{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_772","title":"Report: ''Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study Demographic Survey,'' 3D/International, Volume II","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":["1995-08-30"],"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","School attendance","School enrollment","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study Demographic Survey,'' 3D/International, Volume II"],"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/772"],"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\nLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study Demographic Survey Introduction, Recent Trends in Enrollments, Factors Influencing Future Enrollments, Enrollment Projections, and Exhibits August 30, 1995 Volume No 2 Prepared By: 3D/ International Facilities Master Planning, Program Management, Engineering, Strategic Planning, Architecture \u0026amp; Interior Architecture Educational Planning Consultants Educational Consultants The Grier Partnership DemographersM k k COPY 18 OF 30 kp RECEIVED 1 BOARD OF DIRECTORS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1994/1995 1 . 1 Linda Pondexter President Fuller Junior High P.O. Box 8601 Little Rock, Arkansas 72216 (501)490-1503 SEP ? 7 1995 Office of Desegregation Monitoring 3 O a c a o i  3 [1 rI I \u0026lt; r Patricia Gee Vice President 8409 Dowan Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 (501)562-0571 Judy Magness Secretary 708 Hall Drive Little Rock. Arkansas 72205 (501)666-0923 Stephanie Johnson 8701 130, Apartment 206 Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 (501)340-6681 Dr. Katherine Mitchell Shorter College 604 Locust Street North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 (501)374-6305 T. Kevin OMalley Arkansas Board of Review Tower Building - Suite 700 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)324-9038 John A. Riggs J. A. Riggs Tractor Company P.O. Box 8601 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 (501)570-3528 Superintendent of Schools Dr. Henry P. Williams Little Rock School District Slowest Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)324-2000 o 3 a a o w 0 Q O o 3 \u0026gt;o oA 3 X FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY RESOURCE TEAM 1994/1995 Little Rock School District Dr. Russell Mayo Associate Superintendent Doug Eaton Director of Facilities Charles Neal Director of Procurement I Leon Modeste Special Assistant to the Superintendent Mark Millholen Comptroller il o o. c a o 3 O 3 a w p Suellen Vann Public Information Lucy Lyon Media I Dennis Glasgow PTA Representative Marie A. McNeal Learning Resource Center Dr. Patty Kohler Exceptional Children Susan Chapman Exceptional Children Gene Parker, Jr. English Community Resources Chris Heller Attorney for the District Debbie Glasgow President PTA Council Tim Polk Neighborhoods and Planning Mark McBryde Senior Vice President n a o S D .0 Q O o 3 M \u0026gt; o D O 3 X Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I TABLE OF CONTENTS o a c a o 3 i. INTRODUCTION RECENT TRENDS IN ENROLLMENTS FACTORS INFLUENCING FUTURE ENROLLMENTS ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS Page 1 16 27 (D 3 p 5 I 2 j..  I I ! APPENDIX Change in Enrollments by School, Level and District - 1987 to 1994 Total Enrollment Projections by Grade and Level - 1995 to 2005 Provisional Projections by School, Level, and Race - 2000 and 2005 Page I tt oa 5 1994 Attendance Zones - Elementary Schools Attendance Zones - Junior High Schools Attendanze Zones - Senior High Schools 1 -14 1 -13 1 -11 1995 Projected Attendance Zones by Option Option M Option T Option C Table AZ - 2 Table AZ - 3 Table AZ - 4 A O O 3 M \u0026gt; o 75 A 3 JT Introduction Trends Factors Projections Appendix I llWW1ltF| I Iwwnwl1 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I 4 V J  INTRODUCTION Purpose and Method of Study   3 1, The demographic study of the Little Rock School District, undertaken by The Grier Partnership, is part of an overall examination of the School District's existing facilities by 3D/lntemational. It is intended to assist 3D/I in its assessment of the District's current physical facilities and its recommendations for new and improved facilities for the future. While the study has drawn on a wide variety of data sources for its information, its ultimate objective has been to determine the future size and characteristics of the pupil population these facilities will serve. 3   The study began with an examination of recent trends in school enrollments and the changing characteristics of the pupil population. Particular attention was given to trends since 1987 when the District's overall enrollments increased by more than one-third with the absorption of several schools and 7,000-plus pupils formerly in Pulaski County Special School District. At that time or thereafter, the District made a number of changes that substantially altered the pupil population served by the Little Rock District. Specifically, it: A  Q. W I (1) altered the attendance zones from which individual schools drew their pupils. (2) I I a (3) I 3 (4) designated several schools as \"magnets\" which could be attended by pupils without regard to location of residence. designated others as \"incentive schools\" which could also be attended by out- of-zone pupils. n fi) a o w added classes for children below kindergarten age in several schools, and I I a (5) exchanged some pupils with Pulaski County Special District and the North Little Rock School District.  The study also included examination of independent data for the District's total population and economy, drawing on federal, state and local sources of information. These included various public agencies in the city of Little Rock and Pulaski County, the State of Arkansas, the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, and the US Department of Education's School District Data Book, an electronic compilation of extensive demographic data from the 1990 Census specific to the geography of every public school district in the nation. The data from these sources was supplemented by interviews with a number of persons, from both the public and private sectors, who are believed knowledgeable about the demography and economy of Little Rock. TJ o a o 3 W M Results of an Earlier Study The Grier Partnership conducted a similar analysis for the Little Rock School District at the time its territory was expanded to take in schools and pupils formerly assigned to the Pulaski District. The study was part of an overall assessment by Stanton Leggett and Associates of the District's existing and recently-added physical facilities with \u0026gt; o o 3 Q. X Page 1Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI I I recommendations made for meeting future facilities needs. Since the District was also under court order to maintain racial balance within its schools, as it remains today, the demographic study and facilities plan gave consideration to this requirement. Projecting future enrollments in the newly-expanded District posed particularly difficult problems. Most serious was the lack of any reliable historical data on school enrollments in the territory being added which would permit a clear understanding of recent trends. It was known that there had been substantial new residential construction in the annexed territory since the last decennial census was taken, and that there had also been a substantial gain in population. However, much of the new construction had been of apartments, which typically yield fewer children per unit than single family homes. Furthermore, much of the growth in population had gone into one census tract where the 1980 census had found that many parents sent their school-age children to private schools. The most recent detailed demographic data for the annexed area, as well as for the territory within the old School District boundaries, dated back to the 1980 census. Metroplan had made recent estimates of the population for all census tracts within the Little Rock metropolitan area, but these were for all ages and races combined and did not single out school-age children. Data on the number of births, which are important in projecting enrollments more than five or six years into the future, were reported only for entire counties in Arkansas at that time. Yet in 1987, when they were first broken out separately for the city of Little Rock, only 54 percent of all births in Pulaski County were to residents of the city. For white births, it was only 44 percent. For nonwhites (the term used by the State to classify Blacks and members of other groups), the proportion was higher, but still only 69 percent. (D 3 Q. W a\u0026gt; a om fl fl How close did the projections come to what actually happened? Leaving out prekindergarten classes which were not begun by the District until 1990, we compared the projections made in 1988 (using data for the 1987 school year) with the actual enrollments in fall 1990 (three years ahead) and in fall 1994 (seven years ahead). The projections came within 0.8 percent of the actual enrollments in 1990 and within 1.5 percent in 1994. In both years the overall projections were on the low side-204 pupils below the actual enrollments in 1990 and 361 pupils below in 1994. Table 1 Comparison of 1988 Projections with Actual Enrollments Grades Kto 12, 1990 and 1994, Little Rock School District TJ ,3 oo o3' Actual Projected Discrepancy Number Percent 1990 25,509 25,305 1294 24,131 23,770 -204 -0.8% -361 -1.5% Is i The Grier Partnership Page 2 3 Q. X ( Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI The New Projections  I I There are fewer uncertainties affecting the projections made this year for the total Little Rock School District. The boundaries of the District have not changed again since the annexation. Nor have attendance areas serving most of the schools changed, although exceptions have been granted for enrollment in the magnet and incentive schools and, until this year, for pupils who, either themselves or their siblings, formerly attended a school outside the current zone of residence. The magnets, the incentive schools, and the interdistrict schools, as well as the early childhood program-all instituted as part of the District's desegregation plan-have now been in operation long enough to have established trends in most cases. Although two elementary schools have been closed and one new school constructed since 1987, a reliable record of past trends within the entire Little Rock District now exists to assist in the projection of future enrollments. A 3 I rI The current projection series indicate that enrollments in all grades combined will continue to decline as they have over the past several years. The loss is projected to be about 3,600 pupils between the 1994-95 school year and the year 2005-06. This represents a projected decline of about 14.2 percent over the next 11 years. I Enrollments are also projected to decline in all three levels. The largest percentage drop will occur in the high school grades where enrollments, which totaled more than 5,100 in the last school year, are projected to be more than one-fifth smaller in 2005, with only a few more than 4,000 pupils. However, the lowest point will come in 2003, with enrollments increasing somewhat in the final two years. I The largest numerical decline will come among elementary school pupils, who will decline from nearly 14,200 in 1994 to fewer than 12,800 in 2005-a drop of 9.7 percent over the next 11 years. The lowest enrollments will occur at the end of the projection period in 2005. a ow  The junior high grades are also projected to decline, with a loss of about 1,100 pupils (18.6 percent) over the next 11 years. However, the drop will not be continuous. After sustaining losses for several years, enrollments will pick up in the three years from 2001 to 2003, then drop back thereafter. fl fl The projections indicate that enrollments of both Black and white/other pupils will follow similar patterns during the next 11 years. As a result, the racial composition of the District will remain close to its recent level at about 67 percent Black. However, assuming present attendance boundaries for elementary schools are not altered, the racial composition of most schools are likely to diverge substantially from these percentages-some schools becoming much more heavily Black in student enrollment while others will have much larger proportions of pupils who are either white or of other races than Black. 0 o A o o 3 W The new projections are discussed in greater detail in a succeeding section. The chart below presents a summary of the annual projections for total enrollments. D D A 3 Q. X Page 3 n I Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI Projected Total Enrollments Little Rock School District, 1995-2005 I 26,000 21,000 24,000 23,000 22,000 25,000 ft 3 Q. tt / / / / 125,195 ] 24,494124,048 123J73 123,127122.7M |2X51g j 2X317 ] 22,123121.910 j j 21,605 ) The Grier Partnership I I p Page 4 tt os tt 0 S ft o o 3 W \u0026gt; o o ft 3 Q. X Trends Factors Projections Appendix 1 1 1 1 iMwmwwl I*Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I 3 RECENT TRENDS IN ENROLLMENTS 3 Total Enrollments I Like most school systems in established central cities across the nation, the Little Rock School District has experienced a drop in its pupil population since the heady days of a generation ago when the post-World War II baby boom children were making their way through the nation's classrooms. As recently as 1980, the District had an enrollment of more than 20,000 pupils in a land area that was about two-thirds the size of the present District. Every year thereafter until 1986, enrollments declined. In that year, there was a small increase of fewer than 200 pupils. But in 1987, the District suddenly gained more than 7,000 additional pupils who had previously been assigned to the Pulaski County Special District. I1L Since 1987, however, school enrollments have again fallen, albeit slowly. In only one year, 1991, did the District register an increase when enrollments rose by 462. Almost two-thirds of the gain was attributable to the newly instituted pre-kindergarten program in several schools which was designed in part as a tool to promote racial balance. However, there were also small gains in most of the grades from kindergarten to 11th grade. 1 ! Total Enrollment, 1987-1994 Little Rock School District a o 5 p 28,000 I  27,000 26,000 25,000 24,000 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 5 0 ft o o 3 (/)  i 26,834! 26,633 j 26,022125,856126,318126,212125,594 j 25,195 | The Grier Partnership Source: Little Rock School District The largest decline occurred in 1993, when total enrollments fell by 618 pupils, despite an increase of 152 pupils in the pre-k program. They rose in only three other grades. The overall drop in total pupils since the annexation is more than 1,600, or 6.1 percent. o D 3 Q. X Page 5 r r Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I S3 Racial Differences in Enrollment Change Ih During the first six years of the 1980s, the number of pupils who were white or of other nonwhite races gradually declined while the number of Black pupils rose. As a result, the proportion of all pupils who were Black increased from 63.6 percent in 1980 to 71.3 percent in 1986. The addition of the 7,000-plus pupils from Pulaski County reduced the Black percentage to 60.6 percent in 1987. Since then, the Black proportion has increased somewhat, but has stayed between 64 and 65 percent of the total for the past six years. Since 1987, losses have been experienced by both white and Black pupils in most years. Still, Blacks made a slight overall gain. 103 pupils, between 1987 and 1994. This increase would not have occurred except for the addition of pre-kindergarten in 1991. however. White pupils declined in number by 2.096. The number of pupils of other races, usually of Asian. Hispanic or Native American origin has grown in every year since 1989. with a sharp rise in 1994. Nevertheless, their numbers are still small, and they comprised less than 3 percent of total enrollment by 1994. I Enrollments by Race, 1987-1994 Little Rock School District Number Percent Black 80 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 \u0026lt;6 (4 14 64 65 65 60 16.2(2 10.36\u0026gt; \u0026gt;.M7 3M 282 16,717 9,010 2 16,6S6 8,868 6, MS 332 357 16,726 \u0026gt;,062 404 16,674 8.490 430 16,36S 0,170 6S7 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 The Grief Partnerthip 40 20 *0 Block - Whtre * \"Other Pct Block 5 5 o o o 3 (A Source: Little Rock School District I 0 63 a o 5 Enrollment Change at Different Levels Excluding kindergarten and pre-kindergarten enrollments, all three levels-elementary, junior high, and senior high-now have fewer pupils than in 1987. The loss has been especially large in the high schools, where enrollments were nearly one-fifth lower in fall 1994 than in 1987 when the annexation took place. In the seven intervening years, the number of pupils in grades 10 through 12 fell by almost 1,300, for a drop of 19.9 percent. The decline was especially sharp between 1987 and 1990, when enrollments fell by almost 1,000 pupils. They then leveled out and climbed slightly before beginning to drop again. O o \u0026lt;D 3 Q. X Page 6 LIB Bl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I n The loss from 1993 to 1994 was the smallest of any year, and the number of 10th graders in fall 1994 was actually larger than in two previous years. H n Enrollments by School Level (Elementary, Junior High, Senior High) Little Rock School District, 1988-1994 Fl 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Elementary Junior High Senior High 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Elementuy Junior High 14.149 6.138 14,179 6,068 14,076 14,223 14372 5.978 5,984 I 6,062 14,221 6,166 14,017 6,079 14,051 5,862 Senior High 6,444 6,172 5,802 | 5,465 | 5,509 5,632 5,320 5,162 1 5 1 9 j B *  (Elementary Figures Include 4-Yr-Olds Beginning in 1991) The Grier Partnership Source\nLittle Rock School District  Elementary school enrollments fell the least, with a loss of only 98 pupils overall in the seven-year period. a S o 3  However, the elementary grades were helped by growth in kindergarten and by the addition of pre-kindergarten classes in several schools, beginning in the 1990-91 school year. These two grades combined added nearly 1,000 pupils to the i 1 school rolls from 1987 to 1994. As a result, elementary enrollments as a whole remained almost flat despite losses in grades 1 to 6. There was a small increase from 1987 to 1990, a small increase in 1990, a somewhat larger gain in 1991, small losses again for two years, and then a gain of 31 pupils in fall 1994. Junior high enrollments fell by 306 pupils or 5 percent. Like the high schools, junior high classes lost nearly 1,000 pupils from 1987 to 1990, but enrollments climbed again during the next two years, then fell back in 1993 and yet again in 1994. Enrollment changes in the individual junior high grades have been quite erratic. In 7th grade the number of pupils was actually higher in five of the seven years than it had been in 1987. In 8th grade, enrollments were higher in three of the intervening years than in 1987. w  TJ OQ O o3  W Overall, enrollments for both Black pupils and those who are white or of other racial origin have tended to follow the same trends as those for all pupils combined. The widest divergence between the races has been in the high school grades. Both groups entered the high schools of the expanded system in 1987 with almost exactly the same number of pupils -about 3,200 apiece. Thereafter, while the number of Black pupils grew slightly, an increase of only 83 in the seven years, the number of whites and pupils of \"other races\" dropped by more than 1,400 by 1994. Despite losses in every following year, nearly two- \u0026gt; o o A 3 Q. X Page 7 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I 1 3 thirds of the white decline occurred during the first three years. Over the entire period, the entire loss in white pupils was spread more or less evenly among the three high school grades. In the elementary grades, the two groups have actually grown closer together since 1987, with Black losses over the entire seven-year period outstripping white/other losses in each grade from 1st to 6th. Both groups added to their numbers in kindergarten and prekindergarten classes. Overall, the number of whites/others has grown slightly since 1990 while the number of Black pupils began dropping after 1991. At the junior high level, the two groups first moved apart after 1987, but then began to follow a similar pattern from 1991 on. Enrollment Changes in Individual Schools fl School assignment has generally been determined by place of residence within the school system. A series of small \"zone blocks\", often comprising no more than one or two city blocks, have generally determined the school to which a child is sent. Exceptions have been granted for enrollment in magnet or incentive schools, for attendance at out-of-district schools, and for those who wish to continue in schools previously attended by the pupil or his siblings. Zone blocks have been clustered into larger attendance areas, with some schools drawing from only one area while others draw from as many as two or three areas separated from each other by other attendance areas. fl Enrollment change has varied from school to school during the past seven years. While some have lost pupils, others have gained. In general, the gainers have usually drawn many of their pupils from neighborhoods of Little Rock to the west and northwest which have also been growing in total population, while the losers have more often drawn from areas in the central and eastern parts of the city where population has declined. \u0026amp;\u0026gt; gs w fl There have also been racial differences in enrollment change in the individual schools. In some schools, both Black and white pupils declined in number. At others, both groups gained. And in still others, enrollments of one racial group increased while enrollments of the other dropped. fl High Schools: Four of Little Rock's five high schools have lost pupils since 1987. The sole exception has been Fair, which is also the second smallest high school in the District with only 917 pupils on its rolls in 1994, including kindergarten pupils. Overall the school's net gain since 1987 is a grand total of 35 pupils. TJ 5 \u0026lt;D O o' 3 W I 4 Central High School, the District's largest high school, has lost almost 500 pupils during the past seven years, falling from an enrollment of more than 2,000 in 1987 to about 1,600 (including kindergarten) in 1994. Its largest decline occurred between 1993 and 1994. The overall percentage drop has been 22.9 percent. Another big loser has been Hall High School, which started with a much smaller base than Central's, but has lost nearly as many pupils since 1987. Unlike Central, however. Hall's enrollments picked up in 1994. Whether this is a temporary upswing or indicates a reversal j\u0026gt; o O \u0026lt;0 3 X Page 8 A Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I J of past trends we cannot tell at this time. McClellan High School, where enrollments have declined in every year since 1987, also showed a tiny increase in 1994. So did Parkview, whose enrollments had a brief growth spurt in 1991 and 1992, but fell the following year. White enrollments have fallen in all of the District's high schools since 1987, and Black enrollments in three of the five. The exceptions are Fair (a gain of 210 Black students) and McClellan (an increase of 189). High school pupils of other races grew in three of the five schools, but their numbers still remained small and did not make up for losses among the other groups. I 1 Table 2 Change in Enrollments in High Schools 1987 to 1994, Little Rock School District fl a Enrollment 1987 1984 Change 1987-94 No. Pct. Central Fair Hall McClellan Parkview 2123 882 1449 1260 833 1637 917 1031 897 800 -486 35 -418 -363 -33 -22.9% 4.0% -28.8% -28.8% -4.0% 1 I I Junior High Schools-Five of the District's junior high schools also lost enrollments over the seven-year period while three gained. The largest loser was Southwest where enrollments fell by 194 pupils in seven years. Other junior highs whose enrollments declined were Henderson, Mabelvale, Forest Heights, and Cloverdale. Mann Junior High, on the other hand, gained nearly 200 pupils between 1987 and 1994. It was by far the largest gainer among the junior highs, with the two remaining schools, Dunbar and Pulaski Heights, registering only small increases. ft) a o 5 fl fl The number of white pupils grew in three of the junior highs-Mann, Pulaski Heights, and Dunbar-but declined in the other five. Mann also experienced a substantial increase in Black enrollment over the entire period, although its numbers had dropped over the past two years. Black gains at Cloverdale, smaller than those at Mann, also dropped in 1993 and 1994. fl Three more schools, with a net increase in Black pupils since 1987, also saw their growth halt and reverse in 1994\nthese were Forest Heights, Henderson, and Mabelvale. Only Dunbar registered a gain in 1994-but only five pupils over the 1993 figure. Black enrollments were actually lower in 1994 than they had been in 1987 in two schools-Pulaski Heights and Southwest. 5 Q O O 3 (0 4 All but one junior high had a tiny increase in pupils of other races. District-wide, the growth for this group was 47 pupils. Page 9 D o 3 Q. X Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I 1 Table 3 Change in Enrollments in Junior High Schools 1987 to 1994, Little Rock School District  Enrollment 1987 1984 Change 1987-94 No.Pct. Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Hts. Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Hts. Southwest 678 682 862 1033 672 653 754 804 647 707 780 917 585 845 771 610 -31 25 -82 -116 -87 192 17 -194 -4.6% 3,7% -9.5% -11.2% -12.9% 29.4% 2.3% -24.1% Elementary Schools-The picture was equally mixed in the District's elementary  schools. A total of 20 schools lost enrollments between 1987 and 1994, two completely when they were closed. Other elementary schools with enrollments that fell by 100 or more were Badgett, Baseline, Chicot, Dodd, and Romine. H 1 A total of 17 schools gained. The largest increase by far, nearly 500 pupils, was registered by Washington after it re-opened as a magnet school in 1989. The new King school also gained substantially over its predecessor-an increase of almost 300 pupils-in part at least by transfers from other schools. Enrollments at Carver Elementary, also a magnet, grew by more than 200 pupils. fl D) a o 5 In 14 of the elementary schools, enrollments of both white and Black pupils declined between 1987 and 1994, and in four more schools, enrollments of both groups grew during the same period. In the remaining schools, one racial group increased in number while the other fell. In 11 schools, the number of Black pupils increased while the number of white pupils declined. But In eight other schools, racial change was the reverse. fl fl Generally, enrollments in individual schools have followed the same route as the total population of the attendance area. In areas where the population has been growing, enrollments in the District's elementary schools have also risen. Where the general population has been declining, so have enrollments. Thus, those schools located in the west and northwest sections of the District have usually grown since 1987-even when these schools have also drawn pupils from satellite zones located in neighborhoods with declining population. \"D *3 O o o' 3 (0 On the other hand, enrollments in several of the elementary schools located in the District's southwest neighborhoods have dropped since 1987. These are usually in neighborhoods which lost total population between 1980 and 1990, and which are expected to continue to lose throughout the current decade. The only exceptions are the Otter Creek and Geyer Springs schools. (See Table 4 on the following page.) o o (0 3 Q. X Page 10 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I Table 4 Change in Enrollments in Elementary Schools 1987 to 1994, Little Rock School District Enrollment 1987 1984 Change 1987-94 No. Pct. I II 1 3 I. I 3  Badgett Bale Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Garland Geyer Springs Gibbs Ish Jefferson King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Heights Rightsell Rockefeller Romine Stephens Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff Total 290 397 448 636 424 362 642 408 398 315 426 403 503 329 235 265 214 462 269 546 471 449 256 325 340 246 289 484 218 481 467 214 491 314 496 407 229 14,149 177 309 326 573 408 588 503 392 298 282 432 443 542 282 300 293 502 551 474 494 411 272 359 420 229 403 323 559 413 687 427 317 474 345 243 14,051 -113 -88 -122 -63 -16 226 -139 -16 -100 -33 6 40 39 -47 65 28 -214 40 282 -72 23 -38 16 34 80 -17 114 -161 -218 78 -54 473 -64 3 -22 -62 14 -98 -39.0% -22.2% -27.2% -9.9% -3.8% 62.4% -21.7% -3.9% -25.1% -10.5% 1.4% 9.9% 7.8% -14.3% 27.7% 10.6% -100% 8.7% 104.8% -13.2% 4.9% -8.5% 6.3% 10.5% 23.5% -6.9% 39.4% -33.3% -100.0% 16.2% -11.6% 221.0% -13.0% 1.0% -4.4% -15.2% 6,1% -0.7% a\u0026gt; ag 5 D ,3 ft oo 3 o o ft 3 Q. X Page 11 I Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I Impact on the Desegregation Plan I u I What has been the impact of these enrollment changes on the basic objectives of the District's desegregation plan? At the time of the annexation of schools and pupils from the Pulaski District in 1987, an effort was made to balance enrollments racially in as many schools as possible. Several schools, which might be difficult to desegregate, were designated as magnets or incentive schools with special programs intended to help draw pupils from throughout the city as well as some who lived in the adjoining Pulaski and North Little Rock Districts. p I I The evidence indicates that, as a result of racial differences, overall and in specific neighborhoods, the District may now be even farther from achieving racial balance in its schools under the current desegregation plan than it was in 1987. But the failure to do so has not always been in the direction of an increased Black percentage in each school. Even where a school appears to have become \"balanced\" over time, this may merely be a transitory phase with imbalance merely changing from one direction to another, with a brief \"balance\" occurring at some point in the process. fl fl fl fl High Schools. In 1987, high school enrollments^ in the District as a whole were 50.6 percent Black\nthe rest of the pupils were almost entirely white, with only a handful of other races. The five individual high schools varied by no more than 11.3 percentage points from this figure, with McClellan having the smallest black proportion (39.3 percent) and Central High School the highest (56.9 percent). The span between the highest and lowest Black percentage was 17.6 percentage points. Between 1987 and 1994 the number of both Blacks and whites dropped in three of the high schools, but at different rates. In two schools, Black enrollments grew while white enrollments declined. As a result, the overall percentage of Black pupils rose to 65.5 percent, and the range between the highest and lowest Black proportions in individual schools was 21.9 percentage points. The largest change occurred at McClellan, which in 1994 had an enrollment that was 76.3 percent Black. Parkview High School, where enrollments of both racial groups declined, was 54.4 percent Blackan 11 percentage point deviation from the District-wide figure, and a slight drop since 1987. (See Appendix for detail for individual schools.) Junior High Schools. The eight junior highs were close to meeting the criteria for being racially balanced in 1987. As a whole, the junior high population was 61 percent Black and 39 percent white and other. Enrollments in the individual schools ranged from 68-32 to 50-50. Four of the junior highs were less than three percentage points, plus or minus, from the District-wide 61-39 percent figure. Three more were within seven points or less. Only Mabelvale deviated by more than this. The overall span from highest to lowest percent Black was 17.8 percentage points. \"n a o w T O O O o' 3 (A r s  High school enrollment figures used here are for grades 10 to 12 only and do not include kindergarten and pre-kindergarten pupils housed in high school buildings. a o o 3 X Page 12 I Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl During the next seven years, enrollments of both racial groups climbed at two junior highs, and both fell at one. In three schools. Black pupils gained while white pupils declined, and at one school the reverse occurred. As a result, the overall Black percentage in junior high schools rose to 68.3 percent by 1994. The percentage of Black pupils now ranges from a low of 54.0 percent at Mann (a magnet school) to a high of 80.5 percent at Cloverdale~a span of 26.5 percentage points. (See Appendix.) fl Elementary Schools. At the elementary school level with its smaller attendance areas and enrollments, the District found it much more difficult in 1987 to achieve its objective of no more than a 60 percent enrollment of one or the other race. All four magnet schools met the more demanding requirement of 45-55 percent, with the Black percentage ranging from a low of 49.1 percent at Gibbs to 51.4 percent at Booker. However, none of the incentive or interdistrict schools were able to achieve the racial balance goal of the desegregation plan. Despite efforts to pair some primary attendance areas for the remaining 25 schools with satellite areas with a different racial composition, only eight were able to keep enrollments to no more than 60 percent of one race or the other. The span from lowest to highest percent Black was 44.6 percentage points. fl  By 1994, the four magnet schools all remained racially balanced. They were aided in doing so by the enrollment of more than 800 pupils, of whom about 60 percent were white, from Pulaski Special School District and North Little Rock School District. Of the five incentive schools, only Rockefeller came close to achieving a balance between the races at 65.5 percent Black. Two of the three interdistrict schools, which included a new King school with new attendance boundaries, also improved. Among the remaining 2^ elementary schools, the number with a racially balanced student body increased from eight to nine, with the rest outside the limits of racial balance. *n w a o w I fl fl Although these figures may suggest that racial balance has improved over the seven-year period in the Little Rock School District, a closer examination suggests that the improvement could be illusory. While the percentage of Black pupils rose in some schools, the percentage of pupils who are white or other races increased in others and the Black percentage fell. Among the elementary schools, a total of 22 had a higher Black percentage in 1994 than in 1987, but in 13 the Black percentage had fallen. In some cases, the change was small-a few percentage points at most. These included the four magnet schools plus one of the interdistrict schools. In four of the five incentive schools, the Black percentage rose in spite of efforts to encourage enrollment of children from other races. TJ A O o' 3 fl In most of the other elementary schools the shift was much larger. At Mabelvale Elementary, where the drop in number of white/other pupils exceeded a tiny increase among Blacks, for example, the Black percentage grew from 59.3 percent in 1987 to 71.7 percent in 1994. This brought the school's enrollments well past the 60 percent of one race that is the present goal for a racially balanced school. At Terry, on the other hand, the white/other percentage rose from 43 percent to 58.1 percent during the same period as a 2 Two schools. Ish and Stephens, have now been closed. Enrollments in both schools had been more than 80 Black in 1987. \u0026gt; \"S 3 Q. X Page 13hi   S' 1 fl  I fl fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I result of a substantial increase in their number while Black enrollments declined. At present, the white/other proportion is still below the 60 percent limit, but dangerously close to rising above it. A continuation of present trends for just a year or two more will almost certainly take it over the line. The span from lowest to highest percent Black has increased from 44.6 to 56.4 percentage points. If present attendance areas are preserved and recent trends in enrollment continue, then it is likely that more racial imbalance will occur in the public schools of Little Rock over the next several years. This topic is discussed further in the sections of this report covering demographic shifts in the District's total population and the enrollment projections made for individual schools from 1995 through 2005. The Role of Private Schools Many people concerned about the future of Little Rock public schools believe that private schools have drawn off many of the white children whose presence would help to maintain racial balance in the public schools. This is a difficult view either to confirm or to counter with hard numbers. Certainly if all children now enrolled in schools within the district, public or private, were attending public schools. Little Rock's predominant racial groups would be close to equal in size. Some parents, of whatever race they may be and if their economic situation permits, will always elect a private school education for their children regardless of requirements for racial balance or any other condition of the public school system, and it is difficult to identify the motivation in every case. Accurate and up-to-date information about enrollments in private schools is often hard to come by. These schools are usually not held to the same requirements of reporting of their pupil enrollments as the public schools. In any event, some are reluctant to share this information. And since they seldom limit their student bodies to specific geographic areas as do public schools, they do not keep enrollment information separately for those pupils whose residence is within the boundaries of the public school district. The most recent data on private school enrollments are from the 1990 Census. At that time, the census found a total of about 7,900 children residing in the city of Little Rock and attending private schools. This was an increase of almost 900 since 1980. During the same period, public school enrollments in the city fell by almost 3,100 pupils--more than three times the size of the growth in the private schools. In 1980, 79.5 percent of all children enrolled in school in Little Rock were attending public schools\nby 1990, the figure was 75.4 percent. The most recent data on the racial distribution of pupils attending private schools in the Little Rock School District come from special tabulations of the 1990 census prepared for the US Department of Education. They show a total of 31,12^ children, ages 3 to 19, who 3 The number of children said to be enrolled in school in 1990 may vary somewhat from one source to another and the universe which is included in the numbers. The figures on public/private enrollments by race are limited to children between the ages of 3 and 19 who were enrolled in school below the college level. Other figures are for all children enrolled in school regardless of age and may include some below three years of age or more than age 19. Page 14 a o 5 D s. m o o' 3 D o O 3 Q. X fl fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl resided within the Little Rock District and were enrolled in school below the college level. Of this number nearly one-fourth were attending a private school in 1990\nnearly nine out of 10 of the children were white. Fewer than 10 percent were black, with the tiny balance of private school pupils made up of children from other races. fl Table 5 Public vs Private School Enrollment Children Ages 3-19 by Race, Little Rock School District, 1990 Public No. ! Private Total Enrolled 23,369 EsL No. EcL 75.1% 7,760 24.9% 15 kI LI I Nonhispanic White Black Other Hispanic 8,262 14,713 274 120 54.8% 95.1% 76.8% 58.0% 6,824 7,66 83 87 45.2% 4.9% 23.2% 42.0% S  Source: Special tabulations, 1990 Census, School District Data Book I Other census tabulations provided to the school District by Metroplan indicate public and private school attendance by census tract in the Little Rock School District. The tabulations also show the number of pupils enrolled in school, public and private combined, by race for each tract. They do not distinguish between public and private school attendance by race, however. a\u0026gt; oa w fl fl The tabulations indicate that the highest rates of private school attendance were in six census tracts located to the northwest of the city center. These are also areas where general population growth, as well as white growth, has been most vigorous in recent years and where median incomes are most likely to permit private school attendance. In 1990 these tracts contained 32.4 percent of all white children enrolled in school, 37 percent of all enrolled children of other races, but only 2.4 percent of the District's Black school children. fl TJ S Q O o' 3 fl 4 Nationally, nearly 15 percent of all school children ages 3 to 19 were enrolled in private schools in 1990, according to the federal census taken that year. Whites comprised 80 percent of the total, Blacks 8 percent, and other races, including Hispanics, 12 percent. In the state of Arkansas as a whole, about 7 percent of all school children were in private schools in 1990\n92 percent of these children were white, 6 percent were Black, and other races made up only 2 percent. \u0026gt; o o o 3 g. X Page 15 Factors Projections Appendix 'W.n'.V' IlWWi  1Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I  FACTORS INFLUENCING FUTURE ENROLLMENTS I I I  There is no crystal ball that can foretell with absolute certainty the future of enrollments in any school district. Many factors can influence the direction in which they are heading, causing the rate of change to speed up, slow down or even reverse. I The most reliable guidance to future enrollment trends, at least for the short term, can be found in the most current data on existing trends in the population-not only in its size but also in its characteristics such as age, migratory patterns, and fertility rates. These, in turn. are often related to local economic conditions. A change in the local economy, for 1 s example, may cause families to leave the district if the turn is for the worse, and their children (or the children they may have in the future) will move with them. A growing economy will usually attract families to the district if economic conditions are better here than elsewhere, and add children to the school rolls. Or it may be a mixed bag, with a change in the area's economic base sending some families away while bringing in different kinds of jobs and different kinds of jobholders.  1 3 A change in state or national policy may also influence enrollments. A re-allocation of state funds for education or family services or economic development may impact directly or indirectly on the schools. A shift in federal policy toward immigration may also make a difference to a local district. I I I  I s I  I  Not all of the factors that influence enrollments come from outside the school system itself. Some may result directly from changes in school system policy. If an intensive \"stay-in- school\" effort is launched, for example, it will almost certainly bring an increase in high school enrollments. Conversely, if the school board decides to set higher standards for promotion and graduation, it will probably lose some pupils. The addition of new programs, such as the pre-kindergarten classes instituted by Little Rock in 1990 and 1991 increased enrollments at the schools where these were placed above what they would otherwise have been. I 3 3 The nature of some factors can be foreseen, at least for a short time into the future, but others are more difficult to identify, assess or predict. Recent Population Change I Changes in the City's Population. The city of Little Rock, whose boundaries are now virtually contiguous with those of the Little Rock School District, has grown throughout the 20th century. The most recent increases, however, have been due in large part to annexations of adjoining territory. Between 1980 and 1990, the city added more than 17,000 people for an overall rate of increase of 10.9 percent. Without the annexed territory, there would have been a small loss. Metroplan estimates that the city gained somewhat 5 o A O o 3 W over 5,600 additional residents between 1990 and January 1993. occurred as a result of annexations to the city's land area. This increase also Page 16 o D O 3 Q X I Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I Population Change in Little Rock 1900-1990 III 200,000 Pi 150,000 100,000 50,000 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 I 3.7O7 I 45.941 | 6i.l\u0026gt;2 | ll.t?? | 8.03\u0026gt; 1102.213 | IO7.13 1132.483 1139.024 | 17S.7M | s 3 5 IB 0 I i If5 The Grier Partnership k Source: City of Little Rock and Census Bureau The net gain from 1980 to 1990 was almost entirely made up of adults, however. The total child population, 14 years of age and younger, barely grew at all. There was a small increase of 175 in the number of children below age five, and a slight decrease of 23 children between the ages of 5 and 14. I Table 6 Changes in the Population of Little Rock, 1980 to 1990 I. Population 1980 1990 Change No. IPct. 9 Total White Black Other Under Age 5 Total White Black Other Ages 5 to 14 Total White Black Other 158,461 105,504 51,093 1,864 175,781 113,723 59,864 2,194 17,320 8,219 8,771 330 10.9% 7.8% 17.2% 17.7% 12,605 6,096 6,313 196 12,780 6,969 5,641 170 175 873 1.4% 14.3% 0 5 OQ o3' -672 -10.6% -26 -13.3% 24,012 12,920 10,843 249 23,989 11,406 12,272 311 -23 -0.1% -1,514 -11.7% 1,429 13.2% 62 24.9% Note\nFigures in this table may vary slighly from those in text and charts due to differences between Census Bureau source tables. Source: 1980 \u0026amp; 1990 Census a 73 o 3 Q. X I I Page 17 J p Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I   I I Numerically, the overall 1980-90 growth was almost evenly divided between Blacks (8,771) and whites and members of other races (8,219). But there were sharp differences in the changes experienced by the two groups of children. Among the youngest children, the number of whites increased by almost 900 while the number of Blacks declined by almost 700. The number of children of other races in this age group also dropped. The reverse occurred among children aged 5 to 14. The number of white children in this age group fell by more than 1,500 while the number of Black children grew by almost the same number. Children of other races also increased. The virtual stability of the combined number of children in each age group during the 1980s makes it highly unlikely that enrollments could grow during the 1990s, absent a fairly large influx of new families into the city. I ! ' a I 1 The large gain among Black children of school age during the 1980s, and the concurrent loss among whites in the same age group, undoubtedly contributed in some part to the growing ascendancy of Black enrollments in the schools of the Little Rock School District during the decade. At the same time, the large increase among whites in the youngest age group who have now entered school could contribute to a more balanced enrollment overall during the '90s decade. I a s I ! i Changes within the City. While the city of Little Rock as a whole gained population during the 1980s, many individual neighborhoods experienced losses. Of the 42 census tracts located wholly or in part within the 1990 city limits, 28 lost population between 1980 and 1990. This was the case with every one of the tracts located on the eastern and central sections of the city as well as some of the tracts extending westward and southwest from the city's center. This included a number of the areas annexed by the Little Rock School District in 1987. I L Almost all of the city's population growth, on the other hand, was absorbed by the northwest sector of the city, its western fringes, and its far southwest corner. Much of the growth shown, on the maps which follow occurred in census tracts which are only partly located within the city's boundaries. Hence, some of the growth shown by the maps may actually have gone outside the city, and the District, limits. I. i L Black children of school age were heavily concentrated in a number of census tracts where the total population declined. Close to 7,100, out of a total of almost 16,000, resided in just 12 tracts in which they made up 90 percent of all children between the ages of 5 and 17 years. At the other extreme, there were also 12 tracts in which white children predominated and in which Blacks were less than 10 percent of their age group. These tracts were located mainly on the northwestern and western borders of the city. Little wonder that the District faced difficult odds in maintaining racial balance in its schools. .0 o o o' 3 w -3 L \u0026gt; o T3 O 3 a X Page 18 IHRUINRg Qi S!h h^m Sm JSb ^^3 Loss 25% or More CHANGE IN POPULATION OF LITTLE ROCK CENSUS TRACTS, 1980-1990 Loss 10-24% Loss Under 10% 0 w (O o (O S' / xipuaddv SUOIl39|OJd No Change Gain Under 10% Gain 10-24% Gain 25% or More a\u0026gt; ::d o o (fi o zr o o O w* a n 03 O o' (/) fi) 03 3 5 S.   Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I i Future Population Change    .4 According to the \"1994 Urban Development Report\" of the city's Department of Neighborhoods and Planning, Little Rock as a whole is expected to grow slowly if at all over the next several years. If growth does occur, it is likely to come mainly from additional annexations to the city, but these will not affect enrollments in the Little Rock School District unless its boundaries are expanded as well. Thus, the District's enrollments are not likely to benefit from increases in the city's population. The report states further that \"the existing parts of the City are expected to lose population. The westward shift in population should continue.\" 1 \u0026gt;  This conclusion is borne out by projections of total population change made by Metroplan, and shown on the map that follows. The projections for each of the city's census tracts indicate continued losses in most of the tracts in the city's central core and on the east side, with new growth going mainly to the west and northwest.  1 I No more detailed projections are available for the city of Little Rock which would indicate how the specific age groups served by the schools are likely to change over the next several years. Data on recent births in Little Rock (now reported for larger Arkansas cities as well as for counties) and for Pulaski County, however, offer some clues. Projections of population by age group and race for Pulaski County may also be helpful. At the time of the 1990 Census, about 50 percent of Pulaski's total population resided in the city of Little Rock. 3 n Information on births to residents of Little Rock has been recorded by the state's Health Department only since 1987. They indicate a drop in the number of total births between 1987 and 1993, the latest year for which the figures are available. In 1987, they totaled 3,274. The number fell by nearly 200 in 1988, then climbed slightly above the earlier level in 1989. Since then they have declined every year, reaching a total of 3,021 in 1993. In 1987, births to white residents of the city exceeded those of Black and other nonwhite residents by more than 300. By 1993, the numbers were much closer-1,501 for whites and 1,518 for nonwhites. I L The decline in the city of both total and white births was not matched by a rise in the remainder of Pulaski County. Rather, the trends there matched those of the city. White births declined by 188 from 1987 to 1993 while nonwhite births increased by 110. The net result was a drop of 76 in the total number of births to residents of all races combined. Thus, it is unlikely that enrollments in the interdistrict schools will grow from an increase in the number of pupils from the Pulaski or North Little Rock Districts, unless there is a concurrent loss of pupils by one or both-absent, of course, a major but now unanticipated increase in the number of new residents to the county. \"0 Q O O* 3 Other data which may shed some light on the possible future of Little Rock's school age population come from the population projections made for each county in Arkansas by the Arkansas Institute for Economic Advancement at the University of Arkansas, Little Rock. D D Q 3 Q. X Page 20H i.rbulk. Loss 15% or More PROJECTED CHANGE IN POPULATION OF LITTLE ROCK CENSUS TRACTS 1990-2000 Loss 5% Loss 2% No Change Tl 0) (a n\u0026gt; M xipuaddv suoipajojd Gain 2% Gain 5% Gain 15% or More a (B :3D O o X\" ay o o o D cz\u0026gt;' o -n a\u0026gt; o o' U) Vt CD 0 0) 3 O) W f 2 fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI fl The most recent projections were made in 1993. No projections are made for cities in Arkansas. fl fl fl The Institute prepares three projection series by age and race, varying their construction only with regard to assumptions about future age-specific migration patterns in the county. Series A assumes that the individual age groups will continue to migrate in and out of the county at the same rates as in the 1980s decade. Series B assumes that each group will resume the higher migration rates of the 1970s. And Series C assumes that there will be no net gain or loss from migration-that is, there will be no net migration. Fertility and mortality rates used in the projections, the only other elements affecting population change, are the same as those found in 1990. Both are age- and race-specific. The differences between the three series are believed to indicate the most likely range within which the actual change will fall. fl I9 I Two of the three series project decreases in the youngest age group, children below the age of 5, between 1990 when their numbers were actually counted and 2005-one of fewer than 200, but the other of almost 2,800. If either of these projections actually comes to pass, neither the Little Rock School District nor the other districts serving Pulaski County residents are likely to have much if any increase in their elementary schools. Under the third series which projects a gain of more than 4,100 children in this age group, a return to the higher migration patterns of the 1970s would be required. However, most of this growth would have already taken place by 1995, with only modest increases projected thereafter. There is little apparent evidence that this has occurred. II III I Under one series the number of children ages 5-9 and 10-14 would also drop, although the size of the decline would be smaller for the older age group. This is the series that assumes the migration patterns of the 1980s would continue. The \"zero net migration\" series projects a decline of children ages 5-9, but growth among those ages 10-14. Only the series which assumes return to the '70s migration rates shows an increase in both groups. I -3 All three series project a decline in the number of white children in the age group under five years of age. Two project a decline in the number from 5 to 9 years old. But only one projects a loss in the number ages 10-14. In one series the increase turns into a loss after 1995, and in the other the rate of loss slows. Nonwhite children, on the other hand, increase in all but one age group under one series~a loss of 52 children ages 10-14 under the \"80s migration\" series. TJ A O o* 3 W II Altogether, the projected size of the change in total child population, 14 years of age or younger, in Pulaski County ranges from a gain of almost 8,700 to a loss of about 4,500. For whites the range of loss is from nearly 1,100 to more than 6,600. For nonwhites, the projected increase is from about 2,100 to almost 9,700 from 1990 to the year 2005. What is one to make of these projections? And how to relate them to the future of enrollments in only one of Pulaski County's school districts? Given what other information is available about current trends and future prospects of the school districts, we are inclined to believe that the projections which continue the recent migration patterns are most likely to come closest to the actual numbers. This is the series which projects an overall loss in a D A 3 Q. X Page 22  Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I child population in Pulaski County, a larger loss among white children, and a relatively modest increase among nonwhites. Both the losses and the increases will be spread throughout the county although the longer-established cities are likely to sustain a disproportionate share of the losses and fewer of the gains. The table on the page that follows shows the alternative UALR projections. I M   o A O o' 3 o o o 3 Q. X Page 23 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I Table 7 Projections of Child Population (UALR) Pulaski County, 1990 to 2005 1990 1995 2000 2005 Change 1990-2005 ss 3 I I.a IH Total \u0026lt;5 5-9 10-14 White Total \u0026lt;5 5-9 10-14 Nonwhite Total \u0026lt;5 5-9 10-14 Total \u0026lt;5 5-9 10-14 White Total \u0026lt;5 5-9 10-14 Nonwhite Total \u0026lt;5 5-9 10-14 Total \u0026lt;5 5-9 10-14 White Total \u0026lt;5 5-9 10-14 Nonwhite Total \u0026lt;5 5-9 10-14 349,660 27,020 25,786 24,605 253,393 17,531 16,056 14,392 96,267 9,489 9,730 10,213 349,660 27,020 25,786 24,605 253,393 17,531 16,056 14,392 96,267 9,489 9,730 10,213 349,660 27,020 25,786 24,605 253,393 17,531 16,056 14,392 96,267 9,489 9,730 10,213 Series A - Migration at 80-90 Rates 353,000 27,961 24,920 24,118 352,911 25,944 25,835 23,280 350,494 24,262 24,032 24,208 834 -2,758 -1,754 -397 250,830 17,329 15,813 14,428 244,832 15,032 15,631 14,211 236,773 13,354 13,559 14,047 -16,620 -4,177 -2,497 -345 102,170 10,632 9,107 9,690 108,079 10,912 10,204 9,069 113,721 10,908 10,473 10,161 17,454 1,419 743 -52 Series B- Migration at 70-80 Rates 372,262 30,411 26,444 25,850 393,546 30,547 29,890 26,503 414,695 31,154 30,155 30,085 65,035 4,134 4,369 5,480 262,577 18,358 16,577 15,526 268,827 17,051 17,357 16,034 273,525 16,475 16,121 16,786 20,132 -1.056 65 2,394 109,685 12,053 9,867 10,324 124,719 13,496 12,533 10,469 141,170 14,679 14,034 13,299 44,903 5,190 4,304 3,086 Series C - Zero Net Migration 363,744 29,752 26,948 25,702 374,584 27,769 29,672 26,861 383,247 26,841 27,693 29,577 33,587 -179 1,907 4,972 D s \u0026lt;0 o o'  (A 259,933 18,348 17,471 16,007 263,175 16,041 18,306 17,348 264,449 15,013 16,005 18,251 11,056 -2,518 -51 3,859 103,811 11,404 6,457 9,695 111,409 11,728 11,366 9,423 118,798 11,828 11,688 11,326 22,531 2,339 1,958 1,113 o o Q 3 aX Page 24 I Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I i i Changes in the Economy With a backbone of government, medical facilities, and educational institutions. Little Rock has enjoyed a steady rate of economic growth over the years. Unlike \"boom and bust\" economies, rates of both growth and decline have usually been modest. Pulaski County's labor force and its population actually holding jobs have often moved together in synchrony. Between 1991 and 1993, for example, annual unemployment rates moved no more than one percentage point apart, varying between 5.7 percent and 4.7 percent. For 1994, the unemployment rate was lower still at 4.0 percent. The most recent rate (for July 1995 and unadjusted) is even lower, at 3.3 percent. I Pulaski County Labor Force, Employment, and Unemployment Rate Annual Averages 1990-1994 and July 1995 :a 210.000 200.000 190.000 180.000 170.000 160.000 150.000 140.000 Unemployment Kate ------ 14 Thousands \u0026gt; I Labor Fore* Eaployneot UiMBployBt Rate 1990 185.475 175.575 5.3 1991 ^2^25 172.225 5.7 1992 1U.500 177.875 5.6 1993 189.425 180.575 4.7 1994 Jul 1995 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 6.S7S 202.500 I 1.625 195.775 _____ 3.3 i 196.575 US.625 The Grier Partnership Labor Force Employment lUnemploymt Rate Source: Arkansas Employment Security Dept. Asked about prospects for expansion or contraction of employment sectors in the Little Rock area, knowledgeable sources said they saw little likelihood of major changes within the city of Little Rock and Pulaski County over the foreseeable future, although other jurisdictions within the four-county metro area such as Maumelle and Conway are experiencing substantial growth in both jobs and industry. Recent construction along the waterfront to the west of downtown probably has relatively few children. 0 Q O O 3 (A The issuance of building permits, an indicator of activity in the construction industry, rose from 1991 through 1993. The number declined somewhat in 1994, but was still almost as high as it had been during the peak year of the 1980s. It is too early to tell whether the decline represents a real drop in construction activity and whether the drop will continue or whether building is simply playing \"catch up\" with the permits. The number of permits for single-family buildings, more closely indicative of change affecting family households, was also down in 1994 in both the city of Little Rock and \u0026gt; o o o 3 Q. X Page 25 I3 I a I [ f VI Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I 1 j Pulaski County. Nevertheless, the number of permits issued for units in the city that year was higher than it had been in any year since 1986. i Single-Family Building Permits 1980-1994 Little Rock and Pulaski County 4 J I i I 0 400 200 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 I B 11 I IW I 1 I J33 I 437 I 7 I \u0026gt; I 5W I 7 I 1 I 4 I MS I 7 I M I I I ns I \u0026lt;72 I 3M I 74 J37|13|1.173[ 773 | 777 | 7\u0026lt; | 434 | 71 |l.in4|l jw] Little Sack PttlJMfcl Co. ~ Little Rock + Pulaski Co. The Grier Partnership I Source: Metroplan 5 o \u0026lt;D O o 3 W \u0026gt; D D O 3 Q. X Page 26 1 r Projections Appendix WW\" RMTOW*Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I THE ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS 4 I1! J I i 4 $ 1 All projections are fallible. None is the product of a crystal ball. Even when alternative projection scenarios are postulated, they assume that present trends or at least modifications of present trends that appear reasonable will continue throughout their term. All assume also that present policies will remain in force, or at least that any possible future policy changes can be predicted with present knowledge. Thus, any major change in the demographic and economic forces that exist at this time in Little Rock could cause enrollment projections made at this time to be in error-as could any drastic change in current policies affecting the schools, such as the desegregation plan. In addition to being affected by overall shifts in trends and policies, enrollment projections are also subject to random factors-e.g., unpredictable variations in birthrates and patterns of population movement. These random factors will usually tend to wash out when the projections are for a fairly large population, such as a school district. The smaller the population, however, the riskier the projection. Even a modest change in school policy or program or the demolition or addition of a few dozen housing units could alter the picture. Hence, projection errors for individual schools are more subject to error than those for the entire school system, and allowance made for these when interpreting the results. The chance of projection error also increases the farther a projection extends out in time. A projection for the year to come will typically be more accurate than one for ten years in the future, since the latter is affected by events which were not anticipated when the projection was made. As one example, there was a sharp and temporary rise in nonwhite births recorded for both Pulaski County and the City of Little Rock in 1989 and 1990 which has since subsided but is just beginning to be reflected in enrollments in the earliest grades. White births also rose, but for one year only. These events affect the projections as well, creating a sudden and short-lived increase which will continue to move through the enrolled population for the next decade, but will have only a slight effect on the trend overall. I Projections made prior to 1989 probably would not have reflected these events. We recommend that projections be updated often, preferably annually, to detect changes that otherwise might alter the outcome significantly. With these caveats in mind, we present our current projections for the Little Rock School District.^ Total Enrollments 5 I Enrollments in the Little Rock School District are projected to continue their recent pattern of slow decline through the year 2005. By that year, the number of pupils will total 21,605 - lower by nearly 3,600 or 14 percent than in 1994. The rate of decline will slow gradually, from 701 pupils between 1994 and 1995 to 169 between 2004 and 2005. Hence nearly 2,700 of the 3,600 loss projected by 2005 will have occurred by the year 2000. ' The projections for the District as a whole and for the various levels, and the 1994 numbers from which the changes are measured, include ungraded students at the level in which they are enrolled. \u0026gt; D o A 3 Q. X Page 27 aa Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI aa a All three school levels-elementary, junior and senior high schools-will lose pupils, but at different rates. Enrollments in the elementary grades will decline by 1,379 or 9.7 percent. At the junior and senior high levels, the numerical loss will be almost identical. They will differ by only 30 pupils, from a drop of 1,091 for junior high to 1,121 for senior high. But because there are fewer pupils in the senior high schools, the percentage rates of decline will be quite different: 18.6 percent for junior high students, and 21.7 percent for those in senior high. Projected Total Enrollments Little Rock School District, 1995-2005  26,000 21,000 24,000 23,000 22,000 25,000 / 125,195 124.494 j 24.M8123.573123,127 j 22,764122.5H 122J17122,12} 121,910 j 21,774121.605 | The Grier Partnership Elementary Schools Ia I 1 \u0026gt; Looking at all three levels on a single chart, the trends appear quite similar. Losses are of roughly the same magnitude for all three. But when the elementary schools, whose total enrollment is greater than the junior and senior high levels combined, are separated out and shown on a different chart, it becomes possible to look more closely at the trends. Here we can see that the decline in elementary enrollments will begin at a fairly rapid pace, then will moderate between 1997 and 2000, but after that will return close to its initial rate. Between 1994 and 1997, the loss will average 155 students per year. From 1997 to 2000 the average will drop to 63 per year. But between 2000 and 2005 it will accelerate again to 145 per year. Page 28 -O Q  X T Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I I i I Projected Enrollments by School Level Little Rock School District, 1995-2005 J4 3 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 I *** Eleawataiy ^Sr Hiflx + + + + + + *  0 Flmininn [l\u0026lt;.nill4.021H3.S81|13.70an.Mai3.57iH.511ll3.JHIH.12il3.00ll2.9iai2.TO JrHlch SrHl^ 5,882 5,162 5,500 4,973 5,24915.174 4.919(4.694 5,042 4.423 4,959 4432 4.827 4,173 4,933 4.065 4,999 3,999 5,005 14,871 3,897(3.992 4,771 4,041 The Grier Partnership I Projected Elementary Enrollments Little Rock School District, 1995-2005 J3 14^00 Ii 3 3 L 13,500 13,000 14,000 / / 114.171 114,021 ! 13,881 113,705 j (13.573 113317 113.319113.125 113.008 112.912 112,792 | I I 12,500 The Grier Partnership Junior High Schools The year-to-year trends for the junior and senior high levels will be quite different, both from the elementary level and from each other. In the junior highs, the decline during the first two years is projected to be steep, an average of 307 per year. Then from 1996 through \u0026gt; o o A 3 Q. X Page 29 1 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I 2000 it will moderate sharply to barely more than one-third that rate-106 per year. Between 2000 and 2003, junior high enrollments will actually increase. The gain will be modest, however, only 59 students per year, returning enrollments to not quite where they were in 1998 . Then the decline will resume at an average pace of 117 per year between 2003 and 2005. 1 Projected Enrollments in Jr. and Sr. High Little Rock School District, 1995-2005 13 I 3 3 K a 6,000 3,500 5,000 4,500 4,000 5,500 / / / / / / +jf Hitb *Sr High fI I Jr I S,M2 i S.500 I S.:49 t S.174 I 5,042 i 4.9S9 14.S27 14,933 i 4.999 I S.OOS I 4.S71 I 4.77} I I Sr 15,162 14,973 I 4,919 (4,694 | 4,423 14.232 14,173 14,065 | 3,999 | 3.B97 | 3,992 | 4,041 | The Grier Partnership I I Senior High Schools J I Senior high enrollments will decline at a fairly moderate rate at first, 122 per year between 1994 and 1996. Then the loss will accelerate to nearly twice that rate, 229 per year, from 1996 to 1999. This will be followed by a deceleration to an average loss of 84 per year from 1999 to 2003. Finally, as the junior high increase of 2000 to 2003 hits the senior high school years, they too will gain moderately at about 72 pupils per year.  I  Individual Schools^ I A total of 19 elementary schools, more than half of the 35 in operation in 1994, are projected to lose 25 percent or more of their enrollment by 2005. Eight of these will lose 50 percent or more. Another three schools will lose between 10 and 25 percent, and one will 2 The projections for individual schools do not include ungraded students. \u0026gt; o o A 3 Q. X Page 30 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I I J lose less than ten percent, for a total of 23 elementary schools or 66 percent that are projected to lose enrollment by the year 2005.   A total of 12 elementary schools are projected to gain enrollment by 2005. Six of the 12 will gain by 25 percent or more, and three of these six will gain by 50 percent or more. Another three schools will add between 10 and 24 percent to their present enrollments, and three will add less than ten percent.  In the great majority of these elementary schools, the decline will be clearly apparent by the year 2000. All of the 19 schools that are projected to lose 25 percent or more in the next decade will have experienced over half of that loss by 2000, and many will have lost well over half. Eight will already be in the over-25 percent loss category. Similarly, all of the schools projected to be big gainers will have gained more than half of those amounts by 2000.  Among junior high schools, three of the eight (38 percent) are projected to lose 25 percent or more of their enrollments by 2005\none more will escape their fate by a mere three- tenths of a percentage point. One of these schools, Cloverdale Junior High, will see its enrollment decline by 54 percent. No junior high will gain enrollment\nbut one, Mann, will lose by only one-tenth of one percent, and a second, Dunbar, will come nearly as close with a loss of four-tenths of one percent. Several schools - Dunbar, Forest Heights, Henderson, and Pulaski Heights - will be further in the loss column in 2000 than in 2005, and will recover somewhat thereafter. Two of the five high schools. Hall and McClellan, are projected to lose by over 25 percent, and Hall will lose by 51 percent. None will gain enrollment but Fair will drop by only a modest four percent. As with the junior highs, some of these schools will be deeper in the loss column by 2000 than by 2005. I I 5 A table in the appendix shows the projected change in enrollments for each school. Racial Changes in Enrollments L- Overall, black pupils are projected to decrease in number by somewhat over 1,800 or 11 percent over the next 11 years. Pupils of white and other races will decline by close to the same amount-nearly 1,800 or about one-fifth in the same period. The Black percentage of the total will increase only slightly as a result, however, going from 65 percent in 1994 to 67 percent in 2005. 1 I Both Black and white/other enrollments will also decline in each of the three levels. For Black pupils the decline will be about four percent at the elementary level, 19 percent in the junior highs, and 21 percent in the high schools. The comparable losses for the white/other group will be 19 percent in elementary grades, 17 percent in the junior highs, and 24 percent in the high schools. Page 31 \u0026gt; o Q O 3 a XLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I   Projected Enrollments by Level and Race Little Rock School District, 1995-2005 Elementary 9300 8300 \u0026lt;  7300 a 6300 3300 4300 5300 MM W t.m ack (.m \nN* I M I .( I I (,r I M\u0026gt;* WMiatk S^tt MM tJU MH M 4^ MM MM 44W 440 I I Junior High 1 4300 3 I I 4,000 3300 3,000 2300 4 2,000  1300 Blkck White/Othet 1300 / ^4* ^4** ,j5S / ack 44M VM 4a M41 MO 4n MM U MW MM (4 WMliHlIWi LB* l.Tff L7 !,? 1.M* 1,W 141 l.M 14W 14M 14S tM\u0026gt; D D A 3 O. X Page 32 *  Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I II II Senior High  4,000 I 3,500 II 3,000 II 2300 2,000 1300        1,000 500 Bl4 Wbite/Other BMe MM J4U Un KUl UM UWIITM WMUWa\u0026lt; 1.7M 113M I MM 113t I 1.W I MM I UM I M I LWl I MsTI I yu 11,O I MM I t4i II4WI  The racial changes in the system as whole, however, mask widely different patterns of racial composition at the individual school level. The percent of students who are Black will actually increase in 22 of the individual elementary schools and decrease in the remaining 13 where the proportion of pupils who are white or of other races will grow. In the junior highs, the Black proportion will increase in five of the eight schools, white and other pupils in the other three. In the senior highs, there will be an increase in the Black percentage in three schools, an increase in white/other in two. 'I 'I p As a result of these changes, few if any schools in the Little Rock School District are likely to be racially balanced by the year 2005 without substantial changes in program and policy. *0 T3 3 Q. X Page 33 f' L fl fl fl I I L I o D A 3 X Ifl Change in Enrollments by School, Level and District -1987 to 1994t itttMOk) IlitUS- Wl M I  I H H H H HL g CHANCE IN ENROLLMENTS BY SCHOOL, LEVEL AND DISTRICT - 1987 TO 1994 - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1987 1994 PCT. CHANGE 1987 TO 1994 TOTAL BLACK WHITE/ I OTHER I TOTAL BLACK WHITE/ I OTHER I TOTAL BLACK WHITE/ I OTHER I CHANGE IN RACIAL COM,POSITION PERCENT BLACK PERCENT WHT/O 1987 1994 1987 1994 HIGH SCHOOLS Central Fair Hall McClellan Parkview SUH 2123 882 1449 1260 833 6547 1207 421 727 495 462 3312 916 I 461 I 722 I 765 I 371 I 3235 I 1637 917 1031 897 800 5282 1040 631 669 684 435 3459 597 I 286 I 362 I 213 I 365 I 1823 I -22.91 4.01 -28.81 -28.81 -4.01 -19.31 -13.81 49.91 -8.01 38.21 -5.81 4.41 -34.81 I -38.01 I -49.91 I -72.21 I -1.61 I -43.61 I 56.9% 47.7% 50.2% 39.3% 55.5% 50.6% 63.51 43.11 36.51 68.81 52.31 31.21 64.91 49.81 35.11 76.31 60.71 23.71 54.41 44.51 45.61 65.51 49.41 34.51 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Hann Pulaski Hgts Southwest SUM 678 682 862 1033 672 653 754 804 6138 429 463 532 617 337 349 477 529 3733 249 I 219 I 330 I 416 I 335 I 304 I 277 I 275 I 2405 I 647 707 780 917 585 845 771 610 5862 521 468 565 661 417 456 431 487 4006 126 I 239 I 215 I 256 I 168 I 389 I 340 I 123 I 1856 I -4.61 3.71 -9.51 -11.21 -12.91 29.41 2.31 -24.11 -4.51 21.41 1.11 6.21 7.11 23.71 30.71 -9.61 -7.91 7.31 -49.41 I 9.11 I -34.81 I -38.51 I -49.91 I 28.01 I 22.71 I -55.31 I -22.81 I 63.31 67.91 61.71 59.71 50.11 53.41 63.31 65.81 60.81 80.51 36.71 19.51 66.21 32.11 33.81 72.41 38.31 27.61 72.11 40.31 27.91 71.31 49.91 28.71 54.01 46.61 46.01 55.91 36.71 44.11 79.81 34.21 20.21 68.31 39.21 31.71 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Badgett Bale Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale El Dodd 290 397 448 636 424 362 642 408 398 208 276 318 327 274 177 365 260 243 82 I 121 I 130 I 309 I 150 I 185 I 277 I 148 I 155 I 177 309 326 573 408 588 503 392 298 133 214 245 305 254 309 344 312 193 44 I 95 I 81 I 268 I 154 I 279 I 159 I 80 I 105 I -39.01 -22.21 -27.21 -9.91 -3.81 62.41 -21.71 -3.91 -25.11 -36.11 -22.51 -23.01 -6.71 -7.31 74.61 -5.81 20.01 -20.61 -46.31 I -21.51 I -37.71 I -13.31 I 2.71 I 50.81 I -42.61 I -45.91 I -32.31 I 71.7% 69.5% 71.0% 51.4% 64.6% 48.9% 56.9% 63.7% 61. U 75.U 28.3% 24.9% 69.3% 30.5% 30.71! 