Do people lie about FARMS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing that puzzles me is the huge discrepancy between FARM rates for certain schools and the poverty rate and median income figures from the census. Whenever I have looked at schools in the area, there seems to be huge differences. Take Lee HS and the Springfield CDP (which basically covers only central Springfield, not west Springfield). As I recall, the FARMs rate at Lee HS is around 50%, but the census numbers for he Springfield CDP say the poverty rate is something like 7% with a median household income around $90k. What accounts for such a significant difference?

In the Lee HS area specifically (although I dont know exactly the boundary lines so I apologize if my assumptions are bordering into Edison/W Springfield/Hayfield territory), I would guess that the discrepancy is because of several factors that result the phenomenon of a higher income for families w/o school aged kids + lower income for those w/school aged kids:

First, because it is an older neighborhood there are many families whose children have grown up--they have lived there forever. So these families likely have a higher income simply due to age. I'm in my late 30s and when I was in school, Lee didnt suck as bad as it did now. Plenty of people I know's parents still live where they always have--schools dont matter anymore so they have no reason to move. So you get high income from this group but no FARMS because no school aged kids.

Second, there a lot of townhomes/condos that are likely inhabited by single people/couples w/no kids/families w/kids who arent in school yet... Granted there are a lot of older garden style apartments that are going to feed into the high FARMS rate and increase the poverty level. But I'm talking about the newer condos/apartments. A high income for these families seems believable.

So, while the single family houses zoned for Lee are pretty...modest...leading to the FARMs rate being 50%, there are plenty of households w/non-school-aged children who are doing just fine.

This. I have no problem believing Lee is legitimately 50% FARMS and not because anyone is lying about it. The area off Backlick, near Fresh World, that feeds into Lee is quite poor and it isn't the only poor area feeding into Lee.

PP's explanation is probably most likely, but otherwise I would be inclined to believe that either certain areas are not considered part of Springfield CDP for whatever reason, OR they're not counting the people there properly. Undocumented immigrants do not necessarily participate in the census.

You should google Springfield CDP boundary map if you want to see the boundaries. If anything, the numbers for the Springfield CDP should be worse than the Lee HS numbers because the Springfield CDP does not include the Saratoga area which is probably the wealthiest area that feeds into Lee. The reasons mentioned certainly explain some of the differences in the numbers, but the discrepancy is big enough that I'm not willing to conclude that part of the difference could also be attributable to families claiming eligibility for FARMs even if they don't actually meet the income requirements.

The CDP data also states that there are 2.9 people per house. So I think that some faulty census taking could be to blame for the discrepancy. Some of the aforementioned multi family households off of backlick rd could have opted out of taking the census for reasons related to legal status in this country, either of themselves or their family.

Additionally CDP data states that 58% of the area is married couples living alone. Which leaves 33% families w children under the age of 18. Seeing as some of those go to w Springfield and some go to private schools and not all of the children under 18 are in high school , I think it's not a long shot that there it is correct that 900ish kids at Lee (50%) are legit farms.

If you look at the American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates that the census provides for the Springfield CDP, for the year 2014, it estimates that the percentage of families in the Springfield CDP with related children under 18 who are below poverty level to be 6.9% with a margin of error of +/- 3.4%. That same survey gives you estimates for actual numbers of families. Looking at those numbers, I don't see where you can get 900 kids at Lee HS below the poverty level unless the census numbers are so far off as to be laughable. Moreover, median household income in that same survey is estimated to be $89,516, while mean family income is estimated to be $111,115. The income numbers are even higher if you look at just families.

