New Research Reveals Significant Attendance and Behavioral Gains from Connecticut’s Targeted Home Visit Program for Chronically Absent Students

Education policy researchers evaluating a statewide initiative designed to combat chronic absenteeism in Connecticut have released compelling new data indicating that structured, in-person home visits by educators yield substantial improvements in student attendance, behavior, and academic engagement. According to the evaluation of Working Paper 35961, published in October 2026, the Learner Engagement and Attendance Program (LEAP)—launched initially in the summer of 2021—significantly re-engaged students who had become severely disconnected from the classroom during and after the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Utilizing comprehensive, student-level longitudinal data spanning the 2021-22 through the 2023-24 academic years, the study implemented rigorous event-study methodologies to isolate the causal impacts of the intervention. Researchers accounted for selection bias, controlling for both observable and unobservable student characteristics, to arrive at precise estimates of the program’s efficacy. The findings demonstrate that participating students experienced a remarkable 4 to 5 percentage point increase in overall attendance rates, alongside a dramatic 13 to 15 percentage point decline in chronic absenteeism. Furthermore, the evaluation documented a 3 to 5 percentage point decrease in disciplinary incidents among targeted youth, suggesting broad-based improvements not only in physical presence at school, but also in student noncognitive skills and behavioral regulation.

Background Context and the Rise of Chronic Absenteeism

The genesis of Connecticut’s LEAP initiative lies in the unprecedented educational disruption triggered by the global public health crisis of 2020. Across the United States, school closures, remote learning environments, and the subsequent societal readjustment led to an alarming spike in chronic absenteeism—traditionally defined as missing 10 percent or more of the school year for any reason, excused or unexcused. In economically disadvantaged urban districts, these challenges were magnified by systemic hurdles, including housing instability, digital divides, food insecurity, and a general erosion of trust between historically underserved communities and public school systems.

Recognizing that traditional truancy interventions—such as automated warning letters, legal notices, or punitive measures—often alienate struggling families rather than support them, state policymakers and educational leaders sought a radically different paradigm. Rather than waiting for families to walk through school doors, LEAP inverted the dynamic by sending trusted school personnel directly to the doorsteps of chronically absent students.

The strategy was intentionally concentrated on Connecticut’s 15 most disadvantaged school districts, targeting areas where educational disparities were most acute. By fostering direct, collaborative relationships between teachers, support staff, students, and parents, the program aimed to diagnose the root causes of absenteeism, rebuild institutional trust, and provide a direct bridge back to the classroom environment.

Chronology and Implementation of the LEAP Initiative

The timeline of the initiative reflects a calculated, phased rollout designed to meet an urgent crisis with structured intervention:

• Spring 2021: State and local educational leaders conceptualize LEAP as a targeted, relationship-based recovery effort, securing funding and designing protocols for home-visiting teams comprising teachers, social workers, and paraprofessionals.
• Summer 2021: The pilot phase of LEAP is officially launched. Districts begin organizing training for home-visiting personnel, focusing on empathetic listening, cultural competency, and family engagement strategies rather than compliance enforcement.
• Academic Year 2021–22: Full implementation takes root across Connecticut’s 15 most under-resourced school districts. Districts begin systematically identifying chronically absent students, particularly those who have fallen completely off the grid. Researchers begin tracking longitudinal student data to capture baseline metrics.
• Academic Year 2022–23: The program expands its reach, incorporating lessons learned from the initial rollout. State education agencies collaborate with academic researchers to design evaluation frameworks capable of measuring long-term behavioral and academic trajectories.
• Academic Year 2023–24: The final cohort of data within the current study window is collected. Researchers finalize models to control for selection bias and unobservable student traits, observing sustained positive effects across multiple academic parameters.
• October 2026: Working Paper 35961 is officially published, providing the empirical foundation for how structured home-visiting frameworks impact post-pandemic educational recovery.

Detailed Empirical Findings and Data Analysis

The core of Working Paper 35961 relies on sophisticated econometric modeling designed to overcome the inherent complexities of educational interventions. Because students are not randomly assigned to home visits—rather, they are targeted based on severe attendance deficits—researchers utilized advanced event-study designs to control for selection bias.

