{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"loc_rosaparks_47976","title":"[Coretta Scott King (left) and Xernona Clayton, Atlanta, Georgia, 1994] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1994"],"dcterms_description":["\"Copyright\" -- printed on back.","\"1-7\" --printed on back.","Title devised by Library staff."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":null,"dcterms_title":["[Coretta Scott King (left) and Xernona Clayton, Atlanta, Georgia, 1994] [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.47976"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Please contact holding institution for information regarding use and copyright status."],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1990-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Clayton, Xernona","King, Coretta Scott, 1927-2006"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_47977","title":"[Coretta Scott King meeting with Xernona Clayton, Atlanta, Georgia, 1994] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1994"],"dcterms_description":["\"Copyright\" -- printed on back.","\"1-10\" --printed on back.","Title devised by Library staff."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":null,"dcterms_title":["[Coretta Scott King meeting with Xernona Clayton, Atlanta, Georgia, 1994] [graphic]."],"dcterms_type":["StillImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Library of Congress"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ppmsca.47977"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Please contact holding institution for information regarding use and copyright status."],"dcterms_medium":["photographic printscolor1990-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["King, Coretta Scott, 1927-2006"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_342","title":"Correspondence","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":["1994"],"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":["Correspondence"],"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/342"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["correspondence"],"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\nOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date\nOctober 3, 1994 To\nRuss Mayo From\n,\u0026gt;Ann Brown Subject\nDistrictwide Recruitment Plan 1 was pleased to receive a copy of the districts newsletter News \u0026amp; Views, the first such publication in a long time. It was a newsy and interesting edition, and 1 look forward to reading the coming issues. The \"Desegregation Update\" section on the first page of the newsletter states that a districtwide recruitment plan has been written, and that the individual schools have put together strategies for action at the school level. The section goes on to say that the district and parent recruiters will work toward improving the image of the public schools to encourage voluntary student transfers. 1 was also glad to read that ODMs Incentive School Monitoring Report has provided further direction for recruitment efforts. Because recruitment and public relations are areas critical to desegregation, 1 salute you for having completed the plans that will support implementation of the activities referenced in the Update. Its a credit to you and your colleagues that the district has started the school year well prepared with road maps. Please help us get a head start on monitoring this years recruitment activities by sending me a copy of the revised districtwide recruitment plan that will be guiding you. In conjunction with that plan, I would also appreciate the information listed below. Brief answers, summaries, or copies of materials will do fine at this point. 1. 2. 3. Point out how this years districtwide recruitment plan differs from that of the previous year. State the districtwide goal of the recruitment plan in quantitative terms by race, i.e., the percentage increase in enrollment and the total number of students that percentage represents. State the school-based recruitment goal in quantitative terms by race for each school, i.e., the percentage increase by school and the target number of students you hope to recruit to each school according to the racial balance needs of each.October 3, 1994 Page Two 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Forward the results of the evaluation (fast-track or otherwise) you did on the previous recruitment plan that enabled you to determine what changes needed to be made in the current plan based on the successes or failures of last years plan. The Court long ago required the LRSD to establish a tracking system that would enable the district to determine which recruitment efforts are successful and which are not. Indicate the status of the tracking system, when it was established, who is responsible for it, and how it works. Summarize what youve learned from the system, and also how youve used at knowledge to modify the elements of your new recruitment plan. Summarize the recruitment strategies that each school has put together for this year. Or, if it will be easier, just include copies of the school-based plans. The desegregation plans state that parents and Parent Recruiters, along with such groups as the PTA, recruitment teams. Incentive School Parent Recruitment Committees, speakers bureaus, and the Biracial Committee, will assist with recruitment. Indicate the role envisioned for such individuals and groups in the current districtwide and school-based recruitment plans. Include the timeline of e current districtwide recruitment plan. Indicate who is responsible for the major events on that timeline. Describe the plans of the district and parent recruiters for improving the image of the schools, the timeline of the plans, and the responsible personnel. Indicate how you factored in the elements of the Public Relations sections of the Interdistrict Desegregation Plan. 11. Describe or list those elements of ODMs Incentive School Monitoring Report that the district will be using in recruitment. Or, in other words, how has the district modified its current recruitment plan to incorporate elements of the incentive school report? ^3.H'. ^^Aikansas DEPARTMENT of EDUCATION FEDERAL PROGRAMS 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL  LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071 . (501) 682-4475 GENE WILHOIT, Director, General Education Division October 3, 1994 OCT 71994 0/fic3 Dr. Henry P. Williams Superintendent of Schools Little Rock School District 810 West Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 oesegreg\nyoi Dear Dr. Williams\nThank you for your letter of September 29, 1994. The Chapter 2, ESEA, office iiss appreciative of your efforts to meet federal 1994. guidelines in cne expenaiture of your Chapter 2, ESEA, grant In your letter you have outlined some viable steps which agree will reduce the carryover balance at the end of the monies. we the expenditure of your Chapter 2, ESEA, fiscal year. Completion of the strategies mentioned in the letter will indeed guarantee that monies are spent in a timely manner. we are pleased to be able to approve the entire fiscal 1994 carryover of $39,354.59. carried into Completion of Therefore, mentioned This money is to be your fiscal 1995 project for expenditure in the current fiscal year. Sincerely, Bernadine Hoffman Program Administrator Chapter 2, ESEA BH:rjh cc: Ann Brown 1/ L board of EDUCATION: Chairman  ELAINE SCOTT, Little Rock  Vice Chairman  RICHARD C SMITH JR., Tillar Members: CARL E BAGGER R^ers . WLLIAM B. USHER, Paragould . JAMES M. LLEWELLYN, JR., Fort Smith  JAMES A McLARTY III, Newport  RAE RICE PERRY, Arkadelphia  SHERRY WALKER, Little Rock  NANCY M. WOOD, Little Rock An Equal Opportunity Employer  c TA Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: October 5, 1994 To: Frank Martin From: i^Ann Brown Subject: Reassignment of IRC Personnel I enjoyed our chat today and look forward to talking with you further on October 18. Thanks for agreeing to look into the situation regarding Leola Scoggins and Pearl Jackson, two IRC aides whose reassignments have made these two CTA members very unhappy. They met with me before school started and I suggested that they talk with you to determine the status of their complaint. Heres a copy of what I received from Leola, which you may already have in your files. I appreciate your looking into the matter and letting Leola and Pearl Itnow what next steps to anticipate. They both feel pretty helpless, but perhaps the situation isnt hopeless. Although theres probably not much I can do, please let me know how I can help. Thanks very much.Little Rock School District Ann Brown, Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201 October 6, 1994 RECEIVFD OCT 61994 Dear Ann: Office of Desegregation Monitoring Our discussion of my business case for a Director of Student Assignment was helpful. As you know, the proposal is to eliminate the Desegregation Facilitator position appearing in the desegregation plan. The money for that position will be used for a Director of Student Assignment. 1, and others as noted in the business case, will assume the responsibilities mandated by the plan for the Desegregation Facilitator. Since this is a plan modification, I am asking for your assistance with the modification process. The attached business case has been rewritten to Include all desegregation plan mandates for the Desegregation Facilitator, to clarify job responsibilities and accountability, to define a realistic job scope, and to correct some previous incongruities among sections of the business case. The Little Rock School District Board of Directors was presented the original business case by Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent, on June 14, 1994. There were no objections. On or about July 18, Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney, sent copies of the business case to all parties and submitted it to the court v\\4th the budget document. No objections were heard from any of the parties at that time. At a later hearing. Judge Wright requested clarification of specifically who would address the mandates of the plan in addition to the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. A chart responding to her request is included. Since this is a modification to the LRSD Desegregation Plan, the change should be reflected in the document for future reference. 1 suggest that the references to Desegregation Facilitator in the current plan be deleted. Again, thank you for your help with the business case. 1 look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, C. Russell Mayo Associate Superintendent for Desegregation C: Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361Little Rock School District Director of Student Assignment A Business Case Addition  Modification Deletion October 6,1994Little Rock School District Director of Student Assignment Business Case Executive Summary The position of Associate Superintendent for Desegregation was established to insure implementation of our desegregation plan as well as to monitor the districts desegregation process. Historically, this has been done through careful oversight of the Student Assigrunent Office (SAO), generation of numerous statistical reports, and staying abreast of the latest desegregation obligations. Also included with these responsibilities has been oversight of Volunteers In Public Schools (VIPS) and responsibility for recruitment of students as described in the desegregation plan. This past year, the responsibilities of Communications and Transportation were added to this position. Transportation has over 340 employees. Also added this school year are additional reports and documents generated monthly and quarterly to monitor the districts progress in fulfilling its obligations under its plan. The Student Assignment Office is not receiving as much day-to-day supervision as it should to address the sensitivity of student assignments, their impact on the desegregation plan, and the needs of parents. The responsibilities of student assignment require moment by moment attention. Decisions about when to release waiting lists affect racial balance and recruitment of parents to the district. Careful and proper monitoring of racial balance and the student assignment process improves public confidence and maintains racial balance. Projecting demographic data and enrollments aids in planning for future marketing, recruitment, and school closings or construction. Executing plans for closing schools requires attention to patrons who are affected and the assurance of acceptable options. The supervision of SAO personnel requires meetings, planning, and periodic training. Meeting with parents who do not understand the student assignment process requires diplomacy, patience, and time. Meeting with the appeals committee requires time and diplomacy. These are examples of student assignment responsibilities requiring day-to-day, on-site attention. Currently the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation fulfills the role of the student assignment supervisor in addition to broader responsibilities. Though housed at the SAO, his responsibilities require his presence and attention elsewhere too often. This makes the day-to-day attention required by the student assignment impossible. This is a proposal to change the position of Desegregation Facilitator to Director of Student Assignment. Realign responsibilities so the new director assumes the primary responsibility for student assignment, and the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation assumes primary responsibility for desegregation and the duties previously done by the Desegregation Facilitator. This neither increases the costs of personnel nor ignores the responsibilities of the Desegregation Facilitator. Further, it gives the attention necessary to student assignment and allows for greater focus on the desegregation effort. This position will report to the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. See Figure 1.Director of Student Assignment Business Case 2 Now, more than before, senior management is totally involved in the desegregation effort. The responsibilities of the Superintendent, the Deputy Superintendent, Associate to the Deputy Superintendent, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation, Director of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, and staff development personnel are all focused on the desegregation effort. The implementation of a planning and budgeting process has raised the effort to a new consciousness. Now monitoring of desegregation is more extensive them ever. Continuous discussions and analysis in meetings of the Superintendents Council have moved obligations to the forefront. The Program Budget Document and the Management Tool represent additional safeguards not previously used by the district. Therefore, the original intent of the Desegregation Facilitator has grown beyond a single individual into a way of life for senior management in the district. Addressing the need in the area of student assignment now becomes am important part of the solution. The responsibilities of the former Desegregation Facilitator will become the primary responsibility of the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. He will be assisted by those persons listed in the chart below. Tasks 1. Work directly with building principals 2. Identification of problems or practices that impede the Implementation of quality desegregated education in each building 3. Providing technical assistance to building principals and their staffs for desegregation concerns_____________ 4. Working very closely with the remaining associate superintendents as needed______________________ 5. Allow the central office administration to have immediate feedback on the day-to-day activities in the schools^________________________________________ 6. Focusing on all aspects of desegregation implementation including, but not limited to achievement disparity, extracurricular activities, class assignments, guidance and counseling, staffing and staff interaction, student interactions, and parent Involvement. Person (s) Associate Supt. for Deseg. Assistant Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Assistant Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Dir. of Human Resources Dir. of Labor Relations Dir. of Student Assignment Assoc. Supt for Deseg. Dir. of Staff Development Associate Supt. for Deseg. Assistant Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Associate Supt. for Deseg. ' At present, only one Associate Superintendent exists. This reference is interpreted as other senior level administrators in the district. 2 This item is less of a task and more of a result. IO/64 DIRSAOZ.DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 3 Currently, the position of Desegregation Facilitator is vacant because of a retirement. By modifying the position now, no adjustments are necessary for the person in the position. The position will be advertised as described herein. The new person will know what is expected before filling the position. An extended period of training will be necessary once a person is employed. Time for announcing the position and interviewing will be necessary. This should take no more than one month to complete once final approval is given. The busiest time of the year for student assignment is January through September. The sooner we can make this change\nthe sooner we can begin improving service to parents. The following are milestones for implementing this position modification. 1. 2. 3, 4. 5. 6. Milestone Date Person Meet with SAO staff. Director of Communications, the Coordinator of VIPS, and the Director of Transportation^ Present Business Case to the Superintendent for approval Present Business Case to the Board of Directors for approval Present Business Case to ODM to begin modification procedure Discuss this modification with all parties Submit plan modification to the Court for approval 7. Court approval 8. 9. Advertise the position Interview 10. Report for work 8/30/94 6/14/94 6/14/94 10/03/94 10/14/94 10/21/94 11/04/94 11/07/94 11/22/94 12/05/94 Mayo Mayo Williams Attorney Attorney Attorneys Williams Hurley Mayo Appointee Timely consideration of this modification is respectfully requested. Russ Mayo Associate Superintendent for Desegregation September, 1994 3 Though discussed in staff meetings with this group, a specific date was not reflected in an earlier edition of this business case. Another discussion was held updating this group on the progress of the business case. Therefore, the date appears to be out of sequence. 10/6/94 MRSAOZ DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 4 Background The position of Associate Superintendent for Desegregation was established to insure implementation of our desegregation plan as well as to monitor the districts desegregation process. Historically, this has been done through careful oversight of the Student Assignment Office (SAO), generation of numerous statistical reports, and staying abreast of the latest desegregation obligations. Also included with these responsibilities has been oversight of Volunteers In Public Schools (VIPS) and responsibility for recruitment of students as described in the desegregation plan. This past year, the responsibilities of Communications and Transportation were added to this position. Transportation has over 340 employees. Also added this school year are additional reports and documents generated monthly and quarterly to monitor the districts progress in fulfilling its obligations under its plan. Problem Definition The Student Assignment Office is not receiving as much day-to-day supervision as it should to address the sensitivity of student assignments, their impact on the desegregation plan, and the needs of parents. The responsibilities of student assignment require moment by moment attention. Decisions about when to release waiting lists affect racial balance and recruitment of parents to the district. Careful and proper monitoring of racial balance and the student assignment process improves public confidence and maintains racial balance. Projecting demographic data and enrollments aids in planning for future marketing, recruitment, and school closings or construction. Executing plans for closing schools requires attention to patrons who are affected and the assurance of acceptable options. The supervision of SAO personnel requires meetings, planning, and periodic training. Meeting with parents who do not understand the student assignment process requires diplomacy, patience, and time. Meeting with the appeals committee requires time and diplomacy. These are examples of student assignment responsibilities requiring day-to-day, on-site attention. Currently the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation fulfills the role of the student assignment supervisor in addition to broader responsibilities. Though housed at the SAO, his responsibilities require his presence and attention elsewhere too often. This makes the day-to-day attention required by the student assignment impossible. Analysis of Alternatives The following alternatives have been considered: 10/6/94 D1RSAOZ.DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 5 1. Add a new position to cover the responsibilities of student assignment and to assist the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. This creates an additional position and personnel costs. 2. Allow things to remain as they are. SAO and parents will continue to receive less Associate Superintendent Organizational Chart I A\u0026gt;oclt 8upTtnt\u0026lt;ndnt | 3. DIrvctorof Transportation l\" I Director of Student Assignment and Desegregation Student Assignment Coordinator SAO Information Coordinator I than attention. adequate Change the position of Desegregation Facilitator to Director of Student Director of Communications I W Wecrutters | I PreyiUBT I I (8) Student Alonwnt nf [ Figure J Community OovolopmMit CoordkMitor I Staff I Assignment. Realign responsibilities so the new director assumes the responsibility primary for Student and the assignment, Associate Superintendent Desegregation for assumes responsibility primary for desegregation and the duties previously done by the Desegregation Facilitator. This neither increases the costs of personnel nor ignores the responsibilities of the Desegregation Facilitator. Further, it gives the attention necessary to student assignment and allows for greater focus on the desegregation effort. This position will report to the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. See Figure 1. Now, more than before, senior management is totally involved in the desegregation effort. The responsibilities of the Superintendent, the Deputy Superintendent, Associate to the Deputy Superintendent, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation, Director of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, and staff development personnel eire all focused on the desegregation effort. The implementation of a planning and budgeting process has raised the effort to a new consciousness. Now monitoring of desegregation is more extensive than ever. Continuous discussions and analysis in meetings of the Superintendents Council have moved obligations to the forefront. The Program Budget Document and the Management Tool represent additional safeguards not previously used by the district. Therefore, the original intent of the Desegregation Facilitator has grown beyond a single individual into a way of life for senior management in the district. Addressing the need in the area of student assignment now becomes ein important part of the solution. The following are examples of responsibilities to be assigned to the new position: 10/6/94 DIRSAOZ EOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 6 a) Supervises and coordinates the day-to-day operation of the Student Assignment Office\nb) Keeps the Associate Superintendent informed and updated on progress made in performing responsibilities relating to student assignment and on any relevant information discovered in the performeince of these duties\nc) Assists with developmental planning in the areas of long-range student assignment policies, magnet school development, program placement, and equal educational opportunity planning, and proposal development by providing demographic information and other pertinent information\nd) Assists with monitoring and evaluating the districts desegregation plan\ne) Assists in identifying problems or practices that impede the implementation of quality desegregation in the student assignment process\nf) Provides immediate feedback on the day-to-day operations relating to student assignment\ng) Stays informed of current issues before the Board of Directors by attending Board Meetings\nh) Provides for the development, implementation, and evaluation of staff training for Student Assignment Office personnel\ni) Coordinates the appeals committee\nand, j) Performs other duties as assigned. The LRSD Plan defines the position of Desegregation Facilitator. Those tasks are found in the Educational Equity Monitoring section of the plan. The primary responsibility for the tasks described in the LRSD Plan will rest with the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation with this proposal. In the plan, the Desegregation Facilitator is defined as follows: Office of Desegregation A desegregation facilitator will be hired to work directly with building princip\u0026gt;als. The desegregation facilitator will be solely responsible for identifying problems or practices that impede the implementation of quality desegregated education in each building. The facilitator will also be responsible for providing technical assistance to building principals and their staffs, for desegregation related concerns. The use of a desegregation facilitator will allow the central office administration to have immediate feedback on the day to day activities in the schools. The desegregation facilitator will report directly to the Associate Sufjerintendent for Desegregation. However, the desegregation facilitator will work very closely with the remaining associate superintendents as needed. The desegregation facilitator will focus on all aspects of desegregation implementation. This includes, but is not limited to, achievement disparity. 10/6/94 MRSAOZ DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 7 extracurricular activities, class assignments, guidance eind counseling, staffing and staff interaction, student interaction, and parent involvement. Timeline Develop Job Description Announce Position Hire Desegregation Facilitator March 1-15 April 1-15 May 30 The responsibilities of the former Desegregation Facilitator will become the primary responsibility of the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. He will be assisted by those persons listed in the chart below. _______________________Tasks_________ 1. Work directly with building principals 2. Identification of problems or practices that impede the implementation of quality desegregated education in each building 3. Providing technical assistance to building principals and their staffs for desegregation concerns______ 4. Working very closely with the remaining associate superintendents'^ as needed__________________ 5. Allow the central office administration to have immediate feedback on the day-to-day activities in the schools^________________________________ 6. Focusing on aU aspects of desegregation implementation including, but not limited to achievement disparity, extracurricular activities, class assignments, guidance and counseling, staffing and staff interaction, student interactions, and parent involvement. ________Person(s)_______ Associate Supt. for Deseg. Assistcint Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Assistant Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Dir. of Humein Resources Dir. of Labor Relations Dir, of Student Assignment Assoc. Supt for Deseg. Dir, of Staff Development Associate Supt. for Deseg. Assistant Supts. Assoc, to Deputy Supt. Associate Supt. for Deseg. 4 At present, only one Associate Superintendent exists. This reference is interpreted as other senior level administrators in the district. 5 This item is less of a task and more of a result. 10/6/94 DIRSAOZ.DOC Director of Student Assignment Business Case 8 Recommendation Alternative 3 is recommended. 3. Change the position of Desegregation Facilitator to Director of Student Assignment. Realign tasks to make this position responsible primarily for student assignment. The responsibilities of the former Desegregation Facilitator will become the responsibility of the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. This change neither increases the costs of personnel nor ignores the responsibilities of the Desegregation Facilitator. Further, it gives the attention necessary to student assignment. This position will continue to report to the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. Objective Upon implementation of alternative 3, the Student Assigiunent Office will receive the day-to-day supervision necessary to address the sensitivity of student assignments, their impact on the desegregation plan, and the needs of parents. Achieving this objective will permit: 1. More efficient monitoring of progress of desegregation by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation\n2. Greater focus and attention given to daily decisions relating to student assignment\n3. Thorough long-range planning for student assignment policies, magnet school development, program placement, equal educational opportunity planning, and proposal development by providing demographic information and other pertinent information\n4. Quicker response to parent inquires\nand, 5. Identification of problems or practices in the student assignment process that impede the implementation of quality desegregation. Impact Analysis Negatives 1. Student Assignment Personnel will have to adjust to a third supervisor within three years. 2. Parties in the case may be concerned that monitoring of the districts desegregation obligations will be compromised. 10/6/M DIRSAOZ.DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 9 Positives 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. eliminate delays in decision-making and responses to parents in the cirea of student assignments. permit efficient monitoring of progress of desegregation by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation\nbring more focus and attention to daily decisions relating to student assignment\nprovide more thorough long-range planning for student assignment policies, magnet school development, program placement, equal educational opportunity planning, and proposal development by providing demographic information and other pertinent information\nallow quicker response to parent inquires\nand, permit the identification of problems or practices in the student assignment process that impede the implementation of quality desegregation. Risks The risks of not implementing this solution are continued disorganization for the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation, complaints, limited complicince with our obligations, and continuation of a generally poor public image in the area of student assignments. Timing Currently, the position of Desegregation Facilitator is vacant because of a retirement. By modifying the position now, no adjustments are necessary for the person in the position. The position will be advertised as described herein. The new person will know what is expected before filling the position. An extended period of training will be necessary once a person is employed. Time for announcing the position and interviewing will be necessary. This should take no more than one month to complete once final approval is given. The busiest time of the year for student assignment is January through September. The sooner we can make this change\nthe sooner we can begin improving service to parents. Resources Analysis Personnei This is a position modification requiring no increase or decrease in the number of existing positions. 