From ruin to renewal

When the Palisades Fire swept through Southern California in January 2025, I was teaching at Palisades Charter High School. Overnight, the work of educators changed. Students and colleagues lost homes, families were displaced, and uncertainty replaced routine. In those first days, our responsibility extended far beyond instruction. We became communicators, problem-solvers, sources of reassurance, and a constant for a community searching for stability.

Witnessing that transformation inspired me to better understand how educational leaders guide schools through the long and often difficult process of recovery after disaster.

Natural disasters are becoming increasingly frequent and severe, affecting school communities across the country. Although schools routinely prepare for emergency response, far less attention is devoted to what happens after the immediate crisis has passed. Recovery often lasts months or years and requires leaders to rebuild not only facilities, but also trust, relationships, and hope. To better understand this work, I examined the experiences of educational leaders who successfully guided schools and districts through wildfires, hurricanes, and tornadoes. While each disaster differed, their stories revealed a common truth: Effective disaster leadership is not about possessing an entirely new set of skills. It is about applying the core practices of exceptional educational leadership — communication, trust, adaptability, and collaboration — with greater urgency and purpose.

Schools become anchors of recovery One of the clearest findings was that schools quickly become much more than places of learning. They become gathering places, communication hubs, counseling centers, and symbols of hope for communities trying to regain a sense of normalcy.

One superintendent described feeling “a sense of responsibility to get our school community back together as quickly as possible.” Even reopening in a temporary location gave families “something stable to hold onto.”

That observation reflects an important shift in leadership. During recovery, success is not measured solely by how quickly instruction resumes. Instead, leaders must ask a different question: What does our community need to begin healing?

Students may be living in temporary housing, grieving the loss of their homes, or coping with prolonged uncertainty. Employees often face similar hardships while continuing to support students. As a result, effective leaders temporarily redefine priorities. Counseling services, food access, transportation, and opportunities for reconnection may become just as important as attendance, grading, or instructional pacing.

The implications for practice are significant. Recovery plans should recognize schools as community support centers capable of hosting family assistance, mental health services, and resource distribution — not simply instructional sites waiting to reopen.

Looking back on my own experience following the Palisades Fire, I witnessed how meaningful even small moments of normalcy became. Simply bringing students together again offered reassurance that life would continue. Schools help communities recover because they restore connection long before everything else has returned to normal.

Trust must be built before it is needed When participants reflected on what made recovery successful, they rarely began by discussing emergency plans. Instead, they talked about relationships. One superintendent summarized the most valuable resource available during recovery in a single sentence: “What saved us were relationships.”

Established partnerships with local governments, first responders, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and internal leadership teams allowed districts to coordinate resources and make decisions quickly when every hour mattered.

Participants also emphasized that generosity requires organization. One leader recalled being overwhelmed by well-intentioned donations that exceeded the district’s capacity to sort and distribute them, explaining, “Not everyone who wants to help is helpful.”

The lesson was clear: Districts should identify community partners, establish roles, and determine who will coordinate volunteers and donations before disaster strikes.

Trust matters internally as well. Teachers, families, and students need confidence that leaders will communicate honestly, listen carefully, and make decisions grounded in compassion. Those relationships cannot be built during a crisis. They are established through countless everyday interactions long before they are ever tested.

The leaders in this study did not suddenly become collaborative after disaster struck. They had spent years building credibility, strengthening partnerships, and fostering trust. When their communities needed them most, those relationships became the foundation of recovery.

Communication is leadership If relationships formed the foundation of recovery, communication became the tool that sustained it. Every leader in this study emphasized that families and staff needed more than information — they needed reassurance that someone was listening, leading, and committed to helping the community move forward.

One superintendent recalled community members saying, “You’re the only people giving us that information. We don’t know anything from anybody else.”

