Bringing Community Schools to Memphis

  • 1,491 views
Uploaded on

This report was presented by Adam Hanover on 19 May 2009 to Memphis City School (MCS) Superintendent Dr. Kriner Cash and the Policy, Legislative, and Constituent Services Team led by Associate …

This report was presented by Adam Hanover on 19 May 2009 to Memphis City School (MCS) Superintendent Dr. Kriner Cash and the Policy, Legislative, and Constituent Services Team led by Associate Superintendent Thelma Crivens.

The report advocates the application of the Community School model to the Memphis City School system and to the City of Memphis. The report analyzes the current environment in Memphis, a theoretical vision for the synergies between schools and the government, the various Community School models implemented throughout the United States, and how this idea can be realistically applied to Memphis.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,491
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
20
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Bringing
Community
Schools
to
Memphis
 
 
 
 
 
 
 MCS
Policy,
Legislative,
and
Constituent
Services
Team
 
 
This
report
was
presented
by
Adam
Hanover
on
19
May
2009
to
Memphis
City
 
 School
(MCS)
Superintendent
Dr.
Kriner
Cash
and
the
Policy,
Legislative,
and
Constituent
 
 Services
Team
led
by
Associate
Superintendent
Thelma
Crivens.

 
 The
report
advocates
the
application
of
the
Community
School
model
to
the
 
 Memphis
City
School
system
and
to
the
City
of
Memphis.
The
report
analyzes
the
current
 
 environment
in
Memphis,
a
theoretical
vision
for
the
synergies
between
schools
and
the
 
 government,
the
various
Community
School
models
implemented
throughout
the
United
 
 States,
and
how
this
idea
can
be
realistically
applied
to
Memphis.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  • 2. Table
of
Contents
 Preface
........................................................................................................................................ 3
 Strategic
Visions
...................................................................................................................... 4
 Vision
of
Memphis
City
Schools
................................................................................................... 4
 Vision
of
City/County
Leaders
..................................................................................................... 6
 
 MCS
and
PeopleFirst!
–
What
Are
Our
Needs? ............................................................ 10
 Loss
of
Optimism
............................................................................................................................ 10
 Student
Readiness
 ......................................................................................................................... 11
 District
Profile
 ................................................................................................................................ 12
 Accountability,
Academic
Standards,
and
MCS
Performance
 ......................................... 12
 The
Community
 .............................................................................................................................. 14
 Health
 ................................................................................................................................................ 16
 Students
Over
Age
 ......................................................................................................................... 16
 Safety
.................................................................................................................................................. 16
 Student
Mobility
............................................................................................................................. 17
 Fiscal
Demands
and
Constraints
 .............................................................................................. 17
 
 Current
MCS
Initiatives
...................................................................................................... 18
 Goal
1:
Student
Achievement
..................................................................................................... 18
 Goal
2:
Accountability
 .................................................................................................................. 23
 Goal
3:
Parent
and
Community
Involvement
 ....................................................................... 24
 Goal
4:
Healthy
Youth
Development
 ....................................................................................... 25
 Goal
5:
Safety
 ................................................................................................................................... 27
 
 A
United
Vision
–
Community
Based
Learning
........................................................... 29
 What
is
a
Full­Service
Community
School?
 ........................................................................... 29
 Costs
and
Benefits
of
a
Community
School
 ........................................................................... 32
 Federal
Support
for
School­Based
Services
 .......................................................................... 34
 
 Case
Studies:
SUN,
Harlem,
Penn
 .................................................................................... 36
 District
Strategy:
SUN
 ................................................................................................................... 37
 Lead
Agency:
Harlem
Children’s
Zone
 .................................................................................... 44
 University
Assisted:
Penn’s
Netter
Center
 ............................................................................ 48
 
 Recommendations
for
Memphis
..................................................................................... 52
 Commit
to
the
Fully­Service
Community
School
Model..................................................... 53
 Recognize
What
We
Have
............................................................................................................ 54
 Align
City/County
and
MCS
Strategic
Plans
 .......................................................................... 58
 Identify
Major
Community
Targets
 ......................................................................................... 62
 Hire
a
PeopleFirst!
Staff
Person
................................................................................................ 64
 Conclusion
.............................................................................................................................. 65
 
 
 
 2

  • 3. 
 Preface
 This
report
is
the
product
of
a
semester‐long
undergraduate
research
project
 conducted
as
an
independent
study
at
the
University
of
Pennsylvania
called
 “Community
Schools,
Strategic
Planning,
and
School
Reform.”
Professor
Ira
Harkavy,
 the
advisor
on
this
project,
has
been
instrumental
in
my
approach
to
this
work.
His
 dedication
to
education,
both
in
terms
of
policy
and
directly
with
students,
is
 inspirational.

 Thelma
Crivens,
the
Associate
Superintendent
of
Memphis
City
Schools
 (MCS),
offered
me
an
opportunity
to
work
with
the
district
strategy
team,
including
 Mary
Earhart‐Brown
and
David
Hill,
on
an
analysis
of
a
school
model
that
 incorporates
schools
as
the
center
of
society/government
strategy.
As
seen
in
this
 report,
Memphis
is
challenged
with
a
high
concentration
of
socio‐economic
and
 health
issues
that
significantly
hinder
our
students’
ability
to
succeed
academically.
 As
such,
this
report
advocates
the
application
of
the
Community
School
model
to
our
 district
strategy,
whereby
our
schools
open
their
doors
as
community
public
 facilities
and
partner
with
City/County,
non‐profit,
faith‐based,
and
for‐profit
 organizations
to
leverage
their
services
and
resources.
The
MCS
system
is
in
a
 strong
position
to
transform
a
number
of
key
schools
into
full‐service
community
 schools,
given
the
financial
situation
and
its
responsibility
for
overseeing
Memphis
 Fast
Forward’s
PeopleFirst!
Strategic
Plan.

 It
is
important
to
note
that
my
abilities
to
fully
analyze
this
model
were
 limited,
as
I
conducted
the
research
while
in
my
second
semester
junior
year
at
 Penn.
But
the
purpose
of
this
report
is
to
introduce
the
Community
School
model
to
 MCS
leadership,
identify
several
key
examples,
and
provide
a
general
guideline
for
 how
to
move
forward.

 I
would
like
to
thank
Ira
Harkavy,
Patricia
Toarmina,
Thelma
Crivens,
Mary
 Earheart‐Brown,
David
Hill,
Marty
Blank,
Judy
Dimon,
Jamie
Davidson,
Miska
Bibbs,
 David
Cox,
Whitney
Tilson,
Joann
Weeks,
and
Gretchen
Suess
for
their
support
and
 guidance
in
producing
this
document.

 
 Best,
 Adam
 
 Adam
J.
Hanover
 University
of
Pennsylvania
 901.569.4264
 AdamJHanover@gmail.com

 
 3

  • 4. The
Vision
of
Memphis
City
Schools
 In
the
2008‐2011
District
Strategic
Plan,
Memphis
City
School
(MCS)
 Superintendent
Kriner
Cash
outlined
his
major
goals
for
Memphis
City
Schools.
 According
to
Dr.
Cash,
the
“vision
is
to
be
an
internationally
competitive
urban
 school
system
that
produces
well‐rounded,
intrinsically
motivated,
and
high‐ achieving
students.”1
He
then
wrote
that
students
should
be
equipped
to
both
 achieve
their
individual
potential
while
positively
contributing
to
society.2
Dr.
Cash
 explained
the
need
to
involve
parents
and
the
community
with
the
schools
and
to
 demand
the
highest
health,
safety,
and
diversity
standards
for
students.
This
is
a
 progressive
platform
that
requires
a
progressive
educational
approach.

 
 According
to
the
district
strategic
plan,
the
number
one
mission
of
the
 schools
is
academic
achievement.3
But
a
quick
perusal
of
the
MCS
Core
Beliefs
and
 Commitments
demonstrates
a
complex
equation
for
success
that
requires
more
than
 education
to
improve
academic
success.
The
District
committed
itself
to:
 • Increasing
and
advocating
mutual
respect,
cultural
understanding,
and
 racial
and
socio‐economic
equality.

 • Providing
safe
schools
 • Developing
productive
and
mutually
beneficial
family,
district,
and
 community
partnerships

 • Improving
physical,
mental,
and
emotional
well
being
 In
addition
to
these
commitments
and
beliefs,
the
Plan
outlined
specific
goals
that
 are
included
below:
 
 
 
 
 
 























































 1
MCS
2008‐2011
District
Strategic
Plan,
Draft
(Revised
12/18/08),
6.
 2
MCS,
District
Strategic
Plan,
Draft,
6.

 3
Ibid.,
14.

 
 4

  • 5. 
 
 MCS
Strategic
Goals4

 
 Goal
1:
Student
Achievement

 
 Strategy:
Accelerate
the
academic
performance
of
all
students
 Goal
2:
Accountability

 Strategy:
Establish
a
holistic
accountability
system
that
evaluates
the
academic,
operations
and
 fiscal
performance
of
the
school
district
 Goal
3:
Parent
and
Community
Involvement
 Strategy:
Build
and
strengthen
family
and
community
partnerships
to
support
the
academic
 and
character
development
of
all
students
 Goal
4:
Healthy
Youth
Development

 Strategy:
Create
a
school
community
that
promotes
student
leadership
and
healthy
youth
 development

 
Goal
5:
Safety
 Strategy:
Maintain
a
positive,
safe,
and
respectful
environment
for
all
students
and
staff
 Goal
6:
Diversity
 Strategy:
Create
a
school
community
that
is
sensitive
and
responsive
to
the
needs
of
an
 increasingly
diverse
population
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 























































 4
MCS
2008‐2011
District
Strategic
Plan,
Draft
(Revised
12/18/08),
15.
 
 5

  • 6. The
Vision
of
City
and
County
Leaders
 
 
 The
City
of
Memphis,
led
by
Mayor
Willie
Herenton,
joined
the
governments
of
 Shelby
County,
Bartlett,
and
Germantown
on
a
new
strategic
vision
for
the
Mid‐ South
called
Memphis
Fast
Forward.5
Memphis
Fast
Forward
is
a
formalized
 strategy
broken
down
into
four
independent
and
non‐overlapping
plans:

 • MemphisED
 • PeopleFirst!
 • Operation
Safe
Community
 • City
&
County
Efficiency
Plans
 
 Memphis
Fast
Forward
established
partnerships
between
the
major
 organizations
in
Memphis.6
According
to
the
plan,
“All
four
major
Plans
have
a
 variety
of
public
and
private
agencies
named
as
a
“lead
agency”
accountable
for
each
 individual
strategy
in
the
plan.

With
a
few
exceptions,
one
single
organization
has
 been
identified
as
ultimately
accountable
for
the
success
and
management
of
each
 strategy.

However,
many
strategies
require
partnerships
and
collaboration
among
a
 variety
of
stakeholders
and
organizations.

In
these
cases,
the
lead
agency’s
role
is
to
 convene,
engage,
and
coordinate
the
right
partners
and
define
respective
roles
and
 actions.”

 
 With
all
strategic
plans,
accountability,
vision,
dedication,
and
management
are
 key
to
success.
Of
the
four
plans,
a
major
emphasis
has
been
placed
on
MemphisED,
 which
focuses
entirely
on
economic
development.
Reid
Dulberger,
working
for
the
 Greater
Memphis
Chamber,
is
the
current
Vice
President
for
MemphisED
 Administration.
He
has
been
responsible
for
coordinating
MemphisED
since
 beginning
of
2008.7
According
to
Mr.
Dulberger,
there
was
a
concerted
effort
to
 eliminate
the
overlap
between
the
plans;
and
as
such,
education
is
considered
one
of
 many
factors
in
the
strategic
plan.
 























































 5
See
http://memphisfastforward.com/.
 6
I
consider
these
public‐private
partnerships
“paper‐partnerships”
as
they
are
partnerships
of
convenience
and
 do
not
actually
challenge
each
of
these
with
responsibilities
that
hold
them
accountable
to
a
specific
agenda.

 7
Reid
Dulberger
is
Vice
President
of
MemphisED
and
works
within
the
Greater
Memphis
Chamber.
Contact:
 901.543.3561.
 
 6

  • 7. 
 Although
education
is
mentioned
as
a
component
of
solving
crime
in
Operation
 Safe
Community
and
a
factor
in
workforce
development
within
the
MemphisED
 plan,
education
falls
under
the
PeopleFirst!
Plan,
which
is
described
as
a
human
 capital
plan
for
Memphis
and
Shelby
County.8
PeopleFirst!
relied
on
research
from
 the
Memphis
and
Shelby
County
Strategic
Plan
for
Quality
Early
Care
and
Education
 2005,
the
Final
Report
of
the
Shelby
County
Task
Force
for
Quality
Education
Fiscal
 Year
2006‐7,
Shelby
County
Labor
Market
Assessment
(Younger
&
Associates),
 Memphis‐Shelby
County
Economic
Development
Plan/Competitive
Assessment
 Review
(Market
Street
Services),
and
the
work
of
the
Shelby
County
2006
 Innovation
Team.9

 
 MCS
Superintendent
Cash
has
accepted
the
responsibility
of
coordinating
the
 PeopleFirst!
Plan.
According
to
PeopleFirst!
our
young
people
are
“at
a
grave
 competitive
disadvantage
for
good
jobs
in
the
new
century.
The
less
educated
a
 person,
the
lower
their
prospects
are
for
economic
well‐being.
Low
educational
 achievement
also
leads
to
greater
crime,
poverty,
health
care
costs
and
other
social
 ills
—
increasing
demand
for
public
services
and
decreasing
quality
of
life
for
 everyone.”10
PeopleFirst!
demands
that
investments
be
made
in
high
quality
early
 care
and
education,
high
quality
K‐12
education,
productive
“out
of
school
time”
for
 youth,
and
high
quality
post‐secondary
opportunities
that
prepare
people
for
good
 local
jobs.11
The
actual
human
capital
plan
consisted
of
several
strategies
given
the
 vision
–
“Memphis/Shelby
County
develops
its
human
capital
through
high
 quality
education
and
training,
producing
a
workforce
that
is
qualified
and
 ready
to
work
in
our
major
industries.”12

 
 It
is
important
to
fully
outline
the
goals
and
strategies
emphasized
by
the
plan.
 These
strategies,
include:

 
 
 























































 8
See
Agendas
for
all
four
Memphis
Fast
Forward
plans
attached
in
this
document.

 9
PeopleFirst!
A
Human
Capital
Plan
for
Memphis/Shelby
County.
November
2007.1.
 10
PeopleFirst!,
A
Human
Capital
Plan,
4.
 11
Ibid.,
4‐5.
 12
Ibid.,
6.
 
