{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1639","title":"Court of Appeals, appellant Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) appendix","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit"],"dc_date":["1996-07-19"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","Joshua Intervenors"],"dcterms_title":["Court of Appeals, appellant Little Rock School District's (LRSD's) appendix"],"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/1639"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["154 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  I I I I IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2047EALR LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT R ,JIii_ 1 ~ 1996 Office of Desegregation Monitoring APPELLANT I v. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SERVICEMASTER MANAGEMENT SERVICES APPELLEE Appeal From The United States District Court For the Eastern District of Arkansas Western Division Honorable Susan Webber Wright, District Judge APPELLANT LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT'S APPENDIX Christopher Heller John c. Fendley, Jr. Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 376-2011 Attorneys for Little Rock School District I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2047EALR LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. SERVICEMASTER MANAGEMENT SERVICES Appeal From The United States District Court For the Eastern District of Arkansas Western Division Honorable Susan Webber Wright, District Judge APPELLANT APPELLEE APPELLANT LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT'S APPENDIX Christopher Heller John c. Fendley, Jr. Friday, Eldredge \u0026 Clark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 376-2011 Attorneys for Little Rock School District 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I XNDEX TO APPENDXX Relevant Docket Entries . . . . . . . . i Motion To Enjoin The LRSD From Entering Into A Service Contract Without Following Bidding Procedures, Requests For Information And Without Prior Involvement of The Joshua Intervenors ......... . Brief In Support of Motion To enjoin The LRSD From Entering Into A Service Contract Without Following Bidding Procedures, Requests For Information And Without Prior Involvement of The Joshua Intervenors. Motion For Order of Dismissal ..... Brief In Support of Motion For Order of Dismissal order, December 11, 1995 The Joshua Intervenors' Opposition To The LRSD's Motion For An Order of Dismissal Memorandum and Order, March 11, 1996 ex 359 - LRSD Management Services Agreement With Servicemaster . . . . . . . . . . . . ex 364 - Opinion No. 95-294 .. CX 373 - Purported Settlement Between LRSD And Servicemaster . . . . . . . . . . ex 374 - Joshua Acceptance of Settlement . . . . 1 . . . . . 4 34 38 44 50 58 69 192 . . . 197 . 206 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8/31/95 2503 NOTICE of filing of LRSD's Program Planning and Budgeting Process (vjt) [Entry date 09/01/95) [4:82cv866] 8/31/95 2504 NOTICE of filing of LRSD's 1995-96 Budget/August Project Management Tool (vjt) (Entry date 09/01/95) [4:82cv866] 8/31/95 2505 NOTICE of filing of LRSD's 1996-97 Budget/August Project Management Tool (vjt) (Entry date 09 /01/95) ( 4: 82cv866) 8/31/95 2506: MOTION by Joshua to enjoin the LRSD from entering into. a service contract without following bidding procedures, requests for information and without prior involvement of the Joshua Intervenors (vjt) [Entry date 09/01/95) (4:82cv866] 9/1/95 2507 CLERK'S MINUTES: DAY THREE of hearings resumes w/Court taking up LRSD; after witness testimony and exhibits received, court instructs Joshua and Knight to file request for hearing to rebuts w/i 10 days and outline areas in which they want evidence presented; hearing will then be set; court adjourns (Waunzell Petre, court reporter) ( sc) [ 4 : 8 2 cv8 6 6 ) 9/1/95 2508 NOTICE of filing of exhibits (335-342) in open court (vjt) [Entry date 09/05/95) [4:82cv866] 9/5/95 2509 LETTER to court from PCSSD re their submission on the pooling issues (vjt) [Entry date 09/06/95) (4:82cv866) 9/5/95 2510 NOTICE of filing of PCSSD Submission Regarding \"Pooling\" Issues (vjt) [Entry date 09/06/95) (4:82cv866] 9/5/95 2511 NOTICE of filing of LRSD Pre-Trial Information Concerning Pooling of M-to-M Funds (vjt) (Entry date 09/06/95) [4:82cv866] 9/7/95 2512 SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION by LRSD to release incentive school kindergarten seats and four-year-old program seats (vjt) (4:82cv866) 9/7/95 2513 ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright granting LRSD's motions to release incentive school kindergarten seats and four-year-old program seats (2469-1) [2512-1) (cc: all counsel) EOD 9/7/95 (vjt) (4:82cv866] 9/7/95 2514- RESPONSE by LRSD to Joshua's motion to enjoin the LRSD from entering into a service contract without i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 9/7/95 9/8/95 9/8/95 9/8/95 9/8/95 9/14/95 9/14/95 9/15/95 9/15/95 9/15/95 9/18/95 following bidding procedures, requests for information and without prior involvement of the Joshua Intervenors [2506-1) (vjt) [Entry date 09/08/95) [ 4: 82cv866 J 2515 RESPONSE by PCSSD to LRSD pretrial information concerning pooling of m-to-m funds [2511-1) (vjt) [Entry date 09/08/95] [4:82cv866) 2516 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of Budget Hearing before the Honorable Judge Susan Webber Wright on 8/1/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866] 2517 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of Budget Hearing before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright on 8/2/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866) 2518 CLERK'S MINUTES: HEARING before Judge Susan W. Wright re: M-M pooling as ordered by 8th Circuit on remand; PCSSD puts on evidence, calls Dr. Don Stewart to testify; exhibits received; hearings to continue at a later date (Debbie Petre, court reporter) (sc) [4:82cv866] 2519 NOTICE of filing of exhibits (343-358) by PCSSD and LRsD in open court (vjt) [Entry date 09/11/95) [4:82cv866] 2520 MOTION by PCSSD to clarify the PCSSD Desegregation Plan (vjt) [Entry date 09/15/95) (4:82cv866) 2521 SPECIAL STATUS REPORT of the PCSSD concerning its affirmative action transfer procedure (vjt) [Entry date 09/15/95) [4:82cv866] 2522 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of hrg before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright on 8/28/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866) 2523 ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright granting PCSSD's motion to improve racial balance at Pine Forest Elementary School [2494-1) (cc: all counsel) EOD 9/15/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866) 2524 STATUS REPORT by ODM on Staffing: Elementary Classroom Teachers in the LRSD, NLRSD and PCSSD (vjt) [ 4: 82cv866) 2525 ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright granting motion for partial release from court supervision (2486-1); the North Little Rock School District is hereby released from Court supervision on student assignments (cc: all counsel) (EOD 09/18/95) (jad) (4:82cv866) ii I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 9/19/95 2526 NOTICE of filing by Joshua of response to the districts' motions for release of court supervision re the respective settlement plans (vjt) [Entry date 09/20/95) [4:82cv866] 9/20/95 2527 NOTICE by ODM of filing Replacement of Portable Classroom Buildings in the PCSSD {vjt) [Entry date 09 /21/95) [ 4: 82cv866) 9/22/95 2s2s{aRIEF by Joshua in support of motion to enjoin the LRSD from entering into a service contract without following bidding procedures, requests for information and without prior involvement of the Joshua Intervenors (2506-1) (vjt) [4:82cv866] 9/26/95 2529 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright re M-to-M Pooling, the hrg from 9/8/95 is scheduled to continue on Saturday, 10/28/95 from 9:00 am until noon and thereafter to continue on December 14th, 15th, 1995 at 9:00 am if necessary; a hrg is scheduled to begin Monday, 2/12/96 at 9:00 am re court withdrawal from certain aspects of the plan (cc: all counsel) (vjt) [Entry date 09/27/95) [4:8;acv866) 9/26/95 2530 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright finding Joshua's motions for temporary restraining order, for preliminary injunction and to cite the LRSD for contempt of court moot [2477-1] [2477-2) [2477-3] (cc: all counsel) (vjt) [Entry date 09/27/95) [4:82cv866] 9/27/95 2531 NOTICE of filing of the Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study Executive Summary and the Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study Demographic Survey (vjt) [Entry date 09/28/95) [4:82cv866] 9/28/95 2532 NOTICE of filing of LRSD's 1996-97 Budget/September Project Management Tool (vjt) [4:82cv866) 9/29/95 2533 NOTICE of filing of ADE's Project Management Tool (vjt) [4:82cv866] 9/29/95 2534 MOTION by Joshua for extension of time to file petition for fees and costs (vjt) [4:82cv866] 10/6/95 2535 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of hrg before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright on 6/23/95 (vjt) [Entry date 10/10/95] [4:82cv866] iii I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10/6/95 10/6/95 10/6/95 10/6/95 2536 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of hrg before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright on 7/7/95 (vjt) [Entry date 10/10/95] [4:82cv866] 2537 LETTER to court from PCSSD re replacement of portables at Sylvan Hills High School and Elementary School and Robinson Elementary School (vjt) [Entry date 10/10/95] [4:82cv866] 2538 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright granting PCSSD's motion for permission to replace portables at certain schools [2429-1]; the PCSSD is reminded that under the Plan, all school construction is subject to prior approval by this Court (cc: all counsel) (vjt) [Entry date 10/10/95] [4:82cv866] 2539 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright granting Joshua's motion for extension of time until 11/15/95 to file petition for fees and costs [2534-1] (cc: all counsel) (vjt) [Entry date 10/10/95] [4:82cv866] 10/24/95 2540 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of proceedings on 8/30/95 before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright (vjt) [4:82cv866] 10/24/95 2541 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of proceedings on 8/31/95 before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright (vjt) [4:82cv866] 10/24/95 2542 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of proceedings on 9/1/95 before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright (vjt) [4:82cv866] 10/24/95 2543 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of proceedings on 9/8/95 before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright (vjt) [4:82cv866] 10/25/95 2544 MOTION by Joshua for the Court to set forth in detail the continuing obligations of the Little Rock School defts under the desegregation plan with respect to faculty and staff desegregation (vjt) [Entry date 10/26/95] [4:82cv866] 10/25/95 2545 MEMORANDUM by Joshua in support of motion regarding faculty and staff assignment practices [2544-1] (vjt) [Entry date 10/26/95] [4:82cv866] 10/26/95 2546 SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION by deft Pulaski Cty School for order regarding portable buildings (kayp) [Entry date 10/27/95] [Edit date 10/27/95] [4:82cv866] 10/27/95 2547 MOTION by ServiceMaster for leave to intervene (vjt) [Entry date 10/30/95] [Edit date 10/30/95] [4:82cv866) iv I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10/27/95 10/27/95 10/28/95 10/28/95 10/31/95 10/31/95 10/31/95 11/2/95 11/2/95 11/2/95 11/3/95 2548 BRIEF by ServiceMaster in support of motion for leave to intervene [2547-1) (vjt) [Entry date 10/30/95) [ 4: 82cv866] .2549.f RESPONSE by intv ServiceMaster to Joshua's motion to enjoin the LRSD from entering into a service contract without following bidding procedures, requests for information and without prior involvement of the Joshua Intervenors [2506-1) (vjt) [Entry date 10/30/95) [4:82cv866] 2550 'CLERK'S MINUTES: HEARING before Judge Susan W. Wright on mot by LRSD to prevent LRSD from entering into contract with Service Master; mot to intervene by Service Master granted; attys Joseph Mowery and John Everett present for Service Master; Joshua begins proof with certain testimony; exhibits received; Court will not rule at this time; hearing to be continued (Waunzelle Petre, court reporter) (sc) [Entry date 10/30/95) [Edit date 10/30/95) [4:82cv866] 2551 NOTICE of filing of exhibits (359-371) in open court (vjt) [Entry date 10/30/95) [4:82cv866) 2552 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright that the hrg re Joshua's motion to prevent LRSD from entering into a contract with ServiceMaster is now scheduled to continue on Friday, 12/8/95 at 9:00 am (cc: all counsel) EOD 10/31/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866) 2553 NOTICE of filing of LRSD's 1996-97 Budget/October Project Management Tool (vjt) [Entry date 11/01/95) [ 4: 82cv866) 2554 NOTICE of filing of ADE's Project Management Tool (vjt) [Entry date 11/01/95) [4:82cv866] 2555 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of budget hrg continued from 6/23/95 before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright on 7/6/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866] 2556 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of hrg on motion for TRO and preliminary injunction before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright on 8/25/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866) 2557 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright granting ServiceMaster's motion for leave to intervene in accordance w/ the Court's ruling from the bench during a hrg on 10/28/95 [2547-1] (cc: all counsel) EOD 10/2/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866] 2558 MOTION by LRSD for extension of time to respond to Joshua's motion to set forth in detail the V I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11/6/95 11/13/95 continuing obligation of LRSD under its desegregation plan with regard to faculty and staff (vjt) (Entry date 11/06/95] (4:82cv866] 2559 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright granting LRSD's motion for extension of time until 11/13/95 to respond to Joshua's motion regarding faculty and staff (2558-1] (2544-1] (cc: all counsel) EOD 11/6/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866] 2560 RESPONSE by plaintiff to motion for the Court to set forth in detail the continuing obligations of the Little Rock School defts under the desegregation plan with respect to faculty and staff desegregation (2544-1] (bt) [Entry date 11/14/95] [4:82cv866] 11/14/95 2561 RESPONSE by NLRSD to Joshua's motion re faculty and staff assignment (2544-1] (vjt) [Entry date 11/ 15/95] [ 4: 82cv866] 11/15/95 2562 MOTION by Joshua for extension of time to file motion for an award of attys' fees and costs (vjt) [Entry date 11/16/95] [4:82cv866] 11/21/95 2563 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright granting Joshua's motion for extension of time until 11/22/95 to file motion for an award of attys' and costs [2562-1] (cc: all counsel) EOD 11/21/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866] 11/21/95 2564 LRSD's 1995-96 FIRST QUARTER STATUS REPORT (vjt) [Entry date 11/22/95] [4:82cv866] 11/22/95 2565 MOTION AND MEMORANDUM by Joshua for an interim award of attys' fees and for costs for post-judgment monitoring (vjt) [Entry date 11/27/95] [4:82cv866] 11/24/95 2566 ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright finding the following motions moot: for modification of desegregation plan by LRSD [2432-1] and for approval of new school sites by PCSSD (2443-1] (cc: all counsel) (vjt) [Entry date 11/27/95] [4:82cv866] 11/29/95 2567 ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright that parties may file any objections to ODM's Proposed 1995-96 Budget w/i 15 days from the date of entry of this Order (cc: all counsel) EOD 11/29/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866] vi I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11/29/95 11/29/95 11/29/95 11/30/95 11/30/95 11/30/95 2568.~BRIEF by intervenor ServiceMaster in support of motion response (2549-1] (vjt) [Entry date 11/30/95] (4:82cv866] 2569 MOTION by intervenor ServiceMaster for leave to file amended answer (vjt) [Entry date 11/30/95] (4:82cv866] 2570 BRIEF by intervenor ServiceMaster in support of motion for leave to file amended answer (2569-1] (vjt) [Entry date 11/30/95] (4:82cv866) 2571 NOTICE of filing of LRSD's 1996-97 Budget/November Project Management Tool (vjt) [Entry date 12/01/95] (4:82cv866] 2572 NOTICE of filing of ADE's Project Management Tool (vjt) (Entry date 12/01/95] (4:82cv866] 2573 MOTION by LRSD for an order dismissing this case w/ prej w/ respect to LRSD, PCSSD and NLSD as of 1/18/91 except to the extent the court retains jurisdiction to address issues re implementation of the plans and to conduct proceedings to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement or the desegregation plans (vjt) (Entry date 12/01/95] [4:82cv866] 11/30/95 2574 BRIEF by LRSD in support of motion for an order dismissing this case w/ prej w/ respect to LRSD, PCSSD and NLSD (2573-1] (vjt) [Entry date 12/01/95] (4:82cv866] 12/1/95 12/4/95 12/5/95 12/6/95 12/6/95 2575 NOTICE of filing by ODM of Monitoring Report: The LRSD 1994-95 Incentive School Extended Year Program (vjt) [Entry date 12/04/95] [4:82cv866) 2576 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of Budget Hearing before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright on 4/10/95 (vjt) (4:82cv866] 2577 MOTION by LRSD and PCSSD to extend time to respond to Joshua's fee petition (vjt) [Entry date 12/06/95] ( 4: 82cv866] 2578 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright granting joint motion of LRSD and PCSSD to extend time until 12/18/95 to respond to Joshua's fee petition (2577-1] (2565-1] (2565-2] (cc: all counsel) EOD 12/6/95 (vjt) ( 4: 82cv866] 2579 MOTION by Joshua for continuance of hrg scheduled for 12/8/95 (vjt) [Entry date 12/07/95] [4:82cv866] vii I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 12/6/95 12/8/95 12/8/95 12/8/95 12/8/95 2580 FOURTH QUARTER STATUS REPORT by NLRSD re North Little Rock Plan Implementation in 1994-95 (vjt) [Entry date 12/07/95) [4:82cv866) 2581 CLERK'S MINUTES: HEARING before Judge Susan W. Wright continues re: Joshua's mot for preliminary injunction with respect to ServiceMaster contract; Court receives exhibits and rules from bench; order will issue (Debbie Petre, court reporter) (sc) [Entry date 12/11/95) [4:82cv866] 2582 NOTICE of filing exhibits (372-378) in open court (vjt) [Entry date 12/11/95] [4:82cv866] 2583 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright granting motion for leave to file amended answer by intv ServiceMaster (2569-1] (cc: all counsel) (vjt) [Entry date 12/11/95] [4:82cv866] 2584~AMENDED RESPONSE by intv ServiceMaster to Joshua's motion to enjoin the LRSD from entering into a service contract without following bidding procedures, requests for information and without prior involvement of the Joshua Intervenors [2506-1) (vjt) [Entry date 12/11/95] [4:82cv866] 12/11/95 2585 ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright that Joshua's motion for continuance of hrg set for 12/8/95 was denied in open Court during hrgs conducted on 12/8/95 [2579-1] (cc: all counsel) EOD 12/11/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866] 12/11/95 2586 ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright finding that the purported settlement cannot be enforced against ServiceMaster [2506-1) (cc: all counsel) EOD 12/11/95 (vjt) [4:82cv866] 12/12/95 2587 MOTION by Joshua for extension of time to file their response to the LRSD's motion for an order of dismissal (vjt) (Entry date 12/13/95] [4:82cv866] 12/12/95 2588 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright granting Joshua's motion for extension of time until 1/5/96 to file their response to LRSD's motion for an order of dismissal (2587-1] [2573-1] (cc: all counsel) (vjt) [Entry date 12/13/95) [4:82cv866] 12/14/95 2589 CLERK'S MINUTES: HEARING before Judge Susan W. Wright continued from 9/8/95 on M-M Pooling issues on remand from 8th Circuit; after Dr. Stewart testimony, County rests; LRSD calls Earl Jones to testify; certain exhibits received; Court directs LRSD and PCSSD to file briefs on pooling issue by viii I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1/22/96; parties to contact Court if they want a hearing to take Ruth Steele testimony; Court adjourns (Waunzelle Petre, court reporter) (sc) [Entry date 12/15/95) [4:82cv866) 12/14/95 2590 NOTICE of filing of amendment to ODM's September 15, 1995 status report on staffing to add desegregation plan provisions (vjt} [Entry date 12/15/95) [4:82cv866) 12/14/95 2591 NOTICE of filing of exhibits (379-385) in open court (vjt) [Entry date 12/15/95) (4:82cv866] 12/15/95 2592 MOTION by LRSD, PCSSD and NLRSD to extend time to respond to Joshua's fee petition (vjt) [Entry date 12/19/95] (4:82cv866] 12/20/95 .2593 -:\"0PPOSITION by Joshua to LRSD's motion for an order 12/22/95 - of dismissal (2573-1] (vjt) [Entry date 12/21/95] [4:82cv866] 2594-'MOTION by Joshua Intervenors for reconsideration of the court's order of 12/11/95 and for  completion of hearing (bt) [Entry date 12/26/95] [4:82cv866] 12/22/95 2595 BRIEF by Joshua Intervenors in support of motion for reconsideration of the court's order of 12/11/95 (2594-1] and for completion hearing (2594-2] (bt) [Entry date 12/26/95] [4:82cv866] 12/27/95 2596 ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright granting motion of LRSD, PCSSD and NLRSD to extend time until 1/31/96 to respond to Joshua's fee petition (2592-1) (2565-1] (2565-2] (cc: all counsel) EOD 12/27/95 (vjt) [ 4: 82cv866 J 12/29/95 2597 NOTICE by plaintiff Little Rock School of filing 1996-97 Budget/December Project Management Tool (bt) ( 4: 82cv866 J 12/29/95 2598 NOTICE by defendant Arkansas Educ Board of filing Project Management Tool (bt) [4:82cv866) ix I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proceedings include events between 12/29/95 and 5/2/96. LEAD ~ 12cv866 Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al EAL LEAD APPEAL U.S. District Court USDC for the Eastern District of Arkansas (Little Rock) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE#: 82-CV-866 Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al Filed: 11/30/82 Assigned to: Judge Susan W. Wright Demand: $0,000 Nature of Suit: 440 Lead Docket: None Jurisdiction: Federal Question Dkt # in USCA 8USCA: is :00-96-02047 Dkt # in USCA8 : is :00-95-01481 Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act 12/29/95 2597 12/29/95 2598 1/4/96 2599 1,d/96 2600 .- 1/8/96 2601?' 1/12/96 2602 1/17/96 2603 NOTICE by plaintiff Little Rock School of filing 1996-97 Budget/December Project Management Tool (bt) [4: 82cv866] NOTICE by defendant Arkansas Educ Board of filing Project Management Tool (bt) [4:82cv866] ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright approving ODM's Proposed 1995-96 Budget in its entirety [2567-1) (cc: all counsel) EOD 1/4/96 (vjt) [4:82cv866] RESPONSE by intervenor ServiceMaster to motion for reconsideration of the court's order of 12/11/95 [2594-1) and for completion of hearing [2594-2) (bt) [Entry date 01/09/96) [4: 82cv866] BRIEF by intervenor ServiceMaster in support of response to motion for reconsideration and completion of hearing [2600-1) (bt) [Entry date 01/09/96) [4: 82cv866] ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright that the hrg will resume re motion to withdraw court supervision from three discrete areas of the PCSSD plan [2481-1) and LRSD's motion for partial unitary status [2483-1) at 9:00 on 2/12/96 (cc: all counsel) EOD 1/12/96 (vjt) [4:82cv866] MOTION by Joshua for leave to file reply (vjt) [Entry date 01/18/96) [4: 82cv866] I 1/18/96 2604 ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright granting Joshua's motion leave to file reply; a reply to the ServiceMaster submission dated 1/8/96 is extended to 1/26/96 [2603-1) (cc: all counsel) EOD 1/18/96 (vjt) [4:82cv866] for I 1/24/96 I 2605 TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of Budget Hearing before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright on 3/24/95 (vjt) [Entry date 01/25/96) [4:82cv866] I Docket as of May 2, 1996 10:28 am Pagel I X - ----- - - - - - - - ~ I I~P ~oceedings include events between 12/29/95 and 5/2/96. LEAD .2cv866 Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al EAL 1/26/96 I 11/26/96 11/26/96 11/26/96 I l/26/96 I 1/26/96 I l/29/96 I l/30/96 I 1/30/96 I 1/31/96 I l/31/96 I 2/1/96 I 2/1/96 I 2/1/96 I 2/5/96 2/5/96 2606( 2607 2608 2609 2610 2611 2612 2613 2614 2615 2616 2617 2618 2619 2620 2621 REPLY brief by Joshua Intervenors to response to motion for reconsideration of the court's order of 12/11/95 [2594-1] (bt) [Entry date 01/29/96] [4:82cv866] NOTICE by defendant Pulaski Cty School of filing proposed conclusions of law (bt) [Entry date 01/29/96] [4: 82cv866) NOTICE by defendant Pulaski Cty School of filing proposed findings of fact (bt) [Entry date 01/29/96) [4:82cv866] SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF filed by defendant Pulaski County School regarding \"Pooling\" issues (bt) [Entry date 01/29/96] [4: 82cv866] NOTICE by plaintiff Little Rock School of filing findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding pooling agreement (bt) [Entry date 01/29/96) [4: 82cv866] NOTICE by plaintiff Little Rock School of filing depositions of Dr. Ruth Steele \u0026 Bobby Lester (bt) [Entry date 01/29/96) [4: 82cv866) Amendment to Supplemental MOTION by PCSSD regarding the replacement of portable buildings w/pe:cma.nent construction dated 10/25/95 (vjt) [Entry date 01/30/96) [4: 82cv866) MOTION by LRSD to extend time for the LRSD, PCSSD \u0026 NLRSD to respond to the Joshua fee petition (vjt) [Entry date 01/31/96) [4: 82cv866) NOTICE of filing by ODM of 1995-96 School Racial Balance Monitoring Report: LRSD \u0026 PCSSD (vjt) [Entry date 01/31/96) [4: 82cv866) NOTICE of filing of LRSD's 1997-98 Budget/January Project Management Tool (vjt) [Entry date 02/01/96) [4:82cv866) NOTICE of filing of ADE's Project Management Tool (vjt) [Entry date 02/01/96) [4: 82cv866) MOTION by PCSSD to amend desegregation plan (vjt) [Entry date 02/05/96) [4: 82cv866) BRIEF by PCSSD in support of motion to amend desegregation plan [2617-1) (vj t) [Entry date 02/05/96) [4: 82cv866) NOTICE of filing of ADE's Semi-Annual Monitoring Report (vjt) [Entry date 02/05/96) [4: 82cv866J MOTION by Joshua for continuance of hrg set for 2/12/96 (vjt) [Entry date 02/06/96) [4: 82cv866)  WITNESS LIST submitted by LRSD for Unitary Status Hearings lnocket as of May 2, 1996 10:28 am Page 2 I xi I I I PToceedings include events between 12/29/95 and 5/2/96. LEAD ,2cv866 Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al EAL 2/5/96 I 2/6/96 I 2/7/96 I I I 2/8/96 I 2/9/96 I I 2/12/96 I 2/13/96 I 2/14/96 I I 2/20/96 I 2/23/96 I :c. . .1.3/96 2622 2623 2624 2625 2626 2627 2628 2629 2630 2631 2632 (vj t) [Entry date 02/06/96] [4: 82cv866] EXHIBIT LIST submitted by LRSD re Unitary Status Hearings (vj t) [Entry date 02/06/96] [4: 82cv866] ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright granting motion to extend time until 3/1/96 for the LRSD, PCSSD \u0026 NLRSD to respond to Joshua's fee petition [2613-1] [2565-1] [2565-2] (cc: all counsel) (vjt) [Entry date 02/07/96] [4:82cv866] CLERK'S MINUTES: INFORMAL conference in chambers with attys and Ann Brown re: matters to be taken up at next week's hearing \u0026 Joshua's mot for continuance; Joshua's oral mot to extend time to respond to PCSSD's mot to amend granted to 3/1/96; no ruling on continuance; meeting adjourned (Waunzelle Petre, court reporter) (sc) [Entry date 02/08/96] [4: 82cv866] ORDER by Judge Susan w. Wright granting Joshua's oral motion to extend time until 3/15/96 to respond to PCSSD's motion to amend desegregation plan [2617-1] (cc: all counsel) (vjt) [4:82cv866] STIPULATION for Order by PCSSD, LRSD, NLRSD and the Joshua \u0026 Knight Intervenors re which areas of the Districts' respective desegregation plans can be released from Court supervision and monitoring (vjt) [Entry date 02/12/96] [4: 82cv866] Amendment to MOTION by PCSSD to amend desegregation plan (vjt) [4: 82cv866] MEMO TO FILE: finding the motion for continuance of hrg set for 2/12/96 moot [2620-1] (bt) [Entry date 02/14/96] [4: 82cv866] ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright scheduling informational hrgs on the LRSD draft budget and budgeting process for 9:00am on each of the following dates: March 26, 1996; June 6 \u0026 7, 1996; and July 29 \u0026 30, 1996; board members of the LRSD are required to attend hrgs (cc: all counsel) (vjt) [Entry date 02/15/96] [4:82cv866] TRANSCRIPT (Volume I) of Budget Hearing before the Honorable Susan Webber Wright on 8/11/95 (vjt) [Entry date 02/21/96] [4: 82cv866] ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright scheduling evidentiary hrgs for May 13-15 \u0026 May 30-31, 1996 to evaluate the success of settlement plans and desegregation remedies (cc: all counsel) (vj t) [Entry date 02/26/96] [4: 82cv866] LRSD'S SECOND QUARTER STATUS REPORT (vjt) [Entry date 02/26/96] [4: 82cv866] I Docket as of May 2, 1996 10:28 am Page 3 I xii I I Proceedings include events between 12/29/95 and 5/2/96. LEAD , 2cv866 Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al EAL I 2/28/96 1 2/29/96 I 2/29/96 I 3/1/96 I 3/1/96 I 3/1/96 13 't:../96 I I I I I I 3/11/96 13/12/96 I 2633 2634 2635 2636 2637 2638 2639 2640 2641 NOTICE of filing by LRSD of \"Little Rock School D~strict Facilities Master Plan Study Supplement to Executive Sununary\" (vjt) [Entry date 02/29/96) [4: 82cv866] NOTICE of Filing by plaintiff LRSD's 1997-98 Budget/February Project Management Tool (lb) [Entry date 03/01/96) [Edit date 03/01/96) [4: 82cv866] NOTICE of filing by defendant ADE'S Project Management Tool (lb) [Entry date 03/01/96) [4: 82cv866] RESPONSE by LRSD to Joshua's motion for an interim award of attys' fees [2565-1) and costs for post-judgment monitoring [2565-2) (vjt) [Entry date 03/04/96) [4: 82cv866] MEMORANDUM BRIEF by LRSD in support of motion response [2636-1) (vjt) [Entry date 03/04/96) [4:82cv866] RESPONSE by NLRSD to Joshua's motion for an interim award of attys' fees [2565-1) and costs for post-judgment monitoring [2565-2) (vjt) [Entry date 03/04/96) [4: 82cv866] Supplemental and Clarifying MOTION by PCSSD to amend desegregation plan (vjt) [Entry date 03/07/96) [4: 82cv866] MEMORANDUM AND ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright denying as moot PCSSD's motion to withdraw court supervision from three discrete areas of the PCSSD plan [2481-1); denying as moot LRSSD's motion for partial unitary status [2483-1); denying Joshua's motion for reconsideration of the court's order of 12/11/95 [2594-1); denying as moot Joshua's motion for completion of hearing [2594-2); denying w/o prej Joshua's motion to enjoin the LRSD from entering into a service contract without following bidding procedures [2506-1); denying w/o prej PCSSD's motion to clarify the PCSSD Desegregation Plan [2520-1); denying LRSD's motion for an order of dismissal [2573-1); denying w/o prej Joshua's motion for an Order setting forth in detail the continuing obligations of the LRSD under the desegragation plan w/respect to faculty and staff [2544-1); granting PCSSD's motions for an Order regarding portable buildings [2546-1) [2612-1) (cc: all counsel) EOD 3/11/96 (vjt) [4: 82cv866] ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright directing the LRSD to submit to the Court, ODM \u0026 parties by noon on March 18, 1996 all documents, budget material, business cases and any other info to be introduced at the hrg scheduled for 9:00am on March 26, 1996 (cc: all counsel) EOD 3/12/96 (vjt) [4:82cv866] l\u003eocket as of May 2, 1996 10:28 am Page 4 I xiii I I I I I I P-oceedings include events between 12/29/95 and 5/2/96. LEAD ~ .2cv866 Little Rock School, et al v . Pulaski Cty School, et al EAL 3/15/96 3/18/96 3/26/96 3/26/96 I 3/26/96 I 3/27/96 I I I I I I I I I 3/27/96 3/27/96 3/29/96 3/29/96 4/1/96 2642 2643 2644 2645 2646 2647 2648 2649 2650 2651 2652 MOTION by Joshua for leave to file reply (vjt) [Entry date 03/18/96] (4: 82cv866] NOTICE of filing of the Little Rock School District 1996 - 97 Proposed Budget and the Business Cases for Proposed Budget FY 1996-97 in accordance w/the Court's Order of 3/12/96 (vjt) [4:82cv866] CLERK'S MINUTES: HEARING before Judge Susan W Wright re: budget of LRSD; testimony by witnesses \u0026 certain exhibits received; hearings conclude (Robin Johnson, court reporter) (sc) (4: 82cv866] NOTICE of filing of exhibits (386 - 389) in open court (vjt) [Entry date 03/27 /96] [4: 82cv866] FIRST QUARTER STATUS REPORT by NLRSD re North Little Rock Plan Implementation in 1995-96 (vjt) [Entry date 03/27/96] (4: 82cv866] ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright granting PCSSD's supplemental and clarifying motion to amend desegregation plan; the Court authorizes a special millage election to be held May 7, 1996 and approves to convert Jacksonville Junior High North \u0026 Jacksonville Junior High South with one becoming a middle school hosting sixth \u0026 seventh graders and the other a traditional junior high hosting only eighth \u0026 ninth graders (2639-1]; finding PCSSD's previous motions to amend desegregation plan moot (2617-1] (2627-1] (cc: all counsel) EOD 3/27/96 (vjt) [4:82cv866] ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright approving the stipulation for order filed 2/9/96 re areas in which the respective parties can be released from court supervision and monitoring (2626-1) (cc: all counsel) EOD 3/27/96 (vjt) (4: 82cv866) ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright granting Joshua's motion for leave to file reply to LRSD \u0026 NLRSD responses to their motion and memorandum for atty's fees \u0026 costs (2642-1] (cc: all counsel) EOD 3/27/96 (vjt) [4:82cv866] NOTICE of filing of ADE's Project Management Tool (vjt) (4: 82cv866) NOTICE of filing of LRSD's 1997-98 Budget/March Project Management Tool (vjt) [Entry date 04/01/96) [4:82cv866] REPLY by Joshua to LRSD \u0026 NLRSD's response to fee petition (2565-1) (2565-2) (vj t) (4: 82cv866) I Docket as of May 2, 1996 10:28 am Page 5 I xiv I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I P~oceedings include events between 12/29/95 and 5/2/96. LEAD 32cv866 Little Rock School, et al v. Pulaski Cty School, et al EAL 4/4/96 4/4/96 4/8/96 4/9/96 4/16/96 4/22/96 4/26/96 4/30/96 4/30/96 2653 2654 ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright directing parties to file any objections on or before 4/15/96 to the Magnet Review Committee's request for approval of the interdistrict magnet school budget for the 1995-96 school year (letter request dated 3/13/96 attached) (cc: all counsel) EOD 4/4/96 (vjt) [4:82cv866] ORDER by Judge Susan W. Wright setting hrg on Joshua's motion for an interim award of attys' fees [2565-1) and for costs [2565-2) at 9:30 on 7/1/96 (cc: all counsel) EOD 4/4/96 (vj t) [4: 82cv866] 2655 NOTICE of filing of ADE'S Supplemental Report to the 2656 2657 2658 2659 2660 February 1, 1996, Semi-Annual Monitor "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1178","title":"Little Rock School District, school board meeting minutes","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["1996-07-18/1996-12-19"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","School board members","School boards","School management and organization","Meetings"],"dcterms_title":["Little Rock School District, school board meeting minutes"],"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/1178"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThe transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES SPECIAL BOARD MEETING July 18, 1996 NOV b - 1996 Office of Desegrega:ion Monitonn9 ....... , The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District called a special meeting at 5 :00 p.m. on Thursday, July 18, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. Linda Pondexter, Board President, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Linda Pondexter Ms. Patricia Gee Ms. Sue Strickland Dr. Michael Daugherty Ms. Judy Magness Dr. Katherine Mitchell Mr. John Riggs, IV MEMBERS ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: I. Ms.Beverly Griffin\nRecorder of Minutes CALL TO O,RDQt:- . Board President, Li:n:da Pondexter, called the meeting to,ot.der at 5:02 p.m. The roll call revealed the presence,.Df all Board members. SPECIAL BOARD MEETING July 18, 1996 Page 2 PURPOSE OF THE MEETING The meeting was called for the purpose of accepting the report and recommendations of the contingency committee regarding the Superintendency of the Little Rock School District. Members of the contingency committee were present and are listed: Rett Tucker Roosevelt Brown Debbie Glasgow Marian Lacey ACTION AGENDA Betty Mitchell Skip Rutherford John Walker Mr. Rett Tucker provided a brief summary of the findings of the contingency committee. A copy of their report and recommendations are attached to these minutes. The committee's report included two recommendations: 1) to appoint a five member management team to lead the district until the appointment of an interim superintendent, and 2) to appoint Dr. Don Roberts as interim superintendent, effective August 15, 1996. Members of the recommended management team are: Victor Anderson, Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Schools Sadie Mitchell, Assistant Superintendent for Elementary Schools Marian Lacey, Principal of Mann Magnet Jodie Carter, Principal of McClellan Skip Rutherford, member of the LRSD Board of Directors from 1987-1991 Mr. Tucker reported that the committee recommended Dr. Roberts' appointment for a minimum of one year and a maximum of two years in order to give the LRSD Board the time necessary to find a permanent superintendent. He also stated that John Walker had agreed to a two year moratorium on any further legal action related to the Desegregation Plan and the settlement agreement. SPECIAL BOARD MEETING July 18, 1996 Page2 Executive Session Dr. Mitchell moved for the Board to convene in executive session for the purpose of discussing personnel issues. Mr. Riggs seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. The Board returned from executive session at 5:35 p.m. and reported that no action had been taken. Mr. Riggs expressed appreciation to the members of the contingency committee and Ms. Pondexter thanked members of the Board for supporting her in the formation of the committee. Dr. Daugherty made a motion to accept the recommendations of the contingency committee, Ms. Strickland seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. DISCUSSION Price Gardner and Chris Heller, attorneys with the Friday firm, were asked to respond to questions of Board members regarding Dr. Williams' contract and the District's financial obligations to Dr. Williams. Mr. Gardner remarked that the contract was still in full effect unless Dr. Williams tendered a letter of resignation. He also stated that the Board could vote to terminate the contract \"for cause,\" but Mr. Heller suggested that the Board take no further action and allow the negotiations between Dr. Williams' attorney and Mr. Gardner to continue. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Riggs made a motion to adjourn at 5:55 p.m. Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. ~~?~~ ' Linda Pondexter, President APPROVED: g.J\n}., - 9 (, ~~ ,~k\u0026amp;,./J Suetricklan,Secretary CONTINGENCY COMMITTEE REPORT LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT JULY 18, 1996 Rett Tucker and Roosevelt Brown, Co-chairmen Debbie Glasgow, Marian Lacey, Betty Mitchell, Skip Rutherford, John Walker Members of the School Board and citizens of Little Rock, my name is Rett Tucker and I am Co-chairman of the Contingency Committee approved by this Board earlier this year. Other members, who are present, include Co-chairman Dr. Roosevelt Brown, PTA Council President Debbie Glasgow, Mann Principal Marian Lacey, CTA President Betty Mitchell, former school board president Skip Rutherford and attorney John Walker. On behalf of Dr. Brown~ let me begin by thanking the Board for putting your confidence and trust in us. We also want to thank the committee members for their dedication and hard work. We met numerous times in the spring and put together the framework of a contingency plan in the event it was needed. We have had almost perfect attendance at every meeting. We took this assignment very seriously. We considered it an honor and an opportunity to participate in this very important process. We resolved from the beginning that we would put our differences aside and work toward consensus. When we were notified Sunday that Dr. Williams was going to Kansas City, we were prepared. To finalize our recommendations, we have met every day this week and now come before you with a recommended plan of action. This plan comes to you with our unanimous support. In fact, I must say that our committee--with strong wills, strong personalities, strong views and all the diversity we prize in Little Rock--never once had a split vote and never met an issue that we didn't resolve in a civil and thoughtful way. I have been part of many committees both personally and professionally, but this one has represented the best and most gratifying experience I've ever had. Let's clarify first what we did not do. Although there has been a great deal of speculation, we did not consider the selection of a permanent Superintendent. That was not our assignment. We do believe, however, that this is a very important decision in its own right because it comes at such a critical time. We focused on the short-term, although we define short-term as one to two years. Tonight, we have two major recommendations. Our first deals with getting through the next several days and weeks. In this regard, we congratulate Dr. Williams on his new position and wish him well. We thank him for his leadership and his service. This is a tough job. We recognize that and appreciate all he has done. Although Dr. Williams will remain on the payroll until September 1, we know that he will be spending a great deal of his time, his talent and his energy--as he should--on Kansas City and the future. 2 While he will still be a very valuable resource for this school district, we propose--from tomorrow through August 14, the formation of a five-person management team which would report directly to the Board. This team would operate in the same spirit that our Contingency Committee has operated: successfully addressing a short-term assignment. We spent a great deal of time and thought on the membership of this team. We looked for people with experience, with dedication and who had the energy to take on extra assignments. We recommend the following individuals: Dr. Victor Anderson would serve as the daily operations officer. He brings a wealth of experience as a principal, an administrator and, more importantly, as a person who is recognized as both a consensus builder and a team player. He would be in charge of day to day administration. Joining him on the team will be Sadie Mitchell, a former teacher, a former principal, and now an administrator, who has worked very closely with the elementary schools. Also, Jodie Carter, the principal of McClellan High School, who from first hand experience understands both the challenges and the opportunities of our senior high schools. Sadie will be in charge of all elementary schools and Jodie will have the responsibility for the senior high schools. The two other members come from our Contingency Committee. Let me add that neither sought a position on the team. In fact, both had to be drafted. 3 e Marian Lacey is the principal of Mann Junior High School. She is a principal' s principal and was such a positive voice on our committee. Marian knows the junior highs and her outstanding record at Mann speaks for itself. She will focus on all aspects of the junior high schools. Skip Rutherford, the only non-educator on the team, understands the school board better than most. He served on the Board from 1987 to 1991, as its president in 1989 and 1990 and coordinated two victorious millage campaigns. He will supervise communication and student assignments and will serve without pay. All of these members will continue to perform their current responsibilities. Marian Lacey will still be the principal at Mann and Jodie Carter will still be the principal at McClellan. Skip Rutherford will still work at Cranford Johnson Robinson Woods. Vic Anderson and Sadie Mitchell will still be district administrators. All of them, however, for the good of the district, will work on the management team which means extra duty and long hours for each of them. Please note that all four educators are or have been successful principals and the non-educator is a former school board member and president. The team is experienced. It needs to be because much will be happening over the next four weeks--including the opening and beginning of school. We simply can't put this district on hold for that time period. This professional team addresses that issue. 4 The second part of our recommendation relates to the position of Interim Superintendent. We considered many people and possibilities. We listened to board members and to interested citizens. We wanted to recommend someone who could provide effective, steady, experienced leadership\nsomeone with local ties who understands Little Rock, Arkansas and state school funding\nsomeone who could help this district and the Board in its search for a permanent Superintendent. We believe we have found that person. Tonight, we unanimously recommend to you, Dr. Don Roberts--the former Director of the Arkansas Department of Education and the former Assistant Superintendent of the Little Rock School District. Dr. Roberts is an Arkansas native and was educated at Henderson State and the University of Arkansas. He served as State Education Director during the administrations of both Governor Bill Clinton and Governor Frank White. He has been a successful Superintendent in three urban school districts. We recommend him to you as Interim Superintendent for a minimum of one year and a maximum of two. This will give you the time, the breathing room and the opportunity to find the best Superintendent possible. As we know from experience, finding a Superintendent is not always a quick process. Dr. Roberts can and will help you in the search. He is 61 years old and retired in 1994 after seven years as Superintendent of the Fort Worth School District. This is a district with 72,000 students and 9,000 employees. Since that time, he has been doing consulting work with school districts across the country. 5 e He loves Little Rock, loves Arkansas, knows Little Rock and knows Arkansas. We sought him out for this position. He has always been dedicated to high quality desegregated education and seeks to build cooperation across racial lines. He is known as a person who keeps his word and works in good faith. He is an educator, an administrator and, we believe, a healer. He did not seek the job. We went after him. Dr. Roberts can be here tomorrow to meet with you individually and as a group. He can be in Little Rock and on the job no later than August 15. We also recommend the following: When Dr. Roberts arrives on August 15, the management team will become an advisory team to him. Dr. Roberts would, of course, take over the day to day operations, but we envision the advisory team helping him on both a regular and as-needed basis. Their assistance in this transition will be invaluable. As I noted earlier, we believe Dr. Roberts should be given a oneyear contract with the possibility of another year if needed. He has indicated he is not interested in the full-time Superintendent's position, but, again, that subject is a matter for the Board to discuss at the appropriate time. We believe his compensation package should be comparable to that of Dr. Williams. 6 Dr. Roberts said it is extremely important to him that the city's leadership, the business community and other groups come together in support of the public schools. We've seen a great deal of that happening already and tonight we have with us Mayor Dailey, other elected officials, city leaders, school patrons, parents and interested citizens who are here in support of quality desegregated public education in our city. As chairman of the Greater Little Rock Chamber of Commerce, I can pledge to Dr. Roberts, the board, and the management team, the Chamber's continued support. The next two Chamber Chairmen, Doug Buford and Janet Jones, are here to back me up. Finally, and this is very important: to provide this district with stability as it works its way through some difficult problems and prepares for the 21st century, our colleague and fellow committee member John Walker, has agreed--in good faith--to a two-year moratorium on initiating any new legal action against the school district related to the settlement agreement. Dr. Roberts expressed reservations to our committee about accepting a position in a district embroiled in litigation and controversy. This offer was made by Mr. Walker to Dr. Roberts because of Dr. Roberts' past record in the Little Rock School District and the State Department of Education. This means that the Board, Dr. Roberts and the employees in the District, for the first time in almost 40 years, can concentrate totally and fully on educating our children and on implementing and, if necessary, modifying the current desegregation plan and getting out of court. 7 These are our recommendations. We believe they serve as a sound and reasonable short-term plan. We also believe they serve as a new beginning for the district and a bridge to the future. It is amazing what we can accomplish when we work together. Madame President and members of the Board, the Contingency Committee respectfully requests your approval of these recommendations. Having discharged our duties and responsibilities, we have concluded our assignment and will disband as a committee following tonight's meeting. We thank you for this opportunity to serve our school district and our city. Dr. Brown and I as well as members of the committee are now available to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. C:\\wpwin6 l lwpdocsltucker\\Superintendent. 78 8 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES REGULAR BOARD MEETING July 25, 1996 R NOV 6 - 1996 Of/ice of DesegregatJon Monitonng The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District held its regularly scheduled meeting at 6:00 p.m., on July 25, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. The President, Linda Pondexter, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Linda Pondexter Ms. Patricia Gee Ms. Sue Strickland Dr. Michael Daugherty Ms. Judy Magness Dr. Katherine Mitchell MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. John Riggs, IV ALSO PRESENT: Dr. Victor Anderson, Assistant Superintendent Ms. Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes I. CALL TO ORDER Board President, Linda Pondexter, called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. Roll call revealed the presence of six Board members. Mr. Riggs was absent. The teacher ex officio, Dr. Jane Meadows, representing Hall High School, and the student ex officio from McClellan High School, Mitchell Moore, Jr., were also present. EXECUTIVE SESSION Ms. Pondexter asked for a motion from the Board to convene an executive session for the purpose of discussing a contract. Ms. Gee moved for the executive session, Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. REGULAR BOARD MEETING July 25, 1996 Page 2 II. III. The Board returned from executive session at 6:20 p.m. and reported that no action had been taken. SUSPENSION OF THE RULES: Ms. Gee made a motion to suspend the rules to consider an item that was not on the meeting agenda. Ms. Magness seconded the motion at it carried 6-0. Ms. Gee moved to accept a contract designating Dr. Don Roberts as interim superintendent. Ms. Strickland seconded the motion and it carried 6-0. READING OF MINUTES: Minutes from the regular board meeting of June 27, and from special meetings conducted on June 28, and July 11, 1996, were presented for Board approval. The minutes were approved 6-0, on a motion by Ms. Gee, seconded by Ms. Magness. PRESENTATIONS: A. SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Anderson presented citations to the ex officio Board members for the month of July: Dr. Jane Meadows, teacher from Hall High School\nand Mitchell Moore, Jr., McClellan High School student. B. PARTNERSHIPS There were no new partnerships presented for the month of July. C. CITIZENS COMMITTEES Ms. Pondexter invited Mr. Price Gardner to address the Board and answer questions regarding the status of superintendent Henry Williams' contract. He reported that effective August 1, or on the date that Dr. Williams signs a contract in another District, that action would effectively be a resignation from the LRSD and any further obligations to Dr. Williams would be measured as of that date. Mr. Gardner is continuing to negotiate with Dr. Williams' attorney. REGULAR BOARD MEETING July 25, 1996 Page 3 1. Office of Desegregation Monitoring Melissa Gulden reported that ODM monitors had visited extended year (incentive school) sites and would be providing a copy of that report to the Board and administration within the next few weeks. 2. Classroom Teachers Association No report. 3. Joshua Intervenors Joy Springer introduced Sheree Peterson, a Hall High School graduate who will be attending the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff next school term. Ms. Peterson commented on the treatment of black students by police resource officers and school administrators at Hall High School. She asked that District staff members be provided additional training in sensitivity to the needs of black male students. Ms. Springer commended the Board for commissioning the desegregation committee. She asked the Board and the new administration to review the recommendations contained in the committee's report and base plan modifications on those recommendations. She also asked for hwnan relations committees to be formed in the secondary schools to include students and teachers from all backgrounds to increase interaction and goodwill. 4. Knight Intervenors No report. 5. PT A Council No report. E. BOARD MEMBERS Linda Pondexter expressed appreciation to the members of the desegregation committee and the contingency committee. She also thanked Dr. Don Roberts for accepting the appointment as interim superintendent. REGULAR BOARD MEETING July 25, 1996 Page4 IV. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS Diane Douglas is the parent of a special education student who had been charged with assaulting his teacher at Henderson Jr. High in February, 1996. Ms. Douglas distributed copies of documents, including a summons from the Pulaski County Juvenile Court, and asked the Board to investigate why the teacher waited until mid-July to file charges against her son. Mike Campbell, transportation department employee, asked the Board to consider conducting an internal audit and suggested that they should start with the Transportation Department. Hafeeza Majeed expressed concern about communication between the contingency committee and the community. She questioned whether the community had any input into the recommendations made by the committee or the selection of the interim superintendent. Gwen Porter-Cole discussed the elimination of the truancy center and concerns about the students who would not have access to services previously provided by the truancy center staff. Mark Cole introduced himself as a former LRSD student and commended Sheree Peterson on the comments she made regarding treatment of students at Hall High School. He asked the Board to look for ways to better educate black children in our city. V. ACTION AGENDA A. 1996-97 Carl Perkins Application The Board was asked to approve the submission of an application to the Arkansas Department of Education for a two-year local plan utilizing Carl Perkins funds. The application requested $351,570 to implement vocational evaluation, training, and purchase of additional equipment. Ms. Gee made a motion to approve the submission, Ms. Magness seconded the motion, and it carried 6-0. REGULAR BOARD MEETING July 25, 1996 Page 5 B. Mini-Grant Submissions The Board was asked to approve the grant submissions listed in the following table. Dr. Mitchell made a motion to accept the proposed applications, Ms. Gee seconded the motion, and it passed 6-0. PROGRAM Develop a Web site for space/science/math education Establish a school greenhouse Install computer in Kindergarten C. Technology Grant SCHOOL Carver Magnet Mabelvale J. H. Fair Park Elem. AMOUNT REQUESTED $1,020 $1,000 $1 ,500 SPONSORING ORGANIZATION Ark. Space Grant Consortium Entergy/AP \u0026amp; L EDS The Board was asked to approve the submission of a grant application which had been forwarded to the Governor's Telecommunications and Information Technology Advisory Board in early July. The application requested $1,060,000 for the purchase of computers, network servers and printers, and would allow school media centers connection to the Internet. Dr. Daugherty moved to approve the grant submission. Ms. Gee seconded the motion and it passed 6-0. D. ESEA, Title I District Plan, 1996-97 The ESEA, Title I, District Plan was prepared for submission to the Arkansas Department of Education by August 1, 1996. The Board was provided with copies of the Plan and the program abstract, which included a funding allocation of $4,258,731, based on 11,107 eligible students. Mr. Leon Adams, Director of Federal Programs, was present to respond to the Board's questions regarding the application. Dr. Mitchell made a motion to approve submission of the application, seconded by Ms. Strickland. The motion carried 6-0. E. ESEA, Title VI Application, 1996-97 The Board was also asked to approve submission of the ESEA, Title VI application for 1996-97. The program abstract was included in the Board agenda and requested $120,520 to support and enhance existing programs in the schools. Ms. Gee moved to accept the submission, Ms. Strickland seconded the motion, and it passed 6-0. REGULAR BOARD MEETING July 25, 1996 Page 6 F. First Reading: District Employee Conflict oflnterest Policy A policy on Conflict oflnterest and Ethics in Business Activities was submitted for the Board's review and approval. Mr. Charles Neal, Director of Purchasing, was present to respond to questions from Board members, and stated that much of the policy text was taken directly from Arkansas purchasing law and procurement codes. Ms. Gee made a motion to accept the policy on first reading. Ms. Strickland seconded the motion and it carried 5-1, with Dr. Mitchell casting the \"no\" vote. G. Educational Equity Monitoring Instrument, 1996-97 The Incentive School Monitoring instrument for 1996-97 was submitted for the Board's review and approval. Changes in the document had been suggested and approved by the LRSD Biracial Committee. Ms. Gee moved to approve the instrument, seconded by Ms. Magness. The motion carried 6-0. H. Televised Forum for School Board Candidates Upon approval of the Board, administration will arrange for a live broadcast over the District's cable channel, of a discussion among candidates for school board positions in zones one and five. The telecast will be conducted and sponsored by the LR Neighborhood Coalition. Ms. Magness moved to authorize the administration to proceed with the broadcast. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion, and it carried 6-0. I. Student Transfer Request Dr. Ronnie Williams petitioned the Board to approve a transfer request for his son, Torre, from Conway to Little Rock Central High School. The Board was provided copies of Arkansas laws and codes that regulate acceptance of minority students into districts, such as LR, that are operating under court-ordered desegregation plans. Torre would not be prohibited from attending school at Central, if he were living with a relative in the attendance zone, but he would not be allowed to participate in sports without approval of the Arkansas Athletic Association. The Board took no formal action on the request, but referred Dr. Williams to AAA for further information. J. Personnel Changes Dr. Anderson recommended acceptance of the personnel changes printed in the agenda and transfers and promotions listed on a slip sheet to the agenda. The Board asked to vote separately on items previously submitted for approval and additional personnel changes and transfers that were included on a slip sheet to the agenda. Ms. Gee moved to accept the resignations and terminations listed in the agenda. Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. REGULAR BOARD MEETING July 25, 1996 Page 7 VI. Executive Session Ms. Gee moved for the Board to conduct an executive session for the purpose of discussing personnel issues, Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. The Board remained in executive session from 7:20 p.m. until 8:00 p.m., and returned to report that no action had been taken. Dr. Anderson recommended approval to transfer Dr. Walter Marshaleck to Southwest Jr. High School and Mr. Johnny Neely to the Alternative Learning Center. Ms. Magness made a motion to approve these transfers. Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion and it carried 5-1, with Ms. Pondexter abstaining. Administrative personnel changes were approved unanimously on a motion by Ms. Magness, seconded by Dr. Mitchell. They are listed in the table below. NAME Vernon Smith Kenneth Moore Jimmy Mosby Lloyd Sain Ann Blaylock Jerome Farmer PREVIOUS POSITION Asst. Principal/Fair Teacher/Hope High School Asst. Principal/Henderson Teacher/Hall Teacher/Pulaski Heights Teacher-Coach/Mann NEW POSITION Principal/Forest Heights Asst. Principal/Fair Asst. Principal/Hall Asst. Principal/Pulaski Hts. Pt. Time Asst. Prin./Pulaski Hts. Asst. Principal/Henderson Additionally, Dr. Mitchell made a motion to reinstate elementary assistant principals at six schools where those positions had been eliminated as a budget reduction strategy. Mr. Gadberry responded to questions from the Board and reported that reinstating these positions would cost approximately $160,000. Ms. Gee seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. K. Financial Reports Financial reports for the month of June were unavailable at the time of the meeting. Mr. Milhollen responded to questions regarding the status of end-of-year closing progress. REPORT AGENDA A. Desegregation Update Nancy Acre responded to questions from the Board regarding the report printed in the agenda. REGULAR BOARD MEETING July 25, 1996 Page 8 B. Budget Update Mr. Milhollen reported that court hearings that had been scheduled for review of the budget had been canceled by Judge Wright. After filing the budget, meetings will be held in the Office of Desegregation Monitoring for review of the proposed budget. C. Transportation Update: LRSD/Laidlaw Joint Report Mr. Ed Streeter provided information on transportation operations after the first year of Laidlaw's service to the District. He reported that Laidlaw retained 82% of the former LRSD bus drivers, 71 % of the former mechanics, and 100% of former LRSD supervisors and dispatchers. He also reported that the on-time performance rate for Laidlaw was 97.6% compared with the previous LRSD on-time rate of 78%. A copy of the statistical charts were provided for the Board's review. D. Blueprint for Action Ms. Pondexter had asked for this item to be included on the agenda and indicated that she would provide the information to the Board at a later date. The Board took a briefrecess at 8:24 p.m. and returned at 8:35 p.m. VII. AUDIENCE WITH INDMDUALS OR GROUPS Hafeeza Majeed commented on recent actions of the Board relating to the appointment of the management team and the interim superintendent. She questioned the formation of the desegregation committee, the contingency committee and strategic planning committees. She also suggested that Laidlaw provide training in human relations skills for the bus drivers. Lou Ethel Nauden expressed concerns about the teacher contract and the entire negotiations process. She stressed the importance of the fringe benefits to the total contract package. VIII. HEARINGS: DISCIPLINARY None. REGULAR BOARD MEETING July 25, 1996 Page 9 IX. HEARING: LIBRARY BOOK CENSORSHIP Ms. Dee Norton, parent at Pulaski Heights Elementary school, had filed a complaint about two books housed in District libraries\nFirst Date and Beach House, by R. L. Stine. She had appeared before the Board previously, asking that the books be removed from District libraries. The Board had asked for a review of the books, using the District's established procedure for reconsideration of fictional library materials. Ms. Lucy Lyon, Director of Technology and Media Services, coordinated the formation of a review committee, which met to review the books. That committee recommended that the books be retained in the library. Ms. Norton appealed that decision and asked the Board to reconsider the decision of the committee. Dr. Michael Daugherty requested placement of the appeal on the agenda for consideration. In addition to Ms. Lyon, Mr. Mark Burnette spoke on behalf of the committee and its' findings. Other committee members were also present to indicate their agreement with the decision to retain the books on the library shelves: Thelma Watson, Mary Gillespie, Lillie Carter, and Margaret Gremillion. Andy Turner, attorney with the Friday firm, addressed the issue of censorship and provided established precedent for lawsuits that could possibly result from removing library books. He recommended that the Board consider the committee's findings and possible legal exposure resulting in a challenge of the First Amendment. Dr. Anderson suggested that the Board allow the committee's recommendation to stand. Ms. Gee moved to accept the recommendation, Ms. Magness seconded the motion, and it carried 5-1, with Dr. Daugherty casting the \"no\" vote. ADJOURNMENT With no further business to conduct, Dr. Mitchell moved for adjournment at 9:08 p.m. Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. APPROVED: \u0026lt;Z-\n),\n).._q(.o LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES SPECIAL BOARD MEETING August 8, 1996 AEcs NOV 6 - 1996 Office of Des egregar,on Mon,tormg The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District called a special meeting immediately preceding the regularly scheduled agenda meeting, at 5 :00 p.m. on Thursday, August 8, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. Linda Pondexter, Board President, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Linda Pondexter Ms. Patricia Gee Ms. Sue Strickland Dr. Michael Daugherty Ms. Judy Magness Dr. Katherine Mitchell MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. John Riggs, IV ALSO PRESENT: Dr. Victor Anderson, Assistant Superintendent Mr. Chris Heller, Attorney Ms. Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes I. CALL TO ORDER Board President, Linda Pondexter, called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m. The roll call revealed the presence of six Board members. Mr. Riggs was absent. Also present were ex officio members of the Board: Thaddeus Leopoulos, a student at Parkview Magnet, and Rose Bogan, a teacher at McClellan High School. SPECIAL BOARD MEETING August 8, 1996 Page 2 PURPOSE OF THE MEETING The agenda for the special meeting contained the following items: 1. Westside 2. Eastside 3. CTA Presentation 4. Administrative Staffing Reassignments 5. Recommended Personnel Changes 6. Approval of Secretarial Position 7. Briefing by Legal Counsel 8. Student Hearings 9. Employee Hearing ACTION AGENDA Westside Mayor Jim Dailey presented a letter requesting the Board's approval to donate Westside Junior High School to the Volunteers of America and the Central Little Rock Community Development Corporation. Representatives of VOA and the CDC, Belinda Snow and Jeff Arnett, were also present and requested support for development of their plans which include a three phase implementation. Phase I would be the development of 50 efficiency housing units for the homeless\nPhase II would develop office space for public and private non-profit service agencies\nand Phase III would renovate the 1000 seat auditorium for performance space for local arts groups and meeting space for community groups. Federal, state and city funds will be used to complete the project. The District had previously accepted an offer on the property with an August 1996 closing date. Ms. Magness moved to extend the previously approved closing date until October 20, and to authorize Doug Eaton to meet with representatives from the city to explore options for purchase other than actual cash. Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. Eastside Kay Hadley reported that she had met with VOA staff and had used information from their proposal to develop a similar plan for utilizing the now vacant Eastside building. She stated an interest in operating a vocational training center with a day care center. Mr. Eaton was asked by the Board to negotiate a possible lease and report back to the Board at a later date. SPECIAL BOARD MEETING August 8, 1996 Page3 CT A Presentation Betty Mitchell, CT A President, introduced Rich Nagel who provided copies of a trend chart of the amount of District funds used to pay teacher salaries. Frank Martin commented on a possible crisis situation in the contract negotiations process and questioned the authority of the administrators who were bargaining on behalf of the Board and administration. He stated that if there was not a settlement of the contract this week, teachers would not return to work on the first day of school, August 19. Dr. Anderson remarked that the negotiating team had regularly briefed the management team on the status of the negotiations process. He stated that the negotiating team was operating strictly under the parameters allowable, taking into consideration the District's financial condition. He indicated that there was no reason to believe that the team was not operating in good faith and offered to schedule a meeting between Board members and the management team for further discussion or direction. Ms. Pondexter asked for the parties to continue negotiating and indicated that she would like for the contract issue to be resolved before the start of school. She recognized Mr. Skip Rutherford who also commented on the commitment of the management team to solve the issue positively. Administrative Staffing Reassignments The Board was asked to approve the reassignment of two assistant principals: Patricia McMurray to Henderson Jr. High School, and Gail Pitts to Forest Heights Jr. High School. Ms. Magness moved to approve the recommended reassignments. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Recommended Personnel Changes The Board was asked to approve three assistant principals' assignments for the next school term. Action on this request was split for the purpose of voting. Unanimous approval was given to assign Mary Lou Kahler to the position of assistant principal at King Elementary School, and Thomas Voegele as acting assistant principal at Dunbar Jr. High School on a motion made by Dr. Mitchell and seconded by Ms. Magness. On the third request for reassignment, administration requested Board approval to assign Rhonda Dunn as a half-time assistant principal at Dunbar Jr. High School. Ms. Dunn would continue to serve as a classroom teacher for 1/2 day. Dr. Mitchell moved to approve the recommendation, and Ms. Magness seconded the motion. Ms. Pondexter spoke in opposition to the motion and suggested that no additional positions should be approved by SPECIAL BOARD MEETING August 8, 1996 Pagei the Board until the teacher contract negotiations are final. The motion failed 4-2, with Dr. Mitchell and Ms. Magness voting in favor of the motion, and Ms. Pondexter, Ms. Gee, Ms. Strickland and Dr. Daugherty voting \"no.\" Approval of Secretarial Position Administration requested approval for funding of a clerical position for the newly created office of the Athletic Director. Dr. Anderson spoke in favor of establishing the position and provided information regarding the cost of funding the position. Dr. Mitchell moved to accept the recommendation and Ms. Magness seconded the motion. Ms. Gee, Dr. Daugherty, Ms. Pondexter and Ms. Strickland all spoke in opposition to the motion. They indicated that, although the position was probably necessary, they would not support creating a new position at this time and suggested that the clerical duties for the Athletic Director should be shared by someone currently employed, either a school-based employee or an employee of the central office. The motion failed 4-2. Briefing by Legal Counsel Mr. Heller was asked to attend the meeting to respond to questions regarding two separate issues before the Board: 1) the erection of a fence on District property during the renovation of adjoining property\nand 2) the pending motion to enforce the Settlement Agreement. 1. The City of Little Rock petitioned the Board to allow the City to construct a temporary fence 20 feet from the eastern boundary of the District's property at 501 Sherman Street for one to two years while Curran Hall is being renovated. Curran Hall will become the City of Little Rock's visitor's information center. There were no objections to this request. 2. Mr. Heller requested the Board's approval to appeal a decision on the issue of the \"pooling\" agreement regarding M-to-M payments from the State of Arkansas. Board members were provided with a copy of a Memorandum and Order dated July 30, 1996, wherein Judge Susan Weber Wright ordered the District to reimburse the PCSSD $345,294 in M-to-M costs for the period FY 1991-92 through FY 1994-95. Mr. Heller indicated he felt an appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court was in order and necessary to limit current and future liability. Ms. Magness moved to accept Mr. Heller's recommendation to appeal the Order. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. The Board recessed at 6:34 p.m.on a motion by Ms. Gee, seconded by Ms. Magness. The regularly scheduled agenda meeting was conducted before reconvening at 7: 17 p.m. Ms. Gee made the motion to move into executive session for the purpose of conducting an employee grievance hearing. Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. SPECIAL BOARD MEETING August 8, 1996 PageS\" EXECUTIVE SESSION Harold Jump, maintenance employee, requested a Board hearing to settle a dispute regarding his placement on the salary schedule for service employees. Brady Gadberry and Doug Eaton were present at the hearing. Mr. Jump felt that he was entitled to placement on the same salary schedule as another maintenance employee who was hired after him. Dr. Anderson recommended that the Board allow Mr. Eaton to review the two positions and make a recommendation based on the process used to set salary steps and grades for plant services employees. He was asked to return at the next Board meeting with his recommendation. Dr. Daugherty moved to accept Dr. Anderson's recommendation to continue the hearing at the next regular meeting. Ms. Gee seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. The Board returned from executive session and reported that no action had been taken. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Board, there was a unanimous motion to adjourn at 8:03 p.m. APPROVED: 9 -JJ, -f(\n~-~~ ~trickland, Secretary t LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES SPECIAL BOARD MEETING August 15, 1996 r, ,I i I ,\nREc Nov 6 - 1996 ,i. Office of Dese i , g egation. Monitoring c,.,!':.I..., The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District called a special meeting at 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, August 15, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. Linda Pondexter, Board President, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Linda Pondexter Ms. Patricia Gee Ms. Sue Strickland Dr. Michael Daugherty Ms. Judy Magness Dr. Katherine Mitchell MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. John Riggs, IV ALSO PRESENT: Dr. Don Roberts, Interim Superintendent Ms. Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes I. CALL TO ORDER Board President, Linda Pondexter, called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. The roll call revealed the presence of six Board members. Mr. Riggs was absent. PURPOSE OF THE MEETING The agenda for the special meeting contained the following items: 1. Secondary Literature Textbook Adoption 2. Teacher Contract Negotiations Update SPECIAL BOARD MEETING August 15, 1996 Page 2 ACTION AGENDA Secondary Literature Textbook Adoption The Secondary English Literature Textbook Adoption committee provided the Board with a memorandum which contained their recommendations for literature textbooks. Dr. Roberts recommended approval of their recommendation. Ms. Magness moved to accept that recommendation, seconded by Dr. Daugherty. The motion carried 5-1, with Dr. Mitchell casting the \"no\" vote. Teacher Contract Negotiations Update Brady Gadberry reported on the progress of the negotiating team in reaching an agreement on the contract for teachers for the 1996-97 school year. He reported that the teachers had voted to ratify the agreement that afternoon and he asked for the Board to suspend the rules to also approve the contract. The one year contract would provide a 2.46% increase, plus the step increase on the salary schedule. There were also some revisions to the fringe benefit package. A copy of that agreement is attached to these minutes. Ms. Gee moved for a suspension of the rules to take action on the proposed contract, Ms. Strickland seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. Dr. Mitchell moved to accept the negotiated 1996-97 teacher contract. Ms. Gee seconded the motion, and it carried 5-0. (Dr. Daugherty left the meeting during the voting and explained that since his wife was employed by the District he was abstaining to prevent any suggestion of a conflict of interest.) ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Board, Ms. Gee moved for adjournment at 6:17 p.m. Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. APPROVED: 8~\ni._? ~ C/k:.- f ,,,\\ 0\\ ~ rt\\'~\\  Salary:  LRCTA PROPOSAL August 15, 1996 - 3:45 p.m. 0 / Step+ 2.46% + topped-out stipend of $810 ~~0 .:. . ~ / ~ '\n. nur:tion: i f7 ~: --1 year  - Fringe Bene.fits: Insurance -Health $164.00 per month (1bis amount can be applied to any health insurance plan including the spouse and/or family plans.)~emium coverage will revert to the 1994-95 contract language at the end of the 97-98 contract year) Drop Long Term Disability Insurance. The savings are reflected in the salary schedule. . Employees who have health insurance from a source other than the LRSD who do not take any of the health insurance plans will receive a $550 stipend.  -\nfv_ ~ ~ ~ ~ fl.,,__ liCJ-4 ~ ~ lfti) N{)i. \\\u0026lt;5'\"'- ~cr1~~ M it ~~ c',~wtt.'f ...,,, M,,,, /l,yi,,\nl,.,i ~ ~? ~~ /i'J(,, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES REGULAR BOARD MEETING August 22, 1996 R NOV 6 - 1996 Office of Des egrega11.o n Monitoring The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District held its regularly scheduled meeting at 6:00 p.m., on August 22, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. The President, Linda Pondexter, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Linda Pondexter Patricia Gee Sue Strickland Michael Daugherty Judy Magness Katherine Mitchell John Riggs, IV MEMBERS ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Don Roberts, Superintendent of Schools Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes I. CALL TO ORDER Board President, Linda Pondexter, called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and stipulated a quorum without a roll call\nall members of the Board were present. The teacher ex officio, Rose Bogan, representing McClellan High School, and the student ex officio, Thaddeus Leopoulos, from Parkview Magnet High School, were also present. II. READING OF MINUTES: Minutes from the regular board meeting of July 25, and from special meetings conducted on July 18, August 8, and August 15, 1996, were presented for Board approval. The minutes were approved unanimously, on a motion by Ms. Gee, seconded by Dr. Mitchell. REGULAR BOARD MEETING August 22, 1996 Page 2 III. PRESENT A TIO NS: A. SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Roberts asked for the Superintendent's Citations script to be read by Ms. Pondexter. Mr. Riggs distributed the certificates of appreciation. Four of the District's school based security officers were recognized for exemplary service to the schools and the students they served during the 1995-96 school year. Those officers were: Robert Moore, from Pulaski Heights Jr. High School\nDonald McTyre, from Cloverdale Jr. High School\nBrian Anderson, from Forest Heights Jr. High\nand Don Allen, from Hall High School. Three of the District's teachers were recognized for their participation in the 1996 Reading/Language Arts Summer Institute at Tulane University sponsored by The National Faculty. They were Theresa Harris, Kathryn Thomas, and Tammy Frahm. Barbara Byrd and Gregory Harris, both teachers at M. L. King Interdistrict Elementary School, were recognized by the Arkansas Council on Economics Education by winning third place honors in the intermediate category of the Bessie B. Moore Arkansas Awards Program for Teaching of Economics. Citations were also presented to the ex officio members of the Board for the month of August\nRose Bogan, McClellan High School teacher, and Thaddeus Leopoulos, student at Parkview Magnet High School. B. CITIZENS COMMITTEES There were no reports from citizens committees. C. 1. SPECIAL PRESENT A TIO NS Office of Desegregation Monitoring Melissa Gulden reported on ODM informal monitoring activities during the first week of school. When questioned by Mr. Riggs, Ms. Gulden offered to have Board Members visit the schools with ODM monitors. REGULAR BOARD MEETING August 22, 1996 Page 3 2. Classroom Teachers Association Frank Martin remarked on the negotiations process and expressed appreciation to Linda Pondexter for supporting the efforts of the CT A. He thanked all members of the contract negotiations team for their hard work in reaching a settlement before the opening of school. He welcomed Dr. Roberts to the District and pledged support for the new administration. 3. Joshua Intervenors No report. 4. Knight Intervenors No report. 5. PT A Council No report. E. BOARD MEMBERS Mike Daugherty read a prepared statement in response to recent media reports regarding his educational background and stressed his commitment to serving the LRSD. Pat Gee complimented the staff of the District, and parents of our students, for a good opening of school week. She also provided a reminder that the LRSD is a service business. Judy Magness expressed appreciation to the teachers, the staff, and the management team, for a good opening of school week. Ms. Magness introduced Larry Berkley, who is unopposed candidate for the Zone 5 Board position. Linda Pondexter offered congratulations to Mr. Berkley, who will be her replacement on the Board. She also offered as advice to fellow Board members to be true to their own conscience when making decisions that affect the District and the students. REGULAR BOARD MEETING August 22, 1996 Page 4 IV. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS V. Robert \"Say\" McIntosh commented on the recent sentencing of Governor Jim Guy Tucker. He remarked on the recent publicity surrounding the educational background of Mike Daugherty and noted that serving on the school board does not require a college degree. He also remarked on the improvements made to the campus of Shorter College under the direction of Dr. Mitchell. Dr. Roberts asked for a moment to provide comments before taking action on the agenda items. He thanked the staff for the opening of school week, and recognized the negotiations team for their work in reaching a settlement. He also expressed appreciation to all District employees who report to work each day with a good attitude. He asked the Board to recognize that all recommendations for action at this meeting were based on the recommendations of District staff and that he reserved the right to ask for modifications at a later date, if necessary. ACTION AGENDA A. Second Reading: District Employee Conflict of Interest Policy Mr. Charles Neal, Director of Procurement \u0026amp; Materials Management, was present to provide background information and respond to questions from Board members. The policy providing guidelines for ethical operations of the District's purchasing process was provided for second reading. District attorney, Harry A. Light, provided a legal review of the proposed policy and his recommendations were incorporated into the drafting of the final documents. Dr. Daugherty moved to approve the policy on second reading, and Ms. Gee seconded the motion. Dr. Mitchell spoke in opposition to the motion and stated that the document was too long, too impractical, not binding, and that she would vote against approval. The motion to approve the policy on second reading carried, 6-1. B. Strategy Three: Action Plan #1 - Policy Revisions First Reading: Promotion and Retention of Students - Regulation for Retention in K- 6 and Regulation for Student Promotion Strategic Planning Team #3 recommended adoption of a policy statement providing for intervention strategies for retention at the elementary level, and guidelines for promotion of elementary school students. Mr. Riggs moved to accept the recommended policy statement and regulations on first reading. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. REGULAR BOARD MEETING August 22, 1996 Page 5 First Reading: Comprehensive Intervention/Follow Up Remediation - Regulation on Intervention/Follow Up Remediation Also a part of the Strategic Plan was the recommended adoption of a policy statement on intervention, follow up remediation, and regulations for operation. Mr. Riggs moved to accept the policy statement and regulations recommended by administration and Strategic Planning Team #3. Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. C. First Reading: Parent Involvement Policy Statement The Parent Involvement Administrative Team developed a statement which will serve to encourage active parent participation in District activities and was intended to convey the Board's belief in the importance of involving all parents in school activities. The Superintendent recommended approval of the statement on first reading. Ms. Gee moved to accept the statement on first reading. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion and it carried 7-0. D. Student Crime Watch Program The Little Rock Police Department requested instituting a Student Crime Watch program in the schools. The program would operate similarly to the Crime Stoppers Program currently operated by the City and would provide rewards to students for reporting criminal activity or behavior at school or in the community. Sgt. Al Dawson, of the LRPD, was present to respond to questions from Board members. Ms. Gee spoke in favor of the program, and made a motion to accept the proposal. Ms. Magness seconded the motion. Dr. Mitchell and Ms. Pondexter spoke in opposition to the motion and after much discussion, Ms. Magness suggested amending the proposal to include a one-year trial period of implementation. Ms. Gee seconded the motion to amend. The motion to amend failed, as did the original motion, by identical 4-3 votes, with Ms. Gee, Dr. Daugherty and Ms. Magness casting the \"yes\" votes, and Ms. Pondexter, Ms. Strickland, Dr. Mitchell, and Mr. Riggs voting \"no.\" E. Arkansas Public Schools Week The Arkansas School Public Relations Association announced the theme for this year's observance, October 6-12, 1996, of Arkansas Public Schools Week. By proclamation of Governor Mike Huckabee, the theme is Arkansas Public Schools: Put Yourself in the Picture. The Board was asked to pass a resolution in support of this state-wide observance. Mr. Riggs moved to approve the resolution, Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. REGULAR BOARD MEETING August 22, 1996 Page 6 F. Facilities Study Committee Ms. Strickland requested the Board's approval to add four additional persons to the Districtwide Facilities Study Committee. The Board was provided an updated list of the participants on this committee. The newly appointed members were: Lou Ethel Nauden, Gregg Stutts, Skip Marshall, and Brady Gadberry. Mr. Riggs moved to approve the additions to the committee. Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. G. Donations of Property The Board was asked to approve acceptance of recent donations to the District. Mr. Riggs made a motion to accept the donated items, the motion was seconded by Dr. Mitchell and it carried unanimously. Donated items are listed in the following chart. DONATIONS SCHOOL/DEPARTMENT ITEM DONOR Packard-Bell Computer/ Meadowcliff Elementary Monitor and Epson Printer Mary Mitchell Meadowcliff Elementary Sharp UX-185 Fax Sam's Club Machine Mann Arts/Science Magnet Computer/Monitor/Printer Mr. \u0026amp; Mrs. Stanley and Software Bauman, Jr. Chicot Elementary $50.00 cash Wal-Mart Store# 124 H. Personnel Changes Dr. Roberts recommended approval of personnel changes printed in the agenda and referred the Board to Dr. Hurley to answer specific questions. Mr. Riggs moved to accept the personnel changes, Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. I. Financial Reports Mark Milhollen was present to respond to questions of the Board. Mr. Riggs moved to approve the financial reports for the period ending June 30, 1996. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion and it carried 7-0. REGULAR BOARD MEETING August 22, 1996 Page 7 VI. REPORT AGENDA A. Desegregation Update The Desegregation Update was printed in the agenda. August 21, 1996 enrollment figures were provided for comparison with 1995 data. B. Budget Update Mark Milhollen was present and answered questions from the Board regarding the financial reports printed in the agenda. Later in the meeting, Dr. Roberts reminded the Board of the upcoming dates for filing the final budget and suggested that an extension would be requested so that the budget can be finalized. He indicated that the Board might be asked to hold a special meeting to approve the final budget prior to submission. C. Briefing by Legal Counsel Chris Heller, Attorney with the Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark law firm, provided a brief written report regarding two issues pending before the Court. 1) The North Little Rock School District's motion to close Baring Cross School\nand 2) a motion filed on behalf of school districts across the state to intervene as defendants in the Pulaski County School Desegregation case. Mr. Heller was not present at the meeting, but his report offered to provide additional information as needed. D. Transportation Update: LRSD/Laidlaw Joint Report Ed Streeter, terminal manager for Laidlaw, and Mary Jane Cheatham, from the District's transportation department provided a written report for the Board's approval. Ms. Gee asked several questions regarding safety stops, the costs involved in adding stops to existing routes, and adding additional routes. E. Update: Truancy Pick Up Procedures Jo Evelyn Elston, Director of Pupil Services, and Officer Archie Adcock from the Southwest precinct, were present to answer questions regarding the revised truancy pick up procedures printed in the agenda. F. Status Report: Grants Writer The Board had no additional questions regarding the summary report provided by Marvin Schwartz, District grants writer. Ms. Pondexter commented that she wanted to ensure that the grants writer's salary was being paid from grant funding received. REGULAR BOARD MEETING August 22, 1996 Page 8 G. District Advisory Committees At Ms. Pondexter' s request, membership lists of subcommittees that developed as a result of the Strategic Planning process were provided as a part of the agenda. VII. AUDIENCE WITH INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS None. VIII. HEARINGS: DISCIPLINARY Ten students were recommended for reinstatement to LRSD schools and two students were referred for placement at the Pulaski County Juvenile Justice Center by Linda Watson, Student Hearing Officer. Dr. Roberts upheld those recommendations. Ms. Magness made a motion to accept the recommended reinstatements and alternative placements, Mr. Riggs seconded the motion, and it carried 7-0. A list of the students is attached to these minutes. EXECUTIVE SESSION Ms. Pondexter asked for a motion from the Board to go into an executive session for the purpose of discussing a personnel matter. Mr. Riggs made the motion, seconded by Dr. Daugherty. The motion was unanimously approved. The Board returned from executive session and reported that no action was taken during that session. Board President Pondexter asked for a motion and recognized Mr. Riggs. Mr. Riggs made a motion for the Board to accept Dr. Williams' resignation and, in exchange for service rendered to the District, allow Dr. Williams to retain those moneys already expended in Item 5 E of his contract, and the unused vacation for which he has already been compensated. Ms. Strickland seconded the motion and it carried 6-1, with Dr. Mitchell casting the \"no\" vote. ADJOURNMENT With no further business before the Board, Mr. Riggs moved for adjournment at 8:03 p.m. The motion was seconded by Dr. Daugherty, and it carried un imousl .  #Liu APPROVED: C-f J\u0026amp;, -9\u0026amp;\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES SPECIAL BOARD MEETING September 12, 1996 NOV 6 - 1996  Offi~e of Deso r g eg lion Monitoring The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District held a special meeting immediately following the regular agenda meeting on Thursday, September 12, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. Linda Pondexter, Board President, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Linda Pondexter Ms. Patricia Gee Ms. Sue Strickland Dr. Michael Daugherty Ms. Judy Magness Mr. John Riggs, IV MEMBERS ABSENT: Dr. Katherine Mitchell ALSO PRESENT: Mari Flemons, Teacher Exofficio, Parkview Magnet High School Dr. Don Roberts, Superintendent of Schools Ms. Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes I. CALL TO ORDER Linda Pondexter, called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and stipulated the presence of a quorum. Dr. Mitchell was absent. PURPOSE OF THE MEETING The agenda for the special meeting contained the following items: 1. Student Reinstatement Petitions 2. Student Appeal Hearings SPECIAL BOARD MEETING September 12, 1996 Page2 Suspension oftlze Rules Mr. Riggs made a motion to suspend the rules in order to act on an item not included in the published agenda. Ms. Strickland seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Mr. Riggs made a motion to rescind a previous Board action. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. At a special meeting on August 8, 1996, the Board voted 4-2 to deny the administration's request to create a clerical staff position for the office of Athletics. Administration was given authority to proceed with staffing the position. ACTION AGENDA The Board moved into executive session for the purpose of conducting student disciplinary hearings on a motion by Ms. Gee, seconded by Dr. Daugherty. Linda Watson, Student Hearing Officer presented recommendations for placement and reinstatement of two students: Orlando Ellis was expelled from McClellan High School in March 1996, for participating in a gang-related disturbance. He petitioned the Board for reinstatement and the principal of McClellan agreed to his reinstatement there on strict probation. Janai Washington was expelled in November 1995, from McClellan High School. He had petitioned for reinstatement, but due to his age (17), it was recommended that Janai be given an assignment to the Alternative High School at the Job Corp Center. Ms. Magness made a motion to accept the administration's recommendations for reinstatement and placement of these two students. Mr. Riggs seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Three students were present to appeal their expulsions to the Board. Zainab Opurum was recommended for expulsion from Hall High School for possession of a weapon. She asked the Board to reconsider the administration's recommendation and allow her to return to school. Dr. Watson recommended placement at the Job Corp Alternative High School for the remainder of the first semester. She would be allowed to petition for reinstatement to Hall High School if she maintains a good record in the JC program. Ms. Strickland moved to accept the recommendation, Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. SPECIAL BOARD MEETING September 12, 1996 Page 3 Vinson Anderson was recommended for expulsion from Forest Heights Jr. High School on August 27, 1996. He had been charged with being in possession of a pocket knife. Dr. Watson recommended placement at the ALC for the remainder of the first semester. Vinson would be considered for reinstatement at semester if he maintains good progress. Mr. Riggs moved to accept the recommended placement, Ms. Magness seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. Shakina Floyd, eighth grade student from Forest Heights Jr. High School, was recommended for long-term suspension for participating in a group fight in which she was charged with inciting to riot. Dr. Watson upheld the principal's recommendation for a long-term suspension and assigned Shakina to the Alternative Leaming Center for the remainder of the first semester of the school year. Shakina's mother objected to placement at the ALC and appealed to Dr. Vic Anderson and then to the Board when Dr. Anderson also recommended the ALC placement. Ms. Strickland moved to accept the administration's recommendation for placement at the ALC. Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried 4-2, with Mr. Riggs and Dr. Daugherty casting the \"no\" votes. Jabari Cummins had also been scheduled to appeal his expulsion to the Board, but did not arrive for the hearing. His parent phoned to ask for another hearing date. The Board returned from executive session at 6:43 p.m. and reported that the administration's recommendations had been accepted unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Board, Ms. Gee moved for adjournment at 6:45 p.m. Mr. Riggs seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Pat Gee, Vice-President APPROVED: q. J.w  9 l.o ~~,he=-} Sue rickland, Secretary LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES REGULAR BOARD MEETING September 26, 1996 NOV 6 ~ 1996 Office of Deseg regat,.o n Monitoring The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District held its regularly scheduled meeting at 6:00 p.m., on September 26, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. The Vice-President, Pat Gee, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Gee Larry Berkley Michael Daugherty Judy Magness Katherine Mitchell John Riggs, IV MEMBERS ABSENT: Sue Strickland ALSO PRESENT: I. Don Roberts, Superintendent of Schools Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes Judge Chris Piazza Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney CALL TO ORDER Prior to the call to order, Judge Chris Piazza administered the oath of office to Larry Berkley, newly elected Board representative from Zone 5. Board Vice-President, Pat Gee, called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. Roll call revealed the presence of five Board members\nDr. Daugherty arrived at 6: 17 p.m. The teacher exofficio, Mari Flemmons, representing Parkview Magnet High School was also present. REGULAR BOARD MEETING September 26, 1996 Page 2 II. READING OF MINUTES: Minutes from the regular board meeting of August 22, 1996, and from a special meeting conducted on September 12, 1996, were presented for Board approval. The minutes were approved unanimously, on a motion by Mr. Riggs, seconded by Dr. Mitchell. III. PRESENT A TIO NS: A. SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Gene France from the Arkansas Allergy Society presented the District's physician, Dr. Chris Smith, with 51 epipens for placement in each school in the District. These pens are for use when a student suffers a severe allergic reaction. Use of the epipen allows nonmedical personnel to administer the proper treatment in an emergency. Ms. Linda Pondexter was presented with a plaque and gavel in recognition of her service to the LRSD Board of Directors, 1993-1996\nshe served as president of the Board for two years of her term. Mr. Wendell Redmond, math teacher at Mann Magnet Jr. High School was presented with a citation in recognition of his selection as an Entergy Outstanding Teacher of the Year. He will be honored by Entergy by receipt of a $500 cash award. The final citation was presented to Ms. Mari Flemmons, teacher at Parkview Magnet High School, who served as the ex-officio member of the Board for the month of September. B. PARTNERSHIPS Dr. Roberts recognized Debbie Milam, VIPS Coordinator, who presented the partnership certificates to the following schools and local businesses: UALR Division oflnternational and Second Language Studies, partnering with Brady Elementary School\nAda Keown, principal, accepted the partnership certificates on behalf of UALR Staff, Dave McAlpine, Dr. Mary Garrett, and Professor Stephanie Dhonau, who could not be in attendance at the meeting. Geyer Springs Neighborhood Association, represented by Linda Heffington and Verleen Williamson, in partnership with Geyer Springs Elementary School, Julie Davenport, principal. Mr. Riggs moved to accept the new partnerships, Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. REGULAR BOARD MEETING September 26, 1996 Page 3 C. CITIZENS COMMITTEES Vice Mayor, Joan Adcock, presented information to the Board regarding the city's \"Cash for Trash Dash - 1996\" scheduled for Saturday, November 2, 1996. Vice-Mayor Adcock challenged the Board to adopt a neighborhood for clean-up and asked for participation from school groups within the District. Ms. Magness asked Ms. Gee to recognize Hafeeza Majeed for presentation of the Factfinding Committee's report on the Desegregation Plan. Ms. Majeed instead presented a petition requesting a special meeting of the LRSD Board for the purpose of presenting recommendations for modification of the current Desegregation Plan. D. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 1. Office of Desegregation Monitoring No report. 2. Classroom Teachers Association No report. 3. Joshua Intervenors No report. 4. Knight Intervenors No report. 5. PT A Council No report. SPECIAL REPORT Ms. Gee requested that Chris Heller, Attorney for the District, present information scheduled on the agenda under \"Reports\" at this time. Without objection from other Board members, Mr. Heller provided a briefing on two issues relating to the Desegregation case and on the Lakeview School District lawsuit. REGULAR BOARD MEETING September 26, 1996 Page 4 Mr. Heller reported that Judge Wright acknowledged the Joshua Intervenors agreement at the time of the Settlement, and that the two million dollar fee paid by the District at that time was to cover future monitoring of the desegregation case by Joshua. She found, therefore, that the District did not owe any additional fees to the Joshua Intervenors for monitoring. With respect to the District's motion to end federal court jurisdiction, Mr. Heller reported that school districts across the country are being dismissed from federal court supervision when they are found to be in substantial compliance with their desegregation plans. It is his belief that federal court jurisdiction over the LRSD should end because there is evidence to prove substantial compliance with our obligations. Judge Wright had rejected our argument that the desegregation plan was a six year plan, but did so without a formal hearing on the evidence. There are two motions pending in the Court concerning desegregation compliance issues, both filed by the Joshua Intervenors. One suggests that an independent party should be named to run the incentive schools\nthe other asks that the District be held in contempt for non-compliance with its obligations. Mr. Heller suggested that we ask the Judge to reconsider her decision on our motion, and to schedule a hearing in conjunction with the hearing Joshua is seeking so that we might have the opportunity to present our evidence. The District has thirty days from the date of the order to consider filing an appeal. Mr. Heller indicated that he would ask the Judge to reconsider the motion and to schedule a hearing unless there was objection from the Board. There were no objections noted by Board members. Regarding the lawsuit filed by the Lakeview School District, Judge Annabelle Imber ruled that the state school funding formula was unconstitutional and the state was given two years to propose a constitutional plan for funding school districts. A trial is scheduled for November to determine whether or not they have complied. The Lakeview School District has filed to make the suit a class action lawsuit and, therefore, Mr. Heller believes the LRSD should intervene in order to be properly represented in the lawsuit and to protect our interests in the case. Mr. Heller also reported that if Amendment One fails (on the November ballot) the State's present plan for funding school districts will also fail. If that occurs, decisions regarding future plans for funding will probably be made in Judge Imber's courtroom. The central Arkansas school districts should be a part of this process for the purpose of protecting our future interest in school funding. REGULAR BOARD MEETING September 26, 1996 Page 5 E. BOARD MEMBERS Dr. Mitchell reported on her visit to the Adult Education Building and commended the staffs of Adult Ed. and HIPPY for the work that has been done at their new location. She also offered congratulations to Sterling Ingram, who recently announced his intent to retire from the District. Dr. Daugherty invited members of the Board and community to attend a PTA rally to be held at Garland Incentive School on October 8. He extended a welcome to new Board member, Larry Berkley. Ms. Magness reported on attending open houses at Gibbs, Hall, and Dunbar. She thanked Vernon Smith, the new principal at Forest Heights, for providing a tour of the school, and invited other patrons to visit FHJH. She expressed appreciation to Laidlaw and District transportation employees for the on-time bus service during the first few weeks of school. Ms. Magness also thanked the Little Rock Alliance for Our Public Schools and the Little Rock Chamber of Commerce for the reception they hosted to welcome Dr. and Mrs. Roberts. Mr. Berkley thanked Board members and administration employees who had been helpful in providing assistance to him during his first few days on the Board. He reported that he had visited Terry, Dunbar and Central, and thanked District employees who had been involved in providing a quality education to his children. Ms. Gee thanked Sterling Ingram for his many years of service to the District. She also welcomed Larry Berkley to the Board. IV. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS Hazel Bowers, a retired LRSD employee, commented on the dedicated serviced provided to LRSD students by Mr. Ingram. She spoke on behalf of Cleveland Ellis and asked for the Board to support funding for the STOP (Students That Officially Patrol ) program coordinated by Mr. Ellis. Cleveland Ellis provided information to the Board regarding the STOP Program and asked for consideration to continue funding. He is currently funded through the Healthy Family Center Grant\nthat funding will end September 30. Casey Latimore, a student who has participated in the STOP Program, also asked the Board to fund the STOP Program. REGULAR BOARD MEETING September 26, 1996 Page 6 V. ACTION AGENDA A. Election of Officers Mr. Riggs made a motion to table the election of officers until after the Zone 1 run-off election on October 8, 1996. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion, and it carried 6-0. B. Second Reading: Promotion and Retention of Students Regulation for Retention in K-6 - Student Promotion Regulation Second Reading: Comprehensive Intervention/Follow Up Remediation - Regulation on Intervention/Follow Up Remediation Policy revisions and regulations for promotion and retention of K-6 students and for intervention and follow up remediation procedures for elementary students, as recommended by the Strategic Planning Team Three, were approved on first reading at the August Board meeting. Mr. Riggs moved to approve both of these policies on second reading. Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it passed 6-0. C. Second Reading: Parent Involvement Policy Statement The Parent Involvement Administrative Team develop~d a statement to encourage active parent participation in District activities. The statement is intended to convey the Board's belief in the importance of involving all parents in school activities. The policy statement was approved on first reading at the August meeting of the Board. Mr. Riggs moved to accept the policy on second reading, Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion, and it carried 6-0. D. Naming of Drive at Henderson for James L. Washington Students and staff at Henderson Health Science Magnet School requested the naming of the driveway at Henderson for James L. Washington, principal, in recognition of his commitment to improving the school and community. Ms. Magness moved to accept the recommendation of the administration to allow placement of a sign naming the drive James L. Washington Court. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion and it carried 6-0. E. Approval of the 1995-96 Annual Report District program managers developed the 1995-96 annual report which is required to be published in the form of a legal notice prior to September 30 of each year. Administration requested the Board's approval of the report for submission to the Arkansas DemocratGazette for publication. Dr. Mitchell made a motion for approval, which was seconded by Mr. Riggs, and carried unanimously. REGULAR BOARD MEETING September 26, 1996 Page 7 F. Goals 2000 Grant Submissions Two Goals 2000 Grant applications were submitted to the Arkansas Department of Education for consideration. One would provide funding to train administrators and teachers preparing for administrative certification\nthe second would provide math and science staff development for instructors at Central High School. The administration asked for the Board's approval to maintain the submissions. Mr. Riggs moved to approve the grant submissions. Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion and it carried 6-0. G. Mini-Grant Submissions Two mini-grant applications were submitted for consideration during the month of September. Dr. Mitchell moved to approve the submissions\nthe motion was seconded by Ms. Magness and carried unanimously. SCHOOL Rightsell Elementary Fulbright Elementary PROGRAM Academic achievement through exposure to community and professional activities Classroom literacy program to increase reading skills. H. Capitol Improvement Proposal AMOUNT ORGANIZATION $2,000 Rockefeller Foundation $2,000 Rockefeller Foundation Administration requested the Board's approval to submit a proposal for funding capitol improvements to the Adult Education Center in the amount of $16,392.00. Dr. Mitchell made a motion to approve the request, Mr. Riggs seconded the motion, and it carried 6-0. I. Consolidated Application for Special Education and Related Services, 1996-97 The Board was asked to approve the 1996-97 application for funding Special Education and Related Services under the Consolidated VI-B Budget. Mr. Berkley moved to approve the application, Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. REGULAR BOARD MEETING September 26, 1996 Page 8 J. Approval of 1996-97 School Year Budget The 1996-97 School Year budget, due for submission to the Arkansas Department of Education on September 27, 1996, had previously been provided to Board members for review. Mark Milhollen was present to respond to questions and provide additional information. Dr. Roberts recommended approval of the budget for submission and indicated that he would begin the process of reviewing the budget for modifications over the next few months. Mr. Riggs moved to accept the superintendent's recommendation. Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. K. Donations of Property The Board was asked to approve acceptance of recent donations to the District. Mr. Riggs made a motion to accept the donated items, the motion was seconded by Dr. Mitchell and it carried unanimously. Donated items are listed in the following chart. DONATIONS SCHOOL/DEPARTMENT ITEM DONOR LRSD/Health Services 50 Epipens Ark. Allergy Society Central High School Used IBM Computer/ Charles Bolton/UALR Monitor Metropolitan Vo-Tech 1989 Ford Festiva Anonymous Metropolitan Vo-Tech 1996 Geo Metro Chevrolet Motor Division/Bale Chevrolet McDermott Elementary Exterior Sign McDermott PTA L. Personnel Changes Dr. Roberts recommended approval of personnel changes printed in the agenda and referred the Board to Dr. Hurley to answer specific questions. Dr. Mitchell moved to accept the personnel changes, Mr. Riggs seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. M. Financial Reports Mark Milhollen was present to respond to questions of the Board. Mr. Riggs moved to approve the financial reports for July and August, as printed in the agenda. Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion and it carried 6-0. REGULAR BOARD MEETING September 26, 1996 Page 9 VI. REPORT AGENDA A. Desegregation Update The Desegregation Update was printed in the agenda. Members of the Board did not ask any additional questions. B. Class Action Lawsuit: Lakeview School District vs. State of Arkansas Chris Heller, attorney with the Friday Law Firm provided his report earlier in this agenda at the request of the Board. VII. AUDIENCE WITH INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS Sarah Facen, candidate for Zone 1 on the Board, presented two knives that she indicated had been found on the bus stop in her neighborhood. She asked the Board to develop a policy that would insure safety of children at bus stops. Ms. Magness moved for the Board to go into executive session for the purpose of conducting student disciplinary hearings at 7:30 p.m. Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. VIII. HEARINGS: DISCIPLINARY Five students petitioned the Board for reinstatement and their requests were provided for the Board's review. Dr. Linda Watson, student hearing officer, provided information on the following students: Keon Johnson had been expelled from McClellan High School in January 1996, for participating in gang activity. Since he is an 18 year-old, 12th grade student, the principal was willing to readmit him on strict probation in order to give him the opportunity to complete high school. The administration recommended allowing Keon to return to McClellan. Barbara Miller was expelled from Forest Heights Jr. High School in November 1995, for inciting to riot. She had been assigned previously to the Juvenile Justice Center, but did not successfully complete that program. The administration recommended denial of the petition to return to the Little Rock School District and again made a referral for Barbara to attend the JJC. REGULAR BOARD MEETING September 26, 1996 Page 10 Kendrick Alexander was recommended for expulsion from Henderson Jr. High School for possession of a weapon on the bus stop. The principal requested that the Board allow Kendrick to return to school on strict probation, and administration recommended that the Board approve that request. Billy Robinson was charged with possession of a weapon, and recommended for expulsion from Henderson Jr. High School, in the same incident noted above for Kendrick Alexander. The principal requested an opportunity to work with Billy and recommended that the Board allow him to return to school. The superintendent recommended approval of the principal's request for reinstatement. Christopher Berry was recommended for expulsion from Mann Magnet Jr. High School for possession of a weapon. The weapon was found during a scan and had not been used to threaten or injure anyone. Since the student had no prior disciplinary charges, the principal requested reinstatement. Administration recommended approval of the principal's request. The Board returned from executive session and reported that the Board approved the administration's recommendations on student disciplinary requests by a unanimous vote, on a motion made by Mr. Riggs and seconded by Dr. Mitchell. ADJOURNMENT --- APPROVED: IO JL/ -Cf (t, PULASKI COUNTY 96 68875 P.O. Box 2659 Little Rock, AR 72203-2659 CAROLYN STALEY Circuit County Clerk and Registrar 40 I WEST MARKHAM, SUITE I 00 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-2325 OFFICIAL OATH County Circuit Court 50 t-J40-S-l3 I FAX 501-340-8340 I, LARRY BERKLEY , do hereby solemnly swear or affirm, that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Arkansas, and that I will not be interested directly or indirectly, in any contract made by the district of which I am a Director, except that said contract be for materials bought on open competitive bid and let to the lowest bidder and that I will faithfully discharge the duties as school director in LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ZONE 5 of Pulaski County, Arkansas, upon which I am about to enter. Cl uJ\n::, \u0026gt;-i Cl Ln WW o=: _J..J ~ a:) \u0026lt;(CJ c:...\n, ::c -\u0026gt;- UJ c::: c:r 'f)~ = \"''::[ =5 :2: .-o I :CJ ~ = ~ LL.! -....! ~ ~== u.. NAME ~ \\L\\'~~~ .c ~~\"'k ~?\u0026lt; .. ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE CJ ... '.. .. Sworn to and subscribed before me, \u0026gt;i:7\"\"~--------'--:....\u0026amp;.....----' a c~~/ ~ in the County of Pulaski this the One Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety-Six A.D. Civil / Criminal (50 I) 340-843 I Fax (50 I) 340-8420 Marriage License (50 I) 340-8330 Real Estate (5 0 I) 340-8433 Voter Registration (50 I) 340-8683 Fax (50 I) 340-8340 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES SPECIAL BOARD MEETING October 10, 1996 Nov 6 - l99i Office Of D esegregat,on M The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District held a special meeting immediately preceding the regular agenda meeting on Thursday, October 10, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. Pat Gee, VicePresident, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Patricia Gee Larry Berkley Michael Daugherty Judy Magness Katherine Mitchell John Riggs, IV MEMBERS ABSENT: Sue Strickland ALSO PRESENT: Dr. Don Roberts, Superintendent of Schools Ms. Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes Mitchell Perry, teacher ex officio, Metropolitan I. CALL TO ORDER Ms. Gee called the meeting to order at 5: 15 p.m. Roll call revealed the presence of six board members\nMs. Strickland was absent. on,tormg SPECIAL BOARD MEETING October 10, 1996 Page 2 PURPOSE OF THE MEETING The agenda for the special meeting contained the following items: I. Swearing in Ceremony II. Election of Officers III. Personnel Item IV. Expulsion Recommendations V. Student Appeal Hearing ACTION AGENDA Prior to the call to order, Carolyn Staley, County and Circuit Clerk, administered the oath of office to Katherine Mitchell, who was reelected to represent Zone 1 on the Board of Directors. Election of Officers Ms. Gee, Vice-Presidentppened the floor for nomination for the position of president. Dr. Mitchell nominated John Riggs for the position of President of the Board. There being no other nominations for president, Ms. Gee requested a motion for election by acclamation. Dr. Mitchell moved for election by acclamation, seconded by Ms. Magness and the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Riggs opened the floor for nominations for the position of vice president of the Board. Mr. Berkley nominated Judy Magness for election by acclamation. Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Mr. Riggs asked for nominations for the position of secretary. Ms. Magness nominated Ms. Gee, who declined to accept the nomination. Dr. Mitchell nominated Michael Daugherty for the position of secretary. Mr. Berkley seconded the nomination and it carried unanimously. Personnel Item Dr. Daugherty moved to rescind a previous Board action which denied approval of a halftime assistant principal position at Dunbar Magnet Junior High School, and by that action to approve the position. Ms. Gee seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. Dr. Roberts also recommended that the Board approve of the position of secretary to the athletic director. Dr. Mitchell moved to accept Dr. Robert's recommendation, Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried 6-0. SPECIAL BOARD MEETING October 10, 1996 Page 3 Mr. Riggs asked for a motion to recess the special meeting to conduct the regular agenda meeting at 5:25 p.m .. Ms. Gee moved to recess, seconded by Mr. Berkley, and carried 6-0. Dr. Mitchell left at this time due to a previous appointment. After conducting the agenda meeting and recessing for a short break, the Board returned to the special meeting agenda at 6:28 p.m. Student Hearings Linda Watson, Student Hearing Officer presented information and recommendations for students who had received disciplinary suspensions or expulsion sanctions. Those students and the recommendations are noted for the Board's action. Kelton Montgomery was suspended from Central High School for possession of a weapon. He did not appeal the suspension and the Board was asked to uphold the administration in the expulsion. Misty Odem-Harris, from Pulaski Heights and Corey Young, from Henderson, were both recommended for expulsion for verbal abuse of staff. The hearing officer has been unable to reach the parents of these students to schedule hearings or reinstatement conferences. The Board was asked to officially expel these students for their behavior. Dr. Roberts upheld the recommendation of the student hearing officer. Ms. Gee moved to accept the recommendation, Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion, and it carried 5-0. Dimitrios Stubblefield appeared before the Board to appeal the decision of the school administration to place him at the Alternative Learning Center. Dimitrios was expelled from Cloverdale Junior High School for possession of a weapon. Due to the number of previous suspensions and expulsions, the principal asked that Dimitrios not be returned to Cloverdale, but that he be given the opportunity to continue his education at the ALC. Dr. Watson agreed with the building administration and also recommended placement at the ALC. Dimitrios and his mother asked the Board to allow him to return to Cloverdale. Dr. Roberts supported the recommended placement at the ALC for the remainder of the first semester. IfDimitrios exhibits acceptable behavior during his assignment to the ALC, he could return to Cloverdale Jr. High School for the second semester. Dr. Daugherty moved to accept the recommendation, seconded by Mr. Berkley, and the motion carried unanimously. SPECIAL BOARD MEETING October 10, 1996 Page4 On completion of the student hearings, and at the Superintendent's request, the Board convened an executive session at 6:45 p.m., for the purpose of discussing a personnel matter. The motion was made by Dr. Daugherty, seconded by Ms. Gee, and carried unanimously. The Board returned from executive session to report that they had upheld the superintendent's recommendation on all student disciplinary hearings and that no action was taken during the personnel discussion. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Board, Dr. Daugherty moved for adjournment at 7:38 p.m. Ms. Magness seconded the motion and it carried unanimouslv. APPROVED: I 0-~ 4 -qe, ~.L, .L ~ L Michael Daugherty,retary PULASKI COUNTY P.O. Box 2659 Little Rock, AR 72203-2659 CAROLYN STALEY Circuit County Clerk and Registrar 401 WEST MARKHAM, SUITE 100 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-2325 OFFICIAL OATH County Circuit Court 501-340-843 I FAX 501-340-8340 I, KA THERINE PHILLIPS MITCHELL , do hereby solemnly swear or affirm, that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Arkansas, and that I will not be interested directly or indirectly, in any contract made by the district of which I am a Director, except that said contract be for materials bought on open competitive bid and let to the lowest bidder and that I will faithfully discharge the duties as school director in LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DIS CT, ZONE 1 of Pulaski ADDRESS n L L f+k +:Ge_(( }H2_ ? J-J-a\n.___ CITY STATE (zIP CODE Sworn to and subscribed before me, CAROLYN STALEY a CIRCUIT COUNTY CLERK for the County of Pulaski this the -./-0- day of October, One Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety-Six A.D. Civil/ Criminal (501) 340-8431 Fax (50 I) 340-8420 Marriage License (501) 340-8330 Real Estate (501) 340-8433 Voter Registration (50 I) 340-8683 Fax (501) 340-8340 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES REGULAR BOARD MEETING October 24, 1996 The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District held its regularly scheduled meeting at 6:00 p.m., on October 24, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. The Vice-President, Judy Magness, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Judy Magness Michael Daugherty Larry Berkley Pat Gee MEMBERS ABSENT: Katherine Mitchell John Riggs, IV Sue Strickland ALSO PRESENT: Don Roberts, Superintendent of Schools Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes I. CALL TO ORDER Board Vice-President, Judy Magness, called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. Roll call revealed the presence of four Board members. Mr. Riggs, Dr. Mitchell and Ms. Strickland were absent. The teacher ex- officio, Mitchell Perry, representing Metropolitan Vocational-Technical High School was also present. II. READING OF MINUTES: Minutes from the regular board meeting of September 26, 1996, and from a special meeting conducted on October 10, 1996, were presented for Board approval. The minutes were fil!I!TI)Ved by a 4-0 vote, on a motion by Mr. Berkley, seconded by Dr. Daugherty. REGULAR BOARD MEETING October 24, 1996 Page 2 ill. PRESENTATIONS: A. SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Roberts recognized several students who had entered artwork in the Bus Safety Week competition\nthe winning posters were on display in the Board Room. Forest Heights Jr. High students, Calvin Williams, Chris Graham, James Mauney, Jordan Smith, Kari Riedy, Lonzell Pride and Ray Braxton were winners in the group competition\nMabelvale Jr. High student, Thomas Bennett, was the winner in the individual competition. Dr. Ann Smith, history professor at Henderson State University presented a plaque to Christine Green, who teaches history at Hall High School. Ms. Green was recognized by the Arkansas Association of College History Teachers as the Outstanding High School History Teacher for 1996-97. Mr. Lee Gordon, Director of the Arkansas Business and Education Alliance, was at the meeting to recognize the Men of Dunbar, who serve as mentors to students at that school. The Men of Dunbar were awarded the Arkansas Friends for Better Schools/ Arkansas Times 1996 Public School Heroes Award. The membership in_cludes John Talley, Bruce Washington, Carl Hines, L. T. Davis, Lucious Powell, Sterling Rogers, James Vault, Jack Gilbert, Addison Dean, Emmett Willis, Eugene Porter, and Wendell Shead. The members who were present accepted the plaque and other gifts on behalf of the entire group. Miro Hundley, Wayne Cranford, and Gary Smith were recognized for their efforts in offering an opportunity for all 4th grade students in the District to attend \"The Snow Queen. \" Although these individuals were unable to attend the Board meeting, they will receive a letter of appreciation for their contribution to our students. Dr. Roberts presented a citation and plaque to Leonard Willis, who has been employed by the District for 50 years. There will be a reception honoring Mr. Willis on October 30, in the administration building lounge. The final citation was presented to Mitchell Perry, teacher at Metropolitan VocationalTechnical High School, who served as the ex-officio member of the Board for the month of October. REGULAR BOARD MEETING October 24, 1996 Page 3 B. PARTNERSHIPS Dr. Roberts recognized Debbie Milam, VIPS Coordinator, who presented the partnership certificates to the following schools and local businesses: Corky's Restaurant, represented by Carla Hilburn, in partnership with Fulbright Elementary School, represented by Mac Huffman and Beverly Jones. Arkansas Bar Association, represented by Carol King and Jerry Rutledge, partnering with the LRSD Social Studies Department and Mann Magnet School, represented by Marie McNeal, Marian Lacey and Martha Daniel. Cyber Learning Academy, represented by Ron and Yona McFarlane, in partnership with Cloverdale Jr. High Academy, represented by Cassandra Norman. Dr. Daugherty moved to accept the new partnerships, Mr. Berkley seconded the motion, and it carried 4-0. C. CITIZENS COMMITTEES None. D. SPECIAL PRESENT A TIO NS 1. Office of Desegregation Monitoring Melissa Gulden, representing ODM monitors, notified the Board that they should have received a current list of monitoring priorities for the current school year. She reported that monitors visited 18 schools in the LRSD during the first few weeks of school and that a report would be forthcoming. 2. Classroom Teachers Association No report. 3. Joshua Intervenors No report. REGULAR BOARD MEETING October 24, 1996 Page 4 4. Knight Intervenors No report. 5. PT A Council No report. E. BOARD MEMBERS Dr. Daugherty reported that he had attended a PTA meeting at Garland Incentive School on October 8, 1996, where PTA officers were elected and installed. He encouraged everyone to vote in the election on November 5, 1996. Ms. Gee encouraged participation in the Coats for Kids Campaign, sponsored annually by Channel 7 and Fashion Park Cleaners. She invited the public to attend a tailgate party preceding the McClellan High School Homecoming Game on October 25. She also reminded the school community that uniforms have been approved by the Board, in concept, and that implementation of individual school uniform policies do not have to be approved by the Board. Ms. Gee reminded the public that transportation complaints should be reported and she provided the telephone numbers for Laidlaw and for an administration office. Ms. Magness congratulated Parkview drama students on their recent performance of \"Tales From the Crypt. \" She also commented on a recent visit to Dunbar Magnet Jr. High School, where she participated in a science project. IV. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS Diane Vibhaker announced her recent appointment as Executive Director of Parents for Public Schools. She pledged support and commitment to building bridges between schools and the community. REGULAR BOARD MEETING October 24, 1996 Page 5 V. ACTION AGENDA A. National Science Foundation Grant The District was invited to submit a proposal for a program to increase the number of students enrolling in and completing courses in math and science through the Little Rock Comprehensive Partnership for Mathematics and Science Achievement. If awarded, the grant would provide up to $200,000 in the first year and up to $800,000 per year for years 2-5. Ms. Gee moved to approve submission of the grant application. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion, and it carried 4-0. B. Eastside Junior High School Building Acts of H \u0026amp; K Enterprises rendered an offer to lease to purchase the old Eastside Junior High School building for $260,000. This community organization would renovate the building and use the space for vocational and technical education programs. Kay Hadley, President of Acts ofH \u0026amp; K, was present to answer questions posed by the Board. Mr. Berkley moved to accept the lease/purchase offer from Acts ofH \u0026amp; K. Ms. Gee seconded the motion and it carried 4-0. C. Hepatitis B Immunizations The Arkansas Department of Health offered the District a supply of Hepatitis B vaccine for use in immunizing District students and employees. Gwen Efird, Coordinator of Health Services, and Brady Gadberry, Director of Labor Relations, were present to respond to questions regarding this offer. Ms. Gee made the motion to approve acceptance of the vaccine, Mr. Berkley seconded the motion, and it passed, 4-0. D. Safe \u0026amp; Drug Free Schools and Communities Application The Board was asked to approve submission of the 1996-97 Safe \u0026amp; Drug Free Schools and Communities application to the Arkansas Department of Education. JoEvelyn Elston, Director of Pupil Services, reported that the grant amount would be $130,084. for implementation of drug abuse prevention programs in grades K-12. Dr. Daugherty moved to approve submission of the application. Mr. Berkley seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. E. Donations of Property The Board was asked to approve acceptance of recent donations to the District. Dr. Daugherty made a motion to accept the donated items, the motion was seconded by Mr. Berkley, and it carried unanimously. Donated items are listed in the following chart. REGULAR BOARD MEETING October 24, 1996 Page 6 VI. DONATIONS SCHOOL/DEPARTMENT ITEM DONOR Pulaski Heights Jr. High Office/Classroom furniture Greg Hart/Southern Office Supply Chicot Elementary Cash ($70.73) Wal-Mart Store/from Sam's Cola Vending Machine Adult Education Center 12 used 386 SX Computers/ ETOP of AT \u0026amp; T and 13 Monitors/8 Keyboards IBEW Jefferson Elementary Microwave Oven Alice Lynn Greenwood Jefferson Elementary 250' of Chain Link Fence Dr. Tom Smith F. Personnel Changes The Superintendent requested the Board's approval of personnel items printed in the agenda and asked that the approval include a slip sheet recommendation to employ Lillie Scull as the principal at Mitchell Incentive Elementary School. Mr. Berkley moved to accept the personnel items, including the slip sheet. Dr. Daugherty se~onded the motion and it carried 4-0. G. Financial Reports Financial reports for the period ending September 30, were presented for the Board's approval. Mr. Berkley made the motion for approval, seconded by Dr. Daugherty and the motion carried 4-0. REPORT AGENDA A. Desegregation Update The Desegregation Update was printed in the agenda. Members of the Board did not ask any additional questions. B. Budget Update Dr. Roberts reported that he would be meeting with Mark Milhollen, LRSD Manager of Financial Services, and Skip Marshall with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring to begin working on a budget proposal for next year. REGULAR BOARD MEETING October 24, 1996 Page 7 C. Cash for Trash Dash Dr. Roberts reported that it was unknown at this time whether any LRSD schools would be participating in the city-sponsored project, Cash for Trash. He will try to determine if any school groups are participating and provide a report to the Board at a later date. VII. AUDIENCE WITH INDMDUALS OR GROUPS None. VIII. HEARINGS: DISCIPLINARY Dr. Daugherty moved for the Board to go into executive session for the purpose of conducting student disciplinary hearings at 7:20 p.m. Mr. Berkeley seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. The Board took a briefrecess and recoRvened at 7:35 p.m. Dr. Linda Watts, acting Student Hearing Officer, presented information on students who had been recommended for suspension or expulsion from District schools. Those students and the circumstances surrounding their disciplinary sanctions are reported. Monika Wright was charged with possession of a weapon and recommended for expulsion from Henderson Jr. High. The \"weapon\" was a screwdriver, which was found when a security officer asked to see a hall pass. The weapon had not been used in a harmful or threatening manner. The principal agreed to allow Monika to return to school, if that return included a strict probationary period. The Superintendent recommended reinstatement on strict probation for the remainder of the school year. Dr. Daugherty moved to accept Dr. Roberts' recommendation. Ms. Gee seconded the motion, and it carried 4-0. Ricardus Flowers was recommended for expulsion from Fair High School for use of a weapon. Ricardus had a pocket knife, which he attempted to use during a fight with another student. During the altercation the police resource officer, as well as the other student, suffered minor injuries from the knife. At the hearing before the Board, Joy Springer was present to represent the student. His parents wanted him readmitted to school, but Ricardus has a pending court date related to this incident, which would prevent his assignment to the alternative high school program at the LR Job Corp Center. Dr. Roberts recommended that Ricardus be allowed to enroll in that program after the November 14 court date. If there are other charges pending, which would prevent assignment to the Job Corp program, he would be referred to the Juvenile Justice Center. Dr. Daugherty made a motion to accept the Superintendent's recommendation. Mr. Berkley seconded the motion and it carried 4-0. REGULAR BOARD MEETING October 24, 1996 Page 8 Two additional students were scheduled for hearings before the Board, but did not appear. Meagan Grinage, Forest Heights Jr. High School student, accepted the administration's recommended placement at the Alternative Learning Center for the remainder of the 1996-97 school year. Willis Bowie, McClellan High School student, did not appear at the scheduled time. The hearing office will attempt to contact his parents to determine if they accepted the recommended placement at the Juvenile Justice Center. The Board returned from executive session and reported that the Board had approved the administration's recommendations on student disciplinary requests by unanimous votes. ADJOURNMENT With no further business before the Board, Mr. Berkley moved for adjournment at 8:22 p.m. The motion was seconded by Dr. Daugherty, and it carried unanimously. APPROVED: l )- ~ I -1 e.p J\n~~ 61. ~ Michael Daugherty, Se\n?tary LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES SPECIAL BOARD MEETING November 7, 1996 The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District held a special meeting immediately following the regular agenda meeting on Thursday, November 7, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. John Riggs, President, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: John Riggs, IV Judy Magness Michael Daugherty Katherine Mitchell Sue Strickland MEMBERS ABSENT: Larry Berkley Pat Gee ALSO PRESENT: Dr. Don Roberts, Superintendent of Schools Ms. Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes Fran Ables, Teacher Ex officio, Cloverdale Jr. High Crystal Holman, Student Ex officio, Hall High I. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Riggs called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Roll call revealed the presence of five board members\nMr. Berkley and Ms. Gee were absent. Ex officio members of the Board, Fran Ables, teacher at Cloverdale Jr. High School, and Crystal Holman, student at Hall High School, were also present. MINUTES - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING November 7, 1996 Page 2 PURPOSE OF THE MEETING The special meeting was called in response to a request by petition, submitted by the Fact Finding Committee for the LRSD Desegregation Plan. ACTION AGENDA Hafeeza Majeed, Chairman of the Fact Finding Committee for the LRSD Desegregation Plan, addressed the Board and presented a report of recommendations for review. A copy of that report is attached to these minutes. Ms. Majeed's presentation included remarks about increased gang activity in the schools, and she expressed concerns about the safety and security of students while on school buses. She noted that bus drivers were not trained to handle disruptive students. Parents who were in attendance at the meeting were also invited to share their concerns with the Board: Desmond Reed related personal experiences as a new resident of the city. He noted concerns regarding a lack of information available for parents. Rose Williams expressed concerns regarding the District's discipline policy and stated that the process used in hearings at school were unfair. Mary Givens stated concerns about the process used to fill magnet school seats. She also noted the increase in gang activity in the schools, especially at Southwest Junior High School. Pauline Reed remarked that there seemed to be a need for better communications and a better relationship between the school and the home. Barbara Johnson stated that some buses were too crowded and suggested that some behavior problems could be eliminated by running more buses and having them run on time. Some problems have escalated because students are alone at stops for too long. The Fact-Finding Committee for the LRSD Desegregation Plan - Is It Mr. Curtis Hall Mr. Howard Love Ms. Hafeeza Majeed Rev. Larry Staggers Mr. Dale Charles Working For African-American Youth? DATE: NOVEMBER 7, 1996 TO : FROM: LRSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS SUPERINTENDENT DON R. ROBERTS THE FACT-FINDING COMMITTEE FOR THE LRSD DESEGREGATION PLAN - IS IT WORKING FOR AFRICAN-AMERICAN YOUTH? SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDING LRSD DESEGREGATION PLAN The Fact-Finding Committee For The Little Rock School District Desegregation Plan - Is It Working For African-American Youth? submits the following recommendations for amending the LRSD Desegregation Plan, as outlined in the \"Desegregation Plan Amendment Process (Deseg. Tool Kit, April 2, 1996~ Appendix D). Please review and reply to the Committee by December 6, 1996, informing us of any action(s) made by the Board regarding the following recommendations: 1. It is our recommendation that the LRSD Board of Directors and Superintendent Don Roberts clearly delineate the District's desegregation mission to the staff and to the community as required in the \"Commitment To Desegregation In The Little Rock School District. (Desegregation Tool Kit, April 2, 1996, page 1) 2. It is our recommendation that \"Opportunity Learning\", as outlined in \"Voices Of The City\", be further researched and studied for consideration as an effective program for effectively educating youth in the LRSD. 3. It is our recommendation that the current educational curriculum of the LRSD be reviewed and revised to include a thorough education of Africa and African-American History. 4. It is our recommendation that \"Conflict Resolution\" education be provided for LRSD students, beginning at the elementary level. 5. It is our recommendation that the \"Zero Tolerance\" policy in the LRSD be reviewed and revised. LRSD Board November 7, 1996 Page Two 6. It is our recommendation that all LRSD monitoring instruments be revised to include input from students. 7. It is our recommendation that teachers and parents in all LRSD schools be required to attend PTA meetings just at parents in LRSD Magnet schools are required to attend. 8. It is our recommendation that independent \"Community Teams\" be formed to provide independent monitoring by parents, students and community members. 9. It is our recommendation that each schoolbus transporting LRSD students have an adult monitor to assist the d~iver. 10. It is our recommendation that no amendments be made to the LRSD Desegregation Plan until the Board and Superintendent have attempted to address these recommendations. Respe tfully submitted: Mr. Curtis Hall, 11/7/96 Rev. Larry Staggers, 11/7/96 MINUTES - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING November 7, 1996 Page3 ADJOURNMENT Ms. Magness moved for adjournment at 8:00 p.m. Dr. Daugherty seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. APPROVED: 11 -J. (-9 \"- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES REGULAR BOARD MEETING November 21, 1996 The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District held its regularly scheduled meeting at 6:00 p.m., on November 21, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. The President, John Riggs, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: John Riggs, IV Judy Magness Michael Daugherty Larry Berkley Pat Gee Katherine Mitchell Sue Strickland MEMBERS ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Don Roberts, Superintendent of Schools Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes I. CALL TO ORDER II. Board President, John Riggs, called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Roll call revealed the presence of all Board members. The teacher ex-officio, Frances Ables, from Cloverdale Jr. High Academy, and the student ex-officio, Crystal Holman, from Hall High School, were also present. READING OF MINUTES: Minutes from the regular board meeting of October 24, 1996, and from a special meeting conducted on November 7, 1996, were presented for Board approval. The minutes were unanimously approved, on a motion by Dr. Mitchell, seconded by Ms. Magness. REGULAR BOARD MEETING November 21, 1996 Page2 III. PRESENTATIONS: A. SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Roberts recognized students from Rockefeller Incentive School Show Choir, directed by I. J. Routen, who performed before the Board. These students have been invited to a choral festival at Carnegie Hall, and they are currently involved in fund-raising activities to enable them to participate. B. PARTNERSHIPS Dr. Roberts introduced Gwen Efird, Health Services Coordinator, who presented School Nurse Awards. Karen Terry received the First Year Nurse Award. Five nurses received certificates in recognition of their nomination for School Nurse of the Year, Stevie Cherepski, Carla Kelley, Marsha Mahan, Betty Nieser, and Lucia Perry. Deborah Bolls was awarded a plaque in honor of her naming as School Nurse of the Year. The Superintendent read a proclamation recently signed by Mayor Jim Dailey, naming November 21, 1996, as \"Education Day\" in the City of Little Rock. A copy of that proclamation is attached to these minutes. Four LRSD teachers were recently named recipients of the Stephens Awards, which are awarded annually through the City Education Trust Fund. Each of these teachers received a $5,000 award: Leslie Kearney, who teaches German at Central High School\nMelissa Donham, who teaches biology at Central High School\nTommie Sue Wood, who teaches history at Fair High School\nand Mildred Walker, a mathematics teacher at McClellan High School. Citations were presented to the ex-officio members of the Board for the month of November\nFrances Ables, teacher from Cloverdale Jr. High Academy, and Crystal Holman, student from Hall High School. Lee Ann Matson represented the VIPS office in presenting the new partnership certificates. The following schools and local businesses were recognized: ITT Technical Institute, represented by Ken Sullivan, in partnership with Cloverdale Jr. High School, represented by Cassandra Norman and Fran Ables. BFI of Arkansas, represented by Tom Boston and John Embree, partnering with Geyer Springs Elementary School, represented by Julie Davenport and Kathy Farley. - REGULAR BOARD MEETING November 21, 1996 Page 3 Arkansas Federal Credit Union, represented by Richard Gilliland and Lorraine Darral/, in partnership with Mitchell Elementary School, represented by Lillie Scull and Mary Ann Hanson. A collaborative partnership with four ecology related entities has been established by the Washington Magnet School staff: Project Learning Tree, partnership certificate accepted by Susan Glaze\nProject WET, Arkansas Department of Pollution Control \u0026amp; Ecology, accepted by Jim Shirrell\nProject WILD, Arkansas Game \u0026amp; Fish Commission, accepted by Pat Knighten\nand Toltec Mounds State Park, represented by Melanie Thornton. Washington Magnet School staff members present to accept certificates were Katherine Snyder, Betty Hansberry, Cathy Schwartz, and Sheila Flaxman. Ms. Magness moved to accept the new partnerships, Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion, and it carried 7-0. C. CITIZENS COMMITTEES None. D. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 1. Office of Desegregation Monitoring Melissa Gulden, representing ODM monitors, stated that their staff is working to complete several reports, including the annual emollrnent comparison reports of the three Pulaski County Districts and a staffing report on the Incentive Schools in the LRSD. 2. Classroom Teachers Association No report. 3. Joshua Intervenors No report. 4. Knight Intervenors No report. REGULAR BOARD MEETING November 21, 1996 Page 4 5. PTA Council No report. E. BOARD MEMBERS Mr. Berkley reported that he had attended a PTA meeting at Fulbright Elementary School and commended the parents and staff for their work in landscaping the school grounds. He also reported on his attendance at the first meeting of the social studies textbook selection committee. Dr. Daugherty thanked the members of the Rockefeller Show Choir for their performance earlier in this meeting. He especially thanked those persons responsible for the inclusion of handicapped students in the choir's presentation. Dr. Mitchell remarked that she attended an assembly at Wilson Elementary School where students were recognized for their academic achievements and citizenship improvements. She also commended District personnel who coordinated the rally last Sunday at Henderson Junior High School for 6th grade students who will attend 7th grade next year. Ms. Magness expressed appreciation to District teachers and principals who spent a weekend in staff development training at the Hilton. IV. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS Pam Marshall, who works with the Central Little Rock Community Development Council, asked the Board to consider an extension of time for development of a proposal for the purchase of the Westside Junior High School property. Volunteers of America had requested, and had been granted an option for purchase of the property. They have been unable to meet their obligations under the terms of the agreement and had indicated a desire to terminate that agreement. V. ACTION AGENDA A. Interim Millage Adjustment The Pulaski County Quorum court establishes the rates of taxation to be levied on taxable real and personal property for the use and benefit of the cities, towns, and schools, as required by State law. As a result of the countywide reappraisal, the millage rates for personal and real property will be adjusted effective January 1, 1997. The new personal property rate will be 41.90 mills, and the new real property rate will be 41 .40 mills. REGULAR BOARD MEETING November 21, 1996 Page 5 The Board was asked to approve a resolution acknowledging the certification of applicable taxes to the County Clerk prior to the regular November Quorum Court meeting. Dr. Mitchell made a motion to approve the resolution, Mr. Berkley seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. A copy of that resolution is attached to these minutes. B. Donations of Property The Board was asked to approve acceptance of recent donations to the District. Ms. Magness made a motion to accept the donated items, the motion was seconded by Dr. Daugherty, and it carried unanimously. Donated items are listed in the following chart. DONATIONS SCHOOL/DEPARTMENT ITEM DONOR Booker Arts Magnet Elem. 386/25 Computer System Robert Bradley Booker Arts Magnet Elem. Two Echo trimmer/ brush Booker Arts PT A cutters McDermott Elem. Garden Plants/supplies Home Depot Jefferson Elem. Microwave Oven Mr. \u0026amp; Mrs. Price Roark Chicot Elem. $300.00 (for cheerleading J. A. Riggs Tractor Co. outfits) Fulbright Elem. Prone Stander (for disabled Mr. \u0026amp; Mrs. Kelton students) Brown MeadowcliffElem. $504.00 (for carpeting in Metropolitan National classrooms) Bank/AR Capital Corp. Fair High School Lab Equipment \u0026amp; Supplies AT\u0026amp;T F. Personnel Changes The Superintendent requested the Board's approval of personnel items printed in the agenda Ms. Strickland moved to accept the personnel items, Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously. REGULAR BOARD MEETING November 21, 1996 Page 6 G. Financial Reports Financial reports for the period ending were presented for the Board's approval. Mark Milhollen was present and responded to questions from Board members. Mr. Berkley made a motion to approve the reports, seconded by Dr. Mitchell, and the motion carried unanimously. VI. REPORT AGENDA A. Desegregation Update The Desegregation Update was printed in the agenda. Nancy Acre responded to the Board's questions regarding the ten-day pre-registration period scheduled early in 1997. B. Budget Update Mark Milhollen provided information regarding the project management tool and updated the Board on meetings with budget managers. Mid-year budget adjustments will be done in mid-December. VII. AUDIENCE WITH INDMDUALS OR GROUPS Vicki Gonterman invited the Board and Superintendent to attend the 10th annual arts festival at Gibbs Magnet School on Monday, November 25, 1996. ADJOURNMENT With no further business before the Board, Ms. Magness moved for adjournment at 7:55 p.m. The motion was seconded by Dr. Mitchell, and it carried unanimously. APPROVED: / 8.. -I CJ  1 ~ I I I : ' f I j 't G0 cAII G0 ~ \u0026amp;~ cs@~ ~hall ~ome ~l-1\"-.L/A   WHEREAS, a quality education system is vitally important to the well-being of a city - to its quality of life, its economic vigor and the future of its children\nand, WHEREAS, the Little Rock Board of Directors is committed to education and work jointly with the school district to strengthen the link between government and school officials in an effort to bolster everyone's participation in public education\nand, WHEREAS, the City of Little Rock is an active participant in the Partners-In-Education Program, taking an active role in the educational process, supporting those who work tirelessly to ensure our children receive the skills they need to succeed\nand, WHEREAS, Little Rock Mayor Jim Dailey joins Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, along with other Mayors across the country, in encouraging communities to take advantage of the unique opportunity to renew the public school system and work collectively with our schools. NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jim Dailey, Mayor of the City of Little Rock, Arkansas, do hereby proclaim the 2 I st day of November, 1996, \"Education Day\" in the City of Little Rock and encourage all citizens to join me in playing a role in the long-term viability of our schools. IN WITNESS THEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused che seal of che City of Little Rock to be affixed on chis 18th day of November, in the year of our Lord, 1996. ' ~m~ Mayor RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROPERTY MILLAGE RA TES FOR THE YEAR 1996 WHEREAS, the Pulaski County Quorum Court will levy county, municipal, and school taxes for the year of 1996 as required by Ark. Code Ann. 14-14-904\nand WHEREAS, Ark. Ann. 26-73-202 requires that the governing body of any taxing entity approve the applicable taxes prior to the adoption of the county levy\nNOW, 1HEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors of the Little Rock S~hool District of Pulaski County approves the established level of 41 . 90 mills for personal property and 41. 40 mills for real property within the district for the year 1996. ,8 Secretary ll-J.1-1eo Adopted LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS MINUTES SPECIAL BOARD MEETING November 26, 1996 The Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District held a special meeting on Tuesday, November 26, 1996, in the Board Room of the Administration Building, 810 West Markham Street, Little Rock, Arkansas. John Riggs, President, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: John Riggs, IV Judy Magness Michael Daugherty Larry Berkley Pat Gee Katherine Mitchell Sue Strickland MEMBERS ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: I. Dr. Don Roberts, Superintendent of Schools Ms. Beverly Griffin, Recorder of Minutes CALL TO ORDER Mr. Riggs called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m., and stipulated a quorum without a roll call\nall members were present. - MINUTES - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING November 26, 1996 Page 2 PURPOSE OF THE MEETING The agenda for the special meeting contained the following items: I. Superintendent's Presentation II. ODM Remarks III. Parties' Remarks IV. Board Discussion/Comments/Action PRESENTATION Dr. Roberts presented his views on the current status of the Little Rock School District and made recommendations for operational improvements that he sees as necessary to the future of the District. He asked the Board to adopt a resolution that would allow him to proceed in askingfor Court approval to modify the current desegregation plan by working during a six to nine month period without formal monitoring by the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. If approved by the Court, ODM monitors would assist the District with other operational areas, such as budget, staff development, student assignment, and discipline. Ann Brown, ODM Monitor, made brief remarks regarding the importance of building a strong partnership between the ODM office and the LRSD. She stated support for Dr. Roberts' recommendations and presented a book to him, entitled Re-thinking America. John Walker, attorney for the Joshua Intervenors, commented on Dr. Roberts' presentation and questioned whether or not the Courts would allow the federal monitors, as an arm of the Court, to become involved in the daily operations of the District. He made several remarks regarding the current staff of the District and suggested that it was insufficient to meet the needs of the total student population. Although he stated that adoption of the proposed resolution was inappropriate, Mr. Walker did agree to support Dr. Roberts in his efforts. ACTION AGENDA Dr. Roberts read the proposed resolution and asked for the Board's approval. A copy of that resolution is attached to these minutes. Ms. Magness made a motion to accept the Superintendent's recommendation and approve the resolution as read. Mr. Berkley seconded the motion, and it carried by a unanimous vote. MINUTES - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING November 26, 1996 Page 3 ADJOURNMENT Mr. Berkley made a motion to adjourn at 8:35 p.m. Dr. Mitchell seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. APPROVED: Id. -\nq-7\u0026amp;:J /L,~~ Michael Daugherty, Secretary LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the court has repeatedly expressed the view that the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") could benefit from modification to its desegregation plan and has provided expert testimony in order to guide LRSD in the development of plan modifications\nWHEREAS, students and desegregation the necessary LRSD can improve its educational program for all can enhance the prospects for the long term of the District if given the opportunity to devote time and resources to the task\nWHEREAS, LRSD is prepared to work cooperatively with the other parties and with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"ODM\") in order to develop and present to the court plan modifications to improve education and desegregation within the District\nand WHEREAS, ODM could, with court authorization, support LRSD's efforts by consulting with the parties and participating in the development of a modified plan for education and desegregation in LRSD\nredeploying monitors to provide assistance to LRSD in areas such as budget development, staff development, student assignment and resolution of discipline issues, and to withhold any further monitoring of the current LRSD plan (other than the completion of monitoring reports presently in process) for a six to nine month period during which a modified education and desegregation plan will be developed.  IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that LRSD Superintendent Dr. Don Roberts is authorized to submit to the court appropriate pleadings as necessary to secure the time and resources needed to develop a modified education and desegregation plan for the Little Rock School District. (\n\\ha,,o\\foodloylinld\\ 112696.,ca CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned Secretary of the Board of Directors of the above District, certify the foregoing to be a true copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board at a special meeting of the Board held on the 26th day of November, 1996. The Resolution appears in the official minutes of the meeting which are in my custody. At the time of the meeting, the duly elected, qualified and serving members of the Board and their respective votes on the adoption of the Resolution were as follows: Vote Director (Aye, Nay, Abstain or Absent) John Riggs, IV Aye Judy Magness A e Micheal Daugherty A e Larry Berkley A e Patricia Gee A e Katherine Mitchell A e Sue Strickland A e I further certify that the meeting of the Board was duly convened and held in all resp\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 Resources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eLittle Rock School District\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcri_bcri-ohpc_17","title":"LaVerne Revis Martin","collection_id":"bcri_bcri-ohpc","collection_title":"Birmingham Civil Rights Institute Oral History Project Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1996-07-17"],"dcterms_description":["LaVerne Revis Martin discusses her involvement in the Movement with her family. She witnessed bombings, attended mass meetings and demonstrated alongside key figures including Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--Civil rights","Mass Meetings","Civil rights demonstrations--Alabama","Civil rights movements--Alabama--Birmingham"],"dcterms_title":["LaVerne Revis Martin"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Birmingham Civil Rights Institute (Birmingham, Ala.)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://bcriohp.org/items/show/17"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Shuttlesworth, Fred L., 1922-2011"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_155","title":"Arkansas Department of Education's, Semiannual Desegregation Monitoring Report, Volume 1","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"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Education and Lead Planning and Desegregation"],"dc_date":["1996-07-15"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Educational statistics","Education and state","School integration","Pulaski County (Ark.)--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Arkansas Department of Education's, Semiannual Desegregation Monitoring Report, Volume 1"],"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/155"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I nitonng I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S SEMIANNUAL MONITORING REPORT JULY 15, 1996 A. MONITORING OVERVIE\\:, 2 B. ENROLLMENT/ATTENDANCE 6 C. TEST DATA 281 D. BUDGET INFORMATION 306 E. STUDENT DISCIPLINE 374 F. MAJORITY TO MINORITY TRANSFER 621 G. ECOE MONITORING 641 ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. MONITORING OVERVIEW During the 1995-96 school year, the Director of the Arkansas Department of Education selected monitoring teams for the Pulaski County School Districts to monitor these districts in accordance with the Department's Implementation Plan. Monitoring teams were assigned to intensively monitor the following Cycle V schools: Little Rock School District (9) Carver Magnet Elementary, Cloverdale Elementary, Geyer Springs Elementary, Gibbs Magnet Elementary, Hall High School, King Magnet Elementary, Mabelvale Elementary, MeadowcliffElementary, and Pulaski Heights Junior High. (Please note that Pulaski Heights Elementary School was one of the schools reported to be in Cycle V. In actuality, it should have been Pulaski Heights Junior High School that was included in the February, 1996 monitoring report. Pulaski Heights Junior High School is a Cycle V ECOE school while Pulaski Heights Elementary School is a Cycle I ECOE school and should be reported in the 1996-97 monitoring reports. Therefore, quantitative data for Pulaski Junior High School is incomplete at th.is time.) North Little Rock School District (6) Amboy Elementary, Central Elementary, Crestwood Elementary, Lakewood Elementary, Meadow Park Elementary, and Seventh Street Elementary. Pulaski County Special School District (7) Baker Interdistrict Elementary, Cato Elementary, Crystal Hills Interdistrict Magnet Elementary, Dupree Elementary, Fuller Elementary, Landmark Elementary, and Murrell Taylor Elementary. 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II. A. All parties to the suit were invited to participate in the monitoring process during the ADE monitoring update on November 8, 1995. MONITORING PROCESS MONITORING SCHEDULE (_ 1 /1..,c-f(A The monitoring teams visited schools in accordance with an established schedule of announced and unannounced visits. Announced visits were scheduled from February 26, 1996 to May 10, 1996. Monitors conducted monitoring visits using instruments developed to align with the established criteria for the Extended Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation (ECOE). Monitors completed classroom observations, a principal's interview, and a document review process at each school. The school document review process was refined by the establishment of the Tri-District Data Collection Committee and the development of a common tenninology document for the fourteen qualitative data elements identified on pages 3 8-41 of the Implementation Plan, and pages 4-5 of the Allen Letter. Accordingly, the ADE identified and monitored the following: 1. Evidence that policies, procedures, rules and regulations are developed and implemented to facilitate desegregation. 2. Evidence that plans related to reducing achievement disparity between black and non-black students are progressively successful. 3. Evidence that student's assignments to schools, classes and programs at each organizational level are made without bias. 4. Evidence that staff development days authorized as a result of the Agreement are used to facilitate the desegregation process. 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5. Evidence that travel time to and from schools is not disproportionate among black and non-black students and the percentage of black students transported for desegregation is not significantly greater than the percentage of non-black students transported for desegregation. 6. Evidence that guidance and counseling is designed to meet the needs of a diverse student population. 7. Evidence of internal procedures for ensuring that materials for appraising or counseling students are non-discriminatory. 8. Evidence that curricular content and instructional strategies are utilized to meet the diverse needs of the student population served. 9. Evidence that personnel is recruited, employed and assigned in a manner to meet the goals of a desegregating school district. 10. Evidence that procedures related to extracurricular and cocunicular activities are developed and implemented to identify and eliminate conditions that result in participation that is disproportionate to the student population. 11. Evidence of diverse representation on appointed district wide and school-based committees. 12. Evidence of efforts to ensure that parent attendance at school functions is not disproportionate to the student population. 13. Evidence of success related to Majority to Minority Transfers. 14. Evidence that magnet schools are an effective inter-district remedy for racial balance. Results of the announ_ed and unannounced monitoring for the fourteen elements - - are included in the ECOE monitoring section of this reP.ort. 4 ENROLLMENT/ ATTENDANCE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT: CYCLE FIVE SCHOOLS SOURCE: LRSD I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I B. ENROLLMENT/A1TENDANCE DATA The Allen letter requires the collection of the following Attendance/Enrollment data from the three Pulaski County School Districts. 1. Enrollment by race, gender, school, grade, transported, nontransported and instructional programs. 2. Enrollment by race, gender, grade, transported, nontransported and instructional program for each magnet school. This data follows for each of the Cycle V schools excluding Pulaski Heights Junior High School. Concept Definition: For the purposes of desegregation monitoring, the Arkansas Department of Education, North Little Rock School District, Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District defin~d an instructional pr~!F':'.!1 as follows: A combination of courses and experiences that is designed to accomplish a predetermined objective or set of allied objectives. The three districts have agreed that for the purposes ofthis report Compensatory Education costs are the costs that are funded from the special funds received from the ADE for Compensatory Education as specified by the Settlement Agreement. 6 TOTAL ENROLLMENT I l _,_ BY GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ___________________ Cf) r z w 0 :::, r Cf) LL 0 a: w (0 ~ :::, z 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 CARVER MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrollrnent ------65----------------------------------------- Grade 1 Transported ~on-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (65) White Female (16) IIIBlack Female (18) -  White Males (14) - Black Male (17) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- Cf) I-z w 0 ::, I-Cf) LL 0 a: w co ~ ::, z 100 80 60 40 20 0 CARVER MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrolln1ent 91 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (91) White Female (18) _ c\nJ8IackF emale (17) White Male (24) Black Male (32) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- CARVER MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrolln1ent 120 .------------------, ~ 100 z w o::: \u0026gt; 80 I-C/) LL 60 0 a: cwa 40 ~ ~ 20 0 107 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (107) White Female (19) ~Black Female (21) White Male (36) Black Male (31) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- 120 .-----------------, ~ 100 z w o 80 ::::) I-C/) LL 60 0 a: ~ 40 ~ ::::, z 20 0 107 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (107) - White Female (28) C!'.JBlackF emale (30) - White Male (25) Black Male (24) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- Cl) I-z w 0 :::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 a: w al ~ :::\u0026gt; z 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 CARVER MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enroilment 105 r\n_ : ,,,,., - \" -: ,.l ~ , . , .''. , ' \u0026lt;~ I ' -- ,_ __\u0026lt; , --------------------------75-------- Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (105) White Female (18)  Black Female (20) White Male (35) Black Male (32) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- CJ) I- z w 0 =\u0026gt; I-CJ) LL 0 a: w en ~ z= \u0026gt; 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 CARVER MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enroliment 101 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (101) White Female (21) - - Black Female (24) White Male (27) Black Male (29) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY: 80 Cl) 70 I- z w 60 0 ::::, 50 I-Cl) LL 40 0 c:c 30 w co ~ 20 ::::, z 10 0 LRSD Total Enroliment ------- 68-----------------------------------64 ______ _ Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (68) White Female (4) GJ Black Female (26) White Male (5) Black Male (33) ------------------- CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY: 60 Cr l) 50 z w 0 40 ~ r Cl) LL 30 0 a: w 20 Cl) ~ ~ z 10 0 LRSD To\"l 'al E.ill.V-I-I rr..I l!lmI ent 54 53 ---------------------- ---------------------- ---------------------- ---------------------- 1 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (54) White Female (3) [![J8Iack Female (26) White Male (6) Black Male (19) ------------------- CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY: Cl) I- z w 0 ::, I-Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ ::, z 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 LRSD Total Enrollment 51 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (51) _ White Female (3) rgBlack Female (24) - White Male (6) Black Male (18) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrollment 60 ~--------------, Cl) 50 ~ z w O 40 :) ~ Cl) LL 30 0 a: ~ 20 ~ :) Z 10 0 50 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (50) White Female (3) illlBlack Female (27) White Male (1) Black Male (19) ------------------- CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY: 60 Cr-l) 50 z w 0 40 :::) r- Cl) LL 30 0 a: w 20 al ~ :::) z 10 0 LRSD Total Enrollment 51 ----------------------------4-7-------- Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (51) White Female (4) Black Female (19) - White Male (8) Black Male (20) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED 00 'l\"'\"1 ------------------- CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY: LRSD Totai Enrolln1ent 50 ,-----------------, ~z 40 w 0 ~ 30 Cl) LL 0 a: 20 ' w co ~ z= \u0026gt; 10 0 45 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (45) White Female (1) Black Female (24) White Male (2) Black Male (18) ------------------- 50 en rz- 40 UJ 0 :::J r- 30 en LL 0 a: 20 UJ ca ~ :z:: J 10 0 - GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY: LRSD Totai Enrollment 41 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (41) White Female (6) _ @Black Female (20) White Male (2) _ Black Male (13) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrollment 60 .----------------~ ~ 50 -------45------------------------------------------z LJ.J O 40 ::\u0026gt; r(/) LL 30 0 a: ~ 20 ~ ::\u0026gt; Z 10 0 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (46) White Female (5) GBlack Female (20) White Male (7) Black Male (14) ------------------- 40 35 Cl) I-z w 30 0 :::, 25 I-Cl) LL 20 0 a: 15 w Cl) ~ 10 :::, z 5 0 GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrollment 35 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (35) White Female (3) LJBlack Female (11) White Male (5) Black Male (16) ------------------- GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY: LRSD 50 ~--------------- ~ 40 z w 0 ~ 30 Cl) LL 0 a: 20 w m ~ :::) z 10 0 42 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (42) White Female (6) G:J Black Female (13) White Male (3) Black Male (20) ------------------- Cf) I-z w C :::) I-Cf) LL 0 a: w ca ~ :::) z 30 25 , 20 15 10, 5 / 0 GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrollment Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (26) White Female (2) li:lBlack Female (8) White Male (5) Black Male (11) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrollment 50 ~-------------~ ~ 40 z w 0 ~ 30 Cf) LL 0 a: 20 w co :?! :z:J 10 0 43 . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -z1 - - - - - - - Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (43) White Female (5) EBlack Female (18) White Male (3) Black Male (17) ------------------- GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY: Cl) ~ z w 0 :::) ~ Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::) z 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 LRSD Total Enrollment -------48---------------------------------------------- TOTAL ENROLLMENT (48) \\0 White Female (6) Ill Black Female (10) White Male (18) ('-1 - Black Male (14) Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrollment 50 .------------------, ~z 40 - w 0 ~ 30 - Cf) LL 0 a: 20 w co ~ :z:: \u0026gt; 10 0 44 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (44) - White Female (12) []]Black Female (8) - White Male (8) Black Male (16) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrollment 50 ~--------------~ CJ) 42 ~ 40 TOTAL w 0 ENROLLMENT (42) 00 ~ 30 CJ) LL 0 a: 20 w a) ~ 10 z 0 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp - White Female (10) CJ Black Female (13) White Male (11) Black Male (8) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ~ ------------------- GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrollment 50 .------------------, ~z 40 w 0 ~ 30 Cl) LL 0 a: 20 w CXl ~ :z:: :::\u0026gt; 10 0 40 TOTAL --------------------------------------- ENROLLMENT (40) ----------------------------27-------- White Female (8) CJ Black Female (10) _ White Male (9) Black Male (13) Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY: (/) ~ z w 0 ::J ~ (/) LL 0 a: w co ~ ::J z 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 LRSD Total Enrollment -------45--------------------------------------------- TOTAL ENROLLMEN(4T6 ) Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp White Female (4) tlli Black Female (13) White Male (17) _ Black Male (12) GRADET, RANSPORTEADN DN ON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Fnrolin1ent 50 ,-----------------, (I) 1z- 40 w 0 ~ 30 (I) LL 0 a: 20 w al ~ 10 z 0 45 ----------------------------27-------- Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (45) White Female CIJBlack Female White Male Black Male ------------------- Cf) I-z w 0 ::\u0026gt; I-Cf) LL 0 a: w m ~ ::\u0026gt; z HALL HIGH SCHOOL: LRSD 400 350 ------s-30------------------------------------------- 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Grade 10 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (330) White Female (48) ~Black Female (117) White Male (41) Black Male (124) ------------------- (/) I-z w 0 ::) I- (/) LL 0 a: w co ~ ::) z HALL HIGH SCHOOL: LRSD 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 To, ta-11 CL nr,d. ,~viiil meHr. + * h. ------287------------------------------------------ 253 Grade 11 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (287) White Female (50) Iii Black Female (110) White Male (33) Black Male (94) ------------------- HALL HIGH SCHOOL: LRSD 300 ,------------------, 250 ~ z ~ 200 :::::, rCf) LL 150 0 a: w ca 100 ~ :::::, z 50 0 270 Grade 12 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (270) IIIIWhite Female (59) EBlack Female (76) White Male (54) Black Male (81) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY: ~ z w 0 :::\u0026gt; ~ Cf) LL 0 a: w ca ~ :::\u0026gt; z LRSD 100 .--------------------, 80 ______7_7 ___________________________________ ________ 68 60 40 20 0 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (77) White Female (11) Black Female (24) White Male (16) Black Male (26) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY: Cf) I-z w 0 :::, I-Cf) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::, z 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 LRSD Total Enrollment -------5-7--------------------------------------------- TOTAL 50 ENROLLMENT (57) Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp White Female (11) - CJBlack Female (14) _ White Male (12) Black Male (20) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY: Cl) I-z w 0 ::::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 .. a: w a) ~ ::::\u0026gt; z LRSD Tota 1 c-rollment ... I L.11 . .1 80 70 _____6_8__ ________________________________ _________ 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (68) White Female (13) cIJBlack Female (16) White Male (18) Black Male (21) ------------------- KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD T ot,i,a 1a F_ nrou1 men t 60 .-----------------~ ~ 50 -------48-------------------------------------------- z ~ 40 :) IC/) LL 30 0 a: ~ 20 ~ :) z 10 0 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (48) IIIWhite Female (15)  Black Female (11) White Male (12) Black Male (10) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enroilment 60 .-------------------, ~ 50 z w o 40 :::) I-- Cf) LL 30 0 a: ~ 20 ~ :::) 2 10 0 51 Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (51) - White Female (8) lmLlBlackF emale (16) - White Male (12) Black Male (14) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ---------------~--- KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY: Cf) I-z w 0 :J I-Cf) LL 0 a: w m ~ :J z LRSD Total Enrollment 60 50 _____48 _________________________________ __________ TOTAL 40 ----------------------------37-------- ENROLLMENT (48) 0 s::r White Female (10) 30 - ~Black Female (10) 20 10 0 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED White Male (13) Black Male (15) ------------------- MABELVALE ELEMENTARY: Cl) 1- z w 0 ::, IC/) LL 0 a: w cc ~ ::, z LRSD 100 ,---------------, 80 -------74------------------------------------------ 60 40 20 0 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (74) White Female (8)  Black Female (20) White Male (12) Black Male (34) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- en I-z w 0 ::) I-Cl) u. 0 a: w al ~ ::::\u0026gt; z MABELVALE ELEMENTARY: 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 - - - - LRSD Total Enrolln1ent 61 TOTAL ENROLLMENT (61) -----------------------------3t)-------- White Female (11) Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp ~Black Female (18) White Male (12) - Black Male (20) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ---------------~--- MABELVALE ELEMENTARY: Cl) I-z w 0 :::, I-Cl) LL 0 a: w m ~ :::, z LRSD Total Enrollment 80 .---------------~ 70 ------- 68 ---------------------------------------------- 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 - - - - Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (68) White Female (13) ~Black Female (18) - White Male (18) _ Black Male (21) ___G_RAD_E, T_RAN_SPO_RTED_ AN_D NO_N-T_RANS_POR_TED_ ,.. __ _ MABELVALE ELEMENTARY: 60 Cf) I- 50 z w 0 40 ::::) I-Cf) LL 30 O a: w 20 al ~ ::::) z 10 0 LRSD To~al Enrollment 50 - TOTAL ENROLLMENT (50) White Female (15) ----------------------------26 ------- Black Female (11) 24 White Male (12)  Black Male (12) Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- MABELVALE ELEMENTARY: 60 Cf) I- 50 z w 0 40 ::, I-Cf) LL 30 0 a: w 20 co ~ ::, z 10 0 - - - - LRSD Totai Enrollment 51 TOTAL ENROLLMENT (51) White Female (9) ---------28--------------------------- Black Female (16) White Male (12) - Black Male (14) Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- MABELVALE ELEMENTARY: Cl) I-z IJJ 0 :.:.:.:.\u0026gt;.. Cl) LL 0 a: w r:c ~ :::\u0026gt; z 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 LRSD Total Enrolln1ent -------48--------------------------------------------- TOTAL ENROLLMENT (48) White Female (10) Black Female (10) --------------------------2s-------- 22 White Male (13) _  Black Male (15) Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY: C/) I- z w Cl ::, I-C/) LL 0 a: w m ~ ::, z 70 60 50 - 40 - 30 20 10 0 LRSD Total Enrollment 62 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (62) White Female (7) Black Female (19) - White Male (6)  Black Male (30) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED t-- \"\"' ------------------- MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY: 70 en 60 I-z w 50 0 ::::, eI-n 40 LL 0 30 a: w co :E 20 ::::, z 10 0 LRSD Total Enrolh11ent 62 - - - --------- 35 ---------- -- - -- - Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (62) White Female (5) Black Female (18) White Male (9) Black Male (30) ------------------- MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enrollment 60 .----------------------, ~ 50 - z w 0 ::) ~ CJ) LL 0 a: ~ 20 ~ ::) z 10 - 0 50 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (50) White Female (2) Black Female (23) White Male (9) Black Male (16) ------------------- MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY: LRSD Total Enroliment 80 ~-------------~ ~ 70 -------66---------------------------------------------- TOTAL ~ 60 ENROLLMENT (66) 0 :::, Ien LL 0 a: w ca ~ :::, z 0 --------------------------------------- ~-----~ Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp White Female (3) Black Female (27) - White Male (11) _ Black Male (25) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED 0 lt') ------------------- MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY: LRSD 60 .--------------------, ~ 50 z w O 40 ::::\u0026gt; I-C/) u. 30 0 a: ~ 20 ~ ::::\u0026gt; Z 10 0 54 Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (54) White Female (8) Black Female (25) White Male (7) Black Male (14) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY: Cl) I-z w 0 ::::, I-Cl) LL 0 a: w en ~ ::::, z LRSD Total Enrollment 60 50 49 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (49) White Female (8) Black Female (13) White Male (9) Black Male (19) ------------------- i i ENROLLMENT/ ATTENDENCE i\n!Fi i ~ l\"\"\"\" ~ lemI -IL r~= I T .. L W\"\"\"'!i\\/ilt...,.. I'! i\"\"\" 1 .~. I \"' I .,, I ~ ~ SOURCE: NLRSD ,OOL ~ ll) Ol\u0026amp;S ------------------- TOTAL ENROLLMENT BY GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- AMBOY ELEMENTARY: NLRSD Cl) I-z w 0 :::::, I-Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::, z 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 64 TOTAL ENROLLMENT (64) White Female (13) ----------------------------------- Black Female (21) _ White Male (10)  Black Male (20) Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED II') II') ------------------- AMBOY ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 70 62 60 Cl) ..... z w 50 0 :::) I- 40 Cl) LL 0 30 a: w co ~ 20 :::) z 10 0 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (62) White Female (11) \\0 riiBlack Female (18) White Male (16) Black Male (17) an ------------------- AMBOY ELEMENTARY: NLRSD Cf) I-z w 0 ::::\u0026gt; I-Cf) LL 0 a: w en ~ ::::\u0026gt; z 70 ,-------------------, 60 ______5_8 ___________________________________ _________ 50 - ____________________________ 4g_ ______ _ 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (58) White Female (20) t--- ln!Black Female (14) White Male (10) Black Male (14) 11) ------------------- - AMBOY ELEMENTARY: NLRSD Cl) I- z w 0 :::::) I-Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::::) z 80 70 -------a5------------------------------------------- 60 50 --------------------------4a------- 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (66) White Female (10) Black Female (14) White Male (22) Black Male (20) 00 lO ------------------- AMBOY ELEMENTARY: NLRSD Cl) I-z w 0 ::::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 a: w cc ~ ::::\u0026gt; z 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 - 63 Tota-l ' rC- rI- rU-B-1I1 meIn. ,il~ H Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (63) White Female (6) ., Black Female ( 15) White Male (26) Black Male (16) ------------------- AMBOY ELEMENTARY: NLRSD Total Enrollment 60 ~------------~ ~ 50 z ~ 40 :::\u0026gt; I-C/} u. 30 0 a: ~ 20 ~ :::\u0026gt; z 10 0 53 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (53) White Female (14) Black Female (16) White Male (11)  Black Male ( 12) ------------------- ~z 11.1 0 :::) I-CJ) LL 0 a: 11.1 al ~ :::) z CENTRAL ELEMENTARY: 50 40 30 20 10 0 NLRSD Total Enrollment ------37--------------------------------------- 33 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (37) White Female (7) Black Female (10) White Male (7)  Black Male ( 13) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED --------~---------- CENTRAL ELEMENTARY: NLRSD Total Enrollment 50 .---------------~ z~ 40 w 0 ~ 30 Cf) u.. 0 a: 20 - w (ll ~ ::, 10 - z 0 41 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (41) White Female (9) [][]Black Female (13) White Male (6) Black Male (13) ------------------- CENTRAL ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 50 45 Cl) TOTAL Iz- 40 ENROLLMENT (45) tf\") w \\0 0 :::, 30 White Female (6) I-Cl) u. ldlBlack Female (13) 0 20 White Male (8) a: w Black Male (18) al ~ ::::\u0026gt; 10 z 0 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------~ Cl) I-z w 0 :::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::\u0026gt; z CENTRAL ELEMENTARY: 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 NLRSD Total Enroilment ----------4--9--- ---------------------------------- Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (49) White Female (10) Black Female (7) White Male (13) Black Male (19) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED CENTRAL ELEMENTARY: Cl) ..... z w 0 :.:.:.