Initial unadjusted models hinted at treatment effects that grew larger over time. However, once researchers corrected for selection on unobservables, the data revealed that the treatment effects remained consistently stable over the multi-year evaluation period. This methodological rigor ensures that the reported gains reflect the genuine causal impact of the LEAP intervention rather than pre-existing trends or confounding variables.

The quantitative results are striking across several dimensions:

• Attendance Rate Increase: Students who received the LEAP intervention experienced an average increase of 4 to 5 percentage points in their annual attendance rates. For a student on the brink of academic failure due to missed instruction, this margin often represents dozens of critical hours back in the classroom.
• Reduction in Chronic Absenteeism: The most pronounced metric of success is the 13 to 15 percentage point decline in chronic absenteeism among participants. Given how stubborn chronic absenteeism has proven to be in the post-pandemic era, a double-digit reduction represents a major policy breakthrough.
• Behavioral Improvements: Beyond mere physical presence, the intervention yielded a 3 to 5 percentage point decline in disciplinary incidents. Researchers note this is a strong proxy for enhanced noncognitive development, emotional regulation, and improved student-school alignment.
• Demographic Equity: Notably, the positive impacts of LEAP were broadly distributed across demographic lines. The benefits did not favor any single subgroup; similar academic and behavioral improvements were recorded uniformly across different genders, racial and ethnic groups, and socioeconomic statuses as measured by eligibility for free or reduced-price lunch.

Perspectives from Educators and Policy Analysts

While the empirical data provides a robust macro-level view of the program’s success, interviews with educational stakeholders, district administrators, and child welfare advocates illuminate the human mechanics driving these numbers.

“When a teacher or school counselor shows up at a family’s home not to issue a reprimand, but to listen, offer resources, and ask how the school can help overcome barriers, the entire dynamic shifts,” noted a state education official familiar with the program’s administration. “Families struggling with housing transitions, transportation breakdowns, or acute economic stress often feel entirely abandoned by institutional bureaucracies. LEAP humanizes the school system.”

Child advocates and education policy analysts have similarly praised the initiative for shifting the policy paradigm away from punitive truancy enforcement. For decades, standard operating procedure for chronic absenteeism involved warning letters, court referrals, and punitive fines—methods that criminologists and educators agree frequently exacerbate the underlying problems by destabilizing families further. By investing upfront resources into proactive, relational outreach, Connecticut’s approach aligns with contemporary developmental psychology, which emphasizes relational safety and trust as prerequisites for cognitive engagement.

Economists studying human capital development point out that the reduction in disciplinary incidents is just as vital as the increase in attendance. Disciplinary actions—such as out-of-school suspensions—frequently compound attendance deficits and accelerate academic alienation. By lowering disciplinary infractions through targeted support, LEAP appears to break the self-reinforcing cycle of absenteeism and behavioral disruption.

Broader Policy Implications and Future Outlook

As school districts nationwide continue to grapple with persistent post-pandemic learning loss and historically high rates of student absenteeism, the findings from Working Paper 35961 offer a clear, empirically validated roadmap for intervention. The success of Connecticut’s LEAP initiative challenges the prevailing assumption that large-scale systemic problems require purely technological or administrative solutions. Instead, it underscores the enduring power of human-centric, labor-intensive interventions.

However, scaling and sustaining such programs presents ongoing operational challenges for policymakers. Home-visiting initiatives require significant financial investment to compensate educators and support staff for out-of-school hours, specialized professional development in trauma-informed communication, and robust administrative coordination. Districts operating under tight budgetary constraints must weigh the upfront costs of staffing home-visit teams against the long-term societal and financial savings associated with higher graduation rates, reduced juvenile justice involvement, and enhanced workforce readiness.

Furthermore, the research points to the necessity of continuous empirical evaluation. As school systems look to replicate LEAP in other jurisdictions, researchers emphasize that maintaining fidelity to the core principles of the program—empathy, active listening, resource linkage, and non-punitive engagement—is paramount. Programs that devolve into compliance checks or bureaucratic compliance audits are unlikely to replicate the impressive 13 to 15 percentage point reductions in chronic absenteeism documented in Connecticut.

Ultimately, Working Paper 35961 provides policymakers with a rare piece of good news in the ongoing narrative of educational recovery. By proving that targeted, relational home visits can durably improve attendance, behavior, and engagement across diverse student populations, Connecticut has established a benchmark model for how public school systems can successfully reconnect with their most vulnerable learners.