The School District of Philadelphia is presently navigating the final stages of a planning process that will determine the future of its schools and infrastructure, with significant implications for a large number of students and families across the city.
This process comes with a preliminary plan expected to be unveiled this fall, and a set deadline for final decisions slated for December 2025, leaving many stakeholders with anxious anticipation regarding the outcomes.
Over 300 schools are under scrutiny as district staff, along with consultants, deliberate on which schools will receive new investments, which may face closure, co-location, or remain status quo.
For many Philadelphians, memories of the painful Facilities Planning Process in 2013, which led to the closure of 30 schools, loom large.
The lack of sufficient financial benefits from that earlier wave of closures compounded the distress as displaced students faced increased challenges, such as heightened suspension and absence rates, coupled with declines in academic performance at receiving schools.
In stark contrast, district officials insist that this round of planning will adopt a markedly different approach.
Superintendent Dr. Tony Watlington, addressing a school board meeting in June, emphasized the importance of community engagement, stating, “When we get to the end of this process, we want the community to feel like this is an exercise the administration did with them and not to them.”
However, skepticism persists among some Philadelphians involved in advisory groups organized by the district, who argue they have not been adequately informed or empowered in the decision-making process.
In July, a series of community sessions were held throughout the city to educate residents about the planning process and gather feedback.
Four additional in-person sessions are scheduled for the upcoming week to foster further dialogue and input from the community.
The current planning process unfolds against a backdrop of aging infrastructure, with the average age of Philadelphia’s public school buildings estimated at a staggering 73 years.
Students and families alike are all too familiar with schools plagued by inadequate plumbing, insufficient heating and cooling systems, and hazards such as asbestos.
Additionally, the district is grappling with declining enrollment numbers, with over 60,000 empty seats reported throughout the city, resulting in some schools being significantly over- or under-enrolled.
The district aims to allocate resources more efficiently to promote better academic outcomes for all students.
Yet, doubts arise as stakeholders question whether school closures truly lead to the desired improvements.
Factors contributing to fluctuating enrollment levels have included the proliferation of charter schools, as well as trends related to gentrification in historically Black neighborhoods.
While the district did report an increase in enrollment for the first time in a decade in 2024, levels remain below those of the early 2000s.
To ascertain which schools will be targeted for various potential outcomes—ranging from maintenance and modernization to co-location, repurposing, or outright closure—Watlington and his team are utilizing a five-category scoring system.
This includes:
1. School building score: Measures the overall condition of the physical space.
2. Program alignment score: Assesses the building’s ability to support areas such as arts, career technical education, pre-K, physical education, and special education.
3. Capacity/utilization score: Reflects enrollment levels against the school’s capacity.
4. Neighborhood vulnerability score: Utilizes the CDC’s social vulnerability index to gauge socioeconomic conditions in the area.
A strategic shift is also on the table, with Watlington advocating for a reduction in varied grade bands across the district by favoring K-8 schools over traditional middle schools, which, he noted, research indicates are more effective at promoting consistent student performance.
The timeline for the process involves a 30-member project team, which includes leaders from various sectors, meeting monthly since the start of the year until June.
Additionally, a series of community update sessions during July—as part of a broader series—allowing for resident feedback, has been held, with a draft plan expected for release in August, followed by further update sessions to incorporate public input.
The finalized plan will undergo review with the Board of Education in November, demanding completion and approval by the end of the year.
An initial plan to launch a comprehensive data website featuring detailed school information was postponed, leaving many in the community without necessary context for engagement.
The district has acknowledged the importance of improving transparency and pledged to release the data once the review process concludes.
Concerns regarding the district’s outreach process have been voiced by members of various advisory groups, particularly about the level of engagement and information sharing.
Participants have described meetings as largely consisting of presentations with limited opportunities for discussion, raising questions about the efficacy of the engagement strategy.
Akira Drake Rodriguez, a University of Pennsylvania professor and member of the community partners advisory group, expressed frustration, noting that many inquiries regarding underlying data were left unanswered.
She highlighted a decline in participation among group members who felt their concerns were not being addressed, which necessitated the formation of a separate coalition named Stand Up for Philly Schools (SUPS) to facilitate independent dialogue.
Edwin Mayorga, representing the parent and guardian advisory group, echoed similar sentiments about the lack of inclusivity for non-English speaking or immigrant communities.
Mayorga’s involvement with SUPS validated his apprehensions regarding the district’s engagement strategies.
Rodriguez, firmly opposed to school closures, pointed out research indicating that neighborhood public schools serve as vital community anchors.
She asserted that numerous studies suggest closures often fail to deliver the anticipated savings or improvements.
Through discussions held at community update sessions, concerns over representation and engagement strategies emerged.
At a session hosted at Andrew Hamilton Elementary School, many local advocates expressed doubts about whether all relevant schools were represented in the discussions.
The timing of these summer meetings was questioned, with some stakeholders noting that fewer parents and students are likely to attend during the season.
Moving forward, another round of engagement sessions is anticipated to follow the draft plan’s release in August, with continued hopes for greater community involvement.
During recent sessions, district staff attempted to illustrate the data categories affecting school assessments, plotting them visually to aid community understanding.
Attendees observed disparities in school vulnerabilities and capacity utilization, acknowledging the implications of these findings while voicing skepticism about the process.
Concerns were also raised regarding the impact of potential closures on staff and student transportation, alongside debates about grade configurations.
Some community members argued against the district’s plan to reduce the number of middle schools, citing the necessity for comprehensive data to support such decisions.
A district deputy superintendent engaged with attendees, assuring them their feedback would be taken into account in future discussions.
Katy Egan, an organizer with Philly DSA, reflected on her experiences attending sessions during the previous closure cycle, emphasizing the deeply felt impacts of school closures on both educators and communities.
Egan conveyed her apprehension that the present process may still foster a predetermined outcome favoring closures.
The district has acknowledged the prevalent feelings of distrust and uncertainty stemming from the previous facilities planning attempts.
Deputy Superintendent Oz Hill recognized the challenges faced in community engagement and expressed a commitment to improving this aspect moving forward.
Hill conveyed the essential need to effectuate positive academic outcomes across the district, inferring that school closures may ultimately be inevitable given current resources.
He expressed hope that, when closures occur, community members will feel their voices were genuinely heard throughout the decision-making process, thereby easing the transition amid necessary changes.
image source from：whyy
