NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIORFoundation Document Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park Kansas September 2025 Mission of the National Park ServiceThe National Park Service (NPS) preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. The National Park Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country and the world.The NPS core values are a framework in which the National Park Service accomplishes its mission. They express the manner in which, both individually and collectively, the National Park Service pursues its mission. The NPS core values are: · Integrity: We deal honestly, ethically, and fairly with the public and one another. · Stewardship: We provide and inspire exceptional care of the places entrusted to us by the American people. · Respect: We embrace our differences and treat each person with dignity. · Engagement: We each participate fully and extend genuine invitations to all. · Collaboration: We succeed by engaging beyond our silos, tapping new ideas, and expanding our community. · Accountability: We earn the public’s trust each day by competently and transparently fulfilling our responsibilities. The National Park Service is a bureau within the Department of the Interior. While numerous national park system units were created prior to 1916, it was not until August 25, 1916, that President Woodrow Wilson signed the National Park Service Organic Act formally establishing the National Park Service. The national park system comprises more than 400 park units covering more than 84 million acres in every state, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. These units include, but are not limited to, national parks, monuments, battlefields, military parks, historical parks, historic sites, lakeshores, seashores, recreation areas, scenic rivers and trails, and the White House. The variety and diversity of park units across the nation require a strong commitment to resource stewardship and management to ensure both the protection and enjoyment of these resources for future generations. IntroductionEvery unit of the national park system will have a foundational document to provide basic guidance for planning and management decisions—a foundation for planning and management. The core components of a foundation document include a brief description of the park as well as the park’s purpose, significance, fundamental resources and values, other important resources and values, and interpretive themes. The foundation document also includes special mandates from the park’s enabling legislation or other legislation that impacts park management and resource protection.A primary benefit of developing a foundation document is identifying and clearly stating in one document the essential information that is necessary for park management to consider when determining future planning efforts, outlining key planning issues, and protecting resources and values that are integral to park purpose and identity. A foundation document aids park managers, staff, park partners, and the public in understanding a unit of the national park system. Brief Description of the ParkBrown v. Board of Education National Historical Park is co-located in Topeka, Kansas, and Summerton, South Carolina. The park includes the historic Monroe Elementary School in Topeka and the historic Scott’s Branch High School and Summerton High School in Summerton. All three schools are located in neighborhoods that include residences, light industries, small businesses, and vacant lots. Topeka, the Kansas state capital, is a city of approximately 125,000 people in the eastern plains along the Kansas River. Summerton is a small town in Clarendon County, South Carolina, with a population of approximately 800 people. Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site was established by Public Law 102-525 in Topeka, Kansas, on October 26, 1992. The site later opened to the public in 2004 on the 50th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education ruling. On May 12, 2022, Public Law 117-123 renamed the site as a national historical park and expanded it to include two additional sites in Summerton, South Carolina. Monroe Elementary School and Sumner Elementary School had been designated a national historic landmark in 1991, while Summerton High School was listed in the National Register of Historic Places in 1994, and Scott’s Branch High School was listed in 2023.The park interprets the people, places, and events that contributed to the landmark US Supreme Court decisions that declared racial segregation in public education unconstitutional. Furthermore, the park interprets the integral role of the cases that the court combined in the Brown v. Board of Education decision in the context of the civil rights movement. In expanding the park in 2022, the law added to the purpose “to honor the civil rights stories of struggle, perseverance, and activism in the pursuit of education equity.” Working with partners enriches the services provided by the park staff and allows educators and NPS rangers to reach new, untapped audiences. The US Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education is one of the most pivotal opinions ever rendered by that body. On May 17, 1954, at 12:52 p.m., the Court issued a unanimous decision stating that it was a violation of the 14th Amendment to separate children in public schools for no reason other than their race. Since the case from DC could not rely on the protections of the 14th Amendment, the court issued a similar opinion that relied on the protections of the 5th Amendment, which did apply to DC. This landmark decision highlights the court’s role in affecting changes in national and social policy. Often when people think of the case, they remember a little girl whose parents sued so that she could attend an all-White school in her neighborhood. However, the story of Brown v. Board of Education is far more complex. In the middle third of the 20th century, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and other civil rights organizations were actively at work filing cases that challenged racial discrimination in an array of areas including voting, public transportation, teacher salaries, and higher education. The NAACP Legal Defense Fund determined public education the most viable pathway to end legal segregation because of its role in promoting an equal society, and in the 1930s, they developed a legal strategy to challenge segregation in schools. As the Cold War ideologies of the Soviet Union and the United States emerged as global counterpoints, the practice of racial segregation became an international issue rather than just a domestic one. As the US sought new allies to counter Soviet gains in Eastern Europe, the country was forced to recognize its inconsistency of advocating for freedom and equality on the international stage while denying basic rights to its African American citizens at home. President Harry S Truman established the President’s Committee on Civil Rights in 1946. A year later, he used executive authority to order desegregation of the military, a direct response to the brutal blinding of WWII soldier Isaac Woodard in Batesburg, South Carolina. In 1948, the committee issued its report To Secure These Rights, which called for “the prohibition of segregation in the public school system of the District of Columbia” among its recommendations. The Supreme Court declared unconstitutional the racially restrictive covenants that prevented African Americans and other minority groups from purchasing property in White neighborhoods. Additionally, the NAACP won numerous legal victories to integrate