10.20.26 BOE Meeting_Rightsizing

October 20, 2026 Board Meeting Examine the scenarios using key performance indicators and the equity analysis. Today we will: Purpose a Connect the KPIs and Equity Impact to the Scenarios Examine the scenarios using the KPIs Answer questions b c BOARD GUIDANCE & COMMUNITY INPUT KPIs Key performance indicators (KPIs) co-developed with the Board and directly informed by community input and engagement. Opportunity & Stability Indicators 1. Enrollment Thresholds Percent of schools at a grade level with enrollment above threshold 2. Focal Students Percent of focal students enrolled in schools above the threshold 3. Enrollment Balance Range of enrollment (largest - smallest) by grade level Physical Environment & Pathways 1. Utilization Percent of efficiently utilized schools 2. Proximity Percent of students living within 1.0 and 1.5 miles of school 3. Split Feeders Number of schools with split feeders 4. High School Pathways Percent of middle school feeders moving to the same high school Balance & Impact (Scenarios) 1. Student Impact Percent of focal students who will experience the change 2. Title I Number of Title I schools impacted by the change 3. Student Mobility Number of students moving to a new school or site Equity Impact AnalysisRightsizing 4 Equity is Part of the Analysis - not a Final Check 5 Stage Equity checkpoint What it produces Workgroups and Criteria Who benefits, who carries burden, and what could our criteria miss? Disaggregated benefit and burden analysis Scenarios and Clusters What does this mean for these students, in this community, with this history? An equity analysis review attached to every scenario Readiness and Decision Is this equitable and ready, and what must be true before it advances? Required mitigation and an Equity Impact Statement Implementation Are our intended outcomes happening? Disaggregated monitoring and course correction Every checkpoint works through the same five sections ActionSystemsVoiceOpportunityPeople SPRING 2026 Building the KPIs and Equity Lens – What we heard, and what we changed WHAT WE HEARD WHAT WE CHANGED Pathway continuity and feeder patterns matter more than anything else. Built feeder continuity into the KPIs, and used it to guide middle school and DLI consolidation. Keep schools close to home and safe to walk to. Named neighborhood schools as the foundation of the system and added walkability to the Guiding Principles Our students move together from elementary to middle school and middle to high school.. Added an assessment of cohort cohesion to the work plan, and capped receiving schools at two per closing school. Center the students most affected, not the loudest voices. Revised the Equity Lens principle to name the most impacted focal students based upon our data, and reported every indicator by focal group. Protect dual language and the focus programs/schools. All five DLI languages are sustained. Kindergarten DLI seats, ACCESS, Benson, Winterhaven and da Vinci stay the same. SPRING 2026 EQUITY CHECK Building the KPIs and Equity Lens – Families of color ranked factors differently All respondents Last of six Right Mix of Students (student body demographics) was the least important factor of the six options. Respondents were 75% White. PPS is 53% White. Communities of color First Right Mix of Students was rated the most important factor. This is why the scenarios measure who is in each school. We are not setting community feedback aside. We are following what the families most affected told us matters most. EQUITY SNAPSHOT Districtwide Share of each group in a sustainable school. Scenario A closes 14 schools, B closes 11 Students in a sustainable school ● about half with no changes ● 8 in 10 under Scenario A ● 7 in 10 under Scenario B Every focal group gains more than all students combined EQUITY SNAPSHOT Jefferson/Roosevelt Share of each group in a sustainable school. ● Both scenarios close the same 4 schools ● It will have the lowest percentage of students in sustainable schools and sees the largest gains in the district ● Every focal group gains more than students overall EQUITY SNAPSHOT Grant/McDaniel Share of each group in a sustainable school. Scenario A closes 2 schools, B closes 1 Rose City Park is the key difference between the scenarios Every focal group gains; most gain more than students overall EQUITY SNAPSHOT Cleveland/Franklin Share of each group in a sustainable school. ● Scenario A closes 6 schools, B closes 5 ● Most closures and most boundary changes in the district ● Every focal group gains; most gain more than students overall EQUITY SNAPSHOT Well/Lincoln Share of each group in a sustainable school. ● Scenario A closes 2 schools, B closes 1 ● Highest share of students in sustainable schools of any region ● Every focal group gains more under Scenario A than B Status Quo to Scenario A: Percentage-point Gain in Sustainable Schools Change in each group in a sustainable school. 