{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"blackpast_blackpast","title":"BlackPast.Org: remembered and reclaimed, an online reference guide to African American history","collection_id":null,"collection_title":null,"dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["\"This 8,162 page reference center is dedicated to providing information to the general public on African American history and the history of more than one billion people of African ancestry around the world.  We invite you to explore and use all the resources of BlackPast.\"","The Web site includes biographical articles about influential African Americans as well as speeches, reports, and other primary documents relating to the history of African Americans. Civil rights-related documents include speeches by Bayard Rustin, Fannie Lou Chaney, Malcolm X, and Martin Luther King, Jr. Biographical articles provide information about national leaders like Thurgood Marshall, James Meredith, and Ralph Abernathy as well as local leaders such as Edwin T. Pratt and Lincoln and Eleanor Ragsdale. Other articles provide background information on events, such as the 1961 Freedom Rides and the 1966 Seattle School boycott, and organizations, like the National Negro congress and the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party. The site contains audio clips relating to the open housing movement in Seattle and trailers of video programs, including the story of the Pullman Porters and efforts to diversity the University of Washington. A timeline of African Americans is divided into centuries. There are also links to other relevant Web resources.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["text/html"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American civil rights workers","Civil rights movements--United States","Civil rights--United States","African Americans--Civil rights"],"dcterms_title":["BlackPast.Org: remembered and reclaimed, an online reference guide to African American history"],"dcterms_type":["InteractiveResource","Sound","Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["blackpast.org (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.blackpast.org/"],"dcterms_temporal":["1789/9999"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_882","title":"\"Board of Education Meeting Agenda,'' North Little Rock School District","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2004-01/2004-06"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","Education--Finance","School boards","School employees"],"dcterms_title":["\"Board of Education Meeting Agenda,'' North Little Rock School District"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/882"],"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\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nRECEIVED JAN 1 C) 2004 OFFIOCFE DESEGREMGAOTNIIOTONR ING BOARD OF EDUCATION NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Thursday. January 15, 2004 5:00 P.M. MEETING AGENDA NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT AGENDA REGl'LAR MEETING, BOARD OF EDUC..\\ TIO!\\ Administration Building, 2700 Poplar Thursday, January 15, 200-t 5:00 P.1\\1. PUBLIC COMMENTS I. CALL TO ORDER, Teresa Burl. President II. INVOCATION, Ketron Howard. Lynch Dri\\'e Elementary Fifth Grader. III. FLAG SALUTE IV. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Tere a Burl. President Mart~ Moore. \\\"ice President Trent Cox. Secretar~ Rochelle Redus. Parliamentarian Charles Hoskyn. Member Mable Mitchell. Member John Rile). Member son of Lisha Ho\\rnrd \\\". RECOG'.':ITIOJO\\' F PEOPLE/E\\'El\\'TS/PROGRAMS .\\. Superintendents Honor Roll - S. Brazear I. Liz Thompson. Spet!ch Pathologist --, Karen Baker. pecial l:.ducation Teacher at Pike View Elementary B. Partners in Education - . L3r\n.izear Page : - L3oard . \\gcnJ.1 .lanuan I~. :oti...\nI. Duke Energ) and Lynch Driw Elernentar:- chool .., ~orth Little Rock Athletic Club anJ the ~orth Little Rock School District 3. C .. Bank and the Business Leadership Academ:- at ~orth Linle Rock High School C. Recognition of Two\n\\ational Board Ceniticd Teachers-A. Bell \\'I. DISPOSITIO:\\ OF :\\Ill\\TTES OF PRIOR :\\IEETI~GS .--\\. Thursda:-. December 18. :003. 5:00 P.\\ I. t Regular) - Page A - I VII. ACTIOJ'i ITEMS- l 1NFINISHED BUSI ESS B. Consider Updated Board Gonrnance and Operations Policies ( Second Reading) - J. mith VIII. ACTIO~ ITEMS- NEW BUSI ESS A. Certified Personnel Policies Committee Report B. Cla sified Personnel Policie  Committee Report C. Consider Motion for Consent Agenda - .I. Smith I. Consider monthly financial report - Page O - 1 .., Consider employment of personnel - Page P - I .,. Consider payment of regular bills - Page T - I IX. I:\\FORMATIOl\\AL ITEl\\1S X. CALENDAR Of EVENTS Page :, - Bo:.ird .-\\g~nda Januan I 5. 200--l A Teacher Work Day - Frida) . .January 16. 200--l 8. Dr. \\lartin Luther 1--:.ingJr. . Holida) - \\londay . .lanuar) 19. 200 C. 1\\ext Board :\\leering (Regular)- Thursda). February! 9. 200  - 5 P.I\\I. XI. EXECUTIVE SESSIO 1 XII. ADJOURNME 'T ORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of the Superintendent REGl'LAR MEETl:\\G, BOARD OF EDl'CA TIO:\\ \\11:\\TTES December 18, 2003 The :'.\\orth Little Rod. cl1l)OI District Board met in regular ession on Thursda). December 18. 2003 in the Board Room of the A.dministration Building of the !\\orth Little Rock School District. 2700 Poplar treet. 'orth Little Rock. Arkansas. One teacher addressed the Board concerning her opposition against the possibility of changing the middle leYel schools to Grades 5 - 8. One teacher and one student spoke against any changes in the block scheduling at the high school le\\'el. President Teresa Burl called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. Brittany Harris. a Rose Cit) '.\\ liddle School eighth grader. ga,e the inYocation. The flag salute followed. ROLL CALL OF 1EMBER Present Teresa Burl. President Marn Moore. Vice-President Trent Cox. Secretary Rochelle Redus. Parliamentarian Charles Hoskyn. Member Mable Mitchell. Member John Riley. Member Others Present .lames Smith. Superintendent: Bobby Acklin. Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation: Donald Watkins. Assistant Superintendent for Business Ser\\'ices: representatives from the Personnel Policies Committees. PT A and press: se\\'eral other staff members: and Darlene Holmes. Superintendent's secretary were also present. Billy Du\\'all (audio) and Jim Billings ( ,ideo) taped the meeting. RECOG OF PEOPLE 1EVE\\.'TS'PROGRAMS None A- I DISPOSITIO:--: OF \\11:--:lTES \\1OTIO '\n'-.1arty Moore 1110\\ed to accept the minutes of the :\\o\\'ember 20. 2003 tRegular) Board meeting as printed. Rochelle Redus seconded the motion. YEAS: . AYS: Burl. Cox. Hoskyn. Mitchell. Moore. Redus and Riley None lf:\\:FINISHED BUSI\u0026gt;JESS Cpdated Student Policies MOTIO' Trent Cox moved to accept the Student Policies as presented. l\\1arty l\\loore seconded the motion. YEAS: 'AYS: Burl. Cox. Hoskyn. Mitchell. l\\1oore. Redus and Riley None EW BUSINESS Certified Personnel Policies Report Chairman Rick Kron presented the report. There '\"ere no proposals. Classified Personnel Policies Report Secretary Glenda Tucker presented their report. There were no proposals. ACSIP Plan orth Little Rock School District\" s Arkansas Consolidated School Improvement Process (ACSIP) Plan was prese111ed by Letitia Martin. Director of Federal Programs. Each Board member received a copy of the Plan. MOTIO Marty Moore moved to accept the 2003-200-l ACSIP Plan as presented. Rochelle Redus seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl. Cox. Hoskyn. Mitchell. 1oore. Redus and Riley one The Updated Board Governance and Operational Policies \\\\ere presented b\\' Mr. Smith for a first readina. Recommendation for 1 004- ,,005 Schedule Chanue for Grades 9 - I' Mr. Smith presented his recommendation Ill change the present block schedule to a modified block schedule and 10 change graduation requirements from 26 10 24 credits. A- 2 J\\-10TlO1\\i John Riley moved to accept Administration s recommendation for the changes in the modi tied block schedule as presented. Trent Cox seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl. Cox. Hoskyn. Moore. Redus and Riley Mitchell Consent A2:enda Mr. Smith presented the consent agenda as printed. MOTION Charles Hoskyn moved to accept the consent agenda as printed. Marn ~-loore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl. Cox. Hoskyn. Mitchell. Moore. Redus and Riley None Mr. Smith requested to add one more item to the agenda. Chairman Burl yielded to Mr. Smith. At this time. Mr. Smith read his letter of his intent to retire from the North Little Rock School District on June 30. 2004. Chairman Burl immediately called for an executive session. The Board went into a closed session at 6:05 p.m. The Board reconvened in open session at 6:7 5 p.m. MOTION Rochelle Redus reluctantly 1110\\'ed to accept Mr. Srniths letter of his intent to retire on June 30. 2004. Mable Mitchell seconded the motion. YEAS: 1 AYS: Burl. Cox. Hoskyn. Mitchell. Moore. Redus and Riley None ADJOURNME T John Riley moYed to adjourn the meeting. Rochelle Redus seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl. Cox. Hoskyn. Mitchell. Moore. Redus and Riley None Chairman Burl declared the meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m. Teresa Burl. President Trent Cox, Secretary A-3 Daphne Gallot-Knighten Lou Ross '\\ORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT l\\onh Little Rock. Arkansas Board Agenda - January I 5. 200-+ ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSFERS From Rose City ]'diddle Alternati\\'e. Assistant Principal To Lake\\\\ ood l'vild die School. .. \\ssistant Principal CERTIFIED PERSONNEL RESIGNATIONS Ridgeroad Middle School. Special Education Effective 1/15/03 CERTIFIED PERSONNEL CHANGES AND TRANSFERS Monica Ball Debra Finton Ceceila Jarry Debora Rozzell Brenda V/ilson National Board Certification achie\\'ed EffectiYe 8/13/03 From Ridgeroad Middle Charter School. Special Education To Lynch Drive Elementary. Special Education Effective I /5/04 National Board Certification achieved Effective 8/13/03 From District VIPS Coordinator .75 To Title I Parent Involvement Coordinator . 75/VIPS Coordinator .25 Effecti\\e I 1510-+ From L \\\\'MS. Special Education/Family \u0026amp; Consumer Science To L WMS. Career Orientation Effective 1/20/04 P-1 Anna Haustein Andrea Ne\\'ille Letitia utherlen \\'orth Little Rock chool District Board Agenda - .January 15. 200-l \\'E\\\\. CERTIFIED PERSO~l'\\EL :'\\orth Heights Elementar:-. Fourth Grade Effecti\\'e I 5 0-l. Category I. Step 0. 187 days Park Hill Elementary. Third Grade Effecti,e I 5 0-l. Categor:- I. Step 0. 187 days Lakrnood i\\liddle School. English Effecti,e I 5/0-l. Category I. tep 8. 187 days NEW CERTIFIED PERSO fNEL RECOMMEND A TIO S At-1E: PROPOSED ASSIGN:-1ENT: EDUCATIO : CERTIFICATIO 1: STUDENT TEACHING: RECOMMENDATIO : NAME: PROPOSED ASSIGN 1E T: EDCCATIO ': CERTIFICATIO : STUDE, 1T TEACHING: RECOMME DATIO : NAME: PROPOSED ASSIGNMENT: ED CATION: CERTIFICATION: EXPERIENCE: RECOl\\1ME DATIO. : Anna Haustein :'forth Heights Elementar:-. Fourth Grade SSE - Uni,ersity of Central Arkansas. Conv..-ay.A R 12/03 Early Childhood Education P--l \\'ilonia Elementary. Vilonia. AR J/03 - 12/03 Dana Snowden. Principal K.aye Lo\\\\e. Administrati\\'e Director for Elementary Education Danny Reed. Administrati\\'e Director of Personnel/Special Services Andrea Neville Park Hill Elementary. Third Grade BSE- Cni,ersity of Central Arkansas. Conway. AR 12/03 Earh Childhood P-4 Theodore Jones Elementary. Conway. AR 8/03 - 12103 Julia Lee i\\1oore Elementary. Conwa:-. AR 1/03 - 5103 Barbara Hart\\\\ick. Principal K.aye Lowe. Administrati,e Director for Elementary Education Danny Reed. Administrati\\'e Director of Personnel/Special Services Letitia Sutherlen Lakewood Middle School. English SSE - University of Memphis. Tennessee 12/95 Elementary Education P--l: Middle School Language Arts. Social Studies. Math. and Science Springdale School District. Springdale. AR 8/02 - 12/03 Shelby County Schools. Memphis. Tl\\' 1/96 - 5/02 Dr. Ginger Wallace. Principal Dana Chadwick. Administrative Director of Secondary Education Danny Reed. Administrative Director of Personnel/Special Services P-2 Lynn Berr:, Carla Randall Bro,\\'n Robert Burnett Norman Gill Debra Pruss Da\\'id Tate Terri L. Bro\\\\11 Alw. ter Boyd Cand: Finne, Credell Jordan Cassandra :\\oid Laquita Pratt Clition D. Robinson 1arsha Rochelle Simon :\\orth Littk Rock School Di~trict Board Agenda - January 15. 200-+ CLAS IFIED PERSO:'\\:S:EL RESIG~ . .\\ TlO~S Transportation Department. Bus Driwr Effectiw 12 I 9 03 I\\orth Heights Elementar:. Lunch . .\\ide Effecti\\'e 12 1 03 Transportation Departn1tcnt. Custodian Effecti\\'e 12.'29/03 . LRHS West Campus. Custodian Effecti\\'e 12/1 03 NLRHS East Campus. Computer Lab Aide Effectiw l 5. 0-+ Plant Ser\\'ices. 1' laintenance Custodian Effectiw l l 'I-+ 03 CLAS IFIED PERSON 'EL. EW HIRE Food Senice Department. Food Senice Assistant Effectiw 12 '8/03. Category 90 I. Step 15. I 91 days\n\\LRH East Campus. Custodian Effecti, e 12 I 03. Categor\n- 600. tep 23. 252 days Ridgeroad 1iddle Charter School. Olfo.:e 'ecretary Effecti\\'e 12 5 03. Categor:, 225. Step -+9. 207 days Transportation Department. Bus Dri,er Effecti\\'e 12 I 03. Categor: 507. Step 43. 190 days :\\LR! IS Cast Campus. Custodian Effecti,e 12 I 03. Categor\n- 600. Step 22. 252 days \\:LRH.' \\\\'est Campus. Custodian [!Tecti,e 12 I 03. Categor\n- 600. Step 20. 252 days Ridgeroad \\1iddle Charter School. Offo:e ecretar) Effectin: 12 5 03. Categor: 225. tep 55. 207 days Lakewood Middle School. recial Education Aide Effecti\\'e 12 15 03. Categor: 2-+0. Step 5 L 185 days P-3 Eunice Conklin Bob Green Rose Robinson Hazel \\\\.illiams James Williams ~orth Little Rod. chool District Board Agenda - .January 15. 200-l CL.-\\SSIFIED PER O~\"\\:EL TR.:-\\~SFI:-R :-\\~D CH . .\\~GE From Pik.e \\ie\\\\ Elementan. Food en ice Assistant To Boone Park Elementan. Food Sen ice Assistant Effecti,e 12 15 0.3 From Plant Ser\\'ices. Sub titute Custodian To Plant Sen ices. Custodian Effecti\\'e 12 15 03 From Boone Park Elementar~. Food Senice Assistant To Pike \\ie\\\\\" ElementarY. Food Senice Assistant Effectiw 12 1: 03 From Food er\\'ice Department. Food Senice Substitute To !\\LR.HS East Campus. Food Ser\\'ice Assistant Effecti\\'e 12 15103 From NLRHS East Campus. 'ight Custodian To 1LR.H East Campus. Night Lead Custodian Effecti\\'e 8 18 03 P-4 Y-T-D SUMMAROYF :UNDS FUN!l 1-SALARY FUND 2-0PER.\".TING FUND 4-DEBT SERVICE (FUNDS 1 ~ 2 ~ 4) FUNC-3-9U!LDit~3 FUND 5-C.\".PIT.U. OUT:..JI.~ FUND 6-FEDERAL FUND 8-F'OO- SERVICE TO-:\"lu.\nr. fU!J:)5 - MONTHLYS UMMAROYF FUNDS Fund :-salar:\n: f ..:rd 2-0peratin\nFund\nJebt Se!\"\\'lCe f\\onc 3-Bu!.ld1n:\nFund S-Capital Cc~:ay Fund f-Federal fund :-feed Se:-,:1ce T~~. ,r- ~:o::'!'H:.F~U NDS NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRI::7 FINANCilu. RE?OR, DECEMBER, 200: BEGINNING Y-T-C B..!..ANCE REVEN:JE .00 12,862,343.2: 2,892,475.81 16,311,605.95 1,597,982.00 .00 ,,490,457.81 29,173,949.16 5,253,624.0C 26,134.56 9\"5,029.15 905,920.34 1,192,522.35 2,780,121.97 22,796.77 1,244,868.83 ::,934,430.06 3\n, 132,994. BE MONTH RE\\'ENUE 2,711, 90?. 54 -,6215,523.15 .00 J, 100.0G 520,00:.7'\" l, ~25, 726.2-, ,Fl~,5S:.03 13,o9:,e: ... J5 0 - ~--T-C :URREN':' E:XPENDITURES B.'-1.A.\"ICE i2,862,35i.91 l\n. -c::\nR 10,886,551.51 8,317,53C.2: 476,315.94 1,121,666.06 24,225,225.36 9,439,181.61 229,\"14.84 5,052,043.7: 1,160,684.77 720, 26\n. \"\"2 2,417,301.63 1,555,342.69 1,482,533.38 2H, 867. 78CR 29,515,459.98 lc,551,06\n.9 MONTH REVENUE EXPENDITURES OVER/UNDER EX?ENCE 2,011,9~4.24 14.70CR 1,535,963.51 5,7('\",530.64 .00 .00 320.00 :-, -eo.oo 239,700.53 26,301.23 454,768.92 1,213,951.35 _S\",620.40 2:1,9Jl.23 5,533,31\".60 7,5 .. ,4cq 75 REVENUE FUND 1 SALARY FUND Transfer Fund FUND 2 OPERATING fUND LOCAL REVENUE Current Taxes Pullback Delinquent Taxes Land Redemption Interest Soft Drink Sales Spec Ed Preschool Local Misc Local TOTAL LOCAL REVSNUE STATE REVENUE State Equalization Aid State Incentive Funding Pathwise Mentoring Sp Ed Supv/ESY/Res/Cat Special Ed Preschool K-1 Proverty Aid ABC Preschool Smart Start Literacy M-to-M Program Magnet/M-to-M Trans General Facility fund Debt Service F'unding Deseg-Teach Retire/Insu Miscellaneous State TOTAL ST/I.TE REVENUE TRANSFERS TOTAL OPERA,ING FUND FUND 4 DEBT SERVICE Transfers TOTAL REVENUE FUNDS 1, 2, 4 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL REPORT DECEMBER, 2003 BUDGETED COLLECTED REVENUE THIS MONTH 32,975,000.00 2,711,909.54 12,200,000.00 6,063,215.69 5,475,000.00 .00 1,400,000.00 828,661.26 160,000.00 6,878.36 175,000.00 33,532.99 100,000.00 8,505.22 400,000.00 .00 229,068.00 5,993.00 20,139,068.00 6,948,786.54 28,075,080.00 2,552,280.00 1,156,301.00 . 00 .OD . 00 212,792.00 6,110.00 542,449.00 .00 225,269.00 .00 469,956.00 52,000.00 6,,850.00 . 00 2,650,000.00 518,056.00 750,000.00 . DO 179,079.00 .00 249,690.00 .00 1,350,000. 00 224,921.26 175,466. 00 36,278.89 36,100,932. 00 3,389,646.15 34,570,000. OOCR 2,711,909. 54CR 21,670,000.00 7,626,523.15 1,675,000. 00 .00 56,320,000. 00 10,338,432.69 0 - 2 COLLECTED BUDGE, % COLLECTED TO DATE BALANCE TC DATE 12,862,343.21 20,112,656.79 39.00% 11,467,777.67 732,222.13 93. 99% .OD 5,475,000.00 . 00% 2,164,165.48 764,165.46CR 154.58% 80,655.64 79,344.36 50. 4 0% 93,003.19 81,996.61 53. 14% 36,621.06 61,376.94 38.62% .00 400,000.00 .00% 47,278.17 181,789.83 20.63% 13,691,501.41 6,247,566.59 68. 97% 12,761,400.00 15,313,680.00 45.45% .DO 1,156,301.00 .00% .DO .00 .00% - 6,110.00 206,682.00 2. 87% .00 542,449.00 .00% 112,632.00 112,637.00 49.99% 169,489. 00 300,467.00 36.06% 64,850. 00 .00 100.00% 1,036,112. 00 1,613,886 . 00 39 . 09% 263,000.00 487,000 . 00 35. 06% 89,539.0D 89,540. 00 4 9. 99% 124,844.00 124,846. 00 49.99% 562,303. 15 767,696. 85 41.65% 91, 111. 89 84, 354 .11 51.92% 15,281,391 .04 20,819,540. 96 42.32% 12,861,286. 50CR 21,708,713. 50CR .00% 16,311,605. 95 5,358,394 .OS 7 5. 27% .00 1,675,000. 00 . 00% 29,173,949. 16 27,146,050. 84 51. 80% REVENUE (CONTINUED) FUND 3 BIJILDING FUND Interes: O:her TOT\"'1 BUiLDING FUND FUND 5 CP.PITr.:.O. UTLAY Current Taxes Pullback Delinquen: Taxes Other TOThL CAPIT,\".L OU7LJ..'i FUND 6 FEDERJl.:R.. E\\SNUS ROTC TITLE I\"i-3 21st Century TI'!'LE TITLE V-B C!\"',arce= s=hoc Reading Excel-Lance - Vocatior1a: Carl Per :ins TI!LE: V!-9, p:, 94-142 Spe.:ia.i.. Ed ?re-Schoo: Medicaid TIT:.E I:-\n.. Im~rove Teac TITLE l-h:cour.tac1!:ty r-:!s ee :.1aneous teoeral -:-o-:-\n,.:F.. E::ERr..:,.r ::::1,, FUND e FCO::l SE?::c::: Sales Federal Reirr.bursement Othe: TCTh:. FOOC SER.\nr:c: :-o:-\n..:R. E\".c\n:::\n NORTH1 :~T:E ROCYs.: HOO~ o:srR::: :'!NAN:!\n..:. RSPOR:' DECE:MBER2, 003 BUDGETED COLLECTED REVENUE THIS MONTH 22,SOC.OC .00 3,,200.0C 3,100.00 6C,OOO.OO 3,100.00 78C,000.00 462,756.69 550,000.00 . 00 110,000.00 63,245.07 10,000.00 .00 1,450,000.00 526,001.76 100,000.00 9,361.40 '19, '13.00 61,635.00 :,43,,22C.00 549,980.00 150,000.00 150,000.00 377,974.00 .00 194,378.00 16,200.00 l, ST\n, 791.00 788,895.00 4-9,435.00 .00 305,000.0C 26,907.87 642,789.00 125,747.00 9,000.00 .00 10,000.00 .00 7,00C,C00.00 1,728, '26.27 E7C,000.00 '3, 03~. 65 2,050,000.00 424, 325.6- 60,000.00 2. 1 e . 31 3,000,000.00 499,551.63 c,-3:,occ.o: : ,, oc.s, c1:. 15 C - COLLECTED TO DAE 9,53,.56 18,600.0~ 28,134.56 740,761.56 . 00 165,158.78 .00 905,920.34 43,092.52 474,635.00 549,980.00 150,000.00 409,800.00 99,992.20 788,895.00 .oo 53,980.25 200,747.00 9,000.00 .00 2,760,121.07 ~19,014.53 804,607.49 ::,246.81 1,244,866.83 :?4, :32, q~.\n. 86 B.\".LANC:C%: co:.LECTEc' P..MO1NLT TC DAE 13,265 . .:~ 4:. B:, 16, 600.0C 50.CO, 3:,865.H 46.e9t 39,238.44 94.96% 550,000.00 .00% 55,158.78CR 150. 14% 10,000.or- .00% 544,079.66 62. 47% 56, 907. 4 8 43.09% 244,776.00 65. 97% 1,88,, 240.00 2:.59% .00 100.00% 31,826.00CR 106.42\\ 94,385.80 51. 4 4t 786,896.00 4 9. 99\\ 470,435.00 .00\\ 251,019.75 17. 69% 442,042.00 31.23\\ .00 100.00% 10,000.00 .00\\ 4,219,878.03 39.,1\\ 450,985.47 4 S. 16% 1,245,392.51 39.24\\ 58,753.19 26.55% 1,755,131.17 41. 4 9% 33, E9\", 005. Is 50.32% EXPEND!TURES BY fUNCTION FUND l SALARY fUND Regular Programs Special Educatiof\nWorkforce Education Compensation Education Other Instruct Program Student Support Instruct Staff Support General Adrnin Support School Ad~in Support Business Support Maintenance \u0026amp; Operation Transportation Central Office Other Support TOTA:-SALARY fUND 2 OPERATING FUND Regular Programs Special Education ViorY.:'orce Ea'Jcatior. Compensac~on Education Other Ins:ruct Prograrr. Student Supper: Instruct Staff Support General Acmin Support School Adrnin Support Business Support Maintenance \u0026amp; Operation Transportatior, Central Office Other Support TOTAL OPERATING fUND FUND 4 DEeT SERVICE FUND Other Support TOTAL DEBT SERVICE TOTAL FUND l, 2, 4 NORTH :IT7L~ RO:K SCHOO~ D:STRI:7 FINANCIAL REPORT DECEMBER, 2003 BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 16,605,519.0C 4,865,940.0C 1,640,05'.00 101,859.00 1,143,910.00 2,531,292.00 1,653,677.00 316,585.00 2,631,652.00 81,017.00 61,060.00 66,050.00 210,835.00 .00 31,937,453.00 5,044,622.00 1,986,396.00 491,732.00 63,340.00 731,404.00 2,703,132.00 1,883,736.00 247,221.00 1,513,554.00 447,236.00 5,609,526.00 3,446,599.00 739,298.00 1,515,436.00 26,423,232.00 1, 65\", 76C.OC l,65\",760.00 60,018,445.00 0 - 4 EXPENDITURES TH!S MONTH 1,474, 99\u0026lt;. 9E 402,098.7: 111,543.33 .00 100,125.25 215, 72.,. 56 131,288.43 27,200.86 212,354.2: 6,767.50 6,7\"1.05 5,417.61 17,634.73 .00 2,711,924.24 343,349.65 129,643.71 24,007.55 2,875.32 41,753.52 19-,707.41\n03,086.57 32,724.00 122,743.07 38,557.34 337,157.94 259,010.53 52,976.58 153,390.32 1,838,983.51 .00 .00 4,550,907.75 EXPSNDITURSS TO DATE 6,59~,E7C.6.: 1,829,655.86 617,893.71 .00 458,952.42 1,061, 00\". 66 707,149.45 173,826.76 1,193,674.34 43, 30\". 66 43,216.78 30,949.57 107,853.04 .00 12,862,357.91 2,031,429.34 659,637.44 179,898.52 11,908.28 209,814.64 828,663.64 520,034_55 146,644.81 669,305.41 835,940.10 2,595,034.94 1,444,079.55 387,647.98 358,512.31 10,886,551.51 476,315.94 06,315.94 24,225,225.36 AMOUNT%EX PENDITURES DUE lC, 0:3, 646. 36 3,039, 28C 12 1,022,163.29 101,859.00 684,95.5e 1,470,284.34 946,527.55 142,758.24 1,437,977.66 37,709.34 37,843.22 37,100.43 102,981.96 .00 19,075,095.09 3,013,192.66 1,326,758.56 311,833.48 51,431.72 521,589.36 1,874,468.36 1,355,701.45 100,576.19 844,248.59 388,704.lOCR 3,014,491.06 2,002,519.45 351,650.02 1,156,923.69 15,536,680.49 1,181,444.06 1,181,444.06 35,793,219.64 TO DATE 3'.'.57% 3.,. 67% .00% 4 0. 1 :, 41.91% 42.76% 54.90% 45.35% 53.45% 53. 31% 45.48\\ 51.15\\ .00\\ 40.27\\ 40.26\\ 33.20% 36.58% 18.80\\ 28.68% 30.65% 28.03% 59. 31% 44.22% 186. 91% 4 6. 2 6% 41.89% 52. 43% 23.65% 41. 20\\ 28.73\\ 28.73\\ 40.36% - EXPENDITURES BY fUNCTION fUND 6 FEDER.l\\L fUNDS Reg!.llar Programs Special Education Workforce Education Compensation Education Other Instruct Program Student Support Instruct Staf: Support General Adrnin Support School Ad~in Support Business Support Maintenance \u0026amp; Operation Transportation Central Office Suppo=t Othec Support TOTJl.L FEDERJl.L fUNDS FUND 3 fUND 5 FUND BUILDING :\"UNO CAPITAL OUTL!\\Y FOOD SERVICE ALL FUND, FUNCTION TOThLS REGULAR PROGRAMS SPECIAL ED~CATION WORKFORCEE DUCATION COMPENSATIONE DUCJl.TION OTHE\nINSTRUCT!Nhl. D STUDENT SUPPORT INSTUC:- STAfF SUPPORT GENSR.i:i.L J-..D!H!i SUPPORT SCHOOL ADMIN SUPPORT BUSINESS SU?FC\u0026gt;r.T M.'-.INTEN.l\\NC\u0026amp;S OPER.'-.ITO N TRANSPORT.L.7ION CENTR.l\\L O!'Tl CE OTHER SUPPORT ALL :\"UNDS TCTAL EXPE!-:DITt'RES NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL REPORT DECEM3ER, 2003 BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 636,862.00 1,164,720.00 179,195.00 2,106,983.00 872,123.00 1,422,934.00 1,612,181.00 80,602.00 2,000.00 .00 .00 127,316.00 102,850.00 125,012.00 8,432,778.00 288,141.00 2,227,788.00 2,953,606.00 22,302,756.00 8,020,056.00 2,310,984.00 2,282,182.00 2,74\"'?,977.00 6,657,358.00 5,149,594.00 644,408.00 4,147,206.00 528,253.00 6,604,580.00 3,641,965.00 1,634,074.00 7,249,365.00 C - 5 EXPENDITURES THIS MONTH 35,832.79 79,427.26 6,746.66 142,025.85 48,205.40 94,837.47 40,851.21 5,129.50 .00 .00 .oc 157.25 .00 1,555.53 454,768.92 320.00 239,700.53 287,620.40 1,854,177.40 611,169.72 142,297.54 144,901.17 190,084.17 508,272.14 2.,5,226.21 65,054.36 335,097.28 406,789.67 264,585.39 123,313.16 567,024.2: 5,533, 3'.7.6G EXPEN'.lITURES TO DAT 270,53~.7! 360,765.89 65,194.o- 615,301.74 218,016.03 448,831.09 388,217.29 33,586.59 . 00 .00 .00 763.85 9,313.90 6,776.44 2,417,301.63 229,714 . s.\n1,160,684 .77 1,482,533. 38 8,896,834.72 2,850,059.21 862,986.30 627,210.02 886,783.09 2,338,502.39 1,623,401.29 354,058.16 1,862,979.75 964,683. 32 3,156,673. 10 1,475,792. 97 824,284 . 25 2,791,211.41 29,515,459.98 BALANCE%E XPE~D:TcRES A.\"10UNT 366,32\"7.26 4:.47% 803,954.11 30. 97% 11 ~, 000. 93 36.38% 1,491,661. 26 29.20% 654,106. 9- 24. 99% 974,102. 91 31 .54% 1,223,963. 71 24 .08% 47,015. 41 41 .66% 2,000 . 00 .00% .00 .00% .00 .oo, 126,552. 15 . 59!, 93,536.10 9. 05% 118,235.56 5. 42% 6,015, 06.37 28.66% 58,426.16 7 9. 72, 1,067,103.23 52. 10% 1,471,072.62 50. 19% 13,405,921.28 39.89% 5,169,996.79 35.53% 1,447,997.70 37. 34% 1,654,971.98 27.48% 1,861,193.91 32. 27% 4,318,855.61 35.12% 3,526,192. 71 31.52% 290,349. 84 54.94% 2,284,226 25 4 4. 92% 436,430. 32CR 182. 61\\ 3,447,906.90 47. 7 9% 2,166,172.03 4 0. 52% 809,789.75 50.44% 4,458,153.59 38.50% 44,405,298.02 39.92% EXPENDITURES BY OBJEC7 rtJNC l TEACHERS S.\nLARY FUN: Salaries Fringe Benefits Other 707,\n:. TEACHER SALARY FUND 2 OPSRA'!'lt:G F'JNI: Salaries Fringe Bene!:.:s Purchasea Services Supplies Capital Out ay Other ftlllD 4 DE:T SERVICE P:-inc1pal Interest Fees TOTPl. DEBT SER\\'ICE FUIJC 3 B\nJILDING :Ut,::- Supplies Capital 0.1t ay Othec TOThL su:LDI~.JG FUtJQ FUND 5 CAFIThL OUTLAY Purchased Services Suppl!eS Capital Outlay Other TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY NORTs :!TTLE ROCK SCHOO: CISTR!CT rINANCI.'u- REPORT DECEMBER, 2003 BUDGE,ED AMOUNT 29,629,199.0C 2, 308,254.0C .00 31,93,,453.00 9,856,263.00 9,513,3:2.0C 3,694,063.00 2,963,446.0C 319,84'.00 76,304.00 26,423,232.00 635,360.0 99-, 500.00 24,900.0C 1,657,760.00 62,256.0C 155,602.0G .00 286,141.00 941,796.00 531,466.00 536,406.0C 21e,100.oc 2,227,788.00 EXPENDITURES THIS MONTH 0 - 6 2,530,370.96 lS:,553.2 .00 2,-:1,924.24 755,565.75 74,092.23 84,813.66 135, 3\"2. 6C 5,125.86 110,013.39 1,838,983.51 .00 .oc .00 .oo 320.00 . oc .00 .00 320.00 59,225.25 30,00-.-: 25,170.56 125,297.00 239,700.53 EXPEN!J!TURES TO D!\\TE 12,084,323.53 778,03~.3 .oc 12,862,35,.9: 4,200,885.62 4,015,368.95 902,288.24 1, 4 60, 644 . 58 134,686.91 169,677.21 10,886,551.51 2,162.19 474,133.75 .00 476,315.94 57,766.8\" 63,326.71 106,619.26 .00 229,714.84 305,679.30 24\",43\".89 420,699.86 186,861.72 1,160,684.77 AMOUNT BALANCE TO D.\u0026gt;,TE 1,530, :19. 62 .00 19,075,095.09 5,655,377.38 5,49~,943.05 2,791,774.76 1,502,601.42 185,157.09 93,373.21CR 15,536,680.49 633, 1\"7.81 523,366.25 2~,900.00 1,181,444.06 12,516.13 1,072.71CR 46,982.74 .00 58,426.16 636,116.70 284,048.11 115,706.14 31,232.28 1,067,103.23 4C.18t 33.70\\ .00\\ 24.42% 49.20% 42.11% 222.37% 41. 20% .34\\. 47.53%. .00% 28.73% 82. 19\\ 101.72% 69.80\\ .00\\ 79.72% 32. 4 5% 46.55\\ 78.42% 85. 67\\ 52.10\\ EXPENDITURESS Y OBJECT FUND 6 FE~SRAL FUNDS Salaries E\"ringe Benefits Purchased Services Supplies Capital Oi.:tla'.l Other TOTA:. FEDER!'.!. flillDS fUNC 8 FOOJ SSR'-1::C:ES Salaries fringe Benfits Pur=haseo Servi.::es Supplies Capital Outlay Other - TOTA:. FOOD SER'.'ICS ALL rur\ncs TOTA:.S SALARIES FF:NJE ES!~SFI'!'S PURCHASECS ER'-:!CES SUPF:E2 CAP::::-.:....:O. UTLAY OTHER TOTAL ALL ,UNDS NORTE LI':'TL:\" ROCK s::Eoc:, c:sTR:c:FINANCI. C..R:..E PORT DECEMBER, 2003 BUDGETED EXPENDITURES AMOUNT THIS MONTH 3,867,280.00 262,048.6\" 1,194,302.0C 81,111.89 1,644,955.00 68,639.69 1,290,598.00 40,602.66 334,556.00 2,366.01 101,085.00 . 00 6,432,778.00 454,768.92 l, 07, 530.00 136,036.57 497,525.00 n, 356. 62 38,276.00 700. 2\" 975, 575,0C 101,524.94 4,600.00 .00 100.00 . 00 2,953,606.00 287,620.40 H, 790,272.00 3,686,021.95 13,513,393.00 :, 05e, 116.c2 6,369,373.00 213,698.8\" S,:3,36:.o~ 30\",50\".9: 1,351.010.00 32,662.45 2,053,349.00 235,310.39 1 3,920,758.00 5,533,31'.60 EXPENDITURES BALANCE EX?Ern,TURES TO DATE AMOUN':\" TO ~A7E 1,313,109.93 2,55~,1-o.o 33.95% 360,263.11 834,038.89 30. 16% 353,136.9: 1,291,818.09 21 . .\no, 321,376.52 969,221.46 24.90% 63,952.96 270,605.02 19 .11% 5,462.16 95,622.62 5. 4 o, 2,417,301.63 6,Cl5,47E.31 28.66% 642,281.42 795,248.56 44.67% 239,239.05 256,285.95 48.08% 12,099.56 26,P6.44 31. 61% 585,305.15 390,269.85 59.99% 3,608.20 991.80 78.43% .00 100.00 .00% 1,482,533.38 1,471,072.62 50.19\\ 16,240,600.50 26,549,671.50 40.72% 5,395,905.49 8,117,487.51 39.93% 1,630,970. 0e 4, \"58,402. :2 25.52% 2,676,092.65 3,,45,268.15 45.98% 73:,56\".21 619,44:.79 54 .14% 838,323.05 1,215,025. 95 40.82% 29,515,459.% 44,405,298. 02 39.92% ACCOUNT NORTH L=T~LE ROCK SCHOOL D=STR=c~ CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT A \u0026amp; A FIRE AND SAFETY COMPANY A PLUS BAKERY A PLUS BAKERY A-PLUS ~EACHING SUPP~IES A-PLUS TEACHING SUPPLIES A'TEST CONSULTANTS INC A'TEST CONSULTANTS INC A'TEST CO SULTANTS INC AAEA AAEA AAMSCO AASBO ABA EDUCATIONAL ART ABC BLOCK COMPANY ABC SCHOOL SUPPLY ABILITATIONS ACCESS CREDIT MANAGEMENT INC ACCESS CRED:T MA AGEMENT INC ACCESS CREDIT MANAGEMENT INC ACCESS CREDIT MANAGEMENT INC ACCESS SCHOOLS ACCU CUT ACE GLASS COMPANY, INC. ACE GLASS COMPANY, INC. ACI PLASTICS ACI PLASTICS AEA AEA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION AEA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION AEA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION AEA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION AETNA LIFE \u0026amp; CASUALTY AETNA LIFE \u0026amp; CASUALTY AHA PROCESS INCORPOARTED AIMEE STEPP-KUYKENDALL AIMEE STEPP-KUYKENDALL AIMEE STEPP-KUYKENDALL AIMEE WRIGHT ALAN CROWNOVER ALARMTEC SYSTEMS ALICIA YARBROUGH ALIGN ALIG ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN T- 1 266.21 9.87 27.50 423.32 1,017.91 117.00 1,060.00 155.00 100.00 159.66 337.74 115. 00 118.25 2,377.51 68.95 57.95 115. 53 209.90 209.90 115. 53 450.00 1,940.70 226.89 1,596.73 25.37 325.24 1,213.40 400.00 1,225.00 1,225.00 400.00 1,437.56 1,421.51 3,581.09 4,217.50 3,101.00 2,047.50 45.00 78. 96 45.00 22.50 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 CHK. NO. 89263 89034 89299 89089 89316 89000 89288 89431 88769 89107 88971 89365 89445 89180 89179 88928 88756 89110 89135 89157 88794 89302 88770 89181 88780 89372 89174 88748 89099 89127 89149 88771 89367 89432 88914 89257 89416 88984 88778 89224 89031 88742 88751 88767 89093 89105 89121 89133 89143 ACCOUNT NORTH L:~~~S ROCK SCHOO~ DISTRICT CHECK LISTI G FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIG ALIGN ALIGN ALISHA HERRING ALISHA HERRING ALL AMERICAN INC. ALLIED SUPPLY, INC. ALLIED THERAPY ALLIED THERAPY ALLIED THERAPY ALLISON CALLAHAN ALLISON CALLAHAN ALLTEL MOBILE ALPHASMART INC ALPS PUBLISHING AMANDA STUCKEY AMANDA SYMANCYK AMANDA WARE AMERICAN EXPRESS FINANCIAL AMERICAN EXPRESS FINANCIAL AMERICAN EXPRESS FINANCIAL AMERICAN EXPRESS FINANCIAL AMERICAN GUIDANCE SERVICE, INC AMERICAN GUIDANCE SERVICE, INC AMERICAN MATHEMATICS AMERICAN MINORITY REPORTS AMERICAN RED CROSS AMERICAN SPEECH-LANGUAGEAMTREX INTERNATIONAL AMY VOLLMAN AMY VOLLMAN ANDREA HAIN ANDRIA SMITH ANDRIA SMITH ANGIE CHANDLER ANGIE COLCLASURE ANN KINCL ANNAN. VAMMEN ANNIE KIRKPATRICK ANTHONY CANTRELL APPLE COMPUTER INC ARCH FORD EDUCATION SERVICE ARCHILD, INC. ARCOM SYSTEMS ARK DEPT OF ENVIRONMENTAL T- 2 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 97.44 113.40 2,066.84 3,683.24 2,733.75 2,096.25 450.00 75.60 60.48 402.73 410.00 56.40 45.00 41. 36 57.60 400.00 10,111.78 10,111.78 400.00 46.59 1,753.87 118.00 495.00 1,444.50 1,890.00 505.00 65.24 39.20 45.00 121.24 86.24 138.00 45.00 45.00 11. 67 56.00 95.20 351.37 4 4. 17 300.00 752.50 330.00 CHK. NO. 89152 89168 89177 89278 89344 89351 89364 89017 89435 89184 89369 88953 89270 89422 89051 89440 89191 89281 89213 88993 89038 88894 88747 89098 89126 89148 88774 89186 88977 89311 88859 88929 88862 88898 89410 89026 88973 89424 88723 88884 89073 89279 89309 89024 89381 88812 89178 88996 89366 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT ARKANSAS AGENCY FOR FEDERAL ARKANSAS BAG \u0026amp; EQUIPMENT CO ARKANSAS BAG \u0026amp; EQUIPMENT CO ARKANSAS CENTER FOR ARKA SAS DEMOCRAT GAZETTE ARKANSAS DEPT OF HEALTH DIV OF ARKANSAS DEPT OF HEALTH DIV OF ARKANSAS SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIA ARKANSAS STATE POLICE ARKANSAS STATE POLICE ARKANSAS STATE POLICE ARKANSAS TEACHER RETIREMENT ARNOLD - BLEVINS ELECTRIC CO. ARTIS LOFTON ASCO HARDWARE COMPANY, INC. ASCO HARDWARE COMPANY, INC. ASCO HARDWARE COMPANY, INC. ASHLEY HANAN ASHLEY-WOODSON \u0026amp; ASSOC. ASHLEY-WOODSON \u0026amp; ASSOC. ASPMA ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERVISION \u0026amp; ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERVISION \u0026amp; BANK CARD CENTER BANK OF AMERICA-FED INCOME TAX BANK OF AMERICA-FED INCOME TAX BANK OF AMERICA-FED INCOME TAX BANK OF AMERICA-FED INCOME TAX BANK OF AMERICA-PAYROLL ACCT. BANK OF AMERICA-PAYROLL ACCT. BANK OF AMERICA-PAYROLL ACCT. BANK OF AMERICA-PAYROLL ACCT. BARBARA BROWN BARBARA EVANS BARBARA GUMP BARBARA HARTWICK BARBARA LYNN MALO E BARNES AD NOBLE BARRY KINCL BASICS PLUS BASICS PLUS BASICS PLUS BECKY WITCHER BECKY WITCHER BENEFITS-NLRSD BEST WESTERN INN OF THE OZARKS BEVERLY KELSO BILL A. BOWERS BILL DUVALL T- 3 60.00 868.99 1,086.24 417.36 467.91 75.00 200.00 1,002.00 480.00 380.00 20.00 3,262.38 320.00 45.00 229.17 946.13 515.11 45.00 13,320.88 9,715.33 195.00 3,621.10 89.80 40.25 14,075.02 148,031.95 149,509.75 16,457.98 161,473.62 1,038,877.73 1,067,549.99 182,550.60 150.15 20.00 9.95 45.00 1,942.50 347.73 45.00 835.53 2,065.40 268.89 122.64 98.56 1,098,556.20 132. 