{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"loc_rosaparks_47379","title":"[Portrait of Elaine Steele, likely taken during a promotion event for Parks' autobiography \"Rosa Parks, My Story,\" published 1992] [graphic].","collection_id":"loc_rosaparks","collection_title":"Rosa Parks Papers","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["1992"],"dcterms_description":["Title devised by Library staff.","Printing date on photo processing envelope: \"07/92\"."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":null,"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":null,"dcterms_title":["[Portrait of Elaine Steele, likely taken during a promotion event for Parks' autobiography \"Rosa Parks, My Story,\" published 1992] [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.47379"],"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","portrait photographs1990-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Steele, Elaine Eason"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_683","title":"Program budget","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":["1992/1994"],"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","School management and organization","Education--Finance"],"dcterms_title":["Program budget"],"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/683"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nfiled COURT . 4STFRN OlSTpirx Arkansas i JAN 21-1992 tfc' IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT'\"''f EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION ay. S55NTS. CLERK . OEP CLi IK I fl Si  4 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS ORDER On November 14, 1991, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit remanded the cause to the Court to review the parties' proposed modifications [May submissions] to the 1989 plans. 1 Little Rock. School District, et al., Nos. 91-2640EA, 91- 2648EA, 91-2655EA, 91-2683EA, slip op. (8 th Cir. November 14, 1991). In response to the order of the Eighth Circuit, the Court scheduled a hearing to begin on December 18, 1991. It informed the parties involved that, prior to reviewing their proposed modifications, it would ask the Pulaski County Special School District [PCSSD] to report on its financial situation and hear a ^The three school districts involved, Little Rock School District [LRSD], Pulaski County Special School District [PCSSD], and North Little Rock School District [NLRSD], and the Joshua Intervenors submitted proposed modifications to the settlement plan approved by the Eighth Circuit in Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District Ro. 1, 921 F.2d 1371 (8th Cir. 1990).report from the Office of Desegregation Monitoring on the budgetary- processes for desegregation expenditures which are employed by the three school districts involved in the matter. The Court determined that before it could consider proposed modifications to the settlement plans, it needed to learn whether there are district budgetary processes in place which will enable the Court to monitor the implementation of the plans. At the conclusion of the second day of the hearing, the Court expressed concern about its ability to effectively monitor the settlement plan without budgets that reflect the three school districts' intentions, goals. and priorities regarding their desegregation efforts. The Court specifically mentioned the state of the Little Rock School District's [LRSD] budgetary process. In its opinion approving the settlement plans of the three districts, the Eighth Circuit noted the parties have committed to \"solemn undertakings\" and stated: We accept these undertakings, again with the reminder that compliance with them will be closely monitored. If the District Court becomes convinced in the future that money is being wasted, and that desegregation obligations contained in the settlement plans are being flouted, it will be fully authorized to take appropriate remedial action. Little Rock School District V. Pulaski County Special School District Ro. 1, 921 F.2d 1371, 1390 (Sth Cir. 1990). The Eighth Circuit further directed the Court to \"monitor closely the compliance of the parties with the settlement plans and the settlement agreement, to take whatever action is appropriate, in its discretion, to ensure compliance with the plans and agreement, -2-and otherwise to proceed as the law and the facts require.\" Id. at 1394. The Court monitors the use of settlement monies through the Office of Desegregation Monitoring [ODM] . In October 1991, the ODM informed the LRSD that it must be able to provide the Court with information which (1) accurately and comprehensively accounts for the expenditure of settlement funds\n(2) demonstrates the link between the district's legal requirements and the fiscal underwriting of those requirements\n(3) describes desegregation budgeting process that can be demonstrated, justified, and verified\nand (4) enables the district to determine what adjustments might be necessary in order to align finances with desegregation obligations. a [Document # 1517] Pursuant to the directives from and the considerable latitude and discretion given the Court by the Eighth Circuit, the Court finds that the LRSD's current budgetary process does not meet the above requisites and that it is necessary for the LRSD to submit 2 revised cost figures to the Court. Therefore, (1) The LRSD must submit a revised 1991-92 budget which is directly correlated to the specific provisions of the settlement plan and which are reflected on updated implementation timelines contained in the plan. 2 In a note to its May submissions, the LRSD indicated that the cost figures originally submitted with its desegregation plan were outdated and it would provide revised cost figures in a separate desegregation budget. To date, the Court is unaware of any such revised figures having been submitted or filed. -3-a (2) The LRSD must submit a long-range budget projection on per annum basis which covers all anticipated desegregation expenditures over the entire term of the desegregation agreement. (3) The LRSD must submit.a long-range revenue projection covering the same period of time, which includes revenues anticipated not only from the settlement monies and settlement loan, but also from state and millage revenues and any other money sources. This long-term projection will provide a clear picture of the district's financial future and, thereby, enable the LRSD to predict with accuracy if and when a millage increase will be needed. The amount and time of any anticipated millage increase is to be indicated along with the date when the district will present a millage increase to the voters. (4) The LRSD has maintained that a significant portion of desegregation expenditures are \"start up.\" The district must specifically identify which desegregation costs are \"start up\" and when these start up costs will terminate. (5) The revised budget shall be prepared in consultation with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and shall be submitted to the Court within thirty (30) days after the Court rules either from the bench or in a written order on the proposed modifications. \" By this Order, the Court confirms its oral approval of the construction of the interdistrict school at the Crystal Hill site. Further, the Court confirms oral instructions made to the parties to explore alternative sites for the construction of King -4-Interdistrict School along the 1-630 corridor. c^/^^ay DATED this of January, 1992. 'id., \"ONITED stated DIsTRZCT J 'R2CT JUDGE iPLi.\nheet in I FRCP ON -5- r/y/t. IT* Garland. 3615 W. 25th Uttle Rock. AR 72204 Incentive ' Mr. Robert L. Brown. Jr.. Principal ' , Phone: (501) 671-6275 'Simpli/ Transformational\" ,\n! jii  Ltjj Jii lip fC i hi Ann Brown, Director Office of Desegregation 201 E. Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 I 1994 O'fics of Desegrogai iV: u-inofing iipril pitfsj\nt Dear Mrs. Brown: The enclosed documents are being sent to inform the Court of discrepancies in the LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT. Seventeen pages of entries documenting the efforts or performance towards the strategies were not included on the printed document. Although my response may not be accurate, I view the exclusion as retaliatory. I suspect other incidents which have occurred since my testimony to be retaliatory as well. Consider the following: Carla Miranda, an instructional aide, received a new classroom assignment when she returned to work from a medical leave on January 31, 1994. On February 2, 1994, at approximately 1:00 p.m., Larry Robertson and Brady Gadberry came to my building to investigate alleged charges of discrimination against a handicapped person. They were sent by Estelle Matthis. When I asked Estelle why she was circumventing the Policy and Procedures guidelines, she said she was trying to avoid serious problems with the 504 Law. When I emphasized the \"Due Process\" procedures, clause in the contract agreements, she told me you have to use common sense for some things. I told her that I was obligated to follow LRSD PoUcy and insist upon my staff doing the same. On February for a MACDUO Powerbook. , 1994, I received a copy of a P.O. Requisition Attached to the requisition was two 1987 directives written by Vance Jones, focused on the USE OF SCHOOL EQUIPMENT. The directives The second directive listed the consequences for personal use: suspensionwith a possible recommendation for termination. I consulted Mr. Neal and was informed that he customarily sends those directives to principals who purchase laptops. A list of principals was requested but not returned in his response. The principals with laptops were located and stated that they never received the \"Vance Jones\" directives from Mr. Neal. The Parent Council monitored my building on the 22nd of February. Ms. Dazzle Mattison, a former teacher who was terminated last school year, served as the chairman of a two man team. According to some staff members, she badgered them during the interview process. She found many areas of non compliance in three of the five classrooms visited. have never received such a negative report. When I called the LRSD Desegregation Office to see who made the decision to send her to Garland, I received an evasive response. Now we have a Program Budget Document, which really doesn't address the issue of a needed budget process, being doctored to reveal only favorable efforts by selected schools. If you would like to have a copy of the documents referred to in the letter, please let me know and I will send them to you. You will find enclosed a copy of those entries not credited to Garland or not entered into the document shared with the Court of Friday, February 25, 1994. Dr. Williams is scheduled to meet with the local practitioners of Garland Incentive School on Tuesday, March 1, 1994. A staff member made the suggestion that a member of your team attend the meeting. If that can be arranged, we would appreciate the involvement of your office, meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. in Garland's cafeteria. The I Thank you for your interest and support for the incentive schools. Respectfully, Robert L. Brown, Jr.Pngm S^q ft 52 Pzogra Saaa: Inceotiva School Operations: Prograa Coda: Pragraa Goel: Plan Rafeceaca Page Bnabar 180 L 180 LRSD PTf 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMEfTT Peer Tutoring/Retlred Teacher Mentor , Prlaazy Teeder\nC. Russell Mayo, Jr. nefiiiwlery Leaiter\nBvi*iaa Data\nArae Bart 2 February 25, 1994 To develop sn^^iort pEugraae aad pcocadiiraa which will allow 4w. to prorida eBihanrad edocatiaaal for lU 2.0 3.0 Objectiwea Strataglee Beginning Date Ci^letloa Data aapoBBlhllity Svalnatloe To netsMlsh training for paar tstore aad an pear tutoring prograa for snslepts. -ro 2.1 Tea iMia and stodaata will raeelve training in peer tutoring. \u0026amp; Bdal will ba pot in place, coonselor will eupatvina the proceas. A peer-tutoring aodel Is developed In the counselors prograas. The 07/01/93 06/30/94 Staff. Deval., Aaet. Snpts., Cooc. of Inosatlva sctoolB To naa the of retired teerher aeators to tntor and SpCOSCir 3.1 Mentors will volunteer or may be paid a stipend. They will provide extra support to students and suppleoent teacher worK. (Office of Dasag., Ed. Prograas, VIPS, Counselors, Teachers) 2.0 (All students will inprove acadeaically on teacher made tests and Abacus assessnant by assisting peers in various subject areas.) 2.1 (Copy of training nodal, schedule of training, naaes of teachers) 2.1 (Observing the pear tutoring training nodal and process to datemine aCfactlvanass) 3.0 (Through the support of retired teacher oentors, students In sponsored clubs will gain acadealc support and show iBproveaent in classroan related subject areas, on quarterly report cards to parents and Abacus assessnant.)Progran Seq 45 Page: Progran Haise: Foreign Language Prograa Revision Date: Pabruary 25, 1994 Prograa Code:  Prioary Leader: C. Rusaell Prograa Mayo, Jr. Secondary Leader: Ama Bart Goal: The Intent education of for the aU acadenic students prograoB, la instructional the Incentive Schools.] netbodologies or extended and day. instructional Appropriate teebnology staff to will bo proaote bired. excellence la Plan Page Beference Rumber Objectives Strategies Beginning Dato Coopletlo n Date Responsibil Evaluation Criteria B. Evaluate software DUltlaedla package usage. bilingual for I. software Evaluate for foreign use language Lab classrooa In Mnltioedia Hultiaedia PCPage: Pregran Sq : 41 Revision Date: Fabnucy 25, 1994 Program Raoa: Office of laeenclve Schools Program Coda: 51 Primary loader: Sacoodary Laadar: PTograa Goal: Esrabllsb aa Incaariva School Plaa Page Reference Nofflber loplaaaatatloa oe Zacaatlvi Offici School that Program. will sarvi to assist baildlag priaclpals aad staff la uadarstaadlag aad Objactivas Strategies Boglanlag Data Coaipletio a Date Rosponslbll Svaluatioa Criteria B. Thi School meetings la 1.1 1.2 (To principal not of aware Garland of the Jan 1994 A. or agenda facilitate caaBBUnicatioa eoBn\u0026amp;ittaas Schools.) la mantlonad efforts with July 1993 1, June 1994 30, tba Incentive (Assoc. Supt. of 1.2 (Dates and A. Sent meeting members. letters with and Parent scheduled Council Oct. 1993 28, Oeseg., Pareats, Conlttae Neabara, Daseg Facilitator ) Monthly meetings will ba held. agendas coBBtittae hold) of aeetlngs 57^LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Paga: 2 Pngxaa 8^ fi 42 Ravlsica Data: Febnary 25, 1994 Pzogna Baaa: writing to Raad Laba Prograa Code: 52 Priaary Leader: C. Rassell Mayo, Jr. Secondary Loader: Ama Hart Prugrae Goal: The intent of the acadeaic pzogrsaa, laatructloaal aatbodolagisa and use of instractlCBal tochnology ia the XacoBtlve Schools la to prwta stndsDts la tba inceDtive for all L Plan Refamoe Pago uabox 152 ObjoetiToa Stratagiaa Bei^lBiilng Data Cc^lotioa Data neapnia1h\u0026lt;llty B SvaloatixB Criteria 1.2 (To augaent the acadeaic prograa) with spacial stodents aetivltleo sad social stems bonding progrsB to noot tbo cognitive eccisl, eootional, and istoraot noods of stadOBts. (An instructional technology prograa, such as Writing to Read, will be iopleaented at each Incentive School for K-2 students. (K-l) A.- Labs were installed in every school. Coapleted, 1991-92 school year loot B. Oa-golag salateoaBce provided for upkeep of labs. c. Materials aod supplies to nalntaio and enhance the Writing to Read lab needed. Joly 1, 1993 Jono 30, 1994 1991-92 SSI (Assoc. Supt. for Curt., Asst. Supt., Deseg Facilitator, Instructional Technology Dept., Instructional Aides, Principal, Teachers) (Prograa exists in all Incentive Schools)Pag*: 3 Pzogm Sq *: 48 Bvrisloa Data: February 25, 1994 Prograa Baaa: Field Tripe Prograa Coda: 59 Priaary Loader: C. Russell Haye, Jr. SaoDodary '^nartiir: Ama Bare Prograa Coal: daralop sup|HuX progrssa and pcooedarea Mdcta will allow iaoeatlTa schools to prorida adncaticaial opportonltii tta all stadasts. L Plan Bafereoca Page Boabar 180\u0026gt;181 ttrjactlvaa Strategies Beginning Data Coapletloa Data naspTWiBl.Mlity KralaatloB Critarla (Ceasnnity aceass/flald trips are to ba arranged for (relnforcament or earlchaeat) for stndsBts. (Visits to historical, scientific and cultural events and exhibits within the city aad around the state and region with appropriate chaperons to provide educational input.) A. Cosanwlty access field trips are taken each month or as needed. Ccsitpletioa: 5% B. CK^Hunity access for field trips that ocenr on Sundays for parfoEBing groups at Carland are being proridad by the transpartatloB iliniii, t sent of the Pulaski County Spacial School District. Joly 1, 1993 JnzM 30, 1994 (Principals and staff, VIPS, parents) (Review relationship of field trips to subject area taught and students* educational, social and enotlonal needs and detemlne the effectiveness through iBproveaent in ciassrooB perfonaance, Abacus assessBant and teacher-Bads tests.) Dee 12, 1993 Dec. 19, 1993 Jan. 1, 1994Fxuyxw Soq *: 54 Progm Kaaias Exteadad Year Pragra Coda: 65 Prograe Goal: Plan Rafarance Page Himber L 172 LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Prlaacj Leader: C. Ruaaall Mayo, Jr. To develop anpport pngrana aad procadnraa which will allow iacanaiva achoola to prowida ttijactivaa Strategiea Page: 2 Bvl*laa Date: Pabrnary 25, 1994 Secondary ^nartnr: Begiimiag Date Atm Hart opportnnitiaa tar atedanta. CiiiieLluu Date Daapnnalbllltj Svalaation Critazla (To develop a program for year round school including enrichment and remediation options.) (Sunmar segments in remediation/enrichment prescriptiona Cor courses to be taken. (The Students Education Plan (SEP) and parent and staff input determines the course offerings.) Transportation may ba provided.) Suflner School BBrichaant and raaadial courses ware offered and completed at Rockefeller and Franklin School. Completion: 1004 A. Propaad plan Cor Year-Round Education at Garland will be presented for study/approval during the 1993-94 school year. Joly 1, 1993 Joly 1, 1993 Jima 30, 1994 Aug., 1993 Ed. Prograam Coardinator of laoaatlva Schools (VIPS Volunteer Cor Incentive Schools, Oesag. Facilitator, Transportation/ Cafeteria Director, Asst. Supt., Principals, Teachers, Parents) (Annual Saner School Report will indicate ImproveBant in student participation and behavior on sumar school reports to parents.) 61^Page: 3 Prograa Seq : 55 Revision Date: February 25, 1994 Program Raina: RecogolcioB Prograns Program Code: 66 Primary Leader: C. Russell Secondary Leader: Ama Bart Mayo, Jr. Program Goal: To develop Cor all ) support students. programs and procedures which will allow incentlvi schools to providi enhanced educational opportunities Plan Page ReCerence Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completio n Date Rasponslbil ity Evaluation Criteria A. Cor Monthly students awards assemblies school to accomplishments. are recognize held at each students' Completion: 45% B. Teachers student' Bobcat each Rids will month Club. nominate Cor the one C. whan Parents their recognized identiCied will child (based ba has notlCied been on criteria). 6Prograa Seq #: 56 Prograa Raaa: Incantlva School Oparations Caap Pfeifer Program Coda: * Primary Leader: C. Russell Mayo, Jr. Secondary Laadar: Prograa Goal: To develop for all \u0026gt; support studants. programs and procedures which will allow incentlvi schools to provldt Plan Reference Page Ruaber Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completlo n Data 12.2 Work with Director to target incentive students. July 1993 1, June 1994 The aeslstant superintendents are beginning and principals student 30, identification. B. include Attempts have bean made to candidates C.. students Garland designated receive present 12.3 at for has as services cycle. Work with Paga: Revision Dana: Arma Bart enhanced 3 February educational Responsibil tty 25, 1994 opportunitins Evaluation 12.2 students Incentivi (The who for th: Criteria number in schools saleeted program) of Caap not Garland Pfeifer, been school during other as Dec. 1993 13. to the groups projects. to undertake coBBiunlty similar July 1993 June 1994 30. 12.3 (Bvldonc involvwBant in of other projects.) (.nPrograa Seq : 60 Program Naoe: Extended Week Prograa Code: Program Goal: To reassess Individual school LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Primary Leader: C. Russell Hayo, Jr. Secondary Leader: Revision Date: Aroa Bart 2 Pobruary 25, 1994 policies and procedures they relati to meeting the needs of all students. Plan Page Reference Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Coopletio n Date Responslbll ity Evaluation Criteria 188 2.0 for Areas possible to be investigated plan inclusion. (Saturday programs. developed level needs based and students These but field enrichaent Programs the on the will building interests to programs enhance will be educational of learning. Include shall not ba limited to: July 1993 1, June 1994 30, Assoc. Supts., Asst. Snpts. (Principals , teachers, parents) 1.0 (School coomunity (input meabers of the from school snabers cooeninity) the (An increase number of in students participating Saturday 1.1 in Prograa.) (Students activities, make-take, trips, enrichaent tutoring, book . fairs. parent PE educational will be growth evidenced by improveaeot Abacus and on assessment teacher-made tests.) A. Saturday scheduled ' suggested weekly programs activities. and are include 1.2 provided attending Transportation will be for B. for children extended day. Transportation students provided activities as is needed. provided Transportation if the result is Extended not Week opportunities performances. for in SundayPzograa Saq *: 63 Program Baae: Teacher TTtlpani1r/Tnai-rlce Progm Code: 74 Progm Goal: Plan Reference Page 9aBber Page 194 LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Prieary Leader: C. Ruaaall Mayo, Jr. Secondary : ID pznrUa qoallt, staff dmlnpMiir aipuliaKie. n that staff ii il is ata prsfiaiad to aeUan Isesatlsa Setsaol ji-___ Objactiane Stratagiae Begimiiag Data C^^letloe Data Page: 2 BarlaXoa Data: Arma Bart February 25, 1994 to aoccenafully lapleeant piiaji ana and cnrriculne. naacaiaHilliry RealnaTlm Criteria 1.0 (Additional inservice training for staff will be provided prior to the start of school, or when appropriate, based on staff needs.) Joly 1, 1993 June 30, 1994 (Director of staff Development, Principals, Teachers, staff Development Comlttee, IRC Specialist, Asst. Supt., Controller) 1.0 (TMchar knowledge of programs and curriculum will increase as evidenced by positive feedback on Inservice evaluations and clasarocm monitoring reports.) 1.1 InosBtlve school teacbers will report back to work five days earlier for inaarrice (training]. (Appropriate inservice training will be provided needed.) Teacbers reported to work early to develop themes following the 1992-93 school year. 1.2 (Teachers will receive separate stipends (for returning to work ahaml of schedule.) A. Teacbers who reported to work received stipends. 1.3 Monday has been set aside for teacher inservices throughout the school year. B. Inservice stipends for teachers reduced from $30,000.00 during the 1993-93 school year to $11,189.38 for the 1993-94 school year. c. COE plans for identified staff inservice needs are being met under a revision in staff development plans without paying teachers a stipend due to the unexplained budget decrease. Joly 1, 1993 July 1, 1993 Sep. 10, 1993 Jone 30, 1994 Jan 30, 1994 (Director of Staff Development, Principals, Teachers, Staff Development Committee, IRC Specialist, Aset. Supt., Controller) (Director of Staff Development, Principals, Teachers, Staff Development Committee, IRC Specialist, Asst. Supt., Controller) 1.1 (Agenda and dates of staff inservice\nteacher sign-ins) 1.2 (DoeuDentatlon of stipends received) (a5'~\u0026gt;Progm Soq *x 63 Pag.\n3 Pregm Waeas Taar^iaf S^ponds/ZosazTlca SairlBica Dates Pabruary 2S, 1994 Pxuyxaa Codas 74 Priaary laadar\nC. Puasall Maye, Jr. Prograa Goal: laaMtar: TO proTlda qoaUtr :ff dmlofmo nzporioocoo Oat .taff _mi m i\u0026gt;ni|ar.d to kU... Incmln Arna Bart aclMiol goal, ual to nccaaamUT \u0026lt;Wlnt ptogm and corricolna. Plan Bafaraaea Paga BiiBter Objactivaa Stratagii aagiwwing Data Coaplatloa Data BaapfaialTh^^ttj Braloatloa Czltaria D. Tha raductloB Ib tba allocatioo of fUBds for iBBarvlca tralBlBg w\u0026lt;n result 1b tba scbools Inability to fully ioplaaant the staff devalopaant e\u0026lt;Mponnr of tba school inprovenent plan. PxijyiOB Saq *s 64 Pnigcaa Baaa: IneantiTa Sehool Tbaaaa Prograa Coda: 75 Prograa Goal: Plan Rafereaca Page nabar L 153 LRSD FY 93-94 PROCRAM BUDGET POCVMEWT Priaarr Tander: C. Ruasall Mayo, Jr. Memndary Taadar\nPa9\u0026gt;: 2 RarlaioB Data: Atm Hart Fabruary 25, 1994 ? \"  -i' ltmeloil -thodologl- and lB,trncUo1 t-amology, I. to proot. 1B0.U.00. in tao.tK for U ratat. io (ttr}actlvaa Stratagiaa Beginning Data Cc^letloo Data neatiraialhtllty tba Incaotlva Kaalnatloa Crltarla 1.0 School thMoe will bo davmlopad (as a recruitment and educational vehicle to attract parents into the schools) at tba local bonding level by parents and staff sod are zeco^aendad to be Integrated Into tba total corricoliiB. Jaly 1, 1993 Jnaa 30, 1994 (Principal, staff, Desegregation Facilitator, Associate Sept, of Curr., Asst. Supts.) 1.0 (laproved racial aaki up of atudaats. Thaaos are fully developed at every school.) 11 (Principals and staff will survey parents and determine interest for theme selection.} 1.1 (Feedback froa eurvay) A. ' Parents were surveyed in 1992-93 school year. Conpletion: 100%. 1.2 (Themes will be selected from the highest response received by principals.) Jan. 17, 1993 1.2 (Tally of rasponses Indicated theme selection) A. Thenes were selected during the 1992- 93 school year. Completion: 100%. B. Theme specialists have been employed for all incentive schools. February 1993 C. No materials/supplies have been purchased to support the infusion of themes. Jan. 4, 1994 D. District level personnel ware not involved at the ground level of planning. E. A major component of the plan, determined as essential in recruitment efforts, has not received District level support\nplanning for extended year programming with flexible scheduling. GC\u0026gt;LRSD FY 93-94 PROCHAM BUDGET DOCUMENT 2 Picograa 70 BerlalaA Datat February 2S, 199* Ptotfcee Beae: Incentive ai-Hrwwi opantioae - Sapport Serricoe Prograa Code: Prieary Leader: Estelle Nettbis Seeondary Leader: C. Russell Maye, Jr./Anna Hart Prograa Coal: TO \u0026lt;1wlop fopport prograae aad proeednree wblcb *m allow iaesatlve scboola to provide eabancad adaeatiiaial opportnaltiee foe all atndanta. L Z. Plan Refereaee Page IubImu ISO-181 160-181 180-181 180-181 Objectives Strategli Beginning Data Coi^letioa Data Bee[ws\u0026gt;Bll\u0026gt;ll1,\u0026gt; J Svalnatlon Criteria 7.0 Cceenaity access/field tripe are to be arranged for (relnforceaeat or enrichaent) for stndeets. 8.0 To bn-i Id a prograa of cc^Bunity Involveaent provided for stadents with access to i arganinatlana and volunteer eocperlences. Joly 1, 1993 Joae 30, 1994 (Principals and staff, VIPS, parents) 7.0 (Review relationship of field trips to subject areas taught and students' educational, social and eaotlonal needs and detemlne the effectiveness through improvoBent in classroom performance and student achievenent on standardized tests) 7.1 Vlsita to bloterical, scientific and cultural eveots and oKbiblta within tbe city and around tbs state aad region with appropriate chaperons to provide educational input. A. Preaently, the LBSD provldee support If casBoniCy access uppnitnulties occur any day other than Sunday. B. I^Iaentaticm baa been poealble through the support of tbe Pulaahl County Special School District Transportation Department. 8.1 Sstabllsb Girl/Bay Scout Prograas at each school. 6?^ Joly 1, 1993 Joly 1, 1993 Joly 1, 1993 JOM 30, 1994 June 30, 1994 Jone 30, 1994 vipa, Bdncatloaal PtiMjLsas, Curriealua Deaegregatian (Parents, Teachers, Principal) Asst. Snpt., Coord, of Incentive Schools (VIPS) Quapaw Council, Asst. Snpt., Coordinator of Incentive Schools (Parent Coordinator of Incentive Schools) 7.1 (Copy of building level culalnatlng activities and corresponding field trips) 7.1 (Students will demonstrate mastery of stated objectives of subject areas as related to field trips on teacher-made tests and Abacus assessment) 8.0 (An increase in the number of students who participate in consBunlty organizations will be evident) 8.1 (Copy of program and participants and community activities) 8.1 (An increase in the number of students who will participate in scouts in each school)Prograa Seq 72 Prograa Naoa: School Policies and Procedures Prograa Cede: Prograa Goal: To reassess individual school LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET Primary Leader: Estelle Matthis policies and procedures as they DOCUMENT Secondary Leader: relate to oeeting the needs Page: Revision Date: C. Russell of all 2 February Mayo, students. 25, Jr./Ama 1994 Bart Plan Page Reference Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date L 188 L 188 L 188 188 1.0 To prograsBlng incentive complies establish a flexible approach school at Coarpletlo n Date Respqnslbll Ity Evaluation Criteria also needs. with which each July 1993 June 1994 30, Principal Staff 1.0 neets standards individual and student student (Increased on teacher tests, achievement made Abacus 1.1 (or. Allow other for team assessments, classroom observation standardized strategy} scheduling. effective by means teaching teaching of July 1993 June 1994 30, (Principal Staff) team the or 1.2 for classes periods Provide students for to opportunities for as romain extended needed. in time July 1993 June 1994 30, (Principal Staff) 1.3 Develop individualized a plan for within the instructions specific building. July 1991 June 1994 30, (Principal Staff) 1.4 for flexible addressed Local extended Practioners' year adainistration. scheduling by LRSD school must plan with be Jan. 1993 17, and tests) (Evidence teaching building other teaching 1.2 nuober of at level affective strategy) (Increase of participating extended Saturday Extended Programs) teachers plans in students in day, or Year (ClassrooB and Education include strategies lesson student's Individualized instruction Plan specific and will the needs 70^ children) of to E all meetPaga: Program Saq #s 72 Ravision Data: Fabrxiary 25, 1994 Prograa Naoa: School Pollclas aad Procedures Prograa Coda: Primary Leader: Estella Matthia Secondary Leader: C. Bussell Hayo, Jr./Arma Bart Prograa Goal: To reassess Individual school policies and procedures they relate to oaetlng the needs of all students. Plan Page Reference Number Objactives Strategies Beginning Data Ccopletlo n Date Rasponslbil Ity Evaluation Criteria L 188 L 188 188 L 188 L 188 L 188 2.0 for Areas to be possible plan investigated Inclusion. July 1993 June 1994 30, Assoc. Supts., Asst. Supts. 2.0 (Final recoBBseadations from the school 2.1 Permanent substitute school needed. 2.2 At to in be least assistant the 2.3 A. assignad each Incentive available one-half principal. RecoBendation LRSD Board Uniforms Uniforms required climate efforts. 2.4 as time to and Standard teachers. 2.S Encouraged denied (at least of for need Directors. students to be by July 1993 July 1993 July 1993 June 1994 30, (Assoc. Supts., Asst. Supts.) 1, June 1994 June 1994 30, 30, enhance recruitment school two dress PTA for attendance (Principal Asst. Supt.) Assoc. Supts., Asst., Supts. caaoBittae available) 2.1 (Job description and filled) 2.2 ari written position (Staffing reflective Businass of Casa recoBBandations) 2.3 (Students parents idea \u0026lt; of evidenced results) 2.3 racial (An occur) and support uniforms the as by survey acceptable balance will year for for (2) staff) parents/all meetings meetings per July 1993 July 1993 June 1994 June 1994 30, 30, (Parents, Principal, Staff) (Principal, Staff) 2.4 (Teachers participate establishing dress code building) 2.5 of will in In each (Documentation parent participation PTA reflect Beatings In will the number 7/ S of parents attending)Program Seq *: 72 Page: Program Name: School Policies Revision Date: Fabruary 25, 199 aad Procedures Program Code: Primary Leader: Estelle Matthls Secondary Leader: C. Russell Mayo, Jr./Arma Bart Program Goal: To reassess Individual sehool policies and procedures as they relate to meeting th needs of all students. Plan Page Reference Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completlo n Data L 188 Responsibil ity Evaluation Criteria 2.6 Student available individual handbooks in every that will school school. be aad July 1993 June 1994 30, (Principal, Staff) 2.6 Bandbooks {Student used to parents about will inform Informed sehool programs, and bo {3.0 to I \u0026gt; To provide staff.) compensation regarding children) procedures policies their (3.1 will Additional be given teachers/prlncipals to compensation who extra incentive periods of time at work the A. at on school.} Teachers are an hourly rate educational experience ranging $12,000.00 with from B. compensated of hours pay and based salaries $6,000.00 per year. to Principals compensated receiving a have equitably, standard yet to be of $2,200.00 stipend per year. July 1993 1, June 1994 30, (3.1 records) Payroll\u0026lt;\u0026gt;F-. d RECEIVSn MAR 8 1994 Office of Desegregaiion Mcniicring TO: Mr. Larry Robertson, Assistant Superintendent FROmT^V^Robert L. Brown, Jr., Principal DATE: March 4, 1994 SUBJ.: Results of Personal Investigation in Program Budget Document Censorship Please be advised Mr. Sterling Ingram is responsible for censoring the input from Garland's Program Budget Document. At this time, I am asking you to secure for me the \"legitimate\" reason(s) for his authorization of this school's document. If at all possible, I would appreciate a response before my meeting with Dr. Mayo. If you are able to attend that meeting, March 9, 1994 at 3:30 p.m., I would like for you to be present. Thank you for your help. cc: Sterling Ingram Estelle Matthis Dr. Henry Williams Ann Brown John WalkerI. n. m. IV. V. VI. vn. PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT WORKSHOP Welcome 5, 1994 and September 6, 1994 AGENDA Introduction/Purpose Background and History WordPerfect and PBD Examples Questions and Answers Adjournment tf [-s'?'4^ 7^ 7 '*4' 1 -tii*  OCT 0uiC3 oi Robert Glowers Bill Mooney Robert Glowers Robert Glowers 51994 litorii tPROGBUD.DOC DISKETTE 9 THERE IS A METHOD TO THE PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT PROCESS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Planning, Research and EvaluationLittle Rock School District Planning and Budgeting Process Program Planing and Budgeting Process Manual (Gray Book) Project Management Tool Monthly Court Submission The Tool Program Budget Document Quarterly Report (Rainbow Book)  Task analysis of the Program Planning and Budgeting Document (Gray Book)  Program achievements  Identifies when activities are scheduled and completed I . Quarterly Expenditures  Forces communication among departments because the tasks are interrelated1 Planning \u0026amp; Budgeting Time Line MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP Prog. Inventory I T I OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 I I I Prog. Evaluation Needs Assessment Goals Prog. Devel. I I I I I I I I Budgeting I I I I Monitoring \u0026amp; Reporting I I I I I I I I I Reassessment of Planning Process \u0026amp; Organization I I I I I Lidie Rock School District AUG I I JLY R. Mayo Fiscal Year 1994-95 QUARTERLY REPORTING ACHIEVEMENTS First Quarter 07-01-94/09-30-94 Accomplishments, efforts performance toward strategies Diskettes Due: 10-14-94 Placed under Strategies column Returned: 11-21-94 PROGRAM Alphabet precedes each achievement COMPLETION DATE Documents when an achievement is completed, in the format MM/DD/YY Give approximate, educated guess for percent of completion for achievements started but not finished. Give actual date upon 100% completion. BUDGET DOCUMENT PROCESS BEGINNING DATE Every achievement should have a corresponding Beginning Date Documented in format MM/DD/YY Documents when an achievement beginsPBD MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY DIRECTIONS: Fill in the blanks with the correct word(s). 1. The Program Budget Document provides planning information about_____________ information about the programs. and 2. The Program Budget Document diskettes are reported at intervals or periods. 3. _______________________ are efforts, tasks, evidence, performance, or actions undertaken which contribute to the accomplishment of the strategy. 4. If an achievement or activity toward the accomplishment of a strategy has been started but not completed during a reporting period, then a of completion should be entered in the \"Completion Date column. ir 5. Each achievement should have corresponding ______________ date information and________ date information or a percent indication for the date.DISKETTE FLOW INFORMATION Completed Diskettes Returned to: Incentive Schools Principals Sterling Ingram Elementary Schools Principals Margaret Gremillion Sadie Mitchell Secondary Schools Principals Robert Glowers Primary Leaders, Secondary Leaders, Program Managers Robert Glowers IInstructions For Entering Data Into The Progbudl.Doc Step 1 - Press rhe F5 key. Step 2 - Type a\nand press ENTER Step 3 - Press the DOWN ARROW key to move the cursor and the red highlight bar down. Progbud. 1 must be highlighted in red. Step 4 - Type 1 for Retrieve. The table will load onto the screen. Step 5 - Use the ARROW keys to move the cursor under the 'P\" in Program Name. Step 6 - Press the TAB key once. This will move the cursor under the \"S\" in School Operations. With your cursor under the \"S' type your school name, comma, and the press space bar once. The spacing will automatically adjust. Step 7 - Press the TAB key six (6) times and type your principal's name. Step 8 - Press the PAGE DOWN key once to move to the second page. This is the beginning of the table. Step 9 - Use the DOWN ARROW key to move into the table. Press the TAB key two (2) times to move to the Strategies column (column 3). Step 10 - Press the ALT key and the DOWN ARROW key together - 3 times. The cursor will move under the in 1.2 in the Strategies column (column 3). You are now ready to insert rows for the achievements corresponding to strategy 1.1. Step 11 - Press the ALT key and the F7 key together. You are now in the Table Edit screen.Page 2 Step 12 - Press the INSERT key. Type 1 for rows. Type in the number of rows you need to insert and press ENTER. To figure out the number of rows look to see how many achievements there are for the first strategy and insert one row for each achievement. For example, if you have two (2) achievements for the first strategy you will insert two (2) rows. . Step 13 - Press F7 to exit the Table Edit screen. Step 14 - Type the achievements for that strategy using the following format with A. being the achievement for 1.1. Strategies eginnino Date Cospletion Date 1. To review organizational structure in schools and central office to anaure sufficient sifiport for students and staff success and for the iapleaantation of the desegregation plan. 1.1 Appoint school-based biracial coaaiittees to aonitor iapleaamtation and data. (Report to faculty) A. School Biracitl Conmittee established (July 1, 1993) July 1, 1993 09/13/93 (June 30, 1994) 30, 1994 09/16/93 1.2 A district-wide biracial coaittee will laonitor district-wide desegregation efforts and data and (report to Board) July 1, 1993 30, 1994Page 3 Step 15 - You are ready to type the Beginning Date and the Completion Date. Step Step Step 16 - Press the TAB key once and type the Beginning Date. 17 - Press the TAB key once and type the Completion Date. 18- Press the TAB key five (5) times. This will move the cursor to column 3 in the Strategies column. You are ready to type in the next achievement. Step 19 - Before starting on the next achievement you will need to save your work. Press FIO to save. Type in a\nand your document name - then press ENTER. This name can be Budget 1 or your school name, although, you will only be allowed to use eight characters. Step 20 - Repeat steps 10 through 18. Please note that in Step 10 you will move the cursor to the next Plan Reference and Page Number in column 1 that matches the strategy for your next achievement. Step 21 - Continue in this manner until you have entered all achievements. Step 22 - To Exit WordPerfect press F7. Then you will answer Y (yes) or N (no) to save: document name will appear - press ENTER: Y (yes) or N (no) to replace: Y (yes) or N (no) to exit WP51. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Text will wrap around when typing within a column. When retrieving your document you can look at the date the document was saved to decide which document you worked on last. It is a safe practice to save about every 15 minutes. To do this press FIO then press ENTER, press Y. If something goes wrong with the document simply exit without saving. Do this by pressing F7 and type N for No.ADDING ROWS AT THE END OF A TABLE This should only be used when you have reached the double lines at the end or the bottom of a table and there is no space available to type text. BE SURE TO READ THE DIRECTIONS AND MESSAGES ON THE SCREEN WHILE FOLLOWING THESE STEPS. Step 1 - Press the ALT key and the F7 key together. This will open the table edit screen. Step 2 - Press the HOME key twice then the DOAVN ARROW key. The cursor will move to the last cell in the table. Step 3 - Type 1 for SIZE. Step 4 - Type 1 for ROWS. Step 5 - The current number of rows in the table will appear on the screen. Type the new size of your table. For example, the number of rows is currently 23 and you need three (3) more rows - type 26 (23  3  26) and press ENTER Step 6 - Press F7 to exit the table edit screen. Step 7 - Move the cursor to the column you need to type in and type your text.How To Move The Cursor In A Table In Document Screen Use the Following Key Strokes In Edit Screen Use the Following Key Strokes To get to the Edit Screen [Ait} 4- (F7 Q + Q One Cell Down Qor (Alt} + Q Shift) 4. [Tati) or (Ait} + Q One Cell Left Q or Shift + or + Q Tati) or (AjD +  One Cell Right Qor (Tati) or Sl + Q +  One Cell Up CD or Home), [Home). (Home). (^ First Cell In A Row Home). (Home). (^ or Home I, (Home). (Home). Q Last Cell in A Row Home End) I, (Home). [^ or Last Cell in the Table Specific Cell + (EED Cell Location (e.g., Al) To exit the Edit Screen 11} 4-CURSOR CONTROL Character left Character right Line up Line down I I Commind Card Basic WordPerfect Features DELETE TEXT/CODES Character left of cursor BACKSPACE Character at cursor Word at cursor Word Left Word Right Left end of line Right end of line CTRL \u0026lt;- CTRL HOME HOME \u0026lt; HOME HOME - or END Characten right of cursor to end of line Characters right of cursor to end of P*g Sentence, paragraph, page Block DEL CTRL  BACKSPACE DELETE EOL (CTRL . END) DELETE EOP (CTRL  PGDN) CTRL  F4 Undelete Block text DEL. Y n, 1 Left end of tcreen Right end of screen Top of JCToen Bonom of screen HOME. - HOME,-* HOME. * or - (numeric keypad) HO.stE. i or + (numeric keypad) Top of current page Bonom of current page Top of page number Top of previous page Top of next page CTRL  HOME. T CTRL  HOME, i CTRL  HOME. pagenu/nber PGUP PGDN Beginning of document HOME HOME, I HOME HOME i End of doctimeoi SAVE DOCUMENT And Remain in Document 1. Flo 2. Enter filename 3. Y/N (if resaving) And Clear the Screen 1. F7.Y 2. Enter filename 3. Y/N (if resaving) 4. N And Exit WordPerfect 1. F7,Y 2. Enter filename 3. YZN (if resaving) 4. Y BLOCK TEXT/CODES 1. Cursor on first character 1. ALTF4 3. Cunor on last character RETRIEVE DOCUTvfENT Directly 1. SKUTAFIO 1, Enter filename From Lbt Files 1. F5. Enter drive/directory 2. Highlight file, 1 PRINT Text from Screen 1. Position curscr 2. SK!rT-F7 3. 1 for full document. 2 for page Block from Screen 1. Block text 2. SHIFT * F7. Y Document from Disk 1. SHIFT + F7.3 1. Enter document name 3. Enter range of pages Document from Li.ct Files (Disk) 1. F5. enter directory 2. Highlight file, 4 3, Enter range of pagesC.aocei Print Job 1. SJOFr .FT, 4, 1 2. Enter print job number CENTER (OR FLUSH RIGHT) 1. Poiidon cursor 2. SHIFT  P6 (or ALT * PS) UNDERLINE (OR BOLD) While Typing 1. Pl (or PS) 2. Typo text 3. FI (or PS) Existing Text 1. Block text 2. Pl (orP6) CHANGE LINE SPACING 1. Posidon cunor 2. SHIFT  FR, 1, 6 3. Enter apacing, FT RESET MARGINS Left/rtgiit 1, Posidoa cunor 2, SHIFT * Pl, 1,7 3. Enter margdni, FT Top/bottom 1. Pondoncunor 1. SHnT*PI.2,5 3. Enter margin*. F7 RESET TABS 1. Poiidon cunor 2. 3. 4. SHIFT. PI, 1.8 Cle*rT*b() Set Ub(), FT. F7 SEARCH TEXT/CODES 1. Posidon cunor. Fl 2. Type learch icing. Fl REPLACE TEXT/CODES 1. Poiidon cunor 2, AJJT * Fl, Y/N for confirmation 3. Type eared itiing, F2 4. Type replace icing. Fl INSERT HEADERS (OR FOOTERS) I. Poiidon cunor it top of page 2. SHIFT  PS, 2.3 (or 4) 3. Select I or 2 for type of header (or footer) 4. Select frequency 5. Type the text, FT, F7 INSERT PAGE NUMBERS 1. Poiidon cunor at top of page 2, SHIFT * Pl, 2, 7 3. Select page number poiidon, FT MOVE(ORCOPY) Sentence, Paragraph, Psge 1. Posidon cunor 2. CTRL. F4, 1 or 2 or 3 3. I(ot2) 4. Posidoa cunor, ENTER Block of Text 1. Block text 2. CTRL.F*, 1 3. I(or2) 4. Poiidon cunor, ENTER CHECK SPELLING 1. Posidoa cunor o 3. CTRL . Pl, 1 4. 1 for word, 2 for page, 3 for document 5. Respond to menu opdona USE THESAURUS 1, Poiidon cunor on word 2. loaen Tbeiaiirui (floppy diik users) 3. ALT.n 4. Respond to menu opdona WoniPwiocx w * of WordPwriwcl CotporwonPRINT SHIFT F7 print text 4 t2SBlE __ _ ________________ \\ Name Port 1 HP LaserJet IID 2 LPTl: 3 Sheet Feeder None 4 - Cartridges/Fonts/Print Wheels 5 Initial Base Font Courier lOcpi 6 Path for Downloadable Fonts and Printer Command Files I  7 - Print to Hardware Port No / S Selection: 0 Selec Printer: Cartridges/Fonts/Print Wheels 'it Category Quantity Available Built-In Ca: idges Soft Fonts 2 350 K 0 350 K NOTE: Most fonts listed under the Font Category (with the exception of Built-In are optional and must be purchased separately from your dealer or manufacturer. If you have fonts not listed, they may be supported on an additional printer diskette. For more information call WP at (801) 225-5000. If soft fonts are marked you must run the Initialize Printer option in WP each time you turn on your printer. Doing so deletes all soft fonts in printer memory and downloads those marked with If soft fonts are not located in the same directory as your printer files, y must specify a Path for Downloadable Fonts in the Select Printer: Edit menu\". you 1 Select\n2 Change Quantity\nN Name search: 1TERM MANAGEMENT TOOL PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT (PBD) ALLOCATIONS FORMULAS MINIMUM FOUNDATION PERFORMANCE AID (MFPA) CARRY-OVER FISCAL-YEAR GOALS OBJECTIVE PROGRAM PROGRAM DESCRIPTION PROGRAM GOAL ACHIEVEMENTS PROGRAM NAME LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Planning Budget Process Glossary MEANING A listing of annual tasks to be done related to Planning and Budgeting. Tasks appear listed by task, completion percentage, start date, finish date, and person(s) responsible. A listing of all legal obligations of LRSD divided by program areas. Obligations appear listed by reference, obligation, activities, start and finish dates, person(s) responsible, and evidence criteria for the completion of activities. At one time this was known as the \"Rainbow Document\" because it was printed on paper of many colors. Mathematical formulas used to determine how resources are allocated. Technical term. Refers to part of the monies the district receives toward per- pupil expenditure. The amount of money not spent by LRSD when the budget is closed for a given fiscal year. The beginning month period during which spending on the new budget begins and ends our fiscal year is July 1-June 30. If only one year appears with the word \"fiscal\" or \"FY\" in a document, it is the last year of that budget. For example, fiscal year 1995-96 may be expressed as FY 96. A broad expression of one purpose of LRSD. A specific, measurable expression of something to be achieved within a stated time period. A program is an established plan of operation, composed of a group or series of related activities which are carried out to serve a specific area of identified need. (PBD) A program description includes a purpose, scope and content, and participants/beneficiaries related to the respective program. (PBD) A program goal is a broad guiding statement and should describe the overall aim(s), purpose(s), or ambition(s) of the specific program. (PBD) Achievements are efforts, tasks, evidence, performance, or actions undertaken in a program which contributes to the accomplishment of the strategy. Achievements are placed in alpha order underneath the relative strategy. (PBD) To eliminate confusion, an established name for each program has been assigned by the district planner. (PBD)OBJECTIVES Program objectives present explicitly the desired impact the program should have on a problem. They should provide detail to the goals. (PBD) STRATEGIES Strategies are the jobs, tasks, efforts, or actions undertaken in a program which contributes to the accomplishment of the objective. (PBD) PRIMARY LEADER The Primary Leader is the council\\cabinet level associate responsible for the management and operation of the respective program. (PBD) SECONDARY LEADER The Secondary Leader is the associate who is back-up to the Primary and will function in that capacity in the absence of the Primary (i.e. the Program Manager or the Principal). (PBD) DISTRICT GOAL SUPPORT Each program directly supports at least one district goal. If more than one district goal is relative, then the appropriate district goals have been listed in descending priority order. (PBD) BEGINNING DATE This is the actual date a particular strategy began. For consistency, all dates should be printed in the following manner\nMM/DD/YY, (09/30/93). (PBD) COMPLETION DATE This is the actual date a particular objective or strategy was completed. For consistency, all dates should be entered in the following format: MM/DD/YY, (09/30/93). If an activity toward a strategy has been started but not completed, a percent of completion (75 %) should be entered. (PBD) RESPONSIBILITY This is the name of the individual(s) tasked with ensuring an activity has been accomplished. (PBD)Program Seq #: 27 Program Name: Educational Equity Monitoring Program Code\n22 Program Goal: Plan Reference Page Number L 224 LRSD FY 94-95 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: {To provide information to determine the level of educational equity for all students to coordinate the planning and budgeting process.) Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Page: 2 Revision Date: Or. Robert Glowers Responsibility October 3, 1994 Evaluation Criteria 1. To cortduct semi-annual Educational Equity Monitoring visits with the assistance of the local school biracial committees. (1.0 Completed semi-annual report of findings in the thirteen (13) monitoring categories.) (1.1 Develop appropriate surveys, designs, checldists and other reporting forms for monitoring process.) (1.2 Selection of local team members.) (1.3 Conduct training of local team members, as needed.) 107-01-94) (07-01-94) (07-01-94) (06-30-95) (06-30-95) (06-30-95) Director, Planning, Research end Evaluation Principals Director. Planning, Research and Evaluation (1.1 Copies of completed documents.) (1.2 List of local team members.) (1.3 Agenda of completed training session and list of team members who received training.)Program Seq #: 27 Program Name: Educational Equity Monitoring Page: 3 Revision Date: October 3, 1994 Program Code: 22 Primary Leader: Dr. C. Russell Mayo Secondary Leader: Dr. Robert Glowers Program Goal: (To provide information to determine the level of educational equity for all students to coordinate the planning and budgeting process.) Plan Reference Page Number Objectives Strategies Beginning Date Completion Date Responsibility Evaluation Criteria (1.5 Establish monitoring schedule.) (1.6 Conduct site visits.) (07-01-94) (07-01-94) (06-30-95) (06-30-95) Director, Planning, Research and Evaluation Director, Planning, Research and Evaluation (1.5 Completed monitoring schedule for all schools.) (1.6 Completed composite report for each visit.)LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Planning, Research and Evaluation Evaluation of the Seminar on PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT Please help us evaluate this seminar by responding to the items below. Circle the number which best express your reaction to each of the items. Space for additional comments has been provided. 1. The objectives of the seminar were: Clearly evident 5 4 3 2 1 Vague 2. The organization of the seminar was: Excellent 5 4 3 2 1 Poor 3, How effective was the presenter(s): Excellent 5 4 3 2 1 Poor 4. Did the presenter(s) communicate effectively: Excellent 5 4 3 2 1 Poor 5. Was the presentation effective: Adequate 5 4 3 2 1 Inadequate 6. The information gained should prove: Beneficial 5 4 3 2 1 Not Beneficial 7. Overall, I thought this seminar was: Excellent 5 4 3 2 1 Poor What additional information would have been advantageous to you: Comments:CORR25 Date: September 2, 1993 To: Estelle Matthis Sterling Ingram Dennis Glasgow Larry Robertson Margaret Gremillion Brady Gadberry Arma Hart Jeanette Wagner Mark Milhollen Jerry Malone From: Bill Mooney Subj: Completion of the Program Budget Documents Sterling and I have been working on some documentation to support the Program Budget Document, and we think this will help you in your task of loading your initial program data. If you will look at these two documents prior to loading your data, you should have far fewer problems. Attached is a document entitled \"LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT TERM AND DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS.\" This document provides some basic definitions you will need as you work with both the desegregation programs and the non-desegregation programs in the next phase of the project. It also provides a description of every data element field on both pages of the Program Budget Document (PBD), including what should go into those fields. The diskette is built using WordPerfect. You will find three files on the diskette\nINSTRUCT, PROGBUD.DOC, and TABLE JRM. File INSTRUCT contains a complete set of typing and formatting instructions for your clerical staff. This file should be read before opening the other two. If you run into problems, please ask for help. It is very important that you pass on this information to all program people who will be working with the PBD. If you have questions, let us know. The PBD you are creating today will be used for quarterly reporting for the rest of the year. Therefore, maximum happiness will result from maximum communication and understanding. CONCPT04 REVISED 02 SEP 93 LRSD FY 93-94 PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT TERM AND DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS TERM DEFINITIONS. The following definitions are provided for general guidance, and will be used throughout the Program Planning and Budgeting Process. Program. A program is an established plan of operation, composed of a group or series of related activities which are carried out to serve a specific area of identified need. A program is a major undertaking by the district to fulfill statutory, executive, and/or legal reguirements. methods of implementing goals and objectives. Programs are the district's Programs will be a basis for work progress and fiscal reporting and monitoring. Program Description. Generally, program descriptions do not currently exist on most programs, and will have to be written, program description should include at least three parts: A - Purpose. A one or two sentence statement of what the program is designed to accomplish. Scope and Content. A general description of the activities that are to be undertaken to achieve the purpose. description program. This of section might also include the administrative - Participants/Beneficiaries. a brief structure of the A specific statement of how many and what kind of persons will be affected by the program during one fiscal year. Program Goal. A program goal is a broad guiding statement and should describe the overall aim(s), purpose(s), or ambition(s) of the specific program. It is a general and enduring statement of purpose that expresses the district's fundamental intentions and provides guidelines for planning the future development of the program. What is the program trying to accomplish? must have at least one goal, but may have several. Each program Objectives. Program objectives present explicitly the desired impact the program should have on a problem. detail to the goals. They should provide They tell in specific, measurable terms what is to be accomplished to implement adopted goals. The objective statement should: (A) tell what is to be achieved\n(B) tell when the achievement is to be realized\n(C) tell how the achievement of the objective will be measured. least one objective, but may have several. Each program goal must have at Strategies. Strategies are the jobs. tasks. efforts. oractions undertaken in a program which accomplishment of the objective. contributes to the A strategy is a combination of intermediate steps, and produces a distinct end product intermediate processes which only support other strategies. - not These end products should be measurable or quantifiable where possible, showing how the objective is to be achieved. have at least one strategy, but may have several. Each objective must Evaluation Criteria. Evaluation criteria are statements which specify the end product of an objective or strategy and establish measurable levels of performance for the product. These end products should be measurable or quantifiable where possible. showing how the objective or strategy is to be achieved. The criteria should measure, if possible, the relative impact of the results on the problem which the objective or strategy is designed to solve. If a strategy or objective cannot be measured in terms of impact, the measurement can be stated in terms of the level (or volume) of strategy provided and/or the number of persons served. Each strategy must have at least one evaluation criteria, but may have several.PROGRAM PAGE DATA ELEMENTS DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS. Page. Each program will have one of these cover pages. Extensive program narrative will carry-over onto a second page. The form is set up on diskette to allow for this carry-over, so you do not have to get everything on one page. Program Seq #. Each program will be sequence number by the district planner. assigned a unique The purpose of this sequence number is to establish a reference for placing programs in order within the planning document. When the document is assembled, programs are arranged in this sequence. The program sequence number will help facilitate look-up since there is no front-to-back page numbering. This element should be a static field\nit should not change during the year. Revision Date. document was last changed. This date is the actual date this program This date will be entered by the person making the change each time the document is changed. this date will change at As a minimum, performance reporting. least quarterly with the regular Program Name. The district planner established name of the program in this field. will place the Name consistency will eliminate confusion, so try to use the designated name on all documents. change during the year. This element should be a static field\nit should not Program Code. This is a unique accounting code which will link budget and expenditures to the associated program. The code will be assigned by Financial Services prior to the beginning of each fiscal year, and all expenditures during the year should use this program code. should not change during the year. This element should be a static field\nit Primary Leader. The Primary Leader is the cabinet-level associate responsible for the management and operation of this program. This person should have the authority to ensure all necessary actions are taken to make the program successful. This person is responsible for the correctness and timeliness of the planning document and all subsequent reporting. Secondary Leader. The Secondary Leader is the associate who is back-up to the Primary, and will function in that capacity in the absence of the Primary. Program Description. above, must be placed in this field. The program description, as defined This element should be a static field\nit should not change during the year. District Goal Support. Each program must directly support oneor more district goals. If more than one district goal, the appropriate district goals should be listed in descending priority- order. District goals will be established by the Board. This element should be a static field\nit should not change during the year. Program Goal. placed in this field. but may have several. The program goal, as defined above, must be sequentially. Each program must have at least one goal. Each goal should be numbered and listed not change during the year. This element should be a static field\nit should Plan Reference. Specific plan and page references will be listed in this section for those programs directly cited in one of the desegregation plans. L= InterDistrict Plan. LRSD Desegregation Plan. The format should be L23 or 113-20. 1= This element will be left blank if the program is not directly cited in one of the desegregation plans. This element should be a static field\nit should not change during the year, unless by Court Order. FY Program Budget. The total budgeted dollars for the appropriate fiscal year will be shown in this element. The number will be the total for the program code, and will be supplied by Financial Services at the beginning of the fiscal year, element will change only if the budget changes. This FTE. This element reflects the Full Time Equivalents (FTE) budgeted for this program (at the program code level). The number will be the total for the program code, and will be supplied by Financial Services at the beginning of the fiscal year, element will change only if the budget changes. This lst/2nd/3rd/4th Qtr Expend. The actual expenditures for each quarter will be entered into the appropriate field during the quarterly reporting process. Financial Services will provide the information, but the Primary Leader is responsible for entering the information onto the form. remain static unless an error is detected. Once entered, these fields should YTD Expenditures. actual expenditures at the program level. This field is the year-to-date total of This will include all departments with expenditures against this program. Financial Services will provide the information once each quarter is closed, but the Primary Leader is responsible for entering the information onto the form. unless an error is detected. Once entered, these fields should remain static Related Function Codes. This field identifies all function- level accounting codes which combine to make the complete program budget. Each program will have at least one function code, but may have several. with one space between them. Each four digit code should be listed sequentiallyOBJECTIVE PAGE DATA ELEMENTS DATA ELEMENT DEFINITIONS. Page. This is the relating to the the field. ft program\". sequential page number for all pages This number is automatically placed in Program Seq #. program page. This This should be the same number as on the number will link all objectives back to the major program. separate program Revision Date. document was last changed. This date is the actual date this program This date will be entered by the person making the change each time the document is changed. this date will change at As a minimum, least quarterly with the regular performance reporting. The date on this page may be different from that on the program page since this objective page should change more frequently. Program Name. page. This name This should be the same name as on the program is a further link back to the major program. Including the name on this page prevents the need to refer back for the program name. Program Code. This should be the same code(s) as on the program page. This code(s) is a link back to the major program. Including the code(s) on this page prevents the need to refer back for the program code. Primary Leader. This should be the same person as on the program page. Including this name on this page prevents the need to refer back for the leader 's name. Secondary Leader. that name on the program page. This name will generally be the same as objectives, However, if a program has several supporting objectives. the Secondary Leader may be different for those Program Goal. program page in this field. Include only one of the program goals from the For each program goal listed on the program page, there will be at least one objective page. Plan Reference Page Number. listed for each objective and strategy. Source references should be If the objective or strategy is desegregation plan related, list the specific plan and page upon which this objective or strategy is found. If the objective or strategy is not related to a desegregation plan or Court Order, list whatever source was used. be numbered to correspond to the appropriate strategy. Each reference should Objectives. the program goal. List all of the objectives required to satisfy Objectives should be listed in bold face.Wording not taken from a desegregation plan or court order should be in bold face within parentheses. Each program goal must have at least one objective, but may have several. Spacing between objectives should allow for all supporting strategies. Objectives should be numbered sequentially under each goal. Strategies. the related objective. List all of the strategies required to satisfy Strategies should be listed in bold face. Wording not taken from a desegregation plan or court order should be in bold face within parentheses. Each objective must have at least one strategy, but may have several, numbered sequentially under each objective. Strategies should be Beginning Date. activity began. This is the actual date this particular For consistency, all dates should be entered in the following format\nMM/DD/YY, 07/22/93. stated yet, leave this field blank. If an activity has not Completion Date, activity was completed. entered in the following format\nThis is the actual date this particular For consistency, all dates should be MM/DD/YY, 07/22/93. If an activity has been started but not completed, give your best guess on the percent of completion (75%). started, leave this field blank. If the activity has not Responsibility. This is the name of the individual tasked with ensuring this activity is accomplished. Evaluation Criteria. List at least one evaluation criteria for each strategy. Include the specific measure of success. Evaluation criteria should be listed in bold face. Wording not taken from a desegregation plan or court order should be in bold face within parentheses. Each evaluation criteria should be numbered to correspond to the appropriate strategy, and should be numbered sequentially under each strategy.