(Download pdf) Community Partnership Schools Jarrad D Plante full chapter pdf docx

Community Partnership Schools Jarrad
D. Plante
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/community-partnership-schools-jarrad-d-plante/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Arcane Schools John Yarker
https://ebookmass.com/product/arcane-schools-john-yarker/
International Project Finance: The Public-Private

Partnership Felix I. Lessambo
https://ebookmass.com/product/international-project-finance-the-
public-private-partnership-felix-i-lessambo/
Teachers, Schools and Society, 10th Edition
https://ebookmass.com/product/teachers-schools-and-society-10th-
edition/
Money and Schools 7th Edition, (Ebook PDF)
https://ebookmass.com/product/money-and-schools-7th-edition-
ebook-pdf/
Trans Children in Today's Schools Aidan Key
https://ebookmass.com/product/trans-children-in-todays-schools-
aidan-key/
Asset Building & Community Development
https://ebookmass.com/product/asset-building-community-
development/
Reimagining Industry Growth: Strategic Partnership

Strategies in an Era of Uncertainty Daniel A. Varroney
https://ebookmass.com/product/reimagining-industry-growth-
strategic-partnership-strategies-in-an-era-of-uncertainty-daniel-
a-varroney/
Community Nutrition – Ebook PDF Version
https://ebookmass.com/product/community-nutrition-ebook-pdf-
version/
Planning for Community Phil Heywood
https://ebookmass.com/product/planning-for-community-phil-
heywood/
Community
Partnership Schools
Developing Innovative
Practice Through
University-Community
Partnerships
Edited by
Jarrad D. Plante · Amy Ellis
Rethinking University-Community Policy
Connections
Series Editors
Thomas Andrew Bryer, University of Central Florida, Orlando, USA
John Diamond, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK
Carolyn Kagan, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
Jolanta Vaičiūnienė, Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania
Rethinking University-Community Policy Connections will publish
works by scholars, practitioners, and ‘prac-ademics’ across a range of
countries to explore substantive policy or management issues in the
bringing together of higher education institutions and community-based
organizations, nongovernmental organizations, governments, and busi-
nesses. Such partnerships afford unique opportunities to transform prac-
tice, develop innovation, incubate entrepreneurship, strengthen commu-
nities, and transform lives. Yet such potential is often not realized due to
bureaucratic, cultural, or legal barriers erected between higher education
institutions and the wider community. The global experience is common,
though the precise mechanisms that prevent university-community collab-
oration or that enable successful and sustainable partnership vary within
and across countries. Books in the series will facilitate dialogue across
country experiences, help identify cross-cutting best practices, and to
enhance the theory of university-community relations.
Jarrad D. Plante · Amy Ellis
Editors
Community
Partnership Schools
Developing Innovative Practice Through
University-Community Partnerships
Editors
Jarrad D. Plante Amy Ellis
AmeriCorps NCCC University of Central Florida
Washington, DC, USA Orlando, FL, USA
ISSN 2629-2432 ISSN 2629-2440 (electronic)

Rethinking University-Community Policy Connections
ISBN 978-3-031-16403-3 ISBN 978-3-031-16404-0 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16404-0
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2023
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights
of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc.
in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such
names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for
general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and informa-
tion in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither
the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with
respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been
made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.
Cover illustration: © John Rawsterne/patternhead.com
This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
The editors dedicate this book to the students, families, schools, community
members, and leaders with whom we have the pleasure of serving alongside
to realize potential and strengthen communities.
Acknowledgments
The editors acknowledge Dr. Thomas Bryer and the university–commu-

nity book series committee for this opportunity to share the story and
impact that the Community Partnership Schools™ model has had on
students, families, and communities. We thank all participating authors,
endorsers, and our reviewer, Judy Creel, for their contributions to the
literature on community schools. It is with sincere enthusiasm that we
thank our founders: Dr. Michael Frumkin, Dr. Nancy Ellis, and David
Bundy, along with the founding agency partners: Children’s Home
Society of Florida, Orange County Public Schools, and the Univer-
sity of Central Florida (UCF) for the establishment of the Community
Partnership Schools™ model. We truly stand on the shoulders of giants.
We also want to recognize Florida’s legislators, the Florida Department
of Education, and a long list of community school champions for your
instrumental role in driving Florida’s community schools forward, and
helping expand the benefits to underserved communities across Florida.
Finally, we are grateful to UCF leadership and the College of Community
Innovation and Education for providing a home aligned in vision and
mission to work together empowering students and families to realize
their greatest potential.
vii
Introduction
“If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” This
African proverb is at the heart and soul of the UCF Center for Commu-
nity Schools and the Community Partnership Schools™ model, a quote
enshrined at the University of Central Florida’s downtown campus for all
to read and ponder.
The Coalition for Community Schools defines the term community
schools as “both a place and set of partnerships between a school and
other community resources. It’s integrated focus on academics, services,
and supports leads to improved student learning, stronger families, and
healthier communities.” The characteristics of a community school differ
from traditional school models. Some features include (a) a comprehen-
sive array of services—before/after school options, expanded learning
opportunities, parent engagement classes, and health services; (b) coor-
dinating of services—integrating student and family services into core
instruction; (c) community and family involvement—meeting the needs
of children by working closely with families and community members;
and (d) whole school change—creating an environment of wellness, and
school-community interventions to promote a culture of good atten-
dance and achievement (Martinez, Hayes, & Silloway, 2013). Although
community schools incorporate similar characteristics, they can have
varying models, including the Community Partnership Schools™ model.
The Community Partnership Schools™ model includes four (or more)
core partners that are essential to the success of each CPS. Partners work
together to secure resources to address student, family, and commu-
nity needs. The four core partnerships include: (a) school district, (b)
ix
x INTRODUCTION
nonprofit community-based provider, (c) college or university, and (d)

healthcare provider. Partners work together to address student needs and
contribute institutional and social resources. Some content was previously
disseminated as web-based resources.
This anthology, The Community Partnership Schools: An Innovative
Model of Practice for Community Schools through University–Commu-
nity Partnerships, was authored by academics and practitioners alike.
The chapters establish Community Partnership Schools as an educa-
tional equity solution that lifts the ground floor for students, families,
and communities. By showcasing this model of community school from
inception through the first full cycle of K-12 students, authors capture
the CPS as a prime example of how university–community partnerships
work together—illustrating several university–community partnerships
throughout the state of Florida. The scope of the project is to (a) intro-
duce and describe the Community Partnership Schools™ (CPS) model
in the context of the broader scope of community schools’ framework of
wraparound support services for students, families, and larger commu-
nities; (b) demonstrate the importance of the university–community
connection within the framework; (c) highlight the power of partnership;
(d) provide historical context and case studies of the model; (e) illustrate
the comprehensive structure and accountability of the CPS model; and
(6) show impact through data.
Chapter 1, The Community Schools Concepts, defines the term commu-
nity schools and provides a high-level historical context for the devel-
opment of community schools. Chapter 2, The Roles Universities Play
in K-12 Education: University-Assisted Community Schools and Commu-
nity Partnership Schools, provides a literature review on the role colleges
and universities play in primary and secondary schools, narrowing the
focus through the lens of a community school setting; and demon-
strates how the Center for Community Schools was developed at the
University of Central Florida while highlighting the university-assisted
model. Chapter 3, The Community Partnership Schools™ Model, illustrates
the comprehensive structure through the lens of the four commu-
nity school pillars of collaborative leadership, expanded learning, family
and community engagement, and comprehensive wellness; describes the
memorandum of understanding among the four core partners of the
model: school district health care partner, lead nonprofit organization,
and college or university; discusses its funding model; and provides a snap-
shot of the impact of Community Partnership Schools across the state of
Florida.
INTRODUCTION xi
Chapter 4, The UCF-Certified Community Partnership Schools™ Stan-

dards and Certification Process: An Asset-based Approach to Quality
Assurance and Continuous Improvement, invites discussion of the devel-
opment and implementation of the 12-standard readiness assessment; the
results from certification; trends in the field; implications for funding
and accountability; and UCF-Certified Community Partnership School
recognition. Chapter 5, Evans High School, A UCF-Certified Commu-
nity Partnership School: A Case Study of the Comprehensive Community
School Model, illustrates how the Community Partnership Schools™
model is implemented by using Evans High School as a case study to
inform the audience of the process, partnership, and impact the school
and the model has had on students, school, families, and community.
Finally, in Chapter 6, Lessons Learned, Children’s Home Society of
Florida, founding partner and lead nonprofit organizational partner in
21 Community Partnership Schools as of 2022, reflects on its experience
of best practices and the evolution of the model. The author describes
the strategies for developing, replicating, and sustaining the Community
Partnership SchoolsTM model as a strong, evidence-based equity strategy
in our educational ecosystems.
Partnership is the cornerstone of community schools, augmented in
the Community Partnership Schools™ model with its four-core-partner
framework. Partnership is the key to Florida’s community school model
that transforms the lives of students, families, schools, and communities.
It takes time to develop and steward relationships that truly become great
partnerships, and collectively we know that aiming not to go fast alone,
we can go far…together.
In 2017, the UCF Center for Community Schools was named the first
International Hub for Community Schools by the International Center
for Excellence of Community Schools (ICECS) in Coventry, England.
ICECS has strong ties to community school development throughout
Europe, Central Asia, Africa, and North America, working on strategic
planning to advance community school development through demonstra-
tion projects, research, consultation, networking, and conferencing.
Jarrad D. Plante
Amy Ellis
Praise for Community Partnership
Schools
“This anthology skillfully and comprehensively captures the history,

conceptual underpinnings, strategies, structures, and outcomes of the
Community Partnership Schools™ model. We at the Children’s Aid
National Center for Community Schools are grateful to our friends and
colleagues at the University of Central Florida for documenting and
sharing these valuable lessons with the broader national movement.”
—Abe Fernandez, Vice President of Collective Impact & Director of
National Center for Community Schools at Children’s Aid
“A valuable guide for anyone looking to develop a Community Partner-

ship School™ model. The detailed case study and wider reflections on the
lessons learned through the process provide practical information which
will be of great use to those wanting to develop their practice. Thank you
for sharing your experiences and knowledge; we will be drawing on this
as we enhance our own Community Schools model in Wales.”
—Dr. Suzanne Sarjeant, Community Schools Advisor, Welsh Government
“WOW! Herein, Ellis, Plante, and other authors present an extraordi-

nary overview of the community schools partnering with universities,
in particular the Community Partnership Schools™ model, history, and
impact. The authors did an excellent job providing a simple recipe for
tailoring the implementation of this sustainable model and sharing some
xiii
xiv PRAISE FOR COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP SCHOOLS
of the many lessons learned throughout the implementation and scale-up

of community schools in Florida.”
—F. Eloy Hernandez, Associate Dean of Research and Innovation, CCIE,
UCF
“The Community Partnership Schools: An Innovative Model of Practice

for Community Schools through University–Community Partnerships is
a must read for school district leaders, university administrators, and
community partners seeking a clear pathway to community school imple-
mentation. With its four-core partner framework, The Community Part-
nership School model presented in this book demonstrates how univer-
sities and communities come to build capacity among all stakeholders
and respond to local needs. The voices of researchers and practitioners
showcased in the chapters make a compelling case for community schools
and provide the ingredients for success: sound foundational principles,
concrete examples, in-depth case studies, and lessons learned.”
—Dr. JoAnne Ferrara, Chief Operating Officer, New York State
Community Schools Technical Assistance Center, Eastern Region,
Rockland 21C, former Associate Dean, Manhattanville College
“Wales has a strong commitment to developing Community Focused

Schools and to involving a range of partners, including Universities, in
this process. This book will be of great value in informing this work.”
—Emeritus Professor David Egan FRSA FCCT/Emeritws Yr Athro
David Egan FRSA FCCT, School of Education and Social Policy/Ysgol
Addysg a Pholisi Cymdeithasol, Cardiff Metropolitan University/Prifysgol
Fetropolitan Caerdydd
“This new book provides a rich description and analysis of an innovative

model of community schools called Community Partnership Schools—
an equity solution that builds on and contributes to the best available
knowledge about how to organize school and community resources
around student success. I have no doubt that this addition to the profes-
sional literature will become a valuable tool for leaders and practitioners,
especially those with international partners.”
—Jane Quinn, Former Director (2000–2018), Children’s Aid National
Center for Community Schools
Contents
1 The Community Schools Concept 1

Amy Ellis
Background of Community Schools 2
History of Community Schools in America 4
The Start of Evans High School as The Flagship 12
Statewide Developments 14
UCF Center for Community Schools 15
UCF Center for Community Schools and Children’s Home
Society of Florida as Strategic Partners 16
Conclusion 16
References 17
2 The Role Universities Play in Primary and Secondary
Schools: University-Assisted Community Schools
and Community Partnership Schools 21
Donnie Hale and Robert Palmer
University-Assisted Community School 22
Benefits of the University-Assisted Community School
Approach 29
University Assistance Through Community Partnership
Schools 31
Conclusion 37
References 38
xv
xvi CONTENTS
3 The Community Partnership Schools™ Model 39

Amy Ellis
Community School Approaches 40
Community-Managed Community School Approach 42
University-Assisted Community School Approach 43
Community-Based Lead Agency Community School
Approach 44
School-As-Lead-Agency Community School Approach 46
Multiple Core Partners Community School Approach 47
Community Partnership Schools and the Four Pillars 47
Studies 50
Statewide Scale-Up and Certification 50
Long-Term Commitment and Funding 51
Summary 52
References 52
4 The UCF-Certified Community Partnership Schools™
Standards and Certification Process: An Asset-Based
Approach to Quality Assurance and Continuous
Improvement 55
Larry J. Bergeron and Jerry D. Johnson
History 56
Purpose 58
Community Partnership Schools™ Standards
and Certification Process 3.0 59
First-Time Certification Process 61
Certification Readiness Assessment and Certification
Assessment 61
Affirmation Review and Re-Certification Assessment 63
UCF-Certified Community Partnership Schools™ Standards 63
Performance Rating Level 66
Certification Results 67
Trends in the Field 69
Implications and Recommendations 70
References 71
CONTENTS xvii
5 Evans High School, a UCF-Certified Community