10/6/94 DIRSAOZ.DOCDirector of Student Assignment Business Case 10 Financial No increase will occur in the current level of funding for this position. Revenue Source Funding for this position will come from the current line item of the budget. Force Field Analysis Primary supporters of this modification are council members, SAO staff, Director of Communications, the Coordinator of VIPS, and the Director of Transportation. General Information Plan The following are milestones for implementing this position modification. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Milestone Date Person Meet with SAO staff. Director of Communications, the Coordinator of VIPS, and the Director of Transportation^ Present Business Case to the Superintendent for approval Present Business Case to the Board of Directors for approval Present Business Case to ODM to begin modification procedure Discuss this modification with all parties Submit plan rnodification to the Court for approval 7. Court approval 8. 9. Advertise the position Interview 10. Report for work 8/30/94 6/14/94 6/14/94 10/03/94 10/14/94, 10/21/94 11/04/94 11/07/94 11/22/94 12/05/94 Mayo Mayo Williams Mayo Attorney Attorneys Williams Hurley Mayo Appointee 6 Though discussed in staff meetings with this group, a specific date was not reflected in an earlier edition of this business case. Another discussion was held updating this group on the progress of the business case. Therefore, the date appears to be out of sequence. 10/6/94 DIRSAOZ.DOCB4101301 Date: October 13, 1994 To: Robert Glowers From: Bill Mooney Subj: Comments on the September LRSD Project Management Tool Robert, I thought I would send you a brief note of comments on the latest project management tool since I will not be able to talk to you about them for some time. If you have any questions, save them for my return. Task 6. As you know, the 6/30/95 finish date is not really correct. The needs assessment we are talking about in this section must be completed by the 12/15/94 finish date in Task 150. The problem is Task 153, which really belongs in the next cycle. Cycle III. I know the lawyers dont want two tools, but good planning and management says keep things separate so folks dont get confused. I guess lawyers dont get confused like the rest of us. Task 6. Last week we met concerning setting the format for the needs- assessment document. 1 would add a new task to cover that activity, and insert it in as Task 7. Task 71. There is no mention of the facilities committee which has been set up to help develop the facilities plan. I would put some tasking in this section to track their work, and show the world what all we are doing. Task 105. Adding the name of the school, once determined, is a good idea. It shows you are working your plan. Well done. Task 149. 1 dont understand why this finish date is so late? It would seem that they would want their input going into the Program Development decision-making back in January. April 28, 1995 is after the Proposed Budget has already been developed. I would think this date should be back in December/January. Task 154. This is the same problem we have in Task 6. 9/15/95 is not really the right timeframe. The inventory for this cycle should be completed by now. The killer is Task 160, which is really in the Cycle III timeline. Task 186 and Task 192. These tasks indicate that the Board has established and prepared a distribution list of their written priorities. By this note, I am requesting you send Ann Brown and myself a copy of these priorities as soon as possible. Thanks, in advance.Task 188 and Task 189. I understand why they wanted to extend these two, and I think this is a valid reason. What concerns me is the 0% progress. I fear folks will let this one slip again this year because of the hard decisions, and we will get hopelessly behind. Please watch the progress on this one. We need to start work on the known items last week. Task 203. This finish date is not correct. We know that this sub-process must be completed prior to starting on the next sub-process. Budgeting. This sub-process needs to finish by 2/28/95. The problem child is Task 216. If the district is planning on revisiting outsourcing, it should do so and make a decision not later than 2/28/95 so it can be properly included in the budget. To show a date of 6/30/95 replicates the problem we had this past budget\nwaiting too late for decisions. A decision at 6/30/95 is far too late for this budget cycle. Task 214. How can we have 40% of this task complete when the start date is 11/ 16/94? Task 250. I think this task will take more than one day. Think about this one. Task 253. This is the same task as Task 248, and this one can be deleted. Note\nI noticed that you did not include anything in the plan about the budget hearings which will surely occur. I would think about how to at least put a reminder in there. Being a manager and not an attorney, I would ask the Court to tentatively schedule those hearings as soon as possible giving consideration to the overall LRSD schedule. Task 364. One last comment about this. The cover letter for the August 3, 1994 filing, entitled LRSDs 1994-1995 Budget/July Project Management Tool (Corrected), addressed the tool for Cycle II, yet the actual tool submitted was for Cycle I. As I have said, I have been told the lawyers only wanted one tool at a time, but this is what can happen when one fails to clearly understand there are really two separate cycles overlapping. As we have discussed. Cycle I never was completely closed out. Rest assured there will be many more future interpretation errors if we continue to keep two cycles going in one tool. Enough said. Task 378, 379, 380, 381. This is a good idea and reminder for critical things to come. Task 382. This summary task is a good one for including in the tool, but the timing confuses me. It seems to me that these tasks relate to the 94-95 school year and the budget which we have just completed. These tasks were added to the tool after they were actually completed. It seems we have another \"two cycle\" problem. Since this cycle is focusing on 95-96 school year, it seems we should have May 95 dates in this tool.'/ 4- X( Little Rock School District \u0026lt;*15 ' October 20, 1994 eer 2 41994 Mrs. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring Little Rock School District Oiiise of Oosegregaticn ktonii tiering Dear Mrs. Ann Brown, Enclosed is an invitation for everyone in your office, attached flyer) (See We would be honored to have you as our special guest. Love, Catherine 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 C^: A.'J^ 'f SfAsa) /r/^ Little Rock School District October 25, 1994 RSCEP'BP OCT 2 8 1994 Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Ofiioa of D6segre'5aiicn Moriitering Little Rock, AR 72201 RE: Extended Year Program at Incentive Schools ( Attached you will find administration reports for the Extended Year Program for the incentive schools, sending these reports to you. I am sorry for the delay in If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Sterling Ingram Associate to the Deputy Superintendent Sl/adg- Attachments 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SUMMER SCHOOL/SUMMARY REPORT 1994 GRADES 1 - 6 AND EXTENDED YEAR PROGRAM ROCKEFELLER ELEMENTARY 700 EAST 17TH STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 y C^yJ^L ,,^, .. r ....-ZXe. /yiaj.^ ..- -_______ \u0026lt; i /tJt, nopy Ti^u t, (?c  I illJWIIIItWjW' LmuE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT ^sn Memorandum OCI 5 1 1994 DATE\nOctober 27, 1994 Vyi 2tt'Cw 0*  TO: RE: Desegregation Monitoring Office - Ann Brown, Melissa Guldin Joshua Interveners - John Walker Knight Interveners - Eleanor Coleman, Frank Martin Pulaski County Special School District - Bobby Lester North Little Rock School District - James Smith LRSD Planning Team - Matthis, Ingram, Clowers, Mayo, Buchanan, Elston, Kohler, Eaton, Hurley, Schwartz of Schools ) / Magnet School/Development This memo is to invite your participation in a planning process leading to the submission of an application by the Little Rock School District to the federal Magnet Schools Assistance Program. An application for a 3-year program is being prepared for submission in early 1995. Program activity would begin later that year. LRSD seeks involvement of key community representatives to develop the most competitive application. Your involvement will help determine which schools will be targeted to become magnets, what magnet themes will be developed, how enrollment at the schools will be handled, and other issues. Please make every effort to attend or send a representative to a planning meeting on Thursday, November 3, from 2:00 to 3:00 P.M. in the Board Room of the LRSD Administration Building. At that session, you will be presented with some of the Districts preliminary concepts for magnet school development and an overview of the schedule and planning process we will follow for the coming months. Again, your participation in this planning process is strongly encouraged. Please call Marvin Schwartz, #324-2014, with any questions on this initiative or the planning meeting. I look forward to seeing you then. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)824-2000  I 1 C^X \u0026lt;^: ^r)f/,A. FOR CONSIDERATION OF SUSPENSION OF THE RULES AT OCTOBER REGULAR BOARD MEETING LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS October 27, 1994 TO: Board of Directors OCI 27 1994 FROM: Sadie Mitchell^^Xssistant Superintendent Samuel Branch, Principal .^^^Marvin Schwartz, Grants Writer Gliics 0, Ocseg\ney: itiOi' THROUGH: SUBJECT: Parent Involvement Program r P^k Element^ School has prepared an application to the state Department of Education for f establish a parent involvement program for grades K-3. The school will request $15,000 for a one-year program through the Division of Early Childhood Education e intent of the progrm is to involve parents in their chidrens education and prevent academic difficulties through high quality early childhood programs. The Fair Park program design involves developing language skills to bnng parents and children together through the use of books and computer equipment. Parent involvement in the school setting will be complemented by use of educational materials in the home. prevent academic 'O It is recoi^ended that the Board of Directors approve the administration to submit the proposal for the Fair Park parent involvement program.OFF. OF DESEG. MONITORING BANKS, JACQUELYN J - BROWN, ANN S vC BRYANT, LINDA F RECEPTIONIST FEDERAL MONITOR, 515 WEST 24TH STREET 1201 WELCH Sukf.o** 3002 ROMINE ROAD MELISSA R MOONEY, WILLIAM M /MORGAN, ROLAND R v'POWELL, MARGIE L '7rAMER, POLLY A ^fiMITH, HORACE R TANNER, CONNIE H ASSOCIATE FEDERAL MONITOR BUDGET SPECIALIST ASSOCIATE FEDERAL MONITOR ASSOCIATE FEDERAL MONITOR OFFICE MANAGER ASSOCIATE FEDERAL MONITOR ASSOCIATE FeDEBAfc-HONITOfr 6509 CANTRELL 21711 HENLEY LANE MCF 11411 KERRY DRIVE -4eeEECHwee\u0026amp; 0' Ci 72114 72202 72204 72207 72065 72209 TK95- I 758-1315 372-7458 224-7338 663-8177 888-6183 562-7698 ^e^soof- DATE: October 31, 1994 TO: All Principals, Directors, and Managers FROM: Dr. Ri^^ Hurley, Director Human Resources Department SUBJECT: Request for Personnel Directory Update Information Your help is needed in updating the information for your staffs name, address, and phone number for 1994-95 LRSD Personnel Directory. A copy of the current information from Human Resources is attached to assist you. Please have each employee in you division to check their address, zip code, and telephone number for accuracy. If the employee DOES NOT wish to have their address and/or number published, they must indicate so by lining through the information and initialing. All changes should be made on the attached sheet(s). Return your updated information to Human Resources by November 11.1994. vmai aJ i l=,J^ Ct/\u0026gt;\u0026gt;'\u0026lt;-i LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK ARKANSAS 72202 / - October 31, 1994 Mr. Bill Mooney ODM Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Dear Bill: Due to an error there were two pages in the LRSD Transportation Business Case with wrong calculations. Please replace pages 1 and 10 with the enclosed copies. Thank you for your help! Sincerely, Russ Mayo Associate Superintendent for Desegregation RM: elk Enclosure: (2) Little Rock School District Improving Student Transportation Business Case Executive Summary The intent of this business case is to explain the current transportation problems which resulted from an aging fleet and reduced personnel. Unfortunately, the cost of remedies proposed here is only a beginning. It will not fix the problem for the long term. For example, the new buses proposed will not arrive until the spring of 1995. Then too few wUl arrive to impact the long-term need. The personnel proposed can be hired immediately but will have continuous impact on the budgets from year to year, if this solution continues to be used. Additionally, large sums of money will have to be included in each succeeding budget to replace buses. A detailed explanation of the transportation problem follows with a temporary solution for this budget year. The cost to the district will be $1.3 million. Replacement buses will cost $1 million and additional personnel will cost approximately $0.3 million. Below is an itemized list of costs: Quan. Position CosP Quan.^ Item Cost 3.3 Trainers Mechanics 1.5 Helpers Clerks $87,100 $115,200 $62,400 $21,600 33 Buses $990,000 4 4 Total $286,300 Total $990,000 The money will come from the state desegregation loan fund. The following milestones for implementing this proposal are suggested and will be monitored by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation. Milestone 1. Proposal presented to the LRSD Board of Directors and approved 2. Advertise for mechanics and trainers Date 7/14/94 9/1/94 Person Williams Hurley 1 2 Includes benefits Depends on whether or not we lease-purchase or purchase outrightImproving Student Transportation Business Case 10 Timing It is critical that the decision be made before the budget is final for 1994-95. If this solution is to be implemented, buses must be ordered and personnel recruited as soon as possible. Resources Analysis Personnel Several trainers and additional mechanics are necessary to implement this proposal. Financial The cost to the district will be $1.3 million. Replacement buses will cost $1 million and additional personnel will cost approximately $0.3 million. Below is an itemized list of costs: Quan. Position 3.3 Trainers Cost^ Quan.^ Item Cost 4 Mechanics 4 Helpers 1.5 Clerks $87,100 $115,200 $62,400 $21,600 33 Bxises $990,000 Total $286,300 Total $990,000 Revenue Source The money will come from the state desegregation loan ftmd. Force Field Analysis Primary supporters of this proposal will be those directly affected by the solution  patrons and administrators within the District. The Board of Directors and 3 Includes benefits 4 Depends on whether or not we lease-purchase or purchase outright. lO/SI/M BC.BU5Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324'2000  r i iPF . 'J November 1, 1994 '5 1994 Office ot Oe\nKatherine P. Mitchell, Ph.D. 1605 Welch Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72206  '\"Iz  Dear Dr. Mitchell: I am writing asking that you work for and vote for the continuation of hiring registered nurses to provide health care to our school children. Many of our students receive no health care other than what is provided at their school site. Registered nurses are qualified to provide professional assessments, emergency care and referrals, health education. and the all important mental health care. are not qualified to act in such an independent role. Licensed practical nurses In my consultation with the Little Rock School District, I have become aware of countless cases where elementary, junior and senior high students as well as faculty members have not only received excellent health care and mental health/suicide prevention/intervention but are alive today as a result of the professional assessment, quick response and committment of the school nurses of the LRSD. district should be proud! They are certainly a group of winich the As our society becomes more complicated, so do the lives of our students and faculty and so do the health problems demanding professional nurses in our schools. Let's not sell our kids short. Please continue your support of our registered school nurses and giving our students the quality health care they deserve. Thank you very much. * Sincerely Mary Paal, M.S.N..,R.N. ,c. Certified Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse cc: Linda Poindexter Dr. Henry WilliamsOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376.6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Date: November 1, 1994 To: All Counsel of Record From: n S. Brown Subject: LRSD Proposal for Plan Modification: Desegregation Facilitator As you are aware. Judge Wright has asked me to coordinate the desegregation plan modification process for a specific proposal, which was prompted by a LRSD business case presented to the Court during recent hearings. That business case proposed to eliminate the Desegregation Facilitator, to distribute the Facilitators duties to other district administrators, and to create a new Director of Student Assignment position. In an October 24, 1994 Order, the Court directed me to \"work with the LRSD to identify any deficiencies in the business case and to address them in ways that preserve the intent of the desegregation plan when it provided that a Desegregation Facilitator would serve the staff and students of LRSD schools.\" 1 have met at length with Dr. Russ Mayo to discuss the business case. As a result of our discussions and my observations. Dr. Mayo has completed a revised business case. The revision addresses deficiencies in the original proposal, which had to do with\nincongruities within the business case, omitted plan mandates, the scope of the revised job description, possible neglect of plan-mandated responsibilities, and unclear accountability. In my opinion. Dr. Mayo has satisfactorily addressed those deficiencies through this revised proposal. Please review the revised business case, which is attached along with a letter from Dr. Mayo to me. If you have questions or concerns about the proposal, discuss them with Dr. Mayo and his attorney. Do your best to resolve any issues and determine whether the business case may need further revision. Let me know immediately the nature of any matters that remain unsettled or if you anticipate any additional changes in the proposal\n1 will serve as a resource to further facilitate the modification process if necessaiy. 1 wish to conclude this phase of the modification process as soon as possible, certainly no later than November 10, 1994. By that date or before, please indicate in writing to me either that you do not object to the plan modification as proposed in the revised business case, or that you object to the modification for reasons which you specify. 1 will forward your written comments to the Court along with copies of this memorandum and the enclosures. The Court will issue a ruling based on this information, any other filings you may wish to make, and the record of this case. Thank you for your cooperation. Please let me know if 1 may be of further assistance. Enc. Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Date: November 2, 1994 To: From: Subject: Principals of Franklin, Garland, Mitchell, Rightsell, Rockefeller, and Stephens Ann Brown, Melissa Guldin, Bob Morgan, Margie Powell, and Horace Smith, ODM Monitoring Report on the Incentive Schools A draft copy of ODMs monitoring report is enclosed for your review. This report reflects the information we gathered during our visit to your schools this past spring. Please read the report carefully, checking for accuracy. If you find any statements that are inaccurate or if there are areas that need clarification, please summarize your comments and submit them to our office in writing, no later than 5:00 p.in. Tuesday, November 8,1994. One of the monitors will come to your school on that date to pick up the draft copy. If you have written comments and they are ready by the time a monitor arrives, you may send the comments back with him or her. If a monitor arrives before you prepare any response, you may bring it to our office later that same day. We will not accept any responses received after 5:00 p.m. on November 8. If you have questions or concerns about the report, please call our office and discuss those issues with a monitor. We make every effort to present fair, accurate information. Since this report is a draft copy, we ask that you do not duplicate it or share it with others. After the review process, we will file a completed report that includes an introduction, findings, summary, conclusions, and recommendations with the court. We will send you a copy of that final report. We very much appreciate your cooperation during the monitoring process and thank you for taking the time to review the draft. cc: Russ Mayo Pat Price Sterling Ingram4 oi^y J Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: November 3, 1994 To: From: Subject: Bobby Lester, James Smith, Hank Williams A ^Ahn Brown ODM 1994-95 Monitoring Priorities and Procedures My staff and I have identified our monitoring priorities for the 1994-95 school year, which are attached. As in previous years, we identified our monitoring emphasis by reviewing the desegregation plans and mandates from both the circuit and district courts. We also noted court orders and directives issued during hearings that require ODM to review certain desegregation activities or to scrutinize specific provisions of the plans or court orders. It is possible that some of the attached desegregation topics will change depending upon unforeseen events that may develop, such as new court orders. I Some of our monitoring will be in the nature of a follow-up on previous reports, such as those on the alternative schools, racial balance in school enrollment, and the LRSD incentive schools. Other monitoring will be in areas we have not previously reviewed as a discreet topic, such as the secondary interdistrict schools in the LRSD, the specialty programs in the PCSSD, and the status of desegregation in the NLRSD schools. At die conclusion of each monitoring project, we will summarize our findings to the Court in some type of written report. Some of our reports will be brief and limited in scope, such as that on eliminating portable buildings in the PCSSD\nothers, such at that on the secondary interdistrict schools, will be more comprehensive and lengthier. You can expect our monitoring procedures to remain essentially unchanged from previous years, continuing to include review of records and other written information, interviews with principals and other administrators, and visits to schools. Our observations will be guided by a written monitoring guide, the same type of instrument weve used in the past. As usual, we will review the guide with your staff before beginning a formal monitoring project so youll know what we are looking for.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376.6200 Fax (501) 371.0100 Novembers, 1994 Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation Little Rock School District Student Assignment Office 501 Sherman Street Little Rock, AR 72202 Dear Russ\nAnn gave me a copy of the flow chart your staff developed to help explain the LRSD student assignment options. I know how confusing the many assignment options can be. Parents certainly need all the help they can get in making choices for their children. 1 really appreciate your efforts to make the assignment process more understandable to the Board, other educators, and the public. After reviewing the document, I have a few questions and comments regarding its content. I would like for us to meet and discuss the flow chart and other student assignment issues, after you have had time to review my comments. I will call your office by Tuesday, November 8, 1994 so we can set a time to discuss these matters. For whom was this flow chart designed? If the chart is for parents, or other individuals unfamiliar with the students assignment regulations, it may need more information presented in a clearer manner. How will the chart be used? If the flow chart is designed to demonstrate the various student assignment options, it needs some information regarding sending schools. The chart lists the various assignment options, but never indicates that the racial balance at sending schools is a factor. How much weight are you assigning to the racial balance at the sending schools? Has the district resolved the issue of sending school balance versus the need to reach maximum capacity at the magnet schools? Is the position on sending schools the same for all types of transfers (magnet, desegregation, incentive)?Where does the district stand on submitting a revised policy on the enrollment of LRSD white students in the interdistrict schools located within the district? This policy can make a dramatic difference in the options you have to offer to some parents. Why did you opt for the school classifications used on the flow chart? While King has full magnet status, its student assignments and racial balance are those allotted to an interdistrict school. The same is true for Washington, but both schools (along with Rockefeller) are listed with the original elementary magnets. Since the flow chart is trying to explain student assignment options, wouldn't it be more helpful to group schools with the same enrollment and racial balance guidelines together (such as the original magnets, interdistrict magnets, and so on)? I'll be talking to you soon. Sincerely, Melissa Guldin Associate MonitorLittle Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT November 3, 1994 RECEIVED NOV 4 1994 Judge Susan Webber Wright U. S. Federal Court Eastern District of Arkansas 600 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Oifici of Desegregation MoruOiii'.g Dear Judge Wright: Enclosed is a bound copy of the Pulaski County Desegregation Case foundation documents. Included are the Settlement Agreement, the Interdistrict Plan, the Court Order (May 1992) relating to plan modifications, and the LRSD Desegregation Plan. They (except the Court Order) have been reformatted, indexed, and line-numbered for easy reference. The Court Order has been summarized. That summary is found at the front of the Court Order section. No wording was changed. The indexing and line-numbering facilitates discussion and pursuit of our obligations. Though indexes may be grouped in an infinite number of ways, this one serves our purposes for quick reference. We will occasionally revise it as the need arises. Each member of the Board of Directors and key administrators in our district have copies. It occurred to me that you might benefit from it also. Sincerely, Henry P. Williams Superintendent of Schools Enclosure cc: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Stephen W. Jones, NLRSD Attorney M. Samuel Jones, PCSSD Attorney John W. Walker, Attorney, Joshua Intervenors Richard W. RoacheU, Attorney, Knight Intervenors bjg 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 324-2000 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 November 4, 1994 Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: As you know, the deadline for submitting the LRSD October 1 enrollment to ADE has passed. It is my understanding that the LRSD has already sent this information to ADE\nhowever, my office has not received it. It has always been the practice of aU three school districts to send the October 1 data to ODM at the same time they submitted it to ADE. In order for ODM to complete an enrollment comparison, my office needs LRSD's October 1 data as soon as possible. Polly Ramer, my office manager, has tried without success to secure a copy of your submission by talking to Deana Keathley in Russ Mayo's office. Bob Connelly in data processing, and Audrey Lee in Student Assignment. My office was told that this year the LRSD submitted the October 1 enrollment to ADE on computer disc. Since the October 1 enrollment is used as the baseline for obtaining an accurate year-to-year enrollment comparison, it is important that the information be reported in the same format as in years past. For this purpose, we have requested from the persons named above a breakdown of the October 1, 1994 enrollment by school, by grade, and by race. I would appreciate any help you might give me to expedite our receipt of the October I eiu-ollment breakdown. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Ann S. BrownOf'- Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376.6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 November 4, 1994 Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: Lately Ive been hearing the term \"Beacon\" schools used in reference to a subcommittee of the LRSD Board of Education and certain district schools. That is a term with which 1 am unfamiliar. Id appreciate your forwarding any information that can help me and my staff become better acquainted with the concept. 1 am particularly interested in specifically where and how you plan to implement and fund the Beacon idea in the LRSD. New programs or projects invariably have an impact on desegregation. When I am informed about the districts activities and potential new ventures, 1 am better able to answer any questions which members of the community or Judge Wright may ask me. Thanks for helping me keep up-to-date. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376.6200 Fax (501) 3710100 November 4, 1994 Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: Lately Ive been hearing the term \"Beacon\" schools used in reference to a subcommittee of the LRSD Board of Education and certain district schools. That is a term with which 1 am unfamiliar. Id appreciate your forwarding any information that can help me and my staff become better acquainted with the concept. I am particularly interested in specifically where and how you plan to implement and fund the Beacon idea in the LRSD. New programs or projects invariably have an impact on desegregation. When 1 am informed about the districts activities and potential new ventures, I am better able to answer any questions which members of the community or Judge Wright may ask me. Thanks for helping me keep up-to-date. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Of 3 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Ms. Estelle Mathis Deputy Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 Markham St Little Rock, Arkansas November 7, 1994 Dear Estelle, The 1994-95 ODM Monitoring Priorities have been distributed and you probably noted that Computer Managed Instructional Technology is on the list. This is to inform you that I will be doing the monitoring review of the Abacus system. I intend to start this review immediately and ask for your cooperation and support. My understanding is that, at the onset. Abacus would be a tool to insure a consistent curriculum across the district and would help to improve achievement by identifying those areas that needed attention to realize a higher degree of mastery. The purpose of this review is to determine if the Abacus system is being used to its potential and, where appropriate, to make recommendations for improvement. My monitoring plan is to first interview Betsy Choate and Lucy Lyons at the IRC to get an overview of Abacus and then go out to schools to observe on-site use. Principals at the selected schools will be notified in advance, and I don't anticipate that there will be any interference with class activities. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the monitoring process, please do not hesitate to call our office. Thank you very much for your assistance. Sincerely, Bob Morgan Associate Monitor cc: Ann Brown Hank Williams11. os 94\n17  3t \\y' Li  i SI,. (y- ID- (' ' Jjj'ate. 1 ry  p^rtidpat OOI L JTi * I / .^ i \"-.J P.Ol TRANSACTION REPORT NOV-16-94 THU 14:19 JK X X X DATE START SEND^.. RX TIME PAGES a TYPE NOTE l^OV-10 14:18 50te46576 r 1'05\" 2 RECEIVE OK *Vi . X X X X ' X X X1 .N0V-10-*r^l5!10 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 P. 01 I DATE\nTO: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE SUSAN WEBBER WRIGHT (501) 324-5422 'l FAX LINE (501) 324-6576 November 10, 1994 Polly/Ann '. i jJi J 11 J .'i FROM: Lucille DeGosti NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET \u0026gt; 2 LOOK WHAT I FOUND!  \u0026gt; \u0026lt;' 4 ii. -c. / J |3' J .it\"' - lE Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT 3 November 11, 1994 aS~i Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 NOV 1 0 1994 Little Rock, AR 72201 Oiiics cf D! .y, liicn Mcniicnng Dear Ann, In collaboration with the City of Little Rock and New Futures for Little Rock Youth, the Department of Health, and the Division of Children and Family Services, the Little Rock School District has participated in the planning process for the Rock Beacon School Initiative. City of Little The Beacon Initiative of New York City, a highly successful program, has provided a framework to guide the local effort. need The fundamental principle of the Beacons Initiative is the for partnerships between schools and community-based organizations to meet the needs of youth in today's complex society. The Beacons Initiative seeks to link community-based youth organizations with schools to increase the presence of supports for youth to meet their needs and to assist them in building academic and social competencies. A Beacon School Program is managed by a community-based organization working collaboratively with the school district, local school principal, and their own community advisory council. The school facility is utilized for Beacon programming during the evening hours, on weekends, holidays, and in the summer. A Beacon Program offers children, youth and adults a mix of recreation, social services, educational enrichment and vocational activities, health education and referrals, and the opportunity for community meetings and neighborhood social activities. Cloverdale Junior High School has been recommended to the planning committee as the site for the first Beacon School. The new Stephens has been proposed as the second site. Funding for the Beacon Program will be provided primarily by the city of Little Rock. The school district will provide the space for the program. Further infoirmation will be provided to you as the planning process proceeds. Siicere^ H\u0026lt;n: P. Williams, SiiBerintendent of Schools 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (301)324-2000 Little Rock School District November 15, 1994 M : NGV 1 b 1994 Ms. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring Heritage VveSt Building, Room 510 201 East Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 ''iCij iii !Je53i i' arnig Dear Ms. Brown\nI would like to take this opportunity to welcome the participation of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring in future meetings of the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District. As you will note on the November Agenda, you will have the opportunity to address the Board during the Presentations section of the meeting. Placement on the Agenda for ODM, as well as the Classroom Teachers Association, the Joshua Intervenors, the Knight Intervenors, and the PTA Council was approved by the Board at the October 27, 1994, meeting. I look forward to your input and look forward to seeing you. Sincerely, Linda Pondexter, President Board of Directors bjg 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)824-2000di-: CEcrae Little Rock School District November 15, 1994 NGV 1 6 1994 Ms. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring Heritage West Building, Room 510 201 East Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 'C^ Q: Uv\nih'jg Dear Ms. Brown\nI would like to take this opportunity to welcome the participation of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring in future meetings of the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District. As you will note on the November Agenda, you will have the opportunity to address the Board during the Presentations section of the meeting. Placement on the Agenda for ODM, as well as the Classroom Teachers Association, the Joshua Intervenors, the Knight Intervenors, and the PTA Council was approved by the Board at the October 27, 1994, meeting. I look forward to your input and look forward to seeing you. Sincerely, Linda Pondexter, President Board of Directors bjg 810 West Markham street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000i_(/^(_- /i y/' z \u0026lt;^4 c I \u0026gt; f- f'. . -Y. (.'r\u0026lt;^~ Cc'  X r. RcCEIV^O NOV 1 6 1994 Effies or Dcss^rog Z1 I. r 'I/- r -1^- r: t-c i \u0026lt;^ ,iJ.-^^ ~f~.  i l-r^ . ioo. -k \u0026lt; / -n I (^i-t^t'-' ii- ?y\\A ^n-C Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: November 16, 1994 From: Melissa Guldin, Ass Isociate Monitor To: Gwen Efrid, Little Rock School District Health Services Coordinator Subject: LRSD Nursing Staff Our office recently received some information from the Little Rock School District regarding possible budget cutting strategies. The list of budget reduction possibilities included the substitution of Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) for the Registered Nurses (RNs) currently working in the schools. I understand that there are important differences in training, experience, and qualifications between LPNs and RNs. Since the issue of RN versus LPN is sure to be debated in the months ahead, I would like some information on the current status of the LRSD nursing staff. This data should help me be better informed regarding the districts nursing program. Please send me a list of all LRSD schools that currently receive nursing services, the number of days (or hours) per week that each site is served by a nurse, whether that nurse is an RN or LPN, and each nurses race and gender. If you have any additional information that you think would be helpful or informative, I would welcome receiving that also. I would like to become more familiar with the scope of the nursing program, before the district makes budgetary decisions. When the monitors visited the incentive schools, we were impressed with the wellness clinics serving the students, staff, and patrons of the incentive schools. The clinics myriad of health services and eligibility for Medicaid reimbursement help ensure that area residents and LRSD staff have increased access to quality health care. In addition to the staffing information requested, would you please send me a list of all the schools with wellness clinics that have been approved for medicaid reimbursement. Thank you for your help in providing this information. Please call me if you have any questions or concerns.Ff (4* * /^/^ u LrrrtE Rock School District November 16, 1994 TO: FROM: RECEIVED NOV 2 3 iqpi Office of Desegregation Monitoring Ms. Edna M. Wiley, Teacher-Washington Magnet School chard Hurley, Director-Human Resources am in receipt of your letter dated November 15, which you request \"back pay\" due for your 1993-94 contract. I 1994 in I have previously advised you both orally and in writing that I believe you have been paid all the monies due to you. Please refer to my letter dated June 9, 1994. In that letter, I explained that I had discussed your salary concern with Mr. Mark Milhollen and I explained, in detail, how your salary calculations were done. If you need a copy of that letter, I'd be pleased to furnish it to you. Regarding your second issue (sick leave bank), you should mark on your Leave Accountability Report any discrepancies you feel need correcting and forward a copy of the marked Report to my attention. Your Report, and others similarly questioned, will be submitted to the Business office for review and correction, when appropriate. I trust this response will answer your request, please don't hesitate to contact me at your convenience, since you carbon-copied your letter to the below-listed persons, I am taking the liberty to copy them on my response to you. If not. Further, cc: As usual, Edna, it is nice to hear from you. Dr. Williams, Superintendent Ms. Coleman, President-L.R.C.T.A. Mr. Martin, Executive Director-L.R.C.T.A. Ms. Brown, Office of Desegregation Monitoring Ms. Pondexter, President-Little Rock School Board of Directors 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72301  (501)324-3000 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: November 17, 1994 To: Estelle Matthis, Deputy Superintendent, Little Rock School District From: Horace Smith, Associate Monitor, Office of Desegregation Monitoring Subject: Documentation Request I want to follow-up on our recent conversation regarding Academic Progress Incentive Grant documentation. I would like to receive the following information at our monthly meeting on November 22 if possible.  Copy of the 1993-94 APIG school program evaluation  1993-94 APIG data for each elementary and secondary school which includes - school, amount approved, date application was submitted, date application was approved, date of actual appropriation of funds, and the amount expended by the school Thank you for your cooperation. If you have questions or concerns, please dont hesitate to call. I: kfiyf) ar) Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor November 22, 1994 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: Thank you for responding so quickly to my latest request for the LRSD October 1 enrollment by school, race, and grade. We have reviewed the enrollment report, but have found what appear to be some mathematical errors in the data, which I have noted below. Since we did not look at every calculation, the report may have additional errors not listed. Page 4 Chicot Total reported as 42~\u0026amp;e sum is 57 % black wrong Page 4 Cloverdale Elem Total reported as 106the sum is 57 Total reported as 52the sum is 50 % black wrong Page 4 Dodd 12345 6 Page 5 Geyer Springs Page 9 Watson Total reported as 53the sum is 50 Total reported as 105-the sum is 37 Total reported as 43the sum is 38 Total reported as 47the sum is 46 Total reported as 48the sum is 46 Total reported as 31the sum is 28 Total reported as 79the sum is 48 Total reported as 53the sum is 48 Total reported as 41the sum is 35 Total reported as 79-the sum is 49 Altogether missing from the report % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong % black wrong K 1 2 345 1 When we find some apparent errors in a report, we can't help but question the validity of the entire report. Since the October 1 enrollment figures become part of the Court Record, we want to be sure that they are correct. Therefore, please send me an accurate October 1 enrollment count by school, grade, and race. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM 1 To: Becky Rather, Coordinator of Parent Recruitment From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: November 20, 1994 Subject: District-Wide Recruitment Responsibilities NOV 2 2 ,qpA GiiiCQ oi C' igrsgation Mo.nitc.'T.j As you may know by now, Jeanette Wagner has resigned as Director of Communications. Her last day will be November 30. Though the position is advertised, time will be required to interview and acclimate the new person. Currently, we are estimating that the new person will join us no later than January 16. Unfortunately, that person will begin in the middle of the busiest part of our recruitment season. Once in the position, that person will need time to learn policies and procedures of the district. Dina Tecigue will assume temporarily the responsibilities of the communications department and have no responsibility for recruitment beyond assisting in having materials printed. As a result, 1 am asking you to take full responsibility for implementing the LRSD District-Wide Recruitment Plan beginning immediately until further notice. You have the experience and were involved in writing the plan. Please include in your responsibilities the revising and writing of all printed materials noted in the plan. 1 suggest that you establish a tickler system for reminding you of what must be done when. 1 suggest also that you meet with Jeanette before she leaves to make the transition as smooth as possible. The recruitment plan is specific about when things are to be done. Please let me review anything you write or revise that will be sent to district employees or to our patrons. This includes any memoranda. One responsibility not in the recruitment plan is the bimonthly updating of the Bi-Racial Committee on incentive school recruitment. The next update is due at the January 10 meeting. Meetings are held the first Tuesday of the month, except January. With your experience in communications and in recruitment, 1 am confident that we can continue executing our recruitment plan without missing a step. Let me know if you meet obstacles or need me to speak to the topic in principals meetings, council meetings, etc. Deana Keathley will schedule a meeting soon which will include you and Dina Teague. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss recruitment and communication concerns during the transition period. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Superintendents Council Dina Teague, Communications Assistant Ann Brown, Monitor Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney\u0026lt;2P-\nS Little Rock School District OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENTS November 21, 1994 RE? n Ms. Melissa Gul din ODM NOV 2 3 iqp4 Office of Desegregation Mon:i^.u.j Dear Ms. Gul din: I want to thank you for attending the Stephens School Steering Committee Meeting on Monday, November 14, 194. Your input is most valuable in the continued efforts of the planning for our new school. As a result of that meeting, the members of my subcommittee met on Wednesday, November 16, to review the recommendations and to make plans to implement the following\n1. Students in the seven target schools will take surveys home for their parents to mark their choice of the top two themes. Explanation of the two most popular themes will be attached to the ballot sheet. 2. Three community meetings are being scheduled to provide information on the progress of the Stephens School. Community people will be provided surveys at these meetings to vote on their choice of the top two themes. These community meetings are being scheduled at the following times and places:  Thursday, December 1 - 6:45 p.m. - Garland Elementary Incentive School 3615 West 25th Street Little Rock  Saturday, December 3 - 10:30 a.m. - First Baptist Church Highland Park 3800 West 18th Street Little Rock  Tuesday, December 6 - 6:45 p.m. - Fulbright Elementary School 300 Pleasant Valley Road Little Rock 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000Stephens School Steering Committee November 21, 1994 Page 2 Our agenda for each meeting is to give an update on the progress being made in the planning process. Please mark your calendar for one or all of these meetings and contact any group of patrons whom you feel may be interested in attending these meetings. The Little Rock School Districts Communication Office is preparing flyers that will be delivered to various community groups prior to the above dates. Our next Steering Committee meeting is being scheduled for Monday, December 12 at 3:30 p.m. in the Board Room. Please make your calendar and plan to join us attEaffime. Again, thank you for your continued support and interest in the Little Rock School District. Sincerely, Margaret-'Gremillii Little Rock School District 810 W. Markham Street Little Rock, xArkansas 72201 RECEiVF^ Date: MEMORANDUM November 22, 1994 NOV 2 9 1994 jiiica Of Desegieg-t'O'! ini-j'. To: Through: Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation Monitorin' Dr. Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent From: Dina Teagu^ ommunications Specialist Re: Public Relations Training Jeanette Wagner has advised me that you would like to observe one of the public relations training sessions that we provide for school level employees. I hope that you will accept my invitation to come to any of the following meetings scheduled this month: Garland Multi-Media Technology and Educational Research Elementary School Monday, December 5 3:03 - 3:20 p.m. Wilson Elementary School Wednesday, December 7 1:45 - 2:00 p.m. Western HiUs Elementary School Wednesday, December 7 2:45 p.m. By copy of this memo, I will let the principals of these schools know that you might attend their meetings. I am very encouraged by your interest and look forward to your comments and suggestions. cc Robert Brown Franklin Davis Scott Morgandr- Memorandum NOV 3 0 1991 Office of Oesegre^fi :9 DATE: November 30,1994 TO: Principals : Franklin Incentive Elementary. Bale Elementary, Cloverdale Elementary, Southwest Junior High, Cloverdale Junior High Margaret Gremillion - Stephens Magnet Planning Group FROM: Estelle Matti M, larvin Schwartz RECEIV^^ RE: CC: Magnet School application LRSD - Henry Williams, Russ Mayo, Sterling Ingram, Doug Eaton, Leon Modeste, Dena Teague, Sadie Mitchell \u0026gt; ODM - Melissa Guldin Attorney - Chris Heller, Jerry Malone Joshua Interveners - John Walker Knight Interveners/LRCTA - Frank Martin, Eleanor Coleman PCSSD - Billy Bowles, Bobby Lester, Bobby Altom NLRSD - James Smith This memo gives formal notice that the six schools identified below have been selected by the LRSD for application to the federal Magnet School Assistance Program for development as new magnet schools. The six schools include\nFranklin Incentive Elementary Cloverdale Elementary Cloverdale Junior High Bale Elementary Southwest Junior High Stephens Elementary A major administrative effort is underway to gather supporting data to develop the application. An amendment to the desegregation plan will have to be filed. Input from the six schools and their respective communities is also needed. Each school will need to identify the theme(s) for their new status as magnets. This preliminary theme identification is needed by December 9. Following the theme selections, the planning process will seek school input on curriculum development and staff training. Because of the extremely tight timeframe, it is suggested that meetings with school patrons and community members be limited to the core group at each school. School staff may conduct these meetings and gain input in any manner they believe appropriate. Several forms of assistance are available for this effort, including:  Community surveys forms  Listings of sample magnet themes  Examples of successful magnet themes/schools in other cities  Participation by the grants writer in local planning meetings Marvin Schwartz is serving as the central coordinator for this project. Please contact him with any questions or requests for assistance.UXUU.:*tpU-^ - P.Ol r DATE START SENDER DEC- 1 10:22 5013242032 X 444 4 44 4''4'44'4 44'44 44W'4^44'4 4'4'4'4 4'i t i  4 TRANSACTION REPORT DEC- 1-94 THU 10:23 RX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE 46\" 1 RECEIVE OK * )|! * * )K j * X fA^ SB^asBaa'JBBK-a liaji '0 \u0026lt;Z1 m z I m LITlLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT QUIZiSSPLST _ STAFFIMGZ L  o GAI POSITIOK BLACK M F OF 11/10/94 WHITE M F OTHER M F TOTAL % BLACK o\u0026gt; X KI SUPPORT POSITIONS I CAFETERIA WORKER CUSTODIANS MEDIA CLERK SECRETARY NURSE \u0026lt; S(X\niAL WORKER r: f! INSTRUCTIONAL AIDES SUPERVISION AIDES OTHER 0 2 0 00 02 01 3 1 00 0 1 11 2 0 0 00 00 00 00 0 0 1 11 02 00 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 10 3 311 11 16 31 100.00 100.00 00 00 00 100.00 81.25 66.67 100.00 T I \u0026lt;o to , SUBTOTAL SUPPORT POSITIONS -H 5 18 0 5 0 2 30 SUBTOTAL PERCENT 16.67 60.00 00 16.67 00 6.67 30 76.67 30 CO o a: o o o \u0026lt;Z) 1 i oi CjO II B I BiBSai IS: FROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 12 1994 09:56AM P2 To: Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham # 510 Little Rock, AR. 72201 From: John York 7324 Knollwood Little Rock, AR. 72209 December 10,1994 Dear Ms Brown, 1 am writit^ to you in regards to the recent actions taken by Dr. Williams, and others concerning the rebuilding of Chicot School and the closure of Watson. I am not completely positive as to who started what and how. What I am positive about, is that the residents of the Fairfield Sub-Division were completely left out of the process which has lead to the current recommendations. Those recommendations being to close Watson School and merge ifs population into a new and expanded Chicot School. It is also my understanding that Dr. Williams made statements regardu^ the staff of Watson and the Fairfield residents to the affect that this issue was none of our concern, \" This is School Busmess\". It was not until I learned of the actions of die District and the Chicot PTA, and began to raise a ruckus, that die Fairfield residents were contacted regarding these plans. As of the date of this letter the District has failed to recognize the Fairfield Sub-Division. The Chicot School PTA did contact us regarding tins issue and invited us to attend a meeting scheduled for Dec 11, 2 p.m., at McQellan High School. This has been are only contact until board member Gee called me this evening. If my interpretation of the Desegregation Plans are correct Dr. Williams statements and actions are in direct contempt of die court ordered plan. Specifically sections 2.c., 3.c., and 3.d. listed under Parent involvement! Community linkages. And, sections 9.b, and 9.c., listed under Public Relations in the Inter District plan. The latter specifically instructs die District to \" immediately inform the public**, and to \" refrain from springing surprises*. I would greatly appreciate your opinion on this situation as well as copies of any court orders in support or opposition of my position, including the court order dated 11/4/91. It would probably be in the best interest of die community if Judge Wright was aware of the situation as well. Thank You for your time and interest FROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 12 1994 09:57At'1 P3 To\n.Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 Fast Markham # 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 From: John York 7324 Knollwood Utfle Rock, AR 72209 December 11, 1994 Dear Ms Brown, After attending the meeting held at McClellan High School this afternoon, I felt that this supplemental to my letter dated DecembcrlO, 1994 was necessary in order to validate certain statements in that letter and statements made during the meeting. First of an I made statements in the letter, and at the meeting regarding the fact that residents of the Fairfield Subdivision were not contacted tn regards to planning process nor of the meeting that was scheduled for December 11th, and that it was the EHstricts respon-sibiJity to insure that all affected parties were notified. School Board President Tinda Poindexter vehemently denied that die District had anything to do with this committee or today's meeting. However, the committee's minutes as presented at the meeting as the \"Committee History\" indicated that District officials became involved as early as November 28th. I have received verbal information from what I believe to be a reliable source that District Officials met to discuss the closure of Watson at a closed meeting at a Board Members home shortly before Thanksgiving. Abscond source has indicated that the meeting did in fact occur but would not confirm the content of this meeting. Also noted in the committee's minutes is that on December 6th, Board Member Pat Gee \" requested\" that Dr. Williams approve flyers announcing the meeting be distributed through schools in Southwest Little Rock. Dr. Williams was asked to contact the principals of each school and ok distribution of the flyers to students. Statements made by Chicot PTA President Kevin McGuire to me during a telephone conversation and a fax transmission on December 6th indicated that District personnel were very much involved in file situation and intended to withhold information from file Fairfield residents and Watson parents. A copy of the fax transmission is attached.FROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 12 1994 09:58AM P4 Althou^ tniscommunicalion could be credited with portions of this situation, specifically between School Board members, and neighborhood groups. I still believe that there is suflheient evidence to support die theoty that School District .Administration took an active part in the organizational plan to close Watson as a public school, as well as concealing this action from the Fairfield Residents and Waterni Parents in direct violation of the Desegregation Plan and Federal Court orders. The fact that flyers were sent home from all of the affected schools with the exception of Watson and poswbly Mabelvale would tond to support the theory as well. There is the added consideration that would suggest that \"Administration\" may be playing both ends against the middle by supplying mis-information to Kevin McGuire and the Chicot PTA. During the meeting on December 5th, Doug Eaton conducted a short presentation where in he made numerous references to court approved formulas that were utilized in determining which schods should close and which should remain open based on attendance and capacities. When pressed by the Chicot parents to present and define the formula, Doug Eaton became evasive, commenting that it was a \"very complex lonnula\". He later admitted that there was no specific formula to make these determinations. Ihc inaccuracies and halt truths perpetuated during the meeting on December 5th are again in direct contempt of the Desegregation Plan. Specifically sectimi 9 of the Interdistrict Plan (Public relations) which deals with credibility and trust And section 3 which requires the District to H Continue to disseminate public information in ways the districts customarily employ, paying cardul attention to quality, accuracy, and a positive tone\". I recognize that you are not in a position to adjudicate these complaints but I also recognize your authority in investigating this matter, and in bringing these concem-s to the attention Judge Wright should they prove vahd. Sincerely, FROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 12 1994 09:59AM P5 SCHOOL CO.MMITTEE HISTORY FIRE AT CHICOT. CHICOT PARENTS MEET AT WATSON GYMNASIUM WITH DISTRICT OFFICIALS ON IMMEDIATE CONTINGENCY PLANS ON GETTING STUDENTS BACK TO SCHOOL.i QC.T^_23Ka  ADDRESS DR. PTA MEETING AT KcCLELLAH AUDITORIUM FOR PARENTS TO WILLIAMS AND SCHOOL BOARD - WILLIAMS QUOTED \"COMMITTEE MILL WOULD BE FORMED IN A WEEK\". NOY. DEMOGRAPHICS OF COST OF REBUILDING, COURT APPROVAL FOR REBUILDING, NEIGHBORHOOD AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM WILLIAMS. BOARD DECIDED THEY WOULD NEED ALL THIS ILFCRMATIUN AND EE ABLE TO VOTE ON DECISION DEC. AGENDA MEETING. \"HE ENLARGED. CLOSED. i FINANCIAL INTENDS TO DR. WILLIAMS RECOMMEND THAT QUOTED BY CHICOT BE CYNTHIA HOWELL @ GAZETTE REBUILT AND POSSIBLY IF SCHOOL IS ENLARGED, ANOTHER SCHOOL IN SWLR WOULD BE BOARD MEMBERS AGREED THAT THEY WOULD HAVE AND DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION THE NECESSARY CHICOT ELEMENTARY BY EARLY DECEMBER, TO MAKE A DECISION ON Ni 'Tl' REPORT 0 SCHOOL ENTER INTO UPDATE BOARD, ON REBUILDING DISCUSSED 1 CHICOT. DOUG EATON GAVE HE HOPES DECISION ON WHETHER TO REBUILD' DAMAGE AND FACTORS THAT WILL SCHOOL, EATON STATES TO ADMINISTRATION DECEMBER, 1994. HAVE  TO TRY ENOUGH INFORMATION AND VOTE ON FOR THE BOARD AND THE FUTURE OF ANOTHER ITEM THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED CHICOT. BY MID TO COMBINE THIS WITH ANOTHER SCHOOL IN THS AREA. IS WHETHER NOY.,'LTIl - KEVIN McGUIEE WITH CHICOT PTA MEET WITH FOR PROGRESS ON RAILROAD OVERPASSES IN SWLR. XT IS AT THIS MEETING WE SPOKE WITH JOAN ADCOCK, CITY DIRECTOR\nB.J. WYRICK, CITY BOARD ELECT\nCONGRESSMAN RAY THORNTON AND HIS AIDE DEBBIE TABLERIOU\nJOA HUMPHRIES, SOUTHWEST UNITED FOR PRESIDENT. PAUL HOWELL ADDRESSED AUDIENCE OF PAUL HOWELL, SOUTHWEST UNITED XT IS RAILROAD OVERPASSES WITH JOAN PROGRESS TABLERIOV\nJOA HUMPHRIES, PAUL HOWELL AUDIENCE TO RE.' ILi DE ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT GAZETTE ARKANSAS SCHOOL DEMOCRAT GAZETTE ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT GAZETTE 'CHICOT PARENTS MAP CAMPAIGN \"DSCIS'Oh? ON CHICOT DUE INFROM : JOHN YORK' PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 1 1994 09:59AM P6 BUSINESS OWNERS, MERCHANTS. M.ElGH30RHC0D ASSOCIATION PRESIDENTS, ARD SKLR RESIDENTS ON STATUS OF CHICOT. BEFORE MEETING ADJOURNED, PTA DISCOVERED THAT SCHOOL BOARD FAILED TO COMMIT TO REBUILDING CHICOT A7 AGENDA MEETING HELD MINUTES EARLIER. IT IS THEN THAT THE GROUP PLEDGED THEIR SUPPORT, THORNTON'S OFFICE LOOKING FOR AIDE FROM WASHINGTON. ASKED ABOUT STATU NOTIFIED AS TO WHO IS OF COMMITTEE. PTA RESPONDED WK WE FREEDOM EXPRESSED CONCERN SERVING ON THE COMMITTEE OR WHEN CONGRESSMAN CITY LEADERS HAVE NOT BEEN THAT NO HAS OF INFORMATION ACT HAS BEEN INFORMATION REQUESTED TO MEET. THROUGH LARGER. PROPOSED SWLR SCHOOL CLOSURE MADE AVAILABLE AND DISTRICT NO INFORMATION IS QUESTIONED HOW THESE OR MERGERS IF CHICOT REBUILT RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BEING WE HAVEN'T HEARD AVAILABLE TO BASE THEM ON. MADE IF WITHOUT LEADERS. THS SCHOOL FROM DISTRICT DISTRICT AND SOON, HE WOULD WE AGREED THAT IF INVITE CITY TA^T MEETING AND COMMUNITY UmL-JATil - THEY HAVE I ELEMENTARY. COMMITTEE MEMBERS STARTED RECEIVING NOTICES THAT BEEN SELECTED TO SERVE ON COMMITTEE TO REBUILD CHICOT NOTICE MAILED NOV. 11, 1394 FROM DOUG EATON. NOY.- LZIjaL - PTA NOTICES. CHICOT ADDRESSED LRSC SCHOOL THANKED SCHOOL BOARD. BOARD MEETING. CONFIRMED MR. McGUIRE, CHICOT COMMITTEE BOARD FOR APPOINTMENTS, REPRESENTATION AT SWLR CHRISTMAS MEET SOON POSSIBLE RECEIPT OF COMMITTEE AS AS MADE PARADE. BOARD WARE RECOMMENDATION TO REBUILD CHICOT. TO KAKE ASKED PLANS OF THAT FOR ~ CHICOT ELEMENTARY PTA ENTERS SOUTHWEST LITTLE ROCK CHRISTMAS PARADE WITH A FLOAT AND 150 WALKERS, WEARING \"CHICOT - UNITED TO REBUILD CHICOT\" T-SHIRTS. \"ALL WE WANT FOR CHRISTMAS IS OUR SCHOOL REBUILT'. THIRD PLACE AND WAS WELL RECEIVED BY SUPPORTERS ALONG ROUTE. family A FLOAT ARD CHRISTMAS IS OUR SCHOOL PA8ADE/FLOAT THEME. FLOAT WINS THE PARADE --ZZCii - CHICOT ELEMENTARY PTA HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH CONGRESSMAN THORNTON'S OFFICE\nSTATE REP PHIL WYRICK BOARD ELECT. B.J. WYRICK\nJOAN ADCOCK, CITY DIRECTOR\nSC5JOOL DISTRICT AND BOARD MEMBERS. THE PTA CALLS  THORNTON' PTA HAS STATE REP IN SCHOOL PTL MEETING FUR NOV. 28TH AT SOUTHWEST COMMUNITY CENTER. AS A AND CITY WELL AS SPECIAL I'UK MUV. zTH AT SOUTHWEST COMMUNITY CENTER. IT WAS FELT that if public RECORDS INDICATE THAT A DECISION ON CHICOT WOULD BL MADE AT DECEMBER SCHOOL BOARD AGENDA MEETING AND HAS YET TO CONVENE THE COMMITTEE TO REBUILD CHICOT PUBLIC RECORDS INDICATE THAT A the COMMITTEE TO REBUILD CHICOT. GET ORGANIZED NOW AND NOT WATT FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE DISTRICT WE BETTER ilOY. 2Tli PTA ATTENDANCE CHICOT MET AT SOUTHWEST CITY BOARD PROGRESS\nPTA\nJOAN ADCOCK, CITY COMMUNITY CE.NTKR. IN ELECT\nJOA HUMPHRIES. PRESIDENT KELLY TUCKER, NEIGHBORHOOD DIRECTOR\nB.J. WYRICK, SOUTHWEST UNTIED FOR ALERT CENTER\nPAT GEE, LRSDFROM : JOHN 'tORK PHONE NO.