Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the At Risk Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews proposed $1.69 million at-risk budget for 2025-26, including staffing and program allocations
Summary
District staff presented a proposed 2025-26 at-risk (modified supplemental) budget totaling about $1.69 million to fund 22 FTEs and programs including tiered supports, resource navigators, summer school and partnerships; the board later authorized administration to request SBRC supplemental funds tied to at-risk programming.
Becky Witchers presented the district's required annual proposal for the modified supplemental amount (at-risk funds) for the 2025-26 school year at the Jan. 13 board meeting. The at-risk allocation is intended to support a PreK-12 continuum of services to meet academic, social and emotional behavior needs of at-risk students and to promote graduation and postsecondary readiness.
Witchers described the district's locally selected at-risk indicators, which include attendance and chronic absenteeism, school engagement, academic performance (literacy and numeracy), discipline measures (ISS/OSS/major referrals), homelessness or foster status, and on-track-to-graduate credit measures for secondary students. The district also counts students "persistently at risk" as those two or more grade levels below benchmark in elementary benchmark assessments.
Budget summary and staffing
- Total proposed at-risk budget: approximately $1,690,000 for the 2025-26 year (district estimate presented). - Total FTE funded in the proposal: 22 FTE (11 certified teachers, 3 other professional salaries, plus classified and support personnel across programs). - Specific supports funded: MHS tier 2 and tier 3 supports (MCAP), Susan Clark tier 2/tier 3 supports, districtwide attendance and truancy liaison, juvenile court services liaison (50% funded by at-risk dollars and 50% by a state grant), a literacy interventionist at Mulberry (funded from at-risk because Mulberry is not a Title I school), mindfulness intervention services, environment coaches (ECs), resource navigators (4 districtwide), IJAG and AIM partnerships, summer school/spark programs, and funding for contracted services such as Robert Young.
Witchers explained some line items change year to year; for example, Robert Young's billed portion is budgeted at $25,000 for contingencies because the partner now bills Medicaid for many services and federal ESSER funds that previously covered some work have ended. She noted the district's use of other grants (including a state decategorization grant) to support navigator positions in addition to the at-risk funds.
Board members asked clarifying questions about why Mulberry receives a literacy interventionist funded from at-risk dollars (answer: Mulberry is not a Title I school and therefore cannot use Title I funds for a reading teacher even though student needs exist) and about the possibility of funding paraprofessionals with at-risk dollars (answer: current proposal does not designate at-risk funds for paras; paras supporting at-risk students exist but are funded from other budgets).
Nut graf: Why this matters
The proposed at-risk budget funds personnel and programs that the district says directly support students who are chronically absent, off-track for graduation, or showing persistent academic deficits. The board later authorized administration to submit an SBRC modified supplemental amount application that will fund part of these at-risk activities for returning dropouts and dropout-prevention programming.
Ending
Witchers said the proposal will return on the agenda for formal board action later in the meeting cycle; administration is prepared to answer questions and adjust allocations if other revenue shifts occur.