02 45.00 45.00 40.38 CHK. NO. 88806 89085 89314 88966 88811 88916 89259 88779 88784 88785 89193 89176 88820 88955 88772 89182 89368 89025 88857 89393 89183 88783 89192 88810 88744 89095 89123 89145 88743 8 9094 89122 89144 88952 88930 88943 88870 89008 89194 88775 88782 89190 89373 88882 89402 89169 88 97 6 88883 88938 88788 ACCOUNT ORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOO~ c=sTR:CT CHECK LIST- G FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT BILL LEFEAR BILL WHITTEN BILL'S LOCK \u0026amp; SAFE BILL'S LOCK \u0026amp; SAf2 BLI D AMBITIO IC BLUE HILL WRECKER SERVICE BLUE HILL WRECKER SERVICE BOBBIE J RIGGINS BOBBY ACKLIN BOILER INSPECTION DIVISION BOUND TO STAY BOUND BOOKS BRANDY YORK NESSELRODT BRANDY YORK NESSELRODT BRENDA BUTLER BRENDA CREWS BRENDA PARKER BROMLEY PARTS \u0026amp; SERVICE BROUKE REYNOLDS BROWN JANITOR SUPPLY BRYAN DEAVER BUCKEYE BUSINESS PRODUCTS INC. C \u0026amp; W TOOL REPAIR C \u0026amp; W TOOL REPAIR C.T.A. CABOT HIGH SCHOOL CALLOWAY HOUSE, INC. CAPITOL STARTER SERVICE CAROL SOULSBY CAROL THOR TO CCI OF ARKANSAS, INC. CENTAR INDUSTRIES INC CENTER POINT ENERGY ARKLA CENTER POINT ENERGY ARKLA CENTRAL STATES BUS SALES, INC. CENTRAL STATES BUS SALES, INC. CHARLES BARNWELL WELDING SER CHARLIE JONES CHARLOTTE BULL CHARLOTTE VIRDEN CHERYL BING CHERYL HALL CHILDCRAFT EDUCATION CORP CHRISTINE HICKMAN CI CI'S PIZZA CINTAS CINTAS CINTAS CLAUDIA MORAN CLEAR MOUNTAIN T- 4 95.20 13.30 39.42 19.50 5H .81 150.00 75.00 45.00 45.00 119.00 113. 63 91.28 78. 96 45.00 175.16 45.00 84.77 22.50 318.54 19.90 342.14 42.44 35.13 8,734.46 70.00 73.50 524.41 30.80 45.00 260.00 296.00 18,264.20 63.50 196. 97 25.99 640.85 45.00 45.00 19.90 95.20 45.00 1,353.52 45.00 140.01 232.08 42.68 232.88 45.00 121.43 CHK. NO. 88936 89082 88822 89383 89~09 88..,8 9 89196 88923 88877 88790 88791 89052 89441 88985 89307 89060 88793 88978 89197 89047 89090 88885 89403 89170 89203 89199 89075 89408 88933 89433 89291 89188 89322 88937 89265 89256 88934 88802 88964 89050 88910 89200 89081 89395 88754 89109 89155 89029 88960 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT CLEAR MOUNTAIN COBB AND SUSKIE LTD. COMCAST CABLEVISION COMPASS LEARNING INC COMPTREE, INC. CORA SMITH CORPORATE EXPRESS CORPORATE EXPRESS CORPORATE EXPRESS COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO DF104423 COURTNEY MEADOR CRANFORD CONSTRUCTIO COMPANY CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION CREWS \u0026amp; ASSOCIATES, INC. CROSS COUNTRY UNIVERSITY CROW BURLINGAME CO CRYSTAL EVANS CUSTOM PRINTING CYNTHIA MELTON DAN RUSSELL DANA CHADWICK DA A CHADWICK DANA MCCOY DANA MCCOY DA AS OWDEN DANNY REED DARLE E HOLMES DARRELL MCCOY DATEK, INC. DATEK, IC. DAVID D. COOP DAVID D. COOP DAVID D. COOP DAVID MCPHERSON DAW SIMPSON DAWE CARROLL DEANN ROACH DEANE C. ICKLER DEBBIE DAVE PORT DEBBIE ROZZELL DEBBIE TATE DEBRA BUTLER DEBRA PRUSS DELTA DE TAL DEMCO DE ISE WADLEY DEPT. OF FINANCE \u0026amp; ADMINISTRAT DFA-SALES \u0026amp; USE TAX T- 5 104.13 14,062.50 51.42 50,933.88 109.27 20.00 1,516.95 3,545.99 4 35. 72 28.86 81.16 165.90 34.74 139. 38 106,999.86 298.00 259.98 102.20 837.76 45.00 219.00 220.00 34.25 111.72 77.28 45.00 45.00 467.18 194.60 1,027.92 1,203.95 1,250.29 4,112.64 1,250.29 20.00 4 4. 51 40.88 45.00 980.00 20.00 24.58 34.02 21.56 19.58 51,033.02 93.38 61.26 143,002.96 1,554.00 CHK. NO. 89271 89247 89189 88886 8 92 95 89019 88920 89260 89417 88764 89022 887 68 88758 89159 89323 89056 88921 89419 89202 88949 88968 88808 89376 89053 89442 88798 88945 88906 88800 89088 89315 88752 89106 89153 89080 88888 88965 89030 89048 89049 89233 88986 88915 89361 89349 88805 89010 8 9171 89448 ACCOU T NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOO~ D:STRICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT DIAMOND INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS DIANA MATHIS DIANA MATHIS DIANE CRITES DINAH ALLEN DOMINIE PRESS INC DONALD R. WATKINS DOROTHY FARRIS DOROTHY FARRIS DOTTIE MURDAUGH DOYALENE WASSON DREW CAMP EDS SUPPLY CO. EDS SUPPLY CO. EDUCATION DEBT SERVICES INC EDUCATION DEBT SERVICES INC ELENA REYES ELGIN SCHOOL SUPPLY EMPLOYEE BENEFITS DIVISION ETA CUISENAIRE EULETA WARE EVA ALLEN F \u0026amp; E CHECK PROTECTOR COMPANY FAMILY SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTER FAMILY SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTER FAWNDA WHITE FINANCIAL DATA SERVICES INC FINANCIAL DATA SERVICES INC FLEET TIRE SERVICE OF NLR, INC FLEET TIRE SERVICE OF NLR, INC FLEET TIRE SERVICE OF NLR, INC FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLIBS FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FORTIS DI ASI FRAN JACKSON FRANK WISE FRANKLIN COVEY FURNITURE MALL GAYE LONG GE BUSINESS PRODUCTIVITY GINGER WALLACE GLOBAL DOCUGRAPHIX T- 6 881.96 328.80 328.80 45.00 75.00 715.00 45.00 91. 56 37.52 21.84 28.67 45.00 822.94 71.78 56.58 56.58 14.70 76.12 380,346.84 336.49 125.66 83.33 647.04 54.00 54.00 35.42 125.00 125.00 479.93 27 4. 96 17.14 166.58 5,081.04 2,141.60 5,318.54 2,141.60 166.58 1,650.00 102 .17 98.56 13,129.64 45.00 40.13 23.85 5 62. 41 26.32 30.52 45.00 165.27 CHK. NO. 89227 89112 89137 89084 88803 892 62 88889 88983 89426 89430 89370 89086 88809 89204 89118 89142 89319 88892 89356 8 92 64 88860 88799 88852 89115 89140 89444 89104 89132 88814 89207 89379 88750 89102 89103 89130 89131 89151 88721 88760 89161 89357 89061 89012 89212 89436 89415 88830 88948 89286 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT GLORIA SMITH GLOVERS TRUCK PARTS \u0026amp; EGUIP GLOVERS TRUCK PARTS \u0026amp; EGUIP GOLDEN CORRAL GOPHER GOVCONNECTION INC GRAINGER GRAINGER GREG DANIELS GREGG THOMPSON GRETCHEN LAUIPPA GRUENYS GRS INC GWEN WIGGINS HANDWRITING WITHOUT TEARS HAROLD D STARK HAROLD GWATNEY CHEVROLET CO. HAROLD GWATNEY CHEVROLET CO. HART PHYSICAL THERAPY SERVICE HART PHYSICAL THERAPY SERVICE HEINEMAN LIBRARY HELPING HAND CHILDRENS HENDERSON STATE UNIVERSITY HICKS RENTALS-SUNNY HICKS HOME DEPOT/GECF HOUSEHOLD BANK FSB HOUSEHOLD BANK FSB ILLINOIS STATE DISBURSEMENT ILLINOIS STATE DISBURSEMENT IN DYER NEED ENTERPRISES ING RETIREMENT PLANS ING RETIREMENT PLANS I G RETIREMENT PLANS ING RETIREMENT PLANS INMAN QUEST INTEGRATION SERVICES CORP INTEGRATION SERVICES CORP I TER AL REVE UE SERVICE I TERNAL REVENUE SERVICE JACKS THREE STAR MUFFLER SHOP JACQUELINE HAMPTON JACQUELINE SUMLER JAMES HUMPHREY JAMES KIMMER JAMES R. SMITH JAMES REED JAMES W. WOODARD, JR JAMIE EUBANKS JANET E. THOMAS P.T. JANET FOSTER T- 7 45.00 179.69 1,386.24 45.50 835.80 702.38 160.50 751.14 45.00 45.00 115.89 13. 86 166.77 132. 55 45.00 25.00 25.00 1,540.00 1,714.80 1,211.76 2,766.25 70.00 2.02 266.74 140.54 605.47 290.00 290.00 96.41 425.00 2,830.83 2,830.83 425.00 2,970.65 1,826.97 3,507.50 136.00 136.00 74.90 8.60 45.00 58.80 10.40 18.80 95.20 45.00 2,310.00 1,122.34 171.36 CHK. NO. 89083 88817 89209 89267 88816 88807 88869 89243 89068 8 90 63 89434 89210 88900 89283 89071 88765 89167 88989 89427 89015 88981 89205 89162 88876 89009 89292 89116 89141 88777 88746 89097 89125 89147 89306 88967 89273 89114 89139 88864 89062 89064 89021 89353 89059 88868 89066 89007 89245 88901 'ORTH :::..,:\n:TT:::R...OE CK SCHOO\" DIS~RICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 ACCOUNT AMOUNT CHK. NO. JANET FOSTER 123.20 89413 JANIS MASTERS 202.50 88907 JA IS MASTERS 180.00 89253 JASO 'S DEL::: 145.12 89057 JASON'S DELI 123.15 89312 JEFFERSO NATIONAL LIFE 290.58 89350 JENNY OBANNON 45.00 88992 JERRY MASSEY 133.52 88904 JODY EDRINGTO 45.00 88899 JOHN HAYNIE 126.95 88890 JOHN HAYNIE 73.51 89406 JOHN TALLEY 21.28 88911 JOH TURNER SCHOOL SUPPLIES 168.83 89304 JOYCE BRADLEY BABIN 2,152.87 88759 JOYCE BRADLEY BABIN 1,371.38 89117 JOYCE BRADLEY BABIN 2,168.02 89160 JUST FOR KIDS THERAPY SERVICES 765.00 89035 JUST FOR KIDS THERAPY SERVICES 570.00 89300 KAREN POWELL 42.14 88931 KATHRYN HALE 153.59 89023 KATHY VANCE 71.12 88922 KATHY VANCE 4 6. 7 6 89418 KATIE BILLINGS 8.00 88997 KAYE LOWE 71. 99 88797 KAYE LOWE 8.50 89198 KEITH FAULKNER 7.24 88762 KEITH FAULKNER 112.37 89164 KELLIE SHEFFIELD 36.71 88918 KENNETH A. KIRSPEL 45.00 89069 KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN 138. 4 3 88927 KERR PAPER \u0026amp; SUPPLY CO. 266.03 89317 KESSLERS TEAM SPORTS 1,200.16 89305 KETCHER METAL PRODUCTS co. 26.72 88926 KEVA RODGERS 25.76 88987 KIDS DIRECTORY LLC 525.00 89282 KIM PEARSON 116.48 88972 KIM REYNOLDS 75.88 88801 KIM WILMOT 45.00 88982 KOOLVENT ALUM. AWNING CO. 1,460.11 88823 KREBS BROS. SUPPLY CO., INC. 105.96 88824 KROGER #639 177.92 88881 KROGER #639 400.00 8 924 6 KROGER #639 29.65 89401 KROGER COMPANY/INDIAN HILLS 21.00 88825 KROGER COMPANY/INDIAN HILLS 8.42 89214 KROGER COMPANY/PERSHING 151.35 88878 KROGER COMPANY/PERSHING 55. 72 89400 - KWIK-KOPY PRINTING 184.84 89384 LAKESHORE LEARNING MATERIALS 6,762.83 88843 T- 8 ACCOUNT NORTH L:TTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT LAKESHORE LEARNING MATERIALS LARA HUMPHRIES LAURA JENNINGS LAURIE PRATHER LCR-M CORPORATION LCR-M CORPORATION LCR-M CORPORATION LEASE ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION LETITIA MARTIN LEWIS AND LEE DISTRIBUTING LEWIS AND LEE DISTRIBUTING LEWIS AND LEE DISTRIBUTING LIBRARY VIDEO COMPANY LIBRARY VIDEO COMPANY LINDA P. STEWART LINDA WILSON LINGUI SYSTEMS, INC. LINGU: SYSTEMS, INC. LITTLE ROCK WINNELSON CO. LITTLE ROCK WINNELSON CO. LRP PUBLICATIONS LYNN FLOYD LYNN NASH LYNN NASH MB ELECTRONICS M J COMMUNICATIONS MAE BRIGGS MAGG:E B:LLI GS MARCIA CHAPPLE-DEAN MARDEL CORPORATE OFFICE MARIE PIERCE MARISSA MYERS MARSHA MAJORS MARSHA SATTERFIELD MARTHA FEWELL MARTHA K ASTI MARTHA K ASTI MARY BETH COX MARY CAROLY 1 EAST MARY LOU FERGUSO MARY ELL BLACKWELL MARY SHUFFIELD MAURI DOUGLAS MAVIS CHERRY MCCLURE LANDSCAPING MCM MEDICAL MANAGER HEALTH SYSTEMS MEDICAL MANAGER HEALTH SYSTEMS MEDICAL MANAGER HEALTH SYSTEMS T- 9 3,539.63 45.00 61.43 92.82 342.64 291.50 120.51 1,747.97 45.00 2,240.00 864.00 838.00 375.23 98.45 11. 52 45.00 79.90 83.90 1,053.13 282.96 208.00 167.66 45.00 5.83 391.62 560.87 8.38 16.00 60.48 50.00 216.08 56.00 45.00 172.92 45.00 45.00 25.83 138.00 57.60 50.27 199.23 48.17 78.54 45.00 3,175.00 47.56 2,366.01 1,741.19 381.72 CHK. NO. 89226 89027 88773 89004 88908 89254 89414 89001 89065 88990 89284 89428 88827 89215 88902 89077 88826 89385 88834 89218 88919 88995 88887 89405 89289 89091 88939 89429 88950 88776 88872 89310 88954 88913 88836 89042 89439 88722 89074 89072 89362 88796 88828 88880 89293 88912 88893 89248 89407 ACCOUNT ORTH ~ITTLE ROCK SCHOO~ D:STRICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT MELISSA A LEE MELISSA CANNON METRO FOODS MHS MICHAEL HE DERSON MICHAEL KENT MICHAEL KENT MICHELLE KEATON MITCHS TIRE SERVICE MOLLY FLOYD MOVIES 10/TANDY 10 MSS MURIELENE CAMPBELL MUSWICK COMPANY INC. N.L.R. WINTEMP SUPPLY N.L.R. WINTEMP SUPPLY NAEIR NANCY C. GREEN NANCY MARSHALL NANCY MARSHALL NANCY MARSHALL NANCY SHEEHAN NANCY STEWART NANCY STEWART NAPA AUTO PARTS NAPA AUTO PARTS NAPA AUTO PARTS NASCO NATIONAL COUNCIL OF TEACHERS NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY NLR WELDING SUPPLY NLRHS ATHLETIC BOOSTER CLUB NLRSD ADMN OFFICE CHECKING NLRSD ADMN OFFICE CHECKING NLRSD TRANSPORTATION DEPT. NLRSD TRANSPORTATION DEPT. NLRSD WAREHOUSE NLRSD-BACKGROUND CHECK NO. LITTLE ROCK EDUCATORS CRED NORTH LITTLE ROCK DIESEL NORTH LITTLE ROCK POLICE \u0026amp; NORTH LITTLE ROCK POSTMASTER NORTH LITTLE ROCK POSTMASTER NORTH LITTLE ROCK POSTMASTER NORTH LITTLE ROCK POSTMASTER NORTH LITTLE ROCK POSTMASTER NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DIST NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DIST NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DIST. T-10 50.00 161.09 22,091.93 59. 4 0 44.10 29.82 27.34 45.00 48.00 45.00 250.00 601.68 16. 8 6 239.37 4 62. 4 6 13. 92 195.21 45.00 45.00 183.14 158.55 20.02 201. 32 101.36 1,217.73 506.23 134.31 859.87 102.00 389.81 67.44 375.00 127.84 163.30 1,148.25 1,035.38 6,275.00 205.97 83,192.30 1,855.58 40.00 58.00 74.00 50.00 185.00 37.00 8,452.50 602.57 1,184.86 CHK. 8 92 94 88905 89412 89018 89359 89006 89346 89028 88994 89037 88917 89002 89195 88831 88833 89217 89244 88935 88829 89216 89386 88835 88944 89421 88815 89208 89380 89219 89220 89387 89221 88941 8 87 63 89165 89240 89396 89313 89175 89172 88832 89437 88725 88837 89222 89223 89277 89355 89438 89119 0. ACCOUNT ORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOO~ DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DIST. NORTH LITTLE ROCK UTILITIES NORTH LITTLE ROCK UTILITIES NORTH LITTLE ROCK UTILITIES NORTHSIDE SALES COMPANY NOVA STAGGS OCSE OCSE OCSE OCSE OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE DEPOT ONE SOURCE HOME \u0026amp; BUILDING OPTUS INC OTIS SPUNKMEYER, INC PAM GLOVER PAM HANDLOSER PAM w=Lcox PAM WILCOX PATRICK LINDSEY PAUL H. BROOKES PUBLISHING CO. PAUL TAYLOR PEARSON EDUCATION PEARSON EDUCATION PEDIATRIC THERAPY SERVICES PEDIATRIC THERAPY SERVICES PERMA-BOU D PERMA-BOU D PERRY PARR PETREVIA BOARDMAN POSTAL PRIVILEGE PREMIER PRO ED QUALITY FOODS, INC. QUALITY WHOLESALE BUILDING RAMO A MCGEE RA DY SANDEFUR RA UELL BARTO REBECCA HEATHCOCK REBECCA R CARR REBECCA R CARR REGIONAL ADJUSTMENT BUREAU IC REGIONAL ADJUSTMENT BUREAU INC RELLIA DILLINGER RELLIA DILLINGER REMMY S. JACKSON RENAISSANCE LEARNING INC REXEL DAVIES RHONDA BA KS T-11 548.65 97. 94 34,792.54 34,522.59 149.92 45.00 2,537.41 1,630.73 1,630.73 2,562.97 1,199.14 223.61 129.58 857.02 2,399.00 21.50 630.00 45.00 668.90 127.51 71.50 114.66 711.47 308.11 1,473.75 1,076.25 20.01 1,909.17 95.20 18.40 150.00 700.00 39.60 6,900.82 1,362.63 22.40 95.20 150.15 75.92 3,694.90 2,186.88 62.61 62.61 45.00 44.28 127.84 139.00 594.71 45.00 CHK. NO. 89363 88813 89206 89378 88839 89087 88753 89108 89134 89154 88896 89249 88781 89275 89420 89345 89003 88951 89269 88861 88875 88957 89014 89296 89036 89301 88818 89211 88969 88959 88865 88956 89225 89389 88958 89039 88932 89016 89079 88970 89274 89113 89138 89076 89446 89166 89394 89377 88962 ORTH LITT~E ROCK SCHOO~ DISTR=CT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 ACCOUNT RHONDA TOLLETT RICHARD ALEXANDER RICKEY JONES RIGBY EDUCA':'ION RIGBY EDUCATION ROBIN GRAY ROBIN GRAY ROBIN TIBBS ROS IE COLEMAN ROTO-ROOTER SEWER-DRAINER ROY SPRADLIN RUSSELL CHEVROLET CO. RUSSELL CHEVROLET CO. RUSSELL CHEVROLET CO. RUSSELL CHEVROLET CO. RYAN BONA S.R. ROBERTS SADDLEBACK EDUCATIONAL, INC. SAFETY - KLEEN, INC. SAM MASCUILLI SAMS CLUB DIRECT SANDERS SUPPLY SANDRA CAMPBELL SARA GILLISON SAX ARTS \u0026amp; CRAFTS SBC SBC SBC LONG DISTANCE SBC LONG DISTANCE SBG-VAA SBG-VAA SBG-VAA SBG-VAA SCHOLASTIC BOOK FAIRS SCHOLASTIC INC SCHOLASTIC INC SCHOOL SPECIALITY SCHOOL SPECIALITY SECURITY BENEFIT GROUP SECURITY BENEFIT GROUP SERVICE FINANCE CORPORATION SERVICE FINANCE CORPORATION SERVICE FINANCE CORPORATION SERVICE FINANCE CORPORATION SHANNON OBERLAG SHARA BRAZEAR SHARA BRAZEAR SHARON BURRALL SHARON ELDRED T-12 AMOU T 31.86 95.20 45.00 306.38 4,016.77 25.08 15.68 146.84 45.00 148.45 45.00 44.92 21,300.96 104.86 30.12 56.00 987.48 179.83 296.10 14.03 33.51 81.83 45.00 99.48 160. 62 71.58 176.75 129.74 230.31 25.00 1,290.50 1,290.50 25.00 3,571.29 1,175.30 433.15 1,263.73 1,522.21 400.00 400.00 327.09 154.55 154.55 421.22 56.98 45.00 310.43 10.47 92. 4 0 CHK. NO. 89358 88895 88897 88855 89236 88980 89276 89360 88851 88844 88841 88755 88846 89156 89390 89308 89375 88786 89092 88891 88842 89040 89070 88940 89229 88787 89045 89041 89303 88749 89100 89128 89150 89297 88848 89391 88849 89230 89101 89129 88757 89111 89136 89158 89044 88947 89266 88909 89067  ., ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT SHAWN MCCRACKEN SHAY FORTUNE SHEILA SMITH SHERRY RATLIFF SHERYLL SMITH SHIRLEY SCOTT SHIRLEY SCOTT SHRED-IT SOFTWARE MEDIUM SOUTHERN ICE EQUIPMENT SOUTHWEST SPORTING GOODS CO STANLEY HARDWARE CO. STANLEY HARDWARE CO. STANLEY HARDWARE CO. STAR BOLT \u0026amp; SCREW CO., INC. STAR BOLT \u0026amp; SCREW CO., INC. STATE BUSINESS SUPPLY STEPHANY BARNETTE STERLING PAINT STERLING PAINT STEVEN PORTER STUDIES WEEKLY INC. SUBWAY SANDWICHES SUNBURST VISUAL MEDIA SUNDANCE SUPER DUPER INC SUPER DUPER INC SUPERIOR SPRING CLUTCH \u0026amp; GEAR SUPERIOR SPRING CLUTCH \u0026amp; GEAR SUPREME FIXTURE CO. SUSAN HYDEN SUSAN HYDEN SUSAN MILLER SUSIE BALLARD-JACKSON SUZZETTE PATTERSON SYMTRAX CORPORATION SYSCO FOOD SERVICE OF ARKANSAS SYSCO FOOD SERVICE OF ARKANSAS TARGET TAYLOR DIESEL SERVICE TEACHERS VIDEO COMPANY TEACHING RESOURCE CENTER TELETOUCH THE HONEYBAKED HAM THE MCGRAW HILL COMPANIES THE MEDICINE SHOPPE THE OUTSIDER POWER CLEANING THE PARENT INSTITUTE THE PSYCHOLOGICAL CORPORATION T-13 25.70 56.28 47.60 45.00 45.00 121. 52 63.00 55.00 78.45 457.55 947.71 69.62 40.78 93.89 28.06 60.81 88.50 45.00 405.61 43.29 55.72 234.00 138.32 142.91 290.00 442.11 97.80 3,778.72 491.39 134.89 136.36 111.44 29.68 45.00 138.00 450.00 478.75 37,873.68 32.13 774.94 156.68 96. 58 97.19 309.78 27. 96 85.71 150.00 388.80 555.01 CHK. NO. 88975 89054 89011 88879 89078 89055 89443 89280 89058 89043 89231 88853 89234 89392 88854 89235 89272 89032 88856 89237 88999 89046 88961 88858 89020 88795 89374 88847 89228 89238 88821 89382 89013 88850 88724 89290 88867 89399 89239 88946 88942 89258 89185 88988 89268 88979 88974 89255 88819 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT THE SPORTSTOP INC. THE WHISPER GLIDE COMPANY THELMA JASPER THERAPY PROVIDERS, P.A. THERAPY PROVIDERS, P.A. TOP GUN PEST CONTROL INC TRANS AMERICAN TIRE COMPANY TROUTMAN OIL CO.,INC. TROUTMAN OIL CO.,INC. TURNER DAIRY TURNER DAIRY TWIN CITY PRINTING \u0026amp; LITHO INC TWIN CITY PRINTING \u0026amp; LITHO INC TWIN CITY PRINTING \u0026amp; LITHO INC US ABLE LIFE US ABLE LIFE INSURANCE CO US ABLE LIFE INSURANCE/CANCER U S FUEL US FUEL U.S. TOY COMPANY INC. UALR UALR UNITED ART \u0026amp; EDUCATION SUPPLY UNITED WAY OF PULASKI COUNTY UNIVERSAL CARD SERVICES CORP UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL ARKANSAS UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL ARKANSAS UNUM LIFE INSURANCE OF AMERICA USCB INCORPORATED USCB INCORPORATED UTILITY BILLING SERVICES UTILITY BILLING SERVICES VALERIE TORRES VALIC - VARIABLE VALIC - VARIABLE VALIC - VARIABLE VALIC - VARIABLE VICKY ROBERTSON ANNUITY ANNUITY ANNUITY ANNUITY VIRCO MFG. CORPORATION VIRCO MFG. CORPORATION WALMART COMMUNITY BRC WALMART COMMUNITY BRC WANDA HAWKINS LIFE LIFE LIFE LIFE WARD TRANSPORTATION SERVICES  WEEKLY READER WESTERN FOODS T-14 10.69 188.65 123.07 8,898.75 7,398.75 945.00 361.51 8,168.98 8,507.32 11,774.57 1,409.95 2,485.18 246.39 89.99 3,598.00 5,254.60 13,310.20 112.24 87.94 83.40 1,649.84 824.88 163.98 1,413.92 7,038.24 90.00 610.00 612.00 70.00 3,320.56 5,094.30 109.76 109.14 6,476.32 1,525.46 97.83 575.00 29,341.29 29,396.29 575.00 148.67 110. 27 6,770.63 8 67. 08 240.50 63.30 831.05 225.25 10,095.56 CHK. NO. 89232 89033 89250 88903 89252 88840 88792 88924 89261 89318 89447 88863 89241 89397 89347 89348 89352 88963 89423 89201 88991 89285 88845 89173 89321 89242 89251 8 9411 89187 89371 89354 88761 89163 88838 89388 88874 88745 89096 89124 89146 88925 88866 89398 88998 89287 89005 88871 88873 89404 11  ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL D:STRICT CHECK LISTING FOR DECEMBER, 2003 AMOUNT WESTERN SIZZLIN WHIPPLE FAMILY LIMITED WIN-HOLT EQUIPMENT GROUP WINSTON TURNER CHECK TOTALS FOR DECEMBER, 2003 T-15 186.80 124,458.00 249.28 45.00 CHK. NO. 89425 89324 89298 88804 5,549,694.46 RECEIVED FEB1 2004 OFFIOCFE DESEGREGMAOTNIOITNO RING BOARD OF EDUCATION NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Thursday, February 19, 2004 5:00 P.M. MEETING AGENDA NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT. OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT AGENDA 4:45 P.M. - Poplar Street Middle School Robotics Team Demonstration REGULAR MEETING, BOARD OF EDUCATION Administration Building, 2700 Poplar Thursday, February 19, 2004 5:00 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENTS I. CALL TO ORDER, Teresa Burl, President II. INVOCATION, Danielle Jackson, NLRHS East Campus Sophomore, daughter of Louis and Chantel Ford III. FLAG SALUTE IV. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Teresa Burl, President Marty Moore, Vice President Trent Cox, Secretary Rochelle Redus, Parliamentarian Charles Hoskyn, Member Mable Mitchell, Member John Riley, Member V. RECOGNITION OF PEOPLE/EVENTS/PROGRAMS A. Superintendent's Honor Roll - S. Brazear 1. North Little Rock School District Nurses B. Partners in Education - S. Brazear l. Duke Energy and Lynch Drive Elementary 2. US Bank and the Business Leadership Academy at North Little Rock High School Page 2 - Board Agenda January 15, 2004 C. Special Recognition - S. Brazear 1. North Little Rock High School West Campus PTA VI. DISPOSITION OF MINUTES OF PRIOR MEETINGS A. Thursday, January 15, 2004 5:00 P.M. (Regular) - Page A- I B. Thursday, January 22, 2004 5:00 P.M. (Special) - Page A - 5 C. Thursday, February 11, 2004 5:30 P.M. (Special)- Page A- 8 VII. ACTION ITEMS - UNFINISHED BUSINESS None VIII. ACTION ITEMS - NEW BUSINESS A. Certified Personnel Policies Committee Report B. Classified Personnel Policies Committee Report C. Consider Updated Board Administration Policies (First Reading) - J. Smith D. Consider Updated Board School, Home and Community Relations Policies (First Reading) - J. Smith E. Consider Date Revision of March 2004 Board Meeting - J. Smith (Date Change Due to Spring Break- Possibly to March 11, 2004) F. Consider Motion for Consent Agenda- J. Smith 1. Consider monthly financial report - Page O - 1 2. Consider employment of personnel - Page P - 1 3. Consider payment of regular bills - Page T - 1 IX. ADJOURNMENT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of the Superintendent REGULAR MEETING, BOARD OF EDUCATION MINUTES January 15, 2004 The North Little Rock School District Board met in regular session on Thursday, January 15, 2004 in the Board Room of the Administration Building of the North Little Rock School District, 2700 Poplar Street, North Little Rock, Arkansas. Lorene Joshua, N.A.A.C.P president, thanked the Board for spreading the word about the speech tournament and reported it was a great success. President Teresa Burl called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. Ketron Howard, a Lynch Drive Elementary fifth grader, gave the invocation. The flag salute followed. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Present Teresa Burl, President Marty Moore, Vice-President Trent Cox, Secretary Rochelle Redus, Parliamentarian Charles Hoskyn, Member Mable Mitchell, Member John Riley, Member Absent None Others Present James Smith, Superintendent\nBobby Acklin, Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation\nDonald Watkins, Assistant Superintendent for Business Services\nrepresentatives from the Personnel Policies Committees, PT A and press\nseveral other staff members\nand Darlene Holmes, Superintendent's secretary were also present. Billy Duvall (audio) and Jim Billings (video) taped the meeting. RECOGNITION OF PEOPLE/EVENTS/PROGRAMS Shara Brazear, Communication Specialist, presented two new well-deserving members to the Superintendent's Honor Roll. They were Liz Thompson, Speech Pathologist and Karen Baker, Special Education Teacher from Pike View Elementary. Both were given certificates and thanked for a job well done. Mrs. Brazear also presented North Little Rock Athletic Club and the North Little Rock School District as new Partners in Education. A-1 Rick Kron, Meadow Park Elementary Teacher, presented North Little Rock High School West Campus Teachers, Monica Ball and Cecelia Jarry, as new recipients of their National Board Certification. DISPOSITION OF MINUTES MOTION Rochelle Redus moved to accept the minutes of the December 18, 2003 (Regular) Board meeting as printed. Charles Hoskyn seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None UNFINISHED BUSINESS The Updated Board Governance and Operation Policies were presented by Mr. Smith for a second and final reading. MOTION Marty Moore moved to accept the Board Governance and Operations Policies as printed. Rochelle Redus seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None NEW BUSINESS Certified Personnel Policies Report Chairman Rick Kron presented the report. One proposal presented was to add the following wording to Policy CCDA (National Board Certification) as follows: \"Adjustments shall be done upon receipt by the personnel office by December 31, of paperwork or computer notice of completion. If not received by the above date, the additional certification will be recognized on the following year's contract.\" MOTION Marty Moore moved to accept the proposal as presented. Rochelle Redus seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None Classified Personnel Policies Report Chairman Frank Wise presented their report. There were no proposals. A-2 Consent Agenda Mr. Smith presented the consent agenda as printed. MOTION Trent Cox moved to accept the consent agenda as printed. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: MOTION Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None Trent Cox moved to enter into Executive Session to discuss an employee matter. Rochelle Redus seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None The Board went into executive session at 5:30 p.m. The Board reconvened at 6:05 p.m. MOTION Rochelle Redus moved to accept Superintendent James Smith's offer to remain as interim Superintendent if a replacement has not been hired before his retirement date of June 30, 2004. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None A discussion ensued concerning the process to select a new Superintendent. Bobby Lester, a representative of the McPherson, \u0026amp; Jacobson, L.L.C, an Executive Recruiting Firm presented a proposal that his consulting firm handle the search for a new Superintendent. He answered questions from the Board and discussed the fee for this search at approximately $18,000 plus expenses. MOTION Charles Hoskyn moved to schedule a Special Board meeting for Thursday, January 22, 2004 at 5:00 p.m. Mable Mitchell seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None A-3 ADJOURNMENT Trent Cox moved to adjourn the meeting. Rochelle Redus seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Iloskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None Chairman Burl declared the meeting adjourned at 6:52 p.m. Teresa Burl, President Trent Cox, Secretary A-4 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of the Superintendent SPECIAL MEETING, BOARD OF EDUCATION MINUTES January 22, 2004 The North Little Rock School District Board met in a special session on Thursday, January 22, 2004 in the Board Room of the Administration Building of the North Little Rock School District, 2700 Poplar Street, North Little Rock, Arkansas. President Teresa Burl called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Present Teresa Burl, President Marty Moore, Vice President Trent Cox, Secretary Rochelle Redus, Parliamentarian Charles Hoskyn, Member Mable Mitchell, Member John Riley, Member Absent None Others Present James Smith, Superintendent\nBobby Acklin, Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation\nDonald Watkins, Assistant Superintendent for Business Services\nDanny Reed, Administrative Director of Personnel\nseveral staff members\nthe press and Darlene Holmes, Superintendent's secretary were also present. Billy Duvall taped (audio) the meeting. MOTION Trent Cox moved that the North Little Rock School Board move forward in its own search to hire and fill the position of Superintendent immediately. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Moore, and Riley Hoskyn, Mitchell, and Redus A-5 MOTION Trent Cox moved that the North Little Rock School District post the attached job - advertisement in the Arkansas School Board Association and the Arkansas Administrator Educators Association newsletters at their next publication and to start accepting job applications immediately with the understanding that the North Little Rock School Board may identify and pursue qualified candidates. Marty Moore seconded the motion. Amendment John Riley moved to have the job posting also listed on the school district's website. Charles Hoskyn seconded the motion. Vote on the Amendment YEAS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley NAYS: None Vote on the Motion YEAS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley NAYS: None MOTION Marty Moore moved to designate Teresa Burl as the gatekeeper and that all applications are directed to the Office of the Superintendent. Rochelle Redus seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None Rochelle Redus exited the meeting at 5:50 p.m. MOTION Charles Hoskyn moved that each Board member forward to the Superintendent's office a ranked priority list of their top five characteristics for a new Superintendent. John Riley seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: MOTION Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus absent) Charles Hoskyn moved that no Board member solicit any applications. John Riley seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: MOTION Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus absent) Charles moved that the Board enter into Executive Session to discuss possible candidates. Trent Cox seconded the motion. A-6 The Board entered into Executive Session at 6:20 p.m. - The Board reconvened in Open Session at 6:55 p.m. MOTION Charles Hoskyn moved that the Board not offer any invitations to any candidates and the Board will wait on applications. John Riley seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus absent) ADJOURNMENT MOTION Trent Cox moved to adjourn the meeting. Mable Mitchell seconded the motion. President Burl declared the meeting adjourned at 6:57 p.m. Teresa Burl, President Trent Cox, Secretary A-7 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of the Superintendent SPECIAL MEETING, BOARD OF EDUCATION MINUTES February 11, 2004 The North Little Rock School District Board met in a special session on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 in the Board Room of the Administration Building of the North Little Rock School District, 2700 Poplar Street, North Little Rock, Arkansas. President Teresa Burl called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Present Teresa Burl, President Marty Moore, Vice President Trent Cox, Secretary Rochelle Redus, Parliamentarian Charles Hoskyn, Member Mable Mitchell, Member John Riley, Member Absent None Others Present James Smith, Superintendent\nBobby Acklin, Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation\nseveral staff members\nthe press and Darlene Holmes, Superintendent's secretary were also present. Billy Duvall taped (audio) the meeting. MOTION Marty Moore moved to consider employment applications and possible interviews. Trent Cox seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None The Board entered into Executive Session at 5:33 p.m. A- 8 Rochelle Redus exited the Executive Session and the meeting at 6:12 p.m. The Board reconvened at 6:45 p.m. MOTION Trent Cox moved that the Board set up interviews for only two of the three applicants. The two to be interviewed are Mr. Bobby Acklin and Dr. Tom Kimbrell. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus absent) ADJOURNMENT MOTION Charles Hoskyn moved to adjourn the meeting. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, IIoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus absent) President Burl declared the meeting adjourned at 6:57 p.m. Teresa Burl, President Trent Cox, Secretary A-9 Y-T-D SUMMAROYF FUNDS FUND 1-SALARY FUND 2-0PERATING FUND 4-DEBT SERVICE (FUNDS 1 + 2 + 4) FUND 3-BUILDING FUND 5-CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND 6-FEDERAL FUND 8-FOOD SERVICE TOTAL ALL FUNDS MONTHLYSU MMAROYF FUNDS - Fund I-Salary Fund 2-0perating FUnd 4 Debt Service FUnd 3-Building Fund 5-Capital Outlay FUnd 6-Federal Fund 8-Food Service TOTAL MONTHLYF UNDS NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL REPORT JANUARY, 2004 BEGINNING Y-T-D BALANCE REVENUE .00 15,586,099.46 2,892,475.81 16,962,708.32 1,597,982.00 .00 4,490,457.81 32,548,807.78 5,253,624.00 31,234.56 975,029.15 918,066.50 1,192,522.35 3,252,066.42 22,796.77 1,551,752.98 11,934,430.08 38,301,928.24 MONTH REVENUE 2,723,756.25 651,102.37 .00 3,100.00 12,146.16 471,944.45 306,884.15 4,168,933.38 0 - 1 Y-T-D CURRENT EXPENDITURES BALANCE 15,686,937.72 100,838.26CR 12,813,229.57 7,041,954.56 476,315.94 1,121,666.06 28,976,483.23 8,062,782.36 229,714.84 5,055,143.72 1,381,877.33 511,218.32 2,988,437.60 1,456,151.17 1,714,783.78 140,234.03CR 35,291,296.78 14,945,061.54 MONTH REVENUE EXPENDITURES OVER/UNDER EXPENSE 2,723,741.55 14.70 2,045,825.12 1,394,722. 75CR .00 .00 .00 3,100.00 221,192.56 209,046.40CR 552,827.17 80,882. 72CR 232,250.40 74,633.75 5,775,836.80 l,606,903.42CR REVENUE FUND 1 SALARY FUND Transfer Fund FUND 2 OPERATING FUND LOCAL REVENUE Current Taxes Pullback Delinquent Taxes Land Redemption Interest Soft Drink Sales Spec Ed Preschool Local Misc Local TOTAL LOCAL REVENUE STATE REVENUE State Equalization Aid State Incentive Funding Pathwise Mentoring Sp Ed Supv/ESY/Res/Cat Special Ed Preschool K-1 Proverty Aid ABC Preschool Smart Start Literacy M-to-M Program Magnet/M-to-M Trans General Facility Fund Debt Service Funding Deseg-Teach Retire/Insu Miscellaneous State TOTAL STATE REVENUE TRANSFERS TOTAL OPERATING FUND FUND 4 DEBT SERVICE Transfers TOTAL REVENUE FUNDS 1, 2, 4 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL REPORT JANUARY, 2004 BUDGETED COLLECTED REVENUE THiS MONTH 32,975,000.00 2,723,756.25 12,200,000.00 .00 5,475,000.00 .00 1,400,000.00 159,143.55 160,000.00 6,995.91 175,000.00 24,149.48 100,000.00 7,646.58 400,000.00 .00 229,068.00 2,893.00 20,139,068.00 200,828.52 28,075,080.00 2,552,280.00 1,156,301.00 .00 .00 .00 212,792.00 77,782.00 542,449.00 542,449.00 225,269.00 .00 469,956.00 .00 64,850.00 .00 2,650,000.00 .00 750,000.00 .00 179,079.00 .00 249,690.00 .00 1,350,000.00 .00 175,466.00 .00 36,100,932.00 3,172,511.00 34, 5.70, 000. OOCR 2,722,237.15CR 21,670,000.00 651,102.37 1,.675,000.00 .00 56,320,000.00 3,374,858.62 0 - 2 COLLECTED BUDGET % COLLECTED TO DATE BALANCE TO DATE 15,586,099.46 17,388,900.54 47.26% 11,467,777.87 732,222.13 93. 99% .00 5,475,000.00 .00% 2,323,309.03 923,309. 03CR 165.95% 87,651.55 72,348.45 54.78% 117,152.67 57,847.33 66. 94% 46,267.64 53,732.36 46.26% .00 400,000.00 .00% 50,171.17 178,896.83 21. 90% 14,092,329.93 6,046,738.07 69.97% 15,313,680.00 12,761,400.00 54. 54% .00 1,156,301.00 .00% .00 .00 .00% - 83,892.00 128,900.00 39.42% 542,449.00 .00 100.00% 112,632.00 112,637.00 4 9. 99% 169,489.00 300,467.00 36.06% 64,850.00 .00 100.00% 1,036,112.00 1,613,888.00 39.09% 263,000.00 487,000.00 35.06% 89,539.00 89,540.00 49.99% 124,844.00 124,846.00 49.99% 562,303.15 787,696.85 41.65% 91,111.89 84,354.11 51. 92% 18,453,902.04 17,647,029.96 51.11% 15,583,523 .. 65CR 18,986,476.35CR .00% 16,962,708.32 4,707,291.68 78.27% .00 1,675,000.00 .00% 32,548,807.78 23,771,192.22 57. 79% - REVENUE (CONTINUED) FUND 3 BUILDING FUND Interest Other TOTAL BUILDING FUND FUND 5 CAPITAL OUTLAY Current Taxes Pullback Delinquent Taxes Other TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY FUND 6 FEDERAL REVENUE ROTC TITLE IV-B 21st Century TITLE I TITLE V-B Charter Schoo Reading Excellance Vocational earl Perkins - TITLE VI-B, PL 94-142 Special Ed Pre-School Medicaid TITLE II-A Improve Teac TITLE I-Accountability Miscellaneous Federal TOTAL FEDERAL REVENUE FUND 8 FOOD SERVICE Sales Federal Reimbursement Other TOTAL FOOD SERVICE TOTAL REVENUE NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL REPORf JANUARY, 2004 BUDGETED COLLECTED REVENUE THIS MONTH 22,800.00 .00 37,200.00 3,100.00 60,000.00 3,100.00 780,000.00 .00 550,000.00 .00 110,000.00 12,146.16 10,000.00 .00 1,450,000.00 12,146.16 100,000.00 9,259.90 731,299.00 182,777.00 2,434,220.00 .00 150,000.00 .00 377,974.00 .00 194,378.00 16,204.00 1,577,791.00 .00 479,435.00 239,717.50 305,000.00 23,986.05 642,789.00 . 