Independent analysis by a PPS parent, not an official Portland Public Schools product. It may contain errors. Check PPS's own materials: the Rightsizing scenarios page and the October 6, 2026 Board of Education meeting materials. Built with AI, directed by a PPS parent (how).

Did PPS learn from SEGC?

PPS paid for an outside audit of its last big boundary change, the 2020–23 Southeast Enrollment and Program Balancing (“SEGC”). Here is what the audit recommended, and how PPS A and PPS B measure up so far.

In 2026, Dr. Terrance Green and Dr. Havala Hanson audited the 20 schools SEGC changed. They drew on 905 family and 327 staff surveys, five years of student and staff records, and focus groups and interviews (audit pp. 4–5). They found that SEGC evened out middle school sizes but did not stop decline, that its projections ran high, and that staff of color and trust took the biggest hits. The Board wrote several of the process lessons into Resolution 7307.

The scenarios apply some of them: every region is in scope, the criteria came before the list, and Marysville’s closure is phased so SEGC-moved students don’t move twice. Others haven’t been published yet, and a few go the other way.

Applied 3 Partly 6 Not yet 3 Not applied 4

As of October 14, 2026. Nothing new had been posted to PPS’s rightsizing pages since the October 6 release. “p.” is the PDF page of the source. “Not yet” means promised but not published; PPS’s scenario memo says the district will consider “equity impact findings” (none are published yet) and that the superintendent’s mid-November recommendation will describe “implementation considerations and transition supports.”

The scorecard

Applied: visible in the scenarios. Partly: some of it. Not yet: promised, not published. Not applied: the scenarios do something different.

Lesson, and what the audit foundWhat PPS has done so farVerdict
Applied
Put every school in scopeLeaving some Southeast schools out “undermined trust.” Participants described the excluded schools as whiter and more affluent; SEGC schools averaged 54% free or reduced-price lunch vs 25% at excluded Southeast schools. pp. 21, 70 Resolution 7307 puts every school and program in scope, and the scenarios cover all four regions. But “no alternative or focus option school closure is proposed.” Res. 7307 p. 2; scenario memo p. 2Applied
Only promise what is budgeted“Broken promises or even the perceptions of them were among the most trust-damaging elements…” Only 3% of surveyed staff mostly or completely trust PPS to handle rightsizing fairly. pp. 17, 66 Every Family Guide says: “A larger school does not automatically get a full-time librarian, certain staff, or specific programs.” Family Guides p. 1Applied
Track what happens afterwardPPS “must publicly track follow-through.” p. 66 Resolution 7307 commits to “monitoring, evaluation, and adjustment.” Res. 7307 p. 3; Sept 15 deck p. 7Applied
Partly
Set criteria before the listGround scenario work in “transparent criteria.” Only 23% of SEGC members said decision rules were clear and applied consistently. pp. 58, 72 Principles came May 26, measures Sept 15 and scenarios Oct 6. But the criteria “were weighed against one another rather than applied in a fixed ranking, with the balance differing by regional conditions.” scenario memo p. 1Partly
Define “well-resourced” as a funded staffing modelName the staff and services students can count on, funded for several years (“e.g., five-year window”), and show students get more, “not only that enrollment numbers improve on paper.” p. 72 Described: K-5 with “2-3 sections per grade” and “counseling and nursing support on site”; middle school with “6-8 sections per grade.” No funded staffing model. Sept 8 deck p. 7Partly
Count cumulative burdenSchools lived SEGC as “layered disruption.” Map which schools have already absorbed change before choosing who absorbs more. pp. 69, 73 The memo cites “lessons from prior southeast changes” and “limiting repeated transitions,” and Marysville is phased in so SEGC-moved students avoid “multiple school moves.” Still, several audited schools change again: Marysville and Creston close, Clark’s Mandarin moves again (to Woodstock), Atkinson’s Spanish moves to Lent, and Bridger loses grades 6-8. No burden map. scenario memo p. 2; Marysville guide p. 3; district-wide comparison p. 2Partly
Engage early, with data, so people can test alternatives“…limited access to requested data made it difficult for members to test alternatives…” p. 20 About six weeks from release (Oct 6) to the recommendation (mid-November), with the vote in December. The two scenarios “share most of their proposed structural changes.” Boundaries were released as PDF maps, not GIS data. scenario memo pp. 1, 3Partly
Program moves hurt mostBlack students leave SEGC immersion programs at 7–17% a year, higher than any other group. Total SEGC immersion enrollment reached 86% of target. p. 10 13 program moves in PPS A and 12 in PPS B, and the immersion moves are largely shared, so there is no lighter choice on immersion. district-wide comparison p. 2Partly
Acknowledge past harmBegin by “publicly acknowledging past harms, broken trust” and creating guardrails. p. 22 “The gap between stated intentions and actions eroded trust with the impacted communities.” Aug 4 memo p. 1Partly
Not yet
An equity impact summary for every scenarioFor each option: students affected, by race, multilingual status, special education and poverty. p. 71 Required by Resolution 7307, including for “communities that have recently been impacted,” and promised as “an equity analysis review attached to every scenario.” The Oct 6 release has none; focal groups appear only as shares “in sustainable schools.” Res. 7307 p. 2; Sept 15 deck p. 7; district-wide comparison p. 1Not yet
Be honest about moneyA rule of thumb the audit cites: closing 1 of every 15 schools saves about 4% of a budget, mostly in staff. Publish net savings after transition, receiving-school and vacant-building costs. pp. 110–111, 148 A board member asked for “the estimated cost savings to closing a school” and how many layoffs were expected. The reply covered only layoffs (“The number of potential layoffs can not be determined at this time.”) and gave no savings figure. Board Q&A, Oct 1, p. 7Not yet
Staff stability is student stabilityIn the year SEGC took effect, 32% of SEGC staff left their school vs 19% elsewhere, and 39% of staff of color vs 21%. The overall gap closed by 2024-25. p. 14 No staff placement or retention plan has been published, including for staff of color. Board Q&A, Oct 1, p. 7Not yet
Not applied
Add a decline buffer to size floorsTreat the state’s 360 / 500 as “a starting floor,” add about five years of PPS’s own losses, and plan around 450 K-5, 600 middle, 650 K-8. These “should not be understood as automatic closure thresholds.” pp. 140–141, 144–146 PPS uses 360 / 500 as is, and applies 500 to K-8s too. On PPS’s own projections for 2031-32, 13 of PPS A’s 24 K-5 schools at the goal are below 450 (table below). Aug 4 memo p. 2; Family Guides p. 4Not applied
Use projection rangesProjections ran high at 12 of 20 schools; Mandarin immersion reached 69% of target and Russian 67%. Use “enrollment projection ranges rather than a single projected number.” pp. 6, 48, 73 “All figures are projections for the 2031–32 school year”: one number per school. district-wide comparison p. 1Not applied
Fund the transition before the vote“Develop a robust, funded transition plan prior to any Board vote,” and treat receiving-school readiness as “an equity requirement.” pp. 73, 114 Readiness, transportation, staffing and transition supports “will require further implementation planning.” The vote is in December; staffing runs winter to fall 2027. scenario memo pp. 1–2; PPS timelineNot applied
Don’t repeat a whole-school conversionLent’s conversion to whole-school Spanish immersion: 57% of students left, and Black enrollment fell from 10% to 2%. “Programmatic equity and racial equity must be analyzed together.” pp. 11–12, 50, 124; school-by-school p. 45 César Chávez “would change from a K-8 to a focused K-5 regional Spanish DLI school,” and its neighborhood K-5 students would go to Rosa Parks. Its guide shows students experiencing poverty falling from 65.7% to 47.8% and underserved racial groups from 81.5% to 69.1%, with no breakdown by race of who moves. Chávez guide pp. 3–4Not applied

