A school project backed by more than $125 million in funding has come to an end after nearly a decade of operation in California.
The project, known as The Primary School, was co-founded by Dr. Priscilla Chan in East Palo Alto in 2016. It was created with an ambitious idea: education should not be separated from a child's health, family situation and wider social needs.
The school provided tuition-free education while also connecting children and families with services such as healthcare, dental care, developmental support and family wellness programmes.
But after completing the 2025-26 academic year, the school closed its doors in June 2026. The closure has drawn attention because of the large amount of money invested in the project and the ambitious goals behind it.
So, what happened to the $125 million project? Why did the school close? And what will happen to the students and families who depended on it?
Here is the full story.
What Was The Primary School?
The Primary School was launched in East Palo Alto, California, in 2016.
The idea was different from a traditional school model. Instead of focusing only on classroom education, the school tried to bring education, healthcare and family support together.
The organisation said its approach was based on the belief that children's development is affected by many factors outside the classroom.
The school therefore worked with children, parents, teachers and health professionals.
Over the years, the East Palo Alto campus expanded to serve children from early childhood through middle school. A second East Bay site was opened in 2020.
Who Funded The School?
The major financial backing came from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI), the philanthropic organisation created by Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan.
Reports have put CZI's funding for the school at more than $125 million over the project's lifetime.
That made The Primary School one of the more significant private philanthropic experiments in education.
However, the school was not a government-funded public school. It was a tuition-free private school serving families in communities where many children faced economic and social challenges.
Why Was The School Started?
The main goal was to create what the organisation described as a whole-child model.
Under this approach, the school did not look at education as an isolated issue.
Instead, it tried to address several areas at the same time:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The organisation hoped that this model could eventually provide lessons for other schools and communities.
When Was The Closure Announced?
The Primary School announced in April 2025 that its East Palo Alto and East Bay schools would close at the end of the 2025-26 school year.
At the time, the organisation said the decision had been difficult and that it would work to support students, families and staff during the transition.
The school eventually completed its final academic year and closed in June 2026.
The organisation's own website now confirms that the East Palo Alto site operated from fall 2016 until June 2026, while the East Bay site operated for six years.
Why Did The $125 Million School Close?
This is the most important part of the story.
The closure was connected to a decision by the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative not to continue funding the school beyond the 2025-26 academic year.
The school's board subsequently moved ahead with the closure.
Reports have also highlighted a second issue: the school did not consistently reach the academic performance levels that were expected of it.
According to reporting by The Wall Street Journal, the school faced challenges including academic performance below state norms, leadership turnover and difficulty attracting additional funding partners beyond CZI.
At the same time, the school's supporters have pointed to other areas where the project had an impact, including health and wellbeing services.
This makes the story more complicated than simply saying that the school "failed."
Was The School Academically Successful?
The academic results became an important part of the debate around the school's future.
The Primary School was created with a broad mission. It wanted to improve children's educational outcomes while also addressing health, family and social needs.
But according to the Wall Street Journal's reporting, the school struggled to consistently meet academic expectations compared with state standards.
This created a difficult question for the organisation:
Could such a costly and complex model be sustained if the academic results were not strong enough to justify continuing the investment?
There were also signs of progress in other areas.
Reports have noted improvements in student wellbeing and health outcomes, meaning the project had measurable effects beyond standard test scores.
So the school's record cannot be understood through one number alone.
Did The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative Simply Stop Supporting The School?
The funding decision was part of a wider change in CZI's priorities.
Reports have said the organisation shifted more of its philanthropic focus towards science and biomedical research, while reducing some of its previous social advocacy and education activities.
That change had a direct effect on The Primary School because CZI was its major financial backer.
The school itself said it hoped the lessons from its model would continue through partnerships and other organisations even after its own campuses closed.
Did The $125 Million Go Completely To Waste?
That is a question that has generated debate, but it does not have a simple yes-or-no answer.
The money funded almost a decade of operations, staff, education and support services.
The school also provided healthcare, family support and other services that went beyond traditional classroom education.
At the same time, the project did not continue as originally envisioned, and the school ultimately closed after its major funder decided not to continue its financial support.
The school's own leadership has argued that the experience produced lessons that could be useful for other educators and organisations.
Therefore, the closure is better understood as the end of a specific education experiment rather than simply a case of money disappearing.
What Happened To The Students?
The closure affected hundreds of students and their families.
The Primary School said it was working with local school leaders, including the Ravenswood City School District, to help families decide what comes next for their children's education.
The organisation also said it would provide transition support for families.
This was important because students were not only losing their school. Many families were also losing access to the integrated health and family services connected to the school.
What Support Was Announced After The Closure?
CZI said it would provide $50 million in transition and community support after the school's closure.
The organisation said the money would support communities including East Palo Alto, Belle Haven and the East Bay.
The support includes areas such as education savings accounts, family transition services, early childhood education and healthcare-related programmes.
A separate part of the support is intended to help students and families manage the move to other educational settings.
Why Is This Story Getting Political Attention?
Although The Primary School was not a government school or a government-funded project, its closure touches on several issues that often appear in political debates about education.
These include:
- How much private philanthropy should influence education
- Whether education and healthcare should be integrated
- How low-income communities should receive additional support
- Whether privately funded education models can be sustained for many years
- How schools should measure success
- What happens when a major private funder changes its priorities
These are policy questions rather than proof of wrongdoing by any political party or government.
The closure itself resulted from decisions involving the school's board and its major private funder, not from a government order.
A Timeline Of The $125 Million School Project
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The organisation's official records confirm that the East Palo Alto school operated for about 10 years before closing in June 2026.
What Was The Biggest Challenge?
The biggest challenge appears to have been sustainability.
The Primary School required significant funding because it was trying to provide much more than traditional classroom education.
Its model included teachers, health services, family support and other programmes.
That made the project more expensive and complex than a normal school.
When the main funder decided not to continue supporting the school, finding a replacement funding structure became a major challenge.
At the same time, the academic results did not consistently reach the levels needed to make the model an easy candidate for wider expansion, according to reporting on the closure.
What Can Other Schools Learn From This?
The closure has raised an important question for education leaders:
Can a highly integrated education model be scaled without depending heavily on one wealthy donor or philanthropic organisation?
The Primary School's experience suggests that funding stability matters almost as much as the idea itself.
A school can have an ambitious mission, strong community support and additional services, but it still needs a long-term financial and operational structure.
The school's leadership has said it wants its experience and resources to remain useful to other educators and organisations after the closure.
The Bigger Picture
The Primary School story is not simply about a school receiving $125 million and then shutting down.
It is about what happens when a large philanthropic experiment tries to change the way education is delivered.
The project attempted to combine schooling, healthcare and family support under one model. It operated for nearly a decade and served children and families in communities facing significant economic challenges.
But when its major funder changed its priorities and decided not to continue funding after the 2025-26 school year, the school could not continue in its existing form.
The closure now leaves behind two different legacies.
One is the criticism over academic performance and the difficulty of sustaining the model.
The other is the experience, services and research that the organisation says can still help other communities.