Partnership School: A Case Study of the Comprehensive
Community School Model 73
Jarrad D. Plante, Curtesa L. Vanderpool, and Jarvis Wheeler
Background 74
Review of the Literature 76
University-Assisted Partnership 79
Evans Impact 85
Statewide Impact 88
Conclusion 89
References 90
6 Children’s Home Society of Florida’s Lessons Learned 93
Heather A. Morgan
Lessons Learned: Launching a Community Partnership
School 94
Applying Lessons: Starting Today 97
Balancing the Partnerships Within the School
and Community 98
Supporting Operations: Best Practices 99
Establishing and Promoting the Community Partnership
School Brand and Identity 99
Funding 100
Lessons Learned: Evaluation Strategies 106
Looking Back: Key Lessons 108
Community Partnership Schools: An Equity Strategy 110
References 115
Conclusion 117
Notes on Contributors
Bergeron Larry J. is the Lydia E. Skeen Graduate Research Assis-

tant and a Doctoral student in adult learning and leadership at Kansas
State University. His research focuses broadly on educational leadership
and supporting underrepresented students in transition to postsecondary
institutions.
Ellis Amy, Ed.D. is the Director of the Center for Community Schools at
the University of Central Florida. The center serves as a resource for tech-
nical assistance, university-assisted partnership, training, and assessment
and evaluation in the development of high-quality community schools.
She specializes in the development of partnerships that integrate preven-
tion and intervention programs and services into K-12 schools, as well as
the scale-up of initiatives that improve collective outcomes.
Ellis has more than two decades of experience in leading the develop-
ment of frameworks aimed to advance systems of practice; studying and
honing needle-moving strategies; and harnessing the power of collectives.
Proficient in start-ups and scale-ups, she worked for five years as a Senior
Administrator for Orange County Public Schools, where she successfully
launched the first community school of its kind in Florida: Evans High
School, A Community Partnership School. Ellis has since helped grow Flori-
da’s community school initiative from this single building concept in
2009 to a 29-site statewide model. Considered an expert in the field of
xix
xx NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
community schools, Ellis has presented statewide, nationally and inter-

nationally, and she has formed collaborative partnerships with thought
leaders focused on advancing the community schools field.
Hale Donnie, Ed.D. is the Executive Director of community engage-
ment and strategic partnerships at Florida Memorial University, a Histor-
ically Black College/University established in 1879. Hale works with a
team to engage communities by creating strategies to support higher
education, career pathways, mutual beneficial partnerships, and relation-
ships to encourage the college-going culture. He also co-chairs the
nationwide Community School Leadership Network with the Coalition
for Community Schools in Washington, DC.
Prior to FMU, he was an Assistant Director for the Center for Commu-
nity Schools at the University of Central Florida and Director for the
Education Effect at Florida International University in Miami, working
with schools in Overtown, Liberty City, and Little Haiti.
Hale’s research focuses on race, equity, educational opportunity,
college access, and human development. His teaching experience has been
in areas of sociology, education, African American history, and cultural
diversity.
Originally from Stockton, CA, Hale attended undergraduate school at
Willamette University and graduate school at Boise State University. He
is a father to Taylor, Chloe, and Donnie III, husband to Heather Hale,
proud son to Donnie and Debra Hale and brother to Michael, Michelle,
Glen, and Terrence.
Johnson Jerry D. is the Lydia E. Skeen Endowed Chair in Educa-
tion at Kansas State University. A former high school English Teacher
and Principal, Johnson also served as Policy Research Director for the
Rural School and Community Trust and was the 2017 recipient of the
Stanley A. Brzezinski Memorial Rural Education Research Award from
the National Rural Education Association.
Morgan Heather A. is an accredited, nationally award-winning public
relations professional. As senior Vice President of communications,
marketing, and engagement at Children’s Home Society of Florida, she
leads brand and reputation management, internal and external commu-
nication, and community education and outreach. She’s a sought-after
expert in communication strategy, reputation management, crisis commu-
nication, and executive communication.
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xxi
During the COVID-19 pandemic, Morgan led her team to success-

fully position the organization as a leader in addressing key challenges
facing families. Additionally, she led the rebrand of Children’s Home
Society of Florida in 2017, significantly reshaping the organization’s posi-
tion in the field of child well-being, and has led the organization’s crisis
communication strategies since 2012. She has secured hundreds of earned
media placements, and has been published in local, statewide, and national
outlets.
Morgan has been involved in the Community Partnership SchoolsTM
model since its inception, and she was part of the team that led the
brand development and identity for the model. She continues to serve
on the executive team responsible for model sustainment, strategy, and
advancement.
Morgan holds national awards for crisis communication and branding,
and her team earned the Ragan Communications 2019 National
Nonprofit PR Team of the Year. A leader in the public relations profes-
sion, Heather currently serves on the Public Relations Society of America
National Board of Ethics and Professional Standards. Previously, she
served on the Orlando Regional Board of Directors for the Public Rela-
tions Society of America for more than a decade, including a term as
president, and on the Sunshine District Board of Directors, representing
all of Florida, for nearly 10 years, including a term as chair.
Palmer Robert joined the UCF Center for Community Schools in
January 2020 as the university Assistance Coordinator. In this role, he is
responsible for assisting schools as they collaborate with their college and
university partners to develop mutually beneficial programs and services
to impact students, families, and communities.
Prior to joining the center, Palmer worked for Orange County Public
Schools, where he held the position of college and career specialist
supporting students in developing their post-secondary plans. He also
worked for OCPS as a guidance counselor and teacher before becoming
a college and career specialist.
Born and raised in West Palm Beach, FL, Palmer earned his bachelor’s
degree in social science education from Florida State University and his
master’s degree in counselor education from the University of Central
Florida.
xxii NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
Plante Jarrad D., Ed.D., CNP serves as a Unit Leader for AmeriCorps
NCCC FEMA Corps. A Realtor and Certified Nonprofit Professional,
Plante received his Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership for
Higher Education & Policy Studies (HEPS) from the University of
Central Florida (UCF). He is an Eagle Scout and an AmeriCorps*NCCC
alumnus. His research interests include domestic, international, and
the institutionalization of service-learning, community engagement, and
national service. His published works include: The Central Florida Service
Collective: Connecting National Service to Higher Education to Strengthen
Communities; Civic Value of National Service: Ethics to Students; City
Year History, Model, and Impact; and Teammates For Life. Plante has won
several awards for his scholarship including the Graduate Research Forum
as well as the Service-learning Showcase. As a community connector,
Plante developed and leads the Central Florida Service Collective—an
incubator of service-year programs and partnering organizations for the
purpose of collaborating on service-related engagement that positively
impacts the community.
Vanderpool Curtesa L. Central Florida Area Director for Community
Partnership Schools, holds a bachelor’s degree in biology from Oakwood
University and a master’s degree in biomedical sciences from Barry
University. Although she has always had a love for seeing the world as
a better place for all, she gained her passion for children and families
as a missionary in college. Vanderpool traveled nationally and interna-
tionally with N.A.P.S. (the National Association for the Prevention of
Starvation), bringing relief to children and families through housing,
feeding, and medical and educational programs. A former educator with
Orange County Public Schools, Vanderpool has an extensive background
in education and gained additional experience in nonprofit administra-
tion by serving as the Assistant Director and then Director at Evans
High School, A Community Partnership School. Now in the role of Area
Director, she is able to support five of the 21 Children’s Home Society
Community Partnership Schools as well as co-lead statewide health care
strategies. Vanderpool’s continued mission is to be an Educator and
Advocate who inspires individuals to live their best lives.
Wheeler Jarvis serves as the Statewide Director of Community Part-
nership Schools (CPS) at Children’s Home Society of Florida (CHS).
Passionate about youth advancement and community development,
NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xxiii
Wheeler has more than a decade of experience in prevention programs

and services for under-resourced communities. He holds master’s degrees
in both social work and public administration from Florida State Univer-
sity. Prior to his work at CHS, Wheeler served as a high school teacher
and led mentor programs throughout Orlando and Tallahassee, FL.
Wheeler joined CHS in 2013 serving as the CPS Director of his home-
town school, Evans High School, A Community Partnership School,
the first of its kind. As Statewide Director, he is responsible for
advancing service delivery and coordinating efforts to increase organiza-
tional support for CPS with the goal to ultimately improve outcomes for
students. Wheeler leads the collective impact strategy at CHS, focused on
sustaining and expanding the Community Partnership Schools™ model
to create educational equity for students.
List of Figures
Fig. 4.1 Third-year affirmation review 64

Fig. 4.2 Fifth-year re-certification assessment 65
Fig. 5.1 UCF applicants from evans community partnership school 84
Fig. 5.2 Evans applicants to UCF 84
xxv
List of Tables
Table 4.1 UCF-certified community partnership schools™ standards 66

Table 4.2 Indicator performance rating levels 67
Table 4.3 Standard performance rating levels 67
xxvii
CHAPTER 1
The Community Schools Concept
Amy Ellis
Abstract Community schools have a long history dating back to the

nineteenth-century settlement houses. Thousands of community schools
exist across the globe, with no two exactly alike. Various models and
approaches define core partners, scope, context, and purpose differently,
but at the core of each is a set of partnerships committed to providing
students access to needed services. Evans High School, A Community
Partnership School, was the first community school of its kind launched in
Florida. A multiple-core-partnership-approach community school, Evans
High School was established as a community school in 2010. With
statewide interest ignited, the Florida Legislature increased its invest-
ment, and in 2014 the University of Central Florida (UCF) Center for
Community Schools was established, and Community Partnership School
expansion efforts began. As of 2022, Community Partnership Schools
have expanded to 29 sites across the state of Florida.
A. Ellis (B)
University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA
e-mail: AmyEllis323@gmail.com
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 1

Switzerland AG 2023
J. D. Plante and A. Ellis (eds.), Community Partnership Schools,
Rethinking University-Community Policy Connections,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16404-0_1
2 A. ELLIS
Keywords Community schools · Community partnership schools ·

Context · Community partnership schools™ model · Social center ·
Florida legislature · UCF center for community schools
Background of Community Schools

Thousands of community schools exist worldwide, with strong commu-
nity school advancement in Europe, Africa, and North America. In the
United States, the Coalition for Community Schools (2017) in Wash-
ington, DC, reported that 5000 community schools exist in 44 states
and the District of Columbia. Strong community school development
can be found in areas such as New York, Nevada, California, Oregon,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida (Dryfoos, 2000; Ellis, 2017; Heers et al.,
2016; Oakes et al., 2017). The number of community schools in the
United States has increased significantly over the last decade, as shown
by the 33 locations reported in 2007 dedicated to the community school
strategy compared to the more than 100 communities committed in 2017
(Coalition for Community Schools, 2017). As of 2020, 5000 community
schools were reported to the Coalition for Community Schools, with a
goal being set by the Coalition of reaching 25,000 community schools
by the year 2025 (Community Schools, n.d.). According to the Chil-
dren’s Aid Society (2011), what community schools share is a mission
“to change the role of education in the lives of students, families, and
communities, so that underserved youth may be empowered to overcome
obstacles and become happy, healthy and productive adults” (p. 6).
The definitions of community schools vary widely in the literature and
from country to country. Historians, educational theorists, and policy
makers have historically defined community schooling in one of two ways,
either by their pragmatic components or by the process and philosophy
driving the strategy (Crowson & Boyd, 1993; Quinn, 2009; Rogers,
1998). Those defining community schools pragmatically, “point to a set
of core elements which a school must enact before it can be consid-
ered a community school” (Rogers, 1998, p. 8). For those who define
community schools more broadly by the process or philosophy, prag-
matic definitions are too narrow. Instead, they use a broader definition
to describe community schools not as a program, but as a strategy
(Children’s Aid Society, 2011).
1 THE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS CONCEPT 3
Though no single global definition exists for community schools,

fundamental to most definitions is that community schools engage part-
ners to provide students, families, and communities access to needed
resources (Children’s Aid Society, 2011; Coalition for Community
Schools, 2017; Dryfoos, 2002; Figlio, 2016; ICECS, 2012; Quinn,
2009). Definitions “replace the understanding of schools as narrow and
separate institutions with a more vibrant image of schools as centers of
community life” (Rogers, 1998, p. 12). The Coalition for Community
Schools, located in the United States, captures the definition of commu-
nity schools most appropriately and simply for this study as “a place
and a set of partnerships connecting a school, family, and community”
(Jacobson et al., 2013, p. 5).
Varying community school definitions exist in the literature, but central
to each definition is that community schools partner to leverage resources
and harness their communities to address the unmet needs of students,
families, and the community (Coalition for Community Schools, 2017;
Figlio, 2016; ICECS, 2012; Oakes et al., 2017; Quinn, 2009). The
Coalition for Community Schools has defined community schools as
“both a place and a set of partnerships between the school and other
community resources, with an integrated focus on academics, health
and social services, youth and community development, and community
engagement” (Jacobson et al., 2013, p. 5).
Low socioeconomic communities in the United States often lack the
high-quality education, social, and health resources necessary for children
and adolescents to thrive (Children’s Aid Society, 2011). Children from
lower socioeconomic backgrounds are often exposed to difficulties that
create disadvantages in their education (Heers et al., 2016). Schools are
then tasked with having to work through barriers that originate outside
the context of the school (e.g., trauma from community violence and
abuse, student learning limitations, and deprivation). Community schools
take a comprehensive and integrated approach to provide services in
schools to improve outcomes for these children and their families. They
partner with youth organizations, health clinics, social service agencies,
food banks, higher education institutions, businesses, and others to meet
student academic and nonacademic needs. Community schools provide
a comprehensive approach to addressing barriers and concerns, utilizing
some variation on an underlying assumption: If schools provide compre-
hensive services to address nonacademic barriers and concerns faced by
students in low-resourced communities, the potential for teaching and
4 A. ELLIS
learning will be more fully realized. Ultimately, teaching and learning

will provide opportunities for students to succeed academically, graduate
from high school, and have opportunities for positive engagement after
high school, and society will comprise adults who meet life situations with
resilience (Children’s Aid Society, 2011).
History of Community Schools in America

