Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 21:48     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
I thought the sibling preference was once you are enrolled in the school which would mean that wouldn't kick in until your accepted student enrolls.



Anonymous wrote:Huh. This doesn’t line up with my results in a weird way.

My K matched at John Lewis (our #5 choice). Her brother was waitlisted there with waitlist #1 for 1st grade (and he matched with our #6 choice). Both kids’ lists were exactly the same.

I assumed this was because Lewis either didn’t offer any seats for 1st grade or offered one or two and they got taken by siblings. Fine.

But looking at this dashboard, Lewis took FIVE kids for 1st grade, four of whom were no preference. How on earth did four kids with no preference match when my kid, whose results clearly show a preference of “Sibling Offered” wasn’t offered a seat?

I was under them impression that this could only happen if my kid had matched to a school he ranked higher (then he’d be #1 on the waitlist where his sister matched). But that’s not the case - he matched with our #6 school.

Anyone have any idea how this could have happened? This is messing with my whole understanding of how the lottery works.
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 21:32     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Anonymous wrote:Oooh how thrilling! That was quick.

McKinley Tech matched 250 and waitlisted 12. This is the first year in the data that it filled its whole 250-seat offering. More applicants than last year.

Banneker had a dip in applicants, but matched 239 of 260 offered seats.

Walls had 1449 applicants, filled all 260 offered seats, and waitlisted 226.

For Ellington you have to go through each, but it seems like Cinema didn't fill, Dance did, Instrumental didn't, Museum Studies didn't, Tech didn't, Theater didn't, Visual didn't, and Vocal didn't. Leaving them pretty short of kids.



Banneker had 33 fewer applicants than last year - both years with over 1100 applicants. Would hardly classify that as a dip, but ok.

Wonder what it means that McKinley is accepting more students? Better qualified applicants or are they trying to grow?
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 21:30     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Huh. This doesn’t line up with my results in a weird way.

My K matched at John Lewis (our #5 choice). Her brother was waitlisted there with waitlist #1 for 1st grade (and he matched with our #6 choice). Both kids’ lists were exactly the same.

I assumed this was because Lewis either didn’t offer any seats for 1st grade or offered one or two and they got taken by siblings. Fine.

But looking at this dashboard, Lewis took FIVE kids for 1st grade, four of whom were no preference. How on earth did four kids with no preference match when my kid, whose results clearly show a preference of “Sibling Offered” wasn’t offered a seat?

I was under them impression that this could only happen if my kid had matched to a school he ranked higher (then he’d be #1 on the waitlist where his sister matched). But that’s not the case - he matched with our #6 school.

Anyone have any idea how this could have happened? This is messing with my whole understanding of how the lottery works.
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 21:16     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Anonymous wrote:Some of the schools list a large number of lottery spots, a number that is smaller for the # of applications and still have a waitlist. How do you interpret that?

For example, Truth had 200 spots, 178 applications, 89 matches, and 3 on the waitlist. Eastern had a similar discrepancy. Why is there still a waitlist?


In addition to the sibling issue mentioned already, could it be people doing post lottery applications?
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 21:09     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Looked over PreK data from a few areas in the city (NE, Capitol Hill, NW) and my quick take away is that virtually every PreK, even those most in demand, had fewer applicants this year (like 10+%) than last year, with just a couple exceptions including Mundo Verde Calle Ocho and ITDS. I’m curious if there has been a notable drop in younger families in DC (post pandemic and Trump) or if it’s more that there was the COVID baby bump (who are now mostly in PreK or K) and then a natural low year.


MV C8 appears to have offered significantly fewer lottery seats this year than last. Not sure why, but that might explain its longer list. Their other location is down a fair amount this year.


No, they have always been competitive. Waitlist moved more last year because of the swing space. That is not going to happen this year.
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 18:25     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Out of the 600+ applicants to 5th at Latin, (1) some people put Cooper higher because they live closer or already have a sibling there etc. matched at Cooper and were not waitlisted at 2nd Street (and vice versa), (2) some people listed Latin but put other options like Basis, 5th grade [insert dcps middle school] feeders, some option closer to them, got a high enough number to match at whatever they happened to list higher and they do not get waitlisted. Not everybody does the lottery entirely by DCUM logic.
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 18:22     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Anonymous wrote:Looked over PreK data from a few areas in the city (NE, Capitol Hill, NW) and my quick take away is that virtually every PreK, even those most in demand, had fewer applicants this year (like 10+%) than last year, with just a couple exceptions including Mundo Verde Calle Ocho and ITDS. I’m curious if there has been a notable drop in younger families in DC (post pandemic and Trump) or if it’s more that there was the COVID baby bump (who are now mostly in PreK or K) and then a natural low year.


MV C8 appears to have offered significantly fewer lottery seats this year than last. Not sure why, but that might explain its longer list. Their other location is down a fair amount this year.
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 18:18     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Seems like a brutal year for some of the less appealing schools, but still a tough year for the highly sought-after.


Agreed. If I read it right, like Walker Jones only filled 11 of the 28 prek3 spots.