\u0026gt;.. Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::\u0026gt; z 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 NLRSD Total Enrollment -- -- --4 7--- - --- - -- -- -- -- -- ---- - -- -------- -- -- -- - - TOTAL Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp ENROLLMENT (47) White Female (15) ~ Black Female (15) White Male (5) Black Male (12) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ----~---------~---- CENTRAL ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 50 .-------------------, g? 40 z w 0 ~ 30 Cl) LL 0 a: 20 w m ~ z= \u0026gt; 10 0 43 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp TOTAL ENROLLMENT (43) White Female (6) ~Black Female (14) White Male (12) Black Male (11) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ----------~-------- CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY: Cl) I-z w 0 :::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::\u0026gt; z 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 32 NLRSD T . . E 1 g ota1 nro11n1en1 TOTAL ENROLLMENT (32) r-- \\C ---------------------------1-a-------- White Female (7) ,B lack Female (8) - White Male (9) _  Black Male (8) Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY: Cl) I-z w 0 ::::, I=- Cl) u.. 0 . a: w ca ~ :::\u0026gt; z NLRSD 35 30 -------2a------------------------------------------ 25 20 15 10 5 0 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (28) White Female (7) 1 Black Female (5) White Male (9)  Black Male (7) CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY: Cl) I=- z w 0 :J I=- Cf) LL 0 a: w m ~ :::\u0026gt; z 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 NLRSD Total Enrollment _____29 _________________________________ __________ TOTAL ENROLLMENT (29) ---------------------------1-a------- White Female (6) Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp Black Female (5) White Male (9) Black Male (9) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 50 .-----------------, ~ 40 ------ 39 ----------------------------------------z - w 0 ~ 30 CJ) LL 0 a: 20 w m ~ :::, 10 z 0 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (39) White Female (7) Black Female (8) White Male (14)  Black Male (10) ------------------- CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY: 50 Cl) Iz-= 40 w 0 :::\u0026gt; I- 30 Cl) LL 0 a: 20 w m ~ ::J 10 z 0 - - - 45 NLRSD TOTAL --------------------------------------- ENROLLMENT (45) ----------------------------27-------- White Female (9) Black Female (13) _ White Male (12) Black Male (11) Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ~--~--------------- CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY: Cf) I-z w 0 ::::\u0026gt; 1-- Cf) LL 0 a: w cc ~ ::::\u0026gt; z NLRSD Total Enrollment 35 32 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (32) White Female (10) EBlack Female (9) llllWhite Male (3) Black Male (10) --~---------------- LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY: Cl) I-z w 0 :::::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::::\u0026gt; z NLRSD 40 35 35 30 25 20 -------- 19 _______________________ __ 16 15 10 5 0 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (35) White Female (9) ~Black Female (7) White Male (4) Black Male (15) ------------------- LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 35 .-----------------, ~ 30 -------2-8--------------------------------------------z LU 0 ::::, IC/) LL 0 a: LU m ~ ::::, z 10 0 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (28) White Female (4) llilBlack Female (6) IIIWhite Male (8) Black Male (10) ------------------- LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 30 ..------------------, ~z w 25 _____2.4 _ _________________________________ ___________  20 1- U) LL 15 0 ffi 10 - al ~ :z:\u0026gt; 5 0 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (24) tr) ~-----~ t-- White Female (6) Black Female (6) White Male (7) Black Male (5) ------------------- LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY: Cf) I- z LU 0 ::::::\u0026gt; I-Cf) LL 0 a: LU co ~ ::::::\u0026gt; z NLRSD rotal Enroiln1enl 35 30 _____2_._9 _ _______________________________ ___________ 25 20 15 10 5 0 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (29) White Female (8) Black Female (8) White Male (7) Black Male (6) ------------------- LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 50 ,-------------------, ~z 40 w 0 :::, 1e-n 30 LL ~ 20 w m :~::, 10 z 0 42 Grade 5 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (42) White Female (13) Black Female ( 11) White Male (8)  Black Male (10) t--, t--, ------------------- LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY: Cl) I-z UJ 0 :::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 a: w ca ~ :::\u0026gt; z NLRSD Total Enrollment 40 35 _____3_4 ------------------------------------------ 30 25 --------------------------2-3------- 20 15 10 5 0 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (34) White Female Black Female (10) White Male (10) Black Male (7) 00 t-- ------------------- MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY: Cl) I== z w 0 ::) I== Cl) LL 0 er: w m ~ ::) z 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 NLRSD ------ 33 --------------------------------32 _______ TOTAL -------------------- - ENROLLMENT (33) 1 - White Female Black Female White Male -  Black Male Grade 1 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY: ~ z w 0 :J I-Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ ::::\u0026gt; z NLRSD Total Enrollment 40 36 30 20 10 0 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (36) White Female ,,rn,, Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY: Cl) I-z w 0 ::::\u0026gt; I-Cf) LL 0 a: w en ~ ::::\u0026gt; z 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 NLRSD Total Enrollment _____2_9_. _ ______________________28--_---_---___T OTAL 1 ENROLLMENT (29) White Female ,.,,B lack Female - White Male Black Male Grade 3 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ~ 00 ------------------- MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY: C/) I-z w 0 ::J I-C/) LL 0 a: w co ~ ::J z NLRSD 35 30 ______2 9_ __________________________________________ 25 25 20 15 10 5 0 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (29) White Female --Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 50 .--------------------, Cl) ~ 40 w 0 ~ 30 Cl) LL ~ 20 w co ~ 10 z 0 41 40 1 - TOTAL ENROLLMENT (41) White Female IIBlack Female White Male Black Male Grade 5 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY: NLRSD Total Enroliment 50 ,----------------, TOTAL ~ 40 _____39 _________________________3_7_ ______________E NROLLMENT (39) w 0 ~ 30 Cl) LL 0 a: 20 w m ~ :::) z 10 0 2 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transported White Female Black Female White Male Black Male GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY: NLRSD Total Enrollment 50 .-----------------, ~ z 40 w 0 ~ 30 CJ) LL aO: 20 w co :~:, 10 z 0 43 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (43) l!IIIWhite Female Black Female White Male Black Male lr) QC) ------------------- en I-z w 0 ::) I- en LL. 0 a: w OJ ~ :::, z 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 50 --------------------------3-7-------- Grade 2 Transported Non-Transported TOTAL ENROLLMENT (50) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 50 ~------------~ ~z 40 w 0 ::, 1- 30 Cl) LL ~ 20 w co ~ 10 :::::\u0026gt; z 0 43 __________________29 ___________ Grade 3 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (43) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male t-- 00 ------------------- 60 ~ 50 z w 0 40 :::) I-Cl) LL 30 0 a: w co 20 ~ :::) z 10 0 SEVENTH STREET .. ELEMENTARY: NLRSD Total Enrollment 50 TOTAL - ENROLLMENT (50) - ---------------------------------------- White Female \"'\", Black Female ----------24- ---------------2a-------- White Male Black Male Grade 4 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED 00 00 ------------------- ~ z w 0 ::J IC/) LL 0 a: w cc ~ ::J z SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 100 .-----------------------, TOTAL 80 ---------74--------------------------------------------------- ENROLLMENT (74) 60 - 40 - 20 - 0 White Female BBlack Female - White Male Black Male Grade 5 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED 0\"0\" ------------------- Cl) I-z w Cl ::::\u0026gt; I- (/) LL 0 a: w m ~ :::\u0026gt; z 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY: NLRSD Total Enrolln1ent 54 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transported TOTAL ENROLLMENT (54) White Female :+. Black Female White Male Black Male GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED -------------------- ENROLLMENT/ ATTENDANCE SOURCE: PCSSD ----~-----------~-- TOTAL ENROLLMENT BY GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ----------------~-- BAKER INTERDIST. ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 50 ~-----------~ ~ z UJ 0 40 -----_ 39 -------------------------------------- ~ 30 Cl) LL. ~ 20 w m ~ 10 z 0 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transp GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (39) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male --~-~-------------- BAKER INTERDIST. ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 50 .---------------------, ~z 40 w 0 ~ 30 en LL 0 a:: 20 w m ~ :::, 10 z 0 41 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (41) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male --~-~-------------- (/) rz- - w 0 ::) r= Cl} LL 0 a: w cc ~ :::\u0026gt; z 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 BAKER INTERDIST. ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 35 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transported TOTAL ENROLLMENT (35) White Female ~Black Female BWhite Male Black Male GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED --~---------------- 35 Cl) 30 I- z w 25 0 ::::) I- 20 Cl) LL 0 15 a: w cc 10 ~ ::::) z 5 0 BAKER INTERDIST. ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 30 - ----------23----------------------------- - - - - Grade 4 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (30) .----------, White Female Black Female White Male Black Male ~z w 0 ::::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 a: w al ~ ::::\u0026gt; z BAKER INTERDIST. ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 35 TOTAL _______2_9__ _____________________E_N__R_O LLMENT( 35) i- - - Grade 5 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED White Female m!Black Female White Male Black Male 0\"1 ----~-------------- z~ w 0 ::, I-CJ) u. 0 a: w cc ~ ::, z BAKER INTERDIST. ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 40 35 35 30 --------27- ---------------------- 25 20 15 10 5 0 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (35) White Female -iBlack Female BWhite Male Black Male 00 O'\\ L. - - .... :aa - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I CATO ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 100 ....--------------------, ~z w 0 :::\u0026gt; rC/) LL 0 a: 40 - w m ~ ~ 20 - 0 87 -------------------------------------- TOTAL ENROLLMENT (87) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male Grade 1 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ----~-------------- CATO ELEMENTARY: PCSSD ~ z w 0 ::::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 a: w m ~ ::\u0026gt; z 100 ,-------------------, 80 ______7_8 ___________________________________T_O_T_A_L_ __ 0 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ENROLLMENT (78) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male CATO ELEMENTARY: PCSSD CJ) I-z w 0 :) I- en LL 0 a: w co ~ :::) z T otai enrollment 70 62 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (62) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- CATO ELEMENTARY: PCSSD ~ z w 0 ::) IC/) LL 0 a: w m ~ ::::\u0026gt; z T , . = p . otai t:nronment 100 ,-------------------, 86 60 40 0 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (86) White Female . Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- CATO ELEMENTARY: PCSSD ~z LU 0 :J Ien LL 0 100 ~-------------~ 80 -------76------------------------------------------- a: 40 - w co ~ ~ 20 - 0 Grade 5 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (76) White Female\nBlack Female White Male Black Male -------------------- L-CATO ELEMENTARY: PCSSD ~ z w 0 :J IC/) LL 0 a: w 0) ~ :J z 100 ,------------------, 80 -------7~-------------------------------------------  39 ---------35 ------------------------ 0 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (74) White Female ,,SC Black Female BWhite Male Black Male ------------------ ~z UJ 0 ::, IC/) LL 0 a: UJ cc ~ ::, z CRYSTAL HILLS INTERDIST. MAGNET: PCSSD 70 .--------------------, 60 --------55----------------------------_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TOTAL ENROLLMENT (56) 50 - 40 - 30 - 20 10 - 0 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED White Female  Black Female White Male Black Male lr) Q ,-,! ~------------------ CRYSTAL HILLS INTERDIST. Cl) I- z w 0 ::::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ ::::\u0026gt; z MAGNET: PCSSD 50 44 40 --------------------------37------- 30 20 10 0 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (44) White Female ,-.. Black Female White Male Black Male ---~--------------- ~ z UJ 0 ::::\u0026gt; CRYSTAL HILLS INTERDIST. MAGNET: PCSSD Total Enroiiment 70 ~----------------, 60 -------_5_8_ _-- --- ------ ---- -- -------- --- ---- --- ------- --- - TOTAL ENROLLMENT (58) 50 - ~ 40 - White Female EBlack Female _ White Male Black Male LL 0 a: UJ co ~ ::::\u0026gt; z 30 - 20 - 0 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- CRYSTAL HILLS INTERDIST. 60 en 1-- 50 z w 0 40 ::::, 1-- en u. 30 0 a: w 20 co ~ ::::, 10 z 0 - - - - - MAGNET: PCSSD Total Enrollment 50 TOTAL ENROLLMENT (50) White Female Black Female White Male _ Black Male Grade 4 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- CRYSTAL HILLS INTERDIST. 70 Cl) 60 I-z w 50 0 :::, 1-- CJ) 40 LL 0 30 a: W. co 20 ~ ::J z 10 0 MAGNET: PCSSD 64 - - -----------------------------45------- - - Grade 5 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (64) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- CRYSTAL HILLS INTERDIST. MAGNET: PCSSD Total Enrollment 80 .-------------------, ~ 70 ------- 68 ---------------------------------------------- m 60 - Cl ~ 50 Cl) LL 0 a: 30 w en ~ :::\u0026gt; z 20 - 10 0 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (68) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- 70 CJ) 60 t=- z UJ 50 0 :J J=- CJ) 40 LJ... 0 30 a: w co 20 ~ ::) z 10 0 DUPREE ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 64 - - - - - - Grade 1 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (64) White Female , Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- ~z w 0 ::) IC/) LL 0 a: w al ~ :::\u0026gt; z DUPREE ELEMENTARY: PCSSD Total Enrollment 80 ~--------------~ 70 ---------66------------------------------------------------ TOTAL 60 - ---------------------------------------- ENROLLMENT (66) 50 - 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED White Female Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- ~ z w 0 ::) IC/) LL 0 a: w m ~ ::) z DUPREE ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 70 .-------------------~ 60 --------55-------------------------------------------------- 50 - TOTAL ENROLLMENT (56) White Female m!Black Female 30 White Male 20 10 -  Black Male 0 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- ~ z w 0 :::\u0026gt; IC/) LL 0 a: w m ~ :::\u0026gt; z DUPREE ELEMENTARY: PCSSD T0 I~ a11 t...=... nr-ouq men t 100 .--------------------, 80 80 - ----------55---------------------------- 20 0 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (80) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- 70 Cl) 60 I- z w 50 0 ::\u0026gt; I- Cl) 40 LL 0 30 a: w m 20 ~ ::, z 10 0 DUPREE ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 63 - - - - - Grade 5 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (63) White Female 1\"=-Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- 70 Cl) 60 t- z w 50 0 :::\u0026gt; I-=- 40 U) LL 0 30 a: w al 20 ~ :::\u0026gt; z 10 0 DUPREE ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 63 - - - - Grade 6 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (63) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- ~ z w 0 ::\u0026gt; IC/) LL 0 a: w CXl ~ :::\u0026gt; z FULLER ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 50 .--------------------, 44 43 20 1 0 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (44) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male t-,-.( ,-.( ------------------- ~ z w FULLER ELEMENTARY: PCSSD Total Enrollment 60 ~--------------~ 50 --------4.8------------------ -- --------- -- ---- -- --------- -- TOTAL ENROLLMENT (48) Cl 40 - :::) IC/) LL 0 a: w en ~ ::\u0026gt; z 0 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED White Female Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- 50 CJ) Iz- 40 w Cl :::\u0026gt; I- 30 CJ) LL 0 a: 20 w m ~ ::::\u0026gt; 10 z 0 - - - FULLER ELEMENTARY: PCSSD Total Enrollment 42 ----------37---------------------------- TOTAL Grade 3 Transported Non-Transported ENROLLMENT (42) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------~ ~ z w 0 :::, Ien LL 0 a: w co ~ :::, z FULLER ELEMENTARY: PCSSD \"\"\\j1\"\" o t a I fc\"\"\": nrohi n-1en 1 70 .--------------------, 60 --------513------------------------------------------------- 50 - 30 20 10 0 51 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (56) White Female \u0026amp;!Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- 60 ~ 50 z w 0 40 :J I-Cf) u.. 30 0 a: w co 20 ~ :J z 10 0 FULLER ELEMENTARY: PCSSD Total l::nroilment 53 - --------------------- - - --------------------- - - 2 Grade 5 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (53) White Female :.,,B. lack Female White Male Black Male -------------------- FULLER ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 60 51 Cl) 50 - I-z ----------------------------------------- TOTAL ENROLLMENT (51) w 0 40 - :::\u0026gt; --------------------- .---------, IIWhite Female I-Cl) LL 30 - 0 li!Black Female --------------------- White Male a: w co 20 - Black Male --------------------- ....._ ____ ~ ~ :::\u0026gt; z 10 0 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- ~ z w 0 :) 1- (j) LL 0 a: w m ~ :) z LANDMARK ELEMENTARY: PCSSD Total Enrollment 70 .-------------------. 60 ---------5-9-- ----------------------------------------------- 50 30 20 10 0 -----------30---------------------------- Grade 1 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (59) White Female ~Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- CJ) 1-- z w 0 :.:_::.\u0026gt;. CJ) LL 0 a: w co ~ =\u0026gt; z LANDMARK ELEMENTARY: 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 PCSSD T _,,,_g .  irF= -=n '\"~1-\nm. ,,.,,.. .. ,., ~ ULdl ~ .1 \\..h , 1 cI l 61 - - - - - - Grade 2 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (61) White Female Black Female White Male Black Male ------------------- ~ z w 0 ::, IC/) LL 0 a: w m ~ ::, z LANDMARK ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 100 .----------------~ 80 -- - - -- -78 - - - - -- - - - - - -- -- -- -- -- - - - - - -- - - -- -- -- -- - -- - - - 40 20 0 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (78) White Female (18) Black Female (18) White Male (27) Black Male (15) ---~--------------- LANDMARK ELEMENTARY: PCSSD Total Enrollment 100 ..-----------------, ~ 80 ------74--------------------------------------- z w 0 ~ 60 en LL 0 a: 40 w co ~ z= \u0026gt; 20 0 Grade 4 TransportedNon-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (74) White Female (23) Black Female ( 11) White Male (21) Black Male (19) ------------------- LANDMARK ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 100 .------------------, ~ 80 -------75------------ ------------------------------ w 0 ~ 60 Cf) LL 0 a: 40 w al ~ :z: , 20 0 Grade 5 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (75) White Female (23) Black Female (14) White Male (26) Black Male (12) ------------------- LANDMARK ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 80 ,------------------, ~ 70 -------6-7--------------------------------------------- as 60 Cl ::::\u0026gt; 50 IC/) LL 0 aw: 30 co ~ 20 ::J z 10 0 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (67) IIIWhite Female (26) ~Black Female (13) White Male (20) Black Male (8) ------------------- TAYLOR ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 80 ,----------------~ ~ zw 60 0 ::\u0026gt; t- CI) LL 40  0 a: w co ~ 20  ::\u0026gt; z 0 72 Grade 1 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (72) White Female (26) IBBlack Female (9) White Male (24)  Black Male ( 13) --------------~---- TAYLOR ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 60 ,----------------, ~ 50 z w O 40 ::J I-C/) LL 30 0 a: ~ 20 ~ ::) z 10 0 54 Grade 2 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (54) White Female (19) ,.,, Black Female (5) White Male (13) Black Male (17) -----------~------- TAYLOR ELEMENTARY: PCSSD Total Enrollrnent 70 .-------------------, ~ 60 z w 50 0 :::, ~ 40 LL O 30 a: w m 20 ~ :::, Z 10 0 60 Grade 3 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (60) White Female (23) ii!Black Female (9) IIIWhite Male (20)  Black Male (8) ------------------- Cl) I= z w 0 :::, I=- Cl) LL 0 a: w ca ~ ::) z TAYLOR ELEMENTARY: PCSSD Total r-nrol'mAnt fl f: I C, I I ~- 70 60 _____58 _________________________________ __________ 50 40 --------------------------------------- 30 20 10 0 Grade 4 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED TOTAL ENROLLMENT (58) White Female (15) Black Female (14) White Male (14) Black Male (15) ------------------- TAYLOR ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 70 62 CJ) 60 TOTAL Iz- ENROLLMENT (62)  w 50 0 ~ ::\u0026gt; White Female (18) ~ I- ~ en 40 Black Female (9) LL 0 30 White Male (18) a: w Black Male (17) co 20 ~ ::::\u0026gt; z 10 0 Grade 5 Transported Non-Transported GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- Cl) I=-- z w C) ::::\u0026gt; I-Cl) LL 0 a: w m ~ :::, z 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 TAYLOR ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 62 Grade 6 Transported Non-Transported TOTAL ENROLLMENT (62) White Female (19) fillliill8IacFk emale (13) White Male (16) Black Male (14) GRADE, TRANSPORTED AND NON-TRANSPORTED ------------------- ENROLLMENT LJTTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BY COMPENSATORY EDUCATION, TRANSPORTED, AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM ------------------- Carver Magnet Elementary: 60 Cl) I- ' ' z 50 ' ' w 0 ' ' :::\u0026gt; 40 ' I-Cl) ' ' u.. 30 , 0 , , a: 20 , w r:o , ~ 10 ' , :::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment ' ' ' BM 17 13 17 LRSD n ent ----40---------------------------- BF 18 4 18 WM 13 2 14 WF 17 3 16 36 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Carver Magnet Elementary: ~z w 0 ::::\u0026gt; ~ Cl) 100 60 ,' , 76 LL 0 a: w al ~ ::::\u0026gt; z 40 ,, __ 20 ,' 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 32 Transported 12 Enrollment 32 BF 17 8 17 LRSD nr nt WM WF 23 14 4 4 24 18 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Carver Magnet Elementary: LRSD 80 ~ z , w , 0 60 , ::J I-Cl) , , LL 40 , 0 a: w , , co 20 , ~ ::J z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 31 21 28 18 Transported 10 12 8 8 Enrollment 31 21 28 19 _ _ D Compensatory Ed. D Transported __ D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Carver Magnet Elementary: LRSD n en 80 (/) , , , , r 70 , , , z , , , , -- -- - - -- - ---sa --- -- - -- -- -- - -- -- - -- - - - - -- - ---------------59------ 54 w , 0 60 , ::) , _ _ D Compensatory Ed. r 50 , (/) ' (\"') D Transported ~ , LL 40 , 0 , a: 30 , w , co 20 , ~ , ::) 10 , z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 24 8 24 BF 30 8 30 WM 24 5 25 WF 26 5 28 __ CJ Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Carver Magnet Elementary: LRSD f r er 100 Cl) ~ , z , w 80 , ------------- ~------~ 0 ::J , ~ 60 , Cl) LL 0 , 40 , a: w Cl) , , ~ 20 , ::J z o---~-~--~-- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 32 20 35 17 13 8 4 5 32 20 35 18 D Compensatory Ed. Transported ~ Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Carver Magnet Elementary: 80 Cf) 1- z ~ 60 ,' =\u0026gt; 1- Cf) LL 40 ,' 0 a: cwo 20 ,' ~ =z \u0026gt; LRSD r r rnen o---~----.~-~-- Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM BF WM WF 29 24 27 21 15 7 8 7 29 24 27 21 _ _ D Compensatory Ed. D Transported __ D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Cloverdale Elementary: LRSD 80 Cf) Iz- 70 w / 0 60 , :::) / / I- 50 , Cf) / / LL 40 , 0 / a: 30 , w / / co 20 , ~ / / :::) 10 , z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 35 1 33 nro lment - -as--------------------------------------- ----sa---------------------------- BF 30 2 26 WM 3 1 5 WF 4 0 4 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Cloverdale Elementary: LRSD 2 nr lment 53 60 Cl) I- , z 50 , w 0 , :::) 40 , I-Cl) , LL 30 , 0 , a: w 20 , co , ~ , 10 , :::) z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 28 27 4 1 Transported O O 1 0 Enrollment 19 26 6 3 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Cloverdale Elementary: LRSD 60 , , nr rner ________5_2_ -_--- ----------------------- ~z 50 ,' ,' w , 0 :) JC/) LL 0 a: w Cl) ~ :) z 40 ,' 30 ,' 10 ,' , ----11----------------- 6 , o--~-~----- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 17 25 5 3 2 3 0 0 18 24 6 3  Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Cloverdale Elementary: LRSD 60 Cl) r- , z 50 , w 0 , :::\u0026gt; 40 , r- Cl) , LL 30 , 0 a: , w 20, Cl) ~ , 10 , :::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM BF 19 28 2 2 19 27 WM 0 0 1 en WF 1 0 3 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Cloverdale Elementary: LRSD 50 Cl) I-z , w 40 , 0 :::::\u0026gt; , I- 30 , Cl) LL 0 , 20 , a: w co , ~ 10 , :::::\u0026gt; z 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 20 Transported 2 Enrollment 20 5 Enrollment - _42 ------ 41 ___________________ ________ BF 20 2 19 ------------------------ WM 5 0 8 WF 1 0 4 ,---------~  Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. 1.0 ~ \"'\"' ------------------- Cloverdale Elementary: LRSD 60 Cl) I- , z 50 , w 0 , ::\u0026gt; 40 , I-Cl) , LL 30 , 0 a: , w 20 , Cl) ~ , 10 , ::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , , , BM 18 3 18 BF 28 1 24 r r llment 53 WM 2 1 2 WF 3 0 1 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Geyer Springs Elementary: 60 10 ,' , , LRSD Enr llrnent 47 0 -------.-------.----,------r BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 19 21 1 9 Transported 3 6 0 1 Enrollment 13 20 2 6 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. --------~----~----- Geyer Springs Elementary: 60 Cl) I- , z 50 , w 0 , ::) 40 , I-Cl) , LL 30, 0 a: , w 20 , co ~ , 10 , ::) z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment LRSD , ------------50---------------------------- , , , BM 16 6 14 BF 23 7 20 WM 5 2 7 WF 5 1 5 ~ Compensatory Ed. D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. - - - - .. - .. - ...-. - .. - - - - - - .. Geyer Springs Elementary: 35 (f) I- , z 30 , w , 0 25 , :J I- , (f) 20 , LL , 0 15 , a: , w 10 , en ~ , :J 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , BM 13 3 16 LRSD ___2_6 --------------------------- BF 12 3 11 WM 4 1 5 WF 3 3 3 ~ Compensatory Ed. D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. 0 tr) ,-..f -------------------- Geyer Springs Elementary: 60 Cl) I-z 50 , w 0 , ::J 40 , I-Cl) , LL 30 , 0 , a: , w 20, a) ~ 10 , ::J z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 21 11 20 LRSD lme _52_ _________________________ _____________ __-3 0--__ _ _ _ _ ________ _ _ _____ _ _ _ D Compensatory Ed. BF 13 4 13 WM 2 1 3 WF 5 0 6 D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Geyer Springs Elementary: 30 Cf) I- , / z w 25 , 0 / ::::, 20 , I-Cf) , LL 15 , 0 , a: / w 10 , c:c ~ / ::::, 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 11 4 11 LRSD Enr )llmen 1 J _26_ _________________________ _____________ BF 9 5 8 WM 5 1 5 WF 2 0 2  Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ----~-------------- Geyer Springs Elementary: 50 ~z w 40, 0 ::J tC/) LL 0 cc w co LRSD ------------------------ ~ ::J z 0--------.------.---- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 15 18 3 5 Transported 7 8 1 0 Enrollment 17 18 3 5 ,----------, D Compensatory Ed. D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ~ lO ~ ----~~------------- Gibbs Magnet Elementary: LRSD r r llment 50 -----------------------38 ---------------- Cf) , , , I- , , z , , w 40 , ------------- 0 D Compensatory Ed. ::J , , l-/). :r I- 30 , ------------- D Transported ~ Cf) LL D Enrollment 0 , 20 , , a: w a:::i , , ~ 10 , ::J z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 14 10 16 5 Transported 3 0 4 1 Enrollment 14 10 18 6 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. -~~---------------- Gibbs Magnet Elementary: 35 en I- , z 30, UJ , , 0 25 , ::) I- , , en 20 , LL , , 0 15 , a: , UJ , 10 , co ~ , , ::) 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 16 0 16 LRSD __________________________ 26 _____ _ BF 8 0 8 WM 7 1 8 WF 12 2 12 Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. I/') I/') ~ -----~------------- Gibbs Magnet Elementary: LRSD r lmen 27 30 en I- , , z 25 , w 0 , , ::J 20 , I- en / LL 15 , 0 / a: , w 10 , cc , ~ , 5' ::J z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 8 13 11 10 Transported 3 1 2 4 Enrollment 8 13 11 10  Compensatory Ed. D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Gibbs Magnet Elementary: LRSD Enr \u0026gt;llmen 35 ' -3E}--------------------------------------( j)I- ' z 30 ,' w 0 :::) 1- (j) LL 0 a: w en ~ ::) z 25 ,' / 10 ,' / 5 ,' / 0 I'-------~----.---~ BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 13 10 8 8 Transported 4 2 6 1 Enrollment 13 10 9 8 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported G1 Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. 157 t--tr) ...-4 ------------------- Gibbs Magnet Elementary: LRSD e Enrollment 1 ) 50 / / -----------------------38 ---------------- Cl) I- / z / LU 40 , ------------- 0  Compensatory Ed. ::) / 00 I- 30 , D Transported l/) ------------- ,-.( Cl) u. Q Enrollment 0 / a: 20 , LU co / ~ 10 , ::) z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 12 13 16 5 Transported 3 2 5 2 Enrollment 12 13 17 4 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. 1------------------- Gibbs Magnet Elementary: LRSD llm rt 35 / -2g- ------------------2g- ---------------- I-Cf) z 30 ,' ___2_._6_ ~_- -------------- w 0 :) 1- Cf) LL 0 a: w 0) ~ :) z , 25 ,' , 20 ,' , 15 ,'1----- 10 ,' 5 ,' 0--------,-----,-----.-----f' BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 13 12 11 8 Transported 3 2 7 6 Enrollment 13 12 11 9 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- 250 Cl) t-z , w 200, 0 ::::\u0026gt; , t- 150 , Cl) LL 0 , 100 , a: w co , ~ 50 , ::::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment Hall High: LRSD , , , BM 0 111 124 BF 0 95 117 nrullm r t ------------------------ WM 0 16 41 WF 0 25 48 .-----------, D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: High 10-12. Note: Hall High reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. -----~------------- Hall High: LRSD 250 Cl) I- , z , w 200, 0 ::J / I- 150 , Cl) LL 0 , / 100 , a: w cc , / ~ 50 , ::J z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 0 88 94 BF 0 107 110 ------------------------ WM 0 16 33 WF 0 22 50 .------------, D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: High 10-12. Note: Hall High reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. -----~------------- Hall High: LRSD 200 ~z ~ 150 ,' :J I-C/) LL 100 ,' 0 t-------,- a: w co ~ :J z / 50 ,' 0---------- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 0 0 0 0 80 68 16 21 81 76 54 59 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported _ _ D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: High 10-12. Note: Hall High reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- M. L. King Magnet Elementary: 60 Cl) ~ , z 50 , w 0 , :::\u0026gt; 40 , ~ Cl) , LL 30 , 0 a: , w 20 , co ~ , 10 , :::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , , BM 26 0 26 BF 23 1 24 LRSD 1r )lln-1 r t WM 14 3 16 WF 21 5 21 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported kiLl Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- M. L. King Magnet Elementary: 50 Cl) I- z , w 40 , 0 :::\u0026gt; , , I- 30 , Cl) LL 0 , 20 , a: w co , ~ 10 , :::\u0026gt; z 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 20 Transported 1 Enrollment 20 LRSD 2 nrollment _41_ __________________________ ____________ --- 30---------------------------- ,-------- BF 14 2 14 WM 12 2 12 26  Compensatory Ed. WF 9 2 11 D Transported B Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- M. L. King Magnet Elementary: 50 ~ , z , w 40 , 0 :J , 30 , , I-CJ) LL 0 , 20 , a: w , a:) , ~ 10 , :J z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 21 2 21 BF 16 2 16 LRSD ------------- ,----------, WM 16 3 18 WF 12 2 13 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- M. L. King Magnet Elementary: LRSD nrollrn nt 3 5 , , , , -----------------------29--------31 _ ----- (/)I- ,,' z 30 ,' ,, / UJ / , -2{}---- 0 25, / ::J IC/) u.. 0 a: UJ co ~ ::J z , 20 ,' 15 ,' 10 ,' 5 ,' 0---..------.--~-- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 10 10 12 14 Transported 0 1 5 2 Enrollment 10 11 12 15 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. 1,0 1,0 ~ ------------------- M. L. King Magnet Elementary: LRSD r 40 0 l'---------r------,...--------r--------r BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 14 16 11 9 2 4 0 2 14 16 12 9  Compensatory Ed. D Transported __ ~ Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- M. L. King Magnet Elementary: LRSD Enr llment 1 40 , , -34--------------------------------------- , , ~ 35 ,' ----- --- ------ .------------, z w 0 ::J IC/) _ _ D Compensatory Ed. LL 0 a: w co ~ ::J z 10 , , , 01'----,------,-------,r------r BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed.  15 10 12 10 Transported 4 1 2 4 Enrollment 15 10 13 10 D Transported CJ Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. 00 1,0 ~ ------------------- Mabelvale Elementary: LRSD 80 ~ 70 ,' z ~ 60 ,' ::J IC/) LL 0 a: w co ~ ::J z 20 ,' 10 ,' nrollmen 0-------,----,---------.---------\nBM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 24 25 10 6 Transported 9 8 2 2 Enrollment 34 20 12 8 CJ Compensatory Ed. D Transported  Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Mabelvale Elementary: LRSD 2 Enrollment - 1 S-J 70 ,' 57 Cl) ~ 60 ,' w 0 50 ,' ::) ~ 40 ,' LL 0 30 ,' cc w 20 ,' co ~ ::) z 10 ,' ----41---------------------------- ,-----------, 6d Compensatory Ed. D Transported ----1-9-------2-2------ Ga Enrollment / 0 -----.-------,------,-------r Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM BF WM WF 22 21 6 8 15 6 1 3 20 14 12 11 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Mabelvale Elementary: LRSD 60 (f) ..... , z 50 , w 0 , ::::\u0026gt; 40 , ..... (f) , LL 30 , 0 a: , w 20 , co ~ , 10 , ::::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 24 8 21 ,, 3 Enrollment - 1 J c ----39---------------------------- BF 16 7 16 WM 5 0 18 WF 11 3 13 ~ Compensatory Ed. D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Mabelvale Elementary: LRSD G e 4 Enrollment - 1 45 50 Cl) / I- / z / w 40 , 0 ::) / I- 30 , Cl) LL 0 / 20 , a: w a::i / ~ 10 , ::) z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 15 25 7 6 Transported 11 9 3 1 Enrollment 10 11 12 15 5 6 Compensatory Ed. D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Mabelvale Elementary: LRSD 60 CJ) r- , z 50 , UJ 0 , :::\u0026gt; r- 40, CJ) , , LL 30 , 0 , a: , UJ 20 , co :E , 10 , :::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 21 11 14 5 nrolln nt ________5_2_ -_--- ----------------------- BF 25 11 16 WM 14 4 12 WF 12 2 9 Compensatory Ed. Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Mabelvale Elementary: LRSD 50 Cl) I- , z , LU 40 , 0 ::\u0026gt; , , I- 30 , Cl) LL 0 , , 20 , a: LU co , , ~ 10 , ::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment r e 6 Enrollment - 1 BM 19 8 15 -4--2- --------40- -------------------------- BF 22 8 10 WM 6 4 13 WF 10 2 10 Compensatory Ed. D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Meadowcliff Elementary: LRSD 70 Cz/) 1- 60 ,, w , Cl 50 ,, ::::) IC/) LL 0 cc w co ~ ::::) z , 40 ,, 30 ,, I 20 ,' 10 / I ' 1 Enrollment I -60--------------------------------------- -----7-- --------!1------ o,...._------,-------,-----.----~ BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 16 5 1 2 Transported 14 11 0 2 Enrollment 30 19 6 7 Compensatory Ed. Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Meadowcliff Elementary: LRSD 80 ~z 70 / UJ 0 ::::\u0026gt; Ien LL 0 a: UJ co ~ ::::\u0026gt; z , 60 ,' , 50 ,' , 20 ,' , 10 ,' - --, - ..-. -- ... ~~\no\n-~--,,T_ \"%w..~~,.n,:\n', t .:\n-19\n ~p~---~:~ \\ ~ .. : , - ' ~.. 2 Enr llment - 1 35 -----g------------------ 5 0 ------.-------.----,--- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 12 6 0 0 Transported 24 11 0 0 Enrollment 30 18 9 5 Compensatory Ed. Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ----~-------------- Meadowcliff Elementary: LRSD 50 (J) I-z 40 , , w 0 =\u0026gt; , I- 30 , (J) LL 0 , 20, a: w co , ~ 10 , z= \u0026gt; 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported BM 7 9 Er r llment _________4_1_ _ ____________________ ______ BF 3 15 WM 2 0 WF 0 1 Enrollment 16 23 9 2 CJ Compensatory Ed. D Transported ~ Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. t-t- .,...\n------------------- Meadowcliff Elementary: LRSD Enrollment - 1 60 , ------------50 --------------------------- Cl) , , t- , , z 50 , w 0 , ::J 40, t- Cl) , LL 30 , 0 , a: , w 20 , cc , ~ , 10 , ::J z 0------------- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 8 8 3 0 10 15 0 2 25 27 11 3 J D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. 00 ,t-..... ------------------- Meadowcliff Elementary: LRSD 60 Cl) I- , z 50 , w 0 , :::) 40 , I-Cl) , LL 30 , 0 a: , w 20 , co ~ , 10 , :::) z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported , , , , , , , BM 8 12 nrollmer ------------51---------------------------- BF 8 18 WM 2 2 WF 2 1 Enrollment 14 25 7 8 Q Compensatory Ed. D Transported GJ Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Meadowcliff Elementary: LRSD 6 Enr llment 50 42 Cf) r- , z , w 40 , ----------------------------------- ,------------, 0 ::J , , ~ Compensatory Ed. r- 30 , Cf) D Transported LL 0 , 20 , a: D Enrollment w cc , , ~ 10 , ::J z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 9 4 3 2 Transported 14 9 2 0 Enrollment 19 13 9 8 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. 0 00 ~ ----~--------------1 ENROLLMENT NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BY COMPENSATORY EDUCATION, TRANSPORTED, AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM .-I 00 .-I ------------------- Amboy Elementary: NLRSD 70 Cl) Iz- 60 UJ / 0 50 , ::J I- / Cl) 40 , LL / 0 30 , a: / UJ / cc 20 , ~ / ::J 10 , z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment Gra e 1 Enrol ment - 1995-9 53 BM 18 15 20 BF 19 16 21 56 ----21--- WM 10 1 10 WF 13 1 13 27 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported -- D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------~ Amboy Elementary: NLRSD Jracl 2 Enrollment - 19~ 5-96 60 ------------------------------------------- / 47 Cl) / I- / z LU 50 , 0 / D Compensatory Ed. / :::\u0026gt; 40 , I- D Transported Cl) / LL 30 , D Enrollment \"'l 0 00 / ~ a: / 20 , LU Cl) ~ / 10 , :::\u0026gt; z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 15 16 17 12 Transported 13 13 0 0 Enrollment 17 18 16 11 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Amboy Elementary: NLRSD 50 Cf) I-z / LU 40 , 0 ::::\u0026gt; / I- 30 , Cf) LL 0 / 20 , a: LU co / ~ 10 , ::::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 0r a e 3 Enrollrnent - 1995-96 / / / BM 14 14 14 42 ----------------------------------40------ BF 11 9 14 WM 11 0 10 WF 19 1 20 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ~ 00 ~ ------------------- Amboy Elementary: NLRSD r J e 4 nr\nllment - 19 5-96 60 CJ) r , z 50 , w 0 , , :::) 40 , r CJ) , LL 30 , 0 , , a: 20 , w en ~ , 10 , :::) z 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 18 Transported 11 Enrollment 20 BF 14 7 14 WM 22 2 22 WF 10 0 10 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. tr) 00 ~ ------------------- Amboy Elementary: NLRSD r' de 5 Enrollment - 19 5-96 60 ~z 50 ,' w 0 :::) , 40 , 53 , tCI) LL 0 a: w c::c 30 ,' 1--------r --- I======= , 20 ,' 1---- ~ :::) z 10 ,' 0 -------.--------.------,----- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 17 14 26 5 9 12 1 1 16 15 26 6 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Amboy Elementary: NLRSD 50 ~ / m 40 ,, 0 r=-\u0026gt; / 30 ,' Cf) LL O 20 ,' a: w ~ 10 ,' z= \u0026gt; de 6 Er rolln1ent - 1995-96 / ------------40---------------------------- 33 ~- ---------------2g------ ...-----------, D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment o--~-~--~-- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 12 15 12 15 9 9 0 0 12 16 11 14 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. t-- 00 ~ ------------------- Central Elementary: NLRSD r c d  1 nrollment - -1 5-9 J 40 ~z 35 / , -3---------------------------------------- ,.,, .....___ __,, ~ 30 ,' ~ 25 / 1----CI) ___2_1__ _____________Co_m_p ensatory Ed. 18 ,,----___,,.__ D Transported LL 20 ,' 0 a: UJ cc ~ :::, z 15 ,, __ 10 ,' 5 ,' .,,.__ _ ____,, 01'---------~--- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 10 10 7 5 Transported 12 8 7 6 Enrollment 13 10 7 7 D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION 00 00 ~ Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Central Elementary: NLRSD Gr dd 2 nrollment - 1995- , -35--------------------------------------- 40 Cl) r- 35 // z ~ 30 // ::) ..... Cl) 25 // 20 // , 1------r / LL 0 a: w co 15 // --- ~ ::) z / 10 // / 5/ ___3_. 1_ ___________________ ________ --------- 23 ~-___,,,__ D Compensatory Ed. D Transported __ D Enrollment 0 -------.------,-----.-------f' BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 14 10 7 9 Transported 8 8 4 5 Enrollment 13 13 6 9 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. 0\"0\" ~ ------------------- Central Elementary: NLRSD 60 en I-z 50 w 0 / =\u0026gt; 40 , I- en / LL 30 , 0 a: / w 20 , cc ~ / 10 , z= \u0026gt; 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment / Gra e 3 Enrollrnent - 1995-9 46 BM 14 14 18 ____a i____________________________D Compensatory Ed. BF 9 10 13 22 D Transported -------------- 18 ---- D Enrollment WM 8 6 8 WF 8 4 6 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Central Elementary: NLRSD \\rade 4 Enrollment - 1995-9 60 40 ,' 30 ,' , 20 ,,i--- 10 ,' o--~-~--~-- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 17 6 12 9 12 6 10 8 19 7 13 10 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. l\"\"i 0'. l\"\"i ------------------- Central Elementary: NLRSD G de 5 Ent lln1ent - 1 q95_95 50 __________4_1_ ________________4_2_ _- ---- / / ~ ,/ 34 -- d] 40 ,, 0 -- :::\u0026gt; IC/) 30 ,' / LL 0 20 , a: w ca ~ :::\u0026gt; z 10 ,' / o--~-~--~-- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 13 14 4 16 9 12 3 11 12 15 5 15 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Central Elementary: NLRSD 40 Cl) Iz- 35 UJ , 0 30 , :J , I- 25 , Cl) , LL 20 , 0 , a: 15 , UJ , Cl) 10 , ~ , :J 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , , r r J 6 Enrollment - 19~ -96 BM 10 10 11 BF 14 5 14 WM 11 6 12 WF 6 4 6 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Crestwood Elementary: NLRSD 30 Cf) I-z w 25 0 , :::\u0026gt; I- 20 , Cf) , u.. 15 , 0 a: , w 10 , co ~ , :::\u0026gt; 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment Gra e 1 Enrollment - 1995-96 , , BM 8 5 8 ------------2-5---------------------------- 21 BF 9 8 8 WM 9 0 9 WF 6 1 7 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Crestwood Elementary: NLRSD 25 Cl) ~ / z / w 20 , 0 ::) / ~ 15 , Cl) LL 0 / 10 , a: w a:::i / / ~ 5' ::) z 0  Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment rade 2 Enrollment - 1985-96 21 BM 8 6 7 BF 7 5 5 17 WM 9 0 9 18 WF 7 0 7 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Crestwood Elementary: NLRSD :JI .d~ o Enr llment 19 - 6 30 , -25 -------------------------------------- , ~z 25 ,' w 0 :J 20 ,' I- --- 13 Cl) LL 15 ,' 0 a: 10 ,' w co ~ 5 ,' :) z 0 l'---------.--------,-----,--------r BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 8 5 10 6 Transported 8 3 0 0 Enrollment 9 5 9 6 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Crestwood Elementary: NLRSD G1 a . e 4 Enrollment - 1995-9 / / -2 8 ------------------29 ---------------- ___2 1__ / 25 , / 20 ,' 1------f\" 15 ,'  1--- 10 ,' 5 ,' 0 I'------.--------,-----.-------\u0026lt; BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 9 8 15 8 Transported 9 5 0 0 Enrollment 10 8 14 7 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported -- D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Crestwood Elementary: NLRSD j_ 1 18 5 Er, llr11 ,nt - 1 40 Cl) ------------34 --------------------------- , -30--- ------------------------ Iz- 35 / / w / 0 30 , ::, / / I- 25 , Cl) / ----24-----------------~-----~ ----rg------ D Compensatory Ed. _ _ D Transported LL 20 , 0 / / a: 15 , D Enrollment w / cc 10 , ~ / ::, 5' z 0 l'---------,-----,---------.---- Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM BF WM WF 11 11 12 10 8 10 0 0 11 13 12 9 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. 00 C's ,-.( ------------------- Crestwood Elementary: NLRSD 35 Cl) I- / z 30 , w / Cl 25 , :J I- / Cl) 20 , LL / 0 15 , a: / w 10 , co ~ / / :J 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Graoe 6 Enrollment - 199 -9b BM 12 9 _31_ __________________________ ____________ ----2----------------------------- BF 10 6 __________2_1_ ___ .-- ----------, WM 4 0 WF 11 0 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported -- D Enrollment Enrollment 10 9 3 10 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Lakewood Elementary: NLRSD 50 Cf) I- , z , w 40 , 0 ::) , I- 30 , Cf) LL 0 , 20 , a: w ca , , ~ 10 , ::) z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment tad 1 nrollment - 19 5-96 BM 14 13 15 42 ------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------- ~------~ D Compensatory Ed. ___2_1 _ __________________ 18 -----  Transported BF 8 6 7 WM 5 0 4 WF 9 0 9 D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Lakewood Elementary: NLRSD (1de 2 Enrollment - 1995-96 ,,' -29 ------------------------------------- 35 ,' ,............___ ~z 30 ,, , '- ---.\n.\n......__ w , O 25 ,' :::\u0026gt; IC/) LL 0 , 15 ,' a: -- w 10 ,' en ~ :::\u0026gt; z , 5 ,' 0---,.-------,------,-------r BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 11 8 10 7 9 4 5 0 0 6 8 4 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. -------------------- ,----- Lakewood Elementary: NLRSD 20 Cl) I-z w / 0 15 ' =\u0026gt; I-Cl) / LL 10 ' 0 a: w / / co 5' ~ z= \u0026gt; 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment G de 3 nrollment - 1995-96 16 16 BM BF 7 6 4 4 5 6 WM 6 1 7 WF 6 0 6 _ _ D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Lakewood Elementary: NLRSD \\3r d ~ 4 Enrollment - 19 5-96 15 ,' a: 10 ,' w Cl) ~ 5 ,' ::\u0026gt; z 1---- , o---~-~~-~-- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 8 8 7 8 Transported 6 8 2 0 Enrollment 6 8 7 8 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Lakewood Elementary: NLRSD 20 ,   15 ,  Grade 5 Enrollment - 1 95-96 _________3_1_ __ ____________________ ______ 27 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported -- D Enrollment a: 1-- UJ 10 ,  co ~ 5 ,  z o--~-~--~-- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 10 11 7 14 6 9 1 0 10 11 8 13 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Lakewood Elementary: NLRSD 30 / 15 ,' / 10 , / 5 ,' r 1e 6 nrollment - 19 -9  / / , / , ------------25 ----------------------------- 1------:--- D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment 0 -------.------,-----.---~ BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 8 9 10 6 5 6 0 0 7 10 10 7 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Meadow Park Elementary: 35 ~ , z 30 , LU , , 0 25 , ::J , ~ , en 20 , LL , , 0 15 , cc , LU 10 , co ~ , ::J 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment NLRSD Gr\u0026lt;-1de1 nrolln1ent - 1c BM 17 0 14 _31_ _________________________ _____________ BF WM 9 3 0 0 8 2 WF 12 1 9 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported -- D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Meadow Park Elementary: 30 Cl) I- , , z 25 , w 0 , , , :::) 20 , I-Cl) , , LL 15 , 0 cc: , w 10 , co ~ , 5' :::) z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , , , , , , , , , , BM 9 0 9 NLRSD c d , 2 Enroll n1ent - '19S)r.:_g 27 ------ 18 BF 14 0 13 WM 9 1 7 WF 4 2 7 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Meadow Park Elementary: 20 Cl) I- z / w / 0 15 , ::) I-Cl) / / LL 10 , 0 a: w / / en 5' ~ ::) z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment NLRSD ,. de 3 nr llment - 1995-96 18 BM 9 0 9 ---------------4-5--------4-5------ 11 --------- BF 6 0 5 WM 7 0 8 WF 7 1 7 __ D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Meadow Park Elementary: NLRSD 4 l.nrollment - 19 5-96 22 25 Cl) , , I- , , , z , w 20 , 0 , 12 , :::\u0026gt; / , I- 15 , Cl) LL 0 / 10 , a: w cc , ~ 5' :::\u0026gt; z 0-------,----.-----------.----- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 6 12 6 8 Transported O O 2 2 Enrollment 6 10 5 8 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Meadow Park Elementary: NLRSD ,._rl ~ 5 nrollment - 19 )~)-9b 35 (/)I- , z 30 ,' ,, / w , 0 =\u0026gt; IC/) 25 ,' ,/ , , __1_ 6 __ 20 ,' 15 ,' LL 0 a: w co 10 ,'1----- ~ z= \u0026gt; 5 ,' 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , BM 8 0 8 BF 16 0 16 32 WM 6 0 7 WF 11 1 10 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported -- D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Meadow Park Elementary: 30 Cl) I-z w 25 0 / =\u0026gt; 20 , I-Cl) / LL 15 , 0 / cc / w 10 ' co / ~ / =\u0026gt; 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment NLRSD , le 6 Enrollment - 199t}-96 BM 12 0 11 BF 11 0 10 WM 8 1 7 WF 12 1 11 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Seventh Street Elementary: NLRSD G cl J e 1 n r II men t - 'l ) i:: - ~ 50 ~ // 37 m 40 ,, f---- o ::) .,_ 30 // Cl) LL O 20 / __ a: LU a) ~ 10 // ::) z 0 l'---------.-------,,----~-------r BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 19 10 6 4 0 0 3 3 18 13 6 6 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Seventh Street Elementary: NLRSD G .,.de 2 Er rollment - 1 5-9 40 Cl) Iz- 35 , w , 0 30 , I=- \u0026gt; 25 Cl) , , LL 20 , 0 , a: 15 , w , co 10 , ~ , =\u0026gt; 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 12 0 13 ----------------------------------3------ -25-------------------24-- 22 BF 9 0 13 WM 8 7 9 WF 14 6 15 _ _ D Compensatory Ed. __ D Transported __ D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Seventh Street Elementary: 35 en Iz- 30 UJ / 0 25 ' =\u0026gt; I- / en 20 ' LL / 0 15 , a: UJ / ca 10 ' ~ / =\u0026gt; 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment NLRSD Grade 3 Enrollment - 1995-96 / / / BM 14 1 13 __________________________________ 31 _____ _ 28 s--.:..\n, ,~ .c-\"~,.,,.,. D Compensatory Ed. ~~~--fl --  Transported BF 9 1 10 WM 7 4 8 WF 11 8 12 -- D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Seventh Street Elementary: NLRSD Grade 4 Enrollment - 1995-96 60 ,' -----------------------48 --------------- ,,  ~=:-:-:a 44 ~z LU 0 50 ,' :r:-::\u0026gt;4 0 C/) LL 30 0 a: 20 ,' LU co ~ z= \u0026gt; 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 11 0 8 BF 8 1 8 WM 19 11 18 WF 16 12 16 _ _ D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION lnstrucHonal Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Seventh Street Elementary: NLRSD GrcJ ie 5 nrollment - 1995-96 60 ~z 50 // w 0 40 // ::::\u0026gt; IC/) LL 30 ,, 0 a: w co ~ ::::\u0026gt; z 20 // 10 ,  52 , -----------------------4g----------------- --4--2-- ----------- /  t=:=:=== o---~-~--~-- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 21 17 17 18 1 0 14 15 20 17 18 19 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Seventh Street Elementary: NLRSD i nroll. ent - 1 L 5_9c 60 g? z 50 w 0 :::\u0026gt; 40 I-C/) LL 30 ,' 0 aw: 20 co 55 _j_j __ , ~ :::\u0026gt; z 10 ,' 1---- 01\u0026lt;--------------,---- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 5 14 20 12 Transported 0 0 15 9 Enrollment 6 16 20 12 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- ENROLLMENT PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT BY COMPENSATORY EDUCATION, TRANSPORTED, AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM 00 ,-j N ------------------- Baker Elementary: Cl) I- 50 m 40 ,, 0 ::J ,' I- 30 ,' Cl) LL O 20 ,' a: / cwa ,, ' ~ 10 ,' ::J z nrollment , -----------------------38 / / -----------------1------t' / 5 6 0 -------,-------,------r---~ BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 5 6 1 3 Transported O O 17 14 Enrollment O O 20 19 PCSSD 6  Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Baker Elementary: PCSSD 2 Enrollment 50 (J) , I- / / z / w 40 , / 0 , / / :) / I- 30, (J) LL 0 / / 20 , a: 13 w co / ~ 10 , :) z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 7 5 5 6 Transported 3 0 14 17 Enrollment 3 1 18 19 42 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Baker Elementary: PCSSD nrolln1ent 1 -----------------------34 ---------------- 40 ,/ 33 Cl) ------------------ zr- 35 / ,, ,/ ----------------_l------1' w 30 / ,,/ 0 , ----------------- ::) rC/) LL 0 15 ,,' ,,,,' ffi ,' , -------------5--- ca 1 O ,' ,/ 2 ~ , , ::J 5 , z 0 -------,-------,--~-- BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported BM 2 0 3 3 5 1 15 10 Enrollment O 1 16 18 _ _ D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Baker Elementary: PCSSD 1rolln1e t _______________________ 3.1 ________________ _ 35 / (J) / / / I- / / 30 / / z / / / w / / / 0 25 / / / ::) / / / I- / / / 20 / / (J) / / / LL / / / / 0 15 / / / / / a: / / w / / 10 / / / co / / / ~ / / 5 / ::) z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 0 2 2 3 Transported O O 13 10 Enrollment O O 16 14 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported -- D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. -------------------1 Baker Elementary: PCSSD nr )!In n 1 J 50 ~m 40 ,' ------------- ~-------~ 0 ::\u0026gt; IC/) LL 30 ,' 0 20 ,' a: w co ~ ::\u0026gt; z 10 ,' , , o--~-~--~-- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 0 0 1 0 0 1 19 9 1 1 21 12 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. --------~---------- - Baker Elementary: 40 Cl) I-z , LU , 30 , 0 :::, I-Cl) , , LL 20 , 0 a: , LU , , en 10 , ~ :::, z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported , , , , , , , , , , , BM 0 0 nrollm n ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- BF 2 0 WM 0 16 WF 0 11 Enrollment O O 21 14 PCSSD __ D Compensatory Ed. D Transported __ D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------1 Cato Elementary: ~z w 0 :::, IC/) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::, 60 50 40 30 20 10 , , , , , , , , , , , Er r llmer , , , , , , , , , , , , , , z o--~-----,-----.---- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 0 0 0 0 Transported 10 6 13 16 Enrollment 15 6 33 33 PCSSD D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Cato Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Cato Elementary: Enr )llr11ent 50 , ~ ,/ a:i 40 ,' 0 , :J IC/) LL 0 a: w co ~ :J z 30 ,' , 20 ,' 0------------.----- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 0 0 0 0 6 5 12 14 7 7 32 32 PCSSD D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Cato Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Cato Elementary: enrollment 40 Cl) , I- , z , , w , 0 30 , ----------------- :::\u0026gt; I- , Cl) , , LL 20 , 0 a: w , co 10 , ~ :::\u0026gt; z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 0 0 0 0 Transported 6 3 9 11 Enrollment 7 7 22 26 PCSSD G D Compensatory Ed. D Transported __ D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Cato Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Cato Elementary: 70 Cl) r- / 60 , / z / / / w / 0 50 , / / ::\u0026gt; / / r- / / / 40 , / Cl) / / / / LL / / / 0 30 , , /. /. er: w 20 , co ~ / / ::\u0026gt; 10 , z 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 0 Transported 10 Enrollment 11 , Enr llment BF 0 4 7 WM 0 20 42 WF 0 9 26 PCSSD u D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported -- D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Cato Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. 00 ('l ('l ------------------- Cato Elementary: 60 Cf) I- , z 50 , w 0 , :::) 40 , I-Cf) , LL 30 , 0 a: , w 20 , 0) ~ , 10 , :::) z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 0 0 0 0 Transported 4 3 11 18 Enrollment 5 4 36 31 PCSSD D Compensatory Ed. D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Cato Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Cato Elementary: PCSSD Enrollm n 50 ----------------- Cl) , , I- , z , w 40 , , ----------------- 0 , , , , D Compensatory Ed. :::) , , , I- 30 , ----------------- - - D Transported Cl) u. D Enrollment 0 , 20 , a: w cc , 10 , , ~ :::) z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 0 0 0 0 Transported 7 1 14 13 Enrollment 10 3 33 28 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Cato Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. 0 t'f\") M ------------------- Crystal Hills Magnet Elementary: PCSSD nrollrn .,n J 60 ----------------------------------48------ 40 ,' 10 ,' 01\u0026lt;--~------- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 18 8 6 5 Transported O O 5 10 Enrollment O O 23 33 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Crystal Hills Magnet Elementary: PCSSD 1 U( 9 30 , Cl) ,,' ~ 25 / / ------------------w 0 ::::\u0026gt; IC/) LL 0 a: w co ~ ::::\u0026gt; z 20 ,' ,' , 15 ,' ,,' ----------------- , , , , 10 ,' ,' ----------------- , 5 ,' 0-----------,..---- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 3 4 0 0 Transported 0 0 4 3 Enrollment O O 23 21  Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Crystal Hills Magnet Elementary: 50 Cl) I- , , z 40, , w , , 0 ::, , , I- 30, Cl) , , LL , 0 , 20 , cc w a) , ~ 10 , ::, z 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 13 Transported 0 Enrollment 0 PCSSD roll 1en 43 ----------------- ----------------- 13 BF WM WF 1 1 4 0 12 7 0 30 28 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- l Crystal Hills Magnet Elementary: PCSSD nrollr 1ent 33 , 10 ,' , 5' 0 ----...------,,----~-~ BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 8 7 4 1 Transported 0 0 4 4 Enrollment O O 22 28 _ _ D Compensatory Ed. D Transported __ D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Crystal Hills Magnet Elementary: 50 Cf) , I- , z , w 40 , 0 , , :::) , , I- 30, Cf) , LL , , 0 , a: 20 , w co , ~ 10 , :::) z 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 6 Transported 0 Enrollment 0 PCSSD BF 2 0 0 Enrollment 1 ~- WM 2 10 29 WF 1 9 35 45 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Crystal Hills Magnet Elementary: PCSSD nr llment 60 Cf) Iz- 50 ,' ' / ----------------- w ,' 0:: ::\u0026gt;4 0 ,, ' / ----------------- I- ,' Cf) LL 0 a: w Cl) ~ z= \u0026gt; 30 ,, ' ,, , ----------------- ' 20 ,' ' ,,' ----------------- , 10 ,' 0 ----.-------,--~------f' BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 5 8 3 0 Transported 0 0 10 9 Enrollment O O 40 28 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Magnet Elementary K-6. ------------------- Dupree Elementary: PCSSD 50 ~ ,' m 40 ,, 0 ::\u0026gt; ~ Cl) 30 ,' , 20 , LL 0 a: w ca , ,,___ ________ \"-' 1---- ~ 10 , --- ::\u0026gt; z 0 l'------,----------.------.---- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 0 0 0 0 3 7 17 13 6 9 23 26 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Dupree Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Dupree Elementary: PCSSD 50 Cl) I- , z , , w 40 , 0 :) , , I- 30 , Cl) LL 0 , , 20 , a: w co , ~ 10 , :) z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , , , , ----------------- , ----------------- , , , BM BF 0 0 5 6 7 7 WM 0 15 25 WF 0 17 27 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Dupree Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Dupree Elementary: Pesso 40 ~ z ,' ~ 30 ,' ::) I-C/) LL 0 a: 20 ,' , 1 Enrollment UJ co 10 ,' --- ~ ::) z 0 l'--------,-------,-----,-------f' BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 0 0 0 0 7 6 14 7 8 9 24 15 l } ) D Compensatory Ed. D Transported __ D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Dupree Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Dupree Elementary: PCSSD n llmen J 60 Cf) , I- , z 50 ,, ----------------- / , w / 0 / / D Compensatory Ed. / ----------------- ::) 40 , I- D Transported Cf) / 30 , ----------------- LL D Enrollment 0 cc / w 20, co ~ / 10 , ::) z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 0 0 0 0 Transported 4 7 26 18 Enrollment 10 10 31 29 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Dupree Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. 0 \"1' (',l ------------------- Dupree Elementary: PCSSD 50 ~ ct] 40 , 0 ::::) 1- (J) LL 30 , O 20 a: w ~ 10 ::::) z Err llrnent / 0 ~---,------,----~--~ BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 0 0 0 0 3 8 18 14 5 10 28 20 CJ Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Dupree Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Dupree Elementary: 50 , ~ ,,,,,' m 40 ,, 0 ::, IC/) LL 0 a: w co ~ ::, z 30 ,' 20 ,' 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , , , , , , , , , , , BM 0 7 9 BF 0 3 6 r 11r r r WM 0 14 26 WF 0 16 22 PCSSD D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Dupree Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Fuller Elementary: Enrollmen - 50 / -40--------------------------------------- Cl) / I-z / w 40 , ------------------------ 0 :::) / I- 30 , Cl) LL 0 / , 20 , a: w co , / ~ 10 , :::) z 01\u0026lt;----~------- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 8 4 3 1 16 15 6 6 16 15 7 6 PCSSD .--------------, D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. --------~---------- Fuller Elementary: nro ln1 n 30 (f) I- / z 25 , w 0 / / :::::\u0026gt; 20 , I- (f) / LL 15 , 0 a: / w 10 , co ~ / 5' :::::\u0026gt; z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 2 5 2 0 Transported 12 11 9 9 Enrollment 13 11 13 11 PCSSD D Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. -------------------1 Fuller Elementary: PCSSD 35 Cl) I- , z 30 , w , 0 25 , :::) , I- , Cl) 20 , LL , 0 15 , a: , w 10 , co ~ , :::) 5' z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 5 13 13 Enr llmen ) _31_ _________________________ _____________ BF 1 9 9 WM 1 6 10 WF 1 9 10 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported -- B Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Fuller Elementary: PCSSD nr Im nt J 50 Cl) I-z , UJ 40 , 0 ::, , , I- 30, Cl) u.. 0 , , 20 , a: UJ co , 10 , , ~ ::, z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 10 5 0 3 Transported 15 13 12 11 Enrollment 16 13 16 11 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. --------~---------- Fuller Elementary: PCSSD 40 Cl) I- z w 30 , 0 ::::) I-Cl) / LL 20 , 0 a: w / en 10 , ~ ::::) z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM BF 8 3 14 15 14 15 Enrolln1ent - 1 Jt\u0026gt;- WM 3 14 15 WF 2 8 9 D Compensatory Ed. D Transported EJ Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Fuller Elementary: 40 , 10 ,' , , , , Enr llment 0 -----,------,------r---~ BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 3 4 0 2 9 7 16 10 11 7 22 11 PCSSD 6 Compensatory Ed. D Transported EJ Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. --------~---------- Landmark Elementary: PCSSD (J) 80 , I- , z 70 , w , 0 60 , ::::\u0026gt; , I- 50 , (J) , , LL 40 , 0 , cc 30 , w , (l) 20 , ~ , , ::::\u0026gt; 10 , z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 26 18 21 BF 9 9 10 Enr llment 1 WM 13 5 13 WF 17 4 15 Compensatory Ed. __ D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. --------~---------- Landmark Elementary: PCSSD Enrollment 1 ~ 50 ~ ,/ m 40 ,, 0 =\u0026gt; IC/) LL 0 a: w c:o ~ z= \u0026gt; 30 ,' 20 ,' 10 ,' , , , , , 45 ,' ------------3g--------40--- 0 -------r-------,----,---~ BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 9 12 18 19 Transported 10 13 6 6 Enrollment 11 14 16 20 96 E3I Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION I Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. 1 ------------------- Landmark Elementary: PCSSD Er rollment J 64 ~ 70 ,/ 52 z 60 / ,,,,, 47 w 0 :::J 50 ,' ~ 40 / LL 0 30 ,' a: ~ 2 0 , , i--:-~- ~ 10 ,' z 0 --~-----,.----.---- BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 17 15 15 18 26 17 16 11 6 18 27 18 D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported -- D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Landmark Elementary: PCSSD Enrollment 1 70 ,' 57 Cl) ~ 60 ,' 53 ---------------50----------------- w 0 ::J IC/) LL 0 a: w OJ ~ ::J z , 50 ,' , 30 ,' 20 ,' 10 ,' 0 --~--.-------,---- BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 21 13 22 21 Transported 17 9 7 9 Enrollment 19 11 21 23 CJ Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported -- D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Landmark Elementary: PCSSD 80 Cl) 1- z w 0 ::\u0026gt; IC/) LL 40 ,' 0a : 30 ,' __ _ cwo 20 ,' ~ --- ::\u0026gt; 10 ,' z r. Enr llmen 66 0 !'----------.-----,,----,------~ BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 13 14 24 21 Transported 10 12 16 11 Enrollment 12 14 26 23 D Compensatory Ed. _ _ D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Landmark Elementary: PCSSD E::nr )llment J , ----------------------------------70 ----- 80 , , Cl) ---------------------------- ..... 70 / ,,/ z , ---------------------------- w 60 / ,,/ 0 / I, - - - - - - - - - - - - 3a---- ~ 50, / Cl) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::\u0026gt; z 40 ,,' ,,,,' ,' _22 __ 30 ,' 20 , , ------ -- 10 , 0 -----.-----,----~-----(' BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 8 13 18 28 Transported 6 12 7 16 Enrollment 8 13 20 26 _ _ EJ Compensatory Ed. __ D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. ------------------- Taylor Elementary: 40 ~ z ,' ~ 30 ,' ::\u0026gt; I-Cf) LL 20 ,' 0 a: cwo 10 ,' ~ ::\u0026gt; z n llment 0-------~-- Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM BF WM WF 0 0 0 0 4 1 14 10 13 9 24 26 PCSSD _ _ D Compensatory Ed. D Transported 13:1E nrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Taylor Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Taylor Elementary: PCSSD L Enr llment - 1 -96 30 / ----------------------------- , / Cl) , / t- , z 25 , w 0 , [TI Compensatory Ed. :::\u0026gt; 20 , t- D Transported Cl) , LL 15 , Enrollment 0 a: , w 10 , co ~ , :::\u0026gt; 5' z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 0 0 0 0 Transported 5 3 4 9 Enrollment 17 5 13 19 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Taylor Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. \\C lO (',l ------------------- Taylor Elementary: 35 , , , 30 , , 25 , 20 ,' , , , , , , , nr llmen , , ----------------~~~ 15 ,' / 10 ,' 5 ,' 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , , BM 0 0 8 BF 0 1 9 WM 0 9 20 WF 0 10 23 PCSSD D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported Enrollment Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Taylor Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Taylor Elementary: PCSSD Enrollment 30 , , , Cl) , , I- , z 25 ,, ---------------------------- w 0 , , EJ Compensatory Ed. ::\u0026gt; 20 , I- D Transported Cl) , LL 15 , D Enrollment 0 a: , w 10 ' co\n~ , ::\u0026gt; 5' z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 0 0 0 0 Transported 6 3 7 14 Enrollment 15 14 14 15 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Taylor Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. 00 lO ('l ------------------- Taylor Elementary: PCSSD 30 Cf) J- , z 25 , w 0 , ::) 20 , J-Cf) , LL 15 , 0 a: , w 10 , en ~ , 5' ::) z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , , , BM 0 3 14 BF 0 3 6 Enrollment - 19 ~ WM 0 7 18 WF 0 8 18 Compensatory Ed. D Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Taylor Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- Taylor Elementary: En ollment 35 / / ' Cl) / / r / / z 30, / ' ' / w / ----------------- 0 ' / 25 , / / :::J / / r / Cl) 20 , LL / ' 0 15 , a: / w 10 , co ~ / / :::J 5' z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 0 0 0 0 Transported 6 3 9 13 Enrollment 14 13 16 19 PCSSD D Compensatory Ed. -- D Transported Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Elementary K-6. Taylor Elementary reported no instructional program funded by funds generated from the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. ------------------- ENROLLMENT MAGNET SCHOOLS BY COMPENSATORY EDUCATION, TRANSPORTED, AND INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM ,-t I.D N ------------------- MANN MAGNET JUNIOR HIGH: LRSD r t 300 , , , -----------2 44------------------2 3 g----- en / I- / / z 250' / UJ / 0 / _15_8_ / ::\u0026gt; 200 ' I- en / LL 150 , 0 / a: / UJ 100 , co ~ / 50 ' ::\u0026gt; z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 62 91 57 82 Transported 34 62 57 75 Enrollment 62 91 57 82 _c D Compensatory Ed.  Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts and Science Magnet Junior High (7-9) ------------------- MANN MAGNET JUNIOR HIGH: LRSD 8 Enrollment - '19 5 ~ 219 250 Cl) -----------2 03-------1 g 1--- --- I-z ll.J 200 167-- 0 :) , I- 150 , Cl) LL , 0 , 100 , a: ll.J ca , ~ 50 , :) z 0 BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 63 77 65 73 Transported 41  49 61 73 Enrollment 63 77 65 73 D Compensatory Ed. --  Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts and Science Magnet Junior High (7-9) ------------------- MANN MAGNET JUNIOR HIGH: 250 Cl) I- , z , , UJ 200 , 0 ::\u0026gt; , , I- 150 , Cl) LL 0 , 100 , a: UJ c::c , , :?! 50 , ::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment , BM 73 53 73 BF 81 59 81 LRSD 1rollment \"I \u0026gt;~-c WM 59 56 59 WF 60 52 60 D Compensatory Ed. --  Transported  Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts and Science Magnet Junior High (7-9) ------------------- Parkview Magnet High: LRSD r 1 1tl O .nrolln1ent , -----------301--------------------------- 350 ,' 271 Cl) ,,..,.\" ~ 300 ,' ,,/ w ,' O 250 ,' ::::, IC/) 200 , 178 LL 0 a: w c:a 150 ,' t------t\" ~ ::::, z 100 ,' 50 ,' 0---------,----,----------,------r BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 60 101 58 91 Transported 58 99 56 89 Enrollment 60 101 58 91 D Compensatory Ed. --  Transported -- o Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts and Science Magnet High (10-12) ------------------- Parkview Magnet High: LRSD 250 Cf) I- / z / / w 200 , 0 ::\u0026gt; / I- 150 , Cf) LL 0 / 100 , a: w co / / ~ 50 , ::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment r i 1 1 1 E n r J 11n 1 r t 1 5 / / / 180 / BM 61 58 61 BF 75 73 75 223 WM 59 58 59 WF 73 71 73 217 D Compensatory Ed. --  Transported ru Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts and Science Magnet High (10-12) ------------------- Parkview Magnet High: LRSD 300 Cl) I-z LU 250 0 , , ::\u0026gt; 200 , I-Cl) , LL 150 , 0 a: , 100 , LU a:l ~ , 50 , ::\u0026gt; z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment J  1d . -12 Enrollment ~ 1 q _q5 , , BM 59 57 59 ----------------------------------245----- BF 74 74 74 222 WM 44 43 44 WF 83 80 83 D Compensatory Ed.  Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts and Science Magnet High (10-12) ------------------- Booker Magnet Elementary: 100 (I) I- z w 80 0 ::) , , I- 60 , (I) LL 0 , 40 , a: w co , / ~ 20 , ::) z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment BM 24 21 24 LRSD nr )lln1ent = 1 ----------- 79---------------------------- 69 i\u0026lt;-----'--- 70 BF 27 25 27 WM 24 22 24 WF 19 16 19 D Compensatory Ed.  Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts Magnet Elementary (1-6) ------------------- Booker Magnet Elementary: 100 en ~ / z / w 80 , 0 ::) / ~ 60 , en LL 0 / 40 ' a: w co / / ~ 20 , ::) z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment LRSD 2 E1 rollrn nt - 9 ) - ----------------------------------76 ____ _ / , _52__ __- - --~?_ __---s_a --,__ D Compensatory Ed. BM BF 21 22 20 21 21 22 WM 20 18 20 WF 26 24 26 --  Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts Magnet Elementary (1-6) O\"I 1,0 N ------------------- Booker Magnet Elementary:  LRSD 100 Cl) r- / z / / w 80 , 0 ::::\u0026gt; / / r- 60 , Cl) LL. / 0 40 , / a: w co / / ~ 20 , z= \u0026gt; 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment / / / _... 1 ~ :_,,t :nr )ilment 1 i , - ,, --------------------------------- 1s----- 71 D Compensatory Ed. --  Transported  Enrollment BM BF WM WF 22 20 22 19 18 19 24 23 24 27 24 27 INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts Magnet Elementary (1-6) ------------------- Booker Magnet Elementary: 100 Cl) I-z w 80 0 ::) / I- 60 , Cl) LL 0 / 40 , a: w cc / ~ 20 , ::) z 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 21 Transported 21 Enrollment 21 LRSD 4 Enrollment - ~1~ b- BF 15 13 15 WM 13 11 13 WF 25 24 25 74 D Compensatory Ed. --  Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts Magnet Elementary (1-6) ------------------- Booker Magnet Elementary: LRSD ~  - r l I n1 n - 7 120 Cl) 92 1- z w 0 :J IC/) ---------------61------ D Compensatory Ed. LL 0 a: w en ~ :J z 60 ,' 40 ,' 20 ,' 53 / 0 ------,----........-------r-----r BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment 23 31 18 21 22 30 17 19 23 31 18 21  Transported  Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts Magnet Elementary (1-6) ------------------- Booker Magnet Elementary: 100 Cl) I- , z , w 80 , 0 :::\u0026gt; , , I- 60 , Cl) LL , 0 , 40 , a: w co , ~ 20 , :::\u0026gt; z 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 26 Transported 24 Enrollment 26 LRSD j Enr llment - 1 BF WM WF 24 19 26 24 17 25 24 19 26 D Compensatory Ed. --  Transported CJ Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Arts Magnet Elementary (1-6) ------------------- Williams Magnet Elementary: 70 Cl) I- 60 / / z / / / UJ / 0 50 , :J I- / Cl) 40 , LL / 0 30 , a: / / UJ 20 , co ~ / :J 10 , z 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 16 Transported 14 Enrollment 16 46 BF 22 20 22 LRSD Enrollment 19' le\n96 64 _- --49--_- -__5 2_ ____ _ WM 17 15 17 WF 18 16 18 D Compensatory Ed. --  Transported  Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Basic Skills Magnet Elementary (1-6) ------------------- Williams Magnet Elementary: 80 Cl) / / / Iz- 70 , w 60 0 ::::\u0026gt; / I- 50 , Cl) / LL 40 , 0 / / a: 30 , w / co 20 , ~ / ::::\u0026gt; 10 , z 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment / / BM 20 19 20 LRSD Je 2 Enr llment - 1 ~ ~,5~96 BF 16 14 16 WM 17 15 17 WF 22 22 22 66 _ _ D Compensatory Ed.  Transported u Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Basic Skills Magnet Elementary (1-6) ------------------- Williams Magnet Elementary: LRSD I ltnent - 1 70 ,,,, ------------59--------------------ss----- ~z ,/ , -59---60 , ,, -- ----I w , ------ 0 50, :::\u0026gt; IC/) LL 0 a: w co ~ :::\u0026gt; z 40 ,' 30 ,' , 10 , i----- 0 --~--,---------.-------(' BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 17 20 14 20 Transported 16 19 12 18 Enrollment 17 20 14 20 D Compensatory Ed. --  Transported --  Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Basic Skills Magnet Elementary (1-6) ------------------- Williams Magnet Elementary: 100 Cl) I-z , w 80 , 0 ::::\u0026gt; , I- 60 , Cl) LL 0 , 40 , a: w co , ~ 20 , ::::\u0026gt; z 0 BM Compensatory Ed. 29 Transported 27 Enrollment 29 85 LRSD i4 E:nr lln1 ~rat 1 ---------------59-------55-----.-----------, D Compensatory Ed. BF 12 11 12 WM 20 19 20 WF 19 18 19 --  Transported D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Basic Skills Magnet Elementary (1-6) ------------------- Williams Magnet Elementary: 60 ,  50 ,  40 ,  10 ,  LRSD 65 0 -------,----.----------,--------f\" BM BF WM WF Compensatory Ed. 19 22 16 18 Transported 19 21 15 18 Enrollment 19 22 16 18 __ D Compensatory Ed.  Transported __ D Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Basic Skills Magnet Elementary (1-6) 00 t-M ------------------- Williams Magnet Elementary: 80 10 ,' 0 Compensatory Ed. Transported Enrollment LRSD rade Enrollment - 19 5- 6 BM 17 17 17 BF 22 21 22 65 WM 15 15 15 WF 18 17 18 D Compensatory Ed.  Transported __ C'.J Enrollment INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM: COMPENSATORY EDUCATION Instructional Program Type: Basic Skills Magnet Elementary (1-6) -------------------1 TEST DATA LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT: CYCLE FIVE SCHOOLS 0 00 N ------------------- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I C. TEST DATA The Allen letter requires the collection of the following norm referenced test data on the three school districts in Pulaski County: Since 1991-92 the ADE has collected test data by using the Stanford Achievement Test-8. Scores for 1991-92, 1992-93, and 1993-94 have previously been reported in the 1994 Interim Monitoring Report, the February 1995 Semiannual Report and the July 1995 Semiannual Report. Scores for the spring of 1994-95 and the fall of 1995-96 school years are outlined on the following pages. The graphs on the following pages indicate the results by composite score on the Stanford Achievement Test by race, gender, grade, school, SES and teacher. 281 CARVER MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD w 0 z ~ ~ LL 0 1- z w 0 a: w Q. w 8 Cf) w t: ~ ~ 8 100 60 20 84 86 85 82 85 BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !spring 95 - Grade 4 IIIIIFall 95 - Grade 5 I SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility NE 66.3% \\ RC 5.1% NE= Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free F 28.6% N 00 N Teacher administering test was Linda Ammel ----------~-------- CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY: LRSD w 0 z 80 2 60 ~ ~ LL 0 fz w 0 a: w 40 0.. w ~ 0 (f) ~ ~ 20 ~ g 71 BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !Spring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grade 5 I SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility RC 8.6% NE 40.2% F 51.2% I NE = Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free Teacher administering test was Lorraine Mosby ----------------~-- GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY: LRSD w () z z Li!i ~ LL 0 I-z w () a: w 0.. w a: 0 () Cl) w !::: Cl) ~ ~ 0 () 80 70 60 50 / 40 30 20 10 / / / / / / / / / / 65 0.__--------------~ BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !spring 95 - Grade 4 IIIIIFall 95 - Grade 5 j Teacher administering test was Linda Parker SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility RC F 54.8% NE 40.0% I NE= Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free -----~-----------~- GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD w 0 z z\n'.S 2: IL 0 1- z w 0 a: w D. w 15 0 Cf) ~ ~ 2: 8 120 100 80 60 40 ,, 20 / / / / 95 o~--------------- BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !spring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grade 5 I SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility NE 4.9% 62.5% 32.6% NE = Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free 1./) 00 ('l Teacher administering test was Judy Bryant ----------~-------- HALL HIGH SCHOOL: LRSD w 0 z 80 ~ 60 ,, ~ LL 0 1- z w ffi IL 40 w ~ 0 Cf) w !::: ~ 20 ~ 0 0 71 70 0\"-------------------J BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !Spring 95 - Grade 4 aFall 95 - Grade 5 I SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility RC 2.0% NE= Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free Teacher administering test was Linda Porter ------------~---~-- M. L. KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD 100 SES ____________ 83 83 ____________________ _ Based on Free Lunch Eligibility w 0 2 80 ~ :': LL 0 1- z w 0 a: w 0. w 8 40 Cf) w I- ~ ::'i: 20 8 BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER Jspring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grades I Teacher administering test was Geraldine Johnson ------------ RC 6.4% NE 49.0% I F 44.6% NE = Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free - - - - - - -1 w 0 z ~ ~ LL 0 fz w 0 a: w Q. w 8 Cf) w f- ~ ~ 0 0 MABELVALE ELEMENTARY: LRSD 100 80 60 ,' 40 20 / ---------------------------------- 81--- ,, 77 / / / / / / / / BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !Spring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grade 5 I SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility RC 8.5% \\ F 62.6% NE = Not Eligible NE 28.9% / 00 00 N RC = Reduced Cost Teacher administering test was Lee Van Enk F = Free ------------------- MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY: LRSD 80 70 w 0 z ~ 60 ~ IL 0 fz w 0 a: w a.. w ~ 0 Cl) w t: 50 40 30 / / ~ 20 ,, ~ 0 0 10 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / BM 69 _____________ 52_ __ _ BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !Spring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grade 5 I F-\u0026lt;ES SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility RC F 66.5% 8.5% \\ NE = Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free NE Teacher administering test was Tracye Thomason ------~------------ TEST DATA NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT: CYCLE FIVE SCHOOLS 0 a, N -------------------- AMBOY ELEMENTARY: NLRSD M SES 70 / / / 65 65 w / ------------- 0 / z ,' ~ 60 ,' 2 ,' LL O 50 f-z w ffi 0. w 8 (I) w t: 40 ,' 30 ,' ~ 20 2 8 10 ', / / BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !spring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grade 5 I Teacher administering test was Barbara Woodyear Based on Free Lunch Eligibility NE 42.8% F 52.2% I NE= Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free ----------~--~----- w 0 z z ~ ~ LL 0 1- z w 0 ffi 0.. w ~ 0 Cf) w !::: ~ ~ 0 0 CENTRAL ELEMENTARY:. NLRSD 100 80 40 20 01\u0026lt;------------------r BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !spring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grades j SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility 67.9% RC 3.2% NE = Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free NE Teacher administering test was Pat Siegel ------------------- . CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY: NLRSD S.....A,,. \".I, ..8 \\C...J'Vf \"'QRES UJ 0 z ~ 2: LL 0 fz UJ 0 a: UJ 0.. UJ ~ 0 Cf) ~ Cf) i 2: 8 100 80 _, 60 40 / 20 / / - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 79- - -81 - 80 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - // 76 / / BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !Spring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grade 5 I Teacher administering test was Linda Wilson SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility RC 2.5% NE 53.3% F 44.2% NE= Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free ------------------- LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY: NLRSD UJ 0 .100 Z 80 ~ 2: LL 0 ~ 60 UJ 0 a: UJ D.. UJ ~ 40 0 Cf) ~ ~ 2: 20 g BM 90 BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER Jspring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grade 5 J RES SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility NE 47.3% I F 51.4% NE = Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free Teacher administering test was Kaye Lowe ------------------- MEADOW PARK ELEMENTARY: NLRSD 70 63 / / / / w 60 0 z z / / ~ 50 / ~ LL ----------- 0 / I- / z / w 40 0 a: ---------- w Q. w 30 / ~ 0 (J) w t: 20 (J) ~ ~ 0 0 10 0 ~---------------' BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !spring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grade 51 Teacher administering test was Sam Mascuilli SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility 74.0% RC 6.6% NE = Not Eligible RC = Reduced Cost F = Free ------------------- w 0 z ~ ~ LL 0 fz w 0 ffi Q. w ~ 0 Cl) w t: ~ ~ 0 0 SEVENTH STREET ELEMENTARY: NLRSD SAT 8 SCORES 100 80 / 60 ,/ 40 / 20 / / / / / / 88 0\"----------------~ BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !Spring 95 - Grade 4 Fall 95 - Grade 5 I SES Based on Free Lunch Eligibility RC 1.3% NE 44.8% F 53.9% NE = Not Eligible Teacher administering test was Marsha Paul RC = Reduced Cost F = Free ------------------- TEST DATA I /\\ C+-KCI N y I ,. re t-- I \".'. 0\"I ~ ,~~.. ~ rn ~-'\"',\\I ~') ' .  I\"\"\"' w,,mI\u0026lt; N 1_--,-T-R- I Ta ~y L ,. aS ~  I ~ .. I -~ ------------------- BAKER ELEMENTARY: PCSSD w 0 z z ~ ~ LL 0 1- z w 0 a: w Q. w ~ 0 (f) w I- ~ ~ 0 0 100 80 60 / 40 20 0\"---------------~ BM BF WM WF OM OF RACE AND GENDER !Spring 95 - Gr\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eOffice of Education and Lead Planning and Desegregation\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_152","title":"Arkansas Department of Education's, Semiannual Desegregation Monitoring Report, Volume 2","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"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Education and Lead Planning and Desegregation"],"dc_date":["1996-07-15"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Educational statistics","Education and state","Pulaski County (Ark.)--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Arkansas Department of Education's, Semiannual Desegregation Monitoring Report, Volume 2"],"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/152"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nl D J nitorin9 LRSD PROGRAM COST -:~-::..-... .,cf~ tt:-::~ .\ni~~:~~\"I' ' 308 Little Rock School District (LRSD) The following is a summary of the LRSD Program Cost Section of the July 15, 1996 Monitoring Report. Total program expense for the district is separated by funding source and expense category within the funding source. Total program expense is actual for FY 95/96 through March 31, 1996 and is estimated for the fiscal year. Separate schedules indicate the total program expense for the Cycle 5 schools. The programs funded by the Cycle 5 schools are also included. Teacher expense and school administrator expense are also presented for the Cycle 5 schools. Cost per student information is presented for the: district\nelementary school programs\njunior high school programs\nhigh school programs\nand Cycle 5 school programs. Graphs indicate total program cost and average cost per student rates for elementary, junior high and high school programs. 309 rT' LOCAUSTATE LEA# SCHOOL PROGRAM DISTRICT TRANS 8001001 CENTRAL HIGH 3,187,056 1,562,623 328,669 8001002 HALL HIGH 2,191,579 923,114 191,706 8001003 MANN JR. HIGH 0 842,5-40 174,973 8001- PARKVIEW HIGH 0 Be0,498 176,626 8001006 BOOKER ELEM 0 800,820 124,774 8001007 OUNBAR JR. HIGH 1,402,978 728,148 151,217 8001009 FOREST HEIGHTS JR. HIGH 1,573,787 755,004 156,794 8001010 PULASKI HEIGHTS JR. HIGH 1,66e,881 776,888 161,339 8001011 SOUTHWEST JR. HIGH 1,127,909 608,778 126,427 8001013 HENDERSON JR. HIGH 1,762,542 787,830 183,612 8001017 BALE ELEM 873,788 310,357 84,483 8001018 BRADY ELEM 840,180 375,015 77,881 8001020 MCDERMOTT ELEM 819,919 484,436 100,806 8001021 CARVERaEM 0 826,888 129,939 8001023 FAIR PARK ELEM 801,488 232,788 48,340 8001024 FOREST PARK ELEM 849,728 432,710 89,862 6001026 FRANKLIN ELEM 0 380,094 74,782 6001026 GARLAND ELEM 0 235,752 48,959 8001027 GIB8SELEM 0 305,384 83,420 8001029 WESTERN HILLS ELEM 637,567 313,341 86,073 6001030 JEFFERSON aEM 837,781 488,362 103,497 6001033 MEAOOWCLIFF aEM eee.100 397,894 82,632 8001034 MITCHELL ELEM 0 282,810 84,637 8001036 MLKINGaEM 54,804 487,578 115,027 8001038 PULASKI HEIGHTS ELEM 1586,562 403,862 113,872 6001039 RIGHTSELL ELEM 0 199,942 41,523 8001040 ROMINE ELEM 886,880 287,564 55,570 8001042 WASHINGTON ELEM 1,188,126 599,825 124,588 8001043 WILLILAMS aEM 0 805,325 104,943 8001044 WILSONaEM 700,003 364,073 75,608 6001045 WOODRUFF ELEM 392,888 216,862 48,034 8001047 TERRY ELEM 828,801 633,178 110,727 6001048 FULBRIGHT ELEM 961,524 515,273 107,009 8001000 ROCKEFELLERE LEM 0 311,352 84,660 8001061 BADGETT ELEM 387,305 173,084 35,948 6001062 BASELINE ELEM 519,919 289,486 80,115 6001053 CHICOT ELEM 944,183 431,715 89,656 6001004 CLOVERDALE ELEM 579,813 397,894 82,832 6001056 DAVID O'OOOD ELEM 517,068 292,452 80,735 6001056 GEYER SPRINGS ELEM 633,250 271,563 56,396 6001067 MABELVALE ELEM 747,949 440,668 91,515 6001068 OTTER CREEK ELEM 569,718 337,215 70,031 6001059 WAKEFIELD ELEM 893,524 426,741 88,623 6001080 WATSON ELEM 872,937 406,847 84,491 6001081 CLOVERDALE JR. HIGH 1,143,329 805,794 125,807 8001062 MABELVALEJ R. HIGH 1,244,332 488,415 101,431 8001063 JA FAIR HIGH 1,941,790 900,235 186.~5 6001084 MCCLELLAN HIGH 2,176,823 899,240 186,748 NIA METRO HIGH 1,027,915 0 0 NIA ALT LEARNING CTR 33,830 0 0 NIA ISHELEM 12,015 0 0 TOT AL PROGRAM EXPENSE 37,262,354 2 ,026,827 4,989,738 SOURCE: -See the not aectlon on the next page for explanatlona of th categorle . The Llttle Rock School D13tncFt inance omce. - - - - - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSE FY 96/96 FUNDING SOURCES FEDERAL LEGAL PROGRAM DISTRICT PROGRAM 10,492 0 107,425 21,078 6,120 0 82,659 1,351 M86 0 57,190 0 o,639 0 57,730 0 3,983 0 40,782 0 4,827 0 49,425 133,661 5,006 36,828 51,248 87,811 5,151 0 52,734 76,174 4,036 57,280 41,323 103,110 5,223 34,382 83,476 131,417 2,056 27,534 21,088 76,951 2,486 36,177 25,455 49,831 3,212 28,924 32,883 4,269 4,148 0 42,470 0 1,543 32,289 15,800 eo,729 2,869 37,364 29,371 15,254 2,387 80,962 24,442 1,122,980 1,563 4,412 16,002 800.788 2,026 0 20,729 0 2,077 28,111 21.289 4,403 3,304 36,238 33,828 17,357 2,638 44,102 27,008 18,220 1,741 30,894 17,825 890,948 3,034 36,788 31,069 1,026,237 2,878 31,832 27,413 13,889 1,326 29,832 13,572 874,772 1,774 34,1127 18,163 111,788 3,977 87,414 40,715 182,703 3,3e0 0 34,300 0 2,414 36,112 24,713 39,148 1,436 32,487 14,720 51,330 3,535 0 36,191 9,513 3,416 29,277 34,978 18,825 2,064 119,283 21,134 1,345,421 1,147 27,264 11,749 83,842 1,919 36,888 19,649 70,718 2,862 88,811 29,304 83,517 2,638 33.795 27,008 81,497 1,939 8,485 19,851 15,310 1,800 31,149 18,433 84,721 2,922 86,804 29,912 52,876 2,236 30,876 22,889 14,185 2,829 83,735 28,966 12,962 2,897 34,455 27,616 88,316 4,016 52,428 41,120 86,736 3,238 2,271 33,153 29,101 5,968 0 61,108 22,927 5,962 0 61,039 34,776 0 35,510 0 0 0 0 0 256,346 0 0 0 0 159,293 1,359,880 1,630,891 7,856,384 - - - - DESEGREGATION DISTRICT MAGNET TRANS 370,756 0 184,336 216,255 0 115,853 197,379 2,063,752 87,487 199,244 2,326,882 88,313 140,752 1,425,443 82,387 170,561 0 75,608 178,873 0 78,397 181,999 0 80,870 142,617 0 83,214 184,563 0 81,806 72,706 0 32,227 87,854 0 38,940 113,487 0 80,302 148,578 1,257,1162 84,970 54,830 0 24,170 101,370 0 44,931 84,358 0 37,391 56,229 0 24,480 71,541 775,244 31,710 73,406 0 32,eae 118,780 0 51,748 93,213 0 41,318 81,521 0 27,269 107,1115 0 47,513 94,612 0 41,1138 48,840 0 20,781 82,886 0 27,786 140,519 0 82,284 118,381 1,143,488 52,471 86,290 0 37,804 80,801 0 22,517 124,906 0 56,364 120,711 0 63,804 72,940 0 32,330 40,548 0 17,973 87,813 0 30,067 101,137 0 44,828 93,213 0 41,318 68,512 0 30,367 83,818 0 28,198 103,234 0 48,768 78,998 0 35,015 99,971 0 44,311 95,311 0 42,248 141,917 0 62,904 114,420 0 80,715 210,8~ 0 93,478 210,862 0 93,374 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,628,692 8,992,448 2,494,869 - - - TOTALS TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEGAL 03131196 FYIW96 4,189 5,776,823 8,837,048 2,444 3,891,061 6,518,803 2.230 3,431,137 5,130,141 2,261 3,707,183 M42,8n 1,600 2,400,831 3,569,:2()! 1,1127 2,718,370 4,064,432 1,999 2,923,n1 4,371,470 2,056 2,902,872 4,340,294 1,811 2,276,305 3,403,469 2,085 3,206,936 4,794,922 822 1,281,942 1,918,724 1183 1,334,812 1,995,774 1.282 1,839,319 2,481,065 1,886 2,273,111 3,398,693 818 972,270 1,483,711 1,148 1,404,804 2,100,125 953 1,768,339 2,829,020 824 1,187,789 1,775,949 608 1,270,881 1,900,158 829 1,078,812 1,812,711 1,319 1,111111,184 2,5-40,573 1-,053 1,374,179 2,064,635 1,147,840 1,716,219 1,211 1,880,148 2,781,238 1,0l!II 1,297,415 1,939,869 529 1,028,797 1,638,229 708 1,287,843 1,895,348 1,888 2,391,719 3,578,032 1,338 1,953,573 2,935,880 954 1,365,127 2,041,100 574 828,411 1,238,817 1,411 1,703,426 2,548,918 1,384 1,633,879 2,741,1165 824 1,1120,008 2,870,743 468 759,115 1,135,008 788 1,097,312 1,840,871 1,143 1,787,126 2,842,156 1,053 1,340,869 2,004,815 774 1,013,493 1,015,347 719 1,089,862 1,829,517 1,187 1,801,405 2,394,377 893 1,181,854 1,737,172 1,130 1,482,792 2,187,126 1,077 1,485,993 2,178,961 1,804 2,264,655 3,386,080 1,293 2,068,369 3,092,588 2,383 3,425,737 5,122,088 2,380 3,871,004 5,488,784 0 1,063,425 1,590,004 0 291,976 436,554 0 12,015 17,964 83,597 94,464,753 1  1,241,095 - - - 0 ..-\n('f') Funding Categories L.ocal\u0026amp;Stal9 Federal DeHg NOTES FOR LRSD TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSE SCHEDULE FOR FY 95/96 This category Includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. This category Includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; Stall, o-g Total Categories This category consists of axpenses Incurred relative to regular program expense, district expanse, transportation expanse and legal expanse funded by unrestricted local, stat and federal sources. This category consists of expenses lncur..-.d relative to federal program expense and district expanse funded by reslrlcted federal sources. This category consists of expanses Incurred relative to desegregation program expense, district expanse, magnet expanse, transportation expanse and legal expanse funded from desegregation sources. Total at 03/31/gtj The totals In this column represent actual costs Incurred for each school site through March 31, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. Total for FY ll~ The totals In this column represent the total estimated expanse for each school site for ftscal year 1995/1996. SOURCE: The LJttle Rock School 0/\u0026amp;trict Finan,::. Office.   LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CYCLE Ii SCHOOL PROGRAM EXPENSE FY 911/96 FUNDING SOURCES LOCAI./STATE FEDERAL DESEGREGATION LEA# SCHOOL PROGRAM DISTRICT TRANS LEGAL PROGRAM DISTRICT PROGRAM DISTRICT MAGNET TRANS 6001002 HALL HIGH 2,191,679 1123,114 191,706 6,120 0 62,~9 1,351 216,255 0 96,~3 6001021 CARVER ELEM 0 1!26,688 129,939 4,148 0 42,470 0 146,678 1,257,662 114,1170 6001027 GIBBS ELEM 0 306,384 63,420 2,026 0 20,729 0 71,541 TT8,244 31,710 6001033 MEAOOWCLIFF ELEM 866,103 3117,894 82,632 2,638 , 102 27,008 18,220 93,213 0 41,316 6001035 ML KING ELEM 54,!504 487,878 95,027 3,034 36,788 31,059 1,026,237 107,198 0 47,813 tl001004 CLOVERDALE ELEM 8711,813 3117,894 82,632 2,638 33,796 27,008 81,497 93,213 0 41,316 tl001088 GEYER SPRINGS ELEM 833,256 271,883 88,3911 1,800 31,149 16,433 114,721 63,618 0 28,196 tl001057 MABEL\\IALE ELEM 747,949 440,688 91,616 2,922 86,1104 29,1112 82,576 103,234 0 48,788 TOTAL CYCLE 8 PRCIGRAM EXPENSE 4,TT3,203 3,8111,783 7113,257 25,325 231,438 zjj9,276 1,264,702 894,847 2,032,1109 3'\"',834 The district's Total Program Expense as of March 31, 1186 was $14,484,713, and Total Program Expense for the fiscal year Is expected to be $141,241,otli. The programs funded In uch of the Cycle I schools are Indicated on the chart entitled \"Programs In Cycle I Schools. Funding categortee Local \u0026amp; State De#(/ Th  category lncludN funding from focal 90Ul'CM, r.gular ate aourcn, and unl'Ntrtcted f9deral 80Urcn. Th  cat.gory lnctudM funding from rNtricted fedral eourcn which mult be accounted tor Nparately from the Gtneral Fund. Toil ca1-gofy conailbl ol funding lor d-regauon purpoHI. Expenu Categor1N Loce/ \u0026amp; Stote Th61 categofy conaletl of expenau Incurred relative to regular program expenN, district expense, transportation expense and legal expense funded by unrestrk:ted local, state and federal eources. Thtl categOf)' con latl of XJMn ... Incurred relatNe to federal program expenN and dlltnct expense funded by restricted federal sources. Th  category conI11t1 of ex.,.nMt Incurred relatlw to deHgregaUOn program xpenN, dlstr1ct expense, magnet xpense, transportation expense and legal expense tunded from deaegregaUon 10urces. Total Categorle Total at 03131\ng~ The totals In th61 column represent actual costs Incurred tor each of the Cycle 5 schools through March 31, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. Total for FY Q.W6 The totads In thts column represent the tot.al estimated expense tor each or the Cycle 5 schools tor fiscal year 199511996. SOURCE' The Little Roel\u0026lt; School Dl$tr/ct Finance Office.     TOTALS TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FDR LEGAL 03131/96 FY96196 2,4 3,691,081 8,618,803 1,1166 2,273,111 3,396,693 806 1,270,881 1,11001, 88 1,003 1,374,179 2,004,638 1,211 1,860,148 2,781,239 1,003 1,340,869 2,004,818 719 1,089,882 1,1!211,817 1,157 1,801,408 2,394,3TT 10,111 14,801,494 21,11\u0026amp;2,~ PROGRAMS Four-Year Old Kindergarten Elementary Elementary Music AcceleratedL eaming Itinerant lnstructlon ResourceR oom Special Class Homebound \u0026amp; Hospital Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Guidance Services Library Services High School Marketing/District Ed-Coop Business Ed-Coop Business Ed- Skill Training Trade \u0026amp; Ind-Coop Consumer/Marketing Coord Career-Coop SOURCE:    LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Programs in Cycle 5 Schools FY95/96 MEADOWCLIFF HALL HIGH CARVER ELEM GIBBS ELEM ELEM KING ELEM X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X The uttte Rock School District Finance Offica. CLOVERDALE GEYER SPRINGS ELEM ELEM X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X MABELVALE ELEM X X X X X X X X X X X X - ('I') ~ ('I') I I I I II I I I I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR TOTAL PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROLLMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL.AS OF TOTAL.FOR COST PER STU LEA, SCHOOL @ 10/01/95 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 03/31/96 FY 95196 FOR FY95196 6001001 CENTRAL HIGH 1,591 5,108,640 107,425 560,358 5,776,623 8,637,048 5,429 6001002 HALLH IGH 928 3,312,519 62,659 315,903 3,691,081 5,518,803 5,947 6001003 MANN JR. HIGH 847 1,023,099 57,190 2,350,848 3,431,137 5,130,141 6,057 6001005 PARKVIEW HIGH 855 1,032,763 57,730 2,616,690 3,707,183 . 5,542,878 6,483 6001006 BOOKER ELEM 604 n9,577 40,782 1,630,1n 2,400,531 3,589,208 5,942 6001007 DUNBAR JR. HIGH 732 2,287,168 49,425 381,m 2,718,370 4,064,432 5,553 6001009 FOREST HEIGHTS JR. HIG 759 2,490,571 88,076 345,080 2,923,n7 4,371 ,'476 5,760 6001010 PULASKI HEIGHTS JR. HIG 781 2,509,239 52,734 340,899 2,902,872 4,340,294 5,557 6001011 SOVTHWEST JR. HIGH 612 1,867,150 98,603 310,552 2,276,305 3,403,469 5,561 6001013 HENDERSON JR. HIGH 792 2,719,207 87,858 399,871 3,206,936 4,794,922 6,054 6001017 BALE ELEM 312 1,050,636 -48,600 182,706 1.281,942 1,916,724 6,143 6001018 BRADY ELEM 377 1,095,562 61,632 177,618 1,334,812 1,995,77  5.294 6001020 MCDERMOTT ELEM -487 1,408,1n 61,807 169,340 1,639,319 2,451,065 5,033 6001021 CARVER ELEM 629 759,775 42,470 1,470,866 2,273,111 3,398,693 5,403 6001023 FAIR PARK ELEM 234 784,136 -48,089 140,045 972,270 1,453,711 6,212 600102  FOREST PARK ELEM 435 1,175,169 66,735 162,700 1,404,604 2,100,125 4,828 6001025 FRANKLIN ELEM 362 437,263 75,394 1,245,682 1,758,339 2,629,020 7,262 6001026 GARLAND ELEM 237 286,274 20,414 881,101 1,187,789 1,775,949 7,493 6001027 GIBBS ELEM 307 370,829 20.n9 879,303 1,270,861 1,900,156 6,189 6001029 WESTERN HILLS ELEM 315 918,058 49,380 111,17  1,078,612 1,612,711 5,120 6001030 JEFFERSON ELEM 501 1,442,944 69,066 187,174 1,699,184 2,540,573 5,071 6001033 MEADOWCUFF ELEM 400 1,149,267 71,110 153,802 1,374,179 2,054,635 5,137 6001034 MITCHELL ELEM 264 318,888 -48,519 780,433 1,147,840 1,716,219 6,501 6001035 ML KING ELEM 460 610,143 67,847 1,182,156 1,860,146 2,781239 6,046 6001038 PULASKI HEIGHTS ELEM 406 1,086,964 58,945 151,506 1,297,415 1,939,859 4,778 6001039 RIGHTSELL ELEM 201 242,791 43,104 742,902 1,028,797 1,538,229 7,653 6001040 ROMINE ELEM 269 1,011,588 53,090 202,965 1,267,643 1,895,345 7,046 6001042 WASHINGTON ELEM 603 1,896,496 108,129 387,094 2,391,719 3,576,032 5,930 6001043 WIWLAMS ELEM 508 613,618 34,300 1,315,655 1,963,573 2,935,880 5,779 . 6001044 WILSON ELEM 366 1,142,098 59,825 163,204 1,365,127 2,041,100 5,577 6001045 WOODRUFF ELEM 218 656,012 47,177 125,222 828,411 1,238,617 5,682 6001047 TERRY ELEM 536 1,476,041 36,191 191,194 1,703,426 2,546,916 4,752 6001048 FULBRIGHT ELEM 518 1,577,222 64,253 192,404 1,a33,879 2,741,965 5,293 6001050 ROCKEFELLER ELEM 313 378,076 90,417 1,451,515 1,920,008 2,870,743 9,172 6001051 BADGETT ELEM 174 597,-481 39,013 122,621 759,115 1,135,008 6,523 6001052 BASELINE ELEM 291 871,421 56,537 169,354 1,097,312 1,640,671 5,638 6001053 CHICOT ELEM 434 1,468,386 98,115 200,625 1,767,126 2,642,158 6,088 6001054 CLOVERDALE ELEM 400 1,062,977 60,803 217,079 1,340,859 2,004,815 ~.012 6001055 DAVID O'DODD ELEM 294 872,194 26,336 114,963 1,013,493 1,515,347 5,154 6001056 GEYER SPRINGS ELEM 273 863,014 49,582 177,256 1,089,852 1,629,517 5,969 6001057 MABELVALE ELEM 443 1,283,054 115,516 202,835 1,601,405 2,394,377 5,405 6001058 OTTER CREEK ELEM 339 979,198 53,565 129,091 1,161,854 1,737,172 5,124 6001059 WAKEFIELD ELEM 429 1,211,717 92,701 158,374 1,462,792 2,187,126 5,098 6001060 WATSON ELEM 409 1,166,972 62,071 226,950 1,455,993 2,176,961 5,323 6001061 CLOVERDALE JR. HIGH 609 1,878,946 93,5-48 292,161 2,264,655 3,386,050 5,560 6001062 MABELVALE JR. HIGH 491 1,837,416 35,424 195,529 2,068,369 3,092,568 6,299 6001063 JAFAJR HIGH 905 3,034,948 61,106 329,683 3,425,737 5,122,068 5,660 6001064 MCCLELLAN HIGH 904 3,268,773 61,039 341,192 3,671,004 5,488,784 6,072 NIA METRO HIGH NIA 1,027,915 35,510 0 1,063,425 1,590,004 NIA NIA ALT LEARNING CTR NIA 33,630 0 258,346 291,976 436,554 NIA NIA ISH ELEM NIA 12,015 0 0 12,015 17,964 NIA TOTAL EXPENSE 24,154 66,438,212 2,990,571 25,035,970 94,464,753 141,241,095 5,848 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95/96. See the note section on the nexl page for explanations or the categories. 314 I I NOTES FOR LRSD COST PER STUDENT FOR TOTAL PROGRAMS FOR FY 95/96 Funding Categorie5 Local \u0026amp; State Federal Deseg Thi\" category includes funding from local sources, regular state aources, and unrestricted federal aources. This category includes funding from restricted federal aources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal Deseg Total Categories This category consists of expen\u0026amp;e$ incurred relative to regular program expense funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. Thia category consists of expen\u0026amp;e$ funded by restricted federal aources. This category consists of expen\u0026amp;e$ Incurred relative to desegregation program\" funded from desegregation aources. Total at 03131/96 The totals in this column represent actual costs incurred for each school site through March 31, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. Total for FY 95196 The totals in this column represent the total estimated expense for each school site for fiscal year 1995/1996. SOURCE: Th\u0026amp; Uttle Rock School District Finance Office and the Local Fiscal S\u0026amp;rVices Dr.sion of the ADE. 315 I I II I I I    II LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR CYCLE 5 SCHOOL PROGRAMS FY95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROLLMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR COST PER STU LEA# SCHOOL C 10/01195 STATE FEDERAL OESEG 03/31/96 FY95196 6001002 HALlHIGH 1128 3,312,519 62,659 315,903 3,691,081 5,518,803 6001021 CARVER ELEM 629 759,nS 42,470 1,470,866 2,273,111 3,398,693 6001027 GIBBS ELEM 307 370,829 20,ns 879,303 1,270,861 1,900,156 6001033 MEAOOWCUFF ELEM 400 1,149,267 71,110 153,802 1,374,179 2,054,635 6001035 MLKJNG ELEM 460 610,143 67,847 1,182,156 1,860,146 2,781,239 6001054 CLOVERDALE ELEM 400 1,062,sn 60,803 217,079 1,340,859 2,004,815 6001056 GEYER SPRINGS ELEM 273 863,014 49,582 1n,2ss 1,089,852 1,629,517 6001057 MABELVALE ELEM 443 1,283,054 115,516 202,835 1,601,405 2,394,377 TOTAL EXPENSE 3,640 9,411,578 490,716 4,599,200 14,501,-494 21,682,235 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95/96 . Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal Daseg Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal Daseg Total Categories Total at 0:v.11196 Total for FY 9~ SOURCE: This category includes funding from locaJ source., regular \u0026amp;late source., and unrestricted federal source.. This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund . This category con\u0026amp;lsts ol funding for desegregation purposes. This category con\u0026amp;lsts ol expenoes incurred relative to regular program expense funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. This category consists ol e,q::,enoesfu nded by restrided federal sources. This category consists ol expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs funded from desegregation sources. The totals in this column represent actual cosl5 incurred for each of the Cycle 5 schools through March 31, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. The totals in this column represent the total estimated 8xpen$8 for each of the Cycle 5 schools for fiscal year 1995/1996. The UttJe RocJc School District Finance Otnce and the Local Flsca/ SeMces D/vsJon of the ADE. 316 FOR FY95196 5,s.47 5,403 6,189 5,137 6,046 5,012 5,969 5,405 5,646   I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT BY PROGRAM FY 95/96 PERCENT AVG COST DISTRICT VARIANCE PROGRAM OF PER STUDENT AVG COST OVER DIST AVG/ SCHOOL PROGRAM COST TOTAL COST BY PROGRAM PER STUDENT (UNDER DIST AVG) ELEMENTARY PROGRAMS 76,758,158 54.3% 5,751 5,848 (97) JR. HIGH PROGRAMS 32,583,352 23.1% 5,795 5,848 (53) HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMS 31,899,585 22.6% 6,155 5,848 307 LRSD PROGRAM COST LRSD COST PER STUDENT 80000000 60000000 40000000 20000000 0 PROGRAM COST FY 95/96 PERCENT OF TOTAL COST AVG COST PER STUDENT BY PROGRAM FY 95/96 Program costs consist of the total estimated cost for FY 95/96 for the indicated category of school programs . The percentage of program cost to the estimated total district cost of $141,241,095 for FY 95/96 The estimated total program cost for FY 95/96 to the total number of students in the program category. DISTRICT AVG COST PER STU The total estimated cost for FY 95/96 of $141,241,095 to the total enrollment at October 1, 1995 of 24,154 . VARIANCE SOURCE: The difference between the cost per student by program and the district average cost per stude A positive variance indicates the cost per student by program is greater than the district cost per student, and a negative variance indicates the cost per student by program is less than the district cost per student. The Little Rock School District Finance Office. 317  I II   II    LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR ELEMENTARY PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROLLMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR COST PER STU LEA# SCHOOL @ 1001/95 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 03/31/96 FY 95196 6001006 BOOKER ELEM 6'.),4 729,fi77 40,782 1,630,172 2,400,531 3,589,208 6001017 BALE ELEM 312 1,050,636 48,600 182.706 1,281,942 1,916,724 6001018 BRADY ELEM 377 1,095,562 61,632 177,618 1,334,812 1,995,774 6001020 MCDERMOTT ELEM 487 1,408,172 61,807 169,340 1,639,319 2,451,065 6001021 CARVER ELEM 629 7fS,775 42,470 1,470,866 2,273,111 3,398,693 6001023 FAIR PARK ELEM 234 784,136 48,089 140,045 972,270 1,453,711 6001024 FOREST PARK ELEM ,435 1,175,169 66,735 162,700 1,404,604 2,100,125 6001025 FRANKLIN ELEM 362 437,263 75,394 1,245,682 1,758,339 2,629,020 6001026 GARLAND ELEM 237 286,274 20,414 881,101 1,187,789 1,775,949 6001027 GIBBS ELEM 'J/J7 370,829 20.729 879,303 1,270,861 1,900.156 6001029 WESTERN HILLS ELEM 315 918,058 9,380 111,174 1,078,612 1,612,711 6001030 JEFFERSON ELEM 501 1.442,944 69,066 187.174 1,699,184 2,540,573 6001033 MEAOOWCUFF ELEM 400 1,1 9,267 71,110 153,802 1,374,179 2,054,635 6001034 MITCHELL ELEM 264 318,888 48,519 780,433 1,147,840 1,716,219 6001035 ML KING ELEM 460 610,143 67,847 1,182,156 1,860,146 2,781,239 6001038 PULASKI HEIGHTS ELEM 06 1,086,964 58,945 151,506 1,297,415 1,939,859 6001039 RIGHTSELL ELEM 201 242,791 43,104 742,902 1,028,797 1,538,229 6001040 ROMINE ELEM 269 1,011,588 53,090 202,965 1,267,643 1,895,345 6001042 WASHINGTON ELEM 603 1,896,496 108,129 387,094 2,391.719 3,576,032 6001043 WILLILAMS ELEM 508 613,618 34,300 1,315,655 1,963,573 2,935,880 6001044 WILSON ELEM 366 1,142,098 59,825 163,204 1,365,127 2,041,100 6001045 WOODRUFF ELEM 218 656,012 47,177 125,222 828.411 1,238,617 6001047 TERRY ELEM 536 1,476,041 36,191 191,194 1.703,426 2,546,916 6001048 FULBRIGHT ELEM 518 1,577,222 64,253 192,404 1,833,879 2.741,965 6001050 ROCKEFELLER ELEM 313 378,076 90,417 1,451,515 1,920,008 2,870,743 6001051 BADGETT ELEM 174 597,481 39,013 122,621 759,115 1,135,008 6001052 BASELINE ELEM 291 871,421 56,537 169,354 1,097,312 1,640,671 6001053 CHICOT ELEM 434 1,468,386 98,115 200,625 1,767.126 2,642.158 6001054 CLOVERDALE ELEM 400 1,062,977 60,803 217,079 1,340,859 2,004,815 6001055 DAVID 0'0000 ELEM 294 872,194 26,336 114,963 1,013,493 1,515,347 6001056 GEYER SPRINGS ELEM 273 863,014 9,582 177,256 1,089,852 1,629,517 6001057 MABELVALE ELEM 43 1,283,054 115,516 202,835 1,601,405 2,394,377 6001058 OTTER CREEK ELEM 339 979.198 53,565 129,091 1,161,854 1.737, 172 6001059 WAKEFIELD ELEM  29 1,211,717 92,701 158,374 1,462,792 2,187,126 6001060 WATSON ELEM 409 1,166,972 62,071 226,950 1,455,993 2,176,961 NIA Al T LEARNING CTR NIA 33,630 0 258,346 291,976 436,554 NIA ISH ELEM NIA 12,015 0 0 12,015 17,964 TOTAL EXPENSE 13,348 33,039,658 2,042,244 16,255,427 51,337,329 76,758,158 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95/96 . Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal IJeseg Expensa Categortu Local \u0026amp; State Federal IJeseg Tobi Cat.gortas Thi\u0026amp; category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal oources. This cateQO\u0026lt;Yin cludes funding from restrided federal sources ..tlich must be accounted fo, oeparately from the General Fund. This categOIY consists of funding to, desegregation purposes. This category consists of expenses incurred relative to regular program expense funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. This categOIY consists of expenses funded by restricted federal sources. This categOIY consists of expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs funded from desegregation sources. FOR FY 95196 5,942 6,143 5,294 5,033 5,403 6,212  ,828 7,262 7,493 6,189 5,120 5,071 5,137 6,501 6,046 4,778 7,653 7,046 5,930 5,779 5,577 5,682 4,752 5,293 9,172 6,523 5,638 6,088 5,012 5,154 5,969 5,405 5,124 5,098 5,323 NIA NIA 5,751 Tola/ at 03/31196 The totals in this column represent actual costs incurred for each of the elementary 6Chools through March 31, 1996 fo, fiscal year 199511996. Tola/ for FY 95'96 The totals in this column represent the total estimated expense fo, each of the elementary 5Chools fo, fi\u0026amp;cal year 1995/1996. SOURCE: The Utfie Rock School District Finance Offtee and the Local Fiscal Services Oivsion of the ADE. 318 I I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR JR HIGH PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROUMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR COST PER STU LEAi SCHOOL @10/01195 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 03/31~ FY 95196 FOR FY95/96 6001003 MANN JR. HIGH \u0026amp;47 1,023,099 57,190 2,350,848 3,431,137 5,130,141 6,057 6001007 DUNBAR JR. HIGH 732 2,287,168 49,425 381,m 2,718,370 4,064,432 5,553 6001009 FOREST HEIGKTS JR. HIGH 759 2,490,571 88,076 345,080 2,923,n7 4,371,476 5,760 6001010 PULASKI HEIGHTS JR. HIGH 781 2,509,239 52,73-4 3\"0,899 2,902,an 4,3\"0,29-4 5,557 6001011 SOUTHWEST JR. HIGH 612 1,867,150 98,603 310,552 2,276,305 3,\"3,469 5,561 6001013 HENDERSON JR. HIGH 792 2,719,207 87,858 399,871 3,206,936 4,794,922 6,05o4 6001061 CLOVERDALE JR. HIGH 609 1,878,9,46 93,5\"8 292,161 2,26\",655 3,386,050 5,560 6001062 MASELVAI.E JR. HIGH 4Sl1 1,837,416 35,424 195,529 2,068,369 3,092,568 6,299 TOTAL EXPENSE 5,623 16,612,796 562,858 4,616,717 21,792,371 32,583,352 5,795 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95/96. Funding Categories LDCa/ \u0026amp; State Federal 09S8fl Expense Categor1u Local \u0026amp; state Federal 09S8fl Tot.al Categories Tola/ at OJl.lf/96 Tola/ kx FY 95'96 SOURCE: This calegOl'f includes lunding from local sources, regular state sources, and un\"\"\"1icted federal sources. This categOl'f includes funding from r8\"1ricted federal sources which must be accounted lor separately from the General Fund. This categOl'f consists o( funding lor desegregation purpose,\n. This calegory consists o( expenses incurred relative to regular program expense funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. This categOl'f consists o( expenses lunded by restricted lederal sources. This categOl'f consisl$ o( expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs lunded lrom desegregation aources. The totals in this column represent actual costs incurred for each o( the junior high schools_through March 31, 1996 ror fiscal )'8\"r 1995/1996. The totals in this column represent the total estimaled expense for each o( the junior high schools for f16Cal year 1995/1996. Tile LlttJe Rocle School District Finance Otrlce and the L.ccaJ Fiscal S8MC8S DlvsJoo of the ADE. 319 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROUMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEAi SCHOOL G 10101/95 STATE FEDERAL OESEG 03131196 95196 6001001 CENTRAL HIGH 1,591 5,108,3-40 107,25 560,358 5,776,623 8,637,048 6001002 HAI.LH IGH 928 3,312,519 62,659 315,903 3,691,081 5,518,803 6001005 PARKVIEW HIGH 855 1,032,763 57,730 2,616,690 3,707,183 5,542,878 6001063 JAFAIR HIGH 905 3,034,948 61,106 329,683 3,425,737 5,122,068 6001064 MCCLELl.AN HIGH 904 3.268,m 81,039 341,192 3,671,004 5,488,78 NIA METRO HIGH NIA 1,027,915 35,510 0 1,063,425 1,590,004 TOTAL EXPENSE 5,183 16,785,758 385,469 4,163,826 21,335,053 31,899,585 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95/96. Funding Categories Locsl \u0026amp; Sta ta Fed\u0026amp;ra/ Deseg Expense Categories Locsl \u0026amp; State Fed\u0026amp;ra/ Deseg Tot.al Categories Total st 03/311!16 Total for FY 9!196 SOURCE: This catego,y includes funding from local aources, regular state sourcea, and unrestricted federal sources. This catego,y includes funding from restricted federal sources which muol be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This catego,y consists o( funding for desegregation purposeo. This catego,y consists o( expenses incurred relative to regular program expense funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. This catego,y consists o( expenses funded by restricted federal sources. This catego,y consists o/ expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs funded from desegregation sources. The totals in this column represent actual costs incurred for each of the high schools through March 31, 1996 for f1Scal year 1995/1996. The totals in this column represent the tolal estimated expense for each o/ the high schools for fiscal year 1995/1996. The LJttJeR ock Scllool District Finance Otr,ce and the LOCBIF isc.BJS OMOOSO iYsion of the ADE. 320 COST PER STU FOR FY95196 5,429 5,947 6,483 5,660 6,072 NIA 6,155 I I II I I I I I I I I I I I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CYCLE 5 SCHOOL TEACHER \u0026amp; ADMINISTRATOR EXPENSE FY 95/96 TEACHER SALARIES ADMINISTRATOR SALARIES TOTALS LEA# 6001002 6001021 6001027 6001033 6001035 6001054 6001056 6001057 Teacher Expense SCHOOL @03/31/96 FY95/96 @03/31/96 FY 95/96 @03/31/96 HALL HIGH 1,450,674 2,188,496 155,403 223,269 1,606,077 CARVER ELEM 719,480 1,139,139 67,803 99,784 787,283 GIBBS ELEM 474,097 750,629 57,082 84,006 531,179 MEADOWCLIFF ELEM 486,568 790,686 39,002 57,412 525,570 ML KJNG ELEM 695,440 1,136,995 51,887 75,479 747,327 CLOVERDALE ELEM 450,771 745,652 28,826 42,149 479,597 GEYER SPRINGS ELEM -410,894 514,585 36,835 55,734 447,729 MABELVALE ELEM 542,107 866,012 66,694 100,001 608,801 TOTAL 5,230,031 8,132,194 503,532 737,834 5,733,563 Total district expense for teacher and school site administrator salaries for FY 95/96 is expected to be $62,647,464 or 44.4 percent of total expense for FY 95/96 of $141,241,095. At 0l/31196 Actual teacher salary expense for each Cycle 5 school as of March 31, 1996. FY 95196 Expected teacher salary expense for each Cycle 5 school for FY 95/96. Administrator Expense At 0l/31196 FY95tll6 SOURCE: Actual administrator salary expense for each Cycle 5 school as of March 31, 1996. Expected administrator salary expense for each Cycle 5 school for FY 95/96. The Utile Rock School District Finance Office. 321 FY95/96 2,411,765 1,238,923 834,635 848,098 1,212,474 787,801 570,319 966,013 8,870,028 NLRSD PROGRAM COST ?ew.:n 't\\, \"J.f. ~ct!! .~ - 322 I I I I I I I I I I I I North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) The following is a summary of the NLRSD Program Cost Section of the July 15, 1996 Monitoring Report. Total program expense for the district is separated by funding source and expense category within the funding source. Total program expense is actual for FY 95/96 through March 31, 1996 and is estimated for the fiscal year. Separate schedules indicate the total program expense for the Cycle 5 schools. The programs funded by the Cycle 5 schools are also included. Teacher expense and school administrator expense are also presented for the Cycle 5 schools. Cost per student information is presented for the: district\nelementary school programs\njunior high school programs\nhigh school programs\nand Cycle 5 school programs. Graphs indicate total program cost and average cost per student rates for elementary, junior high and high school programs. 323 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSE FY961M FUNDING SOURCES LOCAUSTATE FEDERAL LEA# SCHOOi. PROGRAM DISTRICT TRANS LEGI\\L PROGRAM DISTRICT 8002080 AMBOY ELEMENTARY 738,642 363,080 57,718 815 153,856 \u0026lt;10,n1 = BELWOOO ELEMENTARY 321,463 104,201 18,1566 234 9,808 11,702 II002064 BOONE PARK ELEM 708,428 384,780 68,401 797 141,688 39,843 80020e6 CRESlWOOO ELEMENTARY 434,683 200,960 31,947 461 8,121 22,688 80020C58 GLENVIEWE LEMENTA RY 427,384 172,842 21,4n 388 36,248 19,410 8002067 IND!AN HILLS ELEMENTARY 766,808 315,812 60.= 708 90,689 36,478 8002068 LAKEW000 ELEMENTARY 348,464 186.247 29,460 418 47,871 20,804 8002069 CENTRAL ELEMENTARY 787,114 333,278 62,983 748 116,966 37,428 8002080 LYNCH DRIVE ELEM 708,828 369,742 57,190 808 88,329 40,400 8002061 MEADOW PARK ELEM 414,188 187,728 29,844 421 43,288 21,082 8002063 N. HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY --329,144 52,328 739 81,114 36,984 6002084 PARK HILL ELEMENTARY 423,898 238,174 37,864 1536 41,711 -it\n,747 80020e6 PIKE VIEW ELEMENTARY 883,008 288,140 45,489 842 32,868 32,134 6002067 REOWOOO ELEMENTARY 4112,178 184,420 29,318 414 87,611 20,711 8002069 SEVENTH STREET ELEM 708,717 311,m 49,1566 700 119,llM 36,013 8002070 LAKEW000 MIDOI.E SCHOOi. 1,099,080 401,0112 63,763 800 82 46,043 80020n RIOGEROAO MIDOI.E SCHOOi. 1,219,088 498,en 1nn 1,120 38,817 68,003 8002075 NLR HIGH SCHOOl.~T 2,888,819 1,073,439 170,= 2,410 25,686 120,649 8002078 NLR HIGH SCHOOI.-WEST 2,1121,488 1,044,494 166,048 2,346 80,887 117,299 80020n ROSE CITY MIOOLE SCHOOi. 1,081,418 301,028 47,856 878 46,828 33,808 8002078 BARING CROSS CENTER 220,701 33,080 5,269 74 46,982 3,716 NIA SECONDARY ALTERNATIVE 318,881 0 0 0 25,373 0 NIA ELEMENTARYA LTERNATIVE 284,863 0 0 0 11,841 0 TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSE 18,847,818 7,2711,204 1,157,208 18,342 1,136,225 817,470 Funding CatogorlN Loce/\u0026amp; Salt ExpnN Co1ogor1N Tlucallgory-~lrom--.reguornite....-ces,and\"\"\"'1\u0026lt;:lodf-..i-. Tiu callgo\u0026lt;y- ~ 1rom. --1--.i -- rruat bo oc:c:o\u0026lt;mfldo r--lolytrom ti GenonllF tn!. Tiu callgory c:onnla of flnilig lor ~Ion- PROGRAM 4,788 6,081 3,808 4,319 10,983 4,849 4,883 4,788 4,824 4,862 4,990 4,848 14,360 4,073 4,957 423 342 11,224 22,389 376 0 34,494 19,281 174,462 OESEGREGI\\TION DISTRICT TRANS LEGI\\L 4,843 10,130 3.- 1,333 2,1107 1,048 4,1537 8,899 3,687 2,570 6,807 2,021 2,210 4,822 1,738 4,040 B.814 3,178 2,369 6,189 U63 4,262 8,289 3,361 4,801 10,037 3.817 2,401 5,238 1,887 4.208 8,184 3,308 3,048 8,846 2,396 3,658 7,984 2,an 2,369 6,148 1,864 3,987 8,699 3,136 6,130 11,181 4,033 8,378 13,914 5,014 13,728 29,ll50 10,793 13,368 29,143 10,502 3,860 8,399 3,027 423 823 333 0 0 0 0 0 0 93,0113 203,100 73,190 Loe,,/ \u0026amp; Slolt Tiu callgo\u0026lt;ycorwiata of-- lncu-red r-.lolve lo reguor prosrom ---...._.Ion _and - flmed by ...-ontcled local, 11111 ond fedoral-. Tlucatego\u0026lt;yc:onntaof--lncuTed-lof-..iprosrom-ondc:ln1ct--byren1clodfedonll-. O..eg Tlucallgo\u0026lt;yc:onntaof __ lncuTed lo ~1onprosrm-. --...._.Ion_ ond lego/- Mded lrom ,.__1on ....-ca. Tololot03131M Tholoall lnlll ---- coni lncuTedforeocllachool altohoogl Morch 31, 1996forllacalyer 1995/1996. Tolo/ for FY 8MG Tho loall In Illa ---ti - --lod -for Ncll achool al1e for flacal year 1995/1996. SOURCE: The North Ul/le Rock School Dlatrlcl F/nonc,, 0/IJce. TOTALS TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR 03/311118 FY- 1,277,i40 2,048,169 474,322 1594,813 1,323,844 2,074,384 714,127 1,139,360 700,482 1,089,218 1,2ao,3n 1,848.- Me,328 1,038,310 1,310,198 2,016,420 1,274,178 2,036,3116 710,818 1,108,1153 1,198,434 1.1194,808 786,883 1,289,6-43 1,108,148 1,714,825 808,084 1,198,319 1,184,108 1,843,829 1,630,717 2,478,433 1,918,828 2,973,638 4,348,1127 8,818,337 4,387,733 8,697,895 1,609,089 2,146,034 310,490 360,487 378,748 378,746 315,1166 315,886 29,697,113 46,000,000 - c-I=f 'o ff 7\u0026lt;:Jd'!\n-.(,\"'\u0026lt;T\nz,--- 6=~-- NORTHLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CYCLE 5 SCHOOL PROGRAM EXPENSE FY95/96 FUNDING SOURCES LOCAL/STATE FEDERAL DESEGREGATION TOTALS TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEA# SCHOOL PROGRAM DISTRICT TRANS LEGAL PROGRAM DISTRICT PROGRAM DISTRICT TRANS LEGAL 03/31196 6002050 AMBOY ELEMENTARY 738,542 363,050 57,716 815 53,855 40,771 4,768 4,843 10,130 3,650 1,277,940 6002055 CRESlWOOD ELEMENTARY 434,563 200,960 31,947 451 9,121 22,568 4,319 2,570 5,607 2,021 714,127 6002058 LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY 348,454 185,247 29,450 416 47,871 20,804 4,683 2,369 5,169 1,863 846,326 6002059 CENTRAL ELEMENTARY 767,114 333,279 52,983 748 96,966 37,428 4,768 4,262 9,299 3,351 1,310,196 6002061 MEADOW PARK ELEM 414,188 187,728 29,844 421 43,268 21,082 4,862 2,401 5,238 1,887 710,919 6002069 SEVENTH STREET ELEM 706,717 311,777 49,565 700 59,555 35,013 4,957 3,967 8,699 3,135 1,184,105 TOTAL CYCLE 5 PROGRAM EXPENSE 3,409,578 1,582,041 251,505 3,551 310,636 177,666 28,357 20,232 44,142 15,907 5,843,615 The district's Total Program Expense as of March 31, 1996 was $29,597,113, and Total Program Expense for the fiscal year la expected to be $45,000,000. The programs funded In each of the Cycle 5 schools are Indicated on the chart entitled \"Programs In Cycle 5 Schools.\" Funding catagortu Local \u0026amp; State Federal Deseg This category Includes funding from local 1011rces, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. This categoryI ncludes funding from Nlltricted -ral sources which must be 11CCOUntfeodr separately from the General Fund. This category consists rA funding for desegregation purposes. Expanse Catagorlu Local \u0026amp; State Federal Deseg Total Categorlu This category consists rA e,cpenaa Incurred relati\\/e to regular program expense, district expense, transportation expense and legal expense funded by unrestricted local, state and federal 1011rces. This category consists rA expenses Incurred relati\\/e to federal program expense and distrtct expense funded by restricted federal 1011rces. This category consists rA e,cpenaa Incurred relati\\/e to desegregation program expense, district expense, transportation expense and legal expense funded from desegregation 1011rcee. Total at 03/31196 The totals in this column represent actual costs Incurred for each rlthe Cycle 5 ochools through March 31, 1996 for fiscal year 1995.'1996. Total for FY 95,96 The totals In this column represent the total estimated expense for each of the Cycle 5 schools for fiscal year 1995.'1996. SOURCE: The North Little Rock School District Finance Off,ce. FY 95196 2,046,159 1,139,360 1,038,310 2,015,420 1,108,153 1,843,829 9,191,231 PROGRAMS Four-Year Old Kindergarten Elementary Elementary Music Itinerant Instruction Resource Room Special Class Homebound \u0026amp; Hospital Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Guidance Services Library Services SOURCE: NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Programs in Cycle 5 Schools FY 95/96 AMBOY CRESTWOOD LAKEWOOD CENTRAL MEADOW ELEM ELEM ELEM ELEM PARK ELEM X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X The North Little Rock School District Finance Office. 7TH STREET ELEM X X X X X X X X ' N CV) I I I I I I I I I I I NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR TOTAL PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROU.MENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS Of TOTAL FOR COST PER STU LEA# SCHOOL C 10/01195 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 03131196 FY 95196 FOR FY 95196 6002050 AMBOY ELEMENTARY 439 1,160,123 94,626 23,191 1,277,940 2,046,159 4,661 6002053 BELWOOD ELEMENTARY 126 442,463 21,510 10,349 474,322 694,813 5,514 6002054 BCX)NE PARK ELEM 429 1,120,404 181,429 21,811 1,323,644 2,074,364 4,835 6002055 CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY 243 667,921 31,689 14,517 714,127 1,139,360 4,689 6002056 GLENVIEW ELEMENTARY 209 628,071 55,658 19,753 703,482 1,069,218 5,116 6002057 INDIAN HILLS ELEMENTARY 382 1,133,451 126,047 20,879 1,280,377 1,948,850 5,102 6002058 LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY 224 563,567 68,675 14,084 646,326 1,038,310 4,635 6002059 CENTRAL ELEMENTARY 403 1,154,124 134,394 21,680 1,310,198 2,015,420 5,001 6002060 LYNCH DRIVE ELEM 435 1,124,368 126,729 23,079 1,274,176 2,035,396 4,679 6002061 MEAl)()','J PARK ELEM 227 632,181 64,350 14,388 710,919 1,108,153 4,882 6002063 N. HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY 398 1,078,664 98,078 21,692 1,198,434 1,894,906 4,761 6002064 PARK HILL ELEMENTARY 288 700,471 68,458 16,734 785,663 1,289,643 4,478 6002065 PIKE VIEW ELEMENTARY 346 1,015,277 64,992 28,880 1,109,149 1,714,625 4,956 6002067 RED'NOOD ELEMENTARY 223 706,330 88,322 13,432 808,084 1,198,319 5,374 6002069 SEVENTH STREET ELEM 377 1,068,759 94,568 20,778 1,184,105 1,843,829 4,891 6002070 LAKEWOOD MIDDlE SCHOOL 485 1,564,835 45,105 20,777 1,630,717 2,479,433 5,112 6002072 RIDGEROAD MIDDlE SCHOOL 603 1,798,160 94,820 25,648 1,918,628 2,973,836 4,932 6002075 NLR HIGH SCHOOL-EAST 1,298 4,135,118 146,114 65,695 4,346,927 6,618,337 5,099 6002076 NLR HIGH SCHOOL-WEST 1,263 4,134,355 177,986 75,392 4,387,733 6,597,895 5,224 6002077 ROSE CrTY MIDDlE SCHOOL 364 1,410,973 82,434 15,652 1,509,059 2,146,034 5,896 6002078 BARING CROSS CENTER 40 259,114 49,697 1,679 310,490 380,487 9,512 NIA SECONDARY ALTERNATIVE 0 316,881 25,373 34,494 376,748 376,748 0 NIA ELEMENTARY ALTERNATIVE 0 284,963 11,641 19,261 315,865 315,865 0 TOTAL EXPENSE 8,802 27,100,573 1,952,695 543,845 29,597,113 45,000,000 5,112 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95/96. Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State Thi5 category inciude\u0026amp; funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. Expense Categories Thi5 catego,y inciude\u0026amp; funding from restncted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. Thi5 catego,y C0n6ists a funding for desegregation ~. Local \u0026amp; State This category consists a expensei\nincurred relative to regular program expense funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources Federal Thi5 category consists a expensei\nfunded by restricted federal sources. 0eseg Thi5 category consists a expenses incutTed relative to de\u0026amp;egregation programs funded from desegregation 50Urces. Total Cat.gorln Total at O.ll.31196 The totals in this column represent actual costs incurred for each 5Chool site through March 31, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. Total for FY 95'% The totals in lhi5 column represent the total estimated expense for each school site for fiscal year 1995/1996. SOURCE. The North LJttle Rock School District Finance Otr,ce and the Local Fiscal Services Divsion of the ADE. 327 I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR CYCLE 5 SCHOOL PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROLLMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEA# SCHOOL @ 10/01195 STATE FEDERAL OESEG 03/31196 FY95196 6002050 AMBOY ELEMENTARY 439 1,160,123 94,626 23,191 1,277,!MO 2,046,159 6002055 CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY 243 667,921 31,689 14,517 714,127 1,139,360 6002058 LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY 224 563,567 68,675 14,084 646,326 1,038,310 6002059 CENTRAL ELEMENTARY 403 1,154,124 134,394 21,680 1,310,198 2,015,420 6002061 MEADOW PARK ELEM 227 632,181 64,350 14,388 710,919 1,108,153 6002069 SEVENTH STREET ELEM 377 1,068,759 94,568 20,778 1,184,105 1,843,829 TOTAL EXPENSE 1,913 5,246,675 488,302 108,638 5,843,615 9,191,231 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95/96. Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State Thi\u0026amp; category includes funding from local \u0026amp;OUrcesr,e gular state sources, and un,estncted federal sources. Oeseg Expense Categorlas Local \u0026amp; State Federal Oeseg Total Categories Total at 03/31196 Tota/for FY 95196 SOURCE: This category includes funding from restlicted federal IOUrces v.tlich must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This category consists al funding for desegregation purpose\u0026amp;. This categO/)' consists al expenses Incurred relative to regular program expense funded by unrestricted local, slate and federal sources. This category consists al expenses funded by restricted federal sources. This category consists al expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs funded from cle\u0026amp;egregation liOUrces. The totals in this column represent actual co6ls incurred for each al the Cycle 5 schools through Maren 31, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. The totals in this column represent the total estimated e\u0026gt;\u0026lt;pellSe for each al the Cycle 5 6Chools for fiscal year 1995/1996. The North Little Rock School District Finanoe Olf,ce and the Local Fiscal Setvices Q\nvsjoo of the ADE.. 328 COST PER STU FOR FY95/96 4,661 4,689 4,635 5,001 4,882 4,891 4,805 l I I I I I I I I NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT BY PROGRAM FY 95/96 PERCENT AVG COST DISTRICT VARIANCE PROGRAM OF PER STUDENT AVG COST OVER DIST AVG/ SCHOOL PROGRAM COST TOTAL COST BY PROGRAM PER STUDENT (UNDER DIST AVG) ELEMENTARY PROGRAMS 23,807,717 52.9% 4,971 5,112 (141) JR. HIGH PROGRAMS 7,599,303 16.9% 5,234 5,112 122 HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMS 13,592,980 30.2% 5,308 5,112 196 NLRSD PROGRAM COST NLRSD COST PER STU 25000000 20000000 15000000 10000000 5000000 0 PROGRAM COST FY 95/96 PERCENT OF TOTAL COST AVG COST PER STUDENT BY PROGRAM DISTRICT AVG COST PER STU VARIANCE SOURCE: 5400 5300 5200 5100 5000 4900 4800 FY 95/96 Program costs consist of the total estimated cost for FY 95/96 for the indicated category of school programs. The percentage of program cost to the estimated total district cost of $45,000,000 for FY 95/96. The estimated total program cost for FY 95196 to the total number of students in the program category. The total estimated cost for FY 95196 of $45,000,000 to the total enrollment at October 1, 1995 of8,802. The difference between the cost per student by program and the district average cost per student. A positive variance indicates the cost per student by program is greater than the district cost per student, and a negative variance indicates the cost per student by program is less than the district cost per student. The North Little Rock School District Finance Office. 329 l I I I I I I I NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR ELEMENTARY PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROU.MEITT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEA# SO-OOl. a 10/01195 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 03/31196 FY 95196 6002050 AMBOY ELEMEITTARY -439 1,160,123 94,626 23,191 1,277,940 2,046,159 6002053 BELWOOD ELEMEITTARY 126 442,463 21,510 10,349 474,322 694,813 6002054 BOONE PARK ELEM 429 1,120,404 181,429 21,811 1,323,644 2,074,364 6002055 CRESTWOOD ELEMEITTARY 243 667,921 31,689 14,517 714,127 1,139,360 6002056 GLENVIEW ELEMEITTARY 209 628,071 55,658 19,753 703,482 1,069,218 6002057 INDIAN HIU.S ELEMEITTARY 382 1,133,451 126,047 20,879 1,280,377 1,948,850 6002058 LAKEWOOD ELEMEITTARY 224 563,567 68,675 14,084 646,326 1,038,310 6002059 CENTRAL ELEMEITTARY 403 1,154,124 134,394 21,680 1,310,198 2,015,420 6002060 l YNCH DRIVE ELEM 435 1,124,368 126,729 23,079 1,274,176 2,035,396 6002061 MEAr:O\u0026gt;NPARKELEM 227 632,181 64,350 14,388 710,919 1,108,153 6002063 N. HEIGHTS ELEMEITTARY 398 1,078,664 98,078 21,692 1,198,434 1,894,906 6002064 PARK Hill ELEMEITTARY 288 700,471 68,458 16,734 785,663 1,289,643 6002065 PIKE VIEW ELEMEITTARY 346 1,015,277 64,992 28,880 1,109,149 1,714,625 6002067 REDWOOD ELEMEITTARY 223 706,330 88,322 13,432 808,084 1,198,319 6002069 SEVEITTH STREET ELEM 377 1,068,759 94,568 20,778 1,184,105 1,843,829 6002078 BARING CROSS CENTER 40 259,114 49,697 1,679 310,490 380,487 NIA ELEMEITTARY ALTERNATIVE 0 284,963 11,641 19,261 315,865 315,865 TOTAL EXPENSE  ,789 13,740,251 1,380,863 306,187 15,  27,301 23,807,717 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95/96. Funding CalegoriH LDca/ \u0026amp; State This catego,y includes funding from local 50Urces, regular state 50Urces, and unrestricted tederal 50Urces. This category Includes funding from reslricted federal 60Urces which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. 09seg Thi5 catego,y consists a! funding for de5egregation purposes. Expensa Categories Local \u0026amp; State This catego,y consists a! expenses incurred relawe to regular program e\u0026gt;\u0026lt;pen,\ne funded by unrestricted local, state and federal 50Urces. Federal This catego,y consists ct expenses funded by reslricted federal 50Urces. 09seg This catego,y consists ct expenses incurred -,ti,e to de5egregation programs funded from desegregation 50Urces. Total CalegorlH Total at 031.31196 The totals in this column represent actual 005ts incurred for each o( the elementary school$ through March 31, 1996 for fiocal year 1995/1996. T eta/ for FY 95'96 The totals in lhi5 column represent the tolal estimated e,q:,ense for each ct the elementary school$ for liscaJ year 1995/1996. SOURCE: The North Little Roel\u0026lt;S. chool District Finanoe OITioea nd tl\u0026gt;9 Local Fiscal Services Divsion of the ADE. 330 COST PER STU FOR FY 95196 4,661 5,514 4,835 4,689 5,116 5,102 4,635 5,001 4,679 4,882 4,761 4,478 4,956 5,374 4,891 9,512 NIA 4,971 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR JR HIGH PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROUMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEA# SCHOOL @ 10/01195 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 03131196 FY 95196 6002070 LAKEWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL 485 1,564,835 '45,105 20,TT7 1,630,717 2,479,433 6002072 RIDGEROAD MIDDLE SCHOOL 603 1,798,160 94,820 25,648 1,918,628 2,973,836 6002077 ROSE CITY MIDDLE SCHOOL 364 1,410,973 82,434 15,652 1,509,059 2,146,034 I TOT Al EXPENSE 1,\u0026lt;452 4,773,968 222,359 62,077 5,058,404 7,599,303 I Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95196. Funding categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal I Oeseg Expense categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal Oeseg I Total ~orles Total at 0.Jr.Jl/96 Total tor FY 95'96 SOURCE: I I I This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. This category includes funding from restrided federal sources 'Mlich must be accounted tor separately from the General Fund. This category consi6ls cl funding for desegregation purpo,\nes. This category consists cl expense!i Incurred rela!Ne to regular program e,q,ense funded by unrestricted local, slate and federal 60Urce6. This category consists cl expenses funded by restricted ,-.,.i sources. This category consists cl expen,\neo incurred relalNe to desegregation programs funded from desegregation sources. The totals in this column represent actual costs incurred for each cl the junior high schools through March 31, 1996 to, fiscal year 1995/1996. The totals in this column represent the total estimated expense for each cl the junior high schools for fiscal year 1995/1996. The North Uttle Rock School District Finance Office and the Local Fiscal Ser,ices 0/vsion of the ADE.. 331 COST PER STU FOR FY 95196 5,112 4,932 5,896 5,234 I I I I NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROLLMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEA# SOlOOL C!l 1Ml1195 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 03/31/96 95/96 6002075 NLR HIGH SCHOOL-EAST 1,298 \u0026lt;1,135,118 146,11\u0026lt;1 65,695 \u0026lt;1,346,927 6,618,337 6002076 NLR HIGH SCHOOL-WEST 1,263 \u0026lt;1,134,355 177,986 75,392 \u0026lt;1,387,733 6,597,895 NIA SECONDARY ALTERNATIVE 0 316,881 25,373 34,-494 376,748 376,748 TOTAL EXPENSE 2,561 8,586,354 349,473 175,581 9,111,408 13,592,980 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95196. Funding categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal Deseg Expense categories LDca/ \u0026amp; State Federal Deseg Total categories This catego,y includes funding from local sources, regular st.ate sources, and unrestricted federal sources. This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This category consi\u0026amp;ts a funding for desegregation purpo,\ne,\n. This catego,y con\u0026amp;ists a expenses incuned ralalNe to regular program expense funded by unrestricted local, st.ate and federal oources. This catego,y consi6b\na e,cpenses funded by restricted federal sources. This catego,y c:on\u0026amp;ists a expenseo incuned relawe to desegregation programs funded from desegregation sources. Total at OJIJ1~ The totals in this column represent adual C06t1i incurred for each a the high 6Chools through March 31, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. Total lex FY 9~ The totals in this column represent the total estimated expense for each dthe high schools for fiscal year 1995/1996. SOURCE: The Ncxth LJttle Roci\u0026lt; School Distnct Finance Otr,ce and the Local Fiscal S\u0026amp;vioes Divsion of the A.DE. 332 COST PER STU FOR FY 95/96 5,099 5,224 NIA 5,308 I I I I I I I LEAi 6002050 6002055 6002058 6002059 6002061 6002069 Teach er Expense _ At 03131196 FY9~6 NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CYCLE 5 SCHOOL TEACHER \u0026amp; ADMINISTRATOR EXPENSE FY 95196 TEACHER SALARIES ADMINISTRATOR SALARIES SCHOOL C 03131196 FY 95196 @03131196 FY 95196 AMBOY ELEMENTARY c.t,691 745,591 56,880 80,318 CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY 260,575 432,668 30,195 43,169 LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY 202,752 361,389 27,790 39,749 CENTRAL ELEMENTARY 488,857 TT4\n262 58,525 80,041 MEADOW PARK ELEM 234,529 395\n290 32,195 44,314 SEVENTH STREET ELEM 393,303 660\n294 30\n265 50,393 TOTAL 2,014,707 3,369,494 235,850 337,984 Total district expense for teacher and school site administrator salaries for FY 95/96 is estimated to be $20,533,600 or 45.6 percent of total expense for FY 95/96 of $45,000,000. Actual taact- salary expense for each Cycle 5 school as of March 31, 1996. Expected teacher salary expense for each Cycle 5 school for FY 95196. Administrator Expense AtD3131A15 FY9~6 SOURCE: Actual administrator salary expense for each Cycle 5 school as of March 31, 1996. Expected administrator salary expense for each Cycle 5 school for FY 95196. The North LittJe Rock School District Finance Otriai. 333 TOTALS C 03131196 FY95/96 491,571 825,909 200,no 475,837 230,542 401,138 547,382 854,303 266,724 439,604 423,568 710,687 2\n250,557 3,707,478 I I '  I I I I PCSSD PROGRAM COST 334 Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) The following is a summary of the PCSSD Program Cost Section of the July 15, 1996 Monitoring Report. Total program expense for the district is separated by funding source and expense category within the funding source. Total program expense is actual for FY 95/96 through April 30, 1996 and is estimated for the fiscal year. Separate schedules indicate the total program expense for the Cycle 5 schools. The programs funded by the Cycle 5 schools are also included. Teacher expense and school administrator expense are also presented for the Cycle 5 schools. Cost per student information is presented for the: district\nelementary school programs\njunior high school programs\nhigh school programs\nand Cycle 5 school programs. Graphs indicate total program cost and average cost per student rates for elementary, junior high and high school programs. 335 ~ PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT LOCAUSTA TE LEA# SCHOOL PROGRAM DISTRICT TRANS 1v6003090 HOMER ADKINS ELEM 746,912 298,831 80,516 8003092 BAKER ELEM 710,124 292,395 78,781 8003093 CRY ST AL HILL ELEM 1,323,883 874,899 181,841 8003094 BAYOU METO ELEM 1,237,865 583,870 157,315 8003095 CLINTON ELEM 1,178,267 544,332 146,882 8003099 WARREN DUPREE ELEM 779,404 424,800 114,456 8003100 FULLER ELEM 841,559 318,140 85,718 8003102 HARRIS ELEM 818,085 298,831 80,516 8003103 JACKSONVILLE ELEM 1,326,885 891,449 186,301 8003104 LANDMARK ELEM 964,390 445,029 119,906 8003105 LAWSON ELEM 758,177 283,200 78,304 8003108 TOlLESON ELEM 908,815 500,197 134,771 8003108 OAK GROVE ELEM 923,923 349,403 94,141 8003110 ROBINSON ELEM 932,095 355,839 95,875 8003111 SCOTT ELEM 467,241 125,049 33,893 8003112 SHERWOOD ELEM 940,321 425,719 114,704 8003113 SYLVAN HILLS ELEM 1,188,937 408,249 109,997 8003118 JACKSONVILLE N. JR. HIGH 1,401,049 583,870 157,315 8003117 JACKSONVILLE S. JR. HIGH 1,301,945 470,774 126,843 8003120 FULLER JR. HIGH 2,123,485 811,901 218,755 8003122 SYLVAN HILLS JR. HIGH 2,076,807 788,914 212,581 8003123 JACKSONVILLE HIGH 2,741,051 917,842 247,245 8003125 WILBUR MILLS HIGH 1,965,718 891,449 188,301 8003126 OAK GROVE HIGH 2,488,988 826,813 222,719 8003127 ROBINSON HIGH 1,161,758 331,933 89,434 8003128 SYLVAN HILLS HIGH 2,554,994 742,021 199,926 8003129 CATO ELEM 990,812 507,553 136,753 8003130 PINEWOOD ELEM 970,185 532,379 143,442 8003135 COLLEGE STATION ELEM 529,913 264,120 76,552 6003138 N. PULASKI HIGH 2,481,986 750,296 202,156 8003137 ARNOLD DRNE ELEM 720,188 349,403 94,141 8003139 OAKBROOKE ELEM 1,058,269 418,384 112,722 6003140 NORTHWOOD JR. HIGH 2,603,098 903,849 243,529 6003141 TAYLOR ELEM 921,185 386,182 104,051 6003142 PINE FOREST ELEM 918,002 457,901 123,375 6003143 ROBINSON JR. HIGH 1,168,099 430,317 115,942 6003146 BATES ELEM 1,209,500 445,948 120,154 NIA SCOTT ALTERNATNE 13,088 0 0 TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSE 47,360,321 18,651,661 5,025,413 SOURCE: S the not s.etlon on the next IMP for explanatton. of the categories. The Pulaki County Special School Di,trict Finance Office. TOTAL PROGRAM COSTS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES FEDERAL LEGAL PROGRAM DISTRICT PROGRAM 1,372 137,779 37,068 4,990 1,342 53,321 36,270 164,898 3,098 191,726 83.717 260,158 2,880 132,405 72,425 1,471 2,499 198,095 87,521 262,305 1,950 114,359 52,894 2,188 1,480 202,720 39,463 95,877 1,372 154,759 37,068 37,159 3,174 224,098 85,770 23,141 2,043 191,577 55,203 110,728 1,300 64,402 35,129 1,503 2,296 81,128 82,046 0 1,804 139,007 43,341 132,971 1,834 104,800 44,140 0 574 93,342 15,512 1,464 1,954 54,599 52,808 0 1,874 55,593 50,841 0 2,880 75,126 72,425 20,161 2,161 73,791 58,396 19,617 3,727 138,605 100,711 432,022 3,621 89,759 97,860 33,882 4,212 81,895 113,627 0 3,174 109,481 85,770 492,104 3,795 134,447 102,536 26,506 1,524 88,473 41,174 17,896 3,406 87,677 92,043 1,961 2,330 145,219 62,959 2,247 2,444 123,983 88,038 1,256 1,304 115,654 35,243 406,614 3,444 115,553 93,069 0 1,804 51,951 43,341 0 1,921 87,086 51,895 0 4,149 145,525 112,117 26,675 1,773 147,936 47,903 2,505 2,102 82,895 56,800 1,810 1,975 70,631 53,378 50,448 2,047 264,862 55,317 248,251 0 72 0 370,810 85,619 4,384,331 2,313,618 3,253,438 DESEGREGATION DISTRICT TRANS LEGAL 39,710 18,408 4,300 38,855 18,010 4,207 89,884 41,569 9,711 11\n588 35,963 8,401 72,334 33,527 7,832 58,449 26,185 8,112 42,278 19,595 4,577 39,710 18,408 4,300 91,883 42,589 9,948 59,138 27,411 8,403 37,833 17,443 4,075 88,489 30,809 7,197 48,430 21,521 5,027 47,286 21,917 5,120 18,817 7,702 1,799 58,572 26,221 8,125 54,250 25,145 5,874 77,587 35,982 8,401 62,559 28,997 6,774 107,889 50,008 11,882 104,835 48,592 11,351 121,941 58,521 13,203 91,883 42,589 9,948 109,844 50,914 11,884 44,109 20,445 4,776 98,603 45,704 10,876 67,446 31,262 7,303 70,745 32,791 7,660 37,755 17,500 4,088 99,703 48,213 10,795 46,430 21,521 5,027 55,594 25,788 8,020 120,108 55,671 13,005 51,318 23,786 5,556 60,848 28,204 8,588 57,183 26,505 6,192 59,260 27,487 6,416 0 0 0 2,478,524 1,148,819 268,365 TOTALS TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR IW30l96 FY 95196 1,369,884 1,804,401 1,398,203 1,837,588 2,860,086 3,349,719 2,309,783 2,705,207 2,511,374 2,941,309 1,578,577 1,848,822 1,851,385 1,934,094 1,468,206 1,742,980 2,865,219 3,144,915 1,981,828 2,321,107 1,299,186 1,521,577 1.m.128 2,077,382 1,757,368 2,058,221 1,608,708 1,884,109 783,013 893,837 1,879,023 1,966,464 1,880,560 2,202,503 2,434,578 2,851,364 2,151,857 2,520,244 3,998,785 4,883,357 3,467,962 4,081,884 4,297,537 5,033,254 3,878,418 4,308,145 3,956,236 4,833,524 1,781,320 2,086,273 3,837,011 4,493,889 1,953,884 2,288,379 1,950,903 2,284,888 1,508,743 1,767,032 3,783,215 4,430,883 1,333,586 1,561,889 1,817,639 2,128,810 4,227,726 4,951,492 1,692,195 1,981,890 1,718,525 2,012,728 1,980,670 2,319,751 2,439,222 2,856,605 383,970 449,704 64,990,109 99,540,000 \\.0 CV') CV') NOTES FOR PCSSD TOTAL PROGRAM EXPENSE SCHEDULE FOR FY 95/96 Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal Deseg This category Includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. Thia category Includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. Thia category conslala of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal Deseg Total Categories Thia category conslala of expenaea Incurred relative to regular program expense, district expense, transportation expense and legal expense funded by unrestricted local, otate and tlederal sources. Thia category conalala of expenaea Incurred relative to federal program expense and district expense funded by restricted federal sources. Thia category conaista of~ Incurred relative to desegregation program expense, district expense, transportation expense and legal expense funded from desegregationo ournes. Total at 04l3Q,,96 The totals In this column represent actual costs Incurred for each school lite through April 30, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. Total for FY 95'96 The totals In this column represent the total estimated expense for each school site for li$cal year 1995/1996. SOURCE: The Pulaski County Special School District Finanoe Off,oe. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT CYCLE 5 SCHOOL PROGRAM EXPENSE FY 116/96 FUNDING SOURCES ,p 1Y LOCAUSTATE FEDERAL DESEGREGA TlON TOTALS TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEA# SCHOOL PROGRAM DISTRICT TRANS LEGAL PROGRAM DISTRICT PROGRAM DISTRICT TRANS LEGAL eoo3092 BAKER ELEM 710,124 292,395 78,781 1,342 53,321 38,270 184,898 38,855 18,010 4,207 0003093 CRYSTAL HILL ELEM 1,323,083 074,899 181,841 3,098 191,726 83,717 260,158 89,884 41,seG 9,711 eoo3()gg WARREN DUPREE ELEM m,404 424,800 114,456 1,950 114,359 52,894 2,188 58,449 26,1e5 e,112 8003100 FULLER ELEM 841,558 318,140 e5,718 1,490 202,720 39,463 115,877 42,279 19,5115 4,577 8003104 LANDMARK ELEM 984,3110 445,029 119,906 2,043 191,577 55,203 110,728 SG,138 27,411 e,403 8003129 CATO ELEM 1190,912 507,553 138,753 2,330 145,219 82,959 2,247 97,449 31,262 7,303 8003141 TAYLOR ELEM 921,1116 388,182 104,051 1,m 147,938 47,1103 2,505 51,318 23,788 5,569 TOTAL CYCLE 5 PROGRAM EXPENSE e,531,157 3,048,998 821,509 13,- 1,048,856 378,208 938,1101 405,109 187,788 43,- The district's Total Program Expense as of Aprll 30, 1996 was $84,990,109, and Total Program Expense for the ftscal year Is expected to be $99,540,000. The programs funded In each of the Cycle I schools are Indicated on the chart entitled \"Programs In Cycle 5 Schools.\" Funding catagorles Local \u0026amp; stale Thia categot'y Includes lundln\nfrom local _,,_, 19gulars late 10Urcet1a, nd unrea1rk:tedf ederal oources. Thia category Includes lundln\nfrom -.:.d _,.,_,,_which must be accounted for separately from the Gen ral Fund. Thia categot'y consisla al lundin\nfor deeegregatlon pu_.. ExpanM categories Local \u0026amp; Stale Thia catego,y conaisla al expenua inc,Jn.d - to 19gular program expense, di.triet expense, trll--,,orta1ion expense and '\"9al expense funded by unreatricted local, slate and federal -,rces. This category conalsta rA expen ... Incurred relatiYe to federal program expense and district expense funded by reatricted federal sources. O..eg This category consists of expen ... Incurred r..-M to desegregation program expense, district expenae, tranaportation expense and legal expense funded from deaegrwgation aources. Total catagorles Total t04./3tWtl The totals in this column 18prsent actual oos1sin cun.d for each of the Cycle 5 schools through April 30, 1996 forfiacal year 1995/1996. Total for FY 115,VO The totals In this column reprsentthe total Htimeted expense for each of the Cycle 5 schools for fiscal year 1995/1996. SOURCE: The Pulaaki County Special School Diatrlct Finance Offtce. \u0026lt;W30IIHI FYll5/Ve 1,388,203 1,837,588 2,860,081! 3,349,719 1,578,577 1,948,822 1,951,385 1,934,094 1,981,828 2,321,107 1,953,984 2,288,379 1,992,1115 1,981,1180 13,119,158 15,381,5711 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Programs in Cycle 5 Schools FY 95/96 BAKER CRYSTAL HILL DUPREE FULLER LANDMARK PROGRAMS ELEM ELEM ELEM ELEM ELEM Pre-School X X Kindergarten X X X X X Elementary X X X X X Reading X Resource Room X X X X X Special Class X X X Gifted \u0026amp; Talented X X X X X Guidance Services X X X X X Library Services X X X X X SOURCE: The Pulaski County Special School District Finance Office. CATO ELEM X X X X X X X TAYLOR ELEM X X X X X X X Q'\\ C\"\") C\"\") I I I I PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR TOTAL PROGRAMS FY 96/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROLLMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR COST PER STU LEA# SCHOOL C 10/01195 STATE FEDERAL DESEG \u0026lt;w.30/96 FY95196 FOR FY 95196 6003090 HOMER ADKINS ELEM 325 1,127,631 174,847 67,406 1,369,884 1,60oC,\u0026lt;I01 4,937 6003092 BAKER ELEM 318 1,082,642 89,591 225,970 1,398,203 1,637,568 5,150 6003093 CRY ST Al. HILL ELEM 734 2.183,521 275,443 401,122 2.860,086 3,349,719 4,564 6003094 BAYOU METO ELEM 635 1,981,530 204,630 123,423 2.309,783 2,705,207 4,260 6003095 CUNTON a.EM 592 1,869,760 265,616 375,998 2,511,374 2,941,309 4,968 6003099 WARREN DUPREE a.EM 462 1,320,610 167,053 80,914 1.57s,sn 1,848,822 4,002 6003100 FULLER ELEM 346 1,246,BTT 242.183 162,325 1,651,385 1,934,094 5,590 6003102 HARRIS EL8,I 325 1,196,80' 191,827 99,575 1,488,206 1,742,980 5,363 6003103 JACKSONVILLE ELEM 752 2.207,789 309,868 167,562 2,685,219 3,144,915 4,182 60031'4 LANDMARK ELEM 484 1,531,368 246,780 203,680 1,981,828 2,321,107 4,796 6003105 LAWSON ELEM 308 1,118,981 119,531 60,654 1,299,166 1,521,5TT 4,940 6003106 TOLLESON ELEM 544 1,546,079 123,174 1'4,475 1,m.128 2,0TT,382 3,819 6003108 OAK GROVE ELEM 380 1,369,071 182,348 205,949 1,757,368 2,058,221 5,416 6003110 ROBINSON ELEM 387 1,385,443 148,940 74,323 1,608,706 1,884,109 4,868 6003111 SCOTT ELEM 136 626,557 108,854 27,602 763,013 893,637 6,571 6003112 SHERWOOD ELEM 463 1,482.698 107,\u0026lt;107 88,918 1,679,023 1,966,464 4,247 6003113 SYLVAN HILLS ELEM 444 1,689,057 106,234 85,269 1,880,560 2,202,503 4,961 6003116 JACKSONVILLE N. JR. HIGH 635 2.144,914 147,551 142,111 2.Gl,576 2,851,364 4,ol90 6003117 JACKSONVILLE S. JR. HIGH 512 1,901,723 132,187 117,947 2.151,857 2,520,244 4,922 6003120 FULLER JR. HIGH 883 3,157,868 239,316 601,601 3,998,785 4,683,357 5,304 6003122 SYLVAN HILLS JR. HIGH 858 3,081,703 187,619 198,660 3,467,982 4,061,684 4,734 6003123 JACKSONVILLE HIGH 998 3,910,150 195,722 191,665 4,297,537 5,033,254 5,043 6003125 WILBUR MILLS HIGH 752 2,846,642 195,251 636,525 3,678,418 4,308,145 5,729 6003126 OAK GROVE HIGH 899 3,520,095 236,983 199,158 3,956,236 4,6l3,524 5,154 6003127 ROBINSON HIGH 361 1,584,647 109,647 87,026 1,781,320 2,086,273 5,TT9 6003128 SYLVAN HILLS HIGH 807 3,500,347 179,720 156,944 3,837,011 4,4!13,689 5,569 6003129 CATO ELEM 552 1,637,448 208,178 108,258 1,953,884 2,288,379 4,146 6003130 PINEWOOD ELEM 579 1,648,430 190,021 112,452 1,950,903 2,284,888 3,946 6003135 COLLEGE ST A TION ELEM 309 891,689 150,897 465,957 1,508,743 1,767,032 5,719 6003136 N. PUL.ASKHJ IGH 816 3,417,882 208,622 156,711 3,783,215 4,430,883 5,430 6003137 ARNOLD DRIVE ELEM 380 1,165,316 95,292 72,978 1,333,586 1,561,689 4,110 6003139 OAKBROOKE ELEM 455 1,591,276 138,981 87,382 1,817,639 2,128,810 4,679 60031\u0026lt;1() NORTHWOOD JR. HIGH 983 3,754,625 257,642 215,459 4,227,726 4,951,492 5,037 6003141 TAYLOR ELEM 420 1,413,191 195,839 83,165 1,692,195 1,981,890 4,719 6003142 PINE FOREST ELEM 498 1,501,380 119,695 97,450 1,718,525 2,012.728 4,o.42 6003143 ROBINSON JR. HIGH 468 1,716,333 124,009 140,328 1,980,670 2,319,751 4,957 6003146 BATES ELEM 485 1,TT7,649 320,179 341,394 2.439,222 2,856,805 5,890 SCOTT Al. TERNA TIVE 13,088 n 370,810 383,970 449,7().4 NIA TOT Al. EXPENSE 20,285 71,143,014 6,697,949 7,149,146 84,990,109 99,540,000 4,907 Cost PN student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1996 enrollment figures and the tot.al estimated expense for FY 95196. Funding CategoriH Local \u0026amp; Slale federai o.s..g Loc,il \u0026amp; Slale This catego\u0026lt;y includes funding from local '\"\"\"\"rog ular s1a1e '\"\"\"\"an d \\llll8Slric:lad federal oourta. This category includes funding from reslric:tedfe deral sources ..tlich must be 1CCO\u0026lt;Jntefodr o\neparatelyfr om the General Fund. This category c:onsisls o( funding tor desegropobon - This category consists o( expenses ina!rred rolatiw ID regular program expense funded by unr.ttictad local, stata and fedal sources. This category consists o( expenses funded by '11Strict8dle deral sources. OeJeg This category consiS1s o/ expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs funded from desegregation sources. Total Cmgorlu Total at 04/.l0'96 The totals in this column represent actual costs incurred tor oach school site through April 30, 1996 for fiscal year 199511996. Total lor FY 95'96 The lotlls in this column represent the lotll estimated expense for each school site for fiscal year 199511996. SOURCE: The Ptila.ski County Spec,al School Di.slricl f-,c\ne Qffa, and the Local Fisal Sa-vices Divsion cl the ADE. 340 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR CYCLE 5 SCHOOL PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROL.LMEl',ff LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEA# SCHOOL C 10/01195 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 04/30/96 FY95/96 6003092 BAKER ELEM 318 1,082,642 89,591 225,970 1,398,203 1,637,568 6003093 CRYSTAL HILL ELEM 73'1 2,183,521 275,443 401,122 2,860,086 3,349,719 6003099 WARREN DUPREE ELEM 462 1,320,610 167,053 90,914 1,578,577 1,848,822 6003100 FULLER ELEM 346 1,246,877 242,183 162,325 1,651,385 1,934,094 6003104 LANDMARK ELEM 484 1,531,368 246,780 203,680 1,981,828 2,321,107 6003129 CATO ELEM 552 1,637,448 208,178 108,258 1,953,884 2,288,379 6003141 TAYLOR ELEM -420 1,-413,191 195,839 83,165 1,692,195 1,981,890 TOTAL EXPENSE 3,316 10,415,657 1,425,067 1,275,,43,4 13,116,158 15,361,579 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95/96. Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State Deseg This categOI)' includes lunding from local sources, regular stale 600/CeS, and unrestricted federal sources. Thi,\ncategOI)' includes funding from restricted federal sources - musl be accounted for oeparately from the General Fund. This category consists o/ lunding for desegregation purpooes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal Deseg Total Catagories This categOI)' consists o/ expenses incurred relali\u0026gt;,e to regular program expen\u0026amp;e lunded by unrestricted local, 6late and federal sources. This categOI)' consists o/ expenses lunded by restricted federal sources. Thi6 categOI)' consists o/ expenses incurred re!a!Ne to desegregation program5 funded from desegregation sources. Total at 04l3lW6 The totals in thi6 column represent adual ooota incurred for each o/ the Cycle 5 IChools through April 30, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. Total to, FY 9\u0026amp;-95 The tctal6 in thi6 column represent the total e6limated expense for each o/ the Cycle 5 ocllaols b fiscal year 1995/1996. SOURCE: The PulasW County Special School Disttict Finance o,r,ce and tile Local Fiscal Services Divoon of tile ADE. 341 COST PER STU FOR FY 95/96 5,150 4,564 4,002 5,590 4,796 4,146 -4,719 4,633 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT BY PROGRAM FY 95/96 PERCENT AVG COST DISTRICT VARIANCE PROGRAM OF PER STUDENT AVG COST OVER DIST AVG/ SCHOOL PROGRAM COST TOTAL COST BY PROGRAM PER STUDENT (UNDER DIST AVG) ELEMENTARY PROGRAMS 53,166,140 53.4% 4,700 4,907 (207) JR. HIGH PROGRAMS 21,387,892 21.5% 4,929 4,907 22 HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMS 24,985,968 25.1% 5,393 4,907 486 PCSSD PROGRAM COST PCSSD COST PER STU 60000000 40000000 20000000 0 PROGRAM COST FY 95/96 PERCENT OF TOTAL COST AVG COST PER STUDENT BY PROGRAM DISTRICT AVG COST PER STU VARIANCE SOURCE: 5400 5200 5000 4800 4600 4400 FY 95/96 Program costs consists of the total estimated cost for FY 95/96 for the indicated category of school programs. The percentage of program cost to the estimated total district cost of $99,540,000 for FY 95/96. The estimated total program cost for FY 95/96 to the total number of students in the program category. The total estimated cost for FY 95/96 of $99,540,000 to the total enrollment at October 1, 1995 of 20,285. The difference between the cost per student by program and the district average cost per student. A positive variance indicates the cost per student by program is greater than the district cost per student, and a negative variance indicates the cost per student by program is less than the district cost per student. The Pulaski County Special School District Finance Office. 342 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR ELEMENTARY PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROLLMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEA# SCHOOL @ 10KJ1/95 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 04/30/96 FY 95/96 6003090 HOMER ADKINS ELEM , 325 1,127,631 17~.847 67,\"'6 1,369,884 1,604,401 6003092 BAKER ELEM 318 1,082,642 89,591 225,970 1,398,203 1,637,568 6003093 CRYSTAL HILL ELEM 734 2,183,521 275,443 401,122 2,860,086 3,349,719 6003094 BAYOU METO ELEM 635 1,981,530 204,830 123,423 2,309,783 2,705,207 6003095 CLINTON ELEM 592 1,869,760 265,616 375,998 2,511,374 2,941,309 6003099 WARREN DUPREE ELEM 462 1,320,610 167,053 90,914 1,578,Sn 1,848,822 6003100 FULLER ELEM 346 1,246,Bn 242,183 162,325 1,651,385 1,934,094 6003102 HARRIS ELEM 325 1,196,804 191,827 99,575 1,488,206 1,742,980 6003103 JACKSONVILLE ELEM 752 2,207,789 309,868 167,562 2,685,219 3,144,915 6003104 LANDMARK ELEM ,484 1,531,368 246,760 203,680 1,981,828 2,321,107 6003105 LAWSON ELEM 308 1,118,981 119,531 60,654 1,299,166 1,521,577 6003106 TOLLESON ELEM 544 1,546,079 123,174 104,475 1,773,728 2,077,382 6003108 OAK GROVE ELEM 380 1,369,071 182,348 205,949 1,757,368 2,058,221 6003110 ROBINSON ELEM 387 1,385,443 148,940 74,323 1,608,706 1,884,109 6003111 SCOTT ELEM 136 626,557 108,854 27,602 763,013 893,637 6003112 SHERWOOO ELEM 463 1,482,698 107,407 88,918 1,679,023 1,966,464 6003113 SYLVAN HILLS ELEM 444 1,689,057 106,234 85,269 1,860,560 2,202,503 6003129 CATO ELEM 552 1,637,448 208,178 108,258 1,953,884 2,288,379 6003130 PINEWOOO ELEM 579 1,648,430 190,021 112,452 1,950,903 2,284,888 6003135 COLLEGE STATION ELEM 309 891,889 150,897 465,957 1,508,743 1,767,032 6003137 ARNOLD DRIVE ELEM 380 1,165,316 95,292 72,978 1,333,586 1,561,889 6003139 OAKBROOKE ELEM 455 1,591,276 138,981 87,382 1,817,639 2,128,810 6003141 TAYLOR ELEM 420 1,413,191 195,839 83,165 1,692,195 1,981,890 6003142 PINE FOREST ELEM 498 1,501,360 119,695 97,450 1,718,525 2,012,728 6003146 BATES ELEM 485 1,1n,649 320,179 341,394 2,439,222 2,856,805 SCOTT ALTERNATIVE 13,088 72 370,810 383,970 449,704 TOTAL EXPENSE 11,313 36,606,085 4,483,660 4,305,011 45,394,776 53,166,140 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95196. Funding Catagorles Local \u0026amp; Stale Oeseg This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for oeparately from the General Fund. This category consists c:J funding for desegregation purp06e6. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; Slate Federal Total Categories This category con\u0026amp;ists c:J expenses incurred relatille to regular program expense funded by unmstricted local, state and federal oources. This category consist,\nol expenses funded by restricted federal sources. This category consists c:Je xpenses incurred relatille to desegregation programs funded from desegregation sources. Tola/ at 04/3005 The totals in this column represent actual costs incurred for each ot the elementary 6Chools through April 30, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. Tola/ for FY 95196 The totals in this column represent the total estimated expense for each c:J the elementary schools for fiscal year 1995/1996. SOURCE: Tt\u0026gt;e Pulaski County Special School District Finance Off,ce and the Local Fiscal Services Divsion of the ADE. 343 COST PER S1U FOR F\\'95196 4,937 5,150 4,564 4,260 4,968 4,002 5,590 5,363 4,182 4,796 4,940 4i 3,819 5,416 4,868 6,571 4,247 4,961 4,146 3,946 5,719 4,110 4,679 4,719 4,042 5,890 NIA 4.700 I I I I I I PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR JR. HIGH PROGRAMS FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS ENROU.MENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEA# SCHOOL @ 10/01/95 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 04/30/96 FY95J96 6003116 JACKSONVILLE N. JR. HIGH 635 2,144,914 147,551 142,111 2,434,576 2,851,364 6003117 JACKSONVILLE S. JR. HIGH 512 1,901,723 132,187 117,947 2,151,857 2,520,244 6003120 FULLER JR. HIGH 883 3,157,868 239,316 601,601 3,998,785 4,683,357 6003122 SYLVAN HILLS JR. HIGH 858 3,081,703 187,619 198,660 3,467,982 4,061,684 6003140 NORTHWOOD JR. HIGH 983 3,754,625 257,642 215,459 4,227,726 4,951,492 6003143 ROBINSON JR. HIGH 468 1,716,333 124,009 140,328 1,980,670 2,319,751 TOTAL EXPENSE 4,339 15,757,166 1,088,324 1,416,106 18,261,596 21,387,892 Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95/96. Funding Catagorlas Local \u0026amp; Slate Federal Des,,g This catego,y includes funding from local sources, regular state source,\n, and unreotricted lederal sources. This catego,y includes funding from restricted lederal .ource,\nwhich must be 8CCOUntefdo r separately from the General Fund. This category con,\nisU\ncl funding for desegregation purpoGe$. Expense CatagorlH Local\u0026amp; Slate Federal Des,,g Total Catagoria,\nTotal at 04l.3()\n'96 Total for FY 95196 SOURCE: This catego,y consists al expenses incurred relative to regular program expense funded by unrestricted local, state ar\u0026gt;d federal sources. This category consists al expenses funded by restricted federal sources. This catego,y consists al expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs funded from desegregation sources. The totals in this column ~t actual costs incurred for each cl the junior high schools ttvough April 30, 1996 for fiscal year 1995/1996. The totals in this column repreM!Ot the total estimated expense for each cl the junior high schoofolsr l iscaJy ear 1995/1996. The Pulaski County Special School Distnct Finanoe Oflice and tt\u0026gt;e Local Fiscal Sarvices Divsxx, of tl\u0026gt;e ADE.. 344 COST PER STU FOR FY 95/96 4,490 4,922 5,304 4,734 5,037 4,957 4,929 I I PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT COST PER STUDENT FOR HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMS FY 95/96 I FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS I ENROLLMENT LOCAL\u0026amp; TOTAL AS OF TOTAL FOR LEA# SQ-IOOL G 1001195 STATE FEDERAL DESEG 04/30/96 FY95196 6003123 JACKSONVILLE HIGH 998 3,910,150 195,722 191,665 4,297,537 5,033,25\" I 6003125 WILBUR MILLS HIGH 752 2,646,6\"2 195,251 636,525 3,678,418 4,308, 1\"5 6003126 OAK GROVE HIGH 899 3,520,095 236,983 199,158 3,956,236 4,633,524 6003127 ROBINSON HIGH 361 1,58\u0026lt;1,6\"7 109,647 87,026 1,781,320 2,086,273 6003128 SYLVAN HILLS HIGH 807 3,500,3\"7 179,720 156,944 3,837,011 4,\"93,889 6003136 N. PULASKI HIGH 816 3,417,882 208,622 156,711 3,783,215 4,43-0,883 I TOTAL EXPENSE 4,633 18,779,763 1,125,945 1,428,029 21,333,737 24,985,968 I Cost per student figures were calculated using the October 1, 1995 enrollment figures and the total estimated expense for FY 95196. I I I I I I I I I I I Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State This catego,y includes funding from local source,\n, regular state \u0026amp;OUl'CeS, and unresllicled federal \u0026amp;OUrces. Federal This catego,y includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. De.seg This catego,y comists o1 funding for desegregation purpo5eS. Expanse Categories Local \u0026amp; State Federal Deseg Total Catagor1as To/al at 041Ja196 Total fcx FY 95196 SOURCE: This catego,y consists ol expenses incurred relative to regular program expense funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. This catego,y consists ol expenses funded by restricted federal sources. This category consist,\nol expenses incurred relatr,oeto desegregation programs funded from desegregation \u0026amp;OUrces. The totals in this column represent actual costs incurred for each ol the high schools through April 30, 1996 for fiscal year 199511996. The totals in this column re..--,! the total estimated expense for each d the high school5 for fiscal year 199511996. The Pulaski County Special School District Finance orrce and the Local Fiscal Services Divsion d the ADE.. 345 COSTPERS1U FOR FY 95196 5,043 5,729 5,154 5,779 5,569 5,43-0 5,393 I I I I I I I I I I LEAi 6003092 6003093 6003099 6003100 6003104 6003129 6003141 TeachN Expense At 04/JQ/96 FYSISl!,6 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT CYCLE 5 SCHOOL TEACHER \u0026amp; ADMINISTRATOR EXPENSE FY 95196 TEACHER SALARIES ADMINISTRATOR SALARIES TOTALS SCHOOL @04/30/96 FY 95/86 @04/30l96 FY95/96 @04/30/96 FY95/96 BAKER ELEM 446,505 597,979 87,163 116,733 533,668 714,712 CRYSTAL HILL ELEM 903,976 1,210,645 122,566 164,146 1,026,542 1,374,791 WARREN DUPREE ELEM 535,645 717,360 81,649 109,348 617,294 826,708 FULLER ELEM 546,708 732,176 67,391 90,253 614,099 822,429 LANDMARK ELEM 830,982 845,039 78,135 104,642 709,117 949,681 CATO ELEM 674,680 903,562 81,310 108,894 755,990 1,012,456 TAYLOR ELEM 585,498 784,125 74,090 99,225 659,588 883,350 TOTAL 4,323,994 5,790,886 592,304 793,241 4,916,298 6,584,127 Total district expense for teacher and school site administrator salaries for FY 95/96 is estimated to be $45,397,250 or 45.6 percent of total expense for FY 95/96 of $99,540,000. Actual teacher salary expense for I08ch Cycle S school u of April 30, 1996. Expected teacM\u0026lt; salary expense for each Cycle 5 school for FY 95196. Administrator Expense At 0413(1196 SOURCE: Actual administrator salary expense for I08ch Cycle 5 school u of April 30, 1996. Expected administrator salary expense for each Cycle 5 school for FY 95/96. Thfl Pulaski CO\u0026lt;Jnty Special School District Finar,ce Office. 346 TRANSPORTATION -  COST 347 U.l I I I I I I D. BUDGET INFORM.A TION 2. Transportation cost and funding source. Transportation costs for FY 95/96 are presented for the three school districts in Pulaski County as specified by the Allen Letter. Transportation cost information for the LRSD and the NLRSD contains actual expenses by funding source for FY 95/96 through March 31, 1996. Transportation expense information for the PCSSD contains actual expenses by funding source for FY 95/96 through April 30, 1996. Outsourcing costs, bus driver salaries and replacement parts expense are also addressed. 348 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LEA# 60-01 60-02 60-03 PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS TRANSPORTATION EXPENSE FY 95/96 AS OF MARCH 31, 1996 FUNDING SOURCES LOCAL\u0026amp; DISTRICT STATE FEDERAL DESEG LITTLE ROCK 4,989,738 0 2,494,869 NORTH LITTLE ROCK 1,157,209 0 203,100 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL 5,025,413 0 1,148,819 TOTAL 0 3,846,788 TRANSPORTATION FY 95/96 THRU 03/31/96 8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0 TOTAL 7,484,607 1,360,309 6,174,232 15,u Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. Federal Oeseg This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category consists of transportation costs incurred relative to programs funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. Federal This category consists of transportation costs funded by restricted federal sources. Deseg NOTE: SOURCES: This category consists of transportalion costs incurred relative lo desegregation programs funded by desegregation sources. The expenses for the PCSSO are for FY 95/96 through April 30, 1996. The Finance Off1Ces of each of the school districts in Pulaski County. 349 %OF TRANS EXP TO TOTAL :XP FOR 03/31/96 7.9% 4.6% 7.3% ~ l, \" (- I I I I I I I I I I PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS TRANSPORTATION EXPENSE DISTRICT LITTLE ROCK NORTH LITTLE ROCK PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL TOTAL LRSD NLRSD PCSSD SOURCES: FY 95/96 AS OF MARCH 31, 1996 BUS DRIVER REPLACEMENT OUTSOURCING SALARIES PARTS TOTAL 5,182,587 666,476 0 5,849,063 0 544,939 91,286 636,225 0 2,641,505 322,716 2,964,221 5,182,587 3,852,920 414,002 9,449,509 Outsourcing costs accounted for 69.2 percent of the total transportation expense of $7,484,607. Bus driver salaries, exclusive of any bus driver salaries included in the outsourcing fee, accounted for 8.9 percent of the total transportation epxense. The district did not incur any replacement part costs because this was included in the outsourcing costs. The district does not outsource its transportation function\ntherefore, no outsourcing costs were incurred. Bus driver salaries accounted for 40.1 percent of the total transportation expense of $1,360,309. Replacement parts accounted for 6.7 percent of the total transportation expense. The district does not outsource its transportation function\ntherefore, no outsourcing costs were incurred. Bus driver salaries accounted for 42.8 percent of the total transportation expense of $6,174,232. Replacement parts accounted for 5.2 percent of the total transportation expense. The Finance Offices of each of the school districts in Pulaski County. 350 ,1 \\., \\J l I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I I I I I I LRSD TRANSPORTATION COST 351 l( I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ITTI S:: ~nr.K ~r.1-1nn1 nl~T~lr.T TRANSPORTATION EXPENSE FY 95/96 THRU MARCH 31, 1996 LRSD TRANSPORTATION FY 95/96 THRU 03/31/96 LEGEND 5000000 4000000 3000000 2000000 1000000 LOCAUSTATE 0 FED DESEG TOTAL Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. Federal Deseg This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category consists of transportation costs incurred relative to programs funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. Federal Deseg SOURCE: This category consists of transportation costs funded by restricted federal sources. This category consists of transportation costs incurred relative to desegregation programs funded by desegregation sources. Of the total transportation expense in the LRSD through March 31, 1996, outsourcing costs accounted for $5,182,587 or 69.2 percent of total transportation expense, and bus driver salaries, exclusive of any bus driver salaries included in the outsourcing costs, accounted for $666,476 or 8.9 percent of the total transportation expense. The district did not incur any cost for replacement parts because this is included in the outsourcing fees. The Little Rock School District Finance Office. 352 4,989,738 0 2,494,869 7,484,607 i'll l., \" I I I I NLRSD 1 TRANSPORTATION COST 353 lb t, \" 1 I l I I I I I I I I I I NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION EXPENSE FY 95/96 THRU MARCH 31, 1996 NLRSD TRANSPORTATION FY 95/96 THRU 03/31/96 LEGEND 1200000 1000000 800000 600000 400000 200000 LOCAUSTATE 0 FED DESEG TOTAL Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. Federal Deseg This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. I Expense Categories I I I I I I Local \u0026amp; State This category consists of transportation costs incurred relative to programs funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. Federal This category consists of transportation costs funded by restricted federal sources. Deseg This category consists of transportation costs incurred relative to desegregation programs funded by desegregation sources. SOURCE: Of the total transportation expense in the NLRSD through March 31, 1996, bus driver salaries accounted for $544,939 or 40.1 percent of total transportation expense, and replacement parts accounted for $91,286 or 6.7 percent of total transportation expense. The district did not have any outsourcing transportation expense. The North Little Rock School District Finance Office. 354 1,157,209 0 203,100 1,360,309 PCSSD - 1 TRANSPORTATION I COST 355 I I I I I I I I I I I I PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION EXPENSE FY 95/96 THRU APRIL 30, 1996 PCSSD TRANSPORTATION FY 95/96 TH RU 04/30/96 6000000 4000000 2000000 0 ,::,'Yo .. \"      '  ~--- DE FUNDING SOURCES -LEGEND LOCAUSTATE FED DESEG TOTAL Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. Federal Oeseg This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category consists of transportation costs incurred relative to programs funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. Federal Oeseg This category consists of transportation costs funded by restricted federal sources. This category consists of transportation costs incurred relative to desegregation programs funded by desegregation sources. Of the total transportation expense in the PCSSD through April 30, 1996, bus driver salaries accounted for $2,641,505 or 42.8 percent of total transportation expense, and replacement parts accounted for $322,716 or 5.2 percent of the total transportation expense. The district did not have any outsourcing transportation expense. SOURCE: The Pulaski County Special School District Finance Office. 356 ~ 5,025,413 0 1,148,819 6,174,232 I I I . I I I I LEGAL FEES 357 I I I I I I I D. BUDGET INFORMATION 3. All legal fees reported by type of services. Legal fees are reported by funding source and type of service for each of the three districts in Pulaski County. The information is as of March 31, 1996 for the LRSD and the NLRSD. The PCSSD information is as of April 30, 1996. The LRSD's legal fees totaled $222,890 for FY 95/96 through March 31, 1996. The district's legal expense in FY 94/95 was $315,036. Legal fees for the NLRSD totaled $89,532 as of March 31, 1996. The district's legal expense for FY 94/95 totaled $98,087. Legal fees for the PCSSD increased 67.4 percent from $211,463 in FY 94/95 to $353,984 in FY 95/96 through April 30, 1996. 358 I I I I I PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS LEGAL EXPENSE FY 95/96 AS OF MARCH 31, 1996 FUNDING SOURCES ~ LOCAL\u0026amp; LEA# DISTRICT STATE FEDERAL DESEG 60-01 LITTLE ROCK 159,293 0 63,597 60-02 NORTH LITTLE ROCK 16,342 0 73,190 60-03 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL 85,619 0 268,365 TOTAL 261,254 0 405,152 LEGAL FY 95/96 THRU 03/31 /96 Funding Categories 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 222,890 89,532 353,984 666,406 Local \u0026amp; state This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. Federal This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. Deseg This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category consists of legal expenses incurred relative to programs funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. Federal This category consists of legal expenses funded by restricted federal sources. Deseg This category consists of legal expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs funded by desegregation sources. NOTE: The expenses for the PCSSD are for FY 95196 through April 30, 1996. SOURCES: The Finance Off,ces of each of the school districts in Pu/ask/ County. 359 %OF LEGAL EXP TO TOTAL EXPAT03/31/96 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.9% I I I I I I I I PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS DISTRICT LITTLE ROCK NORTH LITTLE ROCK PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL TOTAL LEGAL BY CATEGORY LRSD NLRSD PCSSD SOURCES: LEGAL EXPENSE BY CATEGORIES FY 95/96 AS OF MARCH 31, 1996 LEGAL CATEGORIES FUNDING SOURCES LOCALJSTATE DESEG SPECIAL ED/ TEACHER/ DUE PROCESS EMPLOYEE OTHER DESEG TOTAL 15,498 81,598 62,197 63,597 222,890 0 12,284 4,058 73,190 89,532 25,853 40,057 19,709 268,365 353,984 41,351 133,939 85,964 405,152 666,406 Special Ed/due process fees accounted for 7.0 percent of the total legal expense at March 31, 1996 of$222,890. Teacher/employee fees accounted for 36.6 percent of the total legal expense. Other fees accounted for 27.9 percent of the total legal expense. Desegregation fees accounted for 28.5 percent of the total legal expense. Teacher/employee fees accounted for 13.7 percent of the total legal expense at March 31, 1996 of $89,532. Other fees accounted for 4.5 percent of the total legal expense. Desegregation fees accounted for 81.8 percent of the total legal expense. There were no fees incurred regarding Special Ed/due process litigation. Special Ed/due process fees accounted for 7.3 percent of the total legal expense at April 30, 1996 of $353,984. Teacher/employee fees accounted for 11.3 percent of the total legal expense. Other fees accounted for 5.6 percent of the total legal expense. Desegregation fees accounted for 75.8 percent of the total legal expense. The Finance Offices of each of the school districts in Pulaski County. 360 I I I I I I I LRSD LEGAL FEES 361 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT LEGAL EXPENSE FY 95/96 THRU MARCH 31, 1996 LRSD LEGAL FY 95/96 THRU 03/31/96 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 LEGEND LOCAUSTATE FED DESEG TOTAL Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. Federal Deseg This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category consists of legal expenses incurred relative to programs funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. Federal Deseg This category consists of legal expenses funded by restricted federal sources. This category consists of legal expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs funded by desegregation sources. Of the total legal expense in the LRSD through March 31, 1996, Special Ed/due process fees accounted for $15,498 or 7.0 percent of total legal expense, teacher/employee fees accounted for $81,598 or 36.6 percent of total legal expense, other ligitation fees accounted for $62,197 or 27.9 percent of total legal expense, and desegregation fees accounted for $63,597 or 28.5 percent of total legal expense. SOURCE: The Little Rock School District Finance Office. 362 159,293 0 63,597 I I I I 1 NLRSD LEGAL FEES I I I I . I 363 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NORTH UTTLE ROCK SCHOOL DiSTRiCT LEGAL EXPENSE FY 95/96 THRU MARCH 31, 1996 NLRSD LEGAL FY 95/96 THRU 03/31 /96 LEGEND 80000 60000 40000 20000 LOCAUSTATE 0 FED DESEG FUNDING SOURCES TnTAL Funding Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. Federal Deseg This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separateiy from the General Fund. This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category consists of legal expenses incurred relative to programs funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. Federal Deseg SOURCE: This category consists of legal expenses funded by restricted federal sources. This category consists of legal expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs funded by desegregation sources. Of the total legal expense in the NLRSD through March 31, 1996, teacher/employee fees accounted for $12,284 or 13.7 percent of total legal expense, desegregation fees accounted for $73,190 or 81.8 percent of total legal expense, and other fees accounted for $4,058 or 4. 5 percent of total legal expense. No Special Ed/due process fees were incurred during FY 95/96. The North Little Rock School District Finance Office. 364 16,342 0 73,190 89,532 I I I I I I I . I I I I I PCSSD LEGAL FEES 365 I I I I I I I I I I PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT LEGAL EXPENSE FY 95/96 THRU APRIL 30, 1996 PCSSD LEGAL FY 95/96 THRU 04/30/96 LEGEND LOCAUSTATE FED DESEG FUNDING SOURCES TOTAL Funding Categories I Local \u0026amp; State This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrestricted federal sources. I I I I I I I I Federal Deseg This category includes funding from restricted federal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category consists of legal expenses incurred relative to programs funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. Federal Deseg This category consists of legal expenses funded by restricted federal sources. This category consists of legal expenses incurred relative to desegregation programs funded by desegregation sources. Of the total legal expense in the PCSSD through April 30, 1 996, Special Ed/due process fees accounted for $25,853 or 7.3 percent of total legal expense, teacher/employee fees accounted for $40,057 or 11.3 percent of total legal expense, desegregation fees accounted for $268,365 or 75.8 percent of total legal expense, and other fees accounted for $19,709 or 5.6 percent of total legal expense. SOURCE: The Pulaski County Special School District Finance Office. 366 85,619 0 268,365 353,984 I I I I I I . I I I I I I I I COMPENSATORY EDUCATION 367 I I I I I I I D. BUDGET INFORMATION 4. Compensatory Education Program cost. Compensatory Education costs incurred and funds received from the ADE for Compensatory Education by each of the three districts in Pulaski County during FY 95/96 are presented in this section of the July 15, 1996 Monitoring Report. The information for the LRSD and the NLRSD for FY 95/96 through March 31, 1996, and the PCSSD information is for FY 95/96 through April 30, 1996. The three districts have agreed that for the purposes of this report Compensatory Education costs are the costs that are funded from the special funds received from the ADE for Compensatory Education as specified by the Settlement Agreement. The LRSD incurred Compensatory Education costs totaling $3,323,890 in FY 95/96 as ofMarch 31, 1996. The ADE paid the district $4,970,262 in FY 95/96 to fund their Compensatory Education programs. As ofFY 95/96, the LRSD has received $56,601,950 or 95.7 percent of the total amount of$59,129,886 due to the district by the ADE for Compensatory Education. The NLRSD incurred expenses totaling $267,555 in FY 95/96 as of March 3 1, 1996 for Compensatory Education programs. The district was paid $389,025 in accordance with the Settlement Agreement for Compensatory Education during FY 95/96. As of FY 95/96, the district has received $4,000,000 or 100.0 percent of the funds due to the district by the ADE for Compensatory Education as specified in the Settlement Agreement. The PCSSD incurred Compensatory Education expenses totaling $2,063,550 in FY 95/96 as of April 30, 1996. The district did not receive any funding from the ADE for Compensatory Education programs in FY 95/96. The last payment made by the ADE to the district for Compensatory Education was in FY 94/95 in the amount of $2,500,000, and at that time, the district had been paid a total of$16,000,000 by the ADE for Compensatory Education as required by the Settlement Agreement. 368 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LEA, 60--01 60--02 60--03 PULASKI COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS DISTRICT LITTLE ROCK NORTH LITTLE ROCK PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL TOTAL COMPENSATORY EDUCATION FY 95/96 AS OF MARCH 31, 1996 TOTAL DESEGREG.IITION COMPED EXPENSE EXPENSE 25,036,970 3,323,890 543,85 267,555 7,149,1 6 2,063,550 32,nB,961 5,654,995 COMPED FY 95/96 THRU 03/31/96 000000 3000000 2000000 1000000 0 COMPEDPMTS FROM ADE IN FY 95196  ,970,262 389,025 0 5,359,287 PERCENT OF COMPED EXP TOOESEG EXP 13.3% 9.2% 28.9% 17.3% Compensatory Education Payments Made by the \u0026gt;DE. LRSD NLRSD PCSSO Total Oeseg Expense Comp Ed Expense The distric1 has received a total of $56,601,950 for Compensatory Education as o! FY 95196. The Settlement Ag,__,, stipulates that the \u0026gt;DE. I\u0026amp; to pay the LRSD  total $59,129,886 for Compensatory Education. The distric1 received  total o1 $ ,000,000 for Compensatory Education as ol FY 95196. As ol FY 95196, the ADE. has fully funded their CompM1Satory Education oi,jigations to the distric1 as stipulated In the Settlement ~- As ol FY 95196, the ADE. had fully funded their Compensatory Education obligations to the district totaling $16,000,000 as stip,,lated in the SeltlemMrt Ag.._,_,t. The total desegregation expense incurred In FY 95196 through March 31, 1996 for LRSD and NLRSD and through April 30, 1996 for PCSSD as detailed in the Program Cost ponion of the Budget Section o( the monttoring report. Compensatory Education expense incurred in FY 95196 through March 31, 1996 for LRSD and NLRSD and through April 30, 1996 for PCSSD. Comp Ed Pmts Compensatory Education payments by the ADEt.o the distric1in FY 95196.  of Comp Ed Ratio of Compensatory Education expense to desegregation expense in FY 95196 through March 31, 1996 Exp to Deseg for LRSD and NLRSD and through April 30, 1996 for PCSSD. Expense NOTE: The expenses tor the PCSSD are tor FY 95\"96 through Aprll 30, 1996. 369 I I I I I I . I I I I I I I I MAGNET SCHOOL COST 370 I I I I I I I D. BUDGE INFORMATION 5. Magnet school cost Magnet school costs incurred and funds received from the ADE for magnet school operational costs by the LRSD during FY 95/96 are presented in this section of the July 15, 1996 Monitoring Report. The information presented is actual costs incurred for FY 95/96 through March 31, 1996 and the estimate of total costs for the fiscal year. As of March 31, 1996, the district has incurred magnet operational costs totaling $8,992,448 and has received $5,375,278 or 72.9 percent of the total amount due to the district from the ADE for magnet operational costs. 371 I I I I I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MAGNET SCHOOLS MAGNET SCHOOL PROGRAM EXPENSE FY 95/96 FUNDING SOURCES TOTALS LEA# SCHOOL 6001003 MANN JR. HIGH 6001005 PARKVIEW HIGH 6001006 BOOKER ELEM 6001021 CARVER ELEM 6001027 GIBBS ELEM 6001043 WILLILAMS ELEM TOTAL MAGNET EXPENSE Funding Categories LOCAL\u0026amp; STATE FEDERAL DESEG 0 0 2,063,752 0 0 2,326,882 0 0 1,425,443 0 0 1,257,662 0 0 nS,244 0 0 1,143,465 0 0 8,992,448 MAGNET EXPENSE FY 95/96 THRU 03/31/96 2500000 2000000 1500000 1000000 500000 0 MN PY BK CV GBwL TOTAL AS OF 3131/96 2,063,752 2,326,882 1,425,443 1,257,662 nS,244 1,143,465 8,992,448 Local \u0026amp; State This category includes funding from local sources, regular state sources, and unrastric1ed federal sources. F\u0026amp;deral This category ir\u0026gt;cludes funding from restricted fedefal sources which must be accounted for separately from the General Fund. Deseg This category consists of funding for desegregation purposes. Expense Categories Local \u0026amp; State This category consists of expenses incurred re!atille to magnet programs funded by unrestricted local, state and federal sources. Federal This category consists of magnet program expenses funded by restricted federal sources. Deseg This category consists of expenses incurred relatiw to magnet p,ograms funded from desegregation sources. 