Though often marketed as a new idea, the community school concept has
a long history dating back to the late nineteenth century when the first
settlement houses were established (Benson et al., 2009; Children’s Aid
Society, 2011; Dryfoos, 2002; Prout, 1977; Rogers, 1998). “They are
based on two premises: that the purpose of schooling is to educate youth
for democratic citizenship, and that schools and communities are inex-
tricably intertwined and interdependent” (Benson et al., 2009, p. 22).
The Children’s Aid Society (2011) noted three other significant eras of
community schools marked by growth of and investment in the commu-
nity school strategy: the 1930s, the 1960s, and the late 1980s and early
1990s when numerous national models were developed. In 1988, Rogers
wrote, “Community schooling seems to rise and fall in salience every
generation. It is an idea which has been continually ‘rediscovered’—by
educators, community activists, policy makers, and presidents” (p. 6).
The settlement house movement began in Britain when Canon Samuel
Barnett and his wife, Henrietta, founded the first East End London settle-
ment house, Toynbee Hall, in 1884 (Benson et al., 2009; Bhavnagri &
Krolikowski, 2000). Settlement houses began as neighborhood centers
formed in impoverished areas in which Britain’s affluent would settle,
learn about the conditions of the poor residents, and assist them by
connecting resources to those in need (United Neighborhood Houses,
2018). Joining the settlement house movement, the United States
founded University Settlement Society in 1886 (United Neighborhood
Houses, 2018). Located in the lower east side of New York City, this
first American settlement house served the flood of immigrants living in
poverty and struggling to acclimate to the country. The University Settle-
ment Society became a center of living where residents of all ages could
access education, resources, and social assistance for their needs (United
Neighborhood Houses, 2018). “The educated reformers from the upper
class, who were called ‘residents’ or ‘settlement workers’... moved into
working-class neighborhoods in the congested cities where they actively
promoted community development through regularly visiting homes and

businesses” (Bhavnagri & Krolikowski, 2000, p. 12).
By 1913, professionals, affluent volunteers, and college-aged upper-
class idealists gained exposure and aided the poor in more than 400
settlements throughout the United States (Addams, 1909, 1910; Husock,
1992). Of these 400 settlements, Chicago’s Hull House was one of
the most well-known settlement houses (Addams, 1910; Bhavnagri &
Krolikowski, 2000; Husock, 1992; Seaman, 2017). Established in 1889
by Jane Addams (the first woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize in
1931) and Ellen Gates Starr, Hull House primarily served recently arrived
European immigrants, though anyone could access the offerings of the
settlement (Addams, 1909, 1910; Benson et al., 2009; Children’s Aid
Society, 2011; Husock, 1992). Hull House provided clubs for both
adults and children, food, arts and crafts, dancing, library services, and
employment assistance (Addams, 1909, 1910; Husock, 1992). “Orga-
nized children’s theatre in the United States began in the settlement
houses in New York City and Chicago. Social activists like Jane Addams
realized that live theatre offered an ideal way to bring diverse groups of
uprooted immigrant children together and to teach them communication
and social skills as well as literature and language” (Mercogliano, 1988,
p. 17).
Many early settlement houses were formally or informally connected
to universities, others to churches (Addams, 1909; Husock, 1992). Some
settlements focused largely on social supports, while others worked to
improve the quality of lives through education (Bhavnagri & Krolikowski,
2000; Husock, 1992; Keith, 1999; Moore, 1987). Though service
providers were a part of the early delivery model, settlements of this time
“focused on treating the poor as citizens, not clients” (Husock, 1992,
p. 55).
In the early 1900s, changes were significant in American society due
to the increasing numbers of immigrants, industrialization, and child
labor laws (Fusarelli & Lindle, 2011). Educators and social reformers
believed schools were not functioning as they should, so some focused
on the relationship between the school and community, campaigning
to bring needed social and health resources to the schools and to at-
risk children (Children’s Aid Society, 2011; Dryfoos, 1994; Fusarelli &
Lindle, 2011; Prout, 1977; Rogers, 1998). American philosopher and
educational reformer John Dewey, “whose ideas about education and
6 A. ELLIS
democracy were directly influenced by Addams and Hull House” (Benson

et al., 2009, p. 24), wrote in his powerful 1902 essay, The School as Social
Centre:
The feeling that the school is not doing all that it should do in simply
giving instruction during the day to a certain number of children of
different ages, the demand that it shall assume a wider scope of activi-
ties having an educative effect upon the adult members of the community,
has its basis just here: We are feeling everywhere the organic unity of the
different modes of social life, and consequently demand that the school
shall be related more widely, shall receive from more quarters, and shall
give in more directions. (p. 2)
It was noted by Dryfoos (2002) that “John Dewey brought the school
into the community and Jane Addams brought the community into the
schools” (p. 394).
World War I negatively impacted support for community school inno-
vations, and the rise of the professional social worker in the 1920s
diminished the settlements’ volunteer approach to providing resources for
the poor (Benson et al., 2009; Fusarelli & Lindle, 2011; Husock, 1992).
Americans’ concerns that social services imbedded in schools would dilute
the academic focus increased, and fears of socialism rose (Fusarelli &
Lindle, 2011). The community school approach gained favor again in
the 1930s when fears of socialism subsided and a focus returned to the
whole child (Benson et al., 2009; Fusarelli & Lindle, 2011; Prout, 1977).
This began the second generation of community schools, as defined by
Children’s Aid Society (2011).
The term, community school, began to be used in the 1930s when
referring to schools that used their educational facilities to offer commu-
nity resource services to members of the community (Prout, 1977).
Against the backdrop of the Great Depression, Eleanor Roosevelt, a
supporter of John Dewey’s perspective on education, envisioned a school
as the center of a community (Parker, 1991). In 1934, Roosevelt
appointed Elsie Ripley Clapp as Community School Director to build
a community school in Arthurdale, WV (Moyer, 2009; Parker, 1991;
Stack, 1999). Clapp was an associate of John Dewey and had made
significant contributions to community schooling and progressive child-
centered education (Moyer, 2009; Parker, 1991; Stack, 1999). Under
Clapp’s direction, Auburndale opened a community school in 1934, but
it closed two years later when funds to sustain the effort could not be
secured (Parker, 1991).
In 1935, a start to a long-term partnership began between Charles
Stewart Mott, an engineer and philanthropist, and Frank J. Manley, a
Flint, MI, educator and city recreation leader (Campbell, 1972; Decker,
1999; Dryfoos & Maguire, 2002). Mott believed schools should be used
by the community when not in use by the school (Benson et al, 2009).
After Manley gave a speech about community-driven programming to the
Flint Rotary Club, the two men teamed to deliver community educa-
tion and recreation programs (Campbell, 1972; Decker, 1999). Mott
contributed $6000 from the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation to Flint
public schools to encourage the use of school facilities, and the two
men initiated the “lighted schools” community school (Dryfoos, 2002;
Prout, 1977). Initially, Manley and Mott’s work focused narrowly on
lessening the delinquency of juveniles by offering recreational activities
during non-school hours in school facilities. Their shared vision eventually
evolved into years of partnering on community school development and
advancing the principles of community schools (Campbell, 1972; Decker,
1999; Dryfoos, 2002). The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation has, since
its inception, invested steadily and significantly to advance the commu-
nity school concept nationally and internationally (Children’s Aid Society,
2011; Rogers, 1998).
By the 1940s, most cities provided residents with public health
services, with many being delivered by the schools (Fusarelli & Lindle,
2011). The 1950s brought desegregation orders for U.S. schools; and
during the 1960s, community control efforts drove the decentralization
of many school systems (Kane, 2007; McNeal, 2009). The government
was involved in the delivery of health services, but questions surfaced
about who should pay for and receive these services (Fusarelli & Lindle,
2011).
The Children’s Aid Society (2011) noted that the 1960s marked the
third generation of major community school investment and growth.
In 1964, then-President Lyndon Johnson initiated a national campaign,
the “War on Poverty,” which significantly increased school-based social
service funding (Fusarelli & Lindle, 2011). Under Johnson’s leadership
and as the driver of his War on Poverty, the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act was passed in 1965. This legislation dedicated significant
federal funding to schools that served low-income, high-needs students,
bringing education into the forefront to minimize the effects of poverty
8 A. ELLIS
(Paul, 2016; Seaman, 2017). Title I is a provision of the Elementary and

Secondary Education Act, which continues at present to distribute federal
funds to schools with high percentages of students from low-income fami-
lies (Paul, 2016). Much of the legislation enacted during the Johnson
administration from 1963 to 1969, including Medicaid, Medicare, and
Head Start, still shapes the current delivery of social services (Fusarelli &
Lindle, 2011), and Title I funding has continued to be used by schools to
advance community school efforts across the country in the twenty-first
century (Coalition for Community Schools, 2017; Frankl, 2016).
President Richard Nixon did not support coordinated school-based
services through his presidency in the first half of the 1970s, vetoing
the Comprehensive Child Development Act that would have provided
funding for universal child care (Fusarelli & Lindle, 2011). In 1975,
under President Gerald Ford, the Education for All Handicapped Chil-
dren Act was signed into law, requiring all public schools to provide
equal access to education and one free meal to students with disabilities
(Fusarelli & Lindle, 2011).
In 1983, President Ronald Reagan presented A Nation at Risk, a
report that was commissioned to evaluate the state of education in
America. In a Study.com (2014) update, A Nation at Risk: Summary &
Effects on Education, the report described an education system that was
“falling apart,” failing on a wide range of issues including teacher quality,
academic achievement, graduation, and literacy. “Concern about preven-
tion of adolescent morbidity (sex, drugs, violence, and stress) led to the
establishment by outside public health agencies and hospitals of primary
health-care clinics in the schools, mostly in secondary schools” (Dryfoos,
2002, p. 395). Following secondary schools, elementary schools soon
added school-based health clinics, mental health counseling, and parent
resource centers to support families and their children, a model later
known as full-service schools (Dryfoos, 2002).
The late 1980s and early 1990s marked the fourth era of significant
community school momentum (Children’s Aid Society, 2011). By the
mid-1980s, private foundations such as the Charles Stewart Mott Foun-
dation, Anne E. Casey Foundation, Kellogg Foundation, and the Dewitt
Wallace-Reader’s Digest Foundation became active in advancing and
broadening community school collaborations and interagency strategies
(Fusarelli & Lindle, 2011). The community school concept grew with
the development of several national models (Beacons, Bridges to Success,
CAS community schools, and university-assisted community schools). All
of these initiatives “appear to have been created in direct response to

research about the educational struggles of children living in poverty
and concerted calls to action by advocacy and philanthropic organiza-
tions” (Children’s Aid Society, 2011, p. 5). In 1991, Florida created
the concept and enacted the first landmark full-service school legislation
integrating comprehensive educational, medical, and social services on a
school campus (Dryfoos, 1996, 2002). Florida used state funding to relo-
cate service providers to schools where programs could be delivered to
meet the needs of students and families (Dryfoos, 1996, 2002). Other
states followed with large-scale initiatives providing health and mental
health services in the schools (Dryfoos, 2002).
During this fourth generation of community school advancement, two
national community school organizations were established. After opening
its first two community schools in Washington Heights, NY, in 1992
and 1993, the Children’s Aid Society founded the National Center for
Community Schools in 1994 in response to the growing interest in
community schools (Children’s Aid Society, 2011). The National Center
for Community Schools offers technical assistance and consultation to
developing community school initiatives (Children’s Aid Society, 2011).
In 1997, after only four people attended a break-out community school
session at a school reform conference in Memphis, TN, Joy Dryfoos, Pete
Moses from Children’s Aid Society, and Ira Harkavy from University of
Pennsylvania made a decision over dinner to form a coalition for commu-
nity schools to reach the educational community (Children’s Aid Society,
2011; Dryfoos & Maguire, 2002). By 1998, an emerging Coalition for
Community Schools was established at the Institute for Educational Lead-
ership in Washington, DC, after hiring Founding Director Martin Blank
(Dryfoos & Maguire, 2002), who by 2001 had provided the leadership
to partner with more than 170 national organizations in the commu-
nity school movement (Dryfoos & Maguire, 2002). The Coalition for
Community Schools has been described as “an alliance of national, state,
and local organizations that helps build awareness and understanding of
community schools, advocates for supportive public policies and helps
promote research and disseminate knowledge among its members and
other organizations” (Children’s Aid Society, 2011, p. 6).
The U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Justice Department
released a report in 1998, “Safe and Smart: Making the After-School
Hours Work for Kids,” which claimed that after-school programming
10 A. ELLIS
was a remedy against juvenile crime and victimization (Simpson, 2012).