colleges in Oklahoma, Texas, and Missouri that established a new legal precedent to challenge segregation in public schools. After nearly 60 years of “separate but equal,” a precedent set in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, the NAACP and the nation were on the verge of a major victory against segregation. In South Carolina during 1947, a parent from rural Summerton began a petition requesting that Black students be provided the same bus transportation available to White students. Prior to the petition, the Clarendon County school board reserved all the buses in its fleet for White children, leaving Black students as much as a nine mile walk to school. To aid this effort, parents retained attorneys Harold Boulware and Thurgood Marshall. Marshall’s opinion was that the bus transportation inequity violated “separate but equal” and used that strategy moving forward. In late summer of 1948, members of the Topeka chapter of the NAACP volunteered to challenge the “separate but equal” doctrine governing public education. NAACP Topeka Branch President McKinley Burnett continued to petition the Board of Education to voluntarily desegregate the public schools while branch lawyers began assembling a case and signing up plaintiffs, often recruiting friends and neighbors. A group of parents agreed to participate on behalf of their children. In 1949, after the rejection of Pearson v. Clarendon County, NAACP attorneys switched tactics and reached beyond their case for equal bussing. They asked fot full equal educational opportunities for students in Clarendon County. Leaders in the community worked together with parents to garner enough signatures on the “Equal Everything” petition to sue in federal court, calling for “educational advantages and facilities equal in all respects to that which is provided for whites.” As news of the petition reached the larger community, signers began to face backlash in the form of job loss, evictions, and violence. The year 1950 brought continued struggle. In May, Briggs v. Elliott was officially filed in federal court. That summer, the NAACP Topeka branch secretary notified the NAACP in New York that, in her words, the school situation had grown unbearable, and they were prepared to go to court. In early 1951, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas was filed in the US District Court for Kansas. To make the case that separate could not be equal, the legal team relied on the work of social scientists who had been studying the effects of segregation on Black children. In preparation for the Briggs v. Elliott case, Marshall asked Dr. Kenneth Clark to repeat experiments with school children from Scott’s Branch using light- and dark-skinned dolls. Clark asserted that his tests showed the psychological damage on Black children caused by prejudice and segregation. He and other social scientists testified that segregation gave African American children a sense of inferiority. In December 1952, the US Supreme Court had on its docket cases from Kansas (Brown v. Board of Education), Delaware (Gebhart v. Belton), the District of Columbia (Bolling v. Sharpe), South Carolina (Briggs v. Elliott), and Virginia (Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County), all of which challenged the constitutionality of racial segregation in public schools. The US Supreme Court consolidated these five cases under one name, Oliver Brown et al. v. the Board of Education of Topeka. One of the justices later explained that the court felt it was better to have representative cases from different parts of the country. There is no definitive explanation for why the court chose to list the Topeka case first. Years after the decision, Justice Tom Clark related that they had decided to put Brown first “so that the whole question would not smack of being a purely Southern one.” This collection of cases was the culmination of years of legal groundwork laid by the NAACP in its work to end segregation. None of the cases would have been possible without the many individuals who were courageous enough to challenge segregation in public-school systems. Each of the five cases that collectively formed Brown v. Board of Education at the Supreme Court level varied in their specifics. The lack of school buses, educational facilities, and basic supplies were among the evidence in the cases outside of Kansas. In Topeka, the African American schools were housed in quality buildings with supplies and teacher pay commensurate with the city’s White schools. However, children of the plaintiffs were denied access to the schools much closer to their neighborhoods. They had to attend more distant facilities designated for their race. Persuaded by the expert testimony of social scientists, Chief Justice Earl Warren related the court’s unanimous opinion that the legal separation of Black children gave them “a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely to ever be undone.” Legal scholars note that the Brown v. Board of Education decision was the first in which the Supreme Court used sociological research in crafting its ruling. The court firmly rejected the precedent of Plessy v. Ferguson that had created the doctrine of “separate but equal.” The court declared “that in the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” Following the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision, resistance to school integration quickly spread across the nation, determined to make integration as difficult as possible. In 1955, the Supreme Court issued another opinion, commonly called Brown II, in which it ordered federal courts to oversee public school integration “with all deliberate speed.” In South Carolina, the state had attempted to circumvent the expected Brown ruling by developing “equalization schools” (the first being Scott’s Branch in Summerton) and after the ruling, the state immediately made plans to appeal. The state announced in 1954 that it would end aid to any school accepting Black students as transfers. Ku Klux Klan activity increased with planned attacks on local participants of the case. By August of 1955, Clarendon County officials told Marshall that they would close schools rather than integrate them. It was not until 1965 that Black students were enrolled at the previously all-White Summerton High School. The experience in South Carolina echoed across the southern United States as communities grappled with the real-life impact of the Brown decision and developed strategies collectively known as massive resistance. Court battles continued for decades after the decision, and communities across the country adopted many strategies—some more successful than others—to achieve education equity in the US. Park PurposeThe purpose statement identifies the specific reason(s) for establishment of a particular park. The purpose statement for Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park was drafted through an analysis of its enabling legislation and the legislative history that influenced its development. The park was established when the enabling legislation adopted by Congress was signed into law on October 26, 1992, and redesignated and expanded by further legislation on May 12, 2022 (see appendix A for enabling legislation and subsequent amendments). The purpose statement lays the foundation for understanding what is most important about the park.The purpose of Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park is to preserve, protect, and interpret the resources related to the landmark US Supreme Court decisions that declared unconstitutional the racial segregation of children in public schools; to interpret the integral role of the Brown v. Board of Education decisions in the civil rights movement; and to honor the civil rights stories of struggle, perseverance, and activism in the pursuit of education equity. Park SignificanceSignificance statements express why a park’s resources and values are important enough to merit designation as a unit of the national park system. These statements are linked to the purpose of Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park, and are supported by data, research, and consensus. Statements of significance describe the distinctive nature of the park and why an area is important within a global, national, regional, and systemwide context. They focus on the most important resources and values that will assist in park planning and management.The following significance statements have been identified for Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park. (Please note that the sequence of the statements does not reflect the level of significance.) 