The proposed changes would cause huge disruptions to the lives of children and families across Pittsburgh, with no evidence that it will lead to long-term benefits.

The F.U. Plan did not take into consideration the impact on class size, school start times and end times, before- and after-school care, hazardous walking paths, or other critical issues raised by people who attended the community input sessions. 

The proposed changes would cause a major shift in teachers and school staff who will have to move to different schools. This is a bad idea when teacher retention is already difficult. 

In July, many community organizations joined together to send an open letter to Superintendent Dr. Walters and the PPS School Board, with the demand to stop the F.U. Plan.

Tell your Board Member to vote NO on the F.U. Plan because it hurts all of us!

Haven't our children gone through enough disruption with the pandemic?

We have yet to see any evidence that the proposed changes would actually result in improved student outcomes or the promise of "equity, excellence, and efficiency."

Children are harmed by the massive disruption, uncertainty, and trauma of...

• waiting for months to know if the Board will close their school

• their school getting shut down

• having to go to a new school, likely further away from their house

• having to ride the bus when they used to be able to walk to school

• feeling overwhelmed or underserved in a larger school (as a result of grade reconfiguration and school consolidation)

• feeling overwhelmed or underserved in a larger class (as a result of school consolidation)

As highlighted in an Oct. 18 press release from 412 Justice, the changes disproportionately impact Black students, disabled students, and other historically marginalized communities.

The initial F.U. Plan ignored students who attend Conroy, Clayton, Student Achievement Center, Pioneer, and the Online Academy. The final proposal recommends moving students and closing Conroy, Student Achievement Center, and the Online Academy. These students and their families were excluded from participating in the community feedback sessions! 

SEARCH BY SCHOOL to see the potential impact at your child's PPS school.

Tell your Board member to vote NO on the F.U. Plan because it hurts kids!

The plan will create education deserts in neighborhoods across the city, and hit hardest in places that have already been hit hard before by school closures and consolidations.

School closures are a disinvestment in our neighborhoods and communities, and also accelerate gentrification. The Advancement Project’s Action Kit: Stop Closing Public Schools is an accessible guide to understanding the harms of closing schools. 

Check out an interactive map of the proposed school closures and new portfolio of schools to show the many neighborhoods that will be left without a public school nearby.

Tell your Board Member to vote NO on the F.U. Plan because it hurts neighborhoods!

They haven’t done the math. The consultant, ERS, acknowledged in a news interview they “don’t know yet” if the plan will save or cost money. In 2006, PPS closed 22 schools and it didn’t save money; it cost millions of dollars. The final proposal includes an unsupported “cost saving” number.

In board meetings earlier in 2024, Board President Gene Walker framed this plan as an opportunity for cost savings. In "community input" meetings in September, he and ERS acknowledged that this plan may cost money rather than saving money.

Tell your Board Member to vote NO on the F.U. Plan if they don’t know how much it will cost!

The plan is rooted in a lot of THEORY (see “theory of action” on slides 43-44 of the initial F.U. Plan) but no EVIDENCE.

The final F.U. Plan did not offer any additional evidence to back its proposals.

Many parents asked about this at the “community input” sessions, and the Board and its consultant did not provide any evidence that their plan could achieve its goals of “equity, excellence, and efficiency.”

Some crucial missing evidence:

The plan assumes that the ideal school size is >350 students for K-5 and K-8 schools, and >500 students for 6-8, 6-12, and 9-12 schools (see slide 116 of the initial F.U. Plan).

The plan assumes that K-5, 6-8, and 9-12 are the ideal grade configurations (see slides 14-15 of the initial F.U. Plan).

Where is the evidence that those school sizes and grade configurations in an urban public school district has resulted in…

• higher academic outcomes?

• higher attendance rates?

• higher teacher retention?

• increased family participation?

• higher public school retention?

• cost savings?

Tell your Board Member to vote NO on the F.U. Plan if they don’t have evidence for each part of the plan!

The plan is missing a comprehensive plan for transporting students. We all know how badly the bus driver shortage has impacted PPS. Will this plan make that better or worse? 

