HB 2665:
Effects of Poverty on
Education Attainment
As Addressed in Oregon Law
Oregon Department of Education
June 2014
http://www.ode.state.or.us
It is a priority of the Oregon Department of Education that there will be no discrimination or harassment
on the grounds of race, color, sex marital status, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, age or
disability in any educational programs, activities, or employment. Persons having questions about equal
opportunity and nondiscrimination should contact the Oregon Department of Education, 255 Capitol
Street NE, Salem OR 97310: Telephone (503) 947-5600; Fax (503) 378-5156
This document was prepared by the Oregon Department of Education
© 2014 Oregon Department of Education
Permission is hereby granted to copy any or all parts of this document for non-commercial
educational purposes.
Please credit the “Oregon Department of Education.”
EFFECTS OF POVERTY ON EDUCATION ATTAINMENT AS ADDRESSED
IN OREGON LAW
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4
Part 1: Statutes Relating to the Distribution of the State School Fund ................................................ 13
Part 2: Equivalence in Opportunities to Learn Across Neighborhoods ............................................... 19
Part 3: Efforts to Mitigate Disparities in Opportunities Outside of the School Day or Year .............. 36
References ........................................................................................................................................... 40
Appendix A: Federal Compensatory Education Programs ................................................................... 41
Appendix B: HB 3232 and USDOE Test Fee Program Funding 2013-15 ........................................... 43
Appendix C: Poverty by School District ............................................................................................. 44
Table of Figures:
Table 1.1 Formula Revenue per Average Daily Membership ............................................................. 14
Table 1.2 Oregon Pre-Kindergarten Participation .............................................................................. 26
i
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
Effects of Poverty on Education Attainment as Addressed in
Oregon Law
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2013, the Oregon Legislature enacted HB 2665, which directed the Oregon Department of Education
to identify how state law addressed poverty in its K-12 education system.
The Department of Education shall conduct an evaluation of the means by which the impact of
poverty on educational attainment is addressed by state law. The study shall include an analysis of:
(a) Distributions of the State School Fund
(b) Standards for equivalency in opportunities to learn across neighborhoods and economic
circumstances.
(c) Efforts to mitigate disparities in opportunities that are provided outside of the school day
or the school year.
Poverty & Education in Oregon
Poverty continues to increase in Oregon. In the 1995-96 school year, 31 percent of students were
eligible for free and reduced meals. By Oct, 1, 2013, that had increased to 53.7 percent.1 Children
living in poverty face a number of challenges: they are more likely to be diagnosed with learning
disabilities; have a higher rate of absenteeism; typically perform at a lower level on state assessments;
and are more likely to drop out of school. In addition, they are less likely to be prepared for primary
schooling or to continue on to postsecondary education. Policymakers have responded to the issue of
poverty and education with a number of strategies.
The School Funding Distribution Formula
The School Funding Distribution Formula was enacted with a goal of providing equitable funding
among school districts by compensating for local revenue and family income disparities. Specific to
poverty, school districts receive an additional .25 weight for every student in poverty. In a recent
hearing of the School Funding Task Force,2 a national expert questioned whether the weight was
appropriate or should be larger. A number of school programs and grants seek to mitigate the effects of
poverty, including the Free and Reduced meals programs and grants targeted at reducing the
achievement gap.
1
Source: Oregon Department of Education. http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=3256
2
Established by HB 2506 (2013)
2
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
Many of the weights and grants do not specifically target poverty, but are likely to affect impoverished
students disproportionately. These include the 1.0 special education weight, the .25 neglected and
delinquent weight, and the .25 foster home student weight.
Equivalency in Opportunities
Historically, education has been viewed as the great equalizer—where persons of humble means can
attain the knowledge and skills to become anyone they wish—engineer, doctor, astronaut, or president.
HB 2665 asks if Oregon students have equal opportunities to realize their dreams.
Laws that attempt to equalize education opportunities are found in Part 2 of the report and include laws
that measure how well schools are serving all their students; the incorporation of social services at the
school level; efforts to recruit teachers that reflect school populations; reading initiatives; programs for
certain populations of children including the economically disadvantaged; and the prohibition of tuition
or other potential financial hurdles to an education.
Early learning programs—such as kindergarten and prekindergarten—enrich all children, but are
especially significant for those children without books at home or parents who don’t have the resources
to read to them or engage in enrichment activities. The Governor, the Chief Education Officer, and the
Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction are focusing on early learning and early interventions as
the best strategy to get students on track to graduate as well as being the most cost-effective in longterm costs.
Not specifically called out in statute is the Oregon Education Investment Board’s commitment to
consider recommendations for education change through an “equity lens.” The OEIB has adopted a list
of core beliefs, such as “every student has the ability to learn” and “ending disparities and gaps in
achievement begin in quality delivery” when considering any education initiative before it.
Efforts to Mitigate Disparities in Opportunities Outside the School Day or Year
While individual districts have programs that extend the school day or extend into summer, state
involvement is limited to distributing federal grants. One initiative is the Schools Uniting
Neighborhoods (SUN) Community Schools, which began in 1999. SUN programs bring together
schools and community partners to positively affect student education success and family selfsufficiency through an integrated network of social and support services for youth, families, and
community members. The Department of Education distributes a federal grant that funds a portion of
the after-school portion of this program.
A complete copy of the report is available at www.ode.state.or.us
3
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
INTRODUCTION
In today’s economy, graduating from high school ready for college
rigor and career can mean the difference between a lifetime of poverty
and a secure economic future. In the United States, only four percent
of college graduates live in poverty; 14 percent of high school
graduates and nearly 28 percent with less than a high school degree
are considered poor based on the federal poverty guidelines (U.S.
Census Bureau: American Fact Finder, 2011). Average annual
earnings increase with level of education—a college graduate can
expect to earn 66 percent more over a lifetime (working full time for
40 years) than a high school graduate (Baum et al, 2010).
Employment rates increase with each additional level of education, and this has been consistently true
over time. In 2012, for example, the employment rate for young adults was 48% for those without a
high school diploma, 64% of high school graduates, and 87% for those holding at least a bachelor’s
degree (Aud et al, 2013). Educational attainment not only impacts the chances of getting any job, but it
affects the type of job. Before the recent recession, those with a bachelor’s degree qualified for more
than twice as many available jobs as those with an associate’s degree and more than four times as many
college-level jobs as high school graduates. This advantage did not deteriorate during the recession
(Pew Charitable Trusts, 2013).
High school completers have lower levels of crime, arrests, and incarceration than those who drop out
(Lochner & Moretti, 2004). While dropouts constitute less than 20 percent of the U.S. population, they
comprise over 75 percent of the state prison inmate population (Measure of America, n.d.). It has been
estimated that raising the high school completion rate by one percent among men ages 20-60 would
potentially save as much as $1.4 million per year in reduced costs from crime incurred by victims and
society at large (Lochner & Moretti, 2004).
Throughout Oregon, schools and districts are serving increasing numbers of students whose family
income and resources fall far below the level necessary to provide the basics. In 2014, for a family of
four, the Federal Poverty Guideline allows only $5,963 per person per year (Federal Register, 2014).
Higher levels of poverty create a potential deficit for achievement levels, in many cases even before
students reach traditional “school age.” Of students who enroll in college, only 50 percent earn a
diploma within six years. For low-income students, the college completion rate drops to 25 percent.3
3
http://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/education_and_poverty.aspx#sthash.NfYQW7Hy.dpuf
4
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
Academic Achievement Disparities by Family Income
Students in poverty have challenges that other students do not. According to Do Something.org4:
 Children living in poverty have a higher rate of absenteeism or leave school all together because
they are more likely to have to work or care for family members.
 Forty percent of children living in poverty aren’t prepared for primary schooling.
 Children who live below the poverty line are 1.3 times more likely to have developmental delays or
learning disabilities than those who don’t live in poverty.
 By the end of the 4th grade, African-American, Hispanic, and low-income students are already two
years behind grade level. By the time they reach the 12th grade they are four years behind.
 Dropout rates of 16 to 24-year-old students who come from low income families are seven times
higher than those from families with higher incomes.
 Less than 30 percent of students in the bottom quarter of incomes enroll in a four-year school.
Among that group – less than half graduate.
In addition, lower-income students in eighth grade score lower than non-low-income students on the
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) mathematics, reading and science tests (U.S.
Department of Education, 2012). The National Household Education Survey (NHES) indicates that
impoverished children in grades one through three are nearly three times more likely to repeat a grade
and those in kindergarten through third grade are more than twice as likely to have an individualized
education plan (IEP) to meet special education needs. Youth from families in the bottom quintile of the
income distribution are more than four times as likely as those from families in the top quintile to have
dropped out of school during the prior year (NCES, 2012).
Education has historically been seen as a major strategy to lift the impoverished to a better life.
However, research finds that wide disparities not only exist prior to a
child’s entry into formal education, but persist—and in some cases
widen—as a student progresses through their school careers (Reardon,
2011). These disparities are displayed not only in cognitive abilities
and academic achievement but also represent outcomes in the areas of
health and safety and the prevalence of risky behaviors. (Rothstein,
2008).
The gap continues in college. In a University of Michigan study, two
generations of students were studied; those born from 1961 to 1964 and
4
http://www.dosomething.org/facts/11-facts-about-education-and-poverty-america
5
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
those born from 1979 to 1982. By 1989, about one-third of the high-income students in the first
generation had finished college; by 2007, more than half of the second generation had done so. In
contrast, only nine percent of the low-income students in the second generation had completed college
by 2007, up only slightly from a five percent college completion rate by the first generation in 1989.
Recent changes in Oregon’s education governance structure and the 2013 strategic investments at the
state level have sought to better serve students, with an emphasis on struggling students and students in
poverty. These actions have jumpstarted efforts to raise student levels of achievement and support
schools and communities in their quest to raise graduation rates and better prepare all students for
success in college and career.
In recognition of these facts and others, ORS 409.750 sets forth that, “. . . [I]it shall be a state goal to
eliminate or alleviate the causes and conditions of poverty in Oregon.”
Poverty in Oregon Schools
According to the US Census, 15.5% of Oregonians were living
below the poverty level for 2008-2012.5 In 2013, the Annie E.
Casey Foundation ranked Oregon 41st in child economic well-being
with 45% of Oregon children living in households that devote more
than 30% of their income to housing costs, compared with 40% of
children nationally.
A 2014 study by Children First for Oregon found about 44% of
children were poor or low income. Of those children, 23.4% or
382,542 were living at or below the federal poverty line (using
2011 data). That is about 23.4% of children, up from 21.7% in 2010
and 19.4% in 2009.6
School Year
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-2000
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
% of Oregon Students
Eligible for Free and
Reduced Meals
31.0%
30.8%
32.0%
33.3%
34.4%
34.4%
36.4%
38.6%
41.0%
42.6%
42.7%
42.1%
42.8%
46.1%
50.2%
52.7%
53.2%
53.7%
Free and Reduced Price Lunch
5
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/41000.html
Children First for Oregon 2014 Progress Report.
http://cffo.convio.net/site/DocServer/2014_Progress_Report_FINAL_web.pdf?docID=3702&AddInterest=1941
6
6
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
According to Oregon Department of Education (ODE) data collected as of October 1, 2013, 57% of
elementary students, 55% of middle school students, and 49% of high school students were eligible for
free and reduced price lunches.7 Free and reduced price meals are available for eligible students based
on their household size and family income. Foster children are automatically eligible for free meal
benefits as are identified migrant students. For a household of four people, an annual income of
$29,965 or less qualifies those children for free meals and free milk, and an annual income of $42,643
qualifies the children for reduced price meals.
