Equal Opportunity in the Fort Wayne Community Schools: A ...

CR 1.2:Sch6/24Equal Opportunity inthe Fort Wayne Community Schools:A Continuing Struggle3 1428 03526783 6LC214.23.F68U541977—A report of the Indiana Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights prepared for the information andconsideration of the Commission. This report will be considered by the Commission, and the Commission will make public its reactionIn the meantime, the findings and recommendations of this report should not be attributed to the Commission, but only to the IndianaAdvisory Committee.

Equal Opportunity inthe Fort Wayne Community Schools:A Continuing Struggle—A report prepared by the Indiana AdvisoryCommittee to the U.S. Commission on CivilRightsATTRIBUTION:The findings and recommendations containedin this report are those of the Indiana AdvisoryCommittee to the United States Commissionon Civil Rights and, as such, are not attributableto the Commission. This report hasbeen prepared by the State Advisory Committeefor submission to the Commission, and willbe considered by the Commission in formulatingits recommendations to the President andthe Congress.RIGHT OF RESPONSE:Prior to the publication of a report, the StateAdvisory Committee affords to all individuals ororganizations that may be defamed, degraded,or incriminated by any material contained inthe report an opportunity to respond in writingto such material. All responses have been incorporated,appended, or otherwise reflectedin the publication.

LETTER OF TRANSMITTALINDIANA ADVISORY COMMITTEETO THE U.S. COMMISSION ONCIVIL RIGHTSMay 2, 1977MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSIONArthur S. Flemming, ChairpersonStephen Horn, Vice ChairpersonFrankie M. FreemanManuel Ruiz, Jr.Murray SaltzmanJohn A. Buggs, Staff DirectorSirs and Madam:The Indiana Advisory Committee submits this report on issues of equal educational opportunityin the Fort Wayne Community Schools (FWCS) as part of its responsibility to advise theCommission about civil rights problems within this State.This report is a review of activity in the FWCS by the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) of theDepartment of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW); the Department of Justice; and the IndianaCivil Rights Commission (ICRC), from 1968 to the present. It also addresses recent FWCSadministration proposals for school reorganization and improved racial balance at the elementarylevel, and the reactions of the community to that plan.The Advisory Committee has found that, while racially identifiable junior and senior highschools have been eliminated in the FWCS, the proportion of minority students attending raciallyidentifiable elementary schools increased from 67 percent in 1970 to 78 percent in 1975.In 1969 and 1971 OCR found several possible Title VI violations, including student and teacherassignment practices. In July 1975 HEW was sued for not concluding investigations or beginningenforcement proceedings in 46 school districts, including Fort Wayne. In August 1975 OCRdropped all potential Title VI charges against the FWCS except teacher assignment, and no writtenrecord was kept of the basis for that action. Meanwhile the Department of Justice receivedseveral complaints from black parents alleging civil rights violations in the FWCS and is stillreviewing the case.The FWCS civil rights issues are also the subject of a complaint filed in 1974 by the ICRC,which is attempting conciliation, without success to date. The Advisory Committee found thatthere has been little or no coordination between ICRC, OCR, and the Department of Justicein these investigations.The Advisory Committee has also found that a recent reorganization plan proposed by theFWCS superintendent has met opposition from many white and minority organizations, parents,and teachers. Opposition has centered on plans to close several inner-city schools, build a newhigh school in an all-white area, place the burden of busing entirely upon minority students,and desegregate only a portion of the elementary schools.Based on these findings, the Advisory Committee recommends that a number of specific actionsbe taken by local, State, and Federal officials. The report contains recommendations toii

the FWCS, OCR, and the Department of Justice regarding the Fort Wayne case. The AdvisoryCommittee also recommends that the Commission monitor specific OCR investigations and seekState-Federal coordination of such investigations.It is the Advisory Committee's hope that the Commission will support these recommendationswith specific actions, that the inadequacies of Federal and State civil rights enforcement in theFort Wayne case can be rectified and that the Fort Wayne example can be one starting pointfor improvements throughout the enforcement of equal educational opportunity in the Nation.Respectfully,Harriette Bailey ConnChairpersonin

PREFACESchool desegregation has been a controversial issue in the Fort Wayne community for at least10 years. It is an issue that heated up considerably in the winter and spring of 1977 and thatpromises to spark controversy in the months ahead. This report is not the end of the story. Inthis report, released in its unpublished form early in May 1977, the basic conflicts that havelong been raised in Fort Wayne are reviewed and the current issues are discussed. Recommendationsare also offered for dealing with some of the prevailing issues.The first chapter of this report is based upon extensive documentary review and telephoneinterviewing by the Commission's Midwestern Regional Office. Sources of information includedlocal, State, and Federal agencies having relevant information on the Fort Wayne CommunitySchools (FWCS), as well as representatives of local and national organizations concerned withthese issues. The second chapter summarizes supporting information gathered onsite by Commissionstaff in April 1977 and additional documentary analysis and telephone interviewing. Allsources of information are cited in the text or footnotes.Supporting documentation cited in this report and related documents not cited are retainedin the files of the Commission's Midwestern Regional Office, Chicago, 111. Copies of files ofFederal agencies are available to the public through requests made under the Freedom of InformationAct, 5 U.S.C.A. 552, as prescribed by the Commission's rules and regulations for thefiling and granting of such requests, 45 C.F.R. 704, including procedures for requesting waiverof search and copying fees under certain conditions.All inquiries for documents under the Freedom of Information Act should be sent to theDirector of the Commission's Midwestern Regional Office, 230 S. Dearborn St., Room 3280,Chicago, 111. 60604.IV

MEMBERSHIPINDIANA ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THEUNITED STATES COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTSHarriette Bailey Conn, ChairpersonIndianapolisThomas W. BinfordIndianapolisDonna BucoveIndianapolisSteve Caldemeyer*MuncieDr. Luis Davila*BloomingtonNicolas C. Kanellos*GaryJeanne F. MaysIndianapolisLotte MeyersonGaryRicardo ParraSouth BendCharles ReddFort Wayne* Not active during Fort Wayne study.

THE UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTSThe United States Commission on Civil Rights, created by the Civil Rights Act of 1957, is anindependent, bipartisan agency of the executive branch of the Federal Government. By theterms of the act, as amended, the Commission is charged with the following duties pertainingto denials of the equal protection of the laws based on race, color, sex, religion, or nationalorigin: investigation of individual discriminatory denials of the right to vote; study of legaldevelopments with respect to denials of equal protection of the law; appraisal of the laws andpolicies of the United States with respect to denials of equal protection of the law; maintenanceof a national clearinghouse for information respecting denials of equal protection of the law;and investigation of patterns or practices of fraud or discrimination in the conduct of Federalelections. The Commission is also required to submit reports to the President and the Congressat such times as the Commission, the Congress, or the President shall deem desirable.THE STATE ADVISORY COMMITTEESAn Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights has been establishedin each of the SO States and the District of Columbia pursuant to section 10S(c) of the CivilRights Act of 1957 as amended. The Advisory Committees are made up of responsible personswho serve without compensation. Their functions under their mandate from the Commission areto: advise the Commission of all relevant information concerning their respective State on matterswithin the jurisdiction of the Commission; advise the Commission on matters of mutual concernin the preparation of reports of the Commission to the President and the Congress; receivereports, suggestions, and recommendations from individuals, public and private organizations,and public officials upon matters pertinent to inquiries conducted by the State Advisory Committee;initiate and forward advice and recommendations to the Commission upon matters inwhich the Commission shall request the assistance of the State Advisory Committee; and attend,as observers, any open hearing or conference which the Commission may hold within the State.ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThis report was written by Gregory D. Squires, research/writer. Field investigation was performedby Squires and Frank E. Steiner, equal opportunity specialist. Editorial and legalassistance were provided by Margaret V. Johnson, regional attorney. Other assistance in thepreparation of this report was provided by Delores Miller, administrative assistant, and Ada L.Williams, clerk-stenographer. The report was prepared under the supervision of Clark G.Roberts, Regional Director, Midwestern Regional Office.Final production of the report was the responsibility of Audree Holton and Vivian Washington,supervised by Bobby Wortman, Office of Management, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.vi

CONTENTSChapter One •. 1Overview 1The OCR Investigation *The Indiana Case *Reorganization and Reaction 5An Alternative to the Superintendent's Proposal 1Chapter Two 9The Coalition 9Teachers Join Protest 9Cooperation—A Difference of Opinion 10The Superintendent's Proposal— Reorganization or Resegregation? 10Latino Concerns 11What is to be Done? 11Chapter Three 13Findings and Recommendations 13Appendices 16A. Communications Between HEW and Fort Wayne Community Schools RegardingTitle VI Violation Due to Teacher Assignment 16B. Summary of Center for National Policy Review's Assessment of Fort Wayne CommunitySchool Situation , 33C. Communications Regarding OCR's Handling of the Student Assignment Issue in theFort Wayne Community Schools 34D. Superintendent Grile's Jan. 24, 1977, Proposed Reorganization Plan 37E. Organizations Joining Coalition to Protest Grile's Reorganization Plan as of April 22,1977 41F. Urban League Alternative to Segments of Superintendent Grilc's Reorganization Plan 42G. Staff Analysis of Data Pertaining to Faculty Desegregation—Fort WayneCommunity Schools 44vii

Chapter OneThe ineffectiveness of the plans OCRnegotiates is compounded by its lack of anadequate followup program***.OCR should not consider any school districtto be in compliance unless it addresses alldeficiencies, including student assignment.U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1975 1The process of school desegregation has been along and hard struggle in the Fort Wayne CommunitySchool System. It is a struggle that is far fromover, one that promises to heat up considerably inthe next few weeks. While there have been significantaccomplishments, much remains to be doneand there is much controversy over what specificgoals should be set and how they should beachieved. This report presents a brief overview ofthe school desegregation contfoversy, an assessmentof pending proposals and the reactions ofvarious segments of the community to the currentsituation, and recommendations for resolving atleast some of the prevailing issues.OverviewStudent and Teacher AssignmentBetween the fall of 1970 and the fall of 1975total enrollment in the Fort Wayne CommunitySchool System declined from 43,400 to 40,250while minority enrollment increased from 7,025(16 percent) to 7,911 (20 percent). As table 1 indicates,some progress was made towardsdesegregating the schools, particularly at the juniorand senior high levels. The percentage of minoritystudents enrolled in schools with minority enrollmentsof 50 percent or more declined from 66percent to 43 percent. This change is entirely accountedfor by changes in junior and senior highschool enrollments where, according to the datasupplied by the school system, all schools hadminority enrollments between 9 percent and 35percent of total enrollments in the fall of 1975.This resulted in part from a reorganization of thejunior high schools. Among elementary students,however, segregation increased. The percentage ofminority elementary students in schools with 50percent or more minority enrollment increasedfrom 67 percent to 78 percent between 1970 and1975.Improvements were also made in the number ofschools with minority enrollment between 10 percentand 30 percent of total enrollment. 2 Againmost of the progress was made at the junior andsenior high school level where 89 percent of theschools had minority enrollment within this bandin 1975 compared with 17 percent in 1970.Among elementary schools the change was from17 percent to 20 percent. At the same time, however,the percentage of elementary schools withminority enrollment of 5 percent or less, or 50percent or more, increased from 66 percent to 72percent. While progress has been made indesegregating the school system as a whole, virtuallyall of it occurred at the upper levels. Considerableimprovement remains to be made at theelementary school level.As a result of an agreement entered into withthe Office for Civil Rights (OCR) of the U.S. Departmentof Health, Education, and Welfare(HEW) in 1976, Fort Wayne has agreed to assignits faculty in such a way that the proportion ofminority teachers within each school approximatesthe proportion of minority teachers throughout thesystem. (See appendix A for a copy of the teacherassignment plan for the 1976 school year that wasapproved by OCR and a copy of final teaching assignmentsfor that year.)The OCR InvestigationIn 1968 OCR began a series of investigationsinto the student and teacher assignments of theFort Wayne Community Schools. In its 1969 and1971 onsite reviews, OCR found evidence ofpotential Title VI 3 violations in the assignment ofboth students and teachers. Among the discriminatoryfactors cited were the use of optional highschool zones, gerrymandering of school boundaries,school site selection, lack of comparable1

