{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1329","title":"Proceedings: ''Little Rock School District,'' Volume III","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":["1995-09-01"],"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","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School improvement programs","School management and organization","School employees","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Little Rock School District,'' Volume III"],"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/1329"],"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":["98 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_p1532coll1_13791","title":"Annie M. Auter Williams interview with Hazel Marie Palmer Fields","collection_id":"bcas_p1532coll1","collection_title":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies Audio Collection","dcterms_contributor":["Williams, Annie Mildred Auter"],"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","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, Dunbar High School, 34.73231, -92.28654"],"dcterms_creator":["Fields, Hazel Marie Palmer"],"dc_date":["1995-08-31"],"dcterms_description":["This oral history interview with Hazel Marie Palmer Fields was conducted as part of the Dunbar History Project"],"dc_format":["audio/mpeg","image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : University of Arkansas at Little Rock Center for Arkansas History and Culture"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["National Dunbar Alumni Association historical collection, 1880-2016 (UALR.MS.0021)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["African American--History--Arkansas","African Americans--Arkansas--Little Rock","Dunbar High School (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas--History","Education--Arkansas--Little Rock","Education, Secondary","School integration--Arkansas--Little Rock","Segregation in education--Arkansas--Little Rock"],"dcterms_title":["Annie M. Auter Williams interview with Hazel Marie Palmer Fields"],"dcterms_type":["Sound","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/p1532coll1/id/13791"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["files (digital files)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1378","title":"Proceedings: ''North Little Rock School District,'' 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":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"dc_date":["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","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School enrollment","School integration","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''North Little Rock School District,'' 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/1378"],"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":["141 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_679","title":"Program planning and budget tool, FY 1996","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":["1995-08-31"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Program planning and budget tool, FY 1996"],"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/679"],"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 Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 1 Code PINV Name % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Jul 3 '9-5 Scheduled Finish Aug 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 2 PINV Identify and revise DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% Jul 3 '95 Aug 11 '95 Jackson,Lewis,Smith 3 PINV Review and adjust primary and secondary leaders for DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% Jul 17'95 Aug 14 '95 Lewis,Mayo 4 PINV Finalize list of DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% Aug 15 '95 Aug 18 '95 Jackson, Lewis 5 PINV Generate a Program Inventory Report for 1995-96 100% Aug 18 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson,Lewis  PEVAL 66% Jul 3 '95 Nov 22 '95 Jackson RECEIVED MIR 3 1 1995 7 PEVAL Notify program managers that program evaluation begins in fall\nbegin data collection 100% Jul 3 '95 Jul 28 '95 Jackson Office Of Desegregation Monitoring 8 PEVAL Review/revise process for cabinet review of program evaluations 100% Aug 1 '95 Aug 15 '95 Jackson,Cabinet Page 1 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 9 Code PEVAL Name Review/revise program evaluation instrument % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Aug 1 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Cabinet,Jackson 10 PEVAL Distribute program evaluation instruments and instructions to primary and/or secondary leaders\nprovide additonal information/instruments, if needed 100% Aug 25 '95 Aug 25 '95 Jackson 11 PEVAL Conduct required training sessions describing the process and evaluation criteria for designated staff 100% Aug 4 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson 12 PEVAL Program evaluations due from secondary or primary leaders 0% Sep 15 '95 Sep 15 '95 Cabinet 13 PEVAL Review program evaluations (DSeg and NonDSeg) for potential target programs for extended evaluations 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 2 '95 Cabinet 14 PEVAL Finalize identification of extended evaluation targets 0% Oct 2 '95 Oct 13'95 Cabinet 15 PEVAL Notify appropriate staff to prepare Extended Program Evaluations 0% Oct 16 '95 Oct 20 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 16 PEVAL Extended evaluations due 0% Nov 13'95 Nov 13'95 Program Managers Page 2 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 17 Code PEVAL Name______________________________ Cabinet review extended evaluations for merge into needs assessment report % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 17'95 Scheduled Finish Nov 22 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 18 NEEDS 0% Sep 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson.Cabinet 19 NEEDS Review types of data to measure needs of district for FY 96-97 0% Sep 1 '95 Sep 8 '95 Cabinet,Jackson 20 NEEDS Analyze results of the budgeting and planning priorities revealed from the 94-95 Needs Assessment Report 0% Sep 1 '95 Sep 8 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 21 NEEDS Review current mission statement and goals of the District 0% Sep 1 '95 Sep 8 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 22 NEEDS Board identifies District concerns for input from public at Town Hall/District Dialogues 0% Sep 14 '95 Sep 14 '95 Williams,Board 28 NEEDS STANFORD 8 TEST DATA STUDY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson 24 NEEDS Define purpose and scope for Stanford 8 Test data study 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Jackson,Cabinet Page 3 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 25 Code NEEDS Name Assign responsibilities for study of Stanford 8 Test data % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 26 NEEDS Design data collection plan for study of Stanford 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Dunbar 27 NEEDS Collect and analyze data from Stanford 8 Test 0% Sep 15'95 Oct 13'95 Jackson, Dunbar,Savage 28 NEEDS Prepare Stanford 8 Test Report 0% Oct 13 '95 Oct 31 '95 Dunbar 29 NEEDS Submit Stanford 8 Test Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Dunbar 3Q NEEDS PRE EDUCATIONAL EQUITY MONITORING REPORTS SURVEY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson 31 NEEDS Define purpose and scope for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 32 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson Page 4 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 33 Code NEEDS Name Analyze data from PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Studies % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 30 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Smith 34 NEEDS Prepare PRE Educational Equity Monitoring findings 0% Oct 2 '95 Oct 13'95 Smith 35 NEEDS Submit PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing 0% Oct 31 '95 I Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Smith as NEEDS SCHOOL CLIMATE/HUMAN RELATIONS SURVEY (SC/HRISTUDY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson 37 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of SC/HR Survey 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 38 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for SC/HR data collections 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson 39 NEEDS Design data collection plan for study of SC/HR 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Jackson,Hobby 40 NEEDS Collect and analyze data from SC/HR Survey 0% Sep 15 '95 Oct 13'95 Jackson,Hobby Page 5 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 41 Code NEEDS Name Prepare SC/HR Survey Report % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Oct 13'95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Hobby 42 NEEDS Submit SC/HR Survey Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Hobby I 42 NEEDS PORPQRTIONALS ALLOCATION FORMULAS STUDY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith.Milhollen 44 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Smith.Milhollen,Cabinet 45 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Smith 46 NEEDS Design data collections plan for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Smith 47 NEEDS Collect and analyze data for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 15 '95 Oct 13'95 Hurley,Eaton,Gadberry,Neal,Milhollen,Smith 48 NEEDS Prepare Proportional Allocation Fomiulas Report 0% Oct 13'95 Oct 31 '95 Milhollen,Hurley,Eaton,Neal,Smith Page 6 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 49 Code NEEDS Name Submit Proportional Allocations Formulas Study Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Oct 31 '95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Milhollen 5Q NEEDS DISTRICTWIDE FACILITIES STUDY 0% Seo 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith 51 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Districtwide Facilities Study/Report from 1994-95 Study for purposes of 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Williams,Smith,Cabinet 52 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for the Districtwide Facilities Study/Reporting of findings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Smith,Eaton 53 NEEDS Prepare findings from the Districtwide Facilities Study 0% Sep 16 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith,Mayo,Eaton 54 NEEDS Submit Districtwide Facilities Study Report recommendations to PRE for merge into needs assessment report 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith,Mayo,Eaton 55 NEEDS DESEGREGATION MONITORING REPORTS AUDIT FROM PPM 0% Seo 11 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mavo 56 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Williams,Mayo, Cabinet Page 7 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 57 Code NEEDS Name_______________________________ Assign responsibility for data collection of transcripts and Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Mayo 58 NEEDS Design data collection plan for study of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Mayo 59 NEEDS Collect data 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 13'95 Mayo 60 NEEDS Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% Oct 16'95 Oct 31 '95 Mayo 61 NEEDS Report findings to PRE 0% Oct 31 '95 Nov 18'95 Mayo 62 NEEDS Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mayo,Lewis 2 NEEDS COURT ORDERS AUDIT 0% Seo 11 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mavo 64 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Court Orders Audit 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Cabinet,Mayo Page 8 FY97 August 31 '95ID 65 Code NEEDS Name Assign responsibility for data collection of Court Orders Audit Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15'95 Revised Finish Resource Names Mayo 66 NEEDS Collect data 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 13'95 Mayo 67 NEEDS Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% Oct 16 '95 Oct 31 '95 Mayo 68 NEEDS Report findings to PRE 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 18 '95 Mayo 69 NEEDS Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mayo, Lewis 22 NEEDS TOWN HALL MEETINGS 0% Seo 11 '95 Nov 21 '95 Williams, Jackson.Modeste 71 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Town Hall Meetings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Jackson,Modeste,Cabinet 72 NEEDS Review previous years data from Town Hall Report 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Modeste, Jackson, Vann Page 9 FY 97 August 31 '95 ILittle Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 73 Code NEEDS Name ___________________________ Design data collection plan for Town Hall Meetings % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15'95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Vann,Lewis 74 NEEDS Set locations and schedule for Town Hall Meeting 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Vann.Modeste 75 NEEDS Develop advertisement plan and schedule for Town Hall Meetings\nPrepare sample agenda 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Vann.Modeste 76 NEEDS Review and revise data collection tool (matrix) for Town Hall Meetings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Modeste,Lewis 77 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting I 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann.Modeste 78 NEEDS Conduct Town Hall Meeting I 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Williams 79 NEEDS Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting I for input into matrix 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 80 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting II 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Modeste Page 10 FY 97 August 31 '95I Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 81 Code NEEDS Name_____________________ Conduct Town Hall Meeting II % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18'95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams 82 NEEDS Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting II for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 83 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting III 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 31 '95 Vann.Modeste 84 NEEDS Finalize and publish Town Hall Meeting Report 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Modeste,Lewis 85 NEEDS Merge findings of Town Hall Meeting Report, 1995-96 into needs assessment listing 0% Nov 15'95 Nov 21 '95 Jackson,Lewis as NEEDS DISTRICT DIALOGUES 0% Sep 11 '95 Nov 21 '95 Williams. Jackson.Modeste 87 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of District Dialogues 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Williams, Jackson,Modeste,Cabinet 88 NEEDS Review previous years data from District Dialogue Report 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Modeste,Vann Page 11 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 89 Code NEEDS Name_____________________________ Design data collection plan for District Dialogues % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Vann,Modeste 90 NEEDS Set locations and schedule for District Dialogue Meetings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Modeste.Vann 91 NEEDS Develop advertisement plan and schedule for District Dialogues\nprepare sample agenda 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Vann,Modeste 92 NEEDS Design data collection tool (matrix) for District Dialogue 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Modeste,Jackson 93 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue I 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Modeste 94 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue I 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Williams 95 NEEDS Gather feedback from District Dialogue 1 for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 96 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue 11 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Modeste Page 12 FY97 August 31 '95ID 97 Code NEEDS Name Conduct District Dialogue II 98 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue II for input into matrix 99 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue III 100 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue III 101 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue III for merge into matrix 102 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue IV 103 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue IV 104 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue IV for input into matrix Page 13 Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18 '95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Sep 18 '95 Sep 18'95 Sep 18 '95 Sep 18 '95 Sep 18 '95 Sep 18 '95 Sep 18 '95 FY97 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis Vann,Modeste Williams Vann,Lewis Vann,Modeste Williams Vann,Lewis August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 105 Code NEEDS Name Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue V % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18 '95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Vann,Modeste 106 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue V 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Williams 107 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue V for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 108 NEEDS Finalize and publish District Dialogue Report 1995-96 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Jackson,Lewis 109 NEEDS Merge findings of District Dialogue Report 1995-96 into needs assessment listing 0% Nov 15'95 Nov 21 '95 Jackson, Lewis Ufl NEEDS PREPARE NEEDS ASSESSMENT REPORT 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson 111 NEEDS Conduct Administrative review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Jackson,Cabinet 112 NEEDS Conduct Board Work Session for review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Williams, Jackson, Board Page 14 FY97 August 31 '95ID 113 Code NEEDS Name Publish Draft of Needs Assessment /Report and disseminate to selected persons Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 27 '95 Scheduled Finish Nov 27 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Cabinet 114 NEEDS Publish Needs Assessment Report, 1995-96 0% Nov 30 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson 115 GOAL PLANNING AND BUDGET GOALS 0% Oct 2 '95 Jan 31 '96 Jackson US GOALS CABINET PLANNING SESSION Oct 2 '95 Dec 11 '95 Jackson.Cabinet 117 GOALS Review 1994-95 Needs Assessment Report 0% Oct 2 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 118 GOALS Distribute 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report to Cabinet members 0% Dec 1 '95 Dec 8 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 119 GOALS Distribute District goals to Cabinet 0% Dec 1 '95 Dec 8 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 120 GOALS Cabinet review of goals 0% Dec 11 '95 Dec 11 '95 Jackson,Cabinet Page 15 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 121 Code GOALS Name BOARD WORK SESSION % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 15 '95 Scheduled Finish Dec 19 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson.Williams 122 GOALS Establish date and site for Work Session 0% Nov 1595 Nov 30 '95 Williams,Cabinet 123 GOALS Identify materials for Board Work Session 0% Nov 15'95 124 GOALS Prepare materials for Board Work Session 0% Nov 15'95 125 GOALS Conduct Board Work Session 0% Dec 12'95 126 GOALS Distribute background materials to Board members 0% Dec 12'95 127 GOALS Review/revise mission statement and goals 0% Dec 12 '95 128 GOALS Review DSeg and NonDSeg Program Inventory 0% Dec 12'95 Page 16 FY97 I Nov 30 '95 Nov 30 '95 Dec 15 '95 Dec 15 '95 Dec 15 '95 Dec 15 '95 Jackson,Williams Jackson Board,Williams Jackson Board Board August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 129 Code GOALS Name Review identified proportional allocations % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Dec 12 '95 Scheduled Finish Dec 15'95 Revised Finish Resource Names Board 130 GOALS Establish written priorities 0% Dec 12 '95 Dec 15 '95 Board 131 GOALS Identify strategies for funding shortfalls D'ye Dec 12 '95 Dec 15'95 Board 132 GOALS Develop timeline for identification and researching of funding shortfall strategies 0% Dec 12'95 Dec 15'95 Board 133 GOALS Develop communication strategy for mission statement and goals 0% Dec 14'95 Dec 14 '95 Williams,Vann 134 GOALS Distribute mission statement and goals 0% Dec 19'95 Dec 19'95 Jackson,Vann 135 GOALS Distribute list of priorities 0% Dec 19 '95 Dec 19 '95 Jackson,Vann 136 GOALS BOARD RETREAT 0% Dec 8 '95 Jan 31 '96 Williams Page 17 FY 97 August 31 '95 JLittle Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 137 Code GOALS Name Determine date and site for Board Retreat % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Dec 8 '95 Scheduled Finish Dec 20 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams,Board 138 GOALS Identify agenda items for Board Retreat 0% Dec 8 '95 Dec 20 '95 Williams,Board 139 GOALS Establish agenda for Board Retreat 0% Dec 8 '95 Dec 20 '95 Williams,Boa rd 140 GOALS Identify materials for Board Retreat 0% Dec 8 '95 Dec 20 '95 Williams,Jackson 141 GOALS Distribute materials for Board Retreat 0% Jan 9 '96 Jan 10 '96 Williams,Jackson 142 GOALS Conduct data analysis work session in preparation for Board Retreat 0% Jan 12'96 Jan 12'96 Williams,Cabinet 143 GOALS Conduct Board Retreat 0% Jan 22 '96 Jan 26 '96 Williams,Board 144 GOALS Report outcomes of Board Retreat 0% Jan 31 '96 Jan 31 '96 Williams,Board Page 18 FY97 August 31 '95ID 145 Code PDEV Name PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start May 22 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson.Cabinet 146 PDEV SUBMIT BUSINESS CASE FOR ERQGRAM AND/OR MODIFICATIONS TO SUPERINTENDENT 0% Nov 1 '95 Feb 22 '96 Williams.Jackson 147 PDEV Review process for program development 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 10'95 Cabinet 148 PDEV Use extended program evaluations to identify program additions, modifications, deletions 0% Nov 17'95 Nov 27 '95 Cabinet 149 PDEV Notify appropriate staff to prepare Business Cases on results of extended program evaluations 0% Nov 17'95 Nov 30 '95 Cabinet 150 PDEV Review recommendations from district needs assessment report in order to identify additional programs or programs modifications resulting in business case(s) 0% Dec 5 '95 Dec 11 '95 Cabinet 151 PDEV Business Cases due 0% Jan 8 '96 Jan 8 '96 Primary Leaders 152 PDEV Review of Business Cases by Cabinet 0% Jan 15 '96 Jan 22 '96 Cabinet Page 19 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 153 Code PDEV Name Submit Business Cases for program and/or program modifications to Board of Directors % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Feb 8 '96 Scheduled Finish Feb 8 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Williams 154 PDEV Review of Business Cases by Board 0% Feb 8 '96 Feb 22 '96 Board 155 BUDGT BUDGETING 0% Nov 20 '95 Aug 30 '96 Smith.Gadberrv.Hurlev.Milhollen 156 BUDGT Develop budget preparation training materials 0% Nov 20 '95 Nov 27 '95 Smith.Milhollen 157 BUDGT Issue instructions for budget preparation at all levels 0% Nov 28 '95 Nov 30 '95 Smith 158 BUDGT Conduct budget preparation training sessions 0% Dec 1 '95 Dec 8 '95 Smith 159 BUDGT Budget managers develop and submit revised 1995-96 expense budget revisions and 1996-97 expense budget requests 0% Dec 11 '95 Jan 6 '96 Milhollen, Smith 160 BUDGT Begin districtwide expense budget consolidation and executive review process 0% Jan 9 '96 Mar 8 '96 Smith Page 20 FY97 August 31 '95ID 161 Code BUDGT Name________________________________ Year to date revenue expenditure analysis Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jan 9 '96 Scheduled Finish Jan 31 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Smith,Milhollen 162 BUDGT Revise financial forecast for coming year 0% Feb 26 '96 Mar 6 '96 Smith 163 BUDGT Submit proposed budget to Board 0% Mar 14 '96 Mar 14 '96 Williams 164 BUDGT Conduct Board Work Sessions on proposed budget 0% Mar 18'96 Mar 29 '96 Smith, Board,Williams 165 BUDGT Revise proposed budget, as needed 0% Mar 14 '96 Apr 2 '96 Smith, Milhollen 166 BUDGT Prepare tentative budget 0% Apr 3 '96 May 13 '96 Smith,Milhollen 167 BUDGT Board review of tentative budget 0% May 23 '96 May 23 '96 Board,Smith 168 BUDGT Conduct Board Work Session on tentative Budget 0% May 24 '96 May 31 '96 Board,Williams Page 21 FY 97 August 31 '95 |Little RocR School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 169 Code BUDGT Name Account reconciliation and Purchase Order (PO) clean-up % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jun 17 '96 Scheduled Finish Jul 12'96 Revised Finish Resource Names Eaton 170 BUDGT 171 BUDGT Receipt of state generated revenue numbers (payroll liabilities, adjusted supplemental payroll, last payroll, Carl Perkins, M to M, JTPA, Vocational Ed., Chapters 1 and 2, Compensatory Ed., MFPA, Transportation, ABC) Close-out 1995-96 accounts\nadjust physical inventory, (fiscal)federal grants, magnet, state grants, accruals 0% 0% 172 BUDGT Compute ending fund balance 0% 173 BUDGT Administrative review of final budget 0% 174 BUDGT Submit final budget to Board 0% 175 BUDGT Board review and adoption of 96-97 final budget 0% 176 BUDGT Submit final Budget to Court/Parties 0% Jun 16 '96 Jun 16 '96 Milhollen, Smith Jul 1 '96 Jul 19'96 Smith,Milhollen,Cabinet Jul 22 '96 Jul 22 '96 Milhollen,Smith Jul 24 '96 Jul 29 '96 VVilliams,Cabinet Page 22 Aug 1 '96 Aug 1 '96 Williams,Smith Aug 1 '96 Aug 8 '96 FY 97 Aug 8 '96 Aug 21 '96 Board VVilliams,Attorney August 31 '95ID 177 Code BUDGT Name_________________________ Submit 96-97 final budget to State Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Aug 21 '96 Scheduled Finish Aug 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams,Smith ITS BUDGT Staffing 0% Jan 26 '96 Aug 15 '96 Hurley 179 BUDGT First review of changes in course offerings by Board 0% Jan 26 '96 180 BUDGT Meeting with counselors and principals to review courses offerings 1995-96 0% Jan 29 '96 181 BUDGT Print secondary course selection sheets 0% Jan 29 '96 182 BUDGT Counselors meet with students and complete course selection sheets 0% Feb 19'96 183 BUDGT Counselors send course selection sheets to receiving schools 0% Mar 8 '96 184 BUDGT Registrars tally course selections 0% Mar 11 '96 I Feb 8 '96 Feb 15 '96 Feb 15 '96 Mar 8 '96 Mar 11 '96 Mar 29 '96 Page 23 FY97 Board,Williams Elston Williams,Gadberry Principals,Counselors Principals,Counselors Principals,Registrars August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 185 Code BUDGT Name Review course tallies secondary. Note possible staffing changes based on courses requested % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Apr 1 '96 Scheduled Finish Apr 19'96 Revised Finish Resource Names__________ Gadberry, Hurley,Asst. Supts. 