1. The US Supreme Court consolidated five cases from four states and the District of Columbia and decided the cases in two decisions on the same day in 1954. The court declared unanimously that the doctrine of “separate but equal,” established in the court’s 1896 decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, no longer applied in the realm of public education. The decisions interpreted clearly the constitutional right of all persons to equal protection of the law as guaranteed by the 14th and 5th amendments to the US Constitution. The decisions, commonly referred together to as the Brown v. Board of Education decision, established a legal precedent that led to the dismantling of other forms of segregation in the country during the height of the modern civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s. 2. The five cases—Briggs v. Elliott, Bolling v. Sharpe, Brown v. Board of Education, Davis v. County School Board, and Gebhart v. Belton—consolidated as Brown v. Board of Education, reflect regional dynamics, showing how systemic racial segregation impacted education across diverse geographic locations in the United States. Each case—originating from South Carolina, Washington, DC, Kansas, Virginia, and Delaware—highlights unique local circumstances that nonetheless underscore a shared national struggle against segregated schooling. 3. Attorneys from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) chose cases that proved crucial to the Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education. The case Briggs v. Elliott from deeply unequal Clarendon County, South Carolina, compelled the state to advance an “equalization” strategy that would comply with the Plessy doctrine by closing the disparity between Black and White school facilities. Scott’s Branch High School was one of the first “equalization schools” built in the early 1950s. At the other extreme, segregated elementary schools for Blacks in Topeka, Kansas, including Monroe School, were tangibly equal facilities that provided equal—or better—education to Black pupils. Yet, expert testimony from social scientists urged the court to move beyond measuring purely financial or physical inequalities to conclude that legalized and forced segregation itself had negative psychological effects on African American children and, therefore, should not be allowed. 4. The struggle for education equity has a long history in the United States. Many communities and excluded groups have contributed to that history. The sites included in Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park represent the perseverance and activism of community members—especially young people and their parents—as advocates for education equity. These communities symbolically represent the many other places and cases that built a history of judicial decisions stretching back into the 1800s and moving forward from Brown in legal and political efforts to achieve education equity. They also demonstrate the spectrum of reactions to the Brown decisions, from compliance to various forms of massive resistance. 5. Beyond the immediate effects the Brown decision had on segregated schools, the impact of the decision provided the legal principle—“segregation is inherently unequal”—that created a legacy for future movements to work on dismantling societal inequities. The decision also has had a broad global impact and has often been cited in other nations’ courts to establish a fundamental human value of racial equality and the right to an education. Fundamental Resources and ValuesFundamental resources and values (FRVs) are those features, systems, processes, experiences, stories, scenes, sounds, smells, or other attributes determined to warrant primary consideration during planning and management processes because they are essential to achieving the purpose of the park and maintaining its significance. Fundamental resources and values are closely related to a park’s legislative purpose and are more specific than significance statements. Fundamental resources and values help focus planning and management efforts on what is truly significant about the park. One of the most important responsibilities of NPS managers is to ensure the conservation and public enjoyment of those qualities that are essential (fundamental) to achieving the purpose of the park and maintaining its significance. If fundamental resources and values are allowed to deteriorate, the park purpose and/or significance could be jeopardized.The following fundamental resources and values have been identified for Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park: · Monroe Elementary School and Grounds. As one of four segregated elementary schools for Black children, Monroe is an example of the quality of education provided to African Americans in comparison to White pupils in Topeka’s elementary schools. By any measure at the time, the quality of education provided to Black children in segregated elementary schools was equal to—or better than—that provided to White children. By traditional interpretations of the Constitution, therefore, Topeka was “separate but equal.” The Supreme Court crucially ruled that despite the comparable availability of funding and facilities for Black and White students, “separate is inherently unequal.” The two-story brick building and surrounding grounds retain their appearance from the time of the court case. The building serves as the Topeka Visitor Center as well as park headquarters. · Scott’s Branch High School and Summerton High School. The disparity between the wood frame Scott’s Branch School and the brick Summerton High School, both built in the mid-1930s, was at issue in the Briggs v. Elliott case. During 1951, in an effort to make schools truly “separate but equal,” the state attempted to “equalize” school facilities for Black and White children by constructing a brick and cinderblock facility for Black children adjacent to their existing wood frame school. The wood frame structure was eventually demolished, but the brick and cinderblock Scott’s Branch school still stands today. Summerton High School was the better-resourced school for White students and was eventually integrated after the Brown decision. Both surviving buildings retain a substantial amount of their historical integrity to the time of the Briggs case and immediately after. · Oral Histories. Recording eyewitness accounts of participants in the Brown v. Board of Education cases has been an important method to “honor the civil rights stories of struggle, perseverance, and activism in the pursuit of education equity” as directed in the park’s enabling legislation. As older generations give way to newer ones, the