The State Board of Education modified how poverty is calculated for the State School Fund on January
23, 2014.8 The new calculation is based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s Small Area Income Poverty
Estimate (SAIPE). The model is based on a number of data sets including the Decennial Census,
Supplemental Nutritional Aid Program data, several yearly surveys by the U.S. Census, and specific
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) data. This model considers information on the number of students aged
5-17 in each district, pinpointing the number of students in poverty, so the distribution formula more
accurately reflects the actual number of students living in poverty.
Homeless Students
The federal Education of Homeless Children and Youth Program works to ensure that school ageeligible homeless children and youth are provided with immediate school enrollment and access to
education services despite a lack of a permanent residence, supervising adult, or lack of records from a
previous school.
In the 2012-13 school year, the Oregon Department of Education identified 18,165 homeless youth.9
For purposes of the program, “homeless” children and youth are defined as those who “lack a fixed,
regular, and adequate nighttime residence.” A homeless family could live in an emergency shelter or
transitional housing unit, share housing with others, reside in motels, or live in a tent or trailer.
Unaccompanied minors who have been abandoned by their parents or who have run away from home
are also eligible for educational services as homeless students.
Prior to 2012-13, only those districts receiving competitive subgrant funds were required to record
homeless students by individual student. Districts not receiving a grant previously reported only district
totals. The 2012-13 report provides unprecedented data on Oregon student homelessness from over 150
school districts including student achievement data. ODE will soon be able to extract socioeconomic
7
http://www.ode.state.or.us/data/annreportcard/rptcard2013.pdf
8
As directed by HB 2098 (2013).
9
2012-13 Oregon Report Card, p. 26.
7
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
data, graduation rates, and other relevant data on homeless students. This additional data will allow
appropriate implementation of strategic investments for homeless youth to increase educational
attainment through specific programing and policy implementation. Districts with a high concentration
of homeless students, by both percentage of the total student population and by numbers of students are
highlighted in the following chart:
District with highest
number of identified
homeless students
Beaverton SD 48J
Portland SD 1J
Medford SD 549C
Eugene SD 4J
Reynolds SD 7
Salem-Keizer SD 24J
Bend-Lapine SD 1
Springfield SD 19
K-12 Total Homeless
2012-13
% of enrollment
2012-13
1,373
1,154
993
770
768
757
681
537
3.48%
2.48%
7.53%
4.53%
6.76%
1.88%
4.11%
4.87%
Districts with the highest percentages
of homeless students are primarily
rural and some distance from the I-5
corridor. Their homeless counts are
attributed to unemployment, lack of
family-wage jobs, and lack of
affordable housing in their areas.
Services to homeless students may include school transportation, tutoring, extended-day, and summer
school programs. Districts may receive funding through Title I-A funds, McKinney-Vento competitive
subgrants, and community and local donations.
Academic Performance
Districts with the Highest % of Homeless Students
K-12 Total
% of enrollment
Homeless
2012-13
2012-13
Butte Falls SD
35
23.97%
Culver SD
126
18.03%
Dayville SD
9
15.00%
Marcola SD
29
14.87%
McKenzie SD
31
14.22%
Prospect SD
35
13.83%
Warrenton-Hammond SD
119
13.34%
Port Orford-Langlois SD
31
11.92%
Mapleton SD
20
11.56%
Monroe SD
48
10.71%
Adrian SD
24
10.39%
Rogue River SD
92
10.26%
Coos Bay SD
318
10.24%
Lincoln County SD
535
10.17%
District
Academically, economically
disadvantaged students in Oregon
typically perform at a lower level on state
assessments when compared to more
affluent peers. For example, in 2012-13,
85% of all high school students met the
reading standard, while only 77% of
economically disadvantaged students did
so. In math, 69% of all students met the
grade level standard with 58% of
economically disadvantaged students
Myrtle Point SD
62
10.02%
performing at this basic level of
expectation. In writing, 60% of all
students met the standard, while only 47% of economically disadvantaged students did so. In science,
63% of all students met the standard while only 50% of economically disadvantaged students were able
to demonstrate benchmark levels of achievement.10
10
2012-13 Oregon Report Card, p. 46.
8
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
Assessment Type
Grade 3 Reading
Grade 3 Math
Grade 4 Reading
Grade 4 Math
Grade 5 Reading
Grade 5 Math
Grade 5 Science
Grade 6 Reading
Grade 6 Math
Grade 7 Reading
Grade 7 Math
Grade 8 Reading
Grade 8 Math
Grade 8 Science
High School Reading
High School Math
High School Writing
High School Science
All Students Meeting or Exceeding
Standard – 2012-13
66%
61%
73%
64%
68%
58%
67%
63%
59%
73%
61%
67%
63%
66%
85%
69%
60%
63%
Economically Disadvantaged Students
Meeting or Exceeding Standard 2012-13
55%
50%
63%
52%
56%
45%
54%
51%
47%
62%
49%
54%
51%
53%
77%
58%
47%
50%
Graduation Rates
Seventy-seven percent of non-economically
disadvantaged white students graduated in
four years, compared with 67% of
economically disadvantaged students.11
Looking Forward
In recent years, a growing body of
sophisticated economic analyses has
contributed an important new dimension to
the public debate about the value to society
of investing in the care and education of
young children who are at risk for later
failure in school and in the workplace. Extensive data now indicate that policymakers can achieve
greater return on investments in early education for children from families with low income and limited
parent education than they can from investments in remedial programs or adults with limited workforce
skills (Harvard University National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, 2008). In short,
although optimal financial benefits depend on continued investment throughout the middle childhood
years, the greatest returns are realized when investments are made in the lives of vulnerable children
well before they begin school.
11
2012-13 Oregon Report Card, p. 61.
9
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
Oregon must commit to success for all learners, including all racial and ethnic groups, economically
disadvantaged students, English language learners, and students with disabilities. To meet our
40/40/20 goal,12 we need every group of learners to maximize its potential. We simply cannot meet our
vision for Oregon if the most educated Oregonians remain disproportionally white, native English
speakers, relatively affluent, and without disabilities. The very promise of the American Dream, of
opportunity available to all who strive for success, demands that we include all Oregonians in our goal
and that we very specifically and intentionally plan for an education system that meets our varied
students’ needs equitably and effectively.
Governor Kitzhaber has made education reform a keystone of his administration. To Metzger
Elementary kindergarteners, Governor Kitzhaber stated, “Our commitment to you—the class of 2025—
is that every single one of you, in every community in Oregon, will graduate from high school with the
tools and skills to pursue your dreams in college and careers.”13
Federal Education Programs
In addition to state efforts there are federal initiatives. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act
was passed in 1965 as part of the “War on Poverty.” The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
reauthorized the ESEA, as well as mandating new requirements.
Oregon students are served through the following ESEA programs:
Title 1-A
Title 1-B1
Title 1-B2
Title 1-B3
Title 1C
Title 1D
Improving Basic Programs
Reading First
Early Reading First
Even Start Family Literacy Program
Education of Migratory Children
Prevention and Intervention Programs for Children
and Youth Who Are Neglected, Delinquent, or AtRisk
Title 2A
Preparing, Training, and Recruiting High Quality
Teachers and Principals
Title 2B
Mathematics & Science Partnerships
Title 2C
Troops to Teachers
12
ORS 351.009 sets forth that the mission of education beyond high school is to ensure that at least 40 percent of adult Oregonians
have earned a bachelor’s degree or higher; at least 40 percent of adult Oregonians have earned an associate’s degree or postsecondary credential as their highest level of educational attainment; and ensure that the remaining 20 percent or less of all adult
Oregonians have a high school diploma.
13
Governor Kitzhaber, speaking to Metzger Elementary kindergarteners, September 5, 2012.
10
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
Title 2D
Title 3
Title 4A
Title 4B
Title 5A
Title 5B
Title 6A
Title 6B
Title 7
Title 10
Enhancing Education Through Technology
Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students
Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities
21st Century Community Learning Centers
Innovative Programs
Charter Schools
Funding Flexibility
Rural Education Initiative
Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Alaskan Native Education
McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance Improvements
HB 2665
While the emphasis in education has been on increasing expectations for all students, some educators
believe that recent policy efforts have not taken into account the effect poverty plays in student
achievement. Do Oregon’s laws acknowledge the role poverty plays in education? In 2013, the Oregon
Legislature voted to find out and enacted HB 2665:
(1) The Department of Education shall conduct an evaluation of the means by which the impact of
poverty on educational attainment is addressed by state law. The study shall include an analysis of:
(d) Distributions of the State School Fund
(e) Standards for equivalency in opportunities to learn across neighborhoods and economic
circumstances.
(f) Efforts to mitigate disparities in opportunities that are provided outside of the school day or
the school year.
(2) The department shall submit a report on the evaluation described in subsection (1) of this section to
the interim legislative committees on education no later than July 1, 2014.
Methodology
While many laws support those in poverty, generally, this review is limited to education statutes.
Education statutes relating to poverty typically fall into two categories:
(1) Those that explicitly mention poverty or identify an income level that made students eligible for a
program or service;
(2) Those programs that do not explicitly mention poverty or income eligibility but are much more
likely to affect lower income students.
11
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
The authors include both categories to provide maximum inclusivity rather than inadvertently
excluding information the audience for this report might find useful.
In the list of statutes that follow, longer statutes are summarized. Brief laws may be spelled out
verbatim. Readers who are particularly interested in a particular law will want to refer to the law’s
exact wording.
12
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
PART 1: DISTRIBUTIONS OF THE STATE SCHOOL FUND
HB 2665:
The Department of Education shall conduct an evaluation of the means by which the impact of
poverty on educational attainment is addressed by state law. The study shall include an analysis
of:
(a) Distributions of the State School Fund.
(b) Standards for equivalency in opportunities to learn across neighborhoods and economic
circumstances.
(c) Efforts to mitigate disparities in opportunities that are provided outside of the school day or
the school year.
School Fund Distribution Formula & Grants – ORS chapter 327
The way Oregon distributes the legislatively appropriated funding for K-12 schools is commonly
referred to as the State School Fund (SSF) Distribution Formula. Oregon’s distribution formula, along
with its funding grants that fall outside the formula, consider poverty both explicitly and implicitly.
The distribution formula seeks to provide districts across the state with about the same dollar amount of
funding per student weight in an attempt to make education funding equitable, regardless of the
community’s economic status. Students with higher needs receive extra weights in the formula, with
students in poverty receiving an extra .25 weight.
