Berkeley County Schools reports improving attendance but warns chronic absence remains elevated

Al Van Meter, Berkeley County Schools attendance director, told the school board on Monday that the district’s chronic absence rate began the year higher than last year but has improved in successive 20‑day reporting windows.

"If students don't show up regularly to school, investments in curriculum, instruction, and expanded learning opportunities are unlikely to make a difference," Van Meter said, framing the presentation with the stakes for instruction.

Van Meter said the county began the year with a 22.7% chronic absence rate compared with 17% at the same point last school year. He reported the rate had declined each 20‑day checkpoint to 21.7% in the most recent update and said average daily attendance has risen from 92.1% to 92.7% during the year. He cautioned the board that events early in the school year — including bomb and gun threats that kept some students home — contributed to the higher starting point.

The district uses four attendance definitions in its reporting, Van Meter said: average daily attendance, truancy (10 or more unexcused absences), chronically absent (more than 10% of the year, roughly 18½ days), and chronic‑absence rate (percentage of students meeting the chronically absent definition). He emphasized the state accountability metric is the chronic‑absence rate.

Van Meter outlined several countywide strategies: county reports sent to schools every 20 days, targeted coaching and shared problem‑solving among schools with the highest rates (including a coalition of four high schools that meets twice monthly), meaningful contact with families per state policy within three to five days of absences, tiered interventions (whole‑group, small‑group, individual), and referrals to outside agencies for mental‑health or substance issues. He said the district increased referrals to the magistrate system and has a truancy diversion specialist who provides case management for middle and high school students.

Board members questioned specifics on home visits, safety and recordkeeping. Van Meter said attendance workers are assigned geographically so the same worker covers feeder schools when possible and that workers coordinate to avoid sending multiple different staff to the same home. To increase staff safety, he said the district limits unannounced home visits, encourages two‑person visits when practical, and asks workers to check in by phone before or during a visit. "If they feel at all uncomfortable going to that home, they are not going," Van Meter said.

The board asked about whether school resource officers accompany attendance workers; Van Meter said counselors or social workers typically accompany visits and that resource officers go only in limited circumstances (for example, if the officer is already the school's resource officer or there are extenuating circumstances). Van Meter also said the district transported McKinney‑Vento and foster students to reduce churn and that those transportation counts have increased this year.

Board members raised concerns about students who miss large amounts of instruction yet advance grade to grade. Van Meter and Superintendent Dr. Saks discussed pupil‑progression options, possible retention or seat‑time requirements, and alternatives such as homebound instruction or other formats for students with medical needs. Van Meter said some chronically absent students still pass course assessments but that missed seat time creates gaps that widen over time.

Van Meter recommended continued focus on data, communication with families and collaboration with magistrates and community partners. He said the district would present follow‑up options — including a district pupil progression plan and stakeholder engagement — if the board wants to consider attendance tied to promotion criteria.