President Bill Clinton and Mott Foundation President William White
announced support for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers
Program in 1998 (Rogers, 1998). By 2001, the program budget
increased to $845.6 million.
In 2002, President George Bush signed the No Child Left Behind
Act (NCLB) of 2001, a law reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (NCLB, 2002). The major focus of NCLB was to close the
student achievement gaps by increasing accountability (Blank et al., 2003;
Seaman, 2017; Tagle, 2005). According to the No Child Left Behind Act
of 2001 (2002), for states to receive federal funding, rigorous academic
standards had to be adopted, and students were required to partici-
pate in annual assessments (NCLB, 2002; Seaman, 2017). The NCLB
Act exposed the growing achievement gap in the United States and, in
response, raised the question of how to create environments in which all
children, particularly those historically underserved, could succeed (Coali-
tion for Community Schools, 2003; Tagle, 2005). Many educators were
realizing they “need[ed] parents and other community leaders to work
with them, not just to raise student test scores but, more important[ly], to
develop a community vision of successful, positive outcomes for children
and youth” (Tagle, 2005, p. 45).
The first two decades of the twenty-first century brought increased
growth of community school development across the United States
(Coalition for Community Schools, 2017; Martinez et al., 2013) as the
great recession during the late 2000s and early 2010s increased the strain
on families and the need for additional programs and services (Fusarelli &
Lindle, 2011). The rising poverty had a tremendous impact on schools,
especially those ill-equipped to respond to social service needs (Jacobson
et al., 2013). Oakes et al. (2017) commented, “With inequality and child
poverty on the rise, community schools have garnered increased atten-
tion as a school improvement strategy in high-poverty neighborhoods”
(p. 3). In 2007, the Coalition for Community Schools reported 33 places
across the nation operating community schools, and in 2017 more than
100 regions were counted (Coalition for Community Schools, 2017).
In 2013, 5000 community schools were reported in 44 states and the
District of Columbia (Martinez et al., 2013); and in 2017, the Coalition
for Community Schools reported the number of community schools to
be “7500 and growing” (p. 4).
The federal government increased promotion of and investments in

the community school strategy beginning in 2000. In 2008, $5 million
was allocated to full-service schools through the U.S. Department of
Education to provide education, social, and health services to students,
families, and communities (Bireda, 2009); in 2017, $10 million was
allocated; and in FY2018, $17,500,000 was allocated (Coalition for
Community Schools, 2017; U.S. Department of Education, 2018). The
21st Century Community Learning Centers, which fund extended day
programming for students in schools, also received increased funding in
FY2018 by $20 million by the federal government, up to a total of $1.21
billion (Coalition for Community Schools, 2017). Responding to the
economic crisis of 2009 and the need for additional services, President
Barack Obama’s administration “prioritized the building and support of
community schools by providing monies from the American Recovery &
Reinvestment Act of 2009, or Stimulus Package” (Fusarelli & Lindle,
2011, pp. 406–407). In 2014, the Full-Service Community Schools Act
of 2014 was introduced by Congress (H.R. 5168, 2014), and in 2015,
the Supporting Community Schools Act of 2015 was introduced “to
provide state educational agencies and local educational agencies with
the funding, flexibility, and support necessary to implement a research—
and evidence-based community school model” (H.R. 718, 2015). With
increased understanding of inequities in under-resourced communities
during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020–2021, a significant increase in
federal resources became available to support schools and local commu-
nities by way of such efforts as the Covid-19 Economic Relief Funds
and the Full-Service Schools Grant (Office of Elementary and Secondary
Education, 2021; U.S. Department of Education, n.d.).
Several states also increasingly promoted and invested in community
schools in the first two decades of the twenty-first century (Biag & Castre-
chini, 2016; Coalition for Community Schools, 2017). Illinois added
community schools to its state school code in 2009, writing “Community
schools have a powerful positive impact on students, as demonstrated by
increased academic success, a positive change in attitudes toward school
and learning, and decreased behavioral problems” (Illinois Public Act
096-0746, 2009). In 2015, 12 bills were implemented across nine states
for community schools (Coalition for Community Schools, 2017). In
2016, Maryland passed a law that required the Department of Education
(a) to provide community school technical assistance and (b) to notify
school districts that Title I funds could be used for community school
12 A. ELLIS
activity (Coalition for Community Schools, 2017). In 2017, the Florida

Legislature allocated, through the Schools of Hope program, up to $2000
per student for community school strategies as a turn-around solution for
persistently low performing schools:
A traditional public school that is required to submit a plan for imple-

mentation pursuant to s. 1008.33 (4) is eligible to receive up to $2000
per full-time equivalent student from the Schools of Hope program based
upon the strength of the school’s plan for implementation and its focus
on evidence-based interventions that lead to student success by providing
wraparound services that leverage community assets, improve school and
community collaboration, and develop family and community partnerships.
(H.B. 7069, 2017, p. 213)
In 2019, the Florida Legislature furthered support of community

schools by approving policy specific to community schools, to include
Community Partnership Schools, and by committing increased recurring
funding for community school expansion. This policy, the Commu-
nity School Grant Program (S.B. 7070, 1003.64), defines in statute
community schools, the requirements for initiatives applying for grant
funds under the program, the UCF Center for Community Schools, and
reporting obligations back to the state (S.B. 7070).
The Start of Evans High School as The Flagship

The power of partnership was evident in Florida when the University of
Central Florida (UCF) and Children’s Home Society of Florida came
together in 2009 with the intent of eliminating institutional silos to
make greater impact in schools and communities. Aligning organizational
missions and visions for better futures, the CEO of Children’s Home
Society of Florida, the dean of UCF’s College of Health and Public
Affairs, and the director of UCF’s Center for Community Partnerships
explored community schooling as a solution to provide better access to
needed resources in Florida’s schools and communities. After visiting the
National Center for Community Schools and touring multiple community
schools in New York, the partners returned convinced of the concept’s
potential and committed to implement a community school in Florida.
Following numerous discussions with Central Florida school districts,
school principals, hospitals, health-care providers, and funders, Maynard
Evans High School in the Pine Hills area of Orlando was identified as the
implementation site for the first community school of its kind in Florida.
In 2010, following much discussion and planning, UCF, the Children’s
Home Society of Florida and Orange County Public Schools signed a
long-term memorandum of understanding (MOU) to establish a partner-
ship to lead the development of a community school in Orange County.
Two years later, these partners were joined by an additional core partner:
Central Florida Family Health Center, a federally qualified health center
(FQHC).
During the 2010–2011 school year, Evans High School was a Title I
high school, serving an estimated 2500 students in grades 9–12 (FDOE,
2018). FDOE data showed that 100% of students were on free or
reduced lunch plans. Minority enrollment at the school was 98%, with
85% of students self-reporting as Black. More than 12% of the students
were enrolled in an English for other languages (ESOL) program as
non-English-speaking students, most of these Creole-speaking Haitian
students. Between 1999 and 2010, the school received Florida school
performance grades of F four times, and grades of D seven times. In
2006–2007, the school had a graduation rate of less than 50% and was
considered a dropout factory (Sparks, 2018). In the 2010–2011 school
year, only 18% of the school’s students scored at a level of proficiency or
higher in reading. The school began transitioning the high school to a
community school (Community Partnership Schools™) in 2010–2011 to
improve academic, attendance, graduation, and behavior measures.
The planning stage for Evans as a community school began in August
2010 with the first community school coordinator/senior administrator
hired by the school district to align Evans’ school operational compo-
nents (later known as pillars) and to develop processes to implement
additional programs and services. The first community school director
was hired through the nonprofit partner during the 2011–2012 school
year to further implementation efforts, and Evans High School officially
announced it had become a community school during a grand opening
ceremony in August 2012.
14 A. ELLIS
Statewide Developments
Since the long-term strategic partnership between UCF and Children’s
Home Society of Florida (CHS) began in 2009, many statewide develop-
ments have taken place. Evans High School was established as a commu-
nity school in 2010. Over the next three years, Evans’ metrics of improved
graduation rates and school grades, decreased disciplinary incidents, and
improved attendance ignited interest across the state. Working together
at a statewide level, UCF and CHS committed resources to sustain and
expand the impact of community schools in Florida. With increased
interest by legislators in Tallahassee and by communities across the state,
the Florida Legislature appropriated funds in 2014–2015 through the
University of Central Florida to establish the UCF Center for Community
Schools as the technical assistance provider and to provide planning grant
funds to Florida communities interested in replicating the Evans High
School community school effort. In the fall of 2014, UCF’s Center for
Community Schools and Child Welfare Innovation was founded, a name
later shortened to UCF Center for Community Schools. For replication
purposes, the community school concept that began implementation at
Evans High School in 2010 was defined as a model in 2016, renamed
as a “Community Partnership School.” Originally housed in the College
of Health and Public Affairs, UCF Center for Community Schools was
realigned with UCF’s College of Community Innovation and Education
in 2017 during the university’s college reorganization.
While statewide community interest in developing Community Part-
nership Schools outgrew legislative funding initially, with greater under-
standing of the impact, Florida legislators increased funding and defined
community school policy to institutionalize and ensure greater expansion
of the model throughout Florida. From the 2014–2015 to 2017–2018
school years, a total of $4,085,000 was invested by the Florida Legislature
for community school expansion. Another $1.4 million was appropriated
in 2018–2019. In 2019, the Florida Legislature defined the Community
School Grant Program through policy (S.B. 7070, 1003.64), commit-
ting increased funds ($7.1 million) for expansion of community schools
in the 2019–2020 fiscal year. Community school grants were provided to
11 new sites in 2019, expanding the initiative from 15 to 26 sites across
the state. The same level of funding ($7.1 million) was committed in
FY2020–2021 and 2021–2022, further anchoring Community Partner-

ship Schools into the fabric of Florida’s schools and communities. As of
2022, Community Partnership School sites have grown to 29 sites across
Florida.
UCF Center for Community Schools

Established in 2014, the UCF Center for Community Schools is an
integral part of the College of Community Innovation and Education
at UCF. Partnering to address complex social issues through inno-
vative engagement of schools and communities, the UCF Center for
Community Schools provides technical support and grant administration
to schools and communities interested in the Community Partnerships
Schools™ model during scale-up, and helps to advance community
schools broadly. The UCF Center for Community Schools serves as
a comprehensive resource to community schools, providing technical
assistance, assessment and evaluation, university assistance, and learning
and development opportunities to ensure the highest quality community
schools are implemented.
Committed to high quality and partnership, and to ensuring that
responsibility and continuous improvement are collaboratively shared,
the center facilitates statewide networks to encourage cross-institutional
alignment and communication, knowledge and practice exchange, and
systems-wide advancement. Directors, coordinators, administrators, and
partners meet regularly throughout the year to discuss innovations, chal-
lenges, and strategies to better implement community schools and to
serve students and families. Working committees form to advance critical
needs of larger steering groups to most effectively and collectively reflect
on celebrations and address common challenges experienced in the field.
Practice-based and research-informed decisions are at the core of UCF
Center for Community Schools’ functions and processes, intentionally
driving innovation and community school advancement.
16 A. ELLIS
UCF Center for Community Schools

and Children’s Home Society
of Florida as Strategic Partners
Since 2009, the advancement of Florida’s Community Partnership School
efforts has been propelled by a strategic partnership between UCF and
Children’s Home Society of Florida (CHS). After multiple changes in
leadership and organizational developments within each organization,
UCF’s Center for Community Schools and CHS formalized their part-
nership through an MOU in 2021. Sharing responsibility for statewide
strategy, sustainability, and expansion, UCF Center for Community
Schools and CHS continue to work collectively to advance community
school efforts and to provide the highest quality coordinated programs
and services to students, families, and communities across the state.
Together, innovative community school advancements in systems-level
and practice-based solutions are blended and forwarded to improve
community schooling more broadly.
Conclusion
Community schools have a long history dating back to the late nine-
teenth century. Existing worldwide, community schools have localized
functions, but core to all community schools is the harnessing of collec-
tive partners to provide access to needed resources for students, families,
and communities. With understanding of community schools across the
country, support and commitment of resources have ebbed and flowed in
the form of grant programs and policy at federal and state levels.
The Community Partnership Schools™ (CPS) model community
school was piloted at Evans High School in Orlando, FL, in 2010. Posi-
tive trends for student outcomes at Evans ignited interest across the
state, and over the next several years the initiative had great advance-
ment in support and expansion. As of 2022, 29 Community Partnership
Schools were being implemented across the state of Florida, a number
that continues to grow with understanding and exposure to the impact of
the model.
References
Addams, J. (1909). The spirit of youth and the city streets. Macmillan. Reissued
by the University of Illinois Press in 1972.
Addams, J. (1910). Twenty years at Hull-House. Macmillan.
Applicant info and eligibility. Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.
(2021, April 16). https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-discretionary-grants-
support-services/school-choice-improvement-programs/full-service-commun
ity-schools-program-fscs/applicant-info-and-eligibility/
Benson, L., Harkavy, I., Johanek, M., & Puckett, J. (2009). The enduring appeal
of community schools: Education has always been a community endeavor.
American Educator, 33(2), 22–29.
Bhavnagri, H., & Krolikowski, S. (2000). Home-community visits during the era
of reform (1870–1920). Early Childhood Research and Practice, 2(1), 2–36.
Biag, M., & Castrechini, S. (2016). Coordinated strategies to help the whole
child: Examining the contributions of full-service community schools. Journal
of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 21(3), 157–173.
Bireda, S. (2009). A look at community schools. Center for Amer-
ican Progress. http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/iss
ues/2009/10/pdf/community_schools.pdf
Blank, M., Melaville, A., & Shah, B. (2003). Making the difference: Research and
practice in community schools executive summary. Coalition for Community
Schools Institute for Educational Leadership.
Campbell, C. (1972). Contributions of the mott foundation to the community
education movement. The Phi Delta Kappan, 54(3), 195–197.
CARES Act Emergency Relief. U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). CARES
act emergency relief . https://www.ed.gov/coronavirus/cares-act-emergency-
relief
Children’s Aid Society. (2011). Building community schools: A guide for action.
The Children’s Aid Society.
Coalition for Community Schools. (2017). Community schools: A whole-child
framework for school improvement. Institute for Educational Leadership.
http://www.communityschools.org/resources/default.aspx
Community Schools. (n.d.). 25,000 Community Schools by 2025. https://www.
communityschools.org/
Crowson, R. L., & Boyd, W. L. (1993). Structures and strategies: Toward an
understanding of alternative models for coordinated children’s services. https://
files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED400349.pdf
Decker, L. (1999). The evolution of the community school concept: The leadership of
Frank J. Manley. National Community Education Publication Series. National
Community Education Association.
Dryfoos, J. (1994). Full-service schools: A revolution in health and social services
for children, youth, and families. Jossey-Bass.
18 A. ELLIS
Dryfoos, J. G. (1996). Full-service schools. Working constructively with fami-

