Sign up for Chalkbeat Chicago’s free daily newsletter to keep up with the latest news on Chicago Public Schools.
Chicago Public Schools leadership may restructure middle management and is considering aligning it to school board electoral districts, according to multiple sources with knowledge of the plan.
District leaders say the change could be a way to make the administration more responsive to school needs and to save money, but some principals are concerned about an organizational overhaul in the middle of the school year.
During a routine call with principals on Friday, CPS leadership said it planned to reorganize the current network system of middle management into districts, but didn’t offer additional details, according to two principals who spoke to Chalkbeat on condition of anonymity in order to avoid reprisal.
The networks organize schools based on geographic location and each has a network chief who principals answer to. Among their responsibilities, network chiefs evaluate principals, provide instructional expertise if needed, and may step in when principals need help during the year, such as for additional staff or issues with their building.
According to two school board members who spoke directly to interim CPS CEO Macquline King, the potential restructure would involve reorganizing the district’s 13 existing networks for elementary and middle schools into 10 that would align with the Chicago Board of Education’s electoral districts. The four high school networks would be kept the same. The plan would also require current network chiefs and their deputies to reapply for their jobs.
On Monday, district spokesperson Sylvia Barragan said CPS has been considering changes at central office to “strengthen teaching and learning for all students,” and that no final decisions have been made about the district’s network offices. She did not outline specific plans that CPS is considering.
“All plans remain subject to change as CPS leadership continues to thoughtfully review options and considerations moving forward,” Barragan said.
The number of students under each network varies. For example, Network 14, which covers part of the North Side, oversees two dozen schools with a total 27,000 students. But Network 5 on the West Side has 28 schools with just under 8,000 students.
Switching to the 10 districts mirroring school board electoral districts could also mean uneven distribution. For example, District 5 on the West Side has more than 100 schools, many of them charters. But just over 30 schools exist in District 4 on the North Side.
A senior CPS official told Chalkbeat that the goal of the reorganization is to make the district’s administration more nimble and responsive to school needs. It would also reduce spending on administrative positions, delivering a portion of $50 million in savings the district’s 2025-26 budget assumes it will make this year and allowing it to steer more dollars directly to schools in the longer run. The official said it is too soon to say how much the district would save thanks to the overhaul or how many administrative positions might be affected.
However, the two school board members who spoke with King said the cost savings were estimated to be roughly $2 million.
The district recently passed a $10.2 billion budget that included a slew of cuts to close a $734 million deficit, but district leaders said the plan avoided midyear cuts to classrooms. Still, CPS faces potential funding threats, including a recent threat from the Trump administration to withhold federal funding.
It’s not uncommon for new leadership to restructure the district’s central office. Under Mayor Rahm Emanuel, his handpicked CEO Forrest Claypool laid off hundreds of central office staffers and did an organizational restructure. Before that, former CPS CEO Jean-Claude Brizard also oversaw a revamp of district’s management structure that was meant to provide oversight and additional support for schools.
In addition to the 17 networks that exist for most CPS schools, there are also separate networks for options — or alternative — schools, charter schools, and schools run by principals who have been granted more autonomy than their peers.
One elementary school principal said a midyear change feels “very unfair” to school leaders. Her network chief has already evaluated her once this year, and she’s concerned about losing a supervisor with whom she’s built a positive relationship and knows her school well.
But another longtime district principal said less middle management would free up more dollars to spend directly on schools.
“Reorganizing is always an opportunity to build a better structure,” the principal said.
One of the principals who spoke to Chalkbeat said it could make sense to reorganize schools in a way that corresponds with school board electoral districts given the new structure of the board.
But two school board members who spoke to King said they’re concerned such a change could send the message that school board members have a managerial role with schools when they shouldn’t.
“I don’t want me to go visit a school, and the principal thinks this is going to affect their evaluation or they have to put a show on for me,” said board member Carlos Rivas.
Reema Amin is a reporter covering Chicago Public Schools. Contact Reema at ramin@chalkbeat.org.
Mila Koumpilova is Chalkbeat Chicago’s senior reporter covering Chicago Public Schools. Contact Mila at mkoumpilova@chalkbeat.org.
