Reconfiguration Proposal
Reconfiguration Presentations
UDASD Special Board Meeting October 5, 2026
Reconfiguration Q&A
Based on Feedback from the October 5 Public Meeting
Thank you to the students, parents, staff, and community members who participated in the October 5 public meeting. The District reviewed the feedback and identified several recurring themes. The following addresses the questions and concerns most frequently raised.
1. Are current class sizes already too large, and would reconfiguration make them larger?
We heard concerns particularly regarding current class sizes in grades 5 and 6. Reconfiguration does not automatically mean larger classes. Staffing and scheduling would be evaluated based on enrollment, student needs, and programming. We believe reconfiguration will address current class sizes in fifth and sixth grade.
At the high school, six required course areas currently average approximately 17 students per section, while 274 elective sections average 8.4 students. A 7-12 configuration will provide additional scheduling flexibility, use staff more efficiently, and continue to provide student opportunities.
2. How would the District address the maturity, safety, and social-emotional differences between grades 7-8 and grades 9-12?
This was one of the most consistent concerns expressed by students and parents. A 7-12 configuration does not mean that 7th graders and 12th graders would spend their entire school day together. If approved, the District would intentionally address schedules, designated spaces, supervision, transitions, and age-appropriate programming to preserve an appropriate identity and experience for younger students.
The current proposal includes separate lunch periods and Discovery groups for grades 7-9 and grades 10-12, limiting unnecessary interaction between younger and older students during less-structured portions of the school day.
The 7-12 configuration is already utilized by many rural Pennsylvania school districts. This model provides greater flexibility in teacher scheduling and course offerings while allowing districts to maintain developmentally appropriate programming for younger students.
3. Why is reconfiguration being considered now, when UDA was financially stable during the Millersburg feasibility study?
The District’s enrollment and financial circumstances have changed significantly. For four consecutive school years, enrollment remained relatively stable, with 1,025 students in 2020–21, 1,015 in 2021–22, 1,025 in 2022–23, and 1,015 in 2023–24. However, enrollment has since declined more rapidly, falling to 973 students in 2024–25 and 957 in 2025–26. This represents a loss of 58 students in just two years.
During this same period, major operating expenses, including healthcare, special education and cyber charter tuition, have increased at a rate that exceeds revenue growth.
The District has maintained responsible debt management, with annual debt service representing approximately 2% of total expenditures. This demonstrates that our current financial challenges are primarily associated with increasing operational costs and declining enrollment rather than excessive borrowing.
The purpose of considering reconfiguration is to proactively address these financial challenges while preserving educational opportunities for students and avoiding more significant program reductions in the future.
4. Will reconfiguration result in fewer teachers or the loss of programs such as music, electives, advanced courses or extracurricular opportunities?
The goal of reconfiguration is to sustain programs and opportunities, not eliminate them. No final staffing model has been approved. The District’s preference is to primarily utilize normal attrition where possible. Music, electives, AP/college courses, career and technical education, extracurricular activities, and other student opportunities would be considered as part of the scheduling and staffing process.
5. Are transportation and overcrowded buses part of the proposed savings?
We heard concerns regarding current bus capacity and specific routes, and the District will continue to review those concerns with our transportation provider.
The District has already realized transportation savings by moving from two daily bus runs to one bus run. That change resulted in approximately $77,000 in annual savings in 2024-2025. Because UDA already operates on a single bus run, the proposed reconfiguration is not expected to generate significant additional savings from regular bus transportation.
As discussed during the October 5 presentation, the area where UDA has experienced significant transportation cost increases is van transportation, particularly transportation associated with specialized student placements. Van transportation costs increased from approximately $521,000 in 2021–22 to approximately $748,000 in 2024–25, an increase of about 44%. Developing additional programming within the District could help reduce some of these transportation costs while allowing more students to receive services closer to home.
6. Has the District considered other ways to address its financial challenges instead of reconfiguration?
Yes. Reconfiguration is one potential strategy, not the only strategy being considered. The District continues to evaluate attrition, operational efficiencies, special education costs and programming, cyber charter enrollment, revenue opportunities, grants, partnerships, facility utilization, and other expenditures. The District also routinely reviews and competitively evaluates major contracted services and proposed projects, including food service, technology, HVAC services, and facility improvements, to ensure we are receiving the best value for District resources.
The objective is to develop a combination of strategies that allows UDA to remain financially sustainable while preserving and enhancing opportunities for students.
7. Could the District sell the farm property to help address its financial challenges?
The farm property is an asset owned by the District. If necessary, the District could consider selling a portion of the property and potentially recover a significant portion of its original investment. However, selling land would provide a one-time source of revenue and would not address the District’s recurring operating deficit or declining enrollment.
This approach allows the District to evaluate the property not only as an asset, but also for its potential to provide hands-on educational opportunities, recover the District’s investment, and encourage new housing within the community.
In Summary:
The Board has not made a final decision regarding reconfiguration. Community and student feedback, financial information, educational considerations and feasibility study will continue to inform the process before Board action is considered.