Prior to the development of the distribution formula in 1991 (prompted by the passage of Ballot
Measure 5), schools were largely dependent on local property taxes. Revenue for school districts varied
significantly throughout Oregon. Economically-depressed counties, or areas with tax-exempt
properties, could not raise the same amount of revenue as other counties.
13
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
What were acceptable differences in funding per student prior to 1991 were deemed unacceptable
following the passage of Ballot Measure 5 and the shift to state funding. With the state primarily
responsible for funding education, the state needed to ensure a level of parity. A new measure of
fairness was implemented, influenced by school finance court cases.14
The SSF distribution formula15 is the statutory definition of fairness applied to the financial needs of
school districts. Using school district revenue data, the K-12 equalization formula determines an
equalization funding for each district. This funding level is each school district’s share of available SSF
dollars and local revenue used in the formula. SSF dollars for each district make up the difference
between the district’s equalization funding and its local revenue.16
Local revenues are combined with state revenues such that students across the state receive about the
same amount of dollars to fund their education (see chart below; most districts hover at the $6000 per
student weight amount). If local revenues are low, state aid is high to compensate. While variations still
exist, equalization has largely been achieved.
Table 1.1 Formula Revenue per Student Weight (ADMw) by School District (2009-10)
$7,000
$6,000
$5,000
$4,000
$3,000
$2,000
$1,000
$0
Local Revenue
State School Fund
One of the goals of the new funding formula was funding equity for students. Students in Harney
County should have access to a similar academic program as those students in Multnomah County. To
reach that goal, state funding was increased in some districts and frozen in others.
14
Legislative Revenue Office. K-12 and ESD School Finance, State School Fund Distribution. Research Report #2-10. July 2010.
HB 2506 (2013) created a task force to review the distribution formula and whether it helped or hindered meeting education goals
and possibly make recommendations for changes to it.
16
Legislative Revenue Office. K-12 and ESD School Finance, State School Fund Distribution. Research Report #2-10. July 2010.
15
14
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
The formula was the primary measure of equity used in school finance in 1991. Funding equity per
student may generally provide for similar educational programs and opportunities. However, funding
equity does not necessarily result in equal educational offerings, results, or achievement levels.17
Important elements of the formula are its student weights (ORS 327.013).18 The formula assumes that
some students will require more services than others, and therefore, will cost more to educate than
others. The weights are all student-characteristic driven and provide additional funding for those
students. A number of weights exist, including one for students in poverty.
NOTE: The School Funding Distribution Formula directs how the Oregon Department of Education
distributes the funds to school districts. School districts are not instructed in how to spend the funds,
with the exception of a relatively small amount distributed as categorical grants. For example, school
districts do not have to spend the additional weighting they receive for poverty on students in poverty.
Oregon Statutes – Explicit Identification of Poverty
 ORS 327.013(1)(c)(A)(v)(I)19 - Student weights: Students 5-17 years old in poverty families (as
defined by statute and administrative rule) receive an additional .25 weight in the SSF distribution
formula. (Children in foster homes and children in state-recognized facilities for neglected and
delinquent children are counted as impoverished students.) If each single ADMw (weighted
student) receives $685220 in SSF, then for a student weighted 1.5, a district would receive $10,278.
 ORS 327.297 - Grants for Activities Related to Student Achievement: This statute lays out a number
of activities eligible for funding through this grant. The activities are those that improve student
achievement, including “programs to improve a student achievement gap between student groups
identified by culture, poverty, language and race and other student groups.” Activities include
increases in instructional time including summer and before-and after-school programs; programs
to improve a student achievement gap between student groups identified by culture, poverty,
language and race; class size reduction, remediation, mentoring, and early childhood programs; and
at-risk youth.
17
Ibid.
NOTE: While districts receive student weights, they are not required by law to spend the weights on the students in the respective
categories.
19
HB 2098 (2013) will allow the Department of Education to update its poverty calculations.
20
Estimated statewide average amount per ADMW for 2014-15.
18
15
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
 ORS 327.520 – 540 - Child Nutrition Programs: These programs provide meals to low income
children or those attending a school in which 50% or more of those enrolled are low income.
Children who are homeless, runaways, receive Migrant Education Support, or are living in a
household that is on the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program or the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and those children who are in a Youth
Corrections Education Program or Juvenile Delinquent Education Program automatically qualify
for free meals regardless of the income or family size. Foster children and children who live in
households that are on the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) also qualify
for free meals.
 ORS 327.535 - School breakfast program: School districts are directed to provide breakfast at any
school site where lunch is served if 25% or more of the students at the site are eligible for free or
reduced price lunches. Federal income guidelines are used to determine eligibility.21 A school
district that makes breakfast accessible at any school site shall make breakfast accessible at that
school site at no charge to all students who are eligible for free or reduced price lunches. For each
breakfast that a school district provides free of charge to a student who is eligible for a reduced
price lunch, the Department of Education shall provide reimbursement to the school district for the
actual amount that a student would have been required to pay for the reduced price breakfast.
 ORS 327.540 – School afterschool meal and snack program: The Department of Education is
directed to assist school districts, government agencies, and community groups to encourage
participation in the USDA’s Afterschool Meal and Snack Program and may award grants not to
exceed $20,000 to purchase necessary equipment and services.
Oregon Statutes – Implicit Identification of Poverty
A number of the weights in the school funding formula are not directly tied to poverty but do
disproportionately affect impoverished students.
 ORS 327.013(1)(c)(A)(ii) – ELL Student Weight: Approximately 85% of students learning English
live in poverty. Under the formula, ESL students receive an additional weight of .5.
21
In Oregon, for 2013-14, a household of four may not exceed an annual income of $41,348 for reduced price meals; for free
meals, the income cap is $29,055.
16
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
 ORS 327.013(1)(c)(A)(v)(II)- Foster home student weight: Students in foster homes receive an
additional .25 weight. The foster home student count comes to ODE from the Department of
Human Services as an aggregate by district and the total estimated number for student in foster care
for 2013-14 is 2,829.
 ORS 327.013(1)(c)(A)(v)(III) - Neglected & Delinquent: Students in state-recognized facilities for
neglected and delinquent children receive an additional .25 weight. For 2013-14, districts claimed
the additional weight for 738 students.
 ORS 327.013(3), 327.033, 327.043 – Transportation Grant: By providing transportation to school,
state law recognizes that not all parents have the resources (time, money) to transport their students
to school. The transportation grant eliminates a hurdle for those of reduced means.
 ORS 327.026 – Youth Corrections Education Program and Juvenile Detention Education Program
weight: All incarcerated students are automatically eligible for the USDA free and reduced school
lunch program. Students in a Youth Corrections Education Program are given an additional weight
for a total of two weights. Students in a Juvenile Detention Education Program are given an
additional half weight for a total of 1.5.
 ORS 327.023(10) – Grants for special and compensatory education programs: Directs ODE to
provide grants in aid or support for special and compensatory education programs, including
“disadvantaged children program under ORS 343.680.”
 ORS 327.082, 327.106 - Kindergarten: Studies have shown that children in poverty are often not
ready for school, so they begin their school life already behind. Kindergarten helps prepare all
children for school, but there is general acknowledgement that impoverished kids particularly
benefit from kindergarten. Until recently, the state only funded school districts for a half-day of
kindergarten. State law was changed in 2011 (SB 248) to allow school districts to be funded for
full-day kindergarten. That law becomes operative on July 1, 2015.
 ORS 327.297 Grants for activities related to student achievement: Activities include increases in
instructional time including summer programs and before-and after-school programs, services to atrisk youth, programs to improve a student achievement gap between student groups identified by
culture, poverty, language, and race and other student groups.
 ORS 327.320-.330 - School Facility Improvement Fund: In addition to building new schools, some
districts do not have the financial means to maintain and remodel existing buildings. Under this
17
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
law, districts may apply for grants up to $500,000 for the purpose of construction and maintenance
of public school facilities. Criteria shall include, but not be limited to, building age, overcrowding,
and health and safety concerns. This program has not been funded recently.
 ORS 327.345 - English as a Second Language Teacher Training Grants: Approximately 85% of
ESL students are impoverished. In addition to the student weighting described above, the
legislature created a grant program for school districts in which 3% or more of the students enrolled
are ESL students; or districts that serve ESL students or bilingual students within a large
geographic area in the district; or districts that experience a rapid growth of ESL students; or
districts that can demonstrate an extraordinary need for ESL teachers or training for ESL teachers.
18
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
PART 2: EQUIVALENCY IN OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN ACROSS
NEIGHBORHOODS & ECONOMIC CIRCUMSTANCES
HB 2665:
The Department of Education shall conduct an evaluation of the means by which the impact of
poverty on educational attainment is addressed by state law. The study shall include an analysis of:
(a) Distributions of the State School Fund.
(b) Standards for equivalency in opportunities to learn across neighborhoods
and economic circumstances.
(c) Efforts to mitigate disparities in opportunities that are provided outside of the school day or
the school year.
Education then, beyond all other devices of human origin, is the great equalizer of the
conditions of men, the balance-wheel of the social machinery.
Horace Mann
Horace Mann, the Massachusetts secretary for the board of education (1837), believed that by bringing
children of all classes together, they could have a common learning experience; such an education
would equalize the conditions of men. This value continues today and is the foundation of a public
education.
This section of the report includes those laws that exist to mitigate reduced opportunities to learn due to
geography, student characteristics, and economic circumstances. All students in Oregon are entitled to
equitable opportunities to learn, whether their school is in a rural area, an urban area, a suburban area,
or an incarcerated environment. All students deserve to have similar learning opportunities whether
they come from different countries and cultures; whether they have handicapping physical conditions
or learning disabilities; or whether they come from disadvantaged backgrounds.
19
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
The Governor, the Chief Education Officer, and the
Deputy Superintendent of Public Instruction are
focusing on early learning and early interventions as
the best strategy to get students on track as well as the
most cost-effective in the long-term .
To this end, the Governor and Legislature have created
the Early Learning Council and Early Learning
Division and placed the division under the leadership of the Oregon Department of Education. The goal
of this governance change is to emphasize the education mission of the Early Learning Council and
better align the education and social service sectors so the whole child is better served in an integrated
and coordinated manner. The Youth Development Council, which focuses on preventing and treating
juvenile crime, was similarly relocated to the department.
The goals of the Oregon Early Learning System are to prevent child abuse and neglect; improve the
health and development of young children; promote bonding and attachment in the early years of a
child’s life; support parents in providing the optimum environment for their young children; link and
integrate services and supports in the voluntary statewide early learning system; ensure that children
are entering school ready to learn; and ensure that parents have access to affordable, quality child
care.22
Early learning programs, such as kindergarten and prekindergarten, enrich all children but are
especially significant for those children without books at home or parents who have the time to read to
them or engage in enrichment activities.
Not specifically called out in statute is the Oregon Education Investment Board’s commitment to
consider recommendations for education change through an “equity lens.” The OEIB has adopted a list
of core beliefs, such as “every student has the ability to learn” and “ending disparities and gaps in
achievement begin in quality delivery.”23 Deputy Superintendent Rob Saxton created an Office of
Education Equity to focus on building on research-based methods to improve the performance of
students at risk of failure.
