Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Summer Learning Targeted Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lakeville Area Schools reports rising summer enrollment for targeted services; credit recovery yields 194 recovered credits so far
Summary
District staff told the ISD 194 school board July 22 that summer alternative programming is near capacity, funded largely through state School-Age Program (SAP) mechanisms tied to attendance, and producing immediate results in credit recovery and foundational reading supports.
Lakeville Area Schools reported on July 22 that its summer alternative programs—targeted services for K–8, high‑school credit recovery and an online tuition program—are operating near capacity and producing measurable short‑term results.
Margaret Garem, principal of Alternative Programs, told the school board the district is running targeted services at four elementary sites and one middle school and currently serves about 454 students in grades 1–8. “This provides a system of supports for the whole child,” Garem said, describing tiered instruction, small‑group station rotations and social‑emotional learning as central features of the summer work.
Board members asked for financial and outcome details. Garem and Janet McBride, Alternative Programs coordinator, said the credit recovery program had 173 students enrolled this summer and, as of the morning of July 22, had recovered 194 course credits. The online tuition program enrolled 77 students and runs tuition‑based health and physical‑education and elective courses for students who want to keep courses in their schedules.
On staffing, presenters said the program used about 41 licensed and support staff for targeted services and about 170 high‑school teachers/staff supporting the credit‑recovery sites; presenters noted those numbers fluctuate with rolling summer enrollment. Garem said the district’s goal is break‑even financially: targeted services, credit recovery and the tuition program are funded through a mix of SAP/state funding and attendance/membership accounting. “Another way this is possible is because we have a SAP,” Garem said, referring to the district’s school‑year approved program authorization that allows year‑round reporting and state support. She added that about 10% of the state funding may be used for administrative costs, consistent with SAP rules.
The board asked how the district triages credit‑recovery demand; presenters said seniors are prioritized and the program maintains a waiting list and rolling enrollment so students can be moved in as seats open. Director Brian Thompson pressed on whether summer programming is closing the “summer slide” and how attendance mediates outcomes; staff said the intended effect is to prevent learning loss and that they track fall FastBridge scores to measure impact.
Administrators identified community partners that support summer operations, including Open Door (Eagan) for mobile lunches and district community‑education programs that share space and staff. Garem invited board members to visit summer sites in the coming days.
Board discussion included capacity, staffing limits, and whether extra revenue or savings could be reinvested in the programs. Staff said targeted services funding is essentially stagnant from the state and rising labor costs make break‑even harder, though historical program accounting typically reaches near break‑even once final attendance/membership is reconciled.
