dropouts","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Update of Discipline Sanctions and Compensatory Programs Aimed at Dropout Prevention in the North Little Rock School District,'' Office of Desegregation and Monitoring"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1413"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["14 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1078","title":"'Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting,'' agenda","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2005-03"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Curricula","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["'Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting,'' agenda"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1078"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["92 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nMAR 2 05 5 Agenda Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting n \u0026gt;-o f=~ ... c 0:1:: oz ~~ m-\u0026lt;\na..,\n-a Cz : on r-\u0026lt; rc5 nz i!!:\"' r .,,\na g ~m mC rC: n~ Or ~ ~ ~ ill \u0026gt;. ~.,, \"C:' O\na ~i!l n:a =\u0026gt;l nm \"O\"'8z z =l \"'a z (I) !D ~ :!l z m\na (I) :c \"6 (I) I. 11. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests REGULAR MEETING March 24, 2005 5:30 p.m. Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Partners in Education - New Partnerships C. Discussion: Long-term Budgetary Considerations (Berkley) D. Discussion: Tax Increment Financing Issues (Kurrus) E. Discussion: Student Attendance at Athletic Events / Excusing Absences (Daugherty) F. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) G. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: V. A. Remarks from Board Members B. Student Assignment Report C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes Regular Meeting - 02-24-05 Special Meeting - 63-10-05 0 \u0026gt;~ i=~ .... C: o\nic oz ~~ m-\u0026lt;\n,c.., -c::\n,o.,.c o..z.. ,.. i5 oz ,~.. \"'\n::: ?' ~ ~ z m\n,c \"::c' '5 \"' Board Meeting March 24, 2005 Page2 VI. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES A. Grant Application: School-Based Tobacco Use Prevention Project B. Second Reading: Revision of Policy JE - Student Enrollment, Attendance and Transfers C. Establishment of a Tri-District Charter School I Alternative Learning Academy VII. CURRICULUM \u0026amp; INSTRUCTION A. Second Reading: Revision to Policy IKF - General Education Graduation Requirements Second Reading: Revision to Policy IAA - Professional Development B. Secondary English/ Language Arts Textbook Adoption C. Memorandum of Understanding - Audubon Arkansas VIII. HUMAN RESOURCES A. Request from Psychological Examiners B. School Calendar, 2005-06 C. Personnel Changes IX. BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A. Acceptance of Report: Organizational Audit B. Updated Travel Regulations DKC-R C. Cloverdale Elementary School D. Donations of Property E. Financial Report/ Approval of Annual Audit X. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions XI. STUDENT HEARING XII. ADJOURNMENT PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS/ WELCOME Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. PARTNERSHIPS C. DISCUSSION/ BUDGETARY D. DISCUSSION/TI F DATE: TO: FROM: March 24, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Partners in Education BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District Partners in Education program is designed to develop strong relationships between the community and our schools. The partnership process encourages businesses, community agencies and private organizations to join with individual schools to enhance and support educational programs. Each partnership utilizes the resources of both the school and the business for their mutual benefit. RATIONALE: The following schools and businesses have completed the requirements necessary to establish a partnership and are actively working together to accomplish their objectives. FUNDING: Not applicable. RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that the board approve the following partnership: First United Methodist Church and Chicot Elementary School PREPARED BY: Debbie Milam, ViPS Director p ,...\na C') \u0026gt; Chicot Elementary and First United Methodist Church, Little Rock Partnership Agreement March 2005 First United Methodist Church, Little Rock will provide:  Classroom tutoring during Literacy time  Volunteers one afternoon a week to assemble teacher materials and to assist students in checking out library books  A team responsible for providing treats for the Chicot staff on a monthly basis  Volunteers for VIPS Reading Day  Coordination with other Partners in Education Chicot Elementary will provide:  Students serving as pen pals for church members who are shut-ins  The school facility for church functions as needed DATE: March 24, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: March 2005 Construction Report - Bond Projects BACKGROUND: In the February 2005 report to the Board, the completion of the drawings for the renovation of Rightsell Elementary was to be March 1,\n1 . The architect now reports that the drawings will not be completed until the first week in May. The delay is necessary because of a change in the HVAC system that was recommended by Doug Eaton and Bill Goodman. The architect has stated that this delay will not jeopardize the completion of the renovation in time for the start of the 2006-07 school year. The bids for the classroom addition to Gibbs will be received March 24th . It appears that today's bid market favors the owner, and we are optimistic that the low bid will not exceed our budget. Meetings have taken place with the new Principal at Forest Heights, Dr. Debbie Price, regarding the school's remodeling and addition. Dr. Brooks has visited the campus, and his input has been important to the planning process. It is too early to have a firm date for construction start-up. RATIONALE: Monthly reports are submitted to the Board to keep members up-to-date on construction projects in the District. FUNDING: Bond Funds RECOMMENDATION: Report item\nno action necessary. PREPARED BY: Bill Goodman, District Engineer !\"\" .z.... m\n:o z j!!: \u0026gt; C: 0 a\n:o ~ ..... m C') ::i: z 0  -\u0026lt; C: \"ti ~ m\n,, :S Cl\u0026gt; ~o z~ -4Z \u0026gt; (I) -cm \"ti\n:o r- \u0026lt; c'5 \u0026lt;'5 \u0026gt;m :0: ! \"'\nz: ~ \"i''\n::0 ~ 0 z p \"C 0 r- n -\u0026lt; m' CONSTRUCTIONREPORTTOTHEBOARD MARCH 24, 2005 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION I I I Est. completIon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - SPRING/ SUMMER 2005 I I I Est. CompletIon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Carver ___ Media Center Expansion _ _ $167,490_ Dec-05 Fair Park __ _ _ _Remodel ___ $799,000_ __ Aug-05 Gibbs Addition $705,670 Dec-05 Meadowcliff - Remodel -- -- _- _ __ $164,150 --= Aug-05 Oakhurst (Adult Education) New Windows ___ $215,000 Aug-05 Rightsell - ,==.__~enovation -- , $2,494,000 Aug-06 Western Hills Electrical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC $622,160 Aug-05 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED I I I t:SL 1..,ompIet1on Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Booker __ ___ Electrical Upgrade _________ Unknown Unknown Chicot Electrical Upgrade , Unknown Unknown Cloverdale Elementary- Addition I $520,750- Unknown Forest Heights Remodel ________ i $1,547,000 - Unknown Mitchell Renovation 1 _ $2,21_?,493 Unknown Pulaski Hgts. MS Energy monitoring systeminstallation I Unknown Unknown Woodruff Parking addition- $193,777 Aug-05 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I I I Est. Completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date f--A_d_m_in_ist_ra_ti_on _____ ,A_s_bes_tos abatement ~ $380,495 ~ Mar-03 Administration Fresh air system , $55,000 Aug-03 ,_A_d_m-in- is- t-ra-ti_on _____ ,_F-ir_e_a_la-rm~----~ $32,350 Aug-03 Administration HVAC 1 $70,000 Nov-04 Administration Annex  Energy monitoring system installation May-02 Alternative Learning Ctr. Energy monitoring system installation $15,160 Oct-01 Alternative Learning'--C_t_r. __E ne_r=gy'-e-f_ficien_t_li=ght_in__,.g'---______l_ ___ __$\n._82,,0_00 ____D_ e_c-_0 1 Badgett Partial asbestos abatement I $237,237 Jul-01 Badg~e_tt ______+ F-=-i,r-e-_a_lar_m_-,-,-,...,.---,---,-----~l~-----=-$..1..,8,'\"\"2\"=..5,...0,.. ____A_ u=g--=0-2=-1 B_a_le_ ________C lassroom addition/renovation 1 $2,244,524 Dec-02 B_a_le Energy monitoring syst_em _____ -,----,-------~M_a_r_-0_2 Bale 'Partial roof replacement _ _ __ $269,587 _ Dec-01 Bale Baseline Booker Booker Booker Booker Booker Booker Brady Brady Brady HVAC -- - - $664,587 Aug-01 - Renovatioo - $953,520 Aug-04 Gym Roof $48,525 Oct-04 ADA Rest rooms $25,000 Aug-04 Energy efficient lighting S170,295 Apr-01 Energy monitoring system installation $23,710 Oct-01 Asbestos abatement $10,900 Feb-02 Fire alarm Addition/renovation Energy efficient lighting Asbestos abatement $34,501 Mar-02 $973,621 Nov-04 $80,593 _ Sep-02 $345,072 Aug-02 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD MARCH 24, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date Carver Energy monitoring system installation $14,480 May-01 -- Parking lot -- --- Carver I $111,742 Aug-03 Central HVAC Renovation - Band Area $225,000 Dec-04 -- - Central Reflecting Pond $57,561 Sep-04 --- -- Central Parking Student parking I $174,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair $265,000 Aug-03 -- Central/Quigley Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Irrigation System $14,500 Aug-03 Central Purchase land for school Unknown Dec-02 -- -- -Ce-ntra-l Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations $2,000,000 Dec-02 -- -Cen-tral --- Ceiling and wall repair $24,000 Oct-01 Central Flre Alarm System Design/Installation $80,876 Aug-01 Central Front landing tile repair-- $22,470 Aug:Q.!_ Chicot Dramage -- -- --~-- ----- -- --- $64,700 Aug-04 ~ Chicot Sound Attenuation $43,134 Jul-04 Cloverdale Elem. 1 Energy efficient light~ ---- --- $132,678 Jul-01 Cloverdale MS Energy efficient lighting $189,743 Jul-01 Cloverdale MS Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $1,393,822 Nov-02 Dodd Fire Alarm Upgrade $9,200 Oct-04 Dodd Energy efficient lighting $90,665 Aug-01 Dodd Asbestos abatement-ceiling tile $156,299 . Jul-01 Dodd Replace roof top HVAC $215,570 Aug-02 Dunbar 'Renovation/addition $6,149,023 Nov-04 Facilities Service Interior renovation $84,672- - Mar-01 Facility Services Fire alarm $12,000 Aug-03 -Fa-ir Par-k --- HVAC renovation/fire alarm $315,956 Apr-01 -- Fair Park Energy efficient lighting $90,162 Aug-01 Fair Park Asbestos abatement-ceiling $59,310 Aug-01 -- J. A. Fair 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music , room addition $3,155,640 Aug-04 J. A. Fair Energy efficient lighting I $277,594 Apr-01 J. A. Fair Press box $10,784 Nov-00 -J. A-. Fair 'Security cameras $12,500 Jun-01 J. A. Fair Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Jul-03 J. A. Fair Irrigation System $14,000 Jul-03 J. A. Fair Roof repairs $391,871 Aug-03 ---- - Forest Park Replace window units w/central HVAf $48~258 Nov-03 -- - F-or-est P-ark -- Diagonal parking $111,742 ___ Aug-03 Forest Park Energy efficient lighting $119,788 May-01 --- ~ --- - Fulbright Energy efficient lighting $134,463 Jun-01 - Fulbright Energy monitoring system installation - $1.:1 ,950 - - Aug::Q.!_ Fulbright -Replace roof top HVACunits $107,835 Aug-02 Fulbright Parking lot $140,000 Sep-02 Fulbright Roof repairs $200,000 Oct-02 Franklin Renovation $2,511,736 Mar-03 Geyer Springs Roof Repair $161,752 Jun-04 Gibbs Energy efficient lighting $76,447 Apr-01 Gibbs Energy monitoring system installation $11,770 Jul-01 Hall Maj~ renovation \u0026amp; addition $8,637,709 Sep-03 Hall Asbestos abatement $168,222 Aug-01 - - - Hall Energy efficient lighting $42,931 Jul-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting $296,707 Apr-01 2 !TI .z.. m\n:c .~.... \u0026gt; C: 0 :::::i 0\n:c .:.n. mn :,: z .0.. .. 8 -\u0026lt; C..,: 0 ~ m ?-s G'\u0026gt;  ~o zl!,\n... z \u0026gt;en \"tlm \"tl\n:c n..... o\u0026lt; \u0026gt;m ::! rJ\u0026gt; 0\nz: CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD MARCH 24, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Proiect Descriotion I Cost I Est. Completion Date Hall Infrastructure improvements $93,657 Aug-01 -- Hall Intercom I Feb-01 Hall Security cameras $10,600 Jun-01 ----- Henderson Lockers $43,854 Dec-04 Henderson Energy efficient lighting -- - - $193,679 Jul-01 Henderson Roof replacement gym $107,835 May-01 Henderson Asbestos abatement Phase I ---- - I $500,000 Aug-01 -- Henderson Asbestos abatement Phase 2 I $250,000 Aug-02 IRC Energy efficient lighting I $109,136 Jul-02 - -Jef-ferson - Asbestos abatement $43,639 Oct-01 -- Jefferson Renovation \u0026amp; fire alarm ~ $1,630,000 Nov-02 Laidlaw Parking lot - $269,588 Jul-01 - Mablevale Elem Fire Alarm Upgrade $12,000 Oct-04 -- ~ Mabelvale Elem. Energy monitoring system installation ' $12,150 Aug~ Mabelvale Elem. Replace HVAC units $300,000 Aug-02 Mabelvale Elem. Asbestos Abatement - $107,000 Aug-02 Mabelvale Elem. Energy efficient lighting I $106,598 Dec-02 Mabelvale MS Renovate bleachers -I $134,793 __A ug-_Ql Mabelvale MS Renovation $6,851,621 Mar-04 Mann 1 Partial Replacement --- - $11,500,000 ~ -- Apr-04 -Ma-nn - Asphalt walks --- The total $1.8 million Dec-01 Mann Walkway canopies is what has been Dec-01 -- - Mann Boiler replacement -- used so far on the Oct-01 -- Mann - Fencing projects listed Sep~ Mann Partial demolition/portable classroom~completed for Mann. Aug-01 McClellan Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Jul-03 -- McClellan Irrigation System $14,750 Jul-03 McClellan Security cameras I $36,300 Jun-01 McClellan Energy efficient lighting $303,614 . May-01 McClellan Stadium stands repair i $235,QQQ I Aug-01 McClellan Intercom T $46,000 Feb-02 McClellan Classroom Addition I $2,155,622 Jul-04 -- McDermott Fire Alarm Upgrade I $7,700 Sep-04 McDermott Energy efficient lighting I $79,411 Feb-01 McDermott Replace roof top HVAC units ' $476,000 Aug-02 Meadowcliff Fire alarm I $16,175 Jul-01 -- --- Meadowcliff !Asbestos abatement I $253,412 Aug-02 Meadowcliff Engergy efficient lighting $88,297 Dec-02 -- - - Metropolitan Replace cooling tower I $37,203 Dec-00 ---- Me!ropolitan - _ R~place shop vent system -- $20,000 May-01 Metropolitan Energy monitoring system installation - $17,145 Aug-_Ql Mitchell BuildingR emediation - $165,000 Jul-04 Mitchell Energy efficient lighting $103,642 Apr-01 Mitchell Energy monitoring system installation $16,695 Jul-01 Mitchell Asbestos abatement $13,000 Jul-01 Oakhurst HVAC renovation $237,237 Aug-01 Otter Creek Energy monitoring system installation $10,695 May-01 Otter Creek Energy efficient lighting $81,828 Apr-01 Otter Creek Asbestos abatement $10,000 Aug-02 - Otter Creek Parking lot $138,029 Aug-02 Otter Creek 6 classroom addition $888,778 Oct-02 -- - - Otter Creek Parkinq Improvements $142,541 Aug-03 3 CONSTRUCTIONREPORTTOTHEBOARD MARCH 24, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date Parkview Addition $2,121,226 Dec-04 Parkview HVAC controls I $210,000 Jun-02 Parkview Roof replacement i $273,877 Sep-01 Parkview Exterior lights $10,784 Nov-00 Parkview HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls I $301,938 Aug-01 Parkview 1 Locker replacement I $120,000 Aug-01 Parkview Energy efficient lighting $315,000 Jun-01 Procurement Energy monitoring system installation $5,290 Jun-02 Procurement Fire alarm I $25,000 Aug-03 Pulaski Hgts. Elem Renovation $1,193,259 Nov-04 -- -- Pulaski Hgts. Elem Move playground - $17,000 Dec-02 Pulaski Hgts. MS Renovation $3,755,041 Nov-04 -- - Rightsell Energy efficient lighting $84,898 Apr-01 Rockefeller Energy efficient lighting $137,004 Mar-01 Rockefeller I Replace roof top HVAC $539,175 Aug-01 Rockefeller Parking addition -- - $111,7~ Aug-02 Romine Asbestos abatement $10,000 Apr-02 Romine Major renovation \u0026amp; addition --~- $3,534,675 -- Mar-03 - Security/Transportation Bus cameras $22,500 Jun-01 Southwest I Addition $2,000,000 Nov-04 Southwest Asbestos abatement $28,138 Aug-00 Southwest !New roof $690,000 Oct-03 Southwest Energy efficient lighting $168,719 Jan-02 Southwest Drainage/ street widening $250,000 Aug-03 Student Assignment Energy monitoring system installation $4,830 Aug-02 Student Assignment I Fire alarm $9,000 Aug-03 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation $275,000 Dec-01 Tech Ctr/ Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II $3,679,000 Jun-04 Technology Upgrade Upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data Nov-02 Terry Energy efficient lighting $73,850 Feb-01 Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking I $83,484 Aug-02 Terry Media Center addition $704,932 Sep-02 Wakefield Rebuild $5,300,000 Dec-04 Wakefield Security cameras $8,000 Jun-01 Wakefield Energy efficient lighting $74,776 Feb-01 Wakefield - Demolition/Asbestos Abatement ----- $200,000 Nov-02 -- Washington Fire Alarm Upgrade $11,600 Oct-04 - -- Washington Security cameras $7,900 Jun-01 Washington - Energy efficient lighting $165,281 ~ r -Q! Watson ~E~rgy monitoring system installation _ $8,530-- Jul-01 --- - - - -- - Watson - - - Asbestos abatement $182,241 Aug-01 -- Watson Energy efficien_!Jighting $106,868 Aug-01 - Watson Asbestos abatement $10,000 Aug-02 Watson Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $800,000 Aug-02 Western Hills Fire Alarm Upgrade $8,400 Oct-04 Western Hills ADA Rest rooms $25,000 Aug-04 Western Hills Asbestos abatement $191 ,946 Aug-02 Western Hills Intercom $7,100 Dec-01 Western Hills Energy efficient lighting_ $106,000 Jul-01 Williams Renovation - -- -- - $2,106,492 Mar-04 Williams Parking expansior:._s $183,717 Dec-03 - T - $122,719 - Williams Energy efficient lighting Jun-01 Renovation/expansion - - $1,263,876 - Wilson Feb-04 - - $110,000 - - Wilson Parking Expansion Aug-03 - Woodruff Renovation $246,419 Aug-02 4 ~... m 0 :z:c 0  -\u0026lt; C: \"\" ~ m :\u0026lt;\n,o  0  C: l]!\ni Zm ~i \"'=l m ill .?..J, i\n:o m \u0026gt; 0 z p \"t\u0026gt; 0 r- 1'i -\u0026lt; 'm- DATE: March 24, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Board Auditor Report BACKGROUND: Monthly report to School Board. RATIONALE: Summary report of activities. FUNDING: No changes. RECOMMENDATION: None. PREPARED BY: Sandy Becker :.n.. m 0 ::c z 0  -\u0026lt; C: ~ m ~ \"i's'\n,:, m \u0026gt; 0 z ~ 2l r- n -\u0026lt; m' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS Date: March 24, 2005 To: Board of Directors @ From: Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Re: Audit Report - March This is the sixty-fifth communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with two high schools, one middle school and three elementary schools to resolve financial issues in their activity funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial infonnation for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. . b) The AAB has forwarded a Booster Club Guidelines Package to be included in official publications of the District after review. Board Policy and Regulation a) The amended Out of District Travel regulation is on the agenda to facilitate the use of Pro Cards in a limited manner for travel expenditures. Technology a) Monitoring technology plans and technology meetings to detennine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. b) Facilitating technology upgrade in cooperation with the English Department for Yearbook and Newspaper production staff in LRSD high schools to improve access to tools needed for students and staff. Training a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of Tuts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. Audit Report - March 2005 Page 2 of2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring combined payroll and human resources issues for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Reviewing Teacher School Supply Fund Records for recommendations. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Served as District coordinator of United Way's Day of Caring (April 17, 2004) and on planning committee for 2005. Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-447-1115. My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. :,, nl (\") ::,: z 0  -\u0026lt; C: ~ m ~ \"6'\n\u0026lt;) m )\u0026gt; 0 z p \"C ,0.. . n -\u0026lt; \u0026lt;... m DATE: March 24, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Technology Report BACKGROUND: Since the last Board meeting the following technology activities took place:  The Edline project has expanded to McClelland and Central High School this month. By March 25, teachers at both schools will be trained to send grades to Edline. Parents will be trained shortly after Spring Break.  The computer refresh program for the 2004-2005 school year started in January. By the end of June the District will have replaced approximately 1000 old Windows 95 and Windows 98 computers in fourteen schools. Since we have been notified of reimbursed E-rate funds for 2003-2004, we will continue the replacement cycle through the summer.  Five elementary schools will implement the new Compass Learning Enterprise software this month. Software will be loaded at the Technology Center to be accessed by students at 5 elementary schools. This version of the software is directly correlated to Arkansas Curriculum Frameworks. After the software has been tested within the District network, it will be opened up for students and teachers to access from home. RATIONALE: To implement the LRSD Technology Plan 2003 - 2006 FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: :c:\na \u0026gt;0  c :1:::! z~ ~f\n(I) =l m\na (I) !l' \"5'\na ~ 0 z 0 \"C 0 r-c'i -\u0026lt; 'm- It is recommended that the Board accept this report. PREPARED BY: Lucy Neal, Director, Technology and Media Services John Ruffins, Director, Computer Information Services DATE: March 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Grant Application: School-Based Tobacco Use Prevention Project: 2005-06 Background: Through tobacco-settlement dollars received by the state of Arkansas, the Arkansas Department of Health has issued a Request for Applications to fund school-based tobacco prevention initiatives, for which local school districts are eligible to apply. Priorities to be addressed in the proposal include the development and maintenance of and compliance with comprehensive tobacco free policies for all students and employees\nimplementation of research-based tobacco prevention supplemental curricula K-12, and the reduction of the number of children and youth who initiate smoking or the use of other tobacco products. The Little Rock School District has received a tobacco prevention grant award from the Arkansas Department of Health for the last two years. This proposal is a renewal request for year three. A full-time tobacco coordinator/trainer is required to carry out the activities included in the grant. Goals \u0026amp; Objectives: 1. To reduce the initiation of tobacco use among Little Rock School District adolescents to 16% by January, 2007. 2. To reduce the suspension rate for smoking related offenses in Little Rock School District schools. 3. To implement and maintain a comprehensive tobacco prevention policy that prohibits the use of tobacco products on school grounds and in any other district facility or at any school-related event. 4. To implement research-based tobacco prevention curricula and programs, K-12, that provide students with the knowledge, skills and understanding to resist tobacco usage and maintain a healthy lifestyle. f) !I:: 0 C: \u0026gt; C: C C: a, 0 z ~ ?- ?' \"5'\nc m \u0026gt; C z .p,, 0 r-c'i -\u0026lt; L.. m Rationale: The initiation of daily smoking often begins in grades five through nine. Smokers who begin at a young age find it hardest to quit. Each day, approximately 4,400 youth in the U.S. between the ages of twelve and seventeen try their first cigarette. In Arkansas, 23. 7 percent of all high school students (9-12) are current smokers and 13.5 percent have used chew tobacco or snuff at least once in the past 30 days. School-based programs can reach children and adolescents when they are most vulnerable to starting a tobacco habit or before their tobacco use has become a strong addiction. Moreover, children spend a third of their waking time in school, and much of the peer pressure kids feel regarding whether or not to use tobacco occurs in school. At the same time, school-based tobacco prevention strategies are most likely to have a strong, enduring effect when supported by strong anti-tobacco school district policies. Funding: Grant Budget: $100,000.00 - No match required. Recommendation: It is recommended that the board approve the submission of this grant application. Prepared By: Junious Babbs, Assoc. Superintendent-Administrative Services Jo Evelyn Elston, Director - Pupil Services Department DATE: March 24, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Second Reading: Revision of Policy JE - Student Enrollment, Attendance, and Transfers BACKGROUND: Expanded language in Arkansas State Statutes for school enrollment, birth documentation and transfers has been recommended by the State Standards Monitoring Team. RATIONALE: Arkansas Department of Education compliance. FUNDING: No funding is required. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the board adopt revised Policy JE - Student Enrollment, Attendance, and Transfers PREPARED BY: Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services fl 31: 0 C: \u0026gt; C: C C: a, 0 z \u0026gt;\na ?\u0026lt; ~ \u0026gt;:= :.,,:r \u0026lt;J\u0026gt;c n-\u0026lt; ::I.! ::c:z ~~ 3_1: cC z\n:, mc\nan (J) u LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: JE STUDENT ENROLLMENT, ATTENDANCE, and TRANSFERS The Little Rock School District is open and free to any child five (5) through twenty-one (21) years who resides within the District and has not graduated from high school. Children who attain the age of five (5) on or before September 15th of a given year will be eligible to attend kindergarten during that school year. School attendance is required until a student's eighteenth (18th ) birthday. All students are required to maintain a level of attendance that will enable them to discharge their responsibility as learners and will enable the school to meet its obligations to the students. Parents/guardians seeking enrollment of a child in the District will provide the following:  Certified copy of birth certificate, visa/passport or military I.D. card, and /or other documentation as provided by law (A.C.A. 6-18-208)  Proof of address (lease agreement, current utility bill, or personal property tax bill)  The child's immunization record  Social security number or request that the District assign an alternate nine-digit number  Expulsion records if applicable Any student transferring from a school accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) to another school accredited by the ADE will be placed into the same grade the student would have been in had the student remained at the former school. Any student transferring from home school or a school that is not accredited by the ADE to a school that is accredited by the ADE will be evaluated by the staff of that accredited school to determine that student's proper placement in the accredited school. All transfer students must meet the graduation requirements of the Little Rock School District in order to receive a diploma. The LRSD high schools will accept transfer credits, grades and grade placement for students who previously attended Arkansas high schools that are accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education. Students transferring from out-of-state schools or from Arkansas schools that are not accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education will be assessed by the school staff to determine appropriate grade placement and course credit. Multiple criteria, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: JE (continued) including the following as appropriate, will be used for decision-making in determining grade placement and credit: 1. Any performance data presented by the sending school and/or parents, such as portfolios of work, project samples, etc. 2. Indicators of achievement such as report cards, reports from participation in virtual schools, correspondence course reports, and dual-enrollment college reports. 3. Results of norm-referenced tests. 4. Results of criterion-referenced tests that are part of the sending state's NCLB accountability plan. 5. Results of assessments administered by the sending school staff, such as local criterion-referenced tests in language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies\ntests available through educational software programs used by the school, etc. 6. Results of \"credit-by-examinations\" in the core subject areas administered by LRSD. 7. Information gained from oral interviews with the students or performance tasks administered by LRSD staff. Students who transfer into a Little Rock School District high school from a home school or an unaccredited high school must attend at least two (2) semesters in order to receive a high school diploma (see IKED and IKED-R) and must attend at least four semesters to be eligible for rank-in-class (see IKC-R). Foreign Exchange students who complete the senior year in good standing may, at the discretion of the principal, participate in the graduation ceremony. Revised: Revised: May 23, 2002 Adopted: May 25, 2000 Legal References: A.C.A. 6-18-201(a), A.CA 6-18-202, A.C.A. 6-18-207(a) Cross References: Board of Education Policy and Regulations JLCB, IKF, IKED, IKED-R, IKC-R and the LRSD Student Handbook 2 f\u0026gt; ii: 0 c:: \u0026gt; c:: C c:: a:, 0 z \u0026gt; :,::, ?\" DATE: TO: For consideration of a suspension of the rules. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 March 24, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: The Establishment of a Tri-District Charter School for the purpose of housing the Pulaski Alternative Learning Academy (PALA) and the Juvenile Justice Step One-Program BACKGROUND: The Pulaski Alternative Learning Academy (PALA) was operated through a Juvenile Justice Department Grant which was established with the Juvenile Justice Judges and the three school districts, LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD. The three Juvenile Judges placed students in the program as a last alternative before placing them in juvenile detention facilities. The JJC Step-One Program is currently housed in the Juvenile Justice Complex and is funded by the three school districts, OHS, and the Pulaski County Government. Representatives from the three school districts place students in the Step-One Program who have committed serious offenses and/or who have had weapons on their campuses or at school-related activities. RATIONALE: Currently, none of the school districts claim the students for ADM purposes who have been placed in the PALA program. The LRSD presently uses the Step-One Program to place students who have displayed serious behaviors in school and/or have had guns on a school campus. If the program were discontinued, the district would not have a program/or facility to place these students. FUNDING: Since this would be the first year the school would be in operation, funding would come from a $350,000.00 special improvement appropriation provided by the state leg islature, a $150,000.00 Charter School Implementation Grant provided by the ADE, $141 ,000.00 provided by OHS and approximately $170,000.00 that is currently being provided by the three school districts for the JJC Step-One Program. The Pulaski County Government plans to provide the facility and the building maintenance. NOTE: Additional funding would come from the allocation of seats to the three school districts which will be determined in future meetings. !I' ~ :t: 8,.... n ~ mz i !..I..' m ~ CD 8\n\u0026gt;: \u0026gt; 8 '.!l 0 z ~ :I: 0 C: \u0026gt; C: 0 C: CD 0 z \u0026gt; \"?\u0026lt;' ~ \u0026gt;\n: :.., :i en C -\u0026lt; 3 (\") ~ :t: 2 ~ ~\n_i:cC z\n:, me \"e'n\"\" RECOMMENDATION: The administration recommends that the Little Rock School District form a partnership with the North Little Rock School District, and the Pulaski County Special School District for the purpose of establishing a Tri-District Conversion Charter School in conjunction with the Juvenile Courts. Little Rock School District would serve as the Lead Educational Agency (LEA) and would claim the students for funding purposes. PREPARED BY: Linda Watson LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: March 24, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Second Reading: Policy Revisions: IKF - General Education Graduation Requirements\nIAA- Professional Development BACKGROUND: The Board of Education policies IKF - General Education Graduation Requirements and IAA - Professional Development require slight revisions in order to ensure compliance with Arkansas state statutes and Arkansas Department of Education Standards for Accreditation. RATIONALE: Little Rock School District Board of Education policies will be updated to ensure all are current, clear and compliant. FUNDING: None required. RECOMMENDATION: Board adoption is recommended for policies IKF - General Education Graduation Requirements and IAA - Professional Development. PREPARED BY: Dr. Olivine Roberts, Associate Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction !J:I ~ ::,: ,8- (\") ~ m z C \u0026gt;\n,o .!\".\u0026gt;, m\n,o !S z z ,m- (\") ::,: \u0026gt;z C) m Cl\u0026gt; !J:I  a:, 8\n:,\u0026lt;: \u0026gt; 8 ~ 0z !\"\u0026gt; ll: 0 C: \u0026gt; C: C C: a:, 0 z \u0026gt;\n,o ?\" :: :\u0026gt;_.\",:,' C/)c: -\u0026lt; :f n:. ::,: 2\n,.,\n:, ~~ 3_: cC: Z\n:\u0026lt; mC'\n,\n, \" Cl\u0026gt; u LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF GENERAL EDUCATION GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS The Little Rock School District Board of Education believes that students should graduate from high school possessing the skills, knowledge, and attitudes needed for responsible citizenship, life-long learning, and productive employment in our modern economy. Programs for post-secondary preparation will be available to equip students for the advanced training that will be needed for the work of the 21 st century. The Little Rock School District will be responsible for providing the educational opportunities and experiences that will enable our students to take full advantage of post-secondary education and employment opportunities available to them after graduation. The District shares with the state of Arkansas the commitment to ensure all students have access to a rigorous curriculum. The District' general graduation requirements meet and exceed the State's adopted Smart Core or Common Core curriculum. Diploma-Earning Options A student may earn a diploma from a Little Rock School District high school in one of four ways. Each has different requirements and different numbers of required units of credit. 1. Diploma from any of the five high schools for completion of the required 24 units for tho classes of 2002 and 2003\nor the required 26 units for the class of 2004 and after. 2. Diploma from any of the -five high schools for completion of the Little Rock Scholars curriculum of 27 units for tho class of 2003\nor 28 units, including at least eight PreAdvanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses, for the class of 2004 and after. Hall High School students may take University Studies courses as substitutes for Pre-Advanced Placement and/or Advanced Placement courses. 3. Diploma earned at the Accelerated Learning Center for completion of the 21 units required by the State of Arkansas. 4. Diploma with waived or altered requirements established by an Individual Education Program (IEP) team for a student identified with disabilities. Even though the graduation requirements may be changed by the Board of Education during the time a student is enrolled in high school, the requirements established for a student's graduation class (assuming graduation in four years of high school) are those he/she must meet, even though he/she may require more than four years to earn the necessary number of units. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) Units of credit will generally be earned in grades nine through twelve, except that one unit of Algebra I (or higher-level mathematics) and Level I (or higher level) of foreign language may be earned in grade eight. High school courses taken before grade eight will not satisfy a unit of credit toward graduation. (See policy IKEC for list of creditearning options.) Transfer Students All transfer students must meet the graduation requirements of the Little Rock School District in order to receive a diploma. The LRSD high schools will accept transfer credits, grades and grade placement for students who previously attended Arkansas high schools that are accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education (see JE for additional information). Students who transfer into a Little Rock School District high school from a home school or an unaccredited high school must attend at least two semesters in order to receive a high school diploma (see IKED and IKED-R) and must attend at least four semesters to be eligible for rank-in-class (see IKC-R). Foreign Exchange students who complete the senior year in good standing may, at the discretion of the principal, participate in the graduation ceremony. Senior-Year Enrollment Requirements Students participating in dual-credit courses with local colleges/universities during their senior year must be enrolled in high school courses at least half time for their senior year (four units of credit) or full-time during the fall semester in order to receive a diploma from a Little Rock School District high school. This enrollment standard is required regardless of how many credits a student may need to satisfy graduation requirements. (See IKEC-R1 for regulations governing dual-credit enrollments.) Magnet Program Seal Students who participate in the District's high school magnet programs may meet the magnet curriculum requirements through completion of the designated Career Focus courses established for each magnet. In order to receive a Magnet Seal, magnet students must complete ill! the requirements of the magnet program. Students transferring into a magnet program after the freshman year may earn a diploma from that high school, but they will not earn the Magnet Seal. ADE Seal In order to receive the ADE Seal, students must complete the state's recommended core curriculum with a minimum grade point average of 2.75 ( see Standards for Accreditation 14.01 and 14.02). 2 ?I ltl :,: 8 r ~ m z g :,0 p \"t, m :,0 is z z rm (\"') i'\nz Cl m en p ll:: 0 C: \u0026gt; C: C C: a, 0 z \u0026gt; :,0 ?\" LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT (continued) Arkansas Scholars Seal NEPN CODE: IKF Arkansas Scholars, a program of the Arkansas business \u0026amp; Education Alliance, is a partnership between the District and the Little Rock Chamber of Commerce's Education Committee. Many local businesses have agreed to recognize the achievement of Arkansas Scholars status as a symbol of high quality education. A special Arkansas Scholars seal will be affixed to the diploma and transcript of a student who meets the following standards established by the Arkansas Scholars program: 1. Earn a grade of \"C\" or above in all courses. 2. Achieve a 95 percent or better attendance record for each of the four years of high school. 3. Complete high school in eight consecutive semesters. 4. Complete successfully at least three units in science, three units in mathematics, three units of social studies, and four units in English. Honors Diploma Seal A special Honors Seal will be affixed to the diploma and transcript of a student who meets the following standards: 1. Completes the units required for the Little Rock Scholars curriculum, which includes and goes beyond the requirements of the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board for unconditional admission to any public two-year or fouryear institution of higher education in Arkansas and which includes, but goes beyond, the requirements for eligibility for the Arkansas Challenge Scholarship. The Little Rock Scholars curriculum also reflects the admission requirements of the most competitive universities in the United States of America. 2. Successfully completes a minimum of eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses over a four-year period. Hall High School students may take University Studies courses as substitutes for Pre-Advanced Placement and/or Advanced Placement courses. Other approved dual-credit courses offered to LRSD students in collaboration with area colleges/ universities may also be substituted for the Pre-AP or AP requirement. 3. Earns a grade-point-average of at least 3.5. Students designated for valedictory or salutatory recognition must have completed the Little Rock Scholars curriculum. Recognition of Graduates Each high school may design its own traditions to commend and celebrate the achievements of the following sets of graduates: 1. The valedictorian and salutatorian\n2. Students earning an overall average of 3.5 or above\n3 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) 3. Students earning Magnet Program, Arkansas Scholars, Little Rock Scholars, and/or Honors Diploma Seals\n4. Members of the National Honor Society or similar honors organization\n5. Scholarship recipients\n6. Students with perfect attendance throughout high school\nand 7. Students whose other achievements are worthy of special recognition. Participation in Graduation Ceremony In order to be a participant in the graduation ceremony, the student must be within one unit of completing the graduation requirements and must have paid the tuition for the one-half or one unit to be taken in summer school (or, alternately, in another approved credit-earning program). All high school students and their parents will be informed in writing of this expectation when course lists and graduation requirements are published for the spring registration process. Principals will make a determination of potential graduates at the end of the junior year and each quarter of the students' senior year and inform students and their parents immediately if it is determined that the student is in danger of not graduating. Such students will be advised of all the appropriate credit-earning options, including, but not limited to, evening high school, summer school, correspondence courses, online courses, credit-by-examination, and placement at the Accelerated Learning Center. Award of Diploma The award of the high school diploma will not be made until all graduation requirements are met. Specific Course Requirements The following table specifies the required courses for graduation for each curriculum area. Revised: Revised: January 22, 2004 Adopted: July 22, 1999 Legal References: A.C.A. 6-15-1101 , Standards of Accreditation 9.03, 14.01 , 14.02 Cross References: Board of Education Policies and Regulations IKED, JE, IKED-R, IKC-R, and IKEC-R1 , and the LRSD Student Handbook 4 ~ ::c 8 rn \"l!= m z ~ fl \"D m :x, ~ z z m rn ::c \u0026gt;z C, m Cl\u0026gt; !..\".. s a, 8\n:,,\n\u0026gt; 8 '.!l 6 z fl ll: 0 C: \u0026gt; C: 0 C: a, 0 z \u0026gt; :x, ?\" ~ \u0026gt;\" :.., :i cn C -n\u0026lt; :3. ::,: 2 ~ ~ 3_: cC Z\ni\u0026lt; me\n,:, \" Cl\u0026gt;CJ High School Graduation Requirements Little Rock School District Reauired, Classes of 2004 and After Reauired, ACC Students English-4 units English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1/2 unit Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications IA (1/2 unit) Communications IA--one-half unit English Language Arts-1/2 unit One-half unit from any English, Journalism, or Communications course. Modern Grammar (1/2) is strongly recommended. Mathematics--3 units Mathematics-3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or Statistics Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP) will no longer Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) substitute for Algebra II for the Class of 2007. Effective for the Class of 2007, four (4) units of mathematics are required in grades 9-12. All students must take a mathematics course in arade 11 or 12 and comolete Aloebra II. Science--3 units Science-3 units Physics I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Physical Science or Physics I\nand Biology I\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One additional unit Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Social Studies--3 units Social Studies-3 units Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Government (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Government (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, Regular, or AP) United States History (ESL, Regular, or AP) Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education IA Physical Education IA Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety Health and Safety Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1/2 unit One unit from art, dance, drama, or music Technology--1 unit None One unit from any of the approved technology courses. Career Focus-3 units Career Focus-3 units At least three units from any of the approved Career Three units from any of the approved Career Focus proqrams. Focus proqrams. 5 High School Graduation Requirements Little Rock School District (continued) Electives-6 units (5 units, effective for Class of Electives-3 units 2007) A fourth year of both science and social studies is encouraged, as are at least two units of foreign language. Total-26 units Total-21 units Although not required to do so, students graduating in 2004 through 2006 are encouraged to complete the requirements for the Class of 2007, especially the four units of mathematics in grades 9-12. 6 f\u0026gt; \"0 m\no is z z,m.. . n $\nz Cl m u, !.D... ~ 8\n,: \u0026gt; 8 ~ 5 z f\u0026gt; !I: 0 C: \u0026gt; C: C C: a, 0 z \u0026gt;\no ?' ~  \" :., ::i u, C n-\u0026lt;: ,:i,i ::i: 2 ~~ 3_: cC z\n,: mr\nuo, (\"J Little Rock Scholars Curriculum The Board of Education recommends that students elect the challenge of a more rigorous graduation plan than the minimum requirements, including at least eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses (or University Studies courses at Hall High or approved dual-credit courses). Little Rock Scholars, Class of 2004 and After English--4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand Enolish IV (ESL, Reoular, or AP). Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications IA English Language Arts-1/2 unit Any one-half unit from Enolish, Communications, or Journalism. Modern Grammar is stronoly encouraoed. Mathematics--4 units (in grades 9-12, class of 2007} Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One or more additional units of advanced mathematics for the completion of four units in orades 9-12. Science--4 units Active Physics (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One additional unit Social Studies--4 units Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand One additional unit Foreign Language-2 units Two units of any one foreion lanouaoe Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education IA Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety Fine Arts-1 unit One unit from art, dance, drama, or music Technology-1 unit* One unit from any of the approved technolooy courses. Career Focus-3 units* Three units from any of the approved Career Focus proorams. Electives-3 units Total-28 units *Students graduating in 2004 through 2006 are encouraged to take four units of mathematics m grades 9-12, although they are not required to do so since their plan only specified three units of mathematics. If they do choose to take the Class of 2007 plan, they may also reduce the requirements in Technology and Career Focus and have three electives instead of one. 7 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The Board of Education is committed to providing the best possible educational opportunities for all students in the District. The Board will, therefore, commit the necessary time and other resources to a comprehensive professional development program that will be driven primarily by student performance data and result in improved educational achievement and equity of outcomes for all students. The Board recognizes that the key to a quality professional development program is the establishment of an environment that facilitates and nurtures customer service, continuous learning, data-driven decisions, and continuous improvement at every level of the District. By definition a learning community member assumes responsibility for his or her own growth. The District, however, has the responsibility to encourage, facilitate, and provide a full range of learning opportunities, including job-embedded learning, study groups and seminars, workshops, informational or awareness sessions, in-depth study, access to resources and distance learning, in-classroom coaching and follow-up, tuition reimbursement for university courses, conference attendance, participation on various committees, and so forth . Required Professional Development As per State Board of Education regulations, all certified employees of the District will complete a minimum of sixty (60) required approved hours of professional development annually. The professional development calendar begins July 1 and ends June 30. Any excess professional development hours earned in a given year cannot be carried over to the next school year. An employee who misses any part of regularly scheduled professional development activities for any reason (such as sickness) must make up that time in other professional development activities so that the sixty (60) required hours are earned by each certified employee of the District prior to June 30. Approved professional development activities must relate to one or more of the following areas: content (Pre K - 12)\ninstructional strategies\nassessment\nadvocacy/ leadership\nsystemic change process\nstandards, frameworks, and curriculum alignment\nsupervision\nmentoring/coaching\ninstructional technology\nprinciples of learning/developmental stages\ncognitive research\nand building a collaborative learning community.  At least six (6) of the sixty (60) hours of required professional development will be in the area of educational technology. At least two (2) hours for teachers and !\"\u0026gt; \"'0 m\na lS z ,mz.. n $: z C) m fJ) !.X...' m ~ a, 8\n:,,\n\u0026gt; 8 '.!:l 6 z !\"\u0026gt; :I: 0 C: \u0026gt; C: C C: a, 0 z \u0026gt;\na ?- ~ \u0026gt;\n= :.,, :r \u0026lt;Jl c -\u0026lt; 3' c-, ), :,: 2 ~~ 3_:cC z\n, mr\na\" \u0026lt;J)CJ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA (continued) three (3) hours for administrators will be in the area of parent involvement strategies.  Approved professional development activities that occur during the instructional day or outside the employee's annual contract days may apply toward the sixty (60) hour minimum professional development requirement.  For each administrator, the sixty (60)-hour professional development requirement will include training in data disaggregation, instructional leadership and fiscal management  A three-hour graduate-level, college credit course will count as twelve (12) hours of professional development. Professional development will be awarded only when the college credit is related to a teacher's current teaching assignment or is part of the requirements for the teacher to obtain additional certification in a subject matter that has been designated by the ADE as having critical shortage of teachers. No more than half of the required sixty (60) hours of professional development time may be met through college credit hours An effective professional development program which results in improved student learning includes, but is not limited to, the following characteristics:  has adequate financial resources, space, and time to facilitate effectiveness\n is designed in collaboration with potential participants\n is primarily driven by needs identified through the analysis of student performance data and needs identified in the school improvement plans\n includes performance evaluations of staff both to enhance strong performance and to address weaknesses\n is designed to reflect research-based best practice, to be subject-specific and site-specific as often as possible, and to align with the professional development standards established by the National Staff Development Council\n2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA (continued)  incorporates the requirements of the State Board of Education relative to professional development activities for certified staff\n is evaluated annually for its impact on student learning. Definitions: Advocacy/leadership means building the capacity for shared visions and system improvement in order to improve student learning. Assessment means measuring and judging student performance and achievement relative to the learning standards. Building a collaborative learning community means understanding community, sensitivity, diversity, and effective communication of high expectations. Cognitive research means research about learning and application to practice. Content (PreK-12) means increasing knowledge in a discipline or domain. Educational technology means the use of any technology to enhance instruction, learning and management. Instructional strategies mean techniques or methods for teaching students. Mentoring/coaching means increasing capacity for coaching and mentoring others to assist in growth of instructional skills and effectiveness of colleagues. Principles of learning/development stages means understanding and applying knowledge about how humans learn from birth through adulthood in order to maximize achievement. Professional development means a coordinated set of planned learning activities for teachers and administrators which are standards-based and continuous. Professional development will result in individual, school-wide, and system-wide improvement designed to insure that all students demonstrate proficiency on the state academic standards. Approved professional development will be linked to the local school's improvement plan, demonstrate research-based best practice, and be subject-specific and site-specific as often as possible. 3 !D !!l :t: 8 r(\") ~ m z ~ ~ fl \"D m ~ ~ z z m r(\") $: z C\u0026gt; m en fl :I: 0 C: \u0026gt; C: C C: a, 0z ~\n-: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA ( continued) Standards, frameworks, and curriculum alignment means defining what students should know and be able to do at acceptable performance levels and organizing curriculum and instruction to bring about desired learning results. Supervision means gaining knowledge and skills in instructional management in order to improve the quality of staff members and staff performance. Systemic change process means understanding changes across an entire system such as culture, governance, community, roles, rules, responsibility, etc., to improve the education results and increase student achievement. Revised: Adopted: February 22, 2001 Legal References: A.C.A. 6-17-701 through A.C.A. 6-17-703 A.C .A. 6-15-1001 through A.C.A. 6-15-1006 Act 603 of 2003 Standards for Accreditation 15.04, 15.04.1, 15.04.2 Cross References: Arkansas Department of Education Regulations Governing Professional Development and the LRSD Strategic Plan 4 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: March 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Secondary English/Language Arts Textbook Adoption BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District English/Language Arts Textbook Adoption Committee began the reviewing and selection process as outlined in the LRSD policy manual in December of 2004. This process was completed in February of 2005 after several days of participation in a caravan day, a study day, and several meetings of discussion. The books were available in all secondary schools for perusal by teachers and administrators as well. A set was available at the IRC for inspection also. RATIONALE: The committee, who represented all levels and schools, worked diligently and comprehensively to determine which series most closely aligned to the State Benchmarks and Frameworks, the LRSD curriculum, and the needs of LRSD students. Much consideration was given to the support provided to both teachers and students through materials and professional development opportunities. The voting members were clear in their choices of the above series as those best suited for meeting the needs of the students and teachers of the LRSD. Much time was spent looking at the reading and writing and grammar components of the different series, and the recommended books and materials were viewed to be the best for preparing our students for success in these areas. A list of the committee members will be made available upon request. As a result of the exemplary work of the committee, the following recommendations are made for purchase for the LRSD Secondary English/Language Arts program: 1. Middle School English: Prentice Hall Series for Literature and Language Arts, all levels 6-8. 2. High School English: Holt, R_inehart and Winston Series for Literature and Language Arts, regular and Pre AP 9-12. !Xl ~ ::c 8,.... ~ m z i !\"\u0026gt; \"ti m ::tJ ~ z z m re-, $\nz C) emn ?-x - na, n c: men -\",tzl m nz eenn men om ..,\no ~ c: m l en !\"\u0026gt; I: 0 C,.: C: C C: a, 0 z  ::tJ ?\" ~ ,_\n: :..,,::i enc: n-\u0026lt; :3. ::c:z ~~ 3_:c C\nz\n,: mce:: no\"\" 3. High School AP English: McGraw-Hill - Literature: Reading Fiction, Poetry, Drama (grade 12) Five Steps to a 5- AP Lit and Comp (12) Five Steps to a 5- AP Language (11) W.W. Norton - The Norton Reader :An Anthology of Nonfiction ( 11 ) Harper \u0026amp; Roe - On Writing Well (11) Wadsworth Co.-The Informed Argument (11) 4. Journalism: National Textbook Co. - Journalism Today, Level I Jostens - Radical Write, Levels II - IV 5. Speech/Communication: Glencoe - Speech FUNDING: Textbook funding is provided by the District and the State. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board accepts the recommendations of the Secondary English/Language Arts Textbook Adoption Committee. PREPARED BY: Suzi Davis, Director of Secondary English and Foreign Languages LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: March 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Memorandum of Understanding by and between LRSD and Audubon Arkansas BACKGROUND: Audubon Arkansas and the Little Rock School District are renewing a previous Memorandum of Understanding to continue educational projects that center on Audubon's planned restoration of the Fourche Creek watershed and the creation of an Audubon Center in Little Rock focused on science and technology experiences. J. A. Fair, Central, Mabelvale, and Mann have been engaged with Audubon over the past few years. J. A. Fair, which has an Environmental Science theme as part of its magnet program, has been the primary partner with Audubon. Current projects that are underway at Fair include a nature trail, greenhouse, teaching garden, and sediment basin. Audubon and J. A. Fair also have an approved partnership agreement. Audubon and the District, under this MOU, propose to collaborate on:  Designing, piloting, and disseminating materials linking the Fourche Creek Restoration Project and the proposed Audubon Center\n Developing environmental studies projects involving LRSD students and Audubon and its partners\n Developing proposals to fund project activities. RATIONALE: A Memorandum of Understanding gives credence to the value of the proposed activities and indicates the importance that Audubon and LRSD give to real world, project-based learning activities. Interdisciplinary learning that will be aligned with state standards holds the prospect of increased student achievement in science, math, and literacy. Developing a sense of stewardship of the environment is another noteworthy goal. FUNDING: No funding is requested under this MOU. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board approve this Memorandum of Understanding. PREPARED BY: Dennis Glasgow, Director of Mathematics and Science !\"' ~ ::c 8 rC') ~ mz i .r.\u0026gt;, m ::0 is z z m rC') $: z C, m (I)\n,,,x ' C') a, C') C: -m.C,1-1 -\nZ \u0026gt;m zCII nCII mCII .o,.,m::o \u0026gt;~ c: m ~(I) !\"' .... i r-ill C, C: \u0026gt;.... 0 z V, ~ \u0026gt;\n: :..,:x v, C -\u0026lt;\n: C')), ::c 2 ~~\n_i:cC z\n,: me ::0\" (I)(/ MEMORADUM OF UNDERSTANDING BY AND BETWEEN LITTLE ROCK PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT AND AUDUBON ARKANSAS This MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (\"MOU'') between Little Rock Public Schools and Audubon Arkansas, the Arkansas State Program of National Audubon Society, Inc., (\"Audubon\"). The MOU is designed to foster a community and educational environmental leadership partnership between the District and Audubon. The focus of the partnership will be built around Audubon's planned restoration of the Fourche Creek watershed and the creation of an Audubon Center in Little Rock focused on science and technology experiences. 1. Audubon and the District intend to pursue the following areas of cooperation ( collectively, the \"Projects\"), subject to the execution by the parties of a written agreement for each such project setting forth the specific terms thereof prior to beginning work thereon: A. Collaboration with Little Rock Public School District schools to design, pilot, and disseminate materials linking Fourche Creek Restoration Project and the proposed Audubon center. These materials would include teacher resource packets, teacher training workshops, and student project opportunities. The materials would focus on an understanding of local environmental systems--watershed science and stewardship, native plants and animals, and human impact on those systems. The Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation provides support for Common Ground, Audubon's educational initiative. Support for the Fourche Creek Education and Restoration Project is provided by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. B. Development of environmental studies projects involving LR public school students and Audubon's Fourche Creek Restoration Project and its governmental and educational partners. Federal, state, and city agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency, Arkansas Soil and Water, Department of Environmental Quality, Arkansas Forestry Commission, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, Arkansas Heritage, Little Rock Public Works, and Little Rock City Parks. Educational partnerships include the University of Arkansas Extension and Environmental and Spatial Technology (EAST) initiative. C. Collaboration in proposal development for funding and sponsorship of the Projects is expected with the understanding that the MOU does not obligate either party to financially support or fundraise for the benefit of this MOU. Additional funding of equipment, travel, and restoration expenses could be developed via grants, partnerships, and donations. 2. The Projects will be developed under the direction of Roy Brooks, Superintendent of Little Rock Public Schools and Ken Smith, Executive Director of Audubon Arkansas, who hereby designate the following individuals to work closely with each other to ensure the success of the Projects: Dr. Olivine Roberts, Associate Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction Cassandra Norman, Principal, J. A. Fair Magnet High School, LRPSD Ann Blaylock, Principal, Mablevale Magnet Middle School, LRPSD Dennis Glasgow, Director of Mathematics and Science, LRPSD Mary M. Smith, Director of Education, Audubon Arkansas Kevin Pierson, Director, Fourche Creek Restoration, Audubon Arkansas 3. The parties affirm that, absent an agreement to the contrary signed by each party, this MOU shall not result in i) the transfer of ownership or control of any intellectual property between the parties\nii) a requirement that either party share information that the party considers to be proprietary, confidential or beyond the scope of the MOU\nor iii) an obligation by either party to financially support or fundraise for the benefit of this MOU. The District further agrees that it will not use Audubon's name or trademarks, including but not limited to AUDUBON, in any written manner accessible to the public without Audubon's prior written approval. Similarly, Audubon agrees that it will not use the District's name or trademarks in any written manner accessible to the public without the District's prior written approval. 4. This Agreement shall be in effect for two years, at which time it shall be reviewed for possible extension. Either party may terminate the agreement by providing written notice of termination to the other. Superintendent of Little Rock School District Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Executive Director, Audubon Arkansas Kenneth L. Smith, Vice President National Audubon Society Monique Quinn, ChiefFinancial Officer !I' lll ::i: 8,- (\") ~ zm ~ .r,\u0026gt;, m\n:o ~ z z m,- (\") $\nz C) m en\n,,,x \u0026gt;  C\"la, nc:: men ~z \u0026gt;zemn nen men om ..,\n:o \u0026gt;~ C:m ~en !I' --\u0026lt; ~ ~,- ~ C) C: \u0026gt; --\u0026lt; \u0026lt;zS en DATE: TO: March 24, 2005 Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Request for Psychological Examiners to form a collective bargaining group with LRTCA BACKGROUND: On March 13, 2001 , a memo was submitted to the LRSD Board of Education through Dr. Les Carnine by Dr. Richard Hurley regarding the Psychological Examiners. As a group they asked permission to withdraw from the Little Rock Classroom Teachers' Association {LRCTA). Their reason was the extra schooling / training required for their position justified being placed on a higher paying salary schedule than the teachers, ala the Occupational and Physical Therapists. The Administration made a neutral recommendation regarding their request. (The memo is attached for your information.) At the regular Board meeting on March 22, 2001 , the board voted 5-1 to allow them to withdraw from the Association. This is reflected in the attached minutes under VIII. Action Agenda Item F. Psychological Examiners. One of the conditions to this withdraw is that it would not occur until the current contract was exhausted. Therefore, with the negotiations last spring for the 2003-05 school years, the examiners were removed from the Association. Working with the Chief Financial Officer, the Human Resources Director placed the examiners on the pay 06-60 schedule which is a similar placement for OTs and PTs. This was the request of the examiners in their petition to the board in 2001 . The attached petition is a request from the Psychological Examiners to form a collective bargaining group with LRCTA. It contains the signatures of fourteen (14) of the sixteen (16) examiners. Two examiners did not sign the petition. All signatures have been verified by the Human Resources Department. Also attached is board policy NEPN Code HD regarding Negotiation Practices and Process and the Recognition of Bargaining Practices and Initial Recognition. !I\u0026gt; ~ :c 8,... n ~ m z ~ .r.