May 5, 2025  |  Peter Long, CEO

State-by-State K-12 Marketing Strategy?

Never miss a Moment: Sign up for MCH's Monday Marketing Moment here!

With the 2025-2026 school year on the horizon, educational marketers face an unprecedented level of uncertainty in K-12 funding. Federal program reductions, economic instability, evolving standards, and policy shifts are converging to create a challenging and unpredictable landscape. As a result, many in the education sector are asking:
Is it time to embrace a state-by-state K-12 marketing strategy?

The answer? Maybe.

The Current K-12 Funding Landscape

As of now, many Federal programs critical to schools—such as Head Start, Title II (Teacher Training), and other grant-based initiatives—have been cut or restructured. Title I and IDEA funding remain in flux, with new rules yet to be finalized. Meanwhile, macroeconomic trends like looming recessions, tariff impacts, and shifting education standards (especially related to DEI and curriculum reform) further complicate the outlook.

This uncertainty affects educational budgeting timelines, most of which go into effect by July 1, 2025. That leaves many vendors wondering: How much funding will truly be available? Will states receive more autonomy over Federal dollars? Will vouchers or revised programs gain traction?

Why a State-by-State Strategy Might Make Sense

It’s critical to remember that 85–95% of K-12 funding comes from state and local sources—not the Federal government. However, the per-student funding levels vary dramatically by state. For instance:

• New York leads with ~$25,500 per student.
• Utah trails with only ~$7,500 per student.

That’s a threefold difference in available funds per student. Federal funding’s contribution also varies, from as low as 4% in some states to 13% in others. This uneven distribution of dollars is a compelling reason to reconsider how and where marketing dollars are spent.

Some educational consultants are recommending a simple tactic: allocate more marketing resources to states with high per-pupil spending and greater state/local funding stability. Conversely, reduce spending in states with poor funding or high dependency on Federal aid.

On the surface, this seems logical—but it’s not universally applicable.

The Real Answer Lies in Knowing Your Customer

Before shifting to a state-centric strategy, companies need to evaluate their ideal K-12 customer profile:

• Do your solutions work best in private schools or public schools with strong local tax bases?
• Are your products aligned with Title I or IDEA funding requirements?
• Is your business reliant on bond issues, capital projects, or state curriculum approvals?
• Have you already been approved or shortlisted by specific districts?

Every company’s position is unique, and blanket strategies rarely deliver optimal results. While a state-by-state plan may prove helpful in re-allocating excess budget or expanding reach, it should not replace precision targeting based on proven performance indicators.

Precision Targeting Beats Blanket Campaigns

Modern marketing databases provide detailed insights beyond state borders—including school wealth, enrollment size, and demographic trends. Every state includes both high-performing and underperforming districts. A more nuanced targeting approach, based on data-driven profiling rather than geographic generalizations, will often yield better ROI.

However, when you’ve exhausted precise segmentation and still have budget to deploy, it makes sense to invest excess spending in states with higher per-pupil funding. If your offerings don’t resonate in high-budget districts, success is unlikely in lower-funded regions. Our century-long experience in K-12 marketing confirms that states with a stronger state and local funding base almost universally deliver higher returns.

Building a Smarter Marketing Plan

Start with your budget. Use lifetime value metrics to guide your targeting decisions. If your product or service results in long-term contracts or recurring revenue (e.g., subscription models), then extending efforts into niche or lower-funded regions may still be profitable.

However, your core strategy should follow this structure:

1. Begin with high-value segments that align with your strongest historical performance.
2. Nurture and engage consistently, creating multiple touchpoints over time.
3. Expand downward only if it continues to make financial sense.
4. Avoid saturation tactics, especially in outreach. Today’s schools are highly sensitive to irrelevant or mass-messaging strategies.
5. Focus on targeted, value-driven engagement that appeals to prospects most likely to convert.

What’s Next?

In part two of this series, we’ll provide a state-by-state K-12 funding chart to help further refine your 2025-2026 marketing plans. This data will support smarter decision-making around territory management and campaign budgeting.

Until then, remember: the smartest marketers don’t just follow the money - they follow the right money.

Want to know which states or districts align best with your goals? Contact us today to explore how MCH education data can sharpen your targeting.