Chronic Absenteeism Is Hampering School Improvement Efforts in New York City What Can Be Done About It?
Introduction
There is a strong relationship between student attendance and success in school. As a 2007 report from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) explained, attendance data have great predictive value: students with regular attendance have better academic achievement and are less likely to drop out of school.[1] Those who are chronically absent in early grades are more likely to require interventions to be able read at grade level by third grade.[2] In 2023, the White House raised concerns[3] about how increased absenteeism puts students at greater risk for several adverse outcomes beyond school, including poor labor market prospects, diminished health, and greater involvement in the criminal justice system.[4]
Absenteeism has been on the rise since schools reopened after the Covid-19 pandemic. The Return to Learn Tracker, produced by the College Crisis Initiative (C2i) and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), shows that the average national chronic absenteeism rate almost doubled between 2019 (15%) and 2022 (28%).[5] Virtually all districts across the country experienced increased student absenteeism, but the growth was much higher in districts with low academic performance and high rates of low-income students.[6] AEI’s Nat Malkus, an education-policy expert and leading researcher on absenteeism, estimates that one in three students in those districts are chronically absent.
This issue brief provides descriptive statistics on chronic absenteeism in New York City public schools to help local policymakers address this issue and improve the city’s schools.
New York City’s rate of absenteeism is above the national average. The New York State Department of Education defines chronic absenteeism as missing 10% or more of the total days throughout the school year.[7] New York City public schools entered the pandemic with a 25% chronic absentee rate, which increased to 34.8% at the end of the 2023–24 school year.
Chronic absenteeism in New York City varies across demographics. Across all grades, students in temporary housing (as defined by the McKinney-Vento Act)[8] have the highest average chronic absentee rate (51.7%). The rate is 39.1% among low-income students, 41.5% among black students, and 41.7% among Hispanic students. White and Asian students have chronic absentee rates of 26.2% and 19.6%, respectively. Students with disabilities have a higher rate (44.8%) than those without (32%) (Table 1). (To be clear, rates across these groups do not sum to one hundred as they are not mutually exclusive.)
Table 1
Increase in Portion of Chronically Absent Students by Subgroup
| Grade | Subgroup | Chronically Absent SY 2018–19 | Chronically Absent SY 2023–24 | Increase in % of Chronically Absent |
| All Grades | All Students | 26.5% | 34.8% | 8.3 |
| All Grades | Students with Disabilities | 37.1% | 44.8% | 7.7 |
| All Grades | Students in Temporary Housing | 42.6% | 51.7% | 9.1 |
| All Grades | Low-Income | 30.4% | 39.1% | 8.7 |
| All Grades | English Language Learners | 28.0% | 39.7% | 11.7 |
| All Grades | Asian | 13.3% | 19.6% | 6.3 |
| All Grades | Black | 34.3% | 41.5% | 7.2 |
| All Grades | Hispanic | 31.8% | 41.7% | 9.9 |
| All Grades | Other | 23.2% | 30% | 6.8 |
| All Grades | White | 17.2% | 26.2% | 9.0 |
New York City’s chronic absentee rates also vary significantly by grade level. Pre-K has the highest rate of chronically absent students: over 60% for two of the past three years. The rate drops to 40.7% in kindergarten and continues to decrease in elementary and middle school. In high school, chronic absentee rates increase to the mid-30s, reaching 45.5% in grade 12 (Table 2).
Table 2
Increase in Portion of Chronically Absent by Grade Level
| Grade | Chronically Absent SY 2018–19 | Chronically Absent SY 2023–24 | Increase in % of Chronically Absent |
| All Grades | 26.5% | 34.8% | 8.3 |
| Pre-K | 43.3% | 54.4% | 11.1 |
| Kindergarten | 31.3% | 40.7% | 9.4 |
| 1 | 25.4% | 35.4% | 10.0 |
| 2 | 22.6% | 32.4% | 9.8 |
| 3 | 21.2% | 29.8% | 8.6 |
| 4 | 19.7% | 29.1% | 9.4 |
| 5 | 19.5% | 27.9% | 8.4 |
| 6 | 18.7% | 28.5% | 9.8 |
| 7 | 19.9% | 30% | 10.1 |
| 8 | 23.1% | 32.7% | 9.6 |
| 9 | 29.7% | 35.6% | 5.9 |
| 10 | 32.3% | 36.6% | 4.3 |
| 11 | 30.2% | 33.8% | 3.6 |
| 12 | 43.7% | 45.5% | 1.8 |
Source: NYC Public Schools, Infohub, “End-of-Year Attendance and Chronic Absenteeism Data”
This descriptive, school-level data does not allow a statistical analysis of interactions between student characteristics and grade level, but we can examine specific subgroups in which more than 50% of students are now chronically absent (Table 3).