No one in the Springfield CDP is zoned for West Springfield (although some certainly pupil place). Sure, some families of means opt for private. And, as I stated earlier, the wealthiest area that feeds into Lee isn't even part of the Springfield CDP numbers. Based on the census numbers, 900 kids at Lee under the poverty level does seem like a long shot. Maybe the census numbers are just totally crazy and wrong, and the FARMs numbers provided by FCPS are actually accurate. I don't know. It just seems to me that there is some sort of discrepancy here that can't be explained by, well, just look at all the cheap garden apartments off of Backlick - half the kids at Lee must be coming from poverty. I'm not saying lots of families are lying to get FARMs, but I have yet to find a good explanation why the numbers are so different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing that puzzles me is the huge discrepancy between FARM rates for certain schools and the poverty rate and median income figures from the census. Whenever I have looked at schools in the area, there seems to be huge differences. Take Lee HS and the Springfield CDP (which basically covers only central Springfield, not west Springfield). As I recall, the FARMs rate at Lee HS is around 50%, but the census numbers for he Springfield CDP say the poverty rate is something like 7% with a median household income around $90k. What accounts for such a significant difference?

In the Lee HS area specifically (although I dont know exactly the boundary lines so I apologize if my assumptions are bordering into Edison/W Springfield/Hayfield territory), I would guess that the discrepancy is because of several factors that result the phenomenon of a higher income for families w/o school aged kids + lower income for those w/school aged kids:

First, because it is an older neighborhood there are many families whose children have grown up--they have lived there forever. So these families likely have a higher income simply due to age. I'm in my late 30s and when I was in school, Lee didnt suck as bad as it did now. Plenty of people I know's parents still live where they always have--schools dont matter anymore so they have no reason to move. So you get high income from this group but no FARMS because no school aged kids.

Second, there a lot of townhomes/condos that are likely inhabited by single people/couples w/no kids/families w/kids who arent in school yet... Granted there are a lot of older garden style apartments that are going to feed into the high FARMS rate and increase the poverty level. But I'm talking about the newer condos/apartments. A high income for these families seems believable.

So, while the single family houses zoned for Lee are pretty...modest...leading to the FARMs rate being 50%, there are plenty of households w/non-school-aged children who are doing just fine.

This. I have no problem believing Lee is legitimately 50% FARMS and not because anyone is lying about it. The area off Backlick, near Fresh World, that feeds into Lee is quite poor and it isn't the only poor area feeding into Lee.

PP's explanation is probably most likely, but otherwise I would be inclined to believe that either certain areas are not considered part of Springfield CDP for whatever reason, OR they're not counting the people there properly. Undocumented immigrants do not necessarily participate in the census.

You should google Springfield CDP boundary map if you want to see the boundaries. If anything, the numbers for the Springfield CDP should be worse than the Lee HS numbers because the Springfield CDP does not include the Saratoga area which is probably the wealthiest area that feeds into Lee. The reasons mentioned certainly explain some of the differences in the numbers, but the discrepancy is big enough that I'm not willing to conclude that part of the difference could also be attributable to families claiming eligibility for FARMs even if they don't actually meet the income requirements.

The CDP data also states that there are 2.9 people per house. So I think that some faulty census taking could be to blame for the discrepancy. Some of the aforementioned multi family households off of backlick rd could have opted out of taking the census for reasons related to legal status in this country, either of themselves or their family.

Additionally CDP data states that 58% of the area is married couples living alone. Which leaves 33% families w children under the age of 18. Seeing as some of those go to w Springfield and some go to private schools and not all of the children under 18 are in high school , I think it's not a long shot that there it is correct that 900ish kids at Lee (50%) are legit farms.

If you look at the American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates that the census provides for the Springfield CDP, for the year 2014, it estimates that the percentage of families in the Springfield CDP with related children under 18 who are below poverty level to be 6.9% with a margin of error of +/- 3.4%. That same survey gives you estimates for actual numbers of families. Looking at those numbers, I don't see where you can get 900 kids at Lee HS below the poverty level unless the census numbers are so far off as to be laughable. Moreover, median household income in that same survey is estimated to be $89,516, while mean family income is estimated to be $111,115. The income numbers are even higher if you look at just families.

No one in the Springfield CDP is zoned for West Springfield (although some certainly pupil place). Sure, some families of means opt for private. And, as I stated earlier, the wealthiest area that feeds into Lee isn't even part of the Springfield CDP numbers. Based on the census numbers, 900 kids at Lee under the poverty level does seem like a long shot. Maybe the census numbers are just totally crazy and wrong, and the FARMs numbers provided by FCPS are actually accurate. I don't know. It just seems to me that there is some sort of discrepancy here that can't be explained by, well, just look at all the cheap garden apartments off of Backlick - half the kids at Lee must be coming from poverty. I'm not saying lots of families are lying to get FARMs, but I have yet to find a good explanation why the numbers are so different.