(7c: Program Description: Purpose: Scope and Content. In-depth Program Evaluation Format This comes from the program description in the Program Budget Document (PBD). The description may be expanded if necessary to better describe the program. A statement or succinct description of the purpose of the program A narrative of what the program encompasses Participants/Beneficiaries'. A description of who the participants and beneficiaries are of the program. A specific group of workers, a specific group of students\ngeneral description of participants or beneficiarieswhichever is more applicable. Program Goals: The program goal(s) taken from the PBD Evaluation Criteria: Evaluation criteria are listed on the far right side of the PBD. The evaluation criteria should be listed separately and numbered as part of the format of your evaluation. / Evaluation Results: The corresponding results of the evaluation criteria should be listed here. The evaluation results should be numbered to match the evaluation criteria listed above for easy reference. If no evaluation results are available for a corresponding evaluation criteria item as listed above, then no evaluation results should be so stated. Objective 1: This is the first objective from the PBD for the program being evaluated and should be restated. Following restatement of the first objective, relevant data results of findings from the evaluation results listed above should be presented here. Tables are also appropriately presented at this point to indicate the success of attainment of objective 1 with respect to the attainment of the appropriate program goal or goals. This section of the evaluation provides you with the opportunity to pull together the different evaluation results that indicate the success of objective 1. Discussion I: A discussion of objective 1. A statement of whether or not you met objective 1 based on conesponding criteria. That is, what can you say about your success in meeting objective 1 in terms of your evaluation criteria. Was/were the appropriate goal or goals met. It is at this point that you would pull together the various pieces of your evaluation results in order to holistically discuss the success of achievement of objective 1.2 Objective 2: Restatement of the second objective followed by relevant data results as described in the process above. Discussion 2: Restate the second objective. Discuss whether or not you met objective 2 based upon the evaluation criteria/results in terms of the program goal(s). Objective X: This process should continue until all objectives for your program have been listed and criteria appropriately dealt with. Discussion X: This process should continue until all objectives for your program have been dealt with in terms of meeting the objective in terms of the related program goal or goals. Obstacles to Goal Attainment:Below, please list the obstacles encountered. Use the conesponding objective number as listed in the PBD. Objective 1: Provide a succinct statement as to whether or not the objective was met in terms of its goals. If the objective was achieved, then state objective achieved. If the objective was not achieved, then state objective not achieved and indicate why the objective was not achieved in terms of your goal(s)\nexamples could include the lack of resources, inadequate personnel, lack of community interest, etc. Objective 2: As above Objective X: This process should continue until ail objectives have been dealt with in terms to relative to obstacles to goal attainment Recommendations: After evaluation of your program, recommendations are likely to be forth coming. These recommendations are recommended changes to the existing program. The new recommendations will entail several components. The new objectives listed for a particular recommendation are not to be confused with the objectives listed in the PBD which you have already evaluated. Essentially, you are now writing a new objective and component elements. Recommendation 1: A statement of what you recommend as a program change to the current program. Objective D. State the objective of the recommendation described above. Evaluation Criteria: State the new evaluation criteria that will be used to evaluate the objective. Expected Benefits'. State the benefits to be experienced/expected by the District as a result of this recommendation were it to be implemented. eval_94.doc 11/11/943 Impact Analysis'. Describe the expected impact of the program. Refer to the Business Case format for additional detailed instructions. Resources Analysis'. Personnel analysis, financial analysis, expected costs, savings, etc. Refer to the Business Case format for additional detailed instructions. Force Field Analysis'. Who will be the primary supports of the recommendation\nwho will be the primary detractors of the recommendation. Refer to the Business Case format for additional detailed instructions. General Implementation Plan'. This includes the timelines, corresponding activities, and responsible persons for implementation of the recommendation. Refer to the Business Case format for additional detailed instructions. Recommendation 2: Follow above process Recommendation X: Follow above process for each additional recommendation. Please include the following wording at the end of your extended evaluation and indicate your recommendation and check-off one of the budgetary impact statements.  Business Case is recommended___yes___no  Plan modification is recommended___yes___no  Overall recommendations are likely to have what type of budgetary impact: No budgetary impact___ Increased costs___ Decreased costs eval_94.doc 11/11/94\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_617","title":"Program planning and budgeting process","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":["1992/1996"],"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 employees","Educational law and legislation"],"dcterms_title":["Program planning and budgeting process"],"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/617"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n- IRC  TEL : 501-324-0504 Oct 0193 15:11 No .004 P.Ol LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING, RESEARCH AND EVALUATION Date: September 30, 1993 To: All principals From: Sterling Ingram, Director Subject: Instructions for completing Program Budget Document In order to standardize procedures for reporting achievements (evidence) of the strategies on the Program Budget Document, the following instructions are provided. 1. Responsibilities of Principals Principals are expected to document the achievement of strategies only where \"Principal\" or \"District is stipulated in the \"Responsibility\" Principals are Staff 11 column of the Program Budget Document. responsible for inputting information in only three\nstrategies. Beginning Date and Completion The diagram below shows the relative columns (3) columns: Date. for inputting information by principals. strategies Beginning Date Completion Date 2. Submission to Assistant superintendents Your diskette should be forwarded to the assigned 1993 assistant superintendents on or before the second Thursday following the end of the quarter (i.e. Thursday, October 14, 1993, for this quarter). The assistant superintendents will compile the information to form a district-wide report that will be keyed into a master School Operations diskette. 3. Return to Schools Your diskette will be returned to you after a paper copy has been extracted for office use.ik'c' TEL :501-324-0504 Oct 0193 15:11 No .004 P.02 Memo to Principals September 30, 1993 Page 2 4. Placement of Achievements (Evidence) on the Program Budget Documents Evidence of the achievements should be placed underneath the II Strategies\" column. Use alpha order to list achievements underneath strategies (A._______ B., etc.) where the principal or district staff has been specified as the responsible person. REMEMBER\nThe achievements will continue to grow underneath each strategy until the information for that particular strategy is completed. See the Sample of Achievements Documentation below for selected objectives and selected corresponding strategies for further clarification. sample of Achievements Documentation OBJECTIVE STRATEGIES 1. To ensure an organizational structure which provides equal opportunity and access for parents,students and staff. 1. To review organizational structure in schools and central office to ensure sufficient support for students and staff success and for the implementation of the desegregation plan. 3.1 Mini-seminars at PTA meetings and in the community. A. PTA Mini-Seminars Agenda, October 10 5. Beginning Date Each achievement should have a corresponding beginning date (MM/DD/YY) , example: 09/28/93.\" IRC' TEL:501-324-0504 Oct 0193 15:12 No .004 P.03 Memo to Principals September 30, 1993 Page 3 6. 8. 7 . Completion Date An actual date (MM/DD/YY) , example: 11/14/93, will document when an achievement was completed. If an achievement has been started but not completed, give an approximate guess for the percent of completion, example: 75%. Limited Achievements for This Reporting Quarter Identify only achievements which have been completed during this quarter (July 1 - September 30). Every strategy is not expected to show achievements at this early date. Laser Printers Are Required for Hard Copies Only laser printers are capable of producing hard copies (photocopies) of the information entered onto However, some laser printers in the the diskettes. schools are not capable of printing the WordPerfect Program Budget Document. For those schools not having printing capabilities for this document. Planning Research and Evaluation will provide a hard copy upon request. REMINDER: _________ If you are confused, do not forget to refer to the three (3) sets of definitions for the Program Budget Document given you at the inservice. As a final note, schools are expected to present only achievements which are succinct and meaningful. Blank forms of the Program Budget Document are enclosed. If you have content questions concerning this memorandum, contact Marjorie Bassa at 324-2120. If you have technical questions concerning the Program Budget Document, contact Dennis Glasgow at 324-0518. drg Enclosures cc: Assistant SuperintendentsTRAIN06 REVISED 07 OCT 93 PROJECT OBJECTIVE Assist the LRSD in developing and implementing a long range planning and budgeting process that links programs/ obligations and fund allocations and expenditures beginning with FY 94-95. 1. Assist the LRSD in developing and implementing a needs assessment process that incorporates both legal obligations and other programs. 2. Assist the LRSD in developing and implementing a process that results in a planning document, based on the needs assessment, which qualifies existing programs/ obligations and identifies new programs to meet defined goals and objectives\nand which defines programs/ obligations in terms of purpose, evaluation criteria and methods, ownership, priorities, and timelines. 3. Assist the LRSD in developing and implementing a budget process that links plan programs/obligations and funding allocations for budgeting and expense reporting analysis\nthat identifies and allocates all financial resources\nthat provides regular review of progress and expenditures\nthat provides a method of initiating modifications to program/ obligations and budgets. 4. Assist the LRSD in developing and implementing a process for program and expenditure evaluation for decision-making.X J mo PUNNING AND BUOGHING PSOCESS A B Program Coordination  Bro ad-leased Iniput and Participation a C  E T Organization and StaPfinsr Needs Assessnent PrograR Inventory \u0026lt; 0  PrograM DevelopMent Budgeting Goals and 01\u0026gt;JectivesG  Prograw Budget BocuMent H Honitoriny and Reporting I Progran Evaluation L Itestart cycleACTIVITIES July Aug. 19 9 3 Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. PLANNIMG AND BUDGETING CYCLE Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Hay 19 9 4 June Needs Assessment Begins July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Har. 19 9 5 Apr. Hay June July Aug. Program Inventory Begins Ha Loa Is/Ob5ec11ves Development Program Development Budgeting Budget Document Monitoring and Reporting (prior quarterly reports) Program Evaluation 1 iTRAIN09 REVISED 07 OCT 93 AUTOMATED PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS PROJECT KICKSTART MICROSOFT PROJECT FOR WINDOWS...windows...excellent SUPERPROJECr...DOS...WINDOWS...EXCELLENT INSTAPLAN...DOS PROJECT SCE TO 'ULER..DOS ON TARGET-WINDOWS PRIMAVERA..DOS PROTRACS...DOS..JLIMITED CAPABILITY TIME LINE...DOS...WINDOWS LOTUS AGENDA..DOS...LIMITED CAPABILITYTRAIN08 REVISED 07 OCT 93 PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOLS CHECKOFF LIST STUFF TO DO TASK LISTING SEQUENTIAL LIST OF TASK/PERSON/TIME GANTT CHART TYPE BASED ON HORIZONTAL TIME PERT PROGRAM EVALUATION AND REVIEW TECHNIQUE CPM CRITICAL PATH METHOD - TIME - MATERIAL - PERSONNELTRAIN07 REVISED 07 OCT 93 BENEFITS OF PPBS PROCESSES 1. LONG RANGE PLANNING BECOMES ROUTINE 2. PLANS AND PROGRAMS REVIEWED CONTINUOUSLY 3. CLASSIFICATION OF PROGRAMS AND PURPOSES 4. INTER-DEPARTMENT COORDINATION STRENGTHENED 5. PROGRAM EVALUATION ESTABLISHED 6. PROGRAM EVALUATION BASED ON GOALSSTPROGOl REVISED 10 AUG 93 SHORT TERM PROJECT PROGRAM DEFINITION PURPOSE: Develop a template for definition, purpose, and measurements. program identification. TASKS TAR ACT 1. Review Bernd tasking memo. 4/12 4/13 2 . audit. Sterling Ingram. Determine his plans for Bernd 4/14 4/14 3. Sterling Ingram. Get copy of Barksdale material. 4/14 4/14 4 . Volunteer assistance and define role. 4/14 4/14 5. Review Barksdale material. 4/16 4/14 6. Sterling Ingram. Draft project plan for audit. 4/19 CANC 7 . Complete research on template items. 4/20 4/23 8. Design template, definitions, and examples. 4/28 4/28 9. Approval of template design. 4/30 CANC 10. plan. Work with Sterling Ingram on completing project CANC 11. project. Deadline on decision from Sterling Ingram on 5/7 5/10 12. Draft initial document for Cabinet on program definition and listing. Distribute. 5/11 5/17 13. Cabinet returns mark-up of program listing. 5/24 CANC Date due is 5/24. 14. Meeting to verify and clean-up. 6/21 6/21 15. Program identification deadline. 6/1 Pass 16. Meet with Morgan on financial coding requirements. 6/23 6/30 17. Distribute final draft for review and comment. Date due back is 7/9 7/2 7/218. Get final mark-ups back from cabinet members. 7/9 7/9 19. Complete any final changes, and finalize program listing. 7/14 7/12 20. Get sign-off from Superintendent. 7/16 7/16 21. Distribute final program listing. 5/28 7/19 22. Meet with Milhollen on re-coding programs. 6/1 6/21 23. Meet with Ingram on template/report design. 7/1 7/21 24. Finalize Program Planning and Budgeting Document and reporting format. 8/16 25. Provide Ingram with complete diskette. 8/23gut Little Rock School District Human Resources Implementation Plan 10 6 Task Desorption Development al Human Resources System Marural I 8^15 [ 6^2 I I 95 Septwnber | Octobw | Novembw | DcmbM f I 9'12 I aUS I 326 I 103 I 1010 | 1CV17 | 1024 | \u0026lt;0/31 | 11/7 | 11/14 | llgl | KgS | 12/5 | 12/12 | 12/19 | 12/26 January I 1g I 1/9 I 1/16 12 DevelqM Needed Forms 5 One on One Meetings with Principals and Department Heads 13 Review and Revise New Forms 9 Oevelope Implementation Plan 14 Prepare Job Descriptions and Expectations 17 Prepare user material 19 Develcpe Education Materials for Users 20 Padtc^ manual for Approval 28 Upgrade tables for CIMSIII - Application System 10 Desigrtale Project Leader 15 Review arxf Revise Job Description and Etqdectatiora 18 Devekpe Education Plan for Users 27 Print rtew coding manuals 1 Hire Hurrwi Resource Director 24 trrplement job desc. \u0026amp; expec. thru mtgs with HR staff 25 Transition for HR Ststfl 26 Forms Printing 29 Print users manuals 8 Corrpletion ol New Forms 16 Education Plan for HR Staff 11 Briefing of HR Director 21 Receive approval for manual and reorganization 22 Anrxxincement to HR SteA 23 Anrxxjrtcemenl toOistrid 2 Reorganization Meetings w/ HR 3 Human Resources Trainirtg 4 Announce Reorganizdion lo Customers 7 Procedures for Prirx^tpals and Budget Marwgers Project: Date\n9/17/93 Critical iiiiiininirniin] Noncritical K\u0026lt;\u0026lt;y:iiiiiiii1 iiiiaiiiiiiiiii K^llllll bnnnni] Hl 111111111 lllllllll lllllllll tn  mnnnmiiinin] B 1 nun mi fnrmnriii rrTrnn.TrTTi tllllllllHIII lllllllllllll B I I I I Progress Milestone e Summary V  Page 1 Date: 9/17/93gust Little Rock School District Human Resources Implementation Plan D 33 Task Description Personnel Coordirutfors' problem log establshed I September I October I November I December arts I a/22 I aoa I as | ari2 | 9/19 | aes | 103 | wio | nvi7 | 1024 | 1031 | 11Z7 [ iizu | 11/21 | n/za | las | iznz | raw [ \\2ix Jenuery I 1/2 i 1S I 1/16 31 Otstrfcule new coding manuals OnTfTl X Distrbule new forms 32 Set irrplementetfion hot-Gne mn HD 34 Modify training and manuals based on prcfclem logs IIIIIHI u im 35 Conduct foHow-on training if necessary I Project: Date: 9/17/93 Critical nrrniriiTunnTn Noncriticai Progress Milestone Summary V Page 2 Date: 9/17/93ID Task Description 12 Develope Needed Forms 10 Designate Project Leader 9 Develope Implementation Plan 17 Prepare user matenal 13 Review and Revise New Forms 18 Develope Education Plan tor Users 5 One on One Meetings with Princtpais and Department Heads 14 Prepare Job Descriptions and Expectations 1 Hire Human Resource Director 6 Development of Human Resources System Manual 8 Completion ol New Forms 16 Education Plan for HR Staff 20 Package manual for Approval 27 Print new coding manuals 28 Upgrade tables for CIMSIII - Applicabon System 21 Receive approval for manual and reorganization 22 Announcement to HR Staff 11 Bneling of HR Director Little Rock School District Human Resources Reorganization Tasks Listing % Complete Finish Assigned to: Notes: 100% 9/13/93 PCS team 0% 50% 0% 50% 0% 0% 0% 80% 80% 80% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 9/20/93 9/21/93 9/24/93 9/27/93 9/28/93 9/29/93 9/30/93 10/1/93 10/1/93 10/1/93 10/1/93 10/1/93 10/1/93 10/1/93 10/4/93 10/5/93 10/6/93 Pagel Dato: 9/17/93 PCS team Choate/Mooney Choate/Mooney PCS Team PCS Team Gad berry Choate/Mooney Dr. Williams Choate Choate Choate Choate Project Leader PCS Team PCS Team HR Dir/Supenntendent Project LeaderID Task Description 23 Announcement to Distnct 15 Review and Revise Job Descriptions and Expectations 2 Reorganizabon Meetings w/ HR 3 Human Resources Training 24 Implement job desc. \u0026amp; expec. thru mtgs with HR staff 4 Announce Reorganizabon to Customers 7 Procedures for Pnnapals and Budget Managers 25 Transihon for HR Staff 26 Forms PrinUng 29 Print users manuals 33 Personnel Coordinators' problem log established 19 Develope Educabon Materials for Users 30 Disbibute new forms 31 Disbibute new coding manuals 32 Set up implementabon hot-hne 34 Modify baining and manuals based on problem logs 35 Conduct follow-on baining if necessary Little Rock School Disbict Human Resources Reorganizabon Tasks Listing % Complete Finish Assigned to: Notes: 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10/8/93 10/8/93 10/11/93 10/12/93 10/14/93 10/15/93 10/15/93 10/15/93 10/15/93 10/15/93 10/15/93 10/25/93 10/25/93 10/25/93 11/5/93 11/15/93 11/22/93 Page 2 Date: 9/17/93 HR Dir/Superintendent PCS Team Human Resource Director Into Svcs Human Resource Director HR Dir/Supenntendent Choate Human Res. Dept. Project Leader Project Leader Human Resource Director Choate/Mooney Human Res. Human Res. Human Res. Dept. Dept. Dept. Human Resource Director Human Resource DirectorB5050101 05/10/1100 PROGRAM PLANNENG AND BUDGETING PROCESS WORKSHOPS WORKSHOPS EVALUATION SUMMARY NOTE\nThe following summary report is designed to assist the ODM staff, and the Court, in preparation for the June 8/9, 1995 LRSD budget hearing. 8/12/94. The final budget hearing on the LRSD FY94-95 budget was held on August 12,1994. During that hearing, the Court addressed some of the deficiencies in the LRSD planning and budgeting processes. At page 77-82 of the hearing transcript, the Judge directed the district to conduct some staff development on the budget process and to contact ODM concerning those workshops. Further, the Judge indicated that she would follow up with a written order to that effect. 8/26/94. Bill Mooney started preparing a design and material for an ODM training session on the Program Budget Document (PBD) and concepts for recommending LRSD workshops. 8/30/94. Ann Brown and Bill Mooney met to discuss initial ideas on the ODM training and what to recommend to LRSD for their workshops. 9/2/94. Bill Mooney conducted training on the PBD for the ODM staff. Lessons learned went into recommendations for LRSD workshops. 9/12/94. Russ Mayo, Robert Glowers, Ann Brown, and Bill Mooney met to discuss the LRSD plan for the workshops suggested by the Court. The meeting was a general discussion on what the district had already tentatively planned\nthe who, what, when, where, and why. Brown suggested the LRSD wait until the order comes out. Mayo and Glowers felt the district had to move quickly in order to meet their timelines. 9/13/94. Robert Glowers issued a memo outlining the workshop schedule. (Attachment A)9/19/94. Ann Brown sent a memo to Robert Glowers in response to his 9/13/94 memo. She informed him that his listing of workshop offerings, contrary to what he stated in his memo, was neither Court mandated nor Court approved. (Attachment A, notation) 9/19/94. Robert Glowers issued a memo reducing the time allotted for the Program Planning and Budget Process workshop and the Program Evaluation workshop in order to minimize the time principals were out of their buildings. 9/20/94. Robert Glowers asked Bill Mooney to attend the Program Planning and Budget Process workshop to help answer any questions. Bill Mooney agreed. 9/22/94. The LRSD conducted the Program Planning and Budget Process and the Program Evaluation workshops. 9/23/94. The LRSD conducted the Program Planning and Budget Process and the program Evaluation workshops (two sessions each). 10/5/94. The LRSD conducted the Program Budget Document workshop (two sessions). 10/6/94. The LRSD conducted the Program Budget Document workshop. 10/24/94. The Court issued the order relating to the staff development requirements. The Court required the LRSD to work with ODM to develop and conduct quality, continuous training on the program planning and budget process for all those who participate in that process. At a minimum, these training sessions were to address the operational responsibilities of the participants in each of the components of the process (needs assessment, program inventory, goals and objectives, program development, budgeting, monitoring and reporting, and evaluation). The LRSD was charged to work with ODM to ensure that the training was adequately defined and implemented. 11/21/94. Robert Glowers called Bill Mooney for a meeting on the Court order. 11/22/94. Russ Mayo, Robert Glowers, Ann Brown, and Bill Mooney met to discuss the training requirements of the Court order. There was a general discussion of what the LRSD had already planned. Brown and Mooney suggested using other staff members to help in the instruction, and mentioned a problem with time allotments. 11/23/94. Bill Mooney began preparing material and examples of good business cases to assist the LRSD in getting ready for the Business Case workshop. 11/28/94. Russ Mayo, Robert Glowers, Ann Brown, and Bill Mooney met on the Business Case workshop. The meeting mainly addressed the various options for the session format, the need for some policy guidelines on when to use a business case, and the time allocation problem. 11/29/94. Robert Glowers and Bill Mooney met to discuss the Business Case and Budget Process workshops. They reviewed the workshop outline, and discussed session format. Mooney reminded Clowers of the time problem. Mooney did not accept the invitation to be the instructor due to the time allotment problems. 11/29/94. Robert Clowers called Bill Mooney to inform him that Superintendent Williams had rejected the time allotment recommendations, and directed him to stay with the original allotments. 11/30/94. Bill Mooney discussed the time allotment problem with Superintendent Williams. Williams said he would stay with the schedule. 11/30/94. Robert Clowers informed Bill Mooney that Estelle Matthis would be the instructor for the Business Case workshop. There were only five work days before the first session. 12/1/94. Bill Mooney delivered a complete set of business case examples, organized into a training package, and supported by some overheads for the LRSD to use in the Business Case workshop. The cover memo discussed the enclosed material and the time allotment problem. 12/2/94. Robert Clowers sent a memo to Ann Brown with the agenda and timelines for the coming workshops. 12/5/94. Bill Mooney met with Estelle Matthis on the Business Case workshop. Matthis shared her plan for the session. Mooney discussed his ideas on subject matter and session format. Mooney shared his concerns with the time allotments. Mooney provided other assistance. 12/6/94. Bill Mooney met with Estelle Matthis prior to the Business Case workshop. Matthis shared her revisions for the session, and asked for final comments. Mooney reviewed the material and format, and provided suggestions. 12/6/94. The LRSD conducted the Business Case workshop and the Budget Process workshop (two sessions each). 12/8/94. The LRSD conducted the Business Case workshop and the Budget Process workshop. 12/19/94. Robert Clowers informed Bill Mooney that the LRSD would conduct follow-up training sessions on the Business Case and the Budget Process for those that missed the first sessions or wanted more information. Clowers said follow-up workshop would be on 12/20/94. 12/20/94. The LRSD conducted a follow-up workshop on the Business Case and the Budget Process.LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Planning, Research and Evaluation Evaluation of the Seminar on PROGRAM EVALUATION FORMAT Please help us evaluate this seminar by responding to the items below. Circle the number which best express your reaction to each of the items. Space for additional comments has been provided. 1. The objectives of the seminar were: Clearly evident 5 4 3 2 1 Vague 2. The organization of the seminar was: Excellent 5 4 3 2 1 Poor 3, How effective was the presenter(s): Excellent 5 4 3 2 1 Poor 4. Did the presenter(s) communicate effectively: Excellent 5 4 3 2 1 Poor 5. Was the presentation effective: Adequate 5 4 3 2 1 Inadequate 6. The information gained should prove: Beneficial 5 4 3 2 1 Not Beneficial 7. Overall, I thought this seminar was: Excellent 5 4 3 2 1 Poor What additional information would have been advantageous to you: Comments:Workshop: Dates: The Program Planning and Budgeting Process 9/22/94, 9/23/94 (two sessions) Presenter: Russ Mayo Audience: All budget managers and principals Total evaluations returned: 19 Rating scale: excellent = 5, poor = 1 1. The objectives of the seminar were: (Clearly evident/vague) 4.32 2. The organization of the seminar was: (Excellent/poor) 3.84 3. How effective was the presenter(s): (Excellent/poor) 4.05 4. Did the presenter(s) communicate effectively: (Excellent/poor) 4.11 5. Was the presentation effective: (Adequate/inadequate) 4.16 6. The information gained should prove: (Beneficial/not beneficial) 4.42 7. Overall, I thought this seminar was: (Excellent/poor) 4.00 Overall rating: 4.13 Evaluations with comments: 3 Comments follow: * Very concrete ! lots of specific examples - pleasant delivery! * If possible, future presentations of the planning process would take place earlier in the work year/annual cycle. * Overall redundant programs: 1. PBD, 2. Program Eval, 3. Annual Reports, 4. COE, 5. NCA, 6. State Department reports, 7. Periodic evaluation instruments.Workshop: The Program Evaluation Dates: 9/22/94, 9/23/94 (two sessions) Presenter: Robert Glowers, Selma Hobby Audience: All budget managers and principals Total evaluations returned: 45 Rating scale: excellent = 5, poor = 1 1. The objectives of the seminar were\n(Clearly evident/vague) 4.02 2. The organization of the seminar was: (Excellent/poor) 3.98 3. How effective was the presenter(s): (Excellent/poor) 4.00 4. Did the presenter(s) communicate effectively: (Excellent/poor) 3.98 5. Was the presentation effective: (Adequate/inadequate) 3.96 6. The information gained should prove: (Beneficial/not beneficial) 4.07 7. Overall, I thought this seminar was: (Excellent/poor) 4.00 Overall rating: Evaluations with comments: 13 4.00 Comments follow: * Fantastic! Great job! * Like the concrete * Great! Im relieved and I welcome the challenge. * Thanks for your help. * Veiy good presentation. I was lost, but now Im found.* Dr. Hobby was very clear and to the point. I understand the expectations. * very helpful. The well defined and written sample and the step-by-step explanation of the process was * Additional information requested: why we have to do this, and what is in it for me\nQ\u0026amp;A example walk-through using overhead so all can participate. 1. Policy questions must be handled, and not avoided. How does this fit in with the other plans they are having to do? 2. Presenter attitude sometimes projects this is something you just have to do. Up The Down Staircase example. 3. Why are you not using the established evaluation criteria? This could lead to wasted effort. * Dr. Hobby was great. * More clarity is needed - each area has its own unique problems that could not be addressed in the whole group. Need a complete sample. I dont think the process has been thought through completely. * Sample and commentary should not be together. Please provide a clean sample, so that participants may see exactly what the final product is to look like. Thanks. * issues for me. I already was familiar with the process, but the presentation helped clarify a couple of * Additional information requested: Access to the overall process.Workshop: The Program Budget Document Dates: 10/5/94 (two sessions) Presenter: Robert Clowers Audience: All budget managers and principals Total evaluations returned: 33 Rating scale: excellent = 5, poor = 1 1. The objectives of the seminar were: (Clearly evident/vague) 3.88 2. The organization of the seminar was: (Excellent/poor) 3.79 3. How effective was the presenter(s): (Excellent/poor) 3.55 4. Did the presenter(s) communicate effectively: (Excellent/poor) 3.67 5. Was the presentation effective: (Adequate/inadequate) 3.76 6. The information gained should prove: (Beneficial/not beneficial) 3.85 7. Overall, I thought this seminar was: (Excellent/poor) 3.58 Overall rating: Evaluations with comments: 11 3.72 Comments follow: * Additional information requested: To be able to use our own PBD plans at seminar. Have scheduled individual sessions about our PBD. Are talk to other program managers about their PBD. This seminar really helped in clearing up so of my misconfusion. * The evaluation criteria is not as clear as I would like it to be. How can we truly tell the evaluation is what the District want it to be. * Lets work in the lab for hands on activities. When you are opening and closing please consider the PET model to make your presentation better. * Wasted time talking about Plant Services problems. * Effective, but would have been more helpful if it had been done two weeks earlier to avoid 3 or 4 reports being due OCT 14 - But the effort is very much appreciated - Wish we had in service for each report for us new folks. * It would be nice if you could bring a PC to the next seminar.  Point out differences between normal schools and incentive schools and not directions are different (No PROGBUD1.DOC). Provide dates for all upcoming quarters. * Thanks. * The presentation was helpful. * This workshop was a bit elementary. It should have been voluntary. Most of the principals are done with the document of this quarter. * Not needed by principals who have been doing it right for one year.Workshop: The Business Cases Dates: 12/6/94 (two sessions), 12/8/94 Presenter: Vic Anderson, Estelle Matthis Audience: All budget managers and principals Total evaluations returned: 38 Rating scale: excellent = 5, poor = 1 1. The objectives of the seminar were: (Clearly evident/vague) 4.76 2. The organization of the seminar was: (Excellent/poor) 4.66 3. How effective was the presenter(s): (Excellent/poor) 4.68 4. Did the presenter(s) communicate effectively: (Excellent/poor) 4.74 5. Was the presentation effective: (Adequate/inadequate) 4.63 6. The information gained should prove: (Beneficial/not beneficial) 4.58 7. Overall, I thought this seminar was: (Excellent/poor) 4.58 Overall rating: Evaluations with comments: 30 4.66 Comments follow: * Not enough time for the activities. * Lack of time was a major factor. Did not allow for enough work...A consultant will be needed to....the business case will be accepted. * For next year - more time to study samples - with January 13 deadline, no need for more work this year. * Page numbers on the handouts.* A sample of one, comprehensive approved business case. One of the best LRSD in services in which Ive participated. Quite informative and familiarizing about the budgeting process - inclusive of the business case. Thanks! * We should practice. * How will this business case effect area schools with limited budgets? Do we write cases for current programs for possible more funding to better service students? Please have these seminars on school time. It is inhumane to expect effective participation when most of us have been up since 5:00 am. * At the time inservice is to begin, close door  let late arrivers go to make-up session. * Mrs Matthis has a reputation for beginning meetings on time. I was disappointed that those of us who were on time had to wait almost 30 minutes for all participants to arrive. In the case of mandatory meetings, participants should not have been allowed to enter after a certain time - they should have to come back to another meeting. * More time to go through the actual process, but I know we were given the opportunity to get more. It was good. * Very good! * I needed more think time to reflect and digest info. * I would like to read one business case that was successful from start to finish. More time to understand presentation. * Getting out after 6 PM was not acceptable. I have 3-4 hours of LRSD work to do this evening in preparation for a workshop tomorrow. The meeting should have stated on time. * The time allotted did not allow for actually developing a business case, but analysis of the parts (examples) was helpful. Perhaps another workshop for those who desire it. * Presentation was interesting and well articulated. Wished we had more time. * Good job! More time for work sessions. * Not enough time to write business case or program evaluations. * The hands-on approach was very effective. The information given was very thorough 10and presented very well. Very helpful!! * Good presentation but needed more time to do sample cases in group. Too much noise for those of us that need quiet when reading.  More time to analyze business cases would help! * An example of a business case that is considered to be perfect. Not enough time. * Good job! * You did a super job. * Need more time on subject. * Need follow-up! Also someone to contact about questions about the business plan. Someone to review and give me feed back about my plan before turning it in on January 13, 1995. * Mrs. Matthis did an excellent job. * Good handouts, helpful visuals - very nice job. Clear and articulate presenters. * How about a complete business case which exemplifies the best in each of the 10 elements? A good model is the best teacher! ITWorkshop: The Financial and Manpower Reports Dates: 12/6/94 (two sessions), 12/8/94 Presenter: Brady Gadberry, Mark Milhollen Audience: All budget managers and principals Total evaluations returned: 63 Rating scale: excellent = 5, poor = 1 1. The objectives of the seminar were: (Clearly evident/vague) 4.38 2. The organization of the seminar was: (Excellent/poor) 4.43 3. How effective was the presenter(s): (Excellent/poor) 4.38 4. Did the presenter(s) communicate effectively: (Excellent/poor) 4.44 5. Was the presentation effective: (Adequate/inadequate) 4.29 6. The information gained should prove: (Beneficial/not beneficial) 4.51 7. Overall, I thought this seminar was: (Excellent/poor) 4.32 Overall rating: Evaluations with comments: 34 4.39 Comments follow: * More time to understand presentation. * Work with individual principals that are new to the district or with district procedures. More time for elaboration and questions would have helped me. I would have been more alert and able to digest all the info had it been presented earlier in the day. 12* I think that more time should be given to principal to help them understand the process. Its critical that all of us know how the process works. * This was totally inadequate for the new principals (no offense intended to Brady). We need a walk-through workshop by an expert to prepare these forms properly. * Small groups which include like schools. Mark should have been here\nlet this part be done later. Brady did his best. * Very helpful in that I knew nothing before or about these topics. * It was no fault of the presenter that the time was too short. He was also standing in for another which led to a bit of disorganization. * Too rushed! * Need more time.  Needed a little more time to ask questions. * Time allocation was too short and intended presenter was absent. * My manpower report has been corrected in the same place at least 3 times. Could some please fix it this time - a big red note will be sent. * Need more time. * Short and sweet. * Need more time on subject. * I would like one a little more in depth for first year principals. * Good, short to the point. * Excellent, clear and helpful. Too tired at end of the day. Mark, you are always thorough. Thanks! * Good job, Mark! I understand most of the information\nhowever, I will probably need help with it. 13* Not clear at all. * More time! * Very effective presentation. * Well done. * We need a work session on the budget addition, deletion and allocation. * Very good. * Magnet schools at a disadvantage without materials to track. * Mark is always clear, to the point and very well prepared - appreciate packet again this year very much. * Thank you for the Budget Instruction booklet - Im very pleased with it! * Presenter was rushed due to time limitation. * Financial staff not present/available for presentation. Budget staff needs to be available with more time spent on this process. * Well organized and concise. 14USD PUNNINC AND BUDGETING PROCESS A Organization and Staffing X J B PrograM Coordination a Broad-l\u0026gt;ased Input and Participation Needs Assessnent  Progran Inventorg D Goals and Olbjectives  E Progran Deuelopnent t-  r Budgeting \u0026gt;G   Program Budget Bccunent H Honitoriny and Reporting  I  Progran Evaluation \u0026gt; L Restart cycleCORR44 REVISED 3/4/94 MOONEY NOTES ON THE ROBERT BROWN SITUATION THE \"REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE\" MEMO - I could not tell what he wants other than \"equity\". He did not ask for anything specific. He may have just wanted to blow. -1 could not tell what he was really getting at with the money situation, nor could I tell what the situation really was. It will take some research and a talk with Mark to figure out what the facts really are in this case. -1 dont think ODM action would be appropriate particularly since we dont have any of the facts about the situation. THE PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT - He had 25 statements not included in the PBD. I concur with not including 24, and found several more that were included which I would have rejected. - I would have included 1 of the statements. - He said 17 pages were excluded. The 25 statements just happened to be on 17 separate pages. There were not 17 pages of statements excluded. - The statements which were not included were poorly written in that they were not statements of achievement. Some were statements of future actions, some were requests for support, some were negative comments on the administration. The statements reflect a very negative view of the administration. - He had 24 achievement statements included. This does put him far behind Rightsell, Stephens, and Rockefeller. These 24 achievements covered only 9 of the possible 30 programs (30%). The result is that Garland does not look like they are doing very well. -1 dont think ODM action is warranted on this issue. The District should train the principals to write good achievements, and the principals should bring good works to the writing session. - I have prepared the attached sheet analyzing the Incentive School section of the latest PBD. Quality and appropriateness was not considered\nonly effort.ODM ACTION -1 recommend a letter to Robert Brown covering these points\n* * ODM does not have all the information on either of these issues Both the money and the achievements are operational issues, the purview of the administration * We recommend he work within the channels of the District to get his grievances redressed. * We recommend he request a training session for the Incentive School principals on the PBD and writing achievements. * We recommend he develop his material in a positive tone to sell the ideas to the administration.QUICK ANALYSIS OF INCENTIVE SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENT STATEMENTS The following analysis of achievement statements is based on the material in the second quarter 1994 Program Budget Document. Quality and appropriateness was not considered. The count is only based on a response being made. RIGHT STEPH MITCH ROCKE FRANK GARLA 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 69 70 71 72 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 1 2 4 0 0 1 8 0 0 7 0 3 4 0 23 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 3 1 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 6 0 2 4 3 0 2 0 4 5 0 4 15 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 3 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 4 1 3 0 1 1 8 0 2 6 4 5 1 0 33 10 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 1 2 1 7 2 0 0 0 3 6 0 8 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 (1) (1) (2) (1) (1) (1) (2) (2) (1) (3) (3) (2) (1) (4) TOT 59 66 6 92 23 24 25 PG 14 20 4 21 12 9FRIDAY, 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 S. URSERY, P.A. H.T. LARZELERE, P.A. OSCAR E. DAVIS, JR.. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK, JR.. P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT. P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON, P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM HI, 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. P.A. 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 B. HURST. JR.. P.A. ELIZABETH J. ROBBEN, P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P.A. ROBERT S. SHAFER. P.A. WII LIAM M. GRIFFIN HI. P.A THOMAS N . ROSE. P.A. MICHAEL S. MOORE. P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL HI. P.A. 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 August 5, 1994 AUG 8 1994 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 GSCHWEND. JR., P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT, P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH. P.A. GUY ALTON WADE, P.A. PRICE C. GARDNER J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID D. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE ANDREW T. TURNER JOHN RAY WHITE DAVID M. GRAF CARLA G. SPAINHOUR JOHN C. FENOLEY, JR. ALLISON GRAVES BAZZEL JONANN C. ROOSEVELT R. CHRISTOPHER LAWSON GREGORY D. TAYLOR TONY L. WILCOX FRAN C. HICKMAN BETTY J. DEMORY Fax 371-0100 Office of Desegfegauon .. COKNSEI. WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELDREDGE. JR., P.A. 8.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON. JR.. P.A. WRITER'S DIRECT NO. (601} 370-1606 Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Monitoring 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: ODM Observations on the LRSD Budgeting Documents and Process Dear Ann: 1994 Mark Milhollen has shared with me a document dated July 28, which is titled \"Office of Desegregation Monitoring Observations on the LRSD Budgeting Documents and Process\". paragraph eight of that document, you say that \"LRSD contemptuously failed to comply with Court-ordered timelines.- am writing to express my disagreement with that statement. In has The first issue is a relatively minor one. You say that the district has known about the summer hearing schedule since May, 1994. That statement is true but incomplete. The May 9, 1994 order scheduled the June and July hearings, but said that \"Orders detailing the information the Court will review at the June and July hearings will follow at a later date\". The order which detailed the information LRSD would be required to submit by noon on July 18, 1994 was filed on July 6, 1994. The more important issue concerns your statement that our decision not to seek an extension of time was \"a major failure of execution\" and \"contemptuous.\" Nothing about LRSD's failure to move for an extension of time was contemptuous. failure of execution. There was no We simply made a judgment that we could file a document in a timely manner which would substantially comply with the court's order. We also believed that the process of ODM'sreview and the court's review of the LRSD budget would be better served by filing a document on July 18 than by seeking an extension of time. NLRSD and PCSSD also apparently made the judgment to submit to the court the most current information available rather than to seek an extension of time. NLRSD Superintendent James Smith described the document submitted by NLRSD as follows: This is a preliminary projection of our budget for this year. It's not the final document that will be presented to our Board in August for final approval. We began on this several months ago trying to project what the state revenues would be, local revenues and come with the best guess that we could at this time to present to the Court. Transcript of June 28, 1994 hearing, p. 10. PCSSD submitted a document described by its Assistant Superintendent for Business Affairs as \"an updated version of the tentative 1994-95 budget\". PCSSD noted \"that actual expenditures for the 1993-94 school year are still very tentative and some revenue changes may still occur\". PCSSD also described several unresolved issues which could \"significantly impact\" the budget numbers provided to the court. Finally, PCSSD observed that \"[s]ignificant changes could still be necessary in both revenue and expenses.\" There has been no effort in any district to contemptuously refuse to provide information to the court or to delay in providing information to the court. information available to All of the districts provided the best them at the time of the deadline established by the court. I thought it was apparent to everyone that the budget documents would continue to evolve after the July 18 deadline and that each of the districts could provide more complete and accurate information at a later date. I did not consider this to be sufficient reason to seek to delay the July 18 filing, particularly since a hearing on the budgets was to be held ten days after that deadline. In any event, there was nothing contemptuous about our decision to provide information to the court on July 18 rather than seek an extension of time. Yours v^y ul CJH/k cc: Dr. Henry P. Williams LRSD Board of Directors iristopher Heller1 Little Rock School District MEMORANDUM To: Krom: Through: Date: Subject: All PrDfrtiin Miiiuif^rs Roberl Glowers, Director of^Planning, Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation 'ten dent September 13, 1994 Planning Process Workshops During the 1993-94 school year, we implemented a new planning process. This year we are refining that process while ensuring that all of us are clear about its intent. Recently, Judge Wright issued an order for us to present workshops to all program managers involved in the process. Below is a listing of workshops with dates, times, places, and the intended audience. Please place the workshops on your schedules. All will be presented al the district office in the board room. The importance of these workshops cannot be overemphasized. Thanks for your cooperation. J Date Time Audience Topic 9/22/94 1:0(\u0026gt;pin - 4:()()pin Program Managers (not principals) The Planning \u0026amp; Budgeting Process Tlic Program Evaluation 9/23/94 9:()()ani - I2:0()pni Secondary- principals The Planning \u0026amp; Budgeting Process The Program Evaluation kot'pni - 4:0()pm Elemcnlar} principals The Planning \u0026amp; Budgeting Process Tlte Program Evaluation 10/5/94 l:()Opni - 2:30pni Program Managers (not principals) The Program Budget Document 10/6/94 12/6/94 3:00pm - 4\n30pm 4:()0pm - 5:30pm 1:00pm - 3:00pm Elementary principals Secondary principals Program Managers (not principals) The Program Budget Document The Program Budget Document Business Cases Financial and Manpo\\5 er Reports 4:00pm - 6:00pm Secondary principals Business Cases Financial and Manpow er Reports 12/8/94 3:00pm - 5:00pm Elementary principals Business Cases Financial and Manpower Reports C: ) Superintendents Council Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney Jerry Malone, LRSD Attorney Ann Brown, MonitorPROGRAM PLANNING BUDGET PROCESS WORKSHOPS December 20, 1994 Little Rock School District Follow-Up Workshop AGENDA Welcome Dr. Robert Clowers Session Schedules I. BUSINESS CASES Objectives Timeline on Business Cases Guidelines - When a Business Case is Required \"Whats In It For Me\" Mrs. Estelle Matthis Purpose of A Business Case History of the Business Case and Why Development of the Business Case  The 10 Elements Questions and Answers Evaluations BREAK II. BUDGET PROCESS Objectives Mark Milhollen Financial Manpower Reports Questions and Answers EvaluationsOffice 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 September 19, 1994 Dr. Robert Glowers Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, .AR 72201 Hand Delivered Dear Robert: When I returned to my office after 5:00 p.m. on Friday (after having spent another long day in Judge Wright's courtroom), I found that the day's mail had brought a copy of a September 13, 1994 memo from you to \".All Program Managers.\" Thank you for sending me this information. Unfortunately, the memo contains a sentence that is incorrect: \"Recently, Judge Wright issued an order for us to present workshops to all program managers involved in the process.\" During recent conversations between you and me and Russ Mayo as well I've repeatedly stressed that Judge Wright has QQl yet issued such an order, but I've told you that she has said she will soon write one containing detailed information. Your statement in the memo is not only inaccurate, it also implies that your listing of offerings is both court-mandated and court-approved. Not so. In our conversations about this topic. I've emphasized that, while you may go ahead with your own workshops, you must do so realizing that the forthcoming court order may include specific requirements that you are not addressing with your current training. For example, as I told you when we discussed the request you've sent to principals about evaluation, I don't believe that you're going to get very meaningful or useful results from the process as it's currently set up. What I think you're going to get back is the model example (regurgitated verbatim) embellished with the PBD in narrative form. The real results? (1) Unhappy principals complaining about being overburdened with paperwork and duplicate efforts\n(2) no meaningful measurement that reveals how far people have gotten toward the goal in terms of meeting objectives\n(3) no solid indicators of what worked, what didn't, what needs to be changed, and how to change it. Robert. I do believe you intend to do right. I also know that you have lots of people telling you what to do, that you don't get to make all the decisions, and that you have timelines and deadlines to meet. I understand what it's like to be in that position, because I'm frequently there. But even under those circumstances. I've always found that I can control what I put in my own memos. I've also found that it's best to strive for scrupulous accuracy-and to be especially careful about any implications regarding the Court. Sincerely yours, Ann S. Browns I 09/20/94 14:56 QoOl 324 2032 I. R School Dlst 002 Little Rock School District Planning, Research, and Evaluation \\ I I MEMORANDUM cX \u0026gt; TO\nAll Principals From: Dr. Robert Glowers, Director Through: Dr. Henry P. Williams, Superintendent Subject\nTime Changes in Planning Process Workshops A memorandum of September 13, 1994, outlined a series of workshops that will be presented for the Districts Program Managers. The dates remain the same. However, the times for the September 23,1994, meetings have been rescheduled in order to minimize the time principals are out of their respective building due to the Parent Conference Day. Please make the following changes to your calendar: All secondary principals along with Margaret Gremillions cluster group of elementary principals will meet beginning promptly at 7:30 a.m. until 9:30 a.m. in the board room. The other cluster group of elementary principals will meet from 10:00 a.m. until 12:00 noon in the board room. The topics. The Planning and Budgeting Process and The Program Evaluation remain the same. As expressed in the previous memorandum, the importance of these workshops cannot be overemphasized. Thank you for your cooperation. prog_cv2.doc I J-t  09/20/94 14:57 501 324 2032 L R School Dlst 0003 I, 7 I Lillie Rock School Di.strici MEMORANDUM 'ft' .yQf To: Eroni\nThrough: Date\nSubject: .4// Pro^nun Mttna^rs R-O^^rt Clowers, Director ofrianning. Research, \u0026amp; Evaluation D41)S^4Xj^illi\u0026amp; Itendent September 13, 1994 Planning Process Workshops iie During the 1993-94 school year, we implemented a new planning process. This year we are refining that process while ensuring that all of us are clear about its intent. Recently, Judt-e Wright issued an order for us to present workshops to all program managers involved in the process. Below is a listing or workshops with dates, times, places, and the intended audience. Please place the workshops on your schedules. All will be presented al the district office in the board room. The importance of these workshops cannot be overemphasized. Thanks for your cooperation. i 7'inie Audience Topic 9l}2m IrOOptn - 4:0()pm Program Managers (not principals) 9/23/94 9:00am - 12:00pm Secondan.' principals The Planning \u0026amp;. Budgeting Process The Program Eval nation The Planning \u0026amp; Budgeting Process Tlie Program Ei'aluation r 1 l:00pra - 4:00pm Elemcntar}' principals Tlie Planning \u0026amp; Budgeting Process Tlie Program Evaluailon 10/5/94 1:00pm - 2\n30pm Program Managers (not principals) The Program Budget Document 10/6/94 12/6/94 12/8/94 3:00pm - 4\n30pm 4:00pra - 5:30pm T.OOpm - 3:00pm 4:00pm - 6:00pm 3:00pm - 5:(Xlpm Elemcniar)- principals Secondarj' principals Program Managers (not principals) Secondan principals Elementar}' principals The Program Budget Document The Program Budget Document Business Cases Financial and Manpower Reports Business Cases Financial and Manpower Reports Business Cases Financial and Manpower Reports C: ) Superintendents Council Chris Heller, LRSD Attorney Jerry Malone. LRSD Attorney Ann Brown, .Monitoru o\n.a: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION OCT 2 4 CE? C\nRK LITTLE ROCX SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF vs. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS ' KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS ORDER A hearing held on August 12, 1994 culminated a series of Court dates, which had begun in February 1994, Little Rock School District (LRSD) budget. to consider the 1994-95 In an August 22, 1994 Order, the Court stopped short of affirmatively approving the 1994-95 LRSD budget, but did not block its implementation. The Court now- addresses in more detail the deficiencies in the LRSD budgeting processes. The LRSD made some improvements in its final budget document over the course of the budget hearings. The district succeeded in producing a final document that is much more readable and concise than previous versions. In the final budget, items are easier to find, understand, and correlate. Also, during 1993-94, as it planned for the coming fiscal year, the LRSD worked through the steps of the planning and budgeting process which it had developed in conjunction with the Court-appointed Budget Specialist. In generating the 1994- 95 budget, the district addressed all of the components of thatprocess to some degree. However, the LRSD did not always follow its plan and needs to improve timeliness, and overall quality of its work. accuracy, comprehensiveness, I. Projected Budget Deficits The Court continues to be particularly concerned about the increasingly large and ominous budget deficits that the LRSD projects for future years. These shortfalls are due in part to recurring expenses being funded through non-recurring revenue sources, as well as to the apparent trend of overall expenditures growing faster than revenues. As with the FY 1993-94 budget, the LRSD created a balanced 1994-95 budget by using extraordinary one-time budget-balancing strategies that do not represent lasting fiscal reductions\nfor example. saving $908,776 through the Early Retirement Incentive Program\nborrowing $1.6 million in settlement loans\nusing a $4.1 million carryover balance\na spending freeze in the amount of $400,000\na cut of $300,000 in the line item for substitutes (with no explanation of how that amount was determined or the potential impact of the cut). The specter of a financial crisis looms ever larger over the LRSD, threatening to jeopardize the district's ability to carry out its obligations to provide a high-quality, desegregated education in the years to come. Yet the district continues to procrastinate in facing the tough decisions that it must make in order to align its spending patterns with the hard realities of declining revenues. For example, positions in the administrative ranks continue to be added, schools are under-enrolled, and salary increases appear automatic. -2-II. The Program Planning and Budgeting Process The district has developed, with the assistance of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (ODM), a program planning and budgeting process that can serve the LRSD well if the district exercises the required management discipline. The program planning and budgeting procedures are tools that must work for the LRSD. The process is not static, but ongoing and cyclical\nit must be constantly managed and continuously improved so that it meets the district's changing needs and resources. The Court has repeatedly stressed that the LRSD must delineate the links between budgeting, planning. and evaluation which will ensure that the district spends money wisely and meets its desegregation obligations. Yet the district made little effort during the 1993-94 fiscal year to complete meaningful program evaluations operations. for budget decisions or modifications in programs or At the end of the 1993-94 program development cycle. recommendations to modify or delete inefficient or ineffective programs were virtually non-existent. The district must improve the quality and timeliness of the products that should result from the planning and budgeting processes. Needs assessment, program evaluations, decisions to add. modify, or delete programs, and the budget itself all suffered from problems relating to timeliness and quality. Decision-making must be built on defined processes that are based on data and analysis and correlated into a management time-frame. Rather than using business cases as rationales to justify changes already made by -3-\"administrative prerogative,\" the district should use its businesscase process as a decision-making tool to define problems, identify alternatives. anticipate consequences. and then confidently make well-reasoned choices. As examples of deficiencies that can be generally categorized as quality-related, the FTE's (Full Time Equivalence, which indicate specific numbers of employees) had been omitted from the budget (but were restored at the direction of the Court)\nof 37 proposed business cases, 33 involved additions and modifications that added costs to. the budget\nthe district had formulated no contingency plan in the event the transportation \"outsourcing\" option being investigated by the LRSD did not materialize (as it subsequently did not)\nproposed school closings at Baseline and Stephens did not relate to a comprehensive long-term facilities plan\nseveral of the business cases lacked substantive information and others contained information that was disjointed and fragmentary, incongruous. or inadequately explained and supported. thus leaving many questions unanswered. especially these having to do with the relationship between evaluation and planned changes. Program decisions must be made within a time-frame which will allow orderly input into the budget process. Decisions delayed early in the cycle compress decision-making into slim time-frames. resulting in last minute decisions that leave little time for proper incorporation into the budget document. Examples of tardiness include: the needs assessment was two months overdue and published so late that its usefulness was severely limited\ndecisions on -4-transportation outsourcing were two months late and delayed until the very last moment\nprogram development decisions were still being considered five months after they were scheduled for completion\nthe district has yet to develop a plan for paying back the settlement loans\nfilings due on July 18, 1994 for hearings scheduled for July 28 and 29, 1994 were lata, forcing a continuation until August 12, 1994. The district must work to institutionalize the planning and budgeting process throughout all levels of the organization. The- process must become a well-understood, standard operating procedure that is well-accepted and consistently practiced as a way of life in the LRSD. The process can be institutionalized only if participants all levels are actively involved in all aspects on a day-to-day basis. The distric must ensure that those who are responsible for managing programs and budgets have a working knowledge of the process and are completely involved in it throughout the year. To this end, the Court requires the LRSD to work with ODM to: 1. Develop and conduc quality, continuous training on the program planning and budget participate in that process. process for all those who At a minimum, these training sessions should address the operational responsibilities of the participants in each of the components of the process (needs assessment, program inventory, goals and objectives. program development. budgeting. monitoring and reporting. and evaluation). The LRSD will work with ODM to ensure that the training is adequately defined and implemented. -5-2. Institute management processes which will actively review progress, in terms of achievements and expenditures, on a regular basis, involving every level of the organization down to at least every budget manager. The LRSD will work with ODM to ensure that the management processes are adequately defined and implemented. III. Business Cases The LRSD presented a number of business cases in conjunction. with its 1994-95 budget. some of which the district subsequently withdrew or ultimately did not fund. Although the Court will not comment here on each one of the business cases. it specifically addresses below those for which the Court requires additional information or orders the district to take specific action. The parties are reminded that, until such time that the Court approves changes (whether proposed through business cases or other means) that constitute any alteration in desegregation plan 007111711 -t-mpn-t-q, the parties are obligated to abide by the desegregation plan and relevant courr orders. a) Incentive School Spanish Program The district submitted several business cases regarding the Spanish language program in the incentive schools. The desegregation plan identifies foreign language as featured subject area of a emphasis in the incentive schools. The plan strongly recommends thaf: Spanish be the studied language, and calls for a number of specific activities and supports, including language labs, a total physical response methodology, and provisions for practical experiences and -6-interactions with a native language user. In addressing earlier proposals from the LRSD to modify or eliminate certain incentive school features, such as language labs, the Court issued a May 1, 1992 Order noting that the parties had agreed to a wide array of activities, enhanced programs, and support mechanisms that would be available at the incentive schools. The Order admonished the LRSD that the \"Eighth Circuit has emphasized the importance of the incentive schools and this Court will not allow the district to diminish the scope and quality of the schools' instructional programs and enrichment activities.