The Delaware Valley School District board voted Wednesday to decline participation in the 2025 Pennsylvania Youth Risk Behavior Survey after trustees and public commenters raised questions about the survey's content and process.

The action: a motion to approve the district's participation in the state youth-risk survey was moved and seconded; the board took a roll-call vote and recorded nine "no" votes, defeating the motion.

Why it mattered: public commenters and multiple trustees said the questionnaire includes sensitive items about sexual behavior, suicide and family instability that could be triggering for students and that the district would face mandatory-reporting duties if individual students disclosed abuse or imminent danger.

Public comment and trustee concerns

Matthew Contreras, a member of the public, urged the board to vote against the survey and said the district did not provide the questionnaire to parents in advance. "This is an outside survey... these questions are not only inappropriate," Contreras said during public comment, adding that some questions probe issues he described as unrelated to education and potentially distressing for students.

Trustees then spent nearly an hour addressing the survey. Multiple members said they found the length and content objectionable and said the district should not be the vehicle for the state to collect sensitive data without stronger parental engagement. Trustee Emily (first name only in the record) asked whether the survey data would be anonymous and noted that the state aggregates results by building; staff confirmed the results are aggregated by building for district use but the survey instrument contains questions trustees found concerning.

Trustees expressed three recurring concerns: 1) some items might trigger mandatory‑reporting obligations if students disclosed abuse; 2) the district received limited advance notice and some trustees said the process should be opt‑in rather than opt‑out; and 3) trustees wanted clarity on how the 90 schools selected statewide were chosen and whether nonparticipation could be substituted.

Board members who spoke included Christine Agron, Vandy Colville, Jessica Decker, Bridal Fells, Jack Fisher, Pam Luckte, Felicia Sheehan, Rosemary Walsh and Carl Well; each recorded "no" on the final roll-call vote.

Staff context and final vote

District staff noted the survey is run in conjunction with the state health department and that participation would have offered staff professional-development opportunities. Staff also included an email from a state official explaining how the survey data are used for public‑health planning.

After discussion, the board proceeded to a roll-call vote. The clerk read the roll and recorded nine "no" votes; the motion to participate failed.

Ending: The board did not adopt the survey. Trustees asked staff to continue using existing local student-health screening procedures and to bring any future external survey requests to the board with more lead time and clearer opt‑in consent procedures.