ACSD 1 presents SCOPE communications survey showing strong local support but gaps on finances and transparency

Albany County School District #1 released results of a districtwide communications survey during its February board meeting, reporting mostly positive views among parents and staff but notable gaps in how informed stakeholders feel about finances and district‑level decisions.

Jessica Shechtin, a communications research specialist with the National School Public Relations Association (NSPRA), told trustees the survey—conducted Oct. 27–Nov. 12—received 371 responses. ‘‘The net promoter score for all stakeholders together is 13,’’ Shechtin said, adding that parents’ score rose to 20 while employees’ score was about 12. She said parents and staff most often preferred email and the district newsletter for substantive updates.

The presentation also flagged areas of concern. Shechtin reported two‑thirds of parents said they felt only slightly or not at all informed about district finances, and that parents felt less well informed about district goals, leader decisions and facilities. She advised the district to examine open‑ended survey comments and consider targeted communications and focus groups to understand what specific information people feel is missing.

Board members pressed for specifics. Trustee Jesse Martin asked how the district should prioritize communicating financial details versus changing delivery channels; Shechtin advised reviewing who was reached, which channels were used and whether messages were targeted. Trustee Tracy Aragon asked whether the data show what kinds of information people feel are withheld; Shechtin said the survey alone cannot fully answer that but the open comments often point to tax or budget concerns.

Trustees and staff also discussed sample reliability. The presenter said parent and staff samples met or nearly met target participation rates (margin of error near 6%), but community engagement was very low—only four community responses—making community figures unreliable. Superintendent Dr. Goldhart and communications staff agreed to circulate the raw open‑ended responses to trustees and to use the results to refine newsletters, a facilities website and staff communications.

What happens next: board members asked administration to review the open comments, consider targeted outreach or pilots (including more in‑person focus groups), and return with recommendations. The presentation concluded with an invitation to trustees to suggest follow‑up steps; Shechtin recommended that communicating about finances and leader decisions be a priority area for deeper qualitative work.