 
 7

  • 8. 
 PeopleFirst!
Strategic
Goals13
 Goal
A:
Inspired
citizens
determined
to
fully
develop
their
abilities
and
aggressively
 pursue
economic
opportunity
 Strategy
1:
Implement
campaign
that
encourages
citizens
to
invest
themselves
in
 education
and
career
advancement,
and
instill
those
values
in
their
children
 Goal
B:
Affordable,
accessible
high
quality
early
care
and
education
for
all
young
 children
in
Shelby
County
in
care
outside
the
home

 Strategy
2:
Strengthen
and
coordinate
local
lobbying
efforts
for
State‐funded
pre‐K
for
 all
four
year
olds

 Strategy
3:
Support
quality
improvement
for
all
ECE
providers
by
expanding
the
 Memphis
Shelby
County
Quality
Childcare
Resource
Center
 Strategy
4:
Increase
number
of
highest
quality,
accredited
centers
by
expanding
Ready,
 Set,
Grow!

 Strategy
5:
Expand
and
coordinate
campaigns
that
encourage
parents
to
choose
high
 quality
ECE
 Strategy
6:
Adjust
ECE
funding
system
so
more
public
funds
are
provided
to
ECE
 programs
that
demonstrate
higher
quality
 
 Goal
C:
High
quality
k­12
public
education
throughout
Shelby
County
 Strategy
7:
MCS
and
SCS
prioritize
spending
on
student
achievement
strategies
that
are
 proven
by
research
 Strategy
8:
MCS
and
SCS
conduct
regular
third‐party
efficiency
audits
and
publish
 results
to
demonstrate
good
stewardship
of
funds

 Strategy
9:
Maintain
momentum
to
fully
fund
the
BEP
2.0
to
expand
state
funding
for
 high
quality
K‐12
education
 Strategy
10:
Expand
best
practices
for
teacher
and
principal
recruitment
and
 development,
including
New
Leaders
for
New
Schools,
Teach
for
America,
and
the
New
 Teacher
Project
 Strategy
11:
Expand
education
options
for
economically
disadvantaged
K‐12
Students
 Strategy
12:
Strengthen
and
expand
programs
that
engage
parents
in
educating
their
 children
 
 
 
 























































 13
Memphis
Fast
Forward.
PeopleFirst!
 
 8

  • 9. 
 Goal
D:
Affordable,
accessible
high
quality
“out
of
school
time”
programs
for
all
youth
in
 Shelby
County
 Strategy
13:
Develop
a
plan
to
expand
opportunities
for
youth
access
to
high
quality
 after‐school,
weekend
and
summer
programs
in
Shelby
County
 Goal
E:
High
quality
post­secondary
and
workforce
programs
that
effectively
prepare
 people
for,
and
match
them
with,
local
workforce
opportunities

 Strategy
14:
Expand
and
regularly
conduct
study
of
local
industry
workforce
needs

 Strategy
15:
Expand
and
regularly
conduct
study
of
local
labor
force
characteristics

 Strategy
16:
Distribute
industry
workforce
needs
requirements
to
local
 education/training
institutions
and
promote
the
development
of
career
development
 programs
responsive
to
industry
needs
 Strategy
17:
Expand
Effective
recruitment
and
hiring
of
quality
employees
by
local
 employees
Strategy
18:
Strengthen
local
resources
that
help
people
advance
in
their
 careers
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 9

  • 10. From
MCS
and
PeopleFirst!
‐
What
Are
Our
Needs?
 As
noted
in
the
MCS
and
PeopleFirst!
strategic
goals,
it
is
important
to
at
least
 recognize
the
factors
that
may
contribute
to
a
person’s
inability
to
learn
and
 therefore
succeed
in
life.
These
factors
are
usually
given
as
reasons
for
why
we
are
 not
succeeding.
As
argued
in
the
second
half
of
this
paper,
this
report
will
challenge
 us
to
consider
how
to
affect
directly
these
untraditionally
school‐oriented
issues.
 The
facts
listed
below
rely
primarily
on
the
MCS
District
Strategic
Plan
and
 PeopleFirst!.

 
 Loss
of
Optimism
 First
and
foremost,
25%
of
MCS
students
“lose
their
optimism
for
a
positive
 personal
future
by
the
time
they
reach
high
school.”14
According
to
PeopleFirst!,
the
 trend
downward
begins
toward
the
end
of
middle
school,
where
students
tend
to
 hold
a
positive
future
outlook
and
vision
for
their
own
capabilities.
A
major
decline
 occurs
during
the
 years
between
the
 transition
of
middle
 school
and
the
end
of
 high
school,
in
which
 students
are
no
 longer
motivated
to
 graduate
high
school
 and
pursue
higher
 education.
This
 attitude
affects
the
 community
and
the
 workforce.
As
seen
in
 the
figure
comparing
 























































 14
PeopleFirst!,
A
Human
Capital
Plan,
22.
 
 10

  • 11. Memphis
with
its
“peer
group”,
defined
by
PeopleFirst!
as
direct
our
competitors
for
 good
jobs
in
industry,
Memphis
is
not
producing
(even
in
relative
terms)
acceptable
 numbers
of
students
that
have
graduated
from
both
high
school
and
any
other
 higher‐education.15

The
MCS
2006
high
school
graduation
rate
was
67.2%,
 compared
to
the
SCS
92.3%
graduate
rate
and
the
State’s
target
of
90%.16
 Interestingly,
according
to
PeopleFirst!,
we
are
among
the
“lowest
in
the
nation
for
 graduating
students
with
degrees
in
natural
sciences
and
engineering.”17
From
the
 City’s
perspective,
and
equally
for
us
as
a
community,
this
places
us
in
a
difficult
 predicament
whereby
we
cannot
or
do
not
want
to
recruit
from
our
citizens.
Equally
 important
for
MCS,
very
few
employers
recruit
from
local
colleges
and
 universities.18

 
 Student
Readiness
 The
issue
of
student
readiness
is
comprised
of
multi‐faceted
variables
that
must
 be
contextualized
within
an
analysis.
The
graph
below
shows
students
entering
the
 MCS
system
at
the
 Kindergarten
level
in
2005.
As
 seen
in
the
graph,
students
 entering
Kindergarten
were
 between
the
16%
and
27%
of
 school
readiness
for
math,
 language,
memory,
and
 auditory
skills,
as
defined
by
 the
Memphis
City
School
 system.

 
 
 























































 15
PeopleFirst!,
A
Human
Capital
Plan,
10.

 16
Ibid.,
9.
 17
Ibid.,
10.
 
 18
Market
Street
Services,
PeopleFirst!
10.

 
 11

  • 12. District
Profile

 The
District
is
comprised
of
190
schools,
administering
111,357
students.
Of
 these
students
86%
is
African
America,
7.25%
is
White,
5.3%
is
Hispanic,
and
1.3%
 other.
81%
of
these
students
are
economically
disadvantaged
and
therefore
receive
 free
or
reduced
prices
for
lunch.
5%
of
these
students
have
limited
English
 proficiency.
Only
about
one
thousand
students
in
elementary,
middle,
and
high
 school
respectively
attend
summer
school.
Below
is
a
breakup
of
students
in
specific
 school
models:
 • 2,286
students
attend
one
of
the
District’s
nine
Charter
Schools
 • 2,260
students
attend
a
Career
and
Technical
Education
(CTE)
Program,
 24,129
are
enrolled
in
CTE
courses

 • 16,742
students
are
enlisted
in
Exceptional
Education
Student
programs

 • 11,761
students
are
in
Optional
School
programs,
comprised
of
32
 separate
programs19

 
 The
annual
budget
for
the
district
is
$910
million.
Of
this
total,
$371
million
 is
dedicated
to
salaries,
assuming
7,319
teachers
and
an
average
salary
of
$50,534.
 This
does
not
include
additional
faculty
and
staff.20

 
 Accountability,
Academic
Standards,
and
MCS
Performance
 
 The
State
of
Tennessee
is
the
authority
responsible
to
assign
overall
ratings
 and
interventions
to
districts
via
No
Child
Left
Behind
(NCLB).
The
steps
outlined
 below
represents
the
process
by
which
schools
are
targeted
and
assessed
within
the
 NCLB:
 Target
–
Schools
that
do
not
make
Adequate
Yearly
Progress
(AYP)
during
 the
first
year
 High
Priority
–
Schools
that
do
not
make
AYP
for
two
or
more
consecutive
 years
(levels
of
intervention
depend
on
how
many
years
a
school
stays
in
 High
Priority)

 























































 19
MCS,
District
Strategic
Plan,
8.
 20
Ibid.,
8.
 
 12

  • 13. Proficiency
–
When
student
population
and
subgroups
achieve
the
designated
 level
of
knowledge
on
the
Tennessee
Comprehensive
Assessment
Program
 (TCAP).21
 In
addition
to
the
current
levels
of
state
proficiency
requirements
(elementary
and
 middle
school:
89%
in
Reading/Language
Arts,
86%
in
Mathematics;
and
high
 school:
93%
in
Reading/Language
Arts
and
83%
in
Math),
there
is
an
attendance
 rate
target
for
elementary
and
middle
schools
of
93%
and
90%
for
high
schools.
It
is
 important
to
note
that
NCLB
mandates
that
there
be
100%
proficiency
in
both
 Reading
and
Mathematics
by
2013‐14.

 
 In
terms
of
graduation
rates,
the
State
of
Tennessee
now
requires
(starting
 with
the
class
of
2013)
students
to
earn
22
credits,
rather
than
just
20,
which
 incorporates
four
years
of
Mathematics
and
two
sciences.
This
new
curriculum
will
 direct
all
students
on
the
“University
Path,”
rather
than
the
“Technical
Path.”22
 
 Below
is
an
outline
of
the
performance
of
Memphis
City
Schools
between
 2008
and
2009:
 • 119
of
the
190
schools
are
in
“Good
Standing.”
 • 34
schools
are
“Target”
 • 30
schools
are
“High
Priority”
(compared
to
41
between
2007‐08)
 
 NCLB
Performance
of
MCS
Schools
 High
Priority
 16%
 Target
 Good
 19%
 Standing
 65%
 























































 21
MCS,
District
Strategic
Plan,
9.

 22
Ibid.,
9.
 
 
 13

  • 14. Although
the
average
achievement
grades
for
the
District
has
improved,
the
District
 received
the
following
grades
per
subject
in
2008:

 MCS
Average
Achievement
Grades
 100%
 80%
 60%
 40%
 48%
 49%
 43%
 42%
 20%
 0%
 Math
 Reading/Language
 Social
Studies
 Science
 
 It
should
be
noted
that
in
an
assessment
of
the
academic
growth
(“Value
Added”),
 students
in
grades
four
through
eight
scored
much
higher
relatively
than
high
 school
students.

 
 The
graduation
rate
fell
from
69.6%
in
2007
to
66.9%
in
2008.
In
addition,
 the
dropout
rate
increased
from
14.7%
in
2007
to
19.3%
in
2008.23
In
addition
to
 these
dismal
numbers,
the
average
ACT
score
in
the
District
was
17.4
in
2008,
 compared
to
the
State’s
average
of
20.7
and
the
national
average
of
21.1.

 
 The
Community
 
 The
District
outlined
some
of
the
major
socio‐economic
factors
it
considers
 to
affect
students’
academic
progress.

According
to
the
2008‐11
District
Plan,
the
 District
will
“seek
to
partner
with
the
broader
community
in
order
to
address
the
 societal
issues
that
impact
MCS
students.”24
In
the
next
section
of
this
report,
we
will
 analyze
the
major
initiatives
of
the
MCS
system
to
address
these
needs.
In
addition
 to
the
graph,
which
provides
relative
numbers
of
how
Memphis
compares
to
the
 United
States
on
socio‐economic
issues,
it
is
important
to
consider
how
the
City
of
 Memphis
compares
to
other
cities
in
the
United
States.
 























































 23
MCS,
District
Strategic
Plan,
10.
 24
Ibid.,
10.
 
 14

  • 15. • Memphis
has
the
highest
infant
death
rate
in
the
U.S.
 • Memphis
has
the
5th
highest
low
birth
weight
in
the
U.S.
 • Memphis
is
the
3rd
highest
city
with
children
in
single
parent
families
in
the
 U.S.
 • Memphis
is
the
3rd
highest
city
with
children
living
in
poverty
in
the
U.S.
 • Memphis
has
the
highest
(among
large
cities)
obesity
rate
in
the
U.S.
 • Memphis
is
the
3rd
most
violent
metropolitan
area
in
the
U.S.
(2nd
most
 violent
large
metropolitan
area
in
the
U.S.25
 Memphis
Socio
Economic
Issues
 70%
 64%
 60%
 50%
 42%
 40%
 32%
 34%
 32%
 30%
 18%
 20%
 13%
 8%
 10%
 0%
 Low
Birth
Weight
 Children
in
Single
 Children
Living
in
 Obesity
Rate
(2006)
 (2005)
 Parent
Families
 Poverty
(2007)
 (2007)
 Memphis
 United
States
 
 
 In
the
United
States,
78%
of
adults
living
in
poverty
regularly
read
to
their
 children.
In
Memphis,
only
52%
of
parents
living
in
poverty
do
the
same.
There
are
 approximately
30,400
2‐4
year
old
children
in
Memphis.
Therefore,
even
assuming
 60%
of
these
children
are
read
to,
12,160
of
these
receive
no
basic,
pre‐K
literacy
 experience.26
Currently,
there
are
5,800
children
enrolled
in
MCS
preschool.
The
 district
has
committed
itself
to
increasing
this
enrollment
and
expanding
preschool
 programs.

 
 
 
 























































 25
MCS,
District
Strategic
Plan,
10.
 26
Ibid.,
11.
 
 15

  • 16. Health
 As
seen
in
some
of
the
data
earlier,
there
are
significant
health
and
wellness
 issues
in
the
City
of
Memphis.
According
to
Well
Child
Inc,
which
screened
21,952

 MCS
students
in
the
2007‐2008
school
year:
 • 32%
were
overweight
or
obese
 • 19%
failed
vision
tests
 • 8%
received
mental
health
referrals
 • 32%
received
referrals
to
primary
care
physicians
for
a
variety
of
health
 conditions.

 The
district
concentrates
its
efforts
on
addressing
the
serious
health
issues
of
MCS
 students.27

 
 Students
Overage
 
 In
the
2007‐2008
school
year,
30%
(33,498)
students
were
overage
for
their
 grades.
The
grade
breakdowns
are
below:
 • Grades
K‐5:
12,040
 • Grades
6‐8:
8,686
 • Grades
9‐12:
12,772
 5%
of
these
students
were
two
or
more
years
older
than
their
expected
grade.
MCS
 Prep,
noted
below
in
the
initiatives
section,
hopes
to
assist
these
students
on
getting
 back
on
track.
 
