The document summarizes an upcoming meeting of the Student Reassignment Committee for the Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools. The meeting will take place on April 30, 2012 from 6:00-7:00 pm at the Nash Central High School Media Center. The agenda includes a call to order, roll call, approval of minutes from the previous meeting, review of committee operating procedures, scenario review and revision led by Mike Miller from OREd, and a report to the school board on May 21. The next meeting is scheduled for May 29 and will continue scenario review and revision.

3. STUDENT REASSIGNMENT COMMITTEE MEETING
Media Center, Nash Central High School
Monday, April 30, 2012 - 6:00 pm
 Call to Order……………………………………………………………………Victor Ward
 Roll Call………………………………………………………………………..Carina Bryant
 Approval of Minutes from the March 26, 2012 Meeting
 Committee Operating Procedure
 Scenario Review and Revision………………………………Mike Miller, OREd
 Report to School Board 5/21/12
 Questions?
Next Meeting
Scenario Review and Revision (continued)
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
6:00 pm
3

4. Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools

5. Jan-Aug 2012 Aug - 2012 Aug – Dec 2012 August 2013
Committee Committee Public Input/ Community
Deliberations/ Recommendations Engagement Implementation
Monthly Reports to Presented to the
the School Board School Board Board of Education
Approval
5

6. Board of Public Engagement
Education
Committee Chairs
Technical Support
Community
Feedback Committee
ORED
Staff 6

7. Contiguous boundaries:
 Attempt to maintain contiguous school boundaries without using
satellite attendance areas.
Respect neighborhoods:
 Avoid dividing easily recognized “neighborhoods” or identified
“developments” or “sub- divisions” unless it is necessary to meet other
guidelines. Whenever possible and practical use major highways,
railroads, rivers, and streams as natural boundaries.
Proximity to schools:
 While it is recognized that all students cannot be assigned to their closest
school, consider students proximity to other schools when creating
school boundaries.
7

8. Modify feeder systems:
 In order to maximize facility use and establish reasonable numbers of students at each
site, consider the use of 6 middle school feeder systems instead of 5. This would
allow smaller, more instructionally suited middle schools and less dependence on
mobile classrooms.
Stay within enrollment capacities:
 Unless it is likely that a school enrollment will be declining, assign students to the
four high schools in a way that their enrollments are under established capacities.
Consider anticipated growth:
 Enrollment growth patterns should be taken into consideration, where feasible, to
ensure that anticipated growth will not adversely impact one school significantly
more than the others.
Enrollment balance:
 In keeping with the intent of SB612, attempt to balance the percentage of academic
and economic populations at each middle and high school.
8

9.  February 13 – Understanding the Optimization
Process
 March 26 – Out of Capacity table and Scenario Data
 April 30 – Scenario Review and Revision
 May 29 – Scenario Review and Revision
 June 25 – Final Scenario Presentation
9

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

11. Mike Miller, OREd
11

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

13.  Optimal Scenarios
 Optimal scenarios for each level: Elem, Mid, High
 Scenario data presented at March 26 meeting
 Optimal with respect to Proximity + Utilization
 OREd scenario review
 Planning segment level review of optimal scenarios
 Multiple review criteria
 Assignment changes to address geographic issues
13

14. Optimal Attendance Zones
School
Membership building Balance index
forecast capacities allowance
Optimization
Algorithm
Optimal Attendance Zones
14

15. Scenario Review/Revision Cycle
Optimal Attendance Zones
Scenario Review
Track Edits &
Update School
Data
15

16. Assignment Change Considerations:
 Elem > Mid and Mid > High feeder pattern
 Contiguity
 Transportation issues
 Natural/man-made barriers
 Current assignment
 Capacity
16

17. Assignment change fixes
transportation issue, but
may impact other criteria.17

18. 18

19. 19

20. CURRENT HIGH SCHOOL OPTIMAL HIGH SCHOOL
20

21. OPTIMAL HIGH SCHOOL OPTIMAL HIGH SCHOOL - REVISED
21

22. 9-12 Student Count
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash
CURRENT 1232 1204 1130 1232
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 1145 1201 1416 1036
(See data tables in handouts.)

23. Statistics based on residence (2011 geocode).
Does not measure impact of special
programs such as IB.
Utilization
140%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash
CURRENT 107% 105% 81% 115%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 100% 104% 102% 97%
Minority %
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash
CURRENT 67% 69% 84% 51%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 53% 62% 94% 53%

24. Statistics based on residence (2011 geocode).
Does not measure impact of special
programs such as IB.
Free/Reduced Lunch %
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash
CURRENT 67% 65% 72% 64%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 50% 59% 86% 67%
Academic Proficiency %
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Nash Central Northern Nash Rocky Mount Southern Nash
CURRENT 60% 61% 53% 63%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 71% 68% 42% 62%

25.  Maximum Utilization: 104%
 Minimum Utilization: 97%
 Total Grade 9-12 students reassigned: 1356

26. CURRENT MIDDLE SCHOOL OPTIMAL MIDDLE SCHOOL
26

27. OPTIMAL MIDDLE SCHOOL OPTIMAL MIDDLE SCHOOL - REVISED
27

28. 6-8 Student Count
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
NEW MS (RM HS
Edwards Nash Central Parker Red Oak Southern Nash
site)
CURRENT 729 633 433 910 1099 0
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 661 639 445 705 695 659
(See data tables in handouts.)

