For decades, teachers have navigated a mismatch between what the profession asks of them and what it pays in return. Even as the role has grown more complex and costly to sustain, compensation has failed to keep pace: A 2024 Economic Policy Institute report found that educators earn just 73.4 cents for every dollar made by similarly educated professionals, a gap that has widened over decades. That imbalance has consequences. Since 1970, the number of graduates earning education degrees has fallen by half, even as overall college attendance has climbed sharply, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.
At the same time, rising living costs have made it harder for schools to compete for talent. Salaries have increased only modestly—and not enough to outpace inflation—leaving many teachers struggling to cover basic expenses, as a 2025 analysis by K‑12 Dive noted. Nowhere is that strain more visible than in the housing market. Since 2019, rents and home prices have both surged, far outstripping growth in teacher pay.
For early‑career educators, especially those in high‑cost regions, living near their schools is increasingly out of reach even though living within their districts is linked to lower absenteeism and higher retention. This has prompted schools to consider what kinds of support might help teachers stay rooted in their communities.
NAIS Findings on Faculty Housing
In October 2025, NAIS began its Faculty Turnover and Housing study to understand how housing challenges were affecting independent schools. The research began with a Snapshot survey—12 questions focusing on faculty turnover, retention, and housing—to which 384 heads responded. NAIS then interviewed 11 day-school heads from the West, the Southeast, and New England to gather more in-depth, anecdotal information.
Most schools—81%—reported that “many” of their faculty live within a 30-minute drive, while only 16% said that just “some” lived that close. By comparison, in 2024, the U.S. Census Bureau found that the average one-way commute was 27 minutes, suggesting that most independent school faculty live within a typical commuting distance. However, a 2001 study found that the ideal commute was around 16 minutes, providing enough time to decompress and create a healthy separation between work and home without being overly time-consuming.
On-Campus Housing
In conversations with heads, NAIS researchers heard a range of faculty preferences. Some wanted to live within walking distance of campus, whether on campus or nearby. Others preferred a clear separation between home and work and adamantly did not want to live on campus. These preferences often reflected stage of life: Established teachers with families preferred living off campus, while newer teachers were generally more open to nontraditional or on-campus housing opportunities.
Nearly three-quarters of heads were not considering implementing housing support strategies, likely due to how many faculty live within a reasonable driving distance. Interest was higher among schools in high-cost areas, such as New England, the East, and the West, where 43%, 37%, and 35% of heads, respectively, were exploring housing solutions. The strategies under consideration varied by region, city, school size, and school resources. Schools with smaller campuses often lacked capacity for on‑campus housing and instead looked to partnerships with local landlords, rental subsidies, and mortgage down payment programs.
For schools that did offer on-campus housing, equity and mission concerns frequently emerged. Determining who should receive housing was challenging; some schools relied on a lottery system, while others prioritized need. This often created tension among those not selected for housing. Most offered heavily discounted rent for on-campus housing and, in some cases, asked teachers to assume additional responsibilities, such as extracurricular duties or serving as dorm-parents for boarding students.
Several schools also questioned whether acting as a landlord aligned with their mission. Balancing the roles of employer and landlord felt complicated, and some worried it blurred boundaries. In a few cases, schools acknowledged that on‑campus, market-rate housing could become a revenue‑generating venture, though none ultimately pursued this approach.
Other Retention Methods
Often, schools turned to alternative retention strategies when school-provided housing wasn’t feasible or faculty wasn’t interested. One school invested heavily in professional development, believing that expanding teachers’ skills was a more effective retention tool than higher salaries, since teachers could find a higher salary elsewhere if they switched schools. Other schools focused on helping faculty pursue home ownership, recognizing that owning property encouraged faculty to stay in the community and, in turn, at the school.
Workplace culture was also recognized as playing a key role in retention. Schools worked to create joyful, supportive environments and to build strong, positive relationships between teachers and school leaders. These heads noted that when employees feel valued and appreciated, they are far more likely to stay.
Advice From Other Heads
When asked to give advice to schools considering housing support, heads emphasized the importance of speaking with faculty first. Many faculty may not need housing assistance but instead want rent stipends, more professional development, or higher salaries. Having that conversation early can save significant time, money, and energy.
For schools that decide to pursue housing solutions, especially if they are buying property, heads advised planning well in advance. Beginning the analysis early ensures the school is prepared when it’s time to make decisions.