\u0026gt;, m\na z~ z ,m... n ~ z Cl rn\n,,,x   n a, n c: mu, ~z \u0026gt;m zU\u0026gt; nu, mu, om ..,\na \u0026gt;~ \u0026lt;=m ~u, RATIONALE: See attached petition FUNDING: Any negotiations for salary and benefits will be funded by District Operating Budget RECOMMENDATION: The Administration is making a neutral recommendation regarding their request to for a collective bargaining group with LRCT A. PREPARED BY: Beverly Williamrirector of Human Resources '.\n-4.n I ndividuai A pproach ro a World of Knowieage\" March 13, 2001 To: From: Through: Sub}ect: BoardO!E~ Dr. Richa'?~ (r ey, /ector - Human Resources Dr. Les Carnine, Superintendent of Schoois Psychological Examiners The Psychological Examiners in the Little Rock School District have requested that they, as a group, be oermitted to withdraw from the Little Rock Classroom Teacners' Association (LRCTA). Their reasoning is the extra schooling/training required for their position justifies being placed on a higher paying salary schedule than the teachers, ala the Occupational and Physical Therapists. DiSCl..!SS io n The Psychological Examiners are specifically mentioned in the Recognition clause (Article 1, Section D) of the P. N. agreement. The Occupational and Physical Therapists were not. When the Occupational and Physical Therapists requested being allowed to leave the LRCTA bargaining unit, their logic was that 1) they were not specifically covered in the recognition clause\n2) they are required by law to be licensed in their profession\n3) the profession is in great demand and therefore can command a higher salary in order to compete for licensed staff\n4) the cost difference to outsource the position instead of hiring internally was so great as to justify placing them on a different saiary schedule\n5) the schooi distric: :::or.metes with the medical profession (ie: hosoi,ais and ciinics) for their senti:::es. :.onve\nse!:~_' . :ns =:tsy:::7oiagicai =xaminsr~ =r= s2rtfiso :J~ th~ 3ta::s c.: -!,_t\n~2.ns2~ ~u:\n:~2 sar::~ 2s ~ss:\ne:~ ~~c :-1\ni~- eJ~:31::~~\ns:i:s:::a!js:\n.. 2:7: -\n-:3\n:- 35:--1.':::s~    r 'J', ~,._, \\ .... '  ----:._. 1  =- _- ,... __ _ ,..._r,_- !D !!l :,: 8,... (\") i!!: mz ~\n,\n:, f.,), m\n,\n:, lS z z ,m... (\") $\nz Cl m en\n,,,x \u0026gt;' Oc:, nc ,m,e_n __.z \u0026gt;m z en o en men om ..,\n,\n:, \u0026gt;~ Cm l en !D --\u0026lt; i,...\n,\n:, ~ C r\n: --\u0026lt; 0z en While the ?sychologicai Examiners make a compelling argument about their salary !eve!, it is believed that our curient difficulty in hiring speciaiized teachers (ie: foreign languages. science, and special education) would justify much the same salary request. Lastly, the LRCTA has officially rejected the Psychological Examiners' request to be dropped from the bargaining union. The Union's position was that to do so might cause considerable damage io the solidarity of the bargaining unit. Conclusion/Recommendation While this is truly a justifiable request on the part of the Psychological Examiners' to get higher salaries, the Administration makes a neutral recommendation regarding their request. To grant their request obviously would be of greater cost to the District and potentially would cause other specialist groups to request separate treatment from the LRCT A. This could certainly raise the issue of Union-busting on the part of the LRCTA and may not be in the iong-term best interest of the District while we are in the first year of a multi-year agreement with the Union. Cc: fvlr. 3rady Gadbeny, Associate Suoerintendent - Operations LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES REGULAR BOARD MEETING March 22, 2001 The Board of Directors of the Littie Rock School District held its regularly scheduied meeting at 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, March 22, 2001, in the Boardroom of the Administranon Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. Vice President Balcer Kurrus presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Balcer Kurrus Judy Magness Larry Berkley Micheal Daugherty Tony Rose Sue Strickland MEMBERS ABSENT: Katherine Mitchell ALSO PRESENT: I. Leslie V. Carnine, Superintendent of Schools Beverly Griffin, Recorder oflV'Jinutes CALL TO ORDER Vice President Balcer Kurrus called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Six members of me Board were present at roll call\nDr. Mitchell was absent. In addition, ex-officio representatives to the'Board were also present: Tonya Johnson. teacher at Forest Heights ::vfiddle Schoo:. and :vfichael Gutien-ez. stuci.ent at Parkview Magner High Schooi ~vi:rn.:t=~ ::.-c-i:-~: !'. ..= : e\n1..1i:.:-r:.:-=e::::~ o:\"?e::112.:-:.- :.:::.. : .. ,~'- anL :. 3pe::12.  :.:-i~er~:g 0::. l'-.1 2.:-::\n:\n.:.. 20CJ:. v.e:-:: nrese::1ec. fo: appro'-2.l. -:\n:-:ne ,mnme~ we,:: ur.ammo ,sj.- a:3oro,,ej OL I,,,. 1n o:1ar.i. :\n: ~,\n.:-. 3e:~~e~ .. se~on:J.e:. ~: ~.\\'.!.S. ~\\.ic..p e~:. ~ ::c 8 ,- (\") ~ mz ~ fl ~\n:c is z z m,- (\") z~ C) m \"'\n,i.,., .\u0026gt;\u0026lt; (\") CD (\") C: m.,, ::!lz ,..m nz\"\"'' m\u0026lt;h om ..,\n:c c\u0026gt;: ~m ~\"' REGULAR BOARD MEETING March 22, 2001 Page6 F. Psychoiogical Examiners The District's Psychological Examiners petitioned the Board requesting that they be permitted to withdraw from the L. R. Classroom Teachers' Association. The District's administration took a neutrai position on the request and asked the Board to make a determination based on the information from the Examiners, talcing into consideration the LRCTA's opposition to the request. Mr. Berkley made a motion to approve the request from the Psychological Examiners to be removed from representation by the L. R. Classroom Teachers Association. Mrs. Magness seconded the motion. :Mr. Rose questioned the legality of taking such action while a valid contract is in force, and :tvlr. Kurrus recommended that additional discussion take place prior to making the final decision. Ms. Magness suggested that the original motion be amended to make cenain that this action would not have any effect on the current contract. Although there was no formal amendment to the motion. it was agreed by consensus that there was no iment to change the current contract by approval of the Examiner's request. The monon nassed. 5-1. with Mr. K.urrus casting the \"no\" vote. G. Short Term Debt for Bus Purchase Mr. Gadberry presented a proposal for the purchase of seven to eleven diesel buses to replace several older buses that need to be retired from the special needs transportation fleet. The administration plans to review and inspect several used buses that are available and if they are of good quaiity, we would be able to purchase eleven used buses for the same price as seven new ones. The administration requested Board approval to expend approximately $390,000 for the purchase of school buses. Mr. Berkley made a motion to approve the purchase. W1r. Rose seconded the motion and it carried unanimouslv. H. Te~hnoiogy: Dr. Stewan reviewed the information provided for consideration of a District Technology Ceme:. In aci.dinon rn a cemraiizec: technoiog: facility. :he Boan:: was asked to consider :he ::unciing p\noposai for ne~wori: sysrems integration and caiJiing for non-E-rate schools. ~aci: o: tnese projec1s w2.s suomine::: as pa::.: o::he wrn: te:::lmoiog: pi2.i., which w2.s compie,e::: ::i:  ::c1e ~ ec~: '.:,000 ,vori: group. ~::. ~te\\.\\at .. dis::.:::se::. pu::h2.sin\ne:::::~ng p!Jpe:-::y t:) i1ous\n: ~i1: ~ e:~1 =~nte-:-- :cn-r1pare:_ LC :ie c,:,s: c: 0u11Q.::1f:: ne\\.': ~2.::1r::\\_ _..:i ._r__ e::t~ns1ve repor:: ,\na5: p::-ovicied. as par: o:\" ti1~\nrimec. 2.genciL _-_::\n2.:-: o:\"thE rel)0:-:. :v.c:. :.C2.\nac.is. Director o::.Crocure::nen:. provicied mio:u:an01: or. me ?\n.eques: io: :?roposa1: io: the van.ous se::-v1ces v.rncc. w:l: oe conrrz..:Le~ U1i-OU:~-- Ollls1c:- ,enci.orE:. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: HD NEGOTIATION PRACTICES AND PROCESS The Little Rock School District Board of Education wishes to establish a working relationship with all employees which will result in a working environment which will be as productive, efficient, and creative as possible. The Board of Education is willing to allow groups of employees to establish the type of relationship they would like to have with the Board of Education, including the communication process between the Board and the employees.  Staff members will have the opportunity to work with their supervisors to determine their working conditions, to use the process of \"Meet and Confer,\" or to select the process of negotiations. RECOGNITION OF NEGOTIATING PRACTICES While there is no legal obligation on the part of the Board of Education to negotiate with employee groups, the Little Rock School District Board of Education will voluntarily enter into negotiated agreements with certain classifications of non-management employees. It is the desire of the Board to extend negotiating rights on economic conditions of employment, e.g., -safaries and fringe benefits, to these classifications of employees, as long as this arrangement is beneficial to the employees and to the District as determined by the Board of Education. Recognition of the right to negotiate will be granted under the following condi_tions: A. That such recognition of the rights to negotiate be deemed by the Board of Education to be in the best interest of the employees and the District. 8. That such negotiating practice will be a voluntary practice of the individual groups of employees. C. That the Board of Education will recognize the official representatives of those individual groups. D. That in the opinion of the Board of Education , the employees to be represented have a community of interests, including but not limited to, the following: 1. Similarity of duties, skills, interests, and working conditions of employees. 2. Similar placement in the Little Rock School District organizational structure . For the purpose of this policy, the Board identifies the following !I' ~ ::,: 8 rn '{!: zm C ~ .f.l, m\n:a ~ z z m rn ~ z Cl m Cl\u0026gt;\ni,,x :,.  n a, n c: .m.,e_,, ... z :,.m zCI\u0026gt; c-,CI\u0026gt; me,, om ..,:::a \u0026gt;~ c: m ~Cl\u0026gt; LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: HD (continued) groups to have differing community of interests: security officers\nbus drivers\nmaintenance workers\ncustodians\nfood service workers\nclerical personnel\nparaprofessionals\nnurses\nand teachers. If it can be shown that a different community of interest does exist, the Board of Education will be willing to combine those groups into a community for the purpose of negotiations, and reserves the right to do so. (Upon the decision of the Board of Education to alter the defined groups, this policy will be edited to reflect the change.) 3. The following positions will be excluded from the above groups because of their direct relationship with management: executive assistants and the staff assistant in the superintendent's office. Any employee who has access to information subject to use by the Board of Education in the negotiations or meet and confer process also will be excluded from the groups. E. While the Board is willing to negotiate with employee groups under the above conditions, it also recognizes the necessity-to reserve for the Boan:l and the administration, certain management rights, including, b~t not limited to establishment of policy\nto determine qualifications, hire, direct, assign, suspend, demote, promote all employees\nand to establish the work year. In this vein, the Board directs that an acceptable management rights clause be part of every negotiated agreement. PERSONNEL SERVICE OBLIGATIONS F. Any employee organization will not cause or permit its members to cause, nor will any member of the organization take part in any curtailment of work or restriction of services or interference with the operations of the District in any manner in those areas affecting work responsibility. The organization will not support the action of any employee taken in violation of this article nor will it directly or indirectly take reprisals of any kind against an employee who ' continues the full, faithful, and proper performance of his/her contractual duties, obligations, or refuses to participate in any strike or curtailment of work or restriction of services activity. Violation of this policy or Arkansas law by an organization will cause the Board of Education to remove recognition of the organization and terminate 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: HD (continued) any contract. Violation of this policy or Arkansas law by any employee will cause the Board of Education to terminate the employee. The Board agrees that as long as recognition is granted, and a valid contract remains in force, the Board will not participate in a lockout. PROCESS A. Initial Recognition For a group to be initially recognized, or to challenge the recognition of the present representative, the following procedure shall be followed: A valid petition calling for a representative election will be presented to the Board of Education. For a petition to be valid it must (1) contain at least a majority of the signatures of the employee group, e9be accompanied with a statement from a -certified public accountant, mutually agreed to, that a majority of the employees of the group are bona fide dues paymg members of an organization representing the group, and (2) be presented to the Board prior to December 1 of the school year. Petitions may be circulated only in the month of November. The Board may ask the Human Resources Office to verify the signatures of the employees. If the petition is valid, the Board will schedule an election to select or decertify an official representative. B. Continued Recognition Once an organization has been recognized as the official representative of an employee group, the following procedures will be followed: The organization must present certified verification that it represents at least a majority of the employees of the employee group. To determine whether or not an organization represents a majority of the employees in the group, the Human Resources Office will provide the organization a list of all of the persons employed in the group on December 1. The organization will present a statement from a cenified public accountant, mutually agreed to, verifying that a majority of the employees on the list were bona fide dues paying members of the organization on December 1. Such verification will be presented to the Board by January 15. 3 f) .., m ::0 is zz m rn z~ C) Cl\n,,,\u0026gt;\u0026lt; \u0026gt;  n a, n c: .m.,\"_' \u0026gt;... mz nz\"\"'' men o..,:m:o \u0026gt;~ \u0026lt;=m l\"' !ll r. (' re \u0026lt; IT\nt c:: ,)\u0026gt;IT ,IT-IT ~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: HD (continued) If the organization fails to provide such verification by January 15, the Board will withdraw its recognition of the group. The Board will schedule an election to determine the desire of the employees concerning representation. C. Elections 1 . The ballot used for representation elections will be approved by the Board and will include an option to the issue being considered. 2. The election will be conducted by the Human Resources Office and will be by secret ballot. 3. In order for an employee representative to be recognized\nit must receive in the election at least a majority of the votes of the total number of employees in the employee group. 4. Campaigning on District property will not be allowed. 5. The cost of the petition and the cost of the election will be paid by the organization petitioning the Board. D. Harassment Harassment or coercion of employees concerning joining or not joining or voting or not voting for an employee group will not be allowed. Such conduct is grounds for invalidating the results of an election or withdrawing continued recognition of a representative. E. Non-compliance Non-compliance with any of these regulations will be grounds for the Board to revoke the recognition or the privilege to negotiate with the Board. Continued recognition of any employee group bargaining representative will be contingeht upon both of the following: 1. Continued belief on the part of the Board of Education that such recognition is in the best imerest of the employees and the District\nand 4 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: HD ( continued) 2. Continued desire on the part of the employees of that particular group that continued recognition is desirable. Adopted: April 22, 1999 5 ~ ::,: 8 rC') ~ m z ~ r, \"ti m\n,c is z z m rC') $\nz C'l m \"'\ni,,,\u0026gt;\u0026lt; \u0026gt; C'la:, C') C: m v, ::!lz \u0026gt;m z\"' C')\"' m v, om ..,\n,c \u0026gt;~ c: m ~\"' DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 March 24, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: School Calendar 2005-06 BACKGROUND: In order to plan for the upcoming school year, the proposal of the 2005-06 school calendar is presented for Board approval. RATIONALE: None FUNDING: None RECOMMENDATION: The Administration is recommending the Board's approval of the attached school calendar for the 2005-06 school year. PREPARED BY Beverly WiWams~ctor of Human Resources !\"\u0026gt; \"D m\nn !S z z mr C') s\nz Cl m Cl) 8 z g z Cl)\n,,,x \u0026gt;' C') a, C') C: men ::!lz z\u0026gt;emn nen men om ..,\nn \u0026gt;~ c: m ~Cl) !%' --\u0026lt; ~ \u0026lt; m r ~ Cl C: ~ 0 z en ,. ,r-c ,\u0026lt;,. ::t C: ,,),\u0026gt;. ,,. ,,,. 31: MONTH M T JULY AUGUST 1 2 SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 3 4 NOVEMBER 1 DECEMBER SD JANUARY '06 2 3 FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL 3 4 MAY I 2 JUNE Legend * I J WV sv PC ST DAY LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT CALENDAR 2005-2006 w TH F M T w TH F M T 1 4 5 6 7 8 11 12 SD SD 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 H 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 12 13 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 SD SD 2 3 4 7 8 9 10 11 14 15 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 12 13 [85] R H ~ 4 5 6 9 10 11 12 n 16 17 I 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 I 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 SD 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 (178( R I 2 5 6 I 1 JU 9 12 13 1st Day Students H Holiday End Quarter SD Staff Development w TH 13 14 SD WD 17 18 14 15 [42] 19 20 16 17 14 15 18 19 15 16 15 16 19 20 17 18 14 15 Winter Vacation R Record Days (one-half day) F 15 * 19 16 SD 21 18 16 20 17 17 21 19 16 Spring Vacation TCD Total Contract Days (9.25 teachers) Parent Conference WD Non-student Work Day Student Days # Last Day Students M 18 22 19 24 21 WV 19 23 PC 20 20 24 22 19 T w 19 20 23 24 20 21 25 26 R 22 23 WV WV 20 21 24 25 SD 21 22 21 22 25 26 23 24 20 21 FOR BOARD AP 3/10/05 WV WD ST sv PC TH F M T w TH F DAY H R SD TCD 21 22 25 26 27 28 29 25 26 29 30 31 9 0 1 3 13 PC SD 22 23 26 27 28 29 30 19 1 1 1 21 27 28 31 20 0 0 1 21 H H 24 25 28 29 30 17 3 0 2 19 WV WV H WV WV WV H 22 23 26 27 28 29 30 12 10 0 0 12 26 27 30 31 19 1 0.5 1 20.5 23 24 27 28 18 0 1 1 20 [132] sv sv SV sv SV 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 18 5 0 0 18 27 28 19 0 0 1 20 H 25 26 29 30 31 22 I 0 0 22 22 23 26 27 28 29 30 5 0 0.5 5.5 TOTALS 178 21 4 10 192 I STUDENTS DO NOT ATTEND ON THE DAYS SHADED ABOVE 1st Quarter = 42 student days 2nd Quarter = 46 student days 3rd Quarter = 4 7 student days 4th Quarter = 46 student days TOTAL = 178 STUDENT DAYS DATE: March 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Personnel Changes BACKGROUND: None RATIONALE: To staff allocated positions within the District FUNDING: Operating Fund RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.CA 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) consecutive years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 19, 2004 for regular schools are considered intern teachers. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 9, 2004 for EYE are considered intern teachers. PREPARED BY, Beverly Williamrirector of Human Resources ~ g z g z \"' ?-s. \u0026gt;  na, n c: mu, .\".0.. z- \u0026gt;m z\"' n\"' mu, o..,m\nc \u0026gt;~ C:m l\"' !Jl .... ~\u0026lt; m r\nc m C) C: .r.\n.\n.: 0z u, r: r r C ,\u0026lt;,. ::t C )\u0026gt; ,,r,, .. ,r, . 3: Personnel Changes Page 2 March 24, 2005 NAME Howard, Dianne Reason: None Given Johnston, Margaret Reason: Personal Banks, Cal Bernard, David Crader, Jason DeBow, Bradley Holloman, Berlinda Humphrey, Vernita Martinez, Diana START DATE/ POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE Resignations/Terminations Certified Employees Counselor/ 8-16-93 OTTER CREEK 3-1-05 Kindergarten/ 8-7-03 MEADOWCLIFF 2-7-05 New Certified Employees Social Studies/ 2-14-05 MABELVALE MIDDLE Physical Education/ 2-10-05 ALC Tutor/ 2-14-05 BALE Band/ 2-7-05 PARKVIEW Elementary I/ 2-15-05 BOOKER ISSP/ 2-11 -05 ALC Tutor/ 2-7-05 BASELINE SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 4-12 46128.00 CNL925 1-03 31195.00 TCH925 1-05 33506.00 TCH925 annual 12913.77 prorated 4-04 36885.00 TCH925 annual 13063.44 prorated 1-01 30040.00 TCH925 annual 11577.92 prorated 4-05 38041 .00 TCH925 annual 15652.29 prorated 1-09 38127.00 TCH925 annual 14496.20 prorated 4-09 42662.00 TCH725 annual 16664.84 prorated 1-01 30040.00 TCH925 annual 12360.21 prorated Personnel Changes Page 3 March 24, 2005 START DATE/ NAME POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE Pinkard, Tawanna Math/ 1-31-05 HENDERSON Relford, Melvia Special Education/ 1-18-05 CENTRAL Richardson, Joyce Special Education/ 2-22-05 HALL Signaigo, Katherine Tutor/ 2-10-05 BALE Whitby, Jennie Kindergarten/ 10-19-04 BRADY Certified Promotion NONE Certified Transfer NONE SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 1-01 15020.00 TCH925 annual 6571.25 prorated 1-05 33506.00 SPE925 annual 16229.47 prorated 1-16 46215.00 SPE925 annual 16367.81 prorated 1-01 30040.00 TCH925  annual 11890.83 prorated 1-03 31195.00 TCH925 annual 24692.24 prorated !=' 0 0 z )\u0026gt; 6 z en ~?\u0026lt; -en,\u0026lt;\"r\u0026gt; c:0 c!!! mz zc\n, -,\n,:, :cm m\n:: )\u0026gt; )\u0026gt; e'!!\n,:, Z,\u0026lt; c\n, en\n,,,\u0026gt;\u0026lt; )\u0026gt; . n a, nc: men ~z \u0026gt;m zen nen men om ...,\n,:, )\u0026gt; ~ c:m ~en !\" -, I r ~ G\"\u0026gt; C: s\n: -, 0z en C: C: re ,\u0026lt;,. ::c C )\u0026gt; ,,r,,.. ,r,. !I: Personnel Changes Page4 March 24, 2005 NAME START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY Resignations/Terminations Non-Certified Employees Baird, Sharon Reason: Deceased Bryant, Caroline Reason: Personal Crawford, John Reason: Personal Edwards, Norma Reason: Accepted another position House, Evans Reason: Retired Mason, Shanika Reason: Never reported to work Moore, Tamalyn Reason: Job Abandonment Pondexter, Brack Reason: Accepted another position White, Anthony Reason: Retired Albritton , Salvin Instructional Aide/ WILLIAMS Care/ CARE Maintenance/ FACILITY SERVICES Child Nutrition/ BRADY Bus Monitor/ TRANSPORTATION Care/ CARE Care/ CARE Instructional Aide/ GARLAND ALE GED Examiner/ ADULT EDUCATION New Non-Certified Employees Instructional Aide/ ALC 8-23-93 3-24-05 10-28-04 3-24-05 7-28-04 2-14-05 8-26-91 2-11-05 9-13-99 3-17-05 1-31-05 2-25-05 1-24-05 2-14-05 8-13-03 1-13-05 5-02-88 4-28-05 2-14-05 33-13 14735.00 INA185 3-17 10.36 CARE per hour 49-07 29760.00 MAINT 7-14 11739.00 FSH650 1-06 11509.00 BUSMON 2-03 7.85 CARE per hour 2-02 7.70 CARE per hour 33-09 13070.00 INA925 43-20 36672.00 AN10 33-07 12307.00 INA925 annual 4789.75 prorated Personnel Changes Page 5 March 24, 2005 !=' 8 START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL z \u0026gt; CLASS SALARY .... NAME POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE i5 z U\u0026gt; Bunting, Devona Custodian/ 2-15-05 31-01 5689.50 FULBRIGHT CUS925 annual 2257.25 prorated Carter, John Care/ 2-28-05 3-17 10.36 ~?'\u0026lt; u,n -\u0026lt; r- CARE CARE per hour cO mo!!z! !:i Cl Dulaney, Stephanie Instructional Aide/ 3-21-05 33-08 12682.00 :c\n:o mm \u0026gt;~ CHICOT INA925 annual ::!!\n:o Z\n\u0026gt;: 3290.46 Cl tn prorated Givens, Vera Care/ 2-21-05 3-15 10.05 CARE CARE per hour Hardman, Melissa Instructional Aide/ 2-7-05 33-16 16109.00 ,\n,.,.,\u0026gt;. \u0026lt; (') a, FOREST HEIGHTS INA925 annual nc mu, 6704.83 .-..,. :z,- \u0026gt;m prorated zU\u0026gt; nU\u0026gt; mu, o.,,\nm:o Hawkins, Clifford Instructional Aide/ 1-18-05 33-16 16109.00 \u0026gt;~ c: m HENDERSON INA925 annual ~ U\u0026gt; 7923.89 prorated Johnson, Tonya Instructional Aide/ 2-14-05 33-16 16109.00 WILLIAMS INA925 annual 6269.45 !l:l prorated .... ~ \u0026lt;m r- Lyles, Eddie Care/ 2-21-05 3-03 8.06\n:o m Cl CARE CARE per hour C: !\n-\u0026lt; i5 McClure, Jesse Custodian/ 1-31-05 31-01 14532.00 z en CLOVERDALE CUS12 annual ELEMENTARY 6369.34 prorated c-: Pulliam, Shareka Care/ 3-7-05 2-03 7.85 c-: r- CARE CARE per hour C ,\u0026lt;,. :,\nC: )\u0026gt; ,,r,,-.. ,r,-. 31: Personnel Changes Page 6 March 24, 2005 NAME Shumate, Emma Steverson, Patrick Thomas, Crystal Thomas, Tamiko Tyler, David Williams, Shirley Woods, Anne Woodus, Sherri Yelder, Robert START DATE/ POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE Child Nutrition/ 2-15-05 BRADY Custodian/ 1-31-05 METROPOLITAN Instructional Aide/ 1-31-05 FULBRIGHT Instructional Aide/ 2-21-05 WILSON Technician/ 2-21-05 CHILD NUTRITION Instructional Aide/ 2-14-05 STEPHENS Instructional Aide/ 2-16-05 ROCKEFELLER Instructional Aide/ 2-15-05 FULBRIGHT Instructional Aide/ 1-3-05 FOREST HEIGHTS SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 3-01 9350.00 FSH550 annual 3669.62 prorated 31-01 11379.00 CUS928 annual 5194.76 prorated 33-16 8054.50 INA925 annual 3570.10 prorated 33-04 11253.00 INA925 annual 4075.41 prorated 42-04 22080.00 AN12 annual 8362.21 prorated 33-16 16109.00 INA925 annual 6269.45 prorated 33-16 20463.00 INA12 annual 8011 .05 prorated 33-16 16109.00 INA925 annual 6182.37 prorated 33-09 13070.00 INA925 annual 7135.51 prorated Personnel Changes Page 7 March 24, 2005 NAME START DATE/ SALARY POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS Non-Certified Promotion Montgomery, Timothy - Promoted from Bus Aide to Bus Driver White, Donna - Promoted from Bus Aide to Bus Driver ANNUAL SALARY\n,,-5\u0026lt;  - 0 a, 0 C: me,, ~z \u0026gt;m z\"' moc\"n' .o., m\n., \u0026gt;~ c: m !!l\"' !D ..... i ..... ~ C) C: !j\n: ..... 0z V, ,. CrC ,\u0026lt;,.\n:c C ,,).,\u0026gt;... ,,.,... ,,. ~ DATE: TO: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 March 24, 2005 Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Organizational Audit Report BACKGROUND Upon acceptance of the position of Superintendent of Schools, I shared my vision and defined some guidelines for strategic thinking for the Little Rock School District. The Superintendent's Entry Plan, The First 100 Days included a two-part approach for taking action and the steps that would be required to turn the vision into reality. First, the numerous school visits, interviews, and community forums provided an opportunity for me to meet with a cross-section of the LRSD school community including students, teachers, administrators, parents, and business people for the purpose of sharing the vision and expectations. It also provided an opportunity for me to listen carefully and take note of concerns, challenges, and hopes. The investment of time was significant\nhowever, the results were invaluable. The second essential element of the Entry Plan was the formation of a district transitional assistance team to work closely with the outside consultants in providing an objective audit of the district's organizational structure and staffing. In doing so, the consultants would provide the leadership necessary to compare the most effective school practices with those in the Little Rock School District and detail our areas of strength and identify specific areas for improvement. On September 23, 2004, the Board of Education approved a recommendation to offer a contract to these consultants and the work commenced immediately. The services and deliverables included:  Independent interviews conducted with key district and community leaders, staff, selected student leadership, and Board of Education members in gaining strategic, technical and political insights. !=' 8 z .\u0026gt;... 0 z en ~ \u0026gt; 0 '- 0 C\no z\n:: m z :--\u0026lt; !D .... i ,- ~ C\u0026gt; C \u0026gt;.... 0z en C\": ,. r C \u0026lt; IT :,: C )\u0026gt; r IT IT r IT !C Page 2  Consolidation and analysis of all gathered data.  Continuous review and refinement of work with the transitional assistance team.  Face to face debriefing with the Superintendent and Board President and other leaders as determined by the Superintendent.  Scheduled presentations to the Board of Education for the purpose of project updates.  Preparation of written executive report and supporting exhibits. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve / accept the organizational audit report as submitted and direct the Superintendent to move forward to implement the restructuring efforts. The audit recommendations will be used as a blueprint and changes will be made following Board policies, Arkansas law and established school district practices. DATE: March 24, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Updated Travel Regulations DKC-R BACKGROUND: The current travel regulation has been modified to include the instructions for utilization of the ProCard for certain portions of travel. RATIONALE: Utilization of the District ProCards will allow for less expensive travel cost and empower staff to more efficiently make travel arrangements. FUNDING: No changes. RECOMMENDATION: Submitted for review by Board. PREPARED BY: Mark Milhollen Darral Paradis Sandy Becker 8 z .\u0026gt;... iz5 U\u0026gt; ~ \u0026gt; 0 \u0026lt;... 0 C\no z\ni: m z :--\u0026lt; ,. (\"' E ,\u0026lt;,. A C: )\u0026gt; ,,r,, .. ,r, . 3: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: DKC-R (Updates the Previous DKC-R - Out-OfDistrict Travel Regulations) TRAVEL EXPENSE AUTHORIZATION/REIMBURSEMENT Travel will be for necessary school business purposes. Prior approval for all travel, including prepaid expenses, will be obtained before any expenses are incurred. Economical and reasonable modes of transportation, lodging, and other expenditures in accordance with the purpose of the travel must be used . A copy of the full agenda for the conference or training will be provided with the request for travel and request for professional leave. To insure that maximum impact can be achieved, the following regulations apply to all out-of-district travel. Out-of-district travel will be defined as being outside Pulaski County, AR. Travel Day The travel day will begin at 6:00 a.m., include breakfast, lunch, dinner and one night's lodging, and will end the following morning at 6:00 a.m. Request for reimbursement of expenses incurred in less than full travel days must reflect a reasonable allocation based on the expense limits directed herein for a full travel day. Meal costs will be prorated by one half for that travel day if travel begins after 2:00 p.m. and for a return time prior to 2:00 p.m. Meals and Incidental Costs Meals costs will be determined by the last accepted federal per diem schedule. Partial days meal cost will be determined by the departure and return time as indicated in the above section. Meals included in the cost of registration will be deducted from the per diem amount as follows: breakfast (20%), lunch (30%), and dinner (50%). No deductions will be made for continental breakfasts. Lodging Expenses The District will reimburse actual lodging expense incurred in travel for the District. Lodging will be reimbursed only for the days of the conference attended plus night(s) required based on the conference schedule. Economical and reasonable lodging in accordance with the purpose of the travel must be used . Reimbursement for lodging LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: DKC-R ( continued) expenses will require lodging receipts that indicate the employee has paid for the lodging. Receipts from personal credit cards will not be accepted unless accompanied by the receipt from the lodging establishment. If the rate for lodging exceeds the federal maximum for lodging, a justification must be provided (i.e. no local travel costs between hotel and conference hotel\nlegitimate safety concerns\nor room sharing to reduce cost). Travelers are encouraged to use cost saving initiatives such as appropriate sharing of rooms, car pooling and like arrangements. Using District Pro Card for Travel AFTER THE TRAVEL FORM HAS BEEN APPROVED, Go to your principal/ director and request to use the site's main ProCard (usually the principal/director's) to do the following: a. Secure a hotel reservation\nb. Purchase airline tickets on-line (use website of your choosing, or online service, etc). DO NOT USE ANY ON-LINE SERVICE THAT REQUIRES YOU TO ENTER YOUR CARD NUMBER TO FIND A RATE)\nc. Book airfare or obtain the estimated cost of airfare using a local travel agency\nhowever, employees are encouraged to book tickets using available on-line services. d. Pay for registration fees\ne. Purchase transportation tickets for multiple persons from same location traveling to same destination. If amount is expected to exceed $1,000 contact Procurement. Employees CANNOT USE THE ProCard to PAY for the following: a. Hotel room\nb. Meals\nc. Auto rental\nd. Incidental Expenses. You will receive an expense check to pay for these items that have been approved on your travel form. Travel to Destination The District will reimburse travel expenses to the maximum limit for point-to-point costs for coach fare on common carriers. Receipts or ticket stubs are required for reimbursement of common carrier costs. If an employee chooses to use a personal automobile, reimbursement will not exceed the current per mile rate approved by the 2 8 z \u0026gt; g z en ~ )\u0026gt; 0 '- 0 C\n,:, z ~ m z :--\u0026lt; f' (,.\".' C ,\u0026lt;,.\n,:: C: ,,),.\u0026gt;.. ,,,... ,,. 3: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: DKC-R (continued) District or point-to-point coach fare, whichever is less. When more than one employee travels to the same location in a personal automobile, mileage will be reimbursed only to the employee whose personal automobile is used. When automobiles are used for transportation to a destination, car pooling for multiple attendees is recommended. Mileage requests may be denied when the best interest of the District is not met after taking into account the circumstances of the request. Local Travel at Destination Actual reasonable expenses of local travel by common carriers at the destination will be reimbursed. Mass transit or taxi fare does not require receipts if all local travel claimed for the trip is less than thirty dollars. Receipts are required if the claim is over thirty dollars. Automobile Rentals - At Destination Automobiles will not be rented at District expense without prior approval of the superintendent or his/her designee and in no case without documentation, in advance, that automobile rental will be less expensive to the District than the cost of public transportation to meeting, conferences, etc. Reimbursement is conditioned upon advance authority as well as receipts from the leasing agency. Automobile Rentals - Travel to Destination If an employee chooses to rent a vehicle to travel to an approved destination, the employee will only be reimbursed the lesser of common carrier coach rates or round trip map mileage to and from the destination. If a vehicle is rented for multiple attendees, the limit for reimbursement will be the lesser of common carrier coach rates for two employees or round trip map mileage to and from the destination for two employees. The approval or disapproval level will be at least at the equivalency level of an assistant superintendent for this type of arrangement. Reasonableness must be documented. Advance Request for Travel The first two forms listed below must be submitted at least thirty days prior to travel if an advance is requested. If there is no District expense for this trip or no advance required 3 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: DKC-R (continued) the deadline will be two weeks prior to the trip. The third form should be filled out only when multiple attendees from the same location or area are attending the same event. If an employee has not sent in documentation for the advanced funds within sixty days, payroll deduction will be made for the non-documented advance that has not been reimbursed.  Request for Absence for Professional Meetings - to be completed and submitted in accordance with the instructions on that form.  Request for Out-of-District Travel - to be submitted in accordance with the instructions on that form (attached). Non-travel items will not be included on advances or reimbursed with travel. Registrations and common carrier expenses (to and from the destination) should be paid by separate check to the vendor unless you used your district ProCard.  Travel Summary for School - When multiple attendees from the same area or school are going to the same educational event. A travel summary will be prepared by the administrator of that school or area and sent with the other documents. No employee will be reimbursed for out-of-district travel unless the required forms are submitted and approved in advance by the area supervisor, funding source manager (if required) and financial services. These forms must cover the entire cost of travel, the total days absence requested, be accompanied by the full agenda of the conference or event to be attended, and be delivered together for approval. Requests for travel will be completed in a timely manner to avoid registration penalties, and to obtain good rates for hotels, airlines, registration, etc. No travel will be paid from any source for which the required forms have not been completed and approved. Date: March 24, 2005 4 8 z g z \"' ~ \u0026gt; 0 c.... 0 C\n,:, z ~ m z :-\u0026lt; r. DATE: TO: FROM: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 March 24, 2004 Board of Directors Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Cloverdale Elementary School BACKGROUND: The Board has been provided frequent reports on the status of structural problems at Cloverdale Elementary School. These structural instabilities will require relocation of the students beginning with the 2005-06 school year. RATIONALE: A full report, The Big Picture - Cloverdale Elementary School, contains a detailed analysis and further recommendations. This document will be provided under separate cover. FUNDING: Funding issues will be determined by the Board's final decision on which option will provide the best educational environment for the students at that school. PREPARED BY: Sadie Mitchell Mark Milhollen bjg DATE: March 24, 2005 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Cloverdale Elementary School Structural Concerns BACKGROUND: Cloverdale Elementary School has been identified as having structural damage that requires correction in the near future. The attached report details the concerns and options for resolving the problems. RATIONALE: To inform the Board there are structural problems with the Cloverdale Elementary building that require the District to relocate the students. FUNDING: Capital Projects Fund RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve Option 3 which will relocate the Cloverdale Elementary students to Mabelvale Elementary beginning with the 2005-06 school year using a combination of available classrooms and portable buildings. This option also includes the demolition of the defective areas of the Cloverdale Elementary site. PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen, Manager Financial Services Sadie Mitchell, Associate Superintendent School Services 8 ~ z \"' ~ \u0026gt; 0 '- 0 C \"z '\n:: zm :-' The Big Picture District Operation of Schools with Major Structural Concerns CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL March 2005 INTRODUCTION This paper is intended to provide an overview of the structural problems at Cloverdale Elementary School and options to resolve the problems. Information regarding this situation has been included in the January 14 and January 28, 2005 Snapshots. A brief history and discussion of the problem, conclusions, possible options, and the administration's recommendation are presented to assist the Board in taking appropriate and timely action so that the administration can effectively plan for the 2005-06 school year. OVERVIEW Cloverdale Elementary School, constructed in 1959, was transferred by Court Order from the Pulaski County Special School District to the Little Rock School District in the 1987- 88 school year. It is located in southwest Little Rock at 6500 Hinkson Road. Additions to the facility were constructed in 1961, 1971, 1975, and 1978. The campus consists of a three-wing facility housing the administrative area and classrooms and a separate building attached to the north wing that houses the media center (See ATTACHMENT l). The school is a covered open-corridor type which provides partial protection from the weather for students moving from one area to another. Cloverdale Elementary School has the capacity for 448 students\nthe October 1, 2004 student enrollment was 360. While not at full operational capacity, the school is considered a viable entity in southwest Little Rock. The Cloverdale attendance zone is bordered on the northwest by the attendance zones of Watson and Mabelvale Elementary Schools, on the northeast by the Geyer Springs Elementary School zone, and on the east by the Baseline Elementary School zone. The school generally serves a population that resides south of Interstate 30, west of Geyer Springs Road, and east of Mabelvale Pike. Any future planning consideration for zone changes in the southwest part of the city might impact the enrollment, capacity and design for this location. FACILITY PROBLEM/ HISTORY Cloverdale Elementary School, a single-story building elevated approximately three feet off the ground, was built on farmland with soil that would be considered poor for construction, poorly graded and consisting of expansive clay and areas of largely organic matter. The school is built on bar joists supported by grade beams on drill piers. The Cloverdale Elementary School March 2005 Page 2 metal structural members on which the floor slab is resting have become seriously eroded over the 45 years that the school has been in existence. This erosion can be attributed to a lack of adequate preparation to protect these members from ground moisture and poor drainage around the school. As a result, these structural members have been identified as being problematic and are most assuredly going to fail in the future. In 1995, the building was surveyed as part of the 3D/I Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan. Of the District's 35 elementary schools, 3D/l's survey ranked Cloverdale Elementary as 25th in general overall condition and suitability for retention as an elementary school. At that time, the survey did not include an in-depth structural analysis of the facility. In 2001 the LRSD Facility Services staff, in conjunction with structural engineers, conducted inspections of Cloverdale Elementary School. The problems were identified, and portions of the building have been braced, or \"shored up,\" as a precautionary and temporary measure. However, it is a problem that we have been monitoring, inspecting periodically, and assessing for appropriate and timely corrective action. A structural study of Cloverdale Elementary was commissioned in the spring of 2004 when water began pooling on the exterior walkways and running back toward the building. The construction of the facility, if it were standing as it was originally constructed, would not allow this to happen. This evidence shows that portions of the building are subsiding, or slowly sinking, due to structural failure. The study, completed in May 2004, verified that the metal structural members, or bar joists, supporting the school are seriously deteriorating and several have already failed. The structural analysis concluded that eventual structural failure is probable. These structural failures are evident by cracks in the floors, floors have begun to shift or move, and cracks are in the walls. It should be noted that structural failure and continued deterioration of the steel members is imminent, but the rate of deterioration is varied throughout the building. The deterioration will continue to be slow but will eventually reach a point where failure will occur. SEE PHOTOS FROM THE 2004 STRUCTURAL STUDY AT ATTACHMENT 2. CONCLUSION The District is at the point where a plan must be formed and necessary action determined. Large portions of Cloverdale Elementary School will need to be demolished. The structural engineer's report shows that consideration was given to replacing the bar joists under the building\nhowever, this is not a feasible option because of space limitations and massive engineering problems. Without doing an in-depth cost analysis, it would be extremely expensive and very risky to undertake this type of repair. The probability of success would be extremely low, and we would continue to have the moisture problem and differential settlement even if these joists were replaced. For these reasons, the best alternative is to demolish the defective sections of the building. ~ \u0026gt; 0 '- 0 C:\n,::, z\n:: zm :-\u0026lt; Cloverdale Elementary School March 2005 Page 3 The deterioration under the Pre-K section (Area 4 on Attachment 1) is extremely limited, and it is possible this portion of the building could remain intact by drying and treating the soil under the building. The two remaining wings (Areas 1 and 3 on Attachment 1) will require demolition. The media center (Area 2 on Attachment 1) was not evaluated in the 2004 study due to lack of crawl space accessibility\nhowever, there is no evidence of distress on the exterior. Further evaluation is needed to determine the actual condition of the media center structure. RECOMMENDATION A committee of administrative staff has developed options for resolving the problems that exist at Cloverdale Elementary School and continuing the education of the Cloverdale Elementary students for the Board's consideration: Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Place portable buildings between Cloverdale Elementary and Middle School campuses, continue school at that location and demolish the defective areas of the elementary site (similar to the method used at Mann Middle School). Place portable buildings between Cloverdale Elementary and Middle School campuses, utilize available classrooms at Cloverdale Middle School and demolish the defective areas of the elementary site. Place portable buildings on the Mabelvale Elementary School campus and use eight (8) available classrooms to conduct school separately from the Mabelvale program and demolish the defective areas of the Cloverdale Elementary site. Place portables at Watson Elementary School, divide the Cloverdale students between Watson and Mabelvale Elementary School and demolish the defective areas of the Cloverdale Elementary site (similar to the initial Mitchell School plan whereby some students attended Stephens and others attended Washington). SEE ATTACHMENT 3 FOR THE COST ESTIMATE FOR EACH OPTION. The committee recommends Option 3, the relocation of Cloverdale Elementary students to the Mabel vale Elementary campus. Availability of classroom space at Mabel vale, supplemented by placement of portable buildings, leads the committee to believe this option would be the least disruptive to the overall operation of Cloverdale Elementary School. Option 3 will require no additional buses to transport the students. With Board approval, relocation would take place over the summer of 2005. t N !I 1 Administrative Offices \u0026amp; 1/ Classrooms 2 Media Center 3 Classrooms 4 Pre-K / K Classrooms WHILIUh CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL  1N3WNMnorov 'IIX ONIM\\f3H 1N30n1S 'IX S\u0026gt;4MlfW3M ONISOl:\u0026gt; x SNotlVNOO 'O )\u0026gt; -I -I )\u0026gt; (\") :c s: m z -I ...... ATTACHMENT 2 Page 1 of 3 (') '+- 0 N (I) 0) ro D.. X. CLOSING REMARKS XII. ADJOURNMENT. D. DONATIONS XI. STUDENT HEARING I, ~ q. ,1, _] ,,. .... .!. Page 3 of 3 T ) \"- Cloverdale Elementary Cost Estimate - Cost item Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Portables I $638,000_ $638,000 _ $112,000 --- -- Covered Walks $67,770 $67,770 $26,0QQ__ Fencinq $11,4QQ.._ $11,400 $8,000 Steps I $18,000 $18,000 $11,450 Liqhts I $4,500 $4,500 $3,150 Intercom I $11,000 $11,000 $7,000 Data I $4,200 $4,200 $1,960 Walks/Steps I $1,185 $1,185 $1,580 Telephones I $9,000 $9,000 $4,200 Fire Alarm ___$7 ,500 _ $7,500 $3,500 Securit I $5,250 $5,250 _ $2,450 i I Relocation $2,500 $2,500 $6,000 Demolition I $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 Misc Cost I $3,700 $3,700 $3,700 I TOTAL I $984,005 $984,005 $390,990 ATTACHMENT 3 Option_!_ $112,000 $26,000 $8,000 $11,450 $3,150 $7,000 $1,960 $380 $4,200 $3,500 $2,450 $8,000 $200,000 $3,700 $391,790 ~ )\u0026gt; a '- 0 C\nc z s:: zm :--\u0026lt; DATE: March 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District receives donations from businesses and individuals on a regular basis. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District that donations are not formally accepted until they are approved by the Board of Directors. RATIONALE: District policy states that, in order to maintain the centralized fixed asset property accounting system, all property donation requests are forwarded to the Director of Procurement. The Procurement Department forwards the requests, along with the appropriate recommendations, to the Board of Directors for acceptance and approval. In order for proper recognition and appreciation to be conveyed to the donor, donor's name and current mailing address should be included in the donation memo. FUNDING: None RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the attached donation requests be approved and accepted in accordance with the policies of the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District. PREPARED BY: -~' Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement . \\- Gwen Caraway, Fixed Asset Property Manager ~ \u0026gt; 0 c.... 0 C: ::c z\n: m z :-- DONATIONS School/Department Item Donor Central High School Equipment, valued Roy \u0026amp; Louise Gutierrez at $589.00, to LR Central Quiz Bowl Team Central High School $250.00 cash Gregg Heming to LR Central Girls' Cheerleading Squad Metropolitan Career Assorted supplies and Billy-Jack's Body Shop, Inc. \u0026amp; Technical Center materials, valued at $1 ,500.00, to the Paint \u0026amp; Body program Romine Elementary $500.00 cash to be Hunter United Methodist School used for student Church Incentives Williams Magnet Trees and 6 hours Clayton Johnson and Elementary School labor valued at Trent Roberts of the $550.00 Merriweather Park Neighborhood Association in conjunction withe City of LR Urban Forestry Commission LRSD ASAP Program $1 ,700.00 check to Landers Auto Sales purchase Project THRIVE t-shirts LRSD CARE Program Assorted toys valued Mrs. Cheryl Stanley at $200.00 Little Rock Central High School 1500 South Park Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Phone 501-447-1400 Fax 501-447-1401 DATE: 2/15/2005 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PR_QCUREMENT FROM: A CY ROUSSEAU, PRI CIPAL J K/LilJdi{UA_,/ SUBJECT: DO ATIO Roy \u0026amp; Louise Gutierrez of 32 Fontenay Circle, Little Rock, AR  72223, very graciously contributed equipment valued at $589.00 to our Quiz Bowl team. It is my recommendation that this contribution be accepted in accordance with the donation policies of the Little Rock School District. ~ )\u0026gt; a '- 0 C\n,:, z 3:: zm :-\u0026lt; DATE: TO: FROM: Little Rock Central High School 1500 South Park Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Phone 501-44 7-1400 Fax 501-44 7-1401 FEBRUARY 28, 2005 DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT A CY ROUSSEAU, PRI CIPAL 7U::_t,~ SUBJECT: DO ATIO Gregg Herning, in behalf of the Peabody Hotel at #3 Statehouse Plaza, Little Rock, AR 72201, graciously donated $250.00 to our girl's cheerleading squad. It is my recommendation that this be accepted in accordance with the donation policies of the Little Rock School District. To: From: Date: RE: Darral Paradis, Dir of Procurement Michael Peterso~rincipal Metropolitan Career ff echnical February 8, 2005 DONATION Billy-Jack's Body Shop, Inc has donated the following items to the Paint and Body program at Metropolitan, valued at $1 ,500.00. 1 - LX 90 A Turbine paint sprayer 2 - AirHose 1 - Paint Gun 4 - HD Jack Stands 1 - 21/2 Ton Floor Jack 2 - Snap on Roll around seats 1 - Paint Shaker 8 - Cans/plastic Body Mat. 1 - Dirt Rag Can 1 - Sanding Board 1 - 3/8 Air Rachet cp 1 -  Air Rachet cp 1 - Drill 1 - Welding Helmet 1 - Paint Mixing System w/ various paint mixing colors 1 - Computer mixing scales Books It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. Metropolitan Career-Technical Center 7701 Scott Hamilton Drive  Li ttle Rock, Arkansas 72209  (501) 447-1200  Fax (501) 447-1201 ~ )\u0026gt; 0 c.... 0 C :,:, z 3: m z :-\u0026lt; ROMINE INTERDISTRICT SCHOOL Theme: Computer Science and Basic Skills February 21 , 2005 TO: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement FROM: 1s. Li!lie Scull, Principal RE: Donation Hunter United Methodist Church has generously donated $500.00 to our school. The money will be ust\u0026gt;d for student incentives. It is my recommendation that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Board of Education of the Little Rock School District Sponsor: Hunter United Methodist Church 3301 Romine Road Little Rock, AR 72204 '... .... - ,. .... - ,. .. t WILLIAMS RADITIONAL r\\/iAGr IET SCHOOL A CHOICE FOR EXCELLENCE Date: Re: Dottatiotts The Cifii of littk Rock Vrbatt Forestr\\i Commissiott has bottateb $\n0.00 from the .. ,-,act Grattt for Tree PlatttittS.. to the Memweather Park Nd5hborhoob Associatiott for the purchase of trees. Mr. da\\itOtt Johttsott 1203 M Street littk Rock. Ar. 72207 attb Mr. T rmt Roberts 7304 vu5rem Street littk Rock. Ar. 72207 bottateb the trees attb 6 hours of thdr time itt platttitt5 the trees at WiTiiams Masttct School. lt is recommettbeb that this bottatiott be accepteb itt accorbattee with the policies attb procebures of the little Rock School District. Thattk \\.10U for \\iOUr cottsiberatiott. ~ )\u0026gt; 0 '- 0 C\no z\n: m z :-\u0026lt; DATE: TO: Accelerated Student Achievement Program LRSD Advanced Placement Incentive (API) Program 3001 S. PULASKI STREET March 3, 2005 Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 FROM: f Darral Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Management THROUGH: Roy G. Brooks, Ed. D., Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donation Landers Auto Sales will donate a check in the amount of $1,700.00 to the Little Rock School District for Project THRIVE t-shirts. The donor's mailing address is: Landers Auto Sales, Attention: Rodney Plack, 7800 Alcoa Road, Benton, AR 72015. It is recommended that this donation request be approved in accordance\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1045","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2005-02"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents","Education--Curricula","School enrollment"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1045"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["201 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nAgenda FEB 2 2005 DESEGREG ~ llTDRING Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting -~1-:: ~ ~:~::::-t:::~:: ):\n~(r\n: . . - .. 2 5 C') )\u0026gt;\"D .j..- ~,.. -\u0026lt;- 031:: ~ ~ ~~\n,o.., -c:\n,oz .o...n... ,.. ~ oz ,~..( I) \u0026gt;~  \"D CIIQ C:\n,o \"D .... :-'~ o\n,o :::im \u0026gt;C') =! 8 Oz ~::! 0 z (I) !\"' \"D\nz m ill ::c 'iS (I) 0 0 :::\n.c Nm ,...z\n,o (I) ..,-.,. on )\u0026gt;:!I: :!I: .zm.. . (I) I. 11. 111. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING February 24, 2005 5:30 p.m. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests B. Student Performance - Mitchell Academy REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Partners in Education - New Partnerships C. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) D. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A. Remarks from Board Members B. Student Assignment Report C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update V. APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes Regular Meeting 01-27-05 Special Meeting 02-10-05 ,... n \u0026gt;.,, ~~ .... c Oll: oz ~?ii m-\u0026lt;\nl:l..., -c: :o..l.:..In..Z.. I'\"\" l5 nz ~en ::e\n= m-,:, I'\"\"\nl:l gg ll:m me -c: ~~ ~~\nl:l ::l ~m Z:l:l Ot/\u0026gt; m-\nl:l . .m,, t/\u0026gt;O .C,,:\n.l.:..l :-\u0026lt; 111 O:l:l :::::im \u0026gt;n -\u0026lt;8 Oz ~3 0 z (/) ?.,,' \u0026gt; ~z m ~ :c '6 (/) n n :::. c. Nm r- z\nl:l(J) nn .... o \u0026gt;\nc\nc m .z.. . (J) Regular Board Meeting February 24, 2005 Page2 VI. SCHOOL SERVICES A. Naming of Facilities: Proposal to Name Football Field at Quigley Stadium VII. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES A. Grant Application: Minority Initiative - Tobacco Prevention Program B. First Reading: Revision of Policy JE - Student Enrollment, Attendance and Transfers VIII. CURRICULUM \u0026amp; INSTRUCTION A. First Reading: Revision to Policy IKF - General Education Graduation Requirements First Reading: Revision to Policy IAA - Professional Development and Review of Regulation IAA-R Review of Regulation ID-R - Student Schedules IX. HUMAN RESOURCES A. Personnel Changes X. BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A. Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Qualified Zone Academy Bond (QZAB) Agreement B. Employee Request to Conduct Business with The District C. Donations of Property D. Financial Report XI. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions XI I. ADJOURNMENT n\u0026gt; .,, F.... ~_ OE oz\n:o\u0026gt; ~~\n:o.., -\n:oCz: ,o... n.... ..... c5 nz j!: en ..... :E\n= m-,:, r-\n:o gg Emmo - C: ~~ ~r- 0~\n:o::1 ~m z\n:o n en m~ p n :::\n,:, ~ ,....z\n:o(/) n.... no \u0026gt; 3: 3: m z... . (/) I. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER/ ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS/ WELCOME/ PERFORMANCE Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. PARTNERSHIPS C. CITIZENS COMMENTS 0. LR CTA To: From: Through: Subject: Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 February 24, 2005 Board of Education Debbie Milam, Director, ViPS/Partners in Education ~ Roy G. Brooks, Superintendent of Schools Partners in Education Program: New partnerships The Little Rock School District Partners in Education program is designed to develop strong relationships between the community and our schools. The partnership process encourages businesses, community agencies and private organizations to join with individual schools to enhance and support educational programs. Each partnership utilizes the resources of both the school and the business for their mutual benefit. The following schools and businesses have completed the requirements necessary to establish a partnership and are actively working together to accomplish their objectives. We recommend that the Board approve the following partnerships: Alternative and Accelerated Learning Centers and Little Rock Job Corps Chicot Elementary and Popeye's Chicken and Biscuits Martin Luther King, Jr. Magnet Elementary and Cozymel's ?' 0 U) . ~ ctome 8=:i !!l~ CUI \"D~ Cz \u0026gt;31: m-\u0026lt;mz .... ~ 0 0 z ~\n:,:, m i3 ~ !T1 \u0026gt; C C =I 0\n:,:, (/)\n:,:, m c3 .\n:.,.:., !'\"' n :::j .c Nm ,- z\n:,:, (/) n_.no \u0026gt; 3: 3C m .z.. . (/) Job Corps and LRSD Partnership The Little Rock Job Corps and the LRSD ALC and ACC Programs will strengthen their partnership by: Job Corps will provide services that may include: Grounds upkeep at ALC, ALC Garland, and ACC Provide the man power to paint at ALC Apperson and ALC Garland Provide clerical assistance for the ALC Provide a Career Day at the ALC Through the Vocational Training Department - build cabinets and benches for the ALC andACC Little Rock School District will: Provide the academic component for Job Corps students who fall under the compulsory attendance guidelines as required by the State, and Provide Inservice for Job Corps Staff Members Partnership Proposal Popeyes Chicken \u0026amp; Biscuits--Baseline and Chicot Elementary Popeyes Chicken \u0026amp; Biscuits--Baseline commits to the following partnership activities:  Send readers on ViPS Reading Day  Provide coupons quarterly to be used for student incentives  Provide lunch for teachers twice per year  Provide teacher discount club cards for each staff member  Provide a free dinner to be used as a door prize for PTA meeting each nine weeks Chicot Elementary commits to the following partnership activities:  Provide artwork for display at restaurant  Provide a banner to hang at the restaurant  Acknowledge Popeyes Chicken \u0026amp; Biscuits--Baseline as a Partner in Education in school materials  Invite the restaurant employees to school events and volunteer recognition events !\" \u0026gt; C: C ~ 0\nc \"'\nc m c3 ~ 0 (\") :::. !='~ ,...z\nc\"' (\")(\") _.a \u0026gt;\nrr:: m .z.. . \"' 02/04/2005 15:28 50144751 01 Martin Luther King, Jr. Magnet Elementary School and Cozymel's Coastal Mexican Grill will enter into the following partnership agreement for the 2004-2005 school ye. King Magnet Elementary will: 1. send a monthly calendar of events. 2. invite employees to parent night meetings. 3. allow the business to use the multipurpose room for meetings. 4. provide art work to be used as special placemats. Cozymel's will: 1. help with standardiZed testing attendance by providing incentives. 2. provide menus and recipes for math dasses. 3. participate in VIPS Reading Day. 4. help with the annual staff luncheon. 5. set up at booth at Fall Fest for the Dining Dinero program. 6. provide coupons for Honors Assemblies. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: February 2005 Construction Report - Bond Projects BACKGROUND: The drawings and specifications for the remodeling of Rightsell Elementary School will be completed by March 1st . Review of these documents by the LRSD and governmental code enforcement authorities will occur for a period of two (2) or three (3) weeks after March 1st . The bidding process will begin the latter part of March, and the bids should be received in late April. Construction is scheduled to begin the week of June 6, which is the first week that there are no students in the building. The drawings and specifications for the classroom addition to Gibbs are nearing completion by the architect. This project will be bid soon. RATIONALE: Monthly reports are submitted to the Board to keep members up-to-date on construction projects in the District. FUNDING: Bond Funds RECOMMENDATION: Report item\nno action necessary. PREPARED BY: Bill Goodman, District Engineer r\" \u0026gt; C: C =l 0\n,:, (J)\n,:, m\n_ls ~ CONSTRUCTIONREPORTTOTHEBOARD FEBRUARY 24, 2005 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I t::st. (.\nompIetIon Date Central Renovation - Interior -- $10,200,266 Aug-05 ----Roof - -- - Fair Park $245,784 Mar-05 -- -- -- -- ~ - ---- Scott Field Track Renovations $289,056 Mar-05 --- -- -- Wilson HVAC for Cafeteria $56,000 Mar-05 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - WINTER/ SPRING 2004-05 Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date Carver Media Center Expansion $167,490 --- Aug-05 Gibbs Addition I $705,670 Feb-06 Meadowcliff I Remodel L $164,150 Aug-05 Oakhurst {Adult Education) l'kwWindows -- -- $215,000 Aug-0 Rightsell Renovation $2,494~000 - Aug-06 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I t::st. (.\nompIetIon Date Booker Electrical Upgrade -- - Unknown Unknown Unknown -- - C-hi-cot Electrical Upgrade Unknown --- - - - - Cloverdale Elementary_ _ A-dd-ition --- $520,750 Unknown Fair Park Remodel $799,000 Aug-05 -- --- Forest Heights - Remodel $1,547-.0oo - Unknown -- - --- - Unknown - Garland Remodel Unknown -- -- - -- ~ - -- Mitchell Renovation - $2,212,493 Unknow-n Pulaski Hgts. MS Energy monitoring system installation Unknown Unknown -- Western Hills Ele~ical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC $622,160 Aug-05 - Woodruff Parking addition $193,777 Unknown BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date Administration Asbes-tos aba-tem-ent -- $380,495 Mar-03 Administration - Fresh air system - $55,000 Aug-03 Administration Fire alarm $32,350 - Aug-03 Administration HVAC $70,000 Nov-04 Administration Annex Energy monitoring system installation May-02 Alternative Learning Ctr. Energy monitoring system installation - $15,160 Oct-01 Alternative Learning Ctr. Energy efficient lighting $82,000 Dec-01 Badgett Partial asbestos abatement - $237,237 Jul-01 - Badgett Fire alarm - - $18,250 - Aug-02 Bale Classroom addition/renovation - $2,244,524 Dec-02 Bale Energy monitoring system Mar-02 Bale Partial roof replacement $269,587 Dec-01 Bale HVAC $664,587 Aug-01 Baseline Renovation $953,520 Aug-04 Booker Gym Roof $48,525 Oct-04 Booker ADA Rest rooms $25,000 Aug-04 Booker Energy efficient lighting $170,295 Apr-01 Booker Energy monitoring system installation $23,710 Oct-01 Booker Asbestos abatement $10,900 Feb-02 Booker Fire alarm $34,501 Mar-02 Brady Addition/renovation $973,621 Nov-04 Brady Energy efficient lighting $80,593 Sep-02 Brady Asbestos abatement $345,072 Auci-02 Facility Name CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD FEBRUARY 24, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I I I Est. Completion Project Description Cost Date Carver Energy monitoring system installation $14,480 May-01 Carver Parking lot ~ 7 42r Aug-03 Central HVAC Renovation - Band Area , _ $225,000 Dec_:Q Central Reflecting Pond ' $57,561 Sep-04 rc=-e-n-tr-a-,1-----P =--a-r--k,--,-i-n---g-----~S-t-ud_e_n_t_p,'-a----rk-in_g__ I - $174,000 _ - Aug-03 Central/Quigley Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair 1 $265,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Athletic Field Improvement I $38,000 Aug-03 rc=-e-n-tr-a--1:-/--:-Q=--uci-g\"'-,l--e-~y-----~l-rr,ig--a-t-i,-o- n--=s--ys-t-em-'---- -- -- _l __ ___ f-14:soo Aug-03 Central Purchase land for school L_ Unknown Dec-0~ Central Roof \u0026amp; exterior renovations $2,000 ,000 Dec-02 Central Ceiling and wall repair --==----=:=- $24,000 Oct-01 Central I Fire Alarm System Design/Installation __ $80,876 Aug-0_!_ Central Front landing tile repair $22,470 Aug-01 Chicot Drainage -1--- $64,700 Aug-04 Chicot - Sound Attenuation __ I_ $43,1~ Jul-04 C- lo-ve-rd-a-le- El_em__ Energy efficient lighting $132,678 - Jul-01 i-,C,...1.