SchoolSite & MGT Planning Comparison

Toggle columns to compare self-service tools vs. consultant-led planning.

Show products:
Dimension SchoolSite Locator SchoolSite Pro SchoolSite Suite (Locator + Pro) MGT Expert Planning Services (Consultant-led)
Primary purpose
Public “What’s my school?” lookup that lets families self-serve school assignments and reduces boundary calls. Professional planning tool to build forecasts, scenarios, and redistricting plans inside ArcGIS Pro. Unified boundary management platform: internal planning + public-facing assignments in one ecosystem. Full-service engagement where MGT consultants lead the analysis, forecasting, boundary scenario design, and recommendations.
Intended audience (buyer)
District leadership, communications/enrollment teams, IT/web—anyone focused on parent experience and call reduction. Planning, facilities, demography, research, and strategy teams with the capacity to own GIS workflows. Cabinet-level leaders who want both public-facing and internal planning tools under one vendor/stack. Superintendents, boards, and cabinet leaders who want expert-led planning, third-party validation, and political cover rather than building in-house GIS capacity.
Typical end users
Parents/guardians, school office staff, registrars, realtors, and the general public. GIS analysts, demographers, planners, data-savvy leaders. Combination of public users (families) and internal planning staff. MGT consultants as primary “doers”; district leaders, boards, and communities consume the maps, reports, and recommendations.
Core functionality / deliverable
Address or map search → shows assigned schools, boundaries, and related info in a web map. Tools to forecast enrollment, draw/edit boundaries, model capacity, compare scenarios, and export maps/reports. Shared, consistent boundaries from planning through to the public locator; easy publishing of approved plans. End-to-end consulting: data intake/cleanup, enrollment projections, utilization/capacity analysis, multiple boundary scenarios, equity/impact analysis, and final recommendations/deliverables.
Where it lives in the workflow
Embedded on the district website / parent portal as a 24/7 self-service tool. Inside the district’s desktop GIS (ArcGIS Pro) as part of ongoing planning and analysis. Internal work happens in Pro; once approved, boundaries are pushed into Locator for public communication. Primarily in project cycles: MGT runs the analysis, collaborates in work sessions, supports community engagement, and hands off final plans and tools.
Technical platform / requirements
Hosted web app; district provides boundary data and branding; minimal IT support after go-live. ArcGIS Pro on Windows + licenses and data; requires internal GIS/data management practices. Mix of hosted (Locator) + on-prem/desktop (Pro) with agreed processes for keeping them in sync. Minimal technical lift: secure data sharing with MGT; MGT can use its own tool stack (often including SchoolSite Pro) so districts don’t have to stand up or learn GIS.
Ownership of GIS workflow
MGT manages the app; district owns data updates/approvals but not the underlying GIS tooling. District owns GIS workflows: data prep, scenario building, analysis, and maintenance. Shared: district owns GIS workflows (Pro) and MGT hosts the public locator and integration. MGT owns and operates the GIS workflows for the engagement; district reviews and approves options rather than building the workflows itself.
Training / skills needed
None for families; light orientation for staff (how to use and explain the map). Moderate–high: ArcGIS Pro skills and understanding of enrollment/facilities planning. Two tiers: no training for the public; formal training and governance for internal Pro users. Very low: district staff need only enough understanding to interpret results and participate in decision-making; MGT brings the technical and planning expertise.
Pricing model (high level)
Annual SaaS subscription for hosting, maintenance, and support. Annual software license (plus Esri stack) sized to enrollment and use case. Bundled pricing for Locator + Pro; typically more efficient than buying disparate tools. Project- or retainer-based professional services; higher per-project cost than software alone but includes expert time, facilitation, and deliverables.
Primary value proposition
Reduce boundary-related inquiries, improve family experience, and ensure consistent, accurate assignment information. Empower districts to be self-sufficient in boundary planning and enrollment analysis with strong GIS tooling. Create a single source of truth from internal planning to public communication; smoother, more transparent boundary changes. Maximize confidence and capacity: expert-led analysis, politically defensible recommendations, and bandwidth for districts that can’t (or don’t want to) build deep in-house GIS capabilities.
Best-fit scenarios
Any district wanting a fast, visible customer-service win, even without internal planning staff. Districts with GIS/planning capacity doing frequent projections, redistricting, or facilities planning. Districts that treat boundary management as an ongoing strategic function and want integrated tools for both inside and outside audiences. Districts with limited GIS capacity, high-stakes or controversial boundary changes, tight timelines, or a desire for third-party validation/neutral facilitation.
All product columns are hidden. Turn at least one product back on to see the matrix.