15.2% 29.01 24.81 53.21 48.61 46.81 62.31 35.41 37.71 52.61 51.11 47.41 68.41 43.11 31.61 79.61 36.31 20.41 64.81 38.91 35.21 aojono i I W V k'lWtx*-' CHANGE IN ENBOLLMENTS BY SCH(L, LEVEL AND DISTRICT - 1987 TO 1994 - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT (continued) I 1987 1994 Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Garland Geyer Springs Gibbs Ish Jefferson King Mabelvale McDeniiott Headoncliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Hgts Rightsell Rockefeller Romine Stephens Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff SUM TOTAL 315 426 403 503 329 235 265 214 462 269 546 471 449 256 325 340 246 289 484 218 481 467 214 491 314 496 407 229 14149 BLACK 217 253 290 289 280 156 130 174 260 217 324 263 293 219 196 256 189 251 343 196 274 290 200 309 192 246 288 174 9217 WHITE/ I OTHER I 98 I 173 I 113 I 214 I 49 I 79 I 135 I 40 I 202 I 52 I 222 I 208 I 156 I 37 I 129 I 84 I 57 I 38 I 141 I 22 I 207 I 177 I 14 I 182 I 122 I 250 I 119 I 55 I 4932 I TOTAL 282 432 443 542 282 300 293 502 551 474 494 411 272 359 420 229 403 323 559 413 687 427 317 474 345 243 14051 BLACK 204 198 393 235 246 223 160 closed 218 309 340 241 279 260 154 197 225 264 234 closed 234 327 443 340 215 250 254 148 8900 WHITE/ I OTHER I 78 I 234 I 50 I 307 I 36 I 77 I 133 I I 284 I 242 I 134 I 253 I 132 I 12 I 205 I 223 I 4 I 139 I 89 I I 325 I 86 I 244 I 87 I 102 I 224 I 91 I 95 I 5151 I GRAND TOTAL 26834 16262 10572 I 25195 16365 8830 I PCT. CHANGE 1987 TO 1994 TOTAL -10.5% 1.4% 9.9% 7.8% -14.3% 27.7% 10.6% BLACK -6.0% -21.7% 35.5% -18.7% -12.1% 42.9% 23.1% -100.0^ -100.0% 8.7% 104.8% -13.2% 4.9% -8.5% 6.3% 10.5% 23.5% -6.9% 39.4% -33.3% -16.2% 42.4% 4.9% -8.4% -4.8% 18.7% -21.4% -23.0% 19.0% 5.2% -31.8% -100.0% -100.0% 16.2% -11.6% 221.0% -13.0% 1.0% -4.4% -15.2% 6.1% -0.7% -14.6% 12.8% 121.5% 10.0% 12.0% 1.6% -11.8% -14.9% -3.4% WHITE/ I OTHER I -20.4% I 35.3% I -55.8% I 43.5% I -26.5% I -2.5% I -1.5% I -100.0% I 40.6% I 365.4% I -39.6% I 21.6% I -15.4% I -67.6% I 58.9% I 165.5% I -93.0% I 265.8% I -36.9% I -100.0% I 57.0% I -51.4% I 1642.9% I -52.2% I -16.4% I -10.4% I -23.5% I 72.7% I 4.4% I CHANGE IN RACIAL COM,POSITION PERCENT BLACK PERCENT WHT/0 1987 68.9% 59.4% 72.0% 57.5% 85.1% 66.4% 49.1% 81.3% 56.3% 80.7% 59.3% 55.8% 65.3% 85.5% 60.3% 75.3% 76.8% 86.9% 70.9% 89.9% 57.0% 62.1% 93.5% 62.9% 61.1% 49.6% 70.8% 76.0% 65.1% 1994 1987 1994 72.3% 31.1% 27.7% 45.8% 40.6% 54.2% 88.7% 28.0% 11.3% 43.4% 42.5% 56.6% 87.2% 14.9% 12.8% 74.3% 33.6% 25.7% 54.6% 50.9% 45.4% 18.7% 43.4% 43.7% 56.6% 56.1% 19.3% 43.9% 71.7% 40.7% 28.3% 48.8% 44.2% 51.2% 67.9% 34.7% 32.1% 95.6% 14.5% 4.4% 42.9% 39.7% 57.1% 46.9% 24.7% 53.1% 98.3% 23.2% 1.7% 65.5% 13.1% 34.5% 72.4% 29.1% 27.6% 10.1% 41.9% 43.0% 58.1% 79.2% 37.9% 20.8% 64.5% 6.5% 35.5% 79.6% 37.1% 20.4% 67.8% 38.9% 32.2% 52.7% 50.4% 47.3% 73.6% 29.2% 26.4% 60.9% 24.0% 39.1% 63.3% 34.9% 36.7% -6.1% 0.6% -16.5% I 60.6% 65.0% 39.4% 35.0% J fl 11 tl Total Enrollment Projections by Grade and Level -1995 to 2005TOTAL ENROLLHENT PROJECTIONS BY GRADE AND LEVEL - 1995 to 2005 - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 PRE-K 726 I 575 564 566 562 557 552 546 541 536 531 526 Kindergarten 2060 I 2056 1951 1911 1923 1898 1882 1865 1849 1833 1818 1802 1 1990 I 2146 2126 2017 1976 1989 1962 1945 1928 1911 1894 1878 2 1914 I 1855 2000 1982 1880 1842 1853 1829 1812 1796 1780 1764 3 1796 I 1824 1768 1906 1888 1791 1755 1766 1742 1726 1710 1695 4 1895 I 1770 1798 1743 1878 1861 1765 1730 1740 1717 1702 1686 5 1842 1 1844 1722 1749 1696 1828 1811 1719 1684 1694 1672 1657 6 1797 I 1795 1797 1678 1704 1652 1781 1765 1675 1641 1651 1629 7 1949 I 1847 1843 1847 1724 1749 1697 1831 1815 1723 1686 1698 8 1966 I 1798 1702 1698 1703 1589 1611 1564 1688 1674 1589 1555 9 1843 1 1791 1638 1550 1546 1551 1447 1467 1424 1537 1524 1447 10 1930 I 1897 1844 1687 1596 1592 1597 1489 1510 1466 1583 1569 11 1601 1 1620 1593 1545 1413 1341 1338 1341 1252 1271 1232 1329 12 1548 I 1403 1419 1395 1353 1237 1175 1173 1175 1097 1114 1080 Ungraded Elei 151 I Ungraded Jr Hi 104 I Ungraded Sr Hi 83 I 156 64 53 154 65 63 154 78 66 155 69 60 154 71 63 154 73 63 154 71 62 154 71 63 154 72 63 154 71 63 154 71 63 TOTAL 25195 I 24494 24048 23573 23127 22764 22518 22317 22123 21910 21774 21605 SUMMARY OF TOTAL PROJECTIONS BY LEVEL Eleientary Junior High Senior High 14171 I 14021 13881 13705 13662 13573 13517 13319 13125 13008 12912 12792 5862 I 5500 5249 5174 5042 4959 4827 4933 4999 5005 4871 4771 5162 I 4973 4919 4694 4423 4232 4173 4065 3999 3897 3992 4041 TOTAL 25195 I 24494 24048 23573 23127 22764 22518 22317 22123 21910 21774 21605 I I I I I ii i a BLACK ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS BY GRADE AND LEVEL - 1995 to 2005 - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 H PRE-K 451 1 352 339 347 347 346 345 344 343 342 341 340 d KINDERGARTEN 1332 I 1349 1292 1242 1274 1274 1270 1266 1262 1257 1254 1250 1 1268 I 1385 1384 1325 1274 1306 1306 1303 1298 1294 1290 1286 2 1189 I 1172 1281 1279 1225 1177 1208 1208 1204 1200 1196 1192 3 1128 I 1129 1113 1216 1214 1163 1118 1147 1147 1143 1140 1136 4 1211 I 1112 1113 1097 1199 1197 1147 1102 1130 1130 1127 1124 5 1160 I 1189 1092 1093 1077 1177 1175 1126 1082 1110 1110 1107 6 1155 I 1133 1161 1067 1067 1052 1150 1148 1100 1057 1084 1084 7 1333 I 1219 1196 1226 1126 1127 1111 1214 1212 1161 1116 1145 8 1349 I 1243 1137 1116 1143 1050 1051 1036 1132 1130 1082 1040 d n 9 1243 I 1234 1137 1040 1020 1046 960 10 1311 I 1285 1276 1176 1076 1055 1082 961 993 947 1035 1034 994 990 980 1071 1069 11 1022 I 1058 1037 1029 12 Ungraded Elei Ungraded Jr Hi Ungraded Sr Hi 957 I no I 81 I 65 I 883 114 46 39 914 113 50 47 896 113 59 50 948 889 113 52 45 868 819 113 54 47 851 750 113 55 47 872 801 736 754 113 53 47 113 54 47 802 692 113 54 47 790 693 113 54 47 864 683 113 54 47 TOTAL 16365 I 15943 15681 15370 15091 14872 14739 14668 14620 14549 14541 14523 Eleentary Junior High Senior High 9004 1 8936 8887 8778 8790 8806 8832 8756 8679 8647 8654 8631 4006 1 3743 3520 3441 3342 3276 3177 3264 3345 3380 3286 3229 3355 1 3265 3273 3151 2959 2790 2730 2648 2596 2521 2601 2663 TOTAL 16365 I 15943 15681 15370 15091 14872 14739 14668 14620 14549 14541 14523 I Q I IWHITE/OTHER ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS BY 6RADE AND LEVEL - 1995 to 2005 - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 y PRE-K Kindergarten 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Ungraded Elei Ungraded Jr Hi Ungraded Sr Hi 275 1 728 I 722 I 725 I 668 I 684 I 682 I 642 I 616 I 617 I 600 I 619 I 579 I 591 I 41 I 23 I 18 I 222 707 760 683 695 658 656 661 627 555 557 612 562 520 42 18 14 226 659 743 719 655 685 631 636 646 565 501 568 556 505 41 16 16 219 669 692 703 690 645 656 612 621 582 510 511 516 499 41 19 16 215 649 702 655 674 680 619 637 597 560 526 521 465 464 41 17 15 211 625 682 665 628 664 651 600 622 539 505 536 473 417 41 17 16 206 612 656 646 637 619 636 632 586 561 486 515 487 425 41 18 16 202 599 642 621 619 628 593 617 617 528 506 496 468 438 41 17 16 198 587 629 608 595 610 602 575 603 556 477 516 451 421 41 17 16 194 576 617 595 583 586 584 584 562 543 502 486 469 405 41 18 16 190 564 604 584 571 574 562 567 570 507 490 512 442 421 41 17 16 186 552 592 572 560 562 550 545 554 514 457 500 465 397 41 17 16 TOTAL 8830 I 8551 8368 8203 8037 7892 7779 7649 7502 7361 7233 7082 Elementary Junior High Senior High 5167 I 5085 4994 4928 4872 4767 4685 4563 4446 4360 4257 4162 1856 I 1757 1728 1733 1700 1683 1651 1669 1653 1625 1585 1542 1807 I 1708 1645 1543 1464 1442 1443 1418 1403 1376 1391 1378 TOTAL 8830 I 8551 8368 8203 8037 7892 7779 7649 7502 7361 7233 7082 u I a r I 1 I Jifl H 11 11 d Provisional Projections by School, Level, and Race - 2000 and 2005L SHB B H fi H H H H PROVISIONAL PROJECTIONS BY SCHOOL, LEVEL, AND RACE - 2000 AND 2005 - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENTS - 1994 WHITE/ PCT. PCT. I TOTAL BLACK OTHER PROJECTED ENROLLMENTS - 2000 WHITE/ PCT. PCT. I HIGH SCHOOLS Central Fair Hall McClellan Parkview SUH 1637 917 1031 897 800 5282 1040 631 669 684 435 3459 597 286 362 213 365 1823 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS Cloverdale Dunbar Forest Heights Henderson Mabelvale Mann Pulaski Hgts Southwest SUM 647 707 780 917 585 845 771 610 5862 521 468 565 661 417 456 431 487 4006 126 239 215 256 168 389 340 123 1856 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Badgett Bale Baseline Booker Brady Carver Chicot Cloverdale Dodd 177 309 326 573 408 588 503 392 298 133 214 245 305 254 309 344 312 193 44 95 81 268 154 279 159 80 105 BLACK WHT/OTH I TOTAL BLACK OTHER PROJECTED ENROLLMENTS - 2005 WHITE/ PCT. PCT. BLACK WHT/OTH I TOTAL BLACK OTHER BLACK WHT/OTH 63.5% 36.5% I 68.8% 31.2% I 64.9% 35.1% I 76.3% 23.7% I 54.4% 45.6% I 65.5% 34.5% I 80.5% 19.5% I 66.2% 33.8% I 72.4% 27.6% I 72.1% 27.9% I 71.3% 28.7% I 54.0% 46.0% I 55.9% 44.1% I 79.8% 20.2% I 68.3% 31.7% I 75.1% 24.9% I 69.3% 30.7% I 75.2% 24.8% I 53.2% 46.8% I 62.3% 37.7% I 52.6% 47.4% I 68.4% 31.6% I 79.6% 20.4% I 64.8% 35.2% I 1405 825 655 624 664 4173 829 600 440 561 299 2730 576 224 215 63 366 1443 59.0% 41.0% I 72.8% 27.2% I 67.2% 32.8% I 90.0% 10.0% I 45.0% 55.0% I 65.4% 34.6% I 1451 880 505 535 669 4041 816 669 358 535 255 2633 635 211 147 0 414 1408 56.2% 43.8% 76.1% 23.9% 70.8% 29.2% 99.9% 0.1% 38.1% 61.9% 65.2% 34.8% 407 653 672 796 454 667 714 463 4827 400 427 493 515 348 294 317 383 3177 8 226 179 281 106 373 397 80 1650 98.0% 2.0% I 65.4% 34.6% I 73.4% 26.6% I 64.7% 35.3% I 76.7% 23.3% I 44.1% 55.9% I 44.4% 55.6% I 82.7% 17.3% I 65.8% 34.2% I 300 704 688 821 426 636 770 426 4771 299 481 539 515 369 242 301 387 3133 1 223 149 306 57 394 469 39 1638 99.8% 0.2% 68.4% 31.6% 78.3% 21.7% 62.8% 37.2% 86.6% 13.4% 38.1% 61.9% 39.1% 60.9% 90.8% 9.2% 65.7% 34.3% 106 202 248 486 320 536 420 375 237 95 103 223 266 162 303 341 365 204 11 99 26 220 158 233 79 10 33 89.7% 10.3% I 50.9% 49.1% I 89.7% 10.3% I 54.8% 45.2% I 50.7% 49.3% I 56.6% 43.4% I 81.2% 18.8% I 97.2% 2.8% I 86.2% 13.8% I 52 120 186 411 249 485 349 353 187 51 11 185 230 85 293 331 353 186 1 109 1 181 164 192 18 0 1 98.4% 1.6% 8.8% 91.2% 99.6% 0.4% 56.0% 44.0% 34.1% 65.9% 60.5% 39.5% 94.9% 99.9% 99.7% 5.1% 0.1% 0.3%1 u1 fc-j in -'Aw\nOJOJOttO PROVISIONAL PROJECTIONS BY SCHOOL, LEVEL, AND RACE - 2000 AND 2005 - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT (continued) ENROLLMENTS - 1994 PROJECTED EHROLLMEHTS - 2000 PROJECTED ENROLLMENTS - 2005 TOTAL BLACK OTHER Fair Park Forest Park Franklin Fulbright Garland Geyer Springs Gibbs Jefferson King Mabelvale McDermott Meadowcliff Mitchell Otter Creek Pulaski Hgts Rightsell Rockefeller Romine Terry Wakefield Washington Watson Western Hills Williams Wilson Woodruff SUM 282 432 443 542 282 300 293 502 551 474 494 411 272 359 420 229 403 323 559 413 687 427 317 474 345 243 14051 204 198 393 235 246 223 160 218 309 340 241 279 260 154 197 225 264 234 234 327 443 340 215 250 254 148 8900 WHITE/ PCT. PCT. I WHITE/ PCT. PCT. I WHITE/ PCT. PCT. BLACK WHT/OTH I TOTAL BLACK OTHER BLACK WHT/OTH I TOTAL BLACK OTHER BLACK WHT/OTH 78 234 50 307 36 77 133 284 242 134 253 132 12 205 223 4 139 89 325 86 244 87 102 224 91 95 5151 72.3% 27.7% I 45.8% 54.2% I 88.7% 11.3% I 43.4% 56.6% I 87.2% 12.8% I 74.3% 25.7% I 54.6% 45.4% I 43.4% 56.6% I 56.1% 43.9% I 71.7% 28.3% I 48.8% 51.2% I 67.9% 32.1% I 95.6% 4.4% I 42.9% 57.1% I 46.9% 53.1% I 98.3% 1.7% I 65.5% 34.5% I 72.4% 27.6% I 41.9% 58.1% I 79.2% 20.8% I 64.5% 35.5% I 79.6% 20.4% I 67.8% 32.2% I 52.7% 47.3% I 73.6% 26.4% I 60.9% 39.1% I 180 471 464 490 325 421 222 521 1281 332 426 344 347 340 529 266 564 211 580 268 547 279 270 406 226 309 63.3% 36.7% I 13549 111 201 463 168 312 348 132 205 312 331 140 286 346 127 190 265 379 123 171 267 479 278 245 222 208 197 8567 70 270 1 322 13 72 90 316 969 1 286 58 1 213 339 1 184 88 409 1 68 1 25 184 18 111 4982 61.3% 38.7% I 42.6% 57.4% I 99.9% 0. I 34.2% 65.8% I 96.0% 4.0% I 82.9% 17.1% I 59.4% 40.6% I 39.4% 60.6% I 24.4% 75.6% I 99.8% 0.2% I 32.8% 67.2% I 83.1% 16.9% I 99.7% 0.3% I 37.4% 62.6% I 35.9% 64.1% I 99.4% 0.6% I 67.3% 32.7% I 58.2% 41.8% I 29.5% 70.5% I 99.5% 0.5% I 87.5% 12.5% I 99.7% 90.6% 0.3% I 9.4% I 54.7% 45.3% I 92.0% 8.0% I 64.0% 36.0% I 103 486 466 439 347 495 166 520 1767 221 367 286 391 317 592 286 663 125 580 158 433 166 229 347 135 347 63.2% 36.8% I 12824 33 199 465 110 346 443 107 191 308 220 55 286 390 103 180 285 465 30 117 157 432 165 228 195 134 234 7603 70 287 1 329 1 52 59 329 1459 1 311 1 1 215 411 1 197 95 463 1 1 1 1 152 1 113 5220 31.8% 68.2% 41.0% 59.0% 99.8% 0.21 25.0% 75.0t 99.8% 0.2% 89.5% 10.5% 64.3% 35.7% 36.7% 63.3% 17.5% 82.5% 99.4% 0.6% 15.1% 84.9% 99.7% 99.7% 0.3% 0.3% 32.4% 67.6% 30.5% 69.5% 99.7% 0.3% 70.2% 29.8% 23.9% 76.1% 20.1% 79.9% 99.3% 99.8% 99.5% 99.6% 0.7% 0.2% 0.5% 0.4% 56.3% 43.7% 99.1% 0.9% 67.3% 32.7% 59.3% 40.7% TOTAL 25195 16365 8830 65.0% 35.0% I 22549 14474 8075 64.2% 35.8% I 21636 13370 8266 61.8% 38.2%  B 0 I a Attendance Zones Elementary SchoolsLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 3. ZONE-SCHOOL Badgett (20) Subtotal UI z o U 3201 3250 3251 3253 3255 3640 Of lU z H  X o 3 co z UI S O 0 Z UI 177 0 35 17 4 0 0 56 4 32 21 24 0 23 104 4 67 38 28 0 23 160 I Bale (21) 309 Subtotal 521 531 532 534 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 9 23 5 5 34 21 24 14 3 138 29 40 29 18 48 12 12 65 4 257 38 63 34 23 82 33 36 79 7 395 Baseline (41) 326 Subtotal 3401 3406 3410 3415 3420 3425 3430 3620 3625 3652 14 5 21 2 5 4 13 18 14 5 101 55 90 7 51 17 19 4 5 12 8 268 69 95 28 53 22 23 17 23 26 13 369 Page 1 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Brady (7) lU z o n 1010 1020 1311 1321 1331 1332 1630 1712 1713 1716 1910 Subtotal oc UJ z - o I o 03 JS o hL Z UJ S O K z UJ___ 408 7 33 28 12 38 9 39 9 6 12 0 193 3 10 1 0 7 0 8 45 6 22 16 118 10 43 29 12 45 9 47 54 12 34 16 311 Brady (31) Subtotal 540 591 592 593 4 2 1 0 7 7 52 2 0 61 11 54 3 0 68 Page 2Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Chicot (45) lU z oe lU z H  o CD Subtotal z tu  O DC Z UJ___ 503 3435 3440 3445 3464 5408 7401 7405 7410 7415 7425 7467 7468 7469 7470 7471 7474 7476 7479 7480 10 5 0 29 7 33 6 10 14 5 1 13 2 3 2 3 6 1 2 152 7 7 1 29 40 25 21 31 39 20 13 28 24 16 13 15 13 0 16 358 17 12 1 58 47 58 27 41 53 25 14 41 26 19 15 18 19 1 18 510 X o Cloverdale (42) 392 Subtotal 3601 3605 3615 3630 3645 3646 3647 3648 3649 3650 3651 7310 7375 7387 10 12 9 2 4 2 4 8 9 3 2 3 2 4 74 31 16 20 0 46 17 32 22 17 64 28 9 23 96 421 41 28 29 2 50 19 36 30 26 67 30 12 25 100 495 I Page 3Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Dodd (34) LU z o N 1722 1728 4001 4010 4017 4020 4025 4046 4049 4052 4053 5467 Subtotal Q Itt  o u} t z A 16 5 21 12 0 18 11 21 11 21 1 4 141 43 31 0 43 0 3 29 1 22 1 0 0 173 JS o 59 36 21 55 0 21 40 22 33 22 .1 4 314 I- z LU s o O' z m___ 298 O 3 m Fair Park (9) 282 Subtotal Forest Park (1) Subtotal Forest Park (4) Subtotal 511 512 513 554 920 1110 1111 1120 1121 6110 6125 6610 811 821 910 13 1 5 5 38 43 42 4 11 162 66 9 1 76 40 59 75 174 9 11 76 59 8 0 29 2 0 194 7 1 0 8 0 1 5 6 22 12 81 64 46 43 71 6 11 356 73 10 1 84 40 60 80 180 432 I t I I Page 4Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Forest Park (12) lU z o u 411 412 413 420 Subtotal IX UI z I-  z o 3 m \u0026lt; t- o hL z UI S O IX z tu 0 0 1 9 10 0 3 1 14 18 0 3 2 23 28 z 5 Forest Park (18) I I Subtotal 553 556 63 42 105 71 42 113 8 0 8 Franklin (23) 443 Subtotal Fulbright (2) Subtotal 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 538 539 571 575 1210 1405 1410 1440 6115 6120 6122 6171 6188 8 1 4 2 0 1 3 0 0 2 0 4 0 25 51 61 64 40 22 30 40 5 18 29 10 46 33 449 59 62 68 42 22 31 43 5 18 31 10 50 33 474 542 33 26 114 35 31 0 15 24 44 322 4 1 12 1 14 0 3 4 3 42 37 27 126 36 45 0 18 28 47 364 Page 5 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Fulbright (15) UI z o 0^ lU X o Ui I- z UJ S Subtotal o 3 CD ! o o q: z UJ 1714 1810 1811 1812 14 12 0 5 31 137 38 30 40 245 151 50 30 45 276 X Garland (30) 282 Subtotal Geyer Springs (38) ___________________Subtotal Geyer Springs (47) Subtotal Jefferson (3) Subtotal 581 582 584 585 586 587 4401 4405 4410 4415 4420 4429 4430 3405 1220 1230 1231 1240 5 2 5 14 0 0 26 3 9 10 9 12 5 5 53 11 56 40 220 327 45 57 89 55 23 44 313 35 19 22 12 28 36 20 172 54 54 1 1 0 6 8 50 59 94 69 23 44 339 38 28 32 21 40 41 25 225 62 62 12 57 40 226 335 300 502 8 8 Pagesi . 4 f i Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Jefferson (13) lU z o U 111 112 121 122 210 Subtotal it ui Z H o a t z 5 0 0 0 0 1 1 Z ID  u 3 co 19 26 14 47 76 182 19 26 14 47 77 183 O a z tu s Jefferson (19) ( 431 Subtotal 36 36 37 37 1 1 Jefferson (22) t| Subtotal 434 435 0 11 11 18 6 24 18 17 35 King (17) 551 Subtotal 432 433 438 439 4 0 0 0 4 23 41 43 70 177 27 41 43 70 181 King (36) Subtotal McDermott (5) 473 476 477 479 480 485 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 63 49 40 44 26 56 278 63 49 40 46 26 57 281 494 1310 1312 1420 1421 1430 1520 1531 1541 32 3 36 42 118 20 13 29 20 0 2 1 38 3 4 7 52 3 38 43 156 23 17 36 Page 7I f Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Subtotal lU z o tu z  X 293 z UJ S tie o 5 (0 75 O Jz. 368 O O' z lU McDermott (16) Subtotal 552 561 562 4 0 0 4 63 46 53 162 67 46 53 166 Page 8Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Mabelvale (44) LU Z s. 3635 3654 3655 5401 5402 5405 5406 5407 5415 5452 5455 5462 5465 7420 7475 Subtotal DC LU Z H  X 5 4 10 12 7 25 11 14 8 13 19 4 7 16 4 9 163 69 46 9 0 1 10 1 9 6 0 1 0 7 30 33 222 z LU S \u0026lt; I- o 73 56 21 7 26 21 15 17 19 19 5 7 23 34 42 385 o q: z LU___ 474 O \u0026lt; m Mabelvale (48) t Subtotal Meadowcliff (32) Subtotal 7325 7383 7388 7390 533 535 536 537 0 2 1 1 4 0 5 3 5 13 33 14 30 57 134 41 41 41 56 179 33 16 31 58 138 41 46 44 61 192 411 Page 9Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Meadowcliff (39) UJ z O U 2110 2120 4015 4048 Subtotal DC UJ z o tu t X 77 41 19 20 157 60 60 8 9 137 z UJ S \u0026lt; I- O hL 137 101 27 29 294 O z UJ o 3  Mitchell (28) 272 Subtotal 442 443 444 445 446 451 452 453 457 458 459 3 5 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 11 31 25 19 17 9 24 40 26 50 37 39 317 34 30 19 17 9 25 41 26 50 37 40 328 Otter Creek (35) 359 Subtotal 471 472 475 30 48 48 126 30 48 48 126 60 96 96 252 Otter Creek (43) Subtotal 5460 5470 5472 5475 5476 5477 5478 5492 31 2 0 56 45 41 25 10 210 3 0 0 7 12 6 1 5 34 34 2 0 63 57 47 26 15 244 Page 10 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT p ZONE-SCHOOL Pulaski Heights (6) UJ z P Nl 610 620 630 640 641 651 660 710 Subtotal K UJ z o U} I 34 46 10 16 14 73 24 37 254 o \u0026lt; _1 m 1 2 0 2 0 0 78 9 92 35 48 10 18 14 73 102 46 346 z tu S _i o It z UJ___ 420 \u0026lt; O Rightsell (29) 229 Subtotal 448 449 450 454 455 464 1 1 0 0 14 2 18 101 54 55 19 42 45 316 102 55 55 19 56 47 334 Rockefeller (25) 403 Subtotal Romine (27) Subtotal 232 440 456 460 461 462 463 1715 1717 1721 1723 1724 1727 1 4 13 3 2 4 0 27 2 0 3 0 22 7 34 7 17 35 32 42 54 35 222 8 21 48 35 44 58 35 249 323 75 98 49 38 44 86 390 77 98 52 38 66 93 424 I Page 11Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT .1 ZONE-SCHOOL Stephens (26) UJ iZ o N 441 572 573 574 583 Subtotal Terry (8) 1510 1511 1512 1515 1530 1532 1550 1610 1620 3330 Subtotal Terry (24) 436 437 563 Subtotal DC UJ z o in t z 0 01 0 01 38 96 26 98 9 18 44 23 19 47 418 45 48 46 139 o CD 24 56 34 45 48 207 6 33 55 4 19 8 2 35 90 45 48 46 139 \u0026lt; I-o Jz 24 56 35 45 48 208 44 129 31 103 13 37 52 25 22 52 508 90 96 92 278 z UJ S o DC Z UJ 559 1 1I L 0 Page 12 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I  ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Wakefield (40) lU z o It tu I O iu z \u0026lt; m z LU 5 IOt tzu __ 413 _____________Subtotal Washington (14) Subtotal 7201 7210 7220 7230 7235 7240 7245 7250 7276 7277 7279 7280 7281 123 124 125 126 127 220 240 301 474 478 481 482 483 484 16 10 69 12 2 7 13 6 14 551 106 71 15 9 30 51 16 73 50 21 12 21 9 16 394 87 25 15 39 63 18 80 63 27 26 26 14 17 500 687 01100 10 0 001210 0 16 42 80 25 39 17 107 29 7 14 36 85 69 86 30 666 42 81 26 39 17 117 29 7 14 37 87 70 86 30 682 Page 13 fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study fl 3D/I   5f ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Watson (46) Subtotal Western Hills (37) Wilson (10) Wilson (33) Subtotal Subtotal Subtotal UJ z O N 7301 7305 7315 7330 7377 7378 7380 7381 7382 7384 7385 7490 7495 1725 1726 1822 2010 2015 2020 1711 3301 3312 3316 1813 1821 1823 1824 a: UJ I 9 UJ Z hoe 3 co o t-t-z UJ S o O' z UJ___ 427 7 13 22 3 16 49 12 4 12 116 110 1 15 19 23 47 17 122 18 36 40 27 121 16 8 32 25 81 71 9 51 4 60 15 42 27 63 40 27 1 17 427 78 22 73 7 76 19 51 39 67 52 28 2 23 537 317 29 14 92 12 28 18 193 30 29 111 35 75 35 315 345 1 14 10 9 34 19 50 50 36 155 57 59 107 30 253 73 67 139 55 334 Page 14 dd Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI  ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT  ZONE-SCHOOL Woodruff (11) UJ z o N 650 662 670 Subtotal TOTAL o: UJ z H-o uj _j \u0026lt; o z UJ S o O' z UJ___ 243 5 4 51 60 5 29 51 85 10 33 102 145 4592 8965 13557    Z 5 o 3 m I I Page 15 h fl Attendance Zones Junior High SchoolsLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT O' 2 - z UJ S s ZONE-SCHOOL Cloverdale UJ z o N ULI t- 5S o o DC z UI 647 240 301 474 478 480 481 482 483 484 485 3435 3440 3445 3464 3601 3605 3615 3620 3645 3646 3647 3648 3649 3650 3651 5408 7301 7305 7310 7315 7325 7330 7375 7377 7378 7380 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 3 0 5 7 2 1 3 1 1 0 0 6 3 0 4 5 4 0 8 0 1 1 7 0 4 12 4 12 12 16 29 22 16 11 20 5 2 1 10 8 4 6 3 15 17 10 9 4 10 8 21 26 7 7 18 11 3 2 14 3 24 12 4 12 13 16 29 23 16 11 20 9 5 1 15 15 6 7 6 16 18 10 9 10 13 8 25 31 11 7 26 11 4 3 21 3 28 I Page 1Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Subtotal ui z o hl____ 7381 7382 7383 7384 7385 7387 7388 7390 7401 7405 7410 7425 7467 7468 7469 7470 7474 7476 7479 7490 7495 oc lU z I-  _i i5 S z UJ S -I o z z 1 0 0 3 1 0 3 1 15 3 4 3 1 7 0 4 6 1 1 0 1 127 14 17 7 17 21 27 5 17 13 7 20 13 5 14 12 11 10 12 0 0 13 657 15 17 7 20 22 27 8 18 28 10 24 16 6 21 12 15 16 13 1 0 14 784 z u  Page 2Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT i ZONE-SCHOOL Dunbar UJ z o O' UJ z I- o z z UI S o a: z Ly___ 707 126 412 413 420 431 433 434 435 439 445 446 448 449 450 650 670 3201 3250 3251 3253 3255 3401 3405 3406 3410 3415 3420 3425 3430 3625 3640 3652 4401 4405 4410 4415 0 0 1 5 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 19 0 11 2 1 0 2 5 5 3 1 3 0 2 7 0 1 1 0 8 1 18 2 0 3 15 13 5 4 25 7 9 28 26 28 1 13 4 13 12 12 0 18 33 34 2 11 5 9 2 6 11 3 11 13 4 7 18 2 1 8 15 13 6 9 25 7 9 28 26 28 5 32 \"4 24 14 13 0 20 38 39 5 12 8 9 4 13 11 4 12 13 12 8 o 3  o Page 3Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT I ZONE-SCHOOL Subtotal UJ z o JSl____ 4420 4429 4430 7201 7210 7220 7230 7235 7240 7245 7250 7276 7277 7279 7280 7281 or UJ z t- o UJ t X \u0026lt; I- o I- z UJ s J o z z UJ 1 5 2 6 0 2 4 1 2 3 7 2 10 3 0 0 136 8 17 5 34 8 2 14 14 11 13 15 7 8 12 0 6 581 9 22 7 40 8 4 18 15 13 16 22 9 18 15 0 6 717 o 3 m Page 4Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT -1 ZONE-SCHOOL Forest Heights UJ z o U 511 512 513 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 538 554 561 562 571 572 573 574 575 620 1010 1020 1110 1111 1120 1121 1310 1311 1321 1331 1405 ce. UI z I- o 12 I- I 1 0 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 20 2 6 12 13 4 4 11 15 9 15 8 5 3 19 29 21 32 6 11 14 10 2 7 17 16 40 27 28 25 19 16 13 2 1 4 0 11 0 0 11 2 0 5 5 I- z LU S -I i* O z. 6 3 22 30 21 33 6 11 14 10 2 7 19 16 40 28 31 25 19 16 13 22 3 10 12 24 4 4 22 17 9 20 13 o z jy___ 780 u 3 m Page 5Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Subtotal lU z o Nl____ 1410 1450 1451 1430 1440 1910 O' tu z t- o is 42 22 15 32 9 1 252 I- z lU S y: u \u0026lt; -1 EQ i* o h- O O' z 14 5 1 16 1 14 452 56 27 16 48 10 15 704 z Page 6Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Henderson UJ z o n Ct UJ z I- o in t X -1 o H Z UJ S o Ct z tu___ 915 432 436 437 438 441 442 443 444 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 464 563 1210 1510 1511 1512 1515 1520 1530 1531 1532 1541 1550 1610 1620 1630 1712 1713 1714 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 1 0 0 12 12 23 6 29 7 1 4 5 7 20 5 6 16 3 3 1 8 27 23 13 12 8 10 3 17 13 8 15 13 17 22 18 20 16 24 1 4 6 8 4 2 4 2 4 3 2 1 0 7 23 8 48 8 27 23 13 12 8 10 3 17 13 8 15 18 22 22 18 21 16 24 13 16 29 14 33 9 5 6 9 10 22 6 6 23 26 11 49 u m Page 7Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Subtotal UJ z o ___ 1715 1716 1717 1721 1723 1724 1727 1810 1811 1812 3330 6110 6115 6120 6122 6125 6171 6188 6610 Q UJ X o X !5 o z UJ s u o X z 2 3 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 6 4 13 0 11 12 5 7 8 0 247 38 16 33 36 19 24 34 13 13 30 3 1 0 4 3 0 0 4 0 685 40 19 34 36 20 26 35 13 13 36 7 14 0 15 15 5 7 12 0 932 u m Page 8Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Mablevale lU z o Jti 471 472 473 475 476 477 479 540 582 583 584 585 586 587 591 592 593 3635 3654 3655 5401 5402 5405 5406 5407 5415 5425 5455 5460 5462 5465 5470 5472 5475 5476 5477 a^ tu X I- o X o \u0026lt; _l m -J O hL z tu s _1 o X z tu___ 585 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 2 5 3 8 4 4 4 3 0 14 1 3 0 0 9 14 23 10 12 26 26 20 6 16 1 30 20 31 15 8 23 22 0 1 19 23 5 0 2 1 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 3 6 10 12 27 26 20 6 17 4 30 20 31 22 8 23 22 0 1 23 28 7 5 5 9 4 8 5 3 0 14 1 6 0 0 10 17 29 Page 9I Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Subtotal lU z o N 5478 5492 7415 7420 7471 7475 7480 QC UI X o is t X 2 4 6 4 3 3 7 3 148 1 0 28 13 16 18 4 415 5 6 32 16 19 25 7 563 I- z UJ S 21 O X z o 3 m  Page 101B r. 1 I I. I I Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Pulaski Heights ui z o 111 112 121 122 123 124 125 127 210 220 232 440 460 461 462 463 552 553 556 610 620 630 640 641 651 660 662 710 811 821 910 1220 1230 1231 1240 Subtotal a: UJ z  i U 2 m JS o I-z UJ s-J o oc z UJ 771 0 0 00 00 00 31 05 01 0012 0 14 19 752 23 17 5 15 19 15 28 5 27 22 78 314 __ 6 12 89 20 29 10 11 27 59 2 11 10 21 17 12 33 31 25 12 0 200 40 10 2 0030111 416 __ 6 12 8 __ 9 20 29 10 11 30 60 2 16 10 22 17 12 34 33 25 15 21 77 2 23 57 15 17 19 15 31 5 28 23 79 730 Page 11 i Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Southwest lU z o IU X o a I- I- z UJ S O O' z lU 610 521 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 539 581 1711 1722 1725 1726 1728 1813 1821 1822 1823 1824 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 2010 2015 2020 2110 2120 2301 3312 3316 4001 4010 4015 4 4 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 8 7 1 5 0 7 7 8 15 6 22 12 9 2 3 10 12 10 27 15 11 15 10 4 9 3 35 19 18 15 3 15 27 33 4 20 4 7 13 14 15 25 22 25 35 15 27 7 8 33 1 8 13 9 14 12 5 2 4 1 47 1 39 23 19 15 6 15 30 33 4 21 12 14 14 19 15 32 29 33 50 21 49 19 17 35 4 18 25 19 41 27 16 17 14 5 56 4  O m \u0026lt; O Page 12u Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT I ZONE-SCHOOL lU z s____ 4017 4020 4025 4046 4048 4049 4052 4053 5457 UJ z - o t3 H I z UJ S mV Subtotal 0 3 1 3 12 4 3 1 0 281 o \u0026lt; _l  \u0026lt; O I- o Q Z lU TOTAL 1505 0 0 19 0 2 14 0 0 0 591 0 3 20 3 14 18 3 1 0 872 3797 5302 L 3^ Page 13Li Attendance Zones Senior High SchoolsLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT a ZONE-SCHOOL Central tu z o JI 110 112 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 210 220 411 412 413 420 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 448 451 452 453 457 O' UJ z I- o iD t z -J O z UJ S o z z UJ 1637 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 6 7 16 18 13 7 17 6 13 35 0 0 0 4 13 5 4 4 0 16 13 14 23 5 7 9 5 7 3 6 17 4 7 10 13 7 6 7 16 18 14 7 17 6 14 36 0 0 0 7 14 6 4 4 4 16 13 14 23 5 7 9 6 1 3 6 17 4 1 10 13 o 3 m Page 1Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL UJ z o U Q UJ Z l- o Qj 458 459 521 531 532 534 535 552 563 610 620 630 640 641 650 651 660 662 670 710 811 821 910 1210 1220 1230 1231 1240 3640 1510 1511 1512 1515 1520 1530 1531 1532 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 8 8 5 2 2 7 15 11 2 14 15 16 21 21 10 10 22 18 44 0 14 27 6 29 7 1 6 5 17 16 18 16 17 8 8 22 19 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 21 10 14 2 0 1 2 5 0 1 0 1 11 4 6 3 2 1 3 1 4 i5 o hi z UJ S _i -J o z z UJ 17 16 19 17 18 9 9 24 20 8 9 5 3 2 7 15 32 12 28 17 16 22 23 15 10 23 18 45 11 18 33 9 31 8 4 7 9 z U 3 a Page 2Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL IU z o ___ 1541 1550 1610 1620 1630 1711 1715 1717 1721 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1813 1821 1822 1823 1824 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 2010 2015 2020 3201 3250 3251 3253 3255 3301 3312 3316 oe IU z I- o a 4 16 4 1 13 3 2 2 1 1 2 0 0 1 5 4 2 12 3 6 14 5 2 3 3 9 4 1 7 4 3 0 18 10 7 2 3 0 0 2 2 29 40 44 14 20 9 12 32 23 15 36 28 17 21 8 3 22 1 5 8 12 4 6 4 15 0 15 3 0 !5 o I- z lU S d oe z UJ 6 19 4 1 15 5 31 42 45 15 22 9 12 33 28 19 38 40 20 27 22 8 24 4 8 17 16 5 13 8 18 0 33 13 7 I u m Page 3Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Subtotal tu z o N____ 3330 6110 6125 O' tu z 1- o a 9 25 2 575 4 2 0 1030 _t J5 o - z tu S _i -I o x z tu 13 27 2 1605 X O 5 m r r Page 4Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT rj ZONE-SCHOOL Hall ui z o U 511 512 513 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 538 553 554 556 591 562 571 572 573 574 575 578 920 1010 1020 1110 1111 1120 1121 1310 1311 1312 1321 1331 UI z H o in JS o Jtz I- z UI S O Q Z JU__ 1031 2 0 3 4 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 15 5 10 19 17 5 5 3 27 0 8 20 1 5 23 17 35 27 1 9 4 8 0 0 21 20 18 17 18 17 21 15 14 11 8 0 0 1 4 0 6 0 0 5 1 0 0 1 3 5 26 21 35 30 1 9 4 8 0 0 21 20 18 19 20 17 21 15 14 11 9 1 15 6 14 19 23 5 5 8 28 0 8 21 z u Page 5IT Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT I ZONE-SCHOOL Subtotal UI z o hl____ 1332 1405 1410 1420 1421 1430 1440 1712 1713 1714 1716 1810 1811 1812 1910 6115 6120 6122 6171 6188 UI z I- o a t z z lU S 9 23 57 16 25 37 14 3 3 3 3 0 0 5 0 18 0 9 7 20 404 1 3 10 2 0 23 2 27 6 46 7 16 21 25 10 3 0 1 1 3 535 \u0026lt; I-  o Of z m 10 26 67 18 25 60 16 30 9 49 10 16 21 30 10 21 0 10 8 23 939 o 3 m Page 6Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI p ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Fair UJ z o U 471 472 473 475 476 477 479 533 536 537 539 540 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 591 592 593 1722 1728 2110 2120 3630 3656 3654 3655 4001 4010 4015 4017 4020 4025 UJ X o a t z 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 6 1 25 10 0 3 2 2 5 8 0 0 6 0 11 23 16 19 23 12 11 19 17 20 6 4 13 16 20 37 15 8 19 26 1 0 17 24 19 6 0 19 13 4 0 46 1 0 1 21 o hl 11 23 17 19 23 12 11 19 17 23 6 6 14 16 20 39 16 8 19 28 1 0 23 25 44 16 0 22 15 6 5 54 1 0 7 21 I- z UJ S o z z JU__ 917 1. o 3 m t ! I t I Page 7Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL Subtotal IU z o 1____ 4046 4048 4049 4052 4053 5401 5402 5405 5406 5407 5415 5452 5455 5460 5462 5465 5467 5470 5472 5475 5476 5477 5478 5492 7415 7420 7471 7475 7480 0* tu X t-  X JS o z IU s O X z IU 5 13 2 2 0 2 7 11 7 5 5 6 0 8 3 1 1 1 0 19 18 31 8 4 7 0 2 6 3 257 1 0 7 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 5 4 0 0 10 9 12 10 4 579 6 13 9 2 0 2 7 13 7 7 7 6 0 9 3 4 1 1 0 19 23 35 8 4 17 9 14 16 7 836 O m Page 8Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL McClellan UJ z o UJ I 1- O iD z UJ S O 0^ z UJ___ 897 240 301 449 450 454 455 456 460 461 462 463 464 474 478 480 481 482 483 484 485 3401 3405 3406 3410 3415 3420 3425 3430 3435 3440 3445 3464 3601 3605 3615 3620 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 3 3 0 1 2 0 5 2 4 0 1 1 4 2 1 4 7 10 13 5 11 5 10 15 14 10 13 8 10 11 16 13 20 5 13 10 24 20 1 12 4 6 2 5 2 0 6 8 4 8 2 4 7 10 13 5 16 8 11 17 16 10 13 8 10 11 16 14 20 5 13 14 27 23 1 13 6 6 7 7 6 0 7 9 8 10 3 X 5 o \u0026lt; m O h: Page 9Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL ui z o N 3625 3645 3646 3647 3648 3649 3650 3651 3652 4401 4405 4410 4415 4420 4429 4430 5408 7201 7210 7220 7230 7235 7240 7245 7250 7276 7277 7279 7280 7281 7301 7305 7310 7315 7325 7330 7375 O' lU z I-  z z UJ S 4 0 1 4 3 2 2 1 2 0 4 6 3 0 0 3 1 8 3 0 2 0 4 1 6 0 2 3 2 0 3 3 2 12 1 6 2 6 13 7 5 8 5 16 4 1 13 11 3 4 3 7 6 11 18 12 4 13 10 7 12 10 4 8 6 5 1 26 1 5 14 7 2 1 10 13 8 9 11 7 18 5 3 13 15 g 7 3 7 9 12 26 15 4 15 10 11 13 16 4 10 9 7 1 29 4 1 26 8 8 3 u m I o z z Page 10Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Fl ZONE-SCHOOL Subtotal TOTAL tu z o ____ 7377 7378 7380 7381 7382 7383 8384 8385 8387 8388 7390 7401 7405 7410 7425 7467 7468 7469 7470 7474 7476 7479 7490 7495 oc tu X H o X 3 0 5 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 5 6 4 2 7 1 6 0 7 3 2 1 2 10 211 14 6 18 9 10 9 23 18 22 14 11 12 16 18 6 6 13 7 7 4 9 0 1 13 882 i5 o hi z tu S J O flC z m 1447 3026 17 6 23 9 10 10 24 19 23 14 16 18 20 20 13 7 19 7 14 7 11 1 3 23 1093 4473 u m Page 11Projected Attendance Zones Option TLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES - OPTION \"T\" LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT ZONE-SCHOOL BADGETT (1) (*) Rockefeller - 27 (TRock-27/Wash-32 (*) Washington - 32 Subtotal Adjustments Table AZ-3 N IU O \u0026lt; o in a + z \u0026lt; o z IU Of lu z I-  1- z s w Z UJ Z o 3 co  o z JiL. 177 nrr 112 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 210 220 240 301 3201 3250 3251 3253 3255 3640 0\" 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 35 17 4 0 0 63 26 14 47 42 80 25 39 17 38 53 14 7 4 32 21 24 0 23 525 nT 26 14 47 42 81 26 39 17 38 58 14 7 4 67 38 28 0 23 588 Assigned to Booker Magnet Assigned to Carver Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total I BALE (2) 1810 1811 1812 1813 1821 1823 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 Subtotal Adjustments Assigned to Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total {) Indicates split attendance blocks. 14 38 5 6 I 42 115 39 329 I 56 153 44 335 I 309 12 0 5 16 8 32 34 21 24 14 3 169 11 158 38 30 40 57 59 107 48 12 12 65 4 472 38 434 50 30 45 73 67 139 82 33 36 79 7 641 49 592 Table AZ-3 Page 1Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES - OPTION \"T\" LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Table AZ-3 ZONE-SCHOOL BASELINE (3) N lU U  o IO U + Z \u0026lt; Q Z tu t A 3401 3405 3406 3410 3415 3435 3440 3445 3464 7325 7330 7375 7383 7384 7385 7387 7388 7390 Subtotal Adjustments Assigned to Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total I i BRADY (5) (*) Terry - 30 1010 1020 1110 1111 1120 1121 1310 1311 1312 1321 1331 1332 1541 1910 Subtotal Adjustments Assigned to Williams Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total () Indicates split attendance blocks. o\u0026gt; a\u0026gt; O' tu z I- o a t z O 3 m -I s z UJ S o a z 111 326 14 8 5 21 2 10 5 0 29 0 3 2 2 12 1 4 1 1 120 12 108 I 7 33 43 42 4 11 32 28 3 12 38 9 14 0 276 47 17 212 55 54 90 7 51 7 7 1 29 33 4 23 14 40 27 96 30 57 625 33 592 I 3 10 0 29 2 0 20 1 0 0 7 0 3 16 91 76 11 4 69 62 95 28 53 17 12 1 58 33 7 25 16 52 26 100 31 58 745 45 700 I 408 10 43 43 71 6 11 52 29 3 12 45 9 17 16 367 123 28 216 Table AZ-3 Page 2Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES - OPTION \"T\" LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1 Table AZ-3 ZONE-SCHOOL CHICOT (7) Adjustments Subtotal N UI O r\u0026gt; o in Q + Z \u0026lt; o z UJ 3635 3654 3655 5401 5402 5405 5406 5407 5415 5452 5455 5460 5462 5465 7401 7415 7420 7425 7471 7474 7475 7476 7479 7480 Assigned to Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total O) z UI z H s t z z lU S i* o i=. o z z UJ 503 4 10 12 7 25 11 14 8 13 19 4 31 7 16 33 14 4 5 2 3 9 6 1 2 260 17 343 69 46 9 0 1 10 1 9 6 0 1 3 0 7 25 39 30 20 13 15 33 13 0 16 366 73 56 21 7 26 21 15 17 19 19 5 34 7 23 58 53 34 25 15 18 42 19 1 18 626 37 32? 54 371 u 3 m ( ) Indicates split attendance blocks. Table AZ-3 Page 3r Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES - OPTION \"T\" LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Table AZ-3 ZONE-SCHOOL CLOVERDALE (8) N UI U  o o O + z \u0026lt; Q Z UI t Of UI z I- o a t z A O\u0026gt; I- z UI s Adjustments Subtotal 3420 3425 3430 3601 3605 3615 3620 3625 3630 3645 3646 3647 3648 3649 3650 3651 3652 5 4 13 10 12 9 18 14 2 4 2 4 8 9 3 2 5 T5T o 3  o z UJ 392 Assigned to Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total 11 TTT DODD (9) () Romine - 28 1722 1725 1726 1728 4001 4010 4025 4046 4052 4053 Subtotal 16 1 15 5 21 12 11 21 11 1 114 Adjustments Assigned to Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total 8 106 (*) Indicates split attendance blocks. 17 19 4 31 16 20 5 12 0 46 17 32 22 17 64 28 8 w 33 32F 43 29 14 31 0 43 29 1 1 0 191 37 1S4 22 23 17 41 28 29 23 26 2 50 19 36 30 26 67 30 13 ISS 44 w 298 59 30 29 36 21 55 40 22 12 1 305 45 260 Table AZ-3 Page 4Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES - OPTION \"T\" LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Table AZ-3 ZONE-SCHOOL FOREST PARK (11) (*) Pulaski Heights - 2 (*) McDermott - 2C Subtotal Adjustments N UJ U \u0026gt; O in U + z \u0026lt; Q Z UJ t 710 811 821 910 1240 O' UJ X  - X 18 40 59 75 55 247 24 O 3 m 4 0 1 5 2 12 J* O 22 40 60 80 57 259 o\u0026gt; O) z UJ s -I o X z UJ 432 f^ftAKikLlKi \u0026lt;12) Assigned to Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total 8 239 13 246 443 5 7 () 39/40 () 39/40 () 39/40 () 39/40 Subtotal 511 512 513 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 538 554 561 571 575 13 1 5 9 6 1 4 2 0 1 3 0 0 2 5 0 3 0 55 9 11 76 29 39 31 64 40 22 30 40 5 18 29 59 46 35 17 600 22 12 81 38 45 32 68 42 22 31 43 5 18 31 64 46 38 17 655 Adjustments Assigned to Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total 7 48 39 561 46 609 (*) Indicates split attendance blocks. Table AZ-3 Page 5Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONES - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS SUMMARY OF BLOCK ZONES - OPTION T\" LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Table AZ-3 ZONE-SCHOOL FULBRIGHT (13) N UJ U o IO U + z \u0026lt; a z UJ A 1210 1405 1410 1440 6110 6115 6120 6122 6125 6171 6188 6610 Subtotal Adjustments Assigned to Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total a: UJ z 1- I i 33 26 114 35 66 31 0 15 9 24 44 1 398 16 382 at at J- Z UJ S O q: z JU_ 542 4 1 12 1 7 14 0 3 1 4 3 0 50 11 39 37 27 126 36 73 45 0 18 10 28 47 1 448 27 421 O  O 6VfeR spriN6$(15) 300 Subtotal Adjustments 4401 4405 4410 4415 4420 4429 4430 7201 7210 7220 7230 7235 7240 7245 7250 7276 7277 7279 7280 7281 3 9 10 9 12 5 5 16 10 6 9 12 2 7 13 6 14 5 5 1 159 35 19 22 12 28 36 20 71 15 9 30 51 16 73 50 21 12 21 9 16 566 38 28 32 21 40 41 25 87 25 15 39 63 18 80 63 27 26 26 14 17 725 Assigned to Magnet Projected Enrollment Decrease Projected Net Total 11 148 47 519 58 667 (*) Indicates split attendance blocks. Table AZ-3 Page 6Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Stu\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_762","title":"Report: ''Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study Executive Survey,'' 3D/International, Volume I","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":["1995-08-30"],"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","School facilities","Education--Finance","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study Executive Survey,'' 3D/International, Volume I"],"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/762"],"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\nLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study Executive Summary Introduction, Recommendations, Cost Factors Demographic Study Summary Tabulations Educational Facility Study, Attendance Zone Options Facility Perceptions Summaries and Public August 30,1995 Volume No 1 Prepared By: 3D/ International Facilities Master Planning, Program Management, Engineering, Strategic Planning, Architecture \u0026amp; Interior Architecture Educational Planning Consultants Educational Consultants The Grier Partnership DemographersCOPY 18 OF 30 I B II II II P P D  H B Ba II RECESV^ //J i' BOARD OF DIRECTORS A SEP 4 7 1995 41? ' S'/? oo. c oo LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of Desegregation Monitoring A 1994/1995 A A Linda Pondexter President Fuller Junior High P.O. Box 8601 Little Rock, Arkansas 72216 (501)490-1503 ii i| 39) Oo 3 3 3 o 3 W A Patricia Gee Vice President 8409 Dowan Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 (501) 562-0571 oo aft) 3I A A Judy Magness Secretary 708 Hall Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 (501) 666-0923 I I 3 A Stephanie Johnson 8701 130, Apartment 206 Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 (501)340-6681 I I A Dr. Katherine Mitchell Shorter College 604 Locust Street North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 (501)374-6305 ) laio* A T. Kevin OMalley Arkansas Board of Review Tower Building - Suite 700 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 324-9038 O  II\nA 1 John A. Riggs J. A. Riggs Tractor Company P.O. Box 8601 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 (501) 570-3528 A ?I Superintendent of Schools Dr. Henry P. Williams Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)324-2000 I 1 a 11 a FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY TEAM II oo. c oo LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT II 1995 a 33 o o 3 o3 3 S' o3 a ti 3D/lnternational Facilities Master Planning, Program Management, Engineering, Strategic Planning, Architecture \u0026amp; Interior Architecture 112 East Pecan Suite 2350 San Antonio, Texas 78205 (210) 227-2500 oo n ao 3 n II Educational Planning Consultants Educational Consultants TASA Building 406 East 11th Street Austin, Texas 78701-2617 (512) 477-6361 y aa The Grier Partnership Demographers 6532 East Halbert Road Bethesda, Maryland 20817 (301)229-4454 ' m - a /.I c s*o  0 1n Cromwell Architects Engineers Facility Sunzey Manager 101 South Spring Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)372-2900 II a Matrix IV Architects, Incorporated Facility Survey Manager 100 South Main Street Suite 408 Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 (501) 376-7326 n!?  James Mitchell Architects Facility Survey Manager 5117 Sherwood Road Little Rock, Arkansas 72225-1364 (501)661-9322 ?I A FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY RESOURCE TEAM 3 O Q. C O o 1994/1995 tai Little Rock School District  Dr. Russell Mayo Associate Superintendent Doug Eaton Director of Facilities 3D s o 3 o3 a3 (U O3 W / Charles Neal Director of Procurement a Leon Modeste Special Assistant to the Superintendent o o 21 os 3 a Mark Millholen Comptroller a Suellen Vann Public Information c 4 ifl Lucy Lyon Media 5 J Dennis Glasgow PTA Representative a Marie A. McNeal Learning Resource Center d iDr. Patty Kohler Exceptional Children m a o 39 d Susan Chapman Exceptional Children d Gene Parker, Jr. English Community Resources d Chris Heller Attorney for the District Debbie Glasgow President PTA Council Tim Polk Neighborhoods and Planning Mark McBryde Senior Vice President iNf 1: ? I Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I 3 a Table of Contents Executive Summary 8 CL I O a H Facilities Master Plan Study Little Rock School District 30 O o o 3 3 Q 3 3* o 3 W a a Tabs Introduction Introduction Pages 1-5 a -3 1 a Recommendations Basis Conditions of Existing Buildings Financial Condition of District Demographics Survey Findings School Attendance Zones Closures of Facilities Initiatives Page 1 Page 1 Page 2 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 a a a a a Cost Factors General Cost Estimates By District Cost Priorities Inflation Options Funding Tables: Cost Summaries by Groups and Priorities Unit Cost of Renovation Cost Options Option M Option T Option C Analysis of Discontinued Use Demographics Executive Summary Page 1 Page 1 Page 1 Page 2 Page 2 Page 2 ' if ri I ' o o sa n fi) a o 5 4 e 4 m a c s 0 3 9 Educational Study Education and Facility Evaluations Capacity Utilization Page 1 CST-1, Pages 1-3 CST-2, Pages 1-2 CST-3, Pages 1-5 CST-4, Pages 1-4 CST-5, Pages 1-3 CST-6, Pages 1-3 CST-7, Page 1 Pages 1-4 Pages 1-2 Pages 2-3 Page 3 sit \u0026lt; i? Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I  a   School Size School Assignment Impact of Middle School Organization Tables: Projections Value Scores Closures The Middle School- Planning For Young Adolescents Tables: Ranking Evaluation Capacity Utilization Ratios Distribution of M to M Building and Site Areas Pages 4-6 Page 6 Page 6 Tables 1-4, Pages 7-10 Tables 5-6, Page 11-12 Table 7, Page 12 Pages 1-5 Table ES-1, Pages 1-2 Table ES-2, Pages 1-2 Table ES-3. Pages 1-2 Table ES-4, Pages 1-2 Table ES-5, Page 1 Table ES-6, Pages 1-2 a Attendance Zones General Table AZ-1 Maps: Pages 1-2 Pages 1-9 a a a Option M, Elementary Schools Option M, Exhibit Option M, Junior High Schools Option M, Senior High School Option T, Elementary Schools Option C, Elementary Schools Option C, Junior High Schools A A A A Facility Summaries Badgett Elementary Bale Elementary Baseline Elementary Booker Arts Magnet Elementary Brady Elementary Carver Magnet Elementary Cloverdale Elementary David 0. Dodd Elementary Fair Park Elementary Forest Park Elementary Franklin Incentive Elementary Fulbright Elementary Garland Incentive Elementary Geyer Springs Elementary Gibbs International Studies Magnet Elementary Ish Incentive Elementary Jefferson Elementary M.L. King Magnet Elementary Mablevale Elementary McDermott Elementary Page 01 Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 2 3 8 Q. C O o a 0 O o 3 3 o 3 a. 0 5 3 (0 o o a 0 a q S' m a I 1111 S' ,, I 3 0 i\nILittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I If a If a fl fl dddd Meadowcliff Elementary Mitchell Incentive Elementary Otter Creek Elementary Pulaski Heights Elementary Rightsell Incentive Elementary Rockefeller Incentive Elementary Romine Interdistrict Elementary Terry Elementary Wakefield Elementary Washington Magnet Elementary Watson Elementary Western Hills Elementary Williams Magnet Elementary Wilson Elementary Woodruff Elementary Cloverdale Jr. High Dunbar Jr. High Forest Heights Jr. High Henderson Junior High Mablevale Jr. High Mann Magnet Jr. High Pulaski Heights Jr. High Southwest Junior High Alternative Learning Center Metropolitan Vocational Technical Center Central High School J. A. Fair High School Hall High School McClellan High School Parkview School Administration Building Administration Building Annex Cashion Building Plant Services Purchasing Safety and Security Transportation Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 38 Page 40 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 46 Page 48 Page 50 Page 52 Page 56 Page 58 Page 60 Page 62 Page 65 Page 67 Page 69 Page 71 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 O a c o 6 33 (0 o o 3 3 Q 3 Q. O 3 M oo a ttn oS S F  i m ' a 0 o T, 03 2r Il N d Public Perception Survey Strategy Results Table: Page 1 Page 2 fl Survey Graph Exhibits I Page 3 i 1 Introduction Recommendations Cost Factors '*~?9rnhtc Study Educational g^aa\u0026amp;ieoAMfc SI Zones 1^9 BBI  Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI INTRODUCTION:   In February 1995, the Little Rock School District (LRSD) engaged the services of 3D/lntemational to perform a facilities assessment of approximately 50 school buildings including high schools, jr. high schools, and elementary schools.  The scope of services was later expanded to include a facilities survey of the Districts administrative buildings. (30) oo 3 A3 3 tt  w )  To accomplish the survey goals, 3D/lntemational engaged the services of five team members: K Eunice Grier of The Grier Partnership provided demographic studies and information. oo a tt o\u0026amp; 3  Ben Graves of Educational Planning Consultants contributed the educational facility ratings along with studies and information on school sizes and the middle school concept. ? B To assist in gathering survey information on individual school sites, three local architectural firms joined the 3D/I team: Cromwell Architects Engineers Matrix IV Architects, Inc. James Mitchell, Architect 9 ^3 B Assessment Goals: Goals of the Project were: am If: C s o I  Survey Existing District Facilities I II n On-site facilities surveys were conducted for all the school sites and the administrative buildings as listed in the RFP and as later added to the project scope. Original survey sheets, with annotations, reflect the general conditions encountered and list deficiencies, including life safety and code compliance issues. These surveys are included in a series of volumes identified by school or administrative building. Summaries of this information are included in this volume. * i: I The survey reports established a priority listing relating to time of implementation for the improvement of all deficiencies including HVAC, grounds, mechanical/electrical, and athletic facilities. An evaluation of each building was conducted and a scoring system established to provide ranking of facilities based on the condition of the facility and its site. This ranking is presented along with a separate evaluation result performed by the educational consultant, Ben Graves. Each evaluation and ranking has been based on a 1000 point scoring system. pI Page 1 u I Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I H  Determine Educational Capacity n Each building has been analyzed and evaluated not only the building, but also the to determine the capacity of spaces within the building based on their who^'iTb^ number of studen'ts I n Pf*''  summary of current adjusted operating capacity detailed information is provided under each school tab.  Survey Demographic Data 33 s O 3 3 ( 3 Q\u0026gt; fl  i (A I \u0026lt; 11 The demographic study focused on trends since 1987 to the current oeriod with projections include populatioS k? V changes in school attendance zones and birth rates In addition, the economic factors, growth of the Pblaski CounVv construction trends, and national economic trends werp economic trends were considered. area, o o a Tl fil I 3 If ^ \"^ster plan study was provided as a basis for the development of recommendations ......... and additions. zone options. of building improvements new construction, and school consolidations and attendance J si a  Recommend Overall Capital Improvements a This report includes a projected cost of El th/fpriNtip a projected cost of capital improvement needs based on the facilities survey, school capacities, and demographic analysis. Included is a recommendation structured for implementation includes estimated costs to bring the schools with the educational mission of the District. over a period of 10 years. This to a level of quality consistent m I a i\nS d I Consistent with the scope of this include estimates provided by the District'for hazardous material abatement, and ADA compliance. These cost estimaVpQ were previously provided to the District by others. project,^ projected costs used in this report 'oof replacements, asbestos and  Provide an Executive Summary and Recommendation N If i: I Options and recommendations relate to meet the changing needs of the city and have Desegregation rio,,. ,c ,epon aiso includes scS elementary, middle or junior highs, and high general courses of action for LRSD to considered the impact of the Plan. The report also includes I I Recommendations are included for: new facilities, renovation and/or expansion of existing facilities, school consolidations student population General recommendations are also included for existinq Dislnct (ac,l,l,es with regard to their capabilities of providing for smairTroup and redistribution of I Page 2 Ia B Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI B instruction, large group requirements, special educational services, physical education, general administrative requirements, and community needs. BB The analyses have considered: current educational programs offered by the District, its desegregation initiatives, the directions in which the school system is moving, the use of alternative learning settings, the development of new educational programs, desired staffing ratios, new technology, and federally-funded programs as these issues impact upon utilization of building space within the District. fl Assessment Process: \u0026lt;393 OO 33 (9 3 fi) O 3 M I The approach to assessing Little Rock schools has been in three phases: fl  Phase 1 - Organization and Planning fl 1J Following the award of contract in February, 3D/I initiated a fact-finding meeting with representatives of the Little Rock School District to ascertain the parameters of the overall master plan study. During this meeting an approach was selected, contacts were established, and the general logistics of the survey were developed utilizing both 3D/I and LRSD resources. oo % w s o5 I 4 Cl fl At this meeting, plans for the charrette were established and attendees were selected to represent all aspects of the District's education program: population, census, and objectives. II 1 fl It was also determined that community involvement would be through the auspices of PTA councils, community town meetings, and public input surveys. Resources were established to interface with these activities. I' m rt Program Definition Charrette On March 10 the one-day Program Definition Charrette was held in the Administrative Board Room at District offices with the following attendance. fl fl fl 3D/I Core Team: Gene Rutherford, Program Manager Glenna Peterson. Project Resource Barbara Trammell, Project Administrator and Communications Ben Graves, Educational Consultant Eunice Grier, Demographer Joe Johnson, Survey Coordinator and Planner Bill Woodsmall, Mechanical Engineer Ron Ross, Survey Team Leader N *  i! fl LRSD Administrative Representatives: Dr. Russel Mayo, Associate Superintendent Doug Eaton, Director of Facilities Charles Neal, Director of Procurement Leon Modeste, Special Assistant to the Superintendent I a I I i I Page 3 I I p I II n Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I a Mark Millhollen, Comptroller Suellen Vann, Public Information Chris Heller, Attorney for the District II I II LRSD Educational Program Representatives: Lucy Lyon, Media Dennis Glasgow, PTA Representative Marie A McNeal, Learning Resource Center Dr. Patty Kohler, Exceptional Children Susan Chapman, Exceptional Children Gene Parker, Jr., English 3) S O 3 3 \u0026lt;0 3 Q. 0) o 3 W M n II a City of Little Rock Tim Polk, Neighborhoods and Planning The charrette included discussion to identify programs, build constructive communication, determine methods and procedures, establish logistics, and anticipate problems and solutions. This all-day meeting provided the initial opportunity for client-consultant team building. The agenda included a thorough description of the process being implemented and provided a forum for dialogue among staff and core team members. In addition, presentations and discussions were held on: the City of Little Rocks long-range plan and desegregation issues\nconstruction trends\nand legal ramifications/expectancies of LRSDs court order. It also included assignment of LRSD resources for the core team, established points of contact, and definition of communication goals. [ EM EM The charrette provided several hours of direct interface among core team members and LRSD personnel to better understand conditions in Little Rock as well as available resource centers of information pertinent to the study. Milestone dates were confirmed and the general housekeeping issues to effect an orderly start of the survey was accomplished. I I I IM  Phase 2 - Inspections and Surveys: EM The core team met prior to the charrette to develop a definitive understanding of each participant's role. Following the meeting a general critique of the d charrette process was held, dates were established for team training and the model survey exercise, and participants set goals and deadlines for each phase of their responsibilities. d Team Preparation: Model Survey Exercise Following the charrette, the survey teams were formed and on March 20, a presurvey workshop that included LRSD staff was held. The session, led by 3D/I project resource, Glenna Peterson, was held to familiarize team members with forms and procedures, and to provide general information regarding the survey process. Page 4 o o a n tt S o 5 I t II J m a 3 fit si ( I: h 1fl fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl Following the workshop, the two teams conducted a complete walk-through and facilities survey of the Bale Elementary School. This effort served as a laboratory project and was critiqued following its completion to allow for any fine-tuning of the forms or process before proceeding to other school locations. fl fl Facility Site Survey During the period from March 20 through May 4, the two survey teams completed the facilities survey at all school locations. The resulting forms are included in this report as a part of each school summary. 33 A O O 3 3i fl fl Educational Facility Survey During the same time period (March 20 through May 2), core team member, Ben Graves, (EPC) conducted similar educational evaluations of each school building. This survey establishes the condition of the space, its present use, and other pertinent data required to render an opinion of adequacy, capacity, and utilization. Q. a\u0026gt;o 3 W  4 fl The facility survey instrument used on this project has been tested for its effectiveness by use in a significant number of projects throughout the United States. Its scoring is based on a 1000 point system to generally bracket the facilities into four groups. I fl Scores from the educational survey provide three areas of comparison\n1) within an individual school, each feature can be compared with established norms or minimal standards\n2) for the entire district, schools have been sorted according to characteristic features, and 3) a graphic profile is included for each facility as a summary reference. I fl fl Capacity and Utilization: Analysis of Facilities During the educational facility survey process, information was gathered to provide the following evaluation criteria\n1. Educational adequacy of facility. ,'l fl 2. Current use of space. 3. Current operational capacity. fl 4. Current utilization fl The work described above has been completed and is included under the appropriate school tab. Demoqraphic Survey 3D/I team member, Eunice Grier of The Grier Partnership, has completed the demographic survey of the LRSD area and her analysis is provided with this report. fl The study considers the impact of recreation\nzoning\ncity planning: highway construction\neconomic projections, and the effect of residential, commercial, and industrial developments on public school facilities. h i\nh I Page 5 oo a ! ttn   I Iih J1 ma I I o. I 3  Mi I d d Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I d Since the basis of the demographic study is district-wide and is the predicate for projections with suggested realignment options, it has been included in its entirety in this volume. d d d Community Involvement 3D/I core team member Barbara Trammell worked closely with LRSD staff member Suellen Vann to develop a survey that would allow input from parents, neighbors, and employees. This form was distributed through the school system via students and made available to the general public at town meetings and through a mailing to neighborhood groups. A summary of the district-wide data gathered is included with this executive summary and the responses and comments particular to the individual schools are located with the site-specific information. 3D o o o 3 3 o 3 Q O 3 W d  Phase 3 Analysis and Reporting d Review and Consistency of Survey Data During this final phase, core team members reviewed the findings of each task area to ensure accuracy, consistency, and completeness. Trends were d reviewed, \"what-if scenarios were examined for the purpose of providing recommendations and/or options that would best serve the students in the Little Rock School District. d This process was employed to integrate the facility, education, and demographic survey data to provide continuity. d d District-wide Summary Report This volume summarizes the findings and evaluations of schools and administrative facilities, the cost to correct deficiencies, construction costs for new facilities, school and administrative consolidations, and options for realignment of school attendance zones. I 1 d The following Page 7, of this section, entitled \"ORGANIZATION OF REPORT, HOW TO READ IT' is included as a tool to help the reader move through the various sections and better understand the logic of the text, tables and maps. The index also locates topics for convenience. d d Page 6 o o a w a o S / ^3 m i! LI n a Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I a ORGANIZATION OF REPORT HOW TO HEAD IT a ORGANIZATION The Demographic Survey, Educational Survey, and Facility Survey, each are investigatory endeavors that lead to recommendations and options. The cost factors are estimates of the cost to renovate and repair existing facilities and provide additions a or new construction based on the options considered. Recommendations are the M resulting conclusions of investigation of population and enrollment trends, the condition of existing facilities, costs to the district, and other factors observed during the facility master plan process. 33 S O 3 3 Q 3 Q. fi) O 3 W The Executive Summary of this report has been organized in the following manner: II Tab_____________ Introduction Recommendations Cost Factors Demographic Study Educational Study Attendance Zones Facility Summaries Public Perception Surveys Description_______________________________ A brief introduction of the process Recommendations for action Cost of Implementing recommendations Summary of demographic study materials Study of school size, capacity, impact of middle schools and the number of required facilities Zone configuration options with maps and tables Summaries of each facility with itemized cost priorities Summary results of public opinions o o a S' a g 3 fl n a a d m - c a Demographic details are provided in Volume 2. Facility details are provided in Volumes 3 through 13. f !  ' fl d d TIPS School Sizes and Number Required Are located under the Educational Study tab in the Executive Summary These include the trends of population and student enrollment forecasts with the resulting quantity of schools required displayed on three bracketed size ranges as set out on tables 1-3.  ! I: d d Attendance Zone Options The attendance zone options are located under the Attendance Zone tab in the Executive Summary and describe the sizes of existing schools and their present capacity. These include recommendations for additions to increase their capacities, based on a projected enrollment capability of the area. These options have been illustrated by the Summary table AZ-1, Option M, T, and C maps. This information is located in the Attendance Zone section, as well as Tables CST-4, 5, and 6 in the Cost Factor section. i Page 1a a Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I II a School Closures and Other Uses The attendance zone options, illustrated on the maps described above, indicate schools recommended for closure, which have been based on condition, location, size, and cost to renovate or repair the facility. These factors were a part of the evaluation^ score and ultimate ranking of the facilities which are found under the Educational Summary tab in tables ES-1 and ES-2 and illustrated on Table CST-7 under the Cost Factors tab. a a Facilities available for other uses, are schools that are recommended for functions other than their initial purpose, generally because of the surplus of facilities in a particular attendance zone area. Table CST-7, under the Cost Factors tab illustrates these facilities and recommendation No 5, under the Recommendations tab elaborates on these buildings. 3) o o o 3 3 \u0026lt;0 3 fi\u0026gt; O 3 \u0026gt; a a a a d Cost Factors Tables CST-4, 5, and 6 show ethnic composition for each school in each option studied with resulting total enrollment capability used. The operating capacity of each school is subtracted from the enrollment capability to produce a difference (delta) in capacity which is shown. A negative number indicates additional capacity is required, and a positive number indicates that sufficient capacity is available. The negative capacity numbers are then multiplied by the factor of 107 (square feet required per student) and result in a deficit area expressed as a negative number in square feet required. These space requirements are multiplied by a assumed cost factor of $65 per square foot for additions to buildings or $55 per square foot for new building construction. Totals of costs for each option for renovation additions and for new school construction are carried forward to the summary sheets Table CST-3 under the appropriate option. I d Cost Factors Table CST-3 indicates the cost of renovating each facility, except those recommended for closure which appear as a gray line with costs removed. d d This data comes from Table CST-1 and is summarized near the bottom of (CST-3 Page 2) at the line labeled TOTAL BASIS AMOUNT. The amount under each column, totals and priorities, is then added to the cost of each option, including escalation, from table CST-3, Pages 3, 4, and 5 to obtain the total projected cost of each option by totals and priorities. d Cost Factors Table CST-1 indicates the cost of renovating every facility currently in the Little Rock School District, whether recommended for closure or not. This cost summary has been organized by type of schools and includes the seven administrative facilities within the district. This is the basis of the data used to develop the total cost under each of the three options (Options M, T, and C) presented within Table CST-3. Page 8 o o fa a o w I'rt' m a c s I 3 ' ii n 3 * J?a a II Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I The line total entitled SUBTOTAL SCHOOLS \u0026amp; ADMIN on page 2 represents total costs as a whole and priorities 1-5, in their respective columns. To this number is added those estimates of costs, provided by the district, for ADA, Roof Replacement, and Asbestos Abatement, by facility, which produces non-escalated costs in each column. H a H A A A Escalation Impact is summarized at the bottom of Page 2, is developed in depth on Page 3, and projects the total program costs (renovations of existing facilities) from one through ten+ years by whole and by priority. These numbers do not include new construction cost estimates or options, which are developed in CST-3. Implementation of the Plan The Facilities Master Plan Study has been approached as a study of the facts and data available regarding the Little Rock School Districts facilities, projected enrollments, and needs, over the next 10 years. This information has been summarized with options and priorities for consideration and implementation by the Board and its Administration. The logistics of the implementation, are therefore dependent on policy decisions of the Board and were not a part of the study. The plan, however, considered implementation in the development of its options and recommendations and is viable, if executed in a careful systematic manner following an implementation schedule. This schedule is dependent on four undetermined factors: 33 ( O o 3 3 \u0026lt; 3 a w o' 3 (A o o \u0026amp; m S o s 1. A 2. 3. A 4. Approval of available options {which could involve adjustment of the selected option to meet boa nd policy.) Acceptance by the Court (the plan and the selected option). Acquisition of Financing (adequate to support the plan or meaningful components of the plan). Selection of an implementor (Skilled in development of capital schedules and programs along with district counterpart) ^4 4 I m I : a . A I '/I I .It I ' I AT A *\u0026lt;10 3 'i I 1*1 A A \u0026lt;1 N A 5? 3 7 Page 9Cost Factors .1 r . X 6 f-' I I I I a  -\u0026gt; -  I  I  J  I* .1 ' e  Recommendations  t . . a fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl RECOMMENDATIONS Basis of Recommendations The 3D/I team approached the facilities master plan task with four specific targets: 1) assessment of facilities and the cost of implementation, 2) assessment of  a demographics and changes in population and enrollments, 3) analysis of all school capacities with their current and projected utilization, and 4) alignment of the study with the desegregation court order components. Each step of the survey was undertaken with attention to these factors. 2' 9 fl Therefore, conclusions have been thoroughly considered, reconsidered, and evaluated with the resulting recommendations and options being in harmony with and influenced by the four specific targets outlined above. An implied directive, and perhaps the most important, influencing recommendations is What is in the best interests of the children being served.\" o o Ji w I By Conditions of Existing Buildings I fl As the 3D/I teams visited and noted the conditions of over 50 individual buildings, it became very obvious that the District is in need of a substantial preventive maintenance plan, endorsed and supported by the Board of Directors. The I 7^ 4 40 fl d consequences of failing to implement such a plan, are a cycle of never-ending unchecked damage and deterioration. Lack of a substantial preventive maintenance does not serve the public, and creates the appearance of frequent calls on funds with no visible results. I I 4 fl d Experience has shown that institutions that consider their facility improvement requirements too costly to be accomplished, continue to allow the depreciation of their assets by lack of action. On the other hand, institutions that have addressed their capital needs in a manner that the public could support and at the same time have established a preventive maintenance program are able to manage the facility issues and maintain their assets. I I I 1 jni ' a 4 C 'iBL  0 1  i  I ri fl The secret to this success is the establishment of an escrow funding account where the unspent dollars remaining from the annual maintenance budget accrue to the Preventive Maintenance Escrow Fund without penalty to the next years budget negotiation process. This eliminates the historical urgency of spending to justify the budget, typical of most institutional and government entities. The annual contribution to this fund is established by the Board of Directors as a sinking fund with sufficient policy directives to protect it from any other non related uses and pet programs. Where this is an established procedure, the system works. Major capital replacement cost can be dealt with without affecting operating budgets as well as unexpected costs such as storm damage etc. it *  N Si g I, An important element of preventive maintenance is an effective housekeeping system. Whether out-sourced or in-house, custodial services should be directed by the physical plant department, but accountable to the school principal. The teams observed that I Page 1fl fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl where the principal took an active role in ownership of his or her facility custodian and maintenance functions were improved and the facility presented a more appealing environment to students, staff, and the public. fl fl  Recommendation Number 1 is the establishment of a preventive maintenance program with a policy-protected escrow funding account that is incrementally funded each year, as a part of the annual budget process, but not used for normal day to day maintenance items. Disbursements from this account could have board oversight to insure its designed purpose. fl Financial Condition of the District During the course of the public meetings and subsequent meetings with the Districts fl financial representatives, the revenue shortfall was thoroughly discussed. The fl presumable reason for this shortfall is tied to the simple axiom of too much cost, too little income. This apparently results from a low utilization of the Districts physical plants and a high cost of education due to the various special programs established as a result of the current desegregation plan and the high cost of administering that program. other considerations may be the traditional concern of the ratio of fl administrators to the number schools and students. Since District budgeting of operations was not one of the tasks of the 3D/I team, no detailed analysis has been made as a part of this facilities master plan. However, it is important to note that the recommended closure and alternate use of certain facilities, based on condition and enrollment factors, could have a positive affect in reducing the operating costs of the school district while improving the quality of the basic facilities. z' 3 o o a \"n 0) I 3 a ) \u0026lt; m a c  Recommendation Number 2 is the establishment of a capital program through the sale of bonds supported by an adjusted millage program that accomplishes, in the shortest period practical, the renovation, repair, and proposed new construction of the Districts schools and administrative facilities. (Five years is the optimum building period for a project of this nature.) Refer to the cost projections set out under the Cost Factors tab. o I I 3 I I  i / Based on the recent opinion of the Arkansas Attorney General, it would appear that a capital improvement millage issue could be accomplished on its own merits. Notwithstanding this opinion, it is recommended that any millage brought before the public should include a major capital improvement package as an element as well as the seed for the Preventive Maintenance Escrow Fund. Demographics During the course of examining the population changes and the influences of economic factors operating in the Little Rock area and their affect upon the families living in the LRSDs enrollment area, it became evident that sufficient information for projection was not readily available. Due to the lack of established reporting zones, (District enrollment blocks and federal census tracts do not align.) it is difficult to measure the migration and school attendance of potential students living within District boundaries. Page 2 J S iiLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I \"!