-ov_e_r-da_l_e_M_Sc--------E-n_e_r_g,,.y efficient lighting -- $189,743 - Jul-01 -C-lo-verd-a-le_M_S__ Major renovation\u0026amp;addition - $1,393 ,822 Nov-02 Dodd Fire Alarm Upgrade __ -- $9,200 Oct-04 Dodd ___ ---~_E_n_erg,. y efficient lighting $90,6~ Aug-01 D_odd_ ________A sb_e_s_to_s_a_b_a_te_m--'e--n_t-ceiling tile ____ 1 _ $156,29~ Jul-01 Dodd Replace roof top HVAC $215,570 Aug-02 Dunbar Facilities Service Facility Services Fair Park Renovation/addition ___ $6,149,023 Nov-04 Interior renovation + $84,672-- Mar-01 Fire alarm ______ --- ----- $12,000 - Aug-03 ---HVAC renovation/fire alarm - - --- $315,956 Apr-02 Fair Park -- -- Energy efficient lighting ---- $90 ,1 62 Aug-01 F_air_P_a_rk_ ______ Asbestos abatement-ceiling ____ -- $59,310 Aug-01 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/music J. A. Fair ------room addition J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fa_ir --- J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair Forest Park Forest Park Forest Park Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Fulbright Franklin Geyer Springs Gibbs Gibbs Hall Hall Hall Hall Energy efficient lighting ,Press box Security cameras I -----I-- ~ etic Field -lm_p_r-ov_e_m_e-nt - Irrigation System -- Roof repairs Replace window units w/central HVAC Diagonal parking Energy efficient lighting Energy efficient lighting Energy monitoring system installation Replace roof top HVAC units Parking lot Roof repairs Renovation Roof Repair Energy efficient ligh ting Energy moni toring system installation Major renovation \u0026amp; addition Asbestos abatement Energy efficient lighting Energy efficient lighting $3,155 ,640 Aug-04 $277,594 Apr-01 $10,784 Nov-00 $12 ,500 Jun-01 $38~000 - - Jul-03 $14,000 Jul-03 -- $391 ,871 Aug-03 $485,258 Nov-03 $111 ,742 Aug-03 $119,788 May-01 $134,463 Jun-01 $11,950 Aug-01 $107,835 Aug-02 $1 40,000 Sep-02 S200,000 Oct-02 S2,511 ,736 Mar-03 S161 ,752 Jun-04 S76,447 Apr-01 S11,770. Jul-01 $8,637,709 Sep-03 S168,222 Aug-01 $42,931 Jul-01 $296,707 Apr-01 2\ni\u0026gt;s C, :-- ~ ~ -Z-:-I,:: ,..\nz: -0 Ch -om r\n,:, ~~ ---tm ~ Ch z rn \u0026gt; C: 0 =i 0\n,:, Ch\n,:, m ~\n-,-:-,, CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD FEBRUARY 24, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Project Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date Hall - ~rastructure improvements $93,657 Aug-01 - Hall  intercom --- Feb-01 Hall Security cameras $10,600 Jun-01 -- -- - Henderson -- - Lockers $43,854 Dec-04 -+ Energy efficient lighting -- - Henderson ---- - --- $193,6~ Jul-01 Henderson Roof replacement gym $107,835 May-01 Henderson --Asbestosabatement Phase_!_ - - -- - $500,000 Aug-01 Henderson Asbestos abatemen-t P-hase 2 $250,000 Aug-02 I-RC -- -- Energy efficient lighting $109,136 Jul-02 Jefferson 2sbestos abatement $43,639 Oct-01 - - - - - -+- Jefferson Renovation \u0026amp; fi-re -ala-rm - - $1,630,0Q_Q__, ----No-v-0-2 Laidlaw Parking lot $269,588 Jul-01 -- Fire Alarm Upgrade- - Mablevale Elem $12,000 Oct-04 - Energy monitoring system installation $12,150 -- Mabe-lvale Elem. - Aug-01 Mabelvale Elem. Replace HVAC units $300,000 Aug-02 --- - Asbestos Abatement -,- Mabe-lvale Elem. - $107,000 ' Aug-02 Mabelvale Elem. - Energy efficient lighting $106,598 Dec-02 + Mabelvale MS Renovate bleachers $134)93 Aug-01 ~enovation - +-- Mabelvale MS --- - - - $6,851,621 Mar-04 Mann Partial Replacement $'!1,500,000 __Ap r-04 - - - Mann Asphalt walks --- The total $1.8 million , Dec-01 Mann - -- Walkway canopies is what has been - Dec-01 Mann -- - --- Boiler replacement used so far on the - Oct-01 Mann Fencing projects listed Sep-01 ----,-Partial demolition/portable classrooms - Mann completed for Mann. Aug-01 McClellan Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Jul-03 -- - McClellan Irrigation System ____ ,_ $14,750 Jul-03 - - McClellan Security cameras $36,300 Jun-01 --- _,_ -- McClellan --- - Energy efficient lighting -- -- - $303,614 - - May-01 McClellan - -- Stadium stands~ pair -- $235,000 Aug-01 McClellan - Intercom - $46,000 Feb-02 $2,155,622 - McClellan Classroom Addition Jul-04 McDermott Fire Alarm Upgrade - $7,700 ~ep-04 McDermott Energy efficient lighting $79,41-1~ Feb-01 McDermott Replace roof top HVAC units - $476,000 Aug-02 - Meadowcliff Fire alarm - $16,175 Jul-01 Meadowcliff Asbestos abatement - - $253,412 Aug-02 Meadowcliff Engergy efficient lighting $88,297 - Dec-02 Metropolitan Replace cooling tower $37,203 Dec-DO Metropolitan Replace shop vent system $20,000 May-01 Metropolitan Energy monitoring system installation $17,145 Aug-01 Mitchell Building Remediation $165,000 Jul-04 Mitchell Energy efficient lighting $103,642 Apr-01 Mitchell Energy monitoring system installation S16,695 Jul-01 Mitchell Asbestos abatement S13,000 Jul-01 Oakhurst HVAC renovation S237,237 Aug-01 Otter Creek Energy monitoring system installation S10,695 May-01 Otter Creek Energy efficient lighting S81,828 Apr-01 Otter Creek Asbestos abatement $10,000 Aug-02 Otter Creek Parking lot $138,029 Aug-02 Otter Creek 6 classroom addition $888,778 Oct-02 Otter Creek Parkinq Improvements $142,541 Aug-03 3 CONSTRUCTIONREPORTTOTHEBOARD FEBRUARY 24, 2005 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I I I Est. Completion Project Description Cost Date Parkview Addition __ _ $2,121--_26 _ Dec-04 Parkview HVAC controls $210,000 Jun-02 Parkview I Roof replacement $273,877-- Sep-01 Exterior lights $10,784 Nov-00 HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700area controls Parkview Parkview Parkview $301,938 Aug-OJ_ Locker replacement __ _ $120,000--:-- ~t1l-01 Parkview Procurement Energy efficient lighting $315,000 Jun-01 I Energy monitoring systerninstallation I $5,290 Jun-02 Procurement I Fire alarm -- $25,000 1 - Aug-03 Pulaski Hgts. Elem Renovation -----$1, 193,259 Nov-04 t-::P:-u-,l-a-s-,k--i -H=gt_s_. -E-le_m_ ___ ___.lM~_o_v_e_p_la_y_g_ro_u_n_d____ - - $17,000 - Dec-02 Pulaski Hgts. MS 1Renovation - - ~ $3,755,041 - Nov-04 --- Rightsell Energy efficient lighti_n,ge___ ------~ - $84,89~ ~r-01 R:-o_c,.k...e_f:e--l,l-e_r_ ______- -=E_n_e.r...g,,=y_e_ff_ic_ie_n_t_li_,,,_ght_in__g,,,__ _ $137,004 _ Mar-01 Rockefeller ______R_ e_p,__la_ce_ro_o_f_to___p,__H_V_A_C____ _ _ $53~75 ~ ~g-01 Rockefeller Parking addition $111,742 Aug-02 R_o_m_in_e_ _______ __._Al__sb_estos abatement -- -=-_-=-_--=-_ $10,000 l-- - Apr-02 1--::,R-o_m_i.n.,..e--=--=------..M,.._a_,_oj_r_r_en_o_v_a_ti_on _\u0026amp;_a_d_d_it_io_n_ __ $3,534,675 Mar-03 SecurityfTransportation Bus cameras $22,500 - Jun-01 1-:S:-0-u-th_w_,e_s_t _~-----'-A_d_d-iti_on ______ -- ~- $2,000,000 -,-- ~v-04 Southwest Southwest - \\Asbestos abatement New roof Southwest Energy efficient lighting Southwest -- _ Drainage / street widen~ Student Assignment Energy monitoring system installation Student Assignment - - 'Fire alarm Tech Center Phase 1 -- Renovation -- -- Tech Ctr I Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II Technology Upgrade upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data _ Terry Energy efficient lighting Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking T er.!}'_ - Media Center addition Wakefield Rebuild Wakefield - _ - -=--= Securit_y_c_a_m_e-ra_s ____ _ Wakefield _ _ Energy efficient lighting Wakefield Demolition/Asbestos Abatement Washington Washington Washington Watson Watson Watson Watson Watson Western Hills Western Hills Western Hills Western Hills Western Hills Williams Williams Williams Wilson Wilson Woodruff -Fire Alarm Upgrade Security earner~ Energy efficientlighting Energy monitoring system installation Asbestos abatement Energy efficient lighting Asbestos abatement Major renovation \u0026amp; addition Fire Alarm Upgrade ADA Rest rooms Asbestos abatement Intercom Energy efficient lighting Renovation Parking expansions Energy efficient lighting Renovation/expansion Parking Expansion Renovation $28, 138 -- _ ~g-00 $690,000 _ _ _Qct-03 $168,719 _ Jan-02 $250,000 Aug-03 $4,830 Aug-02 $9,000 Aug-03 $275,000 Dec-01 $3,679,000 Jun-04 Nov-02 - $73,850 Feb-01 ~ $83,484 ~ug-02 $704,932 Sep-02 - $5,300,000 - Dec-04 $8,000 Jun-01 - $74,776 Feb-01 - - $200,000 Nov-02 - $11,600 Oct-04 $7,900 Jun-01 $165,281 Apr-01 $8,530 Jul-01 $182,241 Aug-01 $106,868 Aug-01 $10,000 Aug-02 $800,000 Aug-02 $8,400 Oct-04 525,000 Aug-04 $191,946 Aug-02 $7,100. Dec-01 $106,000 Jul-01 $2,106,492 Mar-04 $183,717 Dec-03 $122,719 Jun-01 $1,263,876 Feb-04 $110,000 Aug-03 $246,419 Aug-02 4\ni,,s Cl,- ~ ~ .Z...! -I: \u0026gt;\nz: -,:,u, -,:,m ,... ::0 c\u0026gt;'inS -tm iz: 5\"' rn \u0026gt; C: C =I 0 ::0 en ::0 .m,, 0 ~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Board Auditor Report BACKGROUND: Monthly report to School Board. RATIONALE: Summary report of activities. FUNDING: No changes. RECOMMENDATION: None. PREPARED BY: andy Becker Date: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS February 24, 2005 To: Board of Directors @ From: Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Re: Audit Report - February This is the sixty-fourth communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with one high school, one middle schools and three elementary schools to resolve financial issues in their activity funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. b) The AAB has forwarded a Booster Club Guidelines Package to be included in official publications of the District after review. Board Policy and Regulation a) Pro Cards are in place for most sites of the District. Local purchase orders (paper vouchers) have been replaced by Pro Cards. Pro Cards have been basically limited to operational fund purchases. A process is being developed to use the Pro Cards for travel, activity fund expenditures, and for grant expenditures where appropriate. With each added area Pro Cards are used in, guidelines must be developed or modified to reflect the proper use and documentation for the cards. Technology Training a) Monitoring technology plans and technology meetings to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. b) Facilitating technology upgrade in cooperation with the English Department for Yearbook and 1ewspaper production staff in LRSD high schools to improve access to tools needed for students and staff. a) Served as a trainer for finai~cial portion of uts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. Audit Report - February 2005 Page 2 of2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) a) b) c) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring combined payroll and human resources issues for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Reviewing Teacher School Supply Fund Records for recommendations. Assisting in travel regulation modifications for submission to the Board. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Served as District coordinator of United Way's Day of Caring (April 17, 2004) and on planning committee for 2005. Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need fu1iher infom1ation. My telephone number is 501-44 7-11 I 5. 1y e-mail is sandy.bcckcr@lrsd.org. ?-s Cl,- ~ ~ .z..\n.\nr-:: .\u0026gt;.,\nz\":' -.,m ,...\no oS \u0026gt;n -\u0026lt;m cz5 \"' ?J .., ~ ,0.. .\n-o nr\n: -\u0026lt; 0 \u0026lt;-.- mZ Cl DATE: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Technology Report BACKGROUND: Since the last Board meeting the following technology activities took place:  Training for both teachers and parents at Parkview in using Edline has occurred since the last report. Edline is the product that provides web access to student grades, attendance and other activities. The other high schools will be brought up as soon as we have fully assessed the Parkview implementation.  E-rate activities this month include an audit visit for the circuits supplied by DIS, reimbursement filings for 2003-2004 school year, program questions about the 2005-2006 applications that have been filed, and preparations for the final filings for 2005-2006 school year. We still have no word on any of our applications for the 2004-2005 school year. RATIONALE: To implement the LRSD Technology Plan 2003 - 2006 FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board accept this report. PREPARED BY: Lucy Neal, Director, Technology and Media Services John Ruffins, Director, Computer Information Services ~ M 0 ~ ,-:x, or\n',: -\u0026lt;o c...- mZ G'l '!\"'\u0026lt; ~= o  rn !5~ m:x, CJ\u0026gt;\"\"(') C :x,r me G'l3: C po r\n- __,z 0~ z  CJ\u0026gt; LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Naming of Facilities: Proposal to Name Football Field at Quigley Stadium BACKGROUND: Parents, students, and supporters of the Central High School football program have submitted a request for the Board to consider renaming the athletic field Quigley Stadium in honor of Coach Bernie Cox. Coach Cox has been at Central High School since 1972 and has been head football coach since 1975. He has won seven state championships and his win-loss record makes him the \"winningest\" coach in Central's long history, with a 250 wins, 93 losses, and 8 ties. RATIONALE: In accordance with Board Policy FF: Naming of Facilities, this request is submitted for your review. FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: The administration requests approval to name the football field at Quigley Stadium in honor of Coach Bernie Cox. PREPARED BY: Nancy Rousseau, Principal Marian Lacey, Associate Superintendent \u0026gt;?\u0026lt;  a,\nJ:J C: men is z ,-m C:\"' l\"~5\"\"'\"\n'' ~~ a,\"' .,.\u0026lt; -0 = o,-  (\") Q~ m\n,:, cn-pog\nJ:J ,m c: C'l lC C: po !j\n:- .... z 0~ z  \"' NAMING AND RENAMING FACILITIES I propose that the field in Earl Quigley Stadium, c/o Little Rock Central High School, 1500 S. Park, be named for Bernie Cox. I. Biographical Data: Bernie Cox is a native Arkansan. Coach Cox graduated from Harding University in 1965. He was a lettennan for the Harding Bison football team from 1962 - 1965. His tenure at Little Rock Central High School began in 1972 when he served as an assistant football coach under Joe Fred Young. Coach Cox became the Head Football Coach at Central High in 1975 and he holds that position today. Coach Cox has been married to Myrene since 1966\nthey have two children and four grandchildren. II. The Nominee's Significant Contribution Is: Coach Cox's accomplishments as a head football coach at Central are legendary. Coach Cox's teams at Central have won seven state championships and compiled a winloss record of 250 wins, 93 losses and 8 ties . That record makes him the winningest Coach in Central history. A number of his players have gone on to play collegiate and professional sports. More importantly, Coach Cox has been a shining example and role model for his players, fellow coaches, teachers and parents. A man of high moral character, he has been a great teacher of life's lessons to his players. Former players routinely state their gratitude for the impact Coach Cox had upon their lives. Parents of his players see firsthand this impact upon their sons. III. I Believe The Facility Should Be Named For This Person Because: The field should be named Bernie Cox Field to honor a person who has exemplified what the Little Rock School District needs and wants in its teachers and to remind those who come behind us of the accomplishments and contributions of this dedicated public servant. Such a reminder will serve as an inspiration for years to come. The field would be referred lo as Cox Field at Quigley Stadium in a way much like John Wooden Court at Pauley Pavilion honors a great basketball coach at UCLA. ~ 1(,(/l{J? l (Signature) Kevin and Cathy Crass Jim and Judy Irwin Cliff and Judy Henry '(Dale) DATE: February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Grant Application: Minority Initiative Tobacco Prevention Program Background: The Arkansas Department of Health has issued a Request for Proposals for Communitybased tobacco prevention initiatives that target the minority community. The focus of our proposal is to reduce youth access to tobacco through education and youth development activities\nto implement a broad-based education/awareness campaign in the midtown area to reduce the detrimental health effects of tobacco on residents and pursue public policy strategies that protect children, youth and the public from exposure to tobacco smoke. The Little Rock School District has received tobacco prevention grant funds for the last two years from the Minority Grant Initiative. This is a grant renewal proposal for year three. Goals \u0026amp; Objectives: 1. To reduce the initiation of tobacco use among children and youth. 2. To implement school and community-based education and awareness campaigns that promote smoking cessation and adoption of healthy, smoke free lifestyles. 3. To reduce the suspension rate for smoking related offenses in LRSD schools. 4. To reduce absenteeism of children and youth due to exposure to environmental tobacco smoke in the home and automobiles. Rationale: Published research has documented a strong negative relationsh ip between children's exposure to tobacco smoke and their performance on tests measuring reading, math and reasoning skills. These facts add to the long list of harmful health related conditions caused by tobacco that negatively impact school attendance and the well being of our students. \"C ~ 0 ~ r\nn n- m\u0026gt; -\u0026lt;o c....mZ G) .,.\u0026lt; ,o:, = rn Q~ m\nn (/) - po g\nn ,m c G) 3: C po r\n- _,z 5~ z (/) Funding: Grant Budget: $100,000.00 - No match required. Recommendation: It is recommended that the board approve the submission of this grant application. Prepared By: Junious Babbs, Assoc. Superintendent-Administrative Services Jo Evelyn Elston, Director - Pupil Services Department LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: First Reading: Revision of Policy JE - Student Enrollment, Attendance, and Transfers BACKGROUND: Expanded language in Arkansas State Statutes for school enrollment, birth documentation and transfers has been recommended by the State Standards Monitoring Team. RATIONALE: Arkansas Department of Education compliance. FUNDING: No funding is required. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the board adopt revised Policy JE - Student Enrollment, Attendance, and Transfers PREPARED BY: Junious Babbs, Associate Superintendent for Administrative Services !D m .3.,: 5 m-\u0026lt; m\n,\n, m 0 C: m !!l p 0 0 z ~ 6 z en ?\u0026gt; \u0026lt; ,,:: o  rn !2 ~ m:,:, en - QO g\n,\n,r m c: G) 3: C: QO _-,z 6~ z  en LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: JE STUDENT ENROLLMENT, ATTENDANCE, and TRANSFERS The Little Rock School District is open and free to any child five (5) through twenty-one (21) years who resides within the District and has not graduated from high school. Children who attain the age of five (5) on or before September 15th of a given year will be eligible to attend kindergarten during that school year. School attendance is required until a student's eighteenth (18th ) birthday. All students are required to maintain a level of attendance that will enable them to discharge their responsibility as learners and will enable the school to meet its obligations to the students. Parents/guardians seeking enrollment of a child in the District will provide the following:  Certified copy of birth certificate, visa/passport or military I.D. card, and /or other documentation as provided by law (A.C.A. 6-18-208)  Proof of address (lease agreement, current utility bill, or personal property tax bill)  The child's immunization record  Social security number or request that the District assign an alternate nine-digit number  Expulsion records if applicable Any student transferring from a school accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) to another school accredited by the ADE will be placed into the same grade the student would have been in had the student remained at the former school. Any student transferring from home school or a school that is not accredited by the ADE to a school that is accredited by the ADE will be evaluated by the staff of that accredited school to determine that student's proper placement in the accredited school. All transfer students must meet the graduation requirements of the Little Rock School District in order to receive a diploma. The LRSD high schools will accept transfer credits, grades and grade placement for students who previously attended Arkansas high schools that are accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education. Students transferring from out-of-state schools or from Arkansas schools that are not accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education will be assessed by the school staff to determine appropriate grade placement and course credit. Multiple criteria, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: JE (continued) including the following as appropriate, will be used for decision-making in determining grade placement and credit: 1. Any performance data presented by the sending school and/or parents, such as portfolios of work, project samples, etc. 2. Indicators of achievement such as report cards, reports from participation in virtual schools, correspondence course reports, and dual-enrollment college reports. 3. Results of norm-referenced tests. 4. Results of criterion-referenced tests that are part of the sending state's NCLB accountability plan. 5. Results of assessments administered by the sending school staff, such as local criterion-referenced tests in language arts, mathematics, science, and social studies: tests available through educational software programs used by the school, etc. 6. Results of \"credit-by-examinations\" in the core subject areas administered by LRSD. 7. Information gained from oral interviews with the students or performance tasks administered by LRSD staff. Students who transfer into a Little Rock School District high school from a home school or an unaccredited high school must attend at least two (2) semesters in order to receive a high school diploma (see IKED and IKED-R) and must attend at least four semesters to be eligible for rank-in-class (see IKC-R). Foreign Exchange students who complete the senior year in good standing may, at the discretion of the principal, participate in the graduation ceremony. Revised: Revised: May 23, 2002 Adopted: May 25, 2000 Legal References: A.C.A. 6-18-201(a), A.C.A. 6-18-202, A.C.A. 6-18-207(a) Cross References: Board of Education Policy and Regulations JLCB, IKF, IKED, IKED-R, IKC-R and the LRSD Student Handbook 2 \u0026gt; ?\u0026lt;  a,\no C: men !S z ,....m c: en \"\"'en \u0026lt;5 en ~~ ~~ a, en ?\" m .i.i,: 5 m-\u0026lt; m\no m 0 C: m !!l 0 0 0 z ~ 5 z en ?\u0026gt; \u0026lt; -0 = o  r-C\"l ~~ m\no en - QO g\narm c: G')3:: rC\n:\n:\"-\" ..... z 5z ~ en DATE: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: First Reading: Policy Revisions: IKF - General Education Graduation Requirements\nIAA - Professional Development Regulation Review: IAA-R Professional Development\nID-R - Student Schedules BACKGROUND: The Board of Education policies IKF - General Education Graduation Requirements and IAA - Professional Development require slight revisions in order to ensure compliance with Arkansas state statutes and Arkansas Department of Education Standards for Accreditation. Revisions to regulations IAA-R Professional Development and ID-R Student Schedules are required for compliance. RATIONALE: Little Rock School District Board of Education policies and regulations will be updated to ensure all are current, clear and compliant. FUNDING: None required. RECOMMENDATION: Board adoption is recommended for policies IKF - General Education Graduation Requirements and IAA - Professional Development. Board review is recommended for regulations IAA-R and ID-R. PREPARED BY: Dr. Olivine Roberts, Associate Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction  ?\u0026lt;  tD\n:cc mu, igz ,-m Cu, .... u, ~u, ~~ ~~ tD u, !D m .:I.:,: 5 m-\u0026lt; m\n:c m 0 C m !!l r\u0026gt; g z .\u0026gt;... 5z u, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF GENERAL EDUCATION GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS The Little Rock School District Board of Education believes that students should graduate from high school possessing the skills, knowledge, and attitudes needed for responsible citizenship, life-long learning, and productive employment in our modern economy. Programs for post-secondary preparation will be available to equip students for the advanced training that will be needed for the work of the 21 st century. The Little Rock School District will be responsible for providing the educational opportunities and experiences that will enable our students to take full advantage of post-secondary education and employment opportunities available to them after graduation. The District shares with the state of Arkansas the commitment to ensure all students have access to a rigorous curriculum. The District' general graduation requirements meet and exceed the State's adopted Smart Core or Common Core curriculum. Diploma-Earning Options A student may earn a diploma from a Little Rock School District high school in one of four ways. Each has different requirements and different numbers of required units of credit. 1. Diploma from any of the five high schools for completion of tho required 24 units for tho classes of 2002 and 2003\nor the required 26 units for the class of 2004 and after. 2. Diploma from any of the five high schools for completion of the Little Rock Scholars curriculum of 27 units for tho class of 2003\nor 28 units, including at least eight PreAdvanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses, for the class of 2004 and after. Hall High School students may take University Studies courses as substitutes for Pre-Advanced Placement and/or Advanced Placement courses. 3. Diploma earned at the Accelerated Learning Center for completion of the 21 units required by the State of Arkansas. 4. Diploma with waived or altered requirements established by an Individual Education Program (IEP) team for a student identified with disabilities. Even though the graduation requirements may be changed by the Board of Education during the time a student is enrolled in high school, the requirements established for a student's graduation class (assuming graduation in four years of high school) are those he/she must meet, even though he/she may require more than four years to earn the necessary number of units. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) Units of credit will generally be earned in grades nine through twelve, except that one unit of Algebra I (or higher-level mathematics) and Level I (or higher level) of foreign language may be earned in grade eight. High school courses taken before grade eight will not satisfy a unit of credit toward graduation. (See policy IKEC for list of creditearning options.) Transfer Students All transfer students must meet the graduation requirements of the Little Rock School District in order to receive a diploma. The LRSD high schools will accept transfer credits, grades and grade placement for students who previously attended Arkansas high schools that are accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education (see JE for additional information). Students who transfer into a Little Rock School District high school from a home school or an unaccredited high school must attend at least two semesters in order to receive a high school diploma (see IKED and IKED-R) and must attend at least four semesters to be eligible for rank-in-class (see IKC-R). Foreign Exchange students who complete the senior year in good standing may, at the discretion of the principal, participate in the graduation ceremony. Senior-Year Enrollment Requirements Students participating in dual-credit courses with local colleges/universities during their senior year must be enrolled in high school courses at least half time for their senior year (four units of credit) or full-time during the fall semester in order to receive a diploma from a Little Rock School District high school. This enrollment standard is required regardless of how many credits a student may need to satisfy graduation requirements. (See IKEC-R1 for regulations governing dual-credit enrollments.) Magnet Program Seal Students who participate in the District's high school magnet programs may meet the magnet curriculum requirements through completion of the designated Career Focus courses established for each magnet. In order to receive a Magnet Seal, magnet students must complete fill the requirements of the magnet program. Students transferring into a magnet program after the freshman year may earn a diploma from that high school, but they will not earn the Magnet Seal. ADE Seal In order to receive the ADE Seal, students must complete the state's recommended core curriculum with a minimum grade point average of 2.75 ( see Standards for Accreditation 14.01 and 14.02). 2 \u0026gt;?\u0026lt;  a,\n,:, C me,, ig z ,-m c\"' -\"' 1z5!!\"J' -~ ~m a,\"' ~ m ii: \"ti 5 -m\u0026lt; m\n,:, m D C m !!l r, 0 0 z ~ 0z \"' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT (continued) Arkansas Scholars Seal NEPN CODE: IKF Arkansas Scholars, a program of the Arkansas business \u0026amp; Education Alliance, is a partnership between the District and the Little Rock Chamber of Commerce's Education Committee. Many local businesses have agreed to recognize the achievement of Arkansas Scholars status as a symbol of high quality education. A special Arkansas Scholars seal will be affixed to the diploma and transcript of a student who meets the following standards established by the Arkansas Scholars program: 1. Earn a grade of \"C\" or above in all courses. 2. Achieve a 95 percent or better attendance record for each of the four years of high school. 3. Complete high school in eight consecutive semesters. 4. Complete successfully at least three units in science, three units in mathematics, three units of social studies, and four units in English. Honors Diploma Seal A special Honors Seal will be affixed to the diploma and transcript of a student who meets the following standards: 1. Completes the units required for the Little Rock Scholars curriculum, which includes and goes beyond the requirements of the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board for unconditional admission to any public two-year or fouryear institution of higher education in Arkansas and which includes, but goes beyond, the requirements for eligibility for the Arkansas Challenge Scholarship. The Little Rock Scholars curriculum also reflects the admission requirements of the most competitive universities in the United States of America. 2. Successfully completes a minimum of eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses over a four-year period. Hall High School students may take University Studies courses as substitutes for Pre-Advanced Placement and/or Advanced Placement courses. Other approved dual-credit courses offered to LRSD students in collaboration with area colleges/ universities may also be substituted for the Pre-AP or AP requirement. 3. Earns a grade-point-average of at least 3.5. Students designated for valedictory or salutatory recognition must have completed the Little Rock Scholars curriculum. Recognition of Graduates Each high school may design its own traditions to commend and celebrate the achievements of the following sets of graduates: 1. The valedictorian and salutatorian\n2. Students earning an overall average of 3.5 or above\n3 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) 3. Students earning Magnet Program, Arkansas Scholars, Little Rock Scholars, and/or Honors Diploma Seals\n4. Members of the National Honor Society or similar honors organization\n5. Scholarship recipients\n6. Students with perfect attendance throughout high school\nand 7. Students whose other achievements are worthy of special recognition. Participation in Graduation Ceremony In order to be a participant in the graduation ceremony, the student must be within one unit of completing the graduation requirements and must have paid the tuition for the one-half or one unit to be taken in summer school (or, alternately, in another approved credit-earning program). All high school students and their parents will be informed in writing of this expectation when course lists and graduation requirements are published for the spring registration process. Principals will make a determination of potential graduates at the end of the junior year and each quarter of the students' senior year and inform students and their parents immediately if it is determined that the student is in danger of not graduating. Such students will be advised of all the appropriate credit-earning options, including, but not limited to, evening high school, summer school, correspondence courses, online courses, credit-by-examination, and placement at the Accelerated Learning Center. Award of Diploma The award of the high school diploma will not be made until all graduation requirements are met. Specific Course Requirements The following table specifies the required courses for graduation for each curriculum area. Revised: Revised : January 22 , 2004 Adopted: July 22, 1999 Legal References: A.C.A. 6-15-1101 , Standards of Accreditation 9.03, 14.01 , 14.02 Cross References: Board of Education Policies and Regulations IKED, JE, IKED-R, IKC-R, and IKEC-R1 , and the LRSD Student Handbook 4 )\u0026gt; ?\u0026lt;  Ill\n:oc:: mu, ~z ,- m .c..:.,:c\"n' oz!\"!J' '\u0026lt; ~~ Ill U\u0026gt; ~ m 31: \"C 5 m-\u0026lt; m\n:o m 0 c:: m !!l 0 0 0 z )\u0026gt; ..... 0 z V, \"TI z )\u0026gt; z (\"') \u0026gt;,- \"' High School Graduation Requirements Little Rock School District Required, Classes of 2004 and After Required, ACC Students English-4 units English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Enolish IV (ESL, Reoular, or AP). Oral Communications-1/2 unit Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications IA (1/2 unit) Communications IA--one-half unit English Language Arts-1/2 unit One-half unit from any English, Journalism, or Communications course. Modern Grammar (1/2) is stronqly recommended. Mathematics--3 units Mathematics-3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or Statistics Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP) will no longer Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) substitute for Algebra II for the Class of 2007. Effective for the Class of 2007, four (4) units of mathematics are required in grades 9-12. All students must take a mathematics course in arade 11 or 12 and comolete Aloebra II. Science--3 units Science-3 units Physics I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Physical Science or Physics I\nand Biology I\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One additional unit Chemistry I (ESL, Reqular, or Pre-AP) Social Studies--3 units Social Studies-3 units Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Government (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Government (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, Reqular, or AP) United States History (ESL, Reoular, or AP) Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education IA Physical Education IA Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety Health and Safety Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1/2 unit One unit from art, dance, drama, or music Technology--1 unit None One unit from any of the approved technology courses. Career Focus-3 units Career Focus-3 units I Al least three units from any of the approved Career Three units from any of the approved Career Focus programs. Focus oroqrams. 5 High School Graduation Requirements Little Rock School District (continued) Electives-6 units (5 units, effective for Class of Electives-3 units 2007) A fourth year of both science and social studies is encouraged, as are at least two units of foreign lanauaae. Total-26 units Total-21 units Although not required to do so, students graduating in 2004 through 2006 are encouraged to complete the requirements for the Class of 2007, especially the four units of mathematics in grades 9-12. 6  ?\u0026lt;  Cl) ::o:,c m\"' igz ,-m c\"' -\u0026lt; \"' c5 \"' ~~ ~m t11\"' !XI m .3.1,: 5 -m\u0026lt; m ::0:, m 0 C m !!l 0 8 z \u0026gt; -\u0026lt; 5 z \"' .., z \u0026gt; z (\") ~ \"' Little Rock Scholars Curriculum The Board of Education recommends that students elect the challenge of a more rigorous graduation plan than the minimum requirements, including at least eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses (or University Studies courses at Hall High or approved dual-credit courses). Little Rock Scholars, Class of 2004 and After English--4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand Enalish IV (ESL, Reaular, or AP). Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications IA English Language Arts-1/2 unit Anv one-half unit from Enalish, Communications, or Journalism. Modern Grammar is stronolv encouraoed. Mathematics--4 units (in grades 9-12, class of 20071 Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One or more additional units of advanced mathematics for the completion of four units in grades 9-12. Science--4 units Active Physics (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One additional unit Social Studies--4 units Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand One additional unit Foreign Language-2 units Two units of anv one foreion lanouaoe Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education IA Health and Safety--1/2 unit Health and Safetv Fine Arts-1 unit One unit from art, dance, drama, or music Technology-1 unit* One unit from anv of the approved technoloov courses. Career Focus-3 units* Three units from anv of the approved Career Focus programs. Electives-3 units Total-28 units *Students graduating an 2004 through 2006 are encouraged to take four units of mathematics an grades 9-12, although they are not required to do so since their plan only specified three units of mathematics. If they do choose to take the Class of 2007 plan, they may also reduce the requirements in Technology and Career Focus and have three electives instead of one. 7 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The Board of Education is committed to providing the best possible educational opportunities for all students in the District. The Board will, therefore, commit the necessary time and other resources to a comprehensive professional development program that will be driven primarily by student performance data and result in improved educational achievement and equity of outcomes for all students. The Board recognizes that the key to a quality professional development program is the establishment of an environment that facilitates and nurtures customer service, continuous learning, data-driven decisions, and continuous improvement at every level of the District. By definition a learning community member assumes responsibility for his or her own growth. The District, however, has the responsibility to encourage, facilitate, and provide a full range of learning opportunities, including job-embedded learning, study groups and seminars, workshops, informational or awareness sessions, in-depth study, access to resources and distance learning, in-classroom coaching and follow-up, tuition reimbursement for university courses, conference attendance, participation on various committees, and so forth. Required Professional Development As per State Board of Education regulations, all certified employees of the District will complete a minimum of sixty (60) required approved hours of professional development annually. The professional development calendar begins July 1 and ends June 30. Any excess professional development hours earned in a given year cannot be carried over to the next school year. An employee who misses any part of regularly scheduled professional development activities for any reason (such as sickness) must make up that time in other professional development activities so that the sixty (60) required hours are earned by each certified employee of the District prior to June 30. Approved professional development activities must relate to one or more of the following areas: content (Pre K - 12)\ninstructional strategies\nassessment\nadvocacy/ leadership\nsystemic change process\nstandards, frameworks, and curriculum alignment\nsupervision\nmentoring/coaching\ninstructional technology\nprinciples of learning/developmental stages\ncognitive research\nand build ing a collaborative learning community.  At least six (6) of the sixty (60) hours of required professional development will be in the area of educational technology. At least two (2) hours for teachers and  ?\u0026lt;  tD\n:oc mtJJ igz ,-m ctJ\u0026gt; -,\u0026lt;JI c5 (JJ ~~ ~m tD (JJ !D m :I: \"'t\u0026gt;  m m\n:o m 0 C m !!l !\"' 0 0 z ~ 0 z (JI LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA (continued) three (3) hours for administrators will be in the area of parent involvement strategies.  Approved professional development activities that occur during the instructional day or outside the employee's annual contract days may apply toward the sixty (60) hour minimum professional development requirement.  For each administrator, the sixty (60)-hour professional development requirement will include training in data disaggregation, instructional leadership and fiscal management  A three-hour graduate-level, college credit course will count as twelve (12) hours of professional development. Professional development will be awarded only when the college credit is related to a teacher's current teaching assignment or is part of the requirements for the teacher to obtain additional certification in a subject matter that has been designated by the ADE as having critical shortage of teachers. No more than half of the required sixty (60) hours of professional development time may be met through college credit hours An effective professional development program which results in improved student learning includes, but is not limited to, the following characteristics:  has adequate financial resources, space, and time to facilitate effectiveness\n is designed in collaboration with potential participants\n is primarily driven by needs identified through the analysis of student performance data and needs identified in the school improvement plans\n includes performance evaluations of staff both to enhance strong performance and to address weaknesses\n is designed to reflect research-based best practice, to be subject-specific and site-specific as often as possible, and to align with the professional development standards established by the National Staff Development Council\n2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA (continued)  incorporates the requirements of the State Board of Education relative to professional development activities for certified staff\n is evaluated annually for its impact on student learning. Definitions: Advocacy/leadership means building the capacity for shared visions and system improvement in order to improve student learning. Assessment means measuring and judging student performance and achievement relative to the learning standards. Building a collaborative learning community means understanding community, sensitivity, diversity, and effective communication of high expectations. Cognitive research means research about learning and application to practice. Content (PreK-12) means increasing knowledge in a discipline or domain. Educational technology means the use of any technology to enhance instruction, learning and management. Instructional strategies mean techniques or methods for teaching students. Mentoring/coaching means increasing capacity for coaching and mentoring others to assist in growth of instructional skills and effectiveness of colleagues. Principles of learning/development stages means understanding and applying knowledge about how humans learn from birth through adulthood in order to maximize achievement. Professional development means a coordinated set of planned learning activities for teachers and administrators which are standards-based and continuous. Professional development will result in individual, school-wide, and system-wide improvement designed to insure that all students demonstrate proficiency on the state academic standards. Approved professional development will be linked to the local school's improvement plan, demonstrate research-based best practice, and be subject-specific and site-specific as often as possible. 3 !J' m .31.:,: 5 m-\u0026lt; m :,0 m 0 C: m !!l ~ g z .).\u0026gt;. i5 z V, .,., z )\u0026gt; z (\") ,\u0026gt;- v, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA (continued) Standards, frameworks, and curriculum alignment means defining what students should know and be able to do at acceptable performance levels and organizing curriculum and instruction to bring about desired learning results. Supervision means gaining knowledge and skills in instructional management in order to improve the quality of staff members and staff performance. Systemic change process means understanding changes across an entire system such as culture, governance, community, roles, rules, responsibility, etc., to improve the education results and increase student achievement. Revised: Adopted: February 22, 2001 Legal References: A.C.A. 6-17-701 through A.C.A. 6-17-703 A.C.A. 6-15-1001 through AC.A. 6-15-1006 Act 603 of 2003 Standards for Accreditation 15.04, 15.04.1, 15.04.2 Cross References: Arkansas Department of Education Regulations Governing Professional Development and the LRSD Strategic Plan 4 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA-R PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT Required Professional Development Hours Workshops (provided by the LRSD) and conferences (professional leave) conducted during the contract day will count towards the sixty (60) required professional development hours as long as they meet the focus areas for professional development required by the Arkansas Department of Education. A minimum of five days devoted to professional development activities will be included in the District's annual calendar for staff. Participants in District-sponsored professional development workshops will have their hours recorded if they sign in at each session and remain in the session for the designated time. Staff members who do not attend the full sessions designated on the District calendar for professional development must make up the time in order to earn the required 60 hours mandated by the Arkansas Department of Education. Principals of individual schools are charged with the development of procedures to account for full attendance at all sessions. Approval of professional development hours will be based on the requirements within the ACT AAP State Rules, Board priorities, student achievement data, growth plan resulting from the Professional Teachers Appraisal System (PTAS), and the local school's improvement plan. The participant is responsible for obtaining and submitting the necessary documentation of professional leave hours to the Professional Development Department for recording purposes. Professional Development Information Website http://profdev.lrsd .org Employees may access the District's professional development information website for information related to upcoming professional development opportunities, the LRSD professional development calendar, salary data, degree information, transcript information, and individual employee professional development records beginning with the 2001-2002 school year. NCLB Professional Development Paraprofessional Requirements According to NCLB requirements, all Paraprofessionals must complete a minimum of six hours of professional development on an annual basis. In some cases the job assignment may require additional professional development hours to comply with federal regulations. The District will provide the professional development sessions for Paraprofessionals. \u0026gt;?\u0026lt;  ID\n:o C: mu, !S z ,- m C: u, .... u, ~ u, z~ '\u0026lt; ~~ ID u, !JI m .:,I:, 5 m-\u0026lt; m\n:o m 0 C: m !!l ,\u0026gt; g z .\u0026gt;... 5z u, .., z \u0026gt;z (') ,\u0026gt;- (/) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA-R (continued) Use of the School Day for Professional Development To the extent possible, professional development activities should be conducted outside the school day in order to preserve the integrity of the instructional program. Participants may choose from salary credit or stipends to reimburse them for their time. Salary Credit Salary credit can be awarded only for professional development activities that are at least three (3) hours in length or more and are beyond the participant's regular contractual hours. The amount of salary credit awarded for professional development activities will be based on one (1) clock hour of salary credit for each clock hour scheduled for activity. The acquired clock hours of salary credit are accumulative and will be converted to semester hours of credit on the salary scale at the rate of fifteen (15) hours for each semester hour. Teachers will be limited to six (6) semester hours of salary credit per year. Any extra clock hours will be carried over to the next school year. Salary credit may be received only one time for participating in a particular course\nno salary credit will be awarded for repeating a course. Salary credit will be given only when a participant attends the entire time designated. If a course is scheduled for more than one session, the participant must attend all sessions and fulfill the course requirements to receive salary credit. If a stipend is paid, salary credit will not be awarded. If a professional development activity occurs outside the District, the participant is responsible for obtaining and submitting the necessary documentation to the Professional Development Department for credit. Clock hours for salary credit must be approved by the Professional Development prior to taking the course. Eligible credit for degrees or hours earned through a college or university during the preceding summer will be given during the current school year if a teacher presents a written statement concerning such work to the Human Resource Office by September 1, such statement to be supported by an official transcript sent to this office by October 1. Upon receipt of such statement by the Human Resource Office, a revised contract will be drawn up, and the second pay check will be based upon this adjusted amount. Stipends At times the District will pay stipends to teachers at the negotiated rate for participation in high priority professional development activities that occur outside contractual times, 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA-R (continued) i.e., after-school, Saturdays, or summer days. Participants who elect to receive a stipend for participation in professional development may not also receive salary credit. Tuition Reimbursement The District may make available tuition reimbursement programs for teachers to become certified or endorsed in areas where there are shortages and/or to meet other District priorities, e.g., English-as-a-Second Language endorsement, gifted/talented endorsement, or instructional technology. Teachers who receive prior approval to participate in such programs will be reimbursed only for tuition for university courses. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards Certification LRSD teachers are encouraged to participate in the certification process established by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. The Professional Development Department will annually provide to principals copies of the Arkansas Department of Education Regulations Governing Incentives for National Board for Professional Teaching Standards for dissemination to teachers and will provide appropriate District-level support to those teachers seeking certification. Arkansas Education Association (AEA} Days The LRSD designates the two days for the AEA conference as two of the five required days of professional development in the year's calendar. Staff members who do not choose to participate in the AEA conference must attend a District-sponsored workshop on those two days. Otherwise they will be expected to make up the two days in order to acquire the 60 required hours of professional development mandated by the Arkansas Department of Education. Pathwise/lnduction Program for NoviceTeachers and Administrators The District will administer an Induction Program for Beginning Teachers and Administrators. School Improvement Plans Each school must include in its School Improvement Plan a professional development plan designed to build the capacity of the staff to achieve the plan's goals and objectives. 3 !D m 3.,1,: 5 m-\u0026lt; m ~ D C: m !!l ~ 0 0 z ~ 0 z (/) p \"Tl z )\u0026gt; z () \u0026gt;,... (/) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IAA-R (continued) Monitoring and Evaluation The criterion for evaluating the impact of professional development will be the improvement by student achievement on the state criterion-referenced assessments and other related indicators defined by ACTAAP. Revised: Date: January 25, 2001 Cross References: Arkansas Department of Education Regulations Governing Professional Development\nArkansas Department of Education Regulations Governing Financial Incentives for National Board of Professional Teaching Standards, PN Agreement\nStrategic Plan\nCampus Leadership Plan Handbook\nGuidelines to Writing School Improvement Plans 4 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ID-R STUDENT SCHEDULES Grades 9-12 Students in grades 9-12 must be enrolled in a full day academic program that includes four units (eight courses) each semester in a school with an A/8 block schedule or three and one-half units (seven courses) in a school with a seven-period daily schedule. One unit may be placement in a study hall or enrollment as a student assistant/monitor. The principal is authorized to modify this requirement if there are extenuating circumstances. Extenuating circumstances include the following: 1. The student is enrolled in a concurrent program at a college or university. 2. The student is enrolled in a school-sponsored work program. 3. The student has an illness that precludes full-time enrollment. 4. The student demonstrates a hardship of needing to support self and/or family. 5. The student demonstrates other reasons acceptable to the district inclusive of legal matters. Dropping/Adding Courses, Grades 9-12 According to Arkansas Accreditation Standards, a student must be enrolled in a course for at least 60 clock hours in order to receive one-half unit of credit. Students, therefore, are not permitted to change their class schedules after the tenth class day of each semester to ensure that the school is in compliance. The following exceptions to the ten-day rule are permitted, but only with the high school principal's permission: 1. The student is changing from one teacher's class to another teaching the same course. 2. The student is changing from one level of a course to another, such as from the regular level to the Pre-AP level or from Pre-AP to the regular level. 3. The student is exiting an ESL adapted course in order to move into a mainstreamed equivalent course. 4. The student is dropping a course in order to enroll in a study hall or other non-credit period (only one such period is allowed in any one semester). Grades 6-8 Students must take all courses, including a double period of the Reading/Writing Workshop at each grade level, 6-8, approved by the Board of Education for the requ ired middle school curriculum. Principals may waive the second period of Reading/Writing Workshop at the Pre-AP level at parent request, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the student and without question if the student is performing at the Proficient/ Advanced level on the state Benchmark literacy examination. Courses not required by the State of Arkansas may be waived through the waiver process. (See Policy IBA, IBA-R, and IBA-R Exhibit.) \u0026gt; ?\u0026lt;  a,\n,\n:, C: m\"' ~z ,-m C--,:e\"n' c5\"' z~ '\u0026lt; ~i:i a,\"' !D m :I: ~ ~ m\n,\n:, m 0 C: m !!l 0 0 0 z ~ 5 z \"' .., z )\u0026gt; z (\") \u0026gt;,- \"' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ID-R ( continued) Additionally, all grades 6-8 students must participate in at least one hour per week of physical training, including at least three sessions of 20 minutes each. (See IMP-R.) Middle schools may schedule classes seven periods a day, or they may elect to use the A/B block schedule, enabling students to take eight courses every two days. Grades 3-5 All students in grades 3-5 must have instruction in all the areas specified in the Arkansas Accreditation Standards. LRSD time requirements are as follows: English Language Arts/Reading 2  hours daily at grade 3\nMathematics Science Social Studies Music or Visual Art Physical Education At least 2 hours daily at grades 4-5 At least one hour daily Daily instruction\nmay be interdisciplinary Daily instruction\nmay be interdisciplinary At least one hour per week At least one hour per week, including no less than 20 minutes three times per week Time requirements that go beyond the Arkansas Accreditation Standards must be observed unless the school applies for and receives a waiver. (See IBA, IBA-R, and IBA-R Exhibit.) Grades PreK-2 All students in grades 3-5 must have instruction in all the areas specified in the Arkansas Accreditation Standards. LRSD time requirements are as follows: English Language Arts/Reading 2  hours daily Mathematics At least one hour daily Science Instruction may be interdisciplinary\nat least Social Studies Music or Visual Art Physical Education every other day, if not every day Instruction may be interdisciplinary\nat least every other day, if not every day At least one hour per week At least one hour per week, including no less than 20 minutes three times per week 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ID-R (continued) Time requirements that go beyond the Arkansas Accreditation Standards must be observed unless the school applies for and receives a waiver. (See IBA, IBA-R, and IBA-R Exhibit.) A sample pre-kindergarten daily schedule is attached that meets all licensing and LRSD requirements. Revised: Revised: December 18, 2003 Date: October 21 , 1999 Cross References: Board of Education Policies and Regulations, IBA, IBA-R, ID and IMP-R 3 !JI m .!,I:, 5 m-\u0026lt; m ill 0 C: m !!l r\u0026gt; g z \u0026gt; -\u0026lt; 0z (J) .., z \u0026gt;z (\") \u0026gt;,... (J) ID-R: Attachment 1 Request for Waiver of School Day Scheduling Requirements Administrative Regulations ID-R Little Rock School District Name of Student- -------------ID Number- ---- Classification I request a waiver from the scheduling requirements in Administrative Regulations ID-R. I understand that in order to be eligible for such a waiver, I must provide proof of one or more of the following extenuating circumstances:  need to take fewer courses due to poor health (verification by a licensed physician is required)\n need to take fewer courses in order to go to work\n need to take fewer courses due to responsibilities to care for a child or other family member\n need to take fewer courses in order to free a period for remedial instruction or for study hall (verification required by an assistant principal, a counselor, and/or a teacher)\n need to take fewer courses in order to enroll in a post-secondary course (verification required of application to enroll and admission). Therefore, I request that during the next semester/school year (circle one) I be permitted to enroll in only ___ courses rather than a full day academic program. My proof of extenuating circumstances is either attached through signed statements or follows below: Signature of Student Signature of ParenUGuardian Date Approved/Disapproved (circle one) Signature of Principal Date 4 Sample Pre-K Schedule Time Monday Tuesday 7:30- Arrival/Centers Arrival/Centers 8:00 Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Including Math, Including Math, Science Social Science Social Studies, Art Studies, Art 8:00- Circle Time Circle Time 8:15 Explanation and Explanation and Directions for today's Directions for activities todav's activities 8:15- P.E Music 8:45 8:45- Snack Time Snack Time 9:30 Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Arts Arts Choice of Centers Choice of Centers Math, Science Social Math, Science Studies, Art Social Studies, Art 9:30- Outside Play: Outside Play: 10:00 Including Including Gross Motor, Art, and Gross Motor, Art, Dramatic Play and Dramatic Play Activities Activities 10:00- Circle Time Circle Time 10:45 Shared Reading Shared Reading Transition Activities Transition Activities Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Hands Hands 10:45- Lunch Lunch 11 :15 Social Skills Social Skills Language Language Develooment Develooment 11: 15- Outside Play Outside Play 11:45 Gross Motor Gross Motor Art Art Dramatic Play Dramatic Play 11 :45- Language Arts/ Language Arts/ 12:15 Shared Reading Shared Reading Transition Activities Transition Activities Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Hands Hands 12:15- Story Time/Rest Story Time/Rest 1 :15 Period Period 1 :15- Snack Time Snack Time 2:15 Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Arts Arts Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Including Math, Including Math, Science, Social Science, Social Studies, and Art Studies, and Art 2:15- Circle Time Circle Time 2:35 Story Story Review of Review of Activities/Closure Activities/Closure Dismissal Dismissal Wednesday Arrival/Centers Choice of Centers: Including Math, Science Social Studies, Art Circle Time Explanation and Directions for todav's activities Library/Guidance Snack Time Small Group Inst. Literacy/Language Arts Choice of Centers Math, Science Social Studies, Art Outside Play: Including Gross Motor, Art, and Dramatic Play Activities Circle Time Shared Reading Transition Activities Bathroom/Wash Hands Lunch Social Skills Language Develooment Outside Play Gross Motor Art Dramatic Plav Language Arts/ Shared Reading Transition Activities Bathroom/Wash Hands Story Time/Rest Period Snack Time Small Group Inst. Literacy/Language Arts Choice of Centers: Including Math, Science , Social Studies, and Art Circle Time Story Review of Activities/Closure Dismissal 5 ID-R: Attachment 2 Thursday Friday Arrival/Centers Arrival/Centers Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Including Math, Including Math, Science Social Science Social Studies, Art Studies, Art Circle Time Circle Time Explanation and Explanation and Directions for Directions for today's activities today's activities P.E Music Snack Time Snack Time Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Arts Arts Choice of Centers Choice of Centers Math, Science Math, Science Social Studies, Art Social Studies, Art Outside Play: Outside Play: Including Including Gross Motor, Art, Gross Motor, Art, and Dramatic Play and Dramatic Play Activities Activities Circle Time Circle Time Shared Reading Shared Reading Transition Activities Transition Activities Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Hands Hands Lunch Lunch Social Skills Social Skills Language Language Develooment Develooment Outside Play Outside Play Gross Motor Gross Motor Art Art Dramatic Plav Dramatic Plav Language Arts/ Language Arts/ Shared Reading Shared Reading Transition Activities Transition Activities Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Hands Hands Story Time/Rest Story Time/Rest Period Period Snack Time Snack Time Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Arts Arts Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Including Math, Including Math, Science, Social Science, Social Studies, and Art Studies, and Art Circle Time Circle Time Story Story Review of Review of Activities/Closure Activities/Closure Dismissal .Dismissal \u0026gt;?\u0026lt;  a,\nn C: men is z ,-m C-,:e Cnl\u0026gt; i5 Cl\u0026gt; ':\"~ ~i:l a, Cl\u0026gt; !Jl m .3.1,: 5 m-\u0026lt; m\nn m g m !!l ,:-, 8 z ~ 5 z en ,:::, ..., z \u0026gt;z n ,\u0026gt;- en DATE: February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Personnel Changes BACKGROUND: None RATIONALE: To staff allocated positions within the District FUNDING: Operating Fund RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.C.A. 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) consecutive years. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 19, 2004 for regular schools are considered intern teachers. Teachers with an effective date of employment after August 9, 2004 for EYE are consid~~~ intern teachers. PREPARED BY: Beverly William~irector of Human Resources !D m :I: ~ 5 m-\u0026lt; m ~ 0 C: m !!l ,, 8 z ~ 5 z (/) .., z \u0026gt;z (\") ,\u0026gt;- (/) Personnel Changes Page2 February 24, 2005 NAME START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY Resignations/Terminations Certified Employees Acre, Nancy Principal/ 6-11-87 69-20 79692.00 Reason: Retirement TERRY 2-24-05 ADC11 Logan, Jacob American History/ 9-1-03 1-02 30617.00 Reason: Personal MABELVALE MIDDLE 1-17-05 SPE925 Reed, Martha Kindergarten/ 8-11-04 1-01 30040.00 Reason: Accepted another BRADY 1-28-05 K925 position Robertson, Angela Spanish/ 8-9-00 1-09 38127.00 Reason: Personal GIBBS 3-9-05 TCH925 Whaley, Andress English/ 8-16-93 6-12 49277.00 Reason: No reason given HALL 1-13-05 TCH925 New Certified Employees Akdamar, Lynn Elementary IV/ 1-18-05 1-01 30040.00 WAKEFIELD TCH925 annual 14550.63 prorated Austin, Lori Speech Pathologist/ 1-18-05 62-6 45576.00 MABEL VALE SPE925 annual ELEMENTARY 21066.25 prorated Farrar, Neoma Elementary II/ 1-18-05 1-01 30040.00 CHICOT TCH925 annual 14550.63 prorated Gault. Amanda Special Education/ 1-24-05 4-14 48439.00 STEPHENS SPE925 annual 22958.07 prorated Howard-Klein, Risie Biology/ 1-17-05 4-09 42662.00 CENTRAL TCH925 annual 20664.41 prorated Personnel Changes Page3 February 24, 2005 START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY Key, Shawn Spanish/ 1-18-05 4-06 39196.00 J. A. FAIR TCH925 annual 18985.56 prorated Sandel, Cathryn Gifted and Talented/ 1-10-05 4-03 35730.00 ROCKEFELLER G\u0026amp;T925 annual 18237.19 prorated Van Alstyne, Vicki Special Education/ 1-03-05 1-10 39283.00 FRANKLIN TCH925 annual 21073.69 prorated Educational Leave (Article 14 -Section C) Carson, Rene' Hire Date: 8-27-74 Length of Educational Leave 1 year (2005-2006) Approved leave as recommended by the Superintendent Armstrong, Hayley - medical leave without pay (effective 1-3-05) Resignations/Terminations Non-Certified Employees Boyd, Alfred Custodian/ 4-3-01 31-7 17388.00 Reason: Accepted another CENTRAL 11-30-04 CUS12 position Curry, Tangela Care/ 9-17-04 3-08 8.85 Reason: Accepted another CARE 1-28-05 CARE per hour position Haley, Leslie Custodian 6-22-87 34-18 26412.00 Reason: Retirement WOODRUFF 1-31-05 CUS12 Hockersmith, Kimberly Secretary/ 7-28-94 46-20 40116.00 Reason: Personal HUMAN RESOURCES 2-11-05 CLK12 ~~ c~o~ \u0026lt;- (J) o- c:Z\n:o C'l Z\n:o\nr:m ~~ --\u0026lt;\n:o\n,,\n(J) \u0026gt;?\u0026lt;  tD ~~ ~z .--m C: (J) -\nrJ\u0026gt; ~(J) ~\n~~ tD (J) ?' m .\n.r.:, 5 -m\u0026lt; m\n:o m 0 C: m !!l ,, C 0 z \u0026gt; --\u0026lt; 5 z (J) !=' .., z \u0026gt;z (\") \u0026gt; r- (J) Personnel Changes Page4 February 24, 2005 NAME Hubbard, Myia Reason: No reason given Hokes, Henry Reason: Deceased Jackson, Andrea Reason: Resigned without notice Paige, Cynthia Reason: No reason given Williams, Jacquelyn Reason: No reason given Akins, Kharisty Bridgeford, Wanda Cook, Deshawn Davidson, Katherine Davis. Ebony START DATE/ POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE Care/ 8-9-04 CARE 1-13-05 Custodian/ 2-15-93 PARKVIEW 12-9-04 Care/ 12-10-02 CARE 1-7-05 Care/ 3-1-93 CARE 1-13-05 Care/ 8-23-01 CARE 12-17-04 New Non-Certified Employees Care/ 1-31-05 CARE Custodian/ 1-7-05 ROMINE Custodian/ 1-3-05 KING Bookkeeper/ 1-24-05 CHILD NUTRITION Instructional Aide) 1-18-05 BRADY SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 1-02 7.13 CARE per hour 31-15 22080.00 CUS12 1-04 7.41 CARE per hour 2-17 10.01 CARE per hour 1-06 7.74 CARE per hour 2-01 7.55 CARE per hour 31-01 5689.50 CUS925 annual 3030.28 prorated 31-01 11379.00 CUS925 annual 6307.92 prorated 45-17 35592.00 AN12 annual 16357.17 prorated 33-16 16109.00 INA925 annual 7923.89 prorated Personnel Changes Page 5 February 24, 2005 ~ ~ START DATE/ SALARY ANNUAL :,.