Prekindergarten students at programs inside New York Department of Education (DOE) schools have a 54.4% chronic absentee rate. (Data are not available for students in community-based Pre-K centers.)
In kindergarten, students in temporary housing generally have a chronic absenteeism rate above 60%.
Among high schoolers, chronic absenteeism is highest for 12th graders, who are, by definition, usually on track to graduate. This is because students are assigned to a grade level based on their credit accumulation; those who are not on track to graduate on time because they are missing credits are thus classified as 9th, 10th, or 11th graders, regardless of age. High absenteeism among 12th graders may result in part from reduced attendance in the spring by students who either have fulfilled all their graduation requirements or, conversely, are on the verge of dropping out.[9] Among 12th graders, students with disabilities and students in temporary housing have the highest chronic absenteeism rate, at 56.3%.
Table 3
Subgroups with More Than 50% of Students Chronically Absent in SY 2023–24
| Grade | Subgroup | Chronically Absent SY 2018–19 | Chronically Absent SY 2023–24 | Increase in % of Chronically Absent |
| Pre-K in K–12 Schools | All Students | 43.3% | 54.4% | 11.1 |
| Kindergarten | Students in Temporary Housing | 53% | 61.2% | 8.2 |
| 1 | Students in Temporary Housing | 45.8% | 55.8% | 10.0 |
| 2 | Students in Temporary Housing | 40.4% | 53.4% | 13.0 |
| 9 | Students in Temporary Housing | 47.3% | 53.1% | 5.8 |
| 10 | Students in Temporary Housing | 49.6% | 50% | 0.4 |
| 10 | Students with Disabilities | 48.1% | 51% | 2.9 |
| 12 | Students in Temporary Housing | 57.0% | 56.3% | –0.7 |
| 12 | Students with Disabilities | 54.3% | 56.3% | 2.0 |
| 12 | Hispanic | 50.3% | 51.6% | 1.3 |
| 12 | English Language Learner | 57.5% | 56.3% | –1.2 |
| All Grades | Students in Temporary Housing | 42.6% | 51.7% | 9.1 |
Source: NYC Public Schools, Infohub, “End-of-Year Attendance and Chronic Absenteeism Data”
The persistence of chronic absenteeism even after the end of the pandemic is difficult to fully explain. This brief will focus on two important factors: a shift in parental attitudes toward attendance and the state’s ineffectiveness in its efforts to reduce chronic absenteeism.
Shift in Parental Attitudes
Public polling and interviews with New York City (NYC) charter-school educators reveal a shift in parental attitudes toward attendance. During the pandemic, the overall message was clear: stay at home to keep your families and others safe. But even as Covid-19 has receded, parents are maintaining this attitude if their kids show any symptoms of minor sickness. Here is what Mayor Bill de Blasio said on March 9, 2020:
Everyone can be a part of this. If you are sick, if you have those cold or flu-like symptoms, stay home. If your child’s sick, don’t send your child to school. Really basic stuff. If you’re someone with vulnerabilities and we’ve talked about that, we’ll go over it again, but certainly that means folks with pre-existing serious medical conditions, and particularly if they’re over 50 years old, you don’t want to visit folks who are sick. Even if you love your grandchildren, for example, you don’t want to go see your grandchildren if they happen to be sick. Even with a common cold, you just don’t want to do it, and so there are so many things that people can do that actually will determine the whole trajectory of this crisis.[10]
Until December 2021, DOE’s official policy was to quarantine close contacts of infected students for 10 days. That meant hundreds of classrooms were closed because students had been in contact with an infected student, regardless of whether they had any symptoms.