372 TOTAL FOR FY 95196 3,385,630 3,817,300 2,338,470 2,063,222 1,271,805 1,875,879 14,752,306 STUDENT DISCIPLINE -------------- --- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I E. STUDENT DISCIPLINE: REFERRALS The Allen Letter requires the collection of the following student discipline data: 1. Number of discipline referrals by school and teacher reported by race, gender, grade, subject and teachers' years of experience. 2. Student suspensions, exclusions and expulsions according to type of infractions, length of punishment by race, gender, school and teacher. This information follows: The following Cycle V schools reported no discipline referrals for quarters 1-3 of the 1995-96 school year\nthus, no graphs appear for these school sites and grade levels. Little Rock School District  Carver Magnet Elementary  Gibbs Magnet Elementary\nGrade 2  Hall High Schools  Mabelvale Elementary\nGrade 6  MeadowcliffElementary\nGrade 1 Pulaski County Special School District  Baker Elementary  Cato Elementary\nGrade 1  Landmark Elementary\nGrades 1, 2, 5 and 6 The following graphs indicate the number of discipline referrals by school and teacher, reported by race, gender, grade, subject and teachers' years of experience for the Cycle V schools. Pulaski Heights Junior High School is not included. 374 CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY 7 6 / 5 / 4 / 3 2 / 1 NO. OF REFERRALS /-----6------------------------------------------------- -------~----------------------------------- 0 -----,---------r--------,-------( BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENC Dudeck (4) Rogers (18) 1 5 SUBJECT: Grade 1 0 1 RACE AND GENDER 0 Dudeck (4) lllilRogers (18) CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS / --- i---------------------------------------------- 1 BM BF WM WF Betton (3) 1 0 0 0 RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 2 1.1 x -~ . ' TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE I Betton (3) j \\0 t--- ~ CLOVERDALEEL EMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS / , ----------------------------- 2 -------------------- / / 2 / / / / 1 / 0 1'-----,---------,--------,,------( TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE / vanecko (22) / BM BF WM WF Vanecko (22) 0 0 2 0 RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 3 t-- t-- ('f') - - - - -------- - - - - - CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY (]uarters NO. OF REFERRALS ----2---------------------------------------------- 2 / 1 / BM BF WM WF 0 -------~--~-------( TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Tripcony (17) 2 0 0 0 lTripcony (17) I RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 4 2 / 1 / 0 Ellis (31) CLOVERDALEEL EMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS ----2-------------------------------------------------- BM 2 ------------------------------------i------- BF WM 0 0 RACE AND GENDER WF 1 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE I Ellis (31) / SUBJECT: Grade 5 ---------- CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS ----1------------1--------------------------------- 1 / 0 BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Cokeley (20) 1 1 0 0 J 1111cokeley(2 0) I RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 6 - - -I - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY Ceuarters NO. OF REFERRALS 5 / , ---4------------------------------------------- 4 / 3 / 2 / 1 / 0 BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Rhodes, M. (5) 4 0 0 0 j llllllRhodes, M. (5) / RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 1 GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY 5 4 / 3 / 2 / 1 Douglas, P. (13) / / NO. OF REFERRALS ----------------4-------------------------------- BM BF WM 3 4 0 RACE AND GENDER WF 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Joouglas, P. (13) SUBJECT: Grade 2 - - - - - - - ....: - - - GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY 3 / 2 / 1 / 0 Frahm, T. (8) Bohra, B. (7) / / SUBJECT: Cluarters NO. OF REFERRALS -----------------J---------------------------------- ------2--------------------- BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 2 1 1 0 Frahm, T. (8) 2 1 111B1o hra, B. (7) RACE AND GENDER Grade 3 GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY [= NO. OF REFERRALS 50 40 / 37 30 / 20 / 10 / 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE BM BF WM WF Miller, P. (4) 13 6 0 0 IIDllMiller, P. (4) Bibbs, J. (9) 24 12 Bibbs, J. (9) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 4 GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS ---~-----------------------~------------------- 1 / 0 ------,-------,------,---- TE ACHE R'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE BM BF WM WF Stubblefield, E. (7) 1 0 1 0 I stubblefield, E. (7) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 5 GEYER SPRINGS ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS 25 21 20, 15 10 5 / 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE BM BF WM WF Peterson, T. (9) 1 2 ID Peterson, T. (9) Jarboe, J. (2) 20 5 6 5 lil\u0026amp;Jarboe, J. (2) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 6 GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS / / ----------------------------1------------------- / 1 / 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE BM BF WM WF Newsome (19) 0 0 1 0 j111Newsome (19)j RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 1 t--, 00 ~ GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS / --- 2----------------------------------------------- 2 / -------~---------------------------------- 1 / 0 BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Weaver (2) 2 0 ll'ililWeaver (2) Kimball (18) 1 0 Kimball (18) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 3 00 00 ~ GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY (:\u0026gt;.uartc NO. OF REFERRALS / -----------------------------~-------------------- 1 / / / 0 1'----------.----------,--------.----------r' BM BF WM WF Robinson (22) 0 0 1 0 RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 4 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE !Robinson (22) I GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY [llS(::IPI iNE REFERRALS: Quarters 1-3 (95-96) 6 5 / 4 3 / 2 / 1 / NO. OF REFERRALS / ----5----------- --------------------------------------- ----------------------1---------------------- 0 ---~--------,-------,------ BM BF WM WF TE ACHE R'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Luzzi (15) Dunn (1) 3 2 SUBJECT: Grade 5 0 1 0 RACE AND GENDER -------------- - !Illuzzi (15) Dunn (1) - - -- - 2 / 1 / 0 Guinn (4) GIBBS MAGNET ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS ----2-------------------------------------------------- BM BF WM 2 0 0 RACE AND GENDER WF 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE !Guinn (4) I SUBJECT: Grade 6 --------- M. L. KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS ----1------------------------------------------------- 1 / o---~-----,-------,.---~ TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE I Norwood (2) I BM BF WM WF Norwood (2) 1 0 0 0 RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 1 M. L. KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS ___-- 3_ _________________3_ ___________ __________ ____ 3 2 / 1 Smith (21) Fletcher (14) Gunnell (3) BM 1 2 BF WM 0 3 RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 2 - - - - ------ WF 1 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE  Smith (21) Fletcher (14) Gunnell (3) - - - - M. L. KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS 25 20, 15 , 10, 5 Rutherford (3) Martin (11) Cooper (3) 21 BM 2 10 9 SUBJECT: Grade 3 BF WM 1 1 1 1 RACE AND GENDER WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 1 ~Rutherford (3) Martin (11) Cooper (3) ... - - M. L. KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY C.)uarters NO. OF REFERRALS 5 ---4---------------------------------------------- 4 / -------3--------------------------------- 3 2 / -------1-------------------- 1 / 0 BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE  Van Patter (3) 4 2 llil!Van Patter (3) Jenkins (11) 1 1 0 Jenkins (11) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 4 M. L. KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY 25 20 / 15, 10 / 5 / 0 Capps (16) Davis (1) Goodman (3) NO. OF REFERRALS ------------19----------------------------- BM BF 8 5 9 5 1 WM 2 13 4 WF 0 RACE AND GENDER OM OF 0 2 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE  Capps (16) Davis (1) Goodman (3) SUBJECT: Grade 5 - -------------- M. L. KING MAGNET ELEMENTARY 5 4 3 / 2 / 1 Harris (3) NO. OF REFERRALS ---4------------------------------------------ ------2------------------------------- BM BF WM WF 4 2 0 0 RACE AND GENDER TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE !Harris (3) I SUBJECT: Grade 6 - --- ...., - ---------- MABELVALE ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS / ----------------------------------------------2-------- 2' / -------------------------------- 1------ 1 / 0 BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Carr (1) 0 1 Lee (7) 0 1 1 RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 1 IIIR - -. - ----- --..., ~ - - MABELVALE ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS 7 ----6------------------------------------------------------ / / 6' 5 4  _______________________ 3 _______________________ _ 3  2 1 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE BM BF WM WF Witt (16) 1 2  Witt (16) Sims (17) 2 1 Sims (17) Moore (19) 3 0 0 Moore (19) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 2 MABELVALE ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS / __-_3 ------------------------------------------------- --------2------------------------------------ 1 / 0 BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Raney (14) 2 0 0 Raney (14) Dees (12) 1 2 Dees (12) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 3 ... 0 R cker (7) Ca well (7) Geach (25) MABELVALEELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS ---2---------------------------------------------- -------------------1-------------------- BM BF WM WF 1 0 1 0 1 RACE AND GENDER TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE  Rucker (7) lillCaldwell (7) Coach (25) SUBJECT: Grade 4 - --_,\n- - - - ---- --- - MABELVALE ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS _______________3_._ _____ ____________________________ ______ 3' 2' _____1__ ____ _____________ _______ 1 , 0 BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Beard (0) 1 0  Beard (0) Pinkerton (5) 1 Pinkerton (5) Durham (15) 1 2 1 Durham (15) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 5 ~----------------..-.- ---....- - MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS , ---3-------------------------------------------- 3 / -------------------2------------------- 2 / 1 / 0 BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Wetzel, M. (1 O) 2 0 ~Wetzel, M. (10) Burgess, L. (24) 2 llill!Burgess, L. (24) Bishop, I. (18) 1 0 Bishop, I. (18) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 2 MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS ---~------------------------------------------- 1 / BM BF WM WF Craig, D. (18) 1 0 0 0 RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 3 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE !Craig, D. (18) I MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY 6 4 / 2 / 1 Robinson, S. (5) Hence, V. (25) Childs, S. (10) / / NO. OF REFERRALS / --5----------------------------------- --------------3--------------- BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 2 1  Robinson, S. (5) 1 2 1 0 Hence, V. (25) 2 1 Childs, S. (10) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 4 --------- MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY 3 / 2 / 1 / 0 Burgess, S. (1) Cox, S. (9) SUBJECT: NO. OF REFERRALS ~r,n ~~ g,.= ! L- ---3-----------3-------------------------------- BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 1 1 0 IIIIIIBurgess, S. (1) 2 2 0 Cox, S. (9) RACE AND GENDER Grade 5 MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY 3 / 2 / 1 / / / Quarters NO. OF REFERRALS / ------------------------------3-------------------- 0 -----,-------,-------,------(' BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Lewis, L. (16) 2 0 3 0 !Lewis, L. (16) I RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 6 00 0 -.::t' ------~ AMBOY ELEMENTARY 12 2 ,' Warren, J. (25) Veasley, J. (8) Thornton, C. (18) Jeffrey, R. (5) Hensley, S. (7) Amaden, C. (1) NO. OF REFERRALS --tO---------------------------------- -----2 ----------------------- 1 BM BF WM WF 1 1 1 0 1 1 3 4 1 RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 1 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Amaden, C. (1) li!l!Hensley, S. (7) ~Jeffrey, R. (5) lllllThornton, C. (18) Veasley, J. (8)  Warren, J. (25) AMBOY ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS 5 / --4---------------------------------- -----2------------------------- 2 / 1 / 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE BM BF WM WF Summons, T. (1) 1 1 0 0 Jeffrey, R. (5) Mayherhoff, C. (13) 1 0 0 0 ll!lllawhon, J. (21) Lawhon, J. (21) 1 1 0 0 GJMayherhoff, C. (13) Jeffrey, R. (5) 1 0 0 0 liiiSummons, T. (1) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 2 - - - - - AMBOY ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS 7 --6--------------------------------------- 6 5 4 3 -----2---------------------------- 2 1 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE BM BF WM WF Summons, T. (1) 2 0 Jeffrey, R. (5) Smith, K. (1) 3 2 1 lffl!ISmith, K. (1) Jeffrey, R. (5) 1 B'f11SummonsT, . (1) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 3 AMBOY ELEMENTARY (Juarters NO. OF REFERRALS 16 / __1 4 ____________________________ _______ 14 ,  -------------------------------- 12 .  -1_Q --------------- --------------- 10 ,  8 / 6 .  4 / 2 / 0 Veasley, J. (8) Summons, T. ( 1) Sullivan, L. (2) Reeves, M. (6) Powell, H. (21) Hooper, G. (2) Hickman, D. (4) BM 2 1 1 1 5 Allen, C. (20) 4 SUBJECT: Grade 4 BF 1 1 1 WM 5 2 3 RACE AND GENDER WF 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE l!!IAllen, C. (20) l!!ii!Hickman, D. (4) ~Hooper, G. (2) lli!!Powell, H. (21)  Reeves, M. (6)  Sullivan, L. (2) summons, T. (1) IIIVeasley, J. (8) AMBOY ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS 14 / __________________j2_ ___________ _________ / 12 -' -------------------- / / 10   / -------------------- 8 / /~=7=\"'\u0026lt;1 6 / 4 / 2 / / 0 l'-----------r-----,-----,------, BM Summons, T (1) Milsap, C. (1) 1 Manning, P. (1) 1 Kelso, B. (16) Jeffrey, R. (5) 1 Hickman, D. (4) 2 Gardner, N. (10) 2 SUBJECT: Grade 5 BF 1 2 1 1 2 WM 1 2 4 5 RACE AND GENDER WF 1 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Gardner, N. (10) Hickman, D. (4)  Jeffrey, R. (5) Kelso, 8. (16)  Manning, P. (1)  Milsap, C. (1) Summons, T. (1) - - 5 4 / 3 2 1 Scott, M. (8) Reeves, M. (6) Morow, N. (31) Kelso, B. (16) Jeffrey, R. (5) Hickman, D. (4) Hibbard, J. (34) AMBOY ELEMENTARY Quarters 1-3 t 95-96) \\_ NO. OF REFERRALS / -- 4 -------- 4 -------------------------- _____j _________________ BM BF WM WF 3 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 RACE AND GENDER TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE l!IHibbard, J. (34) ll!l!llHickman, D. (4)  Jeffrey, R. (5) lilKelso, B. (16)  Morow, N. (31)  Reeves, M. (6) Scott, M. (8) SUBJECT: Grade 6 - - CENTRAELL EMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS 16 14 ,  12 ,  10 , 8 / 2 / / / AMi\u0026amp;\u0026amp;i#h#MiiAAP\u0026amp; %iiW%\u0026amp;i?\u0026amp;\u0026amp;f-tMW6 ifiiiiki\u0026amp;ii%MfM-I 0 I'--------.----,--------.---- Southard, C. (6) Hassell, L. (5) Bradford, P. (20) BM 2 12 1 SUBJECT: Grade 1 BF 0 0 0 WM 0 0 0 RACE AND GENDER WF 0 0 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Bradford, P. (20) liilllHassell, L. (5)  Southard, C. (6) - CENTRAELL EMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS 7 6 / 5 / 4 3 / 2 / 1 / 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE BM BF WM WF Perreault, L. (6) 1 0 0 0 Atherton, R. (5) Harper, K. (4) Atherton, R. (5) 4 0 2 0 lllilHarper, K. (4) 1 1 0 0  Perreault, L. (6) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 2 CENTRAELL EMENTARY H\\IE F\u0026lt;E E'l~RALS: NO. OF REFERRALS 10 9 8 / --------------0--------------- 4 / / 2 ,' BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Young, M. (22) 6 2 4 0 Roders, A. (23) 0 0 1 0 Allen, E. (16) Pendergraft, A. (0) 0 0 1 0 lilllColeman, R. (15) Diffey, D (20) 1 0 0 0  Diffey, D (20) Pendergraft, A (0) Coleman, R. (15) 1 0 0 0  Roders, A (23) Allen, E. (16) 1 0 0 0  Young, M. (22) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: Grade 3 - - CENTRAELL EMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS BM Wolfe, S. (4) Setzler, N. (18) Pendergraft, A. (0) Goldsby, 0. (31) Custer, R. (5) SUBJECT: Grade 4 1 2 5 1 BF WM 1 1 RACE AND GENDER WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 0 ,.. .,... - Custer, R. (5) llllillGoldsby, 0. (31)  Pendergraft, A. (0) lllilSetzler, N. (18) Wolfe, S. (4) - --- - 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Moody, S. (5) Lipsmeyer, L. (25) Custer, R. (5) Coleman, R. (15) CENTRAELL EMENTARY / NO. OF REFERRALS BM BF 2 2 2 WM 2 1 1 WF RACE AND GENDER OM 1 Quarters \"1= 3 OF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE BMoody, S. (5) l:iS Lipsmeyer, L. (25) IIIIICuster, R. (5) Coleman, R. (15) SUBJECT: GRADE 5 CENTRAELL EMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS Young, M. (22) Whitten, W. (21) Perreault, L. (6) Moody, S. (5) Mathews, B. (25) Lipsmeyer, L. (25) Hickman, C. (1) Dunn, S. (28) Coleman, R. (15) Acklin, C. (19) BM 1 1 1 1 3 6 SUBJECT: GRADE 6 BF WM WF OM 0 1 5 1 1 2 6 1 1 2 1 RACE AND GENDER OF 0 Acklin, C. (19)  Coleman, R. (15) Dunn, S. (28) Hickman, C. (1) C:Jlipsmeyer, L. (25)  Mathews, B. (25) Moody, S. (5) IIIIPerreault, L. (6) Whitten, W. (21) Young, M. (22) CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY 3 / 2 / 1 / Wilson, L. (26) Saltmarsh, J. ( 19) Powers, J. (1) / LS: Cl NO. OF REFERRALS , --3------------------------------------ BM 1 1 1 -------------------------2------ BF WM 1 1 GRADE AND RACE WF 1 1 SUBJECT: GRADE 1 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Powers, J. (1) BSaltmarsh, J. (19) Wilson, L. (26) CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY 10 8 6 4 2 / 0 Wilson, L. (26) Thomas, L. (0) Powers, J. (1) Hargrave, L. (1) Fuselier, A (18) NO. OF REFERRALS ------2-----------2------------------ BM 3 2 2 1 1 BF 1 1 WM 2 GRADE AND RACE WF 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Wilson, L. (26) !illlThomas, L. (0)  Powers, J. (1) ml Hargrave, L. (1) Fuselier, A (18) SUBJECT: GRADE 2 CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY 8 7 ,/ 6 / 5 ,/ 4 ,/ 3 / 2 ,/ 1 ,/ NO. OF REFERRALS __ ]_ __________________________________ _ / ----2-------------------------- 0 ---~--~-~--- BM BF WM WF Warrior, W. (0) 1 0 0 Sheppard, K. (5) 3 Pace, S. (1) 1 Hargrave, L. (1) 1 Cummings, L. (3) 1 Bryant, R. (12) 2 RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: GRADE 3 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Bryant, R. (12) ll!Cummings, L. (3) ~Hargrave, L. (1) II Pace, S. (1)  Sheppard, K. (5) Warrior, W. (0) CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY 12 10 / 8 / 6 / 4 / 2 / 0 Wilson, L. (26) Sheppard, K. (5) Powers, J. (1) Pace, S. (6) Hargrave, L. (1) Fulmer, L. (4) NO. OF REFERRALS 11 BM 2 1 1 1 1 5 -----8----------------------------- BF 2 1 1 1 3 1 WM 1 RACE AND GENDER WF 0 SUBJECT: GRADE 4 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Wilson, L. (26)  Sheppard, K. (5) Iii Powers, J. ( 1)  Pace, S. (6) ll!'!!lllHargraveL, . (1) l!!IIFulmer, L. (4) CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS / --12---------------------------------- 12 8 / 4 3 0 BM BF WM WF Warrior, L. (0) 1 0 Slattery, L. (12) 1 Powers, J. (1) 2 Pace, S. (6) 2 Harris, M. (3) 1 Hargrave, L. (1) 2 1 Gaines, H. (1) 1 Fulmer, L. (4) 1 Anderson, S. (24) 2 1 SUBJECT: GRADE 5 RACE AND GENDER TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Anderson, S. (24) liil!Fulmer, L. (4) B:?i!GainesH, . (1) l!li!Hargrave, L. (1)  Harris, M. (3)  Pace, S. (6) Powers, J. (1) lil!Slattery, L. (12) Warrior, L. (0) CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY 25 20 / 15 10 5 / NO. OF REFERRALS t-,,,,-,-~=\"\"\" 0------------ Wilson, L. (26) Warrior, W. (0) Ware, E. (1) Slattery, L. ( 12) Powers, J. (1) BM 2 1 1 1 3 Hargrave, L. (1) 6 Gaines, H. (1) 7 Burnett, J. (20) 1 SUBJECT: GRADE 6 BF 1 1 2 WM 0 RACE AND GENDER WF 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Wilson, L. (26) warrior, W. (0) Ware, E. (1)  Slattery, L. (12) liiilPowers, J. (1)  Hargrave, L. (1) IIIIIGaines, H. (1) Burnett, J. (20) LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS // --- i ------------------------1-------------------- 1 / BM BF WM WF 0 ------,----------r-----,-------( TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Lowe, K. (14) 1 0 1 0 !Lowe, K. (14) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: GRADE 1 LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY il i NO. OF REFERRALS 3 / 2 / 1 / Scott, S. (O) Lowe, K. (14) Cothern, L. (3) BM 1 1 1 SUBJECT: GRADE 2 BF WM 3 2 RACE AND GENDER uarters 1-3 (95-96) WF 0 ' F TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE @Scott, S. (0) Lowe, K. (14) IIICothern, L. (3) LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY 1.2 1 / 0.8 , 0.6 , 0.4 , 0.2 , Lowe, K. (14) Huddleston, K. (1) , NO. OF REFERRALS , --1-------------------1--------------BM BF WM WF 1 0 0 1 RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: GRADE 3 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Huddleston, K. (1) l!Rllowe, K. (14) LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS 5 / ---4--------------------------------------------- 4 / 3 / -------2-------------------------------- 2 / 1 / 0 TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE BM BF WM WF Lowe, K. (14) 2 2 0 0 li!lllllowe, K. (14) Hickman, C. (2) 2 Hickman, C. (2) RACE AND GENDER SUBJECT: GRADE 4 l~\"ii\"',Z1 LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY NO. OF REFERRALS 7 -------------0--------------------------- 6 / 4 / 3 / 2 / 1 / / / / / . ----------- -----~----------------- 0 I'------,-----,-----,----- BM BF WM WF TEACHER'S YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Lowe, K. (14) Kerth, K. (2) Hickman, C. (2) Cothern, L. (3) Briggs, A. (3) Barrett-Smith, G. (3) SUBJECT: GRADE 5\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eOffice of Education and Lead Planning and Desegregation\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_501","title":"Incentive Schools: ''Little Rock School District Incentive School Monitoring Report (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations''","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":["1996-07-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Educational planning","School improvement programs","School integration","Educational law and legislation"],"dcterms_title":["Incentive Schools: ''Little Rock School District Incentive School Monitoring Report (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations''"],"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/501"],"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\n12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1996-96) Summary of Recommendations 1 Little Rock School District INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96), July 12,1996 Summary of Recommendations DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC MR MR MR MR NO 1 PG 6 _________________________________RliCOMMENDATIOM______________________ The incentive program Is successfully dosogrogatlng each Incentive school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 149) Make recruiting white students to the incentive schools among district priorities, focusing the energy and resources necessary to ensure that the incentive schools become fully desegregated. (ODM 1992-93 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, pg^)____________________________________________________ The incentive program Is successfully dosogrogatlng oaclt Incentive school. (LRSD Plan, pg. 149) Identify the factors that are working to mako Rockefeller a desegregated school and adopt or adapt them ___^rthe other Incentive schools. (ODM 1992-93 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 6)___ 28 28 Shidonts In grades 3-6 have access to either inohllo or pormnnont scloncn lat)s with ndnqtinlo materials Hint allow chikJien to oxocuto long-tonn oxpurlmunts end stuily sclonco In Itio fullest sense. (LRSD Plan, pQ. 153\nJuly 10, 1992 Court Order\nref. Juno 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 15) Schedule science inservice training for teachers who need or want help improving their science instruction. Principals should bo able to determine which teachers are not fully using the science labs and steer them to staff dovolopinont sessions devoted to enlivening science in the classroom. (ODM 1992-M Incentive Schools Monitoring Report,jjg. 49)____________________________________________ The curriculum at each school Incorporntos foreign language Instruction using the foreign language lab and the total physical response\"method of Instruction. Emphasis Is on l)nslc vocabulary, conversation, and cultural materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 156) Each building operates (oroign language labs with appiopriato equipment and matoiials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153) PERSON Rather Principals Gremllllon Gremllllon Pilnclpols Glasgow Gremllllon DONE 8/96 2 3 4 7 Capitalize on the district's resident expertise and experience to assist the Incentive schools In establishing a foreign language program as an Integral part of the overall school program. (ODM 1992- 93 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, pg. SI) RESPONSEtxQaniiParker gave court* WWpy th* foralgn lnouafiTproBram*n\u0026lt;iT^ probloim LR8D'facttcl. LR8D  coiitlnuo9 toTac9 Uio\nonm8 problems that wore outlined In Parkers Mtlmonxtolhicoiirtjhl^^ - Neodn t'.o bo done Denoton roconunendation apponrod in prior ODM Monitoring Roport I Tn Proni'onn * Coinpl otfd12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 2 DATE 7/12/96 DOC MR NO 5 PG 28 _________________________________RECOMMENDATION The curriculum at each school incorporates foreign language Instruction using the foreign language lab and the total physical response\" mothod of instruction. Emphasis Is on basic vocabulary, conversation, and cultural materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 156) Each building operates foreign language labs with appropriate equipment and materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153) PERSON Gremilllon Parker DONE 7/12/96 7/12/96 MR MR MR 6 1 8 28 28 28 Place as many qualified foreign language teachers as needed to provide Spanish instruction to incentive school students as part of the regular school day instructional program. Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 51) ODM 1992-93 Incentive RESPONSE: Gene Parker gave court testimony on the foreign tanguag* program arid the problems LRSD faced. LRSD continue# to face the aame problems that were outlined In Gene Parkers teatimoriytothe Courts^ The curriculum at each scliool Incorporates foreign language Instruction using the foreign language lab and the total ptiyslcal response\" method of instruction. Emphasis Is on basic vocabulary, conversation, and cultural materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 156) Eacli building oporalos loroign language labs with appropriate equipment and malorials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153) Encourage the Spanish teachers to develop a series of Spanish mini-lessons\" for each grade level to help the regular classroom teachers reinforce foreign language instruction across the curriculum. (ODM 1992-93 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 61) RESPONSE:'Goho Parker gavo' court 8-11-9(5, on the rdrolgF problems LRSD faced. LRBD rcontInuos to face the aame problems that were outlined In Gene Parker's testimony to thioi'cdurts. tho~curtlculum al each sciiool incorporates foreign language Instruction using the forolgn language lab and ttio total ptiyslcal response\" method of Instruction malorials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 156) Emphasis Is on basic vocabulary, conversation, and cultural Eucti building oporalos loioign langungo labs with appropilalo equipment and materials. (LRSD Plan, pg. 153) Increase the amount and improve the quality of Spanish language materials available in each school. (ODM 1992-93 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 61) RESPONSEi Oorie Parkor gave court testimony 8\u0026gt;1198, oh the foreign longuap^p^^ problome LRSO faced. LRSD conttinies to face the samo problems that were outlined In Gene Parkers testimony to the courta.___________________________________________ Cumulnllvo records document both host and guest schools paillclpnllon In Snturdny programs. (ODM 1992 *!! Repoit, pg. 25) Satuidny programs will bo dovolopod Io onhanco loaming. Those programs will Include but shall not bo limited - Noodti t o be done Dnot recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report ! In Progronu  f.'oinplotod Gremilllon Parker Gromllllon Parker Gromllllon Principals +12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summaiy of Recommendalions 3 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 71^2196 DOC MR MR MR MR NO 9 10 11 12 PG 29 29 29 40 _________________________________RECOMMENDATION_________________________________ to field trips, enrichment activities, tutoring, paronl/child mako-and-tako sessions, book fairs, and physical education activities. (LRSD Plan, pg. 179) Standardize the reporting process for Saturday school. Data should be cumulative and reflect race, gender, and grade of participating students. (ODM 1993-94 Incentive School Monitoring Report, pg. 60) Cumulative records documont both host and guest scliool's participation in Saturday programs. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 25) Saturday programs will bo developed to enhance loaming. Those programs will include but stiall not be limited to field trips, onrlchmont actlvitios, tutoring, paronl/child mako-and-tako sessions, book fairs, and physical education actlvitios. (LRSD Plan, pg. 179) Perform annual evaluations of the Saturday programs, using the information to design programs that ai ppeal to the students and thek parents. (PPM 1993-94 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 60)___ Cuniulatlvo records documont bolti liosl and giiosl school's paiticipniion In Saliirday proyrams. (ODM 1992 Ropoit, py. 25) Saturday programs will bo dovolopod to enhance lourniny. Those proyrams will Include but shall not bo llinitod to Hold trips, onrlchmont actlvltlos, tutoring, paront/ctilld mako-and-tako sessions, book lairs, and physical education nctlvIHos. (LRSD Plan, pg. 179) Perform regular evaluations of the Saturday program, both during and at the end of the school year, asking staff, parents, and students for feedback. Use the garnered Information to design activities and events that coincide with the Interests of all participants. (ODM 1994-96 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 37 I W V * I ------------------- Cuimiinllvo racords docunioiiTijoHi liosl and ynost scliool's paillcipatlon In Salnrday proyrams. (ODM 1992 Ropoit, py. 25) Satuiday programs will bo dovolopod to enhanco loaininy. Tlioso proyrams will Include but stuill not bo limited to Hold tiips, enrichment aGtIvlllos, tutoriny, pnronl/clilld mako-and-tako sessions, book lairs, and physical education activities. (LRSD Plan, py. 179) Promote collaboration among the Incentive schools and between the Incentive schools and the district's area and magnet schools to plan Joint field trips and other collnborntlve activities during the regular academic wook. Tho district can thus do a bettor job of fulfilling its obligation to provide Incentive school studonts^tjHiioro opportunities lor desogrogatod louriiliig oxporloncos. fIto purposo~of the InconllvoTchool proyram Is io piomolo and onsiiio acadoinlc oxcollonco In scitools thnt have boon dilllcull to dosoyroyato. (LRSD plan, py. 149) Willi proper resources and oxpoctatloiis, Itio Incentive sctiool program will servo ns a model of oxcollonco lor the county, stalo, and the nation. (LRSD plan, (ly. 149) Base staff development activities on areas of domoiistratod need. Some tonchors many need more - Noodfi Io 1)0 (lone *DenotB rcomnu\u0026gt;ndtion nppenrod in prior ODM Monitoring Report I Ln Iroyi'onn  tronipl Rt.o(i PERSON Gremillion Principals Gremillion Principals Asst. Siipls. Principals Gremillion Pilnclpnls DONE + +12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1996-96) Summary of Recommendations 4 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC MR MR MR *Danotea NO 13 14 15 PG 40 48 54 _______________RECOMMENDATION training than others in areas such as classroom management and organization and effective discipline. It is incumbent upon the building administrator and the individual teachers to identify areas of need and access the resources necessary to address them. (ODM 1992-93 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, ___________________________________________________________________________________ The purpose of the incentive scliool program Is to promote and ensure academic oxcollonco in sctiools that have been difficult to desegregate. (LRSD plan, pg. 149) With proper resources and expectations, the Incontivo school program will servo as a model of excollcnce for the county, state, and the nation. (LRSD plan, pg. 149) Better define the role of phonics Instruction in the Incentive schools and convene a meeting of those administrators in charge of the incentive schools and the reading supervisor and his staff to communicate that role to all teachers so that phonics instruction will conform to the board-adopted LRSD curriculutii\n_________________________________________________________________________ The schools use a Career Skills Development Program to develop career cholco.s using written information, guest speakers, films, and Interest Invonlorlos. (LRSD Plan, PG. 172, 180) Study skills training onhancos skills In test-taking, lisloning, and studying. Test-taking skills aro being taugtit and students practice lest taking. (LRSD Plan, pp. 153, 176, 183\nJuly 10, 1992 Couit Older ref. Juno 5, 1992 ODM Ropoil, pg. 32) Students receive Individual and group counseling and aro taught conflict resolution. Tho school uses poor facilitators. (LRSD Plan. Pp. 176, 184) Ttio stall has dovolopod wrilton building giildanco plan.s Io address personal growlli, social dovolopmont, caroor awnronoss, and educational dovolopmont. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ret: June 5, 1092 ODM Ropoil, pg. 27) Roquiro counselors to have bullding-lovol guidance plans that rolloct activities and projects for the current school year. I PERSON Gromllllon Principals Parker Elston DONE Clear guidance plans help teachers and administrators achieve school improvement goals, reflect an assessment of the schools^iildance noeds^and shov^how the counselor plans to address those needs. bisaggrogato data rblutod to studuni dlsclpliao anil rovlow stud'unt data to addioss Issuos of racial disparity. (Intordis. Plan. pg. 27) Carefully collect discipline data and closoly monitor Iho discipllno program to make modifications that are indicated by formative, as well as summativo, information. The district would bo wise to analyze Iho factors that contribute to some schools having fewer overall discipllno problems and loss dispailly In discipline botwoon black and white students. Identifying and omulating those factors and closoly scrutinizing progress should result In interventions Hint roduco ltio number of students suspended or oxpollod, as woll as ttio disproportionate number of black students roforrod lor disciplinary action. (ODM 1992, Report, pg. 23) Attendance and behavior guidelines include time-out rooms that aro staffed with trained personnel. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175, 184)________________________________________________________________________________ - Notulii I o bo doiio rocommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Ropoit I In IrcxjrtiiKi * Comp]oLud Gromllllon Principals Watson12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 5 DATE DOC I NO I PG RECOMMENDATION Students help develop school-based management rules and receive help with problem solving. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175, 184) Staff, parents, and students cooperatively design discipline policies. (ODM 19923 Report, pg. 23) Discipline policies and procedures are well publicized, clearly indicate what is appropriate and inappropriate behavior, and spell out consequences for infractions. Policy enforcement is fair and consistent. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23) Classroom management approaches are appropriate for tho work being done. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 32) Hold periodic \"summits\" to develop a forum for an exchange of ideas and successful techniques for handling disciplinary problems. Incentive schools have similar characteristics and staff members who, along with parents and students, are valuable resources for ideas to combat problems. (ODM 1993-94 PERSON DONE 7/12/96 7/12/98 Donoteo MR MR 16 17 54 54 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 29)__ Disnggrogalo data related to student discipline and review student data to address issues of racial disparity. (Intordis. Plan. pg. 27) Carefully collect discipline data and closely monitor tho disclpllno program lo mako modifications that are indicatod by formative, os well ns summntivo, Information. Tho district would bo wise lo analyze tho factors Hint contribulo to sonio schools having fowor overall discipline problonis and loss dispailly In discipline between black and while students. Identifying and emulating those factors and closely scrutinizing progress should result In interventions that reduce the number of students suspended or expelled, as well as tho disproportionate number of black students referred for disciplinary action. (ODM 1992, Ropoit, pg. 23) Attondanco and behavior guldollnos Includo limo-out rooms that are stalled with trained personnel. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175, 184) Students help develop school-based management rules and receive help with problem solving. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175, 184) Staff, parents, and students cooperatively design discipline policies. (ODM 19923 Ropoil, pg. 23) Discipline policies and procedures are well publicized, clearly Indicate what is appropriate and inappropriate behavior, and spell out consoquoncos for Infractions. Policy onforcomont Is fair and consistent. (ODM 1992 Ropoit, pg. 23) Classroom management approaches are appropriate for tho work being done. (ODM 1992 Ropoit, pg. 32) Explore the feasibility of developing permanent alternative educational sites designed specifically for chronically disruptive students. Tho presence of chronically misbehaving and disruptive students in tho classroom hindors teaching and learning (or tho rost. (ODM 1993-94 Incontlvo Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 29) RESPONSE: ThpBssItttant Superlntentje^tover lncwW|iie\nft|o|8, IRSP Hearing oriicer, along with the Incentive SchooWlncIpals are currently^|seuaalria4bSi%nd BOnd exploring alternative educational sites ..... \"Disaggrogato data rolalod iirstu'd'oiit disclpllno and rovlow stuaoni gain lo nouioss Issiios of racial disparity - Noi'dii In be done roconintondation appoarad in prior ODM Monitoring Roport I Tn Progrenn * (\\)nipl etOit Gromillion Watson Gromillion12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summaiy of Recommendations 6 DATE /12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC MR MR MR I NO I PG 18 19 20 RECOMMENDATION (Interdis. Plan. pg. 27) Carefully collect discipline data and closely monitor tho discipline program to make modifications that are indicated by formative, as well as summativo, information. The district would be wise to analyze the factors that contribute to some schools having fewer overall discipline problems and less disparity in discipline between black and white students. Identifying and emulating these factors and closely scrutinizing progress should result in interventions that reduce the number of students suspended or expelled, as well as ttie disproportionate number of black students referred for disciplinary action. (ODM 1992, Report, pg. 23) Attendance and behavior guidelines include time-out rooms that are staffed with trained personnel. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175, 184) Students help develop school-based management rules and receive help with problem solving. (LRSD Plan, pp. 175, 184) Staff, parents, and students cooperatively design discipline policies. (ODM 19923 Report, pg. 23) Discipline policies and procedures are well publicized, clearly indicate what is appropriate and inappropriate behavior, and spell out consequences for infractions. Policy enforcement is fair and consistent. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 23) Classroom management approaches are appropriate for tho work being done. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 32) Provide ongoing training in behavior management for school district employees who are responsible for supervising children for any period of time. The Assistant Superintendent over Incentive Schools^ LRSD Hearing Officer, Staff Oevttlopinont Supervisor, along with Incentive School Principals and teachers will be planning RESPONSE: 60 60 60 PERSON Watson DONE inservices for LRSb employeea responsiblefor cupervjslrifl children on bebavlof mahagement._________ The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from tho addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Franklin - Investigate the cause of the failing paint and take corrective action.________________________ Tho district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain tho Incontivo scliools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven Incontivo schools would benefit aosthollcally from tho addition of attrnctivo landscaping. Once plantings are Installed, train tho custodial sluff In proper plant care Io provenl loss of plantings Io Improper pruning or undor-waloring. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Fraiikihi - Correct drainage problom^n all affected levels of tlio_buildjng.__________________________ The district wifi provide clean and safe facliitlos and rnako all repairs fundamental to malnialn tho Incontivo schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All sovon Incentive schools would bonofit aosthoticnily from tho addition of allractlve landscaping. Once - Needii t.o be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report I 111 Progreuf.) * Completed Eaton Eaton Eaton 8/96 8/96 12/9612/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 7 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC MR MR MR MR MR NO PG RECOMMENDATION plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) I PERSON DONE 21 22 23 24 25 60 60 60 60 60 Garland - Attend to the peeling paint on the exterior doors._______________________________________ The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain tire incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once Garland Principal plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant caro to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Garland - Improve cleanliness in the cafeteria and bathrooms._____________________________________ The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from tho addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, train tho custodial staff in proper plant caro to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Garland - Correct the problems with floor tiles in the large downstairs bathrooms.__________________ The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain tho incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are Installed, train tho custodial staff In proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Mitchell - Replace the worn lunchroom tables.__________________________________________________ The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain tho incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All sovon Incontivo schools would bonofit nosthotlcally from tho addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings aro Installed, train Iho custodial staff In proper plant caro to prevent loss of plantings to Improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Mitchell - Remove or replace the malfunctioning urinal in the bathroom located on the second floor landing. The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain tho incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All sovon Incontivo schools would bonofit aosthollcally from tho addition of atlrnctlvo landscaping. Once plantings aro Installod, train the custodial staff In proper plant caro to prevent loss of plantings Io Improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) _________________________________________ - Needo to be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + In Progreee * Completed Eaton Moran Eaton Eaton 8/96 8/96 ' 8/96 8/9612/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 8 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC MR MR MR MR NO I PG 26 27 28 29 60 60 60 60 RECOMMENDATION Mitchell - Replace or reattach the loose tiles in the hallways._______________________________________ The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan. pg. 129) All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Rightsell -Determine the cause of the leaks found throughout the building and correct the problems. RESPONSE\nLRSD is committed to repairing leaks In the roof, but duo to the ago and condition of the building, leaks ara likely to be a reoccurring problerri untIt funds are available to replace the roof.  - The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Rightsell - Repair and repaint damaged ceilings._______________________________________________ The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Rightsell - Assess water damage to carpets and replace as needed. RESPONSE: Malnfenance of the carpets will be acceseed by school personnel while roof repair Is in The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven incentive schools would benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings are installed, train the custodial staff In proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Rightsell - Repair any broken partitions and fittings in the bathrooms. PERSON Eaton Eaton Eaton Eaton DONE 11/96 12/98 - Needa to be done Denotes reconunondation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + In Progreoo * Completed12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 9 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC MR MR MR MR MR NO I PG 30 31 32 33 34 60 60 60 RECOMMENDATION The district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain the incentive schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven incentive schools v/ould benefit aesthetically from the addition of attractive landscaping. E Once plantings are installed, train the custodial staff in proper plant care to prevent loss of plantings to improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Rightsell - Evaluate the school's plumbing needs and complete work needed to make all bathrooms fully functional. Tho district will provide clean and safe facilities and make all repairs fundamental to maintain tho incontivo schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven Incontivo schools would bonofit aosthotically from tho addition of attractive landscaping. Onco plantings aro installed, train tho custodial staff In propor plant care Io provont loss of plantings Io Improper pruning or undor-watoilng. (ODM 1092 Report, pg. 43) Rightsell - Eliminate tho Insect Infestation._____________________________________________________ The district will provWo clean and safe facliitios and make all repairs fundamontai to maintain Iho Incontivo schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All seven incontivo schools would bonofit aoslhofically from Iho addition of atlracllvo landscaping. Onco plantings aro installod, train tho custodial staff In proper plant care to provont loss of plantings to Improper pruning or under-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Rockefeller - Repair the small area of damaged tile In the boys bathroom before the problem escalates. 60 Tho district will provide clean and sate lacilltlos and make all repairs fundamental to maintain Iho Incontivo schools. (LRSD Plan, pg. 129) All sovon incontivo schools would bonofit aosthotically from tho addition of attractive landscaping. Once plantings aro Installod, train tho custodial staff In proper plant caro to provont los,s of plantings to Improper pruning or undor-watering. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 43) Before releasing as RFP, Rockefeller -Replace carpeting throughout all areas of the building, representatives from the plant services and tho purchasing departments should consult with tho principal and staff regarding details of carpet replacement, such as tho replacement schedule, the carpet color, and the areas to bo carpeted, including the carpot-covered furnishings. 78 RESPONSEnQurOTiaj^^ A Parent Center In each school provides resources and rnatorials, locommondod by a parent and staff commlltoo, that can bo lonnod to parents. A parent has boon triilnod Io opornto Iho contor, which Is to bo tho - Needo Co be done Denoteo recommondatlon appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report I In Proyreoo  Completed PERSON Eaton Eaton Eaton Eaton Eaton DONE 11/96 8/96 8/96 +12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendalions 10 DATE DOC I NO I PG ______________________RECOMMENDATION source of a monthly communications packet that is distributed to parents. (LRSD Plan. pp. 206. 208) The schools actively seek parent recommendations for resources to be housed in the Parent Centers, incorporating as many of their suggestions as possible. The school documents the degree to which parents use the center and its resources. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Keep more accurate and complete records of Parent Center use by consistently using sign-in sheets. PERSON DONE 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 MR MR MR 35 36 37 78 79 79 (ODM 1993-94 Incentive School Monitoring Report, pg. 77) A Parent Center in each school provides resources and materials, recommended by a parent and staff committee, that can be loaned to parents. A parent has been trained to operate the center, which is to be the source of a monthly communications packet that Is distributed to parents. (LRSD Plan. pp. 206. 208) The schools actively seek parent recommendations for resources to be housed in the Parent Centers, incorporating as many of their suggestions as possible. Tho school documents the degree to which parents use Gremillion Principals the center and its resources. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Develop strategies and arrange events to encourage greater use of the Parent Center. For example, design boxes or bags containing materials on a certain topic that could be checked out. Highlight Parent Center Resources in the school newsletter, bulletin boards, and PTA meetings to heighten awareness and increase interest in the centers. (ODM 1993-94 Incentive School Monitoring Report, pg. 77)________________________________________________________________________________:------- The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and cariying out school expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management, pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209) Document parent training activities by topic, time, and location along with the number of paiticipanls by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of tho potential helpfulness of tho training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Complete documentation of all parent meetings and activities is maintained, including sign-in sheets that reflect parents' race, gender, and the school their child attends. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38) Team with community organizations (such as churches and civic clubs) and other programs (such as HIPPY and New Futures) to explore ways to cooperate in offering parent training. Such collaboration can help coordinate and strengthen resources to focus on targeted audiences. (ODM 1993-94 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 79)____________________________________________-------------------- The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out school expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, lime management, pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209) Document parent training activities by topic, limo, and location along with Iho number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Complete documentation of all parent mootings and actlvitios Is maintained, Including slgn-ln sheets that reflect Gremillion Principals Gremillion Principals  Ncodu to be done *Danote8 recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report I- Tn Proyveuo * Completed12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 11 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC MR MR MR NO I PG I' 38 39 40 79 79 79 RECOMMENDATION parents' race, gender, and the school their child attends. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38) Offer sessions on timely and intriguing topics at times, dates, locations, and circumstances that haven't been tried before as a means to increase participation. (ODM 1994-94 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 79) _______________________________________________________________________ The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out school expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management, pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209) Document parent training activities by topic, limo, and location along with the number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of tho training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Complete documentation of all parent mootings and actlvitlos Is maintalnod, including sIgn-in shoots that reflect parents' race, gondor, and the school Ihoir ctilld attends. (ODM 1992 Roport, pg. 38) Ask workshop participants to evaluate each session at its conclusion and mako candid suggestions tor training improvements and future session topics. Then carefully analyze tho feedback to assess the quality and relevancy of tho training to make changes accordingly. (ODM 1994-96 Incontlvo Schools Monitoring Report, pg. 62)___________________________________________________________________ Tho schools offer parent workshops to assist paronts In understanding and carrying out school expectations. The workstiops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management, pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209) Document parent training activities by topic, time, and location along with tho number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on tiow well tho session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Complete documentation of all parent meetings and activities is maintained, including sign-in sheets that reflect parents' race, gender, and the school their child attends. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38) Evaluate the parent workshops offered to determine if they are meeting the goals of helping incentive school parents understand and carry out school expectations. Use the feedback to redesign offerings as necessary to ensure progress toward the goals. (ODM 1993-94 Incentive School Monitoring Report, .31751 The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out scfiool expectations. The workshops includo such topics as study skills, discipline, time managomont, pre-reading skills, financial managomont, and dovolopmontal loaming skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209) Document parent training activities by topic, limo, and location along with tho numbor of participants by raco, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze pailicipants' feedback on how well tho session was conducted and their perception of tho potential helpfulness of tho training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Complcto documentation of all parent mootings and activities Is maintained, Including sign-ln sticets that reflect - Needo l.o lio doiio Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Roport ( III Il tiqroiJU  Coinplotod PERSON Gremillion Principals Gromillion Principals Gremillion Principals DONE12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 12 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC MR MR MR MR NO I PG I 41 42 43 44 79 79 79 79 __________________________RECOMMENDATION parents' race, gender, and the school their child attends. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38) in order to standardize reporting and minimize the burden of documentation, schools could use a simple form identifying the contact date, type of contact (such as parent/teacher conference, home visit, interim or monthly report, phone call, success or alert card), which staff member contacted whom (parent, grandparent, guardian, or other), and a brief description of the results of the contact or any other pertinent information. (ODM 1992-93 hicentive School Monitoring Report, pg. 105) Develop and expand the parent volunteer programs and school/business partnerships. (LRSD Plan, pg. 132) Expand contacts with and widen access to the variety of community-based programs, designed to support children and families. (ODM 1992-93 Incentive School Monitoring Report, pg. 78)_____________ The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out school expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management, pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209) Document parent training activities by topic, time, and location along with the number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Complete documentation of all parent meetings and activities is maintained, including sign-in sheets that reflect parents' race, gender, and the school thoir child attends. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38) Develop transportation policies and procedures, ensuring that principals are aware of this service, know how to identify parents' transportation needs, and understand how to arrange for it to support parent participation where needed. (ODM 1992-93 Incentive School Monitoring Report, pg. 105)________ Each school provides community role models and a mentoring program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 157) The district has mounted an intense mentor recruitment campaign. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29) Individual school volunteer mentoring programs are coordinated with VIPS and all volunteers are screened and trained prior to being matched with students. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29) The school maintains mentor-student records that include the race, gender, participation hours, and types of activities shared by the mentors and their students. Records of training participants by race, gender, and classification (i.e. student, mentor, parent, teacher) are also maintained. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 30) Consider having VIPS train incentive school principals to serve as instructors for new mentors so these building leaders can conduct their own streamlined, on-site mentor training. (ODM 1992-93 Incentive SchooI Monitoring Report, pg. 78)____________________________________________________________ A speakers bureau on education issues for community groups exists in school zones. Each school has identified three key communicators. The school staff coordinates events to promote neighborhood pride. These strategies work together to raise the trust level between the school and the community. (LRSD Plan, pp. 210, 213) - Needa to be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + Ill Progreoo * Completed PERSON DONE Milam Cheatham Principals Milam Gremilllon Principals Ratherb, - INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) 13 Suiniiiary of Recommendations DATE I DOC I NO | PG | 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 MR MR MR 45 46 47 80 80 80 ____________RECOMMENDATION Develop and implement a comprehensive plan for using the services of the speakers bureaus and key communicators that includes specific goals, objectives, the persons responsible, and evaluation criteria to determine success and where changes need to be made. (ODM 1993-94 Incentive School Monitoring Report, pg. 86)____________________________________________________________________________ A speakers bureau on education issues for community groups exists in school zones. Each school has identified three key communicators. The school staff coordinates events to promote neighborhood pride. These strategies work together to raise the trust level between the school and the community. (LRSD Plan, pp. 210, 213) Develop job descriptions for the speakers bureaus and key communicators that clearly identify the Job goal, qualifications, performance expectation, the participant and district responsibilities, and the amount of time that will likely be required to successfully perform each job. (ODM 1993-94 Incentive School Monitoring Report, pg. 86)____________________________________________________________ The districtwide Biracial Committee, whose members represent various geographic areas of the community, will monitor the incentive schools quaiterly. (LRSD Plan, pp. 224, 225) The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incontivo school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports that summarize all monitoring visits. The superintendent will share the PRE document with the Board of Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225) The Biracial Advisory Committee, with the advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment reports from the desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp. 217, 223) Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with tho expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of: incentive school principals, the superintendents senior management foam, specialist from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must bo Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. LRSD Plan, 225) The Biracial Committee's monitoring instrument will include a recruitinonf assessment. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 5) Engage in a recruitment campaign that is broad and intense enough to ensure that the district can select a Biracial Committee membership that is racially balanced and also fully representative of the districts geography. (ODM 1991-92 Monitoring Report on the Biracial Committees, pg. 26)____________ The districtwide Biracial Committee, whose members represent various geographic areas of the community, will monitor the incentive schools quarterly. (LRSD Plan, pp. 224, 225) The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports - Needo to be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + In Progreso * Completed PERSON Rather Supt. Supt. DONE +12,,.,- NCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 14 DATE DOC I NO PG ________________________________RECOMMENDATION________________________________ that summarize all monitoring visits. The superintendent will share the PRE document with the Board of Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225) The Biracial Advisory Committee, with the advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment reports from the desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp. 217, 223) Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with the expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of: incentive school principals, the superintendents senior management team, specialist from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. LRSD Plan, 225) The Biracial Committees monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment. (July 10, 1992 Court Order\nref: Juno 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 5) PERSON DONE 7/12/96 7/12/96 MR MR 48 49 80 80 Define Biracial Committee goals and then develop and carry out specific objectives and timelines for reaching them. (ODM 1991-92 Monitoring Report on the Biracial Committees, pg. 27) Tho dislrictwide Biracial Committee, whoso members represent various geographic areas of tho community, will monitor tho incontivo schools quarterly. (LRSD Plan, pp. 224, 225) The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports ttiat summarize all monitoring visits. Tho superintendent will share tho PRE document witli the Board of Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225) The Biracial Advisory Committee, with the advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment reports from the desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp. 217, 223) Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with the expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of\nincentive school principals, the superintendents senior management team, specialist from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. (LRSD Plan, 225) The Biracial Committees monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 5) Coordinate Biracial Committee monitoring activities with other internal district monitoring groups to eliminate duplication and ensure that no part of the desegregation efforts go unscrutinized. (ODM 1992- 92 Monitoring Report on the Biracial Committees., pg. 28)________________________________________ The dislrictwide Biracial Committee, whose members represent various geographic areas of the community, will monitor the incentive schools quarterly. (LRSD Plan, pp. 224, 225) - Needfj to be done Denotes roconunondation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + In Progreuo * Completed Supt. Supt. Jackson12/19/96 .INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 15 DATE I DOC I NO | PG RECOMMENDATION The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports that summarize all monitoring visits. The superintendent will share the PRE document with the Board of Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225) The Biracial Advisory Committee, with the advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment reports from the desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp. 217, 223) Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with the expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of: incentive school principals, the superintendent's senior management team, specialist from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. LRSD Plan, 225) The Biracial Committee's monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 5) Design Biracial Committee monitoring instrument that correlate specifically with the desegregation plan provisions so each district can measure its progress in plan implementation. (ODM 1992-92 Monitoring PERSON I DONE 7/12/96 MR 50 80 Report on the Biracial Committees, pg. 28) 7/12/96 MR 51 80 The districlwide Biracial Committee, whose members represent various geographic areas of the community, will monitor the incentive schools quarterly. (LRSD Plan, pp. 224, 225) The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports that summarize all monitoring visits. The superintendent will share the PRE document with tho Board of Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. Tho Associate Superintondont for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225) The Biracial Advisory Committee, with tho advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school rocruitrnont reports from tho dosegregalion office, ovalirato tho program quarterly and recommend needed changes to tho Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp. 217, 223) Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with tho expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of: incentive school principals, the superintendent's senior managornent team, specialist from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (Iwo of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. LRSD Plan, 225) The Biracial Committee's monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment. (July 10, 1992 Court Older: ref: Juno 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 5) Regularly update Biracial Committee monitoring instruments to reflect all modifications to the desegregation plans. (ODM 1991-92 Monitoring Report on the Biracial Committees, pg. 28)____________ The districtwide Biracial Committee, whose members represent various geographic areas of the community, will I monitor the incentive schools quarterly. (LRSD Plan, pp. 224, 225)__________________________ Supl. 8/96 - Needs to be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + In Progreos * Completed Supt. Jackson12/1b,3. JCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summaiy of Recommendations 16 DATE I DO'C I NO I PG~~[ ___________________________RECOMMENDATION The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports PERSON DONE 7/12/96 MR 52 80 The superintendent will share the PRE document with the Board of that summarize all monitoring visits. ' Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225) The Biracial Advisory Committee, with the advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment reports from the desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board ot Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp. 217, 223) Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with tho expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of\nincentive school principals, the superintendent's senior management team, specialist from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. LRSD Plan, 225) The Biracial Committees monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment. (July 10, 1992 Court Order\nref\nJune 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 5) Make evaluation an integral part of the Biracial Committee monitoring process so that conclusions and recommendations for improvement are used to both prevent and correct problems. (ODM 1991-92 Monitoring Report on the Biracial Committees, pg. 29)_________________________________ Tt)o districtwido Biracial Committee, whoso members represent various geographic areas of tho community, will monitor the incentive schools quarterly. (LRSD Plan, pp. 224, 225) Tho Biracial Committoe will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. Tho Office of Planning, Rosoarch, and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports that summarizo all monitoring visits. Tho superintondont will share tho PRE document with tho Board of Directors al their regularly scheduled meetings. Tho Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225) The Biracial Advisory Committoo, with tho advice of marketing and advertising exports, will servo as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment reports from tho desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp. 217, 223) Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with the expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of\nincentive school principals, tho superintendents senior management team, specialist from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. LRSD Plan, 225) The Biracial Committees monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment. (July 10, 1992 Court Order\nref\nJune 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 5) Supt. Annually evaluate the role, operations, and accomplishments of the BIraclal Committee In relationship - Needa to be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report h In Progreoa it Completed12/19/91 jCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summa, y of Recommendations 77 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC I NO MR MR 53 54 PG 80 80 _________________________________RECOMMENDATION to specific settlement plan provisions and overall desegregation goals. (ODM 1991-92 Monitoring Report on the Biracial Committees, pg. 29) I PERSON RESPONSE: An annual evaluation of the Biracial Committees role, operations, and accomplishments at the end of each fiscal year beginning with the 1996-97 school year. The districtwide Biracial Committee, whose members represent various geographic areas of the community, will monitor the incentive schools quarterly. (LRSD Plan, pp. 224, 225) The Biracial Committee will furnish copies of their monitoring reports to the incentive school principals and various district officials. The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (PRE) will prepare quarterly reports that summarize all monitoring visits. The superintendent will share the PRE document with the Board of Directors at their regularly scheduled meetings. The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation is responsible for eliminating any noted deficiencies in a timely manner. (LRSD Plan, pg. 225) The Biracial Advisory Committee, witfi the advice of marketing and advertising experts, will serve as the steering committee for incentive school recruitment reports from the desegregation office, evaluate the program quarterly and recommend needed changes to the Board of Directors. (LRSD Plan, pp. 217, 223) Before July 1 of each year, the district will convene a committee to revise the instrument used to monitor the incentive schools, ensuring that it conforms with the expectations set for the program. The review committee shall consist of: incentive school principals, the superintendent's senior management team, specialist from PRE, and six members of the Biracial Committee (two of whom must be Joshua appointees). Any resulting revisions must be submitted to the LRSD Board and Joshua by August 15. LRSD Plan, 225) The Biracial Committee's monitoring instrument will include a recruitment assessment. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 5) Regularly ask Biracial Committee members to review and rate the type and quality of support the district is furnishing them, and solicit suggestions for new or improved support services. (ODM 1991-92 Monitoring Report on the Biracial Committees, pg. 29) RESPONSE: LRSD will develop a survey for KlrttcJa) Committee members to review and rate the quality of support LRSD is providing and asking for suggestions for new and Improved support services. This survey will be distributed to members during tho 3rd quarter of tho 1996*97 school year. Beginning with the 1997-98 school year LRSD will Survey members during the 1st end 3rd quarter of each school year. The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out school expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management, pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209) Document parent training activities by topic, time, and location along with the number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Complete documentation of all parent meetings and activities is maintained, including sign-in sheets that reflect - Needs to be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + In Progress * Completed DONE Supt. Gremillion Principals12/19/96 JCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summaiy of Recommendalions 18 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC I NO I PG I MR MR 55 56 80 80 RECOMMENDATION parents' race, gender, and the school their child attends. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38) Standardize the method staff uses to document and report home and school communication to promote data consistency and accuracy._______________________________________________________________ Each school provides community role models and mentoring program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 157) The district has mounted an intense mentor recruitment campaign. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 29) Individual school volunteer mentoring programs are coordinated with VIPS and all volunteers are screened and trained prior to being matched with students. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 29) Focus on the schools where community involvement is lagging and intensify efforts to increase volunteer support in those buildings. Pay particular attention to targeting those schools which fall far behind the others in volunteer activity._________________________________________________________ The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out school expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management, pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209) Document parent training activities by topic, time, and location along with the number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Complete documentation of all parent meetings and activities is maintained, including sign-in sheets that reflect parents' race, gender, and the school their child attends. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38) Each school provides community role models and mentoring program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 157) The district has mounted an intense mentor recruitment campaign. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 29) Individual school volunteer mentoring programs are coordinated with VIPS and all volunteers are screened and trained prior to being matched with students. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 29) Strengthen the communication between school and community by considering placement of an outreach coordinator in each incentive school to function as a liaison. This position, which should require at lease half-tinie and preferably full-time attention, could be paid or voluntary and filled by an employee, a volunteer, or an intern. The outreach coordinator would be supervised by the principal and work closely with all aspects of the school, as well as the district's offices of student assignment and communications. Any funding necessary for such a position could be sought from a grant or come from the extra money provided through the schools' double funding. The outreach coordinator could perform a number of tasks that could include, but not be restricted to, the recommendations listed below. RESPONSE: LRSD is exploring the possibility of using a volunteer to serve as an outreach coordinator for each incentive schoot. - - Needs to be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + In Progress * Completed PERSON Milam Gremillion Principals DONE12/19/96 INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 19 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC I NO MR MR MR MR 57 58 59 60 PG IT 81 81 81 _________________________________RECOMMENDATION________ ___________________ A speakers bureau on education issues for community groups exist in school zones. Each school has identified three key communicators. The school staff coordinates events to promote neighborhood pride. These strategies work together to raise the trust level between the school and the community. (LRSD Plan, pp. 210,213) Develop a school communications plan that includes specific objectives as well as methods to measure results. Each school should write objectives that answer the following questions\nWho will benefit from this activity and how will they benefit from it? How will the activity be implemented, who will do the work, when will the work start, and what is the implementation schedule? When will the benefits be visible and what will they look like? How will we know if were successful? RESPONSE\nLRSD Assistant Superintendent for Incentive Schools, Parent Recruiters, Communications Director and Incentive School principals are currently working together to develop a communications A speakers bureau on education issues for community groups exist in school zones. Each school has identified three key communicators. The school staff coordinates events to promote neighborhood pride. These strategies work together to raise the trust level between the school and the community. (LRSD Plan, pp. 210,213) Produce a monthly school newsletter that targets the community, with distribution to parents, volunteers, partners, and residents of the neighborhood. These neighbors would include churches, shops, fire stations, nursing homes, hospitals, professional offices, etc. The newsletter should stress the success of students and teachers, herald coming events, and highlight individuals who live or work in the community. Use the publication as a means to more broadly recognize students, teachers, parents, and volunteers. Students could write some of the articles, striving to create a friendly, chatty communiqud that conveys a positive and enthusiastic attitude, school pride. Make this publication a banner of The district has mounted an intense mentor recruitment campaign. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 29) Work the territory by actively reaching out to the neighborhood and beyond. Instead of waiting for the community to come to the school, the school can energetically extend itself to the community. Contact local businesses and other organizations to explain the school and its place in the neighborhood. Personally extend an invitation to attend an open house or any other special function being held in the school. If a class is presenting a play, invite the neighbors in for the fun and assign student hosts to guests.____________________________________________________________________________________ A speakers bureau on education issues for community groups exists in school zones. Each school has identified three key communicators. The school staff coordinates events to promote neighborhood pride. These strategies work together to raise the trust level between the school and the community. (LRSD Plan, pp. 210, - Need.g to be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + In Progre.en * Completed PERSON I DONE Gremillion Principals Rather Gremillion Principals Vann Rather Gremillion Principals Vann Rather Rather Principals12/19/96 ir JENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 20 DATE 7/12/96 7/12/96 DOC I NO I PG I RECOMMENDATION PERSON DONE MR MR 61 62 81 82 213) Develop the speakers bureau into a proactive ambassadorship for the school. Members of the bureau can be parents, teachers, students, and community volunteers. Give the speakers a special title (such as Goodwill Ambassadors, Outreach Angels, etc.) and help them focus on a specific theme or point of school pride. Arrange for them to meet frequently with small groups at a well known nearby place, such as a church, fire station, or community alert center. Such experiences are prime learning opportunities for students, helping boost their self esteem while also polishing their schools image._______________ A Parent Center in each school provides resources and materials, recommended by a parent and staff committee, that can be loaned to parents. A parent has been trained to operate the center, which is to be the source of a monthly communications packet that is distributed to parents. (LRSD Plan. pp. 206. 208) The schools actively seek parent recommendations for resources to be housed in the Parent Centers, incorporating as many of their suggestions as possible. The school documents the degree to which parents use the center and its resources. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Gremillion Principals Actively manage the Parent Centers to become the catalyst and focal point of parent resources and services they were intended to be. Suggestions for strengthening the centers include the following: foster the ongoing involvement of a strong Parent Center Committee in each school, using the Committee to establish a means for determining what special parent needs exist, such as materials and equipment, home visits, extended center hours, etc.\nconsider relocating the centers to a place of prominence and easy access, where parents can meet and chat without fear of disturbing classes\ndevelop a monthly theme of parenting emphasis that is carried throughout the school in such way as a featured bulletin board and the school newsletter, then follow up with appropriate workshops on the themes\nequip the centers with welcoming and comfortable furniture that invites parents to linger awhile\nconsider the feasibility of merging the faculty lounge and the Parent Center into a combined building resource center to promote frequent and sustained interaction between teachers and parents._________________________________ The schools offer parent workshops to assist parents in understanding and carrying out school, expectations. The workshops include such topics as study skills, discipline, time management, pre-reading skills, financial management, and developmental learning skills. (LRSD Plan, pg. 209) Document parent training activities by topic, time, and location along with the number of participants by race, gender, and the child's school. Regularly collect and analyze participants' feedback on how well the session was conducted and their perception of the potential helpfulness of the training. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 39) Complete documentation of all parent meetings and activities is maintained, including sign-in sheets that reflect parents' race, gender, and the school their child attends. (ODM 1992 Report, pg. 38) Each school provides community role models and mentoring program. (LRSD Plan, pg. 157) The district has mounted an intense mentor recruitment campaign. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 29) Milam Principals - Needs to be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + In Progress * Completed12/19/9G INCENTIVE SCHOOL MONITORING REPORT (1995-96) Summary of Recommendations 21 DATE 7/12/96 DOC I NO MR 63 PG 87 ________RECOMMENDATION_________________________________ Individual school volunteer mentoring programs are coordinated with VIPS and all volunteers are screened and trained prior to being matched with students. (July 10, 1992 Court Order: ref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pg. 29) PERSON I DONE Intensify efforts at the school level to coordinate the services of volunteers and school partners in the school, making them an integral part of the school family. Routine operation procedures should include follow-up to determine the degree of volunteer satisfaction, because these very important people need consistent guidance, support, encouragement, and thanks. Keep in contact with them through meetings, phone calls, and notes. Invite them to the special functions at the school and assign a student host to escort them. Spend time training the children who are selected as hosts, showing them how to be courteous and respectful. Make these students a part of the symbols of school pride. The district will inform the community about the incentive schools and their special features by providing informational sessions to special interest and community groups, including churches. Additional strategies will include conducting Saturday information booths at malls and neighborhood stores, securing special media coverage, and developing an incentive school telephone hotline. The district will distribute highlight sheets to all elementary parents and local businesses. (LRSD Plan, pp. 215, 218-219) Recruitment will be an ongoing process with each incentive school establishing a parent recruitment team to encourage voluntary assignments that enable the schools to comply with desegregation requirements. (LRSD Plan, pp. 132, 135, 215\nInterdist. Plan, pg. 57) The districts recruitment strategies will include public service announcements, billboards, a media blitz, videocassette recordings, flyers, open houses, targeted neighborhood blitzes, small group tours, a special designation from the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE), and celebrity endorsements. Each school will establish a speakers bureau and help the district develop a brochure highlighting their school. Meetings will be held with NLRSD and PCSSD parents and PTA groups to encourage M-to-M transfers. (LRSD Plan, PG. 215- 216, 220-222) Parent recruiters will focus on recruiting white students to desegregate the incentive schools and conduct recruitment activities. (LRSD Plan, pp. 216, 222) All parties have made firm commitments to assist the LRSD in desegregating the incentive schools. (May 1992 Order, pg. 29) The LRSD will establish a strategic plan, based on the recruitment section of the desegregation plan, that reflects a well-thought-out, interrelated process\npresent a firm timetable in its recruitment plan and strictly adhere to it\ndevelop a tracking system to determine the success of particular awareness and recruitment efforts, especially with identified geographic areas and specific groups\nincrease the number and variety of specifically targeted recruitment activities. (July 10, 1992 Courf Order\nref: June 5, 1992 ODM Report, pp. 4, 5) Gremillion Principals Rather Millhollen Establish a budget that is adequate to underwrite an aggressive and sustained recruitment program that encompasses the special needs of the incentive schools, investing that allotment in high-quality, high- energy strategies that result in steady progress toward the desegregation goals. - Needs to be done Denotes recommendation appeared in prior ODM Monitoring Report + Tn Progress * Completedi| Little Rock School District  MEMORANDUM RECE^VSD 4 To: Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation and Monitoring DEC 2 0 1996 From\nI Date: Dr. Don Roberts, Superintendent December 6, 1996 Office cf Desegregation Moniiortn^ Subject\nLRSD Responses to Incentive School Monitoring Report (1995-96),July 12, 1996 q q q Attached you will find a report stating the status of each recommendation the Office of Desegregation and Monitoring recommended in their 1995-96 Incentive School Monitoring Report, If you should have questions, please contact me. C-. Chris Heller. LRSD Aiiome\u0026gt;' q q q I I I I I q q\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1453","title":"Report: ''1995-96 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["1996-07-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","School enrollment","School integration","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''1995-96 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report,'' Office of Desegregation Monitoring, United States District Court, Little Rock, Ark."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1453"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["191 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1653","title":"Court Filings concerning ODM recommendations, ADE semi-annual monitoring report, PCSSD and LRSD settlement agreement, NLRSD motion to close Baring Cross School and to expand office complex at Redwood Elementary School, and PCSSD motion to modify desegregation plan regarding class sizes.","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1996-07"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Joshua Intervenors","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Arkansas. Department of Education","Special districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Education--Arkansas","Education--Finance","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Education, Elementary","School management and organization","School buildings","School facilities","School integration","Redwood Elementary School (North Little Rock, Ark.)","Baring Cross Elementary School (North Little Rock, Ark.)","School employees","Students"],"dcterms_title":["Court Filings concerning ODM recommendations, ADE semi-annual monitoring report, PCSSD and LRSD settlement agreement, NLRSD motion to close Baring Cross School and to expand office complex at Redwood Elementary School, and PCSSD motion to modify desegregation plan regarding class sizes."],"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/1653"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["judicial records"],"dcterms_extent":["72 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"District Court, two orders; District Court, motion of the Joshua intervenors for the implementation of recommendations of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring; District Court, memorandum of the Joshua intervenors in support of their motion for the implementation of recommendations of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring; District Court, two orders; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) semi-annual monitoring report; Court of Appeals, standard of review; District Court, motion to shorten time to respond to discovery; District Court, motion for extension of time; District Court, motion to intervene as defendants; District Court, brief in support of motion to intervene as defendants; District Court, answer of intervenor school districts to second motion of the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) to enforce settlement agreement with the state; District Court, order; District Court, North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) motion to close Baring Cross School and to expand office space at Redwood Elementary School; District Court, North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) memorandum in support of motion to close Baring Cross School and to expand office complex at Redwood Elementary School; District Court, Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) motion to modify desegregation plan regarding class sizes; District Court, brief in support of Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) motion to modify desegregation plan respecting class sizes; District Court, memorandum and order; District Court, notice of filing, Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) project management tool; District Court, notice of filing Little Rock School District (LRSD) project management tool  The transcript for this item was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.  ( \\ U.S. OIST:-ICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARl:ANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL RECEl\\'ED 'JUL 2 1996 JUL O 1 1996 PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS SERVICEMASTER MANAGEMENT SERVICES Office of D A Limited Partnership j esegregation Monitoring INTERVENORS ORDER Upon motion of the Joshua Intervenors, the Pulaski County Special School District, and the Little Rock School District, the time within which they must file their application for attorneys' - fees with respect to this Court's January 13, 1995 decision and with respect to the May 15, 1996 decision of the Eighth Circuit is hereby extended to thirty days after the mandate is issued by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. IT IS SO ORDERED this st- / day of July 1996. rl-115 DOCU:.1c:, i [::f n::r;:::0 c;~ DOCKET SHEET IN CC1MPUANCE WITH RULE 56 ANDiOR 79(a) FRCP ON 11119': --ev J;7\\:: -=s 270 3 ( IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS fiLEfD U.S. OISTi-lCT COURT [:ASTERN DISTRICT ARV.ANSAS JUL O 1 1996 WESTERN DIVISION JAMES r ~RMACK, CLERK By: \\ ' \\A}\\ AAO I:\"-:,, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL SERVICEMASTER MANAGEMENT SERVICES, A Limited Partnership ORDER OE? CLERK PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Upon motion of the Arkansas Department of Education, the time within which it must respond to the Pulaski County Special School District's, the Little Rock School District's, and the North Little Rock School District's pending motions to enforce the Settlement Agreement is hereby extended to and including July 22, 1996. IT IS SO ORDERED this ~ / day of July 1996. rHIS DOCUME ff [1-ffERED ON DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 56 AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ON /J It l9G BY tZJ: J I =t . 2704 u.foi\\bfJ~1RT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUL O 2 1996 EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JAMES W McCORMACK, CLERK WESTERN DIVISION By: -------;:;;:,;:;-;:;:;--;::-;:,;, DEP. CLERK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL filSTRICT, ET AL. REC I MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. JUL 2 1996 PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS Office of Desegregation Monitoring MOTION OF THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE OFFICE OP- DESEGREGATION MONITORING (ODM) The Joshua Intervenors respectfully move for the entry of orders, as described in greater detail in this motion, requiring the LRSD defendants to implement various recommendations previously made by the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM), including the recommendations which the court ordered these defendants to implement in an order entered om July 10, 1992. This motion is based upon the ODM reports which it cites, the \"law of the case,\" the record of the case generally, the accompanying memorandum, and the following allegations. (1.) In its court-approved desegregation plan (see amended version, April 29, 1992), the LRSD defendants agreed to undertake many actions for the benefit of the class of African-American students ( and their parents) , represented by the Joshua Intervenors. These actions were, among other things, to promote desegregation; to strengthen educational opportunities and outcomes 1 for African-American pupils; and to complete \"the transition to a system of public education freed of racial discrimination\" [Brown v. Board of Education, 349 U.S. 294, 299 (1955)] in a comprehensive and sensitive manner. (2.) In its opinion directing that various settlement agreements of the parties be approved and a subsequent opinion setting forth standards for the modification of those initial agreements, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit identified particularly important features of the settlement, including the LRSD desegregation plan. See Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, 921 F. 2d 1371, 1386 ( 1990) ( \"the kinds of programs that the plan contemplates for the Incentive Schools\"); 949 F.2d 253, 256 (1991) (including \"double funding for students attending the incentive (virtually all-black) schools; ... the agreed effort to eliminate achievement disparity between the races; ... appropriate involvement of parents\"). (3.) In its 1990 opinion in this case, the Court of Appeals required the creation of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM) \"to be headed by a Monitor appointed by (this court], with such additional personnel as (this court] shall deem appropriate.\" See 921 F. 2d at 1388. The creation of ODM was to help insure \"that the parties' compliance with (the settlement agreements would] be carefully monitored.\" Id. The 1990 opinion also set forth the responsibility of this court to address inadequate compliance with the agreements and, at minimum, implicitly, the propriety of the court's relying upon the findings of its monitors as a predicate 2 for requiring remedial actions. 1 (4.) ODM has described in periodic reports many inadequacies in the LRSD defendants' implementation of their court-approved desegregation plan. Many have involved areas which the Court of Appeals identified as of critical importance. ODM has also set forth many recommendations for addressing the shortcomings in plan implementation which it found. These actions, if carried out in a meaningful manner, would strengthen the implementation of the plan, and thereby benefit the persons represented.by Joshua. (5.) Orders requiring the LRSD defendants to implement ODM recommendations constitute \"action (which] is appropriate ... to ensure compliance with the (LRSD desegregation plan] ... \" (921 F. 2d at 1394], so long as these defendants have an opportunity to demonstrate that the implementation of a particular recommendation should not be required. (6.) In an order dated July 10, 1992, this court adopted the recommendations made by ODM in its 1991-92 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report. However, the LRSD defendants have failed to implement these recommendations adequately. 1 See 921 F.2d at 1386 (\"It is important for the settlement plans to be scrupulously adhered to -- and here we have in mind especially the kinds of programs that the plan contemplates for the Incentive Schools -- and it will be the job of the District Court to see that this monitoring is done effectively, and that appropriate action is taken if the parties do not live up to their commitments.\"); ig., at 1390 (\"We accept these undertakings [to implement compensatory and remedial education programs], again with the reminder that compliance with them will be closely monitored. If the District Court becomes convinced in the future that money is being wasted, and that desegregation obligations contained in the settlement plans are being flouted, it will be fully authorized to take appropriate remedial action.\"); .ig., at 1394, para. 8. 3 (7.) It is appropriate for the court to order the LRSD defendants to implement the following recommendations, including those set forth in the ODM 1991-92 Incentive Schools Monitoring report, absent a satisfactory particularized showing of impropriety as to a specific recomme.ndation: (a.) 6/5/92 Incentive Schools Monitoring Report 1991-92 ( i) recommendation to assign students with sensi ti vi ty to the relationship between placement stability and academic progress (Summary at 2) (ii) five recommendations to improve student recruitment [Summary at 4-5; see also paras. 7-c. and 7-i.(i)] (iii) two staffing recommendations to improve quality of staff selections [Summary at 6; see also paras. 7-f., 7-h.-(ii), 7-k., 7- 1.] (iv) four recommendations to improve and implement staff development [Summary at 7-8; see also paras. 7-h.-(iii), (ix)-(xi), (xiii) , (xix)] (v) three recommendations to implement court orders and improve class sizes and three recommendations re student groupings (Summary at 10-11) (vi) five recommendations to improve implementation of the commitment to multicultural education (Summary at 13) (vii) three recommendations to improve instructional practices ( Summary at 14) (viii) four recommendations regarding materials and equipment which support the instructional process [Summary at 15; re science 4 program, # 4, see also para. 7-h.-(xi)] (ix) four recommendations re the Early Childhood program to improve its implementation [Summary at 17; see also paras. 7-h.( viii) ; 7-i.] (x) two recommendations re the Special Education program [Summary at 18; re gifted and talented program,# 2, see also para. 7-h.-(iv)] (xi) three recommendations to enhance supplemental programs, such as foreign language, Latin program, cl~ssics reading, African American studies and field trips [Summary at 18-21; re school themes, # 3, se also para. 7-h.-(x)] (xii) six recommendations to improve and implement discipline commitments in the plan [Summary at 23; see also para. 7-h.-(iii)J (xiii) five recommendations to improve implementation of the extended day, week, and year activities [Summary at 25; see also para. 7-h.-(xvi)-(xviii)J (xiv) recommendation to evaluate the relationship between the Homework Hotline and Homework Centers (Summary at 26) (xv) three recommendations re guidance counseling services [Summary at 27; see also para. 7-h.-(xxii)J (xvi) two recommendations to improve implementation of wellness program (Summary at 29} (xvii) three recommendations to improve implementation of mentoring program (Summary at 29-30; see also para. 7-h.-(xiv)] (xviii) 11 recommendations to help reduce achievement disparity (Summary at 31-32) 5 I I I I I I I I I (xix) two recommendations to help reduce student retention in grade (Summary 33) (xx) 12 recommendations to improve parental involvement through implementation of programs such as Parent council, parent workshop, home visits, PTA, etc. (Summary 37-39; see also para. 7- h.-(xxiv)-(xxv)] (xxi) recommendations to correct apparent physical facility problems . at each school (Summary at 43 (excluding Ish and Stephens); see also para. 7-h.-(v)-(vi)] (xxii) three recommendations to implement double funding (Summary at 47; see also para. 7-h.-j.J (b.) 11/16/92 Report on the Biracial Committees 21 recommendations designed to strengthen the operation of the biracial committee (see also, 1994-95 Incentive Schools monitoring report, at 62, # 38) (c.) 3/11/94 Recruitment Monitoring Report 12 recommendations to improve recruitment (at 12-13, 19-20; excluding# 11, at 19) (d.) 12/18/94 Report on the Alternative Schools 21 recommendations designed to strengthen each aspect of the LRSD alternative school program (at 14-17); (however, Joshua intervenors do not seek expansion of the alternative school program, at least until such time as the system demonstrates the ability to deal with black youth who are dropouts or potential dropouts in an evenhanded manner) (e.) 9/6/94 Involvement in the 1994-95 Selection of Principals 6 19 recommendations~ the principal interview and selection process, with an emphasis upon the effective involvement of parents (at 21-23) (f.) 12/2/94 Incentive Schools Staffing 1994-95 three recommendations to promote involvement of incentive schools staffing committees in the selection of all certified personnel (at 3, 4) (g.) 12/22/94 Focused Activities and Academic Progress Incentive Grants four recommendations directed to the timeliness and quality of these activities (at 31-32) (h.) 5/17/95 Incentive Schools Mon. Report 1994-95 (and Incentive Schools Monitoring Reports for 1992-93 and 1993-941 (i) identify the actions that are working to make Rockefeller 4I a desegregated school and adopt or adapt them for the other incentive schools [1992-93, at 5; 1993-94, at 5] (ii) three recommendations designed to improve the assessment, on an annual basis, of the positions needed in each incentive school (1992-93, at 15; see also 1993-94, at 15] (iii) hold periodic meetings to discuss successful techniques for addressing disciplinary needs (1993-94, at 29] (iv) increase the amount of time the gifted and talented specialist spends in each incentive school to improve the quality of the program and the identification of youths who should be participants (1992-93, at 34; 1993-94, at 32] (v) develop a system of preventive maintenance which assures that each structure will be maintained in good working order and 7 have sufficient aesthetic appeal (cleanliness, fresh paint, landscaping, and other evidence of care and attention) to attract parents and students (1993-94, at 36] (vi) carry out any of ODM's other recommendations concerning facilities, which have yet to be carried out (see 1992-93, at 38; 1993-94, at 36; 1994-95, at 17] (vii) seven recommendations to improve the functioning of the Incentive Schools Parent Council (1992-93, at 41] (viii) two recommendations to improve ~he functioning of the Early Childhood Education Task Force (1992-93, at 43] {ix) recommendations to improve the abilities of teachers and administrators to implement the new curriculum (1992-93, at 45-46) {x) a total of four recommendations to improve the integration of the school theme in the various aspects of the program [1992-93, at 47-48, excluding recommendation re Ish; 1993-94, at 46) {xi) a total of three recommendations to insure adequate inservice training of science teachers, availability of adequate materials for science instruction, and humane treatment of laboratory animals [1992-93, at 49; 1993-94, at 47; 1994-95, at 36) {xii) a total of four recommendations to provide for the implementation of the foreign language program promised in the plan [1992-93, at 51; 1993-94, at 48) {xiii) provide in-service training to implement plan provision for criterion referenced assessment [1992-93, at 53] {xiv) three recommendations to increase the number of mentors and their skills [1992-93, at 61, 78; 1993-94, at 84] 8 (xv) allow three and four year-olds to use buses for field trips [1992-93, at 63) (xvi) a total of nine recommendations designed to increase the number of youth participating in the extended year program and to enhance its quality ( 1992-93, at 68; 1993-94, at 65-66] (xvii) a total of four recommendations to increase participation in and otherwise improve the extended week program [1993-94, at 60; 1994-95, at 36) (xviii) three recommendations re the extended day program (1992-93, at 72; 1994-95, at 36) (xix) two recommendations designed to improve coordination between teachers and teacher aides and to enhance the aides' skill levels (1992-93, at 76] (xx) two recommendations to increase the involvement in the schools of persons enrolled in pre-professional programs and employed in community agencies (1992-93, at 78) (xxi) recommendatf ons for standardizing the content of student profiles and insuring their preparation for each student [1992-93, at 85; 1993-94, at 70) (xxii) a total of eight recommendations designed to strengthen the provision of guidance and social work services in the schools, and to promote the comprehensiveness and the coordination of available services (1992-93, at 89, #'s 1 and 3; 1993-94, at 73; 1994-95, at 37) (xxiii) three recommendations re the incentive schools parent program (.i;:g parent job skills, providing requested help, and use of 9 community resources to meet parents educational needs) (1992-93, at 91-92] (xxiv) a total of four recommendations to improve parent workshops (coordinate training with other agencies, evaluate workshops in terms of their purposes, secure feedback from participants, try new approaches) (1992-93, at 97; 1993-94, at 79; 1994-95, at 62] (xxv) a total of five recommendations regarding the extent of parental involvement (standardize methods for recording contacts, develop transportation to increase parent involvement, promote increased use of parent centers and document their use, provide updated contracts for parents to sign) (1992-93, at 105; 1993-94, at 77] (xxvi) three recommendations to improve the programs for speakers bureaus and key communicators (1992-93, at 109; 1993-94, at 86; 1994-95, at 62] (i.) 5/26/95 1994-95 Four-Year-Old Program in the LRSD (i) three recommendations re improved recruitment (at 13) (ii) workshops for parents earlier in the school year (at 22) ( iii) strengthen tracking of youth attending programs to improve the ability to study the relationship of participation to later academic success (two recommendations, at 26) (iv) replace worn out consumable furnishings (at 28) (j.) 8/16/95 Double Funding of Incentive Schools budget annually an amount of money adequate to double fund the incentive schools without overspending that budget category (at 4) 10 (k.) 9/15/95 Staffing: Elementary Classroom Teachers - (i) develop policies on numerical ranges for black staffing at individual schools (at 11) (ii) develop specific methods to identify and address instances in which subgroups of staff are racially identifiable (at 11) 10) (1.) 5/10/96 Incentive School Staffing 1995-96 (i) conduct exit interviews of departing staff (at 8) (ii) develop support system for first year teachers (at 8) (iii) select experienced principals for incentive schools (at (iv) develop specific methods to identify and address instances in which subgroups of staff are racially identifiable (at 12) (see also 12\\22\\94 report on incentive schools staffing, at 6) WHEREFORE, the Joshua Intervenors respectfully pray that the court order the LRSD defendants: ( 1. ) to implement each recommendation listed in paragraph ( 7. ) of this motion, as originally described by ODM, absent a satisfactory particularized showing of impropriety as to a specific recommendation; (2.) to report to the court and the parties 120 days from the date of the court's order re the recommendations, and at 120 day intervals thereafter until excused by the court, the system's progress in implementing each recommendation; and ( 3. ) to respond to any reasonable requests by the Joshua Intervenors to learn the system's progress in implementing a 11 particular recommendation(s). Respectfully submitted, ohn W. Walker# 64046 John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 501-374-3758 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby state that a copy of the foregoing motion was sent via United States mail to all counsel of record on this ~ day of July, 1996. 12 RE UUL 2 1996 I JUL O 2 1996 / Office of Desegr:Hfli't\\{IJ!prmfil!'J'ED STATES DISTRICT COUR.l?\\MES W McCORMACK, CLERK EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS By: WESTERN DIVISION -----~D~E=P~C~LE=R=K LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. v. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA ET AL. KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS MEMORANDUM OF THE JOSHUA INTERVENORS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING (ODM) Joshua's motion for enforcement of ODM recommendations is straightforward. The LRSD defendants agreed in their desegregation plan to implement many actions for the benefit of the class of persons represented by the Joshua Intervenors . Beginning in 1992, ODM has documented these defendants' failure to fulf i ll, in an adequate manner, many of the promises which they made. ODM has also made a large number of specific recommendations for remedial action, many set forth more than once. An order requiring implementation of these ODM recommendations is in keeping with the guidance provided to this court by the Court of Appeals, and earlier action by this court. In its opinion at the end of 1990 directing appr oval of the various settlements, the Court of Appeals provided for the creation of ODM; stated that this court was responsible for the careful monitoring of the systems' compliance with the agreements 1 (obviously with considerable reliance on the work of ODM); and identified \"the job (of this court]\" as involving the framing of remedies in the event of the \"flout(ing] 11 of \"desegregation obligations contained in the settlement plans .... \" See Little Rock School District v. Pulaki County Special School District, 921 F.2d 1371, 1386, 1390, 1394 (8th Cir.). The Joshua Intervenors proceed in accord with these principles. Joshua's motion provides, in effect, that a prima facie case is established by an ODM finding of non-compliance with a particular provision of the desegregation plan. That is, the ODM finding establishes the predicate for the court's requiring compliance with the corresponding ODM recommendation (or a variant deemed to be more appropriate), absent a particularized showing by LRSD that it is not appropriate to require compliance with a particular recommendation. See Motion, at paras. 5., 7. We submit that the Court of Appeals sanctioned this approach. In three instances, the Court's articulation of this court's obligation to monitor compliance with the agreements was immediately followed by the identification of this court's responsibility to take appropriate remedial action in the event of noncompliance. 1 This language either states or clearly implies that the results of monitoring -- otherwise determined by the Court of Appeals to be the task of ODM -- provide one basis for requiring further remedial action. It would be senseless to provide for a separate monitoring 1 See Little Rock School District, supra, 921 F.2d at 1386, 1390, 1394 at para. s. 2 office at considerable expense, and then to limit the impact of its actions to providing notice of problems only. In an order entered on July 10, 1992, this court after a hearing \"adopt[ed) the recommendations of the ODM contained in the (1991-92) Incentive Scho~ls Monitoring Report.\" To be sure, the court there noted the absence of objections to the report. While that may not be the case here, again, Joshua's motion recognizes the right of LRSD to seek to show that a recommendation or recommendations should not be adopted. Thus, fairness to the LRSD defendants is guaranteed. Because there has not been adequate compliance with the court's order of July 10, 1992, the current motion requests the court to reiterate the requirement to implement the recommendations set forth in the 1991-92 Report. There is an obvious relationship between the current motion and Joshua's earlier motion seeking the appointment of a wellqualified educator independent of the LRSD to direct the implementation of the incentive schools provisions of the agreements. Compliance with the current motion, if granted, will require, among other things, fact gathering; assessment of facts; policy development; implementation of policies; program devlopment; designing and carrying out training programs; and reaching out to staff and parents, including those serving on various committees. Granting of the earlier motion will mean that new leadership will lead and oversee these endeavors. The facts set forth in the earlier motion establish the need for the change in leadership. See also \"Monitoring Report: The Little Rock School District 1994- 3 95 Incentive Schools Extended Year Program,\" ODM Report, Dec. 1, 1995, at 12 (\"While we have noted pockets of excellence many times, never have we seen the top-level commitment and consistent effort that would yield the superior quality of education envisioned in the 1992 Desegregation P_lan. The extended year program in 1995 is no exception.\") The relief sought by Joshua requiring periodic reports of compliance and Joshua's ability to secure additional information is appropriate. Compare Louisiana v. United Sates, 380 U.S. 145, 155- 56 (1965) (monthly reporting); and Vail v. Board of Education, 354 F. Supp. 594, 604 (D.N.H. 1973) (right of plaintiffs' counsel to inspect records to insure compliance with court's order). Lastly, it is again appropriate to note that the LRSD - defendants have had more than enough time to comply with the promises which they made to the class represented by Joshua. Thus, one finds Judge Henry Woods in his order of December 11, 1989, 4 lamenting, i nter alia, LRSD's failure to implement its own proposals regarding the incentive schools, a continuing problem. 2 Walker# 64046 Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 501-374-3758 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby state that a copy of the foregoing Ment via United States mail to all couns of record on this day of July, 1996. 2 Judge Woods wrote, in part: \" .... The LRSD apparently intends to continue its course of complying only with court orders it likes. Once again the areas of non-compliance concern the all-black schools. The LRSD ignored and failed to implement virtually every educational component which would justify the existence of the allblack schools. This includes approved portions of their own plan for the proposed 'Incentive Schools.' ... \" (at 16, footnote omitted). 5 IN TIIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DMSION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. . NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL. ..... JUL ~) 1996 Office of DeseQregation Monitoring ORDER FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS JUl O 3 1996 PLAINTIFF  DEFENDAN1S INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Joshua Intervenors shall be allowed 30 additional days to respond to the discovery request of the Little Rock School District conerning the Joshua fee petition. Therefore, a response shall be served not later than July 29, 1996. fHIS DOCUM~NT ENTcRC:D O~J DOCKET SHEET IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE 5tl AND/OR 79(a) FRCP ON 1Li/9.b BY_.lj,_ ----=--- 2707  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT vs . No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL SERVICEMASTER MANAGEMENT SERVICES, A Limited Partnership ORDER FILED U.S. DIST~ICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS JUL t 2 1996 PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS The Court has previously scheduled hearings for July 29 and 30, 1996 to consider Little Rock School District (LRSD) budget matters for FY 1996-97. Also on those dates, the Court intended to review the 1996-97 budgets for the North Little Rock School District (NLRSD) and the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD). Due to scheduling conflicts on the Court's docket (primarily as a result of an ongoing criminal trial), the Court will be unable to hold budget hearings on the dates scheduled. Those hearings are therefore canceled. In lieu of budget hearings, the Court orders the LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD to submit to the Office of Desegregation monitoring (ODM), on a date and time to be determined by them, any information ODM deems necessary for an adequate review of each district's budget. The Court expects the LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD to cooperate in good faith with ODM 2709 regarding submission of any requested information so that further - orders of the Court are unnecessary. Also before the Court is the Joshua Intervenors' motion for an interim award of attorney's fees and costs (doc.#2565] . 1 The Court hereby schedules a hearing on this motion to begin at 9:30 a.m. on July 29, 1996, in room #305, 600 West Capitol Avenue, U.S. Courthouse, in Little Rock, Arkansas. IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of July 1996. TE:S-- D:tSTicT JUDGE 1 A hearing on this motion had previously been scheduled for July I , 1996, but had to be cancelled due to an ongoing criminal trial. -2- Atkansas DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division July 15, 1996 John W. Walk~r, Esq. John W. Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206-1220 M. Samuel Jones III, Esq. Wright, Lindsey \u0026 Jennings 2200 Boatmen's Bank Building Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72201-3699 Richard W. Roachell, Esq. First Federal Plaza 401 West Captiol Avenue Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Counsel of Record: Christopher J. Heller, Esq. Friday, Eldredge, \u0026 Clark First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Avenue Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3401 Ann S. Brown, Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Stephen W. Jones, Esq. Jack, Lyon \u0026 Jones, P.A. TCBYTower 425 West Capitol Avenue Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 RECE!V~D ;!c,,,, c'  ,J,; .. ,,., ,, t d JUL 1 5 199/, c;: ::,-i' 4 ..... Office of Desegregation Monitoring ' -- - -- -- -- -- .. -  --   - - - -. -- --_,..,,  .4 Please find enclosed a copy of the Arkansas Department of Education's Semi-Annual Monitoring Report. If you need any additional information, please let me know. Sincerely, J ilMa/41/4 , ;li~~th Turner Enclosure --STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION: Chairman - RICHARD C. SMITH~ JR .. McGeheo  Vice Chairman - WILLIAM 8 . FISHER, Paragould Members: CARL E. BAGGETT, Rogers  GARY BEASLEY. Crossett  LUKE GORDY. Van Buren  MITCH LLEWELLYN, JR. , Fort Smith JAMES McLARTY III, Newport  RAE RICE PERRY, Arkadelphia  BETTY PICKETT, Conway  ELAINE SCOTT, Little Rock SHERRY WALKER, Little Rock  JAMES WHITMORE, Springdale An Equal Opportunity Employor UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL. PLAINTIFFS vs. PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL., MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL.,----- MRS. KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL., LR-.C,....-. 82-866 RECEIVED )/lf,,.J- J)e/, ,,,4., c.,!_ DEFENDANTS , 1111 1 5 1996 INTER VEN ORS 7 ! .)d\"~ Olfic8 ot Desegregation Monitoring INTER VEN ORS THE ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S  SEMI-ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT (J:fc.J ,,, ,.-1. .. ,,. .. y) In compliance with this Court's Order of December 10, 1993, and the Department's Implementation Plan filed with this Court, the Arkansas Department of Education submits its - Semiannual Monitoring Report to the parties and the Court. The Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee met on July 8, 1996, and discussed this report. The Committee noted no representatives from the parties or the Office of Desegregation Monitoring attended. The Committee invites the parties and the Office of Desegregation Monitoring to attend committee meetings and offer comments and suggestions on the semi-annual monitoring reports. Respectfully submitted, ELIZETHTlJRNER, Bar I.D. # 90-181 Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 401A Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 682-4227 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Elizabeth Turner, do hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing response by hand delivering on this A.day of July 1996, to: John W. Walker, Esq. John W. Walker, P.A. 1 "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_19","title":"Memos received","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"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["1996-07","1996-08","1996-09"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education and state","Education--Standards"],"dcterms_title":["Memos received"],"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/19"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["memorandums"],"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\nTextbook selection and adoption\n....... .  ADE Memos - Received 7-1-96 Textbook Selection and Adoption State Approved List of Materials to be Incorpoarated into the Textbook and Instructional Materials Binder Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION , 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 j ~I!!- GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division / q~c~,11i\n:~. :::6-122 j. o11L ' C Ottice 1996 Of r,_ -11reg\n:,f {/0f7 A, IV/Qn ,11tori17 Forward Copies To:~ Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Middle/Jr. High Principals Elementary Principals Date: June 27, 1996 Type of Memo: Informational Response Required By: None There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis - Subject: Textbook Selection and Adoption State Approved List of Materials to be Incorporated into the Textbooks and Instructional Materials Binder Index Code: IJJ Regulatory Authority: Arkansas Code Annotated 6-21-401-413 (Repl. 1993) Contact Person: Sue McKenzie Phone No: 682-4593 This memorandum is accompanied by pages listing the new grades K-6 textbooks and other instructional materials for fine arts, handwriting, spelling and literature. These materials were adopted by the State Board of Education with contracts effective July 1, 1996 thru June 30, 2002. These pages should be inserted in your school's copy of Textbooks and Instructional Materials for Arkansas, Grades K-6 (the red vinyl binder). Please follow these instructions: Fine Arts Remove from binder and discard all old fine arts (art and music) pages. Insert the new fine arts (art and music) pages, 1 thru 9. Language Arts: Remove and discard any old handwriting and spelling pages. Insert the new handwriting and spelling pages, 1 thru 9. Do not remove lanaguage arts pages, A-1 thru A-13, these are still current. Director's Memo No. FIN 96-122 Page2 June 27, 1996 The other pages provide updated information to replace, page for page, the information in the front of your binder and the textbook depositories' and publishers' information in the back of your binder. Please remove and discard all old pages and replace them with the new. Besides the new pages, we are also enclosing a list of changes to be made in other sections of the binder. Please cross out the old information and write in the new information for each individual change at the appropriate location in the binder. The aforementioned pages and the changes give you the most current information to keep the binder of state-approved listings up-to-date. It is extremely important that these insertions and changes be made, when possible. Please return to the appropriate textbook depository, all samples (examination copies) of the fine arts, handwriting, spelling and literature textbooks or other materials received by your district. (You may keep samples of any materials that your school adopts and purchases, but all other samples should be returned.) Please exercise one following .option when returning the textbook samples to the appropriate - depository: If shipment weighs 100 pounds or less, send it \"PARCEL POST FOURTH CLASS.\" Package no more than 50 pounds per carton~ Do not send COD. Instead, request a postage credit or refund from the depository. Ship \"FREIGHT COLLECT\" if a depository shipment weighs more than 100 pounds. Be sure to label all boxes with the words \"TEXTBOOK SAMPLES.\" If your district has not submitted a Report of Local Adoptions for fine arts, handwriting, and spelling Grades K-6, please do so immediately. These reports are used to have adequate stock available when you place your textbooks/instructional materials orders in July and August. Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ~ 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 I\nc GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division JJ NO: FIN 96-121 lj JUL 1 1996 Office of Desegregation AA,..~,   , .-----~~l,IJ.Jjj~~...- ~ ------,,-------------------, Page: 1 of2 Date: June 27, 1996 Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Secondary Principals Type of Memo: Administrative Response Required By: None Middle/Jr. High Principals There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Textbook Selection and Adoption State Approved List of Materials to be Incorporated into the Textbooks and Instructional Materials Binder Index Code: IJJ Regulatory Authority: Arkansas Code Annotated 6-21-401-413 (Rep!. 1993) Contact Person: Sue McKenzie Phone No: 682-4593 This memorandum is accompanied by pages listing the new grades 7-12 textbooks and other instructional materials for fine arts, handwriting, spelling and literature. These materials were adopted by the State Board of Education with contracts effective July 1, 1996 thru June 30, 2002. These pages should be inserted in your school's copy of Textbooks and Instructional Materials for Arkansas, Grades 7-12 (the gray vinyl binder). Please follow these instructions: Fine Arts Remove from binder and discard all old fine arts (art and music) pages. Insert the new fine arts (art and music) pages, one thru 9B. Language Arts: Remove and discard any old handwriting or spelling pages. Insert the new handwriting and spelling pages, 10 thru 13. Remove and discard any old literature pages. Insert the new literature pages, 14 thru 53. The remaining pages in this section, A-1 thru A-53 (journalism, language, grammar, composition) are still current, do not remove. Director's Memo No. FIN 96-121 Page 2 June 27, 1996 The other pages provide updated information to replace, page for page, the information in the front of your binder and the textbook depositories' and publishers' information in the back of your binder. Please remove and discard all old pages and replace them with the new. Besides the new pages, we are also enclosing a list of changes to be made in other sections of the binder. Please cross out the old information and write in the new information for each individual change at the appropriate location in the binder. The aforementioned pages and the changes give you the most current information to keep the binder of state-approved listings up-to-date. It is extremely important that these insertions and changes be made, when possible. Please return to the appropriate textbook depository, all samples ( examination copies) of the fine arts, handwriting, spelling and literature textbooks or other materials received by your district. (You may keep samples of any materials that your school adopts and purchases, but all other samples should be returned.) Please exercise one following option when returning the textbook samples to the appropriate - depository: If shipment weighs 100 pounds or less, send it \"PARCEL POST FOURTH CLASS.\" Package no more than 50 pounds per carton. Do not send COD. Instead, request a postage credit or refund from the depository. Ship \"FREIGHT COLLECT\" if a depository shipment weighs more than 100 pounds. Be sure to label all boxes with the words \"TEXTBOOK SAMPLES.\" If your district has not submitted a Report of Local Adoptions for fine arts, handwriting, spelling and literature, Grades 7-12, please do so immediately. These reports are used for having adequate stock available when you place your textbooks/instructional materials orders in July and August. ADE Memos - Received 7-18-96  Voting Method Compliance with the Federal Voting Rights Act  Communication Services Corrections for the 1996-97 Arkansas Education Directory  Textbook Selection and Adoption  Recognition for Accomplishment Identification of Exemplary Educators in Arkansas  Professional Staff Schedules Instructional/Classified Salary Schedules  Professional \u0026amp; Support Staff Fringe Benefits Employer Contribution for Employee Health Insurance and Retirement  Food Services - ~ J\n~ ?-2-'I- 9~ Debarment and Suspension  Audits - ~ t-, ~ ~ 1-\niv-e, ~ Rules and Regulations Governing Audit Requirements for School Districts  Regulations Communication Rules and Regulations Governing Waivers of Minimum Salaries for Certified Personnel  Student Transportation Volunteer Assistance Program  Compensatory Education Title I Summer School Data Gathering Instrument  Food Services Reimbursement Rates, Effective from July 1, 1996 - June 30, 1997 Report Forms for School Lunch and Breakfast Programs Adcansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION C ~~t~~ CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 ii_\n:: ,1 . GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division ,1111 1 B 1996 Office of D~gregation Mom10Mir, Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors NO: FIN-97-009 Page: 1 of 1 Date: July 11, 1996 Type of Memo: Regulatory Response Required By: All There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Voting Method Index Code: BEDF Compliance with the Federal Voting Rights Act Regulatory Authority: Arkansas Code Annotated 6-13-631 (Supp. 1993) Contact Person: Brandy Vogelpohl Phone No: 682-4488 In accordance with A.C.A.  6-13-631 (Supp. 1993) the State Department of Education is required to obtain information concerning the effect of minority population on school elections. Enclosed is a form concerning your district's compliance with the Federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 as amended. Based on your September. 1995 election, please indicate if your district meets one of the exceptions in category I. If you do not, please indicate the type of board you have in category II. If you do not meet any of the exceptions, please mark \"other\", and explain your board size and whether it is at-large or zoned, and your minority ratio. Please return the form no later than July 26, 1996 to: Department of Education Local Fiscal Services Attn: Brandy Vogelpohl #4 State Capitol Mall, Room 202-A Little Rock, AR 72201 I.      Compliance With Act 786 of 1993 Member of the Board of Directors of Local School Districts Elected from single-member zones or single member zones and at-large Does the district meet one of the following exemptions as specified in Act 786 of 1993? Please indicate by using a check mark in one of the boxes in category I. a. The district is currently operating under a federal court order enforcing school desegregation or the Federal Voting Rights Act of I 965, as amended\nor b. The district is operating under a pre-consolidation agreement that is in compliance with the Federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended\nor c. The district has a zoned board which meets the requirements of the Federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended\nor d. A federal court has ruled the district is not in violation of the Federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended, and the court order is in effect. e. (Ark. Code Ann.  6-13-631) A school district which on August 13, 1993 was in the process of defending a lawsuit brought under the Voting Rights Acts of 1965, as amended, shall also be exempt from the provisions of this section until such time as the lawsuit has been finally resolved. OR II. If the district does not meet one of the exceptions listed above and then which one of the four listed below does the district meet. Please indicate by using a check mark in one of the boxes. D a. A five single member district board selected in compliance with Act 786 of I 993\nor D b. A seven single member district board selected in compliance with Act 786 of 1993\nor D c. A seven member board selected in compliance with Ark. Code Ann.  6-13-631 members elected from single member districts and with two members elected at-large. D d. Other, please explain:----------------------- County School _______ _ Phone ________ _ Board President Signature ______________________ _ Superintendent Signature ______________________ _ RETURN TO: Department of Education, Local Fiscal Services, Attn: Brandy Vogelpohl, #4 State Capitol Mall, Room 202-A, Little Rock, AR 72201  6-13-631. Effect of minority population on election. (a) Beginning with the 1994 annual school ele:::tion, the qualified electors of a school district having a ten percent (10%) or greater mi nority population. as reported by the most recent federal decennial census information, shall elect the members of the board of directors as authorized in this section, utilizing selection procedures in compliance with the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended. (b)(l) At least ninety (90) days before the election, the local board of directors shall: (A) By resolution choose to elect board members from five (5) or seven (7) sinle-member zones or from five (5) sinle-member zones and two (2) -at large\nand - (B) With approval of the controlling county board of education, shall divide each school district having a ten percent (10%) or greater minority population into five (5) or seven (7) single-member zones in accordance with the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended. (2) Zones shall have substantially equal population, with boundaries based on the most recent available federal decennial census information. (c) A board of directors choosing to elect board members by five (5) single-member zones and two (2) at-large positions may fill the two (2) at-large positions by drawing lots from among the current board members. (d)(l)(A) A candidate for election from a single-member zone must be a qualified elector and a resident of the zone. CB) A candidate for an at-larze Position must be a auali.fied elector and a resident of the ci.istrict~    (2)(A) Except as provided in subsection ( e) of this section, a ci.istrict board member shall serve a five-vear term. CB) A term shall commence wh\nn the countv court declares the results of the election bv an order entered or\" record. (e) At the first meetin of a new board of ci.irectors, the membe:-s shall establish initial terin.s by lot so that, to the extent possible, an eaual number of Positions are filled each vear and not more than two (2.) members' terms exnire each vear.  (f)(l) After each federal decenn'ial census and at least ninetv (90) days before the annual school election, the local board of directori, with the approval of the controlling county board of education, shall ci.ivici.e each school ci.istrict having a ten percent (10%) or greater minority population into single-member zones. The zones shall be based on the most recent federal decennial census information and substantially equal in population. SCHOOL DIS7RICTS 6-13-632 (2) At the annual school election following\nthe rezoning\n, a new school board shall be elected in accordance with procedures set forth in this section. (g) The following school districts shall be exempt from the provisions of this section: (1) A school district that is currently operating under a federal court order enforcing school desegregation or the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended\n(2) A school district that is operating under a preconsolidation agreement that is in compliance with the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as amended\n(3) A school district that has a zoned board meeting\nthe reouirements of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, as ~ended\nand (4) A school district that a federal court has ruled is not in violation of the federal Voting Rights Ac: of 1965, as amended, so long as the court order is in effect. (h) The State Department of Education shall withhold twenty percent (20%) of the annual state funds allocation to a school district not in comnliance with this section. (i) The State Board of Education is herebv authorized to adoot rules and regulations necessary for the implem~ntation of this se.ction. History. Ac:s 1993, No. 786,  1\n1993, No. 1169,  1. A.C.R.C. Notes. Reierences to \"this subchaote,\" in  6-13-601 - 6-13-630 mav not aoolv to this section which wa enicted sti~s\nquentiy. V.S. Code. The fecieral Voting Rights Act oi 1965, referred to in this section, is cociified as 42 U .S.C.  1971 et seq.  I' Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION RECEV PITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division .1\\11 1 B ,996 office ot oesegre9auon Monitonnij X SUPERINTENDENTS, CO-OP DIRECTORS SECONDARY PRINCIPALS MIDDLE/JR. HIGH PRINCIPALS ELEMENTARY PRINCIPALS OTHER DEPUTY DIRECTOR: Diana Julian SUBJECT: Communication Services TYPE: ADMINISTRATIVE X INFORMATIONAL REGULATORY X ATTACHMENT(S) Corrections for the 1996-97 Arkansas Education Directory REGULATORY AUTHORITY: N/ A CONTACT PERSON: Gayle Morris, Communications Supervisor NO: DIR 96-015 PAGE: 1 of I DATE: July 11 , 1996 RESPONSE REQUIRED BY: X ALL THOSE AFFECTED OPTIONAL NONE lNDEXCODE: EGA PHONE NO: 682-4217 We are updating information for the 1996-97 Arkansas Education Directory and our computer mailing lists for the coming school year. We are attaching the listing for the schools in your district as it currently appears in our computer files and need your assistance in revising this information. Please review the attached mailing labels (which have been expanded to include additional information necessary for the directory) for your district and make the corrections needed according to the instructions on the attached form . Be certain to check the accuracy of names and grade levels for schools, North Central accreditation listings, zip codes, and telephone numbers, as well as the names of the administrators and mailing addresses. The attached information should be corrected on the form provided and returned to the Communications Office, Room 101 A, no later than Friday, August 9, 1996. It is important that the attached form be returned EVEN lF THERE ARE NO CHANGES. We need a response from every district so that we will know if our information is correct. Additional position changes which occur after Friday, August 9, can be phoned to us prior to Friday, August 23, 1996, in order to be included in the directory. We would also like to be made aware of changes as they occur throughout the year in order to keep our mailing lists current. DIRECTIONS CORRECTIONS NEEDED FOR CURRENT SCHOOL DISTRICT INFORMATION Please make the needed corrections directly on the attached labels when possible. If there is not enough room 011 the label, please write to the side and plearly indicate which information is being corrected. If a new school has been established and/or the grade levels for one school have been split into two schools, please provide all of the information for the schools on the back of the sheet oflabels (PLEASE MARK- SEE BACK) using the format of the sample below: SAMPLE OF ATTACHED MAILING LABEL WITH DESCRIPTIONS OF INFORMATION TO BE REVIEWED AND CORRECTED, IF NEEDED: (LEA Number) 01-01-004 Tom Davis, PRIN. DeWitt High School* 204 N. Jackson Street DeWitt 72042 (Grade Levels) 09-12 (Administrator) (Name of School) (Mailing Address) (Phone) 946-4661 The asterisk(*) beside the school name is the North Central indicator and only appears if the school is accredited by the North Central Association. Please review, c01Tect, and return the attached labels for your school district no later than Friday, August 9, 1996. Please remember that accuracy is extremely important. Return to: NOTE: Gayle Morris, Communications Arkansas Department of Education 4 Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 PLEASE RETURN THE LABELS EVEN IF THERE ARE NO CORRECTIONS - MARK THE ''NO CORRECTIONS NEEDED\" ENTRY AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SHEET. SPECIAL REQUESTS: 1. If the mailing address of the superintendent's office is normally a P. 0 . Box, then it will be used for the mailing label. There are occasions when we need a street address for the superintendent's office in order to ship items by UPS. Please make a note beside the superintendent entry of a street address and zip code if our label shows a P. 0 . Box. 2. Next to the listing of the names of the superintendent and principals in the district, please note the proper title of each. For example, Dr., Mr. , Mrs., or Ms. 3. Beside each building entry, please give the facsimile telephone number if the building has a FAX machine. Alkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION RECE ~APITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 ,.. GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division JIii 1 8 1996 Office of oesegre9ation Monitoring Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: Child Nutrition Directors NO: FIN-97-010 Page: 1 of 1 Date: July 11, 1996 Type of Memo: Regulatory Response Required By: None Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Food Services Debarment and Suspension Regulatory Authority: 7CFR 3017 Contact Person: Dorothy Caldwell or Barbara Smith Index Code: EF Phone No: 501-324-9502 The suspension of Hiland Dairy Foods has been terminated by the Defense Logistics Agency. The Southwest Regional Office of USDA Food and Consumer Service has confirmed that the company is once again an eligible bidder for schools participating in Child Nutrition Programs and is qualified to participate in school bids. As you were notified in Director Memo FIN-96-104, Hiland Dairy Foods was ineligible to enter into school contracts in excess of $100,000 during the time of the suspension\nhowever their eligibility to enter into school contracts below the $100,000 threshold was not affected by the suspension. Please contact me if you have questions. Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ECE, \\ f-!! ITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division Jlll_ 1 8 1996 Office ot oeseoregation Monitorini Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors . NO: FIN-97-001 PAGE: 1 OF 2 DATE: July 11, 1996 Type of Memo: Informational Response Required By: None There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Textbook Selection and Adoption Index Code: IJJ Regulatory Authority: Arkansas Annotated Code 6-21-401-413 (Repl. 1993) Contact Person: Sue McKenzie Phone No: 682-4593 During the 1995-96 school year some district exercised flexibility in the Arkansas Code concerning textbooks and other instructional materials by selecting materials other than those on the state-approved lists. The Department of Education negotiated contracts with publishing companies for materials identified on the requests from these districts enabling them to utilize funds from the state for purchasing. A list of these textbooks and other instructional materials now on official state contracts is being provided to each district. The list does not signify state approval or carry a state recommendation because the materials listed have not been reviewed or evaluated by a state textbook selecting committee. The materials listed carry only the endorsement of the district who requested them. Any district may select materials from this list. Districts desiring to utilize funds received from the state to purchase them may do so by following these steps: Contact the Department of Education Instructional Materials office and identify the instructional material. Director's Memo No.: FIN-97-001 Page 2 July 11, 1996 Provide a justification for specific request assuring that the materials requested are consistent with the curriculum and educational goals established by the State Board of Education. Include an explanation of why instructional materials on the state-recommended list was not considered appropriate for use by the district. This justification process is required by Rules and Regulations established by the State Board of Education. The off-list request form enclosed with this mailing, when completed, will fulfill these requirements. It is provided for your convenience. -- Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION RECEUV4 rS_--mi::: '~APITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division JUI_ 1 8 \\996 Oltice ot oesegregation Monitoring Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Secondary Principals Middle/Jr. High Principals Elementary Principals Other: Deans, Colleges of Education NO: DIR-97-001 Page: 1 of2 Date: July 11, 1996 Type of Memo: Informational Response Required By: Optional There are attachments to this memo. Deputy Director, General Education: Dr. Diana Julian Subject: Recognition for Accomplishment Index Code: AEB Identification of Exemplary Educators in Arkansas Regulatory Authority: NI A Contact Person: Betty Gale Davis Phone No: 682-4247 The Arkansas Department of Education maintains a talent pool that consists of a cadre of educators to be considered for membership on advisory boards, task forces and special recognition programs. We invite you to make recommendations for the talent pool by completing the attached form identifying the assignment of each person and her/his strong capacities. Though experience is an important ingredient in the refinement of an educator's effectiveness, often highly innovative, enthusiastic educators with only a few years' experience, seven years or less, can be highly effective. Therefore, in your consideration of exemplary educators, we ask you to include educators with less experience. Please feel free to reproduce the form so that you can share this communication with your colleagues. Thank you for your valuable input in the process of identifying our exemplary educators. IDENTIFICATION OF EXEMPLARY EDUCATORS IN ARKANSAS Recommendation Form Please use this form when, in your opinion, the individual possesses exceptional expertise in his/her area. The recommendations you make should be truly exemplary educators who display outstanding qualities as an educator and have made outstanding contributions to education. A separate form is required for each individual recommended. Make copies of this form as needed. Name of Educator: School Name: -------------- School Address: -------------School Phone: ( Number, Street, or P.O. Box) -------------School Fax: (City) (Zip Code) School District: ____________ County: Number of Years of Experience: ______ _ Current Working Level: Teacher ___ Counselor ___ Media Specialist __ _ Principal ___ Assistant/Vice Principal ___ Other: (Give description) ______ _ Grade Level(s) and/or Area(s) of Expertise: Ethnicity: (Used for affirmative action purposes only) Please check. ___ African-American ___ Asian ___ American Indian ___ Filipino Brief Reason for Recommendation: List any awards or special recognitions this educator has received: --- Hispanic White Please return your completed form to: Betty Gale Davis, Recognition Programs, Arkansas Department of Education, 4 Capitol Mall, 203B, Little Rock, AR 72201 Signature/position of person making recommendation: Exedform.srp Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION REC~'i'\\T.. f~OL MALL LITTL~ ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 C, D V ~ -B.J GENE WILHOIT, Dtrector, General Education Division NO: FIN-97-006 .1111 1 8 1996 Page: 1 of2 Office of Desegregation Monitorin9 Date: July 11 1996 Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Type of Memo: Regulatory Response Required By: All Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Professional Staff Schedules Instructional/Classified Staff Salary Schedules Index Code: GCBA Regulatory Authority: Ark. Code Ann. 6-13-906 (1993 Rep.), 6-17-201 (1993 Rep.) Ark. Code Ann. 6-17-204 (1995 Supp.), 6-17-808 (1993 Rep.) Ark. Code Ann. 6-17-1001 (1995 Supp.), 6-20-319 (4) (B) (1995 Supp.) Contact Person: John Kunkel Phone No: 682-4258 In order to comply with Ark. Code Ann.  6-17-20 I ( 1993 Rep.) and 6-17-808 (d) (I) ( 1993 Rep.) we are requesting the following information from all school districts and education service cooperatives. Please submit the information referred to in the three sections of this memo no later than July 31, 1996. Be sure to send in updated salary schedules for certified and classified employees as schedules are amended. A. PERSONNEL POLICIES AND SALARY SCHEDULES FOR CERTIFIED PERSONNEL Ark. Code Ann.  6-17-20 I ( 1995 Rep.) requires each school district to report annually their current personnel policies and/or updates, as approved by the district school board (showing date of approval), including current salary schedules. The personnel policies including salary schedules must: (I) be signed by the president of the school board\n(2) recognize a minimum level of training and experience\n(3) reflect the actual pay practices of the district including all fringe benefits\n(4) have all salary increments for education and experience identified on the salary schedule\n(5) include supplemental schedules for personnel employed for I 0, 11, or 12 months and the schedules for added responsibility. Fringe benefits received for extended contracts and added Director's Memo No. FIN-97-006 July 11, 1996 Page 2 of2 responsibilities should also be listed. If indexed, list the indexed percentage. If not indexed, list the supplement portion which is in addition to the teacher salary schedule amount. As a reminder, all Superintendents, Assistant Superintendents and Principals are required to be on the Salary Schedule and their salary indexed for the additional duties. NOTE: Reimbursement for travel expenses is not a fringe benefit. Fringe benefits include free housing, automobiles furnished for private and business use, payments of insurance premiums, uti I ities paid by the district for personal use of certified personnel, annuities purchased by the school district for certified personnel, etc. If the employee receives a flat grant for travel, list the total amount and the estimate of actual travel expenses. List the positions receiving fringe benefits and the amounts of the fringe benefits. Also, list separately positions and fringe benefits available to only selected certified personnel. B. SALARY SCHEDULES FOR CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL Ark. Code Ann.  6-17-808 (2) (d) ( 1993 Rep.) requires annually each school district to adopt and file with the Department of Education, written salary schedules for classified personnel by job category. The schedules shall reflect the actual pay practices of the district. Classified employees are those employees not required to hold a valid teaching certificate issued by the Department of Education. (Example: maintenance employees, instructional aides, secretaries, paraprofessionals, etc.) C. MINIMUM BASE SALARY For 1996-97, Ark. Code Ann.  6-17-1001 ( 1995 Supp.) Establishes a new minimum base salary of $20,000 for a bachelors degree and zero years of experience. For 1996-97, a district shall pay teachers with a masters degree and zero years of experience 115% of the minimum base salary ($23,000). Districts must also continue to have a salary schedule which reflects a minimum of fomteen annual increments for experience. NOTE: Language in Ark. Code Ann. 6-17-1001 (1995 Supp.) states that the minimum base salary must be \"in the school year 1996-97\". Therefore, districts wi II have until the end of the 1996-97 school year to meet this requirement. If a waiver of this requirement is deemed necessary, please refer to Director's Memo FIN-97-004 dated July 11, 1996 for the State Board rules and regulations concerning this matter.  Ari\u0026lt;ansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 RECEIVE~ENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division NO: FIN-97-007 .llll 1 8 1996 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: Educational Agencies Page: 1 of2 Date: July 11, 1996 Type of Memo: Informational Response Required By: Optional Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Professional \u0026amp; Support Staff Fringe Benefits Index Code: GCBD Employer Contribution for Employee Health Insurance and Retirement Regulatory Authority: Act 1194 of 1995 Contact Person: Paul Blaney Phone No: 682-4258 Act 1194 of 1995, requires Local School Districts to assume the responsibility for paying the employer contribution for employee health insurance and retirement benefits beginning with the 1996-97 school year. Districts are required to pay $105 per month for those employees participating in the health insurance program, beginning with the payment due July of 1996. The payment for the employer contribution should be recorded as an expenditure for the 1996-97 fiscal year. Additionally, the expenditure must be coded to the same functional area that the employee's salary is coded. For example, if the employee was an elementary teacher and the salary was posted to function 112 Elementary and object 11 Salaries (Regular Certified), then the employer contribution for health insurance would be coded to function 112 Elementary and object 24 Employee Benefits (Insurance). Districts are also required to pay an amount equal to 12% of the prior fiscal year salaries as retirement benefits for non-federal employees participating in the Teacher Retirement System. Districts will be required to make nine (9) monthly payments to the Teachers' Retirement System beginning October of 1996, and ending June 1997. Federal employees' retirement Director's Memo No. FIN-97-007 July 11, 1996 Page 2 of2 contribution will continue to be calculated on 12% of current year salaries. Prior year salaries are used only for the calculation of retirement contributions for employees paid from district funds. The payment for the employer contribution, although calculated using prior year salaries, is a liability to the district for the current year. Therefore, the expenditure would be recorded in the 1996-97 fiscal year. The distribution of the expenditure, for both federal and non-federal employees, should follow the same method as detailed above for health insurance benefits. For state reporting purposes, expenditures for retirement contributions may be prorated to the various functional categories using the percentage of gross salaries for the current year. It is not a requirement to track the expenditure by employee. As with FICA and Medicare employer matching payments, the expenditure for health insurance and retirement should be recorded in the fund the salary is paid from, with the exception of salaries paid from the Teachers' Salary Fund, in which case the employee benefit would be recorded in the Operating Fund. These expenditures should not be posted to a single functional area such as 231 General Administration (Board of Education Services). Because of the significance of these expenditures, in both amount and type, the cost must be traceable back to the functional areas that the expenditures are related to (i.e. elementary, high school, special education, vocational education, etc.). NOTE: School districts will be required to send premiums withheld and the matching amount for insurance at the same time. However, districts may wait to make the payment for July until they receive their first installment of state funds in late July. Blue Cross Blue Shield has assured the state that there will be no loss of coverage and no penalty for this payment. Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 4 STATE ~PITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 RECEI fr:!\" GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division ' NO: FIN-97-003 Jlll 1 8 1996 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: Child Nutrition Directors Page: 1 of2 Date: July 11, 1996 Type of Memo: Regulatory Response Required By: None There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Food Services Reimbursement Rates, Effective from July I, 1996 - JW1e 30, 1997 Report Forms for School LW1ch and Breakfast Programs Regulatory Authority: 7CFR 210.4, 220.4 Index Code: EF Contact Person: Dorothy Caldwell or Louann Griswood Phone No: 501-324-9502 Reimbursement rates for the National School LW1ch, School Breakfast and Special Milk Programs which became effective July 1, 1996 arc as follows: Rei:ular Lunches Total LW1ches Additional for Reduced Price Ltmches Additional for Free Lunches Rei:ular Breakfasts Total Breakfasts Additional for Reduced Price Breakfasts Additional for Free Breakfasts $ .1775 1.2600 1.6600 $ .1975 .5200 .8200 Special Milk Paid Free $ .1225 Average cost per  pint Safety Net Lunches Total LW1ches Additional for Reduced Price Lw1ches Additional for Free LW1ches Severe Need.Breakfasts Total Breakfasts Additional for Reduced Price Breakfasts Additional for Free Breakfasts $ .1975 1.2600 1.6600 $ .1975 .7150 1.0150 Commodity Entitlement per LW1ch $ .1450 Estimated Bonus Commodity Value per LW1ch .0150 Director's Commw1ication FIN-97-003 July 11, 1996 Page 2 of2 School districts which served 60% or more of the total lunches to students eligible for free or reduced price meals in the second preceding school year ( 1994-95) are designated \"Safety Net\" districts and will receive 2 cents additional reimbursement for each lunch served. A list of districts eligible for these rates is enclosed. Severe Need Breakfast rates are approved on a school by school basis after application is made by the school district. Enclosed is a copy of the following report forms. Please make additional copies as needed. Claim for Reimbursement: The revised Claim Form has the new reimbursement rates for 1996-97. Please discard the old claim forms. Daily Record Form: It is recommended that a separate record be maintained for each school as listed on Schedule A of the Agreement. Participation figures, by school, are required for severe need breakfast reimbursement. If you will not apply for severe need breakfast reimbursement and wish to keep only one record for all students served in the same location (even if this includes more than one school), you may do so. If this is done, all schools combined on one report will be reviewed when State or Federal Reviews are made. This form may be modified if a local district needs additional information. The cash management worksheet on the back will provide good management information. If you decide to use it, you may use it in its entirety or you may use only the total columns (O,S,W,X, and Y). Edit Check Worksheet: This is the current form recommended for edit checks required by regulation. It may be modified to meet local needs\nhowever, the comparisons required on this form must be a part of any form used. On-Site Review Form: Regulations require that each district (with more than one serving site) conduct on-site reviews of each school by February 1 each year. Verification Summary: This is the current form recommended for the swnmary of verification results. It may be modified if you choose\nhowever, the information required on this form must be a part of any form used. SAFETY NET SCHOOL DISTRICTS 1996-97 - This is a list of school districts that served 60% or more of total student lunches to free and/or reduced price students during the 1994-95 school year. Arkansas Franklin Lonoke Pulaski Stuttgart Altus-Denning England AR School F/T Blind Humphrey Fulton Humnoke AR School FIT Deaf Ashley Mammoth Spring Madison Little Rock Hamburg Garland Kingston North Little Rock Baxter Hot Springs St. Paul Randolph Cotter Greene Marion Biggers-Reyno Norfork Delaplaine Marion County Maynard Boone Hempstead Miller Randolph Omaha Blevins Texarkana St. Francis Bradley Hope Mississippi Forrest City Hermitage Saratoga Blytheville Hughes Warren Hot Spring So. Miss. County Palestine/Wheatley Chicot Malvern Special Manila Searcy Dermott Independence Osceola Leslie Eudora Special Cushman Monroe St. Joe Lakeside Southside Brinkley Witts Springs Cleburne Izard Clarendon Sharp Wilburn Izard Co. Consol. Holly Grove Williford Cleveland Jackson Montgomery Stone Kingsland Newport Caddo Hills Mountain View - Rison Swifton Special Nevada Stone County Columbia Jefferson Emmet Union McNeil Altheimer Unified Prescott El Dorado Waldo Dollarway Nevada Huttig Walker Pine Bluff Newton Smackover Crawford Watson Chapel Deer Strong Cedarville Johnson Jasper Van Buren Mountainburg Oark Mount Judea Alread Crittenden Westside Western Grove Scotland Crawfordsville Lafayette Ouachita Shirley Earle Bradley Camden-Fairview Washington West Memphis Lewisville Stephens Lincoln Consol. Turrell Stamps Perry Winslow Cross Lawrence East End Woodruff Parkin Black Rock Perry-Casa Augusta Dallas Sloan-Hendrix Phillips Cotton Plant Carthage River Valley Elaine Yell Fordyce Lee Heler:ia-West Helena Fourche Valley Desha Lee County Marvell Ola Arkansas City Lincoln Lake View Delta Special Gould Poinsett Dumas Special Grady Marked Tree McGehee Special Little River Polk Drew Foreman Acorn - Monticello Logan Hatfield Faulkner Magazine Van-Cove Mount Vernon-Enola Wickes School Term Regular __ Summer __ l. LEA NUMBER ------- CHILD NUTRITION UNIT ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT 1996-97 DISTRICT ____________ MONTH _____ , 19 _ SUPERINTENDENT _____________ _ la. NUMBER OF SCHOOLS IN DISTRICT --- NUMBER OF SCHOQLS WITH BREAKFAST __ LUNCH _ lb. NUMBER OF SEVERE NEED BREAKFAST SCHOOLS _ _ le. ELIGIBLE FOR SAFETY NET YES ___ NO __ _ PREPARED BY ___________ PHONE NUMBER ______ FAX NUMBER _____ _ ld. Breakfast ADM Last Quarter Pre-K ___ K-12____ ADA Last Quarter Pre-K __ _ K-12 ---- Lunch ADM Last Quarter Pre-K____ K-12____ ADA Last Quarter Pre-K ___ _ K-12 __ _ le. FREE ELIGIBLES BREAKFAST_________ LUNCH ________ _ REDUCED ELIGIBLES BREAKFAST LUNCH ----------- 1 f. DAYS SERVED BREAKFAST LUNCH ----------- ,...-:,:--:.:.-:.-:-:-:-.-...,.:-,.-:-\u0026gt;-:.--.\u0026lt;--.-.:-.-::-:-:-.:--...... ........ -.,,.-.....-.-.-.-.. -.',.,...- ........ .....,..., ...  .. ,. .. .. .. , i{f,4.J1tv~'!i litt l~ij5ui:rvii~PVRI:NG MPN:fI a. Opening Cash Balance $ a. Food $ ______ _ b. Federal Reimbursement $ b. Labor $ ______ _ c. Student Meal Income $ c. Loan Repayment $ ________ _ d. Adult Meal Income $ d. Other Expenditures $ ______ _ e. A la carte Income $ e. Total $ ______ _ Contract Meal Income $ Loans to Progam $ h. Other Cash Income $ 4. CLOSING CASH -- i. Total $ BALANCE $ ______ _ 5. UNPAID BILLS: FOOD____ LABOR____ OTHER ____ _ TOTAL$ ___ _ 6. ENDING FOOD INVENTORY, EXCLUDING USDA COMMODITIES: 7. FUNDS DUE PROGRAM: FED. REIMB. ____ CONTRACT ____ OTHER ___ _ 8. Free Reduced Price Paid TOTAL (severe need) (severe need) .8200 1.0150 .5200 .7150 ------ ------ ------ ~ xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xx .1975 Free Reduced Price Paid TOTAL (safety net) TOTAL$ __ _ TOTAL$ ___ _ 1.6600 1.2600 ------ xxx.xx xxxxxxxxxxxxx.xx .1775 .1975 9. TOTAL BREAKFAST REIMBURSEMENT$____ TOTAL LUNCH REIMBURSEMENT$ __ _ ea. TOTAL COMBINED REIMBURSEMENT$_ ______. NUMBERADULTBREAKFASTS: PAID _ FREE _ NUMBERADULTLUNCHES: PAID _ FREE _ NUMBEROFCONTRACTMEALS ___ _ 11. DATE________ SIGNATURE ________________ _ 7CFR Parts 210.8 and 220.11 ADE FORM NO. FIN O 1--00-005 R6/96 INS'IRirnCNS: Provide all infornatian requested. Inanplete claims will delay processim. 1. Sch::x:\u0026gt;l Tenn: Check regular or surnrer. If meals for roth regular and surrmer terms are served in same rronth, suhnit one claim for regular rreals and another for surrmer rreals. Provide financial info:mation on only one claim, since it will be the same for roth. Sul:mit roth claims at the same tine. a. It\u0026gt;. Sch::x:\u0026gt;ls in District: \"As reported on October, 1996 (FAPD6) Annual Report of Pupil Enrollrrent by School District.  b. It\u0026gt;. Severe Need Sch::x:\u0026gt;ls: \"As approved on 96-97 Severe Need Ibcurrentation of Eligibility (FIN-01-00-002 R/5-96). 2. 3. c. Eligible for Safety Net: \"As identified by Director Merro # FIN-97-003. d. AIM/ADA.: K-12 - Fran the rrost recent Superintendent's Quarterly Report e. f. a. b. C. d. e. f. g. h. i. a. b. C. d. Eligibles: IHys Seived: q:,ening Cash Balance: Federal ReinhJrsaIEnt: student ~ Inccne: Adult~ Inccne: A la carte Inccne: Cbntract ~ Inccne: loans to Program: Other Cash Inccne: 'lbtal: Food: I..aoor: loan Repaynent: Other Expenditures: (FAPD3). Pre-K - Fran other school records. Highest number eligible, by count of applications, on any day during rronth. Number of days served during rronth. Sarne as closing cash balance on prior rronth's claim. All federal reimburserrent received during rronth. All rroney collected during rronth for student lunches \u0026amp; breakfasts. All rroney collected during rronth for adult lunches \u0026amp; breakfasts. All rroney collected during rronth for a la carte items, including second rreals and milk. All rroney collected during rronth for banquets, rreals for Headstart, senior citizens, and any other contracted function. All funds transferred to program frcm operating fund or any other loan source. - All other incare received during rronth, including, but not limited to, state matching funds and interest on investrrents. Add 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e, 2f, 2g and 2h. All food expenditures for all program areas. All labor expenditures for all program areas. All expenditures for repayrrent of loans to program. Total of all other expenditures from child nutrition account during rronth. e. 'lbtal: Add 3a, 3b, 3c and 3d. 4. Closing Cash Balance: Subtract 3e, from 2i. May not be a negative number. 5. Anount of unpaid bills for food, labor and other .rrchases. If expenditures have been paid from operating fund and are to be repaid, they should be included in unpaid bills. 6. Value of inventory of all food, excluding USDA carrrodities. 7. Funds due program, including federal reimburserrent clairred but not received, contract rreals served but not paid, and any other funds due program. 8. Enter total breakfasts and lunches served to students by category (free, :redua:d price, paid) . Enter total. Multiply free, reduced price ar19- total rreals by assigned rate and enter reimburserrent by category. There is no rate for paid rreals. 9. .Adi re:iIIbrrsarent for all categ'.)ri.es. Add reimburserrent for breakfast and lunch. Enter total. 10. Enter nurrber of breakfasts and lunches served to adults and nurrber of contract treals. ll. Claim is to be signed by official autlX\u0026gt;rized in the Agrearent. Signature indicates a review and analysis of rreal counts to ensure accuracy as specified in regulations. Claims are processed weekly in order received. Mail by 10th of month following service of meals to: Child Nutrition Section Arkansas Department of Education 2020 West Third Street, Suite 404 Little Rock, AR 72205 DAILY RECORD FORM DAILY RECORD OF __________ SERVED FOR.___________ 19  (LUNCHES/BREAKFASTS) (SCHOOL) (MONTH) (YR) ' ' It is important that counts be accurate and based upon on-line no int of service record of paid free and reduced price meals EDITCHECKl STUDENT MEALS ADULT MEALS CURRENT TOTAL NUMBER DATE REDUCED PAID l\n\u0026lt;JUDE  l'RJCE  TOTAL .. MEALS k OFELIGIBLES $ PRICE PRICE STUDENT PRICE FREE SERVED FREFi REDUCED $ $ MEALS  $ A B C D E F G H l J K I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ~]] TOTALS *Meals served free to student workers should be reported m the category (free, reduced pnce, paid) for which they are ehg1ble. Record total meals served to student workers during this month (reduced price___, paid___) to document variance in potential and actual income. D A T E 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 PAID TODAY L TOTALS REDUCED PRICE AbV PMT M CHG Pb N 0 CASH MANAGEMENT WORKSHEET PAID TODAY p PAID ADV PMT Q CHG PD R ADULT ...  . .. TOTAL PAID ADV  CHG TODAY PMT PD  s T u V w . . ALA . CARTE AND SECOND MEALS X . \u0026lt; .TOTAL . \u0026lt;2i~f~   y Total Columns (O,S, W,X, Y) must be completed. Other columns are optional. Enter amount of money collected by category. EDIT rnEX:X 1 (nrily Recn:rd Fb:rm) UlRRENI' Nl:M3ER. OF ELIGIBIES: EDIT CllEIX * Enter the current number of students eligible for free and reduced price meals in Col. A \u0026amp; B of the Daily Record Form on the first day of the TTDnth. As changes occur, enter the revised number on the appropriate date. * Canpare the current number of eligible free and reduced price students (Col. A \u0026amp; B) to the number of free and reduced price meals claimed daily (Col. D \u0026amp; E) . The number of free and reduced price meals claimed MET WI' exceed the number of eligibles on file (Col. A \u0026amp; B) for that day. EDIT rnEX:X 2 (See ~tan back) ~ F7\\C.IDR.: * Place the highest number of students eligible for free meals (Col. A, Daily Record Form) and for reduced price meals (Col. B, Daily Record Form) for this TTDnth in Col. I on Edit Check 2 Worksheet. Determine the highest number eligible for paid meals by subtracting the free eligibles and reduced price eligibles fran the average daily membership (Col. 14, line G on superintendent's Quarterly Attendance Report, Grades K-12, FAPD-3) . Place the number of students eligible for paid meals in Col. I on Edit Check 2 Worksheet. * Calculate the attendance factor by dividing the average daily attendance (ADA) (Col. 13, line G on superintendent's Quarterly Attendance Report, Grades K-12, FAPD-3) by the average daily membership (ACM) (Col. 14 on superintendent's Quarterly Attendance Report, Grades K-12, FAPD-3) . Enter attendance factor in Col. II. Add pre-kindergarten students to ADA \u0026amp; ACM if their meals are claimed for reimbursement. * Multiply the highest number of eligibles for free, reduced price, and paid meals by the attendance factor and enter each in Col. III (attendance adjusted eligibles). * Compare the attendance adjusted eligibles for free meals in Col. III to the number of free meals claimed daily (Col. D, Daily Record Form). Repeat the sane procedure for reduced price meals (Col. E - Daily Record Form) andc for paid meals (Col. F \u0026amp; G - Daily Record Form) . If the number of free, reduced price or paid meals claimed on any day exceeds the attendance adjusted eligibles in Col. III, a p:\u0026gt;tential problem exists. Document valid reasons for variances or take corrective action. JA: 7/01/96 EDIT CHECK 2 \\IJRKSHEET  II Ill SCIIOOL HIGHEST ATTEll\u0026gt;ANCE ATTEll\u0026gt;ANCE IUIIER FACT!lt ADJUSTED ELIGIBLE ELIGIBLES (I X II) FREE REDUCED PAID FREE REDUCED PAID FREE REDUCED PAID FREE REDUCED PAID FREE REDUCED PAID FREE REDUCED PAID FREE REDUCED PAID FREE - REDUCED PAID ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CHILD NUTRITION SECTION ON-SITE REVIEW (Sample Form) School District School ADA EST. PERCENT ATTENDANCE ________ % Prior Month ADP Meal Count On Currently Day of Review Approved Paid Reduced Price Free I. APPLICATION APPROVAL 1. Are applications approved at this school? Responsible party _________ _ 2. Are applications on file correctly approved? 3. Are applications retrievable by school? II. MASTER LIST/ROSTER 1. Is a master list used in the meal count system? 2. Do names listed on the master list match approved applications on file? 3. If more than one list is used (e.g. master list/ticket issuance list/ food service list), are all lists the same? 4. Are all lists updated as needed? (Increased benefits within 3 days decreased benefits within 1D days) IEAL OlJIIT SYSTEM 1. Does the meal count system produce an accurate count of reimbursable meals (free/reduced price/paid) served to eligible children? a) Does the collection procedure in use match the approved collection procedure? b) If the meal count is not taken at the end of the food service line, does the school have a system to monitor reinbursable,meals? c) Are only meals that meet the meal pattern requirement counted and claimed for reimbursement? d) Does the collection procedure in use ensure that only one meal per child per day is claimed for reimbursement? 2. Does the meal count system prevent overt identification? a) Is the mediun of exchange made available to all students at the same location? b) Does the mediun of exchange use prohibited codes for identifying students as free, reduced, or paid? c) Does the school have a trained substitute cashier? YES NO N/A IV. IEAl IXIIIT RECXIIDING All) EDIT CHECICS 1. Does the school use proper procedures for counting and recording meals? 2. For any day during the review month, does the nllli:\u0026gt;er of free and reduced price meals exceed the nllli:\u0026gt;er of free and reduced price eligibles? 3. For any day during the review month, does the nllli:\u0026gt;er of meals claimed exceed average daily attendance? If yes, explain in conments (VI.) 4. Does the school have proper procedures to manage and safeguard cash (reconciliation, extra item sales, adult meals, etc.)? V. RESULTS OF REVIE\\I 1. Is corrective action plan required? 2. Is follow-up review required? VI. CCJIENTS, NOTES, All) \u0026lt;BSERVATIONS DURING THE REVIEV VII. SUGGESTED CORRECTIVE ACTION (Must be completed within 45 days) YES NO N/A Initial Review Completed: Follow-Up Review Showing Satisfactory Completion of Corrective Action: (Date) (Date) Signature of Reviewer Signature of Reviewer Signature of Manager Signature of Manager JA: 7/01/95 .. CCMPIEIE BY DECEMBER 15 VEIDFICATICN SlM-1ARY District ----------- * SELECTION ME:IHOD: OR RANIXM _____ applications on file October 31, 19 _ total# _____ :i:,ercent of applications verified FOCUSED _____ total applications on file October 31, 19 _ total# ----- focxi stanp/AFDC applications on file October 31, 19 total# ----- % of non-focxi stanp/AFDC applications verified ----- % of focxi stanp/AFDC applications verified - * BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF ME:IHOD USED TD SELECT APPLICATIONS FDR VERIFICATION: * SOURCE (S) OF INFDRMATION USED: _____ wage stubs collateral contacts ----- focxi stanp/AFDC office * STATUS rnANGES AFTER VERIFICATION: _____ reduced price to free ----- reduced price to full price ----- free to reduced price free to full price ----- _____ no change - * Refer to Eligibility Guidance for Sclx:x::\u0026gt;l M=als August 1990 pages 41-59 JA: 7/01/95 1D BE RETAINED BY SCHOOL Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION REC4 S TATE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 , -~ENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division -  NO: CUR-97-001 .JIii 1 B 1996 Office of Desegregation Monitoring ~-.._ -- - .......... ........ ~ ..,. Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: Title I Coordinators Page: 1 of 1 Date: July 11, 1996 Type of Memo: Administrative Response Required By: Those Affected There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Planning \u0026amp; Curriculum: Jim Boardman Subject: Compensatory Education Index Code: IHBD Title I Summer School Data Gathering Instrument Regulatory Authority: 20 USC 6491 Contact Person: Bob Kerr Phone No: 682-4269 The enclosed forms are for those school districts that spent Title I funds for summer school. This form is to report the summer school project(s) approved in your FY 1996 Title I plan. Please retain a copy of the completed report for your files and return the original report to this office no later than August 1, 1 996. Approval of the FY 1997 Title I plan will not be delayed because of this supplemental report. If your district did not spend Title I funds for this FY 1996 summer school, you are not required to report. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call 682-4269. TITLE I DEMOGRAPHIC DATA COLLECTION FORM SUMMER SCHOOL 1995-96 SCHOOL YEAR Submitted by: School District LEA Code Number Authorized by: Original Signature of the Superintendent Contact Person: Name and Phone Number of Contact Person Date Submitted: -------------------- DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING THIS REPORT IS AUGUST 1, 1996 SUBMIT ONE COPY TO: Bob Kerr, Coordinator Title I, ESEA State Education Building #4 Capitol Mall, Room 202-B Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1071 (FOR STATE DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) REPORT REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: ____________ / ______ _ Title I Program Advisor Date Approved DISTRICT LEA CODE NUMBER NARRATIVE EVALUATION OF TITLE I SUMMER PROGRAMS On plain white paper, attach a write-up on the total instructional program in terms of its success or failure in the Title I objective(s) as set out in the school's plan. Use the following outline: INTRODUCTION 1. 2. 3. 4. Name of local educational Length of term - Beginning: agency. weeks. Ending: Length of treatment - per week. FOR EACH SCHOOL, PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: TOTAL NUMBER NO. STUDENTS NO. STUDENTS OF STUDENTS ACHIEVING NOT ACHIEVING GRADE LEVEL IN SCHOOL* OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE WAS OBJECTIVE ACHIEVED? YES NO *Number of students not completing pre or post measuring instrument USC 6311 (Public Law 103-382) FED-01-00-003 7/96R Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION REC~ ~~,,1,! ''E,C PITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 C, ~ ~} GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division JllL 1 8 199g Offii\ne of Desegregation Monitol'lng Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: Other Educational Agencies NO: FIN-97-004 Page: 1 of 1 Date: July 11 , 1996 Type of Memo: Regulatory Response Required By: None There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Regulations Communication Index Code: CHC Rules and Regulations Governing Waivers of Minimum Salaries for Certified Personnel Regulatory Authority: Ark. Code Ann. 6-17-1001 (Supp. 1995) and 6-11 -105 (Rep!. 1993) Contact Person: John Kunkel Phone No: 682-4258 Attached are the Rules and Regulations Governing Waivers of Minimum Salaries for Certified Personnel. These regulations are enacted pursuant to the State Board of Education's specific authority under Arkansas Code Annotated 6-17-1001 (Supp. 1995) and 6-11-105 (Rep!. 1993). Arkansas Department of Education Rules and Regulations Governing Waivers of Minimum Salaries for Certified Personnel c\n-, I..O 1.00 Regulatory Authority /-\u0026lt; ~\n:\n~u: ~ ~~: ~~= ~ -. 1.01 These regulations shall be known as the Department of Edu~ati5tf~g~tioJs \"71 governing the waiving of minimum salaries to be paid certified/pe1*-pjip-:_e1. - ,:~ 1:=: I\n:::.\n:\n...,: -i, -  -- / - ::.: --\n- -  1 ., 1.02 These re11:ulations are enacted pursuant to the State Board oftEd~6\"h'~ecinC:::, authority-under Arkansas Codes Annotated 6-17-1001 and 6-1 -l~Rep~99:~- 2.00 Purpose 2.01 It is the purpose of these regulations to set general guidelines for granting waivers to school districts which cannot meet the provisions of Arkansas Code Annotated 6-1 7- 1001. 3.00 Filing a Request 3.01 School district requests for waivers shall be on forms provided by the Arkansas Department of Education. 4.00 District Eligibility Criteria 4.01 School districts shall meet the minimum expenditure requirements of Ark. Code Ann. 6-20-310 (Supp. 1995) for the school year for which the request is made. 4.02 School districts shall have a base millage of no less than 25 mills available for maintenance and operation. 4.03 A school district must show that its combined teacher salary, operating and debt service fund balances will be depleted within three years if relief is not granted. 4.04 Prior to receiving a waiver, a school district shall seek assistance from the Department of Education in developing and filing a plan with the Department for the purpose of eliminating the need for a waiver as soon as possible. -L05 Prior to receiving a waiver, the school board shall review in a regularly scheduled public meeting the need for a waiver, the plan to eliminate the future needs for a waiver which is to be filed with the Department, and implications for all educational programs should the waiver be granted. ADE 022-1 5.00 Review and Approval of Requests 5.01 A committee appointed by the Director of the Department of Education shall review waiver applications and make recommendations. The Director shall have final authority in the disposition of requests. 5.02 One year approved waivers shall be tentative subject to findings which reflect compliance with all eligibility criteria. 