For purposes of this report, this phrase, “neighborhoods and economic circumstances,” was interpreted
broadly to include neighborhoods of students with similar characteristics (e.g. special education or
pregnant or parenting) and attempts to ensure equitable treatment of students regardless of income,
22
23
ORS 417.727.
http://education.oregon.gov/Documents/Final%20Equity%20Lens%20Adopted.pdf
20
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
race, ethnicity, gender, country of origin, or school district. There are no laws addressing funding
equivalency among schools in a single district.
Oregon Statutes
Oregon law sets forth its goals for education—preparation for life and life-long learning—that have
equity for all students at its core. Set forth below are those statutes that seek to address inequities in
opportunities to learn. In some cases, the statutes are summarized and other times they are quoted.
Portions of the law that relate to the equity issue are in italics by author.
HB 3232 (2013)
The Oregon State Legislature enacted HB 3232 (2013) that directed the Oregon Education
Investment Board to design and implement programs that make strategic investments to, among
other goals, “close the achievement gap that exists between historically underserved student
groups.”
HB 3232 directed the OEIB to establish the Oregon Early Reading Program to improve the
readiness of children preparing to enter into kindergarten and improve the reading proficiency of
students by the time the students complete the third grade. Third grade reading is a key indicator for
success in school.
Another provision created a scholarship fund aimed at increasing access for underserved students to
post-secondary institutions by paying for first-year college courses or accelerated college credit
programs. The 2013 Legislature allocated $2.6 million for this purpose, and the Oregon Department
of Education has used the state budget allocation to leverage the USDOE’s Test Fee Program
funding to provide additional support to students taking Advanced Placement (AP) and International
Baccalaureate (IB) examinations that may result in the students earning college credit. All AP and
IB examination and registration fees will be paid for low-income public school students (see
Appendix B).
Funds were also appropriated to the Department of Community
Colleges and Workforce Development to educate and engage
underserved or first-generation college-bound students and their
families through counseling programs, parent advocacy, parent
education, college visits, college initiatives, and assistance with
obtaining financial aid.
Another provision of the bill sought to better connect
underserved students to careers, particularly in science,
21
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
technology engineering, and mathematics.
Education goals – ORS 329.015 (2) (Addresses issue broadly)
The Legislative Assembly believes that the goals of kindergarten through grade 12 education are (a) to
equip students with the academic and career skills and information necessary to pursue the future of
their choice through a program of rigorous academic preparation and career readiness; (b) to provide an
environment that motivates students to pursue serious scholarship and to have experience in applying
knowledge and skills and demonstrating achievement; (c) to provide students with the skills necessary
to pursue learning throughout their lives in an ever-changing world; and (d) to prepare students for
successful transitions to the next phase of their educational development.
Characteristics of school system – ORS 329.025 (Addresses issue broadly)
It is the intent of the Legislative Assembly to maintain a system of public elementary and secondary
schools that allows students, parents, teachers, administrators, school district boards, and the State
Board of Education to be accountable for the development and improvement of the public school
system. The public school system shall have the following characteristics:
(1) Provides equal and open access and educational opportunities for all students in the state
regardless of their linguistic background, culture, race, gender, capability, or geographic
location;
(2) Assumes that all students can learn and establishes high, specific skill and knowledge
expectations and recognizes individual differences at all instructional levels;
(3) Provides each student an education experience that supports academic growth beyond
proficiency in established academic content standards and encourages students to attain
aspirational goals that are individually challenging;
(4) Provides special education, compensatory education, linguistically and culturally appropriate
education and other specialized programs to all students who need those services;
(5) Supports the physical and cognitive growth and development of students;
(6) Provides students with a solid foundation in the skills of reading, writing, problem solving
and communication;
(7) Provides opportunities for students to learn, think, reason, retrieve information, use technology
and work effectively alone and in groups;
(8) Provides for rigorous academic content standards and instruction in mathematics, science,
English, history, geography, economics, civics, physical education, health, the arts, and second
languages;
(9) Provides students an educational background to the end that they will function successfully in a
constitutional republic, a participatory democracy and a multicultural nation and world;
22
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
(10) Provides students with the knowledge and skills that will provide the opportunities to succeed
in the world of work, as members of families and as citizens;
(11) Provides students with the knowledge and skills that lead to an active, healthy lifestyle;
(12) Provides students with the knowledge and skills to take responsibility for their decisions and
choices;
(13) Provides opportunities for students to learn through a variety of teaching strategies;
(14) Emphasizes involvement of parents and the community in the total education of students;
(15) Transports children safely to and from school;
(16) Ensures that the funds allocated to schools reflect the uncontrollable differences in costs facing
each district;
(17) Ensures that local schools have adequate control of how funds are spent to best meet the needs
of students in their communities; and
(18) Provides for a safe, educational environment.
Assessment of schools and school districts required – ORS 329.085
To facilitate the attainment and successful implementation of educational standards . . . the State Board
of Education or its designee shall assess the effectiveness of each public school, public charter school,
and school district. The findings of the assessment shall be reported to the school or school district
within six months. (2) The board shall establish the standards, including standards of accessibility to
educational opportunities, upon which the assessment is based.
School district and school self-evaluations; local district
continuous improvement plans; department’s technical
assistance – ORS 329.095
. . . The school districts shall ensure that representatives from the
demographic groups of their school population are invited to
participate in the development of local district continuous
improvement plans to achieve the goals. (2) As part of setting
local goals, school districts shall undertake a communications
process that involves parents, students, teachers, school
employees, and community representatives to explain and discuss
the local goals and their relationship to programs under this
chapter.
School district and school performance reports – ORS 329.105
Student performance on state assessments give parents and the community at large feedback on how
well their school is doing in educating all its students.
Policy on parental and community participation – ORS 329.125
23
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
It is recommended but not required that: (1) School districts provide opportunities for parents or
guardians to be involved in establishing and implementing educational goals and to participate in
decision-making at the school site: (2) Employers recognize the need for parents or guardians and
members of the community to participate in the education process not only for their own children but
for the educational system; (3) Employers be encouraged to extend appropriate leave to parents or
guardians to allow greater participation in that process during school hours; (4) School districts enter
into partnerships with business, labor and other groups to provide workplace-based professional
development opportunities for their educational staff; and (5) School districts enter into partnerships
with recreation groups, faith-based organizations, social service and health care agencies, businesses,
child care providers, and other groups that support children and families to create community learning
centers for students, parents, and members of the surrounding community.
Services for Children & Families at School Site – ORS 329.150
School districts may provide services for children and families at the school site. School districts may
coordinate services with programs provided through and overseen by the Early Learning Council. To
ensure that all educational and other services for young children and their families offer the maximum
opportunity possible for the personal success of the child and family members, it is the policy of this
state that the following principles be observed:
1. Services for young children and their families should be located as close to the child and the
family’s community as possible, encouraging community support and ownership of such
services;
2. Services for young children and their families should reflect the importance of integration and
diversity to the maximum extent possible in regard to characteristics such as race, economics,
gender, creed, capability, and cultural differences;
3. Services should be designed to support and strengthen the welfare of the child and the family
and be planned in consideration of the individual family’s values;
4. Services should be designed to ensure continuity of care among car givers in a given day and
among service plans from year to year;
5. Service systems should address the most urgent needs in a timely manner including health,
intervention, and support services; and
6. Service providers and sources of support should be coordinated and collaborative, to reflect the
knowledge that no single system can serve all of the needs of the child and family.
Community Learning Centers - ORS 329.156
The Department of Education and the Department of Human Services shall support the development
and implementation of a network of community learning centers across the state. Community learning
centers shall be located in or near a school or a cluster of schools; involve parents in the care and
education of their children; involve the local community in developing and overseeing community
24
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
learning center programs; incorporate the principles of family support services; in partnership with the
local school district board, create or designate an advisory committee to offer guidance on program
development and implementation, with membership that is representative of the diversity of
community interests, including representatives of businesses, schools, faith-based organizations, social
service and health care agencies, cultural groups, recreation groups, municipal governments,
community colleges, libraries, child care providers, parents, and youths.
Identification and coordination of existing resources – ORS 329.157
Community learning centers shall promote identification and coordination of existing resources
including the following services and activities: before-school and after-school enrichment activities
linked with the school curriculum; (b) Youth development and service learning activities; (c) child care
programs; (d) mentoring and tutoring programs; parent literacy and adult education programs; (f)
prenatal and early childhood support programs; (g) parent education and support groups; (h) cultural
activities and English as a second language programs; (i) school-to-work and workforce development
programs; (j) intergenerational activities connecting senior citizens with children; (k) referrals for
health care and other social and education services; (l) primary health care services, including
immunizations, sports physicals and well-child checkups; and (m) counseling services.
Children & Families Long-Range Plans – ORS 329.165
In consultation with the advisory committee for the Oregon pre-kindergarten program, the Early
Learning Council, acting as the state advisory council for purposes of the federal Head Start Act, shall
develop a long-range plan for serving eligible children and their families and shall report to each oddnumbered year regular session of the Legislative Assembly on the funds necessary to implement the
long-range plan, including but not limited to regular programming costs, salary enhancements, and
program improvement grants. The council shall determine the rate of increase in funding for programs
necessary each biennium to provide service to all children eligible for the pre-kindergarten program.
Each biennial report shall include but not be limited to estimates of the number of eligible children and
families to be served, projected cost of programs, and evaluation of the programs.
Policy on early childhood and parenting education; funding goal – ORS 329.160
It is the policy of this state to implement programs for early childhood education, for parenting
education including instruction about prenatal care, for child-parent centers, and for extended Oregon
pre-kindergarten programs.
Department to administer pre-kindergarten program; grants eligibility; coordination with other
programs – ORS 329.175
The Department of Education shall administer the Oregon pre-kindergarten program to assist eligible
children with comprehensive services including educational, social, health, and nutritional development
25
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
to enhance their chances for success in school and life. Eligible children, upon request of parent or
guardian, shall be admitted to approved Oregon pre-kindergartens to the extent that the Legislative
Assembly provides funds.
Oregon Head Start Pre-kindergarten programs serve children 3-5 years old with the highest needs from
families living at or below the federal poverty level. Children in foster care and children who are
homeless are automatically income eligible. The program offers integrated services to support school
readiness in the areas of early childhood education and development; child health and nutrition; and
parent education and family support. There are 28 Oregon Head Start Pre-kindergarten programs
receiving state funds. These programs serve children in all 36 counties in Oregon. Programs receive
funding from the Federal Office of Head Start, the Oregon Department of Education, or both. A state
and federal partnership agreement allows grantees to blend funding to provide a seamless, integrated
program that is tailored to meet the needs of children and families in their community.