TABLE 1DESEGREGATION IN FORT WAYNE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS: 1970-75Total enrollmentElementaryJunior & senior highMinority enrollmentElementaryJunior & senior highNumber of elementary schoolsNumber of junior & senior highsPercent of schools with less than 5% ormore than 50% minority enrollmentPercent of schools with minority enrollmentbetween 10% and 30%Percent of minority students in schoolswith 50% or more minority enrollment1970-71 1975-7643,40024,90118,4997,0254,4092,6164118(16%)(18%)(14%)40,25021,75018,5007,9114,4043,5074618(20%)(20%)(19%)ElementarySecondary1970-71 1975-76 1970-71 1975-7666%17%67%72%20%78%72%17%65%0%89%0%Percent of minority students at all levelsin schools with 50% or more minorityenrollment1970-7166%Source: Fort Wayne Community Schools, Enrollment Data: 1970-71 and 1975-76.1975-7643%

facilities, lack of comparability in teacher recruitment,and different grade plans for predominantlywhite and predominantly black schools. Review of1973-74 enrollment data found that 5 elementaryschools had minority enrollments above 90 percent,4 others were more than 50 percent minority,and 19 had less than 3 percent minority students.More than 73 percent of the district'sminority students were in schools with minorityenrollments of 50 percent or more. In 1971, 39 of66 black elementary school teachers were in nineschools with over 50 percent black enrollment.Seventeen elementary schools had no minorityteachers, and 7 of these had a minority enrollmentof less than 3 percent. A similar pattern was foundfor the 1973-74 academic year with respect toteacher assignments. According to HEW, byFebruary 1975 student racial imbalances in the juniorand senior high schools were substantiallyreduced. Improvements were reportedly also madein the grade plan used in predominantly blackschools. 4In 1975, in the case of Brown v. Weinberger*HEW was sued for: (1) failure to initiate investigationsof discrimination in school districts where racialimbalances gave cause to believe that certaindistricts were violating Title VI; (2) failure to actexpeditiously in completing investigations of allegedTitle VI violations that the Department hadinitiated; (3) failure to commence enforcementproceedings in certain cases where violations werefound and voluntary compliance had not beenreached; and (4) failure to commence enforcementproceedings against schools determined byHEW to be ineligible for Emergency School AidAct (ESAA) funds because they were practicingsegregation and discrimination. Forty-six schooldistricts, including 15 in Region V, were included.The Fort Wayne Community Schools was one ofthe districts, found to be in violation of Title VIby HEW, in which voluntary compliance had notbeen achieved and where enforcement proceedingshad not been initiated. In July 1976, United StatesDistrict Court Judge John J. Sirica ordered HEW,within 60 days, either to commence enforcementproceedings against Fort Wayne or to make an administrativedetermination that the district was incompliance.A conference was held in Cleveland betweenAugust 13 and 15, 1975, to discuss the then pendingBrown case. Among those attending the conferencewere Martin Gerry (Acting Director,OCR), Kenneth Mines (Region V Director, OCR),and Orrie Barr (Region V Education BranchChief, OCR in Cleveland). At that conference adecision was made to drop the student assignmentissue and to pursue the teacher assignment issue.The decision to drop the student issue was madein part because Fort Wayne had reduced racial imbalancesat the junior high school level, 6 accordingto HEW documents. According to Kenneth Mines,it was determined at the Cleveland conference thatthe evidence was insufficient to support a Title VIviolation. 7Subsequent reviews of the Fort Wayne schoolsituation, and of the situation in other schools includedin the Brown decision, call into questionOCR's handling of its investigation. FrankKrueger, attorney with the HEW Office of GeneralCounsel (OGC), who negotiated the teacher assignmentissue with Fort Wayne, said in March1977 he believed at that time, and still believes,that there is a student assignment case whichcould be made. According to Krueger, the juniorhigh school reorganization did not resolve theissue satisfactorily. When the Fort Wayne case wasreferred to Krueger, however, it was simply ateacher assignment case. Krueger said that accordingto his recollection of the situation, student assignmentpatterns constituted a Title VI violationandthat he could probably convince OCR to initiateadministrative proceedings if he had the timeto review the situation. 8William L. Taylor, director of the Center forNational Policy Review and attorney for the plaintiffsin the Brown case, also believes there may stillbe a Title VI violation based on student assignment.(See appendix B for a summary of thecenter's assessment of the Fort Wayne situation.)Taylor also expressed concern about the fact thatthere is no written record indicating why the studentissue in Fort Wayne and in several otherBrown-related school systems was dropped. Accordingto Taylor, there is nothing in the Brownfiles explaining why this issue was dropped. 9 Inresponse to a memo from Frederick T. Cioffi(Chief, Operations Branch, Office of the Secretary,HEW) to Orrie Barr, asking for documents thatwould explain why the student assignment issuewas dropped, Cioffi was informed that "no docu-3

perience, teaching skills, and post-graduatedegrees." In his letter Henderson asked Grile toprovide a list of the final teacher assignments anda breakdown of teachers assigned to each schoolaccording to race, educational degrees, certificates,and experience. Henderson asked thatsuch information be submitted by October 15,1976.On September 30, 1976, Grile sent Henderson aletter containing a list of the number of blackteachers assigned to each elementary school. Additionalinformation on the number of years of experienceand the highest degree earned for theblack teachers who were transferred was also provided(see appendix A). However, according toLeonard Hamilton (OCR, Cleveland), Fort Waynedid not provide the systemwide breakdown of theexperience and education of teachers in eachschool until mid-April 1977. As of April 27, OCRhad not had time to analyze that information. 16Preliminary analysis of that data by Commissionstaff indicates that an equal admixture of teachersaccording to experience and postgraduate degreeshas not been achieved. Also, faculty assignmentsappear to continue to contribute to the racialidentifiability of elementary schools (see appendixG).The Indiana CaseIn 1974 the director of the Indiana Civil RightsCommission filed a class action complaint withthat commission against the Fort Wayne CommunitySchools and the Indiana Department of PublicInstruction, alleging the denial of equal educationaland employment opportunity to blacks,Spanish surnamed, and women (State of Indiana v.Fort Wayne Community Schools, No. 05804). Thiscomplaint did not involve teacher or student assignment.Instead, it cited the school system fordiscrimination in its hiring and promotion practicesand in the content of the educational program.Failure to provide special programs toSpanish-speaking students, discouraging womenfrom taking industrial arts and men from takinghome economics, unequal provision of athleticfacilities between men and women, perpetuating* sexist stereotypes regarding occupations and opportunitiesfor women in the counseling programs,and the use of textbooks that perpetuate negativeracial and sexist stereotypes were some of thespecifics in the complaint. In July 1976, Joseph R.Smith, conciliation officer of the Indiana CivilRights Commission, sent Superintendent Lester L.Grile a proposed consent agreement. The superintendentresponded on July 27 that he would likemore specific information before agreeing to meetin order to work out a mutually satisfactory solution.Later in the summer, however, the Fort WayneCommunity Schools sent a counterproposal to theIndiana Commission on Civil Rights and requestedthat conciliation proceedings be initiated. A totalof 15 issues are now being negotiated. After 4months, three of the issues have been discussed,but no resolution on any issue has been reached.Denise Walderich, Indiana commission staffmember who was involved in the investigation ofthe complaint and who is currently involved in theconciliation, would not predict when the conciliationwill be completed. 17Reorganization and ReactionThe Superintendent's PlanOn January 24, 1977, Superintendent Lester L.Grile submitted a school reorganization plan to theboard of trustees having the following stated objectives:1. To provide better educational programs.2. To maximize utilization of facilities andstaff.3. To upgrade educational facilities in orderto accommodate present and future needs.4. To improve racial balance.5. To develop a financial program which iseconomically feasible. (For a copy of AProposed Plan for the Fort Wayne CommunitySchools 1977-1983, see appendix D.)Grile stated in his plan that: "This proposal mustbe considered as a total package since each partis dependent for effectiveness upon each otherpart***.The proposal establishes a direction forthe Fort Wayne Community Schools which has implicationsfor the next twenty years." He recommendedthat the board approve the plan at itsApril meeting so that implementation could be initiatedin September 1977, and be completed bySeptember 1980. He acknowledged his apprecia-5

tion for the Peabody evaluation (see note 2) andstated, "Several major components of this plan relateto the Peabody Study."The plan calls for grade reorganization, the closingof some schools and the construction of newfacilities, pupil reassignments, and other actions tomeet the objectives. Specifically, the plan calls forclosing six elementary schools, five of which are inthe central city and four of which have minorityenrollments of 75 percent or more. Thus 4 of the10 elementary schools with predominantly minorityenrollments would be closed. Two of the elementaryschools to be closed under this proposalwould be turned into enrichment centers wherefourth- and fifth-grade students would spend 1week each semester for human relations trainingand preparation for later school years. Elementaryschools would contain grades K-5, junior highschools would house grades 6-8, and senior highschools would serve grades 9-12. Students currentlyattending schools that would be eliminatedin the plan would be transferred to schools immediatelybordering the central city. Finally, a newhigh school would be built in the predominantlywhite, northeastern portion of the school district.Grile's proposals have not met with unanimousapproval among board members, and muchsharper criticism has been directed against theplan by other members of the community. Boardmember Lorraine Davis stated, "I want toemphasize this is a proposed plan. As far as theadministration is concerned this may be a singleunit plan, but as far as the community is concerned,and perhaps as far as the board is concernedit's not necessarily a unit plan." 18 FredMeriwether, one of two black board members said,"I'm not pleased with the plan as it presently exists.The comment I hear over and over again isthat it seems as if the onus is being put on theminority community again." 19 Board memberLeonard Goldstein claimed the commitment madeby the board on July 8, 1974, "to eliminate racialsegregation in the entire school system," is dilutedin the plan. However, Goldstein said he found theplan "acceptable, but falling far short of what Ithink is even a beginning of what we want." 20The major criticism of the plan from other communitymembers revolves around the desegregationissue. It is reportedly argued, first, that theplan does not go far enough towards desegregatingthe schools and, secondly, that the burden isplaced entirely on the black community. Somecritics maintain that the extent of desegregationpredicted in the plan is less than that in any of thefive plans recommended in the Peabody report. 21Former Mayor Ivan Lebamoff charged the planwas designed to barely meet legal pressures fordesegregation. 22 Grile's response to this line of argumentwas that the Peabody plans would notcompletely desegregate all the schools and that hisplan would result in 66 percent of all black studentsattending schools with a white majority andjust 33 percent attending majority black schools by1980. In addition, only 6 of the 38 elementaryschools would be predominantly black by thattime. 23Nowhere in the plan or in the newspaper articlesobtained by the Midwest Regional Office of theU.S. Commission on Civil Rights, however, doesGrile make any reference to the 10 percent to 30percent band cited in the Peabody report asproviding "optimum potential for meaningfulminority-majority interaction." One question thatremains unanswered is what percentage of theschools will be brought within this band. Grilestated his plan would reduce the percentage ofblack students attending majority black schools to33 percent. This would represent a reduction ofapproximately 10 percent, since 43 percent ofminority students were enrolled in predominantlyminority schools in 1975 (see table 1). As indicatedabove, this is not considered enough bysome board members and others in the communi-ty-Harsher comments were directed at the planbecause it places the burden of desegregation onthe black community. The fact that all busingwould be one way, involving busing of black studentsout of the central city, and that a new highschool would be built in a predominantly whitearea while several schools in the central city wouldbe closed were particularly sore points. One blackmother said, "We have been going to the whiteschools for a long time. It's time for you to cometo some of our schools." She went on to arguethat it would be just as easy to remodel the olderschools as to tear them down. 24 Concerns werealso expressed about declining property values inthe central city once the schools were gone andthe difficulty parents would have in getting to PTA6

meetings and having a role in the school communityin general. 25 In responding to questions aboutthe possibility of two-way busing and building thehigh school in the central city, Grile said the administrationdoes not think "two-way busing hasan educational value. We do not think it is worththe effort or the money." He argued that by constructingthe new high school where the populationis growing most rapidly, fewer students willhave to be bused than if it were built in the centralcity. 26But these are not the only issues. Grile was alsocriticized by Frank W. Heyman, executive directorof the Allen County Economic Opportunity Council(ACEOC), for "the arrogance with which thisplan was put forward." In response to Grile's claimthat the plan should be treated as a total package,Heyman went on to say, "No plan is such a sacredcow that any piece of it can't be discussed by thecommunity." 27 Lebamoff also accused Grile of failingto take into consideration any input from thecommunity: "We've broken our backs, given theschool administration some real honest to goodnessthinking over which we agonized, yet we'vehad absolutely no response, or even any indicationthey wanted to listen." He went on to say,"They've rejected our suggestions out of hand;they've rejected the Urban League's suggestions;they've rejected the Fort Wayne Education Association'ssuggestions." 28 Rose Gerra, a representativeof the Educational Council for Latino Affairs,noted that the plan failed to include anyprovision aimed at furthering bilingual and biculturaleducation, 29 an issue also covered in the IndianaCivil Rights Commission's complaint.One indication of the reaction to Grile's plan inthe black community is a petition, signed by 1,500parents, opposing the plan. The petition criticizesthe plan for its reliance on one-way busing, for theproposal to build a new high school on the northside of the district, and for "dodging the issue" ofdesegregation of grades K-5. 30 Several other organizations,including the Fort Wayne UrbanLeague, the Fort Wayne NAACP, the Fort WayneEducation Association, and the Allen CountyEconomic Opportunity Council have all madepublic statements against the plan. One possibletactic that has been discussed is to draw up an alternativeplan to present to the board. 31An Alternative to theSuperintendent's ProposalA coalition of organizations—including theACEOC, the Fort Wayne Urban League, the FortWayne NAACP, and several other organizationsand individuals—has been organized and is consideringthe possibility of presenting an alternativeplan to the board. (See appendix E for a list ofcoalition organization members.) At least onecoalition member, the Fort Wayne Urban League,has presented detailed alternatives to segments ofGrile's proposal. (See appendix F for the UrbanLeague's response.) Reverend Clyde Adams, oneof the petition drive leaders, has exhorted variousgroups to organize: "Any impact this community isgoing to make—we've got to make it now andwe've got to make it together***. No public servantis immune from public pressure***. Onceyou get an organization that's really organized,you're going to get heard." 32Charles Redd, a member of the Indiana AdvisoryCommittee, told Commission staff he would likethe board to at least postpone its vote in order togive the coalition time to present its plan. Two relatedproblems, according to Redd, are locatingthe technical assistance required to draw up a planand the financial resources to support the work.Even if this meant a 1-year delay in implementationof a desegregation plan, Redd believes thegreater payoff would make the wait worthwhile.Notes to Chapter One1. U.S., Commission on Civil Rights, To Ensure Equal EducationalOpportunity (1975), pp. 360 and 386.2. In January 1975 the board of trustees and the superintendentof the Fort Wayne Community Schools authorized the Officeof Educational Services of George Peabody College forTeachers to make a comprehensive study of the school corporation.In its report, Fort Wayne Community Schools (1975),the Peabody consultants suggested the 10 percent to 30 percentband as an ideal because it "offers the optimum potential formeaningful minority-majority interaction without precipitouswhite flight." (p. 246) However, in the five desegregation plansrecommended to the school system in the Peabody report, nonewould bring all the elementary schools within this band becauseto do so "would require large-scale busing, across distances upto eight miles, and forego most prospects for preservingneighborhood schools for any of the lower grades." (p. 256) Infact none of the plans would bring more than 70 percent of theelementary schools within this band. (p. 277)The Peabody report noted that as of the 1974-75 school yearall junior and senior high schools were within the 10-30 percentband. (p. 277) It should also be noted that as of the fallof 1975 two of the schools fell outside this band, one with a7