186 BUDGT Identify elementary enrollment (tentative) for 1995-96 0% Apr 1 '96 May 19'96 Mayo,Hurley,Gadberry,Asst Supts 187 BUDGT Make determination by subject area (secondary) of possible changes and by projected elementary enrolled 0% Apr 1 '96 Apr 19'96 Gadberry,Hurley,Asst. Supts. 188 BUDGT List known retirements, resignations, and intern positions 0% Apr 3 '96 Apr 24 '96 Gadberry,Hurley 189 BUDGT Identify certified personnel for Reduction in Force (RIF), if needed 0% Apr 17'96 Apr 26 '96 Hurley,Gadberry 190 BUDGT Notify certified personnel of Reduction in Force (RIF), if needed staff reduction 0% Apr 24 '96 Apr 29 '96 Hurley,Gadberry 191 BUDGT Recall certified personnel from RIF, if needed 0% Jun 3 '96 Aug 1 '96 Hurley, Gadberry 192 BUDG Notify classified personnel of staff reduction 0% May 6 '96 Jul 15'96 Hurley,Gadberry Page 24 FY97 August 31 '95I ID 193 Code BUDGT Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool 194 BUDGT 195 BUDGT 196 BUDGT 197 BUDGT 198 BUDGT 199 BUDGT 200 BUDGT Page 25 Name Recall classified personnel from RIF, if needed PROVIDE BROAD-BASED INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL FEEDBACK Plan for internal and external feedback. Set locations and dates Execute advertisement for district feedback. Session I Conduct District Feedback Session I Execute advertisement plan for district feedback. Session II Conduct District Feedback Session II Execute advertisement for district feedback. Session III % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jun 3 '96 Scheduled Finish Aug 15 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Hurley 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% May 22 '95 Apr 30 '96 Modeste. Vann. Williams Feb 1 '96 Feb 1 '96 Feb 1 '96 Feb 1 '96 May 22 '95 Feb 1 '96 FY97 Feb 15'96 Apr 30 '96 Apr 30 '96 Apr 30 '96 Aug 17 '95 Apr 30 '96 Williams,Modeste,Vann Modeste,Vann Williams Modeste,Vann Williams Williams August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 201 Code BUDGT Name____________________________ Conduct district feedback. Session III % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Feb 1 '96 Scheduled Finish Apr 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams 202 BUDGT Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall feedback. Session I 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,Vann 203 BUDGT Conduct district feedback, Session I 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams 204 BUDGT Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall feedback. Session II 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,Vann 205 BUDGT Conduct district feedback , Session II 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams 206 BUDGT Execute advertisement for Town Hall feedback. Session III 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams 207 BUDGT Conduct district feedback. Session III 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,\\/ann 208 MR MONITORING AND REPORTING OF DESEG AND NONDESEG PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS (1ST QUARTER: 2ND QUARTER: 3RD QUARTER: 4TH QUARTER! 14% Aug 1 '95 Aug 31 '96 Jackson Page 26 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 209 Code MR Name PRE performs necessary diskette management functions for the summer ( i.e. archival filing, achievement erasures, copying, etc.) % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Aug 1 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 17'95 Revised Finish Resource Names PRE Clerical 210 MR Revise written program budget document instructions, as needed 68% Aug 31 '95 Sep 5 '95 Lewis 211 MR PRE forward program budget document diskettes to principals and program managers 68% Aug 31 '95 Sep 5 '95 PRE Clerical,Lewis 212 MR Distribute written program budget document instructions to principals and program managers 0% Sep 1 '95 Sep 5 '95 Lewis,PRE Clerical 213 MR Plan maintenance education and orientation regarding the program budget document process 100% Aug 1 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson,Lewis 214 MR 215 MR Conduct maintenance education workshops and orientation sessions regarding the program budget document process for principals, clerical staff, program managers, primary and secondary leaders 1ST QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% 18% 216 MR Advise program managers and principals on program budget document 25% Page 27 Sep 4 '95 Aug 8 '95 Aug 8 '95 FY97 Sep 30 '95 Oct 14 '95 Jackson,Lewis Jackson Asst. Supts,Lewis,PRE Clerical August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 217 Code MR Name___________________________ Generate diskette management flow information to relative staff School Operations and PRE office % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Aug 8 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Lewis 218 MR Plan training sessions on the Program Budget Document and WordPerfect 0% Sep 2 '95 Sep 15 '95 Lewis,Jackson 219 MR Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 1st Quarter PBD diskettes 0% Oct 3 '95 Oct 3 '95 Lewis 220 MR DSeg and NonDSeg diskettes returned to PRE 0% Oct 14 '95 Oct 14'95 Principals,Program Managers 221 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% Oct 16 '95 Nov 8 '95 PRE Clerical,Lewis 222 MR PRE generate hard copies of diskettes 0% Oct 16'95 Nov 8 '95 PRE Clerical 223 MR PRE develops narrative and the Controller provides financial info for the PBD reports 0% Oct 16 '95 Oct 31 '95 Lewis,Milhollen 224 MR PRE combines all information for the 1st Quarter Program Budget Report 0% Oct 31 '95 Nov 8 '95 Lewis,PRE Clerical Page 28 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 225 Code MR Name___________________________ Submit report to Attorney for review % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 8 '95 Scheduled Finish Nov 13'95 Revised Finish Resource Names Lewis 226 MR Prepare for publication of 1st Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Nov 1395 Nov 13'95 Lewis,Jackson 227 MR Submit 1st Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% Nov 21 '95 Nov 21 '95 Jackson .Attorney 228 MR Return diskettes and hard copies to managers and principals 0% Nov 21 '95 Nov 22 '95 PRE Clerical 229 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to the secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% Nov 21 '95 Dec 21 '95 Primary Leaders 230 MR 2ND QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% Nov 21 '95 Mar 22 '96 Jackson 231 MR Advise program managers and principals on Programs Budget Document 0% Nov 21 '95 Jan 13 '96 Asst. Supts, Lewis 232 MR Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 2nd Quarter PBD diskettes 0% Jan 6 '96 Jan 6 '96 Lewis Page 29 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 233 Code MR Name___________________ Diskettes due back to PRE % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jan 13 '96 Scheduled Finish Jan 13 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Program Managers,Principals 234 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% Jan 13 '96 Jan 26 '96 PRE Clerical 235 MR PRE generates hard copies of diskettes 0% Jan 15 '96 Jan 31 '96 PRE Clerical 236 MR PRE revises narrative and the controller provides financial info for Program Budget Document Reports (DSeg and NonDSeg) 0% Jan 29 '96 Feb 3 '96 Lewis,Milhollen 237 MR PRE combines all revised information for 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Jan 29 '96 Feb 3 '96 Lewis,PRE Clerical 238 MR Submit report to Attorney for review 0% Feb 14 '96 Feb 19'96 Attorney,Jackson 239 MR Prepare publication of 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Feb 22 '96 Feb 22 '96 Lewis 240 MR Submit 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% Feb 23 '96 Feb 23 '96 Jackson,Attorney Page 30 FY97 August 31 '95J Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 241 Code MR Name Return diskettes and paper copies to principals and program managers % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Feb 23 '96 Scheduled Finish Feb 24 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names PRE Clerical 242 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% Feb 23 '96 Mar 22 '96 Primary Leaders 243 MR 3RD QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% Feb 23 '96 Jun 24 '96 Jackson 244 MR Advise program managers and principals on the Program Budget Document 0% Feb 23 '96 Apr 12'96 Asst. Supts,Lewis 245 MR Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 3rd Quarter PBD diskettes 0% Mar 7 '96 Mar 7 '96 Lewis 246 MR Diskettes due back to PRE 0% Apr 12 '96 Apr 12 '96 Principals,Program Managers 247 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% Apr 15'96 Apr 28 '96 PRE Clerical 248 MR PRE generate hard copies of diskettes 0% Apr 15'96 May 3 '96 PRE Clerical Page 31 FY97 August 31 '95 |Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 249 Code MR Name __________________________ PRE revises narrative and the controller provides financial information for 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Apr 29 '96 Scheduled Finish May 3 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Lewis,Milhollen 250 MR PRE combines all revised information for 3rd Quarter PBD Reports 0% May 6 '96 May 10 '96 Lewis,PRE Clerical 251 MR Submit report to Attorney for review 0% May 13 '96 May 16'96 Lewis 252 MR Prepare publication of 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% May 20 '96 May 23 '96 Lewis 253 MR Submit 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document to Court 0% May 24 '96 May 24 '96 Jackson .Attorney 254 MR Return diskettes and paper copies to principals and program managers 0% May 24 '96 May 27 '96 PRE Clerical 255 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% May 24 '96 Jun 24 '96 Primary Leaders 256 MR 4th QUARTER PROGRAM BVOCLI DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% May 9 '96 Aug 31 '96 Jackson Page 32 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 257 Code MR Name Advise program managers and principals on Program Budget Document % Complete 0% Scheduled Start May 22 '96 Scheduled Finish Jul 22 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names____________ Asst. Supts,Lewis,PRE Clerical 258 MR Send reminder notice for completing the PBD to principals and program managers 0% May 9 '96 May 15'96 Lewis 259 MR Principals submit School Operations Diskettes to Asst. Supts. 0% Jun 10 '96 260 MR Diskettes due from Program Managers who are on a less than 12 month contract 0% Jun 10 '96 261 MR All Program diskettes due back to PRE 0% Jul 14 '96 262 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up 0% Jul 15'96 263 MR PRE develops narrative and the controller provides financial information for 4th quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Jul 29 '96 264 MR PRE combines all information for 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Jul 29 '96 I Jun 16 '96 Jun 16 '96 Jul 14 '96 Jul 28 '96 Aug 4 '96 Aug 4 '96 Page 33 FY97 Principals Program Managers Program Managers PRE Clerical,Lewis Lewis,Milhollen Lewis,PRE Clerical August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 265 Code MR Name__________________________ Submit report to Attorney for review % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Aug 12 '96 Scheduled Finish Aug 12'96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 266 MR Prepare for publications the 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Aug 16 '96 Aug 19 '96 Lewis 267 MR Submit 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% Aug 22 '96 268 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% Aug 1 '96 269 MR PRE house diskettes as 1996-97 school year begins 0% Jun 16 '96 270 MR SUBMIT MONTHLY MANAGEMENT REPORT [MANAGEMENT TOOLI TQ COURT 15'% Jul 31 '95 271 MR Submit July's monthly management report to Court 100% Jul 31 '95 272 MR Submit August's monthly management report to Court 100% Aug 31 '95 I Aug 22 '96 Aug 31 '96 Aug 22 '96 Aug 31 '96 Jul 31 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson .Attorney Primary Leaders Lewis Jackson Jackson,Attorney Jackson,Attorney Page 34 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 273 Code MR Name Submit September's monthly management report to Court % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 29 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 29 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson ,Attorney 274 MR Submit October's monthly management report to Court 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Attorney 275 MR Submit November's monthly management report to Court 0% Nov 30 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson .Attorney 276 MR Submit December's monthly management report to Court 0% Dec 21 '95 Dec 21 '95 Jackson,Attorney 277 MR Submit January's monthly management report to Court 0% Jan 31 '96 Jan 31 '96 Jackson,Attorney 278 MR Submit February's monthly management report to Court 0% Feb 29 '96 Feb 29 '96 Jackson,Attorney 279 MR Submit March's monthly management report to Court 0% Mar 29 '96 Mar 29 '96 Jackson,Attorney 280 MR Submit April's monthly management report to Court 0% Apr 30 '96 Apr 30 '96 Jackson ,Attorney Page 35 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 281 Code MR Name________________________________ Submit May's monthly management report to Court % Complete 0% Scheduled Start May 31 '96 Scheduled Finish May 31 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson, Attorney 282 MR Submit June's monthly management report to Court 0% Jun 28 '96 Jun 28 '96 Jackson,Attorney 283 MR Submit July's monthly management report to Court 0% Jul 31 '96 Jul 31 '96 Jackson .Attorney 284 MR Submit August's monthly management report to Court 0% Aug 31 '96 Aug 31 '96 Jackson 285 ORG REASSESSMENT OF PROCESS AND ORGANIZATION 1996-97 12% Jul 5 '95 Aug 30 '96 Jackson.Attornev 286 ORG Analyze, reassess, and revise planning organization and structure 10% Jul 5 '95 Jul 28 '96 Williams,Jackson 287 ORG Revise, discuss and reach consensus regarding format and tasking of 1996-97 Management Tool 100% Jul 5 '95 Jul 24 '95 Cabinet,Lewis, Jackson 288 ORG Initial circulation of 1996-97 Management Tool 100% Jul 13'95 Jul 31 '95 Lewis,Jackson Page 36 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 289 Code ORG Name________________________________ Evaluate tasking of 1996-97 Management Tool % Complete 5% Scheduled Start Jul 24 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Cabinet,Lewis Page 37 FY97 August 31 '95Quarter 3rd Quarter ID 1 Name % Complete 100% May I Jun Jul | Aug | Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 2 Identify and revise DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% 3 Review and adjust primary and secondary leaders for DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% 4 Finalize list of DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% I 5 Generate a Program Inventory Report for 1995-96 100% fi 66% 7 Notify program managers that program evaluation begins in fall\nbegin data collection 100% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  PagelID 8 Name Review/revise process for cabinet review of program evaluations % Complete 100% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 9 Review/revise program evaluation instrument 100% 10 Distribute program evaluation instruments and instructions to primary and/or secondary leaders\nprovide additonal information/instruments, if needed 100% 11 Conduct required training sessions describing the process and evaluation criteria for designated staff 100% 12 Program evaluations due from secondary or primary leaders 0% I 13 Review program evaluations (DSeg and NonDSeg) for potential target programs for extended evaluations 0% 14 Finalize identification of extended evaluation targets 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page2ID 15 Name Notify appropriate staff to prepare Extended Program Evaluations % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec s 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 16 Extended evaluations due 0% I 17 Cabinet review extended evaluations for merge into needs assessment report 0% s Ifi 0% 19 Review types of data to measure needs of district for FY 96-97 0% 3 20 Analyze results of the budgeting and planning priorities revealed from the 94-95 Needs Assessment Report 0% 2 21 Review current mission statement and goals of the District 0% 3 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress  Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  PagesID 22 Name________________________________ Board identifies District concerns for input from public at Town Hall/District Dialogues % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 23 STANFORD 8 TEST DATA STUDY 0% 24 Define purpose and scope for Stanford 8 Test data study 0% 25 Assign responsibilities for study of Stanford 8 Test data 0% 26 Design data collection plan for study of Stanford 0% 3 27 Collect and analyze data from Stanford 8 Test 0% 28 Prepare Stanford 8 Test Report 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page4ID 29 2Q 31 32 33 34 35 Name Submit Stanford 8 Test Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment PRE EDUCATIONAL EQUITY MONITORING REPORTS SURVEY Define purpose and scope for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study Assign responsibilities for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study Analyze data from PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Studies Prepare PRE Educational Equity Monitoring findings Submit PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical % Complete 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Noncritical Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 0 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec I 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec Progress hi Milestone | Summary Rolled Up Q PagesID Name SCHOOL CLIMATE/HUMAN RELATIONS SURVEY ISC/HRISTUDY % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 37 Define purpose and scope of SC/HR Survey 0% 0 I 38 Assign responsibilities for SC/HR data collections 0% 0 39 Design data collection plan for study of SC/HR 0% 0 40 Collect and analyze data from SC/HR Survey 0% 41 Prepare SC/HR Survey Report 0% 42 Submit SC/HR Survey Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  PagesID 42 Name PORPQRTIONALS ALLOCATION FORMULAS STUDY % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 44 Define purpose and scope of Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% s 45 Assign responsibilities for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% 46 Design data collections plan for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Q 47 Collect and analyze data for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% 48 Prepare Proportional Allocation Formulas Report 0% 49 Submit Proportional Allocations Formulas Study Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing 0% I Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page?r ID Name_______________________________ DISTRICTWIDE FACILITIES STUDY % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 51 Define purpose and scope of Districtwide Facilities Study/Report from 1994-95 Study for purposes of 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report 0% 0 52 Assign responsibilities for the Districtwide Facilities Study/Reporting of findings 0% 0 53 Prepare findings from the Districtwide Facilities Study 0% 54 5S 56 Submit Districtwide Facilities Study Report recommendations to PRE for merge into needs assessment report DESEGREGATION MONITORING REPORTS AUDIT FROM OOM Define purpose and scope of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% 0% 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  PagesID 57 Name Assign responsibility for data collection of transcripts and Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 58 Design data collection plan for study of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% 59 Collect data 0% 60 Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% 61 Report findings to PRE 0% 62 2 Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document COURT ORDERS AUDIT Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical 0% 0% I Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page9ID 64 Name Define purpose and scope of Court Orders Audit % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 65 Assign responsibility for data collection of Court Orders Audit 0% 0 66 Collect data 0% 67 Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% 68 Report findings to PRE 0% 69 Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document 0% 2fl TOWN HALL MEETINGS 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Paget0ID 71 Name Define purpose and scope of Town Hall Meetings % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep Q 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 72 Review previous years data from Town Hall Report 0% 73 Design data collection plan for Town Hall Meetings 0% s 74 Set locations and schedule for Town Hall Meeting 0% 75 Develop advertisement