The 2013 Oregon Legislature approved a budget for Oregon Pre-kindergarten of $127,424,153 million
for the 2013-15 biennium. When combined with federal and other funding sources, total OHS Pre-K
funded enrollment for 2012-13 was 13,443. An estimated 12,545 of the enrollment slots were filled by
children living at or below the federal poverty level. The remaining slots were filled by children with
other identified risk factors.24
Table 1.2 Oregon Pre-Kindergarten Participation
School Year
# of Children
Eligible
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
17,249
18,154
18,444
17,894
19,605
19,605
25,161
Oregon Pre-kindergarten
# of Eligible
# of Eligible
Children Served
Children Not
Served
9,793
7,456
11,325
6,829
12,582
5,862
11,938
5,956
10,686
8,919
12,523
7,082
12,545
12,092
% of Eligible
Children Served
57.0%
62.4%
68.2%
66.7%
54.5%
63.9%
50.0%
% of Eligible
Children Not
Served
43.0%
37.6%
31.8%
33.3%
43.5%
36.1%
50.0%
Pre-kindergarten Program Trust Fund – ORS 329.183
The primary purpose of the trust fund is to assist eligible children with comprehensive services
including educational, social, health, and nutritional development to enhance their chances for success
in school and life. The trust fund may be listed on the Oregon income tax return for check-off pursuant
to application made to the Oregon Charitable Check-off Commission.
Expansion of Oregon pre-kindergarten program- ORS 329.185
24
2012-13 Oregon Report Card, p. 69.
26
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
When the federal Head Start program provides funding for programs for eligible children at or greater
than the 1990-01 per child level, eligibility for the state funded Oregon pre-kindergarten program shall
be expanded to include programs for children whose family income exceeds the federal Head Start
limits or who are in an underserved or unserved age category.
Rules for Oregon pre-kindergarten program; grant applications – ORS 329.195
The State Board of Education shall adopt rules for the establishment of the Oregon pre-kindergarten
program. Rules shall require the Oregon pre-kindergarten program to provide for parental
involvement and performance standards at a level no less than that provided under the federal Head
Start program guidelines.
Child development programs; student-parent programs – ORS 329.385
The Department of Education shall review applications for approval of child development programs
and student-parent programs and may approve up to 20 child development and up to 20 student-parent
programs after considering (a) the educational adequacy and type of programs; (b) the number of
students and children who are to be served by the program; (c) the availability of trained personnel and
facilities; (d) the need for the programs in the applying district.
Nationally Normed Assessment Contract – ORS 329.488
This statute directs the Department of Education to contract with an entity that administers a 10th grade
nationally-normed assessments to administer the assessments to Oregon tenth graders. The department
reimburses the school district for the cost of the assessments. The public policy is to increase the
number of students who see themselves as college material and attend college. While some students
and their families simply do not consider college an option for them, the cost of the assessment
precludes others from taking the test. This free assessment seeks to capture both groups.
Administration of Oregon Teacher Corps – ORS 329.765
The Oregon Teacher Corps encourages the entry of certain persons into the teaching profession through
the use of forgivable student loans for those who complete three years of successful teaching.
Allowance shall be given for those applicants whom the commission determines to be in at least one of
the following categories: (a) minority individuals; (b) prospective teachers in scarce endorsement areas;
(c) prospective teachers who agree to teach in remote and difficult to serve school districts.
Early Success Reading Initiative – ORS 329.832 - .834
This statute creates a program to identify struggling readers as early as kindergarten with a goal of
creating a foundation of success for the student. Children who read below grade level after third grade
are at significantly greater risk of truancy, school failure, criminal, and at-risk behaviors, early
pregnancy, and substance abuse.
27
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
Special English Courses for Certain Children (English as a Second Language) – ORS 336.079
Oregon law requires school districts provide specific courses to teach speaking, reading, and writing of
the English language at kindergarten and each grade level to those children who are unable to profit
from classes taught in English.
Kindergarten - ORS 336.092-.095
Oregon law directs every school district to provide kindergarten facilities free of charge for
kindergarten children residing in the district, by operating such facilities as the district or jointly
with other districts, or by contracting with public or private providers as long as they conform to
state standards. Requires school districts to offer half-day kindergarten and allows school districts
and public charter schools to offer full-day kindergarten beginning with the 2015-16 school year provides SSF (ADMw) distributions to match the school’s offering.
Parenting skills and child development course – ORS 336.107
School districts are encouraged to develop a course of study to instruct high school students on parental
skills and child development.
Gang Involvement, Violent Activities, & Drug Abuse Reduction – ORS 336.109
This statute encourages school districts to develop and adopt a comprehensive policy to reduce gang
involvement, violent activities, an drug abuse by public school students in the school district. The
district is encouraged to include in the policy an evaluation of the extent and nature of gang activity; its
impact; the need to reduce activity; strategies to reduce the activities; use of conflict resolution skills;
and communication of the policy.
Multicultural Education – ORS 336.113
Directs the Superintendent of Public Instruction to direct the Department of Education to increase
efforts to increases awareness of the diversity of Oregon students in a number of ways:
Evaluate the distribution of ethnic, racial, and cultural backgrounds of the public school students of
Oregon and the use of demographic data by school districts for curricula and program planning as
reflected in district continuous improvement plans; examine strategies to inform school district boards,
school administrators, teachers, parents of students, and the public about multicultural and diversity
laws and policies; identify and review exemplary multicultural curricula for different grade levels
based on the needs of Oregon’s public school students; identify and review strategies to integrate a
multicultural education program with other education programs of school districts; and evaluate how
current laws on diversity and multicultural education are being implemented and applied at the state
and school district levels.
28
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
Adult Education Classes – ORS 336.145
Any district school board may establish classes for adult education and employ personnel for the
purpose of establishing and maintaining classes for adults on the fundamental principles of democratic
government, English language, citizenship, public affairs, arts and crafts, general cultural subjects,
adult recreation, and other subjects.
Extended Educational Experiences – ORS 336.175
District school boards may offer extended educational experiences through public and private
community agencies when such experiences can be provided by the agencies more appropriately or
at a lesser cost.
Farm-to-School – ORS 336.431
When making grants to school districts for the purchase of Oregon food products, preference is given
to those programs that, among other criteria, serve a high percentage of children who qualify for free or
reduced price school meals under the USDA’s National School Lunch Program.
Community Schools – ORS 336.505 – 336.525
A “community school program” means a program that fosters citizen involvement and provides
educational, recreational, cultural, and related services to the community. The policy set forth is that
“the Legislative Assembly finds that the community school is an expression of the philosophy that the
local school is most effective when it involves the people of that community in programs designed to
fulfill their needs and interests while increasing the community’s use of personnel, buildings,
equipment, and other public educational resources.” Local advisory committees shall make
recommendations to district school boards and local administrators.
Youth Care Centers – ORS 336.580
Every child at a youth care center (defined in ORS 420.855) is entitled to receive appropriate education
suited to the needs of the child in the least restrictive environment in which the child can function until
the child is no longer of compulsory school age or receives a high school diploma or an equivalent.
Youth care centers are defined as a facility established and operated by a public or private agency or a
combination thereof, primarily to provide care and rehabilitation services for youths committed to the
custody of the youth care center by the juvenile court or placed by the youth authority (ORS 420.855).
Juvenile Detention Education Programs – ORS 336.585
The Department of Education is directed to provide, or cause to be provided, an appropriate education
for children enrolled in an educational program under the Juvenile Detention Education Program. The
department may contract with a school district or ESD for this education. The State Board of Education
is directed to adopt standards for the Juvenile Detention Education Program. A “juvenile detention
29
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
education program” means the provision of educational services to youths lodged overnight who
receive educational services on consecutive days within a detention facility (ORS 326.695).
Youth Corrections Education Programs – ORS 336.590
The Department of Education shall provide or cause to be provided appropriate education for children
enrolled in an educational program under the Youth Corrections Education Program. The department
may contract with a school district or ESD for this education. The State Board of Education is directed
to adopt standards. “Youth Corrections Education Program” means the provision of educational
services to youths in youth correction facilities (ORS 326.695).
Alternative Education Programs – ORS 336.615 – 336.665
“Alternative Education Program” is defined to mean a school or separate class group designed to best
serve students’ educational needs and interests and assist students in achieving the academic standards
of the school district and the state. Such programs are to be flexible as to environment, time, structure,
and pedagogy. The State Board of Education is directed to adopt standards for private alternative
education programs. Private alternative education programs must register with the Department of
Education. Programs must be evaluated annually.
Pregnant & Parenting - ORS 336.640
State law directs the State Board of Education procedures for obtaining special services for pregnant
and parenting students. The school district is obligated to inform pregnant and parenting students and
their parents of the availability of special services such as counseling, life skills and parenting
education, child care, transportation, career development, and health and nutrition services; the
resources provided by other agencies such as health and social services; scheduling education programs
to address the individual learning styles and needs of pregnant and parenting students; and develop
individualized educational programs or services to address the needs of pregnant or parenting students
when their needs are not met by the regular school program. When such individualized programs are
provided to pregnant and parenting students, districts receive and extra 1.0 weight in the state funding
formula.
Traffic Safety – ORS 336.807
The Department of Transportation reimburses a public school for the cost of providing a course in
traffic safety education. The Department of Transportation shall reimburse the Department of Human
Services for the cost of providing a course of traffic safety education that is certified by ODOT and
provided to children in the legal custody of the Department of Human Services and in foster homes.
Charter School Waiver – ORS 338.025
30
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
Upon application, the State Board of Education may waive certain charter school statutes if the waiver
promotes the development of programs by providers; enhances the equitable access by underserved
families to the public education of their choice; extends the equitable access to public support by all
students, or permits high quality programs of unusual cost.
Equitable Access to a Virtual Charter School – ORS 338.120, 338.125
Among other requirements for a virtual charter school, such a school must have “a plan to provide
equitable access to the education program of the school by ensuring that each student enrolled in the
school has access to, and use of, computer and printer equipment as needed and is offered an internet
service cost reimbursement arrangement. This plan must also include access to the computer, printer,
and internet service by students who are from families that qualify as low-income under Title I of the
federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. In addition, virtual charter schools are
prohibited from limiting student enrollment based on race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity,
national origin, disability, the terms of an individualized education program, income level, proficiency
in English, or athletic ability.
Charter School Transportation – ORS 338.145
A school district in which a charter school is located is responsible for transporting public charter
school students if the student is a resident; however, the district does not have to extend or add bus
routes. Students that reside outside of the district may use existing bus routes.
Charter School Poverty Funding Adjustment – ORS 338.157
For purposes of calculating the weighted average daily membership of a public charter school, it shall
be assumed that the public charter school has the same percentage of children in poverty families as the
school district and this additional amount shall be added to the ADM of the public charter school.
Charter School Special Education Funding Adjustment – ORS 338.165
Students enrolled in a charter school who qualify for special education programs and related services
are considered students of the district in which the charter school is located. For those students, an
additional amount shall be added to the ADM of the public charter school; the amount is to be divided
between the sponsoring district, who maintains responsibility for providing services, and the public
charter school. (Cindy check this)
Admission of students; waiver; denial – ORS 339.115
Except as provided in ORS 339.141, the district school board shall admit free of charge to the schools
of the district all persons between the ages of 5 and 19 who reside within the school district. A district
must admit an otherwise eligible person who has not yet attained 21 years of age if the person is
receiving special education services and has not yet received a high school diploma or is receiving
31
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
special education services and has received a modified diploma, an extended diploma, or an alternative
certificate. A district may admit an otherwise eligible person who is not receiving special education and
who has not yet attained 21 years of age if the person is shown to be in need of additional education in
order to receive a high school diploma.