\" A December 1993 report from ODM observed that the Spanish program in the incentive schools is \"in a deplorable state. The district still has failed to implement the foreign language program described in the incentive school section of the desegregation plan.\" (pg. 50) Subsequently, in submissions dated April 15, 1994, the LRSD filed individual business cases regarding Spanish instruction in each of the incentive schools. Most of the business cases requested either a half-time or full-time Spanish teacher. One proposed to pilot a Spanish immersion program at an unnamed incentive school. Later, in a July 18, 1994 submission, the district proposed a pilot program at one school that would cost $149,000. In this scenario. the remaining incentive schools would not offer Spanish during the regular instructional day. but would instead focus on infused cultural activities through the revised curriculum and thematic units. However, the district ultimately did not fund these business cases, but instead chose to allot new resources for foreign language -7-instruction at only- one incentive school, Franklin, where the proposal was for a pilot Spanish immersion program in one first-grade class. Since the district has submitted and subsequently withdrawn or simply not funded so many proposals regarding Spanish instruction, it is unclear to the Court how the district plans to deliver a quality foreign language program as outlined in the desegregation plan. Therefore, the district must submit on or before Wednesday, November 16, 1994, a concise but complete description of the Spanish program as it is being offered at each of the incentive schools. The description is to include the extent to which the program is offered during the regular instructional day or extended day\nthe date the program began in each school during this academic year\nthe days and times Spanish is offered at each school\nhow instruction is beino delivered\nthe number of FTE's teaching the subject in each school\nwhether each teacher is certified in Spanish\na description of each language lab and how it is being used to reinforce instruction\nthe grade levels at which Spanish is offered\nthe number of children enrolled in Spanish classes at each school by grade level\nthe specific learning objectives of the program, and how those objectives correlate to the program as it is being offered in each school (for example, as related to the methodology, instructional time, language lab practice periods, interaction with native speakers, etc.) b) Incentive School Theme Implementation On April 15, 1994, the LRSD submitted five separate business cases that requested funding to implement various \"phases\" of themes -8-in each incentive school. However, the district ultimately funded none of these proposals in its final 1994-95 budget. The 1994-95 school year is well underway, and the Court fears that the district may not be providing students the full range of programs promised in the desegregation plan. Even though this Court's May 1, 1992 Order instructed the LRSD to fully implement themes in the incentive schools, the district has consistently dragged its feet. For example, the December 1993 ODM report on the incentive schools points out that \"the earliest official starting date for a specialist was Februarv 17, 1993 at Rockefeller. Program specialists at Franklin, Mitchell, and Rightsell started as late as April 12, 1993, almost one full year after the [May 1992] court order.\" The report goes on to state that the specialists had been working to integrate each theme into the school's curriculum. Now, over two years after the May 1992 Order and over one year since full-time specialists began' working. it appears that the schools are requesting funding for implementation. What has happened in the interim is unclear. So that the Court may determine the extent to which the district is currently complying with previous orders to fully implement themes, the district is to submit on or before Wednesday, November 16, 1994, a description of theme implementation in each of the incentive schools that includes at least the following information: 1) a summary of the theme, how it is being integrated into the curriculum and school activities, and the implementation timeline school and 2) if theme implementation is contemplated in phases. the -9-rationale for such a method and plans for seeking Court approval for that approach activities, events, 3) a summary of the special programs, activities, events, equipment, and materials which are devoted to theme support at each school explanation for 4) the extent to which the theme is fully implemented at each school and an explanation for any delays in implementation 5) what remains to be done to implement the theme fully 6) the amount of money spent on each school's theme implementation during FY 1992-93 and FY 1993-94 and the amount budgeted for FY 1994-95, by line item category, if possible (e.g., personnel, equipment, etc.) c) Staff Attorney In a June 1994 business case, the district proposed to add a full-time staff attorney position to the LRSD administration. The proposal states that the costs of adding this position would be offset by the savings in outside legal fees. Despite this assertion. the business case includes no dollar amounts for savings\nit only covers the costs of the new position and additional clerical support, a figure of some $94,000. Without a cost savings analysis, it is not possible for either the district or the Court to determine what the real savings may be. The budget figures for 1994-95 reflect no savings in the line item for legal expenses over the previous budget- The Court advises the LRSD to determine what portion of outside legal fees a staff attorney can realistically save the district before it moves to add another position to an already swollen administrative body. -10-b^bbs d) Director of Student Assignment and Desegregation The district has proposed to change the Desegregation Facilitator's title and duties to encompass direct responsibility for all aspects of the Student Assignment Office, coordination of citizen monitoring groups, and other duties. During the hearings, the attorney for Joshua expressed objections to the change, maintaining that the LRSD had afforded him neither adequate notice nor involvement. He also cited the proposal as a modification of the desegregation plan. which requires adherence to a modification process that had not been followed in this instance. The Court. concurred and also noted that, while the superintendent was free to organize his staff according to his professional judgment. any recasting of roles had to be consistent with the desegregation plans or else approved through the requisite plan modification process. The Court cautioned that any staff reorganization or changes in job descriptions could not result in neglect of plan-mandated responsibilities. Furthermore, the Court raised the issue of accountability, because the business case does not make clear exactly who would perform the jobs formerly assigned to the Desegregation Facilitator. The Court has charged the Monitor with coordinating among the parties the plan modification process for this proposed change. She will 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. -11-e) Great Expectations Program On August 8, 1994, the district filed a business case proposing to implement Great Expectations, a program concept and methodology developed by an educator in Chicago and implemented in that city and elsewhere. The case does not adequately reflect that the district used the business-case method as a planning tool to enable it to make a confident, fully informed decision in adopting Great Expectations. For example, the case does not reflect the extent to which the district researched other programs, the criteria the district used to choose this one, or what the district expects the program to achieve.- The case does not state why Mitchell and Rightsell were selected as participating schools or how this program would mesh with the district's desegregation obligations. In depicting Great Expectations, the business case describes the types of learning activities that are already operationalor should bein the incentive schools according to the desegregation plan\nfor examnle. cooperative learning. the new LRSD integrated curriculum. the classics literature program, the Latin Enrichment Program, reading and oral expression across the cut-ti n:i im heterogeneous groups. Writing-to-Read, positive expectations, positive self-esteem, and the Effective Schools model. While the Court does not disapprove Great Expectations, it does not accept it as a replacement of the incentive school programs which are catalogued in the desegregation plan. Rather, the Court sees the program as complementary and hopes that the Great Expectations approach will be useful in coordinating and supporting delivery of -12-the many programs and activities that incentive school children should regularly be experiencing. The Court notes that the district has provided no information indicating that Great Expectations should in any way affect the funding level or double funding feature of the incentive schools. (f) Incentive School Double Funding An August 8, 1994 business case proposed to save over $312,000 in the incentive schools by reducing certain personnel and services. ODM monitoring reports on the incentive schools have documented. that the LRSD is more than double funding the incentive schools. The amount of money spent per pupil in the schools is a function of personnel and program costs in relation to the number of students enrolled in a particular building. Incentive school overhead costs remain relatively fixed from year to year, so if enrollment drops. per-pupil costs rise. Incentive school expenses have been increasing beyond the double funding point primarily due to under-enrollment and to increased personnel costs, noticeably due to the total amount of stipends paid t staff for the extended day and week programs. The district must curtail expenses wherever possible and appropriate\nbut at the same time, the district also must provide adequate compensatory, remedial. and enriched education to its students. The challenge which the double funding business case attempts to address is aligning incentive school costs with the programs and services promised in the desegregation plan. The only alignment method the district has contemplated in this proposal is cutting funding in various line items\nthe case does not consider -13-savings by increasing the number of students in each school through diligent recruitment, by releasing reserved seating, or by returning to their attendance zone those children who attend schools located outside their home zone. (Since the August hearing, the district has sought and received approval to release seats previously reserved for white children in the four-year-old and kindergarten programs.) While the Court does not block implementation of these cuts, this business case is a further example of an instance where the quality of the district's proposals need to be greatly improved. For example, a key element absent in this proposal is evaluation. The LRSD does not offer an evaluation base upon which to construct a solid case for changing elements of school programs or operations as they relate to funding. Decisions must not be solely money-driven\nthey must be based on monitoring, measurement. outcomes, evaluation. research, and reassessment as well as on economy. Otherwise, how can the district determine what needs to be changed and how to change it? The business case fails to draw clearly the connections between the decisions that drove specific cuts. which cuts relate to which program or activity, how the cuts will potentially affect programs. what proportion of a category (such as supplies) a specific line item cut represents, and how the LRSD will monitor and measure the effect of the changes. Furthermore, the case neglects to factor in the critical relationship between the number of students and per-pupil expenditure\nnor does the proposal state the enrollment level upon which the cuts were based. (When Stephens Incentive School closed at the end of 1993-94, significant number of its students were a -14-assigned to Garland Incentive School. The business case does not state whether such enrollment shifts were considered.) The Court will be watching the effects which these cuts have on the incentive schools. g) Academic Progress Incentive Grants On July 18, 1994, the LRSD submitted a number of business cases which included one on Academic Progress Incentive Grants (APIG) . That business case is subtitled \"Proposed Modification of the Court- approved Desegregation Plan.\" Yet the district has provided no information or evidence that indicates the degree to which the LRSD may have followed the required plan modification process. The proposal is essentially to combine the funding of APIG and focused activities, although the desegregation plan indicates that schools were to have the opportunity to carry on both focused activities and APIG from separate funding sources: \"The elementary area schools (non-incentive and non-interdistrict) will receive an annual allocation for implementing the focused activities for the school year\" (pg. 31). As for APIG, the plan refers to an annual process where area schools (both elementary and secondary) nay develop proposals in order to receive funding. Subsequent court orders stressed that focused activities and APIG were to remain complementary of each other, and that one was not to supplant the other: \"However, the Court recognizes the [Academic Progress Incentive Grant Program] as a complementary addition to, but not a replacement of. the original focused activities feature of the plan. Focused activities will continue to be an option for area schools. -15-may center around a theme, and will operate according to the original plan which provides for community and parental involvement and an annual allocation of funds.\" (May 1, 1992, pp. 24-25, emphasis original). The record shows that more than 80% of LRSD students attend area schools. Focused activities and APIG were designed to ensure that the vast majority of the district's students would have access to school-based programs and services tailored to help them reach the desegregation goals for academic achievement. As a matter of fact. the business case on cutting incentive school funding states that the cuts will free up more money for the area schools, presumably to help meet the needs of those schools. The district has not persuaded the Court that the prooosal as presented in the July 1994 business case will help promote desegregation goals, nor that it is in the bes interests of the thousands of students who attend area schools. Therefore, the Court does not approve the proposal as submitted. If the district wishes to revisit this area. the Court advises it to consult with ODM and the parties to develop a proposal that will clearly supmort the desegregation plan goals and serve the needs of area school students. Any proposed modification of the desegregation plan must be done in accordance with the requisite procedures. h) Transportation The 1994-95 budget contained a $1.3 million appropriation for transportation, but that allotment was unaccompanied by a plan or business case indicating how the sum would be applied. Testimony at -16-U16 hGaring was tliat $1 million would ba used for buses and the remainder would be spent on other needs. The Court requires the file a plan or business case which explains how the district plans to spend the money on transportation. IT IS SO ORDERED this 24th day of October 1994. UNITED STATES DTSTRyCT JUDGE ON , -17-Ual* Xdl Sdi^ Ditiria B5032701 04/06/0900 LRSD PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESS PROCESS INSTITUTIONALIZATION PROJECT April 1, 1995 OfTice of Desegregation Monitoring United States District Court Little Rock, Arkansas Ann S. Brown Monitor Bill Mooney Budget SpecialistLRSD PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESS PROCESS INSTITUTIONALIZATION PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION A. Purpose B. Background C. What is institutionalization? - Definition D. How will I know it is institutionalized? - Expectations E. Monitoring Process and Information Sources F. Report Organization IL EXPECTATIONS AND FINDINGS A. Organizational Structure for Planning and Budget Process. Reassessment of Process and Organization. (Organization and Process Structure/Reassessment). B. Needs Assessment C. D. E. F. G. H. Program Inventory Planning and Budget Goals Program Development Budgeting Monitoring and Reporting Program Evaluation I. Management Tool III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 21. INTRODUCTION A. Purpose The purpose of this status report is to informally document for the Judge the extent to which the Little Rock School District (LRSD) has institutionalized the planning, budgeting, and evaluation process as defined in the Program Planning and Budgeting Manual. A secondary purpose is to provide informal standards that might assist the LRSD in developing a quality program planning and budgeting process. - Not many people are interested in the accountability of whether something happened. Most people want to slap it in and go. Not a formal report with formal data collection. Based upon operational observations. In some cases, it was hard to get the information necessary for a determination without formal inquiry. Snapshot of the district as of March 31, 1995. Answer the question is the process institutionalized? 3B. Background History - Early budget and planning problems - 12/91 letter and response - 1-2/92 events leading to Budget Specialist - Budget Specialist - Short projects - PPBP development - LRSD development Considerations - Give LRSD credit for doing what they have done. They do far more than the other districts and the State. - In the report, we must show how the past is the foundation for change. Dont ridicule or downplay the past or old processes. Take things to the next level. - Might include the planning assumptions from the draft project concept paper, B5O1O3O1. 4 C. What is institutionalization? - Definition Objective: to operate a program planning and budgeting process which will support logical decisionmaking at all levels in the LRSD. It is one thing to develop a process, but quite another tohave-it institutionalized, dt. Court Order, 10/24/94, page 5. The district must work to institutionalize the planning and budgeting process throughout all levels of the organization. The process must become a well-understood, standard operating procedure that is well-accepted and consistently practiced as a way of life in the LRSD. The process can be institutionalized only if participants at all levels are actively involved in all aspects on a day-to-day basis. The district must ensure that those who are responsible for managing programs and budgets have a working knowledge of the process and are completely involved in it throughout the year. Before we can determine if the LRSD has institutionalized its processes, we must define institutionalization. Search yielded no useful definition. Create our own. For the purposes of this report, institutionalization is defined as the incorporation of the sub-processes outlined in the Program Planning and Budgeting Manual, into the organizational culture of the LRSD so that these practices become the normal, everyday way of doing business. Part of the problem is that bad processes are already institutionalized, and we are looking for substantive changes to better processes. We want people to really use the improved processes. To reconcile institutionalization and change, we might approach it from this perspective. Now have institutionalized bad processes...change to good processes...move on to culture of continuous change... but not ready to go there yet because of poor state of affairs. - Just because a process is institutionalized does not mean that it never changes. We want the process to be systemic, but we want that systemic process continually subjected to improvement in order to support our changing environment. - Bad word. Institutionalization may be an inappropriate word. Part of todays management philosophy is looking at Peters chaos ideas. They like stuff like draw, shoot, aim. They see this as getting away from institutionalization. - Culture of continuous change. What we are really talking about is getting a culture of positive, controlled, orderly, goal-based, logical model, continuous change within the district. - Change. Changing a culture is not a matter of teaching people a bunch of new techniques, or replacing their behavior patterns with new ones. It is a matter of exchanging values and providing role models. This is done by changing attitudes. Crosby, p98. 5D. How will I know it is institutionalized? - Expectations 1. Define standards..expectations fiom requirements (specific to this process) and good management practices (general for all processes). 2. Measure performance. Expectations in this report are like legal requirements in an ODM monitoring guide\na standard against which to measure. These expectations define the characteristics of an institutionalized process. TTie extent to which those expectations are met, measure the degree of institutionalization. Requires a measure. Process will be as defined in the PPBP Manual. Cite both. What they said they were going to do, not what the other districts are doing or not doing. Measurements against expected performance requirements. Where can I find them? Sources. Question for expectation identification: What would we expect to see in a successful process? subAnswer for expectation identification: We would expect to see positive evidence of Answers: - NOTE...this is not a complete list, different folks might add different ideas. - What do we really want to measure? Something else? Such as the extent to which processes and the associated tools are used? The quality of that use or the entire process? The areas of strength and weakness, or what has worked well and what needs work? Lessons learned? - Quality is not an issue in institutionalization per se - Quality has to be defined as conformance to requirements, not as goodness. Crosby, p64 and p60. - Quality measurement. The measurement of quality is the price of non-conformance, not indexes. Prices of non-conformance are all the expenses involved in doing things wrong (to correct, to do it over, to pay claims). Maybe 35% in LRSD. Price of conformance is what is necessary to spend to make things come out right the first time. Not a simple yes or no, but rather it is usually a matter of degree. 3 6E. Monitoring Process and Information Sources - Look in Court Orders and transcripts for citations of failures to follow the process and institutionalization statements. Look for citations of success to do the same. - Take the requirements/expectations list and go interview the people that should be involved. Retrospective review based on operational observations. No formal data collection. 1. 2. 3. 4. Establish the standards..expectations Retrospective analysis Reviewed documents and monitored performance. No formal data collection since informal project. 7F. Report Organization We want narrative describing each of the sections per table of contents. 8II. EXPECTATIONS AND FINDINGS A. Organizational Structure for Planning and Budget Process. Reassessment of Process and Organization. (Organization and Process Structure/Reassessment) Reference\nProgram Planning and Budgeting Manual, dated 8/24/94, page 1 and page 10. Expectations 1. In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the structured planning process is successfully implemented as designed. (PPBM 2, 10) ** Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - The strategic planning initiative was started without considering how it fits or works with the processes they already have in place. 2. In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a long-range strategic planning process\na process which includes mission, critical analysis, assumptions, action goals, components, objectives, evaluation, action plans, and monitoring. (G2, 121) ** Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - The strategic planning initiative was started without considering how it fits or works with the processes they already have in place. 3. In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a planning and budgeting cycle calendar prepared under Board guidance. (PPBM 2, 1) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 4. In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of an effort by the Board and Superintendent to sell other staff on the Program Planning and Budgeting Process. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 5. In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process,, we would expect to see evidence of a commitment by the Board and Superintendent to embrace and further develop the Program Planning and Budgeting Process. (WMM) 9 * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 6. 7. 8. 10. 11. 12. In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process,, we would expect to see evidence of the Board continuously monitoring the progress of the Program Planning and Budgeting Process. (PPBM2, 1) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process,, we would expect to see evidence that the long-range planning and budget process instills in the minds of the patrons and others interested in the affairs of the district a sense of fiscal responsibility, accountability, and internal program evaluation by the district. (PPBM 2, 11) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process,, we would expect to see evidence that the Program Planning and Budget Process is coordinated with and successfully interfaces with other district processes. (NCQA, 21) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process,, we would expect to see evidence that the Program Planning and Budget Process has contributed to improvement in the overall management and operations of the district. (NCQA, 51) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that there is a designated senior executive responsible for program implementation. (NCQA, 5) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the lead planning person is positioned to coordinate the Program Planning and Budget Process across the district. (WMM) *  Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Glowers is the lead planning person for the PPBP and Modesta/Young are leading the strategic planning effort. You would think that the designated district planner would lead both efforts so that they could more easily be brought together. 10- Court 3/24/95. Williams and staff unsure of who the lead planner really is. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of key people being involved in the sub-process. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of district users at all levels generating continual process improvement so that the process is modified to meet the changing needs of the district. (NCQA, 29) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the administration reviews and evaluates the overall process at least aimually. (PPBM2,10) (NCQA, 7) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the Board has approved the annual plan. * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a mechanism for communicating the Program Planning and Budget Process to the associates, taxpayers, and district patrons. (NCQA, 29) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the sub-process serving as a guide for day-to-day operations within the district. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the sub-process being discussed and used in regular meetings within the district. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence 11of staff understanding of the sub-process. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 21. In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of associates several levels down recognizing the terminology and being able to describe the elements of the Program Planning and Budgeting Process. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 22. In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of critical events in the sub-process being properly timed and interfaced with other tasks. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Strategic Planning effort not planned or coordinated with the PPBP. Some Board and administration dont understand that the PPBP has a strategic component. Two processes running separately and apart. - The strategic planning initiative was started without considering how it fits or works with the processes they already have in place. 23. In the Organization and Reassessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of sub-process tasks being completed on time or early. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 12B. Needs Assessment Reference: Program Planning and Budgeting Manual, dated 8/24/94, page 2. Expectations 1. In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the subprocess meeting or exceeding the purposes for which it was designed. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 2. In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of determining the needs of the district, particularly legal obligations. (PPBM 2, 1) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 3. In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a document which identifies a need as the variance between the goal/objective and the current 2+4^ position. (SPE) (PPBM 2, 2) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization j^e district is poorly executing many elements of the planning, evaluation, and budgeting process, thus failing to forge the links between planning, evaluation, and budgeting that will ensure that money is spent wisely and that desegregation promises are ke^\u0026gt;For example, we have seen in the Needs Assessment that needs did not drive recommendations. Indeed, the Needs Assessment listed no needs at all. 1994-95 cycle. (Fl6) - The products of the subprocesses are frequently slow, of low quality, or missing altogether, and need to be improved substantially. For example, I see uneven and frequently poor quality in such subprocesses as needs assessment and facilities study. 94-95 was poor, but 95-96 better. Still not measuring gap. (Fl6) 4. In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of both perceptual and empirical data collected and analyzed to determine the needs of the students, parents, teachers, and administrators. (PPBM 2, 2) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Decision-making is not based on defined decision-making processes nor the results of the process. Decisions are frequently made without data\nrather they appear to be arbitrary or based on personal opinions and 13feelings, customary procedures, or administrative prerogative. For example, you admit that you have repeatedly failed to involve the Intervenors in appropriate ways and at appropriate times. Yesterday, we heard that you didnt reach out to Joshua enough. (Fl6) 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a document listing needs in the curriculum, desegregation, and support areas that are rank ordered based on supporting data. (PPBM 2, 3) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a district-wide facilities section. (G2, 109) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - The last version of the facilities study was not planned, and there was no change in the project management report to reflect the changing work picture and timeline. - The products of the subprocesses are frequently slow, of low quality, or missing altogether, and need to be improved substantially. For example, I see uneven and frequently poor quality in such subprocesses as needs assessment and facilities study. 94-95 was poor, but 95-96 better. Still not measuring gap. (Fl6) - The processes are not being used to manage and improve the district, nor are they yet institutionalized, and I see little evidence of efforts to make them so. For example, as the district considered closing schools, it had no current long-range facilities study to guide those decisions and prepare the community for them. (Fl6) - Facilities Study not tasked out, included in the PM tool, and managed to. In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the needs assessment document reflects objectives from the desegregation plan and various desegregation plan audits. (A7) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the superintendent is directing the administration team to conduct a desegregation plan audit and related budget proposals. (A5) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of key people 14being involved in the sub-process. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Decision-making is not based on defined decision-making processes nor the results of the process. Decisions are frequently made without data\nrather they appear to be arbitrary or based on personal opinions and feelings, customary procedures, or administrative prerogative. For example, you admit that you have repeatedly failed to involve the Intervenors in appropriate ways and at appropriate times. Yesterday, we heard that you didnt reach out to Joshua enough. (Fl6) 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of input from each of the organizational and functional units in the district for inclusion in the plan. (G2) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the subprocess serving as a guide for day-to-day operations within the district. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of staff understanding of the sub-process. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of sub-process tasks being completed on time or early. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - The desegregation audit update was completed in 11/94, but was not filed until 2/95, and only after Mooney asked about it. A well-functioning process would have had this step planned into the project management report. - The district lacks discipline on timelines and does not manage them, therefore, it is almost always late on everything. Intermediate and final deadlines of all types are repeatedly pushed back, missed, or ignored altogether. For example, you missed the needs assessment deadline by several months, the junior high capacity study was months late, and an audit of student assignment is still incomplete. (Fl6) In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a plan for 15c disseminating the Broad-Based Feedback. (PPBM 2, 3) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 5. In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of Broad-Based Feedback to the Town Hall and District Dialogue participants. (PPBM 2, 3) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 16. In the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of positive community support in recognition of the thoroughly planned budgeting process. (PPBM 2, 3) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 1 17. In the Broad-Based Feedback section of the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the LRSD works with the MRC prior to implementing reorganization or budget reduction plans that would affect the programming or staff at the magnet schools. (Fl3) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 18. In the Broad-Based Feedback section of the Needs Assessment Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the district works with the McClellan Community High School Advisory Council as a means for promoting community involvement and input so that whatever changes are proposed for the school will reflect the community's needs and wishes\nthat the council is meaningfully involved in all changes at McClellan, including budget, planning and adjustment\nand that the committee helps the district monitor the effect of the budget cuts on the community school program, recommends any appropriate changes that will enable the program to achieve its goals economically but effectively, and works with the district in planning the community school program budget. (Fl4) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Problems with McClellan business case. 167 L 17C. Program Inventory Reference: Program Planning and Budgeting Manual, dated 8/24/94, page 4. Expectations 1. In the Program Inventory Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the process meeting or exceeding the purposes for which it was designed. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 2. In the Program Inventory Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the program inventory identifies cunent desegregation and non-desegregation programs. (PPBM 2, 4) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 3. In the Program Inventory Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a standard district format for clearly identifying programs, defining programs, documenting program purpose, and developing program measurements. The format should include a written program description that outlines program structure and design. (WMMSP) (NCQA, 1) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 4. In the Program Inventory Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a standard expense coding scheme which will link those identified programs to expenditures. (WMMSP) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 5. In the Program Inventory Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of key people being involved in the sub-process. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 6. In the Program Inventory Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the program description is reviewed aimually and updated as necessary. (NCQA, 4) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 187. In the Program Inventory Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the subprocess serving as a guide for day-to-day operations within the district. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 8. In the Program Inventory Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of sub-process tasks being completed on time or early. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization  Negative examples of institutionalization 9. In the Program Inventory Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of staff understanding of the sub-process. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 19D. Planning and Budget Goals Reference: Program Planning and Budgeting Manual, dated 8/24/94, page 4. Expectations 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the subprocess meeting or exceeding the purposes for which it was designed. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Task 196 Board Retreat Work Session was designed to review material prior to going into the program development sub-process. The Board session was subsequently used for the bonding session, and written off as completed. This would indicate that the district did not have a firm idea of what the process was doing. Had this awareness been present, they would have simply added a task for the bonding session and continued on about business. In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a defined, written district-wide mission statement, and goals and objectives published by the Board and the Superintendent. (G2, 32) (PPBM 2,1) (PPBM 2, 4) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of long range planning directed at goals and objectives. (G2, 32) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of defined expected outcomes. (PPBM 2, 4) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that program goals and evaluation criteria are linked to the district-wide goals. (PPBM 2, 5) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of clear delineation oft, the district's desegregation mission to the staff and the community. (Fl 5, 7) 20* * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 7. 8. 9. In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the district utilizing the desegregation mission as a guide for developing policies and setting expectations for the superintendent to implement those policies. (Fl5, 7) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization In the Goal and Objectives Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that goals and objectives are established for the same 3/5 year span covered by the revenue and expense projections. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of key people being involved in the sub-process. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 10. 11. 12. 13. In the Goal and Objectives Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the superintendent is directing a process for Board involvement in the long-range planning and budgeting process. (A5) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the subprocess serving as a guide for day-to-day operations within the district. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of resources (people, time, material) directed toward and effort focused on accomplishment of established goals and objectives. (G2, 32) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of published program objectives by the Council and Cabinet which would satisfy the established district goals. (PPBM 2, 4) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 2114. In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of published, written priorities by the Board to guide staflF in program modification, program development, and funding and resource allocation. (PPBM 2, 5) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 15. In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of developed strategies for funding shortfalls. (PPBM 2, 5) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 16. In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the subprocess incorporated into the policies and procedures of the district. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 17. In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of sub-process tasks being completed on time or early. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 18. 19. In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of st^ understanding of the sub-process. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that ^taff know the goals and objectives, particularly the ones to which their unit must contribute. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 20. In the Goal and Objective Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the goals and objectives are known and supported by district employees. (OA, 217) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 22E. Program Development Reference: Program Planning and Budgeting Manual, dated 8/24/94, page 5. Expectations 1. 2. 3. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the subprocess meeting or exceeding the purposes for which it was designed. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Memo from Williams on 1/26/95 says the business cases are in draft form and cannot be given out. The business cases were to have been submitted to the Superintendent on 1/13/95. The case should be final at that point, if no further information is required. Yet the Superintendent seems to think they are only final after he has approved them. This does not show much confidence in your staff, and is an attempt to keep them secret as long as possible. - The operations of the district are not driven by nor do they flow from the level of mission and goals. I see little focus toward that level and little progress in the direction of fulfilling the districts mission. For example, although I heard testimony yesterday that everything the district does is focused on the desegregation plan, the evidence indicates that there is an acute lack of comprehensive, coordinated, and consistent focus on implementing the plan. (Fl6) In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of programs developed to achieve objectives, particularly those required by the desegregation plan and settlement agreement. (PPBM 2, 1) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Middle School initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. Not on the business case listing. Task 218 (12/22/94). If you are not following the process, it is not institutionalized. - Beacon School initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. Not on the business case listing. Letter from Williams to Brown, dated 11/11/94 confirms this, institutionalized. If you are not following the process, it is not In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of established and measured performance standards and expenditures. (PPBM 2, 1) 23* Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 4. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a district plan and corresponding timeline for reaching the 90% achievement goal for black students, thereby attaining forgiveness of state loans the district otherwise must repay. (F8) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 5. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a logical decision-making process, consistent throughout all levels of the organization, and based on research, information, cost/benefit analysis, analysis of alternatives and on program goals and performance. (G2,119) (CMA,217) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Middle School initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. Not on the business case listing. Task 218 (12/22/94). If you are not following the process, it is not institutionalized. - Beacon School initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. Not on the business case listing. Letter from Williams to Brown, dated 11/11/94 confirms this, institutionalized. If you are not following the process, it is not - Decision-making is not based on defined decision-making processes nor the results of the process. Decisions are frequently made without data\nrather they appear to be arbitrary or based on personal opinions and feelings, customary procedures, or administrative prerogative. For example, business cases are not used to guide decision-making but rather to justify decisions after the fact. (F16) - Decision-making is not based on defined decision-making processes nor the results of the process. Decisions are frequently made without data\nrather they appear to be arbitrary or based on personal opinions and feelings, customary procedures, or administrative prerogative. For example, the issue of the proposed savings of $2 million in incentive school double funding, yet there is no business case or even an explanation of how the district arrived at this number. (Fl 6) 6. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the district is exercising appropriate stewardship such as in management of programs and personnel. (FIO) * Positive examples of institutionalization 24* Negative examples of institutionalization 7. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the goals and objectives, the needs assessment, the program inventory, and the program evaluations being used in the decision-making process. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 8. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of information prepared for corrective decision-making. (PPBM 2, 1) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 9. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of a comparison between the identified needs and the program inventory to determine gaps in program coverage. (PPBM 2, 3) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization 10. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the Position Control System being used to provide accurate and timely decision-making information. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 11. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of regular use of the business case decision procedure at all levels in the district. (WMMSP) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Middle School initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. Not on the business case listing. Task 218 (12/22/94). If you are not following the process, it is not institutionalized. - Beacon School initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. Not on the business case listing. Letter from Williams to Brown, dated 11/11/94 confirms this, institutionalized. If you are not following the process, it is not - The district is poorly executing many elements of the planning, evaluation, and budgeting process, thus failing to forge the links between planning, evaluation, and budgeting that will ensure that money is spent wisely and that desegregation promises are kept. For example, the business cases that are increasingly weak in resource and cost 25analysis. (Fl6) - The products of the subprocesses are frequently slow, of low quality, or missing altogether, and need to be improved substantially. For example, I see uneven and frequently poor quality in such subprocesses as business cases. (Fl6) - Business cases show that LRSD has not learned the planning process. Poor quality, used for justification rather than decision-making. Limited alternatives appears to be manipulative. (WMM) - Magnet School grant initiative y^re started without the benefit of a business case. Had a business case been prepared properly, we could have prevented all of the district effort, setting a hearing, grant preparation, canceling a hearing, calling the whole thing off. We should have done it right the first time. ( 12. 13. 14. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of identification and analysis of alternatives before decisions are finalized. (OA, 220) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Middle School initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. Not on the business case listing. Task 218 (12/22/94). If you are not following the process, it is not institutionalized. - Beacon School initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. Not on the business case listing. Letter from Williams to Brown, dated 11/11/94 confirms this. If you are not following the process, it is not institutionalized. - Magnet School grant initiative were started without the benefit of a business case. Had a business case been prepared properly, we could have prevented all of the district effort, setting a hearing, grant preparation, canceling a hearing, calling the whole thing off. We should have done it right the first time. - Incentive School business case on new alternative. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the district is making budgetary decisions consistent with district desegregation policies in terms of buildings, staff, materials, and equipment. (F15(^ 7 * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the subprocess serving as a guide for day-to-day operations and decision-making within the district. (WMM) 26* * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - If the PPBP were part of everyday operations, we would expect some effort to modify job descriptions to cover the support of the process. This has not been done. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of developing or modifying programs to support identified needs. (PPBM 2, 5) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that program additions, modifications, or deletions are supported by business cases. (PPBM 2, 5 and 6) *  Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Middle School initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. Not on the business case listing. Task 218 (12/22/94). If you are not following the process, it is not institutionalized. - Beacon School initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. Not on the business case listing. Letter from Williams to Brown, dated 11/11/94 confirms this, institutionalized. If you are not following the process, it is not - Strategic Planning initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. If you are not following the process, it is not institutionalized. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the elimination of programs not supporting the identified needs. (PPBM 2, 5) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of changes to the Program Budget Document as a result of program additions, modifications, or deletions. (PPBM 2, 6) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of key people being involved in the process. (WMM) * Positive examples of institutionalization 27* Negative examples of institutionalization - The operations of the district are not driven by nor do they flow from the level of mission and goals. I see little focus toward that level and little progress in the direction of fulfilling the districts mission. For example, you have not adequately helped the community anticipate change, nor understand the reasons behind certain changes, nor allowed then to participate in some important decisions (such as closing schools), causing feelings of fear, frustration, and even betrayal among parents and other citizens. (Fl6) - Williams not responding to the ODM request for business cases and extended evaluations demonstrates the level of cooperation of the district. 20. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of staff understanding of the sub-process. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Strategic Planning initiative generated outside of the PPBP. Moved on it without a business case, or business case after the fact. If you are not following the process, it is not institutionalized. 21. In the Program Development Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of subprocess tasks being completed on time or early. (WMM) *  Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - Scheduling flaws indicate a lack of understanding of what is happening in the process. Desegregation Plan modifications, per Mayos report, will not be submitted to the Board until 3/95. This is after the proposed budget, and at least a month late in the process. For such controversial items, the Board should get any plan modification proposals at least a month and a half before the proposed budget is put together. - The products of the subprocesses are frequently slow, of low quality, or missing altogether, and need to be improved substantially. For example, I see that the district is very slow to produce data that should be driving important decisions, such as a student assignment audit. (Fl6) - The district lacks discipline on timelines and does not manage them, therefore, it is almost always late on everything. Intermediate and final deadlines of all types are repeatedly pushed back, missed, or ignored altogether. For example, you are still contemplating incentive school modifications and should have been done during the program development and evaluation subprocesses. (Fl6) 28n - Open houses and pre-registration occur before decisions on school closings. Consequently, parents will not have the opportunity to visit possible alternatives and will have to go through the registration process again after the decision. Should have been timed better. See Mayo memo of 1/6/95. - The districts poor execution and timing is shown in their handling of registration. The pre-registration brochures are sent out the week of 2/6. They announced the open houses which were the week of 1/28. 29F. Budgeting Reference: Program Planning and Budgeting Manual, dated 8/24/94, page 6. Expectations 1. In the Budgeting Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence of the sub-process meeting or exceeding the purposes for which it was designed. (WMM) * * Positive examples of institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - The LRSDs July 18, 1994 budget submission reflects no significant advances in decision-making nor meaningful progress toward a 1994- 95 budget that is accurate, complete, and final. (ODM hearing preparation, 7/28-29/94) - The LRSDs July 18, 1994 budget submission is inaccurate and incomplete, thereby failing to meet the Order requirements. (ODM hearing preparation, 7/28-29/94 - Some of the budget document information is better. Improving with each budget cycle. 2. In the Budgeting Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that budgets are the direct result of genuine planning. (OA, 219)   Positive examplesof institutionalization Negative examples of institutionalization - The LRSD budgeting is top-down rather than bottom-up, forcing the figures to fit the bottom line instead of deriving the bottom line from the financial facts. (ODM hearing preparation, 7/28-29/94 - The district is poorly executing many elements of the planning, evaluation, and budgeting process, thus failing to forge the links between planning, evaluation, and budgeting that will ensure that money is spent wisely and that desegregation promises are kept. For example, you are using non-recurring revenue sources to fund recurring expenses. (Fl6) 3. In the Budgeting Sub-process, we would expect to see evidence that the budget is viewed as a comprehensive planning document driven by curriculum needs. (FIO) * Positive examples of institutionalization * Negative examples of institutionalization 4. In the Budgeting Sub-process, we\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_657","title":"Program planning and budgeting process","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":["1992/1996"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--20th century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation"],"dcterms_title":["Program planning and budgeting process"],"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/657"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nLittle Rock School District Program Planning \u0026amp; Budgeting Process The purpose of this session is to: Help you understand how you can get what you need to do your job\n Clarify why the answer is NO to some of your requests at certain times of the year\n Explain why program evaluations, a Program Budget Document, etc. are necessary\nand.  Justify why we have a planning process and how we are all involved. We will need from you: Any questions you have as the presentation is made\n A careful understanding of the process when the presentation is complete\n Accurate and complete Program Budget Document information\nAccurate program evaluations\nand,  Properly formatted business cases. In its simplest form, the purpose of the Planning \u0026amp; Budgeting Process is to link what we should be doing as a school district with how we spend our money.filed oijTPiQj rniiDT JAN 211992 1: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT'^^*- EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION by\nS^NTS, clerk OEP. CLi IK LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS ORDER On November 14, 1991, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit remanded the cause to the Court to review the parties' proposed modifications [May submissions] to the 1989 plans. Little Rock School District, et al., Nos. 91-2640EA, 91- 2648EA, 91-2655EA, 91-2683EA, slip op. (8 th Cir. November 14, 1 1991). I:  ' 5: I I K teifi  \u0026lt; In response to the order of the Eighth Circuit, the Court scheduled a hearing to begin on December 18, 1991. It informed the parties involved that. prior to reviewing their proposed modifications, it would ask the Pulaski County Special School District rpcsSD] to report on its financial situation and hear a ^The three school districts involved. Little Rock School District [LRSD], Pulaski County Special School District [PCSSD], and North Little Rock School District [NLRSD], and the Joshua Intervenors submitted proposed modifications to the settlement plan approved by the Eighth Circuit in Little Rock School District V. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, 921 F.2d 1371 (8th Cir. 1990).report from the Office of Desegregation Monitoring on the budgetary processes for desegregation expenditures which are employed by the three school districts involved in the matter. The Court determined that before it could consider proposed modifications to the settlement plans, it needed to learn whether there are district budgetary processes in place which will enable the Court to monitor the implementation of the plans. At the conclusion of the second day of the hearing, the Court expressed concern about its ability to effectively monitor the settlement plan without budgets that reflect the three school districts' intentions, goals. and priorities regarding their desegregation efforts. The Court specifically mentioned the state of the Little Rock School District's [LRSD] budgetary process. In its opinion approving the settlement plans of the three districts, the Eighth Circuit noted the parties have committed to \"solemn undertakings\" and stated: We accept these undertakings, again with the reminder that compliance with them will be closely monitored. If the District Court becomes convinced in the future that money is being wasted, and that desegregation obligations contained in the settlement plans are being flouted, it will be fully authorized to take appropriate remedial action. Little Rock School District V. Pulaski County Special School District No. 1, 921 F.2d 1371, 1390 (Sth Cir. 1990). The Eighth Circuit further directed the Court to \"monitor closely the compliance of the parties with the settlement plans and the settlement agreement, to take whatever action is appropriate, in its discretion, to ensure compliance with the plans and agreement. -2-and otherwise to proceed as the law and the facts require. Id. at 1394. The Court monitors the use of settlement monies through the Office of Desegregation Monitoring [ODM]. In October 1991, the ODM informed the LRSD that it must be able to provide the Court with information which (1) accurately and comprehensively accounts for the expenditure of settlement funds\n(2) demonstrates the link between the district's legal requirements and the fiscal underwriting of those requirements\n(3) describes desegregation budgeting process that can be demonstrated, justified, and verified\nand (4) enables the district to determine what adjustments might be necessary in order to align finances with desegregation obligations. a [Document # 1517] Pursuant to the directives from and the considerable latitude and discretion given the Court by the Eighth Circuit, the Court finds that the LRSD's current budgetary process does not meet the above requisites and that it is necessary for the LRSD to submit 2 revised cost figures to the Court. Therefore, (1) The LRSD must submit a revised 1991-92 budget which is directly correlated to the specific provisions of the settlement plan and which are reflected on updated implementation timelines contained in the plan. 2 In a note to its May submissions, the LRSD indicated that the cost figures originally submitted with its desegregation plan were outdated and it would provide revised cost figures in a separate desegregation budget. To date, the Court is unaware of any such revised figures having been submitted or filed. -3-a (2) The LRSD must submit a long-range budget projection on per annum basis which covers all anticipated desegregation expenditures over the entire term of the desegregation agreement. (3) The LRSD must submit.a long-range revenue projection covering the same period of time, which includes revenues anticipated not only from the settlement monies and settlement loan, but also from state and millage revenues and any other money sources. This long-term projection will provide a clear picture of the district's financial future and, thereby, enable the LRSD to predict with accuracy if and when a millage increase will be needed. The amount and time of any anticipated millage increase is to be indicated along with the date when the district will present a millage increase to the voters. (4) The LRSD has maintained that a significant portion of desegregation expenditures are II start up. II The district must specifically identify which desegregation costs are \"start up\" and when these start up costs will terminate. (5) The revised budget shall be prepared in consultation with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring and shall be submitted to the Court within thirty (30) days after the Court rules either from the bench or in a written order on the proposed modifications. - By this Order, the Court confirms its oral approval of the construction of the interdistrict school at the Crystal Hill site. Further, the Court confirms oral instructions made to the parties to explore alternative sites for the construction of King -4-Interdistrict School along the 1-630 corridor. DATED this of January, 1992. I .2?