28 minutes ago, theguru said:

 

The Board also asked for additional data on the potential adoption of multipliers, including their enrollments prior to classification, and for consideration of a "success factor" to be included in the realignment considerations. The Board will continue to study this information and consider options, with implementation no earlier than the 2029 season, using data from the 2027 and 2028 seasons.

 

If the KHSAA wanted to make a significant, impactful adjustment to the alignment, they would create a Free and Reduced Lunch adjustment that lowers student enrollment numbers for schools that have high numbers of free and reduced lunch students. It is a fact that schools with higher percentages of FRL students have less participation in athletics, especially football. Just to add, RPI needs to be flushed down the toilet. It is a terrible system.

18 hours ago, Builder1214 said:

If the KHSAA wanted to make a significant, impactful adjustment to the alignment, they would create a Free and Reduced Lunch adjustment that lowers student enrollment numbers for schools that have high numbers of free and reduced lunch students. It is a fact that schools with higher percentages of FRL students have less participation in athletics, especially football. Just to add, RPI needs to be flushed down the toilet. It is a terrible system.

It is an interesting point you bring up but correlation is not causation.  With that said, I am not saying I am necessarily in disagreement with you if we are going to start moving teams around but I think we need to look deeper at it.

For argument's sake, what schools have a lot of free and reduced lunch students but are also "good" in football?  Anyone?

9 minutes ago, theguru said:

It is an interesting point you bring up but correlation is not causation.  With that said, I am not saying I am necessarily in disagreement with you if we are going to start moving teams around but I think we need to look deeper at it.

For argument's sake, what schools have a lot of free and reduced lunch students but are also "good" in football?  Anyone?

I added the KDE public spreadsheet... almost every high school that is public is on this as school wide qualifying. I got down the the Bullitt County schools and the only high school I saw not private and under 75% free and reduced was Bullitt East at about 30% I'm not sure if we can apply a multiplier to everyone and it mean anything.

2024-2025FinalQualifyingData.xlsx

19 hours ago, theguru said:

This jumped out at me:

The Board also asked for additional data on the potential adoption of multipliers, including their enrollments prior to classification, and for consideration of a "success factor" to be included in the realignment considerations. The Board will continue to study this information and consider options, with implementation no earlier than the 2029 season, using data from the 2027 and 2028 seasons.

===========

Hey KHSAA, if you are going to go to a multiplier, what are you going to do with Trinity and St. Xavier? And if the answer is nothing, then a multiplier is complete garbage. 

They'll just make a seventh class with two teams and then some one will be the champion and the other the runner-up lol. Actually about 20 years ago I suggested to Julian to go to 111 classes and everyone would either be a champion or runner-up. That's about as crazy as having 6 classes for 222 teams as far as I'm concerned. Always amazes me that no one ever talks about classifying basketball. As I watch scores I notice more disparity in boys than girls.

4 minutes ago, AppalachianTactician said:

I added the KDE public spreadsheet... almost every high school that is public is on this as school wide qualifying. I got down the the Bullitt County schools and the only high school I saw not private and under 75% free and reduced was Bullitt East at about 30% I'm not sure if we can apply a multiplier to everyone and it mean anything.

We need would need someone to get the right data column from that spreadsheet and maybe list the top 50 high schools on free or reduced lunch.  That spreadsheet is a lot..

1 hour ago, theguru said:

It is an interesting point you bring up but correlation is not causation.  With that said, I am not saying I am necessarily in disagreement with you if we are going to start moving teams around but I think we need to look deeper at it.

For argument's sake, what schools have a lot of free and reduced lunch students but are also "good" in football?  Anyone?

I believe a list of schools was provided in a thread a few years ago, back when Boone County was suggesting that change. Which the list provided other schools that had similar numbers in regards to free and reduced lunch, but were also successful on the field. I will see if I can find that thread. 

1 hour ago, theguru said:

We need would need someone to get the right data column from that spreadsheet and maybe list the top 50 high schools on free or reduced lunch.  That spreadsheet is a lot..

Notable schools with 90% of students on free and reduced lunch or higher:

1A - Campbellsville, Russellville

2A - Mayfield, Danville

3A - Bell County, Central, Hart County, Glasgow

4A - Paducah Tilghman

5A - Owensboro, Butler, Southwestern

6A - Bryan Station

Just trying to think of schools that have experienced fairly recent success. I may have missed some.

3 minutes ago, WKU52 said:

Notable schools with 90% of students on free and reduced lunch or higher:

1A - Campbellsville, Russellville

2A - Mayfield, Danville

3A - Bell County, Central, Hart County, Glasgow

4A - Paducah Tilghman

5A - Owensboro, Butler, Southwestern

6A - Bryan Station

Just trying to think of schools that have experienced fairly recent success. I may have missed some.

Thank you and in my opinion that list of schools "blows up" any basis for moving schools down in class based on free or reduced lunch students. 

Could any of you imagine some of those teams moving down in class, for any reason!?