 Safety
 
 The
MCS
system
has
taken
steps
to
address
the
community‐wide
crime
and
 safety
issues
creeping
into
our
schools.
MCS
has
taken
steps
to
increase
building
 security
(including
requiring
student
membership
cards),
metal
detector
screenings,
 additional
police/security
officers,
and
the
partnership
with
the
Memphis
Police
 Department.
There
is
also
an
array
of
prevention
and
intervention
strategies.
 Several
of
the
key
reform
initiatives
include
a
“focus
on
changing
the
culture
in
high‐ 























































 27
MCS
2008‐2011
District
Strategic
Plan,
Draft
(Revised
12/18/08),
12.
 
 16

  • 17. incidence
schools,
establishing
comprehensive
truancy
assessment
centers,
 providing
a
truancy
hotline,
and
implementing
the
School
House
Adjustment
 Program
Enterprise
(SHAPE).”28
 
 Student
Mobility
 
 The
MCS
average
student
mobility
was
30%
in
2007‐08.
Of
this
percentage,
 students
of
low‐income
families
tend
to
be
the
most
mobile.
There
were
1,399
 homeless
MCS
students
in
the
2007‐08
academic
year.29
 
 Fiscal
Demands
and
Constraints
 
 The
Memphis
City
Council
voted
to
reduce
funding
to
the
MCS
system
by
 $66,261,000
for
the
2008‐09
academic
year.
Historically,
the
City
of
Memphis
has
 funded
the
Memphis
City
Schools
for
over
one‐hundred
fifty
years;
however,
the
 current
Memphis
City
Council
argues
(currently
in
litigation)
that
it
is
not
legally
 obligated
to
fund
the
MCS
system.
The
issue
over
litigation
is
a
clause
in
the
 Tennessee
state
statute,
which
prohibits
local
governments
from
reducing
the
 funding
to
school
districts.30
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 























































 28
MCS,
District
Strategic
Plan,
12.
 29
Ibid.,
13.
 30
Ibid.
 
 17

  • 18. Current
MCS
Initiatives
 
 Specific
initiatives
have
been
implemented
to
address
MCS
goals
and
district
 needs.
The
Academic
Operations,
Technology,
and
Innovations
team
published
a
 Compendium
of
Strategic
Initiatives
in
February
2009
that
outlined
these
major
 initiatives.

Below
is
a
list
of
these
initiatives.
The
highlighted
sections
focus
on
 initiatives
that
depend
on
community
partnerships
and/or
focus
on
community
 needs
and
progressive
educational
goals,
rather
than
the
traditional
curriculum
 model.31

 
 Goal
1:
Student
Achievement
 Initiative
 People
Affected
 Summary
 Advanced
Placement
 1,898
Students
(500
 AP
program
expansion.
MCS
hopes
to
establish
 Incentive
Grant
 in
non‐Title
I
 an
AP
Coordinator
position
for
the
district
and
 schools),
457
 increase
AP
courses
and
enrollment
by
10%.
 Teachers
 Algebra
I
Institute
 8500+
students,
176
 Professional
development
 Teachers
 Bridge
to
Kindergarten
 None
 3‐day
summer
program
to
target
the
3000
 (B2K)
Summer
Transition
 students
entering
kindergarten
with
no
 Program
 structured
Pre‐K
experience
 District
Writing
 23,411
students
 PreK‐12
writing
rubric.
Grades:
4,5,7,8,10,
and
 Improvement
System
 11.
 Douglass
High
School
 32
students
 Developing
community
partnerships.
Active
 (Start‐up
–
public
service
 advisory
council
and
student
participation
in
 &
Communication
Arts
 site
visits
to
area
nonprofit
agencies,
 Optional
Program)
 government
offices,
hospitals
and
other
sites.
 Exhibition
of
Student
 Target:
All,
104,622
 Students
develop
their
practical,
creative,
and
 Work
 students
 analytical
intelligences
through
the
use
of
 project
based
learning.
Students
in
exit
grades
 (5th,
8th,
and
12th)
extend
their
project
based
 learning
by
creating
capstone
projects,
a
 recommendation
of
the
new
Tennessee
Diploma
 Project.
MCS
partners
with
the
Memphis
 Community
and
involves
them
in
judging
the
 work.

 FIRST
(For
Inspiration
 Target:
9‐12th
 Works
to
increase
achievement
in
the
areas
of
 and
Recognition
of
 grades
in
the
11
 science,
mathematics,
and
technology.
Works
 Striving
Schools’
 with
mentors
from
Medtronic
and
hopes
to
 























































 31
Based
on
the
February
2009
Compendium
of
Strategic
Initiatives.
See
full
report
for
indicator
analysis,
key
 challenges,
status
of
implementation,
etc….
 
 18

  • 19. Science
and
Technology
 High
Schools,
40
 develop
partners
with
additional
members
of
 –
High
School
Robotics
 students

 the
Memphis
Community.

 Team
 Honors
Program
 14,200
students,
 Honors
Program
 470
teachers

 MCS
Curriculum
 All
 150
teachers
working
on
curriculum
revision.
 Overhaul
 Consultant
Dr.
Holly
Houston
review
of
process
 and
documents
 MCS
eSchool
 All
 Expansion
of
E‐Learning:
increase
number
of
 students
acquiring
credits
and
completing
courses
by
 25%
via
online
course.
All
MCS
students
must
take
 one
online
course
prior
to
graduation.
 All
middle
school
students
will
be
offered
an
Online
 Computer
Technology
course.
 MCS
PM
Schools
 Adult
students
who
 This
initiative
has
many
benefits
for
our
school
 left
the
school
 district:
1),
it
allows
us
to
use
federally
funded
 district
without
 buildings
and
equipment
to
benefit
adults
in
our
 earning
a
high
 community
who
need
employable
skills
–
many
 school
diploma;
 of
whom
are
parents
of
our
students
(i.e.
 Students
17
years
of
 supports
workforce
investment);
2),
it
responds
 age
or
older
who
 to
a
community
need
where
so
many
citizens
 recently
withdrew
 don’t
have
employable
skills
or
high
school
 from
school,
 diplomas;
3)
the
regionalization
of
the
four
sites
 Approx.
350
 helps
us
to
serve
this
population
district‐wide;
 
 4)
it
responds
to
a
need
in
the
Memphis
 community.
(Requires
part‐time
teachers

 can’t
attract
desirable
pool
of
teachers)
 MCS
Prep
Schools
 640
students
 For
students
who
want/need
accelerated
 graduation
experience,
including
those
that
are
 two
or
more
years
below
grade
level.
Continue
 the
level
of
funding
for
reduced
class
size,
 extended
day
and
year,
and
student
snacks.
 MCS
Summer
 14,230
students
 For
students
who
are
overage
or
failed
reading
 Intervention/Enrichment
 and
math,
Gateway,
etc.
See
detailed
document.
 Programs
 MCS
Summer
Reading
 1200
students
 Voluntary
participation
for
students
in
 Clinic
 transition
to
middle
school
and
interventions
 for
students
in
2009‐10
 Memphis
Health
Careers
 Target:
250,
57
 Increased
the
student
body
population
by
 Academy
 students
 attracting
Health
Occupations
Students
of
America
 (HOSA)
to
MHCA.
Expanded
the
licensure
and
 certificate
with
5
new
programming
partnerships
 with
UTHSC,
SWCC,
Mid‐South
College.
And
 provide
clinical
experience
for
students.

 Memphis
Literacy
Corps
 2500
students,
830
 Tutoring
program
with
a
budget
of
$1.05
million
 Tutors
 focuses
on
grades
3,4,5.
Attempts
to
recruit
 college
students
via
the
University
of
Memphis
 research‐based
tutorial
program,
gratis.
 M2
Cohort
I
(Memphis
 Target
2500
sixth
 Sessions
with
developed
curriculum.
Three
 
 19

  • 20. Mathematics)
 grade
students,
 Saturday
sessions
and
the
one
week
culminating
 1100
students
 session
on
college/university
campuses
in
June
 to
be
completed.
Students
from
outside
MCS
are
 asking
to
attend.
AT&T
donated

$30,000
to
 supply
graphing
calculators.
 Optional
Schools
 Will
be
available
in
 Hope
to
focus
on
professional
development

‐
 Program
Expansion
 August
2009
 collaborations
with
teachers
participating
in
 local
and
national
training
as
well
as
 collaborations
with
local
colleges,
universities,
 museums,
and
professionals.
Ridgeway
will
 have
an
IB
program.
See
more
details
in
 document.
 Pre‐K
Expansion
 Target
500
 Pre‐K
Express
–
August
8,
2009,
2009‐2010
Pre‐ underserved
four‐ K
students
and
parents,
All
day
Workshops,
 year
old
children
 Screenings:
vision,
hearing,
health,
&
academic,
 living
within
Title
I
 Community
resources
 school
zones.
2,800
 students
in
146
 classrooms.
110
 classrooms
are
 operated
by
MCS.
 36
classrooms
are
 operated
in
 collaboration
with
 Community
 Partners.
 
 PreK‐12
Literacy
–
Early
 Target
grade
1,
 70%
of
students
at
ORF
Benchmark
(40
wcpm)
 Literacy
Headsprout
 8,379
(95%),
470
 Teachers
(95%)

 PreK‐12
Literacy:
Read
 In
progress

 See
details.
 180
middle
School
 PreK‐12
Literacy:
Read
 In
progress
 See
details.
 180
9th
Grade
 PreK‐16
Innovations
and
 
 District
wide
interest
for
dual
enrollment
in
all
 Reform

 secondary
schools
in
all
college
and
university
 articulated
programs
at
LeMoyne‐Owen
College,
 The
University
of
Memphis,
Tennessee
 Technology
Center,
Southwest
Tennessee
 Community
College
,
Christian
Brothers
 University
 
 Smaller
Learning
Communities
Grant

$3.9
 Total.
Grant
2005‐2010.
Redesign
of
Large
 Comprehensive
High
School

into
Freshman
and
 Career
AcademiesSecondary
Students

Grades
9‐ 12
at
Craigmont,
Hamilton,
Kirby,
Raleigh‐Egypt,
 and
Trezevant
High
Schools.
Implemented
 Freshman
Academies
and
Career
Academies
in
 5
Schools.
In
progress
for
refining
career
 
 20

  • 21. academies
to
meet
the
needs
of
the
students
and
 the
community
 
 Resurgence
of
Science
 38,000
students
 Resurgence
of
Science
in
grades
K‐5
on
content
 and
pedagogy
that
will
meet
the
new
state
 standards.
FOSS
is
a
unified
curriculum
that
 builds
content
knowledge
and
science
process
 skills
with
both
vertical
and
horizontal
 alignment.
The
lessons
require
30
minutes
per
 day.
Science
investigations
offer
tremendous
 opportunities
for
students
to
think
critically
and
 to
gain
experiences
to
help
them
apply
what
 they’ve
read
while
developing
written
and
 verbal
communication
skills.
See
more
details
in
 document.
 
 Stanford
Math
 62,128
students
 Focus
is
Intervention
,
90
minutes
per
week
 Intervention
described
as:
Below
Proficient
and
 20%
above
the
BP
cut
score
 Striving
Schools
 • 12,000+
 16
Striving
Schools.
((??))
 Student
Proficiency
 a. 50%
(4,304)
 Consider
extending
the
day,
Continue
to
cut
the
 Targets
 students
will
 below
proficient
group
by
50%,
Increasing
 achieve
 academic
rigor
for
all
students
for
new
state
 proficiency
on
 standards,
Using
EdPlan
to
track
Individual
 TCAP
Math.
 b. 50%
(3,247)
 Learning
Plans,
Expanding
the
M2
program
 students
will
 achieve
 proficiency
on
 TCAP
Reading.
 c. 50%
(2,018)
 students
will
 achieve
 proficiency
on
 Gateway
Algebra.
 d. 2500
6th
graders
 will
achieve
 advance
 proficiency
in
 math
 Urban
Education
Center
 
 The
Urban
Education
Center
is
the
new
 entrepreneurial
/
revenue
generating
 Program
for
the
Memphis
City
Schools
 District.
The
Urban
Education
Center
is
in
a
 collaborative
partnership
with
The
 University
of
Memphis
and
Christian
 Brothers
University.

The
University
of
 Memphis
has
accepted
our
SREB
 Instructional
Leadership
curriculum
and
 
 21

  • 22. will
award
the
candidates
an
Urban
 Education
Certification.

 
 The
Urban
Education
Center
has
three
 components:
the
Executive
Leadership
 Program,
the
Principals'
Academy
and
the
 Summer
Institutes.


 Wooddale
High’s
 60
students
 Firm
commitments
with
Federal
Express,
 Aviation/Travel
&
 Pinnacle
Airlines,
and
OBAP.
 Tourism
Optional
 Program
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 22

  • 23. Goal
2:
Accountability
 
 
 Initiative
 Students
Affected
 Summary
 Document
Imaging
 Central
Office
 N/A

 Personnel
 ENA
Infrastructure
for
 District
 N/A
 Network
and
Phone
 Services
 e‐Procurement
 Central
Office
and
 N/A
 Schools’
 administrative
 personnel
 eScholar
Data
 District
 N/A
 Warehouse
 Administrators
and
 Implementation
 Principals
 e‐Timecard
 Central
Office
and
 N/A
 Schools
 administrative
 personnel
 Intranet
Portal
 District
 N/A
 Microsoft
Exchange
 District
 N/A
 Email
 Regionalization
 110,000
and
 • To
increase
student
achievement
 Parents
 • To
intensify
focus
on
teaching
and
 learning
 • To
provide
highly
functioning
legendary
 service
in
all
four
regional
offices

 • To
provide
support
and
education
for
 good
physical
and
mental
health
for
 students
and
families
 • To
improve
efficiency
 • To
improve
transparency

 • To
increase
accountability
 • To
be
more
responsive
to
community
 constituents
 • To
better
coordinate/align
school
 services
with
local
priorities
and
needs
 • To
improve
curricular
coherence
 • To
encourage
collaborative
participation
 • To
improve
supervisory
coverage
and
 quality
of
services
 • To
increase
competitive
pressure

 • To
improve
customer
satisfaction
 
 
 
 
 
 23

  • 24. Goal
3:
Parent
and
Community
Involvement
 Initiative
 Students
Affected
 Summary
 Demand
Parent
Summit
 Parents
of
MCS
 Increase
in
student
achievement
for
children
of
 students
who
 parents
who
attended
the
summit
workshops
 traditionally
have
 with
an
academic
focus.

 not
been
involved
in
 
 their
children’s
 
 education.

Parents
 of
children
who
are
 overage
for
grade,
at
 risk
and
expelled
or
 suspended
students.
 Family
Resource
Centers
 Students
and
 Current
Status:
Approximately
20%
of
MCS
 parents
of
Memphis
 student
population.
 City
Schools.
 
 
 Town
Hall
Meetings
 Parents
of
Memphis
 Consideration
should
be
given
to
inclusion
of
 City
School
 more
options
for
students
and
their
parents
to
 students.
 attend
the
town
hall
meetings.
 