Correctional Facilities – ORS 339.129
A school district shall provide or cause to be provided appropriate education for children placed in a
local or regional correctional facility located in the school district. A “local correctional facility” is
defined to mean a jail or prison that is maintained and operated by a county or city and holds persons
for more than 36 hours (ORS 169.005). A “regional correctional facility” means a correctional facility
operated pursuant to an agreement among cities or counties or the state with cities or counties and used
to house prisoners having either pretrial or post-trial status (ORS 169.630).
Residency of a Child with Disability – ORS 339.134
A child with a disability shall be considered a resident for school purposes in the school district in
which the child’s parent or guardian resides if the child is voluntarily placed outside the child’s home
by the child’s parent or guardian; if the child’s parent or guardian retains legal guardianship of the
child; if there is a plan for the child to return home; if the placement is within 20 miles by the nearest
traveled road from the original school building; and if the child’s parent or guardian and the school
staff can demonstrate that it is in the best interest of the child to continue to attend the school the child
was attending prior to the placement.
Tuition Prohibited – ORS 339.141
School district boards and public charter schools are prohibited from charging tuition to any resident
pupil enrolled in the regular school program. Tuition may be charged for educational programs, classes,
or courses of study that are not part of the regular school program.
When Tuition Authorized – ORS 339.147
No school district or public charter school shall require tuition for courses not part of the regular school
program (except for traffic safety education) from a pupil who is a member of a low-income family in
an amount in excess of what the low-income family may receive as money specifically to be used for
payment of such tuition. “Low-income family” means a family whose children qualify for free or
reduced price school meals. A family that does not qualify as a low-income family may request a
waiver of the tuition if they believe the tuition would pose a hardship.
Any parent or guardian who believes that payment of any fee poses a severe hardship may request the
district school board or public charter school to waive payment of the fee and the feeshall be waived
upon a finding of hardship.
32
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
No district school board of public charter school shall impose or collet fees from any student who is a
ward of a juvenile court, the Oregon Youth Authority, or the Department of Human Services unless
funds are available in the court’s budget, the OYA’s budget, or the department’s budget.
Prohibition of certain fees as condition of admission; allowable fees – ORS 339.155
A school district may not require payment of fees as a condition of admission to those pupils entitled to
free admission.
Child with disability continues to be entitled to free appropriate public education if removed for
disciplinary reasons; due process procedures – ORS 339.252
A child with a disability continues to be entitled to a free appropriate public education if the child has
been removed for disciplinary reasons from the child’s current educational placement for more than 10
school days in a school year. Federal special education due processes apply.
Expanded Options Program - ORS chapter 340
The Expanded Options Program was created to assist high school students earn college credit and
increase the number of at-risk students earning college credits or preparing to enroll in public
community colleges and universities. “At-risk student” is defined as a student who qualifies for a free
or reduced lunch program or otherwise defined by the State Board of Education. The school district
pays for the college courses.
ORS 340.015(3) directs school districts to establish a process to ensure that all at-risk students and their
parents are notified about the Expanded Options Program.
ORS 340.080(4) directs school districts to ensure that all eligible students who are at-risk to participate
in the program if a district has more eligible students who wish to participate than allowed under the
credit hour cap.
ORS 340.083(1) allows school districts to request a waiver from offering the Expanded Options
Program if compliance would adversely impact the finances of the school district or if the school does
all of the following:
1. Offer a dual credit program, a two-plus-two program, an advanced placement program, an
International Baccalaureate program or any other accelerated college credit program AND
2. Ensure that at-risk students who participate in the accelerated college credit programs are not
required to make any payments for participation in the programs AND
33
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
3. Has a process for participation that allows all eligible at-risk students to participate and allows
at-risk students to earn the number of credit hours established by the State board of Education
or has a process for increasing the participation rate of eligible at-risk students.
ORS 340.320 directs the Department of Education to administer a grant program to assist students
in paying for books, materials, and other costs, other than test fees, related to accelerated college
credit programs.
Minority Teacher Act – ORS 342.433-449
Minority students make up approximately 36 percent of Oregon school enrollment, yet minority
teachers only account for 8.5 percent of Oregon teachers.25 Minority students tend to benefit from
teachers with similar backgrounds and these teachers of color serve as role models for all children and
role model a future career path. A statutory goal is that by July 1, 2015, the number of minority
teachers, including administrators, employed by school districts and education service districts shall
increase ten percent as compared to July 1, 2012.26 The Oregon Education Investment Board must
report on the progress toward this goal.
School Nurses – ORS 342.455-.495
While school nurses assist all students, their assistance is likely to be more keenly felt by families who
lack medical insurance or a regular physician. The mission of the National Association of School
Nurses is to improve the health and academic success of all students.
Special Education – ORS chapter 343
A community of school children includes those with special needs. ORS chapter 343 is dedicated to
this student population. Because that population does not seem to be the focus of HB 2665, more detail
on this point will not be provided unless a clear poverty link exists.
Talented and Gifted Students – ORS 343.391 -.413
The purpose of this section of law is to facilitate the identification and education of talented and gifted
children, those children who require special educational programs or services, or both, beyond those
normally provided by the regular school program in order to realize their potential.
Disadvantaged Children - ORS 343.650 - .680
School districts may provide equipment, special classes, special instruction, extracurricular programs,
camp and recreation programs, testing and research programs, counseling and guidance programs,
25
Source: Oregon Department of Education. Teacher count taken on Dec 1, 2013 and student count on Oct. 1 2013.
26
Language updated by SB 755 (2013).
34
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
transportation, orientation programs, nursery schools and kindergartens, and the construction and use of
special schools for the educational needs of disadvantaged children where the regular school program
is inadequate. “Disadvantaged children” means children who in their backgrounds are socially or
culturally deprived to such a degree that without supplemental facilities and services they cannot profit
in the regular school program to the same extent as children with normal backgrounds.
Migrant Children - ORS 343.810-.835
School districts may establish summer programs for migrant children to supplement the regular school
program and instruct in those educational areas in which the migrant child needs special help.
Department duties for programs for students with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities –
ORS 343.923
The Oregon Department of Education shall supply the Department of Human Services with
information concerning all students with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities who are 15 year of
age and older, which the Dept. of Human Services needs to serve and plan for their transition to adult
living and work situations.
Responsibility for costs of education of children in day and residential treatment programs –
ORS 343.961
The Department of Education is responsible for payment of the costs of educating students in eligible
day treatment programs and eligible residential treatment programs by contracting with the school
district in which the program is located. The school district in which an eligible day treatment or
residential treatment program is located is responsible for providing the education of a student.
Policy on career and technical education and employment training – ORS 344.055
Access to career and technical education should be facilitated. Provisions should be made to meet the
needs of women, minorities, disadvantaged, or persons with disabilities, and others who have special
training needs.
Programs for Persons Who Are Blind or Deaf – ORS chapter 346
ORS chapter 346 addresses that community of students who are blind or deaf and lays out the
requirements for training and education schools. Included is the Blind and Visually Impaired Student
Fund which assists students who are blind or visually impaired to receive appropriate resources and
services in the communities where they live or other settings identified in the student’s individualized
education program.
35
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
PART 3: EFFORTS TO MITIGATE DISPARITIES IN OPPORTUNITIES THAT
ARE PROVIDED OUTSIDE OF THE SCHOOL DAY OR SCHOOL YEAR
HB 2665:
The Department of Education shall conduct an evaluation of the means by which the impact of
poverty on educational attainment is addressed by state law. The study shall include an analysis of:
(d) Distributions of the State School Fund.
(e) Standards for equivalency in opportunities to learn across neighborhoods and economic
circumstances.
(f) Efforts to mitigate disparities in opportunities that are provided outside of
the school day or the school year.
Researchers have suggested that one reason for the growing gap in achievement is that wealthy parents
invest more time and money than ever before in their children (in weekend sports, ballet, music
lessons, math tutors, and in overall involvement in their children’s schools), while lower-income
families, which are now more likely than ever to be headed by a single parent, are increasingly
stretched for time and resources. This has been particularly true as more parents try to position their
children for college, which has become ever more essential for success in today’s economy.
Sabino Kornrich, a researcher at the Center for Advanced Studies at the Juan March Institute in
Madrid, and Frank F. Furstenberg, found that in 1972, Americans at the upper end of the income
spectrum were spending five times as much per child as low-income families. By 2007 that gap had
grown to nine to one; spending by upper-income families more than doubled, while spending by lowincome families grew by 20 percent.
“The pattern of privileged families today is intensive cultivation,” said Dr. Furstenberg, a professor of
sociology at the University of Pennsylvania.
36
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
Meredith Phillips, an associate professor of public policy and sociology at the University of California,
Los Angeles, used survey data to show that affluent children spend 1,300 more hours than low-income
children before age 6 in places other than their homes, their day care centers, or schools (anywhere
from museums to shopping malls). By the time high-income children start school, they have spent
about 400 hours more than poor children in literacy activities, she found.
HB 2665 asks whether Oregon has programs in place that mitigate these disparities. There are no
statewide programs, although some federal and state grant funds may be used to fund before- and afterschool programs.
One initiative is the Schools Uniting Neighborhoods (SUN) Community Schools, which began in 1999.
SUN programs bring together schools and community partners to positively affect student education
success and family self-sufficiency through an integrated network of social and support services for
youth, families, and community members. SUN Community Schools are located in elementary, K-8,
middle, and high schools. The specific services offered depend on the needs of the school’s
community. The goal is to address the spectrum of a student’s family needs.
A typical SUN Community School opens early and provides breakfast and a place to do homework or
an opportunity to participate in recreational or skill-building activities. During the school day, a site
manager may work to identify student and family needs and work to connect the families with those
services. Family members may take parenting classes or access health, food, clothing, mental health, or
other social services. After school activities include academic, enrichment, and recreational activities.
Students may receive dinner. In the evenings, the school becomes a community center and hosts a
variety of activities.
Funding SUN schools come from a variety of sources: city, county, state, school districts, non-profits,
and businesses. There are 46 SUN schools in six districts across the Portland-Multnomah County areas.
Federal funding supports after-school activities at SUN Community Schools as well non-SUN schools.
The 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) program, authorized under Title IV, Part
B, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) is designed to mitigate some of the
disparities in opportunities and are provided outside the school day. This federal grant funding
supports the creation of community learning centers (developed in partnership between a local
educational agency, a community-based organization, and another public or private entity). These
provide academic enrichment during non-school hours for students who attend high-poverty (greater
than 50% Free & Reduced Lunch) and low-performing schools.27 The federal funds are awarded to
27
For more information see http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg55.html
37
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
state education agencies (SEAs), which make competitive awards to eligible local grantees to support
out of school time learning programs for a minimum of three and a maximum of five years28. During
the regular school year, ODE requires each 21st CCLC grantee to provide at least 12 additional weekly
hours29. 21st CCLC summer programs must provide at least 20 hours per week and continue at least
four weeks.