lies. Educational Leadership, 53(7), 18–23. http://www.ascd.org/publicati
ons/educational_leadership/apr96/vol53/num07/Full-Service_Schools.aspx
Dryfoos, J. (2000). Evaluation of community schools: Findings to date. Coalition
for Community Schools. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED450204
Dryfoos, J. (2002). Full-service community schools: Creating new institutions.
Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 393–400.
Dryfoos, J., & Maguire, S. (2002). Inside full-service schools. Sage.
Ellis, A. (2017). Community partnership schools handbook: A manual for develop-
ment. University of Central Florida.
Figlio, D. (2016). A preliminary evaluation of the Evans community school
and the extant literature on community schools. Northwestern University.
https://www.cohpa.ucf.edu/communityschools/wp-content/uploads/sites/
15/2017/04/evans_community_school_evaluation_with_exec_summary_-_
jan_2016.pdf
Florida Department of Education [FDOE]. (2018). Historical account-
ability reports. http://www.fldoe.org/accountability/data-sys/edu-info-acc
ountability-services/pk-12-public-school-data-pubs-reports/index.stml
Frankl, E. (2016, February 10). Transforming struggling schools into thriving
schools. Center for Popular Democracy. https://www.populardemocracy.org/
news/publications/community-schools-transforming-struggling-schools-thr
iving-schools
Full-Service Community Schools Act of 2014, H.R. 5168, 113th Cong. (2014).
https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5168
Fusarelli, B. C., & Lindle, J. C. (2011). The politics, problems, and potential
promise of school-linked social services: Insights and new directions from the
work of William Lowe Boyd. Peabody Journal of Education, 86(4), 402–415.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2011.597270
H.B. 7069. (Fl. 2017). https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2017/7069/?
Tab=BillHistory
Heers, M., Van Klaveren, C., Groot, W., & Maassen van den Brink, H. (2016).
Community schools: What we know and what we need to know. Review
of Educational Research, 86, 1016–1051. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465
4315627365
Husock, H. (1992). Bringing back the settlement house. The Public Interest, 109,
53–72.
Illinois Public Act 096–0746. (Il. 2009). https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/pub
licacts/fulltext.asp?Name=096-0746
International Centre of Excellence for Community Schools (ICECS). (2012).
Community schools. http://www.icecsweb.org/community-schools
Jacobson, R., Jacobson, L., & Blank, M. (2013). Building blocks: An examina-
tion of the collaborative approach community schools are using to bolster early
childhood development. Coalition for Community Schools. http://www.com

munityschools.org/about/publications_resources_tools_.aspx
Kane, K. (2007). Empowerment schools. Center for Educational Innovation.
Keith, N. (1999). Whose community schools? New discourses, old patterns.
Theory into Practice, 38(4), 225–234.
Martinez, L., Hayes, C., & Silloway, T. (2013). Measuring social return on
investment for community schools: A practical guide. The Finance Project.
McNeal, L. (2009). The re-segregation of public education now and after the
end of Brown v. Board of Education. Education and Urban Society, 4(5),
562–574. https://doi.org/10.11770013124509333578
Mercogliano, C. (1988). Children’s theatre as education. In M. M. Laue
(Ed.), Skole: The Journal of the National Coalition of Alternative Community
Schools, 1988–1992 (pp. 14–18). National Coalition of Alternative Community
Schools.
Moore, D. T. (1987, August). Urban resources as educators—Equal opportunity
review. National Institute of Education (DHEW).
Moyer, D. (2009). The gendered boundaries of child-centered education: Elsie
Ripley Clapp and the history of U.S. progressive education. Gender and
Education, 21(5), 531–547.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). (2002). https://www2.ed.gov/
nclb/landing.jhtml
Oakes, J., Maier, A., & Daniel, J. (2017). Community schools: An evidence-
based strategy for equitable school improvement. National Education Policy
Center. Retrieved from https://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/equitable-
community-schools
Parker, F. (1991). Arthurdale (WV), Its community school, and director Elsie
Ripley Clapp (1879–1965); First New Deal subsistence homestead program
(1933–1948), 141, 13. Reports—Descriptive.
Paul, C. A. (2016). Elementary and secondary education act of 1965: Social
Welfare History Project. http://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/programs/edu
cation/elementary-and-secondary-education-act-of-1965/
Prout, P. (1977). Community schools in Canada. The Canadian Education
Association.
Quinn, J. (2009). Community schools: A strategy, not a program. Research Brief.
National Education Association Visiting Scholars Series, Vol. 2.
Rogers, J. S. (1998). Community schools: Lessons from the past and present.
Unpublished manuscript. https://www.communityschoolsinstitute.org/upl
oads/1/0/1/9/101990890/rogers_onhistoryofcommunitschools.pdf
S. B. 7070. (Fl. 2019). https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2019/07070
Seaman, R. (2017). When we all win: A guide for adopting the community schools
model: An action report submitted to the faculty of the college of social sciences
and public policy. Florida State University.
20 A. ELLIS
Simpson, S. (2012). A brief history of 21st century community learning centers.

After School Alliance Website. http://www.afterschoolalliance.org/afterscho
olSnack/A-Brief-History-of-21st-Century-Community-Learning-Centers_06-
25-2012.cfm
Sparks, S. D. (2018). Study points to fewer ‘dropout factory’ schools. Educa-
tion Week Newsletter. https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2010/11/30/
14grad.h30.html
Stack, S. (1999, April). Elsie Ripley Clapp and the Arthurdale Schools. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association.
Study.com/ A nation at risk: Summary & effects on education. (2014,
Aug 25). https://study.com/academy/lesson/a-nation-at-risk-summary-eff
ects-on-education.html
Supporting Community Schools Act of 2015, H.R. 718, 114th Cong. (2015).
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/718
Tagle, R. (2005). Full-service community schools: Cause and outcome of
public engagement. New Directions for Youth Development, 107, 45–54. Wiley
Periodicals.
U.S. Department of Education. (2018) Apply for a grant website. https://
www2.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html?src=banner-button&
queries%5Bsearch%5D=community+school
United Neighborhood Houses. (2018). Settlement house history. http://www.
unhny.org/about/history
CHAPTER 2
The Role Universities Play in Primary

and Secondary Schools: University-Assisted
Community Schools and Community
Partnership Schools
Donnie Hale and Robert Palmer
Abstract The University of Central Florida Center for Community

Schools is dedicated to the development and sustainability of impactful
community schools. The center serves as a comprehensive resource for
Community Partnership School sites in Florida, across the nation, and
around the world by offering the following services: technical assis-
tance; grant management; training and development; and assessment and
D. Hale (B)
Florida Memorial University, Miami Gardens, FL, USA
e-mail: Donnie.hale@fmuniv.edu
R. Palmer
University of Central Florida, Orlando, USA
e-mail: Robert.Palmer@ucf.edu
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 21

Switzerland AG 2023
J. D. Plante and A. Ellis (eds.), Community Partnership Schools,
Rethinking University-Community Policy Connections,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16404-0_2
22 D. HALE AND R. PALMER
evaluation. The UCF Center for Community Schools has taken best prac-
tices from various community school approaches and a clearinghouse of
other sources to support the implementation of community schools in
Florida. It is the fundamental belief of the center that community schools
are an approach to respond to educational crisis. As a technical assis-
tance center housed at an institution of higher education, the center
recognizes the great benefit of aligning college or university resources
to provide assistance that enhances learning and additional supports
(i.e., wellness supports, family and community engagement, collabora-
tive leadership) for improved student educational outcomes. Through
the involvement of college or university core partners at each Commu-
nity Partnership School site, an approach grounded in the larger strategy
of university-assisted community schools, partnerships can be developed
across academic disciplines providing benefits for all parties involved.
Keywords University-assisted community schools · College/university

partner · University-community partnerships · Netter Center
University-Assisted Community School

Historical Context
The university-assisted community school approach was developed by the
University of Pennsylvania (Penn) with its school and community partners
in West Philadelphia in 1985. Since then, the Netter Center for Commu-
nity Partnerships at Penn has developed partnerships with universities
and colleges across the country to advance university-assisted community
school partnerships that include support and knowledge exchange on key
topics such as college access, nutrition and health, science, technology,
engineering, math, arts and culture, education and citizenship, poverty
and race, anchor institutions, and perspectives from university and college
presidents.
The university-assisted community school approach is grounded in
John Dewey’s theory that the neighborhood school can function as
the core neighborhood institution that provides comprehensive services,
galvanizes other community institutions and groups, and helps solve the
myriad problems schools and communities confront in a rapidly changing
2 THE ROLE UNIVERSITIES PLAY IN PRIMARY … 23
world. Building on Dewey’s ideas, Harkavy and Hodges (2013) suggest