~ co \u0026lt;- \u0026lt;J) NAME POSITION / SCHOOL END DATE CLASS SALARY o- C: z ::,, C, z::,, 31: m ~ ~ --\u0026lt;::,,\n,,\nFarmer, Dennis Custodian/ 1-10-05 31-07 6808.00 \u0026lt;J) DUNBAR CUS925 annual 3589.00 prorated Gary, Angela Care/ 1-24-05 2-03 7.85 \u0026gt;?\u0026lt;  a, ::,, C: CARE CARE per hour mu, !Sz ,-m C: \u0026lt;J) .... \u0026lt;J) Holland, Robin Instructional Aide/ 1-18-05 33-03 5795.02 ~\u0026lt;J) z!!l CHICOT INA925 annual  ?i 2850.52 ~m a, \u0026lt;J) prorated Hunt, Emma Child Nutrition/ 1-10-05 3-01 9350.00 PARKVIEW FSH550 annual 4926.34 prorated ~ m 3C Jeffers, Ferrell Instructional Aide/ 1-04-05 33-09 13070.00 .,...,. 0 DODD INA925 annual m-\u0026lt; 7064.86 m ::,, m prorated 0 C: m \u0026lt;..J..) Jordan, Leon Custodian/ 1-5-05 31-01 14532.00 Forest Heights CUS12 annual 7358.76 prorated Lovelace, Corey Bus Driver Aide/ 1-24-05 2-04 29760.00 TRANSPORTATION BUSDRV annual 0 15323.23 C 0 prorated z .\u0026gt;... 0 z Mason, Shanika Care/ 1-31 -05 2-03 7.85 \u0026lt;J) CARE CARE per hour McDonald, James Care/ 1-31 -05 3-05 8.38 CARE CARE per hour McFee, Sarah Care/ 2-7-05 2-07 14532.00 CARE CARE annual !=' 7915.30 .., prorated z \u0026gt;z C) \u0026gt;,... \u0026lt;J) Personnel Changes Page6 February 24, 2005 NAME Milam, Lisa Mitchell, Rashumda Moore, Tamalyn Moser, Matthew Portlock, Douglas Reynolds, Carl Robinson, Barbara Robinson, Kamesha Robinson, Onetha Sample-Harper, Michelle Spencer, Steven White, Tremayne START DATE/ POSITION/ SCHOOL END DATE Care/ 1-24-05 CARE Care/ 1-24-05 CARE Care/ 1-24-05 CARE Security Officer/ 1-4-05 MCCLELLAN Bus Driver/ 1-24-05 TRANSPORTATION Maintenance/ 1-18-05 FACILITY SERVICES Care/ 1-24-05 CARE Care/ 1-24-05 CARE Care/ 1-31-05 CARE Care/ 1-24-05 CARE Maintenance/ 1-24-05 FACILITY SERVICES Instructional Aide/ 1-24-05 DODD SALARY ANNUAL CLASS SALARY 1-04 7.41 CARE per hour 2-02 7.70 CARE per hour 2-02 7.70 CARE per hour 36-10 15463.00 SOFR9 annual 8411.19 prorated 2-01 9481.00 BUSDRV annual 4633.97 prorated 49-07 29760.00 MAINT annual 14183.49 prorated 1-07 7.89 CARE per hour 2-03 7.85 CARE per hour 2-04 8.01 CARE per hour 2-02 7.70 CARE per hour 49-07 29760.00 MAINT annual 13676.94 prorated 33-03 10934.00 INA925 annual 5141.94 prorated LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Qualified Zone Academy Bond Application BACKGROUND: Qualified Zone Academy Bonds (QZAB), created under Section 226 of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, are unique financing instruments available to public schools meeting the following eligibility requirements: located in an Enterprise Zone or Empowerment Community\nOR at least 35% of the students at the school site are eligible for free or reduced-cost lunches\nAND a partnership with a private entity is entered into whereby curriculum is enhanced, graduation and employment rates are increased and students are prepared for college and the workforce\nAND private entity donations of not less than 10% of the total amount of the issue must be received (to be used as matching funds). The District previously has been approved by the Arkansas Department of Education for three (3) separate QZAB issues, totaling $5,410,506. The proceeds were used to finance a portion of the cost of energy efficient lighting systems installed throughout the District. Even though the current QZABs have an interest cost to the District of 0%, the holder of the QZAB is still allowed annual federal income tax credits while the debt is outstanding. These credits function as \"interest\" on the debt and are intended to compensate the holder for lending money to the issuer. The current QZABs are financed over ten (10) years by mandatory sinking fund payments into deposit accounts maintained at the financial institutions holding the QZABs. The District receives a guaranteed rate of earned interest on these deposits which, when combined with the cumulative deposit amounts, is designed to be sufficient to repay the entire face amount of the bonds at maturity. The balances in these sinking fund accounts at June 30, 2004 totaled $1 ,177,638 making the net debt $4,232,868 as of the same date, of which $3,218,430 is the LRSD portion and $1,014,438 represents the bank's guaranteed interest. RATIONALE: The District is seeking permIssIon to file a QZAB application with the Arkansas Department of Education against the State allocation pool, which totals $10,830,000 for !:ti m :I: ~ 5 ~ m\n,o 2l C m ~ !\"' 0 0 :z: ... i5 :z: en 2005. The proposed application for $5,870,000 would fund seven (7) heat and air projects as shown on the attached schedule. In-kind matching funds will be provided by hours donated to each of the seven schools through the ViPS program and Johnson Controls, Inc. A representative of Stephens Inc., the District's financial advisor, will attend the Board meeting to discuss the financing process of the proposed QZAB application. FUNDING: To be determined upon approval by ADE and sale of the financing instrument. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the attached resolution, allowing the administration to proceed with the application for QZAB funding . PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen, Manager Financial Services Little Rock School District - Qualified Zone Academy Bond Application Data Qualification of School Facility LEA# School Site School Address Henderson Middle 70% Free/Reduced 401 John Barrow Rd. School 6001013 Lunch Little Rock, AR 72205 57% Free/Reduced 1100 Wright Ave. Dunbar Middle School 6001007 Lunch Little Rock, AR 72206 Mabelvale Elementary 88% Free/Reduced 9401 Mabelvale Cut-Off School 6001057 Lunch Mabelvale, AR 72103 37% Free/Reduced 1000 E. Roosevelt Rd. Mann Middle School 6001003 Lunch Little Rock, AR 72206 Booker Elementary 63% Free/Reduced 2016 Barber St. School 6001006 Lunch Little Rock, AR 72206 Fair Park Elementary 73% Free/Reduced 616 N. Harrison St. School 6001023 Lunch Little Rock, AR 72205 Pulaski, AR 1500 South Park Central High School 6001001 Empowerment Zone Little Rock, AR 72202 Totals SlVl:\u0026gt;NVNl:l a SNOllVNOO \":) lS3n03H 33AOldW3 '8 Qualified Site Project Description Budget Replace all 40-yr old HVAC system, except chiller, boiler \u0026amp; cooling tower $3,750,000.00 Replace chillers, boilers - convert to HW\n50-ton AHU for Auditorium $278,800.00 Replace 23 pkg rooftop HVAC units and 6 furnaces/ condensing units \u0026amp; ductwork $220,000.00 Media Ctr- New Pkg Unit or Splits\nHVAC for Cafeteria\nReplace existing classroom HVAC units in original section of building $382,400.00 Replace furnace coils $239,560.00 Replace chiller \u0026amp; boiler $79,480.00 Replace air cooled chillers, fan coil units\ngym boiler, and boiler at Quigley Field $919,760.00 $5,870,000.00 1N3WNHnorav nx S}IHVW3H ~NISOl:\u0026gt; 'IX RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Little Rock School District of Pulaski County, Arkansas (the \"District\") proposes to create Qualified Zone Academies within the District designed to enhance the academic curriculum, increase graduation and employment rates and better prepare students for the rigors of college and the workforce (the \"Academy'')\nWHEREAS, the District proposes to make improvements to certain facilities located in the Academy by acquiring and installing HV AC equipment (the \"Project\")\nand WHEREAS, the District proposes to obtain funds to accomplish the Project from issuing either Second-Lien Construction Bonds (Qualified Zone Academy Bonds) (the \"Bonds\") or Post Dated Warrants to be issued in the approximate principal amount of $5,870,000 (collectively, the \"Debt\"). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE DISTRICT: Section 1. That the Superintendent of Schools and the President of the Board of Directors are hereby authorized and instructed to prepare and file an application with the Arkansas Department of Education (the \"Department\") for approval of the Academy. Section 2. That the District shall receive written commitments from private entities (which may include commitments from Volunteers In Public Schools) to make qualified contributions having a present value as of the date of issuance of the Debt of not less than ten percent of the proceeds of the Debt (the \"Qualified Contributions\"). Section 3. That the Qualified Contributions shall be used solely in connection with the Academy. Section 4. That in connection with the sale and issuance of the Debt, the District hereby authorizes Stephens Inc. to serve as financial advisor in connection with the structuring and sale of the Debt. Section 5. That the District hereby authorizes Stephens Inc. to file an application with the Department to issue the Bonds. Section 6. That the fees paid to Stephens Inc. will be subject to approval of the Department, if necessary, and the District and will be paid only if the District issues the Debt. Section 7. That if the Department approves only a portion of the Debt for the Academy, the Superintendent of Schools may explore other funding options to complete the Project. CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned, Secretary of the Board of Directors of the above District, certify the foregoing to be a true copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board at a regular meeting of the Board held on the 24th day of February, 2005. The Resolution appears in the official minutes of the meeting which are in my custody. At the time of the meeting the duly elected ( or appointed), qualified and serving members of the Board and their respective votes on the adoption of the Resolution were as follows: Director Larry Berkley Micheal Daugherty Dr. Katherine Mitchell Bryan Day H. Baker Kurrus Tony Rose Sue Strickland Vote (Aye, Nay, Abstain or Absent) I further certify that the meeting of the Board was duly convened and held in all respects according to law\nthat to the extent required by law due and proper notice of the meeting was given to the members of the Board and to the public\nthat the meeting was open to the public\nthat a legal quorum was present throughout the meeting\nthat all other requirements and proceedings under the law incident to the proper adoption and passage of the Resolution have been duly fulfilled, carried out and otherwise observed\nand that I am authorized to execute this Certificate. CERTIFIED under my hand and seal of the District this 24th day of February, 2005. Secretary (SEAL) ~ ~ ~p co oc.... en c:Z\no C\u0026gt; z\no ii: m mil: Z  ....\no ::,,\nen !D m ii: ~ 5 m-\u0026lt; m\no m 0 C: m !!l 0 0 0 z ~ 5z CJ) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Employee Request to Conduct Business with the District BACKGROUND: AR law 6-24-101: 119 requires full open disclosure before a school district employee may sell, lease, provide services or enter into a contract with a school district where he/she is employed if the employee has knowledge that he or she is directly interested in the contract. Part of the disclosure is for all employees to complete a Conflict of Interest form provided by the district. If an employee declares a conflict on the form, the Procurement department will not approve their company as an approved vendor unless the employee appears before the school board explaining why their particular vendor circumstance should be considered an exception. In the event the Board, by resolution, approves the employee's company as a district vendor, the district may contract with the employee's company. At the 12/18/03 regular Board Meeting Ms. Virginia (Jennie) Cooper, owner of Soccer Plus, was on the Board agenda requesting to conduct business with the District. The Board tabled her request. Subsequently, the Board approved at its 4/22/04 regular Board meeting regulation GBEA-R (attached) concerning employees selling to the District. Ms. Cooper has asked the Board to reconsider her case: Ms. Virginia Cooper, owner of Soccer Plus, is the boys soccer coach at Central High School. As a coach, Ms. Cooper would be in a position to both set the specification and choose the vendor for the products needed for the Central soccer program. She also wishes to sell to other high schools in the District but would have no influence over specifications or vendor selection for these schools. Expected purchases would be less than $5,000 annually. Ms. Cooper has completed the Contract Disclosure Form (attached) required by the Arkansas Department of Education. !\"\u0026gt; g z ~ 5 z CJ) ..., z \u0026gt;z C\") \u0026gt;.... CJ) RATIONALE: A resolution (template provided by the Arkansas Department of Education) approving Soccer Plus as a District vendor must be signed by the Board before the District can conduct business with this company in accordance with Arkansas law and District regulation. FUNDING: None RECOMMENDATION: In accordance with Board Policy GBEA and its regulations, the Administration recommends that the Board make a determination regarding the attached Resolution. PREPARED BY: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement RESOLUTION Act 1599 WHEREAS, the Little Rock School District (LRSD) Board of Directors met in a regular, open, and properly-called board meeting on February 24, 2005 at LRSD Administration Offices in Little Rock, AR\nand WHEREAS,_ members were present, a quorum was declared by the chair\nand WHEREAS, Ms. Virginia Cooper, a non-administrative employee of the LRSD, has declared a direct financial interest in Soccer Plus\nand, WHEREAS, Ms. Cooper would like to bid on a competitive basis, through Soccer Plus, for soccer uniforms and equipment purchases by the LRSD\nand, WHEREAS, the Board, after serious consideration, moved to approve possible business transactions with Soccer Plus\nand, WHEREAS, any possible business transactions are approved with the following restrictions and/or limitations: Athletic Director review of specifications, competitive bidding and only where Soccer Plus is low bid received\nNOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby declared to be the intent of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors to approve Soccer Plus as a District vendor for possible future business transactions. Superintendent Board President Date Date Attest: !\"' 8 z ~ 0z Cl) .., z \u0026gt;z n ,\u0026gt;... Cl) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: GBEA - R CONFLICT OF INTEREST - Employees selling to the District The LRSD contracts for goods and services in conformance with statutory ethics laws and, in addition, in a manner that will avoid any conflict of interest or the appearance thereof. Accordingly, the Board will approve employees as District vendors under the statutory exception provisions only when it is clearly in the best interest of the District. General Prohibitions and Guidelines for Statutory Exceptions: In general, except as provided below, it is a breach of statutory ethical standards for an employee to contract with the District if the employee has knowledge that he or she is directly interested in the contract. The Board by exception may under unusual and limited circumstances approve an employee's business as a District vendor if the Board determines that the potential vendor relationship is in the best interest of the District. In such cases, the Board will document the approval by written resolution after fully disclosing the reasons justifying the potential vendor relationship in an open meeting in conformance with AR law. Following are the guidelines for these exceptions: I. No exceptions will be allowed for District Administrators (defined as Director-level and above) who are directly or indirectly interested in a contract since these individuals are in District-wide decision making positions. In addition, any employee on a District Administrative salary schedule is prohibited from conducting business with fami ly members. 2. District Administrator's family members who have a financial interest in a business as defined by AR law may contract with the District only after appearing before the Board of Directors explaining why their particular vendor circumstance should be considered unusual and limited. In the event the Board by resolution approves the business as a District vendor, the District may contract with the family member's company for transactions of any amount for a fiscal year provided the services/commodities are procured on a competitive basis and where the family member company's offer is the lowest received. However, the ADE must first have approved the District resolution before any contract will be valid or enforceable. 3. Under no circumstances will it be authorized for the District to do business with an employee when the employee regardless of their salary schedule placement or position has the ability to set the specifications for purchase and choose and/or recommend the vendor. 4. Non-Administrative employees (defined as any employee below Director-level) who are directly interested in a contract may conduct business with the District only after appearing before the Board of Directors explaining why their particular vendor circumstance should be considered unusual and limited. In the event the Board by resolution approves the employee as a District vendor, the District may contract with the employees company: a. for transactions totaling up to $5,000 for a fiscal year provided the services/commodities are procured on a compet1t1\\'e basis and where the employee company's offer is the lo\\\\'est received or\nb. for transacuons expected to exceed S5,000 for a fi cal year pro\\'lded the ser\\1ces commod1t1es are procured on a compe11l1\\e basis and \\I here the employee compan) 's offer is the lo\\\\'e t received. HO\\\\'e\\er, the ADE mu t first ha\\e appro\\ed the D1s1r1ct re oluuon before any contract 11 ill be 1alid or enforceable or: c. \\I here competll1\\'e quot111g b1dd111g 1s not practical regardless of dollar amount due to the nature of the ser11ce or comrnod1t) (sole source) prol'lded the ADE has first appro\\ed the D1stnct resoluuon in those cases expected to exceed $5,000. Legal Reference: A.C.A. 6-24-101 :119 CONTRACT DISCLOSURE FORM Name of Public Educational Entity: Name of Person Disclosing Transaction: \\)1 ~A\n.,\u0026lt;\u0026amp;A .... I G2, ~b?.__ Note: Fully complete this form and return to the administration office. NO TRANSACTION OR SERVICE MAY BE RENDERED UNTIL THIS FORM HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND APPROVED. Act 1599 of 2001 requires FULL and COMPLETE DISCLOSURE of transactions with public educational entities. KNOWINGLY FAILING to FULLY DISCLOSE pertinent information relating to a transaction could result in criminal felony charges. I am a an Board Member Administrator of the ublic educational entit . L Mailing Address City State Home Telephone: 001 z.2..-'-I (.e[p f~ Work Telephone: Nature of transaction subject to disclosure and a9proval: ~----------------- 70 Se-tL Soa::.v z.~ f ~ 1\n, '-ftce 1,,~s D Estimated dollar amount of transactions with public educational entity for ENTIRE school year: Check ONE: DI have a financial interest in the transaction with the public educational entity. uA family member has a financial interest in the transaction with the public educational entity. . J80TH a family member and I have a financial interest in the transaction with the public educational entity. Nature of financial interest: (State how you and/or family members are financially interested in the transaction): . Justification for Approval (State reason why you believe the transactions are in the best interest of the public educational entity: state the unusual circumstances involved.) ~ P~us LL:e. 0-(L.., ~ 1o ~ a_ CL,, l.tfUYv1 Check here if Emergenc~ Transaction as defined by Section 9 of Act 1599 of 2001 P~EASE ATTACH ANY OTHER A::JDITIONAL INFORMATION OR DOCUMENTS YOU BELIEVE ARE ECESSARY FOR A FULL, COMPLETE, AND ACCURATE DISCLOSURE OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE TRANSACTIONS. SIGNATURE: Vu~) e, Lft\u0026gt;fP ~ DATE: Wolos-l ~~ ~p co oc.... en c::Z\n:c C) Z\n:c :1:m !:ll~ --\u0026lt;\n:c :,,\nen fl 8 z ~ 0z en CONTRACT DISCLOSURE FORM FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: DalecomgF= School Official 's Signa z__/ l \\/ o5 Telephone Number Local Board Action: OAPPROVED DISAPPROVED FAX Number Date PRESENTED to Board : _______ Board President's Signature: _________ _ Required to be presented to the Director of the Department of Education for written approval: DYES ~O Written Adopted Resolution Attached: DYES ONO Required Additional Documentation: ________________________ _ Date Certified to ADE: Date Director's Written Approval received by district: Effective Date: ____________ _ l\u0026lt;e\"'- ::J\n,,-,v,..e ~ Please return by certified mail to: Mr. Raymond Simon, Director Arkansas Dept. of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 304A Little Rock, AR 72201 2 ,, DATE: February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property BACKGROUND: The Little Rock School District receives donations from businesses and individuals on a regular basis. It is the policy of the Little Rock School District that donations are not formally accepted until they are approved by the Board of Directors. RATIONALE: District policy states that, in order to maintain the centralized fixed asset property accounting system, all property donation requests are forwarded to the Director of Procurement. The Procurement Department forwards the requests, along with the appropriate recommendations, to the Board of Directors for acceptance and approval. In order for proper recognition and appreciation to be conveyed to the donor, donor's name and current mailing address should be included in the donation memo. FUNDING: None RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the attached donation requests be approved and accepted in accordance with the policies of the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District. PREPARED BY: _.,,t..:..-Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement Gwen Caraway, Fixed Asset Property Manager ~ \u0026gt; ~ a C: ~ 31 IT z DONATIONS School/Department Item Donor Bale Elementary $100.00 cash Calvin Brown School for Kathleen Shute's kindergarten class Bale Elementary $9,020.00 cash Children International School to be distributed as through Children follows: school lnternational-UALR uniforms $625.00\nwinter coats, hats \u0026amp; gloves $450.00\nhealth room equipment, supplies and materials $550.00\nmaterials to build outside classroom $5,100.00\nAR Rice Depot for Backpack Program $7 45.00\nt-shirts for Hip Hop Health and registration fee for students participating in the LR Marathon $1,550.00 Central High School $3,000.00 cash to Winthrop \u0026amp; Lisenne the special education Rockefeller department Central High School Microwave oven, Paula Aultz, Kevin valued at $48.00, and Cathy Crass to the basketball concession stand Cloverdale Magnet Gift cards, valued at Bank of America Middle School $220.00, trophies valued at $95.00, and 25 subject dividers valued at $25.00 to be used for student spelling bee awards and teacher incentives Rightsell Academy $700.00 cash for 100 Black Men school uniforms and teacher/student incentives School/De12artment Item Donor Rightsell Academy $400.00 cash for LR Black Police ~ school uniforms and Officers' Association \u0026gt; C \u0026lt;- teacher/student 0 C:\n,o incentives z :,I,:. ~ Rightsell Academy $300.00 cash for Dr. \u0026amp; Mrs. Cortez McFarland staff t-shirts for the \"Race for the Cure Walk\" Rightsell Academy $100.00 cash for Mr. Andre Pendleton materials and food supplies for the Rightsell Spaghetti Dinner/Talent Show Rightsell Academy $250.00 cash for Rightsell PT A school uniforms Rightsell Academy $50.00 cash for food The family of Charlie supplies/materials for Carrington the Rightsell Spaghetti Dinner/Talent Show Rightsell Academy Washer/dryer, valued Jimmerson Family at $250.00, to assist Health Care In providing clean school uniforms for students Little Rock School $1,000.00 cash to The Wal-Mart Foundation District \"Smoke Free purchase incentives Homes\" Campaign to be distributed to the elementary and middle school classes with the highest number of \"Smoke Free Homes\" pledges Little Rock School $102.93 cash to be Grace Presbyterian District Homeless used to provide Church Education Program emergency services for homeless families Little Rock School $75.00 cash for LRSD Association of District Homeless Christmas Holiday Educational Office Education Program assistance for Professionals homeless students BALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DATE: 1/18/05 TO: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement FROM: ~ . /1,,___/  1 rl Barbara Anderson, Principal_\"~ \"l U('- (,1 , SUBJECT: Donation Calvin Brown of 11 Lakeside Drive, Little Rock, AR 72204, contributed $100.00 to Kathleen Shute, kindergarten teacher for classroom use. It is my recommendation that this be accepted in accordance with the donation policies of the Little Rock School District. ...--.-- :,_--. .... ._ __ __ ! '\n' I  Little Rock ArKansas 72 04 BALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL January 31, 2005 To: r Darrel Paradis, Director of Procurement From: if Barbara Anderson, Principal Subject: Donation Children International made a special donation to Bale Elementary through Children Intemational-UALR in the amount of $9,020.00. The following list shows the breakdown of how the money will be spent. $625.00- School uniforms $450.00 - Winter coats, hats and gloves $550.00- For the health room - school clinic equipment, supplies and materials $5100.00 - Materials to build an outside classroom (picnic tables/pavilion) $745.00- Donated to AR Rice Depot for Backpack Program $ 1,550.00 T-shirts for Hip Hop Health (Kid's Club) and registration fee for students participating in LR Marathon It is recommended that this donation be accepted in accordance with the polices and procedures of the Little Rock School District. l Little Rock Central High School 1500 South Park Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Phone 501-447-1400 Fax 501-447-1401 DATE: JANUARY 10, 2005 - ,:\nTO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT FROM: NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL tf'f_ttl2Jt(ln ... ./ SUBJECT: DONATION Winthrop \u0026amp; Lisenne Rockefeller of P. 0. Box 3157, Little Rock, AR 72203, very generously donated $3,000 to our special education department. It is my recommendation that this be accepted in accordance with the donation policies of the Little Rock School District. II Little Rock Central High School 1500 South Park Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Phone 501-44 7-1400 Fax 501-44 7-1401 DATE: 1/11/2005 TO: FROM: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL \"-fl(flilklla,lu SUBJECT: DONATION Paula Aultz of 36 St. Andrews Drive, Little Rock, AR, 72212, and Kevin \u0026amp; Cathy Crass of 4521 Country Club Blvd., Little Rock, AR 72207, donated a microwave valued at $48.00 to the basketball concession stand. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the donation policies of the Little Rock School District. ? ., J ~ )\u0026gt; C l: C ~ 3r1r :z I CLOVERDALE MAGNET MIDDLE SCHOOL January 18, 2005 To: Mr. Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement From: An~Munns, Principal RE: Donations Please accept the following donations that were given to Cloverdale Magnet Middle School. The trophies will be awarded to sixth grade students who participate in a \"spelling bee\". The subject dividers will be given to students to organize their portfolios. The gift cards will be given as incentives to teachers who earn perfect attendance. Bank of America Ms. Carol Murray, Vice President Gift Cards Trophies 25 subject dividers Total Value of Donations Total Value $220.00 $95.00 $25.00 $340.00 RIGHTSELL ACADEMY \"Great Expectations: Believe! Achieve! Succeed!\" TO: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement FROM: '1 Eunice M. Thrasher, Principal t.- Rightsell Academy DATE: January 31, 2005 RE: Donation The donor listed below has generously donated $700.00 for school uniforms and teachers/students incentives: 100 Black Men c/o J.C. Babbs 12804 St. Charles Blvd Little Rock, AR 72211 It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. Thank you. /lh , r, I: 7- _, I RIGHTSELL ACADEMY \"Great Expectations: Believe! Achieve! Succeed!\" TO: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement FROM: DATE: RE: Eunice M. Thrasher, Principal Rightsell Academy January 31, 2005 Donation The donor listed below has generously donated $400.00 for school uniforms and teachers/students incentives: LR Black Police Officers Association 700 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. Thank you. 1/h RIGHTSELL ACADEMY \"Great Expectations: Believe! Achieve! Succeed!\" TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement Eunice M. Thrasher, Principal tj. Rightsell Academy January 31, 2005 Donation The donor listed below has generously donated $300.00 for stafft-shirts for the \"Race for the Cure Walk\": Dr. \u0026amp; Mrs. Cortez McFarland 1 St. Vincent Circle Little Rock, AR 72205 It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. Thank you. /lh RIGHTSELL ACADEMY \"Great Expectations: Believe! Achieve! Succeed! \" TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement Eunice M. Thrasher, Principal f) Rightsell Academy January 31, 2005 Donation The donor listed below has generously donated $100.00 for materials and food supplies for the Rightsell Spaghetti Dinner/Talent Show: Mr. Andre Pendleton 108 S. Rodney Parham Road Little Rock, AR 72205 It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. Thank you. 11.h C: . - RIGHTSELL ACADEMY \"Great Expectations: Believe! Achieve! Succeed!\" TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement I t~ Eunice M. Thrasher, Principal u,---, Rightsell Academy January 31, 2005 Donation The donor listed below has generously donated $250.00 for school uniforms: Rightsell PTA 911 W. 1 \u0026lt;Jh Street Little Rock, AR 72206 It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. Thank you. /lh I ' RIGHTSELL ACADEMY \"Great Expectations: Believe! Achieve! Succeed!\" TO: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement FROM: DATE: RE: Eunice M. Thrasher, Principal Rightsell Academy January 31, 2005 Donation 8 The donor listed below has generously donated $50.00 for food supplies/materials for the Rightsell Spaghetti Dinner/Talent Show: To The Family of Charlie Carrington 819 W. 33rd Street Little Rock, AR 72206 It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. Thank you. 1/.h RIGHTSELL ACADEMY \"Great Expectations: Believe! Achieve! Succeed!\" TO: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement FROM: Eunice M Thrasher, Principal ~ Rightsell Academy DATE: January 31, 2005 RE: Donation The donor listed below has generously donated a washer/dryer valued at $250. 00 to assist in providing clean school uniforms for the students: Jimmerson Family Health Care c/o Dr. Robert Jimmerson 6917 Geyer Springs Road Little Rock, AR 72209 It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. Thank you. 1/h - ,. ~ :,, ~ C: i IT z TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Little Rock School District Pupil Services Department January 21, 2005 Darral Paradis, Director - Procurement Department Jo Evelyn Els~irector - Pupil Services Department Donation The Wal-Mart Foundation donated $1,000 to the Little Rock School District Smoke Free Homes Campaign. These funds will be used to purchase incentives which will be distributed to the class at the elementary and middle school levels with the highest number of Smoke Free Homes pledges signed by parents and returned during the campaign (January 18- February 4, 2005). It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with governing polices of the Little Rock School District. Your consideration is appreciated. 1 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Little Rock School District Pupil Services Department January 21, 2005 Darral Paradis, Director - Procurement Department Jo Evelyn Elst~\nector - Pupil Services Department Donation The following organizations wish to make a donation to the Little Rock School District Homeless Education Program in the amount shown below: Grace Presbyterian Church LRSD Association of Educational Office Professionals $102.93 $75.00 The Grace Presbyterian Church donation will be used to provide emergency services for homeless families. The donation from the Little Rock School District Association of Educational Office Professionals will be used for Christmas Holiday assistance for homeless students. It is recommended that these donations be approved in accordance with governing policies of the Little Rock School District. Your consideration is appreciated. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: February 24, 2005 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Roy G. Brooks, Ed.D. Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Financial Reports BACKGROUND: Financial reporting is designed to keep the Board of Directors up-to-date regarding the District's current financial condition. Financial reports are submitted monthly to the Board for review and approval. RATIONALE: January 2005 financial reports are submitted for the Board's review and approval. FUNDING: N/A RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the January 2005 financial reports as submitted. PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen, Manager Financial Services LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JANUARY 31, 2004 AND 2005 APPROVED RECEIPTS % APPROVED RECEIPTS % 2003/04 01/31/04 COLLECTED 2004/05 01/31/05 COLLECTED REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 57,547,800 55,681,497 96.76% 61,436,691 61,324,530 99.82% DELINQUENT TAXES 10,100,000 9,516,878 94.23% 12,135,000 6,480,684 53.40% 40% PULLBACK 29,600,000 31,250,000 EXCESS TREASURER'S FEE 210,000 205,000 DEPOSITORY INTEREST 180,000 155,000 REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES 150,000 206,062 137.37% 185,000 203,569 110.04% MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS 380,000 231 ,195 60.84% 485,000 113,002 23.30% INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 200,000 77,339 38.67% 245,000 199,653 81.49% ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 240,000 166,872 69.53% 215,000 174,899 81.35% TOTAL 98,607,800 65,879,843 66.81% 106,311,691 68,496,337 64.43% REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL 21 ,000 11 ,594 55.21% 22,000 16,103 73.20% TOTAL 21,000 11,594 55.21% 22,000 16,103 7320% REVENUE - STATE SOURCES EQUALIZATION FUNDING 53,226,139 29,447,876 55.33% 65,082,694 37,508,038 57.63% ALTERNATIVE LEARNING 1,927,250 963,624 50.00% ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS 193,739 NATL SCHL LUNCH STUDENT FUNDING 6,498,240 3,544,494 54.55% PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 1,141,165 1,141,165 100.00% REIMBURSEMENT STRS/HEAL TH 8,300,000 3,373,820 40.65% 8,275,000 4,162,579 50.30% VOCATIONAL 1,400,000 621 ,053 44.36% 1,350,000 731 ,911 54.22% HANDICAPPED CHILDREN 1,675,000 271 ,285 16.20% 2,100,000 470,225 22.39% EARLY CHILDHOOD 273,358 202,301 74.01% 5,542,510 2,593,434 46.79% TRANSPORTATION 3,875,562 1,243,841 32.09% 4,125,000 1,330,714 32.26% INCENTIVE FUNDS - M TO M 3,900,000 1,473,688 37.79% 4,575,000 2,048,076 44.77% ADULT EDUCATION 920,337 368,337 40.02% 934,380 344,768 36.90% POVERTY INDEX FUNDS 560,545 267,486 47.72% TAP PROGRAM 285,245 142,623 50.00% 382,903 162,312 42.39% AT RISK FUNDING 360,000 193,739 53.82% 395,000 9,400 2.38% TOTAL 74,776,187 37,606,049 50.29% 102,522,882 55,010,739 53.66% REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES TRANSFER FROM CAP PROJ FUND 770,000 770,000 TRANSFER FROM OTHER FUNDS 1,350,000 141,308 10.47% 1,295,000 8,155 0.63% TRANSFER FROM MAGNET FUND 1,632,430 544,143 33.33% 1,849,008 616,336 33.33% TOTAL 3,752,430 685,451 18.27% 3,914,008 624,491 15.96% TOTAL REVENUE OPERATING 177,157,418 104,182,938 58.81% 212,770,581 124,147,670 58.35% REVENUE - OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 24,075,790 10,010,008 41.58% 21 ,531,929 11 ,631,207 54 .02% DEDICATED M \u0026amp; 0 4,000,000 2,398,316 59.96% 4,500,000 2,465,282 54 .78% MAGNET SCHOOLS 24,689,351 9,322,338 27,964,934 10,526,834 37 .64% TOTAL 52,765,141 21,730,662 41 .18% 53,996,863 24,623,323 45.60% TOT AL REVENUE 229,922,559 125,913,600 54.76% 266,767,444 148,770,993 55.77% a LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JANUARY 31, 2004 AND 2005 APPROVED EXPENDED % APPROVED EXPENDED 2003/04 01/31/04 EXPENDED 2004/05 01/31/05 EXPENSES SALARIES 100,684,982 46,716,574 46.40% 117,324,912 54,777,459 BENEFITS 26,483,772 12,288,907 46.40% 36,185,811 15,514,121 PURCHASED SERVICES 19,719,297 9,320,130 47.26% 20,959,918 9,892,052 MATERIALS \u0026amp; SUPPLIES 8,185,459 5,169,777 63.16% 8,725,914 4,931,068 CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,575,580 630,412 40.01% 2,760,600 932,979 OTHER OBJECTS 8,384,567 2,968,136 35.40% 10,770,418 3,623,285 DEBT SERVICE 12,098,342 12,1 91,763 100.77% 12,474,809 4,590,834 TOTAL EXPENSES OPERATING 177,131,999 89,285,698 50.41% 209,202,382 94,261,798 EXPENSES-OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 26,056,193 8,419,292 32.31% 23,853,134 9,481,805 DEDICATED M \u0026amp; 0 4,000,000 2,306,955 57.67% 5,007,809 2,303,856 MAGNET SCHOOLS 24,689,351 10,577,444 42.84% 27,964,934 11,967,752 TOTAL 54,745,544 21,303,691 38.91% 56,825,877 23,753,413 TOTAL EXPENSES 231,877,543 110,589,388 47.69% 266,028,259 118,015,211 INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE (1 ,954,984) 15,324,211 739,184 30,755,781 BEGINNING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; DED M \u0026amp; 0 3,558,580 3,558,580 4,005,957 4,005,957 OPERATING 9,026,855 9,026,855 6,531,706 6,531,706 ENDING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; DED M \u0026amp; 0 1,578,177 3,985,551 1,176,943 4,875,867 OPERATING 9,052,274 23,924,095 10,099,905 36,417,578 TOTAL 10,630,451 27,909,647 11,276,848 41,293,445 % EXPENDED 46.69% 42.87% 47.20% 56.51% 33.80% 33.64% 36.80% 45.06% 39.75% 46.01% 42.80% 41.80% 44.36% ' ~ \u0026gt; 0 \u0026lt;- 0 c:: ~ 3C m ~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JANUARY 31, 2005 PROJECT BEG BALANCE INCOME TRANSFERS EXPENDITURES ENCUMBRANCES END BALANCE 07-01-04 2004-05 2004-05 2004-05 2004-05 01-31-05 $6,200,000 BOND ISSUE FAIR 17,956.90 2,900.00 15,056.90 MCCLELLAN 77,519.02 77,519.02 CLOVERDALE MIDDLE 396.12 396.12 CONTINGENCY 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 95,872.04 0.00 0.00 2,900.00 0.00 92,972.04 $136,268,560 BOND ISSUES ADMINISTRATION 11 ,586.46 80,000.00 53,155.88 8,936.88 29,493.70 NEW WORK PROJECTS 6,090,835.40 2,964,708.39 885,702.75 2,240,424.26 SECURITY PROJECTS 14,541.25 14,541 .25 LIGHTING PROJECTS 0.00 0.00 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 7,569,593.08 799,765.94 114,071.78 6,655,755.36 RENOVATION PROJECTS 12,752,856.34 5,822,014.90 1,034,233.51 5,896,607.93 TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES 1,569,424.27 1,143,377.19 350,633.20 439,999.88 1,922,168.38 SUBTOTAL 28,008,836.80 1,143,377.19 80,000.00 9,990,278.31 2,482,944.80 16,758,990.88 REVENUES PROCEEDS-PROPERTY SALE 445,618.31 231 ,104.00 676,722.31 DUNBAR PROJECT 5,266.71 5,266.71 PROCEEDS-BOND SALES 14,773,544.18 (80,000.00) 14,693,544.18 PROCEEDS-QZAB SALE 1,293,820.97 1,293,820.97 INTEREST 5,037,437.95 504,492.74 5,541,930.69 SUBTOTAL 21 ,555,688.12 735,596.74 (80,000.00) 0.00 0.00 22,211,284.86 GRAND TOTAL !ll li!ill ~llli llli 1 uza l!Z~ ll~ l2.WI. ll lll!J lZU Jl ~!~ ll~Ull ~ll llli~.~!Z za LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ISSUE PROJECT HISTORY THRU THE PERIOD ENDED JANUARY 31, 2005 I I PROJECT I I ENDING ALLOCATIONS EXPENSE I EXPENSE I EXPENSE EXPENSE EXPENSE ENCUMBERED ALLOCATION PROJECT CATEGORIES THRU 01-31-05 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 THRU 01-31-05 THRU 01-31-05 SUBTOTAL 01-31-05 I I ADMINISTRATION 760,526.80 889,772.32 (485,325.77) 149,597.63 114,896.16 53,155.88 8,936.88 731,033.10 29,493.70 NEW WORK PROJECTS 38,788,412.86 443,467.00 I 4,589,606.29 I 11,671.442.11 15,993,062.06 2,964,708.39 885,702.75 36,547,988.60 2,240,424.26 SECURITY PROJECTS 265,814.17 113,930.47 I 109,609.73 27,732.73 0.00 0.00 251,272.93 14,541.25 LIGHTING PROJECTS 4,862,548.33 2,641,482.13 1,832,392.06 I 379,661 .38 9,012.76 0.00 0.00 4,862,548.33 0.00 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 18,922,387.50 I 791,385.63 1 4,218,294.40 1 3,455,350.67 2,887,763.72 799,765.94 114,071 .78 12,266,632.14 6,655,755.36 RENOVATION PROJECTS 51,027,748.84 397,615.34 4,119,045.21 15,666,239.90 18,091,992.05 5,822,014.90 1,034,233.51 45,131,140.91 5,896,607.93 TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES 12,878,988.97 I 575,016.53 4,325,201 .40 4,500,374.61 765,594.97 350,633.20 439,999.88 10,956,820.59 1,922,168.38 UNALLOCATED PROCEEDS 15,987,365.15 I 15,987,365.15 TOTAL 143,493,792.62 5,852,669.42 18,708,823.32 35,822,666.30 37,890,054.45 9,990,278.31 2,482,944.80 110,747,436.60 32,746,356.03 - -  t I i I I I I I  -- I - - - - I 1N3WNHnorov 11x LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS BY FUND FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JANUARY 31, 2005 j   Fund Purchase Maturity Institution Interest Rate Type Principal Date Date r Operating 01-28-05 TFN Bank of America 2.190% Repo 8,075,000.00 Operating 01-28-05 02-01-05 Bank of America 2.220% Treasury Bills 7,448,162.33 Operating 12-10-04 03-15-05 Twin City Bank 2.410% CD 4,668,206.83 Operating 12-16-04 02-01-05 Twin City Bank 2.630% CD 11,000,000.00 Operating 12-16-04 02-15-05 Twin City Bank 2.670% CD 9,200,000.00 Operating 12-16-04 03-01-05 Twin City Bank 2.710% CD 3,500,000.00 Operating 12-16-04 03-\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_981","title":"Discipline: ''Analysis of Disciplinary Actions, District Level,'' North Little Rock School District","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2005/2006"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","North Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School discipline"],"dcterms_title":["Discipline: ''Analysis of Disciplinary Actions, District Level,'' North Little Rock School District"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/981"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["19 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nNORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ANALYSIS OF DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS District Level FRANCICAL J. JACKSON Director of Student Affairs RECEIVED APR2 3 2007 OFFICEOF DESEGREGMAOTNIOITNO RING IJ I I I I I I I I i i 1 1 I RECEIVED Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Summary APR2 3 2007 OFFIOCFE Presented by Fran Jackson, Director of Student Affairs DESEGREGMAOTNIOITNO RING The Analysis of Disciplinary Actions is analyses of data showing numbers by school, race, and gender in relation to enrollment in each school and the district as a whole. This report compares the data with that of the previous years. The actions are categorized as Black Males, Black Females, Non-Black Males and Non-Black Females. They are shown in the following categories: Actions 09 SAC (Student Assignment Class) 10 Home Suspensions 11 Boys Club / ASAC (Off Campus Suspension-Argenta Student Assignment Class) 12 E.I.C. (Intervention Classroom) 17 Expulsion A ten year comparison is provided at the end of the report to give a wide view of the discipline actions over a longer period. An analysis at the District level shows a decrease in actions in the following areas: Black Males E.I.C 23.6% Expulsion 63.6% Non-Black Males Expulsion 38.5% All other areas show an increase in actions. The elementary level shows a decrease in actions in the following areas: Black Males Black Females Home Suspensions 8.9% Home Suspensions 11.5% E.I.C. 23.6% Non-Black Males Non-Black Females Home Suspensions 11.8% Home Suspensions 76.9% E.I.C. 200% All other areas show an increase in actions. J I The middle school level shows a decrease in action in the following area: Black Males Expulsion 50% All other areas show an increase in actions. The high school level shows a decrease in actions in the following areas: Black Males Non-Black Males SAC Expulsion 50.2% 27.3% SAC 5.1% All other areas show an increase in actions. The ten year comparison shows an increase in home suspensions during the 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 school year when the off campus suspension class was not available. However, this program was reinstated at the beginning of the 2006-2007 school year. A major effort by the total District has been made to keep our students in school. This is reflected in the total number of expulsions at the District level. This analysis also reflects a decrease in the number of actions for Black males. The staff is commended for the various programs provided to increase student achievement. Research shows high achievement - lower discipline. March 22, 2007 llJ ] I J IJ I J IJ I J I J I l I J I I J I I I I I J I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Discipline Actions Schoo1Year2005-2006 District Level Elementary Middle Schools High Schools 9 Year Comparison Ref: DIS032 Date: 6/12/06 rime : 18 : o 5 : 5 3 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions DISTRICT LEVEL From AUGUST Through MAY 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU ======================--====--=-------------------------------=-----===-------~= 09 S.A.C. 1560 52.3% 860 28.8% 390 13.1% 172 5.8% 2982 626 421 211 117 1375 10 HOME SUSP. 753 61.2% 325 26.4% 110 8.9% 43 3.5% 1231 438 200 72 30 740 11 BOYS CLUB 3 75.0% 1 25.0% 0 0 5l-  0 0 O!l-  0 4 3 1 0 0 4 12 E. I.C. ll0 72. 4% 30 19.7% 11 7.2% 1 7 5l-  0 152 70 17 9 1 97 17 EXPULSION ll 52.4% 0 O!l-  0 9 42.9% 1 4.8% 21 11 0 9 1 21 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 1843 50.3% 1189 32.5% 471 12.9% 158 4.3% 3661 722 515 257 107 1601 10 HOME SUSP. ll66 58.5% 565 28.3% 208 10.4% 54 2.7% 1993 566 288 134 37 1025 11 BOYS CLUB 40 58.0% 15 21.7% 9 13. 0% 5 7.2% 69 20 8 5 3 36 12 E.I.C. 84 60.9% 38 27.5% 13 9. 4 % 3 2.2% 138 60 26 11 3 100 17 EXPULSION 4 30.8% 2 15.4% 5 38.5% 2 15.4% 13 4 2 5 2 13 ----=========------------======================================================= COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ---==============--------------=-==============-=--------=======-=============== 09 S.A.C. 283 18.1 % 329 38.3 % 81 20.8 % 14- 8.1-% 679 96 94 46 10- 226 10 HOME SUSP. 413 54.8 % 240 73.8 % 98 89.1 0 'o 11 25.6 % 762 . 128 88 62 7 285 ll BOYS CLUB 37 1233.3 % 14 1400.0 % 9 900.0 % 5 500.0 % 65 17 7 5 3 32 12 E. I.C. 26- 23.6-% 8 26.7 % 2 18.2 % 2 200.0 % 14- 10- 9 2 2 3 17 EXPULSION 7- 63.6-% 2 200.0 % 4- 44.4-% 1 100.0 % 8- 7- 2 4- 1 8- Ref: DIS032 Date: 6/12/06 Time: 18:05:53 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION _Analysis of Disciplinary Actions ELEMENTARY K-5 From AUGUST Through MAY 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 !l.  0 0 224 69.3% 129 0 O!l.  0 0 110 72.4% 70 0 O!l.  0 0 -----BF-----# REF PCT /TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 52 16.1% 34 0 O!l.  0 0 30 19.7% 17 0 O!l.  0 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 O!l.  0 0 34 10.5% 20 0 0 !l.  0 0 11 7.2% 9 0 O!l.  0 0 -----NBF----# REF PCT /TOT # STU 0 O!l.  0 0 13 4.0% 6 0 O!l.  0 0 1 79.  0 1 0 O!l.  0 0 0 0 323 189 0 0 152 97 0 0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2, 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------==-===-=----------======================================================== 09 S.A.C. 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 O!l.  0 0 O!l.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 204 69.2% 58 19.7% 30 10.2% 3 1.0% 295 143 43 22 3 211 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 O!l.  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C. 84 60.9% 38 27.5% 13 9.4% 3 2.2% 138 60 26 11 3 100 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 O!l.  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 -=============================================================================== COMPARISON ---============----------======================================================= -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT( /-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ----============-------------------============================================= 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 20- 8.9-% 6 11. 5 % 4- 11. 8-% 10- 76.9-% 28- 14 9 2 3- 22 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 g. 0 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 26- 23.6-% 8 26.7 % 2 18.2 % 2 200.0 % 14- 10- 9 2 2 3 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 J ] ] J ] Ref:. DIS032 Date: 6/12/06 Time : 18 : 0 5 : 5 3 Art~lysis of Disciplinary A~tions MIDDLE SCHOOLS From AUGUST Through MAY 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 839 52.0% 434 26. 9% 254 15.8% 85 5.3% 1612 328 224 131 54 737 10 HOME SUSP. 199 53.4% llO 29.5% 52 13. 9% 12 3.2% 373 122 74 29 8 233 11 BOYS CLUB 3 75.0% 1 25.0% 0 .0% 0 09-  0 4 3 1 0 0 4 12 E. I.C. 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 5 55.6% 0 0 9-  0 4 44.4% 0 0 9-  0 9 5 0 4 0 9 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BE'------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 1138 50.4% 747 33.1% 286 12.7% 87 3.9% 2258 414 298 14 3 55 910 10 HOME SUSP. 568 55.0% 315 30.5% ll9 11. 5% 31 3.0% 1033 221 134 70 22 447 ll BOYS CLUB 40 58.0% 15 21.7% 9 13. 0% 5 7.2% 69 20 8 5 3 36 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1 50.0% 0 09-  0 0 .0% 1 50.0% 2 1 0 0 1 2 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BE'------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ---------=---------------------------------------------------------============= 09 S.A.C. 299 35.6 % 313 72 .1 % 32 12.6 % 2 2.4 % 646 86 74 12 1 173 10 HOME SUSP. 369 185.4 % 205 186.4 % 67 128.8 % 19 158.3 % 660 99 60 41 14 214 ll BOYS CLUB 37 1233.3 9- 0 14 1400.0 % 9 900.0 % 5 500.0 % 65 17 7 5 3 32 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 9- 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 4- 80.0-% 0 . 0 % 4- 100.0-% 1 100.0 0 'o 7- 4- 0 4- 1 7- Ref: DIS032 Date: 6/12/06 Time: 18:05:53 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions HIGH SCHOOLS From AUGUST Through MAY 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 721 52.6% 426 31.1% 136 9.9% 87 6.4% 1370 298 197 80 63 638 10 HOME SUSP. 327 61. 5% 163 30.6% 24 4.5% 18 3.4% 532 185 92 23 16 316 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 6 50.0% 0 Og_  0 5 41. 7% 1 8.3% 12 6 0 5 1 12 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION 705 50.2% 442 31. 5% 185 13. 2% 71 5.1% 308 217 114 52 394 59.2% 192 28.9% 59 8.9% 20 3.0% 202 111 42 12 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 3 27.3% 2 18.2% 5 45.5% 1 9.1% 3 2 5 1 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU 1403 691 665 367 0 0 0 0 11 11 ------------------------ ------------------------------------ ------------------ 09 S.A.C. 16- 2.2-% 16 3.8 % 49 36.0 % 16- 18.4-% 33 10 20 34 11- 53 10 HOME SUSP. 67 20.5 % 29 17. 8 % 35 145.8 % 2 11.1 % 133 17 19 19 4- 51 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 3- 50.0-% 2 200.0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 1- 3- 2 0 0 1- ] Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time : 18 : 0 5 : 5 3 School: 012 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL - 11/12 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 142 42.5% 101 30.2% 67 20.1% 24 7.2% 334 88 69 41 17 215 10 HOME SUSP. 59 60.8% 21 21.6% 6 6.2% 11 11. 3% 97 52 18 6 10 86 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 O!l-  0 0 .0% 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 O!l-  0 0 .0% 0 O!l-  0 1 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 !l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 1 100.0% 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 234 49.2% 118 24.8% 91 19.1% 33 6.9% 476 126 81 59 23 289 10 HOME SUSP. 67 60.4% 26 23. 4 % 15 13.5% 3 2.7% 111 53 25 14 3 95 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 O!l-  0 0 .0% 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1 25.0% 2 50.0% 1 25.0% 0 O!l-  0 4 1 2 1 0 4 =---------------------------------=======-==============================--=====- COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----# REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------== 09 S.A.C. 92 64.8 % 17 16.8 % 24 35.8 % 9 37.5 % 142 38 12 18 6 74 10 HOME SUSP. 8 13.6 % 5 23.8 % 9 150.0 % 8- 72. 7-% 14 1 7 8 7- 9 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C. 0 . 0 g. 0 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1 100.0 % 2 200.0 % 1 100.0 % 1- 100.0-% 3 1 2 1 1- 3 l l I I I I I l I I ' I I I J I J I J I J Ref: Date: Time: DIS032S 6/12/06 18:05:53 School: 013 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY NORTH LITTLE ROCK HIGH SCHOOL - 09/10 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 57 9 55.9% 324 31. 3% 69 6.7% 63 6.1% 1035 210 127 39 46 422 10 HOME SUSP. 167 56.2% 106 35.7% 17 5.7% 7 2.4% 297 94 57 16 6 173 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 5 051-  0 0 051-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 6 54.5% 0 0 51-  0 5 45.5% 0 Og_  0 11 6 0 5 0 11 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -----=====----------------=-============----==================================== 09 S.A.C. 470 50.8% 324 35.0% 93 10.1% 38 4. 1% 925 182 136 54 29 401 10 HOME SUSP. 184 53.8% 119 34.8% 33 9.6% 6 1.8% 342 97 67 25 6 195 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 g_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 0 g_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 2 28.6% 0 .0% 4 57.1% 1 14.3% 7 2 0 4 1 7 ----=====-=--------------======================================================= COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU --=================---------------=========-===-==-----========================= 09 S.A.C. 109- 18.8-% 0 . 0 % 24 34.8 % 25- 39.7-% 110- 28- 9 15 17- 21- 10 HOME SUSP. 17 10.2 % 13 12.3 % 16 94.1 % 1- 14.3-% 45 3 10 9 0 22 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C. 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 4- 66.7-% 0 . 0 % 1- 20.0-% 1 100.0 % 4- 4- 0 1- 1 4- Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time: 18:05:53 School: 020 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY ARGENTA ACADEMY 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 O!l,  0 0 O!l,  0 0 O!l,  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 102 71. 3% 40 28.0% 1 7!,,  0 0 O!l,  0 143 46 23 1 0 70 11 BOYS CLUB 0 O!l,  0 0 02-  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 .0% 0 02-  0 0 02-  0 0 . 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 02-  0 0 02-  0 0 0 2-  0 0 02-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 1 50.0% 0 02-  0 1 50.0% 0 0 2-  0 2 1 0 1 0 2 10 HOME SUSP. 14 3 67.8% 48 22.7% 11 5.2% 9 4.3% 211 64 24 4 2 94 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 2-  0 0 0 2-  0 0 02-  0 0 02-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 2-  0 0 02-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 2-  0 0 0 2-  0 0 02-  0 0 02-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -----------------------------------======-================-=-----------------=== COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------======-=------------------------------------------------------=========-- 09 S.A.C. 1 100.0 % 0 . 0 % 1 100.0 % 0 . 0 % 2 1 0 1 0 2 10 HOME SUSP. 41 40.2 % 8 20.0 % 10 1000.0 2- 0 9 900.0 % 68 18 1 3 2 24 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 0 'o 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 T irne : 18 : 0 5 : 5 3 School: 024 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY RIDGEROAD MIDDLE CHARTER SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 337 54.5% 193 31. 2% 67 10.8% 21 3.4% 618 124 86 32 15 257 10 HOME SUSP. 52 57.8% 27 30.0% 10 11. 1% 1 1.1% 90 37 15 6 1 59 11 BOYS CLUB 0 05).  0 0 05).  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 05).  0 0 0 5).  0 1 05).  0 0 0 5).  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 5 83.3% 0 05).  0 1 16.7% 0 0 5).  0 6 5 0 1 0 6 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 457 46.5% 414 42.2% 81 8.2% 30 3.1% 982 150 150 38 18 356 10 HOME SUSP. 242 53.2% 158 34. 7% 45 9.9% 10 2.2% 455 89 66 24 7 186 11 BOYS CLUB 1 50.0% 1 50.0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 2 1 1 0 0 2 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 05).  0 0 05).  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 1 100.0% 0 05).  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 1 1 0 0 0 1 =------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMPARISON =---------------------------------===============================-=----========- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU 09 S.A.C. 120 35.6 % 221 114. 5 % 14 20.9 % 9 42.9 0 15 364 26 64 6 3 99 10 HOME SUSP. 190 365.4 % 131 485.2 % 35 350.0 % 9 900.0 % 365 52 51 18 6 127 11 BOYS CLUB 1 100.0 % 1 100.0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 2 1 1 0 0 2 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 5). 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 4- 80.0-% 0 . 0 % 1- 100.0-% 0 .0 % 5- 4- 0 1- 0 5- Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time : 18 : 0 5 : 5 3 School: 025 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY LAKEWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU =======================================--------==-----=-----=------------------- 09 S.A.C. 127 39.4% 61 18.9% 103 32.0% 31 9.6% 322 57 35 59 25 176 10 HOME SUSP. 29 35.8% 19 23.5% 31 38.3% 2 2.5% 81 21 14 15 2 52 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 3 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 3 100.0% 0 09-  0 3 0 0 3 0 3 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 146 42.3% 66 19.1% 109 31.6% 24 7.0% 345 69 31 63 18 181 10 HOME SUSP. 68 47.6% 17 11. 9% 48 33.6% 10 7.0% 143 30 11 32 10 83 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 09-  0 1 100.0% 1 0 0 0 1 1 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ======================------------------------------------------------------==== 09 S.A.C. 19 15.0 % 5 8.2 % 6 5.8 % 7- 22.6-% 23 12 4- 4 7- 5 10 HOME SUSP. 39 134. 5 % 2- 10.5-% 17 54.8 % 8 400.0 % 62 9 3- 17 8 31 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 3- 100.0-% 1 100.0 % 2- 0 0 3- 1 2- Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time: 18:05:53 School: 026 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY ROSE CITY MIDDLE SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 105 59.7% 35 19.9% 26 14.8% 10 5.7% 176 44 22 10 4 80 10 HOME SUSP. 42 50.6% 35 42.2% 4 4.8% 2 2. 4% 83 25 26 4 2 57 11 BOYS CLUB 3 100.0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 3 3 0 0 0 3 12 E. I.C. 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 g_  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 g_  0 0 0 g_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 225 60.5% 97 26.1% 37 9.9% 13 3.5% 372 68 42 11 6 127 10 HOME SUSP. 14 9 60.8% 71 29.0% 17 6.9% 8 3.3% 245 53 32 8 4 97 11 BOYS CLUB 39 58.2% 14 20.9% 9 13. 4% 5 7.5% 67 19 7 5 3 34 12 E. I.C 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 g_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -========================----=--==============-------------------==-=========== 09 S.A.C. 120 114. 3 % 62 177.1 % 11 42.3 % 3 30.0 % 196 24 20 1 2 47 10 HOME SUSP. 107 254.8 % 36 102.9 % 13 325.0 % 6 300.0 % 162 28 6 4 2 40 11 BOYS CLUB 36 1200.0 % 14 1400.0 % 9 900.0 % 5 500.0 % 64 16 7 5 3 31 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S 6/12/06 18:05:54 030 Date: Time: School: 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY POPLAR STREET MIDDLE SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 270 54.3% 113 76 65.0% 40 0 Og_  0 0 0 Og_  0 0 0 09-  0 0 -----BF-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 146 29. 4 % 84 27 23.1% 18 1 100.0% 1 0 .0% 0 0 Og_  0 0 -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 58 11. 7% 31 7 6.0% 4 0 Og_  0 0 0 Og_  0 0 0 Og_  0 0 -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 23 4.6% 12 7 6.0% 3 0 Og_  0 0 0 Og_  0 0 0 Og_  0 0 4 97 240 117 65 1 1 0 0 0 0 ---------=---------------------=---==-----------================================ 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 310 55.5% 170 30.4% 59 10.6% 20 3.6% 559 136 79 32 13 260 10 HOME SUSP. 109 57.1% 68 35.6% 9 4.7% 5 2.6% 191 52 28 7 2 89 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 0 g_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C 0 Og_  0 0 0 g_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 0 g_ . 0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---==========--------------=================================-----------========= COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 40 14.8 % 24 16.4 % 1 1. 7 % 3- 13.0-% 62 23 5- 1 1 20 10 HOME SUSP. 33 43.4 % 41 151. 9 % 2 28.6 % 2- 28.6-% 74 12 10 3 1- 24 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 1- 100.0-% 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 1- 0 1- 0 0 1- 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time : 18 : 0 5 : 5 4 School: 031 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY AMBOY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU =============-==---------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 19 67.9% 1 3.6% 3 10.7% 5 17.9% 28 7 1 2 2 12 11 BOYS CLUB 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 . 0 9- 0 0 9- 0  0  0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -==============-----------=-===========----------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 7 77.8% 1 11.1% 1 11.1% 0 0 9-  0 9 4 1 1 0 6 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 1 100.0% 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------ COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 12- 63.2-% 0 . 0 % 2- 66.7-% 5- 100.0-% 19- 3- 0 1- 2- 6- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 1 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 J I J ] Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time: 18:05:54 School: 032 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 09-  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 4 57.1% 1 14.3% 2 28.6% 0 0 9-  0 7 3 1 2 0 6 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C. 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 9,.  0 0 0 9,.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 09-  0 0 0 9,.  0 0 0 9,.  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 9,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 5 62.5% 2 25.0% 1 12.5% 0 .0% 8 5 2 1 0 8 11 BOYS CLUB 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 09,.  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 1 100.0% 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9,.  0 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 09,.  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 1 25.0 % 1 100.0 9- 0 1- 50.0-% 0 . 0 % 1 2 1 1- 0 2 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 1 . 0 % 0 . 0 0 15 0 . 0 0 15 0 .0 % 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 ] ] ] I J J J j Ref: DIS032S 6/12/06 18:05:54 033 Date: Time: School: 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY BOONE PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 O!l-  0 0 7 87.5% 5 0 O!l-  0 0 30 76.9% 17 0 0 !l-  0 0 -----BF------ # REF PCT /TOT # STU 0 O!l-  0 0 1 12.5% 1 0 O!l-  0 0 9 23.1% 2 0 O!l-  0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 O!l-  0 0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 .0% 0 -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT /TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 0 0 !l-  0 0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 !l-  0 0 0 O!l-  0 0 -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 8 6 0 0 39 19 0 0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 11 78.6% 3 21. 4 % 0 .0% 0 O!l-  0 14 8 3 0 0 11 11 BOYS CLUB 0 O!l-  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 33 68.8% 13 27.1% 2 4.2% 0 O!l-  0 48 17 10 2 0 29 17 EXPULSION 0 O!l-  0 0 .0% 0 O!l-  0 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------========-=-----------------------------------------------------========== 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 4 57 .1 % 2 200.0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 6 3 2 0 0 5 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 3 .0 % 4 . 0 % 2 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 9 0 0 2 0 10 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I J I I I I I J I I I I I J I J I I I J I J I J Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 T irne : 18 : 0 5 : 5 4 School: 035 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 g.  0 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 67 84.8% 12 15.2% 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 79 42 10 0 0 52 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 54 80.6% 13 19.4% 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 67 34 9 0 0 43 17 EXPULSION 0 0 g.  0 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 g.  0 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 40 75.5% 11 20.8% 2 3.8% 0 Og.  0 53 29 9 1 0 39 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 g.  0 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 O!l-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og. . 0 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 27- 40.3-% 1- 8.3-% 2 200.0 % 0 .0 % 26- 13- 1- 1 0 13- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 54- .0 % 13- .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 67- 1- 1- 0 0 43- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time: 18:05:54 School: 037 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY LYNCH DRIVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 4 40.0% 6 60.0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 g_  0 10 4 4 0 0 8 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 10 71. 4% 3 21. 4 % 0 7.1% 0 0 9-  0 14 7 2 1 0 10 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 21 91. 3% 1 4.3% 1 4.3% 0 0 9-  0 23 15 1 1 0 17 11 BOYS CLUB 0 09-  0 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 5 83.3% 1 16.7% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 6 4 1 0 0 5 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU --------=-===-==-----------------------=------------------------------========== 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 17 425.0 % 5- 83.3-% 1 100.0 % 0 .0 % 13 11 3- 1 0 9 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 5- . 0 % 2- . 0 % 1- . 0 % 0 .0 % 8- 1- 1- 1- 0 5- 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time: 18:05:54 School: 040 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 55 64.7% 23 27.1% 2 2.4% 5 5.9% 85 23 11 2 1 37 11 BOYS CLUB 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 09-  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 09-  0 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 34 66.7% 16 31. 4 % 1 2.0% 0 .0% 51 19 12 1 0 32 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og_  0 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 09-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 21- 38.2-% 7- 30.4-% 1- 50.0-% 5- 100.0-% 34- 4- 1 1- 1- 5- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,J Ref: DIS032S 6/12/06 18:05:54 041 Date: Time: School: 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY NORTH HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 Og.  0 0 2 20.0% 2 0 Og.  0 0 4 30.8% 4 0 Og.  0 0 -----BF-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 Og. . 