With the end of federal COVID-19 emergency funding and the inherent volatility of state income tax revenues, California school districts are in an era of financial uncertainty. Fortunately, Jurupa Unified School District is already several years into the process of finding ways to track and control expenses while still supporting teachers and staff so they can provide the best possible educational experience for our students. Here’s how we’re making staffing and payroll processes more efficient, starting with the perennially challenging extra duty.
Getting a handle on extra duty
In addition to our salaried staff, we have a number of part-time, hourly, and what we call “extra duty” assignments. Because a significant amount of our funding comes from grants, many of our assignments are temporary or one-time. We fill those positions with extra duty requests so we’re not committed to ongoing payroll obligations.
For many years, those extra duty requests and time cards were on paper, which meant the payroll department was performing redundant work to enter the information in the payroll system. The request forms we used were also on paper, making it very difficult to track the actual time being used back to the request, so we could be sure that the hours being used were within the limitations of the request. We needed a better control mechanism that would help school sites stay within budget, as well as a more formal budget mechanism to encumber the department and site budgets to cover the extra duty requests.
Budgeting can get very complicated because it’s cross-functional. It includes a position-control component, a payroll component, and a financial budgeting component. We needed a solution that could make all of those universes work together. The mission was either to find a system or build one. Our county office started a pilot program with our district to build a system, but ultimately decided against continuing with this effort due to the resources required to sustain such a system for 23 county districts.
Our district engaged in a competitive process and chose Helios Ed. Within six months, our team developed and launched a new system to address extra duty. Since then, we have saved more than $100,000 in staffing costs, time expenses, and budget overruns because of the stronger internal controls we now have in place.
A more efficient (and satisfied) payroll department
Eliminating redundant data entry and working with data instead of paper has allowed us to reduce staffing by two full-time equivalents–not through layoffs, but through attrition. And because they have a system that is handling data entry for them, our payroll department has more time to give quality to their work, and feel they are working at a level more aligned to their skills.
Finding efficiencies in your district
While Jurupa Unified has found efficiencies and savings in these specific areas, every school district is different. As many California district leaders like to say, we have 1,139 school districts –and just as many ways of doing things. With that in mind, there are some steps to the process of moving from paper to online systems (or using online systems more efficiently) that apply universally.
Sit down and identify your objectives. What are the critical components that you must have?
Make the decision to make or buy. When COVID first hit, Jurupa Unified created its own invoice-routing system through SharePoint. We’ve also built an excursion request process in PowerApps that handles travel, conferences, and field trips. As our county office found out, though, when you’re bringing a number of functionalities together, it can make more sense to work with a vendor you trust.
If you choose to buy software, be certain that it can do precisely what you need it to. If a vendor says they can develop a functionality along the way, ask to see the new feature before you buy.
Be certain the vendor will be responsive. When it comes to a function such as payroll, you’re dealing with people’s livelihoods, and you need to know that if there’s something wrong with the system, or if you need help, that help is just a phone call away.
Putting in a new payroll management system has made an enormous difference for our district, but it’s not the end of our cost-cutting process. We’re always looking at our different programs to see where we can cut back in ways that don’t impact the classroom. Ultimately, these changes are about ensuring that resources stay focused where they matter most. While budgets fluctuate and funding streams remain unpredictable, my team and I come to work every day because we believe in public education. I’m a product of public education myself, and I love waking up every day knowing that I can come back and support today’s students and teachers.
Jacqueline Benson, Jurupa Unified School District
Jacqueline Benson is the director of fiscal services at Jurupa Unified School District. She can be reached at [email protected].
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
by Kathryn Joyce, The Hechinger Report January 6, 2026
The West Shore school board policy committee meeting came to a halt almost as soon as it began. As a board member started going over the agenda on July 17, local parent Danielle Gross rose to object to a last-minute addition she said hadn’t been on the district’s website the day before.
By posting notice of the proposal so close to the meeting, charged Gross, who is also a partner at a communications and advocacy firm that works on state education policy, the board had violated Pennsylvania’s open meetings law, failing to provide the public at least 24 hours’ notice about a topic “this board knows is of great concern for many community members interested in the rights of our LGBTQ students.”
The committee chair, relentlessly banging her gavel, adjourned the meeting to a nonpublic “executive session.” When the committee reconvened, the policy was not mentioned again until the meeting’s end, when a lone public commenter, Heather Keller, invoked “Hamlet” to warn that something was rotten in the Harrisburg suburbs.
The proposed policy, which would bar trans students from using bathrooms and locker rooms aligned with their gender identity, was a nearly verbatim copy of one crafted by a group called the Independence Law Center — a Harrisburg-based Christian right legal advocacy group whose model policies have led to costly lawsuits in districts around the state.
“Being concerned about that, I remembered that we don’t partner with the Independence Law Center,” Keller said. “We haven’t hired them as consultants. And they’re not our district solicitor.”
To those who’d followed education politics in the state, Keller’s comment would register as wry understatement. Over the past several years, ILC’s growing entanglement with dozens of Pennsylvania school boards has become a high-profile controversy. Through interviews, an extensive review of local reporting and public documents, In These Times and The Hechinger Report found that, of the state’s 500 school districts, at least 20 are known to have consulted with or signed formal contracts accepting ILC’s pro bono legal services — to advise on, draft and defend district policies, free of charge.*
But over the last year, it’s become clear ILC’s influence stretches beyond such formal partnerships, as school districts from Bucks County (outside Philadelphia) to Beaver County (west of Pittsburgh) have proposed or adopted virtually identical anti-LGBTQ and book ban policies that originated with ILC — sometimes without acknowledging any connection to the group or where the policies came from.
In districts without formal partnerships with ILC, such as West Shore, figuring out what, exactly, their board’s relationship is to the group has been a painfully assembled puzzle, thanks to school board obstruction, blocked open records requests and reports of backdoor dealing.
Although ILC has existed for nearly 20 years, its recent prominence began around 2021 with a surge of “parents’ rights” complaints about pandemic-era masking, teaching about racism, LGBTQ representation and how library books and curricula are selected. In many districts where such debates raged, calls to hire ILC soon followed.
In 2024 alone, ILC made inroads of one kind or another with roughly a dozen districts in central Pennsylvania, including West Shore, which proposed contracting ILC that March and invited the group to speak to the board in a closed-door meeting the public couldn’t attend. (ILC did not respond to multiple interview requests or emailed questions.)
On the night of that March meeting, Gross organized a rally outside the school board building, drawing roughly 100 residents to protest, even as it snowed. The board backed down from hiring ILC, but that didn’t stop it from introducing ILC policies. In addition to the proposed bathroom policy, that May the board passed a ban on trans students joining girls’ athletics teams after they’ve started puberty and allowed district officials to request doctors’ notes and birth certificates to enforce it.
To Gross, it’s an example of how West Shore and other school boards without formal relationships with ILC have still found ways to advance the group’s agenda. “They’re waiting for other school boards to do all the controversial stuff with the ILC,” Gross said, then “taking the policies other districts have, running them through their solicitors, and implementing them that way.” (A spokesperson for West Shore stated that the district had not contracted with ILC and declined further comment.)
“It’s like a hydra effect,” said Kait Linton of the grassroots community group Public Education Advocates of Lancaster. “They’ve planted seeds for a vine, and now the vine’s taking off in all the directions it wants to go.”
Related: Become a lifelong learner. Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter featuring the most important stories in education.
ILC was founded in the wake of a Pennsylvania lawsuit that drew nationwide attention and prompted significant local embarrassment.