 This
initiative
was
designed
to
highlight
MCS
 students
who
have
demonstrated
academic
 success
and
valuable
parental
support.
This
 audience
was
targeted
to
receive
information
 pertaining
to

all
of

MCS
new
initiatives

that
 were
data
driven.


 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 24

  • 25. Goal
4:
Healthy
Youth
Development
 Initiative
 Students
Affected
 Summary
 1st
Annual
MIAA
Jr.
 Student‐athletes
 This
will
be
the
first
tennis
tournament
that
 Tennis
Championship
 (Tennis
Players)
 most
MCS
tennis
athletes
have
competed
in,
and
 Ages
10
‐
18
 this
is
a
great
step
in
improving
our
tennis
 programs.
 Coordinated
School
 All
students
and
 • Healthy
Schools
Teams
 Health
–
State
Dept.
of
 staff
 • School
Health
Advisory
Council
 Education
Grant
 
 • Staff
Coordinating
Council

 2007‐08:
25
Pilot
 • Student
Wellness
Campaign
 sites,
2008‐09:
All
 
 schools
 Will
screen
8,000
MCS
students
by
end
of
year
 Health,
Physical
 All
students
and
 Improved
PE
programming‐
Fitness
Gram,
 Education,
and
Lifetime
 teachers
 Compliance
with
90
minutes
Physical
Activity
 Wellness
Curriculum
 Law,
Will
be
district‐wide
and
provide
for
an
 Overhaul
 intramural
program
 Healthy
Choices
Week
 All
students
and
 New
and
existing
community
partnerships,
 staff
 School
level
ownership
of
District
Initiative
 Regional
Health
Clinics

 Target:
To
screen
all
 Clinics
are
under
construction.
Operational
 students
every
two
 Clinics
are
located
at
East,
Northside,
Westwood,
 years
 and
Sheffield
CTC.
 River
City
Relay
 Anticipate
800
from
 
 MCS,
Northern
 Mississippi,
 Northern
Alabama,
 and
Western
 Arkansas
 School
Age
Child
Care
 5,303
students
K‐8,
 Successful
school‐based
before
and
after‐school
 Target
elementary
 programs
address
children
as
developing
 and
middle
school
 teenagers,
not
solely
as
students,
by
blending
 students
desiring
 academics
with
child
development
skills
such
as
 before/after
school
 independence,
time
management,
leadership,
 care
 decision
making,
teamwork
and
communication.
 They
are
learner‐centered,
complement
the
 school
setting,
and
engender
support
of
school
 administrators.
 Staff
Wellness
Campaign
 All
School‐level
and
 Health
screenings
will
also
be
provided
for
 district
 parents
at
the
next
three
Demand
Summits
 administration
staff,
 250
health
 screenings
 Student
First
Responders
 Target:
all
high
 SFRs
continue
to
assist
their
home
school
&
 schools,
66
Students
 district,
Expose
students
to
various
occupations
 in
sports
medicine,
Provide
SFRs
with
practical
 and
engaging
educational
experiences
 Synthetic
Turf
Project
 Target:
3600,
YTD
 In
Progress,
Three
(3)
year
implementation

of
 1200,
Target
K‐12
 12
fields;
Year
One
(1)
Five
(5
)
Fields
(Melrose,
 
 25

  • 26. Students,
Athletes,
 Halle,
Crump,
Raleigh‐Egypt,
and

Whitehaven)
 Band,
and
 
 Community
 A
total
of
five
fields
will
be
completed
 Organizations

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 26

  • 27. Goal
5:
Safety
 Initiative
 Students
Affected
 Summary
 G.R.A.S.S.Y
 Target:
students
at
 Newly
implemented.

Multiplicity
of
 risk
of
gang
 partnerships
will
be
developed
with
corporate
 involvement,
500
 and
grass
root
entities,
as
well
as
university
 students,
200
staff
 partnerships.
 
 • Safer
school
environment
 • Increase
partnership
capacity
 • Increase
staff
and
community
knowledge
 • Workforce
Investment
Network
Grant
 Submittal
 • Various
staff
and
student
presentations
 • Quarterly
Award
Ceremony
 • Safe
School
Rally
 • Behavioral
Specialist
Training
 • School‐based
Consultations
 
 Kingian
Nonviolence
 Target
50,000
 2
hour
workshops
for
students
in
at‐risk
 Training
 students
and
staff,
 schools,
2
day
training
for
teachers
in
the
 325
students
at
 summer
of
2010,
Professional
Development
 Vance
Middle
School
 throughout
the
Regions
for
MCS
staff,
Summer
 training
for
MCS
staff,
Youth
summits
to
 empower
students,
Community
workshops
 Memphis
Ten
Point
 600
students,
50
 Continue
to
build
partnerships
to
focus
on
 Coalition
 staff
 student
gang
violence.
Will
host
safe
school
raff,
 quarterly
award
ceremony,
and
behavioral
 specialist
training.
 SRU
 52,905
students
 • Utilizing
data
driven
information
‐
targeting
 problem
locations
on
specific
dates,
days
 and
times.



 • Prevention
strategies
‐
high
visibility
to
 deter
incidents.
 • Create
a
safer
learning
school
environment
‐
 continued
reduction
in
serious
targeted
 offenses.
 • Increase
narcotics
enforcement
in
identified
 schools
 • Increase
manpower
to
deter
problems
in
 high
incident
schools
 
 Truancy
Assessment
 95
students
 • Increase
community
awareness
through
 Centers
 Parent
Summit
meetings
 • Identify
agencies
in
target
communities
to
 assist
with
truancy.
 • Develop
community
collaboration.
 • Foster
greater
cooperation
between
the
 schools,
Juvenile
Court
and
the
Attorney
 
 27

  • 28. General’s
Office.
 Trust
Pays
 
 Hopes
to
reduce
weapons
and
drugs
on
MCS
 campuses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 28

  • 29. A
United
Vision
–
Community
Based
Learning
 
 Our
needs
are
great
and
we
have
creative,
diversified
programs
to
address
 these
needs.
It
is
widely
recognized
that
many
variables
affect
a
student’s
ability
to
 succeed
academically;
and
it
requires
the
resources
and
energy
of
both
the
City
of
 Memphis
and
the
Memphis
City
School
system
to
effectively
and
efficiently
address
 the
developmental
needs
of
students
and
decrease
barriers
to
learning.
Our
goal
is
 and
should
always
be
to
educate
youth
to
be
proper
citizens.
Community
 involvement,
parental
attention,
health,
and
demands
during
after
school
hours
are
 only
a
few
of
the
issues
that
require
improvement
and
strategic
consolidation.
After
 analyzing
the
strategic
goals
of
Memphis
Fast
Forward
and
the
Memphis
City
School
 system
and
the
initiatives
of
the
MCS
system,
it
is
clear
that
there
can
be
more
 strategic
alignment
and
coordination
between
the
city,
the
district,
nonprofit
 organizations,
faith
based
organization,
and
businesses.

 
 A
model
that
has
gained
recognition
in
recent
years
is
the
Community
School
 model.
This
model,
based
in
part
on
Professors
Lee
Benson,
Ira
Harkavy,
and
John
 Puckett’s
book
Dewey’s
Dream
views
the
school
system
as
the
center
of
society,
and
 therefore
the
main
vehicle
to
accomplish
the
goals
of
the
people.
A
coalition
 between
various
private
and
public
entities
was
built
to
address
this
new
vision.
The
 Coalition
for
Community
Schools
is
a
coalition
of
142
local,
state,
and
national
 organizations
dedicated
to
the
advocacy,
implementation,
expansion,
and
 application
of
the
Community
School
model
to
school
systems
around
the
United
 States.
 
 What
is
a
Full‐Service
Community
School?
 The
Coalition
for
Community
Schools
provides
the
following
definition:
“A
 community
school
is
both
a
set
of
partnerships
and
a
place
where
services,
supports,
 and
opportunities
lead
to
improved
student
learning,
stronger
families,
and
 healthier
communities.
Using
public
schools
as
a
hub,
inventive,
enduring
 relationships
among
educators,
families,
community
volunteers,
business,
health
 
 29

  • 30. and
social
service
agencies,
youth
development
organizations,
and
others
 committed
to
children
are
changing
the
educational
landscape
–
permanently
–
by
 transforming
traditional
schools
into
partnerships
for
excellence.”32

 Community
Schools
aim
to
affect
not
only
students
but
also
families
and
 communities.
In
this
model,
schools
move
away
from
operating
in
isolation
and
 enter
into
a
new
relationship
with
non‐profit
organizations,
surrounding
 universities,
governmental
agencies,
and
the
private
sector.
In
an
article
written
in
 the
Informed
Educator
Series,
a
series
published
by
the
Educational
Research
 Service,
“The
reality
is
that
no
matter
how
high
the
standards,
how
rigorous
the
 curriculum,
or
how
qualified
the
teacher,
students
will
still
be
affected
by
their
lives
 outside
of
school.”33

 
 Martin
J.
Blank
is
the
Director
for
the
Coalition
for
Community
Schools,
 within
the
Institute
for
Educational
Leadership.
He
serves
along
with
University
of
 Pennsylvania
Professor
Ira
Harkavy,
who
is
the
Chairman
of
the
Coalition
for
 Community
Schools.
In
a
paper
Blank
wrote
in
2003,
Blank
provided
a
particularly
 detailed
definition
of
the
Community
School
model:
 
 “A
community
school
is
both
a
place
and
a
set
of
partnerships
between
the
school
and
 other
community
resources.
Its
integrated
focus
on
academics,
services,
supports,
 and
opportunities
leads
to
improved
student
learning,
stronger
families
and
 healthier
communities.
Schools
become
centers
of
the
community
and
are
open
to
 everyone
–
all
day,
every
day,
evenings
and
weekends.

 
 Using
public
schools
as
hubs,
community
schools
knit
together
inventive,
enduring
 relationships
among
educators,
families,
volunteers,
and
community
partners.
Health
 and
social
service
agencies,
family
support
groups,
youth
development
organizations,
 businesses,
and
civic
and
faith­based
groups
all
play
a
part.
By
sharing
expertise
and
 resources,
schools
and
communities
act
in
concert
to
transform
traditional
schools
 into
permanent
partnerships
for
excellence.
Schools
value
the
resources
and
 involvement
of
community
partners,
and
communities
understand
that
strong
 schools
are
at
the
heart
of
strong
neighborhoods.
In
an
increasingly
complex
and
 demanding
educational
climate,
schools
are
not
left
to
work
alone.”34
 
 
 























































 32
The
Coalition
for
Community
Schools
Report,
2009.
 33
“Full‐Service
Community
Schools:
Combating
Poverty
and
Improving
Student
Achievement.”
Educational
 Research
Service.
The
Informed
Educator.
 34
“Full‐Service
Community
Schools:
Combating
Poverty
and
Improving
Student
Achievement.”

 
 30

  • 31. Community
Schools
link
education,
positive
youth
development,
family
 support,
and
community
development.
Services
offered
in
a
full‐service
community
 school
include:
 
 • Primary
health
care
 • Family
resource
centers
 
 • Dental
services
 • Adult
education
classes
 
 • Nutrition
counseling
 • Parent
workshops
 
 • Mental
health
services
 • Job
training
 
 • Immunizations
 • Immigration
assistance
 
 • Referrals
 • Housing
assistance
 
 • Early
childhood
education
 • Case
management
 
 • After‐school
programs
 • Food
and
clothing
 
 • Mentoring
and
tutoring
 • Sports
and
recreation

 
 • Community
service
 • Career
education
 
 opportunities
 • Community
service
 
 • Tutoring
 opportunities
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 There
are
numerous
community
school
initiatives
across
the
country
and
no
 two
programs
are
the
same.
Listed
in
the
next
section
are
several
key
initiatives
that
 have
shown
distinguishable
results.
But
it
is
clear
that
the
Community
School
model
 is
gaining
recognition
as
a
systemic
model
that
can
effectively
integrate
and
achieve
 city
and
district
goals.
According
to
Marty
Blank,
Community
Schools
have
proven
to
 result
in
“(a)
significant
and
widespread
gains
in
academic
achievement
and
in
 essential
areas
of
nonacademic
development,
(b)
increased
family
stability
and
 greater
family
involvement
with
schools,
(c)
increased
teacher
satisfaction
and
 more
positive
school
environments,
and
(d)
better
use
of
school
buildings
and
 increased
security
and
pride
in
neighborhoods.”35
 Secretary
Duncan,
the
former
Superintendent
of
the
Chicago
Public
School
 System
–
a
system
that
structured
25%
(160
schools)
of
its
schools
as
community
 























































 35
Memphis
City
Schools
Grant
Proposal
for
a
Ninth
Full‐Service
Community
Center.
2.
 
 31

  • 32. schools
within
a
five‐year
period,
discussed
his
vision
for
public
schools
during
his
 Senate
confirmation
hearings.
Duncan
said,

 “In
every
neighborhood
in
our
country,
you
have
schools.

In
every
school,
you
 have
classrooms,
you
have
computer
labs,
you
have
libraries,
you
have
gyms,
 many
have
pools.

Those
buildings
don’t
belong
to
you
or
I.

They
don’t
belong
to
 the
unions.

They
belong
to
the
community.”36

 Furthermore,
Secretary
Duncan
explained,

 “I
am
just
convinced
that
when
families
learn
together
and
where
schools
truly
 become
the
heart
and
center
of
a
neighborhood
–
a
community
anchor
–
there
are
 tremendous
dividends
for
children.”37
 Not
only
do
students
benefit,
but
also
communities
benefit
enormously
from
the
 many
services
provided.
It
is
for
this
reason
that
this
paper
looks
specifically
at
the
 strategic
plans
of
both
the
City
of
Memphis
and
the
MCS
system
and
proposes
an
 opportunity
to
realign
interests
and
restructure
leveraged
resources
to
unite
 communities
with
the
community
school
approach.

 
 Costs
and
Benefits
of
a
Community
School

 It
is
important
to
note
that
a
major
misconception
of
the
full‐service
 community
school
model
is
that
teachers
and
school
staff
will
now
have
to
work
 more
hours
and
schools
will
have
to
fund
these
efforts.
This
is
not
the
case.
The
 initiative
will
require
funding
for
a
full‐time
coordinator.
The
Children’s
Aid
Society
 (CAS)
paid
its
coordinator
$40,000
to
work
from
one
to
nine
daily.
In
order
to
 develop
a
sustainable
infrastructure
for
this
effort,
there
are
investments
required.
 But
this
money
should
originate
from
government
grants
and
contracts,
legislative
 earmarks,
community
foundations,
private
funders,
in‐kind
gifts
and
fees‐for‐service
 and
a
partnership
with
the
City
of
Memphis
to
address
community
services.

