hero background image

How Are States Handling Chronic Absenteeism?

Evaluating State Capacity to Address Chronic Absenteeism

Learn about our Evaluation Framework

A group of different colored chairs in a classroom.

Chronic absenteeism, defined as a student missing 10% or more of school days in an academic year, whether excused or unexcused, is a clear warning sign that a student is disengaged from school or facing significant challenges at home, in their community, or within the education environment itself. Unfortunately, the national average of chronically absent students is at 23% and for students of color and students from low-income backgrounds, those rates are higher than the national average.

The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated this crisis: the national average of chronically absent students nearly doubled from 16% in the 2018-19 school year to 28% in the 2021-22 school year. While some states are beginning to see improvement, absenteeism rates remain far above pre-pandemic levels. This reality underscores the urgency that interventions to address chronic absenteeism are crucial to improve student engagement and academic outcomes.

Accurate and timely data on attendance is essential for reducing chronic absenteeism. States and districts rely on this information to identify patterns in student attendance, implement early interventions, allocate resources wisely, and address the root causes that keep students out of school. Without strong data, it is nearly impossible to identify the needs of students and families and address them effectively.

For example, data shows that chronic absenteeism does not impact all students equally. Students of color, students from low-income backgrounds, and students with disabilities are disproportionately affected, often due to systemic barriers and a lack of access to resources. Children living in poverty are two to three times more likely to be chronically absent, and their communities often lack the resources to help them catch up. Understanding these gaps through regularly updated data and strategically addressing these barriers is vital to advancing educational equity and ensuring every student can thrive.

The path forward requires evidence-based strategies that help students attend school consistently and feel connected to their learning environment. By investing in proven practices to identify and re-engage chronically absent students, states and districts can create sustainable change that benefits both students and school communities, especially those with the greatest needs.

Our Campaign: Absent but Not Invisible

To support this work, EdTrust created Absent but Not Invisible, an interactive chronic absenteeism package designed to equip policymakers, advocates, and education leaders with the policy analyses, guidance, and insight they need to act. This resource highlights data trends, elevates equity considerations, and showcases strategies that work because every student matters, and no student should be unseen.

EdTrust is currently co-sponsoring a 50% attendance challenge, along with Attendance Works, and Nat Malkus at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

The challenge is a call to action for states to make reducing chronic absenteeism a top priority. It also seeks to demonstrate that chronic absenteeism can be significantly reduced when states commit to data-driven, comprehensive approaches that begin with early prevention and focus on student groups that are most chronically absent.

The 50% challenge is composed of 16 states and Washington, D.C. Each participating state is committed to reducing chronic absenteeism by 50% within a five-year period. The monitoring period started with the 2021-22 school year. Fifteen of the 17 participating states have seen reductions during the 2022-23 school year and the 2023-24 school year. Most of the participating states, 11 of the 16, are also included in our 23 State Scan.

What’s Happening Across States?

EdTrust conducted a 23-state scan evaluating attendance data systems and policies, investment strategies, and discipline policies and practices. The states included in this analysis represent a mix. Nine are EdTrust states, some are emerging leaders in reducing chronic absenteeism, and others have made clear commitments to reducing chronic absenteeism through policy, practice, and/or funding.

Choose a state from the pull-down menu to see its rating, how they have committed to addressing chronic absenteeism, and its actual chronic absenteeism data.

pdf ico 61.5 KB
Immigration Guidance
pdf ico 87.6 KB
Policy Guide
Blank map of the United States, territories not included Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming District of Columbia District of Columbia

Tennessee Policies

State Policy Evaluation Framework

We used 11 criteria to assess state policies across three categories:

Data and Accountability

For states to make progress toward addressing chronic absenteeism, all stakeholders must have access to useful, accurate, and timely attendance data. As stewards of state data systems, state education agencies (SEAs) are best positioned to establish common definitions and collect and share this data, which should be publicly available and easily accessible so stakeholders can make targeted, strategic workforce decisions at the school, district, and state level.