park will continue to collect and preserve oral history interviews as valuable assets for understanding the impacts of the Brown cases and the obstacles to achieving education equity. Other Important Resources and ValuesBrown v. Board of Education National Historical Park contains other resources and values that are not fundamental to the purpose of the park and may be unrelated to its significance but are important to consider in planning processes. These are referred to as “other important resources and values” (OIRV). These resources and values have been selected because they are important in the operation and management of the park and warrant special consideration in park planning.The following other important resources and values have been identified for Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park: · Associations/Partnerships. The park’s enabling and expansion legislation directs the National Park Service to interpret the impact of the Brown v. Board of Education decisions on civil rights history in the US and to assist in the preservation, protection, and interpretation of the Brown-related sites in DC and four states. In order to achieve these directives, the park relies on partnerships with the owners of the affiliated areas and with museums, colleges and universities, heritage tourism agencies, and other nonprofit organizations. · Archeological Collections. The park’s archeological collections consist of artifacts reflecting the lives and material culture of those who lived and learned on the land. The archeological resources, combined with historical information, tell the story of migration and settlement. For example, artifacts relating to residents who lived in the Monroe Elementary School neighborhood from the late 1860s until 1928 reflect those who lived during the segregation era and were the ancestors of those who ultimately pushed for equality in the 1950s and 1960s. Future investigations in Summerton will likely reveal similar artifacts that illuminate the history of education in the community. The park’s archeological collections warrant special consideration as park resources. Interpretive ThemesInterpretive themes are often described as the key stories or concepts that visitors should understand after visiting a park—they define the most important ideas or concepts communicated to visitors about a park unit. Themes are derived from, and should reflect, park purpose, significance, resources, and values. The set of interpretive themes is complete when it provides the structure necessary for park staff to develop opportunities for visitors to explore and relate to all park significance statements and fundamental and other important resources and values. Interpretive themes are an organizational tool that reveal and clarify meaning, concepts, contexts, and values represented by park resources. Sound themes are accurate and reflect current scholarship and science. They encourage exploration of the context in which events or natural processes occurred and the effects of those events and processes. Interpretive themes go beyond a mere description of the event or process to foster multiple opportunities to experience and consider the park and its resources. These themes help explain why a park story is relevant to people who may otherwise be unaware of connections they have to an event, time, or place associated with the park.The following interpretive themes have been identified for Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park: · A century of personal struggles, community activism, and legal battles culminated in the US Supreme Court’s decisions in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. This theme explores the legal, political, moral, and social circumstances leading up to the cases and the cases themselves as representative of many other struggles in the US for educational equality and civil rights. · The local communities that initiated the five court cases comprising Brown v. Board of Education represented a broad range of economic, geographic, and cultural contexts, ranging from rural areas to thriving cities. Many people risked their safety and livelihoods to advocate for change in the face of massive resistance, and they suffered significant consequences as a result of the legal decisions. This theme conveys the significance of the “case of the century” as the result of the efforts of many people in diverse places over a long time, to honor their civil rights stories of struggle, activism, and perseverance, and to inspire audiences through those stories of personal sacrifices made for the greater common good. · The Brown v. Board of Education decisions provide the foundation for the major civil rights actions taken by the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of government and by more and more citizens, as the struggles broadened to include other groups in American society, establishing a landmark precedent that continues to inspire debate over the meanings of equality to the present day. This theme delves into the subsequent impact of the Supreme Court’s decisions in the struggle for education equity and in the many other legacies of the decisions. It is intended to convey the complex, interconnected nature of constitutional rights across groups and generations. · The Brown v. Board of Education decisions have informed the international movement for civil and human rights. National courts in many countries have used the Brown v. Board of Education decisions in their own opinions that have expanded rights and freedoms across the world. This theme highlights the international impact of the US Supreme Court’s decisions and conveys the far-reaching significance of those decisions in the context of global history. · The broad story of Brown v. Board of Education in the context of the American civil rights movement inspires the celebration of our common humanity and reminds us that engaged citizens through collective action, whether they are students, parents, teachers, lawyers, or judges, can propel a nation—and the world—toward equality and justice for all. This theme emphasizes democratic engagement. Special MandatesSpecial mandates are requirements specific to a park that must be fulfilled. Mandates can be expressed in enabling legislation, in separate legislation following the establishment of the park, or through a judicial process. They may expand on park purpose or introduce elements unrelated to the purpose of the park. They are an essential component of managing and planning for Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park.