that all colleges and universities should make solving the problem of
the American schooling system a very high institutional priority. Their
contributions to its solution should count heavily both in assessing
their institutional performance (by themselves and others) and be a crit-
ical factor when responding to their requests for renewed or increased
resources and financial support.
Community schools bring together multiple organizations and their
resources not only to serve and educate young people, but also to demo-
cratically engage all members of the community in which the school is
located. Essentially, this idea extends and updates Dewey’s theory. Dewey
recognized that if the neighborhood school were to function as a genuine
community center, it would require additional human resources and
support. But to our knowledge, he never identified universities as a key
source of broadly based, sustained, comprehensive support for commu-
nity schools. “University-assisted” is emphasized because colleges and
universities are uniquely well positioned to provide strategic, compre-
hensive, and sustained support for community schools (e.g., academic
and instructional resources, health and human services, college-access
programs, and evaluation) that effectively engages students, their parents
and guardians—indeed all individuals living in the neighborhood (Benson
et al., 2007; Harkavy & Hodges, 2013).
Based on their work in West Philadelphia, Harkavy and Hodges (2013)
suggest the university-assisted community school strategy assumes that
community schools, like colleges and universities, can function as focal
points to help create and foster healthy urban environments and demo-
cratically engaged communities. The strategy also assumes that universi-
ties and colleges function best in urban environments with democratically
engaged communities. More specifically, the strategy assumes that public
elementary, middle, and high schools can function as environment-
changing institutions and can become strategic centers of broadly based
partnerships that engage a wide variety of community organizations
and institutions (Harkavy and Hartley, 2009). Because public schools
“belong” to all members of the community, they should serve all
members of the community. More than any other institution, public
schools are particularly well suited to serve as neighborhood “hubs” or
“centers” around which local partnerships can be generated and devel-
oped. When they play that innovative role, schools function as community
institutions par excellence. They then provide a decentralized, democratic,
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
The “Violette” mentioned in the fourth reference above may not be
identical with the Violet of the older writers but it seems to be similar.
According to Parkinson the Violet is “a small and long blackish blew
plum, ripe about Bartholomew tide, a very good dry eating plum.”
Victor Sand Cherry. (Prunus besseyi × Munsoniana) × Domestica.
1. Am. Br. Assoc. Rpt. 2:184. 1906.
Theodore Williams of Benson, Nebraska pollinated Prunus
besseyi with Wild Goose and the resulting seedling was fertilized
with pollen from Quackenboss. This final cross resulted in the variety
under discussion. Fruit nearly two inches in diameter; apparently of
value.
Violet Imperial. Domestica. 1. Horticulturist 4:196. 1849.
Die Violette Kaiserpflaume 1. Impériale Violette 1.
Violet Imperial is usually considered the same as Red Magnum
Bonum but Liegel describes it as distinct in that its leaves are
shorter, its fruit smaller, darker and ripening period three or four
weeks later.
Violet Royal. Domestica. Mentioned in Miller Gard. Kal. 155. 1734.
Violette Americaine. Species? 1. Mathieu Nom. Pom. 452. 1889.
Mathieu found reference in Revue Horticole 351. 1869.
Virgata. Species? 1. Ga. Hort. Soc. Rpt. 51. 1889.
A tender shrub of value only as an ornamental. Flowers semi-
double, rose colored; fruit of medium size, oblong, yellow; flesh
yellow, juicy, subacid; quality fair; clingstone; very early.
Virgie. Hortulana mineri × Hortulana. 1. Vt. Sta. An. Rpt. 12:229.
1899.
Originated with A. L. Bruce of Texas; a cross between Miner and
Crimson Beauty. Fruit medium, nearly round; suture a line; cavity
very shallow; deep crimson with many yellow dots; flesh yellow;
good; stone small, round, slightly flattened, clinging.
Virginia Damson. Insititia. 1. Am. Pom. Soc. Rpt. 151. 1891.
Mentioned in the preceding reference as doing well in Virginia.
Von Berlepsch Zwetsche. Domestica. Mentioned in Mathieu Nom.
Pom. 453. 1889.
Berlepsch’s Violette Zwetsche.
Von Bose Rote Zwetsche. Species? Mentioned in Mathieu Nom.
Pom. 453. 1889.
Von Lade Späte Mirabelle. Insititia. Listed in Mathieu Nom. Pom.
453. 1889.
Von Moro Reine Claude. Domestica. 1. Mathieu Nom. Pom. 453.
1889.
Mathieu’s reference taken from Pomologische Monatshefte 1.
1878.
Voslauer Zwetsche. Domestica. 1. Mathieu Nom. Pom. 453. 1889.
2. Guide Prat. 163, 367. 1895.
Similar to the Italian Prune.
Vulcan. Triflora ×? 1. Vt. Sta. An. Rpt. 12:229. 1899.
A hybrid grown by Luther Burbank; much like Wickson. Fruit very
large, oval, with sides unequal; cavity large, abrupt; stem short, very
stout; suture deep at the top; purple with darker shades; dots
numerous, yellow; flesh red next the skin, sweet and pleasant;
excellent; stone large, elliptical, slightly flattened, clinging.
Wabash. Species? 1. Ind. Hort. Soc. Rpt. 72. 1868.
Noted as a native variety grown in Gibson and Posey Counties,
Indiana. Tree low and shrubby, bearing early; fruit large, conical.
Wady. Species? 1. Ia. Hort. Soc. Rpt. 286. 1887. 2. Cornell Sta. Bul.
38:80. 1892. 3. Wis. Sta. Bul. 63:62. 1897.
Wady’s Early 1, 2, 3.
Reported as of little value except for early ripening and
productiveness; fruit small; good for canning.
Wagner. Americana. 1. Ia. Sta. Bul. 46:291. 1900.
Wagner No. 9 1.
A seedling of Weaver fertilized with a wild variety; grown by J. F.
Wagner, Bennett, Iowa, in 1894. Fruit small, ovate; cavity broad,
shallow; suture clearly defined; yellowish-red; bloom thin; flesh
brownish-yellow, sugary, sweet; quality best; stone large, flattened,
clinging; mid-season.
Wahre Frühzwetsche. Domestica. 1. Lucas Vollst. Hand. Obst. 473.
1894. 2. Mathieu Nom. Pom. 453. 1889.
August Zwetsche 2. Couetsche Précoce 2. Couetsche Précoce La
Vraie 2. Diel’s August Zwetsche 2. Frühe Gemeine Zwetsche 2.
Frühe Haus Zwetsche 2. Frühe Zwetsche 2. Précoce Veritable 2.
Tree large, a quick grower; fruit medium, oval, dark blue; stone
completely free; valuable for dessert and drying.
Wahre Weisse Diaprée. Species? Mentioned in Mathieu Nom. Pom.
453. 1889.
Dorell’s Neue Weisse Diaprée.
Wakapa. Triflora × Americana. 1. S. Dak. Sta. Bul. 108. 1908.
A hybrid between De Soto and Red June reported by Hansen, the
originator, in the preceding reference as worthy of further testing.
Walker Seedling. Domestica. 1. Can. Hort. 21:390. 1898.
A seedling raised by A. W. Walker, Clarksburg, Ontario. Fruit of
medium size, dark maroon; flesh greenish, tender, moderately juicy,
sweet, pleasant; freestone; early.
Wallace. Americana. 1. Meneray Cat.
A seedling of Harrison grown by H. A. Terry; introduced by F. W.
Meneray, Council Bluffs, Iowa. Tree healthy, vigorous and
productive; fruit large, inclined to oblong, bright yellow overspread
with red; flesh firm; good; semi-clinging; mid-season.
Walter. Domestica. 1. Oberdieck Deut. Obst. Sort. 431. 1881.
Produced by Herr Walter in Altenburg, Germany; valuable for table
and market purposes. Tree vigorous; shoots glabrous; fruit roundish-
oval, medium; suture deep; halves usually equal; stem thick, straight,
strongly hairy; skin not adherent, dark brown; bloom thick; flesh
yellow, tender, very juicy; like Reine Claude in flavor; early.
Walther Pflaume. Species? 1. Mathieu Nom. Pom. 453. 1889.
The reference by Mathieu came from Monatsschrift für Pomologie
281. 1858.
Ward October Red. Rivularis ×? 1. Munson Cat. 10. 1902-3.
Found in Clay County, Texas, by Robert Ward; introduced by T. V.
Munson, Denison, Texas. Tree very vigorous and hardy, spreading
habit, very productive; fruit dark bright red with meaty flesh; excellent
quality; stone small; ripens in Texas in September and October.
Warner. Domestica. 1. W. N. Y. Hort. Soc. Rpt. 31:60. 1886. 2.
Cornell Sta. Bul. 131:193. 1897.
Warner’s Late 1. Warner’s Late Red 2.
Warner originated in Schoharie County, New York, and was
introduced by S. D. Willard, Geneva, New York. It is a late variety too
small and unattractive for commercial purposes. Fruit below medium
in size, roundish; cavity shallow; suture a line; stem three-quarters of
an inch long; skin moderately thick, dull greenish-red; bloom thin;
flesh yellow, juicy, firm, sweet, mild; quality fair to good; stone oval,
slightly flattened, clinging; season very late.
Warren. Americana. 1. Terry Cat. 5. 1900.
Grown from seed of Hawkeye by H. A. Terry; first fruited in 1897.
Fruit large, mottled light red, with thin bloom; late.
Wastesa. Species? 1. Cir. S. Dak. Exp. Sta. 1910.
State Fair No. 16 1.
A seedling of some native plum; grown and sent out by N. E.
Hansen of the South Dakota Experiment Station.
Waterloo Pflaume. Domestica? 1. Mathieu Nom. Pom. 453. 1889.
Duc de Waterloo 1. Prune de Waterloo 1.
This may be identical with Golden Drop although Mathieu
separates them.
Watson. Triflora × Angustifolia varians? 1. Vt. Sta. Bul. 67:21. 1898.
A seedling of Kelsey thought to have been pollinated by Lone Star;
originated with D. H. Watson, Brenham, Texas; introduced by W. A.
Yates in 1897. Tree vigorous, open; fruit large, pointed, red when
fully ripe; flesh yellow, juicy, melting; stone nearly free, small.
Watts. Species? 1. Am. Pom. Soc. Rpt. 166. 1885.
Mentioned as grown by Dr. D. S. Watts of Madison County,
Mississippi.
Waugh. Triflora × Hortulana. 1. Vt. Sta. An. Rpt. 14:273. 1901. 2.
Rural N. Y. 61:658. 1902. 3. Ibid. 65:730. 1906.
Grown by J. W. Kerr, Denton, Maryland, from seed of Chabot
fertilized with Wayland; introduced in 1901. Favorably reported
where tested. Tree vigorous, rapid and shapely in growth; fruit
medium to large, roundish inclining to oblong; cavity shallow; stem
slender; dark purplish-red; dots few and indistinct; flesh yellow, firm,
meaty; very good; stone small, semi-clinging; mid-season or early.
Wax. Domestica. 1. Cultivator 3:19. 1855. 2. Mathieu Nom. Pom.
425. 1889.
Cire 2. Wax Plum 2.
Raised by Elisha Dorr of Albany, New York; thought to be a cross
between Bleeker and Denniston Superb; resembles Bleeker in
growth and productiveness of tree; fruit large, slightly oval; stem very
long; deep yellow overspread with carmine; flesh greenish-yellow,
juicy, firm, sweet with a sprightly flavor; clingstone; late.
Wazata. Nigra? 1. Cornell Sta. Bul. 38:42. 1892. 2. Bailey Ev. Nat.
Fruits 190. 1898. 3. Waugh Plum Cult. 171. 1901.
Found wild in Minnesota; introduced by P. M. Gideon and W. F.
Heikes. Tree upright, very ornamental in bloom; fruit small to
medium, round, dull red; flesh yellow; inferior; clingstone; mid-
season to late.
Webster Gage. Domestica. 1. Watkins Cat. 1892. 2. Guide Prat.
157, 364. 1895. 3. Garden 56:344. 1899.
Reine-Claude de Webster 2. Webster Gage 2. Webster’s Gage 1,
3.
Tree bears regularly but sparsely; fruit larger than Reine Claude, a
little more oval in shape, yellowish-green; flesh yellowish, tender,
soft, juicy, rich; mid-season.
Weeping Blood. Triflora. 1. Hill Side Nursery Sp. Cir. 1895-6.
From J. L. Normand of Marksville, Louisiana; produces blood-red
plums of good quality; valuable only as an ornamental.
Weisses oder Grünes Zeiberl. Species? 1. Mathieu Nom. Pom.
454. 1889.
Weisse Zeiberl 1.
Mathieu found reference to this variety in Wiener Garten-Zeitung
290. 1884.
Welch. Americana. 1. Meneray Cat.
Grown by H. A. Terry from seed of Hammer; introduced by F. W.
Meneray, Council Bluffs, Iowa. Tree upright, vigorous; fruit large,
bright red on a yellow ground; flesh yellow, rich; clingstone; mid-
season.
Welcome. Americana. 1. Can. Exp. Farms Rpt. 100. 1903.
A handsome seedling of De Soto grown by the Central
Experimental Farm, Ottawa, Canada. Tree vigorous and productive;
fruit above medium size, oval, flattened; cavity narrow, shallow; rich
yellow, more or less washed with red; dots very small, yellow,
indistinct; bloom thin; skin moderately thick, tough; flesh yellow, juicy,
sweet, pleasant; good; mid-season.
Weisse Kaiserin. Domestica. 1. Oberdieck Deut. Obst. Sort. 418.
1881. 2. Mathieu Nom. Pom. 431. 1889.
Datte Jaune 2. Gelbe Marunke 2. Grosse Gelbe Dattel Pflaume 2.
Grosse Gelbe Dattel Zwetsche 2. Imperial Jaune 2. Prune Datte 2.
Weisse Kaiserin 2.
Probably of German origin; tree medium in size, a rapid grower,
productive; fruit medium in size, roundish-oval; suture shallow; stem
short, glabrous; skin not adherent, whitish-yellow, the sunny side dull
red, sometimes dotted with red; dots numerous, fine, yellowish;
bloom thin; flesh whitish-yellow, firm, very juicy, highly flavored; good
for dessert and cooking; clingstone; late.
Werder’sche Frühzwetsche. Species? Mentioned in Mathieu Nom.
Pom. 454. 1889.
Stengel Pflaume.
Wetherell. Domestica. 1. Mag. Hort. 6:92. 1840.
Col. Wetherell 1.
Originated by Henry Corse, Montreal, Canada, about 1830.
Spoken of highly at the time of its origin; valuable for commercial
purposes.
Wetherill’s Sweet. Insititia. 1. Prince Treat. Hort. 27. 1828. 2. Lond.
Hort. Soc. Cat. 154. 1831.
A Damson-like plum; small, sweet and delicious; clingstone; early.
Whatisit. Prunus besseyi × Americana. 1. Kerr Cat. 18. 1899-1900.
Grown by Theodore Williams of Nebraska from seed of Prunus
besseyi pollinated by an Americana; introduced by J. W. Kerr. Tree
upright and vigorous, bears early, productive; fruit small, spherical
inclining to oblong, dark purplish-red.
Wheat. Insititia. 1. Parkinson Par. Ter. 576. 1629. 2. Rea Flora 209.
1676. 3. Ray Hist. Plant. 2:1529. 1688. 4. Lond. Hort. Soc.
Cat. 154. 1831. 5. Floy-Lindley Guide Orch. Gard. 293, 383.
1846. 6. Downing Fr. Trees Am. 913. 1869. 7. Hogg Fruit
Man. 730. 1884.
English Wheat 6. Great Whitton 4. Nutmeg 2. Nutmeg 4, 5, 6. Red
Wheate 1. Wheaten 3. Wheaten 4, 5. Whitton 4, 5. Wheat Plum 5.
Wheat Plum 6. Wheaton 6. Whitlow 6.
During the Seventeenth Century this name was applied to all
Insititia plums and is still so used in parts of Europe.
Whitaker. Munsoniana. 1. Cornell Sta. Bul. 38:51, 86. 1892. 2. Am.
Pom. Soc. Rpt. 74. 1895. 3. Waugh Plum Cult. 190. 1901. 4.
Ill. Hort. Soc. Rpt. 212. 1904.
Whitacre 4.
Whitaker is a seedling of Wild Goose raised and introduced by J.
T. Whitaker of Tyler, Texas. Fruit of medium size, oval; cavity
shallow; suture a line; skin thin; bright red; bloom thin; dots many,
distinct; flesh yellow, sweet; quality fair; stone small, long-oval,
pointed, flat, clinging; mid-season. Listed in the catalog of the
American Pomological Society since 1899.
Whitby. Species? 1. Can. Hort. 18:350. 1895.
A seedling exhibited at the Toronto Industrial Fair in 1895 by the
originator, J. K. Gordon, Whitby, Canada.
White Corn. Domestica. Mentioned in Lond. Hort. Soc. Cat. 154.
1831.
White Diaper. Domestica. 1. Downing Fr. Trees Am. 952. 1869.
Diapre Blanc 1. Diaprée Blanche 1.
This variety seems to have been known only by Downing who
says it is a small, round plum with a whitish-green skin covered with
bloom; flesh rather firm, pale yellow, sweet; good; mid-season.
White Honey Damson. Insititia. 1. Wild Bros. Cat. 1892.
A sweet yellow Damson.
White Muscle. Domestica. 1. Parkinson Par. Ter. 576. 1629.
White Mussell 1.
A strain of the Muscle plum differing from it only in its greenish-
white color.
White Otschakoff. Domestica. 1. Am. Pom. Soc. Rpt. 61. 1887. 2.
Bailey Ann. Hort. 18. 1889.
Bielaya Otschakorskaya 1.
One of the numerous varieties imported from East Europe by the
Iowa Agricultural College about 1882. At one time recommended for
the prairie states by Professor Budd.
White Pear. Domestica. 1. Parkinson Par. Ter. 576. 1629. 2. Langley
Pomona 96, 97. 1729. 3. Lond. Hort. Soc. Cat. 154. 1831. 4.
Prince Pom. Man. 2:104. 1831.
Late White Pear 1.
A variety of ancient and unknown origin. Fruit medium in size,
obovate; flesh adhering to the stone.
White Peascod. Domestica. 1. Parkinson Par. Ter. 576. 1629. 2.
Rea Flora 208. 1676.
Peascod Plum 2. White Pescod 1.
Mentioned by the early writers; similar to the Green and Red
Peascod.
White Prune. Americana. 1. Ia. Hort. Soc. Rpt. 228. 1909.
Grown by H. A. Terry, Crescent, Iowa; not yet introduced. Fruit
long-oval, yellow, partly over-spread with red; bloom thick,
conspicuous; skin thick, tough, acrid; flesh very firm, meaty,
sweetish; good; freestone.
White Queen. Domestica. 1. Ann. Pom. Belge 7:95, Pl. 1859. 2.
Mas Le Verger 6:101, fig. 1866-73. 3. Hogg Fruit Man. 721.
1884. 4. Mathieu Nom. Pom. 454. 1889. 5. Mich. Sta. Bul.
177:42, 43. 1899.
Neue Weisse Kaiserin 4. Prune Reine Blanche 1. Reine Blanche
2, 3. Reine Blanche 2, 4. Reine Blanche de Galopin 4. Weisse
Königin 2. Weisse Königin 4.
Raised by M. Galopin, a nurseryman of Liege, Belgium, about
1844; introduced into America by the United States Department of
Agriculture about 1890. Tree vigorous, upright; fruit medium in size,
roundish-ovate, flattened at the ends, yellowish-white, sometimes
tinged with red; suture shallow; cavity shallow, wide; flesh greenish-
yellow, juicy, aromatic; good; stone small, oval, clinging; late.
White Sweet Damson. Insititia. 1. Mag. Hort. 6:123. 1840.
Originated as a seedling in Essex County, New York, sometime
previous to 1840.
White Wheat. Insititia. 1. Parkinson Par. Ter. 576. 1629. 2. Knoop
Fructologie 2:63. 1771.
Spilling Jaune-simple 2. White Wheate 1.
A yellow variety of the Wheat plum of Europe. Fruit small, oval,
yellow; fair quality.
White Virginal. Domestica. 1. Prince Pom. Man. 2:73. 1831. 2.