Does the school get many out-boundary students?

In "bad" DC schools, few neighbors send their kids there, so 80 or 90% kids come from elsewhere, often from poorer areas with "worse" schools.

This alone explains high school FARM rates in otherwise wealthy areas.

[Anonymous]

This gives good explanations as to why census numbers aren't accurate for lower income, non native English speaking and rural families...

http://www.civilrights.org/census/accurate-count/inaccuracies.html

[Anonymous]

Interesting article re why schools lie about inflated farms numbers... Basically it's not the parents lying it's the schools per this author...

http://educationnext.org/fraud-in-the-lunchroom/

[Anonymous]

How does the census calculate household income? Is it the same way FARMS does (individual family units) or are they actually combining everyone in the home? Because that would throw off pretty much anyone who lives in a basement.

But also, yes, honestly the census numbers in high FARMS areas are probably massively off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How does the census calculate household income? Is it the same way FARMS does (individual family units) or are they actually combining everyone in the home? Because that would throw off pretty much anyone who lives in a basement.

But also, yes, honestly the census numbers in high FARMS areas are probably massively off.

That is a good question. Thinking about it, I never completed a census form when I lived with roommates. I'm assuming someone else did...maybe... Or not. No idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing that puzzles me is the huge discrepancy between FARM rates for certain schools and the poverty rate and median income figures from the census. Whenever I have looked at schools in the area, there seems to be huge differences. Take Lee HS and the Springfield CDP (which basically covers only central Springfield, not west Springfield). As I recall, the FARMs rate at Lee HS is around 50%, but the census numbers for he Springfield CDP say the poverty rate is something like 7% with a median household income around $90k. What accounts for such a significant difference?

In the Lee HS area specifically (although I dont know exactly the boundary lines so I apologize if my assumptions are bordering into Edison/W Springfield/Hayfield territory), I would guess that the discrepancy is because of several factors that result the phenomenon of a higher income for families w/o school aged kids + lower income for those w/school aged kids:

First, because it is an older neighborhood there are many families whose children have grown up--they have lived there forever. So these families likely have a higher income simply due to age. I'm in my late 30s and when I was in school, Lee didnt suck as bad as it did now. Plenty of people I know's parents still live where they always have--schools dont matter anymore so they have no reason to move. So you get high income from this group but no FARMS because no school aged kids.

Second, there a lot of townhomes/condos that are likely inhabited by single people/couples w/no kids/families w/kids who arent in school yet... Granted there are a lot of older garden style apartments that are going to feed into the high FARMS rate and increase the poverty level. But I'm talking about the newer condos/apartments. A high income for these families seems believable.

So, while the single family houses zoned for Lee are pretty...modest...leading to the FARMs rate being 50%, there are plenty of households w/non-school-aged children who are doing just fine.

This. I have no problem believing Lee is legitimately 50% FARMS and not because anyone is lying about it. The area off Backlick, near Fresh World, that feeds into Lee is quite poor and it isn't the only poor area feeding into Lee.

PP's explanation is probably most likely, but otherwise I would be inclined to believe that either certain areas are not considered part of Springfield CDP for whatever reason, OR they're not counting the people there properly. Undocumented immigrants do not necessarily participate in the census.

You should google Springfield CDP boundary map if you want to see the boundaries. If anything, the numbers for the Springfield CDP should be worse than the Lee HS numbers because the Springfield CDP does not include the Saratoga area which is probably the wealthiest area that feeds into Lee. The reasons mentioned certainly explain some of the differences in the numbers, but the discrepancy is big enough that I'm not willing to conclude that part of the difference could also be attributable to families claiming eligibility for FARMs even if they don't actually meet the income requirements.

The CDP data also states that there are 2.9 people per house. So I think that some faulty census taking could be to blame for the discrepancy. Some of the aforementioned multi family households off of backlick rd could have opted out of taking the census for reasons related to legal status in this country, either of themselves or their family.

