{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_740","title":"Year-round classes","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":["2000/2005"],"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--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","School improvement programs","School attendance"],"dcterms_title":["Year-round classes"],"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/740"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"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\nRECEIVED Catterall 5711/2005 Draft MAY 1 6 2005 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Questions for Parent Interviews Target parents\nIdentify parents of an YRE student or students where at least one of these students spent two or more years in a traditional calendar year school. The main goal is students) in both the traditional and YRE school setting. Randomly select 20 of these parents from each of five YRE schools. Conduct a phone interview with each parent. Explain the purpose of the interview. We are interested in how Year Round Education schooling in Lade Rock is working, especially when it comes to student learmng. Since you have experience in both YRE and traditional calendar schools we'd like to ask you a few questions - \"X\" number questions to be exact lour name will be confidential. It will not appear in any of our reports and only your school name will remain with our notes from this interview. B. Confirm that a child in this family attended both YRE and traditional calendar j schools. I. What was the reason your students change from traditional calendar to YRE education? a. The school changed to YRE./_/ b. My child transferred to a YRE schooi/_/ c. Multiple children - both reasons apply. Capture the essence of responses, but always check\na., b., or c. You may spark talk of rationales for changing schools here - e.g. I wanted my student to learn more wanted access to inter-sessions, didnt like previous school, etc. If parent claims to be dissatisfied with prior school, hear parent out here and bring this back up when asking about differences between YRE and traditional calendar schools below. Record worthwhile quotes.2. What are the year schools? main differences you see between YRE and traditional caleada ar Capture essence of responses. Record worthwhile Retrospectively group into categories in for reporting. quotes. 3. Let's focBs particularly on how different schools help kids learn ff apphcable, solicit elaborations of any school effectiveness differences Question 2. (Remember to focus year schools.) on reported in comparisons between YRE and traditional calendar Or if learning did not come the main differences in up in response to Question 2, ask parent: What do yo\n'u see as student learning in YRE vs. traditional calendar year schools? Capture essence of responses. Record worthwhile quotes. 4. (If leaning-related differences seem not well addressed in responses to Question 2, push harder on learning differences through the following que^tiX If^X- dillerences were well-covered, skip to question 5.) Are there things about the YRE calendar that help kids learn better? calendao'^ perceptions of learning differences, YRE to traditional You wUl probably get these sorts of responses, so check-off if you hear any of these\na. Kids are in school more. b. Shorter breaks/vacations. i. Kids forget less academic content. iii. Shorter gaps in teaching. iv. Kids remember better how to behave in school, c. Inter-sessions help kids learn more. e. d. Teachers seem to like YRE better, and Others (specify each). are happier in their jobs. Also\nCapture essence of responses. Record worthwhile Retrospectively group into categories in for reporting. quotes.calendar schools, do vou think that children feci differently about school or about themselves in one type versus another? Yes, a lot. Yes, a little. No. Check One that best describes main response If No, interview is done. If Yes, probe for what kinds of differences and why they might exist. Pay attention to claims that specific aspects of being an YRE school affect how kids feel about school. their motivation for school. their outlook. And other effects mentioned. Capture essence of responses. Record worthwhife quotes. 6. Docs your child/children talk about the fact that the they If yes, what kinds of things do they say? are in an YRE school? Capture essence of responses. Record worthwhile quotes.1. I think the main parts of the survey should remain comparisons between as they are, responses in different years will be valid. so 2. It seems like we need a better comparative school experiences^ way to identify PARENTS who have YRE and traditional Calendar year. I suggest adding an item (B2) to the Parent Survey, which asks: \"How many of your children were enrolled in traditional calendar schools before they enrolled in an YRE school?\" 0 1 2 3 4 or more 3. Add at the bottom of Student Survey (same reason): \"What was the LAST grade you spent in a 9-month school' LAST and 9-month) (Bold both Never attended 9-month school Kindergarten 1st 2nd 3rd 4 th Perhaps the back of 4. on tne Dac\u0026lt; or ALL THREE surveys, parent, student, and Xsacner , place zh sane n*AO open Questions: think YRE is better than traditional calendar for heloing children -  succeed academically, K-he^k here /_/ and please list one or two reasons for this: (follow with 4 -5 lines for writing) b. What suggestions do you have for improving the schools? (one or two suggestions): effectiveness of Y.RE (follow with 4 -5 lines for writing) That would give us some things to chew and suggestions. on. Let me know your thoughts] Arkansas Democrat 1^(ijazettc THURSDAY, JANUARY 13^, 2000 3 LR grade schools line up year-round classes secret-ballot vote. The school teachers have to spend so much . time reteaching the information BY CYNTHLA HOWELL .ARK.\\SS.\\S DEMOCR,.\\T-GAZETTE For pupils at three Little Rock elementary schools, the 2000-2001 school year may begin earlier and last longer than it will at other schools. But included in the year will be more frequent or longer vacations. Parents and faculty at Woodruff and Mabelvale elementary schools have voted to try what is referred to nationally as a year-round The new calendar. school Stephens Elementary School also will operate on the reconfigured calendar when it opens in early 2001. More than 80 percent of the fac- Ultj- members and families at Woodruff and Mabelvale favored the proposed change, which now must be acted on by the Little Rock School Board. Frances Cawthonjones. the Little Rock School Districts assistant superintendent for elementary schools, said Wednesday. A majority of families at two other schools. Washinpon .Magnet and Dodd elementaries. also favored the revised calendar. But the margin of approval did not reach the 80 percent requirement, so the schools wont make any changes in the coming year. The School Board is expected to discuss school-year calendars  both traditional and modified  at an agenda meeting that begins at 5 p.m. tonight. The board isnt scheduled to vote on calendars until Jan.27. Pupils at the three participating schools wont go to school any more days than children at other elementmy schools in the district but the 178 days will be distributed differently, CawthonJones said. Mabelvale Principal Tabitha Phillips said Wednesday that she's had a long-standing interest in year-round school calendars. When district officials invited principals and others to informational meetings on the subject she was eager to go. Additional meetings were held at the school for teachers and parents. Information was sent home to parents and visits were made to a year-round school program in Texarkana. Ultimately. 96 percent of the Mabelvale staff voted in favor of the change. Parent approval followed. Each family was entitled to one has about 400 pupils in pre-kinder- garten through fifth grades. The bottom line is student achievement. Phillips said about the desire to try the year-round calendar. Everything we are hear- ing, everything weve read, indicates that student achievement goes up. The reason behind that is the children are not out of school for extended periods like they are on a traditional calendar. Phillips continued. They are out in June. July and most of August. By the time they come back in .August our that was not retained over the summer months. With the alternate calendar, the children arent out as long and they dont lose as much information. .An added benefit is that during the school breaks, pupils who need remediation can get it more immediately and from Mabelvale teachers at the school. The children dont have to wait to attend a traditional summer school remediation session, which would probable be at another school- .and See SCHOOL YEAR, Page TOB School year  Continued from Page 1B taught by teachers whom the children dont know, Phillips said. Teachers would have the opportunity to work during the intercession periods for extra money, just as they would choose to work in summer school. A specific calendar for the three participating schools has not yet been selected or designed, Cawthon Jones said. Representatives from the three schools will meet Jan. 18-19 with Richard Alcorn of the National Association of Year Roimd Education to select a year-round calendar and work out other details, such as transportation, food service and after-school child care for the days when year-round pupils are in classes and other pupils are not, and vice versa. The calendar options are numerous. One of the most common arrangements nationally is a 45-15 plan, in which the school year is divided into four nine-week terms separated by four three-week vacations or intercessions. An exfra four weeks are scheduled for winter and spring breaks and national holidays. Both Cawthonjones and Phillips said an initial concern from parents and others about a year-round syrtem centered on families that might have one child in a year-roimd calendar school and others in a school with a traditional calendar. Its interesting the different ways people look at that, Cawthonjones said. Ive had a couple of families tell me they think it would be wonderful to have time with one child while another is in school. It gives them opportunities to do different things. She also said that despite the calendar differences, there will be common vacation time between the traditional and alternative calendars. The winter and spring breaks are expected to be the same, as will staff development days and part of the summer vacation. Cawthon-Jones said that when she was an elementary school principal she would have been reluctant initially to tinker with her traditional summer vacation. But now that Ive looked at these year-round calendars I love them, she said. You really have periods to take a breather, just regroup. I cant see why any teacher or principal wouldnt like it... I really think that in 10 or 12 years most of our country will be using extended year. If approved, the three Little Rock schools will be in rare company in the state as the only other year-round calendar schools are in the Texarkana, Bentonville and Fayetteville school districts. Nationally, there are year-round schools, public and private, in 43 states, totaling about 2.800 schools and affecting about 2 million students.z Ir IArkansas Democrat (Gazette  FRIDAY. FEBRUARY 4, 2000  ' Pupils year to stretch out at 3 schools BY CYNTHIA HOWELL .\\RK.\\NS.\\S DEMOCR..\\T-G.\\ZETTE The Little Rock School Board voted unanimously Thursday to allow Mabelvale, Woodruff and the new Stephens elementary schools to operate on an e.xtend- ed-year calendar that could have pupils attending class from early August until the end of June. The 2000-01 school year will start Aug. 8 next summer for children at the three Little Rock elementary schools, 13 days earlier than classes in the rest of the districts schools. . Stephens, however, won't open until January 2001, so its pupils will start the school year, along 'with the extended calendar, at .iExtended Continued from Page 1A $laski County to try an extended- lyear schedule. They join only five ..'other schools in the state that use . an alternative calendar.\n\"We do believe this will improve student achievement.\" Assistant Snmediation. The intersession periods will be taught by teachers who volunteer to work. They will be paid extra for the intersession work, just as teachers are paid extra for teaching summer school courses. The second intersession period of the coming school year will be Jan. 2-5, which will be a one week extension of the regular Dec. 18 - Jan. 1 perintendent Frances Cawthon- winter vacation that all district stu- ' Jones told the board. \"We are veiy dents and employees get The next enthusiastic. We have good staff intersession will be April 2-6. which  and community support and we are .................... in the process of doing some excellent planning with community gioups and day-care facilities.\" The affected schools had fifthgrade standardized test scores this year ranging from the 18th to the 24th percentiles. The 50th percentile is considered average. The Mabelvale, Woodruff and Stephens children \\rill have the would be tagged on to the tradition spring break of March 26-30. Board member Baker Kurrus said he had some initial doubts about the concept of a year-round school calendar but was pleased by the motivation of the teachers. \"I hope it works.\" he said. Board member Mike Daugherty said his only concern was for parents who have children in different same 173 school days next year that schools with different school vaca- other district students have but will have three two-week breaks that school officials are calling \"intersessions.\" when pupils may attend remediation classes. Clois Bell, a music teacher at tions. But he said he was pleased to see that efforts were being made at the affected elementary schools to ensure that child care is possible for families that need it. Garland Elementary. LXXCUIU The three Little Rock schools are the first public schools in Pu- See EXTENDED, Page 11A The board on Thursday also ap- Mabelvale, told the board that provedthe200001schoolyearcal- teachers at her school were eager to tiy the calendar as a way to better educate and motivate children. endar for the schools not affected by the extended-year plan. Classes will start for those students on Aug. She said the reused schedule 21 ^nd will end May 31.2001. and two-week breaks will enable children who need more instimc- tion to get immediate attention be- Thursday's board meeting was rescheduled from last week when a ___________ snowstonn caused the regularly fore they fall far behind. Other scheduled meeting to be postponed, pupils and teachers can take time The board will hold its Februarv to regroup and refresh before the agenda meeting next Thursday and next nine-week giading period, she ' said. And the shorter summer recess will mean less time for pupil skills to weaken. \"I'm excited about this.\" Bell said. . Sharon Faulkenbeny. a fifthgrade teacher who will work at Stephens Elementaiy. echoed the enthusiasm. is expected to call a special meeting within the next two weeks to con- sider recommendations from a three-member committee charged with exploring the feasibility of a property tax campaign to finance improvements to school buildings and to expand technologj' systems in the schools. Committee membeis include board President Sue Strick- \"One problem that teachers face land, the Rev. Steven Arnold and when we come back from being out all summer is remediation.'' Faulkenberry said. \"We always member. state Sen. John Riggs IV, who is a fonner Little Rock School Board have to spend several weeks going Superintendent Les Camine told board members that thev will over material that was already cov- __________________________ ered. We think this will be a great also be asked within the next sev- help. Also, after spring break, students tend to shut down, and we eral weeks to consider some short- term construction projects at think that if we have intersession schools where there's crowding breaks throughout the year, that that could worsen next year as the will be eliminated.\" district's enrollment grows. In past years, the districts enrollment has Teachers in the extended-year schools will begin work Aug. 1 in dropped as students move away or preparation for the return of pupils lea\\'e school for other reasons. This Aug. 8. The school year will stretch year, the Jan. 11 enrollment of through at least June 15 and possi- 25.643. was higher than the Oct. 1 bly June 29 for pupils who need the time to build their skills. The fimt intersession period will count of25.190. Camine called the unusual growlh and the need for some im- beOct. 9-20. At least one week of the mediate expansions at the high two-week period will be used for re- schools \"a happy challenge.\"Arkansas Democrat ^^(j^azctte [ . THURSDAY, JANUARY.20',? Faculty, parents send year-round schools to board for OK during the intersession periods students throughout, the district The consultant also urged the BY CYNTHIA HOWELL ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE Faculty and parent leaders from three Little Rock elementary schools agreed Wednesday to an extended-year calendar for the coming year that would make Aug. 8 the first day of class and provide for quarterly breaks of two to three weeks. The proposed extended-year calendar  planned for Woodruff. Mabelvale and the new Stephens elementary schools  will now be submitted to the School Board for final approval. The board is expected to act on the alternative calendar, as well as on a regular 2000-2001 school-year calendar, at its Jan. 27 meeting. Both calendars provide for 173 student days for next year. The regular school year is slated to begin Aug. 21. Richard Alcorn, senior consultant for the National Association of Year-Round Education, said an extended-year calendar offers the opportunity for continuous leam- 'shorter summer breaks lessen the amount of review teachers have to provide their pupils. Alcorn said. And. the short breaks during the school year not only allow staff and pupils to take a breather but make it easier to offer timely remediation to low- achieving pupils. Alcorn is a former elementary school principal and district administrator of extended-year schools in San Diego. He worked Tuesday and Wednesday with campus leaders from the three Little Rock schools to establish the proposed calendar and begin planning for the intersession periods between the nine-week grading periods. Teachers in the extended-year schools would begin work Aug. 1 in preparation for the return of pupils Aug. 8. if the proposed calendar is adopted. The first break from regular classroom instruction, or the intersession period, would be Oct 9-20. During that intersession time, a school might offer one week of instruction and activities to pupils and one week of vacation, although some schools might decide to offer two weeks of academics at no cost to parents, Assistant Superintendent Frances Cawthon- Jones said. Pupils would not be required to attend classes during the intersession period but would be encouraged to do so. she said, especially if they are achieving below their grade levels. Teachers who work would be paid extra, but payment plans have not yet been determined. Next November, pupils at the Richard Alcorn, senior consultant for the National Association of Year-Round Education, said an extended-year calendar offers the opportunity for continuous learning. three affected schools would get the same teacher convention days and Thanksgiving holidays that all will get. Similarly, all district students will be out of school for the winter vacation, Dec. 18 through Jan. 1. Pupils at the three affected schools would have an intersession period Jan. 2-5. Spring break would be March 26-30 for all district students. An intercession period for Woodruff. is llabelvale and Stephens planned for April 2-6. The last school day of the year is scheduled to be June 15.2001. but a two-week intersession program would be developed for June 21-29. Alcorn encouraged educators to use a different approach to instruction during the intersession periods and to incorporate community activities, field trips, games, the arts, storytelling and more individual attention to pupils into the curriculum. planners to make every effort to communicate their ideas regularly and work with others at the school and in the community to prevent feelings of disgruntlement and ultimately rejection of the year- round calendar. Funding plans have not been finalized but Cawthon-Jones said the schools would likely pay for the intersession periods with their allotment of the district's traditional summer school funding and with their federal Title I funds for improving achievement in schools with large numbers of children from low-income families. Each of the three schools planning to use a year-round schedule has previously polled parents and faculty on the .concept and got more than 80 percent approval from both groups.\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_1442","title":"Report: ''Specialty Programs in the Pulaski County Special School District,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","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":["1999-12-17"],"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","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational innovations","Educational statistics","School improvement programs","School management and organization","Student activities","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Specialty Programs in the Pulaski County Special School District,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"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/1442"],"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":["101 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1712","title":"Court filings: District Court, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion for approval of Plan 2000; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) brief in support of Plan 2000; District Court, two orders; District Court, motion for extension of time to respond to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion for approval of Plan 2000","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":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1999-11"],"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","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Standards","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Magnet schools","School management and organization","School improvement programs","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion for approval of Plan 2000; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) brief in support of Plan 2000; District Court, two orders; District Court, motion for extension of time to respond to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion for approval of Plan 2000"],"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/1712"],"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":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["84 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * Plaintiff, * vs. * No. LR-C-82-866 * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL * DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., * Defendants, * * MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., * Intervenors, * * KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., * Intervenors. * ORDER FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS NOV 0-5 J999 JAM~~~.:_ Mff!ORMACK, CLERK By: \\/_ ~ \\1 !\\A\\~ OEP CL,ERJ('\"' This Order addresses two matters: the Magnet Review Committee's (MRC's) request to change the magnet schools' grade structure and number of seats and the Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) motion to modify the settlement agreement. After careful consideration, the Court approves the MR.C's proposed changes regarding grade structure and seating configuration; this approval does not extend to proposals regarding funding for the approved changes. Further, the Court denies LRSD's motion to modify the settlement agreement to the extent LRSD seeks modification of the total number of magnet school seats the State must fund (4,065). However, to the extent LRSD seeks modification of the number of state-funded seats within individual magnet schools, the Court holds LRSD's motion in abeyance, pending further briefing from the parties. 1 - I. In a letter to the Court, the MRC requested approval to change the grade structure of the interdistrict magnet schools and the number of seats within five of the six schools. 1 The following chart is based on information contained in the MR.C's letter. It illustrates that, relative to the number of seats stipulated in the settlement agreement, the proposed changes decrease the number of seats in the four magnet elementary schools, increase the number of seats at Parkview, and leave unchanged the number of seats at Mann. 2 As a result, the total number of seats will increase by 132 (from 4,065 to 4,197). School Booker Carver Gibbs Williams Mann Parkview TOTALS Seats Stipulated in Settlement Agreement 660 613 351 515 935 991 4,065 Revised Seats!IJil~SJJ 4,191Mil The MRC projects that the proposed seating changes will increase costs by $129 per student. Further, the MRC proposes that the three Pulaski County school districts and the State 1 Docket no. 3269, attachment. The MRC explains that the changes would enable the magnet schools to conform to the changed structure ofLRSD schools. Pursuant to its revised desegregation plan, the LRSD reorganized its traditional elementary, junior high, and senior high schools into a new configuration, which includes middle schools. 2 See letter attached to docket no. 3269. 2 share in paying for the increased costs as follows: Party State North Little Rock School District Pulaski County Special School District Little Rock School District Proposed Increase $567,270 74,373 138,171 354,917 The Court gave the parties an opportunity to respond to the MR.C's request and advised that it would approve the changes if no objections were filed. 3 The State responded it did not object to changing the magnet schools' structure and seating, but did object to providing funds for more magnet school seats than specified in the parties' settlement agreement. 4 LRSD responded with a motion to modify the settlement agreement, 5 and the State replied. 6 II. No party has objected to the MR.C's request to change the magnet schools' grade structure and seating numbers. Accordingly, the Court approves the changes in structure and seating but emphasizes that the approval does not extend to MR.C's proposal for funding the cost of the approved changes-the subject to which the Court now turns. The State asserts it does not object to restructuring the magnet schools but does object to paying costs associated with magnet school enrollment in excess of the seating capacities set forth 3 Docket no. 3269. 4 Docket no. 3276. 5 Docket nos. 3292 \u0026 3293. 6 Docket no. 3296. 3 - in the settlement agreement. 7 Part II of the settlement agreement states, in pertinent part, as follows: D. Restrictions on Funding Magnet Schools The State will have no further obligation to contribute any additional funds to magnet schools other than under paragraph II.E. below. . . . Any reference to the six existing magnet schools in this settlement shall mean, for funding purposes, up to their present seating capacities. Those seating capacities are as follows: Carver 613 Williams 515 Gibbs 351 Booker 660 Mann 935 Parkview 991 E. Continuation of Existing Funding In addition to any payment described elsewhere in this agreement, the State will continue to pay the following costs: (1) The State's portion of magnet school operational costs for the six existing magnet schools (Gibbs, Booker, Carver, Parkview, Mann and Williams) .... Despite the funding limitation included in the settlement agreement, LRSD argues the State is estopped from refusing to pay its share of costs associated with the approved changes because two members of the MRC, who represent the Arkansas Department of Education, voted that each District and the State would share in paying for the increased costs. 8 The Court disagrees that under a theory of estoppel, the State must provide more funding for magnet schools than required by the settlement agreement. For an estoppel theory to apply, \"the party who is to be estopped, or one in privity with that party, must have asserted a fact or a claim, or made a promise, that another party relied on .... \"Maitland v. University of Minnesota, 43 F.3d 357, 364 (8th Cir. 1994). Additionally, \"estoppel is an equitable doctrine, and 7 Docket no. 3276 8 Docket no. 3293. 4 it should not be given effect beyond what is necessary to accomplish justice between the parties.\" Id The Court does not find that justice requires invoking an estoppel theory in the present situation or that the State (by proxy) asserted it would fund more magnet school seats than required under the settlement agreement. Alternatively, LRSD moves the Court to modify the parties' settlement agreement with the State \"to the extent necessary to implement MR.C's decisions.\" In 1991, the Eighth Circuit explained that this Court may approve modifications of the parties' consent decree when proposed modifications merely alter details that do not affect the parties' substantive commitments to desegregation. Little Rock Sch. Dist. , 949 F.2d 253, 255 (81h Cir. 1991). Ordinarily, parties should consent to such minor changes, but \"if a party refuses to consent and the moving party has a reasonable basis for its request, the court should modify the decree.\" - Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail, 112 S. Ct. 748, 760 n.7 (1992). A different standard applies when the parties dispute a proposed modification that alters a basic agreement among the parties. In these cases, a party may obtain relief from a consent decree when it is no longer equitable that the decree should have prospective application, \"not when it is no longer convenient to live with the terms of the consent decree.\" Rufo, 112 S. Ct. at 760. \"Accordingly a party seeking modification of a consent decree bears the burden of establishing that a significant change in circumstances warrants revision of the decree.\" Rufo, 112 S. Ct. at 760; also see Little Rock School Dist. v. Pulaski Cty. Special Sch. Dist. , 56 F.3d 905, 914 (8th Cir. 1995). A party seeking modification may meet its initial burden by showing a significant change in factual conditions or the law. See id The Court finds that under the parties' settlement agreement, the State may not be 5 required to fund more than 4,065 magnet school seats. This proviso constitutes a basic agreement among the parties, not a dispensable detail. LRSD asserts the Court should modify the agreement, to the extent necessary to implement restructuring of the magnet schools, because the magnet schools promote desegregation. However, the Court finds that LRSD's general assertion falls short of establishing that significant changes in fact or law warrant revision of the provision limiting the State's funding to 4,065 magnet school seats. Finally, LRSD urges that the Court should at least require that the State continue funding the total number of magnet school seats stipulated in the settlement agreement (4,065). Under LRSD's interpretation of the agreement, the State must fund at least 77 new seats at Parkview, to offset the reduction in seats at Booker, Carver, Gibbs, and Williams, and insure the State continues to fund a total of 4,065 seats.9 The State asserts that the settlement agreement limits the State's funding obligations to costs associated with a maximum number of seats for each school: 613 seats at Carver, 515 seats at Williams, 351 seats at Gibbs, 660 seats at Booker, 935 seats at Mann, and 991 seats at Parkview.10 The State maintains that under the settlement agreement, the stipulated number of seats for each school is fixed and does not vary according to changes in the number of seats in other schools. The Court has concluded it lacks a proper basis to increase the total number of magnet ' school seats the State must fund beyond 4,065. However, it isnot clear whether the number of stipulated seats for each individual school, as set forth in the settlement agreement, involves a substantive commitment (which may not be modified absent a showing of significant change in fact or law) or a detail (which may be modified when a reasonable basis for modification exists). 9 See table, supra page 3. 10 Docket no. 3276, page 3. 6 The Court requests that the parties brief the Court regarding this issue. m. THEREFORE, no party having objected to MR.C's request for approval to change the interdistrict magnet schools' grade structure and seat numbers, the Court hereby approves the proposed changes. The Court's approval does not extend to the Committee's proposals for funding. FURTHER, the Court declines increasing the total number of magnet school seats funded by the State, and to this extent, LRSD's motion to modify the parties' settlement agreement with the State is hereby DENIED IN PART [docket no. 3292]. FURTHER, the Court directs the parties to brief the Court regarding whether under the settlement agreement, the stipulated number of state-funded seats for individual magnet schools may vary (providing the total number of state-funded seats remains at 4,065) without disrupting the substantive commitments contained in the agreement. To this extent, LRSD's motion to modify the parties' settlement agreement with the State is hereby HELD IN ABEYANCE [docket no. 3292]. FURTHER, the parties have to and including 60 days from entry of this Order, to submit the requested briefs. ~ - ~ IT IS SO ORDERED THIS~DAY OF ,\u003c , 1999 ~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN ~:=ce WITH RULE se AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ~ i./:;\u003e:-CJ1 BYJiZC:...i .---- 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT'S MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAN 2000 The PCSSD for its motion, states: NOV 1 8 1999 OfflCEOF DESEGREGATION MDNITORJUB PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS 1. The PCSSD petitioned for unitary status on March 25, 1999. 2. By order dated July 19, 1999, this Court ruled that the PCSSD had not achieved unitary status. 3. Appended to the PCSSD petition for unitary status was a document entitled Pulaski County Special School District Post Unitary Commitments. While Joshua opposed the PCSSD petition for unitary status, it, in the words of this Court, \"embraced\" the PCSSD post unitary commitments and, except for the issue concerning the duration of the commitments, agreed that the commitments could serve as a new or amended desegregation plan. 139757-v1 \\ 4. This Court has frequently encouraged the parties to modify their desegregation plans to make them more workable, has elicited testimony from court experts to assist the parties regarding issues being monitored by the district court and has approved a new Little Rock plan that is very similar to proposed Plan 2000. Further, the district court's finding that the PCSSD is not yet unitary is at least a de facto finding that its plan warrants modification. 5. The PCSSD converted the post unitary commitments to \"Plan 2000\" which was considered by and unanimously approved by the PCSSD Board of Directors on November 4, 1999. 6. Plan 2000 was previously considered by the Court and the parties as the PCSSD Post Unitary Commitments and was furnished to all parties before the PCSSD - Board action. 7. The PCSSD submits that Plan 2000 is constitutional, workable and fair to Joshua Class members and that it comports with the requirements of this and the Court of Appeals' standards for approval. 8. Attached to this motion as Exhibit A is a copy of Plan 2000. Exhibit Bis a letter dated November 2, 1999, detailing the changes which converted the Commitments to Plan 2000. Exhibit C is a proposed notice for publication to Joshua Class members and Exhibit D is a proposed order for the consideration of this Court. 9. This motion is accompanied by a memorandum brief which fully explains and supports the relief sought herein. WHEREFORE, the PCSSD prays that this Court give tentative approval to Plan 2000, that it order publication of the notice attached as Exhibit C, that it assign a closing 139757-v1 2 date for comments to be submitted to the United States District Court clerk and that, thereafter, it approve Plan 2000 as submitted and dismiss the PCSSO petition for unitary status without prejudice. Respectfully submitted, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 0) ty Special CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On November_!_!_, 1999, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. mail on each of the following: Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown OOM Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 139757-v1 3 Mr. Richard W. Roachell Roachell and Street First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 A. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAN 2000 DA TED November 4, 1999 Scope of This Plan (1) This Plan shall supersede and extinguish all prior agreements and orders in Pulaski County Special School District, U.S.D.C. No. LR-C-82-866, and all consolidated cases related to the desegregation of the Pulaski County Special School District with the following exceptions: (a) The Pulaski County School Desegregation case \"Settlement Agreement\" as revised on September 28, 1989; (b) The Magnet School Stipulation dated February 27, 1987; (c) Order dated September 3, 1986, pertaining to the Magnet Review Committee; (d) The M-to-M Stipulation dated August 26, 1986; and ( e) Orders of the district court and the court of appeals interpreting or enforcing sections (a) through (d) above to the extent not inconsistent with this Plan. B. General Obligation PCSSD shall in good faith exercise its best efforts to comply with the Constitution, to provide that no person is discriminated against on the basis of race, color, or ethnicity in the operation of the PCSSD, and to provide an equal educational opportunity for all students attending PCSSD schools. C. Assignment of Students (1) The PCSSD shall continue to implement the current standards for the assignment of students to schools within the district. The PCSSD shall inform the Joshua lntervenors of the documents which set forth the details of the existing plan. This notice shall be provided within 30 days of the court's approval of this Plan. (2) The PCSSD shall submit not later than October 15 in each school year a report concerning one race classes. The report shall set forth for each such class: (i) the school, (ii) the class including the grade level, (iii) the racial make-up of~th~ec-la~ss, --- ijQt..-r ;. ,~. - '1f\" ::::..~.: ~ -. ... ~~-'/) :: : . ~if.~;., 1367~v1 (iv) a description of steps taken to eliminate the particular one race class and the reason(s) why this proved to be infeasible. The PCSSD shall submit not later than March 1 of each school year a similar, supplemental report concerning any one race classes in courses commencing in the second semester of the school year. D. Advanced Placement, Gifted and Talented and Honors Programs Not later than 45 days after the court's approval of this Plan, the PCSSD shall provide to the Joshua lntervenors the standards then in place for selecting secondary students for and educating them in advanced placement, gifted and talented, and honors programs, including standards to promote racial diversity in these programs. The PCSSD shall include in this submission notices which are used to inform staff members of the relevant standards. E. Student Assignment; lnterdlstrlct Schools (1) PCSSD and LRSD shall operate interdistrict schools in accordance with the following: 136743-v1 (a) PCSSD lnterdistrict Schools. PCSSD shall operate Baker Elementary, Clinton Elementary, Crystal Hill Elementary and any new elementary school which may be constructed in the Chenal Valley area as lnterdistrict Schools. (b) LRSD lnterdistrict Schools. LRSD shall operate King Elementary, Romine Elementary and Washington Elementary as lnterdistrict Schools. ( c) Racial Composition. The ideal composition at the interdistrict schools shall be as close to 50%-50% as possible with the majority race of the host district remaining the majority race at the interdistrict school, except that Baker School shall not be subject to this requirement. (d) Reserved Seats. PCSSD shall reserve at least 200 seats at Clinton Elementary and up to 399 seats at Crystal Hill Elementary for interdistrict transfer students from LRSD. The District shall also reserve up to half of the seats for LRSD black students in any new Chenal Valley School. ( e) Recruitment. PCSSD and LRSD agree to implement programs at interdistrict schools designed to attract 2 (f) (g) interdistrict transfer students and to work cooperatively to recruit interdistrict transfer students to interdistrict schools. Outside Students. lnterdistrict schools shall be open to students who reside outside Pulaski County where the acceptance of the transfer will assist the interdistrict school in achieving its ideal racial composition. Transportation. Transportation shall be provided by the PCSSD for interdistrict transfers from Pulaski County to interdistrict schools. F. Discipline (1) The PCSSD will continue to gather data which allows a full assessment of its success in achieving its objective of eliminating racial disparities in the imposition of school discipline. As a foundation for this effort, disciplinary records shall be kept on each student concerning the nature of any discipline imposed (suspension, Saturday school, expulsion, etc.); the teacher and staff member involved; and the school, race, and sex of the student. (2) Not later than 45 days after the court's approval of this Plan, the Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation shall submit to the Joshua lntervenors, for comment, proposed criteria for identifying, from the data collected: (i) teachers and other staff members who are experiencing problems which require attention; (ii) schools which have atypically high discipline rates; and (iii) schools which have atypically high racial disparities in discipline. The Joshua lntervenors shall have 21 days to provide comments on these proposed criteria. The PCSSD shall then complete the criteria promptly. (3) The Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation and the Assistant Superintendent for Pupil Personnel shall thereafter provide for and participate in specific efforts to work with teachers and other staff members and the personnel of schools, identified pursuant to the criteria set forth in paragraph 2, to promote achievement of the goal of eliminating racial disparities in school discipline. The Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation shall maintain records showing the specific steps undertaken. ( 4) PCSSD shall conduct a comprehensive study of the disciplining of African-American students, particularly male students, at the secondary level. The participants (a minimum of twelve (12)), one-half designated by the Joshua lntervenors and one-half by PCSSO and the PACT and PASS, shall consider the causes for the high rates of discipline for African-American students and possible remedies. The panel 3 136748-v1 shall, among other things: review discipline records to secure an understanding of the circumstances in which African-American students are disciplined; interview and\\or survey African-American students regarding their experiences in the system generally and in the discipline process; and consider the possibility of a relationship between unmet academic needs and discipline rates. The written study shall be completed not later than 150 days after court approval of this Plan and shall provide suggestions for prevention and intervention measures. (5) The PCSSD shall develop a specific initiative to reduce the rates of discipline in the PCSSD shown in ODM's report dated March 18, 1998. This initiative shall be implemented not later than 150 days after the court's approval of this Plan. (6) PCSSD shall adhere to the policies set forth in the Handbook for Student Conduct and Discipline, as revised after consultation with the Joshua lntervenors, PACT and PASS, to provide that students are disciplined in a fair and equitable manner. The Assistant Superintendent for Pupil Personnel shall be responsible for determining the fairness of student disciplinary decisions. He will delegate the student hearing function to a single hearing officer who will consider the appeal brought by parents and the position of the administrator making the recommendation and then make a decision based upon equitable factors. An aggrieved student may appeal to the Superintendent of Schools. The Superintendent may review the matter or refer it to the school board for action. The committee approach which utilizes school principals in the student appeal process has been discontinued and will not be reinstituted. G. Multicultural Education (1) The PCSSD shall continue its efforts to infuse multicultural instruction in all curriculum areas. All phases of a school's environment (~. instructional materials, lesson plans and lessons, library contents, bulletin boards, extracurricular activities, school assemblies, speaker programs, and food services) shall reflect the system's Plan to multicultural education. (2) A principal activity of the Coordinator for Multicultural Education and the Coordinator's office shall be on-site visits to individual schools to determine whether the system's policy and the provisions of this Plan are being implemented in fact. The Coordinator shall maintain records permitting an evaluation of the status of implementation at each school visited. H. School Facilities (1) The PCSSD shall prepare, with the help of consultants, as necessary, a plan so that existing school facilities are clean, safe, attractive and equal. The plan shall address alternatives for funding its implementation. The Board of School Directors shall approve a plan not later than 150 days after the court's approval of this Plan. The 4 136748-v1 Joshua lntervenors shall be given a 14 day period to comment on the content of the plan prior to its adoption. (2) An elementary school, located around 145th Street, and a middle school or junior high school in the Crystal Hill\\Maumelle area will be built. The Board will address the development of a plan for new school construction during the term of this Plan if funds are sufficient, including its funding, and report its conclusions not later than 150 days after the court's approval of this Plan. Moreover, the PCSSO shall not close schools which are located in predominantly African-American areas absent reasons of compelling necessity (which does not include the opposition of white patrons to attending such schools). (3) The PCSSD shall notify the Joshua lntervenors of plans for constructing new schools and for adding capacity to existing schools. The notice shall identify the capacity of the proposed facility, the area of the system to be served, and the projected impact on the racial make-up of the students in each school expected to be affected by the new construction. The Joshua lntervenors shall have a period of 14 days in which to provide input concerning each such proposal. I. Scholarships Within 30 days from the date that the LRSD successfully establishes its own scholarship program, PCSSD shall establish a bi-racial committee to explore a program for providing college scholarships to designated PCSSO students. J. School Resources PCSSO shall design and carry out, in consultation with the Joshua lntervenors, a study to determine whether school resources are allocated equitably among the schools of the district. The resources assessed may include such factors as pupil\\teacher ratio; pupil\\staff ratio; square feet per pupil; percentage of staff with a masters degree and nine or more years of experience; the turnover rate of certified staff; school size: computer\\pupil ratio; per pupil expenditure; volunteer hours per pupil; and donations per pupil. The study shall contain recommendations, where appropriate, to address any problems identified. K. Special Education (1) Not later than 45 days after the court's approval of this Plan, the PCSSD shall provide to the Joshua lntervenors the standards then in place for: (i) stressing intervention strategies and regular class modifications in an effort to prevent inappropriate referrals of black males and kindergarten students; (ii) monitoring the folders of all kindergarten students and black students who are being considered as in need of special education under IDEA and Section 504 to insure nondiscrimination in 5 136748-v1 evaluation and placement. The PCSSD shall include in this submission materials which are used to inform staff members of the relevant standards. (2) The Director of Special Education shall develop a specific plan for additional monitoring each year, by his\\her staff, of schools where there are atypically high racial disparities in special education classification, generally or as to black male students. The PCSSD shall provide a copy of this plan to the Joshua lntervenors, which shall include criteria for identifying schools for monitoring. L. Staff (1) The PCSSD shall recruit applicants for each available administrative position, by internal and external means, in a manner designed to communicate, broadly, its availability and to develop a racially diverse pool of applicants. The Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation shall, with the cooperation of the Assistant Superintendent for Personnel, be informed of the make-up of each such applicant pool and they shall have the authority to direct that additional recruitment take place prior to the offering of the position to a particular applicant. (2) The PCSSD shall engage in recruitment so that new teachers are selected from a racially diverse pool of applicants. The Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation shall monitor the recruitment process so that recruitment is extensive and sustained, and the hiring process so that no policy; practice, or custom has the purpose or the effect of imposing an upward limit on the proportion of black teachers. (3) The PCSSD shall continue to implement programs, policies and\\or procedures which result in an increase in the number of African-American earty childhood teachers, primary grade teachers, and secondary core teachers, including offering incentives for African-American teachers to obtain certification in these areas, and to assign those teachers to the PCSSD schools where the greatest disparity exists. (4) The PCSSD will allocate teachers and other professional staff in a manner which avoids the racial identification of schools. M. Student Achievement (1) The PCSSD shall implement the plans designed to improve student achievement, recommended by Dr. Stephen Ross, and shall work with Dr. Ross in their implementation. See Attachment (plans). (2) The PCSSD shall continue to implement its home-school counselor program. 