C.F.R. » Title 34 » CHAPTER II—OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION › PART 222—IMPACT AID PROGRAMS › Subpart E—Payments for Heavily Impacted Local Educational Agencies Under Section 8003(b)(2) of the Act

34 C.F.R. § 222.63

When is a local educational agency eligible as a continuing applicant for payment under section 8003(b)(2)(B)?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

A continuing heavily impacted LEA must have—

(a) The same boundaries as those of a Federal military installation;

(b)(1) An enrollment of federally connected children described in section 8003(a)(1) equal to at least 35 percent of the total number of children in average daily attendance (ADA) in the LEA;

(2) A per pupil expenditure (PPE) that is less than the average PPE of the State in which the LEA is located or of all the States, whichever PPE is greater (except that an LEA with a total student enrollment of less than 350 students shall be determined to have met the PPE requirement); and

(3) A tax rate for general fund purposes of at least 95 percent of the average tax rate of comparable LEAs identified under § 222.74 or all LEAs in the applicant's State;

(c)(1) An enrollment of federally connected children described in section 8003(a)(1) equal to at least 30 percent of the total number of children in ADA in the LEA; and

(2) A tax rate for general fund purposes of at least 125 percent of the average tax rate of comparable LEAs identified under §§ 222.39-40 or of all LEAs in the applicant's State; or

(d) A total enrollment of at least 25,000 students, of which at least 50 percent are children described in section 8003(a)(1) and at least 6,000 of such children are children described in section 8003(a)(1)(A) and (B).

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7703(b)(2)(B))
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1983–2004 · leading case: Lake View Sch. Dist. No. 25 v. Huckabee, 91 S.W.3d 472 (Ark. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lake View Sch. Dist. No. 25 v. Huckabee, 91 S.W.3d 472 (Ark. 2002). · cites it 4× “1999), which provides: "Local school district at the ninety-fifth percentile" means, when ranking school districts in descending order by the total state and local revenue per average daily membership, a district which falls at the ninety-fifth percentile of the total number of…”
Opinion of the Justices, 624 So. 2d 107 (Ala. 1993). “See 34 C.F.R. § 222.63 (1989). [16] Testimony suggesting that Wilcox County, a poorer, majority—black school system, has wasted money by building a swimming pool in its new high school is clearly insufficient alone to condemn all poorer systems.”
Zuni Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 89 v. United States Dep't of Educ., 393 F.3d 1158 (10th Cir. 2004). · cites it 2× “See 34 C.F.R. § 222.63 (1993), 34 C.F.R. pt. 222, subpt.”
Gwinn Area Cmty. Schs. v. State of Mich., 574 F. Supp. 736 (W.D. Mich. 1983). “Under the "25% disparity limitation” provided in 34 C.F.R. 222.63(a), the Secretary of Education will consider a program of state aid to be equalized "if the disparity in the amount of current expenditures or revenue per pupil for free public education among local educational…”
Opinion No. (Ark. Att'y Gen. 2002). · cites it 2× “34 C.F.R. 222.63 (d) (1994). Regardless, then, of which of these conflicting statutory provisions applies 3 A.”
— 34 C.F.R. § 222.63(a) — 1 case
Gwinn Area Cmty. Schs. v. State of Mich., 574 F. Supp. 736 (W.D. Mich. 1983). “Under the "25% disparity limitation” provided in 34 C.F.R. 222.63(a), the Secretary of Education will consider a program of state aid to be equalized "if the disparity in the amount of current expenditures or revenue per pupil for free public education among local educational…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.