* =.? \"f on the day o, school enrollment each year. Historical detailed records of this \u0026amp;., for past years, thus making detailed projections by attendance blocks enrollment were not available difficult. . Recommendation Number 3 is the formation of a database, maintained by nictnrt ___. .............. the district, consisting of a survey of school-aged children residing in the a vanous areas of the district and updated on an annual basis. This database should also include specific details of those children who attendance block as well schools. are students by as those leaving the district to attend other 2 9  An additional record to facilitate using this information is an annual a accounting of students entering LRSD on the M to M program. The magnet shadow-zone attendance should also be recorded and tracked. While this recommendation involves personnel and effort on an annual o o \u0026amp; tt I t a basis, its benefit would be invaluable in budgeting, long-range planning, and the resultant capital decisions. I i a Survey Findings and Desegregation Plan a At the beginning of the facilities master plan study, the importance of the court order for desegregation was emphasized and has remained as a key factor in planning and ha s master plan study. The components of the court^order are basically summarized as follows\na A. Basis of Facility Needs: Trends in student population Trends in staffing Impact of trends on demographics geographies student assignment zones B, Analysis of Facility Resources: Capacities Location Campus size Special features Limitations c. Additional Factors For Proposed Facilities Use: (five to ten year plan) District goals and objectives Desegregation requirements (includes interdistiict obligations) Decisions criteria for facility actions Identification and analysis of options Proposed facility changes Page 3 I u 3 4 , m o % t'r I 'H o JI ' h'- 5? n IILittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan study 3D/I  M Impact of programmatic changes (i.e. middle schools) Reassignment of students (' (impact on enrollment and racial I 1 I I Burden of busing on students Impact on financial stability D. Includes\nbalance at receiving schools) ^amination of buildings used for administrative Requisite plan modification Community involvement All of the applicable aspects of the this master plan assessment process space court order have been considered and addressed programs, double funding, and other incentives plan, were proposals of the district '-UI laiueieu ano aooressed as nT understand that many of the special currently a part of the desegregation approved by the court in years past. Current the population shifts and the continuing decrease i --------- in enrollment of white In Also, the burden of bussing and disruption of the \u0026lt;.......... childs home environment created by to these problems, options unitary status for Little Rock School District based of education currently being offered an appeal to the court for program to systematically complete on continuing the quality to students, a capital improvement renovation, upgrading, and the constmction of new sohccis in the areas reoommentied by ms Sport as the preventive maintenance plan to adequately on a continuing basis. as well maintain these facilities Itudenirfn^^V'J provided for all attendance areas along with a unified available to every student with sufficient flexibility gifted and talented, accelerated and program of education and opportunities through magnet school programs. School Attendance Zones As a part of the master plan study, zones, closure of schools, and and capital program analysis, the school attendance recommended construction of new facilities were given Page 4 I 1 I 2 Q o o a \u0026amp; g 4 g ^4 ft 0 I m \u0026amp; I fig 3 \u0026amp; 3 M If II fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl thorough consideration. One common element that emerged was the recommended closure of seven elementary schools and one junior high school, over a period of time, with additions and new construction resulting in the consolidated attendance zones.  fl Three options were developed to examine the effective linkage of elementary to junior and senior high schools. This process also considered the effect of middle schools when the sixth grade is moved from elementary school and the ninth grade is shifted to the high school. Attendance zone options considered were\n2 fl  Option M where the recommended closure of elementary and junior high school distributed students to existing facilities with the least disruption to the district. Under this option, the current split attendance zone system would remain. I 2 ' 9   Option T considered the effect of trying to align the current attendance blocks and schools, both existing and new, into a zoning system aligning with the federal census tracts. This option was found to be difficult and of questionable value based on the current census tract configurations. o o 21 w S o S fl  Option C considered the corridor approach where the major highways, railroad tracks, river, and other physical barriers created natural divisions of the city. This approach largely developed a method of attendance zones that allowed students to attend an elementary school within reasonable I o J I L fl distance from their home. This option provides a more cohesive school/home environment although enrollment ethnic ratios under this plan 8 1 reflect the makeup of the area surrounding the school. To offset this fl imbalance, however, the burden of bussing is reduced and the magnet shadow zones are utilized. I m a c SI fri o 3 fl As the system progresses from elementary through junior high or middle school to senior high, the number of options decline and are less distinctive. However, tracking from elementary to senior high can be clearly defined. 'I fl fl fl In addition to the eight schools recommended for closure, four additional elementary schools are not used, generally because of a surplus of schools in a particular attendance zone. These facilities, at the Boards discretion, could remain in operation with modifications to adjacent school enrollment assignments. The recommendation, however, is that a more efficient use of the districts inventory and personnel would eliminate these facilities as active schools.  Recommendation Number 5 is the closure of seven elementary schools and one junior high school along with four additional elementary schools to be slated for alternate uses by the district and the community. These closures and reassignment of functions are predicated on the premise that the alterations, additions and construction of new school or schools is accomplished as a part of the plan. Savings resulting renovation expenses and reduced, if not eliminated, operating expenses can significantly reduce the cost of new construction. Reduced operating expenses, even with Page 5 ii hi o li IS 3 7 iffl fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I i  inflation, can retire the capital debt on paper, assuming these savings are not spent elsewhere. fl  Recommendation Number 6 is the consultants opinion, that of the options considered, Option C is preferred. The preference is based on fl considerations of the school experience for the children, a more- favorable opportunity for parent participation, development of community identities, diminished burden of bussing, comparable cost to the district, and the more effective value to the public. 2* Q  Recommendation Number 7 notwithstanding, the consultants  Recommendation Number 5, is the formation of a representative committee of the board of directors, the administration, the court, and the public, to consider each of the options, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each and effect a conclusion that best serves the children of the Little Rock school system in their pursuit of the learning experience. o o a w \u0026amp; o S  b  fl Initiatives \u0026lt;G 'll a J I fl In every dynamic community, city, and state the importance of education is placed high on the list of priority considerations. Decisions of businesses considering localities for establishing their home or branch office is always influenced by the available school system serving the area and the level of education offered. This is true of elementary schools through colleges. 5 1'^ 1 m a fl Little Rock has suffered in this area due to the unfortunate political decisions of the past and the fact that it remains under the courts desegregation management. While the level of education has substantially improved in all schools (the outstanding reputation of Central High School is a good example), the stigma of operating without unitary status tends to cast a shadow over the quality of the school system, whether it is deserved or not. I ' A I 11 B 2  S. I* I N During the course of the survey, the 3D/I team found a positive attitude among most of the faculty and patrons which was demonstrated by the public opinion survey responses representing almost 20 percent of parents and employees of the district. Considerations yet to be developed are alternate uses of facilities recommended for closure. Possible uses include: neighborhood library and learning center sites. community centers, and neighborhood alert centers. Since these types of uses require city and citizen support, both actively and financially, two initiatives are recommended for consideration.  Recommendation Number 8 is that initiatives be taken to reverse decreasing enrollment patterns by active, visible involvement of a task force to promote and support the Little Rock School District, its academic program, its capital needs, the possibility of adult continuing education programs for the community, the support of preventive maintenance, and Page 6 8, I Ffl fl fl fl fli Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I support of unitary status. A part of this recommendation is the formation of a representative committee of the city, board of directors, district administration, and patrons to actively pursue a feasible plan for the alternative use of those facilities recommended for closure and other uses. This plan should provide for a use that benefits the community, is supported by the taxpayers, and does not become a burden to either the district or the city. These facilities, at the Boards discretion, could remain in operation with modifications to adjacent school enrollment assignments. The recommendation, however, is that a more efficient use of the district's inventory and personnel would eliminate these facilities as active schools.  Recommendation Number 9 is a deliberate effort, on the part of the Board of Directors, of the Little Rock School District, to cultivate and encourage a representative group of leaders and professional men and women in the Little Rock community to become interested and involved in the activities of the district in its guidance of the education process and policies. This would include important committee assignments, PTA offices, and, if elected, service on the Board. In addition to the dedicated board members of today, this effort would continue the development of community awareness and respect of the school system and be a positive building block for the boards of tomorrow. These recommendations are offered with the sincere thought that their implementation will enhance the stature and improve the operation of the Little Rock School District as well as improve the credibility of the district as perceived by the public. I fl Page 7 2 Q -I o o a 9 \u0026amp; o 9 r '1 R fl If fl I I ni 1 a 'll 3 9 N O I 9* i\nn 3 7 JCost Factors Study Zones oauvnniHrwv   * . 11 k r II ' (T h h I hP'  r rI I i r 11 1 J J  * Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I H COST FACTORS N General  a a a The facilities survey conducted at fifty schools and seven administration buildings was limited to a period ranging from a partial day to two days per facility, depending on its size and condition. The projected estimate of cost, therefore, becomes an order of magnitude estimate that deals with broad base cost allowances to correct deficiencies described in broad terms. Detailed specificity and quantification was not permitted within the scope and time allowed, however, it is believed that the estimates portray an accurate allowance of cost that the district should expect in executing corrections and updates to the conditions found. In some cases, conditions found warranted further study or detailed structural solutions and these were so noted in the field notes and summarized under the tab Facility Summaries. Cost Estimates Provided by LRSD 2| 3 S y I 8 a a H  8 8 a a a 8 While the cost of asbestos and hazardous materials abatement, roofing repair and replacement, and ADA compliance were provided to the district as a result of studies that preceded this contract, allowances have been included in the estimated costs tables, as provided by LRSD. to more clearly define the scope and magnitude of capital cost requirements. With the exception of the cost of asbestos and hazardous materials abatement, these costs have been removed, along with other estimated costs, provided by 3D/I, in the following studies showing the affect of school closures. It was assumed that abatement would be the responsibility of the district regardless of disposition of the facility. Cost Priorities Facility surveyors approached the examination of each building with a pre-established priority index, district wide: Priority #1 Priority #2 Priority #3 5 m ! I 11 I \u0026amp; I ^8 0 Included life safety issues, serious code compliance issues and those critical items and others that need to be accomplished during the first year. Table CST-1 assumes this work will occur between 1995 and 1997. Brackets that work that needs to occur in the second and third years Table CST-1 assumes this work will occur in 1998. Brackets that work that the surveyors felt could be extended to be done in a 3 to 5 year period. Table CST-1 assumes this work will occur between 1998 and 2001. Page 1 N tf i i! i: a n 3 I 9 * fi \u0026amp; I-? rLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan fl Study 3D/I fl Priority #4 Brackets that work that the surveyors felt could be extended to be 521?JCST.1 assumes this win occur between 2001 and 2006. fl Priority #5 Includes all technology updates. -- This basically provides conduit communication outlets, cable racks, cabling   t coaxial wiring, and associated items, except equipment, to provide communication and interactive teaching system a state-of-the-art dHu interactive teaching system. TABLE CST-1 \"O 2011\nhowever, ih 2 fl todays information explosion, it is likely that these earlier installation. needs will dictate an 0 Inflation fl iltXl^c'sriTav^:^'^'??! loearing in the summary set out fl during each priority phase.  such as adding or removing schools from total should be adjusted to reflect those changes. project totals If the order presented in those priority phases is changed consideration, then the inflation factor Additions and New Construction 1 ii J ^'13 I I Xm7MdinL*''a7?''  'I''\"\" 1\" d^dhlished far both additions to cron  construction. The unit costs used for thP S P\" ^or new construction and structures. Both amounts are bX on 95 dollar values, and the inflation formula should be applied as may be appropriate. construction. I Table CST-2 provides  a *  summary of unit costs for each of the 50 schools   - ' '\"rt ^0'\"19 redUiring renovation and replacement work These unit co'sts can be indicators of when new constniction Is preferred to renovation 0^ and 7 I 'I t'il is i 1 3 J s. A Options Funding While it was not within the presented under this tab in Tables CST-3 CST-4 and CST scope of this report to establish a detailed funding program ft nhta nod Xi________ri* ... .  Stai'lmDr^ve??' feasibill^^f'TecimmZ^^ahOT capital improvement program approaches. , along with the District financial officer, available within a realistic millage rate. 3D/I consulted with the Stevens Company to explore and examine realistic possibilities Using prelirninary broad-based estimating assumptions, $1 514 M per mil oer vear for s to 7 years have bean considered as a workabte c^p,isf base Lm which mis Page 2 f I 11 \" .1 N 1 'Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I program can be executed. While it is our understanding that the property values and taxing base has been relatively flat in the Little Rock area while inflation has risen, the District feels the need to request millage increases to offset the increased costs of operations. I This report recommends that either a capital improvement millage request and resulting bond issue or a dual-purpose millage request covering both capital and operating costs be effected. Operating cost increases without improvement of physical facilities, would be less likely to receive enthusiastic support from taxpayers. The most effective approach to the improvement schedule set out in this report would be a single bond issue approval for renovation, improvements, and new construction that could be accomplished within a 5-year period with the sale of bonds occurring in stages during that same period. I 4 It is also important that a capital program, when executed, unilaterally covers work in all attendance zones throughout the District. To have the least impact on the operation of schools, new school construction and major renovations to buildings temporarily taken out of service should occur prior to general renovation work throughout the District. Those schools slated for closure could serve as temporary facilities during the building program. e i Careful attention and prioritization should be exercised if the district elects to undertake a project of less magnitude than is set out in this report to avoid new work that must be destroyed to later accomplish delayed priorities. The detailed programming of projects and the resultant cost estimating, accomplished by architects and program managers, during the course of the Districts capital program is the first step that needs to be taken before design is completed or construction contacts are awarded. ' a Professional management of the capital endeavor should be considered to provide economy in contracting, less disruptive scheduling, and in come cases pre-purchasing and value engineering options available to the school district. nI? 3 S' i\nr \u0026gt; s  4 Page 3H Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I EM ICOST SUMMARY OF BUILDINGS Renovation and Repair, Existing Buildings Little Rock School District Table CST-1 TYPE OF SCHOOL EM EM IM iM I HI NO HIGH SCHOOLS NAME 1 CENTRAL (Main Building) (Gymnasium) (Library) (Quigley Stadium) Subtotal Central TOTAL BASE COST Idas $4,790,209 $290,617 $201,263 $481,629 $5,763,718 2 3 4 5 McClellan J.A.FAIR HALL PARKVIE\\A/ (Building 1) _______ (Building 2) (Building 3) Subtotal Parkview TOTAL HlOH SCHOOLS $3,489,032 $1,725,309 $2,182,064 $724,389 $24,087 $89,396 $837,872 $13,987,995 VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL 6 METROPOLITAN Total VTS $3,488,387 $3,488,387 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 PRIORITY 1 1-2 Years 1995-1997 PRIORITY 2 3 Years 1998 PRIORITY 3 3-5 Years 98-2001 PRIORITY 4 5-10 Years 2001-2006 PRIORITY 5 10-15 Years 2008-2011 PRIORITY TOTALS No Escalation DIST SITE NO $2,942,332 $77,225 $51,905 $153,017 $3,224,480 $579,059 $411,771 $453,800 $6,690 $0 $0 $8,690 $4,677,800 $412,381 $412,381 $922,092 $172,597 $10,158 $69,536 $1,174,383 $1,397,303 $235,246 $800,095 $314,469 $24,087 $19,621 $358,177 $3,965,204 $505,588 $605,688 $172,319 $7,328 $3,616 $162,128 $345,393 $1,076,795 $454,968 $404,394 $967 $0 $0 $967 $2,284,516 $1,567,873 $1,567,873 $0 $33,467 $0 $0 $33,467 $18,586 $77,696 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $129,750 $3,567 $3,567 $753,466 $0 $135,580 $96,948 $985,994 $415,286 $545,629 $523,775 $400,263 $0 $69,775 $470,038 $2,940,722 $996,969 $998,969 $4,790,209 $290,617 $201,263 $481,629 $5,763,716 $3,489,032 $1,725,309 $2,182,064 $724,389 $24,067 $89,396 $837,872 $13,997,994 $3,488,387 $3,488,387 1 12 8 2 5 $5 $27 4 1 'Jl \u0026lt;1 CLOVERDALE_________________ DUNBAR FOREST HEIGHTS_____________ HENDERSON MABELVALE MANN MAGNET ( Building #1) __________________(Building tf2) PULASKI HEIGHTS (Building #1) __________________ (Building #2) __________________ (Building #3) SOUTHWEST________ ________Total Junior High Schools ALTERNATE LEARNING CENTER ALC Total ALC ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS t 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 BADGETT BALE ^SELINE booker MAGNET BRADY CARVER MAGNET CHICOT CLOVERDALE DAVID O DODD FAIR PARK_______ forest PARK franklin________ FULBRIGHT $687,389 $3,855,668 $2,410,310 $845,431 $2,263,241 $930,224 $484,276 $926,119 $74,076 $619,988 $1,483,632 $14,580,354 $1,183,270 $1,183,270 $666.504 $1,200,466 $1,111,915 $892,564 $476,919 $378,889 $0 $461.989 $954,119 $714,626 $752,687 $1,845,175 $484,019 $228,836 $1,476,235 $822,810 $219,472 $277,011 $99,054 $21,565 $43,756 $12,890 $233,662 $18,690 $3,453,981 $415,614 $415,614 $145,216 $341,296 $156,719 $154,780 $220 $5,026 $0 $45,062 $12,275 $35,836 $91,391 $214,024 $26,102 $73,850 $533,350 $632,646 $105,842 $819,091 $70,719 $348,274 $379,487 $12,786 $120,624 $468,791 $3,565,459 $474,524 $474,524 $145,305 $423,784 $351,026 $25,820 $170,862 $121,554 $0 $56,127 $183,633 $538,790 $373,162 $626,040 $43,096 $228,017 $1,442,690 $722,897 $191,157 $944,741 $326,736 $37,185 $211,865 $11,088 $35,202 $548,199 $4,701,777 $133,401 $133,401 $279,738 $150,163 $402,280 $472,862 $68,787 $45,033 $0 $241,614 $474,315 $47,995 $190,839 $650,595 I $129,202 $0 $86,423 $6,415 $0 $24,526 $125,146 $26,257 $111,557 $5,211 $220,540 $182,264 $790,338 $40,658 $40,658 $21,651 $178,047 $8,001 $1,557 $0 $1,332 $0 $0 $127,580 $0 $0 $136,192 $71,761 $156,684 $316,970 $223,542 $328,960 $197,872 $306,569 $50,996 $179,454 $32,101 $9,960 $265,669 $2,068,798 $119,074 $118,074 $74,594 $107,175 $193,869 $237,544 $108,027 $205,943 $0 $139,166 $156,315 $92,005 $97,295 $218,324 $213,856 $687,369 $3,855,668 $2,410,310 $845,431 $2,263,241 $930,224 $484,276 $926,119 $74,076 $619,988 $1,483,632 14,680,354 $1,183,270 $1,183,270 $666,504 $1,200,466 $1,111,915 $892,564 $347,917 $376,889 $0 $481,989 $954,119 $714,626 $752,687 $1,845,175 $484,019 Table CST-1 Page 1 15 7 9 13 16 3 am 10 11 14 19 17 22 6 18 21 27 31 32 23 24 25 48 f'o 3 ( J N J{?f i: 2 2* - h I 'll r l 'N 3s r3- J  Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ICOST SUMMARY OF BUILDINGS Renovation and Repair, Existing Buildings Little Rock School District Table CST-1 TYPE OF SCHOOL  fl fl fl NO 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 NAME GARLAND GEYER SPRINGS GIBBS MAGNET ISH JEFFERSON MARTIN L KING MABELVALE McDermott_______ MEADOWCLIFF MITCHELL_________ MARTIN L KING OTTER CREEK PULASKI HEIGHTS RIGHTSELL ROCKEFELLER ROMINE TERRY WAKEFIELD WASHINGTON WATSON__________ WESTERN HILLS WILLIAMS MAGNET WILSON___________ WOODRUFF ADMINISTRATION BUILDINGS Total Etementary TOTAL BASE COST 1996 $1,373,658 $321,017 $215,003 $656,776 $1,814,531 $239,042 $1,568,674 $689,136 $1,138,095 $579,516 $239,042 $674,313 $1,389,146 $645,652 $399,444 $1,660.421 $498.742 $1.238,092 $313,822 $937,532 $650,067 $723,963 $933,698 $212,098 $29,271,352 PRIORITY 1 1-2 Years 1995-1997 $63,502 $36,657 $5,446 $10,800 $953,937 $0 $334,844 $94,614 $71.174 $139,245 $0 $48,281 $302,995 $61,724 $133,487 $233,762 $96,792 $126,957 $7,607 $308,388 $89,413 $211,937 $23,358 $37,892 PRIORITY 2 3 Years 1998 $620,356 $96,646 $12,684 $328,091 $601,600 $0 $474,776 $208,177 $921,415 $258,663 $0 $422,872 $429,235 $264,764 $11,695 $499,837 $194,583 $734,402 $7,206 $252,213 $304.581 $294,576 $440,444 $11,315 PRIORITY 3 3-5 Years 98-2001 $431,070 $51,671 $39,627 $216,525 $120.203 $0 $561,070 $231,863 $27,798 $37,943 $0 $86,664 $175,058 $58,917 $48,492 $89,765 $60,406 $253,058 $12,597 $205,311 $316,702 $67,012 $198,818 $38,301 PRIORITY 4 5-10 Years 2001-2006 $26,034 $2,588 $38,364 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $650,913 $2,540 $4,489 $0 $0 $5,537 $0 $101,260 $3,476 PRIORITY 5 10-15 Years 2006-2011 $230,695 $133,255 $116,662 $101,360 $138,791 $239,042 $197,964 $154,481 $117,706 $143,666 $239,042 $116,496 $481,858 $260,247 $205,770 $186,123 $144,419 $119,186 $266,212 $171,619 $133,834 $150,437 $169,818 $121,114 PRIORITY TOTALS No Escalation $1,373,658 $321,017 $215,003 $656,776 $1,814,531 $239,042 $1,568,674 $689,136 $1,138,095 $579,516 $239,042 $674,313 $1,389,146 $645,652 $399,444 $1,660,421 $498,742 $1,238,092 $313,822 $937,532 $850,067 $723,963 $933,698 $212,098 $4,621,163 $10,449,353 $6,482,514 $1,383,323 $6,205,997 $29,142,350 ) DIST SITE NO 26 37 27 49 30 35 46 20 33 34 35 10 38 39 50 40 47 51 42 32 29 43 44 45 \u0026lt; rj r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ANNEX________ CASHION BUILDING TRANSPORTATION PLANT SERVICES PURCHASING SAFETY/SECURITY _____________Total Administration SUBTOTAL SHOOLS \u0026amp; ADMIN $597,648 $539,715 $117,330 $247,707 $498,894 $272,004 $387,874 $2,661,172 $66,182,630 $274,848 $54,724 $17,576 $47,649 $53,716 $41,951 $20,563 $511,026 $14,091,965 $110,770 $54,714 $19,625 $47,959 $126,004 $24,594 $313,590 $697,256 $19,657,383 $128,376 $172,268 $32,380 $113,938 $215,840 $115,296 $34,671 $812,769 $15,982,850 $1,981 $187,670 $27,469 $12,736 $39,574 $26,403 $759 $296,693 $2,644,228 $81,673 $70,339 $20,280 $25,425 $63,760 $63,760 $18,292 $343,530 $12,677,090 $597,648 $539,715 $117,330 $247,707 $498,894 $272,004 $387,874 $2,661,173 $66,063,629 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 : I a II03 district estimates_________ ADA COSTS ROOF REPLACEMENT ASBESTOS ABATEMENT ______ total SHOOLS \u0026amp; ADMIN N2 Sn escalation impact COST escalation e 4%/ YEAR L $6,386,000 $3,462,000 $3,185,000 $77,205,630 $1,386,000 $674,000 $1,587,000 $17,738,965 $1,000,000 $261,000 $1,500,000 $22,418,383 $1,000,000 $406,000 $17,388,850 $1,000,000 $1,425,000 $5.069,228 $1,000,000 $686,000 $0 $14,363,090 $5,386,000 $3,452,000 $3,087,000 $76,978,529 I? 3 2 $77,206,530 1 Year 1995 $3,088,221 $80.293,751 $17,738,966 1-2 years 1995-1997 $1,447,500 $19,186,464 $22,418,383 3 Years 1998 $2,799,249 $26,217,632 $17,388,860 3-5 Years 2000 $3,767,345 $21,166.195 $5,069,228 5-10 Years 2005 $2,434,468 $7,603,696 $14,363,090 10-15 Years 2010 $11.504,023 $25,867,113 $76,978,629 $21,952,685 $98,931,113 Table CST-1 Page 2\n1 I i\nI u Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I  ICOST SUMMARY OF BUILDINGS Table CST-1 fl Renovation and Repair, Existing Buildings Little Rock School District TYPE OF SCHOOL fl fl fl fl fl fl [fl fl NO NAME ESCALATION DETAIL 4- 1 1 1996 ___ 2 1997 3 1998 ____4 1999 ____5 2000 6 2001 7 2002 ____8 2003 9 2004 ___10 2005 11 2006 ___ 12 2007 ___ 13 2008 14 2009 15 2010 i TOTAL BASE COST 1995 PRIORITY 1 1-2 Years 1995-1997 PRIORITY 2 3 Years 1998 PRIORITY 3 3*5 Years 98-2001 PRIORITY 4 6-10 Years 2001-2006 PRIORITY 5 10-16 Years 2006-2011 PRIORITY TOTALS No Escalation $3,088,221 $80,293,751 $709,669 $18,448,523 $737,941 $19,186,464 $767,459 $19,953,923 $798,157 $20,752,080 $830,083 $21,582,163 $863,287 $22,445,449 $897,818 $23,343,267 $933,731 $24,276,998 $971,080 $25,248,078 $1,009,923 $26,258,001 $1,050,320 $27,308,321 $1,092,333 $28,400,654 $1,136,026 $29,536,680 $1,181,467 $30,718,147 $1,228,726 $31,946,873 $896,736 $23,315,118 $932,605 $24,247,723 $969,909 $25,217,632 $1,008,705 $26,226,337 $1,049,053 $27,275,391 $1,091,016 $28,366,406 $1,134,656 $29,501,063 $1,180,043 $30,681,105 $1,227,244 $31,908,349 $1,276,334 $33,184,683 $1,327,387 $34,512,071 $1,380,483 $35,892,554 $1,435,702 $37,328,256 $1,493,130 $38,821,386 $1,552,855 $40,374,241 $695,664 $18,084,404 $723,376 $18,807,780 $752,311 $19,660,092 $782,404 $20,342,495 $813,700 $21,156,196 $846,248 $22,002,443 $880,098 $22,882,541 $915,302 $23,797,842 $951,914 $24,749,756 $989,990 $25,739,746 $1,029,590 $26,769,336 $1,070,773 $27,840,109 $1,113,604 $28,953,714 $1,158,149 $30,111,862 $1,204,474 $31,316,337 $202,769 $5,271,997 $210,880 $5,482,877 $219,315 $6,702,192 $228,088 $5,930,280 $237,211 $6,167,491 $246,700 $6,414,191 $256,568 $6,670,758 $266,830 $6,937,589 $277,604 $7,215,092 $288,604 $7,503,696 $300,148 $7,803,844 $312,154 $8,115,998 $324,640 $8,440,638 $337,626 $8,778,263 $351,131 $9,129,394 $674,624 $14,937,613 $597,505 $15,535,118 $621,405 $16,166,523 $646,261 $16,802,783 $672,111 $17,474,895 $698,996 $18,173,891 $726,956 $18,900,846 $756,034 $19,656,880 $786,276 $20,443,155 $817,726 $21,260,881 $850,435 $22,111,317 $884,453 $22,995,769 $919,831 $23,915,600 $956,624 $24,872,224 $994,889 $26,867,113 i DIST SITE NO r Table CST-1 Page 3 J '! 2' a :1 e-3 5J ac o 5) N O 3  ( fl II I If j I J?Ha fl fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan 3DZI fl UNIT COST OF RENOVATION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Table- CST-2 TYPE OF SCHOOL PERMANET fl NO HIGH SCHOOLS NAME CLASSRMS AREA TOTAL COST COST $/SF fl fl  fl 1 2 3 4 5 CENTRAL_____________________ HALL___________________________ PARKVIEW______________________ J.A.FAIR_________________ _______ McCLELL^_____________________ TOTAL HIGH SCHOOLS VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL 6 METROPOLITAN TOTAL VTS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 111 59 61 49 48 328 55 55 266,823 152,340 166,477 131,628 118,425 835,693 129,546 129,546 $5,763,718 $2,182,064 $837,872 $1,725,309 $3,489,032 $13,997,995 $3,488,387 $3,488,387 $21.60 $14.32 $5.03 $13.11 $29.46 $26.93 2* 3ml CLOVERDALE___________________ DUNBAR________________________ FOREST HEIGHTS_______________ HENDERSON____________________ MABELVALE_____________________ MANN___________________________ PULASKI HEIGHTS_______________ SOUTHWEST____________________ TOTAL JR HIGH SCHOOLS 37 41 35 51 27 51 36 44 322 81,894 99,397 70,137 103,212 59,981 113,013 73,216 82,968 683,818 $687,389 $3,855,668 $2,410,310 $845,431 $2,263,241 $1,414,500 $1,620,183 $1,483,632 $14,580,354 $8.39 $38.79 $34.37 $8.19 $37.73 $12.52 $22.13 $17.88 a ALTERNATE LEARNING CENTER ALC 27 37,360 $1,183,270 $17.88 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 BADGETT________ BALE____________ BASELINE________ BOOKER_________ BRADY CARVER MAGNET CHICOT CLOVERDALE DAVID O DODD FAIR PARK FOREST PARK FRANKLIN_______ FULBRIGHT GARLAND GEYER SPRINGS GIBBS ISH JEFFERSON MARTIN L KING 14 21 open space 38 24 31 open space 18 open space 12 19 42 26 25 17 18 22 23 23,404 33,626 50,455 74,530 36,259 61,695 59,687 33,263 46,712 28,867 31,914 68,500 66,892 38,632 41,780 37,237 31,802 43,546 75,000 $666,504 $1,200,466 $1,111,915 $892,564 $476,919 $378,889 $0.00 $481,989 $954,119 $714,626 $752,687 $1,845,175 $484,019 $1,373,658 $321,017 $215,003 $656,776 $1,814,531 $239,042 $28.48 $35.70 $22.04 $11.98 $13.15 $6.14 $0.00 $14.49 $20.43 $24.76 $23.58 $26.94 $7.24 $35.56 $7.68 $5.77 $20.65 $41.67 $3.19 i TABLE-2 Page 1 i m ac  \u0026amp; 3 ii !  iU NIT COST OF RENOVATION little rock school district TYPE OF SCHOOL PERMANET NO NAME fl fl 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 MCDERMOTT MABELVALE MEADOWCLIFF MITCHELL________ OTTER CREEK PULASKI HEIGHTS RIGHTSELL ' ROCKEFELLER ROMINE_________ TERRY__________ WAKEFIELD WASHINGTON ' WATSON________ WESTERN HILLS WILLIAMS_______ WILSON_________ WOODRUFF CLASSRMS 25 28 25 15 20 21 19 30 28 26 23 46 25 21 25 24 23 AREA 48,020 55,568 36,931 39,200 36,551 58,252 37,630 64,561 42,314 45,312 37,395 89,800 53,846 41,991 47,200 37,075 38,000 TOTAL ELEMENTARY 774 1,693,447 TOTAL ALL SCHOOLS ADMINISTRATION BUILDINGS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ADMINISTRATION________________ ADMINISTRATION ANNEX________ CASHION BUILDING______________ TRANSPORTATION______________ PLANT SERVICES_______________ PURCHASING___________________ SAFETY/SECURITY Total Administration 1,479 3,342,504 26,790 26,273 6,418 20,914 20,914 6,000 19,500 126,809 Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan 3DZI Table- CST-2 TOTAL COST $689,136 $1,568,674 $1,138,095 $579,516 $674,313 $1,389,146 $645,652 $399,444 $1,660,421 $498,742 $1,238,092 $313,822 $937,532 $850,067 $723,963 $933,698 $212,098 $29,032,310 $61,099,046 $597,648 $539,715 $117,330 $247,707 $498,894 $272,004 $387,874 $2,661,172 COST $/SF $14.35 $28.23 $30.82 $14.78 $18.45 $23.85 $17.16 $6.19 $39.24 $11.01 $33.11 $3.49 $17.41 $20.24 $15.34 $25.18 $5.58 $22.31 $20.54 $18.28 $11.84 $23.85 $45.33 $19.89 TABLE-2 Page 2 zl  i 4 a 51 1 c :il \u0026amp; o C a Ji !r 5o 3 B N Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ri ri  COST SUMMARY OF BUILDINGS By Options and Priorities Little Rock School District Table CST-3 TYPE OF SCHOOL NO HIGH SCHOOLS 1 (CENTRAL NAME I (Mam Building) (Gymnasium) (Library) (Quigley Stadium) Subtotal Central 2_ 3 I McCLELWN iJ,A.FAIR 4 (HALL 5 (PARKVIEW T T 1 TOTAL BASE COST 1995 $4,790,209 $290,617 $201,263 $481,629 $5,763,718 PRIORITY 1 1-2 Years 1995-1997 PRIORITY 2 3 Years 1998 PRIORITY 3 3-5 Years 98-2001 PRIORITY 4 5-10 Years 2001-2008 PRIORITY 5 10-15 Years 2006-2011 PRIORITY TOTALS No Escalation DIST SITE NO $2,942,332 $77,225 $51,905 S153.Q17 ! $922.092 t $172,597 I $10,158 ! $69,536 I 53.224,4fl0 I $1,174,383 | $172,319 $7,328 $3,618 $162,128 $345,393 I T I I SO $33,467 $0 $0 $33,467 I $753,466 SO $135,580 $96,948 $985,994 $4,790,209 $290,617 $201,263 $481,629 $5,763,718 1 Q (Building 1) (Building 2) (Building 3) Subtotal Parkview TOTAL HIGH SCHOOLS VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL 6 I metropolitan T 1 Total VTS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS____________ 7 (CLOVERDALE_________________ 8 (DUNBAR______________________ 9 (FOREST HEIGHTS_____________ 10 (HENDERSON__________________ 11 IMABELVALE__________________ 12 'MANN MAGNET ( Building#!) I__________________(Building #2) 13\nPULASKI HEIGHTS (Building#!) ' _________________( Building #2) (Building #3) ! 14 I SOUTHWEST__________________ Total Junior High Schools i ALTERNATE LEARNING CENTER I 15 lALC Total ALCI $3,489,032 $1,725,309 $2,182,064 $724,389 $24,087 $89,396 $837,872 $13,997,995 I $3.488.367 $3,488,387 $687,389 $3,855,668 $2,410,310 $845,431 $930,224 $484,276 $926,119 $74,076 $619,988 $1,483,632 $12,317,113 I $1.183.270 $1,183,270 $579,059 $411,771 5453,800 58,690 $0 SO 58.690 $4.6n.800 i T I I i T $1,397,303 $235,246 $600,095 $314,469 $24,087 $19,621 $358,177 $3,965,204 I $1,078,795 $454,968 $404,394 $967 $0 $0 $967 $2,284,516 $18,588 $77,696 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $129,750 I T T 5415,286 $545,629 5523,775 $400,263 $0 $69,775 $470,038 $2,940,722 $3,489,032 $1,725,309 $2,182,064 $724,389 $24,087 $89,396 $837,872 $13,997,994 12 8 2 5 $5 $27 I $412.381 $412,381 I $505.588 ( $505,588 J___________ i 1 i J S228.836 I T $1,476,235 I $822,810 $219,472 i $99,054 521,565 $43,756 $12,890 $233,662 518.690 $3,176,970 1 t $1.567,873 I $1,567,873 ! $3,567 $3,567 $996,969 $998,969 $3.488.387 $3,488,387 I 4 TQ\nI 5415,614 $415,614 $73,850 $533,350 $632,646 $105,842 $70,719 $348,274 $379.467 $12,786 $120,624 $468,791 $2,746,368 $474.524 $474,524 ! $228,017 1 $1,442,690 +i I 1 $722,897 $191,157 $328,736 537.185 $211,865 $11.088 $35,202 $548.199 I $3.757.036 $133,401 $133,401 i 1 so $86,423 $8,415 $0 $125,146 $26,257 $111,557 $5,211 I 5220,540 $182,264 $765,812 $40,658 $40,658 I7 $156,684 $316,970 $223,542 $328,960 $687,389 $3,855,668 $2,410,310 $845,431 J. I $306,569 $50,996 $179,454 $32,101 $9,960 $265,689 $1,870,926 I $119,074 $119,074 $930,224 $484,276 $926,119 $74,076 $619,988 $1,483,632 12.317.113 $1,183,270 $1,183,270 15 7 9 13 16 3 10 11 14 m I a Pl N O a  M 12^* i  I ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS 16 :badgett 17 :BALE 18 IBASELiNE 19 BOOKER MAGNET 20 iBRADY___________ 21 'CARVER MAGNET 22 iCHlCOT 23 CLOVERDALE 24 DAVID O DODD 25 iPAIR PARK________ 26 I FOREST PARK 27 FRANKLIN 28 I FULBRIGHT_______ 29 1 GARLAND_________ 30 (GEYER SPRINGS 31 'GIBBS MAGNET $666,504 $1,200,466 $1,111,915 $892,564 $476,919 $378,889 $0 S481.989 $954,119 $752,687 $1,845,175 $484,019 $321,017 $215,003 I St i\n5145,216 5341.296 5156,719 5154.780 $220 55.028 so $45,062 $12,275 19 17 22 6 18 21 27 31 32 23 24 25 48 26 37 27 $666,504 $1,200,466 $1,111,915 $892,564 $476,919 $378,889 SO $481,989 $954,119 $74,594 $107,175 $193,889 $237,544 $136,713 $205,943 so S139.186 $156,315 $21,651 $178,047 $8,001 $1,557 $0 51,332 $0 $0 $127,580 $279,738 $150,163 $402,280 $472,862 $76,074 $45,033 SO $241,614 $474,315 5145,305 ( $423,784 S351.026 $25,820 j $263,912 $121,554 $0 $56,127 I $183,633 I I?, 3 21 s .4M $91,391 $214,024 $26,102 $373,162 $626,040 $43,098 I $190,839 $650,595 $129,202 I SO $136,192 $71,761 $97,295 $218,324 $213,856 $752,687 $1,845,175 $484,019 I $36,857 $5.446 $96,646 $12.684 $51,671 $39 827 $2,588 $38,364 $133,255 $116,682 $321,017 $215,003 Table CST-3 Page 1  Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI  COST SUMMARY OF BUILDINGS By Options and Priorities Little Rock School District Table CST-3 TYPE OF SCHOOL NO 32 33 34 NAME ISH___________ JEFFERSON MARTIN L KING 35 ! MABELVALE 36 i McDermott 37 38 39 40 41 42 MEADOWCLIFF MITCHELL_______ MARTIN L KING OTTER CREEK PULASKI HEIGHTS RIGHTSELL 43 [ROCKEFELLER 44 I ROM INE 45 ItERRY 46 [WAKEFIELD 47 iWASHINGTON 48 [WATSON__________ Tg [western hills 50 [WILLIAMS MAGNET 51 iWILSON IWOODRU^ ADMINISTRATION BUILDINGS_______ Total Administration SUBTOTAL SHOOLS \u0026amp; ADMIN TOTAL BASE COST 1995 PRIORITY 1 1-2 Years 1995-1997 PRIORITY 2 3 Years 1998 PRIORITY 3 3-5 Years 98-2001 PRIORITY 4 5-10 Years 2001-2006 PRIORITY 5 10-15 Years 2006-2011 PRIORITY TOTALS NoEscalition DIST SITE $239,042 $1,568.674 5689,136 $1,138,095 $239,042 $674,313 $1,389,146 $645,652 $399,444 51.660,421 $498,742 $313,822 $937,532 $850,067 $723,963 5933.698 Total Elementaryi $22,682,055 ' $2,661,172 $56,329,991 $0 $334,844 $94,614 $71,174 $0 $48,281 5302,995 561.724 $133,487 $233,762 $96,792 $7,807 $308,388 $89,413 5211,937 $23,358 $3.252,993 $511,026 $12,446,784 I I7 T IT $0 $474,776 $208,177 $921,415 so $422.872 5429.235 I $264.764\n$11,695 : 5499,837 [ $194,583 I I TI $7,206 $252,213 5304.581 5294.576 S440.444 $7.449.167 $697,256 $15,838,106 t T so $561,070 i $231,863 IT i i $27,798 $0 $86,664 $175,058 $58,917 $48,492 $89.785 $60,406 $12,597 $205,311 $316,702 $67,012 $198,818 $5.344.706 $812,769 $13,900,301 T T I X $0 $0 so so ITI $239,042 $197,984 $154,481 $117,708 $239,042 $1,568,674 5689,136 $1,138,095 DISTRICT ESTIMATES__________ ADA COSTS :ROOF REPLACEMENT__________ ASBESTOS ABATEMENT TOTAL SCHOOLS \u0026amp; ADMIN I I OPTIONS OPTION M escalation Deduct District Costs TOTAL BASIS AMOUNT option t escalation option c escalation $5,386,000 $3,452,000 $3,185,000 $68,352,991 ($1,223,000) $67,129,991 I $12,821,275 TOTAL PROJ, COSTI TOTAL PROJ, COSTI S3.198.051 $83,149,317 $24,259,575 $3,655,583 $95,045,149 __________________ ' 519,317.245 __________________ ' 53,457,869 total PROJ, COST! $89.905.125 51,386.000 5674.000 51,685.000 $16,191,784 51.000,000 $261,000 $1,500,010 $18,599,116 $1,000,000 $406,000 I $15.306.301 ($1,223,000)  $14,968,784\nso ' 51.270,373 ! $16,239,157 SO 51,541.862 $18,599.116 $15.306.301 ~S12.821.275~r 52.877,060 ' $34.297.451 I $13,412.985 $3.602.387 $16.510,646 i $35.614,489 i so ! $1,913,413 $16,882,197 I $12,584,805 i $4,526.826 $35,710,748 SO 53.316,155 $18.622,456 58,537,530 54.816,234 $28,660,065 $6,732,440 56.317,360 $28,356,101 I $0 SO $0 so so $650,913 $2,540 $0 SO $5,537 SO $101,260 $1,347.324 $296,593 $2,583,704 $1,000,000 $1,425,000 $5,008.704 $5.008.704 $0 52.405.401 $7,414,105 $2,309,060 $3.434,366 $10,752.150 SO 54,564,758 $9,593,462 I [ T t I $239,042 $116,496 $481,858 $260.247 $205,770 $186,123 $144,419 $286,212 $171,619 5133,834 $150,437 $169,818 $5.287,865 $343.530 $11,561.085 $1,000,000 5686,000 SO $13,247,085 $13.247.085 $0 S10.610 167 $23.857.252 SO $14.713,150 $27.960.235 so 520.328.367 $33,575,452 $239,042 $674,313 $1,389,146 $645,652 $399.444 $1,660,421 $498,742 $313,822 $937,532 $850,067 $723,963 $933,698 ,682.055 $2,661,172 $56,329,991 $5,386,000 $3,452,000 $3,185,010 $68,352,991 S12.821.275 520.479,155 $100,430,421 I NO 49 30 35 46 20 33 34 35 10 38 39 50 40 47 51 42 32 29 43 44 45 ($1,223,000) $67,129,991 1 ! $24,259,575 | I $28.108.019 i T $119.497.585 [i $19,317,245 $37.670.724 $124,117,960  + il_ p- Table CST-3 Page 2 2l J .J 11 1 ma ' 2. Jo I? 3 I \u0026lt; 1 fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl fl fl   fl I COST SUMMARY OF BUILDINGS By Options and Priorities Little Rock School District Table CST-3 TYPE OF SCHOOL NO______________ OPTION M NAME I ADDITIONS____________________ I NEW SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION :total option cost ESCALATION IMPACT iCOST I ESCALATION @ 4%/ YEAR ESCALATION DETAIL TOTAL BASE COST 1995 $5,417,945 $7.403.330 $12,821,275 i PRIORITY 1 1-2 Years 1995-1997 PRIORITY 2 3 Years 1998 PRIORITY 3 3-5 Years 98-2001 PRIORITY 4 5-10 Years 2001-2006 PRIORITY 5 10-15 Years 2006-201i PRIORITY TOTALS Ho Escalation SO I 55.417,945 I $7,403,330 1 $12,821,275 I 1T 1 r SO SO $0 $5,417,945 $7,403,330 $12,821,275 ! DIST SITE NO J 1 $79,951,266 1 Year 1995 53,196,051 $83,149,317 $14,968,784 1-2 years 1995-1997 $1,270.373 $16,239,157 $31,420,391 3 Years 1996 52.877,060 $34,297,451 I_____________ ! 11 $3,198,051 19961 $71,551,042 ___ Z 1997 31 19981 4| 19991 ___ 5I_ 20001 if 20011 zzr 20021 81 20031 ol 20041 101 20051 ___11l_ 2006 i M. 20071 13l 20081 141 20091 ___1^ 20101 t I I $15,306,301 I i 3-5 Years S 2000 ' 53.316,155 ! I $18,622,456 | $5,008,704 5-10 Years 2005 52,405.401 $7,414,105 !I $13,247,0'35\" ! 10-15 Years I 2010 i 510,610.167 I $23,857,252' $79,951,266 $20,479,155 $100,430,421 I nl $598,751 , $16,790,536 $671,621 $1,256,816 $612,252 $19,855,932 I $15,918,553 I $794,237 I $636,742 $17,462,157 : $20,650,169  $698,486 i $18,160,643 ! $726.426 I $826,007 : $21,476,176 I $859.047 I $18,887,069 I $22,335,223 I $755,463 $893,409 i $19,642,552 j $23,226.632 $785,702 I $929,145 $16,555,296 I $662,212 $17,217,507 $688,700 $17,906,208 $716,248 $18,622,456 $744,898 I\n$20,426,254 j $24,157,777 ! $19,367,354 $817,130 $966,311 $774,694 1 S21.245.364 I 525,124,086 3849,815 51,004,964 522,095,199  526,129,052 : 520,142.048 I I 5805,682 i\n520,947.730 5883,808 i 522,979,007 1 5919,160 , $1,045,162 j 527,174,214\n$1,086,969 I 5837,909\n521.785.640 5871,426 523,896.166 528,261,163\n522,657,065 $955,927 524,854.094 5994,164 ' 525.848,258 : $1,033,930 i 526.882,189  51.075,286 527,957.476 $1,118,299 529.075.775 51.130.447 i 529.391.630 $1,175,665 5906,263\n523.563,348 5942,534 ' $30,567,295 I $24,505,882 j $1.222.692  531.769.967 51,271.599 $33,061,586 51.322.463 534.384,050 5980.235 : 525.486.117 I 51.019,445 526.505.562 . 51.060,222 527.565.784 $200,348 $5,209,052 $208,362 $5,417,414 $216,697 $5,634,111 $225,364 $5,859,475 $234,379 $6,093,854 $243,754 $6,337,608 $253,504 $6,591,113 $263,645 $6,854,757 $274,190 $7,128,948 $285,158 $7,414,105 $296.564 57.710.670 $308,427 $8,019,096 5320,764 58.339.860 $333,594 $8,673,455 $346,938 59.020.393 $529,883 $13,776,968 $551,079 $14,328,047 $573,122 $14,901,169 $596,047 $15,497,216 I I t 1 MF $619,889 $16,117,104 $644,684 $16,761,789 $670,472 $17,432,260 $697,290 $18,129,551 $725,182 $18,854,733 $754,189 $19,608,922 $784,357 $20,393,279 $815,731 $21,209,010 $848,360 $22,057,370 $882,295 $22,939,665 $917,587 $23,857,252 Table CST-3 Page 3 h m 4 I Q N O 2* :i\n5? I 1 II 1   COST SUMMARY OF BUILDINGS Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I Table CST-3 fl By Options and Priorities Little Rock School District TYPE OF SCHOOL fl fl fl fl fl fl  TOTAL BASE COST NO OPTION T NAME 1995 PRIORITY 1 1-2 Years 1995-1997 PRIORITY 2 3 Years 1998 PRIORITY 3 3-5 Years 98-2001 PRIORITY 4 5-10 Years 2001-2006 PRIORITY 5 10-15Years 2006-2011 PRIORITY TOTALS No Escalation DiST SITE NO lADDITIONS !NEW SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION total option cost $13,666,575 $10,593,000 $24,259,575 $8,116,485 $5,296,500 T 1 ESCALATION IMPACT iCOST I t ESCALATION @ 4%/ YEAR ESCALATION DETAIL I I L $0 I $13,412,985 ! $3,241,030 $5,296,500 $8,537,530 i $2,309,060 I $2,309,060 $0 $13,666,575 $10,593,000 $24,259,575 i I I i 1 1996 2 1997 ___ 3 1998 4 1999 5 2000 I T T T IT T iT iT iT 6l 2001 7 20021 ___ 8I_ 20031 ___ 9 2004 __ 10 2005 11 2006 12 2007 i| TT __ 13[ 20081 __ 14 2009 J. T tsi 20101 BASE COST $91,389,566 1 Year 1995 $3,655,583 $95,045,149 $3,655,583 $3,655,583 PRIORITY 1 I PRIORITY 2 i PRIORITY 3 I PRIORITY 4 PRIORITY 5 $14,968,784 1-2 years I $32,012,101 I 1995-1997 I $1,541,862 i 3 Years 1998 $3,602,387 I i T $23,843,831 3-5 Years 2000 $4,816,234 I $7,317,764 5-10 Years 2005 I $13,247,085 TOTAL 1-5 $91,389,566 2I fl $16,510.646 I $35,614,489 | $28,660,065 i $3,434,386 I $10.752.15'0 I 10-15 Years 2010 $14,713,150 I $27,960.235 $28,108,019 $119,497,585 I i $598,751 $1,280,484 $23,577,759 i $28,454,698 $943,110 $24,520,869 I $980,835 ! $1,138,188 $29,592,886 i $1,183,715 I $25,501,704 ! $30,776,601 $1,020.066 $1,231,064 I $953,753 I $22,739,393 $909,576 $23,648,969 $945,959 I $24,594,927\n$983,797 I I $26,521,772 i $32,007,666  $25,578,724 1 $1,060,871 I $1,280,307 $1,023,149 $27,582.643 j $33,287.972 i $26,601,873 ' ! $1,103,306\n$28,685,949 ' $1,147,438 i $29,833,387 I $1,193,335 $1,331,519 $1,064,075 ! $34.619,491 ] $27.665.948^ ~ ! $1,384,780 i $1,106,638 ' $36,004,271 $1,440,171 I $31,026,722 ! $37,444,441 i $1,241,069 $32,267,791 ' $1,290,712 I $33,558,503 $1,342,340 $1,497,778 I I $26.772.566 I $1,150,903 ! $29,923,490 1 I $1,196,940\n$38,942,219 1 $31,120,429 $1,557,689 $40,499,908 $1,619,996 : $1,244,817 i $32,365,246\n$1,294,610 $292,711 $7,421,658 $296,866 $7,718,524 $308,741 $8,027,265 $321,091 $8,348,356 $333,934 $8,682,290 $347,292 $9,029,582 $361,183 $9,390,765 $375,631 $9,766,396 $390,656 $10,157,052 $406,282 $10,563,334 $422,533 I $34,900,843  $42,119,904 1 $33,659,856\n$10,965,867 $1,396,034 $1,684.796 I $1,346,394 I $36,296,876 | $43,804,700  $35,006,250 $1,451,875 $37,748,751 $1.509.950 $39,258.702 $1,570,348 $1,752,188 $1,400,250 $439.435 $11,425,302 $457,012 : $45,556,868 I $36,406,500 $1.822.276 T $1,456,260 i $47,379,164 ! $37,862,761 $1,895,167 $1,514,510 $40,829,050 I $49,274,330 I $39,377,271 I $11 882,314 $475,293 1 $12,357,606 $494,304 i $12,851,911 $529,883 $19,384,616 $775,385 $20,160,001 $806,400 $20,966,401 $838,656 $21,805,057 $872,202 $22,677,259 $907,090 $23,584,349 $943,374 $24,527,723 $981,109 $25,508,832 $1,020,353 $26,529,186 $1,061,167 $27,590,353 $1,103,614 $28,693,967 $1,147,759 $29,841,726 $1,193,669 $31,035,395 $1,241,416 $32,276,811 $1,291,072 $33,567,883 1ir III II ma I T I Table CST-3 Page 4 I' 3 \u0026amp; s i:}t i: I r 1 I.   a  a a a a a COST SUMMARY OF BUILDINGS By Options and Priorities Little Rock SchooL District TYPE OF SCHOOL NO OPTION C NAME jADDITIQNS____________________ (NEW SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION ! total option cost I ESCALATION IMPACT I t IcOST lESCALATION @ 4%/ YEAR ESCALATION DETAIL 1 19961 21 19971 19981 4? 19991 20001 6 2001 7 20021 ___8|_ 20031 91 20041 101 2005) 11( 20061 I2I 20071 131 20081 __ 2QQ9| __1^ 2010\nTOTAL BASE COST 1995 I i Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I Table CST-3 $15,127,125 $4,190,120 $19,317,245 BASE COST $86,447,236 1 Year 1995 $3,457,889 $89,905,125 $3,457,889 $3,457,889 i I PRIORITY 1 1-2 Years 1995-1997 PRIORITY 2 SYears 1998 PRIORITY 3 3-5 Years 98-2001 PRIORITY 4 5-1OYaars 2001-2006 PRIORITY 5 10-15 Years 2006-2011 PRIORITY TOTALS No Escalation $0 PRIORITY 1 $14,968,784 1-2 years 1995-1997 $1,913,413 $16,882,197 I $598,751 $32,866,542 : $1,314,662 ' $34,181,204 I 51.367,248 DIST SITE NO I $8,394,685 I $4,190,120 f i $12,584,805 I I PRIORITY 2 i P$31,183,921 I I 3 Years 1998 $4,526,826 1 T $6,732,440 1 $6,732,440 PRIORIPr 3 $22,038,741 3-5 Years 2000 $6,317,360 $35,710,748 I $28,356,101 $1,247,357 i $40,189,576 ! $1,607,583 ( $41,797,159 ! $1,671,886 [ T $881,550 I i I SO $0 i PRIORITY 4 1 PRIORITY S I S5.008.704 I 5-10 Years 2005 $4,584,758 $9,593,462 I i $13,247,085 10-15 Years 2010 $20,328,367 I T $200,348 ! $32,001,979 I $10,357,400 $1,280,079 $414,296 $33,282,058 I $10,771,696 $1,331,282 1 $430,868\n$35,548,452 | $43,469,045  $34,613,340 [ $11,202,564 S1.421.938 I $1,738,762 $1,384,534 $448,103 I $33,575,^ i I $36.970.390 I $45.207.807 j $35,997,874 j $11,650,666 I i S1.478.816 i S1.808.312 $1,439,915 ' $38,449,206 | 547,016.119 j $37,437,789 I S1.537.968 ! $39,987,174 I S1.599,487  541,586,661 i $1,663,466 I $1,880,645 $1,497,512 i $48,896,764 | $38,935,300 i I $1,955,871 I $50,852,635 ! $2,034,105 $1,557,412 $40,492,712 $1,619,708 i $43.250,128\n$52,886.740 i $42,112,421 $1,730,005 I $2,115,470 $1,684,497 ! $44 980.133 i $55.002.210 I $43,796,918 i $1,799,205 : $46,779.338 : $1,871,174 i S48.650.511 ' $1,946,020 I $50,596,532  52.023,861 ! $52.620,393 $2,104,816 554,725.209 ! S2.189.008 $2,200,088\n557,202,298 ' $2,288,092 $1,751,877 $45,546.795 $1,821,952  $59.490,390  $47,370,746 $2,379,616 I $1,894,830 $61,870,006 I $49,265.576 I $2,474,800\n$64,344,806 ' $2,573,792  $66.916,596 S2.676.744 I $56,914,217 : $69,595,342 $1,970,623\n$51,236,199 $2,049,448 $53.285.647 ! $2,131,426 ! $55,417,073 I $466,027 $12,116,693 $484,668 $12,601,360 $504,054 $13,105,415 $524,217 $13,629,631 $545,185 $14,174,817 $566,993 $14,741,809 $589,672 $15,331,482 $613,259 $15.944.741 $637,790 j $16.582,531 I $663,301 ! S17.245.832  $669,833 ! $17,935.665 $529,883 $27,059,069 $1,082,363 $28,141,432 $1,125,657 $29.267,089 $1,170,684 $30,437,773 $1,217,511 $31,655,283 $1,266,211 $32,921,495 $1,316,860 $34,238,355 $1,369,534 $35,607,889 $1,424,316 $37,032,204 $1,481,288 $38,513,493 $1,540,540 $40,054,032 $1,602,161 $41,656,193 $1,666,248 $43,322,441 $1,732,898 $45,055,339 $1,802,214 $46,857,552 I $15.127,125 $4,190,120 $19,317,245 I I TOTAL 1-5 $86,447,236 $37,670,724 $124,117,960 ...... I II i! Table CST-3 Page S 1 7 I ir *1 m a 3 \u0026amp; I. Io ' b* S\n3 f \u0026gt; Iia  Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I a a a ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (ATTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL OPTION \"M BADGETT BALE BASELINE BOOKER MAGNET BRADY CARVER MAGNET CHICOT CLOVERDALE DAVID O DODD FAIR PARK FOREST PARK FRANKLIN FULBRIGHT GARLAND GEYER SPRINGS II (REVISED) (REVISED) (REVISED) (CLOSED) (REVISED) (CLOSED) Table CST-4 Bi ui X I- 9 UI X  X o 3 m _J o X u 3 m z UJ o x UJ Q. in 3 _l X X 3 tn O \u0026lt; X \u0026lt; o o z \u0026lt; X UJ X o u iZ UJ Q \u0026lt; I- _t UJ Q z o m X UJ X X a\u0026gt; o \u0026lt; UJ X \u0026lt; X S? o (O tn O o O z UJ X X S? io o CO o u X m z o o 5 UJ z Elementary z\u0026lt; 9 ffl 56 49 138 129 101 143 104 89 257 239 268 442 160 138 395 368 369 585 65% 64% 65% 65% 73% 76% 200 152 152 143 74 69 141 129 162 268 281 25 21 353 328 26 61 104 179 118 358 335 421 395 173 156 194 137 171 449 418 287 255 313 226 379 379 270 510 478 495 464 314 285 356 405 452 474 439 640 583 339 287 483 47% 44% 70% 70% 85% 85% 55% 55% 54% 34% 38% 95% 95% 45% 44% 92% 79% 78% 223 223 345 345 414 414 660 660 471 471 500 523 523 448 448 350 350 350 418 418 A12 472 584 584 297 331 331 63 85 -50 -23 45 -171 92 201 500 13 45 -Al -16 36 65 -6 13 -34 -2 33 -56 1 -42 44 -152 6,741 9,095 -5,350 -2,461 4,815 -18,297 9,844 21,507 1,391 4,815 -5,029 -1,712 3,852 6,955 -642 1,391 -3,638 -214 3,531 -5,992 107 -4,494 4,708 -16,264 subtotal $159,965 $1,189,305 $111,280 $236,470 $1,057,160 $2,754,180 $0 TABLE CST-4 PAGE 1 5 J !( y m o. Ps  o 1 h. }\u0026gt; N J? 2 =' S i\n* :i s? 3 3  ILittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION fATTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) Table CST-4 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT   SCHOOL OPTION \"M GIBBS MAGNET ISH JEFFERSON MARTIN L KING MCDERMOTT MABELVALE MEADOWCLIFF MITCHELL OTTER CREEK PULASKI HEIGHTS RIGHTSELL ROCKEFELLER ROMINE TERRY WAKEFIELD II (CLOSED) (CLOSED) (REVISED) (CLOSED) (REVISED) (REVISED) (REVISED) (CLOSED) a: UJ X o iu X S u 3 m O 340 7 4 231 167 153 170 155 11 336 306 254 235 18 14 27 26 34 32 557 408 106 250 590 u 3 m 2 lU U UI Q. 42% J: o \u0026lt; Q. \u0026lt; U o z \u0026lt; O' LU Q. o 351 351 459 Ui 3 -I Q. X 3 Ui + u iZ UJ o \u0026lt; LU a -131 u. io IO Z O Ui EC UJ a iu Ui o \u0026lt; UJ O' \u0026lt; -14,017 2 u. \u0026lt;2 IO IO 5 (0 O u O 2 LU K m O U O' m z o u g z Q ni Elementary y J 5- J 1  I 462 465 169 302 356 315 316 278 317 160 135 92 80 316 306 222 204 390 368 229 282 394 469 469 466 578 523 468 486 433 328 496 441 346 315 334 320 249 230 424 400 786 690 500 99% 99% 36% 52% 68% 67% 65% 64% 97% 32% 31% 27% 25% 95% 96% 89% 89% 92% 92% 29% 41% 79% 617 617 524 524 542 542 463 463 283 376 376 394 394 264 264 426 426 424 424 545 545 539 148 148 58 -54 19 74 -23 30 -45 -120 -65 48 79 -70 -56 177 196 0 24 -241 -145 15,836 15,836 6,206 -5,778 2,033 7,918 -2,461 3,210 -4,815 -12,840 -6,955 5,136 8,453 -7,490 -5,992 18,939 20,972 0 2,568 -25,787 -15,515 subtotal $375,570 $452,075 $389,480 $1,008,475 $2,225,600 I $0 ! I m a c ^9 3 TABLE CST-4 PAGE 2 l i it ! S' ! t I J n 3 \" ri ST aLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I   ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (ATTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL OPTION \"M\" WASHINGTON WATSON WESTERN HILLS (REVISED) WILLIAMS MAGNET WILSON WOODRUFF (CLOSED) PROPOSED NEW SCHOOL PROPOSED NEW SCHOOL Table CST-4 09 3 _l Q. It 3 09 O' UJ z I-o tu Z g u 3 m o \u0026lt; Q. \u0026lt; O o z o uiZi Q it u3 m _i \u0026lt; I-o z UI u It UI Q. UI a. O \u0026lt; 1- ui o Z o m a: UI Q. IL mo  \u0026lt; UI It \u0026lt; U. IS m \u0026lt;o @) O o O z UI O' U. io5 IO (0 o u It 09 z o o g UJ z 16 15 110 107 122 119 202 199 60 28 449 666 574 i,21 414 193 186 682 589 537 521 315 305 98% 97% 80% 79% 61% 61% 801 801 505 505 350 350 119 212 -32 -16 35 45 12,733 -3,424 -1,712 3,745 4,815 Elementary $111,280 287 274 85 489 473 145 59% 58% 59% 515 426 426 328 515 -63 A,7 183 -6,741 -5,029 19,581 $326,885 614 642 96% 0 -642 -68,694 $3,778,170 167 616 27% 0 -616 -65,912 subtotal total elementary schools $438,165 $5,417,945 $3,625,160 $7,403,330 $7,403,330 I 3 ?  1 TABLE CST-4 PAGE 3 J n Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I H    fl  fl fl * I p ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (ATTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL OPTION \"M CLOVERDALE DUNBAR FOREST HEIGHTS HENDERSON MABELVALE MANN MAGNET PULASKI HEIGHTS SOUTHWEST OPTION \"M CENTRAL FAIR HALL McClellan II II (CLOSED) Table CST-4 loU\nX o ui X 2 o 3 m O X o 3 m z LU U X LU X X \u0026lt; o o z LU Q. o m _i Q. X 3 W + u lZ LU a \u0026lt; I-LU Q zo X LU a. iZ co \u0026lt; IU X \u0026lt; u. co IcOo @ co O u o z LU Of u. CO IO IO IO \u0026lt;) co o o a: co z o u2 LU Z 2l ml Jr.High School 127 200 139 129 255 222 247 209 148 657 741 585 517 452 574 685 542 415 784 941 724 646 707 796 932 751 563 84% 79% 81% 80% 64% 72% 73% 72% 1^% 1000 1000 1046 1046 1268 1268 1221 1221 737 216 59 322 400 561 A12 289 470 174 ^1 a 7 I ir I... m a I C ' Fsi u^-51 B3 314 295 281 313 416 378 591 535 730 673 872 848 57% 56% 68% 63% 935 935 935 971 971 935 205 262 99 123 total jr. high schools $oT $0 High School if  S'if \"i\n575 496 251 2M 404 333 211 212 1030 1164 579 491 533 420 882 755 1605 1660 836 733 937 753 1093 1027 64% 70% 69% 67% 51% 56% 81% 74% 2255 2256 1206 1206 1389 1389 1157 1157 651 596 370 473 452 636 64 130 I? 3 * I TABLE CST-4 PAGE 4 11 ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (ATTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I Table CST-4 M la  SCHOOL OPTION \"MII PARKVIEW MAGNATE SUMMARY OPTION M COSTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS TOTALS q: tu z I-O UJ sZ 365 u 3 m ie. o3 m 435 -1 O H 800 z lU u lU Q. 54% \u0026lt;0 3 Q. z 3 (0 O \u0026lt; Q. \u0026lt; O o z \u0026lt; z UJ Q. O g Z UJ Q 4 H UJ Q Z o 0) oe UJ Q. Z to o i) \u0026lt; UI z U. J2 o (O @ (0 o o o z lU q: u. to IUO) too u z 0) z O o  UJ Z 3fl 991 191 total high schools High School $oT $0 i I I ADDITION $5,417,945 SO ________ $0 $5,417,945 NEW $7,403,330 $0 _______ $0 $7,403,330 $12,821,275 IT , ma 0'sir \nM  'I S' P1 1 TABLE CST-4 PAGE 5 H fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl  fl fl fl fl fl fl ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (A TTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL OPTION \"WI BADGETT BALE BASELINE BOOKER MAGNET BRADY CARVER MAGNET CHICOT CLOVERDALE DAVID O DODD FAIR PARK FOREST PARK FRANKLIN FULBRIGHT GARLAND GEYER SPRINGS II (REVISED) (REVISED) (REVISED) (CLOSED) (REVISED) (CLOSED) Table CST-4 q: UJ I o UJ H X 5 o \u0026lt; m \u0026lt; I-O O \u0026lt; m z lU o b: tu Q. 56 49 138 129 101 143 200 152 152 143 74 69 141 129 162 268 281 25 21 353 328 26 61 104 104 89 257 239 268 442 160 138 395 368 369 585 65% 64% 65% 65% 73% 76% 179 118 379 270 47% 44% \u0026gt; O \u0026lt; Q. \u0026lt; O o z \u0026lt; a: UJ Q. O 223 223 345 345 414 414 660 660 471 471 Ui 3 a. q: 3 Ui g UuJ. a 4 UJ Q z o co q: UJ 0. LL mo \u0026lt; UJ er \u0026lt; u. tuo\u0026gt; O oO z IB q: u. io2 () o u a: I- (0 z o o 5 UJ z zl 3ffl Elementary 63 85 -50 -23 45 -171 92 201 6,741 9,095 -5,350 -2,461 4,815 -18,297 $159,965 $1,189,305 S 9,844 21,507 !i I m fl 358 335 421 395 173 156 194 510 478 495 464 314 285 356 70% 70% 85% 85% 55% 55% 54% 500 523 523 448 448 350 350 350 500 13 45 -47 -16 36 65 -6 1,391 4,815 -5,029 -1,712 3,852 6,955 -642 $111,280 bl 3\u0026gt; j 2s S' * :i: I' 137 171 449 418 287 255 313 226 379 405 452 474 439 640 583 339 287 483 34% 38% 95% 95% 45% 44% 92% 79% 78% 418 418 472 472 584 584 231 13 -34 -2 33 -56 1 -42 1,391 -3,638 -214 3,531 -5,992 107 -4,494 $236,470 J? 91 n 331 331 44 -152 4,708 -16,264 subtotal $1,057,160 $2,754,180 $0 TABLE CST-4 PAGE 1 1  Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I  ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (A TTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Table CST-4 fl fl fl q: UJ X i- O UJ isC O \u0026lt; _l m fl SCHOOL OPTION \"M X 5 lx: o m \u0026lt; I- o z UJ o O' UJ Q. a \u0026lt; a. \u0026lt; o o z \u0026lt; a: UJ Q. O II fl GIBBS MAGNET ISH (CLOSED) JEFFERSON 340 250 590 42% (CLOSED) martin l king McDermott (REVISED) MABELVALE MEADOWCLIFF MITCHELL (CLOSED) OTTER CREEK (REVISED) PULASKI HEIGHTS RIGHTSELL (REVISED) rockefeller ROMINE terry (REVISED) WAKEFIELD (CLOSED) 351 351 459 CO Z) 0. q: X tn o u. UJ Q \u0026lt; UJ Q Z' o m a: UJ Q. uZ Oi o \u0026lt; UJ Q \u0026lt; u. 52 u3 co O o o Z UJ Qi -131 -14,017 U. 55 U) () \u0026lt;n O o q: (D Z o o 5 UJ z z n Elementary 7 f S 7 __4 2n 27^ 167 153 170 155 11 336 306 254 235 18 14 21 26 34 32 557 408 106 462 465 169 302 356 315 316 nz 317 469 469 466 578 523 468 486 433 328 99% 99% 36% 52% 68% 67% 65% 64% 97% 617 617 524 524 542 542 463 463 283 148 148 58 -54 19 74. -23 30 -45 15,836 15,836 6,206 -5,778 2,033 7,918 -2,461 3,210 -4,815 $375,570 m a Fl 0 3 It 160 135 92 80 316 306 222 204 390 368 229 282 394 496 441 346 315 334 320 249 230 424 400 786 690 500 32% 31% 95% 96% 89% 89% 92% 92% 29% 41% 376 376 394 394 264 264 426 426 424 424 545 545 539 -120 -65 48 79 -70 -56 177 196 0 24 -241 -145 -12,840 -6,955 5,136 8,453 -7,490 -5,992 18,939 20,972 0 2,568 -25,787 -15,515 $452,075 $389,480 $1,008,475 subtotal $2,225,600 $0 TABLE CST-4 PAGE 2 o :\u0026gt; 8*' ii 5?  3 f IILittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION TTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT a: lU I 1- O UJ o \u0026lt; _i m \u0026lt; Q. \u0026lt; O o z Table CST-4  SCHOOL OPTION \"M I s o 3 CD \u0026lt; O Z. UJ o UJ Q. \u0026lt; O' UJ Q. O II  WASHINGTON WATSON fl WESTERN HILLS (REVISED) 16 15 110 107 122 119 666 574 427 414 193 186 682 589 537 521 315 305 98% 97% 80% 79% 61% 61% 801 801 505 505 350 350 WILLIAMS MAGNET WILSON WOODRUFF 202 199 60 287 274 85 489 473 145 59% 58% 5Q% 515 426 426 328 (CLOSED) PROPOSED NEW SCHOOL PROPOSED NEW SCHOOL 28 449 614 642 96% 0 167 616 27% 0 co 3 Q. O' 3 OJ + o u. UJ Q lU Q 119 212 -32 -16 35 45 515 -63 47 183 z O co O' UJ iL co o \u0026lt; UJ a: \u0026lt; u. to h-m O o O z UJ O' 12,733 -3,424 -1,712 3,745 4,815 -6,741 -5,029 19,581 -642 -68,694 -616 -65,912 subtotal total elementary schools u. \u0026gt;o lo  co O O O' la z. O CJ 5 UJ z Elementary $111,280 $326,885 $3,778,170 I 21 I I 3 3 J i S' m  I I .  ( $438,165 $5,417,945 $3,625,160 $7,403,330 $7,403,330 I 9 :i !  ws S' '  I? 3 I TABLE CST-4 PAGE 3 15   Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I  d 1  d d d ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (A rrEND4NCe zone MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL OPTION \"M CLOVERDALE DUNBAR FOREST HEIGHTS HENDERSON MABELVALE MANN MAGNET Pyi^SKI HEIGHTS SOUTHWEST II (CLOSED) tn Table CST-4 OPTION \"M II CENTRAL FAIR HALL McClellan O' LU X I- o iu X s O \u0026lt; _1 m \u0026gt; O \u0026lt; Q. \u0026lt; O o z X _l Q. q: X tn o iu Q z Q tn O' LU LU tn o' u. io O o- o \u0026lt; _i m \u0026lt; O z LU O K LU 0. \u0026lt; a: LU OL o \u0026lt; ui Q \u0026lt; LU Q \u0026lt; LU \u0026lt;2  o o o z LU a: tn o o q: tn z o o  LU z ml Jr.High School 127 200 139 129 255 222 247 209 148 314 295 281 313 575 496 257 242 404 333 211 272 657 741 585 517 452 574 685 542 415 416 378 591 535 1030 1164 579 491 533 420 882 755 784 941 724 646 707 796 932 751 563 730 673 872 848 1605 1660 836 733 937 753 1093 1027 84% 79% 81% 80% 64% 72% 73% 72% 74% 57% 56% 68% 63% 64% 70% 69% 67% 57% 56% 81% 74% 1000 1000 1046 1046 1268 1268 1221 1221 737 935 935 935 971 971 216 59 322 400 561 472 289 470 174 935 205 262 99 123 total jr. high schools $o7 $0 High School IT I I m a fl -\"o 3 a )  S!)  I 2256 2256 1206 1206 1389 1389 1157 1157 651 596 370 473 452 636 64 130 5 n I TABLE CST-4 PAGE 4  ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION fl fl fl fl fl fl fl (A TTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL OPTION \"M II PARKVIEW MAGNATE SUMMARY OPTION M COSTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS TOTALS Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I Table CST-4 o: UJ X o LU X 5 3 m _1 \u0026lt; o 365 435 800 o 3 ffl z LU O LU Q. 54% \u0026gt; o \u0026lt; Q. \u0026lt; O o z \u0026lt; CH LU Q. o 991 m 3 Q. X 3 (0 u. 52 in m O LU Q \u0026lt; _i UJ Q 191 Z O (0 Q LU Q. LU \u0026lt;n o \u0026lt; LU Of \u0026lt; u. to io (D l) to o o O z UJ K VJ O o q: ta z o o 5 LU Z High School 1 total high schools ADDITION $5,417,945 $0 $0 $5,417,945 $0 1 5- 3 I 1 NEW $7,403,330 $0 $0 $7,403,330 $12,821,275 TABLE CST-4 PAGE 5 IF i m J O' ' II* I *^1 a ' r- M l1 bl J 5?  3 f I fl 'I  Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I d ri ri ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (ATTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL OPTION \"C BADGETT BALE BASELINE BOOKER MAGNET BRADY CARVER MAGNET CHICOT CLOVERDALE DAVID O DODD FAIR PARK FOREST PARK franklin FULBRIGHT GARLAND GEYER SPRINGS II (REVISED) REVISED) (REVISED) (REVISED) (CLOSED) (REVISED) (REVISED) (CLOSED) (REVISED) Table- CST-6 m UJ z O uj z  CJ \u0026lt; -I m \u0026lt; I- O o \u0026lt; m I- z lU o tn UJ 0. \u0026gt; o \u0026lt; 0. \u0026lt; o o z I \u0026lt;  UJ O. O 3 U O. or 3 CO O iZ UJ o \u0026lt; ui Q z o co z UI 0.  tn o \u0026lt; UJ tn 4 u. 2 to co O \u0026lt;J O z LU O' X lA 1 co O o O' CO z O o 5 UI Z: 0 1 fll Elementary 66 66 138 137 101 145 104 292 257 247 268 186 170 358 395 384 369 331 61% 82% 65% 64% 56% 200 300 152 90 89 141 221 162 268 516 25 47 353 380 26 61 152 179 55 379 355 47% 15% 358 386 510 476 70% 81% 438 173 227 194 137 202 449 612 2Z1 48 313 226 548 527 314 448 356 405 718 474 659 640 428 339 287 700 83% 55% 51% 54% 34% 28% 95% 93% 45% 11% 92% 79% 78% 223 223 345 345 414 414 660 471 471 613 523 523 Tas' 448 350 350 350 53 -135 -50 -39 45 83 -14,445 -4,173 8,881 $938,925 $271,245 92 116 12,412 13 47 -79 36 -98 5,029 -8,453 -10,486 $549,445 $681,590 9 * a S m a F a s S'  o  S. I f 3? ot! i\n* : J 418 418 472 472 584 584 297 13 -300 -2 -187 -56 156 -42 1,391 -32,100 -214 -20,009 -5,992 16,692 -4,494 $2,086,500 $1,300,585 s? 3 ? II I 331 331 44 -369 4,708 -39,483 $2,566,395 TABLE CST-6 Pagel  Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl fl fl fl fl fl fl ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (ATTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL GIBBS MAGNET ISH JEFFERSON MARTIN L KING OPTION \"C II (CLOSED) (CLOSED) MCDERMOTT MABELVALE MEADOWCLIFF (NOT USED) MITCHELL (CLOSED) OTTER CREEK PULASKI HEIGHTS (NOT USED) RIGHTSELL (REVISED) ROCKEFELLER (REVISED) ROMINE (REVISED) \u0026gt; \u0026lt;0 -I . Qi 3 VI Table- CST-6 TERRY WAKEFIELD (CLOSED) Qi UJ I I- O ul z 5 ii o \u0026lt; _l tn \u0026lt; O st- o 5 (D Z UJ O Z UI 0. o \u0026lt; a. \u0026lt; o o z \u0026lt; Qi UJ a. O 351 2 u. UJ Q \u0026lt; UJ Q__ 351 340 250 590 42% 459 -131 7 147 462 459 469 606 99% 76% 617 617 148 11 297 419 167 187 170 11 336 304 254 18 20 21 88 34 94 557 399 106 169 83 356 217 316 317 160 66  92 316 531 777 587 390 536 229 87 394 466 502 523 404 486 328 496 370 346 334 551 249 675 424 630 786 486 500 36% 524 58 17% 68% 54% 65% 97% 32% 18% ^21% 95% 96% 89% 87% 92% 85% 18% 79% 524 542 542 463 22 19 138 -23 283 376 376 -45 -120 6 394 48- 264 -70 Z o Oi Qi UJ a. iL (O e\u0026gt;: \u0026lt; UJ i subtotal 6,206 2,354 2,033 14,766 -2,461 -4,815 -12,840 642 5,136 -7,490 264 -287 -30,709 426 426 424 424 545 545 539 All -249 0 -206 -241 59 39 18,939 -26,643 0 -22,042 -25,787 6,313 4,173 u- co S3 (O (O O o O z lU Q $8,394,685 | u. io IO M- I/} O o O' to z o o S UJ z^ $0 Elementary $1,996,085 $1,731,795 $1,432,730 TABLE CST-6 Page 2 2 in 1 r } i !! m a Pb o 3 a i\nff )  st yji s I? 3 ?fl fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (ATTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Table- CST-6 fl co 3 _1 a tn 3: tn fl fl SCHOOL WASHINGTON fl WATSON WESTERN HILLS WILLIAMS MAGNET WILSON (NOT USED) WOODRUFF (CLOSED) PROPOSED NEW SCHOOL OPTION \"C fl CLOVERDALE DUNBAR FOREST HEIGHTS HENDERSON MABELVALE MANN MAGNET (CLOSED) PULASKI HEIGHTS q: LU z 1- o I S 16 98 110 22 122 182 o \u0026lt; m 666 667 6,21 419 193 394 \u0026lt; I O 002 765 031 441 315 576 202 287 489 60 83 127 195 139 19 255 609 247 174 148 314 110 281 85 145 635 718 Je:: o r 5 o Z: lU o : tu Q. 98% ilV 80% 95% 61% 68% 59% 59% 88% 657 602 585 746 452 462 685 433 415 784 797 126, IZZ 101 1071 932 607 563 84% 76% 81% 98% 64% 43% 73% 71% 74% 416 473 591 730 583 872 57% 81% 68% o \u0026lt; 0. \u0026lt; a (3 Z\n\u0026lt; o: lU 0. o 801 801 505 505 350 350 515 426 328 o Z LU o \u0026lt; lU Q___ 119 36 -32 64 35 -226 -63 183 712 z O co a: LU Q. Z o @ \u0026lt; LU q: \u0026lt; 12,733 3,852 -3,424 6,848 -24,182 76,184 subtotal total elementary 1000 1000 1046 1046 1268 1268 1221 1221 737 216 203 322 281 561 197 289 614 174 23,112 21,721 34,454 30,067 60'.027  21,079 30,923 65,698 18,618 u. 52 io IO IO 500 955 955 971 225 372 99 24,075 39,804 10,593 u. 52 lO (O w @ CO O o o z LU q: co O o O' t- co z o o S lU Z\n$1,571,830 $6,732,440 $15,127,125 $4,190,120 $4,190,120 $4,190,120 Jr.High School TABLE CST-6 Page 3 2 9 ni J I I m a ag W o S o 3 n I .r yl! I? I ? Mi 1I  fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl fl fl ATTENDANCE ZONE COMPOSITION (ATTENDANCE ZONE MODIFIED) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL SOUTHWEST K in z g in H Z 5 264 ic:: o tn 582 O ? \u0026gt;- 846 Z' o 3 ffl z LU O z UJ z 69% \u0026gt; n 3 _1\u0026lt; n. z \u0026lt;0 Table- CST-6 \u0026lt; Q. \u0026lt; O O z 2 E tu Q z O co Of tu iL u\u0026gt; o \u0026lt; q: lU 0, o 971 \u0026lt; H- -I lU Q__ 125 \u0026lt; lU z 13,375 z w io o @ to O o O z lU z u. 52 io o O o Z: or Z' O o 5 tu Z: total jr. high schools $0 $0 7 I rl SUMMARY OPTION C COSTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS (Uses same as Option M) TOTALS ADDITION $15,127,125 $0 ________$0 $15,127,125 NEW $4,190,120 SO _______$0 $4,190,120 $19,317,245 TABLE CST-6 Page 4 ft J I I m I ft n c B r c r l1 \"I ts 5? 3 J r, a  Little Rock school District Facilities Master Plan 3D/I ANALYSIS OF DISCONTINUED USE OF Mr - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTIES Table CST-7 Bl FACILITY NAME OPTION M OPTION T OPTION c COST or RENOVATION FACILITIES RECOMMENDED FOR CLOSURE FAIR PARK ELEMENTARY GARLAND ELEMENTARY ISH ELEMENTARY JEFFERSON ELEMENTARY $714,626 $1,373,658 $656,776 $1,814,531 ri MITCHELL ELEMENTARY WAKEFIELD ELEMENTARY $579,516 $1,238,092 8* e e e s i a J 1 1 i WOODRUFF ELEMENTARY $212,098 MABLEVALE JR. HIGH SCHOOL $2,263,241 total reno costs $8,852,538 m a 1 c 1 o * tt 0 0 FACILITIES AVAILABLE FOR OTHER USES * WILSON ELEMENTARY $933,698 s \"X MEADOWCLIFF ELEMENTARY $1,138,095 II MABELVALE ELEMENTARY PULASKI HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY $1,389,146 RIGHTSELL ELEMENTARY $645,652 i\ntotal reno costs $4,106,591 The four facilities listed as \"not used \" on tables following the revised attendance zone maps are available for alternate uses such as administrative functions, special programs, community uses, and lastly, closure if no other purpose is found. I? These schools initially provide , temporary locations for students from schools where extensive renovation or additions occur during the capital improvement process. Table CST-7 PagelWOTE^ StuW Educational ' AZ*\u0026lt;iuaMvw Zones ,^f^ '^MN^flMe-' ItLittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 30/1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY The demographic study focuses on trends since 1987, when the Little Rock School District absorbed 7,000-plus pupils and several schools formerly in the Pulaski County Special School District. At that time or thereafter numerous other changes were made, including altering attendance zones, designating magnet and incentive schools, and adding pre-kindergarten classes. A 1988 study, which was based on 1987 data and lacked reliable data on recent enrollment trends in the newly added territory, nonetheless projected 1990 enrollments within -0.8 percent and 1994 enrollments within -1.5 percent. The projections made this year are based on better data with fewer uncertainties. The new projections indicate a continued slow decline, bringing a loss of about 3,600 pupils or 14.3 percent by the 2005-06 school year. All three school levels will lose, with the high schools having the highest percentage drop (21.7 percent or 1,121 pupils), and the junior highs the second highest (18.6 percent or 1,090 pupils). The elementary schools will have the smallest percentage drop, 9.7 percent. However, because the elementary enrollments exceed those in the junior and senior highs combined, the numerical decline at this level is projected to be 1,379. i Among the 35 elementary schools, 19 are projected to lose 25 percent or more of their enrollment by 2005, among which eight will lose 50 percent or more. A total of 23 schools, two-thirds of the total, will lose to some degree. The remaining 12 will gain, six by 25 percent or more, and three of these by 50 percent or more.  I m ' o Three of the eight junior highs will lose 25 percent or more of their pupils, with one dropping by 54 percent. None will gain, but two will lose by only fractions of one percent. Similarly, no high school will gain. Two of the five will lose by over 25 percent, with one of these dropping by 51 percent. One will lose by only four percent. 3 V r f The racial composition of the District as a whole will remain close to its present level at 67 percent Black. However, assuming no change in policies or in the current attendance zone boundaries, the racial makeup of many individual schools will change much more. N K s if \"i: J All projections are fallible, since none comes from a crystal ball. All assume the continuation of current or presently foreseeable trends and policies. The longer the time period involved, the greater the likelihood that unforeseeable events may alter the outcome. The smaller the area for which they are made, the more likely that unpredictable localized changes may invalidate them. The success of past projections does not guarantee similar results in the future. Our projections are offered with these caveats. 3 ? ! i These projections reflect recent history. Like most school systems in established 1 central cities, the Little Rock School District has been watching its enrollments Page 1 ILittle Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI decrease. As recently as 1980 it had more than 20,000 pupils in a land area about two-thirds of the present District. After the 1987 gYain, enrollments returned at once to a slow decline ~ losing more than 1,600 pupils or 6.1 percent in the next seven years. Both white and Black pupils have decreased in most years since 1987. While Blacks made a small gain of 103 pupils over the seven-year period, this increase would not have occurred without the addition of pre-kindergarten in 1991. Whites declined by 2,096. Pupils of other races have increased, but still are less than 3 percent of the total. Although the Black proportion has increased slightly, it has remained between 64 and 65 percent for the past six years. The losses have been especially large in the high schools, where enrollments have dropped by 19.9 percent or about 1,300. Most of the decrease was before 1991, however. Recent years have seen less change and even some small transitory gains. Junior highs have lost by 5 percent or 306 pupils over the entire seven years, but this reflects an initial loss of nearly 1,000 followed by some recovery. The elementary schools have lost the fewest pupils, only 98, but were helped by the addition of prekindergarten in some schools and by growth in kindergarten enrollments. Grades 1 to 6 have lost. 1 r I Individual schools have varied widely in the extent and direction of enrollment change. In general, the gainers have been those that drew their pupils predominantly from neighborhoods in the west and northwest of the city, while the losers have more often drawn from the central and eastern sections. Four of the five high schools have lost, the sole exception being Fair. Five of the eight junior highs have lost, while the remaining three have gained - one, Mann, growing by 29 percent, but the other two increasing only slightly. 1 m I t A total of 20 elementary schools have lost enrollments, including two that were closed. The remaining 17 have gained. Both King and Washington have more than doubled in size, while Carver has increased by 62 percent and Rockefeller by 39 percent. Most of the other gains were modest. I I r What impact have these changes had on the basic objectives of the desegregation plan? The evidence suggests that the District, despite strenuous efforts, may be even farther from achieving its goals than in 1987. In three of the five high schools, both Blacks and whites have declined in number\nin the other two. Blacks have increased while whites decreased. The span between the highest and lowest Black percentage has grown from 17.6 percent points to 21.9. 1 N if si' ii g The eight junior highs were close to meeting the criteria for racial balance in 1987. The overall span from highest to lowest percent Black was 17.8 points. Four of the eight were less than three percentage points, plus or minus, from the District-wide figure. li while four more were within seven points. Since then, both racial groups have j? increased at two schools, both races have fallen at one, Black enrollments have gained while whites have fallen at three schools, and the reverse has occurred at one. The overall span from highest to lowest percent Black is now 26.5 points. 