How thin is “sustainable”?

PPS counts a school at its goal (360 K-5, 500 middle) as sustainable. The audit’s planning floor adds a five-year decline buffer: about 450 and 600. Schools between the two lines meet PPS’s goal today but have little room if enrollment keeps falling, as it’s forecast to after 2031 (Res. 7307, recital C).

2031-32, PPS’s own projectionsNeighborhood schoolsAt PPS’s goalAt the audit floorBetween the two
PPS A, K-5 (360 / 450)35241113
PPS B, K-53819613
PPS A, middle (500 / 600)13835
PPS B, middle13936

Source: PPS Family Guides, “How many students are expected?”, p. 4, 2031-32 column; neighborhood schools only (program-only immersion schools left out), the same set the Durability page uses. Floors: audit pp. 144–146. See Why these sizes for where 360 and 500 come from.

What would close the gap by mid-November

  1. Publish the equity impact analysis for PPS A and B now, including who moves (by race, poverty, special education and language) and the recently impacted schools, as Resolution 7307 requires.
  2. Show low, expected and high enrollment for every receiving school, not one 2031-32 number.
  3. Say what happens below the line. For schools projected at 360–449 (K-5) or 500–599 (middle), state the staffing they keep if they drift under, and whether they’d be on the next list.
  4. Put a number on net savings, after transition, receiving-school and vacant-building costs.
  5. Publish a cumulative-burden map, and explain each second move: Mandarin, Lent, Atkinson, Creston, Bridger.
  6. Fund transition and receiving-school readiness before the vote, or vote in stages so readiness gates each step.
  7. Release the boundaries as GIS data, so families can test alternatives.

Read with care

Sources