Polaris, Summit: Alpine School District weighs options to preserve care for youth in custody and at‑risk students

Alpine School District presented enrollment, funding and operational options May 20 for its two alternative high schools — Polaris and Summit — and recommended keeping both schools running under a shared model through at least 2030 to protect specialized services for youth in care and other at‑risk students.

Staff described Polaris as a structured, lower student‑to‑staff program that supports students who need intensive adult intervention and Summit as the district’s primary site for youth in care (students in state custody, foster care or group homes). District presenters said the schools are more costly per pupil than traditional high schools because of smaller class sizes and higher support levels, but argued the investment reduces longer-term social costs by increasing graduation rates and stabilizing at‑risk students.

Dan Biolo, director over Summit, described Summit’s funding mix: about 85% of Summit’s revenue derives from the state youth‑in‑care grant, which allows Summit to serve non‑youth‑in‑care students alongside youth in care because the mixed population stabilizes the learning environment. Hannah Figueredo (Polaris director) said Polaris’s graduation rate recently rose to about 85 percent, up from the mid‑60s a few years ago, and the program has produced more than 1,100 graduates since its founding.

Staff gave four options for successor districts to consider: - Option 1 (recommended): Central District hosts Summit and Polaris and serves students from all three districts under a shared-service agreement through at least 2030. Staff said this preserves continuity and limits immediate cost increases for the new districts. - Option 2: Consolidate Polaris and Summit into a single combined school serving all students, which would reduce some overhead but risk losing distinct program cultures and services. - Option 3: Retain Summit as a single site for all youth in care students while each successor district builds its own alternative program for non‑YIC students. - Option 4: Each new district assumes full responsibility for both youth‑in‑care and alternative programming and builds independent programs.

Staff provided sample per‑pupil figures: Summit’s combined per‑pupil cost (including facility average) was presented near $33,000 per pupil in one model; Polaris’s per‑pupil cost was shown near $30,000. After subtracting specialized funding (youth‑in‑care grant, SPED, CTE and similar sources) and the WPU, staff produced per‑student reimbursement estimates other districts would pay the host district under the proposed billing methodology (examples presented in the slide deck showed estimates, e.g., roughly $410 per non‑YIC student to Summit and about $2,259 per student to Polaris in staff’s illustrative calculations for the last full year). Staff cautioned those numbers were illustrative and would change with final ADM counts and updated WPU figures.

Why it matters: Polaris and Summit provide services not readily available at traditional high schools — lower student‑to‑staff ratios, in‑person counseling and alternative pacing — and staff said losing or rapidly decentralizing those services at reconfiguration could interrupt graduation pathways, particularly for sophomores and other students mid‑program. The recommended shared-host approach would aim to avoid gaps while successor district boards make longer-term choices.

Staff noted constraints including building leases that run to 2030 and the need for successor boards to address long-term governance and cost-sharing. They also listed implementation questions that require further work, such as bus-route reimbursements, slot allocation versus per‑ADM billing, and the impact of combining unique school cultures.