Did the recovery work hold the line?
Two tools kept students learning when a classroom seat wasn’t possible: short-term independent study and attendance recovery. The question for this report is plain — did that work actually hold the district’s attendance, and the funding tied to it, steady this year? We answer it with our own P-2 figures, preliminary and subject to revision.
No student records here — only the district’s aggregate P-2 totals and the days the recovery work added back.
Source: District P-2 attendance master + attendance-recovery days report, 2025–26 P-2 (preliminary, aggregate — no PII).
student-days recovered — through short-term independent study and attendance recovery.
These are days students would otherwise have been marked absent. The recovery work converted them back into attended, fundable days — the margin that kept the district’s ADA from slipping this year.
Recovered student-days, 2025–26 P-2 (preliminary). Source: District P-2 attendance master + attendance-recovery days report.
Independent study did the overwhelming share of the work.
Of the 86,263 recovered student-days, short-term independent study accounts for 81,269 — 94%; attendance recovery adds 4,994 — the remaining 6%. The two together are what held attendance steady.
Recovered student-days by program, 2025–26 P-2 (preliminary). Independent study = short-term, F-code. Source: District P-2 attendance master + attendance-recovery days report.
P-2 ADA — held steady, essentially even with last year’s 17,654.89.
Year over year, district ADA moved +0.35 — flat. No funding was lost. In a year when many districts posted declines, holding level is the outcome the recovery work bought.
District P-2 ADA, 2024–25 vs. 2025–26 (preliminary, subject to revision). Source: District P-2 attendance master.
Two years of P-2 ADA, side by side — level.
The bars are honestly near-identical — 17,654.89 to 17,655.23, a difference of 0.35 ADA. The point is not a visible jump; it is that the line held. The roughly 600 ADA of recovered days (estimated) is what kept this bar from falling.
District P-2 ADA by year (preliminary, subject to revision). The ~600 ADA recovery figure is an estimate, pending the official P-2 day count. Source: District P-2 attendance master.
Within this year, cumulative ADA climbed from P-1 to P-2 — reversing last year’s slide.
Through the year, the running average rose from 17,586.97 at P-1 to 17,655.23 at P-2. Over the same span last year it fell 363. The trajectory reversed — consistent with the recovery work accruing across the year.
P-1 and P-2 are cumulative apportionment checkpoints (year-to-date averages, not semesters). Within-year = P-2 − P-1. 2025–26 preliminary, subject to revision. Source: District P-1 and P-2 attendance master. Distinct from the year-over-year read (+0.35, P-2 vs. P-2) on the prior slides.
The recovery work was the margin between flat and a decline.
Strip the recovered days and the district posts a clear year-over-year decline — with the funding loss that follows.
The recovered days equal an estimated ~600 ADA — about 3.4% of the district total. That is what held the line.
The ~600 ADA figure is preliminary, pending the district’s official P-2 instructional-day count. The direction is not in question: without the recovery work, the district would have posted a decline this year.
ADA-equivalent = recovered days ÷ P-2 instructional days (≈144), preliminary. Source: District P-2 attendance master + attendance-recovery days report.
Methodology and caveats.
The recovery work held the line.
86,263 recovered student-days kept the district’s P-2 ADA level at 17,655.23 — an estimated ~600 ADA that was the margin between flat and a decline. The figures are preliminary; the direction is clear.