Too much, too fast! Sign the petition urging PPS to press pause on rightsizing
Join the community
Back to the overview

Before a decision · Save PDX Schools

Our open letter to the Superintendent

PPS parents are calling for a more comprehensive solution, grounded in reliable data, clear planning, and measurable outcomes.

The challenge ahead for both PPS and districts nationwide facing declining enrollment trends is real, and it’s clear action must be taken. This could even include school closures and redistricting for a district that is now nearly half of its peak capacity.

The process that the district has followed has raised more questions than it answered. As a community, we will have one chance to get this right. We cannot afford to overlook the real and persistent questions that have emerged around the current school closure proposals (both Scenarios A and B).

Based on feedback from our growing community of more than 800 PPS families, we have identified three core concerns:

  1. The integrity of the data and the analysis used to justify the District’s proposed school closure scenarios;
  2. The lack of clarity around existing infrastructure and logistics planning to support a major move that will directly impact more than one-quarter of the district’s students, teachers and staff less than 12 months from now;
  3. The lack of specific and outcome-bound metrics by which PPS will be ensuring a means to measure the ongoing success of this massive transition.

As PPS parents, we’re calling on the District to work with us in developing a more comprehensive solution that better addresses the many unanswered questions that remain.

We encourage you to share these questions within your school communities, and to pose them to the district and board members for more clarity ahead of such a critical decision.

Save PDX Schools

The questions behind our concerns

20 questions · 4 sections. Open a section to read its questions.

BIG PICTURE

  1. What other opportunities beyond these right sizing proposals has the District considered and/or already implemented to achieve its stated goals of “stability in staffing, balance resources and improve the student learning experience across the city, especially for historically underserved students?”

  2. What are the specific and measurable consequences of not passing either Option A or Option B by December 15, and instead allotting more time to addressing at least some of the unanswered questions above?

    1. Why not wait for the long session to play out in Salem, beginning this January, when education funding is expected to be on the agenda and any new legislation and/or reforms could meaningfully impact the PPS landscape?

  3. Until the September 2 School Board meeting, PPS had repeatedly cited “better-resourced schools” as the primary goal of school closures. At that meeting, the language shifted to “stability,” with no further commitment to any specific, outcome-bound success metrics for the rightsizing proposal. Why did this shift in messaging suddenly come about, and what specific commitments can you make to how this process will support specific academic outcomes for PPS students and staff, including retention plans?

  4. What sort of dedicated retention and recruitment efforts will the district make for impacted students at closed schools? And what about schools that will receive students from closed schools?

  5. Ahead of the binding vote, will the District provide the School Board with clearly articulated staffing plans, a financial impact statement, projected costs / savings and/or a broader community impact report to include the projected impact closures will have on enrollment?

ACCOUNTABILITY & OUTCOME-BOUND METRICS

  1. When will you be publicly documenting the costs and benefits for proposals A, B and C? This was a specific recommendation from the SEGC audit and cited as a key decision factor for any future PPS school closure process. We believe it is critical to share this prior to any decision making.

  2. At what point in the process will you commit to specific staffing ratios, specialist positions and funding guarantees that define “well-resourced” under this proposal – and will this information be made public ahead of a binding board vote on December 15?

  3. How will the Board measure transition success during the first 90 days, 120 days and first academic year if proposal A or B is passed?

  4. Are there any planned interventions or emergency funding available if academic or behavioral distress metrics spike in that timeframe?

  5. This has repeatedly been described by the District as a five-year process, at minimum – and as a result of a history of mismanagement, frequent turnover and a lack of strategic clarity from previous District leadership. What is the District proposing to avoid repeating some of the past challenges related to continuity, oversight, and strategic implementation?

DATA ANALYSIS & INTEGRITY

  1. What specific data analysis practices, methodologies, and validation standards were used to underpin the proposal to close up to 14 PPS schools, including the statistical models, demographic projections, and quality assurance protocols applied to ensure accuracy and limit bias?

  2. Given the scale and consequences of these recommendations, was PPS’ data analysis independently audited or otherwise reviewed by any qualified, third-party experts? If not, why – and what was the process used to verify the accuracy and objectivity of the analysis?

  3. Can you confirm whether or not AI was used to aid the analysis process, and if it was, what specific, human-led processes, tooling and/or guardrails you had in place to verify the integrity of its output?

LOGISTICS AND PLANNING

  1. Following these changes, some schools will then be below target sustainability thresholds. Considering the Southeast Guiding Coalition (SEGC) process ultimately led to accelerated enrollment loss and community disruption, what objective evidence proves that this rightsizing proposal will achieve long-term stability rather than triggering another cycle of under-resourced schools and further closures?

  2. For each dual language immersion (DLI) program proposed for consolidation, how has PPS assessed academic continuity, transportation access, cultural connections, and student and family safety?

    1. As students from certain vulnerable communities become more consolidated – and often further from their homes than their original schools – what additional safeguards is PPS providing for community members concerned about ICE actions?

  3. In some cases, schools will be losing their hard-fought-for Title 1 status as a result of the demographic shifts that will come from rightsizing. What’s your response to families from communities whose schools will lose Title 1 status as a result of this process?

  4. What’s the plan for managing and/or selling off PPS’ real estate portfolio, especially if it’s about to add 14 soon-to-be-mostly-vacant school buildings to the mix? Is there a specific individual or committee responsible for setting and articulating this strategy?

  5. Given the logistical magnitude of this closure scenario, has PPS committed to finalizing bus/transportation routes, staffing assignments, IEP transfers, facility accommodations well ahead of the beginning of the next school year? And if so, when will that information be made public?

  6. Will there still be blended classrooms in a post-rightsizing PPS? If so, what additional training are you planning to support teachers in blended classrooms?

  7. What is the response rate of the PPS exit survey, and what is the primary reason or reasons why most families leave the district?