minority enrollment of 35 percent and one with a minority enrollmentof 9 percent. The board has not, however, formallyendorsed the recommendations in the Peabody report.3. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §2000d(1970).4. U.S., Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Officefor Civil Rights, Summary of Fort Wayne School DesegregationCase, February 1975.5. Brown v. Weinberger, C.A. No. 75-1068 (D.D.C. Filed July20, 1976).6. U.S., Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Officefor Civil Rights, Summary of Fort Wayne School DesegregationCase, February 1977.7. Kenneth Mines, Director, OCR, Region V, telephone interview,Mar. 10, 1977.8. Frank Krueger, Office of General Counsel, HEW, telephoneinterview, Mar. 8, 1977-.9. William L. Taylor, Director, Center for National PolicyReview, telephone interview, Mar. 10, 1977.10. U.S., Department of Health, Education and Welfare,memorandum from Linda A. Cornelius, Specialist-in-Charge,Elementary and Secondary Education Branch, Cleveland, toFrederick T. Cioffi, Nov. 8, 1976. See appendix C for copiesof communications regarding OCR's handling of the student assignmentissue in Fort Wayne.28. The Journal Gazette, Feb. 17, 1977.29. The Journal Gazette, Feb. 22, 1977. Rose Gerra, telephoneinterview, Mar. 11, 1977.30. The Journal Gazette, Feb. 15, 1977.31. Ibid.32. Ibid.11. U.S., Department of Health, Education and Welfare,memorandum from Frederick T. Cioffi to Orrie Barr, Nov. 1,1976.12. Alexander Ross, Chief, Education Section, Civil RightsDivision, U.S. Department of Justice, telephone interview, Apr.28, 1977. Daniel L. Jennings, letter to Clark G. Roberts, Apr.22,1977.13. Frank Krueger, Office of General Counsel, HEW, telephoneinterview, Mar. 8, 1977.14. Alexander Ross, telephone interview, Mar. 10, 1977.15. Daniel Jennings, attorney, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Departmentof Justice, telephone interview, Mar. 22, 1977.16. Leonard Hamilton, OCR, Cleveland, telephone interview,Apr. 27, 1977.17. Denise Walderich, Indiana Civil Rights Commission,telephone interview, Mar. 8, 1977.18. The JOurnal-Gazette, Jan. 25, 1977.19. The Journal Gazette, Feb. 4, 1977.20. Ibid.2\.The Journal Gazette, Feb. 8, 1977.22. The Journal Gazette, Feb. 17, 1977.23. The Journal Gazette, Feb. 8, 1977.24. The News-Sentinel, Feb. 11, 1977.25. The Journal Gazette, Feb. 16, 1977.26. The News-Sentinel, Feb. 8, 1977.27. The Journal Gazette, Feb. 15, 1977.8

Chapter TwoIf any major reorganization plan is to be implementedby the fall of 1977, the school board willhave to come to a decision within the next fewweeks, as Grile indicated in his proposal. Yet thereare several controversial issues being debated inthe community and, it appears, any decision theboard may come to is unlikely to resolve them all.Below is a summary of the major prevailing controversies.The CoalitionCommission staff met with five members of thecoalition that has been organized to protest andseek major revisions in Superintendent Grile'sreorganization plan. 1 The basic objections citedearlier in the report were reaffirmed. These objectionsare, first, that the plan does not go farenough in desegregating the schools and, second,that the plan calls for one-way busing, thus placinga disproportionate share of the burden on theminority community. The coalition also reiteratedits objection to the closing of six elementaryschools, five of which are in the central city, andthe building of a new high school in the predominantlywhite, northeastern section of the schooldistrict. The coalition prepared a formal statement,which was presented to the school board and administrationin mid-April.Superintendent Grile responded that hisproposal would significantly reduce racial imbalanceswhile minimizing any disruption thatcould result. He stated there was a limit to theamount of busing the community would accept.The superintendent also expressed concern thatyounger students attend schools near their homes.In his opinion, the critical age where reducing racialimbalances begins having maximum payoff isat the sixth or seventh grade. Therefore, Grilemaintained, the focus of desegregation efforts inFort Wayne is at the junior and senior high schoollevels.Superintendent Grile acknowledged that most ofthe students to be transported are minoritybecause most students attending schools to beclosed under the plan are minority. The northeastpart of the district is selected as the site for thenew school primarily, according to Grile, becausethe population is growing and is expected to keepgrowing in that area while the population of thecentral city is expected to decline. If the new highschool were to be built in the predominantly blackinner city, it would either be a predominantlyblack high school or, if the racial balance of highschool students were to be maintained throughtwo-way busing, many more students would haveto be bused. Grile maintained that his reorganizationproposal meets the basic considerations thatmust be taken into account: It is economicallyfeasible, it is educationally sound, and it serves thewelfare of the general community. 2School board president Helen Lee echoedGrile's concern that there was a limit to theamount of desegregation the community would accept.If the board went too far in reducing racialimbalances, Lee said, more parents would sendtheir children to private schools and eventually thepublic schools would be attended by predominantlypoor and minority students, a situation shedid not want to create. Those groups who claimGrile's proposal does not go far enough towardsreducing racial imbalances represent one segmentof the community, but in any plan to be implementedby the board the concerns of the totalcommunity must be taken into consideration, accordingto Lee. 3Teachers Join ProtestIn February 1977 leaders of the Fort WayneEducation Association (FWEA) issued a publicstatement opposing the superintendent's reorganizationplan and containing a series of alternativeproposals. (The FWEA is the exclusive bargainingagent for public school teachers. Its membershipincludes 1,400 of the 1,700 teachers.) Asubsequent survey of FWEA members revealedstrong support of the position taken by the FWEA9

leadership. 4 Below are some of the key points ofcontention and, in parentheses, the percentage ofrespondents who supported the FWEA's rejectionof these positions:1. closing inner-city elementary schools withoutproviding replacement within the inner city (75percent);2. placing the major burden of implementationon the minority community (71 percent);3. treating and adopting the proposal in itstotality (85 percent).Among the alternative proposals recommended byFWEA leadership and supported by the teacherswere the following:1. including at least 75 percent of the elementaryschools in the plan (74 percent);2. committing time, money, and staff for curriculumimprovement and including multiethnicand multicultural approaches in the curriculum(87 percent).According to Marvin Ross, executive director ofthe FWEA, the executive board has recommendedthat the organization join the coalition and he anticipatedthat it would formally do so within a fewweeks. 5 (As indicated in appendix E, the FWEAhas joined the coalition.)Cooperation—A Difference ofOpinionAccording to Robert S. Walters, attorney for theFort Wayne Community Schools (FWCS), the administrationhas made every effort to solicit communityinput and to be responsive to concerns expressedby various segments of the community. 6Board president Lee concurred and stated, "Grilehas been to many meetings, lunches, etc. and hastaken all the information he received into consideration."But, according to representatives ofthe coalition, the administration has been totallyunresponsive.Marvin Ross said the administration has gonethrough the motions of receiving input, but itsdecisions have not reflected that input. He claimedthe input of the black community regarding thereorganization plan was not reflected in that plan.Board member Helen Brown also claimed the administrationhas not been cooperative. While theadministration may listen to community input, shemaintained, the proposal Grile wants to implementdoes not reflect the input received from the community.In fact she asserted that not even theschool board's input was reflected in the plan. 7The Superintendent'sProposal—Reorganization orResegregation?The stated policy of the Fort Wayne CommunitySchools has long been one of support for improvedracial balance and school desegregation. In 1969the school board adopted a resolution that read, inpart: "That the Board of School Trustees willsearch for ways and do what it can to helpeliminate racial segregation in the entire schoolsystem, including the elementary grades." The July8, 1974, minutes of the board of school trusteesincluded the following statement:This Board passed a motion on November 10,1969, declaring that it would do what it couldto eliminate racial segregation. The problemhas not been whether the Board was fordesegregation, but how it should implement itsconcern.Similar pronouncements have been made in thesubsequent years. 8But questions have been raised as to whether ornot actions on the part of the administrationreflect the stated policy. As indicated earlier, onereason OCR dropped the student assignment issuewas that the school district had voluntarilydesegregated its junior high schools. In 1971, whileOCR was conducting its investigation of potentialTitle VI violations, the FWCS converted WeisserPark and Memorial Park Schools from junior highto elementary schools. As a result, racial imbalancesat the junior high school level werereduced. Board president Lee referred to SuperintendentGrile as a "genius" who was able todesegregate half the students in 1 year without anymajor disruption. Racial imbalances in the elementaryschools, however, were increased. WeisserPark changed from a 61 percent minority juniorhigh school in 1970-71 to a 76 percent minorityelementary school in 1971-72. Memorial Parkchanged from an 80 percent minority junior highschool to an 82 percent minority elementaryschool. During those 2 years the percentage ofminority elementary students enrolled in schoolswith minority enrollment of 50 percent or largerincreased from 67 percent to 73 percent. 910

Alleged contradictions between the administration'spolicy statements and its actions have beennoted in reference to the current reorganizationproposal. Superintendent Grile claimed that underhis plan only 1,800 (25 percent) of 7,200 minorityelementary students would be enrolled in schoolswith minority enrollment of 50 percent or more in1980. This would represent a reduction from 78percent in 1975 enrolled in such schools. (Seetable 1.) According to board member LeonardGoldstein, however, the commitment to eliminateracial segregation has been diluted and abused inGrile's proposal. 10 Representatives of the coalitionmaintained that building a new high school in thenortheast section of the district will have asegregative effect. Boyd Bosma, desegregationconsultant for the National Education Association(NEA), stated that the plan, "is abhorent in termsof responsibility to the minority community" andthat it would contribute towards resegregation ofschools in the district. 11Latino ConcernsMembers of the Educational Council for LatinoAffairs expressed to Commission staff primaryconcern for what they perceived as denial of equaleducational opportunities for Spanish-speaking studentsand employment discrimination againstLatinos. 12 The council has formally requested theadministration to implement bilingual-biculturalprograms and to hire a Latino administrator todeal with Latino problems. The council claims thatSpanish-speaking students are frequently placed inspecial education classes, that they have a higherdropout rate than other groups, and that counselorsdiscourage Spanish-speaking students frompursuing college and encourage them to enroll invocational education programs. The council alsostated that the administration does not pursueFederal or State funds available for bilingual-biculturalprograms. In the area of employment, thecouncil charged the FWCS with discriminationagainst Latino applicants for teaching positionsand asserted that the failure to hire a Latino administratoris not due to lack of funds, as it saidis the reason given by Grile. (As of 1975, 11, or0.7 percent, of the 1,507 elementary and secondaryteachers were Latinos and no Latino administratorswere employed.) 13The superintendent responded that there is anextensive program operating within the districtthat answers most of the special needs of theSpanish-speaking students. Applications for additionalFederal funds have been denied because ofthe low number of Spanish-speaking students inthe district, according to Grile. As of 1975 Latinosaccounted for 622 (1.5 percent) of the 40,250 studentsin the district. 14 While acknowledging thatSpanish-speaking students frequently haveproblems not faced by most students, Grile maintainedthe major source of the problems is that theLatinos are relative newcomers to Fort Wayne,and they do not have sufficient role modelsestablished in the community to follow. In addition,he said there is a power struggle within theLatino community and the schools are being usedas a battleground by the various segments of thatcommunity. Grile admitted that the dropout ratefor Latino students may be somewhat higher thanthat of other groups, but he denied that they aretracked into special education or vocational educationprograms and away from academic programs.He stated that a lack of resources is onereason why a Latino administrator to handleLatino problems has not been hired and that thiswas not a high enough priority problem to justifyreplacing existing positions with the special Latinoadministrator.What is to be Done?The consensus on the part of the communitygroups interviewed by Commission staff was thatHEW or some other outside source would have tobring pressure on the FWCS to deal with theproblems raised by each group. According toBosma, "the only effective check is OCR investigationand enforcement." The EducationalCouncil for Latino Affairs claimed the administrationwill not deal with its grievances unless"threatened by HEW." Board member HelenBrown said the school administration will neverbring about desegregation unless HEW or someonefrom the outside brings pressure on the FWCS.She recommended that the Commission ask HEWto investigate the situation in Fort Wayne.OCR may have settled its formal charges, theJustice Department may have decided not to pursueits investigation, the Indiana Civil Rights Commissionmay never complete its negotiations with11