^ STATES DIST'RR2I CCTT JJUDGE SHEET IN ^PLL i) FRCP -5- Synopsis of Circuit and District Court orders and ODM communication regarding the LRSD budget: Circuit Court Order of December 12, 1990: 1. If the District Court becomes convinced in the future that money is being wasted, and that desegregation obligations contained in the settlement plans are being flouted, it will be fully authorized to take appropriate remedial action. 2. The Court is to monitor closely the compliance of the parties with the settlement plans and the settlement agreement, to take whatever action is appropriate, in its discretion, to ensure compliance with the settlement plans and agreement Letter from the Monitor to LRSD, October 28, 1991: The LRSD must be able to provide the Court with information that: 1. Accurately and comprehensively accounts for the expenditure of settlement funds\n2. Demonstrates the link between the districts legal requirements and the fiscal underwriting of those requirements\n3. Describes a desegregation budget process that can be demonstrated, justified, and verified\n4. Enables the district to determine what adjustments might be necessary in order to align finances with desegregation obligations. District Court Order of January 21, 1992: 1. The Court expressed concern about its ability to effectively monitor the settlement plan without budgets that reflect district intentions, goals, and priorities regarding desegregation efforts. 2. The Court determined that the LRSD budgetary process does not meet the requisites stated in the Monitors letter and directed the district to submit a revised budget. 3. The budget must be directly correlated to the specific provisions of the settlement plan which are reflected on updated implementation timelines contained in the plan. 4. The LRSD must submit a long-range budget projection on a per annum basis that covers all anticipated desegregation expenditures over the entire term of the desegregation agreement. 5. The LRSD must submit a long-range revenue projection, covering the same period of time, that includes revenues anticipated not only from the settlement monies and the settlement loan, but also from state and millage revenues and any other money sources.6. 7. The long-range revenue projection will provide a clear picture of the districts financial future and, thereby, enable the LRSD to predict with accuracy if and when a millage increase will be needed. The amount and time of any anticipated millage increase is to be indicated along with the date when the district will present a millage increase to the voters. The district must specifically identify which desegregation costs are \"start up\" and when these start up costs will terminate. District Court Order of February 23, 1993: 1. 2. The Court expressed concern about its ability to monitor the parties compliance with the settlement plans absent budget documents that clearly reflect the districts allocation of resources in relation to both short-range and long-range planning to meet desegregation plan goals, programs, and priorities. The superintendent submitted a budget document wherein he stated he would: a. b. c. d. e. Immediately begin directing a process for Board involvement in the long-range planning and budgeting process\nDirect the new administration team to conduct a desegregation plan audit\nRestructure the budgeting process so that full attention and resources are directed at improving student achievement\nStrive to place the entire district in the position of being accountable for improving student achievement\nLink programs which are designed to improve instruction and achievement to expected outcomes and goals. If a program does not have this linkage, the superintendent will recommend nonrenewal of personnel contracts in these areas. 3. The Court stated that findings in the LRSDs 1990 Curriculum Audit continue to exist in the district a. b. c. d. School management practices show inadequate control of district resources. The district may be not exercising appropriate stewardship such as in management of programs and personnel. The budget is not viewed as a comprehensive planning document driven by curriculum needs. Visible and tangible linkages between budget priorities and curriculum priorities are not apparent. 4. 5. The superintendent stated in a February 1,1993 hearing that it would be one-and-one-half years before the LRSD would have a budget that would meet the requirements of the Courts previous orders. The LRSD must achieve a budget process, develop a budget document, and demonstrate budget management that fully reflect the districts careful planning for meeting itsdesegregation obligations over the full span of the settlement plans. 6. 7. 8. The Court is concerned with not only the expenditure of desegregation settlement money but also all the state, local, and federal fonds the district uses to finance its entire operation. The Court finds it necessary to assist the LRSD by appointing a person or persons to work with the LRSD to prepare a budget document that will make it possible for the Court to monitor the districts many desegregation commitments. The Court will not consider the task complete until the LRSD demonstrates it understands that budgeting procedures, and the resulting budget documents, are not static, but an integral part of the districts on-going planning and evaluation processes.Numerous Court orders and records address the characteristics of the budgetary process and budget document that will enable the Court to effectively monitor how the LRSD is planning and applying use of its resources toward fulfilling its desegregation commitments. Based on ODMs monitoring needs and on Court records that include the Monitors letter of Oct. 28, 1991, Circuit Court orders of December 12, 1990, District Court Orders of January 21, 1992 and February 23, 1993, and LRSD submissions of July 31, 1992 to the District Court, the LRSDs budget processes and resulting documents must reflect the following elements, clearly and closely linked together\n1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. The districts legal obligations (plan provisions and court orders,) based upon a current desegregation plan audit that will enable the district to clearly identify its desegregation goals and subordinate objectives. 0uly 31, 1992 LRSD submission) Needs assessment and planning, both short-term and long-term, to meet court order and desegregation plan goals, programs, and priorities, that also reflects a process which includes Board involvement in long-range planning and budgeting. 0uly 31, 1992 LRSD Budget submission and Feb. 23, 1993 Order) Prioritization based on (1) importance or \"weight\" factors in relation to desegregation goals, plan provisions, and Court orders, (2) sequence of events (what must be done first so other things can be done second, and so on,) and (3) programs or activities that will require larger portions of resources, or a longer commitment of resources, in order to be fulfilled. 0an. 21, 1992 and Feb. 23, 1993 Orders) Identification of all financial resources (including settlement funds and federal, state, local, and any other revenues) and anticipation of when millage increases will be sought. 0an. 21, 1992 and Feb. 23, 1993 Orders) An accurate and comprehensive accounting for the allocation and expenditure of all financial resources (including settlement funds and federal, state, local, and any other revenues.) (Feb. 23, 1993 Order) A monitoring system that includes a regular review of whether expenditures are being made at the rate and amount proportionate to allocations, goals, objectives, priorities, timelines, and formative and summative evaluation feedback. (Circuit Court Order, Dec. 12, 1990\nDistrict Court Orders of Jan. 21, 1992 and Feb. 23, 1993) Evaluation criteria and methods, both formative and summative, upon which to determine whats working, where changes may be needed, where any money is being wasted, where economies can be effected, and the rate of progress toward desegregation goals. (Circuit Court, Dec. 12, 1990) Timelines, with specific starting and completion dates for all work, that include a designation of who is responsible for each step described above. Qan. 21, 1992)Project goal: To develop and implement budgeting processes, budget documents, and budget management procedures and practices that are institutionalized as an integral part of the district's ongoing planning, monitoring, and evaluation processes to ensure the district fulfills its desegregation goals, programs, and priorities over the full span of the settlement agreement (Feb 23, 1993)' { FE3 2 4 r 53 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION 0!:ic3 ci Ci\n!\nti s!J LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS ORDER On February 1, 1993, the Court held a hearing to determine. among other things, what progress the Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") was making with respect to conforming its budgetary process to that outlined in earlier orders of the Coxirt. Having considered the testimony and exhibits presented at the hearing, the Court detennines that the LRSD needs assistance in developing a budget that complies with the Court's requirements for a budgeting process and document that can be effectively monitored. The Court first notified the LRSD of its concern about the LRSD's budgetary process over a year ago. During hearings on the parties' proposed modifications to their settlement plans, the Court expressed concern about its ability to monitor the parties' compliance with the settlement plans absent budget documents that clearly reflect the districts' allocation of resources in relation to both short-range and long-range planning to meet desegregation plan goals, programs, and priorities. The Court specifically addressed its remarks to the LRSD, and followed up its comments I 5 Q with an order filed on January 21, 1992, directing the LRSD to submit a revised 1991-92 budget, prepared in consultation with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring (\"ODM\"). The Court ordered the LRSD to make certain submissions so the Court could determine that the LRSD's budgetary process would meet the following requisites: 1) accurately reflect and comprehensively account for the expenditure of settlement funds\n2) demonstrate the requirements requirements\nand link the between fiscal the district's underwriting of legal those 3) describe a desegregation budgeting process that can be demonstrated, justified, and verified\nand 4) enable the district to detennine what adjustments might be necessary in order to align finances with desegregation obligations. The LRSD filed its response to the Court's order on June 1, 1992, \"LRSD Projected Revenue and Expense - 1992/93-1996/97.\" A revised version of this document was filed on July 31, 1992. Among the changes and additions in the revision's section entitled \"Desegregation Budgeting: Description Future Year Procedures\" were new statements that II [t]he Superintendent will immediately begin directing a process for Board involvement in the long-range planning and budgeting process\" and \"[t]he Superintendent will direct the new administration team to conduct a Desegregation Plan audit and related budget proposals.\" Additionally, in the budget document presented to the Court on July 31, 1992, which was the subject of an August 3, 1992 hearing. LRSD Superintendent Bernd, who had come on board July 1, 1992, stated: Once this budget is adopted, the budgeting process will not end. We must begin to restructure the budgeting -2-process so that full attention and resources are directed at improving student achievement rather than providing so many different programs which ultimately distract the District's focus to other issues. It is my goal to place the entire District in the position of being accountable for improving student achievement. This will be done by concentrating our attention first on the core curricular areas. Next, programs which are designed to improve instruction and achievement in these areas will be linked to particular expected outcomes and goals. If a program dees not have this linkage, I will be recommending in the Spring of 1993 that personnel contracts in these areas not be renewed for the next fiscal year. Finally, for the District to operate efficiently and effectively, it will be necessary to streamline the administration, Because contracts have been renewed for 1992-93, this cannot be fully accomplished this year. On the other hand, the District has several cost centers where investment in personnel might produce savings generate revenues for the District. or will be considered in the coming months. All of these items Document # 1649. In December 1990, the LRSD Board of Directors received a Curriculum Audit it had commissioned the National Curriculum Audit Center to conduct. This report is a part of the case record. In Finding 5.3, the report found that \"school management practices show inadequate control of district resources.\" In Finding 5.1, the auditors stated: 11 [T]he district may be not exercising appropriate stewardship such as in management of programs and personnel.\" The auditors found that \"the budget was not viewed as a comprehensive planning document driven by curriculum needs. Visible and tangible linkages between budget priorities and curriculum priorities were not apparent . . It Finding 5.4. The Court finds that this continues to be the case. -3-Despite the persistent urging of the Court, there is no indication that a budget process of the type sought by the Court is or will be forthcoming from the LRSD. During the February 1, 1993 hearing at which budget matters were discussed, the Court asked Superintendent Bernd when the district would have a budget that would meet the requirements of the Court's previous Orders. Dr. Bernd replied that he believed the district was \"at least a year and a half away. tl The Court has been patient. It encouraged the LRSD to work with the ODM on the district budget, but, despite ODM's diligent efforts to assist, the LRSD has not produced a budget process that enables the Court to meet its obligation to monitor desegregation plan compliance. The Court, thus, finds it is necessary to assist the LRSD by appointing a person or persons to work with the LRSD at LRSD expense to prepare a budget document that will make it possible for the Court to monitor the myriad of programs the LRSD agreed to conduct in its desegregation settlement plan. The Court is concerned not only with the LRSD's expenditure of desegregation money but also with all the state, local, and federal funds the district uses to finance its entire operation. The LRSD must achieve a budgeting process, develop a budget document, and demonstrate budget management that fully reflect the district's careful planning for meeting its desegregation obligations over the full span of the settlement plans. The person or persons employed will be paid by the LRSD but will report to the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. The LRSD is -4-expected to treat the employee or employees like its other full- time employees for purposes of benefits and will provide adequate work space, equipment, and materials along with full access to information and. support. The Court, after consultation with the person or persons and the LRSD, will determine appropriate salaries. The employment will not be permanent but will continue for as long as it takes to get the job done, as determined by the Court. The Court will not consider the task complete until the LRSD demonstrates that it understands that budgeting procedures, and the resulting budget documents, are not static, but an integral part of the district's on-going planning and evaluation processes. DATED this day of February, 1993. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS DOCUMENT ENTERED ON COMPLIANCEV/ITH RULE53 AND/OR Ta^RCP )N BY______d-------------- -5-0 iSC a UK! rc3 C\ni:C9 0 IN (Ht UNITEU STATES OISIHtCT CUURT L 2 b 1993 s * EASIEHN DISIRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION Lfc 2-^ as. OtSTHICT COURT EASTSRN OtSTRiCT ARKANSAS X\n2 i995 LU I IE KOCk SCHOOL UlSf HICI p I ai nt i r r, w s . PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT , 0\u0026gt;i l endan t. CARL R- BRENTS, CLBRf^ Dy\nNO. a2-CV-866 Monday , February 1 , Little Roc k , 9:35 A.H. VOLUME XLil HE.AHING ON HUOGET PROCESS C?.CUnK 1993 .A r k a n 3 ( J 5 I i BEhORE THE HONORABLE SUSAN MEBBE.R WHiGHT, UNilEU SI.aIES OiSTRiCl JUDGE, APPEARANCES: as rol lows-. I i I On Behair oT the Plaintifr: CHRISTOPHER J. HELLER Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Little Rock, Arkansas 7 2201 On Behalf of the Joshua Intervenors: JOHN W. WALKER WILEY BRANTON, JR. John w. Walker, p.a. 1723 South Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas TZZQb On Behalf of the Knight Intervenors: RICHARD W. ROACHELL Attorney at Law 1014 West Third Street Little Hock, Arkansas Proceed i ng s I 7220 I reported by niachine stenography\nTranscript prepared by notereading. ( Page I 209 ) i 02 It was coded In terms or Functions, not programs. in other  2 words, textbooks, utilities. the t sort or thing. And 11 does 3 give the Court Inrornallon about the functions the district 4 0 o / Span t its inone^ on, but it's not grouped according to programs. tor example, magnet program at Central, magnet program at Henderson, the accelerated learning program, or any theme at id i2 any 1 nee nt1ue terms or conce rn schooI. rune L i ons. Nutii I ng IS In And It was my concern that that i c Q u I d ri t do much wI th terms or programs. it s I ri i could not and still my that in terms or planning. or determining 1mpI emen ta 11 on what the district was planning and monitoring its or that plan. a a i i Ihe new superintendent, Ur. Uernd, did Indicate at a i4 hearing last summer or last spring when he rirst came on board. i5 and this hearing on was budget cuts, that he would make every id errort to implement a budget process that was designed to i / evaluate programs and meet student needs. id i9 And, in fact, he wrote and this Is in the LKSO iyy2-i994 operating budget document dated July 23, iy92. He 40 wrote, unce this budget is adopted, the budgeting proce ss will 2i 22 23 not end. we must begin to restructure the budgeting process so that rulI attention and resources are directed at 1mprow1 ng student achievement rather than providing so many di rferent 24 programs which ultimately distract the districts focus to other- 2b issues.'' i bJ Now, X have some question about all or these things. about the curriculum audit, about my own budgeting order and J about what Ur. Bernd pledged. 4 b b / B r I rs t or all. I want to ask what process 1s the district using i I don t know. Hr. Heller, who should answer these questions. What process is the district using to identity programs that do improve student achievement as opposed to those that d i 5 t rac t i ng i MH. HtLLtHi I would suggest, your Honor, that to lU talk about the whole budget process. it might be best to start i.s with Bernd who can give IHk cUUHIs AII right. i 1 U r . i J MR. HtULtH: a lot of the background and where 1 4 ib we've come since the operating budget was submitted, and then Mr. oary Jones can answer the more particular questions ib about our accounting methods and budgeting process. 1 / td IHt CUUKI! All right. I hat will be tine. Ur. Bernd, and Id like tor the clerk to swear Ur. Bernd it he s 19 going to take the stand. MB. BilrUNt 1 r you  11 raise your right hand, please. ai MAC BERNU, SWORN 2Z . VHt WITNESSt 1 do . MS. Sir I ON: Please be seated. 24 f Ht COUR I I All ri ght. Ur. Bernd, again, 1 recall 2 J 2b your budget document or 1992-93 dated last summer, July 23,  d. right? 04 And i feineititie r you came on board. when, July 1, is that IHt WilNtSS: fes , your Honor. 1 J 4 IHt CUUKt: And i remember your First day on the Job b was spent in this courtroom which must not ha-ye bean a pleasant o experience. z You indicate that full attention and re sou rces a le directed at improving student achievement rather than y providing so many ditrerent programs which ultimately distract the district' b Focus to other issues. i I What i want to know 15 what process are you using to iii identlFy programs that help student achievement as opposed to X J those tha t don' t. X4 ib ib IHt WilNtbS: somewhat long answer'! I Ht GOUR I . is your Honor prepared to indulge in im going to need to give you background. Yes. i tell you what my concern is. i i guess i should ask this: Uo you have a budget document that ib would indicate to me how you plan to spend your money on a i iy programs, and then, can you explain to me through that document 20 how you would evaluate and seIF-ava Iuate the Implementation or 2i 22 those programs, that is, the success oF them or lack or it? IHt WirNtbSi Your Honor, we're working toward that. 2 3 but id like to give you some background and, also, talk a 24 2b little bit about what we have done to change our budgeting process so so you could have an understandI ng oF that. 1 a J 4 b o ! a a io i i i^ i J i4 ib lb i / ib ig 20 21 22 23 24 2b b b fHt GUUHI I You may answer. A I I right. You may answer. I h a t 3 Fine. I would prefer to have brief answers, but if has to be lengthy, you may make a lengthy answer. iHt WilNtbS: Your Honor, at the time i was before this Court to talk about the budget cuts. concerned about i n the district still that 1 was I was a primary And , the linkage between and 1 t between what were doing student achievement. and that certainly I s consideration. at this point. that shows we don t have a budget document that linkage, and id have to. your Honor that i think frankly, tell Its going to be a while before it would be possible to come up with that. And what i want to do is give you some background on the problem so you 11 understand why. The other point that 1 was making in that hearing. i think this is an area that we have made some progress to do with community input and just the Input of people budget itself because i accompanying need. saw that as as as a on , and had into the an We made some some drastic budget cuts In a very short amount of time last sumraer with very little input. and so, we began an input process early this carrying that through. And 1 can talk about think that is IHt G0UR1 All right. fell me (Ht HllNtSS. I Ht GOUR I I fall that important to mention. All right. and we've been because X Now, keep in mind that when1 you say bo community input,' does the comiiiun 1 ty input come from a  J 4 b b / b body or who are people who has before them ths Ueaegregition Plan and coinmitted to Implementing that Plan/ I Hb I Ht IHh IHt IHt Mi I NtSli! dUUHi: Mi INbSS\nGUUHI I Mi I NtSb! i A. I I i believe right. be I i eve so. Or are they so . coinmitted to other things? well. they may well be committed to y other things as well. iu I Ht GOURI : right. AS long as they have berore A I I 1 i them as a working document the UesegregatI on Plan which sets id forth the goals. Its r i ne with me to have community input. i 1 J til ink thats very healthy. but If they have other agendas that 1 4 work at cross-purposes with the court s obligation to desegregate these schools pursuant to the Plan, i don't think ib its fruitful to have it. i / IHt MIlNtbSi {Nodding head up and down.) ib la I Ht CUUKI I IHh WiTNESSi But you may proceed. Well, i want to first start with the 20 the matters that are of most concern to you, and that is the 2i I inkage between the things we re doing in the district and s tuden t achi evemen t. 22 2 J in order to get a good start on establishing that 24 2b I Inkage I Inkage and, your Honor, i m nut admitting that a perfect can ever be made, but we can certainly do better. i n1  2 J 4 b o snn Other words, we're talking about a very complex system, and 1 X have had a lot of experience with school districts in the county , i know or none that can demonstrate a causal relationship between budgetary expenditures and student achievement. but we can do a lot better. IHt CUURI! but can t you with programs and student achl e vemen L tan you make a causa i relationship between b i tt programs and achievement/ iu IHh WilNtbS: Not causal, your Honor. You can make COITS I all one I re I at I onsii i p , you can make some pretty informed i 1 Ld i J dec 1s i ons . and i think they can be much more informed than the ones we are niak i ng now . 1Ht tOUKl: All right. 14 th IHt WXfNtSS: things we're Xn order to do that, one of the first we re going to need is a better accounting 10 system, and X have to talk a little bit about what we were 1 / confronted with when we began in July. lb Ihe district had converted over to a a budget that. 1!# basically, gave each of the program managers a sum of money CO which. i n a sense. is a good thing because you have site-based :i 2 4 24 2b management, but we had gone completely away from the line item budget that the district theyd had before, and X think X heard your Honor  one of the frustrations you expressed is we Just had these categories like salaries that go across tiie district and they're not linked to programs.I IHt CUUHI I H 1 ghL. QU  J 4 Q / u y id 1 i 14 id 14 lb IQ 1 / lU ly ZO 41 44 4J IHt WilNtSU: oppoiite extreme. W* I I , we -- we have gone to the We had d kind oi a location budget control budget where there was or a a pot ot money ror each program managers, but we had gone away r rom sped tying item within those programs what the dirtsrent the managers. So, spent on salary, on, and i t ot the by line accoun t s we re tor they were unable to tel I how much was being how much was being spent on textbooks and so s created so, a what were converting back to a it s created quite a problem. in the middle or doing is now line item budget within those control accounts so, hoperully, or best worlds. well have the best or best the both but that is taking And the other thing that or time is the computer changeover. L i me. s taken a considerable amount Ihat was a system that was purchased betore this administration came on board. been a tremendous number or runctional problems with ability to get basic rinanclal to the district. Ihere have 1t and i t s Inrormation and other info rma tI on And, again, we feel like we're making some progress in addressing those problems, but they re not f i xed yes. i think the yet. the In the middle frustration for me at this point is is that were or building a basic in format ion system so we can 4 4 4b Just begin to envision. move to the kind of a system that that you 1 think we could have some some dialogue about the i level or speciricity we' I I eventually get to. i oy the Is sue o r  a J 4 b o ! a y io i i tc X4 Xb Xb i J XH X9 \u0026lt;:u Zi di causa I relationship Is, 1 think. an important.one. We  1 I probably never get tu that point, but we can do a lot better job. 1 i i m going to make a cominent, your Honor. We re kI nd o r driving it. 1 n the and Its situation or Fixing the car while we ' I'e i t so , we have to go on with the Functions oF the district, and at changeoV e r s, and that's what I Ht CdUKI : IHt wiiNtaa\nthat there are aud i t, re the same time, make the se in the middle or doing. Have you read the tyetl curriculum audit.' Yes, ma am, i have. I could X COM I d some areas that we have addressed in that but there are many more to address. And X m also quite taken with the Judge's remark about distractions. There are many . IHt UObrtli Uh, X know. IHt WXINtSSi addressed, your Honor. IHt GUUH1: and I n r i X i ng to Fix a district a And some or them, regretrully, must be Well, the re wilt like yours, it will vehicle that is moving. always be distractions, always be tantamount to in other words, you can t stop it\nyou have to keep on going. Xt keeps on. My concern is that two years ago, the district did get ^4 ab notice from the curriculum audit and the Court made that audit a part of the record and, 1n essence, adopted its recommendations, Bl /O 1 and nothing was done for a year. or at least i don't think much  J 4 b tl ! b iu Xi i^ I j i4 ib io i z ib i9 au 2i 22 2b was done For a year. And then the court had another budget hearing ago and ordered And you came on what you go I ng to d I strict said. things be remedied. board and you've J. L sounded good. be a while more. a year and It hasn t been done. indicated that and i I i ke bu t. now , you're saying it's And a I I the while. not only is you r continuing to operate, settlement monies but you continue to yet the From the state. FHt MilNtbb: VHh CUURI: monies rroiii the Yes, your Honor. And you continue to spend the settlement state, and by the time we get this car rixed, going to be out of gas. that s what i m worried about. And it s going to be running, but it's going to be out or gas. i am going to take a more active role through the monitor s i t Ano orrice and, probably, through a court order in your budgetary process, and you can expect that. o you have any more comments to make with my question about linkage curriculum programs to the you have any more comments/ IHE WLINkSSt in a in a general sense. respect to budge t ? Uo your Honor, It'S - we're going to have to get our basic Inrormatlon systems repaired and 1n place, i think, before we can do an ertective 24 2 b job that meets the court s requirements, and i i have to be honest in that regard and and its not something that that 1 i J 4 b 6 / a a iu i i i J I j 14 ib ib I i lb I a au ai 22 2 3 24 2b i 1 can be done In a short amount or time. I Ht COUK I I IHt WilNtSb: First Issue was was When did you start working on It? we began work OU r OU r ou r the computer system, and we. began work on it in July. the with the coming understanding or lend some o r some very to accompI i sh. i 1 will basical Iy, Ihe whole process accelerated with or Mr. Jones, who does have a the who I e system, and i think valuable eApertise to what we good is going t re t r yI ng Freely aonn t to your Honor that virtually did nothing on it until until we got the we budget For this school year adopted and got school open. what we In the meant 1 me, ve basically been doing is trying to make work For the people who rely, on It For the reports that ara required in order kinds or decisions that youre talking une OF the issues is is that the coinpu ter i n F o rmat i on to begin to abou t. the reports and to get make the we got From the new system were quite difterent and much less detailed than the reports that people in the district were used to. and in some cases. as well. And in they had very inaccurate i n to rina t i on on them. And SO, we've had to go through and - great number oF reports, redo and correct a redo them, and work with the venders and the people who sold us this system in order to make it work more adequately For us.az 1 J 4 5 6 MH. WALktH\nIn view or the tact that you will Inquire Into this area this arternoon, may I have access to a copy or any writings that they have documentation of a needs assessment that 1 can study it before? rHt COURi. Su re. Yes . which reflect that there is having already been made so Lets just let Mr. Hoacheil I and any other parties who are interested and who are present be a rurn1 shed that. and the monitors office, too , too. a Who is the person here who is responsible ror that. 10 Ur. He rnd i 11 12 13 IHt WllNtSS: responsibility for It. IHt CUUHI: Mrs. Bernard has over overa I I She is assisted by Mrs. Hart. Ms. Hart and Ms. Bernard. We can talk to 14 them In a rew minutes when we break ror lunch. 15 is that a I I right ? 16 17 18 19 ao HR. WALktH1 IHt COURII I'm talking You stated. position or All right. Also, In your document, you stated about the budget document you submitted 1n July. and \"It 1s my goal to place the entire district 1n the being accountable for Improving student achievement. I , This will be done by concentrating our attention rirst on the core curricular areas. \"Next, programs which are designed to Improve ! instruction and achievement in these areas wl I I be linked to particular expected outcomes and goals. If a program does not ^5U' J S* 6 10 jhava thl s 11 nkage . I Mill be 83 recommending in the spring of igyj ithat personnel contracts In these areas are not to be renewed ror the next rtscal year.\" Now, what links between goals, programs and outcomes have you established for these core curriculum areas/ IHt MllNhSbi right now, your Honor. estab Ii shed. Me are In the process of doing that 1 can't tell you that they've been AS a part or -- of a budget process, we Intend to make statements i n that regard. 1 do want to be careful and tell your Honor were 7 a 11 I ! I I i not talking about quantitative measures here. 12 13 14 THE couwr. IHt WllNhSS. fHt GOOHf: Well, ot course not, I understand that. we we cant do that. But we Do you have any programs that you've lb determined don't have the link to student achievements'? lb IHt MilNtSSi At this point, 1 could not 1 couId LI not report on that, but 1 w1I I be able to. IB IHt CUUHI J But you will be recommending this spring ig that personnel contracts In areas won't be renewed  40 41 42 IHt MllNtShi IHt COUKTi IHt WITNESSj Yes, your Honor. if the link isn't made? The 4 J THE COURT I Mell, When do you think you can have 44 this? Because the Court asked you in November, November bth or 4 b 1994, to let me know of changes before registration, beforeNEEDSOl REVISED 08 APR 93 NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUBPROCESS REQUIREMENTS The survey instrument should have an optional question to ask the person if they know of additional people we should talk to. 2. During the survey, be sure to get the mailing address of the person so that we can send them a draft of the findings, help build buy-in and team attitude. This will 3. The needs assessment should have section dealing with enrollment and school avallabi1ity...kind of a school plan. It should be linked with the long range facility plan to give Plant Services some idea of the future. 4. The needs assessment should include appropriate items from the Curriculum Audit report, items with which we agree. What needs to be done to complete those 5. As part of the needs assessment, I should look at the other budget and planning systems within the county, models. and some other 6. The needs assessment should include items from the deseg plan and various deseg plan audits. 1. a 7. CA. The needs assessment should take input from each of the organizational and functional units for inclusion in the plan. 8. CA-109. The needs assessment should have a facilities section. This recommendation has some outline factors at CA-109. 9. CA-115. testing...recommendation. Establish a functional assessment program and expand The planning needs assessment should draw on this functional assessment and testing outcomes. 10.GOAL01 REVISED 14 MAY 93 GOAL AND OBJECTIVE SUBPROCESS REQUIREMENTS 1. Review all board policies and try to start with some existing goals and objectives. Should include any policy statements. 2. CA-32. Outlines the need for district-wide goals and objectives. Framework for the plan. 3. BC-10. Has a good objective item. ..setting up the Little Rock Public Education Fund which would provide community support for education programs. 4. BC-10. Good goal item stop the out migration of students. 5. BC-10. schools. Good goal item attract students from the private 6. G4-1. the major starting point. Good list of goals for the district. This should be 7. F15-7. of the 1992 plan, Additionally, under the title \"leadership\" on pages 2-3 the board and superintendent have failed to assert strong leadership in the following areas: (1) Clearly delineating the district's desegregation mission to the staff and the community. (2) Utilizing the desegregation mission as a guide for developing policies and setting expectations for the superintendent to implement those policies. BUDOl REVISED 18 MAY 93 BUDGET SUBPROCESS REQUIREMENTS 1. We will need to write a budget manual. It will have to give instructions and definitions to all budget managers on budget use and process preparation. 2. Might expand \"School/Dept Budget Requests\" to include a program review and to solicit input from budget managers. 3. There needs to be a provision for monthly expense reporting and financial review. this. Check out the principles meeting. The principles meeting might be used for 4. There needs to be a expenditure items, and budget sections. supporting Doug Eaton handles this. subprocess for capital Should link planning 5. There needs to be a expenditure items. supporting subprocess for property Charlie Neal will have to play a big part. Should link the planning and budget sections. 6. CA-13. personnel. Budget process needs to involve key administrative 7. CA-91. Need better expense allocations in the budget process. management and control of 8. CA-92. educational staff. Budget process needs the involvement of key 9. CA-94. and trained to. Budget process steps need to be clearly articulated 10. CA-94. Budget needs allocations...program budget. programmatic identification of 11. CA-119. Good outline of the program budgeting process. Could be used for the budget manual, process. Talks about linking to the planning 12. F8. The LRSD must be able information that: 1. to provide the Court with expenditure of settlement funds\nAccurately and comprehensively accounts for the 2. Demonstrates the link between the district's legal requirements\nrequirements and the fiscal underwriting of those 3. Describes a desegregation budget process that can be demonstrated, justified, and verified\n4. Enables the district to determine what adjustments might be necessary in order to align finances with d e s eg r a t i o o^ ig^ tjjjn s^ Budgeting and^ TrSca management to ensure full implementation of the desegregation plan needs to be such that the district can answer the following questions: 1. What are the district guidelines for identifying expenditures as desegregation costs? 2. What process is used to project the desegregation budget? 3. How do these costs correspond to the specific provisions of the desegregation plan, i.e., what is the correlation between the settlement monies and specific desegregation objectives? 4. If a cost item IS determined to be both a desegregation and nondesegregation item (staff development might be a fair example), what criteria determines the apportionment of cost to the desegregation budget (code 13) and the \"regular\" budget? 5. Who makes the decisions about which cost items are budgeted in code 13? 6. Who makes the decisions about which costs actually debited to code 13? are 7. What criteria determine debiting decisions are made? how budgeting and 8. What checks are built into the accounting/bookkeeping system to prevent arbitrary debiting of cost items to one budget category or another? 9. What are the district's spending priorities and how have they been determined? 10, What is the district's plan and corresponding timeline for reaching the 90% achievement goal for black students, thereby attaining forgiveness of state loans the district otherwise must repay? 11. What steps is the district taking to prevent a funding shortfall that will inhibit carrying out the desegregation plan to its full extent? 13. F9. The Court effectively monitor the expressed concern about its reflect district intentions, settlement plan without budgets ability to that goals. and priorities regarding desegregation efforts. The Court determined that the LRSD budgetary process does not meet the requisites stated in the Monitor's letter and directed the district to submit a revised budget. The Budget must be directly correlated to the specific provisions of the settlement plan which are reflected on updated implementation timelines contained in the plan. The LRSD must submit a long-range budget projection on a per annum basis that covers all anticipated desegregation expenditures over the entire term of the desegregation agreement. The LRSD must submit a long-range revenue projection. covering the same period of time. that includes revenues anticipated not only from the settlement monies and the settlementloan, but also from state and millage revenues and any other money sources. The long-range revenue projection will provide a clear picture of the district's financial future and, thereby, enable the LRSD to predict with accuracy if and when a millage increase will be needed. The amount and time of any anticipated millage increase is to be indicated along with the date when the district will present a millage increase to the voters. The district must specifically identify which desegregation costs are \"start-up\" and when these start-up costs will terminate. 14. FIO. The Court expressed concern about its ability to monitor the parties' compliance with the settlement plans absent budget documents that clearly reflect the districts' allocation of resources in relation to both short-range and long-range planning to meet desegregation plan goals, programs, and priorities. The Court ordered (Jan 21, 1992) the LRSD to make certain submissions so the Court could determine that the LRSD's budgetary process would meet the following requisites: 1) accurately reflect and comprehensively account for the expenditure of settlement funds\n2) demonstrate the link between the district's legal requirements and the fiscal underwriting of those requirements\n3) describe a desegregation budgeting process that can be demonstrated, justified, and verified\nand 4) enable the district to determine what adjustments might be necessary 3 obligations. in order to align finances with desegregation The Superintendent submitted a budget document wherein he stated he would restructure the budgeting process so that full attention and resources are directed at achievement. The improving student Court stated that findings in the LRSD's 1990 Curriculum Audit continue to exist in the district: a. control of district resources. School management practices show inadequate b. The budget is not viewed as planning document driven by curriculum needs. a comprehensive c. Visible and tangible linkages between budget priorities and curriculum priorities are not apparent. The superintendent stated in a February 1, 1993 hearing that it would be one and one half years before the LRSD would have a budget that would meet the requirements of the Court's previous orders. The LRSD must achieve a budget process, develop a budget document, and demonstrate budget management that fully reflect the district's careful planning for meeting its desegregation obligations over the full span of the settlement plans. The court is concerned with not only the expenditure of desegregation settlement money but also all the state, local, and federal funds the district uses to finance its entire operation. The Court will not consider the task complete until the LRSD demonstrates it understands that budgeting procedures, and theresulting budget documents, are not static, but an integral part of the district's on-going planning and evaluation processes. 15. A4. Reference 10/28/91 letter from ODM....F8. QI. What are the district guidelines for Identifying expenditures as desegregation cost? Our approach has been to identify personnel and materials that are required for the specific programs mandated by the desegregation plan, to set up budget accounts for those expenses, and charge to them as the programs are implemented. This approach may result in our charging less than possible to desegregation, but it should allow us to account for the settlement funds. It has never been the view of the LRSD that the settlement funds would cover the total cost of desegregation. Q2. What process is used to project the desegregation budget? Building principals, department directors. and others responsible for various functions in the LRSD are designated as budget managers. Each spring the budget managers submit requests for each of the budget account codes assigned to them. Q5. Who makes the decisions about which cost items are budgeted to code 13? The budget managers make the decision with review by the Deputy Superintendent, Associate Superintendents, the Manager of Support Services, and the Controller. Q6. Who makes the decisions about which costs are actually debited to code 13? The budget managers either make this decision or properly done. review monthly expense listings to make sure it is 16. Fil. In October 1991, the ODM informed the LRSD that it must be able to provide the Court with information which (1) accurately and comprehensively accounts for the expenditure of settlement funds\n(2) demonstrates the link between the district's legal requirements and the fiscal underwriting of those requirements\n(3) describes a desegregation budgeting process that can be demonstrated, justified, and verified\nand (4) enables the district to determine what adjustments might be necessary in order to align finances with desegregation obligations. The Court finds that the LRSD's current budgetary process does not meet the above requisites and that it is necessary for the LRSD to submit revised cost figures to the Court. Therefore, (1) The LRSD must submit a revised 91-92 budget which is directly correlated to the specific provisions of the settlement plan and which are reflected on updated implementation timelines contained in the plan. on a (2) The LRSD must submit a long-range budget projection per annum basis which covers all anticipated desegregation expenditures over the entire term of the desegregation agreement. (3) The LRSD must submit a long-range revenue projection covering the same period of time. which includes revenue anticipated not only from the settlement monies and settlement loan, but also from state and millage revenues and any other money sources. This long-term projection will provide a clear picture of the district's financial future and, thereby, enable the LRSD topredict with accuracy if and when a millage increase will be needed. The amount and time of any anticipated millage increase is to be indicated along with the date when the district will present a millage increase to the voters. (4) The LRSD has maintained that a significant portion of desegregation expenditures are \"start-up\" . The district must specifically identify which desegregation costs are \"start-up\" and when these start up costs will terminate. 17. A5. Description of future year procedures: A. a list of desegregation programs with 2-digit program numbers and a description of costs to be charged to each program will be prepared. The program number will be coded in the fifth and sixth positions of the account number that costs may be charged to a desegregation program from various operating units and B. functions for various objects and using money from various fund sources. C. Each budget manager will submit a spending allotted funds. proposal for conjunction with the desegregation plan audit. These proposals will be reviewed in Once specific plans for spending have been proposed, the superintendent will prepare a proposal for Board approval. In addition the superintendent will prepare a process for requiring Board approval for changes in planned expenditures above a to-be determined spending authority. Once the types of expenditures have been programmed, the Purchasing Department will not be authorized to issue a purchase order except for those items programmed and approved. D. The superintendent will immediately begin directing a process for Board involvement in the long-range planning and budgeting process. E. The superintendent will direct the new administration team to conduct a desegregation plan audit and related budget proposals. 18 . F14-15. The court will not tolerate budget cuts inhibiting the full, on-schedule implementation of the desegregation plan. It has ordered the LRSD to restore for the 1992-1993 academic year the seventh period at McClellan High School. The court has ordered that 22.8 FTE music teacher positions and the seventh period at Henderson Junior High School be restored for the 1993-1994 academic year. talented The effect of the other budget reductions: gifted and specialists reduced to 16 FTE positions cut by 10 FTE\npositions: custodial the Pupil Personnel Department\nFTE counselors cut by 19\nelimination of reassignment of 4 instructional aides form the IRC\nreductions in the budgets for material, supply. equipment, and substitutes\nand the strategy to reduce utility costs, will all be monitored closely and may have to be restored if the court determines the cuts are having a negative impact on the district's desegregation efforts. 19. F15-7. Additionally, under the title \"Leadership\" on pages 2- 3 of the 1992 plan, the Board and superintendent have failed to assert strong leadership in the following areas:(1) Adopting a budget that will provide the resources necessary for an effective, desegregated school system. (2) Making budgetary decisions consistent with district desegregation policies in terms of buildings, staff, materials, and equipment. 20. A6-1. Superintendent....We must begin to restructure the budgeting process so that full attention and resources are directed at improving student achievement rather than providing so many different programs which ultimately distract the District's focus to other issues. As part of the desegregation monitoring process, the Distrcit must improve its reporting capabilities. This will require rebuilding the desegregation budget by conducting a \"Desegregation Plan Audit\". The individual desegregation programs have been given separate accounting codes to track programs across school and department lines. The dollars listed in this budget represent the dollars charged against Settlement and operating revenue. In addition, special revenue sources. support desegregation programs. such as Chapter 1, are also used toPLANOl REVISED 18 MAY 93 LONG RANGE PLAN SUBPROCESS REQUIREMENTS 1. Should audit the desegregation plan and link expenditures to the plan elements. of the requirements. strategic plan. All desegregation plan items should become part This would incorporate all legal 2. as part Be sure to include Doug Eaton's long range planning committee of the planning process. point...kind of their idea. Could be a useful starting 3. The plan must start with some long range planning factors which will be monitored on a foundation of the planning process. regular basis. and will be the These would be enrollment trends, enrollment by school, teacher assignment, etc. figures at the district and school level to track progress. Aggregate 4. CA-13. planning process. Key administrative staff should be involved in the 5. CA-17. Strategic vision and long range planning a must. Good overall justification and big-picture approach. 6. CA-19. The purpose of strategic plans is outlined here. 7. CA-19. Board policy AD-1 requires curriculum plan. 8. CA-44. Outlines the need for a curriculum development plan. Also cites a 5/24/90 memo to sample plan. the Superintendent outlining a 9. CA-106. Audit recommends a team board/administrative planning and collaboration, idea. through Really a good 10. CA-119. linkages. Need Material for in programmatic budgeting this section could be and planning used for the description of the planning and budgeting process. 11. CA-121. Cites the need for strategic planning. Also outlines the planning process and some of the factors which should be cons idered. 12. BC-1. Outlines some very specific things for planning factors to be considered in planning staffing and population trends, about minimum class size. Talks 13. BC-3. analysis. Outlines more specific planning factors for staffing Good reference point.14, BC-10. a strategic planning effort. Outlines the need for and general requirements for 15. BC-10. Outlines the need for the Little Rock Public Education Fund,,,community support for education programs. Would probably be a good item to include in the goals and objectives. 16. FIO. the parties' The Court expressed concern about its ability to monitor documents that compliance with the settlement plans absent budget clearly reflect the districts' allocation of resources in relation to both short-range and long-range planning to meet desegregation plan goals, programs, and priorities. The superintendent submitted a budget document wherein he stated he would: a. Immediately begin directing a process for Board Involvement in the long-range planning and budgeting process\nb. Direct the new administration team to conduct a desegregation plan audit\nc. Link programs which are designed to Improve instruction and achievement to expected outcomes and goals. program does not have this linkage, the superintendent If a will recommend nonrenewal of personnel contracts in these areas. The Court stated that findings in the LRSD's 1990 Curriculum Audit continue to exist in the district: a. The district may be not exercising appropriate stewardship such as in management of programs and personnel. The Court will not consider the task complete until the LRSD demonstrates it understands that budgeting procedures, and the resulting budget documents, are not static, but and integral part of the district's on-going planning and evaluation processes. 17. F12-2. Further, The parties are not authorized to modify it at will. we agree. for the most part, that any changes approved should be concerned only with the details of the plan, affecting it onl and at the margin, so to speak. We wish to dispel, in particular. the three notion that an asserted lack of funds on the part of any of school districts would justify a reduction in their commitment to desegregation represented in the 1989 plan...The desegregation obligations undertaken in the 1989 plan are solemn and binding commitments, not be disturbed. The essence and core of that plan should If a question is truly one only of detail, not affecting the major substantive commitments to desegregation. the district court has the authority to consider It. example. as the district court noted. Some such changes. may have merit. because they advance desegregation, or for other reasons. changes that go beyond the level of detail, moreover. for either Even could be approved, but only if the parties affirmatively establish good reasons (not including lack of funds) for them. It may be helpful for us to state those elements of the 1989 plan that we consider crucial, and with respect to which no retreat should be approved. They are as follows: (1) double funding for students attending the incentive (virtually all -black)schools\n(2) operation of the agreed number of magnet schools according to the agreed timetable\n(3) operation of the agreed number of interdistrict schools according to the agreed timetable\n(4) intradistrict desegregation of PCSSD according to the agreed timetable\n(5) the agreed effort to eliminate achievement disparity between the races\n(6) the agreed elements of early- childhood education. appropriate involvement of parents. at least in the incentive schools\nand (7)MONITOI REVISED 08 APR 93 MONITORING SUBPROCESS REQUIREMENTS 1. Need to think about a monthly budget/plan review with all department heads. 2. Need to think about at report for the board and the money managers. least a monthly financial summary 3. CA-54. Outlines some of the monitoring practices rhe ihi) need to be set up and controlled.EVAL01 REVISED 18 MAY 93 EVALUATION SUBPROCESS REQUIREMENTS 1. Need a component system to capture achievements tracking and monitoring. for plan 2. CA-22. evaluation. Points out that board policy IM requires program This should also be linked to the planning subprocess. 3. a CA-68. Outlines some of the items which should be included in program evaluation program.... some looking for. of the standards they are 4. CA-86. Points out that evaluation and assessment data and information should be used as feedback into the decision-making process. This must be worked into the process plan. 5. BC-1. evaluation. Points out the need for a concerted effort at program Major statement. 6. F15-7. Additionally, under the title \"leadership\" on pages 2- 3 of the 1992 plan, the board and superintendent have failed to assert strong leadership in the following areas: (1) Conducting an annual self-evaluation of their commitment to a quality desegregated education. 7. A6-2. Superintendent...programs which are designed to improve instruction and achievement in these areas will be linked to particular expected outcomes and goals. If a program does not have this linkage, I will be recommending in the Spring of 1993 that personnel contracts in these areas not be renewed for the next fiscal year.PUBLICOl REVISED 18 MAY 93 PUBLIC INFORMATION SUBPROCESS REQUIREMENTS 1. Presentation of project plan to Brown and Bernd. 2. Presentation of project plan to School board. 3. Presentation of project plan to Court. 4. There will have to be a training component in each module or subprocess. 5. F13-2. obligation to The MRC complains work with the that MRC the LRSD failed in its reorganization prior to implementing or budget reduction plans that would affect the programming or staff at the magnet schools. 6. F13-4. Initially it is clear that the MRC is a decision-making rather than merely an advisory body. 7. F14-12. The district must be mindful of the language in its desegregation plan which states that a McClellan Community School planning committee (now called the McClellan Community High School Advisory Council) is a means for promoting community involvement and input so that whatever changes are proposed for the school will reflect the community's needs and wishes. This council must be meaningfully involved in all changes at McClellan, including budget planning and adjustment. It is within the scope of the committee's responsibilities to help the district monitor the effect of the budget cuts on the community school program, recommend any appropriate changes that will enable the program to achieve its goals economically but effectively, and to work with the district in planning the 1993-1994 community school program budget.FILED U-S-OISTBiCTCOUBT niSTPICTABKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JUN 1 51993 csp.cLs\n, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL. DEFENDANTS MRS, LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL. INTERVENORS KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL. INTERVENORS ORDER The Court hereby notifies the parties that hearings will be held on Wednesday, July 7, 1993 and Thursday, July 8, 1993 to review budget matters involving the Pulaski County Special School District (PCSSD) and the Little Rock School District (LRSD). The following week is open for continuation of the hearings. The Court will begin the hearings with a discussion of the PCSSD's approval of a 1992-93 contract agreement with its employee union, PACT. The Court wants to know how the PCSSD will be able to fund that retroactive salary agreement and continue to meet its desegregation obligations under the settlement plan. The Court will also address the LRSD's 1993-94 budget, including the planning process the district used to develop that budget. Prior to the hearing, both the PCSSD and LRSD must submit the information specified below to the Court, the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, and the other parties by the dates listed. The Court is requiring this detailed information because the school districts' ability to fund and carry out theirdesegregation plan commitments is requisite to fulfilling the legal obligations they agreed to in their settlement plans. In particular, the Court has expressed longstanding concern that it cannot meet its obligation to monitor desegregation plan compliance until the LRSD implements a budgeting process that will yield a budget reflecting the district's careful planning for meeting its desegregation plan provisions over the full span of the settlement agreement. Therefore, the PCSSD and LRSD will submit: By June 28, 1993: 1. Documentation of the following budgetrelated changes that includes a complete rationale for these changes (a \"business case\") and the dollar amount represented by each change: A. All changes in the nature of additions, deletions, reinstatements\nor B. Deficit reduction actions, such as changes in insurance funding, food service contracting, loans, etc. C. All certified teacher salary increases. These increases must be charted in the following manner (which is illustrated and explained in the accompanying chart): (1) Starting with the base salary for an employee category, create a table in increments of $5,000. Within each incremental group, show (2) the number of employee positions\n(3) the average salary, based on that group's total number of employees and their salaries\n(4) the average step increase\n(5) the average of any additional salary increase (percentage raise) -2- above the step increase\n(6) the new average salary for the increment that results from the step increase eind percentage raise\n(7) the revised total increase for the increment group\n(8) the impact of these salary increases on the budget\n(9) total cost to the district of teacher salaries\n(10) the average teacher salary in 1993-94. D. (LRSD only) A summary spreadsheet reflecting the E. following: April 26, addition, the initial 1993-94 tentative budget dated 1993\nseparate line items reflecting each deletion. reinstatement. reduction. or any other action impacting the base budget\nand a total to be consistent with the updated 199394 tentative budget. (LRSD only) A written action plan for how the district will deliver all requirements of item 4 detailed below. By Jxme 30, 1993: 2. An updated 1993-94 tentative budget document from both and LRSD. PCSSD The LRSD budget must include: A. By school or department, budget detail showing function code, object code, and FTE that includes any changes from the 199293 budget as to additions, deletions, and reinstatements\nB. Also by school or department, 1991-92 actual expenses, the 1992-93 budget, 1992-93 unaudited actual expenses, and the 1993-94 budget\n-3-c. Any other summaries and budgets shown in the table of contents of the tentative budget document. 