plan and schedule for Town Hall Meetings\nPrepare sample agenda 0% 0 76 Review and revise data collection tool (matrix) for Town Hall Meetings 0% 0 77 Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting I 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Paget 1ID 78 Name Conduct Town Hall Meeting I % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 4th Quarter Sep Oct I Nov I Dec 79 Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting I for input into matrix 0% 80 Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting II 0% 81 Conduct Town Hall Meeting II 0% 82 Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting II for input into matrix 0% 83 Execute advertisement plan tor Town Hall Meeting III 0% 84 Finalize and publish Town Hall Meeting Report 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Page12 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Summary Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 85 Name Merge findings of Town Hall Meeting Report, 1995-96 into needs assessment listing % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec as 0% I 87 Define purpose and scope of District Dialogues 0% 0 88 Review previous years data from District Dialogue Report 0% 0 89 Design data collection plan for District Dialogues 0% 0 90 Set locations and schedule for District Dialogue Meetings 0% 0 91 Develop advertisement plan and schedule for District Dialogues: prepare sample agenda 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone | Summary Rolled Up Q Pagel3ID 92 Name Design data collection tool (matrix) for District Dialogue % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep s 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 93 Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue I 0% 94 Conduct District Dialogue I 0% 95 Gather feedback from District Dialogue 1 for input into matrix 0% 96 Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue II 0% 97 Conduct District Dialogue II 0% 98 Gather feedback data from District Dialogue II for input into matrix 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress  Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Paget4ID 99 too 101 102 103 104 105 Name Execute advertisement plan tor District Dialogue III Conduct District Dialogue III Gather feedback data from District Dialogue III for merge into matrix Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue IV Conduct District Dialogue IV Gather feedback data from District Dialogue IV for input into matrix Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue V Project: Date\n8/31/95 Critical % Complete 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Noncritical Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec Progress H Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  PagelsID 106 Name Conduct District Dialogue V % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 4th Quarter Sep Oct I Nov I Dec 107 Gather feedback data from District Dialogue V for input into matrix 0% 108 Finalize and publish District Dialogue Report 1995-96 0% 109 Merge findings of District Dialogue Report 1995-96 into needs assessment listing 0% PREPARE NEEDS ASSESSMENT REPORT 0% 111 Conduct Administrative review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% 112 Conduct Board Work Session for review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Pagel6 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 113 Name Publish Draft of Needs Assessment /Report and disseminate to selected persons % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec I 1 st Quarter 2nd Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Apr | May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 114 Publish Needs Assessment Report, 1995-96 0% Ui 116 117 118 119 PLANNING AND BUDGET GOALS CABINET PLANNING SESSION Review 1994-95 Needs Assessment Report Distribute 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report to Cabinet members Distribute District goals to Cabinet 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% i Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  I Pagel?ID 120 Name Cabinet review of goals % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec I 121 BOARD WORK SESSION 0% 122 Establish date and site for Work Session 0% 123 Identify materials for Board Work Session 0% 124 Prepare materials for Board Work Session 0% 125 Conduct Board Work Session 0% 0 126 Distribute background materials to Board members 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone H Pagel8 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Summary Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 127 Name Review/revise mission statement and goals % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 0 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 128 Review DSeg and NonDSeg Program Inventory 0% 0 129 Review identified proportional allocations 0% 0 130 Establish written priorities 0% 0 131 Identify strategies for funding shortfalls 0% 0 132 Develop timeline for identification and researching of funding shortfall strategies 0% 0 133 Develop communication strategy for mission statement and goals 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Pagel 9ID 134 Name Distribute mission statement and goals % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 135 136 137 138 139 140 Distribute list of priorities BOARD RETREAT Determine date and site for Board Retreat Identify agenda items for Board Retreat Establish agenda for Board Retreat Identify materials for Board Retreat 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% I Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress M Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page20ID 141 Name Distribute materials for Board Retreat % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 142 Conduct data analysis work session In preparation for Board Retreat 0% 143 Conduct Board Retreat 0% 0 144 Report outcomes of Board Retreat 0% 145 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT 0% 146 SUBMIT BUSINESS CASE FOR PROGRAM AND/OR MODIFICATIONS TO SUPERINTENDENT 0% 147 Review process for program development 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress m Milestone  i i Page21 Summary Rolled Up ID 148 Name Use extended program evaluations to identify program additions, modifications, deletions % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 0 149 Notify appropriate staff to prepare Business Cases on results of extended program evaluations 0% 150 Review recommendations from district needs assessment report in order to identify additional programs or programs modifications resulting in business case(s) 0% 151 Business Cases due 0% 152 Review of Business Cases by Cabinet 0% 153 Submit Business Cases for program and/or program modifications to Board of Directors 0% 154 Review of Business Cases by Board 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Page22 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar I I Summary Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 155 Name__________ BUDGETING % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 156 Develop budget preparation training materials 0% 0 I 157 Issue instructions for budget preparation at all levels 0% 8 158 Conduct budget preparation training sessions 0% 0 159 Budget managers develop and submit revised 1995-96 expense budget revisions and 1996-97 expense budget requests 0% 160 Begin districtwide expense budget consolidation and executive review process 0% 161 Year to date revenue expenditure analysis 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page23ID 162 Name Revise financial forecast for coming year % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 0 163 Submit proposed budget to Board 0% I 164 Conduct Board Work Sessions on proposed budget 0% 165 Revise proposed budget, as needed 0% 166 Prepare tentative budget 0% 167 Board review of tentative budget 0% 168 Conduct Board Work Session on tentative Budget 0% I Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress H Milestone H Summary Rolled Up  Page24 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun I 0 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 169 Name Account reconciliation and Purchase Order (PO) clean-up % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 170 171 Receipt of state generated revenue numbers (payroll liabilities, adjusted supplemental payroll, last payroll, Carl Perkins, M to M, JTPA, Vocational Ed.. Chapters 1 and 2. Compensatory Ed.. MFPA.________ Close-out 1995-96 accounts: adjust physical inventory, (fiscal)federal grants, magnet, state grants, accruals 0% 0% 172 Compute ending fund balance 0% I 173 Administrative review of final budget 0% B 174 Submit final budget to Board 0% I 175 Board review and adoption of 96-97 final budget 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress  Milestone | Page25 i .. i Summary Rolled Up ID 176 Name Submit final Budget to Court/Parties % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 177 12a 179 180 181 182 Submit 96-97 final budget to State Staffing First review of changes in course offerings by Board Meeting with counselors and principals to review courses offerings 1995-96 Print secondary course selection sheets Counselors meet with students and complete course selection sheets 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page26ID 183 Name Counselors send course selection sheets to receiving schools % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jut? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 0 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 184 Registrars tally course selections 0% 185 Review course tallies secondary. Note possible staffing changes based on courses requested 0% 186 Identity elementary enrollment (tentative) for 1995-96 0% 187 Make determination by subject area (secondary) of possible changes and by projected elementary enrolled 0% 188 List known retirements, resignations, and intern positions 0% 189 Identify certified personnel for Reduction in Force (RIF), if needed 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up Q V Page27ID 190 Name Notify certified personnel of Reduction in Force (RIF), if needed staff reduction % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 191 Recall certified personnel from RIF, if needed 0% 192 Notify classified personnel of staff reduction 0% 193 Recall classified personnel from RIF, if needed 0% 194 PROVIDE BROAD-BASED INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL FEEDBACK 0% 195 Plan for internal and external feedback. Set locations and dates 0% 196 Execute advertisement for district feedback. Session I 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page28 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 197 Name Conduct District Feedback Session I % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jut? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter 2nd Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar ~Apr | May | Jun 198 Execute advertisement plan for district feedback. Session II 0% 199 Conduct District Feedback Session II 0% 200 Execute advertisement for district feedback. Session III 0% 201 Conduct district feedback. Session III 0% 202 Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall feedback, Session I 0% 203 Conduct district feedback, Session I 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page29 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 204 Name Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall feedback, Session II % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter 2nd Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Apr | May | Jun 205 Conduct district feedback , Session II 0% 206 Execute advertisement for Town Hall feedback, Session III 0% 207 202 209 210 Conduct district feedback. Session III MONITORING AND REPORTING OF DESEG AND NONDESEG PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS tISI QUARTER: 2ND QUARTER: 3RD QUARTER: 4TH QUARTERI PRE performs necessary diskette management functions for the summer ( i.e. archival filing, achievement erasures, copying, etc.) Revise written program budget document instructions, as needed Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical 0% 14% 100% 68% a Progress h Milestone | Page30 Summary Rolled Up  3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 211 Name__________________________________ PRE fonward program budget document diskettes to principals and program managers % Complete 68% Quarter May I Jur? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 5 Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 212 Distribute written program budget document instructions to principals and program managers 0% 3 213 Plan maintenance education and orientation regarding the program budget document process 100% 214 215 Conduct maintenance education workshops and orientation sessions regarding the program budget document process for principals, clerical staff, program managers, primary and secondary leaders___________________ 1ST QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% 18% 216 Advise program managers and principals on program budget document 25% 217 Generate diskette management flow information to relative staff School Operations and PRE office 100% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page31ID 218 Name Plan training sessions on the Program Budget Document and WordPerfect % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 219 Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 1st Quarter PBD diskettes 0% I 220 DSeg and NonDSeg diskettes returned to PRE 0% 221 PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% 222 PRE generate hard copies of diskettes 0% 223 PRE develops narrative and the Controller provides financial info for the PBD reports 0% 224 PRE combines all information for the 1st Quarter Program Budget Report 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page32ID 225 Name Submit report to Attorney for review % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 226 Prepare for publication of 1st Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% I 227 Submit 1st Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% I 228 Return diskettes and hard copies to managers and principals 0% 229 Primary leaders provide feedback to the secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% 230 2ND QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% 231 Advise program managers and principals on Programs Budget Document 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page33ID 232 Name Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 2nd Quarter PBD diskettes % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 4th Quarter 1st Quarter 233 Diskettes due back to PRE 0% 234 PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% 235 PRE generates hard copies of diskettes 0% 236 PRE revises narrative and the controller provides financial info for Program Budget Document Reports (DSeg and NonDSeg) 0% 237 PRE combines all revised information for 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% 238 Submit report to Attorney for review 0% Sep Oct I Nov I Dec Jan | Feb | Mar I Q B B Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page34 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 239 Name Prepare publication of 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 240 Submit 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% 241 Return diskettes and paper copies to principals and program managers 0% 242 Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% 243 3RD QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% 244 Advise program managers and principals on the Program Budget Document 0% 245 Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 3rd Quarter PBD diskettes 0% I Project: Date\n8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone H Summary Rolled Up  Page35ID 246 Name Diskettes due back to PRE % Complete 0% Quarter May I JurT 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 247 PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% 248 PRE generate hard copies of diskettes 0% 249 PRE revises narrative and the controller provides financial information for 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Q 250 PRE combines all revised information for 3rd Quarter PBD Reports 0% 251 Submit report to Attorney for review 0% 0 252 Prepare publication of 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page36ID 253 Name Submit 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document to Court % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 254 Return diskettes and paper copies to principals and program managers 0% 0 255 25e 257 258 259 Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 4th QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS Advise program managers and principals on Program Budget Document Send reminder notice for completing the PBD to principals and program managers Principals submit School Operations Diskettes to Asst. Supts. 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page37ID 260 Name Diskettes due from Program Managers who are on a less than 12 month contract % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 261 All Program diskettes due back to PRE 0% 262 PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up 0% 263 PRE develops narrative and the controller provides financial information for 4th quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% 264 PRE combines all information for 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% 265 Submit report to Attorney tor review 0% 266 Prepare for publications the 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress  Milestone  Summary Rolled Up Q Page38 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep I 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 267 Name Submit 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jur? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep I 268 Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% 269 PRE house diskettes as 1996-97 school year begins 0% 270 SUBMIT MONTHLY MANAGEMENT REPORT (MANAGEMENT TOOLI TO COURT 15% 271 Submit July's monthly management report to Court 100% 272 Submit August's monthly management report to Court 100% 273 Submit Septembers monthly management report to Court 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page39 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 274 Name__________________________________ Submit October's monthly management report to Court % Complete 0% Quarter May I Juri 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 275 Submit November's monthly management report to Court 0% I 276 Submit December's monthly management report to Court 0% I 277 Submit January's monthly management report to Court 0% I 278 Submit February's monthly management report to Court 0% I 279 Submit March's monthly management report to Court 0% 280 Submit April's monthly management report to Court 0% I Project\nDate: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress M Milestone I Summary Rolled Up  Page40ID 281 Name Submit May's monthly management report to Court % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun I 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 282 Submit June's monthly management report to Court 0% I 283 Submit July's monthly management report to Court 0% 284 2a\u0026amp; 286 287 I Submit August's monthly management report to Court ORGANIZATION 1996-97 Analyze, reassess, and revise planning organization and structure Revise, discuss and reach consensus regarding format and tasking of 1996-97 Management Tool Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai 0% 12% 10% 100% Progress H Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page41ID 288 Name Initial circulation of 1996-97 Management Tool % Complete 100% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 289 Evaluate tasking of 1996-97 Management Tool 5% Project\nDate: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page42\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_618","title":"Program planning and budget tool, FY 1997","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":["1995-08-31"],"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","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Program planning and budget tool, FY 1997"],"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/618"],"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 Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 1 Code PINV Name % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Jul 3 '9-5 Scheduled Finish Aug 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 2 PINV Identify and revise DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% Jul 3 '95 Aug 11 '95 Jackson,Lewis,Smith 3 PINV Review and adjust primary and secondary leaders for DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% Jul 17'95 Aug 14 '95 Lewis,Mayo 4 PINV Finalize list of DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% Aug 15 '95 Aug 18 '95 Jackson, Lewis 5 PINV Generate a Program Inventory Report for 1995-96 100% Aug 18 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson,Lewis  PEVAL 66% Jul 3 '95 Nov 22 '95 Jackson RECEIVED MIR 3 1 1995 7 PEVAL Notify program managers that program evaluation begins in fall\nbegin data collection 100% Jul 3 '95 Jul 28 '95 Jackson Office Of Desegregation Monitoring 8 PEVAL Review/revise process for cabinet review of program evaluations 100% Aug 1 '95 Aug 15 '95 Jackson,Cabinet Page 1 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 9 Code PEVAL Name Review/revise program evaluation instrument % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Aug 1 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Cabinet,Jackson 10 PEVAL Distribute program evaluation instruments and instructions to primary and/or secondary leaders\nprovide additonal information/instruments, if needed 100% Aug 25 '95 Aug 25 '95 Jackson 11 PEVAL Conduct required training sessions describing the process and evaluation criteria for designated staff 100% Aug 4 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson 12 PEVAL Program evaluations due from secondary or primary leaders 0% Sep 15 '95 Sep 15 '95 Cabinet 13 PEVAL Review program evaluations (DSeg and NonDSeg) for potential target programs for extended evaluations 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 2 '95 Cabinet 14 PEVAL Finalize identification of extended evaluation targets 0% Oct 2 '95 Oct 13'95 Cabinet 15 PEVAL Notify appropriate staff to prepare Extended Program Evaluations 0% Oct 16 '95 Oct 20 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 16 PEVAL Extended evaluations due 0% Nov 13'95 Nov 13'95 Program Managers Page 2 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 17 Code PEVAL Name______________________________ Cabinet review extended evaluations for merge into needs assessment report % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 17'95 Scheduled Finish Nov 22 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 18 NEEDS 0% Sep 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson.Cabinet 19 NEEDS Review types of data to measure needs of district for FY 96-97 0% Sep 1 '95 Sep 8 '95 Cabinet,Jackson 20 NEEDS Analyze results of the budgeting and planning priorities revealed from the 94-95 Needs Assessment Report 0% Sep 1 '95 Sep 8 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 21 NEEDS Review current mission statement and goals of the District 0% Sep 1 '95 Sep 8 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 22 NEEDS Board identifies District concerns for input from public at Town Hall/District Dialogues 0% Sep 14 '95 Sep 14 '95 Williams,Board 28 NEEDS STANFORD 8 TEST DATA STUDY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson 24 NEEDS Define purpose and scope for Stanford 8 Test data study 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Jackson,Cabinet Page 3 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 25 Code NEEDS Name Assign responsibilities for