the schools, and the school board may not reachagreement on a reorganization proposal this year;but the issues of school desegregation and thequality and equality of educational opportunitiesavailable to minorities and women are very muchalive in Fort Wayne.Notes to Chapter Two1. Interview in Fort Wayne, Ind., Apr. 6, 1977. The five coalitionmembers interviewed were: Gayle Greer, ExecutiveDirector, Fort Wayne Urban League; Karen Duemling, Leagueof Women Voters; Gay Schmidt, Fort Wayne Urban League;Dixie Arter, Inter-Religion Action Council; and Joyce Dunlap,YWCA Urban Affairs Committee. (Subsequent references torepresentatives of the coalition are based on this interview.)2. Lester Grile, Superintendent of FWCS, telephone interview,Apr. 11, 1977. (Subsequent references to Lester Grile arebased on this interview.)3. Helen Lee, President of School Board, FWCS, telephone interview,Apr. 13, 1977. (Subsequent references to Helen Leeare based on this interview.)4. "Results of Referendum Vote: Desegregation Statement ofthe Fort Wayne Education Association," Feb. 9, 1977, FortWayne Education Association, news release, Apr. 1, 1977.5. Marvin Ross, Executive Director, FWEA, interview in FortWayne, Ind., Apr. 6, 1977. (Subsequent references to MarvinRoss are based on this interview.)6. Robert Walters, attorney for FWCS, telephone interview,Apr. 8, 1977.7. Helen Brown, Board Member of FWCS, interview in FortWayne, Ind., Apr. 6, 1977. (Subsequent references to HelenBrown are based on this interview.)8. Special Report, from Superintendent Lester Grile to theBoard of School Trustees, Fort Wayne Community Schools,Oct. 25, 1976.9. Fort Wayne Community Schools Enrollment Data, 1970-71and 1971-72. '10. The Journal Gazette, Feb. 1 1, 1977.11. Boyd Bosma, desegregation consultant, NEA, telephone interview,Apr. 7, 1977.12. Interview in Fort Wayne, Ind., Apr. 6, 1977. The five councilmembers interviewed were: John Rivera, United Mexican-Americans Organization, Inc.; Nora Alicia Trevino, Mayor's Office;Rosa Gerra, CETA; Marcilino Espinosa, Department forSpanish Speaking People, Diocese of Fort Wayne; and PaulMendez, former Title I Liaison.13. Elementary-Secondary Staff Information (EEO-5), Oct. 1,1975.14. Fort Wayne Community Schools Enrollment Data,1975-1976.12

Chapter ThreeFindings and RecommendationsThe basic findings of this report are:(1) While some progress has been made inreducing the racial imbalances in student andteacher assignments in the Fort Wayne CommunitySchools, much remains to be done.(2) Federal officials, particularly OCR, have notfully utilized authority granted to them underlaw to assure that equal opportunity is providedin the Fort Wayne Community Schools.(3) Events in the next few weeks will be criticalin determining, in the words of the superintendent,"a direction for the Fort Wayne CommunitySchools which has implications for the nexttwenty years."The major specific findings are as follows:Racial Imbalance in StudentAssignments1. Racially identifiable junior and senior highschools have been eliminated. As of 1975 allschools at this level had minority enrollmentsbetween 9 percent and 35 percent of total enrollments.2. As of the fall of 1975, 72 percent of the elementaryschools were identifiable by race (72percent had minority enrollments of less than 5percent or more than 50 percent) compared to66 percent in 1970. And in 1975, 78 percent ofminority elementary students were enrolled inschools with minority enrollments greater than50 percent. This is an increase from 67 percentof minority students enrolled in such schools in1970.Involvement of Federal Officials3. In its 1969 and 1971 onsite reviews, OCRfound potential Title VI violations in the studentand teacher assignments and other areas in theFort Wayne Community Schools, but decided in1975 to drop the student assignment issue. FortWayne is one of several cases where potentialTitle VI violations were dropped reportedly dueto insufficient evidence, but where all decisionswere made verbally and no written record justifyingsuch decisions was kept.4. Informed individuals at OCR and the Centerfor National Policy Review, a private researchand litigation organization, who reviewed thepertinent data, believe there is sufficientevidence to support a charge of Title VI violationson the basis of student assignment, andthey are considering asking that the case bereopened.5. In July 1976, U.S. District Court Judge JohnJ. Sirica ordered HEW to initiate enforcementproceedings or to make an administrative determinationof compliance in Fort Wayne and inseveral other school districts.6. OCR pursued the teacher assignment issue inFort Wayne and in September 1976 approved aplan submitted by the school district. However,OCR did not receive the followup informationregarding the experience and education ofteachers in the school system that it hadrequested in its letter approving the teacherreassignment plan until mid-April 1977. Preliminaryanalysis by Commission staff appears to indicatethat the teacher desegregation plan hasbeen only partially implemented.7. The Civil Rights Division of the Departmentof Justice received several complaints of discriminationin the Fort Wayne schools fromparents of minority students and is currentlyreviewing the student assignment issue. As ofMarch 1977, no determination had been madeas to whether or not the Department will act inthe Fort Wayne Community Schools case.8. At least two Federal agencies and one Stateagency having civil rights enforcement authorityhave conducted investigations of the FortWayne Community Schools. There has been littleor no State-Federal coordination of these efforts.As a result, interrelated, systemwideproblems of recruitment, hiring, teacher and studentassignment, programs, services, and cur-13

icular materials are being addressed by enforcementagencies in a fragmentary fashion.Current School Desegregation Issuesin Fort Wayne9. The Indiana Civil Rights Commission is attemptingto negotiate a settlement with FortWayne to resolve 15 charges of discriminationin employmen. and in the educational programthat the commission brought against the schooldistrict in May 1974.10. The superintendent has proposed a reorganizationplan, which includes proposals forreducing racial imbalances. The plan is unacceptableto many individuals (including someboard members) and organizations in the community,primarily because it does not go farenough in desegregating the schools and itplaces the burden of desegregation on theminority community.11. A coalition of local white and minority organizationsthat has publicly opposed the superintendent'sproposal is seeking major revisionsin the plan.A variety of issues, involving several individuals,community organizations, and public agencies,have been raised in this investigation. Given thetimeliness of this report our recommendations include,first, a series of immediate actions that canbe taken during the next few weeks, and second,procedural proposals regarding the Federal civilrights enforcement effort in the area of education,based on the experience in the Fort Wayne case.Recommendations for ImmediateActions:1. The Indiana Advisory Committee to the U.S.Commission on Civil Rights recommends to thesuperintendent and board members that the FortWayne Community Schools develop a new reorganizationplan. In doing so the school administrationshould work with the Fort Wayne community,including parents of black and Hispanicstudents, teachers, and representatives of majorwomen's and minority organizations.Such a plan should be educationally sound; itshould allow for systemwide desegregation; itshould address the issues raised in the IndianaCivil Rights Commission complaint; and itshould be responsive to the major disagreementssurrounding the current reorganization proposal.2. The Advisory Committee recommends thatthe U.S. Commission on Civil Rights formallyrequest that OCR reopen and that the Departmentof Justice more actively pursue their investigationsof the student assignment issue inthe Fort Wayne schools. OCR should also monitormore closely the district's implementation offaculty desegregation.These agencies should be asked to update theirfiles, to reexamine all relevant information, andto reconsider all previous decisions on this issue.The Commission should recommend that theseagencies give equal consideration to communityinput, particularly that from representatives ofthe various protected groups, and to data providedby the Fort Wayne Community Schools. Ifviolations of Federal law are found to exist,these agencies should review any proposed reorganizationplan for the Fort Wayne schools. Ifthe proposed plan does not remedy the Federalviolations, enforcement proceedings should beinitiated.Recommendations for ProceduralChanges in the Civil RightsEnforcement Effort3. The Advisory Committee recommends thatthe Commission's Office of Federal Civil RightsEvaluation conduct periodic reviews and publishreports of specific OCR and Department ofJustice investigations, focusing on those caseswhere potential Title VI violations are found oraction under Title IV appears warranted basedon onsite reviews. The first such review shouldbegin within 60 to 90 days and should coverOCR procedures utilized in settling the cases involvedin the 1976 case of Brown v. Weinbergerand procedures utilized by the Department ofJustice in its current investigation of the FortWayne schools.Among the issues that should be examined are:the criteria employed in determining whether ornot evidence supports the finding of a violation;whether and how official agency records of decisionsare maintained; how these agencies attemptto bring about voluntary compliance; andhow they monitor settlements reached with noncomplyingdistricts.4. The Advisory Committee recommends thatthe Commission request:14

a. The Departments of Health, Education, andWelfare and Justice to develop revised investigatoryand enforcement procedures in thearea of equal educational opportunity thatwould enable:1. referral of specific cases from Federal toState civil rights enforcement agencies, andvice versa, where appropriate;2. State-Federal coordination of such effortswhere appropriate;3. Joint State-Federal investigatory, enforcement,and followup efforts in such caseswhere appropriate; and4. Any additional changes and reorganizationnecessary to achieve more efficient andtimely Federal enforcement actions in thesematters.b. Where such changes are not possible undercurrent Federal law, that the appropriate committeesof the Congress consider any statutoryrevisions necessary to achieve more efficientand timely equal educational opportunity enforcementthrough State-Federal cooperationas proposed above.15

Appendix ACommunications Between HEW and Fort Wayne Community SchoolsRegarding Title VI Violation Due to Teacher Assignment:• HEW Letter Notifying School District of its Noncompliance• Fort Wayne Teacher Assignment Plan• HEW Approval of Plan and Request for Followup Information• Followup Information Provided by Fort WayneDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARENovember 17, 1975Mr. Lester L. GrileSuperintendent of SchoolsFort Wayne Community Schools1230 S. ClintonFort Wayne, Indiana 46802Dear Mr. Grile:The Office for Civil Rights has the responsibility to enforce Title VIof the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and its implementing Regulation (45 CFRPart 80), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color,or national origin in any program or activity receiving Federal financialassistance. Pursuant to such enforcement responsibility; this Officeconducted a review of the Fort Wayne Community Schools in April 1969,and visited the District in January and April of 1971 and in February1975. In addition, the Office has reviewed the data supplied by theFort Wayne Community Schools on the Elementary and Secondary SchoolCivil Rights Survey Fores (OS/CR 101-102) and Elementary-Secondary StaffInformation Forms (F.DO-5). Based upon our analysis of this information,I have determinad that the Fort Wayne Community Schools are not incompliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by virtue ofracially motivated policies and practices v/ith respect to faculty assignment.No black teacher was hired by the Fort Wayne Community Schools until 1952,when one was employed. During the 10 year period, 1952-61, a total of 16were hired. Of these 16 teachers, 15 taught in elementary schools withover 50% minority student populations. The first black teacher in a highschool was hired and assigned in 1954. However, the second was not hiredand assigned until 1964. The first black teacher in a junior high washired in 1963. Betveen 1962 and 1968, the Fort Wayne Community Schoolshired 74 black teachers, which was 4.4% of the total number of teachershired during this period.In the 1967-63 school year the Fort Wayne Community Schools employed 69minority teachers out of a total of 1,670 teachers (4.1%). At thatOFFICE '• S'JP'i AME DATE OFFICE SURNAME DATE OFFICE SURNAME DATE16

Page 2 - Mr. Lester L. Griletime 38, or 55*1% of the 69 minority teachers taught in A elementaryschools (Hanna, Harmar, McCulloch and Smart) each of which had over50% black student enrollment. At the same time, ninety or 5.6% ofthe system's white faculty were assigned to these schools. (TheseA schools had 7*67% of the system's faculty.) During this time theminority student enrollment in Fort Wayne was 11.5% of the total schoolpopulation. In 1967 there were A3 schools in the system with lessthan 10% minority student populations. Only 2A minority teacherswere assigned to schools with less than 10% minority student populations.No minority teachers were assigned to 31 of these schools.The Pall 1968 (HEW Directory of Selected Public Elementary and SecondarySchools) statistics show AA, or 66.7% of 66 black teachers taughtin the 7 schools (of the total 56 schools) which had over 50% blackstudent enrollment.During the period between 1968 and 197A the number of minority teachersin predominantly tninority schools decreased. However, the Fall 197Aforms OS/CR 101-102 show that nine of the Fort Wayne Community Schools'61 schools have over 50% black student population and 35, or 32.7% ofthe 107 minority teachers, are assigned to these nine schools. At thesame time 25 schools with less than 10% minority student populationshave only 8 minority teachers assigned to them, 19 of these schools hadno minority teachers assigned to them, and a total of 23 schools hadno minority teachers.The Fort Wayne Community Schools employ 6 minority principals. Fiveof these six are elementary school principals and they are all assignedto schools with over 81% minority student enrollments.The District'8 foregoing practice of assigning minority group facultyto schools attended predominantly by minority group students has caused orIncreased the racial identiflability of 3A of Fort Wayne's schools asintended primarily for children of one race.Based on the above information, the Office for Civil Rights has determinedthat the Fort Wayne School System is assigning faculty in a discriminatorymanner in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 196A and theDepartment Regulation, A5 CFR 80. Accordingly, it is therefore necessarythat the District prepare a specific plan for faculty desegregation andsubmit this plan to the Office for Civil Rights within A5 day9 after receiptof this letter.In order to establish compliance with Title VI by submitting a facultydesegregation plan, such plan must provide for the reassignment offaculty so that the ratio of minority group teachers in each school issubstantially the Bame as the ratio throughout the District. This remedy17

