This blog is the third in a multi-part series that will address the current state of K-12 digital tool management and offer recommendations emphasizing that the shift from ad-hoc purchasing toward strategic governance is essential for ensuring both fiscal responsibility and educational quality.
Here’s the blunt truth: licenses go unused in K-12 because a lot gets bought fast, by many different hands, and only a fraction gets fully implemented, integrated, and trained against. The result is thin usage spread across a very wide stack.
Why underutilization happens:
- Too many tools to meaningfully adopt.
Districts now touch thousands of apps a year—usage keeps climbing—so attention, PD time, and integration capacity get diluted. Even in 2024–25, reports show districts accessing ~1,100+ tools per month, with students using ~48 unique tools over the year and educators ~50. That scale alone makes deep adoption hard. - Purchases made on grant clocks, not adoption clocks.
Pandemic relief accelerated “buy now, implement later.” AP News’s analysis shows large districts spent tens of millions on software/tutoring with uneven usage and scant evidence—classic conditions for shelfware. Liquidation extensions prolonged the cleanup cycle, so some 2021–24 buys are still rolling through budgets. AP News - Decentralized procurement = overlapping features.
Schools, programs, and central office can all buy tools. The same functions (assign, quiz, message, monitor) arrive via different vendors—teachers split across options, and no single tool hits the critical mass needed for strong usage. (Interoperability gaps push “one more tool” purchases, too.) - Weak implementation & PD follow-through.
Training is often one-and-done, not job-embedded. EdWeek’s review highlights how tech PD commonly misses sustained coaching and classroom integration—so adoption stalls after kickoff. - Integration friction (rostering/SSO/grade passback).
If a tool isn’t rostered/SSO’d on day one, or can’t pass grades back, teachers abandon it. Many districts don’t consistently monitor app telemetry; without that data, targeted fixes and coaching don’t happen - Auto-renewals + multi-year terms.
Contracts roll over before a usage review, locking in seats that aren’t being used. That’s a known K-12 contract risk pattern—especially when renewal dates don’t align to academic cycles. - Staffing bandwidth.
IT/procurement teams are thin; leaders cite hiring gaps as a top challenge, so few districts have a dedicated analyst regularly reconciling licenses vs. actual use. - And yes—historically high waste.
Pre-pandemic analyses already showed the scale: a study of $2B in spend found ~67% of software licenses went unused. While dated, it’s directionally consistent with what districts still see when they finally audit usage. Marketbrief+1
What to change (fast wins):
- License to actives, not enrollments. Push vendors for active-seat or concurrent licensing, with ramp schedules the first year.
- Adoption SLOs in contracts. Tie year-2 renewals to activation targets (e.g., ≥80% teacher logins in 60 days) and require vendor-provided telemetry.
- Quarterly utilization review. Standard report: Assigned seats → 30-day actives → cost per active; de-provision or reassign dead seats.
- One primary tool per capability. Publish a “primary system rule” (LMS for assignments/grades, one safety suite, etc.) to curb overlap.
- Set renewal notifications. Set 90-day renewal reminders to ensure time to notify vendors of non-renewal.
- Implementation first, then expansion. Fund coaching/time-to-use (rostering/SSO set-up + job-embedded PD) before buying more seats.