National Center for Homeless Education 

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

Increasing School Stability for Students Experiencing 

Homelessness 

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation 

to the School of Origin 

Authors 

Diana Bowman, Director 

Katina Barksdale, Assistant Program Specialist 

National Center for Homeless Education at SERVE 

October 2004
National Center for Homeless Education ii

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

NCHE Profile 

The National Center for Homeless Education (NCHE) is a 

national resource center of research and information enabling 

communities to successfully address the needs of children and their 

families who are experiencing homelessness and unaccompanied youth 

in homeless situations. Funded by the U.S. Department of Education, 

NCHE provides services to improve educational opportunities and 

outcomes for homeless children and youth in our nation’s school 

communities. NCHE is housed at SERVE, a consortium of education 

organizations associated with the School of Education at the 

University of North Carolina at Greensboro. 

The goals of NCHE are the following: 

• Disseminate important resource and referral information 

related to the complex issues surrounding the education of 

children and youth experiencing homelessness. 

• Provide rapid-response referral information 

• Foster collaboration among various organizations with interests 

in addressing the needs of children and youth experiencing 

homelessness 

• Synthesize and apply existing research and guide the research 

agenda to expand the knowledge base on the education of 

homeless children and families, and unaccompanied youth 

Website: www.serve.org/nche

HelpLine: 800-308-2145 

Contact: Diana Bowman, Director 

NCHE at SERVE 

P.O. Box 5367 

Greensboro, NC 27435 

Phone: 336-315-7453 or 800-755-3277 

Email: dbowman@serve.org or homeless@serve.org 

Publication Editing: Donna Nalley 

The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. 

Department of Education, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or 

organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 
National Center for Homeless Education iii

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

Acknowledgments 

 NCHE gratefully acknowledges the time and wisdom of local 

homeless education liaisons and pupil transportation directors who 

provided interviews and documents related to providing transportation 

for homeless students to their school of origin. Specifically, NCHE 

thanks the following individuals: 

 

Anchorage School District, Anchorage, AK 

Ms. Patricia O’Gorman, Program Coordinator for Child in 

Transition/Homeless Project 

Cincinnati School District (Project Connect), Cincinnati, OH 

Ms. Debbie Reinhart, Executive Director 

Mr. Paul McDole, Operations Manager 

Houston Independent School District (HISD), Houston, TX 

Dr. Connie Thompson, Director/District Liaison 

Putnam County District Schools, Putnam County, FL 

Mr. Bob Pugh, Director of Federal Programs 

San Antonio Independent School District (SAISD), San Antonio, TX 

Ms. Estella Garza, Coordinator of Family/Student Services 

Mr. Mike Daly, Executive Director, Transportation Services 

Dr. Patricia Karam, Executive Director for Student Services 

Spokane Public Schools, District 81, Spokane, WA 

Ms. Edith Sims, Homeless Facilitator 

St. Paul Public Schools, St. Paul, MN 

Ms. Becky Hicks, McKinney-Vento Liaison 

Educational Service District (ESD) 112,Vancouver, WA 

Mr. Lionel Pinn, Manager, Specialized Transportation 

Cooperative 
National Center for Homeless Education iv

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

Increasing School Stability for Students Experiencing 

Homelessness 

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the 

School of Origin 

Executive Summary 

Underscoring the importance of school stability for children and 

youth experiencing homelessness, the McKinney-Vento Homeless 

Education Assistance Act, reauthorized as Title X, Part C, of the No 

Child Left Behind Act of 2001, requires that school districts provide 

transportation to enable children and youth to remain in their school of 

origin (the school a student attended when permanently housed or the 

school in which the student was last enrolled). Although this mandate 

increases the complexity and expense of pupil transportation, school 

districts have developed resourceful strategies to provide children and 

youth experiencing homelessness transportation to their school of 

origin. 

 In order to provide ideas to school districts that experience 

challenges to implementing the mandate for transportation to the 

school of origin and those that seek additional implementation 

strategies, in 2003-2004, the National Center for Homeless Education 

(NCHE) interviewed local homeless education liaisons and pupil 

transportation directors from eight school districts that have instituted 

a variety of approaches to ensuring that children and youth 

experiencing homelessness receive transportation services to their 

school of origin. 

Following is a summary of recommendations to school districts 

for providing transportation for children and youth experiencing 

homelessness to attend the school of origin: 

(1) Establish strong networks of community support. 

• Initiate conversations with the department of social 

services, housing authorities, foster care, juvenile justice, 

child protective services, and public and private 

transportation agencies 

• Create partnerships with shelters, group homes, and 

community agencies 

• Develop memoranda of understanding to clarify roles and 

expectations 

• Participate in local homeless coalitions or councils

• Sponsor meetings to familiarize these agencies with 

educational needs for children and youth experiencing 

homelessness and to identify strategies for collaboration 
National Center for Homeless Education v

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

• Identify a contact in each agency with whom routine 

communication takes place 

• Sensitize private sector businesses to the needs of 

children and youth experiencing homelessness 

(2) Develop a strong partnership between the homeless education 

program and the department of pupil transportation. 

• Develop a team approach to coordination between the 

homeless education program and department of pupil 

transportation 

• Provide training to department of pupil transportation 

staff to increase sensitivity to and buy-in for the needs of 

homeless children 

• Review data on homeless children and youth in the 

district to identify what the transportation needs are and 

how the current transportation system might meet those 

needs 

(3) Establish inter-district collaboration. 

• Have frequent communication between local liaisons and 

pupil transportation directors across districts 

• Designate which district has the primary responsibility to 

ensure that children and youth do not “fall through the 

cracks” 

• Host collaborative cross-district meetings of local liaisons 

and pupil transportation directors to plan strategies and 

review their effectiveness 

(4) Establish formal procedures for equity, transparency, and 

consistency. 

• Involve all stakeholders in the development of procedures 

and publicize them in the school system and community 

• Establish inter-district policies and memoranda of 

agreement 

• Review procedures periodically and revise as needed 

• Develop forms for intake and record keeping 

• Develop informational brochures for parents 

• Develop procedures for inter-district transportation and 

put in place before the need arises 

(5) Establish policies to support federal legislation. 

• Develop state and/or local policies that reinforce the 

McKinney-Vento legislation 

• Develop state and/or local policies that clarify roles and 

responsibilities related to transporting children and youth 

experiencing homelessness to their school of origin 

• Review policies from other states or districts to serve as 

models 
National Center for Homeless Education vi

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

(6) Establish a database and system for data collection. 

• Establish an electronic database that can be shared 

among school and school district staff, shelters, and other 

agencies involved with homeless children and youth

• Attend to confidentiality issues

• Ensure regular and accurate data input

• Use data to facilitate and expedite transportation 

arrangements

• Use data to report on the transportation needs of 

homeless children and youth for advocacy and funding 

purposes

(7) Seek economical and creative solutions. 

• Seek the most economical solutions first 

• Identify potential resources in the community 

• Involve private sector businesses and foundations 

• Plan ahead; have resources identified and procedures in 

place 

• Be flexible with bus routes and use of special education or 

magnet school buses 

(8) Keep in mind the safety of the child or youth 

• Ensure that transportation modes for transporting 

children to the school of origin are equally as safe as those 

for other children 

• Follow state and local policies related to approved 

vehicles and drivers 

• Ensure taxis and public vehicles meet guidelines outlined 

in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

Guideline #17: Pupil Transportation Safety 

(http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/nhtsa/whatsup/tea21/tea21programs/402G

uide.html#g17)

• Screen all drivers for background checks and driving 

records 

(9) Inform policymakers of the need for school stability for highly 

mobile children 

• Provide accurate and concrete data

• Visit the website of NAEHCY (www.naehcy.org) to 

become aware of national advocacy efforts

. 
National Center for Homeless Education vii

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

NCHE Profile..............................................................................................................ii 

Executive Summary................................................................................................. iv 

Table of Contents.....................................................................................................vii 

Introduction ................................................................................................................1 

Rationale for School Stability..................................................................................2 

Overview of Provisions of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance 

Act of 2001 Relating to Transportation to the School of Origin............4

 

Challenges and Strategies for Transporting Homeless Children to 

their School of Origin—Summary of Interviews......................................6 

General Recommendations for Implementing the Mandate for 

Transporting Homeless Children to their School of Origin.................14 

Conclusion .................................................................................................................19 

APPENDICES

Appendix A Excerpts from the McKinney-Vento Act Relating to 

Transportation..............................................................................................A1-3

Appendix B Excerpts from Education for Homeless Children and Youth 

Program Non-Regulatory Guidance, July 2004...........................................B1-9 

Appendix C McKinney-Vento 2001—Law into Practice Transportation 

Brief ..............................................................................................................C1-2 

Appendix D National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation 

Services--Resolution ........................................................................................D1 

Appendix E Interview Questionnaire ...................................................................E1-3 

Appendix F Interviews with LEA Staff...............................................................F1-38 

Appendix G Sample Documents from Local Education Agencies ..................... G1-13 

Appendix H- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Guideline 

#17: Pupil Transportation Safety................................................................ H1-6 

Appendix I NCHE (National Center for Homeless Education), Services, and 

Products............................................................................................................I1 

Appendix J National Partners in Homeless Education.......................................... J1
 

National Center for Homeless Education 

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

Increasing School Stability for Students Experiencing 

Homelessness 

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation 

to the School of Origin 

Introduction 

 Underscoring the importance of school stability for children and 

youth experiencing homelessness, the McKinney-Vento Homeless 

Education Assistance Act, reauthorized as Title X, Part C, of the No 

Child Left Behind Act of 2001, requires that school districts provide 

transportation to enable children and youth to remain in their school of 

origin (the school a student attended when permanently housed or the 

school in which the student was last enrolled). 

Many school districts have devised resourceful strategies for 

implementing the mandate. Local homeless education liaisons, now 

required in every school district, work with pupil transportation 

directors and other administrators, community agencies, municipal 

transportation systems, or private transportation providers seeking 

ways to coordinate efforts and pool resources to ensure that children 

can remain in their school of origin when they or their families become 

homeless. States and local districts throughout the nation have 

developed policies that support the federal legislation and facilitate 

inter-district transportation when necessary. 

Many school districts implemented systems to keep children in 

their school of origin even before the 2001 legislation and have lessons 

to share on ways to establish an effective transportation system for 

this purpose. Other school systems are just beginning the conversation 

and are struggling to meet the requirement. 

Increasing School Stability for Students Experiencing 

Homelessness: Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to 

the School of Origin, developed by the National Center for Homeless 

Education (NCHE), targets school districts that are in the initial 

stages of addressing the school stability and transportation needs of 

homeless students and those that wish to refine their current system. 

Information from interviews with local administrators in eight school 

districts that successfully provide transportation to the school of origin 

provides strategies and guidelines for establishing effective 

transportation programs to serve the needs of homeless children and 

youth. 
National Center for Homeless Education 2

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

Included in the publication are: 

• Rationale for school stability

• Overview of the McKinney-Vento legislation relating to 

transportation to the school of origin

• Challenges and strategies for transporting homeless children 

to their school of origin—summary of interviews

• General recommendations for implementing the mandate for 

transporting children to their school of origin 

Rationale for School Stability 

Currently, an estimated 1.35 million children are homeless in 

the United States (NCH, 2003; Noll & Watkins). Families with 

children now represent the fastest-growing segment within the 

homeless population (Noll & Watkins, Nunez & Collingnon, Stronge & 

Hudson). An inevitable reality of homelessness for these families and 

children is a life of frequent moves. Families who are experiencing 

homelessness often must move from shelter to shelter, as their 

allowable stays come to an end. They may move in with family 

members temporarily, stay at hotels or motels for short stints, live out 

of their cars or live in temporary housing through government or nonprofit programs. In cases where these families must move a distance to 

find temporary housing, they are not only burdened with the stresses 

of a new living situation, but often are moving into different school 

districts and faced with the possibility of their children having to enroll 

in a new school with new teachers, curriculum, and classmates. 

Not surprisingly, children and youths who move frequently, due 

to their families’ homelessness or other unstable work and home 

situations often related to high poverty, are vulnerable to educational 

difficulties. It is important to note, however, that not all children and 

youths move because of crisis or other difficulty. There are those who 

move for “strategic” reasons to enter a better educational situation, 

according to Rumberger, and those who make “reactive” school changes 

“due to intolerable social or academic situations” (2003). Students 

moving for reactive reasons, such as homelessness, were more likely to 

report negative educational impacts in Rumberger’s study of mobility 

in California schools (1999). 

Despite the different motivations for moves, there is a 

significant body of research to show that highly mobile students often 

perform less well than their stable peers (Attles, 1997; Alexander, 

Entwisle, & Dauber, 1996; Family Housing Fund, 1998; Temple & 

Reynolds, 1999; Hofstetter, 1999; Lee & Smith, 1999; Wood, Halfon, 
National Center for Homeless Education 3

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

Scarla, Newacheck, & Nessim, 1993). In a national study of thirdgraders conducted by the U.S. General Accounting Office, students 

who had changed schools frequently were more likely to have repeated 

a grade or have performed below grade level on reading assessments 

(1994). One study conducted by the Texas Education Agency in 1997 

found that the difference between mobile and non-mobile students’ 

standard test scores positively increased with the students’ grade level; 

that is, the higher the grade level, the greater the gap between the 

mobile and non-mobile students’ achievement, with the mobile 

students falling further and further behind. Even after controlling for 

previous test scores and socio-economic status, mobile students still 

performed one to two points lower than their non-mobile counterparts 

(Texas Education Agency). School mobility has also been found to be 

associated with higher dropout rates in high schoolers (Rumberger, 

1995; Swanson & Schneider, 1999; Teachman, Paasch, & Carver, 

1996). In these instances, it was clear that highly mobile students were 

at an educational disadvantage. 

In addition to educational difficulties, highly mobile students 

have been found to experience other significant problems. The same 

study of third-graders conducted by the U.S. General Accounting Office 

found nutritional and health deficiencies in these highly mobile 

students. Other studies found that students who change schools often 

experience more behavioral problems (Simpson & Fowler, 1994; Wood, 

Halfon, Scarla, Newacheck, & Nessim, 1993; Swanson & Schneider, 

1999), including an increased risk for violent behavior (Ellickson & 

McGuigan, 2000). According to Mantzicopoulos and Knutson (2000), 

frequent school moves and the transitions associated with them may 

overburden young children’s limited emotional resources as they try to 

cope with such major changes. 

While it is clear that children and youths can benefit from 

remaining in their school of origin, the U.S. Department of Education’s 

McKinney-Vento Report to Congress for Fiscal Year 2000 cited 

transportation as the primary barrier for children attempting to enroll 

in and regularly attend their school of origin. Fortunately, with the 

reauthorization of the McKinney-Vento legislation, local school 

districts are now required to not only remove barriers to enrollment, 

but to provide students transportation services to their school of origin 

when requested, once remaining in the school of origin is determined to 

be in the best interest of the child or youth. 

With both the legislative mandate and increased awareness of 

the critical nature of school stability for homeless children and youth, 

new collaborations abound among school districts and state and federal 

agencies. Building on a 2000 NCHE national symposium on 

transportation for homeless children and youth, a strong partnership 
National Center for Homeless Education 4

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

between NCHE and the National Association of State Directors of 

Pupil Transportation Services (NASDPTS) resulted in a NASDPTS 

resolution committing to serving the transportation needs of homeless 

children and youth. (See Appendix D). In addition, the National 

Association for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth 

(NAEHCY) has facilitated many opportunities for states and school 

districts to share transportation strategies through its annual 

conference, listserv, and newsletters. (See Appendix J.) 

Overview of Provisions of the McKinney-Vento Homeless 

Assistance Act of 2001 Relating to Transportation to the School 

of Origin 

McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (Title X, Part C, No 

Child Left Behind Act). Key provisions in the McKinney-Vento 

legislation related to transportation to the school of origin include: 

• Local Education Agencies (LEAs), otherwise known as school 

districts, must provide students experiencing homelessness 

with transportation to and from their school of origin, at a 

parent or guardian’s request, once remaining in the school of 

origin is determined to be in the best interest of the child. 

The LEA must provide transportation to the school of origin 

whether or not it receives funding through a McKinneyVento subgrant. In addition, the LEA must provide 

transportation to the school of origin even if it does not 

provide transportation to non-homeless students. 

• For unaccompanied youth, LEAs must provide 

transportation to and from the school of origin at the LEA 

homeless liaison’s request. 

• “School of origin” is defined as the school that the child or 

youth attended when permanently housed or the school in 

which the child or youth was last enrolled. 

• If the student’s temporary residence and the school of origin 

are in the same LEA, that LEA must provide or arrange 

transportation. If the student is living outside the school of 

origin’s LEA, the LEA where the student is living and the 

school of origin’s LEA must determine how to divide the 

responsibility and cost of providing transportation, or they 

must share the responsibility and cost equally. (See 

Appendix A for relevant portions of the statute.) 
National Center for Homeless Education 5

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

U.S. Department of Education 2004 Non-Regulatory Guidance. 

Further clarification of the statute is provided in the July 2004 NonRegulatory Guidance issued by the U.S. Department of Education (See 

Appendix B for relevant portions of the Guidance.) The Guidance

reinforces that State Education Agencies (SEAs) and LEAs are 

responsible for reviewing and revising policies, including 

transportation policies that may act as barriers to the enrollment and 

retention of homeless children and youth. 

In determining a child’s or youth’s best interest for school 

placement, an LEA must, to the extent feasible, continue a homeless 

child or youth in the “school of origin” for the duration of homelessness 

unless contrary to the wishes of the child or youth’s parents or 

guardian. Factors that an LEA may consider when determining 

feasibility include the age of the child, the distance of a commute and 

the impact it may have on a student’s education, personal safety 

issues, a student’s need for special instruction (e.g., special education 

and related services), the length of the anticipated child’s stay in a 

shelter or other temporary location, and the time remaining in the 

school year. Determining the most appropriate placement for a child or 

youth experiencing homelessness is a student-centered, individualized 

determination. 

If the student continues to live in the area served by the LEA in 

which the school of origin is located, then the LEA must provide or 

arrange for transportation to and from the school of origin. If the 

student is continuing his or her education in the school of origin but 

begins to live in an area served by another LEA, the LEA of origin and 

the LEA in which the child or youth is living must agree upon a 

method to apportion the responsibility and costs or share the costs 

equally. LEAs should establish inter-district agreements, where 

appropriate, that address potential issues that may arise as homeless 

students transfer from one district to another. 

The Guidance recommends a team approach to addressing the 

transportation needs of homeless and other highly mobile students. 

Based on the best interest of the student and in consultation with the 

parents or guardian, the LEA will determine the mode of 

transportation. The LEA transportation director is a key figure in the 

process and should work with district leadership, the local liaison for 

homeless education, neighboring districts, and service providers. 

If the appropriate school placement of a child is in dispute, the 

LEA must provide or arrange for transportation to and from the school 

of origin until the dispute is resolved. Inter-district transportation 

disputes should be resolved at the SEA level. 

Regarding the use of Title I or other federal funds to support the 

transportation of a child or youth to the school of origin, although 
National Center for Homeless Education 6

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

LEAs are required to set aside Title I, Part A, funds to serve homeless 

children and youth, these funds or other federal funds may not be used 

to provide transportation to the school of origin, due to supplanting 

issues. 

The legislation allows a child or youth who becomes homeless 

during the academic year to continue in the school of origin for the 

remainder of the academic year if he or she becomes permanently 

housed. It is within the intent of the McKinney-Vento legislation to 

continue to provide transportation to the school of origin in order to 

prevent fragmentation of school services for formerly homeless 

students who may not be able to maintain the continuity of their 

education in the school of origin if transportation support is no longer 

provided. An LEA may use district Title I, Part A funds reserved under 

Section 1113(c)(3)(A), other Title I, Title V or McKinney-Vento 

subgrant funds to pay the excess costs of transportation for formerly 

homeless students remaining in their school of origin. 

Challenges and Strategies for Transporting Homeless 

Children to their School of Origin 

Summary of Interviews 

In 2003, NCHE invited its national partners (National 

Association for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth, 

National Coalition for the Homeless, and National Law Center on 

Homelessness & Poverty) to recommend school districts that have 

implemented effective systems for transporting homeless children to 

their school of origin. Of the ones recommended, NCHE staff selected 

eight that were willing to provide interviews. (See Appendix E for the 

Interview Questionnaire.) The LEAs represented in the interviews are 

Anchorage (AK), Cincinnati (OH), Houston (TX), Putnam County (FL), 

San Antonio (TX), Spokane (WA), St. Paul (MN), and Vancouver (WA). 

Following is a summary of issues and strategies compiled from the 

interviews. (Readers are strongly encouraged to review individual 

district responses to the interview questions in Appendix F.) 

Profile of Participating School Districts. Table 1 provides an 

overview of the eight districts included in this document. Although 

most of the districts are urban, the Putnam County (FL) district is 

rural. The San Antonio Independent School District covers 16 local 

districts in the metropolitan area, and ESD 112 in Vancouver (WA) 

covers six counties that include urban, suburban, and rural districts 

through their transportation cooperative. All of the districts included 

in the interviews provide bus transportation to their students, and 
National Center for Homeless Education 7

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

most are able to utilize the public transportation system to assist with 

providing transportation to the school of origin. Six out of the eight 

districts receive funding through McKinney-Vento subgrants, yet five 

out of the six use only a small portion of their McKinney-Vento 

subgrant for transportation. Most of the districts are able to provide 

transportation through additional or extended bus routes. They most 

frequently supplement school district transportation with public 

transportation, taxis, and reimbursement to families for mileage. 

Table 1: Profile of School Districts Interviewed 

Challenges and strategies—funding. Funding is overall the 

biggest challenge for LEAs to provide transportation to the school of 

origin. Because the McKinney-Vento Act requires school districts to 

provide transportation to the school of origin, school districts may not 

use federal funds from other programs to do so. However, many LEAs 

have committed district funds for this key to school stability for 

homeless children and youth and have resourcefully sought additional 

LEA Type Est. No. 

Homeless 

Children 

Est. No. 

Homeless 

Children 

Transported 

School 

Transportation 

System? 

Public 

Transportation 

Available? 

McKinneyVento 

Subgrant? 

% M-V 

Subgrant 

Spent on 

Transportation 

Top 3 Modes of 

Transportation Most 

Frequently Used 

Anchorage, 

AK 

urban 2,121 759 Yes Yes, but 

limited 

Yes 0-10% Taxis, mileage 

reimbursement, 

additional or extended 

bus routes 

Cincinnati, 

OH 

urban 2,000 300 Yes Yes Yes 0-10% Contracted 

transportation services 

with additional or 

extended bus routes, 

public transportation, 

taxis 

Houston, TX urban 1,600 1,520 Yes Yes Yes 0-10% Existing bus routes, 

public transportation, 

additional or extended 

bus routes 

Putnam Co., 

FL 

rural 736 700 Yes Yes, but 

limited 

Yes 0-10% Additional or extended 

bus routes, personal 

vehicles, mileage 

reimbursement 

San Antonio, 

TX (1 LEAs 

in the metro 

region) 

urban 1300 340 Yes Yes Yes 0-5% Additional or extended 

bus routes, public 

transportation, special 

education buses 

Spokane, 

WA 

urban 572 400 Yes Yes Yes 10-25% Public transportation, 

additional or extended 

bus routes, taxis 

St. Paul, MN urban 1,000 900 Yes Yes Yes 75-100% Existing bus routes, LEA 

program vans, public 

transportation, additional 

or extended bus routes 

Vancouver, 

WA (6 county 

region, not 

school 

district) 

rural, 

suburban, 

urban 

235 235 Yes - 

Cooperative 

Yes—

approximately 

10% 

No NA Special education buses 

only 
National Center for Homeless Education 8

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

funds and strategies to implement the mandate. Even districts that 

receive McKinney-Vento subgrants generally seek additional funding 

sources, rather than use their subgrants solely for this purpose. 

The LEAs participating in interviews each rely primarily on 

district funds to support the transportation of homeless children to 

their school of origin. LEAs from Texas and Washington receive 

additional support from the state level. Cincinnati and St. Paul receive 

foundation, local agency, and/or donor support as well. Some school 

districts have explored funding sources from the Department of Health 

and Human Services, their state Department of Transportation, and 

from federal programs such as Medicaid and TANF. 

Many school districts are creative and economical in their use of 

resources to provide transportation to the school of origin. Most of the 

districts interviewed for this document extend or add on to existing bus 

routes, and some are able to use special education buses. The homeless 

education liaison from the Houston Independent School District states, 

“The district has been willing to place students on any route that is 

necessary to accommodate them. For example, the district has placed 

elementary-aged students on high school routes, used ambulatory 

special education routes, and even transferred students from one route 

to another, to make sure that they were transported where they 

needed to go.” 

The Vancouver (WA) Specialized Transportation Cooperative is 

a unique approach to transporting students with special needs. 

Initiated in 1988, the cooperative is funded by the state and 23 LEAs 

that pay annual fees. Participating districts pooled resources to 

purchase a fleet of buses to transport students on a daily basis to 

education, treatment, and specialized programs in the region. In 2002, 

members voted to add to the cooperative the responsibility of 

transporting homeless children to their school of origin. In 2003-2004, 

the Cooperative transported 235 homeless children and youth, 

averaging 27 per day. Local liaisons approve applications for 

transportation and send them to the Cooperative. 