3. A budget sximmary from both PCSSD and LRSD projecting revenues and expenses for each of the next five fiscal years. The summary must reflect annual incoming settlement monies (and for the LRSD, drawing). any settlement loan funds the district anticipates The summary must also include anticipated yearly M- to-M revenues. By July 30, 1993\n4. (LRSD only) A written plan for the long-range planning and budget process to be used in developing the 1994-95 budget that includes at least the following: A. Details of the planning and budgeting organization, including identification of the lead planning person and his/her responsibilities and authority, and how implementation of this process will be coordinated and controlled. These details should clearly describe the roles in the planning and budgeting process of the school board, the superintendent, the superintendent's cabinet, and any other key participants. B. A description of the needs assessment strategy that C. addresses sources of input and techniques used to identify needs. along with the roles of the key participants, anticipated outcomes, and timeframes. A description of the process for determining district planning and budgeting goals, including how those goals -4-will influence programs and budgets, the major planning standards and criteria used by the district, and the strategy for integrating the requirements of the desegregation plan into the goals. The description should include the roles of key participants, anticipated outcomes, and timeframes. D. A description of how programs will be identified and matched to priority needs. how programming will be developed to meet unaddressed needs. and how the requirements of the desegregation plan will be addressed. This description should include the roles of key participants, anticipated outcomes, and timeframes. E. A description of the process for linking programs and budgets, for determining program budget priorities, for ensuring that desegregation plan responsibilities are funded, and for the actual decision-making in allocating funds. This description should include the roles of the key participants, anticipated outcomes, and timeframes. F. A description of: how the planning and budgeting document will be structured and monitored\nwhat the document will look like (format)\nthe type and frequency of monitoring\nthe type and frequency of reporting\nand how program performance will be matched with budget expenditures. This entire description should include the roles of the key participants, anticipated outcomes, and timeframes. -5-G. A description of the program evaluation strategy, including how evaluation criteria will be established, how corrective action will be initiated, and how pyngT-am evaluation will impact the next program and budget cycle. This description should include the roles of the H. key participants, anticipated outcomes, and timAf-ramag. A description of what strategy the district will use to specifically address the continuing shortfall of funding, and how this strategy will be incorporated into the ongoing long-range planning and budgeting process. This description should include the roles of the key participants, anticipated outcomes, and timeframes. SO ORDERED this day of June, 1993. UUITED STAlES DISTRICT JI iTRlCT JUDGE THJS ON__L- - / O '*ND/O^9(a) MD/OR 79(a) FRCP SY 1. -6-LRSD 1993-94 CERTIFIED SALARY INCREASES (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (I) Base Salary Number of Cartlfled Positions Actual Aiveraoa Salary Actual Aweraga Step Increase Actual Aiveraoa Salary Raisa Aiveraoa Total Increasa (D-i-E) Haviaad AMeraoa SalaiY (C-i-F) Impact on Sudgat (BxF) Total Coat to Oiitilct (BxG) 16,000-21,000 21,001-26,000 26,001-31,000 31,001-36,000 36,001-41,000 41,001-56,000 56,001-61,000 61,001-76,000 76,001-61,000 81,001-86,000 TOTAL (J) 1993-94 Average Salary (A) The base salary will be used only for identifying employees within a certain salary range. (B) The number of positions column identifies the number of positions within that base salary range. (C) The actual average salary is an average salary for all the positions identified in column (B). (D) Actual average step increase is the averaged dollar amount received per position identified in column (B). (E) Actual average salary raise is the averaged dollar amount received for the across the board\" percentage raise per position identified in column (B). (F) Average total increase is the step increase plus the salary raise. This is the amount the district will pay \"over and above\" last year. (G) Revised (or adjusted) average salary is the average salary identified in column (C) plus the step increase, plus the salary raise. (H) The impact on the budget is the number of positions identified in column (B) times the average total increase, column (F). This is the additional amount the district will be paying during 1993-94 over what they paid in 1992-93 for the positions identified in column (B). (I) Total cost to district is the amount the district will pay for salaries of those positions identified in column (B) during 1993-94. (J) 1993-94 average salary is determined by dividing the total cost to district, column (I), by the number of positions, column (B).CONCPTOl REVISED 29 JUN 93 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESS CONCEPT PAPER GENERAL CONCEPT A. Purpose. Given the complexity of present and future problems facing the district, it is absolutely essential that the best decision-making processes be in negotiate these troubled times. operation if we are to A comprehensive program planning and budgeting process would improve the chances that our limited revenue would be allocated rationally and would have maximum impact on achieving the goals of the district. By linking program objectives and program expenditures we can see more clearly if our money is being well-spent. B. Description. In this process, we will do the following: 1. Determine the needs of the district, including legal obligations under the desegregation and settlement plans. 2. Define our goals and objectives. 3. Define our programs to achieve those objectives, including those reguired by the desegregation plans. 4. Measure our performance and expenditures. 5. Prepare information for corrective decision-making.A. ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING 1. Purpose. This sub-process deals with the designation of an organizational structure and the assignment of staff responsibilities for carrying out the planning and budgeting activities. This designation and assignment should be in writing, and should be disseminated to all district employees. 2. Players. Cabinet is in a direct support role. The Superintendent has the lead, and the 3. Input. Look at the job reguirements and at the personnel resources available, and make best choice. 4. Description. Organization is the process of establishing lines of authority and assigning responsibility for work tasks to accomplish the objectives of the district. Staffing refers to the skills and background reguired of the assigned personnel to carry out the various planning activities described by the process. The Superintendent must designate a chief planner who will be responsible for developing and coordinating the planning and budgeting process. This designated planner and staff should be familiar with professional planning concepts and technigues. The designated planner would ensure that the process is followed, provide technical assistance, coordinate the process, prepare the document, collect reports, and advise the Superintendent and Board. The designated planner should also be responsible for ensuring all reguirements from the desegregation plans and court orders are integrated into the planning process. 5. Output. The output is an organization chart, lines of authority, tasking assignment, and general timeframes for the process to be operational. 6. Timeframe. must be designated on front end. The first step in the process. The planner Once done, this sub-process will be revisited annually (preferably in early May) to make sure we are in the best configuration.B. NEEDS ASSESSMENT 1. Purpose. In the needs assessment sub-process, the problems of the student/parent are identified. Teacher/administrator problems which are barriers to service delivery are also identified. \"need tl from II want II or II desire\", We must be able to distinguish 2. Players. needs assessment process. The designated planner will coordinate the leadership and direction for the process. The Superintendent will provide the The Cabinet will be responsible for directing the staff in the collection of assessment information. The Superintendent and the Cabinet will be the decision-makers for identifying the needs. 3. Input. The data on the accepted planning factors and proportional allocation formula (enrollment projections, staffing criteria, capacity study, material allocations formula, other data) must be collected first. must be selected and implemented. Other needs assessment techniques It is critical that the desegregation plans and court orders be reduced to legal requirements which can be II hard coded II into the needs assessment until justification can be made to change them. 4. Description. Utilizing a combination of perceptual and empirical instruments, a range of input information and collected data would be analyzed to determine the needs of the students. parents, teachers, and administrators. The perceptual instruments might include various surveys, samplings, and hearings. The currently used Community Forums and District Dialogues would be used as the foundation of the perceptual instruments, and would be built on with possibly a selected mail survey. All perceptual issues identified must be crystallized into hard issues and cranked into the planning and budgeting process. The empirical instruments might include data on the accepted planning factors, the proportional allocation factors, various needs indicators (economic patterns, employment patterns, education patterns, family patterns, etc.), and review of other data. The desegregation plans and court orders will be dissected, and requirements will be extracted for incorporation into the needs assessment, converted into a listing on data. The data will be massaged and II needs\", keyed back to supporting 5. Output. The output of the needs assessment is a list of needs/problems, the description of the needs/problem, and supporting information on the needs/problem. These will be inputs to our goals and objectives determination, and will subsequently be the basis of programs. 6. Timeframe. in May with data collection. The needs assessment sub-process should begin September. Surveys should be completed by An initial needs listing should be drafted byOctober\nthe final listing must incorporate the results from the Community Forums and District Dialogues, should be published in December. The final listingC. PROGRAM INVENTORY 1. Purpose. This sub-process will identify all of the current programs and services being delivered and will consider their effectiveness. modification or elimination. Ineffective programs can be targeted for will be pointed out. Gaps and duplications in programs Resources, both inside and outside of the district, which can be utilized will be identified. 2. Players. The Superintendent would provide overall direction, and the Board would review the findings. The Cabinet and staff would collect all the basic data and prepare the data into documents for use in goal setting and program development. The designated planner would play a coordinating role. 3. Input. Current program documents, program evaluations. and various surveys would provide the baseline input data. The desegregation plans and court orders would be reviewed to ensure coverage. 4. Description. This sub-process is mainly a data collection and data manipulation activity in support of other sub-processes. The first phase of this sub-process is to inventory all existing programs to make sure all we are doing is included. This inventory would include a program definition. Program evaluations would be used to flag those programs which are failing to meet current goals and objectives. Staff would begin to compare the current programs with the preliminary needs to identify and flag gaps and duplications. It is most important that programs required under the desegregation plans and court orders be verified and status checked during this sub-process. Surveys would be used to identify all resources which can be used to address identified needs\nthis would become a bank\". II resources 5. Output. This sub-process would identify the programs and resources available to address the needs identified. The Program Inventory report would be generated, and this status of current programs would be utilized in the Goals and Objectives subprocess, the Program Development sub-process, and the Budgeting sub-process. 6. Timeframe. This sub-process would run concurrently with the Needs Assessment sub-process and the Goals and Objective sub- process. It must be completed before the Goals and Objective sub-process can be completed, completed in August. It would be started in May, and beD. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 1. Purpose. The subprocess of setting goals and objectives is designed to establish a vision/mission for the district which would guide all actions by the administration. Supporting goals and objectives further define what the district wants to accomplish for the year, and any activity or expenditure which does not further satisfaction of these goals and objectives should be discarded. 2. Players. Setting the vision/mission and goals would be the purview of the Board and the Superintendent. They would receive assistance and support from the Cabinet members, and the Cabinet members would subsequently define objectives for programs which will satisfy the accepted goals, would coordinate the sub-process. The designated planner 3. Input. The Board and Superintendent should utilize the needs listing generated by the needs assessment sub-process and the program resources generated by the program inventory. 4. Description. vision/mission of the district. The first step is to define the The vision/mission will establish the general value beliefs and educational purposes of the school organization. Given the direction, the needs, and the available services, the Board and Superintendent can determine what goals are consistent with the vision and are realistic with respect to accomplishment. Planning assumptions must be defined which will provide staff with more specific directions and considerations on how to proceed with programming and budgeting. Guidelines for the planning factors (staffing) and the proportional allocation formulas should be established/reviewed. Priorities must be established which will guide staff in program development, and which will be used to help allocate funding and resources during the budgeting sub-process. The latter phase of this sub-process is characterized by the Cabinet working with staff to establish program objectives and evaluation criteria for each program in the district. items. 5. Output. The output of this sub-process consists of two First is the Goals Statement by the Board. This includes the written vision statement, the written goals, the written planning assumptions, and the written priorities. The initial calendar for the FY 93-94 planning and budgeting cycle should be published. This should all be in one document signed by the Board and the Superintendent. Second is the development of the specific program objectives and evaluation criteria for each program, and these will be incorporated into the planning and budgeting document. 6. Timeframe. This sub-process is dependent on the Needs Assessment sub-process and the Program Inventory sub-process, but will run concurrently with them. A preliminary goals statementshould be set by the Board during a planning session in June/July which will also establish the process and calendar for planning and budgeting for the coming year. The final Goals Statement should be issued in October. Program objectives and evaluation criteria should be established by November.E. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT 1. Purpose. This sub-process is the decision-making stage where the results of all previous sub-processes are considered in an effort to develop new programs or modify current programs to meet the needs addressed by the defined goals. This is where we decide what we want to do and how we want to do it. 2. Players. Cabinet, and the staff. The key players are the Superintendent, the The role of the Superintendent is to provide leadership and guidance to ensure the goals are satisfied with the best possible programs. The Cabinet's role is to educate the administrative and school staff, and provide direction to those staff in developing and implementing creative. effective, and efficient programs. The designated planner is in a coordinating and monitoring role, and serve as the process advisor to the Superintendent. Input. 3. The sub-process will use the output of the Needs Assessment sub-process, the Program Inventory sub-process, and the Goals and Objectives sub-process. 4. Description. This sub-process is the point at which the district defines what programs will be provided. New programs may have to be developed to address newly identified needs or fill gaps. Current programs may have to be modified to successfully meet objectives. eliminated. Some programs may have to be direction to the staff. The Cabinet should outline the tasking and provide The best results will be obtained by allowing the staff to develop or modify the programs, and roll them up to the Cabinet. Decisions will have to be made on what programs will be provided, what the definition of the program will be, and what activities will be necessary to deliver the program. Since programs are selected to meet assessed needs. this is also a crucial time for designing the framework for program evaluation. The last step in this sub-process should be a final check to ensure all requirements from the desegregation plans and the court orders have been provided for by the program lineup. 5. Output. At this point, all of the elements of a good program planning document have been completed\nvision, goals, programs, program definition, program objectives, activities, and evaluation criteria. This material will be used for budget development, and will be directly input into the program planning and budgeting document. 6. Timeframe. This sub-process may run somewhat concurrent with the Goals and Objectives sub-process, but cannot be finished until the Goals and Objectives sub-process has been completed. This sub-process should start in September, and be completed in early February.F. BUDGETING 1. Purpose. The Budgeting sub-process is the resource allocation function. Money and other resources are allocated to the programs identified in the Program Development sub-process to address the needs identified in the Needs Assessment subprocess . 2. Players. authority on the budget. The Board is the ultimate decision-making The Superintendent is the leader of the sub-process by ensuring a balanced budget meeting the needs and goals of the students and parents is presented to the Board. The Cabinet is deeply involved in programmatic decisions and matching the budget dollars to the programs. The Business Manager will coordinate the budget preparation, and the designated planner will ensure the planning and budgeting pieces come together. The budget managers will provide input into the sub-process, rolling the budget up to the next level, budget information. The Controller will produce the 3. Input. Many sources of information will be used in this sub-process: needs assessment information, planning factors, proportional allocation factors, previous expenditures, program requirements, public input, desegregation plan and court order requirements. 4. Description. Budgeting involves allocating money and assigning personnel and facilities to effect the programs and goals set in the previous steps. As a result of the allocations made, some changes in developed programs may be necessary, programs define both current year operations and planning The assumptions for the future. The budget should continue with this by projecting a multi-year revenue and expense picture based on these assumptions. formulas should be reviewed each year, fiscal allocations should be consistent. Planning factors and proportional allocation Planning priorities and Maximum input should be solicited from staff and parents regarding allocations. budget issue and major addition/change/deletion should be Each supported with a written business case outlining the decision- making process. Each identified program must be separately coded for expenditure collection so that programs may be monitored by performance and cost throughout the fiscal year. 5. Output. In one sense, the allocation of resources in the Budgeting sub-process ends the planning phase and begins the implementation phase. The output is a multi-dimensional budget document which will be used to satisfy the traditional budgeting and accounting requirements, with a program planning and budgeting component which will link the programs and budget allocations. 6. Timeframe. Nov...financial forecasts for next and out-yearsNov...review planning factors and proportional allocation formula results Dec... submission of budget requests by budget managers Feb...complete budget development Mar. revise financial forecast Mar... finalize add/change/deletes and business cases Apr...tentative budget to board Jul...Adopt budget Aug... submit to stateG. PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMENT 1. Purpose. The primary purpose of preparing the program budget document (Program Operations Plan) is to develop rational planning and effective resource allocation. The document should provide a road map for getting from needed and required programs, through funding, to the destination of the related goal. 2. Players. The Board will review the plan in relationship to the stated goals, and give final approval of the plan. The Superintendent provides overall guidance for the development of the plan. The Cabinet members provide all the program information for their respective areas. The Business Manager provides the financial numbers that match the programs. The designated planner puts together the work plan and coordinates the documentation into the final product. 3. Input. on the results of the The initial program budgeting document is built tt work. deseg audit It and the program definition The program budget document resulting from this cycle will incorporate this initial document but will be the synthesis of all previous key outputs\nthe needs assessment, the program inventory, the goals and objectives, new program definitions, and budget allocations. 4. Description. Although the preparation of the program budget document is not usually considered part of the planning process, it is included here as the culmination and documentation of the other planning sub-processes, aspects must be mutually supportive. The planning and budgeting We want the plan to be a useful and living document which can satisfy several purposes and be readily changed as the environment changes. While the planning module should remain fixed for the year, the format should be used to facilitate regular monitoring and reporting. An example of some things which might be included in the plan would be: an introduction about the plan\nplanning process description\nidentification of the needs of the district and a description of how those needs were identified\ndescription and objectives of the programs\nactivities/strategies on how the programs will operate\nevaluation criteria of the programs\nanalysis of the needs in relation to the available funding\nbudget allocations for the programs\ndescription of how the plan will be impacted\ndescription of how the goals will be impacted\nand major issues for the future. A Cabinet member will be assigned as the responsible primary leader for every identified program. would also be assigned. A secondary leader The primary leader is tasked with ensuring the program meets its objectives, coordinating the required activities or strategies, and the preparation and submission of regular reporting. 5. Output. The program budget document will be the output.This document will become the basis for follow-on monitoring and reporting, and will become the guide for any interim decisionmaking activity. 6. Timeframe. Development of the document should begin around December, and should be completed in conjunction with the completion of the tentative budget in April.H. MONITORING AND REPORTING 1. Purpose. This sub-process should be designed to provide decision-makers with a regular flow of information on the district's progress toward accomplishing its stated goals and objectives. The reporting should be designed to satisfy both internal requirements as well as the reporting requirements under the desegregation plans. 2. Players. The Board and the Superintendent would be the recipients of the reporting for oversight and decision-making. The designated planner would coordinate the sub-process and prepare the composite report. the matching financial information by program. The Business Manager would supply The Cabinet and staff would prepare all reporting documents falling within their area of responsibility. 3. Input. The program budget document (Program Operations Plan) would be the basis for the monitoring and reporting, and would establish the format and design. Cabinet members will provide performance reports from which the designated planner can prepare the composite report, from the Business Manager. Financial information would come 4. Description. Extending the format and content of the program budget document (Program Operations Plan), a sub-process of regular monitoring and reporting would be established immediately. By using the same format, we can reduce the production overhead of the reporting as well as satisfying all parties. ease of function. The reporting mechanism would be set up on diskette for The sub-process would merge both program performance and expenditure reporting on a guarterly basis. The Board could choose to review in depth a certain program at each Board meeting, but still have performance reporting information on all programs. Programs with poor performance or expenditure problems could be addressed with corrective action during the year rather than after the year is complete. Such a process would also facilitate modification of both the program plan and the desegregation plans. Additionally, performance history will be built as a matter of regular business rather than a situational special effort. We would have a comprehensive listing of all the good things we have done, in addition to the bad, and take some credit along with the blame. 5. Output. A quarterly composite progress report on all identified programs within the district, supported with expenditure information. Would be an extension of the program budget document (Program Operations Plan). 6. Timeframe. Work on the sub-process would begin immediately, with the first set of actual reports generated in early October covering the period July/August/September. quarter reports would be due in January, April, and July. PriorI. PROGRAM EVALUATION 1. Purpose. we are doing. This sub-process is where we find out how well Program evaluation will provide us an assessment of the program's performance for decision-making purposes. It will tell us if our program is meeting the stated objectives and having the impact intended. We can go one step further with a program analysis which would tell us whether the program should be cut or improved, and the best options for achieving the latter. 2. Players. The Board and the Superintendent are the recipients of the evaluations, and will use them in determining direction and resource allocation. The designated planner would coordinate the sub-process and be the keeper of the documentation. financial information. The Business Manager would supply the supporting The Cabinet and staff would prepare all reporting documents falling within their area of responsibility. 3. Input. General directions and targets from the Board\nspecific targets from Superintendent. Program planning information, including evaluation criteria and program objectives will be used in developing the evaluations. 4. Description. At least during the first year of the planning and budgeting process, there should be two, concurrent and parallel program evaluation components working\na regular evaluation component and a It fast-track If evaluation component. into each program. The regular program evaluation component would be built As programs are put in place, they would contain program objectives and evaluation criteria. Evaluation would continue to get better as we improve our ability to develop and monitor evaluation criteria. Special or more detailed evaluations might be directed by the Superintendent with the intent of looking deeply into a programs workings. Since little or no program evaluation of the regular type is in operation at this time, information is needed upon which to base critical near-term decisions. To address this information need. II fast-track II designated programs which might be suspect. evaluations should be performed on identified for II fast-track II Programs should be and direction of the district. if they have high impact on the goals II fast-track II Some possible candidates for evaluations might be as follows: incentive school operations, school closing, student assignment process, construction of Stephen, outsourcing support services, special evaluations from this year. Utilizing the program evaluation information, business cases would be prepared for decision-making in the areas of program modification, program development, and program elimination. 5. Output. Specific program evaluations. These would be used as input into the next planning cycle as well as input intobusiness cases for making modifications in resource allocation or totally eliminating the program. 6. Timeframe. This sub-process should begin after the Board defines district goals in July, and should continue until input time into the Program Inventory sub-process. n Fast-track\" evaluations might continue until the initial decision point in the Budgeting sub-process, in January.J. BROAD-BASED INPUT AND PARTICIPATION 1. Purpose. Broad-based education, participation, review and comment provide an opportunity for persons outside the immediate planning process organization to assist in preparing the plan\nand to review and comment on the plan, the planning process and decisions such as those that affect the allocation of resources. 2. Players. The Board and the Superintendent should provide direction on the type and extent to which broad-based input and participation should be utilized in the various sub-processes. This should be done at the initial summer planning session. Communications Director, working closely with the designated planner, should develop an input and participation plan and The implement it in conjunction with the efforts of the designated planner. 3. Input. Direction from the Board and Superintendent. 4. Description. This sub-process is one in which we seek to get maximum input and participation from as many informed sources as possible, both inside and outside of the district organization. There should be a plan, developed and coordinated by the Communications Director with assistance from the designated planner, for obtaining input and participation from other sources for each of the sub-processes. The more front-end participation, the better the buy-in on the back side. We should take every opportunity to use information to educate the general public and removed staff on the planning and budgeting process and the contents of the Program Budget Document. There are a number of possible input sources which might be called upon to participate in one or more of the sub- processes. A partial list follows: the Community Forums and District Dialogues for needs assessment, the building coordinating committees, the budget committee, the Magnet Review Committee, the bi-racial committee, the PTA, the ODM, and Joshua. The Communications Director should identify those sources which would be most appropriate for each sub-process, and work with the designated planner on building the best input mechanism. 5. Output. Each source would have a different method of providing participation and input into each of the sub-processes. Thus, the output would vary depending on the situation. 6. Timeframe. Since some form of broad-based input and participation might be solicited in each sub-process, process would be ongoing. this sub-K. PROGRAM COORDINATION 1. Purpose. The planning and budgeting effort must be closely coordinated so as to maximize the use of available resources in meeting the needs of the students and parents, minimize of duplication and gaps in programs, and ensure all district efforts are aimed at the district goals. 2. Players. The designated planner is the leader in this sub-process, and must be a close advisor to the Board and Superintendent. The designated planner must keep the Board and the Superintendent informed as to what is being done and where we stand relative to achieving our goals. The Board and the Superintendent must exercise oversight authority on the process and allocate resources accordingly. Additionally, the Superintendent must support the designated planner and ensure all district staff are aggressively working on the completion of the plan. 3. Input. Superintendent. District goals, direction from the Board and 4. Description. which relates to all other activities. Program Coordination is a key activity Each of the planning activities such as needs assessment, program development and budgeting would be coordinated with similar activities in the other sub-processes. Since there would be many participants in the entire process, it is most critical that all of the pieces fit together and support each other. This coordination is achieved by having a designated planner who will develop project plans for the overall process and each sub-process, monitor the progress against those project plans, and provide progress reporting back to the Board and Superintendent. The designated planner is there to make sure everything happens on time, not necessarily to do it. 5. Output. Project plans and status reports. Should be a part of the regular monitoring and reporting sub-process. 6. Timeframe. A start to finish sub-process. Ongoing.L. RESTART CYCLE 1. Purpose. The program planning and budgeting cycle is a continuous process, and would be the heart of the way we manage the business of the district. Once the cycle for one fiscal year is complete, the next cycle begins\nin fact, there is actually some overlap.CONCPT02 REVISED 29 JUN 93 PROPOSED PLANNING AND BUDGET CALENDAR JULY 1993 - Designate planner and job responsibilities - Board/Cabinet workshop on planning and budgeting\ntentative district goals defined, identify \"fast-track It evaluation targets, define guidelines on broad-based input, design planning and budgeting calendar - Proposed planning factors and proportional allocation formulas identified, published, and data collection begins - Planning and budget calendar published - Begin development of the monitoring and reporting procedures - Begin Program Inventory using tl - Begin \"fast-track II evaluations deseg audit tt as baseline AUGUST 1993 - Complete Program Inventory - Complete monitoring and reporting procedures, and issue instructions - Board reviews planning factors and proportional allocation formulas Continue \"fast-track evaluations SEPTEMBER 1993 - Complete needs assessment surveys Continue fast-track tl evaluations - Begin Program Development OCTOBER 1993 - Needs listing finalized - Board approves planning factors and proportional allocation formulas - Enrollment statistics and projections published - First quarter FY93-94 cycle monitoring and evaluation report published - Board issues final Goals Statement - Continue Program Development Continue tl fast-track It evaluations - Begin Community Forum input on programs and budgets - Begin District Dialogues input on programs and budgets NOVEMBER 1993 - Board issues directions and assumptions for budgetpreparation - Initial financial forecasts prepared - Base budgets and budget instructions generated and distributed - Program objectives and evaluation criteria finalized for each program - Review planning factors and proportional allocation formula results Continue fast-track II evaluations - Continue Program Development - Continue Community Forum input on programs and budgets - Continue District Dialogues input on programs and budgets - Continue Community Forum input on programs and budgets DECEMBER 1993 - Complete District Dialogues input on programs and budgets - Complete Community Forum input on programs and budgets - Complete needs assessment listing - Budget managers submit budget requests Continue II fast-track\" evaluations - Continue Program Development - Begin developing program budget document (Program Operations Plan) JANUARY 1994 - Complete \"fast-track II evaluations - Second quarter FY93-94 cycle monitoring and evaluation report published - Continue developing the Program Budget Document - Continue budget request review and budget development - Continue Program Development - Begin identification of major budget issues and development of business cases FEBRUARY 1994 - Complete program development - Complete budget development and business case development - Continue developing the program budget document (Program Operations Plan) MARCH 1994 - Revise financial forecasts - Revise the program budget document (Program Operations Plan) - Finalize budget issue recommendations and business case on each issue - Feedback to all input participantsAPRIL 1994 - Complete the program budget document (Program Operations Plan) - Revise budget - Board workshop on budget - Submit tentative budget to Board - Certified personnel reduction deadline - Third quarter FY93-94 cycle monitoring and evaluation report published MAY 1994 - Revise budget - Non-certified personnel reduction deadline - Board workshop on budget - Board approves tentative budget - Reassess planning organization for FY94-95 cycle - Begin FY94-95 cycle needs assessment - Begin program inventory for FY94-95 cycle JUNE 1994 - Revise to final budget - Court hearing on budget - Continue FY94-95 cycle needs assessment - Continue FY94-95 cycle program inventory JULY 1994 - Board adopts final budget - Fourth quarter FY93-94 cycle monitoring and evaluation report published - FY94-95 cycle Board workshop on planning and budgeting - Continue FY94-95 cycle needs assessment - Continue FY94-95 cycle program inventory AUGUST 1994 - Complete FY94-95 cycle program inventory - Submit final budget to State - Board reviews planning factors and proportional allocation formulas for FY94-95 cycle - Continue FY94-95 cycle needs assessmentRECEP- ,11)1 2i 0ic9 Qi Desegregaiion Moniicrina IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1 ' PLAINTIFF V. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENORS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS NOTICE OF FILING The Plaintiff, Little Rock School District (\"LRSD\") for its Notice of Filing, states: On June 15, 1993, an Order was entered directing the LRSD to prepare and submit detailed documents, records and information by certain designated dates. The LRSD timely submitted the information required by June 28, 1993 and the information required by June 30, 1993. The Order further required the LRSD to submit, by July 30, 1993, a written plan for the long-range planning and budget process to be used in developing the 1994-95 budget. The Order contained specific items to be included in that document. Filed herewith as Exhibit 1 are copies of the program planning and budgeting document prepared by the LRSD in response to the Order of the Court. The submission is dated July 30, 1993. The document was presented, discussed and approved by the LRSD Board ofDirectors in a special meeting of the board on Wednesday, July 28, 1993 . Respectfully submitted. FRIDAY, ELDREDGE \u0026amp; CLARK 2000 First Commercial Building 400 West Capitol Little Rock, Arkansas (501) 376-2011 72201-3493 Attorneys for Plaintiff LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BY: ^Hferry L. Malone Bar ID No. 85096 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Filing has been served on the following people by depositing copy of same in the United States mail on this 29th day of July, 1993. Jerry L. Malone Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY \u0026amp; JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 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 -2-Mr. Richard Roachell Roachell and Streett First Federal Plaza 401 West Capitol, Suite 504 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Brown Desegregation Monitor Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Jerry L. Malone -3- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 July 30, 1993 To: Board of Directors From: Estelle Matthr lis, II nterim Superintendent Subject: Planning Program and Budgeting Document Please find attached a copy of the long-range planning program and budgeting document being submitted to the Court pursuant to its June 15, Order. 1993. This document was filed with the Court on July 29, If you have questions, please contact Jerry Malone. EM: nr Enclosures c: Jerry L. MaloneAUG G - 1993 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING, RESEARCH AND EVALUATION DEPARTMENT Date: August 5, 1993 To: From: Jeanette Wagner, Director of Communications Sterling Ingram,^irector Planning, Research and Evaluation Re: Program Planning and Budgeting Tasks Attached is a copy of the Planning and Budgeting document which was submitted to the court on July 29, 1993. Although the document has not been approved, I expect the basic framework will not be changed. On page 3 of Attachment 4, you will find that Community Forums and District Dialogue sessions will be conducted as part of the needs assessment process. You have been identified as one of the persons responsible for this task. Please plan for three area school forums instead of one for a total of five community forums, an addition that the Board wanted. This was As the lead planning person for the planning and budgeting process, I am requesting that as you make plans for the 1993-94 school year, please include the necessary strategies, timelines, etc. in your management plan which will be included in the budget document. bjg cc: Estelle Matthis Jerry Malone I PROJECT PLAN PROJECT: PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESS 8/23/93 1PROJECT\nPROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESS People involved Bill Mooney Board Estelle Matthis Sterling Ingram Program leaders Jeanette Wagner Hank Williams Mark Milhollen Brady Gadberry Budget Managers Project goals Develop and implement a long range planning and budgeting process that links programs/obligations and fund allocations and expenditures beginning with FY 94-95. Project notes Major job components\na. Assist the LRSD in developing and implementing a needs assessment process that incorporates both legal obligations and other programs. b. Assist the LRSD in developing and implementing a process that results in a planning document, based on the needs assessment, whcih qualifies existing programs/obligations and identifies new programs to meet defined goals and objectives\nand which defines programs/obligations in terms of purpose, evaluation criteria and methods, ownership, priorities, and time lines. c. Assist the LRSD in developing and implementing a budget process that links plan programs/obligations and funding allocations for budgeting and expense reporting analysis\nthat identifies and allocates all financial resources\nthat provides regular review of progress and expenditures\nthat provides a method of initiating modifications to program/obligations and budgets. d. Assist the LRSD in developing and Implementing a process for program and expenditure evaluation for decision-making. 2TASK LIST PROGRAM PLANNING AND BUDGETING PROCESS 11 phases 66 tasks ORG AND STAFFING C Designate district planner Hire PRE Specialist Train PRE Specialist NEEDS ASSESSMENT Set schedule for Community Forums Develop Community Forum sample agenda Develop data collection tool for Forums Set schedule for District Dialogues Develop District Dialogue sample agenda Develop data collection tool for Dialogues Merge input data PROGRAM INVENTORY Complete Desegregation Audit Copy of Desegregation Audit to Court C Prep non-deseg program listing Merge Deseg audit into PPBD Submit status report on prog obj \u0026amp; eval cri Publish initial prog inventory report Submit proposal for grouping non-deseg programs Develop non-deseg program groups Merge deseg and non-deseg program listings Publish final prog inventory report GOALS AND OBJECTIVES C Obtain copies of current mission statement C Obtain copies of current goals Hold Cabinet work session Hold Board work session PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT BUDGETING PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMEN C Revise form, instructions, and definitions Approval on form, instructions, and definitions Diskette of form, inst, and def to Ingram Initial data load to diskettes Prepare training material Conduct training sessions Distribute diskettes to program leaders Diskettes due back to Ingram Data check on diskettes Clean up period 3Obtain feedback on training Modify training as necessary Send draft to ODM for plan verification Report publication MONITORING/REPORTING Run financial pull test on August data Modify process as necessary Prepare M/R instructions Prepare M/R training material Conduct M/R training Set up financial pull for October report Distribute M/R reports M/R reports returned M/R reports reviewed and corrected Prepare front section of 1st Qtr Rpt 1st Qtr report prepared Distribute 1st qtr report Obtain feedback on training sessions PROGRAM EVALUATION Review Deseg Plans for possible targets Develop evaluation format Approval on evaluation format Publish evaluation format Identify tl Fast-Track tl Tasking on tl Fast-Track eval targets It evaluation targets INPUT/PARTICIPATION Define input requirements at Board session PROGRAM COORDINATION C Complete Requirements Definition Questionnaire Revise Req Def listing Approval for interviews Requirements Definition interviewing Merge requirements into process design Update Mooney proposal Set up Cabinet work session Set up Board work session 4ASSIGNMENTS PHASE 1: ORG AND STAFFING Task People assigned C Designate district planner Estelle Matthis Hire PRE Specialist Sterling Ingram Train PRE Specialist Sterling Ingram PHASE 2: NEEDS ASSESSMENT Task People assigned Set schedule for Community Forums Sterling Ingram Develop Community Forum sample agenda Sterling Ingram Develop data collection tool for Forums Sterling Ingram Set schedule for District Dialogues Sterling Ingram Develop District Dialogue sample agenda Sterling Ingram Develop data collection tool for Dialogues Sterling Ingram Merge input data Sterling Ingram 5PHASE 3: PROGRAM INVENTORY Task People assigned Complete Desegregation Audit Sterling Ingram Copy of Desegregation Audit to Court Sterling Ingram C Prep non-deseg program listing Bill Mooney Merge Deseg audit into PPBD Sterling Ingram Submit status report on prog obj \u0026amp; eval cri Sterling Ingram Publish initial prog inventory report Sterling Ingram Submit proposal for grouping non-deseg programs Bill Mooney Develop non-deseg program groups Sterling Ingram Merge deseg and non-deseg program listings Sterling Ingram Publish final prog inventory report Sterling Ingram PHASE 4: GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Task People assigned C Obtain copies of current mission statement Bill Mooney C Obtain copies of current goals Bill Mooney Hold Cabinet work session Estelle Matthis Hold Board work session Estelle Matthis 6PHASE 5: PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT Task People assigned PHASE 6: BUDGETING Task People assigned 7PHASE 7: PROGRAM BUDGET DOCUMEN Task People assigned C Revise form, instructions, and definitions Bill Mooney Approval on form, instructions, and definitions Sterling Ingram Diskette of form, inst, and def to Ingram Bill Mooney Initial data load to diskettes Sterling Ingram Prepare training material Sterling Ingram Conduct training sessions Sterling Ingram Distribute diskettes to program leaders Sterling Ingram Diskettes due back to Ingram Program leaders Data check on diskettes Sterling Ingram Clean up period Program leaders Obtain feedback on training Sterling Ingram Modify training as necessary Sterling Ingram Send draft to ODM for plan verification Sterling Ingram Report publication Sterling Ingram 8PHASE 8\nMONITORING/REPORTING Task People assigned Run financial pull test on August data Mark Milhollen Modify process as necessary Sterling Ingram Prepare M/R instructions Sterling Ingram Prepare M/R training material Sterling Ingram Conduct M/R training Sterling Ingram Set up financial pull for October report Mark Milhollen Distribute M/R reports Sterling Ingram M/R reports returned Budget Managers M/R reports reviewed and corrected Sterling Ingram Prepare front section of 1st Qtr Rpt Sterling Ingram 1st Qtr report prepared Program leaders Distribute 1st qtr report Sterling Ingram Obtain feedback on training sessions Sterling Ingram 9PHASE 9: PROGRAM EVALUATION Task People assigned Review Deseg Plans for possible targets Sterling Ingrain Develop evaluation format Sterling Ingram Approval on evaluation format Estelle Matthis Publish evaluation format Sterling Ingram Identify It Fast-Track It eval targets Board Estelle Matthis Hank Williams Tasking on tl Fast-Track evaluation targets Estelle Matthis PHASE 10: INPUT/PARTICIPATION Task People assigned Define input reguirements at Board session Board 10PHASE 11: PROGRAM COORDINATION Task People assigned C Complete Requirements Definition Questionnaire Bill Mooney Revise Req Def listing Bill Mooney Approval for interviews Estelle Matthis Requirements Definition interviewing Bill Mooney Merge requirements into process design Bill Mooney Update Mooney proposal Bill Mooney Set up Cabinet work session Estelle Matthis Set up Board work session Estelle Matthis 11swtt! r ^5.A ^.^4 /wi-r F *1 I* ti -3 * 5 A  .3 -  AUG 2 7 1S?3 of Ltepitofing IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION , filed *I8 2 6WJ CARL fl. brents. CLERK Oy\n\\' ''. 1 r LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT Cli vs. No. LR-C-82866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 1, ET AL MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL ORDER PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS INTERVENORS On July 7-8, 1993 and again on August 12-13, 1993, the Court held hearings on the Little Rock School District's (\"LRSD\") budget for the 1993-94 school year. This Court has previously expressed concern that it cannot meet its obligation to monitor desegregation plan compliance until the LRSD implements a budgeting process that yield a budget which reflects the district's careful planning for meeting its desegregation obligations over the full span of the settlement agreement. Having heard testimony over the course of the two hearings, the Court commends the LRSD for initiating, with the help of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring, budgeting and long- range planning processes. The Court acquiesces in the implementation of the budget for the following two reasons: (1) the LRSD budget for the technically balanced, and 1993-94 school year is (2) the LRSD considered its desegregation obligations in the budget, although there remain certain areas of concern. The Court continues to be concerned with the tremendously large budget deficits the LRSD projects for future years These deficits i -are brought about partly by recurring expenditures that are funded through non-recurring revenue sources, a practice that threatens to jeopardize the district's ability to fund its desegregation obligations in the future. The Court also notes that, although the LRSD succeeded in creating a balanced budget, the district was able to do so by using extraordinary one-time budget balancing strategies that do not represent lasting budget reductions. One example of such budgetary practices is the way in which the district drained its Risk Management Loss Program to create additional revenue for the 1993-94 fiscal year. This fund, which the LRSD established to pay deductibles associated with losses not covered by insurance premiums, had accumulated a reserve. The LRSD transferred $500,000 from this reserve into the revenue side of the budget to shore up the sagging bottom line. However, the district will not be able to implement this strategy on an annual basis. See Exhibit 1-B, June 28, 1993 Submission. Although the district has termed such maneuvers \"Major Deficit Reduction Actions,\" most are actually one-time budget reduction tactics that do little or nothing to remedy the predicted out-year shortfalls. This type of financial manipulation only allows the district to delay making the difficult budget decisions that will alleviate the projected deficits. The Court is also particularly concerned about the following budget items that represent reductions in previous program or department funding levels and thereby create the potential for negatively affecting the desegregation plan\n(1) Office of Communications: The Interdistrict plan states 2that  [d]esegregation will succeed only so far as the community supports and participates in it,\" and \"[a] community well-informed about its schools, and their desegregation, is more willing to place confidence in them and to participate in various aspects of desegregation-related initiatives and activities\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":"tmll_hpcrc_69254118","title":"Prospects and impact of losing state and local agencies from the Federal fair housing system : a report","collection_id":"tmll_hpcrc","collection_title":"Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Commission on Civil Rights"],"dc_date":["1992"],"dcterms_description":["A digital version of the report published by the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","Requires Acrobat plug-in to view files."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Discrimination in housing--Government policy--United States--States"],"dcterms_title":["Prospects and impact of losing state and local agencies from the Federal fair housing system : a report"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Thurgood Marshall Law Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":["http://www2.law.umaryland.edu/Marshall/usccr/documents/cr12p94z.pdf"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://crdl.usg.edu/id:tmll_hpcrc_69254118"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports","records"],"dcterms_extent":["88 p. ; 28 cm."],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_788","title":"Publications","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":["1992/2000"],"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","School management and organization","School improvement programs"],"dcterms_title":["Publications"],"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/788"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nLittle Rock School District McClellan Community High's Business/Communications Magnet Is First Of Its Kind In Arkansas \"Award-Winning Departments at McClellan Make Magnet Site A Natural\" JSAcClellan High School was chosen as the site for a new Business/Communications Magnet program because of its outstanding programs. Students and faculty members have been recipients of local, state, and national awards. Opportunities at McClellan include a school store operated by marketing education students, Food/Restaurant Management Program, Junior Executive Training, Future Business Leaders of America, Distributive Education Clubs of America, Youth in Government, Speech and Drama, Quill and Scroll, Computer Club, foreign language clubs. Graphic Arts, math technology organizations, a comprehensive Advanced Placement Program, physics and science-related clubs, and awardwinning music and athletic departments. Locating an innovative business/communi-cations magnet school at McClellan is a natural because all of the necessary resources are in place to expand the emphasis on corporate, economic and mass media education. The magnet program will establish an educational partnership which involves the corporate and media communities, higher education, and the school district. Educational experiences in the business/ communications magnet program at McClellan will launch students to success in international entrepreneurship, communications, and ail related fields. McClellan Business/ x\n,  Communications Magnet Program New in '92 1 First Class Schools For World Class Kids Business/Communications Program Provides Multiple Benefits McClellan High School's Business/Communications Magnet Program has a dual focus, and is the first of its kind in Arkansas. It will provide a solid college prep business/ communications program and prepare students for the world of work. Ongoing collaboration with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock and other nearby institutions of higher education includes proiects directed by guest instructors, shadowing experiences, leadership development workshops, and more. Expanding McClellan's campus throughout the community will allow students to experience the worlds of corporate managers, college professors, and media professionals. A comprehensive business/communica- tions curriculum and the opportunity to network with professionals bring the corporate and mass media worlds to the classroom in a special way. The three areas of study are: Business Principles and Management, Market- ing/Advertising, and Economics and Finance. An interdisciplinary approach adds dimension to McClellan's business/communications magnet program. In addition to the core programs offered by the business and communications areas, related courses and experiences are interwoven throughout the various subject areas. Specialized Courses Include: Food/ Restaurant Management, Business Finance, Business Etiquette, Introduction to Mass Media, Advertising, Radio \u0026amp; Television Production, Advanced Foreign Language, Computer Programming, Economics, Entrepreneurship, and Business Statistics. SPECIAL ATTRACTIONS  College Preparatory And Advanced Placement Courses Across The Curriculum  Hands-On Learning Opportunities - Science and Math technology and research centers - Writing labs - Computerized Business and Graphic Arts labs - Restaurant management  National And International Field Trips  Modeled After The Most Successful Business/Communications Programs In The Country.  Business Partnerships - Local television, radio and newspaper professionals - Small Business Development Center - Local business firms - Advertising agencies  Award-Winning Business Program And National Business Teacher Of The Year  Opportunities For Entrance And Scholarships To Outstanding Universities, $415,000 Awarded in 1990-91  Highly Qualified Staff Of Professional Educators.  Curriculum Enhanced'Through Community Education  Solid Academic Background In The Basics: English, History, Math, And Science  Interdisciplinary Approach To Learning  Seven-period day McClellan Business/Communications Magnet Program 9417 Geyer Springs Little Rock, AR 72209 570-4100 For Additional Information, Call or Visit The Little Rock School District Student Assignment Office 501 Sherman, Little Rock Call 324-2285Little Rock School District \"Windows On the Future is Romine Interdistrict School 3 o nF\u0026gt;T o The Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District offer an innovative alternative to your neighborhood school. It's an interdistrict school with a focus on providing students with the highest possible competence in academic skills and concepts. And its uniquely enriched and enhanced with computerand satellite technology. Romine Computer Science \u0026amp; Basic Skills Interdistrict School is an elementary school conveniently located in west Little Rock near Baptist Medical Center and Parkview Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet High School. It is open to students who live in the attendance zone for Romine and primarily PCSSD students who are eligible for an M-to-M transfer. The school offers a special emphasis on basic concepts and skills such as reading, writing, speaking, spelling, mathematics, science, social studies, problem solving, art, music and physical education. Integrated learning activities link all curricular areas to the \"real world\" to give your child a realistic understanding of their importance to the childs future. We offer a clear and consistent instructional philosophy which includes developing and nurturing each childs maximum potential and promoting learning for its own sake. We stress order, respect, pride and responsibility, also. o 73 Q I Z p hj O' o Oo 73 o NJ O 73 O 3 Q 73 O 03 Q. 0 n cn n uy z n 73 a 2 n on n x O O O z m n O c m n m z n m Romine Computer Science \u0026amp; Basic Skills Interdistrict School iozi dQQ\u0026gt; m o tQSJ 3 n' cu 3o' z o3 o    First Class Schools For World Class Kids Unique Features Of Instructional Programs Give Students Learning Advantage Teaching techniques at Romine are combined with computer and satellite technology to teach basic skills and expand the curriculum. Language Arts. The language arts program includes instructional television correlated to basic skills, such as journal writing on the computer. These opportunities enable students to develop basic skills and to apply them in reading and research. Science. The science curriculum provides instruction using a technological approach to teaching and learning. \"Windows on Science is a comprehensive science program on interactive videos that brings scientific phenomena to life by using pictures, video clips and extensive hands-on experiments to capture students' imagination and create an early interest and understanding of science. This program enables students to see the relevance of science to everyday life and to develop critical thinking and collaborative-learning skills. Reading and Mathematics. The computer program for reading and mathematics enables students to visit the computer lab at least twice a week. An additional visit by all students is used for keyboard skills and writing activities. Advanced math students receive \"Gifted Math programming (pre-algebra and/ or algebra 1). Physical Fitness, Music, \u0026amp; Art. Physical education, music, and art are also an integral part of the educational program and include a variety of forms and concepts to be studied, such as physical fitness, muscle coordination, and fine motor skills in physical education\nthe concepts of rhythm, melody, and harmony in music\nand drawing, painting, weaving and pottery art forms. Unique Characteristics Of Romine Interdistrict School  Strongly anchored with a traditional basic skills curriculum (social studies, science, math, reading and language arts).  The only elementary school in Pulaski County with a computer science theme.  Hour for hour, your child will experience more hands-on time on computers and satellite technology which enrich learning opportunities.  One of only two schools in the district offering the exciting \"Windows on Science,\" state-of-the-art learning experiences combining interactive video and computer technology to teach science.  Gifted math taught by a certified math specialist using computer-based programs developed by university educators which offers pre-algebra and algebra I to advanced math students in grade six and mathematics to students (grades 3-6) enrolled in the special gifted program.  Multi-components of acceleration, enrichment and micro-computers offered in the gifted math program.  One of three elementary schools west of University Avenue offering a free four-year-old program.  Full-time certified gifted and talented specialists for identified students in all grade levels.  Full-time school nurse.  Before and after school C A R E. Program, 7 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.  Easy access to the west Little Rock campus which is located in close proximity to Interstate 630, Kanis Road and other major transportation arteries in the city.  Focus on developing strong research skills via computer-based research activities interwoven through all subject areas.  More than 100 seats reserved to meet desegregation requirements. For Additional Information, Call (501)228-3086 Lionel '^'ard, Principal If you live in the Pulaski County Special School District, Call 490-2000 about a Majority-to-Minority transfer to Romine School. School Locations Xepsjnqx pjjtp qaea ui d i je 51 Suiiaaiu aauiuiujo^ preog X|q)uoui aqi y puueqo aiqej Al-aSai 90 aAij pasiAapi aie s^paauj pjcog siHuiiaaui pjBog le suopeiuas^ aiiqndjoj uorsiAOJdesiaiaqxpuaue 01 paiiAUi st aqqnd aqi tueqiqen isam 018 ^'Pling uo|i -eiisiuiuipv 6qi JO uiooy pjeog aqi ui w'd 9 le qiuouj qaea jo Xepsjnqi quno) aqi uo X|ie|n8ai siaaui pjeog |OOqas aqi Xieiaiaas 16M-KZ 'uouuea 8joao 'jg tMZ-W9 'uos^ KI Xasiog iS69-Sit 'liaqHW auusqieji -jg 'uoilliueH |)!g !Z5l)-J94'930 epwed lubpisard-MlA 'aiooH uitol lUp)S4Jd 5SW-894'l!