6 minutes ago, WKU52 said:

Notable schools with 90% of students on free and reduced lunch or higher:

1A - Campbellsville, Russellville

2A - Mayfield, Danville

3A - Bell County, Central, Hart County, Glasgow

4A - Paducah Tilghman

5A - Owensboro, Butler, Southwestern

6A - Bryan Station

Just trying to think of schools that have experienced fairly recent success. I may have missed some.

Site Name	Percent Free and Reduced
Paul G Blazer High School (* CEP Sponsor)	86.19%
Bardstown High School (* CEP Sponsor)	87.60%
Bell County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Larry A Ryle High School	36.01%
Conner High School	36.42%
Bowling Green High School (* CEP Sponsor)	81.66%
Boyle County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	62.75%
Bullitt East High School	31.75%
Campbellsville MS/Campbellsville HS (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Bishop Brossart High	9.52%
Covington Catholic High	6.11%
Newport Central Catholic HS	16.59%
Christian County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
George Rogers Clark High School (* CEP Sponsor)	81.39%
Corbin High School (* CEP Sponsor)	81.02%
Danville High School (* CEP Sponsor)	98.22%
Trinity High School	28.11%
Owensboro Catholic High School	11.59%
Elizabethtown High School (* CEP Sponsor)	60.94%
Bryan Station High School (* CEP Sponsor)	97.52%
Tates Creek Middle School (* CEP Sponsor)	95.44%
Lafayette High School (* CEP Sponsor)	51.38%
Frederick Douglas High School (* CEP Sponsor)	68.40%
Franklin County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	75.50%
Glasgow High School (* CEP Sponsor)	90.85%
John Hardin High School (* CEP Sponsor)	75.33%
North Hardin High School (* CEP Sponsor)	74.99%
Central Hardin High School (* CEP Sponsor)	56.10%
Hazard High School (* CEP Sponsor)	94.21%
Madisonville North Hopkins High School (* CEP Sponsor)	74.85%
DuPont Manual High (* CEP Sponsor)	31.90%
Central High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Atherton High School (* CEP Sponsor)	60.80%
Louisville Male High School (* CEP Sponsor)	63.76%
Johnson Central High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Dixie Heights High School (* CEP Sponsor)	65.89%
North Laurel High School (* CEP Sponsor)	85.12%
Logan County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	76.22%
Madison Central High School (* CEP Sponsor)	74.82%
Mayfield High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Middlesboro Middle School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Murray High School (* CEP Sponsor)	62.51%
North Oldham High School	12.59%
Owensboro High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Paducah Tilghman High School (* CEP Sponsor)	94.91%
Belfry High School (* CEP Sponsor)	83.60%
Pikeville High School (* CEP Sponsor)	46.37%
Pulaski County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	86.61%
Raceland-worthington High School (* CEP Sponsor)	75.36%
Scott County High School	41.92%
Great Crossing High School (* CEP Sponsor)	64.42%
Franklin-Simpson High School (* CEP Sponsor)	72.26%
Somerset High School (* CEP Sponsor)	88.51%
South Warren High School (* CEP Sponsor)	50.26%
Woodford County High School	43.00%

10 minutes ago, AppalachianTactician said:

 

Site Name	Percent Free and Reduced
Paul G Blazer High School (* CEP Sponsor)	86.19%
Bardstown High School (* CEP Sponsor)	87.60%
Bell County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Larry A Ryle High School	36.01%
Conner High School	36.42%
Bowling Green High School (* CEP Sponsor)	81.66%
Boyle County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	62.75%
Bullitt East High School	31.75%
Campbellsville MS/Campbellsville HS (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Bishop Brossart High	9.52%
Covington Catholic High	6.11%
Newport Central Catholic HS	16.59%
Christian County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
George Rogers Clark High School (* CEP Sponsor)	81.39%
Corbin High School (* CEP Sponsor)	81.02%
Danville High School (* CEP Sponsor)	98.22%
Trinity High School	28.11%
Owensboro Catholic High School	11.59%
Elizabethtown High School (* CEP Sponsor)	60.94%
Bryan Station High School (* CEP Sponsor)	97.52%
Tates Creek Middle School (* CEP Sponsor)	95.44%
Lafayette High School (* CEP Sponsor)	51.38%
Frederick Douglas High School (* CEP Sponsor)	68.40%
Franklin County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	75.50%
Glasgow High School (* CEP Sponsor)	90.85%
John Hardin High School (* CEP Sponsor)	75.33%
North Hardin High School (* CEP Sponsor)	74.99%
Central Hardin High School (* CEP Sponsor)	56.10%
Hazard High School (* CEP Sponsor)	94.21%
Madisonville North Hopkins High School (* CEP Sponsor)	74.85%
DuPont Manual High (* CEP Sponsor)	31.90%
Central High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Atherton High School (* CEP Sponsor)	60.80%
Louisville Male High School (* CEP Sponsor)	63.76%
Johnson Central High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Dixie Heights High School (* CEP Sponsor)	65.89%
North Laurel High School (* CEP Sponsor)	85.12%
Logan County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	76.22%
Madison Central High School (* CEP Sponsor)	74.82%
Mayfield High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Middlesboro Middle School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Murray High School (* CEP Sponsor)	62.51%
North Oldham High School	12.59%
Owensboro High School (* CEP Sponsor)	100.00%
Paducah Tilghman High School (* CEP Sponsor)	94.91%
Belfry High School (* CEP Sponsor)	83.60%
Pikeville High School (* CEP Sponsor)	46.37%
Pulaski County High School (* CEP Sponsor)	86.61%
Raceland-worthington High School (* CEP Sponsor)	75.36%
Scott County High School	41.92%
Great Crossing High School (* CEP Sponsor)	64.42%
Franklin-Simpson High School (* CEP Sponsor)	72.26%
Somerset High School (* CEP Sponsor)	88.51%
South Warren High School (* CEP Sponsor)	50.26%
Woodford County High School	43.00%