00 9,000.00 . 00 10,000.00 . 00 7,011,886.00 471,944.45 870,000.00 85,191.61 2,050,000.00 188,828.11 80,000.00 32,864.43 3,000,000.00 306,884.15 67,841,886.00 4,168,933.38 0 - 3 COLLECTED BUDGET % COLLECTED TO DATE BALANCE TO DATE 9,534.56 13,265.44 41.81% 21,700.00 15,500.00 58.33% 31,234.56 28,765.44 52.05% 740,761.56 39,238.44 94.96% .00 550,000.00 .00% 177,304.94 67,304.94CR 161.18% .00 10,000.00 .00% 918,066.50 531,933.50 63. 31% 52,352.42 47,647.58 52.35% 657,412.00 73,887.00 89. 89% 549,980.00 1,884,240.00 22. 59% 150,000.00 .00 100.00% 409,800.00 31,826.00CR 108.42% 116,196.20 78,181.80 59. 77% 788,895.00 788,896.00 49. 99% 239,717.50 239,717 .so 50.00% 77,966.30 227,033.70 25.56% 200,747.00 442,042.00 31.23% 9,000.00 .00 100.00% .00 10,000.00 .00% 3,252,066.42 3,759,819.58 46.37% 504,206.14 365,793.86 57.95% 993,435.60 1,056,564.40 4 8. 4 6% 54,111.24 25,888.76 67.63% 1,551,752.98 1,448,247.02 51. 72% 38,301,928.24 29,539,957.76 56.45% EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION FUND 1 SALARY FUND Regular Programs Special Education Workforce Education Compensation Education Other Instruct Program Student Support Instruct Staff Support General Admin Support School Admin Support Business Support Maintenance \u0026amp; Operation Transportation Central Office Other Support TOTAL SALARY FUND 2 OPERATING FUND Regular Programs Special Education Workforce Education Compensation Education Other Instruct Program Student Support Instruct Staff Support General Admin Support School Admin Support Business Support Maintenance \u0026amp; Operation Transportation Central O.ffice Other Support TOTAL OPERATING FUND FUND 4 DEBT SERVICE FUND Other Support TOTAL DEBT SERVICE TOTAL FUND 1, 2, 4 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL REPORT JANUARY, 2004 BUDGETED EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES THIS MONTH 16,608,519.00 1,473,681.45 4,868,940.00 402,912.63 1,640,057.00 122,304.16 101,859.00 .00 1,143,910.00 100,432.27 2,531,292.00 216,503.51 1,653,677.00 131,694.59 316,585.00 26,928.97 2,631,652.00 212,693.08 81,017.00 6,767.50 81,060.00 6,771.05 68,050.00 5,417.61 210,835.00 17,634.73 .00 .00 31,937,453.00 2,723,741.55 5,044,334.00 368,343.42 1,986,396.00 130,561.36 491,752.00 32,493.33 63,340.00 2,749.66 731,404.00 48,330.86 2,703,332.00 182,796.50 1,924,093.00 89,637.19 247,221.00 23,652.57 1,514,154.00 128,435.88 447,236.00 60,386.25 5,609,526.00 541,494.08 3,446,599.00 297,405.96 739,298.00 53,209.46 1,515,436.00 86,328.60 26,464,121.00 2,045,825.12 1,657,760.00 .00 1,657,760.00 .00 60,059,334.00 4,769,566.67 0 - 4 EXPENDITURES BUDGET % Of' TO DATE BALANCE BUDGET 8,145,771.88 8,462,747.12 4 9. 04% 2,240,308.51 2,628,631.49 46. 01% 740,272.87 899,784.13 45.13% .00 101,859.00 .00% 575,456.89 568,453.11 50.30% 1,276,217.44 1,255,074.56 so. 41% 838,844.04 814,832.96 so. 72% 200,755.73 115,829.27 63. 41% 1,406,367.42 1,225,284.58 53.44% 50,075.16 30,941.84 61.80% 49,987.83 31,072.17 61.66% 36,367.18 31,682.82 53.44% 125,487.77 85,347.23 59.51% 1,025.00 1,025.00CR .00% 15,686,937.72 16,250,515.28 4 9 .11% - 2,316,856.16 2,727,477.84 45.92% 782,458.80 1,203,937.20 39. 39% 212,406.85 279,345.15 4 3. 19% 14,657.94 48,682.06 23.14% 242,073.30 489,330.70 33. 09% 1,007,058.88 1,696,273.12 37.25% 610,939.74 1,313,153.26 31. 75% 170,207.38 77,013.62 68.84% 797,556.29 716,597. 11 52. 67% 896,326.35 449,090.35CR 200.41% 3,136,529.02 2,472,996.98 55. 91% 1,741,485.51 1,705,113.49 50.52% 440,857.44 298,440.56 59.63% 443,815.91 1,071,620.09 29.28% 12,813,229.57 13,650,891.43 48.41% 476,315.94 1,181,444.06 28.73% 476,315.94 1,181,444.06 28.73% 28,976,483.23 31,082,850.77 48 .24% - EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION FUND 6 FEDERAL FUNDS Regular Programs Special Education. Workforce Education Compensation Education Other Instruct Program Student Support Instruct Staff Support General Admin Support School Admin Support Business Support Maintenance \u0026amp; Operation Transportation Central Office Support Other Support TOTAL FEDERAL FUNDS FUND 3 FUND 5 FUND BUILDING FUND CAPITAL OUTLAY FOOD SERVICE ALL FUND, FUNCTION TOTALS REGULAR PROGRAMS SPECIAL EDUCATION WORKFORCED UCATION COMPENSATIONE DUCATION OTHER INSTRUCTINAL ED STUDENT SUPPORT INSTUCT STAFF SUPPORT GENERAL ADMIN SUPPORT SCHOOL ADMIN SUPPORT BUSINESS SUPPORT MAINTENANCE\u0026amp; OPERATION TRANSPORTATION CENTRAL OFFICE OTHER SUPPORT ALL FUNDS TOTAL EXPENDITURES NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL REPORT JANUARY, 2004 BUDGETED EXPENDITURES 636,862.00 1,164,895.00 179,195.00 2,116,983.00 872,123.00 1,423,384.00 1,611,556.00 80,602.00 2,000.00 .00 .00 127,316.00 102,850.00 125,012.00 8,442,778.00 288,141.00 2,242,413.00 2,959,606.00 22,302,468.00 8,020,231.00 2,311,004.00 2,284,845.00 2,747,977.00 6,658,008.00 5,189,326.00 644,408.00 4,147,806.00 528,253.00 6,613,047.00 3,641,965.00 1,634,074.00 7,268,860.00 73,992,272.00 EXPENDITURES THIS MONTH 0 - 5 29,833.78 79,087.08 3,304.22 137,280.76 63,440.46 97,863.33 53,119.76 5,586.99 .00 .00 .00 717. 59 79,729.67 2,863.53 552,827.17 .00 221,192.56 232,250.40 1,871,858.65 612,561.07 158,101.71 140,030.42 212,203.59 497,163.34 274,451.54 56,168.53 341,128.96 115,693.69 642,472.10 303,541.16 196,978.41 353,483.63 5,775,836.80 EXPENDITURES TO DATE 269,869.02 441,553.97 63,175.46 750,642.04 316,616.00 552,389.41 454,853.14 39,173.58 .00 .00 .00 1,481.44 89,043.57 9,639.97 2,988,437.60 229,714.84 1,381,877.33 1,714,783.78 10,732,497.06 3,464,321.28 1,015,855.18 765,299.98 1,134,146.19 2,835,665.73 1,904,636.92 410,136.69 2,203,923.71 1,080,377.01 3,799,145.20 1,779,334.13 1,021,262.66 3,144,695.04 35,291,296.78 BUDGET BALANCE 366,992.98 723,341.03 116,\"019.54 1,366,340.96 555,507.00 870,994.59 1,156,702.86 41,428.42 2,000.00 .00 .00 125,834.56 13,806.43 115,372.03 5,454,340.40 58,426.16 860,535.67 1,244,822.22 11,569,970.94 4,555,909.72 1,295,148.82 1,519,545.02 1,613,830.81 3,822,342.27 3,284,689.08 234,271.31 1,943,882.29 % OF BUDGET 42. 37% 37.90% 35.25% 35.45% 36.30% 38.80% 28.22% 48.60% .00% .00% .00% 1.16% 86.57% 7. 71% 35.39% 7 9. 72% 61. 62% 57.93% 48.12% 43.19% 43.95% 33.49% 41. 27% 42. 59% 36.70% 63.64% 53 .13% 552,124.0lCR 204.51% 2,813,901.80 1,862,630.87 612,811.34 4,124,164.96 38,700,975.22 57. 4 4 % 48.85% 62.49% 43.26% 47.69% EXPENDITURES BY OBJECT FUND 1 TEACHERS SALARY .UND Salaries Fringe Benefits Other TOTAL TEACHER SALARY FUND 2 OPERATING FUND Salaries Fringe Benefits Purchased Services Supplies Capital Outlay Other TOTAL OPERATING FUND FUND 4 DEBT SERVICE ...., Principal Interest Fees TOTAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 3 BUILDING FUND Purchased Services Supplies Capital Outlay Other TOTAL BUILDING .UNO FUND 5: CAPITAL OUTLAY Purchased Services Supplies Capital Outlay Other TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL REPORT JANUARY, 2004 BUDGETED EXPENDITURES AMOUNT THIS MONTH 29,629,199.00 2,541,080.81 2,308,254.00 182,660.74 .00 .00 31,937,453.00 2,723,741.55 9,856,263.00 853,951.22 9,513,312.00 788,984.68 3,712,359.00 193,773.46 2,982,767.00 200,013.06 322,461.00 5,752.93 76,959.00 3,349.77 26,464,121.00 2,045,825.12 635,360.00 .00 997,500.00 .00 24,900.00 .00 1,657,760.00 .00 70,283.00 .00 62,256.00 .00 155,602.00 .00 .00 .00 288,141.00 .00 962,008.00 71,665.40 520,314.00 33,071.45 541,991.00 102,962.87 218,100.00 13,492.84 2,242,413.00 221,192.56 0 - 6 EXPENDITURES BUDGET % OF TO DATE BALANCE BUDGET 14,726,265.78 14,902,933.22 49.70% 960,671.94 1,347,582.06 41. 61% .00 .00 .00% 15,686,937.72 16,250,515.28 49.11% 4,939,995.07 4,916,267.93 50.12% 4,803,048.34 4,710,263.66 50.48% 1,096,026.10 2,616,332.90 29.52% 1,660,693.24 1,322,073.76 55. 67% 140,439.84 182,021.16 43. 55% 173,026.98 96,067.98CR 224.83% 12,813,229.57 13,650,891.43 48.41% 2,182.19 633,177.81 .34% 474,133.75 523,366.25 47. 53% - .00 24,900.00 .00% 476,315.94 1,181,444.06 28 .. 73% 57,766.87 12,516.13 82.19% 63,328.71 1,072. 71CR 101. 72% 108,619.26 46,982.74 69.80% .00 .00 .00% 229,714.84 58,426.16 79.72% 377,344.70 584,663.30 39.22% 280,509.34 239,804.66 53. 91% 523,662.73 18,328.27 96. 61% 200,360.56 17,739.44 91. g6% 1,381,877.33 860,535.67 61. 62% Terri Baker Angela Guinn Karen McMurray Courtney Meador Laura McDowell Deborah Cline Rebecca Darnell Julie Denton Jessica Ganus Robin Lee NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT North Little Rock, Arkansas Board Agenda - February I 9, 2004 CERTIFIED PERSONNEL RESIGNATIONS Poplar Street Middle School, Special Education Effective 1/22/04 Poplar Street Middle School, 6th Grade Language Arts Effective 1/10/04 Poplar Street Middle School, 6th Grade Science Effective 1/13/04 Lakewood Middle/Poplar Street Middle, Vocal Music Effective 1/21/04 CERTIFIED PERSONNEL CHANGES AND TRANSFERS From Lakewood Middle School, Health/PE To Lakewood Middle School, Health/PE/Coaching Effective 1/20/04 NEW CERTIFIED PERSONNEL Boone Park Elementary, Fourth Grade Effective 8/13/03, Category I, Step 0, 187 days Boone Park Elementary, Math Cooperating Teacher Effective 1/8/04, Category 1, Step 0, 187 days Ridgeroad Middle Charter School, Special Education Effective 1/30/04, Category, I, Step 5, 187 days Lakewood Middle/Poplar Street Middle, Vocal Music Effective 1/30/04, Category I, Step 0, 187 days Belwood Elementary, Fifth Grade Effective 8/13/03, Category IV, Step 1, 187 days P-1 North Little Rock School District Board Agenda - February 19, 2004 NEW CERTIFIED PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS NAME: PROPOSED ASSIGNMENT: EDUCATION: CERTIFICATION: STUDENT TEACHING: RECOMMENDATION: NAME: PROPOSED ASSIGNMENT: EDUCATION: CERTIFICATION: STUDENT TEACHING: RECOMMENDATION: NAME: PROPOSED ASSIGNMENT: EDUCATION: CERTIFICATION: EXPERIENCE: RECOMMENDATION: NAME: PROPOSED ASSIGNMENT: .EDUCATION: CERTIFICATION: STUDENT TEACHING: RECOMMENDATION: Deborah Cline Boone Park Elementary, 4th Grade BSE- UALR, Little Rock, AR 7/03 Early Childhood P-4 Boone Park Elementary, North Little Rock, AR 1/03 - 7/03 Mavis Cherry, Principal Kaye Lowe, Administrative Director for Elementary Education Danny Reed, Administrative Director of Personnel/Special Services Rebecca Darnell Boone Park Elementary, Math Cooperating Teacher - Grant Position BSE-Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, AR 12/03 Early Childhood P-4 Valley View Elementary, Jonesboro, AR 8/03 - 12/03 Mavis Cherry, Principal Kaye Lowe, Administrative Director for Elementary Education Danny Reed, Administrative Director of Personnel/Special Services Julie Denton Ridgeorad Middle Charter School, Special Education BSE- University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 1/71 Special Education Access Schools, Little Rock, AR 7/98 - 7/99 Glendale Unified School District, Glendale, CA 8/96 - 6/98 Tobinworld School, Glendale, CA 8/95 - 6/96 Arkansas Pediatric Facility, North Little Rock, AR 1994-95 Winston Turner, Principal Martha Kay Asti, Director of Special Services Danny Reed, Administrative Director of Personnel/Special Services Jessica Ganus Lakewood Middle/Poplar Street Middle, Vocal Music BA - Harding University, Searcy, AR 12/03 Middle School Math, Vocal Music K-12 Ahlf Jr. High, Searcy, AR 9/03 - 12/03 Dr. Ginger Wallace, Principal, Lakewood Middle School Bill Bowers, Principal, Poplar Street Middle School Lynn Nash, Supervisor for Middle Level Education Danny Reed, Administrative Director of Personnel/Special Services P-2 North Little Rock School District Board Agenda - February 19, 2004 NEW CERTIFIED PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS NAME: PROPOSED ASSIGNMENT: EDUCATION: CERTIFICATION: EXPERIENCE: RECOMMENDATION: Terri Brown J. W. Burkes Robert Burnett Patrice Dunn Norman Gill Saneicia Hall Lamonica Lewis Shelia Mayweather Mary McCullough Mose Randall Robin Lee Belwood Elementary, Fifth Grade BSE- University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS 5/01 MSE- University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS 5/02 Early Childhood Education P-4\nMiddle Childhood Language Arts, Social Studies, Science and Math 4-8 Helena-West Helena School District, 8/02 -5/03 Cynthia Melton, Principal Kaye Lowe, Administrative Director for Elementary Education Danny Reed, Administrative Director of Personnel/Special Services CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL RESIGNATIONS Food Service Department, Food Service Assistant Effective 12/19/03 Boone Park Elementary, Custodian Effective 2/19/04 Transportation Department, Custodian Effective 12/29/03 NLRHS West Campus, Food Service Assistant Effective 1/20/04 Plant Services Department, Custodian Effective 12/1/03 NLRHS West Campus, Custodian Effective 1/8/04 Boone Park Elementary, Lunch Aide Effective 1/5/04 Lynch Drive Elementary, Teacher's Aide/Pre-School Effective 1/22/04 Glenview Elementary, Lunch Aide Effective 2/3/04 Argenta Academy, Custodian Effective 2/13/04 P-3 North Little Rock School District Board Agenda- February 19, 2004 CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL RESIGNATIONS CONTINUED Teronica Snell David Tate Benji Belton Gloria Clarks Angela Dandridge Jerry Dowdy Eldra Land Bill Ed White Robbi Williamson Linda Roseberry LaQuania Janell Saine Boone Park Elementary, Lunch Aide Effective 1/30/04 Plant Services, Maintenance Custodian Effective 11/14/03 NEW CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL Transportation Department, Bus Driver Effective 1/20/04, Category 507, Step 51, 186 days Transportation Department, Bus Driver Effective 2/05/04, Category 507, Step 85, 190 days Transportation Department, Bus Aide Effective 1/20/04 Administration Annex, Computer Technician Effective 1/30/04 Lynch Drive Elementary, Teacher's Aide/Pre-School Effective 2/11/04 Transportation Department, Bus Driver Effective 1/20/04 Argenta Academy, Teacher's Aide/Special Education Effective 1/21/04 CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL TRANSFERS AND CHANGES From Plant Services, Substitute Custodian To Ridgeroad Middle Charter School, Night Lead Custodian From Plant Services, Substitute Custodian To Pike View Elementary, Custodian P-4 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT *VOID* *VOID* A PLUS BAKERY A-PLUS TEACHING SUPPLIES A-PLUS TEACHING SUPPLIES A'TEST CONSULTANTS INC A'TEST CONSULTANTS INC AAA AUDIO METRICS/MEDICAL AAEA AAEA AAMSCO AASBO ABC SCHOOL SUPPLY ABC SUPPLY CO. INC. ABERNATHY COMPANY ABILITATIONS ACCESS CREDIT MANAGEMENTIN C ACCESS CREDIT MANAGEMENTIN C ACCESS CREDIT MANAGEMENTIN C ACCESS CREDIT MANAGEMENTIN C ACE GLASS COMPANY, INC. ADE JOB FAIR ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC. ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC. AEA AEA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION AEA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION AEA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION AEA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION AHA PROCESS INCORPOARTED AHA PROCESS INCORPOARTED AHA PROCESS INCORPOARTED AIMEE STEPP-KUYKENDALL AIMEE WRIGHT AIMEE WRIGHT ALARMCO INCORPORATED ALICIA YARBROUGH ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN T- 1 .00 .00 30.53 304.37 724.23 368.00 155.00 4,088.21 159.66 310.00 383.85 115. 00 172. 45 785.98 430.83 319.53 115.53 115. 53 116.58 117. 83 315.27 150.00 1,142.86 1,142.86 1,213.40 400.00 1,325.00 400.00 1,325.00 8,200.00 9,873.93 2,835.00 1,939.50 45.00 44.35 959.63 22.50 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 CHK. NO. 88700 88900 89910 89764 89928 89896 90043 89810 89614 89774 89771 89650 89652 89519 89520 89870 89329 89633 89952 90019 89775 90044 89477 89686 89971 89341 89605 89646 89937 89553 89739 89897 89865 89547 89890 89542 89567 89325 89335 89449 89599 89612 89618 89629 89640 89649 89727 89773 8 9883 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALIGN ALL AMERICAN INC. ALL AMERICAN INC. ALL-STORAGE PRODUCTS ALLIED THERAPY ALLTEL MOBILE ALPHASMART INC AMANDA STUCKEY AMERICAN EXPRESS FINANCIAL AMERICAN EXPRESS FINANCIAL AMERICAN EXPRESS FINANCIAL AMERICAN EXPRESS FINANCIAL AMERICAN GUIDANCE SERVICE, INC AMERICAN GUIDANCE SERVICE, INC ANDREA HAIN ANGELA GUINN ANGIE COLCLASURE ANN KINCL ANNAN. VAMMEN ARCH FORD EDUCATION SERVICE ARCH FORD EDUCATION SERVICE ARCH FORD EDUCATION SERVICE ARCH FORD EDUCATION SERVICE ARCHILD, INC. ARCOM SYSTEMS ARKANSAS AGENCY FOR FEDERAL ARKANSAS AIR FRAGRANCE CO ARKANSAS ART CENTER ARKANSAS ASSOCIATION OF ARKANSAS BUSINESS ARKANSAS CENTER FOR WOMENS ARKANSAS CENTER FOR WOMENS ARKANSAS COUNCIL OF TEACHERS ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF ARKANSAS DEPT. OF EDUCATION ARKANSAS LAMINATION PRODUCTS ARKANSAS MAILING SYSTEM ARKANSAS STATE BOARD OF ARKANSAS STATE POLICE ARKANSAS STATE POLICE ARKANSAS TEACHER RETIREMENT ARTIS LOFTON ASCO HARDWARE COMPANY, INC. T- 2 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 2,598.12 475.64 327.00 2,055.00 365.74 369.00 45.00 400.00 10,286.78 400.00 10,211.78 241.50 70.66 45.00 19.40 45.00 45.00 20.64 561.55 724. 00 324.73 47. 92 562.50 617.98 154.00 257.10 725. 00 130.00 625.00 209.90 209.90 10.00 25.00 6,667.71 1 71. 92 368.24 75.00 220.00 264.00 3,037.38 45.00 115. 82 CHK. NO. 89901 89931 89946 89962 89965 89974 90057 89654 89777 90020 89877 89659 89888 89550 89340 89604 89645 89936 89452 89655 89562 90070 89506 89588 89887 89470 89673 89793 89986 89651 8 9736 89464 90010 89704 89453 89878 89767 90026 89500 89799 89778 90008 8 9783 8 9795 89660 89661 89973 89537 89653 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT ASCO HARDWARE COMPANY, INC. ASCO HARDWARE COMPANY, INC. ASHLEY HANAN ASHLEY-WOODSON \u0026amp; ASSOC. ASHLEY-WOODSON \u0026amp; ASSOC. ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERVISION \u0026amp; ATC COMPUTER SERVICES INC ATC COMPUTER SERVICES INC B \u0026amp; D RADIATOR SERVICE BACKGROUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS BAM INSTITUTIONAL SALES BAM INSTITUTIONAL SALES BANK CARD CENTER BANK OF AMERICA-FED INCOME TAX BANK OF AMERICA-FED INCOME TAX BANK OF AMERICA-FED INCOME TAX BANK OF AMERICA-FED INCOME TAX BANK OF AMERICA-FED INCOME TAX BANK OF AMERICA-PAYROLL ACCT. BANK OF AMERICA-PAYROLL ACCT. BANK OF AMERICA-PAYROLL ACCT. BANK OF AMERICA-PAYROLL ACCT. BANK OF AMERICA-PAYROLL ACCT. BARBARA EVANS BARBARA HARTWICK BARBARA LYNN MALONE BARNES AND NOBLE BARRY KINCL BASICS PLUS BASICS PLUS BASICS PLUS BENCHMARK EDUCATION COMPANY BENEFITS-NLRSD BEVERLY KELSO BILL A. BOWERS BILL DUVALL BILL'S LOCK \u0026amp; SAFE BLAINECO STRUCTURAL MOVERS BLUE HILL WRECKER SERVICE BLUE HILL WRECKER SERVICE BOB CALLAHAN SERVICES BOBBIE J RIGGINS BOBBY ACKLIN BOILER INSPECTION DIVISION BRENDA BUTLER BRENDA LEE BRENDA PARKER BROMLEY PARTS \u0026amp; SERVICE BROMLEY PARTS \u0026amp; SERVICE T- 3 39.95 54.88 45.00 4,645.55 5,307.90 189.00 755.96 377.98 145.75 315.00 501.35 3,197.14 56.60 11,299.51 148,648.03 11,209.87 153,265.28 16,727.17 137,265.63 1,031,536.15 132,680.42 1,053,551.10 181,963.05 20.00 45.00 1,995.00 96 .17 45.00 587.43 999.45 54.50 1,468.50 1,144,735.61 45.00 45.00 54.18 33.64 1,000.00 150.00 150.00 14,275.98 45.00 45.00 68.00 45.00 22.08 45.00 84.77 157.06 CHK. NO. 89776 89975 89561 89703 89835 89779 89523 90021 89867 89916 89558 89748 894 68 89337 89601 89642 89933 89964 89336 89600 89641 89932 89963 89724 89499 89899 89457 89454 89456 89658 89979 89884 89966 89505 89526 89459 89807 89720 89781 89981 89873 89518 89501 89782 89548 89575 89577 89663 89784 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT BROUKE REYNOLDS BROWN JANITOR SUPPLY BROWN JANITOR SUPPLY BYE WAY BOOKS INC C.T.A. CAMBRIDGE EDUCATIONAL CAPITOL STARTER SERVICE CARLTON-BATES CO. CARLTON-BATES CO. CAROL BUTTS CAROL THORNTON CARRIER MIDSOUTH CCI OF ARKANSAS, INC. CDW GOVERNMENT, INC CENTAR INDUSTRIES INC CENTER FOR MOURNING SLOT 669 CENTER POINT ENERGY ARKLA CENTERPOINT QUIZ BOWL CENTRAL ARKANSAS PEDIATRIC CENTRAL STATES BUS SALES, INC. CHARLIE JONES CHARLOTTE BULL CHEMSEARCH CHERYL HALL CHILDCRAFT EDUCATION CORP CHRISTINE HICKMAN CHROMATE INDUSTRIAL CORP. CINTAS CINTAS CINTAS CINTAS CLASSROOM DIRECT CLASSROOM DIRECT CLAUDIA MORAN CLAUDIA MORAN CLEAR MOUNTAIN CLEAR MOUNTAIN CLEAR MOUNTAIN COCA-COLA USA, A DIVISION OF COCA-COLA/DR PEPPER BOTTLING COLUMBIA BUSINESS SYSTEMS COMMUNICATION PLUS+ COMMUNICATION PLUS+ COMMUNICATION PLUS+ CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DISTRI COOPERATIVE EDUCATIONAL CORA SMITH CORPORATE EXPRESS CORPORATE EXPRESS T- 4 22.50 1,993.89 795.69 338.00 8,714.36 129.49 373.04 12.05 150.25 531.00 45.00 1,916.62 292.50 1,920.16 170.00 1,320.00 40,440.22 45.00 13,195.00 328.19 45.00 45.00 269.97 45.00 158.37 45.00 786.26 232.88 42.68 232.88 232.88 444.37 352.41 45.00 50.00 214.91 338.32 19.87 31,166.28 135. 00 266.67 2,896.88 656.25 525.00 1,597.49 33.22 20.00 711. 60 3,641.49 CHK. NO. 89544 8 9785 89982 89921 89967 89528 90053 89665 89786 90015 89522 89598 89555 89922 89744 90052 89657 89902 89735 89726 89524 89462 89843 89515 89666 89593 89759 89328 89616 89632 89950 89543 89732 89565 89905 89729 89880 90025 89805 89858 90054 89716 89859 90011 89800 90003 89559 89517 89722 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT CORPORATE EXPRESS CORPORATE EXPRESS COURTNEY MEADOR CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION CUMMINS MID SOUTH INC CUMMINS MID SOUTH INC CUSTOM PRINTING CYNTHIA MELTON DAN RUSSELL DANA CHADWICK DANA CHADWICK DANA CHADWICK DANA CHADWICK DANA SNOWDEN DANNY REED DATAMAX OF ARKANSAS DATEK, INC. DAVID D. COOP DAVID D. COOP DAVID D. COOP DAVID D. COOP DAVID MCPHERSON DAWSON EDUCATION COOPERATIVE DEANN ROACH DEANNE C. ICKLER DEBBIE DAVENPORT DEBRA BUTLER DEBRA PRUSS DELTA DENTAL DEMCO DEPT. OF FINANCE \u0026amp; ADMINISTRAT DFA-SALES \u0026amp; USE TAX DIAMOND INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS DIAMOND INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS DIANA MATHIS DIANA MATHIS DIANE CRITES DISCOUNT DICTIONARIES DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY DISCOUNT TROPHIES, INC. DIVERSIFIED COLLECTION DIVERSIFIED ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO DONALD R. WATKINS DREW CAMP EARLY LITERACY CONFERENCE EDS SUPPLY CO. EDS SUPPLY CO. EDS SUPPLY CO. EDS SUPPLY CO. T- 5 564.79 179.02 19.58 24.71 19.59 73.76 87.85 45.00 45.00 45.00 242.14 44.48 429.62 45.00 45.00 48,539.94 69.26 1,250.29 3,548.00 1,250.29 1,250.29 20.00 692. 42 45.00 1,569.17 20.00 17. 64 9.79 50,825.92 441.11 147,611.65 2,771.00 8.03 174.47 328.80 328.80 45.00 89.28 194.55 63.98 30.48 37.30 45.00 45.00 2,455.00 795.57 113. 68 372.50 424.70 CHK. NO. 89866 90016 90068 89954 89728 90024 89668 89533 89541 89465 89669 89790 90058 89461 89529 89945 89763 89326 89613 89630 89947 89592 89857 89566 89758 89573 89721 90078 90065 89788 89968 90055 89696 89823 8 9620 90031 8 9595 89747 8 9871 8 9791 8994 9 89680 89509 89596 90004 8 9467 89670 89792 89944 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT EDUCATION DEBT SERVICES INC EDUCATION DEBT SERVICES INC EDUCATION OPPORTUNITY CENTER EDUCATORS BOOK DEPOSITORY OF EL LATINO ELGIN SCHOOL SUPPLY EMPLOYEE BENEFITS DIVISION ETA CUISENAIRE FAMILY SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTER FAMILY SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTER FINANCIAL DATA SERVICES INC FINANCIAL DATA SERVICES INC FLEET TIRE SERVICE OF NLR, INC FLEET TIRE SERVICE OF NLR, INC FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLEXBEN CORPORATION FLINN SCIENTIFIC COMPANY FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF FOLLETT LIBRARY RESOURCES FOLLETT LIBRARY RESOURCES FORTIS DI ASI FRAN JACKSON FRANCES MALONE FRANK FLETCHER DODGE FRANKLIN COVEY GALE GROUP GARETH STEVENS PUBLISHING GE BUSINESS PRODUCTIVITY GEORGIA WILLIAMS GINGER WALLACE GLOBAL DOCUGRAPHIX GLORIA SMITH GOLDEN CORRAL GOLDEN CORRAL GOODMAN MIDWEST GPN GRAINGER GRAINGER GRAINGER GREENSGROOMER WORLD WIDE INC GREG DANIELS GREGG THOMPSON HARDING UNIVERSITY T- 6 56.58 56.58 19,200.00 840.84 26.00 91. 51 377,900.72 492.31 54.00 54.00 125.00 125.00 311. 92 532.77 166.58 5,306.04 2,141.60 166.58 5,306.04 2,349.93 168.10 95.66 84.79 96. 75 324.31 920.62 13,129.64 45.00 171.48 1,497.11 48.45 680.00 155.00 3.05 282.32 45.00 1,946.82 45.00 201. 50 372 .14 68.65 3,837.18 270.86 75.67 60.33 3,512.07 45.00 45.00 100.00 CHK. NO. 89626 90047 89772 89671 89898 89853 90073 89725 89623 90037 89610 89942 89676 89797 89343 89608 8 9609 89648 89940 89941 89977 89332 89636 89956 89675 89796 90074 8 9578 89560 89761 89472 89824 89753 89476 89617 89531 89551 89594 89532 89875 89803 89527 89498 89844 90005 89991 89584 89579 90040 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT HARDING UNIVERSITY HAROLD D STARK HAROLD GWATNEY CHEVROLET CO. HAROLD GWATNEY CHEVROLET CO. HAROLD GWATNEY CHEVROLET CO. HASLER INC HEALTH ADVANTAGE/HMO HELPING HAND CHILDRENS HELPING HAND CHILDRENS HENRY SCHEIN INC HERAL ENTERPRISES, INC. HIGHSMITH INC HOME DEPOT/GECF HOME DEPOT/GECF HOUGHTON-MIFFLIN CO. HOUSEHOLD BANK FSB HOUSEHOLD BANK FSB HOUSEHOLD BANK FSB HUGH DANIELS TRUCKING ILLINOIS STATE DISBURSEMENT ILLINOIS STATE DISBURSEMENT IN DYER NEED ENTERPRISES ING RETIREMENT PLANS ING RETIREMENT PLANS ING RETIREMENT PLANS ING RETIREMENT PLANS INTEGRATION SERVICES CORP INTEGRATION SERVICES CORP INTEGRATION SERVICES CORP INTEGRATION SERVICES CORP INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INTERSTATE MUSIC SUPPLY IOWA PAINT MANUFACTURING IOWA PAINT MANUFACTURING IOWA PAINT MANUFACTURING J LS BRUSHES JACK T CARTER COMPANY JACQUELINE SUMLER JAMES KIMMER JAMES W. WOODARD, JR JAMIE EUBANKS JAMIE EUBANKS JANET E. THOMAS P.T. JANET GROSSMAN JANET RODGERS JEFFERSON NATIONAL LIFE JENNY OBANNON JERRY MASSEY T- 7 600.00 45.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 196.23 36.62 3,893.75 2,292.50 602.66 95.25 52.90 274.14 51. 36 7 68. 93 140.55 194.57 172. 97 250.00 290.00 290.00 192.83 425.00 2,843.33 425.00 2,843.33 2,105.15 16,989.25 1,254.62 115,362.22 136.00 136.00 225.03 644.92 814.39 109.42 507.50 872.40 45.00 1. 89 45.00 2,065.00 1,050.00 1,020.84 180.00 474.28 290.58 45.00 153.59 CHK. NO. 90041 89587 89334 89639 89961 89734 89556 89733 89886 90050 89677 89678 89710 8984 9 89679 89557 89746 89900 89713 89624 90042 89976 89339 89603 89644 89935 89540 89731 89882 90029 89622 90036 89804 89569 89754 89907 89920 89806 89580 90069 89582 8 9745 90045 89709 89755 90059 90066 8954 9 89514 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT JERRY MASSEY JODY EDRINGTON JOHN HAYNIE JOHN HENSLEY JOYCE BRADLEY BABIN JOYCE BRADLEY BABIN JOYCE BRADLEY BABIN JOYCE BRADLEY BABIN JUST FOR KIDS THERAPY SERVICES K \u0026amp; E OUTDOOR POWER EQUIPMENT KAREN MCMURRAY KAREN POWELL KATHY ARMAN KAYE LOWE KEITH FAULKNER KENNETH A. KIRSPEL KERR PAPER \u0026amp; SUPPLY CO. KERRY EVANS KIDS DIRECTORY LLC KIM WILMOT KITTLES GARAGE INC. KONE INC KREBS BROS. SUPPLY CO., INC. KROGER #639 KROGER COMPANY/INDIAN HILLS KROGER COMPANY/PERSHING LAB SAFETY SUPPLY LAKESHORE LEARNING MATERIALS LAKESHORE LEARNING MATERIALS LARA HUMPHRIES LAURA JENNINGS LCR-M CORPORATION LCR-M CORPORATION LEANN NANNEN LEASE ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION LEES SCHOOL OF COSMETOLOGY LEGO DACTA-PITSCO LLC LETITIA MARTIN LEWIS AND LEE DISTRIBUTING LEWIS AND LEE DISTRIBUTING LIBRARY VIDEO COMPANY LINDA WILSON LINDSEY'S BARBECUE LINGUI SYSTEMS, INC. LITERACY EMPOWERMENT LITTLE ROCK WINNELSON CO. LITTLE ROCK WINNELSON CO. LIVING ARTS FOR STUDENTS LOVING GUIDANCE T- 8 48.72 45.00 45.00 1,936.00 2,281.24 1,371.38 2,101.07 2,030.67 735.00 659.51 68.56 43.43 4.16 45.00 51.77 45.00 310.28 52.20 525.00 45.00 232.82 1,900.50 1,393.90 157.21 89.79 88.24 714.75 77.18 743.24 45.00 42.73 127.83 138. 36 53.62 1,747.97 11,425.00 515 .13 45.00 1,505.60 300.00 442.56 45.00 117.56 41. 95 130. 00 102.26 55.39 65.00 46.80 CHK. NO. 89862 89513 89510 89715 89331 89625 89635 89955 89912 89927 90075 89521 90060 89460 89958 89585 89765 90077 89889 89546 89808 89850 89682 90009 89683 89502 89474 89695 89820 89563 89450 89719 89863 89538 89740 90038 89473 89581 89892 90039 89809 89590 89684 89990 89909 89688 89812 8 9879 89574 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT LULA TURNER LYNN NASH MB ELECTRONICS M LOU ROSS MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTIONS MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTIONS MAGGIE BILLINGS MARSHA MAJORS MARSHA SATTERFIELD MARSHA SATTERFIELD MARTHA FEWELL MARTHA K ASTI MARTHA NORTON MARY NELL BLACKWELL MARY WALKER MAVIS CHERRY MEDICAL MANAGER HEALTH SYSTEMS MICHELLE KEATON MIDDLE SCHOOL CONSULTING INC MITCH CRUNKLETON MOLLY FLOYD MONICA TALBERT MR DICTIONARY/BOOKS TOO MSS N.L.R. WINTEMP SUPPLY N.L.R. WINTEMP SUPPLY N.L.R. WINTEMP SUPPLY NAEIR NANCY C. GREEN NANCY MARSHALL NAPA AUTO PARTS NAPA AUTO PARTS NASCO NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY NCS PEARSON NEA REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP FOR NEWLINE PRODUCTS NLR WELDING SUPPLY NLRHS WEST CAMPUS NLRSD ADMN OFFICE CHECKING NLRSD TRANSPORTATION DEPT. NLRSD WAREHOUSE NLRSD-BACKGROUND CHECK NO. LITTLE ROCK EDUCATORS CRED NO. LITTLE ROCK WINNELSON CO. NORTH LITTLE ROCK CHAMBER OF NORTH LITTLE ROCK POSTMASTER NORTH LITTLE ROCK POSTMASTER NORTH LITTLE ROCK POSTMASTER T- 9 1,344.00 45.00 62.29 11. 50 20.27 169.84 8.00 45.00 83.78 98.80 45.00 45.00 3,885.00 415.56 7.70 45.00 5,019.91 45.00 35.00 121.97 45.00 1,062.00 356.64 1,725.41 781.58 326.26 486.69 112. 62 45.00 45.00 1,468.17 799.58 1,739.89 125.82 2,646.91 85.00 2,995.19 93.73 950.00 104.26 1,150.01 3,975.00 312.81 83,625.80 10,444.30 550.00 160.12 157.21 99.00 CHK. NO. 90049 89508 89742 90076 89466 89984 89894 89536 89516 89864 89480 89572 89756 90079 89545 89504 89854 89564 89918 89891 89570 90046 897 60 89741 89478 89687 89811 89845 89525 89475 89798 89988 89479 89992 89743 90048 89904 89993 89815 89959 89839 89925 89972 89969 89481 89813 89611 89768 89943 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 ACCOUNT AMOUNT CHK. NO. NORTH LITTLE ROCK POSTMASTER 150.00 89994 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DIST 9,058.06 90072 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DIST. 919.04 89576 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DIST. 285.56 89628 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DIST. 1,079.89 90080 NORTH LITTLE ROCK UTILITIES 62.34 89471 NORTH LITTLE ROCK UTILITIES 539.34 89674 NORTH LITTLE ROCK UTILITIES 59,548.23 89794 NORTH LITTLE ROCK UTILITIES 745.44 89987 NOVA STAGGS 45.00 89597 OCSE 2,364.92 89327 OCSE 1,630.73 89615 OCSE 2,492.08 89631 OCSE 2,576.25 89948 OCSE 1,630.73 89980 OFFICE DEPOT 333.70 89511 OFFICE DEPOT 88.52 .89714 OFFICE DEPOT 23.88 89856 ONE SOURCE HOME \u0026amp; BUILDING 151.80 89978 PAM GLOVER 10.75 90061 PAM HANDLOSER 647.50 89554 PAM WILCOX 45.00 89535 - PAULA MCCARTHER 6,465.00 89711 PBS 89.64 89860 PC ASSISTANCE 215.00 89751 PEARSON EDUCATION 237.05 89750 PEDIATRIC THERAPY SERVICES 1,012.50 89913 PERMA-BOUND 1,821.29 89802 PERMA-BOUND 1,034.69 89989 PITNEY BOWES 142.77 89691 PITNEY BOWES CREDI~ CORP. 143.63 89787 PLANK ROAD PUBLISHING 195.00 89872 POSTAL PRIVILEGE 67.97 89706 POSTAL PRIVILEGE 73.67 89842 PRO ED 64.90 89484 PRO ED 42.90 89692 PRO ED 800.80 89995 PROGESSIVE PHYSICAL THEARAPY 109.46 89638 PROGESSIVE PHYSICAL THEARAPY 108.88 89960 PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 759.36 89752 PULASKI COUNTY JUVENILE 6,475.00 89851 PULASKI COUNTY TREASURER 6,114.99 89770 RAINEY ELECTRONICS 117. 54 89818 READING A-Z 180.00 89924 REFRIGERATION \u0026amp; ELECTRIC 677.66 89694 REGIONAL ADJUSTMENT BUREAU INC 62.61 89621 REGIONAL ADJUSTMENT BUREAU INC 62.61 90033 - RELLIA DILLINGER 45.00 89589 RENAISSANCE LEARNING INC 532.41 89836 T-10 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATION REXEL DAVIES REXEL DAVIES REXEL DAVIES REYNOLDS RUBBER STAMP CO., INC RHONDA BANKS RICKEY JONES RIGBY EDUCATION RIVENDELL BEHAVIORAL HEALTH RIVER CITY JANITORIAL ROBBI S CHAMBERS ROSEWOOD TEACHER PUBLICATIONS ROSIE COLEMAN ROTO ROOTER PLUMBING \u0026amp; DRAIN ROY SPRADLIN ROYAL BUSINESS MACHINES RUSSELL CHEVROLET CO. SAFETY - KLEEN, INC. SAFETY - KLEEN, INC. SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC SAMS CLUB DIRECT SAMS CLUB DIRECT SAMS CLUB DIRECT SAMS CLUB DIRECT SANDERS SUPPLY SANDRA CAMPBELL SANDRA CAMPBELL SARA GILLISON SAX ARTS \u0026amp; CRAFTS SBC SBG-VAA SBG-VAA SBG-VAA SBG-VAA SCANTRON CORPORATION SCHOLASTIC BOOK FAIRS SCHOLASTIC INC SCHOLASTIC INC SCHOLASTIC INC SCHOLASTIC INC SCHOLASTIC MAGAZINES SCHOOL BUS EXHAUST \u0026amp; SUPPLY CO SCHOOL BUS EXHAUST \u0026amp; SUPPLY CO SCHOOL SELF-INSURANCE PROGRAM SCHOOL SPECIALITY SCHOOL SPECIALITY SCHOOL SPECIALITY SCHOOL SPECIALITY T-11 56.80 153.77 167.93 513.68 22.35 45.00 45.00 11,255.91 495.00 469.16 531. 00 187.90 45.00 864.90 45.00 196.19 102.88 116.06 302.00 146.48 158.57 418.74 295.37 401.31 600.00 26.06 45.00 113.80 531. 00 62.69 71. 58 25.00 1,290.50 25.00 1,290.50 2,412.51 303.88 105.01 2,296.58 910.01 279.00 182.25 192.46 4 41. 67 85,497.00 2,538.63 52.27 2,771.08 29.93 CHK. NO. 89816 8 9469 89672 89985 89821 89539 89512 89702 90013 90030 90032 89914 89492 89822 89485 89487 8 9951 89766 89930 89458 89780 89486 89693 89817 89996 89571 89586 89926 90022 89827 89662 89342 89606 89647 89938 89819 89906 89489 89698 89826 89998 89999 89700 89830 89664 89490 89699 89828 90000 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 - ACCOUNT AMOUNT CHK. NO. SOE 825.00 90034 SECURITY BENEFIT GROUP 541. 66 89607 SECURITY BENEFIT GROUP 541.66 89939 SERVICE FINANCE CORPORATION 226.10 89330 SERVICE FINANCE CORPORATION 154.55 89619 SERVICE FINANCE CORPORATION 221. 43 89634 SERVICE FINANCE CORPORATION 229.64 89953 SERVICE FINANCE CORPORATION 154.55 90023 SHARA BRAZEAR 45.00 89530 SHARI BROWN 540.00 90017 SHARON ELDRED 105.64 89583 SHEILA MAYWEATHER 100.68 90062 SHERRY RATLIFF 45.00 89503 SHERYLL SMITH 45.00 89591 SIMPLEXGRINNELL LP 271. 26 89801 SKATE CONNECTION 300.00 90014 SKILLPATH SEMINARS 298.00 -89718 SOCIAL STUDIES SCHOOL SERVICE 354.88 89493 SOCIAL STUDIES SCHOOL SERVICE 83.47 89829 SOUTHERN ICE EQUIPMENT 27.75 89915 SOUTHWEST SPORTING GOODS co 59.47 89701 SOUTHWEST SPORTING GOODS co 4.31 90001 - STAGE STEP 360.05 90028 STAGEWORKS INC 49,402.54 89681 STANLEY HARDWARE CO. 62.37 89494 STANLEY HARDWARE CO. 264.81 89831 STANLEY HARDWARE CO. 28.92 90002 STAR BOLT \u0026amp; SCREW CO., INC. 39.68 89832 STATE BUSINESS SUPPLY 442.49 89881 STECK-VAUGHN COMPANY 207.84 89834 STEPHANY BARNETTE 45.00 89568 STEPHEN COBB PA 117. 83 89627 STEPHEN COBB PA 117. 83 90051 STERLING BOOKS CONNECTION 422.06 89762 STERLING PAINT 108.15 89495 STERLING PAINT 357.83 89833 SUMMIT LEARNING 1,738.25 89712 SUPERIOR SPRING CLUTCH \u0026amp; GEAR 333.02 89697 SUPERIOR SPRING CLUTCH \u0026amp; GEAR 114. 