Horry County Schools proposes $2.02 million in one‑time support for early literacy; board tables decision for more data

District staff on Thursday presented a package of targeted, one‑time steps to support early literacy and reduce third‑grade retention that would cost $2,019,505 and be paid from the district's undesignated fund balance.

Lee James, a district staff member who introduced the plan during the board meeting, said the package bundles five strategies district principals ranked highest: paid release time for teachers attending LETRS professional development; funds for school‑level literacy plans; additional pay for part‑time interventionists; expanded summer reading camp sites; and after‑school reading tutoring. "If my math is correct, that would be a total of $2,019,505 and that would come from our undesignated fund balance," James said.

The proposal listed specific funding lines: $390,547 for two days of professional release time per participating teacher to support LETRS implementation; $400,000 in school‑directed literacy planning funds; $250,000 to increase part‑time interventionist capacity; $478,958 to restore summer reading camp from four sites back to seven; and $500,000 to fund after‑school reading tutoring across elementary schools.

Nut graf: The request was prompted by winter MAP reading assessment results and a district count showing roughly "a little over a thousand" third‑grade students identified as at‑risk for retention in 2024–25. Staff emphasized evidence of higher gains among students receiving Tier 2 intervention and argued the one‑time money would expand that support immediately. Board members, however, urged more precise projections of how many students would be served, how many would be exempted from retention rules, and measurable targets for the funds, and they voted to table the request until the next meeting to allow staff to return with that information.

In the presentation, district ELA staff member (identified in the packet and at the meeting as Ms. Coy) summarized interim assessment results that staff used to justify the request. Coy reported that grade‑3 students not in intervention grew about 8.5 RIT points between fall and winter MAP administration, while students in Tier 2 intervention grew about 12 RIT points over the same period. Coy said the trend — larger short‑term gains for students receiving targeted intervention — supports investment in intervention capacity and out‑of‑school tutoring.

Board members pressed staff on operational details and expected outcomes. Board member Debbie Edmonds asked when intervention services begin; staff replied interventions commonly start in first grade, with some kindergarten supports. Several board members said they wanted school‑level goals rather than a single district target. Board member Daryl Ricketts suggested letting each school set stretch goals tied to the funds. Others asked staff to estimate how many of the roughly 1,000 at‑risk students would qualify for good‑cause exemptions (for example, for students with IEPs or recent arrival to the U.S.) and to provide a projected return‑on‑investment and target reduction in retention numbers.

After discussion a motion to postpone the measure "until the next meeting" passed. Staff said they would return with more precise counts of students who remain at risk after exemptions, school‑level plans, and suggested targets for the funds.

Ending: The proposal remains under consideration; the board directed staff to supply targeted data and recommended goals before taking a final vote. The item is expected back on the agenda at the board's next meeting.