13 ● District: +32 pts ● Every region gains ● Focal groups: +36 to +43 ● Largest gains: JHS/RHS (+46) and CHS/FHS (+44) 14 Status Quo to Scenario B: Percentage-point Gain in Sustainable Schools Change in each group in a sustainable school. Key Performance Indicators 15 Opportunity and Stability Indicators 1. Percent of schools at a grade level with enrollment above threshold 2. Percent of focal students enrolled in schools above the threshold 3. Range of enrollment (largest - smallest) by grade level Enrollment Range By Grade Level 16 Enrollment Range Actual 2025-26 Projected 2031-32 Scenario A and B K5 560 -160 =400 557 -168 = 389 557 - 235 = 322 K8 610 -207 =403 602 -177 = 425 431 - 177 = 254 Middle Schools 689 - 358 =331 620 -350 = 270 636 - 405 = 231 High Schools 2074 -391 =1683 1492 -1117 =375 1491 - 1190 = 301 Key Performance Indicators 17 Physical Environment and Pathway Indicators 1. Percent of efficiently utilized schools 2. Percent of students living within 1.0 and 1.5 miles of school 3. Number of schools with split feeders 4. Percent of middle school feeders moving to the same high school Efficiently Used Schools 18 Grade Band Status Quo Scenario A Scenario B Elementary K5 22% 51% 38% K8 54% 40% 40% Middle School 0% 43% 43% High School 89% 78% 78% Students Living Within 1.0 and 1.5 Miles 19 Grade Band Status Quo Scenario A Scenario B Elementary K5 65% / 81% 55% / 78% 58% / 79% K8 78% / 84% 71% / 82% 71% / 82% Middle School 30% / 50% 28% / 50% 28% / 50% High School Did not analyze Did not analyze Did not analyze Rightsizing Dashboard Schools with Split Feeders 20 Split Feeder Next level: Current State Scenario A Bridlemile K5 Robert Gray MS West Sylvan MS No Change Bridger Creative Science K8 Franklin HS if they live in the attendance area Focus option students return to their neighborhood HS Now K5 Focus/Neighborhood → to Harrison Park or return to neighborhood MS Sunnyside Environmental K8 Franklin HS if they live in the attendance area Focus option students return to their neighborhood HS Now K5 Neighborhood→ Hosford→ Cleveland Atkinson Kellogg (Spanish DLI) Harrison Park (Non-DLI) All students go to Kellogg MS Woodstock Harrison Park (Mandarin DLI) Brentwood (Non-DLI) No Change Schools with Split Feeders 21 Split Feeder Next level: Current State Scenario A Scenario A Vestal K5 All students continue to Harrison Park MS Vietnamese DLI continues to Roseway Heights Neighborhood to Harrison Park MS Kelly K5 All students move to Brentwood MS Russian DLI continues to Brentwood Neighborhood students move to Harrison Park MS At the transition from elementary to middle school, there is no net change in the overall number of split feeders. We reduce at Sunnyside and Atkinson and increase at Vestal and Kelly. Schools With Split Feeders (6 fewer overall) 22 Split Feeder Next level Current State Scenarios A and B Beaumont MS Grant HS McDaniel (Spanish DLI) Grant HS: No split Harriet Tubman MS Grant HS Jefferson HS Jefferson HS: No split Harrison Park MS Franklin HS McDaniel HS Cleveland HS (Chinese DLI) No Change: Split to three high schools Hosford MS Cleveland HS Franklin HS Cleveland HS Brentwood MS Cleveland HS Franklin HS No Change: Split to two high schools Mt. Tabor MS Grant HS (Japanese DLI) Franklin HS No Change: Split to two high schools Ockley Green MS Jefferson HS Roosevelt (Spanish DLI) Jefferson HS: No split Key Performance Indicators 23 Balance and Impact Indicators for Scenarios 1. Percent of focal students who will experience the change 2. Number of Title I schools impacted by the change 3. Number of students moving to a new school or site Balance and Impact Indicators - Scenario A 24 Indicator % and N Scenario A North: JHS/RHS Northeast: GHS/MHS Southeast: CHS/FHS West: LHS/WHS Students who experience move 7981 (27%) 33% 26% 30% 18% Students who are experiencing poverty who move 2648 (27%) 32% 22% 32% 16% Students on IEPs who experience a move 1545 (27%) 31% 21% 34% 20% Multilingual Learner Students who experience a move 1006 (31%) 39% 32% 29% 14% Historically Underserved Students 2888 (28%) 34% 21% 32% 14% Number of Title I schools students will move from 19/32 T1 24/50 Non T1 10/14 T1 2/6 Non T1 3/7 T1 6/8 Non T1 6/9 T1 10/18 Non T1 0/2 T1 6/15 Non T1 Number of Title I schools students will move to 19/32 T1 21/50 Non T1 8/14 T1 3/6 Non T1 5/7 T1 2/8 Non T1 5/9 T1 12/18 Non T1 1/2 T1 4/15 Non T1 Balance and Impact Indicators - Scenario B 25 Indicator % and N Scenario B North: JHS/RHS Northeast: GHS/MHS Southeast: CHS/FHS West: LHS/WHS Students who experience move 6988 (24%) 33% 19% 27% 13% Students