The Superintendent’s Guide to Thinking Like a Marketer in a Choice-Driven Climate

Competition is Increasing as Universal Choice Scales

Public schools are operating in an increasingly “choice-saturated” environment, where family decisions resemble consumer decisions: options are expanding, switching costs are falling in many places, and reputation, often formed online and through word of mouth, can shift enrollment faster than annual strategic plans can respond.

As universal school choice policies expand nationwide, more families are being incentivized to explore private and alternative education options across 18 states. Additional growth is expected as programs mature and as a new federal tax-credit-based scholarship mechanism takes effect in 2027.

Districts are experiencing increasing competitive pressure, particularly in suburban and mid-sized markets where enrollment margins are already tight.

School Pulse Panel results released by Institute of Education Sciences report that, as of October 2024:

• 50% of public school leaders said they felt understaffed
• 35% of schools reported at least one teacher vacancy
• Vacancies contributed to staff working outside intended duties and larger class sizes 

Private vs. Charter Schools

The strongest “early market signal” in the article comes from work by Douglas N. Harris and Gabriel Olivier, whose national analysis reports two notable short-run associations:

• Private school enrollment rising about 3–4% (relative to comparison states)
• Private school tuition rising about 5–10% in early post-policy years

COVID-era conditions complicate interpretation, but researchers expect effects could grow over time as families and providers adjust.

Charter enrollment growth remains a durable competitive force. NCES tables show charter enrollment rising from about 2.27 million (preK–12) in 2012–13 to about 3.72 million in 2022–23.

Even where private choice is limited, charter expansion reshapes family expectations around specialization, communication, and recruitment practices.

In other words, families are comparing.

State-Level Variation in Choice Access & Incentives

Public-to-Public Transfers

The National Conference of State Legislatures reports that 45 states have provisions for inter-district open enrollment (and 33 states plus Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico have intra-district provisions), with details varying widely in whether participation is mandatory, how capacity is defined, and how transfers are prioritized. 

Public-to-Private

Universal-eligibility private school choice programs now exist in at least 18 states, but many are not fully funded for all eligible students—meaning participation may depend on program caps, prioritization, or appropriations.  

In the highest-scale examples, ECS cites Arizona as fully funding a universal ESA, with enrollment surpassing 99,000 as of January 2026 (as a contextual indicator of scale). 

Incentive Landscape

A December 2025 Internal Revenue Service release announced guidance enabling states to opt into a new federal tax credit for contributions to scholarship-granting organizations. Beginning January 1, 2027, taxpayers may claim a nonrefundable credit (limited to $1,700), contingent on state participation.  

A January 2026 fact sheet from the U.S. Department of Education describes the same overall mechanism and eligibility rules (e.g., household income not greater than 300% of area median gross income).

The implication: scholarship-funded private options could expand in participating states.

The Enrollment Equation: How Staffing Impacts Retention

Staffing constraints are now a front-page operational reality because families experience instability as canceled electives, larger class sizes, slower service for special education and supports, and inconsistent communication. 

Additional School Pulse data reinforces the strain:

• 3% of teaching positions were vacant
• 35% of schools reported at least one teacher vacancy
• 6% of non-teaching positions were vacant
• 41% of schools reported at least one non-teaching vacancy

Vacancies averaged about 5% in several hard-to-staff teacher categories (including special education, ESL/bilingual, and CTE), compared to about 2% in general elementary roles. This role-specific mismatch is where staffing partnerships and targeted retention strategies matter most.

When critical student-facing roles remain unfilled:

• Special education services are delayed
• Intervention support weakens
• Caseloads increase
• Staff burnout rises

Vacancies create ripple effects:

• Service interruptions
• Increased burnout for remaining staff
• Compliance risk
• Lower staff morale
• Parent frustration
• Increased attrition

For CFOs, that translates to per-pupil funding loss.
For Superintendents, it becomes a board-level conversation.
For Special Education Directors, it raises audit and litigation risk.

Happy Employees Are Your Best Marketing Campaign

Families stay where students feel supported.

Students feel supported where adults are stable.

Adults stay where systems work.

Marketing isn’t about slogans. It’s about delivering what you promise.

In public education, marketing should not be reduced to advertisements. In a competitive environment, the most persuasive marketing is lived experience: whether students feel known, whether services are reliable, and whether parents trust the institution to follow through.

A widely cited synthesis by Patricia A. Jennings and Mark T. Greenberg argues that teacher social-emotional competence and stress shape influence classroom climate and student outcomes through feedback loops involving behavior management, relationships, and instructional quality.