|Wwe| peuig sjo}D3jja JO pjBog asai Aieiuawao Tuapuaiuuadns lueisissy 'uosuoqoy Ann Xieiuduja|3 luapuaiuuodns lueispsv uomiuiajo laje\u0026amp;eM Aiepuooas 'luapuaiuuadns lueisjssv '\nR*9S 'N eioSuv '-\u0026lt;0 uoddns looips pue saoinosaa 'jaSeueyj /luapuaiuuadng aieiaossv qpasunouuv ag 01) timba 3uiujea-| pue leuoiieziueSjQ 'luapuaiuuadns aieiMssy 'ta\u0026gt;|iRd 'V luaiuanojduji Suiuieaq pue suieiSoid leuoiieonps luapuaiuuadns aiejxissv 'siquen anaisg aieuiiQ pue suoiieiado looqjs luapuaiuuadns aiepossv pjeiuag -] lauej luapuaiuuadns puiag ..ae^.. ap^op 'jg uogeijsiuiiupv aSBI OWZ-fZE 'luauiaSeueyj J^sga jo aoyjo aqi JO (ooqas jnoX peiuoa 'uoiieuiiojui ajoiujoj uoiieixissv Ojiaiqiv sesueigjv aq) Xq pauoipues suods aiisepqasiaiu! ui Suiiedpiued siuapnis ye joj aSeJdACo aouejnsui aiiaiqie luapnis aajj sappcud puisig aqi Xyeuoiiippv '(ooqas JO ueis aqi Suwoyoj rgaan pjiqi aqi ueqi jaie| ou gooq^s aqi 01 pauiniaj aq isnuj suoiiesydde paiagduioo yeiap ui aSeiaAoa aqi uieidxa uoiieaydde pue ajnqxuq a^uejnsui uv 'isoa (euiuiou le aiqeyBAe aje aSeJOACP jnoq-yz pue aiuii-iooqas qiog XouaSe luapuadapu! ue qSnojqi paplAOid aauBJnsui luapiaav luapnis aqi lapisuo) siuajBd leqi lueuodiui S{ 11 os sasiidwea uo saunlui ie]uap!e s.uajpyqa joj Xiyiqey ou seq gsdl aqi 3Duejnsu| puv Aupen sdunluj 'OS op 01 noX a\u0026amp;n am pue (anai puisia JO leao) aqi le paAiOAUi laSoi sXem Xueui ate aiaqi '|ooqas e pue uopeziueSjo apisino jo ssauisnq e uaaau -aq ujej3ojd diqsjauped e si uopeanpi ui siauuBd 'SZ9-li9 llK) uoiieujjojui joj Joieuipjoo} aqi si suieiqv aiuuy sdoqsipOM ui siuajed joj Suiuiej] pue 'spunj leiapaj qiiM s|ooqas o] papiAOJd saniAipe JO siudJed Suiuuoju! Xq spunj n pue 1 Jdideqo SAiaaaj 01 aiqiSqa sfooips ui luauiaAiOAUi luajed saiouiojd pvd) (Punoo XiosiApy luajej qsHT dblZ-fZi lira ppoqs siaaiunpA paisaiaiui joieuipjooa aqi si uieniy aiqqao uajpiiqo qiiM sisaiaiu\npue saauauadxa jeuosiad ajeqs pue isisse siaaiunpA uajpiiqs jo uoiieonpa aqi UI suazqp jaqio pue suojied Siuaied sanpAUj ujaSojd isdiAl siooqss oiiqod ui sjaaiunpA aqi E6-Z66I jojiuapisajd s) gtL9-tZZ '9A99 epeo qSST aqJ ui S|ooq6s aqqnd joj uoddns jaaiun|OA pue suoiieoiunujuioo joj apiqaA e SuipiAOid puisio aqi pue S|00ips aqi jo suojja aqi suoddns uauuieqa aaiiiuiiuos pue siuapisaid Vid p uoiieziueSjo s.ppisiQ aqi ipunoo vid ^Mi luaujaApAui JOJ Xiiunuoddo isjy jnoX aje svid looqos (enpiAipui )U3UJ9A|0AU| JOJ X)iun)joddo luojed uoiieuuojui aiejnojBJoj Qon-tzi 'Xiunsas pue Xiajes jo aoyjo aqi yes suoiisanb aAeq noX jg 'll qiiMjeyiujej aq sayiuiej jiaqi pue siuapnis leqi (epuassa si ig joiAeqaq apeidasoeun JO sasuanbasuoa aqi pue joiASqaq aiqeidane syeiap qoiq/A 'dwypuiH uiiimkuaIsjii piiv sjna^njs aqi uo Suiisai pue uoipruisui dAiaoaj siuapnis yv 'sauyapmd XiajBS pue Xiuroas Aioyoj S[ooq6s xxiy a|un spoqos ojnoos ojeg 'uoiiBJisiSaj luapnis le aiqeyBAe aq yiw suoiiesyddy sgedpuud Jiaqi qiM uoiieaydde ue ayj isniu sjeauj paaud paanpaj jo aay joj Xjyenb oqm siuapnis y v siuapnis apej9 qixis q9nojqi uaue9japui)| osdT HR JOj luauia^uequa uminsuina e .,'uoiiuingq Xijyq., pue ujejSojd gyvo aqi u! uajpiiqa JOJ sijaeus sapiAoid osie aaiAiag pooj sujaii nuaiu jo asioqae aneq oqm siuapnis Xiepuooasjoj ^1$ pue Xiei -uaujaiajo) i$S| qoun| puesiuaoos sisoo isejijeajg s|qe|{eAv sieoiAj snoputitM y lauueqo aiqeo Ai-OSHT pue eipaiu |B3O| ((B uo aq iiiai uoiiBuuojui Suisop (ooqas jaqiBam luaiuapui Suung ^uoypiiH simugisuoila^ pun sii/fni impnis aqi UI sauiiapinS uoiiBuodsueii aqi Aui|pj ppoqs pue qiiAi jeyiuiq aq ppoqs siuaied pue siuapnis 'XiajBS joj uoiieuuoju! ajoui joj OOOk-Oii IIO jeaX aqi moqSnojqi sdui p|aq aijei 01 siuapnis joj pue S|ooqas pauSisse uioij sa|jiu oau ueqi ajoui aAq oqM siuapnis JOJ papiAOJd si uoiieuodsueji snq |ooqas uopejjodsueji sojj 'ajes sjieiapjoj i9ic-yzL saoiAias qi|eaH 10 |ooqas inoX [jeo 'suieiSoid Suiuaajas snoueA pue siuaiussasse aupncu sapiAoid (ooqas qaeg UJ33U0D KieuiUd V S| ip|B3H ZLZZ-PZi auoqdaiai suoiisanb OAeq noX ji 'paidaaae dJB gedpuud aqi Xq paAOJdde Xaua\u0026amp;auia Xyiuej jo ssauyi 01 anp saauasqe Xguo aauasqe jo asea ui aayjo aauepuaiie (ooqas s.pyqa jiaqi Xjiiou isniu siuaJBd uop enpejS JO uoiiouioid jipaj? asmoajo geiuapjoj siseq e SB pasn aq Xeiu sasuasqe aAissaaxa iBqi sapiAOJd osiB/ABjaiBis '2661 '1 JaqoiaQuoii qSnoiqiaAy saSe uaamiaq aauBpuauB gooqas sajinbaj Meg aisis 'uauB9japu|)| puaue oi aiqiSya aq 01 'Z661 'I Jaqopo ppsieaXaAyaq isnui uajpyq3 '(Xepquiq isjy aqiJaijBJO uo ubaiSi Byaqru puBBgoaqru puB ypapaau aq yim uopBziunujuJ! geuoiigppB ub XBpquiq qimoj aqi O] JOud uaAiS ajam oyod pue idg aqi ji| oyod aajqi pue tsissnuad 'snueiai euaqiqdip aajqi tsuoiieziuniuuji Suimoyoj aqi sajinbaj meg sesueigiy agdujexa JOJ yiq Xiyiin e ssajppejojoojd Suuq pgnoqs siuaied 'LUBJSojd gyvD aqi joj uoiieiisiSaj pue spjoaaj JO uoiieayudA uaueSjapuiii siuapnis mau se qans sasea leioadsaipueq 01 ui d $ yiun ui e 1 g luojj |\u0026gt;| pue g IsnSnv uado aq yim Xjepuoaas pue Xieiuatuap sgooqos yv jaqiunu Xiunsas legaos pue spjoaaj uopeziunujiui aiesijjijao yuiq s.iuapms aqi apiAOJd pue siuapnis Xieiuaujap guiiuniaj 01 yeuj Xq jo gooyas aS8T tfue le aiqeyBAe uuoj uopeuuojui ydng e ino yy yojua Oi oouepuouv Q uo!)eJis|Sdd Senior High Schoofs I. Central lohn Hickman 1500 Park. 02 324-2300 2. I.A. Fair Al Niven 13420 David 0. Dodd. 10 228-3100 3. Hall Dr. Victor Anderson 6700 \"H'. 05 671-6200 Junior High Schools 4. Cloverdale Gayle Bradford 6300 Hinkson Rd.. 09 570-4085 5. Forest Heights Richard Maple 5901 Evergreen. 05 671-6390 6. Mabelvaie Waiter Marshaleck 10811 Mabelvaie w. Rd. Mabelvaie. AR 72103 455-7400 7. Pulaski Heights Ralph Hoffman 401 N. Pine. 05 671-6250 6. Southwest Charity Smith 3301 S. Bryant. 04 570-4070 Elementary Schools 9. Badgett Mary Colston 6900 Pecan Rd.. 06 324-2475 10. Bale Levanna Wilson 6501 W. 32nd.04 570-4050 11. Baseline William Finn 3623 Baseline Rd.. 09 570-4150 12. Brady Mary Menking 7915 W. Markham. 05 228-3065 13. Chicot Otis Preslar IllOO Chicot Rd., Mabelvaie, AR 72103 570-4062 14. Cloverdale Sadie Mitchell 6500 Hinkson Rd., 09 570-4055 15. Dodd Patricia Howse 6423 Stagecoach Rd., 04 455-7430 16. Fair Park Barbara Means 616 N. Harrison, 05 671-6260 17. Forest Park Virginia Ashley 1600 N. Tyler. 07 671-6267 18. Fulbright Mac Hulfman 300 Pleasant Valley Dr.. 12 228-3080 19. Geyer Springs Eleanor Cox 5240 Mabelvaie Pike. 09 570-4160 20. leiferson Frances Cawthon 2600 N. McKinley. 07 671-6281 21. Mabelvaie lulie Davenport 9401 Mabelvaie Cut-off Mabelvaie. AR 72103 455-7420 22. McDermott Michael Oliver 1200 Reservoir Rd.. 07 228-3072 23. Meadowcliff lerry Worm 25 Sheraton Dr.. 09 570-4165 24. Otter Creek Carolyn Teeter 16000 Otter Creek Pkwy., 09 455-7440 25. Pulaski Heights Kay Loss 3I9N. Pine.05 671-6290 26. Terry LaDell Looper 10800 Mara Lynn Dr.. 11 228-3093 27. Wakefield Lloyd Black 75 Westminister Dr.. 09 570-4190 26. Watson Dr. Diana Glaze 7000 Valley Dr.. 09 570-4195 29. Western Hills Scott Morgan 4901 Western Hills. 04 570-4175 30. Wilson Gwen Zeigler 4OI5Stannus Rd . 04 570-4180 31. Woodruff Pat Higginbotham 3010W. 7th. 05 671-6270 Incentive Schools (Elementary Schools! 32. Franklin Franklin Davis 1701 S. Harrison. 04 671-6380 33. Carland Robert Brown 3615 W. 25th. 04 671-6275 34.Ish Stan Strauss 3001 Pulaski. 06 324-2410 35. Mitchell Donita Hudspeth 2410 Battery. 06 324-2415 36. Rightsell Sharon Davis 911 W. 19th. 06 324-2430 37. Rockefeller Anne Mangan 700 E. 17th. 06 324-2385 38. Stephens Lonnie Dean 3700W. 18th. 04 671-6350 Magnet Schools 39. Booker Arts Magnet Elementary Dr. Cheryl Simmons 2016 Barber. 06 324-2482 40. Carver Basic Skills/ Math-Science Magnet Elementary Mary Guinn 2100 East 6th.02 324-2460 41 Central High International Studies lohn Hickman 1500 Park. 02 324-2300 42 Dunbar Magnet lunior High (International Studies/ Gifted \u0026amp; Talented) Nancy Volsen 1100 Wright Ave.. 06 324-2440 43 Cfbbs Foreign Language/ International Studies Magnet Elementary Donna Davis III5W. 16th. 02 324-2400 44 Henderson Health Science Magnet lunior High Clell Watts 401 Barrow Rd . 05 228-3050 45 Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet lunior High Marian Lacey 1000 E. Roosevelt Rd.. 06 324-2450 4b McClellan Business/ Communications Magnet Senior High lodie Carter 9417 Geyer Springs. 09 570-4100 1. Parkview Arts  Science Magnet Senior High lunlous Babbs. Ir. 2501 Barrow. 04 228-3000 48. Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet Anne Mangan 700 E. 17th- 06 324-2385 49. Washington Basic Skills/ Math-Science Magnet Elementary Karen Buchanan I15W. 27th. 06 324-2470 50. Williams Basic Skills Magnet Elementary Dr. Ed lackson 7301 Evergreen. 07 671-6363 Interdistrict School 51. Romine Elementary Lionet Ward 34 00 Romine Rd . 04 228-3086 Crystal Hill Elementary (Pulaski County Special School District! 5001 Doyle Venable Dr. North Little Rock. AR 72118 Vo-Tech Center 52. Metropolitan Dr. Doyle Dillahunty 7701 Scott Hamilton. 00 565-8465 Options In Little Rock School District Provide Individualized Education Opportunities Theres a school in the LRSD that's custom-tailored to your child's needs. Area schools are those assigned based on where you live  your district school. Incentive schools promote academic excellence in elementary schools difficult to desegregate. They receive double financial resources and offer computer literacy and programming instniction. extended day. week, and year learning opportunities\nforeign language, pennanent substitute teachers, additional instructional aides and the development of an individualized learning plan lor each student. Magnet schools present exciting opportunities for students with specific Interests such as art, math, science, foreign language, basic skills, international studies, health sciences and business communications. Interdistrict schools with special themes provide another choice and are open to their attendance zones and M-to-M transfers from PCSSD and LRSD. The Little Rock School District offers special education for the handicapped and gifted and talented education. Early childhood education opportunities Include the tuition-free four-year-old programs. HIPPY IHome instruction Program for Pre-School Youngsters), and the Rockefeller Cooperative Eady Childhood Education Magnet School for children ages six weeks through tour years. Welcome to the Little Rock School District and Its world of choices. Cal! 324-2272 about options. AIB I 4 Is S This calenclarls sponsored, in part, by these companies. We sincerely thank them because we couldn't do it without their support Legend -AP\u0026amp;L HI An Entergy Company WORTHEN NATIONAL BANK OF ARKANSAS 0 Senior High Schools  lunior High Schools  Elementary Schools Incentive Schools (Elementary) Magnet Schools A Interdistrict School O Vo-Tech Center The Little Rock School District Calendar'Brochure, designed togive information to staff, patrons and citizens. Is edited by the Communications Department. Dianne C. Woodruff, director\n(eanette Wagner, communications coordinator\nVicki Armstead, secretary. Please call T2\u0026lt;l-2020 for more information. Before And After School Child Care The CARE program operates from 7 a.m. until school opens and from the close of school until 530 p.m.(6 p.m. at incentive schools) and is located In elementary schools where there is a minimum of 15 paiticipants. Obtain registration forms at schools or from the CARE office. 324-2595. Registration fee is $6. Rates are $4.50 for drop-ins, $7 for holidays, and $3.50 a day full-time or part-time. Incentive school fees are on a sliding scale. Little Rock School District v\u0026gt; oo o O FACTS First Class Schools For World Class Kids 1 Little Rock School District [ 00 ( Positive learning opportunities during the early years of life are critical if we are to help each child realize his or her full potential. The Rockefeller Early Child-  1p o o rn C/1 __ (-f XI S- 2 O hood Magnet School program was developed to provide a good educational start for children whose parents work or attend school. Child-centered in its approach, the program strives to match curriculum to the individual child's interests and styles of learning. Since children need the opportunity to learn about themselves and other cultures to live successfully in the world, the Early Childhood Program is multi-cultural and enrichment-oriented in focus and sensitive to the children's cultural and ethnic heritages. The developmental program revolves around an active learning philosophy with a full spectrum of activities designed to stimulate children at different levels of development. Children are given the freedom to use materials in their own way, and move about and interact verbally and physically. Staff members are selected for their ability to express love and warmth as well as their formal training in child development. Ongoing training is an integral part of the program. The Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet School isn't just pre-school daycare  it's much, much more! 3 tn OJ V) td o 03 n 3 X o o C cn n n For Children Ages 6 Weeks through 4 Years 73 o ro 3 z o != o tn OtQu 73  o o QSji eora 3 n' cu o' 2 O 3 O First Class Schools For World Class Kids Four Good Reasons To Enroll At ROCKEFELLER EARLY CHILDHOOD MAGNET SCHOOL Teaching - Caring - Loving - Safety when a child is given the foundation for learning early in life, the chances for academic achievement are much greater. The Rockefeller Early Childhood Education Program for children age six weeks through four years provides such an avenue for pre-school children of all economic and ethnic backgrounds. Its just one way the Little Rock School District is assuring that today's kids will have a good start in tomorrow's world. The principal and staff are dedicated to this unique program and its continued success. A safe and loving environment in which every child's basic needs are met contributes to the success of the program. In addition, an innovative curriculum assures that each child will be able to reach his/her full potential. This program found its roots in 1969 with the Kramer Research Project, developed by Dr. Bettye Caldwell of UALR, internationally known early childhood specialist. This creative program was developed to determine the effect of a high-quality education coupled with an extended day childcare program on children who were from six months of age through the sixth grade in school. Cooperative support was gained from UALR, the Little Rock School District and the federal government. Qualified Teaching Staff Our certified staff includes the principal\na vice principal\ncertified classroom teachers\nmedia, music, art, and physical education specialists\na counselor, speech therapist and a registered nurse. This means your child is being taught and cared for by people who have all the necessary experience and knowledge to receive appropriate licensing in their teaching field. Aides and Service Staff Provide Extra Measure of Attention and Security Your child is in good hands with more opportunity for individual attention because of the program's ratio of adults to students. Rockefeller has one of the best student-to-staff ratios in the district, as do all seven of the District's so-called \"incentive\" schools. There are 18 early childhood instructional aides. Nutritional Food At Breakfast, Lunch \u0026amp; Snack Time children arriving prior to 7:20 a.m. may have breakfast. Lunch and an afternoon snack are served daily to all children. Facts About Schedules \u0026amp; Fees Rockefeller Early Childhood Program operates 12 months of the year, Monday through Friday, from 7 a.m. until 5:30 p.m., with the exception of holidays. There is no charge for the four-year-old program during regular school hours (7:55 a.m. - 2:35 p.m.). The LRSD CARE program is available for a fee to provide childcare services before and after the school day. A sliding-scale tuition schedule is available for Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet participants age six weeks through three years of age. For four-year-olds, a CARE program is available after school to 6 p.m., also. It operates on most school holidays. Reserve Your Space Now Enrolling your child is simple, just contact the LRSD Student Assignment Office, 501 Sherman, or call 324-2272. Because assignments are subject to desegregation requirements and due to the popularity of this program, there may not be an opening at first inquiry. If not, your child's name will be put on a waiting list and you will be contacted as soon as an opening occurs. (iP SPECIAL ATTRACTIONS  The only Early Childhood Magnet program in the District accepting children as young as six weeks of age.  Accessible location for working parents.  Exceptional student-to-staff ratio.  Classes for all pre-school ages, with one class for infants, one for toddlers, one for three-year-olds, and three classes for four-year-olds.  Well-developed philosophy and appropriate age-related goals.  Clean, safe facility with a host of play and learning materials such as blocks, toys, games, puzzles, art supplies and books.  Diverse teachers and students, and a varied curriculum provides many learning experiences.  Each child receives individual attention.  A learning atmosphere that encourages children to have fun and interact. Send your PRE-SCHOOLER on a \"learning experience\" at RocHefeller Early Cfiildfiood Magnet School, 700 E. nth, Little Roch 72206. For Information, Call 324-2272 Little Rock School District  22   H 73 o m 2 S n QJ  in 03 (fi ru hj o QJ O 3 o o r-  n Free Program For Four- Year-Olds Applications Accepted April 2 7-May 8 ni 73 o n ni 3 r-t' - \u0026gt; p O c O tn CIO cu -Z. 00 - o in S CTQ O D n' O 73 First class Schools For World Class KidsA Program Of Fun And Learning For Four-Year-Olds  Certified early childhood education teachers  Ratio of two adults to every 18 students (I teacher, I aide)  Structured learning environment  Developmentally appropriate curriculum and activities  Before- and after-school childcare available Tuition-Free The Program for Four-Year-Olds is a tuition-free program for children who will be four years old on or before October 1, 1992. It is available at the following schools during the 1992-93 school year:  Badgett  Bale  Cloverdale \u0026gt; Franklin  Garland  Geyer Springs  Ish  Mitchell  Rightsell  Rockefeller  Romine  Stephens  Washington  Watson  Wilson  Woodruff School Hours The regular school hours are from 8 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. Monday through Friday except for regular school holidays. Childcare Childcare for a fee is available from 7 a.m.to 8 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. (6 p.m. at incentive schools). For additional information For more information about the Program for Four-Year-Olds, call the Student Assignment Office at (501 324-2272. Put Your Four-Year-Old On Tfie Rig fit Tracfi For Social, Emotional, Physical, And Cognitive Growth. Enroll now for the Little Rock School District's Special Program for Four-Year-Olds. Little Rock School District Student Assignment Office 501 Sherman, Little Rock, AR (501)324-2272 Applications will be accepted at these schools and at the Student Assignment Office April 27 through May 8. Selections will be by lottery whenever the number of applicants for the Program for Four- Year-Olds exceeds the available seats. Enrollment preference is given to children who live within the schools attendance zone or have brothers/sisters enrolled at the requested school. Students selected for enrollment will be notified by May 18. Those who cannot be placed will be put on a waiting list. \"J INCENTIVE SCHOOL PROGRAMS LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INCENTIVE SCHOOLS  Student Education Plan An individual learning plan is developed to meet each student's learning style, interests, and needs.  Exciting, Themed Focus Each school will have a theme that provides an exciting focus for solid basic skills results.  Computer-Assisted Instruction children learn computer-based instruction in elementary school reading, math, social studies and science. Writing to Read computer labs are available for kindergarten and first grade.  Extended Day, Week, And Year Learning Opportunities Classes after school Ihomework center, special skills, clubs and leisure activities) and on Saturday, as well as field trips, enhance learning. it-  Parent Center Parents may obtain materials on parenting skills and other information at each school.  Student Homework Hotline A telephone hotline is available for students to call for assistance Monday through Thursday from 6 to 8 p.m.  Best Pupil-to-Staff Ratio in the District This classroom ratio helps increase interaction between students and trained adults.  Special Skills Program Foreign language, free string program, band, choir, dance, gymnastics and aerobics are offered afterschool.  Parent Workshops Special training in working with their children to assist with homework, computer literacy, nutrition and child development. I. Franklin Franklin Davis, Principal i 701 South Harrison 671-6380 2. Garland Robert Brown, Principal 3615 West 25th Street 671-6275 3. Ish Stan Strauss, Principal 3001 Pulaski Street 324-2410 4. Mitchell Donita Hudspeth, Principal 2410 Battery Street 324-2415 5. Rightsell Bobbie Goodwin, Principal 911 West 19th Street 324-2430 6. Rockefeller Anne Mangan, Principal 700 East 17th Street 324-2385 7. Stephens Lonnie Dean, Principal 3700 West 18th Street 671-6350  Four-Year-Old Program The four-year-old program offers certified teachers, an instructional aide and an age appropriate curriculum that prepares for kindergarten level learning. FOR MORE INFORMATION AND SCHOOL TOURS, CALL 324-2286 Transfer Options Incentive Schools. Elementary schools with extended day programs, foreign language instruction, computer lab and other extras. PRE-REGISTRATION FEBRUARY 3-14 FOR NEW STUDENTS AND KINDERGARTNERS 3 Magnet Schools. Themed elementary, junior high and senior high schools available to students from the Little Rock. North Little Rock and Pulaski County schot\u0026gt;: districts. Focus on arts, math/science. language/ international studies, and basic skills. Who Should Register: All students new to the LRSD for the 1992-93 school yearorchildren who will be five years old by October 1.1992. should complete the preregistration process February 3 to 14 to receive a confirmed assignment by March 6.____________________ Interdistrlct Schools. The LRSD has one interdistric! elementary school with a computer-science theme. PCSSD operates an interdistrict school at Crystal Hill. Desegregation Transfers. Students may transfer to another area school as long as the reassignment allow.s the sending and receiving school co comply with desegregation requirements and as long as a seat is available. Applications for desegregation transfers lor secondary students will be granted from March 9 to March 20 only. Desegregation transfers also will be granted to the following elementary schools: Badgett. Bale. Baseline, Cloverdale, Fair Park, Geyer Springs, Romine, Watson. Wilson, and Woodruff. M-to-M (Majority to Minority) Transfers. Student-whose race is in the maiority in their home district ma\ntransfer to a district where their race is in the minority Act 609\nInterdistrlct Transfers. Provides the option for a student to attend school in a district other than that in which he or she lives, subject to some restrictions. How To Register\nFollow these two steps for a quick and easy pre-registration process. 1 PicJ^ up a Pupil Information Form from your area school. If you don't know your area school, call the Student Assignment Office. 324-2272, and tell them your address. Of drop by the office at 501 Sherman to look at district maps. 2. When pre-registering, parents or guardians must bring the following information with them: Proof of student's Social Security number, age and verification of home address. Acceptable documentation of age includes a certified birth certificate, visa or passport. 5 S S 2 5 I a- fl eV J m g r-. S - S \u0026gt;0' 0o -5~J0 2s\u0026amp;5 ('f'l 1=1 HOWTO PRE-RECiSTER FOR OPTIONS who's Eligible: Any Student new or reiutning. may request anol her school Options are incentne schools high school lurxlergartens. interdistrici tnagrte(s.tT)aiority-l\u0026gt;raitK)tity iM-Io-Mi transfers, and desegregation transfeis to anotlrer area school isee Transfer OpdonsPaneii How To Pre-Register: Fil I out a form called the Optional Enrollment Request Form at your area school or at the Student Assignment Office Any appiicant not chosen (or Immediate placeflieni will be placed on a waiting Iisi Sibling Preference\nSibling preference will be granted (or any family whose children arc attending their area (attendance zonel school. Sibling preference assignments are subject to des^iegation requirements andcapacily Beginningin 1992-93. sibling preference will nN be framed to a non-attendance zone school Siblingpreferencedoesnot appiyco magnet schools 'Ji s O  VI e For inlormalion afeoul nni/ of these transfer options, coiilacl the Student Assignment Office, 501 SficrnwH, or call 324-2272. Acceptable documentation of address includes a current utility statement, a sales/purchase contract, lease agreement or personal property tax bill. It is very important to have your correct address on file so we can mail important information to you. I i I I O is I o g \" I INTRODUCTION CALENDAR First Class Schools For World Class Kids The purpose of this brochure is to save your time by assuring that you know how. when, and where to register your child in the Little Rock School District for the 1992-93 school year. If you have other questions about school options or feel that you need more information, please call the Student Assignment Office at 324-2272. Welcome to our first class schools. We know that your world class kid deserves no less. The LRSD has everything your child needs to put his or her best foot forward toward a successful future. OUR MISSION The mission of the Little Rock School District is to provide an educational program that enables each child to achieve his/her highest potential. To that end. the LRSD will provide\n(1)3 program of basic education for all students, (2| programs that address the special needs of students (emotional, physical, and mental): and (3) enrichment opportunities such as art, music, and athletics. Through an organized program of studies, each student will experience academic success and will learn to appreciate responsibility and productive citizenship. ALTERNATE PRE-RECISTRATiON DATE If you miss the February 3-14pre-registration. the next pre-registration opportunity will be April 6 to lune 5. February 3-14 Pre-registration for new students, kindergarten and options (incentive, interdistrlct. and magnet schools). March 6 Assignment notification letters to all students. March 9-20 Desegregation Transfer application period. April 6-June 3 Registration resumes at area schools. April 13 Notification letters to Desegregation Transfers. April 27-May 8 4-year-oldapplication period. May 18 Assignment notification letters to 4-year-olds. June 8-|uly 24 Summer Registration at Student Assignment Office. July 27-31 No registration accepted. August 3-7* Registration in all school buildings. OPEN HOUSE DATES (All Open Mouses Begin At 6:30 P.M.) lanuary 27 Area Elementary Schools January 28 incentive and Interdistrlct Schools January 29 Secondary Schools January 30 All Magnet Schools Al! students, new and returning, must confirm their school assignment at this time. Diverse Choices Allow You To Customize Your Child's Education Put them where they'll thrive in a learning environment that's tailored to their personality and talents. With so many options in the LRSD. theres bound to be one that is especially suited for each child. The following is a summary of options now available Area Schools: The ctemcBtory school that is the district school for your home is called an area school. Each area elementary school feeds intoa particular junior high and senior high school. This is square one in ycsir search lor a school that's tight for your child. Area schools offer a strong classroom-based program in basic skills as well as essential skill development necessary for problem solving and critical thinking The elementary program focuses on instruction in reading, language arts, roaihemaiics. social studies and science, it offers computer lab. music instruct ion. PE. certified ccHjnselors. and a gifted and talented education prc^iam for students in grades 3-6. At the juniar ftfjA level, the locus on basicskills and decision making is expanded to a broader range of subjects including art, band, computer education. English, foreign languages, health, mathematics, physical education, practical arts, reading, science, social studies and vocal music Extracurriculai athletic opportunities include basketball, football, golf, tennis, track, volleyball, and. in some schools, soccer. The comprehensive fiigA school program offers a diverse mix of opportunities and challenges which emphasize critical thinking, teamwork, leadership and hi^ expectations for personal achievement. The schools provide a sign ificant array of academic programs from advance placement courses in science, mathematics and liberal arts to vocational technical edixation courses. The graduation requirements are based on student mastery of specified skills in English, mathematics, science and social studies Elective courses span a wide variety of subjects {S Dimiary of Sckoais Far A List a/ Arm Sdiaab Ami Addresses SetOiJeirziir FwOyWH House Dates) Incentive Schools: TheieareseveniiKeniiveelementary schools in the LRSD that emphasize science, language and individualized learning. They each offer enriched programs and will havea focus geared toeducaiional achievement. These schools receive enhanced funding and voluntary transfers are available for students who wish to attend an incentive sdrool. Features that distinguish incentive schools from area elementary schools include StudcvKaducalron pfaxi: an individual learning plan is developed to meet each student's learning style, interests, and needs Compufcr-ossisied insirudian children learn computer-based instruction In reading, mathematics, social studies, and science. Writing to Read computer labs are available for kindergarten and first grade. EiirnilAi dag. vh6 Mil yairl/ariiiiij eppurtmilia: classes after school and Saturday enrichment programs enhance learning. ParrnI Oiler parents may obtain materials on parenting skills and other information. Student tonork Mne. a telephone hotline isavailable for siudentstocallforassistance Btsipupil-iif-siall'iilioiiiikfilisliki this latio helps increase interaction between students and trained adults Sjwiaf skills program foreign language, free siring pic^tam, band, choir, dance, gymnastics and aerobics are offered afterschool Pareni uvrksfnjps Piiohlg la learning skills u^ick enktinreifecisiim making, problem exhibit agenuine interest in the program selected Enrollment is open county-wide. Thereare lOinteidistrict magnets Booker Arts (K-6): Visual aits, creative movement, dance, orchestra, gymnastics, drama, music and an 18-slation keyboard lab all serve to complement the regular elementary program Carver {K-61 Computer, math, sclenceand Young Astronauts labs, as well as special math and science projects, enhance mathematics and science education and reinforce academicand critical-thinking skills. Cibbs iK-6) Daily French. German, and Spanish language sohing andcmilM Ikinking skills. Pnur-grariTlifpragrams these programs oiler an early start to help prepare children for the learning process The incentive school program is based on the K-6 core curriculum but uses a modified instructional approach to emphasize more activity and student involvement. Thegoalc^the incentive schools is to promote and ensure academic excel- fence in schools that have been difficulltto desegregate. |S Dinxla^ of Scfioois h UslofiiKCfiliKSckools. Su Calendar For Open House Doiel Magnet Schools: There is a thematic curriculum on which all courses focus in a magnet school-with exciting possibilities for students who wish to pursue specific interests All magnet schools are tuition-free and Special Features The following are some of the special features offered daily by the LRSD throughout the school year Before And After School Child Care: The CARE pre^ram is a nonprofit program of child care olfered to elementary age students in the LRSD. It operates before and afterschoolandalldayonmostschool holidays CARE provides a structured program of creative activities and recreation in a nurturing and familiar environment Hours are 7 a m. until school opens and from the close of school until 5:30 p.m (6 p.m. at incentive schools) and is located in elementary schools where there is a minimum of 15 participants Nutritious Meals: Breakfast is available to students for 50 cents and lunch is Si lor elementary and $1.05 for secondary students who have a choice of menu items. Safe, Free Transportation: School bus transportation is provided for students who live more than two miles from assigned schools and for school field trips Call 570-4000 for more information Safe, Secure Schools\nLRSD schools follow security and safety guidelines It is essential that students and their families be familiar with the Stdeis Rigkis and ResponsiMl es Handbook which details acceptable behavior and consequences of unaaeptable behavior. The LRSD recently adopted 53 points of action to assure that out schools continue to be safe and secure available to students in the Little Rock Sdiool District. North Little Rock School District, and Pulaski County Special School District. Transportation is provided to students who live more than two miles from the magnet school they attend There is no tryout or prerequisite course required for entrance, however a student must instruction, plus an exploration of cultures from a global perspective. enrich the traditional elementary program Williams IK-61: An emphasis on structure, organization, discipline and highest possible competence in basic academic skills characterize this program Washington |Pre-K-6) A comprehensive education pregram including a Young Astronauts lab. two science labs. Iwo math labs, a computer lab. IBM Writing to Read program, and a strong emphasis on the hands-on approach to math and science education Dunbar International Studies/Glfted \u0026amp; Talented l7-9): International studies are incorporated into daily seven- period classes including foreign languages, international studies, world issues and soccer program Dunbarstudentswho wish to participate in the gifted and talented program must be identified and recommended for placement Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science 17-91' Two magnet programs, arts and science, are offered Curriculum requirements are combined with extended opportunities in an. music, drama, dance, and science labs Central High International Studies 110-12) Limited magnet program with 175 seats develc^ around an international theme that capitalizes on the school's extensive foreign language program. Parkview Arts \u0026amp; Science 110-12): Expanded and specialized studies in arts and sciences, in addition to standard academic cuniculum are offered Visual arts, theatre, dance, music, microbiology. and human anatomy areamong the offerings. Rockefeller Cooperative Early Childhood Magnet School {six weeks-age3). See Early Childhood Education Section {S Di'rcctory of Schools For Addresses. SuColendar For O/m House Dales) Interdistrict Schools: Thereare two 'interdistrict schools. Romine Elementary is a LRSD interdistrict school with a thematic focus on computer science and basic skills. It is c^n to students who live in the attendance zone lor Romine and primarily PCSSD students whoareeligible for an M-to-M transfer. Stronglyanchoredwitha traditional basic skills curriculum in social studies, science, math, reading and language arts, it is one of only Iwo schools offering the exciting 'Windows on Science' program. There's a computer-based gifted math program which offers pie-algebraand algebra 1 to advanced math students. Physical fitness, music, and art are a strong part of the curriculum (See Oiwcionj o/Scfewls For Address SwCaWarFarOjwuHause Dares) Crystal Hill Elementary: In August. 1992. Pulaski County Special School District will open the Crystal Hill Elementary Interdistrict School Located adjacent to W30 north of the Arkansas River, this school will be open to LRSD students whoare eligible for an M-to-M transfer Early Childhood Education: Selected LRSD schools offer one or more of the following early childhood education programs. Four-year-old Program: Tultion-freeprogramsforchildrenwho will befouryearsoldonofbeforeOctrAer 1.1992. iSraDiffltorija/ Sckwis Far A List of Four-^r-oli Programs And Aditeises. Su Calendar For Open Hausr Dales) HIPPY (Home Instructional Program for Pre-school Youngsters)\nA home-based instructional program that recognizes the parent as the child's first teacher and reinforces this idea in order to increase educational achievement and closedisparities in achievement among students Call 324-2266 for more information Rockefeller Cooperative Early Childhood Education Magnet School: A pre-school program that provides educational experiences and child care for children from six weeks through three years of age. A fee for this program may be applicable, based on family income lS Diraewny of Sckoab Far Address Su Calmdar Far O^n Hause Daini SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS Central loAx HkAxiux 1500 Pari, 02 324-2)00 AiNivrn 13420 DuvidO. Dodd. 10 228-3100 Hall Dr. Virtar \\aUrsO\" 6700-H\". 05 671-6200 McClellan lodd Carlrr O4l7GrYxrSivfxYS, CSO 570-4100 JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS Cloverdale Gdylc Drmajord 63IHinfeM Rd.. 00 570-408S NoxtY VohfH IIOaWda\u0026gt;rlAw..06 374-2440 Foreet Heights RVJiflra Muj:lr 5901 Ewryrrrx. 05 671-6390 EiYrrll Horis 401 Borrow R4.. OS 228-3050 Mabelvate CM Woll! 10311 MoMroIr W M Mohrh-olr. AR 72103 455-7400 Pulaski Heights RoloA HoTInon 401 N. Pixr. 05 671-6250 CAontY SnuA 3301 S. BiYoxl. 04 570-4070 Directory Of Schools ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS CvhiM 0900 Prftfx Rm4. 06 6501 W. 32x4. 04 570-4050 3623Bosr!rxr Rd.09 570-4150 MorY MrxAIuY 7915 MorAAOfli. 05 228-3065 Oli! Pirsbr IIIOOCAkM Rd,. MuSrlmlr. 7210) 570'4062 Cloverdate Sedir MrIrArll 6500 HixAsM Rd. 09 570-4055 Mary I4sr COratOan 6423 SluOrilwA Rd . 04 455-7430 Berhuru MruK! 6I6N. Hdrriwx.OS 671-6260 Viryaia AsAVy I6CN3N TYlfr.07 671-6207 Eulbrtght Mur Hutlxnix 300 PIrusuul VuUty. 12 228-3080 GeyerSprlngs 5240 Muhrhvrfr PIAx. 09 570-4160 Icfforson Pruxtrs CevlOoa 2600 N MrKinlrY.O7 671-6281 Mabelvale lulir Onexpurl 9401 MstrJnile Cul-uff MuMmIc.AR 72103 McDermott MxAurlOAirr l200RncnpirRd.l\u0026gt;7 228-3072 Meadowcliff Jrrrv Worar iSStirnUm Or.09 570-4165 Otter Creek CurolYx yrelrr ItMOOlIrrCmliPt.ClO 455-7440 Pulaski Heights 3I9N PixaOS 671-6290 LuDrII Looorr IO8OU Moro Ly4X Dr , 11 228-3093 Wakefield Uoy4 BOitA 75 Wnlxilxslcr. 09 570-4190 Dr. DIoxo Clotf 7000 VotfeY Dr, 09 570-4195 Western Hilts Morair Pvcferll 4901 Wciirrx HIHs.04 570-4175 Cara Zclairr 40I5SWXX1S Rd.. 04 570'4180 Woodruff 30l0W^7lA. 05 671-6270 INCENTIVE SCHOOLS lElroVRlorYl FnluAljx DuvB 1701 S Hurrrsux.O4 671'6380 RuhcrI Brwx 36I5W. 25IA.04 671-6275 Ish Slux SIraais 3001 PiitoiJh.06 Mluhell Duuitu HudsprlA 24IOBulirrY.O6 324-2415 Rlghuell BuOAir CaodaiH 9IIW 19IA.06 324-2430 Rockefeller Axxr Muxdux 700E I7IA.06 Stephens Lexxtr Drun 3700 W I8IA. 04 671-6)50 MAGNET SCHOOLS EtruirxlurY Dr. Cftriyl Simnoas 2016 Burhrr. 06 )24-2482 Carver Basic Skills/ Math-Science Magnet Murg Cuihx 2IOOeu!l6lA. 02 321-2460 Central High loAx HYAxiun 1500 Ps/A. 02 324-2300 Dunbar International Sludlea/Glfted \u0026amp; Talented Magnet 1100 WrtgAI Aw.. 06 Gibbs Foreign Language/ Intemadonal Studies Magnet eitntalary II15W. I6IA.02 324-24913 Mann ArtsS Science Magnet luxlur HidA Muriun LurcY 1000 E. Ruusnvtl Rd. 06 324-2450 Parkview Arts S Science ^xur H\u0026gt;yA luxKXS Bu66! 2501 Burrow. 01 228-3000 Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet Auxe Munouu 700 E 1710. 06 Washington Basic Skills/ Math-Science Magnet EIrmrxturY Ku'cx BurAuuux 115W 271A )24-24 70 Williams Basic Skills EJrfxrxlurY Dr EdlurAsou 730iewrYiW4. 07 671-636) INTERDISTRICT SCHOOL Romine Lioxrl Word 3400 Rom'xr Rd., 04 228-3086 EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION IS CjMirnUro. Ixcynriw. InKnlisliei. 6 Uslinos Pm PSow NumMy \u0026amp; fijUirsses tlOclixIa 6-Weeks To 3-Vcars ROlifller Early dilldhood raaenet Home Instructional YouMOters (HIPPYl ColHZ'l'ZZOOfor 4-Year-0(d Protram RocXetcller Early Childhood Magnet AfwAMUoNrAlAJI SrJiwh Law UnUrr Incendve Schoola jElementary) tn urV as nJ lAr bSowina Badtcti Cloverdale Geyer Springs Romine Interdlstrlct Washington Magnet Watson Wilson Woodmlf VO-TECH CENTER Metro polltan Dr. Dn/k Oiltoavnly 7701 Sirll HomillOR. 04 565-M6SPRESCHOOL PROGRAM HOME INSTRUCTION PROGRAM FOR FOUR \u0026amp; FIVE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1401 SCOTT STREET YEAR OLD CHILDREN LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 12202 SUPERINTENDENT: Dr. Ruth Steele 324-2266 BOARD OF DIRECTORS: STAFF MEMBERS: PRESIDENT: O.G.Jacovelli PROGRAM SUPERVISOR: MARIAN SHEAD F~ cn VICE PRESIDENT: John Moore COORDINATORS: SECRETARY: Patricia Gee JACKIE RICHARDSON BRENDA HILL ANNETTE ROPER tm HIPPY USA MEMBERS: IN-OFFICE AIDES: ^3 O Robin Armstrong DEBORAH THOMAS LINDA ALLISON J? s W.D. \"Bill\" Hamilton Dr. Katherine Mitchell SECRETARY: DONNA PETTY Dorsey Jackson OFFICE HOURS: 8:30 TO 4:30 MONDAY FRIDAY HIPPY was developed at the National Council of Jewish Women Institute for Innovation at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, All U.S. HIPPY Programs are affiliates of the national network called HIPPY USA,UHAT 1. QUrSTTCNS rWV ,WStt/EyS ABCIJT THE Hippy PPCGR/\\M Hippy? '.me diitr yoang-i-tc-vi .toon di I . Program PreidiccE a home bcoied edacatton program where a dvcEd di taaght by a po-rent. HOW WAS Hippy VEVELOPEV? HIPPy ho-i been di ope-tatTon -iZiica 1969 and ViCbi deoe.T.oped by Vn.. AvTma Lomba.id, HIPPV Academte. Vdieaton., The NCjW Reieaidi liutdtate ^on. Innooatton .\u0026lt;n Edacatton, the Heb-teai Uiu.oei.idty 04 J at! iaC.z.m. WHAT 7^ I THE COST OF HIPPV? There di no coi Ell ti'ic p.rcg.ram. to eivtedE ycai diddd Odi-t'idat' i The Ldttde Rcc.b. SdwoT. itIO IS MV CUILVS TL\\CHER? w-ttli did H^sions, litCetu ldjn/lie.r Worn on. Vad. di die. du^' 4 ^ut teacher. However, a 4ZfaZng may teach the chdU when Vad or Mom di not avac^abCe. eo^or and cat oat ptetara, ddicoii the ptetarei. HG(il OFTEN ARE HOME VISITS MAOE? Hane vZicti IIC'J/ LESSON? MUCH TIME IS VEVarEO TO d\\CH The -Eci^oiLi take aboat ^yteen to twenty mtnatei a day, HOW VO you GET MATERIALS? A diatned n.e.iponiT.b.e .^n. Pn.ogn.am matendadi. InidLuadconad ATd di Z64uxng cM HIPPV WHET ARE .MATERIALS ISSUED? Ha-cr,ca\u0026lt;.j are dieiaed at g-raaa ,7ic2,\u0026lt;ng4 and adio to the hemei o4 patenti. made I)ie,z.i.ac.tLoaaa. ATdei. Chaptei (j-unctctig .ipon.ic.i.i aie ^undi and the Ldttde Rodz 'WHO WILL TEACH .ME HOW TO USE THE HIPPV MATERIALS? did)i iL'cc.tCy fcy die. WHV SHOULV THE INSTRUCTIONAL AIVE CONTINUE TO VISIT MV HOME ONCE I AM TRAINED TO USE THE MATERIALS? The mcLte'Ua.li diaiige n.eguT.a,z^a, and die Inidlu.adLona^ Aide ma.ditaT.iii eondaet. io oi to a.iidit wddi pn.obILemi uilitdi may andie dtcEd. a.i yoa teadi yean. [VHAT ARE THE MATERIAL CONTENTS? The ccnteitti 04 die .natct-tot are: 1. Lanaaage 2. .Matii 3. Setiiory and Perce^otdon SlecEdi Job Tia.dUn!j Pa-odie-Vihdp Act p.iog.iam. Vou,i liiidiactconad Atde di neipomt-bZe WHAT ARE THE BASIC CHARACTERISTICS OF Hippy? HOW VO I ENROLL .MV CHIES? HIPP'- teaehdng yoa. Haue'je.n., the ^.ocad CtT-CC die Home Imtiaedton JfliEEce Coon.dtnaton. LUTdd pfiooTde Thene core 04 HIPPV: ^oe bcoitc diaraeten.didi.e HOW OLV MUST A CHILV BE TO ENROLL IN Hippy? I WANT TO BE IN THE PROGRAM, BLIT CANNOT ATTENV EVERV MEETING BECAUSE I WORK. WHAT CAN I VO? A parent jedn HIPPV mhen the dic^d di lioar year^i oEd. \u0026lt;11 the pn.ogaa/n and iend I. St-tacu/tcd matercadi 2. Vad/Mom dutnaetcon 3. TutoAxaZ n.ed.adi.Qii-ilup 4. The gn.oap 4etzng 5. Home ba-ie HOW LONG MUST MV CHILV BE IN THE PROGRAM? A dicCd mait remadi di the pn.ugn.am (yo-t nt Ccait two yean. ^amicEy ineinben. m/ien yoa cannot come. (1 MV CHIEU LIKES THE LESSONS .\\NV VOES NOT WANT TO STOP AT THE ENV OF ONE LESSON. WHAT SHALL I VO? HOW LONG HAS THE HIPPV PROGR^UM BEEN IN THE LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL VISTRICT? The Hippy Progriun began Zn Augttit, J9S6. fl} (/oo-i diUd iuoadd ^dze to continue[ Little Rock School District Tucked away in a quiet, residential neighborhood just a few blocks west of the Arkansas State Capitol complex, Woodruff Elementary School offers a small, caring school community in a location that is easily accessible. The school's proximity to Arkansas Childrens Hospital, the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, most state government offices, and 1-630 via the Woodrow Street exit, offers many parents the opportunity to be more active in their children's school experiences. Whether it's sharing a lunch date, attending school day performances or simply being closer for those inevitable calls about childhood illnesses, parents will find that having their children attend Woodruff is as convenient for them as it is enriching and satisfying for their children. n\u0026gt; 73 O DTT \u0026gt; 73 s NJ O NJ wn O cn o 3  s faS  s 73 o n ft \u0026gt;(fi (fi n 00 O O  n Woodruff Elementary State Capitol 7th St. W. 1-630  Q3 on fT\u0026gt; oo Q. O S Arkansas Children's Hospital 5 fl) w fl) X 5* 3 m X O \u0026gt; 70 s73 2 z p NJ s 00 5 6 c to s co O z o 3? O 0) 3I o 3 First Class Schools For World Class Kids Woodruff Elementary School opened in 1911. In the ensuing 80 years. Woodruff has provided a rich heritage of educational experiences to many generations of Little Rock students. During 1991 the building and grounds underwent a major addition and renovation project which has resulted in an efficient, up-to-date school environment coupled with the charm and character of a traditional school setting. A new, Early Childhood Wing houses the four-year-old program, kindergarten classrooms, first grade classrooms, and the computer laboratory. A driveway at the entrance permits easy access for dropping off or picking up early childhood students. Improvements to the original school building include an expanded and refurbished media center, an enlarged cafetorium with stage, and new furnishings. Playground improvements feature new equipment selected to meet the developmental needs of both the Early Childhood and elementary students, as well as new basketball courts and an exercise track. A lease agreement permits use of the Billy Mitchell Boys' Club facilities (located next to the school) for special events. ooDRUFF School  Family atmosphere nurtured in a small school setting.  Located in a quiet neighborhood, one minute from 1-630.  Character education program in all classes, kindergarten through sixth grade.  Non-violent problem-solving curriculum including strategies for effective communication, self control and helping each other solve conflicts.  Hands-on math materials in all classes to help children understand concepts and solve problems.  Before and after school C.A.R.E. Program, 7:00 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT Woodruff Elementary School 30low. 7th Street Telephone 671-6270 or Student Assignment Office 501 Sherman Telephone 324-2286 The heart of Woodruff Elementary School's instructional program is an energetic, enthusiastic, well-trained staff who assess all students consistently to determine their learning needs and who plan lessons to meet those needs so that no child is bored or frustrated. Cooperative (team) learning, and independent, small group enrichment projects assure effective, appropriate instruction for all children. Top priorities of the program include mastery of basic skills, development of independent level critical-thinking abilities, and accuracy in problem solving. Students have extensive opportunities to use their skills as they participate in \"units of study\" which require application of learning in reading, math, language arts, science and social studies. Additional enrichment programs include:  One to two hours of individualized instruction per week in the 28 station computer lab.  Music instruction conducted by a certified music specialist one hour per week.  Gifted and Talented Program for identified students in third through sixth grade.  Tutors to provide extra help in reading, math, and language arts for students with remedial needs. Active, hands on instruction Relaxed atmosphere, smaller classes College prep and job prep education Computers and high tech equipment in every class Qualified, experienced staff Interesting people from 23 public and private schools in central Arkansas Flexible scheduling-morning, afternoon and extended day (after school) classes Quality, fully accredited programs No cost to you-free tuition and free transportation (Adults are charged a small tuition fee.) Dont miss the Metro experience! Call us today 565-8465 Ask for Martha Allen, counselor, or See your home school counselor METROPOLITAN VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL EDUCATION CENTER 7701 Scott Hamilton Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 Non*ProlH Organization U.S. Pottage PAID Little Rock, AR 72201 Permit #2608 A place to learn, to grow, to succeed AWESOME Choose from these exciting career options Design If you want to use your artistic and creative abilities to solve technical problems, consider: COMPUTER-AIDED DRAFTING. Prepare for challenging careers in engineering, architecture, and manufacturing as you master Autocad and other software. Create an impressive portfolio of drawings. COMMERCIAL ARTICOMPUTER GRAPHICS. Utilize the tools of commercial artists, including Amiga computers. Create art work, graphics, animation and explore desktop publishing. COMPUTER PRINTING TECHNOLOGY, Build graphic arts skills in composition and desktop publishing, camera and darkroom preparation, platemaking and press operations, and bindery. Use the latest electronic and laser publishing equipment in a professional production shop. (Prerequisite: keyboarding skills for composition area only) RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION. Explore rewarding careers in the construction field, one of the nations largest industries. Develop skills in framing, finishing and cabinetmaking on the job site or with customer projects on campus. Communications If you have good communications skills and think clearly and logically, consider: COMPUTER PROGRAMMING. Write business programs in structured RPG and COBOL on the IBM36 miniframe system. (Prerequisite: Algebra 1 Regular) COMPUTERIZED WORD PROCESSING. Master WordStar, WordPerfect, Lotus 123 and dBase IV on miniffame and personal computers. (Prerequisite: keyboarding skills) RADIO BROADCASTING, Work as a disc jockey, program director, news writer, reporter, sports announcer, copywriter, and traffic director at KMVT, Metro's modem campus station. Reading, writing and speech skills are important for success in this field. TELEVISION PRODUCTION. Produce scripts, direct, perform as on-air talent and gain experience in camera operation, lighting, audio, electronic editing and computer graphics. See your work air locally and intern at television stations. Mechanics and Repair If you like working with tools and equipment and enjoy the challenge of solving mechanical puzzles, consider: AIR CONDITIONING \u0026amp; HEATING TECHNOLOGY. Learn to install, maintain and repair units in recreational vehicles, homes and businesses as you prepare for a financially rewarding career. 4[/TO BODY \u0026amp; PAINT TECHNOLOGY Develop skills in dent removal, sanding, painting, and glass installation as you learn to repair and restore vehicles. AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY. Develop skills in diagnosing and troubleshooting with one semester courses in Engine Repair\nEngine Performance: Electrical: and Brakes, Suspensions and Steering. The program is nationally certified by ASE. ELECTRONICS. Broaden your possibilities in computer repair, electronics, telecommunications and industrial controls with knowledge and skills in electronics. (Prerequisite: Algebra 1 Regular) MACHINE TECHNOLOGY. Build precision skills in machining as you master the lathe, milling machine, surface grinder, drill press, and precision hand tools. Produce tools, dies and other machine devices. METAL FABRICATION/WELDING, Learn electric arc, plasma arc, MIG and TIG welding. Use the skills developed in a variety of businesses and industries. Services If you have an understanding of human nature and want to make a difference in the quality of people's lives, consider: CASHIERICHECKER, Go where the action is by preparing for the expanding world of retail. Develop skills on electronic and scanning registers and learn consumer behavior, salesmanship, advertising, and marketing. COMMERCIAL FOODS. Learn nutrition, menu planning and purchasing techniques necessary to be a successful chef, dietitian or manager. Develop culinary and creative skills from visiting chefs who share their secrets. COSMETOLOGY. Prepare for a career in beauty as a hair stylist or manicurist. Those who enroll for three years and attend extended day classes can earn the 1500 hours required by the State Board of Cosmetology. (Prerequisites: 10th grade reading level, 15 years of age and completion of 9th grade) HEALTH OCCUPATIONS EDUCATION (HOEL Explore the opportunities in the medical field through computerized instruction and lab activities. You may also choose an on-the- job training experience in a health care agency with an individualized study plan. Ji 8* School Locations I Senior High Schools 1 Central To Be Announced 1500 Park, 02 324-2300 2. |,A. Fair Al Niven 13420 David 0. Dodd, 10 228-3100 3. Hall Dr. Victor Anderson 6700 \"H\", 05 671-6200 lunior High Schools 4, Cloverdale Gayle Bradford 6300 Hinkson Rd,, 09 570-4085 5. 8. Forest Heights Richard Maple 5901 Evergreen, 05 671-6390 Mabelvaie Walter Marshaleck !08l 1 Mabelvaie W. Rd, Mabelvaie. AR 72103 455-7400 Pulaski Heights Ralph Hoffman 401 N. Pine. 05 671-6250 Southwest Charily Smith 3301 S. Bryant, 04 570-4070 Elementary Schools 9. Badgett Mary Colston 6900 Pecan Road, 06 324-2475 4 G |azzw 0. J vM***^ 1-690 I Xepsjnijxpuooas ipea uj d  18 S| SuiiaauiaauiuiuiOD pjeog it|ij]uouj aijx \u0026gt; [auueijDaiqo Al-aSST uo axil pasuajai aje sSupaaui pjeog sSuiiaauj pieoq le suoiieiuasajd 3i|qnd joj uojsubOJd e s| aiaiu. puaue 01 paiiAui si oijqnd aqx ujeippen isa^ 018 au!PI?na uoiiEJisiuiuipvaqi JO ujooa pjeog aqi uj lu d 9 le qiuoiu qaea JO A^Kinqi qunoj aqj uo ApejnSaj swam pieog poqog aqi XreKUMS 8tS-0ZS 'Al 'S88|a V uqo| S09-yi liaipiiyt auusqies JO Si-995 IliaAOMI.OO. UO US0-W4 'SSO WlBd i8^ 'uoiiiuieH iiig luapisaJd-aaiA SZt-Si uosipei Xasjoo luapgsajd 9-BX aoow auqol sjopaiiQ JO pjBog aSHl 10. Bale Levanna Wilson 6501W. 32nd, 04 570-4050 11 Baseline To Be Announced 3623 Baseline Rd,. 09 570-4150 12. Brady Mary Menking 7915 Markham, 05 228-3065 13, Chicot Otis fheslar IllOO Chicot Rd., Mabelvaie, 72103 570-4062 14. Cloverdale To Be Announced 6500 Hinkson Rd., 09 570-4055 15. Dodd Patricia McNeil 6423 Stagecoach Rd.. 04 455-7430 16. Fair Park Barbara Means 616 N. Harrison. 05 671-6260 17. Forest Park Virginia Ashley 1600 N. Tyler, 07 671-6267 18. Fulbright Mac Huffman 300 Pleasant Valley Dr., 12 228-3080 19, Geyer Springs Eleanor Cox 5240 Mabelvaie Pike, 09 570-4160 20. lefferson Frances Cawthon 2600 N. McKinley, 07 671-6281 mo-m [[ uopeuuqjui aiouj JOJ uajpijqo Jiaqi qiim XjjenpiAipui qjom 01 luaiu -a8ejno6ua pue Suiuieii jeuoiiesnpa jeuojiippe SujAiaoaj pue sdoqsqjOM 8uipuaue Xq ssaxud auiiueaj aqi UI siauued auiooaq siuajej spunj jj pue | jaideq^ jejapaj Xq paAjas sjooqos ui uoiiedi^jued luajed saioujojd uiBJSoJd luaiuaAjoAui iuajBj 1 jaidBqo asaT aqi Oezz-ITL l|K\u0026gt; Pinoqs sjaaiunjOA paisajaiuj sujejSojd qioqjojoieuipjooaaqi SI ujejiiq aiqqao 'os op 01 palm aje noX pue janaj uuisio JO jexij aqi le panjOAUi laS 01 sXem Xueuj aJe aiaqi uopeonpa uoddns 01 sjooqos qiiMjaqjaSoisassauisnqsSuuq uoqesnpj ui sjauuej sjadjaq ujoojssep pue siaqeads sioiuauj sjoini se aAias siaaiunpA uajpjiqajo uoiiesnjTa aqi ui suazpp jaqio pue suoJied 'siuajed saAjOAui LuejSojd (SdjAl sjooq^s aiiqnj u| sjaaiunjOA aqi 'M-E66I JO) luapjsajd sj '9kl9-kZZ 'oqog ejJO asai aqi Uj sjooqos oijqnd joj uoddns jaaiunjoA pue sut^toi -uniuujco JOJ apiqaA e SuipiACud 'ppisjo aqi pue sjooqas aqi JO suc^a aqi suoddns 'uauuieqs aauiiuuico pue siuapisaid Vid JO uoiieziueSJO s.ppisjo aqi 'jpunoo vid aiy. 'luaujaAjoAui JOJ Xiiunuoddo isjy jnoX aJesvu jooqos jenpiAipui )U9U19A|OAU| loj Xiiunuoddo luaiej uoiieuuqjui aJOUJ JOj OOOP-OZS IIO t puueqo 9|AO Al-asar pue eipaui |eoo| qe uo iseopeojq aq [jua uopeuuoju! 3UISOJ6 [ooips 'jaqieam luaujapui Suung pw Siifim lujprns 9qi U! saujjapini uoiieuodsuei} aqi mo\noj pjnoqs pue qiim jeqiuiej aq pjnoqs siuaied pue siuapnis 'Xiajes joj jooqos aqi q^ojqi painoj aq pjnoqs uoiieuodsueJi joj sisanb^ jjV 'JeaX aqi moqSnojqi sdui pjay aqej o] siuapnis joj pue sjooqas pauSisse uiojj sajiuj owi ueqi ajouj aAij oqm siuapnis JOJ papjAOJd sj uoiieuodsueji snq jooqos uopeyodsueii aajj sjes 'l9IZ'kZE 'sasjAias qtjeaH ye] 'sjieiapioj suja^uo) qijeaq s.pjiqo jiaqi jo juuoju! asjnu jooqos aqi daaq 01 paSeinosua aje siuaied 'Suijasunco qijeaq pue sujejSojd 8uiuaajos siuauissasse auiinoj apiAOJd 01 ajqejieAe SI oqm asJnu jooqos pauSisse ue seq jooqss Xjaxo luoDuoo Xieuiud V s] ifi|esH 'ZiZDKf auoqdajai 'suoiisanb axeq noX jj jiaidaoae aie jedpuud aqi Xq paAOJdde XauaSiauia XjiujBj JO ssauji! 01 anp saauasqe Xjuq aauasqe jo asea uj aayjo aauepuaiie jooqas s.pjiqa Jjaqi Xjitou isnui siuajej uopenpejS JO uoiioiuojd 'iipaja asinoa jo jeiuap joj siseq e se pasn aq Xeui saauasqe axissaaxa leqi sapiAOjd osjemEjaieis 661 'I Joqopouoii qSnojqiaAy iOOZ-tZi JO900Z-K( Xieiuauiagg siuapuaiupadns lueisissy aqi jo aaiyo ilOWEibepuoaas luapuaiuiiadns lueisissy aqi jo aayjo 600J-K uoddns gooqas pu^ saainosay jaSeuen aqijo aayjo OiZZ-PZi Xlinbs Suiujeaq pue geuoiieziueSjo luapuaiuuadns aiegaossv sqi Jo aagjjo l10t-K'iU9UJ9AOJdiu: 8uiujeaq pue suieiSojij geuoiieanpg 'luapuaiuuadns aieiaossv aqi jo aayjo 0I0J-F5L 'aiBUjgio pue suogiejadQ gooqas 'luapuaiuuadns aieiaossy aqi jo aaijjQ ZIOZ-FZE 'luapuaiuuadns aqi jo aayjo uopBjjsjuiuipv asai fSl/^ 'OS/irK^. OOfZ-hJC 'Xipnoas pue Allies Jo aaqjo aqi \n83 uopeuuojui jaqiinj joj uopepossv oqajqiv sesueqjy oqi pauoqoues suods orisej -oqxjaiui ui Supedptued siu^ms \nejqj ^axco aouejnsui oiiaiqie luapnis aaq sapiAOJd puisiq aqi 'Aneuoiitppv Tooqos JO ueis aqi 8uiao\noj qaam pjiqi aqi ueqi jaie| ou jooqss aqi 01 paujniaj aq isnuj suoiie^qdde paiagduio^ '|i8iop UI 9gejA00 sqj I I 38 pSpiAOJd 'uoiiesijdde pue ajnqscuq a^uejnsui uy iso? jeuiuiou IB ajqejiexe aje agejaxoo jnoq-yj pue aujji-jooqos qiog X3ua8e luapuadapu) ue q8ncuqi papjAoid aauemsuj luapjxv luspus 9qi lapisuoa sluajed leqi lueuodiui sj ij os 'sndiueo uo sapniuj jBiuappse s.uajpjiqo joj XiijiqBij ou seq asai sqx 3Duejnsu| puvX)i|iqen 'ssunlui 'UOIIBUUOJUI aiEinaaB loj 'OOPE-VZE 'Xiunaag pue XiajBS JO aayjo oqi ggea suoiisanb axeq noX jg 1! qiim Jeigiuiej aq saigiuiq Jiaqi pue siuapnis leqi gegiuassa si u JOiAeqaq agqe -idaaaeun jo saauanbasuoa aqi pue JoiAeqaq agqeidaaae sgieiap qaiqm jjwqpiinH siRiJiq'SMXfMii I\" ^^pilS aqi uo Suqsai pue uoipiujsui aAiaaaj siuapnis ggv sauig -apinS Xjajes pue Xjunaas moggoj sgooqas qaoy agun S|OoqDS sinods sjiBS uoiieJisiSaj luapnis le agqegieAe aq ggim suopeaigddv sgedgaupd jiaqi qigm uogieaigdde ue agy isniu qaung pue isejqeajq aaud-paanpaj 10 aajj joj Xjigenb oqm siuapnis ggv siuapnis apejS qixis qSnojqi uauB8japu!q OSHT l|e JOj luaiuaauequa lungnaiuna e .uoiiuirm Xijin. pue luejScud agvD aqi Uj uajpgiqaicy sigaeus sapiAOjd osge aaiAiag gaooj siuai! nuaiu JO aaioqa e axeq oqm siuapnis Xiepuoaas joj 0'i$ pue Xjeiuaujaga joj |$ si qaung pue siuaa o sisoa isejqeajg saSe uajpijqs joj. ibaj mqoiejs uaueSiapuiq puaue 01 a|qi8\na aq 01 '661 'I JaqopoXq ppsjeaXany aqisnui uajpjiqo (Xepquiq isjy aqi Jaye JO uouaniS) eyaqiu pue eioaqiu pue qpapaau aq yim uoiieziunuiui) leuopippe ue 'Xepquiq qunoj aqi 01 joud uaniS aiam O!|Od pue uo aqi jij oyod aajqi pue isissnuad 'snueiai 'euaqiqdip aajqi isuopeziunuiuii 8uimo\noj aqi saj.inbai meg sesueqiv uogieqsgSaj le (luaujaajSe aseag luaujaieis xei ggiq ^iggui) ssajppejojooJd apiAOJd isniu siuaiej UZZ-iZZ 'wyjo ]uauiu8issv luapnis aqi peiuoa 'gooqas auoz aauepuaue aqi Suiuguuaiap ui aaueisisseioj gooqas auoz aauepuaue jpque\nlaAsqoqAauapnjs JO Suuds aqi u| ja]si8aj-ajd lou pip oqm siuapnis maN 'jaqiunu Xiunaas geiaos pue guoaaj uogieziunuiuii aieayguaa qugq jiaqi luasajd isniu aiugi isjy aqi joj oSHl sqi Suuaiua siuapnis lud 8 |i]UR m e 11 luojj '01 pue6isn8nv uo gooqas gaauSisse jiaqne siuapnis ggeJOj pgaq aq ggim uoiiej]si8aa aDuepuspv puV uopeJisiSs^ 21. Mabelvaie lulie Davenport 9401 Mabelvaie Cut-off Mabelvaie, AR 72103 455-7420 22, McDermott Michael Oliver 1200 Reservoir Rd., 07 228-3072 23, Meadowcliff Jerry Worm 25 Sheraton Dr.. 09 570-4165 24. Otter Creek Carolyn Teeter 16000 Otter Creek Pkwy., 09 455-7440 25, Pulaski Heights To Be Announced 319 N, Pine, 05 671-6290 26, Terry LaDell Looper 10800 Mara Lynn Dr 11 228-3093 27. Wakefield To Be Announced 75 Westminister Dr.. 09 570-4190 28. Watson To Be Announced 7000 Valley Dr., 09 570-4195 29, Western Hills Scott Morgan 4901 Western Hills, 04 570-4175 30, Wilson Gwen Zeigler 40I5Stannus Rd.. 04 570-4180 31. Woodruff Pat Higginbotham 30I0W. 7th.05 671-6270 Incentive Schools (Elementary Schools) 32. Franklin Franklin Davis 1701 S. Harrison. 04 671-6380 33. Carland Robert Brown 3615 W. 25th. 04 671-6275 34 Ish Stan Strauss 3001 Pulaski. 06 324-2410 35. Mitchell Donita Hudspeth 2410 Battery. 06 324-2415 36. Rightsell Sharon Davis 911 W. 19th. 06 324-2430 37. Rockefeller Anne Mangan 700E. 17th. 06 324-2385 38. Stephens Lonnie Dean 3700 W. 18th. 04 671-6350 Magnet Schools 39. Booker Arts Magnet Elementary Dr. Cheryl Simmons 2016 Barber, 06 324-2482 40. Carver Basic Skills/ Math-Science Magnet Elementary Mary Guinn 2100 East 6th. 02 324-2460 41. Central High International Studies To Be Announced 1500 Park, 02 324-2300 42. Dunbar Magnet lunior High International Studies/ Gifted \u0026amp; Talented Nancy Acre 1100 Wright Ave., 06 324-2440 43. Gibbs Foreign Language/ International Studies Magnet Elementary Donna Davis 1115 W. 16th. 02 324-2490 44. Henderson Health Science Magnet lunior High Ciell Watts 401 John Barrow Rd.. 05 228-3050 45 Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet lunior High Marian Lacey i 000 E. Roosevelt Rd.. 06 324-2450 46. McClellan Business/ Communications Magnet Senior High ) )die Carter 9417 Geyer Springs, 09 570-4100 47. E arkview Arts \u0026amp; Science Senior High I inlous Babbs, |r. 2501 John Barrow Rd,, 04 228-3000 48. Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet Anne Mangan 700 E. 17th. 06 324-2385 49. Washington Basic Skills/ Math-Science Magnet . Elementary Karen Buchanan 115 W. 27th. 06 324-2470 50. Williams Basic Skills Magnet Elementary Dr. Ed [action 7301 Evergreen. 07 671-6363 Interdistrict School 51. Romine Elementary Lionel Ward 3400 Romine Rd.. 04 228-3086 52. Martin Luther King, )r, Sadie Mitchell 907 Martin Luther King, |r. Drive.02 324-2135 Crystal Hill Elementary (Pulaski County Special School District) Wanda RuHin 500) Doyie Venable Dr. No. Little Rock. AR 72118 753-4323 Vo-Tech Center 53. Metropolitan Dr, Doyle Dillahunty 7701 Scott Hamilton, 09 565-8465 This calendar is sponsored, in part, by these companies. We sincerely thank them because we couldn't do it without their support. Legend ^AP\u0026amp;L 89 An Entergy Company WORTHEN NATIONAL BANK OFAI5KANSAS 0 Senior High Schools  Junior High Schools  Elementary Schools Incentive Schools (Elementary) Magnet Schools Olnterdistrict School O Vo-Tech Center The Little Rock School District Calendar/Brochure. designed to give information to staff, patrons and citizens, is edited by the LRSD Communications Department, leanette Wagner, director, Vicki Armstead, secretary. Please call 324-2020 lor more Information, diqeiiBAv s|e9v\\l snopumN Options In Little Rock School District Provide Individualized Education Opportunities There's a school in the LRSD that's custom-taitoied to your child's needs. Aiea Schools ate those assigned based on where you live. Area schools offer a strong classroom-based program in basic skills, as well as essential skills development necessary lor problem solving and critical thinking The elementary level focuses on instruction in language arts, mathematics, sodal studies and science, lunior high and senior high programs are comprehensive and offer diverse oppwtunities and challenges which emphasize teamwork, leadership, and high expectations for personal achievement Incentive Schoofs promote academic excellence with themaO'c emphasis in sdence, language and individualized learning They receive enhanced funding and have a focus geared to educational achievement Incenttve schools offer computer literacy and programming Insmrction, extended day, week, and year learning opportunities\nloreii language, permanent substitute teachers, addidonal instructional aides arid the development of an individualized learning plan for each sturdent Magnet Schools present fixating opportunities for students with spedfk interests such as art, math, sdence, foreign language, basic ^lls. international studies, health sciences and business communications, Inierdistrict Schoch with special themes provide another choice and ate open to dreir attendance zones and M-to-M tratsfers frwn PCSSD and in\u0026amp;a\u0026lt;listiict transfers from other LRSD sdrcds. The Little Rotdt School District offers special education for both handicapped and ^Ited and talented students. Eady childhood education opportunities include the toitiort-free four-year-old programs, HIPf\"f IHome Insnucticsi Program for Pre-School Youngsters), and the Rockefeller Cooperative Eady Childhood Education Magnet School for children ages six weeks thnxrgh four years. Welcome to the Little Rock School District and its world d choices. Call 324-2272 about options. Before And After School Child Care The CARE program operates from 7 a.m. until school opens and from the close of school until 5:30 p.m.|6p.m. at incendve schools! and is located in elementary schools where there is a minimum of 15 participants. Obtain registration forms at schools or from the CARE office, 324-2395. Registration fee is$6. Rates are54.50for drop-ins, $7 for holidays. Monthly, full-time and part-time rates are based on $3,50 per day. Incentive school fees are on a sliding sale. n B M (-  5 o o \u0026lt; 8 3 o 7t V\u0026gt;nX o o 2 a\u0026gt; Q J \n3 I p in I I o S s i .-ft Little Rock School District I  First Class Schools For World Class Kids Date: April 17, 2000 To: Gene, Horace, and Melissa From: Ann Re: Recent LRSD Publications Attached are some LRSD publications that Bonnie Lesley recently sent us, asking for our feedback. Please review each document individually according to the assignments below, answering the seven review questions in writing for each document. Note that these publications are the originals, so please dont mark them up. If youd like to jot notes on them (edits, etc.), work on a copy. Id like to have your reviews by this Thursday. April 20. Thanks. Gene: Horace: Melissa: High Schools\n High School Curriculum Catalog 2000-2001  Guide to Course Selection and Graduation Requirements, 2000-2001 Middle Schools:  b* Grade Standards, Benchmarks  7'*' Grade Standards, Benchmarks  8* Grade Standards, Benchmarks  Middle School Curriculum Catalog 2000-2001  Guide to Learning in Middle School Elementary Schools:  Kindergarten Standards, Benchmarks  1 Grade Standards, Benchmarks  2\"* Grade Standards, Benchmarks  3\"* Grade Standards, Benchmarks  4* Grade Standards, Benchmarks  5\"* Grade Standards, Benchmarks Review Questions 1. For which audience is the publication intended? 