study of Stanford 8 Test data % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 26 NEEDS Design data collection plan for study of Stanford 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Dunbar 27 NEEDS Collect and analyze data from Stanford 8 Test 0% Sep 15'95 Oct 13'95 Jackson, Dunbar,Savage 28 NEEDS Prepare Stanford 8 Test Report 0% Oct 13 '95 Oct 31 '95 Dunbar 29 NEEDS Submit Stanford 8 Test Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Dunbar 3Q NEEDS PRE EDUCATIONAL EQUITY MONITORING REPORTS SURVEY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson 31 NEEDS Define purpose and scope for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 32 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson Page 4 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 33 Code NEEDS Name Analyze data from PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Studies % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 30 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Smith 34 NEEDS Prepare PRE Educational Equity Monitoring findings 0% Oct 2 '95 Oct 13'95 Smith 35 NEEDS Submit PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing 0% Oct 31 '95 I Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Smith as NEEDS SCHOOL CLIMATE/HUMAN RELATIONS SURVEY (SC/HRISTUDY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson 37 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of SC/HR Survey 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 38 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for SC/HR data collections 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson 39 NEEDS Design data collection plan for study of SC/HR 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Jackson,Hobby 40 NEEDS Collect and analyze data from SC/HR Survey 0% Sep 15 '95 Oct 13'95 Jackson,Hobby Page 5 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 41 Code NEEDS Name Prepare SC/HR Survey Report % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Oct 13'95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Hobby 42 NEEDS Submit SC/HR Survey Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Hobby I 42 NEEDS PORPQRTIONALS ALLOCATION FORMULAS STUDY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith.Milhollen 44 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Smith.Milhollen,Cabinet 45 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Smith 46 NEEDS Design data collections plan for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Smith 47 NEEDS Collect and analyze data for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 15 '95 Oct 13'95 Hurley,Eaton,Gadberry,Neal,Milhollen,Smith 48 NEEDS Prepare Proportional Allocation Fomiulas Report 0% Oct 13'95 Oct 31 '95 Milhollen,Hurley,Eaton,Neal,Smith Page 6 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 49 Code NEEDS Name Submit Proportional Allocations Formulas Study Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Oct 31 '95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Milhollen 5Q NEEDS DISTRICTWIDE FACILITIES STUDY 0% Seo 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith 51 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Districtwide Facilities Study/Report from 1994-95 Study for purposes of 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Williams,Smith,Cabinet 52 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for the Districtwide Facilities Study/Reporting of findings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Smith,Eaton 53 NEEDS Prepare findings from the Districtwide Facilities Study 0% Sep 16 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith,Mayo,Eaton 54 NEEDS Submit Districtwide Facilities Study Report recommendations to PRE for merge into needs assessment report 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith,Mayo,Eaton 55 NEEDS DESEGREGATION MONITORING REPORTS AUDIT FROM PPM 0% Seo 11 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mavo 56 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Williams,Mayo, Cabinet Page 7 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 57 Code NEEDS Name_______________________________ Assign responsibility for data collection of transcripts and Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Mayo 58 NEEDS Design data collection plan for study of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Mayo 59 NEEDS Collect data 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 13'95 Mayo 60 NEEDS Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% Oct 16'95 Oct 31 '95 Mayo 61 NEEDS Report findings to PRE 0% Oct 31 '95 Nov 18'95 Mayo 62 NEEDS Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mayo,Lewis 2 NEEDS COURT ORDERS AUDIT 0% Seo 11 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mavo 64 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Court Orders Audit 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Cabinet,Mayo Page 8 FY97 August 31 '95ID 65 Code NEEDS Name Assign responsibility for data collection of Court Orders Audit Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15'95 Revised Finish Resource Names Mayo 66 NEEDS Collect data 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 13'95 Mayo 67 NEEDS Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% Oct 16 '95 Oct 31 '95 Mayo 68 NEEDS Report findings to PRE 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 18 '95 Mayo 69 NEEDS Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mayo, Lewis 22 NEEDS TOWN HALL MEETINGS 0% Seo 11 '95 Nov 21 '95 Williams, Jackson.Modeste 71 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Town Hall Meetings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Jackson,Modeste,Cabinet 72 NEEDS Review previous years data from Town Hall Report 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Modeste, Jackson, Vann Page 9 FY 97 August 31 '95 ILittle Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 73 Code NEEDS Name ___________________________ Design data collection plan for Town Hall Meetings % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15'95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Vann,Lewis 74 NEEDS Set locations and schedule for Town Hall Meeting 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Vann.Modeste 75 NEEDS Develop advertisement plan and schedule for Town Hall Meetings\nPrepare sample agenda 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Vann.Modeste 76 NEEDS Review and revise data collection tool (matrix) for Town Hall Meetings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Modeste,Lewis 77 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting I 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann.Modeste 78 NEEDS Conduct Town Hall Meeting I 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Williams 79 NEEDS Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting I for input into matrix 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 80 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting II 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Modeste Page 10 FY 97 August 31 '95I Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 81 Code NEEDS Name_____________________ Conduct Town Hall Meeting II % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18'95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams 82 NEEDS Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting II for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 83 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting III 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 31 '95 Vann.Modeste 84 NEEDS Finalize and publish Town Hall Meeting Report 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Modeste,Lewis 85 NEEDS Merge findings of Town Hall Meeting Report, 1995-96 into needs assessment listing 0% Nov 15'95 Nov 21 '95 Jackson,Lewis as NEEDS DISTRICT DIALOGUES 0% Sep 11 '95 Nov 21 '95 Williams. Jackson.Modeste 87 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of District Dialogues 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Williams, Jackson,Modeste,Cabinet 88 NEEDS Review previous years data from District Dialogue Report 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Modeste,Vann Page 11 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 89 Code NEEDS Name_____________________________ Design data collection plan for District Dialogues % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Vann,Modeste 90 NEEDS Set locations and schedule for District Dialogue Meetings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Modeste.Vann 91 NEEDS Develop advertisement plan and schedule for District Dialogues\nprepare sample agenda 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Vann,Modeste 92 NEEDS Design data collection tool (matrix) for District Dialogue 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Modeste,Jackson 93 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue I 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Modeste 94 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue I 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Williams 95 NEEDS Gather feedback from District Dialogue 1 for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 96 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue 11 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Modeste Page 12 FY97 August 31 '95ID 97 Code NEEDS Name Conduct District Dialogue II 98 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue II for input into matrix 99 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue III 100 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue III 101 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue III for merge into matrix 102 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue IV 103 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue IV 104 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue IV for input into matrix Page 13 Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18 '95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Sep 18 '95 Sep 18'95 Sep 18 '95 Sep 18 '95 Sep 18 '95 Sep 18 '95 Sep 18 '95 FY97 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis Vann,Modeste Williams Vann,Lewis Vann,Modeste Williams Vann,Lewis August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 105 Code NEEDS Name Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue V % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18 '95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Vann,Modeste 106 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue V 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Williams 107 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue V for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 108 NEEDS Finalize and publish District Dialogue Report 1995-96 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Jackson,Lewis 109 NEEDS Merge findings of District Dialogue Report 1995-96 into needs assessment listing 0% Nov 15'95 Nov 21 '95 Jackson, Lewis Ufl NEEDS PREPARE NEEDS ASSESSMENT REPORT 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson 111 NEEDS Conduct Administrative review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Jackson,Cabinet 112 NEEDS Conduct Board Work Session for review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Williams, Jackson, Board Page 14 FY97 August 31 '95ID 113 Code NEEDS Name Publish Draft of Needs Assessment /Report and disseminate to selected persons Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 27 '95 Scheduled Finish Nov 27 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Cabinet 114 NEEDS Publish Needs Assessment Report, 1995-96 0% Nov 30 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson 115 GOAL PLANNING AND BUDGET GOALS 0% Oct 2 '95 Jan 31 '96 Jackson US GOALS CABINET PLANNING SESSION Oct 2 '95 Dec 11 '95 Jackson.Cabinet 117 GOALS Review 1994-95 Needs Assessment Report 0% Oct 2 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 118 GOALS Distribute 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report to Cabinet members 0% Dec 1 '95 Dec 8 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 119 GOALS Distribute District goals to Cabinet 0% Dec 1 '95 Dec 8 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 120 GOALS Cabinet review of goals 0% Dec 11 '95 Dec 11 '95 Jackson,Cabinet Page 15 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 121 Code GOALS Name BOARD WORK SESSION % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 15 '95 Scheduled Finish Dec 19 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson.Williams 122 GOALS Establish date and site for Work Session 0% Nov 1595 Nov 30 '95 Williams,Cabinet 123 GOALS Identify materials for Board Work Session 0% Nov 15'95 124 GOALS Prepare materials for Board Work Session 0% Nov 15'95 125 GOALS Conduct Board Work Session 0% Dec 12'95 126 GOALS Distribute background materials to Board members 0% Dec 12'95 127 GOALS Review/revise mission statement and goals 0% Dec 12 '95 128 GOALS Review DSeg and NonDSeg Program Inventory 0% Dec 12'95 Page 16 FY97 I Nov 30 '95 Nov 30 '95 Dec 15 '95 Dec 15 '95 Dec 15 '95 Dec 15 '95 Jackson,Williams Jackson Board,Williams Jackson Board Board August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 129 Code GOALS Name Review identified proportional allocations % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Dec 12 '95 Scheduled Finish Dec 15'95 Revised Finish Resource Names Board 130 GOALS Establish written priorities 0% Dec 12 '95 Dec 15 '95 Board 131 GOALS Identify strategies for funding shortfalls D'ye Dec 12 '95 Dec 15'95 Board 132 GOALS Develop timeline for identification and researching of funding shortfall strategies 0% Dec 12'95 Dec 15'95 Board 133 GOALS Develop communication strategy for mission statement and goals 0% Dec 14'95 Dec 14 '95 Williams,Vann 134 GOALS Distribute mission statement and goals 0% Dec 19'95 Dec 19'95 Jackson,Vann 135 GOALS Distribute list of priorities 0% Dec 19 '95 Dec 19 '95 Jackson,Vann 136 GOALS BOARD RETREAT 0% Dec 8 '95 Jan 31 '96 Williams Page 17 FY 97 August 31 '95 JLittle Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 137 Code GOALS Name Determine date and site for Board Retreat % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Dec 8 '95 Scheduled Finish Dec 20 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams,Board 138 GOALS Identify agenda items for Board Retreat 0% Dec 8 '95 Dec 20 '95 Williams,Board 139 GOALS Establish agenda for Board Retreat 0% Dec 8 '95 Dec 20 '95 Williams,Boa rd 140 GOALS Identify materials for Board Retreat 0% Dec 8 '95 Dec 20 '95 Williams,Jackson 141 GOALS Distribute materials for Board Retreat 0% Jan 9 '96 Jan 10 '96 Williams,Jackson 142 GOALS Conduct data analysis work session in preparation for Board Retreat 0% Jan 12'96 Jan 12'96 Williams,Cabinet 143 GOALS Conduct Board Retreat 0% Jan 22 '96 Jan 26 '96 Williams,Board 144 GOALS Report outcomes of Board Retreat 0% Jan 31 '96 Jan 31 '96 Williams,Board Page 18 FY97 August 31 '95ID 145 Code PDEV Name PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start May 22 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson.Cabinet 146 PDEV SUBMIT BUSINESS CASE FOR ERQGRAM AND/OR MODIFICATIONS TO SUPERINTENDENT 0% Nov 1 '95 Feb 22 '96 Williams.Jackson 147 PDEV Review process for program development 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 10'95 Cabinet 148 PDEV Use extended program evaluations to identify program additions, modifications, deletions 0% Nov 17'95 Nov 27 '95 Cabinet 149 PDEV Notify appropriate staff to prepare Business Cases on results of extended program evaluations 0% Nov 17'95 Nov 30 '95 Cabinet 150 PDEV Review recommendations from district needs assessment report in order to identify additional programs or programs modifications resulting in business case(s) 0% Dec 5 '95 Dec 11 '95 Cabinet 151 PDEV Business Cases due 0% Jan 8 '96 Jan 8 '96 Primary Leaders 152 PDEV Review of Business Cases by Cabinet 0% Jan 15 '96 Jan 22 '96 Cabinet Page 19 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 153 Code PDEV Name Submit Business Cases for program and/or program modifications to Board of Directors % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Feb 8 '96 Scheduled Finish Feb 8 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Williams 154 PDEV Review of Business Cases by Board 0% Feb 8 '96 Feb 22 '96 Board 155 BUDGT BUDGETING 0% Nov 20 '95 Aug 30 '96 Smith.Gadberrv.Hurlev.Milhollen 156 BUDGT Develop budget preparation training materials 0% Nov 20 '95 Nov 27 '95 Smith.Milhollen 157 BUDGT Issue instructions for budget preparation at all levels 0% Nov 28 '95 Nov 30 '95 Smith 158 BUDGT Conduct budget preparation training sessions 0% Dec 1 '95 Dec 8 '95 Smith 159 BUDGT Budget managers develop and submit revised 1995-96 expense budget revisions and 1996-97 expense budget requests 0% Dec 11 '95 Jan 6 '96 Milhollen, Smith 160 BUDGT Begin districtwide expense budget consolidation and executive review process 0% Jan 9 '96 Mar 8 '96 Smith Page 20 FY97 August 31 '95ID 161 Code BUDGT Name________________________________ Year to date revenue expenditure analysis Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jan 9 '96 Scheduled Finish Jan 31 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Smith,Milhollen 162 BUDGT Revise financial forecast for coming year 0% Feb 26 '96 Mar 6 '96 Smith 163 BUDGT Submit proposed budget to Board 0% Mar 14 '96 Mar 14 '96 Williams 164 BUDGT Conduct Board Work Sessions on proposed budget 0% Mar 18'96 Mar 29 '96 Smith, Board,Williams 165 BUDGT Revise proposed budget, as needed 0% Mar 14 '96 Apr 2 '96 Smith, Milhollen 166 BUDGT Prepare tentative budget 0% Apr 3 '96 May 13 '96 Smith,Milhollen 167 BUDGT Board review of tentative budget 0% May 23 '96 May 23 '96 Board,Smith 168 BUDGT Conduct Board Work Session on tentative Budget 0% May 24 '96 May 31 '96 Board,Williams Page 21 FY 97 August 31 '95 |Little RocR School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 169 Code BUDGT Name Account reconciliation and Purchase Order (PO) clean-up % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jun 17 '96 Scheduled Finish Jul 12'96 Revised Finish Resource Names Eaton 170 BUDGT 171 BUDGT Receipt of state generated revenue numbers (payroll liabilities, adjusted supplemental payroll, last payroll, Carl Perkins, M to M, JTPA, Vocational Ed., Chapters 1 and 2, Compensatory Ed., MFPA, Transportation, ABC) Close-out 1995-96 accounts\nadjust physical inventory, (fiscal)federal grants, magnet, state grants, accruals 0% 0% 172 BUDGT Compute ending fund balance 0% 173 BUDGT Administrative review of final budget 0% 174 BUDGT Submit final budget to Board 0% 175 BUDGT Board review and adoption of 96-97 final budget 0% 176 BUDGT Submit final Budget to Court/Parties 0% Jun 16 '96 Jun 16 '96 Milhollen, Smith Jul 1 '96 Jul 19'96 Smith,Milhollen,Cabinet Jul 22 '96 Jul 22 '96 Milhollen,Smith Jul 24 '96 Jul 29 '96 VVilliams,Cabinet Page 22 Aug 1 '96 Aug 1 '96 Williams,Smith Aug 1 '96 Aug 8 '96 FY 97 Aug 8 '96 Aug 21 '96 Board VVilliams,Attorney August 31 '95ID 177 Code BUDGT Name_________________________ Submit 96-97 final budget to State Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Aug 21 '96 Scheduled Finish Aug 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams,Smith ITS BUDGT Staffing 0% Jan 26 '96 Aug 15 '96 Hurley 179 BUDGT First review of changes in course offerings by Board 0% Jan 26 '96 180 BUDGT Meeting with counselors and principals to review courses offerings 1995-96 0% Jan 29 '96 181 BUDGT Print secondary course selection sheets 0% Jan 29 '96 182 BUDGT Counselors meet with students and complete course selection sheets 0% Feb 19'96 183 BUDGT Counselors send course selection sheets to receiving schools 0% Mar 8 '96 184 BUDGT Registrars tally course selections 0% Mar 11 '96 I Feb 8 '96 Feb 15 '96 Feb 15 '96 Mar 8 '96 Mar 11 '96 Mar 29 '96 Page 23 FY97 Board,Williams Elston Williams,Gadberry Principals,Counselors Principals,Counselors Principals,Registrars August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 185 Code BUDGT Name Review course tallies secondary. Note possible staffing changes based on courses requested % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Apr 1 '96 Scheduled Finish Apr 19'96 Revised Finish Resource Names__________ Gadberry, Hurley,Asst. Supts. 186 BUDGT Identify elementary enrollment (tentative) for 1995-96 0% Apr 1 '96 May 19'96 Mayo,Hurley,Gadberry,Asst Supts 187 BUDGT Make determination by subject area (secondary) of possible changes and by projected elementary enrolled 0% Apr 1 '96 Apr 19'96 Gadberry,Hurley,Asst. Supts. 188 BUDGT List known retirements, resignations, and intern positions 0% Apr 3 '96 Apr 24 '96 Gadberry,Hurley 189 BUDGT Identify certified personnel for Reduction in Force (RIF), if needed 0% Apr 17'96 Apr 26 '96 Hurley,Gadberry 190 BUDGT Notify certified personnel of Reduction in Force (RIF), if needed staff reduction 0% Apr 24 '96 Apr 29 '96 Hurley,Gadberry 191 BUDGT Recall certified personnel from RIF, if needed 0% Jun 3 '96 Aug 1 '96 Hurley, Gadberry 192 BUDG Notify classified personnel of staff reduction 0% May 6 '96 Jul 15'96 Hurley,Gadberry Page 24 FY97 August 31 '95I ID 193 Code BUDGT Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool 194 BUDGT 195 BUDGT 196 BUDGT 197 BUDGT 198 BUDGT 199 BUDGT 200 BUDGT Page 25 Name Recall classified personnel from RIF, if needed PROVIDE BROAD-BASED INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL FEEDBACK Plan for internal and external feedback. Set locations and dates Execute advertisement for district feedback. Session I Conduct District Feedback Session I Execute advertisement plan for district feedback. Session II Conduct District Feedback Session II Execute advertisement for district feedback. Session III % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jun 3 '96 Scheduled Finish Aug 15 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Hurley 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% May 22 '95 Apr 30 '96 Modeste. Vann. Williams Feb 1 '96 Feb 1 '96 Feb 1 '96 Feb 1 '96 May 22 '95 Feb 1 '96 FY97 Feb 15'96 Apr 30 '96 Apr 30 '96 Apr 30 '96 Aug 17 '95 Apr 30 '96 Williams,Modeste,Vann Modeste,Vann Williams Modeste,Vann Williams Williams August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 201 Code BUDGT Name____________________________ Conduct district feedback. Session III % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Feb 1 '96 Scheduled Finish Apr 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams 202 BUDGT Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall feedback. Session I 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,Vann 203 BUDGT Conduct district feedback, Session I 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams 204 BUDGT Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall feedback. Session II 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,Vann 205 BUDGT Conduct district feedback , Session II 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams 206 BUDGT Execute advertisement for Town Hall feedback. Session III 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams 207 BUDGT Conduct district feedback. Session III 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,\\/ann 208 MR MONITORING AND REPORTING OF DESEG AND NONDESEG PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS (1ST QUARTER: 2ND QUARTER: 3RD QUARTER: 4TH QUARTER! 