In October 2004, the Dover Area School District — situated, like West Shore, in York County, south of Harrisburg — changed its biology curriculum to introduce the quasi-creationist theory of “intelligent design” as an alternative to evolution. Eleven families sued, arguing that intelligent design was “fundamentally a religious proposition rather than a scientific one.” In December 2005, a federal court agreed, ruling that public schools teaching the theory violated the U.S. Constitution’s establishment clause.
During the case, an attorney named Randall Wenger unsuccessfully tried to add the creationist Christian think tank he worked for — which published the book Dover sought to teach — to the suit as a defendant, and, failing that, filed an amicus brief instead. When the district lost and was ultimately left with $1 million in legal fees, Wenger found a lesson in it for conservatives moving forward.
Speaking at a 2005 conference hosted by the Pennsylvania Family Institute — part of a national network of state-level “family councils” tied to the heavyweight Christian right organizations Family Research Council and Focus on the Family — Wenger suggested Dover could have avoided or won legal challenges if officials hadn’t mentioned their religious motivations during public school board meetings.
“Give us a call before you do something controversial like that,” Wenger said, according to LancasterOnline. Then, in a line that’s become infamous among ILC’s critics, Wenger invoked a biblical reference to add, “I think we need to do a better job at being clever as serpents.” (Wenger did not respond to multiple requests for comment.)
The following year, in 2006, the Pennsylvania Family Institute launched ILC with Wenger as its chief counsel, a role he remains in today, in addition to serving as chief operating officer. ILC now has three other staff attorneys and has worked directly as plaintiff’s attorneys on two Supreme Court cases: one was part of the larger Hobby Lobby decision, which allows employers to opt out of employee health insurance plans that include contraception coverage; the other expanded religious exemptions for workers.
ILC has financial ties and a history of collaborating with Christian right legal advocacy behemoth Alliance Defending Freedom, including on a 2017 lawsuit against a school district outside Philadelphia that allowed a trans student to use the locker room aligned with their gender. ILC has filed amicus briefs in support of numerous other Christian right causes, including two that led to major Supreme Court victories for the right in 2025: Mahmoud v. Taylor, which limited public schools’ ability to assign books with LGBTQ themes; and United States v. Skrmetti, which affirmed a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming care for minors. In recent months, the group filed two separate amicus briefs on behalf of Pennsylvania school board members in anti-trans cases in other states. In both cases, which were brought by Alliance Defending Freedom and concern school sports and pronoun usage, ILC urged the Supreme Court to “resolve the issue nationwide.”
In lower courts, ILC has worked on or contributed briefs to lawsuits seeking to start public school board meetings with prayer and to allow religious groups to proselytize public school students, among other issues. More quietly, as the local blog Lancaster Examiner reported — and as one ILC attorney recounted at a conference in 2022 — ILC has defended “conversion therapy,” the broadly discredited theory that homosexuality is a disorder that can be cured.
To critics, all of these efforts have helped systematically chip away at civil rights protections for LGBTQ students at the local level, seeding the policies that President Donald Trump’s administration is now trying to make ubiquitous through executive orders. And while local backlash is building in some areas, activists are hindered by the threat that the ILC’s efforts are ultimately aimed at laying the groundwork for a Supreme Court case that could formalize discrimination against transgender students into law nationwide.
But ILC’s greatest influence is arguably much closer to its Harrisburg home, in neighboring Lancaster and York counties, where nine districts have contracted ILC and at least three more have adopted its model policies.
The rural hillside and farmland in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, are seen on Aug. 15, 2025. The local school district, Penn Manor, adopted anti-trans and anti-LGBTQ policies presented by the Independence Law Center, a Harrisburg-based Christian-right legal advocacy group.
A sign is seen in a residential neighborhood in Holtwood, Pennsylvania.
In Lancaster’s Hempfield district, it started with a 2021 controversy over a trans student joining the girls’ track team. School board meetings that had already grown tense over pandemic masking requirements erupted in new fights about LGBTQ rights and visibility. In the middle of one meeting, recalled Hempfield parent and substitute teacher Erin Small, a board member abruptly suggested hiring ILC to write a new district policy. The suddenness of the proposal caused such public outcry, said Small, that the vote to hire ILC had to be postponed.
But within a few months, the district signed a contract with ILC to write what became Pennsylvania’s first school district ban on trans students participating in sports teams aligned with their gender identity. Other ILC policy proposals followed, including a successful 2023 effort to bar the district from using books or materials that include sexual content, which immediately prompted an intensive review of books written by LGBTQ and non-white authors. (The Hempfield district did not respond to requests for comment.)
In nearby Elizabethtown, the path to hiring ILC began with a fraudulent 2021 complaint, when a man claimed, during a school board meeting, that his middle schooler had checked out an inappropriate book from the school library. Although it later emerged that the man had reportedly used a fake name and officials found no evidence he had children attending the school, his claim nonetheless sparked a long debate over book policies, which eventually led to the district contracting ILC as special legal counsel in 2024. Two anti-trans policies were subsequently passed in January 2025, and a ban on “sexually explicit” books, also based on ILC’s models, was discussed this past spring but has not moved forward to date. (The Elizabethtown district did not respond to requests for comment.)
Across the Susquehanna River in York County — where five districts have contracted ILC and two more have considered or passed its policies — the group’s influence has been broad and sometimes confounding. In one instance, as the York Dispatch discovered, ILC not only authored four policy proposals for the Red Lion Area School District, but ILC senior counsel Jeremy Samek, a registered Pennsylvania lobbyist, also drafted a speech for the board president to deliver in support of three anti-trans policies, all of which passed in 2024. (The Red Lion district did not respond to requests for comment.)
The same year, South Western School District, reportedly acting on ILC advice, ordered a high school to cut large windows into the walls of two bathrooms that had been designated as “gender identity restrooms,” allowing passersby in the hallway to see inside, consequently discouraging students from using them. (The district did not respond to requests for comment, but in a statement to local paper the Evening Sun, school board President Matt Gelazela cited student safety and said the windows helped staff monitor for vaping, bullying and other prohibited activities.)
In many districts, said Lancaster parent Eric Fisher, ILC’s growing relationships with school boards has been eased by the ubiquitous presence around the state of its sister organizations within the Pennsylvania Family Institute, including the institute’s lobbying arm, voucher group, youth leadership conference and Church Ambassador Network, which brings pastors from across Pennsylvania to lobby lawmakers in the state Capitol.
As a result, said Fisher, when ILC shows up in a district, board members often are already familiar with them or other institute affiliates, “having met them at church and having their churches put their stamp of endorsement on them. I think it makes it really easy for [board members] to say yes.”
But in nearly every district that has considered working with ILC, wide-scale pushback has also followed — though often to no avail. In June 2024, in Elizabethtown — where school board fights have been so fractious that they inspired a full-length documentary — members of the public spoke in opposition to hiring ILC at a ratio of roughly 5 to 1 before the board voted unanimously to hire the group anyway.
In the Upper Adams district in Biglerville, southwest of Harrisburg, the school board voted to contract ILC despite a cacophony of public comments and a 500-signature petition in opposition.
In Lancaster’s Warwick district, the school board’s vote to hire ILC prompted the resignation of a superintendent who had served in her role for 15 years and who reported that the district’s insurance carrier had warned the district might not be covered in future lawsuits if it adopted ILC’s anti-trans policies.
Since then, Warwick resident Kayla Cook noted during a public presentation about ILC this past summer, the mood in the district has grown grim. “We do not have any students at the moment trying to participate [in sports] who are trans. However, we have students who simply have a short haircut being profiled as being trans,” Cook said. “It’s tipped far into fear-based behaviors, where we are dipping our toes into checking the student’s body to make sure that they’re identifying as the appropriate gender.” (A district spokesperson directed interview requests to the school board, which did not respond to requests for comment.)