Thank you for doing that for us all and again everyone, the free lunch move down in football class idea is dead on arrival. 

36 minutes ago, theguru said:

Thank you for doing that for us all and again everyone, the free lunch move down in football class idea is dead on arrival. 

CEP sponsor is explained below. These school districts have chosen to give free lunch. The school districts are paying to give the whole school Free lunch. These districts do not ever collect financial information. They choose to compensate all families regardless of income. The existence of CEP and schools not being forced to present actual information would be an issue for any type of alignment adjustment.

This is what Minnesota does. 

MSHSL enrollment:

MSHSL enrollment is determined by the schools Minnesota Department of Education enrollment in year one in grades 9 – 12 minus 40 percent of their educational benefit (free and reduced lunch).

The Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) is a meal service option for schools in high poverty communities to serve breakfast and lunch at no cost to all enrolled students without collecting household applications. Eligible schools adopting CEP are reimbursed using a formula based on the percentage of students categorically eligible for free meals based on their participation in other specific means-tested programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and income eligible Medicaid participants.

School/district administrators must consider financial factors prior to participating in CEP. This is especially true for schools at a lower identified student percentage (ISP). If there is a difference between the cost of serving lunches and breakfasts at no cost to all participating children and funding available to support CEP, the school/district must pay that difference with non-Federal funding sources. Sources of non-Federal funds may include State and local funds, cash donations and in-kind contributions from outside sources, such as volunteer services.

6 minutes ago, Builder1214 said:

CEP sponsor is explained below. These school districts have chosen to give free lunch. The school districts are paying to give the whole school Free lunch. These districts do not ever collect financial information. They choose to compensate all families regardless of income. The existence of CEP and schools not being forced to present actual information would be an issue for any type of alignment adjustment.

This is what Minnesota does. 

MSHSL enrollment:

MSHSL enrollment is determined by the schools Minnesota Department of Education enrollment in year one in grades 9 – 12 minus 40 percent of their educational benefit (free and reduced lunch).

The Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) is a meal service option for schools in high poverty communities to serve breakfast and lunch at no cost to all enrolled students without collecting household applications. Eligible schools adopting CEP are reimbursed using a formula based on the percentage of students categorically eligible for free meals based on their participation in other specific means-tested programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and income eligible Medicaid participants.

School/district administrators must consider financial factors prior to participating in CEP. This is especially true for schools at a lower identified student percentage (ISP). If there is a difference between the cost of serving lunches and breakfasts at no cost to all participating children and funding available to support CEP, the school/district must pay that difference with non-Federal funding sources. Sources of non-Federal funds may include State and local funds, cash donations and in-kind contributions from outside sources, such as volunteer services.

Unless I'm missing something, almost every single school in Kentucky is a CEP sponsor.

6 minutes ago, Builder1214 said:

CEP sponsor is explained below. These school districts have chosen to give free lunch. The school districts are paying to give the whole school Free lunch. These districts do not ever collect financial information. They choose to compensate all families regardless of income. The existence of CEP and schools not being forced to present actual information would be an issue for any type of alignment adjustment.

This is what Minnesota does. 

MSHSL enrollment:

MSHSL enrollment is determined by the schools Minnesota Department of Education enrollment in year one in grades 9 – 12 minus 40 percent of their educational benefit (free and reduced lunch).

The Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) is a meal service option for schools in high poverty communities to serve breakfast and lunch at no cost to all enrolled students without collecting household applications. Eligible schools adopting CEP are reimbursed using a formula based on the percentage of students categorically eligible for free meals based on their participation in other specific means-tested programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and income eligible Medicaid participants.

School/district administrators must consider financial factors prior to participating in CEP. This is especially true for schools at a lower identified student percentage (ISP). If there is a difference between the cost of serving lunches and breakfasts at no cost to all participating children and funding available to support CEP, the school/district must pay that difference with non-Federal funding sources. Sources of non-Federal funds may include State and local funds, cash donations and in-kind contributions from outside sources, such as volunteer services.

I see, so basically we don't know.  With that said, I think all schools should provide students with a free lunch and great job to all the CEP Sponsor schools for doing so.