2021 Year-in-Review

Question: In our district, a youth and parent can complete a form to change both preferred name and gender identity in the student information system/student record. It typically requires a parent signature. A high school student (14) who is identified as an unaccompanied youth has requested to change their preferred name and gender identity in the student information system. This youth’s parent is reachable and in contact with the student; however they don’t live together due to ongoing conflict. The high school wants to know 1) can the student complete the form/change without a parent signature? and 2) does the school need to contact the parent to either attempt to get a signature or notify the parent of the change? The student isn’t identifying this as a barrier to attendance currently. They do want to make the change themselves without including the parent. They haven’t shared specifically, but I think the on-going conflict is related to identity.

Answer:

A pivotal issue in this scenario is that the student is saying that not changing their chosen name and gender identity is not a barrier to enrollment (which includes attending classes and participating fully in school activities).  States, school districts, and charter schools need to revise policies to remove barriers to identification, enrollment, and retention in school (42 U.S.C. 11432(g)(1)(I)). If the student indicates that not being able to change the information in the student information system makes the student hesitant to come to school or otherwise is a barrier to identification, enrollment, or retention in school, then you would need to allow the change without parental signature or notification. It’s important to have these conversations sensitively with students and ensure barriers are removed, particularly given that transgender students are ten times more likely to experience homelessness than cisgender students.

However, if the policy is not a barrier to identification, enrollment, or retention, then the district would need to apply the same rules to McKinney-Vento students as you’d apply to housed students around a procedure like this. If at any point not being able to make those changes becomes a barrier to the student attending or participating fully in school, then you would need to revise the policy to allow the youth to make the change independently from parents.

Question: We have a student who became homeless this school year, so School A became her school of origin. The family relocated to another attendance area (School B). In January, the student decided to leave school of origin (School A) per parent request and enroll in the school of her attendance area (School B). The student now wants to return to School A. Is School A still her school of origin? What if the student now has secure housing in School B’s attendance area?

Answer: Our team looked at this from two different perspectives and ultimately concluded that it depends on the interpretation of “the school attended when permanently housed”. We looked at school A as the school the student last attended when permanently housed before losing housing, which would make school A the school of origin. We also looked at school B as the school the student last attended when (now) permanently housed, which would mean A is no longer a school of origin. We think both are legally defensible.

But, our conversation kept coming back to what’s in the best interest of the student. If the interpretation is that school A is a school of origin, is transferring at this point in the year in the best interest of the student? The student would only have school of origin rights at school A until the end of this school year, assuming the student remains permanently housed in B.

In this case, it seems like either way you interpret the law, best interest will be key.

Question: We are working with a family that struggles financially. Mom is dealing with some medical challenges and is needing brain surgery; she currently can’t be left alone. Since mom can’t be alone, our student and her mom are doubled up with grandma three to five days out of the week. The other days they are able to be at their home, because grandma can be there with them. Grandma lives out of our school district and has reached out for help with transportation. We know they are struggling financially, but we can’t decide if the living situation is one that would be eligible under McKinney-Vento.

Answer: You are right to think about the reasons for sharing housing, as the law is clear that it must be “due to loss of housing, economic hardship, or a similar reason.” 42 U.S.C. §11434a(2) It does seem that in this situation, the family is staying with grandma due to the mother’s health needs, rather than due to a loss of housing, economic hardship, or similar reason. They have fixed, regular and adequate housing, and the only reason they are staying off and on with grandma is due to the mother’s health needs. It doesn’t seem that their financial needs are a reason for the doubling up.

Question: Our state has a law that excludes all students in mid-February if they are not up to date with their immunizations. This statewide day is called “Exclusion Day”. McKinney-Vento law states that we must review and revise policies that are a barrier to McKinney-Vento students enrollment and participation, and I believe exclusion day can be a barrier to a student’s attendance. We connect our students to health resources and advocate for students so that we can prevent their exclusion from school. This year, some of my liaison colleagues in neighboring school districts and I have experienced schools excluding students despite our advocacy. I know that federal law supersedes state law, and I’m hoping for a national lens to this practice.

Answer: You are correct that McKinney-Vento, as a federal law, supersedes state law, and a blanket policy like “Exclusion Day” cannot be applied to McKinney-Vento students. McKinney-Vento requires that districts review and revise policies to “remove barriers to the identification of homeless children and youths, and the enrollment and retention of homeless children and youths in schools in the State.” [42 U.S.C. §11432(g)(1)(I)]. Excluding these students creates a barrier and may prevent immediate enrollment and full participation under McKinney-Vento [42 U.S.C. §11434A(1)].

You’d want to look at each situation individually – if a family is simply refusing immunizations despite advocacy and support from the liaison, exclusion could be applied (although the family would also have access to medical, religious, or philosophical exemptions that exist in the district or state).

Question: Our state recently welcomed a large number of immigrant families who were placed in hotels. The families are now moving to shelters in a neighboring city. The school district in the neighboring city has stated that they will transfer the students to their schools rather than support them staying in their schools of origin. We have identified the students under McKinney-Vento, as they are living in hotels and shelters. Do the students have the right to continue in their schools of origin in our community or can the district of residence make them transfer?

Answer: These families meet the McKinney-Vento definition of homeless because they were placed in hotels in your community. If they enrolled in school in your community while in hotels, these schools meet the definition of school of origin and the students have the right to remain there if it is determined to be in their best interest. Each situation would need to be evaluated individually to determine best interest. The McKinney-Vento Act needs to be followed fully, including providing transportation and also, in the case of a disagreement over best interest, providing written notice to the family with the explanation of the school’s decision and how to appeal. The students must be able to remain in the school where enrollment is sought during the appeal process.