2. What is the stated purpose of the publication? 3. List the documents strengths in relation to its purpose. 4. List the documents weaknesses in relation to its purpose. 5. Overall, how well do you think the publication fulfills its purpose? 'Why? 6. What suggestions do you have for improving the publication so that it can better fulfill its purpose? 7. Additional comments.\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":"tmll_hpcrc_68908275","title":"Public education in Idaho : does it meet the needs of all students","collection_id":"tmll_hpcrc","collection_title":"Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Idaho, 44.5002, -114.25118"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Commission on Civil Rights. Idaho Advisory Committee"],"dc_date":["1992"],"dcterms_description":["A digital version of the report published by the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","Requires Acrobat plug-in to view files."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Hispanic American youth--Education--Idaho","Hispanic American dropouts--Idaho","High school dropouts--Idaho","Education--Idaho"],"dcterms_title":["Public education in Idaho : does it meet the needs of all students"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Thurgood Marshall Law Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":["http://www2.law.umaryland.edu/Marshall/usccr/documents/cr12ed813z.pdf"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://crdl.usg.edu/id:tmll_hpcrc_68908275"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports","records"],"dcterms_extent":["31 p. ; 28 cm."],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1470","title":"Pursue the Possibilities","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":["Magnet Review Committee"],"dc_date":["1992"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"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","Education","Segregation in education","African Americans","Little Rock School District","Magnet schools"],"dcterms_title":["Pursue the Possibilities"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"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/1470"],"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":["videocassettes"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"tmll_hpcrc_70046345","title":"Racial and religious tensions on selected Kansas college campuses","collection_id":"tmll_hpcrc","collection_title":"Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Kansas, 38.50029, -98.50063"],"dcterms_creator":["United States Commission on Civil Rights. Kansas Advisory Committee"],"dc_date":["1992"],"dcterms_description":["A digital version of the report published by the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of online collection: Historical Publications of the United States Commission on Civil Rights.","Requires Acrobat plug-in to view files."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["Discrimination in higher education--Kansas--Case studies","College students--Civil rights--Kansas--Case studies"],"dcterms_title":["Racial and religious tensions on selected Kansas college campuses"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Thurgood Marshall Law Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":["http://www2.law.umaryland.edu/Marshall/usccr/documents/cr12t25z.pdf"],"edm_is_shown_at":["http://crdl.usg.edu/id:tmll_hpcrc_70046345"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports","records"],"dcterms_extent":["14 p. ; 28 cm."],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_44","title":"Rankings of Arkansas School Districts on Selected Items","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["1992-01"],"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":["Education--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Educational statistics","Public schools","Pulaski County (Ark.)--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["Rankings of Arkansas School Districts on Selected Items"],"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/44"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nRANKINGS OF ARKANSAS SCHOOL DISTRICTS ON SELECTED ITEMS DEPARTME T OF EDUCATION LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS JANUARY 1992 C IVE At'kansas sEP 1 3 1993 DEPARTMENTOF EDUC~Tf~NMonitoring 4 STATE CAPITOL MALL  LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201-1071  (501) 682-4475 BURTON L. ELLIOTT, Director, General Education Division January 1992 MEMOT O: The Governor of Arkansas, Members of the General Assembly, and Superintendents of Public Schools FROM: Burton L. Elliott, Director, General Education Division SUBJECT: Rankings of the School Districts on Selected Items Contained herein are the names of the school districts of Arkansas ranked on the basis of twelve (12) selected items contained in the Annual Statistical Report of the Public Schools (Report on the House Concurrent Resolution No. 58 of 1961) dated January, 1992. These figures do not include expenditures of restricted federal funds as ECIA or personnel paid with federal funds. Data for 1990-91 are actual\ndata for 1991-92 are estimates. The school districts are listed in LEA number order beginning on page 3 for easy reference. This should permit the reader to quickly locate an individual district on any table. Definitions of items included are listed below: 1. Expense Per ADA. The current expense, less the amount received from the other districts for tuition, divided by the resident ADA. Kindergarten and Pre-Kindergarten pupils and expenditures included in this figure. The 1990-91 ADA were used in computing the expense for both years. 2. Average Daily Attendance. The ADA is total days of attendance divided by days taught. This number includes those who attend school outside the district on a tuition agreement between the respective districts. This is the annual average. 3. Average Daily Membership. The total days of attendance and absence divided by the number of days taught. This number includes those who attend outside the district on a tuition agreement between the respective districts. This is the annual average. The average for the first three (3) quarters is used for MFPA and transportation aid purposes. 4. Number of Teachers K-12. Includes all certificated personnel except superintendents, principals, supervisors, assistant superintendents, and those paid with federal funds. 5. Average Salary of Teachers K-12. The average salary of personnel as defined in item 4 above. 6. Number of Certificated Personnel. The number of personnel as defined in item 4 above plus superintendents, principals, supervisors, and assistant superintendents. Personnel paid with federal funds are not included. 7. Average Salary of Certificated Personnel. The average salary of the personnel as defined in item 6 above. The data contained herein should be of interest to persons desiring to compare the statistics of one district with those of another. For additional information call or write the Office of Local Fiscal Services, Division of the Department of Finance and Administration, #4 Capitol Hall, Room 202-A, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1071. Telephone: (501) 682-4259. Printing of this publication has been made possible by the United States Department of Education in conjunction with the National Center for Education Statistics {NCES), P.L. 100-297. The information represented or reported herein was printed pursuant to a _grant from the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare. However, the opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the United States Office of Education, and no official endorsement by the United States Office of Education should be inferred. In keeping with the guidelines on Title VI, Section 601, Civil Rights Act of 1964\nTitle IX, Section 901, Educational Amendments of 1972\nand Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Arkansas Department of Education assures that no person in the United States shall on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex or handicap be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. An Equal Opportunity Employer Page 2 CONSOLIDATIONS AND ANNEXATIONS Effective July 1, 1~91, the following districts were consolidated or annexed: 1. Griffithville, Judsonia and Kensett consolidated to become the Riverview School District (White County). 2. Enola consolidated with Mount Vernon to become the Mount Vernon/Enola School District (Faulkner Countyj. ' LEA t 01-01 01-02 Qi__-04 01-05 02-01 02-02 02-03 02-04 03-02 03-03 03-04 03-06 04-01 04-02 04-03 04-04 04-05 04-06 04-07 05-01 05-02 05-03 o:s-01 05-05 05-06 06-01 06-02 07-01 08-01 08-02 08-03 09-01 09-02 09-03 10-01 10-02 10-03 11-01 11-04 11-06 12-0i 12-02 12-03 12-04 12-05 13-01 13-03 COUNTY ARKANSAS ARKANSAS ARKANSAS ARKANSAS ASHLEY ASHLEY ASHLEY ASHLEY BAXTER BAXTER BAXTER BAXTER BENTON BENTON BENTON BENTON BENTON BENTON BENTON BOONE BOONE BOONE BOONE BOONE BOONE BRADLEY BRADLEY CALHOUN CARROLL CARROLL CARROLL CHICOT CHICOT CHICOT CLARK CLARK CLARK CLAY CLAY CLAY CLEBURNE CLEBURNE CLEBURNE CLEBURNE CLEBURNE CLEVELAND CLEVELAND ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS DISTRICT RANK DEWITT GILLETT STUTTGART HUMPHREY CROSSETT FOUNTAIN HILL HAMBURG PARKDALE COTTER MOUNTAIN HOME NORFORK TRI-COUNTY CON. BENTONVILLE DECATUR GENTRY GRAVETTE ROGERS SILOAM SPRINGS PEA RIDGE ALPENA BERGMAN HARRISON OMAHA VALLEY SPRINGS LEAD HILL HERMITAGE WARREN HAMPTON BERRYVILLE EUREKA SPRINGS GREEN FOREST DERMOTT EUDORA LAKESIDE AMITY ARKADELPHIA GURDON CORNING PIGGOTT CLAY COUNTY CENTR CONCORD HEBER SPRINGS QUITMAN WEST SIDE WILBURN KINGSLAND RISON 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 EXPENSE PER ADA 90-91 91-92 1 2 LEA ORDER 1990-91 A/D/A A/D/M 3 4 ~18 ~09 1,317 1,378 3.174 3,705 278 288 2_, 481 2,796 2,304 2,437 ~771 3~287 306 322 2.593 2.916 2.666 2,788 2,965 3,567 244 265 2,729 _,_984 l,_630 ~4 3,169 3,231 145 152 2,906 3,148 502 530 2,643 3,083 3,268 3,451 2,483 2,895 451 472 4,809 4,762 151 159 2,487 2,909 3,987 4,171 2,970 3,405 474 499 2,548 2,977 969 1,018 2,622 2,947 985 1,033 2,634 2,998 6,179 6,511 2,553 2,659 2,686 2,559 2,338 3,168 2,494 3L202 2,568 2,477 2,654 2,231 2,430 2,430 2,502 2,867 2,617 2,B47 2,614 2,574 2,465 2,413 2,697 2,696 2,480 2,608 2,635 3,041 2,708 2,366 2,989 3__1, 53 3. 100 3,029 2,673 3,633 2L892 3,529 2,972 2,809 3,099 2,610 2,756 2,769 2,780 3,012 2,973 3,196 3,022 2,921 2,900 2,896 2,968 3,197 2,944 2,903 3,129 3,911 3,076 2,886 2,149 679 461 665 2,504 282 770 329 589 1,733 879 1,331 595 1,071 1,123 925 1,216 280 2,181 881 1,187 905 748 483 1,300 562 426 164 394 663 2,273 720 482 694 2,618 298 805 347 624 1,818 910 1,393 625 1,126 1,193 966 1,310 293 2,267 921 1 1250 953 782 515 1,382 594 448 177 411 689 NUMBEORF TEACHERS K-12 90-91 91-92 5 6 PAGE N0_~~3~- AVG. SLRY. NO. OF CERT. AVG. SLRY. TCHRS. K-12 PERSONNE=L==-=---C=E=R~T~~P~E=R~S=-=,=------ 90-91 91-9~2~_9~0~-~91 91-92 90-91 91-92 7 8 9 10 --1=--c-1'---\"'---'--c'1=2-'--='------ 92.7 94.7 23,157 26,141 98.9 101.1 24,016 27,140 23.6 24.6 20,081 21,921 26.5 27.5 21,637 23,436 152.2 149.9 22,802 27,051 162.1 ~1~5=9~-~8=--2=3=--'-,7=2~8_=_-_- ~2~7~ ,~9~8~8 23.2 23.2 22 369 27,520 25.2 --,-=2~5~=2=-----'2~3~,~3=2=9=---'2=8=--'-,4~8=7-'------ 185.7 187.2 23,635 27,543 197.7 199.6 24,373 28,510 21.3 21.3 20,106 25,0~00~_~2=3='-~3=--_~2=3=--=-.3=-~2~1~,~7~0~3~2=6~,~86=3'----- 109.5 110.0 21,956 25,346 11~7~-~2'--~1~1~7~-~3=--2~3=',~2='3='4_~_2_= 6\"'--_'- ,6=0-=--=4 14.7 12.8 17,735 20,021 16.7 14.8 17,592 19,567 38.6 38.8 21,655 23,710 41.6 4_~1~~8=-'2=2=',~8~4~4-'--_-2 =5=--_'- -'=10-=--c-1 194.9 199.8 24,400 28,162 210.4 216.4 25,607 29,310 31.3 35.o 20 1 100 22 1 20~4.3 =3=0~.~oc---'2=1~,5=1~7-'--2=3-'c--'--,4=9~4---- 18.3 13.8 20,313 23,402 20.3 ~1=6==3'--=2~1~~3=7=8=--_2_~ 5=_~ 0~5~2::_ 260.3 261.8 22,592 26,723 274.8 282.3 23,719 28,087 44.0 43.3 19,333 21,625 47.0 46.3 20,269 22,654 72.0 72.7 20,387 23,000 76.0 76.7 21,078 23,844 68.0 69.3 22,275 24,946 72.0 75.8 23,037 25,910 358.5 375.3 26,969 30,889 386.6 403.4 28,108 32,060 133.5 137.o 24,071 20,077 144.5 1~4=0~~0~2=s~,2=7~3_2=9_~_,35 -~=o_ 51.1 ~2.5 20,828 24,170 54.2 55.5 21,783 25,149 30.7 31.6 22,765 25,947 33.7 34.6 23,985 27,353 42.2 46.1 23,322 26,319 45.3 49.2 24,596 27,627 152.4 154.3 22,991 26,373 163.3 165.2 23,976 27,642 23.5 24.5 21,440 23,723 26.1 27.1 22,720 25,302 50.5 50.5 23,320 27,812 54.5 54.5 24,117 28,609 27.5 27.8 19,972 23,130 30.3 30.6 21,469 24,467 40.0 41.0 21,319 23,910 43.0 44.0 22,304 24,951 114.6 116.5 23,100 25,869 124.5 126.5 24,570 27,468 58.8 60.2 23,248 27,539 62.3 63.7 24,437 28,466 84.0 88.0 21,773 25,257 88.0 92.0 22,371 25,847 40.8 41.S 21,305 24,147 43.8 44.5 22,463 25,477 71.3 72.5 21,586 24,559 77.0 78.5 22,420 25,469 74.3 73.0 24,145 26,991 79.3 78.0 25,129 28,122 66.5 59.8 21,804 25,099 72.6 64.9 23,193 26,462 B6.3 86.0 20,759 23,497 92.3 92.0 21,660 24,566 21.7 21.2 20,790 24,156 23-.-8--23.3 21,967 25,331 145.9 148.9 22,384 26,027 155.8 159.3 23,404 2~7~~1_-2_~_2 _ 65.5 64.5 20,832 24,557 69.5 68.5 21,680 25,556 82.5 80.9 21,926 26,340 88.0 B6.4 22,844 2~7~,3~4~0---- 65.0 68.2 20,335 23,052 69.0 73.2 21,113 23,894 ---- 54.7 54.7 21,391 23,965 57.7 57.7 22,211 24,796 34.0 33.3 21 1 B24 26,690 37.0 36.3 23,141 27,726 89.5 91.S 22,139 26,271 94.9 97.2 22,990 2_7~~2~1~ 0 _ 39.5 38.2 22,919 26,206 42.5 41.2 23,841 27,049 31.7 32.S 20,652 25,688 34.7 35.5 21,592 26,620 14.2 15.4 18,682 22,473 16.2 17.4 21,181 25,723 26.8 26.6 19,836 23,259 29.8 29.4 20,738 24,406 44.8 44.7 22,378 27,958 47.8 47.7 23,383 29,055 ---- LEA COUNTY 13-04 CLEVELAND 14-01 COLUMBIA 14-02 COLUMBIA 14-03 COLUMBIA 14-04 COLUMBIA 14-06 COLUMBIA 14-07 COLUMBIA 15-03 CONWAY 15-05 CONWAY 15-07 CONWAY 16-01 CRAIGHEAD 16-02 CRAIGHEAD 16-03 CRAIGHEAD 16-05 CRAIGHEAD 16-08 CRAIGHEAD 16-ii CRAIGHEAD 16-12 CRAIGHEAD 16-13 CRAIGHEAD 17-01 CRAWFORD 17-02 CRAWFORD 17-03 CRAWFORD 17-04 CRAWFORD 17-05 CRAWFORD 18-01 CRITTENDEN 18-02 CRITTENDEN 18-03 CRITTENDEN 18-04 CRITTENDEN 18-05 CRITTENDEN 19-01 CROSS 19-03 CROSS 19-05 CROSS 20-01 DALLAS 20-02 DALLAS 20-03 DALLAS 21-01 DESHA 21-02 DESHA 21-03 DESHA 21-04 DESHA 21-05 DESHA 22-02 DREW 22-03 DREW 23-01 FAULKNER 23-02 FAULKNER 23-03 FAULKNER 23-04 FAULKNER 23-05 FAULKNER 23-06 FAULKNER ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS DISTRICT RANK WOODLAWN 48 EMERSON 49 MAGNOLIA 50 MCNEIL 51 TAYLOR 52 WALDO 53 WALKER 54 NEMO VISTA 55 WONDERVIEW 56 SO. CONWAY CO. 57 BAY-BROWN 58 WEST SIDE 59 BROOKLAND 60 BUFFALO ISLAND CE 61 JONESBORO 62 NETTLETON 63 VALLEY VIEW 64 RIVERSIDE 65 ALMA 66 CEDARVILLE 67 MOUNTAINBURG 68 MULBERRY 69 VAN BUREN 70 CRAWFORDSVILLE 71 EARLE 72 WEST MEMPHIS 73 MARION 74 TURRELL 75 CROSS COUNTY 76 PARKIN 77 WYNNE 78 CARTHAGE 79 FORDYCE 80 SPARKMAN 81 ARKANSAS CITY 82 DELTA SPECIAL 83 DESHA-DREW 84 DUMAS 85 MCGEHEE 86 DREW CENTRAL 87 MONTICELLO 88 CONWAY 89 ENOLA 90 GREENBRIER 91 GUY-PERKINS 92 MAYFLOWER 93 MOUNT VERNON/ENOL 94 EXPENSE PER ADA 90-91 91-92 1 2 2~39 2,803 3,554 2J326 2..,834~4 2,912 3,141 2J669 2,948 2,669 2,678 2,610 2,683 2~477 2._438 2,685 2,685 2,572 2,-424 2,873 2,375 2,591 2,676 2,645 2,424 2,805 3,104 2,590 2,493 2,957 2,825 2,736 2,525 3,483 3,087 2,888 6,165 2,974 3. 126 2,439 2,357 2,611 2,478 2,505 3,529 2,344 3,198 2,356 2,844 :L_ii4 3_,_229 3,091 2,980 3,113 3.073 ~839 2_,_847 3.025 3,007 2,909 2.946 3,028 2,764 2,906 3. 105 3,068 2,831 3,195 2,811 2,941 2,950 3,231 3,135 3,509 2,875 3,725 3,474 3,031 6,609 3,165 3,420 2,818 2,619 2,950 2,882 3,019 2,902 3,459 2,883 3,106 LEA ORDER_ __ _ PAGE NO. 4 1990-91 NUMBER Of AVG, SLRY. NO. Of CERT. AVG, SLRY. ---~TEACHERS_K-12____LCHRS. K-12~-~P~E~R=S=ON=N=E=L~_~C=ER~T~~P~ER~S==----A/ D/A A/D/M 90-91 __ 91-92__'!'9-91~~9~1~-~9~2~~9~0-~9~1~-9~1=--92~_~9=0_-~9=1-=9=1_-=9=2~--- 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 402 _4~1~7~_ 30._5 __ 29.9 19 931 22 201 33.6 33.0 21 164 23 629 341 354 30,6 27.1 23.895 26.812 33.6 30.1 25.319 28,474 967-\"3\"---\"\"13=0~_175.9 174.5 24,035 28,255 189.0 186.6 25 024 29 245 332 3~ 25.6 __ 26.1 18,335 20 566 28.6 29.1 19 594 21 :573 328 341 26.0 26.0 21.169 23.497 29.0 29.0 22.615 25.088 532 569 39.9 41.1 ~170 24 450 42.8 44.1 22 602 25 712 235 242 21.5 20.7 18.985 21,790 24.0 23.2 20 496 23 078 380 399 29.0 31,020.393 22,671 32.0 34,021,360 22.970 419 437 30.1 __ 30.1 1~889 23,297 33.1 33.1 21 173 24 324 2L451 21_595 153.0 155.0 23,250 28,587 165.8 167.8 24 263 29 621 619 648 42.7 42.7 21,575 25,787 45.7 45.7 22.513 26.912 1,229 1._310 81.8 82.1 ~231 24.726 89.8 90.1 22,227 25,797 842 885 :54.0 54.0 2~833 27,336 57.0 57.0 23 763 28 354 784 814 59.0 59.0 21,348 24,708 63.8 63.8 22.079 25.468 4,523 4..,770 309.4 301.4 25,478 29 486 329.3 320.4 26 346 30 350 1,539 1,638 102.5 110.1 22,004 24.966 __ 1=1=1==.3,,___=1=1=8=9=653_ 22 5 949 960 998 58.5 63.5 24,915 27,971 62.5 67.5 25,660 28,714 786 020 59.0 56.0~364 23,937~.o 60.0 22 383 25 126 2,186 2,288 137.5 140.5 23_,_431 27 669 146.8 149.8 24,749 29,088 708 760 50.7 :50.4 23,371 26,507 53.7 53.4 24.312 27,503 759 013 53.o 54.0 23L099 26,583 __:u.o ~o 23 966 27 267 415 439 33.1 33.2 21._716 2~26 36.4 36.5 22,793 26,146 4,310 4,620 266.5 275.5 24,929 28.772 283.0 292.0 25.926 29,819 532 559 38.9 39.4 19,823 22,402 42.5 43.0 20 999 23 6=9~6_,,__ _ 937 982 69.0 65.0 23,968 26,910 73.2 69.2 24 955 27 781 5,514 5,866 385.5 378.6 24.695 28,220 412.4 405.6 25.597 28,879 2,317 2,469 143.0 145.0 24,102 2!\n!_,037 154.8 156.8 25 111 29,200 496 524 34.8 33.7 21,691 25,393 38.1 36.7 23,150 26 894 820 857 60.7 60.0 20,372 23,814 65.8 65.2 21,367 24,893 554 :591 42.0 42.3 20,121 23,897 45.0 45.3 21 520 25 407 2,728 2,860 183.5 180.8 23,808 27,357 195.1 192.4 24,802 28 442 165 172 17.5 17.5 19,528 21,383 19.5 19.5 20,894 22,722 1,249 1,303 88.7 88.0 22,429 25,216 95.7 94.0 23,368 26 245 345 362 28.5 26.1 19,954 23,089 30.5 28.1 21 392 24 850 145 152 18.2 17.0 22.727 23,780 20.7 19.5 25,110 26.262 324 341 27.1 26.6 19,060 21,556 30.1 29.6 20,755 23L0~4~8\"-- 182 190 11.3 10.8 18,583 21,402 13.3 12.8 21_,094 2.1_,3:.9,_4_._., _ 2,259 2,381 133.0 137.5 25,061 28,513 143.5 148.0 26,197 29,752 1,227 1,276 79.5 81.0 22,334 25,180 84.5 86.0 23,200 26,226 1,023 1,064 70.2 70.2 22,361 25,736 74.7 ~23 487 26,9~ 2,096 2,183 138.1 138.4 22,363 26,295 150.1 150.3 23,590 27,577 5,479 5,734 341.0 353.3 25,116 28,704 366.5 384.5 26,175 29,8~4=1~-- 121 126 13.1 17,962 14.6 -~-~---~- 19,~5=2=0\"--~-~- 1,505 1 1 586 87.S 99.0 24 1 801 27 1 934 93.5 104.5 25,713 28 1 921 272 283 23.0 23.5 20,696 23,355 25.0 25.5 21,847 24.~ 667 701 44.5 47.0 21,680 25,128 47.5 50.0 22,604 26.~0~5~6 232 242 19.6 28.5 19,134 21,461 21.6 31.5 20,027 22,230 ' LEA t COUNTY 23-07 FAULKNER 24-01 24-02 24-03 2'4-04 24-05 25-01 25-02 25-03 26-01 26-02 26-03 26-04 26-0:5 26-06 26-07 27-03 27-04 27-05 28-01 28-03 28-06 28-07 28-08 29-01 29-03 29-05 29-06 30-01 30-02 30-03 30-04 30-05 31-02 31-04 31-05 31-06 32-01 32-02 32-03 32-06 32-09 32-10 32-11 33-01 33-02 33-03 FRANKLIN FRANKLIN FRANKLIN FRANKLIN FRANKLIN FULTON FULTON FULTON GARLAND GARLAND GARLAND GARLAND GARLAND GARLAND GARLAND GRANT GRANT GRANT GREENE GREENE GREENE GREENE GREENE HEMPSTEAD HEMPSTEAD HEMPSTEAD HEMPSTEAD HOT SPRING HOT SPRING HOT SPRING HOT SPRING HOT SPRING HOWARD HOWARD HOWARD HOWARD INDEPENDENCE INDEPENDENCE INDEPENDENCE INDEPENDENCE INDEPENDENCE INDEPENDENCE INDEPENDENCE IZARD IZARD IZARD ARKANSAPSU BLIC SCHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUAFLI SCAL REPORTA NALYSIS LEA ORDER PAGE NO. 5 DISTRICT RANK VILONIA 95 ALTUS-DENNING 96 CHARLESTON 97 COUNTY LINE 98 OZARK 99 PLEASANT VIEW 100 MAMMOTHS PRING 101 SALEM 102 VIOLA 103 CUTTER-MORNING ST104 FOUNTAIN LAKE 105 HOT SPRINGS 106 JESSIEVILLE 107 LAKE HAMILTON 108 LAKESIDE 109 MOUNTAIN PINE 110 POYEN 111 PRATTSVILLE 112 SHERIDAN 113 DELAPLAINE 114 MARMADUKE 115 STANFORD 116 GREENE COUNTY TECi17 NORTHEAST ARKANSA118 BLEVINS 119 HOPE 120 SARATOGA 121 SPRING HILL 122 BISHARCK 123 GLEN ROSE 124 MAGNET COVE 125 MALVERN 126 OUACHITA 127 DIERKS 128 MINERAL SPRINGS 129 NASHVILLE 130 UMPIRE 131 BATESVILLE 132 CORD-CHARLOTTE 133 CUSHMAN 134 NEWARK 135 SOUTH SIDE 136 SULPHUR ROCK 137 MIDLAND 138 CALICO ROCK 139 MELBOURNE 140 MOUNT PLEASANT 141 EXPENSE PER ADA 90-91 91-92 1 2 2 455 :L_Q29 2.839 2.970 2_,560 2_,969 2_,_fil0~6 2,499 2,874 3_,528 3. 790 2,_888 3,222 2,628 2,937 2L711 3,047 2,801 2,997 3,072 3,309 3,307 3,430 3,454 3,321 2,461 2,863 2,572 2,901 2,678 2,979 3,036 3,753 3,011 3,407 2,523 2,939 3,052 3,501 2,488 2,767 3,357 3,548 2,403 2,834 2,692 2.L888 2.481 2,850 2,651 2,427 2 539 3,014 2,360 2,849 2,492 2,663 2,514 4,781 2,672 2,892 3,235 5.384 2,586 2,925 2.697 2,657 2,513 3,213 3,005 3...J.52 2,811 3 445 3,133 3,006 2 988 3,172 2,728 3,195 2,866 2,955 2,943 5,471 2.932 3,381 3,814 5,823 3,002 3,1-40 3,003 3,291 2,911 3,518 1990-91 A/D/A A/D/M 3 4 1___,_542 304 678 555 1,322 227 428 641 398 483 853 3,116 566 2,901 2,081 583 242 257 3,261 270 629 194 2,123 2,226 449 2,978 340 294 778 824 553 2,578 369 573 476 1,690 123 2,335 249 271 711 1,039 280 582 435 472 265 1__,_614 323 702 588 1,400 240 451 672 415 514 899 3,364 593 3,047 2,188 622 250 268 3,459 285 658 201 2,223 2,369 468 3. 133 354 307 812 864 582 2,690 381 596 496 1,771 127 2,458 259 286 742 1,103 294 618 457 490 274 NUMBER OF TEACHERS K-12 90-91 91-92 5 6 AVG. SLRY. TCHRS. K-12 90-91 91-92 7 8 NO. OF CERT. PERSONNEL 90-91 91-92 9 10 AVG. CERT. 90-91 11 SLRY. PERS. 91-92 12 97.0 101.0 23,538 27,980 104.0 109.0 24,352 28,878 26.6 23.4 19.555 22,617 28.6 25.4 20,752 24,089 47.0 49.0 22,853 25,850 50.0 52.0 23,825 26,923 44.3 40.7 19,945 24,416 47.3 43.7 20,761~9 85.5 87.5 22,725 25,873 91.9 93.8 23,698 26,926 22.0 22.5 18,844 20,650 24.0 24.5 20,113 22,059 33.8 34.S 22,569 25,325 36.3 37.0 23,751 26,288 47.8 48.8 20,407 23,401 50.8 51.8 21,416 24,434 29.5 30.0 21,778 24,765 31.5 32.0 22,917 25,992 36.2 33.7 22,585 26,780 39.2 36.7 23,777 27,874 62.S 62.5 24,393 27 1 180 67.0 67.0 25,672 28,428 239.2 232.8 24,490 27,350 255.2 248.3 25,599 28,802 41.7 41.7 27,093 27,444 44.7 45.7 28,196 27,99~~9 ___ _ 164.5 170.0 25,173 29,156 177.5 183.0 26,269 30,458 126.9 129.0 24,051 27,798 136.9 139.0 24,950 28,866 43.5 43.5 21,482 25,103 46.5 46.5 22,679 26,242 18.0 19.0 22,841 26,009 20.0 21.0 24,385 27,592 17.0 17.0 25,864 28,709 19.0 19.0 27,408~3~0~~3=7~_8_ _ _ 205.8 212.1 23,683 27,554 219.4 225.7 24,622 28,534 21.4 23.2 21,828 24,835 24.1 25.4 22,888 25,892 40.6 40.6 23,344 27,541 43.6 43.6 24,381 28,290 20.1 20.5 19,263 20,816 22.4 22.8 20,131 21,694 131.4 133.3 23,179 27,566 140.1 142.1 24,030 28,558 152.5 151.4 23,495 27,217 162.7 162.6 24,277 28,050 31.5 32.6 23,203 25,593 34.5 35.6 24,180 26,545 178.5 181.5 24,433 28,48!5 190.5 193.5 25,485 29,512 25.6 27.8 17,651 20,728 28.1 30.3 19,005 22,269 22.0 22.0 19,606 24,774 25.0 25.0 20,921 26,217 48.3 52.0 23,170 27,850 51.3 55.0 24,117 28,803 53.6 54.0 23,866 27,882 56.6 58.0 24,795 28,992 43.9 42.0 21,175 23,619 46.9 45.0 22,112 24,778 174.5 174.5 22,021 25,604 183.0 183.0 22,732 26,362 29.4 29.4 19,283 21,985 32.3 32.3 20,678~2=.3.,...,_,,2=1=0~---- 39.2 40.2 21,712 26,08_1 __ 4_2_._2~ 43.2 22,765 26,821 37.2 37.0 20,904 23,595 40.7 40.7 22,250 25,104 109.2 110.2 23,172 26,948 116.5 117.6 24,028 27,762 ___ _ 14.9 15.6 20,349 22,369 17.8 18.5 22,124 24,559 157.0 158.5 25,114 27,967 168.3 169.8 25,851 28,778 19.7 20.6 21,662 24,815 21.7 22.6 23,106~2~6~~2~2~3,-__ _ 22.9 24.8 21,442 24,645 25.4 27.3 22,633 25,939 70.0 70.1 28,616 28,774 75.3--75.4 29,495 29,644 69.7 73.0 22,643 26,433 76.0 80.0 23,544 27,356 24.3 23.4 20,340 23,265 26.3 25.4 21,519 24,554 44~45.2 21,141 24,131 47.4 48.2 22,099 25,254 34.1 36.6 20,404 23,314 37.1 39.6 21,508 24,523~--- 35.0 35.3 20,890 23,838 38.0 38.3 22,093 25,078 24.6 24.5 22,182 24,694 26.6 26.5 21,885 24,298 LEA~ COUNTY 33-06 IZARD 34-02 JACKSON 34-03 JACKSON 34-04 JACKSON 34-05 JACKSON 35-01 JEFFERSON 35-02 JEFFERSON 35-05 JEFFERSON 35-08 JEFFERSON 35-09 JEFFERSON 35-10 JEFFERSON 36-01 JOHNSON 36-04 JOHNSON 36-05 JOHNSON 36-06 JOHNSON 37-01 LAFAYETTE 37-02 LAFAYETTE 37-03 LAFAYETTE 38-01 LAWRENCE 38-04 LAWRENCE 38-05 LAWRENCE 38-06 LAWRENCE 38-07 LAWRENCE 38-08 LAWRENCE 39-04 LEE 40-01 LINCOLN 40-02 LINCOLN 40-03 LINCOLN 41-01 LITTLE RIVER 41-02 LITTLE RIVER 41-03 LITTLE RIVER 42-01 LOGAN 42-02 LOGAN 42-03 LOGAN 42-04 LOGAN 43-01 LONOKE 43-02 LONOKE 43-03 LONOKE 43-04 LONOKE 43-05 LONOKE 44-01 MADISON 44-02 MADISON 44-03 MADISON 45-01 MARION 45-02 MARION 45-03 MARION 46-01 MILLER ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS LEA ORDER PAGE NO. 6_ DISTRICT RANK IZARD CO CONSOL 142 GRUBBS 143 NEWPORT 144 SWIFTON 145 TUCKERMAN 146 ALTHEIMER-SHERRIL147 DOLLARWAY 148 PINE BLUFF 149 WABBASEKA-TUCKER 150 WATSON CHAPEL 151 WHITE HALL 152 CLARKSVILLE 153 LAMAR 154 DARK 155 WEST SIDE 156 BRADLEY 157 LEWISVILLE 158 STAMPS 159 BLACK ROCK 160 HOXIE 161 LYNN 162 SLOAN-HENDRIX 163 STRAWBERRY 164 WALNUT RIDGE 165 MARIANNA 166 GOULD 167 GRADY 168 STAR CITY 169 ASHDOWN 170 FOREMAN 171 WINTHROP 172 BOONEVILLE 173 MAGAZINE 174 PARIS 175 SCRANTON 176 LONOKE 177 ENGLAND 178 CARLISLE 179 CABOT 180 HUMNOKE 181 HUNTSVILLE 182 KINGSTON 183 SAINT PAUL 184 FLIPPIN 185 YELLVILLE-SUMMIT 186 MARION CO 187 BRIGHT STAR 188 EXPENSE PER ADA 90-91 91-92 1 2,~16 3,306 2,532 3,474 2,617 2,847 2,773 2,974 2,931 2,637 2,699 2,363 2,377 4,027 2,615 2,920 2,970 2,611 2,542 2,446 3,281 3,024 3,432 2,473 2,975 2,571 2,687 2,511 2,580 2,988 3,675 2,499 2,835 2,638 2,742 2,390 2,559 2,668 2,235 3,647 2,493 2,950 2,846 2,691 2,736 3,100 2,952 2 3,129 3.673 2,922 3,563 2,951 3,139 3,021 3,233 3,420 3,034 2,865 2,750 2,819 4,242 2,931 3,323 3,184 2,887 2,914 2,899 3,810 3,287 3,885 2,871 3,130 2,980 3,435 2,896 2,901 3,142 3,738 2,901 3,1:52 2,817 2,854 2,814 2,842 2,961 2,759 3,727 2,908 3,353 3,198 3,103 3,017 3,222 3,529 1990-91 A/D/A A/D/M 3 4 :520 188 2,149 181\n518 549 1,892 7,116 265 3,327 2,724 1,490 978 150 622 440 579 847 378 914 228 478 216 852 2,602 323 324 1,450 2,068 569 169 1,256 441 1,192 391 1,661 1,016 669 4,542 169 1,566 286 321 741 791 286 248 :553 200 2,252 191 547 581 1,989 7,518 282 3,479 2,884 1,560 1,028 158 657 469 612 875 395 967 237 500 224 899 2,773 341 335 1,506 2,173 590 176 1,328 467 1,260 403 1,740 1,068 696 4,832 180 1,666 300 337 781 832 303 259 NUMBER OF TEACHERS K-12 90-91 91-92 AYCi, SLRY. TCHRS. K-12 90-91 91-92 NO, OF CERT. PERSONNEL 90-91 91-92 Aye\n. CERT. 90-91 11 SLRY. PERS. 91-92 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 37.6 19.3 134.2 20.1 37.6 39.4 132.0 459.3 21.0 209.6 179.0 97.5 63.7 16.9 44.4 37.5 43.3 58.3 30.5 60.5 20.0 37.9 21.2 62.0 183.5 25.8 21.8 91.9 133.0 43.6 14.6 73.9 33.5 82.0 28.4 104.9 71.5 48.2 264.5 15.8 104.6 21.0 25.3 48.0 55.0 22.7 17.0 41.2 20L88:5 2-'l,402 40.6 44.2 2.!_,812 2~4 19,317.374 20,410 21.3 21.3 18,485 21.324 132.0 25,_114 29__,_489 142. 7 140.5 25-.,935 30~98 19.6 18~578 20--L946 22.1 21.6 20_,J)19 2~23 38.6 19,807 22.708 40,6 41,620.979 23,839 40.4 19,907 22,626 42.4 __ 43.4 20__,_893 2~55 130.0 23,238 2~360 141.5 140.3 24,196 27,241 459.0 26,811 29,916 491,0 491,527,755 30,847 20.0 18J326 22J969 24.0 23.0 19__,_553 2'l,__\nl99 211.6 26,185 29,567 225.6 227.6 27,328 30__,_TI3 177.0 24,662 27,786 191.0 189.0 25,507 28,619 102.0 22,571 25,660 102.:5 107.0 23,479 26 759 65.7 21,607 24,753 67.4 69.5 22,351 25,564 17.9 19,417 21,674 18.9 19.9 20,721 23,160 45.9 22,259 24,808 47.4 48~3,073 25 595 37.5 20,120 22,799 40.5 40.5 21,422 24..,__!32 40.3 22,519 26,079 46.8 43.8 23,713 27,300 58.7 21,915 24,938 61.7 62.2 22L802 25,858 30.0 20,628 23,358 33.5 33.0 21,726 24,607 59.9 22,618 27,508 64.8 64.4 23.505 28.858 20.9 20,890 23,520 22.2 23.4 21,718 24~8 37.9 23,187 25,777 40.9 __ 40.9 24.489 26_,_fil!9 21.0 20,052 21,645 23.2 23,421,372 23,288 61.1 20,867 25L353 66.0 65.1 21,649 2~49 183.5 23,103 25,458 200.0__2QQ.O 24,252 2~867 26.0 18.021 20,888 28.8 29.0 19,044 22,017 22.7 18,717 24,072 24.8 24.7 19L736 25,212 92.3 22,897 26,320 100.6___!Q_2.\u0026lt;l_24 005 27.384 136.3 23.207 25.828 144.5 147.5 24,229 26.814 42.6 21,414 24L109 46.6 __ 45.6 22,450 25,103 14.6 20,966 23,019 16.6 __ 16.6 22,339 24 477 75.6 24,567 29,031 80.4 81.1 25,796 30,124 34.5 21,487 24,342 36.5 37.5 22,379 25,259 82.2 23,725 26,602 87.9 88.1 24,571 27,499 27.4 22,362 25,034 30.7 29.7 23,990 26,709 107.4 22,918 26,479 1u...,_1 114.1 23,782 27,580 71.0 22,834 25,794 76.5 76.0 23,881 26,957 47.7 22,134 25,011 51.1 50.7 23,184 26,163 285.0 24,371 28,136 281.0 302.0 25,307 29,048 17.1 18,729 19,880 17.8 19.1 19,963 21,_Q_24 105.9 22,473 27,092109.6 110.9 23,110 27,761 21.0 21,498 25,643 23.0 23.0 23,025 27,229 26.3 20,710 23,396 27.5 28.5 21,764 24,394 49.0 24,145 28,048 51.0 52.3 25,200 29,180 57.6 21,660 24,347 58.0 61.1 22,574 25,422 __ _ 19.7 21,032 25,791 24.7 21.7 22,218 26.553 18.0 22,656 27,552 19.0--2-0.0 23,707 28,742 ' aBKIUiSaS EIIE!I IC SCl::tlllll llISIBICIS aHMJaL EISCaL BEEOBI a!ffi1.r:m\n1 LEA ORDER PAGE NO. 7 El!:EEHSE 1220-21 HUl:11:!EBO E a:ll!i. SI.BY. NO. OF CERT. AVG. SLRY. - PER ADA TEACHERS K-12 TCHRS. K-12 PERSONNEL CERT. PERS. 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 -- I Ea  COLIHD'. IUSIBICI BaHK 1 2 J 1 :i 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 - -- \"ltcQ2.JULI..ER_ ~l.._ 189 2,872\n1,305 70:5 749 50.0 51.0 22 779 25,926 53.0 :54.0 23,986 27,197 ~6::QJ 1:I1I I EB ElllJKE 120 2,62:Z 2,220 155 121 :a.1 ::i2,1 22,J!:!1 2!f!,i5 54.7 55.7 23,111 26,870 - 4-6-Q5 MILLER_ ____IEXAR.KrullL -1.9-1 2.,.791 3.,121\n! 5__,411 5 7'57 384.3 3B9.5 23,949 27,352 410.6 416.8 24 953 2B,293 47=0.i.-1'1ISSISSIPPI ~ _i_9_2_L850 ~4 218 232 21.4 21.8 22 820 26 179 23.4 23.8 24 056 27,587 11-02 MISSISSIEEI E!LYil::lE:Il l! .LE 1J 2,612 J,Q2Q 1,Q6 1,J2!\n! 271.9 277,6 23,197 27,561 296.0 295.7 24,866 28,693 41=:Q6 111..Sl:!ISSIPPI _SQ MISSISSIPPI 194 2.,_875\nI,_400 1_, 81:5 1\u0026amp;_5 135.8 139.4 21,763 25,354 144.2 147.8 22,764 26,449 - 41-Q8 1:1ISSISSIPPJ ~SNELL 195 ~170 ~617 2,1074 ~ 195 149.6 14B._5 2~95 2~16 159.1 158.0 26,389 30,109 ~:Z-12 l:1ISSISSIEEI MANILA 16 2,6::i2 2,1J 8::iJ 9Q\n'\ni 57.4 56.8 61,794 24,954 62.2 61.6 22,779 25,790 47-13 ...ttl.S_SISSIPPI 0 EOLA 197 2_,_636 ~993 ---..L094 2,213 141.8 142.0 2~~31 28,054 150.2 152.4 24,940 28,895 - 48-01 MONROE BRINKLEY 198 ~99 ~800 1,264 1L338 89.1 87.1 20,413 23,896 95.1 93.1 21,121 24,460 1EI-Q2 MllMBllE CLABEHllllH 1 2.~Q4 ~.Qi3 606 Q37 42.0 42.0 19,908 24,849 45.4 45.4 21,299 26,412 48-03 MONROE HOLLY GROVE 200 2,929 2,863 384 401 29.5 28.8 19,545 22,318 31.5 30.8 20,682 23,452 49-01 MONTGOMERY CADDO HILLS 201 2,661 2,901 522 549 38.0 38.3 21,664 24,400 41.0 41.3 22,848 25,855 12-02 !1!JHI!im!EBY 1:!Q!.!NTI DA 202 2,707 3,098 504 524 37.5 36.8 21,840 25,827 40.5 39.8 23,040 27,137 - 49-04 MONTGOMERY ODEN 203 3,461 3,703 215 227 19.5 19.5 22,264 24,224 21.5 21.5 23,121 25,446 - 50-04 NEVADA EHHET 204 _\n!__,982 3,323 143 151 13.0 12.0 19,106 23,854 15.0 14.0 20,489 25,302 ::iQ-Q6 HE:lllllla E:BESCQII 205 6,567 2,862 1,162 1,210 84.3 83.3 21,144 24,028 91.3 90.2 22,078 25,149 - 50-08 NEVADA - NEVADA COUNTY 206 _b638 ~031 692 731 48.1 49.0 21,590 24,755 51.1 52.0 22,489 25,675 51-01 NEWTON DEER 207 2,843 3,218 335 357 25.8 25.0 20,967 24,243 27.8 27.0 22,098 25,454 ::i1-Q2 HEWIQH JllPER 208 2,778 3,203 555 581 37.6 37.6 23,619 27,283 40.6 40.6 24,533 28,209 51-03 NEWTON MOUNT JUDEA 209 3,277 3,706 236 252 19.6 19.1 20,764 25,272 21.6 21.1 21,943 26,052 51-04 NEWTON WESTERN GROVE 210 2,743 3,273 267 283 21.1 21.4 20,175 23,780 23.2 23.5 21,487 24,766 ::i2-Q1 OUllCl:U Ill E!EARllEN 211 2,474 2,884 855 887 55.5 55.S 22,887 28,382 60.5 60.5 24,258 29,298 52-04 OUACHITA FAIRVIEW 212 ~648 3,045 3,910 4,086 261.3 253.8 24,070 28,414 280.2 273.8 25,136 29,537 52-05 OUACHUA HARMONY GROVE 213 ~563~038 760 788 48.5 49.5 22,977 26,960 51.5 52.5 23,926 27,902 -- ::i2-Q6 lll.ll:ICl:Uill SIEE:l:lEtlS 214\n,?, 7:\ni1 3,Q08 502 519 35.0 35.0 22,436 25,768 38.0 38.0 23,562 26,678 53-01 PERRY EAST END 215 ~781 3 242 490 523 36.5 37.0 20,819 25,861 39.3 39.9 21,980 26,889 53-02 PERRY PERRY CASA 216 4 405 4,182 167 184 19.2 15.7 23,028 24,809 21.2 17.7 24,200 26,192 :iJ-QJ EEBBY E:EBBY:llI!..1.E 217 2,489 3,041 807 848 50.9 53.5 22,719 26,790 53.9 56.5 23,797 27,602 54-01 PHILLIPS BARTON/LEXA 218 2,453 2,905 710 741 45.0 47.0 22,438 26,247 48.0 50.0 23,600 27,440 54-02 PHILLIPS ELAINE 219 2,774 3,144 698 744 53.0 54.0 20,938 23,921 56.6 56.6 21,778 25,043 -- ::i1-QJ E:l:lILLIE:S HEI.EHA-l!!EST HE!..EN220 2,721 2,904 4,075 4,318 289.0 286.0 22,302 24,928 306.0 303.0 23,156 25,860 54-04 PHILLIPS HARVELL 221 2,723 2,966 823 870 57.5 57.0 22,276 25,284 63.4 61.2 23,274 25,953 54-05 PHILLIPS LAKE VIEW 222 3,240 2,778 213 214 19.3 18.1 16,691 19,376 22.3 21.1 18,092 20,945 ::i::i-Qi E:IKE DELIGHT 223 3,090 3,301 375 393 34.0 32.6 19,588 22,701 37.0 35.6 20,784 24,16_1 __ S:5-02 PIKE GLENWOOD 224 2,:528 2,753 399 419 30.5 30.5 18,369 21,333 33.5 33.5 19,708 22,522 55-03 PIKE KIRBY 225 2,710 3,179 424 447 35.2 36.5 19,945 22,027 39.1 40.4 20,873 23,007 - 55-04 PIKE MURFREESBORO 226 2,727 3,144 555 583 44.2 43.3 22,202 25,552 47.2 46.3 23,310 26,761 56-02 POINSETT HARRISBURG 227 2,563 2,811 916 976 65.0 63.8 21,791 24,279 69.0 67.8 22,612 25,086 56-04 POINSETT HARKED TREE 228 2,668 2,942 847 894 64.5 64.0 20,983 24,052 68.0 67.5 21,675 24,759 ::i6-05 POINSETT TRUMANN 229 2,655 2,939 1,568 1,673 115.1 111.9 21,395 25,291 124.8 120.6 22,393 26,245 56-07 POINSETT WEINER 230 2,963 3,482 378 395 30.5 32.6 20,459 23,390 32.5 34.6 21,265 24,150 56-08 POINSETT EAST POINSETT COU231 2,553 2,859 776 817 58.o 56.5 20,599 24,198 62.0 60.5 21,467 25,059 57-01 POLK ACORN 232 3,134 3,304 327 352 26.2 26.0 23,766 25,685 28.2 28.0 25,225 27,131 57-02 POLK - HATFIELD 233 3,083 3,266 282 299 24.0 23.6 20,080 24,073 26.8 26.4 21,186 25,151 57-03 POLI\u0026lt; MENA 234 2,494 2,927 1,697 1,786 111.5 113.5 24,930 28,810 117.9 120.0 25,675 29,642 57-04 POLK VAN COVE 235 2,969 3,248 355 375 30.3 31.3 20,563 22,727 33.3 34.3 21,814 23,885 - - - - - - --- - -- - - - -- - -- - --- - - ------- - - - - - - ' ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS LEA ORDER PAGE NO. 8 EXPENSE 1990-91 NUMBER OF AVG. SLRY, NO. Of CERT. AVG. SLRY. PER ADA TEACHERS K-12 TCHRS. K-12 PERSONNEL __ CERT. PERS. 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92_'1'._0-91 91-92 LEA ,t COUNTY DISTRICT RANK 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 57-05 POLK WICKES 236 2,621 3,016 451 475 30.0 30.6 22,692 2~60 32.5 33.1 24_, 108 26,~18 58-01 POPE ATKINS 237 2,561 2,867 1.035 1.097 70.0 70,0 23.930 27,570 75.0 75.0 24,663 28,238 58-02 POPE DOVER 238 2,465 2,857 1,113 1,177 70.0 73.0 23,319 2~826 75.0 78.0 ~022 27~4 58-03 POPE HECTOR 239 2,650 3,051 633 667 46.0 47.0 22,406 25,015 49.0 so.~__,_133 25L924 58-04 POPE POTTSVILLE 240 2,557 2,812 671 707 45.0 48.0 25,001 26,620 48.0 51.0 25,738 27,432 58-05 POPE RUSSELLVILLE 241 2,803 3,330 4,630 4,879 303.6 310.9 25,798 30,231 323.3 331.7 26,963 31,387 59-01 PRAIRIE DES ARC 242 2,329 2,791 642 676 40.7 41.9 21,648 25,241 43.8 45.0 22,547 26,125 59-02 PRAIRIE DEVALLS BLUFF 243 2,693 3,003 458 477 35 .. 5 32.9 19,993 24,202 38.3 35.7 21,060 25,345 59-03 PRAIRIE HAZEN 244 2,459 2,630 538 560 38.6 36.5 19,206 22,792 41.6 39.5 20,339 23,917 60-01 PULASKI LITTLE ROCK 245 4,296 4,765 22,397 24,090 1,822.0 1,839.3 28,205 31,371 1,970.0 1,986.3 29,510 32,960 60-02 PULASKI NORTH LITTLE ROCK246 3,407 3,691 8,976 9,653 609.6 609.5 25,249 28,656 666.1 666.0 26,522 29,976 60-03 PULASKI PULASKI COUNTY SP247 3,319 3,447 20,767 22,149 1,346.7 1,340.7 27,563 27,732 1,44S .. 3 1,454.3 28,667 28,830 61-01 RANDOLPH BIGGERS-REYNO 248 3,205 3,428 197 206 18.6 19.0 19,721 22,032 20.6 21.0 20,653 22,895 61-02 RANDOLPH MAYNARD 249 2,761 3,074 489 517 36.4 37.6 21,024 23,937 41.0 41.7 22,073 25,151 61-03 RANDOLPH POCAHONTAS 250 2,380 2,864 1,707 1,807 109.6 115.6 23,513 27,085 115.6 121.6 24,301 27,662 61-04 RANDOLPH RANDOLPH COUNTY 251 2,975 3,320 290 306 23.4 23.4 19,252 22,588 26.4 26.4 20,303 24,072 62-01 ST FRANCIS FORREST CITY 252 2,649 2,870 4,896 5,177 296.6 299.2 23,470 26,789 330.1 332.7 24,587 27,705 62-02 ST FRANCIS HUGHES 253 2,727 3,119 1,058 1,099 75.5 76.5 22,664 25,381 83.4 84.3 23,741 26,598 62-05 ST FRANCIS PALESTINE/WHEATLE254 2,768 2,916 656 681 48.0 44.0 21,968 24,550 52.0 48.0 22,901 25,470 63-01 SALINE BAUXITE 255 3,039 3,401 621 656 39.5 40.0 25,259 28,632 42.5 43.0 26,561 29,877 63-02 SALINE BENTON 256 2,488 2,907 3,834 4,020 239.8 243.0 23,854 27,888 254.8 258.0 24,780 28,915 63-03 SALINE BRYANT 257 2,276 2,722 4,903 5,216 286.6 292.6 25,815 30,085 301.5 309.5 26,520 30,875 63-04 SALINE HARMONY GROVE 258 2,564 3,033 591 618 38.5 41.5 23,031 25,728 41.5 44.5 24,335 27,102 63-06 SALINE PARON 259 3,994 4,366 215 229 19.4 19.'5 22,320 26,619 21.4 21.5 23,368 27,371 64-01 SCOTT WALDRON 260 2,814 3,235 1,424 1,511 109.1 108.5 21,944 24,952 115.3 115.3 22,658 25,840 65-01 SEARCY LESLIE 261 2,742 3,069 286 302 19.9 19.6 19,000 22,950 22.9 22.5 21.156 24,774 65-02 SEARCY MARSHALL 262 2,646 2,965 697 736 50.5 51.5 21,313 24,246 53.5 54.5 22,120 24_, 725 65-03 SEARCY SAINT JOE 263 3,678 4,116 202 214 19.5 19.5 19,352 23,262 21.5 21.5 20,761 24~9 65-04 SEARCY WITTS SPRINGS 264 5,293 5,726 94 99 14.8 14.8 18,050 20,234 16.8 16.8 19,145 21.278 66-01 SEBASTIAN FORT SMITH 265 3,123 3,639 10,921 11,633 757.1 785.2 27,849 31,070 805.4 834.9 28,883 32J 136 66-02 SEBASTIAN GREENWOOD 266 2,516 2,909 2,290 2,398 142.1 148.6 25,396 28J836 150.1 156.6 26,332 29,770 66-03 SEBASTIAN HACKETT 267 2,504 2,930 525 547 39.0 38.0 21.604 25,605 42.0 41.0 22,544 26,692 66-04 SEBASTIAN HARTFORD 268 2,910 3,344 440 470 36.5 36.5 21,097 23,934 39.7 39.7 22,035 24,920 66-05 SEBASTIAN LAVACA 269 2,497 2,801 721 761 50.5 51.6 20,793 23,3-40 53.5 54 .. 6 21,850 24,201 66-06 SEBASTIAN MANSFIELD 270 2,734 3,061 832 873 58.8 58.8 23.408 25.834 62.8 63.5 24,420 27.038 67-01 SEVIER DEQUEEN 271 2,407 2,788 1,449 1,519 88.8 90.4 23,566 26,561 94.3 96.4 24,568 27,738 67-03 SEVIER HORATIO 272 2,207 2,852 520 544 31.8 35.6 21,758 27,490 34.7 38.6 23,187 28,360 67-04 SEVIER LOCKESBURG 273 2,552 2,806 447 472 32.6 33.4 20,950 23,775 35.6 36.4 22,255 24,967 68-02 SHARP CAVE CITY 274 2,528 2,976 950 998 60.0 64.3 23,340 26,548 64.0 68.3 24,204 27,317 68-03 SHARP EVENING SHADE 275 2,941 3,386 262 273 24.0 24.7 18,271 21,090 26.0 26.7 19,470 22,054 68-04 SHARP HIGHLAND 276 2,418 2,674 1,229 1,290 75.5 79.0 22,162 24,775 80.5 84.0 23,154 25,869 68-05 SHARP WILLIFORD 277 3,197 3,247 258 271 22.0 22.5 19,234 21,649 2-4.5 25.0 20,713 22,744 68-06 SHARP POUGHKEEPSIE 278 3,842 3,'598 115 120 15.1 14.0 18,377 19,044 17.1 16.0 19,478 19,503 69-01 STONE MOUNTAIN VIEW 279 2,352 2,635 1,036 1,084 65.0 65.0 23,596 27,042 ~ 69.0 24,492 27,986 69-02 STONE STONE COUNTY 280 3,162 3,898 223 234 18.5 18.8 20,093 26,395 2~ 20.8 21,104 26,885 69-04 STONE RURAL SPECIAL 281 3,234 3,397 227 236 18.5 17.5 22,961 26,270 20.5 19.5 23,989 26,960 70-01 UNION EL DORADO 282 2,718 3,050 4,824 5,110 339.4 339.3 23,278 26,673 360.2 359.1 24,106 27,512 ' ARKANSAS PllBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS LEA ORDER PAGE NO. 9 EXPENSE 1990 91 NUMBER Of AYv, SLRY. NO. OF CERT. AVG. SLRY. _?ER ADA TEACHERS K-12 TCHRS. K-12 PERSONNEL CERT. PERS. 90-91 91-92 A~ A/D/H 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 I EA t COUNTY DISTRICT RANK 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 0-02. UlilQN._ ttUIIICii 283 3...__1_4~39 279 293 21.0 22.0 22,776 25,112 23.0 24.0 23,922 26,451 10-03 llNION ,HJNCTION CITY 284 2.600 2,810 869 910\n58.1 58.1 24,091 27.353 60.3 60.3 25. 116 28,311 - ~ UNION J'1QUN.T.l :IQLLY_ 285 4. 294 -5..,_Qfli 212 224 21.5 24.3 22,745 23.644 23.S 27.0 24 093 25,146 -7.Q-Q6__L/N_I_ JfCIBfltL.EI 286 2 , 60 7 ~ 563 583 41.0 41.0 23,212 26,417 44.0 44.0 24 261 27 219 70-07 llNION PARKERS CHAPEL 287 2,549 3.004 618 643 44.6 45.6 21.989 26,020 47.6 48.6 22,884 26,925 70-08 UNION SMACKOVER_ 288 2,668~0 800 837 so.a 52.4 23 765 27,066 54.8 56.4 24,945 28,160 70-09 UNION STRONG 289 2 938 3_,_155 544 564 43.0 41.0 21 651 25 244 46.3 44.0 22,515 26,101 70-11 UNION UNION 290 3,087 3,399 311 326 25,1 25.0 21,886 24,188 28.0 28.0 23,293 25,651 71-01 VAN BUREN ALREAD 291 4.,___'l_,!OS _,_270 93 99 13.1 13.1 19,780 21.502 15.2 15.3 21.262 23,133 71-02 VAN BUREN CLINTON 292 2,463 2,829 1,073 1,126 70.3 74.0 2~278 25,652 75.0 79.0 23,318 26,568 71-03 YAN BUREN SCOTLAND 293 3,655 4,078 130 135 14.0 14.S 19,973 21,899 16.0 16.S 21,154 23,335 71-04 VAN BUREN SHIRLEY 294 2,721 3_,__055 491 512 34.9 35.0 20,944 24,957 37.9 38.0 22,159 25,968 71-05 VAN BUREN SOUTH SIDE 295 2,877 3,124 412 431 33.0 33.0 21,490 23,696 35.5 36.0 22,060 24,517 12-01 WASHIN(\nTON ELKINS 296 2,691 3,336 683 722 45.4 46.4 22,933 28,969 48.4 49.4 23,955 29,881 72-02 WASHINGTON FARMINGTON 297 2,447 3,001 1.038 1,096 67.8 70.6 21,545 26,400 72.6 75.3 22,619 27,459 72-03 WASHINGTON FAYETTEVILLE 298 2,812 3,117 6,029 6,328 394.1 404.9 27,172 30,441 416.6 426.9 27,882 31,160 72-04 WASHINGTON GREENLAND 299 2,404 3. 172 651 689 43.0 44.3 21. 167 27,310 46.0 47.3 22,285 28,225 72-05 WASHIN(\nTON LINCOLN 300 2,696 2,958 929 987 65.4 65.2 21.499 24,299 69.4 70.2 22,440 25,281 72-06 WASHINGTON PRAIRIE GROVE 301 2,545 2,923 1,013 1,070 63.8 68.4 23,326 26,225 68.8 73.4 24,414 27,141 12-01 WASHINGTON SPRINGDALE 302 2.735 3,145 6,977 7,450 442.0 449.5 26,365 30,062 477.0 485.5 27,504 31,244 72-08 WASHIN(\nTON WEST FORK 303 2,596 2,957 894 932 61.4 59.4 20,860 24,222 66.4 64.4 22,017 25,501 72-09 WASHINGTON WINSLOW 304 3,124 3,551 223 236 20.0 20.4 18,706 21,297 22.0 22.4 19,855 22,564 7.3-01 WHITE BALD KNOB 305 2,701 3,031 1,322 1,397 86.4 84.8 22,921 26,642 91.9 90.9 23,756 27,616 73-02 WHITE BEEBE 306 2,335 2,763 1,575 1,670 103.4 106.7 21,807 26,192 109.6 113.9 22,683 26,867 73-03 WHITE BRADFORD 307 2,627 2,989 547 575 39.7 40.0 21,833 25,472 42.7 43.0 22,926 26,627 7.3-04 WHITE CENTRAL 308 2,468 2,818 503 529 37.3 37.3 20,620 24,579 39.8 39.8 21,704 25,576 73-05 WHITE GRIFFITHVILLE 309 ~024 161 168 17.6 19,502 19.9 21,079 73-06 WHITE JUDSONIA 310 2,626 554 592 38.0 22,494 41.0 23,729 13-01 WHITE KENSETT 311 2,861 3,242 474 504 34.0 89.2 23,050 25,802 37.0 97.2 24,554 27,032 73-08 WHITE MCRAE 312 2,640 3,003 306 323 25.1 25.4 19,335 22,501 27.S 27.S 20,353 23,453 73-09 WHITE PANGBURN 313 2,776 3,195 568 597 42.0 42.7 21,758 24,359 45.5 46.2 22,839 25,689 13-10 WHITE ROSE BUD 314 2,733 3,143 517 547 37.8 39.3 21,773 24,722 40.8 42.3 22,973 25,683 73-11 WHITE. SEARCY 315 2,587 2,937 2,867 3,032 181.2 191.2 24,293 27,138 194.8 205.0 25,359 28,269 74-01 WOODRUFF AUGUSTA 316 2J649 3,108 639 673 46.2 46.2 20,958 23,980 49.2 49.2 22,297 25,414 14-02 WQOPB!.!EE !\nOTTON PLANT 317 2,856 3,055 325 340 28.4 27.4 18,7S5 22,078 30.9 29.9 19,680 23,099 74-03 WOODRUFF MCCRORY 318 2 361 2,656 823 860 53.0 51.7 22,743 2S,741 56.S 55.2 23,534 26,712 75-03 YELL DANVILLE 319 2 581 2,853 526 555 38.6 38.6 21,581 25,063 41.6 41.6 22,664 26,117 15-04 YELL DARDANELLE 320 2,606 2,836 1,335 1,409 91.9 90.5 21,614 24,497 97.2 96.3 22,307 25,274 75-05 YELL FOURCHE VALLEY 3~346 5,125 128 136 16.4 18.2 19. 128 22,348 18.4 20.2 20,494 23,349 75-07 YELL OLA 322 2 483 2,884 470 504 36.3 37.3 19,697 21,984 39.3 40.3 20,802 23,3S5 15-08 YELL PLAINVIEW-ROYER 323 2,928 3,041 320 337 26.8 24.9 18,969 21,888 29.8 26.9 20,212 23. 100 75-09 YELL WESTERN YELL COUN324 3J360 3,390 362 385 35.0 32.7 20. 116 22,233 38.0 35.7 21,124 23,393 --------------------------- - - --- -- ----- ---- ---------- ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS COLUMN 1 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE NO. 10 EXPENSE 1990-91 NUMBER OF AVG. SLRY. NO. OF CERT. AVG. SLRY. PER ADA TEACHERS K-12 TCHRS . K-1'\u0026gt;- PERSONNEL CERT . PERS . 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 LEA,:, COUNTY DISTRICT RANK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 21-01 DESHA ARKANSAS CITY 1 6 165 6,609 145 152 18.2 17.0 22 727 23 780 20.7 19.5 25 110 26 262 32-06 INDEPENDENCE NEWARK 2 5 384 5 823 711 742 70.0 70.1 28 616 28 774 75 3 75.4 29 495 29 644 65-04 SEARCY WITTS SPRINGS 3 5 293 5 726 94 99 14.8 14.8 18 050 20 234 16.8 16.8 19 145 21 278 71-01 VAN BUREN ALREAD 4 4,920 5,270 93 99 13.1 13.1 19 780 21 502 15.2 15.3 21 262 23 133 03-06 BAXTER TRI-COUNTY CON. 5 4 809 4 762 151 159 18.3 13.8 20 313 23 402 20.3 16.3 21 378 25 052 31-06 HOWARD UMPIRE 6 4,781 5,471 123 127 14.9 15.6 20 349 22,369 17.8 18.5 22 124 24 559 53-02 PERRY PERRY CASA 7 4,405 4,182 167 184 19.2 15.7 23,028 24,809 21.2 17.7 24,200 26 192 75-05 YELL FOURCHE VALLEY 8 4 346 5 125 128 136 16.4 18.2 19,128 22 348 18.4 20.2 20 494 23 349 60-01 PULASKI LITTLE ROCK 9 4,296 4,765 22,397 24,090 1,822.0 1,839.3 28,205 31,371 1,970.0 1,986.3 29,510 32,960 70-05 UNION MOUNT HOLLY 10 4,294 5,081 212 224 21.5 24.3 22,745 23,644 23.5 27 .. 0 24,093 25,146 36-05 JOHNSON OARK 11 4 027 4 242 150 158 16.9 17.9 19 417 21 674 18.9 19.9 20 721 23 160 73-05 WHITE GRIFFITHVILLE 12 4,024 161 168 17.6 19,502 19.9 21,079 63-06 SALINE PARON 13 3,994 4,366 215 229 19.4 19.5 22,320 26,619 21.4 21 .. 5 23,368 27,371 47-01 MISSISSIPPI ARMOREL 14 3,850 4,344 218 232 21.4 21.8 22 820 26,179 23.4 23.8 24,056 27,587 68-06 SHARP POUGHKEEPSIE 15 3,842 3,598 115 120 15.1 14.0 18,377 19,044 17.1 16.0 19,478 19,503 65-03 SEARCY SAINT JOE 16 3,678 4,116 202 214 19.5 19.5 19,352 23,262 21.5 21.5 20,761 24,499 41-03 LITTLE RIVER WINTHROP 17 3,675 3,738 169 176 14.6 14.6 20 966 23 019 16.6 16.6 22 339 24 477 71-03 VAN BUREN SCOTLAND 18 3,655 4,078 130 135 14.0 14.5 19,973 21,899 16.0 16.5 21,154 23,335 43-05 LONOKE HUMNOKE 19 3,647 3,727 169 180 15.8 17 .1 18,729 19,880 17.8 19.1 19,963 21,024 ~-01 COLUMBIA EMERSON 20 3 554 3 788 341 354 30.6 27.1 23 895 26 812 33.6 30.1 25 319 28 474 23-02 FAULKNER ENOLA 21 3,529 121 126 13.1 17,962 14.6 19,520 ~-05 FRANKLIN PLEASANT VIEW 22 3,528 3,790 227 240 22.0 22 .. 5 18,844 20,650 24.0 24.5 20,113 22,059 20-01 DALLAS CARTHAGE 23 3,483 3,725 165 172 17.5 17.5 19 528 21 383 19.5 19.5 20 894 22 722 34-04 JACKSON SWIFTON 24 3,474 3,563 181 191 20.1 19.6 18,578 20,946 22.1 21.6 20,019 22,423 49-04 MONTGOMERY ODEN 25 3,461 3,703 215 227 19.5 19.5 22,264 24,224 21 .. 5 21.5 23,121 25,446 26-04 GARLAND JESSI EV ILLE 26 3,454 3,321 566 593 41.7 41.7 27,093 27,444 44.7 45.7 28,196 27 999 38-07 LAWRENCE STRAWBERRY 27 3,432 3,885 216 224 21.2 21.0 20,052 21,645 23.2 23.4 21,372 23,288 60-02 PULASKI NORTH LITTLE ROCK 28 3,407 3,691 8,976 9,653 609.6 609.5 25,249 28,656 666.1 666.0 26,522 29,976 75-09 YELL WESTERN YELL COLIN 29 3 360 3 390 362 385 35.0 32.7 20 116 22 233 38.0 35.7 21 124 23 393 28-06 GREENE STANFORD 30 3,357 J,548 194 201 20.1 20.5 19,263 20,816 22.4 22.8 20,131 21,694 60-03 PULASKI PULASKI COUNTY SP 31 3,319 3,447 20,767 22,149 1,346.7 1,340.7 27,563 27,732 1,445.3 1,454.3 28,667 28,830 26-03 GARLAND HOT SPRINGS 32 3,307 3,430 3,116 3 364 239.2 232.8 24 490 27 350 255.2 248.3 25 599 28 802 34-02 JACKSON GRUBBS 33 3,306 3,673 188 200 19.3 19.3 17,374 20,410 21.3 21.3 18,485 21,324 38-05 LAWRENCE LYNN 34 3,281 3,810 228 237 20.0 20.9 20,890 23,520 22 .. 2 23.4 21,718 24 418 51-03 NEWTON MOUNT JUDEA 35 3,277 3 706 236 252 19.6 19.1 20 764 25 272 21.6 21.1 21 943 26 052 54-05 PHILLIPS LAKE VIEW 36 3,240 2,778 213 214 19.3 18.1 16,691 19,376 22.3 21.1 18,092 20 945 32-03 INDEPENDENCE CUSHMAN 37 3,235 3,814 271 286 22.9 24.8 21,442 24,645 25.4 27.3 22,633 25,939 69-04 STONE RURAL SF'ECIAL 38 3,234 3,397 227 236 18.5 17.5 22 961 26 270 20.5 19.5 23 989 26 960 33-03 IZARD MOUNT F'LEASANT 39 3,213 3,518 265 274 24.6 24.5 22,182 24,694 26.6 26 .. 5 21,885 24,298 61-01 RANDOLPH BIGGERS-REYNO 40 3,205 3,428 197 206 18.6 19.0 19,721 22,032 20.6 21.0 20,653 22,895 05-06 BOONE LEAD HILL 41 3,202 3,529 329 347 27.5 27.8 19 972 23 130 30.3 30.6 21 469 24 467 23-04 FAULKNER GUY-PERKINS 42 3,198 3,459 272 283 23.0 23 .. 5 20,696 23,355 25.0 25 .. 5 21,847 24,396 68-05 SHARP WILLIFORD 43 3,197 3,247 258 271 22.0 22 ..5 19,234 21,649 24 ...5 25.0 20,713 22,744 01-02 ARKANSAS GILLETT 44 3,174 3,705 278 288 23.6 24.6 20 081 21 921 26 .. 5 27.5 21 637 23 436 47-08 MISSISSIPPI GOSNELL 45 3,170 3,617 2,074 2,195 149.6 148.5 25,495 29,216 159.1 158.0 26,389 30,109 02-04 ASHLEY PARKDALE 46 3,169 3,231 145 152 1.4.7 12.8 17,735 20,021 16.7 14.8 17,592 19,567 05-04 BOONE OMAHA 47 3,168 3,633 282 298 23.5 24 .. 5 21,440 23 723 26.1 27 .. 1 22,720 25,302 38-06 LAWRENCE 30-03 HOT SPRING 41.::22 LITTLE RIVER 50-04 NEVADA 37-02 02-02 ASHLEY 56-07 POINSETT 68-03 SHARP 70-09 UNION N 48-03 HONROE 75-08 YELL 03-02 32-02 20-03 LAFAYETTE COLUHBIA BA TIAN BAXTER INDEPENDENCE DALLAS ARKANSAS PIIRI IC SCHOOi DISTRICTS ANNIIAL FISCAL REPQRT ANALYSTS COLUMN 1 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE NO. 11 AVG. SLRY. FOUNTAIN HILL WEINER L BRIGHT STAR KINGSTON AL R EVENING SHADE STRONG_ _ WA ASEKA-TUCKER HOLLY GROVE PLAINVIEW-ROVER SU PH ROCK BRADLEY TAYLOR HARTFORD COTTER CORD-CHARLOTTE SPARKHAN 2,906 2,892 2 888 1990-91 NUMBERO F AVG. SLRY. NO. OF CERT, TEACHERS K-12 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 TCHRS. K-12 90-91 91-92 PERSONNEL 90-91 91-92 CERT. PERS. 90-91 91-92 3,323 3,141 3 344 3,148 3,381 3 031 9 10 11 12 20.s 20.0 21,104 26,885 ___ _ 23.0 24.0 23 922 26 451 28.2 28.0 25,225 2--2L_131 ___ _ 13.3 12.8 21 094 24 394 22.0 22.4 19 855 22 564 32.6 19,588 22,701 37.0 35.6 20,784 24,161 ---- 88.0 22,429 25,216 95.7 94.0 23,368 26,245 ___ _ ~ .1 25.0 21 886 24 188 28.0 28.0 23 293 25 651 ----\"\"'-''---L-- 24.0 23.6 20,080 ~.073 26.8 __ 26.4 21,186 25,151 62.S 62.S 24,393 27,180 67.0 67.0 25,672 28,428~--- 285 21.4 23.2 21 828 24 835 24.1 25.4 22,888 25,892 --=1~7~7,__14.2 15.4 18,682 22,473 16.2 17.4 21,181 25,723 ---- 656 39.5 40.0 25,259 28,632 42.S 43.0 26,561 29,877 250 18.0 19.0 22 841 26 009 20.0 21.0 24,385 27,592 500 37.9 __ ~3~7-=-2.93 ,187 25,777 40.9 40.9 24,489 26,889 ---- 582 43.9 42.0 21,175 23,619 46.-9--45.0 22,112:24,778 ___ _ 268 17.0 17.0 25 864 28 709 19~19.0 27 408 30,378 569 590 43.6 42.6 21,414 2_1,_J.Q9 46.6 45.6 22,450 25,103 ___ _ 143 151 13.0 12.0 19,106 23,854 15.-0--14.0 20,489 25,302 ~ 602 2 773 183.5 183.5 23 103 25 458 200.0 200.0 24,252 26,867 290 306 23.4 23.4 19,252 22,588 26.4 26.4 20,303 24,072 324 34_1_ _ 27.1 26.6 19,060 21,556 30.1 29.6 20,755 23,048 7 116 7 518 459.3 459.0 26 811 29,916 491.0 491.5 27,755 30,847 474 _4~9~9,___ 44.0 43.3 19,333 21,625 47.0 46.3 20,269 22,6_5_4 ___ _ 579 --=6~1~2..__43.3 40.3 22,519 26,079 46.8 43.8 23,713 27,300 ___ _ 355 375 30.3 31.3 20 563 22 727 33.3--34.3 21,814 23,885 244 --=2~6~5..__21.3 _ _,2=1...,3 ,20, 106 25,000 23.3 23.3 21,703 26,863 378 _3=9~5~_ 30.5 32.6 20,459 23,390 32.5 34.6 21,265 24,150 496 524 34.8 33.7 21 691 25 393 38.1 36.7 23,150 26,894 248 259 17.0 18.0 22,656 27,552_~1=9_._0 __ ~2_0_._0~2=3~,7_0_7_2_8_~_,7_ 4_2 _ 206 _ _,3=0=0..__---'2=1..,__,__.o=-------=2=-1-=-2-=5,-6o4--3- -=21,4982 3.0 23.0 23,02s 27,229 235 242 21.5 20.7 18 985_2\"'-\".11~L7~9_~_0 =2~4~~0:.__~2~3~~2:....!2~0~,~4~9~6~2~3~,~0~7~8~--- 262 273 24.0 24.7 18,271 21,090 26.0 26.7 19,470 22,054 544 564 43.0 41.0 21,651 25,244 46.3 44.0 22,515 26,101 265 282 21.0 20.0 18 326 22,969 24.0 23.0 19,553 24,399 384 401 29.5 28.8 19,545 22,318 31.5 30.8 20,682 23,452 320 337 26.8 24.9 18,969 21,888 29.8 26.9 20,212 23,100 280 2~ 24.3 23.4 20 340 23,265 26.3 25.4 21,519 24,554 440 469 _ _,3\"--'7\"--'.'--'5'-----=3'---'71--=\"2-=-0=:5c'---7c2-20'c2,- =9,\"_'-,9 =-_--,,\n4_.,: :,0-=-=-4.,:.\n,\n5:5\no ,2..1c,.4 22 24, 132 328 341 26.0 26.0 21,169 23,497 29.0 29.0 22,615 25,088 440 470 36.5 36.5 21,097 23,934 39.7 39.7 22,035 24,920 502 530 38.6 38.8 21,655 23,710 41.6 41.8 22,844 25,101 249 259 19.7 _ ____.c2~0~21.6,6 62 24,815 345 362 28.S 26.1 19,954 23,089 21.7 22.6 23,106 26,223 -=3=0-.=5~-=2=0-.1 21,392 24,050 ---------- -------- 4 1 i 6 7 i 58-05 26-01 46-05 53-01 Si- 73-09 54-02 35-02 01-05 62-05 61-02 52-06 51-04 42-04 65-01 19-03 45-02 72-07 66-06 73-10 02-03 55-04 62-02 CRITTENDEN POPE GARLAND HILLER PERRY NEWTON WHITE PHILLIPS JEFFERSON ARKANSAS ST FRANCIS RANDOLPH OUACHITA NEWTON LOGAN SEARCY CROSS MARION WASHINGTON SEBASTIAN WHITE ASHLEY PIKE ST FRANCIS ARKANSAPSU BLIC SCHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUAFLI SCAL REPORTA NALYSIS COLUMN 1 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER TEXARK EAST END JA E PANGBURN ELAINE DOLLARWAY HUMPHREY PALESTINE/WHEAT MAYNARD STEPHENS WESTERN GROVE SCRANTON 1 LESLIE 133 PARKIN 134 YELLVILLE-SUMMIT 135 SPRINGDALE 136 MANSFIELD 137 ROSE BUD 138 HAMBURG 139 MURFREESBORO 140 HUGHES 141 EXPENSE PER ADA 90-91 91-92 2,742 2,736 2 736 2,735 2,734 2 733 2,729 2,727 2 727 3,069 3,509 3 017 3,145 3,061 3 143 2,984 3,144 3 119 1990-91 NUMBEORF TEACHERS K-12 A/D/A A/D/H 90-91 91-92 286 19.9 554 42.0 791 55.0 57.6 6,977 7,450 442.0 449.5 832 873 58.8 58.8 517 547 37.8 39.3 1,630 1,714 109.5 110.0 555 583 44.2 43.3 1 058 1 099 75.5 76.5 19,000 22L950 20,121 23,897 21 660 24 347 26,365 30,062 23,408 25,834 21 773 24 722 21,956 25,346 22,202 25,552 22 664 25 381 22.9 45.0 58.0 477.0 62 .. 8 40.8 117.2 47.2 83.4 PAGE NO. 12 23.5 21.,_187 9 23 9 0 22.S 21~6 24,774 45.3__\n!1_,520 25,407 61.1 2? 574 25 422 485.5 27,504 3L__,244 63.5 24,420 27,038 42.3 22 973 25 683 117.3 23,234 26,604 46.3 23,310 26,761 84.3 23 741 26 598 ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS _cm.uMl'L1._RA~D IN,_.D=E~s~c~EtlN~D~r~N~G.,_,O~R~D~E~R-'--------------------~P~A~G~E,_,_N~0~-'--\"1~3:...._ ___ _ EXPENSE 1990-91 NUMBERO F AVG. SLRY. NO. OF CERT. AVG. SLRY. Pr::-R ADA TEACHERS K-12 . ~ TCHRS K-1,., PERSONNEL CERT . PERS . -- 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 C-A ,I, r-nrNTY n - --- OA\"-'V  ? 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 W::A -nA DUTI TDC, MARV\"\"' L 142 2 723 2 966 823 870 57.5 57.0 22 276 25,284 63.4 61.2 23,274 25,953 5,4 .i\\-Z OUTO O JPS uc-o C-UA. -Wi:-!!:Tuc -o C-\"-' c A \"7 I? '??\u0026lt; ? 01\\A \"' 075 \"' :-it\u0026lt;8 289.0 286.0 22 302 24 928 306.0 303.0 23 156 25 860 '?f .i\\A \\IAU DOJOC-U SMTRLEY 144 2 721 3 055 491 512 34.9 35.0 20 944 24 957 37.9 38.0 22,159 25,968 nt-01 s DEWITT 145 2 718 3 109 1 317 1 378 92.7 94.7 23 157 26 141 98.9 101.1 24,016 27,140 '?0-0t I UJTM\"-' c-1 nnoAnn t A.L '? '?1 A :-it \"\"\"\" 4 A2A 5 110 339.4 339.3 23 278 26 673 360.2 359.1 24 106 27 512 ,,\"' .n-. !='IIL T ON VIOLA 147 2 711 3 047 398 415 29.5 30.0 21 778 24,765 31.5 32.0 22,917 25,992 a:-:: .o:-i\nPTll'c- KIRBY 148 2 710 3 179 424 447 35.2 36.5 19 945 22 027 39.1 40.4 20,873 23,007 t :-it-Ot r1 ~.,~, A\"'\" llTNr:.- u,- fAO ? '?OA :-it O'?,\u0026lt;., 394 411 26 8 '\u0026gt;6.6 19 836 23 259 29.8 29.4 20 738 24 406 49 02 Mn\u0026gt;JTGOMERY MOUNT IDA 150 2 707 3 098 504 524 37.5 36.8 21 840 25,827 40.5 39.8 23,040 27,137 73-01 WHITE BALD KNOB 151 2 701 3 031 1 322 1 397 86.4 84.8 22,921 26,642 91.9 90.9 23,756 27,616 \"\"\"' -iO  t-  N ~ T TF\" H\"' I 152 2 699 2 865 2 724 2 884 179.0 177.0 24 662 27 786 191.0 189.0 25,507 28,619 H-06 CLAY CLAY COUNTY CENTR153 2,697 2,968 748 782 54.7 54.7 21,391 23,965 57.7 57.7 22,211 24,796 32-11 INDEPENDENCE MIDLAND 154 2 697 3,003 582 618 44.4 45.2 21,141 24,131 47.4 48.2 22,099 25,254 i2-01 N r::-QURNE CONCORD 155 2 696 3 197 483 515 34.0 33.3 21,824 26,690 37.0 36.3 23,141 27,726 72-05 WASHINGTON LINCOLN 156 2 696 2 958 929 987 65.4 65.2 21,499 24,299 69.4 70.2 22,440 25,281 59-02 PRAIRIE DEVALLS BLUFF 157 2 693 3 003 458 477 35.5 32.9 19,993 24,202 38.3 35.7 21,060 25,345 2B-i\\A r:r:,i:-r::-NE NORTHEAST ARKANSA158 2 692 3 005 2 226 2 369 152.5 151.4 23 495 27,217 1.62.7 162.6 24,277 28,050 45-01 MARION FLIPPIN 159 2 691 3 103 741 781 48.0 49.0 24,145 28,048 51.0 52.3 25,200 29,180 72-01 WASHINGTON ELKINS 160 2 691 3 336 683 722 45.4 46.4 22,933 28,969 48.4 49.4 23,955 29,881 Ai\\ .. I\\? I TNrnt N GRADY 161 2 687 3 435 324 335 21.8 22.7 18 717 24,072 24.8 24.7 19,736 25,212 05-01 BOONE ALPENA 162 2 686 3 100 461 482 30.7 31.6 22,765 25,947 33.7 34.6 23,985 27,353 H,-nc\nrDATf':.MEAD BUFFALO ISLAND CE163 2 685 3 025 784 814 59.0 59.0 21,348 24,708 63.8 63.8 22,079 25,468 ii,,\"\"' - - H ,~w~ 164 2 685 3 007 4 523 4 770 309.4 301.4 25 478 29 486 329.3 320.4 26,346 30,350 16-01 CRAIGHEAD BAY-BROWN 165 2 683 3 073 619 648 42.7 42.7 21,575 25,787 45.7 45.7 22,513 26,912 15-05 CONWAY WONDERVIEW 166 2 678 2 980 419 437 30.1 30.1 19,889 23,297 33.1 33.1 21,173 24,324 ,.,L_,07 r-..,....,,, ..a. 1\"\"' Mnr 1NT6TN PTNE 1.\u0026lt;.7 '\u0026gt; 678 2 979 583 622 43.5 43.5 21 482 25,103 46.5 46.5 22,679 26,242 17-03 CRAWFORD MOUNTAINBURG 168 2 676 3 105 759 813 53.0 54.0 23,099 26,583 57.0 58.0 23,966 27,267 32-01 INDEPENDENCE BATESVILLE 169 2 672 2 932 2 335 2,458 157.0 158.5 25,114 27,967 168.3 169.8 25,851 28,778 4'?- ,O? MTq!::J!::!::TPPT '\" YTMr::-VT c - f70 2 672 3 020 4 069 4 328 277.9 277.6 23,797 27,561 296.0 295.7 24,866 28,693 14-06 COLUMBIA WALDO 171 2 669 3 114 532 569 39.9 41.1 21,170 24,450 42.8 44.1 22,602 25,712 15-03 CONWAY NEMO VISTA 172 2 669 3 091 380 399 29.0 31.0 20,393 22,671 32.0 34.0 21,360 22,970 A-Z-i\\\"Z I rn.inllr::- rADI TSLr::- 173 2 668 2 961 669 696 48.2 47.7 22. 134 25,0ii 51.i 50.7 23,184 26,163 56-04 POINSETT MARKED TREE 174 2 668 2 942 847 894 64.5 64.0 20,983 24,052 68.0 67.5 21,675 24,759 70-08 UNION SMACKOVER 175 2 668 2,930 800 837 so.a 52.4 23,765 27,066 54.8 56.4 24,945 28,160 ~ 1. .nA unLIARD MINERAL SPRINGS 176 2 663 2 955 476 496 37.2 37.0 20,904 23,595 40.7 40.7 22,250 25,104 49-01 MONTGOMERY CADDO HILLS 177 2 661 2 901 522 549 38.0 38.3 21,664 24,400 41.0 41.3 22,848 25,855 04-07 BENTON PEA RIDGE 178 2,659 3 153 679 720 51.1 52.5 20,828 24,170 54.2 55 .. 5 21,783 25,149 \"Z\"Z-01. T\"7.0.D1' CALICO ROCK 179 2 657 3 291 435 457 34.1 36.6 20 404 23,314 37.i 39.6 21,508 24,523 56-05 POINSETT TRUMANN 180 2 655 2,939 1,568 1,673 115.1 111.9 21,395 25,291 124.8 120.6 22,393 26,245 07-01 CALHOUN HAMPTON 181 2,654 3,099 879 910 58.8 60.2 23,248 27,539 62.3 63.7 24,437 28,466 47-12 MISSISSIPPI MANILA 182 2 652 2 943 853 905 57.4 56.8 21,794 24,954 62.2 61.6 22,779 25,790 29-06 HEMPSTEAD SPRING HILL 183 2,651 3,133 294 307 22.0 22.0 19,606 24,774 25.0 25.0 20,921 26,217 58-03 POPE HECTOR 184 2,650 3,051 633 667 46.0 47.0 22,406 25,015 49.0 50.0 23,133 25,924 62-01 ST FRANCIS FORREST CITY 185 2 649 2 870 4 896 5 177 296.6 299.2 23,470 26,789 330.1 332.7 24,587 27,705 74-01 WOODRUFF AUGUSTA 186 2 649 3 108 639 673 46.2 46.2 20,958 23,980 49.2 49.2 22,297 25,414 52-04 OUACHITA FAIRVIEW 187 2 648 3,045 3,910 4,086 261.3 253.8 24,070 28,414 280 .. 2 273.8 25,136 29,537 A..C:::-1'\\? ~..oi.g,ry MARSHALL 188 2 646 2 965 697 736 50.5 51.5 21,313 24,246 53.5 54.5 22,120 24,725 17-04 JEFFERSON MISSISSIPPI 1 B NE 0 BENTON 25-02 FULTON 46 H L ER 73-03 WHITE 73-06 WHITE 04-04 BENTON 57-05 POLK 09-03 CHICOT 4- s 36-06 JOHNSON 10-02 CLARK 22-02 DREW 37-03 LAFAYETTE 15-07 CONWAY 12- B RNE 70-06 UNION 75-04 YELL 7 -03 NIN 72-08 WASHINGTON 02-01 ASHLEY 17-02 CRAWFORD 18-03 CRITTENDEN 73-11 WHITE 32-09 INDEPENDENCE 75-03 YELL 41-01 LITTLE RIVER 10-03 CLARK 16-11 CRAIGHEAD 26-06 GARLAND 40-01 LINCOLN 06-01 BRADLEY 50-06 NEVADA 63-04 SALINE 52-05 OUACHITA 56-02 POINSETT 58-01 POPE 24-02 FRANKLIN 05-02 BOONE 43-02 LONOKE ARKANSAPSU BLICS CHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUAFLI SCAL REPORTA NALYSIS MULBERRY ROGERS SALEH 0 KE BRADFORD JUDSONIA GRA TT WICKES LAKESIDE WEST SIDE ARK DRE ST NORPHLET DARDANELLE T WEST FORK CROSSETT CEDARV LL WEST MEMPHIS SEARCY SOUTH SID DANVILLE 221 ASHDOWN 222 GURDON 223 NETTLETON 224 LAKESIDE 225 GOULD 226 HERMITAGE 227 PRESCOTT 228 HARMONY GROVE 229 HARMONY GROVE 230 HARRISBURG 231 ATKINS 232 CHARLESTON 233 BERGMAN 234 ENGLAND 235 COLUMN 1 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER EXPENSE i99O 91 PER ADA 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/H 415 439 2,581 2,853 526 555 2,580 2,901 2,068 2,173 2 574 2 9 1 88 2,572 2,909 1,539 1,638 2,572 2,901 2,081 2L188 2 571 2 980 323 341 2,568 2,972 589 624 2,567 2,862 1,162 1,210 2 564 3 033 591 618 2,563 3,038 760 788 2,563 2,811 916 976 2 561 2 867 1 035 1 097 2,560 2,969 678 702 2,559 3,029 665 694 2 559 2 842 1 016 1 068 NUMBEOR F TEACHERS K-12 90-91 91-92 AVG. SLRY, TCHRS_. K-12 90-91 91-92 33.1 33.2 2L__716 ~6 38.6 38.6 21,581 2!:l,063 133.0 136.3 23,207 ~828 4 102.5 110.1 22,004 24,966 126.9 129.0 24,051 27,798 25.8 26 0 8 021 20 888 40.0 41.0 84.3 83.3 38. 41.5 48.5 49.5 22,977 65.0 63.8 21,791 24,279 70.0 70.0 23 930 27 570 47.0 49.0 22,853 25,850 42.2 46.1 23,322 26,319 71.5 71.0 22 834 25 794 --- NO. OF CERT. PERSONNEL 90-91 91-92 36.4 41.6 41.6 144.5 147.5 111.3 118.5 136.9 139.0 28.8 29.0 43.0 44.0 91.3 90.2 .5 44.5 51.5 52.5 69.0 67.8 75.0 75.0 50.0 52.0 45.3 49.2 76.5 76,0 PAGE_NO. 14 SLBY, PERS. ~~~- 91-92 22_,_664 26,117 24_,229~4 22,963 25,949 24,950 28,866 19 04 22 0 7 22 304 24 951 22 078 25 149 4 335 27 102 23 926 27 902 22,612 25 086 24 663 28 238 23 825 26 923 24 596 27 627 23 881 26 957 aats:atitsasE :IU H IC SCf:::fCDI 12ISIBICIS at!lt!lll9L EISCaL BEE:IJBI0 N0LYl\u0026gt;Ilii _(\nIJLUMN 1 _RANKED IN DESCENDIN!i ORDE PAGE NO. 15 0\\ll.. SI.BY. tlQ. QE CERI. 6\\l!i. SI.Bl, TCHRS. K-12 PERSONNEL CERT. PERS. l'll'.JU'.l'I 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 9 10 11 12 001 26 48.0 51.0 25,738 27 432 71 28 144.5 148.0 25 273 29 350 599 24 62.0 60.5 21 467 25,059 950 23 35.6 36.4 22 255 24,967 1 989 26 2 47.6 48.6 22 884 26 925 20,387 23,000 76.0 76.7 21 078 23,844 23~26 26,225 68.8 73.4 24,414 27,141 20 6'-'B 23 358 33.5 33.0 21 726 24 607 1'IL._931 22 201 33.6 33.0 21,164 23,629 23,866 27,882 56.6 58.0 24,795 28,992 5 1 4 29 489 142.7 140.5 25 935 30 398 18,369 21,333 33.5 33.5 19,708 22,522 23,340 26 548 64.0 68.3 24,204 27,317 23 BOB 27 357 195.1 192.4 24,802 28 442 205.8 23,683 27,554 219.4 225.7 24,622 28,534 37.6 20,885 24,402 40.6 44.2 21,812 25,194 142.1 25 396 28 836 150.1 156.6 26 332 29,770 109.2 110.2 23,172 26 948 116.5 117.6 24,028 27,762 35.0 35.3 20,890 ~. 838 38.0 38.3 22,093 25,078 91.9 92.3 22 897 26 320 100.6 102.0 24,005 27,384 341.0 353.3 25,116 28,704 366.5 384.5 26,175 29,841 42.0 42. 0 J.'l, 908 24, 849 45.4 45.4 21,299 26,412 3 .o 38.0 21 604 25 605 42.0 41.0 22 544 26 692 74.3 73.0 24 145 26 991 79.3 78.0 25,129 28,122 85.5 87.5 22,725 25,873 91.9 93.8 23,698 26,926 73.9 75.6 24 567 29 031 80.4 81.1 25,796 30,124 66-05 SEBASTIAN LAVACA 761 50.5 51.6 20,793 23,340 53.5 54.6 21,850 24,201 05-05 BOONE VALLEY SPRINGS 805 50.5 50.5 23,320 27,812 54.5 54.5 24,117 28,609 MENA 4 7 1 1 786 111.5 113.5 24,930 28,810 117.9 120.0 25,675 29,642 18-04 CRITTENDEN MARION 265 4 50 2,317 2,469 143.0 145.0 24,102 28,037 154.8 156.8 25,111 29,200 44-01 MADISON HUNTSVILLE 266 4 08 1,566 1,666 104.6 105.9 22,473 27,092 109.6 110.9 23,110 27,761 AD DIERKS 2 866 573 596 39.2 40.2 21,712 26,081 42.2 43.2 22,765 26,821 53-03 PERRY PERRYVILLE 041 807 848 50.9 53.5 22,719 26,790 53.9 56.5 23,797 27,602 28-03 GREENE MARMADUKE ,767 629 658 40.6 40.6 23,344 27,541 43.6 43.6 24,381 28,290 BENTON 907 3 834 4 020 239.8 243.0 23,854 27,888 254 .. 8 258.0 24,780 28,915 BENTONVILLE ,909 3,987 4,171 260.3 261.8 22,592 26,723 274.8 282.3 23,719 28,087 NORFORK ,895 451 472 31.3 35.0 20,188 22,283 34.3 38.0 21,517 23,494 L 884 470 504 36.3 37.3 19,697 21,984 39.3 40.3 20,802 23,355 STUTTGART ,796 2,304 2,437 152.2 149.9 22,802 27,051 162.1 159.8 23,728 27,988 HOPE ,811 2,978 3,133 178.5 181.5 24,433 28,485 190.5 193.5 25,485 29,512 944 1 300 1 382 89.5 91.5 22 139 26 271 94.9 97.2 22,990 27,210 MONTICELLO ,882 2,096 2,183 138.1 138.4 22,363 26,295 150.1 150.3 23,590 27,577 WARREN ,809 1,733 1,818 114.6 116.5 23,100 25,869 124.5 126.5 24,570 27,468 W ST SIDE 839 1 229 1 310 81.B 82.1 21,231 24,726 89.B 90.1 22,227 25,797 52-01 BEARDEN ,884 855 887 55.5 55 .. 5 22,887 28,382 60.5 60.5 24,258 29,298 38-08 WALNUT RIDGE ,871 852 899 62.0 61.1 20,867 25,353 66.0 65.1 21,649 26,249 - 4 CENTR L 2 818 503 529 37.3 37.3 20,620 24,579 39.B 39.8 21,704 25,576 ---- - --- ---- - --- ------------- ARKANSAPSU BLIC SCHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUALFI SCAL REPORTA NALYSIS COLUMN1 RANKEDIN DESCENDINGO RDER PAGE NO. 16 CRAIGHEAD I/ALLEY 1/IEW CRAWFORD I/AN BUREN SHARP HIG LAN CLAY ___ PIGGOTT SEI/IER DEQUEEN WASHINGTON GREEN D 28-=-0LGREEl-lE GREENE COUNTY 48-01 MONROE BRINKLEY 43-01 LONOKE LONOKE 61-03 RANDOLPH POCAHONTAS 36-04 JOHNSON LAMAR 17-01 CRAWFORD ALMA 13-03 CL El/ELAND RISON __ 36-01 JOHNSON CLARKS I/ILLE 74-03 WOODRUFF MCCRORY ,,~ 74 30-04 HOT SPRING MALI/ERN 2 690 174.5 22,021 25,604 183.0 183.0 22,732 26,362 21-05 DESHA MCGEHEE 3 2 _619 __L_227 1,276 79.5 22,334 25,180 84.5 86.0 23,200 26,226 23-05 FAULKNER MAYFLOWER 314 2 356 2 883 667 701 44.5 21 680 25 128 47.5 50.0 22 604 26 05 69-01 STONE MOUNTAIN 1/IEW 315 2,635 i,036 i,084 65.0 23,596 27,042 69.0 69.0 24,492 27,986 23-03 FAULKNER GREENBRIE_R_ 316 2_,902 1,505 1,586 87.5 24,801 27,934 93.5 104.5 25,713 28,921 05-03 BOONE HARRISON 317 2 673 2 504 2 618 152.4 154.3 22 991 26 373 163 3 165.2 23 976 27 642 73-02 WHITE BEEBE 318 2,763 1_, 575 i,670 103.4 106.7 21,807 26,192 109.6 113.9 22,683 26,867 59-01 PRAIRIE DES ARC 319 2,791 642 676 40.7 41.9 21,648 25,241 43.8 45.0 22,547 26,125 14-02 COLUMBIA MAGNOLIA 320 2 667 2 967 3 130 175.9 174.5 24 035 28 255 189.0 186.6 25 024 29 245 63-03 SALINE BRYANT 321 2,722 4,903 5~216 286.6 292.6 25,815 30,085 301.5 309.5 26,520 30,875 43-(),4 LONOKE CABOT 322 2,235 2,759 4_, 542 4,832 264.5 285.0 24,371 28,136 281.0 302.0 25,307 29,048 08-01 CARROLL BERRYVILLE 323 2 231 2,610 1,331 1 393 84.0 88.0 21 773 25 257 B8.0 92.0 22 371 25 847 67-03 SEI/IER HORATIO 324 2,207 2,852 520 __ 544 31.8 35.6 21,758 27,490 34.7 38.6 23,187 28,360 -------------~-\"'-'\"===--=-========:-:_::.::.::.::.::.::.::.::.::.::.::.