Consultants advise against consolidating Asheville City and Buncombe County schools; urge targeted collaboration

A consultant team contracted to assess whether Asheville City Schools (ACS) and Buncombe County Schools (BCS) should merge recommended against consolidation, concluding there is no compelling evidence it would improve student performance or substantially reduce costs.

Prismatic Services lead consultant Dr. Tasha Prieta presented the firm’s analysis and recommendation to the three elected boards, citing a legislative mandate (House Bill 142) that required a consolidation study but did not prescribe analytic methods. “We did not recommend consolidation of ACS and BCS,” Prieta said near the end of the presentation, summarizing the team’s conclusion after reviewing data, interviews and community feedback.

Why this matters: the study was ordered by state law and could influence local and state decisions about whether to merge the two districts. The recommendation against consolidation does not end policy work: Prismatic identified a range of operational, boundary and equity issues that the two districts and Buncombe County should address together to reduce costs and improve student outcomes without merging.

What the study found and recommended

Prismatic reviewed more than 1,100 documents, conducted 68 interviews, hosted nine in-person community forums and visits to 35 schools. The firm’s framework combined research evidence, constituent preferences and functional reviews (governance, transportation, child nutrition, finance and facilities). Key findings included:

- Academic outcomes: Neither district outpaced the other or state averages on metrics such as EOG/EOC or graduation rates, and both struggle with persistent achievement gaps. The consultant said the research does not support the expectation that consolidation alone will improve the academic outcomes reviewed.

- Costs and economies of scale: The literature and local analysis suggested only modest financial gains from consolidation. Prismatic estimated about a 0.8% reduction in combined central office costs by consolidating—“not a compelling number,” Prieta said—and cited research (including a 2023 North Carolina analysis by Dr. Chen) that found small long-term savings in some districts but no reliable academic benefit.

- Facilities and enrollment: Both districts have substantial underutilized capacity; ACS and BCS have lost students countywide, and charters increased enrollment by about 17% over five years. Prismatic found consolidation could facilitate school closures that yield short-term facilities savings but noted that each district could pursue right-sizing independently.

- Boundaries and equity: The study emphasized the county’s irregular district map — which consultants and interviewees described as “Swiss cheese” — as a persistent driver of the consolidation conversation and recommended the county and city consider boundary and choice options that do not require a full consolidation.

- Local support and timeline: Public input indicated little local support for a full consolidation unless it clearly improved student success and well-being. Prismatic described cultural differences between the districts and limited current collaboration; superintendents who had implemented consolidations elsewhere said implementation usually takes at least two years if both parties are fully committed.

Recommendations and next steps

Prismatic offered a single formal recommendation not to consolidate ACS and BCS at this time, plus ancillary recommendations focused on shared services and environmental considerations. Specific operational recommendations included:

- Pursue targeted shared services in transportation, child nutrition and select facilities functions so each system may realize efficiencies without merging central offices. - Address confusing municipal–school boundary lines (the “Swiss cheese” parcels) through county–city dialogue and options such as expanded choice or targeted boundary changes rather than forced district consolidation. - Develop a consistent approach to salaries and supplements before any structural merger: the consultant noted “fairly substantial differences” in how salaries and supplements are administered between ACS and BCS and cautioned any consolidation would require alignment. - Maintain an emphasis on closing achievement gaps directly (equity-driven investments), because the evidence did not show consolidation alone would resolve persistent disparities.

Process and immediate actions

Prismatic’s final report will be submitted to the North Carolina General Assembly by county staff no later than Feb. 15, per the legislative mandate. County staff said they will attach any board endorsements if the elected bodies choose to provide them before submission.

What officials said

Several elected officials and school board members said they welcomed the data and emphasized collaboration. Buncombe County Commission Chair Amanda Edwards said the report provides clarity and that the boards should use positives from each district to strengthen both systems. Multiple elected leaders described “collaboration” as the immediate next step rather than consolidation.

Provenance: Prismatic’s presentation and the Q&A that followed (presentation beginning ~00:04:49; recommendation and questions beginning ~00:39:40) were the source material for this article. Key evidence spans the consultant’s overview, community engagement tallies, enrollment and facilities slides and the final recommendation statement.

Ending: The consultants urged the three elected boards to pursue greater interdistrict collaboration, and county staff scheduled the legislatively required submission of the report to the General Assembly. The boards and staff signaled they will use the study to guide shared-service work and to inform future boundary and facility planning.