Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Community survey finds strong favorability, high trust and broad support for potential funding
Summary
A district-commissioned survey of roughly 400 residents and an additional parent sample finds high favorability for the Osseo Public School District (85% overall, 93% among parents), strong trust (about 91%), and signals that a funding request could be viable if residents view stewardship, listening and trust positively.
Peter Leatherman, the consultant who conducted the district'commissioned survey, told the school board the results were "really, really good news" about how the community feels about the district.
Leatherman said the study interviewed about 400 randomly selected residents, then called an additional roughly 280 parents to create a parent sample of about 400. Interviews were conducted Jan. 7–23 with an average length of about 14 minutes. He said the overall sample yields a margin of error near plus-or-minus 5 percentage points.
Key findings presented to the board included an 85% favorable rating for district quality among the overall community and 93% favorable among parents; 91% of respondents agreed the district "does what's right for children"; and parents were more positive across most outcome measures. Leatherman also told the board that when respondents rate financial stewardship, trust that the district will do right by children, and feeling listened to, support for a funding request rises to the low- to high-80s (Leatherman summarized projected support at about "82–89%" if those three trust indicators are present).
Board members asked about methodology and subgroup analysis; Leatherman said cross-tabs could be run for demographic slices as long as cell sizes are large enough for statistical tests. He noted nonresponse was about 6.5% and that analyses can examine differences between geographic areas and demographic groups.
The presentation framed the survey results as an indicator of political capital and community confidence the district could draw on for future funding discussions. Leatherman cautioned that the margin of error and cell sizes limit some fine-grained conclusions and recommended further targeted analysis for specific questions the board might want to pursue.
The board paused the meeting to discuss next steps and asked staff to follow up with additional cross-tab analyses and subgroup reports to inform outreach and any future referendum planning. The work session moved on to the district's strategic-direction updates after the survey discussion.