~=-::.=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--:..=-=-=--------======------------------------------~  ARKANSASP UBLIC SCHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUALF ISCAi REPORTA NALYSIS COLUMN 2 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE NO. 17 EXPENSE 1990-91 NUMBERO E AY!i, SLRY, NO. OE CERT. AY!i, SLRY, PER ~DA TEACHERS K-12 TCHRS. K-12 PERSONNEL CERT. PERS. 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 I C'6 ~ r-nuNTY DISTRICT \"'\"\"'\" 1 ? 3 4 5 6 7 A 9 10 11 1? ~ 2.1..-.0, _1 ,..,D ESHA ARKANSAS CITY 1 6., 165 ~6,609 145 152 18.2 17.0 22,727 23,780 20.7 19.5 25,110 26,262 - \"'\"'w\"\"'\" 2 5 '.'J:A.4 c\nA?:\u0026gt;: 711 742 70.0 70 1 28 616 '.18 774 7c\n-.: 7\"\n4 ?9 AOc\n?9 Lb.A 65-04 SEARCY WITTS SPRINGS 3 5_.i293 5,726 94 99 14.8 14.8 18,050 20,234 16.8 16.8 19,145 21.,278 31-06 HOWARD UMPIRE 4 4_, 781 5,471 123 127 14.9 15.6 20,349 22,369 17.a__ 18.5 22,124 24,559 ..,  .r,. \"A B' ~-~ AO C.~An \"\" A O\"\u0026gt;A c\n?\"?(\\ o-. QQ 13 1 13 1 19 780 ?1 C:f\\'') 1 \"i ? 1 ~ '.'J: ?1 \"\u0026gt;L? ,., ... 1 ...... 75-05 YELL FOURCHE VALLEY 6 4,346 5., 125 128 136 16.4 18.2 19,128 22,348 18.4 20.2 20,494 23,349 70-05 UNION MOUNT HOLLY 7 4_,294 5,081 212 224 21 .. S 24.3 22,745 23,644 23.5 2'7 .. 0 24,093 25_, 146 60-01 PULASKI LITTLE ROCK 8 4 296 4 765 22 397 24 090 1 822.0 1 839.3 28 205 31 371 1 970.0 1 986.3 29 510 32 960 03-06 BAXTER TRI-COUNTY CON. 9 4,809 4,762 151 159 18.3 13.8 20,313 23,402 20.3 16.3 21,378 25,052 63-06 SALINE PARON 10 3,994 4,366 215 229 19.4 19.5 22,320 26,619 21.4 21 .. 5 23,368 27,371 47-01 MISSISSIPPI ARMOREL 11 3 850 4 344 218 232 21.4 21.8 22 820 26 179 23.4 23.8 24 056 27 587 36-05 JOHNSON DARK 12 4,027 4,242 150 158 16.9 17.9 19,417 21,674 18.9 19.9 20,721 23,160 53-02 PERRY PERRY CASA 13 4,405 4,182 167 184 19.2 15.7 23,028 24,809 21 .. 2 17.7 24,200 26,192 65-03 SEARCY SAINT JOE 14 3 678 4 116 202 214 19.5 19.5 19 352 23 262 21.5 21.5 20 761 24 499 71-03 VAN BUREN SCOTLAND 15 3,655 4,078 130 135 14.0 14 .. 5 19,973 21,899 16.0 16.5 21,154 23,335 12-05 CLEBURNE WILBURN 16 3,041 3,911 164 177 14.2 15.4 18,682 22,473 16.2 17.4 21,181 25,723 69-02 STONE STONE COUNTY 17 3 162 3 898 223 234 18.5 18.8 20 093 26 395 20 .. 5 20.8 21 104 26 885 38-07 LAWRENCE STRAWBERRY 18 3,432 3,885 216 224 21.2 21.0 20,052 21,645 23 .. 2 23.4 21,372 23,288 32-03 INDEPENDENCE CUSHMAN 19 3,235 3,814 271 286 22.9 24.8 21,442 24,645 25.4 27 .. 3 22,633 25,939 38 05 LAWRENCE LYNN 20 3 281 3 810 228 237 20.0 20.9 20 890 23 520 22.2 23.4 21 718 24 418 24-05 FRANKLIN PLEASANT VIEW 21 3,528 3,790 227 240 22.0 22.5 18,844 20,650 24.0 24.5 20,113 22,059 14-01 COLUMBIA EMERSON 22 3,554 3,788 341 354 30.6 27.1 23,895 2l\u0026gt;,812 33.6 30.1 25,319 28,474 27-03 GRANT POYEN 23 3 036 3 753 242 250 18.0 19.0 22 841 26 009 20.0 21.0 24,385 27i592 41-03 LITTLE RIVER WINTHROP 24 3,675 3,738 169 176 14.6 14.6 20,966 23,019 16.6 16.6 22,339 24,477 43-05 LONOKE HUMNOKE 25 3,647 3,727 169 180 15.8 17.1 18,729 19,880 17.8 19.1 19,963 21,024 20-01 DALLAS CARTHAGE 26 3 483 3 725 165 172 17.5 17 ...5 19 528 21 383 19.5 19.5 20 894 22 722 51-03 NEWTON MOUNT JUDEA 27 3,277 3,706 236 252 19.6 19.1 20,764 25,272 21.6 21.1 21,943 26,052 01-02 ARKANSAS GILLETT 28 3,174 3,705 278 288 23.6 24.6 20,081 21,921 26.5 27.5 21,637 23,436 49-04 MONTGOMERY ODEN 29 3 461 3 703 215 227 19 .. 5 19.5 22 264 24 224 21.5 21 .. s 23 121 25 446 60-02 PULASKI NORTH LITTLE ROCK 30 3,407 3,691 8,976 9,653 609.6 609.5 25,249 28,656 666.1 666.0 26,522 29,976 34-02 JACKSON GRUBBS 31 3,306 3,673 188 200 19.3 19.3 17,374 20,410 21.3 21.3 18,485 21,324 70-02 UNION HUTTIG 32 3 143 3 659 279 293 21.0 22 .. 0 22 776 25 112 23.0 24 .. 0 23 922 26 451 66-01 SEBASTIAN FORT SMITH 33 3,123 3,639 10,921 11,633 757.1 785.2 27,849 31,070 805.4 834.9 28,883 32,136 05-04 BOONE OMAHA 34 3,168 3,633 282 298 23.5 24.5 21,440 23,723 26.1 27.1 22,720 25,302 47-08 MISSISSIPPI GOSNELL 35 3 170 3 617 2 074 2 195 149.6 148.5 25 495 '\"\u0026gt;9 216 159.1 158.0 26 389 30 109 68-06 SHARP POUGHKEEPSIE 36 3,842 3,598 115 120 15.1 14.0 18,377 19,044 17.1 16.0 19,478 19,503 02-02 ASHLEY FOUNTAIN HILL 37 2,965 3,567 244 265 21.3 21.3 20,106 25,000 23.3 23.3 21,703 26,863 34-04 JACKSON SWIFTON 38 3 474 3 563 181 191 20.1 19.6 18 578 20 946 22.1 21.6 20 019 22 423 72-09 WASHINGTON WINSLOW 39 3,124 3,551 223 236 20.0 20.4 18,706 21,297 22.0 22.4 19,855 22,564 28-06 GREENE STANFORD 40 3,357 3.,548 194 201 20.1 20 .. 5 19,263 20,816 22 .. 4 22.8 20,131 21,694 05-06 BOONE LEAD HILL 41 3 202 3 529 329 347 27.5 27.8 19 972 23 130 30.3 30.6 21 469 24 467 46-01 MILLER BRIGHT STAR 42 2,952 3,529 248 259 17.0 18.0 22,656 27,552 19.0 20.0 23,707 28,742 33-03 IZARD MOUNT PLEASANT 43 3,213 3,518 265 274 24.6 24.5 22,182 24,694 26.6 26.5 21,885 24,298 19-03 CROSS PARKIN 44 2 736 3 509 554 591 42.0 42.3 20 121 23 897 45.0 45.3 21 520 25 407 28-01 GREENE DELAPLAINE 45 3,052 3,501 270 285 21.4 23 .. 2 21,828 24,835 24.1 25.4 22,888 25,892 56-07 POINSETT WEINER 46 2,963 3,482 378 395 30.5 32.6 20,459 23,390 32.5 __ 34.6 21,265 24,150 20-02 DALLAS FORDYCE 47 3 087 3 474 1 249 i 303 88.7 88.0 22 429 25 216 95.7 94.0 23 368 26 245 ARKANSAS PIIBI IC SCHOOi DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS COLUMN 2 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER_ _ PAGE NO. 18 1990-91 NUMBER Of AVG, SLRY. NO. OF CERT. AVG. SLRY. TEACHE:RS K 12 TCHRS. K- 2 PERSONNEL CERT. PERS. ALDt:t:l 90-91_ 91-92 90-91 91 92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 8 9 10 11 12 -04 25.5 21,847 24,396 1 454.3 28 667 28 830 30.3 19 005 22 269 24.8 24 .. 7 19,736 25,212 255.2 248.3 25 599 28 802 20.6 21.0 20,653 22,895 13.3 12.8 21,094 24 394 20.0 8 326 22 969 24.0 23.0 19 553 24 399 17.0 25 864 28 709 19.0 19.0 27,408 30,378 43.3 19,333 21,625 47.0 46.3 20,269 22,654 39.5 40.0 25 259 28 632 42.5 43.0 26 561 29,877 1,_,Jl95 135.8 139.4 21,763 25l354 144.2 147.8 22,764 26,449 60 326 25.1 25 .. 0 21,886 24,188 28.0 28.0 23,293 25,651 p I L 61 236 18.5 17.5 22 961 26 270 20.5 19 .. 5 23,989 26,960 YELL WESTERN YELL COLIN 62 3,360 385 35.0 32.7 20,116 22,233 38.0 35.7 21,124 23,393 SHARP EVENING SHADE 63 2,941 273 24.0 24.7 18,271 21,090 26.0 26.7 19,470 22,054 COD- HARLOTTE 64 2 892 259 19.7 20 .. 6 21 662 24,815 21.7 22 .. 6 23,106 26,223 44-02 MADISON KINGSTON 65 2,950 300 21.0 21.0 21,498 25,643 23.0 23.0 23,025 27,229 66-04 SEBASTIAN HARTFORD 2,910 470 36.5 36 .. 5 21,097 23,934 39.7 39.7 22,035 24,920 N 2 691 722 45.4 46.4 22 933 28 969 48.4 49.4 23,955 29,881 58-05 POPE RUSSELLVILLE 4,879 303.6 310.9 25,798 30,231 323.3 331.7 26,963 31,387 37-01 LAFAYETTE BRADLEY 469 37.5 37.5 20,120 22,799 40.5 40.5 21,422 24,132 151 13.0 12.0 19 106 23 854 15.0 14.0 20,489 25,302 JESSIEVILLE 593 41.7 41.7 27,093 27,444 44.7 45.7 28,196 27,999 RANDOLPH COUNTY 72 306 23.4 23.4 19,252 22,588 26.4 26.4 20,303 24,072 N N 73 899 62.5 62.5 24 393 27 180 67.0 67.0 25,672 28,428 46-02 HILLER GENOA CENTRAL 74 2 749 50.0 51.0 22,779 25,926 53.0 54.0 23,986 27,197 57-01 POLK ACORN 75~ 352 26.2 26.0 23,766 25,685 28.2 28.0 25,225 27,131 76 3 393 34.0 32.6 19 588 22 701 37.0 35.6 20,784 24,161 33-01 IZARD CALICO ROCK 77 2, 457 34.1 36.6 20,404 23,314 37.1 39.6 21,508 24,523 01-05 ARKANSAS HUMPHREY 78 2, 322 23.2 23.2 22,369 27,520 25 ...2 25 .. 2 23,329 28,487 SLOAN-HENDRIX 79 3 500 37.9 37.9 23,187 25,777 40.9 40.9 24,489 26,889 51-04 NEWTON WESTERN GROVE 80 2, 283 21.1 21.4 20,175 23,780 23.2 23 .. 5 21,487 24,766 POLK HATFIELD 81 3, 299 24.0 23 .. 6 20,080 24,073 26.8 26.4 21,186 25,151 0 VAN COVE 82 2 9 375 30.3 31.3 20,563 22,727 33.3 34.3 21,814 23,885 SHARP WILLIFORD 83 271 22 .. 0 22 .. 5 19,234 21,649 24.5 25 .. 0 20,713 22,744 COLUMBIA ___ MCNEIL 84 349 25 .. 6 26.1 18,335 20,566 28.6 29.1 19,594 21,573 ,y EAST END 85 523 36.5 37.0 20 819 25 861 39.3 39.9 21,980 26,889 73-07 WHITE KENSETT 86 504 34.0 89.2 23,050 25,802 37.0 97 .. 2 24,554 27,032 64-01 SCOTT WALDRON 87 1,511 109.1 108.5 21,944 24,952 115.3 115.3 22,658 25,840 JEF R ON PINE BLUFF 88 2 97 7 518 459.3 459.0 26,811 29,916 491.0 491.5 27,755 30,847 02-04 ASHLEY PARKDALE 89 3 152 14.7 12.8 17,735 20,021 16.7 14.8 17,592 19,567 18-05 CRITTENDEN TURRELL 90 2, 524 34.8 33.7 21,691 25,393 38.1 36.7 23,150 26,894 4- UH A WALKER 91 2 242 21 .. 5 20.7 18 985 21,790 24.0 23 .. 2 20,496 23,078 25-01 FULTON MAMMOTHS PRING 92 451 33.8 34.5 22,569 25,325 36.3 37.0 23,751 26,288 MARION MARION CO 93 286 303 22.7 19.7 21,032 25,791 24.7 21.7 22,218 26,553 NEWTON DEER 94 335 357 25.8 25.0 20,967 24,243 27.8 27.0 22,098 25,454 - - -~~~ ------~----~~---------------------------------------------- 72-07 WASHINGTON 54::02 Pl:iILLIPS 73-10 WHITE 41-02 LITTLE RIVER 33-06 IZARD 46-05 HILLER 62-02 72-03 4-0 15-07 01-01 74- 1 23-06 17-03 ST FRANCIS WASHINGTON CONWAY ARKANSAS F FAULKNER CRAWFORD OS-01 BOONE 07-01 CALHOUN 15-03 CONWAY 24-03 FRANKLIN_ _ ARKANSAS PIIBI IC SCHOOi DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS SPRINGDALE ELAINE ROSE BUD FOREMAN IZARD CO CONSOL 124 TEXARKANA 125 SIDE 126 HUGHES 127 FAYETTEVILLE 128 LDO 129 SO. CONWAY CO. 130 DEWITT 131 AUGUSTA 132 MOUNT VERNON/ENOL133 MOUNTAINBURG 134 F PIN 135 ALPENA 136 HAMPTON 137 11 NT IDA 138 NEHO VISTA 139 COUNTY LINE 140 T N HOME 141 ~ IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE N0.1_9 2,451 1,317 639 232 759 741 461 879 504 380 --l--=~~'--l--~555 3 268 2,773 448 553 5,757 431 1,099 6,328 569 2,595 1,378 673 242 813 781 482 910 524 399 588 3 451 442.0 53.0 44.2 37.8 43.6 26.0 26.6 41.0 52.5 32.6 34.5 8 8 449.5 54.0 43.3 39.3 42.6 26.0 19,060 21,556 21,651 25,244 20 828 24 170 23,203 25,593 21,487 24,342 21 655 23 710 26 365 30 062 20,938 23,921 22 202 25 552 21,773 24,722 21,414 24,109 21 169 23 497 NO. Of CERT. AVG. SLRY. 42.5 43.0 20 999 23 696 32.3 32.3 20,678 23,210 45.5 46.2 22,839 25,689 46.8 43.8 23 713 27 300 3~9~~1~_~40.4 20,873 23,007 ~4~6~~_9_ ~45.0 22,112 24,778 46.0 47.3 22 285 28 225 ~3~0~_-__1 29.6 20,755 23,048~--- _46~_3_ __ 4_4.0 22,515 26,101 54.2 55.5 21 783 25,149 34.5 35.6 24,180 26,545 ____ _ 36.5 37.5 22,379 25,25~9 ___ _ 41.6 41.8 22 844 25 101 477.0 485.5 27,504 31~,2~4___4_ _ _ 56.6 56.6 21,778 25,04~3 ___ _ 47.2 46.3 23,310 26 761 40.8 42.3 22,973 25,683 46.6 45.6 22,450 25, 103 ___ _ 29.0 29.0 22,615 25,088 24.3 __ ~2~3~.4 20,340 23,265 26.3 25.4 21,519 24,554 39.4 40.4 19,907 22,626 42.4 43.4 20,893 23,65=5 ___ _ 60.7 60.0 20 372 23 814 65.8 65.2 21,367 24,893 1 20 2 3~ 10 2 ~3- 0 5 2 19 3' 6 103 6 2 2! 7 ~ 4 0 20 25 0. 0 0 2 20 5 0. 0 0 2 24', 92 2 52 1 22 6 6',0 2 -6 1 - 7 ....  . ..,,4., 7---- 31.7 32.5 20 652 25 688 34.7 35.5 21,592 26,620 37.6 41.2 20,885 24,402 40.6 44.2 21,812 25,19~4 ___ _ 384.3 389.5 23,949 27,352 410.6 416.8 24,953 28,2~9~3~--- 33.0 33.0 21 490 23 696 35.5 36.0 22,060 24,517 75.5 76.5 22,664 25,381 83.4 84.3 23,741 26,598 394.1 404.9 27,172 30,441 416.6 426.9 27~1.~1='6~0~--- 39.9 41.1 21 170 24,450 42.8 44.1 22,602 25,712 153. 0 155. 0 23, 250-2=-0-==-5-'=--9, =7--1-6=5\"'.-=0-----c1---c6cc7c-'.-=9-2c-'4c-',-_c-2_=-_--6 _'--c-3_=--_- -,2',-'9c--',~92.7 94.7 23,157 26,141 ~9=8~=9---=--101.1 24,016 27,140 46.2 46.2 20,958 23,980 49.2 49.2 22,297 25,414 19.6 28.5 19,134 21,461 -=2~1c-'.-c6c-_31.5 20,027 22,230 53.0 54.0 23,099 26,583 57.0 58.0 23,966 27,267 48.o 49.o 24,145 20 040 -\"\"'5='1~.\"\"'o--s2.3 2s,200 29,100 30.7 31.6 22,765 25,947 33.7 34.6 23,985 27,353 58.8 60.2 23,248 27,539 -6=2-.=3-- 63.7 24,437 28,4~6~6 ___ _ 37.5 36.8 21,840 25,827 40.5 39.B 23,040 27,137 29.0 31.0 20,393 22,671 32.0 34.0 21,360 22,97_0 ___ _ 44.3 40.7 19,945 24,416 47.3 43.7 20,761 25,269 194.9 199.8 24,400 28,162 210.4 216.4 25,607 29,31~0---- ------------------------- - - - - -- - - --------------------- ARKANSAPSU BLIC SCHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUAFLI SCAL REPORTA NALYSIS COLUMN 2 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE NC. 20 EXPENSE 1990-91 NUMBEORF PER ADA TEACJ::IERS K-12 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 13-01 CLEVELAND KINGSLAND 16-01 CRAIGHEAD BAY-BROWN 144 65-01 SEARCY LESLIE 145 17-04 CRAWFORD MULBERRY 146 66-06 SEBASTIAN MANSFIELD 147 71-04 \\/AN BUREN SHIRLEY 148 74-02 WOOD UFF COTTON PLANT 49 58-03 POPE HECTOR 150 70-01 UNION EL DORADO 151 4.,_824 5,110 25-03 FULTON \\/IOLA 152 398 4 5 52-04 OUACHITA FAIRVIEW 153 2,648 3,045 3_,910 4,086 253.8 24__,070 28_,_414 280.2 273.8 25, 136 2~ 53]' 53-03 PERRY PERRYVILLE 154 2,489 3,041 807 848 53.5 22,719 2~90 53.9 56.5 23, 797 27_,_6 02 75-08 YELL PLAINVIEW-ROVER 155 2 928 3 041 320 337 26 .. 8 24.9 18 969 21 888 29.8 26.9 20 212 23 100 52-05 OUACHITA HARMONY GROVE 156 2,563 3,038 760 788 48.5 49.5 22,977 26_1_960 51.5 52.5 2~926 27 J 902 35-09 JEFFERSON WATSON CHAPEL 157 .2,637 3,034 3,327 3,479 209.6 211.6 26,185 29A67 225.6 227.6 27 328 30 753_ _ 63-04 SALINE HARMONY GROVE 158 2 564 3 033 591 618 38.5 41.5 23 31 25 728 41.5 44.5 24 335 27 102 20-03 DALLAS SPARKMAN 159 2,888 3,031 345 362 28.5 26.1 19,954 23_.__089 30.5 28.1 2~92 24.,_ 850 50-08 NEVADA NEVADA COUNTY 160 2,638 3,031 692 731 48.1 49.0 21_, 590 24L755 51.1 52.0 22,489 25,675 73-01 WHITE BALD KNOB 161 2 701 3 0 1 3 2 1 397 86.4 84.8 22 921 26 642 91.9 90.9 23 756 27 616 05-02 BOONE BERGMAN 162 2,559 3,029 665 694 42.2 46.1 23,322 26.,_\n319 45.3 49.2 24,596 27,6'2\n1__ 23-07 FAULKNER VILONIA 163 2,455 3,029 1,542 1,614 97.0 101.0 23,538 2I.,_5\u0026gt;80 104.0 109.0 24,352 28L878 16-13 CRAIGHEAD RIVERSIDE 164 2 873 3 028 786 820 59.0 56.0 21 364 23 937 63.0 60.0 22 383 25 126 16-05 CRAIGHEAD BUFFALO ISLAND CE165 2,685 3,025 784 814 59.0 59.0 21,348 24,708 63.8 63.8 22,079 25_, 468 10-02 CLARK ARKADELPHIA 166 2,614 3,022 2,181 2,267 145.9 148.9 22,384 26,027 155.8 159.3 23 d_04~122 35-02 JEFFERSON DOLLARWAY 167 2 773 3 021 1 892 1 989 13 .o 13 .o 23 238 26 60 141.5 40.3 24 196 27 241 47-02 MISSISSIPPI BLYTHEVILLE 168 2,672 3,020 4,069 4,328 277.9 277.6 23,797 27,561 296.0 295.7 24_, 866 28, 693 23-01 FAULKNER CONWAY 169 2,505 3,019 5,479 5,734 341.0 353.3 25,116 28,704 366.5 384.5 26,175 29,841 45-02 MARION YELLVILLE-SUMMIT 170 2 736 3 017 791 832 55.0 57.6 21 660 24 347 58.0 61.1 22 574 25 422 57-05 POLK WICKES 171 2,621 3,016 451 475 30.0 30.6 22,692 25,760 32.5 33.1 24,108 26,918 48-02 MONROE CLARENDON 172 2,504 3,013 606 637 42.0 42.0 19,908 24,849 45.4 45.4 21,299 26,412 09-02 CHICOT EUDORA 173 2 867 3 012 925 966 66.5 59.8 21 804 25 099 72.6 64.9 23 193 26 462 52-06 OUACHITA STEPHENS 174 2,751 3,008 502 519 35.0 35.0 22,436 25,768 38.0 38.0 23,562 26,678 16-08 CRAIGHEAD JONESBORO 175 2,685 3,007 4,523 4,770 309.4 301.4 25,478 29,486 329.3 320.4 26_, 346 30, 350 30-01 HOT SPRING BISMARCK 176 2 427 3 006 778 812 48.3 52.0 23 170 27 850 51.3 55.0 24 117 28 803 28-08 GREENE NORTHEAST ARKANSA177 2,692 3,005 2,226 2,369 152.5 151.4 23,495 27,217 162.7 162.6 24,277 28,050 70-07 UNION PARKERS CHAPEL 178 2,549 3,004 618 643 44.6 45.6 21,989 26,020 47.6 48.6 22,884 26,9~ 32-11 INDEPENDENCE MIDLAND 179 2 697 3 003 582 618 44.4 45.2 21 141 24 131 47.4 48.2 22 099 25 254 59-02 PRAIRIE DE\\IALLS BLUFF 180 2,693 3,003 458 477 35.5 32.9 19,993 24,202 38.3 35.7 21_,060 25_L3~ 73-08 WHITE MCRAE 181 2,640 3,003 306 323 25.1 25.4 19,335 22,501 27.5 27.5 20,353 23,453 32-09 INDEPENDENCE SOUTH SIDE 182 2 586 3 002 1 039 1 103 69.7 73.0 22 643 26 433 76.0 80.0 23 544 27 356 72-02 WASHINGTON FARMINGTON 183 2,447 3,001 1,038 1,096 67.8 70.6 21,545 26 400 72.6 ~3 22,619 ..[,459 04-05 BENTON ROGERS 184 2,634 2,998 6,179 6,511 358.5 375.3 26,969 30,889 386.6 403.4 28 108 32 060 26-01 GARLAND CUTTER-MORNING ST185 2 801 2 997 483 514 36.2 33.7 22 585 26 780 39.2 36.7 23 777 27 874 47-13 MISSISSIPPI OSCEOLA 186 2,636 2,993 2,094 2,213 141.8 142.0 24,131 28,054 150.2 152.4 24,940 28 895 46-03 HILLER FOUKE 187 2,627 2,990 755 797 51.7 52 .. 7 22,384 26,159 54.7 55.7 23,111 26 870 04-06 BENTON SILOAM SPRINGS 188 2 553 2 989 2 149 2 273 133.S 137.0 24 0-71 28 077 144.5 148.0 25 273 29 350 65-02 SEARCY 43-03 LONOKE 72-08 WASHINGTON 31-04 HOWARD 18-04 CRITTENDEN 22-02 DREW 27-05 GRANT 56-05 POINSETT 73-11 72-06 WASHINGTON 34-03 JACKSON 02-01 ASHLEY 62-05 ST FRANCIS 33-02 IZARD 04-01 BENTON ARKANSASP fJRtI C SCHQQl DISTRICTS ANNIJALF ISCAL REPORTA NALYSIS COLUMN2 . RANKEDI N DESCENDINGO RDER PAGE NO. 2 1990-91 NUMBER OF AYG, SLRY, NO, OF CERT, AVG. SLRY. MARSHALL CARLISLE LINCOLN WEST FORK MINERAL SPRINGS MARION DREW CENTRAL 204 205 206 207 2 8 209 210 GROVE 227 228 9 CROSSETT 230 PALESTINE/WHEATLE231 C 232 2 542 MELBOURNE 233~513 BENTONVILLE 234 2,487 ON 235 2 572 43.5 969 _____L___QJ,._782 .0 950 998 60.0 1L216 1 310 86.3 589 624 40.0 304 323 26.6 678 702 47.0 748 ~7~8~2,___54.7 823 870 57.S 697 736 50.5 669 696 48.2 929 987 65.4 894 932 61.4 476 496 37.2 518 547 37.6 2,317 1,023 9 5 960 1,300 1 690 1,013 2,469 143.0 1,064 70.2 1 033 68.0 998 58.5 1,_,382 89.5 1 771 109.2 _,9_,0'--\"S'-5- -7-  4 894 64.5 5 866 385.5 3,459 205.8 1,673 115.1 672 47.8 3,032 181.2 2,458 157.0 657 44.4 547 39.0 837 50.8 1 786 111.5 1,070 63.8 2,252 134.2 921 65.5 2,788 185.7 681 48.0 395 30.5 490 35.0 4,171 260.3 1 638 102.5 25 103 46.5 23 000 76.0 26 548 64.0 23,497 92.3 23,910 43.0 23.4 19 555 22 617 28.6 49.0 22,853 25,850 50.0 54.7 21,391 23,965 57.7 57.0 22 276 25,284 63.4 51.5 21,313 24,246 53.5 47.7 22,134 25,011 51.1 65.2 21 499 24 299 69.4 59.4 20,860 24,222 66.4 37.0 20,904 23,595 40.7 38.6 19 807 22 708 40.6 145.0 24,102 28,037 154.8 70.2 22,361 25,736 74.7 69.3 22 275 24 946 72.0 63.5 24,915 27,971 62.5 91.5 22,139 26,271 94.9 110.2 23 172 26 948 116.5 56.8 21,794 24,954 62.2 64.0 20,983 24,052 68.0 378.6 24 695 28 220 412.4 212.1 23,683 27,554 219.4 111.9 21,395 25,291 124.8 48.8 20 407 23 401 50.8 191.2 24,293 27,138 194.8 158.5 25,114 27,967 168.3 45.9 22 259 24,808 47.4 38.0 21,604 25,605 42.0 52.4 23,765 27,066 54.8 113.5 24 930 28,810 117.9 68.4 23,326 26,225 68.8 132.0 25,114 29,489 142.7 64.5 20 832 24 557 69.5 187.2 23,635 27,543 197.7 44.0 21,968 24,550 52.0 30.0 20 628 23 358 33.5 35.3 20,890 23,838 38.0 261.8 22,592 26,723 274.8 110.1 22 004 24 966 111.3 43.0 22 926 26 627 58.0 24 795 28 992 117.3 23,234 26,604 33.1 21,173 24,324 29.0 19 044 22 017 46.5 22,679 26,242 76.7 21,078 23,844 68.3 24,204 27,317 92.0 21,660 24,566 44.0 22,304 24,951 25.4 20,752 24,089 52.0 23,825 26,923 57.7 22,211 24,796 61.2 23,274 25,953 54.5 22,120 24,725 50.7 23,184 26,163 70.2 22,440 25,281 64.4 22,017 25,501 40.7 22,250 25,104 41.6 20,979 23,839 156.8 25,111 29,200 74.7 23,487 26,948 75.8 23,037 25,910 67.5 25,660 28,714 97.2 22,990 27,210 117.6 24,028 27,762 61.6 22,779 25,790 67.5 21,675 24,759 405.6 25,597 28,879 225.7 24,622 28,534 120.6 22,393 26,245 51.8 21,416 24,434 205.0 25,359 28,269 169.8 25,851 28,778 48.9 23,073 25,595 41.0 22,544 26,692 56.4 24,945 28,160 120.0 25,675 29,642 73.4 24,414 27,141 140.5 25,935 30,398 68.5 21,680 25,556 199.6 24,373 28,510 48.0 22,901 25,470 33.0 21,726 24,607 38.3 22,093 25,078 282.3 23,719 28,087 118.5 22,963 25,949 ARKANSAPSU BLIC SCHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUAFLI SCAL REPORTA NALYSIS COLUMN 2 ~DIN DESCENDINOGR DER PA!.E NO~ 22 1990-91 NUMBEOR F EACHERS t\u0026lt;-1 A/D/M 90-=-91 91-92 LEA+ COUNT 66-02 SEBASTIAN GREENWOOD 44-01 MAD SON HU TSVI 63-02 SALINE BENTON 238 17-02 CRAWFORD CEDARVILLE 239 54-01 PHILLIPS BARTON/LEXA 240 54-03 PHILLIPS HELENA-WEST HELEN241 25 860 12-03 CLEBURNE QUITMAN 242 38.2 22_L919 27 049 23-03 FAULKNER GREENBRIER 243 9 ? 1 7 4 5 9 1 26-06 GARLAND LAKESIDE 244 2,572 2,901 ~ 081~188 126.9 129.0 24,051 27 798 136.9 139.0 24 950 28 866 41-01 LITTLE RIVER ASHDOWN 245 2,580 2,901 2,068 2J 173 133.0 136.3 23,207 2~28 144.5 147.5 24,229 26,814 42-01 LOGAN BOONEVILLE 246 2 499 2 901 1 256 1 328 73.9 75.6 24 567 29 031 80.4 81.1 25 796 30 124 49-01 MONTGOMERY CADDO HILLS 247 2,661 2,901 522 549 38.0 38.3 21,664 24,400 41.0 41.3 22 848 25 855 11-01 CLAY CORNING 248 2,465 2,900 1,187 1,250 82.5 80.9 21,926 26 340 88.0 86.4 22 844 27,340 38-04 LAWRENCE HOXIE 249 2 446 2 899 914 967 60.5 59.9 22 618 27 508 64.8 64.4 23 505 28 858 11-04 CLAY PIGGOTT 250 2,413 2,896 905 953 65.0 68.2 20,335 23,052 69.0 73.2 21,113 23,894 40-03 LINCOLN STAR CITY 251 2,511 2,896 1,450 1,506 91.9 92.3 22,897 26,320 100.6 102.0 24 005 27 384 03-04 BAXTER NORFORK 252 2 483 2 895 451 472 31.3 35.0 20 188 22 283 34.3 38.0 21 517 23 494 05-05 BOONE VALLEY SPRINGS 253 2,494 2,892 770 805 50.5 50.5 23~20 27,812 54.5 54.5 24,117 28 609 37-03 LAFAYETTE STAMPS 254 2,611 2,887 847 875 58.3 58.7 21,915 2~38 61.7 62.2 22,802 25,858 13-03 CLEVELAND RISON 255 2 366 2 886 663 689 44.8 44.7 22 378 27 958 47. 47.7 23 383 29 055 52-01 OUACHITA BEARDEN 256 2,474 2,884 855 887 55.5 55.5 22,887 28,382 60.5 60.5~258 29 298 75-07 YELL OLA 257 2,483 2,884 470 504 36.3 37.3 19,697 21,984 39.3 40.3 20 802 23 355 23-05 FAULKNER MAYFLOWER 258 2 356 2 883 667 701 44.5 47.0 21 680 25 128 47.5 50.0 22 604 6 056 70-06 UNION NORPHLET 259 2,607 2,883 563 583 41.0 41.0 26_d_17 44.0 44.0 24 261 27,219 22-03 DREW MONTICELLO 260 2,478 2,882 2,096 2,183 138.4 26,295 150.1 19-05 CROSS WYNNE 261 2 525 2 875 2 8 ? 860 7 7 .1 24-04 FRANKLIN OZARK 262 i_,_322 400 85.5 2~873 91.9 __ 93.8 38-08 LAWRENCE WALNUT RIDGE 263 852 899 62.0 25, 353 __ 66 .0 __ 65.1 2-01 ST FRANCIS FOREST y 4 7 9 70-03 UNION JUNCTION CITY 265 2,600 2,870 869 910 58.1 ~53 60.3 __ 60.3 25,116 28,311 58-01 POPE ATKINS 266 2,561 2,867 1,__035 1,097 70.0 21...._70 75.0 75.0 24,663 28,238 31-02 HOWARD DIERKS 267 2 492 2 866 573 9 39.2 26 081 42.2 43.2 22 765 26 821 35-10 JEFFERSON WHITE HALL 268 2,699 2,865 2,724 2,884 179.0 24.,_662 27,786 191.0 j,__89.0 25,507 28 619 61-03 RANDOLPH POCAHONTAS 269 2,380 2,864 1,707 1__,_807 109.6 23L513 27,085 115.6 121.6 24 301 27 662 26-05 GARLAND LAKE HAMILTON 270 2 461 2 863 901 3 047 164.5 2 173 29 156 7 5 183.0 26 269 3 458 48-03 MONROE HOLLY GROVE 271 2,929 2,863 384 401 29.5 19L545 2b_318 31.5 30. 8 20,682 23, 452 __ 50-06 NEVADA PRESCOTT 272 2,567 2,862 1,162 1,210 84.3 21,144 :M,__028 91.3 90.2 22,078 25_,__149 56-08 POINSETT EAST POINSETT COU273 2 553 2 859 776 817 58 56.5 20 599 24 198 62.0 60.5 21 67 05 58-02 POPE DOVER 274 2,465 2,857 1_,_113 1,177 70.0 73.0 23,319 26, 826 ___ 75. 0 78.0 24,022 27,664 42-04 LOGAN SCRANTON 275 2,742 2,854 391 403 28.4 27.4 22,362 25,034 __ 30. 7 29.7 2~990 26 709 75-03 YELL DANI/ILLE 276 2 581 2 853 526 555 38.6 38.6 21 581 25 063 41 6 41.6 22 64 11 67-03 SEVIER HORATIO 277 2,207 2,852 520 544 31.8 35.6 21,758 22,_490 34.7 38.6 23,187 28,360 16-03 CRAIGHEAD BROOKLAND 278 2,438 2,847 842 885 54.0 54.0 22_,833 27,336 57.0 57.0 23 763 28 354 43-02 LONOKE ENGLAND 279 2 559 2 842 1 016 1 068 71.5 71.0 2 834 25 794 7 5 76.0 3 1 6 957 16-02 CRAIGHEAD WEST SIDE 280 2,477 2,839 1,229 1,310 81.8 82.1 21,231 24 726 89.8 90.1 22,227 25 797 75-04 YELL DARDANELLE 281 2,606 2,836 1,335 1,409 91.9 90.5 21,614 24,497 97.2 96.3 22,307 25 274 28-07 GREENE GREENE COUNTY TEC282 2 403 2 834 2 123 2 223 131.4 133.3 23 179 27 566 140.1 142.1 24 030 28 558 y 17-0S CRAWFORD 42-03 LOGAN 43-01 LONOKE 58-04 POPE 18-02 CRITTENDEN 29-03 HEMPSTEAD 56-02 POINSETT 06-02 BRADLEY 67-04 SEVIER 13-04 CLEVELAND 66-05 SEBASTIAN 48-01 MONROE 01-04 ARKANSAS 59-01 PRAIRIE 67-01 SEVIER 09-0 CHICOT 54-05 PHILLIPS 08-03 CARROLL 28-03 GRE NE 17-01 CRAWFORD 73-02 WHITE 43- 4  NOKE 08-02 CARROLL SS-02 PIKE 36-01 JOHNSON 30-04 HOT SPRING 63-03 SALINE 68-04 SHARP 05-03 BOONE 14-02 COLUMBIA 74-03 WOODRUFF 69-01 STONE 59-03 PRAIRIE 21-05 DESHA 08-01 CARROLL 23-02 FAULKNER 73-0S WHITE 73-06 WHITE ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS VAN BUREN PARIS LONOKE POTTS I EARLE HOPE 292 HARRISBURG 293 WARREN 294 LOCKESBURG 295 WOODLAWN 296 LAVACA 297 BRINKLEY 298 STUTTGART 299 DES ARC 300 DEQUEEN 301 DER TT 3 LAKE VIEW GREEN FOREST MARMAD KE ALMA 306 BEEBE 307 A OT 3 8 EUREKA SPRINGS 309 GLENWOOD 310 CLARKSVILLE 311 MALVERN 312 BRYANT 313 HIGHLAND 314 HARRISON 315 MAGNOLIA 316 MCCRORY 317 MOUNTAIN VIEW 318 HAZEN 319 MCGEHEE 320 BERRYVILLE 321 ENOLA 322 GRIFFITHVILLE 323 JUDSONIA 324 COLUMN 2 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER EXPENSE 1990 91 PER ADA 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 2,978 916 2,809 1,733 2,806 447 2 803 402 2,497 2,801 721 2,399 2,800 1,264 1,338 2 481 2 796 2 304 2 437 ~329 2,791 642 676 2,407 1,449 2L430 2,756 595 625 2,528 2,753 399 419 2 363 2 750 1 490 1 60 2,360 2,728 2,578 2,690 2,276 2,722 4,903 5,216 2 418 2 674 1 229 1 290 2,338 2,673 2,504 2,618 2,326 2,667 2,967 :Lj.30 2 361 2 656 823 860 2,352 2,635 1,036 1,084 2,459 2,630 538 560 2 357 2 619 1 227 1 276 2,231 2,610 1,331 1,393 3,529 121 126 4 024 161 168 2,626 554 592 NI/MBER PE TEACHERS K-12 90-91 91-92 AVG SIRY TCHRS. K-12 90-91 91-92 266.5 275.S 24,929 28~772 25,J:!_69 32.6 23,775 30.5 29.9 22 201 50.5 51.6 20,793 23,340 89.1 87.1 20,413 23_,_896 152.2 149.9 27 05 41.9 2~41 26,561 ?6 9 19 ,...376 24,559 27 541 27,_669 26,i92 40.8 41.S 24,i47 30.5 30.5 21~33 97.5 102.0 22 571 25 66 174.5 174.5 22,021 25,604 286.6 292.6 25,815 30,085 75.S 79.0 22 162 24 775 152.4 154.3 22,991 26,373 175.9 174.5 24,035 28,255 53.0 51.7 22 743 25 74 65.0 65.0 23,596 27,~42 38.6 36.5 19,206 22,792 79.5 81.0 22 334 25 180 84.0 88.0 21,773 25,257 13.1 17,962 17.6 19 502 38.0 22,494 PAGE NO. 23 N . PE CERT AVG SI RY PEB_S_QNl'IEL 90-91 91-92 C.ERL___P__ERS_._ 90-91 91-92 283.0 292.0 25~926 29,819 24L967 23 629 54.6 21,850 24,201 95.1 93,1 21,121 24,460 162.1 159.8 23 7 8 27 988 43.8 ~547 26_L125 94.3 ~568 27...,_738 5 ':\u0026gt;9 \") 12 21.1 18, 092 20_,_945 22 420 2~469 4 1 28 290 24 749 29,_Q_l:!_8 2b683 26_,_867 48 43.8 44.5 22,463 33.5 33.5 19,708 22-1.._522 102.5 107 0 23 479 26 759 183.0 183.0 22,732 26,362 301.5 309.5 26,520 30,875 80.5 84.0 23 154 25 869 163.3 165.2 23,976 27,642 189.0 186.6 25 024 29..t.245 56.5 26 712 69.0 69.0 27,986 41.6 39.S 23,917 84.5 86.0 23 200 26 226 88.0 92.0 22,371 25,847 14.6 19,520 19.9 21 079 41.0 23,729 -- --- ---- ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS COLUMN3 RANKEDI N DESCENDINGO RDER PAGE NO. 24 - - - EXPENSE 1990-91 AVG. SLRY. NO. OF CERT. AVG. SLRY. PER ADA TCHRS. 1(-12 PERSONNEL CERT. PERS. 90-91 91-,9,2 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1,970.0 1,986.3 29,510 32,960 1 445.3 1 454.3 28 667 28 830 805.4 834.9 28,883 32,136 666.1 666.0 26,522 29,976 491.0 491.5 27 755 30 847 477.0 485.5 27,504 31,244 386.6 403.4 28,108 32,060 416.6 426.9 27 882 31 160 412.4 405.6 25,597 28,879 353.3 25,1 366.5 384.5 26,175 29,841 389.5 23 949 410.6 416.8 24,953 28,293 BRYANT 286.6 292.6 25,815 301.5 309.5 26,520 30,875 FORREST CITY 2,870 296.6 299 .. 2 23,470 26,789~0.1 332.7 24,587 27,705 A 3 050 s 110 339.4 339.3 23 278 26 673 360.2 359.1 24,106 27,512 58-0S POPE RUSSELLVILLE 3,330 4,879 303.6 310.9 25,798 30,231 323.3 331.7 26,963 31,387 43-04 LONOKE CABOT 4 832 264.S 285.0 24,371 28,136 281.0 302.0 25,307 29,048 4 770 309.4 301.4 25 478 29 486 329.3 320.4 26,346 30,350 17-0S CRAWFORD VAN BUREN 18 266.5 275 .. 5 24,929 28,772 283.0 292.0 25,926 29,819 54-03 PHILLIPS HELENA-WESTH ELEN ,1,9 ,, 289.0 286.0 22,302 24,928 306.0 303.0 23,156 25,860 277.9 277.6 23 797 27 561 296.0 295.7 24 866 28,693 04-01 BENTON BENTONVILLE 21 2,487 260.3 261.8 22,592 26,723 274.8 282.3 23,719 28,087 52-04 OUACHITA FAIRVIEW ,2,2 2,,, 261.3 253.8 24,070 28,414 280.2 273.8 25,136 29,537 239.8 243.0 23 854 27,888 254 .. 8 258 .. 0 24,780 28,915 35-09 JEFFERSON WATSON CHAPEL 24 2 209.6 211.6 26,185 29,567 225 .. 6 227.6 27,328 30,753 03-03 BAXTER MOUNTAIN HOME 25 2, 194.9 199.8 24,400 28,162 210.4 216.4 25,607 29,310 ?6 2 205.8 212.1 23 683 27 554 219.4 225.7 24,622 28,534 26-03 GARLAND HOT SPRINGS 27 3, 239.2 232.8 24,490 27,350 255.2 248.3 25,599 28,802 29-03 HEMPSTEAD HOPE 28 2,481 178.5 181.5 24,433 28,485 190.5 193.5 25,485 29,512 A MAGNOLIA 29 2 326 175.9 174.5 24 035 28,255 189.0 186.6 25,024 29,245 26-05 GARLAND LAKE HAMILTON 30 2,461 2,863 164.5 170.0 25,173 29,156 177.5 183.0 26,269 30,458 73-11 WHITE SEARCY 31 2,587 2,937 181.2 191.2 24,293 27,138 194.8 205.0 25,359 28,269 9- R WYNNE 32 2 525 2 875 183.5 180.8 23 808 27,357 195.1 192.4 24,802 28,442 35-10 JEFFERSON WHITE HALL 33 2,699 179.0 177.0 24,662 27,786 191.0 189.0 25,507 28,619 ASHLEY CROSSETT 34 2,593 185.7 187.2 23,635 27,543 197.7 199.6 24,373 28,510 LE MARIANNA 35 2 975 183.5 183.5 23,103 25,458 200.0 200.0 24,252 26,867 HOT SPRING MALVERN 36 2,360 2,690 174.5 174.5 22,021 25,604 183.0 183.0 22,732 26,362 05-03 BOONE_ HARRISON 37 2,338 2,618 152.4 154.3 22,991 26,373 163.3 165 .. 2 23,976 27,642 5- ONWAY so. CONWAYc o. 38 2 610 153.0 155.0 23,250 28,587 165.8 167.8 24,263 29,621 32_-01 INDEPENDENCE BATE_SVILLE 39 2,672 157.0 158.5 25,114 27,967 168.3 169.8 25,851 28,778 18-04 CR_ITTENDEN MARION 40 2,493 143.0 145.0 24,102 28,037 154.8 156.8 25,111 29,200 STUTTGART 41 2 481 152.2 149.9 22,802 27,051 162.1 159.8 23,728 27,988 66-02 SEBASTIAN GREENWOOD 42 2,516 2,909 2,398 142.1 148.6 25,396 28,836 150.1 156.6 26,332 29,770 DUMAS 43 2,439 2,818 2,259 2,381 133.0 137.5 25,061 28,513 143.5 148.0 26,197 29,752 NORTHEAST ARKANSA 44 2 692 3 005 2 226 2 369 152.5 151.4 23,495 27,217 162.7 162.6 24,277 28,050 ALMA 45 2,375 2 764 2,186 2,288 137.5 140.5 23,431 27,669 146.8 149.8 24,749 29,088 ARKADELPHIA 46 2 614 3,022 2,181 2,267 145.9 148.9 22,384 26,027 155.8 159.3 23,404 27,122 P INGS 47 2 553 2 989 2 149 2 273 133.5 137.0 24 071 28 077 144.5 148.0 25,273 29,350 ARKANSAS Pl IA\u0026amp; IC SCHOOi PISTBICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS COLUMN 3 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE NO . .z.s_ EXPENSE 1990 91 NUMBER OF AVG, SLRY, NO. OF CERT. AVG. SLRY. PER ADA TEACHERS K-12 TCHRS. K-12 PERSONNEL CERT. PERS. 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 9 10 11 12 489 142.7 140.5 25,935 30,398 140.1 142.1 24 030 28 558 150.1 150.3 23,590 27,577 28 05.L_g,O. 2 152.4 24,940 28,895 136.9 139.0 24 950 28 866 159.1 158.0 26,389 30,109 25,828 144.5 147.5 24 229 26,814 26 360 141.5 140.3 24 196 27 241 21,763 25,354 144.2 147.8 22,764 26,449 23,100 25,869 124.5 126.5 24,570 27,468 23 513 27 085 115.6 121.6 24,301 27,662 --- 57-03 POLK MENA 113.5 24,930 28,810 117.9 120.0 25,675 29,642 31-05 HOWARD NASHVILLE 110.2 23,172 26,948 116.5 117.6 24,028 27,762 107.4 22 918 26 479 111.1 114.1 23,782 27 580 02-03 ASHLEY HAMBURG 110.0 21,956 25,346 117.2 117.3 23,234 26,604 73-02 WHITE BEEBE 103.4 106.7 21,807 26,192 109.6 113.9 22,683 26,867 115.1 111.9 21 395 25 291 124.8 120.6 22,393 26,245 44-01 MADISON HUNTSVILLE 1,666 104.6 105.9 22,473 27,092 109.6 110.9 23,110 27,761 23-07 FAULKNER VILONIA 3,029 1,614 97.0 101.0 23,538 27,980 104.0 109.0 24,352 28,878 2 909 1 638 102.5 110.1 22 004 24 966 111.3 118.5 22,963 25,949 23-03 FAULKNER GREENBRIER 68 2,344 2,902 1,505 1,586 87.5 99.0 24,801 27,934 93.5 104.5 25,713 28,921 36-01 JOHNSON CLARKSVILLE 69 2,363 2_,750 1,490 1,560 97.5 102.0 22,571 25,660 102.5 107.0 23,479 26,759 6 1 450 1 506 91.9 92.3 22 897 26 320 100.6 102.0 24,005 27,384 67-01 SEVIER DEQUEEN 71 2L788 1,449 1~9 88.8 90.4 23,566 26,561 94.3 96.4 24,568 27,738 64-01 SCOTT WALDRON 72 3,235 1,424 1,511 109.1 108.5 21,944 24,952 115.3 115.3 22,658 25,840 2 836 1 335 1 409 91.9 90.5 21 614 24 497 97.2 96.3 22,307 25,274 08-01 CARROLL BERRYVILLE 74 2.,231 1,331 1,393 84.0 88.0 21,773 25,257 88.0 92.0 22,371 25,847 24-04 FRANKLIN OZARK 75 2,499 1,322 1,400 85.5 87.5 22,725 25,873 91.9 93.8 23,698 26,926 1 1 322 1 397 86.4 84.8 22 921 26 642 91.9 90.9 23,756 27,616 01-01 ARKANSAS DEWITT 77 2_,7 18 92.7 94.7 23,157 26,141 98.9 101.1 24,016 27,140 12-02 CLEBURNE HEBER SPRINGS 78 2,480 89.5 91.5 22,139 26,271 94.9 97.2 22,990 27,210 E B I I\u0026lt; EY 79 2 399 89.1 87.1 20 413 23 896 95.1 93.1 21,121 24,460 -42-01 LOGAN BOONEVILLE 80 2,499 73.9 ~6 24,567 29,031 80.4 81.1 25,796 30,124 20-02 DALLAS FORDYCE 81 3,087 88.7 88.0 22,429 2:5,216 95.7 94.0 23,368 26,245 E T ID 82 477 81.8 82.1 21 231 24,726 89.8 90.i 22,227 25,797 68-04 SHARP HIGHLAND 83 Z,418 75.5 79.0 22,162 24,775 80.5 84.0 23,154 25,869 21-05 DESHA MCGEHEE Bi 2,357 79.5 81.0 22,334 25,180 84.5 86.0 23,200 26,226 LA s 85 2 617 86.3 86.0 20 759 23,497 92.3 92.0 21,660 24,566 PARIS 86 2,638 1,260 82.0 82.2 23,725 26,602 87.9 88.1 24,571 27,499 CORNING 87 2,4_65 1,250 82.5 80.9 21,926 26,340 88.0 86.4 22,844 27,340 PRESCOTT 88 2 567 162 1 210 84.3 83.3 21 144 24,028 91.3 90.2 22,078 25,149 DERMOTT 89 2 502 123 1 193 74.3 73.0 24,145 26,991 79.3 78.0 25,129 28,122 DOVER 90 2 465 113 1 177 70.0 73.0 23,319 26,826 75.0 78.0 24,022 27,664 2 463 073 1 126 70.3 74.0 22 278 25 652 75.0 79.0 23,318 26,568 92 2 430 1 071 1 126 71.3 72.5 21,586 24,559 77.0 78.5 22,420 25,469 93 2 727 1 058 1 099 75.5 76.5 22,664 25,381 83.4 84.3 23,741 26,598 94 2 586 1 039 1 103 69.7 73.0 22 643 26 433 76.0 80.0 23,544 27,356 ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS --------------------------'\"-\"\"'LUHN 3 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE NO. 26 . . P~RSONNEL . CFRT: PERS . -- PER____AM TEACHERS K-12 TCHRS. 1\u0026lt;-12 EXPENSE 1990 91 NUMBER OF AVG SLRY NO OF CERT AVG SLRY 90-91 'l-1~92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 --EA  cnuNTY nT!':TRTr.T ,,,,... .., i ,, 3 4 ~ 6 7 A 0 . (\\  .,, __ 7_2-0~ _W_ ASHIJ'!GTON FARMINGTON 95 2~7 3_,0 01 1 038 1 096 67.8 70 6 21 545 26 400 72.6 75.3 22 619 27 459 69 01 STONE Mnl JNTATN VTC-1.1 O.L ,, ...._ ,, ? .L\"ZC: i ,... .., . i r.OA .Lm':0 LC: 0 ?\"Z C:0.L ?7 AA') ,n f\\ 1,9 0 ?A AO? 27 OA.L __ 58-01 POPE ATKINS 97 ~.561 ~67 1 035 1 097 70.0 70.0 23 930 27 570 75.0 75.0 24 663 28,238 22-02 DREW DREW CENTRAL 98 2 611 2 950 1 023 1 064 70.2 70.2 22 361 25 736 74.7 74.7 23 487 26 948 43 -02 LONOKE ENGi AND 99 ,, c:c:o ? QAC\u0026gt; 1 ,.. .L 1 \"-\"-\"' 7'\\ ~ 71 . 0 C\u0026gt;\")Q \"IA ,_,= ~,-,A '?.\u0026lt;. \"' '?.t. r, ,.,~ n'li C\u0026gt;.\u0026lt;9.,5 7 72-06 WASHINGTON PRAIRIE GROVE 100_2 _,_J~ ~t5 _, 92\n3 1 013 1 070 63.8 68.4 23 326 26 225 68.8 73.4 24 414 27 141 04-04 BENTON GRAVETTE 101 2 622 2 947 985 1 033 68.0 69.3 22 275 24 946 72.0 75.8 23 037 25 910 36 04 IMHNsnLI I i!\u0026gt;MAR ',..,, -, 377 ? Q40 97A 1 r.-:,o .L\"I 7 .L\"' 7 ?1 1,07 ,_,A~~~ .L7 .., In C: ,.,,, ... ,.,. ?C: \"\"\"'\" 04-03 BENTON GENTRY 103 2 548 ~77 969 1 018 72.0 72.7 20,387 23,000 76.0 76.7 21,078 23,844 16-12 CRAIGHEAD VALLEY VIEW 104 2,424 2 946 960 998 58.5 63.5 24 915 27 971 62.5 67.5 25 660 28 714 68-02 SHARP CAVE CITY 105 2 528 2 976 950 998 60.0 64.3 23 340 2.1. 548 6\".0 -\"-A.3 24 204 27 \"14_7 18-02 CRITTENDEN EARLE 106 3,104 2,811 937 982 69.0 65.0 23 968 26 910 73.2 69.2 24 955 27 781 72-05 WASHINGTON LINCOLN 107 2,696 2 958 929 987 65.4 65 .. 2 21 499 24 299 69.4 70.2 22 440 25 281 09 02 CHICOT EUDORA 108 2 867 3 012 925 966 66.5 59 a -:\u0026gt;1 \"\"'4 -,c\n099 7?  .L .t.4.9 -:,-, 40 ... 26 4\"'\"' 56-02 POINSETT HARRISBURG 109 2,563 2 811 916 976 65.0 63.8 21 791 24 279 69.0 67.8 22 612 25 086 38-04 LAWRENCE HOXIE 110 2,446 2,899 914 967 60.5 59.9 22 618 27 508 64.8 64.4 23 505 28 858 11 04 CLAY PIGGOTT 111 2 413 2.896 905 953 65.0 68-, 20 335 23 05? LO(\\ 73 2 ?4 4 4 \"I ?\"I A94 72-08 WASHINGTON WEST FORK 112 2 596 2 957 894 932 61.4 59.4 20,860 24,222 66.4 64.4 22,017 25,501 10-03 CLARI\u0026lt; GURDON 113 2 574 2 921 881 921 65.5 64.5 20 832 24 557 69.5 68.5 21 680 25 556 07 01 CALHOUN HAMPTON 114 2 654 3 099 879 910 58.8 60.2 23 248 27 539 L,_, ... 6\"~ 7 ?4 I :1~1 2~, 4QQ 70-03 UNION JUNCTION CITY 115 2 600 2 870 869 910 58.1 58.1 24 097 27 353 60.3 60.3 25-116 28 311 52-01 OUACHITA BEARDEN 116 2,474 2 884 855 887 55.5 55.5 22 887 28 382 60.5 60.5 24,258 29,298 26-02 GARLAND FOUNTAIN LAKE 117 3 072 3 309 853 899 62.5 6\" 5 \"'.\u0026gt;.4 4Q-::t 27 10n .\u0026lt;.7 \" ,47 (\\ --,c, .L7? --,o A--,0 47-12 MISSISSIPPI MANILA 118 2,652 2,943 853 905 57.4 56.8 21 794 24 954 62.2 61.6 22 779 25 790 38-08 LAWRENCE WALNUT RIDGE 119 2,473 2 871 852 899 62.0 61.1 20 867 25 353 66.0 65.1 21 649 26 249 37-03 LAFAYETTE STAMPS 120 2 611 2 887 847 875 \"\"\"' 3 'SA 7 21 Q4m\n24 O\"TO .\u0026lt;.i '7 A2 . ? \"\u0026gt;\"\") '\"? '\"\u0026gt;C: ocr.o 56-04 POINSETT MARKED TREE 121 2 668 2 942 847 894 64.5 64.0 20,983 24,052 68.0 67.5 21,675 24,759 16-03 CRAIGHEAD BROOKLAND 122 2,438 2 847 842 885 54.0 54.0 22 833 27 336 57.0 57.0 23 763 28 354 66-06 SEBASTIAN MANSFIELD 123 2 734 3 061 832 873 58.8 58 8 23 408 25 834 62.8 63.5 24 420 27 038 30-02 HOT SPRING GLEN ROSE 124 2 539 2 988 824 864 53.6 54.0 23 866 27 882 56.6 58.0 24 795 28 992 54-04 PHILLIPS MARVELL 125 2 723 2 966 823 870 57.5 57.0 22 276 25 284 63.4 61.2 23 274 25 953 74-03 WOODRUFF MCCRORY 126 2 361 2 656 823 860 53.0 51.7 22 743 25 741 56.5 55.2 23 534 26 712 19-01 CROSS CROSS COUNTY 127 2 825 3 135 820 857 60.7 60.0 20 372 23 814 65.8 65.2 21 367 24 893 53-03 PERRY PERRYVILLE 128 2 489 3,041 807 848 50.9 53.5 22 719 26 790 53.9 56 .. 5 23 797 27 602 70-08 UNION SMACKOVER 129 2 668 2 930 800 837 50.8 52.4 23,765 27,066 54.8 56.4 24,945 28,160 45-02 MARION YELLVILLE-SUMMIT 130 2,736 3 017 791 832 55.0 57.6 21 660 24 347 58.0 61.1 22 574 25 422 16-13 CRAIGHEAD RIVERSIDE 131 2,873 3,028 786 820 59.0 56.0 21 364 23 937 63.0 60.0 22,383 25 126 16-05 CRAIGHEAD BUFFALO ISLAND CE132 2 685 3 025 784 814 59.0 59.0 21 348 24 708 63.8 63.8 22 079 25 468 30-01 HOT SPRING BISMARCK 133 2,427 3,006 778 812 48.3 52.0 23 170 27 850 51.3 55.0 24,117 28,803 56-08 POINSETT EAST POINSETT COU134 2,553 2,859 776 817 58.0 56.5 20,599 24,198 62.0 60.5 21,467 25,059 05-05 BOONE VALLEY SPRINGS 135 2,494 2,892 770 805 50.5 50.5 23 320 27 812 54.5 54.5 24 117 28 609 52-05 OUACHITA HARMONY GROVE 136 2,563 3,038 760 788 48.5 49.5 22,977 26,960 51.5 52.5 23,926 27,902 17-03 CRAWFORD MOUNTAINBURG 137 2,676 3,105 759 813 53.0 54.0 23,099 26,583 57.0 58.0 23,966 27,267 46-03 MILLER FOUKE 138 2 627 2 990 755 797 51.7 52.7 22 384 26 159 54.7 55.7 23 111 26 870 11-06 CLAY CLAY COUNTY CENTR139 2,697 2,968 748 782 54.7 54.7 21,391 23,965 57.7 57.7 22,211 24,796 45-01 MARION FLIPPIN 140 2,691 3,103 741 781 48.0 49.0 24,145 28,048 51.0 52.3 25,200 29,180 66-05 SEBASTIAN LAVACA 141 2 497 2 801 721 761 50.5 51.6 20 793 23 340 53.5 54.6 21 850 24 201 ARKANSAPSU BLIC SCHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUALF ISCAL REPORTA NALYSIS COLUMN3 RANKEDI N DESCENDINGO RDER PACE NO. 27 AVG, SLRY. NO, Of CERT, AyC. SLRY. TCHRS. K-12 PERSONNEL CERT. PERS. 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 10 11 12 75.3 75.4 29 495 29 644 4 o.o 23 600 27 440 53.7 53.4 24 312 27 503 53.0 54.0 23 986 27 197 56.6 56.6 21 778 25 043 313 53.5 54.5 22 120 24 725 590 755 51.1 52.0 22 489 25 675 933 969 48.4 49.4 23 955 29 881 20 828 170 54.2 55.5 21 783 25 149 47 \u0026amp;___ 49.0 22,853 850 50.0 52.0 23,825 26,923 4:S.0 48.0 2:S 001 620 48.0 51.0 2:S,738 27,432 48.2 47.7 22,134 011 51.1 50.7 23,184 26,163 44~ 47.0 21,680 25,128 47.:S 50.0 22,604 26,056 42.2 46.1 23 322 26 319 45.3 49.2 24,596 27,627 44.8 44.7 22,378 27,958 47.8 47.7 23,383 29,055 1 48.0 44.0 21,968 24,550 52.0 48.0 22,901 25,470 89 43.0 44.3 21 167 27 310 46.0 47.3 22,285 28,225 76 40.7 41.9 21,648 25,241 43.8 45.0 22,547 26,125 72 47.8 48.8 20,407 23,401 50.8 51.8 21,416 24,434 73 46 .. 2 46.2 20 958 23 980 49.2 49.2 22,297 25,414 67 46.0 47.0 22,406 25,015 49.0 50.0 23,133 25,924 40.6 40.6 23,344 27,541 43.6 43.6 24,381 28,290 44.4 45.9 22 259 24 808 47.4 48.9 23 073 25,595 39.5 40.0 25,259 28,632 42.5 43.0 26,561 29,877 42.7 42.7 21,575 25,787 45.7 45.7 22,513 26,912 44.6 45.6 21 989 26 020 47.6 48.6 22,884 26,925 42.0 42.0 19,908 24,849 45.4 45.4 21,299 26,412 40.8 41.5 21,305 24,147 43.8 44.5 22,463 25,477 38.5 41.5 23 031 25 728 41.5 44.5 24,335 27,102 40.0 41.0 21,319 23,910 43.0 44.0 22,304 24,951 43.5 43.5 21,482 25,103 46.5 46.5 22,679 26,242 44 4 45.2 21 141 24 131 47.4 48.2 22 099 25 254 37-02 184 579 61,_2 43~ 40.3 22,519 26,079 46.8 43.8 23,713 27,300 866 573 :596 39.2 40.2 21,712 26,081 42.2 43.2 22,765 26,821 1-42 569 590 43.6 42.6 21 414 24,109 46.6 45.6 22,450 25,103 568 597 42.0 42 .. 7 21,758 24,359 45.5 46.2 22,839 25,689 566 593 41.7 41.7 27,093 27,444 44.7 45.7 28,196 27,999 563 583 41.0 41.0 23 212 26 417 44.0 44.0 24,261 27,219 562 594 39.5 38.2 22,919 26,206 42.5 41.2 23,841 27,049 44.3 40.7 19,945 24,416 47.3 43.7 20,761 25,269 37.6 37.6 23 619 27 283 40.6 40.6 24,533 28,209 44.2 43.3 22,202 25,552 47.2 46.3 23,310 26,761 3,509 42.0 42.3 20,121 23,897 45.0 45.3 21,520 25,407 5 626 38.0 22 494 41.0 23,729 MAGNET COVE 186 014 3,172 43.9 42.0 21,175 23,619 46.9 45.0 22,112 24,778 ALTHEIMER-SHERRIL187 847~139 39.4 40.4 19,907 22,626 42.4 43.4 20,893 23,655 8 627 2 989 :575 39.7 40.0 21 833 25 472 42.7 43.0 22,926 26,627 66-03 SEBASTIAN 49-01 MONTGOMERY 33-06 ARD 67-03 SEVIER 34-05 JACKSON 73-10 WHITE 49-02 MONTGOMERY 73-04 WHITE 03-02 BAXTER 52-06 OUACHITA 18-05 CRITTENDEN 71-04 VAN BUREN 53-01 PERRY 61-02 RANDOLPH 12-01 CLEBURNE 26-01 GARLAND 38-06 LAWRENCE 31-04 HOWARD 04-02 BENTON 73-07 WHITE 33-02 IZARD 75-07 YELL 05-01 BOONE 59-02 PRAIRIE 03-04 BAXTER 57-05 POLK 29-01 HEMPSTEAD 67-04 SEVIER 42-02 LOGAN 37-01 LAFAYETTE 66-04 SEBASTIAN 33-01 IZARD 25-01 FULTON 12-04 CLEBURNE 55-03 PIKE 15-05 CONWAY 17-04 CRAWFORD 71-05 VAN BUREN 13-04 CLEVELAND 55-02 PIKE 25-03 FULTON 13-01 CLEVELAND ARKANSAPSU BLIC SCHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUAFLI SCAL REPORTA NALYSIS TUCKERMAN UD MOUNT IDA CENTRAL COTTER STEPHENS TURRELL SHIRLEY EAST END MAYNARD CONCORD CUTTER-HORNING SLOAN-HENDRIX MINERAL SPRINGS DECATUR 212 KENSETT 213 MELBOURNE 214 OLA 215 ALPENA 216 DEVALLS BLUFF 217 NORFORK 218 WICKES 219 BLEVINS 220 LOCKESBURG 221 MAGAZINE 222 BRADLEY 223 HARTFORD 224 CALICO ROCK 225 MAMMOTHS PRING 226 WEST SIDE 227 KIRBY 228 WONDERVIEW 229 MULBERRY 230 SOUTH SIDE 231 WOODLAWN 232 GLENWOOD 233 VIOLA 234 KINGSLAND 235 COLUMN 3 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER 1990-91 NUMBERO F ____ TEACHERS K-12 90-91 91-92 3,231 3 055 2,970 3,405 474 499 44.0 43.3 2,861 474 504 34.0 89.2 2 \"'1 2 4 2,483 470 504 36.3 37.3 2,686 461 482 30.7 31.6 2 69 8 4 7 2,483 2,895 451 472 31.3 35.0 2,621 3,016 451 475 30.0 30.6 2 888 152 449 468 5 3 2,552 2,806 447 472 32.6 33.4 2_,835 3,152 441 467 33.5 34.5 2 920 3 323 440 469 37.5 37.5 2,910 3,344 440 470 36.5 36.5 2,657 3,291 435 457 34.1 36.6 2 888 3 222 428 451 33.8 34.5 2,635 3,129 426 448 31.7 32.5 2,710 3,179 424 447 35.2 36.5 2 678 2 980 419 437 30.1 30.1 2,645 3,068 439 33.1 33.2 2,877 3,124 431 33.0 33.0 2 539 2 803 417 30.5 29.9 2,528 2,753 419 30.5 30.5 2,711 3,047 415 29.5 30.0 2 708 3 076 411 26.8 26.6 AVG. SLRY. 1\".CHRS, K-12 90-91 \u0026lt;\n1_1-92 19,333 21,625 23,050_25,802 19_,697 2j_,_5'84 22_, 765 25_, 947 4 20L188 2~83 22,692 2~60 9 20L950 23,775 21,487 24,342 20 120 22 99 21,097 23L934 20,404 23,314 22 :569 25 325 20,652 25,688 19,945 2~027 19 889 23 297 21,716 25,126 21,490 23,696 19 931 22 201 18,369 21,333 21,778 24,765 19 836 23 259 --- 47.0 46.3 20,269 22,654 37.Q_______!l7.2 24,554 27,032 39.3 __ 40.3 2Q_,_802 23,355 33.7 __ 34.6 23_,_9 85 27 ~53 34.3 21,517 23 494 32.5 21,J,_08 26,918 ?4 8 6 4 35.6 36.4 22,255 24,967 36.5 37.5 22,379 25,259 40.5 40.5 21 42 24 132 39.7 39.7 22,035 24,920 37.1 39.6 21,508 24,523 36.3 37.0 23 751 26 288 34 ._7_ _ 35. 5 21_,_592 2~20 39.1 40.4 20___,__87233 ,007 33.1 33.1 21 173 24 324 36.4 36.5 22 793 26,146 35.5 36.0 22,060 24,517 33.6 33.0 21 164 23 629 33.5 33.5 19,708 22,522 31.5 32.0 22,917 25,992 29.8 29.4 20 738 24 406 ARKANSASP IJBI IC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS COLUMN 3 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE NO. 29 NUMBER Of AY!i, SLRY. NO. OF CERT. AI/G. SLRY. TEACHERS K-12 TCHRS. K-12 PERSONNEL CERT. PERS. 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 7 8 9 10 ii 12 25 034 30.7 29.7 23 990 26,709 22 318 31.5 30.8 20 682 23 452 22,671 32.0 34.0 21 360 22,970 23,358 33.5 33.0 21,726 24,607 2 4 9 23 3 0 32.5 34.6 21 265 24 150 __ 32. 6 19 588 22, 70_1_ _ 37. 0 35.6 20,784 24,161 29.4 19,283 21J~ 32.3 32.3 20,678 23,210 32.7 20 116 22 233 38.0 35.7 21 124 23 393 57-04 PQ!.K_ I/AN COVE 375 3 L 3 20, 563 22, 72~3 . 3 3~ 21,814 23,885 20-03 DALLAS SPARKMAN 362 26.1 19,954 23,089 30.5 28.1 21,392 24,850 341 354 27.1 23 895 26 812 33.6 30.1 25,319 28,474 29-05 HEMPSTEAD SARATOGA 340 354 25 .. 6 27.8 17,651 20,728 28.1 30.3 19,005 22,269 51-01 NEWTON DEER 335 357 25.8 25.0 20,967 24,243 27.8 27.0 22,098 25,454 332 349 25.6 26.1 18 335 20 566 28.6 29.1 19,594 21,573 3,529 329 347 27.5 27.8 19,972 23,130 30.3 30.6 21,469 24,467 ,, 3,141 328 341 26.0 26.0 21,169 23,497 29.0 29.0 22,615 25,088 04 327 352 26.2 26.0 23 766 25 685 28.2 28.0 25,225 27,131 74-02 WOODRUFF COTTON PLANT 253 2,856 3,055 325 340 28.4 27.4 18,755 22,078 30.9 29.9 19,680 23,099 21-02 DESHA DELTA SPECIAL 254 2,974 3,165 324 341 27.1 26.6 19,060 21,556 30.1 29.6 20,755 23,048 2 687 3 435 324 335 21.8 22.7 18 717 24 072 24.8 24.7 19,736 25,212 256 2,571 2,980 323 341 25 .. 8 26.0 18,021 20,888 28.8 29.0 19,044 22,017 PAUL 257 2,846 3,198 321 337 2~ .. 3 26.3 20,710 23,396 27.5 28.5 21,764 24,394 58 2 928 3 041 320 337 26.8 24.9 18 969 21 888 29.8 26.9 20,212 23,100 70-11 UNION UNION 259 ~087 326 25.1 25.0 21,886 24,188 28 .. 0 28.0 23,293 25,651 01-05 ARKANSAS HUMPHREY 260 2,771 322 23.2 23.2 22,369 27,520 25.2 25.2 23,329 28,487 2 1 2 640 323 25.1 25 .. 4 19 335 22 501 27.5 27.520,353 23,453 24-01 FRANKLIN ALTUS-DENNING 262 2,__839 323 26.6 23.4 19,555 22,617 28.6 25 .. 4 20,752 24,089 29-06 HEMPSTEAD SPRING HILL 263 2_,651 307 22.0 22.0 19,606 24,774 25.0 25.0 20,921 26,217 264 2 975 306 23.4 23.4 19 252 22 588 26.4 26.4 20,303 24,072 44-02 MADISON KINGSTON 265 2,950 300 21.0 21.0 21,498 25,643 23.0 23.0 23,025 27,229 45-03 MARION MARION CO 266 3,100 303 22.7 19.7 21,032 25,791 24.7 21.7 22,218 26,553 267 2 742 302 19.9 19.6 19,000 22,950 2~ 22.5 21,156 24,774 268 3,168 298 23.5 24.5 21,440 23,723 26.1 27.1 22,720 25,302 269 3,083 299 24.0 23.6 20,080 24, 07-3--26. 8 26.4 21,186 25,151 0 \"847 293 21.7 21 .. 2 20 790 24,156 23.8 23.3 21,967 25,331 INDEPENDENCE SULPHUR ROCK 271 2,925 294 24.3 23.4 20,340 23,265 26.3 25.4 21,519 24,554 UNION HUTTIG 272 3,143 293 21.0 22 .. 0 22,776 25,112 23.0 24.0 23,922 26,451 s GILLETT 273 3 174 288 23.6 24.6 20,081 21,921 26.5 27.5 21,637 23,436 FAULKNER GUY-PERKINS 274 3,198 283 23.0 23.5 20,696 23,355 25.0 25.5 21,847 24,396 INDEPENDENCE CUSHMAN 275 3,235 286 22.9 24.8 21,442 24,645 25.4 27.3 22,633 25,939 NE DELAPLAINE 276 3 052 285 21.4 23.2 21,828 24,835 24.1 25.4 22,888 25,892 51-04 NEWTON WESTERN GROVE 277 2,743 283 21.1 21.4 20,175 23,780 23.2 23.5 21,487 24,766 33-03 IZARD MOUNT PLEASANT 278 3,213 274 24.6 24.5 22,182 24,694 26.6 26.5 21,885 24,298 WABBASEKA-TUCKER 279 2 931 282 21.0 20.0 18,326 22,969 24.0 23.0 19,553 24,399 68-03 SHARP EVENING SHADE 280 2,941 273 24.0 24.7 18,271 21,090 26.0 26.7 19,470 22,054 68-05 SHARP WILLIFORD 281 3,197 271 22.0 22.5 19,234 21,649 24 .. 5 25.0 20,713 22,744 7-04 RANT PRATTSVILLE 282 3 011 268 17.0 17.0 25,864 28,709 19.0 19.0 27,408 30,378 ARKANSAPSU BLIC SCHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUALFI SCAL REPORTA NALYSIS COLUMN 3 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE t'.jO. ~ EXPENSE 1990-91 NUMBERO f AVG. SLRY. NO. Of CERT. AVG. SLRY. PER ADA TEACHERS K-12 TCHRS. K-12 PERSONNEL CERT. PERS. 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 90-91 91~92 90-91 91-92 _____ 32-02 INDEPENDENCE - 46-0 MILER 02-02 ASHLEY 27-03 GRANT POYEN 51-03 NEWTON MOUNT J 14-07 COLUMBIA WALKER 23-06 FAULKNER MOUNT VERNON/E W E 24-0:S FRANKLIN PLEASANT VIEW 291 3,528 3,790 227 240 22.0 22.5 1(L844 ~650 2Q_,J,_l_3 ~_059 69-04 STONE RURAL SPECIAL 292 3,234 3,397 227 236 18.:S 17.5 22,961 2~270 20 .. 5 2~ 989 26 I 960 __ 69-02 STONE STONE COUNTY 293 3 162 3 898 223 234 18.5 18 8 20 093 26 395 20.5 21 104 26 885 72-09 WASHINGTON WINSLOW 294 3,124 3,551 223 236 20.0 20.4 18,706 2j.__,297 22.0 1__.,855 47-01 MISSISSIPPI ARMOREL 295 3,850 4,344 218 232 21.4 21.8 22,820 26,179 23.4 0 6 38-07 LAWRENCE STRAWBERRY 296 3 432 3 885 216 224 4 49-04 MONTGOMERY ODEN 297 3,461 3,703 215 227 24,224 63-06 SALINE PARON 298 3,994 4,3661 215 229 26 619 37_1_ _ 54-05 PHILLIPS LAKE VIEW 299 3 240 2 778 213 214 19 376 22.3 21.1 0 945 70-05 UNION MOUNT HOLLY 300 4,294 5,081 212 224 21 .. 5 24.3 22,745 23,644 23.5 27.0 5,146 65-03 SEARCY SAINT JOE 301 3,678 4,116 202 214 19.5 19.5 19,352 23,262 21.5 21.5 4 499 61-01 RANDOLPH BIGGERS-REYNO 302 3 205 3 428 197 206 18.6 19.0 19 721 22 032 20.6 21.0 20 653 22 895 28-06 GREENE STANFORD 303 3,357 3,548 194 201 20.1 20.5 19,263 20.., 816 22.4 22.8 20, 131~694 34-02 JACKSON GRUBBS 304 3,306 3,673 188 200 19.3 19.3 17,374 2~410 21.3 21.3 18,485 21 324 21-03 DESHA DESHA-DREW 305 3 126 3 420 182 190 11.3 10.8 18 583 21 402 13.3 12.8 21 094 24 394 34-04 JACKSON SWIFTON 306 3,474 3,563 181 191 20.1 19.6 18,578 20,946 22.1 21.6 20 019 22,423 41-03 LITTLE RIVER WINTHROP 307 3,675 3,738 169 176 14.6 14.6 20,966 23,019~.6 16.6 22 339 24,477 __ 43-05 LO\"IOKE HUMNOKE 308 3 647 3 727 169 180 15.8 17.1 18 729 19 880 17.8 19.1 19 963 21 024 53-02 PERRY PERRY CASA 309 4,405 4,182 167 184 19.2 15.7 23,028 24,809 21.2 ___JJ_._7 24,200 26,192 20-01 DALLAS CARTHAGE 310 3,483 3,725 165 172 17.5 17.5 19,528 21,383 19.5 19.5 20,894 22,722 12-05 CLEBURNE WILBURN 311 3 041 3 911 164 177 14.2 15.4 18 682 22 473 16.2 17.4 21 181 25 723 73-05 WHITE GRIFFITHVILLE 312 4,024 161 168 17.6 19,502 19.9 21 079 03-06 BAXTER TRI-COUNTY CON. 313 4,809 4,762 151 159 18.3 13.8 20,313 23,402 20.3 16.3 21,378 25,052 36-05 JOHNSON OARK 314 4 027 4 242 150 158 16.9 17.9 19 417 21 674 18.9 19.9 20 721 23 160 02-04 ASHLEY PARKDALE 315 3,169 3,231 145 152 14.7 12.8 17,735 20,021 16.7 14.8 17,592 1~~ 21-01 DESHA ARKANSAS CITY 316 6,165 6,609 145 152 18.2 17.0 22,727 23,780 20.7 19.5 25 110 26,262 50-04 NEVADA EMMET 317 2 982 3 323 143 151 13.0 12.0 19 106 23 854 15.0 14.0 20 489 25 302 71-03 VAN BUREN SCOTLAND 318 3,655 4,078 130 135 14.0 14.5 19,973 21,899 16.0 16.5 21,154 23 335 75-05 YELL FOURCHE VALLEY 319 4,346 5,125 128 136 16.4 18.2 19,128 22,348 __ 1_8.4 20.2 20,494 23,~ 31-06 HOWARD UMPIRE 320 4 781 5 471 123 127 14.9 15.6 20 349 22 369 17.8 18.5 22 124 24 559 23-02 FAULKNER ENOLA 321 3,529 121 126 13.1 17,962 14.6 19,520 68-06 SHARP POUGHKEEPSIE 322 3,842 3,5981 115 120 15.1 14.0 18,377 19,044 17.1 16.0 19,478 19,503 65-04 SEARCY WITTS SPRINGS 323 5 293 5 726 I 94 99 14.8 14.8 18 050 20 234 16.8 16.8 19 145 21 278 71-01 VAN BUREN ALREAD 324 4,920 5,270 93 99 13.1 13.1 19,780 21,502 15.2 15.3 21,262 23,133 -- --------- LEA,:, COUNTY 60-01 PULASKI 60-03 PUL SKI 66-01 SEBASTIAN 60-02 PULASKI 63-03 62-01 70-01 58-05 43-04 16-08 17-05 47-02 4-03 04-01 52-04 63-02 35-09 27-05 03-03 26-03 29-03 14-02 26-05 73-ii 35-10 19-05 02-01 39-04 30-04 05-03 15-07 18-04 32-01 01-04 66-02 21-04 28-08 17-01 04-06 10-02 CRITTENDEN HILLER F KNER SALINE ST FRANCIS UNION POPE LONOKE CRAIGHEAD CRAWFORD MISSISSIPPI PHILLIPS BENTON OUACHITA SALINE JEFFERSON GRANT AXTER GARLAND HEMPSTEAD COLUMBIA GARLAND WHITE JEFFERSON CROSS ASHLEY LEE HOT SPRING BOONE CONWAY CRITTENDEN INDEPENDENCE ARKANSAS SEBASTIAN DESHA GREENE CRAWFORD BENTON CLARK ARKANSAPSU BLIC SCHOOLD ISTRICTS ANNUALFI SCAL REPORTA NALYSIS COLUMN 4 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE NO. 31 DI BRYANT FORREST CITY EL DORADO RUSSELLVILLE CABOT JONESBORO VAN BUREN BLYTHEVILLE HELE -W S BENTONVILLE FAIRVIEW BENTON WATSON CHAPEL SHERIDAN MOUNTAIN HO HOT SPRINGS HOPE MAGNOLIA LAKE HAMILTON SEARCY WHITE HALL WYNNE CROSSETT MARIANNA MALVERN HARRISON SO. CONWAY CO. MARION BATESVILLE STUTTGART GREENWOOD DUMAS NORTHEAST ARKANSA ALMA SILOAM SPRINGS ARKADELPHIA 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 EXPENSE PER ADA 90-91 91-92 2,587 2 699 2,525 2,593 2 975 2,360 2,338 2 610 2,493 2,672 2 481 2,516 2,439 2,692 2,375 2,553 2 614 2,728 2,673 3 113 2,950 2,932 2 796 2,909 2,818 3 005 2,764 2,989 3 022 174.5 154.3 155.0 145.0 158 .. 5 149.9 148.6 137.5 151.4 140.5 137.0 148.9 25_,_173 24, 293 21,~8 194. 8_ _ 205. 0_2 4 662 27 786 191.0 189.0 25 9 23,808 27 357~-1~9~5~.1 192.4 24 2 23~5 27,543 197.7 199.6 2~373 28,510 23 103 2 45 200.0 00. 24 252 26 867 22,021 2~604 183.0 183.0 22--'--732 26,362 22,991 2A,373 163.3 165.2 23,976 27,642 23 250 28 587 165.8 167.8 24 263 29 621 24,102 28,037 154.8 156.8 25,111 25_,114 27,967 168.3 169.8 2~851 22 802 27 051 162.1 159.8 23 728 25,396 28,836 150.L.____!_56.6 26,332 25,061 28,513 143.5 148.0 26,197 29,752 23 495 27,217~2.7 162.6 24 277 28 050 23,431 27,669 146.8 149.8 24,749 29,088 24,071 28,077 144~~5-~14_8.0 25,273 29,350 22 384 26 027 155.8 159.3 23,404 27 122 ARKANSAS PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ANNUAL FISCAL REPORT ANALYSIS COLUMN 4 RANKED IN DESCENDING ORDER PAGE NO. _32___ EXPENSE 1990-91 NUMBER OF AVG. SLRY. NO. Of CERT, SLRY, PER ADA _TEAQiE8S K-12 TCHRS. K-12 EEBSONNEL E'ERS. 90-91 91-92 0-91 91-92 90-91___'l1._-92 90-21 21-92 JACKSON GRE NE MISSISSIPPI MISSISSIPPI GR AN DREW MONTICELLO LITTLE RIVER ASHDOWN 3 - ,., FE' ON A 47-06 MISSISSIPPI SO MISSISSIPPI 3,400 06-02 BRADLEY WARREN 2,809 61-03 RANDOLPH POCAHONTAS 2 8 4 57-03 POLK MENA 2,494 2,927 iL697 1,786 113.5 24,930 28_,810 117.9 25,675 29...,642 31-05 HOWARD NASHVILLE 2,514 2,943 1,690 1,771 109.2 110.2 23,172 26,948 116.5 21,_028 27..,_762 43-01 LONOKE LONOKE 2 390 2 814 1 661 1 740 104.9 07.4 22 918 26 479 111.1 23 78 27 5 0 02-03 ASHLEY HAMBURG 62 2,729 2,984 1,630 1,714 109.5 110.0 21,956 25_, 346 117.2 23,234 26__,604 56-05 POINSETT TRUMANN 63 2,655 2,939 1,568 1,673 115.1 111.9 21_.,_395 25_, 291 124.8 120.6 22_.,_393 26_,245 73-02 WHITE BEEBE 64 2 335 2 763 1 575 1 670 103.4 106.7 21 807 26 192 109.6 113.9 22 683 26 867 44-01 MADISON HUNTSVILLE 65 2,493 2,908 1,566 1,666 104.6 105.9 22,473 27,092 109.6 110.9 23,110 27,761 16-11 CRAIGHEAD NETTLETON 66 2,572 2,909 1,539 1,638 102.5 110.1 22,004 24,966 111.3 118.5 22.L963 25,949 23-07 FAULKNER VILONIA 67 2 455 3 029 1 542 i 614 97.0 101.0 23 538 27 980 104.0 109.0 24 352 28 878 23-03 FAULKNER GREENBRIER 68 2,344 2,902 1,505 1,586 87.5 99.0 24,801 27L934 93.5 104.5 25,713 28_.,__921 36-01 JOHNSON CLARKSVILLE 69 2,363 2,750 1,490 1,560 97.5 102.0 22,571 25_,660 102.5 107.0 23,479 26,759 67-01 SEVIER DEQUEEN 70 2 407 2 788 1 449 1 519 88.8 90.4 23 6 26 561 94.3 96 4 24 568 27 738 64-01 SCOTT WALDRON 71 2,814 3,235 1,424 1,511 109.1 108.5 21,944 24,952 115.3 115.3 22,658 25,840 40-03 LINCOLN STAR CITY 72 2,~11 2,896 1,450 1,506 91.9 92.3 22,897 26,320 100.6 102.0 24,005 27,384 75-04 YELL DARDANELLE 73 2 606 2 836 1 335 1 409 91.9 90.5 21 614 24 497 97.2 96.3 22 307 25 274 24-04 FRANKLIN OZARK 74 2,499 2,874 1,322 1,400 85.5 87.5 22,725 25,873 91.9 93.8 23,698 26,926 73-01 WHITE BALD KNOB 75 2,701 3,031 1,322 1,397 86.4 84.8 22,921 26,642 91.9 90.9 23,756 27,616 08-01 CARROLL BERRYVILLE 76 2 231 2 610 1 331 1 393 84.0 88.0 21 773 25 257 88.0 92.0 22 371 25 847 12-02 CLEBURNE HEBER SPRINGS 77 2,480 2,944 1,300 1,382 89.5 91.5 22,139 26,271 94.9 97.2 22,990 27,210 01-01 ARKANSAS DEWITT 78 2,718 3,109 1,317 1,378 92.7 94.7 23,157 26,141 98.9 101.1 24,016 27,140 48-01 MONROE BRINKLEY 79 2 399 2 800 1 264 1 338 89.1 87.1 20 413 23 896 95.1 93.1 21 121 24 460 42-01 LOGAN BOONEVILLE 80 2,499 2,901 1,256 1,328 73.9 75.6 24,567 29,031 80.4 81.1 25,796 30,124 09-03 CHICOT LAKESIDE 81 2,617 2,973 1,216 1,310 86.3 86.0 20,759 23,497 92.3 92.0 21,660 24,566 16-02 CRAIGHEAD WEST SIDE 82 2 477 2 839 1 229 1 310 81.8 82.1 21 231 24 726 89.8 90.1 22 227 25 797 20-02 DALLAS FORDYCE 83 3,087 3,474 1,249 1,303 88.7 88.0 22,429 25,216 95.7 94.0 23,368 26_,245 68-04 SHARP HIGHLAND 84 2,418 2,674 1,229 1,290 75.5 79.0 22,162 24,775 80.5 84.0 23,154 25,869 21-05 DESHA MCGEHEE 85 2 357 2 619 1 227 1 276 79.S 81.0 22 334 25 180 84.5 86.0 23 200 26 226 42-03 LOGAN PARIS 86 2,638 2,817 1,192 1,260 82.0 82.2 23,725 26,602 87.9 88.1 24,571 27,499 11-01 CLAY CORNING 87 2,465 2,900 1,187 1,250 82.5 80.9 21,926 26,340 88.0 86.4 22,844 27,340 50-06 NEVADA PRESCOTT 88 2 567 2 862 1 162 1 210 84.3 83.3 21 144 24 028 91.3 90.2 22 078 25 149 09-01 CHICOT DERMOTT 89 2,502 2,780 1,123 1,193 74.3 73.0 24,145 26,991 79.3 78.0 25,129 28,122 58-02 POPE DOVER 90 2,465 2,857 1,113 1,177 70.0 73.0 23,319 26,826 75.0 78.0 24,022 27,664 08-03 CARROLL GREEN FOREST 91 2 430 2 769 1 071 1 126 71.3 72.5 21 586 24 559 77.0 78.5 22 420 25 469 71-02 VAN BUREN CLINTON 92 2,463 2,829 1,073 1,126 70.3 74.0 22,278 25,652 75.0 79.0 23,318 ~~ 32-09 INDEPENDENCE SOUTH SIDE 93 2,586 3,002 1,039 1,103 69.7 73.0 22,643 26,433 76.0 80.0 23,544 27,356 62-02 ST FRANCIS HUGHES 94 2 727 3 119 1 058 1 099 75.5 76.5 22 664 25 381 83.4 84.3 23 741 26 598 38-04 LAWRENCE 09-02 CHICOT 16-03 CRAIGHEAD 37-03 LAFAYETTE 54-Q.4 PHILLIPS 30-02 HOT SPRING ARKANSASP IIBI re SCHOOLD ISTRICT$ ANNUALE lSCAL REPORTA NALYSIS BROOKLAND STAMPS HARVELL GLEN ROSE CROSS COUNTY PERRYVILLE SHAC \\/ER YELLVILLE-SUMMIT RIVERSIDE OLUl1N 4- BANKED...IN DESCENDING ORDER EXPENSE PEFLADA _9Q::_91_ 91-92 NUMBERO F 65.2 65.0 63.8 59.9 59.8 68.2 59.4 64.5 60 .. 2 58.1 56.8 62 .. S 61.1 64.0 55.5 54.0 58.7 58.8 57.0 54.0 51.7 60.0 53.5 52.4 57.6 56.0 56.5 59.0 54.0 52.0 50.5 52 .. 7 49 .. 5 54.7 49.0 51.6 AY~. SLRY. NO, OF CERT. ~T~C=H=R=S=~K~-~1=2~--P~ERSONNEL 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 8 9 10 27 570 75.0 75.0 400 72.6 75.3 042 69.0 69.0 225 68.8 73.4 794 76.5 76.0 25,736 74.7 74.7 24 946 72.0 75.8 24 753 67.4 69.5 23,000 76.0 76.7 27,971 62.5 67.5 23 340 26 548 64.0 68.3 21,499 24,299 69.4 70.2 23,968 26,910 73.2 69.2 21 791 24 279 69.0 67.8 22,618 27,508 64.8 64.4 21,804 25,099 72.6 64.9 20 335 23 052 69.0 73.2 20,860 24,222 66.4 64.4 20,832 24,557 69.5 68.5 23 248 27 539 62.3 63.7 24,097 27,353 60.3 60.3 21 794 24 954 62.2 61.6 4 393 27 180 67.0 67.0 20,867 25 353 66.0 65.1 20 983 24,052 68.0 67.5 22 887 28 382 60.5 60.5 22,833 27,336 57.0 57.0 21,915 24,938 61.7 62.2 23 408 25 834 62.8 63.5 22,276 25,284 63.4 61.2 23,866 27,882 56.6 58.0 22 743 25 741 56.5 55.2 20,372 23,814 65.8 65.2 22,719 26,790 53.9 56 .. :S 23 765 27,066 54.8 56.4 21,660 24,347 58.0 61.1 21,364 23,937 63.0 60.0 20 599 24 198 62.0 60.5 21 348 24,708 63.8 63.8 23,099 26,583 57.0 58.0 23 170 27 850 51.3 55.0 23,320 27,812 54.5 54.5 22,384 26,159 54.7 55.7 22 977 26 960 51.5 52.5 21,391 23,965 57.7 57.7 24,145 28,048 51.0 52.3 20 793 23 340 53.5 54.6 PAGE NO. 33 CERT. 90-91 11 24,663 22 619 24 492 24 414 23 881 23 487 23,037 22 351 21,078 25,660 24,204 22,440 24,955 22 612 23,505 23,193 21,113 22,017 21,680 24,437 25,116 22,779 25 672 21,649 21,675 24 258 23,763 22,802 24,420 23,274 24,795 23 534 21,367 23,797 24,945 22,574 22,383 21,467 22,079 23,966 24,117 24,117 23,111 23,926 22,211 25,200 21,850 SLRY. PERS. 91-92 12 28,238 27 459 27 986 27 141 26 957 26 948 25 910 25 564 23,844 28,714 27,317 25,281 27,781 25 086 28,858 26,462 23,894 25,501 25,556 28,466 28,311 25,790 28 428 26,249 24,759 29,298 28,354 25,858 27,038 25,953 28,992 26,712 24,893 27,602 28,160 25,422 25,126 25,059 25,468 27,267 28,803 28,609 26,870 27,902 24,796 29,180 24,201 - - -- - ---- ------------ ----------------------------- LEA,:, COUNTY 17-02 CRAWFORD 4A 02 MTI I ER 54 02 PHILLIPS 32 06 INDEPENDENCE 54 01 PHILLIPS 65-02 SEARCY 50-08 NEVADA 72-01 WASHINGTON 04-07 BENTON 58-04 POPE 24-02 FRANKLIN 23-05 FAULKNER 43-03 LONOKE 05-02 BOONE 13-03 CLEVELAND 72-04 WASHINGTON 62-05 ST FRANCIS 59-01 PRAIRIE 74-01 WOODRUFF 25-02 FULTON 58-03 POPE 28-03 GREENE 36-06 JOHNSON __ 63-01 SALINE 16-01 CRAIGHEAD 70-07 UNION 48-02 MONROE 08-02 CARROLL -- 06-01 BRADLEY 26-07 GARLAND 32-11 INDEPENDENCE 63-04 SALINE 37-02 LAFAYETTE 73-09 WHITE 31-02 HOWARD 12-03 CLEBURNE 26-04 GARLAND 73-06 WHITE 19-03 CROSS 41-02 LITTLE RIVER 24-03 FRANKLIN 55-04 PIKE 70-06 UNION --30-03 HOT SPRING 35-01 JEFFERSON 51-02 NEWTON 73-03 WHITE ARKANSAPSU BLICS CHOOLD ISTRICTSA NNUAFLI SCAL REPORTA NALYSIS COLUMN 4 ANKED IN DESCENDING ORD R EXPENSE 1990-'11 NUMBEORF AVG. SLRY. F'ER ADA TEACHERS K-12 TCHRS . K-12 90-91 91-92 A/D/A A/D/M 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 DT!'lTRICT \"'\"NK 1 ? 3 4 s 6 7 A CEDARVILLE 142 2 591 2 906 708 760 50.7 50.4 23 371 26 507 :c-tJnA rC\"\u0026gt;.JTCAI ....... ?.A7? ~ -..ncc 7f\\\"\u0026lt; 7AO \"'\" 0 !'ii 0 ':)':) 779 ':)CC Q':),J.. ELAINE 144 2 774 3 144 698 744 53.0 54.0 20 938 23 921 NEWARK 145 5 384 5 823 711 742 70.0 70.1 28 616 28 774 BARTON/LEXA 146 2 453 2 905 710 741 45.0 47.0 '\"\u0026gt;2 438 26 247 MARSHALL 147 2 646 2 965 697 736 50.5 51.5 21 313 24 246 NEVADA COUNTY 148 2,638 3,031 692 731 48.1 49.0 21 590 24 755 ELKINS 149 2 691 3 336 683 722 45.4 46.4 22 933 28 969 PEA RIDGE 150 2 659 3 153 679 720 51.1 52 .. 5 20 828 24 170 POTTSVILLE 151 2,557 2,812 671 707 45 .. 0 48.0 25,001 26,620 CHARLESTON 152 2 560 2 969 678 702 47.0 49.0 22 853 25 850 MAYFLOWER 153 2,356 2,883 667 701 44 .. 5 47.0 21,680 25,128 CARLISLE 154 2,668 2,961 669 696 48.2 47.7 22,134 25,011 BERGMAN 155 2 559 3 029 665 694 42.2 46.1 23 322 26 319 RISON 156 2,366 2,886 663 689 44.8 44.7 22 378 27 958 GREENLAND 157 2,404 3,172 651 689 43.0 44.3 21,167 27,310 PALESTINE/WHEATLE158 2 768 2 916 656 681 48.0 44.0 21 968 24 550 DES ARC 159 2,329 2,791 642 676 40.7 41.9 21,648 25 241 AUGUSTA 160 2,649 3,108 639 673 46.2 46.2 20,958 23,980 SALEM 161 2 628 2 937 641 672 47.8 48.8 20 407 23 401 HECTOR 162 2,650 3,051 633 667 46.0 47.0 22,406 25 015 MARMADUKE 163 2,488 2 767 629 658 40.6 40.6 23 344 27 541 WEST SIDE 164 2 615 2 931 622 657 44.4 45.9 22 259 24 808 BAUXITE 165 3,039 3 401 621 656 39 .. 5 40.0 25,259 28,632 BAY-BROWN 166 2,683~,073 619 648 42.7 42.7 21,575 25 787 PARKERS CHAPEL 167 2 549 3 004 618 643 44.6 45.6 21 989 26 020 CLARENDON 168 2,504_ 3,013 606 637 42.0 42.0 19 908 24 849 EUREKA SPRINGS 169 2,430 2,756 595 625 40.8 41.5 21,305 24,147 HERMITAGE 170 2 568 2 972 589 624 40.0 41.0 21 319 23 910 MOUNTAIN PINE 171 2 678 2 979 583 622 43.5 43.5 21,482 25 103 MIDLAND 172 2J6'l.7 3,003 582 618 44.4 45 .. 2 21 141 24 131 HARMONY GROVE 173 2 564 3 033 591 618 38.5 41 .. 5 23 031 25 728 LEWISVILLE 174 2 970~J.84 579 612 43.3 40.3 22 519 26 079 PANGBURN 175 2,776 3 195 568 597 42 ...0 42.7 21,758 24 359 DIERKS 176 2 492 2 866 573 596 39.2 40.2 21 712 26 081 QUITMAN 177 2,608 2,903 562 594 39.5 38.2 22,919 26,206 JESSIEVILLE 178 3, 45__b 321 566 593 41.7 41.7 27,093 27,444 JUDSONIA 179 2 626 554 592 38.0 22 494 PARKIN 180 2,736 3,509 554 591 42.0 42.3 20,121 23,897 FOREMAN 181 2,988 3 142 569 590 43.6 42.6 21 414 24,109 COUNTY LINE 182 2 830 3 086 555 588 44.3 40.7 19 945 24 416 MURFREESBORO 183 2,727~.144 555 583 44.2 43.3 22,202 25,552 NORPHLET 184 2,607 2,883 563 583 41.0 4l .. O 23,212 26,417 MAGNET COVE 185 3 014 3 172 553 582 43.9 42.0 21 175 23 619 ALTHEIMER-SHERRIL186 2,847 3,139 549 581 39.4 40.4 19,907 22,626 JASPER 187 2,778 3,_203 555 581 37.6 37.6 23,619 27,283 BRADFORD 188 2 627 2 989 547 575 39.7 40.0 21 833 25 472 PAGE NO. JL,. NO. Of CERT. AVG. SLRY. PERSONNEL CERT . PERS . 90-91 91-92 90-91 91-92 9 1n  1? 53.7 53.4 24 312 27 503 ,.,..,\" ' CCA r, ~-. \u0026lt;\"\u0026gt;\u0026lt;\u0026gt;L \".\u0026gt;7 1Q7 56.6 56.6 21 778 25 043 75.3 75.4 29 495 29 644 48.n 5n.n \"'3 6\"0 ?7 440 53.5 54.5 22 120 24 725 51.1 52.0 22 489 25 675 48.4 49.4 23 955 29 881 54.2 55.5 21 783 25 149 48.0 51.0 25,738 27 432 50.0 52.0 23 825 26 923 47.5 50.0 22,604 26,056 51.1 50.7 23 184 26 163 45.3 49.2 24 596 27 627 47.8 47.7 23,383 29,055 46.0 47.3 22,285 28,225 52.0 48.0 22 901 25 470 43.8 45.0 22,547\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"pth_bcja_metapth611486","title":"The Rebirth of Ethics---A Pervasive Challenge","collection_id":"pth_bcja","collection_title":"Barbara C. Jordan Archives","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Texas, 31.25044, -99.25061"],"dcterms_creator":["Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996"],"dc_date":["1992"],"dcterms_description":["Text of speech delivered by Barbara Jordan to the Association for Investment Management and Research in San Antonio, Texas. She discusses the faltering trust between Americans and the United States government."],"dc_format":["image/jpeg"],"dcterms_identifier":["local-cont-no: TSOU_0450-001-005"],"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["ark: ark:/67531/metapth611486"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["ark: ark:/67531/metapth611486"],"dcterms_subject":["African American women politicians--Texas","Speeches, addresses, etc.","Political ethics--United States"],"dcterms_title":["The Rebirth of Ethics---A Pervasive Challenge","Texas Senate Papers"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Texas Southern University. Library"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth611486"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["speeches (documents)"],"dcterms_extent":["15 p. ; 28 cm."],"dlg_subject_personal":["Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"loc_rosaparks_47307","title":"[Reception for Carol Moseley Braun, Atlanta, Georgia, 1992] [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":["1992"],"dcterms_description":["Title devised by Library staff from information on photographer's price list.","Photographer credit: \"Philip McCollum Photography, 646 Lawton Street, Atlanta, Georgia\" on accompanying price list."],"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":["[Reception for Carol Moseley Braun, Atlanta, Georgia, 1992] [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.47307"],"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","contact sheetscolor1990-2000.gmgpc"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["Moseley-Braun, Carol, 1947-"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null}],"pages":{"current_page":686,"next_page":687,"prev_page":685,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":8220,"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}}]}}