Challenges and strategies—intra-district logistics and 

coordination. Because of the variation in each family’s needs and 

mobility, arranging for transportation to the school of origin can be 

logistically complex. Compounded by school bus availability and 

schedules, shelter schedules, and geographical distance, LEAs must 

coordinate with departments within the LEA, external agencies, and 

other school districts to arrange transportation in a timely way. 

Community partnerships are key to coordinating transportation. 

• The Anchorage (AK) school district has established 

partnerships with shelters, group homes, and community 
National Center for Homeless Education 9

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

agencies (housing, medical, mental health, children’s 

services). 

• Project Connect (Cincinnati, OH) staff members attend 

meetings of the community homeless coalition. 

• The Houston (TX) homeless project schedules regular visits 

to local shelters, and staff members attend meetings of the 

homeless coalition where other homeless providers are 

present. 

• St. Paul (MN) school staff works each day with families in 

shelters to determine the best ways of providing 

transportation for their children. 

The San Antonio Independent School District (TX) played a 

pivotal role in establishing the San Antonio Area Homeless Education 

Council that includes shelter personnel, community agency 

representatives, health agencies, social service agencies, child 

protective services, juvenile justice, and LEAs. The Council provides a 

setting in which to train service providers on the rights of children and 

youth in homeless situations, a forum to discuss issues and strategies 

for interagency collaboration, and an entry point for community 

members into the school system. 

The Anchorage (AK) homeless education program convened a 

transportation summit in 2004 that included the LEA director of pupil 

transportation, transportation director for Head Start, district Title I 

coordinator, risk management and safety director, and a 

representative from United Way and a taxi company to discuss ways to 

meet the school transportation needs of homeless students. 

Most of the LEAs interviewed stated that no formal agreements 

exist between the department of social services or child protective 

services. As a result, placing families and children near their school of 

origin is generally not a high priority among these agencies. However, 

some of the LEAs have working relationships with the department of 

social services or child protective services that encourage placement of 

children and families near their school of origin. The Texas 

Department of Protective and Regulatory Services (child protective 

agency) has created a new staff position whose role is to work with 

schools regarding children placed in foster care or other temporary 

placements and work with LEAs to support the educational continuity 

of the children in the child protective agency system. At this time, 

formal agreements are not in place but are under consideration. 

The Spokane (WA) Neighborhood Action Program works with 

the LEA to place children and families near the school of origin. Also, 

agreements exist through the Putnam County (FL) school board to 

The San Antonio 

Area Homeless 

Education Council 

holds meetings 

and workshops 

during brown bag 

lunch sessions. 

Houston school 

administrators and 

shelter providers 

link with homeless 

education staff to 

discuss issues 

such as rerouting 

bus services and 

relocating pick up 

and drop off to 

avoid stigmas 

associated with 

being homeless. 
National Center for Homeless Education 10

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

work with the division of children and youth services that includes 

children in foster care and adjudicated children and youth. 

Interaction between homeless education staff and other district 

program staff is critical to arranging transportation for homeless 

children and youth. The LEA staff members interviewed generally 

agreed that the local homeless education liaison is a key figure to 

provide awareness to other departments on the McKinney-Vento 

legislation and to initiate the establishment of a system to serve the 

transportation needs of homeless children and youth. In addition, the 

liaison should seek funding and troubleshoot. 

The role of the director of pupil transportation is to coordinate 

his or her staff, vehicle availability, and bus routes to ensure that 

children and youth are picked up and dropped off safely and efficiently. 

Regarding the role of the transportation director, the homeless 

education liaison from St. Paul(MN) stated: “It’s important to 

understand that in some cases, the director of transportation runs a 

huge program, of which McKinney-Vento is just one piece. Despite this, 

it is imperative that he/she understands the McKinney-Vento Act, 

supports the transportation mandates, and trains his/her staff to 

support it as well. The transportation director must also have access to 

enough vehicles and staff to make it work effectively, for example, 

hiring part time staff to cover as needed.” 

Several of the LEAs reinforced that collaboration is necessary 

for the system to work. The homeless education liaison from Spokane 

(WA) said, “The only way to make this program work is to share the 

responsibility. No one person or department takes these families on as 

their own. We all must work together to see each situation through ... 

We must have good communication and mutual respect for the process 

to work.” 

The LEAs interviewed emphasized the importance of having a 

system in place so that all parties know their roles in facilitating 

transportation to the school of origin. In Project Connect (Cincinnati, 

OH), for example, homeless families typically contact McKinney-Vento 

program staff after being referred from a shelter or other agency. For 

homeless students who come to school without contacting the 

McKinney-Vento program, the schools know to send them to Project 

Connect. Staff members at Project Connect arrange transportation, 

which is more efficient than schools trying to make arrangements. The 

McKinney-Vento staff contacts the pupil transportation department 

via phone or email, and transportation is arranged individually in each 

case. 

Similarly, in Spokane (WA), a McKinney-Vento program staff 

member interviews families experiencing homelessness and assesses 

their transportation needs. The staff member uses a form that details 

“The intake form 

has been a 

lifesaver. It holds 

the family 

accountable, 

communication is 

clear and concise, 

everyone is on the 

same page, and 

parents know what 

is expected.” 

(Spokane, WA) 

In outlying rural 

areas of Putnam 

County (FL), the 

LEA assists 

homeless 

parents with 

getting their 

children to 

school by 

providing 

reimbursement 

for gas when 

necessary. 
National Center for Homeless Education 11

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

the types of transportation, policies for each, and expectations the 

family must meet. All relevant phone numbers are included as well. 

(See Appendix G for a copy of the form.) A family signs the form and is 

told that staff will notify them of the district’s transportation 

arrangements. The McKinney-Vento staff member faxes the request to 

the pupil transportation department. Pupil transportation department 

staff looks at existing bus routes first, then at special education bus 

routes, then at public transportation, and then at taxi or mileage 

reimbursement for parents. The transportation department makes a 

decision and emails the McKinney-Vento staff with arrangements, and 

the staff contacts the family, school, taxi company, etc. 

Details are crucial. For example, more than one school might 

need to be notified, as in the case of a child who will walk to a nearby 

school to catch an “overflow” bus to take him or her to the school of 

origin. The nearby school must be notified of its responsibility to 

welcome the child and ensure that he or she catches the bus. To 

address the problem of coordinating transportation with differing 

school schedules, the San Antonio homeless education program 

developed a master calendar and schedule of all schools (see Appendix 

G) to ensure that schools where children are taken will be open or will 

have supervising staff available to meet them. 

Because of the importance of ensuring the child attends school 

while LEA transportation arrangements are being made, in Spokane, a 

family is given temporary means for transportation, such as bus tokens 

for public transportation. Social workers and shelters frequently take 

responsibility for making initial transportation arrangements. 

Homeless shelters in Anchorage fax the homeless education 

program staff a list with the names of children staying there and 

include signed releases for them to attend school. The children are 

added to the list for the Shelter Shuttle, which picks up children from 

shelters and motels. For children not staying in shelters, families selfrefer or are referred by school staff. Once a student or family is 

identified as homeless, a homeless education program staff member 

contacts the family and decides on a transportation plan. Two 

administrative staff members assist with daily dispatching of 

information. 

In Putnam County (FL), if a family is staying at a shelter, the 

shelter program staff makes the initial call to McKinney-Vento 

program staff. Parents are referred to the transportation department 

by McKinney-Vento program staff in order to make arrangements 

because it may be easier for parents to discuss pick up locations, etc., 

with the route supervisor. 

St. Paul (MN) facilitates transportation arrangements through 

the use of an electronic database. A McKinney-Vento staff member 

In San Antonio, 

homeless 

parents are 

provided with 

transportation 

brochures in 

English and 

Spanish on 

policies, modes, 

and procedures. 

Parents are 

informed of what 

they need to do, 

how to keep in 

touch, etc. 

(See Appendix 

G for a copy of 

the brochures.) 

Project Connect 

(Cincinnati, OH) 

arranges public 

bus transportation 

while planning 

school bus 

service. For young 

children, bus 

tokens are 

provided for a 

parent or guardian 

to accompany the 

child to and from 

school. 
National Center for Homeless Education 12

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

meets with the parents, assesses the transportation needs, and makes 

a transportation plan (program van, tokens, cab, existing route, or 

request for an additional route). Then he or she informs the parents, 

the school, and the shelter staff of the plan. All alternative route 

requests are made through the district transportation department with 

an ongoing log (form), which is faxed daily. The transportation 

requests are entered in the database and used for planning, cost 

analysis, and program evaluation. If the child is on an alternative 

route outside of the district, a form is given to the parent indicating 

who they need to call if they are not going to need the transportation 

that day or if a vehicle is late in picking them up. This helps with not 

sending vehicles out when they are not needed. The transportation 

department also calls the McKinney-Vento staff daily telling them 

which students did not ride the alternative bus that morning. The staff 

calls each school and asks them to call if the child arrives to school and 

will need the bus home in the afternoon. This helps with not having to 

send a bus at the last minute for a stranded child. The Anchorage 

program also utilizes an electronic database that inputs every school 

transfer. 

The San Antonio homeless education program reinforces the 

importance of communication. The San Antonio coordinator of 

family/student services said, “Staff from two offices (transportation 

and McKinney-Vento) are working together, communicating through 

about 10-15 emails/phone calls per day to see that all services are in 

place and all parties are notified.” The San Antonio program also 

convenes transportation and homeless education staff annually to 

review the year’s activities. The program continually refines and 

retunes its approach, forms, and procedures. 

Challenges and strategies—inter-district coordination. Many 

LEAs face particular challenges with arranging inter-district 

transportation. In San Antonio, for example, because the district 

houses 27 homeless shelters, it is required to transport a large number 

of children and youth out of the district to their school of origin. 

The LEAs interviewed report various levels of cooperation from 

districts regarding the sharing of transportation responsibilities. LEAs 

that have policies and collaborations relating to inter-district 

transportation for homeless children and youth are more successful in 

arranging transportation expediently and in sharing the costs fairly 

than those that do not. 

Formal or informal agreements are helpful in designating 

responsibility so that homeless children do not “fall through the 

cracks.” The Spokane school district developed an informal agreement 

with surrounding districts stating that the school district where a child 

Spokane 

homeless 

education staff 

provides a list to 

all homeless 

shelters in 

adjoining 

districts with the 

homeless 

education 

program contact 

person and 

phone number 

in each. Also 

included is 

information for 

how to initiate 

the process of 

arranging 

transportation to 

the school of 

origin. 

In San Antonio, 

interdistrict 

coordination 

entails first getting 

students onto the 

appropriate bus 

routes, then 

working with 

district 

transportation 

departments to 

coordinate bus 

routes, allowing for 

convenient and 

safe locations for 

children to transfer 

buses. 
National Center for Homeless Education 13

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

is currently residing is responsible for coordinating transportation 

services back to the school of origin. Although all districts must work 

together, the district of residence holds the primary responsibility. 

In explaining the background of this agreement, the Spokane 

homeless education liaison explains, “As we received students in the 

shelters from other districts, we discovered we were doing all the legwork and frequently did not hear back from the other districts because 

they did not understand the McKinney-Vento legislation. We finally 

decided that we would train the shelters to call the school where 

students were enrolled and allow them to begin the process with their 

school district’s transportation director, who would then contact the 

Spokane transportation director. That way they had some buy-in. It 

worked so well that it became an informal agreement.” 

The Houston pupil transportation department maintains 

collaborative relationships with surrounding school districts to 

coordinate transportation services for homeless students. The 

department hosts meetings of transportation directors to establish a 

system to receive and conduct referrals. Designated staff members in 

each of the surrounding districts handle inter-district transfers on a 

case-by-case basis throughout the year. 

State and local policies that support transportation to the school 

of origin. State and local policy support ranges from documents sent to 

LEAs and schools by the State Coordinator for Homeless Education, 

local superintendent, or legal counsel outlining responsibilities under 

the McKinney-Vento legislation, to state and local policies developed 

and implemented to clarify and supplement the McKinney-Vento 

legislation. 

Minnesota has a state policy that specifically addresses the 

transportation needs of homeless children and youth. While mirroring 

the federal legislation, it both bridges homeless education policy with 

Minnesota education statutes and includes specific requirements for 

ways to provide transportation for homeless children and youth above 

and beyond what is required in the federal legislation. 

Most of the LEAs included in this document have local policies 

in place. The Houston Independent School District established Board 

Policy FBD 10192 on Admissions and Attendance: Intra-district 

Transfers. The policy indicates that the parent or person standing in 

parental relation to any student may request, by petition in writing, 

the assignment of the student to a designated school or to a school to 

be designated by the Board of Education. This policy is also indicated 

in TEC 25.033(1), 26.003(a)(1). Additionally, the Board of Education 

must grant the request made in the petition unless the Board 

In 2002, the Houston 

Independent School 

District convened a 

meeting of 

neighboring school 

districts and 

developed a 

cooperative 

agreement to ensure 

timely creation of 

routes that cross 

district lines. A list of 

neighboring districts 

was created to assist 

local liaisons in 

advising parents how 

to arrange 

transportation 

services when their 

family moves. 
National Center for Homeless Education 14

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

determines that there is a reasonable basis for denying it. This policy 

is indicated in Education Code 25.034(e). 

Local policy in Putnam County (FL) supports and clarifies 

requirements in the McKinney-Vento legislation and has helped 

facilitate the smooth implementation of transportation to the school of 

origin throughout the district. (See Appendix G for a copy of the local 

policy.) 

State-level support. The LEAs stated that state-level support 

(beyond state policies that supplement the McKinney-Vento 

legislation) entails primarily funding through subgrants and 

assistance from State Coordinators in answering questions and 

resolving difficult situations. 

In Texas, school districts receive reimbursement from the state 

for transporting children to their school of origin on the same basis as 

for transporting all children. Local funds must provide for the 

additional costs of transporting children to the school of origin. 

In 2004, through advocacy on the federal level, the Washington 

Department of Transportation received a one-time million-dollar grant 

to assist with transportation for homeless children and youth. Initial 

discussions on how to allocate the funds have brought together a 

variety of stakeholders and representatives from both the school 

district and private sector. Plans for disbursement will be forthcoming.

General Recommendations for Implementing the Mandate for 

Transporting Homeless Children to their School of Origin 

(1) Establish strong networks of community support. Many 

community stakeholders are vested in the wellbeing of children and 

families in homeless situations. Schools are just one element in a 

continuum of services. Therefore, the local homeless education liaison 

should be involved with all agencies that impact the lives of homeless 

children and youth. Community partners can provide valuable 

resources and strategies to assist with transportation and school 

stability. 

Even more importantly, however, because schools and school 

districts have not historically been part of community discussions 

surrounding the needs of homeless children and youth, many agencies 

do not consider educational and school placement needs when 

determining social services and placement of families. Community 

agencies need to be informed of the educational needs of and legislative 

requirements for homeless children and youth. In particular, local 

liaisons should initiate conversations with the department of social 

services, housing authorities, foster care, juvenile justice, and child 
National Center for Homeless Education 15

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

protective services. In addition to providing information to these 

agencies, the LEA may wish to host meetings to familiarize agencies 

with one another’s culture, procedures, funding, etc. The LEA may 

explore formal collaborative strategies with agencies such as 

developing memoranda of understanding for how a community agency 

and LEA can support one another’s services. The local homeless 

education liaison should have a contact person in each agency with 

whom routine communication takes place. 

Public and private transportation agencies should also be part of 

the conversation. Many are willing to provide services for free or at a 

reduced rate as a community service. Also, public transportation 

agencies must become aware of and sensitized to the needs of homeless 

children, youth, and families so that their services are safe, efficient, 

and non-stigmatizing. With a wealth of experience in providing 

transportation, these agencies may contribute valuable ideas to LEAs 

on meeting the transportation needs of homeless children and youth. 

LEAs should involve local foundations and private sector 

businesses. Local foundations and businesses, when sensitized to social 

issues, are great sources of funding and support. Educational stability 

helps ensure well-educated, self-sufficient citizens of the future. This 

provides a great economic incentive for businesses to help meet the 

current educational and transportation needs of homeless children and 

youth. Local homeless education liaisons should promote the homeless 

education program to the private sector. 

(2) Develop a strong partnership between the homeless education 

program and the department of pupil transportation. LEAs that are 

able to provide transportation services for homeless children and youth 

have developed a team approach to coordination between the homeless 

education program and department of pupil transportation. In districts 

where this collaboration does not exist, the homeless education liaison 

should initiate conversations with the director of pupil transportation 

to underscore the importance of school stability and to familiarize him 

or her with the McKinney-Vento legislation. In addition, the homeless 

education liaison should provide awareness training on homeless 

issues for the transportation staff to increase sensitivity to the needs of 

homeless children and create buy-in. 

The homeless education liaison and director of pupil 

transportation should review data on homeless children and youth in 

the district to identify what the transportation needs are and how the 

current transportation system might meet these needs. A collaborative 

approach to identifying strategies and resources will reinforce the 

concept that homeless children are everyone’s responsibility. 
National Center for Homeless Education 16

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

(3) Establish inter-district collaboration. Inter-district 

collaboration is essential to establish and smoothly implement 

procedures and policies for transporting children and youth to their 

school of origin. Local liaisons and pupil transportation directors from 

LEAs where homeless families frequently cross district lines should 

communicate regularly and determine how transportation 

responsibilities and expenses will be shared. Although some 

transportation arrangements to the school of origin can be planned 

ahead of time, such as in an area where students frequently move with 

their families to a shelter across district lines, staff members from both 

LEAs must also be willing to problem-solve on a case-by-case basis 

when necessary. 

Regular meetings of local liaisons and pupil transportation 

directors from LEAs that frequently share homeless students help to 

identify emerging issues and provide opportunities to review the 

effectiveness of existing policies and procedures. 

Inter-district collaborations that designate which district has 

the primary responsibility to make arrangements (such as the district 

where the child is currently residing) help ensure that children and 

youth “do not fall through the cracks.”

(4) Establish formal procedures for equity, transparency, and 

consistency. A key to providing transportation for homeless children 

and youth is helping all stakeholders to understand the procedures by 

which these services are provided and their role in the process. The 

local homeless education liaison and pupil transportation director 

should develop a procedure to identify points of contact both in the 

school system and in the community. Shelter and service providers and 

parents should be made aware of the system and invited periodically to 

provide input on how the system could be improved. 

Forms for intake facilitate tracking and record keeping. 

Informational brochures for parents and service providers detailing 

both children’s rights under the McKinney-Vento legislation and 

procedures by which the LEA enacts the legislation will also help 

everyone understand how the children’s needs will be met. 

LEAs that typically share homeless children and families across 

school districts should develop procedures for inter-district 

transportation. Disputes arise when school districts are unsure about 

how the transportation responsibilities for homeless children and 

youth are shared. Unnecessary delays and ill will frequently result 

when districts wait until the occasion arises to develop transportation 

and funding arrangements while under pressure to make 

arrangements for a child as quickly as possible. 
National Center for Homeless Education 17

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

(5) Establish policies to support the federal legislation. Though 

clear in its mandate to provide transportation to the school of origin, 

federal legislation provides flexibility for states and LEAs to 

implement the mandate in ways most appropriate to their locality. 

Many states have developed policies and procedures outlined in their 

state homeless education plans to further guide LEAs in areas such as 

enrollment and inter-district transportation. In addition, many LEAs 

create local or school board policies to further clarify and 

institutionalize the implementation of the mandate. 

The local homeless education liaison should review current 

policies and initiate a process to develop policies related to homeless 

education if none exist. Sample policies are available from the National 

Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty (See Appendix J), and states 

and local districts are generally very willing to share their policies. 

(6) Establish a database and system for data collection. An 

electronic database can be an effective technological solution for 

keeping up with the high mobility of homeless families. Information on 

homeless children and youth can be input and shared immediately 

among LEAs, schools, school districts, shelters, and other agencies. 

 However, electronic databases are not without their 

complications. Confidentiality issues over which agencies can share 

information and what information can be shared often create barriers 

to an efficient use of a database. Also, a database is only as good as the 

information put into it. Information must be entered continually, and 

staff time must be allocated for this purpose. Still, the benefits 

outweigh the effort spent to resolve these issues with agencies for 

which such information would enhance their ability to collaborate. 

Furthermore, a great need exists for data that illustrate the 

needs of homeless children and youth. Because collecting data on 

highly mobile children, particularly with regard to transportation, is 

often difficult, many LEAs have inadequate documentation of the 

needs and costs of meeting the mandates. Subsequently, advocates and 

educators face great challenges in making the case for increasing 

commitment to and funding for school stability. Policymakers and 

legislators who want hard data on school achievement directly related 

to school stability or on the amount of funds LEAs are spending on 

transporting children and youth to their school of origin remain 

unconvinced by anecdotal evidence and ballpark estimates. LEAs must 

work with their data and research staff to collect valid data on 

transporting children to their school of origin. Such data, shared 

locally and nationally, will facilitate the understanding of the effects of 

homeless education policies. 

 “We took charge 

when setting up 

many of our 

policies so that 

they work to our 

advantage, 

meaning this is 

how we need [the 

system] to work in 

order to 

accommodate our 

needs and work 

load.” (San 

Antonio, TX) 
National Center for Homeless Education 18

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

(7) Seek economical and creative solutions. Many alternatives for 

arranging transportation to the school of origin are quite expensive. 

Taxis, for example, are usually one of the most expensive ways to 

transport children. However, LEAs that seek more economical 

solutions at first, such as utilizing existing buses and bus routes, and 

select more expensive alternatives only after they determine that the 

most cost-effective alternatives will not work are able to handle the 

expenses more effectively. Many LEAs have demonstrated creativity 

and resourcefulness as they have developed systems of transferring 

students at various bus route locations or assisted parents with 

mileage reimbursements for transporting their children. Arranging to 

use community agency vehicles or obtaining discounted prices on 

public transportation also help to defray the costs of transportation. 

 Homeless program liaisons and pupil transportation directors 

need to assess resources available in the LEA and community with an 

attitude of doing the most with what is available. The extent to which 

LEAs can plan ahead will increase the likelihood that economical 

solutions can be found, rather than trying to identify economical 

solutions when under pressure to arrange transportation as quickly as 

possible for a child or youth who is waiting to continue in his or her 

school of origin. 

(8) Keep in mind the safety of the child. Although the necessity to 

get homeless children and youth to school frequently drives decisions 

on the method of transport, LEAs are responsible for ensuring that the 

transportation of homeless children and youth to school is equally as 

safe as the transportation of all other students as regulated by federal 

guidelines. LEAs must follow their state and local policies regarding 

transportation safety and approved vehicles. 

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Guideline 

#17: Pupil Transportation Safety establishes minimum 

recommendations for the transportation of students to and from school 

and school-related activities. (See Appendix H for Guideline #17.) 

Taxis and public vehicles should meet these safety guidelines, and all 

drivers should have background checks and be screened for driving 

records. 

(9) Inform policymakers of the need for school stability for highly 

mobile children. The financial demands to meet the mandate for 

transportation to the school of origin pose challenges for many school 

districts. Individuals involved in the education of homeless children 

and youth need to create greater awareness of the strategies that 

foster educational achievement and wellbeing of homeless children and 

youth. The result can be greater funding through federal, state, and 
National Center for Homeless Education 19

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

local budgets. (See Appendix I for a description of the work of the 

National Association for the Education of Homeless Children and 

Youth and its legislative advocacy work.) 

Conclusion 

School stability is a key to helping children and youth 

experiencing homelessness maintain educational continuity. 

Preventing homeless children and youth who are highly mobile from 

falling behind in their education will help them to succeed and break 

the cycle of poverty that condemns many to a future of limited 

opportunity and economic insufficiency. 

To promote school stability, the McKinney-Vento Homeless 

Education Assistance Act ensures the rights of homeless children and 

youth to attend their school of origin when feasible and requires school 

districts to provide or arrange for transportation to the school of origin. 

Although this mandate increases the complexity and expense of 

pupil transportation, the interviews with staff included in this 

document illustrate that with persistence, creativity, and 

collaboration, LEAs can establish effective systems to accommodate 

the transportation needs of homeless children and youth to keep them 

in their school of origin. With all stakeholders, both within the school 

system and in the community, taking responsibility for addressing the 

needs of these children and youth, each agency can support the others 

to increase school stability. 

Homeless education program staff members are usually the 

initiators of awareness and collaboration among departments and 

agencies, but once policies and procedures are in place, most LEAs are 

able to provide homeless children and youth with the school stability 

and educational support they need. With collaboration and 

commitment, transportation to the school of origin can help eliminate 

school instability as a barrier to the education of homeless children 

and youth. 

References Cited: 

Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Dauber, S. L. (1996, 

September/October). Children in motion: School transfers and 

elementary school performance. Journal of Educational Research, 90 

(1), 3-12. 
National Center for Homeless Education 20

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

Attles, H. S. E. (1997). The effects of homelessness on the academic 

achievement of children. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc. 

Bowman, D., Bundy, A., Peoples, A. (2002). Proceedings: National 

Symposium on Transportation for Homeless Children and Youth. 

Retrieved on April 14, 2004 from http://www.serve.org/nche . National 

Center for Homeless Education at SERVE. 

Ellickson, P. L., & McGuigan, K.A. (2000). Early predictors of 

adolescent violence. American Journal of Public Health, 90, 566-572. 

Family Housing Fund (2003). Kids mobility project report. Retrieved 

on March 12, 2004 from http://www.fhfund.org/Research/kids.htm . 

Author. 

Hofstetter, C. H. (1999, April). Toward an equitable NAEP for English 

Language Learners: What contextual factors affect math performance. 

Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational 

Research Association, Montreal, Canada. 

Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1999). Social support and achievement for 

young adolescents in Chicago: The role of school academic press. 

American Educational Research Journal, 36, 907-945. 

Mantzicopoulos, P., & Knutson, D. (2000). Head Start Children: School 

Mobility and Achievement in the Early Grades. Journal of Educational 

Research, 93 (5), 305-311. 

National Coalition for the Homeless. (2003). How many people 

experience homelessness? NCH Fact Sheet #2. Retrieved on March 12, 

2004, from http://www.nationalhomeless.org . Author. 

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (1992). Highway 

safety program Guideline #17: Pupil transportation safety. Retrieved 

on June 7, 2004 from 

www.nhtsa.dot.gov/nhtsa/whatsup/tea21/tea21programs/402Guide.htm

l#g17 . Author. 

Noll, E. and Watkins, R. (2003). The impact of homelessness on 

children’s literacy experiences. The Reading Teacher, 57 (4), 362-371. 

Nunez, R., & Collignon, K. (1997). Creating a community of learning 

for homeless children. Educational Leadership, 55 (2), 56-60. 
National Center for Homeless Education 21

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

Rumberger, R. W. (1995). Dropping out of middle school: A multilevel 

analysis of students and schools. American Education Research 

Journal, 32, 583-625. 

Rumberger, R.W. (2003). The causes and consequences of student 

mobility. Journal of Negro Education, 72 (1), 6-21. 

Rumberger, R.W., Larson, K.A., Ream, R.K., & Palardy, G.A. (1999). 

The educational consequences of mobility for California students and 

schools. Berkeley, CA: Policy Analysis for California Education. 

Simpson, G. A., & Fowler, M. G. (1994). Geographic mobility and 

children’s emotional/behavioral adjustment and school functioning. 

Pediatrics, 93, 303-309. 

Stronge, J. H., & Hudson, K. (1999). Educating homeless children and 

youth with dignity and care. Journal for a Just and Caring Education, 

7, 7-18. 

Swanson, C. B., & Schneider, B. (1999). Students on the move: 

Residential and educational mobility in America’s schools. Sociology of 

Education, 72, 54-67. 

Teachman, J. D., Paasch, K., & Carver, K. (1996). School capital and 

dropping out of school. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 773-

783. 

Temple, J. A., & Reynolds, A.J. (1999). School mobility and 

achievement: Longitudinal findings from an urban cohort. Journal of 

School Psychology, 37 (4), 355-377. 

Texas Education Agency, A Study of Student Mobility in Texas Public 

Schools, Statewide Texas Educational Progress Study Report No. 3

(1997). 

Wood, D., Halfon, N., Scarla, D., Newacheck, P., & Nessim, S. (1993). 

Impact of family relocation on children’s growth, development, school 

function, and behavior. Journal of the American Medical Association, 

270, 1334-1338. 
National Center for Homeless Education 22

Overcoming Challenges to Providing Transportation to the School of Origin

U.S. Department of Education. (2000). McKinney-Vento Report to 

Congress. Retrieved on March 12, 2004, from www.serve.org/nche .

Author.

U. S. General Accounting Office. (1994). Elementary school children: 

Many change schools frequently, harming their education. Washington, 

DC: Author. 
 

 A1 

APPENDIX A 

Excerpts from the McKinney-Vento Act Relating to Transportation 

McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance Improvements Act of 2001, Sec. 

1032 Education for Homeless Children and Youths, reauthorized as Title X of the 

No Child Left Behind Act 

McKinney-Vento Act Sec. 722(g)(1)(J)(iii) 

(g) STATE PLAN- 

(1) IN GENERAL- Each State shall submit to the Secretary a plan to provide for 

the education of homeless children and youths within the State. Such plan shall 

include the following ... 

 (J) Assurances that ... 

(iii) the State and its local educational agencies will adopt policies 

and practices to ensure that transportation is provided, at the 

request of the parent or guardian (or in the case of an 

unaccompanied youth, the liaison), to and from the school of 

origin, as determined in paragraph (3)(A), in accordance with the 

following, as applicable: 

(I) If the homeless child or youth continues to live in the 

area served by the local educational agency in which the 

school of origin is located, the child's or youth's 

transportation to and from the school of origin shall be 

provided or arranged by the local educational agency in 

which the school of origin is located. 

(II) If the homeless child's or youth's living arrangements in 

the area served by the local educational agency of origin 

terminate and the child or youth, though continuing his or 

her education in the school of origin, begins living in an 

area served by another local educational agency, the local 

educational agency of origin and the local educational 

agency in which the homeless child or youth is living shall 

agree upon a method to apportion the responsibility and 

costs for providing the child with transportation to and 

from the school of origin. If the local educational agencies 

are unable to agree upon such method, the responsibility 

and costs for transportation shall be shared equally. 

McKinney-Vento Act Sec. 722(g)(3)(A) 

3) LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY REQUIREMENTS- 

(A) IN GENERAL- The local educational agency serving each child or 

youth to be assisted under this subtitle shall, according to the child's or 

youth's best interest-- 

(i) continue the child's or youth's education in the school of origin 

for the duration of homelessness-- 
 

 A2 

(I) in any case in which a family becomes homeless 

between academic years or during an academic year; or 

(II) for the remainder of the academic year, if the child or 

youth becomes permanently housed during an academic 

year; or 

(ii) enroll the child or youth in any public school that nonhomeless 

students who live in the attendance area in which the child or youth 

is actually living are eligible to attend. 

McKinney-Vento Act Sec. 722(g)(3)(B) 

(B) BEST INTEREST- In determining the best interest of the child or 

youth under subparagraph (A), the local educational agency shall-- 

(i) to the extent feasible, keep a homeless child or youth in the 

school of origin, except when doing so is contrary to the wishes of 

the child's or youth's parent or guardian; 

(ii) provide a written explanation, including a statement regarding 

the right to appeal under subparagraph (E), to the homeless child's 

or youth's parent or guardian, if the local educational agency sends 

such child or youth to a school other than the school of origin or a 

school requested by the parent or guardian; and 

(iii) in the case of an unaccompanied youth, ensure that the 

homeless liaison designated under paragraph (1)(J)(ii) assists in 

placement or enrollment decisions under this subparagraph, 

considers the views of such unaccompanied youth, and provides 

notice to such youth of the right to appeal under subparagraph (E).

McKinney-Vento Act Sec. 722(g)(3)(G) 

(G) SCHOOL OF ORIGIN DEFINED- In this paragraph, the term `school 

of origin' means the school that the child or youth attended when 

permanently housed or the school in which the child or youth was last 

enrolled. 

McKinney-Vento Act Sec. 722(g)(4)(A) 

(4) COMPARABLE SERVICES- Each homeless child or youth to be assisted 

under this subtitle shall be provided services comparable to services offered to 

other students in the school selected under paragraph (3), including the following: 

(A) Transportation services ... 

McKinney-Vento Act Sec. 725. Definitions 

For purposes of this subtitle ... 

 (2) The term `homeless children and youths'-- 

(A) means individuals who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime 

residence (within the meaning of section 103(a)(1)); and 

(B) includes-- 
 

 A3 

(i) children and youths who are sharing the housing of other 

persons due to loss of housing, economic hardship, or a similar 

reason; are living in motels, hotels, trailer parks, or camping 

grounds due to the lack of alternative adequate accommodations; 

are living in emergency or transitional shelters; are abandoned in 

hospitals; or are awaiting foster care placement; 

(ii) children and youths who have a primary nighttime residence 

that is a public or private place not designed for or ordinarily used 

as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings (within the 

meaning of section 103(a)(2)(C)); 

(iii) children and youths who are living in cars, parks, public 

spaces, abandoned buildings, substandard housing, bus or train 

stations, or similar settings; and 

(iv) migratory children (as such term is defined in section 1309 of 

the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965) who qualify 

as homeless for the purposes of this subtitle because the children 

are living in circumstances described in clauses (i) through (iii)... 

(6) The term `unaccompanied youth' includes a youth not in the physical custody 

of a parent or guardian. 
 B1 

APPENDIX B 

U.S. Department of Education 

Education for Homeless and Youth Program 

Title VII-B of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act 

As amended by the No Child Left Behind Act 

Non-Regulatory Guidance, July 2004 

Excerpts 

G. School Placement and Enrollment 

 

G-1. On what basis does an LEA make school placement determinations for 

homeless children and youth? 

Homeless children and youth frequently move, and maintaining a stable school 

environment is critical to their success in school. To ensure this stability, LEAs must 

make school placement determinations on the basis of the “best interest” of the homeless 

child or youth. Using this standard, an LEA must -- 

(a) Continue the child or youth’s education in the school of origin for the duration 

of homelessness when a family becomes homeless between academic years or 

during an academic year; or for the remainder of the academic year if the child or 

youth becomes permanently housed during an academic year; or 

(b) Enroll the child or youth in any public school that non-homeless students who 

live in the attendance area in which the child or youth is actually living are 

eligible to attend. 

G-2. How does an LEA determine the child or youth’s “best interest”? 

In determining a child or youth’s best interest, an LEA must, to the extent feasible, keep a 

homeless child or youth in the “school of origin” unless doing so is contrary to the wishes 

of the child or youth’s parent or guardian. If an LEA wishes to send a homeless child or 

youth to a school other than the school of origin or a school requested by the parent or 

guardian, the LEA must provide a written explanation of its decision to the parent or 

guardian, together with a statement regarding the right to appeal the placement decision. 

 

G-3. Why is it so important to maintain a stable education for homeless children 

and youth? 

Changing schools significantly impedes a student’s academic and social growth. The 

literature on highly mobile students indicates that it can take a student four to six months 

to recover academically after changing schools. Highly mobile students have also been 

found to have lower test scores and overall academic performance than peers who do not 

change schools. Therefore, the McKinney-Vento Act calls for LEAs to maintain students 

in their school of origin to the extent feasible. 
 B2 

G-4. What should a school district consider when determining the extent to which it 

is feasible to educate a homeless child or youth in his or her school of origin? 

As stated above, to the extent feasible, a district must educate a homeless child or youth 

in his or her school of origin, unless doing so is contrary to the wishes of the parent or 

guardian. The placement determination should be a student-centered, individualized 

determination. Factors that an LEA may consider include the age of the child or youth; 

the distance of a commute and the impact it may have on student’s education; personal 

safety issues; a student’s need for special instruction (e.g., special education and related 

services); the length of anticipated stay in temporary shelter or other temporary location; 

and the time remaining in the school year. 

 

G-5. What procedures must an LEA follow if a dispute arises between a school and 

a parent or guardian regarding placement of a homeless child or youth? 

If a dispute arises over school selection or enrollment, the LEA must immediately enroll 

the homeless student in the school in which enrollment is sought by the parent or 

guardian, pending resolution of the dispute. Similar provisions apply to placement of 

unaccompanied youth. Inter-district enrollment disputes should be resolved at the SEA 

level (See G-9). 

Homeless families and youth may be unaware of their right to challenge placement and 

enrollment decisions. Therefore, the LEA must provide the parent, guardian or 

unaccompanied youth with a written statement of the school placement decision and the 

appeal rights. The LEA must refer the unaccompanied youth, parent or guardian to the 

LEA liaison, who must expeditiously carry out the dispute resolution process. 

 

When enrollment disputes arise, it is critical that students not be kept out of school. 

Interruption in education can severely disrupt the student’s academic progress. 

To avoid such disruptions, LEAs need an established process for resolving school 

placement disputes. Permitting students to enroll immediately in the school of choice 

pending resolution of disputes helps provide needed stability. 

 

LEA homeless liaisons help ensure that disputes are resolved objectively and 

expeditiously. Written notice protects both students and schools by outlining the specific 

reasons for the school’s decision. It facilitates dispute resolution by providing decisionmakers with documents to guide their determinations. 

 

G-6. In providing special services to homeless children and youth, how does a 

school or district avoid stigmatizing those children? 

As stated above, a district or school may not segregate homeless children and youth from 

the mainstream school environment. Homeless children and youth are entitled to receive 

all of the services that are provided to their non-homeless counterparts and in the same 

setting as their non-homeless peers. 
 B3 

 

In some circumstances, it may be appropriate to provide additional services to homeless 

children and youth in a separate setting. In doing so, a district should be careful not to 

stigmatize these students. If a district does implement a supplemental program 

exclusively for homeless children, such as a shelter-based evening tutoring program, it 

should not be called “the homeless tutoring program” or the “shelter tutoring program.” 

Instead, the district should use a name such as “Discovery Club” or “Homework Club” to 

avoid stigmatization.

 

 

Enrollment and Attendance Statistics 

The Department’s FY 2000 Report to Congress stated that 87 percent of 

homeless K-12 children and youth are enrolled in school. However, only 

77 percent attended school regularly. Less than 16 percent of eligible 

preschool aged children are enrolled in preschool programs. 

U.S. Department of Education’s McKinney-Vento Report to 

Congress or Fiscal Year 2000 

 

G-7. What are a school’s responsibilities for enrolling homeless children and 

youth? 

A school selected on the basis of the best interest determination (see G-1 and G-2) must 

immediately enroll the homeless child or youth, even if the child or youth is unable to 

produce the records normally required for enrollment (such as previous academic records, 

medical records, proof of residency, birth certificates, or other documentation). The 

enrolling school must immediately contact the school last attended by the child or youth 

to obtain relevant academic or other records. 

 

If a child or youth needs to obtain immunizations, or medical or immunization records, 

the enrolling school must immediately refer the parent or guardian to the LEA homeless 

liaison, who must assist in obtaining the immunizations or records. The records must be 

maintained so that they are available in a timely fashion when the child enters a new 

school or school district. To facilitate immediate enrollment, timely transfer of records 

from school to school should also take into account procedures for State-to-State record 

transfers. 

 

The McKinney-Vento legislation provides a broad mandate to States and districts to 

change policies or practices that act as a barrier to the enrollment, attendance, and school 

success of homeless children. It is important for them to review policies and practices on 

an on-going basis, so that new barriers do not prevent children from receiving the free, 

appropriate public education to which they are entitled. 

 

G-8. What are some steps that LEAs can take to ensure immediate enrollment? 
 B4 

 

Homeless children and youth often do not have the documents ordinarily required for 

school enrollment. Enrolling them in school immediately not only provides these 

children and youth needed stability, but is a legal requirement. 

 

To facilitate immediate enrollment, LEAs should consider the following practices: 

 

• Train all school enrollment staff, secretaries, guidance counselors, school social 

workers, and principals on the legal requirements regarding immediate 

enrollment; 

• Review all regulations and policies to ensure that they comply with the 

McKinney-Vento requirements; 

• Develop affidavits of residence or other forms to replace typical proof of 

residency. Such forms should be carefully crafted so that they do not create 

further barriers or delay enrollment; 

• Develop caregiver affidavits, enrollment forms for unaccompanied youth, and 

other forms to replace typical proof of guardianship. Again, such forms should be 

carefully crafted so they do not create further barriers or delay enrollment; 

• Establish school-based immunization clinics or other opportunities for on-site 

immunizations; 

• Collaborate with community-based or public agencies to provide school uniforms 

within a district and among neighboring districts; 

• Accept school records directly from families and youth; 

• Contact the previous school for records and assistance with placement decisions; 

• Develop short educational assessments to place students immediately while 

awaiting complete academic records; 

• Inform families and youth in a language they can understand or in an accessible 

format, as appropriate, of their right to attend either their school of origin or local 

school; 

• Inform families and youth in a language they can understand or in an accessible 

format, as appropriate, of their right to transportation and immediate enrollment; 

• Develop clear, understandable and accessible forms for written explanations of 

decisions and the right to appeal; and 

• Expeditiously follow up on any special education and language assistance 

referrals or services. 

G-9. What are effective strategies for a LEA to use to resolve enrollment disputes?

 

An LEA should consider the following strategies for effectively resolving school 

enrollment disputes: 

• Disputes should be resolved at the district level rather than the school level; 

• When inter-district issues arise, representatives from all involved districts and the 

SEA should be present to resolve the dispute; 

• A State-level appeal process, involving the State coordinator, should be available 

for appeals from district-level decisions and resolution of inter-district disputes 

(See Section 722(g)(1)(C)); 
 B5 

• The dispute resolution process should be as informal and accessible as possible, 

and allow for impartial and complete review; 

• Parents, guardians, and unaccompanied youth should be able to initiate the 

dispute resolution process directly at the school they choose, as well as at the 

school district or LEA homeless liaison’s office; 

• States should establish timelines to resolve disputes at the local and State level; 

• Parents, guardians, and unaccompanied youth should be informed that they can 

provide written or oral documentation to support their position; 

• Students should be provided with all services for which they are eligible while 

disputes are resolved; 

• Written notice should be complete, as brief as possible, simply stated, and 

provided in a language the parent, guardian, or unaccompanied youth can 

understand. The notice should include: 

 

1. Contact information for the LEA homeless liaison and State 

coordinator, with a brief description of their roles; 

2. A simple, detachable form that parents, guardians, or 

unaccompanied youth can complete and turn in to the school to 

initiate the dispute process. (The school should copy the form and 

return the copy to the parent, guardian or youth for their records 

when it is submitted); 

3. A step-by-step description of how to dispute the school’s decision; 

4. Notice of the right to enroll immediately in the school of choice 

pending resolution of the dispute; 

5. Notice that “immediate enrollment” includes full participation in 

all school activities; 

6. Notice of the right to appeal to the State if the district-level 

resolution is not satisfactory; and 

7. Timelines for resolving district- and State-level appeals. 

G-10. Are children who are awaiting foster care placement eligible for services 

under the McKinney-Vento Act? 

Yes. As stated in A-3, children who are awaiting foster care placement are considered 

homeless and eligible for McKinney-Vento services. (See Section 725(2)(B)(i) of the 

McKinney-Vento Act.) 

Children who are already in foster care, on the other hand, are not considered homeless. 

LEA liaisons should confer and coordinate with local public social service agency 

providers in determining how best to assist homeless children and youth who are 

awaiting foster care placement. 

G-11. Are children displaced from their housing by naturally occurring disasters 

eligible for services under the McKinney-Vento Act? 
 B6 

When children and their families are displaced from their housing as a result of a natural 

disaster, there is often a period of instability in which various private organization and 

local, State, and Federal agencies provide assistance. SEAs and LEAs should determine 

such children’s eligibility for McKinney-Vento services on a case-by-case basis. In 

making this determination, they should take into consideration the services that are 

available through these other sources. 

Following a disaster, one of the LEA’s first priorities is to re-open impacted schools as 

soon as possible and take steps to normalize school routines. LEAs should then proceed 

to examine whether children who have been displaced by the natural disaster are eligible 

for McKinney-Vento services on a case-by-case basis. In such circumstances, the 

Department would provide technical assistance and other assistance, as available, to help 

the LEA. 

H. Transportation

Transportation: The Number One Barrier 

The FY 2000 Report to Congress cited lack of transportation as the number one 

barrier that homeless children and youth faced in attempting to enroll in and 

attend school regularly. 

U.S. Department of Education’s McKinney-Vento Report to Congress for Fiscal 

Year 2000 

H-1. What responsibilities do SEAs and LEAs have regarding providing 

transportation services to homeless children and youth? 

 

SEAs and LEAs are responsible for reviewing and revising policies, including 

transportation policies, that may act as barriers to the enrollment and retention of 

homeless children and youth in schools in the State. Under the McKinney-Vento Act, 

homeless children and youth are entitled to receive the transportation and other services 

that are available to non-homeless students. 

 

SEAs and LEAs must adopt policies and practices to ensure that transportation is 

provided, at the request of the parent or guardian (or in the case of an unaccompanied 

youth, the liaison), to or from the “school of origin” (see definition in Appendix A) in 

accordance with the following requirements: 

• If the homeless child or youth continues to live in the area served by the 

LEA in which the school of origin is located, that LEA must provide or 

arrange for the child’s or youth’s transportation to or from the school of 

origin. 

 

• If the homeless child or youth continues his or her education in the school 

of origin but begins living in an area served by another LEA, the LEA of 

origin and the LEA in which the homeless child or youth is living must 

agree upon a method to apportion the responsibility and costs for 
 B7 

providing the child with transportation to and from the school of origin. If 

the LEAs cannot agree upon a method, the responsibility and costs for 

transportation are to be shared equally. 

 

Steps to Improve Transportation for Homeless Students 

Although the McKinney-Vento Act permits homeless students to remain in their 

schools of origin despite their residential instability, lack of transportation 

commonly prevents them from doing so. Given that transportation has been one 

of the foremost enrollment barriers, in guidance to districts, States should 

highlight the transportation responsibilities of LEAs under the reauthorized 

McKinney-Vento legislation. 

Additionally, highly mobile students have been found to have lower test scores 

and overall academic performance than peers who do not change schools. This 

diminished achievement hurts students and schools. States should work in 

concert with LEAs to develop practices and policies to ensure that transportation 

is provided as required under the statute. 

Adopting a “One Child, One School, One Year” policy and providing 

transportation to enable a student to remain at his/her school of origin assures 

that a homeless student need not change schools before the end of a current 

academic year. 

A systematic process—with agreed-upon steps and individual roles—can help 

homeless students get to and from school efficiently and reliably. LEAs should— 

(1) Identify one individual as the key contact regarding transportation; 

(2) Develop a process to determine the best interests of the student 

regarding travel to a particular school; 

(3) Standard transportation-related data collection and processing; 

(4) Plan for transportation emergencies with back-up support; and 

(5) Identify other sources for funding or arranging transportation. 

U.S. Department of Education’s McKinney-Vento Report to Congress for Fiscal 

Year 2000 

 

H-2. How can LEAs ensure that the education of homeless students is not disrupted 

during inter-district transfers? 

LEAs should have in place inter-district (and inter-State, where appropriate) agreements 

that address potential transportation issues that may arise as homeless students transfer 

from one district to another. 

 

H-3. May funds under Part A of Title I or Part A of Title V of the ESEA be used to 

transport homeless students to and from the school of origin? 

No. LEAs may not use funds under Title I, Part A or Title V, Part A to transport 

homeless students to or from their school of origin. Transportation services to the school 

of origin are mandated under the McKinney-Vento Act’s statute. The “no-supplanting” 

provisions in Title I and Title V prohibit those funds from being used to support activities 

that the LEA would otherwise be required to provide. 
 B8 

H-4. Who should be involved in developing and implementing transportation 

policies for homeless students? 

School districts can best address the transportation needs of homeless and other highly 

mobile students through a team approach. However, based on the best interest of the 

student and in consultation with the parent, the LEA ultimately determines the mode of 

transportation. The LEA’s transportation director is a key figure in the process and 

should work with district leadership, the local liaison for homeless students, neighboring 

districts, and homeless service providers to develop effective transportation policies and 

procedures. 

 Steps district directors of pupil transportation can take to 

 support the transportation of homeless children and youth 

• Communicate regularly with the district homeless liaison 

• Establish procedures to receive information about the 

transportation needs and pickup location of homeless students 

• Train bus drivers and dispatchers on the rights and needs of homeless 

students, as well as on the need for sensitivity and confidentiality 

• Develop a bus routing system that can respond flexibly and quickly to 

new “pickups” 

• Be aware of new motel and shelter locations and prepare to include bus 

stops nearby 

• Support increased district commitment to provide homeless students 

transportation to school, as well as to before- and after-school 

programs. 

The Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program: Learning to 

Succeed 

H-5. Is an LEA required to transport homeless students to and from their school of 

origin, if needed, while enrollment disputes are being resolved? 

Yes. The McKinney-Vento Act’s transportation requirements apply while disputes are 

being resolved. Therefore, at the request of the parent or guardian (or in the case of an 

unaccompanied youth, the liaison), the LEA must provide or arrange for transportation to 

and from the school of origin. Inter-district transportation disputes should be resolved at 

the SEA level (See section 722(g)(1)C)). 

H-6. If an LEA does not provide transportation to non-homeless students, is it 

required to transport homeless students? 

Yes. As discussed above, the legislation not only requires an LEA to provide comparable 

services, including transportation services, to homeless students, it also requires an LEA, 

at the request of a parent or guardian, to provide or arrange for transportation to and from 

the school of origin. 

 

H-7. Do LEA transportation responsibilities apply to all LEAs in the State or only 

to those LEAs that receive a McKinney-Vento subgrant? 

This requirement applies to all LEAs in the State. 
 B9 

H-8. Does McKinney-Vento require an LEA to provide transportation services to 

homeless children attending preschool? 

To the extent an LEA offers a public preschool education, McKinney-Vento requires that 

homeless children have equal access to that preschool education as provided to nonhomeless children. Furthermore, the statute requires that the services provided to 

homeless children be comparable to those provided to non-homeless children, it must 

also provide comparable transportation services for homeless preschool children. 
V1-1/02

Who is homeless? (Sec. 725)

The term “homeless children and

youth”—

(A) means individuals who lack a

fixed, regular, and adequate

nighttime residence ...; and

(B) includes—

(i) children and youths who are

sharing the housing of other

persons due to loss of housing, economic hardship, or a

similar reason; are living in

motels, hotels, trailer parks,

or camping grounds due to

the lack of alternative accommodations; are living in emergency or transitional shelters;

are abandoned in hospitals;

or are awaiting foster care

placement;

(ii) children and youths who have

a primary nighttime residence

that is a public or private

place not designed for or ordinarily used as a regular

sleeping accommodation for

human beings ...

(iii) children and youths who are

living in cars, parks, public

spaces, abandoned buildings,

substandard housing, bus or

train stations, or similar settings; and

(iv) migratory children who qualify as homeless for the purposes of this subtitle because

the children are living in circumstances described in

clauses (i) through (iii).