 
 Community
Schools
will
be
cost
efficient
to
agencies,
the
MCS
system,
and
 the
City
of
Memphis.
Firstly,
locating
all
child
and
family
services
within
a
single
 























































 36
Duncan
Senate
Confirmation
Hearings.
See
 http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/03/12/1833878.aspx
 37
http://www.communityschools.org/.
7
April
2009.
 
 32

  • 33. facility
provides
an
opportunity
for
service
agencies
and
schools
to
save.
Social
 service
agencies
will
be
able
to
cut
on
occupancy
and/or
stand‐alone
buildings,
 outreach,
and
transportation
expenditures.
According
to
the
Children’s
Aid
Society,
 in
many
cases
these
expenditures
represent
up
to
20%
of
an
agency’s
budget.38
 School
staff
benefits
enormously
from
this
approach.
Teachers
are
able
to
dedicate
 more
time
to
education.
Children
receive
services
that
improve
their
readiness
to
 learn.
And
school
buildings
are
no
longer
vacant,
but
constantly
bustling
with
 community
programs,
summer
and
weekend
programs,
and
service
agencies
that
 can
pay
for
the
occupancy.
This
provides
a
revenue
producing
opportunity
to
 compensate
for
additional
costs
for
the
school
system.

 
 According
to
the
Children’s
Aid
Society,
roughly
one‐third
of
the
cost
per
 student
is
for
“health,
dental
and
mental
health
services,
and
two‐thirds
are
for
the
 core
programs
in
education,
recreation
and
preventive
services.”39
Below
is
a
model
 offered
by
CAS
of
the
sizes
of
the
full‐service
community
school
approach.
The
blue
 arrow
shows
the
current
size
of
this
initiative
in
the
MCS
system
(discussed
more
in
 recommendations
section).
 
 
 
 START­UP
PROGRAM
 MEDIUM
PROGRAM
 LARGER
PROGRAM
 
 
 
 Extended­Learning
Activities

 Extended­Learning
Activities

 Extended­Learning
Activities

 Family
Resource
Center
 Family
Resource
Center
 Family
Resource
Center
 Summer
Program
 Summer
Program
 Health
Screenings
 Health/Mental
 Community
Events
 





Health
Services

 Teen
Programs
 Adult
Education
 Early
Childhood
 





Development
 Community
Events
 
 
 
 























































 38
Children’s
Aid
Society.
Building
A
Community
School.
Third
Edition.
88.
 39
Children’s
Aid
Society.
Building
A
Community
School.
Third
Edition.
90. 
 
 33

  • 34. Federal
Support
for
School‐Based
Services
 
 It
is
important
to
simply
note
some
of
the
federal
programs
that
promote
 full‐service
community
schools
and
that
these
schools
offer
an
opportunity
to
think
 creatively
about
funding
sources,
as
they
provide
a
wide
expanse
of
service
 opportunities
that
can
apply
for
funding.
These
summaries
are
based
from
the
 Children’s
Aid
Society
handbook
on
Building
A
Community
School.
 • The
21st
Century
Community
Learning
Centers:
In
Title
X,
Part
I
of
the
 Elementary
and
Secondary
Education
Act
(ESEA),
grants
are
to
target
 school
districts
that
fund
public
schools
as
“community
education
centers
 that
provide
safe,
supervised
and
enriching
after‐school
activities
for
 children,
with
access
to
homework
centers,
tutors,
and
cultural,
 recreational
and
nutritional
opportunities.”40
The
program
also
provides
 funds
for
schools
that
conduct
“lifelong
learning
programs.”41
 
 • Title
I:
The
ESEA
earmarks
$8.6
billion
(FY
2001)
to
help
disadvantaged
 children.
All
but
six
MCS
schools
are
Title
I
schools.

 
 • Head
Start/Even
Start:
The
Head
Start
Program
funds
programs
that
 focus
on
early
childhood
systems
and
provide
access
to
services
for
low‐ income
children.
The
U.S.
Department
of
Education
administers
Even
 Start
to
assist
in
the
building
of
existing
community
resources
that
 improve
family
literacy,
provide
adult
education,
parenting
education
and
 early
childhood
education
within
a
unified
program.

 
 • Safe
and
Drug
Free
Schools
and
Communities:
ESEA
administers
this
 program,
which
focuses
on
classroom‐based
curricula
for
drug
 prevention
programs.

 
 • Safe
Schools/Healthy
Students:
Jointly
administered
between
the
U.S.
 Departments
of
Education,
Health
and
Human
Services
and
Justice,
this
 program
funds
communities
that
promote
healthy
child
development
and
 prevent
violent
behaviors
through
“fully‐linked
education,
mental
health,
 law
enforcement,
juvenile
justice
and
social
services
systems.”42
 
 • Food
and
Nutrition:
Under
the
auspices
of
the
U.S.
Department
of
 Agriculture,
the
Food
and
Nutrition
Service
agency
administers
the
 National
School
Lunch
Program.
In
addition
the
Summer
Food
Service
 Program
offers
opportunities
to
assist
in
providing
meals
to
students
 both
during
school
and
during
the
summer
months.

 























































 40
Children’s
Aid
Society.
Building
A
Community
School.
Third
Edition.
97‐98. 
 41
Children’s
Aid
Society.
Building
A
Community
School.
Third
Edition.
98.
 42
Children’s
Aid
Society.
Building
A
Community
School.
Third
Edition.
99.
 
 34

  • 35. 
 • U.S.
Department
of
Justice:
Administered
by
the
Office
of
Juvenile
 Justice.
Several
of
the
programs,
include
Weed
and
Seed,
Gang‐Free
 Schools
and
Communities
Drug
Prevention
Demonstration
Project
and
 the
Juvenile
Mentoring
Program
(JUMP).
The
Title
V
Community
 Prevention
Grants
Program
can
be
used
for
community
schools.

 
 • U.S.
Department
of
Housing
and
Urban
Development:
This
is
 specifically
applicable
to
Empowerment
Zones
and
Enterprise
 Communities,
which
can
be
applied
to
community
schools.
HUD
has
a
 Community
Outreach
Partnership
Center,
which
helps
universities
 develop
community‐based
programs.

 
 • The
Family
Preservation
and
Support
Program:
To
provide
services
 for
children
and
families
from
prevention
to
intervention.

 
 • Child
Abuse
and
Neglect
Discretionary
Activities:
Administered
by
the
 U.S.
Department
of
Health
and
Human
Services
Office
on
Child
Abuse
and
 Neglect
to
provide
family
activities
for
“the
prevention,
assessment,
 identification,
and
treatment
of
child
abuse
and
neglect.”43
 
 • Community
Health
Centers:
Administered
by
U.S.
Department
of
Health
 and
Human
Services
to
support
the
development
and
operation
of
 community
health
centers.

 
 The
following
section
provides
concise
case
studies
of
three
programmatically
 different,
but
inherently
similar
models
of
the
full‐service
community
school
 approach.
 
 
 
 
 
 























































 43
Children’s
Aid
Society.
Building
A
Community
School.
Third
Edition.
102. 
 
 35

  • 36. Case
Studies:
SUN,
Harlem,
Penn
 
 There
are
numerous
examples
of
the
Community
School
model
throughout
 the
country.
The
Coalition
for
Community
Schools
published
a
list
of
the
various
 models,
their
descriptions,
and
evaluations
of
their
success
in
their
recent
agenda.

 
 There
are
national
models,
like
the
Children’s
Aid
Society,
Communities
In
 Schools,
New
York
City
Beacons,
and
the
Schools
of
the
21st
Century.
The
NYC
 Beacons,
for
example,
transform
public
school
facilities
into
community
centers,
in
 which
they
offer
recreational,
social
service,
educational
enrichment,
and
vocational
 activities.
The
buildings
are
opened
on
the
evenings
and
weekends.

 
 There
are
State­funded/statewide
approaches,
like
California
Healthy
 Start
(a
partnership
between
SRI
International
and
the
California
Department
of
 Education),
Illinois
Project
Success
(a
partnership
between
the
Center
for
 Prevention
Research
and
Development
and
the
Institute
of
Government
and
Public
 Affairs
at
the
University
of
Illinois),
Kentucky
Family
Resource
and
Youth
Services
 Program
(a
partnership
between
Rutgers
University,
R.E.A.C.H.
of
Louisville,
Inc.,
 and
Southern
Regional
Education
Board),
Texas
Alliance
Schools,
Washington
 Readiness
to
Learn,
and
the
Urban
School
Initiative
School
Age
Child
Care
Project.

 
 There
are
also
District­wide
and
local
initiatives.
Some
of
these
district‐ wide
models
include
Achievement
Plus
(St.
Paul,
MN),
Boston
Excels
(Boston),
 Bridges
to
Success
(Indianapolis),
Center
for
School
Change
Initiative
(run
by
 Rainbow
Research),
Dallas
Youth
and
Family
Centers
Programs
(Dallas
Independent
 School
District),
Hamilton
County
Families
and
Children
First
Council
(run
by
the
 University
of
Cincinnati),
LA’s
BEST
After
School
Enrichment
Program
(run
by
the
 University
of
California
at
Los
Angeles),
Polk
Bros.
Full
Service
School
Initiative
(run
 by
the
Chapin
Hall
Center
for
Children
at
the
University
of
Chicago),
and
the
Schools
 Uniting
Neighborhoods
in
Oregon.44

 
 Listed
below
are
three
successful
examples
of
the
Community
School
model.
 These
examples
attempt
to
describe
in
more
detail
how
these
initiatives
began,
their
 























































 44
The
Coalition
for
Community
Schools
Report,
2009.
35‐39.
 
 36

  • 37. unique
structure,
and
some
lessons
that
could
be
particularly
beneficial
for
the
 Memphis
City
School
system.

 
  District
Strategy
 Schools
Uniting
Neighborhoods
Initiative
(Portland,
Oregon)45

 
 Between
2002
and
2003,
due
to
a
dramatic
drop
in
state
funding,
Oregon
 Multnomah
County
forced
school
districts
to
consider
serious
cutbacks.
The
 Portland
Public
Schools
(PPS),
the
largest
district
in
the
area,
considered
cutting
24
 days
off
the
school
year,
while
teachers
threatened
to
strike.
Intense
negotiations
 between
the
district
and
the
teachers
resulted
in
a
reinstatement
of
the
24
days,
as
 teachers
offered
to
work
for
ten
days
without
compensation
and
a
one‐time
increase
 in
business
license
fees.
Other
school
districts
were
not
as
successful,
as
they
had
to
 cut
an
average
of
five
to
eight
days
out
of
the
calendar.

 
 The
social,
demographic,
and
political
environment
of
the
late
1990s
grew
 increasingly
more
challenging.
New
state
school
reform
that
attempted
to
link
state
 funds
to
achievement
restricted
the
districts’
ability
to
creatively
and
independently
 assess
their
progress.
Demographically,
the
region
became
increasingly
more
 diverse
both
racially
and
culturally.
New
services
were
required
for
this
diverse
 constituency.
Furthermore,
parents
could
not
oversee
their
children
as
they
worked
 one
to
two
jobs
a
day.
And
in
some
circumstances,
the
number
student
mobility
 increased,
as
a
shortage
for
affordable
housing
required
families
to
move.
Lastly,
 there
was
a
significant
achievement
gap
based
on
ethnicity
and
language.
Hispanic
 and
African
American
students
dropped
out
at
twice
the
rate
of
the
average
student.

 
 One
of
the
most
successful
and
innovative
initiatives
to
solve
these
monetary
 and
socio‐economic
obstacles
was
the
Schools
Uniting
Neighborhoods
(SUN)
 Initiative
of
Multnomah
County.
The
SUN
Initiative
“turns
local
public
schools
into
 community
learning
centers
by
offering
before
and
after
school
classes,
parent
 























































 45
Please
see
the
Casey
Report
on
the
SUN
Initiative.
This
report
outlines
the
timeframe
of
the
initiative
and
the
 lessons
learned
throughout
its
lifespan.
Several
of
the
applicable
lessons
are
included.
 
 37

  • 38. support
and
involvement
activities,
community
educational
and
cultural
events,
and
 social
services
for
young
people
and
their
families.”46

 
 The
strategic
plans
for
the
SUN
Initiative
began
in
1998
under
the
leadership
 of
Portland
City
Commissioner
Jim
Francesconi,
former
Multonomah
County
Chair
 Beverly
Stein,
and
County
Chair
Diane
Linn
(then
the
Commissioner
of
District
1).47

 The
vision
was
to
“create
a
model
for
extended‐day,
full
service
community
schools
 with
the
combined
support
of
both
the
City
and
County
governments.”48
It
is
 important
to
note
that
community
members,
government
leaders,
social
service
 agencies,
and
school
personnel
ALL
participated
in
the
original
planning
of
the
SUN
 Initiative.
The
goals
of
the
SUN
Schools
are:
 
 Goal
1:
To
increase
the
capacity
of
local
schools
to
provide
a
safe,
supervised,
and
positive
 environment
for
expanded
experiences
that
improve
student
achievement,
attendance,
 behavior
and
other
skills
for
healthy
development
and
academic
success.
 Goal
2:
To
increase
family
involvement
in
their
child’s
education
as
well
as
supporting
the
 school
and
school‐based
activities
that
build
individual
and
community
assets.
 Goal
3:
To
increase
community
and
business
involvement
in
supporting
schools
and
school‐ based
programs
that
combine
academics,
recreation
and
social/health
services.
 Goal
4:
To
improve
the
system
of
collaboration
among
school
districts,
local
governments,
 community‐based
agencies,
families,
citizens,
and
business/corporate
leaders.

 Goal
5:
To
improve
use
of
public
facilities
and
services
by
allocating
services
in
the
 community‐based
neighborhood
schools.
 
