How Advanced Analytics Are Helping US Schools Start Later Without Spending More

For years, educators, parents, and doctors have been stuck in the same frustrating loop. Medical research has consistently shown that early high school start times are harmful for teenagers, yet many school districts say they simply cannot afford to start later. Buses, staffing, family schedules, and tight budgets have all been cited as immovable obstacles. A new study published in the journal Management Science suggests that those obstacles may not be as fixed as once believed.

Using advanced analytics and interactive optimization, researchers demonstrated that school districts can shift to healthier start times without increasing costs—and in some cases, while saving millions of dollars. The findings come from a real-world collaboration with the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD), offering one of the most concrete examples to date that later school start times are not just medically advisable, but also operationally realistic.

Why Early School Start Times Are a Problem

Teenagers are not simply “lazy sleepers.” During adolescence, the human circadian rhythm naturally shifts later, making it biologically difficult for teens to fall asleep early at night. When high schools start before 8:30 a.m., students are often forced to wake up during a period when their brains are still primed for sleep.

Major medical organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association, recommend that high schools start no earlier than 8:30 a.m. Research has repeatedly linked early start times to chronic sleep deprivation, poorer academic performance, increased rates of anxiety and depression, and long-term physical health issues among teens.

Despite this overwhelming evidence, many districts have delayed action. Transportation logistics, limited bus fleets, labor contracts, and concerns about family routines have made schedule changes seem risky or prohibitively expensive.

A New Way to Tackle an Old Scheduling Problem

The new study approaches the issue from a different angle. Instead of asking whether districts should adopt later start times, the researchers asked how they could do so within existing constraints. The research team—Arthur Delarue from the University of Virginia, Zhen Lian from Yale University, and Sebastien Martin from Northwestern University—worked directly with SFUSD to redesign school schedules across the district’s 133 schools.

At the heart of the project was an interactive optimization system. Rather than producing a single “optimal” schedule, the system generated thousands of near-optimal options. District leaders could explore these alternatives, adjust constraints, and immediately see how different choices affected transportation costs, bell times, and community preferences.

This approach marked a significant shift from traditional top-down planning. Instead of relying on static models or one-size-fits-all recommendations, decision-makers were given tools to actively explore trade-offs and test real-world scenarios in real time.

What Changed in San Francisco

SFUSD implemented the redesigned schedules in 2021, and the results were striking. High school start times were shifted later to better align with adolescent sleep biology, while elementary and middle school schedules were adjusted to balance transportation needs.

Most importantly, the district did not have to spend more money to make these changes. In fact, the new schedules reduced annual transportation costs by more than $5 million. The savings came from more efficient bus routing, improved alignment between school start times, and a reduction in unnecessary operational complexity.

The revised schedules also simplified daily logistics. With better coordination across schools, transportation staff could operate more efficiently, and administrators found it easier to manage districtwide operations.

Community Response and Practical Realities

No large-scale schedule change is ever universally popular, and the researchers were clear about this. Not every family received their preferred start time, and some households faced new challenges, especially those with children attending multiple schools.

That said, feedback from the community was largely positive. A survey of nearly 28,000 elementary school families and staff showed that a majority approved of the changes. Many respondents reported improved daily routines, and educators noted better coordination across school sites.

The study highlights an important point often missing from public debates: perfection is not required for progress. While compromises were inevitable, the overall outcome delivered healthier schedules, operational improvements, and financial savings.

Why Interactive Analytics Made the Difference

Traditional scheduling often treats school timetables as fixed puzzles with only one acceptable solution. The interactive model used in this study challenged that assumption. By allowing leaders to explore thousands of feasible schedules, the system revealed flexibility that had previously gone unnoticed.

This process also helped address political and social barriers. When stakeholders could see the consequences of different choices—such as how a small change in one school’s start time affected transportation costs elsewhere—it became easier to build consensus and move past entrenched positions.

The researchers emphasize that the key innovation was not just the math, but the human-centered design of the system. Administrators, transportation planners, and policymakers remained in control, using analytics as a guide rather than a directive.

Broader Implications for Other School Districts

One of the most important takeaways from the study is its scalability. The researchers argue that districts of any size—urban or rural, public or private—can adopt this framework. The tools are adaptable and can incorporate local constraints, community priorities, and policy requirements.

This is especially relevant as more states consider or implement legislation mandating later school start times. Districts often fear that such mandates will strain already limited budgets. The SFUSD experience suggests that, with the right analytical tools, districts may be able to comply with health guidelines while actually improving efficiency.

The Bigger Picture: Sleep, Learning, and Policy

Later school start times are not just about comfort or convenience. Adequate sleep is closely linked to learning, emotional regulation, physical health, and long-term well-being. When students are chronically sleep-deprived, schools face downstream effects ranging from lower academic engagement to increased behavioral and mental health challenges.

From a policy perspective, this research adds a crucial piece to the conversation. It shows that the debate should not be framed as health versus cost. With modern analytics, districts can design schedules that support student health and fiscal responsibility.

What This Study Ultimately Shows

The long-standing belief that later school start times are too expensive or too complex to implement is increasingly difficult to defend. By combining advanced analytics with collaborative decision-making, the researchers demonstrated that school schedules are far more flexible than traditionally assumed.

In the case of San Francisco, later start times were not only feasible—they led to significant cost savings, smoother operations, and broad community support. For districts across the US still hesitating to make the shift, this study offers something rare in education policy: clear evidence that doing the healthier thing for students can also be the smarter operational choice.

Research paper: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2024.05834