A publication of the Association of California School Administrators

Reductions in force

Protecting people while preserving district strength

By Dr. Matthew D. Horvath | January | February 2026

Few decisions weigh heavier on district leaders than implementing a reduction in force (RIF). For those who have navigated this process, the gravity is unmistakable: It impacts livelihoods, disrupts school culture, and can erode trust across the community. While financial constraints, enrollment declines, or state budget fluctuations may force difficult conversations, how districts respond can determine whether they emerge resilient or fractured.

The negative impact of reductions in force RIFs are not simply about numbers on a spreadsheet. Each position eliminated represents a person, often a long-standing member of a school community who contributes far beyond the scope of their job description. The ripple effects include:

Loss of talent and expertise: Districts risk losing highly skilled and experienced employees, creating gaps in institutional knowledge and program quality. Research by the Learning Policy Institute notes that turnover and layoffs can undermine instructional continuity and negatively affect student learning outcomes (Darling-Hammond, Sutcher, & Carver-Thomas, 2017).

Decline in morale: Remaining staff may experience “survivor’s guilt,” heightened anxiety, and a loss of trust in leadership, which can undermine performance. Studies on organizational change consistently highlight morale decline as a significant consequence of workforce reductions (Cascio, 2016).

Community perception: Families and community members may interpret RIFs as instability, which can erode confidence in the district’s ability to serve students effectively. Public perception often has lasting consequences for enrollment and community support.

Ultimately, RIFs risk damaging the very culture and relationships that enable schools to thrive.

Alternatives to reductions in force Forward-thinking leaders should exhaust every possible alternative before turning to layoffs. Among the most effective strategies are:

Natural attrition: Thoughtful workforce planning — such as leaving vacancies unfilled when staff retire or resign — can reduce costs without displacing current employees. According to the Government Finance Officers Association, attrition is one of the most sustainable strategies for managing personnel costs (GFOA, 2020).

Early retirement incentives: Retirement incentives provide veteran employees an opportunity to transition gracefully while creating budget flexibility. A 2021 California School Boards Association brief noted that strategically designed retirement incentives can yield substantial cost savings while maintaining morale. Restructuring and realignment: Creative reassignments or programmatic adjustments can sometimes close financial gaps while preserving staff positions.

Short-term cost controls: Measures such as delayed purchases, travel restrictions, or temporary hiring freezes can provide breathing room while longer-term solutions are developed.

Each of these options allows districts to address fiscal realities without severing ties to valued employees.

Treating employees as people first rather than positions on a staffing chart preserves the integrity of leadership and keeps the door open for positive relationships in the future.

When reductions are unavoidable There are times when a reduction in force cannot be avoided. In those moments, how the process is handled matters just as much as the outcome. Leaders must ensure the process is not only legally sound but also humane and dignified:

Personal communication: Whenever possible, these difficult conversations should occur face-to-face. Employees deserve to hear directly from leadership, not through impersonal notices.

Transparency and compassion: Be clear about the financial or enrollment realities necessitating the decision, while also acknowledging the contributions and humanity of those impacted. Trust is maintained when leaders communicate with empathy and integrity.

Supportive transitions: Offering career counseling, résumé assistance, or letters of recommendation can help staff take their next steps with dignity. The Society for Human Resource Management emphasizes that supportive offboarding practices improve long-term organizational reputation (SHRM, 2019).

Treating employees as people first rather than positions on a staffing chart preserves the integrity of leadership and keeps the door open for positive relationships in the future.

Looking ahead: Leadership with dignity School leaders cannot always control the economic or demographic forces that drive tough staffing decisions. But they can control how those decisions are made and communicated. By prioritizing natural attrition, retirement incentives, and creative alternatives first, and approaching unavoidable reductions with empathy and personal connection, districts can weather fiscal storms without losing sight of their most important asset: their people.

As educational leaders, we are entrusted with more than managing budgets; we are stewards of the culture and trust that define our schools. Leading with dignity, especially in times of reduction, ensures that when the financial picture improves, our schools remain places where people want to work, learn, and grow.

References Cascio, W. F. (2016). Managing Human Resources: Productivity, Quality of Work Life, Profits. McGraw-Hill Education.

Darling-Hammond, L., Sutcher, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2017). Teacher Turnover: Why It Matters and What We Can Do About It. Learning Policy Institute.

Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). (2020). Best Practices in School District Budgeting.

Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). (2019). Managing Workforce Reductions with Dignity and Respect.

California School Boards Association (CSBA). (2021). Early Retirement Incentives: Considerations for School Districts.

Matthew D. Horvath, Ed.D., is principal of Manhattan Beach Middle School and is the founder of Leadership Nexus Consulting.