who are experiencing poverty who move 2450 (25%) 32% 15% 31% 13% Students on IEPs who experience a move 1379 (24%) 31% 16% 30% 15% Multilingual Learner Students who experience a move 909 (28%) 39% 22% 29% 10% Historically Underserved Students 2731 (26%) 34% 18% 31% 11% Number of Title I schools students will move from 20/32 T1 20/50 Non T1 10/14 T1 2/6 Non T1 3/7 T1 5/8 Non T1 7/9 T1 8/18 Non T1 0/2 T1 5/15 Non T1 Number of Title I schools students will move to 16/32 T1 21/50 Non T1 8/14 T1 3/6 Non T1 3/7 T1 2/8 Non T1 5/9 T1 13/18 Non T1 0/2 T1 3/15 Non T1 Sustainable Schools by Grade Level & Title I Status 26 Percent of Schools Actual 2025-26 Projected 2031-32 District North: JHS/RHS NE: GHS/MHS SE: CHS/FHS West: LHS/WHS In Scenario A K5 Title I 18% 9% 13 out of 18 72% 6 out of 7 86% 3 out of 5 60% 4 out of 5 80% 0 out of 1 0% K5 Not Title I 35% 26% 15 out of 21 71% 1 out of 2 50% 2 out of 3 67% 6 out of 9 67% 6 out of 7 86% K8 Title I 50% 50% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A K8 Not Title I 18% 9% 0 out of 6 0% 0 out of 2 0% N/A 0 out of 1 0% 0 out of 2 0% MS Title I 29% 0% 5 out of 6 83% 2 out of 3 67% 2 out of 2 100% 1 out of 1 100% N/A MS Not Title I 50% 25% 3 out of 8 38% N/A 0 out of 1 0% 2 out of 3 67% 1 out of 3 33% Sustainable Schools by Grade Level & Title I Status 27 Percent of Schools Actual 2025-26 Projected 2031-32 District North: JHS/RHS NE: GHS/MHS SE: CHS/FHS West: LHS/WHS In Scenario B K5 Title I 18% 9% 11 out of 19 58% 6 out of 7 86% 1 out of 5 20% 4 out of 5 80% 0 out of 2 0% K5 Not Title I 35% 26% 12 out of 23 52% 1 out of 2 50% 3 out of 4 75% 4 out of 10 40% 4 out of 7 57% K8 Title I 50% 50% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A K8 Not Title I 18% 9% 0 out of 6 0% 0 out of 2 0% N/A 0 out of 1 0% 0 out of 2 0% MS Title I 29% 0% 5 out of 6 83% 2 out of 3 67% 2 out of 2 100% 1 out of 1 100% N/A MS Not Title I 50% 25% 4 out of 8 50% N/A 0 out of 1 0% 3 out of 3 100% 1 out of 3 33% Resources, Engagements and FAQs Rightsizing 28 Resources and Information Updates & Reminders PPS Rightsizing Website Superintendent Video Series How Your School Could Be Impacted Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Community Engagement Calendar *NEW* School Boundary Proposal Dashboard *NEW* Feeder Pattern Visuals (including DLI) Search “PPS Rightsizing” or access from www.pps.net) Released Materials & Focused Sessions Well-resourced School Focus Teaching, Learning & Enrollment, Sept 8 Scenario Release (Board Meeting, Oct. 6) Maps, regional overviews & presentation DLI & Middle Grades Focus Teaching, Learning & Enrollment Committee, Oct. 13 Upcoming Schedule Facilities Focus (Nov 9) Facilities Improvement & Oversight Committee Community Engagements Timeline & locations on next slide NOTE: We continue to add engagements and tailor meeting events to respond to community questions and requests. Engagement Location Date Time Stakeholder Superintendent Round Table: PTA Presidents Prophet Education Center Oct 21 11:00a PTA Presidents of 14 Schools Community Voice: Black Families McDaniel HS Oct 22 6:00p Black/African Am Families, Partners School Impact Conversation: Southeast Region Cleveland @ Marshall HS Oct 24 9:00a Families in SE Region School Impact Conversation: North Region Jefferson HS Oct 24 1:00p Families in North Region School Impact Conversation: West Region Ida B. Wells HS Oct 24 4:00p Families in West Region Community Voice: Native Families Barbie’s Village Oct 26 6:00p Native/Indigenous Families, Partners District Student Council PEC Oct 27 5:00p High School Students Board of Education Community Connection Lincoln HS Oct 27 6:00p All Board of Education Community Connection Virtual via Zoom Oct 28 6:00p All PPS Educator Town Hall Cleveland @ Marshall Oct 29 6:00p All PPS Educators The Village Table Roosevelt HS Nov 5 6:00p Village Table Representatives Board of Education Community Connection Ida B. Wells HS Nov 14 2:00p All Rightsize. Right Support. Right for Students. Fall 2026 Engagement Timeline - Phase III: Making Meaning Together (By Date) 10/05: Scenario Release Collect Feedback & Synthesize Mid-November: Publish Superintendent’s Recommendation Board Consideration & Vote 10/06 Board Meeting: Scenarios 10/13 TLE Committee: Dual Language Immersion and Middle Grades 10/20 Board Meeting: Scenarios 11/04 Board Meeting Feedback Summary 11/09 FIO Committee Rightsizing 11/10 TLE Committee Rightsizing 11/17 Board Meeting: Superintendent’s Recommendation 12/15 Board Meeting: Rightsizing Vote October November December Next Steps Resources and Where to Learn More pps.net/rightsizing View Board Presentations Ask a Question and Read Answers to FAQs Watch Informational Videos Follow the Timeline Join Us at an Engagement Event 33 Questions and Discussion