Each round of Oregon grantees is funded for five years, with a maximum amount of $500,000 per year
and minimum annual grant size of $100,000 for the 1st 3 years. Oregon grantees are level funded
(100%) in years one, two, and three, with declining funding in years four (75%) and five (50%). In
years four and five, programs are expected to maintain service levels equivalent to those provided in
the first three years. Local grantees are also expected to make progress toward program sustainability.
2013-14 21st Century Community Learning Center (Title IV-B) Annual Budget Amounts
$10,817,454 Total ODE Award from US ED, July 1, 2013
$10,276,581.30 95% Each state shall reserve not less than 95% of the amount allotted for Grant in Aid awards to
eligible entities under subsection 4204
$216,349.08 2%
SEA may not use more than 2% for (A) state administrative costs (B) … implementing peer review
process for grant applications
$324,523.62 3%
SEA may not use more than 3% for (A) monitoring & evaluation, (B) capacity building, training
and technical assistance, (C) comprehensive evaluation of program effectiveness (directly or
through contract), (D) training & tech. assistance to entities who are recipients of awards
Each entity that receives a 21st CCLC award may use the funds to carry out a broad array of before and
after school activities (including during summer recess periods) that advance student academic
achievement [see Sec. 4205 (a) –(b)]30.
In 2013-14, the Oregon Department of Education 21st CCLC is funding 19 grantees in their fifth and
final year (serving 62 sites and 7,520 students) and 22 grantees in their first year (serving 97 sites &
14,545 students).
Since 2011, ODE’s 21st CCLC has collaborated internally with ODE’s subject matter experts to offer
non-competitive and competitive supplements for Expanded Learning Opportunities in Science,
Technology, Engineering, [Arts], and Math (STEM/STEAM) and English Language (EL).
ODE’s 2013 21st CCLC grant competition included three competitive application priority areas: STEM,
EL, and Career & Technical Education (CTE). ODE’s new 22 21st CCLC grantees that have begun in
2013 and will continue through 2018:
28
Grantees include but are not limited to local and/or regional education agencies, private and public non-profit organizations, forprofit organizations, institutions of higher education, faith-based organizations and city or county government agencies.
29
Evidence indicates that children need ample extended learning time, based on federal analyses of 21 st CCLC and other program
evaluation data.
30
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg55.html#sec4205
38
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014




21 of 22 new grantees included STEM proposals approved in their program plans.
20 of 22 featured EL initiatives in their funded program plans.
19 of 22 included CTE funded initiatives in their community learning center applications.
15 of 22 new grantees included Summer Learning Programs for their five-year approved
programs. These grantees are funded to serve 66 schools with 8,800 projected students31
participating for a minimum of 20 hours each week for a minimum of 4 weeks.
31
Centennial SD, David Douglas SD, Falls City SD, Hood River SD, Impact NW (serving Beaverton SD), Klamath Falls City SD,
Lincoln County SD, McMinnville SD, No. Clackamas SD, Portland Public SD, Siuslaw SD, Springfield SD, Three Rivers SD,
Umatilla SD, Woodburn SD.
39
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
REFERENCES
Anderson Moore, K., Redd, Z., Burkauser, M., Mbwana, K., Collins, A. (2009). Children in poverty:
trends, consequences, and policy options. Child Trends Research Brief Publication #2009-11.
Federal Policy Guidelines. Federal Register, Vol 79, 14, January 22, 2014, pp. 3593-4.
Harvard University (2007). The timing and quality of early experiences combine to shape brain
architecture. Working Paper 5; Center on the Developing Child, National Scientific Council on the
Developing Child.
Making the Grade: Assessing the Evidence for Integrated Student Supports (February 2014).
Maxfield, Michelle (2013). The effects of the earned income credit on child achievement and long-term
educational attainment. Michigan State University.
Oregon Department of Education News Release State Board of Education Updates Poverty
Calculation. January 23, 2014
Oregon Center for Public Policy. What is poverty? 2014 Federal Poverty guidelines for the 48
contiguous states and the District of Columbia
Oregon Education Investment Board Oregon Learns – report to the legislature from the Oregon
Education Investment Board. December 15, 20
Shaefer, H. Luke & Edin, Kathryn (2012). Extreme Poverty in the United States, 1996 to 2011,
National Poverty Center Brief #28.
Kornrich, S. & Furstenburg, Frank (2007). Investing in Children: Changes in Parental Spending on
Children, 1972 to 2007. Center for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences , University of
Pennsylvania.
United States Census Bureau. American Fact Finder (2012). Educational Attainment. Data Set: 2012
American Community Survey 1 year estimates.
United States Senate Budget Committee. (2011). SBC with paper on education in America: It’s not
about the money. Washington, DC.
U. S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). National Assessment
of Educational Progress at Grades 4 and 8.
U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences National Center for Education Statistics
(2012). Reading, Math and Science Achievement.
40
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
APPENDIX A
Federal Compensatory Education Programs
Through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the Oregon Department of Education
receives and distributes federal education funds to eligible school districts throughout Oregon. These
supplemental funds support district efforts in meeting federal and state requirements and in
implementing programs that improve the ability of all students to meet high academic standards. The
Oregon Department of Education continues its commitment to develop processes that ensure that
ESEA federal funds contribute to these opportunities. 32
Impoverished Oregon students are served through the following programs provided through the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act:
Title I-A
Title I-B1
Title I-B2
Title I-C
Title 1-D
Title II-A
Title II-B
Title II-C
Title II-D
Title III
Title IV-A
Title IV-B
Title V-A
Title V-B
Title VI-A
Title VI-B
Title VII
Title X
Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged
Improving Basic Programs
Reading First
Early Reading First
Migrant Education
Neglected and Delinquent or At-Risk Children
Teacher Quality
Mathematics and Science Partnerships
Troops to Teachers
Enhancing Education Through Technology
Limited English and Immigrant
Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities
21st Century Learning Centers
Innovative Programs
Charter Schools
Funding Flexibility
Rural Education Initiative
Indian, Native Hawaiian and Alaska Native Education
McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance Improvements
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility Waiver33
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was passed in 1965 as a part of the “War on
Poverty.” The federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was signed into law on January 8, 2002. This
legislation reauthorized the ESEA, mandated new requirements for state-level funding, professional
development of teachers, assessment of student performance, and reporting student and school
information to parents and communities.
32
33
Oregon Report Card. P 16
2011-12 Oregon Report Card, p 17
41
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
In September 2011 the U.S. Department of Education invited states to request flexibility regarding
specific requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 in exchange for rigorous and
comprehensive state-developed plans designed to improve educational outcomes for all students, close
achievement gaps, increase equity, and improve the quality of instruction.
Oregon submitted its ESEA Flexibility Request in January 2012, and the request received federal
approval in July 2012. With this approval, Oregon has been able to tailor the mechanisms of the ESEA
to create a more accountable and responsive system that meets the needs of Oregon students and
strengthens Oregon schools.
As part of the federal ESEA Flexibility application, Oregon developed a new accountability system
which uses multiple measures to rate schools. For high schools these measures include academic
achievement, academic growth, subgroup growth, graduation rates, and subgroup graduation. For
elementary and middle schools the first three measures are used. Schools receive an overall rating
based on how well they are doing in each of these areas.
Oregon used this system to identify 94 Oregon schools (34 Priority Schools and 60 Focus Schools)
which will receive additional supports and interventions from the state to help increase student
achievement and close persistent achievement gaps. Priority schools represent the lowest 5% of
high poverty schools (Title 1) in the state according the new accountability system, while Focus
schools are additional schools in the lowest 15% of high poverty schools in the state that have
achievement gaps. The accountability system also identified 30 high poverty Model schools. These
Model schools have been identified as examples of successful student outcomes and will serve as
models and mentors to other schools around the state.
As a requirement of ESEA, if a school receives funds from the federal government because of the high
poverty levels of its students under Title IA Improving Basic Programs, schools are required to send
letters to the parents of students who are being taught for four or more weeks by a teacher who is not
designated as highly qualified. Throughout the United States, students in high-poverty schools are less
likely than other students to be taught by a highly qualified teacher; in Oregon elementary students are
more likely to be taught by highly qualified teachers in high poverty versus low poverty schools.34
34
2011-12 Oregon Report Card, p 18.
