For Board Members

What board members should ask
before voting yes.

The SIS touches every student, family, and staff member in the district. Board members should understand what they're approving before signing off.

Talk to Alma
The short answer

Before approving an SIS purchase, board members should understand: why the current system is being replaced (or why a new one is being purchased), what alternatives were considered, how the decision was reached and who was involved, what implementation and risk look like, and what success will be measured against at 6, 12, and 24 months. If the answers to these questions aren't clear, the decision isn't ready for a vote.

Board oversight of the SIS decision

This is a foundational decision, not a tactical one.

An SIS purchase typically commits the district for 5 to 10 years and touches every student, family, and staff member. It deserves board scrutiny appropriate to its scope, but that scrutiny should focus on governance and risk rather than on technical details.

What boards should focus on:

  • Governance of the process: Was the evaluation rigorous and free of undue influence?
  • Stakeholder involvement: Were teachers, registrars, IT, and families appropriately represented?
  • Risk assessment: What could go wrong, and how is the district mitigating it?
  • Financial commitment: Total operational impact over the contract term
  • Data privacy and security: Community trust depends on this being right
  • Measurable success criteria: How will we know if this was the right call?
  • Vendor stability: Will this vendor still exist in 5 years?

Common questions, answered directly.

How many vendors were evaluated? Who was on the evaluation committee? Were teachers, registrars, IT, and family representatives included? Was there a structured scoring rubric? Were vendor references contacted? Was there an RFP or was this a sole-source decision? A rigorous process typically involves 5+ vendors, a diverse committee, structured scoring, and multiple reference calls.

Implementation risk (what if it doesn't go live smoothly?). Staff adoption risk (what if teachers refuse to use it?). Data migration risk (what if we lose historical records?). Vendor viability risk (what if the company changes ownership or dissolves?). Compliance risk (what if state reporting breaks during transition?). The superintendent should be able to articulate each risk and the mitigation.

Who owns the district's data (the district should). Where student data is stored. Whether the vendor uses student data for AI training (they should not). What breach notification obligations the vendor has. What security certifications the vendor holds. What happens to district data if the contract ends. Community trust in district data handling is fragile; board oversight here matters.

Alma affirms district data ownership and does not use student data to train AI models. Ask Alma to answer each of these six questions in writing as part of the board packet before a vote - a vendor willing to put these answers in writing is giving the board something it can hold them to.

Ask for total contract value over the full term, not just year-one licensing. Include implementation costs, training costs, integration costs, and staff time investment. Ask what happens if the contract is terminated early. Ask what price increases are contractually allowed and on what schedule. A well-negotiated SIS contract locks in pricing for a defined term with capped escalators.

Specific, measurable criteria at defined intervals. At 6 months: implementation complete, staff trained. At 12 months: teacher satisfaction improved, state reporting on schedule, family portal adoption at defined level. At 24 months: sustained operational improvements documented, data quality improved, staff hours saved quantified. If the superintendent can't articulate these, the decision isn't ready.

Years in market. Customer retention rate. Number of similar districts served. Financial position (particularly for private-equity-owned vendors, which have had significant ownership changes in K‑12). Product roadmap commitment. Reference districts that have been on the platform for 5+ years. A vendor's stability is your district's stability for the term of the contract.

Alma has served districts across the country for over 15 years. The company maintains independence and long‑term stability, which matters more than most boards recognize during a purchase decision. Ask Alma directly about ownership, financial position, customer retention, and long‑term product commitment during evaluation.

If you're a board member reviewing an SIS decision, request a board-level briefing from the finalist vendor covering governance, stability, and long‑term commitments before your vote.

Ready to see how Alma handles this?

Get straight answers to the questions this guide raises. Schedule a walkthrough with Alma.

Schedule a Demo

Related guides

SIS Evaluation Scorecard
SIS Vendor Security Questions
Post-ESSER SIS Investment