But perhaps nowhere was the fight as fraught as in Lancaster’s Penn Manor School District, which hired ILC to draft new policies about trans students just months after the suicide of a trans youth from Penn Manor — the fifth such suicide in the Lancaster community in less than two years.
Before the Penn Manor school board publicly proposed retaining ILC, in June 2024 — scheduling a presentation by and a vote on hiring ILC for the same meeting — district Superintendent Phil Gale wrote to the board about his misgivings. In an email obtained by LancasterOnline, Gale warned the board against policies “that will distinguish one group of students from another” and passed along a warning from the district’s insurance carrier that adopting potentially discriminatory policies might affect the district’s coverage if it were sued by students or staff.
In a narrow 5-4 vote, the all-Republican board declined to hire ILC that June. But after one board member reconsidered, the matter was placed back on the agenda for two meetings that August.
Members of the community publicly presented an open letter, signed by roughly 80 Penn Manor residents, requesting that, if policies about trans students were truly needed, the district establish a task force of local experts to draft them rather than outsource policymaking to ILC. One of the letter’s organizers, Mark Clatterbuck, a religious studies professor at New Jersey’s Montclair State University, said the district never acknowledged it or responded. (Maddie Long, a spokesperson for Penn Manor, said the district could not comment because of the litigation.)
That February, Clatterbuck’s son, Ash — a college junior and transgender man who’d grown up in Penn Manor — had died by suicide, shortly after the nationally publicized death of Nex Benedict, a nonbinary 16-year-old in Oklahoma who died by suicide the day after being beaten unconscious in a high school girls’ bathroom.
In the first August meeting to reconsider hiring ILC, Clatterbuck told the Penn Manor board, through tears, how “living in a hostile political environment that dehumanizes them at school, at home, at church and in the halls of Congress” was making “life unlivable for far too many of our trans children.”
Two weeks later, at the second meeting, Ash’s mother, Malinda Harnish Clatterbuck, pleaded for board members talking about student safety to consider the children these policies actively harm.
“ILC does not even recognize trans and gender-nonconforming children as existing,” said Harnish Clatterbuck, a pastor whose family has lived in Lancaster for 10 generations. “That fact alone should preclude them from even being considered by the board.”
A painted portrait of Ash Clatterbuck in his parents’ home in Holtwood, Pennsylvania.
Malinda Harnish-Clatterbuck walks a labyrinth made in 2023 by her late son, Ash, on their property in Holtwood.
Hand-painted signs that once hung on the walls of Ash’s dorm room
Her husband spoke again as well, telling the board how Ash had frequently warned about the spread of policies that stoke “irrational hysteria around” trans youth — “the kind of policies,” Mark Clatterbuck noted, “that the Pennsylvania-based Independence Law Center loves to draft.”
Reminding the board that five trans youth in the area had died by suicide within just 18 months, he continued, “Do not try to tell me that there is no connection between the kind of dehumanizing policies that the ILC drafts and the deaths of our trans children.”
But the board voted to hire ILC anyway, 5-4, and in the following months adopted two of ILC’s anti-trans policies.
In anticipation of such public outcry, some school boards around Pennsylvania have taken steps to obscure their interest in ILC’s agenda.
Kristina Moon, a senior attorney at the Education Law Center of Pennsylvania, a legal services nonprofit that advocates for public school students’ rights, has watched a progression in how school boards interact with ILC.
When her group first began receiving calls related to ILC, around 2021, alarmed parents told similar stories of boards proposing book bans targeting queer or trans students’ perspectives, or identical packages of policies that included restrictions about bathrooms, sports and pronouns.
“At first, we would see boards openly talking about their interest in contracting with ILC,” said Moon. But as local opposition began to grow, “board members stopped sharing so publicly.”
Instead, Moon said, reports began to emerge of school boards discussing or meeting with ILC in secret.
In Hempfield, in 2022, the board moved some policy discussions into committee sessions less likely to be attended by the public, and held a vote on an anti-trans sports policy without announcing it publicly, possibly in violation of Pennsylvania’s Sunshine Act, as Mother Jones reported.
Across the state, in Bucks County, one Central Bucks school board member recounted in an op-ed for the Bucks County Beacon how her conservative colleagues had stonewalled her when she asked about the origins of a new book ban policy in 2022, only to have the board later admit ILC had performed a legal review of it “pro bono,” as PhillyBurbs reported.
Subsequent reporting by the York Daily Record and Reuters revealed the board’s relationship with ILC was more involved and included discussions about other policies related to trans student athletes and pronoun policy. (Both Central Bucks’ books and anti-LGBTQ policies were later cited in an ACLU federal complaint that cost the district $1.75 million in legal fees, as well as in a related Education Department investigation into whether the district had created a hostile learning environment for LGBTQ students.)
But the sense of backroom dealing reached an almost cartoonish level in York County, where, in March 2024, conservative board members from 12 county school districts were invited to a secret meeting hosted by a right-wing political action committee, along with specific instructions about how to keep their participation off the public radar. According to the York Dispatch, the invitation came from former Central York school board member Veronica Gemma, who (after losing her seat) was hired as education director for PA Economic Growth, a PAC that had helped elect 48 conservatives to York school boards the previous fall. (Gemma did not respond to interview requests.)
Gemma’s invitation was accompanied by an agenda sent by the PAC, which included a discussion about ILC and how board members could “build a network of support” and “advance our shared goals more effectively countywide.” The invitation also included the admonition that “confidentiality is paramount” and that each district should only send four board members or fewer — to avoid the legal threshold for a quorum that would make the meeting a matter of public record.
“Remember, no more than 4 — sunshine laws,” Gemma wrote.
In the wake of stories like these, Wenger’s 2005 suggestion that conservatives “become as clever as serpents” in concealing their intentions became ubiquitous in coverage of and advocacy against ILC — showing up in newspaper articles, in editorials and even on a T-shirt for sale online.
“I think it’s very obvious,” reflected Moon, “but if something has to be taking place in secrecy, I’m not sure it can be good for our students.”
But the lack of transparency shows up in subtler ways too, in the spreading phenomenon of districts adopting ILC policies without admitting where the policies come from. That was the case in Eastern York in 2025, where board members who had previously lobbied for an ILC pronoun policy later directed their in-house attorney to write an original policy instead, following the same principles but avoiding the baggage an ILC connection would bring.
In Elizabethtown (which did contract ILC), one policy was even introduced erroneously referencing clauses from another district’s code, in an indication of how directly districts are copy-pasting from one another.
In 2025, ILC attorney Jeremy Samek even seemed to acknowledge the trend, predicting that fewer districts might contract ILC going forward, since the combination of Trump’s executive orders on trans students and the general spread of policies similar to ILC’s meant “it’s going to be a lot easier for other schools to do that without even talking to us.”
In the face of what appears like a deliberate strategy of concealment, members of the public have increasingly turned to official channels to compel boards to disclose their dealings with ILC. Mark Clatterbuck did so in 2024 and 2025, filing 10 Right-to-Know requests with Penn Manor for all school board and administration communications with or about ILC and policies ILC consulted on and any records related to a set of specific keywords.
Thirty miles north, three Elizabethtown parents sued their school board in the spring of 2025, alleging it deliberately met and conferred with ILC in nonpublic meetings and private communications to “circumvent the requirements of the Sunshine Act.”
In both cases, and more broadly in the region, ILC critics are keenly aware that, by bringing complaints or lawsuits against the group or the school boards it works with, they might be doing exactly what ILC wants: furthering its chances to land another case before the Supreme Court, where a favorable ruling could set a dangerous national precedent, such as ruling that Title IX protections don’t cover trans students.
