Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Truancy Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board tables proposed CYS truancy MOU after resident warns referrals can ‘destroy a family’
Summary
After a public commenter expressed deep concern about referrals to Washington County Children & Youth Services (CYS), the McGuffey board voted to table a proposed truancy prevention/referral MOU and asked administration for attendance data and a committee presentation.
The McGuffey School Board voted to table consideration of a proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Washington County Children & Youth Services after a resident warned that school referrals to CYS over truancy can have severe consequences for families.
Vicky Jordan of Buffalo Township used the public‑comment period to urge the board to delay the MOU, saying the district should not "turn[] over our authority and responsibilities over to an outside agency" without clear answers about how and when referrals would be made. "You can literally destroy a family with a referral to CYS over truancy," Jordan said, and she asked the board to conduct more research and discussion before approving the agreement.
During the board's discussion, members noted the MOU language defines certain referral practices. One board member summarized that, under the document, school truancy is classified as three unexcused absences and habitual truancy as six unexcused days, and that a referral to CYS can be made between three and five unexcused absences depending on lack of success with the district's truancy elimination plan.
Board members raised questions about the mechanics and data behind referrals: whether the district or CYS sets referral thresholds, what consequences families might face, how teachers code absences in PowerSchool, and what data shows the district's current truancy trends and the effectiveness of existing truancy elimination plans. Several members urged the administration to prepare a presentation that includes current attendance statistics, the district's Truancy Elimination Plan, and an explanation of why the MOU is being recommended.
After discussion, a motion to table the MOU passed; the board directed specific members to work with the superintendent to request the presentation and data and suggested placing the item on next month's agenda only after the requested information is provided.
Why it matters: The MOU would formalize procedures for referring chronically absent students to a county child‑welfare agency. Residents and officials disagreed over whether the MOU clarifies necessary early intervention or risks unnecessary escalation; the board chose to delay action and collect more information.
The board did not vote to approve the MOU; it was tabled pending a committee presentation and additional data.