60 89825 SUPERIOR SPRING CLUTCH \u0026amp; GEAR 354.39 89997 SUSAN CHAPMAN 300.00 89757 SUSAN COLLIE 7.70 89483 SUSAN MILLER 16.83 89749 SUSIE BALLARD-JACKSON 45.00 89491 SYSCO FOOD SERVICE OF ARKANSAS 1,759.00 89497  SYSCO FOOD SERVICE OF ARKANSAS 841.59 89707 TARGET 56.41 89837 - TASSI INC 200.00 90035 TEACHER'S DISCOVERY 94.45 89507 T-12 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT TEACHER'S DISCOVERY TEACHERS VIDEO COMPANY TEACHERS' DISCOUNT TELE TOUCH THE COLLEGE BOARD THE MCGRAW HILL COMPANIES THE MCGRAW HILL COMPANIES THE TIMES THE TIMES THE TREE HOUSE, INC. THERAPY PROVIDERS, P.A. THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR TIRES FOR LESS TIRES FOR LESS TOP GUN PEST CONTROL INC TRI-STATES VIDEO SYSTEMS TROUTMAN OIL CO.,INC. TROUTMAN OIL CO.,INC. TROUTMAN OIL CO.,INC. TURNER DAIRY TWIN CITY PRINTING \u0026amp; LITHO INC TWIN CITY PRINTING \u0026amp; LITHO INC US ABLE LIFE US ABLE LIFE INSURANCE CO US ABLE LIFE INSURANCE/CANCER US FUEL US FUEL US MAP \u0026amp; BOOK CO US POSTAL SERVICE(AMS-TMS) UALR UALR SPEECH \u0026amp; HEARING CLINIC UC REGENTS-CASHIER'S OFFICE UNITED ART \u0026amp; EDUCATION SUPPLY UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL UNITED WAY OF PULASKI COUNTY UNIVERSAL CARD SERVICES CORP UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT UNUM LIFE INSURANCE OF AMERICA USCB INCORPORATED USCB INCORPORATED USCB INCORPORATED UTILITY BILLING SERVICES UTILITY BILLING SERVICES UTILITY BILLING SERVICES VALIC - VARIABLE ANNUITY LIFE VALIC - VARIABLE ANNUITY LIFE VALIC - VARIABLE ANNUITY LIFE VALIC - VARIABLE ANNUITY LIFE VARSITY SPIRIT FASHIONS T-13 67.12 133.98 204.82 107.83 325.00 119. 78 664.90 136.00 57.00 105.00 8,347.50 53.54 14.47 14.47 945.00 425.43 7,526.80 1,008.53 1,084.02 11,067.37 61. 06 30.00 3,598.00 5,253.40 13,293.00 406.40 175.58 99.55 3,700.00 824.88 240.00 43.35 254.07 2,500.00 1,413.92 927.08 1,143.75 5,094.30 109.76 65.67 108.39 5,290.84 532.30 440.45 575.00 30,672.95 575.00 30,772.95 743.94 CHK. NO. 89852 89874 89919 89451 89667 89534 89876 89496 89838 89737 89861 89855 89789 89983 89690 89840 89723 89868 90018 89929 89705 89841 90063 90064 90067 89730 90027 89869 89685 89893 90012 89917 89488 89847 89970 89885 89717 90071 89333 89637 89957 89482 89689 89814 89338 89602 89643 89934 90006 ACCOUNT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CHECK LISTING FOR JANUARY, 2004 AMOUNT VERONICA DAVIS --WALMAR7 COMMUNITY BRC WALMART COMMUNITY BRC WALMART COMMUNITY BRC WARD TRANSPORTATION SERVICES WASTE MANAGEMENTO F ARKANSAS WASTE MANAGEMENTO F ARKANSAS WEEKLY READER WILLIAMS WINCHESTER WINDFALL WINSTON TURNER WOLVERINE SPORTS XEROX CORPORATION ZARTIC INC CHECK TOTALS FOR JANUARY, 2004 T-14 490.34 1,090.30 878.96 2,233.19 191.07 4,826.78 5,228.17 74.60 214.75 242.50 45.00 259.78 10,884.84 1,533.36 CHK. NO. 89903 8 955\"2 89738 89895 90007 89455 89656 89846 89923 89911 89463 89708 89848 89908 5,761,299.26 BOARD oF EDUCATION NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Thursday, March 11, 2004 5:00 P.M. MEETING AGENDA NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT AGENDA REGULAR MEETING, BOARD OF EDUCATION Administration Building, 2700 Poplar Thursday, March 11, 2004 5:00 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENTS I. CALL TO ORDER, Teresa Burl, President II. INVOCATION, Kyle Shadid, NLRHS West Campus Senior, III. FLAG SALUTE IV. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Teresa Burl, President Marty Moore, Vice President Trent Cox, Secretary Rochelle Redus, Parliamentarian Charles Hoskyn, Member Mable Mitchell, Member John Riley, Member son of Brenda and Steve Shadid V. RECOGNITION OF PEOPLE/EVENTS/PROGRAMS A Superintendent's Honor Roll - S. Brazear 1. Roy Spradlin - Coordinator of Technology 2. Betty Martin - Intervention Aide at Pike View Elementary - Page 2 - Board Agenda March 11, 2004 VI. DISPOSITION OF MI UTES OF PRIOR MEETINGS A. Monday, February 16, 2004 4:45 P.M. (Special)- Page A- 1 B. Thursday, February 19, 2004 5:00 P.M. (Regular)- Page A- 3 C. Tuesday, February 24, 2004 7:00 P.M. (Special) - Page A - 7 D. Monday, March l, 2004 6:30 P.M. (Special) - Page A-10 VII. ACTION ITEMS - UNFINISHED BUSINESS None VIII. ACTION ITEMS - NEW BUSINESS A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. Certified Personnel Policies Committee Report Classified Personnel Policies Committee Report Consider 2002 - 2003 School Year Audit- D. Watkins Consider Proposed 2004 - 2005 School Calendar - J. Smith - Page B - 1 Consider Board Personnel Policy CAK Revision - J. Smith - Page C- l, Consider Updated Board Administration Policies (Second Reading) - J. Smith Consider Updated Board School, Home and Community Relations Policies (Second Reading) - J. Smith Consider Elementary and Secondary Summer School - J. Smith - Page D-1 Consider Motion for Consent Agenda - J. Smith I. Consider monthly financial report - Page O - 1 2. Consider employment of personnel - Page P - 1 3. Consider bid items - Page R - 1 4. Consider payment of regular bills - Page T - l IX. CALENDAR OF EVENTS Page 3 - Board Agenda March 11, 2004 1. Staff Development Day - Friday, March 12, 2004 2. Spring Break- Monday, March 15, 2004 through Friday, March 20, 2004 3. Board Meeting (Regular) -Thursday, April 15, 2004 - 5:00 p.m. X. EXECUTIVE SESSION XI. ADJOURNMENT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of the Superintendent SPECIAL MEETING, BOARD OF EDUCATION MINUTES February 16, 2004 The North Little Rock School District Board met in a special session on Monday, February 16, 2004 in the Board Room of the Administration Building of the North Little Rock School District, 2700 Poplar Street, North Little Rock, Arkansas. President Teresa Burl called the meeting to order at 4:45 p.m. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Present Teresa Burl, President Marty Moore, Vice President Trent Cox, Secretary Rochelle Redus, Parliamentarian Mable Mitchell, Member John Riley, Member Absent Charles Hoskyn, Member Others Present Bobby Acklin, Assistant. Superintendent for Desegregation\nthe press and Darlene Holmes, Superintendent's secretary were also present. Billy Duvall taped (audio) the meeting. MOTION Trent Cox moved that the Board enter in to Executive Session for Employment Interview for New Superintendent. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None (Hoskyn-absent) The Board went into Executive Session at 4:46 p.m. A-1 Rochelle Redus exited the meeting at 6: 12 p.m. The Board reconvened in Open Session at 7: 12 p.m. ADJOURNMENT MOTION John Riley moved to adjourn the meeting. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Hoskyn and Redus-absent) President Burl declared the meeting adjourned at 7:12 p.m. Teresa Burl, President Trent Cox, Secretary A-2 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of the Superintendent REGULAR MEETING, BOARD OF EDUCATION MINUTES February 19, 2004 The North Little Rock School District Board met in regular session on Thursday, February 19, 2004 in the Board Room of the Administration Building of the North Little Rock School District, 2700 Poplar Street, North Little Rock, Arkansas. Robert Lee, N.A.A.C.P. representative, reminded the Board that the community wanted to be more involved. President Teresa Burl called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. MOTION Trent Cox moved to amend the agenda to add two Executive Sessions. John Riley seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus - absent) Danielle Jackson, an East Campus Sophomore, gave the invocation. The flag salute followed. - ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Present Teresa Burl, President Marty Moore, Vice-President Trent Cox, Secretary Charles Hoskyn, Member Mable Mitchell, Member John Riley, Member Absent Rochelle Redus, Parliamentarian Others Present James Smith, Superintendent\nBobby Acklin, Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation\nDonald Watkins, Assistant Superintendent for Business Services\nrepresentatives from the Personnel Policies Committees, PT A and press\nseveral other staff members\nand Darlene Holmes, Superintendent's secretary were also present. Billy Duvall (audio) taped the meeting. RECOGNITION OF PEOPLE/EVENTS/PROGRAMS Shara Brazear, Communication Specialist, presented new members to the Superintendent's Honor Roll. The District's nurses were introduced first. They were all nominated for their professionalism and efforts to meet the State Standards for completing the body mass index measuring all District students. Marty Moore and John Riley presented all seven nurses with a certificate. A - 3 As a surprise, Mrs. Brazear introduced Board member Mable Mitchell as a new member also. Three principals nominated her for helping obtain new playground equipment for their - schools. Teresa Burl presented her with a certificate. Mrs. Brazear presented new Partners in Education: 1. Duke Energy and Lynch Drive Elementary - Charles Hoskyn presented them with certificates. 2. U.S. Bank and The Business Leadership Academy at NLRHS West - Trent Cox presented certificates to both. Also recognized was the Parent Teacher Association (PTA) from NLRHS West Campus for being named as an Outstanding Chapter at the National level. John Riley presented a certificate and introduced all of the officers of the PT A at our NLRHS West Campus. DISPOSITION OF MINUTES MOTION Trent Cox moved to accept the minutes of the January 15, 2004 (Regular) Board meeting, January 22, 2004 (Special) Board meeting and the February 11, 2004 (Special) as printed. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus - absent) UNFINISHED BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS Certified Personnel Policies Report Chairman Rick Kron presented the report. There were no proposals Classified Personnel Policies Report Chairman Frank Wise pres\nnted their report. There were no proposals. Updated Board Administration Policies and Updated Board School, Home, and Community Relations Policies Mr. Smith requested the Board accept these two sections of policies for a first reading. He requested if any questions to contact him. MOTION Marty Moore moved to accept both sections of the updated Board policies as a first reading. Mable Mitchell seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus - absent) A-4 March Board Meeting Date Revision Due to the normal Board meeting date of the third Thursday of the month which is during Spring break, Mr. Smith suggested changing the date of the Regular March Board meeting to Thursday, March 11, 2004 at 5:00 p.m. MOTION John Riley moved to change the March Board meeting to March 11, 2004. Trent Cox seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus - absent) Consent Agenda Mr. Smith presented the consent agenda with an additional late bid. The late bid was for two trucks for Food Service. MOTION John Riley moved to accept the consent agenda as presented. Mable Mitchell seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: MOTION Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus - absent) Marty Moore moved to enter into an Executive Session to discuss potential candidate interviews for the position of Superintendent. Mable Mitchell seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus - absent) The Board went into executive session at 5:50 p.m. The Board reconvened at 6:42 p.m. MOTION Trent Cox moved to offer an interview to Dr. Kieth Williams for the position of Superintendent. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: MOTION Burl, Cox, Iloskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus - absent) John Riley moved to enter into an Executive Session to interview Dr. Tom Kimbrell for the position of Superintendent. Trent Cox seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Iloskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus - absent) A-5 The Board went into executive session again at 6:44 p.m. The Board reconvened in open session at 10:35 p.m. ADJOURNMENT Mable Mitchell moved to adjourn the meeting. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, IIoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, and Riley None (Redus - absent) Chairman Burl declared the meeting adjourned at 10:36 p.m. Teresa Burl, President Trent Cox, Secretary A-6 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of the Superintendent SPECIAL MEETING, BOARD OF EDUCATION MINUTES February 24, 2004 The North Little Rock School District Board met in a special session on Tuesday, February 24, 2004 in the Board Room of the Administration Building of the North Little Rock School District, 2700 Poplar Street, North Little Rock, Arkansas. President Teresa Burl called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Present Teresa Burl, President Marty Moore, Vice President Trent Cox, Secretary Rochelle Redus, Parliamentarian Charles Hoskyn, Member Mable Mitchell, Member John Riley, Member Absent None Others Present James Smith, Superintendent, Dr. Kieth Williams, staff members, the press, and Darlene Holmes, Superintendent's secretary were also present. Billy Duvall taped (audio) the meeting. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Dan Russell, Athletic Director, presented changes to be made in the Spirit Groups Handbook. Changes included the squad organizations, in the demerit system and excused absences. MOTION Charles Hoskyn moved to accept the proposed squad organization portion as proposed with changing the Varsity maximum numbers to 24 girls and 6 boys. Rochelle Redus seconded the motion. A-7 AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION John Riley moved to change the Varsity maximum numbers to 16 girls and 4 boys. Trent Cox seconded the motion. YEAS: Cox, Moore, and Riley NAYS: Burl, Hoskyn, Mitchell, and Redus Vote on original motion: YEAS: Burl, Hoskyn, and Redus NAYS: Cox, Moore, Mitchell and Riley MOTION John Riley moved to accept the Squad Organization Section as presented. Trent Cox seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: MOTION Burl, Cox, Moore, and Riley Hoskyn, Mitchell and Redus Charles Hoskyn moved to accept the changes in the Demerit System and Excused Absences as presented. Trent Cox seconded the motion. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION Marty Moore moved to change the word \"will\" to \"could\" in the sentence in the Demerit System that reads \"Insubordination to a spirit group coach will result in removal from squad.\" John Riley seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None Vote on original motion. YEAS: Burl, Cox, Moore, and Riley NAYS: Hoskyn, Mitchell and Redus EXECUTIVE SESSION John Riley moved to enter into executive session for employment interview for new Superintendent. Trent Cox seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None A-8 The Board entered into Executive Session at 7:50 p.m. The Board reconvened in Open Session at 1 :05 a.m. MOTION Trent Cox moved to offer Dr. Tom Kimbrell a second interview on Monday, March 1, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None ADJOURNMENT Rochelle Redus moved to adjourn the meeting. Mable Mitchell seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None Teresa Burl declared the meeting adjourned at 1 :06 a.m. Teresa Burl, President Trent Cox, Secretary A-9 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of the Superintendent SPECIAL MEETING, BOARD OF EDUCATION MINUTES March 1, 2004 The North Little Rock School District Board met in a special session on Monday, March 1, 2004 in the Board Room of the Administration Building of the North Little Rock School District, 2700 Poplar Street, North Little Rock, Arkansas. President Teresa Burl called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Present Teresa Burl, President Marty Moore, Vice President (entered the meeting at 7:15 p.m.) Trent Cox, Secretary Rochelle Redus, Parliamentarian Charles Hoskyn, Member Mable Mitchell, Member John Riley, Member Absent None Others Present James Smith, Superintemdent, Dr. Tom Kimbrell, the press and Darlene Holmes, Superintendent's secretary were also present. Billy Duvall taped (audio) the meeting. MOTION Rochelle Redus moved that the Board enter in to Executive Session for a second interview with a candidate for the position of Superintendent. Trent Cox seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Redus and Riley None (Moore-absent) A- IO The Board went into Executive Session at 6:35 p.m. Marty Moore entered the meeting and Executive Session at 7: 15 p.m .. The Board reconvened in Open Session at 10:29 p.m. MOTION Rochelle Redus moved to extend an offer of employment to Dr. Tom Kimbrell as Superintendent of the North Little Rock School District, subject to final contract approval, effective July 1, 2004. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None Dr. Tom Kimbrell was congratulated by all present. ADJOURNMENT MOTION Rochelle Redus moved to adjourn the meeting. Marty Moore seconded the motion. YEAS: NAYS: Burl, Cox, Hoskyn, Mitchell, Moore, Redus and Riley None President Burl declared the meeting adjourned at l 0:30 p.m. Teresa Burl, President Trent Cox, Secretary A-11 to ......  DRAFT IMO TH  NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 2004-2005 SCHOOL CALENDAR  DRAFT .  JULY '04 1 2 5 6 ------------ 7 8 9 12 13 14 15 16 19 20 21 22 23 26 27 28 29 30 :ilili:~,il~SD SD SD W f* -AUG-US-T ---2 -3 -4 -5- -6 -9 10 11 12 13 16 17 18 19 20 23 24 25 26 27 30 31 9 SEPTEMBER H 1 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 15 16 17 i--=2::..\n:.o-+-=2-=-1+-=-2=-2-t-=2-=-3_.,.2_,4---=2..\n_7~28=-+-=-=29~-=-OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER 1 2 1 SD SD SD 3 4 5 451 SD f 4 5 6 7 8 11 12 13 14 15 i--.::1~8-+-,:lc:::...9.....,.\n.2~0..:::2..\n.,l-+-112ii11i.2,._u_--:2--.=::-:2..05~+=1 -26~:.:H H H 8 9 10 11 12 15 16 17 18 19 22 23 24 25 26 29 30 16 CV CV H CVCVCV CV CV 1 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 15 16 17 20 21 22 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 15 451 H f 7 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 19 20 21 24 25 26 27 28 31 19 JANUARY '04 Sf 4 5 6 --------11--------11 SD i1-F_E_B_R_U_A_R_Y_-+--+_\nl:......+---=2--+-...\n.3-+_4~1--'-7~-=8-+1--49 ~_1\n51\n..1\n6.0 ---1+7-- \"1~118 21 22 23 24 25 2R 19 471 SD SB SB SB SB ,1-M_A_R_C _H -+--+--=l--+--=-2-+--=3__..,_4..,._...:..7~-=-8-+-9~-=1:.1.:4\n. 0-+1-5- =11:.6:. ..il 17 18 21 22 23 24 25 28 29 30 31 18 SB f ,1-A_P_R_I__ L --+--+---+-----t-___..,.,.1..,._....\n4~-=-5-+-6.::.__+._7--+-.1.\n1 8~1 2 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 25 26 2 7 28 29 ---=-20--11 H 41#1 MA y 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 11 12 13 t--=1::..\n:.-6t---+=--=1l8..=\n_-7t-- -+=--=12~-9= 0-it-=-23=-+-=-24~2=-7=~53-+._-0::....,..:_2,63'\n-.-.l:-=-1=--+2- -+-~---\n------2\"\"'\"'-11 w JUNE 1 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 15 16 17 20 21 22 23 24 27 2R 29 30 0 * = First day for students PC= Parent Conferences CY= Christmas Vacation H = Holiday SB= Spring Break GF = Good Friday KEY ----------, lw = 'l\\'ork Day lso = Staff Development Ir= Begin Grade Period 11 = End Grade Period I#= Last Day for Students MN on-student day DRAFT TOT AL 178 1st grade period - 2nd grade period - 3rd grade period - 4th grade period - TOTAL STAFF DEV. WORKDAYS 45 45 47 41 178 10 2 190 PROPOSED POLICY REVISION PREVENTION OF NEPOTISM CAK No person employed by the North Little Rock School District in any capacity, shall be assigned duties which require him or her to evaluate or be evaluated by any relative. Relative includes spouse, parent, child, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew or first cousin. PRESENT POLICY PREVENTION OF NEPOTISM CAK No person shall be approved to begin employment in the North Little Rock School District in any capacity who is related to the North Little Rock School District Board of Directors or Superintendent whether by blood or marriage including spouse, parent, child, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, or first cousin. No person, employed by the North Little Rock School District in any capacity, shall be assigned duties which require him or her to evaluate or to be evaluated by any relative as defined in paragraph one. JUNE 1988 C-1 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ~-= = -== TO: JAMES SMITH, SUPERINTENDENT FROM: KA YE LOWE, ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION SUBJECT: ELEMENTARYSUMMERSCHOOL DATE: MARCH I, 2004 Proposed Elementary Summer School Program Location: Eleven elementary schools Dates: June 7, 2004 - June 30, 2004 Student Hours: 7:45 a.m.-11:15 a.m. Students Served: Approximately 170 first grade students - Teachers: Total of 14 teachers with a teacher student ratio of I: 12 Estimated Cost: 14 Teachers at $90.00 per day for 18 days Total Fringe 1 Special Assistance Aide (if needed) at $59 .00 per day for 18 days Total Fringe Transportation Breakfast Snacks Supplies and Materials Total Estimated Cost $22,680.00 4,763.00 1,062.00 223.00 7,500.00 3,000.00 750.00 $39,978.00 Boone Park and Lynch Drive will serve K-3 students. Their summer schools will be paid for through an Arkansas Reading Excellence Grant. D-1 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT February 24, 2004 MEMO TO: James Smith, Superintendent FROM: Dana Chadwick, Administrative Director of Secondary Education SUBJECT: Secondary Summer School Programs Summer school programs for secondary students are listed below with specific information regarding dates, locations, funding sources, and tuition rates. I recommend Board of Education approval of these programs for the summer of 2004. 1. Summer Quest Summer Quest is a two-week program for gifted and talented students. It will be conducted for approximately 200 students in grades K-8. Students do not need to be formally identified to participate, but must be recommended jointly by a classroom teacher and a GT teacher/facilitator. Location: Dates: Lakewood Middle School June 14 - 25 Times: 8:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. Funding Amount: $22,500 Fu\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":"ndd_bsams_01033","title":"Box 1, Folder 33: Black graduation yearbooks, 2004","collection_id":"ndd_bsams","collection_title":"Black Student Alliance records, 1969-2006","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Durham County, Durham, 35.99403, -78.89862"],"dcterms_creator":["Duke University. Black Student Alliance"],"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["Printed Materials, Black Student Alliance Records, Duke University Archives, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book \u0026 Manuscript Library, Duke University."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American college students--North Carolina--Durham","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--History","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--Social conditions","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--Social life and customs","African Americans--North Carolina--History--Archival resources","Duke University. Black Student Alliance","Duke University--Students--Social conditions","Duke University--Students--Yearbooks"],"dcterms_title":["Box 1, Folder 33: Black graduation yearbooks, 2004"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["David M. Rubenstein Rare Book \u0026 Manuscript Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/findingaids/uabsa/#bsams01033"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["[Identification of item], Black Student Alliance Records, Duke University Archives, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book \u0026 Manuscript Library, Duke University."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["school yearbooks"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"ndd_bsams_02011","title":"Box 2, Folder 11: Scrapbook, 2004-2005 (loose)","collection_id":"ndd_bsams","collection_title":"Black Student Alliance records, 1969-2006","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, North Carolina, Durham County, Durham, 35.99403, -78.89862"],"dcterms_creator":["Duke University. Black Student Alliance"],"dc_date":["2004/2005"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["Printed Materials, Black Student Alliance Records, Duke University Archives, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book \u0026 Manuscript Library, Duke University."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African American college students--North Carolina--Durham","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--History","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--Political activity","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--Social conditions","African Americans--North Carolina--Durham--Social life and customs","African Americans--North Carolina--History--Archival resources","African Americans--North Carolina--Political activity","Duke University. Black Student Alliance","Duke University--Students--Social conditions","Duke University--Students--Societies, etc.","Duke University--Students--Political activity","Student participation in administration"],"dcterms_title":["Box 2, Folder 11: Scrapbook, 2004-2005 (loose)"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["David M. Rubenstein Rare Book \u0026 Manuscript Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/findingaids/uabsa/#bsams02011"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["[Identification of item], Black Student Alliance Records, Duke University Archives, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book \u0026 Manuscript Library, Duke University."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["scrapbooks","memorandums","fliers (printed matter)","clippings (information artifacts)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tmll_hpcrc_68217562","title":"Broken promises : evaluating the Native American health care system","collection_id":"tmll_hpcrc","collection_title":"Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Commission on Civil Rights"],"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["A digital version of the report published by the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","Requires Acrobat plug-in to view files."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["United States--Indian Health Service","Indians of North America--Medical care"],"dcterms_title":["Broken promises : evaluating the Native American health care system"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Thurgood Marshall Law Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS69594"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports","records"],"dcterms_extent":["vii, 148 p. : digital, PDF file."],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"vhs_crmva_brown","title":"Brown I and Brown II","collection_id":"vhs_crmva","collection_title":"Civil Rights Movement in Virginia : An Exhibition on Display February 7 - June 19, 2004","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Virginia, Prince Edward County, 37.2243, -78.44108"],"dcterms_creator":["Library of Congress","Virginia. Dept. of Historic Resources","Richmond Times-Dispatch"],"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["Section of online exhibit outlining the lawsuits that were decided in favor of integrated education, including the Virginia case, Dorothy E. Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, that was eventually included in the Supreme Court case Oliver L. Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. The page includes four black-and-white photographs from the Virginia Historical Society, the Library of Congress, the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, and the Richmond Times-Dispatch.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of: The Civil Rights movement in Virginia (Virginia Historical Society)"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Civil Rights Movement in Virginia Collection (Virginia Historical Society)"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--Segregation--Virginia","Civil rights movements--Virginia","African Americans--Civil rights--Virginia","Education--Virginia","Segregation in education--Virginia","African Americans--Education","Prince Edward County (Va.). County School Board--Trials, litigation, etc.","United States. Supreme Court","Topeka (Kan.). Board of Education--Trials, litigation, etc.","Brown, Oliver, 1918- --Trials, litigation, etc.","Davis, Dorothy E.--Trials, litigation, etc."],"dcterms_title":["Brown I and Brown II"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage","Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Virginia Historical Society"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://virginiahistory.org/learn/historical-book/chapter/brown-i-and-brown-ii"],"dcterms_temporal":["1951/1955"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["black-and-white photographs","online exhibitions"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Davis, Dorothy E.","Brown, Oliver, 1918-1961"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tmll_hpcrc_79898204","title":"Civil rights implications of post-September 11 law enforcement practices in New York [electronic resource]","collection_id":"tmll_hpcrc","collection_title":"Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, New York, 43.00035, -75.4999"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Commission on Civil Rights. New York State Advisory Committee"],"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["A digital version of the report published by the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","Requires Acrobat plug-in to view files."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Discrimination in law enforcement--New York (State)","Racial profiling in law enforcement--New York (State)","Arabs--Civil rights--New York (State)","Muslims--Civil rights--New York (State)"],"dcterms_title":["Civil rights implications of post-September 11 law enforcement practices in New York [electronic resource]"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Thurgood Marshall Law Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":["http://www2.law.umaryland.edu/marshall/usccr/documents/cr122004024309.pdf"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://crdl.usg.edu/id:tmll_hpcrc_79898204"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports","records"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"vhs_crmva","title":"Civil Rights movement in Virginia : An exhibition on display February 7 - June 19, 2004","collection_id":null,"collection_title":null,"dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Virginia, 37.54812, -77.44675","United States, Virginia, City of Danville, 36.58597, -79.39502","United States, Virginia, City of Richmond, 37.55376, -77.46026","United States, Virginia, New Kent County, 37.50514, -76.99713","United States, Virginia, Prince Edward County, 37.2243, -78.44108"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["Online exhibit with pictures, newspaper articles, posters, images of artifacts, political cartoons, ballots depicting the African American civil rights movement in the twentieth century, focusing on the 1950s and 1960s. Text on the site provides background to the images comprising the exhibit. One page on the site provides links to teacher resources. The exhibit contains objects from several repositories, including the Library of Congress, the Library of Virginia, the New Kent County, Virginia, School Board, the Richmond Times-Dispatch, the Valentine Richmond History Center, the Virginia Historical Society, the Virginia State University Archives and Special Collections, and the Virginia Department of Historic Resources.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--Segregation--Virginia","Civil rights movements--Virginia","African Americans--Civil rights--Virginia","Hampton Institute","African American civil rights workers--Virginia","Civil rights workers--Virginia","African American universities and colleges--Virginia","National Association for the Advancement of Colored People","Education--Virginia","Segregation in education--Virginia","African Americans--Education","School integration--Massive resistance movement--Virginia","Passive resistance--Virginia","School closings--Virginia--Prince Edward County","Busing for school integration--Virginia","De facto school segregation--Virginia","Discrimination in public accommodations--Virginia"],"dcterms_title":["Civil Rights movement in Virginia : An exhibition on display February 7 - June 19, 2004"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage","Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Virginia Historical Society"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://virginiahistory.org/learn/historical-book/civil-rights-movement-virginia"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["text","black-and-white photographs","online exhibitions"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Washington, Booker T., 1856-1915","Du Bois, W. E. B. (William Edward Burghardt), 1868-1963"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"encyofchi_encyofchicr_293","title":"Civil rights movements","collection_id":"encyofchi_encyofchicr","collection_title":"Encyclopedia of Chicago","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Illinois, Cook County, Chicago, 41.85003, -87.65005"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Chicago (Ill.)--Race relations","Civil rights movements--Illinois--Chicago"],"dcterms_title":["Civil rights movements"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Encyclopedia of Chicago"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/293.html"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["articles"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"vhs_crmva_pec","title":"The closing of Prince Edward County's schools","collection_id":"vhs_crmva","collection_title":"Civil Rights Movement in Virginia : An Exhibition on Display February 7 - June 19, 2004","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Virginia, Prince Edward County, 37.2243, -78.44108"],"dcterms_creator":["Richmond Times-Dispatch","Virginia State University. Library. Archives and Special Collections"],"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["Section of online exhibit focusing on the closing from 1959 through 1964 of Prince Edward County public schools to avoid court-ordered integration and the formation of private, white-only academies. The page includes three black-and-white photographs and a digital image of a Prince Edward Academy jacket from the Virginia Historical Society, the Richmond Times-Dispatch, and Virginia State University Archives and Special Collections.