At a meeting of the Joint Committee on the Public Schools, state and district leaders described student mental health challenges as a major contributor to chronic absenteeism and outlined a range of responses districts are using to keep students connected to school.

"We're talking about student mental health and chronic absenteeism," Chairwoman Verlina Reynolds Jackson said as she opened the session.

Why it matters: Speakers from urban, suburban and rural districts told legislators that absenteeism is not a single problem and therefore requires multiple solutions. Superintendents reported higher needs for students with anxiety and other mental‑health challenges after the pandemic, longer waits for child psychiatry, and costly out‑of‑district placements for students who cannot be served in their home districts.

Newark, Pascack Valley and other districts described systems-level steps taken to prevent and respond to absences. "We are in fact in year 5 of our historic 10 year strategic plan," said Roger Leon, superintendent of Newark Public Schools, describing data tracking and a partnership with Communities In Schools. Leon also told the committee that Newark's chronic‑absenteeism rate has been below the state average for two consecutive years.

Pascack Valley Regional Schools Superintendent Dr. Sarah Belotti emphasized school avoidance as an anxiety‑driven phenomenon. "We kind of term this in more of a terminology of school avoidance," she said, and described tiered interventions including guidance‑level check‑ins, modified schedules, wellness centers and, when appropriate, home instruction.

Trenton Superintendent James Earl said his district discovered health‑related reasons — not transportation or safety — were the top drivers of absences in local surveys, and that the district uses attendance officers and community street teams to reduce barriers. "We focused on the adults and we believe it's critically important to reinforce, for adults to come every day," Earl said, explaining that staff presence influences student attendance.

Telehealth and outside partners were raised repeatedly as ways to expand clinical capacity. Bob McCullough of Hazel Health said the company’s telehealth work has been associated with clinical improvements: "we've been able to show a decrease of almost 80 percent in anxiety and depression symptoms after just a few telehealth sessions," he told the committee, and reported district studies showing large reductions in absenteeism after telehealth was introduced.

Districts described a mix of lower‑cost and intensive responses. Old Bridge reported its chronic‑absenteeism rate rose from about 5% pre‑COVID to more than 18% and has fallen to about 9% after adding mental‑health coaches, attendance liaisons and engagement programs such as esports. Springfield Superintendent Dr. Rachel Goldberg said a small number of students placed outside the district are costly: her district budgeted about $650,000 in 2025–26 to serve fewer than eight students placed out of district, and she said many private placements exceed $100,000 per year. By contrast, a Union County Educational Services Commission therapeutic program cited by Goldberg costs about $63,000 per pupil.

Advocates and providers pressed for more school‑based mental‑health staffing and clearer roles. Jennifer Kerenti of the New Jersey School Counselor Association said counselors are essential for early, preventive work and noted recommended ratios are about 1 counselor per 250 students; attendees said many districts fall short of that level.

Parents' access to services, special‑education processes and inequitable application of truancy enforcement also emerged as recurring concerns. Peg Kinsel of the SPAN Parent Advocacy Network noted limits on instructional time for students receiving home instruction: "home instruction is 5 hours a week for a kid that's not classified and only 10 hours a week for a student that's classified," she said, and warned that those limits can leave some students under‑served.

What districts are doing: the committee heard examples including schoolwide attendance tracking (daily tools such as Tableau), buddy systems, traveling attendance trophies, home visits, parent action plans, parent workshops, wellness centers, in‑school therapeutic programs, expanded counseling pay scales to recruit staff, partnerships with community schools and telehealth providers, expanded shared services via county educational services commissions, and pilot walking‑school‑bus programs and street teams to address transportation and safety perceptions.

Challenges and gaps: multiple speakers reported long wait times for child psychiatry evaluations, trouble recruiting licensed mental‑health staff in some areas despite competitive pay in others, and uneven access to coordinated community services. Speakers also said the drivers of absenteeism vary locally — with poverty, housing instability, family illness, bullying amplified by social media, and immigration‑related fears all cited — and that a one‑size‑fits‑all approach will not work.

The committee did not take formal votes at the session. Members said staff would follow up with data requests, including district rates of home instruction tied to mental‑health reasons and comparative attendance figures.

Looking ahead: Committee members and witnesses repeatedly urged a combination of increased school‑based mental‑health staffing, state support for district or regional therapeutic options, better data collection on out‑of‑school placements and informal removals, and sustained partnerships with community organizations as ways to reduce chronic absenteeism and its academic consequences.

The hearing transcript and materials will be circulated to committee members for follow‑up and possible legislative or budgetary recommendations.