· Property Acquisition. The park’s enabling legislation as amended mandates and places conditions on property acquisition, including that any property owned by the states of Kansas or South Carolina or any political subdivision thereof may be acquired only by donation. The secretary of the interior may also acquire personal property associated with, and appropriate for, the interpretation of the historical park. The secretary may not acquire such personal property without the consent of the owner or by condemnation of any land or interest in land within the boundaries of the historical park. · Cooperative Agreements. The park’s enabling legislation as amended authorizes the secretary of the interior to enter into cooperative agreements with private as well as public agencies, organizations, and institutions in furtherance of the purposes of the enabling legislation as amended. · Affiliated Areas. The park’s enabling legislation as amended identifies five “affiliated areas” for their association with a court case included in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. The NPS may provide technical and financial assistance to, and enter into cooperative agreements with, the management entity for each affiliated area to provide financial assistance for the marketing, marking, interpretation, and preservation of the applicable affiliated area. A decision memorandum signed by the secretary of the interior on January 9, 2025, established the five sites associated with Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park as affiliated areas of the national park system: 1) The Robert Russa Moton Museum in Farmville, Virginia; 2) the former Howard High School in Wilmington, Delaware; 3) Claymont High School in Claymont, Delaware; 4) Hockessin Colored School #107 in Hockessin, Delaware; and 5) John Philip Sousa Middle School in the District of Columbia. (See additional information in “Affiliated Areas” below). Affiliated AreasAs noted in Special Mandates above, legislation redesignating and expanding Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park also legislated affiliated areas. While the five affiliated areas are not managed by the NPS, they are eligible for NPS technical and financial assistance and are required to be managed in accordance with laws generally applicable to sites in the National Park System.A decision memorandum signed by the secretary of the interior on January 9, 2025, affirms that the conditions of the legislation have been met by each affiliated area. These areas are required to be managed in a manner consistent with laws generally applicable to units of the National Park System and in accordance with NPS Policy Memorandum 24-04 on Affiliated Areas, which was issued by the NPS Director on October 15, 2024. Public Law 117-123 states that cooperative agreements between the NPS and each management entity are necessary for providing technical and financial assistance for the marketing, marking, interpretation, and preservation of each affiliated area. Policy Memorandum 24-04 confirms the essential role of agreements between the NPS and a management entity. The park’s enabling legislation as amended also requires that the NPS, in consultation with the management entity, develop a management plan for each area. The legislation includes further stipulations about the management plan and public comment (See Appendix A). Robert Russa Moton Museum (Farmville, Virginia)Built in 1939, the Robert Russa Moton High School was the African American high school for Prince Edward County, Virginia. The one-story red brick building remains virtually unchanged from the original design. In 1951, students from the school began a strike that proved to be critical in the march towards challenging “separate but equal.” The strike led to Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, a case decided in the Brown v. Board of Education decisions. Davis was the only student-initiated case of the five that comprised Brown v. Board of Education. Though the Brown decision held that segregation was unconstitutional, Virginians joined the “massive resistance” of other southern states. Though other school districts in Virginia closed schools for days or weeks, Prince Edward County was the only county in the nation to close its schools for five years, between 1959 and 1964, rather than desegregate. In Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, the Supreme Court intervened again to reopen the schools. The school building is a National Historic Landmark, a property recognized as having exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States. Since 2001, it has housed the Robert Russa Moton Museum, which preserves and constructively interprets how Prince Edward County relates to the history of civil rights in education and the leading role its citizens played in America’s transition from segregation toward integration. The museum strives to promote dialogue and advance positions that ensure empowerment within a constitutional democracy. In 2015, the museum and Longwood University entered into a perpetual agreement including a commitment by both institutions to work together to ensure “that the Museum as a landmark site is regularly open to the general public, in order to further its mission of advancing civil rights in education.” Management Entity: The Board of Trustees of the Robert Russa Moton Museum, Inc.Howard High School (Wilmington, Delaware)Built in 1927, the former Howard High School is located in the urban setting of Wilmington, Delaware. The roots of the school date back to 1867, and for many decades, the school was the only secondary school available to African American youth in the entire state of Delaware. As evidenced by photographs taken when the school opened, the interior maintains much of its historical identity. The library is now maintained by the Afro-American Historical Society of Delaware and the Howard Alumni Association to store reference materials and other memorabilia. A group of parents at Howard requested the school board allow their children to attend the all-White Claymont High School because it was within a shorter walking distance of their homes than Howard High. The school board denied this request. The parents took legal action which evolved into Belton v. Gebhart, one of the cases combined to form Brown v. Board of Education. Now known as Howard High School of Technology, the building retains much of its historical integrity and is now a National Historic Landmark. It was chosen as one of the representative buildings in Delaware to be an affiliated area of Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park. Howard High School also has an active alumni association.Claymont High School (Claymont, Delaware)Claymont High School, constructed between 1924 and 1925, was the subject of the Belton v. Gebhart case. The White-only school was also known as the Green Street School. In 1951, when Black students were denied admission, their case went to the Delaware Chancery Court. After the state court ruling in 1952, Black students were successfully enrolled. The ruling was limited in that it did not apply to schools statewide. Claymont was the first public high school in the 17 segregated states to be legally integrated. From there, the community became part of the Brown v. Board of Education case before the US Supreme Court. In 1980, the building became the home of the Claymont Community Center and was administered by the Brandywine Community Resource Council, Inc. The center operates a rich variety of programs today to support its mission to “enhance the community by addressing the human needs of wellness, belongingness and esteem.” Management Entity: Brandywine Community Resource Council, Inc., Board of Directors.Hockessin Colored School #107 (Hockessin, Delaware)Hockessin School #107C, the subject of the Bulah v. Gebhart case, was a “colored” elementary school that students were required to attend without any available transportation. Both the Bulah and Belton cases argued that the facilities and transportation options for Black children were not equal to those for White children. While filed separately in the Delaware courts, the cases eventually were combined. The chancery court decision concluded in both cases that the plaintiffs were in fact correct: the facilities were substantially unequal. They ordered injunctions barring the defendants from denying admission to the plaintiffs. The school is now used as a community facility by Friends of Hockessin Colored School #107, Inc. (FOHCS), a nonprofit corporation in the State of Delaware who saved the school from a sheriff’s sale and has since raised the funds necessary to renovate the school, install museum exhibits, and operate “a Center for Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Equity.” FOHCS entered into a partnership agreement with New Castle County in August 2020 to become a county park with the purpose of insuring that “the FOHCS mission would be financially sustainable in perpetuity.” Management Entity: The Friends of Hockessin Colored School #107, Inc.John Philip Sousa Middle School (Washington, District of Columbia)Built in 1950 in Southeast Washington, DC, and formerly known as John Philip Sousa Junior High School, the Sousa Middle School was the site of an attempt at school integration. When Black students were denied admission to the all-White school, the Bolling v. Sharpe case was filed by James Nabrit Jr., a professor at Howard University School of Law.The New Deal program in the 1930s offered Black Americans their first chance to secure government jobs, uniquely suiting Washington for rapid growth in the Black population. This influx of families led to overcrowding in Black schools, the buildings often holding double or even triple the amount suggested for them. In a story similar to those of the other affiliated-area schools, a group of determined parents relentlessly argued for better circumstances for their children. The culmination was the inclusion of Bolling v. Sharpe in the combined Brown v. Board of Education cases argued in front of the US Supreme Court in 1954. Today, the school remains a National Historic Landmark. The building is still in use as a public school, operated by the District of Columbia Public Schools, which itself is administered by the District of Columbia General Services Administration. Related ResourcesRelated resources are not owned by the National Park Service. They may be part of the broader context or setting in which park resources exist, represent a thematic connection that would enhance the experience of visitors, or have close associations with park fundamental resources and the purpose of the park. The related resources represent a connection with the park that often reflects an area of mutual benefit or interest, and collaboration, between the park and owner/stakeholder.Resources listed as related are those directly related to the court cases in each of the five communities, as well as a list of major repositories of oral histories and archival collections. A comprehensive list of resources related to predecessor cases and the people involved is beyond the scope of a foundation document. The related resources here have typically been recognized for their role in the Brown cases and decisions by being placed on the National Register of Historic Places, declared a National Historic Landmark, or recognized in some other way by the federal government or state historic preservation offices. The following resources related to Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park are grouped by location: South Carolina · Liberty Hill AME Church: Throughout the 1940s and 1950s, the church hosted meetings of African American students and parents in Summerton. In 1955, the church welcomed Thurgood Marshall to a meeting about school desegregation. · St. Mark AME Church: The church often served as a place for the NAACP to meet with African American students and parents in Summerton, including the petitioners in the Briggs v. Elliott lawsuit. · Harry and Eliza Briggs Home: The Briggs family welcomed community members into their home to sign the petition that became Briggs v. Elliott. They and others faced severe retribution after the Brown decisions and only returned from out of state in 1976. · Center for Civil Rights History and Research, University of South Carolina: The center provides educational programming and public engagement about Briggs v. Elliott and houses the papers of the Reverend Joseph A. De Laine. · Cecil Williams South Carolina Civil Rights Museum: Located in Orangeburg, the museum curates the largest collection of artifacts related to the people at the center of Briggs v. Elliott. Kansas · Sumner Elementary School: A National Historic Landmark, Sumner is identified in the park’s enabling legislation as worthy of NPS protection as an example of the White elementary schools that Black children were prevented from attending. · Historic US Post Office and Court House: The district court heard and decided the case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka here. The building is listed in the National Register of Historic Places. · Lucinda Todd Home: Plaintiff Lucinda Todd helped operate the Citizens Committee on Civil Rights from here. As secretary of the Topeka Chapter of the NAACP, Todd used her home as a hub of activity in what became the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka lawsuit. The home is listed in the National Register of Historic Places. · Kansas Historical Society: Archival collections include the Brown v. Topeka Board of Education Oral History Collection and many manuscripts related to the Brown cases—not just the Kansas case. Delaware · Delaware Public Archives: Houses the court, attorney general, and governor papers related to the Delaware cases and the aftermath of the Brown decisions. Virginia · Longwood University: The Greenwood Library Archives and Special Collections include oral histories of civil rights in Prince Edward County and manuscripts related to the Davis v. Prince Edward County case and the closure of schools in the county. District of Columbia · Charles Sumner School Museum and Archives: The official museum and archives of public education in the District of Columbia with emphasis upon the instruction of African American students. · National Archives Building: The main archives hold the records of the District Court of DC (Bolling v. Sharpe) and the records of the US Supreme Court. National Archives Regional Locations · District Court records are located in Atlanta (Briggs v. Elliott), Kansas City (Brown v. Board of Education), and Philadelphia (Davis v. Prince Edward County). · Records of executive agencies related to the Brown decisions are housed at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland. Records of the Office of the President are found at the respective presidential libraries. ContributorsBrown v. Board of Education National Historical ParkJessica Barnett, Acting Manager for Interpretation, Education, and Visitor Services andVisual Information Specialist Karen Maraschino, Facility Manager Diana Merrill, Administrative Officer Nicholas Murray, Division Manager, Interpretation, Education, and Visitor Services James H. Williams, Superintendent Interior Regions 3, 4, 5 (NPS Midwest)Natalie Franz, PlannerBill Harlow, Historical Architect James Lange, Manager, Planning and Compliance Division Aleks Pitt, Planning Portfolio Manager Wendy Ross, Deputy Regional Director Interior Region 2 (NPS Southeast)Chris Abbett, Associate Regional Director, Partnerships, Interpretation, and EducationTarona Armstrong, Deputy Regional Director Rachel Brady Baldwin, Community Planner Laura Waller, Superintendent, Reconstruction Era National Historical Park Ben West, Program Manager, Planning and Compliance External ContributorsSarah Bell, Kansas State Historical Society MuseumLanitra Bennett, Briggs-De Laine-Pearson Foundation Celeste Boykin, Briggs-De Laine-Pearson Foundation Thomas Bradford, Briggs-De Laine-Pearson Foundation Nathanial Briggs, New Jersey NAACP Willie Briggs, Summerton Community Action Group and Clarendon County NAACP Sherri Camp, Black History Collective and Topeka and Shawnee County Public Library Michael Church, Kansas State Historical Society Joseph A. De Laine Jr., Briggs-De Laine-Pearson Foundation Marguirite De Laine, Briggs-De Laine-Pearson Foundation Sean