3. COMMITTEE ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING
Auditorium, School Administration Building
Monday, January 30, 2012
6:00
Welcome Mrs. Evelyn Bulluck, Chair
Introductions
Charge to the Committee Dr. Anthony D. Jackson, Superintendent
 Role of the Committee Chairs
 Role of the Committee
 Role of the Consultant
 School Board Priorities
Senate Bill 612 Mr. Wardlaw Lamar, Esq., School Board Attorney
ORED Mr. Mike Miller
 Methodology
 Process
 Timeline
Communication Mrs. Sandy Drum, Public Information Officer
Questions Next Meeting
February 13
4:00-5:30
Central Office Auditorium
 3

4. Carina Bryant
Principal, Southern Nash Middle School
Victor Ward
Director of Personnel

5.  Ann Mitchell, Elementary School Principal
 Robin May, Middle School Principal
 Chip Hodges, High School Principal

6.  Tommy Stockdale, Eaton Corporation
 Kelley Deal
 Tem Myers, Wells Fargo Bank
 Tripp Evans, CW Williams
 Vanessa McCleary, City of Rocky Mount

7.  Sherri Wells, Spring Hope Elementary
 Sylvia Anthony-McGeachy, Williford Elementary
 Cindi Carpenter, Southern Nash Middle School
 John Gay, Nash Central High School

8.  Tracy Proctor, Swift Creek Elementary
 Laticia Cavazos, Spring Hope Elementary
 Tracy Wiggins-Elliot, Middlesex Elementary
 LaTasha Sledge, Parker Middle/ Hubbard Elementary
 Monica Whitehead, Rocky Mount High School

9.  District 1 – Archie Jones
 District 2 - John Barnes
 District 3 - Reggie Mullen
 District 4 - Chet Osterhoudt
 District 5 - Melissa Dalsimer
 District 6 - Lester Weaver
 District 7 – Chris Miller
 District 8 – Pastor James Gailliard
 District 9 – Shirley Kelly-Morton
 District 10 – Ruth Bullard
 District 11 – Cynthia Dunston

10.  Central Office Staff will serve as ex-officio
members of the committee; providing support
as needed.
 Superintendent
 Assistant Superintendents
 Directors

11. Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools
January 30, 2012

12.  To prepare a recommendation and present a
comprehensive student reassignment plan
consistent with the priorities outlined by the
board of education on or before August 2012.
 After public input and final board
approval, the plan will be implemented at the
start of the 2013-2014 school year.
12

13. Jan-Aug 2012 Aug - 2012 Aug – Dec 2012 August 2013
Committee Committee Public Input/ Community
Deliberations/ Recommendations Engagement Implementation
Monthly Reports to Presented to the
the School Board School Board Board of Education
Approval
13

14. Public Engagement
Board of
Education
Committee Chairs
Technical Support
Community Committee
Feedback ORED
Staff 14

15. At its work session on January 23, the Nash-
Rocky Mount Board of Education reached
consensus on the following priorities to guide
the Student Reassignment Committee’s
preparation of recommendations for their
consideration.
15

16.  Contiguous boundaries:
Attempt to maintain contiguous school boundaries without using
satellite attendance areas.
 Respect neighborhoods:
Avoid dividing easily recognized “neighborhoods” or identified
“developments” or “sub- divisions” unless it is necessary to meet
other guidelines. Whenever possible and practical use major
highways, railroads, rivers, and streams as natural boundaries.
 Proximity to schools:
While it is recognized that all students cannot be assigned to their
closest school, consider students proximity to other schools when
creating school boundaries.
16

17.  Modify feeder systems:
In order to maximize facility use and establish reasonable numbers of students at
each site, consider the use of 6 middle school feeder systems instead of 5. This
would allow smaller, more instructionally suited middle schools and less
dependence on mobile classrooms.
 Stay within enrollment capacities:
Unless it is likely that a school enrollment will be declining, assign students to the
four high schools in a way that their enrollments are under established capacities.
 Consider anticipated growth:
Enrollment growth patterns should be taken into consideration, where feasible, to
ensure that anticipated growth will not adversely impact one school significantly
more than the others.
 Enrollment balance:
In keeping with the intent of SB612, attempt to balance the percentage of
academic and economic populations at each middle and high school.
17

18. Mr. Wardlaw Lamar, Esq.
Mr. Lewis Lamar, Esq.
Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools
January 30, 2012

19.  Sec. 17. (a) The Interim Board and the Nash-Rocky Mount Board of
Education shall make their best efforts to achieve a racial balance in student
enrollment, within plus or minus 12 percentage points of the system wide average
minority student enrollment at the following schools:
 Rocky Mount Senior High, Northern Nash Senior High and any new high school within the Nash-Rocky Mount
School Administrative Unit, and any middle or junior high school that feeds any of these high schools.
 A school will be considered to be in substantial compliance with the racial balance objectives of this
paragraph if its racial balance is plus or minus 18 percentage points of the system wide average minority
student enrollment.