Page 3 - Mr. Lester L. Grilewas set forth by the Federal Court in the case of Singleton v. JacksonMunicipal Separate School District, A19 F. 2d 1211 (5th Cir. 1967):cert. denied, 369 U.S. 1032 (1970), and it is the standard used by thisDepartment in evaluating plans for remedying faculty assignment violationsunder Title VI.In the event that efforts at voluntary compliance prove unsuccessfulwithin 90 days, I will have no alternative but to refer your District'sfile to the Department's Office of General Counsel with a recommendationto initiate administrative enforcement proceedings.This letter is not intended, and it should not be so construed, to coverany other issues regarding compliance with Title VI which may exist andwhich are not specifically discussed herein.Our staff is ready to extend assistance to your school system in itseffort to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If youhave any questions contact Mr. 0.0. Barr of my staff. He can be reachedat Room 222, 55 Erieview Plaza, Plaza Nine Building, Cleveland, Ohio,44114. The telephone number is 216/522-4970.Sincerely,cci The Honorable Harold NegleySupt. of Public InstructionState Department of Public InstructionLMHamiltonrpaebcc:Dr. Lloyd HendersonMary Jane CalaisAl Hamlin, OGC0.0. Barr, Specialist-in-Charge(Sgd) Kenneth A. MinesDirector, Office forCivil Rights, Region V18

MFNTOR KRAUSJ A BB'JGGEMANWILLIAM F MCNAGNYJAMES M BARRETT IIIJ MICHAEL O HARAMILES C GERBERDINGPAUL S STEIGMEVERJOHN M CLIFTON. JR.DOUGLAS E MILLERROBERT S WALTERSJOHN F LYONSN THOMAS HORTON IIJAMES M PRICKETTWAYNE L. WITMERWILLIAM L. SWEET. JRTHOMAS M. FINKGARY J RICKNERJOHN O. WALDABARRETT, BARRETT & MCNAGNYLAWYERSTHIRD FLOOR LINCOLN BANK TOWERJAMES M BARRETT 1929FORT WAYNE. INDIANA PHIL M. MCNAGNY 196946802OTTO E. GRANT. JR. 1969TELEPHONE 423-9551, AREA COOE 219March 22, 1976JAMES M BARRETT. JR.OF COUNSELMr. Frank KruegerOffice of the Attorney GeneralCivil Rights DivisionRoom 32 65HEW - North Building330 Independence Avenue, S.W.Washington, D.C. 20201Re:Fort Wayne Community SchoolsDear Mr. Krueger:Pursuant to its resolve to bring the racial balance ofits faculty into the range of HEW guidelines by the fallsemester of 197 6, the Fort Wayne Community Schools will infact be implementing a plan to reassign both black and whiteteachers in its elementary schools in such a manner as willbring each of the schools within the District within a plusor minus five percent of the average percentage of blackteachers within the elementary school system as a whole.Currently, approximately eight percent of the faculty isblack in the elementary system as a whole.We have taken the total 1975-7 6 Staff (which, inclusiveof special education personnel, totals 688), we have takenthe total 197 5-76 black teachers per school, and we havecompared the resulting percentage of black teachers to eachschool's faculty as a whole with the acceptable HEW range.Based upon this analysis, we have made a determination ofthe number of black faculty members in each school and thenumber of white faculty members in each school that will haveto be transferred or exchanged in order to bring the ratiosand percentages into HEW conformity.Although there are some tentative figures available atthe present time for the approximate number of total facultyin each school beginning in September, 1976, there will be19

Mr. Frank KruegerPage TwoMarch 22, 197 6adjustments made in this number as and when actual enrollmentsare known and teacher-pupil ratios finalized for the fall.Accordingly^ we will use the 1975-76 Staff figures for purposesof this letter and of the proposed reassignments contemplatedhereby.Below you will find listed each elementary school withinthe District, together with the total staff in each school,the 1975-76 number of black teachers per school, and the1976-77 recommendations for black teachers per school aftercompletion of the reassignment program. The total Stafffigures will be high by the number of special educationteachers, which I estimate at 60 within the elementary system,but the ratios for classroom teachers would be maintained,nonetheless.SchoolTotal Staff(1975-76)Black Teachers perSchool (1975-76)Black Teac:per School(1976-77)(recommend^AbbettAdamsAnthony WayneArlingtonBloomingdaleBrentwoodBuncheCroningerForest ParkFranke ParkGlenwood ParkHaleyHannaHarmerHarrisHarrison HillHillcrestHoaglandHollandIndian VillageIrwinLincolnLindleyMcCulloch1812111717151424241620251012243081921161514111011011050000333010200011611111121111222120211111220

Mr. Frank KruegerPage ThreeMarch 22, 197 6MaplewoodMemorial ParkNebraskaNorthcrestPleasant CenterPriceRiversideSt. Joseph CentralShambaughSlocumSouth CalhounSouth WayneSouthern HeightsStudy-WardWashingtonWashington CenterWaynedaleWeisser ParkYoung2023121782092124131423131016122218311905131 10 10 0i• i0 00 10 21 10 10 10 12 22 22 20 10 112 4_3 _2Total 688 58 58Three (3) elementary schools would have no full-time blackteachers on the staff, but through the placement of specialteachers in art, music, and physical education, these schoolswould have the services of black teachers on a part-time basisuntil further placement activities result in the placement ofblack faculty in those schools.The entire reassignment process has already been commenced,in that principals have been alerted and preparations begun forthe administrative implementation of the actual faculty transfers.Specifically, it would appear that approximately 21 black teacherswill have to be reassigned in order to effectuate the proper racialbalance among faculty. It is anticipated that vacancies would becreated in the receiving schools, through leaves of absence, retirement,pregnancy, or the like, so that faculty assignments outfrom the receiving schools would not be necessary. Such assignmentsout, however, would be made in the event that vacancies are nototherwise created in the receiving schools. In summary, the blackteachers in schools from which reassignments must be made wouldinclude three at Bunche, one at Haley, one at Hanna, one atHarmer, four at McCulloch, two at Memorial Park, eight at WeisserPark, and one at Young. These twenty-one black teachers would be21

Mr. Frank KruegerPage FourMarch 22, 1976reassigned to the following schools and in the followingnumbers:SchoolAnthony Wayne 1Brentwood 1Croninger 1Forest Park 1Franke Park 1Glenwood Park 1Harris 1Harrison Hill 1HillcrestHolland 1Indian Village 1Irwin 1Maplewood 1Northcrest 1Pleasant CenterRiversideSt. Joseph Central 1Shambaugh 2South Calhoun 1South Wayne 1Southern Heights 1Washington Center 1Waynedale 1Number of Black Teachersto AssignI trust that the foregoing information,gives you what youneed at this juncture to demonstrate that Fort Wayne CommunitySchools is moving toward implementation of this plan. Thesereassignments will be in place and will be implemented by thecommencement of school in the fall of 1976.I expect to forward to your attention, shortly, the ancillaryadmiftistrative policies that will set down guidelines on thematter of actual transfer mechanisms and considerations.I am enclosing, per your request, with copies to Messrs.Barr and Mines, copies of the current EEO5's, which mayhelp you in your review. If you have any specific questionson numbers or on assumptions, please feel free to call.Very truly yours,BARRETT, BARRETT & McNAGNYRSW:mlcc: Mr. Lester L. GrileMr. 0. 0. Barr *^-*""""~Mr. Kenneth A. MinesRobert S. Walters22

MEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFAREOFFICE OF THE SECRETARY0ROMUBJECT:Lloyd HendersonDirectorElementary and SecondaryDivisionCivil Rights Division:Frank K. Krueger, Jr.Attorney, Office of the GeneralCounselCivil Rights Division:Fort Wayne Community SchoolsAttached hereto is a letter which I have received fromthe Superintendent of schools in Fort Wayne coveringthe ancilliary administrative matters which we discussedwith Fort Wayne's attorney, Robert S. Walters, by telephoneon June 21, 1976.Although I believe the letter covers all of the remainingitems necessary to bring Fort Wayne's faculty assignmentpractices into compliance with Title VI, I suggest thatthe letter and the attached Master Contract between theschool board and the teachears union be forwarded to theRegional Office in Cleveland for their analysis andrecommendation.23

FORT WAYNE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS1230 SOUTH CLINTON STREET • FORT WAYNE, INDIANA 4680?PHONE 219/422-3575FORT WAYNE BICENrtNMlUJune 22, 1976Mr. Frank KruegerOffice of the Attorney GeneralCivil Rights DivisionRoom 3265HEW - North Building330 Independence Avenue, S.W.Washington, D.C. 20201Re:Fort Wayne Community SchoolsDear Mr. Krueger:Please be advised that in implementing the provisions ofthe faculty re-assignment plan, described to you by writtencommunication dated March 22, 1976 from our attorney,Robert S. Walters, the Fort Wayne Community Schools hasfollowed the policies, rules, and guidelines described inthe Master Contract between the Board of School Trusteesof the Fort Wayne Community Schools and the Fort WayneEducation Association, Inc. (1975-1976), and, most particularly,the provisions of Article IX thereof (a copy ofwhich is attached for your reference). As further clarification,however, and to assure you that both the voluntaryand involuntary transfers made necessary by our re-assignmentplan have not resulted in a lessening in the qualifyof instruction in any affected school, nor in the dismissal,demotion, or loss of seniority on the part of any of theaffected teachers, I am pleased to advise you that none ofthe teachers who have been transferred thus far, and noneof the teachers who will be transferred pursuant to the planhereafter, have been or will be re-assigned to a teachingposition for which that individual teacher is not qualified;nor have any such re-assignments been accompanied by anyprofessional demotion or loss of salary.Consistent with the provisions of Article IX Master Contract,an admixture of experienced and inexperienced teachers ineach school has been maintained, as has the unit and buildingbalances of teachers with post-graduate degrees and24

June 22, 1976Mr. Krueger - 2various kinds of teaching skills. As you are no doubt aware,the Fort Wayne Community Schools has a large percentage ofteachers with advanced degrees, inasmuch as the State ofIndiana requires a Master's Degree after the teacher hastaught for five years. All of these things considered, therefore,it is our opinion,-and it is our goal, that equaleducational opportunities have been and will continue to bemaintained within each of our schools on the basis both offacilities and of the skill, experience, educational attainment,and general qualifications of its teachers. There hasnever been, nor will there be, any tendency within the FortWayne Community Schools system to concentrate less-qualifiedteachers in any one or more particular schools, let alone inminority group schools.With regard to future recruitment, hiring, and placement ofteachers within the System, you should be advised, of course,that the Fort Wayne Community Schools has consistently maintainednondiscriminatory policies. Your office has requestedfurther assurances, however, and we do so willingly, knowingthat these assurances do not represent any deviation from therecruitment, hiring, and assignment practices which we havefollowed in the past. In essence, then, our recruitment,hiring, and assignment practices are and will continue to benondiscriminatory with regard to race, religion, ethnicity,or sex and will be based upon the skill, ability, scholasticperformance, personality, and attitude of each and everyinterviewee, applicant, or employee, in over-all relation tothe teaching needs of each particular school or unit withinour System. We are committed to a policy of not limiting theemployment opportunities of any particular group of applicants,although we are striving to make known to various minoritygroups the range of employment opportunities available withinour System, as and when they arise.In effecting the faculty re-assignments, the Fort WayneCommunity Schools wishes to make it abundantly clear that .these re-assignments have been made in compliance with yourOffice's demands, without in any way constituting an acknowledgmenton our part that our recruitment, hiring, and assignmentpractices in the past have been anything but lawful. Weare committed to redressing the racial identifiability of ourfaculties, however, pursuant to your request; although, as wehave discussed with you on a number of occasions, we will continueto make our recruitment, hiring, and faculty assignmentdecisions based upon completely nondiscriminatory criteria,25

June 22, 1976Mr. Krueger - 3even though this may result in future deviations from thetarget faculty balance percentages which you have outlinedto us.Our office will continue to monitor, annually, the proportionalityand balance of the teaching staffs within all ofour schools, in relation to our stated policies herein ofconducting our recruitment, hiring, and assignment practiceson a completely nondiscriminatory basis. Should we perceiveany patterns of imbalance developing in any particular school,schools, or units within our system, we will promptly determinewhether any such imbalance has resulted from any applicationof prohibited standards or criteria anywhere within our System,or whether such patterns, if any, have developed by coincidence.In the event of the former conclusion, we will be prepared totake steps to correct any such imbalance as and when theyoccur and to render any repetition of the problem unlikely.Please let us know if this statement of policy meets withyour approval, and, if so, we will consider this statementof policy as an addendum to and part of our faculty re-assignmentplans submitted to you on March 22, 1976.We will await the favor of your response and are hopeful thatany questions which your Office has had in the past will nowbe laid to rest. It should be of interest to you that mostof the proposed re-assignments, as set forth in the March 22instrument, have been effectuated and all necessary re-assignmentsare anticipated to be in place well prior to the commencementof school in September of 1976.Very truly yours,FORT WAYNE COMMUNITY SCHOOLSLLGrjbfester L. GrileCC: Mr. Walters Superintendent of SchoolsEach Board MemberDr. YoungDr. AnthisDr. Cowan26