6 136748-v1 N. Monitoring (1) The Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation shall: (i) develop a plan so that he (or she) and his (or her) staff focus their monitoring and compliance efforts on the specific elements of this Plan; and (ii) provide the Joshua lntervenors within 30 days of the court's approval of this Plan a list, geared to the sections of this Plan, identifying the staff member or members with particular responsibilities for its implementation and the position held by each. (2) Upon reasonable notice, the Joshua lntervenors shall have the opportunity: (i) to examine and secure copies of records relating to the PCSSO's compliance with this Plan, including records identified in this Plan, and (ii) to meet with the Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation or a staff member responsible for a particular part of the implementation of the Plan. 136748-v1 (3) The PCSSO shall submit statistical reports showing the following: (a) The enrollment in each school by race; (b) The enrollment in gifted and talented programs, honors programs, and advanced placement classes, by school and by race; (c) The make-up of special education programs: (i) by disability category, including Section 504, by race, and by sex; and (ii) by school, by race, and by sex; provided that the system may comply with this reporting requirement by providing copies of materials submitted to ADE, as long as they include all information designated in this paragraph; (d) For each school and the system, the number of instances of each form of discipline, by race and by sex; for each school and the system, the number of students receiving each form of discipline, by race. and by sex; (e) The racial make-up, in each school, of (i) the administrators, (ii) the faculty, (iii) other professional staff, and (iv) support staff; (f) The racial make-up, by category, of the various categories of administrators, faculty, support staff, and other workers employed in the PCSSO. 7 The information in all sub-paragraphs other than sub-paragraph (d) shall be submitted not later than November 1 of each year, and the information in sub-paragraph (d) twice a year, not later than 30 days after the end of each semester. N. Continuing Jurisdiction (1) General Rule. The district court shall have continuing jurisdiction to address issues regarding compliance with and modifications of this Plan. Nothing in this Plan shall affect the district court's jurisdiction to enforce the Plan in the manner required by the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. (2) Process for Raising compliance Issues. Before requesting the district court to exercise its jurisdiction with regard to a compliance issue, the Joshua lntervenors shall follow the procedures set forth below. 136748-v1 (a) Joshua shall as soon as reasonably practicable give the PCSSO Superintendent or his designee specific written notice which includes the following: (i) the paragraph(s) of the Plan at issue; (ii) the names of all students involved, if any; (iii) the names of all PCSSD agents or employees involved, if any; (iv) all facts of which the Joshua lntervenors are aware relevant to the compliance issue: and (v) a copy of all documents in the Joshua lntervenors' possession relevant to the compliance issue. (b) PCSSD shall conduct a reasonable investigation of the alleged noncompliance and shall provide the Joshua lntervenors a written response within a reasonable period not to exceed 30 days from the receipt of written notice from the Joshua I ntervenors or such later time as agreed. 8 (c) If the Joshua lntervenors are unsatisfied with PCSSD's response, the Joshua lntervenors shall within 15 days of receipt of PCSSD's response submit the compliance issue to the Department of Justice, Community Relations Service, for facilitation of an agreement between the parties. (d) If the compliance i "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1731","title":"Court filings: District Court, order; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) motion to modify the settlement agreement as regards the magnet schools; District Court, districts' motion for pre-judgment interest; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to the districts' motion for pre-judgment interest; District Court, notice of filing, project management tool","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":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1999-09"],"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--20th century","Arkansas. Department of Education","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education and state","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Education--Economic aspects","Magnet schools","School management and organization","School improvement programs","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, order; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) motion to modify the settlement agreement as regards the magnet schools; District Court, districts' motion for pre-judgment interest; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to the districts' motion for pre-judgment interest; District Court, notice of filing, project management tool"],"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/1731"],"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":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["86 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  :\u003ei.J:\u003eHN W Wt{ I tit'! I IN TRE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT F:ASTF.RN T\u003eTSTRTr.T OF ARKAN.~4.~ WESTEP-1\\l DIVT..S!ON LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * Plaintiff, * vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT WO. 1, et al., Defendants, * \"' * No. LR-C-82-866 OPTIONAL FORM 99 (7-90) r. UI MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, F\u003ex f  fax~ ;2 .., lr_ - I  ;;.-- . ,:; ?!-oL ofJ.'-----c~--'-~--=-='__,'--~~r'----,-....,,10C....:.,~~- N::iN 7:)40.,01-311-7386 5099-101 GENERAL SERVICES AOMlNIST~ATIO\"'( Y. .- \\THEP-'NE .NIGHT, et al., rntcrvenors. ORDER The Little Rock, North Little Rock; and Pulaski. County School Districts (\"Districts\") filed a motion requesting that t,.,is Coun order the State to distribute funds to the Pulaski County Educational Cooperative upon fon-...a.tion of the cooperative [docket no 3271]. The State responded [docket no_ 3275] and the Districts replied to the response [docket no. 3284]. Having carefully considered the matter, the Court denies the motion_ I_ In 1985, the Arkansas Legislature authorized the State Board of Education to establish a state funded system of multi-county educational cooperatives in Atkansas.1 The legislature intended the cooperatives to \"provide to school districts which choose to use them assistance in .. 1 1985 Atk. Acts 349 (codified at Ark. Code Ann. 6-13-1002). - - - - 3 2 95 ----- -- - ----- - SEP- 8-99 WED 10:12 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 02 - . meeting or exceeding accreditation standards and equalizing educational opportunities. \"2 In I 987, the Districts agreed to form the Pulaski County Educaticna} Cooperative,' and this Court approved the agreement.' Subsequently, the parties agreed to settle the State's liabiiity in this case and formulated a settlement agreement, which eliminated the Pulaski County Educational Cooperative. This Court, in an Order issued by the Honorable Henry Woods, transferred the funds previously eannarked for the cooperative to the budget of the Metropolitan Supervisor. See Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist., 716 F. Supp. 1162, .. .. . 1165 (E.D. Ark. 1989). In light of Judge Woods's Order, the parties agreed that the funds should be .. used to develop effective compensatory and remedial education programs designed to eliminate achievement disparities between black and white students and for other purposes intended to enhance desegregation.\"~ Accordingly, the parties amended Part ill.E of the settlement agreement as follows: State funding for the Pulaski County Education Service [Cooperative] has ceased and the funds were reallocated to the Metropolitan Supervisor by order of the Court. Should these funds no longer be required by the Metropolitan Supervisor, they will be used to assist the ADE [Arkansas Department of Education] in securing the services of trained consultants to develop effective compensatory, remedial education programs designed to eliminate achievement disparities between black and white students and for other purposes intended to enhance desegregation.' 2 Ark. Code. Ann. 6-13-1002. 3 Docket no. 737. 4 Docket no. 739. 5 Docket no. 1263, joint submission 2, ,i 9. 6 Docket no. 1263, joint submission 3, Part III, E. SEP- 8-99 WED 10:12 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 P. 03 In 1990, the Eighth Circuit directed this Court to \"approve the parties' settlement agreement as written by them\" and converted the Office of Metropolitan Supervisor to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"OD~f'). See Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist., 9.21 F.2d 1371, 1394 (8t1t Cir. 1990). In an Order clarifying the obligation of the State with respect to the ODM, this Court stated, \"While (the Office of Metropolitan Supervisor' s] name has been changed and the scope of its function narrowed to monitoring the parties' compliance with the settlement plans, the office ~ .. still exists . . . . Therefore, the State is obligated under the terms of the settlement agreement to continue funding the ODM.\"7 Before the regular session of the 1999 Arkansas General Assembly, the Districts requested that a Pulaski County Educational Cooperative be established. The General Assembly appropriated $328,618 for the cooperative but conditioned the disbursement of funds upon the \"entry of a final, nonappealable order\" in this case relieving the State \"of any further obligation to provide funds for the operation of the federal Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) or any successors to ODM. \"1 II. The Districts maintain this Court should invalidate the appropriation contingency and clear the way for the Districts' receipt of co-op funding. According to the Districts, the appropriation contingency conflicts with the parties' settlement agreement Wlth the State. Both the agreement and the legislation appear to be consistent in one important respect: 7 Docket 1442, page 4.  1999 Ark. Acts 1392  17. 3 SEP- 8-99 WED 10:12 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 04 - both intend that there will be no cooperative as long as the State is funding the ODM. The legislation reflects this intent unambiguously, while the agreement merely st~tes that funding for the cooperative has ceased and has been reallocated to the ODM. 9 Assuming (without deciding) that the Court bas subject matter jurisdiction to invalidate the contingency, the Court finds that there exist no grounds for such invalidation. The ODM continues to function and receive state funds . Until the State stops funding the\u003cODM by order of the Court, there is no need to address the issue of the alleged conflict between the legislation and the settlement agreement.  In conclusion, the Court finds that the Arkansas General Assembly's appropriation contingency regarding a Pulaski County Educational Cooperative does not obstruct the State's current obligations under the settlement agreement. That being the case, this Court must deny the the Districts' motion. m. THEREFORE, it is hereby ordered that the Pulaski County School Districts' combined motion regarding the Pulaski County Educational Cooperative be DEN1ED l docket no. 3 271). ~t'lr\\be-r IT rs so ORDERED TillS __ DAY OF .A0Ct:ffl1', 1999 ~~tp: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 The agreement refers to the Metropolitan Supervisor, but, as noted above, the latter was reconstituted as the ODM. THIS DOCUMENT E~AED ON DOCKET SHEET IN :;QMP_wNC~ 'Nl~Le 58 ANO~P ON - 1/--. av - RECEIVED SEP 1 3 1999 OfflCE Or A TIORNEY GENERAL OF ARKANSAS DESEGREGATION MONITORING September 10, 1999 M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. I 723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mark Pryor Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School-District No. 1, et al USbC No. LR-C-82-866 Dear Ms. Brown and Gentlemen: Enclosed for your record is a copy of the Arkansas Department of Education's Response to the Little Rock School District's Motion to Modify the Settlement Agreement as regards the Magnet Schools that I have filed this date with the Clerk of the Court. TG/nc encl. 1 Respectfully, ~/:_ ~ - Tim ger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street Suite 200  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007  FAX (501) 682-8084 Internet Website http://www.ag.state.ar.us/_ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN .DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED SEP 1 3 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS ADE'S RESPONSE TO LRSD'S MOTION TO MODIFY THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AS REGARDS THE MAGNET SCHOOLS On July 9, 1999, the Arkansas Department of Education (\" ADE\") submitted its objection to the Magnet Review Committee's May 7, 1999 letter to the Court In that letter the MRC sought the Court's approval \"of a change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for the 1999-2000 school year.\" In its July 9 submission ADE pointed out that the Settlement Agreement (paragraphs II.D. and ILE.) placed limits on the State's obligation to fund the magnet schools, and that while ADE did not object to the proposed changes in grade structure and enrollment in the magnets, ADE did object to the MRC' s proposal to the extent it assumed or implied that the State would be required to pay costs associated with magnet student enrollment in excess of the seating capacities set forth in the Settlement Agreement No other party filed objections to the MRC' s May 7 letter, nor did any other party file a timely response to ADE' s July 9 submission. On August 27, 1999, LRSD filed a \"Response to ADE and Motion to Modify Settlement Agreement\" In this pleading LRSD concedes, as it must, that the Settlement Agreement limits the State's funding obligations as regards the magnet schools. LRSD argues, though, that in addition to the proposed changes in grade structure and enrollment, \"the MRC determined that ADE and the [Districts] should share the cost increase in the same proportion each party now pays to support the Magnet Schools.\" From this premise, LRSD argues that ADE is bound by (or is estopped from objecting to) increases in the State's financial obligations necessitated by the restructuring and increases in enrollment In the alternative, LRSD argues that the Settlement Agreement should be modified to increase the State's financial responsibility for the magnet schools because of a \"significant change in circumstances,\" i.e., LRSD's decision to restructure its schools. LRSD' s arguments are without merit, and its motion to modify the Settlement Agreement must be denied. A. The State Is Not Bound By Or Estopped From Objecting To The MRC's Recommendations LRSD' s response and motion is premised on LRSD' s belief that the MRC voted unanimously not only to recommend changes in grade structure and seating capacities in the magnet schools, but also to recommend that the State and the Districts \"share the cost increase [necessitated by the restructuring and increases in enrollment] in the same proportion each party now pays to support the Magnet Schools.\" While the MRC did vote to recommend changes in grade structure and number of seats in the magnets, the - record is ambiguous, at best, on whether the MRC voted on the financial implications of 2 - those changes or made any recommendations at all concerning the relative financial burdens of the State and the Districts. This Court's June 18, 1999 order characterized the MRC's May 7 letter as a request \"for approval of a change in grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools;\" the Court's order says nothing about the FY 2000 magnet school budget generally, or how costs would be allocated among the parties specifically. The MRC's May 7 letter states that on December 15, 1998 the Committee unanimously approved changes \"L11 the grade structure and number of seats\" in the magnets for the 1999-2000 school year. The letter's discussion of the budgetary impact of the proposed changes contains only estimates,1 and the MRC' s discussion of each party's projected \"share\" of the estimated FY 2000 budget is clearly based only upon the assumption that the State would continue to pay half the total costs of the magnet school budget But even if one accepted LRSD's characterization of what the MRC actually voted on and what it did not, LRSD has not cited any authority for the proposition that the recommendations of the MRC are binding on the parties, particularly when as here the MRC's recommendations purport to require one or more of the parties to assume obligations in contravention of the terms of the Settlement Agreement As has been the case with previous recommendations of the MRC, this Court entered an order giving all 1 The MRC's May 7, 1999 letter refers _.to its estimate as a \"projected calculation\" and acknowledges that a final 1999-2CXXJ magnet school budget would be submitted to the Court by June 1999. Given the MRCs uncertainty concerning the projected FY 2CXXJ budget on May 7, 1~, one can safely assume that the M~C harbored a similar uncertainty about the budgetary impact of the proposed changes in grade structure and attendance in the magnets on December 15, 1998, when the MRC voted on those proposed changes. 3 -- - - ' .. - parties notice of the MRC' s May 7 letter and set a deadline for the parties to file objections. If, as LRSD contends, the parties are bound by the MRC' s recommendations, why then would the Court submit those recommendations to the parties and provide an opportunity to object? The answer is simple: The MRC' s recommendations are precisely that - recommendations - which carry no force unless and until approved by the Court after giving the parties the opportunity to voice objections. B. LRSD's Decision To Restructure Its Schools As Part Of Its Revised Plan Does Not Tustify A Modification Of The Settlement Agreement Recognizing that the MRC has no authority to unilaterally modify the Settlement Agreement, LRSD implies that ADE should not be permitted to invoke the provisions of the Settlement Agreement because ADE did not object to LRSD' s Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (which makes reference to restructuring of LRSD's schools and the magnets). LRSD argues further, in the alternative, that the Settlement Agreement should be modified to the State's detriment because circumstances have changed so as to make such a modification equitable. Neither argument has merit LRSD's implication that the State should have objected to the Revised Plan in order to preserve its rights under paragraphs II.D. and II.E. of the Settlement Agreement borders on the frivolous. When the LRSD presented its Revised Plan for the Court's approval, it affirmatively represented to the Court and the other parties that its Revised Plan did not and would not alter or amend the Settlement Agreement in any way: 4 This Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (\"Revised Plan\") shall supercede and extinguish all prior agreements and orders . . . with the follawing exceptions: a. the Pulaski County School Desegregation Case Settlement  Agreement as revised on September 28, 1989 (\"Settlement Agreement'') .. Revised Plan, 1.1. Thus, at the time LRSD submitted its Revised Plan to the Court for approval, there was no reason for the State to believe or even suspect that the Revised Plan would change, alter or cucumvent the limits on the State's financial obligations contained that are set forth in paragraphs II.D. and ILE. of the Settlement Agreement LRSD's request for a \"modification\" of the Settlement Agreement must also be denied. As an initial matter, the LRSD should be estopped from arguing that the restructuring required by its Revised Plan justifies a modification of the Settlement Agreement The LRSD affirmatively represented to the Court and the parties that its Revised Plan would not supercede or extinguish the terms of the Settlement Agreement, and while the LRSD undoubtedly inserted this language in its Revised Plan with an eye toward preserving those aspects of the Settlement Agreement favorable to the LRSD, the LRSD cannot have its cake and eat it, too. In light of the language of the Revised Plan, LRSD should not now be heard to argue that the restructuring required as part of the Revised Plan requires or justifies a modification of the Settlement Agreement Even if LRSD were not estopped, LRSD' s request for a modification of the Settlement Agreement must be denied because no modification is warranted or 5 ,. - . --  necessary in order for the magnet schools to be restructured as set forth in the MRC' s May 7 letter. In support of its request for a modification, LRSD argues that \"the MRC's action in restructuring the Magnet Schools promotes desegregation'' and \"would further the goal of achieving a unitary school district\" ADE has no quarrel with these general assertions; indeed, ADE made it dear in its response and reiterates here that ADE does not object to the restructuring of the magnets or to the changes in enrollment described in the MRC' s May 7 letter. The ADE does object though, to being saddled with financial obligations for the magnets in excess of the limits set forth in the Settlement Agreement and conspicuously absent from LRSD' s motion is any allegation that it or the three Districts collectively2 would be unable to pay the costs of the magnet school program that pursuant to the Settlement Agreement the State cannot be made to bear. The LRSD, which \"bears the burden of establishing that that a significant change in circumstances warrants revision of the [consent] decree,\" has therefore failed to even allege that a modification of the Settlement Agreement is warranted. or necessary to effectuate the MRC' s recommended changes in grade levels and enrollment While the LRSD would undoubtedly like the State to pay as much as possible toward the operation of the magnet schools, the Settlement Agreement places limits on the State's financial obligations to the magnet schools and the State is not willing to 2 Neither the NLRSD nor the PCSSD objected to the MRCs proposal, and neither the NLRSD nor the PCSSD filed any form of response to the ADE' s objection. 6  waive them. LRSD' s desire to increase the State's financial contribution to the magnet schools, by itself, does not and cannot justify a modification of the Settlement Agreement Accordingly, the ADE respectfully requests that LRSD's motion to modify the Settlement Agreement be denied. Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General Assistant Attorne neral 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorneys for Arkansas Department of Education 7 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Timothy Gauger, certify that on September 10, 1999, a copy of the foregoing document will be served by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated: M. Samuel Jones, m Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Oark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 ~Tim~ger 8 EDWARD L. WRIGHT (1Q03-U77) ROBERTS . LINOSEY (1913-1991) ISAAC A. SCOTT, JR . JOHN G. LILE WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW JOHN 0 . DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY KIMBERLY WOOD TUCKER RAY F. COX. JR . GORDON S. RATHER , JR. TERRY L. MATHEWS DAVID M . POWELL ROGER A. GLASGOW C. DOUGLAS BUFORO. JR . PATRICK J. GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS . JR . JOHN R. TISDALE KATHLYN GRAVES M. SAMUEL JONES Ill JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY 111 LEE J. MULDROW N.M. NORTON CHARLES C. PRICE CHARLES T. COLEMAN JAMES J . GLOVER EDWIN L. LOWTHER . JR . CHARLES L. SCHLUMBERGER WALTER E . MAY GREGORY T . JONES H. KEITH MORRISON BETTINA E . BROWNSTEIN WALTER McSPADOEN ROGER 0 . ROW! NANCY BELLHOUSE MAY Mr. John Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RE: PCSSD Dear Counsel and Ms. Brown: 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE 2200 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX (501) 376-9442 WEBSITE : www.wlj .com OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS RONALD A. MAY M. TODD WOOD Writer' s Direct Dial No . 501-212-1273 mjonesCwl/.com September 13, 1999 TROY A. PR ICE PATRICIA A. SIEVERS JAMES M. MOODY, JR , KATHRYN A. PRYOR J. MARK DAVIS CLAIRE SHOWS HANCOCK KEVIN W. KENNEDY JERRY J. SALLINGS FRED M. PERKINS Ill WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL 0 . BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY ROBINSON WILBER BETSY MEACHAM KYLE R. WILSON C. TAO BOHANNON OOHS. McKINNEY MICHELE SIMMONS ALLGOOD KRISTI M. MOODY J. CHARLES DOUGHERTY M. SEAN HATCH PHYLLIS M. McKENZIE ELISA MASTERSON WHITE JANE M. FAULKNER ROBERT W. GEORGE J. ANDREW VINES JUSTIN T. ALLEN R. MARGARET DOBSON Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 CFF!C~ Di: lll\u0026REGATION MONITGRl,'JG Enclosed is a copy of Districts' Motion for Pre-Judgment Interest which is being filed today. MSJ/ao Encl. 127205-v1 Cordially, WRIGHT, LINDSEY .\u0026 JENNINGS LLP c':~,111 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. SEP l 1 1999 vtf!CE OF DESEGREGATION MONIJUUI PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS DISTRICTS' MOTION FOR PRE-JUDGMENT INTEREST 1. On June 16, 1999, this Court ordered the State to pay pre-judgment interest on the sums previously paid by the State, pursuant to Court order, for teacher retirement and health insurance benefits. 2. On July 28, 1999, the Court reduced this order to a money judgment which was then satisfied by the State. 3. Recently, pursuant to a stipulation among the parties, the districts agreed to abandon their appeals concerning the \"106% issue\" and the State agreed to forego any appeal regarding the court-ordered pre-judgment ;nterest. 4. The referenced orders concern teacher retirement and health insurance benefits which were owed for the years preceding 1998-99. 5. On May 11, 1999, the three districts filed an amended motion moving for an order requiring payment of the teacher retirement and health insurance benefits due 126286-v1 - for 1998-99. The State responded to this motion on August 19, 1999, and thereafter made the principal payments of these sums on September 2, 1999. 6. Attached as Exhibit A is a worksheet calculating pre-judgment interest on the sums owed for 1998-99 at the current federal interest rate of 5.2240%. This calculation and methodology is identical to that previously approved by the Court on July 28, 1999, for the pre-1998-99 award. 7. Pursuant to this calculation, the districts contend that the LRSD is owed $191,991 .04 in pre-judgment interest, that the PCSSD is owed $95,995.52, and that the NLRSD is owed $31 ,998.51. WHEREFORE, the districts pray for a total pre-judgment interest award of $319,985.07 to be allocated as described above and for all proper relief. 126286-v1 Respectfully submitted, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP 200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 By  -' .\u003e\"-\\ , v~,~ - l._'-- -~ M. Samue1 Jones Ill (76060) Attorneys for Pulaski County Special (~chool 9if\u003etrict / 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On September~. 1999, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. mail on each of the following: Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Christopher He!ler Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown QOM Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 East Markham Street - Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell Roachell and Street First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 126286-v1 M.~)Jonesj7 3 -- - . . . ,  ::  I .. - -- - - . . - . - --- - --- - -- INTEREST CALCULACTION FOR TEA. AET. \u0026 HEAL TH INSURANCE COURT ORDERED FUNDING -INTEREST RATE - 5.2240% 1998-99 AMT. - $10,288,773 - DATE MO. PAY AMT. INTEREST TOT. DUE I 08/31/98 $925,989.57 $925,989.57 09/30/98 $925,989.57 $3,975.92 $1,855,955.06 I 10/31/98 $925,989.57 $8,234.54 $2,790,179.17 11/30/98 $925,989.57 $11,980.19 $3,728,148.93 I 12/31/98 $925,989.57 $16,541.13 $4,670,679.63 I 01/30/99 $925,989.57 $20,054.49 $5,616,723.69 I 02/28/99 $925,989.57 $23,312.63 $6,566,025.90 I 03/31/99 $925,989.57 $29,132.29 $7,521,147.76 I 04/30/99 $925,989.57 $32,293.54 $8,479,430.87 I I 05/31/99 $925,989.57 $37,621 .72 $9,443,042.16 I 06/30/99 $1,028,877.30 $40,545.58 $10,512,465.04 09/02/99 $96,293.03 $10,608,758.07 09/02/99 PAID AMOUNT $10,288,773.00 INTEREST DUE $319,985.07 ~ $319,985.07 I LASO SHARE (~\u003e- -- 91,991.04 I PCSSD SHARE \\ \\'' _:;,, $95,995.52 NLRSD SHARE ~- \u003c'~ \\) $31,998.51 I , --~,_ I ---~-, ~ . ' W ,:...) , I I - 0:..:___,, I (v(~/ I ~ 00 I C. I S; :~\"- ,- :'\\_--' I (,,.\u003e.' .) '. ( ) ) I /'r ) ~ --:::-:_l 1, \\\") I \\ . , . I / ' ~ _, .. I - EXHIBIT I I? . IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED SEP 2 3 1999 ufflCEOF JESEGREGATION MOHITORINS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. ADE'S RESPONSE TO THE DISTRICTS' MOTION FOR PREJUDGMENT INTEREST DEFENDANTS On September 13, 1999, PCSSD (presumably on behalf of all three Districts) filed a \"motion for prejudgment interest\" In this motion the Districts seek an award of $319,985.07 in \"interest'' on amounts paid by the State to the Districts on September 2, 1999. The September 2 payments represented adjustments for teacher retirement and health insurance matching costs for fiscal year 1999. The Districts' motion must be denied. First, it is a misnomer to call the Districts' request as one for \"prejudgment interest'' because no judgment has been entered with respect to retirement or health insurance payments to the Districts for FY 1999. The Districts' motion can be more accurately characterized as a motion to establish some form of periodic payment schedule in future years for retirement and health insurance payments to the Districts and to establish an obligation to pay some form of \"interest'' if those payments are not timely made. As such, the Districts' motion must be denied because the Districts have already agreed to accept the methodology used to create - Court's Exhibit 504, a methodology that contemplates a single, post-fiscal-year payment to the Districts. Having agreed to such a methodology, the Districts should not now be permitted to essentially \"reopen\" the litigation concerning the retirement/health insurance remedy so as to establish some sort of monthly or other periodic payment obligation on the part of the State. Second, under the methodology used to create Exhibit 504, retirement and health insurance adjustment payments due the Districts for a particular fiscal year cannot be known - and therefore cannot be calculated with any certainty - until that fiscal year has ended and full-year data on retirement and health insurance costs (including costs attributable to ODM employees) is available for that year. As regards fiscal year 1999, there is no dispute that ADE made FY 1999 retirement and health insurance adjustment payments to the Districts in a timely manner after the FY 1999 data was made available to ADE. There is no allegation of untoward delay on the part of the State, and the Districts do not appear to contest the State's calculations of the appropriate amounts due each District Awarding interest to the Districts under these circumstances - whether one calls it \"prejudgment'' interest or some other form of interest - would be inequitable. Accordingly, ADE respectfully requests that the Districts' motion be denied. 2 Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General Assistant Attorn eneral 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorneys for Arkansas Department of Education 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Timothy Gauger, certify-that on September 27, 1999, I caused a copy of the foregoing document to be served by first class U.S. Mail on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated: M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 Nations Bank Plaza 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT  EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED OCT 1 1999 OfFICE OF DESEGREGATION MOMITOPJm; LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of ADE's Project Management Tool for September, 1999. Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General Assistant Attor General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of September 30, 1999 iti:TI:~1;~~:~e~iw~i~zt~'tji,~~,i!l!~i~~f~ i/li~i~1r.ii~11ifll .~li~il(g'a.:m; 8. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June.  This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources. "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1088","title":"\"Guidelines for School Improvement Planning,\" Division of Instruction, 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":["1999-09"],"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--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","School improvement programs","School discipline","School facilities","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["\"Guidelines for School Improvement Planning,\" Division of Instruction, 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/1088"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"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\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\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_1397","title":"Report: ''Report on the Little Rock School District's Preparations for Implementation of its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","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":["1999-08-11"],"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 law and legislation","Educational planning","School improvement programs","School integration","School employees","School discipline","School facilities","School management and organization","School enrollment","Student assistance programs"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Report on the Little Rock School District's Preparations for Implementation of its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"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/1397"],"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":["49 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1704","title":"Court filings: District Court, amended motion for an order directing the State to distribute the districts' teacher retirement and health insurance damages; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Management report, ''Report on the Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) Preparations for Implementation of its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan''; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to the districts' amended motion for an order directing the State to distribute the districts' teacher retirement and health insurance damages; District Court, response to Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) and motion to modify settlement agreement; District Court, brief in support of response to Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) and motion to modify settlement agreement; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool","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":["United States. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["1999-08"],"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--20th century","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Little Rock School District","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Education and state","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School employees","Teachers--Salaries, etc.","Retirement","School integration","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings: District Court, amended motion for an order directing the State to distribute the districts' teacher retirement and health insurance damages; District Court, notice of filing, Office of Desegregation Management report, ''Report on the Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) Preparations for Implementation of its Revised Desegregation and Education Plan''; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to the districts' amended motion for an order directing the State to distribute the districts' teacher retirement and health insurance damages; District Court, response to Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) and motion to modify settlement agreement; District Court, brief in support of response to Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) and motion to modify settlement agreement; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool"],"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/1704"],"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":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["80 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  RECEIVED AUG 9 1999 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS OFFICE OF WESTERN DIVISION DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS INTER VEN ORS INTER VEN ORS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL AMENDED MOTION FOR AN ORDER DIRECTING THE STATE TO DISTRIBUTE THE DISTRICTS' TEACHER RETIREMENT AND HEAL TH INSURANCE DAMAGES For their amended motion, the Little Rock School District (LRSD), North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) (the \"Districts\") state: 1. On February 18, 1997, this Court found that the state changed its method of funding the teacher retirement program to the detriment of the districts and in violation of the settlement agreement. This Court made the same finding with respect to the health insurance matching program on April 22, 1997. On July 1, 1998 the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this Court's decisions with respect to teacher retirement and health insurance and directed this Court to decide what relief would be appropriate for the districts. 2. After a hearing, all of the other parties agreed to accept the state's proposed - methodology for calculating damages. That methodology is set forth in Court's Exhibit 504. See Exhibit A to \"Motion for an Order Directing the State to Distribute the Districts' Undisputed Teacher Retirement and Health Insurance Damages,\" filed February 9, 1999. 3. On February 9, 1999 the districts asked the Court to order the state to pay the undisputed amount shown in Exhibit 504 for the 1996-97 and 1997-98 school years. On March 4, 1999, this Court entered the requested order. The districts' efforts to reach an agreement with the state for payment for the 1998-99 school year and future years have been unsuccessful. The districts must therefore seek an order from this Court requiring those payments. 4. Beginning with the 1999-2000 school year, the state should be ordered to reimburse the districts each year on the same monthly schedule as equalization funding using prior year average participation numbers and current state minimum required contribution numbers, with adjustments to be made in September of each year using current year actual participation numbers. ~or the 1998-99 school year, the state should be ordered to immediately pay the districts the amount necessary to bring it into compliance with this paragraph. The districts have agreed that the total amount of damages calculated according to the methodology set forth in Court's Exhibit 504 should be distributed each year as follows: 60% to LRSD, 30% to PCSSD and 10% to NLRSD. WHEREFORE, the districts pray that the state be ordered to immediately pay the districts' damages for the 1998-99 school year calculated in accordance with Court's Exhibit 504 subject to an amendment in September, 1999; and, using the methodology in Court's Exhibit 504, to reimburse the districts in future years on the same monthly schedule as equalization  funding using prior year average participation numbers and current year state minimum required contribution numbers, with adjustments to be made each September based on current year actual 2 participation numbers; and that the districts be awarded interest, costs, attorneys ' fees and all other just and proper relief to which they may be entitled. Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRJCT FRJDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 2000 Regions Bank Bldg. 400 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 501/376-2011 ~ PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRJCT M. Samuel Jones WRJGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 200 NationsBank 200 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 501-371-0808 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRJCT Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES 3400 TCBY Tower 425 Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 501-375-1122 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following on this 51h day of August, 1999: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 4 Melissa Guldin Associate Monitor Norman Marshall Associate Monitor Horace Smith Associate Monitor u.s';fh.ED EASTi=RN o,srr,c ' '~.vRT ,, T t,,,,,,NS!\\S Report on the r. u ,.. l .ti ti l  ,-,09 Little Rock School District's  1 ..:.:., ' '1~ ~ . Preparations for Implementation of it~v-' ... :.:. .'.\" ::'.-.;-; f'L .::- .-  -.., Revised Desegregation and Education Pfair  .,_ -' K August 11, 1999 Office of Desegregation Monitoring l[.S. District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Ann S. Brown Federal Monitor - i:-;,~ Gene Jones Associate Monitor Margie Powell Associate Monitor Polly Ramer Office Manager IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVEO AUG 2 o 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONiTORINQ. LITfLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS ADE'S RESPONSE TO THE DISTRICTS' \"AMENDED MOTION FORAN ORDER DIRECTING THE STATE TO DISTRIBUTE THE DISTRICTS' TEACHER RETIREMENT AND HEALTH INSURANCE DAMAGES\" On May 11, 1999, the Districts filed a motion requesting immediate partial payment of their fiscal year 1999 teacher retirement and health insurance \"damages.\" In that motion the Districts also requested that, for FY 2000, they should be paid such damages \"on the same monthly schedule as equalization funding using prior year average participation numbers and current state minimum required numbers, with adjustments to be made in June of each year using current year actual participation numbers.\" In its response to that motion, filed May 25, 1999, ADE noted that the methodology used to create Court's Exhibit 504 - the methodology the Districts \"agreed to accept ... for calculating damages\" - requires full-year data on school district employee health insurance participation, for the Districts and for all other school districts in the State. Further, the methodology used to create Exhibit 504 also requires - full-year data concerning health insurance participation by employees of the ODM. As of the date of its response, such data was not available because FY 1999 had not ended and LRSD had not yet provided to ADE data concerning ODM employee health insurance participation for FY 1999. In their \"amended\" motion the Districts again ask for immediate payment of their teacher retirement and health insurance damages for FY 1999. In addition, the Districts have only slightly modified their proposed schedule for such damage payments for FY 2000. With respect to FY 2000 and beyond, the Districts now state: Beginning with the 1999-2000 school year, the state should be ordered to reimburse the districts each year on the same monthly schedule as equalization funding using prior year average participation numbers and current state minimum required contribution numbers, with adjustments made in September of each year using current year actual participation numbers. Amended motion, ,r 4.1 With respect to the Districts' request for \"immediate\" payment of their FY 1999 retirement and health insurance damages, the motion is moot. ADE has now obtained complete full-year FY 1999 data on school district retirement costs and health insurance participation and has also received from LRSD full-year FY 1999 retirement and health insurance data for ODM employees, which has enabled it to perform the \"Exhibit 504\" 1 In its initial motion filed May 11, the Distric:ts correctly noted that there were issues concerning teacher retirement and health insurance\" damages\" that had not been resolved by this Court. The Districts' amended motion has deleted any reference to unresolved issues, but unfortunately unresolved issues still exist. LRSD and PCSSD have appealed this Court's June 16, 1999 order, in which this Court rejected the Districts' contention that they were entitled to damages to compensate them for more than 100% of their actual retirement and health insurance costs.  