In an NPR/IPSOS survey of 2,237 adults, 51% of parents said they would keep their kid home for general sickness without a fever, and 49% said that their parents were stricter with them about missing school than they are with their own child.[11]
Many NYC educators can attest that parents have become more lenient about their kids skipping school if they say they are sick. Some teachers said that remote work has made it easier for some families to keep kids at home on weekdays. In general, many parents have come to believe, as one educator put it, that “missing school in non-testing grades is not a big deal.”
Second, the state has been ineffective in its efforts to reduce chronic absenteeism and has not made this a priority for schools.
In 2013, the New York State Council on Children and Families launched a campaign called “Every Student Present” to support parents, educators, and school staff in reducing absenteeism.[12] In 2017–18 (the first year for which data is available), New York State’s chronic absentee rate was 15%. This rate was stable until the pandemic, when it rose dramatically and remained at 25.1% in SY 2023–24. Unfortunately, New York City is not the only urban district facing high chronic absenteeism in the state. All other large urban school districts in the state have seen even higher increases in chronic absenteeism (Table 4).
Table 4
Percent of Chronically Absent Students in New York State Urban Districts
| District | Chronically Absent SY 2018–19 | Chronically Absent SY 2023–24 | Increase in % of Chronically Absent |
| Albany City School District | 37.8% | 31.8% | –6.0% |
| Buffalo City School District | 41.1% | 62.2% | 21.1% |
| Rochester City School District | 44.7% | 59.2% | 14.5% |
| Syracuse City School District | 34.7% | 46.8% | 12.1% |
Even more concerning is the recent decision by New York State to deemphasize chronic absenteeism. The state’s new plan—which it must publish to qualify for some funding from the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)[13]—has eliminated chronic absenteeism as a measure of school quality, which means that this will not be one of the measures by which the state evaluates the performance of school districts.[14] Sweeping the evidence under the rug is not a solution.
The NYC Schools Defying the Demographics
Generally, a school’s chronic absentee rate correlates with its student demographics. However, there are several schools in the city that have high attendance levels despite a demographic profile that would predict lower attendance. Some of the schools in this category are secondary and high schools that have special admissions, so their student population may differ from other NYC schools with the same demographics. Still, these schools might offer important lessons for how to reduce absenteeism, particularly at the elementary and middle school levels, which DOE should examine.
We started by selecting only the schools in the top decile of attendance rates. Most of these schools have similar demographic profiles, so we then looked for schools that did not fit the pattern.
Eight schools in the top decile for attendance rates also serve populations that are more than 60% black (Table 5). These eight schools also have high levels of low-income students (at least 69%), low levels of chronically absent students (less than 20%), and maintain an average attendance higher than 93%. No elementary schools are on this list—all are middle or high schools.
Table 5
Schools in the Top Decile of Attendance Rates with More Than 60% of Black Students
| School | Daily Attendance SY 2022–23 | Chronically Absent SY 2022–23 | Black Students | Low-Income Students | Grade Range |
| Science Skills Center High School for Science, Technology* | 94.02% | 19.14% | 60.84% | 84.54% | High School |
| High School for Youth and Community Development | 95.41% | 15.22% | 67.38% | 83.8% | High School |
| Science, Technology and Research Early College High School* | 96.07% | 11.56% | 73.2% | 69.12% | Secondary School |
| Medgar Evers College Preparatory School* | 95.2% | 13.14% | 82.58% | 90.63% | Secondary School |
| Brooklyn Science and Engineering Academy | 93.8% | 19.27% | 85.23% | 77.84% | Middle School |
| Brooklyn College Academy* | 95.02% | 13.25% | 66.61% | 70.73% | High School |
| Pathways College Preparatory School | 95.16% | 13.6% | 75.04% | 74.88% | Secondary School |
| Eagle Academy for Young Men III | 95.24% | 14.37% | 82.37% | 69.68% | Secondary School |
There are 32 schools in the top decile of attendance rates with greater than 60% low-income students (Table 6). Six of these schools serve elementary students and thus could offer particularly helpful lessons for reducing absenteeism in the early grades.