1j I Page 2 f ( Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I   The elementary schools, with their smaller attendance areas, have proven even more difficult to keep in balance. In 1987 only a dozen were able to meet the criterion of no more than 60 percent of one race or the other. All four magnet schools met the even more demanding requirement of 45 to 55 percent Black, but none of the incentive or interdistrict schools met the plans requirement and only eight of the rest met the 60 percent requirement. The latest figures show all four magnet schools still in compliance, and a few of the rest have improved. But the span from lowest to highest percent Black has increased from 44.6 to 56.4 percentage points.  ii Many people believe that the private schools have drawn off many of the white children whose presence would help to maintain racial balance. This view is difficult to confirm or to counter with hard numbers, since current data on private schools are hard to come by. Data from the 1990 Census, however, indicate that at that time about 7,900 children in the City of Little Rock attended private schools, an increase of about 900 since 1980. During the same period, the public schools lost about 3,100 pupils. Census data prepared especially for the US Department of Education show that among children enrolled in any school, either public or private, in the Little Rock School District, about one-fourth were attending private school in 1990 and nearly nine out of ten were white. n I I ri The highest rates of private school attendance are found in areas to the northwest of the city center, where population growth, especially white growth, has been most rapid and incomes are often high enough to afford private tuition. So while the increase in private school attendance can account for only a fraction of the public schools recent loss, it is also true that many white parents who might otherwise have sent their children to the public schools may have enrolled them in private schools instead. A number of factors influence the course of school enrollments. One of the most important is overall population change. The city of Little Rock whose boundaries are now nearly contiguous with those of the Little Rock School District, has grown throughout the 20th century. Without annexations, however, the 11 percent gain of the 1980s would have turned into a small loss. In addition, this gain was made up almost entirely of adults. m ril 'u ,4 The number of children of school and preschool age remained almost constant during the 1980s, making it highly unlikely that enrollments could grow during the 1990s unless there is a fairly large influx of new young families to the city. So far, this does not seem to be materializing. The City government expects Little Rock to grow slowly if at all over the next few years, with a continuing shift in balance from east to west. N P I Metroplans projections bear this out, indicating continued losses in the east and the central core, with new growth mainly to the west and northwest. The School District seems unlikely to benefit unless its boundaries are further enlarged. University of Arkansas projections indicate that if recent migration patterns continue, Pulaski Countys total child population will decline, with the loss occurring mainly among white children and the racial balance shifting somewhat as a result. A disproportionate share of the losses will be suffered by the city. i? 3 n Page 3H M Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3DZI H The Little Rock economy, with a solid backbone of government, medical facilities, and educational institutions, has proven highly resistant to economic downturns, but seldom grows rapidly. Continued slow growth is likely for the foreseeable future. Residential construction within the city has been down recently, but in any event does not seem likely to bring in many young families in the foreseeable future. fl fl fl fl 3 ( I fl '1 fl m a t? 0  jl 1 r JI N 2 s  Page 4 if i\ng 3 r i 7n an * ------ Educational AStcriuoitCv Zonas p\" r h' I h h r I I . J ... ) . r- I 1 \"1 r Ifl fl Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I fl EDUCATIONAL STUDY The educational study of the Little Rock School District was confined by the contract to those features of the buildings that support the educational process\nthe capacity of each school building and its utilization\nconsiderations of school size\nand the organization of the middle/junior high school grades. As a result of the condition survey, the impact of recommended school closures to attendance zones and ethnic composition were considered. I Education and Facility Evaluations fl The educational facilities survey, examined each building relative to its mission to house and support the educational process. Utilizing a survey process tested for its effectiveness by use in a significant number of projects throughout the United States, building scoring was based on a 1000 point system to generally bracket the facilities into four groups. I I : t Group 1 consists of schools with a point value score of 900-1000 and relates to buildings which were highly satisfactory. Group 2 with a point value score of 700-900 relates to buildings that are generally acceptable but require further study of their component parts to establish a level of repair and updating required to meet policy and code standards. Group 3 with a point value score of 600-700 relate to buildings that are in substantial need of rehabilitation and upgrade. The final category. Group 4, with a point value score of 400-600 relates to buildings requiring a complete re-study of the facility before conclusions can be reached. Buildings with score values less than 400 are generally recommended for abandonment. c ri' I A similar evaluation process based on a 1000 point score was conducted by the facility engineers and architects and addressed a subjective impression from the surveyors during the course of their examination of the building (Evaluation No. 1) as well as a weighted score based on the asset value measured in dollars required to correct the deficiencies found (Evaluation No. 2). The latter utilized the CSI cost format basis through the 16 divisions where the greater the cost and deficiency correction requirements, the lower the score. Both the educational and facility scores were then averaged to develop the rank order for elementary schools, junior high schools, and senior high schools. This rank order was one of the considerations in determining recommendations for school consolidations and alternate uses. III\" o ii ii 4 i I 3 1* While the evaluation guidelines were extensive, they are basically summarized as: Structural Features: Foundations, exterior walls, windows, roof (information supplied by LRSD), floor structure, interior walls, ceilings the operating plan, and appearance. Safety and circulation which included the type, condition, and location of stairs\ncorridors\nnumber of location of exits\nfire protection\nand general safety. 1 J i Page 1 .p 1'  Little Rock School District Facilities Master Plan Study 3D/I  Mechanical Features\nAir conditioning and heating (including type and condition of system)\nventilation system\ntemperature and ventilation efficiencies\nmechanical room\nand controls. Plumbing facilities\nToilet room adequacy and conditions\nwater facilities\ndrinking fountains\nindividual room installations\nshowers and special equipment. Electrical Services\nPower installation and control\ncommunication and ll - Signal system\nalarms-and jexit lights\ngeneral and special room installations\nand electrical safety. Illumination\nNumber and type of fixtures\nquality and quantity of illumination\ncontrols\nand effect. Educational Features\nadministrative spaces. Instructional rooms\nspecial rooms\ngeneral areas\nand 1 I Operational Features\nSuitability for educational program\nflexibility\neconomy of effort (circulation, supervision, and access)\ngeneral and instructional storage\npupil lockers\nacoustical conditions\ncustodial facilities\nenergy systems\nand accommodations for the physically handicapped. I Site\nAdequacy and development\ndrainage, lighting, security, recreational equipment, and landscape. Tables ES-1 and ES-2 at the end of this tab provide ranking and evaluation score summaries for individual school buildings. xn r. Capacity The operating capacity and its dynamic nature of school buildings is often misunderstood when one considers the school room merely as a space. Factors that govern capacity are\nregulatory, grade level, policy, and function. Each of these affect a given area and volume of space. A multi-purpose room, for example, would probably be too small to serve as a gymnasium (in both in area and volume) but too large to meet the needs of a classroom. -4 ! 2 ! ( if i 5 21 I 3 H A classroom space of a given size when functioning as a mathematics class could tolerate a larger capacity than if the same space were converted to a laboratory. A more subtle example is the same given space regulated by the grade level or special education requirements. Thus, the dynamics of classroom use can easily generate a different capacity from year-to-year depending on the program assignments. For the purposes of this study, the accepted procedure for developing a schools capacity begins with the determination of the number of pupil stations assigned in accordance with standards and policy to each and every classroom. Pupil stations occurring in portable/trailer facilities were subtracted from the total number of pupil stations recorded for each school. This procedure produced the number of permanent pupil stations that could be accommodated in\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":"fda_jtp_539486","title":"Youth's murder for interracial flirting galvinzed civil rights drive","collection_id":"fda_jtp","collection_title":"Joseph Tobias Papers","dcterms_contributor":["Chicago Daily Law Bulletin","Tobias, Joseph","Sewell, Dan"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1995-08-29"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Joseph Tobias Papers, 1955-1960, 1990-2005--http://purl.fcla.edu/fsu/MSS_2017-002"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--Civil rights--History--20th century","African Americans--Crimes against","Civil rights"],"dcterms_title":["Youth's murder for interracial flirting galvinzed civil rights drive"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Florida State University Libraries. Special Collections"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU_MSS2017_002_MC5_F05_08"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Use of this item is provided for non-commercial, personal, educational, and research use only. Florida State University Libraries is providing access to these materials for educational and research purposes and makes no warranty with regard to their use for other purposes. The written permission of the copyright owners and/or other rights holders (such as holders of publicity and/or privacy rights) is required for distribution, reproduction, or other use of protected items beyond that allowed by fair use or other statutory exemptions (see Title 17, U.S.C.). For information about the copyright and reproduction rights for this item, please contact Special Collections \u0026 Archives, Florida State University Libraries, Tallahassee, Florida: https://www.lib.fsu.edu/department/special-collections-archives."],"dcterms_medium":["clippings (information artifacts)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Till, Emmett, 1941-1955"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1314","title":"Proceedings: ''Hearing Transcript, Pulaski Heights Student Assignment''","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":["1995-08-28"],"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","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Pulaski Heights Junior High School (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Hearing Transcript, Pulaski Heights Student Assignment''"],"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/1314"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["334 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1320","title":"Proceedings: ''Hearing on Motion for Tro and Preliminary Injunction''","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":["1995-08-25"],"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","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School board members","School discipline","School management and organization","Student activities"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Hearing on Motion for Tro and Preliminary Injunction''"],"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/1320"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["224 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1612","title":"Court filings concerning Majority to Minority Transfer Program (M-to-M) funds, preschool program seats, ODM staffing report on LRSD elementary schools, and court motions and responses","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":["1995-08-23/1995-08-31"],"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","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Education, Elementary","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School employees","School management and organization","School integration","School enrollment","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning Majority to Minority Transfer Program (M-to-M) funds, preschool program seats, ODM staffing report on LRSD elementary schools, and court motions and responses"],"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/1612"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["44 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1610","title":"Court filings concerning school districts desegregation plans and status, North Little Rock School District third quarter status report","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["1995-08-23/1995-08-31"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Little Rock School District","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Finance","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Court records","School management and organization","School integration","School enrollment"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning school districts desegregation plans and status, North Little Rock School District third quarter status report"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1610"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["56 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1606","title":"Court filings concerning school districts integration status, district planning, and court motions concerning approval","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":["1995-08-21/1995-08-25"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School integration","School districts","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning school districts integration status, district planning, and court motions concerning approval"],"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/1606"],"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":["legal documents"],"dcterms_extent":["55 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_758","title":"''Little Rock School District 1994-95 Fourth Quarter Status Report, Program Planning and Budget Document for Desegregation Programs,'' Volume I, exhibit 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","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1995-08-17"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics","Educational planning"],"dcterms_title":["''Little Rock School District 1994-95 Fourth Quarter Status Report, Program Planning and Budget Document for Desegregation Programs,'' Volume I, exhibit 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/758"],"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\nVOLUME I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1994-95 FOURTH QUARTER STATUS REPORT PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGET DOCUMENT FOR DESEGREGATION PROGRAMS PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND EVALUATION DEPARTMENT August 17, 1995 EXHIBm TABLE OF CONTENTS SEQUENCE # PAGE# SEQUENCE # PAGE# Preface 1 SCHOOL OPERATIONS CLUSTER (BUFF) 09A,l - 18,2 Mission 4 Goals 5 District Financial Summary 6 Definitions 8 Organization of the Report 10 Cluster Budget Documents 12 09A 09B 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 School Operations (Principals) School Operations (Central Off. Adm.) Extracurricular Participation Student Hearing Officer In-School Suspension New Futures Academic Incentive Grants/Focused Activities McClellan Community School Unassigned Testing Assistance - Disadvantaged Job Fair 09A, 1-162 09B,l-87 10,1-37 11,1-4 12,1-122 13,1-5 14,1-6 15,1-89 17,1-5 18,1-2 CURRICULUM CLUSTER (PINK) 01,1 -08,28 SCHOOL SUPPORT CLUSTER (BLUE) 20,1 - 36,9 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 HIPPY 4 Year Old Program/City Wide Early Childhood Education Program Academic Support Program (PAL) Multicultural Curriculum Special Education Gifted Education Federal Programs Vocational Education 01,1-7 02,1-9 03,1-12 04,1-29 05,1-58 06,1-9 07,1-7 08,1-28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Unassigned Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Staff Development Library/Media Computerized Transportation Data Processing Unassigned Minority Teacher Recruitment Educational Equity Monitoring Commitment to Desegregation/Leadership Summer School (Interdistrict) Summer Learning Program - JTPA 20,1-15 21,1-21 22,1-8 23,1-4 24,1-12 26,1-9 27,1-4 28,1-9 29,1-9 30,1-9 1 .z SEQUENCE # PAGE# SEQUENCE # PAGE# 31 32 33 34 35 36 Unassigned Unassigned Facilities Guidance/Counseling Program Leadership Employment Practices Unassigned 33,1-5 34,1-11 35,1-3 RECRUITMENT CLUSTER (PURPLE) 37,1 - 39,10 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 37 38 39 40 Parent Involvement - Recruitment VIPS - Recruitment Public Relations Unassigned 37,1-26 38,1-22 39,1-11 INCENTIVE SCHQQLS CLUSTER (YELLQW) 41,1 - 72,11 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Qffice of Incentive Schools Writing to Read Science Labs Unassigned Foreign Language Program Unassigned Extended Day/Week Field Trips Unassigned Tranportation Unassigned Unassigned Instructional Aides Extended Year Recognition Program 41,1-10 42,1-3 43,1-3 45,1-5 47,1-11 48,1-5 50,1-2 53,1-4 54,1-4 55,1-4 ii Camp Pfeifer Monitoring Unassigned Unassigned Unassigned Staffing Required Staff Development Teacher Stipends/Inservice Qther Incentive Schools Academic Programs  Peer Tutors/Retired Teacher Mentors  Themes  Kindergarten - Reading Across the Curriculum  Qral Expression Across Curriculum  Learning Styles Inventory  Semi-Departmental  Instructional Tech ~ Study/Test-Taking  Parent Home Study  Computer Managed Instruction  Student Education Plans  Specialized Programs  Incentive Programs  Homework  Criterion-Referenced Test ~ Heterogeneous Grouping  Effective Schools  African/American History 56,1-3 57,1-12 61,1-12 62,1-24 63,1-3 64,1-29SEQUENCE # PAGE# SEQUENCE # PAGE# 65 Social Skills  Family Folklore ~ Positive Imaging  Interpersonal Skills - Rites of Passage  Mentoring Program 65,1-7 71 Counseling/Social Work I Community Services Access - College/Post Graduate Awareness  Study Skills  Home/Neighborhood Meet - Wellness Program 71,1-19 66 Special Activities ~ Peer Tutoring Program  Academic Reinforcement Clubs  Special Interest Clubs 66,1-7 72 13 1^ School Policies and Procedures - Other Unassigned Unassigned 72,1-11 fn 69 Latin Enrichment Program Unassigned Career Skills Development 67,1-8 69,1-3 70 Incentive Schools Operations - Support Services 70,1-6  Community Access/Field Trip ~ Community Involvement - Special Skills Program  Special Training - Parental Involvement  Learning Time Schedule - Home/School Community  Extracurricular Program  Attendance and Behavior - Subject Related Extracurriculum iii STUDENT CHQICES/QPTIQNS CLUSTER (GREEN) 75,1 - 82,3 15 16 11 16 79 80 81 82 Student Choices/Options King Interdistrict School Unassigned Unassigned Unassigned Original Magnets Unassigned M-to-M Magnet Schools (Central, Dunbar, Washington, Henderson, McClellan) QRGANIZATIQNAL CHART 75,1-2 leS-l 80,1-10 82,1-3 Wlo -PREFACE The mission statement and goals for Little Rock School District are the guides for all decision-making. The information gained from the Fourth Quarter Status Report Program Planning and Budget Document for Desegregation Programs provides additional direction for quality, interim and/or summative decision-making for the district. Specifically, programs with poor performance or expenditure problems will have been addressed with corrective action continuously during .the year rather than after the year is completed. The report enhances the district s ability to monitor and report achievements and expenditures relative to the programs identified in the Desegregation Plan for the most efficient and functional program planning on a quarterly basis. Several reporting practices should be noted as follows: First, the fourth quarters report requires an additional volume for desegregation program reporting so that the growth and accumulation of the many achievements reported by schools and programs during the fiscal year of 1994-95 are accommodated. Consequently, the fourth quarters report for desegregation programs consists of Volume I (Seq #s 1-18) and Volume 11 (Seq#s 19-82). Principals and Central Office Administrators have reported achievements in the fourth quarters report. 09A is the designated sequence number for reporting by Principals, and 09B is the sequence number relative to Central Office Administrators reporting. The first desegregation audit was completed during the fourth quarter of the 1993-94 fiscal year. These additional desegregation obligations continue to be reflected in the program budget documents of the fourth quarter report for fiscal year 1994-95. These additional obligations come from the desegregation audit which includes Court orders, ODM monitoring reports ordered by the Court, and Court Hearing transcripts. (Underlined print denotes this additional desegregation obligations language.) A continued refinement and adjustment period throughout the fiscal year 1994-95 will be necessary for language clarification and reference documentation of the additional desegregation obligations. This years audit is for the period from October of 1993 through October of 1994. All court orders, hearing transcripts, monitoring reports and stipulations were reviewed for that period. The document reference appears in the first column of the PBD with an  after it. A portion of these obligations were inserted in the Second Quarter PBD, and remaining obligations have been inserted in the Third Quarter PBD. 1 Propram Budget Document (PBD) Rermement Procedure: When the PBD was first compiled, many non-obligation items were mcluded^ i held at that time about what was and was not an obligation. At the time, we were uncertain about the praise definition Extensive discussions were held at that time about what was and was not an obligation. At the time, we were uncertain about the precise uetm on of an obligation. We knew then that some \"cleanup\" would be necessary. Working with the document this past year has helped. The distinction between obligations and observations or procedures is clearer. This copy of the document reflects an effort to refine the document. We began the refinement process in November. Program mangers were their sections of the PBD and mark items they believed were not appropriate for the document. Two types were identified. y time obligations and 2) items that were not obligations but normal procedure within the program area ot simply  _ - - - Tk__________ Iniart^r l*KI\u0026gt; Willi 9 asked to review were: 1) completed, one observations. Their responses were gallUlld Bitu iitiiio umi TTWAv aivF* - --------- c  - nork .!, returned to the LRSD Office of Desegregation. Responses were reflected in the Second Quarter PBD with a boldly stamped word or words beside them. An explanation of the stamped words appear in the table below: STAMP COMPLETED JOB DESCRIPTION NOT OBLIGATION PROCEDURAL TOOL EXPLANATION This item is a one time obligation that has been completed _____________________________________ This item will be moved to the program managers* job description as a routine function of that position This item is not an obligation___________________________________________________________________ This item is or will be included in departmental procedure as a routine function of that department This item will be or already is reflected in the LRSD Management Tool The stamped items noted in the Second Quarter PBD were dropped from the Third Quarter PBD. A paper trail has been established for each item dropped. None of the ongoing obligations will be dropped. This procedure applies only to the PBD. It does not effect the LRSD Desegregation Plan or Uw!standing obligations of the District. Likewise, the stamped items indicated in the Third Quarter PBD have been dropped from the Fourth Quarter PBD. Where handwritten numbers appeared in the PBD, they were references to the 2nd Quarter PBD (2-24-95) pages where similar items may be found. These items have been deleted from this publication of the PBD. 2exhaustive search for legal references for the Safety and Security (sequence number 25) section of the desegregation volume of the PBD, .......  ____I____C non CnFAfir anH After an exhaustive search for legal references for the Safety and Security (sequence numoer seciion oi me it was determined that this particular program would be more appropriately placed in the non-desegregation volume of the PBD^ The Safety and Security (sequence number 25) section has been moved to the non-desegregation PBD volume and reported with Safety and Security Services (sequence number 225) in this publication of the PBD. Some obligations or strategies have been deleted from the following programs: Four Year Old, Multicultural Curriculum, doine uuiiuauuiu ui iiaicgic9 imv wwu .........................e IB--------------- Library/Media, Educational Equity Monitoring, Commitment to Desegregation Leadership, VIPS Recruiting, Public Relations, Office of Incentive Schools, Incentive Schools Staffing, Office of Incentive School Academic Activities, Counseling and Social Work, School Policy Student Choices \u0026amp; Options, Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment, School Operations 9A, Tri-District Summer and Procedures, Student Choices \u0026amp; Options, Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment, scnooi uperauui :r, School, Facilities, Parent Involvement, Original Magnets, HIPPY and M-to-M Magnets. Programs that have been removed bwause ^1 their objectives and strategies were dropped from the PBD include: Bidding Practices, Rockefeller Early Childhood, Romine Interdistrict School, Computer Loan Program, Computer Lab Program, King Interdistrict School and Contingencies. Fourth Quarter Status Report Program Planning and Budget Document for Desegregation Programs contains the following: (1) The Mission Statement of Little Rock School District\n(2) The Goals of Little Rock School District\n0) LRSD Quarterly Desegregation\u0026gt; Ex^^s The IVllbSlUIl OUllCIllCIIl Ul I\\W1V AaFlOUIWI., ~ al /1\\ 'TUak Summary\n(4) Definitions and Data Elements\n(5) Organization of the Report\n(6) Program Budget Documents Grouped by Clusters\nand, (7) t he LRSD Organizational Chart. 3 7LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the Little Rock School District is to provide a quality, integrated educational program which encourages all children to achieve their A IlV llllOOiMII Vt UIV .w g--------------- --------- kp  , optimum academic, social, and emotional development. To that end, the students in the Little Rock School District will develop an appreciation for ethmc * ..... ... . . .    _____t....:__________1 J_______zxf tka *e rim'tml1lim and cultural diversity, develop skills in problem solving and conflict resolution, and demonstrate mastery of the District s curriculum. This will be achieved through the collaborative efforts of a Board, a dedicated and competent staff, and of parents and citizens committed to fairness, racial equity and adequate support for education. 4LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GOALS I 1. The LRSD will implement integrated educational programs that will ensure all students grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis on basic skills and academic enrichment while closing disparities in achievement. 2. 3. 4. The LRSD will develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. The Little Rock Board, administration, staff, and students will demonstrate in their day to day behavior that they accept each individual as a valued contributor to society and view cultural diversity among students, stoff and the community as a valued resource upon which our community and nation can draw as we prepare for the 21st Century. The LRSD will solicit and secure financial and other resources that are necessary to fully support our schools, including our desegregation plan. 5. The LRSD will provide a safe and orderly climate that is conducive to learning for all students. 6. The LRSD will ensure that equity occurs in all phases of school activities and operations. 5Program Coda Program Nam* Little Rock School District Quarterly Desegregation Expenses Page 1 of 2 01 02 05 06 07 08 09 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 22 24 25 26 27 28 29 32 33 34 35 HIPPY________________________________ 4-YEAR OLD PROGRAM_______________ STUDENT HEARING OFFICER___________ OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION EXTRA-CURRICULAR PARTICIPATION TEACHER RECRUITER STAFF DEVELOPMENT________________ ACADEMIC SUPPORT PROGRAMS MULTICULTURAL PROGRAMS ACADEMIC INC GRANTS/FOCUSED ACT ORIGINAL MAGNETS SPECIAL EDUCATION @ WASHINGTON SECURITY D/P SYSTEM STUDENT INFORMATION M-TO-M MAGNET SCHOOLS ' KING INTERDISTRICT SCHOOL  EDUCATIONAL EQUITY MONITORING ' COMPUTERIZED TRANSP SYSTEM ' ROMINE INTERDISTRICT THEME ' McClellan community school ' IN-SCHOOL SUSPENSION ' JOB FAIR____________________________  TESTING ASSISTANCE_______________ ' LIBRARY SERVICES__________________ ~ PARENT RECRUITING________________ ' VIPS RECRUITING____________________ ' PREJUDICE REDUCTION______________ Bridget 326,723.78 1,943,683.64 96,144.76 511,645.41 7,000.00 45,592.16 352,932.12 1,615,303.00 259,837.33 320,000.00 4,501,756.00 56,853.51 761,286.72 712,289.22 374,496.22 1,333,107.64 421,787.43 8,000.00 69,631.59 170,000.00 794,173.67 ______1,092.82 5,066.96 427,230.43 40,000.00 40,680.19 5,000.00 22.0 89.5 2.0 13.0 1.0 6.0 48.0 1.0 38.0 4.0 5.0 68.6 4.0 2.0 24.3 30.0 2.0 YTD Expenee 303,500.24 2,108,061.00 88,184.58 473,908.54 __________0.00 53,554.32 305,297.05 1,491,150.15 187,092.39 199,254.80 4,237,311.17 52,667.28 921,004.64 709,935.19 348,803.48 1,487,992.78 405,659.60 __________0.00 58,915.95 170,000.00 669,072.20 1,132.89 1,395.74 341,666.84 37,703.26 31,216.18 0.00 1at Quarter 61,678.75 292,010.10 22,243.00 108,505.23 ________0.00 13,998.89 71,968.88 209,511.74 45,936.67 11,939.29 ________0.00 10,223.45 117,300.43 606,929.33 49,630.60 210,448.33 179,438.34 ________0.00 52,813.00 45,764.00 107,224.23 452.34 1,395.74 49,509.88 27,755.74 2,418.93 0.00 2nd Quarter 61,286.76 480,415.35 18,663.59 106,196.97 _________0.00 11,393.85 77,801.97 357,000.40 29,434.99 3,638.41 1,393,556.50 10,660.80 241,696.90 29,838.55 63,555.79 309,259.55 137,411.56 0.00 0.00 36,724.01 169,444.44 _______235.29 0.00 80,466.34 2,364.22 6,382.85 0.00 3rd Quarter 75,281.71 607,059.76 27,166.90 140,638.23 ________0.00 15,015.40 85,041.69 579,493.61 62,392.39 65,906.26 1,393,556.50 16,944.47 331,727.49 38,002.49 97,025.16 432,695.81 214,676.62 0.00 _______113.94 87,511.99 181,116.47 _______155.54 0.00 96,747.26 ' 5,151.25 9,843.29 0.00 4th Quartet 105,253.02 728,575.79 20,111.09 118,568.11 ________0.00 13,146.18 70,484.51 345,144.40 49,328.34 117,770.84 1,450,198.17 14,838.56 230,279.82 35,164.82 138,591.93 535,589.09 (125,866.92) 0.00 5,989.01 (0.00) 211,287.06 _______289.72 0.00 114,943.36 2,432.05 12,571.11 0.00 % Budget Spent 92.89% 108.46% 91.72% 92.62% 0.00% 117.46% 86.50% 92.31% 72.00% 62.27% 94.13% 92.64% 120.98% 99.67% 93.14% 111.62% 96.18% 0.00% 84.61% 100.00% 84.25% 103.67% 27.55% 79.97% 94.26% 76.74% 0.00% 6Program ,Cf^\u0026gt; , Program Nema Little Rock School District Quarterly Desegregation Expenses Page 2 of 2 49 51 52 53 54 56 57 59 61 64 65 66 72 73 74 75 CONTINGENCY FUND OFFICE OF INCENTIVE SCHOOLS WRITING TO READ SCIENCE LABS COMPUTER LABS COMPUTER LOAN PROGRAM__________ EXTENDED DAY FIELD TRIPS TRANSPORTATION (ADD'LI INSTRUCTIONAL AIDES EXTENDED YEAR INCENTIVE/RECOGNITION RECOMMENDED STAFFING REQUIRED STAFF DEVELOPMENT TEACHER STIPENDS/INSERVICE OTHER INCENTIVE SCHOOL ACTIVITIES TOTAL. Budget 94-95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 493,723.62 25,550.00 15,000.00 399,532.68 61,568.93 11,524.35 742,246.94 46,882.67 62,349.90 83,971.87 iT,i43.ee6^s FTSa 42.0 31.0 433.4 VTO Expanse 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 564,222.48 29,183.23 0.00 388,427.63 110,550.11 5,109.52 666,490.95 8,611.74 2,284.52 24,997.81 ie.4S4.3Ba.2e let Quarter 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,353.68 436.00 0.00 45,398.54 51,617.91 0.00 82,516.30 4,284.01 625.00 1,403.78 2,493,732.11 2tKl Quarter 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 132,757.74 6,995.18 0.00 69,779.34 0.00 2,593.30 141,833.90 3,574.13 772.83 8,432.28 3\u0026gt;994iie7/?9 3rd Quarter 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 133,114.69 7,868.37 0.00 108,697.75 0.00 2,946.81 194,418.17 197.60 627.60 11,471.09 5,022,606.31 4th Quarter 0.00 __________0^ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 289,996.37 13,883.68 0.00 164,552.00 58,932.20 (430.59) 247,722.58 556.00 259.09 3,690.66 4,673,652.05 % Budget Spent 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 114.28% 114.22% 0.00% 97.22% 179.56% 44.34% 89.79% 18.37% 3.66% 29.77% 96\n1S96 7 _-r^ - 1DEFINITIONS AND DATA ELEMENTS The following are definitions of terms and data elements used in the Program Budget Documents. Program: A program is an established plan of operation, composed of a group or series of related activities which are carried out to serve a specific area of identified need. Program Description: A program description includes a purpose, scope and content, and participants/beneficiaries related to the respective program. Program Goal: A program goal is a broad guiding statement and should describe the overall aim(s), purpose(s), or ambition(s) of the specific program. Objectives: Program objectives present explicitly the desired impact the program should have on a problem. They should provide detail to the goals. Strategies: Strategies are the jobs, tasks, efforts, or actions undertaken in a program which contributes to the accomplishment of the objective. Achievements: Achievements are efforts, tasks, evidence, performance, or actions undertaken in a program which contributes to the accomplishment of the strategy. Achievements are placed in alpha order underneath the relative strategy. Evaluation Criteria: Evaluation criteria are statements which specify the end product of an objective or strategy and establish measurable and observable levels of performance of the product. Page: Each Program Budget Document uses one of two formatted pages. Program Sequence # (Seq. #): The purpose of this sequence number is to establish a reference for placing programs in order within the planning document. Revision Date: This date is the actual date the program document was first documented or last changed. Program Name: To eliminate confusion, an established name for each program has been assigned by the district planner. Program Code: This is a unique accounting code assigned by Finailcial Services which links budget and expenditure information to the associated program. 8Definitions and Data Elements (cont.) Primary Leader: The Primary Leader is the cabinet-level associate responsible for the management and operation of the respective program. Secondary Leader: The Secondary Leader is the associate who is back-up to the Primary and will function in that capacity in the absence of the Primary (i.e. the Program Manager or the Principal). District Goal Support: Each program directly supports at least one district goal. If more than one district goal is relative, then the appropriate district goals have been listed in descending priority order. Plan Reference: Specific plan and page references will directly cite one of the following desegregation documents\nL(LR) = LRSD Desegregation Plan\nI(ID) = Interdistrict Desegregation Plan\nS = Settlement Agreement\nC(CO)= Court Orders\nT (HT) = Hearing Transcripts\nP(CP) = Court Pleadings\nM(MR) Monitoring Reports. The format should be L23 or 113-20, for example. This element has been left blank if the program is not directly cited in one of the desegregation documents. Plan Reference Page Number: Source references listed for each objective and strategy have been used. If the objective or strategy is desegregation document related, the specific desegregation document and page upon which this objective or strategy has been found should be listed. If the objective or strategy is not related to a desegregation document, then whatever source was used has been listed. This element is contained on page 2 and succeeding pages. Beginning Date\nThis is the actual date a particular strategy began. For consistency, all dates should be printed in the following manner\nMM/DD/YY, (09/30/94). Completion Date. This is the actual date a particular objective or strategy was completed. For consistency, all dates should be entered in the following format: MM/DD/YY, (09/30/94). If an activity toward a strategy has been started but not completed, a percent of completion (for example, 75%) should be entered. Responsibility: This is the name of the individual tasked with ensuring an activity has been accomplished. 9 ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT This section provides guiding information about the text of the Fourth Quarter Status Report Program Planning and Budget Document for Desegregation Programs. Pagination. Pages in the text are numbered using Arabic numerals. Pages are consecutively numbered at the bottom of the page beginning with the \"Preface.\" The \"Table of Contents\" is on page i, page ii, and page iii. Program areas are numbered according to their sequence number followed by the page number within that program (e.g., 02,5 refers to page 5 of the program with a sequence number of 02). Print. The report employs two kinds of print density. Bold Print denotes original language of the desegregation document(s). Lighter print enclosed in parentheses (parenthetical statements) identifies language that is not literal in the desegregation document(s). The parenthetical statements of lighter print have been integrated throughout the program budget documents for clarification of original language in the desegregation document(s) and/or for providing information generalized from the original language of the desegregation document(s). Parenthetical information should not be construed to mean new legal obligations nor expansion of the obligations under the desegregation document(s). Underlined Print. Underlined Print denotes additional desegregation obligations language which was inserted verbatim in the third quarter report of FY 93-94 as a result of the desegregation audit. Stamped Words. Denotes items identified for \"cleanup.\" See Program Budget Document (PBD) Refinement Procedures above. Clusters. Programs have been sorted into broad categories called clusters. Clusters include programs or schools grouped together because of similar and related operational functions. For convenience and management of the report, similar programs have been grouped into six separating color-coded clusters. To locate a program, determine the relative cluster of the program by using the \"Table of Contents\" and then refer to the program sequence number (Seq #) or page number for facilitating program reference in the report. School Operations Program (09A and 09B). The School Operations program description warrants that both Principals and Central Office Administrators provide quality planning for students. Therefore, the School Operations Program is divided into two sections for reporting achievements by both Principals and Central Office Administrators. The sequence number for reporting by Principals (i.e., schools) is 09A, and the sequence number for reporting by Central Office Administrators is 09B. For the first repotting period, the inclusionary dates cited in the \"Beginning Date\" column and \"Completion Date 10column are 07/01/94 and 06/30/95, respectively. These inclusionaty dates represent the boundaries for the first quarter. The generic dates of 07/01/94 and 06/30/95 are used to uniform and conform reporting in the School Operations program budget documents. Specific date information relative to the achievements of Central Office Administrators follows each documented achievement. Organization of the Report (continued) As a final note, the School Operations Program (09A) classifies the area, interdistrict, and magnet schools into three organizational levels: elementary, junior high, and .senior high. Incentive Schools. The Incentive Schools cluster.provides program reporting information for the following schools: Franklin, Garland, Rockefeller, Mitchell and Rightsell. Non-Monetary Tracking. No entry on page one in the fiscal year program budget field and/or the quarter expenditure field of a Program Budget Document means desegregation money has not been tracked to the respective program. Organizational Chart. An organizational chart is provided. 11CLUSTER BUDGET DOCUMENTS 12Curriculum Cluster *  * HIPPY 4-Year Old Program/City Wide Early Childhood Education Program Academic Support Program Multicultural Curriculum Special Education Gifted Programs Federal Programs Vocational Education LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET E\u0026gt;OCUMENT Program Seq f: 01 Page: 1 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: HIPPY (Home instruction Program For Preschool Youngsters) Program Code: 01 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marian Shead Program Description: District Goal Support: Program Goal: HIPPY is a home based developmental program which recognizes de mother as the fint significant teacher of die child. HIPPY assists the mother in preparing die child to be successful in kindergarten, therefore assisting tn the reduction of the disparity gap between black and white students. HIPPY'S major focus is in the shadow areas of major incentive schools and in the Southwest Litde Rock area. HIPPY serves primarily economical artd educationa] disadvantaged families. Implement integrated educationa] programs that will ensure that all students grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis on basic skills and academic enrichment while closing dispanties in achievement. To prepare economically disadvantaged children to enter kiiKlergarten with the necessary skills to be successful: and to improve the educational outcomes of students, particularly black students as it relates to the achievenwnt disparity between black and white students. [ Plan References: Page L-5. L-14, IS. 16 ] FY Program Budget: $326,723.78 1st Qtr Expend: $61,678.75 9rd Qtr Expend: $75,281.71 YTD Expenditures: $303,500.24 2nd Qtr Expend: $61,286.76 4th Qtr Expend: $105,253.02 I FTE 22.0 [ Related Function Codes:  01, 1Program Seq f: 01 Program Name: HIPPY Program Code: 01 Program Goal: To prepare L14 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Page: 2 Revision Date: Marian Shead August II, 1995 ecm,mically disadvantaged chMren  enter kWemanen with the neeessaty skdls to be success\nand to itnpmve the educahonai outcomes of students, pathcularly black students as it relates to the achievement disparity between black and white students. Plan Reference Page Ntunber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria L14 L14 I. To promote the HIPPY program 2. To select HIPPY aides 3. Initial training of aides and staff 4. To enroll families into program. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Staff Mailed letten (Documentation of PSA) 1.1 To compose and mail Public Service Announcement for local radio stations and Channels 14 and 16 A distribute flyers A. Distributed flyen to Watershed Community Development B. Mailed PSA to LRSD Communication Department C. Distributed flyen to day care centers, health department, and local businesses 2.1 A. B. C. 07/01/94 08/08/94 08/18/94 08/25/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 08/08/94 08/18/94 08/31/94 06/30/95 Staff Interview and select nine (9) Home Visitors Interview \u0026amp; select Home Visitors Printed and mailed flyere to area churches Ran classified ad in two local newspapen 3.1 Arrange logistics with State Regional Office for the initial training 4.1 Conduct home interview and enroll families into program. 01, 2 07/01/94 07/25/94 08/05/94 08/07/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 10/03/94 08/05/94 08/17/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Staff Supervisor Supervisor Supervisor Coordinators Supervisor Coordinators Pay the bill (requisition paid) Pay the bill (Documentation of family enrollment)Program Seq f: Program Name: Program Code: Program Goat: LI4 L14 L14 L14 LI4 L14 01 HIPPY 01 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Page: 3 RerisloD Date: Marian Shead August 11. 1995 To prepare economically disadvantaged children to enter kindergarten with the necessary skills to be success\nand to improve die educational outcomes of students, particularly black students as it relates to the achievement disparity between black and white students. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 5. To recruit families 6. To determine service of coordinators 7. To assign families to be serviced by aides. 8. To organize instructional material. 9. To familiarize aides of the HIPPY implementation in LRSD. 10. Obtain material for program A. Mail registration aimouncements to 315 prospective families io LRSD B. Conduct registration for interested parents S.l Compose aixl mail correspondence to community churches to recruit families and instructional aide trainees. 6.1 Identify families to be served by each coordinator 7.1 Identify families to be served by each aide 8.1 Print curriculum material. A. Ordered printed curriculum from Dushkin Publishing 9.1 Conduct three (3) day workshop 01, 3 08/16/94 08/22/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/12/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/16/94 08/23/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 08/12/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 Staff Supervisor Coordinators Supervisor Coordinators Coordinators Coordinators Supervisor Coordinators Supervisor Coordiiutors Certification of aides (position of aides filled) Assignment of families to aides Page: 4 Program Seq /: 01 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: HIPPY Program Code: 01 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marian Shead Program Goal: To prepare economically disadvantaged children lo enter kindergarten with the necessary skill, to be niece,,\nand to improve disparity between black and white students. the educational outcomes of students, particularly black students as it relates to the achievement Flan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria LI4 11. To orientate enrolled families m the HIPPY program. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Supervisor Coordinators Families enrolled in program (documentation of patent orientation) L15 LIS L15 11.1 Conduct orientation meeting. A. Secured space for orientation(Adult Education Auditorium) from Paulette Martin, Adult Education Director B. C. D. 07/01/94 09/19/94 06/30/95 09/19/94 Invited LRSD personnel to Orientation Prepared program agenda for orientation Orientation conducted 09/21/94 WI23I9^ 09/26/94 09/21/94 09/26/94 12. Identic meeting sites of group meetings. 13. To schfate anplemenation of HIPPY curriculum. 14. To provide parents with information that will assist them with their children. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Coordinators Confirmation of site (documentation of letters) 12.1 Secure meeting sites for group meeting, (mailed letten to building principals) 12.2 Mail out notification of meeting sites. 13.1 To schedule aides weekly home visits 13.2 To schedule area group meetiruts - print flyers 13.3 To schedule weekly Inservice Training for aides 13.4 Schedule aides first teaching (with own child). 01, 4 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Coordinators Coordinaton Supervisor Coordinators Supervisor Coordinators Received materialsProgram Seq f: Program Name: Program Code: Program Goal: L15 L6 L16 01 HIPPY 01 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Page: 5 Revision Dote: Marian Shead August 11. 1995 To prepare economically disadvantaged children w enter kindergarten with the necessary skills to be success\nand to improve the educational outcomes of students, particularly black students as it relates to die achievement disparity between black and white students. I Plan Reference Page Ntmber Objectives Strategics Beginning Date Comfrfetion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 16. To determine program success 19. Provide parents with information to be successful with their children 14.1 Schedule workshop for patents and aides, mail out and print matorials. 14.2 Include enrichments for parents at monthly Group Meetings 16.1 Conduct survey of parents - print materials 16.2 Telephone survey conducted 19.1 Obtain a sitt and speaker and schedule a lecture for patents 01. 5 07/01/94 07/01/94 09/01/94 07/01/94 01/04/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 01/18/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Supervisor Coordinators Supervisor Coordiiutors Coordinators Supervisor Supervisor Completion of survey Evaluation using the Early Prevention of School Failure or a similar model which is comparable in validation scope and developmental grounding, will be conducted on the HIPPY participants as they enter and exit the kindergarten. A standardized achievement test will be given to each child at the end of the third grade level. Consultant fee paid Page: 6 Program Seq f: 01 Rerlsion Date: August II. 1995 Program Name: HIPPY Program Code: 01 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marian. Shead Program Goal: To prepare economKilly disadvantaged children to enter kindergarten with the necessary skills to be success\nand to improve the educational outcomes of students, particularly black students as it relates to the achievement disparity between black and white students. L16 L16 Plan Reference Page Nianber L16 LI6 L16 Objectives Strategies lUginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 20. Build die aides children self esteem. 21. Graduation of HIPPY cbildten and aides reception 23. Suff in place. 24. Maintain regular staff. 19.2 Hold Parent Appreciation/Motivational Program 20.1 Activities throughout program year with involvement for children\ni.e. fall carnival, holiday party, black history program, group meetings, graduation A recognition ceremony A. Held Fall Carnival for parents and children Ocmber 24. 1994 at Adult Education Auditorium B. Held Holiday Party for parents and children December 20, 1994 at Adult Education Auditorium C. D. E. F. 04/20/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 10/24/94 12/20/94 04/20/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 10/24/94 12/20/94 Staff Staff Staff Staff Consultant fee paid Completion of program Held Black History Program February 28, 1995 Held Parent Appreciatkm/Motivatjonal Program Held Graduation Ceremony May 21, 1995 Held Recognition Ceremony for Aides 05/25/95 21.1 Staff will organize 23.1 To begin inq)Ieinentation of HIPPY program. 24.1 Secretary 01, 6 02/28/95 04/20/95 05/21/95 05/25/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 02/28/95 04/20/95 06/30/95 05/21/95 05/25/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Coordinator Coordinator Supervisor Staff began implementation of program To assist in die implementation of programPage: 7 Program Seq f: 01 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: HIPPY Program Code: 01 Prhnary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marian Shead Program Goal: To prepare economically disadvanuged children to enter kindergarten with the necessary skills to be success\nand to improve the educational outcomes of students, particularly black students as it relates to the achievement disparity between black and white students. L16 L6 L6 Flan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 25. To assist in traveling expense. 25.1 Aides made borne visit. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Aides Pay stipend 07/01/94 06/30/95 26, The home-based program and die four-vear-old school-based program will collaborate in the areas of parental involvement and teacher training. 27, The Little Rock School and Pulaski County School Districts will collaborate and coordinate the on-goina implementation of the HIPPY Program. 01, 7 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95Program Seq f: 02 Program Name: Program Code: Program Description: Distrkt Goal Support: Program Giud: Plan References: FY Program Budget: YTD Expenditures: Related Function Codes: LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Four-Year Old Program/City-Wide Early Childhood Program 02 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Pat Pike Page: I Revision Date: August II. 1995 The purpose of die program is  meet the growing needs of disadvantaged students and to improve the racial balance at schools that are difficult to desegregate by incorporating Early Childhood Education programs into the Elementary schools. The program provides experiences for young children which meet their needs and stimulate learning in all developmental areas - physical, social, emotional, and intellectual. Priority for identification of program sites will be given to areas that have a very high concentration of low income students and in schools that are diffkult to desegregate. The Disnkts preschool curriculum model will be implemented in all incentive schools and other selected schools in the Little Rock School Distrkt. Effective the 1990-91 school year, this model will be an integral part of the effort to improve the academic achievement of minority and economkallv disadvantaged children and to attract white students to the schools. A loiut-range (four-vear-otd) plan will address deinogriphk. instructional, and structural needs. LRSD will continue to use the four-vear-old program as a means to meet the needs of-disadvantaged students and desegregate schools that are difficult to desegregate. L8 Goal FI - Implement integrated educational programs that will ensure that all students grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis on bask skills and academic enrichment while closing disparities in achievement. Goal F2 - Develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. Goal F3 - The Little Rock School Board, administration, staff, and students will demonstrate in their day to day behavior that they accept each diversity among students, staff and the comiminity as a valued resource upon which our community and nation can draw as we prepare for die 21st Century. Goal F4 - Solicit and secure financial and other resources that are necessary to fully support our schools, including our desegregation plan. Goal F5 - Provide a safe and orderly climate that is conducive to learning for all students. Goal F6 - Ensure that equity occurs in all fdiases of school activities and operatkiu. The District will implement the Four-Year-Old Program by the 1994-95 school year according to the provisions of a long-ranee implementation plan developed for additional four-year-old classes and approved by the Court f72O seats). L7, LIO. L17, 18. 19 ] $1,943,683.64 $2,108,061.00 1st Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: $292,010.10 $480,415.35 02, 1 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend: $607,059.76 $728,575.79 FTE 89.5 1Program Seq f: Program Name: Program Code: Program Goal: Flan Reference Page Number L17 L17 L17 L17 L17 L17 02 Four-Year Old Program LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Primary Leader: To Implement the Four-Year-Old Program In selective schools. (To meet the needs of disadvantaged students\nto improve racial balance in schools that are difficult m desegregate.) Objectives Strategies 2. Recruit teachers and aides as needed. 3. Obtain curricuhan materials, supplies, and furniture as needed. 4. Train teachers and aides in the Implementation of E.C.E. currlctdum.) Page: 2 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Secondary Leader: Pat Price Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 06/30/95 Supervisors, Human Resources Director, Principals 2. (A list of qualified applicants.) 2.1 Interview intererted teachers and aides as needed. A. Teachers and aides hired for every classroom. 3.1 Complete and send orders to vendors. A. Materials, supplies and equipment available in al) new classrooRU. 4.1 Conduct orientation and Inservlces. A. Principals training July 18 and 19. 1994\nOctober 13, 20, 1994 and November 15. 1994\nFebruary 23. 1995 and March 29. 30. 31. 1995 B. Teachers training August 16. 1994 and September 20, 1994\nOctober 12, 13. 20 and November 10, 15, 18. 1994\nFebruary 21. 23. 1995 and March 3. 6. 10. 29. 30. 31. 1995\nApril 11. 12. 13. 19. 1995 02, 2 07/01/94 07/08/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/18/94 08/16/94 06/30/95 08/12/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 08/20/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/06/95 06/06/95 Supervisors, Human Resources Director, Principab (Purchasing Dept. Supervisors) Principals Supervisors Supv/Staff Dev Supv/Staff Dev 2.1 A list of qualified applicants. (Employment of teachers and aides for new and open positions.) 3. (Confirmation of purchase orders.) 3.1 Materials available 4. (Documentation of inservice evaluations.) 4.1 Agenda (Documentation of inservice evaluations) Page: 3 Program Seq f: 02 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Four-Year Old Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Pat Price Program Goal: To Implement the Four*Year-Old Program tn selective schools. (To meet the needs of disadvantaged students\nto improve racial balance in schools that are difficult to desegregate.) I Flan Reference Page Nianber L17 L17 L17 L18 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 5. Familiarize pareida with Four-Year Old Program. 5.1 Conduct paretd orientation meeting and pareid conference. A. Parent Orientation: August 30, 1994 - Romine and Elementary Magnet Schools: September I, 1994 - Elementary Area Schools\nSeptember 8, 1994 - Incentive Schools\nParent Conference Day - September 23. 1994\nNovember 12, 1994 - Brady Parent Woritshop\nOctober 4. 1994 - HIPPY\nMarch 17, 1995 - Parent Conference Day\nApril 13, 20 and May 10. 1995 - Rockefeller Parent Workshops 5.2 Include four-year old children In Master Schedule - students receive service* of counselors, musk teachers, school nurses, librarian*, physical education and art teachers. A. Master schedules reflect services children receive. 5.3 Ensure key experiences occurring far the classroom. A. One hundred and six (106) classroom visitations. B. Forty (40) programs had licensing site visits. 02, 3 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/30/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/22/94 09/13/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/06/95 06/30/95 09/30/94 06/30/95 06/01/75 06/06/95 Classroom teachers Classroom teachers Principab Principals Classroom Teachers Supervisors 5. (Documentation of meetings artd evaluations.) 5.1 Number of parents attending Parent/Teacher Conferences 5.2 Master schedules 5.3 Curriculum checklistPage: 4 Program Seq f: 02 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Four-Year Old Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Pat Price Program Goal: To implement the Four-Year-Old Program in selective schools. (To meet the needs of disadvantaged students\nto improve racial balance in schools that are difficult to desegregate.) Plan Reference Page Nianber L18 L18 L18 L18 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 6. Evaluate effectiveness of Four-Year Old Program. 6.1 Aihnlnister appropriate evaluation to four-year-olds. 6.1 (Maintaining portfolio assessments on four-year-olds.) A. Portfolio assessments began on all children. 6.2 Analyze student assessment test data and prepare report for LRSD Board of Directors. 6.3 Utilize results for program fanprovemeid. 02, 4 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/22/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/06/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 (Principals Classroom Teachers Supervisors Planning, Research, and Evaluation. Assoc. Supt.) Classroom teachers (Classroom teachers) Assoc Supt Supervisor Plnnnlfig, Evaluation, and Testing (Assoc Supt Supervisor) 6. (Annual review of assessment data beginning at die end of the kindergarten year of each child participating in the program. EPSF Post Assessments) o(Comparisons of the progress of children who did and did iMt participate in the program.) (Standardize achievement tests will be given to each child at the end of the third grade level. These tests will provide data indicating the success of the Early Childhood Program as an intervention strategy.) 6.1 Evaluation results 6.1 (Documentation of portfolios recording the work which children do and what they krtow.) 6.2 Evaluation report 6.3 (Areas targeted for improvement.) Page\n5 Program Seq *: 02 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Four-Year Old Program Program Code: Prinarj Leader: Secondary Leader: Pat Price Program Goal: To iinpleinent the Four-Year-Old Program in selective schools. (To meet the needs of disadvantaged students\nto improve racial balance in schools that are difficult to desegregate.) i Flan Reference Page Nimber Objectives Strategics Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 7, Support the continued work of the LRSD Early Childhood Task Force as a valuable avenue for parent, teacher, and conununitv input. 07/01/94 06/30/95 7.1 Conduct monthly Task Force meetings A. Schedule meetings and plan agenda. 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 05/31/95 02, 5Program Seq 9: 02 Program Name: Program Code: Program Goal: Flan Reference Page Nianber L19 L19 L19 L19 L19 L19 L19 L19 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET EXX:UMENT Four-Year Old Program Primaiy Leader: Estelle Matthis Secondary Leader: Page: 6 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Pat Price To combine the efforts of the L.R.S.D.. P.C.S.S.D., N.L.R.S.D.. Head Start and other entities to provide quality early childhood experiences to as many disadvaritage students in the city of Little Rock. Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 2. To develop a plan for planning a city-wide early childhood program. 3. To initiate the planning for the Implementation of a dty wide early childbood program. 1.4 To receive a letter of support from each agency desiring to participate. 2.1 To establish planning procedures and Identify key committees and chairpersons needed for the planning process. 2.2 To Identify appropriate additional representatives from each participating for each committee. agency 2 J To deUneate the goals to be addressed and the tasks to be acc\u0026lt;ai|41shed by each committee, including appropriate timelines to be met. 3.1 To conduct periodic meetings to review progress of each committee. 3.2 To idemify resources needed by identified by each committee, including monetary. 02, 6 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Key representatives from each agency Key representatives from each agency Key representatives from each agency Key representatives from each agency Key representatives from each agency Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Assoc Supt for ELducational Programs File record letters Structured plan for planning on file. Record of committee members Record of committee members Minutes of meetings Identification of committeeProgram Seq f: 02 Page: 7 Revision Date: August II, 1995 Program Name: Four-Year Old Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Estelle Matthis Secondary Leader: Pat Price Program G\u0026lt;m1: To combine the efforts of the L.R.S.D., P.C.S.S.D., N.L.R.S.D., Head Start and other entities to provide quality early childhood experiences to as many disadvantage students in the city of Little Rock. L19 LI9 Ptan Reference Page Number L7(N) LI0(N) LIO (N) Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 3.3 To review the flrst draft of the ctunprebensive plan and to make recommendations for refinement. 3.4 To submit the final draft for approval to aD partldpanl Boards of Directors (where appUcaUe). 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 Assoc Supt for EducatioiuU Programs Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Submission of first draft Draft submitted to Board I. (To collaborate with HIPPY, P.C.S.S.C., N.L.R.S.D., Head Start, and other entities in order to fulfill the district's expectations for a quality Early Childhood Education Program.) (N) 1.1 (To establish a schedule of regular meetings of representatives of the various entities.) (N) 1.2 (Supervisors meet to discuss irtdividual program needs and to determine if resources can be shared.XN) A. manning meeting held August 10. 1994\nSeptember 28. 1994\nSeptember 29. 1994\nOctober 18, 1994\nNovember 8. 1994\nApril 10, 1995\nMay 15, 1995 02, 7 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/10/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 05/31/95 (LRSD Supervisors and PCSSD/NLRSD and Headstart Supervisors of ECE programs) (LRSD Supervisors and PCSSD/NLRSD and Headstart Supervisors of ECE programs) 1.1 (Schedule and minutes of all meetings) 1.2 (Roster of participants arxi minutes of meetings)Page: 8 Program Seq f: 02 Revision Date: August 11. 199S Program Name: Four-Year OW Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Estelle Matthis Secondary Leader: Pat Price Program Goal: To combine the efforts of the L.R.S.D.. P.C.S.S.D.. N.L.R.S.D.. Head Start and other entities to provide quality early childhood experiences to as many disadvantage students in the city of Little Rock. Plan Reference Page Nianber LIO (N) LIO (N) L10 (N) L11 Objectives Strategies T Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1.3 (To plan joint inservices for administrators, teachen and instructional assistants.XN) 1.4 (To plan joint parent involvement activities.XN) 1.5 (To use a student referral system allowing parents on a waiting list to know about vacarK:les.)(N} 1.6 A representative from the Little Rock School District Student Assiaranent Office will meet each year with parents from both programs to review the kindergarten assianwent oroceaa The annual sessions on kindergarten registration will also be used to provide information on magnet school opportimltles. 02, 8 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 (LRSD Supervisors and PCSSD/NLRSD and Headstart Supervisors of ECE programs) (LRSD Supervisors and PCSSD/NLRSD and Headstart Supervisors of ECE programs) (LRSD Supervisors and PCSSO/MLRSD and Headstart Stgrervlsors of ECE programs) 1.3 (Roster of participants and evaluations of inservices) 1.4 (Roster of participants and evaluations of Inservlces) 1.5 (List of vacancies each entity has.) --1Page: 9 Program Seq f: 02 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Four-Year Old Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Estelle Matthis Secondary Leader: Pat Price Program Goal: To combine the efforts of die L.R.S.D., P.C.S.S.D., N.L.R.S.D., Head Start and other entities to provide quality early childhood experiences to as many disadvantage students in the city of Little Rock. L11 Ran Reference Page Nunber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1.7 Beginning in the 1990-91 school year, a list will be conpiled of all graduates from the three early childhood programs. These students will be identified in the Little Rock School District mainframe cowouter system according to their respective programs. A. Requested list of graduates from the ECE programs at Headstart and the city of Little Rock*s East Cosmunity Complex 02, 9 07/01/94 08/22/94 06/30/95 06/06/95 1.7 At the end of each year for grades K-3, these students will be monitored on the basis of standardited tests, criterion-reference tests. EPSF screening, or ony other academic measures that are available and applicebie, The entities will review these results on an annual basis, prior to the beginning of the following school year, and make prograwnatic changes, individually and collectively, as needed. These students will be cowoared to a control group in order to isolate the effectiveness and/or deficiencies of the various early childhood programs.LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Program Seq f: 03 Page: 1 Revlsioii Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: 10 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Parfcer/Glasgow Program Description: Name and Location of Academic Support Programs - The name of all district remediation programs will be Academic Support Programs. All school programs will be located at each school site, except Metropolitan Vocational-Techiuca] Education Center. Purpose - The purpose of the Academic Support Program is to provide support for participating students in grades one through twelve in the areas of reading, language arts, and nuthematics. The program reinforces and enhances the academic achievement of these targeted students. The support will be provided by certified reading specialists, English and mathematics teachers in the regular classrooms, additional classes, and labs. Scope and Content - The Academic Support Program offen a variety of options to die individual schools for providing accelerated reading/language arts and mathematics learning experiences for students identified through a process using multiple criteria. The program is characterized by providing either direct or indirect services to identified students through additional classes, smaller class sizes. or in-class assistance at the secondary level and in-class assistance or limited pull-out at the elementary level. Partldpnnts/Benefldarlea - Target students are initially identified from the student population scoring in the annual studcot asscssinent. Multiple criteria, including student grades, teacher recommendations, and student records are used to select students from the eligible population tn participate in the Academic Support Program. District Goal Support: \u0026lt;1) Implement integrated educational programs dial will ensure that all students grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis on basic and academic enrichment while closing disparities in achievement. (2) Develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. (3) Solicit and secure financial and other resources that are necessary m fully support our schools, including our desegregation ptan. (4) Provide a safe and orderly climate that is conducive to learning for all students. (5) The Litde Rock School Board, administration, staff, and students will demonstrate in their day to day behavior that they accept each individual as a valued contributor to society and view cultural diversity among students, staff and the community as a valued resource upon which our community can draw as we prepare for the 21st Century. (6) Ensure that equity occurs in all (riuses of school activities and ofurations. Program Goal: The goal of the Academic Support Program is to provide equitable language arts and mathematics learning experiences for all students tn the mainstream setting by supporting diem with the instructional and technical assistance needed to reduce the teaming disparity. Flan References: LP 1-20 Program Budget: $1,615,303.00 let Qtr Expend: $209,511.74 3rd Qtr Expend: $579,493.61 FTE 48.0 YTD Expenditures: $1,491,150.15 2nd Qtr Expend: $357,000.40 4(h Qtr Expend: $345,144.40 Related Function Codes: 03, 1 Isogram Seq f: 03 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: Program Goal: Flao Reference Page Nunber March 19, 1993 Revised Academic Support Program P 1 p4,13 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Page: 2 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Adams/Parkcr/Glasgow The goal of die Academic Support Program is to provide equitable language arts and mathematics learning experiences for all students in the mainstreamed setting by supporting diem with die instructional and technical assistance needed to reduce the learning disparity. (Mijectives Strategies Beginning Date Ctnnpletion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1. To Identify and serve students who are at-risk in language arts and mathematics. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Local school teams 1. (Print-out of eligible students is provided to local school teams. Uniform District criteria are used (Stanford 8 cutoff score and multiple criteria) to identify targeted students.) 1.1 Explain the Academic Support Program options to local school administrators. A. Language Arts Plus and Madi Plus and traditional in-class support. 1.2 Provide an overview of bow all the individual Academic Support Programs will be coordinated for continuiQr of services to children and efficient use of resources. -All schools will implement die Board-approved uniform curriculum. 03, 2 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 09/30/95 06/30/95 Associate Supt. for Curriculum Assocbte Supt. for Curriculum, Director of Federal Programs, Cuiriculm Supervisors 1.1 (Schedule of meeting.) 1.2 (Observation reports and staff development activities records are on file.)Page: 3 Program Seq f: 03 Revision Date: August 11. 1993 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Pa rkcr/Glasgow Program Goal: The goal of the Academic Support Program is to provide equiable language arts and mathematics learning experiences for all students in the mainstreamed setting by supporting them with the instructional and technical assistance needed to reduce the learning disparity. Plan Reference Page Number p7,W pl3 p 11.13 p 12.13 Objectivea Strateglea Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Crlterta -The established critical attributes of the Academic Support Program will be evident in each school. -The revised curricutum (K-i2) has been sequentially developed and die objectives have been correlated to the skills in Arkansas Minimum Performance Test, Stanford Achievement Test-Eighth Edition, and existing computer-assisted instructional software. -To provide for continuous improvement of teachers, records will be maintained on staff development activities. -New staff members will be targeted for appropriate staff development activities as well as participation in the district's \"New Teacher Initiative.