2 - damage calculations for FY 1999. See Exhib~t A hereto. The attached calculation and supporting paperwork have already been submitted to the Department of Finance and Administration and warrants payable to the Districts, in the amounts indicated on Exhibit A hereto, should be available shortly. The Districts' request for monthly payments during FY 2000, based upon some form of II averaging\" of prior year's participation data, should be denied. As the Districts admit, the Districts \"agreed to accept the state's proposed methodology\" for calculating damages, and that methodology clearly requires full-year actual cost data for the Districts and all other school districts in the State before the calculation may be performed. More important, though, is the fact that the Districts' proposal makes little sense in light of the way the Exhibit 504 calculations are performed and in light of the availability of the data necessary to perform the Exhibit 504 calculations. For example, as best ADE understands it, the Districts' proposal would require payments II on the same monthly schedule as equalization funding,\" which means that some sort of estimated payment would need to be made in August of each fiscal year. At the same time, however, the Districts' motion appears to concede th~t in some circumstances final data for the prior fiscal year's damage calculation might not be available until the September after the fiscal year has ended,2 and as the Districts know, information 2 Amended motion, 1 4 (requesting\" adjustments to be made in September of each year using actual participation numbers [for the prior fiscal year]). 3 concerning school district retirement matching costs is not available until sometime in October of the fiscal year. While ADE is willing to agree to some form of interim payment schedule in which estimated payment or payments would be made to the Districts at some point or points during the fiscal year with a final accounting and adjustment to be performed when compete fiscal year data is available, the \"monthly payment\" plan proposed by the Districts, as best ADE can understand it, makes little sense. Accordingly, the Districts' motion should be denied. Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General Assistant Attorney neral 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorneys for Arkansas Department of Education 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Timothy Gauger, certify that on August 19, 1999, I caused a copy of the . foregoing document to be served by first class U.S. Mail on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated: M.SamuelJones,m Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Plaza 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Oark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 5 \\ Page 1 State 1998-99 Equalization Additional Distribution Equalization Est. Total for Est Funding Pursuant Eimdin1 D!.lnifii11 D!.lnifit!I R!.lguir!.ld to Qrd!.lr / / Little Rock School District: $ 46,660,674 $ 14,681,738 $ 6,966,462 $ 7,616,276 $ 6,173,264 North Litlle Rock School District: $  26,187,899 $ 4,914,660 $ 3,917,710 $ 996,941 $ 1,028,877 Pulaski County Special School District: $ 66,864,014 $ 10,032,813 $ 8,367,266 $ 1,676,666 $ 3,086,632 State Totals: $ 1,340,461,886 $ 200,602,491 $ 200,633,098 $ 10,288,773 $ 10,288,773 14.96% ~('c . -,~ ~~ T ~ 11--:r r:\u003e ,1,.(. o~~ -\" ...... ._ ---- -------- RECEIVED AUG 3 1 1999 OFflCE 01- DESEGREGATIOtl MONITORING ufol6~cijRT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT C'OSRllT'J DISTRICT ARKANSAS EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS AUG 2 7 1999 WESTERN DIVISION JAMES W McCORMACK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT By: OEP. CLERK PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS RESPONSE TO ADE AND MOTION TO MODIFY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT For its Response and Motion, the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") states: 1. LRSD's revised Desegregation and Education Plan requires the reorganization of , LRSD's grade structure to employ the middle school concept in all schools including Magnet - Schools. The Arkansas Department ofEducation (\"ADE\") did not object to this aspect of the revised Desegregation and Education Plan. 2. The Magnet Review Committee has approved a change in the grade structure and the number of seats at the Magnet Schools for the 1999 school year. According to the MRC's letter to the Court seeking approval of its action, the entire MRC, including the two ADE representatives, voted to change the grade structure and to increase the number of seats in the Magnet Schools. The MRC determined that ADE and the three Pulaski County School Districts should share the cost increase in the same proportion each party now pays to support the Magnet Schools. This is a fair and reasonable approach supported unanimously by representatives of all the parties concerned. 3. The MRC's May 7, 1999 letter to the Court asked the Court to approve a proposed increase in ADE's share of Magnet School funding in the amount of$567,270.00. With respect to the proposed increase in the number of Magnet School seats, the proposed cost increase, and the allocation of the increased costs among the parties, the MRC Chairperson told the Court: \"All MRC members agree to the described changes, and the MRC respectfully requests the Court's approval of these changes.\" 4. The ADE now objects to the changes proposed unanimously by the MRC. No other party has made an objection. The MRC's request should be approved by the Court. 5. The total number of seats potentially funded by ADE under the settlement agreement is 4,065. If the Court does not approve the MRC proposal in its entirety, the Court should at least require the State to continue to fund this number of seats regardless of the fact that the location of some of the seats has been changed because ofrestructuring. 6. The terms of the settlement agreement and the Allen letter obligate ADE to help LRSD achieve unitary status. Magnet Schools are an important part of that effort. A modification of the settlement agreement to permit the changes unanimously supported by the MRC would be a permissible modification of an equitable decree to further the purpose of the decree. WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above and in the accompanying Brief, LRSD requests a hearing and prays for an Order approving the MRC's action described in its May 7, 1999 letter to the Court and, if necessary, for an Order modifying the settlement agreement to the extent necessary to approve the MRC's action. 2 Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHRISTOPHER HELLER JOHN C. FENDLEY FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 2000 Regions Bank Bldg. 400 West Capitol A venue Little Rock, AR 72201 501/376-2011 Christopher Heller CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following on trusZ}__ ~y of August, 1999: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 M. Samuel Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 200 NationsBank 200 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown VIA HAND DELIVERY Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES 3400 TCBY Tower 425 Capitol A venue -==~ ~--- 3 9E~E!l'~~ ufol~~~RT .AUG 31 1999  OFFICEOF fGREGATION MONITORJNQ EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AUG 2 7 1999 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JAMES W McCORMACK, Qbg~K By: -----'\"Rifl6DE\"P~m\u0026EfRfRi LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF RESPONSE TO ADE AND MOTION TO MODIFY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT The MRC Correctly Decided the Magnet School Issue The Little Rock School District's (\"LRSD\") Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (\"Revised Plan\") requires that LRSD change its grade structure: Middle Schools. LRSD shall establish a schedule for the orderly conversion of some or all of its Junior High Schools to Middle Schools for grades 6, 7 and 8 and move the 9th grade to High Schools. As a part of this conversion, LRSD reserves the right fo -change the grade level structure at all of its schools, including Magnet Schools. Revised Plan 3.4. No party objected to this requirement of the Revised Plan. The Magnet Review Committee (\"MRC\") is the policy making group which governs the Magnet Schools hosted by the Little Rock School District. The MRC is composed of representatives of the parties in the Pulaski County desegregation case with two representatives from the Arkansas Department of Education. On December 15, 1998, the MRC voted unanimously to approve a change in the grade structure and the number of seats at the Magnet Schools for the 1999-2000 school year. The reasons for that vote are set forth in the MRC Chairperson's May 7, 1999 letter to the Court seeking approval of the MRC action. The MRC decisions described in the May 7th letter are clearly the product of cooperative hard work by representatives of all the effected parties. Even though representation on the MRC is weighted in favor of the Arkansas Department of Education, the MRC members were able to reach a unanimous agreement about all of the issues related to restructuring the Magnet Schools. That agreement is well described in the May 7th letter which should be adopted by the Court. ADE's Position is Directly Contrary to its MRC Representatives The ADE has objected to the MRC action and now takes a position directly contrary to the position taken by its two representatives on the MRC. ADE argues that its funding obligations for the Magnet Schools should be limited in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement. The MRC clearly decided to proportionately increase the funding obligations of the three Pulaski County School Districts and the ADE and seeks the Court's permission to alter the terms of the Magnet School stipulation and the March 1989 settlement agreement to the extent necessary to implement its decision concerning restructuring of the Magnet Schools. ADE Should be Estopped to Oppose its MRC Representatives The representatives of the MRC worked on this issue for a long time before their December 15, 1998 decision. The ADE has been on notice for all of that time about the position taken by its representatives and, ultimately, the vote of the MRC. After all the time and effort devoted to this issue by the MRC, the ADE should not be allowed to take a position directly contrary to the position taken by its representatives and relied upon by the other members of the MRC for almost a year. This Court has the equitable power to prevent the State from attempting to nullify the position taken in good faith by the State's representatives on the MRC. The Eighth Circuit Court 2 of Appeals has previously addressed an estoppel argument in this case. In LRSD v. PCSSD, 56 F.3d 904,914 {8th Cir. 1995) the Eighth Circuit discussed Joshua's estoppel argument that LRSD should be barred from closing Ish because Ish's low attendance was due to LRSD's failure to implement its recruitment duties. The Eighth Circuit resolved Joshua's estoppel argument as follows: We have recognized that \"estoppel is an equitable doctrine, and it should not be given effect beyond what is necessary to accomplish justice between the parties.\" Maitland v. University of Minnesota, 43 F.3d 357, 364 {8th Cir. 1994). Justice would not be served by requiring Ish to remain open when the evidence indicates that the goal of desegregation will be served by closing it. Thus, Joshua's estoppel argument must fail. Id. at 915. In this case, however, the MRC's action in restructuring the Magnet Schools promotes desegregation. Thus, ADE could appropriately be estopped from attempting to reverse the position taken by its two representatives on the MRC. - Modification of the Settlement Agreement In addition to its equitable power to estop the ADE from taking a position contrary to its MRC representatives, this Court clearly has the authority to approve the MRC's action by granting a modification of the settlement agreement to the extent necessary to implement the MRC' s decision. The United States Supreme Court in Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail, 502 U.S. 367, 116 L.Ed.2d 867 (1992) outlined the standard for modification of a consent decree: [A] party seeking modification of a consent decree bears the burden of establishing that a significant change in circumstances warrants revision of the decree. If the moving party meets this standard, the Court should consider whether the proposed modification is suitably tailored to the changed circumstance. Id. at 393, 116 L.Ed.2d at 866. The Eighth Circuit applied the Rufo standard in affirming this Court's decision to close Ish Incentive School and to assign the former Ish attendance zone students 3 to the new King Interdistrict School. See LRSD v. PCSSD, 56 F.3d 904, 914 (8th Cir. 1995). It held that modification was appropriate where the modification furthered the goal of desegregation. Id. The Eighth Circuit's application of Rufo is consistent with the rule of equity which allows the Court to modify an equitable decree to further the purpose of the decree. See e.g., Larkin Minnesota, Inc. v. Wray, 881 F.Supp. 1413, 1419 (D. Minn. 1995). It is also consistent with decisions from other jurisdictions which have identified myriad changed circumstances which justify modification. See, e.g., Jacksonville Branch, NAACP v. Duval County School Board. 978 F.2d 157 4, 1582 (11 th Cir. 1992) (\"Modification [ of a consent decree] may be considered when ( 1) a significant change in facts or law warrants change and the proposed modification is suitably tailored to the change, (2) significant time has passed and the objectives of the original agreement have not been met, (3) continuance is no longer warranted, or ( 4) a continuation would be inequitable and each side - has a legitimate interest to be considered.\"). Therefore, the issue before the Court is whether the MRC action described in its May 7, 1999 letter would further the goal of achieving a unitary school system. The Magnet Schools were among the very first methods to promote desegregation agreed upon by the parties to this case. They predate the settlement agreement. It has always been a priority among the parties, through their representatives on the MRC, to make certain that the Magnet Schools are well run and adequately funded. The Magnet Schools have established a reputation as providing a high quality education in a racially balanced setting. The MRC' s decision makes good sense for the Magnet Schools and will enable those schools to continue to promote county wide desegregation. This Court should therefore 4 adopt and approve the action of the MRC described in its May 7, 1999 letter, even if it is necessary to modify the settlement agreement to the extent necessary to do so. The changed circumstance which required MRC action is the restructuring ofLRSD schools for educational reasons. The MRC's decisions about how the adjust the Magnet School program in response to restructuring are suitably tailored to the changed circumstance. They represent the minimum necessary change to the settlement agreement in order to fairly maintain the educational and financial foundations of the Magnet Schools. Conclusion The Arkansas Department of Education should be estopped from taking a position directly contrary to the position taken for the past year by its MRC representatives. If the Court determines that an estoppel is not appropriate in this case, the Court should modify the settlement agreement to the limited extent necessary to implement the MRC's decision. Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Christopher Heller John C. Fendley FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 2000 Regions Bank Bldg. 400 West Capitol A venue Little Rock, AR 72201 501/376-201 i 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following on this'Z7~ of August, 1999: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 M. Samuel Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 200 NationsBank 200 West Capitol A venue Little Rock, AR 72201 6 Ms. Ann Brown VIA HAND DELIVERY Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES 3400 TCBY Tower 425 Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED SEP 1  1999 Off!CH'f DESmRESA1UlY ~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of ADE' s Project Management Tool for August, 1999. Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General Assistant Attorney neral 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorney for Arkansas Department of Education IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KA THERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of August 31, 1999 i~!iiiifi~i;~iwdi~t~~~,j~,~!%.\\~~!~}ii~~lifiil!!il!~l:~~i~il'~411 i;ij t6i B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June.  This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resources. "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1735","title":"Court filings concerning the Pulaski Educational Cooperative, June 19, 1999, order concerning proposed change in grade structure and number of seats at magnet schools, and ADE motion concerning 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":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1999-07"],"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--20th century","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Arkansas. Department of Education","Joshua Intervenors","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education and state","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","Education--Standards","Magnet schools","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning the Pulaski Educational Cooperative, June 19, 1999, order concerning proposed change in grade structure and number of seats at magnet schools, and ADE motion concerning 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/1735"],"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":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, motion for extension of time to respond to the Court's June 18, 1999, order and to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion re: the Pulaski Educational Cooperative; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to the Court's June 19, 1999, order concerning proposed change in grade structure and number of seats at magnet schools; District Court, Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to motion re: the Pulaski Educational Cooperative; District Court, order; District Court, Joshua intervenors' response to motion to relieve Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) motion concerning monitoring; District Court, Little Rock School District (LRSD) notice of appeal; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) notice of appeal; District Court, three orders; District Court, reply to Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) response to motion re: the Pulaski Educational Cooperative and supplement to Pulaski County Special School District's (PCSSD's) motion; District Court, order; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUL 1 1999 OFFICE Of DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COURT'S JUNE 18, 1999 ORDER AND TO PCSSD'S \"MOTION RE THE PULASKI EDUCATIONAL COOPERATIVE The Arkansas Department of Education (\" ADE\") hereby moves the Court for a - brief extension of time, to and including Friday, July 9, 1999, in which to respond to (a) the Court's June 18, 1999 order concerning a proposed change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for 1999-2000, and (b) PCSSD's \"Motion re the Pulaski Educational Cooperative.\" The motion is made on the following grounds: 1. On June 18, 1999, this Court entered an order concerning a proposed change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for the 1999- 2000 school year. The court's order allowed the parties to and including July 6, 1999, to file any objections to the MRC's proposal. 2. On June 23, 1999, PCSSD served by mail a document entitled \"Combined Motion and Memorandum re the Pulaski Educational Cooperative.\" ADE's response to - this motion is due on or before July 7, 1999. 3. Undersigned counsel for ADE has been out of town on vacation from June 23, 1999, through July 5, 1999. ADE will therefore require a short extension of time, to and including Friday, July 9, 1999, within which to file its response to this Court's June 18, 1999 order and to PCSSD's motion concerning \"the Pulaski Educational Cooperative.\" WHEREFORE, ADE respectfully requests that the Court enter an order extending ADE's time, to and including July 9, 1999, to respond to (a) the Court's June 18, 1999 order concerning a proposed change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for 1999-2000, and (b) PCSSD's \"Motion re the Pulaski Educational Cooperative.\" Respectfully Submitted, WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General Assistant Atto e G neral 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorneys for Arkansas Department of Education 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Timothy Gauger, certify that on July 6, 1999, a copy of the foregoing document will be served by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated: M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 7220i 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JIJl 1 2 1999 OFFICE OF DESE-aRfGATION MONITCREiG LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS ADE'S RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S JUNE 18, 1999 ORDER CONCERNING PROPOSED GIANGE IN GRADE STRUCTIJRE AND NUMBER OF SEATS AT THE MAGNET SCHOOLS The Arkansas Department of Education (\" ADE\") submits this response to the - Court'c _. ... ne 18, 1999 order. In that order the Court notes that the Magnet Review Committee, by letter dated May 7, 1999, seeks the Court's approval \"of a change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for the 1999-2000 school year.\" The MRC' s May 7 letter to the Court assumes that the proposed changes in grade structure and number of seats will result in a significant increase in the State's share of funding for the magnet schools. Among other things, the MRC' s letter indicates that \"the costs associated with changes in seating will create an initial increase of $129 per student above the current funding level,\" and estimates that the State's share of funding for the magnet schools for 1999-2000 will increase by at least $567,270 over the State's current level of funding.1 ADE does not object to the proposed changes in grade structure for the magnet schools, nor does ADE object to an increase in the number of seats in the magnet schools for 1999-2000. ADE does object to the MRC' s proposal, however, to the extent it implies that the increases in enrollment will result in an increase in the State's funding level for the magnet schools. While the Settlement Agreement does not place any limits on the number of students who might attend the magnets, the Settlement Agreement does set specific limits on the State's funding obligations for the magnet schools. Paragraph II.D. of the \u0026tttlement Agreement provides that \"The State will have no further obligation to contribute any additional funds to magnet schools other than under paragraph II. E. below.\" Paragraph ILE of the Agreement states, in pertinent part, that the State \"will continue to pay ... [t]he State's portion of magnet school operational costs for the six existing magnet schools .... \" Paragraph II.D. of the Settlement Agreement further provides: 1 It is not clear precisely how large this increase in funding will be. The State's funding level for 1998-99 as used in the MRC's projection does not take into account the 7.25% increase in salaries given to LRSD teachers in March, 1999, and the State's \"proposed funding'' level for 1999-2000 used in the MRC's projection does not take into account \"possible changes in salaries and basic operating costs for the 1999-2000 school year.\" It is clear from the MRC's May 7 letter, though, that the MRC assumes that some increase in the State's funding obligation can be expected due solely to the grade level\" restructuring and the increase in the number of seats. 2 Any reference to the six existing magnet schools in this settlement shall mean, for funding purposes, up to their present seating capacities. These seating capacities are as follows: Carver 613 Williams 515 Gibbs 351 Booker 660 Mann 935 Parkview 991 The Settlement Agreement thus makes it clear that, no matter how many students actually attend the magnet schools, the State's' funding obligations for the magnet schools are limited to its share of, for example, the costs associated with a maximum of 991 students at Parkview, 935 students at Mann, and so on. To the extent the MRC's May 7 letter implies that the State's share of magnet school funding will be increased due to the addition of 209 seats at Parkview, such an additional burden on the State would be in direct contravention of the Settlement Agreement. The costs associated with magnet student enrollment in excess of the seating capacities set forth in the Settlement Agreement should be borne either by the  LRSD, whose decision to restructure its schools necessitated the restructuring of the magnets and the concomitant changes in seating capacity, or by the Districts collectively. 3 Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General ~/4 /4~~-:: :r== TIMO (G. GApGER #95019 . Assistant Atto~ General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorneys for Arkansas Department of Education CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE L Timothy Gauger, certify that on July 9, 1999, a copy of the foregoing document will be served by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated: M.SamuelJones,m Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Oark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 ~ Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 ~ fi~~1fu~ ?1- -  ,., . ,, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION RECEIVED JUL 1 2 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF v. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS ADE'S RESPONSE TO \"MOTION RE THE PULASKI EDUCATIONAL COOPERATIVE\" In this motion the PCSSD seeks an order requiring the State to distribute funds to an as-yet-to-be-formed education service coorr:!'c1tive1 (\"co-op\") that would serve only the three Districts. The motion is premised or .. PCSSD's belief that an appropriation contained in Act 1392 of 1999 entitles them to funds for such a co-op, and that conditional language restricting the disbursement contained in the appropriation is \"at variance with the requirements of the Settlement Agreement\" PCSSD's motion must be denied. This Court lacks jurisdiction to give PCSSD the relief it requests. Because the State has been dismissed from this action, this Court's jurisdiction over the State is 1 Education service cooperatives are \"intermediate service units in the state's elementary and secondary education system\" that are eligible to receive and spend state and federal funds. They exist to provide to school districts that choose to use them assistance in meeting accreditation standards, using educational resources more efficiently through cooperation among school districts,_ and promoting coordination between school districts and the ADE in the provision of certain services. See Ark. Code Ann.  6-13-1002 limited to enforcing the terms of the Settlement Agreement (see Kokkanen u. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 128 L.Ed.2d 391 (1994), and PCSSD does not allege that the State has breached the settlement agreement The Settlement Agreement does not compel or require the State to fund a co-op for the Districts. Indeed, quite the opposite is true - the Settlement Agreement acknowledges that state funding for a Pulaski County co-op had ceased, and that the co-operative had been dissolved, before the Agreement was signed. Settlement Agreement, section Ill E. (\"State funding for the Pulaski County Education Service [Cooperative] has ceased and the funds were reallocated to the Metropolitan Supervisor by order of the Court\"). PCSSD' s motion is in reality a somewhat convoluted request that the Court direct ADE to do what PCSSD 1'e1i~ves is required under State law. This Court must deny PCSSD's motion because PCSSD's attempt to enforce State law is not within the Court's Kokkonen-type jurisdiction over the State, and there is no other independent basis upon which this Court can base subject matter jurisdiction over such a claim. Such a state-law claim against the State is also barred by the Eleventh Amendment See, e.g., Pennhurst State School \u0026 Hosp. v. Halderman, 79 LEd.2d 67 (1984) (federal-court claims against state officials based upon alleged violations of state law are barred by Eleventh Amendment); Angela R. u. Clinton, 999 F.2d 320, 325 (8th Or. 1993) (Eleventh Amendment bars federal courts from granting relief against state officials for violations of state law). Finally, even if this Court could exercise jurisdiction over PCSSD's claim, the motion must be denied because the Districts are not entitled to form a co-op and receive funds for such a co-op under either the Settlement Agreement or State law. Appropriations merely authorize the release of funds from the treasury, subject to other applicable laws including the Revenue Stabilization Act and other substantive law. Further, appropriations, by themselves, do not require that funds actually be disbursed. In this instance, the provisions of Act 1392 and the provisions of other substantive state law prohibit the release of funds for a Pulaski County co-op. Act 1392 prohibits the release of funds for a Pulaski County co-op because as of this date, no order has been entered by this Court relieving the State of its obligation to provide funds for the operation of the ODM. See Act 1392 of 1999,  17.2 In addition, the General Assembly has not amended or repealed other provisions of State law that prohibit the formation of a new, sixteenth CO-l.'P that would serve only the three Districts. See, e.g., Ark. Code Ann.  6-13-1002 (authorizing State Board of Education to establish \"no more than fifteen\" cooperatives); Ark. Code Ann.  6-13-1003(b)(l) and (b)(2) (cooperatives must include at least three counties and include at least ten school districts).3 2 PCSSD attempts to sidestep this restriction by arguing that the language conditioning the release of the funds  is \"at variance with the requirements of the Settlement . Agreement and must therefore fail and be severed from the Act\"  The problem with PCSSD' s theory is that the conditional language is consistent With the Settlement . Agreement As noted earlier, the Settlement Agreement does not require that the State fund a Pulaski County co-op, and the special language in the Act recognizes that the State's obligation to fund ODM can only be modifi~ by an order from this Court  3 Thus, even if PCSSD were correct that the contingency language in Section 17 of Act . 1392 is both inconsistent with the Settlement and can be severed from the Act the provisions of Ark. Code Ann.  6-13-1002 and 1003 would nonetheless prohibit the  formation of a new \"16th co-op\" that would serve only the three Districts. For the foregoing reasons, ADE respectfully requests that PCSSD's motion be denied, and that the ADE be awarded its costs and attorneys' fee incurred in responding to this motion. Respectfully Submitted, MARK PRYOR Attorney General TIMOT q_ GAUGER #95019 Assistant Attorney G~neral --- 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-2007 Attorneys for Arkansas Department of Education CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE L Timothy Gauger, certify that on July 9, 1999, a copy of the foregoing document will be served by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, on the following person(s) at the address(es) indicated:  M. Samuel Jones, ill Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank Bldg. 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Oark 2000 Regions Center 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 ~ Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUL 1,3 1999 ~~~E~~- ~~~K,p C~AK OEPC~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, VS. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. 1, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., lntervenors, * * * * * * No. LR-C-82-866 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER Without objection, the motion of the Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\") for an Order relieving it of its obligation to file a July 1999 semiannual monitoring report is hereby granted. In addition, the Court grants nunc pro tune AD E's motion for an extension of time until and including July 9, 1999, in which to respond to (a) this Court's June 18, 1999 Order - concerning a proposed change in the grade structure and number of seats at the magnet schools for 1999-2000, and (b) PCSSD's \"Motion re the Pulaski Educational Cooperative.\" .-f1\\_ IT IS SO ORDERED this _j.d::_ day of 4--= 1999. 9;1'rruo~j- UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT rH1s DOCUMENT ENTER C(.,MPUIJil WITH RULEED ON DOCKET SHEET fN ':)N L 3/ q Cl 58 AND/OR 79(1) FRCP   / BY m::: __j 2 u.s~(L, ,,,.f;,p C:ASTCR. ':,.;.;,': . .:_ v,111r,r .N DI~,, ,,1.,' ,, /~/1,l\"S \"S ' ,~, I-\\ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUL l 1 1 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 1999 WESTERN DIVISION ~;~MES \\V McCORM,iCK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT RECEIVED DEP. CLERK PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al. ,II 11 1 5 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION M0NITOR~~FENDANTS JOSHUA INTERVENORS' RESPONSE TO MOTION TO RELIEVE ADE MOTION CONCERNING MONITORING The Joshua Intervenors respond to the ADE motion concerning monitoring, served on June 28, 1999, as follows. The ADE motion was filed belatedly, rendering the request fait accompli. The - Joshua Intervenors respectfully request that ADE be ordered to file not later than Wednesday, August 4, 1999, their proposed new monitoring and reporting plan. Intervenors further respectfully request that the Court give priority to the development and approval of a new monitoring plan and require that the first report pursuant to that plan be filed not later than November 3, 1999. By: Respectfully submitted, JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 (501) 374-3758 -1- Robert Pressman 22 Locust A venue Lexington, Mass 02421 (781) 862-1955 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed, postage prepaid to the following counsel or record, postage prepaid on this 14th day of July, 1999. Mr. Tim Humphries Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arknasas 72201 Mr. M. Samuel Jones, ill Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2000 NationsBank. Plaza 200 W. Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 -2- Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 W. Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Towers 425 W. Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown 201 E. Markham, Ste. 510 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL JUI 1 6 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSA\u003c:; JUL 141999 JAMfil W, MaQQAMAGK, \"!:.EA ijy'-----~-- DEP.CLERK PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Little Rock School District (LRSD) hereby gives notice of its appeal from the order of the district court filed on June 16, 1999 which denied LRSD's request for certain damages related to teacher retirement and health insurance payments from the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE). Appeal is taken to the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. This notice is filed based upon the understanding that the Arkansas Department of Education intends to appeal this court's decision awarding prejudgment interest to the districts on their claims concerning teacher retirement and health insurance. If ADE does not pursue such an appeal, this notice of appeal may be withdrawn. Respectfully submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026 CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Street Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 376-2011 Christopher Heller J. Clay Fendley CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE A I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the W following on this 14th day of July, 1999 : Mr. John W. Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr . Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026 JONES, P.A. 3400 TCBY Tower 425 Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 2 Ms. Ann Brown Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Timothy G. Gauger Office of the Attorney General 323 Center Street 200 Tower Building Little Rock, AR 72201 3 EDWARD L . WRIGHT ( 1903 1977) ROBERTS . LINDSEY (1913-1991) ISAAC A , SCOTT , JR . JOHN G . LILE WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS I LP ATTORNEYS AT LAW JOHN 0 . DAVIS JUDY SIMMONS HENRY KI MBERLY WOOD TU CKER RAY F COX . JR . GOROON S. RATHER. JR. TERRY L . MATHEWS DAVID M. POWELL ROGER A . GLASGOW C. DOUGLAS BUFORD. JR . PATRICK J . GOSS ALSTON JENNINGS . JR . JOHN R. TISDALE KATH LYN GRAVES M. SAMUEL JONES Ill JOHN WILLIAM SPIVEY Ill LEE J, MULOROW N.M. NORTON CHARLES C . PRICE CHARLES T . COLEMAN JAMES J . GLOVER EDWIN L . LOWTHER . JR . CHARLES L. SCHLUMBERGER WALTER E . MAY GREGORY T. JONES H. KEITH MORRISON BETTINA E . BROWNSTEIN WALTER McSPADDEN ROGER 0 . ROWE NANCY BELLHOUSE MAY Mr. John Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 East Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell Law Firm 401 W. Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RE: PCSSD Dear Counsel and Ms. Brown: 200 WEST CAPITOL AVENUE SUITE 2200 LITTLE ROCK , ARKANSAS 7220 1-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX (501) 376-9442 WEBSITE : www .wlj .com OF COUNSEL ALSTON JENNINGS RONALD A . MAY M. TODD WOOD Writer 's Direct Dial No . 501-212-1273 mj ones@wlj .com July 15, 1999 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark TROY A. PR ICE PATRICIA A. SI EVERS JAMES M. MOODY . J R. KATHRYN A PRYOR J . MARK DAVIS CL AIRE SHOWS HANCOCK K EVIN W. KENNEDY JERRY J . SALLINGS FRED M. PERKINS Ill WILLIAM STUART JACKSON MICHAEL 0 . BARNES STEPHEN R. LANCASTER JUDY ROBINSON WILBER BETSY MEACHAM KY LE R. WILSON C. TAO BOHANNON DONS. McKI NNE Y MICHELE SIMMONS ALLGOOD KRISTI M. MOODY J . CHARLES DOUGHERTY M SEAN HATCH PHYLLIS M. McK ENZIE ELISA MASTERSON WHITE JANE M. FAULKNER ROBERT W. GEORG E J ANDREW VI NES 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 JUI 1 6 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Enciosed is a copy of Notice of Appeal which is being filed today. MSJ/ao Encl. 115616-v1 Cordially, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL IRi,,.-  ---- \\fEO DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. t' MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. 11\\ J' ,.:'.gg KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. \\ l\u0026\u0026REGI '\\TORlNG NOTICE OF APPEAL PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) hereby gives notice of its appeal from the order of the district court filed on June 16, 1999, which denied PCSSD's request for certain damages related to teacher retirement and health insu-rJ~J ~'::ll ~,( ~..l , _',; ; -~ i ' .,.  l s U:i~1-~ ~- ' .... .., payments from the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE). 11 5268-v1 Respectfully submitted, WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026 JENNINGS LLP 200 'Nest Capitol Avenua, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3699 (501) 371-0808 FAX: (501) 376-9442 By ~ M. amue Jones Ill (7~060) orneys or Pulaskl..eounty Special cha istrict CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On July 1..5, 1999, a copy of the foregoing was served by U.S. mail on each of the following: Mr. John W. Walker John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Ann Brown ODM Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Richard W. Roachell Roachell and Street First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Timothy Gauger Assistant Attorney General 323 Center Street, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mr. Stephen W. Jones 3400 TCBY Tower 425 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 2 - RECEIVEt' JUL .2 o 1999 OFFICE Of DESEGREGATION MONITORING IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, * * Plaintiff, * * * vs. * No. LR-C-82-866 * * * * PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL * DISTRICT No. 1, et al., * * Defendants. * * * MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., * * Intervenors, * * * KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al., * * Intervenors, * ORDER JUL 181999 Before the Court is a motion by the Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\") for approval of a new school site (doc.#3266]. In its motion, which was filed June 9, 1999, PCSSD states that it'proposes to close both Bates and Fuller Elementaries and combine that student enrollment at a new site located at the northwest comer of 14S1h Street and Highway - 67/167 proximate to the Siemen's facility with no change of geo codes. The time for filing a response to this motion bas passed without a responsive pleading from any of the parties. Having considered the matter, and without objection from any of the parties, the Court finds that PCSSD's motion to approve the new school site described herein should be and hereby is granted. IT IS SO ORDERED this ii:_ ~ay of fl-4- 1999. ~~ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS iN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUL t 9 1999 JAMES f\" ~RMACK, CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, VS . PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al., Defendants, MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KATHERINE KNIGHT, et al. , Intervenors. * * * * * * * * * * * * * ORDER By: \\. i~U I) '\u003c'1'. -~ OEP CLERK No. LR-C-82-866 RECEIVED JUL 2 o 1999 OFFICE OF  DESEGREGATION MONITORING Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\") filed a petition requesting that the Court grant PCSSD unitary status and release it from further court supervision [docket no. 3253]. The Joshua intervenors responded [docket no. 3253], and PCSSD replied to the response [docket no. 3260]. After careful consideration, the Court denies the petition and for reasons that follow will not, at this time, issue detailed findings regarding its decision. I. On October 14, 1997, PCSSD filed its first petition for unitary status, requesting release from federal court supervision over its desegregation efforts. 1 After receiving notice that the parties contemplated settlement discussions, the Court denied PCSSD's petition, without prejudice, noting the District's freedom to refile the petition if settlement efforts failed .2 1 Docket no. 3057. 2 Docket no. 3211. Presently hefore the Court is PCSSD's second petition requesting a declaration of unitary status. Additionally, PCSSD filed a document entitled \"Pulaski County Special School District Post Unitary Commitments,\" which sets forth actions PCSSD pledges to carry out in the event the Court grants the District unitary status. The commitments call for a dispute resolution process, whereby the Joshua intervenors could, as a last resort, seek the Court's assistance in resolving compliance issues.3 Thus PCSSD envisions that once it attains unitary status, the Court could retain jurisdiction over this matter. PCS SD explains it provided for the Court's continued jurisdiction \"as further evidence of its good faith view of desegregation issues and as such as a further matter for the district court to consider in assessing formal relinquishment of supervision .... \"4 However, the Court finds the provision for continued jurisdiction inapposite to whether PCSSD has achieved unitary status. This Court's jurisdiction depends on the existence of a constitutional violation. Once the PCSSD achieves unitary status and thus complies with the command of the Constitution, this Court's jurisdiction ends. See Swann v. Charlotte- Mecklenburg Bd of Educ. 91 S. Ct. 1267, 1276, 1284 (1971). The Joshua intervenors assert that PCSSD has not achieved unitary status and cite their prior submissions addressing PCSSD's 1997 petition to support their position.5 However, the intervenors believe the proposed commitments represent a \"renewed and more targeted\" plan that 3 Docket no. 3235, Attachment A, Pages 8-9. 4 Docket no. 3260, Page 3. 5 Docket no. 3079 (Opposition Response by Joshua to PCSSD's Motion for Release); Docket no. 3196 (Joshua's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Concerning PCSSD's Motion for Release). 2 could serve as a new or-amended desegregation plan. With the sole exception of a provision concerning the duration of the cornmitments,6 the intervenors embrace PCSSD's proposed plan. In the past, the Court has encouraged the parties to amend their plan, if it would further their goals, and agrees that the proposed commitments would provide the basis for an acceptable amended plan and might even be suitable as a plan itself. II. The Court finds that PCSSD has not achieved unitary status and must deny the District 's petition. In light of the Joshua intervenors' recommendation that PCSSD's post-unitary commitments function as a basis for a revised desegregation plan, and the Court's desire to facilitate agreement among the parties, the Court will not, at this time, issue specific findings regarding its decision to deny the District's petition. If the parties can agree, such an agreement is preferable to court directives. See Little Rock Sch. Dist. v. Pulaski County Special Sch Dist., 921 F.2d 1371, 1383 (8th Cir. 1990). As the parties are in agreement on all items except duration, it would be wasteful of their resources and effort to litigate the many issues concerning unitary status. In any event, duration will be determined, for the most part, by whether the District has achieved its desegregation goals. m. THEREFORE, PCSSD's petition for release from court supervision is hereby denied [docket no. 3253]. FURTHER, the parties have 120 days from entry of this Order to submit an amended desegregation plan for the Court's approval. 6 If the parties desire, the Court is willing to conduct a hearing concerning the duration of an amended plan. 3 FURTHER, in the event the parties do not reach an agreement, the Court will issue detailed findings regarding its denial of PCSSD's petition for unitary status. FINALLY, the time to appeal this Order will run from the date such detailed findings are filed. !TIS SO ORDERED 11-!IS / 'f ./i_DAY OF \u003c;)-, t2\" , 1999 ~)t;c UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT fHIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN XiMPLJANCE Wirf ~LE 58 AND/n::1:1) FRCP , 1N '7//CJ  BY - I 4  IN THE UNITED ST A TES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, Plaintiff, FiLED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS JUL 1 9 1999 JAMES w. M~cc MACK, CLERK By: \\/_ - u ,'\\f\\\\ll,\"- 1 DP ClERll vs. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL DISTRICT No. I, et al., Defendants. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, et al., Intervenors, KA THERINE KNIGHT, et al., Intervenors, ORDER -JUL 21 1999 om:Ecr DESBHC-\\1 ~ ;roNITORI IJG Before the Court are a number of motions from the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\"), the Pulaski County Special School District (\"PCSSD\"), and the North Little Rock School District (\"NLRSD\") relating to attorney's fees and costs [see doc. #'s 3199, 3200, 3201 , and 3218]. The Arkansas Department of Education (\"ADE\"), in tum, has before the Court a motion to defer consideration of LRSD's, PCSSD's, and NLRSD's respective motions for attorney's fees and - costs [doc.