Table 6
Schools in the Top Decile of Attendance Rates with More Than 60% of Low-Income Students
| School | Daily Attendance SY 2022–23 | Chronically Absent Students SY 2022–23 (%) | Low-Income Students | Grade Range |
| Central Park East High School* | 96.26% | 7.81% | 77.53% | High School |
| Science, Technology and Research Early College High* | 96.07% | 11.56% | 69.12% | Secondary School |
| Evergreen Middle School for Urban Exploration | 94.91% | 12.56% | 85.17% | Middle School |
| Medgar Evers College Preparatory School* | 95.20% | 13.14% | 90.63% | Secondary School |
| Brooklyn College Academy* | 95.02% | 13.25% | 70.73% | High School |
| Pathways College Preparatory School | 95.16% | 13.60% | 74.88% | Secondary School |
| Manhattan / Hunter Science High School* | 95.27% | 13.79% | 71.85% | High School |
| Eagle Academy for Young Men III | 95.24% | 14.37% | 69.68% | Secondary School |
| South Bronx International Middle School | 94.86% | 14.49% | 95% | Middle School |
| Pan American International High School | 95.08% | 14.58% | 95% | High School |
| High School for Youth and Community Development | 95.41% | 15.22% | 83.80% | High School |
| I.S. 227 Louis Armstrong | 94.51% | 15.36% | 66.38% | Middle School |
| Concourse Village Elementary School | 94.12% | 15.52% | 73.33% | Elementary School |
| High School of Telecommunication Arts and Technology | 94.27% | 15.87% | 76.36% | High School |
| M.S. 935 (Brooklyn) | 93.57% | 15.90% | 85.48% | Middle School |
| Manhattan Center for Science and Mathematics* | 94.16% | 16.11% | 78.34% | High School |
| M.S. 936 Arts Off 3rd* | 94.48% | 16.28% | 75.00% | Middle School |
| P.S. 031 Samuel F. Dupont | 93.81% | 16.86% | 67.62% | Elementary School |
| Jonas Bronck Academy* | 94.25% | 17.69% | 91.14% | Middle School |
| M.S. 890 | 93.90% | 18.36% | 78.07% | Middle School |
| Brooklyn Preparatory High School | 93.58% | 18.59% | 82.44% | High School |
| I.S. 145 Joseph Pulitzer | 93.82% | 18.65% | 90.11% | Middle School |
| J.H.S. 162 The Willoughby | 93.62% | 18.71% | 86.36% | Middle School |
| Science Skills Center High School for Science* | 94.02% | 19.14% | 84.54% | High School |
| P.S. 108 Philip J. Abinanti | 93.59% | 19.26% | 93.57% | Elementary School |
| Brooklyn Science and Engineering Academy | 93.80% | 19.27% | 77.84% | Middle School |
| Celia Cruz Bronx High School of Music* | 93.90% | 19.47% | 81.69% | High School |
| East Side Community School* | 93.63% | 19.66% | 65.81% | Secondary School |
| New 2021 D.24 MS in Building Q419 | 93.76% | 20.00% | 91.58% | Middle School |
| Pioneer Academy | 93.73% | 20.01% | 92.35% | Elementary School |
| Sunset School of Cultural Learning | 94.00% | 20.32% | 86.18% | Elementary School |
| P.S./I.S. 104 The Fort Hamilton School | 93.50% | 22.03% | 62.21% | K–8 |
Twenty-two schools have more than 20% of students with disabilities and are in the top decile of attendance rates (Table 7). They all have attendance rates higher than 93% and at least 44% of low-income students.