42
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
APPENDIX B
HB 3232 and USDOE Test Fee Program Funding 2013-2015
The Oregon State Legislature passed HB 3232 during the 2013 Session and allocated $2.6
million to support “accelerated college opportunities (AP, IB, dual credit, early college).” To
that end, the Oregon Department of Education has used the state budget allocation to leverage
the USDOE’s Test Fee Program funding to provide additional support to students taking
Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) examinations that may result
in the students earning college credit. All AP and IB examination and registration fees will be
paid for low-income public school students. The State of Oregon will pay for AP Exams for
the following:
Student Category
*Low-income Public School
or home school Student
qualified to participate in the
Test Fee Program
Fee Assistance Available
 $28 fee reduction
from The College
Board
 $20 Federal funding
 $33 State funding
 $8 (school gives up
rebate)
*Low-income Private School
Student qualified to
participate in the Test Fee
Program
 $28 fee reduction
from The College
Board
 $20 Federal funding
 $8 (school gives up
rebate)
43
Student Test Cost
$0
$33
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
APPENDIX C
2014-15 ESTIMATED POVERTY COUNTS BY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Inst ID
2063
2113
1899
2252
2111
2005
2115
2041
2051
1933
2208
1894
1969
2240
2243
1976
2088
2095
2052
1974
1896
2046
1995
1929
2139
2185
1972
2105
2042
2191
1945
1927
2006
1965
44
County
Lake
Malheur
Benton
Yamhill
Malheur
Gilliam
Malheur
Jackson
Jefferson
Clatsop
Umatilla
Baker
Coos
Washington
Washington
Deschutes
Lane
Lane
Jefferson
Curry
Baker
Jackson
Douglas
Clackamas
Marion
Multnomah
Curry
Linn
Jackson
Polk
Columbia
Clackamas
Gilliam
Coos
District Name
Adel SD 21
Adrian SD 61
Alsea SD 7J
Amity SD 4J
Annex SD 29
Arlington SD 3
Arock SD 81
Ashland SD 5
Ashwood SD 8
Astoria SD 1
Athena-Weston SD 29RJ
Baker SD 5J
Bandon SD 54
Banks SD 13
Beaverton SD 48J
Bend-LaPine Administrative SD 1
Bethel SD 52
Blachly SD 90
Black Butte SD 41
Brookings-Harbor SD 17C
Burnt River SD 30J
Butte Falls SD 91
Camas Valley SD 21J
Canby SD 86
Cascade SD 5
Centennial SD 28J
Central Curry SD 1
Central Linn SD 552
Central Point SD 6
Central SD 13J
Clatskanie SD 6J
Colton SD 53
Condon SD 25J
Coos Bay SD 9
Poverty
Count
3
45
27.68
154
20
23
4.58
629.36
5
395.83
71
511
148.86
125.48
4887.08
2661.31
1417.02
30
5.54
305.04
11.08
39.7
66
596.87
361.33
1427.45
78.47
149.1
876.19
612.44
122.41
38.77
12.23
831.56
Poverty
Weights
0.75
11.25
6.92
38.5
5
5.75
1.145
157.34
1.25
98.9575
17.75
127.75
37.215
31.37
1221.77
665.3275
354.255
7.5
1.385
76.26
2.77
9.925
16.5
149.2175
90.3325
356.8625
19.6175
37.275
219.0475
153.11
30.6025
9.6925
3.0575
207.89
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
1964
2186
1901
2216
2086
1970
2089
2050
2190
2187
2253
2011
2017
2021
1993
1991
2019
2229
2043
2203
2217
1998
2221
1930
2082
2193
2084
2241
2248
2020
2245
2137
1931
2000
1992
2054
2100
2183
2014
2015
2023
45
Coos
Multnomah
Benton
Union
Lane
Crook
Lane
Jefferson
Polk
Multnomah
Yamhill
Grant
Harney
Harney
Douglas
Douglas
Harney
Wasco
Jackson
Umatilla
Union
Douglas
Wallowa
Clackamas
Lane
Polk
Lane
Washington
Wheeler
Harney
Washington
Marion
Clackamas
Douglas
Douglas
Josephine
Linn
Multnomah
Harney
Harney
Harney
Coquille SD 8
Corbett SD 39
Corvallis SD 509J
Cove SD 15
Creswell SD 40
Crook County SD
Crow-Applegate-Lorane SD 66
Culver SD 4
Dallas SD 2
David Douglas SD 40
Dayton SD 8
Dayville SD 16J
Diamond SD 7
Double O SD 28
Douglas County SD 15
Douglas County SD 4
Drewsey SD 13
Dufur SD 29
Eagle Point SD 9
Echo SD 5
Elgin SD 23
Elkton SD 34
Enterprise SD 21
Estacada SD 108
Eugene SD 4J
Falls City SD 57
Fern Ridge SD 28J
Forest Grove SD 15
Fossil SD 21J
Frenchglen SD 16
Gaston SD 511J
Gervais SD 1
Gladstone SD 115
Glendale SD 77
Glide SD 12
Grants Pass SD 7
Greater Albany Public SD 8J
Gresham-Barlow SD 10J
Harney County SD 3
Harney County SD 4
Harney County Union High SD 1J
172.49
108
902.2
26.93
192.01
772
74.16
206
489.95
3584.65
191.15
12
2.75
1
40
1445.64
2.35
52.01
968.47
69
74.17
28
78.57
311
3084.08
32.06
303.86
1443.42
38
3
72.75
227.15
306
80.72
190.48
1481.98
1737.54
2174.7
191.87
15.37
18.13
43.1225
27
225.55
6.7325
48.0025
193
18.54
51.5
122.4875
896.1625
47.7875
3
0.6875
0.25
10
361.41
0.5875
13.0025
242.1175
17.25
18.5425
7
19.6425
77.75
771.02
8.015
75.965
360.855
9.5
0.75
18.1875
56.7875
76.5
20.18
47.62
370.495
434.385
543.675
47.9675
3.8425
4.5325
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
2114
2099
2201
2206
2239
2024
1895
2215
3997
2053
2140
1934
2008
2107
2219
2091
2109
2057
2056
2262
2212
2059
1923
2101
2097
2012
2092
2112
2085
2094
2090
2256
2048
2205
2249
1925
1898
2010
2147
2145
1968
46
Malheur
Linn
Umatilla
Umatilla
Washington
Hood River
Baker
Union
Morrow
Jefferson
Marion
Clatsop
Grant
Malheur
Wallowa
Lane
Malheur
Klamath
Klamath
Clatsop
Union
Lake
Clackamas
Linn
Lincoln
Grant
Lane
Malheur
Lane
Lane
Lane
Yamhill
Jackson
Umatilla
Wheeler
Clackamas
Benton
Grant
Morrow
Marion
Coos
Harper SD 66
Harrisburg SD 7J
Helix SD 1
Hermiston SD 8
Hillsboro SD 1J
Hood River County SD
Huntington SD 16J
Imbler SD 11
Ione SD R2
Jefferson County SD 509J
Jefferson SD 14J
Jewell SD 8
John Day SD 3
Jordan Valley SD 3
Joseph SD 6
Junction City SD 69
Juntura SD 12
Klamath County SD
Klamath Falls City Schools
Knappa SD 4
La Grande SD 1
Lake County SD 7
Lake Oswego SD 7J
Lebanon Community SD 9
Lincoln County SD
Long Creek SD 17
Lowell SD 71
Malheur County SD 51
Mapleton SD 32
Marcola SD 79J
McKenzie SD 68
McMinnville SD 40
Medford SD 549C
Milton-Freewater Unified SD 7
Mitchell SD 55
Molalla River SD 35
Monroe SD 1J
Monument SD 8
Morrow SD 1
Mt Angel SD 91
Myrtle Point SD 41
25
130.28
35
1071.76
3062.37
714.29
22
25
11
769.34
189.29
17.97
156.09
15.55
78.58
308.16
1.8
1201.64
900.62
78.05
493.76
166
428.28
874.63
1342.19
3.46
84.65
2.5
65.54
30.39
82.66
1422.05
3117.1
417.23
10
276.95
73.44
7.46
424.76
103.52
229.42
6.25
32.57
8.75
267.94
765.5925
178.5725
5.5
6.25
2.75
192.335
47.3225
4.4925
39.0225
3.8875
19.645
77.04
0.45
300.41
225.155
19.5125
123.44
41.5
107.07
218.6575
335.5475
0.865
21.1625
0.625
16.385
7.5975
20.665
355.5125
779.275
104.3075
2.5
69.2375
18.36
1.865
106.19
25.88
57.355
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
2198
2199
2254
1966
1924
1996
2061
2141
2214
2143
4131
2110
1990
2093
2108
1928
1926
2060
2181
2207
2192
1900
2039
2202
2016
1897
2047
2081
2062
1973
2180
1967
2009
2045
1946
1977
2001
2182
1999
2188
2044
47
Tillamook
Tillamook
Yamhill
Coos
Clackamas
Douglas
Lake
Marion
Union
Marion
Wasco
Malheur
Douglas
Lane
Malheur
Clackamas
Clackamas
Lake
Multnomah
Umatilla
Polk
Benton
Jackson
Umatilla
Harney
Baker
Jackson
Lane
Lake
Curry
Multnomah
Coos
Grant
Jackson
Columbia
Deschutes
Douglas
Multnomah
Douglas
Multnomah
Jackson
Neah-Kah-Nie SD 56
Nestucca Valley SD 101J
Newberg SD 29J
North Bend SD 13
North Clackamas SD 12
North Douglas SD 22
North Lake SD 14
North Marion SD 15
North Powder SD 8J
North Santiam SD 29J
North Wasco County SD 21
Nyssa SD 26
Oakland SD 1
Oakridge SD 76
Ontario SD 8C
Oregon City SD 62
Oregon Trail SD 46
Paisley SD 11
Parkrose SD 3
Pendleton SD 16
Perrydale SD 21
Philomath SD 17J
Phoenix-Talent SD 4
Pilot Rock SD 2
Pine Creek SD 5
Pine Eagle SD 61
Pinehurst SD 94
Pleasant Hill SD 1
Plush SD 18
Port Orford-Langlois SD 2CJ
Portland SD 1J
Powers SD 31
Prairie City SD 4
Prospect SD 59
Rainier SD 13
Redmond SD 2J
Reedsport SD 105
Reynolds SD 7
Riddle SD 70
Riverdale SD 51J
Rogue River SD 35
171.69
93.57
745.1
480
1915.73
64.52
39.9
343.57
33
322.49
680.67
269.86
170
161.49
896.27
890.53
449.13
23
913.89
532.97
27
154.33
655.63
61.22
1.88
48
5
123.34
0.86
119.99
7740.47
20
32.44
35
160.81
1862.73
175.58
3521.44
134.56
39.91
236.43
42.9225
23.3925
186.275
120
478.9325
16.13
9.975
85.8925
8.25
80.6225
170.1675
67.465
42.5
40.3725
224.0675
222.6325
112.2825
5.75
228.4725
133.2425
6.75
38.5825
163.9075
15.305
0.47
12
1.25
30.835
0.215
29.9975
1935.1175
5
8.11
8.75
40.2025
465.6825
43.895
880.36
33.64
9.9775
59.1075
Effects of Poverty on Educational Attainment as Addressed in Oregon Law 2014
2142
2104
1944
2103
1935
2257
2195
2244
2138
1978
2096
2022
2087
1994
2225
2247
2083
1948
2144
2209
2018
2003
2102
2055
2242
2197
2222
2210
2204
2213
2116
1947
2220
1936
1922
2255
2002
2146
2251
1997
48
Marion
Linn
Columbia
Linn
Clatsop
Yamhill
Sherman
Washington
Marion
Deschutes
Lane
Harney
Lane
Douglas
Wasco
Wheeler
Lane
Columbia
Marion
Umatilla
Harney
Douglas
Linn
Josephine
Washington
Tillamook
Wallowa
Umatilla
Umatilla
Union
Malheur
Columbia
Wallowa
Clatsop
Clackamas
Yamhill
Douglas
Marion
Yamhill
Douglas
Salem-Keizer SD 24J
Santiam Canyon SD 129J
Scappoose SD 1J
Scio SD 95
Seaside SD 10
Sheridan SD 48J
Sherman County SD
Sherwood SD 88J
Silver Falls SD 4J
Sisters SD 6
Siuslaw SD 97J
South Harney SD 33
South Lane SD 45J3
South Umpqua SD 19
South Wasco County SD 1
Spray SD 1
Springfield SD 19
St Helens SD 502
St Paul SD 45
Stanfield SD 61
Suntex SD 10
Sutherlin SD 130
Sweet Home SD 55
Three Rivers/Josephine County SD
Tigard-Tualatin SD 23J
Tillamook SD 9
Troy SD 54
Ukiah SD 80R
Umatilla SD 6R
Union SD 5
Vale SD 84
Vernonia SD 47J
Wallowa SD 12
Warrenton-Hammond SD 30
West Linn-Wilsonville SD 3J
Willamina SD 30J
Winston-Dillard SD 116
Woodburn SD 103
Yamhill Carlton SD 1
Yoncalla SD 32
9221.14
112.44
355.3
85
297.54
207.93
44.54
324.08
689.85
138.35
282.15
7.11
546.58
410.99
51.6
14
2700.84
534.74
25.43
106.95
4
300.18
435.87
1363.85
1902
411.45
0
9.77
331.04
49.37
308.31
88.32
36.03
188.07
611.67
133.94
425.76
1880.9
104.92
109.03
2305.285
28.11
88.825
21.25
74.385
51.9825
11.135
81.02
172.4625
34.5875
70.5375
1.7775
136.645
102.7475
12.9
3.5
675.21
133.685
6.3575
26.7375
1
75.045
108.9675
340.9625
475.5
102.8625
0
2.4425
82.76
12.3425
77.0775
22.08
9.0075
47.0175
152.9175
33.485
106.44
470.225
26.23
27.2575