\n56.:\n7722 Dec. 12 1934 10\n00l P7 BOARD MEMBKR. INVITED BUT NOT PRESENT\nLINDA JOYCE, CITY BOARD\nO.G. JACOVELLI. LRSD BOARD\nWATSON ELEMENTARY PTA. SPECIAL CALLED MEETING TO ANNOUNCE EORMATION OF A COMMUNITY BASED GRASS ROOTS COALITION UNITED IN AN EFFORT TO HAVE CHICOT ELEMENTARY REBUILT. TO SET PRECEDENT FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS TO DETERMINE THE FUTURE OF CHICOT ELEMENTARY AND THE DIRECT IMPACT IT WILL HAVE ON THE COMMUNITY. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS MADE. PLANS FOR DEC. IITH MEETING TO INVOLVE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, SWLR SCHOOL PTA'S, PARENTS AND BUSINESS TO BE INVITED. DJiC__SJIh. - SOUTHWEST CHICOT COMMUNITY ELEMENTARY VISION COALITION MET CENTER. INVITED AND NOT PRESENT, ' AT LINDA JOYCE, CITY BOARD\nO.G. JACOVELLI SCHOOL BOARD\nWATSON PTA. SPECIAL GUESTS INVITED - DR. WILLIAMS. DOUG EATON, LEON MODESTE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. THERESA COURTNEY, AND WILLIAM KETCHER OF WATSON ELEMENTARY. THE COMMITTEE EXPLAINED TO DISTRICT WHY WE MET SEPARATE FORM DISTRICT'S COMMITTEE. WE EXPRESSED THAT WITH A SCHOOL BOARD DECISION DUE WITHIN TWO WEEKS AND THE DISTRICT IS STILL TELLING US THAT THEY HAVE NO FURTHER INFORMATION TO SHARK WITH FELT IT US. THAT IT JUST WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE VISION COMMITTEE N.ECESSARY TO GET BUSY AND PREPARE A BUSINESS PLAN OF OUR OWN THAT INVOLVES INPUT FROM ALL SOUTHWEST LITTLE ROCK. WE DID NOT FEEL THE DISTRICT TOGETHER IF THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO PUT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STILL DIDN'T HAVE FIGURES AVAILABLE OR THE COMMUNITY .INVOLVEMENT THAT WAS PROMISED. DR. WILLIAMS DISCUSSED WITH COMMITTEE: PARTNERSHIPS WITH SCHOOL THAT COULD MERGE CENSUS IN SWLR WITH CHICOT\nBUDGET DEFICIT OF 7 MILLION\nLOW DESEGREGATION NUMBERS. SCHOOLS\nPOTENTIAL COMMITTEE SCHOOL CLOSURES\nAND ASKED FOR OPINION FROM THERESA lOUBTKEY, WATSON ELEMENTARY PRINCIPAL, ON A PARTNERSHIP WITH CHICOT AND WATSON, AS DR, WILLIAMS PREVIOUSLY HAD BE CONSIDERED WITH OTHER SCHOOL IN SWLR IF CHICOT PROPOSED COULD WEEK REBUILT LARGER. MEETING. OF WEEK. committees then met to prepare FOR DEC. IITH COMMUNITY WILLIAMS SAID KE WOULD PROVIDE INFORMATION TO US BY END PAT GEE ANNOUNCING MEETING REQUESTED DR. WILLIAMS APPROVE FLYERS WAS ASKED TO DISTRIBUTION. IITH SOUTHWEST AUDITORIUM. BE DISTRIBUTED THROUGH CONTACT FLYERS\nVISION PRINCIPALS Of ENCOURAGE COMMUNITY MEETING AT SCHOOLS IN SWLR. EACH SCHOOL AND HE OK INVOLVEMENT MrCLELLAN HIGH IN DEC. SCHOOL JFROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7?: Deo. 12 1994 10:01AM P8 D.fiC._aiH - BUSINESSES. fLYERS DISTRIBUTED - PRESS RELEASES TO MEDIA AND am. - FOLLOW INFORMATION REOUSST. MADE BOARD, AVAILABLE UNTIL UP ON THE OCTOBER 27TH FREEDOM DR. WILLIAMS NOTIFIED ME THEY WOULD AFTER IT WAS FIRST PRESENTED TO THE LRSD OCTOBER OF FIRST PRESENTED NOT BE -^SKRY MALONE denial of request.  attorney for LRSD ABOUT RECEIVED CALL FROM MR. MALONE wAKr. . - KIS CLIENT AND UNDERSTOOD MADE AVAILABLE ON TUESDAY, DEC 13TH D.EC. 9TH. AT 9:30 PK ON DEC. MATERIAL WOULD BE  MEMBERS RECEIVED NOTICE ? 00 '^SoKFSrSI!P\"^'^?rT?c rebuild CHICOT IS DEC, 13TII AT OKL WlfH ELLIS, MABELVALE PTA PRESIDENT ABOUT stated her CHILDREN DID NOT 1 r? A.BOU.r DEC, IITH MEETING, SHE WAS GOING TO CHECK OHT IF OIHER PARENTS RECEIVED NOTICES CHECK OUT COMMITTEE PM. ATTRNDINO CONFERENCE. WITH THAT THE FIRST REBUILD CHICOT IS DEC. 13TII ELLIS, MABELVALE COKE HOME COMMUNITY MEETING OF THE SOUTHWEST VISION -iBEriNG. McClellan Hrn.Tr .Sntnrsr annT-nnoTF.w V-lSlUM McClellan high school auditorium - 2:00 PK. 4\nFROM : JOHN YORK PHONE NO. : 562 7722 Dec. 12 1994 09:56AM Pl /'I 1/ '2^ FxRdEW\u0026gt;kl.jUUIJW.iJiUK:^^^^-i^WISani5yiULlMB2ML9Uimy^^ 9 1 FROM : JOHN AANSCO PHOtJE HO. : 563 T TEL 501-562 Cb o/\nDec. 12 1994 10:02fiH P9 12 :02 No .006 P.Ol 1 A/^.MSCO 9811 INTERSTATE 30 P 0 Box 190065 LATE: TO: COMPANY: LITTLE ROCK, AR (501) 562-3737 jg.- -Aws^, ye-ftK 72219-0065 FAX (501) 562-5389 (800) 221-S857 (AR WATS) FROM\nSg^. - KEVIN McGUIRE NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET: NOTES: pV\\\u0026gt;L _____________________________________ X bJoOct^ k^\u0026gt;p gP\u0026lt;Hg.Utti Vexj I / ___ .. I I  CiKopk. T Kx. \u0026gt;NWitZh HAS fcRr6ibTHiAJfeS\u0026gt; Ip lUuCH- We^ ^KznctpATgb a itJ SV^Cfe IXap^l fcg\u0026gt; zSlcSopg roios/DgiAnoy\\-~/zjc[LC/z-'\u0026amp;. X imdou:^ P\u0026gt; !fUk ^rAfe.-TC\u0026gt; gv\nyfAaL kJfclAa- Cov^e N^trr MrnA,\u0026lt;AJ \"iSe ^t\u0026gt;u^ rr Gsvub gX^ev T\u0026lt;\\' -Fi^fepE/h ACfT QO/a^T^ (!('!\u0026gt; '^Q!^ LrneoJl- bcSTiticr faw\u0026lt;U5 ftx efeaAs^XTAXXO*-^ Woolh jiOWlei?' IF YOU DO NOT RECIEVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL 501 562-3737. CVr\u0026lt;U?7\" f lei^ Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376.6200 Fax (501) 371.0100 Date: December 2, 1994 To: From: Subject: Marvin Schwartz. LRSD Grant Coordinator in S. Brown, Federal Monitor Magnet School Grant Application Schedule Thank you for the November 30, 1994 memorandum from you and Estelle Matthis regarding the districts intent to apply for magnet school grants. The memo read that questions or requests for assistance were to be directed to you, the central coordinator for this project. As 1 have previously expressed, 1 continue to have several concerns about the districts desire to designate six schools as new magnets, particularly when the current magnet schools are underenrolled by hundreds of students and at a time when the district is contemplating closing more schools. 1 have also told you, the superintendent, and Mrs. Matthis that the Court will need sufficient time to review the grant application, hear the comments of the parties, raise and resolve any questions which the Court herself may have, and to rule on any modification of the desegregation plan. Because the Court will likely hold a hearing on the matter, 1 want to plan now to work a hearing date into the Courts calendar, which fills very quicldy. Please send me your grant development schedule (including all critical events, such as parent input and review by Joshua and the other parties) so we can do our best to find a potential hearing date that will mesh with your timetable as much as possible. Keep in mind*that you will need time to adjust your application pending the outcome of any hearing, motion or objection of the parties, or a Court ruling. 1 understand that your schedule is tight. By factoring in now the period required for the Court review process, we should all be able to work from a timeline that will enable you to meet your deadlines. Thanks very much for your assistance. Please give me a call with any questions. CC: Hank Williams Estelle Matthis Chris HellerC/\"- Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: December 2, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: n Brown Subject: Filling Spaces in the Rockefeller Infants and Twos Program Through visits to Rockefeller Incentive School, I have become aware that Rockefellers Infant and Two-year-old Program has a number of openings for new children. School employees say that these openings have been available for quite a while, and that some of the waiting parents and staff are becoming very frustrated with the delays. 1 understand that a few of the waiting children are siblings of youngsters already enrolled at Rockefeller. The desegregation plan is clear that sibling preference is honored at Rockefeller. The plan also calls for evaluation of the schools early childhood education policies in terms of their impact on desegregation and educational goals. If the districts current placement policies and practices are causing delays in enrolling new early childhood students, its time to re-evaluate and change them so that classes are always at capacity. The success of Rockefeller is due to many factors, among them its fine early childhood education program. I know you share my desire for Rockefeller to continue to fulfill its desegregation role as a model for improving academic achievement and attracting a racially diverse student body. Please help me assess the assignment situation at Rockefeller by letting me know the following: 1. The capacity and number of current vacancies in the Infant and Two-year-old Program. 2. The length of time the vacancies have been open. 3. The timeline for filling the vacancies. 4. Why the Infant and Two-year-old Program has been running at less than capacity. 5. The current placement policies and practices. 6. How and when you will modify the policies and practices to expedite student placement. 7. The date as each of the current vacancies become filled. CC: Anne Mangan Pat Price \u0026gt; Olivetti FX 2100 date , TO\nTRO.'-I\nSS(^CE3?'s PHON: SD\u0026amp;.7SCT: spec\nAL s?d Diai\n12- 6-94 : S:29AM I LR SCHOOL DIST^ B^i n\"j.7 district S10 ?/6st Ma-Khem ^OGk, AR AX (501) 324.2032 n . DCtecUf. SchcAi ^^ST^uariQi^S: (ir.clud e Cover Sb ich\u0026gt;c//L 5013710100\n# 1 Phone Nuxb^s- 371b' f I J i ( j .'I '' '\u0026lt; ( '3. \u0026gt; 1Olivetti FX 2100 :12- 6-94 : 8\n29AM\nLR SCHOOL DIST-* 5013710100!# 2 TO\nPftOMi ifl R1 1\u0026lt;ITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT * MarJthaia Little Rock, AR 72201 Oeceajber 5, 1954 rederal Monitor - offio. Of Dceyresatlo\nF Ci ^X4inda Monitorin^f young, Rsstructuring Diraotor/K i rJ I $ Thank f- I Middle School steering V rutureg LiaiBon Coi\u0026amp;ai'ct.ee you for auggeetione. The first will be the your tijue today. I appreciate your ideaa and Ad Dec^VaV*? hool Planning Adainlatration Building. 4.15 p.. the Board roob of will notify you earlier froB this point forward* IOf'- 2^ Sc/i 6^11 n' Memorandum DEC 1 2 1004 December 6,1994 Oitice o5 Dssegr5ga\n0!'i TO: Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation Monitoring FROM\nMarvin Schwartz, Grants Writer X- THROUGH: RE: Henry Williams, Superintendent Magnet School applicationl/^^^^^^^ Thank you for your input and clarification of the court process regarding review of the magnet school application being developed for Little Rock schools. The LRSD application will include two schools - Franklin Incentive Elementary and Stephens Elementary. This plan replaces an earlier decision to develop six schools as magnets. In accordance with your December 2, 1994 memorandum, the District is requesting your assistance in scheduling a hearing date on the Courts calendar to initiate the application review process. We anticipate having a draft narrative and budget for the magnet school application available by January 16, 1995. Please schedule the court hearing for as soon as possible following that date. Your assistance is greatly appreciated in this process.c\u0026gt;c\ntEcras Little Rock School District k December 6,1994 to: From: Thru: Subject: MEMORANDUM Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Audrey Lee, Coordinator of SA information Dr. Russell Mayo, Associate Superintendent RHCEI .PW DK 1 5 igo^ Office of Oesegi Filling spaces in the Rockefeller infants and Two year program 1. The capacity and number of vacancies in the infant and Two-year old program are as follows: Infant capacity Two-year old 10 17 Current vacancies Current vacancies 2. The length of time the vacancies have been open are as follows: The Infant vacancy occurred in November 1994. The Two-year old vacancies occurred in September 1994 with seven vacancies, in October we enrolled (3) two-year olds and dropped (3). In November (2) seats were filled, in December (2) seats were filled and (11) two-year olds are currently enrolled. 3. The timeline for filling vacancies is as follows: Since the program is functioning on a 12 month cycle we are continuously offering seats from the waiting list on a monthly basis. Our goal is to keep the enrollment at capacity at all times. 4. Why Infant and Two-year-old programs have been running at less than capacity is as follows: The Infant and Two-year old Caucasian capacity is maximized . The remaining seats have been consistently offered to African American families from the waiting list. The cost has been the primary reason for these families declining the seats. The Department of Human Services offers assistance, but it is my understanding that the list has a two-year waiting period. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 D  A 1 6 15. The current placement policies and practices are as follows\nFirst preference, is given to students who live in the attendance zone arid have sibling attending the school. Second, is given to students who live in the attendance zone. Third, is given to students who do not live in attendance zone but have sibling attending the school. Fourth, is staff preference. Fifth, is desegregation transfer. 6. HOW and when we will modify the policies and practices to expedite student placement is as follows\nStarting the month of December we have began to telephone parents and offer seats where vacancies exist. After the parent is called, a follow-up letter is sent to confirm the parent's response. 7. The date as each of the current vacancies are filled. Since we have started the telephone procedure we have filled the (1) infant seat and (5) two-year-old seats. These seats were filled 12/5- 12/8/94. 2Date: December 7, 1994 To: Chris Heller CONROeOiM. From: Subject: in Brown LRSD Board Member Request Youll recall that, a few weeks back, 1 told you that Katherine Mitchell had raised to me (in a televised Board of Education meeting) a question that she had put to judge Wright back during the summer hearings. She wants the Judge to tell the district when it has to involve Joshua and when it doesnt. When you and 1 discussed this subject, we agreed that it was not in the best interests of the district nor desegregation matters for the Judge to draw any such line. Nor is the Judge inclined to do so. At the last Board meeting, when my associate Melissa Guldin was addressing the board, Katherine once again threw down this same gauntlet. Doubtless she intends to continue doing so, as she evidently perceives that she has \"caught the Court in some dereliction of duty and she is revelling in rubbing it in. Katherine needs to understand that it is in everybodys best interests for her to drop this matter immediately. Please take care of this situation, Chris, and help Katherine see that the district is far better off not having the Court draw ever tighter the districts already limited circle of options. The December Board meeting is coming soon, and well be running the risk of embarrassing both Katherine and the LRSD by having to say in public what you and 1 know is better discussed in private. Please let me know your progress as soon as possible. Thanks.O* Little Rock School District OK 9 1994 December 7, 1994 Qfnee oi Desegrayaicn MonitGriPi Ann Brown, Federal Monitor, ODM Heritage West Building, Room #510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: On November 11th, Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent of Schools, requested that you serve on a committee to assist the District in its course of action regarding the rebuilding of Chicot Elementary School. The first meeting of this committee will be December 13th, 1994, from 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., in the Little Rock School District Board Room, 810 West Markham Street. The purpose of this meeting will be to update the committee on the actions that have occurred since the fire on October 13th to discuss the general process that the District must pursue in rebuilding the school, and to determine the interplay of the committee in this District's process. Should you not be able to attend, please contact me at 570-4020. incerely, Douglas C. Eaton DIRECTOR PLANT SERVICES DEPARTMENT DCE/rlh/cesc cc: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 I Little Rock School District 0 . QJS' December 9, 1994 OtC 1 Ann Brown, Federal Monitor, ODM Heritage West Building, Room #510 201 East Markham Street cysce c t*\nH kV Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: This is to advise you that the Chicot Rebuilding Committee meeting originally set for 4:00 pm, tuesday December 13th. has been changed to 5:00 pm. tuesday December 13th, It will still be held in the Little Rock School District Board at 810 W. Markham st. room Siheerely, Director of Plant Services 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM To: Board of Directors Through: Dr. Heiuy p. Williams, Superintendent From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: December 10, 1994 Subject: Desegregation Update Since this months desegregation update includes a number of items in progress, I have attached a summary of those items. On occasions when items continue from a previous month and no new information is available to report, I will present the report orally to you. RHCSJVSD UN 2 7 1995 Office of Desegregation MonitoringLittle Rock School District Desegregation Update Board of Directors Meeting December 15, 1994 Program Budget Document (PBD) When the PBD was first implemented, many non obligation items were included. At the time, we were uncertain about the precise definition of an obligation. Extensive discussions were held at that time about what was and was not an obligation. We knew then that some cleanup would be necessary. Working with the document this past year has helped. The distinction between obligations and observations or procedures is clearer. We began the cleanup process in November. Program managers were asked to review their sections of the PBD and mark items they believed were not appropriate for the document. These were two types: 1) completed, one time obligations and 2) items that were not obligations but normal procedure within the program area or simply observations. Their responses were returned to the Office of Desegregation. They are being compiled. These items will be noted in the second quarter PBD and dropped from the third quarter copy of the PBD. Some items will transfer to other documents such as the job description for the program manager or the procedures record for the program area. A paper trail will be esublished for each item dropped from the third quarter PBD. None of the ongoing obligations will be dropped. This procedure applies only to the PBD. Audit of Obligations (Attachment) The purpose of the annual Audit of Obligations is to catalogue and merge into the Program Budget Document (PBD) all desegregation obligations incurred during the previous year. In October 1993, all previous obligations under the desegregation plans were researched and included in the PBD. This years audit is for the period from October of 1993 through October of 1994. All court orders, hearing transcripts, monitoring reports, and stipulations were reviewed for that period. The obligations were extracted from the documents and listed. The list was reviewed by the Superintendents Council, the Superintendent, LRSD Attorneys, and the LRSD Office of Desegregation. This year research on the audit includes an update on the status of each obligation. Responsible persons were asked to report on the status on their listed obligations. Responses were reduced to codes. Evidence of the status of each is maintained by the person responsible. A copy of the completed audit is included with this update. Original Magnets: Geographic Preference (Attachment) The issue of geographic preference is on the Magnet Review Committees table. Geographic preference refers to the practice of considering the racial balance impact on the area school by the transfer of a student to a magnet. This means that some students may not transfer to magnets because doing so will negatively impact the racial balance of their area school.Desegregation Update Board of Directors Meeting December 15, 1994 2 At a meeting of the MRC on November 19, I informed them that we use geographic preference in selecting students for magnets. Though this issue is being reviewed as if it is a new concept, it is not. It is protected by the Magnet Stipulation (February, 1987). It is also a practice in PCSSD since magnets were established. Attached is a memorandum presented to the MRC stating reasons for supporting the practice and encouraging their support. Desegregation Plan Modifications (Attachment) A number of sections of the plan are being reviewed with a eye toward modifying them. As you know, e process is time consuming. We hope to have a number of modifications before you by the board meeting in march. Any modifications must be approved by the Board of Directors before they are filed with the Court. Therefore, you will have an opportunity to review any modifications before they are final, illustration of the plan modification process. Attached is a graphic Registration Preparation for February registration is complete almost. The details of that information will be presented to the Board at the January meeting. Generally, the dates and activities are as they were last year. Director of Communications Interviewing for the position of Director of Communications has begun. Almost 200 applications were received. We hope to have someone in the position no later than midJanuary. Mayer, OecewU\u0026gt;erl2, 1994Desegregation Plan Amendment Process Students Patrons Teachers Committees AdministAtors Demographic Changes Failure of Deseg. Process Propose Change (in writing) Changes in Law Changing Circumstances I Office of Desegregation (LRSD) If approved 1. Initial Evaluation 2. When appropriate: Surveys \u0026amp; Public Meetings held Informal Consultation with Parties 3. Final Recommendation to Superintendent 4. Superintendent Recommends to Board Submit to Court Share with Parties If the Court approves, the plan shall be amended noting the approved date. Lillie Rock School District R. MayoLittle Rock School District MEMORANDUM To: From: Date: Subject: Magnet Review Committee Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent December 12,1994 Magnet Selection: Geographic Preference Little Rocks original magnets are among the most successful schools in the area. Their reason should not be blurred by the thrill of success, however. They developed from the need to voluntarily desegregate all schools. So weighty is this goal in Pulaski County, that it has bound parties and patrons in a web of priorities punctuated by dilemmas. Too often, these dilemmas ignore the greater goal of educating students. The decision before the MRC is another dilemma. In short, it is the conflict between voluntary desegregation and extra funding. If geographic preference is prohibited in selecting students for magnet schools, a few more seats can be filled, drawing more funding. Area schools, however, will become more racially identifiable violating the intent of desegregation. If geographic preference is permitted, the prospects of desegregation are preserved, but some magnet seats will be empty without additional state funding. The position of the MRC is an important one. The success of voluntary desegregation will be inhibited or enabled by the decision. This decision will be a statement about the priorities of the MRC. By opposing geographic preference, funding becomes the priority. By supporting geographic preference, voluntary desegregation remains the priority. In weighing your decision, the following information may be helpful: 1. The position of the U. S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, is clear on dilemmas involving the goal of desegregation and funding. In its 1991 decision concerning plan modifications, the Court stressed the following: .... We wish to dispel, in particular, any notion that an asserted lack of funds on the part of any of the three school districts would justify a reduction in their commitment to desegregation....' 2. Geographic preference was and is a standing policy in the Pulaski County Special School District, according to Billy Bowles, Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation\n3. The primary goal of the MRC is desegregation. The court order establishing the MRC requires that the MRC shall have as its primary objective the furtherance of effective desegregation. ..2 4. Geographic preference, applied to student selection, drives the desegregating process. It is permitted by the Magnet Stipulation as noted here: ' Appeal of Lillie Rock School Dislricl, Pulaski Courtly Special School Dislricl No. I, North Little Rock School District, 2 and Mrs. Lorene Joshua, 949 F.2d 253, 255 (Sth Cir. 1991). Magnet Review Committee Court Order (September 3, 1986), page 2.Magnet Review Committee Magnet Selection: Geographic Preference 2 SEAT ALLOCATION .... The three districts agree that each district will establish an open enrollment policy for magnet schools and will be permitted to determine how children will be selected for the magnet seats allocated to each district pursuant to that policy. This provision shall not prohibit the establishment of geographic preference areas where appropriate. 5. Regardless of the position taken by the MRC, every seat will never be filled unless the pool of white students requesting magnets increases dramatically. This condition is created by seat restrictions of race and grade level, two restrictions necessary to desegregation. The student selection practices of the Little Rock School District support geographic preference. We would appreciate your support of this practice. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney 3 Magnet Stipulation (February 16, 1987), page 5.Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM To: Magnet Review Committee From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: December 12, 1994 Subject: Magnet Selection: Geographic Preference Little Rocks original magnets are among the most successful schools in the area. Their reason should not be blurred by the thrill of success, however. They developed from the need to voluntarily desegregate all schools. So weighty is this goal in Pulaski County, that it has bound parties and patrons in a web of priorities punctuated by dilemmas. Too often, these dilemmas ignore the greater goal of educating students. The decision before the MRC is another dilemma. In short, it is the conflict between voluntary desegregation and extra funding. If geographic preference is prohibited in selecting students for magnet schools, a few more seats can be filled, drawing more fimding. Area schools, however, will become more racially identifiable violating the intent of desegregation. If geographic preference is permitted, the prospects of desegregation are preserved, but some magnet seats will be empty without additional state fimding. The position of the MRC is an important one. The success of voluntary desegregation will be inhibited or enabled by the decision. This decision will be a statement about the priorities of the MRC. By opposing geographic preference, fimding becomes the priority. By supporting geographic preference, voluntary desegregation remains the priority. In weighing your decision, the following information may be helpful: 1. The position of the U. S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, is clear on dilemmas involving the goal of desegregation and fimding. In its 1991 decision concerning plan modifications, the Court stressed the following: .... We wish to dispel, in particular, any notion that an asserted lack of funds on the part of any of the three school districts would justify a reduction in their commitment to desegregation....' 2. Geographic preference was and is a standing policy in the Pulaski County Special School District, according to Billy Bowles, Assistant Superintendent for Desegregation\n3. The primary goal of the MRC is desegregation. The court order establishing the MRC requires that the MRC shall have as its primary objective the furtherance of effective ,2 desegregation. 4. Geographic preference, applied to student selection, drives the desegregating process. It is permitted by the Magnet Stipulation as noted here: ' Appeal of Little Rock School District, Pulaski County Special School District No. I, North Little Rock School District, and Mrs. Lorene Joshua, 949 F.2d 253, 255 (Sth Cir. 1991). 2 Magnet Review Committee Court Order (September 3, 1986), page 2.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham. Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Date: December 13, 1994 To: Members of the LRSD Board of Education and Dr. Henry Williams From: n S. Brown Subject: Data on Southwest LRSD Schools Enclosed are some charts which my staff has prepared for me in anticipation of todays meeting of the committee which is to consider rebuilding Chicot School. Dr. Williams has graciously asked me to serve on this committee. Im sharing these charts with that group and you because 1 think youll find them informative and helpful. The charts contain information about schools in Southwest Little Rock. Weve included more detailed information about Chicot and Watson because these two schools have recently been publicly discussed in tandem with rebuilding Chicot. It would probably be helpful to the district to have this level of detailed data analysis on all LRSD schools. Such infor\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_343","title":"Correspondence","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":["1994"],"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":["Correspondence"],"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/343"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["correspondence"],"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\nRECIEVED JAN 6 194 Office of Desegregation Monitoring LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING, RESEARCH AND EVALUATION Date: January 4, 1994 To: Margie Powell, Associate Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring From: Sterling Ingra irector Planning, Research and Evaluation Re: Arkansas Minimum Perfoirmance Test, 1993 As requested in your telephone call today, we are enclosing copies of the school summary reports for the 1993 Arkansas MPT. information, please let me know. If we can provide any additional bjg cc: Jerry Malone Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 January 10, 1994 Mrs. Pat Higginbotham Woodruff Elementary School 3010 West 7th Street Little Rock, AR 72205 Dear Pat: Congratulations on 400 fight-free days at Woodruff! Thats a significant milestone to have reached, and 1 am so proud of you, your staff, and your terrific kids. As a former Woodruff parent, 1 know firsthand the importance you and your fine staff place on teaching children how to constructively handle their differences. As a result of his years at Woodruff, my son Jonathan left sixth grade last year with solid skills in decision making and conflict resolution that are serving him well now in junior high. By the way, 1 also want you to know how fondly Jonathan remembers Woodruff and his teachers. Every time we drive by the school, he heaves a sign and says, \"1 wish 1 were still there.\" Jonathan learned so much while he was at Woodruff. He was challenged and he was also cherished, feeling secure and well-guided by his concerned and loving teachers. As a result, he gained much selfconfidence and now approaches school with an \"1 can do it\" attitude. As a Mom, 1 thank you for all the wonderful things your school has given my son. As a monitor, 1 salute you for your superb vision, leadership, and know-how. You dared to set a lofty goal and then you provided the direction, resources, and support that have enabled all of you to achieve your goal together. Please share this letter with your terrific Woodruff colleagues and accept my enthusiastic congratulations on a job well done. Sincerely yours, irownOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376.6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: January 12, 1994 To: Hank Williams From: n Brown Subject: LRSD Communication Assistant Position 1 wrote you on December 3, 1993 regarding the status of the unfilled Communications Assistant position, but still have not received an answer to my letters inquiries. 