School and district leaders make annual decisions about investing their budgets in a multitude of educational programs. Policy directives set expectations for investing in programs that show evidence of improving student outcomes. However, evaluating many simultaneously-implemented programs under typical school operating conditions is challenging. We investigated three methods -- cost-effectiveness analysis, program value-added analysis, and academic return on investment -- to assess how each one fares against three criteria: rigor of methodology, difficulty of execution, and usability of results for decision-making. We apply each method to three programs implemented in a large, U.S. school district: Reading Recovery, Restorative Practices, and school nurses.