A Tale of Two States: Reducing Chronic Absence

“Partnering with states and districts is work that requires being in there for the long haul. The exciting thing about attendance is you can see immediate impacts on attendance from this work, and very quick impacts on student outcomes.”
– Claire Voorhees, Walton Family Foundation

Moderator Hedy Chang of Attendance Works opened this webinar by describing the history of chronic absence as a metric, born out of work with the Campaign for Grade-Level Reading around 2010 and now embedded in federal (ESSA) and state accountability systems. She noted absenteeism rose from roughly 1 in 6 students pre-pandemic to 1 in 3 at its peak, and while national declines have slowed, Connecticut and Georgia are accelerating progress toward a shared goal of cutting chronic absence by 50%. Chang outlined underlying causes as barriers and stressed that lasting change comes from positive conditions for learning paired with data-driven, tiered support at both the district and state levels.

Charity Trowbridge with Fulton County Schools in Georgia described bringing K–5 attendance above pre-pandemic levels through a dedicated attendance department, proactive family communication, and community partnerships (in-school mental health providers, vision care, university engagement partners). Arianne Weldon with Georgia Family Connection Partnership explained the Get Georgia Reading campaign’s four-pillar framework and the practice of stratifying absences (6–15 days vs. 15+) to match interventions to root causes and described two relevant state laws: SB 123 (attendance/climate committees) and HB 740 (MTSS for preK–3 in place of suspension). Justin Hill, Ed.S., with the Georgia Department of Education shared statewide data showing chronic absenteeism down to 17.7%, driven by merging MTSS/PBIS into a whole-child framework, a revised school climate rating system, and an enhanced public dashboard.

Sandra Faioes of Norwalk Public Schools described a 40% reduction in chronic absenteeism through centralized, “peer-comparison” style attendance communications, personalized outreach, and a state LEAP grant funding home-visit staff for families of students missing 10% or more school days. Kari Sullivan Custer with the Connecticut State Department of Education detailed the state’s monthly public data reporting, the LEAP home-visiting program, the Talk Tuesday practitioner community, and a relationship-first, always-voluntary approach to home visits. Commissioner Charlene Russell-Tucker, also with the Connecticut State Department of Education, discussed how she emphasized using data to drive real-time action and securing a dedicated state budget line for attendance work. Russell-Tucker noted the important role state chiefs can play as “chief communicator, advocate, and cheerleader.”

Claire Voorhees of the Walton Family Foundation closed the session with the philanthropic perspective: Flexible funding, coaching, and technical assistance can help states move faster once they’ve set priorities, and sustainability should guide investment.

Key takeaways:

1. Pay attention to the three tiers of intervention that can help reveal different root causes and point to different solutions ranging from universal supports to intensive individualized help.
2. Pair data transparency with capacity building: Georgia and Connecticut both publish attendance data frequently and pair it with resources, coaching, and community-of-practice support so schools can act on what they see.
3. Build systems rather than one-off fixes. Both districts stressed that durable, integrated systems (merged MTSS/PBIS, centralized communication, standing attendance teams) let schools respond quickly when a family’s needs resurface, rather than starting over each time.
4. Lead with relationships not compliance. Home visits, personalized outreach, and community partnerships (mental health, vision, food, housing) address the real barriers behind absences far more effectively than truancy-focused notices.
5. Progress takes sustained, cross-sector commitment. Leaders across state agencies, districts, philanthropy, and community organizations described this as multiyear work requiring consistent leadership, dedicated funding, and shared ownership.