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of: The Civil Rights movement in Virginia (Virginia Historical Society)"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Civil Rights Movement in Virginia Collection (Virginia Historical Society)"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--Segregation--Virginia","Civil rights movements--Virginia","African Americans--Civil rights--Virginia","Education--Virginia","Segregation in education--Virginia","African Americans--Education","School integration--Massive resistance movement--Virginia","Passive resistance--Virginia","Public school closings--Virginia--Prince Edward County"],"dcterms_title":["The closing of Prince Edward County's schools"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage","Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Virginia Historical Society"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://virginiahistory.org/learn/historical-book/chapter/closing-prince-edward-countys-schools"],"dcterms_temporal":["1959/1964"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["black-and-white photographs","online exhibitions"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tmll_hpcrc_55978829","title":"Closing the achievement gap : the impact of standards-based education reform on student performance : draft report for commissioners' review","collection_id":"tmll_hpcrc","collection_title":"Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":["United States Commission on Civil Rights. Office of the General Counsel"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Maryland, 39.00039, -76.74997","United States, Virginia, 37.54812, -77.44675"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["A digital version of the report published by the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","Requires Acrobat plug-in to view files."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Academic achievement--Maryland","Education--Standards--Maryland","Educational equalization--Maryland","Academic achievement--Virginia","Education--Standards--Virginia","Educational equalization--Virginia"],"dcterms_title":["Closing the achievement gap : the impact of standards-based education reform on student performance : draft report for commissioners' review"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Thurgood Marshall Law Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS51792"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports","records"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_382","title":"Compliance remedy","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":["2004/2006"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","School improvement programs","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Compliance remedy"],"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/382"],"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\nJ. As to the educational acronyms, Counsel has requested that the authors of the comprehensive evaluations immediately prepare a glossary of acronyms used in their respective evaluations. These will be consolidated into a single glossary for all exhibits and provided to the Court as soon as possible. Respectfully Submitted, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark. Christopher Heller (#81083) 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 BY: Christopher Heller 1 Page 2 of 3CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the following people by depositing a copy of same in the United States mail on May 13, 2004: Mr. John W. Walker JOHN W. WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp;. Jennings 2200 Nations Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Arm Marshall Desegregation Monitor 1 Union National Plaza 124 W. Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Tim Gauger Mr. Mark A. Hagemeier Office of the Attorney General Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON \u0026amp; JONES, P.A. 425 W. Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201-3472 323 Center Street 200 Tower Buildin! Little Rock, AR 72201 Judge J. Thomas Ray U. S. District Courthouse 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 149 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Clayton Blackstock Mr. Mark Burnett 1010 W. Third Street Little Rock, AR 72201 ig Christopher Heller Pa-. Page 3 of 3 0.!- IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION received may 1 4 200^ DKEGREGATIO? fSoNITORJNG LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO.4\n82CV00866 WRW PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF FIT.iNG DOCUMENTS IN RESPONSE TO THE COURTS ORDER FILED MAY 12, 2004 Plaintiff Little Rock School District (^ERSD) for its Notice of Filing states: 1. Attached are the following documents requested by the Court in its Order filed May 12, 2004: A. Little Rock School District Proposed Compliance Plan Revised Plan  2.7.1 (Appendix 1 of which is IL-Rl\")\nB. Letter from John W. Walker to Chris Heller dated October 10, 2002\nand. C. Letter from John W. Walker to Chris Heller dated October 23, 2002 (received by fax on October 24, 2002). 2. As to Mr. Walker s references to your document, the Court is correct that Mr. Walker is referring to the Proposed Compliance Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A. Page 1 of 3Little Rock School District Compliance Committee Proposed Compliance Plan Revised Plan  2.7.1.The District Courts Compliance Remedy On September 13, 2002, the District Court issued its Memorandum Opinion (hereinafter Opinion ) finding that the Little Rock School District (LRSD) had substantially complied with all areas of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (Revised Plan), with the exception Revised Plan  2.7,1. Section 2.7.1 provided: LRSD shall assess the academic programs implemented pursuant to Section 2.7 after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs in improving Afincan-American achievement. If this assessment reveals that program has not and likely will not improve Afiican-American achievement, LRSD shall take appropriate action in the form of either modifying how the program is implemented or replacing the program a The District Court s Opinion set forth a detailed Compliance Remedy to be implemented by the LRSD. The Opinion first stated: Because LRSD failed to substantially comply with the crucially important obligations contained in 2.7.1, it must remain under court supervision with regard to that section of the Revised Plan until it: (a) demonstrates that a program assessment procedure is in place that can accurately measure the effectiveness of each program implemented under 2.7 in improving the academic achievement of African-American students\nand (b) prepares the program evaluations identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report and uses those evaluations as part of the program assessment procedure contemplated by  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan. The Opinion then outlined the details of the Compliance Remedy as follows: A. For the entire 2002-03 school year and the first semester of the 2003-04 school year, through December 31, 2003, LRSD must continue to assess each of the programs implemented under  2.7 to improve the academic achievement of Afidcan-American students. LRSD now has over three years of testing data and other information available to use in gauging the effectiveness of those programs. I expect LRSD to use all of that available data and information in assessing the effectiveness of those prograrhs and in deciding whether any of those programs should be modified or eliminated. Revised Plan  2.7 provided, LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to improve and remediate the academic achievement of Afiican-American students, including but not limited to Section 5 of this Revised Plan. 1 1B. C. F. LRSD must maintain written records regarding its assessment of each of those programs. These written records must reflect the following information: (a) the written criteria used to assess each program during the 2002-03 school year and the first semester of the 2003-04 school (b) the results of the annual assessments of each program, including whether the assessments resulted in program modifications or the year\nelimination of any programs\nand (c) the names of the administrators who were mvolved with the assessment of each program, as well as at least a grade level description of any teachers who were involved in the assessment process {e.g., all fourth grade math teachers\nall eighth grade Enghsh teachers, etc.).  LRSD must use Dr. Nunnerlw or another expert from outside LRSD with equivalent qualifications and expertise to prepare program evaluations on each of the programs identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report. I will accept all program evaluations that have already been completed by Dr. Nunnerly or someone with similar qualifications and approved by the Board. All program evaluations that have not yet been completed on the remaining programs identified on page 148 of the Final Comphance Report must be prepared and approved by the Board as soon as practicable, but, in no event, later than March 15, 2003. In addition, as these program evaluations are prepared, LRSD shall use them, as part of the program assessment process, to determine the effectiveness of those programs in improving African-American achievement and whether, based on the evaluations, any changes or modifications should be made in those programs. In addition, LRSD must use those program evaluations, to the extent they may be relevant, in assessing the effectiveness of other related programs. * * * On or before March 15, 2004, LRSD must file a Comphance Report which documents its compliance with its obligations under  2.7.1. Any party, including Joshua, who wishes to challenge LRSDs substantial compliance with  2.7.1, as specified above, may file objections with the court on or before April 15, 2004. Thereafter, I will decide whether the LRSD has substantially complied with  2.7.1, as specified in the Compliance Remedy, and should be released from all further supervision and monitoring. The Court is clearly referring to Dr. John Nunnery. 2 iProposed Compliance Plan As the Compliance Committee understands the District Courts Opinion, the Compliance Remedy requires the LRSD to: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Continue to administer student assessments through the first semester of 2003-04\nDevelop written procedures for evaluating the programs implemented pursuant to Revised Plan  2.7 to determine their effectiveness in improving the academic achievement of Afiucan-American students\nMaintain written records of (a) the criteria used to evaluate each program\n(b) the results of the annual student assessments, including whether an informal program evaluation resulted in program modifications or the elimination of any programs\nand (c) the names of the administrators who were involved with the evaluation of each program, as well as at least a grade level description of any teachers who were involved in the evaluation process\nPrepare a comprehensive program evaluation of each academic program implemented pursuant to Revised Plan  2.7 to determine its effectiveness in improving the academic achievement of Afiican-American students and to decide whether to modify or replace the program\nand Submit for Board approval the program evaluations identified on page 148 of the LRSD s Final Compliance Report that have been completed, and complete, with the assistance of an outside expert, the remaining evaluations identified on page 148 of the LRSDs Final Compliance Report. What follows is an explanation of how the Compliance Committee derived these five requirements from the District Courts Opinion, and what the Compliance Committee proposes to do to comply with each requirement. Assessment and Evaluation When first read, the District Courts Compliance Remedy seemed simple and straightforward, but as the Compliance Committee attempted to develop this Proposed Compliance Plan, numerous questions arose. The most fundamental question related to the District Courts use of the term assessment in Paragraphs A and B of the Compliance Remedy. The ambiguity of this term was the subject of testimony at the hearing. The District Court included in its Opinion Dr. Lesleys testimony on the difference between assessment and evaluation, see Opinion, p. 152, but it is unclear whether the Court accepted this testimony. 3It is clear that the District Court understood the distinction between testing data, which are derived from student assessments, and program evaluations, which are used to determine the effectiveness of programs. Opinion, p. 152 (LRSD ackno^vledged in the Interim Compliance Report that it was required\n(a) to use both the testing data and the program evaluations to determine the effectiveness of the key academic programs implemented pursuant to  2.7 . .. (emphasis in original)). Even so, the District Court appears to have used the term assessment in some instances to refer to only student assessments and in other instances to refer to both student assessments and evaluations. This required the Comphance Committee to determine the District Courts intended meaning. In making this determination, the Compliance Committee considered the context in which the term was used, the District Courts findings of fact as set forth in the Opinion, what would be in the best interest of African-American students, and hopefully, common sense. An explanation of each requirement of the Compliance Remedy is provided below. To avoid any ambiguity, Compliance Committee hereinafter uses the term assessment to refer to student assessments and the term evaluation to refer to the program evaluations, whether formal or informal. 1. Continue to administer student assessments through the first semester of 2003-04. This requirement derives from Paragraph A of the Compliance Remedy. Given Paragraph A s reference to testing data, it seems clear that Paragraph A concerns, in part. ^'1* A X WAA w A IO XXX XXX Uj student assessments. The Compliance Committee proposes to comply with this part of Paragraph A by implementing the 2002-03 Board-approved assessment plan. The 2002-03 Board-approved assessment plan incorporates four changes that have been made since the LRSDs Final Compliance Report. First, the Board eliminated the fall administrations of the Achievement Level Tests (ALTs) in 2001-02. The administration recommended this for three reasons\n(1) the loss of instructional time resulting from testing and test preparation\n(2) fall results did not provide significantly different information from the previous springs results\nand (3) the cost of administering and scoring the tests. Second, the fall administration of the Observation Surveys and Developmental Peading Assessment will only be used by the teacher for diagnostic purposes. The scores will not be reported to or maintained by the LRSD. This change saves considerable time in test administration and allows more time for instruction. It was approved by the Board on September 26, 2002. Third, the LRSD will no longer admimster the ALTs. The administration recommended the complete elimination of the ALTs for the following reasons: (1) the lack of alignment with the content and format of the State Benchmarks\n(2) the loss of instructional time resulting from 4testing and test admimstration\n(3) the new federal accountability requirements in the No Child Left Behind Act require annual testing by the State in grades 3-8, making the LRSDs administration of the ALTs redundant\nand (4) the costs of administering and scoring the tests. The Board approved this change on September 26, 2002. Finally, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) has moved the admini stratinn of the SAT9 from the fall to the spring, effective 2002-03. The 2002-03 Board-approved assessment plan calls for the administration of the following student assessments in English language arts and mathematics: Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 Grades 7-10 Grades 9-11 Grade 10 Grade 11 Observation Surveys (5) Developmental Reading Assessment Observation Surveys (5) Development Reading Assessment Observation Surveys (3) Development Reading Assessment Norm-referenced test to be identified for gifted/talented screening Benchmark Literacy examination Benchmark Mathematics examination SAT9 Total Battery Benchmark Literacy examination Benchmark Mathematics examination SAT9 Total Battery Benchmark Literacy examination Benchmark Mathematics examination End-of Course Algebra I examination End-of Course Geometry examination SAT9 Total Battery End-of-Level Literacy examination All of these assessments are administered in the spring. Consequently, the final student assessment before March 15, 2004, will be administered in the spring of 2003. 7 Develop written procedures for evaluating the programs implemented pursuant to  2.7 to determine their effectiveness in improving the academic achievement of African-American students. This requirement derives from the opening paragraph of the Compliance Remedy. To comply with this requirement, two proposed regulations have been drafted, EL-Rl for formal evaluations and IL-R2 for informal evaluations, attached as Appendixes 1 and 2, respectively. 5 1Proposed regulation IL-Rl combines generally accepted principles of program evaluation with practices that have been in place in the LRSD for the past two years. See, e.g., Robby Champion, Map Out Evaluation Goals, Journal for Staff Development, Fall 2002, attached as Appendix o. This regulation will be submitted to the Board, Office of Desegregation Monitoring ( ODM ) and the Joshua Intervenors (Joshua) for review and comment before being finalized. Proposed regulation IL-R2 specifically addresses the next requirement and is discussed therewith. 3. Maintain written records of (a) the criteria used to evaluate each program\n(b) the results of the annual student assessments, including whether an informal program evaluation resulted in program modifications or the elimination of any programs\nand (c) the names of the administrators who were involved with the evaluation of each program, as well as at least a grade level description of any teachers who were involved in the evaluation process. This requirement derives from Paragraph B of the Compliance Remedy. Paragraph B apparently came about as a result of the District Courts concern about the LRSD making program modifications based on informal evaluations of student assessment data. See Opinion, p. 155 ( I have grave reservations about anyone this side of Solomon being wise enough to use two or three semesters worth of erratic composite test scores to make reliable decisions about which remediation programs for LRSD s Afihcan-American students were actually working.). Proposed regulations IL-R2 was drafted to specifically address this requirement. It prohibits substantial program modifications from being made without a written record as required by Paragraph B. This regulation will also be submitted to ODM and Joshua for review and comment before being finalized. Proposed regulation IL-Rl also complies with this requirement. It mandates that the criteria used to formally evaluate a program be identified as the research questions to be answered, the first of which will be, Has this curriculum/instruction program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of Afincan-American students?. See Appendix 1, IL-Rl, p. 5. Recommended program modifications and the members of the evaluation team are routinely included in formal evaluations. As to the results of annual student assessments, the LRSD will continue to maintain a computer database with the results of annual students assessments administered pursuant to the Board-approved assessment plan. 64. Prepare a comprehensive program evaluation of each academic program implemented pursuant to  2.7 to determine its effectiveness in improving the academic achievement of African-American students and to decide whether to modify replace the program. or This requirement derives from Paragraph A of the Compliance Remedy. To comply with this requirement, the Compliance Committee proposes to prepare the following new, comprehensive evaluations: (a) Primary Readingkanguage Arts, (b) Middle and High School Literacy and (c) K-12 Mathematics and Science, Each evaluation will be prepared in accordance with proposed Regulation IL-Rl and will incorporate all available student assessment data relevant to the program being evaluated. Based on Paragraph F of the Compliance Remedy, the LRSD understands these evaluations must be submitted to the Court on or before March 15 2004. Some may argue that Paragraph A and Paragraph C together require the LRSD to prepare new, comprehensive evaluations of all the programs identified on page 148 of the LRSDs Final Compliance Report. The Compliance Committee considered and rejected this argument for three reasons. First, Paragraph As description of the programs to be evaluated differs from that of Paragraph C. Paragraph A states that the LRSD must continue to assess each of the programs implemented imder  2.7 . . . The Compliance Committee understands this to mean that the LRSD should continue to prepare evaluations of some of the key programs, as identified in the Interim Compliance Report. See Opinion, p. 151 (In addition to the Assessment Plan,  2.7.1 of the Interim Compliance Report noted that the LRSD was preparing evaluations of some of the key programs designed to improve African-American achievement in order to provide a more in-depth look at the effectiveness of those programs. (emphasis in original)), In contrast to Paragraph A, Paragraph C requires the LRSD to prepare evaluations of each of the programs identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report. The Compliance Committee understands this to mean that the LRSD should complete all of the evaluations identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report and submit those to the Court. S^ Opinion, p. 156 ( [A]s of March 15, 2001, the date the Final Compliance Report was filed with the Court. (1) PRE had prepared only draft evaluations of some of the programs in question\n(2) none of those evaluations had been approved by the Board . .. . (emphasis in original)). The District Court s statement in Paragraph C that it will accept evaluations already completed and approved by the Board further indicates that Paragraph C does not require new, comprehensive evaluations. Second, recognizing this distinction between Paragraph A and Paragraph C resolves a potential conflict between Paragraph C and Paragraph F. Paragraph C provides, All program evaluations that have not yet been completed on the remaining programs identified on page 148 7 1 Iof the Final Compliance Report must be prepared and approved by the Board as soon as practicable, but, in no event, later than March 15, 2003. However, Paragraph F does not require the LRSD to file a compliance report on its compliance with Revised Plan  2.7.1 until March 15, 2004. The Compliance Committee concludes that March 15,2004, is the deadline for submitting the new, comprehensive evaluations of the programs implemented pursuant to  2.7. See Paragraph A of Compliance Remedy. This is consistent with Paragraph As requirement that the LRSD include assessment data through December 31, 2003. Obviously, such data could not be included in an evaluation filed on or before March 15, 2003. Finally, it makes the most sense for the LRSD to expend the greatest time and resources preparing evaluations of the programs designed to improve Afincan- American achievement. While the requirement for new, comprehensive evaluations derives from Paragraph A, some may argue that Paragraph Cs requirement that the LRSD use an outside expert to prepare evaluations of each of the programs identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report applies to the new, comprehensive evaluations. The Compliance Committee hopes the District Court and the parties agree that the team approach to program evaluation set forth in proposed regulation IL-Rl renders this argument moot. Proposed Regulation IL-Rl states that the program evaluation team must include [a]n external consultant with expertise in program evaluation, the program area being evaluated, statistical analysis, and/or technical writing . . . Appendix 1, p. 4. The exact role of the  external consultant may vary, depending upon the expertise required for the production of the program evaluation. Id. The Compliance Committee believes that the LRSDs practice over the last two years of using the team approach to program evaluation has produced credible evaluations. Moreover, participation of the LRSD staff on the evaluation team provides them an excellent learning experience that they do not typically receive when an evaluation is prepared entirely by an outside expert. The evaluations prepared over the last two years using the team approach are as follows: 1. 2. Dr. Steve Ross was the external consultant in the production of the Early Literacy program evaluation for 1999-2000 and 2000-01. He was asked to read a nearfinal draft and to provide feedback, which he did. His suggestions were then incorporated into the final report before it was published and disseminated. Other team members included Bonnie Lesley (associate superintendent), Patricia Price (program director), Pat Busbea (program specialist), Ed Williams (statistician)^ and Ken Savage (computer programmer). Dr. Julio Lopez-Ferraro is the National Science Foundation (NSF) program officer who over-sees the LRSDs implementation of the grant-funded 8 j iComprehensive Partnership for Mathematics and Science Achievement ( CPMSA ). NSF trained a team of LRSD staff to produce the mandated annual program evaluations for this initiative and then assembled an external team of practitioners and researchers who came to the LRSD each year to validate findings and provide written feedback. The LRSD team members who OUT participated in writing of the annual progress reports included Vanessa Cleaver (project director), Dennis Glasgow (director of mathematics and science), Bonnie Lesley (associate superintendent and co-project investigator), Virginia Johnson (CPMSA program evaluator), Ed Williams (statistician), and Ken Savage (computer programmer). 3. 4. Mr. Mark Vasquez, an attorney and former employee of the Office for Civil Rights in Dallas, has been retained by the LRSD for the past three years to provide guidance in the design and production of the English as a Second Language (ESL) program evaluation. Other team members have been Bonnie Lesley (associate superintendent), Karen Broadnax (program supervisor), Ed Williams (statistician), Ken Savage (computer programmer), and Eddie McCoy (program evaluator). Dr. Larry McNeal, a professor at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock in education admimstration and a private consultant in program evaluation, was retained by the LRSD to lead the team that produced the program evaluation for the Charter School. Other members of that team included Linda Watson (assistant superintendent), Knsta Young (program director), and Ed Williams (statistician). Dr. McNeal wrote this report. The team approach, supported by an external expert, ensures that all areas of expertise (program, implementation, techmeal and evaluative) are included. No one person would have all the knowledge and skills that a team would have. As these examples show, the external expert does not always perform the same role in every project. Rather, the role changes, depending the expertise that is required for a credible report. on 5. Submit for Board approval the program evaluations identified on page 148 of the LRSDs Final Compliance Report that have been completed, and complete, with the assistance of an outside expert, the remaining program evaluations identified on page 148 of the LRSDs Final Compliance Report. The following program evaluations identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report have been completed: 1. Early Literacy. A comprehensive report for 1999-2000 and 2000-01 was prepared, completed, and presented to the Board in fall 2001. An update to this report for 2001-02 was presented to the Board in June 2002, with an emphasis on 9the improved achievement of African-American students and closing the achievement gap. 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Mathematics and Science. Three years (1998-99, 1999-2000, and 2000-01) of program evaluations as required by the NSF were prepared, presented to the Board, and submitted to NSF, and NSF has responded to each evaluation. Extended Year Schools. The LRSD staff prepared, completed, and presented to the Board in the spring of 2002 an evaluation of the Extended Year Schools. Elementary Summer School. The LRSD staff prepared, completed, and provided to the School Services Division an evaluation of elementary summer school programs for 2000-01. 5 HIPPY. The HIPPY program was evaluated by the LRSD staff in July 1999. The report was prepared, completed, and submitted to the program director and the Cabinet. Charter School. This program evaluation was prepared, completed, and presented to the Board in June 2001. ESL. The Office for Civil Rights has required the LRSD to prepare a program evaluation in this area for each of the past three years: 1999-2000, 2000-01, and 2001-02. The first two of these reports have been prepared, completed, submitted to the Board, and submitted to OCR. (A third program evaluation will be completed in October when state scores arrive and will be ready by the March 15, 2003 deadline). Lyceum Scholars Program. Two separate evaluations of this alternative education school program were prepared by the LRSD staff. Southwest Middle School's SEDL Program. Southwest Middle School was the recipient of a two-year technical assistance grant from the Southwest Educational Development Lab (SEDL) to build professional community. SEDL prepared a comprehensive program evaluation that included Southwest among other grant recipients outside the LRSD. The LRSD staff provided SEDL data for this evaluation. Onward to Excellence (Watson Elementary). A grant from ADE funded a partnership between Watson Elementary and the Northwest Educational Development Lab to implement a school improvement initiative. The LRSD staff provided data to Watsons principal for preparation of program evaluations. The principal submitted two armual program evaluations to ADE. 10 t11. 12. Collaborative Action Team (CAT). This one-year partnership with SEDL provided in 2000-01 for establishing and training a Collaborative Action Team of parent and community volunteers supported by LRSD staff to improve parent involvement. SEDL wrote a 249-page evaluation of their three-year grant-funded program, of which LRSD was included only the last year. The LRSD staff provided SEDL data for this evaluation. Vital Link. The LRSD staff prepared a program evaluation, and it was provided to the project director. A question arises as to which of these evaluations are acceptable to the Court without additional work. The first sentence of Paragraph C of the Compliance Remedy provides, LRSD must use Dr. Nunnerly (sic) or another expert from outside LRSD with equivalent quahfications and expertise to prepare program evaluations of each of the programs identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report. The second sentence of Paragraph C states that the District Court will accept all program evaluations that have already been completed by Dr. Nunnerly (sic) or someone with similar qualifications. It is unclear whether an expert from outside the LRSD must have prepared the completed evaluations for them to be accepted by the District Court, whether it is sufficient that they were prepared by someone within LRSD with similar or qualifications. \u0026gt;5 The District Courts findings of fact suggest that the District Court will accept only program evaluations already completed by an outside expert. The District Court noted that Dr. Lesley testified hhat, by the end of November 2000, it was her opinion that no one in PRE had the expertise to prepare program evaluations. Opinion, p. 153. Thus, the District Court likely concluded that the only acceptable program evaluations would be those prepared by persons outside the LRSD. Applying this standard, the Compliance Committee believes that the following evaluations are acceptable to the Court, following Board approval, without additional work: Early Literacy, Mathematics and Science, Charter School, ESL, Southwest Middle Schools SEDL Program and CAT. The remaining program evaluations identified on the bottom of page 148 of the Final Compliance Report must be completed by an outside expert. They are: Extended Year Schools, Middle School Implementation, Elementary Summer School, HIPPY, Campus Leadership Teams (CLTs), Lyceum Scholars Program, Onward to Excellence and Vital Link. The Compliance Committees proposal for completing each of these evaluations will be discussed below. In deciding how to go about completing these evaluations, the Comphance Committee focused on what makes sense to do at this time considering the goal of improving Afincan-American achievement and the limitations inherent in asking an expert to complete an evaluation. 11Extended Year Schools. This evaluation was completed by the LRSD staff. The Compliance Committee proposes retaining an outside expert to review the report and, if possible, draw conclusions and make recommendations based on the existing data. Middle School Implementation. A draft of this evaluation was presented to the Board in July and August 2000, but it was never completed. The Compliance Committee proposes retaining an outside expert to rewrite the report and, if possible, prepare an evaluation based on the existing data. Elementary Summer School. This evaluation was completed by the LRSD staff. The Compliance Committee proposes retaining an outside expert to review the report and, if possible, draw conclusions and make recommendations based on the existing data. HIPPY. This evaluation was completed by the LRSD staff. The Compliance ComTnirtee proposes retaining an outside expert to review the report and, if possible, draw conclusions and make recommendations based on the existing data. CLTs. The LRSD staff conducted a survey of CLTs during 2000-01. A summary of the survey findings was presented during a CLT training session, but no formal report was ever prepared. The Compliance Committee proposes retaining an outside expert to review the survey data and, if possible, prepare an evaluation based on the existing survey data. Lyceum Scholars Program. This evaluation was completed by the LRSD staff. The Compliance Committee proposes retaining an outside expert to review the report and, if possible, draw conclusions and make recommendations based on the existing data. Onward to Excellence. This evaluation was completed by the LRSD staff. The Compliance Committee proposes retaining an outside expert to review the report and, if possible, draw conclusions and make recommendations based on the existing data. Vital Link. This evaluation was completed by LRSD staff. The Compliance Committee proposes retaining an outside expert to review the report and, if possible, draw conclusions and make recommendations based on the existing data. 12Action Plan Timeline The Compliance Committee proposes implementation of this Compliance Plan in accordance with the following timeline. 