14% Aug 1 '95 Aug 31 '96 Jackson Page 26 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 209 Code MR Name PRE performs necessary diskette management functions for the summer ( i.e. archival filing, achievement erasures, copying, etc.) % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Aug 1 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 17'95 Revised Finish Resource Names PRE Clerical 210 MR Revise written program budget document instructions, as needed 68% Aug 31 '95 Sep 5 '95 Lewis 211 MR PRE forward program budget document diskettes to principals and program managers 68% Aug 31 '95 Sep 5 '95 PRE Clerical,Lewis 212 MR Distribute written program budget document instructions to principals and program managers 0% Sep 1 '95 Sep 5 '95 Lewis,PRE Clerical 213 MR Plan maintenance education and orientation regarding the program budget document process 100% Aug 1 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson,Lewis 214 MR 215 MR Conduct maintenance education workshops and orientation sessions regarding the program budget document process for principals, clerical staff, program managers, primary and secondary leaders 1ST QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% 18% 216 MR Advise program managers and principals on program budget document 25% Page 27 Sep 4 '95 Aug 8 '95 Aug 8 '95 FY97 Sep 30 '95 Oct 14 '95 Jackson,Lewis Jackson Asst. Supts,Lewis,PRE Clerical August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 217 Code MR Name___________________________ Generate diskette management flow information to relative staff School Operations and PRE office % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Aug 8 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Lewis 218 MR Plan training sessions on the Program Budget Document and WordPerfect 0% Sep 2 '95 Sep 15 '95 Lewis,Jackson 219 MR Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 1st Quarter PBD diskettes 0% Oct 3 '95 Oct 3 '95 Lewis 220 MR DSeg and NonDSeg diskettes returned to PRE 0% Oct 14 '95 Oct 14'95 Principals,Program Managers 221 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% Oct 16 '95 Nov 8 '95 PRE Clerical,Lewis 222 MR PRE generate hard copies of diskettes 0% Oct 16'95 Nov 8 '95 PRE Clerical 223 MR PRE develops narrative and the Controller provides financial info for the PBD reports 0% Oct 16 '95 Oct 31 '95 Lewis,Milhollen 224 MR PRE combines all information for the 1st Quarter Program Budget Report 0% Oct 31 '95 Nov 8 '95 Lewis,PRE Clerical Page 28 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 225 Code MR Name___________________________ Submit report to Attorney for review % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 8 '95 Scheduled Finish Nov 13'95 Revised Finish Resource Names Lewis 226 MR Prepare for publication of 1st Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Nov 1395 Nov 13'95 Lewis,Jackson 227 MR Submit 1st Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% Nov 21 '95 Nov 21 '95 Jackson .Attorney 228 MR Return diskettes and hard copies to managers and principals 0% Nov 21 '95 Nov 22 '95 PRE Clerical 229 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to the secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% Nov 21 '95 Dec 21 '95 Primary Leaders 230 MR 2ND QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% Nov 21 '95 Mar 22 '96 Jackson 231 MR Advise program managers and principals on Programs Budget Document 0% Nov 21 '95 Jan 13 '96 Asst. Supts, Lewis 232 MR Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 2nd Quarter PBD diskettes 0% Jan 6 '96 Jan 6 '96 Lewis Page 29 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 233 Code MR Name___________________ Diskettes due back to PRE % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jan 13 '96 Scheduled Finish Jan 13 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Program Managers,Principals 234 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% Jan 13 '96 Jan 26 '96 PRE Clerical 235 MR PRE generates hard copies of diskettes 0% Jan 15 '96 Jan 31 '96 PRE Clerical 236 MR PRE revises narrative and the controller provides financial info for Program Budget Document Reports (DSeg and NonDSeg) 0% Jan 29 '96 Feb 3 '96 Lewis,Milhollen 237 MR PRE combines all revised information for 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Jan 29 '96 Feb 3 '96 Lewis,PRE Clerical 238 MR Submit report to Attorney for review 0% Feb 14 '96 Feb 19'96 Attorney,Jackson 239 MR Prepare publication of 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Feb 22 '96 Feb 22 '96 Lewis 240 MR Submit 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% Feb 23 '96 Feb 23 '96 Jackson,Attorney Page 30 FY97 August 31 '95J Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 241 Code MR Name Return diskettes and paper copies to principals and program managers % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Feb 23 '96 Scheduled Finish Feb 24 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names PRE Clerical 242 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% Feb 23 '96 Mar 22 '96 Primary Leaders 243 MR 3RD QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% Feb 23 '96 Jun 24 '96 Jackson 244 MR Advise program managers and principals on the Program Budget Document 0% Feb 23 '96 Apr 12'96 Asst. Supts,Lewis 245 MR Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 3rd Quarter PBD diskettes 0% Mar 7 '96 Mar 7 '96 Lewis 246 MR Diskettes due back to PRE 0% Apr 12 '96 Apr 12 '96 Principals,Program Managers 247 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% Apr 15'96 Apr 28 '96 PRE Clerical 248 MR PRE generate hard copies of diskettes 0% Apr 15'96 May 3 '96 PRE Clerical Page 31 FY97 August 31 '95 |Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 249 Code MR Name __________________________ PRE revises narrative and the controller provides financial information for 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Apr 29 '96 Scheduled Finish May 3 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Lewis,Milhollen 250 MR PRE combines all revised information for 3rd Quarter PBD Reports 0% May 6 '96 May 10 '96 Lewis,PRE Clerical 251 MR Submit report to Attorney for review 0% May 13 '96 May 16'96 Lewis 252 MR Prepare publication of 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% May 20 '96 May 23 '96 Lewis 253 MR Submit 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document to Court 0% May 24 '96 May 24 '96 Jackson .Attorney 254 MR Return diskettes and paper copies to principals and program managers 0% May 24 '96 May 27 '96 PRE Clerical 255 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% May 24 '96 Jun 24 '96 Primary Leaders 256 MR 4th QUARTER PROGRAM BVOCLI DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% May 9 '96 Aug 31 '96 Jackson Page 32 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 257 Code MR Name Advise program managers and principals on Program Budget Document % Complete 0% Scheduled Start May 22 '96 Scheduled Finish Jul 22 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names____________ Asst. Supts,Lewis,PRE Clerical 258 MR Send reminder notice for completing the PBD to principals and program managers 0% May 9 '96 May 15'96 Lewis 259 MR Principals submit School Operations Diskettes to Asst. Supts. 0% Jun 10 '96 260 MR Diskettes due from Program Managers who are on a less than 12 month contract 0% Jun 10 '96 261 MR All Program diskettes due back to PRE 0% Jul 14 '96 262 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up 0% Jul 15'96 263 MR PRE develops narrative and the controller provides financial information for 4th quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Jul 29 '96 264 MR PRE combines all information for 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Jul 29 '96 I Jun 16 '96 Jun 16 '96 Jul 14 '96 Jul 28 '96 Aug 4 '96 Aug 4 '96 Page 33 FY97 Principals Program Managers Program Managers PRE Clerical,Lewis Lewis,Milhollen Lewis,PRE Clerical August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 265 Code MR Name__________________________ Submit report to Attorney for review % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Aug 12 '96 Scheduled Finish Aug 12'96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 266 MR Prepare for publications the 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Aug 16 '96 Aug 19 '96 Lewis 267 MR Submit 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% Aug 22 '96 268 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% Aug 1 '96 269 MR PRE house diskettes as 1996-97 school year begins 0% Jun 16 '96 270 MR SUBMIT MONTHLY MANAGEMENT REPORT [MANAGEMENT TOOLI TQ COURT 15'% Jul 31 '95 271 MR Submit July's monthly management report to Court 100% Jul 31 '95 272 MR Submit August's monthly management report to Court 100% Aug 31 '95 I Aug 22 '96 Aug 31 '96 Aug 22 '96 Aug 31 '96 Jul 31 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson .Attorney Primary Leaders Lewis Jackson Jackson,Attorney Jackson,Attorney Page 34 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 273 Code MR Name Submit September's monthly management report to Court % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 29 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 29 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson ,Attorney 274 MR Submit October's monthly management report to Court 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Attorney 275 MR Submit November's monthly management report to Court 0% Nov 30 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson .Attorney 276 MR Submit December's monthly management report to Court 0% Dec 21 '95 Dec 21 '95 Jackson,Attorney 277 MR Submit January's monthly management report to Court 0% Jan 31 '96 Jan 31 '96 Jackson,Attorney 278 MR Submit February's monthly management report to Court 0% Feb 29 '96 Feb 29 '96 Jackson,Attorney 279 MR Submit March's monthly management report to Court 0% Mar 29 '96 Mar 29 '96 Jackson,Attorney 280 MR Submit April's monthly management report to Court 0% Apr 30 '96 Apr 30 '96 Jackson ,Attorney Page 35 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 281 Code MR Name________________________________ Submit May's monthly management report to Court % Complete 0% Scheduled Start May 31 '96 Scheduled Finish May 31 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson, Attorney 282 MR Submit June's monthly management report to Court 0% Jun 28 '96 Jun 28 '96 Jackson,Attorney 283 MR Submit July's monthly management report to Court 0% Jul 31 '96 Jul 31 '96 Jackson .Attorney 284 MR Submit August's monthly management report to Court 0% Aug 31 '96 Aug 31 '96 Jackson 285 ORG REASSESSMENT OF PROCESS AND ORGANIZATION 1996-97 12% Jul 5 '95 Aug 30 '96 Jackson.Attornev 286 ORG Analyze, reassess, and revise planning organization and structure 10% Jul 5 '95 Jul 28 '96 Williams,Jackson 287 ORG Revise, discuss and reach consensus regarding format and tasking of 1996-97 Management Tool 100% Jul 5 '95 Jul 24 '95 Cabinet,Lewis, Jackson 288 ORG Initial circulation of 1996-97 Management Tool 100% Jul 13'95 Jul 31 '95 Lewis,Jackson Page 36 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 289 Code ORG Name________________________________ Evaluate tasking of 1996-97 Management Tool % Complete 5% Scheduled Start Jul 24 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Cabinet,Lewis Page 37 FY97 August 31 '95Quarter 3rd Quarter ID 1 Name % Complete 100% May I Jun Jul | Aug | Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 2 Identify and revise DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% 3 Review and adjust primary and secondary leaders for DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% 4 Finalize list of DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% I 5 Generate a Program Inventory Report for 1995-96 100% fi 66% 7 Notify program managers that program evaluation begins in fall\nbegin data collection 100% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  PagelID 8 Name Review/revise process for cabinet review of program evaluations % Complete 100% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 9 Review/revise program evaluation instrument 100% 10 Distribute program evaluation instruments and instructions to primary and/or secondary leaders\nprovide additonal information/instruments, if needed 100% 11 Conduct required training sessions describing the process and evaluation criteria for designated staff 100% 12 Program evaluations due from secondary or primary leaders 0% I 13 Review program evaluations (DSeg and NonDSeg) for potential target programs for extended evaluations 0% 14 Finalize identification of extended evaluation targets 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page2ID 15 Name Notify appropriate staff to prepare Extended Program Evaluations % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec s 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 16 Extended evaluations due 0% I 17 Cabinet review extended evaluations for merge into needs assessment report 0% s Ifi 0% 19 Review types of data to measure needs of district for FY 96-97 0% 3 20 Analyze results of the budgeting and planning priorities revealed from the 94-95 Needs Assessment Report 0% 2 21 Review current mission statement and goals of the District 0% 3 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress  Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  PagesID 22 Name________________________________ Board identifies District concerns for input from public at Town Hall/District Dialogues % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 23 STANFORD 8 TEST DATA STUDY 0% 24 Define purpose and scope for Stanford 8 Test data study 0% 25 Assign responsibilities for study of Stanford 8 Test data 0% 26 Design data collection plan for study of Stanford 0% 3 27 Collect and analyze data from Stanford 8 Test 0% 28 Prepare Stanford 8 Test Report 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page4ID 29 2Q 31 32 33 34 35 Name Submit Stanford 8 Test Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment PRE EDUCATIONAL EQUITY MONITORING REPORTS SURVEY Define purpose and scope for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study Assign responsibilities for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study Analyze data from PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Studies Prepare PRE Educational Equity Monitoring findings Submit PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical % Complete 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Noncritical Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 0 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec I 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec Progress hi Milestone | Summary Rolled Up Q PagesID Name SCHOOL CLIMATE/HUMAN RELATIONS SURVEY ISC/HRISTUDY % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 37 Define purpose and scope of SC/HR Survey 0% 0 I 38 Assign responsibilities for SC/HR data collections 0% 0 39 Design data collection plan for study of SC/HR 0% 0 40 Collect and analyze data from SC/HR Survey 0% 41 Prepare SC/HR Survey Report 0% 42 Submit SC/HR Survey Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  PagesID 42 Name PORPQRTIONALS ALLOCATION FORMULAS STUDY % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 44 Define purpose and scope of Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% s 45 Assign responsibilities for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% 46 Design data collections plan for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Q 47 Collect and analyze data for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% 48 Prepare Proportional Allocation Formulas Report 0% 49 Submit Proportional Allocations Formulas Study Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing 0% I Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page?r ID Name_______________________________ DISTRICTWIDE FACILITIES STUDY % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 51 Define purpose and scope of Districtwide Facilities Study/Report from 1994-95 Study for purposes of 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report 0% 0 52 Assign responsibilities for the Districtwide Facilities Study/Reporting of findings 0% 0 53 Prepare findings from the Districtwide Facilities Study 0% 54 5S 56 Submit Districtwide Facilities Study Report recommendations to PRE for merge into needs assessment report DESEGREGATION MONITORING REPORTS AUDIT FROM OOM Define purpose and scope of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% 0% 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  PagesID 57 Name Assign responsibility for data collection of transcripts and Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 58 Design data collection plan for study of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% 59 Collect data 0% 60 Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% 61 Report findings to PRE 0% 62 2 Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document COURT ORDERS AUDIT Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical 0% 0% I Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page9ID 64 Name Define purpose and scope of Court Orders Audit % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 65 Assign responsibility for data collection of Court Orders Audit 0% 0 66 Collect data 0% 67 Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% 68 Report findings to PRE 0% 69 Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document 0% 2fl TOWN HALL MEETINGS 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Paget0ID 71 Name Define purpose and scope of Town Hall Meetings % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep Q 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 72 Review previous years data from Town Hall Report 0% 73 Design data collection plan for Town Hall Meetings 0% s 74 Set locations and schedule for Town Hall Meeting 0% 75 Develop advertisement plan and schedule for Town Hall Meetings\nPrepare sample agenda 0% 0 76 Review and revise data collection tool (matrix) for Town Hall Meetings 0% 0 77 Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting I 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Paget 1ID 78 Name Conduct Town Hall Meeting I % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 4th Quarter Sep Oct I Nov I Dec 79 Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting I for input into matrix 0% 80 Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting II 0% 81 Conduct Town Hall Meeting II 0% 82 Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting II for input into matrix 0% 83 Execute advertisement plan tor Town Hall Meeting III 0% 84 Finalize and publish Town Hall Meeting Report 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Page12 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Summary Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 85 Name Merge findings of Town Hall Meeting Report, 1995-96 into needs assessment listing % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec as 0% I 87 Define purpose and scope of District Dialogues 0% 0 88 Review previous years data from District Dialogue Report 0% 0 89 Design data collection plan for District Dialogues 0% 0 90 Set locations and schedule for District Dialogue Meetings 0% 0 91 Develop advertisement plan and schedule for District Dialogues: prepare sample agenda 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone | Summary Rolled Up Q Pagel3ID 92 Name Design data collection tool (matrix) for District Dialogue % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep s 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 93 Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue I 0% 94 Conduct District Dialogue I 0% 95 Gather feedback from District Dialogue 1 for input into matrix 0% 96 Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue II 0% 97 Conduct District Dialogue II 0% 98 Gather feedback data from District Dialogue II for input into matrix 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress  Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Paget4ID 99 too 101 102 103 104 105 Name Execute advertisement plan tor District Dialogue III Conduct District Dialogue III Gather feedback data from District Dialogue III for merge into matrix Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue IV Conduct District Dialogue IV Gather feedback data from District Dialogue IV for input into matrix Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue V Project: Date\n8/31/95 Critical % Complete 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Noncritical Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec Progress H Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  PagelsID 106 Name Conduct District Dialogue V % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 4th Quarter Sep Oct I Nov I Dec 107 Gather feedback data from District Dialogue V for input into matrix 0% 108 Finalize and publish District Dialogue Report 1995-96 0% 109 Merge findings of District Dialogue Report 1995-96 into needs assessment listing 0% PREPARE NEEDS ASSESSMENT REPORT 0% 111 Conduct Administrative review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% 112 Conduct Board Work Session for review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Pagel6 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 113 Name Publish Draft of Needs Assessment /Report and disseminate to selected persons % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec I 1 st Quarter 2nd Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Apr | May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 114 Publish Needs Assessment Report, 1995-96 0% Ui 116 117 118 119 PLANNING AND BUDGET GOALS CABINET PLANNING SESSION Review 1994-95 Needs Assessment Report Distribute 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report to Cabinet members Distribute District goals to Cabinet 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% i Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  I Pagel?ID 120 Name Cabinet review of goals % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec I 121 BOARD WORK SESSION 0% 122 Establish date and site for Work Session 0% 123 Identify materials for Board Work Session 0% 124 Prepare materials for Board Work Session 0% 125 Conduct Board Work Session 0% 0 126 Distribute background materials to Board members 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone H Pagel8 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Summary Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 127 Name Review/revise mission statement and goals % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 0 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 128 Review DSeg and NonDSeg Program Inventory 0% 0 129 Review identified proportional allocations 0% 0 130 Establish written priorities 0% 0 131 Identify strategies for funding shortfalls 0% 0 132 Develop timeline for identification and researching of funding shortfall strategies 0% 0 133 Develop communication strategy for mission statement and goals 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Pagel 9ID 134 Name Distribute mission statement and goals % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 135 136 137 138 139 140 Distribute list of priorities BOARD RETREAT Determine date and site for Board Retreat Identify agenda items for Board Retreat Establish agenda for Board Retreat Identify materials for Board Retreat 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% I Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress M Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page20ID 141 Name Distribute materials for Board Retreat % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 142 Conduct data analysis work session In preparation for Board Retreat 0% 143 Conduct Board Retreat 0% 0 144 Report outcomes of Board Retreat 0% 145 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT 0% 146 SUBMIT BUSINESS CASE FOR PROGRAM AND/OR MODIFICATIONS TO SUPERINTENDENT 0% 147 Review process for program development 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress m Milestone  i i Page21 Summary Rolled Up ID 148 Name Use extended program evaluations to identify program additions, modifications, deletions % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 0 149 Notify appropriate staff to prepare Business Cases on results of extended program evaluations 0% 150 Review recommendations from district needs assessment report in order to identify additional programs or programs modifications resulting in business case(s) 0% 151 Business Cases due 0% 152 Review of Business Cases by Cabinet 0% 153 Submit Business Cases for program and/or program modifications to Board of Directors 0% 154 Review of Business Cases by Board 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Page22 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar I I Summary Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 155 Name__________ BUDGETING % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 156 Develop budget preparation training materials 0% 0 I 157 Issue instructions for budget preparation at all levels 0% 8 158 Conduct budget preparation training sessions 0% 0 159 Budget managers develop and submit revised 1995-96 expense budget revisions and 1996-97 expense budget requests 0% 160 Begin districtwide expense budget consolidation and executive review process 0% 161 Year to date revenue expenditure analysis 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page23ID 162 Name Revise financial forecast for coming year % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 0 163 Submit proposed budget to Board 0% I 164 Conduct Board Work Sessions on proposed budget 0% 165 Revise proposed budget, as needed 0% 166 Prepare tentative budget 0% 167 Board review of tentative budget 0% 168 Conduct Board Work Session on tentative Budget 0% I Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress H Milestone H Summary Rolled Up  Page24 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun I 0 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 169 Name Account reconciliation and Purchase Order (PO) clean-up % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 170 171 Receipt of state generated revenue numbers (payroll liabilities, adjusted supplemental payroll, last payroll, Carl Perkins, M to M, JTPA, Vocational Ed.. Chapters 1 and 2. Compensatory Ed.. MFPA.