Table 7
Schools in the Top Decile of Attendance Rate and More Than 20% of Students with Disabilities
| School | Daily Attendance SY 2022–23 | Chronically Absent Students SY 2022–23 (%) | Students with Disabilities (%) | Grade Range |
| P.S. 026 The Carteret School | 93.72% | 19.68% | 23.19% | Elementary School |
| P.S. 222 Katherine R. Snyder | 93.64% | 20.58% | 23.12% | Elementary School |
| P.S. 127 Mckinley Park | 93.57% | 21.41% | 22.47% | Elementary School |
| The Academy of Talented Scholars | 93.67% | 19.12% | 24.36% | Elementary School |
| P.S. 042 Benjamin Altman | 94.97% | 14.88% | 23.55% | Elementary School |
| Eagle Academy for Young Men III | 95.24% | 14.37% | 24.73% | Secondary School |
| P.S. 219 Paul Klapper | 93.72% | 22.40% | 28.95% | K–8 |
| East Side Community School | 93.63% | 19.66% | 32.47% | Secondary School |
| Brooklyn Science and Engineering Academy | 93.80% | 19.27% | 25.28% | Middle School |
| P.S. 247 Brooklyn | 93.80% | 19.37% | 21.21% | Elementary School |
| High School of Telecommunication Arts and Technology | 94.27% | 15.87% | 21.52% | High School |
| P.S. 126 Jacob August Riis | 95.08% | 16.73% | 23.18% | K–8 |
| Central Park East High School* | 96.26% | 7.81% | 21.67% | High School |
| Concourse Village Elementary School | 94.12% | 15.52% | 22.67% | Elementary School |
| Celia Cruz Bronx High School of Music* | 93.90% | 19.47% | 20.48% | High School |
| M.S. 935 (Brooklyn) | 93.57% | 15.90% | 20.97% | Middle School |
| High School for Youth and Community Development | 95.41% | 15.22% | 20.26% | High School |
| The School of Creativity and Innovation | 93.75% | 20.60% | 25.13% | Elementary School |
| P.S. 164 Caesar Rodney | 94.07% | 18.13% | 25.93% | Elementary School |
| Jonas Bronck Academy* | 94.25% | 17.69% | 20.66% | Middle School |
| P.S. 169 Sunset Park | 94.11% | 19.33% | 21.94% | Elementary School |
| J.H.S. 162 The Willoughby | 93.62% | 18.71% | 20.98% | Middle School |
States Leading the Fight Against Chronic Absenteeism
New York’s policymakers could learn from other states that are addressing chronic absenteeism. In April 2023, Rhode Island governor Dan McKee announced that chronic absenteeism was an educational priority,[15] and the state launched an online Student Attendance Leaderboard that is updated daily and shows attendance for every public school in the state.[16] The governor has communicated to all state agencies and leaders that this is a priority. Thus far, this effort seems to be working: before the pandemic, 19% of Rhode Island students were chronically absent; in 2021, the rate increased to 34% but since then has dropped to 29% in 2022 and 25% in 2023.
Connecticut has taken a similar approach, with an online dashboard that is updated monthly with attendance data for all school districts. Chronic absenteeism rates in the state declined by 2.3 percentage points (from 20% to 17.7%) in one year, representing 11,674 fewer students missing at least 10% percent of school days. Over 80% of districts showed a decline in their chronic absenteeism rates from the 2022–23 to the 2023–24 school year.[17]
A fixable and manageable problem
The educators interviewed for this report were unanimous that this problem can be fixed if schools are laser focused on decreasing absenteeism.
The solution must include a mix of “carrots and sticks,” focusing on communicating and partnering with families to emphasize the importance of attendance from early grades.
Furthermore, educators explained part of the problem: at one charter school, a third of the students accounted for two-thirds of all the absences. Successful interventions, therefore, should focus on the students responsible for most absences. These interventions likely have benefits beyond a lower school-wide absence rate, because chronically absent students often negatively impact other students—more so than the occasional absentee—given the additional help they need when they are in school.
Chronic absence develops gradually, often starting with students not showing up to school on time. “Lateness is a gateway to absence,” says Arthur Samuels, cofounder and executive director of MESA Charter High School located in Bushwick, Brooklyn.[18]
MESA, which serves a disadvantaged student population,[19] has several policies to prevent students from arriving late. For example, high-level staff are present outside the building daily to greet and encourage students to enter the building. When students are late, they are taken to the office and made to call their family on speakerphone to explain why they were late. Good behavior is also rewarded: when a student who is constantly late arrives on time, the family gets a call to celebrate.
MESA also has a particular focus on seniors’ attendance. Students are allowed to go out for lunch only if they had a period punctuality—how often they arrived on time for every school period, which is rigorously tracked—of 85% or more in the previous month. There are also fun trips and free tickets to the prom available only for seniors who maintain good period punctuality. Samuels highlighted the importance of school culture and family communication in implementing all these policies. Students receive constant feedback on their absences and lateness. Teachers are required to have at least two positive interactions with families every week, and grade leaders ensure that every family is contacted periodically. As Samuels explained, “when we call the family with a problem about lateness or absence, there is already some goodwill because of previous positive interactions with school staff.”[20] MESA’s rate of chronic absenteeism in the 2021–22 school year was 31%, but it dropped to 26% and then to 22% in subsequent years.
