On Nov. 25, 2025, the Pittsburgh Public Schools (PPS) board voted against adopting the “Future-Ready Facilities Plan” (Plan). The Plan was designed to address ongoing financial challenges and declining enrollment and called for closing nine buildings and 12 schools, opening two new schools and reconfiguring the grade level for 10 schools.
At a legislative meeting on Jan. 28, 2026, a motion to reconsider the legislation authorizing the Plan was approved. On Feb. 17, the board held a discussion with the intent of giving the administration time to address concerns and allowing the board to make a more informed decision by the end of the school year. The administration presented its response via a presentation during an education committee meeting on April 14 and with a supplementary 36-page document. The board ultimately approved the Plan on May 27.
The district’s press release announcing the decision noted that the “plan is designed to create more equitable and consistent student experiences while generating approximately $4 million in savings in 2027 and approximately $8 million in savings in 2028, the first full year of implementation ….” Furthermore, the average age of PPS school buildings is 90 years and the district projects that the “plan could avoid more than $100 million in future facility costs while allowing for more than $103 million in investments in modernized learning spaces over the next seven years.”
The Allegheny Institute has consistently reiterated the need for PPS to right-size its footprint and address its out-of-line expenditures. As per the district’s 2024 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report – the latest available – PPS enrolled 19,570 students but had functional capacity to serve roughly 16,000 more.
Based on 2024-25 data from the Pennsylvania Department of Education, PPS’ total expenditure per Average Daily Membership – which includes “all resident pupils of the school district for whom the school district is financially responsible” – was $35,318.68. That was the 9th highest in the commonwealth. The statewide average was just $23,785.90.
Prior Policy Briefs have chronicled PPS’ lackluster academic achievement scores despite significant per pupil spending. Policy Brief Vol. 24, No. 39, emphasized that in moving forward with school consolidations, “PPS also has the opportunity to focus its resources on providing a better educational experience for students.” Ensuring all students have access to a quality education, beyond those in a few well-performing schools, is a must.
The financial forecast included in the administration’s response estimated that even with implementation, the district would still see deficits totaling $94 million by 2030 and would entirely deplete its fund balance by 2029. Clearly then, more work on reducing expenditures is desperately needed.
So, while it will not solve all the problems afflicting PPS, the Plan’s approval does represent a step in the right direction toward more seriously addressing the district’s out-of-line expenditures, declining enrollment and lackluster academic achievement scores.