1 will appreciate your early response to the questions 1 posed last month in my letter: By what date can the Court expect the Communication Assistants position to be filled? Also, will this position be part-time or will it be full-time? Thank you very much. LRSD SUPTS OFFICE 148 P01 JAN 19 4 17:16  LnTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT January 19, 1994 Mrs. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: Dr. Mayo has been given my approval to fill the position of Communication Assistant. It is my hope, that after he has concluded his interviews, filled. the position will be I understand that he has narrowed his choices. and that filling this position is a priority. Sincerely, Henry P. Williams Superintendent of Schools /bjf 810 Wet Maridmin Street  Little Kock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 824-2000 eF.-/A'Lb Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM To\nFrom: Date: Subject: Ann Brown, Monitor Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent February 2,1994 Meeting February 1,1994 FEB 7 10Q4 Onice of Di 'Qbv\u0026lt; Thank both you and Bob for your help yesterday with data about our students in and out of our attendance zones. As you know. Bob and 1 are meeting next week so 1 may benefit from the file he has built. Our meeting was beneficial to me and gave me insight into ways of approaching solutions to student assignment. From our meeting, 1 understand that you will request Incentive School capacities from Doug Eaton based on a maximum of 20 students per class, rather than the current capacities. We agreed that these would be more realistic. We did not agree, however, on the method for calculating range for area elementary schools. 1 understand clearly why you are interpreting the range to be fixed at 40% to 60%. As pointed out, our average percentage black is approximately 64%. This makes it mathematically impossible for us to bring all elementary schools into compliance. We have been using 40% for the bottom of the range and using the formula for secondary schools to figure the top. That way the top of the range moves with our percentage black. Chris Heller and 1 will try to work an agreeable solution. Also, 1 want to reiterate my response to your question about the assistant communication position. We have taken a while to fill this position because of the importance of any position when much is to be done. These are long term decisions, because they affect people's lives, as you know. We want to be careful to get the right people in the right places so they are both happy and productive. The apparent conflict between my testimony and reality is easily explained. When 1 testified that we were completing interviews on Friday, January 28, that was true. The following Monday, we realized that since the position was changed to full-time, it should be re advertised. It has been and will close early next week. This means that three to four weeks may pass before the person selected is actually on the job. This estimate includes the new hire's two weeks notice to their current employer. Again, thank you for your help. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Chris Heller, LRSD AttorneyOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 February 2, 1994 Mr. Doug Eaton Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Doug: I understand that my associate, Melissa Guldin, spoke with you yesterday about the LRSD school capacity figures you sent us earlier this year. The numbers you had reported for the incentive schools were evidently taken directly from the incentive school capacity table which appears on page 147 of the LRSD desegregation plan. Those capacities are based on 18 children in four-year- old classes, 20 in kindergarten, 23 in grades one through three, and 25 in grades four through six. Although you are correct in citing the desegregation plan capacity figures, the Courts May 1, 1992 Order has resulted in the district aiming for a maximum class enrollment at the incentive schools of 20 pupils per classroom in grades K through six. Therefore, please fax me the capacity of each incentive school based on no more than 20 pupils per class in grades K-6 and the appropriate classroom maximum for the early childhood grades (which I understand is 18 in four-year-old rooms and, in the Rockefeller magnet program, 18 in the ree-year-old classes, 17 in the two- year-olds, and 10 for the infants and toddlers). 1 need this information no later than the end of the day on Friday, February 4, 1994. Thank you very much. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown cc: Russell Mayoyf A tt^'^\nOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Date: February 2, 1994 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 To: Interdistrict School Principals From: ODM Monitoring Team Subject: Request for documentation On October 26, 1993 we requested that copies of certain documents be available at our scheduled monitoring visit. To date, the following list of items have not been provided. In order to complete our report we ask you send these documents to us no later than Tuesday, February 8, 1994 by 5:00 p.m. Failure to provide copies of these documents by that time will result in a notation in the final report that your school failed to provide monitors with requested documentation. This report will be filed with the federal district court. Crystal Hill  1993-94 PTA total membership by race and gender  Total number of conferences each teacher held with parents (by race and gender) during the first semester for the 1993-94 school year. Romine  1993-94 PTA total membership by race and gender Washington  Documentation of 1993-94 school committees that includes parent or community representatives by committee name, a brief description of the committees mission, a membership roster (including race, gender,and position) agenda, and minutes  1993-94 PTA total membership by race and gender  1993-94 school/community partnership agreements  1993-94 volunteer program documentation including the number of volunteers by race and gender and the total number of hours served by month  1993-94 classroom enrollment  Discipline Report (first nine weeks) and the definition for SIPSn*  Tin  V? o c:-.  February 2, 1994 FE3 MS94 James L. Washington 0Siic3 ci ce -.3 Hall High School Vice Principal 6700 \"H\" Street Little Rock, AR 72205 Ms. Ann S. Brown Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Brown: A few years ago-while serving the Little Rock School District as Student Assignment Officer- I was encouraged to apply for a position on your staff by a colleague. Unfortunately, I was discouraged after she allegedly visited informally with you about working in your office, solicit her assistance. unknown to me. I would like to note that I did not Being discouraged is not experience I have learned how to provide self-motivation. hard work, and sacrifice in order to accomplish my personal and professional goals. However, when we visited with Mr. Butterfield I was curious to confirm what was told to me about comments allegedly made by you in reference to what you heard about James Washington. I was particularly concerned about the terms \"rude\", \"disrespectful\", and \"discourteous\" being used to describe the way I conducted myself while serving our district patrons. The point to be made is that serving the public in a process that is very emotional professional liability. (student assignments) should not be a demonstrated that: When challenged in the past, it has been (1) no one has been willing to sit and state specifics, and (2) patrons frustrated with the assignment process or the system target the district's contact person. Out of respect for you and myself I won't list (nor necessarily discount) the belief that my race and gender are factors, other words, I was unfairly labeled. In You need not respond. I merely want to state that I hope what was told to me was a gross misunderstanding. Not speaking for me, it may be a disservice to our community if the best available talent is not utilized as a result of heresay. community deserves more. Our school I hope you and your staff continue to have a good year! Sincerely, ton jiic 'V\u0026lt;- c. ho.li cc^c^^eg^ Little Rock School District 4 Feb 1994 receiv Ms. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham St. Heritage West Building Otiice Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann\nFEB 1 1 1994 ot Desegregation UOituv. .'S Pursuant to your letter of 2 Feb 1994, contained herein are the capacities for the Incentive Schools. Elementary at Ms. Gulden's request. I have included Washington The Incentive school capacities are calculated on a maximum class size of 20 students in grades K thru 6 and 18 students in Pre-K. The special programs at Rockefeller Elementary are calculated using 10 students/class in Infant programs. old programs and 18 students/class in 3 yr. 17 students/class in 2 yr. old programs. The capacity of Washington Elementary is calculated using 20 students in K, 23 students in grades 1 thru 3, 25 students in grades 4 thru 6 and 18 students in Pre-K. The capacities listed are based on the number of class sections presently in effect during the 93-94 school year. School Franklin Elementary Garland Elementary Mitchel Elemenatry Rightsell Elementary Rockefeller Elementary Stephens Elementary Washington Elementary Capacity 434 258 298 258 469 198 836 sincerely. Doiigla\\ Eaton 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361 5:^0 I 02/04 94 17:23 S'oOl 324 2032 L R School Dlst ODM LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 FAX (501) 324-2032 TO: FROM: SENDER'S PHONED SUBJECT: q: J, @001 002 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Number of Pages (include cover page Speed Dial___________ Fax Phone Number zss^ssiags]! T' i222:^322a*3BS22^2SS3S\nfi32aS2C\n^2^:S2^a^aS^ai3SM 02fri4 94 1T:24 501 321 2032- i.:.M @002'002 I y AJt L 1\u0026lt; JcllOOl DI Si iwiri\" if j' - f' Rock School District February 4, 1994 Ms. Connie Hickman Tanner Office of Desegregation Monitorinjfg Heritage West Building, Suite 510 201 E. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Connie, Thanks for offering an extension on the final copy of the Districtwide Recruitment Plan. I should be able to provide a copy of the comprehensive plan with its four components (one each for incentive, interdistrict, magnet and area schools) by the middle of next week. There will be a narrative attached. Sincerely, Jeanette Wagner Director of Communications 810 West Markham street  Little Rock, Arkansas 73301  (501)834-3000 _____________________________________ % _____________________________________ Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: February 14, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: Subject: In Brown Elementary Area School Racial Balance Range 1 want to correct an apparent misunderstanding that appears in your memo to me dated February 2, 1994 which 1 received on February 7, 1994. In that correspondence, you stated that I was interpreting the range for LRSD area elementary school at a fixed 40% to 60%. Actually, in figuring the target racial balance range for LRSD elementary area schools, my calculations are guided by the specific relevant language of the desegregation plans. Both the LRSD Desegregation Plan and the Interdistrict Plan provide for the racial balance of LRSD elementary schools to be calculated differently from that of the districts secondary schools. The plans state that the target racial balance at the elementary area schools is 55 percent black and 45 percent white with a variance of 5 percent. The LRSD plan refers to attendance zones that are drawn to establish this racial balance. The plans also state that white enrollment at an area school may not exceed 60%. Clearly, the desegregation plans do not provide for the target racial balance range of LRSD elementary area schools to fluctuate along with the districts black percentage. That you perceive it to be presently \"mathematically impossible\" to achieve the target range is not due to a matter of interpretation of a racial balance formula\nrather, it is due to the districts failure to do what the desegregation plans require of it: to recruit white students into the LRSD in numbers that will allow schools to be desegregated within the range the district set up itself. One effect of a fixed target range is to act as an incentive for the district to maintain white enrollment that is sufficient to achieve the racial balance that the parties agreed upon in their settlement. The challenge the LRSD is now facing is not in reinterpreting its desegregation plans, but in living up its solemn promises, including the tough recruitment job the district committed itself to do. cc: Hank Williams Chris HellerLittle Rock School District MEMORANDUM .-j V To: From: Date: Subject: Ann Brown, Monitor Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent February 2, 1994 Meeting February 1,1994 FEB 7 1004 Oifica of Des^ Thank both you and Bob for your help yesterday with data about our students in and out of our attendance zones. As you know. Bob and 1 are meeting next week so 1 may benefit from the file he has built. Our meeting was beneficial to me and gave me insight into ways of approaching solutions to student assignment. From our meeting, 1 understand that you will request Incentive School capacities from Doug Eaton based on a maximum of 20 students per class, rather than the current capacities. We agreed that these would be more realistic. We did not agree, however, on the method for calculating range for area elementary schools. 1 understand clearly why you are interpreting the range to be fixed at 40% to 60%. As pointed out, our average percentage black is approximately 64%. This makes it mathematically impossible for us to bring all elementary schools into compliance. We have been using 40% for the bottom of the range and using the formula for secondary schools to figure the top. That way the top of the range moves with our percentage black. Chris Heller and 1 will try to work an agreeable solution. Also, 1 want to reiterate my response to your question about the assistant communication position. We have taken a while to fill this position because of the importance of any position when much is to be done. These are long term decisions, because they affect people's lives, as you know. We want to be careful to get the right people in the right places so they are both happy and productive. The apparent conflict between my testimony and reality is easily explained. When 1 testified that we were completing interviews on Friday, January 28, that was true. The following Monday, we realized that since the position was changed to full-time, it should be re advertised. It has been and will close early next week. This means that three to four weeks may pass before the person selected is actually on the job. This estimate includes the new hire's two weeks notice to their current employer. Again, thank you for your help. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams. Superintendent Chris Heller, LRSD AttorneyOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date\nFebruary 16, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: in Brown Subject: New LRSD Brochure 1 hope you could read my notes on my rough edit of your new brochure, which 1 faxed to you last evening. My handwriting is not always the clearest, so please dont hesitate to ask if something isnt legible. Russ, in my hasty comments 1 did not address every edit aspect of the brochure that its important to consider, from small things like the stray period that appears in the list of registration dates to major things like completeness of information and clarity of general purpose and content. You obviously intend for this brochure to be user friend-which is laudable-and 1 like the conversational tone. However, 1 still believe it is important for you to have a technical writer review and refine the brochure before it goes to press. It has been my experience that its worth the money to delegate a job like developing a new brochure to the pros who do that sort of thing for a living and are very good at it. There is one additional aspect of the brochure that I want to stress: in information designed to inform the public about various school options, I believe its critical to address and clarify the issue of eligibility. Parents are frequently upset when they perceive that they have options which we know are not open to them. For example, you may not be fully aware of the ire many parents expressed over King recruitment activities, when both the LRSD and PCSSD failed to make it clear that only certain parents need apply. Although I believe district officials do not mean to intentionally mislead the public, it still happens all too frequently because we fail to explain up front to Moms and Dads what we understand as a matter of routine. Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District ( Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (SOI) 371-0100 February 18, 1994 Dr. Henry P. Williams Little Rock School District 801 West Markham Street Little Rock, .AR 72201 Dear Hank: Enclosed are a number of charts containing information which the Court asked ODM to provide the district. This information should be helpful as you consider a number of issues, particularly those relevant to the future of Stephens and a new LRSD interdistrict school. As the Court requested, the charts show the number of empty seats in the incentive schools, the number of empty seats at King, and the number of children who are enrolled in these schools. To show where LRSD children might most likely be targeted for recruitment to PCSSDs new Clinton Interdistrict School, we have prepared racial balance data on schools in various areas of town and also a chart on the Washington Attendance Zones illustrating the dispersement of children who live in that schools zones but attend elsewhere. We have also used the LRSDs data base and 1993-94 budget to generate additional information which is categorized according to the titles and subtitles of each document. For example, one chart contains information on per-pupil expenditures by elementary school. Earlier this month. Bob Morgan and I met with Russ Mayo and Chris Heller to review the charts in draft form and to stress that our calculations were all based on data given us by the LRSD. We also gave Russ a computer disc containing the student data base from which we developed our charts. We have attempted to make each chart self-explanatory through headings, footnotes, or a brief introduction. However, some of the data may not be as self-evident as we intended it to be. So, please dont hesitate to contact me if we need to be clearer about any aspect of the information. Sincerely yours, d Ou Ann S. B Brown cc\nJudge Susan Webber Wright Bobby Lester James Smith Russ Mayo All CounselLittle Rock School District MEMORANDUM To: Connie Hickman- Tanner, Associate Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: February 20, 1994 Subject: District-Wide Recruitment Plan RECE3VEP FEB 24 1994' Oifica of Desegregation Monitoring Attached is a our district-wide recruitment plan. The cover narrative explains the document. We know that changes will occur as we experiment with ideas in the plan. We believe that all of our obligations are addressed in this plan. We are open to your suggestions for the document. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Members of the Superintendents Council Jerry Malone, LRSD Attorney Chris Heller, LRSD AttorneyOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham. Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 February 22, 1994 Dr. Henry P. Williams Little Rock School District 801 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Hank: I have discovered an error in a footnote that appears on one of the charts I sent you last Friday. In the section entitled Enrollment in Downtown Elementary Schools, a note under the chart on the second page states that incentive school capacities are based on a 20-to-l or less student-teacher ratio. That statement is incorrect. The capacities we actually used in our calculations are those that appear in the April 1992 LRSD Desegregation Plan, which are higher than a 20-to-l ratio. A corrected chart is enclosed. I regret any inconvenience ODM's error may have caused. Sincerely yours, -K \"Ann S. Brown cc\nJudge Susan Webber Wright Bobby Lester James Smith Russ Mayo All CounselENROLLMENT IN DOWNTOWN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Prepared by ODM February 1994 For the purpose of this document, ODM has identified a downtown elementary school as any elementary school located within these boundaries: east of University, west of Adams Field, north of Fourche Creek, and south of Markham. These boundaries create a rectangular area encompassing the six incentive schools (Franklin, Garland, Mitchell, Rightsell, Rockefeller, and Stephens), three magnet schools (Booker, Carver, and Gibbs), two interdistrict schools (King and Washington), one area school (Woodruff), and the kindergarten classes at Central High School. By using the defined boundaries, some schools outside the downtown area have a few contiguous attendance zones that fall within the downtown area\nBale Elementary has four zones east of University, Fair Park has four zones and a partial zone south of Markham, and Pulaski Heights has one zone south of Markham. Woodruff, which is identified as a downtown school, has one zone north of Markham. However, for the purpose of this document, all zones within the defined boundaries are identified in the downtown area. A list of the zones defined for the purpose of this document as downtown attendance zones is provided. The information used to complete the last nine columns of this document is from the Little Rock School District (LRSD) student enrollment data base as of December 8, 1993. The second column is the October 1, 1993 enrollment reported to Arkansas Department of Education. The capacity figures in the third column are reported from LRSD as the current capacities. The fourth and fifth columns are results of calculations based on enrollment and capacity.Corrected 2-22-94 School Enrollment Oct 1 Capacity Franklin Incentive 345 544 LRSD DOWNTOWN ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS % Filled Available Seats Live downtown but attend outside downtown Live downtown and attend downtown Live outside downtown but attend downtown Total Black White Total Black White Total Black White 63 199 270 260 10 281 263 18 55 28 27 Garland Incentive 205 346 59 141 118 117 1 190 172 18 14 6 8 Mitchell Incentive 230 346 66 116 131 127 4 192 177 15 29 21 8 Rightsell Incentive 189 346 55 157 90 87 3 165 163 2 22 17 5 Rockefeller Incentive 340 425 80 85 74 72 2 238 192 46 142 62 80 Stephens Incentive Sub Total Incentive Schools 145 298 49 153 86 86 0 136 135 1 9 6 3 1,454 2,305 63 851 769 749 20 1,202 1,102 100 271 140 131 Booker Magnet 595 656 91 61 N/A N/A N/A 130 116 14 461 202 250 Carver Magnet 595 613 97 18 N/A N/A N/A 130 124 6 465 206 259 Gibbs Magnet Sub Total Magnet Schools 299 353 85 54 N/A N/A N/A 102 88 14 198 83 115 1,489 1,622 92 133 0 0 0 : 362 328 34 1,124 491 633 King Interdistrict 553 692 80 139 90 89 1 331 317 14 217 17 200 Washington Interdistrict Magnet Sub Total Interdistrict Schools 721 939 77 218 262 253 9 406 383 23 314 65 249 Woodruff (Area) Central Kindergarten Satellite Zones Contiguous Zones Grand Total 1,274 1*631 78 357 352 342 10 737 700 IB 1 531 82 449 236 324 73 88 17 15 2 156 113 43 75 33 42 50 50 100 0 N/A N/A N/A 46 46 0 4 4 0 N/A N/A 4,503 N/A N/A N/A 747 722 25 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 313 253 60 N/A N/A N/A 5,932 76 1,429 2,198 2,081 117 2,503 2,289 214 2,005 750 1255There are seven satellite zones in the downtown area wherein students are assigned and transported to schools outside the downtown area: Brady, Forest Park Jefferson, McDermott, Meadowcliff, Otter Creek, and Terry. However, all students in those satellite zones do not attend the targeted schools. For example, Terry has 138 students identified within the downtown satellite zone (all black) of which 25 attend Terry. The remaining 113 students are assigned to 29 different schools. There are no satellite zones for the downtown area that would result in students being assigned and transported to a school downtown. Targeted School Brady McDermott Forest Park Jefferson Meadow -cliff Terry Otter Creek Students in satellite zone 66 180 162 273 191 138 124 Students attending targeted school Students outside targeted school Number of schools students attending outside the targeted school 33 66 60 71 72 25 39 33 16 114 102 202 119 113 85 23 29 29 32 29 22(ff - (3'^/ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1 John L. McClellan Community High School 9417 Geyer Springs Road Phone 570-4100 Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 February 23, 1994 RWU i. r? Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 FcB 2 4 1994 Office ci Dessi Dear Ms. Brown\nI am writing to make you aware of a situation that we feel may be detrimental to our desegregation goals. Next month the Little Rock School District will print the brochure containing the 1994-95 course offerings for grades 9-12. (lam enclosing a copy of the 1993-94 brochure.) We have been notified by Estelle Matthis that approximately 25 magnet courses at McClellan High School will again not be included in this brochure. The reason given by Ms. Matthis is that \"there are too many courses for the districts course offerings brochure to include magnet programs. It is very voluminous and costly in its present format.\" While it is true that the 1993-94 brochure did not include magnet courses from McClellan or Parkview, at least six magnet courses were listed from the other LRSD high school with a magnet program, Central. We ask you to look at the following factors and to consider requesting that all LRSD secondary courses be placed in the brochure. This brochure is the only document that students, especially 9th grade students, use when scheduling their courses. It is also a document seen by people considering entering the district. As such, we feel that every course available to secondary students in the Little Rock School District should be printed in the brochure. Students looking at the brochure would see interesting courses offered at Parkview or McClellan and then perhaps consider enrolling in those schools, possibly increasing white enrollment there. If this brochure is to be the districts course offerings brochure, then it seems fitting that all district secondary courses be included. The argument that Parkview is a true magnet school may seem to justify their omission from the brochure. After all, their counselors go to the junior high schools and register their own incoming sophomores. Even so, it seems that inclusion in this brochure would benefit Parkview as well as McClellan by spreading the word about the wonderful programs available at the two schools, especially at a time when enrollment at both schools is down. A Business/Communications Magnet 1 Ms. Matthis suggested that we have our own course offerings brochures printed\nshe offered to distribute these with the LRSD course offerings brochures. We see several problems with this plan. First, this second brochure would be costly\nwhy not apply this cost to the inclusion of the McClellan and Parkview courses in the district brochure? Second, students consider the LRSD brochure as the primary source of course information. They might look at the individual school brochures, but the district brochure will be the one they keep and use as a reference for decision-making. Third, assuming that the district removes the Central magnet courses from the new district brochure, 9th grade students will be given four different brochures-LRSD, Central, McClellan, and Parkview-to help them select their courses\nthis would be terribly confusing for them as well as their parents. Finally, we feel that inclusion in the district brochure gives credibility to the magnet courses at all three high schools. Inclusion in the brochure says to everyone that these magnet high schools are a viable choice for all students. We at McClellan feel that it is imperative that all courses be included in the district course offerings brochure. We appreciate your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Steve Geurin Curriculum Coordinator Enclosure 'Of / Office of Desegregation Monitoring United Stales District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: March 11, 1994 From: To: Subject: Melissa Guldin, Associate Monitor Julie Wiedower, Student Assignment Coordinator Little Rock School District Shadow Zone Seats at Williams Magnet School As you may recall, the issue of Williams shadow zone seats came up yesterday during the meeting we both attended at the Student Assignment OfiBce. During that meeting I commented that the district had never met the requirement that 25% of the seats in Williams be reserved for students living in the shadow of the school. You said that the district assigned 15 neighborhood students to Williams for the 1993-94 school year and for the upcoming 1994-95 school year. If this is accuarte, 25% of the students entering the Williams kindergarten would be from the shadow zone. Your statement regarding the 15 shadow zone seats was not consistent with the information I received in a memo, dated 12/9/93, from Donna Grady Creer regarding the allotment of magnet seats. That document showed 10 seats allocated to LRSD white students. Since the vast majority of housing near the school is occupied by whites, I assumed and you later confirmed that the 10 white seats shown for LRSD represented the total shadow zone allotment. We discussed this issue during a meeting at your office on January 7, 1994. During that meeting I showed you the memo from Donna and you confirmed that it matched the magnet seat allocations you set for the 1993-94 school year. We even talked about the 10 shadow zone seats and the fact that 10 seats did not constitute 25% of the kindergarten classes. The figure of 10 was also mentioned at each of the recritmnet meetings held for Fair Park parents. In order to clear this up, I need some documentation regarding the LRSD policy on assignment of shadow zone seats to all magnet schools. Please furnish the following in writing:  Copy of the policy or procedures that govern allotment of shadow zone seats at each of the stipulation magnets  Definition of shadow zones  Number of seats allotted to shadow zone students during 1993-94 and for the upcoming 1994-95 school year As Russ Mayo said at the meeting, I think it is important that we all have accurate information. Thank you for your cooperation. cc: Russ Mayo______r- '-' ^SS^^tnci^r' FRIDAY. ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY, P.A. ROBERT V. LIGHT, P.A. WILLIAM H. SUTTON. P.A. JAMES W. MOORE BYRON M. EISEMAN. JR.. P.A. JOE 0. BELL. P.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS. P.A. JAMES A. BUTTRY, P.A. FREDERICK 8. URSERY, P.A. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS. JR. JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT. P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM III. P.