________ Close-out 1995-96 accounts: adjust physical inventory, (fiscal)federal grants, magnet, state grants, accruals 0% 0% 172 Compute ending fund balance 0% I 173 Administrative review of final budget 0% B 174 Submit final budget to Board 0% I 175 Board review and adoption of 96-97 final budget 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress  Milestone | Page25 i .. i Summary Rolled Up ID 176 Name Submit final Budget to Court/Parties % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 177 12a 179 180 181 182 Submit 96-97 final budget to State Staffing First review of changes in course offerings by Board Meeting with counselors and principals to review courses offerings 1995-96 Print secondary course selection sheets Counselors meet with students and complete course selection sheets 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page26ID 183 Name Counselors send course selection sheets to receiving schools % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jut? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 0 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 184 Registrars tally course selections 0% 185 Review course tallies secondary. Note possible staffing changes based on courses requested 0% 186 Identity elementary enrollment (tentative) for 1995-96 0% 187 Make determination by subject area (secondary) of possible changes and by projected elementary enrolled 0% 188 List known retirements, resignations, and intern positions 0% 189 Identify certified personnel for Reduction in Force (RIF), if needed 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up Q V Page27ID 190 Name Notify certified personnel of Reduction in Force (RIF), if needed staff reduction % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 191 Recall certified personnel from RIF, if needed 0% 192 Notify classified personnel of staff reduction 0% 193 Recall classified personnel from RIF, if needed 0% 194 PROVIDE BROAD-BASED INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL FEEDBACK 0% 195 Plan for internal and external feedback. Set locations and dates 0% 196 Execute advertisement for district feedback. Session I 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page28 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 197 Name Conduct District Feedback Session I % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jut? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter 2nd Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar ~Apr | May | Jun 198 Execute advertisement plan for district feedback. Session II 0% 199 Conduct District Feedback Session II 0% 200 Execute advertisement for district feedback. Session III 0% 201 Conduct district feedback. Session III 0% 202 Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall feedback, Session I 0% 203 Conduct district feedback, Session I 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page29 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 204 Name Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall feedback, Session II % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter 2nd Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Apr | May | Jun 205 Conduct district feedback , Session II 0% 206 Execute advertisement for Town Hall feedback, Session III 0% 207 202 209 210 Conduct district feedback. Session III MONITORING AND REPORTING OF DESEG AND NONDESEG PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS tISI QUARTER: 2ND QUARTER: 3RD QUARTER: 4TH QUARTERI PRE performs necessary diskette management functions for the summer ( i.e. archival filing, achievement erasures, copying, etc.) Revise written program budget document instructions, as needed Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical 0% 14% 100% 68% a Progress h Milestone | Page30 Summary Rolled Up  3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 211 Name__________________________________ PRE fonward program budget document diskettes to principals and program managers % Complete 68% Quarter May I Jur? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 5 Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 212 Distribute written program budget document instructions to principals and program managers 0% 3 213 Plan maintenance education and orientation regarding the program budget document process 100% 214 215 Conduct maintenance education workshops and orientation sessions regarding the program budget document process for principals, clerical staff, program managers, primary and secondary leaders___________________ 1ST QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% 18% 216 Advise program managers and principals on program budget document 25% 217 Generate diskette management flow information to relative staff School Operations and PRE office 100% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page31ID 218 Name Plan training sessions on the Program Budget Document and WordPerfect % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 219 Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 1st Quarter PBD diskettes 0% I 220 DSeg and NonDSeg diskettes returned to PRE 0% 221 PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% 222 PRE generate hard copies of diskettes 0% 223 PRE develops narrative and the Controller provides financial info for the PBD reports 0% 224 PRE combines all information for the 1st Quarter Program Budget Report 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page32ID 225 Name Submit report to Attorney for review % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 226 Prepare for publication of 1st Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% I 227 Submit 1st Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% I 228 Return diskettes and hard copies to managers and principals 0% 229 Primary leaders provide feedback to the secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% 230 2ND QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% 231 Advise program managers and principals on Programs Budget Document 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page33ID 232 Name Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 2nd Quarter PBD diskettes % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 4th Quarter 1st Quarter 233 Diskettes due back to PRE 0% 234 PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% 235 PRE generates hard copies of diskettes 0% 236 PRE revises narrative and the controller provides financial info for Program Budget Document Reports (DSeg and NonDSeg) 0% 237 PRE combines all revised information for 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% 238 Submit report to Attorney for review 0% Sep Oct I Nov I Dec Jan | Feb | Mar I Q B B Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page34 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 239 Name Prepare publication of 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 240 Submit 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% 241 Return diskettes and paper copies to principals and program managers 0% 242 Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% 243 3RD QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% 244 Advise program managers and principals on the Program Budget Document 0% 245 Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 3rd Quarter PBD diskettes 0% I Project: Date\n8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone H Summary Rolled Up  Page35ID 246 Name Diskettes due back to PRE % Complete 0% Quarter May I JurT 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 247 PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% 248 PRE generate hard copies of diskettes 0% 249 PRE revises narrative and the controller provides financial information for 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Q 250 PRE combines all revised information for 3rd Quarter PBD Reports 0% 251 Submit report to Attorney for review 0% 0 252 Prepare publication of 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page36ID 253 Name Submit 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document to Court % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 254 Return diskettes and paper copies to principals and program managers 0% 0 255 25e 257 258 259 Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 4th QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS Advise program managers and principals on Program Budget Document Send reminder notice for completing the PBD to principals and program managers Principals submit School Operations Diskettes to Asst. Supts. 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page37ID 260 Name Diskettes due from Program Managers who are on a less than 12 month contract % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 261 All Program diskettes due back to PRE 0% 262 PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up 0% 263 PRE develops narrative and the controller provides financial information for 4th quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% 264 PRE combines all information for 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% 265 Submit report to Attorney tor review 0% 266 Prepare for publications the 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress  Milestone  Summary Rolled Up Q Page38 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep I 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 267 Name Submit 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jur? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep I 268 Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% 269 PRE house diskettes as 1996-97 school year begins 0% 270 SUBMIT MONTHLY MANAGEMENT REPORT (MANAGEMENT TOOLI TO COURT 15% 271 Submit July's monthly management report to Court 100% 272 Submit August's monthly management report to Court 100% 273 Submit Septembers monthly management report to Court 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page39 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 274 Name__________________________________ Submit October's monthly management report to Court % Complete 0% Quarter May I Juri 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 275 Submit November's monthly management report to Court 0% I 276 Submit December's monthly management report to Court 0% I 277 Submit January's monthly management report to Court 0% I 278 Submit February's monthly management report to Court 0% I 279 Submit March's monthly management report to Court 0% 280 Submit April's monthly management report to Court 0% I Project\nDate: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress M Milestone I Summary Rolled Up  Page40ID 281 Name Submit May's monthly management report to Court % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun I 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 282 Submit June's monthly management report to Court 0% I 283 Submit July's monthly management report to Court 0% 284 2a\u0026amp; 286 287 I Submit August's monthly management report to Court ORGANIZATION 1996-97 Analyze, reassess, and revise planning organization and structure Revise, discuss and reach consensus regarding format and tasking of 1996-97 Management Tool Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai 0% 12% 10% 100% Progress H Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page41ID 288 Name Initial circulation of 1996-97 Management Tool % Complete 100% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 289 Evaluate tasking of 1996-97 Management Tool 5% Project\nDate: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page42Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 1 Code PINV Name % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Jul 3 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 2 PINV Identify and revise DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% Jul 3 '95 Aug 11 '95 Jackson,Lewis,Smith 3 PINV Review and adjust primary and secondary leaders for DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% Jul 17 '95 4 PINV Finalize list of DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% Aug 15'95 5 PINV Generate a Program Inventory Report for 1995-96 100% Aug 18'95 I Aug 14 '95 Aug 18 '95 Aug 31 '95 Lewis,Mayo Jackson,Lewis Jackson,Lewis  PEVAL PROGRAM EVALUATION 66% Jul 3 '95 Nov 22 '95 Jackson 7 PEVAL Notify program managers that program evaluation begins in fall\nbegin data collection 100% Jul 3 '95 Jul 28 '95 Jackson 8 PEVAL Review/revise process for cabinet review of program evaluations 100% Aug 1 '95 Aug 15 '95 Jackson,Cabinet Page 1 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 9 Code PEVAL Name Review/revise program evaluation instrument % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Aug 1 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Cabinet,Jackson 10 PEVAL Distribute program evaluation instruments and instructions to primary and/or secondary leaders: provide additonal information/instruments, if needed 100% Aug 25 '95 Aug 25 '95 Jackson 11 PEVAL Conduct required training sessions describing the process and evaluation criteria for designated staff 100% Aug 4 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson 12 PEVAL Program evaluations due from secondary or primary leaders 0% Sep 15 '95 Sep 15 '95 Cabinet 13 PEVAL Review program evaluations (DSeg and NonDSeg) for potential target programs for extended evaluations 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 2 '95 Cabinet 14 PEVAL Finalize identification of extended evaluation targets 0% Oct 2 '95 Oct 13'95 Cabinet 15 PEVAL Notify appropriate staff to prepare Extended Program Evaluations 0% Oct 16 '95 Oct 20 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 16 PEVAL Extended evaluations due 0% Nov 13'95 Nov 13'95 Program Managers Page 2 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 17 Code PEVAL Name___________________ Cabinet review extended evaluations for merge into needs assessment report % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 17'95 Scheduled Finish Nov 22 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 11EED5 0% Sep 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson.Cabinet 19 NEEDS Review types of data to measure needs of district for FY 96-97 0% Sep 1 '95 20 NEEDS Analyze results of the budgeting and planning priorities revealed from the 94-95 Needs Assessment Report 0% Sep 1 '95 21 NEEDS Review current mission statement and goals of the District 0% Sep 1 '95 22 NEEDS Board identifies District concerns for input from public at Town Hall/District Dialogues 0% Sep 14 '95 I Sep 8 '95 Sep 8 '95 Sep 8 '95 Sep 14 '95 Cabinet,Jackson Jackson,Cabinet Jackson,Cabinet Williams,Board 23. NEEDS STANFORD 8 TEST DATA STUDY 0% Oct 31 '95 Jackson 24 NEEDS Define purpose and scope for Stanford 8 Test data study 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Cabinet Page 3 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 25 Code NEEDS Name Assign responsibilities for study of Stanford 8 Test data % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 26 NEEDS Design data collection plan for study of Stanford 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Dunbar 27 NEEDS Collect and analyze data from Stanford 8 Test 0% Sep 15 '95 Oct 13'95 Jackson,Dunbar,Savage 28 NEEDS Prepare Stanford 8 Test Report 0% Oct 13'95 Oct 31 '95 Dunbar 29 NEEDS Submit Stanford 8 Test Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Dunbar ac NEEDS PRE EDUCATIONAL EQUITY MONITORING REPORTS SURVEY 0% Seo 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson 31 NEEDS Define purpose and scope for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 32 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson Page 4 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 33 Code NEEDS Name_________________________________ Analyze data from PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Studies % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 30 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Smith 34 NEEDS Prepare PRE Educational Equity Monitoring findings 0% Oct 2 '95 Oct 13'95 Smith 35 NEEDS Submit PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Smith 3fi NEEDS SCHOOL CLIMATE/HUMAN RELATIONS SURVEY ISC/HRISTUDY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson 37 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of SC/HR Survey 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 38 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for SC/HR data collections 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson 39 NEEDS Design data collection plan for study of SC/HR 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Hobby 40 NEEDS Collect and analyze data from SC/HR Survey 0% Sep 15 '95 Oct 13'95 Jackson,Hobby Page 5 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 41 Code NEEDS Name Prepare SC/HR Survey Report % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Oct 13'95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Hobby 42 NEEDS Submit SC/HR Survey Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Hobby 43 NEEDS PORPQRTIONALS ALLOCATION FORMULAS STUDY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith.Milhollen 44 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Smith,Milhollen,Cabinet 45 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Smith 46 NEEDS Design data collections plan for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Smith 47 NEEDS Collect and analyze data for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% Sep 15 '95 Oct 13'95 Hurley,Eaton,Gadberry, Neal, Milhollen, Smith 48 NEEDS Prepare Proportional Allocation Formulas Report 0% Oct 13'95 Oct 31 '95 Milhollen,Hurley,Eaton,Neal,Smith Page 6 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 49 Code NEEDS Name Submit Proportional Allocations Formulas Study Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Oct 31 '95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Milhollen 5Q NEEDS DISTRICTWIDE FACILITIES STUDY 0% Sep 11 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith 51 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Districtwide Facilities Study/Report from 1994-95 Study for purposes of 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Williams,Smith,Cabinet 52 NEEDS Assign responsibilities for the Districtwide Facilities Study/Reporting of findings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Smith,Eaton 53 NEEDS Prepare findings from the Districtwide Facilities Study 0% Sep 16 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith, Mayo,Eaton 54 NEEDS Submit Districtwide Facilities Study Report recommendations to PRE for merge into needs assessment report 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Smith,Mayo,Eaton NEEDS DESEGREGATION MONITORING REPORTS AUDIT FROM PPM 0% Sep 11 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mavo 56 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Williams,Mayo, Cabinet Page 7 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 57 Code NEEDS Name_______________________________ Assign responsibility for data collection of transcripts and Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Mayo 58 NEEDS Design data collection plan for study of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Mayo 59 NEEDS Collect data 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 13'95 Mayo 60 NEEDS Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% Oct 16 '95 Oct 31 '95 Mayo 61 NEEDS Report findings to PRE 0% Oct 31 '95 Nov 18'95 Mayo 62 NEEDS Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mayo,Lewis 3 NEEDS COURT ORDERS AUDIT 0% Sep 11 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mavo 64 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Court Orders Audit 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Cabinet,Mayo Page 8 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 65 Code NEEDS Name________________________________ Assign responsibility for data collection of Court Orders Audit % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Mayo 66 NEEDS Collect data 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 13'95 Mayo 67 NEEDS Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% Oct 16 '95 Oct 31 '95 Mayo 68 NEEDS Report findings to PRE 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 18'95 Mayo 69 NEEDS Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 30 '95 Mayo,Lewis 2Q NEEDS TOWN HALL MEETINGS 0% Seo 11 '95 Nov 21 '95 Williams. Jackson. Modeste 71 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of Town Hall Meetings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson,Modeste,Cabinet 72 NEEDS Review previous years data from Town Hall Report 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Modeste, Jackson,Vann Page 9 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 73 Code NEEDS Name_______________________________ Design data collection plan for Town Hall Meetings % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson.Vann.Lewis 74 NEEDS Set locations and schedule for Town Hall Meeting 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Vann.Modeste 75 NEEDS Develop advertisement plan and schedule for Town Hall Meetings\nPrepare sample agenda 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Vann.Modeste 76 NEEDS Review and revise data collection tool (matrix) for Town Hall Meetings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Jackson.Modeste.Lewis 77 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting I 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann.Modeste 78 NEEDS Conduct Town Hall Meeting I 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Williams 79 NEEDS Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting I for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 80 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting II 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann.Modeste Page 10 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 81 Code NEEDS Name_____________________ Conduct Town Hall Meeting II % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18'95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams 82 NEEDS Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting II for input info matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 83 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting III 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Modeste 84 NEEDS Finalize and