5.03 Relief shall not be granted beyond an amount necessary to prevent the district from depleting its balances within three years. ADE 0~2-2 Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 REce1vr~ GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division NO: FIN-97-008 ,JUI 1 8 1996 Page: 1 of I Date: July 11 , 1 996 Office ot oesegregalion MonitoriflQ Type of Memo: Informational Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Response Required By: Those Affected There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Student Transportation Volunteer Assistance Program Regulatory Authority: N/ A Contact Person: Spence Holder Index Code: EEA Phone No: 682-4264 As a result of a successful training program for Arkansas School Bus Mechanics, a cooperative agreement among the mechanics has materialized. The mechanics have agreed to offer their service to assist schools with buses that experience mechanical problems on activity trips within driving distance of the mechanics' home school. The superintendents and mechanics who participate in the program are to be commended for the cooperative effort to assist other school districts during mechanical breakdowns on activity trips. This program may have a fee attached to it for parts and/or labor. The attached list of mechanics may be posted in each activity trip bus. The names and phone numbers are for emergency school use only. Please in-service the activity trip drivers on the proper use of the program. ARKANSAS SCHOOL BUS MECHANICS WORKSHOP CONWAY CAREER CENTER - CONWAY, ARKANSAS - JUNE 17-21, 1996 SCHOOL PHONE NUMBERS DISTRICT COUNTY MECHANIC SC!:IOOL SHOP HOME Altheimer Unified Jefferson William Wheat 766-8358 766-4840 Altheimer Unified Jefferson Henry Jynes 766-8358 766-4840 766-4847 Altheimer Unified Jefferson Milbourn Clark 766-8358 766-4840 766-4646 Arkadelphia Clark Wayne Hasley 246-5564 246-1128 246-5706 Ashdown Little River Roy Mitchell 898-3208 898-4415 898-8490 Ashdown Little River Sammy Walker 898-3208 898-4415 903/838-0845 Atkins Pope Jim Camp 641-7871 641-7030 641-2111 Bald Knob White Alvin Holden 724-3361 724-3635 724-5603 Bald Knob White Odell Martin 724-3361 724-3635 724-3876 Barton-Lexa Phillips Dencil Johnston 572-7294 572-1275 572-4307 Beebe White Stanley Woods 882-5463 882-3391 882-6253 Benton Saline James Ray 776-5704 776-5706 778-5897 Benton Saline Betty Hobbs 776-5704 776-5706 776-2863 Bentonville Benton Cliff Downs 271-1100 271-3800 271-8814 Bentonville Benton Don Beard 271-1100 271-3800 248-7417 Bergman Boone Harold Garrison 741-5213 741-5213 Bismarck Hot Springs Tony Tart 865-4888 865-3964 865-6708 - Blevins Hempstead Gene Moses 874-2801 874-2266 874-2872 Blytheville Mississippi Sam Maupin 762-2053 763-0551 763-8947 Blytheville Mississippi Bill West 762-2053 763-0551 763-5026 Booneville Logan Richard Brannam 675-3504 675-2620 928-5680 Bradford White Brent Piker 344-2707 344-2660 Bradley Lafayette Milan Gallander 894-3316 894-3314 894-6141 Brinkley Monroe Charles Sartin 734-5000 734-5021 734-4795 Bryant Saline David Henson 847-5600 847-5641 Bryant Saline Jimmy Lee 847-5600 847-5641 Cabot Lonoke Jimmy Hull 843-3562 843-7848 Cabot Lonoke Ronnie Russell 843-3562 843-7848 Cabot Lonoke Allan Ogden 843-3562 843-7848 Camden Fairview Ouachita Linny Oakley 836-4193 231-6885 836-5028 Camden Fairview Ouachita Lonnie Hall 836-4193 231-6885 837-1354 Carlisle Lonoke Wayne Coffelt 552-3931 552-3196 552-7290 Charleston Franklin Virgil Watson 965-7160 965-7392 965-2695 Clay County Clay David Scallion 595-3151 595-3201 595-2504 Clinton Van Buren Lonnie Flannery 745-2135 745-4212 745-5236 Conway Faulkner John Southerland 450-4800 450-4892 327-4206 Conway Faulkner Billy Brazear 450-4800 450-4892 336-4753 - Conway Faulkner Rick Bane 450-4800 450-4892 336-9003 Cotter Baxter Donald Marler 435-6171 Ext. 134 430-5490 County Line Franklin Robert Greb 635-2113 635-2113 635-5102 ARKANSAS SCHOOL BUS MECHANICS WORKSHOP - CONWAY CAREER CENTER-CONWAY, ARKANSAS JUNE 17-21, 1996 SCHOOL PHONE NUMBERS DISTRICT CQUNTY MECHANIC SCHOOL SHOP HOME Crossett Ashley Wayne Jordan 364-6300 364-3225 364-6364 Crossett Ashley Charlie Jordan 364-6300 364-3225 364-6364 Cutter Morning Star Garland Eddy Poole 262-2414 262-5568 262-1452 Dardanelle Yell Terry Standridge 229-4111 229-4111 229-1692 Deer Newton Vernie Heydenreich 428-5433 428-5587 428-5882 Delaplaine Greene Kenny Allison 249-3898 249-3205 586-0692 Delta Special Desha Preston Greer 644-3800 644-3004 644-3877 Des Arc Prairie Howard Hinshaw 256-4166 256-4166 Devalls Bluff Prairie Wayne Guenther 998-2361 998-2407 Dewitt Arkansas Leon Duncan 946-3576 946-3576 946-4100 Dewitt Arkansas Tim Criswell 946-3576 946-3576 282-3452 Dollarway Jefferson Richard Welch 534-7003 534-8478 247-2525 Drew Central Drew Keith Norris 367-5369 367-3266 367-2143 Dumas Desha Homer Elliott 382-6436 382-6436 382-6562 El Dorado Union Kenneth Vaughn 864-5086 864-5086 El Dorado Union Ronald Harrison 864-5086 864-5086 863-8221 - Elaine Phillips Charles Brown 827-6395 827-6359 827-6865 England Lonoke Garland McRae 842-2031 842-2811 842-3880 Eudora Chicot Charles Hicks 355-2546 355-4066 355-2526 Farmington Washington Harold Smith 267-6028 267-6023 846-2773 Fayetteville Washington David Whittenburg 444-3095 444-3095 443-5056 Flippin Marion Roy Roberts 453-2270 453-2230 453-3362 Fordyce Dallas William Vetter 352-3005 352-8419 352-8557 Forrest City St. Francis Jerry Kilgore 633-1485 633-2416 633-8122 Forrest City St. Francis Alvin Gregory 633-1485 633-2416 630-1725 Fort Smith Sebastian Ken Patterson 785-2501 785-2501 785-2944 Fort Smith Sebastian Daniel McCleary 785-2501 785-2501 785-2955 Genoa Central Miller Gary Green 653-2272 653-2272 653-4572 Gosnell Mississippi Stan Gable 532-4000 532-4025 532-5247 Gravette Benton Richard Carver 782-5268 787-5964 787-6114 Gravette Benton Robert Littrell 782-5268 787-5964 787-5887 Greenbrier Faulkner Randall Reed 679-2113 679-3169 679-4541 Greenbrier Faulkner Curtis Bradley 679-2113 679-3169 679-6610 Greene Co. Tech Greene Brian Hall 236-2762 239-3281 Greenland Washington Lester Shadrick 521-2366 521-7361 443-1609 Guy Perkins Faulkner Jerry Grissom 679-3507 679-3507 679-5602 Hamburg Ashley Richard Smith 853-2892 853-2892 473-2371 - Hamburg Ashley Thurman Shaw 853-2892 853-2892 473-2582 Hampton Calhoun Bill Hannegan 798-2229 798-2673 798-2780 Harmony Grove Ouachita Homer Purifoy 574-0867 574-0867 574-2429 ARKANSAS SCHOOL BUS MECHANICS WORKSHOP CONWAY CAREER CENTER - CONWAY, ARKANSAS JUNE 17-21, 1996 - SCHOOL PHONE NUMBERS DISTRICT COUNTY MECHANIC SCHOOL SHOP HOME Harrisburg Poinsett Billy Loughary 578-2416 578-2415 578-2055 Harrisburg Poinsett Terry Pierce 578-2416 578-2415 578-2749 Harrison Boone Rick Rogers 741-7600 741-5847 741-5356 Harrison Boone Dennis Carter 741-7600 741-5847 420-3303 Harrison Boone John Gragg 741-7600 741-5847 365-0538 Hartford Sebastian Clyde Mendenhall 639-2910 Hazen Prairie Vernon Owens 255-4549 998-2334 Heber Springs Cleburne Jackie Tapley 362-2451 362-7180 556-5336 Heber Springs Cleburne Tim Baldwin 362-2451 362-7180 362-7895 Helena W. Helena Phillips Henry Danaby 338-8172 338-8992 Helena W. Helena Phillips William Johnson 338-8172 338-8992 338-6391 Hermitage Bradley Moses Williams 463-2246 463-2647 463-2521 Hope Hempstead Ron Koontz 722-2700 722-2790 722-6204 Hot Springs Garland Melvin Ashley 623-2995 623-2995 624-6216 Hot Springs Garland Glenn James 623-2995 623-2995 767-3620 Izard County Izard Ronnie Walker 322-7229 322-7373 368-4671 Jackson County Jackson Bobby Clark 349-2657 349-2657 349-5357 - Jessieville Garland Wayne Ritter 984-5381 767-0409 767-9583 Jonesboro Craighead Jerry Lee Lewis 933-5800 933-5897 972-0196 Jonesboro Craighead Harold Bailey 933-5800 933-5897 886-7256 Kingsland Cleveland Michael Jones 348-5381 348-5783 352-8051 Laidlaw Transit Pulaski Keith Baier 570-4000 570-4006 941-2814 Laidlaw Transit Pulaski Jerry Brewer 570-4000 570-4006 455-1091 Laidlaw Transit Pulaski Ray Burke 570-4000 570-4006 Lake Hamilton Garland Willis Loper 767-2306 767-9393 624-5187 Lake Hamilton Garland Vernon Crews 767-2306 767-9393 767-5977 Lakeside Chicot Lamar Payne 263-3883 265-7320 Lakeside Garland Ray Ennis 262-1880 262-2476 767-1725 Lakeside Garland Bob Kellar 262-1880 262-2476 624-6257 Lamar Johnson Don White 885-3907 885-3489 885-3678 Lamar Johnson Don Cagle 885-3907 885-3489 885-3407 Lee County Lee Samuel Jordan 295-7100 295-7134 Leslie Searcy Steven Bresette 447-2431 447-6100 745-2940 Lincoln Washington Willis Winkler 824-3031 824-3024 824-5878 Lonoke Lonoke William Bynum 676-3639 676-3382 843-3950 Magnet Cove Hot Springs George Dorris 332-5468 337-4426 337-1250 Magnolia Columbia Walter Hunter 234-4933 234-5853 234-1455 Magnolia Columbia Mark Trower 234-4933 234-5853 234-8309 - Malvern Hot Springs David Jordan 332-7500 332-7570 865-2561 Malvern Hot Springs James Clifton 332-7500 332-7570 337-5458 ARKANSAS SCHOOL BUS MECHANICS WORKSHOP - CONWAY CAREER CENTER - CONWAY, ARKANSAS JUNE 17-21, 1996 SCHOOL PHONE NUMBERS DISTRICT COUNTY MECHANIC SCHOOL SHOP HOME Mammoth Spring Fulton Jerry Hardin 625-3612 625-3612 895-3985 Marion Crittenden Calvin Parnell 739-5100 739-5190 739-1503 Marion Crittenden Robert Compton 739-5100 739-5190 343-2763 Marshall Searcy Norbert Novak 448-3011 448-3268 448-2566 Marshall Searcy Ray Clark 448-3011 448-3268 448-5715 Marvell Phillips Levi Prowell 829-2101 829-2381 829-2960 Marvell Phillips Lee Tate 829-2101 829-2381 338-9221 Mayflower Faulkner Buddy Huett 470-0506 470-1344 470-0060 Maynard Randolph Wendell Johnston 647-2051 647-2011 647-2229 McCrory Woodruff Jerry Morgan 731-2574 731-2574 731-5597 McGehee Desha Doyle Burke 222-3670 222-4259 367-5705 McNeil Columbia Willie Leaks 695-3342 695-3500 695-3963 Melbourne Izard Dewayne Wallis 368-4500 368-4500 368-4105 Mena Polk Phillip Williams 394-1710 394-5252 Mineral Springs Howard Sherman West 287-4747 845-4979 845-4979 Monticello Drew Billy Boyd 367-6862 367-6690 392-2220 Monticello Drew Danny Lloyd 367-6862 367-6690 367-8261 Mountain View Stone Johnny McIntire 269-3443 269-3922 269-3583 Mountain View Stone Larry Sutton 269-3443 269-3922 269-8293 Mt Vernon/Enola Faulkner Dave Smith 849-2211 849-2211 849-3120 Mulberry Crawford Keith Moore 997-1701 474-1592 Nashville Howard Dan Detar 845-3425 845-7331 845-2120 Nevada Nevada Jim Cross 871-2418 871-2418 871-2313 Nevada Nevada Eddie Heard 871-2418 871-2418 Nevada Nevada Homer Green 871-2418 871-2418 887-2422 Newport Jackson John Cooper 523-1311 523-1322 523-8261 Newport Jackson Mike Barnes 523-1311 523-1322 523-8602 Norfork Baxter Jewell Stinson 499-7193 499-7194 297-4240 Northeast Ar Greene Dub Taylor 236-2238 586-0483 239-5546 Northeast Ar Greene Rickey Norman 236-2238 586-0483 586-0463 North Little Rock Pulaski Johnny Morris 340-5150 340-5150 771-4670 North Little Rock Pulaski Jim Henry 340-5150 340-5150 753-7604 North Little Rock Pulaski Troy Tucker 340-5150 340-5150 920-8525 North Little Rock Pulaski Ray Hollister 340-5150 340-5150 812-0399 Ola Yell Elmer Padgett 489-5251 489-4169 272-4237 Omaha Boone Don Young 426-3366 426-4135 426-5447 - Ouachita Hot Spring Walter White 384-2318 384-2397 384-2251 Ozark Franklin Joe Bond 667-4118 667-2742 667-3110 Palestine Wheatley St. Francis James Moore 581-2646 581 -2246 581-2256 ARKANSAS SCHOOL BUS MECHANICS WORKSHOP  CONWAY CAREER CENTER - CONWAY, ARKANSAS - JUNE 17-21, 1996 SCHOOL PHONE NUMBERS DISTRICT CQUNTY MECHANIC SCHOOL SHOP HOME Pea Ridge Benton Carl Landis 451-8181 451-8181 451-1796 Perryville Perry George Robinson 889-2327 889-2329 662-4722 Perryville Perry Arthur Weith 889-2327 889-2327 889-2689 Piggott Clay Charles Conley 598-2572 598-3092 598-3722 Pine Bluff Jefferson Lester Johnson 543-4200 543-4271 879-0488 Pine Bluff Jefferson Cedric Bennett 543-4200 543-4271 534-4640 Pine Bluff Jefferson Kevin King 543-4200 543-4271 628-3911 Pine Bluff Jefferson Fred Bennett 543-4200 543-4271 536-7187 Pocahontas Randolph Steve Rose 892-4573 Ext. 234 892-9034 Pocahontas Randolph Robert Barnett 892-4573 Ext. 234 647-2485 Pottsville Pope Leonard Hudson 968-8101 Ext. 16 965-1436 Prairie Grove Washington Jerry Farmer 846-4213 846-4233 848-3322 Prescott Nevada Fred Davis 887-3016 887-3221 887-3918 Pulaski County Pulaski Edward Anderson 490-5760 490-5760 490-4176 Pulaski County Pulaski Thomas Pearson 490-5760 490-5760 897-4544 Pulaski County Pulaski Henry Hawkins 490-5760 490-5760 988-1890 Pulaski County Pulaski James Perdicaris 490-5760 490-5760 985-2851 Quitman Cleburne Joe Barber 589-3156 589-2731 589-3890 Randolph Co Randolph Bobby Matthews 869-2479 EXT 24 892-7673 River Valley Lawrence W.O. Watson 528-3856 528-3856 528-3887 River Valley Lawrence A.L. Bennett 528-3856 528-3856 Riverview White Windle Porter 279-0540 279-0038 323-4462 Riverview White James Gray 279-0540 279-0038 729-5692 Rose Bud White Harvey McKay 556-5815 556-5612 556-5648 Rural Special Stone LE. Martin 363-4365 948-2360 Russellville Pope Bobby Carter 968-1306 968-2906 967-4586 Russellville Pope Kenneth Lay 968-1306 968-2906 967-5784 Salem Fulton Ed Foster 895-2516 895-2419 895-4191 Saratoga Hemstead Wade Jackson 388-9262 388-9235 388-9235 Searcy White Lonnie Collins 268-6954 278-2295 Searcy White Danny Martin 268-6954 278-2295 279-3021 Sheridan Grant Terry Draper 942-2413 942-2413 337-1458 Sheridan Grant Clayton Smith 942-2413 942-2413 Sheridan Grant Ron York 942-2413 942-2413 942-8820 Shirley Van Buren Donald Bonds 723-8191 723-4251 745-4435 Shirley Van Buren Mike Hennessee 723-8191 723-4251 723-4238 Siloam Springs Benton Larry Dennis 524-3191 524-5614 524-8598 Sloan Hendrix Lawrence Joe Rone 869-2361 869-2361 869-2849 - So Conway Co Conway Tommy Cook 354-9400 354-9421 354-5837 So Conway Co Conway James Stacy 354-9400 354-9421 354-6958  - ARKANSAS SCHOOL BUS MECHANICS WORKSHOP CONWAY CAREER CENTER - CONWAY, ARKANSAS JUNE 17-21, 1996 SCHOOL PHONE NUMBERS DISTRICT COUNTY MECHANIC SCHOOL SHOP HOME Southside Independence Aldon Bell 251-2341 251-4004 251-2014 Sparkman Dallas Loyce Brazeale 678-2243 678-2243 678-2508 St. Joe Searcy Bob Grinder 439-2213 439-2213 439-2241 Star City Lincoln Tommy Weeks 628-4237 628-5951 628-1226 Stone County Stone Lanny Avey 746-4303 746-4303 447-2933 Strong Union Billy Manning 797-7322 797-2678 318-292-5234 Stuttgart Arkansas Willie Johnson 673-3561 673-7036 673-4537 Texarkana Miller Larry Anderson 772-1401 772-1281 774-0152 Texarkana Miller Chris Richardson 772-1401 772-1281 792-2195 Valley Springs Boone Charles Estes 429-5217 429-8128 743-2538 Van Buren Crawford Shaun Pinkerton 474-7942 471-3140 474-4719 Van Buren Crawford Bob Boston 474-7942 471-3140 474-6742 Van Buren Crawford Eugene Bredrick 474-7942 471-3140 474-3649 Viola Fulton Dennis Richardson 458-2213 458-2213 458-2446 Waldron Scott Ed Hawkins 637-3179 637-3332 637-2597 Waldron Scott Walter Embrey 637-3179 637-3332 637-4381 Warren Bradley Walice White 226-8500 226-8508 226-7861 Warren Bradley Jackie Hall 226-8500 226-8508 Watson Chapel Jefferson Eddie Gaston 879-0220 879-0231 535-5204 Watson Chapel Jefferson Darrell Donaldson 879-0220 879-0231 628-4938 Weiner Poinsett Bill Reese 684-2253 Ext. 25 578-2024 Weiner Poinsett Silias Phillips 684-2253 Ext. 25 684-7166 West Fork Washington Doug Cantrell 839-2231 839-2366 839-3090 West Memphis Crittenden James Ashley 735-1915 735-8220 732-0443 Westside Craighead Richard Bates 935-7503 972-1081 972-5936 Westside Craighead Homer Bishop, Jr 935-7503 972-1081 477-5511 White Hall Jefferson Barry Walters 247-2171 247-3564 247-5006 White Hall Jefferson Randy Reynolds 247-2171 247-3564 247-2188 Wynne Cross Jimmy Mitchell 238-5030 238-5033 238-3497 Wynne Cross David Moyers 238-5030 238-5033 238-2059 Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (50~~A5ee /rr.!'D GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division MC\\.-,, ~  C NO: FIN-97-005 Page: 1 of2 .1111 1 8 1996 Date: July 11, 1996 Office of Dasegregation Momtonnw Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: Other Educational Agencies Type of Memo: Regulatory Response Required By: Optional There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Audits Index Code: DIE Rules and Regulations Governing Audit Requirements for School Districts Regulatory Authority: Ark. Code Ann. 6-11-105 (1993 Repl .) and 6-20-311 (Supp. 1995) Contact Person: Paul Blaney Phone No: 682-4258 Attached you will find the Arkansas Department of Education Rules and Regulations for Audit Requirements for School Districts. These rules and regulations are enacted pursuant to the State Board of Education's authority under Ark. Code Ann.  6-11-105 (1993 Rep!.) and 6-20-311 (Supp. 1995). Effective for the 1995-96 fiscal year, Department of Education rules and regulations regarding audit requirements for school districts provides for, as a minimum, comments on compliance with provisions listed in Ark. Code Ann.  6-1-101 (Rep!. 1993 ). In addition, comments on compliance are also specified for certain other financial laws or regulations designated by the Department of Education. According to section 3.04.2 of the rules and regulations, school districts whose audits will not be conducted by the Division of Legislative Audit, must obtain a list of these other compliance items not listed in Ark. Code Ann.  6-1-101 from the Department of Education before contracting for an audit. The contract for audit services must include these additional compliance requirements. Form OCI 95-96, which is a list of the applicable laws and regulations not specifically addressed in Ark. Code Ann.  6-1-101 (Rep!. 1993), is attached. This list is not Director's Memo No. FIN-97-005 July 11, 1996 Page 2 of2 to be construed so as to exclude performance of other audit procedures deemed necessary under professional auditing standards. Form OCI 95-96 will be updated on an annual basis to reflect changes in legislation and/or ADE rules and regulations. Section 3.04.2 of the rules and regulations requires that the contract for audit services includes that, upon request by the school district, such documentation shall be supplied to the district. Thus facilitating the further requirement that, if requested, the school district must furnish such documentation to the Department. In conjuction, the Department has developed a worksheet to be used in order to calculate the 70% of net current revenue minimum teacher's salary requirement, as set forth in Ark. Code Ann. 6-20-307 (Supp. 1995). The worksheet must be incorporated as a part of the auditor's working papers and be available to the Department upon request. Copies of the 70% teacher's salary requirement worksheet can be obtained by calling or writing the Department of Education, Local Fiscal Services Division. Districts should note that Ark. Code Ann. 6-1-101 (1993 Repl.), along with form OCI 95-96, provides a list of certain state laws with which all school districts must comply. 1.00 ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION RULES AND REGULATIONS AUDIT REQUIREMENTS FOR SCHOOL DISTRICTS REGULATORY AUTHORITY .'t.\n,/ 1.01 These regulations shall be known as Arkansas Department of Education Re:~~\u0026gt; governing audit requirements for school districts. 1.02 These regulations are enacted pursuant to the State Board Education's authority under Ark. Code Ann.  6-11-105 (1993 Repl.) and 6-20-311 (Supp. 1995). 2.00 PURPOSE 2.01 The purpose of these regulations is to describe reporting and audit requirements for Arkansas school districts. 3.00 SCHOOL DISTRICT AUDIT REQUIREMENTS 3.01 3.02 Annual Audits 3.01.1 The accounts of all school districts shall be audited annually by the Division of Legislative Audit or other certified public accountant. Filing of Audit Reports. 3 .02.1 For audits not conducted by the Division of Legislative Audit, the school district shall file a copy of the district's audit report with all findings, comments and recommendations, including all management letters, with the Arkansas Department of Education within thirty (30) days of receipt of the audit. Within the same time period, the school district shall also file these reports and attachments with the Division of Legislative Audit. Audit reports should be sent to the following addresses: A. Director B. Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol Mall Little Rock, AR 72201 Legislative Auditor Division of Legislative Audit Room 172, State Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 ADE 032-1 3.02.2 For audits conducted by the Division of Legislative Audit, audit reports with all findings, comments and recommendations, including all management letters shall be made available to the Arkansas Department of Education upon presentation of the audit report to the Legislative Joint Auditing Committee. 3.03 Federal Program Compliance. 3.03.1 Each audit report shall reflect a determination of, and report on: A. Compliance with requirements applicable to federal programs identified in the Schedule of Federal Financial Assistance for the audit year\nand B. Whether the school district has an internal control structure to provide reasonable assurance that it is managing federal assistance programs in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, in accordance with Office of Management and Budget (0MB) circular A-128, Audits of State and Local Governments, or other applicable guidance. 3.04 State Program Compliance. 3.04.1 The school audit report shall include, as a minimum, comments on substantial compliance with the provisions listed at Ark. Code Ann.  6-1- 101 (Rep!. 1993) that are in effect for the audit period. 3.04.2 In addition, school audit reports shall include comments on substantial compliance with certain other financial laws or regulations designated by the Department of Education. 3.04.3 For audits not conducted by the Division of Legislative Audit, a school district shall obtain a list of the above mentioned laws and regulations from the Department of Education before contracting for the audit. The contract for audit services shall include these additional compliance requirements. The contract shall also include that, upon request by the school district, documentation evidencing compliance or noncompliance with the provisions mentioned in section 3.04.1 and 3.04.2, shall be supplied to the school district. If requested, the school district shall furnish a copy of these working papers to the Department of Education. 3.05 Accelerated Audits ADE 032-2 3.05.1 If the current year school district's audit report reflects expenditures exceeding total available revenue for the combined Salary, Operating, and Debt Service Funds for the school year, the school district shall provide that the school audit for the next year be started by September 30. 4.00 PRESENTATION OF AUDIT REPORTS. 4.01 Audit reports, along with accompanying comments and recommendations shall be reviewed at the first regularly scheduled school board meeting following receipt of the audit report if the audit report is received by the school board prior to ten (10) days before the regularly scheduled meeting. If the audit report is received by the board or governing body within ten (10) days before a regularly scheduled meeting, the audit report may be reviewed at the next regularly scheduled meeting after the ten-day period. 4.02 Each school board shall take appropriate action relating to each finding and recommendation contained in the audit report. The minutes of the board or governing body shall document the review of the findings and recommendations and the action taken by the school board. ADE 032-3 OTHER COMPLIANCE ITEMS NOT ADDRESSED IN ARK. CODE ANN. 6-1-101 (As Provided In Section 3.04.2 Of The Department Of Education Rules And Regulations Regarding Audit Requirements For School Districts) CODE 6-13-701 \u0026amp; 6-17-918 (Supp. 1995) 6-20-222 (Supp. 1995) 6-20-409 (Supp. 1995) 6-21-301 through 6-21-305 (Rep!. 1993) 19-11-259 \u0026amp; 22-9-20 I through 22-9-203 17-15-302 18-44-503 6-5-303 (Rep!. 1993) 6-13-620 (Supp. 1995) 6-17- I 00 I (Supp. 1995), 6-20-307 (Supp. 1995) \u0026amp; - 6-20-319 (Supp. 1995) 6-20-412 (Rep!. 1993) 6-13-628 (Rep!. 1993), 6-21-60 I (Rep!. 1993) \u0026amp; 6-21-603 (Rep!. 1993) 6-17-1201 through 6-17-1208 (Rep!. 1993) \u0026amp; 6-17-1301 through 6-17-1308 (Rep!. 1993) 6-13-604 through 6-13-616 (Rep!. 1993) 6-20-120 I through 6-20-1215 (Supp. 1995) 6-13-619 (Supp. 1995) 26-80-110 NOTICE DESCRIPTION Powers and Duties-District Treasurer Collateralization Requirement for Deposits of School Funds Petty Cash Funds. Bid Requirements and Purchasing Procedures Requirement of Architect on Projects over $100,000. Construction Bond Requirement Educational Excellence Trust Funds Powers and Duties-School Districts Minimum Teacher's Salary Requirements Nonrecurring Salary Payments Related Pat1y Transactions Sick Leave Provisions for Teachers and Other Employees Number of Board Members, Vacancies, Appointments, Etc. Commercial Bonds Required Regular Board Meetings Current Expenditures Tax The above list is not to be construed so as to exclude performance of other audit procedures deemed necessary under professional auditing standards. This list is prepared as a supplement to the Department of Education Rules and Regulations regarding Audit Requirements for School Districts. It details certain legal statutes, in addition to those referenced in ACA 6-1-101 (Rep!. 1993), that all School Districts must comply with. Form: OCl9596 ADE Memos - Received 7-23-96  Public Hearing Proposed Rules and Regulations Governing the Distribution of District Fiscal Crisis Relief  School Funds Rules and Regulations Governing the Distribution oflsolated Funding  Summer Program Administration  School Funds/Types of Funds State Equalization and Trust Fund Aid Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION C RE ~ff' ~ CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 b~ V tt\nU GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division NO: FIN-97-0 I 2 .1111 2 2 l996 Page: 1 of 1 omce of D868Qregaiion MonitonnQ Date: July 18, 1996 Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: Educational Agencies Type of Memo: Informational Response Required By: Optional There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Public Hearing Index Code: BEE Proposed Rules and Regulations Governing the Distribution of District Fiscal Crisis Relief Funds Regulatory Authority: Ark. Code Ann.  6-11-105 (Repl. 1993) Ark. Code Ann.  6-20-305 and 311 (Supp.1995) Contact Person: John Kunkel Phone No: 682-4258 NOTICE: The Arkansas Department of Education, Finance and Administration, will hold a public hearing on Proposed Rules and Regulations Governing the Distribution of District Fiscal Crisis Relief Funds. The public hearing will be held Tuesday, July 30, 1996, at 10:00 a.m. in the Auditorium of the Arch Ford Education Building, Little Rock, Arkansas. Copies of the proposed rules and regulations are attached. Written comments from the public will be accepted until 4:30 p.m. July 30, 1996. Comments should be sent to: Arkansas Department of Education Attn.: John Kunkel, Coordinator Local Fiscal Services #4 Capitol Mall, Room 202-A Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Arkansas Department of Education Proposed Rules and Regulations Governing the Distribution of District Fiscal Crisis Relief Funds. 1.00 Regulatory Authority 1.01 These regulations shall be known as Arkansas Department of Education Rules and Regulations Governing Distribution of District Fiscal Crisis Reiief Funds. 1.02 These regulations are enacted pursuant to the State Board of Education's authority under Ark. Code Ann. 6-11-105 (Repl. 1993) and Ark. Code Ann. 6-20-305 and 311 (1995 Supp.) 2.00 Purpose 2.01 It is the purpose of these regulations to provide a method to determine which school districts are eligible to receive School District Fiscal Crisis Relief funding and how those funds are to be distributed. 3.00 Definitions 3.01 ADM: the total number of days attended plus the total number of days absent by students in grades kindergarten through twelve (K-12) during the first three (3) quarters of each school year, divided by the number of school days actually taught in the district during that period of time rounded to the nearest hundredth. 3.02 Assessment per ADM: the 1995 Total Assessment collectable in 1996 divided by the 1995-1996 ADM. 3.03 Base Millage: twenty-five (25) mills excluding mills required to service debt. 3.04 M\u0026amp;O Revenues for 1995-1996: the sum of Local Revenue less revenue required to service bonded debt, plus MFP A and Trust Funds (Less Isolated Aid, Consolidation Incentive Aid, Act 2 of the First Extraordinary Session of 1 994 Funding and Growth Funding), Transportation Funding, At-Risk Funding, State Teacher Retirement Contribution, State Health Insurance Contribution and, General Facilities Funding. 3 .05 M\u0026amp;O Revenues for 1996-1997: the sum of Local Revenue less revenue required to service bonded debt, plus Total State Equalization Funding per Student, General Facilities Funding, Additional Base Funding and Fiscal Crisis Relief Funds. 3.06 Required M\u0026amp;O Expenditures for 1996-1997: the following required expenditures: Classroom Teacher Expenditures, Special Education Required Expenditures, Gifted and Talented Required Expenditures, Alternative Education Required Expenditures, Vocational Education Required Expenditures\nTeacher Retirement, Health Insurance, and Salary Schedule Required Increase. 4.00 General Provisions 4.01 Any school district that believes that it has suffered adverse fiscal impact due to the implementation of \"The Equitable School Finance System Act of 1995\" shall submit an application to the Arkansas Department of Education by December 2, 1996. 4.02 This application shall be reviewed by the Committee on Adverse Fiscal Impact (hereinafter \"the committee\"). 4.03 The committee shall use all the information in the application as well as any other relevant information on file with the Arkansas Department of Education. The committee shall also have the authority to request additional information or clarifications from the school district. 4.04 The committee shall make a determination as to the eligibility of a school district for Fiscal Crisis Relief funds and the amount of those funds within ninety (90) days of the receipt of the application. 4.05 The Director of the Department of Education, upon recommendation of the Committee, may designate any school district that receives Fiscal Crisis Relief funds a Phase I Fiscally Distressed School District under the provisions of Act 915 of 1995 Rules and Regulations approved by State Board of Education. 5.00 Application 5.01 Any school district submitting an application for Fiscal Crisis Relief funds must be in compliance with the Base Millage requirements. 5.02 In the application, a school district must demonstrate that either its M\u0026amp;O revenues per ADM for the 1995-1996 school year were greater than its M\u0026amp;O revenues per ADM for the 1996-1997 school year or its increase in required M\u0026amp;O expenditures for the 1996-1997 school year were greater than its increase in M\u0026amp;O revenues for the 1996-1997 school year and that these differences in revenues or increased expenditures are solely due to the implementation of Acts 5.03 917and 1194ofl995. /\\ school district shall include with its application any and all documents that substantiate the claims in Section 5.02. These documents can include hut shall not be limited to: budgets, audits, revenue forecasts, property tax collection rates. salary schedules, documents concerning salary schedule waivers or fiscal distress. class schedules, and teacher/student class assignment schedules. 6.00 Committee on Adverse Fiscal Impact. 6.01 The committee shall consist of the following individuals: a) Deputy Director of General Education (or his/her designee)\nb) Assistant Director for Finance and Administration (or his/her designee)\nc) Associate Director for Finance (or his/her designee)\nd) Coordinator of Local Fiscal Services (or his/her designee)\ne) Director of Vocational Education (or his/her designee)\nand, 6.02 The committee shall review all applications after December 2, 1996. 6.03 The committee shall observe the following criteria in disbursing Fiscal Crisis Relief funds: a) No one school district shall receive over ten percent (10%) of the total funds available for Fiscal Crisis Relief\nb) The committee shall first review all requests for fiscal crisis relief funds due to a reduction in M\u0026amp;O revenue per ADM and fund those requests which satisfy the criteria to the extent of available funding. If additional funds are available\nthen, c) the Committee shall review applications for Fiscal Crisis Relief funds for required M\u0026amp;O expenditures, and fund these requests which satisfy the criteria to the extent of available funding. d) If funding is not available for the committee to fund the approved requests, the committee shall first give preference to districts with the lowest Assessment per ADM. e) The Committee shall not approve funding in excess of that which is made available for such purpose. 6.04 Upon the completion of the review of the applications, the committee shall forward its findings to the districts who have applied for funds. 6.05 If the committee determines that a school district is eligible and will receive Fiscal - Crisis Relief funds, those findings shall be forwarded to the individuals within the Arkansas Department of Education responsible for the disbursement of funds and for working with fiscally distressed school districts thirty (30) days following the completion of the review. If the decision of the committee is appealed, the findings shall not be forwarded. 7.00 Appeals 7.01 Within fifteen (15) days of the decision of the Committee on Adverse Fiscal Impact, a school district may submit in writing to the Director of General Education an appeal of the committee's ruling. 7.02 The Director shall immediately notify the committee that its decision has been appealed. 7.03 The Director, within twenty (20) working days, shall consider the district's appeal. Gene Wilhoit, Director .. .Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION .. -----------\"\"\"\"'\"'------------------------------------ ~-, 1-\n~~~~I !1 ~ ~ ! K, ~\nKA.!?,~ S ~ ! ~. 2 t: =~ :s GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division . 1111 2 2 1996 Office of Desegregation Mon\\tonng Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: Educational Agencies NO: FIN-97-011 Page: 1 of 1 Date: July 18, 1996 Type of Memo: Regulatory Response Required By: Optional There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: School Funds Index Code: DIB Rules and Regulations Governing the Distribution of Isolated Funding Regulatory Authority: Ark. Code Ann. 6-11-105 (Repl. 1993) and 6-20-305 (Supp. 1995) Contact Person: John Kunkel Phone No: 682-4258 Attached you will find the final Rules and Regulations Governing the Distribution of Isolated Funding. These regulations are enacted pursuant to the State Board of Education's authority under Arkansas Code Annotated  6-11-105 (Repl. 1993) and 6-20-305 (1995 Supp.). Please review the attached rules and regulations. If your school district had a 1995-96 ADM of less than 350, and you think that your district may meet the conditions and criteria in these rules and regulations, please call to obtain the required application forms. The official ADM can be obtained from Line 1 of the State Aid to School District printout. NOTE: If your district received Isolated Funding during the 1995-96 school year, you will automatically be mailed an application form. You do not need to call to obtain this information. Although the rules and regulations (Section 6.02) states that applications are due by May 15, all requests submitted by August 30, 1996, will be considered. If you have any questions or comments, you may contact John Kunkel at the above number. 1.00 Arkansas Department of Education Rules and Regulations Governing the Distribution o/ Isolated Funding Regulatory Authority 1.01 These regulations shall be known as Arkansas Department of Education Regulations governing the distribution of funding to Isolated School Districts in accordance with Section 1 of Act 1194 of 1995. 1.02 These regulations are enacted pursuant to the State Board of Education s authority under Arkansas Code-Annotated 6-11-105 (Rep!. 1993) and 6-20-305 (1995 Supp.). 2.00 Purpose 2.01 It is the purpose of these regulations to establish criteria to identify Isolated School Districts and establish criteria for the allocation of funding. 3.00 Definitions 3.01 ADM Density--is calculated by dividing the ADM by the square miles in a district. 3.02 Average Daily Membership (ADM) -- The total number of days attended plus the total number of days absent by students in grades kindergarten through twelve (K-12) during the first three quarters of the previous school year. divided by the number of school days actually taught in the school district during that period of time rounded up to the nearest hundredth. 3.03 Base Local Revenue Per Student -- If Category 1 is fully funded. the local revenue per student in the Local School District with the highest amount of Local Revenue Per Student. If Category 1 is not fully funded the Revenue Per Student to which the State equalizes calculated by taking the sum of: 3.04 3.05 (1) The total available state aid for State Equalization Funding per student: (2) Ninety-eight percent (98%) of the Base Millage times the total state assessed valuation\nand C? \\.0 (3) Seventy-five ~e~c~nt (75%) of Miscellaneous Funds collecffedl,n\nt!~e pt:\"'iou.~ year: and by d1v1dmg the sum by the total state ADM.\n:\n,~.::: ~ __ I c,-:~:: .. ::. =-\n-q J. .~ - . ' i Base Millage -- means Twenty-five (25) mills excluding mills u~ed A~~0ibtSt:rvic(:-= I\n:\n.:21-.: i::,\n-- 1 l\u0026gt;-. - :ilj Category I Isolated School District --means a school district \\lhic~!1bts~y t~~1w C/)n, . - --=- .....J :-::::: ADE 038-1 (4) of the following five (5) criteria: ( 1) There is a distance of twelve (12) miles or more by hard-surfaced highway from the high school of the district to the nearest adjacent high school in an adjoining district\n(2) A density ratio of transported students which is less than three (3) students per square mile of area\n(3) Geographic barriers such as lakes, rivers, and mountain ranges which impede travel to schools that otherwise would be appropriate for consolidation. cooperative programs and shared services: ( 4) Total area of one hundred ( 100) square miles or greater\n(5) Less than fifty-percent (50%) of bus route on hard-surfaced roads. 3.06 Category II Isolated School District--means a school district that meets the criteria in Section 3.01 and has a ADM Density ofless than 1.2. 3.07 Density Ratio -- is calculated by dividing the ADT (Average Daily Transported) by the number of square miles in a district. 3. 08 Local Revenue Per Student -- In each year ninety-eight percent (98%) of the amount ofrevenue available, whether or not collected, in a Local School District. solely from the levy of the Base Millage plus seventy-five percent (75%) of the Miscellaneous A Funds collected in the previous year divided by the ADM of such Local School W District for the previous year. 4.00 Conditions for Assistance Eligibility 4.01 School districts shall have a base millage of no less than 25 mills. 4.02 The district's budget must be prepared by the local district with Department of Education approval. 4.03 The district has an average daily membership of less than three hundred fifty (350). 4.04 The district must meet the minimum standards for accreditation of public schools prescribed by law and regulation. ADE 038-2 - 5.00 Calculation 5.01 Category I funding provided to qualifying Local School Districts from funds made available for that purpose shall be calculated as follows: (350 - Previous vear's ADM) 850 X Previous years ADM X Base Local Revenue Per Student 5.02 Category II funding shall be calculated at 50% of the Category I funding. 5.03 Category I Isolated School Districts shall receive Category I funding. - ----- - 5.04 Category II Isolated School Districts shall receive both Category I and Category II funding. 5.05 Category I shall be fully funded before Category II is funded. A funding factor shall be established by the State Department of Education to ensure that the calculation of Category I and Category II funding shall not exceed the funds made available for that purpose. 5.06 If a district's Local Revenue Per Student exceeds the Base Local Revenue Per Student, the following formula to calculate Isolated Aid will be used: (Category I funding + Category II funding) + ((Base Local Revenue Per Student minus Local Revenue Per Student) times ADM) 6.00 Application for Aid 6.01 School districts applications for Isolated Status shall be on forms provided by the Arkansas Department of Education. 6.02 Applications for Isolated Status are due by May 15, preceding the school year for which Isolated Funding is to be provided. 6.03 The Department of Education shall review all applications for isolated status to determine compliance with all eligibility criteria. 7.00 Expiration Clause 7 .01 These regulations expire June 30, 1997. ADE 038-3 I Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION d?Es~1tTM[~!K.~\nKA~!?,:rd~!!,2~ GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division .1111 2 2 1996 NO: CUR-97-002 Page: 1 of 1 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Date: July 18, 1996 Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: Summer School Directors Type of Memo: Informational Response Required By: Those Affected There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Planning \u0026amp; Curriculum: Jim Boardman Subject: Summer Program Aministration Index Code: CGA Regulatory Authority: Ark. Code Ann. 6-16-703 (1993) \u0026amp; Act 348 of 1995 Contact Person: Mary Kaye McKinney Phone No: 682-5615 Enclosed is the Summer School student data form. The student data form will need to be completed and returned by August 31, 1996. This will provide the necessary child count regarding the actual number of children served as well as other data information. The only difference from last year's form is the addition of the number of students who have previously participated in summer school. A representative from the Department was scheduled to visit each summer school program across the state. Feedback from those visits were positive and indicated a lot of motivated students. Thank you and each teacher for the work effort and energy exerted to make a successful enriching experience for so many students. Please contact Mary Kaye McKinney or Shirlee Johnson at 682-5615 if you have questions regarding completion of the data form. Return form to: Mary Kaye McKinney, #4 Capitol Mall Room 401-B, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201. K-5 SUMMER SCHOOL STUDENT DAT A FORM DISTRICT _________ LEA# ___ DIST. PROVIDING SER. _ _ W=WHITE B=BLACK H=HISPANIC A=ASIAN N=NATIVE AMERICAN INDIAN GRADE # SERVED # REPEATING # RETAINED #RETAINED # SPECIAL # LIMITED # TITLE #PRESCHOOL ss ATTENDED DIDNOT ED ENGLISH I EXPERIENCE ss. ATTENDSS PROFICIENT M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F KW KB KH KA KN IW 1B IH IA IN 2W 2B 2H 2A 2N 3W 3B 3H 3A 3N 4W 48 4H 4A 4N 58 SW SH SA SN TOTAL #RETAINED COLUMNS SHOULD BE UNDUPLICATED COUNTS RINS-07-05-005 Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION -- DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 7220 I- I 071  (50 I) 682-44 75 RECr!f\\f~\"\"\"- GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division ~E ft ' NO: FIN-97-013 , II/I t. :\n1996 Office Qt Desegregation Monitorma Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: County School Supervisors Page: 1 of2 Date: July 19, 1996 Type of Memo: Regulatory Response Required By: None There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: School Funds/Types of Funds Index Code: DIB State Equalization and Trust Fund Aid Regulatory Authority: Ark. Code Ann. 6-05-301 through 6-05-306 (Repl. 1993, as amended by 1995 Ark. Acts 1172) and Ark. Code Ann.  6-20-Subchapter 3 (As enacted by 1995 Ark. Acts 91 7 and 1194) Contact Person: Vivian Roberts Phone No: 682-4258 Enclosed is your first State Aid Printout for 1996-97. Please review this memo very carefully because of changes in the printout and funding distributions. The new funding laws of 1995 have required the Department of Education to alter the methods used to distribute state aid to school districts. We plan to use a single printout for several different sources of state aid. This first printout will only project your State Equalization Aid and Educational Excellence Trust Funds. Later, we will calculate the other items listed on lines 11-16 and line 21. At that time, the information required for those calculations will be provided (M\u0026amp;O Mills Available, State Wealth Index and lines 17-20). State Equalization Aid and Educational Excellence Trust Funds will be distributed in 12 monthly payments. Therefore, you will receive your first payment at the end of July. The remaining fund sources (lines 11-16 and line 21) are now separate appropriations and will be distributed on the following schedule: l\u0026gt;in.:ctor's Ml!mo No. FIN-97-013 Page 2 of 2 July I'\u0026gt;, l 1\u0026gt;W\u0026gt; General Facilities Funding Student Growth Funding Isolated Aid Consolidation Aid Debt Service Funding Supplement Growth Facilities Funding Additional Base Funding December November Quarterly (starting September) September September December 90%, June 10% Quarterly (starting September) The requirements for EducationafExcellence Trust Funds have changed. The Trust Fund amount on Line IO of your printout is identified so that you will know the amount necessary to satisfy the requirement that \"Local School Districts must first expend Educational Excellence Trust Funds to satisfy the Classroom Teacher salary requirement\" (Act 1172 of 1995, Section 2). Rosters will no longer be required. For audit purposes, districts should document the use of the Trust Funds to pay classroom teacher salaries. The Department of Education is working with Legislative Audit to develop a worksheet for districts to use to document the expenditure of these funds to meet this requirement. In addition to the items listed above, you will also receive Workers' Compensation funding in 1996-97. For your 1996-97 budget you should use $14.50 per ADM to calculate workers' compensation. In response to many calls we have had, you should be aware of the following: * You will not receive separate funding for Transportation, Textbooks, Vocational or Special Education Add-On Weights. * Act 280 requires that districts purchase textbooks according to State Board Rules and Regulations. ADE has been notified that districts may contact the depositories to establish a payment plan for textbook purchases. * The State Board approved the final Rules and Regulations for Expenditure Requirements on July 12. Special Education and Vocational Education will calculate those expenditure requirements for you. You will be required to calculate the expenditure requirements for classroom teacher salaries, alternative learning and gifted and talented. Your official ADM for classroom teacher salaries is on the enclosed printout. The ADM for the other two requirements, as defined in the Rules and Regulations for Expenditure Requirements, will be sent to you after a legislative review that is scheduled in August. ..,, J .... ADE Memos - Received 7-29-96  Student Transportation  School Funds/Types of Funds Rules and Regulations Governing School District Education Excellence Trust Funds  Technology Resources Satellite Instruction for the 1996-97 School Year -- Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 4 STA'IV CA-Pf('()L Mi\\l.L  LITTLE ROCK, i\\RKi\\NSi\\S 72201 - 1071  ( .'iO I) MC-44 7.'i RECEIVF~ (,ENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division .1111 2 9 1996 Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors NO: FIN-97-014 Page: 1 of 1 Date: July 25, 1996 Type of Memo: Regulatory Response Required By: Optional There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: School Funds/Types of Funds Index Code: DIB Rules and Regulations Governing School District Education Excellence Trust Funds Regulatory Authority: Ark. Code Ann. 6-11-105 (Rep!. 1993) and 6-20-305 (Supp. 1995) Contact Person: John Kunkel Phone No: 682-4258 Attached are the rules and regulations governing School District Excellence Trust Funds. These regulations are enacted pursuant to the State Board of Education's authority under Ark. Code Ann. 6-11-105 (Rep!. 1993) and 6-20-305 (Supp. 1995). If you have any questions or comments, please contact John Kunkel at the number listed above. Arkansas Department of Education Rules and Regulations School District Education Excellence Trust Funds 1.00 Legislative Authority 1.01 These regulations shall be known as Arkansas Department of Education regulations governing the distribution of Education Excellence Trust Funds to school districts. 1.02 These regulations are enacted pursuant to the State Board of Education's authority under Ark. Code Ann. 6-11-105 (Repl. 1993) and 6-20-305 (Supp. 1995). 2.00 Purpose 2.01 It is the purpose of these regulations to provide the method for allocation of Education Excellence Trust Funds to school districts beginning with the 1996-97 school year. 3.00 Definitions 3.01 Education Excellence Trust Funds (Trust Funds) are defined as funds made available to school districts for teacher's salaries as provided for by Ark. Code Ann.  6-5-302. 3.02 State Equalization Funding is defined as the total state equalization funding per student provided to school districts as defined by Ark. Code Ann.  6-5-303 (19) (Enacted by Act 917 of 1995). 4.00 Calculation 4.01 Calculate the percent Trust Funds are of State Equalization Funding by dividing Trust Funds by State Equalization Funding. 4.02 Calculate each district's Trust Funds by multiplying the result of Sect-i~m 4.01 times each district's State Equalization Funding. !--~ E,f,:: ~ l ,:::\n,f~ ~ I its:,.-\n. /.:J I ~~:.:. ::}2 - ,---\n::::,'(..-\n,\":::: -- -~\n' s.t-r'-J !{:\n.\\\n,' - ,' c.::,\nc,,~-1 :\n: ~~\nADE 039-1 I -- Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION , RECEIV CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-44 75 GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division . I\\ II 2 9 1996 D,,.COAnrenation MonitotinQ omce ot - v ---------'-----------. Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Secondary Principals NO: CUR-97-005 Page: 1 of 2 Date: July 25, 1996 Type of Memo: Informational Response Required By: Optional There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Planning \u0026amp; Curriculum: James Boardman Subject: Technology Resources Index Code: IJND Satellite Instruction for the 1996-97 School Year Regulatory Authority: State Board of Education Guidelines Adopted April, 1989 Contact Person: Dr. Charles Watson Phone No: (501) 682-4474 FAX No.: (501) 682-4886 Since 1988, the State Board of Education has endorsed the inclusion of satellite-delivered instruction in secondary schools of the state. Under the guidelines, the Department of Education is charged with supervising the programming as well as approving credit courses that are proposed for the school curriculum. Schools that currently provide satellite courses, as well as those that intend to provide one or more courses via satellite-delivered instruction, must complete the one-page Application for Satellite Instruction 1996-97 form. The providers have been advised that they should not accept registration information that does not include an approved Department of Education application. Currently, there are four approved providers of instructional programming. Each establishes different registration dates, and each has a different method for completing the registration process. Each school must register students directly with the provider. Schools interested in course descriptions and student registration information from the Satellite Education Resource Consortium (SERC) may contact the Department of Education or the Arkansas Educational Television Network (AETN) to receive materials. SERC student registration must be processed through the Department of Education. Due to the changing nature of program delivery, each school should verify that Satellite receiver equipment continues to be compatible with that used by the provider. Schools previously enrolled for courses at OSU or STEP may continue enrollment directly with those institutions . However, new schools must enroll through IDEANET. A Distance Learning Committee, chaired by Dr. Charles D. Watson, is charged with the responsibility of linking the Department with the providers of distance learning and reviewing and recommending approval of applications for credit-based courses. The committee will provide technical assistance to schools as needed to assure quality instructional programs through this medium. Applications will be reviewed as they are received, and a copy of the approval will be returned to the district. Applications should be in our office no later than Thursday, August 15, 1996. Please return to: Dr. Charles D. Watson Manager, Special Projects Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol Mall, Room 107A Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 \\  SATELLITE INSTRUCTION 1995 - 96 Application Form Arkansas Department of Education Please type application information School District ------------------------------------------- Address ----------------------------- County ------------- Zip --------------- Superintendent Telephone _________ _ School Coordinator __________________ _ Telephone ________ _ Do you presently have a dish and receiver equipment? Yes ___ No __ _ List each course to be offered, the program source, the classroom facilitator and the social security number of the facilitator. PROGRAM NUMBER FACILITATOR FACILITATOR'S COURSE SOURCE STUDENTS SS# Any change in course or facilitator should be provided to the Arkansas Department of Education on or before September 1, 1995. Did your district participate in satellite instruction during 1994-95? Yes __ _ No _ _ Please return this form on or before August 1, 1995, to: Dr. Charles D. Watson, Manager, Special Projects, Arkansas Department of Education, 4 State Capitol Mall, Room 107-A, Little Rock, AR 72201-1071. ASSURANCES 1. Teachers/classroom managers will participate in an in-service training to learn about equipment, course organization and classroom management. 2. The district is unable to employ a certified teacher(s) to teach the course(s) used to meet the Standards. 3. Enrollment in the oourse(s) does not exceed requirements of the Standards. Date Superintendent A ------------For S-EA -Use O-nly ----------- 1 Approved Reviewed by: I === Disapp,=:: Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division 'NO: CUR-97-003 Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors Other: GIT Supervisors GIT Coordinators Page: 1 OF 1 Date: July 25, 1996 Type of Memo: Administrative Response Required By: All Assistant Director, Planning \u0026amp; Curriculum: Jim Boardman Subject: Gifted and Talented Education Index Code: IHBB Application for Program Approval Regulatory Authority: Ark. Code Ann. 6-20-317 (a)(2) (Repl. 1993) Contact Person: Ann M. Biggers Phone No: 682-4224 Director's Communication No. CUR 96-097 dated June 20, 1996 erroneously requested that an application for funding for the 1996-97 gifted/talented program be submitted to the Arkansas Department of Education by October 1, 1996. Since no separately identifiable funds for gifted and talented programs will be distributed during the 1996-97 school year, this application is not necessary. The only information currently being requested is the Schedule 2 Program Description page and the 1995-96 Final Report (ADE Form SPED-03-004R) which was printed on blue paper in the June 20 memo. Your 1995-96 Program Evaluation Report is still to accompany the Final Report. Please use the cover form when you send in your information so we can maintain current records for each school district. We hope you were not seriously inconvenienced by the first mailing. For those of you who have already submitted budgets we will simply disregard them. If we can be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us. Arkansas DIRECTOR'S COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION V RECEI ~. WE CAPITOL MALL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 C_Jl GENE WILHOIT, Director, Genera'. Education Division JUL 2 9 1996 Office of Desegregation Monitormij Forward Copies To: Superintendents, Co-Op Directors 'NO: FIN-97-015 Page: I of I Date: July 25, 1996 Type of Memo: Informational Response Required By: All There are attachments to this memo. Assistant Director, Finance \u0026amp; Administration: Dr. Bobbie Davis Subject: Student Transportation Regulatory Authority: N/ A Contact Person: Spence Holder Index Code: EEA Phone No: 682-4264 The attached information was forwarded to the Arkansas Department of Education via certified mail - return receipt requested by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. You are requested to read the recall listing and take corrective action on all buses in the district's bus fleet that are affected by the recall. Please notify the contact person above if any additional assistance is needed. US Deportment of Tronsportot1on National Highway Traffic Safety Administration CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. Spence Holder, Coordinator School Transportation Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 204-A Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Holder: JUL I I 1996 400 Seventh Street. SW Washington. DC 20590 NSA-lllwbl TAB96-001a The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is writing this letter to provide State Pupil Transportation Directors with the enclosed second annual NHTSA School Bus Safety Assurance Program Recall Listing. One purpose of the NHTSA School Bus Safety Assurance Program Recall Listing is to inform State Pupil Transportation Directors, State Transportation Inspection Program Directors, and other interested organizations of the current safety recalls involving school buses. Safety recalls involving school bus handrails are of great concern to the agency. There continue to be reports of children snagging articles of clothing on the handrails as they exit the bus. The tragic consequences of not having the handrail recall remedy work completed on all involved school buses was again demonstrated by the death of a 14 year old Irvington, New York girl on February 8, 1996. To date, defective school bus handrails have caused at least six fatalities and numerous u.J .ries. During the fall when the weather is still warm, children will be wearing their clothes loosely, increasing the likelihood of an article snagging on the handrail. State Pupil Transportation Directors are requested to emphasize to each school district the importance of immediately having all relevant handrail recall remedy work completed on all involved school buses. NHTSA strongly recommends that a copy of the School Bus Safety Assurance Program Recall Listing be forwarded to each school district. In addition, the agency is requesting each State Pupil Transportation Director to encourage all state school districts to develop and implement a program that would ensure that all out-standing recall remedy work is completed on each school bus within the district's fleet during the summer vacation maintenance period. School buses owned and/or operated by contractors should also be advised of the safety recalls and provide assurances to the state/district that all recall work is completed. ~~~~~' SAFETY BEL TS SAVE LIVES AUTO SAFETY HOTLINE (800) 424-9393 Wash D.C Area (202) 366-023 School buses remain one of the safest forms of transportation in the United States. The success of the School Bus Safety Assurance Program is dependent on the willingness of each of us concerned with the transportation of children to review the enclosed recall listing and make every effort to ensure that buses within their purview are corrected during the summer vacation maintenance period. 2 If you have any questions concerning the School Bus Safety Assurance Program, please contact either Mr. Bill Lewis or Mr. Jon White of my staff at (202) 366-5227 or by facsimile at (202) 366-7882. If you have any questions concerning a specific recall campaign, please call the involved manufacturer at the phone number given in the recall listing or call NHTSA' s Auto Safety Hotline at (800) 424-9393. Sincerely, ~ Enclosure: School Bus Safety Recall Campaign Listing Kathleen C. DeMeter, Director Office of Defects Investigation Safety Assurance _-------_--- 5,-,.,.., 4 ..._ ---_-_-_- .._,.. People Saving People SCHOOL Bus SAFETY ASSl1RAi~CE PROG~l RECALL LISTING: JAf,rUARY 1991 TI-IROlTG H JtTNE 1996 National Highw'!_v Traffic Safety Administration Washington, D.C. 20590 Auto Safety Hotline 800-424-9393 Wash. D.C. area 202-366-0123 S!\nHOOL IL RECALL LISTING J!lll!IE 1226 FROMJANU ARY 1991 THROUGH . OGRAM SSAFETY ASSURANCE PR TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Special Section School Bus Handrail Recalls Handrail Recall Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Handrail Inspection Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Handrail Recall Listing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 School Bus Vehicle Recalls Amtran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Blue Bird . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Carpenter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Coach \u0026amp; Equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Collins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Crown Coach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Eldorado National . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Ford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 GM ............................\n........................ 19 Gillig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Girardin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 LES Entreprises/Corbeil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Navistar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Oshkosh .................................................. 23 Spartan ................................................... 24 Superior/United Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Sturdicorp . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Thomas Built . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Transi-Corp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Van-Con .................................................. 29 Wayne ................................................... 29 School Bus Equipment Recalls Carpenter , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Ferodo ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Hercules Engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Kinedyne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Lomar ................................................... 33 Webasto Heater ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Wells Aluminum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"gsl_borm_borm1996-1997","title":"Minutes, Board of Regents, 1996-1997, July 1, 1996-June 30, 1997","collection_id":"gsl_borm","collection_title":"Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia Meeting Minutes, 1932-2005","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798"],"dcterms_creator":["Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia"],"dc_date":["1996-07-01/1997-06-30"],"dcterms_description":["Meeting minutes and agendas of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. Digitization of this collection is a project of the Georgia Public Library Service, a unit of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, in association with the University System. The project is supported with federal LSTA funds administered by the Institute of Museum and Library Services."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia Meeting Minutes, 1932-2005"],"dcterms_subject":["Education, Higher--United States--Administration","Universities and colleges","Schools","University System of Georgia. Board of Regents","Minutes (Records)","Agendas (Series)"],"dcterms_title":["Minutes, Board of Regents, 1996-1997, July 1, 1996-June 30, 1997"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia"],"edm_is_shown_by":["https://dlg.galileo.usg.edu/do:gsl_borm_borm1996-1997"],"edm_is_shown_at":["https://dlg.usg.edu/record/gsl_borm_borm1996-1997"],"dcterms_temporal":["1996-07-01/1997-06-30"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia Meeting Minutes, 1932-2005. Office of Legal Affairs, Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, Atlanta, Georgia."],"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["minute books"],"dcterms_extent":["587 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcri_bcri-ohpc_108","title":"Virginia Volker","collection_id":"bcri_bcri-ohpc","collection_title":"Birmingham Civil Rights Institute Oral History Project Collection","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, Jefferson County, Birmingham, 33.52066, -86.80249"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1996-06-26"],"dcterms_description":["Virginia Volker discusses her involvement with the Movement throughout her education at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. She went on to be actively involved in public education and community politics in Birmingham."],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Alabama--Birmingham","SNCC"],"dcterms_title":["Virginia Volker"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Birmingham Civil Rights Institute (Birmingham, Ala.)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://bcriohp.org/items/show/108"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["oral histories (literary works)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_262","title":"Arkansas Department of Education's Semiannual Monitoring Report, Volume 3","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"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["1996-06-15"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Educational statistics","Education and state","Education--Evaluation"],"dcterms_title":["Arkansas Department of Education's Semiannual Monitoring Report, Volume 3"],"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/262"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nG ECOE CYCLE V MONITORING REPORT 642 ECOE MONITORING REPORT UPDATE: In the last monitoring report on the ECOE Cycle V schools, twenty-one schools within the three Pulaski County school districts were included. These were all to be schools which were assigned to Cycle V of the ECOE school improvement process. Please note that Pulaski Heights Elementary School was one of the schools reported to be in Cycle V. In actuality. it should have been Pulaski Heights Junior High School that was included in the February, 1996 monitoring report. Pulaski Heights Junior High School is a Cycle V ECOE school while Pulaski Heights Elementary School is a Cycle I ECOE school and should be reported in the 1996-97 monitoring reports. A report on the progress of Pulaski Height Junior High School in ECOE Cycle V is included in this document. CYCLE V PROGRE REPORT: During the spring semester of 1996 the Cycle V ECOE schools finalized the school improvement plan in preparation for the upcoming external team visit. Final decisions were made at the building level utilizing teaming acti,ities. The final document was submitted to the appropriate district office for printing or printing was done at the building level. The school improvement document wa then mailed to all team member for perusal prior to the external visit. A copy of the impro\\'em nt plan for each of the ECOE Cycle V school is included with thi report. The completion of the team vi it and the ubmitting of the team report to each choo] places the school at th implem ntation tag for trategies created through the ECOE proc ~. A copy of the improvem nt plan for each of th ycle V ECOE school is on file at th AD . TEAM VI IT External team ,, re e tabli. hed during the foll and pring in preparation for late spring \\'i it date . Team compo ition g nerall) included a chairp r on from the rkan as Department of Education. cla ro m teacher.' and r pre entatiYe from ollege and l 1niversitie . Th teams gen rally c n i t d of fi, e member'. Team re pon ibilitie during th two da  \\'i it included peru al of the accumulat d data at the chool ite. inter\\'iew with variou steering committe memb r and cla r om vi itation. orth entra] ssociation guidelin s and standard V\\ ere reviewed during the team vi it a w 11 a a ment of the chool impro ement proc r ferr d to as ECOE. The major re ult of the t\\\\ da ,t ma] t am \\'i it , a a writt n report generat d by th t am ba ed on the ob rvati n mad during th vi it. This \\vritt n report contain tr ngth and recommendation of th ch I impr ,, m nt proce plu a narrati e that incorporat th chool improvement proce . th t am vi it acti, itie and th crit ria. Thi writt n report i mai 1 d to th appropriate up rint ndent a ,, ell a each eparat chool withing thirty w rking day of the t am \\'i it. c P) f th team , i it r p rt for each f th ycle cho I i includ d in thi docum nt. 643  DATA UTILIZATION: Each Cycle V school collected data in preparation for making decisions in the school improvement process. Three types of data ,\nvere used in this process. Those data types were perceptual, archival and achievement. A perceptual instrument was utilized by each school in the data collection process. Students, parents and teachers were surveyed in order to gather information about cunent perceptions of stakeholders of each particular school. Needs assessments were conducted based on the results and interpretations of these data types. Decisions as to potential strategies to address identified needs were made utilizing teaming methods and were based on data findings. brainstorming activities and current educational research. Each school ECOE improvement plan included narratives that describe the data and how they were utilized in the decision making processes. References to various data types and uses are generally found in several places within the school improvement document. The most notable data reference are found in the school profile or review of data and in the four target narratives. 644 AMBOY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL :!\\ORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ~ORTH LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72118 FEBRUARY 20 - 21, 1996 REPORT OF THE NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTE\\TIED CO~1PREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION Submitted to: !\\1r. James Smith, Superintendent March 25, 1996 Ms. Beverly Kelso Principal, Amboy Elementary School Copies to: Dr. Emma Bass NCA State Director Mr. Frank Anthony Assistant Director, ADE Mr. James A. Hester Co-Coordinator, Field SerYices Ms. Suzy Shaunfield Steering Committee Chairperson Compiled by Mr. Bob Paulovich Field Services Specialist 645  NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION FEBRUARY 20 - 21, 1996 AMBOY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NCA/ECOE VISITING TEAM MEMBERS MR. BOB P AULOVICH, GENERAL CHAIRPERSON Mr. Ron Looper, Chairperson Staff Development Specialist Little Rock School District 600 South Ringold Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mrs. Ann Biggers Administrator of Gifted Programs Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol Mall= Room 105-C Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dr. Bob Lump kins Professor of Elementary Education Henderson State University P.O. Box 7644 Arkadelphia, Arkansas 71999 646 Mrs. Donna Brown Teacher Perrin Elementary School 1201 Smithers Drive Benton, Arkansas 72015 Mr. Dean Burbank Collegeville Elementary School Bryant School District 200 Northwest 4th St. Bryant, Arkansas 72022 FOREWORD On February 20-21, 1996 five rcprc ntatives of the Arkansas North Central Association/Extended Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation (NCA/ECOE) State Committee visited Amboy Elementary School. The comments in this report have been based on the visitors' observations and the findings produced by the faculty. It is the hope of the Arkansas NCA/ECOE) State Committee that the observations and recommendations included in this report will assist the faculty and administration of Amboy Elementary School as they proceed with the implementation and evaluation of the School Improvement Plan. As a goal of the visiting team, recommendations have been made to reinforce the school's conclusions prepared in the School Improvement Plan. These recommendations, in many cases, will not be new and different, but are in support of the school improvement team's conclusions. Recommendations have been made to foster further service and discussion, not to provide specifics of name and topic to utilize. The NCA/ECOE team would like to take this opportunity to thank the Amboy Elementary NCA/ECOE Steering Committee staff, administration, students. board, and community representatives for a superb two-day visit. The students and staff were most courteous, informative, and cooperative throughout the visit. The student guides certainly did their utmost to provide directions to specific areas and to assist with information. The food and various amenities provided by parents and local businesses added to an atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration. Thanks for making this NCA/ECOE team visit valuable through the process utilized and the School Improvement Plan de eloped to meet the needs of all the students at Amboy Elementary. 647 CHAIR SUMMARY: VISITING TEAM REPORT Amboy Accelerated Elementary School is located in a neighborhood setting, two blocks from McArthur Drive. It is one of fifteen elementary schools in the North Little Rock School District. The school population of 400 students which is very mobile with 20% of the students being bused from other neighborhoods. The racial makeup of the school is 53% black and 47% white. The staff consists of the principal. a half-time assistant principal, 21 certified staff members, and 21 non-certified. The school plant and grounds seemed to be well utilized to encompass the school population and programs. Modifications have been made in the building to provide a more structured environment for the teaching learning process. The NCA/ECOE Self Study Process which began in February of 1995, actually became an extension of the Accelerated School Problem Solving Model. As they began looking at the ECOE process, the faculty found a direct correlation between the frameworks of both. Teams were already in place from the Accelerated Program in which they called cadres.\" These teams began working in the target areas as a part of the school improvement process. The following targets were selected for improvement: 1. School Climate\n2. Parent and Commuruty Involvement\n3. Clear School Purpose: and 4. Monitoring and Assessment of Student Achievement. They began with the review of the mission statement and ex:1.mined it to find the degree to which it met the philosophy and beliefs of the schools constituents. Within the accelerated program, achievement data collection and analysis had already begun. The data was broken down and graphed by student populations of black males, white males, black females, and white females. The progress of the district was also charted as a means of identifying needs. The perceptual data was categorized by combining strongly agree and agree scores in one category, and strongly disagree along with disagree scores in another. The perceptual data was used as a means of support for selecting the targets. A vast amount of archival data was also used in the process. The staff interviews and meeting notes indicated that all members of the school were involved in the school improvement process. There was evidence throughout the school improvement plan that the vision was the driving force for Amboy Elementary School and Community. 648 District Recommendations There are none to report at this time. School Improvement Recommendations: 1.  The Committee recommends the identification of specific actions designed for the subpopulations. 2. The committee recommends that a specific person (position) be identified to be responsible for completing the action. 3. The sidewalk between the portable building and the main building needs a guard over the gutter drain. 4. Replace the tile that is cracked. 5. Medications need to be in a locked area. 649 SCHOOL CLIMATE Strengths: 1. Repairing the parking lot and installing new lighting facilitates better access to the school and promotes a safe physical environment. 2. The staff of Amboy Elementary has promoted a love for reading through the \"Read Me A Rainbow\" program. 3. An intervention class has been established to eliminate distractions in the regular classroom. This program is a means of in-school suspension. Recommendations: 1. Resources, such as PT A funds and fund raisers,needs to be pursued to further improve the playground and any other area the faculty chooses to aesthetically improve. 2. Involve grandparents~ parents, and students, along with the teachers. in choices concerning aesthetic improvements in the school. 3. In-service training should be given to all the noncertified staff involved in lunch or recess supervision dealing \\Vith behavior problems and proper management of students. PARE T AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Strengths: 1. A number of special programs have been implemented along with plans for additional programs which have the potential of informing and involving parents and the community (For example, DARE, STARS, VIPS, CHAMPS, READING RECOVERY, READING RAINBOW). 2. The availability of extension telephones in each major area of the school facility facilitates better teacher-parent communication. 3. A monthly newsletter is sent to parents during the school year which provides parents with information relative to school events, special programs, etc. 4. Student work displayed throughout the school plant demonstrates an emphasis on learning and achievement on how parents and community leaders visit the building. 650 5. Teachers, students. and staff personnel demonstrate pride in their school by the general cleanliness of the facility and visual displays. Recommendations: 1. The parent information center has the potential of providing a viable service to parents, but additional planning may be needed relative to its physical location. 2. An ad hoc committee composed of teachers, parents, community, and business leaders should be formed to re-examine the proposed plan for piloting.the teacher-parent communication system. 3. The five year plan may need revising after the 1996/1997 school term. For example, action #2 on page 31 addresses a school wide behavior plan which should be moved to year two or three. 4. Continued efforts should be made to alleviate bus and automobile traffic flow problems. A comprehensive plan may require the construction and/or development of additional parking areas. The plan should also address adding loading and unloading sites for buses and automobiles. 5. Teachers, students. and parent volunteers may assume the responsibility for publishing the monthly newsletter. 6. The school plant appears to be due for routine maintenance and repair. This may include painting (interior and exterior) replacement of missing floor tiles, etc. CLEARS CHOOLP URPOSE Strengths: 1. It is very evident that the school's improvement plan (Clear School Purpose) was well planned. Teachers, students and parents were involved in the planning, surveying and carrying out the whole process of the plan. 2. Campus mission statement and motto was posted throughout the building. Students were involved in activities to learn what the mission of the campus was by: Making announcements on the speaker, writing assignments, what Amboy means to me, classroom discussions, taking the mission into parts and letting students tell what it means, (plays, role playing) and going over it at PT A meetings. 3. The staff was involved in every aspect of the ECOE plan. Data gathering began in 1994 and analyzed by the staff in 1995. 651 3. A monthly newsletter is written to inform parents of the mission, current affairs, projects, etc. Recommendations: 1. The improvement plan actions should be reviewed yearly to determine if actions in years two - five could be moved up. 2. Campus mission statement should be large enough to be visible and readable. 3. Prepare a system of orientation for new parents/students to familiarize parents/students with the mission of the campus, programs, curriculum, volunteer opportunities, campus schedules, etc. MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Strengths: 1. The infusion of the many varied reading~ math, and writing activities into all aspects of the curriculum helps stimulate motivation of students and makes curriculum relevant. 2. Using other materials and pieces of literature beyond the district reading text to teach reading and its connectedness to all aspects of the curriculum is commendable. 3. The enthusiasm and dedication of faculty can be seen throughout the entire school. Recommendations: 1. Explore specific instructional strategies, such as the Shared Inquiry Method, of discussing literature from the Junior Great Books Program that could add to the success of the reading program. 2. To better meet the needs of all students, consider in-service on Learning Styles for all faculty and staff. 3. Contact a specialist from higher education and/or Arkansas Department of Education for a variety of ideas that have proven sound for increasing reading scores\ntherefore decreasing disparity. 4. Review the literature to analyze what other schools with similar concerns have done to help alleviate the problem of disparity in similar areas. 653 Perceptual Survey Use: Amboy Elementary School Amboy Elementary School analyzed the perceptual data and noted the following weaknesses: Only 55% of the parents felt the building and grounds were in good repair. Parents and students did not understand the vision and School purpose of Amboy. Parents did not understand or promote the instructional program. More motivational speakers were needed. As a result, the following outcomes and actions were developed: To improve parent and student perceptions concerning an attractive and inviting  campus. Students. staff. and community will increase understanding of and respect for Amboy's vision. To increase parental involvement in instructional programs. Contact community organizations for motivational speakers. 654 (J'\\ V1 V1 14 ELEMENTS IN THE ALLEN LETTER I. E idence that policie , procedures, rules and regulations are developed and implemented to facilitate de egregation. AMBOY ELEMENTARY: NLRSD STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS EVIDENCE IN ECOESCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN SITE VISITS ANNOUNCED A. Is Acti\\ ity Taking Place? B. Available Evidence A. Yes B. Document/Record Principal's Interview SITE VISITS UNANNOUNCED A. Is Activity Taking Place? 8. Available Evidence A. Yes B. Document/Record Principal's Interview Vl ' ' 2. Evidence that plan related to reducing achievement disparity between black and nonblack students are progressi ely successful. [mplement portfolio assessments, pp.18-19 Implement '\"Reading Across the Curriculum\". p.22 Develop reading incentives. p.23 Establish tudcnt author center, p.23 Provide behavioral rewards. p.13 Re earch factors contributing to absenteeism. p.15 Implement a parent student and teacher contract for homework completion, p.27 Invite guest speakers for special interest groups, p.27 Inform parents of student ' behavior on a consistent basis, p.31 A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Principal\"s Interview Principal' s Interview O\"\\ VI -.....J \"I .) . 4. 5. 6. E idence that student as ignments to schools, classes and programs at each organizational le el are made without bia. Evidence that staff development days authoriz d as a re, ult of the Agreement are u ed to facilitate the d egregation process. E idence that travel time to and from school I not disproportionate among black and nonblack students and the percentage of black students transported for de egregation is not significantly greater than the percentage of non-black students transported for de gregation. Evidence that guidance and counseling is designed to meet the needs of a diverse tudent population. A revie\\v of grouping practices Student Profile ( comp ed. special ed. honor roll. gifted math students. Chapter I students. and summer School students). p.3 Encourage all staff members to attend K-4 Math Crusade, p.15 Test all students for Early Prevention of chool Failure, p.15 A . Yes A. Yes B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Principal's Interview Principal' s Interview A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Principal's Interview Principal's Interview A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Record B. Document/Record . A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Observation O'\\ V1 co 7. Evidence of internal procedures for ensuring that materials for appra1 smg or counseling students are non-discriminatory. A. Yes B. Document/Record Vl ' \\.0 8. Evidence that curricular content and instructional strategies are uti I ized to meet the diver e needs of the student population erved. Implement a parent student and teacher contract for homework completion. p.27 Invite guest speakers for special interest groups. p.27 Promote a Parent Week. p.29 Encourage all staff members to attend K-4 Math Crusade. p.15 Extend Reading Recovery to include students in K-3. p.15 Establish a bulletin board to highlight parental involvement. p.29 Familiarize parents with appropriate books/reading material . p.30 Research factors that contribute to students scoring in the lowest quartile. p.15. Examine literature for strategies in reading and writing that would affect disparity. p. 16 A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Principars Interview Principal' s Interview (J'\\ (J'\\ 0 9. 10. 11. Evidence that personnel I recruited, employed and assigned in a manner to meet the goals of a de egregating school di trict. E idence that procedures related to extracurricular and cocurricular acti ities arc developed and implemented to identify and eliminate conditions that result in participation that is disproportionate to the tudent population. E idence of diverse repre entation on appointed district wide and chool-based committees. A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Principal's InterYi w Principal' s Interview A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Recor=l B. Document/Record A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Recor B. Document/Record Principal' s Intervi w Principal s Interview (J'\\ (J'\\ t--' 12. 13. 14. Evidence of efforts to ensure that parent attendance at school functions is not disproportionate to the student population. Evidence of success related to Majority to Minority transfers Evidence that magnet schools are an effective i nterdistrict remedy for racial balance. Written invitations to parents during School hours, p.12 Invite parents as speakers. p.25 Utilization of parent and community VIPS volunteers. p.25 Organize a parent talent show. p.26 Contact community organization for speakers. p.26 A. Yes A. Yes 8. Document/Record 8. Document/Record A. Yes A. Yes B. Desegregation Files 8. Desegregation Files A. NIA 8. NIA B. NIA Copies to: BAKER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72211 APRIL 2 - 3, 1996 REPORT OF THE NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTE DED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION Submitted to: Mr. Bobby Lester, Superintendent May 24, 1996 Ms. Ila ewberry PrincipaL Baker Elementary School Ms. Peggy Mears teering Committee Chairperson Compiled by: Mr. John 1cKinnon Field Services Specialist Dr. Emma Bas NCA State Director Mr. Frank Anthony Assistant Director, ADE Mr. James A. Hester Co-Coordinator. Field Services 662 NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION APRIL 2 - 3, 1996 BAKER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NCA/ECOE VISITING TEAM MEMBERS MR. JOHN MCKINNON, GENERAL CHAIRPERSON Mr. Bob Paulovich, Chairperson Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol Mall, Room 301-B Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 Ms. Susan Beard, Teacher Terry Elementary School 10800 Mara Lynn Drive Little Rock. Arkansas 72211 Ms. Sue Walls Instructional Resources Center Little Rock School District 600 South Ringo Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 663 Ms. Donna Stiles, Teacher Bale Elementary School 6501 West 32nd Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72204 Dr. Jody Musgrove, Professor Center for Academic Excellence University of Central Arkansas Box 5006 201 Donaghey Conway. Arkansas 72035 FOREWORD On April 2 -3, 1996, five representatives of the Arkansas North Central Association/Extended Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation (NCA/ECOE) State Committee visited Baker Elementary School. The comments in this report have been based on the visitors' observations and the findings produced by the faculty. It is the hope of the Arkansas NCA/ECOE State committee that the observations and recommendations included in this report will assist the faculty and administration of Baker Elementary School as they proceed with the implementation and evaluation of the School Improvement Plan. As a goal of the visiting team. recommendations have been made to reinforce the School's conclusions prepared in the School Improvement Plan. These recommendations, in many cases. will not be new and different, but are in support of the School improvement team s conclusions. Recommendations have been made to foster further service and discussion, not to provide specifics of name and topic to utilize. The NCA/ECOE team would like to take this opportunity to thank the Baker Elementary NCA/ECOE Steering Committee. staff. administration. students. board and community representatives for a superb two-day visit. The students and staff were most courteous. informative. and cooperative throughout the ,isit. The student guides certainly did their utmost to provide direction to specific areas and to assist with information. The food and various amenities provided by parent and local businesses added to an atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration. Thanks for making this CA/ECOE team visit valuable through the process utilized and the School Improvement Plan developed to meet the needs of all the students at Baker Elementary School. 664 CHAIR SUMMARY: VISITING TEAM REPORT J. W. Baker Interdistrict Elementary School is located in western Little Rock. It currently serves students in kindergarten through sixth grade. The building was constructed in 1959, and is in excellent repair. Recently, four classrooms. a multipurpose room. and a twenty-eight station computer Jab. The Schoo] has several specialty programs. Alpha. LEAP. Extended Day Care, and an awardwinning Economic Specialty Program are all incorporated into the School day. The staff at Baker Interdistrict Elementary School consists of twenty seven percent black and seventy three percent white personnel. It includes fourteen regular classroom teachers. two re ourc t ach rs. one Alpha teacher. one LEAP t ach r. one coun elor, one media peciali t one economic specialist and several paraprofessionals. Baker Elementary School began the NCA/ECOE proces during 1994, and the process continued until April 1996, when the NCA/ECOE visiting team was on campus. The principal, Ms. Ila ewberry. appointed the steering committee chairperson, and together they selected the steering committee. The steering committee was responsible for the distribution, collection, and analysis of the perceptual. archival. and achievement data. After close examination of the archi\\'al and achie\\'ement data. the staff selected the following targets for improvement: 1. Monitoring and Assessment of Student Achievement 2. School Climate~ 3. Time on Task/Opportunity To Learn\nand 4. High Expectations. Later, four target area subcommittees were formed and each was chaired by one member of the steering committee. The faculty developed outcomes and actions during the spring of 1995. Implementation began Augu t of 1995. It is evident to the visiting team, that the steering committee provided outstanding leadership throughout the NCA/ECOE process at Baker Elementary. A high level of enthusiasm exists among staff regarding the chool 's plans for impro ement. All faculty members were in vol ed in the process. and are knO\\: ledgeable of the process and the plan. A student profile wa developed emphasizing that there is a need to reduce the disparity between black and v bite 665 students and the plan was written with the subpopulation in mind. The visiting team would like to commend the faculty for the efforts. and we realize the process was difficult and time consuming. We hope our input will help improve an already strong ECOE report. District Recommendations: There are none to report at this time. School Improvement Recommendations: 1. Being that the perceptual surveys were not made available to the staff, the visiting team strongly recommends to re-survey faculty, parents, and students and compare the results to the improvement plan. 2. The visiting team strongly recommends that during early morning planning time, students be monitored in an area other than classrooms in order to provide uninterrupted planning time. 3. Cover exposed concrete edges of the front basketball concrete for safety reasons .. 4. In order to ensure action implementation. specify a specific person responsible by position. 5. In order to have a five-year plan, continue to col1ect and analyze the data and continue to develop the School Improvement Plan. 6. The perceptual data should be available to the faculty for School improvement development. 7. Actions should be developed to a higher degree of specificity. 666 MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Strengths: 1. The staff provides for a variety of techniques, including the use of technology on a regular basis, to improve reading comprehension and Stanford 8 scores. 2. The staff utilizes a potent resource at Baker, parent volunteers. for tutoring in reading comprehension and good test taking skills. 3. The staff verifies evidence that all items listed on the time line have taken place to date. Recommendations: 1. Further refine the frequency/value of alternative measures. such as portfolios. 2. Work with media specialist. teachers. and parents to provide more media center time or alternate access to printed material. 3. Refine the prescription sheet/prescription folders to list specific strategies of concern/ instruction based on tanford 8 comprehensive reading sub-scores. SCHOOL CLIMATE Strengths: 1. The School is a safe place to work. 2. Good di cipline exi ts in clas rooms. 3. Students take pride and are proud of their School. 4. Teachers and student were on task and good learning was taking place. Recommendations: 1. An outcome for disciplin management plan could be separate from the safety and 667 security of students. 2. Continue to develop School spirit activities ongoing in years two through five. OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN/TIME ON TASK Strengths: 1. Classrooms are organized to provide instructional opportunities for a variety of learning styles. 2. Classroom disruptions are kept to a minimum helping maximize time on task. 3. The facility is attractive and well maintained, creating an atmosphere conducive to learning. 4. Cooperative learning strategies are in evidence. 5. Creative strategies for integrating economic into the curriculum are evident in most areas of the School. 6. An active Economics Education Speciali tis an obvious asset to their program. 7. The program of parents serving as tutors for students needing help in reading is commendable. Recommendation : 1. An ongoing program of staff development in integrating economics into the curriculum is needed and would be very beneficial in helping new teachers and teachers not well-versed in economic education. 2. The outcome identified on page 34 of the plan is in reality an action and is listed as action on page 36. This needs clarification. 3. The time line for this part of the plan needs serious revision. In essence, this portion of the plan has nothing beyond January 1996, and the actions listed have not been compl t d. 668 4. Specific instructional strategies should be identified to help reduce the disparity in test scores between black and white students. There strategies (i.e., peer tutoring) should be incorporated into the plan .. 5. How the actions identified on page 36 of the plan will bring about the desired goal needs to be more clearly explained. HIGH EXPECTATIONS Strengths: 1. The administrators/teachers effectively use the \"Real-Life\" Economics program to achieve the desired outcome. 2. Displays of student work were commendable. 3. Use of School-wide motivational speakers appears to be an effective tool. Recommendations: 1. Survey data that revealed concerns leading to the choice of High Expectations as a target area should be available for review. 2. Continue to enlist the aid of the faculty and staff to submit topics and motivational speakers on a monthly basis. Consider the use of a young speaker such as a high School student body president, valedictorian, etc. Younger children can be positively influenced by older children. 3. Additional actions should be developed for years two through five of the ECOE cycle. 669 a PERCEPTUAL SURVEY USE: BAKER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Perceptual surveys were administered by the School, but the results were not used in developing the School improvement plan because, according to the School, the results were lost. 670 BAKER ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 14 ELEMENTS IN THE STRATEGIES TO SITE VISITS SITE VISITS ALLEN LETTER ADDRESS EVIDENCE IN ANNOU CED UNANNOUNCED ECOESCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 1. Evidence that policies, Revise and implement A. Yes A. Yes procedures, rules and Discipline Management Plan. regulations are developed p.19 B. Document /record B. Document/record and implemented to Principal's lnterview Principal' s Interview facilitate desegregation. 