#3209]. The Court notes-that several of these motions are moot and the Court has been informed that other of these motions will be amended to address circumstances that have arisen since the initial motions were filed. That being the case, and so that the record will "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1501","title":"Student handbooks, elementary school, 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":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1999-05"],"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--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Standards","Educational law and legislation","Educational innovations","Education, Elementary","School attendance","School management and organization","School improvement programs","Student activities","Student assistance programs","School discipline","Student suspension","Parents","Student expulsion"],"dcterms_title":["Student handbooks, elementary school, 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/1501"],"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":["handbooks"],"dcterms_extent":["181 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_922","title":"Report: ''How Can Schools and Communities Work Together to Meet the Challenges of Education?'' Study Circles, North Little Rock, Arkansas","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":["1999-02-15"],"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","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''How Can Schools and Communities Work Together to Meet the Challenges of Education?'' Study Circles, North Little Rock, Arkansas"],"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/922"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"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\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\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_306","title":"Communities in Schools of Little Rock, Incorporation","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":["1999/2002"],"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","School improvement programs","Civic leaders","Educational planning","Parents","Students","Teachers"],"dcterms_title":["Communities in Schools of Little Rock, Incorporation"],"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/306"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"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\nLittle Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 RECEIVED New Futures Department JAN 2 6 1999 OfflCE OF Desegregation Monitoring DATE\nJanuary 25, 1998 TO: Middle School Steering Committee FROM: Li Young, New Futures Liaison and Restructuring Director RE: Communities in Schools Program Please find enclosed a copy of the Communities in Schools Program Standards that were requested at the steering committee meeting.Appendix C QUALITY STANDARDS aSCBWSS 59 cmccQf OHSSGREGAriCS LOCAL PROGRAM STANDARDS REVIEW INSTRUMENT c-1CIS LOCAL PROGRAM STANDARDS REVIEW (Note ll.at asteiiskcd standards denote tliose that have a different interpretation when applied in the coinprehens.ve strate^ context parentlietical phrases iininediately following each of tlie standards in question) These dilleieiices aie uuthned in mWMMI coMMpm L GOVERNING BOARD 1 2 3 The local CIS board of duectors has adopted a Mission Statement that is coosiateot in content and spirit with national CIS mission. The CIS program is incorporated as an independent, non-profit corporation, or the CIS program operates under the auspicea of another non-profit corporati^^_____________ CIS programs that operate under the auspices of a corporation that is not chatted as an independent CIS non-profit corporation must meet the following conditions: Copy of Mission Slilenienl Copy of corporation charters Copy of Mission Statement, resolution, or amended by-laws a The corporations mission and that of CIS are essentially the same, or the corporation has adopted a resolution amended iu by-laws to reflect the or corporations commitment to the CIS mission. b The corporation has amended its by-laws or adopted a resolution of corarmtraent Io the operation and financing of the CIS program. Copy of by-laws or resolutionCIS LOCAL PROGRAM STANDARDS REVIEW (Note dial asterisked standards denote diose that have a different inlerprelalion when applied in the comprehensive strategy context These dilfeiences aie outlined in parendiclical phrases uiiniedialely following each of die standards ui question). I *' COMMENTS c. The CIS advisory board and the nonprofit corporations board of director* together form the CIS goveniing board. The CIS advisory board and the ceqaaratioQ have * written agreement that specifies the mutual and individual responaibilifies of each board to ensure that the program will meet national CIS Standards. (See page 12, 1-3C for clarificatioo). I 2 Advisory Board or CIS Committee rosier Copy of agreement d. The CIS advisory board develops and operates under its own by-laws. Copy of by-liws 4 Tlie CIS programs name is Communities In Schools of (the name of the city, community or county where it operates) (e g.. Communities In Schools of Chicago). For programs that have used different names and logos, there should be a plan to use and incorporate the national name, logo, and tag line in the aforementioned format Copies of letterhead, brochures or plans for new letterhead and brochures 5 6. The non-profit governing corporation has on file a written determination from the U.S. Internal Revenue Service and llio state aullioriiy certifying that its tax exempt status, classifications and numbers - copies of which have been sent to the national CIS headquarters. The CIS board of directors or CIS advisory board is organized into workmg committees as specified m the boards by-laws 1 2. 1 2 Copy in file Confirmation from CIS, Inc. Board roster willi ofTicers and coininittoe membership Committee reportsCIS LOCAL PROGKAM SI ANDARhS REVIEW (Note dial aslerisked standards denote diose dial have a different interpretation when applied in the comprehensive strategy context *  t  r . . I. . i.. 11A n I f kd el tt 11/1 aril e 111 n I lur'l i/in t These dillereuees aie uulhtied ill pareridielical phrases iinniedialely following each ol the standards ui question) 1 The CIS corporations board of directors or die CIS advisory board includes members from the public, private, and in4^\u0026gt;eo4otd sectors 8 CIS board members participate in board orientation and continued board development. and/or sign off on, receiving packets of information regarding training materials provided by sUte, local, or national CIS organizations. (See page 13,1-8 for clarification ) u JSL COMMKNTS Board roster with members professional employer and title I. 2. 3 CIS state or national trainmg records or Member's certificate of participation Members signature mdicating receipt of board development materials It is recommended that board members attend additional sUte and/or national training opportunities II. BOARD RESPONSIBIUTIES 1 The CIS governing board, with the program director, has adopted and implemented a three-year strategy to secure public and pnvate fiinduig and community resources to meet its budgetary requirements. I 2. 3 4 A copy of die strategy plan flic governing board collectively secures sufficient funds and resources required to meet its annual budget A copy of the annual budget widi income sources Income sources m die annual budget should reflect broad-based suppoit 2. The CIS governing board has approved a current armual program operations plan and budget ___________________________ Copy of approved cuncnl annual program operations plan and budget on fileC IS LOCAL PROG KAM STANDARDS REVIEW (Note dial asterisked standards denote those dial have a difl'ereill interprelalioii when applied in die comprehensive strategy context parendiclical phrases immediately following each of die standards in question) t hese dilVereiiees are uulluied in mn MSI ...\u0026gt;a. 3 The cunenl annual program operations plan, as adopted by the CIS governing board, presents goals and objectives that are related to the needs of the studenU for whom the program is intended. This plan includes targets or objectives for the brokering of services and for repositioning staff from community agencies and organizations Io meet identified program intervention needs. A copy of the current annual program operations plan 4 5. 6 7 The CIS governing board has secured the sanction of the school district or superintendent to operate a CIS program in conjunction with the school districts schools. The CIS governing board and the appropriate CIS state program have signed a Leiter of Agreement that includes the provisions stated in Appendix A, Letter of Agreement between a stale CIS Program and a local CIS Program. Where there is no CIS Suie Program, the CIS govemmg board and the national CIS, Inc. have signed a Letter of Agreement lliat mcludes provisions stated in Appendix A, Letter of Agreement between CIS nalional/regional and a local CIS program The CIS programs governing board has designated an individual to manage the programs operations who is responsible Io the CIS governing board. The CIS governing board provides the CIS program a main or central office facility Copy of statement of school district official report, or evidence of school districts support Signed Letter of Agreement from state CIS or CIS national I 2 I 1 Executive Directors name, employment status, position description Orgaiiuational chart T On-site observation Address( IS LOCAL PKOGKAM S l'ANDAUDS REVIEW IN I ili.i asterisked slandaids denote tl.ose tli.t have a dilferent interpretat.o.i when applied tn tlie comprehensive sttale^ context These diff (Note tliat asterisked penUielical plirases immediately following each of tlie standards in question) leieiices aie uulliiicd UI .OS 8 The governing board has established policies for. a. b c. d e. f g h personnel management liabihty coverage development of t strategic (Umg-range) plan development of operational plans training and staff dcvelopmenl fiscal controls program evaluation development of a funding and resource 1 1 3. Policy/personncl manual Copy of insurance contract Copy of plans 9. 10 11 plan ____________________ The governing board keeps written records on file of iu official activities._____________ The governing board renders an aimual program report that includes a report on progress toward achieving each adopted program goal and objective and files annual reporU with sUte and regional/national offices. _______________ There is an independent annual audit of iu programs financial records (or limited review in the case of programs with smaller budgets - see glossary for definition) which shall be reviewed by the CIS govemmg board. _____  IIL LETTERS OF AGREEMENT Tlicre IS a Letter of Agreement between CIS if one exists, and nationaiyregional, state program as in section II, Hi} CIS local programs (same Board minutes on file 1 2. Annual report on file Confirmation from state and iiational/regional offices Audit report on file Lelterts) of Agreement on fileCIS LOCAL PROGRAM S TANDARDS REVIEW (Note that asterisked standards denote those tlia. have a different interpretation when applied in the comprehensive strate context (Note Uiat asterisKco p.rentlietical pluases inimediately following each of the standards in question) These dillereiiees ate uiilliiteil in statiminto^ INOICAIORS CO M MINTS V. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT 1 2 3 4 Tlie executive director prepares a cuneol annual program operations plan and budget for the approval of tlie CIS governing board. The executive director, with members of the CIS governing board, prepares and unplements an annual fund-raising and resource development plan. ______________ The executive director, with the CIS governing board, develops the CIS long- range strategic plan at least every five years. Key components of this plan include the following: a. assessment of internal program capacity as well as the external enviroiunent, b statement of vision and mission, c. identified goals, objectives, timeluies, responsibilities, and appropriate measures of success. (Note thst this plan may contain within it the resource development plan called for in section 11, # 1)______________________ The executive duector prepares periodic reports for the CIS governing board on program finances and resource development, tlie operations of the local CIS projects, and such other topics as requested by the governing boarU_______________________ Copy of ciurent annual program operations plan and budget on file (same as in section II. #2 and #3) Copy of tlie plan which idenlifies public, pnvale. state, and federal fund-raising and resource acquisition strategies Long-range sUategic plan on file Copies of board reports on file(Note diat 5 6 7 8 9. \u0026lt; IS LOC AL PROGRAM S I ANDAKhS REVIEW asterisked standards denote diosc diat have a diflcreiit iiileiprelalion when applied in die parendietical plirases coini uiunediately following each of die standards in question) The executive director has formed a management team with specified individual responsibihlies for supportmg project operations, mdudmg the development and coordmalion of services for studenU al the project sites ____________________ The CIS program has reached agreements with local community agencies or organizations to provide health services, human development services, and/or educational support services for studenU and families associated with CIS project sites The CIS program operates at least one CIS proiect that is servmg studenU al the site and has met project. all national standards for the CIS The CIS program has a site coordinator for each CIS site The site coordinator is iponsible for the coordination of services resp------ for youth and families associated with one more CIS sites. or The CIS program has implemented a uniform student records system at all sites to momlor StudenU enrollment, participation in services, and performance outcomes. (In the case of a comprehensive strategy, the program has a standardized system to monitor student participation in services, and die impact of the repositioned service on the students it serves.) ipreheiisive slralegy eonlexl I liesc dillcrciitcs aie uulliiieJ III 1 2. Personnel chart on file Job descnplions on file Letters of Agreement on file or Leiters noting decisions and/or agreements Documentation on file School site coordinators name, job description, and school site on record Data collection system in place and available for review( IS LOCAL PROGRAM S l ANDARDS REVIEW (Note tlial asterisked standards denote tliose that have a different inlerpretalion when applied in tlie comprehensive strategy context 1'hcsc dilleiences aie uutlincd in parenthelical phrases linniediaiely following each of tlie standards m question) B COM MENIS *10 The CIS program monitors and reports at a inininiiun the CIS students' dropout rales, attendance, disciplinary actioiu (wherever available), and promotion/graduatiiMi rates. The CIS program may monitor and report on any otlier indicators that are appropriate. (In the case of a comprehensive strategy, the program will monitor the same indicators for the entire student body.) I 2 Sludeiil records on file Reports on file 11 The CIS program ensures all reasonable criminal background checks are conducted and government clearance reports received on all CIS employees and volunteers who have direct contact with students prior to their invofvement with any student Records in personnel files 12 The executive director provides required periodic reports to the programs funders, partners, and the appropriate CIS state, regional, or national office. Periodic reports on file in state/regional/national offices 13 Within their first six months on the job, all new CIS executive directors will participate in appropriate training conducted by the state or national/regional CIS. Training will be based on the national CIS manual or a substitute course approved by the state or national CIS organization It is recommended that ail executive directors attend trainmg al the CIS Traming Institute. 1 2 CIS national or state trauiing records Traming certificate 14 All CIS program staff (hired, repositioned, assigned, and volunteer) will participate in at least one in-service traming per year as defined by local, state, or regional/national CIS Training records/certificate on fileCIS LOCAL PROGKAM S I ANDARDS REVIEW (Note tli.l asterisked standards denote tliose that have a diflereiil inlerprelation when applied in the comprehensive slralegy conlexi parentlietical plirases immediately tollowing each of tlie standards in question) These dilleieiices aie oiilliiied in W INWCATOBS COMLMKJSrrS V. PROJECT OPERATIONS A. Project Operationi: PROJKCT PARTICIPATION 1 2. 3 The program's policy is that studenU choose to participate in the CIS program except in certain disciplinary settings (e.g., far adjudicated youth). A signed consent or contract agreement is on file for each CIS-enrolled student. (In the case of a comprehensive strategy, this standard may be omitted.) An agreement is signed between assigned and repositioned staff and the CIS program that outlines expectations and the staff member s desire Io participate in the CIS program. The agreement is part of the staff members personnel file. Copy of written policy statement and consent form Signed consent forms on file Agreements m personnel files B. 4 Project Operations: PLANNING The project site staff, with designated program management staff, develop and implement the annual site operations plan of services. _______ Annual site plan on file 5. The site operations plan is based on the needs of the students enrolled al that site and tire CIS programs adopted goals and objectives for smdcnl achievements____________ Review of plan I6 1 8. 9 (Note that asterisked CIS LOCAL P . .1 1 IP ilu.se that have a different uilerpretation when applied in standards denote ,..edialely following e...: Project site staff monitor overaU student . .. J ctiiH^nt OBfllCIOMtiAO UI rivivv* ----------------- , . . needs and overall student participation services to identify needed changot in services Project directors will participate m CIS orientation traiiung provided by local, sta or regional staff prior to beginnmg wort at the school site Orientation training b based on CIS orientation training packoU developed by CIS national. __________ /JI project duoctors will participate in approprute trainmg provided by local, state, ^PLiinnaVremonal staff at bast once a ye^r For each CIS student outcome objective m Ihe operations plan, one or more interventions are provided at the site to address that outcome. (In the case of a comprehensive strategy, replay C^ outcome objective\" with student body outcome objective .) C. Project Operathm.: StRVlCtS FOR studfnts and families 10 Tlie project site mamtams a positive, caring P that encourages student success environment 11 The CIS staff ensures pareni/farnily and mvolvemenl activities are planned and ROCKAM S'l'ANhARDS RLVILW the comprehensive strategy context each of llic standards in tiucslion) Records of monitoring on file Documentation on file I 2 CIS stale or national records Certificate of attendance List of outcome objectives and the conespondmg services tliat will support the attainment of tliose objectives Students can name one or more stalf members and/or volunteers with whom tliey feel comfortable talkuig_________ Documentation of parent conferences, home vuits or oilier activities involving parents________________________ 11,CSC Jillereiices ate outlined iii commentsCIS LOCAL PkOGkAM S'l ANhARDS REVIEW (Note that asterisked standards denote those that have a d.llerei.l uiterpretatio.i when applied in the comprehensive strategy pareiitlietical phrases unmedialely following each of Ilie standards ui question) eonlexl These dillereuees aie utillined in 12 13 On-site program intervention included in the site operations plan are provided in accordance with service guides or plana that describe\ntlie studenU who are intended to participate, the activities and/or services that are provided, staff requiremenU\nand the objectives of each intervention.__________ As outlmed in the site operations plan, the CIS project provides access to a comprehensive array of services to aiUtess the needs of studenU and their families such as: a health services b other human service delivery c educational support services d counseling c. life skills sclivities f parental/family support and strengthening and/or parental involvemcnl g. career development h recreation and enrichment i. juvenile justice services j. community-based programs (e g., extended day programs, summer programs, family resource centers, etc ) I 1 1. 2. 3. 1 JSOW Review of site operations plan Documentation of provision of services List of available services, contacts Record of referrals Record of activities COMMtNT\u0026gt; 14. CIS project staff conduct regular team meelmgs to develop/monitor student case plans and to monitor progress (In the case of a comprehensive strategy, replace student Muiules, notes on file case plans* with repositioned service impact and progress\" )( IS LOCAL PROGKAM S l ANDARhS REVIEW (Note dial asterisked standards denote lliose that have a different inlerpretalion when applied in the comprehensive strategy tonlexi These dilleiences ate oiillmed m parentliclical phrases iininedialely following each of the standards in question) sTAyyiOwrPf, w ^TAriP.w 'i COMMJUSni'S D. Project Opcratlona: STUDENTS ENROLLED IN THE CIS PROGRAM *15. Project records mclude a CIS file on each CIS-enrolled student (In the case of t comprehensive strategy, this standard may be omitted ) * 16. A parent or guardian has given written permission for the minor student Io enroll in tlie CIS program. (In the case of a comprehensive strategy, this standard may be omitted ) * 17 CIS-enrolled students are assigned a case manager who meets regularly with the stuilenl to develop and monitor the case plan and the students progress (In the case of a comprehensive strategy, this standard may be omitted ) E. Project Operations: MANAGEMENT 18 Designated CIS staff manage service coordination and project records al the school site. 19 Project site staff maintain records of student eruollmenls, participation in services, and measures of student outcomes on program objectives in CIS project files. Files on record Written pcnnission on File Periodic reports in student files Project site job descriptions I 2. Sludciil records on file Student outcome data reported 20 The project director provides required periodic reports to the program director as specified m the programs student records system and/or nianagenient information system Reports on file(Note Utal asterisked standards denote CIS I OCAL PROGRAM SI'ANDARDS REVIEW I, lb |j - uuheii aonhed 111 the comprehensive strategy context dmse that have a dillereiit  .d.rds in question) I liese dilleiciitcs aie oiilliiied in parentlietical phrases J w IHtXCATORK VI. A. additional standards FOR SPECIFIC CIS PROJECT model SITES Additional Standards for an .^endewy Project Model SIU 1 All CIS-enrolled sludenU are grouped together with other CIS-enrolled stud^U for I 2. Student schedules Teacher schedules 1. 3 4 5 6 a minimum mstniction. of two cUm porioda P day for The school operates under a recognized educational authonty (i e.. pubUc school Ixtter of Agrocinenl between CIS and school district, slate school, or recognized independent school)- The school district or other educational authonty assigits a principal or lead and appropriately certified teachers and staff to the site. ___________________________ Students earned crediU are accepted by the cz-hool district or other educational authonty ^ If the site is free-standing, all support services normaUy provided by a school district arc provided for (e g, meals, transportation, hbrary media services exlra- cum^a activities, etc ) by the school system or other institution(s).___________ _ Letter of Agrocineiit between CIS and school Documentation of services available and refenals to agencies The program has one or more sponsors Listing of sponsor(s)CIS LOCAL PROGRAM S TANDARDS REVIEW (Note dial asterisked standards denote diose dial have a different iiilerprclalioii when applied in die comprehensive stralegy coiitexi I liese dillereiiees are oulliiicd in parendielical phrases inimediately following each of the standards ui queslion) COMMRNl^ B. Additional Standards for the Comprehensive Strategy/Whole-Scfiool Project Model 1. A school-wide/school community-wide assessment of student/school community needs is completed on a regular basis. 2 All smdenU and families are eligible for services which have been repositioaed by CIS, school and CIS personnel jointly determine who receives these services. Docuinentation of a school-wide and/or school community-wide needs assessment. Documentation of activities and services available as needed to all students emolled in the school 3 The site(s) can demonstrate that there is an increasing number of CIS brokered services which are, wherever possible, duectly reaching a growing number of students and families as determinod by tlie school/CIS personnel 4 The CIS staff brokers direct services which respond to school needs assessments and prionties, CIS may also broker indirect services (such as assembly speakers, health fairs, career fairs, etc.) which reach all students en masse. Documentation that tliere is an increasing amount of ClS-brokercd services reaching an increasmg number of students. Documentation of indirect services tliat reach ail students en masse (such as assembly speakers, healtli faus, career fairs, etc.) 5 Tlie project sile(s) is monitoring direct service provision and its impact as well as aggregate, school-wide student outcome data (i.e., school drop-out rates, absentee rates, promotion and graduation rates, incidences of discipline, etc.) (Same as referenced on C- 9,10aiid C-12, #14 ) Documentation of ducct service provision impicl. as well as changes in aggregate school-wide student dala/systcin-wide data. IS' CIS LOCAL PHOIiKAM STANDAKhS RLVILW .... II,.I have a different uiterprelation when applied ui tlic comprehensive slralegy contcxl (Note that asterisked standards deno e inimediately following each of tl.e standards in question) These dilleieiiees aie oulliiied in COMMENTS 6 CIS Mid school stiff coordinate both pre-existing Mid CIS-brokered sorvicea into one efficient and holistic deliwy system VIL CIS TRAINING A. Replication Talk Force I CIS replication task force members will participate in CIS orienUtion and (continued) replication process training delivered by sUte or national offices. Training will be based on 2. CIS national training materials____________ The CIS local liaison must participate in CIS replication trammg delivered by CIS state or regional/national. B. 3. tiacutfva Directors Witbm their first six months on tlic job, all new CIS executive directors will participate in appropriate training conducted by the state or national/regional CIS. Training will be based on the national CIS manual or a substitute course approved by the state or national CIS organization It is recommended that all executive directors attend the CIS Trainmg Institute (Also referenced in Program MMiagenient StMidMds ) Evidence that CIS persomiel and existing school staff arc jomtly coordinatuig tlic delivery of student services Staff development and plans on file that target the entire school Records or certificates of attendance Records or certificates of attendance Records or certificates of attendMiceC?IS LOCAL PROGRAM STANDARDS REVIEW (Note dial asterisked standards denote tliose that have a different interprelation when applied in tlie comprehensive strategy context These dilleiences aie uutlincd in parenllielical phrases irnitiedialely following each of the standards in question) 4 CIS board members will participate in board orientation and contmued board development delivered by state, local, or national CIS organizations Board development will be based on national traming materials ma4o available to all local programs. It is recommended that board members attend additional state and/or national training opportunities. (Also referenced in Governing Board Standards.) C. Project Director 5 6 Records or cerlificites of iltendsnce COMMtNT^ Project drrectors will participate itt CIS orientatron training provided by locol. stale, or regional staff prior to beginning work at the school site. Onentation training will be based on CIS orientation traming packets developed by CIS national. Records or cerliftcates of altendance All project directors will participate in appropriate training provided by IrKal, state, or rutional/regional staff at least once per year. (Also referonced in Project Operatrons Standards ) Records or certrfrcates of allertdattce D. Local Program Staff 7 All CIS program staff (hired, repositioned, assigned, and volunteer) will participate in at least one in-service training per year as defined by local, state or nationaVregrorul CIS. (Also referenced in Program Management Standards.) Records or certrfrcates of attendance( IS LOCAL PROGRAM SPANDARDS REVIEW (Note that asterisked standards denote those lliat have a different inlerprelation when applied ui the comprehensive strategy context These diffeiences are outlined in parentlietical phrases iininediately following each of tlie standards tn question) ax ...lit...,. 8 All volunteers and mentors working with CIS students must participate in a CIS orieotaticii prior to bemg assigned to a student Thia orientation will be conducted by local, Stalo, or national CIS staff. Records or ccrtiTicites of attendance 9 Ongoing training and support for mentors will be provided by local programs with support and technical assistance from state and national CIS. Records or certificates of attendance Appendix C Concluded.John A. Riggs, IV Senator 16n 1 I\u0026gt;sTRK:r Office 501-570-3528 Fax 501-570-3218 E-mail jolmitS jarij^oom P.O. BOX 1399 LITTLE ROCK. ARK/WSAS 72203-1399 W J as\nMember: EiKCATION CtTY, County, Local AtfzMrs Committee on Committees Joint Commiti ee on Advanced Communications AND iNFORMzVnON TECHNOLOC.Y RECEIW THE SENATE STATE OF ARKANSAS MAR 1 S 1989 March 12, 1999 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MOKlTORiKS Ms. Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Pow I am inviting you to join Dr. Les Camine, Mayor Jim Dailey and me in an exciting new venture for the city of Little Rock, the Little Rock School District and the children and families of our community. I have agreed to chair the Communities In Schools of Little Rock Leadership Task Force. This task force will help design and implement a Communities In Schools initiative in the Little Rock School District. I am hoping that you will consider being part of this task force. We will hold our first meeting March 22, 1999 at 4:00 p.m. in the Board Room at the Little Rock School District central office. I am enclosing information on Communities In Schools for your perusal. I invite you to read over it and then attend the meeting so we can discuss our vision for the project and how you can be a part of our effort. Ann Kamps, Executive Director of Communities In Schools of Arkansas or Liz Lucker, Local Liaison for Communities In Schools of Little Rock will follow up with you next week to answer any questions you may have. If you prefer, you may contact Ann at 370-9661 or Liz at 324-0519, ext. 823. Thank you very much for your interest and support. Sincerely, ohn Riggs, IV State inator The arka.\\sa5 Senate State Cajtol LnTuE Rock, Akka.\\sas 7220\nTELEFHCXE fSOl) 682-6107 ( Communities In Schools Believes... ...that keeping kids in school is not simply a teachers or a schools responsibility. Every morning thousands of Little Rock students bring a host of problems to schooL Family troubles, poor health, fear of violence, economic instability present challenges even the most outstanding teachers and administrators cannot solve alone. ...that the responsibility of keeping kids in school, of preparing young people to successfully learn and achieve belongs to everyone...parents, students, neighbors, health care providers, business leaders, social workers, counselors and volunteers. Communitybased problems demand community-based solutions. ... that a community development approach... supporting education by unifying the resources of a local conununity around children, families and schools... is the most efficient and cost-effective way to significantly raise student expectations and improve academic performance. ... that developing a comprehensive plan designed to connect untapped community resources with children at the school site, will also strengthen, expand and enhance ongoing programs critical to students success and well-being.   Communities In Schools is not a specific program which gets imposed on kids and their schools. Instead... ...it is a process by which local leaders, concerned citizens and parents join with schools, umted in their belief that keeping all kids in school is essential to the social and economic future of the community.Who Wins with Communities In Schools? Kids...Through CIS, all kids can get extra help, attention and support. Specific individual needs can be addressed in a comprehensive, coordinated effort. Parents...Through the CIS site coordinators, parents will see and experience the school districts commitment to their children. This will be especially welcome during the crucial middle school transition process. Teachers...Through CIS, there will be trained, professional staff to provide teachers and administrators with additional on-site support and referral capabilities. This process can also ease the transition for teachers. Schools...Through CIS, the community partners with the school district to help bring additional resources into the schools. These will not be pilot proarams at pilot sites, but a full array of services for all schools. These resources can range from health and social services, to the arts, to actual financial support. And, CIS holds each site accountable for achieving its desired results. Business... Through CIS, corporate Little Rock will see visible evidence of the Little Rock School District and the community it serves committed to improving academic outcomes and building a larger, more qualified future work force. Businesses will find it easier to promote the schools to prospective employees considering re-locating in Little Rock. Programs such as Partners in Education and Vital Links will be enhanced with additional business and corporate support. In CIS communities across the country, corporate leaders have become far more receptive to accepting financial responsibilities and more involved as community partners. Little Rock...Through CIS, the community, itself, will participate in direct day-to- day successes and on-going activities in the schools. It will benefit from a coordinated and focused initiative that better utilizes all of the resources available to students and their families. And, with CISs connection to Americas Promise, Little Rock children will have even more opportunities to participate in community service projects, learning the important lesson of giving back. By joining with Pulaski Countys Promise to Youth, CIS support the crucial connection of community growth and economic development.Why a local CIS Task Force? The local CIS task force chairperson, school superintendent and CIS state director will select the task force membership. Recommended members may include:  Educators and administrators (K-12, technical and four-year colleges),  Private Sector (business, media, non-profit, and potential funders)  Professionals (youth, health, human services, juvenile justice, law enforcement, housing, etc.)  Community and government leaders  Clergy and faith groups  Parents  Students The CIS Task Force is asked to accomplish the following\n Assess, understand and own the problems facing young people in the community\n Determine local needs\n Identify available resources\n Create a comprehensive plan to provide an integrated system of support to all students\n Present proposals to the local board of education for approval\nand finally  Build a local Communities In Schools organization.   The end result is a community-owned program that effectively unifies all applicable resources of the community around students to help them successfully learn.Finally, Why CIS and Why Now? Why CIS? For almost thirty years. Communities In Schools has provided a means to the end,,,a graduation diploma, a better prepared graduate, a healthier community of young people and a brighter future for many who never envisioned one. Through its national office, CIS can offer a school district and the community it serves:  Free technical assistance\n Quarterly national training institutes and/or local/regional cluster training options\n The benefit of rapidly growing national partnerships (Cisco, Morgan Stanley/ Dean Witter, American Association of School Administrators, Americas Promise, and the NFL among others)\n National working agreements with United Way of America and Boys and Girls Clubs of America\nand A network of more than 1000 CIS sites with whom ideas are exchanged and shared. Why Now? Today, in Little Rock, there is a wonderful window of opportunity. Prevention and intervention programs in our citys neighborhoods and schools highlight not just the rapidly growing number of initiatives but also the difficulty of keeping up and staying aware of all the activity. The opportunity to join together has not always been here. Simply stated, we have a wonderful superintendent, a totally committed mayor and a city willing and ready to get involved. Why now? ...because the window is open. ...because our children are watching.COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS Helping kids to help themselves COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF ARKANSAS ^23 South Louisiana St.. Suite 15. P.O. Box 292 Little Rock. AR 2203 Tel (501) 30-9ool  Fax (501) 3\"5-84 F,\\X CISASswbell.nei TO: Communities In Schools of Little Rock Task Force RECEIVED FROM: Ann Kamps, Executive Director Communities In Schools of Arkansas APR 2 9 1999 DATE: April 28,1999 RE: April 19* Meeting/ Questions and Concerns OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING The April 19* ClS/Little Rock Task Force Meeting was one of those very ni issary meetings any emerging organization must, at some point, have. Because time ran out before the questions were answered, I have attempted to respond to some of the concerns that were voiced either at the meeting or in foUow-up conversations. I hope that this memorandum will provide some insights that will help at the upcoming CIS meeting on May 3\"*. First, by now, most of you have realized that Communities In Schools is not an easy concept to understand. It is not a packaged program that comes to a community and proclaims that it has all the answers and will solve all the problems. For example, CIS beheves that all kids should have access to a caring adult or mentor to be successfill, but CIS does not start mentoring programs. Instead, it opens up the school to programs such as Big Brother/Big Sisters. Likewise, there may be needs for after-school programs at all the elementary/ middle schools that LRSD cannot provide on its limited budget. You will find die need for social workers, drug counselors, tutors and other professionals in numbers too great for the district to cover on their own. Additionally, there are critical shortages of state of the art computers and software, needs for expanded computer technology, as well as well as servicing, repair, and updating. Finally, there must be someone responsible for making sure all of this... works, that students are meeting with their tutors, that die services children need are being secured in a coordinated way. We must insure that the kids and schools are connected to the services they need, but we must also assure the community, appropriately utilizing its resources in a coordinated, professional manner. This is a community in its schools, the vital needs of all children connecting with the resources, services and talents of their community. They are the children of the village and we are die villagers. Now, to accomplish this worthwhile endeavor, we begin to see exactly what CIS is and can be. It is, simply, the means to get there. If this were Oz, CIS would be the yellow brick road. We connect the resources with the students. Those resources may be critical to their survival or they may enhance their success and expand their horizons. We are not the programs. We connect them with the programs that are already there, and we connect the community to the programs and ttien, to the children. We are die ones that accept responsibility for Tracking the kids, monitoring the progress, and evaluating the effectiveness of the effort. Through its partnerships, CIS promises that overaU academic outcomes will improve, school attendance will improve, there will be fewer behavior problem s and contacts with the juvenile justices system. To answer Charles question as directly as I can, I can say this. If CIS works to its capacity, if this hoard stays involved and if the CIS staff does its joh. Communities In Schools will know what all is going on in Little Rock. This Board, through its committees and working with the Executive Director, could well be that part of the community that brings it together.  We have the committed involvement and participation of the city of Litde Rock and Mayor Dailey. We will have at our finger tips, all of the projects, programs, and resources the city provides for its children and families, from prevention programs, to alert centers, to fimding opportunities, to in-kind services it can provide. We have the commitment of Arkansas Promise and the Pulaski County Promise to Youth Executive Committee, many of whom are on this task force,  We have the commitment of the LRSD and its superintendent and associate superintendent Many of the programs Charles mentioned are district programs (PIE, VIPS, etc.) We will be in a position to bring them volunteers and additional resources that will enable them to enhance and expand.  We have a community of social service and health providers who have already approached us to work with CIS.  We have a business community that has long been involved with and committed to improving public education in Little Rock. If we build this board and commit to this effort. Communities In Schools could be the entity that brings it together, that makes the big connections among the schools, business and city. While there were other issues discussed, none more affected our ability to move forward than the issue of establishing a 501(cX3). There was concern that this would conflict with New Futures and other funding commitments. I have no easy answers. In developing the CIS Qualities and Standards it was determined that a CIS Board and/ or its Director must be able to meet, as equals, with school boards, city boards and government agencies. It must have the ability to hire staff and to provide benefits. And it must have an autonomous board, one that works for the sustainability of the total effort. This simply cannot be done under the umbrella of another organization or another board, unless CIS is guaranteed its autonomy and decision making capability. Partnering with another non-profit is possible, but not recommended. Fund raising is always an issue. Yes, there will be expenses, but CIS is very cost effective in that if uses reposition staffing and does not create new programs without partnering with other organizations or agencies. Officially, this board would be responsible for hiring and paying an executive director. That person would have the authority to hire the site coordinators. However, those coordinators could be repositioned staff from another organization and be placed at that school at no cost to CIS. It is conceivable that most or all of the site coordinators could be repositioned form other agencies. Additionally, the other agency personnel that would work at the school sites would continue to be paid by their employer thereby cutting CIS costs even more. There will be expenses, but for 30 years CIS has leveraged its dollars, managing to provide services at schools at a minimal cost with extraordinary outcomes. Finally, there is much to be done if this project is to be in place by start of school in August or September. There are major decisions this task force must make. At the May 3\"* meeting, you will receive an outline of projected CIS sites and a timeline for implementation. The start up date would be August/September 1999. This task force will be asked to decide if this effort will continue. If die decision is made to proceed, the process will move forward with the local liaison and my office providing each of you with important and pertinent information. The proposed task force committees will need to begin addressing their specific areas of concern. Regular meeting times will be established with committees meeting and fiuictioning on an as-needed basis. The decision on nonprofit status will have to be addressed, though CISA can be your temporary umbrella until a final determination is made By the end of May, the Task Force should be prepared to present its initial plans to the LRSD Board. By Monday, May 3\"^, I will have prepared for you sample letters of agreement with school districts and agencies for your perusaL I will have job descriptions for site coordinators and the Executive Director. I hope that each of you will carefully consider the role you play. Each of you is critical to our success. As we have too graphically seen in Jonesboro and Littleton, all kids are at risk. Anger and conflict, emotional and mental health, parental involvement and the communitys commitment to its children all play a vital role in defining who we are and what we will be. We cannot be concerned with just one group or one school or one problem. We strive to make sure that kids have a safe place to go to confide in a caring adult, to talk out their fears or their anger, to ask for help or to get that much-needed pat on the back and that encouraging word. Life, and its tragedies, has a funny way of inflicting itself on even the most unsuspecting of us, leaving us searching for answers and asking what could we have done. Today, you have a decision to make and that decision will make all the difference.Communities In Schools of Little Rock Leadership Task Force meeting on Monday, May 3rd, 1999 @ 4:00 pm @ Central Public Library East Conference Room Your attendance will be immensely appreciated. We have lots of planning to do. We will dispense with any activities and forge forward with the important business of planning on behalf of Kids. * Please recognize that CIS of Little Rock does NOT aim to duplicate any services in Little Rock but rather, to enhance and augment what already exists to service more young people in more schools. * Please be reminded that CIS of Little Rock aims to serve as a broker to bring much needed services and programs (already in existence) into our schools during school hours so that, our students get what they need and their parents feel supported and relieved that their children are getting the best that Little Rock can offer. * Please keep in mind that CIS of Little Rock seeks to keep youth serving agencies alive and vital and serving the youth in the most cost effective and time efficient manner possible.  Please know that CIS of Little Rock is an opportunity to invite community partners to participate in a coordinated and comprehensive strategy to provide needed mental and physical health services, workability opportunities, mentoring and tutoring services and corporate partnerships that contribute to successful experiences for our youth and their families. A productive future benefits us all. CIS of Little Rock is about bringing together NOT pulling apart, its about sharing the wedth NOT planning someones demise, and its about enhancing the valuable resources of our schools and our community. Its about inviting our community into our schools to share their wealth of knowledge, experience, support and resources. Its about our community joining together with all of our collective energies to truly, raise our children! Fax:0000000000 Jun 15 99 10:44 P. 01/03 4 COMMUNITIES J. IN SCHOOLS Helping Ms to help themselves Po\u0026amp;t-ifFax Note To: From: Re: Leadership Task Force John Riggs, Chair Next Steps pUniArno CoyOepi.   * Phone  7671 ujlI jOat E Co.  