This document was collaboratively

developed by:

National Association for the Education

of Homeless Children and Youth

(NAEHCY)—512-475-8765—

www.naehcy.org

National Center for Homeless

Education (NCHE)—800-308-2145—

www.serve.org/nche

National Coalition for the Homeless

(NCH)—202-737-6444 ext. 18—

www.nationalhomeless.org

National Law Center on Homelessness

& Poverty (NLCHP)—202-638-2535

—www.nlchp.org

National Network for Youth (NN4Y)—

202-783-7949—www.NN4Youth.org

McKINNEY-VENTO 2001—LAW INTO PRACTICE

The McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (Subtitle B—Education for Homeless

Children and Youth), reauthorized in January 2002, ensures educational rights and

protections for children and youth experiencing homelessness. This brief explains the

legislation and offers strategies for implementing it in a school district. Additional

briefs on various topics in the law may be found on the websites of the organizations listed below.

1

continued on reverse

Transportation

Key Provisions

❒ Local Educational Agencies (LEAs), otherwise known as school districts,

must provide students experiencing homelessness with transportation

to and from their school of origin, at a parent or guardian’s request.

❒ For unaccompanied youth, LEAs must provide transportation to and

from the school of origin at the LEA homeless liaison’s request.

❒ “School of origin” is defined as the school that the child or youth

attended when permanently housed or the school in which the child or

youth was last enrolled.

❒ If the student’s temporary residence and the school of origin are in the

same LEA, that LEA must provide or arrange transportation. If the

student is living outside the school of origin’s LEA, the LEA where the

student is living and the school of origin’s LEA must determine how to

divide the responsibility and cost of providing transportation, or they

must share the responsibility and cost equally.

❒ In addition to providing transportation to the school of origin, LEAs

must provide students in homeless situations with transportation services comparable to those provided to other students.

(See Endnotes for the text of the law.)

Changing schools greatly impedes students’ academic and social growth. A

“rule of thumb” is that it takes a child four to six months to recover academically after changing schools. Highly mobile students have also been found to

have lower test scores and overall academic performance than peers who do

not change schools. This diminished achievement hurts students and schools.

Although the McKinney-Vento Act permits students in homeless situations to

remain in their schools of origin despite their residential instability, lack of

transportation commonly prevents them from continuing in their schools of

origin. Therefore, LEAs are now required to provide transportation to the school

of origin. The resulting educational stability will enhance students’ academic

and social growth, while permitting schools to benefit from the increased test

scores and achievement shown to result from student continuity.

Strategies for Implementation

❒ Coordinate with local housing authorities and community-based organizations to house students near their schools of origin.

❒ Re-route school buses (including special education, magnet school, and

other buses).

❒ Ensure that school buses travel to shelters, transitional living projects,

and motels where homeless students reside.

❒ Provide sensitivity training to bus drivers and arrange bus stops to

keep students’ living situations confidential.
V1-1/02

Every state is required to have a coordinator for the education of homeless

children and youth, and every school district is required to have a liaison for

homeless students. These individuals will assist you with

the implementation of the McKinney-Vento Act. To find out

who your state coordinator is, visit the NCHE website at

www.serve.org/nche.

For further information on the McKinney-Vento Act and

resources for implementation, call the NCHE HelpLine at

800-308-2145 or e-mail homeless@serve.org.

Local contact information:

2

Endnotes

(1) In General—Each State shall submit to the Secretary a plan to provide for the education of homeless

children and youths within the

State. Such plan shall include the

following: ... (J) Assurances that ...

(iii) the State and its local educational agencies will adopt policies

and practices to ensure that transportation is provided, at the request

of the parent or guardian (or in

the case of an unaccompanied

youth, the liaison), to and from the

school of origin, as determined in

paragraph (3)(A), in accordance

with the following, as applicable:

(I) If the homeless child or youth continues to live in the area served by

the local educational agency in

which the school of origin is located, the child’s or youth’s transportation to and from the school

of origin shall be provided or arranged by the local educational

agency in which the school of origin is located.

(II) If the homeless child’s or youth’s

living arrangements in the area

served by the local educational

agency of origin terminate and the

child or youth, though continuing

his or her education in the school

of origin, begins living in an area

served by another local educational

agency, the local educational agency

of origin and the local educational

agency in which the homeless child

or youth is living shall agree upon

a method to apportion the responsibility and costs for providing the

child with transportation to and

from the school of origin. If the

local educational agencies are unable to agree upon such method,

the responsibility and costs for transportation shall be shared equally....

(4) Comparable Services—Each homeless child or youth to be assisted

under this subtitle shall be provided

services comparable to services offered to other students in the school

selected under paragraph (3), including the following: (A) Transportation services....”

McKinney-Vento Act Sec. 722(g)(1)(J)(iii)

and (g)(4)(A); 42 U.S.C. 11432(g)(1)(J)(iii)

and (g)(4)(A).

Transportation (continued)

❒ Develop close ties among LEA homeless liaisons, school staff, and

pupil transportation staff.

❒ Designate a district-level point of contact to arrange and coordinate

transportation.

❒ Provide passes for public transportation, including passes for caregivers

when necessary.

❒ Collaborate with local public agencies and service providers to develop

transportation plans or provide transportation.

❒ Take advantage of transportation systems used by public assistance

agencies.

❒ Coordinate with public assistance agencies, whose clients cannot work

unless their children are in school.

❒ Reimburse parents, guardians, or unaccompanied youth for gas.

❒ Obtain corporate or other sponsorship for transportation costs.

For many more implementation strategies, call 800-308-2145 or e-mail

homeless@serve.org to request a copy of the National Center for Homeless

Education’s FREE publication on transportation for children and youth in homeless situations developed from the 2000 National Symposium on Transportation.

Sources for mobility data:

Dr. Joy Rogers of the Loyola University Department of Education, Education Report of

Rule 706 Expert Panel presented in B.H. v. Johnson, 715 F. Supp. 1387 (N.D. Ill.

1989), 1991.

“Pervasive Student Mobility: A Moving Target for School Improvement,” Finding #9,

Study of the Chicago Panel on School Policy and the Center for School Improvement at the University of Chicago (1996).

Victoria, Texas’ “One Child, One School, One Year” policy, which led to increased

attendance in district schools and a significant increase in state education funds, as

well as improved test scores.
 D1 

APPENDIX D 

National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services Resolution to 

Support the Transportation of Homeless Children and Youth 

 The National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services 

(NASDPTS) passed a resolution at its annual meeting in November 2000 stating its commitment 

to providing transportation services for homeless children. 

 The NASDPTS represents a cross section of individuals and organizations involved in the 

safe transportation of school children. Individuals with the primary responsibility for school 

transportation in each state are members. In addition, the school bus manufacturers, many 

equipment suppliers to the school bus industry, private school transportation contractors, and a 

number of associations whose members include school transportation officials, drivers, trainers, 

and mechanics are also members of affiliated councils within the association. During the past 

several years, the NASDPTS has been deeply involved in all Federal activities dealing with pupil 

transportation. In addition, the association has become the television, radio, and print media's 

most frequently interviewed and quoted source of information on school transportation. 

 

National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services 

Resolution #8 

Transportation for Homeless Children and Youth 

WHEREAS an estimated 1.35 million children in the United States, nearly two percent of the 

total number of children and nearly ten percent of poor children, are likely to experience at least 

one homeless episode over a year, and 

WHEREAS the lives of homeless children and youth tend to be fragmented and chaotic, and 

school can be a source of stability, a haven of emotional and social support, and a means to break 

the cycle of poverty and homelessness, and 

WHEREAS homeless students encounter problems gaining access to transportation, and 

WHEREAS transportation rights are ensured for homeless children and youth through the 

Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, therefore 

BE IT RESOLVED that the National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation 

Services supports the goals of the National Center for Homeless Education and encourages all 

associated with pupil transportation to ensure that homeless children and youth are provided 

appropriate transportation services for access to schools. 

 

 
E 1 

APPENDIX E 

Interview Questions 

Transportation Monograph Project 

“Increasing School Stability: Transportation to the School of Origin for 

Children and Youth in Homeless Situations” 

Overview 

NCHE is in the process of developing a new monograph that will include information from the 

reauthorized McKinney-Vento legislation and U.S. Department of Education 2003 Guidance; an overview 

of the importance of school stability; and descriptions of strategies and approaches to meeting the 

mandate from school districts that have experienced success in implementing the mandate. 

Program 

Interview Participants & Titles 

Interview Date / Time 

Phone number / arrangements 

1. Describe your district’s demographics. 

a. Size? (geographically, number of students) 

b. Location? (rural, urban, suburban) 

c. Number of homeless children & youth? 

2. Of the total number of homeless children and youth provide the estimated numbers who 

have the following as their primary night residence: 

Primary night time residence Estimated number of homeless children/ 

youth (Total LEAs with and without 

subgrants) 

Shelters 

Doubled-up 

Unsheltered (e.g., cars, parks, 

campgrounds, etc.) 

Hotels/Motels 

Other (specify) 

Unknown 

3. Is there a public transportation system in your community? 
E 2 

4. To what extent is transportation provided to school children in general? 

5. How many homeless K-12 children and youth enrolled in school during the 2002-2003 school 

year remained in their school of origin and received transportation to their school origin? 

6. What was the estimated total cost of transportation to the school of origin for homeless 

children and youth in your area? 

7. Did your LEA receive McKinney-Vento subgrant funds in 2002-2003? YES __ NO___ 

If yes, what percentage of the grant did you spend on transportation to school of origin? 

0-10% 10-25% ____ 25-50% ____ 50-75% ____ 75%-100% ____ 

8. What other sources of funds did your district use to transport children/youth to their school 

of origin (district, state, or other federal funding, private funding, other nontraditional 

sources)? 

9. How long does it generally take for transportation services to be arranged once a 

parent/guardian requests for his/her child (or an unaccompanied youth requests) to remain 

in the school of origin? 

10. What specific strategies and systems has the district implemented to provide transportation 

to the school of origin? 

 In your area, which of the following modes is most frequently used for transportation to 

school of origin. 

! Additional or extended bus routes 

! Public transportation 

! Taxis 

! Contracted transportation services 

! Special education buses 

! Non-school agency transportation 

! Personal vehicles 

! Reimbursing families for mileage 

11. What are the biggest challenges to providing transportation to the school of origin? 

To what extent do the following also present challenges? 

! The size of the region served by the district 

! Placement of families and youth (i.e. distance from school) 

! Scheduling conflicts 

! Lack of vehicles 

! Unavailability of parent/guardian to travel with younger children to/from school? 

! Funding 

! Recurring moves / mobility

! Difficulties getting in touch with parents 
E 3 

! Time to make arrangements, considering the immediate enrollment provisions 

12. How has your district addressed these challenges? 

13. Which strategies do you consider the most successful? 

14. What are the roles of the pupil transportation director and local homeless education liaison 

in facilitating transportation? 

15. Who else is involved in arranging transportation to the school of origin? (parents / 

caregivers / guardians, social workers, etc.) 

16. How do all those involved work together (regular meetings, homeless coalitions, local 

policies)? 

17. What agreements or policies exist between DSS or other placement agencies to ensure that 

homeless families are placed close to schools where their children are attending? 

 

18. What state and local policies support keeping homeless children in their school of origin? 

Are there any written policies, MOUs, protocols, etc. in place? 

19. What additional support do you get from the state level? 

20. What policies and arrangements exist for inter-district transfers? 

21. What data do you have that shows the impact of school stability (remaining in the school of 

origin) on the academic achievement of homeless students? 
F 1 

APPENDIX F 

Interviews with LEA Staff 

Anchorage School District, Anchorage, AK 

Ms. Patricia O’Gorman, Program Coordinator for Child in Transition/Homeless Project 

Cincinnati School District (Project Connect), Cincinnati, OH 

 Ms. Debbie Reinhart, Executive Director 

 Mr. Paul McDole, Operations Manager 

Houston Independent School District (HISD), Houston, TX 

 Dr. Connie Thompson, Director/District Liaison, HISD

Putnam County District Schools, Putnam County, FL 

 Mr. Bob Pugh, Director of Federal Programs 

San Antonio Independent School District (SAISD), San Antonio, TX 

Ms. M. Estella Garza, Coordinator of Family/Student Services 

Mr. Mike Daly, Executive Director, Transportation Services 

Dr. Patricia Karam, Executive Director for Student Services 

Spokane Public Schools, District 81, Spokane, WA 

 Ms. Edie Sims, Homeless Facilitator 

 

St. Paul Public Schools, St. Paul, MN 

 Ms. Becky Hicks, McKinney-Vento Liaison 

Educational Service District (ESD) 112,Vancouver, WA 

Mr. Lionel Pinn, Manager, Specialized Transportation Cooperative 
F 2 

Program Anchorage School District, AK 

Interview Participants & Titles 

Ms. Patricia O’Gorman, program coordinator for Child in Transition / Homeless Project (Title One funded 

program) 

Interview Date / Time Tuesday, March 02, 2004

1. Describe your district’s demographics. 

a. Size? (geographically, number of students) 

Almost 2000 sq miles (1956 sq miles) 

49,600 students 

b. Location? (rural, urban, suburban) 

Urban 

c. Number of homeless children & youth? 

Identified: 2121 

2. Of the total number of homeless children and youth provide the estimated numbers who 

have the following as their primary night residence: 

Primary night time residence Estimated number of homeless children/ 

youth (Total LEAs with and without 

subgrants) 

Shelters 1370 

Doubled-up 326 

Unsheltered (e.g., cars, parks, 

campgrounds, etc.) 

36 

Hotels/Motels 212 

Other (specify) 0 

Unknown 0 

3. Is there a public transportation system in your community? 

Public Bus system—but not too extensive (FYI note: Population of Anchorage: 265,000) 

4. To what extent is transportation provided to school children in general? 

Everyone living outside of 11⁄2 mile radius or if they have an IEP for special education that warrants 

transportation (regular yellow school buses) 

5. How many homeless K-12 children and youth enrolled in school during the 2002-2003 school 

year remained in their school of origin and received transportation to their school origin? 

2121 identified. 

759 received transportation. 

Of the 2121, some didn’t need transportation to stay in their school of origin 

Majority of the 2121 remained in their school of origin (We don’t separate out this data in the way it 

was requested) 
F 3 

6. What was the estimated total cost of transportation to the school of origin for homeless 

children and youth in your area? 

District spent $40,000 on shelter shuttle 

Program spent an additional $107,000 ---(Title I funding) on gas vouchers, bus passes, cabs, and a 

vendor called Anchor Rides – (municipal vendor you can contract to provide bus transportation). 

These avenues are used for kids living in areas where shelter shuttle does not go 

Shelter shuttle only picks up in certain areas and only goes to certain schools. 

“Shelter Shuttle” not only goes to the shelters, but to the motels as well 

Children may be picked up by the Shelter Shuttle, taken the to “bus barn,” and they switch buses to 

complete their journey to school 

Unfortunately, a lot of these students have very long bus rides (usually over an hour). 

AND – there are a couple of cases where it is impossible for the buses to get the children to certain 

schools on time -- in these cases, the children routinely miss a 1⁄2 hour a day because that’s the 

only way to do it. 

Then, $26,000 was spent for busing pre-school kids – district transportation dept absorbed this 

cost. 

7. Did your LEA receive McKinney-Vento subgrant funds in 2002-2003? YES 

If yes, what percentage of the grant did you spend on transportation to school of origin? 

0-10% X 10-25% ____ 25-50% ____ 50-75% ____ 75%-100% ____ 

8. What other sources of funds did your district use to transport children/youth to their school 

of origin (district, state, or other federal funding, private funding, other nontraditional 

sources)? 

District covers a substantial cost, and Title I funds, along with McKinney-Vento grant covers the 

rest. But we can no longer use Title I funds for this. 

9. How long does it generally take for transportation services to be arranged once a 

parent/guardian requests for his/her child (or an unaccompanied youth requests) to remain 

in the school of origin? 

24 hours 

Program office gets a faxed list from the shelters every morning with the names of the kids at the 

shelter (signed releases for kids – since they are required to go to school). Those kids are then 

added to Shelter Shuttle list. 

For those kids not in shelters, they get connected by self-referrals, or are referred by school staff 

(nurses, teachers, principals). (Posters sent to every school.) 

Once a student/parent is identified as homeless, the program office does an intake over the phone 

or in person. We talk with families ourselves. If school staff refers a child, we will then talk to family 

– no cold calls. A staff person calls on behalf of the family or suggests to the family that someone 

calls the program office. Three staff people to do in-take, they decide on transportation plan, two 

administrative staff help with daily dispatching of information. 

10. What specific strategies and systems has the district implemented to provide transportation 

to the school of origin? 

Shelter Shuttle – that operates in conjunction with the special education program. 

We are a district program (child in transition / homeless program), but the district transportation 

office handles the Shelter Shuttle – we give them all the information and ask them to add students. 

Contracted bus is done through the program office. We contract with a cab company, buy gas 

coupons from gas company—all of this is done exclusively by the program staff. 

In your area, which of the following modes is most frequently used for transportation to 

school of origin. 

#3 Additional or extended bus routes 
F 4 

#4 Public transportation 

#1 Taxis 

#5 Contracted transportation services 

#2 Reimbursing families for mileage ...in this case, gas coupons 

11. What are the biggest challenges to providing transportation to the school of origin? 

#1 need more bus routes and need more money 

To what extent do the following also present challenges? 

Placement of families and youth (i.e., distance from school) 

Foster care is a challenge (office of children’s services: OCS); they often don’t take into account 

the educational needs of child. The goal is often to just get children into a safe house, and 

children may be placed with families a long distance from school of origin 

Scheduling conflicts 

Funding

Recurring moves / mobility—A family may be in a shelter, then moves to other temporary 

housing (motel) or doubles up 

How do you deal with that? Families are told to stay in touch with us if they move – families are 

good to keep in touch for the most part. When kids are no longer there – the school staff 

sometimes knows and gets the updates from a variety of sources. Sometimes the shelter 

knows where they are going and will encourage family to contact program. Sometimes the 

children will show up at another school, and that school knows to contact the program office. 

12. How has your district addressed these challenges? 

Hoping to get an expanded budget – within our use of Title I funds. Also, we have have had to have 

meetings with asst superintendent and director of transportation. The transportation department 

agreed to share money (came in under budget) to transport these kids. 

13. Which strategies do you consider the most successful? 

Great database – keeps track of families – contact numbers. Can locate family if they “disappear” to 

help get kids back into transportation system. We input every switch to a new school so the 

database can track homeless kids. We know how many in which schools at any given time. We 

send lists to schools (to a point of contact) every month that the homeless students are in their 

school. In Title I schools, it is the same contact. In non-Title I schools the contact is the principal, 

nurse, or counselor. 

Ongoing partnerships / relationships with shelters (4 main shelters: women and children, families or 

single dads with kids, domestic violence, native families), Covenant House – youth on their own, 

and a couple of group homes. We’ve made a real effort to have partnerships and collaborations with 

agencies in community (housing, medical, OCS, mental health). 

In services -- This year we provided an in-service for new staff. We did more training for people in 

the district (admin assistants and secretaries in Title I schools) 

14. What are the roles of the pupil transportation director and local homeless education liaison 

in facilitating transportation? 

Ongoing problem solving – 

Example: We co-hosted a transportation summit in April. Numerous people from community 

attended, such as people in key roles in school administration (for example, the director of public 

transportation, the United Way director, the transportation supervisor from Head Start programs, 

the risk management and safety director, the Title I coordinator, the president of Checker Cab 

Company). Approx.imately 20 people attended. 

15. Who else is involved in arranging transportation to the school of origin? (parents / 

caregivers / guardians, social workers, etc.) 

Arranging transportation is our staff only. 

Our program also provides school supplies, 
F 5 

16. How do all those involved work together (regular meetings, homeless coalitions, local 

policies)? 

It has evolved over time from an initial meeting with the transportation director and program director. 

Now we have daily contact between the program staff and transportation department, cab 

companies, etc. 

17. What agreements or policies exist between DSS or other placement agencies to ensure that 

homeless families are placed close to schools where their children are attending? 

We meet with OCS monthly just for general issues (not related to transportation necessarily), but 

currently no policy that helps ensure they are placed close by. 

18. What state and local policies support keeping homeless children in their school of origin? 

Are there any written policies, MOUs, protocols, etc. in place? 

We have a local policy that addresses schools’ responsibility under McKinney-Vento. Currently we 

have a revised draft. We are waiting for the school board to help with final revisions. 

19. What additional support do you get from the state level? 

State Coordinator; we get funding from a McKinney-Vento subgrant. 

20. What policies and arrangements exist for inter-district transfers? 

This issue has not come up for us yet. Districts are not close together. 

21. What data do you have that shows the impact of school stability (remaining in the school of 

origin) on the academic achievement of homeless students? 

Nothing yet. Have set up a system internally to flag kids and track them for assessment. 

NOTE: FYI...The mobility rate at the elementary system: Transfers in and transfers out = 33% 

(Anchorage seasonal jobs with fishing, military bases, oil companies) 
F 6 

Program Project Connect, Cincinnati School District, Ohio 

Interview Participants & Titles: Debbie Reinhart, Executive Director Project Connect 

 Paul McDole, Operations Manager Project Connect 

Interview Date / Time Wednesday, 8/27/03 

1. Describe your district’s demographics. 

a. Size? (geographically, number of students) 

Approximately 42,000 students 

b. Location? (rural, urban, suburban) 

 Urban 

c. Number of homeless children & youth? 

 Estimated 2,000 / year, on average. This number varies. 

2. Of the total number of homeless children and youth provide the estimated numbers who 

have the following as their primary night residence: 

Primary night time residence Estimated number of homeless 

children/ youth (Total LEAs with and 

without subgrants) 

Shelters 80% 

Doubled-up 14% 

Unsheltered (e.g., cars, parks, 

campgrounds, etc.) 

1% 

Hotels/Motels 5% 

Other (specify) 

Unknown 

*Note: these are estimated percentages 

3. Is there a public transportation system in your community? 

Yes; metro bus system 

4. To what extent is transportation provided to school children in general? 

Transportation provided to any student outside of 1-mile radius, through traditional bus routes 

5. How many homeless K-12 children and youth enrolled in school during the 2002-2003 school 

year remained in their school of origin and received transportation to their school origin? 

An estimated15% were able to stay in their school of origin 

Pilot programs – currently in the 3rd year of pilot 

There are “site managers” at three schools who work with shelters in their districts, consult with 

families regarding enrollment for their children, and provide appropriate services to children/youth. 

95% of the families at these shelters choose to send their children to the schools with the pilot 

programs because of the services offered. 

In reality, transportation is not readily available for children to attend their school of origin. It is much 

easier to get them connected with these pilot programs, which quickly provide transportation 

services. 

6. What was the estimated total cost of transportation to the school of origin for homeless 

children and youth in your area? 
F 7 

Estimates only: Last year, two buses were provided for the McKinney-Vento pilot programs at a cost 

of approximately $75,600 / year. The district paid for these buses, not the McKinney-Vento program. 

This year, the district anticipates using three school buses. Add to that bus passes and taxi cabs 

used for older children’s transportation (when traditional bus routes don’t work). 

NOTE: Most students stay within district. The district is large and most shelters are located within 

the district, so there is little need for interdistrict transfers. 

7. Did your LEA receive McKinney-Vento subgrant funds in 2002-2003? YES 

If yes, what percentage of the grant did you spend on transportation to school of origin? 

0-10% X 10-25% ____ 25-50% ____ 50-75% ____ 75%-100% ____ 

8. What other sources of funds did your district use to transport children/youth to their school 

of origin (district, state, or other federal funding, private funding, other nontraditional 

sources)? 

District pays for transportation for the most part. 

In addition, a private foundation supports the program with an estimated $50,000 grant each year, 

which goes to provide services to homeless students in the district. 

9. How long does it generally take for transportation services to be arranged once a 

parent/guardian requests for his/her child (or an unaccompanied youth requests) to remain 

in the school of origin? 

Within 24 hours. 

If the district transportation dept cannot put transportation services in place immediately, foundation 

monies are used to arrange for temporary transportation until buses, alternate routes, etc. can be 

arranged. 

10. What specific strategies and systems has the district implemented to provide transportation 

to the school of origin? 

Process: 

Typically homeless families go through the McKinney-Vento office first (referred from shelter, etc). 

For homeless students who show up at the school, not having been in touch with McKinney-Vento 

program, the schools know to send them to Project Connect. 

The staff at Project Connect arranges the transportation (works much more quickly through their 

office than if the individual schools were trying to arrange this themselves). 

Each request for transportation is arranged individually – the McKinney-Vento office contacts the 

transportation dept (via phone or email) and the arrangement is made individually for each case. 

 In your area, which of the following modes is most frequently used for transportation 

to school of origin. 

#2 Additional or extended bus routes 

#1 *Public transportation – tokens/passes provided for all older children (children age 10 or older 

may ride the Metro unaccompanied)

#3 Contracted transportation services - Taxis 

** Special education buses – also used when appropriate (for special education students)

#4 Reimbursing families for mileage –also will buy families gas cards

*Public transportation can also be used as interim transportation for younger children while 

traditional bus service is being arranged. In those cases, tokens can be provided for the whole 

family or a guardian to accompany the child to school. 