0 0 3 23 .1% 3 0 Og.  0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 .0% 0 8 80.0% 3 0 Og.  0 0 0 38.5% 3 0 Og.  0 0 -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NBF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 09-  0 0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 7.7% 1 0 Og.  0 0 -----NSF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 10 5 0 0 13 11 0 0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 09-  0 0 09-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 10 76.9% 1 7.7% 2 15.4% 0 0 g.  0 13 7 1 2 0 10 11 BOYS CLUB 0 09-  0 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E.I.C 6 50.0% 2 16.7% 3 25.0% 1 8.3% 12 5 2 3 1 11 17 EXPULSION 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 g.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NSF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ---===================--------------=====-~=~=---------------=================== 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 8 400.0 % 1 100.0 % 6- 75.0-% 0 .0 % 3 5 1 1- 0 5 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C. 2 . 0 % 1- .0 % 2- . 0 % 0 . 0 % 1- 1 0 2- 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time : 18 : 0 5 : 5 4 School: 042 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 19 61. 3% 1 3.2% 11 35.5% 0 .0% 31 15 1 7 0 23 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 g.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 g.  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 0 g.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 6 35.3% 7 41. 2% 2 11. 8% 2 11. 8% 17 5 3 2 2 12 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 1 100.0% 0 0 g.  0 0 .0% 0 0 g.  0 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 0 g.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 0 '\u0026lt;5 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 13- 68.4-% 6 600.0 % 9- 81.8-% 2 200.0 % 14- 10- 2 5- 2 11- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 1 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 1 1 0 0 0 1 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 g. 0 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I IJ I I II I ] I I I J I I I I I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time: 18:05:54 School: 04 3 09 S.A.C. 10 HOME SUSP. 11 BOYS CLUB 12 E. I.C. 17 EXPULSION Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY PARK HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM-----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 Og.  0 0 20 62.5% 11 0 Og.  0 0 0 Og.  0 0 0 Og.  0 0 -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 Og.  0 0 4 12.5% 3 0 0 g.  0 0 0 0 g.  0 0 0 Og.  0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU -----NBM----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 Og.  0 0 6 18.8% 3 0 Og.  0 0 0 100.0% 1 0 0 g.  0 0 -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -----NSF----# REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 Og.  0 0 2 6.3% 2 0 0 g.  0 0 0 Og.  0 0 0 0 g.  0 0 -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU 0 0 32 19 0 0 1 1 0 0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 g.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 15 60.0% 1 4.0% 9 36.0% 0 0 g.  0 25 10 1 6 0 17 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og.  0 0 .0% 0 0 g.  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 1 16.7% 1 16. 7% 4 66.7% 0 Og.  0 6 1 1 3 0 5 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 g.  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- ff REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU n STU # STU n STU ------===========-----------------------------------------------------------===- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 5- 25.0-% 3- 75.0-% 3 50.0 % 2- 100.0-% 7- 1- 2- 3 2- 2- 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 1 . 0 % 1 .0 % 3 . 0 % 0 .0 % 5 1 1 3 0 4 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 J I J J I I I I I I I I J I I I J I J I J I l Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12 /06 Time: 18:05:54 School: 044 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY PIKE VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT /TO.T # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 8 100.0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 g_  0 8 7 0 0 0 7 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 g_  0 0 0 g_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 3 75.0% 0 .0% 0 25.0% 0 Og_  0 4 1 0 1 0 2 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 . 0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU ------------------------------=========------------===========================-- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 23 63.9% 11 30.6% 2 5.6% 0 Og_  0 36 16 6 1 0 23 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 33 55.9% 21 35.6% 3 5.1% 2 3. 4 % 59 27 12 2 2 43 17 EXPULSION 0 Og_  0 0 . 0% 0 0 g_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ==-----------------------------------------------------------------------------= COMPARISON ==----============-----=-======================================================- -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU ===---==============--------------=============-=-=-=--------===============---- 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 15 187.5 % 11 1100.0 % 2 200.0 % 0 . 0 % 28 9 6 1 0 16 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 30 .0 g, 0 21 .0 % 2 . 0 % 2 . 0 % 55 10 21 2 2 41 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I - [_ I I Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time: 18:05:54 School: 045 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY BELWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 7 100.0% 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 7 5 0 0 0 5 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT /TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 9 100.0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 9 8 0 0 0 8 11 BOYS CLUB 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I. C 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 0 9-  0 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 9-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 2 28.6 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 2 3 0 0 0 3 11 BOYS CLUB 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 l I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I l Ref: DIS032S Date: 6/12/06 Time: 18:05:54 School: 04 6 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY GLENVIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 7 87.5% 1 12.5% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 8 5 1 0 0 6 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBE\"'----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REE\"' PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 15 62. 5% 4 16.7% 5 20.8% 0 Og_  0 24 13 4 4 0 21 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBE\"'----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REE\"' PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU 09 S.A.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 8 114. 3 % 3 300.0 % 5 500.0 % 0 .0 % 16 8 3 4 0 15 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I 11 I I I I 1  1 I I 1 I l I l Ref: DIS032S Date : 6 / 12 / 0 6 Time: 18:05:54 School: 048 Analysis of Disciplinary Actions by School From AUGUST Through MAY INDIAN HILLS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 2 0 0 4 - 0 5 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 0 g_  0 0 .0% 0 0 g_  0 0 .0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 7 70.0% 0 Og_  0 2 20.0% 1 10.0% 10 4 0 1 1 6 11 BOYS CLUB 0 Og_  0 0 0 g_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 g_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 9 64.3% 2 14.3% 0 21. 4% 0 Og_  0 14 7 1 3 0 11 17 EXPULSION 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 - 0 6 -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # REF PCT/TOT # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 8 61.5% 0 .0% 4 30.8% 1 7.7% 13 6 0 2 1 9 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0% 0 0 9.-  0 0 .0% 0 09.-  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C 3 75.0% 0 .0% 1 25.0% 0 .0% 4 3 0 1 0 4 17 EXPULSION 0 Og_  0 0 .0% 0 Og_  0 0 Og_ . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 COMPARISON -----BM------ -----BF------ -----NBM----- -----NBF----- # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # REF PCT(+/-) # STU # STU # STU # STU -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 09 S.A.C. 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 HOME SUSP. 1 14.3 % 0 .0 % 2 100.0 % 0 .o % 3 2 0 1 0 3 11 BOYS CLUB 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 . 0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 E. I.C. 6- .0 % 2- . 0 % 2- . 0 % 0 . 0 % 10- 1- 1- 2- 0 7- 17 EXPULSION 0 .0 % 0 . 0 % 0 .0 % 0 .0 % 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I I I I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 BM D \"04-05 1560  05.09 1843 Action 09: SAC BF NBM 860 390 1189 471 NSF 172 158  '04-05  '05-06 1200 1000 800 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 10: Home Suspension 600 D 04-05  os-o\u0026amp; 400 200 BM BF NBM NBF D 04-05 753 325 111 43  '05-08 1188 585 208 54 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 D 04-05  \"05-06 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 11: Boys Club BM BF NBM NBF 3 1 0 0 40 15 9 5  04-05  '05-06 120 100 80 40 I_] 20 I I 0 D 04-05 I  '05-08 I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 BM BF NBM NBF 110 30 11 1 14 38 13 3 12 10 8 6 4 1 2 I I 0 D 04-05 1  '05-08 I 1 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions District Level Action 17: Expulsion BM BF NBM NBF 11 0 9 1 4 2 5 2  04-05  '05-06 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 09: SAC 1 _/ 0.9 _/ o.a--- 0.7-\" 0.6 _/ 0.5-v 0  4-v 0  3-V 0.2 _/ 0.1 _/ 0 BM BF NBM NBF D 04-05 0 0 0 0  '05-08 0 0 0 0 D 04-05  '05-08 J J IJ J IJ IJ 250 200 150 100 50 0 D 04-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 10: Home Suspension BM BF NBM NBF 224 52 34 13  '05-06 204 58 30 3  04-05  '05-06 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 11: Boys Club 1 _/ 0.9-  o.a-  0.7-  0  6 V 0.5_v 0.4-v 0.3-v 0.2-v 0.1 _v 0 BM BF NBM NBF D 04-05 0 0 0 0  os-o\u0026amp; 0 0 0 0  04-05  '05-06 ] J I l J J J i 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 D 04-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 BM BF NBM NBF 110 30 11 1  \"05-08 84 38 13 3  04-05  '05-06 .. North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Elementary K-5 Action 17: Expulsion 1_/ 0.9-\" 0.8- 0.7_v 0  6-V 0.5-L-' 0  4-v 0.3.v 0  2-v 0.1 _v 0 BM BF NBM NBF D 04-05 0 0 0 0  os-o\u0026amp; 0 0 0 0  04-05  '05-06 ] I J I J J I J I l 1 i 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 004-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 09: SAC BM BF NBM NBF 839 434 254 85  '05-08 1138 747 288 87 D 04-05  '05-06 ] I J ] J J J ] 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 D 04-05  '05-08 I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 10: Home Suspension BM BF NBM NBF 199 110 53 12 581 315 119 31  04-05  05.0\u0026amp; ] 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0  04-05 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 11: Boys Club BM BF NBM NBF 3 1 0 0  '05-08 40 15 9 5  04-05  '05-06 I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 1_/ 0.9-v 0  8 _v 0.7y 0.6-v 0  5Y 0.4-L-' 0.3_v 0.2_v 0.1 _v 0 BM BF NBM NBF D 04-05 0 0 0 0  \"05-06 0 0 0 0  04-05  '05-06 I J I J I J I J I J IJ IJ IJ IJ I I I I I I I I I 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0  04-05  '05-08 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions Middle Schools Action 17: Expulsion BM BF NBM NBF 5 0 4 0 1 0 0 1  04-05  05.oe 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 D 04-05  os-06 North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 09: SAC BM BF NBM NBF 721 426 136 87 705 442 185 71  04-05  05.0\u0026amp; 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 D 04-05  '05-08 ~ I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 10: Home Suspension BM BF NBM NBF 327 183 24 18 394 192 59 20  04-05  05.0\u0026amp; I I I_ I I I I I ,I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 11: Boys Club 1 _,, 0.9_v 0.8-\" 0.7_v 0  6-V 0.5_v 0.4-v 0.3.v 0  2-v 0.1-\"' 0 BM BF NBM NBF 0 04-05 0 0 0 0  \"05-08 0 0 0 0  04-05  '05-06 IJ IJ 1:] IJ I I I I II I I I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 1 - 0.9-  o.a ,, 0.7-  0.6-V 0.5_v 0.4-v 0.3_v 0.2- 0.1 _,, 0 BM BF NBM NBF D 04-05 0 0 0 0  '05-08 0 0 0 0  04-05  '05-06 6 5 4 3 I 2 I 1 I I 0 D 04-05 I  '05-08 I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions High Schools Action 17: Expulsion BM BF NBM NBF 8 0 5 1 3 2 5 1   04-05  os-o\u0026amp; I I I I I I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 09: SAC 2000-r------------~ 1800-,......._,r----------~ 1800__......,......__, ________ ~ 1400 1200 1000 800 800 400 200 0 BM BF NBM  98-97 1284 55 489  97-98 1801 882 547  98-99 1443 718 458  99-00 1488 882 401 D 00-01 1092 558 287  01-02 1278 574 354 D 02-03 1903 1050 512  03-04 1981 980 394 D '04-05 1580 880 390  '05-08 1843 1189 471 NBF 142 132 138 139 89 107 172 220 172 158  98-97  97-98  98-99  99-00 D 00-01  01-02 D 02-03  03-04 D \"04-05  \"05-08 I I North Little Rock Public Schools II Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison I Action 10: Home Suspension I I 1200 I 1000 I 800 I 800 I  98-97 400  97-91  98-99 I 200  99-00  00-01 I 0  01-02 BM BF NBM NBF D 02-03 I  98-97 591 208 125 17  03-04  97-98 511 125 104 13  '04-05 I  91-99 588 141 125 22  '05-08  99-00 408 113 102 18 I  00-01 315 92 84 7  01-02 892 234 92 21 I 002-03 522 193 83 13  03-04 489 157 88 18  '04-05 753 325 111 43 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 11: Boys Club 600--------------, 500--------------- 400...Jl-tl------------ 300 200 100 0 BM BF NBM NBF  96-97 357 146 85 20  97-98 515 148 112 8  98-99 359 148 88 22  99-00 351 129 90 27 D 00-01 325 136 56 12  01-02 210 83 52 11 002-03 244 86 83 25  03-04 316 155 51 16  04.05 3 1 0 0  os-o\u0026amp; 40 15 9 5 1196-97  97-98  98-99  99-00 D 00-01  01-02 D 02-03  03-04  04.05 o o5-o6 I I I I I I I I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 12: E. I. C. K-5 350 300- 250 200- \u0026gt;- 150- 100- 0- 0- I ~Jj .. _A. BM BF NBM NBF  98-97 154 30 32 3  97-98 0 0 0 0  98-99 211 108 27 8  99-00 248 83 75 18  00-01 182 55 40 21  01-02 342 184 87 29 002-03 252 97 52 11  03-04 195 70 18 11  '04-05 110 30 11 1  '05-08 84 38 13 3  98-97  97-98  98-99  99-00 D 00-01  01-02 D 02-03  03-04  '04-05  '05-08 IJ ~] I I I I I I I I I I I I North Little Rock Public Schools Analysis of Disciplinary Actions 10 Year Comparison Action 17: Expulsion 12- 10- 8- 8- 4- - 2-a I ~ - - 0- J I II BM BF NBM NBF  98-97 3 7 0 0  97-98 8 5 0 0  98-99 7 2 1 1  99-00 3 0 2 0 D 00-01 3 0 5 3  01-02 1 0 2 1 D 02-03 2 0 2 0  03-04 2 0 2 0  '04-05 11 0 9 1 In n ,. .. 4 ~ a\n: ~ 98-97  97-98  98-99  99-00  00-01  01-02 D 02-03  03-04  '04-05 D '05-08\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_463","title":"Evaluation of Reading Recovery In the Little Rock School District, 2005 Aggregate Report, Draft","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2005"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Evaluation of Reading Recovery In the Little Rock School District, 2005 Aggregate Report, Draft"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/463"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["36 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nRECEIVED JAN 5 2006 OFRCEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Research in EducalionaJ Pcticy Evaluation of Reading Recovery In the Little Rock School District Ceruer for Researdi in Educational Policy The UniversSy of Memphis 325 Browning Ha# f.temohcs Tennessee 38152 To(Free1-866^7(M147 2005 Aggregate Report DRAFT REPORT FOR REVIEW BY Little Rock School District CREP Center for Research in Educational Policy Center for Rcsea'di in Edixatkinal Potcy The University' of Fvlempliis 325 Browning Mali Memohis Tennessee 38152 Tea Free 1-8I56-67M147 Evaluation of Reading Recovery In the Little Rock School District 2005 Aggregate Report DRAFT REPORT FOR REVIEW BY Little Rock School District December 2005 Anna W. Grehan Steven M. Ross Lynn Harrison Center for Research in Educational Policy John Nunnery Old Dominion UniversityEXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The Little Rock School District began implementing Reading Recovery during the 1995-1996 school year in two schools. During the first four years of implementation, the Little Rock School District was part of the Pulaski County Reading Recovery Site. By 1998 there were eight trained Reading Recovery teachers in seven schools in the Little Rock School District. In July 1999 the district became a Reading Recovery Site hiring a full-time teacher leader. In 2000-2001 the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) began conducting the Reading Recovery teacher training for the district. Between the 2000-2001 and 2004-2005 school years UALR trained seventeen Reading Recovery teachers for the district. At the end of the 2004-2005 school year the Little Rock School District had 28 trained Reading Recovery teachers serving 18 of the 34 elementary schools in the district. Reading Recovery is one of eight literacy programs, interventions, and/or models used by Little Rock schools. Currently, Little Rock School District funds are used to support the program. The goal of Reading Recovery is to dramatically reduce the number of first grade students who have difficulty learning to read and write and to reduce the cost of these learners to educational systems. Reading Recovery is a short-term intervention program of one-to-one tutoring for the lowest-achieving first graders. The intervention is most effective when it is available to all students who need it and is used as a supplement to good classroom teaching. Individual students receive a half-hour lesson each school day for 12 to 20 weeks with a specially trained Reading Recovery teacher. As soon as students can read within the average range of their class and demonstrate that they can continue to achieve, their lessons are discontinued, and new students begin individual instruction. The evaluation plan for the Reading Recovery program in Little Rock School District included: (1) analyses of Reading Recovery student achievement and program data, (2) principal, teacher, and parent surveys and interviews, and (3) observations of Reading Recovery tutoring sessions. This report is part of a larger district study of four programs evaluating the effectiveness in improving and 1remediating the academic achievement of African-American students. This report includes results from 18 elementary schools participating in the Reading Recovery program. RESEARCH QUESTIONS The major goals of this research study were to evaluate African-American student achievement outcomes, program implementation fidelity, and principal, teacher, and parent perceptions concerning the Reading Recovery tutoring program for first grade students. Student achievement results on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS), Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), and An Observation of Early Literacy Achievement were analyzed to compare the progress of first graders enrolled in the Reading Recovery intervention program and comparison students in 2004-2005. Program implementation ratings were obtained from observations of 14 tutoring sessions in nine schools. The survey and interview results are based on the perceptions of 156 classroom teachers in grades K-3,22 experienced Reading Recovery teachers, four teachers in-training, 10 principals, and 95 parents. The Reading Recovery evaluation was structured around the following seven primary and supplemental research questions. Primary evaluation question:  Has the Reading Recovery program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) evaluation questions:  What are the quality and level of implementation of Reading Recovery at the 18 schools implementing it in 2004-2005?  What is the level of participation in Reading Recovery by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school?  What is the progress demonstrated by African-American and other student participants in Reading Recovery in improving achievement, as demonstrated on program-specific measures? What percentage of students are discontinued or not discontinued? 2 What are the perceptions of Reading Recovery teachers regarding Reading Recovery program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?  What are the perceptions of principals, regular first-grade teachers, and other teachers in the school regarding Reading Recovery program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?  What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of Reading Recovery students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? DESIGN The evaluation period extended from February 2004 through May 2005. The evaluation design was based on both quantitative and qualitative data collected from Reading Recovery intervention observations, principal and teacher in-training interviews, classroom teachers, Reading Recovery teachers, and parent surveys, and Reading Recovery program data. Reading Recovery student-level achievement data on the ITBS, DRA, DIBELS, and An Observation of Early Literacy Achievement was received in Fall 2005 and incorporated in this report. The primary data collectors in this study were Center for Research in Educational Policy (CREP) trained site researchers. Site researchers: (1) conducted Reading Recovery intervention observations, (2) administered the Reading Recovery teacher survey, (3) conducted principal and teacher in-training interviews, and (4) collected program data. Principals at Reading Recovery schools were responsible for administering the classroom teacher and Reading Recovery parent surveys. Participants Little Rock School District is located in Central Arkansas and serves approximately 26,500 students, with African-Americans representing approximately 67% of the district student population, in 49 schools in an urban area with a population of 184,000. In the 2004-2005 school year 18 elementary schools and 230 first grade students, of which 173 are African American, 27 are white, 22 are Hispanic, and the remaining 8 are other ethnicities, participated in the Reading Recovery program in the district. However, the schools indicated that 365 first grade students needed Reading Recovery services. Three schools were in their first year of program implementation (Bale, Stephens, and 3Terry) and survey and observation data were not collected from these schools. However, randomly selected teachers in-training and principals from these three schools were interviewed for this study. INSTRUMENTATION Six instruments were developed by CREP to collect the evaluation data: a classroom observation tool, a principal interview, a teacher in-training interview, a Reading Recovery teacher questionnaire, a classroom teacher questionnaire, and a parent survey. A detailed description of each instrument follows. Classroom Observation Measures Reading Recovery Implementation Assessment Instrument (RRIAI) The RRIAI was designed for observation in Reading Recovery classrooms and was developed by researchers at CREP and Reading Recovery faculty at ULAR. Ratings are organized around two categories: Reading Recovery Program Components and Reading Recovery Program Strategies. The RRIAI observation tool provides an overall rating for each category based on a rubric that ranges from (1) poor or unacceptable\n(2) below average in comparison to other programs observed\n(3) meets nearly all standards of program quality\nand (4) above average in comparison to other programs. The RRIAI has been aligned to the essential components of the Reading Recovery program. Sub-categories of the program components include: reading familiar stories, reading a story that was read for the first time the day before, working with letters, writing a story, assembling a cut-up story, and introducing and reading a new book. The tool was designed to be utilized by experienced Reading Recovery trainers during the 30-minute tutoring session with additional time allocated for observer questions and examination of student records after the session. Interviews Reading Recovery Principal Interview Randomly selected principals from 10 Reading Recovery schools participated in approximately 45-minute phone interviews with CREP researchers. Interview questions addressed 4the principals general experiences and reactions to the Reading Recovery implementation and the associated outcomes for the school, students, teachers, and parents. Reading Recovery Teacher in Training Interview In the 2004-2005 school year, six teachers were beginning their first year as a Reading Recovery teacher and considered as teachers in-training. Three were located in experienced schools and three were located in the schools beginning their first year of implementation: Bale, Stephens, and Terry. Four randomly selected teachers in-training participated in an approximately 45-minute phone interview with CREP researchers. Interview questions addressed the teacher's in-training experiences with and perceptions of the Reading Recovery program implementation with regard to such areas as resources, professional development, parent involvement, support, and student outcomes. Surveys Reading Recovery Teacher Questionnaire (RRTQ) Reading Recovery teachers in the 15 experienced Reading Recovery schools were asked to complete the RRTQ, which includes four sections. Section I contains 20 items to which teachers respond using a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree. Items assessed the general impressions of the Reading Recovery program, professional development, support for the program, impacts on student achievement, and alignment of state and district reading and language arts standards. In a second section, teachers were asked to indicate to what degree the listed items occurred. The focus of the 4 items were (1) administration support of Reading Recovery teacher efforts\n(2) Reading Coach support of Reading Recovery teacher efforts\n(3) district support of Reading Recovery teacher efforts\nand (4) the time to routinely monitor first grade students progress after they were discontinued from tutoring. Open-ended questions asked Reading Recovery teachers to respond to the statements: What are the strongest aspects of the Reading Recovery program? What are the weakest aspects of the Reading Recovery program? Do you think your school should continue the Reading Recovery program? A final section of the RRTQ contained general questions regarding years of teaching experience, race, and level of education. 5Reading Recovery Classroom Teacher Questionnaire (RRCTQ) All K-3 teacher who taught in experienced Reading Recovery schools were asked to complete the RRCTQ, which contains 13 items to which teachers respond using a five-point Likert- type scale that ranges from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree. Items assessed the specific program elements of Reading Recovery such as: understanding of the program, impacts on student achievement, teacher support for the program, and parent involvement. Open-ended questions asked classroom teachers to respond to the statements: Please describe your understanding of the Reading Recovery program In your school. What are the strongest aspects of the Reading Recovery program? Do you think your school should continue the Reading Recovery program? A final section of the RRCTQ contained general questions regarding years of teaching experience, race, and level of education. Reading Recovery Parent Survey (RRPS) Parents whose first grade children were currently receiving Reading Recovery tutoring services were asked to complete the RRPS, that contains 6 items to which parents respond using a five-point Likert-type scale that ranges from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree. Items assessed general impressions of the program such as: improvement in childs reading skills, child's enjoyment of tutoring sessions, and opportunities to communicate with the Reading Recovery teacher. Open-ended questions asked parents to respond to the statements: Please describe your understanding of the Reading Recovery tutoring program at your child's school. What is the BEST thing about your childs involvement with the Reading Recovery tutoring program? What CHANGES would you like to see in the Reading Recovery tutoring program? A final section of the RRPS asked parents to indicate the race, grade, and age of their child. Program Data Reading Recovery program information was obtained from data submitted to the National Data Evaluation Center at The Ohio State University in 2004-2005. Each year the schools and district submit data and receive a site report. The report represents an examination of Reading Recovery student outcomes for Little Rock and accounts for all children served by Reading Recovery within the 6site during the 2004-2005 school year. In addition, attention is given to implementation factors that may be supporting or hindering the success of the intervention with the site. Student Achievement Results In addition to the program data, interviews, survey, and observation tools cited above, reading achievement data is derived from scores on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS), Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) and An Observation of Early Literacy Achievement. A description of each assessment follows. Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS). The ITBS Form A is a norm-referenced group administered test that measures the skills and achievement of students in grades K-8 and was developed at The University of Iowa. The ITBS provides an in-depth assessment of students achievement of important educational objectives. Tests in Reading, Language Arts, Mathematics, Social Studies, Science, and Source of Information yield reliable and comprehensive information both about the development of students skills and about their ability to think critically. The emphasis of the K-1 assessment is on academic skills found in the early childhood curriculum. These tests are neither measures of readiness for school nor readiness to read. Rather, they assess the extent to which a child is cognitively prepared to begin work in the academic aspects of the curriculum. Test materials have been extensively field tested for psychometric soundness and evaluated for fairness to gender. racial, ethnic, and cultural groups. Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA). The Developmental Reading Assessment provides teachers with a method for assessing and documenting primary students development as readers over time with a literature-based instructional reading program. The DRA is designed to be used in K-3 classrooms with rich literate environments. The assessments are conducted during one- on-one reading conferences as children read specially selected assessment texts. A set of 20 stories. which increase in difficulty, are used for the assessment. The DRA evaluates two major aspects of reading: accuracy of oral reading and comprehension through reading and retelling of narrative stories. Questions pertaining to concepts about print are also included in the assessment with lower leveled texts. 7Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). DIBELS is a tool for early identification of children with potential literacy problems and an assessment of response to instruction. The assessment is individually administered to K-3 children at least three times per year. The DIBELS assessment is designed to enable educators to modify their approach if a student is not on course to achieve reading goals. The Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development at the University of Oregon constructed DIBELS (2000). The Institute reports it has validated the instruments ability to predict outcomes and has tested its reliability with young children across the country. Reading Recovery schools that have received Reading Excellence Act or Reading First grant funding use the DIBELS assessment in Little Rock. An Observation of Early Literacy Achievement: Reading Recovery Subtests. Six tasks in Marie Clays (2002) An Observation of Early Literacy Achievement (Observation Survey) were used as pretest and posttest measures. The Survey tasks have the qualities of sound assessment instruments with reliabilities and validities. The purpose of the assessment is to determine an appropriate level of text difficulty and to record, using a running record, what the child does when reading continuous text. All six tasks of the Observation Survey were administered to Reading Recovery students in the fall (start of the school year) and/or at entry to the intervention. These scores serve as pretest measure in the evaluation design. The six tasks were also administered to Reading Recovery students upon discontinuing or exiting from the program. In the spring (end of school year), the six tasks were again administered to all students who received Reading Recovery services during the year. Year-end scores served as the posttest measures in comparing the progress made by Reading Recovery children in the various end-of-program status groups. PROCEDURE Data for the evaluation were collected March-May for the 2004-2005 school year. On February 16, 2005 principals were given an overview of the evaluation and timelines for collecting data. On March 3-4 and April 14-15,14 tutoring observations were conducted in nine randomly selected experienced Reading Recovery schools by two Reading Recovery content experts from Georgia State and The Ohio State Universities. Only experienced Reading Recovery teachers were observed. On March 23 a CREP trained site researcher administered the Reading Recovery teacher 8survey to experienced teachers at a regularly scheduled monthly meeting at ULAR. In April and May principals in experienced Reading Recovery schools administered the classroom teacher questionnaire to K-3 grade teachers. Principals also administered the parent survey to parents whose children were currently receiving first grade intervention services in the 15 experienced Reading Recovery schools. Four teachers in-training and ten principals were randomly selected from the 18 Reading Recovery schools to participate in a phone interview in April and May conducted by CREP researchers. Reading Recovery program data was received in summer 2005 from the National Data Evaluation Center at The Ohio State University. Student achievement data was received from the district in fall 2005. METHODS - STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Sample. The sample included 1,094 first grade students who attended one of 18 schools that implemented the Reading Recovery program during the 2004-2005 school year. Of these, 230 were referred to the Reading Recovery program, and 864 were in the comparison group. The percentages of students who were African American or of Limited English Proficiency were similar between the comparison and Reading Recovery groups (73.6% versus 75.6% and 7.3% versus 8.7%, respectively). However, Reading Recovery students were more likely to be eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (84.3% versus 73.1%), to receive special education services (15.7% versus 8.6%), and to be male (58.1 % versus 48.0%). A random sample of about 11 comparison students was selected from each school (total n = 189) for administration of the DIBELS and Observation Survey: Reading Recovery test batteries. Reading Recovery Treatment Level. In the Reading Recovery program, students who are deemed to have attained a reading level equivalent to their peers are assigned an end-of-program status of discontinued. Children who received 20 or more weeks of Reading Recovery services, but who do not attain a reading level equivalent to their peers are assigned a status of recommended action. Children who have received fewer than 20 weeks were assigned incomplete program status. Children designated as unknown status were removed from the program in fewer than 20 weeks due to reasons other than the school year ending. Other children were designated as having moved during the school year. The median number of sessions of recommended action {Md = 968.50\nn = 68) children was actually higher than the median for discontinued students (Md = 57.00\nn = 90). The medians for incomplete students (n = 46) and unknown students (n = 12) were very similar (Md = 44.63 versus 46.08, respectively). For the purposes of this study, recommended action and discontinued students were categorized as complete program\n incomplete and unknown students were categorized as incomplete program\n and students who moved were eliminated from the analyses. This left a total of 216 Reading Recovery students: 158 with a complete program, and 58 with an incomplete program. Measures. Pretest (covariate) measures included: (a) Spring. 2004 Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) subtests in Letter Recognition, Word Recognition, Capitatization, Writing, Dictation, and a DRA Test score, (b) Fall 2005 Observation Survey: Reading Recovery program subtests that included Letter Identification, Word Test, Concepts About Print, Writing Vocabulary, Hearing and Recording Sounds in Words, and Text Reading, and (c) the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) subtests in Letter Naming Fluency, Phoneme Segmentation Fluency, Nonsense Word Fluency, and Word Use Fluency. Outcome measures included Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) Reading Normal Curve Equivalent Scores. DRA subtests. Observation Survey: Reading Recovery subtests, and DIBELS subtests administered in Spring 2005. To achieve some parsimony in the analyses, pretest measures were subjected to a principal components analysis, and regressionbased factors scores were constructed for pretest DRA. Observation Survey: Reading Recovery, and DIBELS subtests. A single factor accounted for 60.1 %. 60.5%. and 43.8% of the variance in the DRA. Observation Survey: Reading Recovery, and DIBELS subtests, respectively. Outcome measures included the DRA. Observation Survey: Reading Recovery, and DIBELS subtests, as well as ITBS. The DRA Letter Recognition, DRA Capitalization, and DIBELS Letter Naming Fluency subtests were not administered in Spring 2005. DIBELS and Observation Survey: Reading Recovery tests were administered to a small random sample of comparison students within each school. Student achievement analyses. A 3 (Program Status) X 2 (African American versus other) multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) using student gender, the pertinent pretest factor score, free lunch status, special education status, and LEP status was performed with the various subtests as outcomes for the DRA. Observation Survey: Reading Recovery, and DIBELS test 10batteries. A similar 3X2 analysis of covariance was performed on ITBS Reading NCE scores using the 2003-2004 DRA factor score as a pretest covariate. For the multivariate analyses, Wilks lambda was used as the criterion of multivariate significance. Where Wilks lambda indicated a significant multivariate effect, follow-up univariate analyses were performed on each outcome variable using the Bonferroni procedure to control for experimentwise alpha. When significant univariate results were found, post hoc analyses were performed using Scheffes procedure. Effect size estimates were computed for all posttests by subtracting the adjusted mean for the comparison group from the adjusted mean from the Reading Recovery group within levels of race, then dividing by the total standard deviation of the posttest. For ITBS Reading NCE effect size estimates, the population standard deviation of 21.06 was used. Exploratory and supplementary analyses. Impact of teacher experience and number of sessions. The number of years experience with Reading Recovery was recorded for each teacher. Years experience ranged from 1 to 10 years. ITBS Reading NCE scores and DRA test scores for 2004-2005 were regressed on 2003-2004 DRA factor scores and dummy-coded variables representing student ethnicity, free lunch status, gender, special education status, and LEP status. Standardized residuals were saved from each of these analyses, and plotted against teacher years of experience to graphically assess the nature of the relationship between teacher experience and teacher effectiveness in Reading Recovery for students who received a Complete program. Standardized residuals for each of these 2004-2005 tests were also plotted against number of Reading Recovery sessions received for all students (i.e., those who received either a Complete or Incomplete program). Finally, effect size boxplots were constructed for African American students who had Complete and Incomplete Reading Recovery programs. 11RESULTS Classroom Observation Results Reading Recovery Implementation Assessment Instrument (RRIAI) As indicated in the description of the RRIAI, the observation procedure primarily focuses on Reading Recovery Program Components and Program Strategies. The site observers used a four- point rubric (1 = poor or unacceptable, 2 = below average in comparison to other programs observed, 3 = meets nearly all standards of program quality, and 4 = above average in comparison to other programs) to rate the frequency and application of components and strategies of Reading Recovery instruction. More precise data regarding observed Reading Recovery instructional practices measured by the four-point rubric for the 14 observations. Reading Recovery Program Components The overall mean rating for the Reading Recovery Program Components was 3.46 which suggest a high level of program implementation. Of the six subcategories the highest observed ratings were\nassembling a cut-up story and introducing and reading a new book observed to be above average in 85.71 % of tutoring sessions. The program component subcategory with the lowest observed rating was working with letters and/or words using magnetic letters observed to be above average in only 35.71% of tutoring sessions. The six program components were observed in at least 92.86% of 14 tutoring sessions. Reading Recovery Program Strategies The overall mean rating for the Reading Recovery Program Strategies was 3.61 which also indicate a high level of instructional effectiveness. Of the eight During Tutoring Lesson subcategories the highest observed rating was for appropriate text selected throughout the lesson observed to above average in 85.71% of tutoring sessions. The During Tutoring Lesson subcategory with the lowest observed rating was echo of focus throughout the lesson observed to be above average in just 42.86% of tutoring sessions. For the After Tutoring Lesson, has high expectations for the child and articulates childs strengths and needs were observed to be above average in 78.57% of tutoring sessions and accurate and up-to-date records were observed to be above average in 71.43% of 12tutoring sessions. The Reading Recovery Program Strategies were observed in at least 85.71 of tutoring sessions. Observer Perceptions of Reading Recovery Program Impiementation Site observers reported being impressed with the dedication and commitment of the Reading Recovery teachers to the fidelity of the teaching procedures and the integrity of the implementation of the program. Almost all teachers observed were meeting all the standards, guidelines, and expectations of the Reading Recovery Council of North America and the North American Trainers Group. Since observations occurred in March and April, most of the students observed were second- round students, since teachers had discontinued their first-round students. Teachers reported that students who did not discontinue from Reading Recovery during the first-round were being considered for further intervention services. Site observers also reported that the Reading Recovery program in the Little Rock district receives an adequate allocation of time, materials, and other resources. However, several teachers and principals expressed the need for additional Reading Recovery teachers in their schools. Reading Recovery teachers also reported teaching literacy small groups the rest of the day which enables them to give their Reading Recovery students more attention during the instructional day. By teaching these literacy groups, site observers suggested that the Reading Recovery teachers expertise and knowledge gained from their training and practice benefits children across several grade levels. During visits site observers did suggest areas in which some Reading Recovery teachers need improvement. These instructional areas include: (1) hearing and recording sounds in words\n(2) making and breaking\n(3) do away with the helping hand\nand (4) maintaining up-to-date records on each child as a basis for instruction. 13INTERVIEW RESULTS Reading Recovery Principal Interview Principals at ten of the Reading Recovery schools were randomly selected to participate in a 45 minute phone interview. Principals were asked a series of questions regarding general program implementation, classroom level changes, program results, professional development opportunities and parental and community involvement. Overall, principals were positive about the Reading Recovery program and the impact it has had on their schools. Most of the schools have been utilizing Reading Recovery for several years and faculty and staff are very comfortable with the program. Nearly all of the principals interviewed were instrumental in bringing Reading Recovery to their schools, and the decision to utilize Reading Recovery was made after considerable research and thoughtful consideration. Principals reported that Reading Recovery is a wonderful compliment to the school's balanced literacy programs. The one-on-one attention the reading Recovery students receive is overwhelmingly the most effective of the strategies that the program employs. Other effective strategies mentioned included push-ins, literacy groups, running records, and the writing component. Principals reported being active advocates in their Reading Recovery programs. They described their roles as one of support and involvement, ranging from oversight of the program to more direct involvement including student selection for the program, review of student progress, and ongoing meetings and collaboration with the Reading Recovery specialists. All principals noted that teachers were very supportive of the Reading Recovery program and appreciated the impact it has had on overall student achievement. Most of the resources needed for effective program implementation are available\nhowever principals reported an ongoing need for books, additional teachers and tutors, and more planning time. Principals described the African American population as being well-served by Reading Recovery, and most agree that through Reading Recovery the achievement gap is being bridged for their African American students. In most of the schools, African American students are a large percentage of the Reading Recovery program, 14and the early intervention provided by Reading Recovery allov/s the student to be encouraged by being successful at a younger age. Teacher in-Training Interview In the spring 2005, four teachers in their first year in the Reading Recovery program were contacted by phone for a 30 to 45 minute phone interview. The teachers in-raining were attending classes concerning Reading Recovery instruction, as well as working in their schools implementing the Reading Recovery strategies. Feedback from the teachers was solicited regarding general program information, classroom level changes, results, professional development, and parental involvement and support. All teachers described the process of integrating Reading Recovery into the school's literacy program as well planned and organized. Reading Recovery teachers work individually with the lowest performing students and then follow up individual instruction with literacy groups. Reading Recovery teachers reported a thorough selection process that involved collaboration with the classroom teacher and comprehensive testing and assessment. In general, the Reading Recovery teachers reported strong support from the classroom teachers, that classroom teachers appreciate the effectiveness of the one-on-one approach, and the fact that the Reading Recovery is able to provide this type of support, freeing the classroom teacher to work more effectively with the other students. The Reading Recovery teachers in training strongly felt that Reading Recovery helped to equalize learning and achievement opportunities for African American students at their schools. Most of the students in Reading Recovery are African American, and these teachers were able to see positive gains. Reading Recovery helps all struggling readers by actively engaging them in reading and allowing them to feel successful at reading. The Reading Recovery teachers in training report a significant increase in self-confidence and improvement in overall attitude among the Reading Recovery students. As the students begin to experience success, they are less frustrated and angry. This improvement in attitude improves their classroom behavior and relationships with other teachers and students. Some of these teachers have seen dramatic increases in test scores and other achievement data, while others have not yet been able to see these gains. 15Reading Recovery teachers in- training reported professional training that ranged from adequate to thorough. Changes in Reading Recovery course instructors led to some confusion for some of the teachers in training, and some reported the need for increased classroom hours. However, overall, these teachers reported feeling well-prepared to work with the students. The strategies they have learned have been very helpful. Although the teachers in training reported having significant classroom experience, they are learning unique techniques that have been very beneficial. Survey Results Reading Recovery Teacher Questionnaire (RRTQ) Descriptive results. Reading Recovery teachers had extremely favorable attitudes toward the program at their schools. All of the teachers strongly agreed or agreed that they have a thorough understanding of the program, teachers in their school are generally supportive of the program. ongoing communication exists between Reading Recovery tutors and classroom reading teachers. Reading Recovery monthly meetings are effective and useful, instructional materials needed to implement our Reading Recovery program are readily available, and the Reading Recovery program is aligned with state and district reading and language arts standards. There was also strong agreement that Reading Recovery teachers received support, with 86.36% of the teachers reporting that the school administration and Reading Coach supported their efforts as a Reading Recovery teacher. Almost 75% (72.73%) of teachers reported receiving extensive district support. The items with the highest level of disagreement (disagree and strongly disagree) concerned Reading Recovery teachers having sufficient planning time (36.36%) and enough tutors to fully implement the Reading Recovery program (18.18%). Demographic data. All Reading Recovery teachers (100%) reported having at least six years of teaching experience and 31.82% reported at least six years experience as a Reading Recovery teacher. Approximately 85% (86.36%) of Reading Recovery teachers reported having a Masters Degree and beyond. The majority of Reading Recovery teachers were white (72.73%) and 13.64% reported their ethnicity as African-American. 16Open-ended responses. Reading Recovery teachers were asked to respond to three open- ended questions in addition to the 24 items on the questionnaire. Respondents were instructed to list the strongest aspects of the Reading Recovery program, the weakest aspects of the Reading Recovery program, and reasons for continuing or discontinuing Reading Recovery their school. There were twenty-two Reading Recovery teachers who filled out the questionnaire, and twenty-one of those also answered the open-ended questions. Of the 21 who listed strong aspects of the Reading Recovery program, the two most popular answers were individualized, one-on-one instruction, 57.1%, and the ability to reach the lowest performing students and bridge the achievement gap for these students, 47.6%. Reading Recovery teaching strategies and components were listed in 19% of the responses, and both the early intervention element and the support from the other teachers were listed in 14.3% of the responses. Respondents were also asked to list what they considered the weakest elements of the Reading Recovery program. Time was a factor in many of the responses with lack of planning time most frequently mentioned at 33.3%. Lack of time to complete the lesson was mentioned in 19.0% of the responses. Teachers inability to help all the students who need help was also mentioned in 19.0% of the responses. All of the 21 teachers responded positively to the question Do you think your school should continue the Reading Recovery program? Why?-, and 20 teachers elaborated on their positive response listing reasons for continuing Reading Recovery. The ability of Reading Recovery to help struggling readers was listed in half of the responses (50.0%), and strong progress and results were mentioned in 40.0% of the responses. The fact that Reading Recovery decreases the number of special education referrals was listed in 15.0% of the responses. There was one respondent who pointed out that although he/she felt Reading Recovery should be continued at the school, there needed to be better implementation to make it effective. Reading Recovery Classroom Teacher Questionnaire (RRCTQ) Descriptive results. For the classroom teachers, the three items on which there was 80% or higher agreement included: teacher support of the program (93.59%), positive impact on student achievement (87.82%), and improving achievement of African-American students (82.05%). The two 17items on which classroom teachers expressed the strongest disagreement or disagreement included\nsufficient faculty and staff to fully implement the program (23.08%) and because of Reading Recovery, parents are more involved in the literacy program (14.74%). Demographic data. K-3 classroom teachers reported less teaching experience and education attainment than Reading Recovery teachers. Close to 30% (28.85%) reported less than one year to five years teaching experience in any school and 57.69% reported having a Bachelors degree. However, more classroom teachers reported their ethnicity as African-American (28.85%) than Reading Recovery teachers with the majority (68.59%) reporting ethnicity as white. Open-ended responses. In addition to the 13 items the teachers were asked to rate on the questionnaire, several open-ended questions were also asked of the classroom teachers. Teachers were asked to describe their understanding of the Reading Recovery program, relate the strongest aspects of the program, and discuss whether or not Reading Recovery should be continued at their school. There were 151 teachers who described their understanding of the Reading Recovery program. Classroom teachers at Reading Recovery schools have a very good understanding of the program, which corresponds with the almost 80% (78.2%) who agreed with the item on the questionnaire concerning their understanding of the program. Nearly all of the respondents were able to articulate the main elements of Reading Recovery. A total of 136 teachers responded to the question regarding the strongest aspect of the Reading Recovery program. Many of the teachers listed more than one component as being a strong aspect of Reading Recovery. One-on-one or individualized instruction was listed in 56.6% of the responses as being the strongest aspect of the program. Working with students in small groups was mentioned in 24.2% of the responses and the ability of Reading Recovery to help those students who are most in need was listed in 14.7% of the responses. For the open-ended responses, over half (53.4%) listed the fact that Reading Recovery helps students achieve as a significant reason for keeping the program, and 22.4% stated Reading Recovery should be continued because it helps those in greatest need. Nearly twenty percent (19.8%) listed individualized instruction. Although all of the respondents to the question replied that 18Reading Recovery should continue at their schools, six percent (6.0%) stated the need for more Reading Recovery teachers at the school, and 6.0% felt greater implementation was needed. Reading Recovery Parent Survey (RRPS) Descriptive results. Generally, parents had favorable attitudes toward the Reading Recovery program. A majority of the parents (90.53%) reported that, because of Reading Recovery tutoring, they believed that their child would be successful in school and 86.32% reported that Reading Recovery had improved their child's reading skills. However, less than 75% (66.32%) of parents strongly agreed or agreed that they have many opportunities to talk with the Reading Recovery teacher about their childs progress. Demographic data. Almost 70% (68.42%) of parents reported the ethnicity of their child as African-American and 13.68% reported their childs ethnicity as Hispanic and 7.37% reported the ethnicity of their child as Caucasian. Open-ended responses. In addition to the six scaled items parents of Reading Recovery students were asked to answer, parents were also asked three open-ended questions regarding the program. There were 80 parents who responded to the first open-ended question, which asked them to describe their understanding of the Reading Recovery tutoring program at their childs school. Overall, parents seemed to have a very good understanding of the Reading Recovery program, and many listed several components that are instrumental in Reading Recovery. Over 80% (83.8%) responded that Reading Recovery helps children read better and improve their reading skills, and 21.3% listed the one-on-one help and individualized attention that the program provides. Children bringing books home and reading at home was mentioned in 13.8% of the responses and improvement in writing skills was listed in 8.8% of the responses. Only 2.5% of those who responded indicated that they did not know or understand Reading Recovery. Reading Recovery Level of Participation and Program Measures African American students were in the majority in all of the 18 schools in the study. Not surprisingly, at 75.2% of the total student population, African American students were also a majority of the Reading Recovery students in the schools. In 11 of the 18 schools, the percentage of African American students in Reading Recovery exceeded their percentage of the school wide population. 19How meaningful this difference is may be debatable given instances where 100% of the Reading Recovery students are African American in a school which is 99% African American (Rightsell Incentive Elementary) or where there are just 8 Reading Recovery students in a school with more than 100 first grade students (Terry Elementary School). Reading Recovery End of Program Status by Race A comparison of the total African American Reading Recovery student population to the total other students involved in Reading Recovery indicates that the students were nearly equally represented in two of the three program specific measures. The percentage of African American students Discontinued (43.3%) was not significantly different from the percent of other students Discontinued (46.3%). In addition, in the Incomplete status, the percentage of African American students (21.3%) was not very much different than that of the other students (25.9%). Only in the Recommended status did the percentage of African American students considerably exceed the percentage of other students (34.5% vs. 27.8%). Reading Recovery Year End Reading Group by Race With-in school comparisons are again difficult due to the unequal number of African American students compared to others student participating in the program. On an overall basis however, the percentage of African American students placed in the high/upper-middle group at 25.7% was significantly lower than the percent of other students placed in this group (38.2%). In addition. almost three quarters of the African American students were placed in the low/lower-middle group compared to less than two thirds of other students. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT RESULTS DRA Subtests. A. total of 142 Reading Recovery students (66% pretest-posttest match rate) and 562 comparison students (65% rate) had matching 2005 DRA subtest scores, demographic information, and 2004 DRA factor scores. Wilks lambda indicated significant multivariate effects for Reading Recovery status (Fejaso = 6.83, p \u0026lt; .001), special education status (F^^so = 3.93, p \u0026lt;.01), and 2003-2004 DRA factor scores (= 111 -32, p \u0026lt;.001). Follow-up univariate tests indicated 20significant Reading Recovery status effects on Dictation (F2,693 = 6.34, p \u0026lt;.01) and Test scores (^2,693 = 9.99, p \u0026lt; .001). Post hoc analyses revealed that: (a) Reading Recovery students in both the Incomplete Program {M = 36.32\nES =+0.43) and the Complete Program (W = 35.96\nS =+0.37) had a significantly higher adjusted mean Dictation score than students in the comparison condition (M = 33.82)\nand (b) students in the comparison condition (M = 17.64) and the Complete program {M= 16.42\nS = -0.18) had a higher mean Test score than students receiving the Incomplete Program (W = 13.02\nES = -0.68). No program X race interaction effect occurred, indicating that African American and other students were equally affected by participation in Reading Recovery. DIBELS Subtests. total of 67 Reading Recovery students (31 %) and 53 comparison students (28%) had matching 2005 DIBELS subtest scores, demographic information, and 2003-2004 DIBELS factor scores. Wilks lambda indicated significant multivariate effects for Reading Recovery status (Eg,212 = 4.12, p \u0026lt; .001), special education status ( E4JO6 = 3.50, p \u0026lt;.01), and 2003-2004 DRA factor scores ( F4JO6 = 3.69, p \u0026lt;.01). Follow-up univariate tests indicated significant Reading Recovery status effects on Phoneme Segmentation Fluency (F2,io9 = 3.39, p \u0026lt;.O5) and Oral Reading Fluency (F2.109 = 6.59, p \u0026lt; .01). Post hoc analyses revealed that: (a) Reading Recovery students in both the Incomplete Program {M = 54.81\nES = +0.65) and the Complete Program (M = 54.02\nES = +0.58) had a significantly higher adjusted mean Phoneme Segmentation Fluency score than students in the comparison condition {M = 47.23)\n(b) students in the comparison condition {Ivf = 40.35) and the Complete program (1^= 33.45) had a higher mean Oral Reading Fluency score than students receiving the Incomplete Program (M = 21.62\nES = -0.91)\nand (c) students in the comparison condition had a higher adjusted mean Oral Reading Fluency score (M = 40.35) than students receiving the Complete program (M = 33.45\nES =-0.33). No program X race interaction effect occurred, indicating that African American and other students were equally affected by participation in Reading Recovery. Observation Survey: Reading Recovery Subtests. A total of 161 Reading Recovery students (75%%) and 90 comparison students (47%) had matching 2004-2005 Reading Recovery subtest scores, demographic information, and 2003-2004 Reading Recovery factor scores. Wilks lambda indicated significant multivariate effects for Reading Recovery status (Fio,474 = 4.85, p \u0026lt; .001), 21special education status (Fs ^s? = 3.09, p \u0026lt;.01), 2003-2004 Reading Recovery factor scores (Fs^s? = 22.02, p \u0026lt;.001), and gender {F5,237 = 4.92, p \u0026lt;.01). No program X race interaction effect occurred. indicating that African American and other students were equally affected by participation in Reading Recovery. Follow-up univariate tests indicated significant Reading Recovery status effects on Concepts About Print (F2,241 = 11.87, p \u0026lt;.001), Hearing and Recording Sounds in Words {F2,24-1 = 3.19, p \u0026lt; .05), and Text Reading Levei (F2,24i = 5.38, p \u0026lt; .01). Post hoc analyses revealed that: (a) Reading Recovery students in the Complete Program {M = 20.00\nES = +0.83 ) had a significantly higher adjusted mean Concepts About Print score than student in the comparison condition {M = 17.08) or the Incomplete Program {M = 18.52\nES = +0.41)\n(b) students in the Complete program (M = 34.79\nES = +0.36) had a higher mean Hearing and Recording Sounds in Words score than students in the comparison condition (M = 32.77)\nand (c) students in the comparison condition {M = 13.67) and the Complete program (M= 13.73) had a higher mean Text Reading score than students receiving the Incomplete Program (M = 10.28\nES = -0.53). ITBS Reading NCE. A total of 140 Reading Recovery students (65%) and 562 comparison students (65%) had matching 2004-2005 Reading Recovery subtest scores, demographic information, and 2003-2004 DRA factor scores. The ANCOVA indicated statistically significant effects for Reading Recovery status (F2,69i = 6.62, p \u0026lt;.001), free lunch status (Fi gg, = 7.83, p \u0026lt;.01), and 2003-2004 DRA factor scores (Fi.esi = 195.81, p \u0026lt;.001). No program X race interaction effect occurred, indicating that African American and other students were equally affected by participation in Reading Recovery. Post hoc analyses showed that comparison students (M = 53.82) had a significantly higher adjusted mean ITBS Reading NCE score than students receiving the Complete program (W = 46.65\nES = -0.34). The effect size for African American students receiving a complete program was -0.46, versus -0.09 for those receiving an incomplete program. Exploratory and supplemental results. Exploratory analyses of second and third grade results showed no effects on 2004-2005 DRA and negative effects on ITBS. These results need to be viewed with caution, however, due to low matching rates in second grade and the lack of a true pretest measure. There was no relationship between number of teacher years of experience with Reading Recovery and ITBS standardized residuals or DRA standardized residuals for students 22receiving a complete program, after controlling for 2003-2004 DRA factor scores and student ethnicity. gender, free lunch status, special education status, and LEP status. Likewise, there was no relationship between number of sessions attended and ITBS residuals. A statistically significant, small positive relationship was observed between total number of sessions attended and DRA residuals (r = 0.21, p \u0026lt;.O5). The median effect size estimate across all posttests for African American students with a complete program was Md = +0.17, with a range from -0.25 to +0.52. For African American students receiving an incomplete program, effect size estimates ranged from -0.78 to +0.50, with a median of -0.23. Thus, receiving a complete program yielded a directional advantage for African American students, whereas the reverse occurred for receiving an incomplete program. CONCLUSIONS Has the Reading Recovery program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students?  