“They’re itching for a case,” said Clatterbuck. To that end, he added, his pro bono attorneys — at the law firm Gibbel Kraybill & Hess LLC, which also represents the Elizabethtown plaintiffs pro bono — have been careful not to do ILC’s work for it.
Largely, that has meant keeping the cases narrowly focused on Sunshine Act violations.
But in both cases, there are also hints of the larger issue at hand — of whether, in a repeat of the old Dover “intelligent design” case, ILC’s policies represent school boards imposing inherently religious viewpoints on public schools. After all, ILC’s parent group, the Pennsylvania Family Institute, clearly states its mission is to make Pennsylvania “a place where God is honored” and to “strengthen families by restoring to public life the traditional, foundational principles and values essential for the well-being of society.” And in 2024, the institute’s president, Michael Geer, told a Christian TV audience that much of ILC’s work involves working with school boards “on the transgender issue, fighting that ideology that is pervasive in our society.”
In the Elizabethtown complaint, the plaintiffs argue that district residents must “have the opportunity to observe Board deliberations regarding policies that will affect their children in order to understand the Board members’ true motivation and rationale for adopting policies — particularly when policies are prepared by an outside organization seeking to advance a particular religious viewpoint and agenda.”
The public has ample cause to suspect as much. Five current and former members of Elizabethtown’s school board are connected to a far-right church in town, where the pastor joined 150 other locals in traveling to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021. Among them were current board members Stephen Lindemuth — who once preached a sermon at the church arguing that “gender identity confusion” doesn’t “line up with what God desires” — and his wife, Danielle Lindemuth, who helped organize the caravan of buses that went to Washington. (Stephen Lindemuth replied by email, “I have no recollection of making any judgmental comments concerning LGBTQ in my most recent preaching the past few years.” Neither he nor his wife were accused of any unlawful acts on Jan. 6.)
Another board member until this past December, James Emery, went through the church’s pastoral training program and in 2022 served as a member of the security detail of far-right Christian nationalist gubernatorial candidate Doug Mastriano.
School board meetings in Elizabethtown have also frequently devolved into religious battles, with one local mother, Amy Karr, board chair of Elizabethtown’s Church of the Brethren, recalling how local right-wing activists accused ILC’s opponents of being possessed by demonic spirits or a “vehicle of Satan.”
In Penn Manor, Clatterbuck similarly hoped to lay bare the “overtly religious nature” of the board’s motivation by including in his Right-to-Know requests a demand for all school board communications about ILC policies containing keywords like “God,” “Christian,” “Jesus,” “faith” and “biblical.”
For nearly a year, the district sought to avoid fulfilling the requests, with questionable invocations of attorney-client privilege (including one board member’s claim that she had “personally” retained ILC as counsel), sending back obviously incomplete records and protestations that Clatterbuck’s keyword request turned up so many results that it was too burdensome to fulfill. Ultimately, Clatterbuck appealed to the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records to compel the board to honor the request.
This fall, Clatterbuck received a 457-page document from the board containing dozens of messages that suggest his suspicions were correct.
In response to local constituents writing in support of ILC — decrying pronoun policies as a violation of religious liberty, claiming “the whole LGBTQ spectrum is rooted in the brokenness of sin” and calling for board members to rebuke teachers unions in “the precious blood of Jesus” — at least three board members wrote back with encouragement and thanks. In one example, board member Anthony Lombardo told a constituent who had written a 12-page message arguing that queer theory is “inherently atheistic” that “I completely agree with your analysis and conclusions.”
When another community member sent the board an article from an evangelical website arguing that using “transgendered pronouns … falsifies the gospel” and “tramples on the blood of Christ,” board member Donna Wert responded, “Please know that I firmly agree with the beliefs held in [this article]. And please know that heightened movement is finally being made concerning this, as you will see.”
To Clatterbuck, such messages demonstrate the school board’s religious sympathies, as well as how Christian nationalism plays out at the local level. While national examples of Christian right dominance, like Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s Crusader tattoos or Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s “Appeal to Heaven” flag, get the most attention, Clatterbuck said, “this is what it looks like when you’re controlling local school boards and passing policies that affect people directly in their local community.”
But the local level might also be the place where advocates have the best chance of fighting back, said Kait Linton of Public Education Advocates of Lancaster.
Speaking ahead of a panel discussion on ILC at Elizabethtown’s Church of the Brethren last June — one of several panels PEAL hosted around Lancaster in the run-up to November’s school board elections — Linton emphasized the importance of focusing on the “hyperlocal.”
“With everything that’s happening at the national level,” Linton said, “we find a lot of folks get caught up in that, when really we have far less opportunity to make a difference up there than we do right here.”
PEAL’s efforts have been matched by other groups at the district level, like Elizabethtown’s Etown Common Sense 2.0, which local parent and former president Alisha Runkle said advocates against the sort of policies ILC drafts and also seeks to support teachers “being beaten down and needing support” in an environment of relentless hostility and demands to police their lesson plans, libraries and language.
They’re also reflected in the work of statewide coalitions like Pennsylvanians for Welcoming and Inclusive Schools, which helps districts share information about ILC policies — including a searchable map of ILC’s presence around the state — and resources like the Education Law Center, which has sent detailed demand or advocacy letters to numerous school districts considering adopting ILC-inspired policies.
This past November, that local-level work resulted in some signs for cautious hope. In Lancaster County’s Hempfield School District — one of the first districts in the state to hire ILC — the school board flipped to Democratic control. Among the new board members are Kait Linton and fellow PEAL activist Erin Small.
Across the river, in West Shore, the departure of three right-wing board members — one who resigned and two who lost their elections — left the board with a new 5-4 majority of Democratic and centrist Republican members. After the election, the board promptly moved to table three contentious policy proposals, including the anti-trans bathroom policy the board had copied from ILC and a book ban policy that drew heavily on ILC’s work.
While in other Lancaster districts — including Elizabethtown, Warwick and Penn Manor — school boards remained firmly in conservative control, there are also signs of growing pushback, as in Elizabethtown, where Runkle noted the teachers union has recently begun challenging the board during public meetings and local students have gotten active protesting book bans.
Similar trends have happened statewide, said the Education Law Center’s Kristina Moon, who noted that voters “were so concerned about the extremist action they saw on the boards that it was kind of a wake-up call: that we can’t sleep on school board elections, and we need to have boards that reflect a commitment to all of the students in our schools.”
While reports of ILC’s direct involvement with school boards seem to have waned in recent months, said Moon, that “does not mean the threat to our public schools is over. We see continued use of those discriminatory policies by school boards just copying the policy exactly as it was adopted elsewhere. And it causes the same harm in a district, whether the district is publicly meeting with ILC or not.”
Plus there are now Trump’s anti-trans executive orders, which have spread confusion statewide. And just this December, a legal challenge brought by another Christian right law firm, the Thomas More Society, is challenging the authority of Pennsylvania’s civil rights commission to apply anti-discrimination protections to trans students in public schools.
As a consequence, the Education Law Center has spent much of the past year trying to educate school and community leaders that executive orders are not the law itself, and they cannot supersede case law supporting the rights of LGBTQ students.
“We’re trying to cut through the noise,” Moon said, “to ensure that schools remain clear about their legal obligations to provide safe environments for all students … so they can focus on learning and not worrying about identity-based attacks.”
*Correction: At least 20 of Pennsylvania’s 500 school districts are known to have consulted with or signed formal contracts accepting the ILC’s pro bono legal services. This story previously reported 21.
Contact editor Caroline Preston at 212-870-8965, via Signal at CarolineP.83 or on email at [email protected].
