1. 1 Children At Risk Program Legislative Audit Bureau April 2005

2. 2 Overview u The program serves students in grades 5 through 12 who are at risk of not graduating from high school u Created by the 1985-87 Biennial Budget Act u Since FY 1990-91, the program has been funded with $3.5 million in GPR annually

3. 3 Types of Students Served u Funded districts provide services to students who are dropouts or who meet at least two other criteria: –behind in high school credits earned; –behind in basic skill levels; –habitual truants; –parents; –adjudicated delinquents; or –certain 8 th graders

4. 4 Other Types of At-Risk Students u Most funding for at-risk students is not limited by the Children At Risk definition u At-risk funds are also provided to students who: –are in poverty; –have limited English proficiency; and –exhibit evidence of alcohol or other drug abuse u In FY 2003-04, the program accounted for only 1.2 percent of the $290.7 million in state and federal funds provided for at-risk services

5. 5 Program Participation u The number of districts participating increased from 13 in 1999-2000 to 21 in 2003-04 u In 2003-04, the 21 participating districts identified 29,669 at-risk students

6. 6 Statutory Performance Objectives u Eligibility for program funding is based on achieving at least three of five objectives: –Receiving a high school diploma; –Remaining in school; –Having an attendance rate of at least 70 percent; –Earning at least 4.5 credits during the school year; and –Demonstrating gains in reading and mathematics

7. 7 Funding and Compliance Issues u Districts can receive up to 10 percent of their per pupil state equalized aid for each qualifying student u Funding has been prorated because there are more qualifying students than available funds u School districts do not comply with statutory requirements to: –Specify the amount of funds dedicated to each at-risk program –Provide a preference for alternative schools, charter schools, schools within schools, and private agencies

8. 8 Student Achievement

9. 9 Program Performance u Among 11 districts that participated each year from 1999-2000 through 2002-03: –The graduation rate increased by an average of 6.5 percentage points, compared to an average of 2.5 percentage points statewide –10 of the 11 districts reduced their dropout rates, and 6 of 11 districts had dropout rates below the state average of 2 percent

10. 10 Future of the Program u The Governor has recommended a continued level of funding of $3.5 million annually u Other options the Legislature could consider: –Eliminate the program; –Merge the program with another program; or –Merge the funding into general school aids

11. 11 Children At Risk Program Legislative Audit Bureau April 2005