The Reading Recovery program had equal effects on African American and other students. Students receiving the complete program had significantly higher adjusted means than comparison students on Dictation {ES = +0.37), Phoneme Segmentation {ES = +0.58), Concepts About Print (ES = +0.83), and Hearing and Recording Sounds in Words (ES = +0.36)  Students receiving an incomplete program had significantly higher adjusted means than comparison students on Dictation (ES = +0.43) and Phoneme Segmentation (ES = +0.65).  Students in the comparison condition had significantly higher adjusted means than students receiving a complete program on Oral Reading Fluency (ES = -0.33) and on ITBS Reading NCE scores (ES = -0.34).  Students in the comparison condition had significantly higher adjusted means than students receiving an incomplete program on DRA test scores (ES = -0.68), Oral Reading Fluency (ES = -0.91), and Text Reading (ES = -0.53). 23No relationship was observed between teacher experience with Reading Recovery and 2004- 2005 student achievement outcomes after controlling for 2003-2004 achievement, student ethnicity, gender, free lunch status, special education status, and LEP status.  No relationship was observed between number of Reading Recovery sessions and 2004- 2005 ITBS Reading NCE scores, after controlling for 2003-2004 achievement, student ethnicity, gender, free lunch status, special education status, and LEP status.  A small but statistically significant positive relationship was observed between number of Reading Recovery sessions and 2004-2005 DRA test scores, after controlling for 2003-2004 achievement, student ethnicity, gender, free lunch status, special education status, and LEP status.  The median effect size estimate across all posttests for African American students receiving a complete program was +0.17\nfor students receiving an incomplete program, the median effect size estimate was -0.22. Positive effects of Reading Recovery tended to be associated with lower-order or beginning reading skills like dictation, phoneme segmentation, and concepts about print while negative effects tended to be associated with more complex, higher-order skills like Oral Reading Fluency and Text Reading. What are the quality and level of implementation of Reading Recovery at the 18 schools implementing it in 2004-2005. Classroom observations indicate that Reading Recovery teachers instructional practices conform to the recommendations and requirements of the program throughout the district. Given that there are no national comparisons or benchmarks for the RRIAI, a mean of approximately 3.50 on a 4.00 scale suggests a high level of Reading Recovery implementation in the district. Site researchers noted only three areas in which some teachers were observed below average to some degree, reading familiar stories, appropriate pacing of the lesson components, and working with letters and or/words. However, the observed lack of quality implementation in some classrooms in reading familiar stories and appropriate pacing of the lesson components might 24begin to explain the lack of oral reading fluency, text reading, and ITBS effects for Reading Recovery students. There appears to be a high level of consistency of program delivery across the district. The analysis of student achievement data supports this observation that there is consistency in program delivery. The student achievement analysis found that there was no relationship between teacher experience with Reading Recovery and 2005 achievement scores after controlling for 2004 achievement and other variables. This suggests that generally teachers have a high degree of fidelity to the model. What is the level of participation in Reading Recovery by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? The data indicate that African American students made up a majority of the students participating in Reading Recovery in the 18 schools included in this study. This finding shouldnt be surprising since African Americans are the majority of the students in each of the participating schools. Information compiled from the student achievement analyses also indicates the percentage of African American students receiving Reading Recovery services (75.2%) is very similar to the ethnic makeup of the students used for comparison purposes (73.6%). However, Reading Recovery students were more likely to receive free or reduced-price lunch (84.3% vs. 73.1%) and special education services (15.7% vs. 8.6%) than comparison students, and were more likely to be male (58.1% vs. 48.0%). What is the progress demonstrated by African-American and other student participants in Reading Recovery in improving achievement, as demonstrated on program-specific measures? What percentage of students are discontinued or not discontinued? What proportion of scheduled sessions are actually held, and what are the reasons for missed sessions? Table 11 indicates that African American students, when compared with Reading Recovery students of other ethnicities, were nearly equally represented in two of the three program specific measures examined. The percentage of African American students Discontinued\", at 43.3%, 25was not considerably different than the percentage of students Discontinued of other ethnic backgrounds, 46.3%. In addition, in the Incomplete status, the percentage of African Americans (21.3%) was, again, not much different than students from other ethnicities (25.9%). African American students, at 34.5%, were more likely to be Recommended\" for further actions than other students (27.8%). African American students were, however, more likely to be placed in the Low/Lower Middle reading group by their classroom teachers at the end of the school year than other students (74.3% vs. 61.8%). This finding may present a dilemma for the program and the district. While African American students are generally progressing similarly to other students on program specific measures, their classroom teachers appear to consider that, at the end of the school year, the majority of African American students are still struggling to maintain or falling below grade level in reading. About 22% of scheduled sessions were missed due to the teacher being unavailable (7%), student absence (6%), teacher absence (5%), or the student being unavailable. These missed sessions could contribute to the mean number of sessions per week being just 3.5. What are the perceptions of Reading Recovery teachers regarding Reading Recovery program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Reading Recovery teachers had extremely favorable attitudes toward the Reading Recovery program. Teachers reported a thorough understanding of the program, that they received adequate professional development which was valuable for improving the achievement of African- American students, and that they had the support from teachers in the school. The majority of Reading Recovery teachers also reported receiving extensive administrative, Reading Coach, and district support. The items and areas of the most concern was sufficient planning time. enough tutors to fully implement the program, and time to routinely monitor first grade students progress after they were discontinued from Reading Recovery tutoring. Additionally, Reading Recovery teachers were concerned that only 63.64% of faculty, staff, and administration believe that all children can read at grade level or above by the end of third grade thanks to the Reading Recovery, and that parents are more involved in the literacy program of this school. 26Reading Recovery teachers, on average, appear to be more experienced and better educated. Eighty percent had a Masters degree or beyond in educational attainment and 100% reported at least six year or more years of teaching experience. In addition, the majority (68.18%) reported one to five years of experience as a Reading Recovery teacher. The four teachers in-training were equally committed and positive about the program and overall, felt they were well prepared to work with students. The teachers in-training also felt strongly that Reading Recovery helped to equalize learning and achievement opportunities for African American students. Teachers in-training emphasized the importance of using data to monitor the progress of the students to develop effective teaching strategies based on the individual needs of each student. Finally, teachers in training also reported the need for more time to plan and implement as well as for continuing support to understand Reading Recovery components more thoroughly. What are the perceptions of principals, regular first-grade teachers, and other teachers in the school regarding Reading Recovery program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? A review of Reading Recovery principal interview responses indicates that principals are very supportive and actively involved in the program. All of the principals interviewed reported that they understood the program and were advocates of their program having a positive impact on overall student achievement. Principals indicated that the one-on-one tutoring program supplements and enhances the schools balanced literacy program. Most principals agreed that. through Reading Recovery, the achievement gap is being bridged for their African American students. Principals also noted that teachers were very supportive of the program. K-3 classroom teachers shared the principals enthusiasm for the Reading Recovery program, as evidenced by responses on the RRCTQ. A majority of the classroom teachers reported that they had an understanding of the program, were generally supportive, and that student achievement had been positively impacted. Principals and teachers also agreed that most of the resources and support needed for effective program implementation was available\nhowever they also reported an ongoing need for additional teachers and tutors to support more 27students and time to plan, review student progress, and collaborate together. All (102) of the teachers responding agreed that their school should continue the Reading Recovery program. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of Reading Recovery students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Parents were generally very pleased with the results of the Reading Recovery program. Approximately 90% of the parents responding to the parent survey agreed that\nReading Recovery tutoring has improved my childs reading skills and because of Reading Recovery their child will be successful in school. Less than three percent of those who responded reported that they did not know or understand the program. In the three open-ended responses parents indicated a very good understanding of the program, appreciation of one-on-one tutoring sessions, and the improvement in their childs reading skills. However, a few parents did express the need for longer and more frequent tutoring sessions and more opportunities to talk with the Reading Recovery teacher about their childs progress. In summary, the Little Rock School District has a strong Reading Recovery program. Teachers, principals, and parents appear to be actively engaged in the program and the district tries to provide adequate levels of resources and support. However, the lack of clear program effects may be the result of factors that have been identified in prior studies of Reading Recovery. These factors include:  It would be expected that Reading Recovery students would perform better on assessments more closely aligned with the instructional program (DRA, DIBELS, Observation Survey) than the norm-referenced group administered ITBS. In particular, Reading Recovery enhanced learning for complete program students tests involving Dictation, Phoneme Segmentation, Concepts About Print, and Hearing and Recording Sounds in Words. However, it had no effects on tests assessing Oral Reading Fluency and ITBS Reading NCE scores.  The district should examine the feasibility of providing tutoring support to all incoming first grade students who need services. In the 2004-2005 school year, the 18 Reading Recovery schools indicated that 365 students needed tutoring services and 28approximately half of this number were discontinued and received a complete round of lessons. The Reading Recovery program guidelines state that if a school has more children who need services than one teacher can provide then it will never realize the full benefit of Reading Recovery for later school achievement. It is especially difficult for teachers to continue to scaffold discontinued students learning while supporting a large number of other at-risk students reading below grade level. This may explain why so many Reading Recovery students are placed in the low/lower middle reading groups by their classroom teachers.  The data suggest that after Reading Recovery students are discontinued and return to the classroom at the same reading level as their peers, it appears that they do not maintain the same growth rate and achievement does not keep pace with their peers. Although research indicates that former Reading Recovery students perfomi well in their classes, some slippage in achievement can occur (Clay, 1993). Although Clay (1993) provides guidelines for transition back to the classroom after the student is discontinued\nit is possible that students were returned to the classroom without benefit of a transition plan. As noted by Reading Recovery teachers, few teachers have the opportunity to routinely monitor discontinued students progress. Also in tutoring sessions, children have opportunities to read texts at their instruction level on a daily basis, but they may not have adequate time for daily reading in the regular classroom.  The quality of instruction that Reading Recovery students receive once they return to the classroom is an important factor that was not examined in this study. Additional research could provide critical insight into the optimum classroom environment for discontinued, recommended, and incomplete Reading Recovery students. 29EVALUATION OF READING RECOVERY IN THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT: 2005 AGGREGATE REPORT INTRODUCTION The Little Rock School District began implementing Reading Recovery during the 1995-1996 school year in two schools. During the first four years of implementation, the Little Rock School District was part of the Pulaski County Reading Recovery Site. By 1998 there were eight trained Reading Recovery teachers in seven schools in the Little Rock School District. In July 1999 the district became a Reading Recovery Site hiring a full-time teacher leader. In 2000-2001 the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) began conducting the Reading Recovery teacher training for the district. Between the 2000-2001 and 2004-2005 school years UALR trained seventeen Reading Recovery teachers for the district. At the end of the 2004-2005 school year the Little Rock School District had 28 trained Reading Recovery teachers serving 18 of the 34 elementary schools in the district. Reading Recovery is one of eight literacy programs, interventions, and/or models used by Little Rock schools. Currently, Little Rock School District funds are used to support the program. The goal of Reading Recovery is to dramatically reduce the number of first grade students who have difficulty learning to read and write and to reduce the cost of these learners to educational systems. Reading Recovery is a short-tenn intervention program of one-to-one tutoring for the lowest-achieving first graders. The intervention is most effective when it is available to all students who need it and is used as a supplement to good classroom teaching. Individual students receive a half-hour lesson each school day for 12 to 20 weeks with a specially trained Reading Recovery teacher. As soon as students can read within the average range of their class and demonstrate that they can continue to achieve, their lessons are discontinued, and new students begin individual instruction. Reading Recovery was developed by New Zealand educator and researcher. Dr. Marie M. Clay over 20 years ago. More than one million first graders have been served in 49 states since Reading Recovery was introduced in the United States in 1984. Professional development is an 30essential component of the Reading Recovery program. Training utilizes a three-tiered approach that includes teachers, teacher leaders, and university trainers. In schools, special trained teachers work with children. At the site level, teacher leaders work with children, train teachers, and assist and monitor implementation with the help of a site coordinator. In university training centers, trainers work with children, train teacher leaders, engage in research, and support program implementation at affiliated sites. Professional development for teachers and teacher leaders begins with year-long graduate level study and is followed by ongoing training in succeeding years. Since 1984, the program reports that 80% of students who completed the full 12 to 20 week series of lessons, and 59% all students who have any lessons in Reading Recovery, can read and write with the average range of performance of their class. Program follow-up studies also indicate that most Reading Recovery students also do well on standardized tests and maintain their gains in later years. The evaluation plan for the Reading Recovery program in Little Rock School District included: (1) analyses of Reading Recovery student achievement and program data, (2) principal, teacher, and parent surveys and interviews, and (3) observations of Reading Recovery tutoring sessions. This report is part of a larger district study of four programs evaluating the effectiveness in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students. This report includes results from 18 elementary schools participating in the Reading Recovery program. RESEACH QUESTIONS The major goals of this research study were to evaluate African-American student achievement outcomes, program implementation fidelity, and principal, teacher, and parent perceptions concerning the Reading Recovery tutoring program for first grade students. Student achievement results on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS), Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), and An Observation of Early Literacy Achievement were analyzed to compare the progress of first graders enrolled in the Reading Recovery intervention program and comparison students in 2004-2005. Program implementation ratings were obtained from observations of 14 tutoring sessions in nine schools. The survey and 31interview results are based on the perceptions of 156 classroom teachers in grades K-3,22 experienced Reading Recovery teachers, four teachers in-training, 10 principals, and 95 parents. The Reading Recovery evaluation was structured around the following seven primary and supplemental research questions: Primary evaluation question: Has the Reading Recovery program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) evaluation questions:  What are the quality and level of implementation of Reading Recovery at the 18 schools implementing it in 2004-2005?  What is the level of participation in Reading Recovery by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school?  What is the progress demonstrated by African-American and other student participants in Reading Recovery in improving achievement, as demonstrated on program-specific measures? What percentage of students are discontinued or not discontinued? What proportion of scheduled sessions are actually held, and what are the reasons for missed sessions?  What are the perceptions of Reading Recovery teachers regarding Reading Recovery program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?  What are the perceptions of principals, regular first-grade teachers, and other teachers in the school regarding Reading Recovery program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?  What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of Reading Recovery students regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 32EVALUATION DESIGN AND MEASURES The evaluation period extended from February 2004 through May 2005. The evaluation design was based on both quantitative and qualitative data collected from Reading Recovery intervention observations, principal and teacher in-training interviews, classroom teachers, Reading Recovery teachers, and parent surveys, and Reading Recovery program data. Reading Recovery student-level achievement data on the ITBS, DRA, DIBELS, and An Observation of Early Literacy Achievement was received in Fall 2005 and incorporated in this report. The primary data collectors in this study were Center for Research in Educational Policy (CREP) trained site researchers. Site researchers: (1) conducted Reading Recovery intervention observations, (2) administered the Reading Recovery teacher survey, (3) conducted principal and teacher in-training interviews, and (4) collected program data. Principals at Reading Recovery schools were responsible for administering the classroom teacher and Reading Recovery parent surveys. Participants Little Rock School District is located in Central Arkansas and serves approximately 26,500 students, with African-Americans representing approximately 67% of the district student population, in 49 schools in an urban area with a population of 184,000. In the 2004-2005 school year 18 elementary schools and 230 first grade students, of which 173 are African American, 27 are white, 22 are Hispanic, and the remaining 8 are other ethnicities, participated in the Reading Recovery program in the district. However, the schools indicated that 365 first grade students needed Reading Recovery services. Three schools were in their first year of program implementation (Bale, Stephens, and Terry) and survey and observation data were not collected from these schools. However, randomly selected teachers in-training and principals from these three schools were interviewed for this study. A profile of the Reading Recovery schools and participants included in this study is shown in Table 1. The profile data were obtained from either the 2003-2004 Common Core of Data from the National Center for Education Statistics, the 2004-2005 Reading Recovery Site Report for Little Rock from the National Data Evaluation Center at The Ohio State University, or provided by the district. As indicated in Table 1 the number of years schools have implemented the Reading Recovery program ranged 33from one to 10. The Reading Recovery schools were predominately African-American, ranging from 50% of the student population to 99%. The district reported that four Reading Recovery schools did not receive Title I funding and the percentage of students eligible for free and reduced price lunch ranged from a low of 33% to a high of 94% at all Reading Recovery schools. Table 1 Reading Recovery Participating Schools: 2004-2005 School Name Bale Elementary School Booker Aris Magn^ES Carver Magnet Elem School Chicot Eiem^ool David O'Dodd Elem School Franklin Incentive Elem School C^er Springs ElemSctwol Gibbs Magnet Elem School tvie^cwcliff Elem School Mitohell Incentive Elem School Otter Creek Elem School Rights^ Incentive Bern School Stephens Elem School terry Elem School Wakefield Elem School Watson Elem School VWIiams Magnet Elem School Wilson Elem School School Wide Population Students Teacheis Asian 319 605 496 536 261 387 299 310 349 156 511 262 499 577 451 456 461 285 27 55 43 44 27 35 23 30 24 22 31 25 39 36 29 34 36 27 0% 1% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1% 7% 0% 0% 9% 1% School Wide Student Population African American 87% 55% 54% 75% 58% 97% 89% 52% 77% 96% 56% 99% 95% 51% 83% 95% 52% 89% Hispanic White 7% 5% 4% 3% 15% 10% 0% 4% 3% 9% 0% 6% 0% 3% 5% 15% 3% 1% 4% 40% 40% 10% 32% 2% 7% 41% 13% 2% 36% 1% 2% 36% 2% 2% 38% 6% % Free and Reduced Lunch 88.4% 63.3% 53.0% 85.6% 68.9% 943% 80.6% 43.9% 85.1% 91.7% 55.7% 87.8% 90.6% 47.5% 920% 932% 33.6% 91.9% Reading Recowiy Participant tifonnation % Below Pralicienr Number of RR Teachers Number of K-3 Number of RR Years in RR Teachets Students Program 45% 22% 18% 38% 30% 51% 48% 11% 44% 59% 19% 49% 59% 12% 33% 64% 10% 35% 10 20 32 16 17 12 14 18 18 13 15 13 16 26 10 18 14 18 10 13 10 1 8 1 4 7 2 3 3 5 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 8 9 7 8 8 7 8 6 9 8 3 5 8 2 8 8 8 9 9 8 8 3 1 1 3 3 9 5  Proficiency levels are based on 2003-2004 school year ACTAAP Grade 4 Reading, Language, and Writing data. 34Instrumentation Six instruments were developed by CREP to collect the evaluation data: a classroom observation tool, a principal interview, a teacher in-training interview, a Reading Recovery teacher questionnaire, a classroom teacher questionnaire, and a parent survey. A detailed description of each instrument follows. Classroom Observation Measure Reading Recovery Implementation Assessment Instrument (RRIAI) The RRIAI was designed for observation in Reading Recovery classrooms and was developed by researchers at CREP and Reading Recovery faculty at ULAR. Ratings are organized around two categories: Reading Recovery Program Components and Reading Recovery Program Strategies. The RRIAI observation tool provides an overall rating for each category based on a rubric that ranges from (1) poor or unacceptable\n(2) below average in comparison to other programs observed\n(3) meets nearly all standards of program quality\nand (4) above average in comparison to other programs. The RRIAI has been aligned to the essential components of the Reading Recovery program. Sub-categories of the program components include: reading familiar stories, reading a story that was read for the first time the day before, working with letters, writing a story, assembling a cut-up story, and introducing and reading a new book. The tool was designed to be utilized by experienced Reading Recovery trainers during the 30-minute tutoring session with additional time allocated for observer questions and examination of student records after the session. Site observers received observation protocol training in February 2005 and a copy of the observation guidelines are included in Appendix A. Site observers were also asked to provide overall perceptions of Reading Recovery program implementation in the Little Rock schools. Interviews Reading Recovery Principal Interview Randomly selected principals from 10 Reading Recovery schools participated in approximately 45-minute phone interviews with CREP researchers. Interview questions addressed 35the principals general experiences and reactions to the Reading Recovery implementation and the associated outcomes for the school, students, teachers, and parents. A copy of the principal interview protocol with summary responses is included in Appendix B. Reading Recovery Teacher in Training Interview In the 2004-2005 school year, six teachers were beginning their first year as a Reading Recovery teacher and considered as teachers in-training. Three were located in experienced schools and three were located in the schools beginning their first year of implementation: Bale, Stephens, and Terry. Four randomly selected teachers in-training participated in an approximately 45-minute phone interview with CREP researchers. Interview questions addressed the teachers in-training experiences with and perceptions of the Reading Recovery program implementation with regard to such areas as resources, professional development, parent involvement, support, and student outcomes. A copy of the teacher in-training interview protocol with summary responses is included in Appendix C. Surveys Reading Recovery Teacher Questionnaire (RRTQ) Reading Recovery teachers in the 15 experienced Reading Recovery schools were asked to complete the RRTQ, which includes four sections. Section I contains 20 items to which teachers respond using a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree. Items assessed the general impressions of the Reading Recovery program, professional development, support for the program, impacts on student achievement, and alignment of state and district reading and language arts standards. In a second section, teachers were asked to indicate to what degree the listed items occurred. The focus of the 4 items were (1) administration support of Reading Recovery teacher efforts\n(2) Reading Coach support of Reading Recovery teacher efforts\n(3) district support of Reading Recovery teacher efforts\nand (4) the time to routinely monitor first grade students progress after they were discontinued from tutoring. Open-ended questions asked Reading Recovery teachers to respond to the statements: What are the strongest aspects of the Reading Recovery program? What are the weakest aspects of the Reading Recovery program? Do 36you think your school should continue the Reading Recovery program ? A final section of the RRTQ contained general questions regarding years of teaching experience, race, and level of education. Reading Recovery Classroom Teacher Questionnaire (RRCTQ) All K-3 teacher who taught in experienced Reading Recovery schools were asked to complete the RRCTQ, which contains 13 items to which teachers respond using a five-point Likert- type scale that ranges from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree. Items assessed the specific program elements of Reading Recovery such as: understanding of the program, impacts on student achievement, teacher support for the program, and parent involvement. Open-ended questions asked classroom teachers to respond to the statements: Please describe your understanding of the Reading Recovery program in your school. What are the strongest aspects of the Reading Recovery program? Do you think your school should continue the Reading Recovery program? /\\ final section of the RRCTQ contained general questions regarding years of teaching experience, race, and level of education. Reading Recovery Parent Survey (RRPS) Parents whose first grade children were currently receiving Reading Recovery tutoring services were asked to complete the RRPS, that contains 6 items to which parents respond using a five-point Likert-type scale that ranges from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree. Items assessed general impressions of the program such as: improvement in childs reading skills, childs enjoyment of tutoring sessions, and opportunities to communicate with the Reading Recovery teacher. Both English and Spanish versions were made available to schools. Open-ended questions asked parents to respond to the statements: Please describe your understanding of the Reading Recovery tutoring program at your childs school. What is the BEST thing about your child's involvement with the Reading Recovery tutoring program? What CHANGES would you like to see in the Reading Recovery tutoring program? A final section of the RRPS asked parents to indicate the race, grade, and age of their child. 37Program Data Reading Recovery program information was obtained from data submitted to the National Data Evaluation Center at The Ohio State University in 2004-2005. Each year the schools and district submit data and receive a site report. The report represents an examination of Reading Recovery student outcomes for Little Rock and accounts for all children served by Reading Recovery within the site during the 2004-2005 school year. In addition, attention is given to implementation factors that may be supporting or hindering the success of the intervention with the site. Student Achievement Results In addition to the program data, interviews, survey, and observation tools cited above, reading achievement data is derived from scores on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS), Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA), Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) and An Observation of Early Literacy Achievement. A description of each assessment follows. Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS). The ITBS Form A is a norm-referenced group administered test that measures the skills and achievement of students in grades K-8 and was developed at The University of Iowa. The ITBS provides an in-depth assessment of students achievement of important educational objectives. Tests in Reading, Language Arts, Mathematics, Social Studies, Science, and Source of Information yield reliable and comprehensive information both about the development of students skills and about their ability to think critically. The emphasis of the K-1 assessment is on academic skills found in the early childhood curriculum. These tests are neither measures of readiness for school nor readiness to read. Rather, they assess the extent to which a child is cognitively prepared to begin work in the academic aspects of the curriculum. Test materials have been extensively field tested for psychometric soundness and evaluated for fairness to gender. racial, ethnic, and cultural groups. Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA). The Developmental Reading Assessment provides teachers with a method for assessing and documenting primary students development as readers over time with a literature-based instructional reading program. The DRA is designed to be used in K-3 classrooms with rich literate environments. The assessments are conducted during one- 38on-one reading conferences as children read specially selected assessment texts. A set of 20 stories. which increase in difficulty, are used for the assessment. The DRA evaluates two major aspects of reading: accuracy of oral reading and comprehension through reading and retelling of narrative stories. Questions pertaining to concepts about print are also included in the assessment with lower leveled texts. Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). DIBELS is a tool for early identification of children with potential literacy problems and an assessment of response to instruction. The assessment is individually administered to K-3 children at least three times per year. The DIBELS assessment is designed to enable educators to modify their approach if a student is not on course to achieve reading goals. The Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development at the University of Oregon constructed DIBELS (2000). The Institute reports it has validated the instruments ability to predict outcomes and has tested its reliability with young children across the country. Reading Recovery schools that have received Reading Excellence Act or Reading First grant funding use the DIBELS assessment in Little Rock. An Observation of Early Literacy Achievement: Reading Recovery Subtests. Six tasks in Marie Clays (2002) An Observation of Early Literacy Achievement (Observation Survey) were used as pretest and posttest measures. The Survey tasks have the qualities of sound assessment instruments with reliabilities and validities. The purpose of the assessment is to determine an appropriate level of text difficulty and to record, using a running record, what the child does when reading continuous text. All six tasks of the Observation Survey were administered to Reading Recovery students in the fall (start of the school year) and/or at entry to the intervention. These scores serve as pretest measure in the evaluation design. The six tasks were also administered to Reading Recovery students upon discontinuing or exiting from the program. In the spring (end of school year), the six tasks were again administered to all students who received Reading Recovery services during the year. Year-end scores served as the posttest measures in comparing the progress made by Reading Recovery children in the various end-of-program status groups. 39PROCEDURE Data for the evaluation were collected March-May for the 2004-2005 school year. On February 16, 2005 principals were given an overview of the evaluation and timelines for collecting data. On March 3-4 and April 14-15,14 tutoring observations were conducted in nine randomly selected experienced Reading Recovery schools by two Reading Recovery content experts from Georgia State and The Ohio State Universities. Only experienced Reading Recovery teachers were observed. On March 23 a CREP trained site researcher administered the Reading Recovery teacher survey to experienced teachers at a regularly scheduled monthly meeting at ULAR. In April and May principals in experienced Reading Recovery schools administered the classroom teacher questionnaire to K-3 grade teachers. Principals also administered the parent survey to parents whose children were currently receiving first grade intervention services in the 15 experienced Reading Recovery schools. Four teachers in-training and ten principals were randomly selected from the 18 Reading Recovery schools to participate in a phone interview in April and May conducted by CREP researchers. Reading Recovery program data was received in summer 2005 from the National Data Evaluation Center at The Ohio State University. Student achievement data was received from the district in fall 2005. METHODS - STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Sample. The sample included 1,094 first grade students who attended one of 18 schools that implemented the Reading Recovery program during the 2004-2005 school year. Of these, 230 were referred to the Reading Recovery program, and 864 were in the comparison group. The percentages of students who were African American or of Limited English Proficiency were similar between the comparison and Reading Recovery groups (73.6% versus 75.6% and 7.3% versus 8.7%, respectively\nsee Figure 1). However, Reading Recovery students were more likely to be eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (84.3% versus 73.1%), to receive special education services (15.7% versus 8.6%), and to be male (58.1 % versus 48.0%\nsee Figure 1). A random sample of about 11 comparison students was selected from each school (total n = 189) for administration of the DIBELS and Observation Survey: Reading Recovery test batteries. 40Figure 1. Percentage of Students with Selected Demographic Characteristics by Reading Recovery Status 100.0 -I 90.0 - 84.3 -i 80.0 - 73.6 75.6 \" 73.1 70.0 - 60.0 - 40.0 - 48.0 58.1 50.0 -  30.0 - 20.0  10.0 - 7.3 15.7 8.6 0.0 African American Free lunch LEP Special Education Male J j  Comparison  Reading Recovery Reading Recovery Treatment Level. In the Reading Recovery program, students who are deemed to have attained a reading level equivalent to their peers are assigned an end-of-program status of discontinued.\" Children who received 20 or more weeks of Reading Recovery services, but who do not attain a reading level equivalent to their peers are assigned a status of recommended action. Children who have received fewer than 20 weeks were assigned incomplete program status. Children designated as unknown status were removed from the program in fewer than 20 weeks due to reasons other than the school year ending. Other children were designated as having moved during the school year. As shown in Figure 2, the median number of sessions of recommended action {Md = 68.50\nn = 68) children was actually higher than the median for discontinued students {Md = 57.00\nn = 90). The medians for incomplete students {n = 46) and unknown students {n = 12) were very similar {Md = 44.63 versus 46.08, respectively\nsee Figure 2). For the purposes of this study, recommended action and discontinued students were categorized as complete program\n incomplete and unknown students were categorized as incomplete 41program\n and students who moved were eliminated from the analyses. This left a total of 216 Reading Recovery students: 158 with a complete program, and 58 with an incomplete program. Figure 2. Boxplot of Number of Reading Recovery Sessions by Student Status Upon Exiting the Program 80 c o w 00- V) V) a 2 cr O  40- o o 20- O O o * DisiJuntinueiJ HovhU I I )nl nown Pricominrjndrid a\u0026lt;\ntion T T T T lni\nuin|:'He Status Note. Heavy dark lines indicate median. Gray boxes indicate interquartile range. Whiskers indicate range, excepting extreme values. Extreme values denoted by circles or asterisks. 42Measures. Pretest (covariate) measures included: (a) Spring, 2004 Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA) subtests in Letter Recognition, Word Recognition, Capitalization, Writing, Dictation, and a DRA Test score, (b) Fall 2005 Observation Survey: Reading Recovery program subtests that included Letter Identification, Word Test, Concepts About Print, Writing Vocabulary, Hearing and Recording Sounds in Words, and Text Reading\nand (c) the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) subtests in Letter Naming Fluency, Phoneme Segmentation Fluency, Nonsense Word Fluency, and Word Use Fluency. Outcome measures included Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) Reading Normal Curve Equivalent Scores, DRA subtests. Observation Survey: Reading Recovery subtests, and DIBELS subtests administered in Spring 2005. To achieve some parsimony in the analyses, pretest measures were subjected to a principal components analysis, and regressionbased factors scores were constructed for pretest DRA, Observation Survey: Reading Recovery, DIBELS subtests. A single factor accounted for 60.1%, 60.5%, and 43.8% of the variance in the DRA, Observation Survey: Reading Recovery, and DIBELS subtests, respectively. Outcome measures included the DRA, Observation Survey: Reading Recovery, and DIBELS subtests, as well as ITBS. The DRA Letter Recognition, DRA Capitalization, and DIBELS Letter Naming Fluency subtests were not administered in Spring 2005. DIBELS and Observation Survey: Reading Recovery tests were administered to a small random sample of comparison students within each school. Student achievement analyses. A 3 (Program Status) X 2 (African American versus other) multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) using student gender, the pertinent pretest factor score, free lunch status, special education status, and LEP status was performed with the various subtests as outcomes for the DRA, Observation Survey: Reading Recovey, and DIBELS test batteries. A similar 3X2 analysis of covariance was performed on ITBS Reading NCE scores using the 2003-2004 DRA factor score as a pretest covariate. For the multivariate analyses, Wilk's lambda was used as the criterion of multivariate significance. Where Wilks lambda indicated a significant multivariate effect, follow-up univariate analyses were performed on each outcome variable using the Bonferroni procedure to control for experimentwise alpha. When significant univariate results were found, post hoc analyses were performed using Scheffes procedure. Effect size estimates were computed for all posttests by subtracting the adjusted mean for the comparison group from the 43adjusted mean from the Reading Recovery group within levels of race, then dividing by the total standard deviation of the posttest. For ITBS Reading NCE effect size estimates, the population standard deviation of 21.06 was used. Exploratory and supplementary analyses: Impact of teacher experience and number of sessions. The number of years experience with Reading Recovery was recorded for each teacher. Years experience ranged from 1 to 10 years. ITBS Reading NCE scores and DRA test scores for 2004-2005 were regressed on 2003-2004 DRA factor scores and dummy-coded variables representing student ethnicity, free lunch status, gender, special education status, and LEP status. Standardized residuals were saved from each of these analyses, and plotted against teacher years of experience to graphically assess the nature of the relationship between teacher experience and teacher effectiveness in Reading Recovery for students who received a Complete program. Standardized residuals for each of these 2004-2005 tests were also plotted against number of Reading Recovery sessions received for all students (i.e., those who received either a Complete or Incomplete program). Finally, effect size boxplots were constructed for African American students who had Complete and Incomplete Reading Recovery programs. DATA COLLECTION Table 2 provides the type of measures, instrument names, administration timeline, and a brief data collection description for each of the instruments. 44Table 2 Data Collection Summary Type of Measure Site Visits Instrument Timeline RR Implementation Assessment Instrument Spring 2005 Description/ Response rate  14 conducted Surveys RR Teacher Questionnaire RR Classroom Teacher Questionnaire RR Parent Survey Spring 2005 Spring 2005 Spring 2005  22 respondents/100%  156 respondents/  approximately 90% Interviews Principal Interviews Teacher In-Training Interviews Spring 2005 Spring 2005  95 respondents/9 Spanish  approximately 86%  10 conducted  4 conducted Data Analysis and Reporting ITBS, DRA, DIBELS, \u0026amp; Observation Survey: RR Fall 2005 Little Rock School District Reading Recovery Aggregate Report  1,094 first grade students . 230 RR  864 comparison group  1 Final Report RESULTS The results of the Pleading Recovery evaluation are presented below by instrument. In the Conclusion section, findings are synthesized across instruments to address each research question. Reading Recovery Implementation Assessment Instrument (RRIAI) As indicated in the description of the RRIAI, the observation procedure primarily focuses on Reading Recovery Program Components and Program Strategies. The site observers used a four- point rubric (1 = poor or unacceptable, 2 = below average in comparison to other programs observed. 3 = meets nearly all standards of program quality, and 4 = above average in comparison to other programs) to rate the frequency and application of components and strategies of Reading Recovery instruction. More precise data regarding observed Reading Recovery instructional practices measured by the four-point rubric for the 14 observations are presented in Table 3. 45Reading Recovery Program Components The overall mean rating for the Reading Recovery Program Components was 3.46 which suggest a high level of program implementation. Of the six subcategories the highest observed ratings were\nassembling a cut-up story and introducing and reading a new book observed to be above average in 85.71 % of tutoring sessions. The program component subcategory with the lowest observed rating was working with letters and/or words using magnetic letters observed to be above average in only 35.71% of tutoring sessions. Reading a familiar story and reading a story that was read for the first time the day before was observed to above average in 64.29% of visits. The six program components were observed in at least 92.86% of 14 tutoring sessions. Reading Recovery Program Strategies The overall mean rating for the Reading Recovery Program Strategies was 3.61 which also indicate a high level of instructional effectiveness. Of the eight During Tutoring Lesson subcategories the highest observed rating was for appropriate text selected throughout the lesson observed to above average in 85.71% of tutoring sessions. The During Tutoring Lesson subcategory with the lowest observed rating was echo of focus throughout the lesson observed to be above average in just 42.86% of tutoring sessions. For the After Tutoring Lesson, has high expectations for the child and articulates child's strengths and needs were observed to be above average in 78.57% of tutoring sessions and accurate and up-to-date records were observed to be above average in 71.43% of tutoring sessions. The Reading Recovery Program Strategies were observed in at least 85.71 of tutoring sessions. Observer Perceptions of Reading Recovery Program Implementation Site observers reported being impressed with the dedication and commitment of the Reading Recovery teachers to the fidelity of the teaching procedures and the integrity of the implementation of the program. Almost all teachers observed were meeting all the standards, guidelines, and expectations of the Reading Recovery Council of North America and the North American Trainers Group. Since observations occurred in March and April, most of the students observed were second- round students, since teachers had discontinued their first-round students. Teachers reported that students who did not discontinue from Reading Recovery during the first-round were being considered 46for further intervention services. Site observers also reported that the Reading Recovery program in the Little Rock district receives an adequate allocation of time, materials, and other resources. However, several teachers and principals expressed the need for additional Reading Recovery teachers in their schools. Reading Recovery teachers also reported teaching literacy small groups the rest of the day which enables them to give their Reading Recovery students more attention during the instructional day. By teaching these literacy groups, site observers suggested that the Reading Recovery teachers' expertise and knowledge gained from their training and practice benefits children across several grade levels. During visits site observers did suggest areas in which some Reading Recovery teachers need improvement. These instructional areas include: (1) hearing and recording sounds in words\n(2) making and breaking\n(3) do away with the helping hand\nand (4) maintaining up-to-date records on each child as a basis for instruction. A summary of observers general findings for each classroom observation is included in Appendix D. 47Table 3 Reading Recovery Implementation Assessment Instrument: Spring 2005 N=14 Please check: Observed: 0 Not Observed: N Please rate each of the following items in terms of the quality of implementation by using the appropriate number according to the following scales: I. II. Quality 1 = Poor or unacceptable 2 = Below average in comparison to other programs observed 3 = Meets nearly all standards of program quality 4 = Above average in comparison to other programs Observed Not Obsented Reading Recovery Program Components Poor 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 92.86 7.14 Reading familiar stories Reading a story that was read for the first time the day before - incorporates ronning record Working with letters and /or words using magnetic letters 0.0 0.0 0.0 92.86 7.14 Writing a story 0.0 92.86 7.14 Assembling a cut-up story 0.0 92.86 7.14 Introducing and reading a new book 0.0 Below Average 14.29 7.14 42.86 0.0 0.0 0.0 Quality Meets 21.43 28.57 14.29 21.43 7.14 7.14 Above Average 64.29 64.29 35.71 71.43 85.71 85.71 Overall rating: Folkws the Reading Recovery lesson frameworks Mean:3.46 SD:0.54 Observed Not Observed Reading Recovery Program Strategies Poor 92.86 7.14 Appropriate pacing of lesson components 0.0 Below Average 21.43 Quaflty Meets 7.14 Above Average 64.29 92.86 7.14 100.0 0.0 Appropriate text selected throughout the lesson Appropriate prompts are used for scaffolding the child to problem s\u0026lt;3lve 0.0 0.0 7.14 7.14 0.0 85.71 14.29 78.57 100.0 0.0 Child is engaged in constructive problem solving 7.14 0.0 21.43 71.43 92.86 7.14 Echo of focus throughout the lesson 0.0 7.14 42.86 42.86 92.86 7.14 Procedures ate adjusted according to child's needs 0.0 0.0 14.29 78.57 92.86 7.14 Balance of fluency phrasing practice and problem solving 0.0 7.14 7.14 78.57 85.71 7.14 Opportunities to develop phonological awareness within the lesson 0.0 7.14 21.43 64.29 85.71 7.14 Accurate up-tobate records 0.0 7.14 14.29 71.43 85.71 7.14 Articulates child's strengths and needs 0.0 0.0 14.29 78.57 85.71 7.14 Has high expectations for the child 0.0 0.0 14.29 78.57 Overall Rating: 'NOTE: Item percentages may not total 100% because of missing input from observers. Mean: 3.61 SD:0.66 48INTERVIEW RESULTS Reading Recovery Principal Interview Principals at ten of the Reading Recovery schools were randomly selected to participate in a 45 minute phone interview. Principals were asked a series of questions regarding general program implementation, classroom level changes, program results, professional development opportunities and parental and community involvement. A summary of the principal responses can be found in Appendix B. Overall, principals were positive about the Reading Recovery program and the impact it has had on their schools. Most of the schools have been utilizing Reading Recovery for several years and faculty and staff are very comfortable with the program. Nearly all of the principals interviewed were instrumental in bringing Reading Recovery to their schools, and the decision to utilize Reading Recovery was made after considerable research and thoughtful consideration. Principals reported that Reading Recovery is a wonderful compliment to the schools balanced literacy programs. The one-on-one attention the reading Recovery students receive is overwhelmingly the most effective of the strategies that the program employs. Other effective strategies mentioned included push-ins\", literacy groups, running records, and the writing component. Principals reported being active advocates in their Reading Recovery programs. They described their roles as one of support and involvement, ranging from oversight of the program to more direct involvement including student selection for the program, review of student progress, and ongoing meetings and collaboration with the Reading Recovery specialists. All principals noted that teachers were very supportive of the Reading Recovery program and appreciated the impact it has had on overall student achievement. Most of the resources needed for effective program implementation are available\nhowever principals reported an ongoing need for books, additional teachers and tutors, and more planning time. Principals described the African American population as being well-served by Reading Recovery, and most agree that through Reading Recovery the achievement gap is being bridged for their African American students. In most of the schools, African American students are a large percentage of the Reading Recovery program. 49and the early intervention provided by Reading Recovery allows the student to be encouraged by being successful at a younger age. Teacher in-Training Interview In the spring 2005, four teachers in their first year in the Reading Recovery program were contacted by phone for a 30 to 45 minute phone interview. The teachers in-raining were attending classes concerning Reading Recovery instruction, as well as working in their schools implementing the Reading Recovery strategies. Feedback from the teachers was solicited regarding general program information, classroom level changes, results, professional development, and parental involvement and support. A summary of the teacher in training responses can be found in Appendix C. All teachers described the process of integrating Reading Recovery into the schools literacy program as well planned and organized. Reading Recovery teachers work individually with the lowest performing students and then follow up individual instruction with literacy groups. Reading Recovery teachers reported a thorough selection process that involved collaboration with the classroom teacher and comprehensive testing and assessment. In general, the Reading Recovery teachers reported strong support from the classroom teachers, that classroom teachers appreciate the effectiveness of the one-on-one approach, and the fact that the Reading Recovery is able to provide this type of support, freeing the classroom teacher to work more effectively with the other students. The Reading Recovery teachers in training strongly felt that Reading Recovery helped to equalize learning and achievement opportunities for African American students at their schools. Most of the students in Reading Recovery are African American, and these teachers were able to see positive gains. Reading Recovery helps all struggling readers by actively engaging them in reading and allowing them to feel successful at reading. Through detailed daily records and periodic testing all inherent in the Reading Recovery programstudent progress is effectively monitored and lessons can be planned that are tailor made for each individual child. Additionally, the Reading Recovery program often serves as a first line of defense in determining special education needs. Often Reading Recovery will be used prior to special education referral. Teachers in training emphasized the importance of the daily data reports they collect and view them as essential to the success of the program. Reading Recovery teachers collect and use 50data to monitor the progress of the students and to help develop appropriate, effective teaching strategies based on the individual needs of the student. Data are often shared with the classroom teacher and the principal so a collaborative team develops to help plan and implement instruction for the student. The Reading Recovery teachers in training report a significant increase in self-confidence and improvement in overall attitude among the Reading Recovery students. As the students begin to experience success, they are less frustrated and angry. This improvement in attitude improves their classroom behavior and relationships with other teachers and students. Some of these teachers have seen dramatic increases in test scores and other achievement data, while others have not yet been able to see these gains. Again, from the perspective of the teachers in training, the Reading Recovery program is helping to closing the achievement gap of African American students. Reading Recovery teachers in- training reported professional training that ranged from adequate to thorough. Changes in Reading Recovery course instructors led to some confusion for some of the teachers in training. and some reported the need for increased classroom hours. However, overall, these teachers reported feeling well-prepared to work with the students. The strategies they have learned have been very helpful. Although the teachers in training reported having significant classroom experience, they are learning unique techniques that have been very beneficial. There is considerable support from the district teacher, and all teachers expressed a desire and need for continuing support in the upcoming school year. Parental support has been mixed. although all the teachers reported active attempts at engaging the parents in the Reading Recovery program. Reading Recovery teachers in-training concurred that the exposure to print and the one-on- one attention were the most critical elements of the Reading Recovery program. Teachers reported the need to understand several components better, including the make and break lesson and the writing component\nand the need for time to plan and implement the program is always a factor. Overall, the components of Reading Recovery were well understood and effective. 51SURVEY RESULTS Reading Recovery Teacher Questionnaire (RRTQ) Descriptive results. The results of the RRTQ are summarized in Table 4. Reading Recovery teachers had extremely favorable attitudes toward the program at their schools. As illustrated in Table 4,100% of teachers strongly agreed or agreed that they have a thorough understanding of the program, teachers in their school are generally supportive of the program. ongoing communication exists between Reading Recovery tutors and classroom reading teachers. Reading Recovery monthly meetings are effective and useful, instructional materials needed to implement our Reading Recovery program are readily available, and the Reading Recovery program is aligned with state and district reading and language arts standards. There was also strong agreement that Reading Recovery teachers received support, with 86.36% of the teachers reporting that the school administration and Reading Coach supported their efforts as a Reading Recovery teacher. Almost 75% (72.73%) of teachers reported receiving extensive district support. The items with the highest level of disagreement (disagree and strongly disagree) concerned Reading Recovery teachers having sufficient planning time (36.36%), enough tutors to fully implement the Reading Recovery program (18.18%), and time to routinely monitor first grade students' progress after they were discontinued from Reading Recovery (9.09% not at all and 72.73% somewhat). Demographic data. All Reading Recovery teachers (100%) reported having at least six years of teaching experience and 31.82% reported at least six years experience as a Reading Recovery teacher. Approximately 85% (86.36%) of Reading Recovery teachers reported having a Masters Degree and beyond. The majority of Reading Recovery teachers were white (72.73%) and 13.64% reported their ethnicity as African-American. Open-ended responses. Reading Recovery teachers were asked to respond to three open- ended questions in addition to the 24 items on the questionnaire. Respondents were instructed to list the strongest aspects of the Reading Recovery program, the weakest aspects of the Reading Recovery program, and reasons for continuing or discontinuing Reading Recovery their school. There were 22 Reading Recovery teachers who filled out the questionnaire, and 21 of those also answered the open-ended questions. Many of the Reading Recovery teachers answered in detail, listing multiple 52responses for each of the questions. The open-ended responses are summarized in Table 5, and a verbatim listing of teacher responses can be found in Appendix E. Of the 21 who listed strong aspects of the Reading Recovery program, the two most popular answers were individualized, one-on-one instruction, 57.1%, and the ability to reach the lowest performing students and bridge the achievement gap for these students, 47.6%. Reading Recovery teaching strategies and components were listed in 19% of the responses, and both the early intervention element and the support from the other teachers were listed in 14.3% of the responses. Respondents were also asked to list what they considered the weakest elements of the Reading Recovery program. Time was a factor in many of the responses with lack of planning time most frequently mentioned at 33.3%. Lack of time to complete the lesson was mentioned in 19.0% of the responses. Teachers inability to help all the students who need help was also mentioned in 19.0% of the responses. All of the 21 teachers responded positively to the question Do you think your school should continue the Reading Recovery program? Why?\"-, and 20 teachers elaborated on their positive response listing reasons for continuing Reading Recovery. The ability of Reading Recovery to help struggling readers was listed in half of the responses (50.0%), and strong progress and results were mentioned in 40.0% of the responses. The fact that Reading Recovery decreases the number of special education referrals was listed in 15.0% of the responses. There was one respondent who pointed out that although he/she felt Reading Recovery should be continued at the school, there needed to be better implementation to make it effective. Overall, as reflected in the other items on the questionnaire, the open-ended responses were very positive. Reading Recovery teachers appear knowledgeable and committed to their roles as Reading Recovery teachers and believe strongly in the positive impact the program is having at their schools. Based on survey response and comments provided through the open-ended questions. Reading Recovery teachers are able to see a strong impact from the individualized instruction they provide. 53Table 4 Reading Recovery Teacher Questionnaire (RRTQ): 2004-2005 N = 22 RRTQ Items 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. I have a thorough understanding of the schoofs Reading Recovery program. I have received adequate initial and ongoing professional development/lraining for implementation of the Reading Recovery program. Our Reading Recovery program has positively impacted student achievement Because of Reading Recovery, Literacy Group interventions occur for students in grades K-3. Overall, this program seems valuable for improving the achievement of African-American students. Reading Recovery teachers are given sufficient planning lime to implement the program. Our school has enough tutors to fully implement its Reading Recovery program. The administration protects the time for daily unintenupled Reading Recovery tutoring and Literacy Small Group interventions. Because of our Reading Recovery program, parents are more involved In the literacy program of this school. This school has a plan for evaluating all elements of our Reading Recovery program. Teachers in this school are generally supportive of the Reading Recovery program. Ongoing communication exists between Reading Recovery tutors and dasstoom reading teachers. Reading Recovery teachers are encouraged to communicate concerns, questions, and constnrctive Ideas regarding the program. Our Reading Recovery program adequately addresses the requirements of children with special needs. Reading Recovery teachers participate in the special education referral process to provide early literacy intervention. Because of Reading Recovery, teachers in this school spend more time working together to plan instruction and review student progress. Reading Recovery monthly meetings (continuing contact) are effective and useful. Instructional materials (books, assessments, and other resources) needed to Implement our Reading Recovery program ate readily available. The faculty, staff, and administration believe that aH children can read at grade lev^ or above by the end of third grade. The Reading Recovery program is aligned with state and district reading and language arts standards. Percent Strongly Agree And Agree 100.00 95.45 95.45 95.45 86.36 54.55 59.09 77.27 63.64 86.36 100.00 100.00 81.82 77.27 86.36 81.82 100.00 100.00 63.64 100.00 1. 2. 3. 4. RRTQ Items To what degree did your school administration support your efforts as a Reading Recovery teacher? To what degree did your school Reading Coach support your efforts as a Reading Recovery teacher? Towhat degree (toes the district support your efforts asaReading Recovery teacher? To what degree did your schedule allow the time to routinely monitor first grade students' progress after they were discontinued from Reading Recovery tutoring? Percent Extensively 86.36 86.36 72.73 18.18 Percent Neutral 0.00 4.55 0.00 0.00 4.55 9.09 18.18 22.73 18.18 13.64 0.00 0.00 18.18 13.64 9.09 18.18 0.00 0.00 31.82 0.00 Percent Somewhat 13.64 4.55 27.27 72.73 Percent Disagree and Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.55 0.00 36.36 18.18 0.00 13.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.09 4.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.55 0.00 Percent Not at all 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.09 NOTE: Item percentages may not total 100% because of missing input from some respondents. 