This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/clever-as-serpents-how-a-legal-groups-anti-lgbtq-policies-took-root-in-school-districts-across-a-state/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org”>The Hechinger Report</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://i0.wp.com/hechingerreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/cropped-favicon.jpg?fit=150%2C150&ssl=1″ style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>
When a school building fails, everything it supports comes to a halt. Learning stops. Families scramble. Community stability is shaken. And while fire drills and lockdown procedures prepare students and staff for specific emergencies, the buildings themselves often fall short in facing the unexpected.
Between extreme weather events, aging infrastructure, and rising operational demands, facility leaders face mounting pressure to think beyond routine upkeep. Resilience should guide every decision to help schools stay safe, meet compliance demands, and remain prepared for whatever lies ahead.
According to a recent infrastructure report card from the American Society of Civil Engineers, the nation’s 98,000 PK-12 schools received a D+ for physical condition–a clear signal that more proactive design and maintenance strategies are urgently needed.
Designing for resilience means planning for continuity. It’s about integrating smarter materials, better systems, and proactive partnerships so that learning environments can bounce back quickly–or never go down at all.
Start with smarter material choices
The durability of a school begins at ground level. Building materials that resist moisture, mold, impact, and corrosion play a critical role in long-term school resilience and functionality. For example, in flood-prone regions, concrete blocks and fiber-reinforced panels outperform drywall in both durability and recovery time. Surfaces that are easy to clean, dry quickly, and don’t retain contaminants can make the difference between reopening in days versus weeks.
Limit downtime by planning ahead
Downtime is costly, but it’s not always unavoidable. What is avoidable is the scramble that follows when there’s no plan in place. Developing a disaster-response protocol that includes vendors, contact trees, and restoration procedures can significantly reduce response time. Schools that partner with recovery experts before an event occurs often find themselves first in line when restoration resources are stretched thin.
FEMA’s National Resilience Guidance stresses the need to integrate preparedness and long-term recovery planning at the facility level, particularly for schools that often serve as vital community hubs during emergencies.
Maintenance as the first line of defense
Preventative maintenance might not generate headlines, but it can prevent them. Regular inspections of roofing, HVAC, plumbing, and electrical systems help uncover vulnerabilities before they lead to shutdowns. Smart maintenance schedules can extend the lifespan of critical systems and reduce the risk of emergency failures, which are almost always more expensive.
Build flexibility into the design
Truly resilient spaces are defined by their ability to adapt, not just their physical strength. Multi-use rooms that can shift from classroom to shelter, or gymnasiums that double as community command centers, offer critical flexibility during emergencies. Facilities should also consider redundancies in HVAC and power systems to ensure critical areas like server rooms or nurse stations remain functional during outages.
Include restoration experts early
Design and construction teams are essential, but so are the people who will step in after a disaster. Involving restoration professionals during the planning or renovation phase helps ensure the layout and materials selected won’t hinder recovery later. Features like water-resistant flooring, interior drainage, and strategically placed shut-off valves can dramatically cut cleanup and repair times.
Think beyond the building
Resilient schools need more than solid walls. They need protected data, reliable communication systems, and clear procedures for remote learning if the physical space becomes temporarily inaccessible. Facility decisions should consider how technology, security, and backup systems intersect with the physical environment to maintain educational continuity.
Schools are more than schools during a crisis
In many communities, schools become the default support hub during a crisis. They house evacuees, store supplies, and provide a place for neighbors to connect. Resilient infrastructure supports student safety while also reinforcing a school’s role as a vital part of the community. Designs should support this extended role, with access-controlled entries, backup power, and health and sanitation considerations built in from the start.
A resilient mindset starts with leadership
Resilience begins with leadership and is reflected in the decisions that shape a school’s physical and operational readiness. Facility managers, superintendents, and administrative teams must advocate for resilient investments early in the planning process. This includes aligning capital improvement budgets, bond proposals, and RFP language with long-term resilience goals.
There’s no such thing as a truly disaster-proof building. But there are schools that recover faster, withstand more, and serve their communities more effectively during crises. The difference is often found in early choices: what’s designed, built, and maintained before disaster strikes.
When resilience guides every decision, school facilities are better prepared to safeguard students and maintain continuity through disruption.
John Scott Mooring, Mooring USA
John Scott Mooring is the Chief Executive Officer at Mooring USA, bringing nearly four decades of experience in disaster recovery and restoration services. With deep roots in a family-run business that helped pioneer the industry, he leads Mooring in delivering turnkey solutions for emergency response, remediation, and commercial construction across the U.S.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
eSchool News is counting down the 10 most-read stories of 2025. Story #9 focuses on chronic absenteeism.
Key points:
The biggest problem in education is that kids aren’t showing up to school. Last year, 26 percent of students missed a month of class or more, leading to dramatic declines in academic performance. Chronic absenteeism accounted for 27 percent of the drop in math scores and 45 percent of the decline in reading scores from 2019 to 2022. Students who are chronically absent are 7x more likely to drop out before graduating, and while state and district leaders are scrambling for solutions, kids are falling further behind.
Why chronic absenteeism is hard to solve
In 2019, only 13 percent of students in the U.S. were chronically absent. Typically, these students missed school because of significant personal reasons–long-term illness, gang involvement, clinical depression, working jobs to support their families, lacking transportation, drug use, unplanned pregnancy, etc.–that aren’t easily fixed.
However, since the pandemic, the rate of chronic absenteeism has doubled from 13 percent to 26 percent.
The change is cultural. For the last hundred years, it was drilled into the American psyche that “school is important.” A great effort was made to provide bussing to any child who lived too far to walk, and the expectation was that every child should come to school every day. Cutting class was sure to land you in the principal’s office or potentially even lead to police showing up at your door.
During the Covid-19 pandemic, this narrative flipped. As parents began working from home, their kids sat beside them. With lectures recorded and assignments posted online, attending class began to feel optional. When school doors reopened, many families didn’t fully come back. Common excuses like being tired, missing the bus, or simply not feeling like going were validated and excused rather than admonished. While students who skip school were once seen as delinquent, for many families it has become culturally acceptable–almost even expected–for kids to stay home whenever they or their parents want.
Overwhelmed by the drastic rise in absenteeism, school staff are unable to revert cultural norms about attendance. And it’s not their fault.
The root of the problem
Each student’s situation is unique. Some students may struggle with reliable transportation, while others skip certain classes they don’t like, and others still are disengaged with school entirely. Without knowing why students are missing school, staff cannot make progress addressing the root cause of chronic absenteeism.
Today, nearly 75 percent of student absences are “unexplained,” meaning that no authorized parent called or emailed the school to say where their children are and why they aren’t in class. This lack of clarity makes it impossible for schools to offer personalized solutions and keep students engaged. Unexplained absences only deepen the disconnect and limit schools’ ability to tackle absenteeism effectively.
Knowing why students are missing school is critical, but also very difficult to uncover. At a high school of 2,000 students with 85 percent average daily attendance, 225 students will be absent each day without providing any explanation. In an ideal world, schools would speak with every parent to find out the reason their child wasn’t in class–but schools can’t possibly make 225 additional phone calls without 3-5 additional staff. Instead, they rely on robocalls and absence letters, and those methods don’t work nearly well enough.
Normalize attendance again: It takes a village
Improving attendance is about more than just allocating additional resources. It’s about shifting the mindset and fostering a culture that prioritizes presence. This starts with schools and communities making attendance a shared responsibility, not just a policy.
First, schools must take the initiative to understand why students are missing school. Whether through modern AI-driven attendance systems or with more traditional methods like phone calls, understanding the root causes is critical to addressing the issue.
