Is There a Plan for Sustainability?

By and large, school administrators seem to rise through the ranks. Perhaps from time to time someone with an administrative or business background wanders into running a school district by way of another path, but from what I can gather our current administrators began their careers teaching in a classroom before starting to direct and support others in the challenging work of educating children. So while it’s fair to ask how an administrator is qualified to supervise a $187 million dollar facilities project without adequate training or help from an appropriate project management consultant, it’s also reasonable to expect they are familiar with the basics of organizing a project’s goals, steps, and intended outcomes in the form of lesson planning.

A basic lesson plan starts with determining learning objectives, describes their alignment with curriculum standards, then lists the necessary instructional materials and sequential procedures and activities. Anyone who has responsibility for planning and achieving an outcome in their own career will recognize a similar structure even if they’ve never stood in front of a classroom. Assessment along the way is also critical – if we don’t measure what we’ve achieved and where we’ve fallen short, we’re not likely to know if we’re meeting our objectives or to become any more effective the next time around.

As a key example, sustainability has been identified as a primary driver for the Long-Term Facilities Plan. In the 2023 levy campaign, sustainability for school facilities was a primary plank of the campaign platform. The levy committee’s website included some specific commitments – electric car chargers and outdoor learning for example. Neither of these were incorporated in Ludlow or Woodbury, and the elementary projects exclude significant sitework, so it does not appear as if there is follow-through for these two examples. The Facilities Advisory Committee also identified Sustainability as one of three priority principals, along with Equity and Transparency, and the District said it would adopt these goals as its own.

Further detail has not been fleshed out. Are we trying to achieve beyond baseline compliance with the bare minimum State of Ohio facilities requirements? It would be reasonable to target improvements to student health and achievement, or improved staff performance and job satisfaction by way of a better interior environment with natural light, air quality and ventilation, acoustics, etc. None of these seem to be identified. Reducing district costs in the form of either increased building durability, reduced maintenance, or more efficient systems to reduce energy costs might be another focus.

The district has taken on the broad goal of sustainability, but does not seem to have set objectives or assessment standards that will guide decision making by either the administration or the board. We are targeting LEED certification to meet the state-required minimum standard, but have not established any priorities or specific targets. Put another way, this is like a Algebra instructor setting their objective as “teach math”, their methods as “do math problems” and their assessment as “give a math test”. Without more specifics, they won’t have much hope of identifying what they’re teaching, and whether in the end they’ll know if the students have learned anything.

It’s worth noting that the District has commissioned a sustainability master plan. This was an admirable first step, though the report is heavier on analysis of where the District is, and vague about the path forward. Indeed, it clearly points out that the district lacks formal sustainability goals, and recommends they be created!  What is missing is a clear statement of how the Administration and Board will set priorities and make decisions among competing criteria to achieve objectives that best further the work of educating children and stewarding community resources. Build Shaker Better asked for clarification of the Sustainability objectives and approach with this email below, sent January 28, 2026 to the Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent, and copied to the Board of Education. As of this writing six weeks later, no reply has been forthcoming. Similarly Ludlow is not yet LEED certified, and the commissioning report noted as a key project assessment tool has not been prepared. Our plan remains incomplete.