54Table 4, continued Reading Recovery Teacher Questionnaire (RRTQ): 2004-2005 N =22 Total Years of Experience in this School Less than 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years More than 15 years Number of Respondents__________ Total Years of Experience in any School Less than 1 year 1 - 5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years More than 15 years Number of Respondents 0.00 36.36 31.82 18.18 9.09 22 0.00 0.00 18.18 13.64 68.18 22 How many years experiences have you had as a Reading Recovery teacher? Less than one year 1-5 years 6-10 years 11-15 years More than 15 years ________Number of Respondents ____________Educational Attainment Bachelors degree Masters degree Masters plus 20 hrs Education Specialists Doctoral ________Number of Respondents _______________Ethnicity/Race Asian or Pacific Islander American Indian or Alaskan Native Black, not of Hispanic origin Hispanic, regardless of race White, not of Hispanic origin Multi-racial / Other Number of Respondents 0.00 68.18 31.82 0.00 0.00 22 13.64 36.36 40.91 9.09 0.00 22 0.00 0.00 13.64 0.00 72.73 9.09 22 NOTE: Item percentages may not total 100% because of missing Input from some respondents. 55Table 5 Open-Ended Responses on the RRTQ Question Positive Comments 1. What are the strongest aspects of the Reading Recovery Program? 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Teacher Selection____________ __________Responses________________ One-on-one intervention/ Individualized lessons Bridging Achievement Gap by reaching lowest performing students Reading Recovery Teaching Strategies and Components of Instruction Early intervention Support from other RR teachers Continuing contact with students Professional training and development Addresses both reading and writing Increases students' confidence Collaboration with classroom teacher Close contact with parents Frequency Percent 12 10 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 57.1 47.6 19.0 14.3 14.3 9.5 9.5 9.5 4.8 4.8 4.8 Total Responses N = 21 Sample responses  Working one-on-one with an at-risk child.  Reading Recovery is an early intervention. The ability to identify and provide one-to-one instruction for a child is the strongest aspect. The child can be helped before bad habits are in place and self-esteem is an issue. Because it takes place in first grade the children are usually able to get on track with their classmates instead of falling behind more each day. Question Neutral or Neuative Comments What are the weakest aspects of the Reading Recovery Program? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Teacher Selection __________Responses____________ Planning time Time for Lesson Cant offer RR to All who need it Too much Paperwork Doesnt work for all children Continuing Contact Need more training and professional development support Need more RR teachers at the school More phonological approach in reading instruction Special Education screening No weak aspects Frequency Percent 7 4 4 2 2 2 33.3 19.0 19.0 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 1.48 1.48 1.48 Total Responses N= 21 2 2 1 1 1 Sample responses  Not any planning time.  Need more ongoing training fro teachers, especially those who may be in their second or third year of Reading Recovery. 56Table 5, continued Open-Ended Responses on the RRTQ Teacher Selection Question Continuation Comments Do you think your school should continue the Reading Recovery Program? Responses Why? 1. Yes: Why? Helps struggling readers Can see the results in achievement Decreased the number of students in special ed. Increases parental support Boosts self-confidence of student See continued gains as children advance Frequency Percent 19 10 8 3 2 1 1 90.5 2. Yes, but.... Need better implementation 3. Yes, with no elaboration 4. No_____________________ Total Responses N= 21 1 1 4.8 4.8 0 Sample responses  Yes. It has made a major difference in the number of children not on grade level and even the number of children referred for special education testing at my school.  Yes: I believe that Reading Recovery has enabled many children to get a great foundation for reading on grade level or near grade level by the end of 2\"^ or 3\" grade. Reading Recovery Classroom Teacher Questionnaire (RRCTQ) Descriptive results. The results of the RRCTQ administered to K-3 teachers in the 15 experienced Reading Recovery schools are summarized in Table 6. For the classroom teachers, the three items on which there was 80% or higher agreement included: teacher support of the program (93.59%), positive impact on student achievement (87.82%), and improving achievement of African- American students (82.05%). The two items on which classroom teachers expressed the strongest disagreement or disagreement included: sufficient faculty and staff to fully implement the program (23.08%) and because of Reading Recovery, parents are more involved in the literacy program (14.74%). Demographic data. K-3 classroom teachers reported less teaching experience and education attainment than Reading Recovery teachers. Close to 30% (28.85%) reported less than one year to five years teaching experience in any school and 57.69% reported having a Bachelors degree. However, more classroom teachers reported their ethnicity as African-American (28.85%) than Reading Recovery teachers with the majority (68.59%) reporting ethnicity as white. 57Open-ended responses. In addition to the 13 items the teachers were asked to rate on the questionnaire, several open-ended questions were also asked of the classroom teachers. Teachers were asked to describe their understanding of the Reading Recovery program, relate the strongest aspects of the program, and discuss whether or not Reading Recovery should be continued at their school. Teachers responses were very informative and many listed multiple responses for each of the questions. A complete summary of responses can be found in Table 7, and a verbatim listing of teacher responses can be found in Appendix F. There were 151 teachers who described their understandin\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_439","title":"Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program, Final Report","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Center for Research in Educational Policy, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee"],"dc_date":["2005/2006"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","Literacy"],"dcterms_title":["Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program, Final Report"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/439"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":["24 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nas CREP Little Rock School District Center far Research in Educational Policy Center for Research in Educational Policy The University of Memphis 325 Browning Hall Memphis, Tennessee 38152 Toll Free: 1-866-670-6147 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 2005 - 2006 RECEIVED Final Report DEC 1 3 2006 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING CREP Little Rock School District Center for Research in Educational Policy Center for Research in Educational Policy The University of Memphis 325 Browning Hall Memphis, Tennessee 38152 Toll Free: 1-866-670-6147 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 2005 - 2006 December 2006 Anna Grehan Lynn Harrison Deborah Slawson Center for Research in Educational Policy Shana Pribesh John Nunnery Old Dominion UniversityEXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to summarize and present the results of the Little Rock School Districts (LRSD) Prekindergarten Literacy Program. The primary goal of this evaluation was to determine the impact the Prekindergarten Literacy program had on improving and remediating the academic achievement of African American students. Additionally, this study was designed to determine program implementation, perceptions of strengths and weaknesses of the program by the relevant stakeholders, effectiveness of the program in screening and monitoring students progress, and the level of participation of African Americans in the preschool program. RESEARCH QUESTIONS This evaluation was structured around the following primary and supplementary research questions: Primary Evaluation Question  Has the prekindergarten program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions  What are the quality of instruction and level of implementation of prekindergarten programs in classroom environments at the 28 schools implementing in 2005-2006?  What is the level of participation in the prekindergarten program by African American children relative to other ethnic groups at the school?  To what extent does the prekindergarten program provide screening assessments and other appropriate measures to help identify and monitor the progress of African American children who may be at-risk for academic failure?  What are the perceptions of prekindergarten teachers and paraprofessionals regarding the prekindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths and weaknesses?  What are the perceptions of the principal, kindergarten teachers, and first grade teachers regarding prekindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?  What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of prekindergarten children regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 1EVALUATION DESIGN AND MEASURES Participants. The LRSD identified 28 preschool sites to he included in this study. From those 28 sites, there were 1,316 four-year old children in 69 preschool classrooms. Demographic data indicated 69.0% were African American, 19.0% were Caucasian, and 6% were Hispanic\napproximately two-thirds (66.0%) qualified for free or reduced price lunch. There were 69 prekindergarten teachers and 69 paraprofessionals at the 28 sites, and 214 kindergarten or first grade teachers. Design. A mixed methods design was employed to address all of the research questions. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected either by trained CREP researchers or through the acquisition and analyses of student achievement results provided by LRSD. Instrumentation. Student achievement results for 2005-2006 prekindergarten students were analyzed to determine gains throughout the school year, and achievement results for kindergarten students in 2005-2006 were used with comparisons made between those that attended LRSD prekindergarten programs versus those that had not. In addition, a ten year longitudinal analysis was conducted in which achievement data were compared between cohorts that had attended LRSD prekindergarten classrooms with those that had not. In addition to the student achievement results, two classroom observation tools were utilized, four survey questionnaires were administered, and a phone interview was conducted. Following are descriptions of the instruments and achievement measures used in this study. Early Literacy Observation Tool (E-LOT^). The E-LOT is the preschool version of the Literacy Observation Tool (LOT) both of which were developed by researchers at CREP as an instrument for observing literacy instruction. (Smith, Ross, \u0026amp;Grehan, 2002). The LOT has been aligned to the National Reading Panel and National Research Council findings and captures all five essential components of the Reading First program. The E-LOT has been customized to accurately reflect pre-school activities, especially as they relate to literacy activities. Early Language \u0026amp; Literacy Classroom Observation (ELLCO). The ELLCO is a toolkit that provides researchers and practitioners with guidelines for describing the degree to which a classroom supports literacy activities. Primarily an environmental checklist, the ELLCO contains three assessment tools: a Literacy Environment Checklist, protocols to conduct classroom observations and administer teacher interviews, and a Literacy Activities Rating Scale. The total time to complete the observation is approximately one to one and one-half hours. The ELLCO is used for research purposes in over 150 preschool classrooms and has a reported statistical reliability of 90% or better. Principal Phone Interview. Ten randomly selected principals from schools with prekindergarten programs participated in a 30-45 minute phone interview with CREP researchers. An interview protocol was developed for this study that included questions regarding the principals perceptions of the prekindergarten program at their school and the impact of the prekindergarten program on student achievement, with special note of the perceived impact on African American achievement. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 2Prekindergarten Teacher Questionnaire (PKTQ). Prekindergarten teachers in all 28 schools with prekindergarten programs were asked to complete the PKTQ. The PKTQ was designed to capture prekindergarten teachers attitudes and perceptions of their schools prekindergarten program and their experiences as a prekindergarten teacher. Prekindergarten Paraprofessional Teacher Questionnaire (PKPTQ). Prekindergarten paraprofessional teachers in all 28 schools with prekindergarten programs were asked to complete the PKPTQ. The PKPTQ was designed to capture paraprofessional teachers attitudes and perceptions of their schools prekindergarten program and their experiences as a paraprofessional teacher. Classroom Teacher Questionnaire (CTQ). Kindergarten and first grade teachers in all schools with prekindergarten programs were asked to complete the CTQ. The CTQ was designed to capture these teachers attitudes and perceptions of their schools prekindergarten program. Parent/Guardian Questionnaire (PQ). All parents/guardians of prekindergarten students were asked to complete the PQ. The PQ was designed to capture attitudes and perceptions of their childs prekindergarten program. Early Screening Inventory (ESI). The Early Screening Inventory is a developmental screening instrument that was revised and standardized in 1997. Published by Pearson Early Learning, ESI allows the childs prekindergarten teacher to quickly screen and assess children in the areas of motor development, language development, and cognition. In this evaluation, the ESI database for 2005-2006 was analyzed. Work Sampling System (WSS). Developed in 1995, WSS is a performance assessment system, rather than a battery of tests, that assesses and documents childrens skills, knowledge, behavior, and accomplishments over a spectrum of educational areas and throughout a variety of occasions. WSS is a method in which teacher observations are organized around a set of criteria and procedures. For the purposes of this study, WSS fall 2005 prekindergarten student results were collected and compared with WSS spring 2006 prekindergarten students results as a measure of student growth throughout the year. Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS). DIBELS is a tool for early identification of children with potential literacy problems and an assessment of response to instruction. The DIBELS assessment is designed to enable educators to modify their approach if a student is not on course to achieve reading goals. The Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development at the University of Oregon constructed DIBELS. The measures were developed upon the essential early literacy domains discussed in both the National Reading Panel (2000) and National Research Council (1998) reports to assess student development of phonological awareness, alphabetic understanding, and automaticity and fluency with the code. Not all students in the LRSD were assessed with DIBELS. Primarily DIBELS was administered to those kindergarten students in Reading First schools or those students who did not do well on portions of the Qualls Early Learning Inventory. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 3Qualls Early Learning Inventory (QELI). The QELI is an assessment tool primarily for kindergarten students. The QELI identifies student development as either developed,' developing, or delayed in six areas. Arkansas requires all incoming kindergarten students to be tested with the QELI. For the purposes of this study, fall 2005 QELI results for all incoming kindergarteners were collected for comparisons between those who had prekindergarten the prior year and those who had not. Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS). The ITBS is a norm-referenced group administered test that measures the skills and achievement of students in grades K-8. Developed at the University of Iowa, the ITBS provides an in-depth assessment of students achievement of important educational objectives. PROCEDURES Data for the evaluation were collected April-May 2006 for the 2005-2006 school year. During the week of April 17*, 12 randomly selected preschool sites were visited and observed using the E-LOT and the ELLCO. All observations were conducted by trained CREP researchers. Principals dispersed questiormaires to all teachers in April, and prekindergarten teachers were responsible for disseminating the parent questionnaires. Principal phone interviews were conducted during May. Student achievement data were provided electronically by LRSD throughout the summer and fall of 2006. RESULTS Qualitative: Questionnaires, Interviews, Observations, and Screening Questionnaires. Questionnaires distributed to prekindergarten teachers, paraprofessional teachers, kindergarten and first grade teachers, and parents/guardians of preschool students were instrumental in gathering perceptions of the preschool program.  Prekindergarten Teacher Questionnaire: Teachers were overwhelmingly positive about the prekindergarten program and believed it was having a positive impact on all students and was bridging the achievement gap for Afiican American students. They reported having a strong understanding of the program in general, and the literacy components in particular. Prekindergarten teachers indicated a great deal of support from the principal and the other faculty. The most negative responses were in the areas of parental support and time for teacher collaboration.  Prekindergarten Paraprofessional Questionnaire: Paraprofessionals were also very positive about the preschool program and believed their work as paraprofessionals to be very important. Paraprofessionals felt supported by the teacher, the principal and other faculty and staff. They also indicated the primary strength of the prekindergarten program in improving student achievement and preparing students for kindergarten. Like the prekindergarten teachers, the most negative responses were for questions related to parental support and teacher collaboration.  Classroom Teacher Questionnaire: Kindergarten and first grade teachers were also positive regarding the preschool programs at their schools and most agreed it helped 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 4 prepare the children for kindergarten. Teachers expressed the need for more information about the preschool program and the curriculum.  Parent/guardian Questionnaire: Parents or guardians of all preschool students were asked for their opinion regarding the program and a large majority responded positively. Parents/guardians indicated the prekindergarten program was highly engaging for their children, was preparing them well for kindergarten, and through the literacy program, their child was becoming reading ready. Interviews. Principals responses during phone interviews indicated a high level of support and enthusiasm for the prekindergarten programs. Principals were eager to affirm the positive impacts of the prekindergarten program, the ease with which it complemented broader school initiatives, and the overall positive support the program received from all staff. Principals all strongly agreed that the prekindergarten program was having a positive impact on African American achievement in particular and overall student achievement as well. Observations. Observations with the ELLCO and the E-LOT indicated overall positive preschool classroom environments with knowledgeable teachers and actively engaged students. Although the ELLCO checklists reflected ample literacy curriculum and materials, class libraries, and other varieties of print and writing materi^s throughout the classrooms, observations with the E-LOT suggested literacy activities were not the predominant focus of many prekindergarten classrooms. Instruction that incorporated phonological awareness, emergent writing, oral language and comprehension activities were not fully developed. Screening. Initial results from the ESI data suggested that although African American students scored lower on the ESI than other races, the differences were not statistically significant. Averages were adjusted to accoimt for the influence of gender, socio-economic status, and English language limitations, and no statistically significant differences were found. Quantitative: Student Achievement The impact on student achievement was analyzed at three levels: prekindegarten achievement gains, kindergarten achievement gains, and longitudinal gains realized over students ten year school career. Analysis A: Prekindergarten Achievement Results. Student results based on WSS were positive and suggested the prekindergarten program improved or remediated the academic achievement of African American students. African American students consistently performed higher on the WSS assessments at Time 3 than at Time 1 in all seven domains: Personal and Social Development, Language and literacy. Mathematical Thinking, Scientific Thinking, Social Studies, The Arts and Physical Development and Health. Analysis B: Kindergarten Achievement Results. Students who attended a LRSD preschool program had higher achievement levels on incoming assessments than those who did not attend LRSD preschool program. Achievement results at the end of the kindergarten year were also higher for those who attended LRSD preschool programs than those who had not. In addition, African American students who attended a preschool program in the LRSD consistently out scored African Americans who did not attend preschool on both fall kindergarten assessments and spring kindergarten assessments a 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 5 Analysis C: f through Grade Achievement Results. Results from the longitudinal analysis suggested that African American students who participated in a prekindergarten program were statistically significantly less likely to need special education services as they continued their school careers and were more likely to remain on grade level than those African Americans who did not attend a preschool program. Results from this analysis also indicated that there were long term impacts for students who had attended a prekindergarten program in the district, even ten years after participation. For African American students this, impact was dramatic and more pronounced than for the population in general. FINDINGS 1. Has the prekindergarten program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African American students? In order to gain a full understanding of the impact of the prekindergarten program on African American student achievement, analyses of both cmrent and former prekindergarten students were conducted. Immediate impacts were gauged according to achievement results during the prekindergarten year and achievement results as students entered kindergarten. Long term impacts of the prekindergarten program were assessed through analyzing student achievement data over a ten year period. Findings from this three-tiered approach are described below, but all suggested the prekindergarten program had immediate and long-range impacts on all students, with long term effects especially dramatic for the African American population. Analysis A: Prekindergarten Achievement For the first analysis, test scores on the Work Sampling System by Pearson were examined for 2005-2006 prekindergarten students. Initial fall 2005 scores were compared with spring 2006 student scores. The database from Pearson had 1,300 student scores and comparisons were made between fall 2005 scores and spring 2006 scores. Results from the WSS data suggested that the prekindergarten program was effective in improving or remediating the academic achievement of AIncan American students. African American students consistently performed higher on the WSS assessments at Time 3 than at Time 1 in all seven domains: Personal and Social Development, Language and literacy. Mathematical Thinking, Scientific Thinking, Social Studies, The Arts and Physical Development and Health. Most students reached proficiency (the child can reliably demonstrate the skills, knowledge, behaviors or accomplishments) by Time 3 on all 55 indicators. The pre/post test design employed to assess prekindergarten effectiveness was not rigorous and was open to multiple threats to internal and external validity. Although all students who participated in the state-funded preschool program in Little Rock, Arkansas in 2005-2006 were assessed in this study and most displayed evidence of skill growth, it can not be stated definitively that other factors, such as enrichment programs or parental intervention, did not contribute to the gains. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 6Analysis B: Kindergarten Achievement The evidence from this analysis suggested the preschool program had an overall positive impact on kindergarten student achievement and was effectively improving or remediating the academic achievement of African American students. Relative to students who had not attended a LRSD prekindergarten program, kindergarten students who had attended a Little Rock preschool consistently performed higher on QELI, DIBELS and ITBS subtests. Likewise, African American students who were enrolled in the Little Rock preschool program, consistently performed higher on QELI, DIBELS and ITBS subtests than those who did not attend a preschool program. The design employed to assess effectiveness of the prekindergarten program was rigorous, yet prone to threats of internal and external validity. Students were not randomly assigned to treatment (prekindergarten program) and control (no prekindergarten program), thus, the sample is influenced by selection biases with parents of children who volxmtarily selected to participate in prekindergarten programs more likely to be different than those who chose not to participate. Likewise, this study does not capture information regarding other types of preschool services kindergarten students may have received. The students that were not enrolled in a LRSD prekindergarten program may have been enrolled in private preschool programs or involved in high-quality child care that proximated preschool. Therefore, these students may have received an alternate, yet similar, treatment to that being examined in this study. The sample was representative of Little Rock kindergarten students and appropriate for this evaluation. However, attempts to generalize the findings from this study to other school districts must be carefully consideration based on the above mentioned limitations. Notwithstanding, there does appear to be strong evidence supporting the relationship between Little Rock preschool attendance and positive academic performance. The results were positive across all three achievement tests and 15 subtests. The effect sizes were small to moderate, but all were statistically significant. Therefore, there is strong indication that preschool attendance positively impacted kindergarten academic performance. Analysis C: L* through 10*^ Grade Student Achievement For the longitudinal component of the study, ITBS data for the past ten years were analyzed to evaluate potential long-term benefits of LRSDs prekindergarten program. Scores of students who had previously attended a LRSD prekindergarten program were compared with scores of students who had not. The results of this analysis were very positive. Students who had participated in a LRSD prekindergarten program were more likely to remain on grade level throughout their school career and were less likely to received special educational services than those students who had not. For African American students, those that attended a prekindergarten program had significantly higher ITBS scores than all other cohorts. This longitudinal analysis answered these specific items:  What is the relationship between African American students participation in the prekindergarten program and subsequent receipt of special education services? Afncan American students who participated in a prekindergarten program were statistically significantly less likely to need special education services later in their school careers. In fact, African American students who did not attend prekindergarten were almost 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 7twice as likely to need special education services. Overall, 8.9% of African American PK students received special education services in 2006, versus 14.8% of African American comparison students.  Are African American students who participated in prekindergarten more likely to remain on grade level throughout their school career? For nine out of ten cohorts examined, African American students who attended prekindergarten were more likely to remain on grade level than those who did not. Across cohorts, 87% of African American prekindergarten students were enrolled in the appropriate grade for their age versus 79% of African American comparison students.  Is there a relationship between prekindergarten participation and subsequent performance on the ITBS, and does this relationship differ for African American students versus other students? Prekindergarten participation had a statistically significant, positive effect on the performance of all students, even ten years after program participation. However, participation had a much more pronounced positive effect on the achievement of African American students, with typical effect size estimates of about +0.20 across cohorts and subtests. 2. What are the quality of instruction and level of implementation of prekindergarten programs in classroom environments at the 28 schools implementing in 2005-2005? The prekindergarten program appears to be well implemented with positive classroom environments. An overwhelming majority of prekindergarten teachers, both African American and non-African American, indicated a thorough understanding of the program, valuable training and support from the district and the principal, and an adequate supply of materials for program implementation. Prekindergarten teachers agreed children were excited about learning and most indicated the environment was preparing students for kindergarten. Paraprofessional teachers were also positive regarding the program and responded favorably regarding student enthusiasm, teacher and principal support, materials that supported the program, and the degree to which the program was preparing children for kindergarten. Kindergarten and P grade teachers at the 28 sites were generally positive as well, with an overwhelming majority expressing confidence that the prekindergarten program prepared the children for kindergarten and helped insure that they were reading ready. Through phone interviews, principals reflected positively about the prekindergarten program and deemed it an integral part of their elementary schools. Observations indicated well-implemented programs and positive classroom environments. Site researchers found most of the classrooms were well-equipped with print-rich environments\nhowever opportunities to capitalize on the literacy curriculum, books and themed materials were often missed or not fully explored. In addition, although most teachers were effective classroom managers, observations did not reflect a variety of instructional techniques to address all necessary components of literacy instruction. Learning centers were a predominant orientation of instruction, yet they were often not used to complement literacy instruction. 3. What is the level of participation in prekindergarten by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? 200S -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 8African American students represented the majority of the preschool population during the 2005-2006 school year. According to demographic information provided by the Little Rock School District, in the 69 preschool classrooms that were part of this study, the African American population was 69.0%. The Caucasian population represented 19%, 6.0% were Hispanic, and 6.0% described their ethnicity as other. 4. To what extent does the prekindergarten program provide screening assessments and other appropriate measures to help identify and monitor the progress of African American children who may be at-risk for academic failure? Analysis of ESI data indicated that preschool teachers had screened all eligible students. The majority of those screened were African American, which is not surprising given the majority of students in the LRSD are African American. Although African American students scored slightly lower on the ESI, the results were not significant from those of other ethnicities. Over 80% of all preschool teachers, African American and others, agreed that the Prekindergarten Literacy program was useful as a screening tool for assessing at-risk African American students. For paraprofessionals, 72.7% of the non-African American paraprofessionals agreed that the prekindergarten program was useful in monitoring progress of African American students\nfor African Americans this percentage fell to 63.4%. All principals agreed that their well-experienced prekindergarten teachers were able to distinguish problems that needed to be addressed and that through screening and appropriate follow-up checks, there were adequate opportunities for early identification of those at-risk of failing to make academic progress. 5. What are the perceptions of prekindergarten teachers and paraprofessional teachers regarding prekindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Prekindergarten teachers and paraprofessional teachers were very positive regarding the prekindergarten program. For both teachers and paraprofessionals and across ethnic groups, the majority of items on the questionnaires were answered positively by over 80% of the respondents. Most teachers and paraprofessionals understood their programs, felt supported in their work, and agreed that students were being positively impacted, both academically and socially. Questions that allowed teachers and paraprofessionals to respond in their own words were helpful in understanding the perceptions of strengths and weaknesses of the prekindergarten program. For African American teachers and paraprofessionals, the most popular strength listed was the socialization and peer interaction that children experienced in the classroom. While a popular response for non-African American teachers and paraprofessionals, their most popular response was the literacy component. Responses on the questionnaire indicated that the biggest area of concern for prekindergarten teachers and paraprofessionals was the lack of parental involvement. When 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 9 asked to list the least effective components of the prekindergarten program, the most common answer across all ethnic groups was none or n/a, indicating a high level of overall satisfaction. All responding prekindergarten teachers and paraprofessionals agreed that the prekindergarten program should be maintained. The most frequent reason given for keeping the program was the preparation it provided for kindergarten. 6. What are the perceptions of principal, kindergarten, and first grade classroom teachers regarding the prekindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? All principals who were interviewed were very positive about the preschool program, and most felt it had a significant impact on the long-term achievement of their students. Principals were very complimentary about the prekindergarten teachers and indicated great confidence in their abilities. The literacy aspect of the prekindergarten program was also well thought of by principals, and most understood it to provide the basic foundations of future reading success. Principals reported that the prekindergarten program was well-integrated into the school and enjoyed school-wide support from the rest of the faculty. Principals indicated that the achievement gap historically experienced by African American students was being closed through the prekindergarten program. Concerns articulated by principals included transportation issues and the desire to reach more of the four-year old population. Kindergarten and first grade teachers were also very positive about the prekindergarten program. The majority of both African American and non-African American teachers felt that students were positively impacted because of the program and that the prekindergarten program helped prepare students for kindergarten as well as future reading success. 7. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of prekindergarten children regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Parents who responded to the questionnaire were overwhelmingly supportive of the preschool program. This was true for parents/guardians of African American children, as well as for those who represented other ethnic groups. Of the 14 items respondents were asked to evaluate, over 90% of all parents/guardians responded positively to half of them (7). The childrens excitement for preschool, learning, and teachers was evident to those parents and guardians who completed the questionnaires. The majority of all parents/guardians agreed that preschool was preparing their child for kindergarten. In general, for most items, responses between parents of African American students verses those that were not African American were similar and positivewith two exceptions. Those respondents with non-African American children were more likely to respond positively regarding their childs reading readiness due to the prekindergarten program (82.1% agreed) than those who were parents/guardians of African American children (71% in agreement). Also, when asked about the school their child attended, 93% of the parents/guardians of non-African children responded favorably, compared with 84.7% of the African American parent/guardians. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 10The most popular prekindergarten strengths listed by parents/guardians, regardless of the childs ethnicity, were: high quality, caring teachers and the socialization and interaction with peers that occurred in the classrooms. When asked to list changes that should be made to the program, the most popular response for both African American and non-Affican parent/guardians was no change. This is further indication of a high level of support from the parents/guardians of students who participated in the prekindergarten program. RECOMMENDED PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS The Little Rock School District has been recognized as having a strong prekindergarten program. In addition to the positive support expressed by all stakeholders, achievement results reflect a program that is having a positive impact on African American student achievement. Recommendations to further capitalize on the programs success are grouped within the four broad categories listed below: I. Instructional Effectiveness  A renewed focus on literacy instruction would strengthen students pre- reading skills and further prepare preschoolers for kindergarten. Preschools in the district benefit from first-rate materials, curriculum, and knowledgeable support staff\nyet many opportunities to connect literacy instruction with other classroom activities were missed in the classrooms observed. Teachers and paraprofessionals would benefit from coaching and modeling that focuses on preschool literacy instruction, especially concepts of print, fluency activities, oral language, early writing skills, and phonemic awareness, with an emphasis on incorporating these instructional techniques in small group instruction, learning center activities, and other hands-on activities. Mentoring and support from district professionals could aid teachers in providing instructional activities that capitalize on students natural enthusiasm for learning.  It is recommended that the district should investigate the feasibility of investing additional resources in the necessary support staff to strengthen the program.  It is recommended that a district wide program monitoring system to assess fidelity of literacy curriculum implementation and instructional effectiveness be implemented. This could be a valuable source of formative data and an effective feedback mechanism for project implementation. IL Use of student assessment data  It is recommended that a member of the district research and evaluation office be identified as a specialist in preschool assessments. This individual would understand assessment results and help teachers interpret assessment data, guide the district in making data driven decisions, monitor and make recommendations on district performance goals and benchmarks to improve student achievement. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 11 The district should investigate the current mix of assessment tools with an eye toward identifying more user friendly instruments. The district should explore the usage of instruments that provide immediate access to data for analysis and classroom reports for teachers through a web-based interface. III. Expansion of preschool program  Given the demonstrated benefits of preschool to at-risk children, to the school, and to the commimity at large, thefe is clearly a need for more preschool classrooms. The district has made an impressive step in this direction with the dedication of the renovated former elementary school. Fair Park, as a preschool only site. This commitment and concentration of resources should serve as a model for future planning.  Exploring a public transportation system for preschool students would demonstrate a commitment to inclusiveness that would help to reach the children that could benefit most from the preschool program. IV. Parent Involvement  A more concerted, planned effort to communicate with parents and increase their involvement should be undertaken. Because parents must physically bring their children to the classroom and pick them up, preschool teachers have the opportimity to connect with parents on a daily basis. I EXPECTATIONS OF PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS Many of the valuable pieces to an outstanding preschool program are in place in the Little Rock School District. With the incorporation of the recommended program modifications, the district and community could expect:  An increased commitment of teachers to improve their instructional practices and to align the program components with current research.  A coordinated preschool assessment program which would enhance student achievement.  A broadened commitment to inclusiveness that would further enhance and strengthen the program.  Expanded preschool communities committed to reaching and preparing the most at- risk students for kindergarten.  An increased number of students who enter kindergarten with the necessary social skills to thrive in an organized environment.  An increased number of students entering kindergarten who have the skills necessary to learn to read.  A ripple effect with long-term gains on student achievement tests being realized through high school.  Increased parental involvement and better preschool attendance.  More tailored instruction to meet students individual needs. I 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 12 The ability to identify special needs students earlier and provide the help they need.  A decrease in supplemental services needed. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 13Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program in the Little Rock School District 2005 - 2006 INTRODUCTION Little Rock School Districts (LRSD) Early Childhood program dates back to 1969 with the opening of the Center for Early Development and Education, directed by Dr. Bettye Caldwell at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Originally housed at the Kramer School, the Center was moved to Rockefeller Elementary, and the school was designed as a center for early childhood and for grades 4 through 6. In 1987, Rockefeller became a K-5 elementary school and was renamed Rockefeller Elementary and Early Childhood Magnet School. Currently, Rockefeller serves children as young as six weeks old through 5* grade. In 1991, LRSD received an Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) grant that provided additional funding for preschool education for children in poverty. The original grant provided funding for 78 children in six classrooms in three elementary schools. Over the past years, the preschool program has expanded into every school except three, with funding from poverty index funds, desegregation funds, and district funds. In spring 2004, additional funding for preschool classrooms came from the state of Arkansas through a grant, Arkansas Better Chance for School Success (ABCSS), a successor to the former ABC grant. Initially 25 of the LRSDs elementary schools were approved for ABCSS funding. These funds required a 40% match from the district. During FY 2004-2005, ABCSS and district funds were used to support the preschool program and to expand the number of classrooms to 65. During 2005-2006, Fair Park Early Childhood Center, a renovated elementary school devoted entirely to preschool education, opened and the total number of four-year old preschool classrooms in the LRSD rose to 69. In addition to the increase in the number of preschool classrooms, there were program changes and additions during the 2005-2006 school year to further increase students readiness for kindergarten. The LRSD implemented a comprehensive curriculum system, the Map for Pre- K Literacy, which provided content guides with strategies and resources, concrete monthly benchmarks, and formative assessments for planning. The structure specifically addressed critical early learning skills such as oral language, listening comprehension, vocabulary, phonological awareness, print awareness, and alphabet knowledge and early mathematics skills. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 14Instructional orientations that included group activities and learning centers with a variety of theme-oriented literature and hands-on activities were promoted. The curriculum also called for formative monthly assessments. In conjunction with the Map for Pre-K Literacy, the Houghton Mifflin PRE-K cuniculum was adopted to provide daily lesson structure that is scientifically-based and would complement and strengthen the curriculum map in addressing the critical areas of early literacy instruction. A complete description of the prekindergarten program was provided by the LRSD Early Education Department and is included in Appendix E. The benefits of a strong preschool program are well-researched and documented. According to most long-term studies, Prekindergarten students have been three times more likely to make better grades and significantly more likely to graduate from high school on time. (Southern Education Foundation, 2006, p.9) Consistently, research indicates that high quality ?9 preschool programs are imperative to childrens academic and cognitive development, especially as such programs address growth in emergent literacy. Emergent literacy refers to a continuous period of young childrens development and includes all of their attempts to interpret or communicate using symbols, regardless of whether the symbols are print, scribbles or pictures (Dixon-Krauss, 1996). Children vary widely in their exposure to print, knowledge of letters, and phonemic awareness, and these differences in emergent literacy skills before kindergarten may continue to impact their success in subsequent years. As children progress through school, initial differences in emergent literacy skills and in reading ability become more pronounced (Butler, Newman \u0026amp; Dickinson, 2006). However, preschool attendance, in and of itself, does not necessarily impact a childs later school successthe quality of the program determines its longterm impacts. Evidence continually shows that for there to be a lasting impact on achievement, programs must focus on oral language, emergent literacy, and social development. (Schweinhart, Barnes, Weikart, Barnett, \u0026amp; Epstein, 1993). Nationwide, Arkansas is ranked highly for its preschool programs. The State of Preschool: 2005 State Preschool Yearbook, the third in a series of works by the National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER), states that Arkansas was the only state of the 38 states with preschool programs to meet all 10 of the NIEER recommended benchmarks. These benchmarks include comprehensive early learning standards, teacher degree and professional development requirements, class size and student teacher ratio, support services, and site visits. Although Arkansas was ranked 18'* among the 38 states with preschools in terms of four-year- 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 15 old preschool accessibility, from sy2001-2002 to sy2004-2005, enrollment of four-year-olds throughout the state has risen over 100% (Barnett, Hustedt, Robin, Schulman, 2006). RESEARCH QUESTIONS The primary focus of this research study was to evaluate the effectiveness in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African American students in the Little Rock School District (LRSD). Additionally, this study addressed other'issues pertinent to understanding the Prekindergarten Literacy program and evaluating its impact on achievement. These other issues included the quality and level of implementation of the prekindergarten literacy programs, the level of participation of African Americans in these prekindergarten programs, the extent to which screening assessments were utilized to determine those at-risk for failure, and the perceptions of prekindergarten teachers, paraprofessionals, and parents/guardians of student attending prekindergarten, as well as kindergarten and first grade teachers and principals in whose schools where the preschool programs were examined. A mixed methods design was employed to address all of the research questions. Student achievement results for 2005-2006 prekindergarten students were analyzed to determine gains throughout the school year, and achievement results for kindergarten students in 2005-2006 were used with comparisons made between those who attended LRSD prekindergarten programs versus those who had not. In addition, a ten year longitudinal analysis was conducted in which achievement data were analyzed between cohorts who had attended LRSD prekindergarten classrooms with those who had not. In addition to the student achievement results, two observation tools were utilized, four survey questionnaires were administered, and a phone interview was conducted. The evaluation of the LRSD Prekindergarten Literacy program was structured around the following research questions: Primary Evaluation Question  Has the prekindergarten program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of Afiican American students? Supplemental (Qualitative/Step 2) Evaluation Questions  What are the quality of instruction and level of implementation of prekindergarten programs in classroom environments at the 28 schools implementing in 2005-2006? 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 16 What is the level of participation in the prekindergarten program by African American children relative to other ethnic groups at the school?  To what extent does the prekindergarten program provide screening assessments and other appropriate measures to help identify and monitor the progress of African American children who may be at-risk for academic failure?  What are the perceptions of prekindergarten teachers and paraprofessionals regarding the prekindergarten program implementations, impacts, strengths and weaknesses?  What are the perceptions of the principals, kindergarten teachers, and first grade teachers regarding prekindergarten program implementations, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses?  What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of prekindergarten children regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 11 EVALUATION DESIGN AND MEASURES The evaluation period extended from April 2006 through May 2006. The evaluation design was based on both quantitative and qualitative data collected from observations of prekindergarten classrooms and literacy instruction, phone interviews with principals, parent surveys, prekindergarten teacher and paraprofessional surveys, and questionnaires completed by kindergarten and first grade teachers who taught in schools with prekindergarten classrooms. Student level achievement data included Work Sampling System (WSS) results, Qualls Early Learning Inventory (QELI), Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), and Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS). The results of the Early Screening Inventory (ESI) were also used to provide insight regarding prekindergarten screening measures. The student level achievement data and screening assessment data were received from the district in the summer and fall of 2006. Site researchers from the Center for Research in Educational Policy (CREP) conducted observations of the prekindergarten classrooms and phone interviews with principals. Principals were responsible for dissemination of teacher questionnaires, and prekindergarten teachers for distribution of the parent/guardian questionnaires. Participants The Little Rock School District is the largest school district in the state of Arkansas and served 26, 524 students during the 2005-2006 school year. Approximately 1,316 four-year-old students, roughly 5% of the total student population, attended preschool classes in one of the 28 designated state-funded prekindergarten sites. Of those 28 sites, 27 were elementary (k-5) schools and one site. Fair Park, was an early childhood center comprised entirely of prekindergarten classes. Almost 70 percent (69.0%) of those attending prekindergarten classes were African American, 19.0% were Caucasian, and 6.0% were Hispanic. Approximately two- thirds of the students (66.0%) qualified for free and reduced price lunch. Table 1 summarizes the total school and preschool populations for 2005-2006. 2005 2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 18Tablet. Total School and Preschool Populations, 2005-2006 School Bale Baseline Brady Carver Chicot Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Geyer Springs Jefferson M.L. King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rockerfeller Romine Stephens Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Wilson Woodruff Total Students 340 299 378 520 591 309 137 415 446 651 337 451 616 377 453 383 593 334 493 375 576 644 504 641 517 294 288 236 % African American 83.2 72.9 83.3 54.2 71.9 56.0 62.8 21.4 96.2 24.7 88.4 33.3 65.9 78.8 64.0 77.3 65.1 44.9 76.5 81.1 95.7 56.7 75.0 81.6 87.6 76.9 86.1 91.9 % White 4.1 4.7 6.3 36.7 4.6 21.4 29.9 73.5 2.2 66.5 3.0 63.9 25.0 10.6 20.8 9.9 21.4 47.9 17.0 2.4 1.0 25/0 2.6 6.6 1.5 15.3 3.1 5.9 % Hispanic 8.2 19.4 3.4 3.1 21.5 17.8 .7 1.2 .4 2.2 7.4 .4 1.0 7.2 7.5 10.2 7.1 1.8 2.0 11.7 1.6 9.0 21.4 4.5 8.3 6.1 7.3 .8 % other 4.4 3.0 6.9 6.0 2.0 4.9 6.6 3.9 1.1 6.6 1.2 2.4 8.1 3.4 7.7 2.6 6.4 5.4 4.5 4.8 1.7 9.3 1.0 7.3 2.5 1.7 3.5 1.3 % Free \u0026amp; Reduced Lunch 82.9 94.3 86.2 52.9 88.0 70.9 54.0 17.8 96.4 16.9 86.9 28.2 60.2 86.7 67.3 88.0 57.8 44.6 72.4 81.9 91.3 53.4 91.3 80.3 95.2 77.6 90.6 88.1 ^\"Vno.^- Students \" African Piskinderaarten \u0026lt;g American 38 *5 82.0 75.0 70.0 , White . 50 0.0 \" 5.0 s 30.0 Hispanic Other 8.0 18.0 5.0 0.0 3.0 .^18.0 0.0 8: -de. 38 ' 137 39 58 40 37 , -I?'' 70.0 8.0 - - 20.0 55.0 f 4'26.0 _ 11.0 63.0'''' 0-.- 23.0 J\u0026lt;740 100.0 13.0 Sih 0.0 ^'\"40 ' -at 92.0 . ST 18.o 0.0 70.0 3.0 3.0 I! 77 71 , 37 Jf 40 60 38 40 80 38 20 V  34 1316 - . 62.0 70.0 51.0 78.0 62.0  - 26.0 83.0 \u0026lt;,.27.0 14.0 32.0 10.0 23.0 58.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 5.0 130 0,0 1.0 8.0 7.0 3.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 6.0 11.0 0.0 5-0 .ivi- lO-O 0.0 ^160 69.0 87.0 94.0 66.0 73.0 84.0 92.0 70.0 88.0 85.0 69.0 18.0 2.0 0.0 24.0 i 5.0 5.0 0.0 20.0 6.0 6.0 \" 19.0 3.0 - 8.0 3.0 8.0 20.0 0.0 5.0 . 10.0 y 6.0 3.0 6.0 10.0 30 3.0.$^. 3.0 * 3.0 11.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 6.0 Lunch 69.0 92.0' 68.0 ' 55 0'\" 92.0 61.0 54.0 13.0 980 8.0 92.0 J*', 10.0 52.0:^ 83.0 83.0 f 44.0 16.0 54.0 68.0 87.0 . \u0026lt; 50.0 1 90.0 \u0026lt; 79.0 87.0 70.0 if 88.0 88.0 66.0 W w -\u0026lt;? A' % \u0026gt;- 39 \u0026amp; P 39 .M 39 3 - 7\u0026lt; 30.0 /-^-../.O . iX 0.0 J Source: Little Rock School District Each preschool classroom had one preschool teacher and one paraprofessional teacher leading classroom instruction for a total of 69 preschool teachers and 69 paraprofessional teachers. Within the 27 elementary schools that participated in the study, there were 1,966 kindergarten students in 115 kindergarten classrooms, and 1,899 first-grade students in 99 first grade classrooms. Table 2 summarizes the breakdown of early education classes per school. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 19Table 2. Early Education Classes by School, 2005-2006 No. School Bale Baseline Brady Carver Chicot Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Geyer Springs Jefferson M.L. King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rockerfeller Romine Stephens Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Wilson Woodruff Total Students 340 299 378 520 591 309 137 415 446 651 337 451 616 377 453 383 593 334 493 375 576 644 504 641 517 294 288 236 No. Prekindergarten XArVl\u0026gt;k'.r ' ' . ^Students/^^*^ Classes/ j -.'Jrekindetgarten'' Teachers .Prekindetgarten' ' s\u0026gt;- Q I' 39 -a -.38 40 39 \u0026gt; 58 - -\u0026gt;'^40 \\^2 40 V 8 . 71 37 \\ 40 39 39 60 70 38 40 - ' 80 38 \u0026gt; 20  17 - 34 1316 Source: Little Rock School District 'a f 5*'' '4e-^ 4 2 2  4 - 2 ' 1 2 69 No. Students, K 62 41 80 76 101 57 N/A 61 84 102 55 61 98 41 76 73 100 60 59 59 98 120 78 99 100 40 46 39 1966 No. K Classes/ Teachers 4 3 5 4 7 4 N/A 3 5 6 3 4 6 3 4 4 5 3 3 4 6 7 4 5 5 2 4 2 115 Students, I** grade 50 * 35 N/A \" A 7V. L . 65 120 50 \" IZ : s 86 54\" 70 73 95 50 64 64\\ 87 115 97 100 92 48 48 , 34 1899 No. I\" Grade Classes/ Teachers? 2 N/A^ \u0026amp;3 o -sr, 3 4 2 3/ 4 6 6 4 - . 6  4 7 2 :f.-4 rl\n2 99. ?' J 2 1 . 1^ r s**^5 137* \u0026gt; WS w: 2 2 3 6 2 2 2 3 4 ,- , a 2  . 3 INSTRUMENTATION A variety of instruments were used to collect qualitative data. Site researchers employed two observation tools for use in viewing literacy instruction in prekindergarten classrooms. A principal protocol was designed to determine principals understanding of the Prekindergarten Literacy program at their school. CREP also developed four questioimaires that were disseminated to: (a) prekindergarten teachers, (b) prekindergarten paraprofessionals, (c) kindergarten and first grade teachers, and (d) parents/guardians of the prekindergarten students. All questionnaires were designed to gather perceptions and attitudes of the Prekindergarten Literacy program. Finally, a data from a prekindergarten screening inventory were analyzed. A detailed description of each follows. Classroom Observation Measures 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 20In April 2006,4 site researchers from CREP visited 17 randomly selected prekindergarten classrooms in 12 different schools. The following tools were used to capture literacy instruction and record observations: Early Literacy Observation Tool (E-LOT^). The E-LOT is the preschool version of the Literacy Observation Tool (LOT) both of which were developed by researchers at CREP as an instrument for observing in elementary classrooms where teachers are engaged in teaching reading and other literacy practices (Smith, Ross, \u0026amp;Grehan, 2002). The LOT has been aligned to the National Reading Panel and National Research Council findings and captures all five essential components of the Reading First program. The E-LOT has been customized to accurately reflect preschool activities, especially as they relate to literacy. Individual observations and the summary are organized around the following categories: Instructional Orientation, Instructional Components, Learning Centers (types and activities). Student Activities and Teacher Interactions during the Learning Centers, Classroom Environment and Climate, and Visible Print Environment. The subcategories of Instructional Components include the five essential components of reading including: Concepts of Print, Alphabetic and Phonological Awareness, Fluency, and Vocabulary and Oral Language Development. The E- LOT captures explicit instruction in these five component areas. Quantitative data yielded by the observations reflect the degree to which targeted components are occurring in classrooms. The rubric ratings range from 0 = Not observed, to 1 = Rarely, 2 = Occasionally, 3 = Frequently, and 4 = Extensively observed. There are two forms for recording observations of literacy instruction on the LOT. The Literacy Observation Tool Notes form is completed for each teacher observed. At the conclusion of the observation period, the individual notes forms are then synthesized and summarized on the Literacy Observation Tool Data Summary form. Whereas the standard LOT procedure involves a trained observer visiting 7-9 randomly selected classrooms, for 10 minutes each, during the typical PA to 2 hour reading/ literacy block, the E-LOT can be structured differently. As in the case of this study, E-LOT observations are typically targeted observations. Rather than observing multiple classrooms for 70 to 90 minutes, targeted observations require the observer to remain in one classroom for this period of time. This type of observation allows the site researcher to view the full spectrum of activities, including both direct instruction and learning center instruction. All observations in this study were targeted E- LOTs. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 21A recent reliability study using Generalizability Theory (Sterbinsky \u0026amp; Ross, 2003) indicated that LOT observations have a reliability of .75 when at least five LOTs are completed in a school. Additionally, the validity of the LOT was assessed via a content validation process in the development phase, including the use of a panel of subject matter experts, both researchers and practitioners, from areas such as the University of Memphis, the Memphis City Schools, and the state departments of education in Tennessee, Louisiana, and Illinois. To ensure the reliability of data, observers receive a manual that describes and operationally defines reading variables that comprise the E-LOT and participate in formal training to ensure that the identifying and coding of reading variables occurs in a consistent manner to guarantee the reporting of reliable and valid data. After receiving the manual and instruction in a group training session, each observer participates in sufficient practice exercises and an inter-rater reliability consensus rating process to ensure that his/her data are comparable with those of experienced observers. The LOT was piloted in the Memphis City Schools and is used in multiple schools across the United States, including 70 Reading Excellence Act (REA) and 75 Reading First (RF) schools in the state of Tennessee. The REA and RF evaluations and research studies include rigorous matched control quasi-experimental designs for which the LOT is the primary outcome measure. The E-LOT has been used in two Early Reading First projects, in Tennessee and Oklahoma, and will be prominent in a federally funded, longitudinal study of preschools in the Memphis City Schools system. A copy of the E-LOT can be found in Appendix A. Early Language \u0026amp; Literacy Classroom Observation (ELLCO). The ELLCO is a toolkit that provides researchers and practitioners with guidelines for describing the degree to which a classroom supports literacy activities. Primarily an environmental checklist, the ELLCO contains three assessment tools: a Literacy Environment Checklist, protocols to conduct classroom observation and administer teacher interviews, and a Literacy Activities Rating Scale. The total time to complete the observation is approximately one to one and one-half hours. The ELLCO is used for research purposes in over 150 preschool classrooms and has an established statistical reliability of 90% or better. Interviews During May, 2006, 10 randomly selected principals from schools with prekindergarten programs participated in a 30-45 minute phone interview with CREP researchers. An interview I 7  )\ni. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 22 (' I 1,'^ S'protocol was developed for this study and included questions regarding the principals perceptions of the prekindergarten program at their school and the impact of the program on student achievement, with special note of the impact on African American achievement. Principals were also asked questions regarding the impact the prekindergarten program had on literacy instruction, parental involvement and professional development. Principals were asked to reflect on the perception of other teachers and personnel at the school regarding the program. A copy of the principal interview protocol is included in Appendix B. Surveys Prekindergarten Teacher Questionnaire (PKTQ) Prekindergarten teachers in all 28 schools examined in this study were asked to complete the PKTQ. The PKTQ was designed to capture teachers attitudes and perceptions of their schools prekindergarten program and their experiences as prekindergarten teachers. The PKTQ contained 3 sections. Section 1 consisted of 26 items teachers were asked to evaluate using a 5- point Likert-type scale ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree. Items assessed included teachers understanding of the prekindergarten program, principal and staff support of the program, the impact the program had on student achievement and parental involvement, and professional development experiences. The second section contained 7 items which collected demographic information\nand the final section allowed teachers to record their own responses to 4 open-ended discussion questions. These questions were: What are the most effective aspects of the prekindergarten program? What are the least effective? Do you think the prekindergarten program should be continued? Why or Why not? What type of professional development have you received as a preschool teacher? Prekindergarten Paraprofessional Teacher Questionnaire (PKPTQ) Prekindergarten paraprofessional teachers in all 28 schools with prekindergarten programs were asked to complete the PKPTQ. The PKPTQ was designed to capture paraprofessional teachers attitudes and perceptions of their schools preschool program and their experiences as paraprofessional teachers. Like the PKTQ, the questionnaire for paraprofessionals contained 3 sections. Section 1 consisted of 18 items paraprofessional teachers were asked to evaluate using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree. Items assessed included paraprofessional teachers imderstanding of the prekindergarten program, principal and staff support of the program, collaboration with their prekindergarten 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 23I ,1 teacher, the impact the program had on student achievement and parental involvement, and professional development experiences. The second section contained 7 items which collected demographic information\nand the final section allowed paraprofessionals to record their own responses to 4 open-ended discussion questions. These questions were: What are the most effective aspects of the prekindergarten program? What are the least effective? Do you think the prekindergarten program should be continued? Why or Why not? What type of professional development have you received as a preschool paraprofessional teacher? Classroom Teacher Questionnaire (CTQ) Kindergarten and first grade teachers in all 28 schools with prekindergarten programs were asked to complete the CTQ. The CTQ was designed to capture these teachers attitudes and perceptions of their schools prekindergarten program. This questionnaire also contained 3 sections. Section 1 consisted of 12 items in which teachers were asked to evaluate using a 5- point Likert-type scale ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree. Items assessed included teachers understanding of the prekindergarten program, support of the program, effectiveness of the program, and impact of the prekindergarten on student achievement and parental involvement. The second section contained 7 items which collected demographic information\nand the final section allowed teachers to record their own responses to 3 open-ended discussion questions. I 'M tl I These questions were: What are the most effective aspects of the prekindergarten program? What are the least effective? Do you think the prekindergarten program should be continued? Why or Why not? Parent/Guardian Questionnaire (PQ) All parents/guardians of prekindergarten students were asked to complete the PQ. The PQ was designed to capture attitudes and perceptions of their childs prekindergarten program. This questionnaire consisted of 12 items in which parents or guardians were asked to evaluate using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) Strongly Agree. Items assessed included their understanding of the prekindergarten program, the impact the program had on their child, and their overall perceptions of the teacher and the school. Respondents were also asked to indicate their childs ethnicity, age, and gender. The final section allowed parents/guardians to record their own responses to 2 open-ended discussion questions. These questions were: What are the best things about your childs preschool experience? What changes would you like to see in the preschool program at this school? fl p I Jj !! r'i, r r 1 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 24 1A copy of all four surveys: PKTQ, PKPTQ, CTQ, and PQ can be found in Appendix C. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 257 SCREENING ASSESSMENTS Early Screening Inventory (ESI). The Early Screening Inventory is a developmental screening instrument that was revised and standardized in 1997. Published by Pearson Early Learning, ESI allows the childs teacher to quickly screen and assess children in the areas of motor development, language development, and cognition. ESI is considered highly reliable and valid, with 9 out of 10 children at risk for failure to be adequately identified. ESI is a continuous protocol divided into two sections: ESI-P is for 3-41/2 year olds and ESI-K is for ages 4.5 years to age 6. The 2005-2006 school year was the first year for prekindergarten teachers to use the Early Screening Inventory to assess their students. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT RESULTS In addition to the screening assessments, interviews, questionnaires, and observation tools, student achievement data were derived from student scores on the Work Sampling System (WSS), the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS), the Qualls Early Learning Inventory (QELI), and the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills (ITBS). A description of each assessment follows. Work Sampling System (WSS). Developed in 1995, WSS is a performance assessment system, rather than a battery of tests, that assesses and documents childrens skills, knowledge, behavior, and accomplishments over a spectrum of educational areas and throughout a variety of occasions. WSS is a method in which teacher observations are organized around a set of criteria and procedures. There are 3 primary components to WSS: (1) Development Guidelines and Checklists, (2) Portfolios, and (3) Summary Reports. The checklists are designed for teachers to complete without formally testing their students. Each checklist covers seven areas including personal and social development, language and literacy, mathematical thinking, scientific thinking, social studies, the arts, and physical development. Portfolios are used to collect meaningful representations of childrens work\nfinally, summary reports are designed to be completed three times a year and are a way of translating the information from the checklists and portfolios into an easily understood document for parents and teachers. For the purposes of this study, WSS fall 2005 prekindergarten students results were collected and compared with WSS spring 2006 prekindergarten students results as a measure of student growth throughout the year. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 26 I \nVDynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS/ DIBELS is a tool for early identification of children with potential literacy problems and an assessment of response to instruction. The DIBELS assessment is designed to enable educators to modify their approach if a student is not on course to achieve reading goals. The Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development at the University of Oregon constructed DIBELS. The measures were developed upon the essential early literacy domains discussed in both the National Reading Panel (2000) and National Research Council (1998) reports to assess student development of phonological awareness, alphabetic understanding, and automaticity and fluency with the code. Each measure has been thoroughly researched and demonstrated to be reliable and valid indicators of early literacy development and predictive of later reading proficiency to aid in the early identification of students who are not progressing as expected. When used as recommended, the results can be used to evaluate individual student development as well as provide grade-level feedback toward validated instructional objectives. The Institute has validated the instruments ability to predict outcomes and has tested its reliability with young children across the country. Not all students in the LRSD were assessed with DIBELS. Primarily DIBELS was administered to those kindergarten students in Reading First schools or those students who did not do well on portions of the QELI. Qualls Early Learning Inventory (QELI). The QELI is an assessment tool primarily for kindergarten students. The QELI identifies student development as either developed,' developing, or delayed in six areas: general knowledge, oral communication, written language, math concepts, work habits, and attentive behavior. The QELI is an inventory, not a test, which teachers complete on each child based on recent observations of the students behavior. In 2000, a national standardization study was conducted and norms were established to allow for a variety of interpretations of the scores. The state of Arkansas requires all incoming kindergarten students to be inventoried with the QELI. For the purposes of this study, fall 2005 QELI results for all incoming kindergarteners were collected for comparisons between those who had attended prekindergarten the prior year and those who had not. Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS). The ITBS is a norm-referenced group administered test that measures the skills and achievement of students in grades K-8 and was developed at the 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 27 I i S! University of Iowa. The ITBS provides an in-depth assessment of students achievement of important educational objectives. Tests in Reading, Language Arts, Mathematics, Social Studies, Science, and Source of Information yield reliable and comprehensive information. For analysis of kindergarten students, spring 2006 ITBS achievement scores were used. For the longitudinal analysis of the prekindergarten program, 10 years of ITBS data were compiled in which comparisons between those cohorts who attended preschool in the LRSD were compared with those students who did not attend preschool in the LRSD. Table 3 sununarizes each evaluation question, the relevant participants, and the measurement used for analyses. I.-\nI I I b' '.i III J 5 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 28 1Table 3. Summary of Data Sources and Participants by Evaluation Question Evaluation Question Participants Data Sources Methodology Primary Question 1. Has the prekindergarten program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African American students? Xt\n2005-2006 Prekindergarten students in the 28 state-funded LRSD preschool sites Prekindergarten student  program data - Work Sampling System scores (2005-2006 data) Fall scores compared to spring scores for notable gains. B: 2005-2006 LRSD kindergarten students C: Qualls Early Learning Inventory (QELI) or Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) Fall 2005 data\nDIBELS in Reading First schools only Spring 2006 ITBS kindergarten scores Kindergarten Fall QELI or DIBELS scores: comparisons of 2004-2005 prekindergarten students vs. non-prekindergarten students. Supplemental Questions 1. What are the quality of instruction and level of implementation of prekindergarten programs in classroom environments at the 28 schools implementing in 2005-2006? 2. What is the level of participation in prekindergarten by African American students relative to other ethnic groups at the school? All LRSD students in 1- 10 grade All prekindergarten teachers All prekindergarten paraprofessionals All K and 1 grade classroom teachers at schools with prekindergarten programs Principals at prekindergarten schools Randomly selected pre kindergarten classrooms All prekindergarten schools  ITBS District longitudinal achievement data PKTQ PKPTQ CTQ Phone interviews of 10 randomly selected principals ELLCO and E-LOT School records/archival data ITBS scores compared between previous prekindergarten students vs. non- prekindergarten students. Comparison of those identified as former prekindergarten participants vs. those who did not attend LRSD piekindergarlen All surveys collected participants attitudes and perceptions regarding prekindergarten program. Phone intenriews gathered principals' attitudes and perceptions regarding prekindergarten management. Classroom environments and literacy instruction were evaluated using obsen/ation tools Comparisons of African American prekindergarten population relative to other ethnic groups 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 29Table 3, continued. Evaluation Question Participants Data Sources Methodology 3. To what extent does the prekindergarten program provide screening assessments and other appropriate measures to help identify and monitor the progress of African American children who may be at-risk for academic failure? All prekindergarten teachers and paraprofessionals PKTQ\u0026amp;PKPTQ Teachers attitudes and perceptions regarding screening collected 2005-2006 prekindergarten  student data Early Screening Inventory (ESI)  ' Database analyzed for screening records Principals 4. What are the perceptions of prekindergarten teachers and paraprofessional teachers regarding the prekindergarten program implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 5. What are the perceptions of principal, K and 1* grade classroom teachers regarding the prekindergarten program Implementation, impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? 6. What are the perceptions of parents/guardians of prekindergarten children regarding program impacts, strengths, and weaknesses? Phone interviews of 10 randomly selected principals Principals knowledge and perception of screening collected All prekindergarten teachers and paraprofessionals PKTQ\u0026amp;PKPTQ Teachers attitudes and perceptions regarding the prekindergarten program collected All K \u0026amp; 1 grade classroom teachers 10 randomly selected principals Parents/guardians of all 2005-2006 LRSD prekindergarten students CTQ Principal phone interview PQ Teachers attitudes and perceptions regarding the prekindergarten program collected Principals attitudes and perceptions regarding the prekindergarten program collected. Parents/guardians attitudes and perceptions regarding the prekindergarten program collected PROCEDURE Data for the evaluation were collected April-May 2006 for the 2005-2006 school year. During the week of April 17^, 12 randomly selected preschool sites were visited and observed using the E-LOT and the ELLCO. All observations were conducted by trained CREP researchers. Also in April, all teacher questionnaires were disseminated during school faculty meetings. Prekindergarten teachers were responsible for distributing parent questionnaires to preschool parents. In May, 10 randomly selected principals were interviewed via phone. Student achievement data were received from the district during the summer and fall of 2006. METHODS - EARLY SCREENING INVENTORY Sample. In 2005-2006, the Little Rock School District reported that the Early Screening Inventory (ESI) was administered to 1,206 preschool students. Due to duplicate records, missing student identification numbers, and missing inventory scores, the final sample consisted of 1,105 students enrolled in the Little Rock preschool program. The sample was drawn from 28 LRSD preschool sites included all eligible students who were enrolled in preschool in 2005-2006. The number of students from each of the schools appeared to be reflective of preschool enrollment. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 30 IIn the previous year, 1,068 students were enrolled in Little Rock preschool programs. Students per school ranged from 15 to 113 students (See Table 1). Seventy-one percent of the preschool students in the sample were African Americans. Most students were English speaking (95%), eligible for free or reduced price lunch (68%), and did not have a formal lEP (100%). There were slightly more females (51%) than males in the sample. Tables 4 and 5 summarize the sample population. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 3]Table 4. ESI Sample by School Whole Sample African Americans School Name N Percent N Percent Bale Baseline Brady Carver Chicot Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Geyer Springs Jefferson King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowclitf Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rockefeller Romine Stephens Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Wilson Woodruff Total 35 30 37 15 50 31 3.2 2.7 3.3 1.4 113 37 50 18 30 20 4.5 2.8 10.2 3.3 30 23 28 12 36 17 71 62 32 40 35 18 31 46 66 35 35 68 32 19 15 34 1105 4.5 1.6 2.7 1.8 6.4 5.6 2.9 3.6 3.2 1.6 2.8 4.2 6.0 3.2 3.2 6.2 2.9 1.7 1.4 3.1 100.0 75 9 50 1 28 4 43 42 16 31 20 5 20 40 62 24 28 56 30 13 13 27 783 3.8 2.9 3.6 1.5 4.6 2.2 9.6 1.1 6.4 0.1 3.6 0.5 5.5 5.4 2.0 4.0 2.6 0.6 2.6 5.1 7.9 3.1 3.6 7.2 3.8 1.7 1.7 3.4 100.0 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 32Table 5. Preschool Demographics Whole Sample African Americans Characteristic Race or Ethnicity White African American Hispanic Asian/Pacitic Islander Native American Other Total Gender Female Male Total Free and Reduced Lunch Eligibility Free Full Pay Reduced Total Limited English Proficiency No Yes N 198 783 63 26 2 33 1105 560 545 1105 645 358 102 1105 1045 60 1105 Percent 17.9 70.9 5.7 2.4 0.2 3.0 100.0 50.7 49.3 100.0 58.4 32.4 9.2 100.0 94.6 5.4 100.0 N 404 379 783 554 151 78 783 779 4 783 Percent 51.6 48.4 100.0 70.8 19.3 10.0 100.0 99.5 0.5 100.0 Special Education No 1105 1105 100.0 100.0 783 783 100.0 100.0 Measures. The early screening analysis utilized demographic data and one standardized achievement measures. The demographic characteristics were used for descriptive statistics and as covariates. The achievement measure served as the dependent variable. Demographics. The following student demographic characteristics were provided by Little Rock School District: Race/Ethnicity. Race/Ethnicity was reported in six categories: White, African American, Hispanic, Asian/pacific islander, Native American, and Other. For purposes of this analysis, which centers on remediation of African American students, dummy variables for African American (1) and all Other Races (0) were created. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 33Gender. Gender was reported in two categories: Female and male. In this analysis, female was coded as (1) and male as (0). Free and Reduced Lunch Eligibility. Students were coded as being either eligible for free lunch, reduced price lunch or full-pay. Dummy variables were created that condensed free and reduced price lunch eligibility into one category (1) and full-pay into a second (0). This variable served as an imperfect proxy for socioeconomic status. Limited English Proficiency. Students who had limited English proficiency in kindergarten were coded as 1\nthose who were English proficient were coded as 0. Achievement. This report utilized data from the Early Screening Inventory (ESI). The Early Screening Inventory is a developmental screening instrument that was revised and standardized in 1997. Published by Pearson Early Learning, ESI allows the childs pre-k teacher to quickly screen and assess children in the areas of motor development, language development, and cognition. The 2005-2006 school year was the first year for pre-k teachers to use the Early Screening Inventory to assess their students. Design. To describe the extent to which the prekindergarten program used screening assessments and other appropriate measures to identify African-American children at-risk for academic failure, a cross-sectional design that examined one group of students (preschoolers) at one point in time (Fall 2005) was utilized. The reader should note that although this is a common design for social science research, this is not a design suited to draw causal inference. Instead, this design describes who received screening and illustrate conelational relationships between demographics and screening scores. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 34 bMETHODS - STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Students achievement was analyzed using a three-tiered approach in which both immediate and long term results were studied. Methodology for Analysis A, Analysis B, and Analysis C is described below. Analysis A\nPrekindergarten Achievement Sample. For this analysis, the sample was restricted to students enrolled in public school programs and were in a center-based preschool program (n=1342). Furthermore, the sample was restricted to those students who were enrolled in ABC State funded preschool programs. This resulted in a final analysis sample of 1,300 students from 28 schools.* Table 6 illustrates the original number of prekindergarten students in the study and the number of students included in Analysis A. Minor changes in population were expected, due to the dynamic nature of student populations. * This analysis includes 136 students originally omitted due to a coding error. All available student scores are now included in the analysis. 200S -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 35 I1 Table 6. Sample Population: Analysis A 1I I School * Number of Students, Bale Baseline Brady Carver Chicot Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Geyer Springs Jefferson M.L. King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rockerfeller Romine Stephens Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Wilson Woodruff , Prekindergarten 38 \n40 - 2O.'?...i5.. 71: LiS: 40\n37 60 70 38 40 39 J 19 39 37:W'K--Si 40 58S 40 I Si ijts  80 . 38 , 20 -  17 . 34 1,316 Number of Students, Analysis A 39 45 39 20 75 38 132 39 65 39 39 39 73 72 39 40 40 19 40 55 67 1 41 81 37 20 25 41 1,300 Percent of Sample, Analysis A 3.0 3.5 3.0 1.5 5.8 2.9 10.2 3.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.6 5.5 3.0 3.1 3.1 1.5 3.1 4.2 5.2 .1 3.2 6.2 2.8 1.5 1.9 3.2 X 100.0 w 39 t  Seventy-five percent of the students in the sample were African American (See Table 7). Most students were English speaking (95%), did not have a formal lEP (99%), and were bom in I 2000 or 2001 (99%). The sample was evenly split between male and female students. I I I 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 36 i Table 7. Demographics of Analysis A sample (n = 1,164) n % Ethnicity American Indian, Alaskan Native Asian Black, African American Hispanic/Latino Other White 2 26 915 72 42 243 .2 2.0 70.4 5.5 3.2 18.7 Gender lEP Language Ages Female Male Yes English Other Spanish Born in 1999 Born in 2000 Born in 2001 Born in 2005 657 643 50.5 49.5 12 1232 17 51 4 429 865 2 .9 94.8 1.3 3.9 .3 33.0 66.5 .2 Measures. The Work Sampling System is a valid, research-based performance assessment that utilizes guidelines and checklists, portfolios, and summary reports. Teachers document childrens skills, knowledge, behavior, and academic accomplishments using age- appropriate instruments. The Work Sampling System (WSS) is published by Pearson Early Learning, has been utilized since 1991 and is purportedly a curriculum-embedded assessment based on national and state standards. Efforts have been made to measure both the validity and reliability of this instrument. In a validity study conducted in 17 urban Title I classrooms, WSS ratings were compared to scores on the nationally-normed, standardized Woodcock Johnson Psychoeducational Battery-Revised and were found to be highly correlated and a stronger predictor variable of test scores than demographic variables (Meisels et al. 2001). Meisels et al. (1995) found high internal and moderately high interrater reliability when they studied the instrument with 100 kindergarten aged children and controlled for gender, maturation, and initial ability. Teachers repeatedly assess childrens growth in the following seven domains: Personal and Social Development 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 31 Language and Literacy Mathematical Thinking Scientific Thinking Social Studies The Arts and Physical Development and Health Students are scored on an ordinal scale with three categories: Not Yet (1) - indicating that the child cannot perform the indicator In Process (2) - the skills, knowledge, behaviors or accomplishments are intermittent or emergent but are not demonstrated reliably or consistently. Proficient (3) - the child can reliably demonstrate the skills, knowledge, behaviors or accomplishments. Design. To determine Afiican American preschool students progress on the domains measured by the WSS, a pre-and post-test design was employed for the sample. In the fall, 2005, teachers used the WSS to determine the baseline status of preschool students in the seven domains, for Time 1 results. Teachers again assessed students midyear. Time 2 results, and again at the end of the year, for Time 3 results. An advantage to this design is that all preschool aged children enrolled in a LRSD public preschool program were assessed. However, this meant there was no comparison group. Therefore, it was problematic to determine if students enrolled in Little Rock preschool programs made better progress (based on the WSS measure) than students who were not enrolled. Additionally, the design was prone to ceiling and floor effects. Students who tested at the highest proficiency stage at Time 1 had no place to move upward - the measurement capped growth for the highest achievers. Likewise, those that scored in the Not Yet category had no option for showing that they regressed. Analysis B\nKindergarten Achievement Sample. For this analysis, achievement results for kindergarten students in the LRSD for 2005-2006 were studied. In 2005-2006, Little Rock School District reported that 2,234 students enrolled in kindergarten\nhowever, 70 students had duplicate records. When the duplicates were removed, a sample size of 2,164 kindergarten students was established Because the purpose of this analysis was to compare students progress in kindergarten for those who attended Little Rock preschool programs with those who did not, a close 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 38 I , I, Jexamination of preschool enrollment was conducted to ensure that students who were counted in the preschool enrollment were fully served. Fully served was defined as enrolling in a LRSD preschool program prior to October 1,2004. Students enrolling by this date were assumed to have received most of a full year of service. Using this definition, we found 83 students identified as having attended preschool programs did not meet the definition of fully served (2 students enrolled in 2006, 19 enrolled in 2005, and 62 enrolled in 2004 but after the cut-off deadline of October These 83 students were reclassified as not having preschool services. Thus, the final analysis sample consisted of 1,098 students who received preschool services from the Little Rock School District and 1,066 kindergarteners who did not. Table 8 summarizes the kindergarten population relative to the prior years prekindergarten attendance. The sample was drawn from 31 Little Rock elementary schools and should include all eligible students who were enrolled in kindergarten in 2005-2006. The number of students from each of the elementary schools was reflective of kindergarten enrollment and ranged from 35 to 108 students per school. Table 9 illustrates the kindergarten population by school. Sixty-six percent of the kindergarten students in the sample were African American. Most students were English speaking (93%), eligible for free or reduced price limch (69%), and did not have a formal lEP (91%). There were slightly more males (52%) than females in the sample. Caucasian students were significantly less likely to have been enrolled in prekindergarten programs than African American students (17 % versus 73%). Students who were determined in kindergarten to have limited English proficiency (LEP) were much less likely to have attended the prekindergarten program. Likewise, kindergarten students who were flagged as needing special education were significantly less likely to have attended a Little Rock preschool program. Table 10 further describes the demographics of the student population. Table 8. Description of PreKindergarten Enrollment Preschool Participants Non-participants N 1098 1066 Whole Percent 50.7 49.3 African Americans N 805 614 Percent 56.7 43.3 N 293 452 Other Races Percent I 39.3 : 60.7 Total 2164 100.0 1419 100.0 745 100.0 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 39Table 9. Description of Enrollment by School Whoie Sample African American other Races School Code 006 017 018 020 021 022 024 025 027 028 029 030 032 033 035 036 037 038 039 040 041 042 043 Preschool Participants Non-participants Preschool Participants Non-participants Preschool Participants Non participants N 43 29 37 42 20 21 37 38 14 53 29 41 34 35 65 34 28 28 20 33 54 65 18 Percent 3.9 2.6 3.4 3.8 1.8 1.9 3.4 3.5 1.3 4.8 2.6 3.7 3.1 3.2 5.9 3.1 2.6 2.6 1.8 3.0 4.9 5.9 1.6 N 54 29 37 34 56 20 25 42 25 48 10 21 22 39 38 24 29 31 17 26 42 36 40 Percent 5.1 2.7 3.5 3.2 5.3 1.9 2.3 3.9 2.3 4.5 0.9 2.0 2.1 3.7 3.6 2.3 2.7 2.9 1.6 2.4 3.9 3.4 3.8 N 31 27 35 29 14 19 3 36 10 42 28 8 20 29 46 26 25 10 18 29 51 57 12 Percent 3.9 3.4 4.3 3.6 1.7 2.4 0.4 4.5 1.2 5.2 3.5 1.0 2.5 3.6 5.7 3.2 3.1 1.2 2.2 3.6 6.3 7.1 1.5 N 24 22 30 21 23 12 1 39 10 31 7 4 15 23 28 20 22 5 15 20 41 30 14 Percent 3.9 3.6 4.9 3.4 3.7 2.0 0.2 6.4 1.6 5.0 1.1 0.7 2.4 3.7 4.6 3.3 3.6 0.8 2.4 3.3 6.7 4.9 2.3 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 40 N 12 2 2 13 6 2 34 2 4 11 1 33 14 6 19 8 3 18 2 4 3 8 6 Percent 4.1 0.7 0.7 4.4 2.0 0.7 11.6 0.7 1.4 3.8 0.3 11.3 4.8 2.0 6.5 2.7 1.0 6.1 0.7 1.4 1.0 2.7 2.0 N 30 7 7 13 33 8 24 3 15 17 3 17 7 16 10 4 7 26 2 6 1 6 26 Percent 6.6 1.5 1.5 2.9 7.3 1.8 5.3 0.7 3.3 3.8 0.7 3.8 1.5 3.5 2.2 0.9 1.5 5.8 0.4 1.3 0.2 1.3 5.8Table 9, continued. Whole Sample Preschool Participants African American Other Races School Code N Percent 044 20 1.8 045 20 1.8 046 20 1.8 047 38 3.5 048 40 3.6 050 50 4.6 051 46 4.2 052 46 4.2 Total 1098 100.0 Non-participants Preschool Participants Non-participants Preschool Participants Non participants N 29 15 19 70 60 49 31 48 1066 Percent 2.7 1.4 1.8 6.6 5.6 4.6 2.9 4.5 100.0 N 18 20 18 25 9 33 34 , 43 805 Percent 2.2 2.5 2.2 3.1 1.1 4.1 4.2 5.3 100.0 N 23 15 12 26 6 18 21 36 614 Percent 3.7 2.4 2.0 4.2 1.0 2.9 3.4 5.9 100.0 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 41 N 2 na 2 13 31 17 12 3 293 Percent 0.7 0.7 4.4 10.6 5.8 4.1 1.0 100.0 N 6 na 7 44 54 31 10 12 452 Percent 1.3 1.5 9.7 11.9 6.9 2.2 2.7 100.0Table 10. Kindergarten Demographics Whoie Sample African Americans other Races Preschool Participants N Percent N Non-participants Percent Preschool Participants Non-participants Preschool Participants N Percent N Percent N Percent N Non-participants Percent Ethnicity White Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander Native American Other Total 191 805 56 15 2 29 1098 17.4 73.3 5.1 1.4 0.2 2.6 100.0 282 614 101 17 11 41 1066 26.5 57.6 9.5 1.6 1.0 3.8 100.0 Gender Female Male 533 565 1098 48.5 51.5 100.0 497 569 1066 46.6 53.4 100.0 398 407 805 49.4 50.6 100.0 288 326 614 46.9 53.1 100.0 135 158 293 46.1 53.9 100.0 209 243 452 46.2 53.8 100.0 Free and Reduced Lunch Eligibility Free Full Pay Reduced 662 334 102 1098 60.3 30.4 9.3 100.0 662 339 65 1066 62.1 31.8 6.1 100.0 576 146 83 805 71.6 18.1 10.3 100.0 491 89 34 614 80.0 14.5 5.5 100.0 86 188 19 293 29.4 64.2 6.5 100.0 171 250 31 452 37.8 55.3 6.9 100.0 Limited English Proficiency No Yes 1040 58 1098 94.7 5.3 100.0 973 93 1066 91.3 8.7 100.0 804 1 805 99.9 0.1 100.0 614 614 100.0 100.0 236 57 293 80.5 19.5 100.0 359 93 452 79.4 20.6 100.0 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 42Table 10, continued. Whole Sample African Americans Other Races Preschool Participants N Percent N Non-particIpants Percent Preschool Participants N Percent N Non-particIpants Percent Preschool Participants N Percent N Non-partlcIpants Percent Special Education No Yes 1035 63 1098 94.3 5.7 100.0 945 121 1066 88.6 11.4 100.0 759 46 805 94.3 5.7 100.0 534 80 614 87.0 13.0 100.0 276 17 293 94.2 5.8 100.0 411 41 452 90.9 9.1 100.0 Enrollment in prekindergarten programs was significantly different, Independent samples t test, p\u0026lt;.05 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 43Measures. Analysis B drew upon six demographic and three standardized achievement measures. The demographic characteristics were used for descriptive statistics and as covariates. The achievement measures served as the dependent variable. Demographics. Student demographic characteristics were provided by Little Rock School District and are described below. Prekindergarten Program Enrollment. Each kindergarten student was tagged with an indicator of whether he/she attended a Little Rock prekindergarten program. This field, along with data about the timing of enrollment, was used to construct a variable that defined students as having participated in a full-year of preschool in the Little Rock system (1) or not (0). Race/Ethnicity. Race/Ethnicity was reported in six categories: Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, native American, and other. For the purpose of this analysis, which centers on remediation of African American students, a dummy variable was created for African American (1) and all Other Races (0). Gender. Gender was reported in two categories\nFemale (1) and male (2). Free and Reduced Price Lunch Eligibility. Students were coded as being either eligible for free lunch, reduced price lunch or full-pay lunch. Dummy variables were created that condensed free and reduced price lunch eligibility into one category (1) and full-pay into a second (0). This variable served as an imperfect proxy for socioeconomic status. Limited English Proficiency. Students who had limited English proficiency in kindergarten were coded as 1\nthose who were English proficient were coded as 0. Special Education. Students who had an Individual Education Plan (lEP) in kindergarten were identified as needing special education (1). Those who did not have an lEP were coded as 0. Achievement. This report utilized data from three student achievement measures\nQualls Early Learning Inventory, Dynamic Indicators of Early Literary, and Iowa Tests of Basic Skills. Qualls Early Learning Inventory. The Qualls Early Learning Inventory (QELI) (previously known as the Iowa Early Learning Inventory) is designed to measure six behavioral areas and is intended to be administered in conjunction with a measure of achievement such as the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS). The primary purpose of the QELI is to provide observational information for kindergarten and first graders in the following areas: (a) General Knowledge, (b) Oral Communication, (c) Written Language, (d) Math Concepts, (e) Work 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 44 ftHabits, and (f) Attentive Behavior. The instrument is completed by students classroom teachers and takes about 10 minutes to complete. There are 44 items distributed across the six behavioral areas which are scored on a 3 or 4 point scale ranging from never to often. National norms are used to generate a developmental description of each behavioral area. The three developmental levels that are used for reporting are delayed (0), developing (1), or developed (2). For these analyses, two types of scores were reported for each behavioral area: percent correct (0 to 100) and classification (delayed, developing, developed). Total scores were converted into percent correct so that behavioral areas with different numbers of items could be compared with a similar rating rubric. The QELI has been vetted for validity and reliability. The inventory includes behaviors that: (a) are related to achievement, (b) can be further developed as a result of experience, (c) are not considered a disability if delayed in development, and (d) can be observed in the classroom. In April 1999, kindergarten and first grade teachers from various regions of the U.S. reviewed items and used them in their classes. Early childhood specialists reviewed the final form for content relevance, appropriateness of items, and potential bias. The empirical evidence of validity included correlations among the six QELI behavior scores and correlations between six QELI scores and scores from the subtests of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS). The correlations are fairly high among the six QELI scores ranging in value from a low of .594 to a high of .865. The correlations between the six QELI scores and ITBS subtest scores demonstrate low to moderate correlations ranging in value from .178 to .570. In general, the cognitive skills on the QELI were more highly correlated with the scores on the ITBS than the two behavioral skills. Internal-consistency reliability using coefficient alphas for each domain ranged from .80 to .93, which are adequate. The normative data were collected in the spring of 2000. The 2,108 students in the standardization were from 392 kindergarten classes in 47 states. Roughly, the findings indicated that 7% of students were in the \"Delayed\" category, 30% were in the \"Developing\" category, and 63% were in the \"Developed\" category for each of the six domains. The standardization study was conducted concurrently with the national standardization of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (Eastman Lukin, 2003). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills. The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, 6* Edition (DIBELS) assessments are designed to identify and monitor the 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 45 progress of students who are unlikely to meet state reading standards in third grade. DIBELS is a teacher administered battery of early literacy tests designed for use as benchmark or monitoring assessments so teachers can tailor instruction to meet students needs. The benchmarks are given three times a year, but the tests are quite brief and can be administered in 1 to 3 minutes. Most of the tests have 20 alternate forms allowing teachers to evaluate a struggling student frequently. In this study, the following DIBELS subtests were examined: Letter Naming Fluency, Phoneme Segmentation Fluency, and Nonsense Word Fluency. Results are reported as total scores. Because each domain has a different possible total score which can change over the three administrations, comparisons can be difficult. Rules are provided to translate scores into At Risk, Some Risk, and Low Risk categories. The intent is that students who are At Risk will be targeted for intensive intervention. For this study, the Risk categorizations were used to determine proportion of students in each category versus the expected proportions. The Little Rock students did not take the full complement of tests (beginning, middle, and end), therefore, growth can not be measured. Instead, analyses concentrated on the end score. The reliability and validity evidence for DIBELS is robust. The Letter Naming Fluency (alternate form: .87) showed the most evidence of reliability. Similarly, these tests had strong predictive and concurrent validity evidence when compared to the Woodcock-Johnson Reading Tests and other measures. The average concurrent validity coefficients (correlations with other measures taken at the same time) were .58 for Nonsense Word Fluency and .44 for Phoneme Segmentation Fluency. The predictive validity coefficients were .47 for Phoneme Segmentation Fluency, and .68 for Nonsense Word Fluency. No data were found concerning the reliability or validity of the instructional risk classifications (Shanahan, 2003\nBrunsman 2003). Iowa Tests of Basic Skills. The Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) is designed to assess basic skills necessary for students to progress through school. The teacher administered tests are available in Levels, roughly corresponding to the ages of children who will take them (Levels 5 and 6 correspond to kindergarten). At this level, the ITBS takes no more than 30-minutes to complete. For this study, six skill areas were examined: Vocabulary, Word Analysis, Listening, Revised Writing, Concepts Problems, and Math Total (with computation). In addition, two summary scores that combined the six core skill areas were used: Core Total (with no computation) and Core Total (with computation). 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 46Domain scores were reported as normal curve equivalents (NCE) on a scale of 1-99. A normal curve equivalent score is a type of norm-referenced score. It differs from percentile rank score in that it allows meaningful comparison between different test sections within a test. For example, if a student receives NCE scores of 53 on the Reading test and 45 on the Mathematics test, you can correctly say that the Reading score is eight points higher than the Mathematics score. Unlike percentile rank scores, the interval between scores is equal. This means that you can average NCE scores to compare groups of students or schools. Normal Curve Equivalent scores can only be used for students who are similar in age or grade to those in the norming sample. The ITBS tests were normed in 2000 and 2005 based on a national sample of over 100,000 students including kindergarteners. The ITBS tests have been scrutinized in terms of validity and reliability. Content for the ITBS was based on the careful studying of texts and other curriculum materials, the recommendations of professional societies, and the practices of school districts. The authors created subtest intercorrelations and correlations with the Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT), a test of problem solving and reasoning\ncorrelations with future grades and future test performance\nstudies of cognitive processes students use for the test, especially for problem solving\nbias studies\nequating studies related to score meaning\nand studies of interpretation and understanding of parents and teachers. The overwhelming evidence is positive, that is, the ITBS scores provide valid measures of basic academic skills, if defined and used in the manner intended. Most subtest reliabilities are in the .80s and .90s across Forms K, L, and M\nin general. Levels 5-8 have lower reliabilities (around .80), Core Total and Composite reliabilities are all above .90. Listening Assessment reliabilities range from .67 to .79 (Brookhart 1996). Design. To determine the impact of participation in a Little Rock prekindergarten program on kindergarten performance, a quasi-experimental, post-test only research design was employed. Students who participated in the Little Rock preschool program were compared to students who did not participate in the preschool program, on performance indicators of student achievement. Demographic characteristics were included as covariates to account for the relative influence of personal characteristics on student achievement. Although this was a robust design for social science research, this was not a design suited to draw causal inference. Instead, the design illustrated correlational relationships between participation and later student achievement. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 47Analysis C: 1** through 10*** Grade Student Achievement Sample. For this analysis, district enrollment records that contained 19,919 students in first through tenth grades in 2006 were utilized. The analysis sample was limited to students who initially enrolled in Little Rock Public Schools in either prekindergarten or kindergarten. Cohorts were defined by the 2006 grade level the students were expected to attain if they were not retained in grade. For example, cohort nine was comprised of students who initially enrolled in either prekindergarten in 1995 or kindergarten in 1996. Thus, the final sample for analysis included 12,852 students who initially enrolled in a Little Rock school and remained enrolled in Little Rock schools throughout their school career. Of these, a total of 4,664 (36.3%) had been enrolled in a prekindergarten program. Overall, students who had been enrolled in a prekindergarten program were somewhat more likely to be African American (76% versus 72% of comparison students) and less likely to be male (48% versus 51% of comparison students\nsee Table). Prekindergarten and comparison students were equally likely to receive free or reduced- price lunch (64% each). Table 11 provides a summary of these demographic variables by cohort and prekindergarten status. Measures. Special education status and current grade level were extracted from LRSD enrollment records to permit an examination of special education refenal rates and retention in grade for African American prekindergarten versus African American comparison students. Four ITBS normal curve equivalent (NCE) scores from the 2005-2006 school year were used as student achievement outcome variables: Total Reading, Spelling, Revised Writing, and Math Core Total - Computation. These were selected because they were the only subtests for which scores were available for all grade levels considered. Analyses. Mean proportions of African American students who received special education status and who were enrolled at the expected grade level were computed for each cohort. Within each cohort, analyses were performed to determine whether there was a statistically significant relationship between African American students prekindergarten status and their remaining at the appropriate grade level or receiving special education status. To control for the large number of comparisons, a sequential Bonferroni procedure was used, and the critical value of alpha set alp  .005. For ITBS NCE scores, a 2 (PK vs. Comparison) X 2 (African American vs. Other) X 10 (Cohorts) X 4 (ITBS subtests) multivariate analysis of covariance was performed, with free or reduced price lunch serving as a covariate. Wilks 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 48 lambda was employed as the criterion of multivariate significance. Where multivariate results indicated significant main or interaction effects, follow-up univariate analyses of covariance were performed. Effect size estimates were computed by subtracting the comparison group adjusted mean from the prekindergarten adjusted mean, and dividing by 21.06 (the national norm NCE standard deviation). 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 49Table 11. Proportion of Students who were African American, Received Free or Reduced-Price Lunch, or were Male by Cohort and Prekindergarten Participation Status Cohort 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Comparison Prekindergarten Black .62 .73 .68 .72 .68 .75 .69 .74 .72 .77 .76 .77 .76 .78 .77 .76 .76 .85 .76 .81 .72 .76 Free or Reduced- Price Lunch .66 .69 .68 .70 .70 .63 .69 .66 .66 .68 .66 .63 .62 .60 .63 .60 .57 .61 .51 .50 .64 .64 Male .50 .48 .53 .48 .52 .51 .54 .50 .50 .51 .51 .45 .50 .41 .52 .41 .50 .51 .49 .44 .51 .48 N 920 659 \"922 615 W 616 753 610 528 '875\"\" 405 \"sir 312 788\" 292 311 797 316 4664 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 50DATA COLLECTION Table 12 provides the type of measure, instrument, brief time line, and number and description of collection process. Table 12. Data Collection Summary Type of Measure Site Visits Surveys Interviews Data Analysis and Reporting Instrument ELLCO \u0026amp; E-LOT Timeline April 2006 Number Collected 17 Prekindergarten teacher Paraprofessional K\u0026amp; 1Teacher Parent/Guardian Principal Phone Interview WSS.QELI, ESI DIBELS, ITBS Spring 2006 Spring 2006 Spring 2006 Spring 2006 May 2006 Received in Summer and Fall 2006 64 58 144 686 10 Description Four trained site researchers from CREP observed 17 classrooms at 12 sites\nLiteracy activities including direct instruction and learning centers were observed. Each observation lasted approximately 90 minutes and included a brief teacher interview. Distributed by principals: all prekindergarten teachers were asked to complete\nresponse rate: 92.8% Distributed by principals\nall paraprofessionals were asked to complete\nresponse rate: 84.1% Distributed by principals\nall teachers asked to complete\nresponse rate: 67.3% Distributed by prekindergarten teachers\nall parents/guardians of prekindergarten students asked to complete\nresponse rate: 52.1%_______________________________ Conducted by CREP researcher\nrandomly selected principals were interviewed via phone for 30-45 minutes Data was sent at various times from LRSD. RESULTS When applicable, the results of this study are summarized and presented with distinctions or comparisons between African Americans and those of other races, or of non-African American ethnicity. This format was utilized due to the nature of the study and the primary and supplementary goals of the research to explore distinctions in student achievement results, as well as in program implementations, attitudes, and perceptions of the prekindergarten programs. Prekindergarten Teacher Questionnaire Descriptive results. During the spring of 2006, all 69 prekindergarten teachers in the LRSD were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding their perceptions of the prekindergarten program. The Prekindergarten Teacher Questionnaire (PKTQ) contained 26 items teachers were asked to evaluate using a 5-point Likert scale. Also included in the questionnaire were 7 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 51 demographic items and 4 open-ended questions. There were 64 prekindergarten teachers who completed the questionnaire20 who were African American, 40 who were other ethnicities, and 4 who did not indicate ethnicity. A complete summary of the 26 items can be found in Table 13. Overall responses from both African American teachers and teachers of other ethnicity were very positive regarding the prekindergarten program, with 19 items in which over 80% of all teachers expressed either strong agreement or agreement. These items were:  Teachers had a thorough understanding of the schools Prekindergarten Literacy program\n There was adequate initial and ongoing professional development/training for implementation of Prekindergarten Literacy program\n The professional development provided by the district was valuable\n The principal was an effective instructional leader\n Student achievement was positively impacted by the Prekindergarten Literacy program\n The program was valuable for improving the achievement of African American students\n There were adequate materials to implement the program\n The content areas in the curriculum map were appropriate for the Prekindergarten Literacy program\n The monthly benchmark goals were realistic for Prekindergarten Literacy programs\n The preschool teachers were generally supportive of the Prekindergarten Literacy r .1 program\n The teachers were encouraged to communicate concerns questions, and ideas regarding the Prekindergarten Literacy program\n The Prekindergarten Literacy program was useful as an opportunity for early identification of at-risk African American students\n The program engendered enthusiasm for learning\n The program was valuable in preparing children for kindergarten\n Instructional elements of the program were based on scientifically-based reading research\nI'll I I 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 52 1  Because of the Prekindergarten Literacy program, systematic and explicit instruction in phonemic awareness, oral language, vocabulary, concepts of print, and comprehension occurred daily in the schools classrooms\n The literacy and language components were effective for reading readiness\n Group activities engaged the students and complemented instruction and,  Learning centers engaged the students and complemented instruction There were two items to which African American and other teachers had comparable negative responses: because of the preschool program, more parents were involved in the school\nand that they had time to collaborate with other prekindergarten teachers. For African American teachers, 45.0% responded favorably regarding parental involvement and 70.0% responded favorably regarding collaboration with other prekindergarten teachers. For those who were of other ethnicities, just over half of the respondents (52.5%) agreed that more parents were involved because of the prekindergarten program, and 70.0% responded favorably regarding teacher collaboration. There were 5 items in which there were notable differences between African American and other respondents. These items included the following:  Teachers had sufficient planning time to implement the Prekindergarten Literacy program: 85% of the African American teachers responded favorably to this item, while 72.5% of others responded favorably\n Interim and anchor assessments in the prekindergarten literacy curriculum are useful in assessing growth and progress: 95% of the African American teachers agreed with this item, while only 72.5% of others were in agreement.  Teachers had a thorough understanding of the prekindergarten curriculum map: 80% of the African American teachers agreed, while for others, the percentage was much higher at 95.0%.  Teachers in the school who were not part of the preschool program were supportive of the Prekindergarten Literacy program: for Afncan American teachers, 75% agreed with this statement\nwhereas, 90% of other ethnicity teachers responded favorably.  The Prekindergarten Literacy program was useful in monitoring progress of Afncan American students: 75/o of the African American teachers responded favorably\nthe level of agreement for this item rose to 85% for other ethnicities. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 53Demographic data. Over half (65.0%) of the African American teachers who responded to the demographic items reported that they had 5 years or fewer experience as a prekindergarten teacher\nfor other teachers, 45% indicated 5 years or fewer experience. Only 5% of the African American teachers indicated prekindergarten teacher experience that was more than 16 years, while 15% of the teachers of other ethnicity had more than 16 years experience. Regarding educational level, 35% of African American respondents had a bachelors degree, 30% indicated they had a masters degree, and 15% reported a degree beyond a masters. For non-African American respondents, half reported they had a bachelors degree, 37.5% a masters degree, and 5% indicated they had a degree beyond a masters. Respondents ages were well distributed among all the age groups. At the two extremes, of those that responded, 20% of both African American teachers and other teachers indicated they were 29 years old or less\nwhile 10% of the African American teachers responded they were 60 years old or older, and 2.5% of the other ethnic groups indicated this age. All teachers who responded said they were female\nand 60.9 indicated they were Caucasian, 31.3% African American, and 1.6% Pacific Islander. Table 14 contains all demographic responses. Open-Ended Responses. Teachers were asked several open-ended questions in order to further understand their perceptions of the prekindergarten program. A verbatim list of all prekindergarten teachers responses to all open-ended questions can be found in Appendix D. Teachers were first asked to list the most effective aspects of the program. There were 15 African Americans teachers who responded to this question, and 34 distinct aspects were named. For those teachers of other ethnicities, 33 responded to the question and 78 responses were given. Table 15 categorizes and compares the responses. For African American teachers, the most often named aspect was socialization and interaction with other children, which was mentioned 5 times and comprised 14.7% of the responses. Teachers who were not African American also listed this item in 6 responses, with a frequency of 7.7%. The most popular aspect of the prekindergarten program for other ethnicity teachers was the literacy curriculum, which appeared 21 times for a frequency of 26.9%. Other popular responses for both groups included kindergarten preparation, oral language development and exposure to classroom settings. Teachers were also asked to list the least effective aspects of the prekindergarten program. There were 7 African American teachers who responded to this question and 8 I 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 54 responses were given. Twenty-five non-African American teachers responded to this question for a total of 28 responses. One-fourth (25%) of the African American teachers responded either none or n/a when asked about least effective aspects\nfor other teachers this appeared in 17.9% of the responses. Another popular response for African American teachers was too much paperwork, which appeared in two of eight responses. For other teachers, the frequency of this response was 7.1%. Table 16 has complete results for this question. Teachers were also asked whether they felt the prekindergarten program should be continued and all responded favorably. When asked to list reasons for its continuance, the most common response for both groups of teachers was that it helped prepare the children for kindergarten. See Table 17 for a complete list. Teachers were also asked to list the professional development they had received and responses varied greatly. The most common responses can be found in Table 18. 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 55Table 13. PREKINDERGARTEN TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE Total Teacher Responses: 64 Responses of African American Teachers\n20 Responses of non African American Teachers: 40 I have a thorough understanding of my schools Prekindergarten literacy program. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers I have received adequate initial and ongoing professional development/training for implementation of the Prekindergarten literacy program. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Professional development provided by the district has been valuable. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non Ahican American teachers % Strongly Agree . \u0026amp; Agree 98.4 100.0 100.0 95.3 90.0 100.0 93.8 90.0 97.5 The principal is an effective instructional leader. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Teachers are given sufficient planning time to implement the Prekindergarten literacy program. 79.7 80.0 82.5 % Neutral 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 5.0 0.0 6.3 10.0 2.5 12.5 10.0 12.5 % Strongly Disagree \u0026amp; Disagree 1.6 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 0.0 5.0 Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Student achievement has been positively impacted by the Prekindergarten literacy program. 76.6 85.0 72.5 9.4 10.0 10.0 14.1 5.0 17.5 Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Overall, this program is valuable for improving the achievement of African American students. 95.3 90.0 97.5 1.6 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers I have time to collaborate with other Prekindergarten teachers. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers I have adequate materials to implement the program. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers The content areas presented in the curriculum map are appropriate for the Prekindergarten literacy instruction. 93.8 90.0 95.0 70.3 70.0 70.0 92.2 100.0 90.0 1.6 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 15.0 12.5 12.5 5.0 17.5 3.1 0.0 5.0 4.7 0.0 5.0 Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers The monthly benchmark goals are realistic for Prekindergarten literacy programs. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers The interim and anchor assessments in the Prekindergarten literacy curriculum are useful in assessing growth and progress. 922 90.0 92.5 95.3 95.0 95.0 6.3 5.0 7.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers I have a thorough understanding of the Prekindergarten curriculum map. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Because of the Prekindergarten literacy program, more parents are involved in the school. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers 79.7 95.0 72.5 89.1 80.0 95.0 50.0 45.0 52.5 15.6 0.0 22.5 4.7 5.0 5.0 4.7 5.0 2.5 1.6 5.0 0.0 31.3 35.0 30.0 15.6 10.0 17.5 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 56Table 13, continued. Total Teacher Responses: 64 Responsesof African American Teachers: 20 Responses of non African American Teachers: 40_____________________________________ Preschool teachers in the school are generally supportive of the Prekindergarten literacy program. % Strongly Agree \u0026amp; Agree % Neutral , Strongly Disagree \u0026amp; Disagree Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Teachers in the school (not preschool teachers) are generally supportive of the Prekindergarten literacy program. 90.6 90.0 95.0 7.8 10.0 5.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Teachers ate encouraged to communicate concerns, questions, and ideas regarding the Prekindergarten literacy program. 81.3 75.0 90.0 15.6 25.0 10.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers The Prekindergarten literacy program is useful in monitoring progress of African American students. 90.6 95.0 92.5 7.8 5.0 7.5 1.6 0.0 0.0 Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers The Prekindergarten literacy program is useful as a screening tool for assessing at-risk African American students. 81.3 75.0 85.0 14.1 20.0 12.5 3.1 o:o 2.5 Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers With the Prekindergarten literacy program, children are excited about learning. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers The Prekindergarten literacy program is valuable in preparing children for kindergarten. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Instructional elements of the Prekindergarten literacy programassessments, programs, materialsare based on scientifically-based reading research. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Because of the Prekindergarten literacy program, systematic and explicit instruction in phonemic awareness, oral language, vocabulary, concepts of print, and comprehension occurs daily in our schools classrooms. 82.8 80.0 87.5 10.9 10.0 10.0 4.7 5.0 2.5 98.4 100.0 100.0 96.9 90.0 100.0 92.2 90.0 92.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 5.0 0.0 4.7 0.0 7.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers The literacy and language components are effective for reading readiness. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Group activities engage the students and complement instruction. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers Learning centers engage the students and complement instruction. Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers 95.3 95.0 95.0 96.9 95.0 97.5 100.0 100.0 100.0 93.8 95.0 95.0 Note: Item percentages may not total 100% because of missing input from some respondents. 3.1 0.0 5.0 1.6 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 2.5 2005 -2006 Evaluation of the Prekindergarten Literacy Program 57 JTable 14. PREKINDERGARTEN TEACHER QUESTIONNIARE DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 5 years or fewer 6-10 years 11-15 years 16-20 years How many years experience do you have as a Prekindergarten teacher? Teachers, Total African American teachers Non African American teachers 51.6 65.0 45.0 15.6 20.0 15.0 15.6 10.0 20.0 9.4 5.0 12.5 20 or more years 1.6 0.0 2.5 How many years experience do you have as an employee in any school? Tea\nThis 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.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eCenter for Research in Educational Policy, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "}],"pages":{"current_page":8,"next_page":9,"prev_page":7,"total_pages":48,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":84,"total_count":567,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":567}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":90},{"value":"Arkansas. Department of Education","hits":73},{"value":"Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","hits":53},{"value":"United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)","hits":33},{"value":"North Little Rock School District","hits":6},{"value":"Arkanasas State University. Office of Educational Research and Services","hits":5},{"value":"Office of Education and Lead Planning and Desegregation","hits":5},{"value":"Center for Research in Educational Policy, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee","hits":3},{"value":"Ross, Steven M.","hits":3},{"value":"William Gordon Associates","hits":3},{"value":"Area School Advisory Committee","hits":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"Educational statistics","hits":567},{"value":"Education--Arkansas","hits":561},{"value":"Education--Evaluation","hits":400},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":376},{"value":"Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","hits":351},{"value":"School integration","hits":176},{"value":"School improvement programs","hits":174},{"value":"Educational law and legislation","hits":173},{"value":"Education--Finance","hits":156},{"value":"School management and organization","hits":151},{"value":"Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","hits":144}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Wright, Susan Webber, 1948-","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":3}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":566},{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":565},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":555},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":486},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Chicot County, 33.26725, -91.29397","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Massachusetts, Middlesex County, Cambridge, Harvard University, 42.377, -71.11666","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Arkansas","hits":566},{"value":"Massachusetts","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1994","hits":129},{"value":"1995","hits":120},{"value":"1996","hits":107},{"value":"1993","hits":98},{"value":"1997","hits":93},{"value":"1992","hits":85},{"value":"1998","hits":82},{"value":"1999","hits":81},{"value":"2000","hits":78},{"value":"1991","hits":77},{"value":"2001","hits":72},{"value":"2003","hits":62},{"value":"1990","hits":53},{"value":"2002","hits":53},{"value":"2004","hits":50},{"value":"2005","hits":47},{"value":"1989","hits":39},{"value":"2006","hits":31},{"value":"1988","hits":24},{"value":"2010","hits":21},{"value":"2008","hits":19},{"value":"2009","hits":17},{"value":"2007","hits":15},{"value":"2013","hits":15},{"value":"1986","hits":14},{"value":"2012","hits":14},{"value":"1987","hits":13},{"value":"2011","hits":9},{"value":"1984","hits":8},{"value":"1985","hits":8},{"value":"2014","hits":6},{"value":"1974","hits":4},{"value":"1975","hits":4},{"value":"1976","hits":4},{"value":"1977","hits":4},{"value":"1978","hits":4},{"value":"1979","hits":4},{"value":"1980","hits":4},{"value":"1981","hits":4},{"value":"1982","hits":4},{"value":"1983","hits":4},{"value":"1973","hits":3},{"value":"1950","hits":2},{"value":"1951","hits":2},{"value":"1952","hits":2},{"value":"1953","hits":2},{"value":"1954","hits":2},{"value":"1955","hits":2},{"value":"1956","hits":2},{"value":"1957","hits":2},{"value":"1958","hits":2},{"value":"1959","hits":2},{"value":"1960","hits":2},{"value":"1961","hits":2},{"value":"1962","hits":2},{"value":"1963","hits":2},{"value":"1964","hits":2},{"value":"1965","hits":2},{"value":"1966","hits":2},{"value":"1967","hits":2},{"value":"1968","hits":2},{"value":"1969","hits":2},{"value":"1970","hits":2},{"value":"1971","hits":2},{"value":"1972","hits":2},{"value":"2015","hits":1},{"value":"2016","hits":1},{"value":"2017","hits":1},{"value":"2018","hits":1},{"value":"2019","hits":1},{"value":"2020","hits":1},{"value":"2021","hits":1},{"value":"2022","hits":1},{"value":"2023","hits":1},{"value":"2024","hits":1},{"value":"2025","hits":1},{"value":"2026","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"1950","max":"2026","count":1641,"missing":0},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":282},{"value":"reports","hits":194},{"value":"filing","hits":49},{"value":"exhibition (associated concept)","hits":34},{"value":"agendas (administrative records)","hits":17},{"value":"handbills","hits":16},{"value":"minutes (administrative records)","hits":16},{"value":"correspondence","hits":3},{"value":"books","hits":2},{"value":"newspaper clippings","hits":2},{"value":"printouts","hits":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":567}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Office of Desegregation Management","hits":566}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":567}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":566},{"value":"Collection","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":567}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}