11. What are the biggest challenges to providing transportation to the school of origin? 

Cooperation with transportation office – it is not really a problem for this district anymore due to all 

parties being “on board” and aware of what is required. The key is educating all those involved in 

the process in order to have a successful, seamless program. 
F 8 

Transportation outside of the district has proved to be particularly challenging. Problems have 

included getting the other districts to accept responsibility for transporting their students; and 

problems in long delays in arranging the transportation. We would would very much like to see 

better interdistrict cooperation. 

To what extent do the following also present challenges? 

Placement of families and youth (i.e. distance from school) –ex. from one end of district to 

another 

Unavailability of parent/guardian to travel with younger children to/from school? 

Recurring moves / mobility --In pilot programs, staff communicates with parents very regularly. 

Lots of calls are exchanged to keep transportation arrangements up to date, even when families 

move. For those students not in the pilot program, it is up to the family to keep in touch re: 

transportation changes, needs, moves, etc. Many of these students end up fading in and out. 

Time to make arrangements, considering the immediate enrollment provisions – this problem 

is overcome by giving families bus tokens to use until more permanent arrangements are in place. 

None of these are major challenges. 

12. How has your district addressed these challenges? 

Educating the various parties involved. 

Conducting district-wide inservices – for school clerks, new principals, etc. 

Developing relationships with key people in key positions to ensure it happens 

Developing ties with transportation dept – working to get to know the staff and letting them know 

their work on behalf of the children/youth is appreciated (coffee mugs as gifts, for example). 

Helping to encourage all to embrace the cause. 

NOTE: There is a staff of 7 in the McKinney-Vento program for the district – and the program is 

very well supported. 

13. Which strategies do you consider the most successful? 

Development of a team concept. This is not a one person job!!! 

14. What are the roles of the pupil transportation director and local homeless education liaison 

in facilitating transportation? 

The transportation office has provided 3 school buses for the three pilot sites (at no charge to 

Project Connect). The district also provides bus passes to families – given at no cost to the 

homeless program (approx. $60-$70 per card). It is preferred that the child ride a traditional 

school bus and if that can be arranged, it is done usually within 2 days. 

In addition, with McKinney-Vento funds, Project Connect purchases and makes available bus 

tokens in emergency cases when there is a delay in arranging transportation—so children and 

families are always covered. 

15. Who else is involved in arranging transportation to the school of origin? (parents / 

caregivers / guardians, social workers, etc.) 

Paul McDole handles most of the district transportation. He works with shelter staff, school 

personnel (school social workers, principals, secretaries, etc.) as well as parents to make 

arrangements. 

16. How do all those involved work together (regular meetings, homeless coalitions, local 

policies)? 

• The staff of Project Connect holds weekly staff meetings (8 staff people) 

• Project Connect staff members attend homeless coalition meetings in the community 

• No regular meetings with transportation department are necessary; these relationships have 

been built on existing relationships and continue to thrive; the transportation department and 
F 9 

Project Connect constantly work together to help provide more resources (ex. 3 buses were 

provided for the pilot programs this year.) 

• Staff members meet, as needed, with personnel at bus company (all buses are contracted 

out by the transportation department). 

17. What agreements or policies exist between DSS or other placement agencies to ensure 

that homeless families are placed close to schools where their children are attending? 

No known policies; it is believed that they do not take the child’s educational situation into 

account when arranging placements. 

18. What state and local policies support keeping homeless children in their school of origin? 

Are there any written policies, MOUs, protocols, etc. in place? 

At the state level, there are no known policies in existence 

At the local / district level there is a legal document sent to the counties describing their 

obligations under McKinney-Vento. 

Letter from legal counsel in the district is sent to the Cincinnati Public Schools at the beginning of 

each year (due to staff turnover each year and as reminder to all) 

(NOTE: Project Connect works with 4 surrounding counties – some outside of the Cincinnati 

School District so these policies are relevant in all 4 counties, not just within the Cincinnati School 

District). 

19. What additional support do you get from the state level? 

At the state level, we have access to the State Coordinator and to State Education Agency staff 

who serve as support for our programs 

20. What policies and arrangements exist for interdistrict transfers? 

Most students stay within district. The district is large and most shelters are located within the 

district, so there is little need for interdistrict transfers. When interdistrict transfers are necessary, 

there is no formal procedure, and in fact, arranging for interdistrict transfers has not worked well. 

21. What data do you have that shows the impact of school stability (remaining in the school 

of origin) on the academic achievement of homeless students? 

The impact of remaining at the school of origin is difficult to measure, because there are so many 

factors involved. In all actuality, the impact of remaining at one school for an entire year is unique 

and different for every student. In the past few years, Project Connect has moved away from 

shelter-based tutoring and opened school-based programs in close proximity to emergency 

shelters. Transportation is a key component of the school-based programs. Customized yellow 

bus service, metro bus cards, bus tokens and taxis are utilized to ensure that students can 

remain at the school of origin as long as it is in their best interest and in accordance with the 

parent or guardian’s wishes. 

During the 2003-04 school year, one hundred and fifty-four (154) students participated in the 

school-based programs. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of the students remained enrolled in the 

program for the entire year even though sixty-five (65) students moved two or more times. The 

students had an average attendance rate of eighty-nine percent (89%), and ninety-six percent 

(96%) of the students were promoted to the next grade level. The academic results for the 

students experiencing homelessness were comparable to the results of the nonhomeless 

students. The impact of remaining at the school of origin can also be seen in the ways in which 

the students are integrated into the school community and receive specialized services. Many 

students are involved in school sports, school clubs and attend school field trips for the first time 

in their school careers. Students at one of our sites received school yearbooks and were thrilled 

to find their names and photographs printed in them. Many students received psychological 

assessments and either began counseling services or special education services as a result. 

Ultimately, the specialized transportation services emerge as a key factor in determining the 

quality of a student’s school experience. 
F 10 

Program Houston Independent School District, Texas 

1. Describe your district’s demographics. 

a. Size? (geographically, number of students) 

The Houston Independent School District (HISD) is the largest school district in the state of Texas 

and the sixth largest district in the nation. The growing student population has reached nearly 

211,000 students in 308 schools. Each school is assigned to one of 13 administrative districts. The 

HISD student body represents approximately 90 countries, with 14,000 immigrants and 1,600 

migrants. About 60,000 students are limited English proficient (LEP) as identified by 86 home 

languages. Moreover, 28% of the LEP students participate in regular education, while 8% 

participate in special education. The ethnic composition of the district’s students is 55% Hispanic, 

32% African American, 10% White, and 3% Asian. As reflected by the free and reduced lunch 

status, the economically disadvantaged currently comprise 79% of the total student population. 

Consequently, 63% of the students in the district are eligible for Title I services. Furthermore, an 

astonishing 59% of HISD students are at risk of dropping out of school and about 1,600 students 

dropped out of school during the past school year (HISD District and School Profiles, 2001-2002). 

The mobility rate in HISD is an alarming 38%. 

b. Location? (rural, urban, suburban) 

HISD is an urban school district that encompasses 301 square miles within the greater Houston 

area. Each school is located in residential communities. 

c. Number of homeless children & youth? 

There are approximately 1,600 homeless children and youth in the Houston Independent School 

District. 

2. Of the total number of homeless children and youth provide the estimated numbers who 

have the following as their primary night residence:

 

 

Primary night time residence

Estimated number of homeless children/ 

youth (Total LEAs with and without 

subgrants)

Shelters 400 

Doubled-up 1,100 

Unsheltered (e.g., cars, parks, campgrounds, 

etc.) 

 30 

Hotels/Motels 60 

Other (specify) friend to friend 10 

Unknown 0 

Total 1,600 

 

3. Is there a public transportation system in your community? 

The Metropolitan Transit Authority (METRO) provides public transportation for the city of Houston. 

HISD students have access to bus services through METRO. Discount fares are offered to students 

who utilize these services. 

4. To what extent is transportation provided to school children in general? 
F 11 

HISD has established board policies that govern students’ access to transportation that is supported 

by the district. Specifically, under the Fixed Bus-Stop Plan, non-special needs students may be 

assigned to bus stops up to two miles from their residence. Students are classified according to 

eight principal program categories for purposes of determining transportation eligibility: (1) standard 

education, (2) magnet and majority-to-minority, (3) special education, (4) special transfers, (5) 

career and technology, (6) parent education, (7) mandatory alternative education, and (8) capped 

school programs. A description of transportation eligibility guidelines follows. 

• Students eligible for transportation to standard education programs (attending zoned school) or 

magnet and majority-to-minority programs (attending such programs on approved transfers) 

must reside two or more miles from their assigned campuses. 

• Students eligible for transportation to special education programs are resident district students 

with disabilities, impairments, or both. These students are eligible for special education services 

and would be unable to attend school and benefit from their special education instruction 

without the availability of specialized transportation. To be eligible for special education

transportation, a student must attend the closest appropriate program to his or her zoned school 

of attendance. 

• Transportation to special transfer programs is provided with the approval of the Superintendent 

of Schools and the board if it is in the best interest of student achievement and learning. In 

addition, transportation is provided to JROTC, vocational, as well as career and technology 

programs, particularly if the programs are not offered at the student’s zoned school. 

Students eligible for parent education program transportation are resident district students enrolled 

in approved parent education programs. Parent education program students and the students' infant 

children may be provided round-trip transportation between district-designated stops and their 

daycare facilities to their assigned campuses provided they are attending the closest programs with 

available space to their zoned schools of attendance. However, no infant child will be transported 

outside of HISD district boundaries or transported without a parent. 

Students eligible for mandatory alternative education program transportation are resident district 

students who have been placed in a mandatory alternative education program at the district's 

direction. Mandatory alternative education students may be provided round-trip transportation 

between district-designated stops and their assigned campuses. 

• Students eligible for capped school program transportation are resident district students whose 

attendance at their zoned schools of attendance would cause those schools to exceed their 

legal capacities. These students have been assigned to other campuses by the Student 

Transfers Department and reside two or more miles from their campuses of attendance. 

Specific geographic areas within the attendance boundaries of HISD schools, which are also within 

two miles of the school (as measured along the shortest route that may be traveled on public roads) 

may be considered for transportation eligibility on a case-by-case basis for designation as Special 

Transportation Assignment Zones. Such zones may be established when it is deemed a necessity to 

provide transportation services for students residing in these specific areas to assure student safety 

and attendance. 

Lastly, resident district students who are subject to extreme hardship circumstances may be 

considered for transportation eligibility on a case-by-case basis. Extreme hardship circumstances are 

circumstances of sufficient extent and severity to prohibit a student’s attendance at his or her 

assigned campus without the availability of transportation services. 

5. How many homeless K-12 children and youth enrolled in school during the 2002-2003 school 

year remained in their school of origin and received transportation to their school origin? 

 While HISD makes efforts to accommodate all homeless children and youth, it is estimated that 

1,520 out of the approximate 1,600 homeless students in the district were allowed to remain in their 

school of origin and received transportation to their school of origin. This figure reflects 95% of the 

total approximate homeless student enrollment in the district. Any known exceptions are primarily at 

the pre-kindergarten through third grade levels due to safety issues or the amount of time required 

transporting the student to and from school. Specifically, since the greater Houston area extends far 

beyond HISD, extremely early pick-up times and late arrival times are likely to occur. In these 

cases, transporting students to their school of origin may not be in the best interest of elementary 

students. Otherwise, elementary students are granted the request. At the secondary level, students 

are usually granted their request to remain at the school of origin, regardless of distance. 
F 12 

6. What was the estimated total cost of transportation to the school of origin for homeless 

children and youth in your area? 

The HISD Department of Transportation estimates that, on average, $800.00 yearly is expended on 

transporting a regular education student. Considering an estimated 1,600 homeless children and 

youth are enrolled in the district, at least $1,280,000 dollars is spent on transportation. Additional 

costs are expended if the student requires special instructional programs that are located outside of 

their zoned community, must be transported to another school district, or if a new bus route has to 

be created to ensure that the student remains in the school of origin. 

7. Did your LEA receive McKinney-Vento subgrant funds in 2002-2003? NO 

8. What other sources of funds did your district use to transport children/youth to their school 

of origin (district, state, or other federal funding, private funding, other nontraditional 

sources)? 

The Texas Education Code authorizes each school district in the state to establish and operate an 

economical, public school transportation service. Thus, the state provides an allotment of state 

Foundation School Program funds for eligible school transportation services. The Houston 

Independent School District Transportation Service, in accordance with established board policy, 

meets all reporting and service requirements set forth by the Texas Education Agency for the 

allotment of Foundation School Program funds. 

In addition to funds attained through state taxes, HISD relies on local Houston taxpayers to support 

transportation services. Consequently, tax funds are collected as a result of local bond elections. 

The district does not receive federal grants for the operation of transportation services. However, 

funds have been allotted through the McKinney Homeless grant to help bridge the gap in HISD 

transportation services by supplying students with bus tokens. 

9. How long does it generally take for transportation services to be arranged once a 

parent/guardian requests for his/her child (or an unaccompanied youth requests) to remain 

in the school of origin? 

If the HISD Transportation Department has already established a bus route that encompasses the 

requested route, then it takes two days for the student to receive transportation services. On the 

contrary, if the transportation department has to create a bus route, then it may take from five to 

seven days for the student to receive transportation services. In most cases, the Transportation 

Department has been able to provide transportation in less than five to seven days. 

10. What specific strategies and systems has the district implemented to provide transportation 

to the school of origin? 

Because of a large and varied student transfer program in the district, HISD has been able to 

accommodate most of the in-district transportation needs of homeless students. The district has 

been willing to place students on any route that is necessary to accommodate them. For example, 

the district has placed elementary-aged students on high school routes, used ambulatory special 

education routes, and even transferred students from one route to another, to make sure that they 

were transported where they needed to go. Further, if transportation services were requested to a 

surrounding district, project staff e-mailed the routing and scheduling component of the 

transportation department. If necessary, a bus route or stop was created to accommodate the 

student. In addition, the HISD Transportation Department has worked with neighboring districts to 

establish a cooperative agreement that allowed for the exchange of information and facilitated cross 

school district transportation, where needed. Specifically, a meeting was held in 2002 involving 

neighboring school districts. A cooperative agreement was developed between these districts to 

ensure timely creation of routes that cross district lines. In addition, the school districts created a 

point of contact for handling McKinney-Vento issues. A list of the neighboring districts was created 

to assist the project liaison in advising parents of the best course of action for the student and in 

making informed decisions about the education of their children. 

In your area, which of the following modes is most frequently used for transportation to 

school of origin. 

Additional or extended bus routes 

11. What are the biggest challenges to providing transportation to the school of origin? 
F 13 

It is often difficult to respond quickly to transportation request, particularly when the most critical 

piece of information for transportation, i.e., pick-up location, is often missing or changing. 

To what extent do the following also present challenges? 

• The size of the region served by the district 

HISD is a large district, but the existence of programs such as Magnet, Gifted and Talented, 

Special Education, as well as, Career and Technology, at the majority of HISD campuses 

makes transportation throughout the district feasible. 

• Placement of families and youth (i.e. distance from school) 

Since HISD covers 301 square miles and must comply with laws that allow students to 

remain at their school of origin, the distance from a school of origin impacts the student’s ride 

time. Consequently, some parents have chosen not to subject their children to the long ride 

times and transfer to the school to which they are zoned. 

• Scheduling conflicts 

The most recurrent scheduling conflict is related to meeting the scheduling demands of the 

shelters. Specifically, shelters usually have very regimented meal times. Therefore, students 

who have long distances to travel may be in jeopardy of missing meals. This could make the 

parent’s decision to remain at the school of origin difficult. 

• Lack of vehicles 

HISD has 1,000 fleets available, which is more than adequate to handle transportation needs 

of all of the enrolled students. Therefore, to date, that has not been an issue for the district. 

• Unavailability of parent/guardian to travel with younger children to/from school? 

HISD Board Policy and the Texas Education Code allow homeless students who are 

pregnant and are attending a school with daycare services to receive transportation services 

from the district. Otherwise, parents of students are not allowed to travel with their children on 

HISD buses. 

• Funding 

HISD receives funding from local and state taxes to transport students to their designated 

school. Consequently, funds to transport students have not been an issue for the district. 

• Recurring moves / mobility 

Obviously, arranging transportation takes time and effort by the school, transportation 

department staff, families, and homeless project staff. Therefore, a change in a route impacts 

all the students that ride. All students have to be informed of a time change. Even with a twoday turn-around, students moved before transportation services have begun. 

• Difficulties getting in contact with parents 

Contacting parents is usually an issue for the school or homeless project social workers. 

Communication with parents who live in shelters concerning their child’s transportation needs 

is often difficult, particularly since messages have to be left with shelter staff. 

• Time to make arrangements, considering the immediate enrollment provisions 

As mentioned above, if a change in route is made, the transportation department has to have 

a two-day minimum to make sure all students on the bus are aware of the time changes. The 

project liaison's office does an efficient job covering the transportation needs of the parents 

and students until the district can establish bus transportation. 

12. How has your district addressed these challenges? 

Homeless project staff makes regularly scheduled visits to many of the local shelters in Houston as 

well as to several schools that serve large numbers of homeless students. In addition, project staff 

attends monthly Harris County Coalition for Homeless meetings where other homeless service 

providers are present. As a result, communications concerning new students in the district, issues 

related to transporting HISD students, along with successful strategies are discussed. Further 

collaborative efforts occur between homeless project staff, school administrators, and 
F 14 

Transportation Service staff. Consequently, a nearly seamless system has been established that 

prevents any child from receiving an education in the district. 

13. Which strategies do you consider the most successful? 

Since HISD has extensive experience transporting students to special instructional programs, 

additional strategies were incorporated to provide transportation services to homeless students. The 

primary goal of these strategies was to facilitate communication between the project liaison, social 

workers, transportation department director, schools, shelter providers, and other homeless service 

providers. 

14. What are the roles of the pupil transportation director and local homeless education liaison 

in facilitating transportation? 

The local homeless education liaison works closely with the public transportation director to 

communicate current laws governing transportation of homeless students. In addition, the local 

homeless education liaison has developed, as a key role for one of the social workers in the 

program, to serve as the contact between the schools, transportation department, and the liaison 

concerning problems and issues that students face, particularly related to mobility, intra-district and 

inter-district transfers. 

15. Who else is involved in arranging transportation to the school of origin? (parents / 

caregivers / guardians, social workers, etc.) 

Parents and guardians are involved as they inform the program social workers of changes in 

transportation needs in order to improve access to transportation services. School administrators 

and shelter providers link with project staff to discuss issues such as rerouting bus services as well 

as relocating pick-up and drop off locations to avoid stigmas associated with being homeless. 

16. How do all those involved work together (regular meetings, homeless coalitions, local 

policies)? 

Program staff routinely attends meetings at the Harris County Coalition for the Homeless to educate 

service providers on how to arrange transportation, specifically for students who move within the 

school year. Although a system has been established to ensure that students do not miss school 

due to lack of transportation, project staff occasionally makes office visits to the HISD 

Transportation Department to expedite bus services for students. In addition, the shelter staff 

contacts social workers when they need information and if there are changes or problems. 

17. What agreements or policies exist between DSS or other placement agencies to ensure that 

homeless families are placed close to schools where their children are attending? 

Currently, specific mandated policies do not affect placement of students by DSS or other 

placement agencies near HISD schools. However, these agencies provide social services in several 

HISD schools, which fosters collaborative efforts between the organizations. 

18. What state and local policies support keeping homeless children in their school of origin? 

Are there any written policies, MOUs, protocols, etc. in place? 

The Elementary and Secondary Guidelines 2002-2003 on the Education of Homeless Children and 

Youth has established policies on School Responsibility for Enrollment. Specifically, the guidelines 

state that the McKinney-Vento Act requires each homeless child be allowed to maintain enrollment 

in the school the child attended before becoming homeless, or to enroll in the school where the child 

is located, whichever is in the best interest of the child. The Texas State Plan for the Education of 

Homeless Children and Youth specifies that the parent or person acting as parent determines 

whether or not it is in the best interest of the child to enroll in the school where the child is located. 

This latitude is consistent with TEC 25.001(b). However, the state plan also specifies that the district 

of origin, the district in which the child is located, and the parent, or person acting as parent must 

concur in determining that it is in the best interest of the child to maintain enrollment in the school 

district of origin. This is consistent with TAC 105.23 that requires districts to serve children for the 

remainder of the school year in the district they attended before moving. Placement decisions must 

be made with the single consideration of the best interest of the child. 

Further, HISD has established Board Policy FBD 10192 on Admissions and Attendance: Intradistrict Transfers. The policy indicates that the parent or person standing in parental relation to any 

student may request, by petition in writing, the assignment of the student to a designated school or 

to a school to be designated by the Board of Education. This policy is also indicated in Education 
F 15 

Code 25.033(1), 26.003(a)(1). Additionally, the Board of Education must grant the request made in 

the petition unless the Board determines that there is a reasonable basis for denying it. This policy 

is indicated in Education Code 25.034(e). 

19. What additional support do you get from the state level? 

State support is provided as expressed in the above mentioned policies and education codes in 

serving homeless students. Additionally, funding to support homeless education is awarded to the 

states through the McKinney-Vento Act. 

20. What policies and arrangements exist for inter-district transfers? 

The HISD Transportation Department staff has worked closely with surrounding school districts to 

coordinate transportation services. This process usually has occurred by hosting collaborative 

meetings among transportation directors to establish a system to receive and conduct referrals. 

Telephone contact has been maintained throughout the school year. In addition, the transportation 

directors of surrounding districts have designated staff to handle inter-district transfers on a caseby-case basis; thus ensuring that homeless students can remain in their school of origin. 

21. What data do you have that shows the impact of school stability (remaining in the school of 

origin) on the academic achievement of homeless students? 

The Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAKS) is the state-mandated, criterion-referenced test 

that is based on the state’s essential elements with subtests in reading, writing, mathematics, 

science, and social studies. The TAKS results indicated that the majority of Project Su Casa 

students passed the reading (61%), mathematics (54%), writing (81%), and social studies (78%) 

subtests. At the same time, the passing rate on the science subtest was only 33%. When compared 

to the district, Project Su Casa students lagged behind the district on all subtests. However, the 

difference in percent passing on the writing subtest, was only one percentage point (82% versus 

81%). The largest gap between Project Su Casa students and the district was on the science 

subtest (59% versus 33% percent passing). 

Stanford 9 is a norm-referenced test that is used in the district. Stanford 9 results of Project Su 

Casa students on the spring 2002 test administration indicated Normal Curve Equivalents (NCEs) 

that were within the average range of performance (45-55 NCEs) at the third grade level on the 

mathematics subtest; at the first, third and ninth grade levels on the language subtest; at the third 

and eleventh grade levels on the environment/science subtest, and at the third grade level on the 

social science subtest. Stanford 9, spring 2003 test results of the same student cohort revealed 

NCEs that were within the average range of performance at the first grade level on the reading 

subtest, at the fourth, seventh, and tenth grade levels on the language subtest. Thus, a decline in 

performance was indicated during the two-year period for the 2002–03 Project Su Casa student 

subgroup. 

Since TAKS and Stanford 9 results have indicated that homeless students lag behind the district on 

most grade levels and content areas in academic achievement, the project liaison is working more 

closely with tutors and after-school program staff to provide additional instructional resources for 

students. Shelter staff will be included in the collaborative process as well. 
F 16 

Program Putnam County District Schools, FL 

Interview Participants & Titles Mr. Bob Pugh, Dir of Federal Programs 

Interview Date / Time 10/2/03 @ 2:00 pm 

1. Describe your district’s demographics. 

a. Size? (geographically, number of students) 

70,000 total population in Putnam Co. 

11,800 students (unweighted FTE) 

b. Location? (rural, urban, suburban) 

predominantly rural, county seat = Palatka 

c. Number of homeless children & youth?

736 – currently identified for this year (2003) (and probably even higher) 

661 – for 2002-2003 school year

2. Of the total number of homeless children and youth provide the estimated numbers who 

have the following as their primary night residence: 

Primary night time residence Estimated number of homeless children/ 

youth (Total LEAs with and without 

subgrants) 

Shelters very few -- less than 2% 

(about 10-15 kids ) 

Doubled-up Almost all are doubled up 

95% 

Unsheltered (e.g., cars, parks, 

campgrounds, etc.) 

0 (that they are aware of ) 

Hotels/Motels 6-8 kids 

Other (specify) 

NOTE: In Putnam Co, there are a very limited number of shelters (1 for domestic violence; 1 

emergency shelter for children only; two other shelters for families – these cost a fee to stay) 

All shelters in the county are located in Palatka 

Putnam County Homeless Coalition started this year 

3. Is there a public transportation system in your community? 

Yes: throughout the district and the county 

“Ride Solution” – Limited service – (ex: only travels so many trips in a day; must know the schedule 

to be able to take full advantage of the service) 

Offers to the citizens a service by which any resident can call the Ride Solutions office and arrange 

for transportation to neighboring Gainesville for medical appointments. 

Seems to be jointly funded by grants 

4. To what extent is transportation provided to school children in general? 

All children in the district are eligible for bus transportation 

All transportation is done by the district (no outsourcing or contracting for buses) 
F 17 

Depending on location of schools, some will have as few as 30% of kids riding the bus (schools in 

town where most kids walk), whereas other schools will have as many as 90% riding the bus (more 

rural locations). 

5. How many homeless K-12 children and youth enrolled in school during the 2002-2003 school 

year remained in their school of origin and received transportation to their school origin? 

Over 95% (other 5% choose not to go to School Of Origin or moved) 

6. What was the estimated total cost of transportation to the school of origin for homeless 

children and youth in your area? 