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION. AND WELFAREOFFICE OF THE SECRETARYWASHINGTON, D C 2O20ISEP 2 3Mr. Lester GrileSuperintendentFort Wayne Comnunity Schools1230 South ClintonFort Wayne, Indiana 46802Dear Superintendent Grile:This letter is in response to your letter of June 22, 1976, addressed toFrank Krueger in our General Counsel's Office, and to the letter of March 22,1976, from Mr. Robert S. Walters, attorney for the Fort Wayne ComnunitySchools, also addressed to Frank Krueger.With respect to the projected faculty assignnents outlined in the letterof March 22, 1976, for the 1976-77 school year, I am pleased to adviseyou that such assignments, if Implemented, are consistent with the requirementsof Title VI of the Civil Rights Act ofRegarding the ancillary commitments contained in your June 22, 1976 letter,it is my understanding that the Fort Wayne Community Schools has agreedthat during the desegregation process: s'(1) no teacher will be assigned to a position for whichhe or she is not qualified; and(2) no reassignment of any certificated staff member willresult in demotion or loss of salary.In addition, during the desegregation process, as well as after, the districthas agreed that:(1) faculty will be assigned so that at each school there willbe a substantially equal admixture of teachers according toexperience, teaching skills, and post-graduate degrees;(2) the district will maintain nondiscriminatory recruitment,hiring and assignment practices; and27

Page 2 - Superintendent Grile(3) the district, in the future, will monitor the racial ratioof teachers at each school in the system so that if anyunlawful racial imbalance occurs as a result of the district'sassigning teachers based on their race, color, or nationalorigin, the Fort Wayne Community Schools will take immediateaction to remedy this Title VI violation.If my understanding of the ancillary commitments made by the schooldistrict is correct, then the reassignment of teachers, in conjunction withthese commitments, constitutes a desegregation plan which meets the requirementsof Title VI in the area of faculty assignmentt. I will assume thatmy understanding is correct unless I hear from you to the contrary within15' days from the date of this letter. Since the teacher assignments outlinedin Mr. Walters' letter of March 22, 1976, were projections only,please provide me by October 15, 1976, with a revised list of teacher assignmentsfor 1976-77 as they became finalized at the opening of school. Thelist should include a breakdown of teachers assigned to each school accordingto race, educational degrees, certificates and experience.If I can be of any additional assistance to you in this or any other matter,please feel free to contact me.Sincerely yours,(Signed) Lloyd R. HendersonLloyd R. Henderson, DirectorElementary and Secondary Education DivisionOffice for Civil Rightscc:Director, Office for Civil Rights,Region VChief State School OfficerAttorney, Fort Wayne Community Schools28

.FORT WAYNE COMMUN'TYSeptember 30, 1976Mr. Lloyd R. Henderson, DirectorElementary and Secondary Education DivisionOffice for Civil RightsDepartment of Health, Education, and WelfareWashington, D.C. 20201Dear Mr. Henderson:In your letter of September 23, 1976, you requested areport on the finalized staffing for the 1976-1977 schoolyear.We are enclosing a listing of our elementary schools andthe final teacher assignments as of September 28, 1976.In addition we are supplying a listing of the minorityteachers who were transferred, the name of the school inwhich the teacher taught last year, the name of the schoolto which the teacher transferred, the highest degree ofrecord held by the teacher, the total number of years of "teaching, and the number of years taught in the Fort WayneCommunity Schools.We were pleased with the cooperation of all of our personnelin making these changes and in our opinion satisfactoryadjustments have been made.Thank you for your help and cooperation in this matter.Very truly yours,LLG:jbEncs.CC: PersonnelSuperintendent's File"Xdster L.^^Superintendent of Schools29

SchoolAbbettAdamsAnthony WayneArlingtonBloomingdaleBrentwoodBuncheCroningerForest ParkFranke ParkGlenwood ParkHaleyHannaHarmarHarrisHarrison HillHillcrestHoaglandHollandIndian VillageIrwinLincolnLindleyMcCullochMaplewoodMemorial ParkNebraskaNorthcrestPleasant CenterPriceRiversideSt. Joseph CentralShambaughS locumSouth CalhounSouth WayneSouthern HeightsStudyWardWashingtonWashington CenterWaynedaleWeisser ParkYoungWayne, Indiana 46802 September 28, 1976STAFFING ASSIGNMENTS - ELEMENTARY - FOR 1976-77 SCHOOL YEARTotal 1976-77 Staff1976-77 Black(inc. Spec. Education) Teachers Per School18.5112111119117116114224224.5216119128.5210.5212.5223.5128.5180 1/18121.521612/15112.5111110321121412116.5190 3/201912312421213.51122114110116212222118.51301842750 F.T.E.611/ Black Art teacher and black P.E. teacher assigned HillcreF.2/ Black teacher on Leave of Absence (Maternity)3/ Black P.E. teacher assigned to Pleasant Center30

FORT WAYNE COMMUNITY SCHOOLSFort Wayne, IndianaTRANSFER OF BLACK TEACHERSFOR 1976-77 SCHOOL YEARNAME FROM: TO: DEGREE CSRTIF. YEARS WITHEXP. FWCSDELETED WEisser Park, Shambaugh, B.S. Elem Prov 25th/6th 5th K-82Weisser Park, So.Calhoun, M.A. Elem Prov 45th/6th5th/6thNebraska, So. Wayne, M.A. Elem Prof 93rd/4th 5th K-8McCulloch, Glenwood Pk, B.S. Elem 1st 383rd 2nd 1-8Mem. Park, Croninger, M.S. Elem 1st 225th/6th 2nd Sec.-VocHome EcWeisser park, Northcrest, B.S. Elem Prov 25th/6th 1st K-8Eunche, Harris, B.S. Elem Prov 34 th 3rd K-8Harmar, Wash. Center, B.S. Elem Prov 1%3rd/4th 6th K-8Bunche,St.Joe Centr. B.S. Elem Prov4th 3rd K-6 2%Weisser Park, Anth. Wayne, M.S. Elem Prov 85th/6th 3rd/4th K-6496123133McCulloch Irwin M.S. Elem Prof3rd 4th r-8 10 10Eunche, Forest Park, M.S. Elem Prof 6 61st 3rd K-8Henna, Harr. Hill, M.S. Elem Prof 13 101st Kgn, F.T. K-631

TRANSFER - BLACK TEACHERS - FOR 1976-77 SCHOOL YEARFROM: TO: DEGREE CERTIF. YEARS WITHEXP. FWCSDELETED Weisser Park, Brentwood, B.S. Elem Prov 9 25th/6th 4th/5th K-8Young, Waynedale, B.S. Elem Prov 1 11st 1st K-8McCulloch, So. Heights, M.S. Elem Prof 12 124th 6th K-8Weisser Park, Maplewood, B.S. Elem Prov 1 15th/6th Kgn, F.T. K-832

Appendix BSummary of Center for National Policy Review's Assessment of FortWayne Community School SituationFacsimileCenter for National Policy ReviewWilliam L. Taylor, DirectorSeptember 11, 1976FORT WAYNE, INDIANA SUMMARY SHEETSTATUS: HEW is dealing only with the faculty assignment issue. Cioffi says that the junior andsenior highs have been desegregated. No letter of non-compliance sent tc Fort Wayne in thestudent assignment area.DEGREE OF SEGREGATION: Total district percentage of minority students: 17.09%. Out of41 elementary schools, 11 have 45% or more minority enrollment, 25 have 10% or less minorityenrollment, and 5 have a minority enrollment between 10.1% and 25.1%.SUMMARY OF NATURE OF EVIDENCE: There is evidence detailing the school board'ssegregative intent. This evidence includes discriminatory building practices which have contributedto the Hanna school being 93.9% minority. There is also the fact that the grade structureis dual. The minority schools are on a 1-4 basis while the non-minority elementary schoolsare 1-6. There is contrary evidence in the file which states that many of the boundary changeswere not racially motivated. However, I think there is enough in the file to refute HEW's positionthat there is not enough evidence of segregative intent.33

Appendix CCommunications Regarding OCR's Handling of the Student AssignmentIssue in the Fort Wayne Community SchoolsMEMORANDUM DEPARTMENT of HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFAREOFFICE OF THE SECRETARYTO: Mr. Orrie BarrEducation Branch Chief/Region VDATE, HOV 1 1976FROM: Frederick T. Cioffi'Chief, Operations BranchSUBJECT: Review of Brown FilesDuring the last four months you have been periodically requested toassemble and ship several files to my office in Washington in orderthat they might be examined by representatives of the National Centerfor Policy Review pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act.As a result of their review of said files, a question has arisen. Itappears that in a number of reviews the issue of student assignmentwas pursued or appears to have been pursued, yet the letter of findingswhich was sent to the LEA was silent on the issue. In their review ofthe file the National Center representatives were unable to observedocuments which would explain why the student assignment issues weredropped.Accordingly it is requested that you make a quick review of thefollowing files to determine whether documents exist therein which wouldanswer the question as to why the student assignment issue was dropped.1. South Bend, Indiana (File returned IO/27/76)2. Fort Wayne, Indiana (if you have the file)My recollection is that the files may be silent, since most of thesecases were presented verbally in Cleveland and/or San Francisco andthe decision to drop the issue was due to lack of sufficient evidence.Everything was verbal at these conferences.However, please call me with the results of your review by November k 91976.34

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION,AND WELFAREFrederick T. CioffiChief, Operations BranchNovember 8, 1976Specialist-in-ChargeElementary and Secondary Education Branch (Cleveland)Review of Brown FilesAs you requested in your memorandum of November 1, 1974, I have reviewedthe South Bend, Indiana, and Fort Wayne, Indiana files andhave determined that no documents exist therein which explain whythe student assignment issue was dropped. It is my understandingthat the decision to drop this issue was made at the ClevelandCase Conference in August, 1975.LCORNELIUSrdreLinda A* CorneliusOFFICE SURNAME DATE OFFICE SURNAME DATE OFFICE SURNAME DATE35

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION. AND WELFAREOFFICE OF THE SECRETARYWASHINGTON, D.C. 20201Mr. William L. Taylor, DirectorThe Center for National Folicy ReviewSchool of LawThe Catholic University of AmericaWashington, D. C. 20017Dear Mr, Taylor:As agreed in my deposition of October 12, 1976, I have asked appropriatemembers of the OCR staff to review the files on:1. Fort Wayne, Indiana2. Sweetwater, California3. Pomona, Californiak. New Britain, Connecticut5. South Bend, IndianaThe files were reviewed with negative results. The only document whichwas submitted to me from those reviewing the files is the enclosed copyof a letter dated March 24, 1975 to a complainant in New Britain. Itmay be helpful to you.In discussing the matter of why a number of reviews appear to havepursued the issue of student assignment while the letter of findingsto the School District were silent on the issue, it was brought to myattention and I do recall that most of these case files were presentedorally to a panel of OCR and OGC staffers in Cleveland and San Franciscoin August and September 1975- In those cises where issues "."are notsustained ^oy appropriate evidence the respective regional offices wereverbally directed to disregard the issue. In other words the fileprobably does not contain any documents because the direction was givenorally.I hcpe this assists you in your findings.Sincerely yours,FREDERICK T. CIOFFIChief, Operations BranchElementary and Secondary Education DivisionOffice for Civil Eights36

Appendix DSuperintendent Grile's January 24, 1977, Proposed Reorganization PlanA PROPOSED PLANFOR THEFORT WAYNECOMMUNITY SCHOOLS1977-1983Presented ByLester L. Grile, SuperintendentTo theBoard of School TrusteesJanuary 24, 1977

