For school board members: what to ask before you vote on a family communications contract
You are being asked to approve a recurring expense on the strength of a recommendation you cannot independently verify. These are the six questions that separate a durable agreement from one that becomes a problem in year four, written to be vendor-neutral and then answered for our own contract as a worked example.
| Ask | Answer that should worry you | Answer that should reassure you | Kastr's answer |
|---|---|---|---|
| What is the price in year four and year five? | "We have never raised a district more than a reasonable amount." | A numeric cap written into the agreement | Fixed 36 months; from year four, the lesser of CPI-U or 5% (§3.2) |
| What happens if you are acquired? | "The agreement transfers to the acquirer." | A termination right the district holds, not the vendor | 90-day exit with export and prorated refund on acquisition or material data-terms change (§11.2) |
| Can families be marketed to or charged? | "We have no plans to do that." | A contractual prohibition, not a plan | No marketing to, selling to, or family-facing revenue from district families, ever (§9.4) |
| What do we get out if we leave? | "We'll work with you on a transition." | A named right, machine-readable, no fee, no notice period | §7.1 export right. Honest caveat: we run it on request — there is no self-serve export screen |
| Which features cost extra? | A tier chart with the useful things in the top tier | One price with everything in it | One tier. $3.50 / $3.25 / $3.00 per student per year by enrolment band, everything included |
| Can district records be altered after the fact? | "Only administrators can edit the log." | An append-only mechanism the vendor also cannot edit | SHA-256 hash-chained log, append-only at two independent layers, including against us |
Why the contract matters more than the demonstration
A family communications platform is not a difficult product to demonstrate. Every vendor in the category can show you a message being composed, translated and sent, and by the third demonstration they will look interchangeable. The differences that determine what this costs and what it does to the district over five years are almost entirely in the paperwork.
The three that recur, in the order districts encounter them:
- Renewal escalation. A district signs at a competitive first-year rate. Year two moves with "market conditions". By year four the per-student number has moved 40–60% and the switching cost has grown with every year of accumulated history. This is the standard commercial model in K-12 software, and it is legal, disclosed and entirely predictable if anyone reads the escalation language at signature.
- Change of control. The vendor you diligenced is acquired by a private-equity roll-up, and the data terms, the roadmap and the support model change under an owner your district never evaluated. Unless the agreement gives you a termination right on acquisition, you have no move.
- Family monetisation. A platform funded partly by the district and partly by parents eventually asks parents for money, and the request arrives carrying the school's name. Boards find out about this from a parent at public comment.
How to read a per-student price
A per-student figure is only comparable if you know what is inside it. The questions that convert a headline number into a real one: are text and voice messages included or passed through per message; is there an implementation or onboarding fee; is translation included or a module; is the emergency notification capability the same product or a separate contract; and what is the escalator.
For reference, one worked example at our published rate. A 4,200-student district pays $3.50 per student, so $14,700 a year, $44,100 across the locked 36 months. In year four the contractual worst case is $15,435 — a 5% increase — and it can be less if CPI-U is lower. There is no message fee, no implementation fee and no module. A board can verify the arithmetic in a minute, which is the point of publishing it rather than quoting it.
The general model, including the lines most quotes omit, is set out at total cost of ownership.
What a tamper-evident record is for, in board terms
The reason to ask whether communications records can be altered is not that you suspect anyone. It is that the question will be asked of you, under oath or under a public-records request, and "our administrators could have edited it but we do not believe they did" is a poor answer.
The mechanism worth understanding is a hash chain. Each log entry stores a cryptographic hash computed over the previous entry's hash and the contents of the current entry. Change one entry and every subsequent hash no longer matches, which anyone can verify by recomputation without trusting the vendor. Kastr adds two independent enforcement layers on top: the database role holds no update or delete privilege, and the security policy set contains no update or delete policy at all. The practical claim is narrow and worth stating precisely — it proves entries have not been altered or removed since they were written. It does not prove they were true when written, and no mechanism can.
The disclosure a board should expect and rarely gets
In the interest of not asking you to approve something on incomplete information: Kastr is pre-launch as of August 2026. We have no customers, no SOC 2 audit, no reference districts and no operating history. For most boards that is a sufficient reason to choose an established vendor, and it should be weighed as such.
Specific capability gaps a superintendent may not surface: no single sign-on of any kind; no native connector to PowerSchool, Infinite Campus, Skyward, Aeries or Synergy; automated notice rules configure but do not fire; audience targeting by grade, school or route does not work; no attachments, photos or push notifications; and retention defaults are documented rather than enforced by a purge job.
A vendor that will put that list in front of a board before a vote is making a bet that the district prefers an accurate picture to a flattering one. It is a reasonable bet to test by asking the incumbent for the equivalent list.
Questions people actually ask
What happens to our contract if the vendor is bought?
Read for a change-of-control clause that gives the district a termination right. Ours is §11.2: on acquisition or a material change to data terms, the district may terminate within 90 days, take a full export and receive a prorated refund, with no penalty. Absent such a clause, an acquisition transfers your agreement to an owner you never evaluated.
How do I know families are not the product?
Ask for it in writing rather than in a policy. Clause §9.4 of our agreement prohibits marketing to district families, selling to them, and any family-facing subscription revenue, permanently. A privacy policy can be amended by the vendor; a contract term cannot be amended unilaterally, and §11.2 gives you an exit if a new owner tries.
What should the price do in year four and year five?
It should do something you can calculate today. Ours is fixed for 36 months and then capped at the lesser of CPI-U or 5% annually. If a vendor will not put a numeric cap in the agreement, the honest reading is that they intend to reprice at renewal, when your switching cost is highest.
What proof exists that district records have not been altered?
Ask what mechanism makes the log append-only, and who is excluded by it. A hash chain makes alteration detectable by recomputation; revoked database privileges and the absence of any update or delete policy make it impossible through the ordinary path, including for the vendor. 'Only administrators can edit it' means the record is editable.
Should we require SOC 2 before approving a communications vendor?
It is a reasonable bar, and Kastr does not currently clear it — we are pre-launch and unaudited. If a board sets SOC 2 Type II as a hard requirement, that is defensible. If it wants a substitute for a smaller vendor, the ranked alternatives are a scoped penetration test, published architecture, isolation tests running in continuous integration, and contractual breach and indemnity terms.
One price. Every feature. Locked for three years.
$3.50 per student per year under 5,000 students. No tiers, no add-on modules, no per-message fees. Published on the site because you should not have to book a call to learn a price.