publish Town Hall Meeting Report 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Modeste,Lewis 85 NEEDS Merge findings of Town Hall Meeting Report, 1995-96 into needs assessment listing 0% Nov 15'95 Nov 21 '95 Jackson,Lewis as NEEDS DISTRICT DIALOGUES 0% Seo 11 '95 Nov 21 '95 Williams. Jackson.Modeste 87 NEEDS Define purpose and scope of District Dialogues 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15'95 Williams, Jackson,Modeste,Cabinet 88 NEEDS Review previous years data from District Dialogue Report 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Modeste,Vann Page 11 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 89 Code NEEDS Name_____________________________ Design data collection plan for District Dialogues % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 11 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Vann,Modeste 90 NEEDS Set locations and schedule for District Dialogue Meetings 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Modeste.Vann 91 NEEDS Develop advertisement plan and schedule for District Dialogues\nprepare sample agenda 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Vann,Modeste 92 NEEDS Design data collection tool (matrix) for District Dialogue 0% Sep 11 '95 Sep 15 '95 Modeste,Jackson 93 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue I 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Modeste 94 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue I 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 31 '95 Williams 95 NEEDS Gather feedback from District Dialogue 1 for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 96 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue II 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Modeste Page 12 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 97 Code NEEDS Name Conduct District Dialogue II % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18 '95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams 98 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue II for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann,Lewis 99 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue III 0% Sep 18 '95 100 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue III 0% Sep 18 '95 101 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue III for merge into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 102 NEEDS Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue IV 0% Sep 18 '95 103 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue IV 0% Sep 18 '95 104 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue IV for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 Page 13 FY97 I Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Vann.Modeste Williams Vann,Lewis Vann,Modeste Williams Vann,Lewis August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 105 Code NEEDS Name_____________________________ Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue V % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 18'95 Scheduled Finish Oct 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Vann,Modeste 106 NEEDS Conduct District Dialogue V 0% Sep 18'95 Oct 31 '95 Williams 107 NEEDS Gather feedback data from District Dialogue V for input into matrix 0% Sep 18 '95 108 NEEDS Finalize and publish District Dialogue Report 1995-96 0% Nov 1 '95 109 NEEDS Merge findings of District Dialogue Report 1995-96 into needs assessment listing 0% Nov 15'95 I Oct 31 '95 Nov 15'95 Nov 21 '95 Vann,Lewis Jackson,Lewis Jackson,Lewis HQ NEEDS PREPARE NEEDS ASSESSMENT REPORT 0% Nov 1 Nov 30 '95 Jackson 111 NEEDS Conduct Administrative review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Jackson,Cabinet 112 NEEDS Conduct Board Work Session for review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 15'95 Williams, Jackson,Board Page 14 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 113 Code NEEDS Name Publish Draft of Needs Assessment /Report and disseminate to selected persons % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 27 '95 Scheduled Finish Nov 27 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Cabinet 114 NEEDS Publish Needs Assessment Report, 1995-96 0% Nov 30 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson US GOAL PLANNING AND BUDGET GOALS 0% Oct 2 '95 Jan 31 '96 Jackson ns GOALS CABINET PLANNING SESSION 0% Oct 2 '95 Dec 11 '95 Jackson.Cabinet 117 GOALS Review 1994-95 Needs Assessment Report 0% Oct 2 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 118 GOALS Distribute 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report to Cabinet members 0% Dec 1 '95 Dec 8 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 119 GOALS Distribute District goals to Cabinet 0% Dec 1 '95 Dec 8 '95 Jackson,Cabinet 120 GOALS Cabinet review of goals 0% Dec 11 '95 Dec 11 '95 Jackson,Cabinet Page 15 FY 97 August 31 '95 JLittle Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 121 Code GOALS Name__________________ BOARD WORK SESSION % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 15 '95 Scheduled Finish Dec 19 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson.Williams 122 GOALS Establish date and site for Work Session 0% Nov 15'95 Nov 30 '95 Williams.Cabinet 123 GOALS Identify materials for Board Work Session 0% Nov 15'95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson,Williams 124 GOALS Prepare materials for Board Work Session 0% Nov 15 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson 125 GOALS Conduct Board Work Session 0% Dec 12'95 Dec 15 '95 Board .Williams 126 GOALS Distribute background materials to Board members 0% Dec 12 '95 Dec 15'95 Jackson 127 GOALS Review/revise mission statement and goals 0% Dec 12'95 Dec 15'95 Board 128 GOALS Review DSeg and NonDSeg Program Inventory 0% Dec 12'95 Dec 15 '95 Board Page 16 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 129 Code GOALS Name Review identified proportional allocations % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Dec 12'95 Scheduled Finish Dec 15 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Board 130 GOALS Establish written priorities 0% Dec 12'95 Dec 15 '95 Board 131 GOALS Identify strategies for funding shortfalls 0% Dec 12'95 Dec 15 '95 Board 132 GOALS Develop timeline for identification and researching of funding shortfall strategies 0% Dec 12'95 Dec 15 '95 Board 133 GOALS Develop communication strategy for mission statement and goals 0% Dec 14 '95 Dec 14 '95 Williams,Vann 134 GOALS Distribute mission statement and goals 0% Dec 19 '95 Dec 19 '95 Jackson,Vann 135 GOALS Distribute list of priorities 0% Dec 19 '95 Dec 19 '95 Jackson,Vann 136 GOALS BOARD RETREAT 0% Dec 8 '95 Jan 31 '96 Williams Page 17 FY97 August 31 '95 JLittle Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 137 Code GOALS Name________________________________ Determine date and site for Board Retreat % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Dec 8 '95 Scheduled Finish Dec 20 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams,Board 138 GOALS Identify agenda items for Board Retreat 0% Dec 8 '95 Dec 20 '95 Williams,Board 139 GOALS Establish agenda for Board Retreat 0% Dec 8 '95 Dec 20 '95 Williams,Boa rd 140 GOALS identify materials for Board Retreat 0% Dec 8 '95 Dec 20 '95 Williams,Jackson 141 GOALS Distribute materials for Board Retreat 0% Jan 9 '96 Jan 10 '96 Williams,Jackson 142 GOALS Conduct data analysis work session in preparation tor Board Retreat 0% Jan 12 '96 Jan 12 '96 Williams,Cabinet 143 GOALS Conduct Board Retreat 0% Jan 22 '96 Jan 26 '96 Williams,Board 144 GOALS Report outcomes of Board Retreat 0% Jan 31 '96 Jan 31 '96 Williams,Board Page 18 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 145 Code PDEV Name % Complete 0% Scheduled Start May 22 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Cabinet 146 PDEV SUBMIT BUSINESS CASE FOR PROGRAM AND/OR MODIFICATIONS IQ SUPERINTENDENT 0% Nov 1 '95 Feb 22 '96 Williams.Jackson 147 PDEV Review process for program development 0% Nov 1 '95 Nov 10 '95 Cabinet 148 PDEV Use extended program evaluations to identify program additions, modifications, deletions 0% Nov 17 '95 Nov 27 '95 Cabinet 149 PDEV Notify appropriate staff to prepare Business Cases on results of extended program evaluations 0% Nov 17'95 Nov 30 '95 Cabinet 150 PDEV Review recommendations from district needs assessment report in order to identify additional programs or programs modifications resulting in business case(s) 0% Dec 5 '95 Dec 11 '95 Cabinet 151 PDEV Business Cases due 0% Jan 8 '96 Jan 8 '96 Primary Leaders 152 PDEV Review of Business Cases by Cabinet 0% Jan 15 '96 Jan 22 '96 Cabinet Page 19 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 153 Code PDEV Name_______________________________ Submit Business Cases for program and/or program modifications to Board of Directors % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Feb 8 '96 Scheduled Finish Feb 8 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,VVilliams 154 PDEV Review of Business Cases by Board 0% Feb 8 '96 Feb 22 '96 Board 155 BUDGT BUDGETING 0% Nov 20 '95 Aug 30 '96 Smith. Gadberrv.Hurlev.Milhollen 156 BUDGT Develop budget preparation training materials 0% Nov 20 '95 Nov 27 '95 Smith,Milhollen 157 BUDGT Issue instructions for budget preparation at all levels 0% Nov 28 '95 Nov 30 '95 Smith 158 BUDGT Conduct budget preparation training sessions 0% Dec 1 '95 Dec 8 '95 Smith 159 BUDGT Budget managers develop and submit revised 1995-96 expense budget revisions and 1996-97 expense budget requests 0% Dec 11 '95 Jan 6 '96 Milhollen,Smith 160 BUDGT Begin districtwide expense budget consolidation and executive review process 0% Jan 9 '96 Mar 8 '96 Smith Page 20 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 161 Code BUDGT Name Year to date revenue expenditure analysis % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jan 9 '96 Scheduled Finish Jan 31 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Smith,Milhollen 162 BUDGT Revise financial forecast for coming year 0% Feb 26 '96 Mar 6 '96 Smith 163 BUDGT Submit proposed budget to Board 0% Mar 14'96 Mar 14 '96 Williams 164 BUDGT Conduct Board Work Sessions on proposed budget 0% Mar 18'96 Mar 29 '96 Smith,Board,Williams 165 BUDGT Revise proposed budget, as needed 0% Mar 14 '96 Apr 2 '96 Smith,Milhollen 166 BUDGT Prepare tentative budget 0% Apr 3 '96 May 13'96 Smith,Milhollen 167 BUDGT Board review of tentative budget 0% May 23 '96 May 23 '96 Board,Smith 168 BUDGT Conduct Board Work Session on tentative Budget 0% May 24 '96 May 31 '96 Board,Williams Page 21 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 169 Code BUDGT Name_________________________________ Account reconciliation and Purchase Order (PO) clean-up % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jun 17'96 Scheduled Finish Jul 12'96 Revised Finish Resource Names Eaton 170 BUDGT 171 BUDGT Receipt of state generated revenue numbers (payroll liabilities, adjusted supplemental payroll, last payroll, Carl Perkins, M to M, JTPA, Vocational Ed., Chapters 1 and 2, Compensatory Ed., MFPA, Transportation, ABC) Close-out 1995-96 accounts\nadjust physical inventory, (fiscal)federal grants, magnet, state grants, accruals 0% 0% 172 BUDGT Compute ending fund balance 0% Jun 16 '96 Jun 16 '96 Milhollen,Smith Jul 1 '96 Jul 22 '96 Jul 19'96 Jul 22 '96 Smith,Milhollen,Cabinet Milhollen,Smith 173 BUDGT Administrative review of final budget 0% Jul 24 '96 Jul 29 '96 V\\/illiams,Cabinet 174 BUDGT Submit final budget to Board 0% Aug 1 '96 Aug 1 '96 V\\/illiams,Smith 175 BUDGT Board review and adoption of 96-97 final budget 0% Aug 1 '96 Aug 8 '96 Board 176 BUDGT Submit final Budget to Court/Parties 0% Aug 8 '96 Aug 21 '96 Williams,Attorney Page 22 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 177 Code BUDGT Name Submit 96-97 final budget to State % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Aug 21 '96 Scheduled Finish Aug 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams,Smith ns BUDGT Staffing 0% Jan 26 '96 Hurley 179 BUDGT First review of changes in course offerings by Board 0% Jan 26 '96 Feb 8 '96 Board,Williams 180 BUDGT Meeting with counselors and principals to review courses offerings 1995-96 0% Jan 29 '96 Feb 15'96 Elston 181 BUDGT Print secondary course selection sheets 0% Jan 29 '96 Feb 15'96 Williams,Gadberry 182 BUDGT Counselors meet with students and complete course selection sheets 0% Feb 19'96 Mar 8 '96 Principals,Counselors 183 BUDGT Counselors send course selection sheets to receiving schools 0% Mar 8 '96 Mar 11 '96 Principals,Counselors 184 BUDGT Registrars tally course selections 0% Mar 11 '96 Mar 29 '96 Principals,Registrars Page 23 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 185 Code BUDGT Name_____________________________ Review course tallies secondary. Note possible staffing changes based on courses requested % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Apr 1 '96 Scheduled Finish Apr 19'96 Revised Finish Resource Names Gadberry,Hurley,Asst. Supts. 186 BUDGT Identify elementary enrollment (tentative) for 1995-96 0% Apr 1 '96 May 19'96 Mayo,Hurley,Gadberry,Asst Supts 187 BUDGT Make determination by subject area (secondary) of possible changes and by projected elementary enrolled 0% Apr 1 '96 188 BUDGT List known retirements, resignations, and intern positions 0% Apr 3 '96 189 BUDGT Identify certified personnel for Reduction in Force (RIF), if needed 0% Apr 17 '96 190 BUDGT Notify certified personnel of Reduction in Force (RIF), if needed staff reduction 0% Apr 24'96 191 BUDGT Recall certified personnel from RIF. if needed 0% Jun 3 '96 192 BUDG Notify classified personnel of staff reduction 0% May 6 '96 Page 24 FY97 BO I Apr 19'96 Apr 24 '96 Apr 26 '96 Apr 29 '96 Aug 1 '96 Jul 15'96 Gadberry,Hurley,Asst. Supts. Gadberry,Hurley Hurley,Gadberry Hurley,Gadberry Hurley,Gadberry Hurley,Gadberry August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 193 Code BUDGT Name Recall classified personnel from RIF, if needed % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jun 3 '96 Scheduled Finish Aug 15 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Hurley 194 BUDGT PROVIDE BSQAD-BASEP INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL FEEDBACK 0% May 22 '95 Apr 30 '96 Modeste.Vann. Williams 195 BUDGT Plan for internal and external feedback. Set locations and dates 0% Feb 1 '96 Feb 15'96 Williams,Modeste,Vann 196 BUDGT Execute advertisement for district feedback. Session I 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,Vann 197 BUDGT Conduct District Feedback Session I 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams 198 BUDGT Execute advertisement plan for district feedback. Session II 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,Vann 199 BUDGT Conduct District Feedback Session II 0% May 22 '95 Aug 17 '95 Williams 200 BUDGT Execute advertisement for district feedback. Session III 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams Page 25 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 201 Code BUDGT Name____________________________ Conduct district feedback. Session III % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Feb 1 '96 Scheduled Finish Apr 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Williams 202 BUDGT Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall feedback. Session I 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,Vann 203 BUDGT Conduct district feedback, Session I 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams 204 BUDGT Execute advertisement plan tor Town Hall feedback. Session II 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,Vann 205 BUDGT Conduct district feedback , Session II 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams 206 BUDGT Execute advertisement for Town Hall feedback. Session III 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Williams 207 BUDGT Conduct district feedback. Session III 0% Feb 1 '96 Apr 30 '96 Modeste,Vann 2Q\u0026amp; MR MONITORING AND REPORTING QE DESEG AND NONDESEG PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS (1ST QUARTER: 2ND QUARTER: 3RD QUARTER: 4TH QUARTER! 14% Aug 1 '95 Aug 31 '96 Jackson Page 26 FY97 August 31 '95ID 209 Code MR Name_______________________________ PRE performs necessary diskette management functions for the summer ( i.e. archival filing, achievement erasures, copying, etc.) Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Aug 1 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 17'95 Revised Finish Resource Names PRE Clerical 210 MR Revise written program budget document instructions, as needed 68% Aug 31 '95 Sep 5 '95 Lewis 211 MR PRE fonward program budget document diskettes to principals and program managers 68% Aug 31 '95 Sep 5 '95 PRE Clerical,Lewis 212 MR Distribute written program budget document instructions to principals and program managers 0% Sep 1 '95 Sep 5 '95 Lewis,PRE Clerical 213 MR Plan maintenance education and orientation regarding the program budget document process 100% Aug 1 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson,Lewis 214 MR 215 MR Conduct maintenance education workshops and orientation sessions regarding the program budget document process for principals, clerical staff, program managers, primary and secondary leaders ISI QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% lasi 216 MR Advise program managers and principals on program budget document 25% Page 27 Sep 4 '95 Aug 8 '95 Aug 8 '95 FY97 Sep 30 '95 Oct 14 '95 Jackson,Lewis Jackson Asst. Supts,Lewis,PRE Clerical August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 217 Code MR Name___________________________ Generate diskette management flow information to relative staff School Operations and PRE office % Complete 100% Scheduled Start Aug 8 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 31 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Lewis 218 MR Plan training sessions on the Program Budget Document and WordPerfect 0% Sep 2 '95 Sep 15'95 Lewis,Jackson 219 MR Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 1st Quarter PBD diskettes 0% Oct 3 '95 Oct 3 '95 Lewis 220 MR DSeg and NonDSeg diskettes returned to PRE 0% Oct 14 '95 Oct 14 '95 Principals,Program Managers 221 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% Oct 16 '95 Nov 8 '95 PRE Clerical,Lewis 222 MR PRE generate hard copies of diskettes 0% Oct 16 '95 Nov 8 '95 PRE Clerical 223 MR PRE develops narrative and the Controller provides financial info for the PBD reports 0% Oct 16 '95 Oct 31 '95 Lewis,Milhollen 224 MR PRE combines all information for the 1 st Quarter Program Budget Report 0% Oct 31 '95 Nov 8 '95 Lewis,PRE Clerical Page 28 FY97 August 31 '95ID 225 Code MR Name Submit report to Attorney for review Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Nov 8 '95 Scheduled Finish Nov 13'95 Revised Finish Resource Names Lewis 226 MR Prepare for publication of 1st Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Nov 13'95 Nov 13'95 Lewis,Jackson 227 MR Submit 1st Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% Nov 21 '95 Nov 21 '95 Jackson,Attorney 228 MR Return diskettes and hard copies to managers and principals 0% Nov 21 '95 Nov 22 '95 PRE Clerical 229 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to the secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% Nov 21 '95 Dec 21 '95 Primary Leaders 230 MR 2ND QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% Nov 21 '95 Mar 22 '96 Jackson 231 MR Advise program managers and principals on Programs Budget Document 0% Nov 21 '95 Jan 13 '96 Asst. Supts,Lewis 232 MR Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 2nd Quarter PBD diskettes 0% Jan 6 '96 Jan 6 '96 Lewis Page 29 FY 97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 233 Code MR Name___________________ Diskettes due back to PRE % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Jan 13 '96 Scheduled Finish Jan 13 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Program Managers,Principals 234 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% Jan 13 '96 Jan 26 '96 PRE Clerical 235 MR PRE generates hard copies of diskettes 0% Jan 15 '96 Jan 31 '96 PRE Clerical 236 MR PRE revises narrative and the controller provides financial info for Program Budget Document Reports (DSeg and NonDSeg) 0% Jan 29 '96 Feb 3 '96 Lewis,Milhollen 237 MR PRE combines all revised information for 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Jan 29 '96 Feb 3 '96 Lewis,PRE Clerical 238 MR Submit report to Attorney for review 0% Feb 14 '96 Feb 19'96 Attorney,Jackson 239 MR Prepare publication of 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Feb 22 '96 Feb 22 '96 Lewis 240 MR Submit 2nd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% Feb 23 '96 Feb 23 '96 Jackson,Attorney Page 30 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 241 Code MR Name Return diskettes and paper copies to principals and program managers % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Feb 23 '96 Scheduled Finish Feb 24 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names PRE Clerical 242 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% Feb 23 '96 Mar 22 '96 Primary Leaders 243 MR 3RD QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% Feb 23 '96 244 MR Advise program managers and principals on the Program Budget Document 0% Feb 23 '96 245 MR Send reminder notice regarding deadline for submission of 3rd Quarter PBD diskettes 0% Mar 7 '96 246 MR Diskettes due back to PRE 0% Apr 12 '96 I Jun 24 '96 Apr 12'96 Mar 7 '96 Apr 12'96 247 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up on diskettes 0% Apr 15'96 Apr 28 '96 248 MR PRE generate hard copies of diskettes 0% Apr 15'96 May 3 '96 Page 31 FY 97 Jackson Asst. Supts,Lewis Lewis Principals,Program Managers PRE Clerical PRE Clerical August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 249 Code MR Name______________________________ PRE revises narrative and the controller provides financial information for 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Apr 29 '96 Scheduled Finish May 3 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Lewis,Milhollen 250 MR PRE combines all revised information for 3rd Quarter PBD Reports 0% May 6 '96 May 10'96 Lewis,PRE Clerical 251 MR Submit report to Attorney for review 0% May 13'96 May 16 '96 Lewis 252 MR Prepare publication of 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% May 20 '96 May 23 '96 Lewis 253 MR Submit 3rd Quarter Program Budget Document to Court 0% May 24 '96 May 24 '96 Jackson .Attorney 254 MR Return diskettes and paper copies to principals and program managers 0% May 24 '96 May 27 '96 PRE Clerical 255 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% May 24 '96 Jun 24 '96 Primary Leaders 256 MR 4th QUARTER PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT REPORTS 0% May 9 '96 Aug 31 '96 Jackson Page 32 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 257 Code MR Name Advise program managers and principals on Program Budget Document % Complete 0% Scheduled Start May 22 '96 Scheduled Finish Jul 22 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names____________ Asst. Supts,Lewis,PRE Clerical 258 MR Send reminder notice for completing the PBD to principals and program managers 0% May 9 '96 May 15'96 Lewis 259 MR Principals submit School Operations Diskettes to Asst. Supts. 