Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Title I topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Title I allocation falls about $1M; district outlines uses and carryover
Summary
Financial management staff told the budget committee that the districts Title I allocation after bypass fell from $13.6M in FY25 to $12.5M in FY26, reducing building-level flexibility; staff described required bypass services to nonpublic schools, set-asides for foster/homeless support, and roughly 176.5 FTEs funded by Title I.
Nichelle Hunter, director of the districts Financial Management Office, briefed the committee on federal Title I allocations and what the reduction means at the building and program level.
Hunter said the districts FY25 allocation after bypass was $13,600,000 and that the FY26 allocation after bypass is $12,500,000 — a decrease of about $1,000,000 compared with the prior year. "So we saw a $1,000,000 decrease from the prior year," she said, and added that a carryover of roughly $3,500,000 from prior-year Title I activity would bring available Title I resources in FY26 to about $16,000,000 to cover salaries, set-asides and services.
Hunter explained how allocations are calculated: the U.S. Department of Education and the state use census poverty and population data to determine per-student allocations, and the state provides building-level allocations using the community eligibility provision and poverty ratios. She said the districts poverty ratio fell in recent census counts, which reduced federal allocations.
The director outlined required uses and set-asides: Title I supports building-level staff (Hunter said about 176.5 FTEs are funded by Title I), parental involvement activities, foster-care transportation, services for homeless students and services for neglected and delinquent youth. Hunter also described Title I "bypass" funding that requires the district to provide equitable services to nonpublic schools within district boundaries; she said that bypassed funds are provided through a federal vendor and do not flow through the districts operating account.
Hunter said the district is meeting with building leaders in quarterly reviews to discuss how best to use Title I and other available funds to sustain services at the school level and that district leadership is discussing longer-term reshaping of Title I planning in response to potential future funding declines.
Committee members asked follow-up questions about how set-asides are used at the building level and requested written answers to additional questions submitted by board member Ray Cummings; staff agreed to provide follow-up materials.