It will likely make it worse, with longer distances to school for many students.The F.U. Plan assumes that moving a student “only 1 mile” or “only 2.5 miles” to a different school is acceptable. 

Where is the evidence that moving students to schools further from their neighborhoods has resulted in…

• higher academic outcomes? 

• higher attendance rates?

• increased family participation? 

• higher public school retention? 

• cost savings?

Tell your Board Member to vote NO on the F.U. Plan if they don’t have a comprehensive transportation plan!

People who have been in our schools identified flaws and inaccuracies in the school utilization and facility condition data. The school closure consultant admitted that the data was old. Data must be accurate when making high-stakes decisions that will have a lasting impact on students, families, and the community. 

Decisions about school closure and reconfiguration must consider student learning outcomes and the negative impact on equity for students, families, and staff, not just excess space and efficiency. PPS has underestimated how much space is needed for teaching and learning. Schools are not half empty when spaces are allocated for educational use (therapy, mentoring, tutoring, community schools). PPS refuses to consider alternative ways to utilize schools so we can attract and retain students.

Tell your Board Member to vote NO on the F.U. Plan that relies on flawed data. Garbage in, garbage out!

The Board’s “community input” for this plan has been perfunctory and performative.

The Board and its consultant hosted several “town hall” meetings — over the summer, when many families are less plugged in to school news, and are busy with vacation and other summer activities. These town hall meetings were performative because they allowed very little (only ~20 minutes) of actual public comment, and the consultant prescribed the topics on which attendees could submit comment.

With the “regional community input” meetings in September, the Board and consultant spent the first hour talking.

The rushed process left us with an F.U. Plan that doesn’t describe how education will be delivered at each school. Which programs will be available? What resources will be available? We only have empty promises of more resources, program offerings, and a better student experience. The future welfare of our students and our communities depends upon the quality of education we provide, not just on how many buildings are open.

Throughout this process, testimonies from parents (and teachers and staff) at Board public hearings have been overwhelmingly critical of the Facilities Utilization Plan and the rushed process.

There are students, families, staff, and folks who care for our students eager and ready to work on a community-led plan.

The Mayor of Pittsburgh, City Council, County Executive, County Council, State Representatives, Pittsburgh Regional Transit, Urban Redevelopment Association, Community Development Corporations, and other District partners have not participated in the development of this plan.

The F.U. Plan is bad because it lacks community wisdom.

Tell your Board Member to vote NO on the F.U. Plan because there is no community buy-in for this rushed plan!

The Facilities Utilization Plan is a solution looking for a problem. And it’s not even a good solution. It’s a disinvestment in our schools. 

The Board and its consultant have pointed to decreasing enrollment at public schools as a problem the Facilities Utilization Plan will address. School closures and consolidation, in their view, are the solution. Managing decline is a bad solution. 

The F.U. Plan lacks imagination for the potential uses of space in our schools. Ideas from the community include space for:

• full-service community schools

• before- and after-school programs

• gifted education delivered in each school

• student clubs and activities

• students from the additional affordable housing planned in Pittsburgh

The F.U. Plan also does not address the underlying problems, and it does not address ideas to attract families to PPS to increase enrollment. The F.U. Plan assumes schools will be filled to almost capacity with classrooms filled with students. School closures and consolidation, in reality, create a vacuum that can be readily filled by charter schools and private schools, which will further decrease PPS enrollment.

PPS must follow its own Equity Policy and conduct an equity audit of past school closures to inform this process. The equity audit must consider: 

• Did school closures/consolidations improve or hurt educational outcomes for students? 

• Did school  closures/consolidations have beneficial or harmful effects on the socio-emotional well-being of students?  

• Did school closures/consolidations increase or decrease enrollment and retention? 

• Did school closures/consolidations create transportation benefits or obstacles that hinder students’ learning  and families’ access and engagement? 

• Did school closures/consolidations harm communities?

Tell your Board Member to vote NO on the F.U. Plan because this is a BAD plan.