2. Evidence that plans Incentive program. A. No A. Yes related to reducing p.24 achievement disparity B. ADE Desegregation Files B. Documentation/record between black and Improve test-taking Principal's Interview nonblack students are skills, p. 30 progressively successful. 3. Evidence that student A. Yes A. Yes assignments to schools, classes and programs at B. ADE Desegregation Files B. Documentation/record each organizational level Principal' s Interview are made without bias. 4. Evidence that staff Teaching/learning styles, p.25 A. Yes A. Yes development days authorized as a result of B. Document/record B. Document/record the Agreement are used to Principal' s Interview Principal' s Interview facilitate the desegregation process. ()'I -.J N 5. 6. 7. 8. Evidence that travel time to and from school is not disproportionate among black and nonblack students and the percentage of black students transported for desegregation is not significantly greater than the percentage of non-black students transported for desegregation. Evidence that guidance and counseling is designed to meet the needs of a diverse student population. Evidence of internal procedures for ensuring that materials for appraising or counseling students are non-discriminatory. Evidence that curricular Utilize computer lab, content and instructional p.28 strategies are utilized to meet the diverse needs of Increase use of media the student population p.29 served. A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record center. Observation Observation Conference Conference Principal' s Interview 9. Evidence that personnel A. Yes A. Yes is recruited, employed and assigned in a manner B. Document/record B. Document/record to meet the goals of a Principal's Interview Principal's Interview desegregating school district. 10. Evidence that procedures Implement Student CounciL A. Yes A. Yes related t extracurricular p.20 and cocurricular acti itics B. Document/record B. Document/record arc dev loped and Implement Student implemented to identify Ambassadors. p.20 and eliminate conditions that re ult in participation that is disproportionate to the tudent population. 11. Evidence of diverse A. Yes A. Yes representation on appointed district wide B. Document/record B. Document/record and schoo I-based Confernce committees. Principars Interview 12. Evidence of efforts to A. Yes A. Yes ensure that parent attendance at school B. Document/Record B. Document/record function is not disproportionate to the tudent population. 13. Evidence of success A. NIA A. NIA related to Majority to Minority transfers 8. No M-to-M students were B. No M-to-M students were reported reported 14. Evidence that magnet A. NIA A. NIA chools are an effective interdistrict remedy for B. NIA B. NIA racial balance. CARVER MAGNET SCHOOL LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72202 APRIL 22 - 23, 1996 REPORT OF THE ORTH CE TRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTE DED COMPREHE SIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION Copies to: Dr. Emma Bas N CA State Director Mr. Frank Anthony Assistant Director, ADE Mr. James a. Hester Co-Coordinator_ Field er ice Submitted to: Dr. Henry William , Superintendent May 24, 1996 Ms. Diane Barksdale Principal. Carver Magnet School M . Linda Amm 1 and s. Mary mith 't ering Committee Co-Chairpersons Compiled by: Mr. David Watts Field Services pecialist 675 NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION APRIL 22 - 23, 1996 CARVER MAGNET SCHOOL NCA/ECOE VISITING TEAM MEMBERS MR. DAVID WATTS, GENERAL CHAIRPERSON Mrs. Alice Simelton. Chairperson Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol Mall. Room 301-B Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 Ms. Kim Hearn. Teacher Harris Elementary School 4424 Highway 161, North No. Little Rock. Arkansas 7211 7 Ms. Carla Batton. Teacher Boone Park Elementary School 1400 Crutcher 't. No. Little Rock. Arkansas 72114 676 Ms. Debbie Barnes, Professor University of Central Arkansas 201 Donaghey Avenue Conway, Arkansas 72035-0001 Ms. Susie Jackson. Principal Indian Hills Elementary School 6800 Indian Hills Drive o. Little Rock, Arkansas 72116 FOREWORD On April 22 - 23, 1996, five representatives of the Arkansas North Central Association/Extended Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation (NCA/ECOE) State Committee visited Carver Magnet School. The comments in this report have been based on the visitors' observations and the findings produced by the faculty. It is the hope of the Arkansas NCA/ECOE State committee that the observations and recommendations included in this report will assist the faculty and administration of Carver Magnet School as they proceed with the implementation and evaluation of the School Improvement Plan. As a goal of the visiting team. recommendations have been made to reinforce the School's conclusions prepared in the School Improvement Plan. These recommendations, in many cases. will not be new and different but are in support of the School improvement team's conclusions. Recommendations have been made to foster fmiher service and discussion, not to provide specifics of name and topic to utilize. The NCA/ECOE team would like to take this opportunity to thank the Carver Magnet NCA/ECOE Steering Committee. staff. administration, students. board. and community representatives for a superb t,\\o-day visit. The students and staff were most courteous. informative. and cooperati\\'e throughout the \\'i it. The student guides certainly did their utmost to provide directions to specific areas and to a sist with information. The food and various amenities pro\\'ided by parents and local businesses added to an atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration. Thanks for making this CA/ECOE team visit valuable through the process utilized and the School Improvement Plan developed to meet the needs of all the students at Carver Magnet School. 677 CHAIR SUMMARY: VISITING TEAM REPORT Carver Magnet School began their self-study during the fall 1994-95 School year. with the assistance of Field Services Specialists from the Arkansas Department of Education. a Schoolwide meeting was held to explain the self-study process. The principal, Ms. Diane Barksdale, appointed a Building Steering Committee to organize this effort. The steering committee established four subcommittees to begin the distribution, collection, and disaggregation of achievement, archival, and perceptual data. After close examination of all data, the staff selected the following targets for improvement: 1. High Expectations\n2. Monitoring and Assessment of Student Achievement\n3. Parent and Communit  Involvement and 4. School Climate. During the early stages of the School improvement process, the staff, with the involvement of parents, developed a vision statement. Afterwards, specific learner outcomes were developed for concentration for the next five years. Target committees were selected and began additional data collection in order to determine outcomes for the School Improvement Plan. It is evident to the visiting team that the steering committee worked diligently throughout the NCA/ECOE process at Carver Magnet School. The faculty was involved in the process and communicated a sense of pride in the success of their efforts. They intend to follow through with their plan to evaluate its success for regular revision. Administrative support, both district and building level, was provided for the staff tluoughout the self-evaluation. Arrangements were made to provide release time for committees, and there was continuous support from the Arkansas Department of Education. The Carver Magnet School Educational Programs are designed to ensure that quality programs are accessible for all students. Programs are being implemented that reflect the schools' mission/vision statement and goals. The curriculum is broad in scope and provides for individual differences through a variety of programs. Through the NCA/ECOE self-study, the staff has assessed the effectiveness of the schools' instructional program and has developed a plan for improvement of the programs. Support of the core instructional program is provided through guidance services by two full-time counselors and two media specialists. Carver is a Science and Math Magnet setting with a computer lab and a star planetarium. Hands on manipulatives, models, problem solving, and critical thinking skills are emphasized. The math and science labs are equipped with state of the 678 art materials and equipment to appeal to students varying learning modalities. Classrooms are equipped with closed circuit cable television, computers. and video cassette recorders. The School is to be commended on working toward equity in staffing. There are two male teachers on staff and both administrators are female. Th~ outcomes process has been internalized by the staff at Carver magnet School. The visiting team had a very productive visit time at the School site, and they commend them for their efforts. We offer the following recommendations. District Recommendations: There are none to report at this time. School Improvement Recommendations: 1. Include research from Gold Files in the School improvement process. 2. Continuously review the ECOE process to ensure that it is ongoing. 679 HIGH EXPECTATIONS Strengths: 1. Students and faculty are extremely polite and friendly. 2. There are extensive programs available to students which provide hands-on experiences. 3. Teachers use a variety of teaching techniques and methods. Recommendations: 1. Further develop the proce s for writing the improvement plan. Use survey results and other data to create specific objectives and outcomes. then write actions which directly relate to the objectives. 2. The Improvement Plan should be written for five years with more detail given to years one and two. 3. Prepare a plan to impl m nt specific program (example: in-School postal service. consistent portfolio evaluation system) which will develop and improve the programs. 4. Include areas from the narrative in the actions if appropriate (Carver's Courteous Kid ). 5. Continuously review the mission statement for understanding by all stakeholders. SCHOOL CLIMATE trengths: 1. Carver magnet has a broad variety of activities and opportunities for students within the pull-out programs offered. 2. Teachers at Carver magnet do a great job displaying student work throughout the building. 680 ,, E: ,,. ....... Recommendations: 1. 2. 3. The visiting team recommends incorporating a glossary of terms to identify words and acronyms in the ECOE plan. Consideration should be given to realignment of actions and goals, so actions are specifically directed toward a certain goal. The School should explore possibilities of involving students on the ECOE conunittees. MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF STUD\"ENT ACHIEVEMENT Strengths: 1. Students are provided an opportunity to be interactive learners. 2. Classrooms reflect \"print\"' to reinforce skills taught. 3. Multiple assessments are used. 4. Students appear to be very open and friendly. 5. The staff appears to be cooperative. Recommendations: 1. Utilize the results of all assessment tools to help plan instructional strategies to decrease disparities among subgroups. 2. Provide in-depth training to provide an understanding of the ECOE process. 3. List preexisting programs or strategies separately or designate which are new and which were previously in use. 4. Utilize data relevant to School improvement. 5. Specify beginning dates and ending dates for each action. 6. Denote names of persons responsible for implementing each action. 681 7. Record minutes for each committee meeting. 8. Research publications to provide data to assist in formulating actions to address disparities. 9. Designate specific strategies to decrease the drastic differences between math and science. PARENT AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Strengths: 1. The Carver newsletter is a wonderful way to communicate with the parents. 2. The parenting classes offered by the counselors is a wonderful program for parents. 3. The Men of Carver program is a great way to encourage male involvement at Carver Magnet. 4. The parent involvement in School activities and decisions is extremely high. Recommendation : 1. The visiting team recommend that each action in a plan should have staff development. 2. It is recommended that the time line should be more specific to the month and date. 3. Consideration should be given to including the Men of Carver program to the plan. 682 PERCEPTUAL SURVEY RESULTS: CARVER MAGNET SCHOOL Upon reviewing the results of the Little Rock School District Climate Survey, the Carver ECOE committees identified the following needs: Students lack a sense of the value of education. Teachers need to improve planning in order to address the needs of all students. Parental awareness of all programs/procedures at Carver is often inadequate. Some students do not enjoy being at School. Based on these findings, several examples of the selected outcomes are listed below: Incorporate a variety of teaching strategies to address the needs of all students. Increase awareness of programs/procedures on the part of the Carver parents. Improve the quality and type of staff development activities for teachers. Incorporate multiple assessment techniques. 683 CARVER MAGNET ELEMENTARY: LRSD 14 ELEMENTS IN THE STRATEGIES TO SITE VISITS SITE VISITS ALLEN LETTER ADDRESS EVIDENCE IN ANNOUNCED UNANNOUNCED ECOESCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN A. Is Activity Taking A. Is Activity Taking Place? Place? B. Available Evidence. B. Available Evidence. 1. Evidence that policie . Provide staff training on A. Yes A. Yes procedures, rules and po itive di cipline and conflict regulations are developed resolution. p.37 B. Document/Record B. Document/Record and implemented to Principal's Interview Principal' s Interview facilitate desegregation. Provide parenting classes. p. 47 a recruitment team will be established. p.3 7 co' Vl 2. Evidence that plans related to reducing achievement disparity between black and nonblack students are progressively successful. Summer reading intervention A. Yes A. Yes program for K-2 students B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Math inventories Principal's Interview Principal's Interview Observation Observation Use of Kilgore observation inventory Use of portfolio assessment EPSF program to assess Kindergarten students. pp.2 7- 28 Summer reading intervention program. p. 2 7 Use of the Phelps Kindergarten Readiness Scale. p.28 Rhythm of Reading summer program. EPSF program Enrichment classes will be provided for ALL students in grades K-2, p.20 Reading inventories used with all students with difficulties Q'\\ co Q'\\ ,, ..). E idence that student assignments to schools. cla ses and programs at each organizational level arc made without bias. Cooperative learning will be A. Yes A. Yes used in classrooms B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Iland -on activities will be Observation Principal' s Interview used in integrating curriculum Principal's Interview areas. p.21 .. ummer reading intervention program Reading inventories to students with reading difficulties Math inventories se of Kilgore observation inventory Josten Learning System reports will be used Portfolio assessment will be implemented EPSF program used. pp. 27- 28 Summer reading intervention program Reading inventories. Portfolio 4. Evidence that staff Schedule taff training in A. Yes A. Yes development days positive discipline and conflict authorized as a result of resolution. p.3 7 B. Document/Record B. Document/Record the Agreement are used to Principal's Interview Principal's Interview facilitate the de gregation process. 5. ~ idence that travel time A. Yes A. Yes to and from , chool i not disproportionat among B. Document/Record B. Document/Record black and nonblack tudents and the percentage of black tudent transported for desegregation is not ignificantly greater than Q\"\\ 00 the percentage of non- -..J black students transported for desegregation. 6. Evidence that guidance A. Yes A. Yes and counseling is . designed to meet the B. Document/Record B. Document/Record needs of a diverse student population. 7. Evidence of internal A. Yes A. Yes procedures for ensuring that materials for B. Document/Record B. Document/Record appraising or counseling tudent are non-di criminatory. 8. Evidence that curricular Expand the schedule of multi- A. Yes A. Yes content and instructional cultural speakers for students. strategies are utilized to staff and parents. p.38 B. Document/Record B. Document/Record meet the diverse needs of Observation Principal' s Interview the tudent population Principal's Interview r d. 9. Evidence that personnel A. Yes A. Yes is recruited. employed and a signed in a manner B. Document/Record B. Document/Record t meet the goal of a Observation Principal's Interview de egregating school Principal s I ntcrview district. IO. Evidence that procedures A. Yes A. Yes related to extracurricular ffi co and cocurricular activities B. Document/Record B. Document/Record arc de eloped and implemented to identify and eliminate conditions that result in participation that is disproportionate to the tudent population. 1 I. Evidence of diver e A. Yes A. Yes representation on appointed district wide B. Document/Record B. Document/Record and school-based Principal's Interview Principal's Interview committees. 12. Evidence of efforts to Increase parental A. Yes A. Yes ensure that parent communication through u e of attendance at school the '\"Car er Courier .. and B. Document/Report B. Document/Report functions i not 'Carver Magnet Live. .. p.37 Principal's Interview disproportionate to the tudent population. Adjust parent conference times to better meet the needs of parents Increase use of\"positi\\'c corrc pondcncc Parenting clas cs wi 11 be offered. p. 4 7 13. E idence or ucccs /\\. NIA A. Yes (J'\\ co related to Majority to \\.0 Minority tran fer B. No M-to-M Students B. Document/Record Reported Principal's Interview 14. Evidence that magnet Student work will be displayed A. Yes A. Yes chools are an effective at Magnet Fair interdistrict remedy for B. ADE Desegregation B. Document/Record racial balance. Music students will perform at files Principal s Interview Magnet Fair. p.3 7 Copies to: CATO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NORTH LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72120 APRIL 2 - 3, 1996 REPORT OF THE ORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTE DED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION Submitted to: Mr. Bobby Lester, Superintendent May 24, 1996 Ms. Linda Remele Principal. Cato Elementary School Ms. Alice Robertson teering Committee Chairperson Compiled by: Mr. John McKinnon Field Services Specialist Dr. Emma Bas NCA State Director Mr. Frank Anthony Assistant Director, ADE Mr. James a. Hester Co-Coordinator. Field Ser ices 690 NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION APRIL 2 - 3, 1996 CATO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NCA/ECOE VISITING TEAM MEMBERS MR. JOHN MCKINNON, GENERAL CHAIRPERSON Ms. Trish Hays, Chairperson Northwest Arkansas Education Service Cooperative 409 N. Thompson Springdale, Arkansas 72764 Ms. Shirley Rolax, Teacher Cloverdale Elementary School 6500 Hinkson Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 Ms. Sue Beck. Teacher Bryant Elementary School 200 NW 4th Street Bryant Arkansas 72022 691 Dr. Mary Rollins, Professor Arkansas Tech University Russellville, Arkansas 72801 Mr. Jerry Worm, Principal Meadowcliff Elementary School 25 Sheraton Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 FOREWORD On April 2 - 3, 1996, five representatives of the Arkansas North Central Association/Extended Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation (NCA/ECOE) State Committee visited Cato Elementary School. The comments in this report have been based on the visitors' observations and the findings produced by the faculty. It is the hope of the Arkansas NCA/ECOE State committee that the observations and recommendations included in this report will assist the faculty and administration of Cato Elementary School as they proceed with the implementation and evaluation of the School Improvement Plan. As a goal of the visiting team, recommendations have been made to reinforce the School's conclusions prepared in the School Improvement Plan. These recommendations, in many cases, will not be new and different but are in support of the School improvement team's conclusions. Recommendations have been made to foster further service and discussion, not to provide specifics of name and topic to utilize. The NCA/ECOE team would like to take this opportunity to thank the Cato Elementary CA/ECOE teering Committee. staff. administration. students, board. and community representatives for a superb two-day visit. The students and staff were most courteous, informative. and cooperative throughout the visit. The student guides certainly did their utmost to provide directions to specific areas and to assist \\Vith information. The food and various amenities provided by parents and local businesses added to an atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration. Thanks for making this CA/ECOE team visit valuable through the process utilized and the School Improvement Plan developed to meet the needs of all the students at Cato Elementary School. 692 CHAIR SUMMARY: VISITING TEAM REPORT Cato Road Elementary School began the NCA/ECOE self-study process in the fall of 1994. with the selection of a steering committee. The committee began their leadership of the NCA/ECOE process by creating the mission and outlining a method_ of collecting, disaggregating. and analyzing three types of data (achievement, archival and perceptual). Based on data collected, a student profile was developed for students scoring below the 50th percentile on the MA T-6 and SA T-8 standardized testing. a comparison of the data revealed a disparity between black and white students in all academic areas. The four correlates targeted for improvement were: 1. Monitoring and Assessment of Student Achievement:  2. Time on Task/ Opportunity to Learn~ 3. School Climate~ and 4. Parent and Community Involvement It was apparent that parents, support staff, community patrons, and students were all involved in the School improvement process. Numerous meetings were held throughout the School year to discuss strengths, concerns, and to research strategies prior to the formulation of the School improvement plan. The visiting team began their day with the School's principal and steering chairs presentation of an overview of their self-study and the development of their School Improvement Plan. Immediately following the School s orientation, the visiting team began the evaluation process with an orientation and review of achievement archival, and perceptual data prepared by the Cato Elementary School staff. Individual team members toured the facility, visited with their respective chairperson, and interviewed committee members to gather additional information to clarify any portion of the process or School Improvement Plan. The building was well kept, attractive, in good repair, and the open area concept was well organized and conducive to learning. The classrooms were 'colorfur' and contained vital information relative to themes and concepts being presented. Tours of the School validated the teachers' willingness to work as teams within their grade level areas and to include and promote the involvement of parents and community patrons as volunteers. In general, the data base for subpopulations is adequate and may be used by teachers and administrative personnel to modify instructional and programmatic strategies. Processes are being developed to evaluate programs and actions implemented for the purpose of reducing achievement disparity between the major demographic groups and raising the achievement level of low performing subgroups. 693 The goals, which have been articulated, are linked to the mission appropriate for each correlate and the direction of the program. Their processes and planning are on target and are coordinated with the existing desegregation plan the district has been implementing. In-service and professional de elopment programs have been implemented in order to provide staff with innovative and researched based strategies. An example of one program is the conflict resolution program. This particular program is a student centered, student driven, and student initiated program. The program allows students to become resolvers of their own conflict, thus encouraging self-discipline and responsibility for their own actions. It was evident to the visiting team that the steering committee provided outstanding leadership throughout the NCA/ECOE process. Strong administrative support, both district and building level, was provided for staff throughout the self-study. The staff sought not only to meet the intent of the School improvement process, but also exemplified the spirit of the process. All staff members involved in the process were knowledgeable of the process and the plan, communicated a sense of pride in their efforts. and will continue with their plan and evaluate its effectiveness. In general, the Cato Elementary chool is to be commended for their well organized plan and their comprehensive efforts. The visiting team had a very productive two days and offer the following recommendations for continued improvement: District Recommendations: There are none to report at this time. School Improvement Recommendations: 1. Maintain the steering committee and continue the use of release time for the staff to monitor the progress of the plan and make revisions and amendments as necessary. Communicate the School Improvement Plan with any new staff member. 2. Utilize the process of continuous review of student assessment as a vehicle to modify curriculum and instruction for improved student growth and achievement and to complement the existing desegregation plan outlined by the district. 3. Establish a research committee to research and provide continuous communication and 'Best Practices\" to each target committee. Schedule opportunities for staff to share these \"Best Practices'' ideas and instructional strategies. 4. Continuous contact \\ ith your ADE Field Service Specialist is recommended regarding progress in the chool lmpro ement process. 5. Celebrate your successes as you progress through your improvement plan. 694 MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Strengths: 1. The focus of the improvement of test-taking skills should have a positive impact on reducing the disparity in socialization and achievement between disadvantaged and minority students. 2. The monthly and yearly themes suppo11 the curriculum \\Vithin and among grade levels. 3. The team teaching approach allows teachers to frequently monitor individual student learning, both formally and informally. Recommendations: 1. The School should consider the inclusion of a comparative study for the purpose of monitoring the progrcs~ of ~tudcnts. It is rec mmcndcd that the disparity be calculated in percentages by race and gender. Example: student scoring below 50th percentile. 2. The committee should revisit the data to more clearly define the targeted population. Specifically as to the subpopulations by male, female is suggested. 3. Include lower achieving student accomplishments in the awards program. Example: Any improvement in grades. behavior and/or attendance, etc., could be considered. SCHOOL CLIMATE trengths: 1. The incentives in place promote interesting activities which in turn promote positive consequences for good behavior. 2. The monthly awards program encourages a positive climate by recognizing the achie ements of students and attendance records. 3. Morning Cato ews produced by fifth and sixth gifted and talented students provide a wonderful opening for the day. Representation of students is diverse. 4. Staff monitoring.of unloading of cars and School buses, greeting of students b principaL and friendliness of office per onnel presents a positi e feeling tone. The \"team\" attitude among staff seemed to impact the entire chool climate. 695 5. The manner in which student resolvers were selected represented total involvement of students and ensured the balance of raciaJ representation. 6. The open space design lends itself to allowing interdependence among the teachers. There appears to be a feeling among teachers that all are responsible for ensuring discipline and providing children with support in making \"choices\". 7. Scripts used for handling conflict resolution is very effective. The manner in which teachers support student resolvers by referring disruptions to the resolvers provide student-driven responsibility for discipline maintenance. The program currently in place ensures racial equity and consistency among all students. 8. The School Climate Committee thoroughly explained the process for determining areas of emphasis, and demonstrated that they had brainstormed a number of topics with a broad representative group and reached consensus that discipline and conflict resolution would be the focus of their study. 9. The annual and monthly themes provide a feeling of unity and direction which supports the School vision. Recommendations: 1. ln view of the effectiveness of utilizing student resolvers for recess duty, the committee members interviewed felt that consideration could be given to extend the assignment of student resolvers\" to include lunchroom duty. This could increase the effectiveness and impact of a student driven approach to discipline and shared responsibility for a fair and consistent approach to discipline. 2. The resource room appeared to be providing an important service for the entire School. In view of the close coordination with classroom teachers, it is suggested that an increase in computer support be provided at the same level as available in most of the classrooms. Consideration should be given as to the readiness of students to manage and care for the computer equipment. TIME ON TASK/OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN Strengths: 1. The improvement plan lists activities that will increase efficiency in this area throughout 696 the five-year plan. 2. The plan involves student participation in instruction (peer tutoring. buddy system, conflict resolution) which enhances student learning and teacher focus on student needs. 3. Ample support staff and parent volunteers increase time on task and addresses individual student needs in a positive way. 4. The coordinated efforts between the resource teacher and other teachers enhance time on task opportunities for the students. 5. Grade level. cross grade level. and School wide activities allow all students to be included in the total School program. 6. The reorganization of pull-out programs (Title I) lends itself to an increase of in. tructional focus and allows. upport taff and tudent to addrc, I arning o curring within the classroom. 7. The self-discipline and commitment of students and staff are significant factors in the overall positive climate of the School and realization of the importance of instructional time. Recommendations: 1. ,., .) . Continue to provide the ame commitment in the future as is displayed at present. Re, ie\\\\ . tudent interaction program to prevent and cull any duplication of efforts and programs. Consider reviewing the schedules to determine if adequate preparation, planning, and release time is provided for teachers. There appears to be numerous activities being implemented as a result of the self-study and from the district's desegregation plan. PARENT AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Strengths: 1. Community business partners play an active and integral part of the chool structure at Cato Elementar_ . trong linkage with communit sen ices is exemplified by the 697 visitation of the counselor from the Children's and Families office three days a week. 2. a high level of parental support is evidenced by the willingness and comfort level of the teachers to call parents and follov-7-up with the discipline referral program. 3. The \"Cato Hot Line\" service is an excellent source for families to receive updated information about School activities and events, and the Cato Spirit Newsletter provides a communication link with parents and faculty. 4. The flexible scheduling of the parent/teacher conferences encourage a high percentage of participation from parents. 5. The Title I program provides informative meetings and workshops with babysitting and refreshments a an added incentive for complete family participation. 6. The open space organization encourages and readily allows visitors the opportunity to observe instruction and interactions of staff and students. 7. The active volunteer program is evidenced by the level of instructional support provided by parent volunteers. This support is conducive to a positive learning environment and assist teachers in addressing the various levels of ability. 8. ln\\'olving parents in conflict resolution training suppo1is classroom and School discipline management. Recommendations: 1. Consider providing \"parenting training for families to adopt the conflict resolution in the home. Training would include linkage with business and professional leaders in the community. a stronger impact of the training for both teachers and parents might be documented by monitoring the number of conflict resolution repo1is which are submitted following the expanded training for teachers and implementation of the resolution model in the home. 1 Establish a parent team on the parent/community committee to rotate their involvement to more effectively accompli h ECOE goals. This would move toward a more active involvement from the parents. 698 CATO ROAD ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 14 ELEMENTS IN THE STRATEGIES TO SITE VISITS SITE VISITS ALLEN LETTER ADDRESS EVIDENCE IN ANNOUNCED UNANNOUNCED ECOESCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN A. Is Activity Taking Place? A. Is Activity Taking Place? B. Available Evidence B. Available Evidence 1. E idence that policies. A. Yes A. Yes procedures, rules and regulations are developed B. Document/record B. Document/record and implemented to Principal's Interview Principal s Interview -...I 8 facilitate desegregation. 2. Evidence that plans Implement variety of reading Not Known Not Known related to reducing activities. pp. 19-21 achievement disparity between black and nonblack students are progressively successful. 3. Evidence that student A. Yes A. Yes assignments to schools. classes and programs at B. Document/record B. Document/record ach organizational level Principal s Interview Principal' s Interview are made without bias. --..J 0 I-' 4. 5. 6. 7. Evidence that staff development days authorized as a result of the Agreement are used to facil:tate the de. cgregation proces . E idence that travel time to and from chool i not di proportionate among black and nonblack student and the percentage of black tudent transported for de egregation is not ignificantly greater than th percentage of non-black students transported for de egregation. Evidence that guidance and counseling is designed to meet the needs of a diverse student population. Evidence of internal procedures for ensuring that materials for appraising or counseling tudents are non-discriminatory. A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record Principal's Interview Principal' s Interview A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record A. Yes . A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record ---.J 0 N 8. 9. 10. 11. Evidence that curricular content and instructional strategies are utilized to meet the diverse needs of the student population served. Evidence that personnel is recruited, employed and assigned in a manner to meet the goals of a desegregating school district. Evidence that procedures related to extracurricular and cocurricular activities are developed and implemented to identify and eliminate conditions that result in participation that is disproportionate to the student population . . Evidence of diverse representation on appointed district wide and school-based committees. Implement variety of reading activities. pp. I 9-21 Conflict resolution training for students and teachers. pp. 27- 29 Involve students in multi modal learning activities. p.33 A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record Observation Observation Principal s Interview Principal' s Interview A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record Principal s Interview Principal's Interview A. No A. Yes B. Document/record A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record Principal' s Interview Principal' s Interview -.....J 0 w 12. 13. 14. Evidence of efforts to ensure that parent attendance at school functions is not di proportionate to the tudent population. Evidence of succes related to Majority to Minority transfers Evidence that magnet chools are an effective interdistrict remedy for racial balance. Parent classes on conflict resolution, p. 3 7 Annual grade level teacher-parent meeting. p. 3 7 Parent classe on connict r solution, p. 3 7  xpand volunteer program. p. 38 Semi-annual play-ground improvement day. p. 39 Adopt-a-grandparent program. p. 39 A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record A. Yes A. Yes B. ADE Desegregation files B. ADE Desegregation files NIA NIA CENTRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NORTH LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72116 FEBRUARY 20 - 21, 1996 REPORT OF THE NORTH CENTRA.L ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION Copies to: Dr. Emma Bass NCA State Director Mr. Frank Anthony Assistant Director, ADE Submitted to: Mr. James Smith= Superintendent March 25, 1996 Ms. Pat Siegel Principal, Central Elementary School Ms. Annette Rodgers Steering Committee Chairperson Compiled by: Mr. Bob Paulovich Field Sen-ices Specialist Mr. James A. Hester Co-Coordinator Field Ser\\'ices 704 NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION FEBRUARY 20 - 21, 1996 CENTRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NCA/ECOE VISITING TEAM MEMBERS MR. BOB PAVLOVICH, GENERAL CHAIRPERSON Mrs. Alice Simelton, Chairperson Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol Mall, Room 301-B Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Mrs. Gwen Zeigler Principal Terry Elementary School 10800 Mara Lynn Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72211 Ms. Jewell Walker Basic Academic Services University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff 1200 North University Drive Pine Bluff, Arkansas 71601 705 Mrs. Ann Dawson Teacher Ringold Elementary School 536 River St. Benton, Arkansas 72015 Mr. Doug Vann Teacher Bryant Middle School 200 Northwest 4th St. Bryant, Arkansas 72022 FOREWORD On February 20 - 21, 1996, five representatives of the Arkansas North Central Association/ Extended Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation (NCA/ECOE) State Committee visited Central Elementary School. The comments in this report have been based on the visitors' observations and the findings produced by the faculty. It is the hope of the Arkansas NCA/ECOE State Committee that the observations and recommendations included in this report will assist the faculty and administration of Central Elementary School as they proceed with the implementation and evaluation of the School Improvement Plan. As a goal of the visiting team, recommendations have been made to reinforce the school's conclusions prepared in the School Improvement Plan. These recommendations, in many cases, will not be new and different, but are in support of the school improvement team's conclusions. Recommendations have been made to foster further service and discussion, not to provide specifics of name and topic to utilize. The NCAIECOE team would like to take this opportunity to thank the Central Elementary NCAIECOE Steering Committee, staff, administration, students, board, and community representatives for a superb two-day visit. The students and staff were most courteous, informative, and cooperative throughout the visit. The student guides certainly did their utmost to provide directions to specific areas and to assist with information. The food and various amenities provided by parents and local businesses added to an atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration. Thanks for making this NCA/ECOE team visit valuable through the process utilized and the School Improvement Plan developed to meet the needs of all the students at Central Elementary. 706 CHAIR SUMMARY: VISITING TEAM REPORT Central Elementary School began their NCA/ECOE self study in the fall of 1995, with the assistance of Field Services Specialists froin the Arkansas Department of Education. The principal, Ms. Pat Siegel, appointed a Building Steering Committee to organize this effort. The steering committee established four sub-committees to begin the distribution, collection, and disaggregation of achievement, archival, and perceptual data. After close examination of all data, the staff selected the following targets for improvement: 1. Monitoring and Assessment of Student Achievement\n2. School Climate\n3. Instructional Leadership: and 4. Parent and Community Involvement. During the early stages of the school improvement process. the staff developed a vision statement. Afterwards, specific learner outcomes were deYeloped for concentration for the next five years. Target committees were selected and began additional data collection in order to determine outcomes for the School Impro\\'ement Plan. The Central Elementary School Education Program is designed to ensure that quality programs are accessible for all students. Programs are being implemented that reflects the schools mission/vision statement and goals. The curriculum is broad in scope and provides for individual differences through a variety of programs. Through the NCAIECOE self-study, the staff has assessed the effectiveness of the school's instructional program and has developed a plan for improvement of the programs. Support of the core instructional program is provided through guidance services by the counselors, a nurse, a licensed social worker, and several students from the UALR School of Social Work are full-time as a pilot program. The entire school is a Chapter 1 school. The implementation of a .. mini\" middle school was underway and appeared to be progressing successfully. The school plant is clean and attractive. The school facility has three levels, and the only level that is handicapped accessible is the ground level. If there are students with handicaps, all services would be made readily available. 707 It is evident to the visiting team that the steering committee provided thorough, outstanding leadership throughout the NCA/ECOE process at Central Elementary. A high level of enthusiasm exists among administration, staff, and students regarding the school's plans for improvement. As evidenced by surveys, cooperation, collaboration of administration, and staff, teacher/learner relationships are very positive. All faculty members were involved in the process, are knowledgeable of the process and the plan, and communicZlte a sense of pride in the success of their efforts. They intend to follow through with their plan to evaluate its successes for regular revision and have, in fact, begun the implementation of the actions for year one. Administrative support, both district and building level, was provided for the staff throughout the self-evaluation. The principal kept abreast of all aspects of the planning process, consulted with committee members regularly, and permitted them to carry out their responsibilities. Arrangements were made to provide release time for committees, and there was continuous support from the Arkansas Department of Education. District Recommendations There is none at this time. School Improvement Recommendations: 1. Provide covers for all electrical outlets that evidenced throughout the building. 2. Repair hole in wall in the Gym where outlets have been removed. 3. Ensure that electrical wiring is out of reach of students. 708 MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Strengths: 1. The initiation of a fifth and sixth grade mini middle schoolwas begun. Specialized instruction enable faculty to spend more time plann:ng and researching innovative ways of presenting material,which should result in improved student learning. 2. There is the use of a tutor to provide individualized help to students. 3. There is the use of positive reinforcement to decrease disciplinary problems, such as \"Caught YouBeing Good~ program. Recommendations: 1. Provide in-depth in service relative to Portfolio use and evaluation. 2. Develop specific~ school-wide guidelines for Portfolio Management. 3. Determine and document student improvement on more immediate measures than the Stanford 8 (e.g. compare students' grades in courses from each nine-week period, etc.) 4. Conduct research to determine the extent to which neighborhood students are benefitting from activities (e.g.~ decrease in number of black n1ales and area \\\\.-bite males receiving disciplinary referrals, increase in achievement level of black males and area white males, etc.) 5. Reinstitute Mentor Program with high schooL which provides mentors for students from neighborhood, especially black males and area white males. SCHOOL CLIMATE Strengths: 1. The School Climate actions are designed and implemented to enhance the morale of the faculty and staff members. 2. The actions in this S~hool Improvement Plan include reassessment procedures for continued examination of programs to foster self-esteem among students. 709 Recommendations: 1. Continue the focus on decreasing discipline suspensions, and expulsions rates. 2. Give consideration to being more specific in your time line in the way of including definite months with years. INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP Strengths: 1. Teachers seem to know their children and their needs. 2. Teachers are sharing ideas and helping each other. 3. Actions for Year one have been implemented. 4. Computer Lab with Reading. Math, and Writing is available for students. Recommendations: 1. To ensure action implementation. person responsible should be more specific by position. 2. Have forms for each teacher to stay on target. Ha,'e a time frame established. 3. Set a time for peer coaching and taking notes. PARENT AND COl\\1MUNITY INVOLVEMENT Strengths: 1. The school has a P.art-time parent coordinator to assist in making parent contacts. 2. Great ideas for Reading Day Career Day, \"Wishing Well\", thank you notes, having special speakers, field trips citizens of the week. awards each nine weeks involving businesses such as McDonald's, TOI Fridays, etc have been implemented. 3. There is a good partnership which targets in olvement with families with super community partner with Boys Club. 4. There s a great caring staff and administration: example getting coats for students in need and Christmas tree for student. 710 5. There's a geat preschool program which meets needs of community and at-risk youngsters and social work involvement 6. There's good involvement for Halloween Carnival fund raising and caroling in community at Christmas and good ideas and activities involving community for Black History Month celebrations. 7. There is great participation with parents and grandparents eating lunch with students. 8. There is good contact with local National Guard facilities and the local dentist. 9. There is a great summer program to get students involved in local businesses and making connections between class studies and on the job application of studies. (Wonderful!) Recommendations: 1. It is vital to find a parent from the local neighborhood that can make contacts with local parents and works with the parent coordinator. 2. Add additional businesses for partnerships such as Food King to donate groceries for parties and refreshments, prizes for students and Hardees for prizes for students and door prizes for PT A. TCBY has an edible bookmark reading program available that would coordinate well with reading program. 3. Invite parents to come join in special days that are entertaining non threatening, and \"Low intimidation,\" such as day with Junior High or Senior High bands, or a day for field trip, career day, etc. 4. Have an Open House prior to first day of school in the fall. 5. Send notes or mail them home to parents for communicating when students do well, such as citizens of the week, special recognition, etc., to break down \"intimidation\" of parents who may have had poor experience in their earlier school setting. 6. Pizza Hut is a good contact for free personal pan pizzas and so are local video rental businesses. 711 Perceptual Survey Use: Central Elementary School Central Elementary School reviewed the perceptual data and noted the following areas of concern: Students lack respect for themselves and others. Improve student self-esteem and self-motivation. Staff morale needs continued improvement. Facilities need improvement. As a result, the following outcomes were developed: Increase student achievement through improved student behavior. To improvt stucic:nts\" sLlf-LstLLlll ~nd s lf-moti\\'\n1tion. Continue to improve staff morale. 712 -.......J ~ w 1. 2. 14 ELEMENTS IN THE ALLEN LETTER Evidence that policies, procedures, rules and regulations are developed and implemented to facilitate de egregation. Evidence that plans related to reducing achievement disparity between black and nonblack students are progressively successful. STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS EVIDENCE IN ECOESCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Initiate a ''Caught Being Good\" program, p.41 Initiate a tudent of the week picture program (reward). p.42 Initiate a Student- Administrator Luncheon program. p.43 Student Profile. p.4 Ref er to Perceptual Survey attachment Initiate Co-operative Learning. p.36 Develop guidelines for Portfolio Assessment p.36 Organize a grade 5-6 mini-middle SchooL p.36 Provide more educational field trips, p.39 SITE VISITS SITE VISITS ANNOUNCED UNANNOUNCED A. Is Activity Taking Place? A. Is Activity Taking Place? B. Available Evidence B. Available Evidence A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Principal's Interview Principal s Interview A. Yes . A. Yes B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Principal's Interview Principal' s Interview 3. Evidence that student A. Yes A. Yes a ignments to schools. classes and program at B. Document/Record B. Document/Record each organizational level Principal' s Interview Principal's Interview are made without bia . Observation 4. Evidence that staff A. Yes A. Yes development days authorized as a result of B. Document/Record B. Document/Record the Agreement are used to Principal' s Interview Principal's Interview faci I itate the de egregation process. 5. Evidence that travel time A. Yes A. Yes to and from chool is not disproportionate among B. Document/Record B. Document/Record black and nonblack tudents and the percentage of black -.....J tudents transported for ....... .l::-- de gregation is not ignificantly greater than the percentage of non-black students transported for desegregation. 6. Evidence that guidance Pilot field placement for social A. Yes A. Yes and counseling is workers, p.41 designed to meet the B. Document/Record B. Document/Record needs of a diverse student Observation population. 7. Evidence of internal A. Yes A. Yes procedure for ensuring that materials for B. Document/Record B. Document/Record appraising or coun el ing tudent are non-di criminatory. 8. Evidence that curricular Use Title I tutor to provide A. Yes A. Yes content and instructional individualized help. p.36 strategies are utilized to B. Document/Record B. Document/Record meet the diverse needs of Find more community Principal s Interview Principal's Interview the student population resources to provide individual served. help to students. p.38 Initiate an intervention classroom. p.41 Implement flexible grouping to meet individual needs. p.8 Expand staff knowledge and use of varied teaching strategies. p.8 9. Evidence that per onnel A. Yes A. Yes is recruited, employed and assigned in a manner B. Document/Record B. Document/Record ...J to meet the goals of a Principal's Interview Principal's Interview ~ VI desegregating school district. 10. Evidence that procedures Implement Student Council, A. Yes A. Yes related to extracurricular p.20 and cocurricular activities B. Document/Record B. Document/Record are developed and Implement Student implemented to identify Ambassadors. p.20 and eliminate conditions that result in participation that is disproportionate to the tudent population. 11. E idence of diverse A. Yes A. Yes representation on appointed district wide B. Document/Record B. Document/Record and school-based committees. 12. Evidence of efforts to Initiate a Family Reading Day, A. No A.No ensure that parent p.15 attendance at school B. B. functions is not Hire a parent coordinator, disproportionate to the p.14 student population. Develop a staff \"Wishing Weir' for parents to donate items, p.16 Design a variety of thank-you notes to be sent home when parents help. p.17 Develop a newsletter bi-annual I y by each classroom, p.19 --...J Develop and use a parent- ~ O'\\ teacher contract form, p. 19 13. Evidence of success A. Yes A. Yes related to Majority to Minority transfers B. Desegregation Files B. Desegregation Files 14. Evidence that magnet A. NIA A. NIA schools are an effective interdistrict remedy for B. NIA B. NIA racial balance. CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72209 APRIL 22 - 23, 1996 REPORT OF THE NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION Submitted to: Dr. Henry Williams May 24, 1996 Mr. Frederick Fields Principal, Cloverdale Elementary School Ms. Cherry Norman and Ms. Shirley Rolax Steering Committee Co-Chairpersons Copies to: Dr. Emma Bass NCA State Director Mr. Frank Anthony Assistant Director, ADE Mr. James a. Hester Co-Coordinator, Field Services Compiled by: Mr. David Watts Field Services Specialist 717 NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION APRIL 22 - 23, 1996 CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NCA/ECOE VISITING TEAM MEMBERS MR. DAVID WATTS, GENERAL CHAIRPERSON Mr. Bob Paulovich, Chairperson Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol MalL Room 301-B Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 Ms. Marianne Wells, Teacher Meadow Park Elementary School 400 Eureka Garden Road North Little Rock, Arkansas 72117 Ms. Karen Slayden, Teacher Pine Forest Elementary School 400 Pine Forest Drive Maumelle. Arkansas 72113 718 Dr. Dick Clough, Professor University of Central Arkansas 201 Donaghey A venue Conway, Arkansas 72035-0001 Ms. Lyn Russell, Teacher Landmark Elementary School 16712 Arch St. Pike Little Rock, Arkansas 72206 FOREWORD On April 22 - 23, 1996, five representatives of the Arkansas North Central Association/Extended Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation (NCA/ECOE) State Committee visited Cloverdale Elementary School. The comments in this report have been based on the visitors' observations and the findings produced by the faculty. It is the hope of the Arkansas NCA/ECOE State Committee that the observations and recommendations included in this report will assist the faculty and administration of Cloverdale Elementary School as they proceed with the implementation and evaluation of the School Improvement Plan. As a goal of the visiting team, recommendations have been m~de to reinforce the School's conclusions prepared in the School Improvement Plan. These recommendations, in many cases, will not be new and different, but are in support of the School improvement team's conclusions. Recommendations have been made to foster further service and discussion, not to provide specifics of name and topic to utilize. The NCA/ECOE team would like to take this opportunity to thank the Cloverdale Elementary NCA/ECOE Steering Committee, staff, administration, students, board, and community representatives for a superb two-day visit. The students and staff were most courteous, informative. and cooperative throughout the visit. The student guides certainly did their utmost to provide directions to specific areas and to assist with information. The food and various amenities provided by parents and local businesses added to an atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration. Thanks for making this NCA/ECOE team visit valuable through the process utilized and the School Improvement Plan developed to meet the needs of all the students at Cloverdale Elementary School. 719 CHAIR SUMMARY: VISITING TEAM REPORT Cloverdale Elementary School is located in South,,:est Little Rock and was constructed in 1959. The well maintained facility accommodates 450 students and consists of 21 classrooms, a spacious library, a large teacher work area, a health suite, a spacious counselor's suite, a teacher's lounge, a conference room, and a cafetorium which is shared with Cloverdale Junior High School. The staff consists of 29 certified teachers, which include 21 regular classroom teachers and specialists, a principaL a nurse, six instructional specialists, five supervision aides, three custodians, and one secretary. Cloverdale Elementary School began the Extended COE process during the fall of 1994. The process continued through April of 1996, when the CA/ECOE visiting team was on campus. The steering committee chairpersons were selected by the building principal, Mr. Freddie Fields. The steering committee was responsible for the distribution, collection, and analysis of the perceptual. archival, and achievement data. Each member of the steering committee served as chairperson of one of the target committees. The staff chose to address all seven correlate as sub-categories under the four indicators of success. Although the staff cho e this approach, it proved to the visiting team to be extremely difficult confu ing, and frustrating for the Cloverdale faculty and staff. It is evident to the visiting team that the steering committee provided outstanding leadership throughout the CA/ECOE process at Cloverdale Elementary School. a high level of enthusiasm exists among the administration and staff. All faculty members were involved in the process, are knowledgeable of the plan, and communicate a high sense of pride for their effort and final School Improvement Plan. There was strong administrative support from the administration at the district le el and the Arkansas Department of Education. It is obviou to the visiting team that the faculty and staff at Cloverdale Elementary chool worked long and hard throughout the proces . We understand the process was difficult and time consuming. We hope our input will help impro, e an already strong ECOE report. Thank you for a most enjoyable visit. District Recommendation : There are none to report at thi time. 720 School Improvement Recommendations: 1. Specify a month and year for action implementation. 2. Persons responsible for implementation should be named by position. It should be one person rather than just teachers. 3. Actions should be developed to a higher degree of specificity. 4. Re-examine the surveys and address any item that had a negative type response. 5. Transfer the actions on to large chart paper or poster board by month, year, and person(s) responsible. This will help to visually internalize the entire time line. Strong consideration should be given to priority and delaying least important actions for implementation during later years of the five-year cycle. 6. Considering the volume of staff development in the School Improvement Plan, identify a primary and intermediate teacher to coordinate staff development for curriculum needs. 7. The visiting team strongly recommends that more classroom manipulation (hands-on) materials be provided. 721 TIME ON TASK Strengths: 1. The staff has developed several projects throughout the plan to increase student achievement that also can reduce the disparity of math and reading scores. 2. The Prime Time, Student Council, Behavior Honor Roll, and Lunch with the Principal are each representative of positive programs to enhance the School climate through student assignment and student activities. Recommendations: 1. The faculty may want to utilize volunteer parents to make centers and teach two to three children to use each center. 2. For portfolio assessment and abacus literacy, the clear School purpose committee could implement vertical and horizontal meetings to coordinate curriculum criteria. HIGH EXPECTATIONS Strength: The staff and parent cooperation in School activities is creatively planned. The Parent's Night Out program shows a real commitment by the teacher to work cooperatively with parents. Recommendation: The staff may want to investigate the Family Math. Science, and Literacy Program and continue K-4 Crusade training for K-4 teachers. Other programs that might be investigated are: Math Their Way and Box-It-Or-Bag-It-Math. 722 SCHOOL CLIMATE Strength: Outcomes were developed with student achievement being the primary focus. Recommendations: I. Under Parent and Community Involvement. consider adding a staff meeting for total staff approval and/or awareness of the criteria for awards. 2. Under evaluation of School Climate, consider providing documentation of work involved in the action instead of relying totally on observation. 3. In reference to Time On Task, action four. consider a more detailed explanation. Strengths: INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP/PARENT AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 1. The administration and teachers have already implemented a variety of new '\"parent involvement\" activities which has increased parental involvement aimed at improving student achievement. 2. The staff has demonstrated commitment to implementation of new discipline guidelines. including a \"detention hall and time out'' approach, that has the potential for enhancing student achievement. 3. The School has a wide array of student recognition programs and activities designed to promote high expectations, as well as to motivate improved achievement on the part of all students. 4. The School has demonstrated strong commitment to community involvement by successfully implementing outstanding programs in VIPS and Partners In Education. 723 Recommendations: 1. Consideration should be given to utilizing one staff member on-site to coordinate the implementation of all parent and community involvement activities, particularly those related to fostering student achievement. 2. In regard to the goal of \"involving students of all cultures in leadership activities,'' the administration and staff should explore additional specific activities aimed at increasing participation for students in K-2. 3. The staff should continue to work on developing and enhancing parent leadership in PT A activities by conducting leadership workshops, such as those offered by the Arkansas Parent-Teacher Association. 4. Teacher utilization of interdisciplinary thematic units would be enhanced by additional staff development activities conducted by district subject matter specialists and/or supervisors. 724 PERCEPTUAL SURVEY RESULTS: CLOVERDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Upon reviewing the results of the ECOE perceptual survey, the Cloverdale ECOE committees identified the following needs: There was a lack of cohesion on the staff and within the student body. There is a perception that policies are inconsistent. There is too much negative reinforcement. There is not enough parental involvement from some identifiable groups. Based on these findings, several examples of the selected outcomes are listed below: Greatly increase the number of parental volunteers within the School. Increase on-site, hands-on activities for all students.  Increase the modes of presentation to students to meet the needs of all types of learner. Increase self-esteem program availability for students. 725 -.J N (J'\\ 1. 2. CLOVERDALEELEMENTARY:LRSD 14 ELEMENTS IN THE STRATEGIES TO SITE VISITS SITE VISITS ALLEN LETTER ADDRESS EVIDENCE IN ANNOUNCED UNANNOUNCED ECOESCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN A. Is Activity Taking Place? A. Is Activity Taking Place B. Available Evidence B. Availble Evidence Evidence that policies, A. Yes A. Yes procedures rules and regulations are developed B. Document/Records B. Document/Records and implemented to Principal's Interview Principal' s Interview facilitate desegregation. Evidence that plans Eliminate classroom A. Yes A. Yes related to reducing interruptions achievement disparity B. Desegregation Files B. Document/Record between black and Introduce the use of thematic Principal' s Interview nonblack students are units across the curricula progressively successful. Provide an after School tutoring program, p. 57 Provide leadership opportunities for all students, p. 54 Provide TESA training for all staff members, p.66 -.J N -.J 3. 4. Evidence that student a ignments to school . cla es and programs at each organizational level are made without bias. Evidence that taff development days auth dzcd as a result of th greement arc u cd to facilitat.e the desegregation procc 5. Evidence that travel time to and from chool is not di proportionate among black and nonblack student and the percentage of black tudents tran ported for de egregation is not ignificantly greater than the percentage of nonblack students transported for desegregation. 6. Evidence that guidance and counseling is de igned to meet the need of a di verse student population. Recruit volunteers at local churches and colleges. p. 80 Continuously urvey staff for need and desires as far as training. p. 79 A. Yes B. Document/Records Principal's Interview A. Yes B. Document/Records Principal's Intcnic\\v A. Yes 8. Document/Records A. Yes B. Document/Records A. Yes B. Document/Records Principars Interview A. Yes B. Document/Records Principal's Interview A. Yes B. Document/Records A. Yes B. Document/Records -......J N co 7. 8. 9. 10. Evidence of internal procedures for ensuring that materials for appraising or counseling students are non-discriminatory. Evidence that curricular content and instructional trategies are utilized to meet the diverse need. of the student population served. Evidence that personnel is recruited, employed and assigned in a manner to meet the goals of a desegregating school district. Evidence that procedures related to extracurricular and cocurricular activities are developed and implemented to identify and eliminate conditions that result in participation that is disproportionate to the student population. A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Records B. Document/Records Initiate the 'trainer of trainers'' A. Yes A. Yes program, p.66 B. Document/Records B. Document/Records Thematic uni ts incorporated Observation Principal's Interview across the curricula. p.57 Principal s r ntcrview Classroom Observation Curriculum compacting for gifted students, p.66 Recruit early child hood A. Yes A. Yes volunteers by contacting local colleges. p.80 B. Document/Records B. Document/Records Principal' s Interview A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Records B. Document/Records -i N I..O 11. 12. 13. 14. [:videncc of diverse repre entation on appointed district wide and chool-ba ed committee . r: idence of effort to en. ure that parent attcndanc at.cho I functions is not disprop rtionate to the . tudcnt population. J idence of succe related to Majority to Minority transfers Evidence that magnet chools are an effective interdi trict remedy for racial balance. A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Records B. Document/Records Principars Inter ie\\v Principal's Interview Develop ,oluntecr recruitment A. Yes A. Yes materials B. Document/Records B. Document/Records Ifo. ta VIP break fa t Increase the number of PTA program I lost the Cloverdale Fashion how. p.53 0 A. Yes B. Desegregation Files B. Document/Records Principal's Interview A. NIA A. Yes B. NIA B. Document/Records CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NORTH LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NORTH LITTLE ROCK, ARKL\\NSAS 72116 FEBRUARY 22 - 23, 1996 REPORT OF THE NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION TEAM VISIT Submitted to: Mr. James Smith. Superintendent Jv1arch 25. 1996 I\\1s. Linda Wilson Principal, Crestwood Elementary School Copies to: Dr. Emma Bass N CA State Director Mr. Frank Anthony Assistant Director. ADE Mr. James A. Hester Co-Coordinator, Field Services Ms. Karen Fuselier Steering Committee Chairperson Compiled by: 1r. Bob Paulo,ich Field SerYices Specialist 730 NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION FEBRUARY 22 - 23, 1996 CRESTWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NCA/ECOE VISITING TEAM MEMBERS MR. BOB PAVLOVICH, GENERAL\"CHAIRPERSON Mrs. Alice Simelton, Chairperson Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol Mall, Room 301-B Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Felicia Hobbs Assistant Principal Gibbs Magnet Elementary School 1115 W. 16th St. Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Mr. Wes Whitley Program Advisor, Title 1 Arkansas Department of Education #4 State Capitol Mall Little Rock, Arkansas TJ.201 731 Mrs. Sheila Holicer Counselor Westbrook Elementary School 2621 Highway 229 Benton, Arkansas 72015 Dr. Betty Dickson Assistant Professor University of Central Arkansas 186 Pebble Beach Dr. Little Rock, Arkansas 72212 CHAIR SUMMARY: VISITING TEAM REPORT Crestwood Elementary began their NCA/ECOE self-study the fall of 1995, with the assistance of Field Services Specialists from the Arkansas Department of Education. A school-wide meeting was held to explain the self-study process. The Crestwood Elementary School Educational program is designed to ensure that the quality programs are accessible for all students. Programs are being implemented that reflect the school's mission/vision statement and goals. The curriculum is broad in scope and provides for individual differences through a variety of programs. Through the NCA/ECOE self-study, the staff has assessed the effectiveness of the schools instructional programs and has developed a plan for improvement of the program. The community displays its support for the school by parent volunteers and partnerships with businesses in the community. Support of the core instructional program is provided through guidance services by the counselor. The school offers Special Education services provided in a resource room and selfcontained classroom. The school plant is clean, attractive, and in good repair. The custodial and maintenance services are above average. The principal, Ms. Linda Wilson, appointed a building steering committee to organize this effort. The steering committee established four subcommittees to begin the distribution, collection, and disaggregation of achievement, archival, and perceptual data. After close examination of all data, the staff selected the following targets for improvement: 1. Clear School Purpose\n2. High Expectations\n3. Monitoring and Assessment of Student Achievement\nand 4. Parent and Community Involvement. During the early stages of the school improvement process, the staff with the involvement of parents, developed a vision statement. Then specific learner outcomes were developed for concentration for the next five years. Target committees were selected and began additional data collection in order to determine outcomes for the School Improvement Plan. It is evident to the visiting team that the steering committee provided thorough, outstanding leadership throughout the NCA/ECOE process at Crestwood Elementary. A high level of enthusiasm exists among administration and staff. Teacher/learner relationships are very positive. All faculty members were involved in the process, are knowledgeable of the process, and the plan, and communicate a sense of pride in the success of their efforts. They intend to follow through with their plan to evaluate its success for regular revision and have, in fact, begun the implementation of the actions for year one. 732 FOREWORD On February 22 - 23, 1996, five representatives of the Arkansas North Central Association/ Extended Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation (NCA/ECOE) State Committee visited Crestwood Elementary School. The comments in this report have been based on the visitors' observations and the findings produced by the faculty. It is the hope of the Arkansas NCA/ECOE State Committee that the observations and recommendations included in this report will assist the faculty and administration of Crestwood Elementary School as they proceed with the implementation and evaluation of the School Improvement Plan. As a goal of the visiting team, recommendations have been made to reinforce the school's conclusions prepared in the School Improvement Plan. These recommendations, in many cases, will not be new and different, but are in support of the school improvement team's conclusions. Recommendations have been made to foster further service and discussion, not to provide specifics of name and topic to utilize. The NCA/ECOE team would like to take this opportunity to thank the Crestwood Elementary NCA/ECOE Steering Committee, staff, administration students, board, and community representatives for a superb two-day visit. The students and staff were most courteous, informative, and cooperative throughout the visit. The student guides certainly did their utmost to provide directions to specific areas and to assist with information. The food and various amenities provided by parents and local businesses added to an atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration. Thanks for making this NCA/ECOE team visit valuable through the process utilized and the School Improvement Plan developed to meet the needs of all the students at Crestwood Elementary. 733 Administrative support, both district and building level, was provided for the staff throughout the self-evaluation. The principal kept abreast of all aspects of the planning process, consulted with committees and committee members regularly, and permitted them to carry out their responsibilities. Arrangements were made to provide release time for committees and continuous support from the Arkansas Department of Education. District Recommendations There are none to report at this time. School Improvement Recommendations: 1. None 734 HIGH EXPECTATIONS Strengths: 1. The survey of parents and community was very thorough and the response was good. 2.. The multicultural units for each grade were interesting for students and teacher. 3. There seems to be strong parent and community support. 4. The addition of reading daily is a real plus to get higher expectations. 5. The field trips do enrich your curriculum. Recommendations: Consider distributing the responsibility to staff members other than the chairperson. MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT ACIDEVEMENT Strengths: 1. Teachers use a variety of tools to identify students' strengths and weaknesses. 2. Teachers use portfolios to assess and improve students' achievement. Through portfolios, students are able to judge how much they are growing. Recommendations: 1. Students can select teachers, other students, parents, and principals to evaluate their portfolios. The shcng should be non-threatening. 2. Materials in portfolios should be dated so that growth can be evaluated. 3. Never send a child to a lower grade for instruction. This lowers a child's self-esteem and could foster a dislike for school. 735 CLEAR SCHOOL PURPOSE Strengths: 1. The method of surveying parents to determine their concerns regarding communication was of great benefit. 2. Thirty-four percent of parents responded to the survey. 3. Teachers have a positive attitude regarding the use of a weekly newsletter. 4. Every student has the opportunity to actually check their own progress. 5. Revisions will be made as needed to check students progress. 6. Consistent communication between parents and teachers is positive. 7. The lines of communication are regular and consistent. 8. Contracting with parents as a means of accountability appears effective. Recomrnendati ons: 1. Data should be compiled to determine effectiveness of weekly reports. 2. More parent involvement is needed on the target area for feedback. 3. A specific person should be named to carry out various tasks. 4. Other means should be explored to fund actions such as grants, P .I.E., fundraisers, etc. 5. A survey needs to be conducted more frequently to get a more comparative measure. 6. Student should be able to articulate the school's mission/purpose. 736 PARENT AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Strengths: 1. There needs to be an iniation of a parent resource library at the entrance of the building. 2. Transportation to school needs to be provided for parents when needed. Recommendation: There should be a calendar twice a year to detail events in addition to your monthly communication. 737 Perceptual Survey Use: Crestwood Elementary School Crestwood Elementary chool analyzed the perceptual data and noted the following concerns: Parents were not satisfied with the degree of communication. Some parental dissatisfaction with the knowledge of School goals. Students were not satisfied with their degree of interest in the curriculum. Teachers felt a need for alternative assessments. The disparity of black and white students test scores was still great. As a result, the following actions and outcomes were developed: To improve communication with each parent and student about the students' activities. achievements. and progress. To emich the curriculum by providing more experiences for all students. Expand the use of portfolio assessments. See infusion document. Quality of Education. reduction in racial academic disparity. 738 -.....J w \\.0 1. 14 ELEMENTS IN THE ALLEN LETTER E idence that policies, procedure , rule and regulations are developed and implemented to facilit~te de egr gation. STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS EVIDENCE IN ECOESCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN SITE VISITS SITE VISITS ANNOUNCED UNANNOUNCED A. Is Activity Taking Place? A. Is Activity Taking Place? B. Available Evidence B. Available Evidence A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/Record B. Document/Record Principal's Interview Principal's Interview Evidence that plans related to reducing achievement disparity Develop an accumulative B. Document/Record B. Document/Record between black and reading Ii t for each student_ Principal's Interview nonblack students are p.14 progre ively successful. Adopt a new reading theme each year with reading the major focu . p.15 [nitiate. monitor. and expand p rtfolio assessment. p.22 Revise and continue peer tutoring. p. 18 Expand the adult tutoring program. p. 18 -....J J::-- Revise the special programs 0 for students that show no growth for two y ars. p.19 Collect statistics to compare the disparity of scores for years one. p.19 3. E idence that student A. Yes A. Yes ass1gnm to schools, cla ses and programs at B. Document/Record B. Document/Record each organizational level Principal's Interview are made without bias. Observation 4. E idence that staff A. Yes A. Yes development days authorized as a r suit of B. Document/Record B. Document/Record the Agreement are used to Principal's Interview facilitate the desegregation process. 5. Evidence that travel time A. Yes A. Yes to and from school is not di proportionate among B. Document/Record B. Document/Record black and nonblack students and the percentage of black tudents transported for desegregation is not ignificantly greater than the percentage of non-black students tran, ported fi r de egr gation. 6. Evidence that guidance A. Yes A. Yes and counseling i de igned to meet the B. Document/Record B. Document/Record needs of a diverse student population. -..c...-J- 7. Evidence of internal A. Yes A. Yes ...... procedures for en uring that material for B. Document/Record B. Document/Record appraising or coun eling tudcnts are non-di criminatory. 8. I::.vidence that curricular To promote the appreciation of A. Yes A.Yes content and instructional cultural diversity through the trategies are utilized to study of cultural diversity and B. Document/Record B. Document/Record meet the diverse needs of the celebration of heritage Principal s Interview Principal' s Interview the student population (School goal #8) Observation served. 9.  vid nee that personnel A. Yes A. Yes 1 recruited, employed and a signed in a manner B. Document/Record B. Document/Record t meet the goals of a Principal's Interview Principal' s Interview de egregating chool di trict. 10. Evidence that procedure A.No A. Yes related to extracurricular and cocurricular activities B. Document/Record are developed and implemented to identify and eliminate conditions that result in participation that is disproportionate to th tudent population. 11. Evidence of diverse A. Yes A. Yes repre ntation on appointed district wid B. Document/Record B. Document/Record and chool-ba ed Principal' s Interview committee . 12. E idence of efforts to Utilize a newsletter to inform A.No A.No ensure that parent parents of the mission attendance at school statement. p.24 B. ......... functions is not ,J::-- N di proportionate to the Provide a Parent Center, p.24 tudent population. Issue communication from each class detailing events and progress. p.24 Establish a home reading program for parents and students. p.24 Increase parents in the VIPS program, p.25 13. E idence of success A.NIA A. Yes related to Majority to Minority transfers B. No M-to-M students B. Desegregation Files reported -..J ~ lJ.) I 4. Evidence that magnet chools are an effective interdistrict remedy for racial balance. A. NIA B. NIA A. NIA B. NIA Copies to: Dr. Emma Bass CRYSTAL HILL ELEMENT ARY SCHOOL PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NORTH LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72118 APRIL 16 - 17, 1996 REPORT OF THE NORTH CE TRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTE DED COMPREHE SIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION Submitted to: Mr. Bobby Lester, Superintendent May 24, 1996 Ms. Wanda Ruffins Principal. Cry tal Hill Elementary School Ms. DiAnn Carland Ms. J. J. Morley Ms. Janie Naylor Steering Committee Chairpersons Compiled by: Mr. John McKinnon Field Ser\\'ices Specialist CA State Director Mr. Frank Anthony Assistant Director. ADE Mr. James a. H ter Co-Coordinator. Field erv1ce 744 NORTH CENTRAL ASSOCIATION/ EXTENDED COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOMES EVALUATION APRIL 16 - 17, 1996 CRYSTAL HILL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NCA/ECOE VISITING TEAM MEMBERS MR. JOHN MCKINNON, GENERAL CHAIRPERSON Mr. Bob Paulovich, Chairperson Arkansas Department to Education #4 State Capitol Mall, Room 301-B Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Ms. Lisa Lewis. Teacher Meadowcliff Elementary chool 25 Sheraton Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 Dr. Ryixuan Mao. Profe or Philander Smith College 812 West 13th treet Little Rock, Arkansa 72203 745 Dr. Samuel Branch, Principal Fair Park Elementary School 616 No. Harrison Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 Mr. Deodis Fleming, Teacher David O 'Dodd Elementary School 6423 Stagecoach Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72204 Ms. Lillie Carter, Principal Pulaski Heights Elementary School 319 o. Pine Street Little Rock. Arkansas 72205 FOREWORD On April 16-17. 1996. ix representatives of the Arkansas North Central Association/Extended Comprehensive Outcomes Evaluation (NCA/ECOE) State Committee visited Crystal Hill Elementary School. The comments in this report have been based on the visitors observations and the findings produced by the faculty. It is the hope of the Arkansas NCA/ECOE State Committee that the observations and recommendations included in this report will assist the faculty and administration of Crystal Hill Elementary School as they proceed with the implementation and evaluation of the School Improvement Plan. As a goal of the visiting team. recommendations have been made to reinforce the school's conclusions prepared in the School Improvement Plan. These recommendations, in many cases, will not be new and different. but are in support of the school improvement team's conclusions. Recommendations ha\\'e been made to foster further ervice and discussion, not to provide specifics of name and topic to utilize. The NCA/ECOE team would like to take this opportunity to thank Crystal Hill Elementary NCA/ECOE Steering Committee. staff, administration, students. board and community representatives for a superb two-day visit. The students and staff were most courteous, informative. and cooperative throughout the visit. The student guides certainly did their utmost to provide directions to specific areas and to assist with information. The food and various amenities provided by parents and local businesses added to an atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration. Thanks for making this CA/ECOE team visit valuable through the process utilized and the chool Improvement Plan de\\eloped to meet the needs of all the students at Crystal Hill Elementary. 746 CHAIR SUMMARY: VISITING TEAM REPORT Crystal Hill Elementary Communications Magnet School is located within the North Little Rock City Limits at 5001 Doyle Venable Drive. The building was constructed in 1991-92. and consists of 35 classrooms, an office area. a cafeteria, a multi-purpose room, media center, and a Community Based Instruction area. The facilities are in excellent repair and provide adequate lighting and space to meet the needs of the 775 students. The building staff consists of 35 prekindergarten through sixth grade teachers, a principal. two assistant principals, two counselors, one home school consultant, one media specialist and five custodians, one CBI teacher, three resources teachers. one Language Enrichment ActiYities Program teacher, a communication specialist. two alpha teachers, two part-time speech specialists, occupational therapist. and a extended day care director. The classrooms and hallways were beautifully decorated with students work. The magnet theme of communications. written, oral, and visual is integrated into the regular classrooms by the classroom teachers and the communications specialist, which are all certified teachers. Crystal Hill Elementary Communications chool began the ECOE process during the fall of 1994. The process continued through April of 1996. when the ECOE visiting team was on campus. The principal. Ms. Wanda Ruffins. asked for taff volunteers to head the ECOE teering committee. Later. th teering committee attended an in- er\\'ice explaining the process at the Pulaski County Special School District Central office. After the staff was in-serviced on the complete process. staff members signed up for one of the following committees: 1. Writing and Proofreading 2. Archival Data 3. Opportunity to learn/Time on Task 4. School Climat 5. Clear chool Purpo e 6. Monitoring and Assessment 7. High Expectations 8. Parent Involvement 9. Instructional Leadership During the fall. the staff collected the archi al. perceptual. and achievement data. The school had been in e 'istence for only two year . which led to a limited supply of data. 747 After a close examination of the data, the staff chose the following areas for improvement: 1. Parent and Community Involvement 2. School Climate: 3. Instructional Leadership 4. Monitoring and Assessment of Student Achievement~ and 5. Clear School Purpose. Specific learner outcomes were developed for concentration for the next five years with improving student achievement being the primary focus. It was evident to the visiting team that the teering committee provided outstanding leadership throughout the ECOE process. A high level of pride and enthusiasm exists among administration and staff regarding the chools  plan for improvement. All faculty members were involved in the process and were knowledgeable of the process and plan. It is obvious to the visiting team that the faculty and staff worked long and hard. We understand the process was difficult and time consuming. We hope our input will improve an already strong ECOE report. District Recommendations: There are none to report at thi time. School Improvement Recommendations 1. In order to ensure action implementation the persons responsible should be smaller in size i.e., principal committee chair, or counselor. 2. Yearly re-visit the plan to make nece ary adjustments and revisions. 748 MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT Strengths: 1. There are many wonderful programs in place to decrease the disparity\nL.E.A.R., Jostens Learning Lab, Title I Paraprofessionals, portfolfo assessment, and teacher-made tests. In addition, there are teachers who have completed K-4 Crusade training. 2. Teacher enthusiasm is a strength. Recommendation: Readjust time lines and write specific strategies to address disparity. INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP Strength: The school is doing much more than i indicated in the plan. Recommendations: 1. Be specific when interacting with students about why you are with them. Tell them that you are keeping up with what is happening in the classroom. 2. Be visible when teachers have special activities in their classrooms and say something about the activity. 3. Consider looking at the archival data to make a decision about the administration s invol\\'ement in classroom activities. SCHOOL CLIMATE Strengths: 1. The many clubs and activities used to encourage students positive behavior is excellent within the school community. 749 2. To help encourage positive discipline within the school community, training parents in the Discipline Management Plan is a strong asset. Recommendations: It is recommended that parents, teachers, and students be re-surveyed in the area of school discipline to see if it has improved since the last survey date. CLEAR SCHOOL PURPOSE Strength: The administrators and teachers have done an outstanding job at integrating the outcome related to the target area with the school's communication theme. Recommendation: In reference to item 1, action 1, the school may want to decide the procedure for selecting the Communications Curriculum Committee Members and when the team will be in place. PARENT AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT trength: The school displays a strong commitment to the increase of parent attendance at PT A meetings. Recommendations: 1. It is recommended that the school keep track of parent attendance at PTA meetings. and find out what might keep some parent from coming by, using a brief questionnaire at the beginning of each school year. 2. It is recommended that the school use weekly newsletters in color-coded paper. with a student staff to inform parents and community of the progress of the school. 750 PERCEPTUAL SURVEY USE: CRYSTAL HILL ELEME TARY SCHOOL Crystal Hill Elementary School analyzed the perceptual data and noted the following concerns: Students did feel the principal always knew what was going on in classrooms. Parents did not feel the administration effectively informed the community about the school's progress. Parents and students expressed concern about consistent school discipline. As a result. the following outcomes and goals were developed: More opportunities will be provided for the administrators to become actively involved in daily classroom activities. School leaders will regularly address the community at PT A meetings to effectively inform parents of school progress. Improve consistent discipline throughout the community and transitional areas of the schooL with responsibility being shared by all the staff. 751 -......J Vl N 1. 2. CRYSTAL HILL MAGNET ELEMENTARY: PCSSD 14 ELEMENTS IN THE STRATEGIES TO SITE VISITS SITE VISITS ALLEN LETTER ADDRESS EVIDENCE IN ANNOUNCED UNANNOUNCED ECOESCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN A. Is Activity Taking Place? A. Is Activity Taking Place B. Available Evidence B. Available Evidence Evidence that policie . Develop. teach. and uniformly A. Yes A. Yes procedures. rule and enforce rules for halls. re t-regulations are developed rooms. cafeteria. and B. Document/record B. Document/record and implemented to playground. pp. 38-40 Principal s Interview Principal' s Interview facilitate desegregation. Evidence that plans Develop transition plans for B. Conference A. No related to reducing students moving to new grade. achievement disparity p. 56 between black and nonblack students are Teach test-taking skills to progressively successful. students, pp. 56, 57 Develop strands of communications skills needed but not evident in entering 3rd and 4th grade students. p. 64 --....J V1 w 3. 4. 5. 6. Evidence that student assignments to schools. classes and programs at each organizational level are made without bias. Evidence that staff development days authorized as a result of the Agreement are used to facilitate the desegregation process. Evidence that travel time to and from school is not di proportionate among black and nonblack students and the percentage of black students transported for desegregation is not significantly greater than the percentage of non-black students transported for desegregation. Evidence that guidance and counseling is designed to meet the needs of a diverse student population. A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record Principal s Interview Principal' s Interview A. Yes A. Yes B. Document/record B. Document/record Principal's Interview Observation Principal's Interview A. Not known A. Yes 8. Document/record A.\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "}],"pages":{"current_page":452,"next_page":453,"prev_page":451,"total_pages":6797,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":5412,"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}}]}}