Dixon, Greater Topeka Partnership/Visit Topeka Bobby Donaldson, Executive Director, Center for Civil Rights History and Research and Associate Professor of History, University of South Carolina Sarah Fizell, ArtsConnects/ArtsTopeka Akiva Ford, Clarendon County NAACP George Frierson, Museum Curator, Bethune Cookman Museum Ophelia De Laine Gona, Briggs-De Laine-Pearson Foundation Jannie Harriot, Cecil Williams South Carolina Civil Rights Museum Cheryl Brown Henderson, Brown Foundation for Educational Equity, Excellence, and Research Karen Hiller, Brown v. Board Sumner Legacy Trust and Topeka City Council A.D. Jordan, Office of Senator Tim Scott Roy Jones, Clemson University Moses Levy, Jr., Manning NAACP Bruce Mactavish, Assistant Professor of History, Washburn University Robert McFadden, Summerton Community Action Group Jason R. McGowan, Oral Historian, Albert Gore Research Center, Middle Tennessee State University Valerie Mendoza, Independent Public Historian, Washburn University Elizabeth Miller, Greater Topeka Partnership/Visit Topeka Arthur Moyd, Clarendon County School District Board of Trustees Beryl New, Kansas State Board of Education and Co-Chair, 70th Anniversary Brown Coalition Marietta “Marty” Patterson, National Park Service’s Enduring Service Volunteer Award for Outstanding Volunteer Service (2018) Donna Rae Pearson, Museum Curator, Kansas State Historical Society and Black History Collective Alada M. Shinault-Small, Cecil Williams South Carolina Civil Rights Museum Debbie Stanton, Topeka and Shawnee County Public Library Terrance Tindal, Clarendon County NAACP Dalton Tresvant, Office of Congressman James Clyburn Rebekah Turnmire, Project Coordinator, Center for Civil Rights History and Research Glenda Washington, Chair, 70th Anniversary Brown Coalition Cecil Williams, Cecil Williams South Carolina Civil Rights Museum Sandra Williams, Summerton Community Action Group Rachel Young, Public Historian, Center for Civil Rights History and Research. AppendixEnabling Legislation and Legislative Acts for Brown v. Board of Education National Historical ParkNOTE: This document combines Public Law 102-525 (October 26, 1992), the initial act that created Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site, with the text of Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park Expansion and Redesignation Act, Public Law 117-123 of May 12, 2022.Text in italics is entirely new from the expansion act. Public Law 102-525 102nd Congress An Act Oct. 26, 1992 [S. 2890] To provide for the establishment of the Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site in the State of Kansas, and for other purposes. Civil rights. 16 USC 461 note. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, TITLE I—BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE HISTORICAL PARK SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the “Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park Expansion and Redesignation Act”. SEC. 2. REDESIGNATION OF THE BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION NATIONAL (1) IN GENERAL.—The Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site established by section 103(a) of Public Law 102-525 (106 Stat. 3439) shall be known and designated as the “Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park”. (2) REFERENCES.—Any reference in any law, regulation, document, record, map, or other paper of the United States to Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site shall be considered to be a reference to the “Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park”. (3) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Title I of Public Law 102-525 (106 Stat. 3428) is amended— [4 changes in original text not listed here but made in the text of this document] SEC. 3. EXPANSION OF THE BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK AND ESTABLISHMENT OF AFFILIATED AREAS. (1) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this section is to honor the civil rights stories of struggle, perseverance, and activism in the pursuit of education equity. (2) DEFINITIONS.—Section 101 of Public Law 102-525 (106 Stat. 3438) (as amended by section 2(c)) is amended—[see changes below] SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS. (1) AFFILIATED AREA.—The term ‘affiliated area’ means a site associated with a court case included in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka described in paragraph (8), (9), or (10) of section 102(a) that is designated as an affiliated area of the National Park System by section 106(a). (2) The term “ SEC. 102. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. (a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds as follows: (1) The Supreme Court, in 1954, ruled that the earlier 1896 Supreme Court decision in Plessy v. Ferguson that permitted segregation of races in elementary schools violated the fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution, which guarantees all citizens equal protection under the law. (2) In the 1954 proceedings, Oliver Brown and twelve other plaintiffs successfully challenged an 1879 Kansas law that had been patterned after the law in question in Plessy v. Ferguson after the Topeka, Kansas, Board of Education refused to enroll Mr. Brown’s daughter, Linda. (3) The Brown case was joined by 4 other cases relating to school segregation pending before the Supreme Court (Briggs v. Elliott, filed in South Carolina, Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County, filed in Virginia, Gebhart v. Belton, filed in Delaware, and Bolling v. Sharpe, filed in the District of Columbia) that were consolidated in the case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka. (4) A 1999 historic resources study examined the 5 cases included in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka and found that each case— (A) is nationally significant; and (B) contributes unique stories to the case for educational equity. (7) With respect to the case of Briggs v. Elliott— (A) Summerton High School in Summerton, South Carolina, the all-White school that refused to admit the plaintiffs in the case— (i) has been listed on the National Register of Historic Places in recognition of the national significance of the school; and (ii) is used as administrative offices for Clarendon School District 1; and (B) the former Scott’s Branch High School, an ‘equalization school’ in Summerton, South Carolina constructed for African-American students in 1951 to provide facilities comparable to those of White students, is now the Community Resource Center owned by Clarendon School District 1. (8) Robert Russa Moton High School, the all-Black school in Farmville, Virginia, which was the location of a student-led strike leading to Davis v. County School Board of Prince Edward County— (A) has been designated as a National Historic Landmark in recognition of the national significance of the school; and (B) is now the Robert Russa Moton Museum, which is administered by the Moton Museum, Inc., and affiliated with Longwood University. (9) With respect to the case of Belton v. Gebhart— (A) Howard High School in Wilmington, Delaware, an all-Black school to which the plaintiffs in the case were forced to travel— (i) has been designated as a National Historic Landmark in recognition of the national significance of the school; and (ii) is now the Howard High School of Technology, an active school administered by the New Castle County Vocational-Technical School District; (B) the all-White Claymont High School, which denied admission to the plaintiffs, is now the Claymont Community Center administered by the Brandywine Community Resource Council, Inc.; and (C) the Hockessin