Poiteau Pom. Franc. 1. 1846. 3. U. S. Pat. Off. Rpt. 306.
1854. 4. Bridgeman Gard. Ass’t 130. 1857. 5. Mas Le Verger
6:129. 1866-73. 6. Mathieu Nom. Pom. 454. 1889. 7. Guide
Prat. 158, 367. 1895.
Altesse Blanche? 6, 7. Double Beurre Witte? 6, 7. Peach 3.
Précoce 7. Prune Précoce? 6. Prune Virginale 2. Virginal à gros fruit
blanc 1. Virginal blanc 1. Virginale 4. Virginale à Fruit Blanc 6, 7.
Virginale à gros fruit blanc 5, 6, 7. Virginal Blanche 6. Virginale
blanche 3, 5, 7. Virgin 6. White Virginal 4. White Virginale 6. Weisse
Jungfernpflaume 6. Weisse Jungfernpflaume 5, 7.
A variety confused by Downing with the Red Virginal. Fruit
medium in size, roundish-oblate; suture a line; greenish-yellow;
bloom heavy; flesh pale greenish, juicy, melting, sweet, pleasant;
good; clingstone; mid-season.
Whyte. Nigra. 1. Can. Exp. Farm. Bul. 2nd Ser. 3:57. 1900. 2. Ibid.
43:39. 1903.
Whyte’s Red Seedling 1.
Grown by R. B. Whyte, Ottawa, Canada; under test at the Central
Experimental Farm, under the name “Whyte R. B., No. 3.” Fruit
medium in size, roundish; cavity narrow; suture a line; apex rounded;
deep red; dots and bloom lacking; skin thin, tender; flesh yellow,
juicy, sweet; good; stone long, semi-clinging; mid-season.
Whitley. Domestica. 1. Hogg Fruit Man. 731. 1884.
Whitley’s 1.
Fruit below medium size, round; suture faint; stem on a slight
elevation, of medium length, slender; red with yellow dots, darker on
the side next the sun; flesh yellow with white veins, juicy, sweet and
well flavored; clingstone; late.
Wier. Americana. 1. Am. Gard. 13:460. 1892. 2. Cornell Sta. Bul.
38:45, 86. 1892. 3. Wis. Sta. Bul. 63:63. 1897.
Wier Large Red 1. Wier’s Large Red 2, 3.
Originated by D. B. Wier of Illinois; resembles Miner, but is no
better than that variety. Fruit large, round; skin thin, red; flesh yellow,
moderately firm; fair to good; clingstone.
Wier No. 50. Americana. 1. Kerr Cat. 1894. 2. Wis. Sta. Bul. 63:63.
1897.
Wier’s No. 50, 1, 2.
From D. B. Wier of Illinois. Tree vigorous, healthy, productive,
bears annually; fruit large, round, dark red over yellow; good;
clingstone; mid-season.
Wilde. Domestica. 1. Horticulturist 7:402. 1852. 2. Downing Fr. Trees
Am. 953. 1869.
Wilde’s 1.
Raised by a Mr. Comack from a stone brought from Italy by R. H.
Wilde. Tree productive; fruit medium to large, oval-oblong, greenish-
yellow; flesh yellowish-green, firm, dry, sweet; clingstone; early.
Wilder. Munsoniana. 1. Cornell Sta. Bul. 38:78. 1892. 2. Terry Cat.
1899. 3. Ala. Coll. Sta. Bul. 112:178. 1900. 4. Waugh Plum
Cult. 175. 1901.
Col. Wilder 1, 2. Colonel Wilder 4. President Wilder 3.
Wilder was grown from seed of Wild Goose in 1885 by H. A. Terry,
Crescent, Iowa. Fruit of medium size, roundish-oval; suture a line;
skin firm, dark red; bloom thin; dots distinct; flesh yellow, juicy,
sweet; quality good; stone large, oval, clinging; mid-season.
Wild Goose Improved. Munsoniana. 1. Stark Cat. 29. 1910.
An improved strain of Wild Goose introduced by Stark Brothers,
Louisiana, Missouri, in 1910.
Wildrose. Americana. 1. Am. Pom. Soc. Rpt. 134. 1887. 2. Cornell
Sta. Bul. 38:45, 86. 1892. 3. Wis. Sta. Bul. 63:64. 1897.
A wild seedling found in Minnesota; introduced in 1880 by A. W.
Sias, Rochester, Minnesota. Fruit large, round, yellow blushed with
red; flesh firm; clingstone; early to mid-season.
Wilkinson. Domestica. 1. Downing Fr. Trees Am. 400. 1857.
Tree vigorous; branches smooth, rather slender; fruit of medium
size, oval, slightly necked; skin reddish-purple; bloom thick; stalk
medium, set in a small cavity; flesh dark yellow, firm, sweet, not rich;
semi-clinging; late.
Willamette. Domestica.
For a discussion of this plum see the Pacific.
Williams. Nigra? 1. Kerr Cat. 1894. 2. Ibid. 15. 1897. 3. Wis. Sta.
Bul. 63:64. 1897.
Tree vigorous, healthy, moderately productive; fruit large, oblong,
pointed, red; clingstone; early.
Wilmeth Late. Species? 1. Tex. Sta. Bul. 32:490. 1894.
Noticed in the preceding reference as on trial.
Wilson. Americana. 1. Wis. Sta. Bul. 63:64. 1897.
Noted in the preceding reference as a very early fine plum.
Wine Plum. Domestica. 1. Coxe Cult. Fr. Trees 237. 1817. 2. Prince
Pom. Man. 2:101. 1832.
Much like the Yellow Egg in appearance but smaller, oblong, pale
green; stem long; flesh rich, juicy and well flavored; early.
Winesour. Insititia. 1. Forsyth Treat. Fr. Trees 21. 1803. 2. Prince
Pom. Man. 2:101. 1832. 3. Floy-Lindley Guide Orch. Gard.
294, 383. 1846. 4. Mas Pom. Gen. 2:17. 1873. 5. Mathieu
Nom. Pom. 453. 1889. 6. Guide Prat. 163, 367. 1895.
Rotherham 3, 5, 6. Sauere Weinpflaume 4. Sauere Wein Pflaume
Von Yorkshire 5, 6. Sour Wine Plum of Yorkshire 5, 6. Vineuse
acidule 4, 5. Vineuse-Acidule 6. Vinisour 6. Weinsauerliche Pflaume
5. Weinsauerliche Zwetsche 4, 6. Winesour 6. Winesour Plum 5.
Yorkshire Winesour 5, 6.
An old English variety from Rotherham in Yorkshire, where it is
highly esteemed for making preserves. Fruit of the Damson type,
small, oval; stem one-half inch long; dark purple; dots dark colored;
flesh greenish-yellow, sometimes tinged with red towards the stone,
sour; stone long, slender, pointed, clinging; late.
Winnebago. Americana. 1. Ia. Hort. Soc. Rpt. 286. 1887. 2. Wis.
Sta. Bul. 63:64. 1897. 3. Colo. Sta. Bul. 50:47. 1898.
From Minnesota; tree vigorous, rigid and thorny, moderately
productive; fruit medium in size, round, irregular; stem long, slender;
cavity deep; yellow overspread with deep red; skin thin; flesh
yellowish, soft, of inferior flavor; stone elliptical, somewhat oblique,
rather flat, rounded at both ends, clinging; mid-season.
Winter Creke. Domestica. 1. Parkinson Par. Ter. 576. 1629.
Noted by Parkinson as very late.
Winter Damson. Insititia. 1. Lond. Hort. Soc. Cat. 146. 1831. 2.
Prince Pom. Man. 2:89. 1832. 3. Downing Fr. Trees Am. 297.
1845. 4. Hooper W. Fr. Book 244. 1857. 5. Mas Pom. Gen.
2:145. 1873.
Black Damson 3. Blue Damson 2. Blue Damascene 2. Common
Blue Damson 2. Common Damson 3. Damas d’Hiver 5. Damson 2.
Damson 2, 3. Damson Winter 4. Early Damson 3. Late Damson 2.
Late Purple Damson 2. Purple Damson 3. Purple Winter Damson 2.
Winter Damson 2, 5.
Mas thought that this variety originated in America, but since it
was first noted in England it is probably an importation to the New
World from that country. Downing distinguished it from the common
Damson by its extreme lateness. Tree medium in size; fruit roundish,
small; suture a line; purplish-black; bloom thick; flesh greenish-
yellow, juicy, acid, with a slight astringency; good for preserving;
clingstone.
Wiseman. Domestica. Mentioned in Wild Bros. Cat. 1908.
Wiseman’s Prune.
Wohanka. Triflora × Americana. 1. S. Dak. Sta. Bul. 108. 1908.
A hybrid between De Soto and Red June grown by Hansen of the
South Dakota Experiment Station who considers it worthy of trial.
Wolf and Japan. Triflora × Americana mollis. 1. Ill. Hort. Soc. Rpt.
424. 1905.
Listed with a number of plums which were tested by H. T.
Thompson, Marengo, Illinois.
Wolf Clingstone. Americana mollis. 1. Wis. Sta. Bul. 87:18. 1901. 2.
S. Dak. Sta. Bul. 93:13. 1905.
Clingstone Wolf. Wolf Cling 1.
Propagated and sent out in many cases as the true Wolf which it
much resembles except that it is darker in color and is a clingstone.
It seems to be more resistant to diseases and insects than Wolf.
Woolston. Domestica. 1. McIntosh Bk. Gard. 2:53. 1855. 2.
Horticulturist 13:168. 1858. 3. Mas Le Verger 6:153, fig. 77.
1866-73. 4. Mathieu Nom. Pom. 454. 1889. 5. Can. Exp.
Farms Rpt. 433. 1905.
Reine-Claude de Woolston 5. Reine-Claude Noire de Woolston 3.
Woolston Black 4. Woolston Black Gage 1. Woolston Gage 2.
Woolston’s Black Gage 3, 4. Woolston’s Violette Reine-Claude 4.
Raised by a Mr. Dowling of Southampton, England. Tree vigorous,
productive; fruit medium in size, roundish, purplish-black; suture not
pronounced; cavity deep and wide; stem medium in length, slender;
flesh yellow, juicy, sweet, sugary, tender, aromatic; very good;
freestone; mid-season.
Wooster. Munsoniana. 1. Wis. Sta. Bul. 63:65. 1897.
Mentioned in the preceding reference as not being hardy in
Minnesota.
Wooten. Munsoniana. 1. Cornell Sta. Bul. 38:65. 1892. 2. Thomas
Am. Fruit Cult. 492. 1897. 3. Waugh Plum Cult. 191. 1901.
Wootton 2.
Wooten was found growing wild in Burnet County, Texas, in 1876,
by F. T. Ramsey; introduced by A. N. Ramsey & Son. Fruit oval;
cavity shallow; suture a line; skin thin; bright red; bloom thin; flesh
yellow; quality good; stone large, clinging; mid-season.
Worth. Americana. 1. Kerr Cat. 7. 1902-3.
Originated by Theodore Williams of Nebraska; named and
introduced by J. W. Kerr in 1902. Tree vigorous, healthy and
productive; fruit large, round-oblong, purplish-red on a greenish-
yellow ground; semi-clinging; mid-season.
Wragg. Americana. 1. Meneray Cat.
A seedling of Hawkeye grown by H. A. Terry; introduced by F. W.
Meneray, Council Bluffs, Iowa. Tree vigorous, healthy, productive;
fruit very large, yellow blotched with dark red; flesh yellow, firm, rich;
good; clingstone; mid-season.
Wragg Freestone. Species? 1. Wis. Sta. Bul. 87:18. 1901.
Received by the Wisconsin Experiment Station from Edson
Gaylord, Nora Springs, Iowa. Fruit medium to small, roundish, dark
purplish-red with numerous elongated yellowish markings; bloom
heavy; stem long, slender; skin tender, not harsh; flesh greenish-
yellow, crisp, very rich but harsh near the center; stone round,
grooved, semi-clinging.
Wunder von New York. Species? Mentioned in Mathieu Nom. Pom.
454. 1889.
Merville de New York.
Wyandotte. Species? 1. Mich. Hort. Soc. Rpt. 290. 1889.
Professor Budd of Iowa mentioned this plum as hardy and as
bearing continuously.
Wyant and Japan. Triflora × Americana. 1. Ill. Hort. Soc. Rpt. 420.
1905.
Mentioned in a list of varieties under test by H. T. Thompson,
Marengo, Illinois. Said to be a hybrid seedling; fruit light red; fair
quality; freestone; mid-season.
Wyckoff. Munsoniana. 1. Linn County Nur. Cat.
Wyckoff was found growing wild along the Cedar River, Iowa, by a
Mr. Wyckoff; introduced by Snyder Brothers, Center Point, Iowa.
Wyedale. Domestica. 1. Hogg Fruit Man. 732. 1884. 2. Garden
58:395. 1900. 3. Thompson Gard. Ass’t 4:159. 1901.
From Yorkshire, England; much grown in the northern parts of
England. Tree very productive, strong and upright in growth; fruit
small, oval; cavity small; dark purple, almost black; flesh greenish-
yellow, brisk, juicy, agreeably flavored; clingstone; late.
Wyzerka. Domestica. 1. Kan. Sta. Bul. 73:191. 1897. 2. Ibid.
101:121, Pl. 6 fig. 1. 1901. 3. Budd-Hansen Am. Hort. Man.
328. 1903.
Wiezerka 1, 2.
Wyzerka is one of the numerous Russian varieties imported by J.
L. Budd of the Iowa Experiment Station. There seems to have been
some confusion in the distribution of this plum, for Budd and Hansen,
in reference three, describe Wyzerka as a large, oval, yellow plum
with a fine peach-like flavor; the variety sent to this Station under this
name bears a small, purplish-black, Damson-like fruit, long-oval in
form, cavity shallow; suture a line; skin thin; bloom very heavy; flesh
yellow, juicy, slightly fibrous, sweet, mild; flavor good; stone oval,
small, free; mid-season.
Yates. Triflora × Angustifolia varians. 1. Vt. Sta. Bul. 67:22. 1898. 2.
Vt. Sta. An. Rpt. 14:275. 1901.
From seed of Kelsey thought to have been pollinated with Lone
Star; originated with D. H. Watson, Brenham, Texas; introduced by
W. A. Yates, 1897. Tree thrifty, healthy; fruit large, roundish, red
when fully ripe; clingstone; mid-season.
Yellow Americana. Species? Letter from Kerr.
Originated by Theodore Williams, Benson, Nebraska.
Yellow Egg. Species? 1. Wis. Sta. Bul. 63:66. 1897.
Goff mentions a variety under this name which differs from the
older plum of the same name. Tree of weeping habit, productive; fruit
long; freestone.
Yellow, 43 Fischer. Domestica. 1. Bailey Ann. Hort. 18. 1889.
Introduced into this country from Russia by Professor J. L. Budd of
Ames, Iowa.
Yellow Impératrice. Domestica. 1. Ann. Pom. Belge 55, Pl. 1853. 2.
Pom. France 7: No. 11. 1871. 3. Mas Le Verger 6:113, fig.
1866-73. 4. Hogg Fruit Man. 732. 1884. 5. Mathieu Nom.
Pom. 431. 1889. 6. Cat. Cong. Pom. France 461. 1906.
Altesse Blanche 4, 5. D’Altesse Blanche 6. De Monsieur Jaune 3.
Gelbe Herrn Pflaume 5. Impératrice Jaune 3, ?5. Jaune de Monsieur
2. Jaune de Monsieur 5, 6. Monsieur à Fruits Jaune 4, 5. Monsieur à
Fruits Jaunes 3. Monsieur à Fruits Jaunes 5, 6. Monsieur Jaune 6.
Prune de Monsieur Jaune 5. Prune de Monsieur Jaune 1. Prune de
Monsieur, Varietè Jaune 5. Prune Monsieur Jaune 2. Prune
d’Altesse Blanche 2, 5. Virginale Blanche 4, ?5. Yellow Impératrice ?
3, 5.
M. Jacquin, nurseryman of Paris, France, obtained this plum from
seed of a cross between the Orleans and the Reine Claude planted
about 1820; brought to notice in 1845. Mas considered Hogg’s and
Downing’s Yellow Impératrice as different from the French variety.
Tree medium in vigor; fruit medium in size, usually roundish-oval;
suture broad; halves unequal; skin not adhering, golden-yellow,
dotted and streaked with carmine-red; flesh yellow, juicy, very sweet
and aromatic; freestone; mid-season.
Yellow Imperial. Domestica. 1. Prince Pom. Man. 2:59. 1832.
Imperial jaune 1. Impériale jaune 1.
Described by Prince as distinct from Yellow Egg which it much
resembles but differing in that it is somewhat smaller, about two
weeks earlier and slightly more acid.
Yellow Jack. Domestica. Mentioned in Lond. Hort. Soc. Cat. 154.
1831.
Yellow Jerusalem. Domestica. 1. Hogg Fruit Man. 732. 1884. 2.
Mathieu Nom. Pom. 436. 1889.
Jahns Gelbe Jerusalems Pflaume 2. Jahn’s Jerusalems Pflaume
2. Jerusalem Jaune 1, 2. Jahn’s Gelbe Jerusalems-pflaume 1.
Yellow Jerusalem 2.
Fruit of medium size, roundish-oval; suture a line; cavity deep;
deep yellow with crimson specks next the sun; flesh yellow, with
white veins, tender, juicy, brisk, sweet, very good; clingstone; mid-
season.
Yellow Magnum Bonum. Domestica. 1. Jour. Hort. N. S. 17:228.
1869.
According to the preceding reference this variety is distinct from
the Yellow Egg (White Magnum Bonum). Fruit medium in size, oval,
dull yellow sprinkled with red dots; rich; clingstone; young shoots
smooth.
Yellow Nagate. Triflora. 1. Am. Pom. Soc. Rpt. 106. 1891. 2. Can.
Exp. Farm Bul. 2nd Ser. 3:57. 1900.
A little known Triflora very closely resembling if not identical with
some of the standard yellow Trifloras.
Yellow Oregon. Hortulana. 1. Wis. Sta. Bul. 63:66. 1897. 2. Vt. Sta.
An. Rpt. 11:287. 1898.
Described by Waugh from specimens received by him from B. A.
Matthews, Iowa. Fruit small, nearly spherical; suture a faint line;
bright golden-yellow; dots many, whitish; skin thick and strong; flesh
yellow and not very firm; quality medium; stone large, smooth,
clinging; inferior in size and quality to Captain or Cumberland.
Yellow Panhandle. Angustifolia watsoni. 1. Wis. Sta. Bul. 63:66.
1897. 2. Bailey Ev. Nat. Fruits 222, 223. 1898. 3. Waugh Plum
Cult. 234. 1901. 4. Ga. Sta. Bul. 67:285. 1904.
A variety from the Panhandle of Texas; introduced by F. T. Ramsey
of Austin, Texas. Tree forms a close symmetrical head; fruit small,
roundish-oblong, yellow overspread with clear bright red; dots few,
indistinct; skin tough; flesh yellow, hard; quality poor; stone medium,
oval, turgid, clinging.
Yellow Roman Bullace. Insititia. Mentioned in Lond. Hort. Soc. Cat.
144. 1831.
Yellow Sweet. Americana. 1. Cornell Sta. Bul. 38:46. 1892. 2. Colo.
Sta. Bul. 50:47. 1898. 3. Waugh Plum Cult. 168. 1901.
Thought to have originated in Minnesota. Tree small; fruit large,
round inclining to oblong; suture distinct; stem short and stout; yellow
more or less mottled and shaded with red; bloom thin; flesh firm,
juicy, rich, sweet; good; stone round, flat, clinging.
Yellow Transparent. Angustifolia varians. 1. Am. Pom. Soc. Rpt.
162. 1881. 2. Am. Pom. Soc. Cat. 25. 1897. 3. Ohio Sta. Bul.
113:156. 1899. 4. Waugh Plum Cult. 200. 1901.
Transparent 4 incor. Transparent Yellow 2.
Selected from a seedling orchard of two thousand trees planted
near Denison, Texas, by J. L. Freeman. Tree vigorous, forming a
handsome top, productive; fruit medium in size, oblong, bright
yellow; skin thin and tough, reported to crack badly in some
localities; flesh soft and watery, sweet and good; clingstone; early.
Yellow Wildgoose. Munsoniana? 1. Van Lindley Cat. 42. 1899.
Said to have been introduced by R. Bates of Jackson, South
Carolina. Fruit large, equal in size to Wild Goose with better quality;
ripens at the same time.
Yellow Yosemite. Species? 1. Gard. Mon. 20:176. 1878. 2. Mich.
Sta. Bul. 118:52, 55. 1895.
Yosemite 1. Yosemite Yellow 2.
Yellow Yosemite came from the “Rocky Mountains” about 1870
with the Purple Yosemite; introduced by W. S. Carpenter, Rye, New
York. Fruit roundish; suture a line; skin thick, tough, yellow, with
reddish tinge; flesh yellow, sweet, tender; stone roundish-ovate,
clinging; mid-season.
Yohe. Domestica. 1. Downing Fr. Trees Am. 954. 1869.
Yohes Eagle 1.
Noticed by Downing who says it is an accidental seedling in the
garden of Caleb Yohe, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.
York State Prune. Domestica. 1. Thomas Am. Fruit Cult. 504, 505.
1897. 2. Greene Cat. 1897. 3. Sweet Cat. 13. 1897. 4. W. N.
Y. Hort. Soc. Rpt. 44:92. 1899.
Large German Prune 3. York State Prune 3.
A seedling grown near Dansville, New York. As tested at this
Station and by many fruit-growers it is identical with Italian Prune.
Young. Domestica. 1. Downing Fr. Trees Am. 955. 1869.
Young’s Seedling 1.
From Pennsylvania. Tree vigorous; fruit medium in size, roundish-
oval, deep reddish-purple; flesh yellow, sweet; good; freestone; mid-
season.
Yukon. Nigra? 1. Can. Exp. Farms Rpt. 426. 1900.
A seedling grown at Indian Head Experimental Farm, Canada.
Fruit of medium size, red; skin thick; good; early.
Yuteca. Species? 1. Cir. S. Dak. Exp. Sta. 1910.