Next, categorize and recognize patterns. Small adjustments can have big impacts. One district noticed that students who were 0.9 miles away from school were much more likely to not show up because their bussing policy was for families living 1 mile away from school or further. By changing their policy, they saw a surge in attendance. Similarly, pinpointing specific classes that students are skipping can help tailor interventions, whether through teacher engagement or offering additional support.
Lastly, schools should focus resources on students facing the most severe challenges. These students often require personalized solutions, such as home visits for unresponsive parents or help with transportation. Targeted efforts like these create a direct impact on reducing absenteeism and improving overall attendance.
When communities unite to make school attendance a priority, students receive the support they need to succeed. Tackling chronic absenteeism is not an easy task, but with focused effort and a culture of engagement, we can reverse this troubling trend and give students the foundation they deserve for future success.
Joe Philleo, Edia
Joe Philleo is the co-founder and CEO of Edia, an AI-powered platform that tackles two critical challenges in K-12 education: improving math outcomes and reducing absenteeism. Edia’s mission is to ensure every student has access to an exceptional education, grounded in the belief that school shapes the trajectory of people’s lives.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
In today’s schools, whether K-12 or higher education, AI is powering smarter classrooms. There’s more personalized learning and faster administrative tasks. And students themselves are engaging with AI more than ever before, as 70 percent say they’ve used an AI tool to alter or create completely new images. But while educators and students are embracing the promise of AI, cybercriminals are exploiting it.
In 2025, the U.S. Department of Education reported that nearly 150,000 suspect identities were flagged in recent federal student-aid forms, contributing to $90 million in financial aid losses tied to ineligible applicants. From deepfakes in admissions to synthetic students infiltrating online portals and threatening high-value research information, AI-powered identity fraud is rising fast, and our educational institutions are alarmingly underprepared.
As identity fraud tactics become more scalable and convincing, districts are now racing to deploy modern tools to catch fake students before they slip through the cracks. Three fraud trends keep IT and security leaders in education up at night–and AI is supercharging their impact.
1. Fraud rings targeting education
Here’s the hard truth: Fraudsters operate in networks, but most schools fight fraud alone.
Coordinated rings can deploy hundreds of synthetic identities across schools or districts. These groups recycle biometric data, reuse fake documents, and share attack methods on dark web forums.
To stand a fair chance in the fight, educational institutions must work with identity verification experts that enable a holistic view of the threat landscape through cross-transactional risk assessments. These assessments spot risk patterns across devices, IP addresses, and user behavior, helping institutions uncover fraud clusters that would be invisible in isolation.
2. Deepfakes and injected selfies in remote enrollment
Facial recognition was once a trusted line of defense for remote learning and test proctoring. But fraudsters can now use emulators and virtual cameras to bypass those checks, inserting AI-generated faces into the stream to impersonate students. In education, where student data is a goldmine and systems are increasingly remote, the risk is even more pronounced.
In virtual work environments, for example, enterprises are already seeing an uptick in the use of deepfakes during job interviews. By 2028, Gartner predicts 1 in 4 job candidates worldwide will be fake. The same applies to the education sector. We’re now seeing fake students, complete with forged government IDs and a convincing selfie, slide past systems and into financial aid pipelines.
So, what’s the fix? Biometric identity intelligence, trusted by a growing number of students, can verify micro-movements, lighting, and facial depth, and confirm whether a real human is behind the screen. Multimodal checks (combining visual, motion, and even audio data) are critical for stopping AI-powered identity fraud.
3. Synthetic students in your systems
Unlike stolen identities, synthetic identities are crafted from real–and fake–fragments, such as a legit SSN combined with a fake name. These “students” can pass enrollment checks, get campus credentials, and even apply for financial aid.
Traditional document checks aren’t enough to catch them. Today’s identity verification tools must use AI to detect missing elements, like holograms or watermarks, and flag patterns including identical document backgrounds, which is a key sign of industrial-scale fraud.
AI-powered identity intelligence for education
As digital learning becomes the norm and AI accelerates, identity fraud will only get more sophisticated. However, AI also offers educators a solution.
By layering biometrics, behavioral analytics, and cross-platform data, schools can verify student identities at scale and in real time, keeping pace with advancing threats, and even staying one step ahead.
Ashwin Sugavanam, Jumio Corporation
Ashwin Sugavanam is currently the VP, AI & Identity Analytics at Jumio Corporation. Ashwin is a visionary Data and Analytics leader with two decades of overall experience out of which he has spent the last decade in helping organizations incubate and scale Data & AI practices. Over the last couple of years Ashwin has helped organizations drive measurable business outcomes by responsibly scaling Data and AI initiatives, implementing modern concepts like Data Mesh and MLOps, and leveraging tools such as the Data Scientist Co-Pilot to accelerate impact. He can be reached on LinkedIn and at the company website https://www.jumio.com/ .
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Creating consistency between classrooms and ensuring curriculum alignment school-wide can be challenging, even in the smallest of districts. Every educator teaches–and grades–differently based on their experience and preferences, and too often, they’re forced into a solution that no longer respects their autonomy or acknowledges their strengths.
When Superior Public Schools (SPS), a district of 450 students in rural Nebraska, defined standards-referenced curriculum as a priority of our continuous improvement plan, bringing teachers in as partners on the transition was essential to our success. Through their support, strategic relationships with outside partners, and meaningful data and reporting, the pathway from curriculum design to classroom action was a smooth one for teachers, school leaders, and students alike.
Facing the challenge of a new curriculum
For years, teachers in SPS were working autonomously in the classroom. Without a district-wide curriculum in place, they used textbooks to guide their instruction and designed lesson plans around what they valued as important. In addition, grading was performed on a normative curve that compared a student’s performance against the performance of their peers rather than in relation to a mastery of content.
As other educators have discovered, the traditional approach to teaching may be effective for some students, but is inequitable overall when preparing all students for their next step, whether moving on to more complex material or preparing for the grade ahead. Kids were falling through the cracks, and existing opportunity gaps only began to grow.
SPS set out to help our students by instituting standards-referenced instruction at both the elementary and secondary levels, allowing us to better identify each child’s progress toward set learning standards and deliver immediate feedback and intervention services to keep them on the path toward success.
Take it slow and start with collaboration
From day one, school leaders understood the transition to the new curriculum needed to be intentional and collaborative.
Rather than demand immediate buy-in from teachers, administrators and the curriculum team dedicated the time to help them understand the value of a new learning process. Together, we took a deep dive into traditional education practices, identifying which set students up for success and which actually detoured their progress. Recognizing that everyone–teachers included–learns in different ways, administrators also provided educators with a wide range of resources, such as book studies, podcasts, and articles, to help them grow professionally.
In addition, SPS partnered with the Curriculum Leadership Institute (CLI) to align curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices across all content areas, schools, and grade levels. On-site CLI coaches worked directly with teachers to interpret standards and incorporate their unique teaching styles into new instructional strategies, helping to ensure the new curriculum translated seamlessly into daily classroom practice.
To bring standards-referenced curriculum to life with meaningful insights and reporting, SPS integrated the Otus platform into our Student Information System. By collecting and analyzing data in a concise manner, teachers could measure student performance against specific learning targets, determining if content needed to be re-taught to the whole class or if specific students required one-on-one guidance.
With the support of our teachers, SPS was able to launch the new curriculum and assessment writing process district-wide, reaching students in pre-K through 12th grade. However, standards-reference grading was a slower process, starting with one subject area at a time at the elementary level. Teachers who were initially uncomfortable with the new grading system were able to see the benefits firsthand, allowing them to ease into the transition rather than jump in headfirst.
Empowering educators, inspiring students
By uniting curriculum and data, SPS has set a stronger foundation of success for every student. Progress is no longer measured by compliance but by a true mastery of classroom concepts.