Forte Prep Academy Charter School serves students from 5th to 8th grade and is currently expanding to high school. The school has family managers who are responsible for two grades and meet each student’s family during orientation. If a student is late or absent, the family manager texts or calls the family to let them know. If the issue continues, the senior staff at the school will get involved and develop a plan for the student to improve their attendance with clear consequences and rewards. In one case, the school and student agreed that her cell phone would be locked in school every time she was late—one Friday, she came late and was without her cell phone the entire weekend. But as a reward for regular attendance, the school offered a lunch with her friends paid for by the school. Forte Prep’s chronic absenteeism rate in the 2021–22 school year was 10.5%, and it decreased to 7.4% in 2022–23.[21]
One elementary charter school has focused all its communications with parents on the importance of establishing regular attendance from the first day of the school year. This message is highlighted at orientation, PT conferences, and curriculum nights. The message for parents was,“if your kid is not in school, they are not learning. Even one day makes a big difference: they will miss reading, writing, math, science and learning the school routines.”[22] Similarly, the Dream Charter School network requires that all principals in their network know precisely which students are chronically absent so that school staff can contact the family to develop a plan for the child.
The pre-K–8th grade Hellenic Classical Charter School is focused on bringing families to the school in person to develop a relationship with them, which can be valuable if absences slip. “No more virtual events anymore, we want the families to come into the building, it connects with attendance, they see our work and how the teachers care about their kids,” says Joy Petrakos, Chief of Operations of Hellenic Classical Schools. Every month, middle-school students with perfect attendance are rewarded with a pizza party and permission to not wear uniforms for a day. Prospect Schools has made attendance one of their key performance indicators to ensure that the entire staff is focused on it. Responsibility for contacting the families of chronically absent students has also been moved from the operations team to the director of student support and social workers since they have better expertise in communicating with families and can quickly provide resources.
Recommendations for the City and State of New York
New York City and State are not dealing systematically with their absenteeism problems. This will impact all other educational initiatives that are being planned and implemented. It is imperative that the political leaders in our city and state make student attendance a priority and provide leadership to reverse this disturbing trend. Here are a few recommendations to address this problem:
- Develop a public messaging campaign to families about the importance of regular school attendance, particularly in the early grades.
For the past few years, New York families heard from elected officials that they should keep their kids at home to keep them and others safe. Families have internalized that advice. Unless they hear a different message, this behavior will continue. Elected leaders should lead a campaign to explain to families the importance of regular attendance in school and its impact on kids’ success, not only in school but in life. It is particularly important that this message is aimed at the early grades, which have seen the highest increases in absenteeism. As part of their messaging, New York State leaders and local districts should not support measures that allow for more excused absences, such as mental health days. - Publish school-level absenteeism metrics timely and consider them as a measure of school success.
To fix problems related to chronic absenteeism, more needs to be understood about which students are chronically absent and why. We need more data, not less. The leading states on this issue have created systems that make rates of attendance and chronic absenteeism in their schools publicly available and are regularly updated. Unfortunately, New York is heading in the opposite direction. The absenteeism rates for the 2023–24 school year were only published in February of 2025. Untimely data, at both the state and national levels, can impact policymakers’ ability to understand the nature of the problem. Even more alarming is the proposal of the New York State Department of Education to remove these metrics as measures of success in schools. The state should reverse this proposal and continue to publish and monitor rates of chronic absenteeism in all school districts. Additionally, the New York State Senate should not pass bill 2023-S3179, which would amend the New York’s education law to allow students to miss school days for “the mental or behavioral health of the minor.”[23] - District superintendents should require school principals to learn who the chronically absent students are and develop a plan to contact their families.
Reducing chronic absenteeism will require schools whose leaders are laser focused on the problem. School superintendents across the state should ensure that all school principals are aware of the rate of chronic absenteeism in their schools and have a concrete plan on how to reduce it. Unless school leaders focus on this, all their other initiatives will be negatively impacted by the reality that students are missing too much learning time.
Acknowledgment
Thanks to Thomas Cronin for research assistance with this issue brief and Ray Domanico for his guidance and mentorship.
Endnotes
Photo: SDI Productions / E+ via Getty Images
Are you interested in supporting the Manhattan Institute’s public-interest research and journalism? As a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, donations in support of MI and its scholars’ work are fully tax-deductible as provided by law (EIN #13-2912529).