Preparing for and visiting the elected official’s staffers for Hill Day contributed more to the value of the conference than any other single activity. School business officials are uniquely positioned to explain how proposed policies affect students, employees, operations, and local taxpayers.
Several issues were especially important in our discussions, including child nutrition and scratch cooking, potential reductions to Title programs, the future of E-Rate, school choice, Impact Aid, and support for educator development.
School business officials understand the numbers behind district operations, and those numbers can help policymakers see how a proposal will affect classrooms and communities.
One of the most important lessons for anyone new to advocacy is to begin with empathy.
Being Heard on The Hill
One of the most important lessons for anyone new to advocacy is to begin with empathy. Before meeting with congressional staff or elected officials, I considered their priorities, the concerns of their constituents, and the broader policy environment in which they were working. Effective advocacy is not simply repeating what a school district needs. It is connecting the district’s needs to the goals and responsibilities of the person receiving the message.
On School Choice: School choice provides a good example. It is important to describe the entire educational ecosystem within a local community, including traditional public schools, charter schools, and private schools. Students may move among these sectors, but federal funding decisions can affect all of them.
Traditional public schools and charter schools receive federal support through applicable programs, while local school districts also administer federally required equitable services for eligible private school students and educators.
Several congressional staff members were surprised to learn that reductions in federal education funding could affect the entire local education ecosystem — not just traditional public schools.
On Declining Enrollments: Public school districts may also experience compounding financial pressure when enrollment declines. Reduced enrollment can lower certain state and local revenues while districts continue to maintain buildings, transportation routes, technology systems, and essential academic programs. Federal reductions imposed at the same time can make it even more difficult to align expenditures with changing enrollment.
Declining enrollment also presents an opportunity for federal policymakers to support responsible school consolidation. The federal government could consider providing interest assistance, refinancing support, or other incentives for districts that must renovate facilities, restructure attendance areas, or consolidate schools.
In our district in North Carolina, closing one net school can produce more than $500,000 in recurring annual savings. However, achieving those savings may first require significant investments in construction, transportation, and facility improvements.
On Child Nutrition: In discussing child nutrition, I expressed support for efforts to provide healthier meals and increase scratch cooking at individual school sites. At the same time, policymakers must understand the financial and operational requirements associated with that transition. Districts may need new kitchen equipment, facility improvements, additional employee training, more skilled labor, and higher-cost ingredients. Without adequate reimbursement, these requirements could create operating losses for school nutrition programs.
I explained this challenge by comparing the federal reimbursement received for each meal with the district’s actual cost of producing that meal. Even with careful management, our margins are extremely narrow. One reason we have been able to control costs is our reliance on temporary and part-time labor. Expanding scratch cooking without corresponding support for staffing, equipment, and food costs could place an otherwise well-managed program in a negative financial position.
On E-Rate: Our E-Rate discussions required a different approach. I believe some policymakers may associate school internet access primarily with student devices and concerns about excessive screen time. Those concerns are understandable, and we could be in favor of reducing screen time, but E-Rate supports much more than classroom screen use. Broadband connectivity is the backbone of a modern school district’s business, instructional, safety, and communication systems.
I used a simple comparison: Reducing the number of movies streamed at home does not reduce a household’s monthly internet bill. In the same way, a school district’s internet and network costs do not disappear when students spend less time on screens. Districts still depend on connectivity for financial systems, payroll, emergency communications, student information systems, cybersecurity, testing, instructional resources, and communication with families. E-Rate offsets a significant portion of these essential costs. Losing that support would create a substantial local budget gap and weaken a program that has successfully supported school connectivity for approximately 30 years.
On Impact Aid: I also discussed our district’s need to protect Impact Aid and provided specific examples of how those funds support a community with a significant federal presence. In addition, I explained that approximately 35% of our teachers are new to the district. I described how Title II funding supports professional development, induction, coaching, and other initiatives designed to help those educators succeed.
Rather than discussing programs only in general terms, I brought local statistics, reimbursement rates, cost comparisons, staffing information, and examples of how funding is used. School business officials understand the numbers behind district operations, and those numbers can help policymakers see how a proposal will affect classrooms and communities. Data made each of these conversations more effective.
Advice for New Advocates
It was equally important to communicate gratitude. Our district was able to manage the current year’s budget, and I acknowledged the federal support that helped make that possible. Effective advocacy should not be negative or partisan. It should focus on building relationships, clearly communicating local needs, identifying unintended consequences, and offering practical solutions.
For school business officials who are new to advocacy, my advice is straightforward: Know your numbers, understand your audience, use examples that make complicated issues understandable, and always connect financial decisions to their impact on students. Do not assume that congressional offices understand how every federal program operates at the local level. Explain the connections respectfully, provide credible data, and offer solutions rather than simply identifying problems.
Most importantly, become involved. School business officials bring an essential perspective to federal advocacy because we understand both the policy objectives and the operational realities of implementing them. When we share that knowledge clearly and constructively, we can help elected officials make better-informed decisions for students, schools, and taxpayers.