At-risk count instability at the LEA level varies widely and is largest in small districts¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2028: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? LEA-level At-risk counts changed widely from 2022/23 to 2023/24: Washoe lost over a third of its 5,057 At-risk students, Douglas lost close to half of 171, and Lincoln gained nearly two-thirds of 43; in small districts, mobility and program eligibility drove more change than GRAD scores. → Tanner 2025

Evidence¶

Tanner 2025¶

Tanner, S., Krausen, K., Garcia, B., & Brown, A. (2025). Understanding the At-risk indicator: Nevada's Pupil-Centered Funding Plan. WestEd. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED677573

q2 · i? · associational · r2

LEA-level stability analysis of 2022/23 to 2023/24 At-risk counts (Table 7), with mobility and program-eligibility categories combined for privacy. "Clark experiencing a reduction in the number of At-risk status students of only 49 students from a baseline of 53,670, while Washoe lost over a third of its original count of 5,057 At-risk status students." Descriptive counts and percentages only; no effect size printed.

"Clark experiencing a reduction in the number of At-risk status students of only 49 students from a baseline of 53,670, while Washoe lost over a third of its original count of 5,057 At-risk status students."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• GRAD-score-based At-risk identification shows larger proportional year-to-year churn than direct certification would — related