The plan which we now present for consideration requiresus to look into the future, making projections and plans basedupon what has happened in the past, where we are at the presenttime, and where we project that we should and can be.Specifically, we will want to talk about the years 1977 through1983, but the proposal establishes a direction for the FortWayne Community Schools which has implications for thenext twenty years.The Fort Wayne community can be proud of its past accomplishmentsin its educational programs. These educationalgains have not happened by chance, but have come aboutas a result of good planning and implementation supportedby the Board of School Trustees, parents, and the total community.The major criterion for testing the components of a plan isits educational value. A plan should contribute to presenthigh standards, and it should also reflect improvement. Aschool system exists basically to provide educational opportunitiesfor boys and girls as well as the adults it is privilegedto serve.The Administration and the Board of School Trusteesrecognize that long-range planning is a requirement for publicbodies to which are delegated by law responsibility for operationof the public schools. Major consideration must be givento the economic aspects of a plan so that the plan can be implementedafter adoption.The Fort Wayne Community Schools corporation hasreached a time when it needs to plan facility adjustments forpresent and emerging needs. The school system must alsoadjust to enrollment changes. Projections indicate that totalenrollment will continue to decrease slightly until it beginsto stabilize and possibly increase in the 1980's. Within the150 square miles of the school district, some areas will reflectthe general decline, but other areas will continue to grow.This proposed plan for the period 1977 through 1983 representsthe best professional judgment of the Fort WayneCommunity Schools Administration and is presented to theBoard of School Trustees for its consideration.This proposal is a total plan, made up of closely relatedparts which are dependent on each other. The plan includesgrade reorganization and the closing of some schools, both ofwhich actions make major contributions to improvementof racial balance in the elementary grades. We also shalldemonstrate the need for new facilities which will necessitatethe continuation of the present Cumulative Building Fundtax levy. This proposal must be considered as a total packagesince each part is dependent for effectiveness upon each otherpart.The proposed plan has four recommendations predicatedupon the following objectives:1. To provide better educational programs.38INTRODUCTIONA PLAN FOR FWCS —19771983Facility adjustments will need to result in greater utilizationand most economical use of facilities.Historically, the Fort Wayne Community Schools has financedmost of its major capital expenditures on a pay-as-yougobasis through the Cumulative Building Fund. That fundexpires in 1977 with the 1978 collection. This method of fundingcapital improvements has been effective the last twodecades. The Cumulative Building Fund has played a majorrole in maintaining the highest credit rating possible for theschool district, a triple "A" (Aaa) rating by Moody's InvestorsService, Inc. School planning in this district shouldcontinue to use the Cumulative Building Fund as the mosteconomical method of financing needed capital improvements.In its planning, the Board of School Trustees has recognizedits commitment to consider ways in which racial balance canbe improved throughout the Fort Wayne Community Schools.This proposed plan includes recommendations for such improvements.Several major components of this plan relate to the PeabodyStudy. The Administration appreciates the evaluation of theFort Wayne Community Schools, including recommendationsfor improvement of educational opportunities, providedby the study. The Administration and the Board of SchoolTrustees have attended and participated in eleven publicmeetings beginning with the presentation of the PeabodyReport. We have studied the input of the citizens who attendedthese meetings, and we have welcomed the commentsof administrators, teachers, and other employees.Many persons within and without the community havehelped us to evaluate the available options. The Administrationhas drawn upon the broad and varied experiences ofits personnel in the professional judgments reflected in thisplan. At this time as we make proposals, we recognize our responsibilityto be sure that all actions will be in the best interestof the boys and girls in this community.2. To maximize utilization of facilities and staff.3. To upgrade educational facilities in order to accommodatepresent and future needs.4. To improve racial balance.5. To develop a financial program wh : ch is economicallyfeasible.I. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE BASIC ELE-MENTARY UNIT CONSIST OF GRADES KINDER-GARTEN THROUGH 5.This recommendation requires the assignment of the sixthgrade to the junior high schools. This action provides neededflexibility at the elementary level, improves utilization of elementarybuildings, and makes it possible to effect economiesby phasing out some obsolete and smaller schools.

Because we cannot identify at this time continuing needfor schools at the present sites of four buildings, we recommendthe closing and disposing of these facilities. The fourschools are: Hillcrest, Hanna, Harmar, and Hoagland.Major considerations in this recommendation to close theabove four schools are their locations in relationship to pupilpopulations and/or the physical condition of the facilities.Pupils from Hillcrest School will be assigned to South Calhoun,Southern Heights, and Maplewood schools.Pupils from Harmar School will be assigned to Washington,Memorial Park, Forest Park, Riverside, Slocum, andBrentwood schools.Pupils from Hanna School will be assigned to BuncheWeisser Park, and Harrison Hill schools.And boys and girls from Hoagland. will be assigned toSouth Wayne, Study, and Lindley schools.We recommend that the present elementary programs atMcCulloch and Ward schools be discontinued and the facilitiesutilized for the Fort Wayne Community Schools' newFourth Grade and Fifth Grade Enrichment Centers, respectively.Pupils from McCulloch and Ward will be assigned toMemorial Park and Weisser Park schools, respectively.In order to provide a more intensive experience in humanrelations and to improve the preparation of fourth andfifth grade pupils for junior high school and later years,special programs will be developed at Enrichment Centersfor each of these grades. The fourth grade program andits special staff will be housed in a center to be located at theMcCulloch building, and the fifth grade program and staffwill be located at the Ward building.During one week of each semester, classes of fourth andfifth grade pupils, generally from each junior high attendancearea, will be transported from their home schools tothese centers. There are twelve junior high schools, so eachcenter will have twelve groups of approximately 225 pupilseach attending for one week the first and second semesterseach year. Additional preparation before each visit and follow-upactivities after each visit will be a part of these specialprograms. Teachers will accompany their classes to the EnrichmentCenters and will participate in the programs there.Parents will be asked to take part at the centers as well as inthe pre- and post-activities. The new Department of CommunityServices will play an important role in involving parentsin this program.The success of the Elementary Enrichment Centers will beclosely evaluated to determine if the programs should be expandedinto more time for grades four and five and perhapsextended to other grade levels.In the K-5 organization, we recognize the benefits of greaterutilization of the current optional transfer policy which permitsboys and girls to transfer from schools which are 50 °/o ormore of their race to a school which is less than 25% of theirrace and where space is available. We recommend that the optionaltransfer policy be revised to include transportation provisionsfor those boys and girls in grades 1 through 5 whowish to transfer under this policy.The Administration proposes during the school year of1977-1978 to make a survey to determine the amount of interestand possible participation in racially balanced specialschools or special centers. Any conclusions and/or recommendationsin this area will be considered by December 31,1978.Also, if there is sufficient interest and participation in voluntaryracial balance transfers, it would be possible to considerestablishing an extended school day at the ElementaryEnrichment Centers (McCulloch and Ward). The centerscould be open for students before and after school and wouldserve as collection and drop off points for transportation.II. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE JUNIORHIGH SCHOOL ORGANIZATION INCLUDEGRADES 6 THROUGH 8.There is educational justification for moving the sixthgrade into the junior high program. Sixth grade pupils willprofit from the additional educational opportunities whichwill be open to them in the junior high school facility. Programmodifications open for sixth graders in this new environmentwill be a great educational advantage.We do have some facility needs at the junior high schoollevel, but moving the sixth grade into the junior high schoolwill not require the major changes in most junior high physicalfacilities which will be necessary if the ninth grade b leftin the junior high schools.Moving sixth grade pupils into junior high schools willmove some 2,800 additional boys and girls into the radialplan of attendance which is used for the secondary schoolsof Fort Wayne. This will involve nearly 15% of our presentelementary enrollment in a racially balanced school environment.III. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE SENIORHIGH SCHOOL ORGANIZATION INCLUDEGRADES 9 THROUGH 12.Recent evidence favors inclusion of the ninth grade programin the senior high school for many reasons beneficialto the students. These reasons include increased maturity ofninth graders, additional opportunities for e'ective and specializedcourses, involvement of the ninth grade with high schoolgraduation requirements, use of ninth grade courses in applicationsfor college admission, and the importance of theninth grade to continuity of the extra curricular programs, includingathletics, music, drama, speech and journalism insenior high schools. Educational opportunities for ninth gradepupils will be enhanced by assigning them to the senior highschool.All ninth grade pupils cannot be moved now without majorimpact on educational programs, because we do not haveneeded capacity at the senior high level or all of the needed39

special instructional facilities. Nor can we project sufficientenrollment decreases to say that grades 9-12 could be accommodatedin existing facilities. Because of locations, size, sitelimitations, enrollment needs, uneven distribution of pupilsin the school district, and excessive costs of additions, it is notadvisable to add to the existing high schools. Moving some3,200 ninth graders into the senior high schools will requirea commitment of this school corporation to build a new highschool to house approximately 1,500 pupils. This move alsowill require adaptations in the existing six high schools toprovide space and facilities. Projections of enrollments indicateadequate and defensible utilization of all projectedsenior high school facilities in the foreseeable future.The additional high school spaces will be needed in thenorthern part of the school district because of present enrollmentsand projected growth. The Allen County Plan Commissionhas forecast population increases for all four townshipsof the school district in the next 13 years. However, themajor increases are projected for Washington and St. Josephtownships in the north.This additional high school facility in the north also willaccommodate anticipated reassignment of some students inorder to maintain racial balance at the secondary level.IV. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE CUMULA-TIVE BUILDING FUND RATE OF 70c BE CONTIN-UED TO COVER COLLECTIONS IN THE YEARS1979 THROUGH 1983.With existing balances and anticipated collections through1983, the Fort Wayne Community Schools, through the continuanceof the present Cumulative Building Fund tax rate,will have sufficient capital funds for anticipated needs including,construction of the new high school.Implementation of these programs and facility changes canbegin in September of 1977, and all reorganization and relatedfacility changes can be completed by September, 1980.In September of 1977, the ninth grade will continue inWayne High School. During the 1977-1978 school year,Wayne High School will be used as a model for the 9-12 organizationprogram for other senior high schools.Also in September of 1977, the sixth grade at Miami JuniorHigh School's feeder schools will be assigned to Miami, creatingthe first junior high of grades 6-7-8. We will use the1977-1978 school year to develop a model educational programfor future junior high schools of grades 6-7-8.The present program at McCulloch Elementary School willbe discontinued in the spring of 1977, and those pupils will beassigned to Memorial Park in September, 1977.The Fort Wayne Community Schools' Fourth Grade Centerat the McCulloch building will open in September, 1977.However, until all of the sixth grade pupils are moved intothe 6-7-8 junior high schools, this Enrichment Center mayThis plan is recommended by the Administration to theBoard of School Trustees for adoption no later than April,1?77. Action at that time is important in order that implementationmay begin in September of 1977.The plan merits adoption because:1. It provides excellent opportunities for better educationalprograms through grade reorganization.2. It allows for optimum use of facilities during periods ofpupil population changes.3. It upgrades facilities in those areas where they are neededmost at this time and in the foreseeable future.4. It makes improvement at this time in racial balances whichare educationally sound and at the same time are economicallyfeasible, and involve the total community.IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULESUMMARYserve sixth grade as well as fourth grade. The Fifth GradeCenter will open in September, 1978, when facilities at theWard building become available.Harmar School will close in June of 1977, and in Septemberthe students in the present Harmar attendance area willbe assigned to Washington, Memorial Park, Forest Park,Riverside, Slocum, and Brentwood schools.In June of 1978, Hillcrest, Hanna and Hoagland schoolswill close. Hillcrest's attendance area will be divided amongMaplewood, Southern Heights, and South Calhoun schools.Hanna pupils will attend Bunche, Weisser Park, and HarrisonHill schools; and Hoagland pupils will be assigned toSouth Wayne, Study, and Lindley schools.In all school closings existing transportation policies will beapplied.Continuing evaluation of improvements in racial balancesand possibilities for more adjustments will be made each yearand a report made to the Board of School Trustees at thelast meeting each October.5. It emphasizes a creative approach to helping fourth andfifth grade pupils to learn to live in a multi-ethnic andmulti-racial environment.6. It sets forth long-range goals which can be accomplishedon a pay-as-you-go program without mortgaging the futureof this school corporation.These six features of the plan merit serious considerationand' acceptance by the Board of School Trustees and thecommunity.We trust that members of the Board, parents, school personneland other interested citizens will study and considerthis plan as a totality and seek to grasp its forward-lookingaspects, its prudence and its reach for community unity.40

Appendix EOrganizations Joining Coalition to Protest Griie's Reorganization Plan, asof April 22, 1977Allen County Economic Opportunity Council, Inc.Fort Wayne Urban LeagueFort Wayne NAACPLeague of Women Voters of Fort WayneInter-Religious Action CouncilYWCA-Public AffairsAmerican Association of University WomenEast Central Neighborhood AssociationNeighborhood Services AssociationSocial Concerns Commission, East Wayne St. First United Methodist ChurchCommunity Coordinated Child Care of Allen CountyEast Wayne St. CenterSt. Mary's Catholic ChurchFort Wayne Education AssociationWomen's Bureau41