(b) For all schools other than those covered in subsection (a) of this section, the Nash-
Rocky Mount Board of Education will promote reasonable and
practical racial balance in the schools, utilizing and preserving neighborhood and
voluntary schools to the maximum extent permitted by the Constitution, and consistent
with sound educational practices.

20. Michael Miller, Program Manager
Operations Research and Education Laboratory (OREd)
Institute for Transportation Research and Education
Centennial Campus
North Carolina State University
Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools
January 30, 2012

21. OREd was founded in 1990 by Dr. Raymond Taylor (Professor
Emeritus, College of Education, NCSU) to scientifically address
politically sensitive school planning issues such as district
membership projections, determining the location of new
school sites, creating new attendance boundaries and
demographic balance.
OREd has served school districts ranging from 4000 to 140,000
students in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Mississippi.
21

22. • Alamance–Burlington School System – 02, 03, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, • Haywood County Schools – 99
11 • Hoke County Schools – 99, 08, 09*, 11
• Asheboro City Schools – 04, 05, 06, 07 • Lee County Schools – 08, 09*
• Berkeley County Schools, SC – 09, 11 • Lenoir County School – 09
• Bladen County Schools – 04 • Moore County Schools – 04, 07, 08, 09*
• Buncombe County Schools – 98, 99 • Mooresville Graded Schools – 99, 00, 01, 04
• Brunswick County Schools – 03, 04 • Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools – 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10,
• Carteret County Schools – 09** 11
• Chapel/Carrboro Schools – 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 00, 01, 02, 05, 06, • New Hanover County Schools – 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 00
07 • Onslow County Schools – 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09**, 10, 11
• Chatham County Schools – 03, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11 • Orange County Schools – 95, 09
• Craven County Schools – 96, 97, 98, 99, 00, 01, 02, 04, 05, 06, • Pamlico County Schools – 09**
07, 08** • Pender County Schools – 09**
• Cumberland County Schools – 08, 09* • Randolph County Schools – 05, 06, 07, 08, 09
• Cleveland County Schools – 08 • Richmond County Schools – 00, 08*
• Currituck County Schools – 09 • Robeson County Schools – 08*
• Duplin County Schools – 09** • Rock Hill School District 3, SC – 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09,
• Durham Public Schools – 08, 09, 11 10, 11
• Elizabeth City-Pasquotank County Schools – 07 • Rowan County Schools – 09
• Franklin County Schools – 08 • Pitt County Schools – 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 00,
• Iredell-Statesville Schools – 98, 99, 00, 01, 02, 03, 04 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10
• Jones County Schools – 09** • Stokes County Schools – 05, 06, 08
• Johnston County Schools – 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 00, 01, 02, 03, 04, • Union County Schools – 99, 00, 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07
05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11 • Tupelo Public Schools, MS – 07
• Gaston County Schools – 98, 99, 00, 01, 02, 03, 04 • Vance County Schools – 09
• Granville County Schools – 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09 • Wayne County Schools – 95
• Guilford County Schools – 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 09 • Wake County Public School System – 97, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08,
• Harnett County Schools – 98, 99, 00, 01, 02, 03, 06, 07, 08, 09*, 09, 10, 11
10, 11
“*” denote projects conducted as part of the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) activity through the BRAC Regional Task Force in Fayetteville, North Carolina
“**” denote projects conducted as part of the Military Growth Task Force of North Carolina’s Eastern Region in Jacksonville, North Carolina

23. Data-driven and policy-based model for
forecasting school enrollment and
determining the optimal locations for new
schools and attendance boundaries.
 Forecasting
 Land Use Studies
 Out-of-Capacity Analysis
 Attendance Boundary Optimization
 School Site Optimization
23