Per transportation dir = $6,500 

This was money spent by the district to provide traditional busing services to homeless children and 

youth in the district

7. Did your LEA receive McKinney-Vento subgrant funds in 2002-2003? YES 

If yes, what percentage of the grant did you spend on transportation to school of origin? 

0-10% X 10-25% ____ 25-50% ____ 50-75% ____ 75%-100% ____ 

Less than 2% was spent on transportation; the costs are absorbed through the district’s 

transportation department. 

(On occasion, McKinney-Vento grant money will be used to reimburse staff to transport homeless 

children /youth to their school until regular bus transportation can be provided. In addition, homeless 

program staff will work with families to ensure they can get kids to school while the bus 

transportation is being arranged (no more than a day or two); they will reimburse the family for gas, 

etc. 

Philosophy of district is: “What would you do if it were your child?” 

8. What other sources of funds did your district use to transport children/youth to their school 

of origin (district, state, or other federal funding, private funding, other nontraditional 

sources)? 

Title 1, Part A, funds—used only to transport children back home from after school programs or 

other supplemental opportunities, 

9. How long does it generally take for transportation services to be arranged once a 

parent/guardian requests for his/her child (or an unaccompanied youth requests) to remain 

in the school of origin? 

2 days 

If kids are at the shelters, transportation can begin the next day (routes are already established and 

children can be easily picked up). 

For more out lying areas, we try to help parents get them to school (put gas in car, if necessary) 

10. What specific strategies and systems has the district implemented to provide transportation 

to the school of origin? 

Substitute bus drivers – for coordinating supplemental routes when necessary 

 In your area, which of the following modes is most frequently used for transportation to 

school of origin. 

Additional or extended bus routes 

Personal vehicles (very small percent) 

Reimbursing families for mileage (very small percent)

11. What are the biggest challenges to providing transportation to the school of origin? 

Geographical – size of region – several schools at 30-minute drive one way 

To what extent do the following also present challenges? 

The size of the region served by the district. The district is geographically spread out in a rural county 

Funding -- #1 problem. 
F 18 

How has your district addressed these challenges? 

We are fortunate to have a Superintendent, Director of Title 1, and Transportation Director who all 

believe in helping children. The feeling is, “Whatever it takes, we do it.” We work together to make 

it happen for the kids. 

12. Which strategies do you consider the most successful? 

Working with very good people who care about the children. 

Understand the problem; understandiing the system that the problem can be impacted by; looking 

for a probable solution that can be implemented as quickly as possible. 

13. What are the roles of the pupil transportation director and local homeless education liaison 

in facilitating transportation? 

Route Supervisor in the Office of Transportation is the one who coordinates these efforts. 

The Director of Transportation and Director of Title I have an established relationship and protocol 

for how these services will be implemented, It is then up to the staff in the Title I office and the route 

supervisor to arrange and contact the families / schools once arrangements have been made. 

(There are three staff persons or “resource teachers” in the Title I office who work with the homeless 

program.) 

14. Who else is involved in arranging transportation to the school of origin? (parents / 

caregivers / guardians, social workers, etc.)

Once children and youth have been identified by the homeless program staff as “homeless,” they 

can actually contact the Department of Transportation to make arrangements because it’s easier for 

the parents to discuss pick up locations, etc with the route supervisor. 

If a family is staying at a helter, the shelter staff calls the homeless program office first; homeless 

program staff makes sure the child or youth qualifies as “homeless,” and the staff then begins to 

coordinate services for them. 

15. How do all those involved work together (regular meetings, homeless coalitions, local 

policies)? 

Staff meetings periodically (once every two weeks on average). 

Regular contact via phone or fax with the Department of Transportation; regular contact with 

families re: transportation arrangements 

16. What agreements or policies exist between DSS or other placement agencies to ensure that 

homeless families are placed close to schools where their children are attending? 

There are agreements, through the Putnam Co school board, to work with the division of children 

and youth services (CYS) ; children in CYS include those children in foster care, children and youth 

in the DJJ or department of Juvenal Justice (part of sheriff’’s department in Putnam Co.), etc. 

17. What state and local policies support keeping homeless children in their school of origin? 

Are there any written policies, MOUs, protocols, etc. in place? 

Bob Pugh wrote the Putnam County School board policy a few years ago (based on policy of 

Richmond Co., Va.) with the help of Patricia Julianelle, National Law Center on Homelessness & 

Poverty that addresses the process and responsibilities of schools in meeting the requirements of 

McKinney Vento. 

State of FL policy addresses immunizations/requirements for physicals, etc. 

18. What additional support do you get from the state level? 

None 

Other programs that offer services that homeless children are eligible for (as well as other children) 

are under “Project PRAISE” and are supported in part by state funds. This program in Putnam Co. 

is an effort spearheaded by Bob Pugh. As an example of assistance provided for children 

(homeless and otherwise), the School Board contracted with Family Medical and Dental Services, a 

non profit group in Putnam Co., to provide medical and dental services for children. If the family has 

insurance, or other means by which to pay for the appointment , then payment is made. If they do 

not, the School Board agrees to pay for the initial visit and assist the family with getting connected 
F 19 

to other services. The school district pays for first visit and then they help family qualify for other 

federal and state medical care. 

19. What policies and arrangements exist for interdistrict transfers? 

No real interdistrict transfers 

Neighboring cities – (ex: St. John’s Co., Voulsia Co.) 

Those families who do leave the county to go to a shelter in another county; they tend to choose to 

go to the school there in the other county. 

“Region 2” – very good relationship among staffers (in terms of setting up arrangements, etc.) 

20. What data do you have that shows the impact of school stability (remaining in the school of 

origin) on the academic achievement of homeless students? 

Still trying to get this info together – 
F 20 

Program San Antonio Independent School District (SAISD), TX 

Interview Participants & Titles Ms. M. Estella Garza, Coord. Family/Student Services (Local 

Liaison) 

Mr. Mike Daly, Exec. Dir., Transportation Services 

Dr. Patricia Karam, Exec. Dir. for Student Services 

Interview Date / Time Tuesday, 8/19 @ 2:00 EST

1. Describe your district’s demographics. 

16 school districts within Bexar County 

a. Size? (geographically, number of students) 

 75 sq miles; 92 schools (including 4 alternative campuses); 57,000 students 

b. Location? (rural, urban, suburban) 

Urban / Inner-city; Metropolitan area of Bexar County 

All schools in district receive Title I funds 

Student population: 86% Hispanic; 10% black; 4% white 

90% “economically disadvantaged” 

 100% of students receive free lunch --The San Antonio ISD submitted an application to the 

National School Breakfast and Lunch Program. The school district met the requirements of 

Provision II of this program; consequently, every child in the SAISD gets free meals. 

c. Number of homeless children & youth? 

 Last year, 1200-1300 homeless children and youth identified 

2. Of the total number of homeless children and youth provide the estimated numbers who 

have the following as their primary night residence: 

 Actual children identified as homeless = 1,200 + 

 Children served by McKinney-Vento funds = 1,000 

 If someone asks me how many children in homeless situations we identified in SAISD – I give them 

the larger number. If someone asks me how many children in homeless situations did the M-V 

program serve during the year, I give them the smaller number. We are always able to identify more 

children than we are able to serve; therefore, the difference in the numbers. 

Primary night time residence Estimated number of homeless children/ 

youth (Total LEAs with and without 

subgrants) 

Shelters 608 (75 of these are in transition shelters)

Doubled-up 225 

Unsheltered (e.g., cars, parks, 

campgrounds, etc.) 

0 

Hotels/Motels 11 

Other (specify) 60 (accounts for “at risk” students) 

Unknown 

Note: 2.5 professional staff positions dedicated to outreach; Additional professional staff position as 

Coordinator 
F 21 

3. Is there a public transportation system in your community? 

 Yes – public buses 

4. To what extent is transportation provided to school children in general? 

 School bus and special education transportation (when appropriate) is provided to students in the 

district who live further than 2 miles from the school or live in “hazardous areas” (meaning near a 

four-lane highway, etc.). 

5. How many homeless K-12 children and youth enrolled in school during the 2002-2003 

school year remained in their school of origin and received transportation to their school 

origin? 

 Between 325 and 340 students; they used the traditional school bus services or metro bus system 

(tokens provided)

6. What was the estimated total cost of transportation to the school of origin for homeless 

children and youth in your area? 

 McKinney-Vento transported kids for 60,000 miles last year at a cost of $3.95 / mile 

7. Did your LEA receive McKinney-Vento subgrant funds in 2002-2003? YES 

If yes, what percentage of the grant did you spend on transportation to school of origin? 

0-10% ____ 10-25% X 25-50% ____ 50-75% ____ 75%-100% ____ 

8. What other sources of funds did your district use to transport children/youth to their school 

of origin (district, state, or other federal funding, private funding, other nontraditional 

sources)? 

Local funding from school district only

9. How long does it generally take for transportation services to be arranged once a 

parent/guardian requests for his/her child (or an unaccompanied youth requests) to remain 

in the school of origin? 

Anywhere from same day (within 2-3 hours) to 2-3 days; average 1-1 1⁄2 days 

Depends on if you are transporting inter-district

10. What specific strategies and systems has the district implemented to provide transportation 

to the school of origin? 

Three districts working very well together – three largest districts in city where most of the kids are 

housed. Coordination involves getting the kids onto the appropriate bus route first, then working with 

district transportation departments to coordinate bus routes—allowing for convenient and safe 

locations for kids to transfer buses 

 In your area, which of the following modes is most frequently used for transportation to 

school of origin. 

#1 Additional or extended bus routes – mostly for elementary kids

#2 Public transportation –give high school kids semester passes

#3 Special education buses 

#4 Personal vehicles – although very few

11. What are the biggest challenges to providing transportation to the school of origin? 

The majority of shelters are in our district. There are 30 identified homeless shelters in the San 

Antonio metropolitan area that house families of which 27 are located in the SAISD boundary area. 

So we are required to transport a disproportionate number of kids out of our district to their school of 

origin. Other districts may transport 3-5 students only. This makes our district very unique in all of 

TX and our challenges great. 

To what extent do the following also present challenges? 
F 22 

• Scheduling conflicts --Differing school schedules and calendars. Must coordinate when the 

child will be picked up and dropped off at school – ensure that the school is open or a 

supervising staff person is available to meet the child in the a.m.; can they get into a beforeschool program to accommodate the early drop off time? 

• Lack of vehicles --having additional buses would allow for more flexibility. We are currently 

transporting 100 kids so far this year. Last year we transported 300 kids. 

All McKinney-Vento kids are transported to the school of origin. The SAISD has routes 

established; however, the current routes are not flexible enough to ‘add a child on the 

bus’ mostly due to the kid’s destination and bus route schedules; consequently, bus 

routes are created specifically for the McKinney-Vento kids. Additionally, the McKinneyVento kids’ routes are in all directions and distances and it is difficult for the existing 

routes to ‘add a child’ and get them to their destination in time for school or most of them 

in time for breakfast at school in the mornings.

• Recurring moves / mobility --Families constantly moving from shelter to shelter and having 

to coordinate CUSTOM routing. You may even have a different driver on the bus the next 

day, after arrangements have been made, so you can’t just tell the driver what to do--much 

more documentation and implementation is necessary. 

• Difficulties getting in touch with parents – many parents/families have no phone numbers, 

so we have to do visits to the shelters, etc. This takes an enormous amount of staff time – so 

lack of staff time becomes a problem. 

Additional challenge mentioned: Governmental agencies pass mandates and require that local 

LEAs or SEAs “do it” without providing funding or guidelines for implementation. 

12. How has your district addressed these challenges? 

We took charge when setting up many of our policies so that they work to our advantage – meaning 

this is how we need it to work in order to accommodate our needs and work load (again, more kids 

transported than in other districts due to number of shelters in this district). This was our means of 

survival and the only way to make all of this work. 

Some simple steps have been very good: 

• Coordination of School Calendars. No central clearinghouse for this type of info, so we had to 

collect and maintain it ourselves to keep our services running smoothly (not only school hours, 

but work days, etc). 

• Helped educate LEAs nearby on McKinney-Vento. Esp those who had not received McKinneyVento funding – it took a little more education, and in some cases “the long arm of the law” to 

get them on board. This was difficult in some cases 

• Working out logistics as far as expectations are concerned. For example, bus discipline: if a 

McKinney-Vento student misbehaves on a bus, who is it reported to and what do they do? Or 

what if a child is transported back home or to “exchange” point, but there is no one there to 

pick them up? Have had to work out those issues as they arose. 

• Transportation brochures for parents (in ENG & SPN) re: policies/modes/procedures – outlines 

what parents are to do, how to keep in touch, etc. 

13. Which strategies do you consider the most successful? 

• Keeping communication lines OPEN... We all understand the needs to be 100% coordinated –

daily ... “And we all understand why”.—Estella Garza. And coordination does not equal 

implementation. For example, staff from two offices (transportation and McKinneyVento/support) are working together, communicating about10-15 emails/calls per day to see 

that all services are in place and all parties are notified. Especially important to ensure that 

parents know what’s happening. 

• Workshop/Training – scheduled meeting at end of year for transportation staff and liaisons. All 

districts were invited and attended. Conducted “year in review”--provided an opportunity to 

assess year and process information from the year’s activities. Mike Daly’s office 

(transportation) had a follow-up meeting that included all transportation staff to further review 

their role and processes in transporting homeless children and youth. 
F 23 

• Also, bringing schools on board one at a time. 

• Continually refining and re-tuning our approach, forms, procedures, etc. 

14. What are the roles of the pupil transportation director and local homeless education liaison 

in facilitating transportation? 

To communicate with the various offices / staff persons – true partnership, and therefore share the 

load (no one is left with ultimate responsibility – it is a joint effort). 

Understanding what needs to happen and not wasting time debating why we are doing it or why we 

have to. This is the law, this is our job, and this is how we plan to do it. 

15. Who else is involved in arranging transportation to the school of origin? (parents / 

caregivers / guardians, social workers, etc.) 

90% of referrals come from shelters. School campuses are not really doing referrals, although they 

are working to educate staff at individual school campuses. 

16. How do all those involved work together (regular meetings, homeless coalitions, local 

policies)? 

Last year, a large training session was conducted. 

Daily communication takes place between the transportation department and homeless program (by 

phone and email). 

Local liaisons in county meet monthly (Good group of local liaisons; able to come together to talk). 

The Advisory Council consists of representatives from agencies as well as local liaisons. The San 

Antonio Area Homeless Education Council was created four years ago. At that time it was named 

Tri-District Homeless Advisory Council (at the time there were three M-V programs in Bexar 

County.) The name changed last year due to NCLB. The efforts of the council focused on being 

able to meet the demands of working collaboratively and coordinating services with community 

agencies and other LEAs. Additionally, it provided all participants the ability to make face-to-face 

contact with service providers that will (and did) enhance the referral system. It also provided an 

entry point for community members into the school systems. SAISD was pivotal in creating this 

entity due to the grant activities projected four years ago. Agencies represented in this forum 

included: shelter personnel, community agency reps [health agencies (mental, physical, dental)] 

social service agencies, Child Protective Services, Juvenile Probation, LEAs, etc. Meetings are held 

bi-monthly on the odd numbered months during the school year. 

Secondary outcomes to this council: Greatly facilitated the access of support letters for grant 

applications. Community service providers were trained regarding the rights of children in homeless 

situations according to NCLB. The council has provided a forum to discuss issues of service 

providers and ways they can interact with their local LEAs. It has allowed for general 

announcements of community activities, workshops, conferences, etc. It is held during lunch which 

brown bagging is highly encouraged. 

17. What agreements or policies exist between DSS or other placement agencies to ensure that 

homeless families are placed close to schools where their children are attending? 

A new education liaison for region is in place. 

But no formal policies or agreements currently exist. 

This effort is still in the infancy stages. The Dept of Protective & Regulatory Services (TDPRS) (child 

protective service agency in Texas) has created a new job role. This role is Regional Educational 

Liaison. This person will be outreaching to the schools regarding the children that are placed in 

foster care or other temporary placements and working with the LEAs to support the continuation of 

children they are currently working with. In making contact with this person in San Antonio, we have 

begun our working relationship focusing on the foster children aging out of the system or those who 

run-away. Dialogue has begun in exploring other TDPRS children that we may work with and 

identifying their educational needs. 

Because this role within TDPRS is so new, formal agreements or policies have not been discussed 

yet. Discussions have been held regarding possible awareness training of TDPRS staffs to the 

NCLB. 
F 24 

18. What state and local policies support keeping homeless children in their school of origin? 

Are there any written policies, MOUs, protocols, etc. in place? 

The only known policy is the state McKinney-Vento plan, coordinated or written by the state 

coordinator. 

What additional support do you get from the state level? 

The State Coordinator provides assistance or “back up” with difficult situations, but no funding is 

provided from the state level other than the M-V grant award.

19. What policies and arrangements exist for inter-district transfers? 

• Loose verbal communication 

• Mutual understanding re: what needs to happen (ex: must choose safe spots for transfers of 

children) 

20. What data do you have that shows the impact of school stability (remaining in the school of 

origin) on the academic achievement of homeless students? 

None currently. We are able to identify all of the students, but we just need to look at the grades 

now. 
F 25 

Program Spokane Public Schools, WA (District 81) 

Interview Participants & Titles: Edie Sims, Homeless Facilitator 

Interview Date / Time Thursday, 9/11/03 @ 3:30 pm (est) 

1. Describe your district’s demographics. 

a. Size? (geographically, number of students) 

29,500 students 

Geographically spread out 

b. Location? (rural, urban, suburban) 

Urban area 

Most shelters in area are located in Spokane, so they are responsible for a great deal of 

transportation back to the school of origin. 

c. Number of homeless children & youth? 

Last year = 572 (not counting CrossWalk program) 

CrossWalk [associated with Volunteers of America] serves runaway population (“real 

street kids”) –some choose and are able to enroll in school. 

CrossWalk serves 300-400 high school aged kids/year; has a 30 bed shelter; kids can stay 

for 30 days at a time. 

Kids in CrossWalk who want to be in school will connect with McKinney-Vento program at 

Spokane Public Schools to get them enrolled. 

2. Of the total number of homeless children and youth provide the estimated numbers who 

have the following as their primary night residence: 

Primary night time residence Estimated number of homeless children/ youth 

(Total LEAs with and without subgrants) 

Shelters 39% 

Doubled-up 58% 

Unsheltered (e.g., cars, parks, 

campgrounds, etc.) 

Less than 1% 

Hotels/Motels 2% 

Other (specify) n/a 

Unknown n/a 

3. Is there a public transportation system in your community? 

Yes; public bus system

4. To what extent is transportation provided to school children in general? 

Transport 7,500 kids per day (including all special populations --special ed., homeless kids and 

regular bus routes). 

All students in the district, living outside of the one-mile radius of their schools, are able to request 

bus transportation. 

5. How many homeless K-12 children and youth enrolled in school during the 2002-2003 school 

year remained in their school of origin and received transportation to their school origin? 

Out of 572 served, 268 were in the school of origin 
F 26 

Of those who were outside of school of origin district and needed transportation, 85% were 

transported (in the form of bus transportation, bus tokens for parents, taxis, etc.)

The children were transported that needed transportation—the rest were within normal walking or 

regular bus routes—just like all other kids in their neighborhood—some kids actually were housed in 

a shelter, etc. within their school of origin catchment. By protecting them in our McKinney-Vento 

program, they automatically received free lunch/breakfast. Also, they were protected if they received 

housing not in their school of origin for the remainder of the school year. 

6. What was the estimated total cost of transportation to the school of origin for homeless 

children and youth in your area? 

Minimum $180,000—it is difficult to pull out costs for kids riding regular bus routes, etc. so this is a 

minimum estimate. 

7. Did your LEA receive McKinney-Vento subgrant funds in 2002-2003? YES 

If yes, what percentage of the grant did you spend on transportation to school of origin? 

0-10% ____ 10-25% X 25-50% ____ 50-75% ____ 75%-100% ____ 

8. What other sources of funds did your district use to transport children/youth to their school 

of origin (district, state, or other federal funding, private funding, other nontraditional 

sources)? 

State and district funding 

9. How long does it generally take for transportation services to be arranged once a 

parent/guardian requests for his/her child (or an unaccompanied youth requests) to remain 

in the school of origin? 

Immediately; At in-take with the family, transportation needs are assessed and if needed, the family 

is given temporary means for transportation until permanent arrangements can be made. Example: 

a family is given bus tokens for 2-3 days. 

Homeless program sends transportation requests to the Transportation Department throughout the 

week, then Thursday @ 12 noon, all requests are processed and arrangements are coordinated 

and scheduled to begin the following Monday. 

The Transportation Department handles arranging transportation (adding kids to existing bus 

routes, extending existing bus routes, coordinating taxi service, etc,), keeping in mind school 

schedules, timing, length of rides for kids, and cost effectiveness of different alternatives. Once the 

mode of transportation is determined, the Transportation Department notifies the McKinney-Vento 

program. 

Staff of McKinney-Vento program then communicate these arrangements with: families, schools 

(more than one school, when necessary), etc. 

10. What specific strategies and systems has the district implemented to provide transportation 

to the school of origin? 

Form – At in-take, McKinney-Vento staff assesses the need for transportation services. If 

transportation is needed, the staff reviews possible modes of transportation with family, using a form 

that details types of transportation, policies for each and expectations families must meet. All 

relevant phone numbers are included as well. The family signs this form and keeps a copy. The 

scond copy is filed in McKinney-Vento office. 

“This has been a life saver”. It holds the family accountable; communication is clear and concise; 

everyone is on the same page; and parents know what is expected. Note: Transportation services 

can be removed if there are problems (too many infractions on part of family, child, or youth). 

Example of other policies: If reimbursements are given, the family only gets money if the child 

arrives to school on time. The transportation staff checks attendance and tardy records before 

disbursing monies. This rule is also on the form—and explained to parents at in-take. 

Public bus passes are not replaced; if they are lost; there are no refunds. Students must instead get 

tokens daily (a school representative gives them out each afternoon). 

 In your area, which of the following modes is most frequently used for transportation to 

school of origin. 
F 27 

#2 Additional or extended bus routes 

#1 Public transportation 

#3 Taxis 

Only a few used -- Special education buses 

11. What are the biggest challenges to providing transportation to the school of origin? 

Funding #1! 

Because our shelters are in the city, we must share costs with many surrounding districts. They 

receive the FTEs for students enrolled, and the district receives no money to assist keeping children 

in the school of origin. We believe firmly that keeping children and youth in the school of origin is 

best for the child but feel that districts need to be reimbursed for costs of transportation. 

Getting in touch with parents. We also notify school offices and request them to send notes home 

with children if we have not been able to contact parents or the parents have not contacted us to 

receive a transportation plan. 

Cuts, lay offs in district – so everyone is eyeing this funding 

Size of region – very stretched out... population of students is spread out 

To what extent do the following also present challenges? 

Scheduling conflicts --Getting kids to school not too early and not too late 

Lack of vehicles --Ex: “I just don’t have a bus at that time...” 

Scheduling to get the kid to school on time; balancing cost with when you get kid there (if child rides 

reg bus, it’s cheaper, but they arrive 10 min late; otherwise, a taxi must be used... weigh the cost / 

benefits for each case).

Funding --#1 concern

Difficulties getting in touch with parents --Of course a challenge, but we are able to work around 

it; not a huge challenge. 

12. How has your district addressed these challenges? 

• Form (see above) 

• Stay open to all options – taxi, public transit (passes for parents to accompany younger kids) 

• Must work it out case by case – talk with family and their needs; work with school to make 

accommodations (kids arrive early and get someone to supervise) 

• Conduct meetings on difficult situations to try to resolve

13. Which strategies do you consider the most successful? 

The only way to make this program work is to share the responsibility. No one person or department 

takes these families on as their own. We all must work together to see each situation through 

(McKinney-Vento staff; transportation dept; school; family, etc) 

Must have good communication – and mutual respect! for the process to work. 

14. What are the roles of the pupil transportation director and local homeless education liaison 

in facilitating transportation? 

Process – 

In-take with families by McKinney-Vento staff. Interview, assess transportation needs, discuss 

expectations and have family sign form. Explain to family that a decision will be made and the family 

will be notified Friday; new transportation to begin following Monday. 

McKinney-Vento staff faxes a transportation request to the Transportation Department (includes the 

family’s address and school to attend). 

At the Transportation Department, the staff looks first at existing bus routes (all buses are 

contracted out), next at Special Education bus routes, then at possible public buses (provides 

passes or tokens), and then look at taxi or reimbursement for parents. In terms of taxi vs. parent 

transportation, just compare costs. The Transportation Department makes a determination and 
F 28 

documents the decision and emails the McKinney-Vento staff with arrangements. The McKinneyVento staff also documents arrangements and contacts families, schools, taxi companies, etc. on 

Fridays to inform them all of arrangements. 

NOTE: School staff is notified, including office managers and school counselors, with copies to 

principals and vice principals 

EXAMPLE: More than one school might need to be notified. If a child is able to walk to a nearby 

school to catch an “overflow” bus that would take them to their school of origin, that nearby school is 

also notified so that they know a child (not their “own”) will be riding the bus and they know to look 

out for the child and welcome him or her. 

15. Who else is involved in arranging transportation to the school of origin? (parents / 

caregivers / guardians, social workers, etc.) 

Social workers, occasionally will sometimes ask CPS (Child Protective Services) to take 

responsibility for arranging initial transportation until permanent arrangements can be made. 

We also work with shelters, sometimes asking them to take responsibility for initial transportation as 

well. 

16. How do all those involved work together (regular meetings, homeless coalitions, local 

policies)? 