 
 Within
the
first
year,
the
SUN
Initiative
hired
a
director
and
selected
the
first
eight
 schools.
By
2002,
there
were
15
SUN
Schools
and
the
3
transitioning.
Some
of
the
 indicators
of
success
during
this
time
period,
include:
 • 800
extended‐day
activities
and
services
serving
4,871
children
(homework
 clubs,
drama
classes,
health
vans,
family
literacy
nights)
 























































 46
The
Casey
Report.
2.
 47
Ibid.,
7.
 48
Ibid. 
 
 38

  • 39. • Increased
family
involvement
in
schools,
as
the
activities
attracted
18,000
 family
and
community
members
 • The
activities
generated
over
16,000
volunteer
hours
 
 
 Over
$7
million
in
funding
and
support
for
the
SUN
Initiative
came
from
the
 Annie
E.
Casey
Foundation,
City
of
Portland,
Multnomah
County,
and
the
Oregon
 Commission
on
Children
and
Families,
the
21st
Century
Community
Learning
 Centers
and
Safe
Schools,
the
Oregon
Department
of
Human
Services,
and
private
 funders.49

 
 It
is
important
to
note
that
just
as
the
theoretical
model
qualifies,
no
two
 schools
are
exactly
the
same.
The
SUN
Schools
Initiative
conducted
needs
 assessments
of
each
school
and
met
with
school
staff,
parents,
and
community
 leaders
in
order
to
analyze
exactly
what
was
needed
and
how
these
needs
could
be
 targeted.
But
there
are
three
main
components
of
each
schools:
(1)
Academics,
(2)
 Social
and
Health
Services,
and
(3)
Extended
Day
Activities
that
are
linked
with
the
 school
day.
Extended
days
consisted
of
days
from
7:00
am
to
9:00
pm
and
served
as
 community
centers,
in
which
they
partnered
with
libraries,
parks,
community
 centers,
churches,
neighborhood
health
clinics,
and
businesses.
The
SUN
Initiative
is
 managed
by
individuals
in
the
Multnomah
County’s
Office
of
School
and
Community
 Partnerships
–
under
the
leaderships
of
Director
Lolenzo
T.
Poe.50

 
 Below
is
the
timeline
of
SUN
Initiative
provided
in
the
Casey
Report
that
is
 particularly
helpful
within
the
context
of
this
report,
as
it
gives
a
timeframe
of
the
 required
stages
to
establish
such
an
initiative.
 























































 49
Casey
Report.
ii.
 50
Contact
Lolenzo
T.
Poe,
Director
of
the
Office
of
School
and
Community
Partnerships:
503.988.6295,
 lolenzo.t.poe@co.mulnomah.or.us
 
 39

  • 40. 
 
 
 40

  • 41. 
 
 
 
 The
Casey
Report
also
broke
down
several
of
the
main
issues,
obstacles,
and
 lessons
learned
throughout
its
lifespan.
Below
are
several
lessons
in
the
Casey
 Report
that
can
highlight
what
is
required
to
successfully
and
practically
achieve
 their
goals:
 
 41

  • 42. • Staying
Focused
with
Constant
Involvement:
Through
early‐stage
 evaluations
SUN
Initiative
recognized
that
staff
required
extra
support
in
 order
to
meet
goals.
As
such,
a
small
team
of
Multnomah
County
staff
in
 the
Office
of
School
and
Community
Partnerships
designed
a
method
to
 properly
oversee
SUN
operations.
First,
there
are
regularly
one‐on‐one
 meetings
between
SUN
Initiative
staff
and
SUN
Site
Managers.
Second,
the
 Initiative
brings
in
organizational
development
consultants
to
provide
an
 annual
six‐hour
coaching
for
leadership.
Third,
there
are
monthly
group
 meetings
for
Site
Managers
to
share
experiences,
discuss
practices,
 realize
networks/resources,
and
receive
training.
And
fourth,
there
are
 quarterly
Initiative‐wide
gatherings
that
bring
together
principals,
Lead
 Agencies,
and
parents
to
provide
training
and
planning
sessions.
Some
of
 these
topics
include:
“
  Community
building
and
engagement
  Involving
and
empowering
parents

  Delivering
culturally
appropriate
services
  Developing
Advisory
Committees
  Successfully
managing
a
full‐service
site
with
multiple
 stakeholders
  Linking
extended‐day
and
school‐day
activities

  Closing
the
achievement
gap
  Strategic
planning
  Cultivating
positive
relationships
and
resolving
conflicts”51
 
 The
Annie
E.
Casey
Foundation
provided
$200,000
over
the
past
three
 years
to
support
these
efforts
and
supplement
them
with
technical
 assistance.
Furthermore,
the
Initiative
contracts
with
non‐profit
partners,
 who
are
capable
of
extensive
community
organizing.
According
to
the
 Casey
Report,
each
school
can
access
one
of
three
project
consultants
to
 assist
in
partnership
development.
In
addition,
the
SUN
Initiative
takes
 teams
of
stakeholder
to
national
conferences
like
the
Harvard
 Collaborative
for
Integrated
Schools
Services,
Coalition
for
Community
 schools,
and
Yale
Schools
of
the
21st
Century.

 
 • Political
Support
Across
Jurisdictions:
It
is
recommended
to
read
the
 detailed
analysis
of
the
political
situation
in
Oregon,
provided
in
the
 Casey
Report.
To
summarize,
the
Report
suggests
that
it
learned:
(1)
 Identify
common
agendas
with
political
leaders,
(2)
Politicians
are
in
a
 unique
position
to
support
innovation,
(3)
political
leaders
can
help
 connect
new
initiatives
with
existing
programs,
and
(4)
Politicians
need
 to
be
kept
informed
and
involved.

 
 • Expand
Opportunities
Through
Strategic
Partnerships:
It
is
imperative
 to
designate
a
person
to
follow
through
on
partnership
opportunities.
 























































 51
Casey
Report.
14.
 
 42

  • 43. This
person
must
understand
the
importance
of
personal
relationships
 and
networking.
These
partnerships
can
provide
activities
that
have
 mutual
benefits
for
all
stakeholders.
For
one
example,
between
2002‐ 2003,
19
businesses
joined
SUN
in
a
strategic
partnership
with
local
 schools
to
design
specific
activities
that
educate
students
on
 unconventional
topics.
The
Academically
Based
Community
Service
 (ABCS)
courses
are
examples
of
these
unconventional
learning
 opportunities
that
provide
real‐life
applications
to
the
material
learned
in
 class.

 
 For
more
information
on
the
SUN
Initiative,
please
see
the
Casey
Report
or
 http://www.co.multnomah.or.us/oscp/sunschools/mission.html.
In
addition,
it
is
 helpful
to
see
an
organizational
chart
of
the
SUN
Initiative
located
below:
 
 
 
 43

  • 44.  Lead
Agency

 Harlem
Children’s
Zone
(Harlem,
New
York)52

 
 The
Harlem
Chidren’s
Zone
is
an
example
of
a
different
community
school
 approach.
In
this
example,
an
organization
independent
of
the
district
developed
a
 program
and
found
its
own
donors.

Due
to
the
crack
epidemic
sweeping
through
 the
streets
of
Harlem
in
the
1980s
and
‘90s,
the
Harlem
Children’s
Zone
(HCZ)
staff
 realized
the
importance
of
targeting
the
family
and
the
environment
in
order
to
 effectively
educate
youth.
In
1991,
the
agency
opened
a
Beacon
Center
called
 Countee
Cullen
Community
Center,
in
which
they
transformed
a
public
school
that
 once
shut
its
doors
at
the
end
of
the
school
day
into
a
full‐service
community
center
 opened
on
weekends
and
summers.
 
 Throughout
the
1990s,
specific
programs
like
the
Harlem
Peacemakers
 program
were
established.
This
program
brought
in
AmeriCorps
participants
to
 assist
the
teachers
during
the
school
day
and
run
supplemental
programs
after
 school.
Starting
in
the
late
1990s,
HCZ
initiated
a
pilot
project
to
provide
support
 services
for
families
to
a
single
block.
By
1997,
the
network
expanded
to
a
24‐block
 area
–
taking
on
the
characteristics
of
what
now
defines
the
mission
of
the
Harlem
 Children’s
Zone.
In
2004,
the
Promise
Academy
charter
school
was
established;
and
 by
2007,
the
Zone
Project
extended
to
approximately
100
blocks,
in
which
it
served
 7,400
children
and
4,100
adults.53

 
 The
Harlem
Children’s
Zone
model
believes
in
five
core
principals:
“
 • Serve
an
entire
neighborhood
comprehensively
and
at
scale.
Engaging
an
 entire
neighborhood
helps
to
achieve
three
goals:
(1)
It
reaches
children
 in
numbers
significant
enough
to
affect
the
culture
of
a
community,
(2)
it
 transforms
the
physical
and
social
environments
that
impact
the
 children’s
development,
and
(3)
it
creates
programs
at
a
scale
large
 enough
to
meet
the
local
need.
(According
to
HCZ
research,
collective
 programs
must
reach
at
least
65%
of
the
total
children
in
the
area
served
 in
order
to
create
a
tipping
point
in
which
community
culture
norms
can
 be
affected.)
 
 























































 52
Please
see
http://www.hcz.org/what‐is‐hcz/history
 53
Ibid.
 
 44

  • 45. • Create
a
pipeline
of
support.
Develop
excellent,
accessible
programs
and
 schools
and
link
them
to
one
another
so
that
they
provide
uninterrupted
 support
for
children’s
healthy
growth,
starting
with
pre‐natal
programs
 for
parents
and
finishing
when
young
people
graduate
from
college.
 Surround
the
pipeline
with
additional
programs
that
support
families
and
 the
larger
community.
 
 • Build
community
among
residents,
institutions,
and
stakeholders,
who
 help
to
create
the
environment
necessary
for
children’s
healthy
 development.
 
 • Evaluate
program
outcomes
and
create
a
feedback
loop
that
cycles
data
 back
to
management
for
use
in
improving
and
refining
program
offerings.

 
 • Cultivate
a
culture
of
success
rooted
in
passion,
accountability,
leadership
 and
teamwork.”54
 
 
 HCZ
strategically
views
their
entire
program
as
a
“continuum
of
service”
or
a
 pipeline.55
This
pipeline
attempts
to
target
children
at
every
age
specifically
 addressing
pre‐natal
care,
infants,
toddlers,
elementary
school,
middle
school
 adolescence,
and
college.
According
to
the
HCZ:
“Academic
excellence
is
a
principal
 goal
of
the
HCZ
Pipeline,
but
high‐quality
schools
are
only
one
of
the
means
we
use
 to
achieve
it.
Others
include
nurturing
stable
families,
supporting
youth
 development,
improving
health
through
fitness
and
nutrition,
and
cultivating
 engaged
and
involved
adults
and
community
stakeholders.”56
The
pipeline
does
not
 require
a
student
to
enter
early
in
his/her
life.
Children
can
enter
at
any
age.
The
 HCZ
prides
itself
on
its
sophisticated
and
aggressive
outreach
efforts
and
multiple
 entrance
points.
Below
is
the
visual
strategy
of
the
pipeline:
 
 























































 54
The
Harlem
Children’s
Zone
Project
Executive
Summary.
2.

 55
Ibid. 
 56
Ibid.,
3.
 
 45

  • 46. 
 Several
of
the
programs
within
the
pipeline,
include:
 
 Early
Childhood
Programs
 • 2000,
The
Baby
College:
A
9
week
parenting
workshop
for
expectant
 parents
and
any
individuals
raising
a
child
up
to
three
years
old.

 
 • 2001,
Harlem
Gems:
An
all
day
pre‐kindergarten
program
that
prepares
 students
for
kindergarten.
These
classes
have
a
4
to
1
child‐to‐adult
ratio.
 They
teach
English,
Spanish,
and
French
and
from
8:00am
to
6:00pm.
HCZ
 runs
three
of
these
sites,
serving
approximately
250
children.
 
 
 Elementary
School
Programs
 
 • Harlem
Peacemakers:
In
partnership
with
AmeriCorps,
Peacemakers
 work
as
teaching
assistants
in
seven
public
schools
and
the
HCZ
Promise
 Academy
Charter
School.
There
are
also
supplemental
activities
after
the
 school
day
specifically
focused
on
training
young
people
to
care
about
a
 safe
neighborhood.
 
 
 Middle
School
Programs
 
 • Truce
Fitness
and
Nutrition
Centers:
Offers
free
classes
to
children
on
 fitness,
karate,
and
dance.
Participants
are
also
taught
nutrition
and
 health.
Personnel
at
these
centers
have
assisted
students
on
academic
 work,
as
well.
This
initiative
is
focused
on
students
in
grades
5‐8.

 
 • A
Cut
Above:
Specifically
focused
to
support
students
not
in
the
Promise
 Academy
charter
school.
This
program
provides
academic
help,
 leadership
development,
and
high‐school/college
preparation.
This
is
an
 after‐school
program
targeting
students
during
their
adolescent
years.

 
 
 High
School
Programs
 
 • Truce
Arts
&
Media:
(The
Renaissance
University
for
Community
 Education)
conducts
arts
and
media
activities
with
students
in
grades
9‐ 12
on
academic
growth
and
career
readiness.
 
 • Employment
and
Technology
Center:
The
center
teaches
computer
and
 job‐related
skills
to
teens
and
adults.

 
 
 
 College
Programs

 
 • The
College
Success
Office:
Offers
support
to
students
who
already
 graduated
high
school
and
the
HCZ
programs.
The
office
helps
students
 
 46

  • 47. get
into
the
“most‐appropriate”
college
and
then
provides
counsel
 throughout
college
years.


 
 
 Family,
Community
and
Health
Programs
 
 • 2001,
HCZ
Asthma
Initiative:
Teach
families
how
to
manage
the
disease.
 
 • 2006,
Obesity
Initiative:
A
program
to
educate
children
and
families
on
 how
to
reverse
obesity
in
the
community
and
the
negative
health
effects
 associated
with
obesity.
 
 • Community
Pride:
Organizes
tenant
and
block
associations
and
assists
 tenants
on
how
to
convert
city‐owned
buildings
into
tenant‐owned
co‐ ops.
 
 • Single
Stop:
Provides
a
wide
range
of
services,
including
personal
finance
 counseling
and
legal
consultation.
These
programs
are
hosted
weekly
in
 several
locations.
 
 
 
 The
Harlem
Children’s
Zone
Executive
Summary
also
provides
several
policy
 recommendations
that
could
be
applicable
to
the
Memphis
City
School
system.
(1)
 The
first
and
most
important
policy
recommendation
is
to
recognize
the
existing
 programs
in
one’s
district
and
not
to
try
to
replicate
a
specific
model
like
the
HCZ
 model.
But
this
being
said,
it
is
imperative
to
incorporate
consistent
principles
that
 are
proven
to
work
best
in
respective
neighborhoods.
(2)
The
second
major
point
is
 that
it
takes
at
least
10
years
to
fully
implement
a
pipeline
and
see
major
outcomes.
 HCZ
notes
that
it
tends
to
take
3
to
4
years
to
see
results.
Dr.
David
Cox
of
the
 University
of
Memphis
corroborated
this
timeframe
within
the
context
of
the
MCS
 system.
(3)
The
third
recommendation
is
to
make
sure
the
community‐based
 organization
and
NOT
the
government
is
the
lead
entity
with
full
accountability
for
 the
program.
From
HCZ’s
experience,
10
years
is
too
long
to
wait
for
politicians
 electorally
in
need
of
quick
results.
(4)
The
fourth
recommendation
is
to
guarantee
 at
least
$3,500
per
participant
in
funding
in
order
to
execute
high‐quality
programs.
 This
number
must
be
variant
depending
on
the
programs
and
needs
of
the
students.
 More
relevant
is
the
(5)
fifth
recommendation,
which
is
to
plan
for
the
long
term.57 
 
 























































 57
For
more
information,
see
www.hcz.org
or
contact
Kate
Shoemaker,
Policy
Director
at
kshoemaker@hcz.org
 
 47

  • 48.  University‐Assisted
 The
Netter
Center
for
Community
Partnerships
(Philadelphia,
PA)
 In
1983,
under
the
Hackney
Administration,
the
University
of
Pennsylvania
 planted
the
seeds
for
what
is
now
recognized
as
the
paradigm
for
university‐ community
relations.
According
to
Dr.
Ira
Harkavy,
prior
to
1983,
“Penn’s
 relationship
with
West
Philadelphia
could
charitably
be
characterized
as
severely
 strained.”58
By
1992,
under
the
leadership
of
Drs.
Hackney,
Harkavy,
and
Benson
the
 Center
for
Community
Partnerships
(CCP)
was
established.
The
creation
of
the
CCP
 demonstrated
a
serious
effort
on
Penn’s
part
to
commit
its
resources
to
improving
 the
“quality
of
life
in
its
local
community
–
not
only
in
respect
to
public
schools,
but
 to
economic
and
community
development
in
general.”59
In
Harkavy’s
paper
 “Strategy
for
Taking
Penn’s
Local
Engagement
Effort
from
Excellence
to
Eminence,”
 he
detailed
how
these
resources
were
used
in
programs,
such
as
the
West
 Philadelphia
Initiatives,
the
partnership
between
Penn’s
Graduate
School
of
 Education
and
the
School
District,
the
revitalization
of
housing
developments,
and
 the
successful
investments
in
its
own
public
security.
 
