51����

What 51����s Are Doing to Support Mental Health in 2025

As mental health concerns among children and adolescents continue to rise, public schools are playing an increasingly vital role in providing early intervention, support and referrals. In 2025 many public schools are embracing multi-layered strategies to support student wellbeing: embedding prevention efforts, bolstering school-based services, enhancing screening, and engaging families and communities. This article explores current practices, challenges and examples of how public schools are supporting mental health in 2025.

Why mental health support in public schools matters

Public schools are uniquely positioned to address student mental health for several reasons: they act as accessible sites for young people, they can promote social-emotional development within the school environment, and they can coordinate with community mental health resources. Research shows that when students feel connected to their school and supported in their emotional wellbeing, outcomes improve.

Yet the need remains high: more than half of students with mental health concerns go without adequate support. Against this backdrop, public schools are increasingly adopting practices to respond to student mental health in 2025.

Key strategies being implemented

Below are four major strategies public schools are using in 2025 to support mental health.

1. Expanding school-based mental health services

One of the most direct approaches is increasing in-school mental health professionals and services. For example, the U.S. federal School‑Based Mental Health Services Grant Program (SBMH) is

Measuring Student Success in 51����s: Beyond Test Scores

As public schools navigate shifting educational landscapes in 2025, it is imperative to reassess how we measure student success. Traditional reliance on standardized test scores provides only a narrow lens on student achievement. For parents, students, and educators alike, recognizing broader indicators of success in public schools offers a more complete and equitable view of school performance and student growth.

Why We Must Move Beyond Test Scores

Standardized tests historically served as the dominant metric for student and school performance. However, research shows several limitations:

• Test scores often fail to capture growth, engagement, and other non-academic dimensions of success.

• They correlate strongly with external factors such as socioeconomic status and family background rather than purely reflecting school quality.

• Recent commentary suggests test-based assessments may even derail student engagement and learning if overemphasized.

Thus, measuring student success in public schools demands a more holistic, multi-dimensional approach. The goal is not to eliminate test scores entirely but to integrate them into a broader framework of indicators.

Key Dimensions of Student Success in 51����s

Below is a summary table of dimensions that public schools should consider when measuring student success:

Transfer Pathways: Moving from One 51���� District to Another

When a student moves from one public school district to another—or when a family wishes to transition their child to a non-resident district—the concept of transfer pathways becomes critical. Whether prompted by a relocation, school fit concerns, academic programs or safety issues, navigating the process of moving between public school districts in 2025 requires preparation, awareness of state/district rules, and proactive communication. This article outlines key considerations, steps, eligibility factors and expert commentary to help parents, students and educators make informed decisions about district-to-district transfers.

Why Families Choose to Use Transfer Pathways

Families may pursue transferring a student between public school districts for several reasons:

• Relocation to a new address outside the student’s current district boundary.

• Seeking a better academic program, extracurricular offering or specialized service that the resident district may not offer.

• Safety, health or hardship issues that make the current school environment less appropriate.

• Opportunity for open-enrollment or inter-district choice policies in certain states.

Understanding the motivation early helps frame which type of transfer pathway is relevant—whether an intra-district move, inter-district “choice” transfer or a residency-related enrollment change.

Terminology: Intra- vs. Inter-District Transfers

It is useful to distinguish between common terms:

• Intra-district transfer: The student remains within their home

Public schools play an essential role in supporting students from low-income households — especially those eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (FRPL). This article outlines how public schools support students on free/reduced-price lunch programs, examines key strategies in 2025, and presents insights for parents, educators, and policymakers.

Understanding the Free/Reduced-Price Lunch Program

The federal National School Lunch Program (NSLP) offers free or reduced-price meals to eligible students. Eligibility is determined based on family income: children from households at or below 130 % of the federal poverty level qualify for free meals, and those between 130 %–185 % for reduced-price meals.

Statistics from recent data:

• More than 95,000 schools serve lunches to approximately 29.7 million students daily.

• Schools where a large share of students qualify for FRPL are more likely to offer additional nutrition-related programs.

Thus, being eligible for free or reduced-price lunch signals significant need — and schools aim to respond with structured support.

Key Support Strategies in 51����s

Public schools use a range of strategies to support students eligible for free/reduced-price lunch programs:

1. Ensuring Access to Nutritious Meals

By providing free or reduced-price lunches — and in some cases breakfasts — schools help reduce food insecurity and nutrition shortfalls. Research shows students participating in school meals:

• Are less likely to experience food insecurity.