Meetings with each other and with taxi companies, for example, as needed (a few times a year) 

The McKinney-Vento director attends monthly homeless coalition meetings for area. 

17. What agreements or policies exist between DSS or other placement agencies to ensure that 

homeless families are placed close to schools where their children are attending? 

DSS refers families to us and tells families about us. However, because of available foster homes, it 

is difficult to place children in neighborhoods of their schools or origin. 

SNAP – Spokane Neighborhood Action Program (private, grant funded organization) 

Homeless program –provides emergency placements in motels, etc. Staff works work well with the 

district to place kids in areas close to the school of origin , whenever possible. 

18. What state and local policies support keeping homeless children in their school of origin? 

Are there any written policies, MOUs, protocols, etc. in place? 

At the district level – policies re: homeless children and youth are part of the formal and official 

policies and procedures 

As for adjoining districts – they are working on developing their own policies. Spokane Public 

Schools has sent out copies of their policies and procedures to fellow districts encouraging them to 

develop policies to address the issue. In general, adjoining districts work very well together to make 

arrangements for homeless children and youth – no problems there. 

19. What additional support do you get from the state level? 

The State Coordinator is always available when we have questions, and we have annual trainings. 

What policies and arrangements exist for inter-district transfers? 

Last year, there were bumps in the road due to other districts not knowing McKinney-Vento. 

This year, a policy is in place that states that the school district where the child is currently residing 

is responsible for coordinating transportation services back to the school of origin, if requested. All 

districts work together, but ultimately it is that district’s responsibility. 

Spokane Public Schools McKinney-Vento staff has compiled a list of all adjoining districts with 

Homeless Program contact person and phone number that is given out to all shelters. It explains the 

process and who to contact to initiate it. “This has helped a lot!” 

20. What data do you have that shows the impact of school stability (remaining in the school of 

origin) on the academic achievement of homeless students? 

No hard data currently, but lots of anecdotal evidence from counselors, teachers, principals. Test 

scores rose in all areas for the district last year and the McKinney-Vento program has been credited 
F 29 

with helping to pull up those scores through their programs that support better attendance and lower 

turn over rates. 

Data has been collected for every child since the beginning of this program five years ago. Data 

from the past two years, especially, would be easy to pull out (as it is coded) and look for trends. It 

just hasn’t been done yet. 
F 30 

Program: St. Paul Public School, MN 

Interview Participants & Titles: Ms. Becky Hicks, McKinney-Vento Liaison

Interview Date / Time: Thursday, 8/21 @ 1:30 pm (EST)

1. Describe your district’s demographics. 

a. Size? (geographically, number of students) 

 second largest district in state (behind Minneapolis) 

 Over 44,000 students in district 

b. Location? (rural, urban, suburban) 

 State Capital; urban 

c. Number of homeless children & youth? 

 Approx. 1,000 + (last year was first year of computerized attempt to track numbers...this is just 

an estimate) 

2. Of the total number of homeless children and youth provide the estimated numbers who 

have the following as their primary night residence: 

Primary night time residence Estimated number of homeless children/ 

youth (Total LEAs with and without 

subgrants) 

Shelters 677 

Doubled-up 57* 

* we estimate that this pop is much larger than 

indicated here 

Unsheltered (e.g., cars, parks, 

campgrounds, etc.) 

41 

Unknown 157 

NOTE: School district worked with a local homeless agency to collect these numbers based on a 

one night “snapshot” of homeless children/youth. 

3. Is there a public transportation system in your community? 

Yes – bus system 

4. To what extent is transportation provided to school children in general? 

All children who live outside of a one-mile radius of their school can ride the bus. 

5. How many homeless K-12 children and youth enrolled in school during the 2002-2003 school 

year remained in their school of origin and received transportation to their school origin? 

Estimated 85-90% 

6. What was the estimated total cost of transportation to the school of origin for homeless 

children and youth in your area? 

$35,000 : alternate transportation: bus tokens/passes; cabs; gas for program vans 

$76,000: salaries + benefits for two full time van drivers (program vans) 

unknown costs: 

• existing bus routes that pick up homeless children / youth 
F 31 

• inter-district transportation: (very small # of children transported this way), district just picks up 

this bill and does not keep records of additional costs for homeless children/youth 

*NOTE: Largest mode of transporting homeless children/youth is using existing bus routes, no cost 

estimates available. 

7. Did your LEA receive McKinney-Vento subgrant funds in 2002-2003? YES 

If yes, what % of the grant did you spend on transportation to school of origin? 

0-10% ___ 10-25% ____ 25-50% ____ 50-75% ____ 75%-100% __X__

8. What other sources of funds did your district use to transport children/youth to their school 

of origin (district, state, or other federal funding, private funding, other nontraditional 

sources)? 

• Title I, Part A funds last year (prior to guidance being published, which does not allow for use of 

these funds anymore) 

• Charitable contribution from individual: $15,000+ 

• Received grant from local homeless agency: $15,000 

• Van donated so old van sold and profits paid for bus tokens, etc. 

9. How long does it generally take for transportation services to be arranged once a 

parent/guardian requests for his/her child (or an unaccompanied youth requests) to remain 

in the school of origin? 

1-3 days ; goal is before 3 days (inter-district transfers sometimes take as long as 3 days) 

10. What specific strategies and systems has the district implemented to provide transportation 

to the school of origin? 

• Significant collaboration with district transportation office for adding stops, etc. 

• Real challenges—extra time/collaboration needed for arranging inter-district transfers and 

working to transport children to neighborhood schools where no city-wide transportation options 

exist (buses/vans must be sent) 

 In your area, which of the following modes is most frequently used for transportation to 

school of origin. 

 #1: existing bus routes 

 #2: program vans (owned by district) 

 #3: public transportation (bus tokens / passes; cabs) 

 #4: extended / additional bus routes 

 #5: special education routes 

11. What are the biggest challenges to providing transportation to the school of origin? 

• This year, funding because of lack of ability to utilize Title I funds. 

• Amount of staffing time it takes to coordinate transportation. Our program needed to hire a .5 

FTE transportation coordinator to handle all the requests. This role was previously assigned to 

the program coordinator until it grew so large. If we had more funding, this could be a full time 

position. 

• Collaboration between school districts. Some are unaware of the legislation, some do not have 

the resources, and some are unwilling. It gets difficult and unclear on what we are supposed to 

do when another district refuses to transport one of our students. We also need to know what is 

shelter staff responsibility, what is school staff responsibility, as it varies from shelter to shelter. 

The state department of education is trying to make the procedure more defined, but we are still 

experiencing difficulty. 

• Collaboration – staff changes, especially in shelters! 

Note: St. Paul Public School District is inside Ramsey County. There is a new shelter that is in 

the county but not in district. The county provides two vans for transporting kids. We must 
F 32 

collaborate with the county and adjacent school district to make transportation arrangements for 

children. 

• Parents – so many challenges anyway, and so highly mobile; they are in and out of placements 

To what extent do the following also present challenges? 

Placement of families and youth (i.e. distance from school)—especially in the case of 

neighborhood schools or schools outside of city 

Scheduling conflicts--especially with neighborhood schools; AND with all schools on 

different schedules (different start and end times – having to coordinate bus pick up and drop 

off at school with staff is around – getting them in a program so they aren’t just left at the 

school door before opening in the a.m., etc. 

Lack of vehicles--difficult to estimate how many buses (for example), we’ll need or will use, 

based on number of kids and where they are at any given point in the school year. Some 

trends are beginning to emerge (ex: families are less mobile in the winter); but efforts are new 

(McKinney-Vento is new) and we plan to continue to look for trends in years to come to help 

in the planning process 

Unavailability of parent/guardian to travel with younger children to/from school? --if 

children are too young to take public transportation alone, state funds wont pay for tokens 

and passes for parents and relatives to ride with these younger students; therefore , we must 

use McKinney-Vento funds to pay for parents 

Funding – see notes above re: Title I funding (lack of) 

Recurring moves / mobility 

Difficulties getting in touch with parents –due to recurring moves / mobility! 

Note: City of St. Paul does offer voice mail services for homeless indivudals, but some don’t 

use it... 

Time to make arrangements, considering the immediate enrollment (problem really only 

with out-of-district transfers; can take up to 3 days to arrange) 

12. How has your district addressed these challenges? 

By training school staff (through in-services); creating awareness 

Working with: student placement center (registration), school nurses, bus drivers, clerical staff, 

principals, etc. 

Also meetings with: community agencies: St. Paul Coalition for the Homeless, for example 

Note: St. Paul school staff are in shelters every day (this helps tremendously with education, 

awareness, etc) 

13. Which strategies do you consider the most successful? 

• Enough staffing / Staff Availability 

--McKinney-Vento Staff in shelters on regular basis; McKinney-Vento staff knows what is 

happening and shelter staff know to contact us to get needs addressed 

--McKinney-Vento Staff available to consult with families regarding what will work best for them 

in transporting children (Ex: bus tokens or reimbursements, etc.) 

• Electronic Database: 

--Staff using laptops in shelters (database) instead of paper trails related to where kids are 

located, etc. Instead of having to have a conversation at each staff meeting related to 

placement issues, simply consult the database. 

• Access to different types of transportation 

--Ex: use of special education routes for homeless children and youth; public transportation; etc. 

14. What are the roles of the pupil transportation director and local homeless education liaison 

in facilitating transportation? 
F 33 

It’s important to understand that in some cases (as in the case for this school district), the director of 

transportation runs a HUGE program, of which McKinney-Vento is just once piece. Despite this, it is 

imperative that he/she understands the McKinney-Vento act, supports the transportation mandates, 

and trains his/her staff to understand and support it as well. The transportation director must also 

have access to enough vehicles and staff to make the system work effectively (ex: hire part-timers 

to cover as needed). 

McKinney-Vento liaison’s role is to determine how to best implement McKinney-Vento, looking at 

everything from: 

• Policies 

• Training / in-services 

• Seeking additional funding 

• AND, knowing the legislation in order to educate others and to encourage, support, and put in 

place effective, appropriate policies that enforce the legislation and ensure student success 

15. Who else is involved in arranging transportation to the school of origin? (parents / 

caregivers / guardians, social workers, etc.) 

• Parents (Staff works 1:1 with parents to discuss appropriate transportation arrangements) 

• Foster care providers 

• County social workers 

• School district staff in shelters (20 shelters in St. Paul). Homeless education staff includes three 

full time education assistants, one part time education assistant, one full time social worker, and 

two van drivers. This direct contact with shelters is aimed at keeping kids in school and not 

setting up separate schools and supporting the education of kids in the local school district by 

having staff in school. 

NOTE: There is a homeless contact at every school in the district; district staff know who to 

contact in each school. 

16. How do all those involved work together (regular meetings, homeless coalitions, local 

policies)? 

• Shelter staff (daily contact with staff) 

• McKinney-Vento program staff meet weekly 

• Attend monthly homeless coalition meetings 

• Ongoing meetings as needed with principals, transportation directors, etc.; most work is done 

over the phone / email 

• Shelter directors meeting conducted every fall 

17. What agreements or policies exist between DSS or other placement agencies to ensure that 

homeless families are placed close to schools where their children are attending? 

Work closely with Ramsey Co DSS/ Child Protective Services 

Children are usually placed within the St. Paul public school district, but not placed in the closest 

school. It is not a coordinated effort; DSS simply places in a location that happens to be available 

(school placement is very much a secondary issue in many of the circumstances). 

18. What state and local policies support keeping homeless children in their school of origin? 

Are there any written policies, MOUs, protocols, etc. in place? 

There are school board policies in place 

Board of Education has written policies 

The MN Department of Education issued a policy beginning in 2004-5 indicating that the district 

where the student is residing is responsible, the opposite of what we were doing. The policy is tied 

into reimbursement legislation so we are hoping school district will get funding for the transportation 

of homeless youth residing in shelters. 
F 34 

19. What additional support do you get from the state level? 

None with our program 

20. What policies and arrangements exist for inter-district transfers?

Lots of phone conversations 

The McKinney-Vento office at St. Paul will contact the school directly (in the other district) to make 

arrangements. We have plans in place because we are larger, we do more work with transporting 

homeless children /youth 

Would like to have inter-district policies in place 

21. What data do you have that shows the impact of school stability (remaining in the school of 

origin) on the academic achievement of homeless students? 

Last year (2002-2003) = first year of tracking 

Tracked standardized test scores and found that the students scores were slightly above the district 

average 

Data show that 86% of all our homeless students remained in their school of origin. The mobility 

rate in our district is 6.79%. (K-6: 2.9%, 7-12: 3.88%). For the homeless population, the mobility 

rate is 13.61%. (K-6: 10.57%, 7-12 (3.04%). We actually have a better mobility rate for secondary 

students than the district average. Our attendance rate is 88% of school days attended; for the 

district it is 96%. We also had 37 homeless children with perfect attendance. We are still looking at 

standardized test scores but from initial screening, it appears they have dropped below the district 

average. We believe this may because we have a better data collection system in place and more 

students were identified as being homeless. We are going to further analyze the data to see if 

homeless students in transitional sites are scoring better than students in emergency shelters or 

doubled up. 
F 35 

Program: Vancouver WA, ESD 112 (Educational Service 

District 112)

Interview Participants & Titles: Mr. Lionel Pinn, Manager, Specialized Transportation 

Cooperative 

Interview Date / Time: Tues, 2/24/04 @ 4:00 EST /1:00 PCT

The cooperative began in 1988. It was originally established to handle transportation of special needs 

students (those with existing IEPs). In 2002, 23 district members voted to add to the co-op the 

responsibility of transportation of homeless students to their school of origin when it involves a transfer 

across districts. (The same requirement exists for the transportation of special needs students – across 

district lines only.) 

The co-op is a state organization –funded primarily by the state, with some funding coming from the 23 

member districts. Each district pays a set amount each year for this service. 

About 10-15% of operation is for transporting homeless students; the rest is for the transportation of 

special needs children. 

The co-op is unique in WA state – no other co-op like this in the state. 

The co-op has a Constitution and bylaws – a regular business agreement between co-op and districts. 

1. Describe your district’s demographics. 

a. Size? (geographically, number of students) 

ESD 112 is a region, not a district, with 35 school districts within the ESD 112 region. Of those, 

23 school districts belong to the cooperative program 

Geographically: covers 6 counties in SW Washington region 

b. Location? (rural, urban, suburban) 

Rural, urban and suburban 

c. Number of homeless children & youth? 

213 children who were referred for transportation services

2. Of the total number of homeless children and youth provide the estimated numbers who 

have the following as their primary night residence: 

Primary night time residence Estimated number of homeless 

children/ youth (Total LEAs with and 

without subgrants) 

Shelters 181 

Doubled-up 29 

Unsheltered (e.g., cars, parks, campgrounds, 

etc.) 

0 

Hotels/Motels 3 

Other (specify) 0 

Unknown 0 

We received 213 applications – 213 students were transported. 100% of those who requested 

transportation were able to receive it. 

3. Is there a public transportation system in your community? 

Varies from location to location – some areas do lack public transportation; but probably about 90% 

of region does have public transportation. 

4. To what extent is transportation provided to school children in general? 
F 36 

This co-op only provides transportation for special needs children with an IEP and homeless 

students to their school of origin if outside of their current district. In other words, the co-op only 

provides inter-district transportation. Use special education buses. 

5. How many homeless K-12 children and youth enrolled in school during the 2002-2003 school 

year remained in their school of origin and received transportation to their school origin? 

213; 100% who requested it 

(But keep in mind, the transportation co-op won’t see applications for transportation until after the 

liaison approves it. The liaisons out in the districts may be denying some requests occasionally that 

we never hear about.) 

6. What was the estimated total cost of transportation to the school of origin for homeless 

children and youth in your area? 

approx. $60,000 per year 

7. Did your LEA receive McKinney-Vento subgrant funds in 2002-2003? NO

8. What other sources of funds did your district use to transport children/youth to their school 

of origin (district, state, or other federal funding, private funding, other nontraditional 

sources)? 

Largely funded by the state, some funding from districts – no other sources. 

9. How long does it generally take for transportation services to be arranged once a 

parent/guardian requests for his/her child (or an unaccompanied youth requests) to remain 

in the school of origin? 

Three days is the policy, but arrangements are generally made within a few hours. 

(There are 5 shelters in area and 1 transitional home. Numerous other children are doubled-up or 

living in temporary housing.) 

(Each district has a liaison that coordinates transportation needs. In the case where a student is 

living in a shelter, the shelter contacts the district liaison. The liaison fills out a form requesting 

transportation services and faxes it to the transportation office. (Sometimes the transportation office 

is notified ahead of time.) Arrangements are then made by transportation office. 

The majority of shelters are in the downtown area. One bus is used exclusively for transporting 

students at those shelters. In other cases, the homeless students ride the special education buses. 

Stops are added to existing bus routes. 

In general, bus routes and stops don’t change a lot with families in shelters. Changes occur more 

often with the doubled-up families, which proves to be a challenge. 

10. What specific strategies and systems has the district implemented to provide transportation 

to the school of origin? 

Special education buses are used. 

A system is already in place for special education students, therefore, it is easy to adapt to the 

needs of the homeless population. 

Most important is communication, which is the link between the co-op, liaisons, shelters, parents, 

students and drivers. 

 In your area, which of the following modes is most frequently used for transportation to 

school of origin. 

Special education buses –only means used

11. What are the biggest challenges to providing transportation to the school of origin? 

#1—Funding 

#2 – (a very close #2) coordination / logistics. For example, a student may be living in a doubled-up 

situation 50 miles away from the school of origin. This is tough. 

To what extent do the following also present challenges? 

Scheduling conflicts (#3 biggest challenge – see above) 
F 37 

Ex: Co-op policy requires that the student be met by a parent or guardian; problems arise if a 

parent can’t be there. 

Lack of vehicles—tied into funding issue

Unavailability of parent/guardian to travel with younger children to/from school---Co-op 

policy requires that student be met by parent; this isn’t always possible. 

Funding –identified as #1 problem

Recurring moves / mobility—tends only to be a problem with doubled-up families

Difficulties getting in touch with parents –Frequent changes in contacts for a student; 

sometimes the father is contact, then next week the mother is contact, etc.

Time to make arrangements, considering the immediate enrollment provisions --this we do 

very well and almost immediately 

12. How has your district addressed these challenges? 

Addressing them as an ongoing process 

Changing the annual fees / assessments: Districts pay set rate at beginning of school year. The coop may have to go back to ask for more money if more services were needed than expected. 

13. Which strategies do you consider the most successful? 

Communication is real key! 

Finding funding is key. We are fortunate that the co-op had vehicles in place (for special needs 

students) that could be used to transport homeless students. 

14. What are the roles of the pupil transportation director and local homeless education liaison 

in facilitating transportation? 

See above 

One bus is used specifically for downtown shelters 

40 buses are in the co-op fleet – 15 of those are used to help pick up homeless kids as well as 

special education kids. 

15. Who else is involved in arranging transportation to the school of origin? (parents / 

caregivers / guardians, social workers, etc.) 

No one else at this level 

16. How do all those involved work together (regular meetings, homeless coalitions, local 

policies)? 

Two meetings are held per year. Regular meetings were already in place for the co-op. Agenda 

items include a review of procedures to determine what is working, not working, costs, etc. etc. 

23 district representatives attend this meeting, one from each district in the co-op 

23 school districts are in our cooperative / region. However, there are 35 school districts – not 

everyone is a cooperative member. When one is a co-op member and the other isn’t – they have to 

bill that non-cooperative member 

17. What agreements or policies exist between DSS or other placement agencies to ensure that 

homeless families are placed close to schools where their children are attending? 

N/a 

18. What state and local policies support keeping homeless children in their school of origin? 

Are there any written policies, MOUs, protocols, etc. in place? 

Transportation request form – detailed 

19. What additional support do you get from the state level? 

Largely funded by the state. 

20. What policies and arrangements exist for inter-district transfers? 

Only work with inter-district transportation. 
F 38 

21. What data do you have that shows the impact of school stability (remaining in the school of 

origin) on the academic achievement of homeless students? 

None available at this time. 
Appendix G 

Sample Documents 

SAISD Transportation Request Form 

SAISD Parent Brochure 

SAISD Transportation Schedule 

Spokane Intake Form 

Putnam County Local Policy 
San Antonio Independent School District 

1103 Austin Street • San Antonio, Texas 78208-1156 

Telephone (210) 223-9792 • Fax (210) 271-7204 

Transportation Department 

Supplemental Transportation Request 

Date of Request: McKinney-Vento 

Spec. Ed. 

LPS 

Student Information:

Student Name: Grade: SSN/ID: 

Facility (if applicable) 

Facility Contact Person 

Address (location for pick-up) Rm. / Apt. # 

Parent/Guardian Parent/Guardian Contact # 

2nd Contact # 3rd Contact # 

Destination School Information:

School Name School District: 

School Address 

Campus Contact Name / Phone 

Campus Bell Schedule AM PM 

Breakfast Time: (if SoO is in another LEA) 

Earliest Time a Student can be Dropped @ School with Supervision 

Special Accommodations 

 

 

______________________________ Worker (please print) / Date 

______________________________ ______________________________ Authorized SAISD Staff Date Faxed to Transportation

Request faxed to / date:

Alamo Heights Harlandale Northside South San Antonio

East Central Judson San Antonio Southside 

Edgewood North East Schertz, Cibolo,

Universal City 

Southwest 

Other: (identify) 

Revised: September, 2003 
Guidance & Counseling 

Department 

School Social Work Services 

Transitions Program 

1702 N. Alamo Ste. 213 

San Antonio, Texas 78215 

210-227-1206 

210-227-4737 (fax) 

Together, our children will 

attend school 

Juntos nuestro niños 

asistirán a la escuela 

Transitions Program  Guidance & Counseling Depa 1702 N. Alamo Ste. 213  San Antonio, Texas 78215  210-227-1206  Fax. 210-227-4737 

Transp

Transp

Servicios de Transpo

Date/Fecha: 12/20/2002 
Transportation Services 

Page 2 

N

O CHILD LEFT BEHIND

The “No Child Left Behind” Law of 2001 provides students who are temporarily without a home with certain federal rights. Your child has the right to continue his/her education in the school of origin (school in which the child became homeless) or the school in the attendance area where the child is temporarily living. 1. Parents must be advised of their choice for school 

enrollment. 

2. Student transportation should be made available to 

the school of origin should the parent desire. 

3. Should the school of origin be located in another 

school district, transport to that school district must be made available in the best interest of the child. 

The San Antonio Independent School District (SAISD) provides school transportation or VIA bus passes to the school of origin should it be in the best interest of the child. The best interest of the child is determined on a case by case basis with the assistance of the parent. To request the service, the parent must call the Transitions Program at 227-1206 and speak with the Transitions Program staff. These guidelines are being provided for you, the parent, to assure a safe and enjoyable ride for your child. Please read the school bus rules on page 8 and help your child(ren) to abide by these rules. 

Students can help to keep SAISD buses on schedule for everyone. 

Servicios de Transportació

Notice of receipt of inMy signature below indicates thawith the rules and regulations for tion services. I understand that iget continued uninterrupted tranchild(ren) and I must abide by thhas been provided to me that incschool district offices that must b(ren) are to be absent or if I chanstand that my child(ren) can loostheir behavior in the bus. Parent/Guardian/Caregiver: 

Date signed: 

Aviso de recibo de infMi firma indica que me han proporegulaciones para los servicios de escolar de San Antonio. Entiendo servicios, mi hijo/a y yo necesitamautobús. Este pamfleto informatproporcionado incluye los teléfodistritos que deben ser notificadoniños estén ausentes o si hay camEntiendo que mi hijo/a puede permal comportamiento en el autobPadre/Guardian: 

____________

Fecha de firma: 

_____________
Alamo Heights ISD 832-5973 

East Central ISD 649-2332 

Edgewood ISD 444-4671 

Harlandale ISD 977-1670 

Judson ISD 659-0487 

North East ISD 657-8815 

Northside ISD 690-6945 

San Antonio ISD 223-9792 

Schertz, Cibiolo, 945-6224 

 Universal City ISD 

South San Antonio ISD 977-7075 

Southside ISD 626-3825 

Southwest ISD 622-4352 

Alamo Heights ISD 442-3720 

East Central ISD 337-5769 

Edgewood ISD 444-8215 

Harlandale ISD 921-4440 

Judson ISD 945-5331 

North East ISD 804-7155 

Northside ISD 678-2992 

San Antonio ISD 227-1206 

Schertz, Cibiolo, 945-6040 

 Universal City ISD 

South San Antonio ISD 977-7000 

Southside ISD 626-0600 

Southwest ISD 622-4335

Transportation Services 

Page 10 

BEXAR COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS

HOMELESS LIAISONS TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENTS

Servicios de Transportació

NINGÚN NIÑO DE

La ley del 2001 “Ningún Niño Destudiantes sin hogar con ciertos hijo/a tiene el derecho de continescuela de origen (la ubicación essu hogar) o la escuela en el área del hogar temporero. 1. Las escuelas deben de inform

opciones de matrículas de es

2. El distrito transportará a su 

origen si los padres desean. 

3. Si su escuela de origen está lo

escolar entonces el distrito e(SAISD) transportará a su himayor interés y beneficio par

El distrito de San Antonio provee autobús escolar o servicio de VIA El servicio será determinado individualmente con la asistencia padres para el mayor interés y bedel niño/a Para recibir el servicio, los padrepueden llamar al programa de Transición al 227-1206 y hablar los empleados del programa. Las reglas de autobús escolar sopara que instruyan a, sus hijos a transportación segura. Lea la pag
By Law, your school-aged children in these situations 

may be homeless and eligible for transportation to the 

school of origin and other services from the Transitions Program. 1. Families or unaccompanied youth living in emergency 

shelters. 

