The WakeEd blog is devoted to discussing and answering questions about the major issues facing the Wake County school system. How much will the new Democratic majority on the school board do to undo the changes made by Republicans since 2009? Will the new student assignment plan be a hybrid of the last two models or primarily be a return to the use of busing for diversity? Who will replace Tony Tata as the new superintendent of the state's largest district? How will voters react to a likely request in 2013 to borrow potentially more than $1 billion to build and renovate schools?
WakeEd is maintained by The News & Observer's Wake schools reporter, T. Keung Hui. While Keung posts information and analysis on the issues, keep us posted on your suggestions, questions, tips and what you're doing to cope with the changes in Wake's schools.
Based on all the questions about the accuracy of free and reduced lunch data, I thought you might be interested in the new federal income guidelines for the program.
For the 2008-09 school year, a family of four who reports a household income of less than $27,560 is eligbile for free lunch at school. For that same family, the feds consider $21,200 to be the poverty threshold.
Click here to see the chart.
Comments
Why did you choose to
Fri, 09/12/2008 - 16:38 — Anonymous (not verified)Why did you choose to highlight the income amount for free lunches instead of reduced lunches?
Do you think a family making almost $50,000 a year should be able to get a reduced lunch?
Can the News and Observer do
Mon, 08/04/2008 - 12:25 — Anonymous (not verified)Can the News and Observer do an investigative story on the fraud apparent with the Free and reduced lunch program? Since this is the entire basis of busing and has been widely lauded across the US, wouldn't it be relevant to prove the validity of this program? I could see this getting national attention. There is no way I can support Wake County school's policies unless I know this is a valid determination of economic diversity.
FYI - Good Luck
Mon, 08/04/2008 - 13:56 — Voice_of_Reason_National attention will not happen; F&R fraud is a political hot potato. The John Locke Foundation already has done an investigative piece. Of course, since they are conservative, for some it must be lies.
IF
Thu, 07/31/2008 - 21:13 — Voice_of_Reason_IF this program wasn't so riddled in fraud I wouldn't have a problem with it. It is meant to help children whose parents can't afford to feed them properly or ensure that the children will eat despite their parents. Of course the program goes much further, but in the big scheme of things, still not a big issue. Fraud at the nation level is bad, but in the big scheme of things, still not a big problem. The big problem with the F&R program is how it is used for Title I spending when fraud is included. Title I funding is based on US Census poverty level, not F&R numbers. That dilutes the money being spent on the target schools. What WCPSS does when they use F&R numbers (with high fraud levels) to do "diversity" balancing with fraud factored in costs us locally in money and family upheaval. That's the real story, that being said... thanks for the data points though Mr. Hui.
No disrespect
Thu, 07/31/2008 - 17:30 — Dadof3I do not mean any disrespect, Mr. Hui, but some of us are concerned over F&R parents who provide false information to qualify. If we're $6k higher than the national threshold, that's nice, but moot if no one is checking. What mechanisms are in place the ensure that all applicants are carefully screened?
I agree
Thu, 07/31/2008 - 18:56 — pmI agree that there ought be audits in place to ensure that folks actually qualify when registering. Additionally, there should be mechanisms in place to validate periodic qualification as well. E.G. Second parent goes back to work, college is over and primary income is restored or whatever else might move someone over the line.