Phor\u0026gt;e \u0026gt; Fax  XZ hX'artXa\" SfiM-Our project! Enclosed for your perusal is a Board. copy of the handout I prepared for the LRSD We will be sending you information to consider for the next meeting which will include such items as what committee would you be willing to serve on Probably the most important decision that you will need to make is whether you want to continue with this project as we transform from a task force to an incorporated 501-C3 that has legal, moral, and financial obligations. I hope each of you will stay hitched, but I would certainly understand if you could not. Lastly, on behalf of myself and the children of Little Rock, thank you for participating in this project. Each of your efforts will make a difference for manv of our children. The next CIS of Little Rock Task Force meeting is scheduled for: Monday, June 21,1999 4:00 p.m. East Conference Room  Little Rock Main LibraryFax=0000000000 Jun 15 99 10 = 45 P.02/03 -3| COMMUNITIES H. IN SCHOOLS Helping kids to help themselves Communitiea in Schools-LRSD Proposal .Mission\nCommunities in Schools of Little Rock will be the conduit to connect the children of the Little Rock School District with the resources, services and talents of the community. Objectives\nConnect LRSD with existing programs that meet the five needs of children identified by President's Summit for America's Future\nan ongoing relationship with a caring adult-parent, mentor, tutor coach\nsafe places and structured activities during non school hours\na healthy start\na marketable skill through effective education\nand an opportunity to give back through community service\nand support the LRSD strategic plan and Education and Desegregation plan. Goals\nMeasurements have not been adopted but might include drop out rates (used in Texas), number of children involved in after school activities, hours of community service given by kids, etc. Strategy\nReposition employees from outside agencies within each of the schools (focusing on Middle Schools first) to serve as Site Coordinators. These Coordinators will report to an executive director hired by the CIS of Little Rock Board. Bridge Plan (1999-2000 School Year)\nSite Coordinators for Forrest Heights, Pulaski Heights, and Cloverdale Middle Schools. By January, add Alternative Learning Center. Designate all these plus Hall High School* as CIS sites. Budgets/Resources\nCIS-LR\nalthough the budget has not been formerly drawn up, in general, the CISLR board will commit to raising sufficient funds (from in kind and hard dollars) to hire an executive director. We anticipate that we will need to raise somewhere in the neighborhood of $ 100,000 per year for this. In 1Jun IL F.03/0o ranolof  M*  hard/soft $s-probably in the ge of $50,000 as a minimum. Most of these dollars will be from in-kind asenoies, AmeriCorps fell^ at the no ha^ dollar budget allocations are requested. In kind budqet r^uests would include office space for each of the coordinators at the sites, furniture, phone, supplies. In addition, until the CIS-LR Board can '------------------------------------------III auuiiiuii, urnii me UlO-LK Board can raise the funds to hire an Executive Director, continue to loan LRSD employee for this task. IssMe9/$how Stoppers (CIS-LR Board and LRSD Board)  raising $100K per year plus $50K per site per year * Incorporation and gaining 501-C3 status for CIS-LR * articulation agreements with outside agencies  selection of next sites * goal selection  monitoring and evaluation of program (CIS Program Information Management System)  hiring staff * communication process between CIS-LR Board and LRSD Board  Hall High previously approved by LRSD Board as Cisco Academy. 2RECF Communities In Schools of Little Rock, Inc. Board of Directors Meeting Monday, August 23rd, 1999 4:00 p.m. @ AUG 2 S 1935 OFFICE Or desegregation MONITORff Centtral Public Library-East Conference Room YOUR attendance is important...critical! We must vote to approve the enclosed by-laws! We have a lot to catch you up on! We have LOTS of exciting news and plans!! We need your input, feedback, ideas, insight, resources!!! We must develop our committees and MEET!!!! School is starting and so are WE!!!!! CIS of LR will be operational at:  Cloverdale Middle School * * Forest Heights Middle School Pulaski Heights Middle School  Hall High School * LRSD Alternative School sites We have site coordinators reassigned by four community organizations to be placed at the above schools! WOW! Wanna hear more good news???? COME...call 370-9661 to confirm...Thanks! BYLAWS COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF LITTLE ROCK, INC ARTICLE I - NAME 1. The name of this organization shall be Communities in Schools of Little Rock, Inc. ARTICLE II - PURPOSE 2.1 The purpose of this organization shall be to coordinate health and human services and to deliver them to at-risk youth in Arkansas and to their families through the supportive environment of the public schools or alternate education sites. The Corporation will endeavor to enable youth and their families to have access to a broad range of needed health, social, and educational services by establishing coordinated delivery systems of community, county, and state resources within educational settings. The objective of the Corporation will be to reduce the number of school dropouts in Little Rock. 2.2 No substantial part of the activities of the Corporation shall be the carrying on of propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation, and the Corporation shall not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distribution statements), any campaign on behalf of any political candidate for public office. Not withstanding any other provisions of these Bylaws, the Corporation shall not carry on any other activities not permitted to be carried on by a Corporation exempt from federal income tax under Section 501(c)(3) of the Code, contributions to which are deductible under Section 170(c)(2) of the Code. ARTICLE III - OFFICES 3. The Corporation may have its offices at such place or places within the State of Arkansas as the Board of Directors may from time to time determine. ARTICLE IV - DIRECTORS 4.1 The activities, property and affairs of the Corporation shall be managed by its Board of Directors which is empowered to exercise all such powers of the Corporation and to do all such lawful acts and things as are authorized by law, by the Articles of Incorporation or bylaws. To the extent permitted by law, the Board of Directors may delegate power and authority in the exercise of its duties and responsibilities to its duly elected and duly appointed committees, and to its duly appointed officers or other such qualified agents. 4.2 The Board of Directors shall consist of not less than seven nor more than 30 members, the precise number to be fixed by resolution of the Board of Directors. 4.3 The composition of the membership of the Board of Directors shall at all times include high-level decision-makers from the public and private sector. At least one member of the Board shall be from the education sector.09/21/1959 09:07 5013240504 LRSD PAGE 02 Hello Friend\nThis Thursday, the 23rd is the LRSD Board of Directors meeting. Communities In Schools of Little Rock, Inc. is on the agenda for an update report and for the superintendent to receive confirmation to sign the letter of agreement between CIS and LRSD. The meeting begins at 6:00 p.m. I know its after work hours but, I would like to encourage you to join us at the meeting to support our presentation. Your presence is very valuable and we would like to introduce as many board members and community partners who are present, as possible. Also, Cynthia Howell from the Democrat will be there and wed like to give her a packet of information and a supportive group to report as being at the meeting. I dont think it will last very long, were probably towards the beginning of the agenda. PLEASE try hard to fit this into your busy schedule! And, please call me (370-9661) to let me know so I can look for you to introduce you. A\u0026lt;always, Thanks from the heart! iz \\11/02/1999 11:04 5013240504 LRSD PAGE 02 5JTi w3 w jAk^lZ Ai:'/J wrs-^jv Has your committee met yet?! Our next CIS of Little Rock Board of FDirector^s meeting is: MONDAY, November 15th, 4:00 pm @ the Central Library, * PLEASE e-mail me back or call 370-9661 to confirm your attendance! Please meet with your committee BEFOREthe Boarrd meeting or make plans to do so...review the committee charges, begin to examine your goals and objectives and let's MOVE AHEAD! Obviously, you do not wish to be a committee of one or two so, please use your experience and expertise and your great wisdom to invite those people who you know will bring diversity, creativity and strength to the charges at hand! You are ALWAYS appreciated because...This is about YOUth!! Also, Dr. Camine has requested to meet with me on Wed. Nov. 3rd. He has not yet signed the letter of agreement as approved by the school board in Sept but hopefully, will do so after I meet with him. If there is a problem with signing the letter, 1 hope to find out tomorrow and I will report back to you. The site coordinators are busy compiling information for the site assessment of their respective schools. The site plan will grow from that data compiled. Student assistance groups are either being formed or have begun to provide a safety net for students. These groups are a partnership activity between Pupil services and CIS in connecting community folks to assist with the groups as needed. I am working on a proposal to present to the TEA for the expenses of the CIS of LR budget. Charles Nickerson is assisting with this and Henry McHenry is also providing an assist. Please help usget the support needed to benefit our LR kids! Uaa G 3 1SS9 DESESitEC^^ Has your committee met yet???!!! Our next CIS of LR Board of Directors meeting is Monday, November ISth, 4:00 pm @ the Library' PLEASE meet with your committee BEFORE the Board meeting...review the committee charges, begin to examine your goals and objectives and lets MOVE AHEAD! Obviously, you dont wish to be a committee of one or two so, please use your expertise and great wisdom to invite those people who you know will bring the diversity, creativity and strength to the charges at hand! You are always appreciated because... This Is about YOUth!! Please call me so that I can join you when you have a date a time. THANKS! Liz 399-8250 Communities In Schools of Little Rock Finance Committee (Treasurer) General Commission The Finance Committee is commissioned by and responsible to the Board of Directors to be responsible for ail ' matters pertaining to the organization's general financing and budget control. i n, ' Composition - . i The Treasurer of the CIS.. Board shall serve as chair of e Finance Committee. Committee membeis shall be appointed by the Chairperson jf the Board. -  vj. Meetings The committee shall meet on call as needed in order to accomplish its tasks and responsibilities. it '%'t i I Responsibilities I 1. To review financial policies and recommend improvements/changes as necessary. 2. To approve the annual budget development process and calendar, to review the annual operating budget and submit the final draft to the Board for approval. 3. To monitor financial performance and make regular financial reports to the Executive Committee and the Board. 4. To select an independent auditor to perform the annual certified audit\nto review the report and interview the auditors annual\nto report the results to the Executive Committee and the Board. 1 i I 5. To monitor and evaluate e risk management program, including insurance to safeguard the aw* of the organization. ! I I '.\\r- y. ,Communities In Schools Of Little Rock Board Development Committee Commission I 1 General Commission { The Board Development Comminee. commissioned by and responsible to the Board of Direemrs, is responsible for evaluating, recruiting and nominating prospective board members, nominating a slate of officers, paracipaunz in new board member orientations, plamung the annual board retreat, and pcriodicallv reviewing and evaluating individual board member performance, ' \" , I I Composition The chairperson and members of the committee shall be appointed by the Chair of the Board, who wiU also on the committee. serve n\" Meetings The committee shall meet on call as needed in order to accomplish its tasks and responsibilities-. Responsibilities i Create minimum standards for recruitment, board membership, and board member performance evaluauons. 1. 2. To develop and maintain the highest level of committed and talented community volunteers to CIS Board service. 3. 4. 5.. 6. To develop a set of criteria or minimum standards for Board membership, specify recruitment goals, and define specific characteristics, skills and/or abilities which will strengthen the board. To work with staff to recruit train and recognize Board members. To ensure that the Board of Directors has a full complement of director in compliance with the Bylaws, To periodically review and evaluate individual performance of board members based on agreed-upon criteria, 7. 8. 9. 10. To propose a slate of officers to the Board for election as required by the By-Laws. To ensure that the Board membership is representative of the state of Arkansas To act as enabler and facilitator in strengthening local boards as appropriate. To repon periodicaUy to the E.xecutive Committee and to the Board regarding progress. I i I 1 I The E.xecutive Director shall ser/e as the staff officer to the committee. 1 ICommunities In Schools of Little Rock Partnership Development Committee Commission General Commission: To generate partnerships in the community that will enhance and expand existing services in the schools. Composition: The chairperson shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Board. Members can be selected who have a working knowledge of available community partners who will willingly participate with positive regard for the mission of CIS and the basics to youth adopted nationally. The Executive Director will actively participate in this activity. Meetings: The committee shall meet on call as needed to accomplish its tasks and responsibilities. Responsibilities: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6, To compile a comprehensive list of potential partners. To assure that duplication/overlap does not occur. To draft letters of agreement that will facilitate a smooth working relationship with each partner. To follow-up and evaluate the viability of each partnership from a school perspective and partner perspective to ensure success. To provide ongoing networking for additional partnerships as needed. To network with National partnerships in a similar fashion to those on a local level.Communities In Schools of Little Rock Resource Development Committee Commission General Commission: The Resource Development Conunittee, commissioned by and responsible to the Board of Directors, is responsible for developing a comprehensive resource development plan to carry the organizations through long term operations. The committee is also responsible for ensuring that the necessary funds are raised so as to allow for the consistent and continued operations of the CIS of Little Rock office. Composition: The chairperson of the committee shall be appointed by the President of the Board. The president shall also serve on the committee. The chairperson needs to be the President-elect in order to sustain knowledge of resource development from one year to the next. Meetings: The committee shall meet on call as needed in order to accomplish its tasks and responsibilities. Responsibilities: 1. 2. 3. 4. To develop and establish a procedure for soliciting board members to make a personal and financial commitment to CIS of LR\nto follow-up as appropriate, with individual members regaiding their contributions. To develop, with the CIS of LR board and staff, and oversee a comprehensive resource development plan to ensure the stability and continued operation of the state office\nto ensure all board members receive the appropriate training needed to secure required funding. To establish necessary sub-committees, when appropriate, to carry out the responsibilities and tasks of the committee, including Strategic Planning. To work with the staff when possible funding opportunities become available so that needed introductions are made and the solicitation process will be carried out in an acceptable, positive manner.Communities In Schools of Little Roc Public Relations Committee Commission General Commission: The Public Relations Committee commissioned by and responsible to the Board of Directors, is responsible for advancing the CIS mission by increasing visibility and improving the overall image of CIS throughout Arkansas. This will primarily be accomplished through the advice and counsel to the CIS staff Composition: the Chair of the Board shall appoint the chairperson and members of the committee. Meetings: The committee shall meet on call as needed in order to accomplish its tasks and responsibilities. Responsibilities: 1. To develop and review a CIS public relations plan to ensure it meets the goal of increasing the visibility and improving the overall image of CIS of Little Rock. 2. To advise the CIS staff and Board on an as-needed basis of image-building and publicity opportunities that may include the identification of CIS programs to promote\nthe identification of media representatives with whom to cultivate relationships\nthe identification of and wherever possible, the facilitation of appropriate networking opportunities\nand the identification of resources that may be utilized to strengthen CIS public relations efforts. 3. To seek opportunities to gamer the support of key business and community leaders in furthering the mission of CIS. 4. To speak, whenever possible, on behalf of CIS mission and efforts to appropriate audiences. 5. To apprise the CIS staff and board of issues considered being important and/or sensitive to CIS. '6. To recommend and set expectations of the Public Relations Committee members as well as the CIS Board regarding the public relations needs of CIS. 7. To provide reports to the Executive Committee and to the Board regarding the progress/status of public relations activities at CIS. 8. Seek opportunities for recognition of CIS partners and community/school partners. 9. Provide a year-end report to the community.Communities In Schools of Little Rock Program/Network Design Committee Commission General Commission: To generate annual goals and objectives for the overall operation of CIS of Little Rock. Composition: The chairperson role will be shared and appointed by the Chair of the Board. The Executive Director will also serve an integral role. Memebers will be selected by the chairpersons to fulfill the needs of the subcommittees. Meetings: The committee shall meet on call as needed in order to accomplish its tasks and responsibilities. The sub-committees shall meet as needed to provide the substance of delivery to accomplish the overall goals and objectives. Responsibilities: 1. To generate goals and Objectives for each fiscal year. The following are the goals and objectives for 1999-2000:  Develop and strengthen CIS and School Partnership Effectively connect needed services with children in participating schools. Work with CLT/PST Maintain effective communication with LRSD  Become Financially Healthy Increase corporate support through a Resource Development plan Continue service provider commitment for personnel and servcies with CIS Strengthen LRSD commitment for personnel and services with CIS  Create and Develop public awareness and support for CIS of Little Rock Enhance corporate, family and community awareness with a focus on students Develop and implement a Public relations Plan  Enhance and Expand Plan for 2000-2001 school year. 2. To support the activities of each of the subcommittees: Social Services sub- 3. committee that encompasses mental/physical health, legal issues, financial issues and includes representatives of each of the community partners for CIS\nParenV'Student/Neighborhood Committee that encompasses community education, life-long learning, advocacy, and neighborhood resources. To establish on-going evaluation of service delivery and to establish a tracking system that will ensure students maintain continuous delivery from one school level to the next and that they are not without the four basics to youth as established by CIS, Inc.S)\" -3 \u0026lt; JI \u0026gt;J -3 J Cra .J r L jQ a fiaoi Att* Communities In Schools of Little Rock, Inc. Board of Directors meeting HCV 1S39^ October 18,1999 MINUTES to OESBaSaRTiOW MGNiTORJKS Members present: John Riggs, Larry Berkley, Jim Dailey, Marion Baldwin, Junious Babbs, Bill Fitzgerald, Diane Vibhakar, Liz Lucker (Interim Director) John Riggs called the meeting to order at 4:12 p.m. The minutes of the last meeting were approved as submitted. Introductions were made of the 5 site coordinators present: Kathy Sweeney (Child Study Center)\nAngelica Young (Child Study Center)\nAdrienne Nimmer (AR. Dept, of Health)\nFrances Waddell (Centers For Youth and Families)\nRochelle Webb (Insure The Children at Childrens Hospital\nand Kerri Brazzell from CISA as an Americorps Promise Fellow. Old Business: Each site coordinator shared with the Board their perceptions of their training in Phoenix and the unique qualities of how they see their position at their school site. All four attended the Program Operations training which was a five-day training squeezed into 3 days. Frances emphasized that other cities and states have CIS and they have fully incorporated the process. She looks forward to Little Rock stepping forward to be fully operational real soon. Angelica found the training eye opening and realized she s been doing CIS all along and didnt know it. Kathy Sweeney called it an invaluable experience in figuring out the details of what to do. Adrienne Nimmer was glad to have a clear picture of her first day at school to give her a jump-start on the year. Liz attended the Executive Directors training for three days and then, resource development for a day and a half. Rochelle mentioned that she was able to visit with Cynthia Howell of the Dem./Gazette last Friday when Cynthia spent the day at Pulaski Heights Middle School. Liz shared the goals and objectives of all the sites as they are developing. Each site coordinator is in the process of compiling a site assessment. This will be ah intensive look at what each school already has as resources and where the gaps need to be addressed. After the overview, each school will develop a site plan that will address the unique needs for each school. This site plan will be a . blueprint for the activities and resources needed for this year. Liz reported on the State Board annual luncheon and thanked Larry Berkley for his presentation to the state board and to Junious Babbs for bringing Brady Gadberry and Terrence Roberts to the event and to Dr. Camine for attending.New Business: John Riggs reported that he has met with his attorney who will file the necessary papers to proceed with the CIS of L.R., Inc. 501C3 status. Funding for the Little Rock office was discussed. Liz will contact the TEA Coalition and also look into some grants through DHS, South. Funding is a key issue. Larry Berkley remarked that numbers and figures are needed when budgetplanning time comes along. Zenobia Harris mentioned some grants through DHS South due in Oct. 25*. Committees were discussed and reviewed. Chairpersons were asked to please meet with their committees to proceed with plans and charges as written in the committee overview sheets. Bill asked if they could recruit for the committees outside the Board. Liz replied, most definitely. The goal is for committees to meet in between Board meetings and reports can be brought to the Board at the monthly meetings. No further discussion was heard. John Riggs thanked the site coordinators for attending and invited them to attend any future meetings. The next meeting will be Monday, Nov. 15* at 4:00 p.m. in the West conference room. Meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Liz LuckerRecommended Committees of The CIS of Little Rock Board V 0 3 1SS9 GFrlCt OF To function effectively, our board needs to work through a committee structure. MONITORING following committees are being recommended for CIS of LR board consideration and approval: Executive Committee: Acts on behalf of the board between meetings as defined by the bylaws\nalso serves as the Personnel/Employee Relations Committee\ncan establish an ad hoc committee as needed and provides Quality and Standards assurance from CIS, Inc. Board Development Committee: Evaluates, recruits and nominates prospective board members\nnominates a slate of officers\nperiodically reviews and evaluates individual board member performance\nensures board development activities (such as new board orientations and board retreats) are conducted. Resource Development Committee: Develops plans and raises funds to supportr program needs. Finance Committee: Develops fiscal policies and a financial reporting framework\nprovides for financial audits\nand establishes and monitors the programs budget. The chairperson is the Treasurer of CIS of Little Rock and serves on the Executive Committee. Public Relations Committee: Promotes awareness about the program and advocates for CIS of Little Rock. Program/Network Design Committee: Provides the framework for providing networking and service delivery as needs are identified by students, parents, schools and community. Sub-committees include Social Services Committee and the Parent/Student/Neighborhood Committee. Partnership Development Committee: Explores and recruits those agencies, organizations, corporations and other entities that can meet the needs identified on behalf of youth.11/11/1999 08:41 5013240504 LRSD PAGE 02 Subj: Date\nRa: CIS 08/11/99 11:22:22 p.m. Central Standard Time From\ntemwalnut To: Bill.Fitzgerald@cjtw.com, johnr@jariggs.com To: jdailey@littlefQck.state.ar.us To: mebaldw@mcc.lrsd.K12.ar.us. laiTy@CAR71.com To: Bob_Drrech8ler@Raytheon.com To\nzhani8@mail.doh.state.ar.uB To: cstewart@REGIONSBANK.com, dMbhakar@alltel.net To\njcbabbs@stuasn.iisd.K12.ar.us To: wkamps@aristotte.net, Imrc@compu8eive.com To: lamwalnut Sony about the attachment, Just delete it. All's well, we're trucking right along, fm working hard with the site coordinators to get their sites in gear. Two of them are young and need lots of hand-holding so, it's been more time-consuming than I expected. Plus, getting the desks, file cabinets, etc. for each one is more time consuming. Theyre working diligently on their site assessments so that we can develop good, solid, constructive site plans for each school. We do not want to duplicate services so the more complete the assessments are, the more accurate and effective the plans will be! They are each taking intakes, the SAP/CIS support groups are starting, the asthma groups started last month at FHgts. and Cloverdale, the clinic is toodling right along at Cloverdale and individual counseling is beginning. As the intake forms are completed, we will beginto compile caseloads that will continue to grow throughout the year. AR. Advocates has borrowed all of otr insurance forms to do follow-up calls on those without insixance to sign them 14) for ARKIDSlst Consent forms will be sent home for participation in CIS. Cloverdale has requested a school-wide Sexual Harrassment Awareness Training that Adrienne Nimmer is planning and implementing. The site coordinators are meeting with me once a week to coordinate efforts as needed, give supportive feedback to each other and educate those who were unable to attend Phoenix Another National CIS Training will be coming up in February. It would be VERY beneficial if the money could be raised to send all site coordinators to Atlanta for the training. The two new folks could get the program operations and the others could continue through some further coirses to improve their skills and knowledge. We really need to get the word oti to all parents and students about CIS. I will continue to work with Bill Fitzgerald on a poweriul information piece for that purpose. I will also attempt to connect with several school district people like J. Elston, D. Milam, M. Baldwin, M, Swanson, V. Hudson to make sure fm updating them on our progress and how what we're doing and trying to do will enhance what theyre already working on. Dr. Gamine is also eager to get the Staff Wellness Program off the groLrxd so, fll be getting with Kathy Lease Asst. Superintendent for Planning, Research and Evaluation to design and distribute a \"quickie\" survey on what would be incentives for staff to participate in the Wellness Program, fm also looking into Health Carters that will extend a corporate discotrt to the district employees and hopefully, the district will be willing to do payroll deductions for monthly fees. I look forward to seeing all of you at Mondays CIS board meeting at the Central Pitolic Library downtown at 4:00 pm. Till then! Liz UarMi. OS \u0026lt;i WBxliiiawi da 1M* Anrica OnUna: Guoit P*9r. 103/03/2000 11:03 5013240504 LRSD PAGE 02 Subj\nDate: CIS of Little Rock update and meeting announcement 2/29/00 10:57:18 p.m. Central Standard Time From\n(amwalnut To\njohnr@JARIGGS-com, lany@CARTl com. SFrueauff To: Jdailey@littleroc)(.8tate.ar.us To\nlvcami@lreda\u0026lt;lm.lred.K12.ar.us To: jcbabb3@stuasn.lred.K12.ar.us To: To: bill.fitzgeraW@CJRW. com zham's@mail.doh.state.ar. us To\nmebaldw@mcc.lred.K12.ar.us, zena@ipa.com To: duWiakar@alttel.net, wkamp8@aiistotle net Greetings Board memberst All sites other than Cloverdale are moving along smoothly. Cloverdale is still without a site coordinator and John has been playing e-tag with Dr. Boozeman to try to rectify that on behalf of Zenobia. There has been a freeze on hiring and Adrienne's job was frozen when she left Hall High is so much better off since Marilyn took the helm, staff have been complimenting her and remarking how nice it is to know there is someone who can help fill in those gaps. My only concern at this point is that she is still doing duty. Based on the wording in the Letter of Agreement she is reassigned to CIS and University School so, I will explain. Twelve support groups are up and running and more are to follow. I am writing a technology grant through TOPS with assistance from Holly Felix. It is for Hall and win bring $129,000 of equipment and staff for Hall. We're still working our way through the process. Ill give everyone a copy. Thia grant focuses on Lifelong Learning, parent*teacher communication and 5-8pm classes for anyone. It holds some very exciting potential for everyone. As Ive stated before. Groundhog Job shadow Day went so well that the workplaces have begged our Students to return and a couple of youth were offered summer jobs, I will spend time in the next two weeks compiling some data from the schools. I know we need figures for LRSD budget requests. Oh, an executive Director needs to be hired as a top item on our next Board meeting, as per comments from our last meeting. WHEN???? Monday, March 13th @ 4:00 pm. Central Library (west conference room) PLEASE rsvp so I know whether or not you're coming... 223-3033 (leave a message) Thanks to you! Liz03/03/2000 11:03 5013240504 LRSD PAGE 03 Subj\nCIS issues needing addressing Date\n2/29/00 10:34:17 p.m. Central Standard Time From\nlamwalnut To: johnr^ariggs.com, latTy@CAR'n.com. SFateauff Hello executive board members... Please remember that our next Board meeting is scheduled for Monday, March 13th @4:00pm at Central Library, west conference room. I will inform everyone else as well. It would be a great idea to pre-set the agenda... If you send it to me, John. Ill type it up. Also, since we have been talking and completing a strategic plan and resource development, we cannot receive monies and grants without our S01C3. John, where are we on the paperwork? In order to be operational, ail we need is a verification that the 501C3 has been filed. We are in decent shape at all of our sites except at Cloverdale. PLEASE John have you been able to connect with Faye Bozeman? I dont see how Zenobia can help the situation witfiout a helpful boost from you. Darlene is working on the strategic plan piece to bring back to the whole board to continue with the process. Ann Kamps has requested that we invite Bonnie Lesley to our Board meeting so that, she can discuss the HOSTS program and rally support from our board to encourage Bonnie to get the program on the adoptable status with LRSD. Do you want to do that this month? If so, her calendar fills up speedily. I will retire from this e-mail and proceed on to one going to everyone. Do we need an executive meeting ahead? If so, when is good for each of you? JtttvM, Mano 02,2000 AnioMoo Online: bowabHit Paso: 1Fax:0000000000 Communities In Scnoois oi i^nue xvuvb., Letter of Agreement Update XUV\u0026lt; auw Jun 9 00 -----T- 14:18 P. 02/11 May,2000 i: I^e toUowin, consh^us a of of Little Rock and the local school sites identified as Schools of  -*-i in the Letter of Agreement dated August 30, 1999. 1. The Communities In Schools of Little Rock approach involves an (nnovathC utilization of existing schools for the benefit of all students. This new eduMtion. health and human services delivery system emphasizes personalism, accountability, and teamwork Thetndtvidualaed cZdm^tl aZiZtegrateLffort gives at-risk students and their famUies many of ihe services they need to solve social, educational, health and emotional problems impeding iheir success. stc^ and resources in This point is a simple overview of what CIS aims to provide for students and'families in the identified school sites. 2 as with the strong support of your ojfice. agrees io operate and CIS project Heights Middle School. Forest Heights Middle School, Cloverdale Middle School. Alternative Learning Center and Accelerated Learning Center during the 1999 2000 school year. CIS of Little Rock has placed Site Coordinators at each of the schools listed\nAlternative Learning Center Cloverdale Middle School Forest Heights Middle School Hall High School Pulaski Heights Middle School Frances Waddell Adrienne Nimmer (resigned/Hring freeze) Kathy Sweeney Marilyn Brewster  Rochelle Webb theCtbTlEkin Arkansas Department of Health Child Study Center - UAMS Little Rock Scholol District Insure The Children-ChildrensHospital i 1 3. 77e CIS projects will actively serve all students who will attend these schools. As a CIS School of Promise, all students have access to the following resources.  A healthy start and a healthy future  A safe place to learn and grow  A one-on-one relationship with a eating adult  A marketable skill to use upon graduation  A chance to give back to peers and community All school sites surveyed students and staff for needs other than those already provided. Site Coordinators then made arrangements to provide those services needed. Level 1\nLevel 2'. Levels of Servics Education, awareness\nschool-wide/grade level\ndirect informaUon liervices Support groups that complement the S.A.P. program\nagency mandated visits with individual students (DHS, Courts, etc.)\nscreenings\nimmunizations/physicals\ninsurance referrals\nLevel 3: survival needs (food, shelter, clothing) Individual counseling\nassessment\nreferral for medical or psychological treatmentFax:0000000000 Jun 9 00 14:18 I School Site Level 1 Services Number level 2 Services Served r Number 1'1 bv i Served Hall High I  Rice Depot Closet I  Charactei Education Word of the Week\" 12 weeks  Friends of Prevention resources materials a Ice Cream Social Straight A Students a Science recognition and motivation program (Eastman Kodak) a Academic Excellence Certificates A/B Honor Roll AH School Ah School All School 36 180 267 P. 03/11 IVUUUfCl Served  Ground Hog Job Shadow Day  Support Groups C1S/SAP(15 groups/seek)  College Tour Atlanta, Georgia (Raydieon Corp)  AR Kids! referrals 38 205 students 2 students gponsoredi  Individual Counseling Refenals  Depression/ suicide assessments 100 1 100 I L n i T I 8  Susan Q. Komen pAnndanfla BxCftSt Care 4/25/00 All Female students - 4 sessions X 4. Each school agrees to provide sufficient office space, and all necessary office ffmtture. equipment, and supplies. Each school has provided office space that includes a desk, a file cabinet, phono usage and  needed. A computer at each site is not yet available. Pulaski Heights Middle School needs additional trunk lines in order to provide additional phone lines. The site coordinator Uses the phone m the teachers lounge to a cell provided by Children's Hospital. Forest Heights also needs connections in the site coordinators office. She currently uses the cell phone provided by the Child Study Center. 5. Little Rock School District will reassign staff, as previously agreed to serve as Site Coordinator at Hall High School and as Interim Director. The Interim Director has been reassigned while still performing several respon^bihties for the Little Rock School District Hall High School reassigned Marilyn Brewster as of January 19 ,2000. She still performs many duties of an Assistant Principal Gunch duty, before and after school duty, teacher evaluations, graduation coordination, and aftiletic event chaperoning) in addition to her role as University School Coordinator and CIS Site Coordinator. Those additional A.P. duties make it impossible to properly focus her time on serving the myriad of needs of Hall students. 6. The CIS Site Coordinators will work closely with school teams including the Campus Leadership Teams and Pupil Services Teams to insure seamless service. All Site Coordinators have worked closely with the school staff. They meet rejnilarly with their principal, teacher teams (at Forest Heights and Pulaski Heights), Pupil Services Teams (it Forest Heights and Hall), and any teachers and staff as needed. They also artend PT A meetings and speak when asked, attend all monthly faculty meetings and attend all Campus Leadership Team meetings. 1. Exemplary performance of an assigned staff person -Mill be recognized and duly recorded in his or her personnel file. Performance will be evaluated and filed in appropriate personnel files.8. Fax:0000000000 Jun 9 00 14:19 P. 04/11 TTie Site Coordinators will provide monthly reports io Little Rock and CIS of Arkansas. the school for review, 'tith copies to C/i' of The principals at  t each school site have been well informed on a wecldy basis. Harb site.coordinator to provided weekly reporting in a meeting with the principal by delivering  thaTino concerns and ideas. CIS of Little Rock also continues to receive feedback from each Site Coordmator on a regular basis. Interim Director and Site Coordinators meet regular y as we as, ose from around the state CIS office. 9 It is understood that any staff member assigned to Communities In Schools by the LMe Rock School District will be bound by confidennahty and if he or she has not already done so, will be required to comply with the school districts drug free workplace policy. All Site Coordinators are awar e of the confidentiality laws and maintain their priifesstonal ethics at all times. They are accountable to both their sponsoring agency and CIS of Little Rock. Si gned release forms are used when services arc being provided for students. Letters of agreement with each organization are on file with CIS of Little Rock. 10. CIS of Arkansas agrees to provide technical assistance and consultation in planning, training, interagency coordination and overall project site management. CIS of Little Rock has requested and received technical assistance from the National Office and has been provided the following by Gary Eagleton from CIS National office in Houston, Texas.  Training for the Pupil Services Team at Hall and Site Coordinators (January 25 )  Two Board trainings (February S'* and 22*)  Visits from the regional CISCO office on behalf of the Academy at Hall National CIS Training Institutes are available twice each year. Four Site Coordinators and the Interim Director attended the training in Phoenix, Arizona in September, 1999. The CHS Board and the partnering agencies covered all expenses for the training. Ths Interim Director attended the Spring 2000 National Training Institute in Detroit in April.Communities in schools of Litts Rock \u0026amp; Forest Heights Middle School SM CooRfliwIor UAUS CtilM Study Cmttr  ttayWMMk tor S-B Rionitw 0S 21,4SS.M LEVEL H Services Grounctxjg job Shadow Day 3 students 3 professionals x $14.8Slhour x 4 hrs. $578.00 Level IM Services LEVEL I Services Rice Depot cost ponding Friends of Prevention (Family Service Agency resource materials) Anger Management Group (Chid Study Center) 10 students x $72./child x 12 weeks 10 students x $72.Zchild x 12 weeks Individual CounaeUng (45 students) $8,640.00 assessments O 4 hours each 45x4x $70.00 $ 12, 600.00 Anger Management Group Arkansas Department of Health 10 students x $35./hour x 12 weeks counseling 45 X $7D.OOIhour for 10 weeks $31,5000.00 $4,200.00 StressZAnger Management Group The Centers \u0026lt;4200.00 Eyeglasses (5 students) Lenacrafters 5x$300.00/student $1,500.00 U X StressZAnger Management Group Insure The Children (cost included on the otheri n-kind) Dentistry one student referred for free serves for your benefit. 8 o Food \u0026amp; dothing assistance ARWds 1st refefTal8(150) cost pending Ongoing Intervention average of 5 students daily 5 X $35.00 X120 days $21,000.00 Tutoring for 75 students tutors were certified teachers during off time hours. 75 students 75 adult hours x $14.85+ Crisis Intervention 16 students x 3 hours x $ 35.00 $1,660. c 3 $1114 $66,230.00 Asthma Education Program St. Vincent's Medical Center 75 identified 30 serviced (cost bidudes other in-kind) * AB figures are the most accurate available 8 \u0026lt;\u0026gt; Tale Troupe Summer Youth grant City of Little Rock (21 students) $16,082.00 o 8 Consultations with teachers Ix/week attend Team meetings $41,940.00 Total dollan leveraged\n$ 109,270.00 (plus other Tn kind\" costs last 2 pages)Communites In Schools of Little Rock\u0026amp; HALL High School Site Coordinator. LRSD Repositioned 50% time Level II Services Groundhog Job Shadow Day 38 students FUyttwon CorpoOton, CARTI, CammrSyPuntohmar* ImartmsniFhm Level III Services Rice Depot Level I Services cost pending Character Education (12 wks.) Friends of Prevention FamHy Service Agency resource materials Ice Cream Social straight A* students (36) = HALL Science reoognItiorVmotivation Eastman Kodak engineers (2) = $ 1,000.00 Academic Excelience recognition certificates to A/B Horxx roll (267) Susan G. Komen Breast Care physician speaker 700 female students 3 presentations s $500.00 $1,500.00 33 adults X $14.85/hr. x 4 hre. a 5adults X $14.BS/hr. x 8 hrs. = Atlanta (kiltegs Tour (2 students) Donated by Raytheon Corporation = Pre-natal Group The Centers Teen Parent Group The Centers Anger/Stress Management Group Insure 'Rte ChHdren (3 groups) 40 students = Family Addictions Group 15 students = Staying Straight Gtxxip (3 groups) 30 students = Nicotine Intervention 12 students - Ai^/Strssa Management Groups (2) The Centers- 30 students 30 X $35.00/hr. x 8 weeks  Rape/Sexuai Abuse Group 18 X $35.00rhf. X 12 M*s. = Qrief/Loss Group (2) vara Lloyd Preisbyterian Services 30 students x $ 7000/hr. x 12 weeks = ARKlds 1st refenals 100 students = $1,960.00 $445.00 $280.00 pre-existing pre-existing last page last page last page last page $ 8,400.00 $7,550.00 $25,200.00 cost pending $43,845.00 Individual Counseling referrats (8) Aasesements  4 hrs. each 8 X 4 X $70.0Qfhr. = 8x10x$70.0(Vhr.= DepresslonZSuiside assessments 100 students 100 X $35.00/30 minutes  $2,240.00 $5,600.00 $3,500.00 $11,340.00 \"n X 8 c   IS, 8 -o 8 Total Leveraged dotars $ 56,685.00 (plus other *ln KincT costs on last 2 pages)Communittes in Schools of LttHe Rock ft Pulaski Hsights Hiddls School Site Coordinalor: Insure The Childran Childrens Hospital S daysfwesk for 8.8 months 9 $18300.00 Levgl H Services Aller School Support Group Insure The Children 20 students 20x $3500x 12*4a = $5040 00 Level IH Services Rice Depot Level i Services Big Brother/Big Islers Core Program (8 students referred) 4 students X $14.85/hr. x 1 hrJwA. = $ 475.20 Ongoing Intervention 30 studentslweek  $35.00riv. x 24 wks.= $25,200.00 coat pending Friends of Preventian Family Service Agerwy raeource materials Groudhog Job Shadow Day 12 students Q Blue Cross/Btue Shield' Eyeglasses-3 students Lensctaftere- $300.00 x 3 = $800.00 12 X $14.86/hr. x 4 hrs. = $712.00 School-wide Drug Free Program refreshments: PTA voluntser speakers Healihy Eating Support Group (3) Cooperative Extension Service 30 X $36.00/hr. x 12 wks. = : $10,500.00 Individual Counsehng Referrals 10 students with assessments Aaeesaments (4 hrs. each) 10x4 X $70.00 = 10x$70.00x 12wl(S.= $2,800.00 $ 7,000.00 End of School imenlive pizza, BBQ, Rallys donated $ 175.00 Anger Management Groups Insure The ChHdren (2) 40student8= laet page DrugfAloohol Referrals 12 students  last page Parenting Meetings (2) East UWe Rock Arkansas Department of Health (1) 10 students x$3S.0Qlhr.x 12 wks. = $4,200.00 Free Dentistry (1 student) cost urrknown $ 175.00 Health Education Groups (3) Nursing Supervisor, LRSD $35,900.00 X O 8 o Family Addictions Group Insure The CHIdren 12 students^ last page c 3 Choices \u0026amp; Consequences Group Insure The Children 12 StUdHltSr*- LO 8 Stress Management Group Insure The Children 158tudents= last page 8 Asthma Educalon Program St. Vincents Medical Center 21 8tudents= last page 71 o ARKids 1st Program 100 ttetrals= cost pending $20,827.00 Total dollars leveraged. $56,102.00 (plus in-kind* services last 2 pages)ConununWes bi School* of Little Rock \u0026amp; AHemaUve beaming Center Sita Coordinator: The Centals for Youth and Families 1.5 daya/wask  $6,641.00 for 9.25 months LEVEL II Swvicw KvIlllSfviCM Rice Depot cost pending Sudani of Vie month (luncheon by McIntosh) $120.00 Groundhog Job Shadow Day 11 students 11 adutls x $14.85 x 4 hours $653.40 Crtsis Intervention 10 students x 3 hours x $3SAKKir $ 1050. All scfwol incentive (Kroger) $ 70.00 Support Groups 2AMek from The Centers 24-40 students weeldy pie-existlng Sbdde Intervention 2 students x 3 hours x $35.00 -r $ 210. School Emptoyment assistance Site coord. ARWdslst (5 students reterred) cost pending Indtvfdual Counaeling (10 lefeiTals) 10 students x $7Qlhour x 10 weeks $ 7000. J X  8 End of School Incentive (Alliance Foods) $150.00 Meetings with teachers and staff as needed Meeting with principal Ix/woek Off campus crisis referrats 10 studentsMreek 10 studennts x $ 35. $350. Friends of Prevention (Family Service Agency resource materiab) $653.40 Eyeglasses by Lenzcrafter examination, tenses and frames 3 students x $300. per child $000 $900. $9,510. $340.00 c  * All figures are the most accurate available. \u0026lt;0 8 8 Total dollars leveraged: $17,144 00other In Kind\" Services * Insure The Children @ Children's Hospital Outpatient Drug/Alcohol/NIcotine {Prevention/lntervention 157 referred through Communities in Schools of Little Rock @ Cloverdale Middle school\nForest Heights middle School\nPulaski Heights Middle School\nHALL High School\nAlternative Learning Center Total cost: $ 195,815.00 ($ 1,247/student)  Asthma Education Program St- Vincents Medical Center \u0026amp; The Partnership For A Healthy Community @ Cloverdale Middle school\nForest Heights Middle School\nPulaski Heights Elementary \u0026amp; Middle School\nRockefeller Elementary : Respiratory Therapist: 38 hours @ $15.85/hr, = Supplies, materials, incentives = $ 602 30 $ 5,096.00 -n Al X I $ 5,698.30 o * Cloverdale Community Clinic @ Cloverdale Middle Level Academy August 1999-June 2000 (42 weeks) Tuesdays 10 am- 4 pm RN @ $ S0,000.00iyr. = Volunteers In Medicine physician: students seen: 780 x $65.00/visit = adults seen: 405 x $65./hr. = pharmaceuticals: tests/procedures: $ 10,000.00 $ 50,700.00 $ 26,325.00 $ 1.315.00 $ 1,481.00 c \"sO 8 $89,821.00 4^ 1^ * CISCO Academy in kind software: instructor training ($500./day x 16 days) Regional Directors visits $15,000.00 $ 8,000.00 $ 2.500.00 8 $ 25,500.00 Total this page: $ 316,834.00other In Kind\" Services * CIS National Technical Assistance Gary Eagleton, consultant from Houston, Tx. 3 days training for site staff and CIS Board of Directors = 3 X $2,500.00/day = $7,500.00 * Grant Preparation s (2) consultants @ $35.00/hr. x 28 hours (TOPS grant) consultant @ $35.00/hr. x 16 hours (City Prevention grants) = $ 980.00 $56000 * Conmunities in Schools Board of Directors meetings March 1999-Ju ne 2000 16 meetings x $14.85/hr. x 2hrs. x 1 members average = 2 Board retreats @ 4 hours each x 10 members x $14.85/hr. = $ 3,326.00 $1,188.00 $ 13,554.00 Total School Site in Kind leveraged dollars: $ 565,075.00 01 X  Total indirect in-Kind leveraged dollars\n$ 4,516.00 c  These hgores arehased oethe most figures awailabJe. Several services were unable to provide cost figures until a 8 later date. t-* oFax:0000000000 Jun 9 00 14:22 p. 11/11 Letter of Agreement Update May, 2000 The following document constitutes a summary of the activities sunrounding the 'tune period of October 1, tWSIthrough May, 2000 between CIS of Little Rock and the local school sites identified as Schools of Promise. The following statements correspond numerically with the specific points directly stated in the Letter of Agreement dated August 30,1999. 