0% Jun 10'96 Jun 16 '96 Principals 260 MR Diskettes due from Program Managers who are on a less than 12 month contract 0% Jun 10 '96 Jun 16 '96 Program Managers 261 MR All Program diskettes due back to PRE 0% Jul 14 '96 Jul 14 '96 Program Managers 262 MR PRE performs check-in procedures and data clean-up 0% Jul 15'96 Jul 28 '96 PRE Clerical,Lewis 263 MR PRE develops narrative and the controller provides financial information for 4th quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Jul 29 '96 Aug 4 '96 Lewis,Milhollen 264 MR PRE combines all information for 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Jul 29 '96 Aug 4 '96 Lewis, PRE Clerical Page 33 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 265 Code MR Name__________________________ Submit report to Attorney for review % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Aug 12'96 Scheduled Finish Aug 12'96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson 266 MR Prepare for publications the 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports 0% Aug 16 '96 Aug 19 '96 Lewis 267 MR Submit 4th Quarter Program Budget Document Reports to Court 0% Aug 22 '96 Aug 22 '96 Jackson,Attorney 268 MR Primary leaders provide feedback to their secondary people regarding achievement reporting in the PBD 0% Aug 1 '96 Aug 31 '96 Primary Leaders 269 MR PRE house diskettes as 1996-97 school year begins 0% Jun 16 '96 Aug 22 '96 Lewis 270 MR SUBMIT MONTHLY MANAGEMENT REPORT (MANAGEMENT TOOL) TO COURT 15% Jul 31 '95 Aug 31 '96 Jackson 271 MR Submit July's monthly management report to Court 100% Jul 31 '95 Jul 31 '95 Jackson .Attorney 272 MR Submit August's monthly management report to Court 100% Aug 31 '95 Aug 31 '95 Jackson,Attorney Page 34 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 273 Code MR Name Submit September's monthly management report to Court % Complete 0% Scheduled Start Sep 29 '95 Scheduled Finish Sep 29 '95 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Attorney 274 MR Submit October's monthly management report to Court 0% Oct 31 '95 Oct 31 '95 Jackson,Attorney 275 MR Submit November's monthly management report to Court 0% Nov 30 '95 Nov 30 '95 Jackson,Attorney 276 MR Submit December's monthly management report to Court 0% Dec 21 '95 Dec 21 '95 Jackson,Attorney 277 MR Submit January's monthly management report to Court 0% Jan 31 '96 Jan 31 '96 Jackson,Attorney 278 MR Submit February's monthly management report to Court 0% Feb 29 '96 Feb 29 '96 Jackson ,Attorney 279 MR Submit March's monthly management report to Court 0% Mar 29 '96 Mar 29 '96 Jackson,Attorney 280 MR Submit April's monthly management report to Court 0% Apr 30 '96 Apr 30 '96 Jackson,Attorney Page 35 FY97 August 31 '95 JLittle Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 281 Code MR Name________________________________ Submit May's monthly management report to Court % Complete 0% Scheduled Start May 31 '96 Scheduled Finish May 31 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Jackson,Attorney 282 MR Submit June's monthly management report to Court 0% Jun 28 '96 Jun 28 '96 Jackson,Attorney 283 MR Submit July's monthly management report to Court 0% Jul 31 '96 Jul 31 '96 Jackson,Attorney 284 MR Submit August's monthly management report to Court 0% Aug 31 '96 Aug 31 '96 Jackson 285 ORG REASSESSMENT OF PROCESS AND ORGANIZATION 1996-97 12% Jul 5 '95 Aug 30 '9 Jackson.Attorney 286 ORG Analyze, reassess, and revise planning organization and structure 10% Jul 5 '95 Jul 28 '96 Williams,Jackson 287 ORG Revise, discuss and reach consensus regarding format and tasking of 1996-97 Management Tool 100% Jul 5 '95 Jul 24 '95 Cabinet, Lewis. Jackson 288 ORG Initial circulation of 1996-97 Management Tool 100% Jul 13'95 Jul 31 '95 Lewis,Jackson Page 36 FY97 August 31 '95Little Rock School District Program Planning and Budget Tool ID 289 Code ORG Name Evaluate tasking of 1996-97 Management Tool % Complete 5% Scheduled Start Jul 24 '95 Scheduled Finish Aug 30 '96 Revised Finish Resource Names Cabinet,Lewis Page 37 FY97 August 31 '95Quarter 3rd Quarter ID 1 Name % Complete 100% May I Jun~ Jul | Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 2 Identify and revise DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% 3 Review and adjust primary and secondary leaders for DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% 4 Finalize list of DSeg and NonDSeg Programs 100% I 5 Generate a Program Inventory Report for 1995-96 100%  PROGRAM EVALUATION 66% 7 Notify program managers that program evaluation begins in fall\nbegin data collection 100% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up Q PagelID 8 Name___________________________________ Review/revise process for cabinet review of program evaluations % Complete 100% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 9 Review/revise program evaluation instrument 100% 10 Distribute program evaluation instruments and instructions to primary and/or secondary leaders: provide additonal information/instruments, if needed 100% I 11 Conduct required training sessions describing the process and evaluation criteria for designated staff 100% 12 Program evaluations due from secondary or primary leaders 0% I 13 Review program evaluations (DSeg and NonDSeg) for potential target programs for extended evaluations 0% 14 Finalize identification of extended evaluation targets 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page2ID 15 Name Notify appropriate staff to prepare Extended Program Evaluations % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec Q 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 16 Extended evaluations due 0% I I 17 Cabinet review extended evaluations for merge into needs assessment report 0% 0 la 0% 19 Review types of data to measure needs of district for FY 96-97 0% 3 20 Analyze results of the budgeting and planning priorities revealed from the 94-95 Needs Assessment Report 0% 3 21 Review current mission statement and goals of the District 0% 3 1 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Page3ID 22 Name________________________________ Board identifies District concerns for input from public at Town Hall/Districf Dialogues % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 22 STANFORD 8 TEST DATA SIUPY 0% I 24 Define purpose and scope for Stanford 8 Test data study 0% 25 Assign responsibilities for study of Stanford 8 Test data 0% 26 Design data collection plan for study of Stanford 0% Q 27 Collect and analyze data from Stanford 8 Test 0% 28 Prepare Stanford 8 Test Report 0% .. Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Page4ID 29 Name Submit Stanford 8 Test Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec I 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 30 PRE EDUCATIONAL EQUITY MONITORING REPORTS SURVEY 0% 31 Define purpose and scope for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study 0% B 32 Assign responsibilities for PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study 0% Q 33 Analyze data from PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Studies 0% 34 Prepare PRE Educational Equity Monitoring findings 0% 35 Submit PRE Educational Equity Monitoring Reports Study to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing 0% 1 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  PagesID Name SCHOOL CLIMATE/HUMAN RELATIONS SURVEY ISC/HRISTUDY % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 37 Define purpose and scope of SC/HR Survey 0% 38 Assign responsibilities for SC/HR data collections 0% 39 Design data collection plan for study of SC/HR 0% 40 Collect and analyze data from SC/HR Survey 0% 41 Prepare SC/HR Survey Report 0% 42 Submit SC/HR Survey Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone  Summary Rolled Up Q PagesID 42 Name_____________________________ PORPORTIONALS ALLOCATION FORMULAS STUDY % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jur? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 44 Define purpose and scope of Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% 45 Assign responsibilities for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% 46 Design data collections plan for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% 0 47 Collect and analyze data for Proportional Allocation Formulas 0% 48 Prepare Proportional Allocation Formulas Report 0% 49 Submit Proportional Allocations Formulas Study Report to PRE for merge into needs assessment listing 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page?ID 5fl Name_______________________________ DISTRICTWIDE FACILITIES STUDY % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 51 Define purpose and scope of Districtwide Facilities Study/Report from 1994-95 Study for purposes of 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report 0% 0 52 Assign responsibilities for the Districtwide Facilities Study/Reporting of findings 0% 0 53 Prepare findings from the Districtwide Facilities Study 0% 54 Submit Districtwide Facilities Study Report recommendations to PRE for merge into needs assessment report 0% 55 DESEGREGATION MONITORING REPORTS AUDIT FROM PPM 0% 56 Define purpose and scope of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress  Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  PagesID 57 Name Assign responsibility for data collection of transcripts and Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jur? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 58 Design data collection plan for study of Desegregation Monitoring Reports Audit 0% 0 59 Collect data 0% 60 Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% 61 Report findings to PRE 0% 62 3 Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document COURT ORDERS AUDIT Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical 0% 0% 1 Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up Q PagesID 64 Name Define purpose and scope of Court Orders Audit % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 65 Assign responsibility for data collection of Court Orders Audit 0% 0 66 Collect data 0% 67 Review with Cabinet and Attorneys 0% 68 Report findings to PRE 0% 69 Merge new obligations with Program Budget Document 0% TOWN HALL MEETINGS 0% Project: Date\n8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress  Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Paget0ID 71 Name Define purpose and scope of Town Hall Meetings % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 72 Review previous years data from Town Hall Report 0% 0 73 Design data collection plan for Town Hall Meetings 0% 0 74 Set locations and schedule for Town Hall Meeting 0% 0 75 Develop advertisement plan and schedule for Town Hall Meetings\nPrepare sample agenda 0% 0 76 Review and revise data collection tool (matrix) for Town Hall Meetings 0% 0 77 Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting I 0% .. Project\nDate: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress Milestone Summary Rolled Up  Paget 1ID 78 Name Conduct Town Hall Meeting I % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 4th Quarter Sep Oct I Nov I 79 Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting I for input info matrix 0% 80 Execute advertisement plan for Town Hall Meeting II 0% 81 Conduct Town Hall Meeting II 0% 82 Gather feedback data from Town Hall Meeting II for input into matrix 0% 83 Execute advertisement plan tor Town Hall Meeting III 0% 84 Finalize and publish Town Hall Meeting Report 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Page12 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Summary Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 85 Name Merge findings of Town Hall Meeting Report, 1995-96 into needs assessment listing % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter 2nd Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Apr | May | Jun 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep Oct | Nov [ flS 0% 87 Define purpose and scope of District Dialogues 0% 0 88 Review previous years data from District Dialogue Report 0% 0 89 Design data collection plan for District Dialogues 0% 0 90 Set locations and schedule for District Dialogue Meetings 0% 0 91 Develop advertisement plan and schedule for District Dialogues\nprepare sample agenda 0% Q Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  Pagel3ID 92 Name Design data collection tool (matrix) for District Dialogue % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 0 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 93 Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue I 0% I 94 Conduct District Dialogue I 0% 95 Gather feedback from District Dialogue 1 for input into matrix 0% 96 Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue II 0% 97 Conduct District Dialogue II 0% 98 Gather feedback data from District Dialogue II for input into matrix 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone  Summary Rolled Up  Page14ID 99 Name Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue III % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jur? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 100 Conduct District Dialogue III 0% 101 Gather feedback data from District Dialogue III for merge into matrix 0% 102 Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue IV 0% 103 Conduct District Dialogue IV 0% 104 Gather feedback data from District Dialogue IV for input into matrix 0% 105 Execute advertisement plan for District Dialogue V 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress  Milestone | Pagel5 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Summary Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 106 Name Conduct District Dialogue V % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug 4th Quarter Sep Oct I Nov I Dec 107 Gather feedback data from District Dialogue V for input into matrix 0% 108 Finalize and publish District Dialogue Report 1995-96 0% 109 111 112 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec Merge findings of District Dialogue Report 1995-96 info needs assessment listing PREPARE NEEDS ASSESSMENT REPORT Conduct Administrative review of available districtwide reports and objective data Conduct Board Work Session for review of available districtwide reports and objective data 0% 0% 0% 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Summary Rolled Up  PageieID 113 Name Publish Draft of Needs Assessment /Report and disseminate to selected persons % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jur? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec I 114 Publish Needs Assessment Report, 1995-96 0% US PLANNING AND BUDGET GOALS 0% ue CABINET PLANNING SESSION 0% 117 Review 1994-95 Needs Assessment Report 0% 118 Distribute 1995-96 Needs Assessment Report to Cabinet members 0% 119 Distribute District goals to Cabinet 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress h Milestone | Pagel? 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec Summary Rolled Up ID 120 Name Cabinet review of goals % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec I 121 BOARD WORK SESSION 0% 122 Establish date and site for Work Session 0% 123 Identify materials for Board Work Session 0% 124 Prepare materials for Board Work Session 0% 125 Conduct Board Work Session 0% B 126 Distribute background materials to Board members 0% B Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress m Milestone B Pagels 1st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec Summary Rolled Up ID 127 Name Review/revise mission statement and goals % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jur? 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug' Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 0 128 Review DSeg and NonDSeg Program Inventory 0% a 129 Review identified proportional allocations 0% 0 130 Establish written priorities 0% 0 131 Identify strategies for funding shortfalls 0% 0 132 Develop timeline for identification and researching of funding shortfall strategies 0% 0 133 Develop communication strategy for mission statement and goals 0% I Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncriticai Progress Milestone Page19 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Summary Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 134 Name Distribute mission statement and goals % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec I 135 Distribute list of priorities 0% I 136 BOARD RETREAT 0% 137 Determine date and site for Board Retreat 0% 138 Identify agenda items for Board Retreat 0% 139 Establish agenda for Board Retreat 0% 140 Identify materials for Board Retreat 0% Project: Date: 8/31/95 Critical Noncritical Progress Milestone Page20 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar Summary Rolled Up  2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I DecID 141 Name Distribute materials for Board Retreat % Complete 0% Quarter May I Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 1 st Quarter Jan I Feb | Mar 2nd Quarter Apr I May | Jun 3rd Quarter Jul I Aug I Sep 4th Quarter Oct I Nov I Dec 142 Conduct data analysis work session in preparation for Board Retreat 0% I 143 Conduct Board Retreat 0% 0 144 145 146 147 Report outcomes of Board Retreat PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT SUBMIT BUSINESS CASE FOR PROGRAM AND/OR MODIFICATIONS TO SUPERINTENDENT Review process for program development 0% 0% 0% 0% 0 Project: Date: 8/31/95 Crit\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_1316","title":"Proceedings: ''Pulaski County Special School District,'' 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":["United States. District Court (Arkansas: Eastern District)"],"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","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School employees","School board members","School integration","School management and organization","Court records"],"dcterms_title":["Proceedings: ''Pulaski County Special School District,'' 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/1316"],"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":["66 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"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}],"pages":{"current_page":475,"next_page":476,"prev_page":474,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":5688,"total_count":81191,"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":40200},{"value":"StillImage","hits":35114},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":4552},{"value":"Sound","hits":3248},{"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":9441},{"value":"Civil rights","hits":8347},{"value":"African Americans","hits":5895},{"value":"Mississippi--Race relations","hits":5750},{"value":"Race relations","hits":5607},{"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":4436},{"value":"Civil rights workers","hits":3530}],"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":1809},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1709},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1312},{"value":"Baker, Augusta, 1911-1998","hits":1282},{"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":1909},{"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":431}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":1763},{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":1670},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":965},{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":704},{"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":17820},{"value":"United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","hits":5428},{"value":"United States, Alabama, Montgomery County, Montgomery, 32.36681, -86.29997","hits":5151},{"value":"United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","hits":4862},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":4610},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":4177},{"value":"United States, Alabama, 32.75041, -86.75026","hits":3943},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":2910},{"value":"United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898","hits":2579},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":2430},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":2387}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Georgia","hits":12843},{"value":"Alabama","hits":11307},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":10219},{"value":"South Carolina","hits":8503},{"value":"Arkansas","hits":4583},{"value":"Texas","hits":4399},{"value":"Tennessee","hits":3770},{"value":"Florida","hits":2601},{"value":"Ohio","hits":2391},{"value":"North Carolina","hits":1893},{"value":"New York","hits":1667}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1966","hits":10514},{"value":"1963","hits":10193},{"value":"1965","hits":10119},{"value":"1956","hits":9832},{"value":"1955","hits":9611},{"value":"1964","hits":9268},{"value":"1968","hits":9243},{"value":"1962","hits":9152},{"value":"1967","hits":8771},{"value":"1957","hits":8460},{"value":"1958","hits":8242},{"value":"1961","hits":8241},{"value":"1959","hits":8046},{"value":"1960","hits":7940},{"value":"1954","hits":7239},{"value":"1969","hits":7235},{"value":"1950","hits":7117},{"value":"1953","hits":6968},{"value":"1970","hits":6743},{"value":"1971","hits":6337},{"value":"1977","hits":6280},{"value":"1952","hits":6161},{"value":"1972","hits":6144},{"value":"1951","hits":6045},{"value":"1975","hits":5806},{"value":"1976","hits":5771},{"value":"1974","hits":5729},{"value":"1973","hits":5591},{"value":"1979","hits":5329},{"value":"1978","hits":5318},{"value":"1980","hits":5279},{"value":"1995","hits":4829},{"value":"1981","hits":4724},{"value":"1994","hits":4654},{"value":"1948","hits":4596},{"value":"1949","hits":4571},{"value":"1996","hits":4486},{"value":"1982","hits":4330},{"value":"1947","hits":4316},{"value":"1985","hits":4226},{"value":"1998","hits":4225},{"value":"1997","hits":4202},{"value":"1983","hits":4174},{"value":"1984","hits":4065},{"value":"1946","hits":4046},{"value":"1999","hits":4018},{"value":"1945","hits":4017},{"value":"1990","hits":3937},{"value":"1986","hits":3919},{"value":"1943","hits":3899},{"value":"1944","hits":3895},{"value":"1942","hits":3867},{"value":"2000","hits":3808},{"value":"2001","hits":3790},{"value":"1940","hits":3764},{"value":"1941","hits":3757},{"value":"1987","hits":3657},{"value":"2002","hits":3538},{"value":"1991","hits":3507},{"value":"1936","hits":3506},{"value":"1939","hits":3500},{"value":"1938","hits":3465},{"value":"1937","hits":3449},{"value":"1992","hits":3444},{"value":"1993","hits":3422},{"value":"2003","hits":3403},{"value":"1930","hits":3377},{"value":"1989","hits":3355},{"value":"1935","hits":3306},{"value":"1933","hits":3270},{"value":"1934","hits":3270},{"value":"1988","hits":3269},{"value":"1932","hits":3254},{"value":"1931","hits":3239},{"value":"2005","hits":3057},{"value":"2004","hits":2909},{"value":"1929","hits":2789},{"value":"2006","hits":2774},{"value":"1928","hits":2271},{"value":"1921","hits":2123},{"value":"1925","hits":2039},{"value":"1927","hits":2025},{"value":"1924","hits":2011},{"value":"1926","hits":2009},{"value":"1920","hits":1975},{"value":"1923","hits":1954},{"value":"1922","hits":1928},{"value":"2016","hits":1925},{"value":"2007","hits":1629},{"value":"2008","hits":1578},{"value":"2011","hits":1575},{"value":"2019","hits":1537},{"value":"1919","hits":1532},{"value":"2009","hits":1532},{"value":"1918","hits":1530},{"value":"2015","hits":1527},{"value":"2013","hits":1518},{"value":"2010","hits":1515},{"value":"2014","hits":1481},{"value":"2012","hits":1467}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"0193","max":"2035","count":500952,"missing":56},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"photographs","hits":10708},{"value":"correspondence","hits":9437},{"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":2740},{"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":41178},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":17554},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":8828},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":6864},{"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":197},{"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":8146},{"value":"Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library","hits":4102},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":4024},{"value":"University of North Texas. Libraries","hits":3854},{"value":"Hargrett Library","hits":3292},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":3212},{"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":2633},{"value":"Rhodes College","hits":2264}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":80736},{"value":"Collection","hits":455}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":80994},{"value":"true","hits":197}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}