More broadly, school climate research reviews conclude that school climate dimensions (relationships, safety, teaching and learning environment) are meaningfully associated with student outcomes and school improvement capacity. Staffing shortages directly strain these climate dimensions by increasing adult workload, reducing consistency, and limiting access to student supports. 

Marketing cannot compensate for instability. But stability strengthens reputation organically.

What Marketing-Minded Superintendents Do Differently

In the private sector, a “service profit chain” logic argues that employee satisfaction and capability drive service quality and customer satisfaction. Public schools do not pursue profit, but they do pursue trust. In many states, they operate under funding formulas that make enrollment and attendance financially determinative. 

Forward-thinking district leaders approach staffing as part of strategic planning, not reactive hiring. They:

• Model vacancy impact on student outcomes and budget
• Align staffing strategy with board priorities
• Prioritize hard-to-staff areas early
• Incorporate retention into their enrollment strategy
• Build flexible staffing pipelines before crisis hits
• Understand that protecting student experience protects per-pupil funding.

School-Appropriate Marketing Principles

A practical definition for school leaders: marketing is the intentional management of reputation, relationships, and the family decision journey grounded in authentic program quality and transparent communication. 

Brand clarity and storytelling: Articulate “why us” using evidence and human stories. Case evidence from Des Moines Public Schools shows a district using a defined tagline and multi-channel communications to counter enrollment decline in a competitive market, while acknowledging attribution limits.

Digital “front door” excellence: Ensure mobile-friendly websites, translated materials, clear enrollment pathways, and transparent student support information.

Enrollment management as a funnel: Treat inquiry → visit → application → enrollment → retention as strategic stages.

Customer-service practices: Set predictable response times and structured communication practices—especially during staffing disruptions.

Community engagement as trust-building: Practice structured listening and partnership, particularly in historically underserved communities. Research on recruitment in choice environments cautions that market pressures can exacerbate inequities if engagement is not intentionally inclusive.

Ethical, Equity, & Legal Guardrails

Ethical boundaries: Publicly document what is being claimed and what evidence supports it, and use community listening to shape priorities rather than using messaging to mask service gaps.

Equity implications: Choice markets can intensify stratification if recruitment practices privilege families with more time, information, transportation, or social capital. “Market pressures” can influence who is reached and who is served, making intentional equity design necessary (e.g., multilingual materials, outreach through trusted community organizations, accessible enrollment support). 

Privacy and lawful data use: Schools must avoid using personally identifiable information from education records for marketing in ways inconsistent with FERPA. The U.S. Department of Education’s student privacy guidance explains FERPA protections and the limits/conditions for “directory information” disclosures, including required public notice and opt-out opportunity for families. 

Non-discrimination: Marketing and enrollment processes must comply with federal civil rights laws. Title VI prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in federally funded programs. 

Public funds and procurement: Rules on spending public funds for marketing can vary by state and local policy. A defensible approach is to:

• Tie communications spending to public purposes (family information, enrollment management, transparency)
• Document procurement and approvals
• Prioritize low-cost, high-service improvements (website clarity, response-time standards) before large media buys—especially when staffing needs are acute

Simple Enrollment Marketing Funnel for Schools

The funnel below adapts a standard journey model to K–12 enrollment competition (including intra-/inter-district transfers, charter competition, and private-choice options). 

Awareness: Search-friendly web pages; program explainers; community partner outreach; consistent branding across schools.

• Families ask: “What options exist near me?”
• What to measure: Website traffic to enrollment pages; social reach; referral sources

Consideration: Open houses and tours; student/staff storytelling; transparent data; fast responses; clear support services.

• Families ask: “Can I trust this school with my child?”
• What to measure: Tour RSVPs; inquiry-to-tour conversion; response-time SLAs

Application/Enrollment: Frictionless enrollment; multilingual support; special education intake clarity; transportation clarity.

• Families ask: “Is it easy to enroll and get services?”
• What to measure: Application completion rates; time-to-enroll; enrollment yield

Retention: Onboarding; consistent instruction & supports; proactive issue resolution; family feedback loops.

• Families ask: “Is the day-to-day experience working?”
• What to measure: Midyear withdrawal rate; satisfaction; attendance; complaints resolved

A 5-Point Superintendent Marketing Audit

1. Staffing Stability

• What percentage of special education roles are filled on Day 1?
• What is our average time-to-fill for hard-to-staff roles?
• Are we relying on emergency credentials?

