Blog

Effective district planning begins with thoughtful input. Whether you're crafting a multi-year strategic plan or refining annual improvement goals, a successful planning process typically unfolds in three key phases: 

1) gathering meaningful input from diverse sources
2) developing a structured, goal-aligned plan
3) implementing that plan with consistent progress monitoring

While each phase may vary in scope depending on your district’s needs, it all starts with how you gather and analyze input. This article focuses on strategies to help you make that first step both efficient and impactful.
 

What Is Input Gathering in School District Planning?
Input-gathering can take a variety of forms. In some cases, input-gathering may entail compiling and analyzing data and information that already exist. Resources could include, (but are not limited to), the most current district strategic plan, school improvement plans, student achievement data, student enrollment and demographic information, teacher retention data, teacher evaluation data, current financial statements, and more. On the opposite end of the spectrum, input-gathering could take the form of a full-scale, third-party district review. A few framing questions can help determine what level of input gathering will best meet the district’s objectives.

• WHY is the district entering into planning?
  Is the district charged with refining a previously established plan? Is the district coming to the end of a multi-year plan? Has district leadership recently changed? Have the needs of the students and families in the community shifted in recent years?

The planning “why” will help determine how much overhaul the district is expecting as part of the planning process. In general, if district stakeholders anticipate (or if circumstances necessitate) a significant shift in the priorities addressed by the current plan, more time and resources should be allocated to the input-gathering phase.
 

• WHAT are the requirements of the resulting plan?
  Essentially, what are the “buckets” that must be addressed in the plan? Is the objective to develop an improvement plan focused on academic goals, or a strategic plan that must also encompass financial and operational goals? Will the resulting plan focus on a single academic year, or will it define 5- or 10-year goals?

To help create a vision for the resulting plan, it may be helpful to map out state-defined requirements and examine a few exemplary plans. Establishing a clear vision of the resulting deliverable will provide insight into not only the volume and type of data that must be considered, but also into which district stakeholders must be involved in the process.
 

• HOW will the district determine which priorities to address in the plan?
  In other words, does the district have an adequate grasp on the challenges that must be addressed, or is some additional digging needed?

In general, evidence collection activities should be introduced to ensure that there are no gaps in the data “story” that informs the plan. For example, if existing parent surveys are used as community input, the district may introduce additional data collection methods (such as a focus group) to ensure that all demographic populations have a voice.
 

In some cases, a more comprehensive evidence collection and analysis process (i.e., a district review) is a valid consideration. A third-party district review and the resulting report can help surface trends that are not immediately evident to stakeholders who are immersed in day-to-day district operations. Furthermore, a district review can also depoliticize the planning process. (If friction exists among stakeholder groups and their perceptions of district priorities, an objective evaluation and written report can ensure that the resulting plan is fully aligned to codified areas of need.)
 

Real-World Example: District Improvement Planning in Action

Let’s consider an example of a district embarking on the planning process. In 2021, SchoolWorks was engaged by a mid-sized Massachusetts district (15 schools) to support the development of a district improvement plan.

1. The WHY: In this case, the district had an interim superintendent in place, who wanted to ensure that the planning process was executed with objectivity and transparency in preparation for a change in leadership. For this reason, the district opted to utilize an external facilitator.
   
    
2. The WHAT: In Massachusetts, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education requires that both districts and schools establish a multi-year improvement plan and annual action plan for implementation. The state posts agency-level performance targets and associated strategies that may serve as a framework for district planning, and also publishes both a guidance for district planning and a collection of exemplar district plans. The resulting district improvement plan, as defined by these standards, would focus on academic goals.
   
    
3. The HOW: Within the state-supplied district planning guidance, inputs were defined as district performance data, educator evaluation data, and community feedback. With these parameters, the district determined that it had access to the necessary input data that would inform the planning process. No additional, supplementary evidence was collected to inform the process.

To determine the priorities that would be addressed by the plan, the district relied on its district leadership team. All ten district leadership team members were asked to independently identify the district’s three greatest strengths and three greatest areas of need, as supported by data. During the early stages of planning, the facilitator created a collective list of all input, and stakeholders independently ranked the collectively generated list of strengths and challenges in order of priority. The top three collective challenges were presented back to the group at large. Once these “buckets” were determined, stakeholders entered into root cause analysis, goal setting, and strategy selection.

Prioritizing Equity in Input Gathering

To ensure district plans reflect the needs of all students and families, equity must be intentionally built into the input-gathering process. This means going beyond traditional methods to make sure every voice—especially those from historically underrepresented groups—is heard and considered.

Here are a few strategies to support equitable input collection:

• Use translated surveys and materials to reach non-English-speaking families. Language access is essential to creating an inclusive dialogue.
• Design culturally responsive engagement formats—such as community circles or multilingual listening sessions—that honor the values, schedules, and communication styles of different groups.
• Proactively engage underrepresented voices through targeted outreach. This might include partnering with local organizations, faith-based groups, or family liaisons who already have trusted relationships in the community.
• Review participation data during the input-gathering process to identify gaps in representation—and take steps to close them in real time.

By embedding equity into the foundation of your input strategy, your district will not only collect richer, more authentic data, but also foster trust and shared ownership among stakeholders. Ultimately, inclusive input leads to more effective and sustainable plans.

 

Bringing It All Together: the Why, What, How –and for Whom
While there’s no one-size-fits-all approach to input-gathering, grounding your process in a clear understanding of the why, what, and how can lead to a more focused and effective planning effort. Just as important is the question of for whom the input is being gathered. Ensuring that all voices—especially those historically underrepresented—are intentionally included strengthens both the process and the resulting plan.

In the example shared, the district was able to leverage existing data—thanks to clearly defined state requirements—and move forward with confidence, avoiding unnecessary pre-planning evidence collection. A change in leadership prompted the use of an external facilitator, whose structured approach to prioritization helped the district arrive at a shared vision for improvement.

With thoughtful planning and a commitment to inclusive engagement, even the earliest stages of input-gathering can lay the groundwork for a unified, equity-centered strategy that drives meaningful, lasting outcomes.
 

Find Out More. If you’d like to learn more about SchoolWorks’ facilitated planning supports, reach out to us anytime at hello@schoolworks.org. We structure our planning engagements to meet your specific needs. As always, we’re here to help.