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR., P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS, P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON, P.A. MEREDITH P. CATLETT. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL III DONALD H. BACON, P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. WALTER A. PAULSON II. P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN. P.A. RICHARD D. TAYLOR, P.A. JOSEPH 8. HURST, JR.. P.A. ELIZABETH J. ROBBEN. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P.A. ROBERT 8. SHAFER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III. P.A. THOMAS N . ROSE, P.A. MICHAEL S. MOORE A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 601-376-201 1 FAX NO. 601-376-2147 March 16, 1994 received DIANE 8. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III, P.A. KEVIN A. CRASS. P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL, JR., P.A. CLYDE TAB* TURNER, P.A. CALVIN J. HALL. P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER, P.A. JERRY L. MALONE, P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY, P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH. JR., P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER. JR., P.A. H. CHARLES OSCHWEND, JR., P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT, P.A. SCOTT H . TUCKER JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH GUY ALTON WADE PRICE C. GARDNER J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID 0. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE ANDREW T. TURNER JOHN RAY WHITE DAVID M. GRAF CARLA G. SPAINHOUR JOHN C. FENOLEY, JR. ALLISON GRAVES BAZZEL R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY 0. TAYLOR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN MAR 1 5 1994 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR COUNSEL WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELDREDGE, JR., P.A B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON, JR., P.A. VRITER'a DIRECT MO. 72206 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol \u0026amp; Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Re\nLRSD VS. PCSSD/Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines Gentlemen and Mrs. Brown: Enclosed please find the LRSD's Notice of Filing/Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines filed pursuant to the order of the Court.Attorneys and Mrs. Brown March 16, 1994 Page 2 Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, JLMzca Enclosure cc (w/enc): Jerry L. Malone LRSD Attorney Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent LRSD Council Members IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION MAR 1 5 1994 Office of Oessgrogajj^ ^Qnitffrin^ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF VS. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO\n1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS Notice of Filinq/Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\" or \"District\"), for its Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines, pursuant to the order of this Court, states: 1. By order filed and entered on February 4, 1994, this Court required the LRSD to develop and file specific guidelines regarding assignments to interdistrict schools in the LRSD. The order provided that the guidelines must be complete and filed within thirty (30) days from the date of the order. As such, the deadline was Sunday, March 6, 1994. 2. On Wednesday, March 2, 1994, counsel for the LRSD requested and was granted ten (10) additional days within which to file the required guidelines. Accordingly, the LRSD had through and including Wednesday, March 16, 1994.LRSD Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines March 16, 1994 Page 2 3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is the LRSD Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines as developed by the District's Office of Desegregation and submitted through the Superintendent of the LRSD. 4. Counsel for the LRSD has been authorized by the administration of the LRSD to submit Exhibit 1 as its student assignment guidelines for interdistrict schools located in the LRSD. WHEREFORE, the Little Rock School District submits its Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines. Respectfully Submitted, FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-3493 (501) 376-2011 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT B Y L. Malone Bar No. I. D. 85096 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jerry L. Malone, do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Filing/Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines has been mailed by First Class Mail, postage pre-paid on March 16, 1994, upon the following, except as otherwise indicated: Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 2200 Worthen Bank Building 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol \u0026amp; Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite Little Rock, AR 504 72201 Mrs. Ann Brown (Hand-delivered pursuant to the order of the Court) Heritage West Building, Suite 520 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Jerry L. Malone Little Rock School District Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines It is the intent of the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") that LRSD interdistrict schools exist primarily to bring non-black students from surrounding school districts together with black students from the LRSD. LRSD non-black students may attend interdistrict schools in the LRSD as outlined in the Districts assignment guidelines. The guidelines below will apply to all interdistrict schools in the LRSD. 1. 2. The assignment guidelines are consistent with both the LRSD Desegregation Plan and the Interdistrict Plan with reference to the following sections: a) b) There will be established interdistrict schools which shall seek to obtain a ratio of between 60 percent and 40 percent of either race with the ideal goal of these interdistrict schools to be 50 percent black/white. Proposed interdistrict schools shall be phased-in to these ratios over time. (Interdistrict Plan, p.3) This plan will permit the treatment of interdistrict transfers (including the NLRSD) where students are moving from a situation where their race is a greater proportion of the total student body of a school to a school where their race is a lesser proportion of the student body of a school as Interdistrict Majority-to-Minority transfers under the Courts Order. (Interdistrict Plan, p. 11, Potential Interdistrict M-to-M Enhancements) The selection process will be as follows: a) Black students from the schools attendance zone will be assigned up to 51% of capacity at each grade level. If demand exceeds capacity, a lottery will be conducted to determine assignments. Students who cannot be assigned because of capacity will be assigned to the closest school with capacity which meets racial balance requirements. Their names will, however, be placed on a waiting list for the school. If the students closest school with capacity is an incentive school, that student may choose to attend that incentive school where such an assignment would not inhibit the initial reservation of seats for pre-kindergarten and kindergarten students. (However, these students still maintain their option to be assigned to an elementary area school in accordance with desegregation considerations.) These guidelines assume that interdistrict schools will be located in predominately black attendance zones.Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines Page 2 b) c) d) Non-black students from the schools attendance zone will be assigned. Non-black students from Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) and beyond Pulaski County will be assigned through the Majority-to-Minority transfer process or appropriate State statutes. Seats will be reserved up to 49% of capacity as described by the LRSD Plan, page 147. After the winter pre-registration (normally held in or around February of each year), the number of seats reserved for PCSSD may be reduced to not lower than 40% of capacity or to that percent over 40% which is occupied by PCSSD students on that date. The remaining seats between 40% and 49% may then be made available for LRSD non-black students. However, LRSD non-black students will only be permitted to transfer to an LRSD interdistrict school where it does not cause the racial balance of the sending school to fall outside of acceptable racial balance. Children of staff members will be assigned after attendance zone and PCSSD students are placed. Transfers are subject to desegregation guidelines and the Interdistrict Plan, p. 141, Transfer of Children of Employees. 3. 4. Those LRSD students currently attending an LRSD Interdistrict school may remain until they matriculate out of the sixth grade. However, the siblings of those students may not be assigned to an interdistrict school unless such an assignment complies with these Interdistrict School Assignment Guidelines. In no event will non-black students from the LRSD, PCSSD or elsewhere be allowed to enroll in an LRSD interdistrict school where to do so would cause that schools enrollment to shift from being majority black (i.e. at least 50% -i-1) to majority white, thereby negatively affecting the interdistrict M-to-M funding status of that LRSD interdistrict school.-i-o _ . _ . _____ ac\nft berf r3\u0026gt;o-a ffj n 4 -f-i '/e-d- /a/ aa^c. D-f I toff 4 March 20, 1994 MAR 2 1994 Oifica of Oeoegregaiion Mcmloring Mrs. Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Brown\nRecently, I was made aware of reoccurring accusations about my principal, Robert L. Brown, Jr. The accusations follow: 1. Mr. Brown does not want White children at Garland as evidenced by the uniforms that the students wear and the African nature of the instructional content. I would like to respond to this by saying that I disagree very much. Mr. Brown has done everything within his power to recruit White and Other children to Garland. I, a White female staff member, came to Garland first in 1987 as Dr. Cheryl Simmons' secretary. Our school colors have always been gold and black. Our uniforms are gold tops and black pants or white blouses and gold jumpers. Some do have African print trim along the edges. No student is required or pressured into wearing the African print. We have White children and Hispanic children who wear these uniforms. They are very pleased with them and look very cute in them. I would not mind having a jumper myself. In reference to the curriculum at Garland, each child is taught to be proud of who he is as an individual, whether it be Black, Hispanic, or White. I transferred last year to Rockefeller Incentive School. When I came back to Garland this year as Mr. Brown's secretary, I couldn't believe the difference in the attitude of the children at Garland. They had a sense of pride about themselves that I had never seen before. Our enrollment of Hispanic students has increased tremendously this year. I asked Mr. Brown about taking a couple of teachers and myself to the Landmark School Supplies Multi-Cultural Open House at the Holiday frm-Airport in February. He said that would be fine, but to let the teachers know that we would only be interested in materials for Hispanic students. Mr. Brown is intent on reaching students from their cultural perspective. Our curriculum is multi-culturally based with more emphasis being placed on cultures represented within our school population. I think Mr. Brown has the right idea in teaching about countries and their cultures from around the world, not just Black and White. 2. Mr. Brown has little or no regard for white staff members. To this I disagree, also. Mr. Brown expects all staff members to put 100% into their jobs. He believes the children deserve the best education they can get. Like in all places of employment, there are people who want to sit down and not do the job they are being paid to do. Some of these people are White and some are Black. It is true that Page - 1Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown. Federal Monitor April 5, 1994 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Debbie Gross 18 Fair Oaks Little Rock, AR 72204 Dear Ms. Gross: I've received your recent correspondence expressing support of Garland Incentive School and your principal, Mr. Robert Brown. Because several of your fellow staff members also sent me similar letters on this subject, I hope you will not think me rude for mailing each of you this same reply which addresses your collective concerns. Many of the letters expressed fears that allegations of racial favoritism were circulating about Mr. Brown, along with rumors that he might be replaced as principal. I have not heard any comments or discussion, either \"on\" or \"off' the record, that give credence to such allegations and rumors. Adthough some of the letters were addressed directly to me, I want to explain that neither I nor Judge Susan Webber Wright, who oversees the desegregation case, make decisions about school district personnel. Those decisions are the responsibility of each district's Board of Directors, based on recommendations from the superintendent and input from others, which might include a staffing committee, for example. As you know, many factors affect personnel placement, and an employer has the right-as well as the obligation-to weigh those factors to determine where an individual can best serve the organization. At the same time. Judge Wright has made it clear to both Dr. Williams and the Little Rock School District Board that the Court will not tolerate reprisals against any district employee because of that individual's testimony in the desegregation case. This school year, Mr. Brown testified at Judge Wright's request during a hearing on the incentive schools. At that time, the Court directed the district to take no retributive action toward Mr. Brown due to his having testified. It is obvious from your letter that you care very much about Garland and Mr. Brown, and also that you take pride in the important job you are doing for children. I'm sure Mr. Brown's heart has been warmed by your endorsement and many positive comments about him. I have known Robert Brown for many years, and believe him to be a man of sincere conviction who earnestly wants the very best for co-workers and students alike. Thank you for speaking out on behalf of your school and, most especially, for all you are doing to make Garland a success. 'Fan i/t., Sincerely yours, Amn S. Brown f/fcj.' C-q// Qyf/a. Ah, ~ /Vlor'^ Srm'fA i /y- /4/A'lni* K) Little Rock School District March 21, 1994 Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring Heritage Building - West 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 0nic3 oi Dessgrc- ion Monstcnng Dear Ms. Brown: During a review of the School Profiles which were produced for the second semester monitoring report, it became clear that there might be a possibility of incorrect interpretation of the staffing information included in the reports submitted last fall. The computer program which generates the information counted every individual holding a unique position in the school. This method of calculation caused us to count some employees in the same school multiple times thus possibly causing the reported racial balances to be in error. This method of calculation has been altered in the new set of reports which are being submitted at this time. This change will become apparent when you compare staffing information for this semester with last semester. We feel, though, that this alteration in the program will more accurately reflect the true staffing picture in the schools. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely, A 1 MAR 2 1 1994 Dr. Robert Glowers, Director Planning, Research and Evaluation cc: Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent Estelle Matthis, Deputy Superintendent Jerry Malone, LRSD Attorney John Walker, Attorney r' 4 I 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)324-2000 -['Ji J / / each LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 March 21, 1994 TO: Selected Employees FROM: Zj^Mark D. Milhollen, Manager of Support Services THROUGH: Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Blue Cross-Blue Shield Information Request The District has been notified by Arkansas Blue Cross-Blue Shield that recent federal legislation (Ommbus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993) requires an aimual reporting of employee health insurance plan information to the Department of Health and Human Services. It is very important that the information submitted to Blue Cross-Blue Shield be accurate and current. Therefore, please verify the accuracy of the attached printout generated by Blue Cross-Blue Shield and make any necessary corrections, sign the form (anywhere near the bottom of the form) and return by school mail to the Business Office by March 28.1994. Again, this information is very important in assisting employees with the processing of claims. Thank you for your help in this required reporting. MDMxa Attachment ANN 3 C0CC75 \\BCBS.mdm PLEASE POST PLEASE POST Little Rock School District March 21, 1994 TO: All Employees 4! FROM: Mark D. Milhollen, Manager of Support Services THROUGH: Hen: --------, vi kjujypvil OC iiy Sbp^rintendent'of's^i Schools SUBJECT: DISTRIBUTION OF APRIL 1, 1994 PAYCHECKS 1. Transportation Employees 2. Checks will be distributed at the Transponation Office Maintenance Employees on Friday, April 1, 1994. 3. Checks will be distributed at the Plant Services Office Substitute Employees on Friday, April 1, 1994. ChyCcks will be put in the U.S. mail in the same manner they are mailed each pay 4. All Other Employees Not Mentioned Ahove Adnunistration Bufldmg at 810 1 1994 Anv checks not picked up will be sent through the school mail - - -  a.m. and 3:00 p.m. on Friday, April 1, 1994, on Monday, April 4, 1994. MDM:ca \\checks.mdin 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)374-3361MAR-31-94 THU 11:59 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX noMo 13246576 P. 02 March 2S, 1994 CLAUDIA HOWARD 108 NORTH DEVON SHERWOOD, ARKANSAS 72X16 'J'::. 1 -i Ma. Sadie Mitchell, Principal Martin Luther King, Jr. Interdiatrict Elementary School ( ..'f  905 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Dear Ms. Mitchell, Ma, Dovers, and Staff: I want to express my appreciation to all of you for the chili supper and talent  \"a effort But I am not writing this letter just because of one event at King Elementary. . . - . . '  ------- wKw wAciucuLai y My pUrpOS my-Child finally in a-school where consistently positive, upbeat, and eager. From what i can see when I am in King, is that you and the staff is a job. Appearances show that everyone is working together and eager and are happy with what is going on. time I set foot into King, see so Appearances show that person works. and eager. From what are not there just because it to do I felt that atmosphere the very first 1 am of the opinion that no matter how hard a if their attitude does not come across in a positive matter, it that begins to affect their job and relationships. being bright as they ara, pick up on I also believe, that children, our dispositions and carry it with them. On a personal note about my child (Lauren), . uirrerence in her even SaJ wL'tt'\" r Lauren has always made good grades, but aV waS _ s  1 .  to King. I can see a difference in her Now, she is xnterested, and she wants to do good and she tell what sho is doing at school. 3 me me she does not want to Lauren absolutely loves King Elementary and tells me She doeo not want to go back-because at King, she says, \"they let you learn ,  oh for art, because she knows she does not possess a talent It does not come easy for her. Even though it may not be the most important area in her curriculum, Lauren tells me this is one of things at King.  child from {That and computer lab.) her favorite To be honest with you, switching was -- r- uonesu wicn my our neighborhood school and taking her away from her friends there. the hardest thing I have ever done, school, I know _I ^d_ the right thing. But every time I step foot into your Thank you for your desire and determination to succeed with our children. Yours truly. Claudia Howard CH CC\nThe Honorable Sus an Webber Wright, U, s. District Judge Henry Williams, Ph.D., Superintendent, Little Hock School District Donna Brady Creer, Executive Director, Magnet Review Committee FPOM TO ^10100 P.05 A . LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS March 31, 1994 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Henr ^\n'intendent SUBJECT: Proposal Funding of Business Cases ^=5S5=: Per your request, attached are itemized listings of costs for implementing business cases as submitted for your review on March 29, 1994. '5 4 r I I I r- I r TOTAL P.05 nt* nn 04-04-199'-\nFROM TO 3710100 P.02 BUSINESS CASES CATEGORY 1 - INCENTIVE SCHOOLS (Required - Double Funding) a SCHOOL ITEM AMOU- 1. Franklin Theme 1.0 Spanish teacher $40,000 25,000 Rockefeller 1.0 Aide - Alternative Classroom Specialist 1.0 Spanish teacher Technology Theme Implementation 12,000 25,000 75,000 (maxirr' rn) 3 3. Rightseli .5 Spanish teacher Technology Theme Implementation 12,500 75,000 (maxintum) i 4- litchell .5 Spanish teacher 12.500 Garland .5 Spanish teacher Technology Theme Implementation 12,500 75,000 (maximum) 6 Stephens .5 Spanish teacher 12,500 n No impact on Incentive School Budget. o' 4 I ^1 h 1 1 - I ( M-,4-04-1994 11:17AM 1. 2. FROM TO Bb'SI.NESS CASES 3710100 CATEGORY II  DESEGREGATION PLAN/ADE (Required - Need Funding) P.03 p I 3. 4. 5, 6. DEPARTMENT English Math/l.ang. Arts Science/Voc. Ed. Science English/For. Lang. Science ITE.M AMOUNT English as a Second Language Math/Lang Arts Revision Applied Biology/Chemistry Science Revision For. Language Revision Hands-on Science Total S 75,880 21,100 93,000* 10,000 7,500 '5,000 $139,480 I Fund source - Carl Perkins (No LRSD funds) t11 1/ I 1^- J4-04-1994 11!17AM FROM TO 3710100 P.04 \nBUSINESS CASES CATEGOR Y III - RELATED DESEGREGATION/ADE (Not RequiredBut Essential) DEPARTMENT/SCHQGL ITEM AMOUNT I. 2. 3. 4. Science/Math (K-3) Foreign Language Social Studies Romine Foreign Language Science/Math Reading S 18,000 Foreign Lang. K-I2 Revision (UALR) Secretary- Theme Specialist For. Lang. Immersion Total 15,000 18,000 (use existing position in District) 3,000 $ 54,000 GRAND TOTAL S193,4\u0026lt;S0 I I !f \u0026lt;'-04-1994 11:15AM FROM TO 3710100 P.01 s I p Arkansas Democrat I Q^azettc i I FAX NUMBER: NEVJ3 ROOM: (501) 372-3908 DATE: - TO: FAX NUMBER\nNUMBER OF PAGES TO FOLLOW: MESSAGE\nhflj__ \u0026amp;ilivbcaiin_rOI ce. VO cnn A:/f fewi i__ C u MbjrA Fpxkfeil :JjrS 2 E 9i zm v CAPiTOL AND SCOTT  P.O. BOX 2221  LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72203-2221  (501) 378-3400 ns^ IM LnTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT gsw R  osH7:n. April 4, 1994 APR 5 1994 Office of Desegregation Monitoring Ms. Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court 201 East Markham Street, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: In keeping with your letter of March 14, 1994, in which you requested several documents, I have enclosed the following: The Community Forum Matrix The District Dialogue Matrix Fast Track Evaluations Business Cases (With Itemized Listings of Cost) The following items are being reviewed and will be sent to you upon completion: Program Inventory Report Student Assignment Audit Needs Assessment Report Instructions for Incorporating Additional Desegregation Obligations into the Program Budget Document. Sincerely, (? Henry P. Williams Superintendent of Schools HPW:nr 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501) 324-2000 Little Rock School District April 4, 1994 To: Principals, Directors and Supervisors Through: Dr. He: Superintendent From: Dr. Ric iurley, Director of Human Resources APR 0 1594 Office of DeocGcs luui'i iviOhiiuiiny Enclosed you will find an Employee Intention Report for your site. Please meet with your employees to determine their plans for the 1994-95 school year. Indicate on the space provided whether the individual will return or resign. If any of your employees intend to retire or resign, please remind them that a letter to that effect should be forwarded to the Human Resources Department as soon as possible. (The deadline for the Early Retirement Incentive is May 20, 1994.) If we have left anyone off your list, please add them to the bottom. This report should be returned to the Human Resources Department no later than April 12, 1994. 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  (501)824-2000Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor April 5, 1994 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Debbie Gross 18 Fair Oaks Little Rock, AR 72204 Dear Ms. Gross: I've received your recent correspondence expressing support of Garland Incentive School and your principal, Mr. Robert Brown. Because several of your fellow staff members also sent me similar letters on this subject, I hope you will not think me rude for mailing each of you this same reply which addresses your collective concerns. Many of the letters expressed fears that allegations of racial favoritism were circulating about Mr. Brown, along with rumors that he might be replaced as principal. I have not heard any comments or discussion, either \"on\" or \"off the record, that give credence to such allegations and rumors. zAlthough some of the letters were addressed directly to me, I want to explain that neither I nor Judge Susan Webber Wright, who oversees the desegregation case, make decisions about school district personnel. Those decisions are the responsibility of each district's Board of Directors, based on recommendations from the superintendent and input from others, which might include a staffing committee, for example. As you know, many factors affect personnel placement, and an employer has the right-as well as the obligation-to weigh those factors to determine where an individual can best serve the organization. At the same time, Judge Wright has made it clear to both Dr. Williams and the Little Rock School District Board that the Court will not tolerate reprisals against any district employee because of that individual's testimony in the desegregation case. This school year, Mr. Brown testified at Judge Wright's request during a hearing on the incentive schools. At that time, the Court directed the district to take no retributive action toward Mr. Brown due to his having testified. It is obvious from your letter that you care very much about Garland and Mr. Brown, and also that you take pride in the important job you are doing for children. I'm sure Mr. Brown's heart has been warmed by your endorsement and many positive comments about him. I have known Robert Brown for many years, and believe him to be a man of sincere conviction who earnestly wants the very best for co-workers and students alike. Thank you for speaking out on behalf of your school and, most especially, for all you are doing to make Garland a success. (L- Sincerely yours, Ann S. Brown i\\m ry Boil a y /-.ted-,March 20, 1994 I f'\u0026gt;if '* t j?9 bC'^\n3\u0026gt;nj MAR 2 5 1994 C\n'C3 0} Oeosg:\nai!on Monitoring J' Mrs. Ann Brown, Office of Desegregation and Monitoring 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mrs. Brown\nRecently, I was made aware of reoccurring accusations about my principal, Robert L. Brown, Jr. The accusations follow: 1. Mr. Brown does not want White children at Garland as evidenced by the uniforms that the students wear and the African nature of the instructional content. I would like to respond to this by saying that I disagree very much. Mr. Brown has done everything within his power to recruit White and Other children to Garland. I, a White female staff member, came to Garland first in 1987 as Dr. Cheryl Simmons' secretary. Our school colors have always been gold and black. Our uniforms are gold tops and black pants or white blouses and gold jumpers. Some do have Afiican print trim along the edges. No student is required or pressured into wearing the .African print. We have White children and Hispanic children who wear these uniforms. They are very pleased with them and look very cute in them. I would not mind having a jumper myself. In reference to the curriculum at Garland, each child is taught to be proud of who he is as an individual, whether it be Black, Hispanic, or White. I transferred last year to Rockefeller Incentive School. When I came back to Garland this year as Mr. Brown's secretary, I couldn't believe the difference in the attitude of the children at Garland. They had a sense of pride about themselves that I had never seen before. Our enrollment of Hispanic students has increased tremendously this year. I asked Mr. Brown about taking a couple of teachers and myself to the Landmark School Supplies Multi-Cultural Open House at the Holiday Inn-Airport in February. He said that would be fine, but to let the teachers know that we would only be interested in materials for Hispanic students. Mr. Brown is intent on reaching students from their cultural perspective. Our curriculum is multi-culturally based with more emphasis being placed on cultures represented within our school population. I think Mr. Brown has the right idea in teaching about countries and their cultures from around the world, not just Black and White. 2. Mr. Brown has little or no regard for white staff members. To this I disagree, also. Mr. Brown expects all staff members to put 100% into their jobs. He believes the children deserve the best education they can get. Like in all places of employment, there are people who want to sit down and not do the job they are being paid to do. Some of these people are White and some are Black. It is true that Page - 1 ftPR- 0-94 TUE 12:31 FAX NO. 5013710100 P. 02 Office of Desegregation Monitoring UnKed Slates District Court  Eastern Disbict of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Flock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (SOI) 371-0100 Date: April S, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: Irown Subject School Racial Balance and Student Assignment Guidelines As I stated during our joint staff meeting last month, 1 continue to disagree with some of the numbers which you are promulgating as racial guidelines for LRSD schools. Your February 2,1994 memorandum to me indicated that you and Chris Heller would try to work out 'an agreeable solution' regarding the racial targets. I responded in a memo, once again explaining that ODM calculations are based on what the desegregation plan sets forth as racial balance guidelines. I also emphasized that the most pressing need for the district was not to attempt to manipulate racial balance guidelines, but rather to recruit white students In numbers sufficient to desegregate the schools within the range the district set up for itself in the settlement agreements. That communication notwithstanding and without further discussion with me, you have recently published in the new LRSD Student Assignment Handbook for 1994-95 \"acceptable racial ranges* that are inconsistent with the desegregation plan. The Handbook reminds Student Assignment personnel and alt principals that titey will be held accountable for following what you have set forth as requirements. Im also disturbed by your March 17,1994 memo to principals of selected schools, evidently those having a racial balance below or veiy near the minimum \"acceptable\" percentage of black students. The directive states that you will reserve seats for black students and give white students alternate assignments or place them on a waiting list. Ive received numerous calls from distressed parents and district personnel who perceive the directive as counter to the spirit of the desegregation plan. Its obvious that we need to sit down together to talk over student assignment issues and to reach an understanding about what is reasonable, workable, and consistent with the goals of the desegregation plan. 1 think this kind of conversation will be preferable to asking judge Wright for an Immediate healing to sort out racial guideline and student assignment matters. HI talk with either you or Chris today (depending on wlilch of you I can find first) and arrange a time to get together this week. Thanks for your cooperation. cc Chris HellerAPR- 5-94 TUE 12:31 FAX NO. 5013710100 P. 03 Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM RECEIVED To\nFrom: Date\nSubject: /bin iSnown, Monitor Russ M:wo, Associate Superintendent February 2,1994 Meeting February 1,1994 FEB 7 Office of Desegregatioi'i Momtonng . Thank both you and Bob for your help yesterday witJi data about our students in and out of our attendance zones. As you know. Bob and 1 are meeting next week so I may benefit from the file he has built. Our meeting was beneficial to me and gave me insight into ways of approadiing solutions to student assignment. From our meeting, 1 understand that you will request Incentive School capacities from Doug Eaton based on a maximum of 20 students per class, ratlier than the current capacities. We agreed tliat tliese would be more realistic. . We did not agree, however, on the niediod for calculating range for area elementary schools. 