 According
to
the
CCP
website,

 “Through
the
Center,
the
University
currently
engages
in
three
types
 of
activities:
academically
based
community
service
(ABCS),
direct
 traditional
service,
and
community
development.
Academically
based
 community
service
is
at
the
core
of
the
Center’s
work.
It
is
service
 rooted
in
and
intrinsically
linked
to
teaching
and/or
research,
and
 encompasses
problem‐oriented
research
and
teaching,
as
well
as
 service
learning
emphasizing
student
and
faculty
reflection
on
the
 service
experience.”60
 
 Furthermore
the
CCP
website
explains,
“ABCS
courses
involve
hands‐on,
 real‐world
problem
solving
and
help
students
become
active,
participating
citizens
 























































 58
Ira
Harkavy
(et.
al.)
“Strategy
for
Taking
Penn’s
Local
Engagement
Effort
from
Excellence
to
Eminence,”
2.
 59
Ibid. 

 60
“About
the
Center,”
Center
for
Community
Partnerships,
(2007),
 http://www.upenn.edu/ccp/general/academically‐based‐community‐service‐3.html.
 
 48

  • 49. of
a
democratic
society.”61
Service
learning
is
a
method
of
pedagogical
instruction
 that
aims
to
combine
academic
classroom
curriculum
with
meaningful
service
 within
the
larger
community.
More
specifically,
it
attempts
to
integrate
meaningful
 community
service
anchored
in
the
classroom
with
periodic
reflection
to
enrich
the
 learning
experience,
encourage
lifelong
civic
engagement,
and
strengthen
 communities
for
the
common
good.
It
attempts
to
“enhance
a
students
capacity
to
 think
critically,
solve
problems
practically,
and
function
as
a
life‐long
moral,
 democratic
citizen
in
a
democratic
society.”62

 In
terms
of
the
arguments
proposed
by
both
the
CCP
and
the
university,
it
is
 not
only
important
that
these
students
learn
the
meaning
of
citizenship,
but
also
 that
they
learn
how
to
approach
problems
in
whatever
field
they
chose
to
pursue.
 Furthermore,
the
important
fact
is
not
necessarily
what
they
are
accomplishing,
but
 what
they
are
learning.
According
to
Amy
Edmondson
and
Mark
D.
Cannon
in
“The
 Hard
Work
of
Failure
Analysis,”
analyzing
how
a
project
was
conducted
and
why
it
 failed
is
imperative
to
advancing
knowledge,
efficiency,
and
effectiveness.
They
 divided
failure
analysis
into
two
elements:
a
“defensive”
viewpoint
and
an
 “offensive”
viewpoint.
“Defensive”
analysis
of
failure
provides
an
explanation
for
 why
something
went
wrong
and
who
was
to
blame.
“Offensive”
analysis
of
failure
is
 to
analyze
the
case
as
“deliberate
experimentation.”
In
essence,
although
students
 may
not
solve
poverty
in
West
Philadelphia,
the
analysis
that
assists
the
problem
 solving
method
is
of
most
importance
to
the
goal
of
the
University
of
Pennsylvania
 in
creating
citizens.
 As
Penn
has
embraced
its
role
as
an
integral
member
of
the
community
of
 West
Philadelphia,
it
has
institutionalized
this
sense
of
engagement
into
the
 curriculum.
Although,
Penn
is
highly
decentralized,
the
following
is
a
brief
summary
 of
Penn’s
incorporation
of
service
into
the
learning
published
by
the
Carnegie
 Report
entitled
“Community
Engagement
Indicators
for
the
University
of
 Pennsylvania:”

 























































 61
“Academically
Based
Community
Service,”
Center
for
Community
Partnerships,
(2007),
 http://www.upenn.edu/ccp/general/academically‐based‐community‐service‐3.html.
 62
Lee
Benson,
Ira
Harkavy,
Service
Learning,
(2003).
In
K.
Christian
and
D.
Levinson
(Eds.),
Encyclopedia
of
 Community:
From
the
Village
to
the
Virtual
World,
(Thousand
Oaks,
CA:
Sage),
1223.
 
 49

  • 50. • The
Law
School
was
the
first
in
the
nation
to
establish
a
mandatory
pro
 bono
requirement
and
the
first
law
school
to
win
the
American
Bar
 Associations
Pro
Bono
Public
Award
for
its
Public
Service
Program.

 Students
must
complete
70
hours
of
pro
bono
work
in
order
to
graduate.


 (Participation
is
non‐credit
bearing.)

Penn
students
work
with
practicing
 attorneys
in
such
diverse
areas
as
bankruptcy
law,
civil
rights
and
 constitutional
law
issues,
environmental
justice,
family
law,
 governmental
practice,
health
law,
immigration,
international
human
 rights
law,
labor
law,
women’s
issues
and
youth.

The
explicit
goal
of
the
 program
is
to
instill
in
students
a
commitment
to
public
service.

In
2004,
 a
total
of
710
students
participated
in
the
program
and
71%
of
the
 students
performed
more
than
the
required
70
hours. • The
Medical
School
is
initiating
a
program
as
part
of
its
required
course
in
 doctoring,
which
pairs
each
medical
student
with
a
West
Philadelphia
 patient.

The
expectation
is
that
the
student
will
work
with
this
patient
for
 several
successive
years. • The
School
of
Arts
and
Sciences
recently
adopted
a
new
general
education
 curriculum.

The
curriculum
and
its
degree
requirements
will
be
in
place
 for
students
that
matriculate
in
fall
2006.

The
goals
of
the
new
 curriculum
are
to
foster
the
development
of
graduates
who
are
“broadly‐ educated
people,
who
have
acquired
the
knowledge,
skills,
and
inclination
 that
will
enable
them
to
embark
on
a
lifetime
of
learning’
to
assume
 positions
of
leadership
in
their
chosen
careers;
to
be
independent,
 creative
thinkers;
to
be
able
to
adapt
to
rapidly‐changing
circumstances
 and
to
become
thoughtful,
engaged
citizens
of
their
community,
nation
and
 world.”


Dean
of
the
College,
Dennis
DeTurck
notes
that
the
new
 curriculum,
for
the
first
time,
will
allow
ABCS
courses
to
be
used
to
fulfill
 some
of
the
distribution
requirements.
 
 • The
School
of
Dentistry:
Each
year,
approximately
500
dental
students
are
 required
to
take
an
ABCS
course. 
 • The
School
of
Nursing:

Each
year,
approximately
500
undergraduate
 nursing
students
(as
well
as
the
majority
of
Masters
students)
are
 required
to
take
courses
with
clinical
components
that
directly
serve
the
 people
of
West
Philadelphia.63

 • The
School
of
Social
Policy
and
Practice:
Students
enrolled
in
the
Masters
 of
Social
Work
program
full
time
are
spend
3
days
a
week,
21‐24
 hours/week,
in
community
settings
for
a
total
of
about
900
hours
for
the
 academic
year.

Part
time
students
are
in
community
settings
2
days
a
 week
for
about16
hours/week,
August
through
June,
also
for
about
900
 hours
(during
2
of
their
3
years
of
the
part‐time
program).

Overall,
about
 























































 63
Penn
Nursing,
“Education
in
Practice,”
(2007),
http://www.nursing.upenn.edu/clinical_practices/education/.
 
 50

  • 51. 250
full‐time
and
part‐time
students
are
in
community
agencies
for
a
 total
of
about
900
hours
per
year
per
student.
 
 • The
Wharton
School
of
Business:
All
of
Wharton’s
entering
undergraduates
 (approximately
650
each
year)
must
take
Management
100.
A
 distinguishing
feature
of
this
course
is
a
community‐service
project.

The
 goal
of
the
course
is
to
encourage
students
to
learn
about
the
nature
of
 group
work,
and
to
foster
leadership,
teamwork,
and
communication.
The
 American
Association
of
Higher
Education
designated
the
course
as
 “exemplary”
for
its
ability
to
encourage
students
to
integrate
what
they
 are
learning
both
inside
and
outside
of
the
classroom.”64
 
 Currently
the
Center
for
Community
Partnerships
at
Penn
offers
over
150
 ABCS
courses
from
diverse
schools
and
disciplines
across
the
University.65
During
 the
2004‐2005
academic
year,
2,118
ABCS
students
were
involved
in
46
 undergraduate
courses
across
19
departments
and
16
graduate
courses
involving
8
 of
the
professional
schools.66
The
growth
in
the
number
of
students
willing
to
take
 the
courses,
as
well
as
the
growth
in
faculty
willing
to
teach
these
courses
is
 demonstrative
of
the
satisfaction
the
different
elements
of
the
university
are
 continuously
receiving
from
the
ABCS
curriculum.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 























































 64
All
of
the
information
breaking
down
the
different
schools
at
Penn
came
directly
from
the
Carnegie
Report.

 The
information
was
concisely
outlined
and
should
be
quoted
directly
from
the
report.
Carnegie
Report:
 Community
Engagement
Indicators
for
the
University
of
Pennsylvania;
Fall
2005
 65
“Academically
Based
Community
Service,”
Center
for
Community
Partnerships.

 66
Ibid.
 
 51

  • 52. Recommendations
for
Memphis
 This
report
is
highly
theoretical
and
its
purpose
is
to
introduce
the
 importance
of
a
community
school
approach
as
the
most
effective
and
efficient
 model
to
solve
issues
that
affect
the
City
of
Memphis
and
the
school
district,
a
 district
in
which
all
but
six
schools
are
Title
I
schools.
In
a
phone
discussion
with
 Judy
Dimon,
the
key
person
responsible
for
implementing
the
community
school
 model
in
the
Chicago
Public
Schools
under
Chicago
Public
Schools
CEO
Arne
Duncan,
 she
explained
that
the
theory
of
the
community
school
model
is
great,
“but
we
won’t
 all
live
that
long.”67
Her
point
was
that
it
all
comes
down
to
numbers
and
 practicalities
–
and
it
is
in
this
analysis
that
the
Community
School
model
is
most
 appealing.
According
to
Dimon,
the
Community
School
model
is
the
most
cost‐ efficient
method
of
both
educating
our
youth
and
confronting
drastic
socio‐ economic
issues
in
a
district.
But
this
cost
efficiency
can
only
be
seen
from
a
 financial
analysis
on
the
citywide
(mayoral)
level.
As
such,
Dimon
argues
that
a
 school
district
must
be
under
mayoral
control
in
order
to
effectively
implement
 district
wide
initiatives.

 With
two
separate
governing
bodies,
bureaucratic
inefficiency
and
political
 turmoil
inevitably
plagues
the
City
of
Memphis
and
Shelby
County.
This
report
does
 not
ignore
the
political
obstacles
associated
with
synergizing
many
of
the
 governmental
services.
It
is
clear
that
mayoral
control
over
the
Memphis
City
School
 system
is
an
endeavor
that
would
cause
significant
political
turmoil.

It
is
for
this
 reason
that
this
paper
argues
for
the
alignment
of
strategic
goals
between
 city/county
leaders
and
the
school
district.
Below
are
the
following
 recommendations
for
the
Memphis
City
School
system,
based
primarily
off
of
the
 research
of
this
paper,
discussions
with
Marty
Blank,
Ira
Harkavy,
Mary
Earheart‐ Brown,
and
Judy
Dimon
and
a
combination
of
four
major
models,
including
SUN,
 HCZ,
Penn’s
Netter
Center,
and
the
Children’s
Aid
Society.
 
 























































 67
Phone
discussion
on
04.28.09
with
Judy
Dimon.

 
 52

  • 53. Commit
to
the
Full‐Service
Community
School
Model

 As
noted
in
the
MCS
Strategic
Plan,
Superintendent
Cash
believes
in
a
 complex
equation
for
education
that
does
not
simply
focus
on
the
traditional
 curricular
model.
Dr.
Cash
has
outlined
a
series
of
progressive
initiatives,
including
a
 school‐based
health
clinic
initiative,
pre‐school
and
after‐school
programs,
a
 partnership
program
with
the
private
sector,
and
a
realignment
of
the
strategic
 planning
process
between
the
state
and
the
district.
Dr.
Cash
has
clearly
 demonstrated
his
belief
in
the
key
role
the
school
can
play
within
a
community.
In
fact,
 he
wrote
in
his
welcome
address,
“By
working
together,
we
can
continue
to
give
our
 children
a
world‐class
education
that
will
become
the
foundation
to
a
successful
 future,
not
only
for
our
children,
but
for
our
entire
community.”68
As
such,
the
ideas
 presented
in
this
report
are
not
new
to
the
district.
But
the
full‐service
community
 school
model
provides
a
way
to
consolidate
our
efforts
and
increase
efficiency
 throughout
the
district.
The
full‐service
community
school
model
can:
 • Set
a
tone
that
the
district
and
the
city
are
investing
in
and
entirely
 focused
on
the
community,
 • Consolidate
MCS
initiatives,
 • Target
community
needs
by
focusing
police,
health
services,
 community
organization,
vocational
training
sessions,
and
cultural
 events
into
a
central
public
facility,
and

 • Diversify
funding
sources
to
one
entity
–
the
community
school.

