Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Advisory Boards Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Raleigh survey of advisory-board volunteers finds mixed clarity on mission and impact
Summary
City staff presented results of a survey of current and former advisory board and commission volunteers showing generally positive experience ratings but notable gaps in whether boards feel aligned to City Council priorities and whether their work has measurable community impact.
City of Raleigh staff told a special committee Wednesday that a survey of advisory board and commission volunteers shows generally favorable experiences but a sizable minority question whether boards are working on the issues most important to the City Council.
Tyesha Moseley, Community Engagement Department, told the committee the survey went “to over 300 of our wonderful volunteers” and that the city “received 101 responses.”
The survey data show 78% of respondents rated their overall experience as good, 80% said the board’s mission and goals were clear, and 78% said their role expectations were made clear. But only 69% said their boards’ recommendations addressed the issues the board was created to handle, and about 73% said board programs had a measurable impact on the community, indicating a gap between satisfaction and perceived effectiveness.
“No. Again, for me, the fact that only 69%, so over a third of the people are not sure that they're really working on the issues that are important to council,” Councilmember Branch said during the discussion, urging staff to identify which individual boards scored lowest on clarity.
Moseley said staff have the underlying raw data and offered to provide board-level breakdowns to the committee: “I don't have it available with me now, but I can get that pulled and make it, and get it to the committee.”
Respondents suggested several recurring operational improvements: clearer, consistent guidance for council liaisons; better communication between council and boards; more opportunity to weigh in on active council projects; and more feedback on annual work plans. Survey commenters also asked for more consistent onboarding and training, stricter enforcement of attendance, and more dedicated staff support and accessibility accommodations for volunteers who need assistance.
Committee members also urged aligning boards’ annual work plans with the city’s strategic-plan “buckets” so council and staff can better evaluate impact and funding needs. Councilwoman Jones recommended matching boards to strategic-plan categories to make it easier to measure contributions and to decide whether to adjust workloads or even merge or sunset bodies.
Staff said they received about 70 responses on coordination and cross-collaboration ideas and that common suggestions included a regular convening of board/commission chairs or leadership teams and more joint study sessions among related boards.
The committee directed staff to return with board-level survey breakdowns and recommended next steps, including options to improve onboarding, communication, and metrics so that boards can better demonstrate alignment with council priorities.