Appendix FUrban League Alternative to Segments of Superintendent Griie'sReorganization PlanFACSIMILEA RESPONSE AND ALTERNATIVE TO THEFWCS' ADMINISTRATION PLAN, FORTWAYNE URBAN LEAGUE, INC.FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:The Proposed Plan for the Fort Wayne CommunitySchools 1977-1983 presented on Monday,January 24th, falls far short of the Board ofTrustees resolutions. In 1974 the School Board ofTrustees resolved to look for ways to eliminatesegregation in the elementary schools. Consideringa relatively successful secondary plan andthousands of dollars spent to develop ways todesegregate the elementary level, we are very disappointedin the results. Furthermore, we do notconsider the Administration's plan to be a plan ofdesegregation.Again, the inner-city community is bearing themajor brunt and the school system will be accomplishingless. The schools closely bordering innercityare experiencing some desegregation now. Ithas been clearly documented that totally excludingsuburban schools forces rapid re-segregation. ThePeabody Study reported that "a strategy aimed athaving elementary school children attend schoolsno more than one school removed from theirhomes must be judged unworkable. The enrollmentdata demonstrates that any permanentdesegregation action must go beyond the nineschool zones which encircle the inner-city zones."Six of the schools from the nine school zones arepart of the Administration's Plan. Regarding theschools slated for closing—Hanna, Harmar,Hoagland and Hillcrest—with the possible exceptionof Harmar, the Administration's plan is onlyfostering re-segregation. In other words theproposed plan is providing band-aid approaches.This community should try to avoid repeating thislong and costly process in the near future. Wehave an excellent opportunity to demonstrate goodfaith now.The Enrichment Center suggested for McCullochand Ward seems very shortsighted. There is evensome question as to whether they are feasible asplanned. It is practically impossible to accomplishthe stated objectives, in only one week persemester. The Enrichment Centers would be anexcellent idea as a supportive program to adesegregation plan. Presently, it's an admission ofaccepting noncompliance, because it suggests thatwe are doing nothing in the elementary schoolstoday and have no plans for the remaining weeksin home-based schools. The Administration planacknowledges a need for human relations andpreparation of fourth and fifth grade pupils for juniorhigh school and later years. Yet it proposes aplan that will barely scratch the surface. It hasbeen illustrated that this age group has most likelydeveloped racial biases, and are influenced bystereotypes and myths. Therefore, it's doubtfulthat much can be accomplished in only two weeksper school year. The short, rather staged experiencecould easily enhance feelings of differenceand raise more problems than it can alleviate.The Urban League recognizes the possible needfor a new high school as a result of the grade reorganization.However, we oppose the suggested siteto be in the north quadrant of the city. A new highschool in St. Joseph or Washington Townshipagain puts the burden of long distance traveling oninner-city students. Furthermore, it completelyoverlooks the opportunity for Central City andInner-City redevelopment efforts. The growth andrevitalization of the Central City could be greatlyenhanced with a new high school in the nearvicinity. It appears the school administration embracesthe neighborhood concept for suburbancommunities and completely ignores the wishes ofinner and central city residents.The proposed grade reorganization, moving 6thgrade into middle school can only be considered afirst step minimum effort. We endorse the four (4)year high school.The Urban League would like to propose the followingalternatives. We believe it can be accom-42

plished well within the Administration time tableat no additional cost. Our suggested alternatives isnot considered as the total answer; yet we feel itmoves us closer to alleviating segregation at theelementary level.Suggested Alternatives—1st Step—ImplementationDate: September 1977I. Retain grade K pupils close to the Inner-cityand Central City schools.II. Assign McCulloch students to GlenwoodPark, which is a distance of 2.6 miles, as per thePeabody Study. Or divide the McCulloch studentsand assign some to Brentwood. We feelthis makes more sense than the Administration'sproposal to assign McCulloch students (90.7%Black) to Memorial Park (73.3% Black) toachieve racial balance.III. Pair Hillcrest to Weisser Park (2.8 milesdistance) by the grade method. The pairing ofWeisser Park and Hillcrest seems more feasiblethan tearing Hillcrest down and assigning thestudents to South Calhoun and Maple wood, asthe Administration suggest. In essence, the Administrationis moving majority (white) studentsinto schools with over 90% majority studentsnow.IV. Assign Hanna to Lindley at a distance of 2.9miles, and Harrison Hill, approximately the samedistance. We fail to understand the Administration'srationale of assigning Hanna students(93.5% Black) to two of the three proposedschools (Bunche and Weisser Park) which haveover 80% Black students enrolled today.V. Assign Hoagland students to Bunche andYoung. Again, distance would not exceed 3miles. Assigning Hoagland students (89.8%)white) to South Wayne (98.1% white) as theAdministration suggests, achieve very little or noracial balance.VI. Pair Memorial Park and Forrest Park.VII. Assign Harmar students to Washington,Riverside, Slocum and Bloomingdale.VIII. Assign Ward students to Abbett, SouthCalhoun, and Harrison Hill, and still maintaindistance traveled. The Administration is proposingthat Ward (69.9% Black) be assigned toWeisser Park (82,9% Black), which in essence isre-segregation.IX. The site for the new high school should beclose to the Central City.X. The Enrichment Centers should be utilized asa support program to aid parents, students andteachers. A much more serious attempt shouldbe made to simulate a healthy learning multiculturalenvironment for students. For example,developing semester programs that are innovativeand educationally sound with emphasis onhuman relations. The Program should bedesigned for the entire school year and the racialbreakdown should stay within the 10-30%band. The Enrichment Center could be utilizedto study the effectiveness of a magnet schoolplan.We do not claim to be experts in the field ofschool desegregation: however, we strongly feelthat alternatives must be presented to the Administration'sproposal. The Urban League believeswe must move toward learning to understand,respect and value diverse people's culturalheritage and be aware of their needs. Thereis nothing more educationally sound in America'sdemocracy than teaching all races to live and worktogether. The process must begin early if we areto achieve a goal" of equalizing life chances to accomplishmore just results.43

Appendix GStaff Analysis of Data Pertaining to Faculty Desegregation, Fort WayneCommunity Schools—1976-77 School YearU.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Midwestern Regional OfficeBackgroundIn a Nov. 17, 1975, letter to FWCS SuperintendentLester L. Grile, Kenneth A. Mines, Region VDirector of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) ofthe U.S. Department of Health, Education, andWelfare, stated:[that the school district's] practice of assigningminority group faculty to schools attendedpredominantly by minority group studentshas caused or increased the racialidentifiability of 34 of Fort Wayne's schools asintended primarily for children of one race.Based on this determination, Mines told Grile thatthe FWCS faculty assignment practices constituteda violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of1964 and of HEW regulations, at 45 C.F.R. §80.OCR told the FWCS to submit a facultydesegregation plan that:must provide for the reassignment of facultyso that the ratio of minority group teachers ineach school is substantially the same as theratio throughout the District. (See appendix Aof this report, p. 2 of Mines letter.)Beyond that, according to a Sept. 23, 1976, letterfrom Lloyd R. Henderson, Director of OCR's Elementaryand Secondary Education Division, toSupt. Grile, the district also agreed that:faculty will be assigned so that at each schoolthere will be a substantially equal admixtureof teachers according to experience, teachingskills, and post-graduate degrees***.In the same letter, Henderson also asked the districtto provide, by Oct. 15, 1976, the following:a revised list of teacher assignments for1976-77 as they become finalized at theopening of school. The list should include abreakdown of teachers assigned to eachschool according to race, educational degrees,certificates and experience. (See appendix A,pp. 1,2 of Henderson letter.)According to documents received by the Commission'sMidwestern Regional Office from the OCRCleveland office, Superintendent Grile sent onlypart of the requested data. The superintendent'sdata included the number of black teachers byschool and a list of the 18 black teachers transferredfor the 1976-77 school year, including theiryears of experience, degrees, and certificates. Thedata, however, pertained only to elementaryschools. Thus, according to OCR records providedCommission staff, the district sent OCR no dataregarding "educational degrees, certificates, andexperience" of the remaining black elementaryteachers (43 other than the 18 for which datawere provided), and no data whatsoever regardingwhite and other minority teachers in the system,including all teachers at the secondary level.Five and one-half months later, on Mar. 18, 1977,Orrie Barr, of the OCR Cleveland office, wroteSuperintendent Grile, asking that he send, by Apr.15, the rest of the data requested by Henderson inSeptember 1976, and projections for the 1977-78school year.According to documents received from OCR, thesuperintendent responded on Apr. 13 with a list ofall elementary schools showing numbers ofteachers in each school by race, degrees earned,years of experience, and certification. Again, nocomparable data were supplied regarding secondaryschools.Analysis of DataBased on these data Commission staff have calculated,for each elementary school, the percentageof minority teaching staff, percentage of teachershaving master's degrees, and the average numberof years teaching experience of teachers in eachschool, as compared with the minority percentageof each school's total student enrollment (see tableG-l of this appendix).In general the data indicate that the 12 elementaryschools having high minority enrollment (morethan the district-wide elementary minority enrollmentpercentage of 20.8 percent) also tend tohave higher proportions of minorities amongteaching staff, lower proportions of all teachers44

having master's degrees, and less experiencedteaching staffs. (Data on certification of teacherswere not analyzed because information interpretingthese data was not included in the district'slist.)Specifically, all but two of the high minority elementaryschools also have more than the districtwideproportion of minority teachers. By comparison,27 of the 33 low minority elementaryschools have less than the district-wide proportionof minority teachers. While 8 of the 12 highminority schools have a proportion of teacherswith master's degrees which is less than the district-wideaverage, the opposite is true of the lowminority schools. Twenty-two of the district's 33low minority schools have a proportion of teacherswith master's degrees which is more than the district-wideaverage. Similarly, 8 of the 12 highminority schools have faculties with less than thedistrict-wide average years of teaching experience,while 21 of the district's 33 low minority schoolshave faculties with more than the district-wideaverage years of teaching experience.When Commission staff submitted these data tothe Chi Square test of statistical significance, thefollowing relationships were found:a) The relationship between the race of teachersand the racial composition of the schools towhich they were assigned was significant at the.001 level (x 2= ll.O5). That is, minority teacherswere disproportionately assigned to schools havinghigh minority enrollment.b) The relationship between teachers' academiccredentials and racial composition of their assignedschools was significant at the .001 level(X 2 =14.55). That is, teachers having master'sdegrees were disproportionately assigned toschools having low minority enrollments.c) The relationship between teachers' length ofteaching experience and the racial compositionof their assigned schools was significant at the.001 level (x 2 =18.56). That is, teachers havingmore years of experience were disproportionatelyassigned to schools having low minority enrollments.It should be noted that tests of statistical significance,such as the Chi Square, indicate neitherthe causes nor intent behind the relationshipsunder examination. "Statistical significance" refersto the likelihood that a given relationship betweentwo variables is a random occurrence. In each ofthe three relationships between variables examinedhere, therefore, the likelihood that any of thesepatterns occurred by chance is less than one outof 1,000.The Chi Square tests reported here were basedupon data for each of the district's 757 reportedelementary teachers, and are presented in table G-2 of this appendix.The unequal distribution of teacher characteristicsin the schools is directly related to the racial compositionof student bodies. In the case of assignmentof minority teachers, the effect is to contributeto the identifiability of some schools asbeing intended for one racial group. In the case ofthe distribution of teachers' credentials and experienceamong schools, the effect is to provide alower level of resources to schools currently havinghigh minority enrollments.Based on this analysis, it is clear that among elementaryschools in the FWCS there is not yet "asubstantially equal admixture of teachers" accordingto their race, experience, and credentials.45

Table G-1COMPARISON OF MINORITY STUDENT ENROLLMENT WITH FACULTY ASSIGNMENTSBY: SCHOOL AND DEGREES, EXPERIENCE, AND MINORITY PROPORTION OF FACULTYFORT WAYNE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, 1976-77 SCHOOL YEARELEMENTARY SCHOOLS1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.10.11.12.13.14.15.16.17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24.25.26.27.28.29.30.31.32.33.34.35.36.37.3839.40.41.42.43.44.45.SchoolYoungBuncheHannaMcCullochHarmarWeisser ParkWardMemorial ParkIrwinAdamsStudySouthern HeightsAbbettHoagland'Allen Co. Children's Hm.LindleySouth CalhounHollandWashingtonGlenwood ParkHillcrestBrentwoodSouth WaynePleasant CenterNorthcrestIndian VillageHaleySlocumNebraskaArlingtonBloomingdaleRiversideShambaughHarrisPriceForest ParkCroningerSt. Joseph CentralWaynedaleHarrison HillMaplewoodWashington CenterAnthony WayneFranke ParkLincolnALL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS(A)Minoritypercentageof enrollment97.195.995.393.091.184.980.878.363.051.241.122.118.618.217.213.613.512.111.28.58.38.06.25.54.64.34.23.93.43.33.13.02.72.62.62.52.32.12.01.81.71.21.01.00.820.8(B)Minority percentageofteachers11.113.318.233.315.416.112.522.26.713.310.07.75.65.650.09.17.15.316.710.506.34.605.96.36.98.38.34.85.911.18.34.25.08.08.34.25.36.94.84.69.16.37.78.5(C)Percentagewith mastersdegree72.266.790.966.776.961.375.088.980.093.390.084.694.477.8100.081.878.694.791.784.2100.075.090.988.988.281.393.191.775.081.094.177.883.391.790.092.095.891.773.793.190.590.9100.087.592.385.6(D)Average no.of years ofexperience7.66.99.38.916.56.46.38.914.118.911.918.614.311.521.09.018.115.314.114.114.916.615.811.412.911.113.513.410.37.817.611.411.712.812.514.214.615.519.715.219.113.418.317.412.813.3 years* Only 2 faculty reported.Sources: Student data is from Fort Wayne Community Schools, Student Enrollment by Race—DPI-EIR-1, Sept. 17, 1976.Teacher data is from Fort Wayne Community Schools, Lester L Grile, Superintendent, letter to O.O. Barr, Chief, Elementaryand Secondary Education Branch, Office for Civil Rights, Region V, HEW, Apr. 13, 1977. Analysis of data wasperformed by staff of the Midwestern Regional Office, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.46

Table G-2RELATIONSHIPS OF THE RACE, CREDENTIALS, AND EXPERIENCE OF TEACHERSTO THE MINORITY ENROLLMENT OF THEIR ASSIGNED SCHOOLSFORT WAYNE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS: 1976-77 SCHOOL YEARELEMENTARY SCHOOLSA. Relationship Between Teachers' Race and Minority Enrollment ofTheir Assigned SchoolsMinority Enrollmentof Assigned School*Race of Teacher High LowMinority 27 38White 159 533X 2 = 11.05;p

U. S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTSWASHINGTON, D.C. 20425OFFICIAL BUSINESSPENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300USPOSTAGE & FEES PAiDCOMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTSv. •