Superintendent/Board Communication in a Crisis

Nick Caruso Sr. Staff Associate for Field Services and Coordinator of Technology, CABE

I recently read an article about a board of education whose members were concerned that a serious issue had taken place in the district and they knew nothing about it. Parents had been notified through a phone notification system, but board member felt that they needed enough knowledge to be able to respond to the inevitable phone calls they would receive from concerned parents.

In this new environment, where information is always available instantly, the question often comes up about how much the superintendent needs to share with the board. This isn’t always the easiest question to answer; sometimes board members aren’t privy to confidential information that may need to be presented in a hearing at some future point. The superintendent has to protect the process for investigating, drawing conclusions and bringing a request for action to the board. Spending time on the phone or e-mailing board members, while often necessary, invites opportunities for abuse. I recall one superintendent who attended a three-day workshop. Upon her return she had 65 e-mail messages from board of education members alone. Responding to those e-mails alone took her around 6 1/2 hours to complete. Board members need to be sensitive to that.

That being said, nobody wants to read about a serious issue in the schools either in the newspaper (frontpage/above the fold), in social media or on television. Getting a call from a reporter asking a question about a serious issue he or she knows nothing about is not something anybody wants.

As part of a discussion on board evaluation, or the board/superintendent relationship, discussion should take place about what should, or should not be shared with the board, and the vehicle best suited for it.

Many boards have a communications plan which would include general guidelines for board-superintendent communications. These plans should be deliberate and strategic. In general, it starts by articulating examples of what the board believes should be shared that can be discussed with the superintendent for viability. In the case of the district I mentioned at the outset, putting board members on the general list for broadcast phone calls was easy to do and satisfied the board. In some cases other solutions make more sense.

In many districts, the superintendent regularly (once a month or once a week) reports on things he or she believes the board should know about.

It might be an issue that the district is facing - budget updates, possible labor issues or programmatic problems are examples. Some issues require a personal call, but in most districts the superintendent will reach out to the board chair to figure out who needs to be on the list to be informed, and just how much they should be told. May boards have a protocol where the chair then calls individual board members to share the issue with the rest of the board.

It is important that whatever information is decided to be shared with the board, that all board members receive the same information.

Consider this a work in progress. In doing his or her job, the superintendent might not get information in a timely manner, or the superintendent’s understanding of the problem might not gel with what social media is say- ing… it may have been blown way out of proportion. Sometimes a situation may be underestimated, or exaggerated into something more serious than it actually was. It is OK to look at things in hindsight and learn from the example.

Finally, advice I always give to boards. When a situation develops, the most important thing is that the situation gets assessed, resolved and then communicated to the community. With social media in play, we often try to accelerate the process. That being said everyone should work to establish protocols that will minimize the potential for misreading a situation and to ensure board members don’t get any unpleasant surprises.