The lIIain purpose oflhis study was 10 assess the current praclice oflhe school illlprovement progralll andrnthereby to identify Ihe major constraints those hinder Ihe progralll e./Jecliveness in secondmy schools ofrnHoro Gudum Wollega; Ihen 10 provide possible solulions to Ihe idel1li}ied problems. To achieve thisrnpurpose, descriptive survey lIIethod was employed. The study was conduced in eight secondmy schoolsrnIhat were drawn randomly from a total of twelve secondmy schools in sampled woredas. Then frOIll eachrnschool and respective woreda leachers and job pel/ormers/ experts were selected by using randomrnsalllpling leclmique where as school principals and WEO.heads were selected on p.urposive basis byrnvirtue of decisive position they assume perlaining 10 the issue under discussion. For this sflldy,rnqueslionnaire was used as the lIIain instrumel1l of dafa col~ ion frOIll leachers and WEO job pel/orlllers.rnAccordingly, 150 copies in two sels were distribuled out of which 115fi'01ll Ieachers and 27 frOIll WEOrnjob pel/orlllers were properly filled and retumed. The data ob fain ed frOIll quesliol1llClires were analyzedrnusing quantitalive slalislical lools sllch as freq uency COUlII, percel1lage, weighled point index and chirnsquare lest. On the olher hand, the data oblained through inlerview, FGD, observalion check lisl andrnparlly document review were analyzed qualitalively in narralion mode so as to subsfan tiate Ihe result ofrnquanlitative analysis. The findings of stlldy indicaled that teachers' parlicipalion in CPD progralll wasrnnot adequate 10 conlribute 10 leachers professional developlllent in parlicular, and to enable Ihemrndischarge Iheir pOlentials in alignment with Ihe priorities of school improvemel1l in general. Schoolrnleadership and management parlicularly school principals were nol found in a position to e./Jectively runrnSIP due to mar.,ly knowledge, skill and comlllilment fac tors. Hence, . Ihey failed to develop arliculaledrnstrategic plan. As a consequence, th~ e.rogram objectives were not well addressed. In addition 10 Ihis, .--:p L----'"rnmajority of schools were neither equipped with necessmy physical fac ilities, equipment and educalionalrnm9terials conducive [or studel1ls ' learning nor utilized these resources efficienlty. , Hence, physicalrnconditions were less promising than social conditions. Furthermore, communily members could not havernadequate mvareness abollt the progralll. Thus, it was found that their level of participalion to o./Jer anyrnnecessmJI support was passive. In addilion, il was fo und that the major facto rs that affected effeclivernilllplelllenlation of the SIP in the siudy area were: acute shortage offinancial resource, lack of COIIIIIIWl ilyrnsense of school ownership and absence of consiSlent follow up and supervisO/y support frO Ill WEO and 'olhers. Helice, frO Ill Ihe result of Ihe study, it was concJ.y.ded thai sillce 111051 of the activities across Ihernfour dOlllains were 1101 embedded ill Ihe schools, SIP'7i7 the study area was not implelllenied as envisagedrnby the f ramework As the result, schools werern11 0 1rnin a p ositionrn/0rnmeet/he desired s/udents' achieve ment.rnTherefore, 10 alleviale Ihe proble",s of Ihe school illlprovemeni praclice, il Was recollimelided Ihalrnill/reserved e./Jorl need 10 be IIlCIde to encourage CPD and capacily building lraining opporllll/ilies forrnleachers and principals. In addilion, school enl'ironlllent should be safe and worlhy for sludenls : leamingrn10 lake place. To do so, school should work jOintly wilh leachers, parents and COIIIIIIUllily me;nbers tornlIIinimize resource and olher constraints. On lap of lhis, lechnically, well designed slralegic plan thai canrnserve as a model along wilh various doclllllellls ()f SIP should be dislribUied for all schools.