1. The Communities In Schools of Little Rock approach involves an innovative utilization of existing staff and resources in schools for the benefit of all students. This new education health and human services delivery system emphasizes personalism, accountability, and teamwork. The individualized, coordinated, and integrated ^ort gives at-risk students and their families many of the services they need to solve social, educational, health and emotional problems impeding their success. This point is a simple overview of what CIS aims to provide for students and families in the identified school sites. 2. CIS, with the strong support of your office, agrees to operate and support tite CIS project at Pulaski Heights Middle School, Forest Heights Middle School, Cloverdale MMle School Academy, Hall High School, Alternative Learning Center and Accelerated Learning Center during the 1999-2000 school year. CIS of Little Rock has placed Site Coordinators at each of the schools listed\nAlternative Learning Center Cloverdale Middle School Forest Heights Middle School Hall High School Pulaski Heights Middle School Frances Waddell Adrienne Nimmer (resigned/hiring freeze) Kathy Sweeney Marilyn Brewster Rochelle Webb The CENTERS\" Arkansas Department of Health Child Study Center - UAMS Little Rock School District Insure The Children - Childrens Hospital 3. TTie CIS projects \"mII actively serve all students v^ho will attend these schools. As a CIS School of Promise, all students have access to the following resources\n A healthy start and a healthy future  A safe place to learn and grow  A one-on*one relationship with a caring adult  A marketable skill to use upon gradoation  A chance to give back to peers and community All school sites surveyed students and staff for needs other than those already provided. Site Coordinators them made arrangements to provide those services needed. Levels of Service Level I\nLevel 2: Level 3\nEducation\nawareness\nschool-wjde/grade level\ndirect information sitrvices Support groups that complement die S.A.E program\nagency mandated visits with individual students (DHS, Courts, etc.)\nscreenings\nimmunizations/physicals\ninsurance referrals\nsurvival needs (food, shelter, clothing) Individual counseling\nassessment\nreferral for medical or psychological treatmentFax=0000000000 Jun 9 00 14 = 17 P. 01/11 SCIIQgES auF Arkansas SSiK\u0026amp;ttT' i 523 South Louisiana, I Suite 175 I  P. O. Box 292 Little Rock. AR 72203  (501) 370.9661 (501) 375.8774 Fax  I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Name: ClSA@swbell.net O) \u0026lt;0 \u0026gt; 4)  \u0026lt;u : Q. 0) .C o v\u0026gt; C 'Z On  I FROM: Messoge\nFAX traHsmittal form Organization Namc/Depc fiaiiiMWWK I ^aMIIWI^CSUb j Phone number ~~ Fax number i~ Dti\u0026gt;C) Name: Title: Date sent\nNumber of Pases: (Including cover sheet) * I )1 Communities In Schools of Little Rock Board of Directors Marion Bald win, Director McClellan Cc mmunity School 9417 Geyer S ?tings Road Little Rock, / R 72209 (501) 570-41 9 / (501) 570-4098 FAX E-mail: meba dw@mcc.lrsdJtl2.ar.ui Larry Berkley, Vice-President CARTI - Physics and Pngingering P. O. Box 55050 Little Rock, AR 72215 (501) 664-8573 / (501) 663-0503 FAX E-m^\nLarTy@CAR'n.com Dr. Les Gamine, Superintendent Little Rock School Ehstrict 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 324-4012 / (501) 324-2146 FAX E-mail\nIvcami@lrsdadm.lr5d.kl2.ar.us Mayor Jim I laiiey The City of L ittle Rock 500 West Ma rkham Street Little Rock, i lR 72201 (501) 371-45 10 / (501) 371-4498 FAX E-mail\nJdailey@littlerock.state.ar.u( Bill Fitzgerald Cranford Johnson Robinson Woods 303 West Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 975-8307 / (501) 975-4241 FAX E-m^: Bill.Fitzgerald@cjrw.com Sue Frucauff, Director Charles A. Frucauff Foundation 500 Soudi Shackleford Road Little Rock, AR 72211 (501) 219-1410 / (501) 219-1416 FAX E-mail: SFrueaufT@aol.com Darlene Gai rett, Consultant Urban Assoc 503 Bellaire : ates 3rive Hol Springs, AR 71901 (501)620-4828 FMfZ'=ot)3?l-Ss=\nii E-mail: Zenii@ipa.net Zenobia Hanis AR Department of Health 200 South University, Suite 310 Little Rock, AR 72205 (501) 663-6080 / (501) 663-1676 FAX E-mail: zharris@inail.doh.state.ar.us Duane Morgan, C.E.O. Orbit Valve P.O. Box 193520 Little Rock, AR 72219 (501) 568' / (501) 570-5785 (orbirvalvc.com Margie Powell Office of De icgrcgation Monitoring 201 E. Mark lam Street, Suite 510 Mt. 72201 Little Rock, (501) 376-6100 / (501) 371-0100 FAX E-mail\nmqj owcll@aristotle.niet John Riggs IV, Sure Senator Arkansas State Senate P. O. Box 1399 Little Rock, AR 72203 (501) 570-3528 / (501) 570-3218 FAX E-mail: Johnr@jariggs.com Charles Stewart Regions Bank Capitol and Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 371-7334 / (501) 371-7413 FAX E-mail: cstewart@RegionsBank.coin Diane Vibh iker 3917 South ,ookout Drive Little Rock, AR 72205 (501) 661-8030 / (501) 661-1263 FAX (501) 580-9119 Cell Phone E-mail\ndvil hakar@alltell.net Judge Joyce Williams Warren Chancery Court, 10* Division 3001 West Roosevelt Little Rock, AR 72204 (501) 340-6725 / (501) 340-7012 FAX E-mail: Advisor: Brace Cohen, Program Dir. UAMS Child Study Center 1120 Marshall Street, Slot 654 Little Rock, AR 72202 (501) 320-5150 / (501) 320-1592 FAX cohenbrucem@exchange.uams.edu ('ommunitiea In Sch^iols of Arkansas P. O. Box 292  Little Rock, AR 72203 Phe ne\n(501)370-9661  Fax: (501)375-8774 E-mail\nClSA\u0026lt;gswbell.net Ann Kamps, Executive Director Alysia Colon, Administrative Coordinator Kerri Brazzel, AmeriCorps Promise Fellow CIS of Little Rock Revised 8/00 30/20d S:2T ii 00, ZT das noooonnoon:xeqNov ember 2 8, 2 0 0 0 Improving our schools What communities can do BY RAYMOND W DONNY LEE Special to the Democrat-Gazette 0 you look at the public schools through a telescope or a microscope? Either perspective offers a distorted D view and perhaps a cynical response. When peering through a telescope, the object is necessarily distant and appears but a speck in the lens. The view is illuminating, but precludes a detailed examination. On the other hand, the microscope offers a detailed view but fails to provide the larger context in which the object exists. It is undoubtedly difficult to get a clear perspective on schools in America today. Virtually every community has at least one school, and people have opinions about it. Each year, Gallup polls report that citizens rate schools nationally lower than they rate their own childrens schools. For example, in the 32nd Annual Gallup Poll on Education reported in September 2000,47 percent of respondents assigned a grade of A or B to public schools nationally, while 70 percent assigned a grade of A or B to their oldest childs school. Obviously, personal involvement and familiarity with a school changes attitudes. Its easier to support that with which you are involved and familiar. Why should the community support the public schools? As school millage elections approach, citizens are divided whether to vote for or against maintaining or increasing school taxes. You might hear something like, Those kids arent learning anything in that school. Or even, I dont have any children in school. Why should I vote for a school tax? Public schools do not exist solely for the students and personnel who inhabit them\nrather, they represent the hope that those who pass through them will create a better world for themselves and for all of us. What would our communities and our nation be like if we had no public school system? While our nations history has a somewhat fragmented past with public, parochial and home schooling, it is clear that in a democracy, public schooling is helpful to sustain the democratic ideals we cherish. Further, schools provide a relatively common base upon which students can draw not only knowledge, but also skills and values that will enable them to go on to be successful contributors to the community. Children in the public schools are not only our future, they are a part of the com- niunity, and their views about community, citizenship and commitment are being Guest writer shaped by those surrounding the public schools. In tile past 20 years, local businesses, seeing this relationship, have partnered with schools to collaborate, with the two-fold goal of strengthening the school and putting the business in touch with its future workers and customers. This partnership has been quite successful in most cases. Business, though, should not be the only partner with schools in a town. It is easy for the members of a community, particularly those without children in the public schools, to become detached and somewhat cynical about the schools. Yet, in many towns, the school provides structure and camaraderie to the community. Have you ever been to a small town on a Friday night during a ball game? Where is everyone? At the ball game! Community support should extend beyond the athletic teams and into the very fabric of the school. What if members of the community showed up for music pro^ams, plays and spelling bees like they did ball games? Involvement and : awareness breed support, as the school be- I comes a dynamic part of citizens lives. Volunteering in public schools is another wonderful opportunity to create community. Working with the students personalizes the efforts of the public schools, and schools no longer exist as anonymous institutions\nrather, they become vibrant, living organisms which have personality and vigor. A strong volunteer program will minimize problems that often exist in the absence of meaningful relationships. Without a clear perspective on the purposes and benefits of public schooling, the community may easily lose its will to support this vital institution. Public schools are the arteries through which our nations lifeblood flowsthat is, our children and their potential futures. Interestingly, as polls demonstrate, . schools are rated largely by the investment people make in them. 'The stronger and more personal the investment, the higher the rating. Isnt it time to make your community schools better? Become a part of them, know them, support them, and you will give your community better schools. Raipnoiid W \"Donny Lee. EdD.. is associate professor of education at Harding University in Searcy.FROM : INSURE THE-ChILDREN FAX NO. : 320 6844 Feb. 08 2001 05:03PM P2 Communities In Schools of Arkansas Memorandam To: From\nCIS of Little Rock Board Members CIS Site Coordinators CIS Building Principals a Kamps, Executive Director state Office Date: February 8,2001 Subject: CIS of Little Rock Grant Award It is with, great pleasure that I can announce to each of you that the proposal submitted to the Department of Community Programs by Arkansas Childrens Hospital  Insure the Children program has been approved. As a result of this award, Debbie Rushing, Program Coordinator for Insure the Children will now also hold the position of Executive Director for Communities In Schools of Little Rock. In this role she will assume all responsibilities for developing and implementing the CIS project at Hall High School, Pulaski Heights and Forest Heights Middle Schools. This is a wonderful opportunity to maximize collaboration efforts among Communities In Schools, the City of Little Rock, Little Rock School District and Arkansas Childrens Hospital to really begin to meet the challenges of our young people. I know that Debbie will do a wonderful job! She has long proven that she not only understands the concept of CIS but that she also knows how to make it work. Please refer all day to day questions, concerns or comments regarding CIS of LR to Debbie. You may be reached by phone at 320-1987, by fax at 320-6844 or you may email her at rushiuBsJebhie@exchange.uams.edu. Cc\nLaura Rule, Director Insure the Children Jeanette Perdue, Vice President Family Support Services Arkansas Childrens Hospital1 Apr--24-Ol O2:OOP Frueauff Foundation 5012191416 P-Ol DATE: 4-24'2001 FAX RE: TO: Letter of Agreement Between CISA and CISLR Margie Powell, Bill Fitzgerald Fax\n371-0100 Fax\n975-4241 FROM: Sue Frueauff Fax\n501-219-1416 Phone\n501- 219-1410 Number of Pages Including Cover\n2 I wanted the two of you to have a copy of the Letter of Agreement regarding the Good Cents program. Since the national office awarded the pilot program to the state organization and Ann, as state executive director, and her president, signed that program agreement, they are responsible for the funds. At the direction of Anns board, the Letter of Agreement was written. Hopefully, it will clear the air and eliminate further confusion. All parties have met regarding the Americorps Fellows (Tracy) schedule and the CISA contract with Americas Promise. I believe that our minutes and that contract was for the Badgett/Pulaski Heights program. I understand Debbie has told Tracy she is to work at Washington School this summer. I do not know what the outcome of that particular assignment disagreement will be. On another matter, until I feel more comfortable with the situation, I am holding off writing the letter to non-participating board members. If I feel that my relationship with Ann or Debbie is in anyway causing problems with CISLR or my understanding of board responsibility is incorrect, I will resign. Life is too busy and too full to spend it in turf battles. For now, I will just wait and see how the Letter is received and how Tracys schedule is handled.Apr'-24-Ol O2:O1P Frueauff Foundation 5012191416 P . 02 Letter of Agreement Between Communities In Scfaoob of Arkansas And Communities In Schools of Little Rock This agreeateai etuMisfacs a ooa-legal, cooperative relationship between Communities Io Schoob of Arkansas (OSA) and Communities In Schools of Little Rock (CIS/l^R) for the pirrpose of managing Morgan Stanley Dean Witter (MSDW) funds awarded tor the Good Cents Program. This project is currently being implemented in two LRSD middle schools in partnership with CISA and MSDW I. In so far at Communitict in Schools, Inc. agreed to award CISA $6000.00 to support the Good Cents Curricuiuia pilot project with Morgan Stanley/ Dean Witter, CISA agreed to the following use and oversigbl of the award: I ) 2) 3) 4) Further the Good Cents Curriculum pilot project with Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, Provide final number of students and volunteers who participated in pilot program. Collect evaluation data from students, teachers and volunteers at the pilot school sites to rate ihe effectiveness of the Good cents pilot curriculum, collect the final version to be developed after the pilot and obtain additional comments about the project Complete each objective by June 29, 2001 and submit a report by July 3, 2001 to include a financial statement of monies spent to date IL in so far as CfS/LR agreed Io implement the Good Cenu project in partnership with CISA, CIS/LR further agrees to: 1) 2) 3 ) 4) Present a written description for the planned expcnditure/use of the MSDW monies, Obtain prior approval from CISA for anticipaied expenditures of MSDW monies. Expenditurescan not exceed the grant amount\nSend invoices to CISA for payment CIS/LR also agrees to work with CISA to gather the required data to meet the obligations for the pilot project This Agreement may be amended at any time by mutual agreement of both CISA and CIS/LR ____, 2001\n, President Agreed to\n,2001 , President Communities In Schools of Arkansas Communities In Schools of Little Rock Executive Director , Executive Director Communities In Schools of Arkansas Communities In Schools of Little RockFROM : INSURE THE-CHILDREN FAX NO. : 320 6844 nay. 01 2001 10:51AM P2 CIS Board Meeting Minutes Monday 9 April 2001 First Presbyterian Church Present\nBruce, Margie, Junious, Larry, Debbie, Bill, Margo, Sue, Flash, Jim Daily- Sue F. called meeting to order at 4:15 The minutes from the previous meeting, which had not been proofed, were reviewed. Margie clarified that the money referred to were cunent CIS/Little Rock holdings that CIS A held. Bruce clarified that his agency is still committed to CIS and that Kathy will continue to do the Good Cents Program. Minutes were accepted and approved with those changes. The point was made the meeting minutes are needed ahead of time to avoid the need for such clarifications. Mr. Fitzgerald agreed and humbly offered his apologies and a promise to do better next time. Morgan Stanly Dean Witter - Good Cents Program Debbie stated that she thought the MSDW/Good Cents event was perceived as valuable. All had a good time at the event. Pulaski Heights program is up and running, while Forest Heights is slightly behind schedule. She has received positive feedback from the MSDW employees involved, who said it was good for them and the children seemed to get a lot out of it. Photos are from the Good Cents Mentoring Day are on both the PHMS and Good Cent websites. All Board members are encouraged to review the demonstration curriculum on the Internet and the photos. Despite press releases drafted by CIS and MSDW and sent on Arkansas Childrens Hospital and Little Rock School District letterhead, we received no media attention. Bill said he would have the press release reviewed by PR staffers at his office and determine how we might improve on coverage. Junious commented that the 12 MSDW people were very enthusiastic and committed about the program. MSDW was fully backed by their employees to participate in the mentoring program providing them with 1 hour per week to work with the students. Pulaski Heights/Badgett Elementary Literacy Team Literacy initiative, coordinated by AmcriCorp Volunteer is cooking. Students met their tutoring buddies on Tuesday. We have determined there are still some very basic needsFROM : INSURE THE-CHILDREN FAX NO. : 320 6844 May. 01 2001 10:52AM P3 on the part of Badgett students. These included personal hygiene and body care. Margo underscored the fact that these basic needs must be filled first before reading proficiency can be tackled. As Debbie said, Id rather our results from this project be fabulous ten years from now, than just a so-so program now. The need for some kind of hygiene training was raised. Margo will check into initiating that and who (or what discipline) might be most appropriate to facilitate the training with the kids. Should an csthctician or beautician or a nurse teach the children? The average 5* grade classroom GPA is 2.89 (is this for Badgett?). But the skill level is not there: reading proficiency is not at a 3C2 level. Some discussion followed about whether students were being passed along without the requisite skills. Junious said he would contact the appropriate teacher/adminisfrator to discuss the issue. Sue raised several issues: Money\n501c3 status\nRelationship with ACH\nBoard Memberships and responsibilities, Hall High and AmeriCorp volunteer. Money received from Regions Bank: The check ($2,300.00) was to pay for the ScholarShop program. Tracys expenses to Minnesota came out of that check. Sue reported that Ann Kamps has requested from Tracey a budget for materials to be expended. Money from Morgan Stanley Dean Witter: Sue reported on behalf of Ann that as yet, there is no money received from MSDW. It has been requested. Joan at MSDW says its at CISA. Debbie reported several expenses. 501c3/Relationship with ACH: The purpose of the 501 c3 status is to raise money. We need to decide if were ready as a board to raise money. Sue said that concerning CIS ownership issues, if we are under ACHs wing, they might assume they run CIS. Debbie interjected that ACH applied for the Enhancement Award to run CIS and that ACH is responsible for the Enhancement Award. AmeriCorp Volunteer Time Accrual: Debbie reported that Cynthia Klump with AmeriCorp will be conducting a site visit on April 17,2001. She will be reviewing contract documentation, personnel files and other points of accountability. The reviews were passed around to the board members. Debbie reported because of the accountability requirements we cant have volunteers doing work at home. The grant is to work with students so the majority of the work must be done in that way. Sue suggested we need a plan from Tracy for her goals for April, May, June, etc. It was stated that we arc all pulling toward a common goal of helping the children, and some formalities would enhance communication toward that goal, namely, an organizational chart for CIS and simply defining our terms. Who is CIS and who are we responsible to/for? What are the specific site plans for our site coordinators? Sue mentioned that we will probably need to come up with funds to match for next year, which may involve board members raising some of those funds. Debbie mentioned thatFROM : INSURE THE-CHILDREN FAX NO. : 320 6844 May. 01 2001 10:53AM P4 Gary Eagleton had approved piggybacking on their 50lc3 status. Problems arose only when the two entities completed for the same pot of money on a given project. HALL: We need to assess whether to continue at Hall High. The attitude there, Sue reported, is that they dont want us. She suggested an ad hoc committee of Margie and Margo to speak to the people at Hall and determine what to do. Bill suggested that Junious be included, as he represents the District. It was decided that Junious will make an information-gathering call on Hall and assess the situation and report back to the Board. CIS Board: Board memberships and responsibility. We need more members and we need to generate a list of people who can find money, are forceful and not shy about getting that money. (Sue pointed out that she had found one, Flash!). Margo made a motion that Board members bring 1-3 names of prospective members to the next meeting. Sue asked that the names be run by her first, but after some discussion, it was decided that the names be brought to the board first, before any official contact had been made or invitations extended. Margie seconded the motion, which passed. Jim Daily suggested aloud Mike Wilson of Comcast. Next meeting is at First Pres on Monday 14 May. Meeting was adjourned at 5:30 Respectfully submitted by Bill Fitzgerald Bill Fitzgerald Associate Creative Director CJRW, Inc. 303 W. Capitol Avenue Little Rock, AR 72201 501.975.8307FROM\nINSURE THE-CHILDREH FAX NO. : 320 6844 May. 01 2001 10:46AM Pl FAX TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET  Arkansas Children's Hospital changing children's lives Arkansas Children's Hospital Website address: wviw.archildrans.org TO\nSue Frueauff Margie Powell DATE: May 1, 2001 FAX NUMBER\n219-1416/ 371-0100 FROM\nLaura buckworth NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover sheet): 4 Sue A Margie\nDebbie Rushino was on. vocation Friday, April 27 and she is off this week due to death in her family. Please edit the attached CIS Board Meeting minutes, make changes if necessary and fax to our office so they con be moiled out prior to the next meeting. Thanks If you do not receive all pages, if any are not legible, or there is any question, please call (501) 320-1632 OUR FAX NUMBER IS (501) 320-6844 This meaasa la Intended only lor 0l use oriho addrMseefsj. k comolns Inlormtuon Umi Is cenfldondsl under Uie sBomey^JIont or oUiemrise not auWcu to oiscloaure. If you are not tho Intendad recipient or ll\u0026gt; amployee or agent responsible for dellvoring n\u0026gt;e message to fh Intended recipient, any use of this Infonnetlon or diesemlnetlon, diafrlDuUon or copying of mis communicaPon la aulctly pronioited. If you have received ttiie communication In error, please notiry us Immediately by telephone and return the original message to ua at the above address vis the U.S. Postal Service. Arkansas Childrens Hospital, 800 Marshall Street, Little Rock, AR 72202-3591Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Marshall, Federal Monitor One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Ms. Jackie Stubblefield Arkansas Promise Coordinator Doneghey Plaza South P. O. Box 1437, Slot S230 Little Rock, AR 72203-1437 December 10, 2002 Dear Ms. Stubblefield We offer our support of Communities In Schools of Little Rocks (CIS of LR) proposal for an AmeriCorps Promise Fellow. The CIS of LR has done an outstanding job of serving youth in the Little Rock School District (LRSD) for several years. Had it not been for CIS of LR, many of the services provided in the past year such as mentoring, tutoring, health care, economic education, and counseling would not have reached the students most in need. As a monitor for the federal court, I have personally observed the wonderful accomplishments and ongoing efforts of CIS of LR to serve the whole child. With school budgets dwindling and the continued erosion of city tax bases, many of the programs and services that do not deal directly with academics are often the first to be eliminated. Nevertheless, students do not learn in a vacuum, and they continue to bring emotional, social, and physical problems to the classroom. Having an AmeriCorps Promise Fellow would be a tremendous asset to students and school personnel at the host site, Pulaski Heights Middle School. By providing student and family support to incoming students from distressed schools, the AmeriCorps Promise Fellow could well be the first line of defense in keeping Pulaski Heights Middle School from becoming the type of school those students were fleeing. Sincerely yours. Ann S. Marshall Federal Monitor\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_293","title":"Compliance hearing exhibits, 39-45","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":["1999"],"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","Educational law and legislation","Education--Evaluation","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance hearing exhibits, 39-45"],"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/293"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["exhibition (associated concept)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"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\nHANDBOOK FOR CAMPUS LEADERSHIP TEAM July 1999I HAIVDBOOK FOR CAMPUS LEADERSHIP TEAM Table of Contents I Letter from the Superintendent Vision and Mission Statement Campus Leadership System Summary of Campus Leadership Plan Components Campus LeadershipBoard of Education Policy Campus Leadership Team^Administrative Policy Cluster Coordinating Committee^Administrative Policy ! Campus Leadership Team Tasks - Administrative Policy Cluster Coordinating Committee Tasks - Administrative Policy Leadership Team Expectations Campus Leadership Team - Administrative Policy \u0026amp; Team Matrix Cluster Coordinating Committee Membership Administrative Policy Board of Education Policy Waivers Campus Leadership Team Organizational Components Campus Leadership Team Calendar Campus Leadership Team Evaluation Planning \u0026amp; Decision Making Process Collective Responsibility for Student Achievement Reporting Responsibilities District Annual Performance Report School Performance Reports PAGE I ii 1 2 3 4 4 4 5 5 6 8 8 9 11 13 14 16 16 16 16Accreditation and Accountability Status PAGE 17 I iI Program Evaluations 17 I School Improvement Plans State Quality Indicators School Selected Indicators Additional District Selected Indicators and Value-Added Goals or Improvement Goals Indicators by School Level Rewards for Schools Rewards for Staff/Students Sanctions 17 18-19 20 20-23 23-45 46 47 Technical Assistance and Support for Schools Identified for Improvement Sanctions for Central Office School Role When Identified for Sanctions Definitions 48-52 52 53 53-54 Forms: Addendum a. Nomination Form - Recommendation for Individuals to be Appointed 55 j i b. Campus Leadership Team Nomination Form 56 c. Waiver Form 57 d. Customer Service/Learning Climate Surveys i 1. Parent 2. Teacher 3. Student 4. Administrator 61 62 63 64 i e. Functional Vocabulary 65 f. School Improvement Planner and Implementation Timeline 66 g- Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program 69OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 (501) 324-2012 I July 1999 ! Dear Campus Leadership Colleagues: The Campus Leadership Program at the Little Rock School District uses an organization structure known as site-based decision-making which involves principals, teachers, auxiliary staff, parents, business leaders and community members. The purpose of the Campus Leadership Teams is to establish instructional goals and strategies to further promote the education of all children. Involvement and total commitment are paramount to reaching the ultimate in performance. Involvement is the key component of the Campus Leadership Program. ! The Campus Leadership Plan is a commitment by each unique school campus and allows that unit to develop programs and strategies that best meet the needs of children served at that school. The District has made a renewed commitment to the neighborhood schools and will continue to maintain an outstanding group of magnet  schools. The Little Rock School District also pledges to maintain and further develop a quality education program. The Campus Leadership Program is the participatory vehicle which will ensure that a quality education program is available at all District campuses. The School Board and Administration believe this process fosters the best opportunity for the school children of Little Rock. Sincerely, Lesli\\V. Gamine Superintendent of Schools i 1 I Vision Statement The Campus Leadership program in the Little Rock School District will work to ensure that all Little Rock School District students will graduate from high school. The diploma that graduates receive will represent:      Mastery of all basic skills\nInternalization of a liberal arts education\nUnderstanding of the need to preserve the democratic way of life, including respect for the nations cultural diversity\nExpertise in accessing and applying knowledge\nand Confidence and competency in making career choices. LRSD Mission Statement I The mission of the LRSD 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. ii Campus Leadership System The campus based leadership system is intended to drive fundamental changes in classroom teaching by helping the campuses and District focus on improved student achievement. The six basic components of campus-based leadership are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Commitment to improved student achievement for all students. 1 i ! Improved student achievement will be based on established local goals for student performance. A system of incentives for student performance will be established, which will include multiple and alternative performance measures. Collaborative structure and process Policies and procedures guide the establishment of District and campus leadership to ensure representative collaboration of principals, teachers, other staff, parents, business partners, and community members. Decentralization Parameters The specific areas for implementation with respect to goal setting, classroom instruction, and campus organization are included. Deregulation avenues are provided to waive local policies and state regulations if they inhibit improved student performance. Statement of Purpose of Campus Leadership I I i The uniqueness of each campus related to its needs, and its decision making capacity to address those needs, are acknowledged in District policy and demonstrated through actual practice. Adequate time, ongoing staff development and technical support. Sufficient time is allotted to allow for the development of skills and attitudes that will ensure effective campus leadership. Procedures for planning and evaluating student achievement goals and decision making process. 1I Organizational and management procedures are established to guide the progress of campus leadership in the District and on the individual campus. An evaluation process is developed and used to assess locally established performance goals and the effectiveness of committee and campus leadership and further the impact of decision making on student performance. We acknowledge that planning and implementing these components of campus leadership will require a re-conceptualization of the roles and responsibilities of board members, central office administrators, campus principals, teachers, support staff, parents, business partners, and community representatives. This strategy for school and instructional improvement with a strong incentive initiative will only succeed if it is carefully planned with relevant input from the stakeholders. The campus leadership system is based on the concept of continuous improvement. Every campus can improve. Every campus is expected to show academic growth. Every school will benefit by reaching achievable standards. SUMMARY OF CAMPUS LEADERSHIP PLAN COMPONENTS The plan components are: 1. 2. 3. 4. Board and administrative policy, which support a system of campus leadership at the campus and District level. Identification of quality indicators and an incentive plan, which promotes increases in student performance. Staff development plans and technical assistance, which will support the implementation of the campus leadership system. The assistance will support the planning and technical support for continuous improvement at the campus and District level. Clear guidelines for campus leadership. The parameters for decision making give guidance to the level and type of decision which is made at Federal/State/District levels, those which are better made at the campus/classroom level, and finally those which are collaborative. 2LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN: CFD CAMPUS LEADERSHIP The Board of Education of the Little Rock School District believes that a fundamental responsibility of the school system is to support the sustained improvement of the schools. Site-based decision making provides each school with a framework to attain the Districts mission. Shared decision-making allows representation of administration, staff, students, parents, and patrons to provide more efficient use of time and energy. This facilitates a quality environment for students, a productive working environment for staff members, and increased opportunity for community involvement in our schools. To effect this belief, it is the policy of the Board of Education of the LRSD, that each school shall establish a campus leadership team to improve performance of all student populations. This team will assist in the development and evaluation of campus goals and objectives through planning, budgeting, curriculum development, staff development, and staffing needs. Through consensus based decisions, the campus teams will support the Districts commitment of the sustained improvement of schools. 1 t Adopted: 07-09-98 Cross-Reference: Administrative Regulation CFD-R 3Campus Leadership Team - Administrative Policy Each school year the principal of each school campus, with the assistance of the campus leadership team, shall develop, review, and revise the campus improvement plan for the purpose of improving student performance for all students with respect to the Quality Index Indicators and any other appropriate performance measures for special needs populations. Cluster Coordinating Committee - Administrative Policy i The Cluster Coordinating Committee will meet on a regular basis with times and dates to be determined by the Superintendent. The purpose of the committee to advise the superintendent on policy and implementation of the campus leadership decision making model. The committee may from time to time address additional empowerment strategies and provide a communication link with each campus of the Little Rock School District. Campus Leadership Team Tasks - Administrative Policy The campus leadership team shall advise the principal in the following areas:  development of the campus plan  evaluation of the campus plan  campus budget  campus program and curriculum  staffing patterns  staff development*  school organization  at least one public meeting per year to discuss/review campus performance objectives. * The staff development plan must be approved by the campus leadership team and is coordinated with the campus plan. 4Cluster Coordinating Committee Tasks - Administrative Policy The following are identified tasks of the Cluster Coordinating Committee:  advise the superintendent on implementation of the campus leadership plan  assist in the areas of analyzing and updating the participatory decision making matrix  assist with the assessment the development of Total Quality Schools model i  assist with the assessment of the Customer Service and Learning Climate components of the TQS model  design strategies for improving and maintaining initiatives for Customer Service and appropriate Learning Climate  assist with the development and maintenance of marketing the Little Rock School District LEADERSHIP TEAM EXPECTATIONS Leadership team members are expected to:  make a commitment to improve outcomes for all students  make team goals a higher priority than personal goals  share information, perceptions, and feedback openly  directly confront important issues  make objective judgements based on facts  display leadership in ways which contribute to the teams success  respond constructively to feedback from other team members  collaborate effectively with other team members  demonstrate a unified commitment to team goals and strategies  understand consensus building  identify and communicate statement of purpose for campus leadership  identify and implement strategies to attain goals  identify needs for adequate time, ongoing development and support staff development  communicate team goals and strategies to staff, students, administration, school board, parents and community. 5Campus Leadership Team Administrative Policy Student achievement is the primary focus of the Little Rock School District. Each campus accepts the responsibility and challenge to provide equitable educational opportunities that ensure every student is successful. Therefore, each Little Rock School District campus is committed to establishing a campus leadership team that will work collaboratively with the principal in the decision-making process to enhance student achievement. Membership: The membership for each campus team shall consist of: CAMPUS TEAM MATRIX RECOMMENDED NUMBER OF POSITIONS 1 5-10 1 2 1 1 1 1 Principal Certified Teachers Central Office (Brokers) Parent Business ______Community______ Non-certified School Staff Student POSITION TITLE Chairman Elected Invited/Appointed Appointed Appointed Appointed Elected or appointed Elected or appointed MEMBERSHIP Required Required Required Required Required Required Optional Optional Note: Classroom teachers must be at least 60% of the faculty/staff/central office component. Nomination: The principal shall publish procedures to be utilized for the nomination and election of representatives to the campus team. The principal shall post the election procedure regulations and policy a minimum of ten days prior to the called election. The prescribed form must be used with elected representatives to the campus team. The form indicates their willingness to serve and shall be kept on file in the principals office. Election: The consent of each nominee shall be obtained before the persons name may appear on the secret ballot. Election of the campus team shall be completed by November 1. Election Procedures: The election of representatives to the campus team will be made by secret ballot. On the date of the election, ballots will be distributed to all eligible voters. The ballot will contain the names of all nominees according to their respective grouping and instructions on how each nominee may be chosen by voters. The principal and designated staff members will tabulate completed ballots. I Term: Elected representatives shall serve staggered two-year terms. In the first election, 50% of the elected membership will serve a one-year term. Elected representatives may serve two consecutive terms. Appointed representatives are not subject to term limitations, but rotation of appointed representatives is encouraged unless there are no other volunteers willing to participate. 6Vacancy: If a vacancy occurs among the elected representatives, nominations shall be solicited and an election held for the vacant position in the same manner as the annual election. If a vacancy occurs within 5 months of the end of a term, the principal may, but is not required to, fill the vacancy - elected or appointed. Appointed Members: The principal has discretionary privilege to appoint the parents, business leaders, community members, non-certified staff, and students. Appointed members have all the rights and responsibilities as elected members. Thirty days prior to the appointments in November, the principal shall communicate the process of receiving nominations or recommendations. If a vacancy occurs among the appointed representatives, another person will be selected to fill the vacant position. Definitions: For the purposes of establishing the composition of campus teams: 1. 2. 3. A person who stands in parental relation to a student is considered a parent. A parent who is an employee of the District is not considered a representative of community members on the committee. Community members must reside in the District and must be at least 18 years of age. Meetings: The principal shall serve as chairman of the campus leadership team, set its agenda, and shall schedule at least four (4) meetings per year. The agenda and minutes of the meetings will be posted and filed. i On an annual basis, each principal with the assistance of the campus leadership team shall review and revise the campus improvement plan (COE) for the purpose of improving student performance. i The Board shall also ensure that an administrative policy is provided to clearly define the respective roles and responsibilities of the superintendent, central office staff, principals, teachers, and campus team members in the areas of: I I a. b. c. d. e. f. planning budgeting curriculum staffing patterns staff development school organization i 7Cluster Coordinating Committee Membership Administrative Policy A Campus Leadership Team member and the campus principal will constitute the campus representatives. Board of Education Policy Waivers The Board of Education of the Little Rock School District believes that the District or a campus leadership team should have the option of applying for a waiver of a requirement or prohibition imposed by law or rule. It is the policy of the Board of Education of the LRSD to support the waiver process for local schools to seek relief from requirements or prohibition imposed by law or rule. The waiver must be in written form following the procedures outlined below.  Identification of the statutory requirements for which a waiver is requested.  Description of why the waiver is needed and the goals that would be achieved if granted. I  Descriptions of the measurement process that will be used if the waiver is granted and program is implemented.  Description of how the interested parties were notified of the waiver request.  Descriptions of federal, state, and District requirements to be waived. Restrictions: The District or campus team may not receive an exemption or waiver from requirements imposed by federal law or rule such as Goals 2000, Educate America Act, Elementary Secondary Education Act (ESEA), School to Work Opportunities Act, or from a requirement or prohibition imposed by state law. Waiver Application: A waiver request application form may be obtained by the principal from the Associate Superintendent of Instruction. The principal is to enlist the review of the campus team and obtain consensus before the waiver is processed. The completed waiver must be submitted to the superintendent for review and processing. Requirements for a waiver by the state must follow regulations as described in the Submission and Approval section. A waiver application to be acted upon for the next academic year must be submitted to the District by March 1. 8Submission and Approval: The application shall be submitted to the superintendent no later than March 1 of the year before the campus intends to take action. The superintendent will inform the principal of the action taken within thirty days. A waiver requiring the Arkansas Department of Education or Arkansas State Board of Education action must be acted upon by the District Board before fonwarding to the Arkansas Department of Education. District Board action should be consistent with state and federal guidelines. Campus Leadership Team Organization Components This is an example of one way you could organize the team to fulfill the mission of the Campus Team. The basic components of the Student Success Model follow, and each becomes a subcommittee organizationally. Teachers, parents and community representatives work together to develop goals and objectives to enhance their school for the benefit of students. Development of strategies and crossdiscipline support are maximized by the membership of the committees. Members of the campus leadership team are the chairs, and encourage a broad range of talent to serve on the working committees that support the individual classroom teacher. 1. Skills and Knowledge Continuum a. b. c. d. e. f. g- Curriculum / objectives Materials / equipment to support curriculum Cross integration of curriculum to support core focus Example: Campus develops strategy for Math to support vocabulary building\nmusic with similar strategies with reading supporting math/ science/social studies... th is is an example but there is strategy of support - a comprehensive curriculum. 2. Personalized Education Programs There are a number of individual initiatives, which the campus develops and supports to meet the individual needs of students. Examples of personalized education programs are: i a. Special Education b. Gifted and Talented Education c. Drop Out Reduction Programs d. Accelerated Learning LaboratoryRemedial and Academic Acceleration e. Students with children f. English as a Second Language (ESL) 9I 3. staff Development a. Focus on Campus Goals b. Teacher generated c. Inclusive 4. Community Support a. VIPS \u0026amp; PIE b. c. d. e. f. PTA Neighborhoods Senior Citizens Business State and local officials 5. Assessment 1 a. b. c. d. e. f. Individual and diagnostic program data analysis for focused instruction - SAT9, ACTAP, CRT alternative coordinated with core academic standards prescriptive 6. Communication a. b. c. Coordinated to allow all stakeholders to understand the mission \u0026amp; goals of the campus Creates a network beyond the campus of support for campus strategies Creates a network of support for individuals in support student achievement initiatives 10Campus Leadership Team Calendar The calendar is approximate of the activities that you consider as you work together to create a more effective school. The asterisk (*) denotes where a form or additional information exists to accomplish the task or confirm the activity. January Campus Leadership Team has initial meeting L* February March I i I April Ma a. b. c. d. Introduction to the process orientation activities for new members team expectations planning process reviewed Review and interim evaluation of campus plan activities. Consideration of modification to current year campus plan and submit to designated individual for review. Discuss plans for update of needs assessment. Campus Leadership Teams work with developing skills in problem solving and consensus building, conflict resolution and communication. Request specific type of technical assistance. Monitor and adjust campus plan* Draft action plan due to Assistant Superintendent Begin process of working with the campus community to address perceived needs of campus for following year Discuss and start evaluation of Campus Leadership Teams problem solving process and team effectiveness. Start Evaluation of current year campus plan and establish timelines for completion of evaluation and communication with stakeholders. Create strategy and set in motion the collection of published research and data collection requirements for discussion and analysis by Campus Leadership Team in preparation for next years campus plan. Evaluate assessment results Campus Leadership develops and communicates draft of focus areas based on assessment results. 