Fascinating stuff. Several completely opinion-based comments. As noted, the spending in higher poverty schools on a per-pupil basis is much higher and as noted, a primary reason is lower student-teacher ratios as mandated by governmental fiat. Why is this mandated? Because "the answer" to lower student achievement was decided years ago to be smaller classes. Of course, only once we (and I mean "we" as both individual taxpayers and society in general) spent enormous amounts pursuing this goal was it discovered that the problem is actually much more complex than that. Some (not all) of the people so ardently pursuing "parental choice" in schools do so because of this and other fiascos that have convinced them that we can continue to pour almost infinite amounts into our schools without substantial return. Looking at the amounts spent on education with a corresponding poor rate of return on results tends to be disheartening.

How does this relate to soccer? I have contended for some time that you can't blame high schools for not penetrating underserved communities; instead, local youth soccer clubs must shoulder the responsibility for this. Some people think that the answer to increasing the penetration of soccer into underserved communities is simple -- just lower club and even team fees to zero. However, the cost associated with club soccer in my experience is not typically the greatest barrier to participation. When you talk about 5-6 year old kids, they need a high level of parental support -- and in many underserved communities this is very difficult for two (or one) working parent/guardian to achieve. So techniques have to be created, and more importantly, executed, that augment and supplement this issue. And this is just one of the many issues.

I have greater faith in clubs doing this than I do governmental agencies fixing schools. I believe clubs have a vested interest because increasing its membership base will increase the long-term competitiveness of the club. The trouble is that most clubs only think about appeasing their existing customers instead of thinking about offering the best possible services to future customers.

I would like to believe that the SCYSA, which has as a mission to develop and promote youth soccer to all South Carolina youth, would take the lead in this. However, it doesn't appear as if they are interested. (Note: In their defense, I'm sure that they have a ton of issues with which they have to deal.) Therefore, it's going to be up to several clubs, or even partnerships/alliances of clubs, to invest the time, energy, and money into making this happen.

I believe that the return for clubs willing to do this is a new level of competitiveness in the long-term. And of course, the return for more of our youth involved in athletics has been well documented.

Again -- great subject -- thank you tremendously for raising it.