Hannibal School Board debates attendance policy as 34 families referred to prosecuting attorney’s office

HANNIBAL, Mo. —  The Hannibal School District’s attendance policy was brought to the attention of the Hannibal School Board by member Jeff Evans at the body’s monthly meeting on May 15.

The policy was debated for more than 20 minutes before the board ultimately concluded with a failed motion to amend it.

Evans acknowledged the rigor of the district’s existing policy, but he was concerned it was implemented to the extent it should be. He cited recent conversations with parents who claimed they hadn’t been made aware of attendance issues until the prosecuting attorney’s office contacted them.

The district’s current policy is:

• Automated phone calls to parents at the time of an unexcused absence
• Calls from school secretaries to parents in instances of multiple unexcused absences
• A mailed letter from a student’s school when attendance drops to 94 percent
• A second mailed letter when attendance drops to 88 percent
• A third mailed letter when attendance drops to 82 percent
• Meeting with a “success team” including “school personnel, parents and any additional outside resources that may be beneficial” in instances of continued absences
• Home visits in instances of continued absences
• Additional phone calls or emails in cases of continued absences
• A fourth mailed letter requesting parent and student attendance at an off-campus meeting with representatives from the Juvenile Justice Center (JCC) and the Children’s Division of the Department of Social Services (CD). It “is not a punitive meeting but intended to connect to additional resources, remove barriers and troubleshoot for any information (the district is) not aware of or (hasn’t) addressed.” A plan is developed with the student, parents and school personnel, and parents are warned that charges of neglect will be pursued if attendance does not improve
• A probable cause statement is submitted to the prosecuting attorney if parents do not show up to the scheduled meetings or do not implement the plan, and attendance continues to decrease.

The letters are documented in Infinite Campus, a student information system implemented by the district during the 2023-24 school year that allows parents and guardians, students and teachers to access grades, assignments, attendance and more on any device with an internet connection, including cell phones.

Assistant Superintendent of Student Services Meghan Karr gathered data on attendance-related disciplinary actions taken by the district throughout the 2024-25 school year. It showed 92 letters were sent from her office to schedule informal meetings with parents, students, the JCC, the CD and the prosecuting attorney. A fourth mailed letter a parent would have received regarded attendance, and it would’ve been the first from the district, rather than their child’s school.

“Maybe the letters didn’t get sent out as reliably as our policy outlines, or maybe people didn’t receive the letters, or maybe they received them and threw them in the trash, but the meeting certainly didn’t happen,” Evans said.

Evans claimed Karr’s data showed no indication that any meetings were held. He referenced notes that a meeting in January was canceled due to inclement weather, and another in April was canceled due to scheduling conflicts with outside agencies.

In a May 19 phone call with Muddy River News, Karr clarified that meetings with the JCC and the CD are held monthly and are not scheduled on a case-by-case basis. Mailed letter invites were sent to families roughly 10 days in advance of the meetings, according to Karr’s data.

The data provided by Karr in the May agenda packet provided the dates on which such meetings were held throughout the 2024-2025 school year:

• October 17, 2024
• November 21, 2024
• December 19, 2024
• February 20, 2025
• March 20, 2025

Karr said the meetings were not intended to be a “gotcha” moment against families but rather an opportunity to address barriers, formulate solutions and offer support. She also said families scheduled to attend the meetings that eventually were cancelled in January and April would not have been referred to the prosecuting attorney’s office. They would not have had the opportunity to attend the meeting due to circumstances out of the family’s control. 

Of the 92 families who received invitations to such meetings, 63 percent implemented a plan and improved attendance following the meeting. Eight of the 92 continued to struggle with attendance, but further communication and documentation determined that health concerns were the cause of absences.

“If (families) don’t attend (meetings) and their (student’s) attendance is improving, we don’t do anything. But if they don’t attend and they’re not responding, or they do attend and they’re not implementing the plan … and attendance continues to go down, we would then move forward,” Karr said.