Additionally CDP data states that 58% of the area is married couples living alone. Which leaves 33% families w children under the age of 18. Seeing as some of those go to w Springfield and some go to private schools and not all of the children under 18 are in high school , I think it's not a long shot that there it is correct that 900ish kids at Lee (50%) are legit farms.

If you look at the American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates that the census provides for the Springfield CDP, for the year 2014, it estimates that the percentage of families in the Springfield CDP with related children under 18 who are below poverty level to be 6.9% with a margin of error of +/- 3.4%. That same survey gives you estimates for actual numbers of families. Looking at those numbers, I don't see where you can get 900 kids at Lee HS below the poverty level unless the census numbers are so far off as to be laughable. Moreover, median household income in that same survey is estimated to be $89,516, while mean family income is estimated to be $111,115. The income numbers are even higher if you look at just families.

No one in the Springfield CDP is zoned for West Springfield (although some certainly pupil place). Sure, some families of means opt for private. And, as I stated earlier, the wealthiest area that feeds into Lee isn't even part of the Springfield CDP numbers. Based on the census numbers, 900 kids at Lee under the poverty level does seem like a long shot. Maybe the census numbers are just totally crazy and wrong, and the FARMs numbers provided by FCPS are actually accurate. I don't know. It just seems to me that there is some sort of discrepancy here that can't be explained by, well, just look at all the cheap garden apartments off of Backlick - half the kids at Lee must be coming from poverty. I'm not saying lots of families are lying to get FARMs, but I have yet to find a good explanation why the numbers are so different.

I'm curious now too. I have been googling many things to try and figure this out. I'm going to move on to another school now... Maybe

Anyway, my strange obsession-of-the-day aside, I found this online. Are these the boundaries you expected for Lee? http://www.fcps.edu/images/boundarymaps/leehs.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How does the census calculate household income? Is it the same way FARMS does (individual family units) or are they actually combining everyone in the home? Because that would throw off pretty much anyone who lives in a basement.

But also, yes, honestly the census numbers in high FARMS areas are probably massively off.

It's clear to everyone that schools get funding based on EVERY SINGLE KID enrolled in the school, regardless of that the census says, correct?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How does the census calculate household income? Is it the same way FARMS does (individual family units) or are they actually combining everyone in the home? Because that would throw off pretty much anyone who lives in a basement.

But also, yes, honestly the census numbers in high FARMS areas are probably massively off.

It's clear to everyone that schools get funding based on EVERY SINGLE KID enrolled in the school, regardless of that the census says, correct?

... Yes?

[Anonymous]

I didn't really know much about the boundaries of Lee at all, but pretty much the top half of that map (minus maybe the far left part near Lake Accotink) has plenty of low income areas - either apartment complexes or houses with a lot of people living in them.

[Anonymous]

In PG, they lie all the time!

[Anonymous]

A ha! I have an answer! It seems that farms rates are not a good indicator of poverty level after all! There is not a direct correlation. Farms rates do tend to be much higher than poverty rates.

http://nces.ed.gov/blogs/nces/post/free-or-reduced-price-lunch-a-proxy-for-poverty

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In PG, they lie all the time!

Maybe you should start your own thread on the PG forum, then. This is about Virginia schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A ha! I have an answer! It seems that farms rates are not a good indicator of poverty level after all! There is not a direct correlation. Farms rates do tend to be much higher than poverty rates.

http://nces.ed.gov/blogs/nces/post/free-or-reduced-price-lunch-a-proxy-for-poverty

The reduced lunch portion does make sense.

Northern Virginia doesn't have any schools that have qualified and elected to provide free lunches to all students so that wouldn't apply here.

The "special circumstances" might explain some of it (migrant and foster children, etc.) Not all of it, though - the page lists Head Start students, but in NoVa Head Start is income based and the limits are below the poverty line unless that's changed recently.

[Anonymous]

I looked up my local HS/town I live in (western ffx cty). School FARMS rate is approx 25% while local poverty rate is 6-7%.