Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Edtech Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Lebanon details $2.1 million technology budget and defends GoGuardian parental controls
Summary
District staff told the board the 2026–27 technology budget is about $2.1 million, with roughly $620,000 for software; staff described vendor costs and said GoGuardian parental controls cost about $14,000 and can be offered to families to manage devices off campus.
Mount Lebanon School District staff at the April 6 budget forum described the district’s technology budget and defended recent purchases of software and parental‑control tools.
Mrs. Connelly said the total technology budget for 2026–27 is about $2.1 million, with roughly $620,000 budgeted for software and subscriptions. She listed several vendors and approximate annual costs the district uses for core functions: Atlas (curriculum platform) about $24,000; Arbiter Sports (athletics officials/management) about $25,000; BoardDocs about $10,000; Brightly (energy management) about $15,000; Comply about $13,000; Frontline (substitute/HR management) about $55,000; Finalsite (website) about $25,000; an IEP‑writer product about $24,000; Johnson Controls (security/cameras) about $23,000; Prosoft (budgeting) about $44,000; and Naviance for counseling about $13,000. Staff said many line items support compliance, curriculum and core operations rather than consumer‑facing “ed‑games.”
On parental controls, staff said the district pays about $14,000 annually for GoGuardian parental‑control functionality that allows parents to manage district devices off campus; staff described offering the tool to parents (potentially via automatic enrollment with an opt‑out) and tying parental sign-offs and certain schedule releases to required compliance/privacy acknowledgements. Mrs. Connelly said the district purchased some contracts (for example, a sports filming tool) in previous years and noted multi‑year agreements remain in effect.
Why it matters: technology subscriptions are a recurring operating cost, and the Q&A underscored community questions about whether software spending is mainly for classroom instruction or for administrative and compliance systems. Board members and staff said available software saves staff time and supports transparency (for example, PowerSchool and a learning‑management system) even as some community members perceive a high technology line item.
What remained unresolved: trustees asked for clarity on how much of the software budget directly supports classroom instructional technology versus district administrative systems; staff said they will provide further breakdowns and a technology‑usage report planned for May.
