An equity score of 77/100 ranks Talbot County #21 of 216 districts in Georgia (state average 50). Derived live from how evenly resources are distributed across the district's schools.
At $22,998 per pupil, Talbot County ranks #5 of 219 Georgia districts by per-pupil spending (Georgia districts). NCES F-33 finance data.
408
Total Enrollment
1
Schools
$22,998
Per-Pupil Spending
Combined
School Types
District-Level NCES Analysis
Talbot County operates 1 public schools serving 408 students, placing it among the smallest districts in Georgia. The school portfolio breaks down into 1 combined schools, a small enough portfolio that most families will interact with nearly every campus in the district at some point. These enrollment and school figures come from the NCES Common Core of Data (CCD) 2024-25 release, and the district is based in Talbot County.
Per-pupil expenditure runs $22,998 according to the NCES F-33 School District Finance Survey, among the top 22 of 219 Georgia districts by per-pupil spending. See how Georgia compares in our national per-pupil spending analysis. The funding mix is 49.4% local, 35.7% state, and 14.9% federal, a balanced mix across local, state, and federal sources, spreading budget risk across funding cycles rather than concentrating it in one. The district's equity score is 77/100, ranked #21 of 216 in Georgia against a state average of 50, notably more even than the typical district in the state for how evenly funding reaches its schools.
a 364:1 student-counselor ratio, well above the ASCA benchmark though still under the roughly 408:1 national average, and 3.0% chronic absenteeism from the 2021-22 Civil Rights Data Collection. Demographically, the student body averages 88.7% African American, 9.6% White, 0.5% Hispanic or Latino across the district's schools.
Central Elementary/High School accounts for 89.2% of all Talbot County student enrollment
That is an overwhelming concentration, leaving the rest of Talbot County a distant remainder — means Talbot County-wide averages can mask substantial variation outside the largest entity. Grade band: combined. The share measures enrollment concentration only; it does not establish how the district allocates programs, capital, or staff. Because it contains a majority of the affected population, enrollment-weighted aggregates will sit closer to this entity's reported fields than to those of smaller peers; an unweighted entity count answers a different question.
Talbot County reports 100.0% free-lunch eligibility
The reported share is above 87.5%, so economic need is widespread across the measured student population. Title I operates under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015), but its statutory allocation uses additional LEA-level counts and rules not represented by this average. This percentage is an economic-need context measure; it does not establish a Title I award, show dollars received, or describe how funds are distributed among campuses.
Talbot County student-counselor ratio is 364:1 — high (typically associated with staffing constraints that limit per-student counselor time; CRDC data shows higher ratios cluster in larger urban systems)
student-counselor ratio is the simplest comparative metric but it does not capture the full picture: the ratio counts FTE counselors against total enrollment, districts that contract intervention or social-emotional staff outside the counselor classification may be under-counted Higher values may reflect larger urban scale or recent resource constraints that have widened the gap.
Talbot County chronic absenteeism rate is 3.0% — well below typical (typically associated with unusually small scale or exceptionally high per-unit investment)
chronic absenteeism rate is the simplest comparative metric but it does not capture the full picture: a student is chronically absent if they miss ≥10% of enrolled days for any reason, illness, family obligations, or disengagement Values this far below typical often correlate with unusually small scale or population characteristics rather than higher resource budgets per se — worth checking whether the underlying denominator is itself an outlier.