This resource was created to help concerned citizens understand the issues within IPS and disparities regarding fund distribution, access to resources by Race. Reporting and analysis of disaggregated data by school should be provided by IPS even if not mandated by our state legislature. We are calling for school level data to be provided; keeping two things in mind "In God we Trust, all others bring data" and "Follow the money".

This project began with the IPS Board decision to reclassify Shortridge High School to a IB school. Hereafter referred to as the "Eviction" of Black Students to make room for Non-Black students. I attended several meetings where I learned quite a bit about our schools system. As I attended more meetings, I met people who know quite a bit about IPS and it operations, some of these people carried these folders with newspaper clippings and other documents; it seems that most of us had become "radicalized" over similar issues, but over quite a large time span. At one meeting, an attendee, asked for a "Fact Sheet", so they could be better prepared to discuss strategies and tactics to attempt to reverse the eviction of the Shortridge students. I actually helped my wife prepare her comments as she spoke against the eviction. The Shortrige Problem goes back to the mid sixties (see pages-38-48). The crux of the eviction issue is: The inequities within IPS is a complex subject, for this analysis, I have excluded the topics of

and I have still spent a year searching for answers. I could have spent a year on each of the items I excluded from this analysis.

Just a note on graduation rates:

I requested specific information related to a subset of schools, and was never told no, but never received the data. A secondary objective of this data project is to spur our school district to provide an analysis similar to this to prove/disprove racial disparity in the application of resources.

The recent re-alignment of the IPS magnet schools in November of 2014, is yet another in a long line of maneuvers to “improve quality and reduce cost of educating our children”. Like many of us, over the years I hoped the actions of the board would work, and trusted the judgment of the board and our school administrators. My trust in the board and the IPS administration has diminished since I began to delve into the Shortridge-Gambold re-alignment decision. When I look at the financial and accountability data for the last ten years, the outlook for today’s ninth graders is no better than a ninth grader in 2004. My taxes shot up during this period, and IPS got their fair share, yet today’s ninth grader is no better off than their sibling eight years older. Why is this? I will offer some observations and drill down into some data to provoke some analysis and discussion, with the goal of creating a project for parents and citizens to monitor the activities of Indianapolis Public Schools. My observations of why the board proceeded with the Shortridge-Gambold re-alignment is to:
  1. Provide a logical progression for the Center for Inquiry students.
  2. Address the need have capacity for the “25” in the “90-25-90” goal mandated by the State of Indiana. The 25 portion of the goal is to have 25% of students pass AP, participate in an International Baccalaureate (IB) program or receive a vocational certification. Looking at the 1011-2012 data, AP is “kinda” hopeless, and the vocational component is viewed as a post high school activity, so IB seems to be a misdirected option for success. Indiana’s Three Goals --
  3. “Reset” the clock on improvement initiatives. The board’s options for meeting the bookend 90’s of the State’s “90-25-90” goal are limited; if they had answers, our district would be much closer than we are today!
  4. Our board realizes our city needs a credible IB offering to complete in today’s market place for attracting employers and high tax paying citizens.
  5. The closeness to the Butler partnership school (School 60 a Center For Inquiry School).
  6. The facilities and location of Shortridge are among the best in the city!
  7. The June 2014 audit results indicate that the $30 Mil deficit was actually a $8.4 Mil surplus, reserves are $60 Mil; operation below projections since 2002. This follows a January 2010 report that $24 Mil was received but not disbursed in a timely manner.
  8. Hispanic enrollment at Gambold is 15%, compared to 10% overall in IPS.

So why does this re-alignment matter?

  1. Many longtime residents want the focus on neighborhood schools and the bookend 90’s goals. There is a perception that private school types get a better education than neighborhood kids. We have been paying taxes for many years, and see that once the school is “fixedup” it’s “taken away”. Ninety percent of our tax dollar is spent on public safety; children growing up without lasting relationships may be related to this situation. Students being in a constant state of flux impairs educational performance.
  2. Absence of quantitative data or analysis that this move will reduce cost or improve quality. “In God we trust, others bring data”.
  3. Our general population in IPS have been left behind and Gambold has not provided any “Common Core” data.
  4. The rumor that “Attucks is next” will be the hill “many alumni are willing to die on”.
  5. Two years ago the district drastically reduced the number of “classified” Black employees due to the “deficit”. In 2012-2013 the number of Black “certified” employees is 17%, yet the enrollment is 57% Black. That’s an issue!

The items cited above point to black people paying taxes for others to have jobs and quality education at their expense and detriment. Our school district has been dysfunctional for Black people for generations. The remainder of the paper will explore why the Shortridge-Gambold re-alignment decision should be reversed, and how a community transparency project can make our school district function for us.

In 2006 close to a half of a Billion dollars was borrowed by IPS; have you seen that money in YOUR Child's school?