Lubbock ISD board adopts optimization framework to guide future consolidation reviews
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up Free
Summary
The Lubbock ISD Board of Trustees unanimously approved a framework using three metrics — a three‑year enrollment average of 450 or fewer students, facility utilization at 70% or less, and per‑pupil spending more than 5% above district average — and directed staff to publish a public dashboard and pursue community engagement before any consolidation votes.
The Lubbock Independent School District Board of Trustees unanimously approved an optimization framework designed to guide future school consolidation and closure decisions amid declining enrollment.
Chief Innovation Officer Ken Casarez described a public dashboard and three primary metrics trustees will use to identify campuses for further consideration: a three‑year average enrollment of 450 students or fewer, facility utilization at 70% or less based on the district baseline, and per‑pupil spending more than 5% above the district average on a three‑year basis. "The threshold that we're looking at for the overall enrollment is any campus with an enrollment of 450 students or less based on a 3 year average," Casarez said. He added the dashboard will include multi‑year averages, state accountability measures and a map to help families compare campuses.
The presentation outlined a public timeline: staff would publish a list of campuses that meet the three‑metric threshold, then hold community engagement sessions at identified schools; trustees said they expected any formal board votes on closures or consolidations to come after those engagement steps. Casarez said the district was testing data and hoped to publish the dashboard within a few weeks, targeting a February rollout. "We're looking at trying to push this out in February," he said.
Trustees repeatedly emphasized that approval of the framework is not an immediate vote to close schools. Superintendent Dr. Rolo reiterated that the framework will not include high schools at this time and that the three new campuses approved in the 2025 bond election are not part of the framework. "This does not include the 3 new schools that were part of the 2025 bond election that passed," she said.
Board members framed the framework as an effort to create clearer, consistent criteria and to increase transparency ahead of future decisions. Several trustees urged community members to engage early and often; one trustee noted only about 159 people attended the town halls that shaped the framework and encouraged broader participation. The board voted 7‑0 to adopt the framework.
Next steps outlined by staff include refining the dashboard, publishing campus-level data for public review, additional stakeholder engagement and returning to the board with any recommendations after community input and further analysis.