1. Provide copies of this proposed Compliance Plan to ODM and Joshua for their reactions. 2. Incorporate, as possible, suggested revisions from ODM and Joshua.______ 3. Place Compliance Plan on the agenda for Board review and approval.______ 4. Place 2002-03 Program Evaluation Agenda on the Boards agenda for review and approval. 5. Place on Board agenda for approval two previously presented program evaluations (early literacy, and charter school).______ 6. Place on Board agenda for approval the evaluations of Southwest Middle Schools SEDL program and the Collaborative Action Team (also conducted by SEDL). 7. Place on Board agenda for approval the previously jresented ESL program evaluations for 1999-2000 and 2000-01, plus the new evaluation for 2001-02. Week of September 30, 2002 Week of October 7, 2002 October 10, 2002 October 24, 2002 October 24, 2002 November 2002 November 2002 13 Clay Pendley Ken James Attorneys Ken James Compliance Team Ken James Attorneys Ken James Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Linda Watson Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Karen Broadnax8. Place on Board agenda for approval the three previously presented program evaluations for the NSF-funded CPMSA program, plus the new Year 4 report for 2001-2002. 9. Issue Request for Proposals (RFPs) from available external experts to review and complete the eight remaining program evaluations listed on page 148.________________ 10. Form a screening team to determine recommendations to the Superintendent for designating external experts to review and complete the eight remaining program evaluations listed on page 148.____________________ 11. Select and negotiate consulting contracts with designated external experts. 12. Assign appropriate staff to each external expert to provide needed information, data, access to program staff, etc.________ 13. Monitor the work to ensure timely completion. 14. As each paper is completed and ready for circulation, send copies to ODM and Joshua for their review and comments. December 2002 Mid-October 2002 Late October 2002 Mid-November 2002 Mid-November 2002 Mid-November 2002^February 2003 December 2002^February 2003 14 Bonnie Lesley Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Bonnie Lesley Darral Paradis Ken James Compliance Team Bonnie Lesley Ken James Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley15. As each paper is completed, place on the Boards agenda the item to be reviewed and approved. 16. Write Interim Compliance Report relating to programs on page 148 to be completed. 17. Establish staff teams for each of the three programs on the Boards Program Evaluation Agenda to be completed for 2002-2003 (Elementary Literacy, Secondary Literacy, and K- 12 Mathematics/ Science). 18. Publish RFPs to identify external experts to serve on each of the two staff teams for the Boards Program Evaluation Agenda (K-12 mathematics/science external experts are provided by NSF). 19. Establish consulting contracts with the two external experts required for the Elementary Literacy and Secondary Literacy program evaluations. 20. Train each program evaluation team, including the external expert, on the requirements of the approved Compliance Plan and IL-R. December 2002F ebruary 2003 March 15, 2003 March 1, 2003 March 1, 2003 Late March 2003 May 2003 15 Ken James Bonnie Lesley Attorneys Compliance Committee Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Darral Paradis Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley21. Monitor the completion MayOctober 2003 of the work on all three program evaluations required in the Boards Program Evaluation Agenda.___________ 22. Send copies of the completed Elementary Literacy program evaluation to ODM and Joshua for information.___________ 23. Complete the evaluation of the Elementary Literacy program and place on the Boards agenda for approval. 24. Send copies of the Secondary Literacy program evaluation to ODM and Joshua for information. 25. Complete the evaluation of the Secondary Literacy program and place on the Boards agenda for approval._____________ 26. Send copies of the completed CPMSA program evaluation to ODM and Joshua for information. 27. Complete the five-year evaluation of the CPMSA moject (science and mathematics) and place on the Boards agenda for approval.___________ 28. Write Section 2.7.1 \"inal Compliance Report or federal court and file with Court. With October 2003 Board agenda packet October board meeting, 2003 With November 2003 Board agenda packets November board meeting, 2003 With December 2003 Board agenda packet December board meeting, 2003 March 15, 2004 16 Bonnie Lesley Ken James Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Pat Price Ken James Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Pat Price Ken James Bonnie Lesley Bonnie Lesley Vanessa Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Ken James Attorneys Compliance Team JAppendix 1 Proposed IL-Rl ILITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IL-R1 PROGRAM EVALUATION AGENDA Purpose The purpose of these regulations is to provide guidance to the staff involved in the evaluation of programs required in the Boards Program Evaluation Agenda. They do not necessarily apply to grant-funded programs if the funding source requires other procedures and provides funding for a required evaluation. Criteria for Program Evaluations Policy IL specifies that the evaluations of programs approved in its Board- approved Program Evaluation Agenda shall be conducted according to the standards developed by the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (See Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation, James R. Sanders, Chair (1994). The Program Evaluation Standards, 2^ Edition: How to Assess Evaluations of Educational Programs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.) They are as follows: Utility Standards The utility standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will serve the information needs of intended users. These standards are as follows: Stakeholder identification. People involved in or affected by the evaluation should be identified so that their needs can be addressed. Evaluator credibility. The people conducting the evaluation should be both trustworthy and competent to perform the evaluation so that the evaluation findings achieve maximum credibility and acceptance. Information scope and sequence. Information collected should be broadly selected to address pertinent questions about the program and should be responsive to the needs and interests of clients and other specified stakeholders. Values identification. The perspectives, procedures, and rationale used to interpret the findings should be described carefully so that the bases for value judgements are clear. Report clarity. Evaluation reports should describe clearly the program being evaluated, including its context and the purposes, procedures, and findings of the evaluation, so that essential information is provided and understood easily. 1Report timeliness and dissemination. Significant interim findings and evaluation reports should be disseminated to intended users so that they can be used in a timely fashion. Evaluation impact. Evaluations should be planned, conducted, and reported jn ways that encourage follow-through by stakeholders, so that the likelihood that the evaluation will be used is increased. Feasibility Standards Feasibility standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will be realistic, prudent, diplomatic, and frugal. Practical procedures. Evaluation procedures should be practical so that the disruption is kept to a minimum while needed information is obtained. Political viability. The evaluation should be planned and conducted with anticipation of the different positions of various interest groups so that their cooperation may be obtained, and so that possible attempts by any of these groups to curtail evaluation operations to vias or misapply the results can be averted or counteracted. or Cost-effectiveness. The evaluation should be efficient and produce information of sufficient value so that the resources expended can be justified. Propriety Standards The propriety standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will be conducted legally, ethically, and with due regard for the welfare of those involved in the evaluation, as well as those affected by its results. Service orientation. Evaluations should be designed to assist organizations to address and effectively serve the needs of the full range of targeted participants. Formal agreements. Obligations of the formal parties to an evaluation (what is to be done, how, by whom, and when) should be agreed to in writing so that these parties are obligated to adhere to all conditions of the agreement or to formally renegotiate it. Rights of human subjects. Evaluations should respect human dignity and worth in their interactions with other people associated with an evaluation so that participants are not threatened or harmed. Complete and fair assessments. The evaluation should be complete and fair in its examination and recording of strengths and weaknesses of the program being evaluated so that strengths can be built upon and problem areas addressed. Disclosure of findings. The formal parties to an evaluation should ensure that the full set of evaluation findings, along with pertinent limitations, are made accessible to the people affected by the 2 (evaluation, as well as any others with expressed legal rights to receive the results. Conflict of interest. Conflict of interest should be dealt with openly and honestly so that it does not compromise the evaluation processes and results. Fiscal responsibility. The evaluators allocation and expenditure of resources should reflect sound accountability procedures and be prudent and ethically responsible so that expenditures are accounted for and appropriate. Accuracy Standards Accuracy standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will reveal and convey technically adequate information about the features that determine the worth of merit of the program being evaluated. Program documentation. The program being evaluated should be described and documented clearly and accurately so that it programs is identified clearly. Context analysis. The context in which the program exists should be examined in enough detail so that its likely influences on the program can be identified. Described purposes and procedures. The purposes and procedure of the evaluation should be monitored and described in enough detail so that they can be identified and assessed. Defensible information sources. The sources of information used in a program evaluation should be described in enough detail so that the adequacy of the information can be assessed. Valid information. The information-gathering procedures should be chosen or developed and then implemented in a manner that will ensure that the interpretation arrived at is valid for the intended use. Reliable information. The information-gathering procedures should be chosen or developed and then implemented in a manner that will ensure that the information obtained is sufficiently reliable for the intended use. Systematic information. The information collected, processed, and reported in an evaluation should be review systematically so that the evaluation questions are answered effectively. Analysis of quantitative information. Quantitative information in an evaluation should be analyzed appropriately and systematically so that the evaluation questions are answered effectively. Analysis of qualitative information. Qualitative information in an evaluation should be analyzed appropriately and systematically so that the evaluation questions are answered effectively. Justified conclusions. The conclusions reached in an evaluation should be justified explicitly so that stakeholders can assess them. 3Impartial reporting. Reporting procedures should guard against distortion caused by personal feelings and biases of any party the evaluation reports reflect the evaluation findings fairly. Metaevaluation. The evaluation itself should be evaluated so formatively and summartively against these and other pertinent standards so that its conduct is appropriately guided, and on completion, stakeholders can closely examine its strengths and weaknesses. Program Evaluation Procedures The following procedures are established for the evaluation of programs approved by the Board of Education in its annual Program Evaluation Agenda: 1. 2. 3. The Division of Instruction shall recommend to the Superintendent annually, before the budget for the coming year is proposed, the curriculum/instruction programs for comprehensive program evaluation. The recommendation shall include a proposed budget, a description of other required resources, and an action plan for the completion of the reports. Criteria for the proposed agenda are as follows: A. Can the results of the evaluation influence decisions about the program? B. Can the evaluation be done in time to be useful? C. Is the program significant enough to merit evaluation? (See Joseph S. Wholey, Harry P, Hatry, and Kathryn Newcomer (1994). Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass Publishers. 5-7.) The Superintendent shall recommend to the Board of Education for approval the proposed Program Evaluation Agenda^with anticipated costs and an action plan for completion. For each curriculum/instruction program to be evaluated as per the Program Evaluation Agena, the Associate Superintendent for Instruction shall establish a staff team with a designated leader to assume responsibility for the production of the report according to the timelines established in the action plan approved by the Board of Education. 4. Each team shall include, at a minimum, one or more specialists in the curriculum/instruction program to be evaluated, a statistician, a programmer to assist in data retrieval and disaggregation, and a technical writer. If additional expertise is required, then other staff may be added as necessary. 5. An external consultant with expertise in program evaluation, the program area being evaluated, statistical analysis, and/or technical writing shall be retained 4as a member of the team. The role of the external consultant may vary, depending upon the expertise required for the production of the program evaluation. 6. The team leader shall establish a calendar of regularly scheduled meetings for the production of the program evaluation. The first meetings will be devoted to the following tasks: A. Provide any necessary training on program evaluation that may be required for novice members of the team, including a review of the Board s policy IL and all of the required criteria and procedures in these regulations, IL-R. B. Assess the expertise of each team member and make recommendations to the Associate Superintendent for Instruction related to any additional assistance that may be required. C. Write a clear description of the curriculum/instruction program that is to be evaluated, with information about the schedule of its implementation. D. Agree on any necessary research questions that need to be established in addition to the question, Has this curriculum/instruction program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? (See Policy IL, 2.7.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan, and Judge Wilsons Compliance Remedy.) E. Generate a list of the data required to answer each research question, and assign responsibility for its collection and production. All available and relevant student performance data must be included. (See Judge Wilsons Compliance Remedy.) F. Decide who will be the chief writer of the program evaluation. G. Plan ways to provide regular progress reports {e.g., dissemination of meeting minutes, written progress reports, oral reports to the Superintendent s Cabinet and/or Compliance Team) to stakeholders, including the Associate Superintendent for Instruction, the Superintendent of Schools, the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (until Unitary Status is achieved), and the Joshua Intervenors (until Unitary Status is achieved). (See Joellen Killion (2002). Assessing Impact: Evaluating Staff Development Oxford, OH. National Staff Development Council (NSDC)\nRobby Champion (Fall 2002). Map Out Evaluation Goals.\" Journal of Staff Development. 78-79\n5Thomas R. Guskey (2000). Evaluating Professional Development. Thousand Oaks, CA. Corwin Press\nBlaine R. Worthen, James R. Sanders, and Jody L. Fitzpatrick (1997). Participant-Oriented Evaluated Approaches. Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines\n153-169\nBeverly A. Parsons (2002). Evaluative Inquiry: Using Evaluation to Promote Student Success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press\nand Joseph S. Whoiey, Harry P. Hatry, and Kathryn E. Newcomer (1994). Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.) 7. Subsequent meetings of the program evaluation team are required for the following tasks: to monitor the completion of assignments\nto collaborate in the interpretation and analysis of data\nto pose any necessary new questions to be answered\nto review drafts and provide feedback to the writer\nto formulate recommendations, as required, for program improvement, especially to decide if a recommendation is required to modify or abandon the program if the findings reveal that the program is not being successful for the improvement of African- American achievement\nI? to assist in final proofreading\nand to write a brief executive summary, highlighting the program evaluation findings and recommendations. I s 8. A near-final copy of the program evaluation must be submitted to the Associate Superintendent for Instruction at least one month before the deadline for placing the report on the Boards agenda for review and approval. This time is required for final approval by staff, for final editing to ensure accuracy, and for submission to the Superintendent. 9. When the program evaluation is approved for submission to the Board of Education for review and approval, copies of the Executive Summary and complete report must be made for them, for members of the Cabinet, for ODM (until Unitary Status is achieved), and for the Joshua Intervenors (until Unitary Status is achieved). s I 3 I 10. The program evaluation team shall plan its presentation to the Board of Education on the findings and recommendations. i j 611 .The Associate Superintendent for instruction shall prepare the cover memorandum to the Board of Education, including all the required background information (see Judge Wilsons Compliance Remedy): A. If program modifications are suggested, the steps that the staff members have taken or will take to implement those modifications. If abandonment of the program is recommended, the steps that will be taken to replace the program with another with more potential for the improvement and remediation of African-American students. (See Section 2.7.1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan and Judge Wilsons Compliance Remedy.) B. C, D. Names of the administrators who were involved in the program evaluation. Name and qualifications of the external expert who served on the evaluation team. Grade-level descriptions of the teachers who were involved in the assessment process (e.g., all fourth-grade math teachers, all eighth grade English teachers, etc.). 10. When the program evaluation is approved by the Board of Education, the team must arrange to have the Executive Summary and the full report copied and design a plan for communicating the program evaluation findings and recommendations to other stakeholders. This plan must then be submitted to the Associate Superintendent for approval. 11. Each program evaluation team shall meet with the Associate Superintendent for Instruction after the completion of its work to evaluate the processes and product and to make recommendations for future program evaluations. (See Joeilen Killion (2002).  Evaluate the Evaluation. Assessing Impact: Evaluating Staff Development. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development u Council. 46, 123-124.) 7Appendix 2 Proposed IL-R2LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPNCODE: IL-R2 INFORMAL PROGRAM EVALUATION Introduction The purpose of this regulation is to ensure that a written record exists explaining a decision to significantly modify an academic program. It is not the intent of this regulation to require a formal program evaluation before every significant program modification. Definitions Academic Program means one of the core curriculum programs of English/Language Arts, Mathematics, Science or Social Studies. Significantly modify means a material change in the content or delivery of an academic program implemented throughout the entire District. Written Record A written record must be prepared and maintained explaining a decision to significantly modify an academic program. The written record required by this regulation must include the following information: (a) the written criteria used to evaluate the program, (b) a summary of the student assessment data or other data on which the decision was based\nand (c) the names of the administrators who were involved with the evaluation of each program, as well as at least a grade level description of any teachers who were involved in the evaluation process (e.g., all fourth grade math teachers\nall eighth grade English teachers etc.). 1Appendix 3 Robby Champion, Map Out Evaluation Goals, Journal for Staff Development, Fall 2002 ?9t a k i n g ROBB-Y CHAMPION Map out evaluation goals A master plan can guide you down the rocky path of evaluation when you launch a major professional development evaluation, regardless of the projects scope, you may quickly find yourself on a slippery, often rocky road, v/ith twists and unexpected turns. Before venturing too far and becoming disillusioned about program evaluation, create a master plan. 'While it requires an upfront investment of time and may delay starting, it quickly becomes an invaluable road map that helps you avoid delays and detours along the way. Developing an evaluation master plan is most useful when you are launching a major, summative program evaluation. A summative evaluation is done at major junctures in a programs fife cycle and emphasizes documenting impact. Information from summative evaluations is used to make important decisions about the initiative, such as whether to continue, alter, expand, downsize, or eliminate it A formative evaluation, on the other hand, means monitoring and collecting data, often informally and spontaneously, throughout program implementation. Formative evaluation helps show implementers where to make adjustments so a program can eventually achieve significant results. A thoughtfully prepared master plan for a major evaluation effort would\n Focus the evaluation effort and help implementers avoid being sidetracked by leadership changes and new opinions\n Create a realistic timeline and work plan that B Robby Champion is president of Champion Training \u0026amp; Consulting, You can contact her at Champion Ranch at Trumbeli Canyon, Mora. NM 87732, (505) 387-2016, fax (505) 387-5581, e-mail\nRobbychampion@aol.com. provides needed momentum for the work\n Be a key informational document to provide an overview and answer specific questions throughout the process\n Help recruit people to assist with the project on the myriad evaluation tasks\ne Give the message that the evaluation will be open and not secretive. Whether your evaluation must be completed within a few months or wdl extend for several years, think through four phases of work before starting. PHASE 1: ORGANIZE THE PROCESS 1. Form a steering committee, including any needed outside expertise. 2. Learn more about program evaluation together. 3. Write a clear description of each program to be evaluated. 4. Agree on the primary purpose of the evaluation. .5. Plan how you will keep everyone informed along the way. Steering committees, charged specifically , with program evaluation, are important to focus attention and maintain the energy and momentum needed for the evaluation. They also help build a spirit of 'collaboration and open inquiry. And they keep the evaluation on track when other priorities might push the effort aside. Provide steering committee members with the tools to succeed. Members need not be evalu- 78 National Staff Development Council JSD Fall 2002 t. a\nltj 3l jg: JE St a JI r X I ation experts, but they do need information, support, and guidance to make informed decisions. They need background material to learn about program evaluation and examples of good evaluation studies. Finally, ey need access to experts on professional development, measurement, and the content areas of the training programs. - Before launching any evaluation effort, have a written description of each program to be evaluated. You would be amazed at the number of people who do not have a clear idea of what you mean by the New TeacherJmduction Program or the Early Literacy Initiative since so many different initiatives are being undertaken simultaneously around the school or district PHASE II: DESIGN THE EVALUATION 1. Generate questions to guide the evaluation. 2. Generate potential data sources/ instruments to address the questions. 3. Using a matrix to provide a birds-eye view, agree on e most important questions and the best data sources. 4. Decide if collecting data from a sample group is warranted to make the evaluation manageable. 5. Determine the evaluation approach that makes sense\nquantitative vs\nqualitative/naturalistic. 6. Gather or create the instruments for data collection. .7. Determine a realistic schedule for coUecting data. 8. Create a system for collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data. Decisions made in Phase EI are critical. They determine the technical quality of your evaluation. In the questions you select, you determine what to examine and what to ignore. When you finish with the design phase, your program evaluation wiU be shaped, to use a quantitative or a , quahtative model  or a mixture of the two. In the design phase, you make oer major decisions, such as whether to use a sample group. You also decide whether to do an in-depth case study, wheer to ON THE WEB. See an example of a matrix to help guide evaluations at\nwww.nsdc.org/library/jsd/ champion234.html. survey the whole population, whether to use examples of smdent work instead of official documents such as student grades or standardized test scores, or whether to judge adult learners understanding of the training content with performance tasks during training or by exit tests, classroom observations, or smdent feedback. If the programs to be evaluated already have stated indicators of longterm impact, generating appropriate evaluation questions is much simpler than when programs have only vague, lofty goals. The steering committee may drift into the realm of program planning as you encounter hurdles like fuzzy program outcomes. To avoid making misinformed evaluation design decisions, involve program leaders in your discussions. Developing or gathering instruments and then collecting the data are the most expensive steps in any evaluation. Think strategically about which data to collect, from whom to collect it or where to find it, and the best time to collect it. Your organization may already be collecting data for another purpose that now can be used for program evaluation. Some public records, such as smdent attendance, may be valuable if, for example, 20% increase in smdent attendance at aU grade levels is one of your programs indicators of impact. PHASE III\nPREPARE TO REPORT 1. Determine which audiences wiU want to know the results. 2. Consider several forums and formats to disseminate the results. 3. Plan reports, presentations, photo displays, graphs, charts, etc. Remember that your job is to make the evaluation results useful to your organization, so consider a range of ways to provide information to various groups. Consider briefs in the school or district newsletter, a handout updating staff about the schedule for data collection, five- minute progress updates in faculty meetings, bulleted statements on your web site, a digital picture- album of the programs results in classrooms with photos of smdents, and hallway displays of smdent work. If your final report is a formal document complete with examples of your data collection instruments, consider writing an executive summary of five pages or less to help.readers get the essential information. PHASE IV: CREATE THE WORK PLAN 1. List aU tasks to be completed for the whole evaluation.. 2, Create a realistic timeline. 3. Assign work. .4. Distribute the master plan. You -will have to be creative to accomplish ail the evaluation tasks. In education, we rarely have the luxury of contracting outsiders for the entire project Enlist steering committee members, partners, graduate smdents from the local university, and other talented critical friends to get the work done. One caution: For formal or summa- tive evaluations to be credible, avoid using insiders such as the program designers or implementers (coaches, mentors, trainers, or facilitators) to perform critical evaluation tasks that call for objectivity and distance. And be sure to get ongoing, high-quaiit)' technical expertise for the critical technical analysis. A CATALYST FOR REFLECTION Completing a major program evaluation usually serves as the catalyst for serious reflection on the current designs, policies, and practices of your professional development programs  their goals, content, processes, and contexts. In fact, revelations are often so powerful that they bring about the realization that major changes are needed if significant results' are reaUy expected from professional development People frequently conclude that designing the evaluation should be the first step in the program planning process, rather than an afterthought during implementation. B JSD Fall 2002 National Staff Development Council 79John W. Walker, P.a. Attorney At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 JOHN W. WALKER SHAWN CHILDS Via Facsimile - 376-2147 October 10, 2002  OF COUNSEL ROBERT McHenry, pa donna J. McHenry 8210 Henderson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72210 Phone: (501) 372-3425  Fax (501) 372-3428 Email: mchenryd^wbeU.net Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 Regions Center 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Little Rock School District v. PCSSD, et al. Case No. 4:82CV00866 Dear Chris: Plan. This refers to your letter of October 4, 2002, providing LRSDs proposed Comphance The carts remedy and the general subject matter are too complex for us to provide all comments and objections we may ultimately have before todays Board meeting. We do note the following: 1. More consideration is needed of the programs to be identified as implementation , which are to be subjected to a comprehensive program evaluation cJocument at page 7 identifies three areas. We note the absence of specific reference and detail reg^dmg mteiventions / scaflFolding - areas of vital importance given the achievement patterns of .African Amencan students. We note also that the LRSD compliance report cited pursuant to Section 2.7 . . many more programs as designed to fulfill Section 2.7. 2. In a discussion prior to his testimony in the hearing Judge Wilson, we understood Dr Ross to indicate that the existing evaluation of the Pre-K - 2 literary program was not adequate' hp nntfitinn oorta A J_______ r-.i , , * The notation at page 4 of your document of the changed use u 3 DRA relates to part of the concerns he expressed. This undermines the LRSD of the Observation Survey and the in  r .  -------- ------------------- argument (page 1) that the existing evaluation, upon Board approval, will satisfy a part of the courts remedy. 3. The LRSD discussion about satisfying the courts order regarding the evaluations EXHIBITmentioned at page 148 of the compliance report does not seem to take account of the material provided, which describes an adequate evaluation. 4. We question the period for implementation of a remedy which the court has identified and, therefore, the LRSD schedule. Once again, these comments should not be taken to be the full range of concerns which Joshua may ultimately have about the courts remedy and the Compliance Plan. Nor do we intend to waive our concerns about the court setting forth a remedy, without first hearing from the parties and the ODM with regard to the courts views on an appropriate remedy. ihc^ly. ohn W. Walker JWW:js cc: Ms. Ann Marshall All Counsel of Record, OCT. 24.2002 8:06ftM JOHN W WALKER P A NO.963 P.E JOHN w. Walker SHAWN CHILDS I John W. Wllker, p.a. Attorne? At Law 1723 Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 Telephone (501) 374-3758 FAX (501) 374-4187 October 23, 2002 OR COUNSEL ROBERT McHENKT P^ 8210 Hendeksqn BqaD Lrrtm Sock, Arkansas 722i n Phone: (501) 372-3425  Faz (501) 372-3428 Email\nmcheciydgawbolLaet Mr. Christopher Heller FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 400 W. Capitol, Suite 2200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re\nLRSD V. PCSSD Dear Chris\nThis letter sets forth additional Compliance Plan. We comments of the Joshua Intervenors concerning the LRSD , ----------------* LLiC jUIkOU the dataJ  In tol^TSD attention should be given to the quality of e oata. m_the past, LRSD has used results on the RA and the Observation in consistent Txnth rr  ^nd the Observation SuTvcy in wcvs not nsistent with the purposes of those instruments. In addition, because teanherc 4., In addition, because teachers provided scores for to own students, the past use made of the data was in conflict with the diS newly enacted Regulation IL-Rl that Conflict of Interest .55 must be avoided. :s recognition in the for 2. We are concerned about the .  