The remaining 34 of 92 families were referred to the prosecuting attorney’s office. Karr said families can meet with the prosecuting attorney one-on-one to ensure all other potential solutions have been exhausted before going in front of a judge.

Evans suggested the district send letters via certified mail to ensure parents receive the notifications. Karr said each letter costs more than $9 to send via certified mail. She added that the district has tried that before, and 75 percent of the letters were returned to the district’s office after three failed delivery attempts. 

Evans also suggested personally serving the families with the invitations to the meetings with the JCC and the CD, similarly to how court proceedings are served. The National Association of Professional Process Servers says the cost of such an approach could range anywhere from $20 to $100 per invitation. Using those figures, personally serving the 92 letters sent throughout the 2024-25 school year would have cost the district between $1,840 to $9,200.

“Some parents take those letters and throw them in the trash, then they claim that you’ve had no contact,” said member Ronald Greenwell, a retired Hannibal Middle School teacher and coach. “The schools do the best they possibly can, but sometimes some of those kids are — well, there’s two of them I take to school every day. That’s not a pat on the back. It’s because I know they’re not going to get there if someone doesn’t (take them). If anybody wants to volunteer to pick up kids in the morning (around) 7:15, let me know and I’ll put you on the list.”

Evans made a motion to amend the policy to include an additional step in the process. He suggested families struggling with severe attendance issues would be presented to the board in a closed session meeting before referral to the prosecuting attorney’s office. Evans did not state a suggestion for how families would be invited to appear before the board. His previous suggestions of certified mail or personal service would have cost the district anywhere from $300 to $3,400 to ensure the 34 families who were referred to the prosecuting attorney’s office received invitations to appear before the board, and they would not have necessarily guaranteed their attendance. 

Ann Lear, the board’s newest member, expressed concern that an additional step could further delay a student’s improvement in attendance.

The motion died after failing to garner additional support, but the issue was brought up again during the patron comment portion of the meeting by former School Board candidate Anna Lemon.

“I know (Karr is) very defensive about this whole situation, and that’s unfortunate,” Lemon said. 

Lemon suggested the board and the district were unaware of what was happening with its families and that it wasn’t enacting its policies thoroughly enough. She also stated it was the responsibility of the district to prevent families from falling through the cracks, even if those families use “colorful language.”

In the notes field for a family that had been referred to the prosecuting attorney’s office, Karr noted that a parent did not show up to any of the scheduled meetings, but she did call the district’s office and called her a “stupid b****,” “a f***ing c***” and threatened to come to the office and bury her alive. The attendance rate of that parent’s student improved by seven percent after the family’s referral to the prosecuting attorney’s office.

Most attendance rates improved following the referrals, in one instance jumping as high as nearly 20 percentage points. Three students were pulled from the district by their families following the referral.

One such family was referred after a year and a half of intervention attempts from the district. Karr’s data showed the parents “felt strongly that the school should not interfere with their choice to not send their child to school.” The family withdrew from the district in December and placed their child in parochial school.

Another family, with a student with an attendance rate of roughly 42 percent, was invited to attend the meeting with the JCC and CD for the second year in a row but was subsequently referred. The student’s mother “pulled to homeschool” the child in October, stating that “it’s not mom’s responsibility and she doesn’t want the school to contact her again.”

The third, with an attendance rate around 62 percent, was pulled from the district for homeschooling because the district did not teach through alternative artistic methods such as dance or music.

“Our teachers (and) our staff are bending over backwards,” Superintendent Susan Johnson said. “We do everything to avoid having to go that direction (of referring families to the prosecuting attorney’s office). We just want to educate their children … I’m very proud of this district and the staff for what they do, and I’m proud of our parents.”

The board’s next meeting is set for 6 p.m. June 18 in the Hannibal Middle School auditorium, 4700 McMasters Avenue.

A copy of the board’s entire informational packet for the May 2025 meeting, including Karr’s data on attendance and related disciplinary actions, can be found here.