Further complicating things is the possibility that in some of the Lake Districts, the relatively low incomes might not translate fully into high student poverty as measured by
free and reduced lunch counts (and the under - counting of poverty by that measure, especially with secondary students, is always a factor too).
These formulas are different for each program and take into account several factors, such as the number of students with individualized education programs (IEPs) and
the free and reduced lunch counts or poverty percentage.
Not exact matches
As I switch the metric from per - Title I eligible (i.e., from child poverty
counts) as in the district - level calculations in Table 1 to per - FRPL - eligible student, the grant amounts shrink as more students participate in
free and reduced - price
lunch than are poor (
and counted for district - level allocations).
The options allowed under the USED guidance include using
counts of Identified Students (either alone, or multiplied by 1.6 to approximate the number of children who would be approved for
free and reduced - price
lunches);
counts of students from low - income families based on state or local income surveys;
and Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) assistance, Census (where available), or composite data authorized under the ESEA statute.
Counting Low - income Students Low - income students continue to be identified — for purposes of allocating additional funding through a low - income student weight
and a concentrated poverty weight — in the new ECS formula based on whether they are eligible for the
free and reduced price meals program of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, known in Connecticut as
free and reduced price
lunch (FRPL).
Todd County has 61 % of its children on
free and reduced lunch (185 % of poverty)
and Wolfe County has 78 % (Kids
Count, 2011).