1 understand clearly why you arc interpreting the range to be fixed at 4(^ to 60%. This mat^ it As pointed out, our average percentage black is approximately 64%. madiematically impossible for us to briiig all elementary scliools into compliance. We have been using 40% for the bottom of the range and using the formula for secondary schools to figure the top. That way the top of the range moves with our percentage black. Chris Hellet and I will try to work an agreeable solution. Also, 1 want to reiterate ray response to your question about the assistant comnjiunication position. We have taken a while to fill this position because of the importance of any position when much is to be done. These are long term decisions, because they affect people's lives, as you know. We want to be careful to get the right people in the right places so they are both happy and productive. The apparent conflict betw^n my testimony and. reality is Easily explained. When I testified that we were , ,, completing interviews on Friday, Januaiy 28, that was true. Tire following Monday, we realized that since the position was changed to full-time, it should be re advertised. It has been and will dose early next week. Tliis means that three to four weeks may pass before the Polson selected Is actually on the job. This estimate Includes the new hire's two weeks notice to their current employer. Again, thank you for your help. G Dr. Hejuy P. Williams, Superintendent Chris Heller, UtSD Attorney APR- 5-94 TOE 12:32 FAX NO. 5013710100 : L'ozvf. c^ P. 04 Office of Desegregation Monitoring United Slates District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)375^200 Fax (SOI) 371-0100 Date\nFebruary 14, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: Subject: Brown Elementary Area Scliool Racial Balance Range 1 want to correct an apparent misunderstanding that appears in your memo to me dated February 2, 1994 which f received on February 7, 1994. In that correspondence, you stated that I was interpreting the range for LRSD area elementaiy school at a fixed 40% to 60^ Actually, in figuring the target racial balance range for LRSD elementaiy area schools, my calculations are guided by the specific relevant language of the desegregation plans. Both the LRSD Desegregation Plan and tlie Interdistrict Plan provide for the racial balance of LRSD elementary schools to be calculated differently from that of the districts secondary schools. The plans state that the target racial balance at the elementary area schools is 55 percent black and 45 percent white with a variance of 5 percent. Tire LRSD plan refers to attendance zones that are drawn to establish this racial balance. The plans also state that Miite enrollment at an area school may not exceed 60%. Clearly, the desegregation plans do not provide for the target racial balance range of LRSD elementaiy area schools to fluctuate along with the districts black percentage. That you perceive it to be presently mathematically impossible\" to achieve the target range is not due to a matter of interpretation of a racial balance formula\nradier, it is due to the districts failure to do what the desegregation plans require of it\nto recruit white students into tlie LRSD in numbers that will allow schools to be desegregated within the range the district set up itself. One effect of a fixed target range is to act as an incentive for the district to maintain white enrollment that Is sufficient to achieve the racial balance that the parties agreed upon in their settlement. The challenge the LRSD is now fadng is not in reinterpreting its desegregation plans, but in living up its solemn promises, including the tough recruitment job the district committed Itself to do. cc: Hank Williams Chris Heller APR- -5-94 TUE 12:33 FAX NO. 5013710100 P. 05 Tn Desegregation Requirements/Acceptable Racial Ranges lF* The minixnum black percentage for each elementary attendance zone school will be 40 percent, The maximum black percentage for each elementary attendance zone school will be 12 1/2 percent above the district-wide black percentage at the organizational level. The minimuin black percentage for each secondary Ounior and senior high) attendance zone school will be 25 percent below the districvwidc black percentage at each organizational level. The maximum black percentage will be 12 1/2 percent above (he district-wide black percentage at each organizational, level. The minimum and ipaximum black percentages constitute the desegregation requirement (or acceptable range) for attendance zone schools. Student Idid all building prindpials will be hdd acieountabie for complying with desegregation requirements. Ip addition to complying with desegregation requirements, building principals will be expected to assign students to classes In an equitable manner, to the greatest extent possible. The building principal should not allow resegregation to occur in classrooms. School desegregation requirements and equitable classroom assignments will be monitored by the L^SD Offices of Desegregation. School based biracial advisory committees will also monitor compliance in these areas. The acceptable range is listed below: Elementary Junior High Senior High 40.00% . 73.75% 52.50% - 78.75% 49.25%  73.75% I 1 fiPR- 5-94 TUE 12:33 FAX NO. 5013710100 P. 06 TOs FROM! SUBJECT\nLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT OFFICE 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72202 March 17, 1994 RSC. MAR 2 Q 1594 Office of Desejragascn f.^oniicring Principals of Selected Schools C. Russell Mayo, Associate Superintendent for tie segregation 1994-95 School Assignments I All students who pre-registered during the February preregistration period for entry level grades (kindergarten,7th and 10th) were assigned to their attendance zone school for the 1994-95 school year. As a result of these assignments, your' school's  racial balance is below or very near the minimum acceptable school year. percentage of black students. For that reason, all students who pre \"register on or after March 14 will be assigned by the Student Assignment Office. This procedure will apply to all grade levels. Basically, we will reserve vacant seats for black students while nonblack students will receive alternate assignments. Students who cannot be assigned will be placed on waiting lists. until further notice until further nutite, J am requesting that you allow parents of students in your attendance zone to complete the pre-registration paperwork at your school, enter the information on the database in the' \"NEW district and forward .the paperwork to the Student Assignment Office. If you have questions concerning this procedure, please call at 324-2271. meOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 April 7, 1994 Ms. Debbie Milam Volunteers in Public Schools 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Debbie and Wonderful VIPS Colleagues: Thank you so much for the snazzy and eye-catching invitation to An Evening For The Stars, which came in todays mail. Sounds like you are gearing up for a terrific event where a great time will be had by all. 1 wish 1 could be there to enjoy the show, but 111 be in California on April 26, visiting my folks. 111 be thinking of you on that Tuesday though, and have my family save newspaper accounts of the evening so 1 can read all about it when 1 return. Best wishes for a star-studded good time! Love to all, Ann Brown ?\u0026gt; I I j? itaaa^vs^^. ..saiaw.-.-: Lhtle Rock School Dihikict OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT April 7, 1994 bl\n1 J APR 3 1994 Ms. Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court 201 East Markham Street, Suite 510 Heritage West Building of DsSOGi'S^aVCri ^'tu' Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: In keeping with your request of March 14, 1994, I have enclosed the Needs Assessment Report and the Program Inventory Report for your files. We are continuing to work on the Student Assignment Audit and the Instructions for Incorporating Additional Desegregation Obligations into the Program Budget Document. will be submitted to you upon completion. Additional documents Thanks for your patience. Sincerely He^y P. Williams Superintendent of Schools HPW:nr Encl. I 810 W'est Markham Street  Little Rock, Arkansas 2201 (501) 324-2000ren^ LnTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT April 7, 1994 AS iLaj:.0 APR 8 1994 Ms. Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court 201 East Markham Street, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Cic3 oi Dsssgregalion Mcr,\nc\nh!g Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: In keeping with your request of March 14, 1994, I have enclosed the Needs Assessment Report and the Program Inventory Report for your files. We are continuing to work on the Student Assignment Audit and the Instructions for Incorporating Additional Desegregation Obligations into the Program Budget Document. will be submitted to you upon completion. Additional documents Thanks for your patience. Sincerely e Y P. Williams Superintendent of Schools HPW:nr Encl. 810 West Markham Street Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 CAO 1)324-2000  w* t' -t ye' Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 To: From: Mark Milhollen, Director of Support Services \u0026lt;^^^olly Ramer, Office Manager Through: Brown, Federal Monitor Re: Additional Pay for Linda Bryant and Jackie Banks Date: April 8, 1994 During the supplemental pay period beginning March 7 and ending April 8, 1994, Linda Bryant (431- 88-8471) has worked five days more than her regular work schedule (one half day on March 8, 29, April 5, and 7 and one full day on March 22, 23, and 31). Please include Linda in your next supplemental payroll, with her check reflecting 5 days at $71.51 per day for a gross total of $357.55. Also during this same pay period, Jackie Banks (432-66-0119) worked 3 days more than her regular work schedule (March 14, 16, and 18). Please include Jackie in your next supplemental payroll, with her check reflecting 3 days at $46.04 per day for a gross total of $138.12. If you need additional information, please call. Thank you. Garland 3615W. 25th Little Rock. AR 72204 \"Simply Tran^ormational\" 4* jii'Jii!a-08-94 -\u0026gt; ^Incentive Mr. Robert L. Brown, Jr.. Principal Phone: (501)671-6275 eygsgjgA ^3 liini'ii ii! lai APR Ann Brown, Director Office of Desegregation 3 1994 201 E. Markham Little Rock, AR OffiCQ cf 72201 Dear Mrs. Brown: I suppose one can only conclude that I haven't been handling the I know I've got to get a grip on In reality, I haven't. pressure well. things and use better judgment in all areas of my life. Spring Break would give me some time to recuperate, but Dr. Glowers decision to instruct Mrs. Wagner not to use our comparative academic I thought performance on our brochures didn't help matters. Perhaps I will stop complaining and just allow events to unfold without any reaction on my part. I think that might be my only answer at this point, if I am to maintain a level perspective and focus my energies on the staff and students at Garland I didn't send the attached letter to Judge Wright, but since I wrote it. If you would I thought I would at least entrust it to your care. specifically note the February 18th entry, you will see what I documented hearing from Superintendent Williams. In our meeting on March 10, 1994, I told him I would take care of my own damage control. I had already informed my white staff members of the perceptions I didn't tell them where I had heard the allegations. shared with me. but I asked them to respond on my behalf. Any denial on my part When the Superintended met with them on would only be self-serving. March 11, 1994, he indicated he had no knowledge of the allegations or rumors XX J AAC iliVlxvi.xn.zKA c Naturally, his response left some stad^f members confused. Maybe I only thought I heard him say those things.Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM RECEIVCO To: Ann Brown, Federal Monitor From: Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent Date: April 14, 1994 Subject: Our Meeting of April 8, 1994 APR 1 5 1994 Office of Dssegrsgation ivoriiiOrinfj This is a brief summary of our meeting last Friday, April 8, as I understood it. Tlie meeting occurred as a result of your letter dated April 5, 1994. The primary concerns expressed in your letter related to the upper range limit for area elementaiy schools and the memorandum I sent to principals of five schools projected to be out of range for 1994-95. Items discussed were as follows: 1. 2. 3. Four Year Old Filing ~ You expressed concern about the lateness of the filing, about the naming of Stephens and Badgett as sites, and about the ambiguous last sentence in the paragraph explaining Geyer Springs. You suggested that we consider space remaining in buildings and demand. You suggested that we consider Dodd or Meadowcliff as sites. You noted that these questions will delay the response to the filing. You would like to hear from me on these questions. Elementary Racial Balance - You said that ranges were guidelines and not quotas. You also said that ODM has never said that we were out of compliance. You said that ranges published in our Student Assignment Handbook are incorrect regardless of the method. Melissa will meet with Julie Wiedower and Sue Pedersen to address this and other errors in the handbook. You disagreed with our removing the numbers of the original six magnets when calculating the racial ranges. We agreed to base range calculations on October 1 figures. 1 explained the memorandum sent to five schools freezing their enrollment of whites. Projections show them out of the acceptable range. This does not prohibit attendance zone students from enrollment. You believed that this discourages whites from coming into the district. In support of this position, Chris said that the plan states that I can make no assignment that will knowingly put a school outside of the acceptable range. Magnet Shadow Zone Question - You said that you were glad that I corrected the method of calculating the number of seats for the shadow zone. The 25% Shadow Zone seats come from the capacity before allocating seats to districts. In the past, they were part of the LRSD allocation. 4. Dunbar Magnet-Nou emphasized that Dunbar is a magnet school, not simply a magnet program. Someone in the Student Assignment Office is treating it as a program. Central and Hendersen are clearly programs within a school. You expressed concern about the Gifted and Talented program being predominantly white. 5. Educational Park - You suggested that we consider an educational park involving Mitchell, Dunbar, and Gibbs. Their convenience to each other allows for such, you said. 6. Interdistrict School Policy Filing - You objected to the limited consideration for LRSD whites within this policy. Why a maximum of 9% seats for whites? I explained thatAnn Brown, Federal Monitor April 14, 1994 2 PCSSD has a responsibility for participating in the interdistrict schools by sending whites to help us. I also told you that the county students bring us money. You suggested that we consider submitting an amendment to the policy to permit more LRSD whites. 7. King Interdistrict School Magnet Status - You asked where we were on this and suggested that something be submitted soon. You implied that you thought it may grow more difficult to achieve the status if we wait too long. Chris said that he made a request for information of Principal Sadie Mitchell a few weeks ago. She submitted it to Estelle Matthis for approval. Chris has placed a reminder call. You reemphasized the need to file soon. I will call you by phone with responses to your concerns. C: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Chris Heller, LRSD AttorneyOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: April 15, 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: Subject: Brown Comments on your summaiy of our April 8, 1994 meeting Today I received your memorandum summary of the April 8, 1994 meeting between Chris Heller, Melissa Guldin, Bob Morgan, you, and me. I want to clarify, below, some of the points you chose to address as your understanding of the discussion. However, I want to first point out that 1 do not intend for us to routinely engage in this type of post-meeting correspondence. Since we verbally summarized the \"to do\" points of our meeting at its conclusion, I fail to see the necessity for trading follow-up memoranda. On the other hand. your memo reveals some misunderstandings that trouble me. If necessary, I will make arrangements for a stenographer to be present in the future so a meeting transcription can speak for itself, leaving us time we can devote to something other than creating paper trails. Since you concluded your memo by saying that you will phone your responses to my concerns, I believe that verbal communication should ordinarily suffice for other types of information exchange as well. A. Concerns expressed in my April 5, 1994 letter were for the errors in both the lower and upper range of the racial balance guidelines for secondary schools printed in your Student Assignment Handbook, not only for the upper range for elementaiy schools as stated in your memo. B. During our discussion of the U^D filing to add four-year-old programs, 1 asked why certain schools had been selected (such as Badgett and Stephens) and others excluded (such as Dodd and Meadowcliff, although I acknowledged that limited space at Meadowcliff might made additions difficult there). I named these schools as examples, not an exhaustive list. My questions regarding Stephens were more specific, focusing on the incongruity of the proposal with ree highly relevant factors: (1) very low enrollment in the schools single four-year-old class\n(2) the districts intention to propose a motion that would essentially substitute Washington for Stephens to satisfy settlement terms\nand (3) uncertainty about the future of Stephens. I asked about the criteria the district used in naming the proposed sites for new or expanded four- year-old programs. You explained that someone else had made the placement decisions and that you were not certain why specific sites were selected.April 15, 1994 Page Two C. 1 strongly disagree with your characterization of my remarks regarding compliance with racial balance guidelines. 1 stated that the Circuit Court has termed racial balance ranges as guidelines, not quotas. 1 stressed that, therefore, ODM has avoided using the term \"out of compliance\" in regard to target racial balance. However, we have repeatedly pointed out that a large number of schools do not lie within the target range. Semantics in no way excuse the district from striving to operate its schools within the specific target ranges set forth in the plan and court orders. My concerns included that the LRSD Student Assignment Handbook (1) contains ranges for secondary schools that are either mathematically incorrect or based on unknown or faulty enrollment figures\n(2) that the Handbook range for elementary schools directly conflicts with that named in the desegregation plans. We discussed ODMs 1993-94 School Racial Balance Monitoring Report, filed January 12, 1994, to which the LRSD had not responded. The report is clear about how we calculated racial balance ranges based on specific plan provisions and October 1 enrollment figures. Yet the LRSD Handbook contains racial balance guidelines that conflict with those in the report. Part of my concern is that you are issuing directives about student assignments based on erroneous racial guidelines and, thereby, excluding children from their assignment zone schools. Im aware that the plan provides for the district not to make assignments that promote racial unbalance, but you continue to sidestep my primary point. My prevailing concern about your approach to student assignments remains is as 1 have repeatedly expressed it: manipulating ranges and freezing enrollment for certain groups of children amounts to taking the easy way out. Instead, the districts overriding obligation is to live by its espoused voluntary desegregation credo by consistently, energetically, and early-on carrying out the tough recruitment job to which the district has committed itself, but nevertheless continues to botch year after year. Recruiting to voluntarily move students in and out of schools is a big key to success. Another is returning children to their zoned schools after their families have moved, and 1 was pleased that you had issued a memo dealing with this assignment aspect. 1 also stressed the importance of your following through on the disaggregation of student assignment data that Bob Morgan had begun. 1 inquired about progress on the assignment study James Jennings is conducting, but received no clear answer about a finish date nor any indication of the \"who, what, when, and how\" of district plans for using this information to make important and pressing changes. D. Im pleased that you have modified some magnet school shadow zone assignments after Melissa Guldin brought a problem to the attention of Student Assignment. However, the issue concerning ODM was not the one you expressed in your memo. Melissa became aware that the district had been allotting less than 25% of kindergarten seats to shadow zone students at Williams. Although the district has now increased the number of kindergarten shadow zone seats to 15 at Williams, which is 25% of the available K seats, this number will not be sufficient to continue meeting the schoolwide requirement. SAO must also develop a system to add shadow zone seats at the first and fourth grades (when class size increases) and to place new shadow zone students in the school when others move out.April 15, 1994 Page Three E. The educational park idea stems from my suggestion that the district consider the feasibility of a new relationship between Dunbar, Gibbs, and Rightsell (not Mitchell as your memo stated), because the three schools are so close to each other. The federal government is significantly increasing magnet school grant dollars and the district needs to investigate how to take advantage of those new dollars. F. Regarding the filing on King intradistrict transfers, I have always understood PCSSDs responsibility for interdistrict desegregation, and am fully aware that M-to-M student transfers provide money for both the sending and receiving district. During the meeting, 1 hope Chris, my staff, and 1 clarified for you that funding for magnet school students is different from that of M-to- Ms, and that it does not \"cost you money\" in the M-to-M sense to \"lose\" a student from a magnet. Our concern was that the filing did not adequately take into account the issues raised in the Courts February 4, 1994 Order. Moreover, the districts new policy sets a highly restrictive precedent, severely limiting the number of white students you will allow yourself to place in your own interdistrict schools. Such a move cuts you off from a valuable tool for addressing racial balance challenges, such as burgeoning white enrollment in certain schools. The Court invited you to shape policies that would allow you to use voluntaiy intradistrict transfers to take advantage of the white enrollment in areas where you are now freezing white students out of their attendance zone schools. CC: Hank Williams Chris Hellerd/- 'T^ur'i /fr- 5 .LRSD,TRANS DEPT TEL:570-4009 Nov 2501 17:26 No .019 P.02 Little Rock School District Transportation Department April 19, 1994 Ms. Melissa R. Guldin Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Eastern Division of Arkansas 201 E. Markham, Suite 510 LR, AR 72201 Dear Ms. Guldin, With regard, Mr. Montgomery has asked me to respond to your request for information. Whenever there is a new student or an address change for an M-to-M student, a request from the LRSD Student Assignment Office is sent to this department by means of phone, mail, and fax. It takes approximately 3 days before a stop goes into effect from the time this information is received in our office. Bus routes are given to the M-to-M Drivers to pass out to the students whenever there is a change in a particular route. This action is because some M-to-M Schools do not feel that it is their responsibility to get this information to the students. This office has always made every effort possible to get current route information to parents/students and will continue to do so. Please feel free to contact this office for any further information or assistance. Sincerely, Jayne Agnes Safety supervisor 810 West MarkJiani Street  Little Rock, .irkansas 72201  (501)324-2000LRSD TRANS DEPT TEL:570-4009 Nov 2501 17:26 No.019 P.Ol LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Transportation Department 5400 Murray Street Little Rock, AR 72209 FAX (501) 57(M009 DATE TO FROM SENDER'S PHONE # SUBJECT  4GtiO_________________________ parhJnfn M nL COMMENTS Numbar of Pagoa (ineluda covar page) rax rhoM NwtMr .!i\"1l-6!0OOffice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: May 3, 1994 I To: Mark Milhollen, Director of Support Services Little Rock School District From: Polly Ramer, Office Manager Through: 4J in S. Brown, Federal Monitor Subject: ODM's 1993-94 Budget I have sent with previous correspondence a copy of ODM's 1993-94 budget and the court orders adopting that budget. You will note on page two that LRSD's share of our budget, after the 1992-93 credit, is $200,498.00. Our records indicate that from July 1, 1993 through March 31,1994, ODM salaries have totaled $351,492.72, resulting in a difference of $150,994.72 between LRSD's budget share and the amount the district has paid. Enclosed you will find a check for that amount. By the end of May, you will receive a check to reimburse ODM's April salaries, in June you will receive a check for ODM's May salaries, and in July, a check for our June salaries. When the 1993- 94 books are closed, please send me a year-to-date print-out of each ODM employee's salary, social security taxes, and benefits. For your information, I am including a breakdown of the enclosed check\nSalaries FICA Insurance Total Regular Payroll 321,682.56 21,853.67 6,181.95 349,718.18 Supplemental Payroll 1,648.44 126.10 1,774.54 Total 323,331.00 21,979.77 6,181.95 351,492.72 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you.Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: May 5, 1994 To: Hank Williams From: Subject: in Brown Information on potential principal moves Yesterday, I asked Polly Ramer to contact you for a list of the principal changes you are contemplating. 1 realize both the tentative and sensitive nature of this information, so I assure you that I will neither release nor discuss the names on your list until such time as you make them public yourself. Im weary of the rumors and will appreciate having solid information from you. Thanks very much./ /Cs a Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)376-6200 Fax (501) 371-0100 Date: May 10. 1994 To: Russ Mayo From: n Brown Subject: Registration Information Now that the LRSD has completed its main thrust of pre-registration for the 1994-95 school year, please immediately forward to me the total number of children (whether new students, M-to-Ms, desegregation transfers, or magnet assignments) currently registered by school, race, and grade level (including kindergarten and the four-year-old program). Because 1 had not received a 1994-95 registration brochure, we called your office today to ask for one. Sue Pedersen said that the brochures are still being printed but did not know a delivery date. Please let me know when you expect to receive the brochures and also send me a few copies as soon as you get them. Thanks. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK i Ti J, MCRSCHEU H. FRIDAY. P.A. ROBERT V. LIGHT, P.A. WILLIAM M. SUTTON. P.A. JAMES W . MOORE SVRON M. EISEMAN. JR., R.A. JOE 0. BELL. r.A. JOHN C. ECHOLS, P.A. JAMES A. BUTTRV, R.A. FREDERICK 8. URBERY. R.A. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS. JR., R.A. JAMES C. CLARK, JR., P.A. THOMAS r. LEGGETT. P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON. P.A. RAUL B. BENHAM III. R.A. LARRY W. BURKS. P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET, JR.. F.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS, R.A. J. RHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. MEREDITH P. CATLETT. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL III, P.A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER. P.A. WALTER A. PAULSON II, P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN, P.A. RICHARD 0. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH B. HURST. JR.. P.A. ELIZABETH J. ROBBEN. P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P.A. ROBERT 8. SHAFER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III. P.A. THOMAS N. HOSE. P.A. MICHAEL 8. MOORE. P.A. DIANE 8. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III. P.A. A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201*3413 TELEPHONE 601*370*2011 FAX NO. 601*376*2147 May 20, 1994 KEVIN A. CRABS. P.A. WILLIAM A. WADDELL. JR . P A CUyOE 'TAB* TURNER. P.A CALVIN J. HALL. P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P.A. JERRY L. MALONE. P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH. JR.. P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER, JR.. P.A. H. CHARLES GSCHWENO. JR.. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT. P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH. P.A GUY ALTON WAOE. P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID 0. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE ANDREW T. TURNER JOHN RAY WHITE DAVID M. GRAF CARLA 0. SPAINMOUR JOHN C. FENOLEY.JR. ALLISON GRAVES BAZZSL JOHANN C. ROOSEVELT R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY 0. TAYLOR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN BETTY J. OEMORY received COUMBIk WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELOREOOE. JR.. P.A B.8. