Districts and states across the country are standing on the edge of an enrollment cliff. Between cratering birth rates, shifting housing patterns and the permanent expansion of school choice options, the era of packed traditional classrooms is over. Yet, instead of confronting this demographic reality with strategic courage, the vast majority of district and state leaders are delaying action or sticking their heads in the sand. Managing enrollment decline is the defining test for this generation of education leaders, and too many are failing.
Recruitment campaigns, incremental budget cuts and temporary reserves built up with ESSER funds cannot solve a structural enrollment problem. Even school systems that move forward with closures and consolidations often focus on buildings, spreadsheets and political expedience rather than student success.
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
There is a better way.
Boards and superintendents facing declining enrollment should use this moment to maximize the number of students in higher-performing schools and higher-quality facilities, reinvesting savings in programs that families value. It starts with engaging families and the community about what the data shows for every school: how well the students perform, what shape the building is in, how full it is and whether the families zoned to the school actually send their kids there. District leaders should ask families what is most important to them about their children’s schools: particular programming, which grade levels the school serves (K-5, K-8, etc.) or campus culture and climate.
School boards should then use this data and community feedback to guide decisions on closing or consolidating schools, as well as how savings are reinvested. Communities can understand the need to make hard decisions when it comes to the allocation of resources. They can understand that keeping half-empty buildings open doesn’t make sense. Decisions that feel opaque or political, or where there is no vision for the benefits that will be realized, are far harder to sustain.
Research shows that moving kids to higher-performing campuses schools can lead to sustained academic gains for thousands of students. Consolidating underutilized buildings can cut spending on facilities upkeep by millions of dollars, reduce the need for uncertified teachers and unlock resources for the specialized programming families want.
This is exactly what happened in Texas’ Aldine Independent School District, which has been hit hard by enrollment declines. The Houston-area district went from more than 70,000 students in 2015-16 to 48,000 just 12 years later — one of the largest decreases in the state. In response, the district used the criteria mentioned above to make the difficult but responsible decision to shut 14 aging or low-performing schools over three years. A project manager in the central office position organized the closures, communicated new school assignments to families well before the end of the school year and helped teachers and principals find new placements.
Not only did the closures eliminate 12,000 seats and save millions of dollars in staffing and maintenance costs, but reading scores for students from the closed schools increased by 7 to 14 percentage points on state exams, their attendance rates went up and while chronic absenteeism declined. Educators from closing schools overwhelmingly chose to stay with the district, effectively eliminating a teacher shortage.
Other districts are applying the same principles. The Cleveland Metropolitan School District responded to a potential $150 million deficit by closing 29 schools at the end of the 2025-26 school year. Over 96% of affected students were sent to better- or equally performing campuses, and the anticipated savings allowed the district to expand electives, sports and college and career pathways.
Texas’ Killeen Independent School District responded to stagnant enrollment and the loss of $50 million in federal funding by closing three elementary and two middle schools and bringing a proven turnaround partner to operate another struggling middle school. The Lafayette Parish School System in Louisiana used savings from school closures to expand access to pre-K, STEM and fine arts.
Unfortunately, districts that successfully navigate declining enrollment remain outliers. Local leaders face powerful resistance, elected board members are subjected to political pressure and executing complex school consolidation plans requires time and professional experience that few district staff have. These barriers can delay difficult decisions until financial pressures become a crisis.
But state education agencies can encourage districts to act earlier. First, they can design strong performance and financial accountability systems that encourage districts to act early and use declining enrollment as an opportunity to expand access to better schools, facilities and programs. Second, they can vet technical assistance providers and offset the cost for districts willing to take on the challenge of addressing declining enrollment. Finally, state leaders can use their influence and political connections to give superintendents and school board members the backing they need to make these difficult decisions.
Rather than hoping districts will get it right on their own, states can establish a clear model for maximizing students’ access to higher-performing schools and higher-quality facilities, while providing families with the resources and programming they are demanding.
Declining enrollment may be unavoidable in many communities. The actions of leaders in places like Aldine, Cleveland, Killeen and Lafayette show that declining educational opportunity doesn’t have to be.