(Download pdf) Community Partnership Schools Jarrad D Plante full chapter pdf docx

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Download pdf) Community Partnership Schools Jarrad D Plante full chapter pdf docx

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Community Partnership Schools Jarrad

Arcane Schools John Yarker

International Project Finance: The Public-Private

Teachers, Schools and Society, 10th Edition

Money and Schools 7th Edition, (Ebook PDF)

Asset Building & Community Development

Reimagining Industry Growth: Strategic Partnership

Community Nutrition – Ebook PDF Version

Planning for Community Phil Heywood

ISSN 2629-2432 ISSN 2629-2440 (electronic)

Cover illustration: © John Rawsterne/patternhead.com

The editors acknowledge Dr. Thomas Bryer and the university–commu-

nonprofit community-based provider, (c) college or university, and (d)

Chapter 4, The UCF-Certified Community Partnership Schools™ Stan-

“This anthology skillfully and comprehensively captures the history,

“A valuable guide for anyone looking to develop a Community Partner-

“WOW! Herein, Ellis, Plante, and other authors present an extraordi-

of the many lessons learned throughout the implementation and scale-up

“The Community Partnership Schools: An Innovative Model of Practice

“Wales has a strong commitment to developing Community Focused

“This new book provides a rich description and analysis of an innovative

1 The Community Schools Concept 1

3 The Community Partnership Schools™ Model 39

5 Evans High School, a UCF-Certified Community

Bergeron Larry J. is the Lydia E. Skeen Graduate Research Assis-

community schools, Ellis has presented statewide, nationally and inter-

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Morgan led her team to success-

Wheeler has more than a decade of experience in prevention programs

Fig. 4.1 Third-year affirmation review 64

Table 4.1 UCF-certified community partnership schools™ standards 66

The Community Schools Concept

Abstract Community schools have a long history dating back to the

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 1

Keywords Community schools · Community partnership schools ·

Background of Community Schools

Though no single global definition exists for community schools,

learning will be more fully realized. Ultimately, teaching and learning

History of Community Schools in America

promoted community development through regularly visiting homes and

democracy were directly influenced by Addams and Hull House” (Benson

(Paul, 2016; Seaman, 2017). Title I is a provision of the Elementary and

of these initiatives “appear to have been created in direct response to

was a remedy against juvenile crime and victimization (Simpson, 2012).

The federal government increased promotion of and investments in

activity (Coalition for Community Schools, 2017). In 2017, the Florida

A traditional public school that is required to submit a plan for imple-

In 2019, the Florida Legislature furthered support of community

The Start of Evans High School as The Flagship

FY2020–2021 and 2021–2022, further anchoring Community Partner-

UCF Center for Community Schools

UCF Center for Community Schools

Dryfoos, J. G. (1996). Full-service schools. Working constructively with fami-

childhood development. Coalition for Community Schools. http://www.com

Simpson, S. (2012). A brief history of 21st century community learning centers.

The Role Universities Play in Primary

Donnie Hale and Robert Palmer

Abstract The University of Central Florida Center for Community

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 21

Keywords University-assisted community schools · College/university

University-Assisted Community School

world. Building on Dewey’s ideas, Harkavy and Hodges (2013) suggest

You might also like