Teachers have become intentional with their lesson plans, ensuring that classroom content is directly linked to the curriculum. The framework also gives them actionable insights to better identify the skills students have mastered and the content areas where they need extra support. Teachers can adjust instruction as needed, better communicate with parents on their students’ progress, and connect struggling students to intervention services.
Principals also look at student progress from a building level, identifying commonalities across multiple grades. For instance, if different grade levels struggle with geometry concepts, we can revisit the curriculum to see where improvements should be made. Conversely, we can better determine if SPS needs to increase the rigor in one grade to better prepare students for the next grade level.
While the road toward standards-referenced curriculum had its challenges, the destination was worth the journey for everyone at SPS. By the end of the 2024-2025 school year, 84 percent of K-5 students were at or above the 41st percentile in math, and 79 percent were at or above the 41st percentile in reading based on NWEA MAP results. In addition, teachers now have a complete picture of every student to track individual progress toward academic standards, and students receive the feedback, support, and insights that inspire them to become active participants in their learning.
Tricia Kuhlmann and Jodi Fierstein, Superior Public Schools
Tricia Kuhlmann is the Curriculum Director and Jodi Fierstein is the Elementary Principal and Director of Special Services at Superior Public Schools in Superior, NE.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
America’s special education system is facing a slow-motion collapse. Nearly 8 million students now receive services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), but the number of qualified teachers and related service providers continues to shrink. Districts from California to Maine report the same story: unfilled positions, overworked staff, and students missing the services they’re legally entitled to receive.
“The promise of IDEA means little if there’s no one left to deliver it.”
The data tell a clear story. Since 2013, the number of children ages 3–21 served under IDEA has grown from 6.4 million to roughly 7.5 million. Yet the teacher pipeline has moved in the opposite direction. According to Title II reports, teacher-preparation enrollments dropped 6 percent over the last decade and program completions plunged 27 percent. At the same time, nearly half of special educators leave the field within their first five years.
By 2023, 45 percent of public schools were operating without a full teaching staff. Vacancies were most acute in special education. Attrition, burnout, and early retirements outpace new entrants by a wide margin.
Why the traditional model no longer works
For decades, schools and staffing firms have fought over the same dwindling pool of licensed providers. Recruiting cycles stretch for months, while students wait for evaluations, therapies, or IEP services.
Traditional staffing firms focus on long-term contracts lasting six months or more, which makes sense for stability, but ignores an enormous, untapped workforce: thousands of credentialed professionals who could contribute a few extra hours each weekif the system made it easy.
Meanwhile, the process of credentialing, vetting, and matching candidates remains slow and manual, reliant on spreadsheets, email, and recruiters juggling dozens of openings. The result is predictable: delayed assessments, compliance risk, and burned-out staff covering for unfilled roles.
“Districts and recruiters compete for the same people, when they could be expanding the pool instead.”
The hidden workforce hiding in plain sight
Across the country, tens of thousands of licensed professionals–speech-language pathologists, occupational therapists, school psychologists, special educators–are under-employed. Many have stepped back from full-time work to care for families or pursue private practice. Others left the classroom but still want to contribute.
Imagine if districts could tap those “extra hours”through a vetted, AI-powered marketplace. A system that matched real-time school requests with qualified providers in their state. A model like this wouldn’t replace full-time roles; it would expand capacity, reduce burnout, and bring talent back into the system.
This isn’t theoretical. The same “on-demand” concept has already modernized industries from medicine to media. Education is long overdue for the same reinvention.
What modernization looks like
AI-driven matching: Districts post specific service needs (evaluations, IEP meetings, therapy hours). Licensed providers choose opportunities that fit their schedule.
Verified credentials and provider profiles: Platforms integrate state licensure databases and background checks to ensure compliance and provide profiles with all candidate information including on-demand, video interviews so schools can make informed hiring decisions immediately.
Smart staffing metrics: Schools track fill-rates, provider utilization, and service delays in real time.
Integrated workflows: The system plugs into existing special education management tools. No new learning curve for administrators.
A moment of urgency
The shortage isn’t just inconvenient; it’s systemic. Each unfilled position represents students who lose therapy hours, districts risking due-process complaints, and educators pushed closer to burnout.
With IDEA students now representing nearly 15 percent of all public school enrollment, the nation can’t afford to let a twentieth-century staffing model dictate twenty-first-century outcomes.
We have the technology. We have the workforce. What we need is the will to connect them.
“Modernizing special education staffing isn’t innovation for innovation’s sake, it’s survival.”
Kevin Eberly, FillerB
Kevin Eberly is the co-founder of FillerB, a platform modernizing special education staffing by connecting schools with licensed providers. He has over two decades of experience in education and technology leadership.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Some school boards have recently rejected their districts’ school closure plans at a time when declining student enrollment continues to plague district budgets nationwide. As districts push for closures amid the dwindling enrollment numbers and budget deficits, board members say they need more time to consider plans that would cause major disruptions to their communities.
In Pennsylvania, for instance, 6 of 9 board members at Pittsburgh Public Schools voted on Nov. 25 against the district’s proposal to close nine schools by the end of the 2027-28 school year. The vote came a day after the school board held a three-hour public hearing on the possible closures with a majority of speakers denouncing the district’s plan, according to CBS Pittsburgh.
Gene Walker, the board’s president, said during a Nov. 25 meeting that “in the short-term” he would vote against the closures after hearing public feedback on the issue. Walker added that he thinks the board will need more time to decide on closures, especially as several new board members were set to be sworn in the coming days.
“It’s my personal opinion that we are not in a space where we can properly support the superintendent and his team in this work,” Walker said.
The district recommended the school closures as it faces a projected budget deficit of nearly $11.4 million for the 2025-26 school year. Pittsburgh Public Schools also expects its total expenditures to continue to outpace its total revenue in the coming years. If the district closed the nine schools, Pittsburgh Public School administrators said it could have also saved nearly $103 million by 2031.
The district’s enrollment has steadily decreased over the past five years, dipping from 19,159 students to 17,937 between the 2021-22 and 2025-26 school years. Two decades ago, the number of enrolled students was much higher at 32,529, according to the Allegheny Institute, a nonprofit research and education organization.
Pittsburgh Public Schools Superintendent Wayne Walters said in a Wednesday statement to K-12 Dive that he does not fully agree with the “path” the district’s school board is on right now, but he respects its decision and is committed to finding a “responsible, equitable path forward” with board members.
“Without action, we remain a system unable to deliver the consistent academic and enrichment opportunities our children deserve — one where access too often depends on the building a student attends,” Walters said. “At the same time, our financial stability continues to decline as we stretch limited resources across too many buildings.”
Elsewhere, the school board for Alaska’s Anchorage School District rejected plans on Nov. 18 to close two elementary schools. In a board recap post, the district noted that it’s already had to close five schools since 2015 due to lowering student enrollment. While Anchorage School District has the capacity to serve 50,000 students, only 42,000 are currently enrolled, according to the district.
In Wisconsin, theEau Claire Area School Districtsaid in November that it was no longer considering a proposal to consolidate several elementary schools, according to WEAU 13 News.
The district said on its website that it was planning to consolidate the schools as it continues to see elementary enrollment decline because of lower birthrates and demographic shifts.That planning process began earlier this year. An October report from the district’s Superintendent Mike Johnson shows student enrollment has dropped from 10,267 to 9,910 students between the 2017-18 and 2025-26 school years.
Still, Johnson told WEAU 13 News that the enrollment challenges aren’t going away. “For next year, our second largest class in the district is our 5th grade class,” Johnson said. “If the trends occur the way they have been, when those students exit and go to middle school, we’ll be down 110 students.”