manner in which the regulation describes the team nropAg-\nprepari^ evaluauons, again in the context of conflict of interest  L - - isavoided,e external consultant needs to write the report and control the conflict of interest In order to insure that context of the analysis. Paragraphs 3, 5 and 6 of the guarantee that the external ti' which w= describe,-JI Program Evaluation Procedures do not iizitk , cNfv   .' --------LRSD staff preparing comments to the Board with a differing interpretation of the evaluation results. Continue to be concerned about the global, general manner in which the content of P desenbed (page 7 of the document, first paragraph). For example the Board is bXwX'^sSStoe with remediation for students whose petoanc, is oe ow par Studying the actual implementation of these stotuds im an or a re more T' because class membersare so much AcibeiSn^esS Srf i 1 P^rfoxmauce on the Benchmark and Stanford /vcnievement lests. A. satisfactory desenpuon by e School Board :e standards (in all or a representative of the evaluations which it : exhibit I 10/24/2002 THU 09:03 [TX/Ri: NO 85S0] @002' . CX^. 24.2002 8:07flM JOHN W WALKER P R N0.9S3 P.3 Page Two October 23, 2002 ^dert^c should make clear that the actual implementation of remediation acmvines m ehstnet schools is to receive careful consideration. This is surely an important contextual factor (see Accuracy Standards, para. 2), i^onicxiuai . Plan that the LRSD plans evaluations ofprograms deemed pamculmly direcmd to achievement of African American students for the Uidefiuiu: ' necessary to satisfy the court. We would Uke to receive the Boards assurance mat inns is me case. to be indefinite future, not We would appreciate your providing this letter to the Superintendent and the members of the school board. Walker Sincerely, JWW:Ip cc: AU Counsel Ms. Ann Marshall Judge Thomas Ray 10/24/2002 THU 09:03 [TX/RI NO 8580] @003 MEMORANDUM To: From: Subject: Date: Dennis Glasgow Gene Jones Compliance Remedy August 9, 2004 Thank you for providing time for Margie and me Wednesday and for making our conversation both pleasant and informative. We are pleased to be invited to participate in the planning for and implementation of the Courts June 30 Compliance Remedy. We will be available as much as necessary to complete the work. The proposed responses to the Compliance Remedy that you shared with us should be helpful to the people to be assigned those tasks. As you refine and update the document, it may be worth considering that the language of paragraph A of the Compliance Remedy includes the term statisticians in the list of people to be hired. The language of the list of staff members of the Research, Assessment and Evaluation Department in the proposed response document does not. 1 also note that the term is plural in the Compliance Remedy. Significant tasks ordered by the Compliance Remedy in paragraphs F and G include written notification to Joshua and ODM of the eight programs to be targeted for step 2 evaluations and the quarterly updates. The proposed response document does not include these and may not need to, but they should be prominent on the list of things to do when the staff of the Research, Assessment, and Evaluation Department is assembled. The first of the quarterly updates is due December 1. Thank you for arranging our meeting with the superintendent this Thursday.PROJECTED SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT STATUS OF LRSD SCHOOLS BASED ON 2004 ACTAAP ASSESSMENT RESULTS SUMMARY:  Fifteen (15) elementary schools fully met standards for all subgroups in both mathematics and literacy. These schools are not on school improvement status.  Of the remaining nineteen (19) elementary schools that are on school improvement status, seven (7) met Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in both math and literacy.  Bale, Baseline, Chicot, Cloverdale (Elementary), Dodd, Fair Park, and Rockefeller met AYP for 1 year. These seven schools can come off school improvement if they make AYP next year.  One elementary school moves up to Year 3 status: Mitchell.  Meadowcliff, Rightsell, and Western Hills are projected to be on alert since they failed to meet AYP for one or more subgroups in mathematics. These schools will be on Year 1 of School Improvement should they fail to meet AYP next spring.  At the middle level Mann and Pulaski Heights Middle Schools met the adequate yearly progress standard. They will remain on Year 1 of School Improvement. The other six middle schools will move up a year on school improvement, five to Year 2 and one (Southwest) to Year 3.  All five high schools were on Alert status last year. Four of them will move to Year 1 status due to not meeting AYP in literacy and math. Parkview met AYP in literacy and math and will move off school improvement status. SCHOOLS THAT MET OR EXCEEDED THE STANDARD IN MATH AND LITERACY FOR 2004: Bale Booker Chicot Dodd Forest Park Geyer Springs Jefferson McDermott Pulaski Heights Romine Wakefield Mann Middle Parkview High School Baseline Carver Cloverdale Elementary Fair Park Fulbright Gibbs Mabelvale Elementary Otter Creek Rockefeller Terry Williams Pulaski Heights Middle received AIIR - A 200H OFFICE OF desegregation monitoringSCHOOLS THAT WERE ON SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT STATUS FOR THE 2003-04 SCHOOL YEAR: Current Status (Based on 2002-03 Scores) Level/School ELEMENTARY Chicot Year 3 Bale Baseline Fair Park Mitchell Wakefield Brady Cloverdale Dodd Franklin ML King Mabelvale Rockefeller Stephens Washington Watson Year 2 Year 2 Year 2 Year 2 Year 2 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Projected Status (Based on 2003-04 Scores) Year 3 Year 2 Year 2 Year 2 Year 3 Off School Improvement Year 2 Year 1 Year 1 Year 2 Year 2 Off School Improvement Year 1 Year 2 Year 2 Year 2 Subgroup/Subject not meeting AYP All students: Math and Literacy All students\nMath All students: Math African-American students\nMath All students\nMath and Literacy African-American students: Math and Literacy All students: Math and Literacy Comments Met AYP for 1 year Met AYP for 1 year Met AYP for 1 year Met AYP for 1 year Met AYP for 2 consecutive years Met AYP for 1 year Met AYP for 1 year Met AYP for 2 consecutive years Met AYP for 1 yearWilson Woodruff Year 1 Year 1 Year 2 Year 2 All students: Math All students: Math Meadowcliff Alert Rightsell Western Hills Alert Alert African-American students: Math All students: Math All students: Math MIDDLE SCHOOL Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Heights Southwest HIGH SCHOOL Central Hall Fair McClellan Parkview Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 2 Alert Alert Alert Alert Alert Year 2 Year 2 Year 2 Year 2 Year 2 Year 1 Year 1 Year 3 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Year 1 Not on School Improvement All students: Math and Literacy African American students: Math and Literacy All students: Math All students: Math and Literacy All students: Math and Literacy All students: Math and Literacy African-American students: Literacy All students: Literacy All students: Literacy All students: Literacy Met Safe Harbor provision Met Safe Harbor provision 34% improvement in black students below basic in math compared to last year 88% of white students proficient in literacy Met AYP in literacy and mathEASTI IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS LITTLE ROCK DIVISION FILED U.8. DISTRICT ^URT 'ESN district ARKANSAS JUN 30 2004 JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By\n. DEP CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. 4:82CV00866 WRW/JTR PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1,ETAL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS MEMORANDUM OPINION' I. Warning to the General Reader The general reader, if any there be, should realize that educators, like lawyers, have developed their own language. To the extent that time, patience, and skill would permit, I have tried to Gamerize'^ this Memorandum Opinion. I have fallen short, but hope the effort will be of some help. IL Background On September 13,2002,1 entered a Memorandum Opinion (the September 13 Decision) holding that the Little Rock School District (LRSD) had substantially complied with all of its I would be seriously remiss if I did not once again note the tremendous amount of work United States Magistrate Judge Joe 'Hiomas Ray has done on this case. -Bryan Gamer, of Dallas, Texas, has published several excellent books and articles for the legal profession on the use of plain, understandable English. .0 72A Rev.a/82)desegregation obligations set forth iii the January 16,1998 Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (the Revised Plan)/ except those obligations contained in  2.7.1, LRSD V. Pulaski County Special Sch. Dist, et al., 231F. Supp. 2d 988 (E.D. Ark. 2002)\nafPd, 359 F.3d 957 (8* Cir. 2004). Section 2.7 of the Revised Plan obligated LRSD to implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to improve and remediate African-American achievement. 2.7.1 ensured that the promise made in  2.7 would have teeth by requiring that: Section LRSD shall assess the academic programs implemented pursuant to  2.7 after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs in improving Afiican-American achievement. If this assessment reveals that a program has not and likely will not improve Afidcan-American achievement, LRSD shall take appropriate action in the form of either modifying how the program is implemented or replacing the program. ex 871. As stated above, m the September 13 Decision, I found that LRSD had substantially complied with its obhgations under  2.7 of the Revised Plan\nhowever, I detennined there were numerous, substantial deficiencies in LRSDs efforts to comply with its obligations under 2.7.1. See LRSD, 237 F. Supp. 2d at 1076-1082. The September 13 Decision gave LRSD until March 15, 2004, to demonstrate that it had substantially complied with  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan, as specified in subparts A, B, and C of the Compliance Remedy. LRSD, 237 F. Supp. 2d at 1087-88. LRSD has been involved continuously in desegregation litigation since 1956. See LRSD, 237 F. Supp. 2d at footnote 18. As far as I can tell from the reported cases, LRSD now has the During the 2001-02 unitary status hearings, the Revised Plan was introduced into evidence as CX871. -2- AO72A (Rev.8/82)dubious distinction of having been under federal court supervision longer than any other school district in history. Thus, LRSD is well seasoned when it monitoring. comes to court supervision and On November 12, 2002, Joshua Intervenors\" (Joshua) appealed (docket no. 3704) the Septembers Decision. On March 2,2004, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. LRSD V. Joshua, 359 F.3d 957 (8- Cir. 2004). Thus, all aspects of the September 13 Decision are now final and the law of the case. On March 12, 2004, LRSD filed its Compliance Report (docket no. 3837) seeking complete unitary status on the ground that it had substantially complied with the obligations imposed under the Compliance Remedy and  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan. On April 15, 2004, Joshua filed an Opposition to LRSDs Request for Release from Court Supervision of Its I Desegregation Efforts (docket no. 3856), along with a supporting Memorandum (docket no. 3857). 1 must now decide whether LRSD has met its obligations under the Compliance Remedy, and whether it should be released from almost five decades of court supervision. in. The September 13, 2002 Compliance Remedy Almost 70% of LRSDs students are African-American. Historically, the academic achievement of many of these students, as gauged by standardized test scores, is low and poses a significant long-term challenge to LRSD teachers and administrators. Of course, because this so-called achievement gap IS a nationwide phenomenon, it is a problem that educators must are '^e Joshua Intervenors are a group of Afiican-American school children.. enrolled in each of the three Pulaski County school districts. Thus, Joshua some of whom serves as the class representative for all African-American students enrolled in LRSD, the Pulaski Countv Snecial School District, and the North Little Rock School District. -3- A0 72A (Rev.a/82)I ( ' AO72A (Rev.8/82) confront in schools throughout the-country. See LRSD, 237 F. Supp. 2d at 1073-74. Importantly,  2.7 of the Revised Plan promised only that LRSD would implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to improve and remediate Afidcan-American achievement, See docket no. 3410 at 51. However,  2.7.1 went on to require LRSD to assess the  2.7 programs annually in order to determine their effectiveness, and to modify or replace any programs that were shown not to be working to improve African-American achievement. Id. at 148. Read together, the obligations set forth in  2.7 and  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan required LRSD not only to design academic programs that were int achievement of African-American students, but also to programs to ensure that they were, in fact, effective in improving^ Expressed in the vernacular of my native Scott County, Arkan^\n^ 1 c ise It. id  2.7.1 contained the bacon. These two sections of the Revised Plan are crucially important to the future educational success of a large number of LRSDs current and future students. During the November 2001 hearings on unitary status, Dr. Bonnie Lesley, LRSDs Associate Superintendent of Instruction and Curriculum, defined a program assessment as something that is dynamic, it is interactive, its ongoing, it happens frequently, and it is a measurement, along with the analysis that you would make of whatever results are available. LRSD, 237 F. Supp. 2d at 1077. In contrast, she defined a program evaluation as more long term, it may consider observations or measurements in addition to test scores, and is guided by a series of research questions that are usually provided by whoever the consumer is of that report. Id. In other words, a program assessment is a relatively informal process that may not result in much documentation, while a program evaluation is a formal process that always A-AO 72A (Rev.B/82) I i I I I mvolves the preparation of an often lengthy written program evaluation which is centered around carefully prepared research questions that the evaluation is designed to answer. Section 2.7.1 of the Revised Plan provided that LRSD must make assessmentsnot evaluations-of the  2.7 programs in order to determine their effectiveness in improving the academic achievement of African-American students. However, as early as March 15, 2000, LRSD acknowledged, m its own Interim Compliance Report (docket no. 3356), that  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan obligated it to prepare evaluations on the key  2.7 programs so that LRSD admimstrators could make an informed decision on the effectiveness of those programs. See LRSDs Interim Compliance Report at 51-55. Furthermore, during her testimony in November of 2001, Dr. Lesley admitted that, even though  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan did not mention anything about LRSDs obligation to prepare program evaluations to determine the effectiveness of the  2.7 programs, she and other administrators interpreted that section of the Revised Plan as requinng LRSD to perform evaluations covering the most important  2.7 programs. LRSD, 237 F. Supp. 2d at 1077. Because it is so important to an understanding of the Compliance Remedy, I want to be very clear on this pomt: The evidence overwhelmingly establishes that LRSD has always construed the obligations contained in  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan as requiring It to prepare formal program evaluations on the key  2.7 programs. See Interim Compliance Report at 51-55\nFinal Compliance Report dated March 15, 2001 (docket no. 3410) at 148\nDr. Lesleys testimony cited in the September 13 Decision, LRSD, 237 F. Supp. 2d at 1077. Since my decision will turn on whether LRSD has properly implemented the September 13, 2002 Compliance Remedy, it is set forth below in full\n-5-Vn. Compliance Remedy Because LRSD failed to substantially comply with the crucially important obligations contained in  2.7.1, it must remain under court supervision with regard to that section of the Revised Plan until it: (a) demonstrates that a program assessment procedure is in place that can accurately measure the effectiveness of each program implemented under  2.7 in improving the academic achievement of Afiican-Amencan students\nand (b) prepares the program evaluations identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report and uses those evaluations as part of the program assessment procedure contemplated by  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan. The details of this compliance remedy are set forth below\nA. For the entire 2002-03 school year and the first semester of the 2003-04 school year, through December 31, 2003, LRSD must continue to assess each of the programs implemented under  2.7 to unprove the academic achievement of Afiican-American students. LRSD now has over three years of testing data and other information available to use in gauging the effectiveness of those AO72A (Rev.8/82) i i I i I I I B. C. programs. I expect LRSD to use all of that available data and information in assessing the effectiveness of those programs and in deciding whether any of those programs should be modified eliminated. or LRSD must maintain written records regarding its assessment of each of those programs. These written records must reflect the following information: (a) the written criteria used to assess each program during the 2002-03 school year and the first semester of the 2003-04 school year\n(b) the results of the annual assessments of each program, including whether the assessments resulted in program modifications or the elimination of any programs\nand (c) the names of the administrators who were involved with the assessment of each program, as well as at least a grade level description of any teachers who were involved in the assessment process {e.g., all fourth grade math teachers\nall eighth grade English teachers, etc.). LRSD must use Dr. Nunnery or another expert from outside LRSD with equivalent qualifications and expertise to prepare program evaluations on each of the programs identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report.^ I will accept all program evaluations On page 148 of its March 15, 2001 Final Compliance Report (docket no. 3410), LRSD flatly stated that it had prepared program evaluations on fourteen separate programs listed on that -6-that have already been completed by Dr. Nunnery or someone with similar qualifications and approved by the Board. All program evaluations that have not yet been completed on the remaining programs identified on page 148 of the Final Compliance Report must be prepared and approved by the Board as soon as. In practicable, but, in no event, later than March 15, 2003. D addition, as these program evaluations are prepared, LRSD shall use them, as part of the program assessment process, to determ in p the effectiveness of those programs in improving Afiican- American achievement and whether, based on the evaluations, any changes or modifications should be made in those programs. In addition, LRSD must use those program evaluations, to the extent they may be relevant, in assessing the effectiveness of other related programs. 72A Rev.8/82) D. Joshua must monitor LRSDs compliance with  2.7.1 and must immediately bring to the attention of LRSD all problems that detected in its compliance with its obligations under  2.7.1, as those obligations are spelled out in this Compliance Remedy. Thereafter, Joshua and LRSD must use the Process for Raising Compliance Issues set forth in  8.2, et seq., of the Revised Plan are E. to attempt to resolve those compliance issues. If those efforts are unsuccessful, Joshua must present the issues to me for resolution, as required by  8.2.5. Any such presentation must be timely. The ODM must also monitor LRSDs compliance with  2.7.1 and help to ensure that LRSD fulfills its obligations, as specified in this Compliance Remedy. F. On or before March 15, 2004, LRSD must file a Compliance Report which documents its compliance with its obligations under  2.7.1. Any party, including Joshua, who wishes to challenge LRSD s substantial compliance with  2.7.1, as specified above, may file objections with the court on or before April 15, 2004 Thereafter, I will decide whether LRSD has substantially complied with  2.7.1, as specified in this Compliance Remedy, and should be released from all further supervision and monitoring. page. During the 2001-02 unitary status hearings, the evidence overwhelmingly established that, as of March 15, 2001, LRSD had not prepared any of those fourteen program evaluations. See LRSD,231'?. Supp.2dat 1079-80. Henceforth, I will refer to these fourteen program evaluations as the Page 148 Evaluations. -7- I I I ILRSD,131 F. Supp. 2d at 1087-88 f-emphasis added). Even a casual reading of this Compliance Remedy reveals that it imposed four essential obligations on LRSD, Joshua, and the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM): 1. 2. Preparation of Annual Assessments of  2.7 Program .s LRSD was required to annually assess each of the programs implemented under  2.7 during the 2002-2003 school year and the first semester of the 2003-2004 school year and then use those assessments, the more than three years of testing data, and all other relevant available information to determine the effectiveness of those programs and to decide whether any of the programs should be modified or eliminated. LRSD also was required to maintain written records reflecting: (a) the criteria used to assess each program\n(b) the results of the annual assessments of each program, including whether any programs were modified or eliminated\nand (c) the administrators and teachers who were involved in preparing the assessment of each program. I I Subparts A and B of the Compliance Remedy obligated LRSD to assess each of the  2.7 programs implemented during the 2002-03 school year and the first semester of the 2003-04 school year and to maintain written records of its armual assessments of each of those programs. I made no mention of LRSD preparing evaluations of  2.7 programs because, on its face, nothing in  2,7.1 of the Revised Plan obligated LRSD to perform program evaluations. However, Dr. Lesley made it clear in her testimony that LRSD administrators knew and understood that the assessment obligation in  2.7.1 included the obligation of preparing program evaluations. See discussion, supra, at 4-5. Therefore, I concluded it would be best to use the same terms in the Compliance Remedy that the parties themselves had chosen to use in  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan. Because I was tracking the parties own language, I never dreamed the use of the tenns assess and assessment would suddenly create confusion for LRSD administrators in deciding how to comply with subparts A and B of the Compliance Remedy. Preparation of Page 148 Program Evaluations. I LRSD was required to hire experts to prepare the fourteen program evaluations identified on page 148 of its March 15, 2001 Compliance Report. The Court agreed to accept all program evaluations that had already been prepared by outside consultants and ordered LRSD to hire outside consultants to complete the unfinished program evaluations, which were to be approved by the LRSD Board and filed with the Court no later than March 15, 2003. Finally, as those evaluations were prepared, LRSD was required to use them - to the extent they I -8- AO72A (Rev.e/82)might be useful - in its annual assessment of the effectiveness of the  2.7 programs. 3. Monitoring. Joshuas counsel was required to continue with its monitoring of LRSDs implementation of the Compliance Remedy and to use the procedures set forth in  8.2 of the Revised Plan to resolve any compliance problems that might arise. If Joshua and LRSD were unsuccessful in using the ODM to facilitate and resolve those problems, they were required to bring those compliance issues directly to me for resolution. Finally, the ODM was directed to monitor LRSDs implementation of the Compliance Remedy and to help ensure that LRSD fulfills its obligations specified therein. The sole purpose of subparts D and E the Compliance Remedy was to ensure that, if the ODM was unable to successfully facilitate the resolution of any compliance issues raised by Joshua, those compliance issues would be brought to my attention so that I could resolve them on a timely basis, thereby avoiding any surprises when LRSD filed its Compliance Report. 4. Preparation of Compliance Report. V LRSD was ordered to file a Compliance Report by March 15,2004, documenting its substantial compliance with  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan and the Compliance Remedy. TV. The Parties Compliance Activities after September 13, 2002 A. The Court Clarifies Joshuas Monitoring Obligation. After the entry of the September 13 Decision, LRSD did not seek clarification of any terms used in the Compliance Remedy or any of its compliance obligations. Based on its silence, I concluded that LRSD understood what it was required to do under the Compliance Remedy, and that it was proceeding apace to meet those obligations. In contrast, on October 1, 2002, Joshuas counsel wrote a letter (docket no. 3680) objecting to the monitoring obligations imposed on them under subpart D of the Compliance Remedy. Among other things, Joshuas counsel challenged the Courts decision to: (1) impose monitoring obligations on them that were contemplated to be the responsibility of the ODM\n-9- AO 72A (Rev.8/82)i and (2) place a greater burden upon Joshua than it has imposed upon the ODM. Id. By way of relief, Joshuas counsel sought clarification of their monitoring obligations under subpart D ( . of the Compliance Remedy and a hearing on this matter so that an appropriate record on the issues of the role of the ODM monitoring and Joshuas monitoring may be fully developed. Id. On October 11, 2002, I entered an Order (docket no. 3685) clarifying the monitoring obligations imposed on Joshuas counsel under the Compliance Remedy. After noting that Joshua s counsel had been engaged in monitoring LRSDs compliance with its desegregation obligations since at least 1990,1 made it clear that subpart D of the Compliance Remedy only obligated Joshua s counsel to continue to perform their monitoring role according to the same procedure they and LRSD have followed for many years in this case. LRSD, 237 F. Supp. 2d at 1091. Because the October 1,2002 letter could be read to suggest that Joshuas counsel would only continue their monitoring role, if ordered to do so by the Court, I also made it clear that: I do not believe I can force Joshuas counsel to perform monitoring duties  something that I may have mistakenly assumed they wanted to do. I will leave it up to Joshua s counsel to decide if they have an ethical and professional duty to continue monitoring LRSDs compliance with its sole remaining obligation under the Revised Plan. I hope Joshuas counsel resolves that question in favor of continuing their long-standing commitment to monitoring LRSDs compliance with its desegregation obligations. However, since they complain about my expressly directingthem to continue monitoring LRSDs compliance with  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan - something I never expected to hear -1 believe I must now clarify Section VII.D. of the Memorandum Opinion to read as follows\nJoshua may monitor LRSDs compliance with  2.7.1 and, if they choose to do so, they should bring to the attention of LRSD, on a timely basis, all problems that are detected in its compliance with its obligations under  2.7.1, as those obligations are spelled out in this Compliance Remedy. Thereafter, Joshua and LRSD must use the process for raising compliance issues set forth in  ^-2. et seq., of the Revised Plan to attempt to resolve those compliance issues. If those efforts are unsuccessful, Joshua shall -10- XO72A Rev.8/82) present the issues to me for resolution, as required by  8.2.5. Any such presentation must be timfily Id. at 1091. Finally, I emphasized that, regardless of whether Joshuas counsel decided to continue to monitor LRSDs compliance with its obligations under  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan, the ODM staff most certamly will continue their close monitoring ofLRSDs compliance with that section of the Revised Plan. Id. at 1091. My final admonition follows\non the subject of monitoring was as K Joshua s counsel decide to continue their monitoring role, which is independent from the momtonng work performed by the ODM,... I expect counsel for Joshua and LRSD to cooperate and work together to ensure that things go smoothly with regard to monitoring LRSDs implementation of its obhgations under  2.7.1. However, if actual disputes arise regarding monitoring, I wiU be available to resolve them. I at 1091. B. LRSD Adopts Compliance Plan, Approves Regulation IL-R1, and Designates Areas for  2.7.1 Program Evaluations. On October 10,2002, LRSDs Board of Directors (the Board) adopted a Compliance Plan that was specifically designed to satisfy the Courts Compliance Remedy. See Exhibit A to LRSDs May 14, 2003 Notice of Filing Program Evaluations (docket no. 3745)? The 72A Rev.8/82) During the June 14 and 15, 2004 compliance hearing (hereafter referred compliance neanng (hereafter referred to as the ), the Proposed Compliance Plan was introduced into evidence as LRSDs In most respects, the Proposed Compliance Plan is identical to the final Compliance Plan approved by the Board on October 10, 2002. However, the Proposed Compliance Plan raises a number of questions about the meaning of subparts A and B of the Compliance Remedy. All of those questions were deleted from the final Compliance Plan approved by the Board on October 10,2002. As will be discussed later, LRSD did not bnng any any of those questions to my attention, or otherwise seek clarification of the requirements of the Exhibit No. 2. Compliance Remedy. -11-Compliance Plan recognized that, in order for LRSD to meet its obligations under the Compliance Remedy, it would have to satisfy three core obligations\n(1) develop a written procedure for evaluating the programs implemented pursuant to  2.7 to determine their effectiveness in improving the academic achievement of African-American students\n(2) maintain written records of the criteria used to evaluate each [ 2.7] program\nand (3) repare a comprehensive program evaluation of each academic program implemented pursuant to ...  2.7 to determine its effectiveness in improving the academic achievement of African-American students and to decide whether to modify or replace the program.'\" Id. at 3-5 (emphasis added). Significantly, there is nothing in the Compliance Plan adopted by the Board that suggests LRSD was confused about the meaning of any of the terms in the Compliance Remedy or any of its compliance obligations. Additionally, the Compliance Plan makes it clear that LRSD construed subpart A of the Compliance Remedy as requiring it to prepare a comprehensive program evaluation of each academic program implemented pursuant to .. .  2.7 . The Compliance Plan also included a detailed Action Plan Time Line that: (1) identified the LRSD employees who were responsible for implementing each activity necessaiy to satisfy the Compliance Remedy\nand (2) provided a schedule for completing each of those activities. Dr. Bonnie Lesley, the Associate Superintendent for Curriculum and Instmction, and Dr. Ken James, LRSD s Superintendent of Schools, were assigned personal responsibility for each of the twenty-eight (28) activities identified by the Action Plan Time Line. Id. at 7-10. Thus, It was up to Dr. Lesley and Dr. James to spearhead the timely implementation of all twenty- eight activities necessary to satisfy the Compliance Remedy. Finally, at the same time it approved the Compliance Plan, the Board also adopted -12- \\O72A Rev.e/82)Regulation IL-Rl, which set forth the written procedures for evaluating the programs implemented pursuant to  2.7 to determine their effectiveness in improving the academic achievement of African-American students. See Exhibit A at 2 (docket no. 3745).' According to the Compliance Plan, Regulation IL-Rl established the criteria for preparing the program evaluations necessary to satisfy LRSDs obligations under subparts A and B of the Compliance Remedy. On October 24,2002, the Board approved a Program Evaluation Agenda for the 2002- 03 school year that authorized the preparation of evaluations in three broad areas: (1) Elementary literacy\n(2) Secondary literacy\nand (3) the National Science Foundation (NSF) K-12 Math and Science Project. See LRSDs Exhibit No. 3\nODMs March 30, 2004 Report on LRSDs Implementation of the Courts Compliance Remedy at 4 (hereinafter referred to as the ODMs Compliance Report) (docket no. 3854). LRSD subsequently construed the 2002-03 Program Evaluation Agenda as requiring it to prepare only two  2.7.1 evaluations in order to satisfy its ! I I I i I i I obligations under subpart A of the Compliance Remedy: (1) I I a comprehensive Literacy Evaluation\nand (2) a comprehensive Math and Science Evaluation. Of course, Literacy and Math and Science are not programs they are broad I i ! I i I academic areas that roughly correspond to the grouping of college courses into Arts or Sciences. Because LRSD administrators, such as Dr. Lesley, had always constmed  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan as requiring LRSD to prepare evaluations of the key  2.7 programs implemented to improve African-American achievement, the Board should have been aware that I I I During the compliance hearing. Regulation IL-Rl was introduced into evidence Joshuas Exhibit No. 2. as I -13- AO72A (Rev.a/ea)they were beingtoo general in dividing the academic universe into Literacy and Math/Science and then preparing a global evaluation of each of those areas. Nevertheless, in its March 12,2004 Compliance Report (docket no. 3837), LRSD contends that these two  2.7.1 evaluations fully satisfy all of its obligations under subpart A of the Compliance Remedy/ C. Joshua Invokes Facilitation Provision of Revised Plan. On November 4, 2002, Ms. Ann Marshall, the Director of the ODM, wrote Joshuas counsel a letter confirming that she: (a) had received their November 1,2002 letter requesting that she facilitate the dispute that had arisen between Joshua and LRSD regarding the adequacy of LRSD s Compliance Plan\nand (b) was willing to facilitate that dispute.' I Thereafter, I was never contacted by Joshuas counsel or anyone else about the outcome of the ODMs facilitation efforts. Because subpart D of the Compliance Remedy obligated Joshuas counsel to contact me only if the facilitation was unsuccessful, I concluded from the parties silence (and the ODMs silence) that the ODM had successfully resolved this dispute. On November 6, 2002,1 wrote Ms. Marshall to reinforce the crucially important role I expected herto playmmomtoring LRSDs compliance withits obligations under the Compliance As I explain later in some detail, I was notmade aware ofLRSDsPropoW Compliance Plan and Regulation IL-Rl until two months after LRSD filed its March 12, 2004 Comphance Report. LRSD did not file the October 10,2002 Compliance Plan with the Court until March 14 2003.  