Yes, but change the settings to View Multiple Years Instead and you'll see that it's not unusual for them. Some schools habitually fill up over the summer rather than the initial lottery-- and it's a good thing that people who move their address later in the year have a preschool to go to. If it's not unusual for the school over time, then it isn't a trouble sign. Look at Shining Stars for contrast. This year 18, year before 30, year before that 46-- not a good trend. Or Creative Minds matching 26 PK3s this year. 56 last year, 80 the year before...
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 18:11     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Anonymous wrote:Looked over PreK data from a few areas in the city (NE, Capitol Hill, NW) and my quick take away is that virtually every PreK, even those most in demand, had fewer applicants this year (like 10+%) than last year, with just a couple exceptions including Mundo Verde Calle Ocho and ITDS. I’m curious if there has been a notable drop in younger families in DC (post pandemic and Trump) or if it’s more that there was the COVID baby bump (who are now mostly in PreK or K) and then a natural low year.


https://dcpcsb.org/start-charter-school

You can look at the sector planning supplement here. There definitely is a notable drop in younger kids. It's showing in waitlists across the board, but also in the more troubled schools. SSMA for example matched only 19 kids for PK3, an all-time low for them. Some charter schools will not survive this. And some DCPS preschools will be smaller.

Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 17:36     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Anonymous wrote:Seems like a brutal year for some of the less appealing schools, but still a tough year for the highly sought-after.


Agreed. If I read it right, like Walker Jones only filled 11 of the 28 prek3 spots.
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 17:31     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Oooh how thrilling! That was quick.

McKinley Tech matched 250 and waitlisted 12. This is the first year in the data that it filled its whole 250-seat offering. More applicants than last year.

Banneker had a dip in applicants, but matched 239 of 260 offered seats.

Walls had 1449 applicants, filled all 260 offered seats, and waitlisted 226.

For Ellington you have to go through each, but it seems like Cinema didn't fill, Dance did, Instrumental didn't, Museum Studies didn't, Tech didn't, Theater didn't, Visual didn't, and Vocal didn't. Leaving them pretty short of kids.



I think this is wrong on Ellington being short of kids. My kid applied for tech and although it says they had 23 lottery seats, they told us in the application process they were only going to accept about a dozen. And it looks like that's exactly what they did. Same with another family I know that did theater. So I think the "lottery seats" column is misleading.


Agree. They do this annually and it matches what we were told for vocal.
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 17:30     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Looked over PreK data from a few areas in the city (NE, Capitol Hill, NW) and my quick take away is that virtually every PreK, even those most in demand, had fewer applicants this year (like 10+%) than last year, with just a couple exceptions including Mundo Verde Calle Ocho and ITDS. I’m curious if there has been a notable drop in younger families in DC (post pandemic and Trump) or if it’s more that there was the COVID baby bump (who are now mostly in PreK or K) and then a natural low year.
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 17:23     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Anonymous wrote:Does anyone understand why there is such a big gap between the number of applications on results day and the number of the waitlist? e.g. 5th grade basis 360 matched (140) or were waitlisted (220) out of 450 applications. This leaves 90 unaccounted for.

I assumed it was because students are not put on the waitlist if the school is listed lower in their ranking than the school they matched at. e.g. student matched at latin which is listed 1st is not waitlist at basis.

If this were true you would expect schools which are generally considered more desirable to have *fewer* unaccounted for applicants (i.e. almost everyone would be on the waitlist if they did not match). Because they would have fewer schools ranked above that school. But that is not the case. e.g.
- Basis has 90 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.8 between (matched+waitlist)/total applicants
- Latin 2nd street has 142 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.79
- Latin cooper has 140 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.78
- deal for 6th 187 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.62


That is interesting. My two theories would be that if you got into one, you had a good lottery number definitionally, so if there were a lot of people who put those as their top three but in different exact combinations that could be some of it.

Other theory would be people who don’t understand how the lottery works who think putting a competitive school high lowers their match chances.

But those are just theories, would be curious if anyone knows.
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 17:22     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Anonymous wrote:Does anyone understand why there is such a big gap between the number of applications on results day and the number of the waitlist? e.g. 5th grade basis 360 matched (140) or were waitlisted (220) out of 450 applications. This leaves 90 unaccounted for.

I assumed it was because students are not put on the waitlist if the school is listed lower in their ranking than the school they matched at. e.g. student matched at latin which is listed 1st is not waitlist at basis.

If this were true you would expect schools which are generally considered more desirable to have *fewer* unaccounted for applicants (i.e. almost everyone would be on the waitlist if they did not match). Because they would have fewer schools ranked above that school. But that is not the case. e.g.
- Basis has 90 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.8 between (matched+waitlist)/total applicants
- Latin 2nd street has 142 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.79
- Latin cooper has 140 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.78
- deal for 6th 187 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.62


I think comparing 5th to 6th is apples to oranges. And you need to take into account the EA waitlists, which Latin has and BASIS does not.
Anonymous
Post 04/05/2026 16:57     Subject: 26-27 Lottery data up
Does anyone understand why there is such a big gap between the number of applications on results day and the number of the waitlist? e.g. 5th grade basis 360 matched (140) or were waitlisted (220) out of 450 applications. This leaves 90 unaccounted for.

I assumed it was because students are not put on the waitlist if the school is listed lower in their ranking than the school they matched at. e.g. student matched at latin which is listed 1st is not waitlist at basis.

If this were true you would expect schools which are generally considered more desirable to have *fewer* unaccounted for applicants (i.e. almost everyone would be on the waitlist if they did not match). Because they would have fewer schools ranked above that school. But that is not the case. e.g.
- Basis has 90 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.8 between (matched+waitlist)/total applicants
- Latin 2nd street has 142 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.79
- Latin cooper has 140 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.78
- deal for 6th 187 unaccounted for or a ratio of 0.62