29. Target Middle School capacity = 750.
Parker capacity = 557.
Utilization
140%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
NEW MS (RM HS
Edwards Nash Central Parker Red Oak Southern Nash
site)
CURRENT 88% 94% 78% 107% 129% 0%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 88% 85% 80% 94% 93% 88%
Minority %
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
NEW MS (RM HS
Edwards Nash Central Parker Red Oak Southern Nash
site)
CURRENT 78% 67% 88% 59% 51% 0%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 61% 46% 92% 53% 57% 91%

30. Free/Reduced Lunch %
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
NEW MS (RM HS
Edwards Nash Central Parker Red Oak Southern Nash
site)
CURRENT 73% 68% 78% 58% 64% 0%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 63% 50% 85% 55% 70% 82%
Academic Proficiency %
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
NEW MS (RM HS
Edwards Nash Central Parker Red Oak Southern Nash
site)
CURRENT 51% 54% 55% 69% 63% 0%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 57% 71% 47% 71% 61% 47%

31.  Maximum Utilization: 94%
 Minimum Utilization: 85%
 Maximum MS > HS feeder: 3 (New Rocky Mount
MS)
 Total Grade 6-8 students reassigned: 1618
(including 659 to New Rocky Mount MS)

32. CURRENT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OPTIMAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
32

33. OPTIMAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OPTIMAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - REVISED
33

34. K-5 Student Count
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Red
MB Winstea
Baskervi Benven Cedar Middles Nashvill Oak/Sw Spring Willifor
Bailey Coopers Johnson Hubbar Pope d/Engle
lle ue Grove ex e ift Hope d
d wood
Creek
CURRENT 620 341 743 221 624 475 492 340 709 279 583 550 437 1081
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 620 399 640 214 514 511 477 340 686 304 706 520 575 989
(See data tables in handouts.)

35. Utilization
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Red
MB Winstea
Baskervi Benven Cedar Middles Nashvill Oak/Sw Spring Willifor
Bailey Coopers Johnson Hubbar Pope d/Engle
lle ue Grove ex e ift Hope d
d wood
Creek
CURRENT 93% 80% 111% 99% 104% 83% 96% 81% 104% 90% 72% 101% 75% 95%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 93% 93% 96% 96% 86% 89% 93% 81% 101% 98% 87% 96% 99% 87%
Minority %
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Red
MB Winstea
Baskervi Benven Cedar Middles Nashvill Oak/Sw Spring Willifor
Bailey Coopers Johnson Hubbar Pope d/Engle
lle ue Grove ex e ift Hope d
d wood
Creek
CURRENT 65% 98% 74% 52% 31% 100% 78% 59% 49% 99% 44% 51% 97% 64%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 65% 99% 72% 49% 22% 99% 78% 59% 49% 98% 44% 51% 90% 66%

36. Free/Reduced Lunch %
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Red
MB Winstea
Baskervi Benven Cedar Middles Nashvill Oak/Sw Spring Willifor
Bailey Coopers Johnson Hubbar Pope d/Engle
lle ue Grove ex e ift Hope d
d wood
Creek
CURRENT 71% 94% 68% 73% 47% 91% 70% 70% 52% 91% 46% 65% 92% 59%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 71% 94% 66% 71% 39% 90% 70% 70% 49% 92% 47% 65% 90% 62%
Academic Proficiency %
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Red
MB Winstea
Baskervi Benven Cedar Middles Nashvill Oak/Sw Spring Willifor
Bailey Coopers Johnson Hubbar Pope d/Engle
lle ue Grove ex e ift Hope d
d wood
Creek
CURRENT 62% 45% 63% 73% 73% 38% 58% 61% 71% 35% 72% 60% 35% 61%
PROX + UTIL - Rev. 1 62% 47% 65% 75% 78% 36% 58% 61% 70% 36% 72% 60% 38% 60%

37.  Maximum Utilization: 101%
 Minimum Utilization: 81%
 Maximum MS > HS feeder: 4 (Benvenue ES)
 Total Grade K-5 students reassigned: 1045

38.  Scenario Review Process
 Planning Segment assignment change protocol
 Scenario - Revision 1
 19 Planning Segments reassigned from optimal
scenarios
 Revision 1 scenario data + maps
 Total Grade K-12 students reassigned: 4019 (including
659 to New Rocky Mount MS)
38

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

40. QUESTIONS