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR.. P.A VNiTIH'S OIRiCT HO. (601) 370*1606 Mr. Michael E. Gans Clerk of the Court United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court \u0026amp; Custom House 1114 Market Street St. Louis, Missouri 63101 MAY 2 1994 Oihce of Desegregation Monitoring RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District - No. 93-3592 Dear Mr. Gans: The referenced appeal is one of three consolidated appeals concerning the Pulaski County desegregation litigation. The Little Rock School District and the Joshua Intervenors are appellants. Our reply briefs are due today. I have reviewed the briefs and deteirmined that there is no need for me to file a reply brief in this matter. Appeal No. 93-3592 raises the issue of whether the district court properly rejected a certain site as the location for the construction of a new interdistrict school. On April 20, 1994 LRSD filed a motion in the district court which could have an impact upon the issue on appeal. LRSD contends in its motion that it has already constructed the required number of interdistrict schools and that it should not be required to build another interdistrict school. If the district court agrees, the issue in Case No. 93- 3592 could become moot or could become intertwined with an appeal of a district court order finding that the required interdistrict schools have been constructed. For your convenience, I have enclosed a copy of LRSD's motion and brief in the district court.The other consolidated appeals are not affected by this situation. I am open to suggestions from you and the parties as to how to make the most efficient use of the Court's time in Appeal No. 93-3592. Yours ver' tru Christopher Heller CJH/k Enc cc\nM. Samuel Jones John W. Walker Steve Jones Richard Roachell Ann BrownBCC: Henry Williams Russ Mayo Jerry MaloneTO: 9t\" C^: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS JUL 1 9 1994 May 26, 1994 Office oi Desesfegaion M\u0026amp;riiwing /r/. a/-/ REC^--^^^ Forest Height Jr. High School Principal Interview 'ommittee Members FROM: He Estelle Matthis, Deputy Superintendent SUBJECT: Principal Interviews Thank you for accepting our invitation to participate in the selection process for the principal of Forest Heights Jr. High School for the 1994-95 school year. The interviews will be held in the Little Rock School District Board Room, 810 West Markham Street, on June 8, 1994, from 1 to 4 p.m. Your assistance and cooperation are appreciated.Ca^/ Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Date: June 1, 1994 To: From: Doug Eaton, Director of Plant Services, Little Rock School District Melissa Guldin ^ssociate Monitor Subject: LRSD Facilities Studies Members of our office staff met with LRSD Deputy Superintendent, Estelle Matthis, yesterday. During our meeting she mentioned that the Junior High Capacity Study is nearly ready for publication. As you are aware, the court has been concerned about this study for quite some time. The capacity study is an essential element of the districts long-range planning. I would greatly appreciate it if you could send me a copy of the information you have prepared for the Junior High Capacity Study and any other facility study your department may have made. The deputy superintendent also indicated that the district had studied the feasibility of closing Baseline. If you have information on a facilities study related to closing of Baseline, or any other school, please forward that to me too. While I realize how busy the end of school is for all district employees, I do need copies of these reports by Friday, June 3,1994. Please do not prepare any special reports for our office. I will gladly accept the information in any format. If none of the reports are currently available, please let me know when we can expect their completion. Thank you for your cooperation./^z^c't/ZVf^ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 FSCSn/iD Date: June 14, 1994 JUN 1 4 1994 To: Board of Directors Offics of Oessgrogsiic.n Mi :cr\nng From: :e: :ams, (eimtendent Re: Great Expectations Pilot Project Great Expectations Teaching Model is an instructional model based on Je concepts implemented by Marva CoUins at the Westside Preparatory Srnnnl tn r*hi*zorTz\\ 'TTia j ..  . . School in Chicago. The belief that all children can learn is transformed to all children wiU learn. Teachers accept the responsibility to find a ..... ... every child and to believe in the childs ability to learn. The model seeks enhance self-esteem through academic achievement. a way to reach to an effort to support and strengthen instruction in our schools, we have ^entified Mitchell and Rightsell as potential pilot sites for the Great i^ectations Teaching Model. Each school staff has received a brief overview of the model in anticipation that we would be able to establish a oilot program for the 1994-95 school year. Great Expectations Summer Institutes will be conducted during June 20-25 Md July 25-29,1994, at Northeastern State University, Tahlequah, Oklahoma. A major emphasis of e inservice is the integration of curriculum areas. We believe these sessions provide an excellent opportunity to provide support for , P - * ----------rr'** ouuuui L lUi dehvery of our current curriculum. At least six teachers from each school have been identified as the core group who wiU receive the initial training We expect to build within the District the ability to support the model through existing personnel. Information relative to the basic concepts of the model is attached.cr LRSD Guidelines for News Media R JUN 1 1 1994 Oif!C3 cf ii3ssgrsg: iiion iVwiiiw''''j The main goal of the Little Rock School District is to provide a quality education for all of our students. To that end, we must make every effort to minimize distractions during regular classroom instruction and to ensure the rights of privacy of oiu students, most of whom are under the age of 18. We also want to foster a mutually beneficial relationship between all media personnel and the LRSD staff. We ask for your assistance in reaching our goals and provide the following guidelines for yoiu: information: School level activities: Each Monday morning during the regular school year, the Office of Communications distributes a list of events and photo opportunities to central Arkansas media outlets. This news release serves as an invitation for all media to cover the events. The coordinators of these special events have planned for media coverage and will welcome the publicity for the LRSD. When planning a story around an event or person that is not included in the weekly release, please contact the Office of Communications and speak to the Director or the Communications Specialist for clearance to enter a school. Your contact in Communications will coordinate your visit through the appropriate personnel at the school level. If you choose to go directly to the school, you may be asked to wait outside the school until such clearance is obtained through the central office. Interviews, photography, and filming of teachers or students must be scheduled before school, during lunch, or after school when at all possible. We cannot give permission to interrupt classroom instruction. At times, a release form signed by a students parent or guardian may be required. The communications personnel will direct you in such cases. When reporting on a physically or emotionally challenged student (i.e. special Olympics, academic support programs) parental consent must be obtained. Further, no students may be interviewed or photographed in relation to the school health clinics. They are protected by physician-patient confidentiality rights. Clinic and administrative personnel are available to discuss these LRSD services. Administrative Offices: If you need information on the school district, please route your questions through the Office of Commimications. If the answers to your questions are not readily available, the appropriate personnel will be contacted on your behalf and your call will be returned. When planning to interview or photograph personnel in the administrative offices, please call the Office of Ci nmications ahead of time. This will allow the communications personnel to collect the information you need and to assist you in locating the correct person. If you choose to go directly to the administrative offices, you may be asked to wait until your subject's schedule permits your visit. Other Media opportunities: Board Meetings: All media representatives are invited to attend the monthly agenda meetings and regular meetings of the Little Rock School District Board of Directors. These meetings are usually scheduled on the second and last Thursdays of the month respectively. Notification of Special Board Meetings will be made by fax in accordance with Arkansas FOI requirements. These notifications will include the scheduled agenda items of the meetings. Meeting agendas and special seating are available at the media table in the front of the board room. Personnel from the Office of Communications are available at these meetings to answer questions or provide additional information. News Conferences: Special situations may require the scheduling of a news conference. Central Arkansas media will be notified by news release of the date, time and content of the news conference. The LRSD is committed to upholding the policies outlined in the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act. If at any time you feel that your request for information has not been granted in accordance with the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act, please notify the Director of Communications.^i^prci-e, Cji^' \u0026lt; ' -y' * \u0026gt; ? B. LriTLE Rock School District OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT 7? _ -1 M  2 1. June 21, 1994 JUN 2 4 1994 Mrs. Ann Brown, Federal Monitor Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham Street, Suite 520 Heritage West Building urncs of usss^rs^i lion iwi. J Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Ann: I have enclosed for your perusal and records a copy of a document that was forwarded to me by Mr. Eaton in response to your partial report on the physical condition of particularly Mitchell and Franklin. the incentive schools, The report provided by Mr. Eaton seems to suggest that the buildings are not being neglected and are on a regular maintenance schedule and obviously do receive special consideration when circumstances warrant special attention. It might be a good idea, Ann, for us to meet with Doug regarding the incentive schools so that you and your people are aware of what the capital plans call for with regard to the repairs of all District facilities. Should you require additional information on the incentive schools. please let me know, and I'll get it for you. In the meantime. please consider the possibility of scheduling a meeting with Doug to look at all of the facilities. Sincerely, Hl P. Willicuns HPW:nr Encl. Superintendent of Schools 810 West Markham Street  Little Rock, .4ri\u0026lt;ansas 72201  (501) 324-2000 4, Office of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court  Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 Date: July 1, 1994 To: Jeanette Wagner From: Subject in Brown Incentive School Brochure Review Thanks for sharing your mock-ups of the new incentive school brochures. I didnt find much that I ought you might want to think about changing, but I put a few comments down. Take them or leave them. Youve done a good job on these. Ill be glad to see them all done-and 1 know you will be too!B0708941 Date\nJuly 11, 1994 To: Robert Glowers From: Bill Mooney Subj\nJune Project Management Tool I have reviewed e June Project Management Tool and have a few items to offer for consideration. There are also several items I thought of which would impact the Cycle n Project Management Tool. Since we were not able to meet this week, I just wanted to write down these thoughts and offer them to you. Task 7. For Cycle II, I would consider including the following data reports in the needs assessment: * Report from the blue ribbon committee on safety and security * The report of the NASE/NCAC Curriculum Audit performed in 1990. * The Coopers Lybrand report. Task 80. I would recommend dropping this task into the Cycle II tool since it really has nothing to do with Cycle I. It also prevents you from closing out the Needs Assessment (Task 7), which makes you look way behind (Nov 4, 94). Task 98. I would recommend dropping this task into the Cycle II tool for the same reason. Tasks 99-116. The Community Forum tasks belong in the needs assessment section since they represent perceptual needs data. I would recommend leaving them where they are for Cycle I, but moving them into the Needs Assessment for Cycle H. Tasks 117-130. The District Dialogue tasks also belong in the needs assessment section for the same reasons. Same recommendation. Tasks 154-155. These tasks are critical input for the budget sub-process. In Cycle n, don't forget to follow-up with actions to gather data. Mark should start working on shortfall strategies as soon as they are identified and have the analysis ready by the December timeframe. The data does not have to be fresh in most cases. Get this work done so it will be available when you really need it. Task 168. The Program Development sub-process is the place for lining up all of your new, modified, or cut programs and preparing them for the budget development. Be sure to include tasking for any program changes in this sub-process. Initiatives like the changing to middle schools should be cranked into the program development sub-process right off so that everyone knows they must be planned for. In fact, I recommend not only including middle schools in the program development sub-process but also requiring the project leader to set up a separate, detailed project management tool for just managing that big project. Some other program development items need to be picked up\nsee task 210 below. Task 185. For Cycle 11, I recommend including a whole sub-set of tasking on contract negotiations within the budgeting sub-process. This critical item needs to be completely tasked out and put under watchful eyes. Some of the tasks are already included in the Cycle I tool. Task 191. Somewhere after task 191, Mark needs to include an additional task or tasking for budget preparation. This tasking should deal with analyzing actual expenditures, projecting them for the rest of the year, and basing the proposed budget on those actuals rather than budgeting on budget. If this is not clear, give me a call and we can talk about it. Tasks 193, 205, 238, 241. Last year, the district generated a proposed budget document, a tentative budget document, and a final budget document. The Cycle I budget sub-process was set up with this same progression in mind. However, this year's actual practice is not real consistent with the design. A proposed budget was generated for task 193. There never was a tentative budget generated for task 205, even though it shows 100% complete. Tasks 238 and 241 call for what appears to be the final budget, although it does not specifically say \"final.\" For Cycle II, I recommend defining \"proposed budget\", \"tentative budget\", and \"final budget.\" Mark, you. Bob and I need to get together and have this clearly defined, and work out the timing for next year. You might be able to save some time and work if this is done before you finish the Cycle n \"gray book revision and the Cycle II tool. Tasks 210, 214-232. These tasks aU belong in the Program Development sub-process instead of the budgeting sub-process. I recommend not worrying about it now, but move any of them into Program Development if they are carried over into Cycle H. Task 225. This task calls for business cases in January, 1995. This is a Cycle II item, and should be moved. Otherwise, your Cycle I will not end until January. Task 351. This task should not be 100% until all Cycle I tasks have been completed and aU reports for the Cycle I have been submitted. I recommend getting the Cycle II under control as soon as possible. The district is already slipping behind for the next budget year, and will soon be farther behind an our late start last year. I stand ready to help you in any way I can\njust give me a call. You and Marjorie have done a good job of bringing the project management process along. The district will be far more successful if it will learn how to maximize the benefits of this project management tool and use the fruits of your labor. Well done.LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Planning, Research and Evaluation 810 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201. received July 12, 1994 Ms. Margie Powell Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 E. Markham Street Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 JUL 1 5 1994 Offiea oJ Oasesrasanai^ iojtoinfl Dear Ms. Powell: Per your request, please find enclosed the results of the 1993-94 Arkansas Minimum Performance Test. We have included a copy of the comparative five year district summary for the sixth and eighth 94. grade students and individual school summaries for the years 1990- Also, included is a matrix of those schools that will require a school improvement plan. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Dr. Robert Glowers Director RLC:it cc: Dr. Henry Williams, Superintendent (?zcf\u0026lt;*c//'A/eZ? LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT OFFICE 501 SHERMAN STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 received JUL 1 9 1994 Oltice of Desegregation Moniionng TO: All LRSD Personnel FROM: ^I^Russ Mayo, Associate Superintendent for Desegregation SUBJECT: Reorganization of the Student Assignment Office DATE: July 15, 1994 Effective July 18, 1994, the Student Assignment Office will be undergoing a change. This change will include:  Personnel  New Telephone Equipment and Numbers This transition will require time to train personnel on the new equipment and Student Assignment polices and procedures. Attached is a copy of the Student Assignment Timeline. Indicated are dates we will be involved in special training. We realize that the transition will be difficult, patience during this critical time. and we are requesting your The services which the new system will provide will be beneficial to each of us. Beginning July 18, 1994, all district personnel will be able to reach Student Assignment through the district system by using *44. This special number will connect you directly. All previous private numbers have been changed, therefore you must use *44 to reach Student Assignment personnel, use the published number, 324-2272. information will be heard by the caller, routed to a Student Assignment Assistant. The public will continue to A taped message with pertinent and the call will be The taped messages will be changed periodically to keep announcements current. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. RM:dk cc: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Superintendent's CouncilSTUDENT ASSIGNMENT TIMELINE DATE EVENT July 12 - 18 July 21 Telephone Installation Telephone Etiquette Training 9:00 a.m. July 22 Completion of equipment installation. July 28 - August 5 August 1 August 2 5 Student Assignment Office will NOT accept paperwork during this time period so that assignments can be made prior to registration. This is done annually. Print Pre-Printed PIF forms August 4 Student Assignment personnel will be unavailable due to training on the new phone system and office procedures and policies. Registration Inservice Secretaries / Registrars August 8 and August 9  Incentive /Magnet - 9:00 a.m.  Area'Schools - 11:00 a.m.  Secondary -2:00 p.m. Registration All Schools 10:00 a.m. 7:00 p.m.1 0 e 5OS2 West 56 Little Rock, street Arkansas 72209 Thursday July 14. 1994 Mrs. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring JUL f 8 1994 201 East Markham Heritage West Building Suite 510 Little Rock, Arkansa: 72201 Office of Dcjogre.jaiic.'i .V.: ., Dear Ann, Ai promised in our recent telephone conver letter and a sample of the writing of the Advisory perceive the Council to become. sation. here i Council as I my I realise that ample could be changed a\nome of the might tend to met and the p ee changed. per the need tipulations reflected in thi or desire ubiic is served. As long as the childrens of your office chool need must be changed. Whatever it takes. I am not alarmed if are ome of the wording least two I am a firm believer in advisory boards. uch board\nthe best of either world. and then Having served on at erving on governing boards. opinionated advisory board of true purpo\ngiddy governing board all to pieces! But I am fully aware that a strong, Ive seen and perseverance beat\na The crux of the matter i and read?/ to work - would. that\nuch a Council - once approved or hould give the hungering chool-house crowd the truest picture of whats going on in the citys public chools, because the Neighborhood Association would ee to that. and the Council itself It would be easier to send information down or back to the Neighborhoods from those persons vein of interest than to read it in the erving in that particular newspaper and much more truthful in content than the newspaper - while at the same time reach more honestly interested folk than the papers can, or do daily reach. We might even be able to reach into parents main interest children - and nurture the PTAs back into existence again. - their a new direction just over the horizon... but right in their own backyard. Thank you for your time and effort and your here in the city: we are each and everyone of u gratitude to your offices for the excellent way you Again, Ann. thi maze of if there i glad to do what I can.  interest in us Landing in out ee to our people. an?/thing I can do to help in any manner in chool business, all you need do i let me know. Ill be Sincerely. \u0026gt;a Stafford-Humphrey. Chairperson Southwe\nLittle Rock United for Progre\nLITTLE ROCK PUBLIC SCHOOL BOARD ADVISORY COUNCIL With the consent and advise of the Little Rock Public School Board, herein notated a\nLRPSB, and the Superintendent of chool and the Little Rock Neighborhood Associations, an inclusive Council shall be established, each with equal representaion on the Council. personnel, The little Rock School District, it the Community a\nshall be utilised for the pupils. a whole, environs and it\ntheir parents and for commonly referred to herein a\nthe Public. (14)member The Advisory Council shall comprise not le and not more than ixteen member than fourteen (16). The Superintendent hall have two (2) designated appointees to the Advisory Council. Two (2) persons from each designated ward. or district, shall have appointment to coincide with the LRPSB member geographic locale. Each appointee shall provide a resume coincidental with the wishe of the Board, the Superintendent, Each appointee to the Council and the wishe of the Public. hall have a two-third vote from the three (-3) entities: the Little Rock Public School Board, the Superintendent, together with the approval of the (2/3) Neighborhood A:ssociation from whence the appointee i ma.jority vote where the appointee lives\nbut the Neighborhood recommended by a A: ociation hall have the actual and final vote to approve each appointee The term of office for the appointee shall be two (2) years. In the case of resignation or the death of an installed appointee, Neighborhood Association from whence came the appointee shall have the jurisdiction for appointing another erson to fill the vacancy. If the appointee should die within the time-frame of election to installation. person to fill the vacancy. the Neighborhood Association shall recommend another by the Neighborhood A\nociation. Any other vacancy hall be filled likewise or by the LRPSB, or by the Superintendent from whichever the vacanc?/ occur (30) time-frame from the time of the vacancy. , within a thirty-day Installation of each and every appointee shall occur at the first Little Rock Public School Board meeting following the appointment of the member, or the election of the Little Rock School Board members, whichever come: first. extended to the member unless the press No installation hall be and called the Public hall be addressed. he people otherwise either by mail or by telephone calling attention to the installation and an invitation issued to same. No busine: of any nature hall be conducted unless the press and the public shall have been notified and invited either by mail or by telephone from the three entities(3). the Little Rock Public School Board, from the Associations. uperintendent office, and from the Neighborhood The Neighborhood Association(s) receive material other i wherea\nPublic tated entitle: and/or information hall have due right to consistent with legalities to pertaining to the Freedom of Information Act\neach Neighborhood Association is intended as an arm of the and\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":"umc_awr_50583","title":"Correspondence and General National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1994","collection_id":"umc_awr","collection_title":"Advancing Workers’ Rights in the American South","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1994"],"dcterms_description":["Folder of materials from the \"National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1956-1999\" series from the AFL-CIO Civil Rights Department records"],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights","Labor movement"],"dcterms_title":["Correspondence and General National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, 1994"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of Maryland, College Park. Libraries"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://hdl.handle.net/1903.1/50583"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["records (documents)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_99-9-0","title":"Correspondence - Commission Members, 1957-1958","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Correspondence - Commission Members, 1957-1958, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Correspondence - Commission Members, 1957-1958"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=517%7C99%7C9%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_99-10-0","title":"Correspondence - Commission Members, 1958-1959","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Correspondence - Commission Members, 1958-1959, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Correspondence - Commission Members, 1958-1959"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=518%7C99%7C10%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_2-166-1","title":"Council of Federated Organizations-C.O.F.O.","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Council of Federated Organizations-C.O.F.O., Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Council of Federated Organizations-C.O.F.O."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=659%7C2%7C166%7C%7C1"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_2-166-2","title":"Council of Federated Organizations-COFO","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Council of Federated Organizations-COFO, Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Council of Federated Organizations-COFO"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=663%7C2%7C166%7C%7C2"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_2-166-3","title":"Council of Federated Organizations-C.O.F.O.","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Council of Federated Organizations-C.O.F.O., Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Council of Federated Organizations-C.O.F.O."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=667%7C2%7C166%7C%7C3"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1532","title":"Court filings concerning ODM budget, Pulaski County Special School District racial balance, legal proceedings, and project management tools","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":["1994-01"],"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","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","School districts--Arkansas--North Little Rock","Arkansas. Department of Education","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","School management and organization","School board members","School integration"],"dcterms_title":["Court filings concerning ODM budget, Pulaski County Special School District racial balance, legal proceedings, and project management tools"],"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/1532"],"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":["51 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"mus_sovcom_2-134-0","title":"Craftsmens Club, Inc.","collection_id":"mus_sovcom","collection_title":"Sovereignty Commission Online","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission"],"dc_date":["1994/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Records collected by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission on","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["from Craftsmens Club, Inc., Sovereignty Commission records, Mississippi Department of Archives and History"],"dc_relation":["Forms part of Series 2515 : Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records Online, 1994-2006"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Mississippi","Civil rights workers--Mississippi","African American civil rights workers--Mississippi","Social reformers--Mississippi","Mississippi--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Craftsmens Club, Inc."],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Mississippi. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://www.mdah.ms.gov/arrec/digital_archives/sovcom/imagelisting.php?foldercheckbox%5B%5D=501%7C2%7C134%7C%7C0"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["The Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records are state government records made available to the public pursuant to American Civil Liberties Union v. Fordice, 969 F.Supp. 403 (S.D.Miss.1994). The web-enabled version of the Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission Records is intended for public use in research, teaching, and private study in accordance with the provisions of the Fair Use clause of the United States Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). MDAH makes no warranty or assurances that materials contained in this collection are free from U.S. copyright claims or other restrictions on free use and display. It is the user's obligation to determine and satisfy copyright or other use restrictions when publishing or distributing materials found in this collection. MDAH requests that prior to publication of Sov. Com. images the user submit an MDAH Broadcast/Publication Permission form for approval by the Department. This form must be accompanied by documentation which proves that copyright requirements have been satisfied. Contact MDAH Reference Staff for details on how to obtain and complete the B/PP form: (601) 576 6876 or refdesk@mdah.state.ms.us. There are no MDAH Use Fees associated with use of Sov. Com. images. MDAH asks that each image used in a presentation, display, or publication be accompanied by a credit line, which at a minimum includes the name of this collection, the unique resource identifier for each image, the name of this institution, and URL. ; Cite images according to the following structure: Original Creator, \"Title\", Original creation date (if known), Unique Resource Identifier, Series Number and Title, Archival Repository, date of last web page revision, image location/URL, (image viewed on date)."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":null,"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":554,"next_page":555,"prev_page":553,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":6636,"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}}]}}