I Section 8.2 of the Revised Plan required the parties to use the ODM to facilitate the resolution of any compliance issues. Since the words facilitation and facilitate come directly TT*r\\-m fkio \"D c\u0026amp;irt Din., T _____j.i____... from the Revised Plan, I will use them. A copy of Ms. Marshalls November 4,2002 letter, marked Exhibit A, is attached to this Memorandum Opinion. -14- ^O72A Rev.8/82)I Remedy?* The instructions to her were: It seems to me it would be best if you worked with the parties toward implementing the remedies\nbut you should feel free to contact me in writing if a serious impasse develops. In other words, as long as everything is going along smoothly, I see no reason for you to make regular reports to me in this respect. - J. -------------- A wuywi. I emphasize, however, that you should feel free to call on me if serious problems anse. Neither the parties nor the ODM ever contacted me to request that I become involved in resolving any compliance disputes or other serious impasses between LRSD and Joshua, despite the requirement for such contact by subpart D of the Compliance Remedy and my November 6,2002 letter. D. The Six Completed or Substantially Completed Page 148 Evaluations. The September 13 Decision stated that the Court will accept all program evaluations that have already been completed by Dr. Nunnery or someone with similar qualifications and approved by the Board. LRSD, 273 F. Supp. 2d at 1088. By the time I entered that decision, LRSD had completed or substantially completed six of the fourteen Page 148 Evaluations. These SIX evaluations covered the following programs\n(1) Pre-K-3 Literacy\n(2) NSF Math and Science Project\n(3) Charter Schools\n(4) English as a Second Language\n(5) SEDL*^ Program at Southwest Middle School\nand (6) Collaborative Action Team Project. By December 31,2002, LRSDs Board had approved all six of these Page 148 Evaluations. II A copy of my November 6, 2002 letter, marked Exhibit B, is attached to this Memorandum Opinion. ^SEDL is an acronym for Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. ODMs Compliance Report at 8 (docket no. 3854). See -15- AO72A (Rev.8/82)E. The Eight Remaining Page 148 Evaluations. LRSD contracted with Dr. Steven Ross, a program evaluation expert and a member of the faculty at the University of Memphis, to prepare guidelines for completing or revising the eight remaining evaluations.'^ These eight evaluations covered the following programs\n(1) Middle Schools\n(2) Extended Year Schools\n(3) HIPPY\n'\"* (4) Campus Leadership Teams\n(5) Summer School - Elementary\n(6) Lyceum Scholars Program\n(7) Onward to Excellence - Watson Elementary\nand (8) Vital Link. In late November of 2002, Dr. Ross prepared a document captioned Guidelines for Completing Eight Program Evaluations in the LRSD.'^ On January 10,2003, LRSD contracted with Dr. Ross and two other program evaluation experts. Dr. William Moore and Dr. Larry McNeal, to prepare these eight program evaluations. Dr. Ross prepared or completed evaluations I on Vital Link, Onward to Excellence, HIPPY, and Campus Leadership Teams\nDr. Moore prepared or completed evaluations on Middle School Transition and Extended Year Education- and Dr. McNeal completed evaluations on Lyceum Scholars and Elementary Summer School. j On March 14,2003, LRSD filed all fourteen ofthe Page 148 Evaluations with the Court, as required by subpart C of the Compliance Remedy. See LRSDs Notice of Filing Program Evaluations (docket no. 3745). The six evaluations, which were substantially completed as of 1 t I 'A number of years ago, Joshua formally agreed that Dr. Ross has the qnalificatinns necessary to prepare program evaluations. 'hippy is an acronym for Home Instruction for Parents of Preschool Youngsters. See ODMs Compliance Report (docket no. 3854) at 8. '^During the compliance hearing, this document was introduced as LRSDs Exhibit No. 5. -16- ^O72A flev.e/82)September 13, 2002, are bound together in Volumes I and II. The remaining eight Page 148 Evaluations are bound together in Volumes HI and IV. On April 14,2003, Joshua filed Comments on the Submission of Page 148 Evaluations. (Docket no. 3752.) These comments identify and discuss numerous alleged deficiencies, most of which are contained in the eight Page 148 Evaluations that the Board after January 1, 2003. were completed and approved by F. Dr. Lesley and Dr. James Resign. On March 14, 2003, the same day LRSD filed the fourteen Page 148 Evaluations, Dr. Lesley, who was responsible for overseeing the preparation of those evaluations, resigned. and, two months later. Dr. Janies, LRSDs Superintendent, also resigned. As indicated ( ) previously, LRSDs Compliance Plan had assigned Dr. Lesley and Dr. James direct responsibility for each of the twenty-eight time line activities necessary for LRSD to implement the Compliance '^During the compliance hearing, these fourteen program evaluations were introduced as LRSDs Exhibit No. 13. During its implementation of the Revised Plan in 1998 through early 2001, LRSD originally intended to use its own Department of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) I to prepare the fourteen Page 148 Evaluations. Dr. Kathy Lease was the Assistant Superintendent who headed PRE and reported to Dr. Lesley. See ODMs Compliance Report at 2. According to Dr. Lesley s testimony during the November 2001 hearings on unitary status. Dr. Lease dropped the ball in preparing these evaluations, which resulted in only a few partially completed and woefully inadequate evaluations being available on March 15,2001, the deadline for LRSD to file its Compliance Report seeking unitary status. Additionally, Dr. Lesley testified that, in her opimon, no one in PRE-including Dr. Lease-had the expertise to prepare program evaluations. See LRSD, 237 F. Supp. 2d at 1077-81. I In early 2001, Dr. Lease resigned and left LRSD for other job opportunities. Since that time, PRE has functioned with only a statistician and several support employees, but no one was hired to replace Dr. Lease or take over and operate the department. In November of2003, LRSD appointed the statistician as the acting head of PRE. As a result, since Dr. Leases departure in early 2001, LRSD has essentially functioned without a meaningful Department of Planning, Research, and Evaluation. See ODMs Compliance Report at 6. -17- KO72A Rev.B/82)Remedy. i Thus, less than a year after the September 13 Decision, LRSD lost both of the crucially important leaders to whom all responsibility had been assigned for implementing LRSDs Compliance Plan. Both Dr. James and Dr. Lesley had been deeply involved for years in LRSDs implementation of its desegregation obligations under the Revised Plan, and both were thoroughly familiar with the intricacies of satisfying judicially imposed desegregation obligations. The almost simultaneous departures of Dr. James and Dr. Lesley during the early stages ofLRSDs implementation of its Compliance Plan clearly created problems for LRSD in its compliance efforts. In the ODMs Compliance Report, the authors observe that the loss of Dr. Lesley and Dr. James at a crucial time in the implementation ofLRSDs Compliance Plan, and the delays and difficulties LRSD encountered in filling those positions with acting or interim employees created a period of some uncertainty for LRSD. Id. at 5. In June of2003, LRSD appointed an Interim Superintendent to replace Dr. James. Later that month, on June 26, 2003, Mr. Dennis Glasgow, who previously had been the Director of i I LRSDs Math and Science Department, was appointed to succeed Dr. Lesley as Interim Associate Superintendent of Instruction and Curriculum. According to the Compliance Plans Action Plan Time Line, Mr. Glasgow originally was assigned responsibility for only two of the twenty-eight time line activities. Although it was not mentioned in LRSDs Compliance Report (docket no. 3837), during the recent compliance hearing, Mr. Glasgow testified that, on March 18,2003, he assumed responsibility for all of Dr. Lesleys twenty-eight activities under the Compliance Plan. In August of 2003, after the Interim Superintendent, hired only three months earlier, left that position, LRSD hired Dr. Morris Holmes as the second Interim Superintendent. Dr. Holmes -18- AO72A (Rev.a/82)has continued to serve as Interim Superintendent through the date of this Memorandum Opinion 18 LRSDs Compliance Report does not address what role, if any. Dr. Holmes had in implementing the Compliance Plan. It seems that Dr. Holmes or someone else should have been assigned I responsibility for the twenty-eight time line activities that had been assigned to Dr. James in the October 10, 2002 Compliance Plan\nbut the Compliance Report is silent on this point. G. LRSD Files Its Compliance Report Seeking Release from Court Supervision. When LRSD filed its Compliance Report (docket no. 3837) on March 12,2004, IQ  it was supported by documents attached to it as Exhibits A through G. According to LRSD, the documents attached to the Compliance Report establish that it has substantially complied with the Compliance Remedy and is entitled to be released from all fiirther court supervision and monitoring. A careful reading of the Compliance Report reveals a number of revelations that cast LRSDs efforts in a less than favorable light. First, the Report states that: (a) in October of2002, less than sixty days after the Courts September 13 Decision, Joshuas counsel raised concerns about the Board-approved Compliance Plan\n(b) subsequently, Joshuas counsel invoked the Process for Raising Compliance Issues set forth in Revised Plan 8.2\" and [the parties] met with Ms. Ann Marshall to facilitate .5, an agreement\nand (c) the parties last such meeting with Ms. Marshall was on February 28,2003, but the parties failed to reach an agreement on Joshuas or 'On June 11,2004, the Board announced that it hired Mr. Roy Gregory Brooks to serve as LRSDs new Superintendent of Schools. It is my understanding that sometime in July August Mr. Brooks will assume his new duties as Superintendent. During the compliance hearing, this document was introduced into evidence as LRSDs Eichibit No. 14. -19- AO72A (Rev.B/82)( AO72A (Rev.e/82) objections to the adequacy of the Compliance Plan. See Comphance Report (docket no. 3837) at 1-2. Thus, LRSDs March 12, 2004 Compliance Report constituted my first notice that Ms. Marshalls facilitation efforts in late 2002 had failed-neither the parties nor the ODM brought this to my attention, although they were required to do so by subpart D ofthe Compliance Remedy and by my November 6, 2002 letter to Ms. Marshall Second, LRSD contends that, by failing to bring the parties disagreement over the Comphance Plan to the Courts attention, Joshua waived any objections to the Board-approved Compliance Plan. Id. at 1-2. As I explained earlier, the sole purpose of subpart D ofthe Compliance Remedy was to require the parties to bring potential compliance problems to my attention. as soon as they arose, so that I could resolve them early enough to prevent them fi-om becoming stumbling blocks to LRSDs compliance with its obligations under the other subparts ofthe Compliance Remedy. After the ODMs facilitation efforts failed, it must have soon become obvious to LRSDs counsel and the ODM that Joshuas counsel was not going to notify the Court. It seems to me that, at this point, both LRSD and ODM should have realized that it was in LRSDs best interest to let me determine, in March of 2003-while there was still time to do something about it~if the compliance issues raised by Joshua had merit. In a school desegregation case that has its origins in the infamous 195 7 Little Rock school desegregation crisis, no court is likely to hold the silence of Joshuas counsel-even if they are to be cnticized-against the Aftican-American students they represent, and who now fill almost 70% of the total number of seats in LRSDs classrooms. I believe I would be ill advised to adopt waiver as a way to avoid reaching the merits of the adequacy of the board-approved -20- i I I I iCompliance Plan. In other words, I find that it would be inappropriate for me to default approximately 17,000 LRSD students. Third, LRSD acknowledges in the Compliance Report (docket no. 3837) that it was required to do two things to satisfy the core obligations imposed by subparts A and B of the Compliance Remedy: (1) develop written procedures for evaluating the programs implemented pursuant to  2.7 of the Revised Plan to determine their effectiveness in improving the academic achievement of African-American students\nand (2) prepare a comprehensive program evaluation of each academic program implemented pursuant to  2.7 of the Revised Plan to determine its effectiveness in improving the academic achievement of African-American students and to decide whether to modify or replace the program. See Compliance Report at page 2, paragraph 4 (docket no. 3837\nLRSDs Exhibit No. 14) (emphasis added). To satisfy this first core obligation, which is contained in subpart B of the Compliance Remedy, the Compliance Report states that the Board adopted Regulation IL-Rl. As indicated previously, the Board adopted Regulation IL-Rl on October 10,2002. But, LRSD did not make I this key Regulation an Exhibit to either its March 14,2003 Notice of Filing Evaluations Pursuant to Paragraph C of the Compliance Remedy (docket no. 3745) or its March 12,2004 Compliance Report (docket no. 3837). On May 12, 2004, after I had been unable to locate this document anywhere in the record, I entered an Order (docket no. 3864) requiring that LRSD provide a copy I of Regulation IL-Rl. The next day, LRSD filed its Response (docket no. 3865), which attached I Regulation IL-Rl as Appendix 1 to Exhibit A of that document. Regulation IL-Rl contained the following procedures that were to be followed in preparing all future  2.7.1 program evaluations: 1 -21- AO72A (Rev.8/82)I i (1) Write a clear description of the curriculum/instruction program that is to be evaluated, with information about the schedule of its implementation. (2) Agree on the necessary research questions that need to be established in addition to the question: Has this curriculum/instruction program been effective in improving and remediating the academic achievement of African-American students? (3) If program modifications are suggested, the steps that the staff members have taken or will take to implement those modifications. If abandonment of the program is recommended, the steps that will be taken to replace the program with another program with more potential for the improvement and remediation of AO 72A (Rev.8/82) I II I I I (4) (5) Afiican-American students. (See  2.7.1 of the Revised Designation and Education Plan and Judge Wilsons Compliance Remedy.) Plan ways to provide regular progress reports (e.g. dissemination of meeting minutes, written progress reports, oral reports to Superintendent\nCabinet and/or Compliance Team) to stakeholders, including the Associate Superintendent for Instruction, the Superintendent of Schools, the ODM (until Unitary Status is achieved) and the Joshua Intervenors (until Unitary Status is achieved). \u0026gt;5 The team preparing the program evaluations had to meet to monitor the completion of assignments\nto review drafts and provide feedback to the writer\nand to formulate recommendations ... for program improvement, especially to decide if a recommendation is required to modify or abandon the program if the findings reveal that the program is not being successful for the -22-I improvement of Afiican-American achievement. (6) (7) (8) A final draft of the program evaluation had to be submitted to the Associate Superintendent for Instruction at least one month before placing the report on the Boards agenda for review and approval. After the program evaluation was approved by the Board, a copy of the complete report had to be made available to the ODM and Joshua Intervenors (until Unitary Status is achieved). Each program evaluation team shall meet with the Associate Superintendent for Instruction after the completion of the work to evaluate the process and product and to make recommendations for future program evaluation. See Regulation IL-RI at 3-7 (emphasis added). In paragraph 8 of the Compliance Report, LRSD states that it satisfied the second core obligation specified in subpart A of the Compliance Remedy, by doing the following things: (1) (2) Dr. Steve Ross was hired to prepare evaluations of the Districts elementary and secondary literacy programs. Ultimately, Dr. Ross authored the global Literacy Evaluation, which the Board approved in November of2003. See Exhibit F to Compliance Report (docket no. 3837).^ Dr. Don Wold, a retired member of the faculty at UALR, authored the global Math and Science Evaluation, which covered the overall math and science curricula (grades K-12) that LRSD had implemented with the grant it received ^As indicated previously, during the compliance hearing, the Compliance Report was introduced into evidence as LRSDs Exhibit No. 14. -23- AO72A (Rev.S/82)from the NSF. The Board approved this evaluation in December 2003. See Exhibit G to Compliance Report (docket no. 3837). According to the Compliance Report, these two global evaluations satisfy all of LRSDs obligations under subpart A ofthe Compliance Remedy and constitute substantial compliance with the obligations contained in  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan. Ominously, the Compliance Report says nothing about whether these two evaluations complied with the mandatory requirements of Regulation IL-Rl. H. The ODMs Compliance Report on LRSDs Implementation ofthe Compliance Remedy. On March 30, 2004, the ODM filed its Compliance Report (docket no. 3854)^ commenting on various aspects of LRSDs implementation of the Compliance Remedy. The first four pages of the ODMs Compliance Report re-plow the now largely irrelevant events related to LRSDs earlier compliance efforts under the Revised Plan.\"- The remaining nineteen pages of the Compliance Report contain Findings and Conclusions that, for the most part, criticize LRSDs compliance efforts. Among the more significant Findings and Conclusions in the ODMs Compliance Report are the following: . (1) As of September 13,2002, the date the Court imposed the Compliance Remedy, LRSD had implemented at leastforty-six programs designed to improve African- I During the compliance hearing, the ODMs Compliance Report was introduced into evidence as LRSDs Exhibit No. 15. -\"The September 13 Decision addressed in detail all of the events described in these four pages ofthe ODMs Compliance Report. -24- ^0 72A Rev.8/82)I American achievement under  2.7 of the Revised Plan?\" Id. at 10. I AO72A (Rev.8/82) (2) (3) (4) The ODM had difficulty getting LRSD administrators to identify the specific  2.7 programs that would be evaluated under  2.7.1 of the Revised Plan. LRSD administrators finally acknowledged to the ODM that the program evaluation agenda for the 2002-03 school year would include only elementary literacy, secondary literacy, and the NSF math and science project. LRSD administrators never explained to the ODM which  2.7 programs would be covered in the literacy and math and science evaluations. Id. at 12. While the Compliance Remedy directed LRSD to use all available testing data in assessing the effectiveness of the  2.7 programs, LRSD only did so in the Evaluation of the Math and Science Programs. (Exhibit G to LRSDs Compliance Report.) In the Literacy Program Evaluation (Exhibit F to LRSDs Compliance Report), LRSD limited the testing data to the SAT9 and the benchmark literacy exams. Id. at 14. Subpart B of the Compliance Remedy required LRSD to maintain written records reflecting the results of the annual assessments of each program, including whether the assessments resulted in program modifications or the elimination of programs. LRSD, 237 F. Supp. 2d at 1087-88. The ODM concluded that, while Exhibit C to LRSDs Compliance Report describes the annual program modifications for elementary and secondary literacy and math, there is no ^During the compliance hearing, LRSD witnesses correctly pointed out that the chart on page 10 of the ODMs Compliance Report was flawed. Among other things, a number of programs are listed twice, and some of the things that are listed as programs are not. -25-( AO 72A (Rev.8/82) (5) (6) (7) discussion of annual program modifications for science.^'* Id. at 15. The ODMs Compliance Report noted numerous shortcomings in the Literacy Program Evaluation. Id. at 1677. However, the most serious criticism was that the evaluation draws no conclusions about the extent to which student performance might be affected by program components, such as Reading Recovery or Accelerated Reader, nor does it correlate any teaching practices with student achievement. Id. at 18. The ODMs most serious criticism of the Math and Science Evaluation was that it does not offer data relative to the level of uniformity of program implementation and does not identify which  2.7 programs most directly improved the academic achievement of African-American students in math and science courses. Id. at 19. By the time the Court entered its September 13 Decision, six of the fourteen Page 148 Evaluations had already been completed or substantially completed by outside consultants. Subpart C of the Compliance Remedy provided that the Court will accept all program evaluations that have already been completed by Dr. Nunnery or someone with similar qualifications and approved by the Board. Between October 24, 2002, and December 19,2002, the Board voted to approve these six evaluations which covered the following programs: (a) Pre K-3 Literacy\n(b) NSF Math and Science\n(c) Charter School\n(d) English as a Second Language\n(e) 2'Although not mentioned in the ODMs Compliance Report, Exhibit C also fails to discuss the reasons for making each of the modifications in the math and literacy programs, or and how those modifications were expected to improve the effectiveness of those programs. -26-SEDL Program.- Southwest Middle School\nand (f) Collaborative Action Team. The ODMs Compliance Report does not contain any significant criticism of these six evaluations. Id. at 20. (8) (9) As of September 13,2002, eight ofthe Page 148 Evaluations still remained to be prepared. Under subpart C of the Compliance Remedy, LRSD was obligated to hire outside consultants to prepare those eight evaluations and the\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":325,"next_page":326,"prev_page":324,"total_pages":6797,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":3888,"total_count":81557,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"educator_resource_mediums_sms","items":[{"value":"lesson plans","hits":319},{"value":"teaching guides","hits":53},{"value":"timelines (chronologies)","hits":43},{"value":"online exhibitions","hits":38},{"value":"bibliographies","hits":15},{"value":"study guides","hits":11},{"value":"annotated bibliographies","hits":9},{"value":"learning modules","hits":6},{"value":"worksheets","hits":6},{"value":"slide shows","hits":4},{"value":"quizzes","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":40428},{"value":"StillImage","hits":35298},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":4529},{"value":"Sound","hits":3226},{"value":"Collection","hits":41},{"value":"InteractiveResource","hits":25}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Peppler, Jim","hits":4965},{"value":"Phay, John E.","hits":4712},{"value":"University of Mississippi. Bureau of Educational Research","hits":4707},{"value":"Baldowski, Clifford H., 1917-1999","hits":2599},{"value":"Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission","hits":2255},{"value":"Thurmond, Strom, 1902-2003","hits":2077},{"value":"WSB-TV (Television station : Atlanta, Ga.)","hits":1475},{"value":"Newman, I. DeQuincey (Isaiah DeQuincey), 1911-1985","hits":1003},{"value":"The State Media Company (Columbia, S.C.)","hits":926},{"value":"Atlanta Journal-Constitution","hits":844},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":778}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"African Americans--Civil rights","hits":9445},{"value":"Civil rights","hits":8328},{"value":"African Americans","hits":5912},{"value":"Mississippi--Race relations","hits":5750},{"value":"Race relations","hits":5604},{"value":"Education, Secondary","hits":5083},{"value":"Education, Elementary","hits":4729},{"value":"Segregation in education--Mississippi","hits":4727},{"value":"Education--Pictorial works","hits":4707},{"value":"Civil rights demonstrations","hits":4440},{"value":"Civil rights workers","hits":3536}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966--Correspondence","hits":1888},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1815},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1709},{"value":"Baker, Augusta, 1911-1998","hits":1495},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1312},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1071},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":858},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":814},{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":719},{"value":"Mizell, M. Hayes","hits":674},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":626}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"name_authoritative_sms","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":2598},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1915},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1704},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1331},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1070},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":856},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":806},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":625},{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":605},{"value":"Snelling, Paula","hits":580},{"value":"Williams, Hosea, 1926-2000","hits":440}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":1769},{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":1670},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":969},{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":853},{"value":"Memphis Sanitation Workers Strike","hits":366},{"value":"Selma-Montgomery March","hits":337},{"value":"Freedom Summer","hits":306},{"value":"Freedom Rides","hits":214},{"value":"Poor People's Campaign","hits":180},{"value":"University of Georgia Integration","hits":173},{"value":"University of Alabama Integration","hits":140}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":17987},{"value":"United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","hits":5437},{"value":"United States, Alabama, Montgomery County, Montgomery, 32.36681, -86.29997","hits":5151},{"value":"United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","hits":4847},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":4599},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":4328},{"value":"United States, Alabama, 32.75041, -86.75026","hits":3948},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":2910},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":2580},{"value":"United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898","hits":2580},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":2536}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Georgia","hits":12823},{"value":"Alabama","hits":11313},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":10220},{"value":"South Carolina","hits":8493},{"value":"Arkansas","hits":4733},{"value":"Texas","hits":4399},{"value":"Tennessee","hits":3786},{"value":"Florida","hits":2602},{"value":"Ohio","hits":2403},{"value":"North Carolina","hits":1875},{"value":"New York","hits":1840}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1966","hits":10632},{"value":"1963","hits":10287},{"value":"1965","hits":10218},{"value":"1956","hits":9840},{"value":"1955","hits":9619},{"value":"1964","hits":9365},{"value":"1968","hits":9345},{"value":"1962","hits":9247},{"value":"1967","hits":8897},{"value":"1957","hits":8523},{"value":"1961","hits":8282},{"value":"1958","hits":8259},{"value":"1959","hits":8061},{"value":"1960","hits":7948},{"value":"1969","hits":7348},{"value":"1954","hits":7240},{"value":"1950","hits":7118},{"value":"1953","hits":6969},{"value":"1970","hits":6835},{"value":"1971","hits":6425},{"value":"1977","hits":6367},{"value":"1972","hits":6254},{"value":"1952","hits":6162},{"value":"1951","hits":6046},{"value":"1975","hits":5894},{"value":"1976","hits":5863},{"value":"1974","hits":5849},{"value":"1973","hits":5689},{"value":"1979","hits":5416},{"value":"1978","hits":5405},{"value":"1980","hits":5366},{"value":"1995","hits":4885},{"value":"1981","hits":4811},{"value":"1994","hits":4704},{"value":"1948","hits":4597},{"value":"1949","hits":4573},{"value":"1996","hits":4542},{"value":"1982","hits":4417},{"value":"1947","hits":4317},{"value":"1985","hits":4313},{"value":"1998","hits":4281},{"value":"1983","hits":4261},{"value":"1997","hits":4258},{"value":"1984","hits":4152},{"value":"1999","hits":4074},{"value":"1946","hits":4047},{"value":"1945","hits":4018},{"value":"1986","hits":4006},{"value":"1990","hits":3988},{"value":"1943","hits":3900},{"value":"1944","hits":3896},{"value":"2000","hits":3894},{"value":"2001","hits":3876},{"value":"1942","hits":3868},{"value":"1940","hits":3765},{"value":"1941","hits":3758},{"value":"1987","hits":3744},{"value":"2002","hits":3624},{"value":"1991","hits":3553},{"value":"1936","hits":3507},{"value":"1939","hits":3501},{"value":"1992","hits":3500},{"value":"2003","hits":3489},{"value":"1993","hits":3478},{"value":"1938","hits":3466},{"value":"1937","hits":3450},{"value":"1989","hits":3441},{"value":"1930","hits":3378},{"value":"1988","hits":3355},{"value":"1935","hits":3307},{"value":"1933","hits":3271},{"value":"1934","hits":3271},{"value":"1932","hits":3255},{"value":"1931","hits":3240},{"value":"2005","hits":3143},{"value":"2004","hits":2995},{"value":"2006","hits":2860},{"value":"1929","hits":2790},{"value":"1928","hits":2272},{"value":"1921","hits":2124},{"value":"1925","hits":2040},{"value":"1927","hits":2026},{"value":"1924","hits":2012},{"value":"2016","hits":2011},{"value":"1926","hits":2010},{"value":"1920","hits":1976},{"value":"1923","hits":1955},{"value":"1922","hits":1929},{"value":"2007","hits":1715},{"value":"2008","hits":1664},{"value":"2011","hits":1661},{"value":"2009","hits":1624},{"value":"2019","hits":1623},{"value":"2015","hits":1613},{"value":"2013","hits":1604},{"value":"2010","hits":1601},{"value":"2014","hits":1567},{"value":"2012","hits":1553},{"value":"1919","hits":1533},{"value":"1918","hits":1531}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"0193","max":"2035","count":506439,"missing":56},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"photographs","hits":10710},{"value":"correspondence","hits":9628},{"value":"black-and-white photographs","hits":7678},{"value":"negatives (photographs)","hits":7513},{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":4462},{"value":"letters (correspondence)","hits":3623},{"value":"oral histories (literary works)","hits":3607},{"value":"black-and-white negatives","hits":2771},{"value":"editorial cartoons","hits":2620},{"value":"newspapers","hits":1955},{"value":"manuscripts (documents)","hits":1692}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/","hits":41201},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":17721},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":8830},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":7090},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/","hits":2186},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/","hits":1778},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-CR/1.0/","hits":1115},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/","hits":145},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/","hits":60},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-RUU/1.0/","hits":51},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/","hits":27}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Jim Peppler Southern Courier Photograph Collection","hits":4956},{"value":"John E. Phay Collection ","hits":4706},{"value":"John J. Herrera Papers","hits":3288},{"value":"Baldy Editorial Cartoons, 1946-1982, 1997: Clifford H. Baldowski Editorial Cartoons at the Richard B. Russell Library.","hits":2607},{"value":"Sovereignty Commission Online","hits":2335},{"value":"Strom Thurmond Collection, Mss 100","hits":2068},{"value":"Alabama Media Group Collection","hits":2067},{"value":"Black Trailblazers, Leaders, Activists, and Intellectuals in Cleveland","hits":2033},{"value":"Rosa Parks Papers","hits":1948},{"value":"Isaiah DeQuincey Newman, (1911-1985), Papers, 1929-2003","hits":1904},{"value":"Lillian Eugenia Smith Papers (circa 1920-1980)","hits":1887}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"John Davis Williams Library. Department of Archives and Special Collections","hits":8885},{"value":"Alabama. Department of Archives and History","hits":8153},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":4251},{"value":"Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library","hits":4102},{"value":"University of North Texas. Libraries","hits":3854},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":3438},{"value":"Hargrett Library","hits":3292},{"value":"Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies","hits":2874},{"value":"Mississippi. Department of Archives and History","hits":2825},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":2785},{"value":"Rhodes College","hits":2264}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":81102},{"value":"Collection","hits":455}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":81360},{"value":"true","hits":197}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}