* U Select the local schools appro|Hiate Academic Support Program. (Indtrect/dlrect/cxtended aervices) A. Support program identified 1.4 Ideidl^ students selected for partldpotlon tn each program by achool/grade level. A. Students identified and selected. 1.5 Select staff (Identify by position) responsible for delivering Academic Su|qwrt Program. A. Staff selected for 1994-95 school year. 03, 3 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/01/94 06/30/95 09/30/95 06/30/95 09/30/94 06/30/95 09/30/94 Local school administrators Local school teams PriiKipai 1.3 (Selection on file at buildinglevel aiKl in office of Director of Federal Programs.) 1.4 (Print-out of eligible students is provided to local school teams. Uniform District criteria are used (Stanford 8 cutoff score and multiple criteria) to identify targeted students.) 1.5 (Staff assignments are determined at die building level and assignments filed at the Office of Federal Programs.)Page: 4 Program Seq 9: 03 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Parfcer/Glasgow Program Goal: The goal of the Academic Support Program is to provide equitable language arts and mathematics learning experiences for all students in the mainstrearned setting by supporting them with the instructional and technical assistance needed to reduce the learning disparity. Plan Reference Page Number p12,13 p 13 p 7,8,20 pl Objectives Strategies Rfinning Date Comjdetion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria l.d Schedule the academic teams staff. A. Teacher schedules on file at Office of Federal Programs B. Schedules posted in classrooms 1.7 Implemeid selected school options at local levd. A. Program options implemented 1.8 Utilize resources Invested In PAL remediation approach by reallocating staff positions, computer hardware, software programs, and other equipment and materials toward the itew approach to remediation. A. JoW Year School Improvemerd Plans developed tanplemeoted. B. First Year School improvement plan* developed/implemented. 07/01/94 08/23/94 08/23/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/07/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 09/30/94 06/30/95 09/28/94 Principal Principal and staff (PriiKipal, Coordinator of Media Services. Director of Federal Programs, and Curriculum Supervisors) 2. To prescribe a personalized intervention plan for eligible students. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Principal and staff 03. 4 1.6 (Schedules are developed listing teams contact time, number of students served, and other variables associated with the teams responsibilities.) 1.7 (Schedules of targeted students reflect implementation of the selected school option(s).) 1.8 (Tecimology Department's inventory and schedules of stafFing reflect reallocations of resources.) 2. (Personal education plans of targeted students reflect implementation of the selected school option(s).)Page: 5 Program Seq 9: 03 RevisioD Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Parker/Glasgow Program Goal: The goal of the Academic Support Program is lo provide equitable language arts and mathematics learning experiences for all students in the mainstreamed setting by supporting them with (he instructional and technical assistarx\ne needed to reduce die learning disparity. Flan Relercnce Page Number Objectives Strategiea Beginning Dale Completion Dale Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 2. (To prescribe a personal education plan for targeted students.) pl4 pM 2.1 Cluster schools and develop a staff development schedule for curriculum clusters. 2 J Begin training staff responsible for delivering each Academic Support Program. 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 Directors of Staff Development and Reading\nSupervisors of Language Arts and Mathematics Directors of Staff Development and Reading\nSupervisors of Language Arts, Mathematics and IRC Specialists, Director of Federal Programs 2.1 (Staff development schedule on file.) 2.2 (Staff training for participants will include program administration (student selection process, recordkeeping. progress reports) instructional strategies, parental involvement, and others.) A. Workshops -Applied Madi I and n  State training 08/02/94 08/04/94 -Harcourt Brace Inservice for Principals 08/03/94 08/03/94 -Pre-School Elementary Language Arts Curriculum Inservice -Pre-School Elementary Classroom Teacher Harcourt Brace Inservice -Pre-School Secondary English and Language Arts Plus Inservice Pre-School Elementary Pre-School Secondary Math Plus Inservke 03. 5 08/15/94 08/16/94 08/16/94 08/15/94 08/16/94 08/15/94 08/16/94 08/16/94 08/16/94 08/16/94 J.'Page: 6 Program Seq *: 03 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Parker/Giasgow Program Goal: The goal of the Academic Support Program is to provide equitable language arts and matfienutics learning experiences for all students in the mainstreamed setting by supporting diem with die instructional and technical assistance needed to reduce the learning disparity. Flan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria -Elementary Reading Teacher Inservice -Chapter 1 Record Keeping -Harcourt Brace Reading Department Inservice -Secondary Math Council -Harcourt Brace Inservice for Grade 4, 5. and 6 Teachers -Harcourt Brace Inservice for Grade 1. 2. and 3 Teachers -Secondary Academic Support Madi Teachers Inservice - Math Plus -Harcourt Brace l^ementary Cluster Inservices for New Reading Series Grades 2-6 -Elementary Reading Teacher Inservice -Elementary Reading Teacher Inservice -First Grade Academic Support Math Teacher Inservice (Part I) -Chapter I Mid-Winter Conference (Hot Springs) -Academic Support Program Planning Meeting -Academic Support Elementary Counselors Meeting -Academic Support Secondary Counselors' Meeting -Secortdary English Council Inservice -First Grade Academic Support Math Teacher Inservice (Part 2) 03, 6 08/31/94 09/01/94 09/02/94 09/13/94 09/19/94 09/20/94 09/27/94 10/10/94 11/16/94 11/19/94 12/06/94 01/26/95 02/02/95 02/07/95 02/07/95 02/20/95 02/20/95 08/31/94 09/01/94 09/02/94 11/22/94 09/19/94 09/20/94 09/29/94 11/14/94 11/16/94 11/19/94 01/30/95 01/27/95 02/02/95 02/07/95 02/07/95 02/20/95 03/13/95Page: 7 Program Seq f: 03 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: pTfanary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Parker/Glasgow Program Goal: Hk goal of the Academic Support Progiam is to provide equitable language arts and mathematics learning experiences for all students in the mainstreamed setting by supporting them with the instructional and technical assistance needed to reduce the learning disparity. Ran Reference Page Nianber Objectives Strategics Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria pM -Secondary Chapter I \u0026amp; Language Arts Plus Teacher Inservice \"Instructional Strategies* 2.3 Monitor the implementation of above. 2.3 (Monitor the implementation of the Academic Support Program options. These programs may vary from year-to-year.) A. On site visits made to elementary and secondary schools by staff 2.4 Monitor instruction and learning in Academic Support Program settings on a regular basis and observe to determine: -Teachers involving students in a variety of classroom activities that address learning styles and cultural diversity. 03, 7 03/09/95 03/10/95 07/01/94 08/23/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Principals, districtwide staff development team, and computer specialista (PritKipals. districtwide staff development team, curriculum supervisors. IRC specialists. Director of Federal Programs) Principals 2.3 (School visits/observations are made to provide feedback (oral/written) to trained staff.) Teacher observations and evaluations on record. Page: 8 Program Seq f: 03 Revtsion Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Parker/Glasgow Program Goal: The goal of die Academic Support Program is to provide equitable language arts and mathematics learning experiences for all students in die mainstreamed setting by supporting them with the instructional and technical assistance needed to reduce the learning disparity. 1 Plan Reference Page Nimber Objectives Strategies Bcghmlng Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria p 7,9,10,19 -Teachers selecting methods and strategies that capitalize on students interests and experiences. -Teachers danonstratlng creativity and resourcefulness in deliveiing instruction. -Teachen utilizing effective classroom strategics, such as tutors, smaO-group Instruction, and extended day/weck programs, to maintain the gains students have made. Teachers interacting with students In a caring manner. -Teachers recording of students data that shows increased student achievement and social skills (letter and citizenship grades, standardized test scores, attendance). p7,15 2.5 Provide technical assistance and maintenance workshops as needed in the above staff development areas. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Principals, district- wide staff development team, and computer specialists 2.4 (Requests for technical assistance are documented and evaluated. Feedback related to improvement or change is recorded.) A. Technical assistance has been provided to eleiTKntary and secondary schools. 08/23/94 Q6I3QI95 (PritKipals, districtwide staff development team, curriculum supervisors, IRC specialists) 03, 8Page: 9 Program Seq 9: 03 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Academic Suppon Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader\nAdams/Parker/Glasgow Program Croal: The goal of (he Academic Support Program is assistance needed to reduce the learning disparity. IO provide equitable language am and mathematics learning experiences for all students in the mainstreamed setting by supporting them with the instructional and technical } Flan Reference Page Nianber p 7,10,15 p10,15 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 2.6 Schedule school based meetings to assess program effectiveness. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Principal 2.5 (Records of dates of meetings and participants, minutes of meetings, and issues related to program effectiveness are maintained.) 3. To reduce or eUminate pull-out academic support programs. 07/01/94 06/30/95 3.1 Collect appropriate data for end of school program evaluation, including pre and post standardized test scores, student grades and attendance, xampks of student work, and pareid/teacber/student recommendations. 3.2 Analyze the above data to evaluate program effectiveness In meeting Its particular programmatic goab and objectives of remediating student achievement and contributing to the overall reduction of disparity between Mack and white students. A. Chapter 1 Sustained Effects Reports 1995 03. 9 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/01/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/15/95 Principal and staff\nDir. of Federal Programs Associate Supt. for Curriculum, Assistant Supts., Curriculum Supervisors, and Principab 3.1 (Individual student folders that include a systematic collection of student work, pre and post standardized test scores, grades, and recommendations to provide individual/group/school progress are maintained for continuous student and program progress.) 3.2 Academic Support Programs win be successfully operating in all district schools as evidettced by: Increased student achievement. Improvement on standardized test scores. Increased numbers of students moving to the next quartile. Increased number of students moving above the 50th percentile. Page: 10 Program Seq f: 03 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Parker/Glasgow Program Goal: The goal of the Academic Support Program is to provide equitable language arts aixl mathematics learning experiences for all students in the mainstreamed setting by supporting them with the instructional and techrucal assistance needed to reduce the learning disparity. nan Reference Page Number p 10,15,19^0 pl5 p5 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria B. Stanford Achievement Test Results 3.3 Identic modification for the Academic Support Program for 1993-94. A. Math Plus initiated in regular math, pre-algebra. algebra: FY 95 - 10 schools participated 3.4 Support and extend learning opportunities for studeids by maidng available to targeted students before-scboot, at hmch, after-scbool, and periodic extended weeks computer lab instruction. 03, 10 06/01/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 09/30/94 06/30/95 Associate Supt. for Curriculum, Assistant Supts., Curriculum Supervisors and Principals Director of Federal Programs, Principals -Grade distribution reports (by semester) reflecting an increase in letter grades of \"C\" or better in the core areas for each student. -Grade distribution reports (by semester) by class and grade level reflecting an increase in attainment of letter grades of \"C\" or better In the core areas. -Improved attendaiKe for targeted students. 3.3 (The 1993-94 school year will reflect modifications.) 3.4 (Schedules will reflect additional instructional services.)Page: 11 Program Seq 9: 03 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: - Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Parker/Glasgow Program Goal: The goal of the Academic Support Progmm is  piovide equiable language arta and malhemadcs learning eaperiencea for all students in the nutinstreatned setting by supporting them with the instntctional and technical assistance needed to reduce the learning disparity. I Pbn Reference Page Nunber P Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 4. To provide parents the knowledge and skllla needed to promote the education of their children at home and at school. A. Announcement of Extended E\u0026gt;ay Program to begin 1-4-95 B. Identified studenu of participating schools submitted to Office of Federal Programs. C. Extenday Day proposals to Office of Federal Programs D. Extended Day Programs begin (1500 participants} 4.1 Assist parents in obtaining the knowledge and skills needed to prorfote the education of their children at home and at school through: Providing timely information regarding students achievement and behavior. Involving them in Informative and effective conferences concerning their childs education. Involving parents as partners in their childs educationa) process. A. Provided parent/teacher support at five (5) schools\nconducted twelve (12) parent meetings B. Parent Involvement meetings with Key Facilitators and/or Executive Council C. Parent training sessions (29) 03. 11 07/01/94 06/30/95 (Principal and staff. Director of Federal Programs, Curriculum Supervisors) 4. Parental involvement will show an increase in the numbers of parents attending parent conferences and parent training sessions and visiting schools. 11/18/94 11/18/94 12/20/94 01/04/95 07/01/94 07/05/94 07/11/94 09/27/94 11/18/94 12/08/94 12/20/94 90% 06/30/95 12/21/95 06/30/95 06/29/95 r (Principal and staff, Director of Federal Programs, Curriculum Supervisors) 4.1 (Records of parental involvement activities on file.) Page: 12 Program Seq 9: 03 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Academic Support Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Parker/Glasgow Program Goal: The goal of the Academic Support Program is to provide equitable language arts and mathematics learning experiences for all students in the mainstreamed setting by supporting fliem with the instructional and technical assistartce needed to reduce the learning disparity. Flan Reference Page Nianbcr Objectives Strategics Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria D. District-wide PAC Meeting 10/22/94 10/22/94 E. Homeless Conference 11/02/94 11/04/94 F. Mid-Winter Conference (30 parents) 01/25/95 01/27/95 O. Kindergarten Parent Inservice 'Getting Your Child Ready for First Grade Reading* 02/07/09 02/07/09 H. Family Day Celebration (250 participants) I. National Parent Meeting (8 parents) J. Tri District Parent Meeting (200 parents) K. Awards Picnic (300 parents) L. Chapter 1 Parent Involventent Day 03, 12 03/12/95 10/04/94 02/15/95 04/17/95 07/01/95 03/12/95 10/08/94 04/01/95 06/03/95 03/12/95Program Seq #: 04 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculuin Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Program Description: District Goal Support: Program Goal: Flan References: I FY Program Budget: Expenditures: Related Function Codes: LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Page: I Revision Date: August tl. 1995 1 The Mulriculaiiil Curriculum Program i, designed to provide equity and excellence in ,11 curricullt and program ireas in the Little Rock School Disiricl. (,6 ), The program is further designend tnoi reduce the disparity that exists between black and white students in academic performances and the low representation of black students in ^vanc^ plac^nt ^u^as development in the r?\n:! p:\u0026lt;^rcoS X* -mra,. cdmlc backgroumls wdl be affected dm the cultural, academic and social needs of all children. (1,3,6) To supplement greatest by activities oudined in the Multicultural Curriculum Program. 4, Students will be provided opportunities to develop better self-esteem,. -5-.- ---S--o--i-r-i-e nts will have opportunities to eaamine the artistic. nwiiiol acientific. literary, social and political accomplishments of many ethruc groups. Goal No. I. Implement integrated educational programs that will ensure dut III students grow icademically. sociilly and emotionally with emphasis on basic skills and academic enrichment while closing disparities m achievement. Goal No. 6. Ensure that equity occurs in all phases of school activities and operations. Goal No. 2. Develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. Goal No. 4. Solicit and secure financial and other resources that are necessary to fully support our schools, including our dewgregaaon plan. -Artrfi-rtnr m cncietv and view cultural diversity Goal No. 3. The Little Rock School Board, administration, staff, and students will demonstrate in their day to day behavior that they accept each individual as a valued contributor to society and view cultural di ty among students, staff and the community as a valued resource upon which our community and nation can draw as we prepare for the 21st Century. To ensure educational equity in die elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76 objectives 1,2, 3. 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76, obiectives 1, 2, 3, 4.) L66  80 $259,837.33 $187,092.39 1st Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: $45,936.67 $29,434.99 04. 1 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend: $62,392.39 $49,328.34 FTE  Program Seq f: 04 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Program Goal: Ftan Reference Page Number L66 L66 L66 L76 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Page: 2 Revision Date: Marie McNeal To ensure educational equity in the clcmenury and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1. 2, 3, 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76. objectives 1, 2, 3, 4.) Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility August 11, 1995 Evaluation Crtterb 1. To provide teacher learning opportunities through formal course training 1.1 Contact local colleges and universities to obtain Information on proposed course offerings related to ethnic studies for the simmer and faD, 1991 1.1 (LRSD will receive aimoutKements from local colleges/universities on proposed multicultural courses) A. Letters written, mailed to all 4 year state colleges and universities requesting catalogue listings of multicuitural course offerings. B. Catalogues listing proposed courses for the 1994-95 terms received. 1.2 Receive and advertise course offerings to aD certified staff, Inchiding opportunities for tuition rehnbursement and/or salary credit A. Course offerings advertised. 04, 2 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/11/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) 07/01/94 09/09/94 (06/30/95) 05/02/95 (Director of Staff Development, Subject Area Supervisors, Principals) Assoc Supt.-Educ. Programs Dean of Grad. Seb. Academic Deans (Director of Staff Development) (Supervisor of Social Studies) Assoc Supt - Educ Programs Office of Human Resources 1. (Multicultural strategies will be implemented in schools as assessed by administration during classroom observations and teacher conferences) 1.1 List of college offerings 1.1 (The number of teachers who have received multicultural training will increase.) 1.2 Copy of information IH-ovldedPage: 3 Program Seq f: 04 Revision Date\nAugust II, 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page'76. objectives I, 2, 3, 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the N. . LRSD to promott multicultu ral activiti.e s an.d .cu rric.u lum.. d_e_v_e_l_o pm, ekn_t_. :(_A_p__pltie.. s_ o_n_l_y_ _t_o_ p_a_g__e_ 7_6__. _o_b_i_ecI ov1e s 1I . a2 .\\ 3. 4.) I Plan Reference Page Ntmber Objectives Strategies Begiiinlng Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria L66 L66 L66 L66 2. To develop a district-wide multicultural audto/visual resource catalogue 2. (To maintain district-wide multiculiural audio/visual resource catalogue) B. Opportunities for tuition reimbursement/salaiy credit outlined/identified in die LRSDs office of Human Resources and the Staff Development Department. U Identify participants in stanmer and fall courses 2.1 Review and catalogue present audio/vlsual materials related to multicultural curriculiHn 2.2 Purchase additional audio/visual materials from the 1988-89 budget A. Activity complettd/obligadon met 04, 3 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 09/30/94 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) (06/30/95) (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD Employees (Director of Human Resources) (Subject area supervisors) Supv of Media Services (Subject area supervisors) Supv of Media Services (Subject area supervisors, principals) 1.3 Co|7 of academic course completion on ffle In Personnel office (Office of Human Resources) 2. (Multicultural resources will be used for classroom instruction) 2.1 Current catalogue listing 2.1 (Copies of updated multicultural audio/visual catalogue will be distributed) 2.1 (Multicultural materials will be checked out and used by instructional staff in the schools) 2.2 Requisition material 2.2 (Materials ordered, received, arxl catalogued for distribution/use) Program Seq *: 04 Page: Revistoo Date: 4 August II. 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Siecondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies Io entire document except for page 76, objectives 1. 2, 3, 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76. objectives I. 2. 3. 4.) L66 Ran Reference Page Number L66 L66 L67 L67 L67 Objectives Strategies Begtamliig Date CompktioQ Date Responsibility EvahiatioD Criteria 2.3 Ideitiify and catalogue other resources for multicultural aurtto/vlsual materials, i.e., AR Dept . of Education, LR Public Library, AR Library Commission 2.4 Revise, print and distribute multicultural audio/vlsua) resource catalogue for the LRSD A. Activity coinpleted/obligation met 2.5 Place initial suppiemental order for multicultural audio/visual materiab from the 1989- 90 budget A. Activity compIeted/obligatioQ met 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD Supv of Media Services Superv of Media Services Media Specialists 2.3 2.4 2.4 Completed catalogue Distribution of catalogue (Multicultural materials will be checked out by schools) 2.5 Requisitions submitted 2.5 (Materials are available for check-out/use) 3. To plan and hnplcmeia the Instructional Materiab Fair (Multicultural) 3. (To supply information about multicultural materials for purchase to teachers, parents and the community) 3.1 Involve a team of parents, community resources, and teachers In detailed planning for the Fair-spedfk dates, tfanc, place and format-to be held as a component of 1988-59 pre-scbool conference 3.1 (To plan and implement the Instructional Multicultural Materials Fair for current term) 3.2 Identify national and local vendors of multicultural Instructional materials 04, 4 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) (06/30/95) (Assoc Supt for Educational Programs) (Supv of Media Services) Assoc Supt for Educatiorul Programs (Supv of Media Services) Assoc Supt for Educatiorul Programs 3. (Multicultural materials will be used by instructional staff in all schools) 3. (Evaluate the effectiveness of the Multicultural Fair) 3.1 Implementation Plan 3.1 (Involved input from parents, cotrununity, and teachers) 3.2 Comidetlon of mailing list 3.2 (Major suppliers of multicultural materials will be invited to exhibit at the Fair) - - Page: 5 Program Seq f: Program Name: Program Code: Program Goal: Flan Reference Page Number L67 L67 L67 L67 L67 L68 L68 04 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Multicultural Curriculum 12 Primary Leader: Secondar\nLeader: Marie McNeal To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document excejrt for page 76. objectives 1. 2. 3, 4.) lU eiOUIC tUUVlUUIHU UI wiw..ii..iaua.7 -------------------------,---------------- , ..  .1 i \\ To collaboratE wiUi Bie PCSSD ind the NLRSD to promote mulncultunl activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76. obiecnves I, 2. 3, 4.J 4. To develop adoptbn Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria q crtterb for textbook review and 3.3 Establish pre-school conference dates and extend Invitation to vendors 3.3 (Establish date for Fair) A. Fair date established as 12/01/94 3.4 Confirm Fair participants 3.5 Acquaint principals and ceittral office staff with plam and Fair rebtlonsfaip to desegregation efforts 3.6 Conduct medb campaign for Fair to sbff and parents 3.7 Host trl-district \"Instructional Materials Fair\" 3.7 (Host the Multicultural Fair rotating the site among the diree districts) A. LRSD will host die Fair for the 1994-95 term B. Fair hosted by LRSD at M.L. King School on December 1, 1994. 4.1 Revise Board policy for textbook adoption 04, 5 Mil  07/01/94 09/30/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07-01-94 09/30/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) 09/30/94 06/30/95 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) (06/30/95) 09/30/94 12/01/94 (06/30/95) Executive Staff Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Supv of Medb Services Assoc Supt for Deseg and Seboob Supv of Medb Services, Dir of Communications Assoc Supt of Educational Programs working with conunittee (Assoc Supt for Curriculum, Subject Area Supervisors) Assoc Supt for Educationa) Programs 3.3 Conference scheduled 3.3 (Fair date placed on District master calendar) 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.5 Confirmation (List of participating vendors) Staff agenda (Staff can relate Fair to die District's desegregation efforts) 3.6 Publicity 3.6 (Fair is advertised to the public) 3.7 Validate Fair participation 3.7 (Materials ordered/purchased) 4. (Criteria checklist implemented by textbook committees) 4.1 Approved criteriaPage: 6 Program Seq f: 04 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76. objectives 1, 2. 3. 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and die NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76, objectives 1, 2, 3. 4.) nan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Cmnpletion Date Responsibility EvahutioD Criteria Ld8 L 68 L68 L68 L68 A. Activity completed/obligation met 4.2 Ideirtify an ad hoc committee to review criteria presently being used in LRSD and other districts for textbook adoptions (10 members) A. Activity completed/obligation met 4.3 Conduct staff development training on avoiding sex and race bias and stereotyping in textbooks 4.3 (Textbooks on tbe approved Arkansas State Department of Educations textbook list arc free of sex/race bias) A. Activity completed/obligation met 4.4 Submit revised policy and criteria to the Board of Directors for Rrst reading A. Activity completed/obligation met 4 J Adopt policy on textbooks A. Activity co(i^\u0026gt;leted/obligation met 4.6 UtiUzc a local consultant to train staff on \"Avoiding Sex and Race Stereotyping in Textbooks\" A. Activity completed/obligation met 04, 6 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Assoc Supt for Educational Programs (Arkansas State Dept, of Education) Superintendent Assoc Supt for Ed Progs LRSD Board of Directors Assoc Supt for Educational Programs (Curriculum Supervisors) 4.2 Roster of committee members 4.3 Schedule of meeting and agenda 4.3 (Textbooks selected will be free of sex/race bias) 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.6 Board agenda Board agenda Monitoring (Textbooks are free of sex/race stereotypes)Page: 7 Program Seq f: 04 Revision Date: August 11. 1993 Program Name: Multkultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76. ob^tives 1. 2, 3 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76, obiectives 1, 2. 3, 4.) L6S Flan Reference Page Nianber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria L69 L69 L69 4.7 Select and recommend to Board for adoption of textbooks (elemeidary and secondary) based on criteria for adoption A. Based on criteria for adoption, elementary science textbooks were selected and approved by the Board 12/15/94. B. Secondary science textbooks will be recommended to die Board for adoption at the April Board meeting: secondary science texdxwks were approved. 07/01/94 07/01/94 01-04-95 (06/30/95) 12-22-94 04/27/95 5. To develop and Implement a multicultural curriculum for pre-ldndergarten through grade 6 5. (To implement the LRSD curriculum. K-6. which is multicultural) 5.1 Flan and host at least three (3) public meetings to receive suggestions from patrons on areas to be Included in a multicultural curriculum A. Activity completed/obligation met 5.2 Identify and retain the services of a national expert in multicultural currlculiBn development (IohI consultant for two (2) year contract). A. Activity completed/obligation met 04, 7 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD Assoc Supt for Educational Programs (Curricutum Specialists) (Principals. Teachers, Asst. Supts., Curriculum Supervisors) Assoc Supt for Educ Prog Assoc Supt for Desegregation Assoc Supt for Educational Programs 4.7 Board approval 4.7 (Criteria checklist was used for texdMX)k selection) 5. (Observation of curriculum implementation during classroom visits/teacher conferences) 5. (Improvement in student performance and assessment of attitude regarding learning) 5.1 Transcript of suggestions 5.2 Contractual commitment for the 1988-89 school year (Dr. James A. Banks was used)Program Seq f: 04 Page: 8 Revision Date: Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum August II. 1995 Program Code: 12 Primai7 Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1. 2, 3, 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76, objectives 1, 2, 3. 4.) L69 L69 L69 Plan Reference Page Nianber Objectives Strategies 5.3 In cooperation with the lead ctmsultant, the Division of Educational Programs will issue a detailed currtcuhan development timeline for the year, including a cbecldist for task completion A. Activity completed/obligation met 5.4 Develop expectations for members partiri paring on muttkulturBl curriculum committee A. Activity completed/obligation met 5.5 Identify ctirriculinn committee members and contract for services: 8  Heakh/Science 5  Musk 14  Reading/Language Arts 3 * Art 4 * Social Studies 4  Libraries 38 5.5 (All core curricuhim areas were involved in the development of guides) 5.5 (Curriculum areas revised were: Reading. Language Arts. Social Studies. Math, and Science) A. Activity completed/obligation met B. Mathematics curriculum was revised according to state mathematics framework 04, 8 Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteiia 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) Lead Consultant Assoc Supt for Educationa] Programs 5.3 TimeUne/cbecklist (Timeline included in diis document 5.5 - 5.17) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD 09/15/94 Lead Consultant Assoc Supt for ELduc Programs Assoc Supt for Educational Programs 5.4 Expectations 5.4 (Contractual agreements with curriculum writers) 5.5 Identification of committee members 1Page: 9 Program Seq #: 04 Revlsioii Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Multkultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1, 2, 3. 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76, objectives 1, 2, 3, 4.) L69 L70 Flan Reference Page Number L70 L70 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 5.6 Obtain multicultural currlculinn units from modeb used in other dtlcs A. Activity completed/obligation met 5.7 Develop expectations for use of local resource consultant in multicultural curricuhmi development A. Activity completed/obligation met 5.8 Secure the services of six (6) local resource consuHanta to serve on the district wide curriculum development committee A. Activi^ completed/obligation met 5.9 Conduct inservice session on \"Methods for Developing Multicultural Teaching Strategiea\" to include (a) understanding the rationale, trends, and goab multlcnltural curriculum, (b) developing a conceptual framework for multicultural curricultmi, and (c) establishing procedures for developing a muhlcultura] curriculum A. Activity completed/obligation met 04, 9 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-93 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Assoc Supt for Educational Programs (Curriculum Supervisors) 5.6 Copies of multicultural materials distributed to committee members 5.7 List of expectations 5.8 Contract services of consultants 5.9 Participants written evaluation 5.9 (Original inservice completed\nongoing inservice wilt be documented and evaluated by participants)Page: 10 Program Seq f: 04 Revision Date: August 11. 199S Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Mark McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity io the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76. objectives 1. 2, 3. 4.) To colhborate with the PCSSD and (he NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76, objectives 1, 2, 3, 4.) i L70 L70 L70 Flan Reference Page Nunber L70 Objectives Strategics Beginning Date Crnnfriction Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 5.10 Conduct task completion monitoring as identified In timeline A. Activity completed/obligation met 5.11 Operatiottalize tbe curriculum development timeline (monthly meetings with specific dates developed In cooperation with committee memhef) A. Activity complettd/obligation met 5.12 Review and edit tbe comprebensive guides in each content area at each grade level A. Activity completed/obligation met 5.13 Type and print all guides A. Activity completed/obligation met B. Revised Math, Language Arts and Foreign Language curriculum guide typed and printed 04, 10 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/01/94 (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD 08/12/94 Div of Educational Programs (Assoc Supt for Educational Programs) Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Assoc Supt for Educational Programs 5.10 Implementation of monitoring instrument 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.13 Agenda of each meeting Implementation of guides Guides completed (Guides delivered to schools)Page: 11 Program Seq 9: 04 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure teuduuvc^autivomnaul equity in the elementary and secondary c--u--r--r-i-c--u--l-u--m-  and program areas. (A,p,p lies to entire document -e-x--c--e--p--t for page 76, objectives 1, 2. 3. 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76, obiectives 1. 2. 3, 4.) Plan Reference Page Number L70 L70 L 70 L70 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 5.14 Conduct inservice for all elementary principals and teachen A. Inservice provided to all K-6 teachers during Preschool Conference Cluster Meetings for revised Language Arts, Math and Reading Curriculum 5.15 Involve prindpah and teachers in ordering multicultural mateiiab from local building budgets: a. Make avaOaMe materials catalogues to buUtUng level principals b. Order and acquire materials based on currkulinn to be taught 5.16 Extend inservice through scheduled district levd regular elemeidary cluster meetings (reading, language arts, sodal studies, art, and musk) A. Curriculum inservice extended in all curriculum areas and programs 5.17 Host three (3) lectings for parents of elementary children to provide an overview of the comprebensire multkultural curriculum 04, 11 07/01/94 08/15/94 07/01/94 08/22/94 08/22/94 07/01/94 08/15/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) 08/18/94 (06/30/95) 04/04/95 04/19/95 (06/30/95) 06/23/95 (06/30/95) Assoc Supt for Educational Programs (Curriculum Supervisors) Assoc Supt for Educational Prog Elem Teachers Principals Principals Assoc Supt for Educatioiul Programs Division of Educatioiul Programs 5.14 Agenda 5.14 (Curriculum implementation) 5.14 (Inservice on revised curriculum is ongoing) 5.15 Acquisition of materials 5.15 (Instructional materials representing diverse groups will be present in all schools) 5.16 (Inservice on revised curriculum is being offered through minicourses and building meetings during the 1993-94 school year) 5.17 Program and roster of participants 5.17 (Assessment of multicultural education during parent conferences) I 1 Page: 12 Program Seq 9: 04 Revistoo Date: Program Name: August 11. 1995 Multicultural Curricuhim Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Mark McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Appiks to entire document except for page 76. objectives 1. 2. 3. 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and tire NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Appiks only to page 76, objectives I, 2. 3, 4^) I L72 L74 L74 Flan Reference Page Nunber Objectivet Strategies Beginning Date Cmnpktion Date RespoiuIbiUty Evaluation Criteria A. Activity completed/obligation met See 1993-94 PBD 6. To develop and fanplcment a multicultural curriculum for grades 7*12 (To implement the revised curriculum 7-12. which is imjiticultural) 6.16 Involve principals and teachers hi ordering muHlcuHural materiab from local building budgets: (a) Make available materiab catalogues to building bvel principab (b) Order and acquire materiab based on curricuhan to be taught 6.17 Monitor the use of cinrkiihon guides A. Periodic curriculum monitoring being implemented in all content areas B. Eisenhower math and science specialists and the math/science supervisory staff monitored schools for the use of the mathematics and scknce curriculum guides. 04, 12 07/01/94 (07/01/90) 07/01/94 08/22/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) (06/30/95) 06/02/95 06/07/95 (Principals. Teachers. Asst. Supts.. Subject Area Supervisors) Assoc Supt for Educational Programs Principals Area Supervisors 6. (Observation of curriculum implementation during classroom visits/teacher conferences) 6. (Improvement in student academic performance and assessment of attitude regarding learning) 6.16 Materials purchased 6.16 (Instructional materials representing diverse groups will be present in all secondary schools) 6.17 Scbedule/Documentation 6.17 (Observation of curriculum implementation during classroom visits and teacher conferences) 6.17 (Improvement in student achievement and attitude toward self and learning)Page: 13 Program Seq #: 04 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curncutum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1, 2. 3, 4.) To cotllborate with die PCSSD ind die NLRSD to promote multicultunl icovities and curriculum development, (Applies only to wee 76. objectives 1. 2. 3. 4.) L75 Plan Reference Page Nimiber L75 L76 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Dale Responsibility Evaluatiott Criteria 1. To provide staff development in tbe area of muhicidtural education 6.18 Extend inservice through Kbeduled district level reguhr council meetings (reading, English, social studies, science, art, and musk for tbe secondary level) A. Curriculum inservice extended in all curricuhim areas and programs 6.19 Host three (3) education meetings for parents of secondary children to provide an overview of tbe comprebensive multicultural curriculum A. Activity completed/obligation met 04, 13 07/01/94 08/16/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) 05/31/95 (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) Assoc Supt and Staff for Educational Programs Assoc. Supt. for Educational Progranu (Content Area Supervisor, Principals) (Director of Staff Development, Subject Area Supervisors, Principals) 6.18 Agenda of meetings, roster of participants 6.18 Additiotul inservice will occur through minicourses arxl council meetings during 1993-94) 6.19 Program and roster of participants 1. (Multicultural strategies will be implemented in schools as assessed by administration during classroom observations and teacher conferences) 1. (Academic achievement of students will improve as evidenced by report cards and standardized tests)Program Seq P: 04 Page: 14 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum RevisioD Date: August II. 1995 Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in die elementary aixl secondary curriculum and Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives I, 2, 3, 4.) . ...  __  ------------------------- vnppiiva lu ciiuic uucumeni excetx ror paac /o. obiecnves i 2 3 To collibome wifli die PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multiciiltiinl activities and curriculum development. (Aimlies only lo pane 16. objectives 1. 2, 3. 4,1 Phn Reference Page Number Objectives Strategics Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria L76 1.1 Jolidly negotiate for consultants to provide Inservice for the districts 1.1 (Conduct staff development in the area of multicultural education) A. Tri-District multicultural course \"Children and Youth of African-American Literature and Musk for die Contemporary Child' is currently being implemented. B. Tri-district Multicultural Curriculum completed for first semester. C. Multicultural activities inservices and teaching styles provided to schools during early release, cluster, and department meetings. D. Cultural Diversity - Dr. A. Guero Pulaski Heights Elementary E. Cultural Diversity - J. A. Fair L76 2. To provide access to and information about multicultural materials lo teachers, rents, community 04. 14 07/01/94 08/25/94 08/25/94 08/16/94 02-08-95 02-08-95 07/01/94 (06/30/95) 06/02/95 12/08/94 06/30/95 03/01/95 03/01/95 (06/30/95) LRSD Assoc. Supt for Educ Programs (Director of Staff Development) (PCSSD - Coor for Multicultural Curr Dev Dir of Library Serv LRSD - Assoc Supt for Educ Programs. Supv of Media Serv NLRSD - Coor of Instructiomd Materials) 1.1 l.I 1.1 Contractual agreement (Roster of participants) (Multicuitural strategies will be implemented in LRSD classrooms as determined by classroom observations and teacher conferences) 2. (Teachers, parents, community will have the opportunity to attend Multicuitural Materials Fair)Page: 15 Program Seq f: 04 Revision Date: August II. 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: educational eouity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1. 2. 3. 4.) To ensure tUUIUUIiai ui un. Hkun-nt_a_i_j M IU ......~. .r-~ o-----.- --_-_--_--- - ..\u0026gt; _ J __ \u0026gt;_____ _ 11 ... in- I *\u0026gt; -aJ 4a \\r To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76\nobiecoves 1, 2, 3, 4.) Plan Reference Page Nianber L76 L76 L76 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date ResponsiblUty Evaluation Crfterb 2.1 Share responsibility for Multicultural Materials Fair to be held annually A. Media directors of die three districts planned fair. LRSD will host for 1994-95 school term. 07/01/94 08/25/94 (06/30/95) 12/01/94 3. To provide information to staff members on the availability of graduate course work in muklcultura] education B. Fair hosted by LRS District at M.L. King school. 3.1 Write letters to Institutions of higher education in the area concerning the need for such courses A. Activity conq)Ieted/obligation met 04, 15 07/01/94 12/01/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) 12/01/94 (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD PCSSD - Coor for Multicultural Curr Dev Dir of Library Serv LRSD - Assoc Supt for Educ Programs \u0026amp;ipv of Media Serv NLRSD - Coor of Instructional Materials (Director of Staff Development. Subject Area Supervisors. Principals) PCSSD - Coor of Instructional Materials LRSD - Assoc Supt for Educational Programs NLRSDCoor of Instructioiuil Materials 2.1 Schedule of vendors 2.1 (The Multicultural Fair will be joindy planned by LRSD. NLRSD and PCSSD) 3. (Multicultural strategies will be implemented in schools as assessed by administration during classroom observations and teacher conferences) 3.1 Letters on (Ue 3.1 (The number of teachers enrolled in multicultural courses will increase) Page: 16 Program Seq 9: 04 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marte McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76. objectives I. 2, 3, 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curricuhjni development. (Applies only to page 76, obiectives 1, 2, 3, 4.) i Plan Reference Page Nianber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria L76 L76 L76 3.1 Promote such courses to the staffs of each school district 3.2 (Duplication of lumber) A. Activity completed/obligation met 07/01/94 (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD 4. To Investigate the possibilities of cooperating on strategies to acquaird staff and communities with multicultural education 07/01/94 (06/30/95) 4.1 Meet to dlscua possibilities of seminars, symposiusu, or other activitlea to promote midtkuttural education among the three districts 4.1 (Plan, schedule, advertise arxl implement strategies) 04, 16 07/01/94 (06/30/95) PCSSD Coord of Multicultund NLRSD Coord of Instructional Materiab (LRSD Director of Stair Development, Supervisor of Social Studies) (PCSSD Coor of Multicultural LRSD Assoc Supt for Educational Programs NLRSD Coord of Instructional Materials) PCSSD Coor of Multicultural LRSD Assoc. Supt for Educational Programs NLRSD Coord of Instructional Materiab (Director of Communications, Director of Staff Development) 3.1 Promotional instruments We 3.2 (Duplication of number) 3.2 (The number of teachers eruolled in multicultural courses will increase) 4. (Multicultural education strategies will be used in LRSD classrooms as determined by classroom observations and teacher conferences) 4. (Assessment of community discussion/conferences. feedback from debriefing of multicultural education) 4.1 Minutes of meeting 4.1 (Three collaborative activities will be held to inform staff and community about multicultural activities)Page: 17 Program Seq 9: 04 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1. 2, 3, 4.) To ensure tuuuiiuim u\u0026gt; ww,---------------- - -r  - - To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76. obiecoves 1, 2, 3, 4.) 1 Flan Reference Page Number L77 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1. To educational equity in instructional methodology and teacber/student interaction A. Met, shared outline of goals for year. Wrote Tri- District grant for classroom management workshop. 2nd grant written for discipline procedures workshop. B. Staff development courses planned and listed in the 1994*95 LRSD Staff Development catalogue/calendar. C. Multicultural workshop planned and conducted during ABA Convention. D. Healing Racism workshop collaborated by the 3 districts and the city of Little Rock and is currently being conducted. Topics: 2. 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The Onertess of Humanity Defuung Prejudice and Racism How Racism is Peipetuated Institutionalized Racism Stereotypes and How they Affect Us Unaware Racism Disempowerment of Males Internalized Oppression Reclaiming Our Heritage Cultural Racism Ally-Building as a Way to Heal Celebration/Wbere Now? 04, 17 09/13/94 07/01/94 11/10/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 10/24/94 10/07/94 11/11/94 07/10/95 (06/30/95) (Curriculum Supervisors, Curriculum Specialists, Principals) 1. (Assessment of instiuction/teacher student interaction during classroom/school observation and conference) 1. (Increase in student achievement) 3Page: 18 Program Seq #: 04 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Multkultural Curnculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1. 2, 3. 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum developnwnt. (Applies only to page 76, objectives 1, 2. 3. 4.) L77 Flan Reference Page Nunber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria L77 L77 1.1 Research and dure effective instructional strategies at regularly scheduled council and program area meetings A. Effective instructional strategies researcbed/shared at pre-school conference, council meetings arxl program area meetings. B. Mad) manipulative were presented to compensatory education math teachers from the secondary schools. 1.2 Purchase science supplies for teachers to fadlitate the hands-on science approach A. Science supplies.were ordered for the schools, bids for a larger order will be obtained during the next quarter B. Large purchase of scietrce materials was made and received for leachen in the Science Crusade and the refurbishing of elementary school science boxes. 1.3 Purchase math manipulative for teachers to facilitate hands-on math instruction 07/01/94 08/15/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 01-04-95 07/01/94 (06/30/95) 05/31/95 09/29/94 (06/30/95) 03/01/95 06/30/95 (06/30/95) Content Area Supervisors Supvs of Specific Content Areas Supvs of Specific Content Areas 1.1 Documentation within the Division of Educational Programs 1.1 (Assessment of implementation of instructional strategies through classroom observations and teacher conferences) 1.2 Materials purchased 1.2 (Hands-on science activities used in District classrooms) 1.3 Materials purchased 1.3 (Manipulative are used in District math classrooms) A. Math manipulative were ordered and furnished to teachers who completed Math Crusade and K-4 Crusade training 07/01/94 06/30/95 L77 1.4 Purchase sets of trade books for teachers to facilitate the emphasis on literature and the wholeness of language approach 07/01/94 (06/30/95) Supvs of Specific Content Areas 1.4 Materials purchased 1.4 (Whole language is used in District classrooms) 04, 18Page: 19 Program Seq f: 04 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curricuhim Program Code: 12 IMmary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1. 2, 3, 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76\nobjectives 1, 2. 3. 4.) Plan Reference Page Nianber L77 L77 L77 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1.5 Provide inservice for using materials Wentl/led in 1 J, 1.3,1.4 A. Math Crusade and K-4 Crusade classes ate being held for District teachers B. Science Crusade classes include District teachers 1.6 Identify needs of teachers for improved delivery of instruction using student data, principal recommendation, sch I, and teacher questionnaires as the basis for decision making. (Resource: LRSD Resource Staff Devekipmem Guide) 1.7 Submit the Inservice needs to the Staff Development Departmeitf A. Learning styles and culoiral diversity - Wakefield Self-esteem Phonics Equity Guidelines - Baseline, McDermott. Bus drivers B. Inservice needs submitted and course offerings listed in 94-95 Staff Development catalogue. 04, 19 07/01/94 07/01/94 01/04/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/10/94 08/16/94 06/30/95 06/01/95 06/01/95 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) 02/23/95 06/02/95 Supervisors of Specific Areas (Curriculum Specialists. Principals) Principals, Teachers, and Content Area Supervisors Principals 1.5 Documentation of participants 1.5 (Desired instnictional strategies are being implemented in District classrooms as assessed through classroom observations arxl teacher conferences) 1.6 Observation of instruction 1.6 Disaggregation of data 1.6 (tiMiividual Improvement Plans, HP's, reflect identified needs of teachers) 1.7 Staff development documentation (Needs identified in school improvement plans)Page: 20 Program Seq f: 04 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curricuhini Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1, 2, 3, 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76. obiectives 1. 2. 3. 4.) L78 Flan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1.8 Schedule teachers as identified for the appropriate inservice 07/01/94 (06/30/95) Staff Development Department 1.8 Staff development documentation 1.8 (Inservice will be provided that addresses the needs of teachen as identified in the school improvement plan) A. Placement is based on teacher requests and administrative recommendations. (Reports sent tt\u0026gt; each school at the end of the semester.) 07\\01\\94 05/10/95 B. A total of 468 inservices were provided district wide arxl a total 6426 workshops were provided by the Staff Development Detp. for the 1994-95 school year. L78 1.9 Monitor the teachers use of effective instructional and classroom management strategies 07/01/94 06/30/95 Supervisors of specific areas (Principals) 1.9 (Assessment of implementation of strategies through classroom observations and teacher conferences) A. Teacher use of effective instructional and classroom management strategies is monitored through classroom observations 08/15/94 06/02/95 L78 L78 2. To incorporate multicultural matertah into the instructional programs 07/01/94 (06/30/95) (Supervisors of Specific Areas, Curriculum Specialists, Principals) 2. (Observe implementation of materials at teacher conferences arxl during classroom visits) 2.1 Review and assess appropriate multicultural materials 07/01/94 (06/30/95) Supervisors of specific areas (Curriculum Specialists. Principals) 2.1 (Multicultural materials used in District classrooms) A. Initial activity completed/inidal obligation met See 1993-94 PBD 04, 20Page: 21 Program Seq f: 04 Reriston Date: August II, 1995 Program Name: Mulbcuttunl Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculum and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1, 2. 3, 4.) IO ensure cuuvauuiuu c^uii\nui uv ______ - -.---.--.--- -------.--.---.--.- r.-.- o-------a--_--_--_--- '_ __ J__ I___ ._a \u0026gt;...\n1-,-.- -t-n-  nlku- u'fjuffC iI 7 a 4 \\ To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD  promote multiculairal activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76, ob|ectives I, Z, 3, 4.) I Plan Reference Page Number L78 L 78 L78 Objectives Strategies B. Periodic review of appropriate multicultural material library conducted 2 J Identify and suggest mulUcuhural material to be purchased at local school level by content imd grade A. Initial activity completed/initial obligation met B. Multicultural materials identified and suggested for purchase periodically 2.3 Schedule workshops on use of materiab (where appropriate) A. Iniriat activity completed/initial obligation met B. Appropriate workshops scheduled periodically on use of multiculiural materials 2.4 Monitor the use of appropriate multicultural materials A. Use of appropriate multicultural materials being monitored periodically through classroom observations and teacher conferences 04, 21 Beginning Date Completion Date ResponsibUity Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/15/94 07/01/94 08/15/94 07/01/94 08/22/94 06/06/95 (06/30/95) Supervisors of specific areas (Curriculum Specialists, Principals) 2.2 (Titles/description of materials forwarded to schools) See 1993-94 PBD 04/19/95 (06/30/95) Supervisors of specific areas (Curriculum Specialists, Principals) 2.3 (Catalogue listings) 2.3 (Multicultural materials used in District classrooms) See 1993-94 PBD 06/23/95 (06/30/95) 06/02/95 Supervisors of specific areas (Curriculum Specialists. Principals) 2.4 (Classroom observations/ teacher conferences reflect use of multicultural materials) Page: 22 Program Seq 9: 04 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Muldculural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program Goal: To ensure educational equity in the elementary and secondary curriculuro and program areas. (Applies to entire document except for page 76, objectives 1, 2, 3. 4.) To collaborate with the PCSSD and the NLRSD lo promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76, objectives I, 2. 3. 4.) L78 L 78 Flan Reference Page Number L78 L78 L78 L79 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Comfdetion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 3. To fanplcment organizational practices that will enhance educational equity 4. To ensure Increased educational equity through tmervice training 07/01/94 (06/30/95) (Assoc. Supt., Assisi. Supt., Principals, Teachers) (3. Educational programs in LRSD have equitable participation and success by all students) 3.1 Provide teachers with training for effective in- class grouping 3 J Monitor implementation of strategies through classroom visitations and feedback in follow-up workshops 3.3 Review placement criteria for eniictanent/ honors and advanced idacemeirt classes A. Activity completed/obligation met 3.4 Provide sujpport to principals In monitoring the distribution of students in higher level courses to assess gender and race equity A. Support given lo priiKtpals through periodic staff development and conferences 04. 22 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/18/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) (06/30/95) See 1993-94 PBD (06/30/95) 06/30/95 (06/30/95) Supervisors of specific areas Supervisors of specific areas Assoc Supt of Educatioiul Programs Assoc and Asst Supts 3.1 (Grouping practices are equitable in LRSD classrooms) 3.2 (Assessment of classroom observation) 3.3 (Placement practices in LRSD classrooms will increase participation of black students in GT/Honors/AP classes) 3.4 (Classroom observation of student enrollment and enrollment reports to central office will reflect equitable distribution of gender and race) 4. (Educationa] programs in LRSD have equitable participation and success by all students)Page: 23 Program Seq 9: 04 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Multicultural Curriculum Program Code: 12 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marie McNeal Program G\u0026lt;ml: To ensure educational equity in die elementary and secondary curriculum arxl program areas. (Applies to entire document excegt for page 76, objectives 1. 2, 3, 4.) To collaborate with die PCSSD and die NLRSD to promote multicultural activities and curriculum development. (Applies only to page 76. obiectives 1. 2. 3. 4.) Flan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteiia L79 4.1 Refer to activities outlined in Hots 1.2 - 1.4 above 4.1 (Purchase science supplies, math manipulative, tradebooks) A. Hands-on science materials purchased. B. Math manipulatives purchased L79 L79 L 79 L79 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 (06/30/95) 06/30/95 06/30/95 Supervisor of specific areas 4.1 (Updated multicultural materials in schools) 4.1 (Enrollment/implemen-tation of staff development courses) 5. To ensure equity in the selection and use of textbooks 5.1 Inventory and assess current textbooks for multicultural presence A. Elementary science texdNXiks inventoried and assessed during current adoption period. 5.2 Identify the defldencica existing in current textbooks A. Deficiencies identified in elementary science textiiooks. New textbooks selected that present a greater multiculoiral presence. B. Deficiencies identified in secondary science ttxdxxiks selected that present a greater multicultural presence. 5.3 Select and purchase resource materials to replace or supplement areas of deficiency 04, 23 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 01/04/95 07/01/94 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) 12/01/94 (06/30/95) 12/01/94 03/31/95 (06/30/95) (Assoc Supt of Curr., Subject Area Supervisors. Teachers, Principals) Supervisor of specific areas (Curriculum supervisors. Teachers) (Curriculum supervisors) (Media specialists) (Prin\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_722","title":"Report: ''Little Rock School District 1994-95 Fourth Quarter Status Report, Program Planning and Budget Document for Desegregation Programs,'' Exhibit 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","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1995-08-17"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Little Rock School District 1994-95 Fourth Quarter Status Report, Program Planning and Budget Document for Desegregation Programs,'' Exhibit 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/722"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["budgets"],"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\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1994-95 FOURTH QUARTER STATUS REPORT PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGET DOCUMENT FOR NON-DESEGREGATION PROGRAMS PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND EVALUATION DEPARTMENT August 17, 1995 EXHIBIT 2 SEQUENCE H PAGE# Preface 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SEQUENCE # I PAGE # Mission Statement 2 Goals 3 District Financial Summary 4 Definitions 5 Organization of the Report 7 Cluster Budget Documents 8 CURRICULUM CLUSTER (PINK) 201,1 -208,27 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 4 Year Old Program/City Wide Early Childhood Education Program Kindergarten Special Education Vocational Educational Adult Education Compensatory Education Gifted and Talented Curriculum Services 201,1-6 202,1-3 203,1-7 204,1-7 205,1-5 206,1-5 207,1-3 .208,1-27 SCHOOL OPERATIONS CLUSTER (BUFF) 209 210 211 212 Elementary Junior High School High School Athletics SCHOOL SUPPORT CLUSTER (BLUE) 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 Guidance Services Drug Abuse Prevention Health Services VIPS Educational Media Services Board of Education Services Executive Administrative Services Support Service Management Fiscal Services Plant Services Pupil Transport Services Purchasing Services Safety \u0026amp; Security Services Planning \u0026amp; Evaluation Services Communication Services Human Resource Services Labor Relations Data Processing Services Family Life/New Futures Indebtedness Contingencies ORGANIZATIONAL CHART 209,1 - 212,7 209,1-3 210,1-3 211,1-2 212,1-7 213,1 - 233,2 213,1-12 214,1-6 215,1-12 216,1-10 217,1-3 218,1-2 219,1-4 220,1-7 221,1-3 222,1-2 223,1-4 224,1-4 225,1-12 226,1-18 227,1-8 228,1-4 229,1-5 230,1-9 231,1-4 232,1-2 233,1-2PREFACE The mission statement and goals of the Little Rock School District serve as guides for all decision-making. The information gained from the Fourth Quarter Status Report Program Planning and Budget Document for Non-Desegregation Programs will provide direction for quality, interim decision-making as well as summative decision-making. The report enhances the districts ability to monitor and report achievements and expenditures relative to programs which are not a part of the district s Court-Approved Desegregation Plan obligations. Among other things, specific quarterly expenditure information will be provided in addition to the YTD (Year-to- Date) Expendimre information. After an extensive search for legal references for the Safety and Security (sequence number 25) section of the desegregation volume of the PBD, it was determined that this particular program would be more appropriately placed in the non-desegregation volume of the PBD. The Safety and Security (Sequence number 25) has been moved to the non-desegregation volume of the PBD and reported with Safety and Security Services in this publication of the PBD. The Fourth Quarter Status Report Program Planning and Budget Document for Non-Desegregation Programs conuins the following: (1) The Mission Statement of the Little Rock School District\n(2) The Goals of Little Rock School District\n(3) LRSD YTD (Year-to-Date) Non-Desegregation Expenses Summary\n(4) Definitions and Data Elements\n(5) Organization of the Report\n(6) Non-Desegregation Program Budget Documents, Grouped by Clusters\nand, (7) The LRSD Organizational Chart. 1LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the Little Rock School District is to provide a quality, integrated educational program which encourages all children to achieve their optimum academic, social, and emotional development. To that end, the students in the Little Rock School District will develop an appreciation for ethnic and cultural diversity, develop skills in problem solving and conflict resolution, and demonstrate mastery of the Districts curriculum. This will be achieved through the collaborative efforts of a Board, a dedicated and competent staff, and of parents and citizens to fairness, racial equity and adequate support for education. 21. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT GOALS The LRSD will implement integrated educational programs that will ensure that all students grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis on basic skills and academic enrichment while closing disparities in achievement. The LRSD will develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. The Little Rock School Board, administration, staff, and students will demonstrate in their day to day behavior that they accept each individual as a valued contributor to society and view cultural diversity among students, staff and the community as a valued resource upon which our community and nation can draw as we prepare for the 21st Century. The LRSD will solicit and secure financial and other resources that are necessary to fully support our schools, including our desegregation plan. The LRSD will provide a safe and orderly climate that is conducive to learning for all students. The LRSD will ensure that equity occurs in all phases of school activities and operations.Little Rock School District Quarterly Non-Desegregation Expenses Page 1 of 1 Program 5eq. Wo. 201 202 209 210 211 212 203 204 205 206 207 213 215 208 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 232 233 231 Program Name FOUR YEAR OLD/HIPPY__________ KINDERGARTEN_________________ ELEMENTARY___________________ JUNIOR HIGH___________________ HIGH SCHOOL__________________ ATHLETICS ________________ SPECIAL EDUCATION____________ VOCATIONAL EDUCATION_______ ADULT EDUCATION_____________ COMPENSATORY EDUCATION GIFTED AND TALENTED_________ GUIDANCE SERVICES___________ HEALTH SERVICES_____________ CURRICULUM SERVICES________ EDUCATIONAL MEDIA SERVICES~ BOARD OF EDUCATION SERVICES EXECUTIVE ADMIN SERVICES SUPPORT SERVICE MGMT______ FISCAL SERVICES______________ ' PLANT SERVICES_______________ ' PUPIL TRANSPORT SERVICES ' PURCHASING SERVICES_________ ' SAFETY \u0026amp; SECURITY SERVICES ' PLANNING \u0026amp; EVAL SERVICES ' COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES ' HUMAN RESOURCES SERVICES ' LABOR RELATIONS______________ ' DATA PROCESSING SERVICES  INDEBTEDNESS_________________ ' CONTINGENCIES________________ ' FAMILY LIFE/NEW FUTURES TOTAL ________ Budget 94-96 233,992.00 3,160,053.09 18,985,179.56 9,273,594.63 8,395,188.73 166,457.85 6,558,677.51 4,930,172.15 790,194.57 591,353.64 1,230,868.19 3,090,710.95 841,095.06 1,910,391.39 2,273,321.76 1,009,265.44 334,675.03 1,405,884.22 1,801,273.31 9,787,229.05 7,354,396.24 1,540,494.68 830,592.70 343,221.38 156,392.33 2,954,841.75 103,384.29 875,875.49 8,304,475.00 __________0.00 430,400.00 99,663.661.99 PTE'S 0.00 89.00 653.14 287.20 244.20 0.00 151.50 106.20 23.00 13.80 32.80 67.60 27.10 55.00 70.50 0.00 5.00 3.00 12.00 245.63 346.80 16.00 0.00 7.00 4.00 10.00 2.00 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 YTD Expense 232,430.07 3,132,129.32 20,257,346.76 9,182,825.04 8,857,545.98 203,149.18 6,629,103.58 4,726,337.08 811,821.58 626,997.76 1,162,214.51 2,763,943.33 726,928.54 1,921,331.54 2,125,994.75 788,318.21 321,496.57 1,257,718.99 1,813,499.23 9,253,780.83 6,314,273.43 1,861,518.92 1,328,984.63 313,918.62 157,173.35 3,247,127.85 99,945.30 885,325.62 8,199,614.56 ___________0.00 430,400.00 99,633,195.13 tat Quarter _______374.09 372,250.21 3,111,344.22 1,391,997.19 1,334,045.62 85,811.76 642,886.96 942,972.54 122,829.00 97,832.95 143,592.75 458,418.49 89,253.85 366,222.44 386,959.34 125,694.91 148,421.91 73,043.84 644,934.47 2,019,809.40 873,991.89 762,486.70 445,064.23 71,634.05 36,393.18 480,013.09 28,288.97 179,033.47 1,419,610.48 __________0.00 3,464.67 16,6SS,S76.67 2nd Quarter 77,445.47 655,064.38 4,272,928.70 1,952,941.54 1,880,842.21 37,812.41 1,421,680.65 1,016,148.08 166,018.36 160,673.41 231,433.31 608,890.29 159,044.37 449,839.15 418,230.69 39,808.19 43,779.21 450,414.41 727,100.94 2,392,553.47 1,651,201.39 261,113.13 39,283.72 58,045.64 30,307.16 565,054.26 21,382.06 218,353.59 5,174,298.74 0.00 144,368.47 25,328,067.40 Srd Quarter 62,902.28 942,322.71 5,871,179.45 2,760,617.09 2,622,791.87 59,749.05 1,942,321.67 1,400,279.91 227,058.14 208,830.88 328,957.36 823,503.54 210,317.80 523,689.65 726,027.55 102,248.02 95,707.49 90,285.57 163,058.44 2,720,738.54 2,005,350.09 365,421.74 186,314.83 106,219.69 49,753.01 1,726,577.10 28,571.40 274,893.06 987,645.55 0.00 282,566.86 27,895,900.34 4th Quarter 91,708.23 1,162,492.02 7,001,894.39 3,077,269.22 3,019,866.28 19,775.96 2,622,214.30 1,366,936.55 295,916.08 159,660.52 458,231.09 873,131.01 268,312.52 581,580.30 594,777.17 520,567.09 33,587.96 643,975.17 278,405.38 2,120,679.42 1,783,730.06 472,497.35 658,321.85 78,019.24 40,720.00 475,483.40 21,702.87 213,045.50 618,059.79 0.00 0.00 26,652.560.72 % Budget Spent 99.33% 99.12% 106.70% 99.02% 105.51% 122.04% 101.07% 95.87% 102.74% 106.03% 94.42% 89.43% 86.43% 100.57% 93.52% 78.11% 96.06% 89.46% 100.68% 94.55% 85.86% 120.84% 160.00% 91.46% 100.50% 109.89% 96.67% 101.08% 98.74% 0.00% 100.00% 99.97% 4DEFINmONS AND DATA ELEMENTS The following are definitions of terms and data elements used in the Fourth Quarter Status Report Program Planning and Budget Document for NonDesegregation Programs. Program: A program is an established plan of operation, composed of a group or series of related activities which are carried out to serve a specific area of identified need. Program Description: A program description includes a purpose, scope and content, and participants/beneficiaries related to the respective program. Program Goal: A program goal is a broad guiding statement and should describe the overall aim(s), purpose(s), or ambition(s) of the specific program. Objectives: Program objectives.present explicitly the desired impact the program should have on a problem. They should provide detail to the goals. Strategies: Strategies are the jobs, tasks, efforts, or actions undertaken in a program which contributes to the accomplishment of the objective. Achievements: Achievements are efforts, tasks, evidence, performance, or actions undertaken in a program which contributes to the accomplishment of the strategy. Achievements ate placed in alpha order underneath the relative strategy. Evaluation Criteria: Evaluation criteria ate statements which specify the end product of an objective or strategy, and evaluation criteria establish measurable and observable levels of performance of the product. Page: Each Program Budget Document uses one or two formatted pages. Program Sequence # (Seq.#): The purpose of this sequence number is to establish a reference for placing programs in order within the planning document. Revision Date: This date is the actual date the program document was first documented or last changed. Program Name: To eliminate confusion, an established name for each program has been assigned by the district plaimer. 5DEFTNITIONS AND DATA ELEMENTS Page 2 Primary Leader: The Primary Leader is the cabinet-level associate responsible for the management and operation of the respective program. Secondary Leader: The Secondary Leader is the associate who is back-up to the Primary and will function in that capacity in the absence of the Primary (i.e., the Program Manager, the Principal, and/or the Assistant Superintendent). District Goal Support: Each program directly supports at least one district goal. If more than one district goal is relative, then the appropriate district goals have been listed in descending priority order. Beginning Date: This is the actual date a particular strategy began. For consistency, all dates should be printed in the following format: MM/DD/YY, (03/31/04). Completion Date: This is the actual date a particular objective or strategy was completed. For consistency, all dates should be entered in the following format: MM/DD/YY, (04/01/94). If an activity toward a strategy has been started but not completed, a percent of completion (for example, 50%) should be entered in the Completion Date column. Responsibility: This is the name of the individual tasked with ensuring an activity has been accomplished. 6ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT This section provides guiding information about the text of the Desegregation Programs. Fourth Quarter Status Report Program Planning and Budget Document for NonPagination: Pages in the text are program (e.g., 02,5 refers to page 5 of the program with a sequence number of 02). Clusters. Programs related operational functions. have been sorted into broad categories called clusters. Clusters include programs or schools grouped together because of similar and X^nveXT^ managenfent of this report, similar programs have been grouped into three color-coded cluster Cumcubm hor convemence ano g restive cluster of the program by using the \"Table of Contents\" and then refer to the School Operations, School Support. To locate a program, OVllvAzl VUWltlUVllOi uviiuvi program sequence number (Seq If} or page number for facilitating program reference m the report. Organizational Level. The School Operations Cluster employs only four programs fifty schools according to three school organizational leveled programs\nElementary, Junior High, and Senior High. 1. In addition to Athletics, the School Operations Cluster classifies the Organizational Chart. An organizational chart has been included to provide reference information matching designated responsible persons with desegregation and non-desegregation programs. 