11I June I Submit evaluation of campus plan (There is a recognition that current year results of ACT / SAT would not be available or certain other current year results. The incentive plan will indicate those particular areas and that the previous years results will be utilized in those cases.) July District-wide Campus Leadership Team Meetings Campus Leadership Team refines initial draft of campus goals and further starts development of action plans on determined focus areas. District wide Campus Leadership Team Meetings by Cluster August Opening of School Campus Leadership Team meetings with faculty on Campus. Share recommend goals for current year and draft of action plans. Confirm goals. Designate problem solving and action teams for accomplishment of goals September I I Communication with all stakeholders the goals of the campus*. Prepare final action plans and submit to Superintendent and Board for final approval. Acceptance or modification required goals and action plans. Hold public meeting and share results of previous years campus goals and action plans 1 October Inform public and staff of opportunities to serve on the Campus Leadership Teamshare Leadership Team membership expectations. Receive nominations for membership on the Campus Leadership Team for each membership category*. November Current Leadership Team checks on implementation of action plans. Problem solving teams Election of Leadership Team members* December Collection of data to ascertain effectiveness of action plans and problem solving teams Initiate mid year report of progress * Appointment of members to the Leadership Team ,* 12Campus Leadership Team Evaluation I i Officially the participatory decision-making model was implemented in the LRSD in the fall of 1998. It has been, in various ways, part of the school-based leadership design at several of the campuses prior to that time. This survey is to be utilized as a self-evaluation for the campus leadership team during the initial year of operation. In subsequent years, it is to be utilized with all campus faculty, parents, and a sampling of business and community members. Considerations: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. While I obviously cant have a vote on every decision that is made in this school, I do feel that there are mechanisms that allow me to have input into the decision making process. (Note: There are evaluation instruments appropriate to the customer, staff, parent and community member. In many cases, the only change to the question would be a word change...directed to appropriate group of individuals.) The Campus Leadership Team has an established system of communication, both verbal and written, that ensures that all staff members are informed about Campus Leadership team decisions and plans. The school involves the total faculty in collecting, analyzing, distributing, and soliciting feedback on data related goals and objectives using a total quality school program. The organization and operation of the Campus Leadership Team, as it is currently designed, is becoming an effective process. The Campus Leadership Team develops and coordinates staff development plans consistent with the campus goals. The Campus Leadership Team is an advisory body to the principal in the areas of planning, budgeting, curriculum, staffing, and school organization. In your opinion, has the function of the Campus Leadership Team, as described, played a part in increasing student achievement. I i The Campus Leadership Teams parents, community members and business representatives are involved in contributing to the schools quality improvement goals. (School Climate, etc.) 138. Customer satisfaction has improved with use of home visits, parent surveys, parent conference days, Parent-Teacher Associations, Campus Leadership Team, written communiques, school newsletters and other communication and involvement activities. (Customize for customer group) I i 9. The entire faculty is involved in identifying specific strategies for measuring progress toward achieving quality goals. 10. The District Leadership is continuously involved in supporting Campus initiatives for improved student performance. Ratings could be Almost Never to Almost Always or similar format. PLANNING AND DECISION MAKING PROCESS I Decision Making: In accordance with Board policy the campus team shall be involved in decisions in the areas of planning, budgeting, curriculum, staffing patterns, staff development and school organization, and serve in an advisory capacity to the principal. Procedures: Each campus shall maintain current policies and procedures to ensure that effective planning and site-based decision making occur at each campus to direct and support the improvement of student performance for all students. i Process: The Board shall establish a procedure under which meetings are held regularly by campus teams that include representative professional staff, parents of students enrolled in the District, and community members. Campus teams shall include business representatives, without regard to whether a business representative resides in the District or whether the business the person represents is located in the District. I Plan: Each school year, the principal of each school campus, with the assistance of the campus team, shall develop, review and revise the campus improvement plan for the purpose of improving student performance for all student populations with respect to the academic quality indicators and any other appropriate performance measures for special populations. The plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Superintendent by October 1 for transmittal to the Board. Staff Development: The campus team must approve the portions of the campus plan addressing campus staff development needs. 14I Consultation by Principal: The principal shall regularly consult the campus team in the planning operation, supervision and evaluation of the campus education program. Public Meeting: The campus team shall hold at least one public meeting per year. The required meeting shall be held after receipt of the campus evaluation to discuss the performance on the performance objectives. District policy and campus procedures must be established to ensure that systematic communications measures are in place to periodically obtain broad-based community, parent, and staffing input, and to provide information to those persons regarding the recommendations of the campus team. Campus Level Plan: Each Campus Improvement Plan (ACSIP) must: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Assess the academic achievement for each student in the school using the academic quality system. Set the campus goals based on the academic quality indicator system, including objectives for special needs populations. Identify how the campus goals will be met for each student. Campuses may select up to five goals for the Campus Improvement Plan. Determine the resources needed to implement the plan. Identify the staff needed to implement the plan. Set time lines for reaching the goals. Measure progress toward the performance objectives periodically to ensure that the plan is resulting in academic achievement. Include an annual report with results to be shared with the team, staff, parents and the appropriate assistant superintendent. 15Collective Responsibility for Student Achievement Definition of Collective Responsibility Collective Responsibility means that all the adults in the District and at each school hold themselves accountable for ail the students meeting the challenging behavior and academic content standards and benchmarks and other outcomes established by the Board of Education, by the state for accreditation, by federally funded programs, and by external funders of reform initiatives approved by the Board of Education. District-level staff share with school-level staffs in the collective responsibility for school improvement. This critically important attitude is developed and nurtured through professional learning communities established by the District and each school. In addition, the Superintendent shall ensure that all job descriptions of appropriate District-level and building-level staff\nannual work plans\nDistrict-level processes and school-level parameters for decision-making\npersonnel hiring, assignment, promotion, and evaluation systems\nand the professional development programs are results-based and aligned with the improvement indicators established in the Quality Index. Reporting Responsibilities I The Superintendent shall report to the Board of Education annually on progress related to the implementation of the Strategic Plan and the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. In addition, so that the community is also informed on the Districts progress in meeting expected improvement goals, the following reports must be submitted to the Board of Education in open sessions. District Annual Performance Report The Annual Performance Report is to be submitted to the Board of Education no later than August 30 annually. It shall include data relating to each of the Quality Indicators, including the baseline year data so that progress can be identified. The Annual Performance Report shall also include the accreditation status and accountability status for each school, as determined by the Arkansas Department of Education. School Performance Reports The state-mandated School Performance Reports shall be published and distributed to parents and other interested patrons annually. These report cards shall include the data mandated by the Arkansas Department of Education, but also school data relating to the Districts Quality Indicators. 16School principals shall disseminate these reports to all the staff members and parents in their school community and make them available to interested patrons. At least one parent meeting shall be conducted annually by the Campus Leadership Team and the principal to discuss the performance of the school and planned short- and long-range improvements. The District may disseminate school-level supplements to the School Performance Reports to include data relating to District-selected Quality Indicators. Accreditation and Accountability Status If a school has been identified for school improvement, as per Title I regulations and/or if the school is conditionally accredited or non-accredited, then the designation and an explanation of its implications, as well as the accountability status of the school as defined by the State shall be included in the School Performance Report. I Program Evaluations The results of any internal program evaluation studies or evaluations of grant- funded projects are to be provided to the Board of Education within a month of their submission to the Superintendent and/or to the funding organization. School Improvement Plans Although there are multiple state and local indicators, Campus Leadership Teams should select, based on their data analysis, three to five priority improvement goals as a focus for the School Improvement Plan. (See the Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Planning process.) I 17state Quality IndicatorsTier I The Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment, and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) establishes the following indicators based on performance goals for Tier I: I 1 I =M^State?lndicatoi^^\nl Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests School Drop Out Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development School Safety \u0026gt;-^l-^rade*Leyel(sj5 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics. 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Algebra 1. 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Geometry. 100% of a schools secondary students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Literacy. At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12' grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%. 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. .'J. Grades 4, 6, 8 Secondary Grades 7-12 Grades K-12 Grades K-12 Grades K-12 Grades K-12 18 tfejGoal^f Definition)state Quality IndicatorsTier II The Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment, and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) establishes the following indicators for Tier II. Tier II indicators are based on trend and improvement goals. Trend goals will be established for different cohorts of students, and improvement goals will be established for the same cohort of students over time. I i State Indicator Goal (Definition) Grade Level(s) Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Grades 4, 6, and 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Tests The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficient level in Geometry will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. The percent of secondary students performing at or above the proficienf level in Literacy will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Secondary 19Tier HSchool Selected Indicators (Schools Select Any 5) State Indicator Goal (Definition) Grade l-evel(s) Drop-outs Secondary schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12* grade. Secondary Average Daily Attendance Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. All levels Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. All levels Professional Development Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. All levels School Safety Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. All levels Other School Selected Indicators Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. All levels Additional District-Selected Indicators The following additional academic indicators (based also on both performance and trend/improvement) have been established by the Little Rock School District. Value-Added Goals or Improvement Goals I The District-adopted criterion-referenced tests for grades K-11 will be administered to provide pre- and post-test scores so that gains of individual students may be measured each semester. Only those scores of students who were in the school the previous test administration will be used in calculating value-added gains (or improvement). The purpose of this measure is to be able to determine the extent to which a school adds value through individual students gains. In other words, regardless of whether students attain the proficient level at any given grade, the District is interested in whether the students progressed toward proficiency during that year. Both trend and improvement data will be tracked as well. 20LRSD Indicator Goal (Definition) Grade Level(s) I I Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Kindergarten Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy. The percent of grade 1 students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Grade 1 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Test 65% of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the percentile in reading. The percent of students in every sub-group or race and gender performing at or above the 50 percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50*' percentile in mathematics. The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50*' percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. __________________ Grades 5, 7, 10 21I LRSD Indicator Goal (Definition) Grade Level(s) i i I Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Test At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Grades 5, 7. 10 Performance on District-Adopted Criterion- Referenced Tests Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Enrollment in Algebra I by grade 8 Honors Seal on High School Diploma 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics each quarter will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 65% of middle and high school students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year. The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 90% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. The percent of students enrolled in Algebra 1 by grade 8 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 65% of a high schools students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas. The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Grades 2-11 Grades 6-12 Grade 8 Grades 9-12 22{ t 1 LRSD Indicator Taking the ACT Performance on the ACT Taking Advanced Placement Examinations Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations Completion of Graduation Requirements GdaiHDefinitibn)\n Gr^\u0026amp;lWel(s)? 65% of a high schools students will take the ACT. The percent of students taking the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a high schools students who take the ACT will earn a score of at least 19. The percent of students earning a score of 19 or above will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 65% of a high schools graduates will have taken at least one AP examination. The percent of students taking at least one AP examination will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a high school's students taking AP examinations will score a 3 or above. The percent of students earning a score of 3 or above on AP examinations will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 100% of a high schools seniors will complete all the graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony, The percent of seniors meeting all graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Grades 11-12 Grades 11-12 Grades 11-12 Grades 11-12 Grade 12 A schools performance on these District-selected indicators may be reflected in a local supplement to the state-mandated School Performance Report or as a part of the narrative in the Tier III report that becomes a part of the states School Performance Report. Indicators by School Level On the following pages are lists of the state and district indicators by school level. These indicators include the priorities established in the LRSD Strategic Plan, the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, the National Science Foundation Project, Title I, ACTAAP, and ACSIP. Also included in the tables are the columns of data that will be used to determine a schools status. 23Quality Indicators for Elementary Schools Baseline. Year r '^r^* Level State Indicators Tier I 1998-99 4 Performance on State Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Literacy Test_______ 1998-99 4 Performance on State Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Mathematics Test___ 1999-00 K-5 Average Daily Attendance 1999-00 K-5 Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher ____ 1999-00 K-5 Professional Development 1990-00 K-5 School Safety ^-^Goal(D^ition)r\u0026lt;:\n^.\u0026gt;fc Your 1- -s Results -Growth? ^Your i jGrowttf -Your Score 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in reading and writing literacy. 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in mathematics. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%. ______________________ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. ____________________ 1998-99 4 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion Referenced Grade 4 Literacy Test The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._________ 24Quality Indicators for Elementary Schools (continued) Baseline Year 1998-99 Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels 4 Grade i Levels K-5 K-5 K-5 K-5 K-5 State Indicators Tier I Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Grade 4 Mathematics Test School-Selected Indicators Tier II (Select five) Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development School Safety Other School Selected Indicators Goal (Definition) The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Goal (Definition) Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. ________________ Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually._____ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. _______________ Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Your Results Your Results Growth Goal 14 Growth Goal Your Growth\nYour Growth Your Score Your Score 25LRSD Elementary School Quality Indicators Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators 7 Goal(Deflnition) 1999-00 K Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test 1999-00 K Performance on District- Adopted Kindergarten Literacy Test 1999-00 1 Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test _________ 1999-00 1 Performance on District- Adopted Grade 1 Literacy Test 1998-99 5 Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test __________ 1998-99 5 Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test Your Score Your Growth Growth: Goal ' * 90% of a schools kindergarten students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy. The percent of kindergarten students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend goal each year.__________________________ 90% of a schools grade 1 students shall perform at or above the proficient level in literacy.___________________________ The percent of grade 1 students demonstrating gains from the pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender will perform at or above the 50**' percentile in reading._____ The percent of a schools students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50**' percentile will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.__________________________ 26LRSD Elementary School Quality Indicators (continued) Baseline Year Grade Levels LRSD Indicators ~ i Goal (Definition)' Your Results Growth  Goal Your Growth Your Score 1998-99 5 Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. 1998-99 5 Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.__________ 1998-99 5 Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. 1998-99 5 Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Reading Test The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._________ 1998-99 5 Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test 65% of a schools students shall perform at or above the 50 percentile in grade 5 mathematics. _____________ 1998-99 5 Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test The percent of students performing at or above the 50' percentile in grade 5 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.______ 1998-99 5 Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. 27 LRSD Elementary School Quality Indicators (continued) Baseline S Year 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels LRSD Indicators 2. * - Goal (peflnition) - \u0026gt;5 C' V, . Your Results Growth ? Your Goal Growth^ Your Score 5 5 5 2-5 2-5 2-5 Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test______ Performance on SAT9, the Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.______ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.______ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in grades 2-5 reading each semester._____________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the grades 2-5 reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 28LRSD Elementary School Quality Indicators (continued) Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade^. Lwels LRSD indicators\nYour : ResuHs Growth Gbah^ 'ypur,^ -Growth Your Score 2-5 2-5 2-5 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test ______ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test ______ Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in grades 2-5 mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the grades 2-5 mathematics pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. _________ 29( Quality Indicators for Middle Schools Baseline\nYear\nGrade\nLevels State Indicators Tier r--\n- - tZ'c Goal (Definition) 'ri Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 2001-02 6 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 6 reading and writing literacy. ___________ 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 reading and writing literacy. ________ 2001-02 6 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test ________ 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient\" level in grade 6 mathematics. 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test _________ 100% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in grade 8 mathematics. 2001-02 7 (Dunbar) or 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test __________ 100% of a schools grade 7 or 8 students who complete Algebra I shall perform at or above the proficient level. 2001-02 8 (Dunbar) Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test _________ 100% of a schools grade 8 students who complete Geometry shall perform at or above the proficienf level. 1999-00 7-8 School Dropout At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12** grade. i 30Quality Indicators for Middle Schools (continued) Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Baseline Year 2001-02 1999-00 Grade Levels . 6-8 6-8 6-8 6-8 Grade\nLevels 6 8 State Indicators- Tier i d Jr Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher ____ Professional Development School Safety State-Mandated Indicators Tier 11 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test. Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test. - V Goal (Definition)  Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%. ________________________-___ 100% of a school's classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development.__________ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts^_________________________ Goal (Definition) The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year._________ The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in reading and writing literacy on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Your Results Your Results i Growth Goal Growth Goal Your Growth Your Growth Your Score Your Score 31Quality Indicators for Middle Schools (continued) Baseline - Year Grade Levels State-Mandated Indicators Tier II M Goal (Definitjon) 2001-02 6 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. _______________________ 1999-00 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient\" level in mathematics on the criterion-referenced tests will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.___________ 2001-02 7 (Dunbar) or 8 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. _____ The percent of students completing Algebra 1 performing at or above the proficient level will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 2001-02 8 (Dunbar) Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test. ___ The percent of students completing Geometry performing at or above the proficient level will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Your Results Growth Goal Your ^Growth Your Score 32f Quality Indicators for Middle Schools (continued) , Baseline Year Grade Levels School-Selected Indicators 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 1999-00 6-8 6-8 Tier II (Select five) Drop-outs Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development School Safety Other School Selected Indicators s Secondary schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12* grade. Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. _____________ Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually._________________________ Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. __________ Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. Your Results Growth , . Goar^ Your Growth  Your Score 33LRSD Middle School Quality Indicators Baseline-\n^ -M aGradOisfti ^ALRSPIndic^brsS '^1 ajS6a\n|(Peflnition) / Your Results Growth Goal.' Your Growth Your Score 1998-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test_________ 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50** percentile in reading._______ 1998-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50* percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.__________________ 1998-99 1 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test_________ At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. 1998-99 7 Performance on SAT9. a Norm-Referenced Reading Test The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.__________ 1998-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test_________ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. 1998-99 7 Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 34LRSD Middle School Quality Indicators (continued) Baseline Grade Year Levels LRSD Indicators Goal (Definition). Si Yours Growth Results Goal Your Growth Your Score 1998-99 1 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50** percentile in mathematics. 1998-99 7 Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test The percent of students in every sub-group of race and gender performing at or above the 50* percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.________________________ 1998-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. 1998-99 1 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 1998-99 1 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. 1998-99 7 Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 1999-00 6-8 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in reading each semester. 35LRSD Middle School Quality Indicators (continued) Grade | LRSD indicators Year  Levels Baseline 1999-00 6-8 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test 1999-00 6-8 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion Referenced Reading Test 1999-00 6-8 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test 1999-00 6-8 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test 1999-00 6-8 Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test 1998-99 6-8 Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses 1998-99 6-8 Enrollment in Pre-AP Courses The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. ________________ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester.______ The percent of students demonstrating gains from the mathematics pre-test to the posttest will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year._______________________ 65% of a middle school's students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course each year._______________________________ The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Jour Growth. . Goal Your - \"Growth wYour* jScoHi- 36LRSD Middle School Quality Indicators (continued) Baseline Year 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 6-8 6-8 LRSD Indicators (Definition) II*  Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth\nYour Score Enrollment in Algebra I by Grade 8 Enrollment in Algebra I by Grade 8 90% of a middle schools students will be enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8. The percent of students enrolled in Algebra I by grade 8 will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 37 Quality Indicators for High Schools Baseline Year 2001-02 2001-02 2001-02 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 Grade Levels^ 9-12 9-12 11 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 State Indicators Tierl Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Geometry Test Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test School Drop Out Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher Professional Development School Safety Goal (Definition) \"t. t 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Algebra I. 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Geometry. 100% of a high schools students shall perform at or above the proficient level in Reading and Writing Literacy. At least 99% of secondary students will remain in school to complete the 12* grade. Average daily attendance rate will be at least 95%. __ 100% of a schools classes will be taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. 100% of a schools certified staff will complete at least 30 hours of approved professional development annually. Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and I violent acts.___________ Your Results Growth\nYour - Goal, Growth -Your Score 38Quality Indicators for High Schools (continued) Baseline Year Grade Levels State-Mandated Indicators Tier II \"ik. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth 2001-02 9-12 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Algebra I Test The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in Algebra I will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 2001-02 9-12 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Geometry Test The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in Geometry will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 2001-02 11 Performance on State- Mandated Criterion- Referenced Literacy Test The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in Literacy will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Your Score Baseline Year Grade Levels School-Selected Indicators 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 2001-02 9-12 i Tier II (Select five.)\u0026gt; Drop-outs Average Daily Attendance Classes Taught by an Appropriately Licensed Teacher iltloi V' High schools will improve the percentage of students who stay in school to complete the 12*^ grade. Schools will improve their average daily attendance rate. Schools will improve the percent of classes taught by an appropriately licensed teacher. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 39 Quality Indicators for High Schools (continued) Baseline Year Grades#*?^ School-Selected Levels Indicators Tier II (Select five.) Goal (Definition) 't* ft riss* Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth 2001-02 9-12 Professional Development Schools will increase the percent of certified staff who complete 60 or more hours of approved professional development annually. 2001-02 9-12 School Safety Schools will be free of drugs, weapons, and violent acts. ____________ 9-12 Other School Selected Indicators Schools will select trend or improvement goals directed to student achievement in specific sub-populations or sub-test areas. These must have prior approval of ADE. IL Your Score 40Baseline Yeari 2 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 ^-r9S? -LRSD Indicators LRSD High School Quality Indicators Your Results Growth Goal ? Your Growth   - t - - Your Score Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Reading Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50 percentile in reading. The percent of students performing at or above the 50* percentile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in reading. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. 65% of a schools students in every subgroup of race and gender shall perform at or above the 50' percentile in mathematics. 41 LRSD High School Quality Indicators (continued) Baseline Year v 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00\nGrade Levels- 10 10 10 10 10 9-11 LRSD Indicators Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SAT9, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on SATO, a Norm-Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test The percent of students performing at or above the 50* percentile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. At least 30% of a schools students will perform at the highest quartile in mathematics. ______ The percent of a schools students performing at the highest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.______ At least 90% of a schools students will perform above the lowest quartile in mathematics. The percent of a schools students performing above the lowest quartile in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year.______ 90% of a schools students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in reading each semester. 42 LRSD High School Quality Indicators (continued) Baseline Year 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1999-00 1998-99 1998-99 , Grade Levels 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-11 9-12 9-12 LRSD indicators Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Reading Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Performance on District- Adopted Criterion- Referenced Mathematics Test Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses Enrollment in Pre-AP and/or AP Courses * . ? Goal (Definition) The percent of students performing at or above the proficienf level in reading will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. --3 The percent of students demonstrating gains from the reading pre-test to the post-test will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 90% of a school's students shall perform at or above the proficienf level in mathematics each semester. The percent of students performing at or above the proficient level in mathematics will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each semester. The percent of students demonstrating gains from the mathematics pre-test to the posttest will meet or exceed the improvement goal each year. 65% of a high school's students will be enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course each year. The percent of students enrolled in at least one Pre-AP or AP course will meet or exceed the trend and improvement goals each year. Your Results Growth Goal\nYour Growth Your Score 43 f LRSD High School Quality Indicators (continued) Baseline Year 2002-03 2002-03 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 12 12 11-12 11-12 11-12 11-12 11-12 11-12 11-12 i LRSD Indicat .5^ Honors Seal on High School Diploma Honors Seal on High School Diploma Taking the ACT Taking the ACT .. '' .Goal (Definition) \u0026lt;- - 65% of a high schools students will complete the requirements to earn the Honors Seal on their diplomas. The percent of students completing the requirements for the Honors Seal will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 65% of a high schools students will take the ACT. The percent of students taking the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. Performance on the ACT Performance on the ACT Taking Advanced Placement Examinations Taking Advanced Placement Examinations Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations 90% of a high schools students who take the ACT will earn a score of at least 19. The percent of students earning a score of 19 or above on the ACT will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 65% of a high schools graduates will take at least one AP examination. The percent of students taking at least one AP examination will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 90% of a high schools students taking AP examinations will score a 3 or above. Your Results Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 445 i i I LRSD High School Quality Indicators (continued) Baseline\nYear 1998-99 1998-99 1998-99 Grade Levels 11-12 12 12 LRSD Indicators Performance on Advanced Placement Examinations Completion of Graduation Requirements Completion of Graduation Requirements The percent of a high schools students earning a score of 3 or above on AP examinations will meet or exceed the trend goal each year. 100% of a high schools seniors will complete all the graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony. The percent of seniors meeting all graduation requirements prior to participation in the graduation ceremony will meet or exceed the trend goal each year.___________________ ^Reslilts Growth Goal Your Growth Your Score 45Rewards for Schools The District shall develop a system to reward (a) Quality Schools - schools absolutely meeting all the performance indicators established by the Arkansas Department of Education and (b) Improving Schools - schools demonstrating improvement, meeting a preponderance of the trend and/or improvement goals established by the Arkansas Department of Education and LRSD. The following points are established for each indicator. They will be added to determine a schools total score. 0 1 2 3 Declined in performance from previous year or semester Maintained last years performance and/or improved but did not meet trend/improvement goal Met trend/improvement goal Exceeded trend/improvement goal A definition of preponderance and the number of minimum points required for rewards will be established. Quality Schools and Improving Schools Quality Schools and Improving Schools may be recognized and rewarded in the following ways, as determined by the Superintendent: I a. b. c. d. e. f. A presentation will be made to the Board of Education on the schools achievements involving both staff and parents, a press release commending the schools performance will be issued, and schools will be featured in District publications, on cable television, and on the web page. The school may be designated as a mentor school and granted resources to provide technical assistance and support to another school in the District identified for improvement. I As appropriate, the District will support a schools application for state and national recognition in the national Blue Ribbon School program. The District will collaborate with the community to identify other possible recognitions of the schools progress and achievement. Schools will receive a grant to encourage and facilitate further improvement. The amount of the grant will be determined by annual budget appropriations. Awarded funds will be used for innovative programs, to provide additional materials and supplies, to support technology enhancements, to improve meaningful parent involvement, and/or for professional development of the staff. Each school will receive a banner/flag that celebrates its success.Rewards for Staff and Students Each Quality and each Improving School is encouraged to design, in collaboration with parents and the community, celebrations of success and recognition for contributing teachers, teacher teams, other staff, and parent/community volunteers, as well as students who meet the performance goals. Sanctions According to ADE and the State Board of Education, sanctions in the ACTAAP system are applied for the purpose of improving teaching and learning, not for punishing schools or the people in them. The LRSD supports this view. I Each Arkansas school is expected to achieve annually a minimum percentage of its total possible points assigned for the performance indicators in the ACTAAP system for accountability. Failure to do so will result in the following designations, as determined by the Arkansas Department of Education: First year: Second year: Third year: Fourth year: Fifth year: Sixth year: High Priority Status Alert Status Low Performing Status Academic Distress Phase I Status Academic Distress Phase II Status Academic Distress Phase III Status To be eligible for removal of any sanction designation, leading up to, but not including. Academic Distress Phase I, a school must attain the minimum percentage of its total possible points for two consecutive years. Once classified as Academic Distress Phase I, a school must comply with the rules and regulations to be promulgated by the ADE in order to be removed from this category. Failure to do so will result in the designation of Academic Distress Phase II, and so forth. The District will not identify schools for sanctions. Rather, the District will ensure the following levels of technical assistance and/or corrective actions for schools identified for improvement by the Arkansas Department of Education. In other words, the District will form a partnership with each school in need of improvement and will assist and support that school in its improvement efforts. To that end, the District has reorganized staff in the Division of Instruction to form a multidisciplinary School Improvement department. A common mission for all Division of Instruction teams will be to help schools help students achieve the challenging standards established by the Arkansas Department of Education and the LRSD and as measured by the various performance, trend, and improvement indicators. The assignment of a Broker for each school is another level of support. 47I I The following technical assistance and support services are established for schools requiring improvements\nTechnical Assistance and Support for Schools Identified for Improvement I i I (f  I Year/Stetus/iv  Definition ' YEAR ONE: WARNED The first year that an LRSD school fails to meet its performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. LRSD Assistance/Support \u0026gt; J?/'\n,., The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Ji Inform the principal, the central office broker, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation of the school and its implications. Provide appropriate levels of technical assistance to the school as it develops and implements its School Improvement Plan so that it addresses specific elements of student performance problems and includes waivers of any policies or regulations that impede the ability of the school to education its students. Conduct a School Improvement Audit to determine the extent to which the Campus Leadership Plan is being implemented at the school. Require the recommendations from the School Improvement Audit to be addressed in the following years School Improvement Plan, if not possible to do so immediately. Monitor regularly and conduct formative evaluations of the implementation of the School Improvement Plan, reviewing with the principal and the Campus Leadership Team formative data and making suggestions for modifications and adjustments to the implementation plan. Provide the principal, the broker, members of the Campus Leadership Team, and other appropriate staff opportunities to participate in professional development activities that should lead to school improvement. . Assiigrted Responsibility Testing and Program Evaluation Team Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Technical Assistance Team Associate Superintendent for School Services Associate Superintendent for School Services Professional Development Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team\nAssociate Superintendent for School Services 481 Year/Status/ Definition LRSD Assistance/Support Assigned ' Responsibility YEAR TWO: HIGH PRIORITY STATUS The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to: I I I i i I A school identified by ADE that for two consecutive years fails to meet the performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Inform the principal, the central office broker, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation of the school and its implications. Provide appropriate levels of technical assistance to the school as it develops and implements its School Improvement Plan so that it addresses specific elements of student performance problems and includes waives of any policies or regulations that impede the ability of the school to educate its students. Conduct a comprehensive Curriculum Audit to determine the extent to which the school is implementing the District curriculum and the quality of its interventions for students not meeting the standards. Require that the recommendations from the Curriculum Audit be addressed in the following years School Improvement Plan, if impossible to do so immediately. Possibly mandate the implementation of specific actions, professional development, or programs to address needs identified in the Curriculum Audit and/or the analysis of disaggregated student performance data. The District shall take corrective action during the High Priority Status Year through one or more of the following: (a) (b) (c) (d) Decrease the decision-making authority of the Campus Leadership Team. (b) Require participation in remedial training or professional development, and then implementating the necessary changes. Reflect the schools low performance in the evaluation of the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance of the school. Replace the school principal. Testing and Program Evaluation Team Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Curriculum/ Instruction Team\nPlanning and Development Team Associate Superintendent for School Services Associate Superintendent for School Services 49! Year/Status/ Definition LRSD Assistance/Support \\ Assigned Responsibility 1 Year Three: Alert Status The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to: I i A school identified by ADE that for three consecutive years fails to meet the performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. i Inform the principal, the Campus Leadership Team, the Cabinet, and the Board of Education of the designation and its implications. Conduct follow-up or monitoring of implementation of School Improvement and Curriculum Audit recommendations. Mandate appropriate specific actions, professional development, and/or programs to address student needs. Continue to provide appropriate technical assistance as the school develops and implements its School Improvement Plan. The District shall take corrective action during the Alert Status Year through one or more of the following\n(a) (b) (c) (d) Decrease the decision-making authority of the Campus Leadership Team\nRequire participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes\n(Reflect the schools low performance in the evaluation of the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance of the school. Reconstitute the school staff by replacing the principal and up to 50 percent of the teachers and other staff, as appropriate. Testing and Program Evaluation Team Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services 50 . X^Yeai/Status/ a ^^^Definition LRSD Assistance/Support 'W Assigned Responsibility i Year Four: Low Performing Status The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to apply one or more of the following sanctions: A school identified by ADE that for four consecutive years fails to meet its performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Revoke the authority of the school to design its School Improvement Plan. Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes. Reflect the low performance of the school in the performance evaluations of responsible staff, including the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance. Conduct follow-up audits to determine the extent to which the school has effectively implemented the recommendations of the School Improvement Audit and the Curriculum Audit conducted in years one and two. Reconstitute the school staff by replacing the principal and up to 50 percent of the teachers and other staff, as appropriate. Associate Superintendent for School Services Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services 51YearZStatus/ Definition LRSD Assistance/Support ILL Assigned Responsibility YEAR FIVE\nACADEMIC DISTRESS PHASE I STATUS The Superintendent will ensure that staff are designated to apply one or more of the following sanctions: A school identified by ADE that for five consecutive years fails to meet its performance, trend, and/or improvement goals. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Revoke the authority of the school to design its School Improvement Plan. Require participation in remedial training or professional development and then implementing the necessary changes. Reflect the low performance of the school in the performance evaluations of responsible staff, including the principal, as well as teachers and other staff who contributed to the low performance. Conduct follow-up audits to determine the extent to which the school has effectively implemented the recommendations of the School Improvement Audit and the Curriculum Audit conducted in years one and two. Reconstitute the school staff by replacing the principal and up to 50 percent of the teachers and other staff, as appropriate. Sanctions for Central Office Associate Superintendent for School Services Technical Assistance Team\nCurriculum/ Instruction Team Associate Superintendent for School Services Effective Year Two, upon the Superintendents recommendation, the performance evaluations of central office staff designated to provide leadership in human resources, teaching and learning, school improvement, school services, administrative services, and technology, including members of the Superintendents Cabinet, shall also reflect the schools low performance if it can be determined that they shared responsibility, through their decisions or actions, or lack thereof, for the low achievement of schools identified for sanctions. Sanctions for the Superintendent will be determined by the Board of Education. 52School Role When Identified for Sanctions Each school identified for sanctions shall: a. In consultation with central staff and the Campus Leadership Team develop or revise a School Improvement Plan in ways that have the greatest likelihood of improving the performance of all children in meeting the expected improvement b. c. d. e. f. goals outlined in ACTAAP and the Quality Index. Align all the schools systems and resources behind the effective implementation of the plan. Submit the plan in a timely manner to school and District-level staff for review, feedback, and approval. Implement the plan, conducting self-monitoring on a frequent basis to determine success and then making appropriate adjustments. Consult frequently with District-level staff assigned to support the school and to provide technical assistance. Improve the skills of its staff by providing effective professional development activities. At least ten percent of the Title I funds (if received) shall be committed over a two-year period to professional development\nor the school must otherwise demonstrate that it is effectively carrying out professional development activities from other funding sources. Decisions about how to use the professional development funds shall be made by teachers, principals, and other school staff in that school during the first year a school is identified for sanctions. Definitions ! School Improvement AuditThis audit will include a review of the meeting minutes of the Campus Leadership Team, the participation level of CLT members, quality of the School Improvement Plan, use of disaggregated data for decision-making, action research projects underway, sense of collective responsibility, quality of professional development, etc. If the school receives Title I funds, the audit will include determinations of the extent to which the school is in compliance with federal regulations and expectations. The audit team will be composed of staff from both the central office and campus levels. A written report will be compiled by the audit team and then approved by the Assistant Superintendent for School Improvement and the Associate Superintendent for School Services. It shall be provided orally and in writing to the Assistant Superintendent for School Services, the principal, the broker, and the Campus Leadership Team. Copies will be provided to the Superintendent, the Cabinet, and other appropriate central office staff who need to be involved in the schools improvement efforts. 53Curriculum Audit^The comprehensive curriculum audit will include a review of the schools master schedule, its curriculum maps, its ACSIP plans and processes, observations of classrooms, the extent to which the District curriculum is being implemented, the professional development experiences of the staff, the quality and use of instructional materials, learning climate, academic guidance, etc. The audit will include interviews with most staff and representative numbers of students and parents. The curriculum audit team will be composed of both central office and campus-level staff. A written report will be compiled by the audit team, approved by the Associate Superintendent for Teaching and Learning and provided orally and in writing to the Associate Superintendent for School Services, the Assistant Superintendent for School Services, the principal, the broker, and the Campus Leadership Team. Copies will be provided to the Superintendent, the Cabinet, and other appropriate central office staff who need to be involved in the schools improvement efforts. 54! Nomination Form Recommendation for Individuals to be Appointed ! i I I Year Name Phone (Home) (Work) Mailing Address ! Representative Group on Campus Leadership Team Parent __Student Representative (Optional) (Optional) __Community Representative __Auxiliary Staff Representative __Business Representative __District Representative If applicable, name of person nominating or recommending\nAppointee Acceptance: I hereby voluntarily accept the appointment to the Campus Leadership Team. I have read and understand the Leadership Team expectations and agree to work in the best interest of the campus and school district. Date Signature of Appointee 551 t Campus Leadership Team Nomination Form Year Name of Nominee Phone Campus Assignment I Representative Grouping on Campus Leadership Team __Classroom Teacher __Staff Member (Specify job title) I hereby voluntarily accept this nomination and will serve if elected to serve on the Campus Leadership Team. I have read and understand the Leadership Team Membership expectations and agree to work in the best interest of the campus and school district. Date Signature of Nominee Please return to the principal five working days prior to the election. I i j 56Little Rock School District Application for Local or State Waiver Name of school:________________________ Date of approval by Campus Leadership Team Principals Signature______________________ Date Waiver proposals are required if a school wishes to deviate in any way from federal or State regulations or from LRSD board policies and administrative regulations, including teacher contract or Board-approved curriculum for elementary, middle, or high school. Examples. To Title I schoolwide project without the required percentage of free/reduced lunch counts. To waive a state requirement relating to accreditation. To add a special needs/interests class, to waive a required course yet deliver it differently\nto waive prerequisites or established credit or length of time taught\nto combine courses into a new interdisciplinary course\netc.) Proposal Information: 1. What is the program/course for which a waiver is requested? (Example: To add a remedial reading program for grade 6 students) 2. Describe the specific student needs that this proposed program/course or proposed deviation from the approved curriculum will meet that are not being met. (Example. To provide phonemic awareness and decoding instruction for students who cannot yet decode fluently and to provide adequate on-level reading practice to develop automaticity and a significantly expanded vocabulary across the curriculum) i i 613. Explain how the proposed waiver will enable your school to improve student performance to meet the districts performance goals in the Strategic Plan, to address performance indicators in the Quality Index, to meet Title I performance expectations, and/or to address COE and Smart Start requirements. (Example: Thirty-seven of our incoming sixth graders are currently performing at the below-basic level on ACTAP and in the bottom quartile on the SAT9 in reading. By dividing these students into two or three smaller classes and providing targeted instruction to meet their needs, the Campus Leadership Team believes that the schools average performance will improve and the school will have fewer students performing at the lowest levels. I 1 I i 4. Briefly summarize the specific research findings upon which your proposal is based. (Example: The findings of Finnell, Lyons, DeFord, Bryk, and Seltzer in their 1994 study support the implementation of such programs as Reading Recovery, in large part due to the programs one-to-one tutoring and assistance. Etc. Or: Robert E. Slavin and Olatokunbo Fashola in their 1998 publication. Show Me the Evidence! identified four sets of conditions that are present in effective programs from a review of hundreds of research articles: (1) Effective programs have clear goals, emphasize methods and materials linked to those goals, and constantly assess students progress toward the goals. (2) Effective and replicable programs have well-specified components, materials, and professional development procedures. (3) Effective programs provide extensive professional development. (4) Effective programs are disseminated by organizations that focus on the quality of implementation. ) Ii 3 ! I I 1 5 How, specifically, will you evaluate your success, both formatively and summatively? (Example: Formative Evaluation: We will monitor student performance in this new program on a weekly basis with teacher-designed assessments and the use of informal reading inventories. We will track these thirty-seven students grades in all their classes and intervene as necessary. Each student will keep a log of books read so that increasing levels of difficulty can be monitored. At least one parent conference will be conducted monthly to determine parents observations and to seek their assistance. Summative Evaluation: Students quarterly grades in all their classes, student performance on the SAT9 and ACTAP.) Formative: Summative: 6. Describe, if appropriate, the following: professional development plan\ninstructional .  ____________________________AlzxnmAnt* materials to be used\ncurriculum planning and writing\nassessment development\nand/or other projected activities and/or costs that the proposal will entail. (Attach pages as necessary.) I !7. How will this proposed program be funded? (Example: Reallocated Title I dollars, grant revenue\netc.) Note- If this Waiver Application is approved, it is approved for one year only and must be renewed the following year. At the end of the second year, the renewed approval will be granted for a third year only if the results of the program evaluation are positive in improving student achievement outcomes. The following signatures signify approval of this Waiver Application by the principal and members of the Campus Leadership Team. Principal Central Office Use: I ___Approved ___Disapproved ___Approved ___Disapproved Asst. Supt. Assoc. Supt. Date Date ___Approved ___Disapproved Assoc. Supt.. Date ___Approved ___Disapproved Superintendent Date 60Ur School Climate Survey for Parents *SA= Strongly Agree A= Agree D= Disagree SD= Strongly Disagree DK= Dont Know *SA A D SD DK I 1. Teachers do whatever it takes to help students be successful. 2. Teachers grade fairly. 3. lam familiar with the goals of the school. 4. Teachers share their enthusiasm for learning with their students. 5. Parents and students feel safe while at school. 6. Students feel safe riding the bus to and from school. 7. The school campus is clean and welcoming. 8. School personnel ask my input concerning school goals. 9. I feel comfortable talking to school administrators. lO.Adequate help and guidance are readily available. 11 .Students sense a feeling of commimity and belonging within the school family. 12.1 support the school by attending meetings and events. 13.1 have been informed about the role of the Campus Leadership Team._____________________________________________ 14.The school reaches out to involve parents and community in school improvement efforts through the Campus Leadership Team. 15.The primary focus of the school is on student learning. 16.Students needing academic support or tutoring receive it. 17.Homework is reasonable and meaningful.__________________ 18.A wide variety of extracurricular activities are available to students.___________________________________________ 19.Transportation problems are resolved promptly. 20.Offrce personnel are courteous, friendly, and helpful. 21.All visitors are made to feel welcome by the school staff. 22.My students school offers me a variety of opportunities to be involved school improvement efforts.__________________ 23.Our school has extensive parent and commimity involvement. I 61 *SA= Strongly Agree A= Agree I\u0026gt;= Disagree SD= Strongly Disagree DK= Dont Know School Climate Survey for Teachers 1 *SA A D SD DK 1. The primary focus of the school is on teaching and learning.______________ 2. Adults and students feel safe while at school._________________________ 3. School buildings are generally well maintained._______________________ 4. Administrators encourage frequent and open communication with students, teachers, parents, and community._________ 5. Administrators clearly communicate the importance of high expectetions. 6. Administrators value the diversity of our school. ____________________ 7. Students know where to go for help with personal problems. 8. School personnel respond sensitively to the ethnic and cultural differences among the students in this school.___________________________ ____ 9. Students demonstrate concern and respect for each other._______________ 10. Students behave appropriately in the classroom setting.__________________ 11  I was asked for my input on school goals.____________________________ 12. Building administrators provide the support I need with student behavior problems.__ ______________________________________ _________ 13 A11 students have the opportunity to participate in extracurricular activities. 14. Office personnel are courteous, friendly, and helpful.___________________ 15. Resources needed for effective teaching are adequate. ________________ 16. Adequate personnel are available to meet the educational goals of the school. _______ ______________________________________ __ 17. Technology is used to meet the instructional goals of the school.__________ 181 feel comfortable sharing my concerns with building administrators. ~ 19. The district and my school provide adequate opportunities for professional growth in instructional strategies.__________________________________ 20. Professional development sessions are aligned with district and school goals for improved student achievement.___.______ 21. Teachers in this school know and apply effective teaching strategies.______ 22.1 understand the role and purpose of the Campus Leadership Team._______ 23.1 have sufficient autonomy to perform my job.________________________ 24.1 am kept informed about what is going on in the school._______________ 25. Communication between students and teachers is excellent._____________ 26. It is clear who is responsible for what in the school. ________________ 27. Discipline is fair and adequate in the school._____ ____________________ 28. Communication between teachers and administration is excellent. 29.1 engage in honest, respectful communication with students._____________ 30. Students in this school receive equal treatment regardless of race.________ 31. The curriculum is designed so that objectives, instruction, and assessment are aligned._________ __ ____________________________________ 32.1 am involved in developing school-wide strategies to reduce the incidences of drugs, weapons, and violent acts in my school.__________________ 62- School Climate Survey for Students *SA= Strongly Agree A= Agree 1\u0026gt;= Disagree SD= Strongly Disagree DK= Dont Know *SA A D SD DK i I 1. Teachers do whatever it takes to help me be successful._______ 2. Teachers grade fairly.___________________________________ 3. Teachers give frequent, positive feedback to motivate me. 4. Teachers expect everyone to participate in class.____________ 5. Learning is exciting at my school._________________________ 6. I feel safe at school,__________________________________ __ 7. I feel safe riding the bus to and from school.________________ 8. School buildings are well maintained and clean._____________ 9. The school grounds are clean and attractive._______________ 10. I receive help in goal setting and career planning.___________ 11. Help and guidance are available for all students in this school. 12. Concern is shown for ethnic and cultural differences in my school. _____________________________ 13. Students show concern and respect for each other. 14. I feel accepted in my school._________________________ 15. We make new students feel welcome in our school._________ 16. Students who need extra learning time or tutoring receive it. 17. Homework is reasonable and meaningful.________ 18. Extracurricular activities are available to the students at my school. __________ ___________ _________________ 19. Teachers encourage participation in extracurricular programs. 20. I am satisfied with my progress in school. ______________ 21. Computers are available for student use. *SA= Strongly Agree A= Agree I\u0026gt;= Disagree SI\u0026gt;= Strongly Disagree DK= Dont Know School Climate Survey for Administrators SA A D so DK 1. Teachers do whatever it takes to help students be successful. 2. Faculty and staff feel safe working in the building before and after school. 3. Students feel safe riding the bus to and from school. 4. I encourage frequent and open communication. 5. I have the necessary training to resolve conflict. 6. I encourage the valuing of diversity at my school. 7. Students receive adequate help in educational goal setting and career planning from teachers and counselors. 8. My staff and I have been successful in reducing the incidences of drugs, weapons, and violent acts in our school. _______________________ 9. My school has extensive parent and community support. 10. Community organizations actively recognize students achievement in both academics and extracurricular activities. 11. I have a plan to reach out and engage parents and community in school improvement efforts. 12. The primary focus of the school is on teaching and learning. 13. The vast majority of classroom time is devoted to instruction based on the school curriculum. 14. Interruptions to learning are kept to a minimum. 15. All staff participates in professional development that focuses on improved student achievement. 16. Students are encouraged to participate in a wide variety of extra curricular activities. 17. All students have the opportunity to participate in extra curricular activities. 18. Transportation problems are resolved promptly. 19. Office personnel are courteous, friendly, and helpful. 20. Technology is used to meet the instructional goals of the school. 21.1 have the training necessary to evaluate teachers who are working with new curriculum. 22. The district provides adequate professional development to help me be an effective instructional leader. 23. Students are treated in ways which encourage success rather than focusing on failure. 24. Teachers have the same expectations for academic achievement for students of all races. 25. Teachers use textbooks, materials, and different ways of teaching which are fair to students of all races and lifestyles. ________________ ___ ______________________ 26. Teachers are well trained and current in the subjects they teach. 1. Action Plan 2. Baseline 3. Benchmark 4. Brainstorming 5. Competitive Benchmark 6. Consensus 7. Consensus Decision FUNCTIONAL VOCABULARY Specific method or process to achieve results called for by one or more objectives. An objective assessment of an organizations true operational level. A measurable/performance-based statement. An idea-generating technique that uses group interaction to generate many ideas in a short period of time in a non-judgmental manner. Measuring products, services and processes against the toughest competitors. A state where everyone in the group supports an action or decision, even if they dont agree. A decision made after all aspects of an issue have been reviewed to the extent that everyone has participated in the decision. 8. Customer The person, group, or organization that uses the product, services or information you provide. 9. Improvement Plan 10. Indicators t I 11. Intervention A plan to determine what advice, assistance, training, materials or other resources you may need. They guide the team in determining schedules and identifying benchmarks. Measures of how well you are meeting customers needs and reasonable expectations. They are measures of the degree of conformance to valid requirements. A significant event or process to solve the problem. 12. Mission A statement of what an organization does and why. The actions for carrying out the vision of the organization. 13. Priority The highest need as indicated by supporting data. 14. Process A set of work activities that are characterized by a set of specific inputs and value added tasks that produce specific outputs.Updated Elementary School School Improvement Planner Date Mission StatementSchool School Improvement Planner Date Priority 1\nSupporting Data\nGoal: Benchmark\nIntervention: Actions Person(s) Responsible Timeline (Startirig- Ending dates) Resources Source of Funds (enter amount) District TiUe I APIG i JI Annual School Improvement Plan Implementation Timelines Dates Activity 1. Each school will follow the State NCA/ COE Evaluation Planning Process Varies depending on cycle - but once every five years Person Responsible School Improvement Planning Team 2. Deletions to specific actions on 5-year plan 3. Additions to specific actions on 5-year plan 4. Draft plan with revisions submitted 5. Final copy yearly School Improvement Plan submitted 6. Brief narrative for revisions January 1 January 1 March 15 September 15 September 15 March 15 March 15 Campus Leadership Planning Team Campus Leadership Planning Team Principal Principal Principal *Additional Title I information may be required for the State Report.ARKANSAS COMPREHENSIVE TESTING, ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM Arkansas Department of Education Raymond Simon, Director June, 1999 1I FOREWORD I The following document outlines the provisions of the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) that encompasses both Smart Start and Grades 5-12. It represents the culmination of twelve months of planning, discussion, and interaction with hundreds of administrators, teachers, and school patrons, as well as members of the State Board of Education, governors office, and legislature. The authority to implement ACTAAP is firmly established in legislation by Act 999 of 1999. These revisions to ACTAAP continue to build upon the progress made by the enactment of Arkansas Code Amiotated 6-15-401 through 6-15-407 (Supp. 1997) and 6- 15-1001 through 6-15-1006 (Supp. 1997) from previous legislative sessions. Act 999 of 1999 amends various sections of those statutes to put in place an expanded program. In addition, ACTAAP incorporates the findings of the Excellence in Arkansas Public Education Task Force as reported in October 1998 as well as Arkansas Code Annotated 6-20-1601 through 6-20-1610 (Supp. 1997) which provides for sanctions for school districts which fail to perform at the established achievement levels. Written comments should be directed to Dr. Charles D. Watson, Program Manager in the office of Public Relations and Special Projects, or sent via e-mail to: actaap@arkedu.kl 2.ar.us I 2 IINTRODUCTION The Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP), a comprehensive system encompassing high academic standards, professional development, student assessment, and accountability for schools and students, has the following purposes:  To improve student learning and classroom instruction\n To provide public accountability by establishing expected achievement levels and reporting on student achievement\n To provide program evaluation data\nand  To assist policymakers in decision-making. Based on principles of rigor, clarity, and fairness, ACTAAP makes student achievement of the academic standards the shared priority of all public schools, school districts, education service cooperatives, and the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE). It will result in improved teaching and learning. It will identify successful schools and programs and encourage replication of those successes. It will encourage individual schools and school districts to reflect on their practices, take corrective actions, and receive support from state agencies. Finally, it will fulfill the requirements of various Arkansas statutes, including Act 999 of 1999, which mandates that all students in the public schools of this state demonstrate grade-level academic proficiency through the application of knowledge and skills in the core academic subjects consistent with state curriculum frameworks, performance standards, and assessments. 3 i iACADEMIC STANDARDS ) I The first component, a set of clear, challenging academic standards, defines what students should know and be able to do in the basic academic core. Arkansas academic standards are delineated in ten state curriculum framework documents. Written by Arkansas classroom teachers, the curriculum frameworks are revised on a five-year schedule to ensure that state learning expectations will prepare students to succeed in increasingly more demanding post secondary education and in an ever more competitive job market. As part of Smart Start and as a support and supplement to the curriculum frameworks, K-4 Benchmark documents in Language Arts and Mathematics have been created. These documents are examples of how a school district might implement the curriculum frameworks by grade level. The K-4 Benchmark documents also contain suggested instructional strategies, classroom assessments, and a grade-level skills checklist. Other supportive curriculum documents built around the academic standards are under development. I 4PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The second component, professional development, is a coordinated set of planned, research-based best practice, learning activities for teachers and administrators which are standards-based and continuous. It shall be tied with school improvement planning and with licensure renewal requirements. Thirty approved professional development hours annually will be require^foreach jellified employee in thcTscHool district. Bcginning in January 2002, thirty approved professional development hours annually over a five-year period shall be required to renew a teacher or administrator license. To be eligible, professional development activities must produce teaching and administrative knowledge and skills designed to improve students academic performance. Such activities may include approved conferences^ workshops, institutes,, individual learning, mentoring, peer coaching, study groups. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards Certification, distance i learning, internships, and college/university coursework. Approved professional development activities shalTfelate to the twelve areas adopted by the State Board of I A Education: content (Grades K-12)\ninstructional strategies\nassessment\nadvocacy/leadership\nsystemic change process\nstandards, frameworks, and curriculum aligiunent\nsupervision\nmentoring/coaching\ninstructional technology\nprinciples of leaming/developmental stages\ncognitive research\nand building a collaborative learning community. All approved professional development activities, whether individual or school wide, shall be based on the improvement of student achievement on state- mandated criterion-referenced examinations and other related indicators as defined by ACTAAP. i i 5 I j 1STUDENT ASSESSMENT The third component is a student assessment program, which includes both criterion- referenced and norm-referenced tests in the academic core. Criterion-referenced tests are customized around the academic standards in the Arkansas Curriculum Frameworks and are developed by committees of Arkansas teachers. These criterion-referenced tests are administered to establish the level of student achievement of the state academic standards and to compare the level of student achievement with the expected performance levels set by the State Board of Education. Norm-referenced tests provide information to compare the performance of Arkansas students against the performance of a sample of students from across the country (norming/standardization group). Because norm-referenced tests are not built exclusively around Arkansas academic standards and because their purpose is to group students based on their performance relative to the norming group, they can best be used for assisting in broad program evaluation and in individual student diagnosis. Norm- referenced test data will not be a primary state-mandated indicator within the accountability component, but will be reported annually on the School Performance Report. State-Mandated Assessments The results of all assessinents should be used during the school improvement planning process to help the school focus on the Arkansas academic standards and the need to increase proficient student performance around those standards. State-mandated assessments shall be as follows: __________Assessments Criterion-Referenced Primary Benchmark Intermediate Benchmark Middle Level Benchmark End-of-Course - Algebra I End-of-Course - Geometry End-of-Course - Literacy Norm-Referenced Grade Level Grade 4 Grade 6 Grade 8 When Completed When Completed Grade 11 Grades 5,7, and 10 Month Administered April April April January/May January/May January/April September The Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams, as well as the End-of-  Course Exams, will be given late in the school year to allow maximum instructional time for covering the academic standards. Special provisions will be made for an alternate administration in January for those secondary students on a block scheduling system. The Literacy End-of-Course Exam will be given to students in Grade 11 to allow time for additional remediation, at the schools option, before graduation. These exams are tailored to Arkansas curriculum standards, and their performance levels are absolute and held constant over time. The results of the End-of-Course Exams shall become a part of each students transcript or permanent record. 6An academic improvement plan means a plan which details supplemental and/or intervention an ^remedial instruction in deficient academic areas. One_shall_be developed for eachj^dent not performing at the proficient level in every portion of the criterion-referenced examinations. I I i I I i The norm-referenced tests will be given in early fall of the school year in order to provide teachers with immediate and initial performance assessment data on students currently enrolled or newly enrolled in classes and content areas. The performance of Arkansas students taking the norm-referenced tests in the fall will be compared to the performance of a norming group who took the same tests during the same period in the fall, thus ensuring the reliability, validity and fairness of comparison. Score reports will be returned early in the school year for classroom teachers to use the testing information to address the individual student learning needs, and to modify the instructional program, teaching strategies, and/or classroom assessments as needed. Instruction then can focus fully on the Arkansas academic standards throughout the year and on increasing proficient student performance around those standards. Schools may request a waiver from the fall to a spring testing date. Such waivers will only be granted after a written plan is presented to the ADE and the schooT^gfees to the guidelines as established. The timifig'of sucKrequests must also fall wthin the deadlines as established by the testing company. As another part of the student assessment program for Grades K-4, schools shall select performance assessments or screening/diagnostic tools to assess primary grade students. Any student in Grades K-4 failing to perform at the proficient level in reading and writing literacy or mathematics shall be evaluated as early as possible within each of the Grades K-4 academic years. Those students shall be evaluated by personnel with expertise in reading and writing literacy or mathematics who shall develop and implement an academic improvement plan, using ADE sanctioned early intervention strategies for Grades K-1 students~and remediation ^ategies for Grades 2-4 students. These strategies should assist the students in achieving the expected standard. i Schools serving Grades 5-12 shall establish a plan to assess whether children are performing at the proficient level in order to help assure eventual success on every portion of the Intermediate, Middle Level, and End-of-Course Benchmark Exams. For accountability purposes, no points will be assigned for the results of these performance assessments or screening/diagnostic tools. 1 i Act 855 of 1999 mandates that students in Grades K-3 not performing at grade level during the regular school year shall participate in an ADE approved remediation program or a summer school remediation program to be eligible for promotion to the next grade. Those schools electing not to offer a summer school program shall offer an ADE approved remediation Crogram during the regular school year to students in Grades K-3 not performing at grade level. 7Optional Assessments I ! There are other assessments which are optional for student and school participation. These include the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), college entrance examinations (e.g., ACT and SAT), Advanced Placement testing, PLAN, EXPLORE, and others. Some of these may be included as indicators on the School Performance Report or in the aimual school report to the public. Note: Although NAEP is optional for individual school districts, state participation is mandated by Act 999 of 1999. I t 1 8i 1 ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS AND STUDENTS Accountability is a comprehensive, focused process designed to improve student learning. It is a shared responsibility of the state, school, district, public officials, educators, parents, and students. I The ACTAAP accountability model focuses on each individual school and is constructed around a three-tiered system that includes statewide indicators, individual school improvement indicators, and a locally-generated school accountability narrative. Once 1 appropriate time has elapsed to evaluate trends and improvement expectations in a sufficient number of indicators and a statistically defensible point assignment system can be developed, points for each of the'statewide and individual school improvement indicators will be given. This point system will form the basis for rewards and sanctions. I 1 These three tiers allow for meaningful and appropriate state and local involvement to implement accountability within clearly articulated parameters. ACTAAP encourages proactive corrections by individual schools and their local districts through the development and application of strategies using the school improvement process as a planning instrument. Performance Levels The primary goal of the accountability system is to assure that all students achieve grade-level performance. In this system, grade-level performance is defined as performing at the proficient or advanced level on state-mandated criterion-referenced tests. Four performance levels have been established for these exams: advanced, proficient, basic and below basic. The only test for which scaled scores defining these levels have been set is the Primary Benchmark Exam. Similar scales will be established by the State Board of Education as additional tests are completed and data become available. Performance Levels for the Primary Benchmark Examination i I Performance Level Advanced Proficient Basic______ Below Basic Scaled Score Ranges for Performance Levels for ______Mathematics____ 250 and above_________ 200-249______________ 155-199_______________ 154 and below Scaled Score Ranges for Performance Levels for Literacy 250 and above 200-249 179-199 178 and below (*Performance is subject to adjustment on a periodic basis due to statistical scaling and variability in the test.) 9Public Reportine 1 Each public school in Arkansas will have a School Performance Report that will be created through the combined efforts of the local school, school district, and the ADE. The School Performance Report will provide parents and the public data upon which to evaluate their schools and provide benchmarks for measuring school improvement. Although results from the schools performance on the three-tiered system will be the primary focus of the School Performance Report, other indicators may be included as determined by law or State Board of Education rules and regulations. I Although the same standards of student performance will be expected from all students, assessment data will be analyzed and reported separately for three student classifications: special education, limited English proficiency, and high mobility. The purpose of tracking performance of these student groups is to focus on narrowing the achievement gap between them and their normally higher performing peers. For purposes of this reporting, the following definitions apply: I I i Special education students are those determined to be eligible for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and who have an individualized education plan (lEP). The students lEP must stipulate that the student may participate in the mandatory assessments either with or without accommodations. Those unable to participate with or without accommodations will be referred to the Alternative Assessment program. Limited English proficiency students are those having a language background other than English and whose proficiency in English is such that the probability of academic success in an English-only classroom is below that of native English language students. The districts Language Assessment Committee must have determined that the students may participate in thFmandatory assessments either with or without accommodations. Those unable to participate with or without accommodations will be referred to the Alternative Assessment program. High mobility students are those who, at the time of spring testing, were not enrolled in the current school district on October 1 of the current school year or who, at the time of fall testing, were not enrolled in the current school district on October 1 of the previous school year. i Annual School Report to the Public\nEach year, each school will prepare a report to the parents and community. This report will include a narrative description (such as prepared under Tier III indicators) that will highlight the schools improvement plan and indicate progress made in implementing the performance indicators within that plan. Arkansas School Information Site (AS-IS): The ADE plans to make school accountability data available statewide through the Departments World Wide Web - as-is.org. This Web site will display school data based on student performance and other selected indicators. 10Annual ADE Report to the Legislature: The ADE shall report to the members of the House and Senate Interim Committees on Education on the progress of ACTAAP. The report shall be due on September 1, 1999 and annually thereafter. School Improvement Planning As part of the states accreditation process, each school is required to engage in the development and implementation of a school improvement plan based on priorities indicated by student assessment and other pertinent data. This plan is designed to ensure that all students demonstrate proficiency on all portions of\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 "}],"pages":{"current_page":12,"next_page":13,"prev_page":11,"total_pages":35,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":132,"total_count":419,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":418},{"value":"StillImage","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)","hits":60},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":42},{"value":"Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","hits":23},{"value":"United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit","hits":5},{"value":"Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators","hits":4},{"value":"North Little Rock School District","hits":3},{"value":"Ross, Steven M.","hits":3},{"value":"Arkansas Policy Foundation","hits":2},{"value":"Arkansas. Department of Education","hits":2},{"value":"Quality Education and Management Associates","hits":2},{"value":"Area School Advisory Committee","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"School improvement programs","hits":419},{"value":"Education--Arkansas","hits":413},{"value":"Little Rock School District","hits":307},{"value":"Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","hits":287},{"value":"Education--Evaluation","hits":280},{"value":"Educational planning","hits":229},{"value":"Educational law and legislation","hits":204},{"value":"Educational statistics","hits":174},{"value":"School management and organization","hits":151},{"value":"Student assistance programs","hits":139},{"value":"School integration","hits":138}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Intervenors, Knight","hits":1},{"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":2}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":417},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":415},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":411},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":405},{"value":"United States, New York, 43.00035, -75.4999","hits":2},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Phillips County, 34.42829, -90.84802","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, North Little Rock, 34.76954, -92.26709","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Connecticut, 41.66704, -72.66648","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Maryland, 39.00039, -76.74997","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Michigan, 44.25029, -85.50033","hits":1},{"value":"United States, Michigan, Wayne County, Detroit, 42.33143, -83.04575","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Arkansas","hits":415},{"value":"New York","hits":2},{"value":"Connecticut","hits":1},{"value":"Maryland","hits":1},{"value":"Michigan","hits":1},{"value":"Missouri","hits":1},{"value":"Texas","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1995","hits":88},{"value":"1993","hits":74},{"value":"1994","hits":74},{"value":"1996","hits":72},{"value":"1992","hits":64},{"value":"1999","hits":59},{"value":"2001","hits":59},{"value":"1997","hits":58},{"value":"1991","hits":53},{"value":"2003","hits":53},{"value":"2000","hits":52},{"value":"1990","hits":40},{"value":"1998","hits":40},{"value":"2004","hits":40},{"value":"2002","hits":38},{"value":"1989","hits":33},{"value":"2005","hits":31},{"value":"2006","hits":21},{"value":"1986","hits":10},{"value":"1988","hits":9},{"value":"1984","hits":8},{"value":"2007","hits":8},{"value":"2008","hits":8},{"value":"1987","hits":7},{"value":"2010","hits":7},{"value":"1985","hits":6},{"value":"2009","hits":6},{"value":"2011","hits":6},{"value":"1980","hits":5},{"value":"1981","hits":5},{"value":"1982","hits":5},{"value":"1983","hits":5},{"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":"2012","hits":4},{"value":"1950","hits":3},{"value":"1951","hits":3},{"value":"1952","hits":3},{"value":"1953","hits":3},{"value":"1954","hits":3},{"value":"1955","hits":3},{"value":"1956","hits":3},{"value":"1957","hits":3},{"value":"1958","hits":3},{"value":"1959","hits":3},{"value":"1960","hits":3},{"value":"1961","hits":3},{"value":"1962","hits":3},{"value":"1963","hits":3},{"value":"1964","hits":3},{"value":"1965","hits":3},{"value":"1966","hits":3},{"value":"1967","hits":3},{"value":"1968","hits":3},{"value":"1969","hits":3},{"value":"1970","hits":3},{"value":"1971","hits":3},{"value":"1972","hits":3},{"value":"1973","hits":3},{"value":"2013","hits":3},{"value":"2014","hits":3},{"value":"2015","hits":2},{"value":"2016","hits":2},{"value":"2017","hits":2},{"value":"2018","hits":2},{"value":"2019","hits":2},{"value":"2020","hits":2},{"value":"2021","hits":2},{"value":"2022","hits":2},{"value":"2023","hits":2},{"value":"2024","hits":2},{"value":"1910","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"1910","max":"2024","count":1171,"missing":0},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":244},{"value":"reports","hits":71},{"value":"legal documents","hits":38},{"value":"judicial records","hits":36},{"value":"correspondence","hits":10},{"value":"handbooks","hits":9},{"value":"exhibition (associated concept)","hits":7},{"value":"budgets","hits":6},{"value":"books","hits":2},{"value":"newspaper clippings","hits":2},{"value":"agendas (administrative records)","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":419}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Office of Desegregation Management","hits":417},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies Photographs Collection","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":419}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":418},{"value":"Collection","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":419}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}