Answer: Yes, as long as the letter and process comply with the McKinney-Vento Act. The most directly relevant section of the law is 42 USC §11432(g)(3)(B)(iii):
“if, after conducting the best interest determination based on consideration of the presumption in clause (i) and the student-centered factors in clause (ii), the local educational agency determines that it is not in the child’s or youth’s best interest to attend the school of origin or the school requested by the parent or guardian, or (in the case of an unaccompanied youth) the youth, provide the child’s or youth’s parent or guardian or the unaccompanied youth with a written explanation of the reasons for its determination, in a manner and form understandable to such parent, guardian, or unaccompanied youth, including information regarding the right to appeal under subparagraph (E);”
It seems like, based on lack of attendance despite extensive efforts by the school to remove barriers, the district is making a determination that it is not in the student’s best interest to continue to attend the school of origin. Based on my review of the letter’s form and content, I would say the district is providing written notice with an explanation of the decision, in an understandable manner and form, and with clear instructions for how to appeal the decision. The district should provide this letter using all contact information available (mail it, text it and/or email it if they have cell phone or email info, etc.) and give the parent (or unaccompanied youth) a chance to respond.
Now, if a student misses a few days of school, and the school does little or nothing to intervene or support, but just sends out a letter like this and drops the student, that would not be acceptable under the law. The McKinney-Vento Act requires LEAs to remove barriers to enrollment in school, which includes attendance. 42 USC §§11432(g)(1)(I) and 11434a(1). Based on your description of the history here, it seems like the school has made extensive efforts to remove barriers.
Also, I am assuming that there is reason to believe attendance would be better at the local school. In other words, there is reason for the school to determine that attendance at the local school is in the student’s best interest. The McKinney-Vento Act can’t be used as a tool to get students with attendance struggles out of the school. There should be objective factor(s) making the local school better from a student-centered perspective. For example, maybe the commute is a challenge for the student for a particular reason, or the student just doesn’t like the school of origin and really wants to attend a different school, or the parent isn’t following through with transportation but the student could walk to the local school on his own.