 Given
the
socio‐economic
and
health
issues
challenging
the
City
of
Memphis,
the
 current
list
of
initiatives,
and
the
analysis
of
the
Community
School
model,
it
is
clear
 that
we
should
commit
to
offering
our
public
schools
as
the
central
vehicles
of
the
 community.
This
should
be
done
as
a
district‐wide
initiative,
in
which
MCS
 strategically
targets
specific
communities.
In
many
respects,
the
MCS
approach
 should
be
similar
to
the
SUN
Initiative,
which
started
with
eight
schools
and
now
 has
sixty
Community
Schools,
and
approached
the
initiative
with
broad
political
 support
and
as
a
school
district
policy.
 























































 68
Please
see:
http://www.mcsk12.net/aboutmcs_superintendent.asp.
 
 53

  • 54. Recognize
What
We
Have:
Family
Resource
Centers
in
Memphis
 Currently,
the
MCS
System
has
a
department
of
Community
Partnerships
run
 by
Miska
Bibbs,
Community
Partnerships
and
Volunteer
Services
Coordinator
 (phone:
901.416.7600,
e‐mail:
bibbsmiska@mcsk12.net).
The
Community
 Partnerships
department
runs
the
Adopt‐A‐School
program
in
which
community
 supporters
from
local
businesses,
civic
groups,
and
faith‐based
and
community
 organizations
can
make
substantial
commitments
to
adopt
a
school
and
promote
 achievement
and
student
growth.
According
to
the
MCS
website,
the
MCS’s
Adopt‐A‐ School
Program
currently
partners
with
over
650
business
and
community
 organizations.
In
theory,
each
school
has
an
Adopt‐A‐School
coordinator
that
 reports
to
the
district.
But
in
practice,
these
coordinators
are
not
paid
additionally
 for
their
work
and
end
up
being
principals,
parents,
or
teachers.
Furthermore,
given
 the
recent
budget
cuts,
there
are
no
training
sessions
offered
for
these
coordinators
 to
interact
with
organizations
and/or
learn
how
to
establish
contractual
 partnerships.
As
such,
there
is
an
opportunity
to
work
within
this
department
to
 strengthen
its
role
within
the
Community
School
strategy.69
 
 Although
we
do
not
have
a
full‐service
school
initiative
that
incorporates
the
 strategic
plans
and
resources
of
both
the
City
of
Memphis
and
the
Memphis
City
 School
System,
the
Memphis
City
School
system
operates
eight
family
resource
 centers
–
five
in
elementary
schools
and
three
in
high
schools
–
that
can
provide
a
 starting
point
for
the
city
to
expand
into
the
full‐service
model.
The
grants
 department
of
the
Memphis
City
School
system
applied
for
a
grant
to
develop
a
full‐ service
community
school
located
in
the
38126
zip
code,
which
has
the
highest
 poverty
rate
within
the
city
(59.3%),
a
high
concentration
of
children
(40.3%),
and
 the
lowest
percent
of
high
school
graduates
among
its
adults
(45.1%).70
A
map
of
 the
current
family
resource
centers
(red
star
with
white
center)
and
the
newly
 proposed
full‐service
center
(black
star
with
red
center)
is
below:
 
 























































 69
The
details
of
noted
here
are
based
on
a
call
with
Miska
Bibbs
on
Tuesday,
12
May
2009.
 70
Memphis
City
Schools
Grant
Proposal
for
a
Ninth
Full‐Service
Community
Center.
1.
 
 54

  • 55. 59.3%
families
below
poverty
in
38126
zip
code
 100%
free/reduced
lunch
at
B.T.
Washington
 High
 100%
free/reduced
lunch
at
Vance
Middle
 100%
free/reduced
lunch
at
Georgia
Avenue
 Elem.
 
 
 100%
free/reduced
lunch
at
La
Rose
Elem.
 
 According
to
the
grant
proposal,
approximately
3,000
zip
code
residents
would
be
 
 served
by
this
new
center
on
programs
like
early
childhood
education,
afterschool
 programs,
family
literacy,
adult
education,
and
resources
like
transportation,
job
 training,
and
healthcare.

 
 The
lead
agency
is
the
MidSouth
Reads
Collaborative
which
proposed
the
 following
objectives:
“
 a. Improve
outcomes
for
vulnerable
children
living
in
tough
 neighborhoods
 b. Strengthen
their
families’
connections
to
economic
opportunity,
 positive
social
networks,
and
effective
services
and
supports
 c. Connect
parents
to
good
jobs
and
asset
building
opportunities
 d. Ensure
that
their
young
children
benefit
from
better
health
care,
 quality
early
childhood
services,
and
more
intensive
supports
in
the
 early
grades
 
 55

  • 56. e. Provide
sustained,
simultaneous
emphasis
on
families,
economic
 opportunity,
school
success
in
early
grades,
and
strengthen
 community
capacity.”71
 The
grant
conducted
an
asset
map
in
which
it
noted
specific
lead
agencies,
 collaborative
members,
as
well
as
individuals
that
would
coordinate
and
run
the
 full‐service
school.
It
is
clear
that
the
Memphis
City
School
System
is
dedicated
to
 creating
community
partnerships
and
that
community
members
are
dedicated
to
 contributing
time
and
resources
to
students.
This
report
argues
for
the
 implementation
of
a
district
wide
initiative
to
transform
specific,
targeted
schools
 into
full‐service
community
centers
with
extended
hours
and
programs
that
focus
 on
the
needs
of
the
surrounding
community.

 Highlighted
in
the
initiatives
list
are
the
major
unconventional,
community
 resource‐leveraged
programs.
These
programs
are
targeted
approaches
and
try
to
 provide
various
opportunities
to
both
confront
growing
socio‐economic
issues
 affecting
students
and
cater
to
an
increasingly
complex
student
body
interested
in
 programmatically
diverse
studies,
such
as
tourism
and
aviation.
In
addition,
there
 are
eight
family
resource
centers,
which
provide
a
starting
point
for
a
full‐service
 community
school
model.
As
mentioned
earlier
in
this
report,
we
are
currently
 located
at
the
Start‐Up
position
(seen
below).
We
have
an
opportunity
to
move
 forward,
expand
services,
and
reestablish
a
focus
on
the
school
as
a
major
vehicle
 for
agencies,
the
school
district,
and
government.

 
 
 START­UP
PROGRAM
 MEDIUM
PROGRAM
 LARGER
PROGRAM
 
 
 
 Extended­Learning
Activities

 Extended­Learning
Activities

 Extended­Learning
Activities

 Family
Resource
Center
 Family
Resource
Center
 Family
Resource
Center
 Summer
Program
 Summer
Program
 Health
Screenings
 Health/Mental
 Community
Events
 





Health
Services

 Teen
Programs
 Adult
Education
 























































 71
Memphis
City
Schools
Grant
Proposal
for
a
Ninth
Full‐Service
Community
Center.
30. 
 
 56

  • 57. Early
Childhood
 





Development
 Community
Events
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 57

  • 58. Align
City/County
and
MCS
Strategic
Plans
and
Rethink
Indicators
of
 Success
 
 As
described
earlier,
the
MCS
strategic
plan
focuses
on
academic
 achievement,
accountability,
community
involvement,
healthy
youth
development,
 safety,
and
diversity.
Memphis
Fast
Forward
comprises
of
a
four‐pronged
strategy
 that
attempts
to
fully
separate
economic
development,
safety,
human
development,
 and
an
efficiency
plan
between
the
City
and
County
governments.
Theoretically,
 Memphis
Fast
Forward
does
not
strategically
view
one
factor
above
another.
Rather,
 the
strategic
plan
seems
to
be
divided
due
to
an
emphasis
on
execution
and
 management.
PeopleFirst!,
the
strategic
goal
that
specifically
incorporates
 education,
focuses
on
creating
“inspired
citizens,”
high
quality
education,
out
of
 school
programs
for
youth,
and
workforce
development
programs.

But
the
 emphasis
throughout
the
Memphis
Fast
Forward
plan
is
economic
development
–
 which
can
be
exemplified
by
its
focus
on
human
development
and
a
slow
response
 to
create
a
real,
independent,
and
accountable
position
for
coordinating
the
 PeopleFirst!
effort.
Furthermore,
the
emphasis
on
economic
development
is
 appropriately
epitomized
by
the
Memphis
Fast
Forward
Scorecard,
in
which
the
key
 statistics
of
assessing
the
strategy’s
progress
are
long‐term
economic
indicators.
 
 
 58

  • 59. Memphis
Fast
Forward
does
not
explicitly
recognize
in
its
strategy,
the
crucial
 role
a
school
can
play
in
accomplishing
the
goals
of
PeopleFirst!,
MemphisED,
and
 Operating
Safe
Community.
City
and
County
leadership
should
officially
recognize
the
 role
schools
can
play,
as
full­service
public
facilities,
in
the
community;
and
the
district
 should
coordinate
with
the
city
on
consolidating
and
leveraging
any/all
resources.
It
is
 in
this
respect
that
Memphis
should
base
its
model
off
of
the
SUN
Initiative
–
a
 district
initiative.
Memphis
has
the
capacity
and
the
need
to
implement
a
district
 wide
initiative
that
provides
services
to
both
the
students
and
the
community
 within
a
public
school.

 
 The
realigned
strategy
should
publicly
and
transparently
express
its
interest
in
 solving
practical,
short­term
goals
that
do
not
simply
focus
on
long­term,
economic
 indicators.
There
are
some
untraditional
indicators
like
the
ones
listed
below
that
 divide
the
indicators
into
more
practical,
community‐based
stages.
Many
of
these
 indicators
are
assessed
by
the
Memphis
City
School
system.
But
the
diagram
below,
 created
by
the
Coalition
for
Community
Schools,
provides
an
important
way
to
think
 of
how
we
should
assess
various
factors
affecting
students,
the
community,
and
our
 schools.
To
assess
families
and
support
networks,
please
see:

 • The
Children’s
Aid
Society:
 www.communityschools.org/toolkit/CAS_parentsurvey.doc?pid=7421
 • Duke:
www.childandfamilypolicy.duke.edu/fasttrack/techrept/i/ipe/ipe.pdf

 
 
 
 
 59

  • 60. 
 
 
 60

  • 61. 
 
 
 61

  • 62. Identify
Major
Community
Targets
and
Lead
Agencies

 
 Given
the
models
analyzed
above
(SUN,
HCZ,
and
Penn’s
Netter
Center),
the
 Memphis
City
School
system
is
in
a
good
position
to
establish
an
interest
in
full‐ service
community
schools.
The
decision
by
City/County
leaders
to
place
 Superintendent
Cash
as
the
person
responsible
for
PeopleFirst!
demonstrates
a
 recognition
that
the
schools
have
jurisdiction
and
can
play
a
central
role
 training
our
citizens,
from
a
traditional
youth
curriculum
to
adult
vocational
 programs
to
providing
health
services.
Furthermore,
an
emphasis
of
the
 PeopleFirst!
strategy
is
to
provide
“out‐of‐school‐time”
programs.
City/County
 leaders
are
asking
the
schools
to
expand
their
reach
and
with
limited
resources,
the
 Community
School
model
can
provide
an
answer.

 
 The
school
system
should
consider
expanding
programs
and
services
in
the
 existing
eight
Family
Resource
Centers
(FRCs).
In
addition,
the
Coordinator
will
 work
with
the
strategy
teams
of
the
Memphis
City
School
system
and
the
City
of
 Memphis
to
chose
targeted
places
throughout
Memphis,
whereby
we
can
establish
a
 Community
School
as
a
base
for
one
or
more
communities.
We
should
look
toward
 the
Harlem
Children’s
Zone
model
in
this
respect.
The
expansion
program
and
 pipeline
theory
seems
to
have
produced
a
rippling
effect
where
an
initial
start
of
a
 24‐block
radius
increased
to
a
100‐block
radius.
As
mentioned
earlier,
community
 and
city
assets
have
been
mapped
and
identified
by
various
organizations
and
 departments
with
both
the
City
of
Memphis
as
well
as
the
Memphis
City
Schools
 system
.
Some
of
the
lead
agencies
mentioned
in
Memphis
Fast
Forward,
include:
 
 62

  • 63. 
 
 
 
 
 
 63

  • 64. Hire
a
PeopleFirst!
Staff
Person

 According
to
Reid
Dulberger,
coordinator
of
MemphisED,
PeopleFirst!
is
 headed
by
Superintendent
Kriner
Cash.
At
first
glance,
one
may
think
‐
It
is
an
 unrealistic
expectation
to
have
Dr.
Cash
effectively
execute
PeopleFirst!,
while
 running
the
Memphis
City
School
system.
But
once
reconsidered,
it
is
clear
that
this
 provides
a
phenomenal
opportunity
for
Dr.
Cash
to
align
City/County
strategy
with
 MCS
goals
through
the
community
school
model.
As
such,
this
report
proposes
to
 create
a
district‐wide
staff
person
of
full‐service
centers
and
community
 partnerships
that
works
with
and
between
the
leadership
of
the
Memphis
City
 School
system
and
the
City
of
Memphis.
This
coordinator
will
work
with
the
 City/County
in
organizing
and
synergizing
MCS
and
City
departments
that
focus
on
 leveraging
community
partnerships.
As
noted
earlier
in
the
Memphis
38126
grant
 proposal,
there
are
currently
departments
that
hold
responsibilities
that
overlap
 with
the
full‐service
community
school
model
and
individuals
have
conducted
asset
 mapping.
In
addition,
Judy
Dimon
explained
that
the
average
salary
for
a
 coordinator
is
$40,000
and
this
person
tends
to
work
from
1:00pm
to
9:00pm
–
 whereby
this
individual
focuses
his/her
time
on
after‐school
activities
in
the
 schools.
We
have
the
tools
necessary
now
to
establish
a
district
policy
and
fully
 utilize
what
we
have
already
accomplished
to
provide
full
services
to
the
people
of
 Memphis
through
our
schools.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 64

  • 65. Conclusion
 As
noted
earlier
in
this
paper,
with
two
separate
governing
bodies,
 bureaucratic
inefficiency
and
political
turmoil
inevitably
plagues
the
City
of
 Memphis
and
Shelby
County.
Socio‐economically,
85%
of
our
students
are
 economically
disadvantaged
and
experience
serious
out‐of‐school
obstacles
that
 hinder
their
ability
to
succeed
academically.
As
such,
MCS
leadership
should
 consider
our
current
situation
an
opportunity
to
establish
our
public
schools
as
full‐ service
community
centers,
opened
for
extended
hours
for
every
day
of
the
week
to
 cater
to
the
needs
of
the
community.

They
can
partner
with
governmental,
 nonprofit,
for‐profit,
and
faith‐based
organizations
to
utilize
their
resources
and
 improve
issues
that
affect
the
environmental
profile
of
our
community
as
a
whole.
 Schools
have
the
potential
to
play
a
central
role
within
the
community.
I
hope
this
 report
provided
a
sufficient
introduction
to
the
Community
School
model
and
how
 we
can
apply
it
to
solve
some
of
the
many
issues
affecting
our
great
city.
 
 
 
 65