Ed Champion Leadership Self-Assessment

No one on the team has been identified to lead or coordinate AI-related work. AI comes up occasionally but has no owner.

The Ed Champion has identified a person to begin exploring this space, but the assignment is informal or represents a small fraction of their time. The person does not yet have decision-making authority or clear expectations around the work.

A high-capacity person has been formally assigned to lead AI work with meaningful time (roughly 25-50% of their bandwidth). The leader has relationships with school network leaders across the region and is actively in the field, listening, learning, and beginning to understand the state of thinking and action around AI across the ecosystem. The Ed Champion has taken something off their plate to make this possible.

A high-capacity leader is dedicating 50% or more of their time to AI work with real decision-making authority and direct access to the Ed Champion CEO and school network leaders across the region. They have deep credibility with school network leaders, are actively shaping the Ed Champion's emerging strategy, and are positioned as the go-to person for AI across the region. The Ed Champion is actively pursuing funding to sustain or expand the role.

The Ed Champion does not yet have an articulated perspective on why AI matters for its portfolio school networks. AI is seen primarily as a technology topic or a future consideration rather than a current strategic priority.

The Ed Champion has begun internal conversations about AI's relevance to its mission. There is growing awareness that AI touches more than tool adoption (it connects to instruction, workforce readiness, adult workflows, and equity), but this broader framing has not yet been communicated to school network leaders or funders.

The Ed Champion has developed and pressure-tested a clear case for why AI is a strategic priority, grounded in the equity imperative and encompassing the full landscape of risks and opportunities. This vision has been shared with school network leaders and is being used to engage local funders. School network leaders are beginning to see AI as connected to their existing priorities rather than as an additional burden.

The Ed Champion has a well-developed, locally grounded vision that resonates with school network leaders, funders, policymakers, and community stakeholders. The vision has been pressure-tested and refined based on feedback, and is actively shaping how the region talks about AI in schools. An emerging theory of change is taking shape, informed by the point person's early fieldwork and baseline data, that reflects what school networks can absorb, what the Ed Champion believes is highest impact, and what can be funded.

The Ed Champion's own team has minimal firsthand experience with AI tools. Staff may have heard about AI but are not regular users and lack a working mental model for what AI can and can't do.

A few individuals on the team have begun experimenting with AI tools, but usage is uneven and there is no organizational expectation around fluency. The team has not yet selected an enterprise platform or developed internal norms for AI use.

The Ed Champion team has selected an enterprise AI platform and most staff are regular users. Internal norms are emerging around how AI is used in the organization's own work. The team can engage credibly with school network leaders on AI topics from lived experience.

Genuine AI fluency is embedded across the Ed Champion organization. The team uses AI routinely in its own workflows, has established clear internal norms, and continuously updates its knowledge as the technology evolves. The Ed Champion models the kind of engaged, intentional AI use it is encouraging in school networks.

The Ed Champion has not convened school network leaders around AI in any structured way. Individual leaders may be pursuing AI on their own, but there is no coordinated learning or peer exchange facilitated by the Ed Champion.

The Ed Champion has hosted one or more introductory sessions or conversations about AI with school network leaders, but there is no ongoing structure. Engagement is episodic and attendance is inconsistent. Most school networks have not identified an internal AI owner.

The Ed Champion has launched an ongoing cohort or community of practice with senior leaders from across school networks, spanning functions such as curriculum, operations, talent, and technology. Touchpoints are regular (monthly or more), structured around real decisions leaders are facing, and connected to leaders' existing strategic priorities. Most participating school networks have identified an internal point person to own the AI work within their organization.

The cohort is well-established and producing visible results. Leaders are sharing challenges and bright spots with each other across school networks. The community has moved beyond introductory learning into problem-solving around specific implementation decisions. Every participating school network has a named AI owner with meaningful capacity. Expert facilitation and national peer examples are woven into the learning design. The Ed Champion is seeing evidence that the cohort is influencing how school networks allocate resources, select tools, and approach instruction.

The Ed Champion has no systematic way of knowing where school networks in its region stand on AI readiness, adoption, or impact. Decisions are based on anecdote and impression.

The Ed Champion has begun exploring how to collect data on AI readiness and adoption but has not yet implemented a measurement approach. There may be informal pulse checks or one-off surveys, but nothing consistent or benchmarked.

School networks in the region are participating in structured data collection, such as the AI Innovation Index, that captures leadership conditions, staff readiness and empowerment, and student experience with AI. The Ed Champion has a portfolio-level view of where networks stand and is using the data to identify bright spots, target resources, and inform its own strategy.

Data collection is widespread across the Ed Champion's portfolio and is being used actively to drive decisions. The Ed Champion can track longitudinal progress, identify which networks are excelling on specific dimensions, and broker peer learning based on the data. Baseline data has strengthened the fundraising case. School network leaders view the measurement as valuable to their own decision-making, not as a compliance exercise.

The Ed Champion has not yet helped school networks think about AI opportunities in any structured way. No framework guides where resources go. Any AI-related grants flow toward what school networks request, which likely defaults to adult-facing efficiency tools. There is no awareness of gaps across the landscape.

Conversations with school networks touch on AI opportunities across adult workflows, instructional supports, student-facing learning tools, and student AI readiness (literacy and agency with AI). The Ed Champion has no framework for allocating across domains and has not yet used one in a decision around grants or technical assistance for school networks.