That statement illustrates a fundamental lesson of crisis leadership. Silence creates space for fear and misinformation. Effective leaders did not wait until every answer was known. Instead, they communicated honestly about what they knew, acknowledged uncertainty, and committed to providing regular updates.

Participants described using email, text messages, phone calls, social media, websites, video updates, and community meetings to reach families. They also recognized that communication must be accessible. Messages were translated into multiple languages, printed for families without internet access, and reinforced through personal phone calls when necessary.

Communication also flowed in both directions. Leaders consistently sought feedback through surveys, family meetings, and conversations with staff. One participant explained that bringing together leaders from counseling, facilities, technology, academics, and safety allowed problems to be solved collaboratively rather than in isolation.

The lesson is simple: Communication should not be viewed as a public relations function. It is one of the most visible expressions of leadership. Clear, frequent, and compassionate communication builds trust and helps communities believe recovery is possible (Coombs & Botan, 2021; Smith & Riley, 2012).

Preparedness builds confidence Many participants credited previous experiences — including COVID-19, school safety drills, and earlier emergencies — with preparing them to lead during disaster recovery.

One leader reflected, “Going through COVID, we were constantly making decisions without having all the answers. When the disaster happened, I didn’t freeze.”

Another explained, “I knew how to communicate, who needed to be where, and how to quickly assess what was happening. It wasn’t the same situation, but the process was the same.”

These experiences strengthened leaders’ confidence by giving them repeated opportunities to make difficult decisions under uncertain conditions, increasing their level of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997).

Participants also emphasized that traditional emergency planning is incomplete. Most school safety drills conclude once students have evacuated or reached safety. Recovery, however, introduces a different set of leadership challenges.

Leaders must determine where students will learn, how staff responsibilities will change, how displaced families will be supported, and how community resources will be coordinated. They become the central point of communication while simultaneously managing facilities, transportation, counseling services, and instructional continuity.

The leadership skills required during recovery are not fundamentally different from those used every day — but they become significantly more demanding. Communication becomes constant. Collaboration expands beyond school walls. Decision-making becomes faster, and flexibility becomes essential. For that reason, schools should practice recovery — not just response.

Leadership simulations should extend beyond evacuation procedures and include scenarios involving prolonged closures, damaged campuses, changing staff roles, and community recovery. These exercises prepare leaders to navigate the operational and human challenges that follow a disaster rather than focusing solely on the immediate emergency.

Leaders cannot sustain recovery without support Perhaps the most unexpected finding from this study was the emotional burden carried by educational leaders. Participants described working long hours, making countless difficult decisions, and supporting students and staff while often coping with personal loss themselves.

One participant offered advice that has stayed with me long after our interview: “Do as I say, not as I did.”

Reflecting on the recovery process, the leader continued, “I failed at taking care of myself. You can’t support others if you don’t take care of yourself first.” That perspective serves as an important reminder that resilience is not limitless. Sustained recovery requires leaders who are supported, not simply expected to endure.

Districts should intentionally create systems that protect administrator well-being through shared leadership, peer support, mentoring, executive coaching, and access to mental health resources. Leadership teams distribute responsibility, reduce decision fatigue, and ensure that no single individual carries the weight of recovery alone.

During the Palisades Fire, I witnessed firsthand how easily educators placed the needs of others before their own. That commitment is one of our profession’s greatest strengths, but it also highlights the importance of caring for the people responsible for leading recovery. Supporting educational leaders is ultimately an investment in the long-term health of the entire school community.

Five actions school leaders can take now The experiences of these educational leaders point to five practical actions every school and district can begin implementing before the next disaster.

Most school safety plans focus on the immediate response, but recovery presents a different set of challenges. Plans should identify leadership roles beyond the first 24 hours, outline communication strategies, establish procedures for supporting displaced families and staff, and define how community resources will be coordinated.

2. Practice recovery — not just response. Emergency drills should extend beyond evacuation. Leadership teams should rehearse scenarios involving prolonged school closures, damaged facilities, changing staff responsibilities, and community displacement. Practicing recovery builds confidence and prepares leaders to make thoughtful decisions under pressure.