2. Families living in domestic violence shelters 3. Youth living in youth shelters. 4. Children living in shelters awaiting placement in foster care. 5. Families or youth living in campgrounds or parks. 

6. Families or youth living in automobiles. 7. Families or youth living in abandoned buildings. 8. Families or youth living in airports, bus stations, or 

train stations. 

9. Families or youth that are doubled up with friends or 

relatives (sofa-surfing).

10. Families or youth living in substandard housing, such 

as colonias (no running water, no electricity). 

11. Families living in transitional housing programs 

WHAT IS HOMELESSNESS? 

Transportation Services 

Page 4 

Ayude a sus hijos a aprender y reglas. Estas ayudarán a sus hijescuela y estar listos para apren1. Observar el código de cond

de SAISD y de otras escuel

2. Sean amables, no usar leng3. No comer o tomar en el au4. Siempre mantengan el auto5. Cooperen con el chofer de6. No se permite fumar. 7. No destruyan el autobús es

autobús . 

8. Siempre mantenganse senta9. Mantegan su cabeza, manos 

autobús escolar. 

10. Se prohibe pelear o empuja11. Se prohibe transportar anim12. El chofer del autobús está a

asientos. 

Servicios de Transportació

REGLAS DEL AUTO
Please help your children know and follow these 

rules. These rules are made to help all children arrive to their school of origin safely and ready to learn. 1. Observe SAISD and/or other school districts’ 

codes of conduct. 

2. Be courteous, no profanity allowed. 3. No eating or drinking on the bus. 4. Keep the bus clean. 5. Cooperate with the driver. 6. No smoking allowed. 7. Do not damage the bus or equipment in the bus. 8. Stay in your seat. 9. Keep head, hands and feet inside bus. 10. No fighting, pushing or shoving. 11.No pets on the bus.12.The bus driver is authorized to assign seats.

Transportation Services 

Page 8 

SCHOOL BUS RULES

¿QUE SIGNIFICA NO 

HOGAR

Según la ley para niños de edad ecualquiera de estas situaciones, qser elegibles para transportación para otros servicios del program1. Familias o jovenes no acompa

refugio. 

2. Familias viviendo en un refugi

doméstica. 

3. Jovenes viviendo en un refugi4. Niños viviendo en un refugio 

en hogares de crianza sustitu

5. Familias o jovenes viviendo e

parque. 

6. Familias o jovenes vivendo en 7. Familias o jovenes viviendo e8. Familias or jovenes viviendo e

de autobuses, o estación de t

9. Familias or jovenes que viven 

amigos. 

10. Familias o jovenes viviendo e

nivel normal, como colonias 

11. Familias viviendo en program

Servicios de Transportació
McKinney-Vento Student 

Transportation — Parent Guide 

1. All student absences must be called into the SAISD 

Transportation Department by 5:30 am at 223-9792. If your student is attending another school district, you will need to call their transportation department and provide them with the same information. Your child is attending school district and their transportation department can be reached 

by calling _____________

 .

2. The bus drivers are not responsible for transporting medicine 

or notes. 

3. Students are expected to follow all regulations in the 

Student Code of Conduct. 

4. Students are expected to be dressed, toileted and 

waiting outside five minutes before the bus arrives for pick-up. Your student’s transportation services do not include participation in after-school activities such as sports and/or clubs. 

5. Please tell you student that it is very important that 

they get outside to the bus pick-up area after school immediately. The buses are not scheduled to wait. 

6. Buses may be late for the AM or PM pick-ups due to 

weather, traffic, etc. 

School bus drivers need your help and cooperation. 

Transportation Services 

Page 6 

1. Todas las ausencias del estud

a no más tardar las 5:30 am 

asiste a otra escuela en otro al departamento de transportproveer la misma informaciónescolar . L

transportación al _________

2. El chofer del autobús escolar 

transportar medicinas o nota

3. Se espera que todos los estu

código de conducta para los 

4. Los estudiantes deben estar p

5 minutos antes de que llegue recogerlos. Este servicio no pextra-curriculares como depo

5. Hable con sus hijos sobre la i

puntualidad en esperar el auinmediatemente despues de cautobúses escolares no puedsi no llegan a tiempo a su luga

6. Los autobúses escolares pod

mañanas como en las tardes eventos fortuitos, tráfico u ot

Transportación d

McKinney-Vento—G

Servicios de Transportació
MCKINNEY-VENTO TRANSPORTATION STUDENT SCHEDULE

STUDENT(S) NAME: 

 

 

SCHOOL(S) 

AM 

PICK-UP TIME LOCATION BUS # DRIVER 

 

DROP-OFF 

TIME SCHOOL

 

PM 

PICK-UP SCHOOL BUS# DRIVER 

 

DROP-OFF TIME @ RESIDENCE 

 

 

 START DATE

Putnam County Schools, Florida

Admissions Procedures for Homeless Students 

I. Residency Requirements (Definition of Homelessness) 

Homelessness is a sensitive issue. In some cases, a student’s homelessness 

will be apparent during registration, i.e. residing at a homeless shelter or 

“doubled-up” with a relative or friend. In other cases, the registrants may 

be reluctant to discuss their homelessness. School personnel should be alert 

and sensitive to the issue. However, Putnam County District Schools needs 

to identify and track its homeless student population. School personnel 

should make a determination of the student’s homelessness based upon the 

following criteria: 

A. Lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate residence; or 

 B. Sleeps in a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used 

as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings (abandoned 

cars and buildings, parks and streets); or 

C. Has a primary nighttime residence that is supervised publicly or 

privately-operated shelter designed to provide temporary living 

accommodations (including welfare hotels, emergency shelters, and 

transitional housing); or 

D. Is living in “doubled-up” accommodations, that is, sharing housing 

with other families or individuals. Students are considered homeless 

if they are doubled-up because of loss of housing or other similar 

situations. (Families living in doubled-up accommodations 

voluntarily to save money generally should not be considered 

homeless). 

II. School Registration of Homeless Students 

A. At the time of registration, the principal or the principal’s designees 

 should discuss with the parent, guardian, and/or the student the school 

 enrollment that is in the best interest of the student with reference to 

 such factors as stability of school placement, transportation, special 

 programs, and family plans. Among the options for school 

 registration are the following: 

• The homeless student may maintain the status of a 

registered student in the school attended before the 

homeless situation developed, or 

• The homeless student may be registered in the zoned 

school serving his/her current address. 

B. Subsequent to being registered, the homeless student should be 

 immediately referred to the project coordinator who will assist the 

 student, parents, and school personnel in areas of need. 
 III. Custody/Guardianship Requirements 

 

A. All students, including homeless, must be registered by their parent 

 or legal guardian. If the parent/legal guardian is not available, every 

 effort should be made by the principal or principal’s designee to 

contact the parent or guardian to complete the registration process. 

If local school personnel are unable to contact the parent or legal 

guardian, the student should be referred to the school social worker 

or contact in the Student Services Department. Written 

documentation should be maintained of all written and verbal 

communication, home visits, and efforts to contact the parent or 

guardian. 

 B. In unusual situations in which no parent or legal guardian can be 

contacted, a referral should be made to the Student Services 

Department for Putnam County Schools to report a homeless student 

as a child in need of services. 

 IV. Health Records and Birth Certificate Requirements 

A. If a homeless student seeks to register without a record of 

immunization, the principal or the principal’s designee should 

contact the student’s former school by telephone to request the 

student’s records and to discuss immunization and other 

enrollment/placement issues. If information is given that satisfies 

compliance with immunization requirements, the student should be 

enrolled. If information is not available to satisfy immunization 

compliance, this requirement should be temporarily waived (up to 

30 days extension) and the student enrolled pending efforts to obtain 

the medical records. In the interim, the school should collaborate 

with the Pubic Health Department for an appointment for proper 

immunization. The student should be allowed to attend classes 

while the process of immunization is completed. Assistance in this 

matter is available through the project coordinator for Project 

PRAISE. 

B. If a birth certificate is not available, the student should be registered 

 and subsequent appropriate steps should be taken to resolve this 

 issue. 

V. Education Records and Transfer 

 A. Educational information needed for proper placement should 

 initially be obtained through a telephone contact with the student’s 

former school. If educational records or educational information are 

not available, the student should be registered and an educational 

record developed in accordance the Putnam County School Board 

policies and guidelines. In these cases, an academic diagnostic test 
may be administered to assist in the determination of the student’s 

skill levels and appropriate placement. 

 B. If a homeless student seeks to register without having appropriate 

 transfer forms, the receiving school should register the student, 

telephone the former school for transfer information, and request 

that the education record be forwarded. The sending school should 

provide requested information during the telephone contact and 

forward education records promptly. 

8/21/01 

(Revision to be submitted to School Board on 8/23/04) 
H 1 

APPENDIX H 

NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION 

HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAM 

GUIDELINE No. 17 

PUPIL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY

I. Scope. This guideline establishes minimum recommendations for a State highway 

safety program for pupil transportation safety including the identification, 

operation, and maintenance of buses used for carrying students: training of 

passengers, pedestrians, and bicycle riders; and administration. 

II. Purpose. The purpose of this guideline is to minimize, to the greatest extent 

possible the danger of death or injury to school children while they are traveling 

to and from school and school-related events. 

III. Definition. 

Bus 

A motor vehicle designed for carrying more than 10 persons (including the 

driver). 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR) 

The regulations of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for commercial 

motor vehicles in interstate commerce, including buses with a gross vehicle 

weight rating (GVWR) greater than 10,000 pounds or designed to carry 16 or 

more persons (including the driver), other than buses used to transport school 

children from home to school and from school to home. (The FMCSR are set 

forth in 49 CFR parts 383-399.) 

School-chartered bus 

A "bus" that is operated under a short-term contract with State or school 

authorities who have acquired the exclusive use of the vehicle at a fixed charge to 

provide transportation for a group of students to a special school-related event. 

School bus 

A "bus" that is used for purposes that include carrying students to and from school 

or related events on a regular basis, but does not include a transit bus or a schoolchartered bus. 

IV. Pupil Transportation Safety Program Administration and Operations.-- 

Recommendation. Each State, in cooperation with its school districts and other 

political subdivisions, should have a comprehensive pupil transportation safety 

program to ensure that school buses and school-chartered buses are operated and 

maintained so as to achieve the highest possible level of safety. 

A. Administration. 

1. There should be a single State agency having primary 

administrative responsibility for pupil transportation, and 

employing at least one full-time professional to carry out these 

responsibilities. 
H 2 

2. The responsible State agency should develop an operating system 

for collecting and reporting information needed to improve the 

safety of operating school buses and school-chartered buses. This 

includes the collection and evaluation of uniform crash data 

consistent with the criteria set forth in Highway Safety Program 

Guidelines No. 10, "Traffic Records" and No. 18, "Accident 

Investigation and Reporting. " 

B. Identification and equipment of school buses. Each State should establish 

procedures to meet the following recommendations for identification and 

equipment of school buses. 

1. All school buses should: 

a. Be identified with the words "School Bus" printed in letters 

not less than eight inches high, located between the 

warning signal lamps as high as possible without impairing 

visibility of the lettering from both front and rear, and have 

no other lettering on the front or rear of the vehicle, except 

as required by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 

(FMVSS), 49 CFR part 571. 

b. Be painted National School Bus Glossy Yellow, in 

accordance with the colorimetric specification of National 

Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Federal 

Standard No. 595a, Color 13432, except that the hood 

should be either that color or lusterless black, matching 

NIST Federal Standard No. 595a, Color 37038. 

c. Have bumpers of glossy black, matching NIST Federal 

Standard No. 595a, Color 17038, unless, for increased 

visibility, they are covered with a reflective material. 

d. Be equipped with safety equipment for use in an 

emergency, including a charged fire extinguisher, that is 

properly mounted near the driver's seat, with signs 

indicating the location of such equipment. 

e. Be equipped with device(s) demonstrated to enhance the 

safe operation of school vehicles, such as a stop signal arm. 

f. Be equipped with a system of signal lamps that conforms to 

the school bus requirements of FMVSS No. 108, 49 CFR 

571.108. 

g. Have a system of mirrors that conforms to the school bus 

requirements of FMVSS No. 111, 49 CFR 571.111. 

h. Comply with all FMVSS applicable to school buses at the 

time of their manufacture. 

2. Any school bus meeting the identification recommendations of 

sections l, a-h above that is permanently converted for use wholly 

for purposes other than transporting children to and from school or 

school-related events should be painted a color other than National 

School Bus Glossy Yellow, and should have the stop arms and 

school bus signal lamps described by sections 1, e & f removed. 
H 3 

3. School buses, while being operated on a public highway and 

transporting primarily passengers other than school children, 

should haVe the words "School Bus" covered, removed, or 

otherwise concealed, and the stop arm and signal lamps described 

by sections 1, e & f should not be operated. 

4. School-chartered buses should comply with all applicable FMCSR 

and FMVSS. 

C. Operations. Each State should establish procedures to meet the following 

recommendations for operating school buses and school-chartered buses: 

1. Personnel. 

a. Each State should develop a plan for selecting, training, 

and supervising persons whose primary duties involve 

transporting school children in order to ensure that such 

persons will attain a high degree of competence in, and 

knowledge of, their duties. 

b. Every person who drives a school bus or school-chartered 

bus occupied by school children should, as a minimum: 

1. Have a valid State driver's license to operate such a 

vehicle. All drivers who operate a vehicle designed 

to carry 16 or more persons (including the driver) 

are required by FHWA's Commercial Driver's 

License Standards by April 1, 1992 (49 CFR part 

383) to have a valid commercial driver's license; 

2. Meet all physical, mental. moral and other 

requirements established by the State agency having 

primary responsibility for pupil transportation, 

including requirements for drug and/or alcohol 

misuse or abuse; and 

3. Be qualified as a driver under the Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Regulations of the FHWA. 49 CFR 

part 391. if the driver or the driver's employer is 

subject to those regulations. 

2. Vehicles. 

a. Each State should enact legislation that provides for 

uniform procedures regarding school buses stopping on 

public highways for load ing and discharge of children. 

Public information campaigns should be conducted on a 

regular basis to ensure that the driving public fully under 

stands the implications of school bus warning signals and 

requirements to stop for school buses that are loading or 

discharging school children. 

b. Each State should develop plans for minimizing highway 

use hazards to school bus and school-chartered bus 

occupants, other highway users, pedestrians, bicycle riders 

and property. They should include, but not be limited to: 
H 4 

1. Careful planning and annual reiew of routes for 

safety hazards; 

2. Planning routes to ensure maximum use of school 

buses and school chartered buses, and to ensure that 

passengers are not standing while these vehicles are 

in operation; 

3. Providing loading and unloading zones off the main 

traveled part, of highways, whenever it is practical 

to do so; 

4. Establishing restricted loading and unloading areas 

for school buses and school-chartered buses at or 

near schools; 

5. Ensuring that school bus operators, when stopping 

on a highway to take on or discharge children, 

adhere to State regulations for loading and 

discharging including the use of signal lamps as 

specified in section B.1.f. of this guideline; 

6. Prohibiting, by legislation or regulation, operation 

of any school bus unless it meets the equipment and 

identification recommendations of this guideline; 

and 

7. Replacing, consistent with the economic realities 

which typically face school districts, those school 

buses which are not manufactured to meet the April 

1, 1977 FMVSS for school buses, with those 

manufactured to meet the stricter school bus 

standards, and not chartering any pre-1977 school 

buses. 

8. Informing potential buyers of pre 1977 school buses 

that these buses may not meet current standards for 

newly manufactured buses and of the need for 

continued maintenance of these buses and adequate 

safety instruction. 

c. Use of amber signal lamps to indicate that a school bus is 

preparing to stop to load or unload children is at the option 

of the State. Use of red warning signal lamps as specified in 

section B, 1, f, of this guideline for any purpose or at any 

time other than when the school bus is stopped to load or 

discharge passengers should be prohibited. 

d. When school buses are equipped with stop arms. such 

devices should be operated only in conjunction with red 

warning signal lamps, when vehicles are stopped. 

e. Seating. 

1. Standing while school buses and school-chartered 

buses are in motion should not be permitted. 

Routing and seating plans should be coordinated so 
H 5 

as to eliminate passengers standing when a school 

bus or school chartered bus is in motion. 

2. Seating should be provided that will permit each 

occupant to sit in a seat intended by the vehicle's 

manufacturer to provide accommodation for a 

person at least as large as a 5th percentile adult 

female, as defined in 49 CFR 571.208. Due to the 

variation in sizes of children of different ages, 

States and school districts should exercise judgment 

in deciding how many students are actually 

transported in a school bus or school -chartered bus. 

3. There should be no auxiliary seating 

accommodations such as temporary or folding jump 

seats in school buses. 

4. Drivers of school buses and school-chartered buses 

should be required to wear occupant restraints 

whenever the vehicle is in motion. 

5. Passengers in school buses and school-chartered 

buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) 

of 10,000 pounds or less should be required to wear 

occupant restraints (where provided) whenever the 

vehicle is in motion. Occupant restraints should 

comply with the requirements of FMVSS Nos. 208, 

209 and 210, as they apply to multipurpose 

vehicles. 

f. Emergency exit access. Baggage and other items 

transported in the passenger compartment should be stored 

and secured so that the aisles are kept clear and the door(s) 

and emergency exit(s) remain unobstructed at all times. 

When school buses are equipped with interior luggage 

racks, the racks should be capable of retaining their 

contents in a crash or sudden driving maneuver. 

D. Vehicle maintenance. Each State should establish procedures to meet the 

following recommendations for maintaining buses used to carry school 

children: 

1. School buses should be maintained in safe operating condition 

through a systematic preventive maintenance program. 

2. All school buses should be inspected at least semiannually. In 

addition. school buses and school-chartered buses subject to the 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations of FHWA should be 

inspected and maintained in accordance with those regulations (49 

CFR Parts 393 and 396). 

3. School bus drivers should be required to perform daily pre-trip 

inspections of their vehicles. and the safety equipment thereon 

(especially fire extinguishers), and to report promptly and in 

writing any problems discovered that may affect the safety of the 
H 6 

vehicle's operation or result in its mechanical breakdown. Pre-trip 

inspection and condition reports for school buses and schoolchartered buses subject to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Regulations of FHWA should be performed in accordance with 

those regulations (49 CFR 392.7, 392.8, and 396). 

E. Other Aspects of Pupil Transportation Safety. 

1. At least once during each school semester, each pupil transported 

from home to school in a school bus should be instructed in safe 

riding practices, proper loading and unloading techniques, proper 

street crossing to and from school bus stops and should participate 

in supervised emergency evacuation drills, which are timed. Prior 

to each departure. each pupil transported on an activity or field trip 

in a school bus or school -chartered bus should be instructed in 

safe riding practices and on the location and operation of 

emergency exits. 

2. Parents and school officials should work together to select and 

designate the safest pedestrian and bicycle routes for the use of 

school children. 

3. All school children should be instructed in safe transportation 

practices for walking to and from school. For those children who 

routinely walk to school, training should include preselected routes 

and the importance of adhering to those routes. 

4. Children riding bicycles to and from school should receive bicycle 

safety education, wear bicycle safety helmets, and not deviate from 

preselected routes. 

5. Local school officials and law enforcement personnel should work 

together to establish crossing guard programs. 

6. Local school officials should investigate programs which 

incorporate the practice of escorting students across streets and 

highways when they leave school buses. These programs may 

include the use of school safety patrols or adult monitors. 

7. Local school officials should establish passenger vehicle loading 

and unloading points at schools that are separate from the school 

bus loading zones. 

V. Program evaluation. The pupil transportation safety program should be evaluated 

at least annually by the State agency having primary administrative responsibility 

for pupil transportation. 

Downloaded from: 

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/nhtsa/whatsup/tea21/tea21programs/402Guide.html#g17 
 I 1 

The National Center for Homeless Education (NCHE) is a national resource 

of research and information enabling communities to successfully address the needs 

of children and their families and youth experiencing homelessness.

Call the NCHE HelpLine 

1-800-308-2145

Visit the NCHE Website: www.serve.org/nche

The NCHE website provides current and comprehensive information on the following: 

• Understanding the McKinney-Vento legislation 

• Contacting state coordinators for homeless education 

• Accessing state and local resources 

• Linking to other organizations that address homeless issues 

• Linking to documents and reports 

• Accessing information by topic 

Join the Listserv (Contact: bhartnes@serve.org ) 

NCHE Publications 

Awareness Materials

Poster: Information for Parents ( Education Rights; English and Spanish) 

Poster: Information for School-Aged Youth (Education Rights; English and Spanish) 

Brief: Homeless Education: An Introduction to the Issues (English only) 

Brochure: NCHE: Linking Resources for Children and Youths Experiencing Homelessness 

Brochure: What You Need to Know to Help Your Child Do Well in School (Englilsh and Spanish) 

Parent Packs 

To order posters, brochures, and Parent Packs, call 1-800-308-2145. 

Handbooks—Available on the NCHE website 

Local Homeless Education Toolkit. (Revised 2004). Popp, P.A., Hindman, J.L., Stronge, J.H. 

McKinney-Vento Program Standards and Indicators Data Collection Users Manual. (2004). 

Mooney, K. 

State Coordinators Handbook for Supporting Local Homeless Education Liaisons. (2003). Popp, 

P.A., Hindman, J.L., Stronge, J.H. 

Informational Publications—Available on the NCHE website 

Increasing School Stability for Students Experiencing Homelessness: Overcoming Challenges to 

Providing Transportation to the School of Origin. (2004). Bowman, D.B., Barksdale, K. 

McKinney-Vento Policy to Practice Briefs. (2002). Bowman, D.B., Duffield, B., James, B., 

Julianelle, P. 

Reaching and Teaching: Improving Literacy Skills for Children Experiencing Homelessness and 

School Mobility. ( 2004). Popp, P.A., Stronge, J.H., Hindman, J.L. 

Students on the Move: Reaching and Teaching Highly Mobile Children and Youth. (2003). Popp, 

P.A. 

APPENDIX I 

National Center for Homeless Education 
 

 J 1 

APPENDIX J 

National Partners in Homeless Education 

The National Center for Homeless Education (NCHE) 

Contact: Diana Bowman, Director, 800-755-3277, dbowman@serve.org

Web Address: www.serve.org/nche

NCHE, funded by the U.S. Department of Education, is a national resource center, providing valuable information, training, and 

materials to educators and community members seeking to address the educational needs of homeless children and their families. 

These materials are made available to the public at no charge and include such items as educational rights posters, parent packs, 

training resources, and “law into practice” briefs. 

U.S. Department of Education, Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program 

Contact: Gary Rutkin, Coordinator, 202-260-4412, gary.rutkin@ed.gov

Web Address: www.ed.gov/programs/homeless/index.html

The Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program oversees the education of homeless children and youth in our nation’s 

public schools, including the granting of McKinney-Vento funds and the monitoring of their usage. Program Coordinator Gary 

Rutkin, working with other Department officials and national partners, provides official guidance to states and school districts on 

implementing the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. 

The National Association for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth (NAEHCY) 

Contact: Patricia Popp, President, 757-221-7776, ppopp@naehcy.org

Web Address: www.naehcy.org

NAEHCY, a national grassroots membership association, serves as the voice and the social conscience for the education of children 

and youth in homeless situations. NAEHCY brings together educators, parents, advocates, researchers and service providers to 

ensure school enrollment and attendance, and overall success for children and youth experiencing homelessness. NAEHCY 

accomplishes this through advocacy, partnerships and education. NAEHCY also hosts an annual national conference on homeless 

education, which brings together educators and service providers to learn about new developments within the field. 

The National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty (NLCHP) 

Contact: Joy Moses, Education Staff Attorney, 202-638-2535, jmoses@nlchp.org 

Web Address: www.nlchp.org 

The mission of NLCHP is to prevent and end homelessness by serving as the legal arm of the nationwide movement to end 

homelessness. To achieve its mission, the Law Center pursues three main strategies: impact litigation, policy advocacy, and public 

education. The Law Center strives to place homelessness in the larger context of poverty. By taking this approach, the Law Center 

aims to address homelessness as a very visible manifestation of deeper causes: the shortage of affordable housing, insufficient

income, and inadequate social services. NLCHP provides guidance and produces high-quality publications on legal issues 

pertaining to homelessness and poverty. 

The National Network for Youth (NNY) 

Contact: Mishaela Duran, Director of Public Policy and Public Affairs, 202-783-7949 x3109, mduran@nn4youth.org

Web Address: www.nn4youth.org

The National Network for Youth is the leading advocacy organization for runaway and homeless youth. NNY seeks to promote 

opportunities for growth and development for youth who face greater odds due to abuse, neglect, family conflicts and disconnection 

from family, lack of resources, discrimination, differing abilities, or other life challenges. NNY achieves this through advocacy on 

national policy related to at-risk youth and the provision of training, technical assistance, consultation services, and publications 

on the issue of supporting and protecting at-risk youth. 

National Association of State Directors for Pupil Transportation Services (NASDPTS) 

Contact: Charlie Gauthier, Executive Director, 540-253-5520, execdir@nasdpts.org

The purpose of the association is to provide leadership, assistance, and motivation to the Nation’s school transportation industry. 

The association aims to provide safe, efficient, economical, and high-quality transportation to school children on their trips to 

and from school and school-related activities.