Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Title I topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Darren Rice outlines Title I uses as Greenwood 51 says about 70% of students meet poverty threshold
Summary
District federal‑programs presenter Darren Rice told the Greenwood 51 board that Title I funds support staffing, interventions and technology; he said school‑level eligibility is calculated by direct certification and that the district’s pupil‑in‑poverty rate is roughly 70–71%.
Darren Rice, introduced by the chair as the district’s federal‑programs presenter, told the Greenwood 51 Board of Trustees that Title I exists to “ensure that all students receive fair, equal and significant opportunity to obtain high‑quality education and reach minimum proficiency on state standards.”
Rice summarized how a school qualifies (a 40% poverty threshold is one eligibility route) and said the district uses direct certification sources such as SNAP, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, foster‑care status and homelessness to calculate pupils in poverty. “Around 70 to 71% of our students are considered to be pupils in poverty,” Rice said, adding that funds are distributed by formula based on those percentages.
He listed common Title I uses that Greenwood 51 applies locally: computer labs and service agreements; reading interventionists at primary and middle schools; additional instructional technology (panels and laptops); and pupil‑services positions such as full‑time guidance counselors and media specialists. “These are resources in addition to what we have through our general fund,” he said.
Board members asked whether parents take advantage of Title I programs. Rice said many funds are tied to staff salaries but that the district runs parent nights, community outreach and other family engagement efforts; “some do, yeah…some do not as many as probably we would like,” he said, describing ongoing outreach to increase participation.
Why it matters: Title I dollars are a recurring federal revenue stream that can materially affect staffing and intervention services at schools identified as high‑need. Rice’s presentation signaled both the scale of need in Greenwood 51 and the district’s existing approach to directing federal funds toward instruction, technology and family engagement.
The presentation did not require a board vote. Board members followed with a separate budget review later in the meeting that referenced recently received supplemental federal funds for Title I and other programs.