3. Invest in relationships before they are needed. Strong partnerships with first responders, local governments, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and neighboring school districts become invaluable during recovery. Just as important are the relationships built every day with students, families, and staff. Trust established before a disaster becomes the foundation for effective leadership afterward.

4. Make communication your greatest leadership tool. Districts should develop multilingual communication systems, identify spokespersons, prepare message templates, and create multiple ways for families to receive information and provide feedback. Communication should be frequent, transparent, and compassionate, especially when answers remain uncertain.

5. Protect the people leading the recovery. Recovery is a marathon, not a sprint. Shared leadership, peer support, coaching, and mental health resources help ensure that educational leaders can continue serving their communities throughout a prolonged recovery.

These recommendations reflect an important distinction that emerged throughout this study. The skills required to lead during a natural disaster are not different from those required of effective leaders every day, but they are intensified. Communication becomes more frequent. Collaboration extends beyond the school community. Decision-making accelerates. Relationships become even more essential. Leaders cannot develop these capacities during a disaster; they must cultivate them long before they are needed.

Looking beyond the disaster One of the greatest lessons I learned from both my own experience during the Palisades Fire and from the remarkable leaders who shared their stories is that schools do far more than educate students after a disaster. They provide stability when routines have disappeared, connection when communities feel isolated, and hope when the future seems uncertain.

Although every participant experienced a different disaster, they shared a common belief: people — not buildings — are at the heart of recovery. Facilities can be repaired and campuses rebuilt, but restoring trust, relationships, and a sense of belonging requires compassionate, visible, and adaptable leadership.

As natural disasters become increasingly common, educational leadership preparation must evolve alongside them. School leaders should not only prepare to respond to emergencies but also to guide their communities through the long process of recovery. That preparation begins well before disaster strikes by investing in relationships, strengthening communication systems, practicing adaptive leadership, and building cultures of trust.

Looking back on the Palisades Fire, I am reminded that what our students and families needed most was not perfection. They needed steady leadership, honest communication, and the reassurance that they would not face recovery alone. The same message emerged from every participant in this study. Ultimately, disaster leadership is not measured by how quickly schools reopen or routines return. It is measured by how effectively leaders bring people together, restore hope, and help entire communities move from uncertainty to stability — from ruin to renewal.

References

• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
• Coombs, W. T., & Botan, C. H. (2021). Crisis communication through the lens of strategic communication. In C. H. Botan (Ed.), The handbook of strategic communication (pp. 181–193). Wiley.
• Fletcher, J., & Nicholas, K. (2016). What can school principals do to support students and their learning during and after natural disasters? Educational Review, 68(3), 358–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2015.1114467
• Kousky, C. (2016). Impacts of natural disasters on children. The Future of Children, 26(1), 73–92.
• Le Brocque, R., De Young, A., Montague, G., Pocock, S., March, S., Triggell, N., Rabaa, C., & Kenardy, J. (2017). Schools and natural disaster recovery: The unique and vital role that teachers and education professionals play in ensuring the mental health of students following natural disasters. Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools, 27(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1017/jgc.2016.17
• Masten, A. S. (2014). Global perspectives on resilience in children and youth. Child Development, 85(1), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12205
• Mutch, C. (2015). Leadership in times of crisis: Dispositional, relational, and contextual factors influencing school principals’ actions. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 14, 186–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.06.005
• Smith, L., & Riley, D. (2012). School leadership in times of crisis. School Leadership & Management, 32(1), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2011.614941
• Ungar, M. (2018). Systemic resilience: Principles and processes for a science of change in contexts of adversity. Ecology and Society, 23(4), Article 34. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10385-230434

David W. Pickard, Ed.D., is the assistant principal of Safety, Facilities, & Athletics at Calabasas High School.