The Ed Champion has a deliberate framework for evaluating grants across all domains. Resource allocation is guided by the framework based on readiness and need, not school network demand alone. Multiple domains are represented in the portfolio.

Portfolio allocation is visible and defensible, with all domains active in the portfolio. The Ed Champion can explain why resources are weighted as they are, track coverage across domains, and adjust based on evidence. School network leaders understand the framework and use it to deepen their own strategic thinking around AI. The framework evolves as the AI landscape and school network needs shift.

The Ed Champion has no systematic approach to AI risk. Tool adoption conversations focus on opportunity and implementation; risks around instructional coherence, equity, academic integrity, and vendor dependency are not raised. Risk surfaces only when a school network reports a problem.

The Ed Champion has begun raising risk questions with school networks (coherence, alignment, data privacy, academic integrity, inequitable adoption) but does so informally and reactively. No shared language or framework exists across the portfolio. Risk is network-specific rather than a portfolio-wide concern.

The Ed Champion has a working framework for identifying risks before they materialize and has embedded it in grant conditions and cohort conversations. School networks have shared language for risk and use it in their own decision-making. The Ed Champion monitors for signals of significant risk across the portfolio: tool proliferation, coherence drift, inequitable adoption patterns.

Risk management is integrated across the Ed Champion's full toolkit: grantmaking criteria, cohort design, technical assistance, and policy engagement. The Ed Champion tracks risk signals at the portfolio level, identifies emerging risks as the AI landscape shifts, and adjusts support proactively. School network leaders treat risk assessment as a standing part of their AI decision-making, not a one-time checklist.

The Ed Champion has not yet considered its role in shaping the conditions that determine whether school networks can successfully lean into AI. The ecosystem incentives, including assessment and accountability systems, and regulatory constraints that govern school networks are not on the Ed Champion's radar as levers for change.

The Ed Champion recognizes that the broader policy environment shapes whether school networks can innovate, but has not yet built relationships with policymakers, authorizers, or other ecosystem actors around these issues. The Ed Champion is internally clarifying its perspective on which conditions matter most and where it can add value.

The Ed Champion has established credibility with policymakers and authorizers as a trusted source on AI and school-level innovation. It is in the room before policy decisions are made, not after, and brings portfolio evidence to bear on specific regulatory and accountability questions, naming out loud where current incentive structures point in the wrong direction and where flexibility would allow promising practice to scale. It makes wait-and-see a harder posture to sustain.

The Ed Champion is a recognized advocate for the ecosystem conditions that make school-level innovation possible. It engages policymakers and authorizers on a sustained basis around assessment, accountability, and regulatory conditions, making the case that school networks cannot be expected to design around future-ready outcomes while existing incentives pull in a different direction. It surfaces these tensions publicly and constructively, ensures the right conversations are happening even when the answers are uncertain, and over time helps shift the conditions not just for its own portfolio, but for the broader field.

The Ed Champion has not addressed how families and communities are experiencing or perceiving AI in schools. There is no communication strategy and no forum for family input.

The Ed Champion recognizes that families and communities will form views on AI in schools whether or not they are engaged proactively. It has begun thinking about what a communication and engagement strategy could look like but has not yet supported school networks in developing one or created any forum for family input.

The Ed Champion is supporting school networks in developing communication approaches around AI, helping them explain what is being used, why, and how families can engage. There are emerging forums for family input, and the Ed Champion is helping shape a proactive narrative rather than waiting for backlash.

The Ed Champion treats family and community engagement as a portfolio-wide strategic priority. It has helped establish shared communication norms and narratives across school networks, and has created or supported forums where family input shapes how AI is implemented. Over time, it builds and sustains community trust that makes AI adoption a shared endeavor with families.

The Ed Champion is building its AI strategy in isolation, without connection to national networks, peer learning communities, or benchmarking data from other regions.

The Ed Champion is aware that other regions are pursuing similar work and has begun exploring national networks or resources, but has not yet established consistent connections.

The Ed Champion's point person is plugged into at least one national learning community with peer regions. National benchmarking data is available and being used to contextualize local progress. The Ed Champion is drawing on expert resources and avoiding mistakes that other regions have already made.

The Ed Champion is an active participant in a national community of practice with other regions pursuing this work. Cross-region benchmarking is informing local strategy. The relationship is bidirectional: the Ed Champion's own experience is helping other regions learn and contributing to the national knowledge base.

There is no dedicated funding for AI-related work. Any activity is absorbed into existing budgets with no line item and no fundraising plan.

The Ed Champion has begun conversations with one or more funders about AI as a priority area. There may be a small amount of seed funding or a verbal expression of interest, but nothing sufficient to sustain dedicated capacity or support grantmaking to school networks.

The Ed Champion has secured philanthropic funding sufficient to support a dedicated point person and initial programming. The fundraising case is grounded in baseline data and early results. The Ed Champion has a developing relationship with a funding coalition that includes local anchor support and is diversified across funders.

The Ed Champion has a multi-year funding plan supported by a coalition of local and/or national funders. The case for investment is backed by longitudinal data, concrete bright spots, and a clear theory of change. School networks are beginning to absorb some costs into their own budgets. There is a credible path toward sustainability that does not depend on any single donor.