24. OPPORTUNITY!
24

25. Opportunity for:
 Examining current building utilization:
 What is current policy on building utilization?
 Are some schools being over-utilized?
 Are some schools being under-utilized?
 Are NRMPS schools prepared for growth?
25

26. Opportunity for:
 Examining current feeder patterns:
 What are current Elem > Mid > High paths?
 How do transfer policies affect these paths?
26

27. Opportunity for:
 Examining student balance:
 What do we mean by “balancing” student
populations?
 What are current policies on balancing student
populations?
 What are current practices used by other districts?
 What options are available to try to achieve
balance?
27

28.  Process
 Methodology
 Timeline
28

29.  Form Committee representing stakeholders
 Understand data & tools used
 Understand optimization and scenario review
process
 Communicate to Board and community
 Make recommendations to Board
29

30.  Compile supporting data
 GIS data
▪ Parcels, streets
▪ Student geocodes
▪ Planning segment review
 District membership trends
▪ NC DPI ADM for Month One
 School building capacities
30

31. 273 segments
60 K-12 students/segment (2010-11 geocode)
Planning Segments currently under review.
31

32.  Understand Inputs and Parameters
 District policy for reassignment
 What is the reassignment plan to achieve?
 Utilization
 Feeder Patterns
 Balance
32

33.  Develop Scenario Assumptions
 Based on District policy
 Utilization
 Feeder patterns
 Balance
 Data-driven
33

34.  Optimal Attendance Zone Scenarios
 Understand impact of scenario assumptions
 Understand connection between scenario
assumptions
 Review/Revise scenarios
 Transportation/access issues
 Keeping neighborhoods together
34

35. Optimal Attendance Zones
Data-driven School
building Balance index
membership
capacities allowance
forecast
Optimization
Algorithm
Optimal Attendance Zones
35

36. Scenario Review/Revision Cycle
Optimal Attendance Zones
Scenario Review
Track Edits &
Update School
Data
36

37.  Community engagement
 Community understanding of process
 What is important to NRMS parents?
37

38.  School facility planning is often carried out within a complex, multi-
layered, and poorly articulated environment.
 The layers are qualitative and subjective, where even the best information is
incomplete and constantly shifting.
 School boards are subject to very specific, externally imposed limitations on
their decisions when planning facilities and setting attendance boundaries.
 School boards often change their decisions as they acquire new pieces of
information. This invites negative press and erodes public confidence.
 The failure to fully grasp all relevant information makes it impossible for the
school board to articulate and defend its recommendations to the public.
 This can have disastrous consequences when the budget must be approved or
when school construction bond referenda are put before a public vote.
- Taylor, Vasu, Causby, INTERFACES Vol. 29, 1999
38

39. Optimization
Operations Research techniques solve large-scale optimization
problems involving many variables and constraints.
The driving variable in the optimization algorithm is total
distance traveled by students to school. The solutions
generated by these OR techniques are optimal in the following
way:
the system-wide student travel distance is
minimized while satisfying constraints such as
building capacity
39

40. OR techniques allow the
exploration of holistic
scenarios that can provide
maximum efficiency for
the entire district.
40

41. Utilization/Capacity
Demographic
Proximity
Balance
Feeder Pattern
41

42.  February 13 – Understanding the Optimization
Process
 March 26 – Out of Capacity table and Scenario Data
 April 30 – Scenario Review and Revision
 May 29 – Scenario Review and Revision
 June 25 – Final Scenario Presentation
42

43. Michael Miller, Program Manager
Operations Research and Education Laboratory (OREd)
Institute for Transportation Research and Education
Centennial Campus
North Carolina State University
Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools
January 30. 2012

44. Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools
January 30, 2012

45.  Transparent
 Lines of Communications
 Committee Meetings
 Open to the public
 Website
 Information posted immediately after each meeting
 E-mail/ Phone Line
 An e-mail address to answer questions/ receive
feedback etc has been established to ensure seamless
communication and to make all information readily
available to the public.
 A phone line has been established for those with limited
or no internet access to provide feedback to the
committee.

46.  After the organizational meeting on Monday,
January 30, 2012.
 The committee will begin meeting in February
with the charge to bring recommendations to
the board no later than August 2012.
 The co-chairs will provide updates to the board
at the work session immediately following each
of their committee meetings.

47. February
13 – (4:00-5:30)*
March
26 (6:00)
April
30 (6:00)
May
29 (6:00)
June
25 (4:00–5:30)*
August/ Sept
TBD

48. QUESTIONS