As an instructional leader in my district, one of my responsibilities is coordinating, designing, and leading district-wide professional development (PD). We offer instructional technology graduate/recertification courses at no cost to our teachers. We also offer other PD opportunities: single PD sessions, cohort-based PDs, outside consultants and programs, conferences, and additional graduate classes. While teachers often say they enjoy these opportunities, we have a challenge: how do we know whether or not these types of PD are really making a difference when it comes to classroom instruction and student achievement? We don’t have a system that analyzes the impact of our district level professional development on student success. We also lack a system for following up with teachers across the district and seeing if those teachers are using what they are learning or if they might need additional support. Even though the PD is tied to district goals and research, we don’t know if it’s meeting the needs of our teachers right now and if the teachers who might really need the PD are the ones attending. When I talk with other district instructional leaders, they are facing similar challenges related to professional development that is done with teachers across schools. In addition to evaluating our PD’s implementation and impact, we must balance what the data and research shows teachers and students need with teachers’ desire for autonomy and choice. With the technology and information available today, PD can be done in many different formats and on many different personalized topics. This challenge matters because teachers’ time is valuable and student success is important. If the PD we are providing at the district level isn’t translating into quality classroom instruction and positive student outcomes, then it’s not a good use of time and money.