The changed course for Eau Claire Area School District came after families organized to push back against the proposed consolidation plans through a “Save Our Neighborhood Schools” campaign.
Under the district’s proposal, the campaign said the closing of a neighborhood school means children would be “split across multiple elementary schools,” families could no longer access a walkable, community school, and property values would drop because without “the appeal of top-tier schools.”
‘A consequence of not confronting the reality’
Closing underenrolled schools “is a deeply painful decision,” said Thomas Dee, a professor at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Education. These schools, in many ways, are “the fabric of communities who often have a kind of focal identity” around these places, he said.
But when underenrolled schools are kept open, Dee said that comes at a higher cost to the district and ultimately to students. By keeping under-capacity schools open, districts have to spend extra money per student to keep the buildings operating, he added. Those additional costs can then translate into less financial resources for other things students benefit from and need districtwide, such as school transportation, diverse course offerings, or smaller class sizes.
“Closing a school is highly visible and painful, but watching needed instructional supports disappear, or watching class sizes grow, watching fewer hours from a school nurse, all of that is less visible but can be a consequence of not confronting the reality,” Dee said.
It’s important that districts choosing to forego closures amid declining enrollment understand those difficult tradeoffs, and that it’s likely this enrollment challenge isn’t going away, he said.
Dee added that school districts could run the risk of a state takeover if they can’t get a hold of their finances. In the case of a state takeover, communities would no longer have agency over how their local schools run, he said.
“The only way to release that tension is for communities to increase their own property taxes or for states to increase aid through higher sales and income taxes,” Dee said.
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Dive Brief:
Los Angeles Unified School District’s enrollment fell 4% year over year to 392,654 for 2025-26 — a greater-than-expected drop in a year where the school system has faced heightened immigration enforcement. The dip is “deeply connected to the realities our immigrant families are facing,” Superintendent Alberto Carvalho told K-12 Dive in a statement Tuesday.
Other districts affected by increased immigration enforcement activities have also reported enrollment drops, including Miami-Dade County Public Schools in Florida and Chicago Public Schools. The uptick in enforcement followed a Trump administration policy change in January that allows immigration raids at schools.
In many areas, these declines are partly driven by lower enrollment for newcomers, defined as students who have been enrolled for three years or fewer in any U.S. school, were born outside the U.S., and are English learners.
Dive Insight:
“These declines reflect a climate of fear and instability created by ongoing immigration crackdowns, which disrupt family stability, housing, and mobility,” said Carvalho. “These fears are now exacerbating pre-existing factors that were already driving statewide enrollment declines — including falling birth rates, rising housing costs, and broader economic pressures.”
LAUSD and its surrounding areas have seen an increase in immigration enforcement activity in both the current and previous school years, including incidents in which U.S. Department of Homeland Security officers attempted to gain entry into elementary schools by allegedly making false claims they had parent permission to speak with students. In another instance, agents apprehended a high school student with a disability while he was enrolling for classes in an apparent case of mistaken identity.
LAUSD families and those in other areas hit by heightened immigration enforcement have also experienced activity during school pickup and dropoff hours.
The impact of these activities on attendance has led some school leaders to emphasize the possibility of virtual schools.
Now, the apparent toll on enrollment — including that of newcomers — is set to impact districts’ budgets.
In LAUSD, newcomer enrollment for students who were expected to return for the 2025-26 school year is down 9% at 16,668, compared to the projected 18,232.
“Unless these overlapping issues are addressed at the state level, California’s public schools will face long-term ramifications that will affect classrooms, staffing, programming, and the future of public education itself,” said Carvalho.
Late last month, congressional Democratic lawmakers sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon in which they inquired about steps the department is taking to protect students as raids impact their families and communities. The lawmakers wrote that they are “deeply concerned” about the fallout.
“The chaotic manner in which raids and apprehensions are being carried out is injecting needless trauma into these communities, which then makes its way into schools and contributes to absenteeism,” said lawmakers, led by House Education and Workforce Committee Ranking Member Bobby Scott, D-Va. Students, regardless of their immigration status, are being impacted, they wrote.
“The consequences of the Administration’s actions show that our nation’s students, families, and schools need resources to help in the days ahead,” the lawmakers wrote.
In Greenwood 50, our story began with a challenge shared by many districts: too many tools, not enough connection. With more than 8,000 students across 15 schools, our family engagement efforts felt more fractured than unified.
Each school–and often each classroom–had its own way of communicating. Some used social media, others sent home printed newsletters. Many teachers used a host of apps on their own, often with great results. But without a common system, we couldn’t guarantee that every family, especially those with multiple kids or multilingual needs, felt fully informed and included.
What we needed wasn’t more effort. It was alignment. So, we started with a simple idea: build on what was already working.
Starting with teacher momentum
When we looked closer, we found something powerful: Six of our eight elementary schools had already adopted ClassDojo–without being asked. Teachers liked its ease of use. Families liked the mobile experience and automatic translation. And everyone appreciated that it made communication feel more human.
Rather than rolling out something new, we decided to meet that momentum with support. As district leaders, we partnered across departments to unify all 15 schools using ClassDojo for Districts. Our goal was clear: one platform, one message, every family engaged.
We knew that trust isn’t built through mandates. It’s built through listening. So, our rollout respected the work our teachers were already doing well. Instead of creating a top-down plan, we focused on making it easier for schools to connect–and for families to stay informed.
From tech challenge to time saved
One of the first things we did was connect our student information system directly to the platform. That meant class rosters synced automatically. Teachers didn’t need to manually invite families or set things up from scratch.
For school leaders, this was a game-changer. As a former principal, I (Debbie) remember the long hours spent setting up communication tools each year. Now, it just happens. Teachers log in, their classes are ready, and families are connected from day one.
This consistency has helped every school level up its communication. From classroom stories to urgent messages, everything happens in one place. And when families know where to look, they’re more likely to stay engaged.
Reaching more families, building stronger partnerships
Before our rollout, some schools reached just 60 percent of families. Today, many are well over 90 percent. My school (Anna) has reached 96 percent–and the difference shows. Families aren’t just receiving updates. They’re reading, replying, and showing up.
Because the communications platform includes real-time translation, our multilingual families feel more included. We’ve had smoother parent conferences, better attendance at events, and more everyday connection. When a family can read a teacher’s message in their home language–and write back–that builds a sense of partnership.
As a principal, I use our school’s page to post reminders, spotlight students, and share what’s happening in related arts, music, and physical education. It’s become our school’s storytelling platform. Families appreciate it–and they respond.
Respecting time, creating alignment
The platform’s built-in features have also helped us be more thoughtful. Teachers can schedule messages, avoiding late-night pings. District and school leaders can coordinate messaging so that what families receive feels seamless.
This visibility has been key. Our communications team can see what’s being shared, school teams can collaborate, and everyone is rowing in the same direction. It’s not about controlling the message–it’s about creating clarity.
Lessons for other districts
If we’ve learned one thing, it’s this: Start with what’s working. Our most important decision wasn’t what tool to use–it was listening to our teachers and supporting the systems they were already finding success with.
This wasn’t just a platform change. It was a mindset shift. We didn’t need to convince them to use something new. We just needed to remove barriers, support their efforts, and make it easier to connect with families districtwide.
That shift–from fragmented to unified, from siloed to shared–has made all the difference in reaching new levels of accessibility and engagement.
Johnathan Graves, Debbie Leonard, & Anna Haynes, Greenwood 50 School District
Johnathan Graves is the Executive Director of Communications; Debbie Leonard serves as the Executive Director of Technology; and Anna Haynes is the Principal at Eleanor S. Rice Elementary School in Greenwood 50 School District.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)