7CLUSTER BUDGET DOCUMENTS 8Curriculum Cluster  4 Year Old Program/City Wide Early Childhood Education Program * Kindergarten * Special Education * Vocational Education * Adult Education * Compensatory Education * Gifted and Talented * Curriculum Services \\Program Seq f: 201 Program Name: Four-Year-Okl Program/HIPPY Program Code: Primary Leader: Program DcscripGon: District Goal Support: Program Goal: Plan References: FY Program Budget: YTD Expenditures: LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENX Secondary Leader: Pit Price Page: 1 Revisioii Date: August 11, 1995 The purpose of the program is to meet the growing needs of dislvantaged smdents and to improve the racial balance at schools dutt are difficult Jo desegr^ate by ^ajly Childhjj^Kuc^pmg^ inn, '-------------children which meet their needs and stimulate learning in all developmental areas - physical, social, emotional, and intellectual. Priority for die Elementary schools. The program provides experiences for young identification of program IIIC piugiaill pVIMM -------------------------- - , J sites will be given to areas that have a very high concentration of low income students and in schools that are difficult to desegregate. Goal fl - Implement integrated educational programs that will ensure achievement. Goal f2 - Develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. Goal f3 - accept each diversity among soxlents. staff and the community as a resources that are necessary to fully support our in all phases of school activities and operations. (hit III students grow icidemicilly. sociilly ind emotionaUy with emphisis on bisic skills ind icademic enrichment while closing disparities in Il __I ...all ivi ghwasr ilai/ tn /Ittv till nil J , a\\^.lIIJ IIW *eSSIW*l*W*S  / awl w \"ff t t * g_ aL The Little Rock School Board, administration, staff, and students will demonstrate in their day to day behavior that they he conununity u I vihied resource upon which our community ind nation cm draw is we prepire for the 21st Century. Goil 4 - Solicit airf secure fin^tal and other schools, including our desegregation plm. Goal *5 - Provide a safe and orderly climate that is conducive to leatinng for all students. Goal 16 - Ensure that equity occurs To establish and maintain developmentally appropriate Early Childhood programs for pre-school children. $233,992.00 $140,721.84 IM Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: $374.09 $77,445.47 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend: $62,902.28 $91,708.23 FTE [ Related Functioo Codes: 201, 1Program Seq f: 201 Program Name: Four-Year-Old Program Program Code: Program Goal: Flan Reference Page Ntanber LRSD HY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGEl DOCUMbNX Primary Leader: To establish and maintain de.elopmenlally appropriate Early Childhood programs for pre-school children. Objectives 1. Implement early childhood education programs that provide experiences for young children which meet their needs and stimulate learning in al) developmental levels. Page: 2 RevisioD Date: August 11. 1995 Strategies 1.1 Identify sites for program implementations. A. Sites for program implementation have been identified. 1.2 Assisted in recruiting teachers and aides as needed. Secondary Leader: Pat Price I Begimilng Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 08/01/94 06/30/95 A. Assisted in recruiting teachers and aides as needed. 07/0194 08/22/94 201, 2 De[Hity Supt.. Asst. Supt., Supervisor. Principals, Teachere. Instructional Aides Deputy Supt.. Asst. Supt.. Supervisor. Plant Services, Principals Human Resource Dept.. Principals. Asst. Supt., Supervisor 1. (Annual review of assessment data beginning at the end of the kindergarten year of each child participating in the program. EPSF Post Assessments) (Comparisons of die progress of children who did and did not participate in the program.) (Standardize achievement tests will be given to each child at the end of the third grade level. These tests will provide data indicating the success of the Early Childhood Program as an intervention strategy.) 1.1 Sites established for program implementations. 1.2 Employment of teachers and aides for new and open positions.Page: 3 Program Seq 9: 201 RevlsloD Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Four-Ycar-Old Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Pat Price Program Goal: To establish and maintain developmentally appropriate Early Childhood programs for pre-school children. Plan Reference Page Nwnber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1.3 Obtain materials, supplies and equipment for all new programs. A. Obtained materials, supplies, and equipment for all new programs. 1.4 Provide inservice and technical assistance for principals, teachers, and instructional assistants. A. Inservices provided July 18, 1994\nAugust 16, 1994\nAugust 18. 1994\nOctober 12. 13. 15. 20. 25. 1994\nNovember 10, 15. 18. 1994\nFebruary 21 and 22, March 3, 6. 10. 16. 29. 30. 31. 1995\nApril 11. 12. 13, 14. 19. 26 and May 10, 1995 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/18/94 06/30/95 08/22/94 06/30/95 06/06/95 Supervisor. Purchasing Dept. Supervisor, Staff Development 2. At the end of each year in HIPPY, 80% of the children served will exhibit readiness skills for kindergarten. I. To promote the HIPPY program (To compose and mail public service announcements to local radio and television stations channel 14 \u0026amp; 16 and flyers) 2. To select HIPPY aides (Interview and select aides\ninitial training of aides and staff\nto enroll families into the program) 201, 3 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 Supervisor Staff 1.3 Materials, supplies, and equipment will be in place to meet LRSD curriculum and licensing requirements. 1.4 Agendas and documentation of inservice evaluations. The Early Prevention of School Failure screening instrument will be used for pre \u0026amp; post assessment for die children upon entering kindergarten to provide data diat shows readiness. If students are not proficient in two or more areas, they are identified as not ready. Teacher surveys will be conducted annually to provide information relating to readiness skills.Page: 4 Program Seq f: 201 RevisioD Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Four-Year-Old Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Seeondaiy Leader: Pat Price Program Goal: To establish and maintain developmentally appropriate Early Childhood programs for pre-school children. * Flan Reference Page Nmnber Objectives Strategica Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria A standardized achievement test will be given to each child at the end of die diird grade as a comparison between the HIPPY students and a control group. 3. Arrange logistics with state for the initial training Comment: This is done through HIPPY State Regional Office (Initial training of aides and staff) 4. Conduct home interview and enroll families into program (To enroll Emilies into the program) 5. To recruit families (Compose and mail correspondence m recruit families \u0026amp; instructional aide trainees) 6. Identify families to be served by each coordinator (To determine service of coordinators) 7. Identify Emilies to be served by each aide (To assign Emilies to be served by each aide) 8. To organize instructional mattriai 9. Conduct three (3) day workshop (To familiarize aides of the HIPPY implementation of LRSD) 10. Obtain material for program (Order material) 11. To orientate enrolled families to die HIPPY program (Conduct orientation meeting) 201, 4 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Supervisor/Coordina tor Staff Supervisor Coordinator Secretary Supervisor Supervisor Supervisor/Cootdi- nator Assignment of families to CoordinatorsPage: 5 Program Seq f: 201 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Four-YearOld Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Pat Price Program Goal: To establish and maintain developmentally appropriate Early Childhood programs for pre*schoot children. Flan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 12. Identify meeting sites of group meetings (Secure meetiitg sites for group meetings: mail out notification of meeting sites) 13. To schedule implementation of HIPPY curriculum (Schedule aides weekly home visits: schedule area group meetings, print flyers, schedule weekly service for aides: schedule aides first teaching with own child. 14. To provide parents with information dui will assist them with their own children (Schedule workshop for parents A aides, mail out A print materials) 15. To evaluate aide trainees mid*point 15th week. (To evaluate each aide trainee) 16. Conduct survey of parents-print materials (To determine program success) 17. Implement second part of HIPPY curriculum. 18. Evaluation of aides 19. (X\u0026gt;tain a site and speaker and schedule a lecture for parents (provide parents with information to be successful with their children) 20. Build the aides and childrens self esteem (Activities) 21. Graduation of HIPPY children and aides reception (Staff will organize) 22. Evaluate aides (Schedule final evaluation of trainees in program) 201, 5 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Coordinator Supervisor/Coordina tor Supervisor/Coordina tor Coordinators Supervisor Supervisor/Coordi* nator Coordinator Supervisor Staff Suff CoordinatorLKSL) HY HKUUKAM BUUUtl UUCUMtNl Program Saq *: 202 Page: 1 Revision Dato: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Kindergarten Program Program Code: Primary Leader SecoTKlary Leader: Pat Price Program Description: In accordance with stats standards the Little Rock School District maintains a ton day kindergarten program that renders an environment which provides a variety of experiences appropriate to the child's developmental stage. Services are provided to these students by certified teachers. District Goal Support: . Implement Integrated educational programs that will ensure that aH students grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis oil basic skills and at^der^ic enrWi^nt white doslng _ ... . .. __u .__I___1___I__________________________I iHu Sn/sb Cswhnni RnarH arimnmtration. staff, and students Will demonstrate in the Gaal #1 - Imolement integrated educational programs that will ensure that all students grow acaoemcaiiy. soaairy ano emouonay nn w. - SpLrkies to aXvem^^a2 - maintain a staff that to well-trained and motivated. Goal  - The Little Rock School Board, admintotration, staff, and student, will demonstrate in their day to day behavior that they accept each Indhrldual as a valued contributor Io society and view cultural diversity among * Mw-sa-s__I___ \u0026gt; Jtto O.s.llaUa ftnan/sial anrf Athttr rdk\u0026lt;i students, staff and the community as a valued resource upon which our JI eacn monnuBi as a vaiuau wnuiwuwt iw .....w..., ---------------------------- - w..., communili and nation can draw as wo prepare tor the 21sl Century. Goal #4 - Solicit and secure financial and other resources that are necessary to tolly support our schools, including our SSI \"n ptan G^.?#5 P^v^e a to and orderly dlmate mat Is conducive to learning tor aH students. Goal #6 - Ensure that equity occurs In all phases of school activrtres and operatkins. Program Goal: To provide appropriate instructional services to aH kindergarten students. Plan References: 1 FY Program Budget: $3,160,053.09 1st Qtr Expertd: $372,250.21 3rd Qtr Expend: $942,322.71 FTE 89.00 YTD Expenditures: $1,969,637.30 2nd Qtr Expend: $655,064.38 4th Qtr Expend: Related Function Codes: ] 202, 1LKbU hY ^4-^5 HKUUKAM BUUbtl UUUmvitxW I Page: 2 Program Seq *: 202 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Kindergarten Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Pat Price Program Goal: To provide appropriate instructional services to all kindergarten students. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1. Implement kindergarten programs In accordance wiffi state standards and dbtrict guidelines. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Asst. Supt., Supervisors. Principals, Teachers 1. Programs will be In place to meet state standards and dbtrict guidelines. 1.1 Assbt in recruiting certified teachers as needed. A. Assbted in recruiting certified teachers as needed. 1.2 Obtain materiab. supplies, and equipment for an new programs. A. Obtained materiab. suppKes. and equipment for all new programs. 1.3 Provide inservica and technical assbtance for teachers. A. Provided inservice and technical assbtant for teachers. 1.4 Ensure proper documentation and evaluation of student progress. A. Pre-EPSF completed. 1.5 Provide inservice and technical assistance for principals, teachers, and instructional assistants. 202, 2 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/15/94 07/01/94 08/22/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 09/30/94 06/30/95 09/30/94 06/30/95 06/06/95 06/30/95 09/02/94 06/30/95 Human Resource Dept., Principab. Asst. Supt., Supervisor Supervbor, Purchasing Dept. Supervisors, Staff Development, Principals Asst. Supt.. Supervisor, Principals Supervisor, Staff Development 1.1 Emptoyment of teachers for new and open positions. 1.2 Materials, supplies, and equipment will be in place to meet L.R.S.D. curriculum and state standards. 1.3 Agendasand documentation of inservice evaluations. Annual reviews of data pre and post EPSF assessments. 1.5 Agendasand documentation of inservice evaluationsPage: 3 Program Seq f: 202 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Kindergarten Program Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Pat Price Program Goal: To provide appropriate instructional services to all kindergarten students. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies A. Inservices provided July 18. 1994\nAugust 16, 1994\nAugust 18, 1994\nOctobers, 18. 20 1994\nNovembers. 10, 15, 1994\nDecember 1, 1994\nMarch 28. 1995 - Math Mini Course\nApril 6, 18 and May 11 202, 3 Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/18/94 05/04/95 .-MiProgram Seq #: 203 Program Name: Special Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Program Deacrlptlon: Dbtrtet Goal Support: Program Goal: Flan References: FY Program Budget: YTD Expenditures: Related Funetkrn Codes: LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGEl UOCUMEN1 Punx\u0026gt;se Special education is specially designed instruction, at no cost to parents, to meet die unique Page: 1 Revisloa Date: August 3, 1995 Secondarr Leader\nPatty Kohler needs of students with disabilities. This includes instruction conducted in the classroom, in the home, m hospitals and accordance with each child's Individual Education Program (lEP). A student is hShSdins. and in other sellings\nand instruclion in physical education. Scope and Content Special education services are provided in accordance with each child s Indivulo^Edu^mn Prog^ determined eligible for special education services when a disability is present as defined in die Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that re^ts m an education services corresponding need for special education services. A full continuum of services is provided which includes multiple opdons for placemenr P.rticipanlsn\u0026gt;enefic^.s have ^n Zdfted as lu7mg disabilities denned by the IDEA. During die 1992-93 school year. 8.13* of the district's population or 2.026 students mceived special educaoon services (Dec. 1. 1992 count). Goal fl - Implement integrated educational programs that will ensure achievement. Goal #2 - Develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. that all students grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis on basic skills and academic enrichmera while closing dispanbes m I. Goal 3 - The Little Rock school Board, administration, staff, and students will demonstrate in their day Io day behavior that they community and nation can draw as we prepare for the Bcnicvcmcin. WU  Vttiup xm msniMue m aa\u0026gt;a\u0026lt; c~s. \" w. -------------------------------------- - cepi e*ch individu*! is I vilued contributor to society and view culnital diversity .mong students, staff and the commumty as a vahi^ tesoutc upon whKh our conducive to   --------necssaty to hiUy support our schools, inchiding out desegteganon plan. Goal #5 - Provide a safe and orderly climate mat 15 cotiouc.ve lu 21st Century. Goal 44 - Solicit end secure financial and other resources that are learning for aU students. Goal 46 - Ensure that equity occun in all phases of school activities and operations. The goal of die special eduction progiim is to provide *11 eligible students with disabilities ippropriite speci\u0026gt;l eduction *nd related setvics in cch child's lest restrictive environinent. $6,558,677.51 $6,629,163.58 1st Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: 1210, 1220. 1230, 1240. 1290. 1292, 2142 $642,886.96 $1,421,680.65 203, 1 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend: $1,942,321.67 $2,622,214.30 rre 151.50 1Program Seq *: 203 Program Name: Special Education I^i\u0026gt;gram Code: Program Goal: Flan Reference Page Number NA LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUlXJbl DUCUMbNi Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Page: 2 RevlsloD E\u0026gt;ate: Patty Kohler August 3, 1995 The goil of the speciil eduotion program h 10 provide \u0026gt;11 eligible studenu with disibilWe! ipproprale special education and related retvices in each childs least restrictive environment. Objectives Strategies ginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1. Provide itinerant instruction IO eligible students in accordance with each child's lEP, to be reviewed on an annual basis through federally marxlated review process. 1.1 Identify and employ certified, qualified teachers to deliver services to students 07/01/94 06/30/95 Director. Human Resources. Supervisors 1.1 A list of certified teachers will be provided A. Al) Consulting Teachers hired 07/01/94 09/15/94 1.2 Identify equipment, material and supplies needed in order to deliver services to students 07/01/94 06/30/95 Direcmr. Teachers. Supervisors 1.2 Equipment, materials and supplies will be listed. Pilot projects where new materials are used will be identified A. Materials needs identified 09/01/94 09/15/94 B. Materials ordered, received 11/15/94 12/01/94 C. Materials ordered, received for all speech therapists 02/95 02/95 t.3 Ensure completion of appropriate evaluations and documentation for each student in accordance with State arxl Federal Mandates 07/01/94 06/30/95 Supervisors. Examiners. Principals, Teachers 1.3 Monitoring reports will indicate increased levels of compliance with applicable law and mandates A. Test materials ordered 09/01/94 09/15/94 B. Monitoring schedule initiated 09/15/94 09/30/94 C. Thirty schools monitored 09/30/94 12/21/94 D. made Remaining schools naonitored and follow up visits 1.4 Provide inservice training for teachers as needed to ensure that students are served appropriately A. Preschool inservice B. Inservice for new therapist 203, 2 01/04/95 07/01/94 08/16/94 08/26/94 03/15/95 06/30/95 08/16/94 08/26/94 Director, Supervisors 1.4 Inservice participants, dates, and topics will be providedPage: 3 Prograni Seq 9: 203 RevteioQ Date: August 3, 1995 Program Name: Special Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Patty Kohler Program Goal: The goal of the special education program is to provide all eligible students with disabilities appropriate special education and related services in each childs least restrictive environment. Flan Reference Page Ntnuber Objectives Strategics T Begtiinlng Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria C. Training for new staff on procedures/guidelines D. Inservice for ail speech therapists E. Inservice for vision teachers F. Reading/Math Inservice G. Reading/Math Inservice H. Inservice for secondary teachers on annual reviews and transition 09/19/94 10/20/94 12/01/94 01/20/95 02/17/95 01/23/95 09/30/94 10/20/94 12/02/94 01/20/95 02/17/95 03/14/95 2. Provide Resource instruction to eligible students in accordance with each childs lEP, to be reviewed on an annual basis through federally mandated review process 2.1 Identify and employ certified, qualified teachers to deliver services to students A. Resource, teachers hired B. Additional resource teachers hired 2.2 Identify equipment, material and supplies needed in order to deliver services to students A. Material needs identified B. Materials ordered for high school teachers 2.3 Ensure completion of appropriate evaluations and documentation for each student in accordance with State and Federal Martdates A. Test materials ordered B. Monitoring schedule initiated C. Thirty schools monitored 203, 3 07/01/94 07/01/94 01/04/95 07/01/94 09/01/94 11/01/94 07/01/94 09/01/94 09/01/94 09/30/94 06/30/95 09/15/94 01/30/95 06/30/95 09/30/94 12/01/94 06/30/95 09/15/94 09/15/94 12/21/94 Director. Human Resources. Supervison Director. Teachen. Supervisors Supervisors. Examiners. Principals. Teachers 2.1 A list of certified teachen will be provided 2.2 Equipment, materials and supplies will be listed. Pilot projects where new materials are used will be identified 2.3 Monitoring reports will indicate increased levels of compliance widi applicable law and mandatesPage: 4 Program Seq f: 203 Revision Date: August 3, 1995 Program Name: Special Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Patty Kohler Program Goal: The goal of (be special education program is to provide all eligible students with disabilities appropriate special education and related services in each childs least restnctive environment. Plan Reference Page Nmber Objectives Strategies D. Remaining schools monitored and follow up visits made 2.4 Provide inservice training for teachen as needed to ensure that students are served appropriately A. Preschool inservice B. Inservice for Watson C. Inservice for Central D. Inservice io reading/math E. Inservice for Terry F. Inservice for Henderson Q. Inservice in reading/math H. Inservice for Hall I. Inservice for McDermott J. Inservice for Mabelvale Junior K. Inservice on reading/math L. Reading/Math Inservice M. Reading/Math Inservice N. Inservice for secondary teachers on annual reviews aixl transition Beginning Dote Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 01/04/95 03/15/95 07/01/94 08/16/94 08/19/94 10/14/94 10/15/94 11/01/94 11/02/94 11/18/94 11/14/94 12/05/94 12/07/94 12/16/94 01/20/95 02/17/95 01/23/95 06/30/95 08/16/94 09/08/94 10/14/94 10/15/94 11/01/94 11/02/94 11/18/94 11/14/94 12/05/94 12/07/94 12/16/94 01/20/95 02/17/95 03/14/95 Director, Supervisors 2.4 Inservice participants, dates, and topics will be provided 3. Provide special class instruction to eligible students in accordance with each childs lEP, to be reviewed on an annual basis through federally mandated review process 3.1 Identify and employ certified, qualified teachers to deliver services to students 07/01/94 06/30/95 Director, Human Resources, Supervisors 3.1 A list of certified teachers will be provided A. Special class teachers hired 07/01/94 09/15/94 203, 4Page: 5 Program Seq #: 203 Revision Date: August 3. 1995 Program Name: Special Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Patty Kohler Program Goal: The goal of the special education program is to provide all eligible students with disabilities appropriate special education and related services in each child's least restrictive environment. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 3.2 Identify equipment, material and supplies needed in order to deliver services to students A. Material needs identified B. Materials ordered as needed 3.3 Ensure completion of appropriate evaluations and documentation for each student in accordaix^e with State and Federal Mandates A. Test materials ordered B. C. D. 07/01/94 09/01/94 09/30/94 07/01/94 09/01/94 06/30/95 09/30/94 03/31/95 06/30/95 09/15/94 Monitoring schedule initiated Thirty schools monitored made Remaining schools monitored and follow up visits 3.4 Provide inservice training for teachers as needed to ensure dtat students are served appropriately A. Preschool inservice B. C. D. E. F. 09/15/94 09/30/94 01/04/95 07/01/94 08/16/94 09/30/94 12/21/94 03/15/95 06/30/95 08/16/94 Training for Baseline staff Training for Romine staff Inservice tn reading/math Inservice for Henderson Inservice in reading/nudi 08/19/94 08/29/94 10/15/94 11/02/94 11/18/94 10/20/94 12/21/94 10/15/94 11/02/94 11/18/94 Q. H. Inservice for Mabelvale Junior Inservice in reading/math 203, 5 12/16/94 l2A)7/94 12/16/94 Director, Teachers, Supervisors Supervisors, Examiners, Principals, Teachers Director, Supervisors 3.2 Equipment, materials and supplies will be listed. Pilot projects where new materials are used will be identified 3.3 Monitoring reports will indicate increased levels of compliance with applicable law attd mandates 3.4 Inservice participants, dates, and topics will be providedPage: 6 Program Seq f: 203 Reviskm Date: August 17, 1995 Program Name: Special Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Patty Kohler Program Goal: The goal of the special educatxin program is to provide all eligible students with disabilities appropriate special education and related services in each childs least restncnve environment. Plan Reference Page Nianber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1. Reading/Math Inservice 01/20/95 01/20/95 J. Reading/Math Inservice 02/17/95 02/17/95 K. Inservice for secondary teachers on annual reviews and transition 01/23/95 03/14/95 4. Provide homebound and hospital instruction to eligible students in accordance with each child's lEP. IO be reviewed on an annual basis through federally mandated review process 4.1 Identity and employ certified, qualified teachen to deliver services to students A. Homebound ttachen employed 4.2 Identity equipment, material and supplies needed in order to deliver services to students A. Material needs identified 4.3 Ensure completion of appropriate evaluations and documentation for each student in accordance with State and Federal Mandates A. Test materials ordered B. Monitoring schedule initiated C. Remaining schools monitored and follow up visits made 4.4 Provide inservice training for teachen as needed to ensure that students are serv^ appropriately A. Preschool inservice 07/01/94 08/16/94 07/01/94 09/01/94 07/01/94 09/01/94 09/15/94 01/04/95 07/01/94 08/16/94 06/30/95 09/15/94 06/30/95 09/30/94 06/30/95 09/30/94 09/30/94 03/15/95 06/30/95 08/16/94 5. Provide extended year services to eligible students in accotrlance with State and Federal Maixlates 5.1 identify and employ certified, qualified teachen to deliver services to students 07/01/94 06/30/95 203, 6 Director. Human Resources, Supervison Director, Teachen, Supervison Supervison, Examirten, Principals. Teachen Director. Supervisors Director, Human Resources. Supervison 4.1 A list of certified teachen will be provided 4.2 Equipment, materials and supplies will be listed. Pilot projecu where new materials are used will be identified 4.3 Monitoring reports will iixJicate increased levels of compliance with applicable law and mandates 4.4 Inservice participants, dates, and topics will be provided 5.1 A list of certified teachen will be providedPage: 7 Program Seq f: 203 Revision Date: August 3. 1995 Program Name: Special Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Patty Kohler Program Goal: The goal of the special education program is to provide all eligible students widi disabilities appropriate special education and related services in each childs least restrictive environment. Plan Reference Page Nwnber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria A. Teachers, aides, dierapists hired 05/01/95 05/31/95 5.2 Idennfy equipment, material and supplies needed in order to deliver services to students A. Equipment and materials needs identified 5.3 Ensure completion of appropriate evaluations and documentation for each student io accordance with Slate and Federal Mandates A. Review of documentation 5.4 Provide inservice training for teachers as needed to ensure that students are served appropriately A. Individual visits made with teachers 203, 7 07/01/94 05/31/95 07/01/94 05/01/95 07/01/94 06/19/95 06/30/95 06/23/95 06/30/95 06/14/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Director. Teachers, Supervisors Supervisors, Examiners, Principals. Teachers Directors, Supervisors 5.2 Equipment, materials and supplies will be listed. Pilot projects where new materials are used will be identified 5.3 Monitoring reports will indicate increased levels of compliance with applicable law and mandates 5.4 Inservice participants, dates, and topics wilt be providedProgram Seq f: 204 Program Name : Vocational Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Program Descriptioa: Vocational education is District Goal Support: Program Goal: Plan References: PY Program Budget\nYTD Expenditures: Related Function Codes: LRSD FY 94-95 PKOORAM BUlXihl LMJCUMbNX Secondary Leader: Carol Green designed to provkle a progrmn of learning eaperimKearu^ personal responsibilities. Vocational education also develops abilities, attitudes, and appreciations Pace: 1 Revision Date: August 3, 1995 prepared to pursue addidonal learning opportunities that wUl result in mote produedvrty. Education is vocational when it provides insouction in dm -.by and -^.Jo students. fm cn'Lm oTtbe v^dorjd Skills and atdtudes. O) communiedon. (3) employabili^ 'such a course of study may include related physics. English (applied commumcadons). applied which will add specifically to the students proficiency in a chosen occupation. I. Such a course of study may include Vocational Center. Vocational education instruclion is offered to scope of vocational education. are all students .bo nel. desire and can prom from it. All youtb. reganlless of race, geruler. economic or soeW background, or bandicapping conditions are ir.luded .idrin .be lie enrichment while closing disparities in achievement. (,) implement integrated educa^^ jiZTaS' ^J^irX'rdaZti^X'J^^Z^^^^ secure financial and other resources that are mrsu'p\nt''\n-'\n:iK,\ni7. 'u.ibullri 'our'deseg.egation plan (5, Enmre tbat equity .Kcurs in all phases of school aedvities ml operadon. everchanging society and technological workplace. To pn..kle Ihe opportunity for .11 studeoB to develop wortpl.ee Aills, problem solving .bUides mrd interpersonal skills necessary for success in an $4,930,172.15 $4,726,337.08 1st Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: $942,972.54 $1,016,148.08 1321. 1331, 1332, 1333, 1341, 1351, 1352, 1353, 1354, 1362, 1371, 1392, 1360, 1362^j^ 204, 1 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend: for ttte 21st century. (4) Solicit and ] $1,400,279.91 $1,366,936.55 I FTE 106.20 I ]LR5U bt 94-93 EKLHjKAM ttuuut:! uuuuiviuixi Page: 2 Revision Date: August 3, 1995 Program Seq I: 204 Program Name: Vocational Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Carol Green Program Goal: To provide the oppominily for .11 students to develop workplace skills, problem solving .bUities and interpersonal skills necessary for success tn an everchanging society and technological workplace. Flan Reference Page Ninibcr Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1 1. Provide quality instruction to all students enrolled in vocational courses. 1.1 Identify and employed certified teachers to deliver quality learning experiences and skilled training to saidents. A. Identified teachers interviewed for potential job openings in vocational education. B. Courtesy interview given to 2 applicants for a vocational teaching position (E.LT.E.) 1.2 Identify equipment, materials and supplies needed. A. Task Force meeting planned w review Task Force recommendations prior to rewrite. B. Vocational coordinator's meeting held to discuss/review recommendations for cooperative student contracts. C. Business Educabon Task Force meeting. 1.3 Provide inservice training for teachers as needed to deliver quality instruction to students. A. Pre school inservice planned and held August 10 and August 17. B. Meeting with vocational coordinators to discuss program changes. C. Six vocational teachen received Applied Math Training along with district math teachers. 204, 2 07/01/94 07/01/94 05/16/95 07/01/94 09/25/94 04/04/95 04/26/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 09/30/94 05/25/95 06/30/95 05/31/95 04/04/95 04/26/95 06/30/95 08/17/94 07/19/94 Director, Assistant Director. Principals. Human Resources Director aixi Teacher Recruiter Director. Assistant Director. Teachers Director. Assistant Director. Staff Development Director 1.1 A list of certified teachers or applicants will be provided. 1.2 Equipment, materials and supplies will be listed and prioritized 1.3 A listing of inservice dates, topics, and participants will be provided.Page: 3 Program Seq I: 204 Revision Date: August 3, 1995 Program Name: Vocational Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Carol Green Program Goal: To provide the opportunity for all students to develop workpiece skills, problem solvir, ebUides ml imerpersonal skills necessary for success in n e.erchangtag society and technological workplace. Plan Reference Page Nionber Objectives Strategka T Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria D. Five vocational teachen attended Workplace Readiness Training (Hall. Parkview, and Central). 07/21/94 07/22/94 E. Career Orientation Teachen inservice training on Tech Prep requirements and declaration forms. 11/19/94 11/19/94 F. Vocational coordinator's inservice held on the School - To - Work taw. 11/04/94 11/04/94 G. 10 teachen (5 vocational and 5 academic) attended advanced training for \"Reading To Learn* as a part of the Tech Prep 2+2 articutation agreement with Pulaski Technical College. 12/01/94 12/02/94 H. 7 vocational teachen and the vocational director attended die American Vocational Association national conference in Daitas. Texas. 12/09/94 12/13/94 1. Vocational Director provided inservice training at Mann Magnet Junior high school for vocational staff. 01/25/95 01/25/95 J. Vocational Director. Assistant Principal and three teachen from J.A. Fair high school attended the Arkansas High Schools That Work Conference in Hot Springs, Arkansas. K. Vocational Director provided inservice training for the Vocatkmal staff at Parkview Magnet high school. 02/08/95 Q1IQ3I95 02/08/95 L. Five E.I.T.E. instructors attended die 3rd Annual E.I.T.E. Conference at the Univenity of Central Arkansas in Conway, Arkansas. 02/16/95 02/17/95 M. AHEA Conference attended by Home Economics Teacher arxl Vocationa] Director. 04/06/95 04/06/95 N. Inservice meeting on Developing Competencies for Business Education Teachen. 04/26/95 04/26/95 204, 3Psge\n4 Program Seq /: 204 Revtslon Date: August 17, 1995 Program Name\nVocational Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Carol Green Program G\u0026lt;wl: To provide the opportunity for all students to develop workplace skills, problem solving abilities and interpersonal skills necessary for success in an everchanging society and technological workplace. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies O. Support services provided by State Department of Education/Vocational Division program supervisor for Career Orientation teacher identified for remediation. P. Home Economics teachen inserviced on new equipment purchases. Q. Workplace Readiness teachen inservice meeting held at Metropolitan. R. All Home Economics teachen attended specialized equipment training at the Stitching Post S. All Home Ecorunics teachen received technical training on computerized sewing equipment at McClellan Magnet high school. 1.4 Provide an opporwnity for teachen to keep abreast of changing techiulogical needs and training in the workplace. A. Three additional teachers (1-Parkview. 1-Central. 1-Fair) sent to Authorized Training Associate for WordPerfect Corporation in preparation for implementing die Desktop Publishing course. B. Educaton in Industry Tour provided by Pulaski Technical College and attended by several LRSD teachen atxl counselors. Beginning Date 04/27/95 05/10/95 05/24/95 06/08/95 06/09/95 07/01/94 08/02/94 05/12/95 Completion Date 04/27/95 05/10/95 05/24/95 06/08/95 06/09/95 06/30/95 08/12/94 05/12/95 Responsibility Director. Assistant Director Evaluation Criteria 1.4 A list of professional meetings and conferences teachers have attended will be provided. 2. Review, update, or revise course offerings to reflect the needs and trends of the 21st cenniry. 2.1 A vocational task force will be organized fo address issues of die course offerings. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Director. Assistant Director 2.1 Recommendations made by the task force will be identified and completed. A. Three vocational programs recommerxled for elimination due to consistent low enrollment figures. 07/01/94 08/21/94 204, 4Page: 5 Program Seq f: 204 Revision Date: August 3, 1995 Program Name: Vocational Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Carol Green Program Goal: To provide die opponunity for ell sludenB Io develop workpiece skills, problein solving abilities and inleipetsonal skills necessary for success in an evetchanging sity \u0026gt;l technological workplace. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 3. Maintain all equipment used in skilled training labs. B. Vocational director correlated efforts with Parkview Magnet principal to develop a business case to add Commercial Art to the curriculum for the 95-96 school- year. C. Commercial Art Course approved by die Little Rock School District Board of Directors for 1995-96 school year. D. Program Improvement Plans written for Computer- Aided Drafting/Coinputer Numerica] Control, Commercial Arts/Conqjuter Graphics and Radio Broadcasting. E. Plans made to implement Applied Math and Workplace Readiness at Metropolitan Area Vocational Center for the 1995-96 school year. 3.1 Identify equipment in need of repair or replacement in the vocational skilled training labs. A. Equipment repaired, cleaned and maintained in preparation for opening of schools. B. Purchase equipment to replace destroyed, stolen, or irreparable equipment in E.l.T.E. Lab at Forest Heights. C. Requests for new equipment, supplies, and materials submitted by teachera. D. Equipment purchased for Keyboarding course at Dunbar Magnet junior high. E. Equipment, supplies and materials purchased for all vocational progranu in LRSD. F. Computers purchased for Desktop Publishing classes at Parkview, Fair and Central high schools. 204, 5 11/01/94 02/23/95 06/01/95 04/01/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/10/94 08/01/94 10/01/94 10/01/94 03/23/95 04/01/95 02/23/95 06/28/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 08/22/94 09/30/94 05/15/95 11/20/94 05/15/95 05/15/95 Director. Assistant Director. Principals, vocational teachers. 3.1 All skilled lab equipment will be idendfied for needed repair and maintenance.Page: 0 Revision Date: August 3, 1995 Program Seq 9: 204 Isogram Name: Vocational Education Program Code: . Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Carol Green Program Goal: TO pn..e .. opportunity for sotOen. . doveiop worttpiaco akilis. potHen, aoi.in, .biiidoa . ioutPtao.. a.U,a neceasaty fot auccasa in an e.a.han,ing aociety and ohno,o,.a, wotitpiace. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategics Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 4. Awareness activities to promote vocational education will be made available to alt students. 0. Computen purchased for keyboarding classes at Pulaski Heights. Henderson. Cloverdale and Mabelvale Junior high schools\nand for accounting class at Hall high school. H. Comjwterieed Sewing Machines and Sergers purchased for all junior and senior high home economics programs along with cabinets for the equipment. 4.1 Recruitment activities through advertisement, flyers, videos, and student presentation will be made available to all students. 01/10/95 01/15/95 07/01/94 02/28/95 05/31/95 06/30/95 Vocational teachers. Director, Task Force, and Advisory Conunittees. 4,1 a) Surveys will be conducted to determine how students became aware of vocational education (b) Monitoring of student enrollment will determine the success of the awareness sessions. A. Vocational teachers asked to supply names of former students for \"Success Stories recruitnoenl video. 09/15/94 09/30/94 B. Ad in Arkansas Democrat/Gazettt to publicize classes at Metropolitan Vo-Tech. 08/30/94 09/30/94 C. Revised recruitment video produced and distributed the recruitment team and special needs coordinator for recruitment presentations. 10/01/94 12/01/94 D. Metropolitan Task Force organized to develop strategic public relations campaign. 4.2 Tech Prep committee awareness campaign to inform parents about Tech Prep and its benefits. A. Vocational Director explained/discussed Tech Prep to new LRSD priiKipals. 204, 6 12/09/94 05/10/95 07/01/94 08/09/94 06/30/95 08/11/94 Director. Assistant Director, Tech Prep Coordinator 4.2 List of all awareness sessions and Public Relations Activities will be compiled.Page: 7 Program Seq 9: 204 Revision Date: August 3. 1995 Program Name: Vocational Education Program Code: Primary Leader: SecoDdai7 Leader: Carol Green Program Goal: To provide the opportunity for all smdents to develop workplace skills, problem solving abilities and interpersonal skills necessary for success in an everchanging society and technological workplace. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria B. Vocational Director explained Tech Prep as it relates m Applied Biology/Chemistry at Science Teachers Pre-school inservice. 08/17/94 09/30/94 C. Vocational Director and Janice Hanlon. Tech Prep liaison from the Arkansas Department of Education, vocational/ttchnical division, met with all secondary counselors and priiKipals to review Tech Prep efforts and progress made thus far in the Little Rock secondary schools. 10/05/94 12/07/94 D. Vocational Director and Tech Prep liaison from the ADSE/vocational division presented Tech Prep informational session to parents at Forest Heights junior high school PTSA Open House 03/07/95 03/07/95 E. Vocational Director attended Parent duster meetings to inform parents and smdents about Tech Prep and post secondary opportunities. 04/10/95 04/20/95 F. Chris Ames. Youth Apprenticeship program manager and 2 Commercial Foods students appeared on Channel 7's DayBreak program during the cooking segment. 06/25/95 06/25/95 0. Ford Motor Company Third Year program and its collaborative effort with Metropolitan Area Vocational Center and Pulaski Technical College was official announced by Governor Tucker. 06/29/95 06/29/95 204, 7Program Seq *: 20S Program Name: Adult Education Program Code: Prfanary Leader: Program DescrlpUon: District Goal Supfwrt: Program Goal: Plan References: FY Program Budget: YTD Expendlturea: Related Function Codes:143 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT SecoDdar7 Leader: Paulette H. Martin Page: 1 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Adult Education is specially designed instruction at no cost to students to upgrade their educational level and or to help them obtain a high school equivalency (GED) diploma. This includes instnicnon at the Adult Education Center and its satellite programs in businesses, industries, various community and state agencies and churches. Scope and content Adult Educanon services are provided m accor^nce with each student needs and goals. A student is eligible for Adult Education services if he/she Is at least sisteen years of age or older and has been released from regular public school by the supermtendent or his/her desigiwe oijs of age and has withdrawn or dropped out of public school. Pattjcinanlsdieneficiaries Students served in Adult Education are identified as having withdrawn or dropped out of public school. Dunng die 1992-93 school year. 3078 students received Adult Education services. tol fl - Implement integmted educt.on.1 prognura that willl ensure that all swdents grow academically, socially, and emotionally with emphasis on basic skills and academic ennchment whdie closi^ dispatnes m achievement Goal tl - Develop and maintain a staff that is well-ttained and motivated. Goal f3 - Tile Little Rock School Boatd. administration, staff and students will demonstrate m their day to day behavior that they accept each individual as a valued contributor to sociely and view cultural diversity among students, staff and the community as a valued resource upon which our community and nanon can draw as we prepare for the ... . . _______.,t_____________________1. ZVW..I a c  eafln. mnyl zawulmHu riimai* ic miwliicive In Iftarnins fOF ail StUdCtltS. uoal 21st Century. Goal f4  Solicit and secure financial and other resources u UlVdSIlj' MUIUIIU JUlUtllU, Mail UMa UIV *.V******MMJ w a J t JI  that are necessary to ftUl support our schools. Goal f 5 - Provide a safe and orderly climate that is conducive to learning for all students. Goal * 6 - Ensure that equity occurs in all phases of school activities and operations. The goal of the Adult Education Program is to upgrade the basic literacy skills of adults, to assist adults in obtaining their high school equivalency (GED) diploma, and to provide computer literacy training. ] $790,194.57 $811,821.58 1410. 1420. 1445. 1490 1st Qtr ExpeiMl: 2nd Qtr Expend: $122,829.00 $166,018.36 205, 1 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend: $227,058.14 $295,916.08 FTE23.0Program Saq *: 205 Program Name: AduR Education Program Code: Program Goal: Plan RefererKe Page Number NA LRSD hY 94-9^ EKUUKAM HULXjbi UULUMfcM Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Page: 2 Revision Date: Paulette H. Martin The goal of the Adult Education program is to upgrade the basic literacy skills of adult and/or to assist adults in obtaining their high school equivalency (GED) diploma. Objectivee 1. Develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. 2. inform the CommunRy of the services offered by the AduR Education Program 3. Solicit funding to fully support the AduR Education Center Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility August 11. 1995 Evaluation Crtterla 1.1 Identify and employ qualified teachera to deliver services to students A. AH teachers hired 1.2 Identify equipment, materials, and supplies needed in order to deliver servicas to students A. Materials and supplies disseminated 1.3 Provide Inservice training for teachers as needed to ensure that students are served appropriately A. Preschool Inservice B. Central Arkansas AduR Education Inservice 2.1 Promote the AduR Education Program A. Recruiter distrfeutes posters/brochures to grocery stores, barbar/beauty shops, medical clinics, public heaRh units, churches B. Tapes made and running on local TV and radio stations C. Businesses and Industries Contacted 3.1 SubmR Proposals and secure financial resources for operation of the AduR Education Program 205, 2 07/01/94 08/01/94 07/01/94 06/15/94 07/01/94 08/15/94 09/29/94 07/01/94 08/01/94 08/15/94 08/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/15/94 06n0/95 08/19/94 06/30/95 06/16/94 09/30/94 06/30/95 06/14/95 06/14/95 06/14/95 06/30/95 Director, Human Resources\nDirector, AduR Education Director, Ass't Director. Teachers. examiners Director Director. Ass't Director. RecruRer, teacher Director 1.1 A list of certified teachers win be provided 1.2 Equipment, materials and supplies wiH be listed 1.3 Inservice participants, dates and topics will be provided 2.1 Copies of tapes, brochures, and posters will be provided as well as a schedule of places visRed by the recruiter. 3.1 Copies of proposal will be providedPage: 3 Program Seq : 205 Revision Dato: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Adult Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Paulette H. Martin Program Goal: The goal of the Adult Education program is to upgrade the basic literacy skills of adult and/or to assist adults in obtaining their high school equivalency (GED) diploma. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies T Beginning Dato Completion Dato Responsibility Evaluation Criteria A, Family Literacy (Special Project) 08/03/94 08/10/94 B. Workplace 09/06/94 09/16/94 C. D\u0026amp;E 01/09/95 01/11/95 D. Correctional/lnstitutionaltzed 03/15/95 03/28/95 4. Provide Adult Basic Education and General Adult Education to agencies which have a minimum of ten (10) students when reguested. 4.1 Set up AduK Education satelito classes upon request 07/01/94 06/30/95 Director 4.1 List of satellite classes will be provided A. AGC Math Class 09/01/94 10/13/94 B. Community Punishment Center 08/22/94 06/05/95 C. Raytheon Jet 0ir25/9A 06/05/95 0. Oaks Residential Center 08/25/94 06/05/95 E. Union Rescue Mission 09/06/94 06/05/95 F. Lion's World Services for the Blind 08/22/94 06/05/95 G. Metropolitan Vo-Tech 08/22/94 06/05/95 H. Instructional Resource Center (IRC) 08/23/94 06/05/95 I. Pulaski County Jail 06/22/94 06/05/95 J. Our House 11 08/22/94 11/03/94 K. Pinnacle House 06/23/94 06/05/95 L. Forensic Unit. State Hospital 09/29/94 06/05/95 M. Unit 4, State Hospital 08/22/94 06/05/95 N. United Cerebral Patsy Skin Center 06/22/94 06/05/95 205, 3Page: 4 Program Seq *: 205 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Adult Education Program Code: Primary Leader: SecoTKlary Leader: Paulette H. Martin Program Goal: The goal of the Adult Education program is to upgrade the basic literacy skills of adult and/or to assist adults in obtaining their high school equivalency (GED) diploma. Plan RefererKe Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria O. Watershed II 08/22/94 06/05/95 P. Crystal HiN Baptist Church 09/12/94 06/05/95 Q. Tomberfin Church of Christ 09/08/94 06/05/95 R. McClellan Community School 10/04/94 03\\16\\95 S. Salvation Army 11/14/94 06/05/95 T. Family Literacy 10/13.94 06/05/95 U. Parris Towers 10/26/94 06/05/95 V. Windsor Door 01/17/95 03/09/95 W. Computer Literacy 07-25*94 06/05/95 5. Evaluate the cost Effectiveness of using local Community Resources, such as the Parent Learning Center, as a means for providing education opportunities for parents. 6. Provide Computer Lkeracy courses to students and to agencies, businesses, and industries which have a minimum of ten (10) students, when requested. 5.1 Compare the cost of setting up an AduK Education Center and the cost of using local Community Resources of provide education servicess to parents. A. B. C. 12A)9/93 02/28/94 Director 5.1 Copy of the cost comparison will be available for review. Administrative costs Instructional costs Maintenance and Operation (rent, utilities, custodial services etc.,) D. Other support services (equipment, computer software, office supplies/postage. telephone and graduation expenses, etc.) 6.1 Set up Computer Literacy courses at businesses and industries on request. A. Adult Education Center 205, 4 12/09/93 12/09/93 12/09/93 12A39/93 09/06/94 09/06/94 02/28/94 02/28/94 02/28/94 02/28/94 06/30/95 06/05/95 Director 6.1 A list of Computer Literacy Classes will be provided.Page: 5 Program Seq *: 205 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Adult Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Paulette H. Martin Program Goal: The goal of the Adult Education program is to upgrade the basic literacy skills of adult and/or to assist adults in obtaining their, high school equivalency (GED) diploma. Plan Referer\u0026gt;ce Page Number Objectives 7. Provide a Computerized English As a Second Language (ESL) course for foreign\u0026gt;bom student and Computer-Asststed Instruction (CAI) for aR students. B. C. D. E. Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corp. COPE State Hospital Raytheon Jet 7.1 Set up Computerized ESL courses for foreign- bom students and CAI for all students. A. Adult Education Center 205, 5 03/14/95 04/18/95 02/13/95 07/25/94 08/22/94 08/22/94 04/13/95 06/05/95 06/05/95 10/04/94 05/31/95 05/31/95 Director 7.1 A schedule of courses will be provided.LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Program Seq 9: 206 Page: 1 Revision Date: August 3, 1995 Program Name: Compensatory Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Glasgow/Parker Program Description: Compensatory Education funded programs are designed tt\u0026gt; improve the quality of LRSDs academic programs. Activities include supplemental instruction for students, resource materials, inservice education for teachers, and support for parental involvement. District Goal Support: (1) Implement integrand educational programs that will ensure dutt all students grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis on basic and academic enrichment while closing disparities in achievement. (2) Develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. Program Goal: Disparity reduction - to provide equitable language arts and mathematics learning for all students in die mainstream setting. Plan References: I I FY Program Budget: I YTD Expenditures: Expenditures: $591,353.64 $626,997.76 1st Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: $97,832.95 $160,673.41 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend: $208,830.88 $159,660.52 I FTE 13.80 I [ Rebted Fimctlon Codes: 1560, 1570, 1595 ] 206, 1Program Seq f: 206 Program Name: Compensatory Education Program Code: Program Goal: Plan Reference Page Number LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET EXKUMENT Primary Leader: To assist low achieving students to make accelerated progress and catch up. Objectives 1. To use an integrated shared reading/writing approach of instruction to promote student independence as readers, writers, and learners, (fourteen schools, K-3) 2. To improve students abilities m analyze, explain, and summarize materials from books and tapes utilizing the reading styles approach, (two schools) Page: 2 Revision Date: August 3, 1995 Strategies 1.1 Purchase and distribute materials and supplies U\u0026gt; schools. 1.2 Provide additional time for instruction using the Shared Reading/Writing Approach through thematic units utilizing these materials. 1.3 Provide whole group instructioo for all K-1 students and additional small group and individual instruedoD as needed, 1.4 Provide second and diird grade students with instruclion using the Shared Reading/Writing Approach. 1,5 Provide participating teachers aitd administrators with a minimum of nine hours staff development. 1.6 Provide summer scholarships to train the trainers. 206, 2 Secondary Leader: Adams/Glasgow/Parker Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Principals and Teachers Director of Reading and IRC Reading Specialists Principals. First Grade Teachers, and Reading Specialists Principals and Classroom Teachers Principals. Classroom Teachers, and Reading Specialists Director of Reading and Rigby Consultants Director of Reading and Rigby Consultants 1. Student profiles on LRSD Language Arts Curriculum will be used Io assess student achievement. 1.1 Documentation of purchase orders. 1.2 The number of developed thematic units will comprise the evaluation. 1,3 Record of classroom observation and schedules. 1,4 Schedules and list of students. 1.5 List of participants with evaluations. 1.6 List of trainers. 2. The evaluation criteria includes die recognition of the sound of letters in isolation and in words, and in how to blend sounds together.Page: 3 Program Seq f: 206 Revision Date\nAugust 3, 1995 Program Name: Compensatory Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Glasgow/Parker Program Goal: To assist low achieving students to make accelerated progress and catch up. Plan Reference Page Niraber Objectives Strategies 2.1 Diagnose studentsreading styles in four areas: tactic, visual, kinesthetic, auditory. 2.2 Structure students' work around identified reading styles. 2.3 Actively involve students in learning activities. 2.4 Send home appropriate books and corresporxling tape recordings for the reading styles of targeted students. Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/03/95 06/30/95 Principals and Classroom Teachers Principals and Classroom Teachers Principals arxl Classroom Teachers Principals and Classroom Teachers 2.1 The number of Reading Styles Inventories completed. 2.2 Snidents Individual Learning Plan. 2.3 Students Individual Learning Plan. 2.4 The number of purchases and record of usage. 3. To improve students' vocabulary and comprehetisioo skills through phonics related reading, (one school) 3. The criteria consists of: a) reference data in reading\nb) amount of peer tutoring\nc) number of discipline problems\nd) parental communication\ne) number of identified reading styles. 4. To promote conuminications between home and school. 3.1 Use the Direct Instniction Program in phonics to teach smdents. 3.2 Provide target students with presentation books, story books, homework, and materials. 4.1 Inform parents regarding instructional approaches. 4.2 Conduct conferences with parents on student progress. 206, 3 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Principals and Classroom Teachers Principals and Classroom Teachers Principals and Teachers Principals and Teachers 3.1 Activities contained in the daily lesson plan will comprise the evaluation. 3.2 Record of books students read annually. 4. Record of take-home materials. 4.1 Documentation of communications. 4.2 Documentation of conferetKes. Page: 4 Program Seq f: 206 RevtsloD Date: August 3, 1995 Program Name: Compensatory Education Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Adams/Glasgow/Parker Program Goal: To assist low achieving students to make accelerated progress and catch up. Plan Reference Page Nianber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 4.3 Provide take-home books and materials for parents. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Principals and Teachers 4.3 Record of serxl-home materials. 5. To reduce education deficit in reading of target students tn grades nine through twelve by reinforcing dK regular education program with Language Arts Phis. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Language Arts Supervisor 5. Criteria consists of Pre and Post Norm Referenced data in Reading/Language Arts for participating shidents. 5.1 Reduce language arts/math plus class size and add an enrichment class to the schedule. 07/01/94 06/30/95 PriiKipal 5.1 Class size at each school site and schedules will comprise the evaluation. A. Student class schedules refuted. 07/01/94 09/30/94 B. Math Phis classes - regular, Pre-Algebra, Algebra al 7 junior high schools and 3 senior high schools 5.2 Provide tutorial and remedial learning experience in the enrichment class. A. Classroom instruction. 5.3 Employ a variety of instructional strategies which permit teachen to clarify, enhance or remediate in the academic setting. 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/22/94 VJ/Ol/94 08/22/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06130195 Principal/ Classroom Teacher Principals and Language Arts Teachers 5.2 The number of students, hitor and schedule of session will comprise the evaluation. 5.3 Daily lesson plans will comprise the evaluation. 6. To prevent school failure and dropout with additional assistance from oitors in reading and mathematics. 07/01/94 06/30195 A. Inservice -Pre-School Secondary English and Language Arts Plus 08/16/94 09/01/94 -Pre-School Secondary Math Plus 08/16/94 09/01/94 206, 4Program Seq *: 206 Page: 5 Program Name: Compensatory Education RerisioD Date: August 3, 1995 Program Code: Primary Leader: Program Goal: To assist low achieving students m make accelerated Secondary Leader: Adams/Glasgow/Parker progress and catch up. Plan Reference Page Ntanber Objectives Strategies Beginniiig Date Cmnpletion Date ResponsibUity Evaluation Criteria -Record Keeping - Secondary Academic Support -Math Ptus/Language Arts Plus -New textbook inservice B. Technical Assistance to classroom teachers (162) 6.1 The Little Rock School District will purchase the following tutoring services from the Cornerstone Project: A) Ten certified tumrs who has special training in working with remedial studenu: B) Tuton will work with students through one-on-one situation or in groups not to exceed four students\nC) Students will receive one hour of instruction in reading and one hour in mathematics\nD) Review individual student performance with parents\nE) ComerStone Project's Parent Action Committee will provide a forum for coiTununication among parents, tutors and staff\nF) Parent education seminars will be offered for parents awareness\nG) The service will be Monday through Thursday for nine months or 180 days. A. Technical assistance to program facilitator-on site (3). B. Compensatory Education Annual Evaluation 206, 5 09/01/94 09/27/94 10/01/94 10/01/94 07/01/94 10/01/94 05/15/95 09/01/94 12/21/94 12/21/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 10/21/95 06/30/95 Director of Federal Programs 6.1 Students' progress will be monitored by receiving school report, quarterly grade reports, contact with school counselors, and progress widi tutoring materials.LK^U H ^4-^3 rnuUKniVt puuun i Program Seq f: 207 Page: 1 Revfsion Date: August 3, 1995 Program Name: Gifted Programs Program Code: Primary Leader: I Secondary Leader: Mable Etonaldsoo Program Deacrlptlon: and indirect services arc provided for The Little Rock School Districfl Oifted Piogiem offen to tB snidenB through \u0026gt; dejign thit cotBisB of ohKninon ^ttnch^nt for .11 _____ AppLd Standaid! The Standards provide the fiamewoik grodcs }-6 1 special classes for snideoB io glides 7-12 The program operates tn compliance with the Arkansas Depan of Educaoon s Gifted ^ f.ciliBmral who have completed or who ate pursuing graduate for establishing equitable criteria for the identification of gifted and talented students. Services are provided Io these students by teachera (specialists and facditatora) mp credit in gifted education. District Goal Support: God fl  Implemcnl inlegrated educational programs dial will ensure that all students grow acadenucally. socidly and em^^ly with i Oieb day ^day^havior that achievement. God  2 - Develop md maintain a sBff that is weU-trained and motivated. God g 3 - The LMe Rock School Board, adnumsnation, staff, tiX draw as we prepare for they accept each individud as a valued contributor Io society and view cultural diversity among students, staff and the coi^mhr as a vdu^ lesoutw uin proviXTrafe and olderly climate that is - ----------  financial and other resources that arc necessary to fully support out schools, includmg our desegregatron plan. God # 3 - Provide a sale ano oroeny ciirrw the 21$t Century. Goal f 4 - Solicit and secure----------- . , conductive to learning for all students. Goal # 6 - Ensure that equity occurs in all phases of school activities and operations. Program Goal: To provide appropriate instiuctiona] services to all ideMified students. Plan Referencea: PY Progr Budget: $1,230,868.19 lat Qtr Expend: $143,592.75 3rd Qtr Expend: $328,957.36 FTE 32.80 YTD Expenditures: $1,162,214.51 Znd Qtr Expend\n$231,433.31 4tli Qtr Expend: $458,231.09 Related Function Codes: 207. 1LKbU M EKUUKAlVi OLlUUlil UUCUMUni Page: 2 Program Seq *: 207 Revision Date: August 3, 1995 Program Name: Gifted Programs Program Code: Primary Leader\nSecondary Leader\nMable Donaldson Program Goal: To provide appropriate instructional services to all identified gifted students. Plan Referertce Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Crtterfa 1. Provide resource room and towlirect instructional services to identified students according to district and state curriculum guidelines 1.1 Identify certified teacher(s) (specialists) to provide needed services at each school. A. Specialist positions fined at all schools. 1.2 Aid schools in providing materials, supplies, external laboratory experiences and participation in local, state and national activities. A. Invoices and requests received from schools. 1.3 Ensure proper documentation and evaluation of student-records (placement) according to district and state guidelines. A. Monitoring of school records scheduled. 1.4 Provide inservice training for teachers (specialists) to ensure that students are receiving appropriate instructional services. A. Pre-school hservices held for facilitators and specialists. 207, 2 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/16/94 07/01/94 08/16/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 01/04/95 06/30/95 06/01/95 06/30/95 06/06/95 06/30/95 06/16/94 G/T Supervisor, Coordinator, Teachers Supervisor, Coordinator, Human Resources Dept. Supervisor, Coordinator, Principals Supervisor, Coordinator, Principals, Specialists Supervisor, Coordinator, Staff Development, Curriculum Supervisors List of certified teachers serving each school. Invoices, copies of requests and memberships and/or participation in various activities. Copies of nrK\u0026gt;nitoring report and school visitation logs Agendas, participation roster, inservice. evaluationsPage: 3 Program Seq *: 207 Revision Date: August 3, 1995 Program Name: Gifted Programs Program Coda: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Mable Donaldson Program Goal: To provide appropriate instructional services to all identified gifted students. Plan Reference Page Number Ob|ectivea Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria B. Monthly G/T Council meetings held for G/T tecilitators. C. Tri-District Curriculum Inservice held for G/T specialists. 0. Junior Great Books Workshop held. E. Polaroid Workshop held. F. Quiz Bowl workshop G. Using Literature In tire Social Studies Inservice held. H. Story Pyramids - Mini Session - IRC Open House I. G/T Cuniculum Inservice J. Portfolio Assessment II Workshop 09/27/94 09/16/94 10/03/94 10/25/94 10/27/94 11/03/94 12/01/94 12/15/94 01/26/95 K. G/T Classroom Management Inservice 04/25/95 L. G/T Identification Workshop 05/02/95 05/01/95 09/16/94 10/04/94 10/25/94 10/27/94 11/03/94 12/01/94 12/15/94 01/26/95 04/25/95 05/02/95 207 . 3LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Program Seq *: 208 Page: 1 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Description: The Little Rock School Distrlcfs Olviaion of Curriculum Servicos seeks to Improve curriculum design and delivery K-12 that is consistent with state guidelines and national recommendations. This division works to ensure alignmenl between the written, taught, and tested curriculum as determined by student assessment Finally, efforts are made to ensure that Instructional delivery is based on sound teaching principles and grounded in educational research. To accxjmpiish these ends, this division strives to Identify, develop, and provide educational resources, staff development, and technical assistance Io the schools. District Goal Support: Program Goal: Goal 1 - Implomenl IntegratoO educational programa that win ensure that all students grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis on basic skills and academic enrichmenl while closing disparities kt achievoment Goal n  Develop and maintain a stall that is well-tralnod and mohvated Goal #3 - The Little Rock School Board, administration, stall, and students will demonstrate In their day to day behavior that they accept each individual as a valued conIrSiutor to society and view cultural diversity among students, staff and the community as a valued resource upon which our community and nation can draw as wo prepare for the 21st Century. Goal M - Solicit and secure financial and other resources that are necessary to fully support our schools. Including our desegregation plan. Goal #5 - Provide a sale and orrlerty dknato that is conducive to learning for all students. Goal #6 - Ensure that equity occurs in all phases of school activities and operations. The purpose of curriculum services Is to plan, direct, and cooidinalo Improved curriculum design and delivoiy as well as to ensure curricular artieulation and coordination K-12. Plan References: 1 FY Program Budget: $1,910,391.39 1st Qtr Expend: $366,222.44 3rd Qtr Expend: $523,689.65 FTE 55 YTD Expenditures: $1,921,331.54 2nd Qtr Expend: $449,839.15 4th Qtr Expend: $581,580.30 Related Function Codes: 1190. 1193, 2211, 2212. 2490, 3800, 4900, 2219 I 208, 1Program Seq *: 208 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services LRSD FY 94-95 RHUUKAM BUDbhl UUCUMbNI Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Page: 2 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Is to plan, direct, and coordinate improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan RefererKe Page Number ObjecUvea Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1. Develop a coordinated and articulated curriculum that is comprehensive and demonstrates congruence between what Is written, taught, and tested. 07/01/94 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Principals 1.0 Revised curriculum te in place that responds to the recommendations of the curriculum audit. Comprehensive review process is in place. 1.1 Development of curriculum guides through the assistance of district-wide committees 07/01/94 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Certified Teachers, Principals 1.1 Curriculum guides are in place and are aligned with District objectives A. Mathematics curricuium guide was revised by a district committee to reflect the State Mathematics Framework. 07/01/94 08/15/94 B. Revised language arts curriculum was complefed, edited, and printed. 07/01/94 08/01/94 C. Revised foreign language curriculum was completed, edited, and printed. 07/01/94 08/01/94 D. Science curriculum committees have been working to revise the science cunlculum guides. 01/04/95 06/09/35 1.2 Provide inservice training for teachers to assist in effective delivery of the curriculum 07/01/94 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Principals 1.2 Documentation of inservice activities are available 1.2 Test scores will demonstrate improvement A. AN teachers K-12 were given training In the use of the revised mathematics curriculum guide. 07/01/94 09/01/94 208, 2Program Seq *: 208 Page: 3 Program Name\nCurriculum Services Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Code: Primary Leader: Program Goal: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow The purpose of curriculum services is to plan, direct, and coordinate Improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria B. Eisenhower staff development specialists in science provided training for individual teachers and groups of teachers at greatest need schools regarding strategies and techniques for delivery of the science curriculum. 07/01/94 06/07/95 C. Elementary Chapter 1 mathematics specialists partic^ated b an inservice on the Chapter 1 Program. 07/01/94 09/01/94 0. Secondary Compensatory Education mathematics teacher participated In an Inservice on teaching strategies and documentation required for Comp. Ed. 07/01/94 09/29/94 E. Preschool inservice was held for all special education staff. 08/16/94 08/16/94 F. Preschool inservice was held for library media specialists. 08/12/94 08/16/94 Q. Inservice was provided in Social Studies, teaching strategies to all secondary social studies teachers at preschool conference during monthly council meetings. 08/16/94 05/02/95 H. Inservice training was provided for Kindergarten and E.C.E. teachers and hstructional aides. 08/15/94 06/06/95 I. Harcourt Brace inservice was provided for elementary prindpais in order that they may assist teachers with the new basal series. 08/03/94 08/03/94 J. Elementary language arts curriculum training was provided during preschool inservice week. 06/15/94 08/16/94 K. Secondary EngHsh/Reading/Leaming Foundations new teacher training was provided. 08/16/94 08/16/94 208, 3Page: 4 Program Seq *: 208 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon. Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services is to plan, direct, and coordinate improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K*12. T Plan RefererKe Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria L. Elementary reading teacher inservice providing information for new basal was held. M. Elementary language arts/reading training was provided. N. Pre-school inservice provided to GZT specialist and facilitators. 0. Tri-District inservice held for GZT specialists - North Little Rock west campus. P. Inservice was provided to aU elementary special education resource teachers. Q. Technical assistance provided In Social Studies to individual staff members at Chicot, Mitchell, Franklin, Romine, Dunbar, Bale, Central High, Southwest Jr., Parkview High, and Mabelvale Jr. R. Three early release inservices held in math and science for elementary and secondary schools. S. A cluster of first grade teachers participated in a mathematics inservice conducted by the Chapter 1 Math Traveling Specialists. T. Elementary Science Textbook committee attended textbook caravan sponsored by science textbook publishers. U. Junior Great Books training provided to aU interested teachers. V. Polaroid Workshop held for all interested elementary and junior high teachers. 208. 4 08/31/94 09/19/94 08/16/94 09/16/94 10/16/94 10/10/94 10/01/94 12/06/94 10/27/94 10/03/94 10/25/94 08/31/94 09/20/94 08/16/94 09/16/94 12/16/94 05/30/95 05/10/95 12/06/94 10/27/94 10/04/94 10/25/94Page: 5 Program Seq : 206 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services is to plan, direct, and coordinate improved curriculum design and delivery as weH as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria W. School wide Quiz Bowl Workshop held for schools interested In this activity. X. Mini-inservice session at IRC on \"Using Literature in the Social Studies\". Y. Integrating Science and Literacy K-8 Solving Problems In Sdence and Technology Seminar - UALR. Z. Math and Science inservice for Secondary G/T Facilitators. AA. G/T Portfolio and Cuniculum Development Inservice. AB. Chapter 1 Matti Specialist attended an inservice on effective teaching methods. AC. First grade dusters of teachers attended two inservice sessions on effective teaching strategies in mathematics for first grade students. AO. Secondary science textbooks committee members attended inservice sessions on books being considered for adoptions. AE. Reading/math Inservice for spedal education teachers: Elementary - January 20 and February 17\nSecondary - January 23 and March 14 AF. Portfolio II and Science Center Inservice for G/T Specialists. AO. Writing Across the Curriculum Workshop - Southwest Junior High AH. G/t Classroom Management Inservice for identified G/T Specialists. 208, 5 10/27/94 11/03/94 10/13/94 11/29/94 12/15/94 02/09/95 01/04/95 01/31/95 01/20/95 01/26/95 01/25/95 04/25/95 10/27/94 11/03/94 10/13/94 11/29/94 12/15/94 02/09/95 03/31/95 02/21/95 03/14/95 01/26/95 01/25/95 04/25/95Pago: 6 Program Seq *: 206 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: CurricuKim Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon. Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services Is to plan, direct, and coordinate Improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Referertce Page Number Ob^ctives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria Al. Science model project session held for G/T taciMtators. AJ. G/T Identification Inservica held for aH G/T Specialists. AK. Potydron training was provided for elementary and secondary math teachers. AL. K-2 teachers attended Scholastic \"Science Place\" workshop on new science textbook. AM. 3-6 teachers attended Harcourt Brace \"Science Anytime\" workshops on new science textbook. AN. 7-9 teachers attended Glencoe Science workshop on new science textbook. 1.3 Provide technical assistance as needed for individual school sites and/or Individual teachers A. Technical assistance was provided as needed or requested In all curricular areas by curriculum directors and supervisors. B. Eisenhower staff development specialists In math and science provided technical assistance as requested to schools. C. Chapter 1 mathematics specialists provided technical assistarrce related to the Chapter 1 Program to assigned schools. D. Visits were made to every school by special education staff to provide assistance. 208, 6 04/25/95 04/25/95 05/02/95 06/06/95 05/02/95 05/09/95 05/09/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/22/94 05/02/95 06/07/95 05/03/95 05/10/95 05/09/95 06/30/95 06/07/95 06/07/95 06/07/95 09/30/94 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Staff Development 1.3 Weekly visitation logs reflect visits for technical assistance 1.3 Test scores win demonstrate improvementPafle: 7 Program Seq *: 208 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services Is to plan, direct, and coordinate improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulalion and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria E. Great Expectation training was held for staffs of Rightsell and Mitchell Incentive Schools. 