Impact: Vacancy instability directly affects ROI and service delivery.

2. Compliance & Audit Readiness

• Are we consistently meeting IEP service minutes?
• How often are we using compensatory services?
• Are we audit-ready at any moment?

Impact: Missed services create legal exposure and financial strain.

3. Parent Experience

• How quickly are parent concerns resolved?
• Are complaints tied to staffing shortages?
• Are we proactively communicating service continuity?

Impact: Parent confidence influences enrollment decisions.

4. Staff Morale & Collective Bargaining Climate

• What are absenteeism and burnout trends?
• Are staffing gaps increasing pressure during negotiations?
• Is agency usage perceived as relief or replacement?

Impact: Staffing strategy influences collective bargaining dynamics.

5. Weighted Funding Protection

• How much of our per-pupil funding is tied to specialized services?
• Are service delivery gaps jeopardizing funding streams?
• Are we maximizing reimbursement opportunities?

Impact: Enrollment and weighted funding depend on consistent services.

Red Flag Indicators

If you see these, enrollment risk is already forming:

• IEP meetings delayed due to staffing shortages
• Increased due process filings
• Rising teacher turnover in high-need campuses
• Public board complaints tied to services
• Multiple agencies used with no unified strategy
• Rising overtime and burnout costs
• Repeated emergency credential usage

These are early-warning signals of funding instability.

Integrated Action Plan

The action plan below is prioritized around a single operational idea: you cannot market your way out of an unstable experience. Marketing actions and staffing actions must run together. 

Prioritized Action Plan

How Soliant fits as a Strategic Staffing Partner

In a choice environment, districts that retain students will be those that deliver the most reliable experience and communicate it clearly. For leaders facing persistent vacancies, especially in special education and student supports, Soliant is your strategic partner in stabilizing staffing and protecting service continuity.

Step 1. Conduct a Vacancy Risk Audit → Strategic Workforce Assessment

Soliant begins by helping districts identify high-impact vacancies that influence:

• Special education compliance
• MTSS implementation
• Related services delivery
• Behavioral and mental health supports
• Hard-to-staff instructional roles

Rather than simply responding to open positions, we prioritize roles tied directly to student experience, audit readiness, and stakeholder confidence. This aligns staffing decisions with board alignment and strategic plan commitments.

Step 2. Quantify the Financial Impact → Protect Fiscal Stewardship

Vacancies create:

• Overtime costs
• Burnout-driven turnover
• Compliance risk exposure
• Increased substitute spending
• Enrollment-related revenue volatility

Soliant helps districts reduce vacancy duration, model staffing impact, and stabilize service delivery — supporting fiscal stewardship without compromising outcomes. Shorter vacancy cycles protect both morale and budget predictability.

Step 3. Prioritize Speed-to-Fill → Rapid Stabilization

With dedicated account management and a national recruiting infrastructure, Soliant provides:

• Rapid fill in hard-to-staff areas
• Access to licensed and credentialed professionals
• Tele-services options when geography limits talent pools
• Compliance verification from day one

Speed-to-fill reduces overload on remaining staff and prevents service interruptions that erode parent confidence.

Step 4. Stabilize Workforce Morale → Improve Employee Experience

Soliant reduces workload spillover by:

• Backfilling high-need roles quickly
• Providing clinical mentorship and advisory support
• Ensuring credential alignment and readiness
• Supporting continuity rather than temporary patchwork

Improved stability strengthens teacher morale, climate and culture, which directly influences student experience and parent trust.

Step 5. Explore Flexible Staffing Solutions → Long-Term Predictability

Not every staffing need requires permanent headcount expansion. Soliant supports districts with:

• Contract and contract-to-hire models
• Teletherapy and virtual service delivery
• Specialized support for high-need populations
• Scalable solutions during enrollment shifts

This allows districts to maintain efficiency without compromising outcomes, where compliance and continuity are non-negotiable.

A Strategic Partnership, Not a Transaction

District leaders today are balancing:

• Unfunded mandates
• Collective bargaining agreements
• Budget constraints
• Policy compliance
• Stakeholder engagement
• Enrollment volatility

Soliant’s role is to simplify one of those variables. With education-exclusive focus, credentialing rigor, and clinical advisory support, Soliant operates as an extension of your district.

When evaluated strategically, staffing partnership decisions should answer three questions:

1. Does this reduce risk?
2. Does this protect service continuity?
3. Does this strengthen stakeholder trust?

If the answer is yes, it is not an expense.
It is a stability investment.