Investments in Strategies to Reduce Chronic Absenteeism

To improve chronic absenteeism rates, state leaders must prioritize sustained investments and implement evidence-based strategies that address the root causes especially for students of color, students from low-income backgrounds, and students with disabilities. SEAs, in partnership with districts and communities, are uniquely positioned to allocate resources toward high-impact interventions such as wraparound services, policy agenda, improved transportation, and family engagement. These investments should be driven by data and equity, aligned with state-level goals, and monitored for effectiveness.

Eliminating Harmful Practices and Adopting Evidence-based Policies and Practices

To improve school climate, schools should eliminate discipline practices such as suspensions for disrespect, minor disruptions, dress-code violations, and other non-violent behaviors that harm the relationship between students and school. Success means removing these policies and replacing them with supportive, restorative approaches that keep students connected to leaning and contribute to their social-emotional development.

LEGEND:
  • Most supportive
  • Partially supportive
  • Least supportive
  • Data and Accountability

    • Does the state require taking daily attendance, and does it set a definition of daily attendance?

      The state requires daily attendance to be taken. Students are considered present if they spend at least half of the day in school.

    • Does the state disaggregate and cross-tabulate chronic absenteeism and attendance data?

      The state disaggregates data by race/ethnicity, gender, grade level, economic disadvantage, English learner status, students with disabilities, foster care status, homeless status, military-connected students, school and district, and charter/traditional public schools. Data is available through an Excel file and can be cross-tabulated by the user.

    • Does the state have attendance monitoring systems in place?

      The state has a tracking and monitoring system in place that provides updates and alerts.

    • How often does the state collect chronic absenteeism data from school districts?

      The state collects and reviews chronic absenteeism annually.

    • Is chronic absenteeism data publicly available and accessible?

      The state’s chronic absenteeism data is accessible and publicly available. Reports provide chronic absenteeism data on the state, district, and school levels.

    • Does the state use early warning indicators?

      The state emphasizes the importance of early identification and prevention through the use of a tiered intervention system to reduce chronic absenteeism.

  • Investments in Strategies to Reduce Chronic Absenteeism

    • Has the state invested in strategies to increase engagement and lower rates of chronic absenteeism?

      No evidence.

    • Does the state have a clear policy agenda that prioritizes the reduction of chronic absenteeism?

      No evidence.

    • Are the state's investments to reduce chronic absenteeism financially sustainable?

      No evidence.

  • Harmful Practices

    • Has the state adopted evidence-based discipline guidance and policies?

      The state’s Department of Education developed resources related to trauma-informed discipline policies. A school discipline reform bill was proposed (Keeping Kids in School Act), but it did not pass.

    • Has the state eliminated harmful discipline practices that contribute to chronic absenteeism?

      The state has attempted to eliminate infractions for minor disciplinary issues and train teachers in evidence-based skills on positive behavioral interventions and supports; however, the policies did not passed.

Tennessee Chronic Absenteeism Numbers

Understanding state policy conditions to address chronic absenteeism is one part of the story. It’s also important to review actual – timely – data on chronic absenteeism to understand attendance patterns, engage in early intervention and prevention, identify trends, allocate resources where they are needed most, and implement targeted interventions in a way that addresses root causes and meets the needs of students and their families. Timely and transparent data can also help advocates understand where to ask educators in their communities to focus efforts.

The data below presents information about chronic absenteeism rates in 2022-23, and projects how those rates would need to change to reduce chronic absenteeism by 50% over five years — overall and for individual student groups, because averages hide important details about how specific groups of students are faring. And since we can’t accept different standards for different groups, the goal displayed is for each student group to achieve the same chronic absenteeism rate as other groups.

Select gradespan, locale, or school district to see corresponding data

Reset Filter

Percentage of students who were chronically absent in state by student group (2022-23 to projected 2027-28): All Schools

Select student group for further context:

About this analysis: This information is based on EdTrust’s analysis of data from the U.S. Department of Education’s 2022-23 Chronic Absenteeism data files, the 2022-23 Common Core of Data, and 2021-22 Civil Rights Data Collection.

Do you want to see the data for another state?