08/30/94 09/01/94 F. EPSF Workshop was held. 08/16/94 08/16/94 G. Phonics Workshop was held. 08/21/94 08/21/94 H. Technical assistance was provided In Social Studies to all new social studies teachers and new/reassigned prindpais. 08/04/94 06/06/95 I. Technical assistance was provided for Individual school sites and/or individual teachers. 07/01/94 06/06/95 J. Language Arts Plus technical assistance was provided for Henderson Jr. High and Hall High. 08/30/94 09/13/94 K. English teacher technical assistance was provided for HaN High. 09/14/94 09/14/94 L. Spanish teacheetechnical assistance was provided for Franklin Incentive School. 09/14/94 09/14/94 M. Approximately thirty-one (31) individual schools and/or teachers were provided assistance through visitations, conferences, or technical assistance by the Reading Department specialists including special demonstrations. 08/17/94 09/30/94 N. Technical assistance was provided to new Hbrarians. 08/12/94 06/06/75 O. Technical assistance was provided by computer specialists and technicians in using Abacus Instrucbonal Management System and in using the Computer Labs. 08/15/94 06/09/75 P. Technical assistance provided by G/T supervisor and coordinator as needed. 08/15/94 06/06/95 208, 7Page: 8 Program Seq : 208 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose o, curriculuni services is to plan, direct, and coordmale improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria Q. Earty Childhood Education on-site visits: 108 08/08/94 06/30/95 R. Instructional Technology/Media and Computer Central on-sHe visits: 2,954 08/06/94 06/13/95 S. Math/Science on-sKe visits: 407 08/06/94 06/07/95 T. Reading on-site visits: 557 08/08/94 06/06/95 U. Staff Development Specialists provided testtaking tips and strategies to teachers at the following schools: Badgett. Fair Park, Baseline. Gibbs. Booker, and Woodruff 10/12/94 12/07/94 V. Special Education folders were monitored In 33 schools. 09/15/94 12/21/94 W. Immersion Program workshop was held at Franklin. 11/07/94 11/07/94 X. Engftsh/Foreign Language Department provided technical assistance to visiting Russian teachers and their mentors. 12A)8/94 06/06/95 Y. English/Foreign Language and Social Studies Department provided technical assistance to Central High SchooPs International Studies Program. 12/22/94 12/22/94 Z. English teacher technical assistance was provided at Mabe^aie Jr. and Henderson Jr. 12/12/94 12/16/94 AA. English on-site visits: 50 06/08/94 06/06/95 AB. Monthly Council Meetings: English - 10/17/94. 11/21/94, 02/20/95. 04/17/95, 05/15/95\nForeign Language - 10/20/94. 11/17/94. 01/19/95, 02/16/95, 05/18/95 10/17/94 05/16/95 208, 8Page: 9 Program Seq : 208 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Cunicuhjm Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose o( curriculum services Is to plan, direct, and coordinate Improved curriculum design and deliveiy as well as Io ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria AC. Science teacher technical assistance was provided at Pulaski Heights Junior High and McClellan High. AO. Monthly Council Meeting: Science 02/28/95 and 04/25/95\nMath 02/13/95, 04/11/95, 05/09/95 An special education folders monitored and foNow-up visits made on January 4 and March 15. AF. Staff Development Specialists provided testtaking tips and strategies to teachers at the following schools: January 25 - Rightsett, Wakefield. Western Hills. Woodruff, McClellan\nFebruary 8 - Central, McClellan. Parkview, Cloverdale, Forest Park, Washington, Fair Park, Woodruff AG. Monthly G/T Council Meetings held AH. The Social Studies and Gifted Departments provided staff development in using the curriculum the teach SAT-8 critical thinking skills. Al. Monthly Social Studies Meetings Council 09/07/94. 10/04/94. 11/01/94, 02/07/95, 04/04/95, 05/02/95 AJ. Annual reviews conducted on all students with disabilities. 1.4 Assist schools in the selection of appropriate materials and resources for delivering the curriculum effectively to students 208, 9 01/04/95 02/13/95 01/04/95 01/25/95 07/01/95 02/07/95 09/07/94 02/15/95 07/01/94 03/31/95 06/07/96 03/15/95 02/08/95 06/06/95 02/06/95 05/02/95 05/26/95 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Staff Development 1.4 Materials and resources are in place 1.4 Requisitions for materials are on filePage: 10 Program Seq : 208 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: me purpose ol curriculum services is to plan, direct, and coordinate improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K*12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies A. Schools requesting replacement supplies for science kits were furnished the supplies by the Science Office. B. Equipment and supplies were ordered for K-4. Math Crusade, and Science Crusade participants. C. Visits were made by special education staff to every school to provide assistance. D. Assistance was provided to elementary and secondary teachers and principals In the types of supplemental social studies materials to purchase. E. Materials and resources were ordered and In place for Kindergarten and E.C.E. P. A committee was selected and convened to choose materials and resources for junior high school reading program. G. Materials and resources were identified for Frankbi Spanish program. H. Essential materials ere issued to teachers, principals and support staff where requested. I. Materials were purchased for all high school special education programs. J. New materials, supplies, equipments, and resources were ordered for Chicot Pre-K and Kindergarten teachers. K. English Department provided special materials to Chicot Elementary. L. Elementary and secondary science textbooks recommended to the board for approval. 208, 10 Beginning Date Completion Dats Responslbltlty Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/22/94 08/04/94 07/01/94 09/01/94 09/01/94 08/15/94 11/01/94 10/17/94 10/17/94 09/15/94 06/07/95 06/07/95 09/30/94 06/06/95 09/30/94 10/14/94 10/03/94 08/16/94 12/15/94 10/19/94 11/18/94 04/27/95Page: 11 Program Seq *: 208 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name\nCurriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of currteulum services is to plan, direct, and coordinate improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies T Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria M. Materials purchased for aH speech therapist 02/01/95 02/01/95 N. Equipment and materials needed for students with disabilities Identified. 05/01/95 06/01/95 1.5 Analyze standardized test results together with Abacus and/or other appropriate data to revise and/or modify curriculum as needed 07/01/94 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Principals, Teachers 1.5 School improvement plans reflect emphasis on identified areas of need A. Results of standardized tests were used to identify target schools for service by the Elsenhower science specialists. 07/01/94 09/01/94 B. Mathematics curriculum revision used test data and anecdotal data from teachers to suggest modifications to the curriculum. 07/01/94 08/15/94 C. Planning retreat was conducted for reading specialists to Identify and target weak skills areas. 08/24/94 08/25/94 2.0 Identify and secure resources, both material and human, to support the program of studies offered by the District 07/01/94 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Director of Procurement, Principals 2.0 The courses in the program of studies have resources available for full implementation 2.1 Identify and order equipment and supplies needed by schools to implement their instructional program 07/01/94 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Teachers, Principals, Director of Procurement 2.1 Requisitions/purchase orders reflect the equipment and supplies ordered by/for the schools to implement their instructional program 208. 11Page: 12 Program Seq *: 208 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Seivices Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The punjoso of curriculum services Is to pion, direct, end coordinate improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articuiation and coordination K12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies A. All subject area supervisors and coordinators ordered equipment and supplies as needed by schools. B. Replacement science supplies were provided to schools that made a request. C. K-4 and Math Crusade equipment and supplies were ordered for Crusade participants. 0. Equipment and supplies were identified and ordered for schools to implement their Kindergarten and E.C.E. progress. E. Materials identified and ordered for G/T program. F. Multicultural materials from multlcuttural fair identified and ordered by secondary social studies teachers. O. K-4, Math, and Science Crusade materials were ordered and received for second semester crusade participants. H. Materials ordered for speech therapists. J. Instructional Technology Department provide forty computer covers to Rockefeller. 2.2 Provide direct services to schools through the deployment of curriculum and technical specialists to help implement the schools' instructional program 208, 12 Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/01/94 12/01/94 01/04/95 02/01/95 06/01/95 07/01/94 06/07/95 06/07/95 09/30/94 09/30/94 06/01/95 12/22/94 06/07/95 02/01/95 06/01/95 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Curriculum and Technical Specialists, Principals 2.2 Weekly visitation logs document the direct services to schools provided by curriculum and technical specialistsPage: 13 Program Seq f: 208 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon. Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services is to plan, direct, and coordinate improved curriculum design and delivory as well as to ensure curricular articulation arid coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria K Eisenhower staff development specialists In math and science served target schools. B. Supervisory staff made on-site visits for technical assistance to schools. C. Tedinical assistance provided to schools upon request by G/T supervisor and coordinator. 2.3 Maintain a ltorary of audio-visual materials, staff development materials, and other specialized materials for loan to schools A. Math office loaned materials to schools on request. B. Science office loaned microscopes and other supplies to elementary schools on request C. Videotapes were circulated from the Instructional Materials Center as requested by schools. . D. Professional Ltorary Catalog was issued to all employees. E. Materials checked out to schools upon request from G/T office ltorary. F. The professional Staff Development Media Center offers video tapes, books, films, etc. and is available to all LRSD employees. G. Early Childhood Education department loaned materials and equipment to schools upon request. 208, 13 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/15/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/12/94 08/15/94 07/01/94 01/09/95 06/07/95 06/07/95 06/06/95 06/30/95 06/07/95 06/07/95 06/06/95 08/12/94 06/07/95 06/30/95 06/06/95 Director of Staff Development. Coordinator of Library Services. Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators 2.3 An audio-visual catalog and staff development library catalog will document the matedals available for loan to schools\ncheck-out logs will document the loan of other specialized materials to the schoolsPage: 14 Program Seq : 208 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Curricuium Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services Is to plan, direct, and coordinate Improved curriculum design and deliveiy as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 2.4 Interview prospective candidates for teaching positions as weN as other certified and noncertified positions to assure the best qualified applicants are selected for employment A. Candidates were interviewed and a math secretary was employed. B. Curriculum staff members Interviewed prospective teacher candidates In the respective subject areas. C. Family Life Education teacher position was filled with an experienced and qualified individual. 0. Candidates were interviewed for secretary to the Social Studies Department. Candidate was recommended and approved. E. Prospective G/T specialist interviewed and hired to fW vacancies. F. Family' Lite Education teacher candidates were interviewed and an additional teacher was employed. G. Two new special education teachers interviewed and hired. 208, 14 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/24/94 07/25/94 10/01/94 01/04/95 06/30/95 09/01/94 06/30/95 09/01/94 08/29/94 01/23/95 11/01/94 01/15/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators. Director of Human Resources, Principals 2.4 Appointment books and feedback information will record the applicants who were interviewed by the curriculum supervisorsPage: 15 Program Seq *: 208 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services is to plan, direct, and coordinate improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K*12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Dato Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 2.5 Print District documents ter dissemination to teachers, prmcipals. students, and/or parents A. Parent Home Study Guides were revised, printed and disseminated to the schools. 6. Revised mathematics curriculum guides were printed and distributed to teachers. C. Elementary Itorary media resource guide was printed and disseminated to elementary librarians. D. Curriculum and resource guides provided ter newly assigned teachers and specialist. E. Science Curriculum Guides sent to printer. 2.6 Prepare instructional activities and materials ter teachers and explain/demonstrate their use 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/09/95 07/01/94 06/30/95 09/30/94 09/01/94 08/12/94 09/12/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 A. Eisenhower math and science specialists prepared acUvities ter demonstrations lessons and team teaching experiences at target schools. 07/01/94 06/07/95 208, 15 Curriculum Directors. Supervisors and Coordinators, Administrative Assistant to the Manager of Support Services. Printer at printshop Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, and Specialists at IRC 2.5 Teachers and principals have copies of applicable curriculum guides\nsign-off lists document the distribution of parent home study guides to parents\nstudent/parenl records document that students and parents received \"Rights and Responsibilities Handbook\" 2.6 Monthly IRC Thursday Night Workshops are held to share instructional activities and materials with teachers\ncopies of other activities and materials prepared ter teachers are on file at the IRCPage: 16 Program Seq *: 208 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services is to plen, direct, end coordinate improved curriculum design and doHvery as wen as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies B. Bimonthly IRC inservice \"Open Houses were planned and information was mailed to the schoote. \"Open Houses have been held on a bimonthly basis. C. instructional materials for Kindergarten and E.C.E. teachers were prepared and demonstrated durirrg bimonthly work sessions at the IRC. D. G/T program area provided mini-sessions on Story Pyramids and Diorama to all IRC Open House visitors. Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 08/15/94 12/01/94 05/04/95 05/04/95 12/01/94 3.0 Provide technical assistance to principals, teachers, and other personnel to facilitate the effective implementation of District programs 07/01/94 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors. Supervisors and Coordinators 3.0 District programs In the area of curriculum operate smoothly, without undue breakdown of equipment, lack of training of personnel, or lack of information by district personnel 3.1 Assist the schoota through the senrices of roving computer technicians to keep computer labs and equipment up and running 07/01/94 06/09/95 Coordinator of Technology, Computer Technicians, Principals 3.1 Computer labs provide good service and have little \"down\" time A. Computer Technicians served every computer lab to ensure equipment was up and running. 3.2 Assist teachers wih self-identified or principal- identified needs to improve the teaching/leaming process through content specific training as well as training in using various instructional strategies A. Supervisory staff made on-site visits for technical assistance to schools. 208, 16 08/15/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/09/95 06/30/95 06/07/95 Curriculum Directors, Supen/isors and Coordinators, Director of Staff Development. Principals 3.2 Weekly visitation logs and visitation reports document technical assistance provided to teachers .Page: 17 Program Seq *: 208 Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum servicos Is Io pion, direct, end coordinate improved curriculum design and delivery as weH as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Obfectives Strategies B. Assistance provided by coordinator, peer specialtsL and supervisor. C. Staff Development provided the following training: Cloverdale Elementary - Improve Reading\nForest Park - Discipline Management\nChicot  Reading Styles\nBaseline. Central. Cloverdale Jr., Metropolitan - Reading Styles\nBaseline. Badgett. Booker. Fair Park, Gtobs, Jefferson  Test Taking Tips D. Staff Development provided the following training\nSchool Improvement - Bale, Booker, Brady. FubrighL Gtobs, Hall, Metropolitan E. Staff Development provided the following training\nSchool Improverrrent - Brady. Cloverdale. Fubrlght. Fair Park F. Staff Development provided the following training: School Improvement - Dodd. Fair Park. Badgett. Booker, Brady, Cloverdale Elem., Fubright, Garland. Halt, Metropolitan, Cloverdale Jr.. Jefferson. McDermott, Meadowcliff, Ottor Creek. Pulaski Heights 3.3 Help schools identify staff development needs artd plan inservice to address those needs Beginning Date Completion Dato Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 09/21/94 01/25/95 02/07/95 07/01/94 06/06/95 q 10/12/94 01/25/95 02/07/95 0S/10//95 06/30/95 Director of Staff Development. Principals, Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators 3.3 The Staff Development Catalog contains training that meets the needs identified in the schools' School Improvement Plan A. 'Rights of Passage inservice scheduled and planned for Franklin Incentive School. B. Portfolio planning assistance was provided for King Magnet. 07/01/94 09/13/94 09/30/94 09/13/94 208, 17Page: 18 Program Seq : 20B Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Curriculunri Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secorfdary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum jervices is to plan, dirsct. and coordinata Improved curriculum design and delivery as wel as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. T Plan Reference Page Number OHectIves Strategies C. Staff Development specialists are assigned to specific schools where they work closely with the principal and the schooPs staff development committee to address inservice needs. D. Rights of Passage\" inservice conducted. E. Portfolio planning assistance was provided for Romine and Baseline. F. Integrated science inservice presented to science teachers at Mann Magnet School. G. Secondary schools provided special education inservice In dusters. H. Elementary and secondary science teachers attended textbook inservice. 3.4 Monitor program implementation through classroom visitations A. On-site visits were made to schools by supervisory staff to monitor classrooms for program implementation. B. Monitoring of G/T program ongoing by supervisor and coordinator. 3.5 Provida information to appropriate school personnel concerning academic events, training opportunities, funding sources, content-related questions, and special programs to enhance the Instructional program 208, 18 Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 08/01/94 10/12/94 10/04/94 01/25/95 01/23/95 05/02/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 05/26/95 10/12/94 12A)7/94 01/25/95 03/14/95 05/10/95 06/30/95 06/07/95 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisor and Coordinators Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators 3.4 Weekly visitation logs docurrwnt program monitoring 3.5 Memos, council agendas, and other written correspondence containing pertinent information is on file in each curriculum areaPage: 19 Program Seq *: 208 Revision Date: August 11,1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon. Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The pune o( curriculum services Is to plan, direct, and coordinato improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies A. Supervisory staff provided information to teachers and other staff forough council meetings and maH-outs about special events and opportunities. B. Information on academic events opportunities, etc. provided to schools by G/T supervision and coordinator 3.6 Assist schools with special needs students to address the identified needs to improve the learning process A. Chapter 1 and Compensatory Education mathematics programs were set up and implemented to serve identified students with deficits In mathematics. B. Social Studies assessment was conducted for students at Gfobs, Booker, and Dunbar to assist schools with appropriate placement. Carver student added. C. Assistance was provided for special needs students in Kindergarten and E.C.E. programs to assist the learning process. D. G/T supervisor and coordinator provide assistance to schools in providing needed services fo identified gifted students. E. Special education supervisors made ongoing visits to all programs. 208, 19 Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 08/11/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/22/94 08/22/94 07/25/94 08/16/94 06/07/95 06/01/95 06/30/95 06/07/95 06/02/95 06/06/95 06/06/95 06/06/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Principals 3.6 Programs to address special needs students are In placePage: 20 Program Seq *: 208 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services Is to plan, direct, and coordinate Improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articutetion and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Crtterla 4. Provide staff development experiences for the effective implementation of the curriculum 07/01/94 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Staff Development 4.0 Inservice programs offered are in response to identified needs district-wide as well as local school sites 4.1 Provide inservice training through district\u0026gt;wide minicoufses, training courses as well as school- based workshops to maximize the delivery of the ojniculum 07/01/94 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors. Supervisors and Coordinators, Staff Development 4.1 Catalogue reflects Inservice opportunities 4.1 Computer generated record reflects all inservice topics, dates, participants 4.1 Evaluations are on file /k. Mini-courses were planned and included In the staff development catalog. 07/01/94 06/30/95 B. School-based inservice programs with emphasis on content and methodology were presented. C. Three school-based Inservices provided by Early Childhood Education. Instructional assistants were provided CDA training. 07/01/94 08/08/94 06/06/95 06/06/95 D. Twenty school-based inservices provided by Math/Science. 08/08/94 06/07/95 E. Five school staffs were inserviced by special education supervisors. 09/30/94 12/16/94 F. The revised Language Arts and Math curricutum was implemented in August for aH LRSD employees 06/15/94 08/16/94 G. Staff development in social studies provided to secondary teachers. GZT teachers, and Franklin teachers. 07/01/94 05/02/95 H. Spedal education inservice on transition. 05/10/95 05/10/95 208. 20Page: 21 Program Seq *: 208 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon. Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services Is to plan, direct, and coordinate improved curriculum design and delivory as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Dato ResponsibUity Evaluation Criteria 4.2 Maintain professional materials and supplies that can be accessed by local school sites for identified needs and/or professional development A. Afl curricular areas maintain professional materials and supplies that can be accessed by local school sites. B. Professional materials Incorporated Into G/T office Nbrary. Materials available for check-out. 4.3 Provide technical assistance to individual schools/teachers through demonstration lessons, team-teaching as well as Individual/group planning at the local school A. Eisenhower Staff Development Specialists in science and math conducted demonsbation lessons, team teaching, and small group inservice sessions at the local school level. B. Staff Development provided technical assistance for the following schools: Mabelvale Elementary on 11-14-94, Mitchell on 12-01-94, Rockefeller on 11-30-94, Garland on 11-16-94, and Washington on 11-16-94, Terry on 03-06-95 C. Social Studies Department provided technical assistance to schools with Inservice lesson demonstrations, curriculum planning, and SAT-S test preparation. 208, 21 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 11/14/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/06/95 06/30/95 06/07/95 04/06/95 05/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Staff Development Specialists Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Staff Development Specialists 4.2 Record of available materials is on file as well as documentation of materials ffiat have been checked out for local schoote 4.3 Copies of weekly visitation logs as well as staff development plans are availablePage: 22 Program Sag *: 208 Revision Data: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Curricutum Sarvicas Program Code: Primary Leader Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal\nThe purpose of curriculum services is to plan, direct, and coordinale improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reforence Page Number Ot^ectlves Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 4.4 Provide opportunities for teachers to work at the IRC to design and create their own activities 07/01/94 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Staff Development 4.4 List of available dates and partic^ants is available 5.0 Develop and evaluate programs to meet needs established by the district in the curriculum area A. Bimonthly IRC inservice \"Open Houses\" were planned and a schedule of the \"Open Houses\" was provided to the schools. \"Open Houses\" are held on a bimonthly basis. 4.5 Provide specialists and technicians to assist local schools in die implementation of die Abacus Instructional Management Program A. New Teacher Abacus training 5.1 Plan programs for magnet. interdistricL incentive, and other schools established by the District to incorporate selected themes 208, 22 07/01/94 05/04/95 07/01/94 06/30/95 Staff Development, Computer Central 4.5 Weekly visitation logs document direct services to the schools 4.5 Increased use of the Abacus system 10/26/94 12/06/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Director of Planning Research and Evaluation Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Assistant Superintendents, Principals, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation 5.0 Programs are developed to meet needs established by the District\nthe program budgeting process and \"Fast-track evaluations are used to evaluate new and existing programs 5.1 Schools with special themes have programs in place that infuse the theme throughout the curriculumPage: 23 Program Seq f: 208 Revision Dato: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Curriculum Services Program Code: Primary Leader: Secondary Leader Lucy Lyon, Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose o( curriculum services is to plan, direct, and coordinato improved curriculum design and delivery as well as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Dato Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria A. Assistance was provided staff at Henderson Health Sciences Magnet School to develop two new courses: Technical Writing and Scientific Illustration. B. \"Rights of Passage inservice scheduled and planned for Franklin Incentive School. 5.2 Develop District-wide programs to meet the spedal needs of identified populations of students A. Academic Support Program students were identified for mathematics support and the program has begun. B. ESL program was discussed during principals' meeting. C. ESL tutors were hired for 1994-95 school year to serve 117 students in 35 schools. D. ESL tutor inservice was held. E. ESL conference was held. F. Programming for identified gifted students available at aH schools. 0. ESL tutors held monthly meetings. 208, 23 07/01/94 09/06/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/11/94 08/22/94 08/23/94 09/26/94 07/01/94 08/22/94 08/15/94 09/30/94 06/30/95 06/07/95 08/11/94 08/23/94 09/28/94 06/05/95 06/06/95 Curriculum Directors, Supervisors and Coordinators, Principals, Director of Federal Programs 5.2 Student populations with special needs identified by the District In the curriculum area have programs in place to address their needsPage: 24 Program Seq : 208 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Curricutum Services Program Code: Primary Leader Secondary Leader Lucy Lyon. Dennis Glasgow Program Goal: The purpose of curriculum services is to plan, direct, and coordinate Improved curriculum design and delivery as wen as to ensure curricular articulation and coordination K-12. Plan Reference Page Number Objectlvea Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 5.3 Assess the effectiveness of District programs In the curriculum area 5.4 Seek funding for District programs that qualify for\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_718","title":"Report: ''Little Rock School District 1994-95 Fourth Quarter Status Report, Program Planning and Budget Document for Desegregation Programs,'' Volume II, exhibit 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","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1995-08-17"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Little Rock School District 1994-95 Fourth Quarter Status Report, Program Planning and Budget Document for Desegregation Programs,'' Volume II, exhibit 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/718"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["budgets"],"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\nRECEIVED VOLUME II AUG 2 2 1995 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Office of Desegregation Monitoring 1994-95 FOURTH QUARTER STATUS REPORT PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGET DOCUMENT FOR DESEGREGATION PROGRAMS PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND EVALUATION DEPARTMENT August 17, 1995 EXHIBIT 1 School Support Cluster  * *  *  * * * * Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Staff Development Library/Media Computerized Transportation Data Processing Safety and Security Minority Teacher Recruitment Educational Equity Monitoring Commitment to Desegregation/Leadership Summer School (Interdistrict) Summer Learning Program - JTPA Facilities Guidance/Counseling Program Leadership Employment PracticesLRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT 1 Program Seq 9: 20 Page: Revision Date: August 1. 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo, Jr. Secondary Leader: TBA Program Description\nThe Office of Desegregelion is charged widi monitoring the implementation of the Desegregation Plan which includes the apptopriate assignment of students to schools. The capacities of the elementaty area schools are determined in accordance with Arkansas accreditation standards which have the following limits: Grade: Maximum Number of Students Per Class (Average.) Maximum Number of Students in Any Class Kindergarten 20 25 First-Third 23 25 Fourth-Sixth 25 28 The overall recill comDoiilion of die cleroenMiv irel rehool. Md Ihe ace .viilible for recniinnenl ll Ihoie schooh depend upon the number of Mudene who enroll in Incentive md Intcfdistricl Schools The miol racM composition of the Incenlive Schools is eipected to be predominililv blicll. 11 is eipected drat it leesl 600 blech LRSD students will Mend fmeidislnct Schools. District Goal Support: Program Goal: Ensure that equity occurs in all phases of school activities and operations To implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan E References: L 139 ] FY Program Budget: $511,645.41 lot Qtr Expend: $108,505.23 3rd Qtr Expend: $140,638.23 FTE 13.0 YTD Expenditures: $473,908.54 2nd Qtr Expend: $106,196.97 4th Qtr Expend: $118,568.11 9 [ Rebtcd Function Codes: 20, 1Program Seq *: 20 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Program Goal: Plan Reference Page Number L139 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo To implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Objectives Strategies Page: 2 Revision Date: August 1, 1995 Secondary Leader: Beglnnirvg Date Completion Date TBA Responsibility Evaluation Criteria (1.0 To implement magnet school assignments) (2.0 To implement interdistrict assignments) school 07/01/94 06/30/95 /Kssoc. Supt. for Desegregation 1.0 /Assignments are consistent with the Desegregation Plan as evidenced by an annual review of assignment data 1.1 Magnet Schools - The assignment process to (original) magnet schools will not change under this Plan. 1.2 Monitor Student Assignment and enrollment at Magnet Schools. A Student assignments are reviewed on a weekly basis. B. Waiting Rsts are reviewed in order to fill vacancies. 2.1 Interdistrict Schools - LRSD and PCSSD agree to establish interdistrict schools as described in the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan. A. Six interdistrict schools have been established. 20. 2 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 09/30/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/05/95 06/05/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 12/21/94 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation /kssoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation 2.0 Assignments are consistent with the Desegregation Plan as evidenced by an annual review of assignment dataPage: 3 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1, 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan Reference Page Number Ot^ectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria (3.0 To implement elementary area school assignments). The total capacitv of the elementary area schools is 9,678. 3.1 Students will be assigned to the elementary area schools by attendance zones. A. Elementary area school students assigned. 3.2 The elementary area school attendance zones are drawn to establish a racial balance at each school of 55 percent black and 45 percent white with a variance of 5 percent. The recruitment of white students to elementary area schools may increase the percentage of white students at these schools, but no school shall have a racial composition of greater that 60 percent white. 3.3 Students presently assigned to elementary area schools will be given the option to remain in these schools (grandfathered). A. Targeted students ware notified of options. 3.4 After grandfathered students have been assigned, students in the attendance zone will be assigned to the elementary area schools. A. Students are assigned and notified of assignments to attendance zone school. 20, 3 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95  06/30/95 10/18/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 09/20/94 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation 3.0 Assignments are consistent with the Desegregation Plan as evidenced by an annual review of assignment data 3.1 Enrollment Data 3.3 Student requests to remain in area schools are granted. 3.4 Attendance zone students are assigned based on available seats.Page: 4 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1, 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process that Is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan r\" Plan Reference Page Number L 139 L 148 Objectives Strategies Beginning Dato Completion Date Responsibitity Evaluation Criteria (4.0 To implement incentive school assignments). The capactty of the Incentive schools Is 2.558. 3.5 If there is no space available at a student's zoned school or if assignment of the student to the school would put the school out of compliance with racial balance requirements, the student will be assigned to the closest school with capacity which meets racial balance requirements. A. Students are reassigned and notified. 3.6 The elementary school zones will provide a feeder pattern for elementary students going to Junior high school students going to high school. 3.7 Students In elementary area school zones will be given the option to select an incentive school. 4.1 Each incentive school will have an attendance zone that encompasses the neighborhood around the school (primary attendance zone). 4.2 Students presently assigned to Incentive schools will be given the option to remain In these schools (grandfethered). 20, 4 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 09/20/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation 3.5 Students are reassigned In accordance wiUi Deseg. Plan. 3.6 A feeder pattern is established for the organizational levels. 3.7 Options were granted in accordance to assignment plan. 4.0 Incentive School Assignments are made in accordance with the Desegregation Plan requirements. 4.1 School zone mapsPage: 5 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1, 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process that Is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan Reference Page Number CO 194 CO 194 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 4.3 After grandfathered students have been identified and assigned, students in die primary attendance zone wiH be assigned to the incentive schools. A. Students were assigned as space was allowed. 4.4 All incentive school students will have the option to be assigned to an elementary area school to be selected by LRSD in accordance with desegregation considerations. A. Elementary desegregation transfer applications processed. 4.5 In order to assist in meeting the desegregation requirements, a certain number of seats for black and white students will be reserved for each pre-khdergarten and kindergarten class. The seats reserved for white chHdren shall not remain permanently vacant if unfilled. Sufficient time should be allowed for time^. vigorous, and sustained recruitment efforts before filling these seats. A. Seats are reserved until judge releases. B. Assignments are monitored to ensure acceptable racial balance. 4.6 The incentive schools will have a maximum pupil/teacher ratio of 20 to 1. 20, 5 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/05/95 06/30/95 06/05/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 09/20/94 06/30/95 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt.for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation 4.3 Enrollment data\nschool zone maps. 4.4 Enrollment data 4.S Reserved seats are available by race for prekindergarten and kindergarten students. Page: 6 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1, 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. RusseH Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan Reference Page Number CO 194 Objectives Strategies Beginnlrig Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 4.7 There may be more than 20 students per ciassroom, hovrever, there will be an aide In each class and possible a second teacher in those classes. 07/01/94 06/30/95 4.8 Assign students with sensitivity to the relationship between placement stability and academic progress as well as the need to measure the impact of incentive programs or student achievement 4.9 Student assignment process must be Bie result of carefaHy coordinated decision-making. The incentive school staffs and the LRSD departments responsible for desegregation, student recruitment and assignment, and planning and evaluation must assess the short-and longterm academic and social impact of any anticipated student reassignments. 4.10 The district must be able to demonstrate that the investment has paid the expected dividends for children, if not, changes must be made gutokly before children are tost along with the settlement money. 20, 6 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95Page: 7 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1, 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignrrwnt Program Code: 06 Primary Leader Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan Reference Page Number L 140 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria (S.O To implement Desegregation Transfers) 4.11 When making student assignments, keep in mind that there is a relationship between double funding and enroHn\u0026gt;ent figures that represents the greatest return on investment. Tlie distfict is bound to keep Its pledge to doubie fund each incentive school for sk years or as ionq as the school maintains an enrollment above 80% black. District must also keep in mind that the incentive schools educate only a smalt portion of the class that prevailed In the desegregation lawsuit. Ensure that a portion of the Incentive school funding fulfills the plan's commitment that \"the children who are In radaliy-lsotated settings are provided meaningful opportunities for desegregated experiences/activities.\" 5.1 Junior and senior high school students may transfer to another school as long as ttie reassignment allows both the sending and receiving school to comply with the desegregation requirement and a seat is available. The minimum black percentage is 25 percent below ttie districtwide percentage of blacks in grades 7\u0026gt;12. The minimum and maximum black percentages constitute the desegregation requirement (for acceptable range) for a desegregation transfer. The desegregation requirements In secondary schools is that all schools will remain within a range of 12 1/2 percent above to 25 percent below the districtwide percentage of black students at each organizational level (i.e., high school and Junior high school). 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation 5.1 Racial composition of student enrollments are within acceptable ranges. 20, 7Page\n8 Program Seq : 20 Revision Date: August 1, 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan Reference Page Number L 140 L 140 Objectlvea Strategies 5.2 Elementary students may transfer to an incentive school only if such a transfer enhances desegregation at the incentive school. Desegregation transfers win be granted to elementary area schools that are difficult to desegregate. A. Requests for transfers wore reviewed/approved In accordance with criteria. 5.3 A student may make two desegregation transfers at each organizational level (primary, intermediate, junior or senior high school). The purpose of the second desegregation transfer is to allow a student to return to his or her previous school assignment. A. Requests for desegregation transfers are reviewed to ensure compliance. 5.4 Desegregation transfers wilt be granted during a limited period once each year (Secondary Schools only). 5.5 LRSD will provide transportation for desegregation transfer students where it is cost effecbve to do so. A. Requests for transportation department (Desegregation transfer students assigned to existing bus routes.) (6.0 To implement Staling Transfers) 20. 8 Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 09/20/94 06/30/95 06/05/95 04/07/95 06/30/95 09/20/94 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation 5.2 Transfers reflect an improvement in racial balance. 5.3 Desegregation transfer reports reflect appropriate utilization by students. 5.4 Desegregation transfer reports reflect appropriate use by students. 5.5 Maintain records of number of students transported using desegregation transfers.Page: 9 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1, 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. RusseH Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To Implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan RefererKe Page Number L 141 Objectives Strategies 6.1 Sibling transfers do not apply to magnet schools. (NOTE: Stolings are brothers/slsters, or haif-brothers/sisters, residing at the same address with brothers/sisters, or haif-brothers/sisters, who are enrolled In the LRSD.) 6.2 A student entering the LRSD after the 1991- 92 school year will not be allowed to make a sibling preference transfer to a school outside the student's attendance zone. 6.3 Any student who makes a sibling preference transfer before the 1991-92 school year may remain at the school to which the student transferred until graduation to the next organizational level. 6.4 Sibling preference transfers will be granted if a seat is available and the transfer will allow both the sending and receiving schools to comply with the desegregabon requirements. 6.5 Sibling transfer applicants must have a sfoling currently enrolled in LRSD. Sfoling transfers will be granted only to sfolings of grandfathered students. Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation (7 To Implement Transfer of Children of Employees Assignments) 07/01/94 06/30/95 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation 20, 9 6.1 Publish/distribute procedures regarding sibling transfers. 6.2 Publish/distribute procedures regarding sibling transfers. 6.3 Student transfers reflect acceptance/ rejection of transfer options. 6.4 Documentation of sibling transfers meet desegregation requirements. 6.5 Sibling transfer requirements are in accordance wifo established requirements.Page: 10 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1. 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russen Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implonient a student assignment process that Is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies 7.1 LRSD employees may enroll their children al the schools where they work. 7.2 This provision is not intended to authorize interdistrict transfers (transfers to NLRSD or PCSSD) other than those authorized by the court- approved desegregation plan. 7.3 The transfer of the childron of employees is subject to desegregation requirements and the capacity of the particular school. 7.4 LRSD is not obligated to provide transportation. 7.5 This provision does not apply to magnet schools. 7.6 The order of preference for assigning foe children of employees is listed below: 20. 10 Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Human Resources Director Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation 7.1 Employees children are enrolled in schools requested in accordance with established requirements. 7.2 All interdistrict transfers are court approved. 7.3 Student transfers are consistent with capacities and desegregation requirements. 7.4 Transportation is provided by patrons of employees. 7.6 Documentation of assignments.Page: 11 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1, 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan RefererKS Page Number L 141-142 Ot^ectives Strategies Beglnnlrtg Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria (8 To implement the Reassignment Process) 7.6.1 First preference: attendance zone students with siblings 7.6.2 Second preference: attendance zone students without siblings 7.6.3 Third preference: children of employees 7.6.4 Fourth preference: desegregation transfers 7.6.5 Fifth preference: M-to-M transfers 7.6.6 Sixth preference: Act 609, Act 624, and legal transfers. A. In compliance 8.1 Every effort will be made to install portable buildings in order to accommodate overflow situations at a particular grade level. Only if a building cannot be installed, the student will be reassigned to the nearest school that has a seat available in the student's feeder zone. If the student cannot be assigned to any of the schools in the student's feeder zone, the student will be reassigned to a school in a contiguous feeder zone. The Student Assignment Office will be responsfole for all reassignments. Reassigned students will be placed on the waiting list for the appropriate attendance zone school. A. Requests for portables are reviewed, alternate assignments are made in compliance with capacity requirements and court mandates. 20, 11 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 09/20/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 09/20/94 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation 8.0 The assignment process Is consistent with the desegregation requirements. 8.1 Portables are installed in accordance with Deseg. Plan Page: 12 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1.1995 Program Name: Program Code: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan Reference Page Number L 142 Objectives (9 To establish effective and efficient student assignment procedures) Strategies B. Waiting lists are compiled for area schools. 8.2 The minimum black percentage for each elementary area school Is 40 percent black. Any assignment that causes a school to fall below the minimum black percentage will not be granted. In such cases, the student will be reassigned to the nearest school that meets the minimum black percentage requirenent and has a seat available. If the student cannot bo assigned to any of the schools in the student's feeder zone, the student will be assigned to a school in a contiguous feeder zone. A. Alternate assignments are made in compliance with desegregation requirements. 20, 12 Beginning Dato 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 Completion Dato 09/20/94 06/30/95 09/20/94 06/30/95 Responsibility Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Evaluation Criteria 8.2 Rosters reflect student assignment percentages are within acceptable racial balance. 9,0 Assignment procedures are effective and consistent with the desegregation requirements.Page: 13 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1. 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russen Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies 9.1 The Student Assignment Office will\nmonitor new assignments\nprocess all data entry work for elementary schools (data entry tasks decentralized 1992-9? school year)\nprocess interdistnct M-to-M transfers and magnet assignments\nreassign students because of over-crowdedness or desegregation requlrenwnts\nconsider appeals\nconduct recruitntent efforts (transferred to recruitment program)\nprocess desegregation bansfer, assign all early childhood and incentive school students\nand process all special transfers (Act 609, Act 624, etc.). A. Assignments are reviewed to ensure racial balance. B. Appeals Committee reviews/approves/refects assignment appeals. 9.2 New students to the District who enroH after May 17.1989 will not have to come to the Student Assignment Office to obtain an assignment. Each school will be authorized to enroll students who live within the attendance zone of that school. 20. 13 Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 09/20/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation 9.1 The student assignment process will be effective in assigning students and process special transfers to assist with racial balance. A. Enrollment Data B. Roster of committee members Agendas from meetings 9.2 Each area school will have the ability to assign students within their attendance zone. Page\n14 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date\nAugust 1, 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process that is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Res po risibility Evaluation Criteria ] (10 To monitor all aspects of the Desegregation Plan) 9.3 The Student Assignment Handbook includes the timeline and procedures used by the schools and the Student Assignment Office to assign students. The Student Assignment Handbook will be revised each year, as necessary, to reflect any changes in the procedures for assigning students. Changes will be made as needed to include new deadlines and to improve the implementation of the court-approved student assignment plan. The handbook will be developed by the Student Assignment Office and distributed to the schools and the parties each year. 10.1 Review Program Budget Documents to Identify potential proffiems. 10.2 Conduct site visits as necessary. A. Site visits conducted 10.3 Develop and implement improvement plans as needed. 20, 14 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation Assoc. Supt.for Desegregation. Desegregation Facilitator Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation, Desegregation Facilitator Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation, Desegregation Facilitator 9.3 Revised Student Assignment Handbook is published and distributed. 10.0 Identiflcation of implementation and effectiveness problems as evidence by the Program Budget Document 10.1 Budget Documents are reviewed and problems are listed. 10.2 Site visits are docuniented. 10.3 Improvement Plans are developed and implemented.Page: 15 Program Seq *: 20 Revision Date: August 1. 1995 Program Name: Office of Desegregation/Student Assignment Program Code: 06 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: TBA Program Goal: To implement a student assignment process ^at is consistent with the approved Desegregation Plan Plan Reference Page Number CO 166 Objectives Strategies t Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 10.4 Monitor implementation of improvement plans. 10.16 Before the court will consider approving the construction project at J. A. Fair High School, the LRSD must account for the 1,270 square feet difference between the 3,450 square feel of the old space and the 2,160 of new space and specify the exact number of new dassrooms that will result from the construction. 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/30/94 06/30/95 20, 15 Assoc. Supt. for Desegregation, Desegregation Facilitator 10.4 Scheduled observations of Improvement Plans are documented.Program Seq #: 21 Program Name\nStaff Development Program Code: 09 Primary Leader: Program Description: District Goal Support: Program Goal: [ Flan References: FY Program Budget: YTD Expenditures: LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Page: 1 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 The SBff Development Departmenl was established to promote the implementation of the desegregation plan through activities that will result in improved academic achievement. Inservice opportunities designed to increase the effechveness of cumculum delivery together with training tailored to improve interactions among and across all lines will occur. Additionally, this departmenl will provide support and resources for site-based staff development expenences. integrated educational progranis that will enauie that all students grow academicaUy. socially and emotioiially with emphasis on basic skills and academic enrichment while closing disparities in Goal No. 2. Develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. Goal No. 3. The Little Rock School Board, administration, staff, and students will demonstrate behavior and human relations skills that value understanding of multicultural diversity. Goal No. 5. Provide a safe and orderly climate that is conducive to learning for all students. Goal No. 6. Ensure that equi^ occurs in all phases of school activities and operations. people as human beings and diat are consistent with an appreciation and The Staff Development Department will provide activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement. In support of the goal of providinK onaoina staff development and information to parents relative to student success. LRSD will pursue the followirut a regular and to keep all staff abreast of developments in their field of erxleavor. lecular basis by the followint Update skills of all on L 126-128 I $352,932.12 1st Qtr Expend: $71,968.88 3rd Qtr Expend: $85,041.69 $305,297.05 2nd Qtr Expend: $77,801.97 4th Qtr Expend: $70,484.51 [ Related Function Codes: 1 21, 1Program Seq 9: 21 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Program Goal: Plan Reference Page Number L126 L 126 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: To provide staff development to improve race relations and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Objectives Strategies Beginning Dale Completion Date Page: 2 Revision Dale: August 11. 1995 Marion E. Woods Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1. To provide staff development Inservke to improve race rehtlons and equity (07/01/94) (06/30/95) (Superintendent. Staff Development, Central Office Staff) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 Continue to articulate vision/mlssion of LRSD to fnmin unity Fall 1988 (07/01/94) Ongoing (06/30/95) Superintendent (Central Office. Director of Communications) 1.1 1.1 1.1 A. District goals were issued to all departments for the 1994-95 school year. 07/01/94 09/22/94 21, 2 (Increased minority staff representation in areas needed) (Increased representation of minority students in programs currently under-represented) (Administration of Human Relations Survey will reflect improvement in race relations and equity) Public participation Dissemination of material (Increase in number of students returning to public school) (School Districts required Annual Report to Community will include mission/goals for LRSD)Program Seq ti 21 Page: 3 Program Name: Staff Development Reviston Date: August 11. 1995 Program Code: 09 Primary Leader: Program Goal: To provide staff development to fanix\u0026gt;ve race relations and equity. Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods (To provide saff development ictiviiies thu will promote the implemeotation of the desegregation plan resulting in inqiroved academic achievement.) Plan Reference Page Ninnber L126 L126 Objectives Strategies I T Beginning Date Completiott Date Respottsibillly Evaluation Criteria 1.2 Schedule and im)demen( workshops and activities related to improving race r^tattony for the following groups: a. Board of Directors b. District Administrators c. Certified Staff d. District Support Staff A. Healing Racism Workshop - City of Little Rock B. Healing Racism Seminar  City of Little Rock 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. The Oneness of Humanity Defining Prejudice and Racism How Racism is Perpetuated Institutionalized Racism Stereotypes and How They Affect Us Unaware Racism Disempowerment of Males*Male Oppression Internalized Oppression Reclaiming Our Heritage Cultural Racism Ally-Building As A Way to Heal Celebration/Where Now? 13 Plan and implement an evening symposium for the community on \"Community Involvement in a Desegregated School Setting\" 1.3 (Item completed in April and August. 1988. and is not recurring) 21, 3 1988-89 School Year (07/01/94) Ongoing (06/30/95) Deseg. Asst. Center (DAC) and Central Office Staff (Staff Development Departrrwnt. Principals) 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Roster of participants (Increased minority staff representation in areas needed) (Increased representation of minority students in programs currently under-represented) (Administration of Human Relations Survey will reflect improvement in race relations and equity) 10/15/94 12/12/94 Fall 19M 10/15/94 06/22/95 FbD 1988 DAC Consuttant 1.3 1.3 Roster of participants (Symposium was held in April and August. 1988)Page: 4 Program Seq 21 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Prtmary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staff development to improve race r\u0026lt; ilty. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of die desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Flan Reference Page Number L126 L126 2. Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1.4 Monitor fanplementation of above strategies A. Human Relations (bus drivers) B. Human Relations/Classroom Tips (Instructioiud Aides) C. D. E. F. O. H. Improving Race Relations (Garland) Human Divenity (Wakefield) Equity (Baseline) Equity (McDermott) Equity (Central High School) Equiqr (Metropolitan) Provide inservice on cooperative learning strategies in a heterogeneous classroom 21, 4 Fan 1988 (07/01/94) Ongoing (06/30/95) Assoc Supt for Educational Prog (Superintendent. District Biracial Committee) 1.4 1.4 1.4 Meetings held (Attendance at public meetings) (Districi-wide Biracial Monitoring Report will reflect improvement in minority representation in all areas needed) 08/11/94 08/18/94 08/25/94 09/21/94 09/21/94 09/21/94 12/07/94 12/07/94 (07/01/94) 08/11/94 08/18/94 03/16/95 09/21/94 09/21/94 09/21/94 12/07/94 12/07/94 (06/30/95) (Staff Development Department, Content Area Supervisors) 2.0 2.0 (Increased involvement in group activities in the classroom) (Improved classroom climate and social interactions among all students)Program Seq #: 21 Pige: 5 Program Name: Revisioo Date: Program Code: Program Goal: Plan Reference Page Number L 126 L126 L U6 Staff Development 09 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods August II, 1995 To provide staff development to improve race retatiom and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Objectives Strategics 2.1 Inservice teachers and administration on cooperative learning based on Slavin and Johnson and Johnson (or other appropriate cooperative learning models) A. B. C. Beginning Date Comfdction Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria Cooperative Learning Cooperative Learning Cooperative Learning 2.2 Monitor teachers use of cooperative learning strategies A. Ongoing process by the building Instructional Leader July 1991 (07/01/94) Ongoing (06/30/95) Staff Dev Dept Content Area Supvs 2.1 2.1 2.1 Training model (Increased involveriKnt in group activities in the classroom) (Improved classroom climate and social interactions among ail students) 10/17/94 11/07/94 03/14/95 (07/01/94) 07/01/94 10/24/94 11/14/94 04/11/95 (06/30/95) 06/05/95 Principal (Staff Development Department, Content Area Supervisors) 2J 2.2 2.2 2.2 Classroom observation and documentation (Random observation of classrooms where teachers have been trained) (Random survey of cooperative learning participants regarding effects of implementation in their classrooms) (Principal will observe cooperative learning strategies during routine classroom visitations) 3.0 Provide inservice on additional strategies to Improve instruction in desegregated school setting (To improve instruction through the use of effective teaching strategies in the school setting) (07/01/94) (06/30/95) (Staff Development, Content Area Supervisors) 3.0 (Increase tn achievement of students of teachers in identified programs) 21, 5Page: 6 Prognun Seq *: 21 Revlsloa Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staff development to Improve race relations and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Flan Reference Page Number L 126 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date CompletioD Dale Responsibthty EvaluatioD Criteria 3.1 Provide Inservice opportunities on: a. Effective Schools Model PCT b. Teaching/Leaming Styles c. Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement (TESA) d. Classroom Management e. (and/or other appropriate inservice oppomutities) July 1991 (07/01/94) Ongoing (06/30/95) Staff Dev Dept (Content Area Supervisors) 3.1 Roster of participants Workshop evaluations 3.1 (Number of participants from a cross-section of district staff involved in Ihe identified progrants) A. Effective Schools Model PET 1. PET Refresher 11/01/94 11/01/94 2. PET Refresher 12/08/94 12/08/94 3. Full cycle of PET 03/16/95 05/25/95 B. Teaching/Leaming Styles 1. Provided Learning Styles for the Alternative School and McClellan High School 2. Learning Styles (Chicol. Southwest, Franklin, Parkview) 3. Learning Styles - Martin L. King, Jr. 4. Learning Styles - Mitchell 5. Learning Styles  Rockefeller aitd Fulbright 09/12/94 10/21/94 02/08/95 03/01/05 04/26/95 09/12/94 12/07/94 02/08/95 03/01/95 04/26/95 C. Teacher Expectations and Student Achievement (TESA) 1. TESAI 11/14/94 03/27/95 2. TESAD 02/13/95 04/10/95 D. Classroom Management 21, 6Program Seq f: 21 Par: 7 Program Name: Saff Development Revision Date: August II. 1995 Program Code: 09 Primary Leader: Program Goal: To provide itaff develoiaiient to Improve race relations and equity. Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods (To pmvide stair development :tivides that will promole the implementedon of d desegmg.don plan mmiting in improved ecwlemic achievement.) Plan Reference Page Nianber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Dale Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1. Provided for new teachers 08/11/94 08/11/94 2. Provided for new teachen 09/19/94 09/26/94 3. Provided for new teachen 10/10/94 10/19/94 4. Provided for new teachers 10/17/94 10/24/94 E. (and/or other appropriate inservice opportunities) 1. Secondary Self-Esteem 10/20/94 10/20/94 2. At-Risk 10/24/94 10/24/94 3. At-Risk 11/07/94 11/07/94 5. 6. 7. 8. Cooperative Team Learning Elementary Self-Esteem Thinking Skills National Faculty Cooperative Learning 3.2 Send selected staff to professional development sessions in order to inctease the number of available trainers and in return for a commitment to assist with collegial staff development. A. Great Expectation Training B. COE Training c. Great Expectation Training D. Great Expectation/School Improvement 21. 7 11/07/94 12/05/94 12/08/94 02/27/95 03/14/95 07/01/94 08/30/94 08/23/94 12/07/94 04/14/95 11/14/94 12/05/94 12/08/94 06/30/95 04/11/95 06/30/95 09/01/94 12/07/94 04/14/95 1Pile: 8 Prognun Seq f: 21 Revision Dite: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Prtaiary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staff development to improve race relations and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Flan Reference Page Nimber Objectives Strategics Beginning Date Completioo Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria L127 L127 4.0 Provide inservice on \"Effective Implementation of the LRSD Disci|dine Management System\" 3.3 Provide district-wide program of staff development A. Printed and distributed Staff Development Catalogue/Caleitdar B. Scheduled workshops and minicourses 4.1 Continue to Involve counselors, principals, assistant principals, and teachers in discipline management in a desegregated school setting A. Schools distributed Students* Rights/Responsibilities Handbook B. Training provided in Students Rights/Responsibilities Handbook C. Provided Positive Discipline workshop for Romine D. Provided Discipline Management workshop for Forest Park 21. 8 07/01/94 09/01/94 08/23/94 (07/01/94) July 1991 (07/01/94) 09/06/94 09/06/94 09/12/94 09/12/94 06-30-94 11/01/94 06/30/95 (06/30/95) Ongoing (06/30/95) 09/30/94 09/30/94 09/12/94 09/12/94 (Director of Pupil Personnel) Director of Pupil Services (Pupil Services Department. Principals. Counselon) 4.0 4.0 4.1 4.1 4.1 A (Decrease in the number of students who receive disciplinary sanctions) (Decrease in die disproportionate number of minority students who receive disciplinary sanctions) Roster of participants (Building Level Discipline Management Plans established for all schools) (Counseling classes will include orienution to the building level plan and district-wide Righu and Responsibilities Handbook)Page: 9 Program Seq f: 21 Revision Dale: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staff development to Improve race relations and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Plan Reference Page Number LI27 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria E. Provided Violence Prevention for Mabelvale Jr. High F. 0. H. 10/13/94 10/13/94 Provided Positive Discipline for Fair High School Provided Discipline workshop for Gibbs Provided Discipline workshop for Carver I. Provided Violence Prevention for Cloverdale Jr. J. Provided Cooperative Discipline for Rightsell K. L. 10/13/94 10/13/94 11/02/94 11/02/94 11/02/94 10/13/94 10/13/94 11/02/94 11/02/94 11/02/94 Provided Conflict Resolution for Rockefeller Cooperative Discipline for Franklin M. Cooperative Discipline for Chicot N. Conflict Resolution 4.2 Monitor use of \u0026lt;Usci{4ine management system A. Schools distributed Students' Rights/Responsibilities Handbook B. Training provided in Students Rights/Responsibilities Handbook C. Provided Positive Discipline workshop for Romine 21, 9 12/07/94 01/25/95 03/01/95 05/10/95 Fan 1988 (07/01/94) 09/06/94 09/06/94 09/12/94 12/07/94 01/25/95 03/01/95 05/10/95 Ongoing (06/30/95) 09/07/94 09/07/94 09/12/94 Prfocipals Counselors School Teams 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 Documentation ((^arterly Behavior Management Reports) (Building level biiacial committee reports will be used to monitor and/or adjust discipline plans) (District-wide Biracial Committee)Pace: 10 Profram Seq 21 Revision Dale: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Stair Development ProcTAio Code: 09 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staff development to improve race rehtlons and equtty. lo provHie null ucTciuptucu* uu|v'v j j  v * \\ (To provide staff development activities that wUl promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in unproved academic achievement.) Plan Reference Page Number L 127 Objectives Strategies D. Provided Discipline Management workshop for Forest Park E. Provided Violence Prevention for Mabelvale Jr. High F. Provided Positive Discipline for Fair High School G. Provided Discipline workshop for Gibbs H. Provided Discipline workshop for Carver I. Provided Violence Prevention for Cloverdale Jr. J. Provided Cooperative Discipline for Rightsell K. Provided Conflict Resolution for Rockefeller L. Discipline Management for Jefferson M. N. Beglnninc Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 09/12/94 10/13/94 10/13/94 10/13/94 11/02/94 11/02/94 11/02/94 12/07/94 02/08/95 09/12/94 10/13/94 10/13/94 10/13/94 11/02/94 11/02/94 11/02/94 12/07/94 02/08/95 Discipline widi Dignity for Cloverdale Jr. High Discipline Management for McDermott O. Assertive Discipline for Carver P. Discipline 02/08/95 04/14/95 04/26/95 02/08/95 04/14/95 04/26/95 5.0 Provide PAL (Academic Support) teachen with strategies for phnning and delivering more than one type of Instructional grouping (To provide academic support teachers with strategies for planning and delivering more than one 9pe of instructional grouping) (07/01/94) (06/30/95) (Assoc. Superintendent. Academic Support Supervisors, Content Area Supervisore. Staff Development) 5.0 5.0 5.0 (Increase in achievement for all students in Academic Support Programs) (Decrease in achievement gap in representative population) (Decrease in number of students requiring academic support services) 21, 10Program Seq tx 21 Page: 11 Program Name: Staff Development Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Program Code: 09 Program Goal: Primary Leader: To provide staff development to improve race rebtioos and equftv. tTn nmviW* ctFr _ ...... .  Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Plan Reference Page Number L 127 Objectives Strategies 5.1 Coidlnue to investigate and research sources of strategica, models and activities of successful small and torge group instructional practices witUn heterogenous classes A. B, Elementary Reading - Academic Support Math Academic Support C. D. Elementary Reading - Academic Support Elementary Reading - Academic Sunrt E. Principals - Academic Support Reading Teachers (Sec. Textbook) F. Principals - Acidemic Support Reading Teachers (Sec. Textbook) Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria Fall 1988 (07/01/94) Ongoing (06/30/95) Assoc Supt for Educational Prog (Staff Development Department, Concent Area Supervisors, Academic Support Supervisors) 5.1 Identification of sources 5.1 (Provide staff with information from current research monthly) 08/31/94 09/27/94 11/16/94 11/19/94 12/13/94 12/19/94 08/31/94 09/27/94 11/16/94 11/19/94 12/13/94 12/19/94 G. Secondary Reading (Language Arts) High Schools H. Secondary Reading (Language Ans) Jr. High Schools 03/09/95 03/10/95 03/09/95 03/10/95 21, 11 Page: 12 Program Seq #: 21 RevlsioD Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Primary Leader: Secondar\nLeader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staffs development to Improve race relations and equity. (To provide sttff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Plan Reference Page Number L12? L127 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 5J A. B. C. D. 6.0 Provide Inservice to assist principal and faculties with strategies for promoting student achievement and growth Conduct workshop to address the following: a. grouping theory and strategies b. demonstration of strategics for varied instruction Reading \u0026amp; Connection Writing for Baseline Math Manipulatives for Bale Teaching Math for Woodruff Reading Styles 21, 12 Fall 1988 (07/01/94) 01/25/95 02/07/95 02/07/95 05/10/95 (07/01/94) Fan 1988 (06/30/95) 01/25/95 02/07/95 02/07/95 05/10/95 (06/30/95) Supervisor of Math and English (Content Area Supervisora. Staff Development Department) (Asst. Superinteixlent. Planning. Research and Evaluation, Staff Development. Content Area Supervisors) 5.2 Written evaluation by 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 6.0 6.0 participants (Increase in achievement for all students in Academic Support Programs) (Decrease in achievement gap in representative population) (Decrease in number of students requiring academic support services) (Principal will observe through classroom observations and teacher conferetKes) (Increase in achievement for all students) (Decrease in achievement gap in representative population)Par: J3 Program Seq f: 21 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staff development to Improve race relations and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of die desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) I Flan Reference Page Nunbcr L127 Objectives Strategics Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 6.1 Continue to provide tnservke for principals on methods for developing their school improvement plan A. School Improvement - Carver B. School Improvement - Woodruff C. School Improvement - Garland D. School Improvement/lmproving Achievement - McClellan E. School Improvement - Wakefield P. School Improvement at the following sites: Dodd. Fair. Southwest. Cloverdale. Fulbright, Geyer Springs, Garland. Central, Pulaski Heights Elementary. Bale, Booker, Brady, and Gibbs G. School Improvement at die following sites\nCentral, Fair, Hall, McClellan, Parkview, Meadowcliff, aixl Otter Creek H. School Improvemeni at die following sites: Brady, Hall. Metropolitan, Martin L. King, Jr., Meadowcliff, Otter Creek. Badgett, Bale, Booker, Cloverdale, Fulbright, and Geyer Springs I. School Improvement at dw following sites: Badgett, Booker, Brady, Cloverdale Elem., Dodd, Fair Park and Fulbright 21. 