School #107C (Hockessin Colored School)— (i) is the all-Black school in Hockessin, Delaware, that 1 of the plaintiffs in the case was required to attend with no public transportation provided; and (ii) is now used as a community facility by Friends of Hockessin Colored School #107, Inc. (10) John Philip Sousa Junior High School in the District of Columbia, the all-White school that refused to admit plaintiffs in Bolling v. Sharpe— (A) has been designated as a National Historic Landmark in recognition of the national significance of the school; (B) is now known as the ‘John Philip Sousa Middle School’; and (C) is owned by the District of Columbia Department of General Services and administered by the District of Columbia Public Schools. (b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of this title are— (1) to preserve, protect, and interpret for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations, the places that contributed materially to the landmark United States Supreme Court decision that brought an end to segregation in public education; and (2) to interpret the integral role of the Brown v. Board of Education case in the civil rights movement. (3) to assist in the preservation, protection, and interpretation of related resources SEC. 103. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS IN EDUCATION: BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK. (a) IN GENERAL.—There is hereby established as a unit of the National Park System the Brown v. Board of Education (b) DESCRIPTION.—The (c) BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT.— (1) ADDITIONS.—In addition to the land described in subsection (b), the historical park shall include the land and interests in land, as generally depicted on the map entitled ‘Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park Boundary Additions and Affiliated Areas’, numbered 462/178,449, and dated February 2022, and more particularly described as— (A) the Summerton High School site in Summerton, Clarendon County, South Carolina; (B) the former Scott’s Branch High School site in Summerton, Clarendon County, South Carolina; and (C) approximately 1 acre of land adjacent to Monroe Elementary School in Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas. (2) MAP.—The map described in paragraph (1) shall be on file and available for public inspection in the appropriate offices of the National Park Service. SEC. 104. PROPERTY ACQUISITION. The Secretary is authorized to acquire by donation, exchange, or purchase with donated or appropriated funds the real property described in section 103(b) subsections (b) and (c) of section 103. Any property owned by the States of Kansas SEC. 105. ADMINISTRATION OF HISTORIC SITE HISTORICAL PARK. (a) IN GENERAL,—The Secretary shall administer the historic site in accordance with this title and the laws generally applicable to units of the National Park System, including the Act of August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535), and the Act of August 21, 1935 (49 Stat. 666). (b) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—The Secretary is authorized to enter into cooperative agreements with private as well as public agencies, organizations, and institutions in furtherance of the purposes of this title. (c) Amendment To General Management Plan.—The Secretary shall prepare and submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives an amendment to the management plan for the historical park to include the portions of the historical park in Summerton, Clarendon County, South Carolina. SEC. 106. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION AFFILIATED AREAS. (a) In General.—On the date on which the Secretary determines that an appropriate management entity has been identified for the applicable affiliated area, as generally depicted on the map described in section 103(c)(1), the following shall be established as affiliated areas of the National Park System: (1) The Robert Russa Moton Museum in Farmville, Virginia. (2) The Delaware Brown v. Board of Education Civil Rights Sites, to include— (A) the former Howard High School in Wilmington, Delaware; (B) Claymont High School in Claymont, Delaware; and (C) Hockessin Colored School #107 in Hockessin, Delaware. (3) The John Philip Sousa Middle School in the District of Columbia. (b) Administration.—Each affiliated area shall be managed in a manner consistent with— (1) this title; and (2) the laws generally applicable to units of the National Park System. (c) Management Plans.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with the management entity for the applicable affiliated area, shall develop a management plan for each affiliated area. (2) REQUIREMENTS.—A management plan under paragraph (1) shall— (A) be prepared in consultation and coordination with interested State, county, and local governments, management entities, organizations, and interested members of the public associated with the affiliated area; (B) identify, as appropriate, the roles and responsibilities of the National Park Service and the management entity in administering and interpreting the affiliated area in a manner that does not interfere with existing operations and continued use of existing facilities; and (C) require the Secretary to coordinate the preparation and implementation of the management plan and interpretation of the affiliated area with the historical park. (3) PUBLIC COMMENT.—The Secretary shall— (A) hold not less than 1 public meeting in the general proximity of each affiliated area on the proposed management plan, which shall include opportunities for public comment; and (B) (i) publish the draft management plan on the internet; and (ii) provide an opportunity for public comment on the draft management plan. (4) SUBMISSION.—Not later than 3 years after the date on which funds are made available to carry out this section, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives the management plan for each affiliated area developed under paragraph (1). (d) Cooperative Agreements.—The Secretary may provide technical and financial assistance to, and enter into cooperative agreements with, the management entity for each affiliated area to provide financial assistance for the marketing, marking, interpretation, and preservation of the applicable affiliated area. (e) Land Use.—Nothing in this section affects— (1) land use rights of private property owners within or adjacent to an affiliated area, including activities or uses on private land that can be seen or heard within an affiliated area; or (2) the authority of management entities to operate and administer the affiliated areas. (f) LIMITED ROLE OF THE SECRETARY.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Nothing in this section authorizes the Secretary— (A) to acquire land in an affiliated area; or (B) to assume financial responsibility for the operation, maintenance, or management of an affiliated area. (2) OWNERSHIP.—Each affiliated area shall continue to be owned, operated, and managed by the applicable public or private owner of the land in the affiliated area. SEC. There are authorized to be appropriated $1,250,000 to carry out the purposes of this title including land acquisition and initial development. This Foundation Document has been prepared as a collaborative effort between park and regional staff and is recommended for approval by the DOI Regions 3, 4, and 5 Regional Director.Signed by Superintendent James H. Williams on 09/19/2025 Foundation Document • Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site NATIONAL PARK SERVICE • U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR |
Last updated: September 10, 2026