13 Fan 1988 (07/01/94) 09/21/94 09/21/94 09/21/94 12/07/94 12/07/94 01/25/95 02/08/95 03/01/95 04/14/95 Ongoing (06/30/95) 09/21/94 09/21/94 09/21/94 12/07/94 12/07/94 01/25/95 02/08/95 03/01/95 04/14/95 Div of Sebook Eval and Testing IRC Spedalista (Asst. Superintendents) ti.l 6.1 6.1 Comprehensive and accurate product (Number of workshops in Integrating the Curriculum. Literature-based Instruction. Authentic Assessment and/or other relevant methodologies) (Better school improvement plans are submitted)Pate: 14 Protram Seq f: 21 Rerisloo Date: August 11. 1995 Protram Name: Staff Development Protram Code: 09  Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staff dcvelopmeot to improve race relations and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of die desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Plan Reference Pate Number Objectives Strategics Bcginnint Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria L127 J. School Improvement at the following sites: Badgett. Bale. Brady. Dodd. Fair Park, Gibbs, Rightsell, Franklin and Garland K. School Improvement at the following sites: Dodd and Fair Park 6.2 Comtnue to assist principals in revising school Improvement plans through the analytls of disaggregated data A. Staff Development Specialists provided Test- Taking Tips and Strategies to staff members at the following schools: Badgett, Baseline, Booker. Gibbs. Fair Park, aixl Woodniff B. Test-Taking Tips and Strategies were provided to staff memben at the following schools: Central, McClellan. Parkview, Cloverdale Jr. High, Washing, Forest Park, and Fair Park 6.3 Continue to provide special school-based program and content area Inservice meetings scheduled on a regular basis with specific sessions on content methodology and interpersonal relations for program fattplementatioo In a desegregated setting 04/26/95 05/10/95 July 1991 (07/01/94) 10/12/94 03/01/95 1991 School Year (07/01/94) 04/26/95 05/10/95 Ongoing (06/30/95) 12/07/94 03/01/95 Ontoing (06/30/95) Assoc and Asst Su pts Staff Dev Dept Content Area Supervisors Principob 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.3 6.3 6.3 Completed plans (Provide written feedback and opportunities for sharing *What Works\" in various building-level plans) (Plans reflect strategies that evolved from disaggregated data) Workshop agendas and evaluations (A computer based compilation of individual employees/school-wide staff development activities will be available) (Student achievement will increase: disparity gap in representative population will decrease) 21. 14 MPage: 15 Program Seq f: 21 ReTlston Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Priiiiaf7 Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staff development to improve race rebtions and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date CompletioD Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria A. Workshops and minicourses scheduled throughout the year (See Staff Develt^ment 1994-95 Catalogue/Calendar) 08/23/94 06/30/95 L127 6.4 To provide special assistance for teachers as requested. 07/01/94 06/30/95 A. Special assistance provided throughout the year and also at monthly wort sessions at the IRC 08/23/94 04/18/95 L 128 L128 7.0 Form tri-district committee for coDaborative procedures July 1, 1991 (07/01/94) Ongoing (06/30/95) (Directors of Staff Development from LRSD. PCSSD. and NLRSD) 7.0 7.0 Ongoing analysis (Tri-district workshops will be held) 7.1 Establish tri-distiict committee July 1. 1991 Ongoing (Directors of Sta^ Development from LRSD. PCSSD. and NLRSD) 7.1 7.1 Ongoing analysis (Tri-district committee was forrrted in August. 1991) A. Tri-district committee established 09/13/94 09/13/94 B. A $2,500.00 grant for Classroom Management was received to offer two classroom management training sessions C. A second $2,500.00 grant for Classroom Management was received to offer two additional Classroom Maiugement training sessions 21, 15 08/11/94 10/10/94 10/24/94Page: 16 Program Seq *: Program Name: Program Code: Program Goal: Plan Reference Page Number L128 L128 L128 21 RevMon Date: August 11, 1995 Staff Development 09 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods To provide staff development to improve race rebtions and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of die desegregation plan resulting tn improved academic achievement.) Objectives Strategics Rginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 8.0 Provide staff development component for effective staff development In desegregated school setting 7.2 Meet four times per year, two times each semester. The committee funrtloos wM be to Identify and Implement staff development strategies that will assist the districts in fuinilioa expectations of 'maintaining quaUty\" desegregated school districts. A. B. C. Tri-district committee meeting Tri-district committee meeting Tri-district committee meetings (NLR, LRSD. PCSSD) (10/06/94, 11/08/94. 12/06/94, 12/21/94) D. Tri-district Resource Guide E. Tri-district (Resource Guide for the three districts) F. Tri-district (National Staff E\u0026gt;evelopment Affiliate Membership) G. Tri-district (How to utilize die business sector tn the schools) 7 J Plan any activities appropriate for coUalmratlon, e.g., community meetings, etc. 21, 16 3K9 (07/01/94) 07/01/94 (06/30/95) 06/30/95 (Directors of Staff Development from LRSD. PCSSD. and NLRSD) 7.2 (Record of meetings arxl collaborative nature of areas addressed) 09/13/94 09/20/94 10/06/94 11/23/94 01/26/95 02/23/95 03/30/95 (07/01/94) (07/01/94) 09/13/94 09/20/94 12/21/94 05/30/95 01/26/95 02/23/95 03/30/95 (06/30/95) (06/30/95) (Directors of Staff Development from LRSD. PCSSD. and NLRSD) (Board of Direcion, Superintendent Director of Staff Development) 7.3 8.0 (Documentation of number of activities among die three districts) (Gather and analyze data from school district participants on the effectiveness of the staff development activities designed to address their specific needs) P.ge: 17 Program Seq f: 21 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To |Ni\u0026gt;vide staff development to improve race relations and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in unproved academic achievement.) Flan Reference Page Number LI24 Objectives Strategies T Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 8.1 Establish staff developmetU componerd a. Staff Develo|anent Dept Personnel b. Staff Development Office e. Staff Developmeid Cataloguc/Calendar a. Staff Development Department established with Acting Director b. Staff Development Office established c. Staff Development Catalogue/Calertdar printed and distributed d. Staff Development Professional Libntfy Catalog 8.2 Certified staff members (administrators aiai teachers) shall be trained to teach and counsel black and educationallY-advantased students. A. A staff member hired m teach and counsel black and educationally-advantaged students B. Multi-cultural Diversity - Pulaski Heights Elementary 21, 17 July 1991 July 1991 July 1991 (07/01/94) 07/01/94 07/01/94 09/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 02/08/95 Ongoing Ongoing Ongoing 10/07/94 09/29/94 07/13/94 11/01/94 08/22/94 06/30/95 07/13/94 02/08/95 Board of Directors/Supt Human Resources Dir of Staff Dev 8.1 Implementation of Staff Development Dept Employment of Director, four specialists and one secretary 8.1a (Implementation of Staff Development Departmenl in July. 1991) 8.1b Office b operational 8.1b (Office was established in July. 1991 8.1c Distribution of catalogue/ calendar 8.1c (Staff Development Catalogue/Calertdar distributed annually 1Pace: 18 Program Seq #: 21 Rcvlston Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staff devetopaneiit to Improve race relations and equity. (To provide staff development activities dial will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) I Plan Reference Page Number L124 L124 L124 Objectives Strategice Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria C. Cultural Divenity * Fair 8.3 The Little Rock School District will hire a five-member staff development team for this purpose. A. Staff Development team of four (4) people hired to provide effective Staff Development in desegregated school setting 1. 2. 3. 4. One Acting Director Ooe Secretary Two Specialists One Incentive School Specialist 8.4 The Little Rock School District Staff Development Department will be responsible for implementing the staff development services. A. Provided Staff Development during early release days (52 schools provided various inservices during early release days) B. The Staff Development Director and Specialists are assigned to specific schools, where they work closely with the Principals and the StaH' Development Committee to address and provide Staff Development needs 8.5 The staff development goals and programs currently used by the District, such as TESA. PET and others, will be continued, but a far more creative and comprehensive staff development program suitable for the needs of all employees and volunteers will be implemented. A. Cooperative Leaniing (10/17/94. 10/24/94. 11/07/94. 11/14/94) B. Secondary Self-Esteem 21. 18 03/01/95 03/01/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 09/21/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 10/17/94 10/20/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 04/26/95 06/06/95 06/30/95 11/14/94 10/20/94 Psge\n19 Program Seq f: 21 Revbton Dale: August 11, 1995 Program Name\nStaff Development Prc^ram Code: 09 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Prt^ram Goal: To provide staff development to Improve race rebtiona and equRy. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Plan Reference Page Nianber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Crtteiia L124 C. D. E. F. O. H. At-Risk Learning Styles PET Refresher Leadership for Change TESA I Elementary Self-Esteem 1. Thinking Skills J. TESAD K. L. 10/24/94 10/27/94 11/01/94 11/09/94 11/14/94 12/05/94 12/08/94 02/13/95 11/08/94 11/22/94 12/08/94 11/09/94 12/05/94 12/08/94 04/10/95 PET Refresher Thinking Skills - Rightsell M. PET Refresher N. Cooperative Learning O. Full cycle of PET 8.6 The districts will cooperate in designing a fresh and extendi approach to staff development. Included in the plannimt will be community resource persons and all district personnel responsible for delivering training to staff, and to parent, volunteer, or student committees or groups. A. Healing Racism Workshop- City of Little Rock 21, 19 02/28/95 03/01/95 03/09/95 03/14/95 03/16/95 07/01/94 10/15/94 02/28/95 03/01/95 03/09/95 04/11/95 05/25/95 06/30/95 10/15/94Page: 20 Program Seq 9: 21 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Staff Development Program Code: 09 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Marion E. Woods Program Goal: To provide staff development to improve race relations and equity. (To provide staff development activities that will promote the implementation of the desegregation plan resulting in improved academic achievement.) Plan Reference Page Number L124 L124 L124 L124 Objectives Strategics Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evahiation Criteria B. Healing Racism Seminar * City of Little Rock 1. The Oneness of Humanity 2. Defining Prejudice and Racism 3. How Racism is Perpetuated 4. Institutionalized Racism 12/12/94 06/22/95 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Stereotypes and How They Affect Us Unaware Racism Disempowerment of Males-Male Oppression Intertulized Oppression Reclaiming Our Heritages 10. Cultural Racism II. Ally-Building As A Way To Heal 12. Celebration/Where Now? i.7 Staff development will based utwn certain basic principles of human behavior, leamina process and change dynamics. 8.8 The diverse training needs of staff at all employment levels will be met. A. Provided Human Relations workshop for Bus Driven B. Provided Human Relations workshop for Instructional Aides 8.9 The District will establish resource banks which identify the training skills or specialized knowledge of employees and volunteen which can be shared through staff development activities. A. Resource Bank organized by subject B. NLR Resource Personnel submitted 8.10 Computer data bases will be used to record each employees staff development history. 21, 20 07/01/94 06/30/95 07/01/94 08/11/94 08/18/94 07/01/94 11/23/94 01/26/95 07/01/94 06/30/95 08/11/94 08/18/94 06/30/95 11/23/94 01/26/95 06/30/95 Program Seq #: Program Name: Program Code: Program Goal: L124 L125 L125 L125 21 Staff Development 09 Prlmaiy Leader: To provide staff development to improve race relations and equity. Secondary Leader: (To pravide suff development .e.t.me, ft,, wUl promoft fte implemenudon of fto desegtog.tion plu. msulttag in impm.ed .clen.io .chievemen,.) Page\n21 Revision Dale: Marion E. Woods August It, 1995 Flan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies =1, Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria A. Computer data base used to record each staff development activity for all employees each quarter B. Staff Development computer report for inservice hours registered through Staff Development office sent to building principals 8-11 Carefully plaimed *tr\u0026gt;inirui of trainen* events will be actively used to expand in-house training expertise. A. Stress Management training of trainers L12 Interdistrict training activities will be frequently offered for groups of employees and volunteera. A. Substitute Handbook 8-13 The District will deal decisively with the issue of racism and will involve all staff, snwtents. and parents in a comprehensive prejudice reduction program, A. Healing Racism Workshop - Chy of Little Rock B. Healing Racism Seminar - City of Little Rock 8.14 Certain areas of training and staff development will be specially emphasiied: utilization of volunteer resources, preparation of substitute teachers and avis and training for parents. A. Developed and completed the Substitute Handbook (The LRSD Substitute Handbook was written and completed - now in the process of being printed) 21, 21 07/01/94 03/17/95 07/01/94 03/06/95 07/01/94 02/01/95 07/01/94 10/15/94 12/12/94 07/01/94 02/01/95 06/05/95 06/05/95 06/30/95 03/06/95 06/30/95 03/01/95 06/30/95 10/15/94 06/22/95 06/30/95 03/01/95Prograin Seq /: 22 Program Name: Libraiy /Media Program Code: 32 Primary Leader: Program Description: District Goal Support: Program Goal: [Flan References: FY Program Budget: YTD Expenditures: Related Function Codes: LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon Page: I Revision Date: August 11, 1995 Each child in the Little Rock School District should be given access to his/her full measure of die instructional resources. Library/media services will be designed to provide for extension and ennchment of basic sWIs and will also accommodate the varied learning styles of students in different instructional groups. Because students will have opportunities to work and learn in the library/media center under the direction of a trained teacher-librarian, they will be able to approach learning in a variety of ways, thus accommodating their individual styles and also providing for the additional 'time on task\" or enrichment that many students need in order Io internalize die material initially presented. The Districts plan is to offer a library/media program to serve learners with diverse needs, background and abilities through a comprehensive program designed to better support District goals and student needs with regard to learning styles, relevance of instruction, support of multicultural school curriculum, and the application of learning to real-life situations. Library/media serviires will be designed to provide SIUUCIK I ictus WIUI KgaiU iw Itailiui^ w. --------- . *_ _ -  . -  _ I ...Ilf L... ... H.Aal. A Mal /ill ili.a j**nt for extension and enrichment of basic skills and will also accommodate the varied leamirut styles of students in different instructional groups. Students will have opportunities to work and learn in the hbrary/media center under the dire\u0026lt;-rion ooff aa trained teacher-librarian. The Little Rock School Districts library/media program will fulfill its potential as an essential contributor to the District s successful desegregation plan. Upon of the elementary proaiam a review of die secondary program will commence with special attention being given to meetina the interests and needs of the District s diverse population. Goal #1 - Implement integrated educational programs dial will ensure that all students grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis on basic skills artd academic enrichment while closing disparities in achievement. Goal  - Develop and mainttin a staff that is well-trained and motivated. Goal *3 - The Little Rock School Board, administration, staff, and students will demonstrate in their day to day behavior that they accept each irxlividual as a valued contributor to society to society and view cultural diversity among students, staff and the community as a valued resource upon which our community and nation can draw as we prepare for die 21st Century. Goal #6 - Ensure that equity occurs in all phases of school activities and operations. The district will provide each student with library/media services in accordance with the essential role outlined in the districts Desegregation Plan. L 106. L 107, L 109. L 110 I $427,230.43 $341,666.84 Ist Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: $49,509.88 $80,466.34 22, 1 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend: $96,747.26 $114,943.36 FTE 30 J Program Seq 9i 22 Program Nam*\nLibrary/Media Program Code: 32 Program Goal: The dinricl wUl provide eech student with libnty/media LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Prfa\u0026amp;ary Leader: Secondary Leader: services in eccoidence with the essential role outlined in the district s Desegregation Plan Pafe: 2 Rerisloii Date: Lucy Lyon August II. 1995 Plan Reference Page Number L109 LI06 L109 LI09 L109 Objectives 1. Implement the districts proposed elcmemary Ubrary/media program ne* I. (To provide equitable access to library resources including multkultural and audiovisual resources for all students.) Strategies 1.4 Order equlpmeid and material necessary including AV soft*are. (Determine/purchase materials needed for each elementary school.) core A. AV equipment ordered for each school. 1.7 Conduct inservice and curriculmn devdopment for classes for librarians, principals, and teachers. Library media specialists wUl provide hwerytre trainlM to bufldina-level sUff in the use of materiah and equipmCTt. l.t ProceM ne* material tncliiHim 22, 2 Beginning Date CMnpletion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria (07/01/94) (07/01/94) 04/06/93 07/01/94 (06/30/93) (06/30/93) 04/06/95 06/30/95 (Coordinator of Library Services. Principals. Librarians) Supv of Inst Tech, Coor of Lib Services, (Librarians) Consultant, Supv of Inst Tech, Coor and Advisory Committee Librarians, Media I Starr 1. Comparison of survey results 1988-1993 *111 sbo* In**reared use. 1. Comparison of data collected monthly *ill sho*: Student vbita *111 increase. Vohane of books checked out *111 increase.  IiKlepciident research by students will be document(o sbo* use. Ntonber of classes/groups scheduled by teachers will be documertted to sbo* use. 1.4 Purchase orders (Materials supporting the curriculum will be used in each elementtry school.) 1.7 (Agendas aiKi memos) (Agendas and memos on file in Dept, of Instructional Techiwlogy.) 1.8 Completioo memoPace: 3 Program Seq f: 22 Revision Date: August 11. 199S Program Name: Library /Media Program Code: 32 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon Program Goal: The district will provide each student with libiary/media services in accordance with the essential role outlined in die district's Desegregation Plan r Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria LI 10 A. Activity completed/obligation met in 1989. see 1993-94 p. 32 1.10 Schedule flhnslvidcos as possible. (Schedule videos correlated to LRSD curriculum as requested by teachera. Use of 16nun film is outdated.) A. Videos scheduled daily and were current on 05/26/95 1.11 Hire full-time librarians and full-time clerks for each elementary school as needed. A. Full-time Librarians and clerks saffed based on LRSD formula . 1.12 Develop a maintenance proposal which assures prompt and efficient repair of all AV equipment independent of the time of year. (Maintain procedures for prompt and efficient repair of AV equipment.) A. First quarter repair record: 155 audiovisual machines. 19 computer monitors B. Second quarter repair record: 135 AV machines aixl 31 computer monitors C. Third quarter repair record: 135 AV machines and 45 computer moniion D. Fourth quarter repair record: 22, 3 (07/01/94) (06/30/95) Supv of Inst Tech (Coor Lib Serv) 1.10 Schedule (Videos correlated to curriculum will be used in each school.) 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 10/01/94 01/04/95 04/01/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 09/30/94 06/30/95 09/30/94 12/31/94 03/31/95 06/30/95 Dir of Human Serv, Supv of Inst Tech, Coor Lib Serv, Prlndpats Supv of tost Tech (Coor Lib Serv) 1.11 Contracts (Sufficient staff will be in place to meet state and North Central Standards for librarians. Library clerks will be staffed according to LRSD formula, based on enrollment.) 1.12 Copy of proposal Ninety percent of equipment sent in will be repaired within a week.Pace: 4 Program Seq #: 22 Revision Date\nfh-ogram Name: August 11, 1995 Program Code: Program Goal: Plan Reference Page Number LI 10 L109 LllO L106 L107 Library/Media 32 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon The district will provide eich student with libiiiy/raedia services in accordsnce with the essential role outlined in the districts Desegregation Plan Objectives Strategies Beginning Dale Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criterta 2. (To extend and enrich the basic skills in ways that meet students varied learning s^les and promote life long learning.) 1.13 Notify teachers via Ubrarians of the fall schedule (fOms/videos). (Instructional videos correlated to LRSD curriculum are scheduled. Use of 16rrun film is outdated.) A. Teachers are notified weekly of current videos 1.14 Suiqdy fUms/videos per schedule. A. Videos supplied on weekly basis. 1.15 Develop a seven to ten year AV equlpmern purchase plan based on accepted life spans for equipment and equity considerations. The goal to to devise a plan which will provide the district with consistent Une Item cost each year Io simplify budgetary planning and prevent the necessity for large one-time expenditures as to now required 1.17 CoiMluct Inservice for librarians and library clerks. A. Inservice for librarians held on 08/12/94, 08/16/94, 09/27/94, 12/01/94 2.5 Library media specialists will plan with classroom teachers for materials needed for classroom units. 22, 4 07/01/94 08/29/94 07/01/94 09/06/94 Sept. 5, 1989 (07/01/94) 08/12/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 05/26/95 06/30/95 05/26/95 Nov. 1, 1989 (06/30/95) 06/09/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Supv of Inst Tech (Coor Lib Serv) Supv of Inst Tech (Coor Lib Serv) Supv of Inst Tech Coor of Lib Serv Librarians PriiKipals, Ubrarians Prmcipals, Librarians 1.13 FDe copy (Videos correlated to the curriculum will be used in each school.) 1.14 Weekly deUvery (Videos correlated to curriculum will show 1.15 Copy of plan (Copy of plan on file in Department of Instructional Technology.) Agendas ((^anerly data will reflect an iiKrease in library use.) 2. (As a result of increased plaruting and instruction by LM Specialist, test scores will increase on norm and criterion-referenced tests.) 2.1 (Improved planning with teachera will increase student tests scores.)Par: 5 Program Seq f: 22 Revision Date: August 11. 1995 Program Name: Library/Media Program Code: 32 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon Program Goal: The district will provide each student with library/media services in accordance with the essential role outlined in the districts Desegregation Plan Flan Reference Page Ntniber L107 L107 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility A. LMS/Teachers planned for materials August through November: Elementary \" 10,031 and Secondary 7,306 B. LMS/Teachers planned for materials December through February: Eletrwntary  7179 and Secondary \" 4100 C. LMS/Teachen planned for materials March through May: Elmentaiy  6.545 and Secondary  2,702 2.6 Library media specialists will plan with classroom building staff for at least one school -wide reading motivation activity each year. A. Reading Motivation Activities for August through November: Elementary \"110 and Secondary \" 32 B. Reading Motivation Activities for December through February: Elementary \" 56 and Secondary \" 25 C. Reading Motivation Activities for March through June 5: Elementary \" 89 and Secondary  14 2.7. Library media specialists will plan with classroom teachen for library instruction to be correlated to classroom instruction. A. LMS/Teachen plan for instruction August through November: Elementary  2.634 and Secondary - 2.010 B. LMS/Teachen plan for instruction December through February: Elementary \" 2.194 and Secondary - 1.374 C. LMS/Teachen plan for instruction March through June 5: Elementary \" 2,113 and Secondary \" 694 22, 5 08/22/94 12/01/94 03/01/95 07/01/94 08/22/94 12/01/95 03/01/95 07/01/94 08/22/94 12/01/94 03/01/95 11/30/94 02/28/95 05/31/95 06/30/95 11/30/94 02/28/95 06/05/95 06/30/95 11/30/94 02/28/95 06/05/95 Principals. Librarians Principals, Librarians 2.3 (Improved planning with teachers will result in higher achievement for students.) 2.2 (More books will be checked out in each school.) Evaluation Crtteiia Page: 6 Program Seq #: 22 Revizion Date: August 11. 1995 Prognun Name: Libraiy /Media Program Code: 32 - Primary Leader: SecoDdary Leader: Lucy Lyon Program Goal: The district will provide each student with library/media services in accordance with the essential role outlined in the district's Desegregation Plan Flan Reference Page Number L107 133 133 Objectives Strategies Begiiining Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteiia 2.8 Library irtedia specialists will instruct students in Itteiarv skills and reference/sadv skills. A. LMS instruction of library skills August through November: Elementary  170,514 students\nSecondary  48.827 students B. LMS instruction of library skills December through February: Elementary  97,894 and Secondary  44,992 C. LMS instruction of library skills March through June 5: Elementary  115,275 artd Secondary * 32,270 07/01/94 08/22/94 12/01/94 03/01/95 06/30/95 11/30/94 02/28/95 06/05/95 Principals, Librarians 2.4 (Abacus assessment will show mastery of reference/study skills.) 1. The selection of materials/resources to support the curriculum in desegregated school districts b a muHi-district goal of the library media programs. 2. The inservice training Ubrary media staff members to desegregated school districts is a muttl- distiict goal of the library media programs. 1.1 Continue hosting Multi-District. MuHIcuHura] Resource Sharing Fair. In the future, the fair site will rotate among the three districts. A. Tri-district meeting held to discuss fair B. Multicultural Materials Fair hosted by LRSD 1.2 Begin hostirut Multi-District Resource Sbarirut Fair with book and AV materials, vendora. rotatirut the site arrwng the three districts. A. Multicultural Materials Fair hosted by LRSD 2.1 Plan to host multi-dlstiict inservice meetings such as the one sponsored by the Pulaski County Educational Service Cooperative tn April of 1988 to explain the new national guidelines for school Ubrary media program plaimlng. 22, 6 Armually 08/25/94 12/01/94 07/01/94 12/01/94 Ongoing Ongoing 08/25/94 12/01/94 06/30/95 12/01/94 Ongoing Library Media Director or responsible person (including NRLSD) Library Media Directors or responsible person (including NLRSD) Resources will be selected, purchased, and utilized by teachen and students as they teach the curriculum of the desegregated school districts. Inservice training will develop skills for library medial specialists who work in desegregated school districtsPage: 7 Program Seq f: 22 Revision Date: August n, 1995 Program Name: Library/Media Program Code: 32 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon Program Goal: The district will provide each student widi library/media services in accordance with the essential role outlined in die district's Desegregation Plan 134 134 134 Flan Reference Page Number L108 Objectives Strategies rI Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility EvaluatioD Criteria A. Multi-district inservice held. 2.2 Plan to host inservice training for muM-district library media specialists using district employees. 12/01/94 12/01/94 07/01/94 Ongoing 3. Utilization of television technology in desegregated school districts is a multi-district goal of the library media programs. 4. Recruitment of minority Library Media Specialists in desegregated school districts Is a muHi-district goal of library media programs. 5. Multl-dlstrict communication for library media |M-ogram administrators is a goal for the programs. 7. Library media specialist will annuallT evaluate the collection for adequacy of multicultural materials and will cnnttnuallv evaluate new materials to be considered for purchase. 3.1 Implement utilization of cable channel 19 and/or videotapes produced at Metro to leach basis skills, etc. 4.1 Contact teachers training instltutions/rccnilt teachers for training |Hx\u0026gt;grams in library media certlficatkrn. 5.1 Copy memos relating staff development opportunities to other district administrators. 5.2 Meet informally for sharing sessions. A. Informal tri-district sharing meeting held 08/25/94 and 09/20/94 22, 7 . 4\ng* 07/01/94 Ongoing Ongoing 07/01/94 08/25/94 07/01/94 To be establisbed Ongoing Ongoing 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Library Media Directors or responsible person Library Media Directors or responsible person (including NLRSD Library Media Directora or responsible person (itKluding NLRSD) Students will gain practical vocational experience tn running a television studio\nstudents will benefit from instructional units provided over cable system or recorded for later classroom use Hiring and placement of minority media specialists will occur Better communication will be achieved Page: 8 Program Seq *: 22 RevisioD Date: August 11, 1995 Program Name: Library/Media Program Code: 32 Primary Leader: Secondary Leader: Lucy Lyon Program Goal: The district will provide each student with library/media services in accordance with the essential role outlined io the district's Desegregation Plan Han Reference Page Nianber LIOS LIOS Objectives 8. RecMnmendatlons for multicultural materials win be shared with all principals and librarians and recommended for core purchase for all schools. 9, The 1992-92 school year wB be used to establish baseline data for determining progress. 10. Undertake a comparative study of library resources amans the Incentive schools as weD as other schoob of comparable size to brine about parity of boMinga through an equitable purchasing policy. 11. Modify buiMina space to increase Ufararv capacities at Mitchell and Garland, Purge the shelves of outdated and well-wom materials. At Mttgheil. books most frequertlv used by the four year old program. Mndergarten, and first grades could be permanently placed in the individual glawrooms since those grades are all housed In structures that are detached from the main buUdtng. Strategies Beginning Date 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 Completion Date 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Responsibility Evaluation Criteria A. Chart of library resources on file indicating holdings of incentive schools 22, 8 09/01/94 09/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95Program Seq 9: 23 Program Name: Computerized Transportation Routing System Program Code: 24 Primary Leader: Program Description: District Goal Support: Program Goal: Flan References: FY Program idget: YTD Expenditures: Related Function Codes: LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Freddie Smith Secondary Leader: Page: I Revision Date: August 1. 1995 Mary Jane Cheatham Transportation system provides die means for students to have access to various school options and educational programs, as well as extracurricular activities. The District will continue to use its automated routing system to make efficient use of district resources in providing transportation to those students eligible for transportation. Students shall be provided transportation in order to attend their assigned schools and its programs and activities. Ensure diat equity occurs in all phases of school activities and operations. To provide safe, efficient, and reliable transportation for the students of the Little Rock School District. L227 J $8,000.00 $0.00 1st Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: $0.00 $0.00 23, 1 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend: $0.00 $0.00 FTE  Program Seq *: 23 Program Name: Computerized Transportation Routing System Program Code: 24 Program Goal: Plan Reference Page Number L227 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET EXXZUMENT Primary Leader Freddie Smith To provide safe, efficient, and reliable transportation for the students of the Little Rock School District. Objectives 1.0 The Transportation Department will request additional resources to help provide transportation support for evening and exterxled day programs. 1.1 In 1990-91 the District reduced Its number of runs from three to two. 1.2 LRSD has made progress In the utilization of the ECOTRAN MAPNET System...!988-89 school opening. Page: 2 Revision Date: Strategies I Secondary Leader: Beginnirfg Date Completion Date August 1, 1995 Mary Jane Cheatham Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1.0 Determine resource requirements necessary to support programs and procure them. Provide transportation support as required. A. Resource requirements were identified. Additional buses are on order to support the mission. B. As departments make requests for support, the Transportation Department makes every effort to support the request. C. Replacement buses for regular program have been ordered for delivery for July, 1995. D. Discussion concerning Athletic Programs to be treated as Field Trips. 1.1 Procure resources necessary to support two run system and implement two run system. A. Routes were limited to the number that could be supported by the buses available for a two run system. 1.2 Student and geographic data loaded in system, and personnel trained and proficient in computerizing routing. A. Item completed 06/90, and is not recurring 23. 2 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 02/95 02/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/88 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 02/95 75% 06/30/95 08/22/94 06/90 Director of Transportation Director of Transportation Director of Transportation 1.0 Adequate service provided in support of programs. Determined by dividing number requested by number provided. 1.1 All buses assigned only Iwo routes. 1.2 Students effectively and efficientty routed to focilitate a smooth school opening 1988-89.Page: 3 Program Seq *: 23 Revision Date: August 1, 1995 Program Name: Computerized Transportation Routing System Program Code: 24 Primary Leader: Freddie Smith Secondary Leader: Mary Jane Cheatham Program Goal: To provide safe, efficient, and reliable transportation for the students of the Little Rock School District. Plan Reference Page Number L227 L227 Ot^ectlves Strategies Beginning Date Completion Dato Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1.3 There is extensive work to be done In updating the geographic files, table with the LRSD database. 1.4 School attendance areas and updatod walk zones need to be encoded Into map files. 1.5 (Transportation Safety Policies need to be reviewed and updated property. Changes will be incorporated from Applicable Board Policies and Administrative Directives). 1.3 A cooperative effort between Transportation Department. LR City Engineers. Student Assignment, and ECOTRANS staff wifl help Io ensure that software reflects accurate geographic information. A. All new streets were added to the map. As new streets are added the map is updated. 1.4 School attendance areas not initiated. Walk zones encoded into map for maximum bus utilization. A. Changes created by the dosing of Stephens school were encoded into the map. 1.5 A comprehensive review of all LRSD policies germane to transportation must be performed and recommendations/changes reduced to writing and incorporated into applicable documents. A. A comprehensive rewriting of the Practices and Procedures for the department was completed and reviewed by the Drivers' Council before publication and distrtoution. 23, 3 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 08/22/94 07/01/94 09/30/94 Director of Transportation, Director of Information Services Director of Transportation Director of Transportation 1.3 Significant reduction in street address errors introduced by poor/inadequate data entry. 1.4 No student required to exceed four block/six block walk. 1.5 Published policies on student behavior/safety on LRSD buses. Published policies for drivers/driver aides to assist in communicating the dlstrid's position on transportation safety procedures. Frequent meetings to address safety Issues and concerns. Attendance verified through 8ign\u0026gt;in sheets. Review of supervisor's monitoring report. Program Seq *: 23 Page: 4 Revision Date: Program Name: Computerized Transportation Routing System August 1. 1995 Program Code: 24 Primary Leader: Freddie Smith Program Goal: To provide safe, efficient, and reliable transportation for the students of the Little Rock School District. SecoTKlary Leader: Mary Jane Cheatham Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 1.6 (Assignment promotion population region tables need to be created to ensure proper student assignment). 1.7 All school attendance areas will be er\u0026gt;coded Into the geographic tables. Corresponding walk zones will be generated for schools, all transportation policies will be reviewed arid updated. 1.8 An entire new stop network will be generated to Improve efficiency and most economically utilize District resources. 1.6 Information downloaded from mainframe media format compatibie with HP Vectra. on A. Download completed with tape from Data Processing. 1.7 Wah zones established In accordance with district policy and software criteria selection. A. Wak zones were established because of the closing of Stephens. 1.8 Transportation staff will update and revise all routes based upon census data provided by Infonnation Services. A. Additional census information is Included when it is available to the Transportation Department. B. Reflective end of 1st Quarter Reflective end of 3rd Quarter 23, 4 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 08/15/94 06/30/95 08/10/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/10/95 Director of Transportation Director of Transportation 1.6 Routes generated based upon current assignment information. 1.7 Two mile list published and distributed to school staff. Add transportation policies and procedures. 1.8 Written request for student data fontvarded. Census incremental initiated by routing supervisor Research system error listing to within 5%. Completion of first day routes prior to registration.LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Program Seq 9: 24 Page: 1 Revision Date: August 7, 1995 Program Name: Data Processing Program Code: 17 Primary Leader: Dr. Henry Williams Secondary Leader: David Beason Program Description: To provide the resources (Hardware. Software. Ttaining. Programming. Computer Opeiatious. and Haidware and Software Support) necessaiy to collect, store and report information on LRSD sWdents. Information Services wUl provide the computer resources necessary to collect, store, and report student infonnation in a timely and accuiate manner. School and central office-based staff, parents, and students will benefit accurate up-to-date information on students. District Goal Support: To implement integrated educational programs to ensure that all students will grow academically, socially and emotionally with emphasis on basic skills and academic enrichment while closing disparities in achievement. Program Goal: to collect and store all peitineot student infonnation. To provide all necessaiy reports requited to support school and central office based functions. To provide all To provide the programs and data bases necessary . . necessary infonnation required by outside interests. To provide droely response to all requests for information. [ Plan References: L129. L130 FY Program Budget: $712,289.22 YTD Expenditures: $709,935.19 11st Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: $606,929.33 $29,838.55 Related Function Codes: 24, 1 3rd Qtr Expend: 4tfa Qtr Expend: $38,002.49 $35,164.82 I FTE 4.0 Program Sag #: 24 Program Name: Data Processing Program Coda: 17 Program Goal: Plan Reference Page Number L 129/130 L 129 L 129 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Primary Leader: Or. Henry Williams I Secondary Leader: Page: 2 Revision Date: David Beason August 7, 1995 To provide the programs and date bases necessary to collect and store all pertinent student information. hmSfan. Tr, P^^inent student information. To provide all necessary reports required to support school and central office based functions. To provide all necessary information required by outside interests. To provide timely response to all requests for information. Objectives 1. Data Processing (Information Services Department) will pro^dde the necessary support for all school and central office* based hjnctions. 1.1 Str elegies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 06/30/95 Director of Information Services 1.A (Administration has received all required reports for the school year). 1.6 (All data is accurately stored and is retrievable). 1 .C (Quality reports are being delivered on time). Programs will be developed arxi implemented relative to the following areas: (Collect. Store, and Report) Dropout Statistics (to include the ability to generate data by race, gender, grade on a school by school as wen as District*wida basis). 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 Director of Information Services 1.2 (Score, Collect, Store, ar\u0026gt;d Report) Test Scores (to Irtclude capacity to score tests arxi to generate data by race, gender, grade, school, subject area, and districtwide). 07/01/94 06/30/95 Director of Information Services A. Tag students for JTPA 09/15/94 06/30/65 24, 2 1 .D (Complaints are no lorrger being received about information not being available). 1.1 (Reports are available which accurately report dropout statistics). 1.2 (All test results are stored in the computer and are reflected in pertinent reports).Pag*: 3 Program Seq f: 24 Revision Date: August 7, 1995 Program Name: Data Processing Program Code: 17 Primary Leader: Dr. Henry Williams Secondary Leader: David Beason Program Qori: To provide the progteme end dete beses necessary to collect end store all pertinent student Information. To provide ell necessery reports required to support school end control office based functions. To provide all necessary information required by outside interests. To provide timely response to all requests for information. J Plan Reference Page Number L 129 Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria B. Wrote Stanford 8 report showing last years reading, math, and language scores that were less than 35.8. C. Listed Comparison (93 vs. 94) of complete battery scores for 7th grade students at select schools for Planning, Research \u0026amp; Evaluation study. D. Created diskette with 9th graders at select schools showing their K-4 MAT 6 Reading Comprehensive scaled scores for study. E. Provided Associate Superintendent with the JTPA student listing. 1.3 (Collect, Store, and Report) Student AcNavement Data (to include the capacity to monitor test scores, grade distribution and other Identified achievement data by race, gender, grade, subject, school and district-wide). A. Load SAT'8 test data onto AS/400. B. Transferred student and basic data from Student Management System to Abacus. Test scan sheets where generated for all schools. / C. Print Abacus test answer sheets, attendance scan sheets and grade scan sheets. 24, 3 08/15/94 11/16/94 11/23/94 01/06/95 07/01/94 07/15/94 09/08/94 08/20/94 08/15/94 11 /17/94 11/30/94 02/21/95 06/30/95 07/20/94 09/09/94 06/30/95 Director of Information Services 1.3 (All available student achievement data is stored and reported as requested). Program Seq #: Program Name: Program Co\u0026lt;ie: Program Goal\nPlan Referertce Page Number L 130 L 130 24 Data Processing 17 funcon.. To provide Objectives Page: 4 Revision Dato\nAugust 7, 1995 Primary Loader: Dr. Henry Williams Secondary Leader: David Beason Strategies response to all requests for information. D. Allowed Secondary Registrars to update Transcript History Data district wide. E. Loaded Chapter 1 data an added it to the School FVofile Report for Federal Programs. 1.4 (Collect, Store, and Report! Attendance (sheN be hept In such a way as to allow data to be gathered for any period of time, for withdrawals and re-enrollment, for students by grade, school, race, gender, and district-wide). A. Pre-select attendance entry records for all expected incoming students. 8. Print Attendance scan sheets on a weekly basis to assist in gathering Attertdance Data. C. Automated State 9 Weeks Report using Monarch a Excel. D. Provided PRE with a list of random students (20%| from each school for research. 1.5 (Collect, Store, and Report! Disciplinary Data (by offense, school, teacher, c subject, race, gender, district-wide. over any period of time!. 24, 4 class. and Beginning Date Completion Date 07/01/94 01/19/95 07/01/94 08/15/94 08/20/94 10/15/94 01/27/95 07/01/94 06/30/95 01/26/95 06/30/95 08/15/94 06/30/65 10/30/94 03/20/95 06/30/95 to support school and central office based Responsibility Director of Information Services Director of Information Services Evaluation Criteria 1.4 (Attendance data is accurately stored arxJ reported to the state with minimum manual compilation. 1.5 (Disciplirw data is accurately entered and reported as required!. Page: 5 Program Seq #: 24 Revision Date: August 7. 1995 Program Name: Data Processing Program Code: 17 Primary Leader: Dr. Henry Williams Secondary Leader: David Beason Program Goal: To provide the programs and data bases necessary to collect and store all pertinent student information. To provide all necessary reports required to support school and central office based functions. To provide all necessary information required by outside interests. To provide timely response to all requests for information. Plan Reference Page Number L 130 Objectives Strategies Beginnirtg Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Crfterla A. Added to field to Discipline Database to allow tracking of final vs. recommended sanction. B. Printed letters to all suspended students. C. Provided Student Hearing with a list of students with 3 or more OOS or LT for 1994/1995. 1.6 (Collect. Store, and Report) Student Assignment Data (by race, age, gender, class, school, grade, level, and districtwide). A. Promoted students to next grade using the Student Assignment criterion. B. Randomized student school choices and placed on the Waitir\u0026gt;g List Screen. C. Ran October 1 counts report. D. Printed district-wide school profiles for schools to evaluate. E. Automated State Oct 1st Report for certified and non-certified staff. F. Produced diskette with Free \u0026amp; Reduced lunch data for Student Assignment. G. Ran assignment letters for Student Assignment. 24, 5 11/30/94 12/19/94 02/08/95 07/01/94 07/15/94 07/30/94 09/30/94 09/30/94 10/01/94 11/23/94 03/15/95 12/01/94 12/19/94 02/14/95 06/30/95 07/15/94 07/30/94 09/30/94 09/30/94 10/15/94 11/30/94 03/21/95 Director of Information Services 1.6 (Student assignment data is stored and all reporting requirements are met). Program Seq *: 24 Page: 6 Program Name: Data F^ocessing Revision Date: August 7. 1995 Program Code: 17 Primary Leader: Program Goal: Or. Henry Williams Secondary Leader: David Beason nan Reference Page Number Ok^^ctives Strategies Beginning Dete Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Cdterla L 130 2.Data Processing Department (Information Services Department Staff) win have the capacity to respond to District needs es required by District goals and state and federal laws such as grade (flstribution and the ability to Identify specific students and cohorts of students. 2.1 H. Ran monthly download report for OOM after 12/31/94 closing. I. Ren monthly download report for ODM after 01/31/95 closing. J. Ran monthly download report for ODM after 02/28/95 closing. (The Information Services Department will maintain adequate computer hardware and support to meet the needs of the district). A. Move telephone lines, computer lirws, and computer equipment as requested. B. Provide user support on the operation of computer equipment. C. Provide user support for Abacus equipment. D. Provide access to Student Software for performing routir\u0026gt;e data entry and reporting. 24, 6 01/26/95 02/17/96 03/27/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 01/30/95 02/20/95 03/31/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 Director of Information Services Director of Information Services 2. (The District requirements for computer resources are being met). 2.1 (All employees requiring access to student records have access to terminslsl.Page\n1 Program Seq f: 24 Revision Date: August 7, 1995 Program Name: Data Processing Program Code: 17 Primary Leader: Dr. Henry Williams Secondary Leader: David Beason Program Qoal: To provide the programs and data bases necessary to collect and store all pertinent student information. To provide all necessary reports required to support school and central office based I U pi UVlUO II IO pi Vyi 01119 OKU uaia vuovtf  y . - --------- . functions. To provide all necessary information required by outside interests. To provide timely response to all requests for information. Plan Reference Page Number Ob}ectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria E. Reinstalled the equipment st Williams Magnet as a result of the new construction that took place during the summer. F. Purchased and installed a tape back-up unit with the appropriate software to accommodate the programs that are being designed for budgeting procedures between Information Services and Financial Services. G. Purchased and installed an IBM 6406 Line Matrix Printer to accommodate the large amounts of printing required from the AS/400 users of the District. This will also speed up the printing process with the additional printer. This printer is located in the Operations Department of Information Services. H. Purchased HP 1200C Deskjet Printer and the HP LaserJet 4-i- Printer located in the Office of Desegregation and Student Assignment. I. Purchased the new telephone system located in the Office of Desegregation and Student Assignment. 24, 7 09/20/94 09/14/94 09/14/94 09/22/94 07/01/94 09/21/94 09/30/94 09/30/94 09/30/94 08/25/94 Program Seq f: 24 Page: 8 Program Name: Data Processing Revision Date: August 7. 1995 Program Code: 17 Program Goal: Primary Leader: To provide the programs and data bases Dr. Hervy Wiliiams I Secondary Leader: functions. To provide all necessary Information required by necessary to collect and store all pertinent student information. Devid Beason ou.sid. inures.,. To provide .imeiy reip^n'ee u \"\"\"\" Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Begirwiing Date Completion Date Responsibility Ev^uation Criteria J. Purchased for the Office of Desegregation artd Student Assignment In lot were three each of the following: Microprocessor, CD-ROM Drive, Disk Drive, Monitor, Keyboard, Mouse, and all other required attachments. 09/22/94 09/22/94 K. Purchased for Information Services on PC to allow access to the AS/400 and have the capability of running software In a Windows environment. 12/15/94 12/15/94 L. Installed 3 terminals and cabling at Booker Magnet to allow access to the AS/400. 10/01/94 10/04/94 M. Installed cabling and equipment at the new Student Hearing Office to allow access to the AS/400 student system. N. Installed 3 new Hard Drives into 3 computers at Transportation Dept. 0. Information Services Installed 2 Ian drops in Operations. P. Installed terminal and ran cabling for the PC at Southwest Jr High. Q. Installed PC's\none each to Support Services, PRE, and. Information Services. R. Connected PC in Pupil Personnel to the AS/400. 24, 8 11/14/94 11/16/94 01/09/95 01/09/95 01/11/95 01/12/95 11/15/94 11/16/94 01/23/95 02/14/95 02/01/95 01/27/95Page: 9 Program Seq #: 24 Revision Date: August 7, 1995 Program Name: Data Processing Program Code: 17 Primary Leader: Dr. Henry Williams Sacondary leader\nDavid Beason Program Goal: To provide the programs and data bases necessary to collect and store all pertinent student functions. \u0026gt;e me progiaina aiiu uaio uoaoa iraxwoif --------------- -- ----- --- - t  t 1. To provide all necessary information required by outside interests. To provide timely response to all requests for information. informatiJn. To provide all necessary reports required to support school and central office based Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Dato Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 2.2 (The Information Services Department will develop or acquire the software required to support the needs of the district). A. Purchased arxi installed Word Perfect 5.1 to schools and departments as requested. B. Provide technical support for data entry in all schools using Word Perfect to enter data into the LRSD Program Budget Document. C. Modified a series of approximately tvi/elve (12) screens to allow schools to enter aggregated information not currently stored on the AS/400 database that was needed for the School Profile Report. D. Modified the School Profile Report to show breakdowns by race and sex of all items required by the Office of Desegregation arid Monitoring. E. Provided equipment maintenance, cabling, arKi communication lines connecting users to the AS/400 system. F. Provide telephone service end computer access to the Truancy Office's new location. 24, 9 07/01/94 07/20/94 07/01/94 08/23/94 08/23/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 08/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 08/23/94 Director of Information Services 2.2 (All necessary software is installed and functioning properly to collect, store and report information in a timely end accurate manner). Program Saq f  24 Page: 10 Program Nams: Data Processing Revision Oats: August 7. 1995 Program Cods: 17 Program Goal: Prlmsry Leader: To provide the programs and data bases Dr. Henry Williams Secondary Leader:   - ----------- ...MW  J lu VUUeL functions. To provide all necessary information required by necessary to collect and store all pertinent student information. outside interests. To provide tinrei^reip^nsew David Beason Plan Refersrtcs Page Number Objectives Strategies G. Purchased Paradox 6.0 for Windows assist with budgeting and financial procedures. to H. Installed AS/400 Software Upgrade Version 2.3 from IBM. This will bring the system up to date In moetir\u0026gt;g the needs of the District. I. Purchased Crystal Reports Pro Version 3.0 to assist with additional programmir\u0026gt;g for budgeting and financial procedures. J. Purchased Monarch for Windows version 1.0 to assist with designing additional documents used for budgeting and financial procedures. K. Installed Microsoft Office Pro Version 4.3 and Microsoft Visual Basic Pro Version 3.0 throughout the Information Services Department to accommodate the staff In providing Information arxi support to the District users In a more timely and professional manner. Beginning Dats Completion Date Rssponsibillty Evaluation Crtteris 09/14/94 08/10/94 07/29/94 09/14/94 07/20/94 09/14/94 08/15/94 07/29/94 09/14/94 09/20/94 L. Acquired training for the Interim Director of Information Services Department for Netware 3.12 Software to be able to provide the Users with the support that is requested. 24, 10 09/29/94 09/30/94Paga: 11 Program Saq f: 24 Revision Data: August 7, 1995 Program Name: Data Processing Program Code: 17 Primary Leader: Dr. Henry Williams Secondary Leader: David Beason Program Goal: to collect and atote ell pertinent student Information. To provide all necessary reports required to support school and central office based To provide the programs and data bases necessary U --------------------------------------------------------- ... information required by outside interests. To provide timely response to all requests for information. functions. To provide all r^ecessary Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies M. Purchased in lot of three each wore the following software applications located in the Office of Desegregation and Student Assignment: Corel Pro Photo Sampler, MS-Dos 6.2, Microsoft Windows for Workgroups Version 3.11, Microsoft Office Pro Version 4.3 on CD. and all other requested software. N. Information Services loeded Baber Software to Monitor the performance of the AS/400. O. Purchased and Installed memory for the HP LaserJet 4 Printer to allow the PBD an other large documents to be processed by Information Services. P. Configure PC and Printer for Dodd Elementary. Q. Loaded WordPerfect on new PC at Geyer Springs Elementary. R. Loaded WordPerfect on the PC in the Media Center at MLK Elementary. S. Loaded WordPerfect in the Computer Lab at Henderson Jr High. T. Installed Phonemaster and WordPerfect on the Attendance Secretary's PC at Henderson Jr High. 24, 11 Beginning Date 09/22/94 01/04/95 02/03/95 02/20/95 01/04/95 01/04/95 01/04/95 01/04/95 Completion Date 09/22/94 01/04/95 03/03/95 02/22/95 01/04/95 01/06/95 01/06/95 01/05/95 Responsibility Evaluation Criteria Program Saq 9: 24 Page: 12 Program Name\nData Processing Ravisiort Date: August 7, 1995 Program Code: 17 Primary Leader: Program Goal: Or. Hervy Williams Secondary Leader: David Besson nan Reference Page Number Ob}ectivos Strategies U. Loaded WordPerfect on new PC in Staff Development. V. Set-up printers for all Information Services users. W. Installed extended memory in 2 Laserjet Printer located in PRE. 2.3 Computerized Data Access- Computerized data access will be a reality in all incentive schools so that student data is easily accessible and access can be immediate for reports which might be needed relative to ell school program aspects. 24. 12 Beginning Dote Compiotlon Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 01/10/95 03/06/95 03/16/95 07/01/94 01/12/95 03/16/95 03/29/95 06/30/95 1ProKram Seq 9: 26 Program Name: Minority Teacher Recniitroent Program Code: 08 Primary Leader: Program Description: District Goal Support: Program Goal: [ Flan Rererences: FY Progr Budget: YTD Expenditures: LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Richard Hurley Pate: I Revision Date: June 30. 1995 I Secondary Leader: Robert Robinson Primary htnetion is to recruit high quality profession.1 and support personal to meet the distriefs goals ami objectives m a .b etween .tah-e- school district -a.n1d uhiimghKe.r. education institutions\n.aqscsiunmwe. rreecsnpoonnssiihbUiliittvy ffoorr ddeelleesgsattcedd optrooagrraammss rreellaatteedd ttoo ssttatffff rleecciruuiiotmneenntt ttoo meet EEO and AfTirmaove Action ano personnel services imiug UClWCCII UC Sbliuui UWUIVI maaw waa-w,---------- , , _ . - . . responsible for assigned tasks and projects that wdl enhance the productivity and efficiency of the human resources division. Develop and maintain a staff that is well-trained and motivated. E\u0026gt;eveloping equity in employees composition that reflects racial and ethnic diversity.  $45,592.16 $53,554.32 lot Qtr Expend: 2nd Qtr Expend: $13,998.89 $11,393.85 3rd Qtr Expend: 4th Qtr Expend: $15,015.40 $13,146.18 I FTE 1.0 [ Related Function Codes: 26, 1 Program Seq f: 26 Program Name: Teacher Recndtment Program Code: 08 Program Goal: Flan Reference Page Number U3 U3 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Primary Leader: Richard Hurley Secondary Leader: (To organize reciuitmenl and retention programs for the puipose of developing equity in the employee composition that reflects racial and ethnic diversity .) Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Page: 2 RevbioD Date Robert Robinson Responsibility July 14, 1995 Evaluation Criteria 1. Update review of recruiting needs by age. race, sex and seniority in positions in the District to ascertain projected needs. 1.1 Review of all current staffing with identirtcation of staff by sex. race and subject area who will be retiring to project needs. (Reserve at least 25 percent of the positions for Black applicants.) A. Request for forecast based on 1.1 ta being prepared by Information Services. However, the number of retirees for the preceding three (3) years b taken in consideratioo when reserving a nianber of slots for minorities. 07/01/94 08/10/94 06/30/95 20% 2. Review of position assignments related to racial equity such that all races are represented in every position and Job description tn the district. 2.1 Development and assessment of school and divisional staffing patterns. A. From July 1, 1994 through October 1, 1994, there were fifty (50) school sites, of these: 1. Nine (9) sites were 0-24% minority faculty. 2. Twenty four (24) sites were 25-39% minority faculty. 26, 2 07/01/94 06/30/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 HR Director(Minority Recruiter)HR Director/ (Minority Recruiter) HR Director/(Mioority Recruiter) Bldg. Principab, Division Heads.) HR Director/ (Minority Recruiter) Bldg. Principab, Divbion Heads.) 1. (Completion of needs assessment.) I.l (Forecast of Retirees/Reservation of slots for minority staffing) 2. (Maintain an image of district-wide multi-cultural starting) 2.1 Completion of task (Computerized reports of staffing ratios)3 Program Seq *: 26 Revision Date July 14. 1995 Program Name: Teacher Recruitment Program Code: 08 Primary Leader: Richard Hurley Secondary Leader: Robert Robinson Program Goal: (To organae reoniilmenl and retendon programs for the pun of developing equity in the employee composition that renects racial and ethnic diversity .) Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strate^es Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 3. Twelve (12) sites were 40-50* minority faculty. 4. Five (5) schools had a minority leaching staff that exceeded 50% of the total teaching force. 07/01/94 10/01/94 144 12/09/93 MR 12 I. Create pool of currently certified teacher applicants and of students pursuing certification. From Jidy 1, 1994 through October 1,1994, there were 163 full-time certified employees - new hires. Fifty (50) or 31% of the appointments weid to minorities. From July 1, 1994 through October 1, 1994, there were 1959 fuU-tfane teachers. 686 or 35% of these teachers were minorities. B. EEOC Report Revised 2.2 Recruitment of support artd non-teaching staff to reflect equitable racial representation in all positions. 2.3 Establish goals and objectives for racially balancing each incentive school staff as part of a comprehensive long-range strategic plan for implementing the incentive school features. A. Tentative Goals for Incentive Schools staffing widtin guidelines of EEOC are in place. 1.1 Share applicant pools with PCSSD/NLRSD. 26, 3 02/15/95 07/01/94 07/01/94 02/15/95 07/01/94 03/31/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 HR Director/(Minority Recruiter) Principals, Assoc. Sup HR Directors - Three Districts (Minority Recruiter) HR Directors - Three Districts (Minority Recruiter) 2.2 (Improved Sttff diversity will be shown by staffing reports) 1. (An assemble of quality applicants for school based referrals and resources for replenishing the dwindling pool of minority applicants) 1.1 Completion of task (Identification of prospects)Program Seq #: 26 Page\n4 Program Name: Teacher Recruitment Revision Dale July 14. 1995 Program Code: 08 Prr^ram Goal: IMmary Leader: 125 (To organize recruitment and retention Richard Hurley Secondary Leader: programs for Ihe purpose of developing equity in the employee composition that raflecls racial and ethnic diversity.) Robert Robinson Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies I Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria I. To develop joint recniiting efforts and procedures with particular emphasis on minority teacher recruitment. A. LRSD shares its minority applicant pools with PCSSD/NLRSD on a regular basis to meet mutual staffing goals. Referrals are made through telephone calls and recruitment registry when requested. 1.1 Share planning, resources and contacts for recruitment of staff, both certified and non-certified. A. Inter/lntrastate recruitment schedules shared districts. among B. ASCUS membership information shared with PCSSD/NLRSD. This is an opportunity to broaden recruiting base for new teachers, providing teachers of diverse backgrounds for the classroom. C. ASCUS application has been submitted for data base representing the colleges and universities which prepare 90 percent of each yean graduating leachere.  a------------ Baaiuuaaui^ licablicis, national diiecloiy of job career faits for educators with a cross-reference of instinitions which will graduate minority candidates. 26, 4 07/30/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 08/15/94 08/15/94 09/30/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 03/31/95 09/30/94 HR Directors (Minority Recruiters) HR Directors - (Minority Recruiter) 1. Increase in minority staffing among certified staff and more proportional representation among support staffs. 1.1 Increase tn minority staffing among certified staff and more proportional representation among support staff.Pe: 5 Program Seq f: 26 Revision Date July 14, 1995 Program Name: Teacher Recruitment Program Code: 08 Primary Leader: Richard Hurley Secondary Leader: Robert Robinson Program Goal: (To organize recruitment and retention programs for the purpose of developing equity in the employee composition that reflects racial and ethnic diversity.) 125 125 Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Crfterla 2. To share the applicant pools among the districts 2.1 Use teachers in die recruitment process. A. Teacher recruitment team, comprised of new teacher-recruits, at least (1) tenured teacher, one (1) principal selected annually to accompany Recruiting Specialist on certain recruitment trips. The following employees selected for 1994-95: Theresa Courtney, Shanda Macon, Alvena Grissom, Christopher Threatt. Jodie Carter, Dora Wallace - subject area specialists included as well. Sixteen recruiting trips made and follow-up actions in progress. B. Recruiting Team also serves as a welcome committee when recruits visit LRSD to preview employment opportunities. 2.2 Certified and non-certified applicant pools will be shared with the agreement to assist each other in correction of disproportionate stafTmg. 07/01/94 07/01/94 07/18/94 11/02/94 07/18/94 07/01/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 HR Directors (Minority Recruiter) HR Directors (Minority Recruiter) HR Directors (Minority Recnjiier)Principals 3. To monitor distribution of sta^ across grade levels aitd support areas. A. Recruitment registry shared with NLRSD and PCSSD focusing on critical supply areas: Math Science. Elementaty. Spanish. 07/01/94 06/30/95 HR Directors (Minority Recruiter) Assoc./Asst. Supts 26, 5 2. Proportional representation of mirwrity and majority employees in all staffing categories. 2.1 (List of teachers who participated \u0026amp; activities) 2.2 (An established applicant referral system for teacher employment in any of Pulaski County's public schools) 3. Proportional representation of minority and majority employees in all staffing categories. Program Seq f: 26 Page: 6 Program Name: Teacher Recruitment Revision Dale July 14. 1995 Program Code: 08 Program Goal: Primary Leader: 125 (To organize recruitment and retention Richard Hurley Secondary Leader: programs for die purpose of developing equity in the employee composition tfiet tefleco racial and ethnic diversity.) Robert Robinson Plan Reference Page Nianber Objectives 4. To identify students who may be future teachen and provide support programs to them. Strategies 3.1 The principals will be accountable to ensure equitable distribution of teachen by grade level and subject area. A. Monitoring reports complied and principals advised accordingly. 4.1 Establish future teacher clubs in elementary. Junior high aixl senior high schools. A. For the 1994-95 school year, the following schools have active Teachen of Tomorrow Chapten: I. Elementary Carver Magnet Mitchell Chicot Washington Beginning Dale Completion Date ResponsibOfty Evaluation Criteria 07/01/94 09/21/94 07/01/94 08/22/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 2. Junior High: Forest Heights Mabelvale Jr. Pulaski Heights Jr. Henderson Mann Magnet Southwest Jr. 3. Senior High: 26, 6 Principals. HR Directon (Minority Recruiter). Assoc./Asst. Supts. HR Directors (Minority Recruiter) Principals and Teachen (HR Directors, Minority Recruiter) Principals A Teachen 3.1 Statistical data that minority teachen have access to teaching opportunities at all grade levels, in all subject areas and in all programs  AP Honon. G/T. etc. '4. (Adoption of a comprehensive Teachen of Tomorrow Program for students considering careen in teaching.) 4.1 Increase the number of students entering the teaching profession.Pate*. 7 Program Seq #: 26 Revision Date July 14. 1995 Program Name: Teacher Recruitment Program Code: 08 Primary Leader: Richard Hurley Secondary Leader: Robert Robinson Program Goal: (To organize recruitment and retention programs for the purpose of developing equity in the employee composition that reflects racial artd ethnic diversity.) 126 126 126 Flan Reference Page Number Objectives Strate^es Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria Central High Halt High Parkview Magnet J.A. Fair McClellan B. Teachen of Tomorrow Academy - Tri-district program: 1. Opened at the beginning of the 1994-95 school year, the Teachen of Tomorrow Academy continues to offer students a unique head start on a career in teaching: Learning Training Internship programs Priori^ hiring in the three school districts in Pulaski County after college graduation and certification requirements have been met Exposure to various teaching situations and levels Opportunities to work with children Special scholarships Individualized attention to personal and academic needs 2. Currently, minority students comprise approximately 60% of the total Teachen of Tomorrow Academy. 08/22/94 07/01/94 06/02/95 06/02/95 HR Directors (Minority Recruitment) Number of contracts of intent signed. 5. To establish a joint committee to address district planning for support of students who wish to become teachers. 07/01/94 06/30/95 HR Directors (Minority Recruiter. PrirKipals) 5. (Committee minutes reflect a support mechaitism ensuring a shared vision* for minority future teachen.) 5.2 Create contracts of intent\" to hire future teachen upon degree and certification completion. 26, 7 07/01/94 06/30/95 HR Directors (Minority Recruiter, Principals) 5.2 (Number of contracts intent signed) Program Seq \u0026lt;: 26 Page: 8 Program Name: Teacher Recruitment Revision Date July 14. 1995 Program Code: 08 Primary Leader: Program Goal: (To organize recruitment artd retention Richard Hurley Secondary Leader: programs for the purpose of developing eipjity in die employee composition that reflects racial and ethnic diversity.) Robert Robinson Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria 126 126 6. To establish a joint committee for planning recruitment strategies and procedures. U6 126 D6 Program Seq f: 26 A. Contracts of Intent have been developed for peak recruiting season - Spring 1995. B. Candidates for advanced contracts in progress 5.3 Provide internship opportunities for students of education. A. Internship executive summary has been designed and submitted to Deputy Superintendent and Human Resources Director. 6.1 Production of a set of recruitment procedures and timelines to be developed joindy to increase effectiveness and define recruitment. A. Joint recniiting schedules have been defmed. 6.2 Develop a cooperative agreement for recruitment of certified and non-certified staff with reservation of a number of slots so that employee categories will be desegregated. 6.3 Improve teacher working conditions to maintain teachers in the profession. 07/01/94 01/26/95 07/01/94 07/05/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 09/15/94 07/01/94 07/01/94 26, 1 05/10/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 07/05/94 06/30/95 06/30/95 05/11/95 06/30/95 06/30/95 HR Director (Minority Recruiter. Principals HR Directors, (Minority Recruiter) HR Directors (Minority Recruiter HR Directors (Minority Recruiter) (Minority Recruiter) HR Directors, Support Services and Principals Page: 5.3 (List of interns to be recruited for full-time employment). 6. (A support mechanism will be in place to ensure successful recruitment and retention programs for minorities.) 6.1 Completion of the document 6.2 Racial ratios in all staff commensurate with district and court approved guidelines. 6.3 Increase district staff retention. 1Revision Date: April 4, 1995 Program Name: Minority Teacher Recruitment Program Code: 08 Primary Leader: Richard Hurley Secondary Leader: Robert Robinson Program DescriptioD: Primaiy function is to recruit high quality professional and support personnel to meet the distriefs goals and objectives in a wide range of positions in school and the central ^ministration offices. To sup^rt linages between the school distri.ct a.nd .high.er .edu.cati.on i.nsti.tuti ons\nassume respons.i.b..i.l.i ty fro. r_ dJe l.e_g_a_t_edJ _p_ro_g_r_a_m__s_ _relia_te..dj t__o_ s__tt_f_f _r_e_c_r_u_it_m__e_n_t tao/v imeet cEcE/O*i aannd/i AAfrf\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_1458","title":"Report: ''Double Funding of the Incentive Schools,'' 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":["1995-08-16"],"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","Education--Finance","Educational statistics","School improvement programs","School integration","School management and organization"],"dcterms_title":["Report: ''Double Funding of the Incentive Schools,'' 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/1458"],"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":["107 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":476,"next_page":477,"prev_page":475,"total_pages":6797,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":5700,"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}}]}}