# One Story, Ready to Send

## Turn a program lead’s rough notes into an update that is accurate and worth reading.

A good update gives the donor one real result, what it probably means and a detail that makes the work visible. All three have to come from records someone can check. This guide goes from a program lead’s notes to a finished email, showing what each editorial choice adds.

*This is a teaching case. The program, people, records and figures are invented.*

### What the program lead sent

Morgan, who supports the reading program, asked how September went. Amina, Morgan’s contact, has this from Ben, the program lead:

- **Register.** 42 distinct students came to at least one of six sessions, September 2–30. 31 came to four or more.
- **Reading check.** In the first and last week, tutors ran the program’s one-minute check, which counts words read correctly. 36 students took both. 26 read more words correctly at the end. Tutors scored their own students.
- **Session logs.** From week three, students asked to take books home. Tutors started a sign-out sheet: 58 sign-outs by September 30.
- **Ben’s note.** “The kids loved it. Huge jump in confidence.”
- **A tutor’s story, told to Ben.** A boy who wouldn’t read aloud in week one read a full page to the group in week four. It isn’t in the log.
- **Photos.** The book shelf, with no students in frame, cleared for donor emails. Students reading in a circle, with no permission recorded for donor use.
- **Next result.** Ben has scheduled the same check for December and agreed to have results ready for Amina on January 12, 2027. Amina has reserved time to review them and send Morgan an update by January 16.

### Choose what goes in, and why

| In the notes | Choice | What it adds, or why it stays out |
|---|---|---|
| 42 students; 31 at four or more sessions | Keep both numbers | The second shows regular attendance, which a headcount hides. |
| 26 of 36 read more words correctly | Keep, with how it was measured and one sentence on its limits | The one real result. Describing the check lets Morgan judge it. |
| 58 book sign-outs | Keep | A recorded detail that shows students asking to borrow books. It makes their interest visible without claiming we know what they read at home. |
| “Huge jump in confidence” | Leave out; ask Ben what tutors saw | Nobody measured confidence. A specific recorded behavior could go in instead. |
| The boy in week four | Leave out | It isn’t recorded, and it describes an identifiable child. It would need his family’s permission and the tutor’s confirmation. |
| Shelf photo; circle photo | Use the shelf only | The shelf is cleared and shows something real. The circle photo has no recorded permission. |

### Say what the result means, and how sure you are

“26 of 36 read more words correctly at the end of the month” is what the check shows. Deciding what it means takes judgment. One month is short, tutors scored their own students, and there is no comparison group, so some of the gain might have happened anyway. Together those support “an encouraging early sign.” They don’t support “improved reading ability” in general, or a claim that the program caused the change.

Say that in one plain sentence next to the result. Morgan gets a real finding and enough context to weigh it, without a paragraph of caveats.

**Draft to reject:**

> Your generosity transformed 42 young readers, who gained confidence and fell in love with books.

**What the records support:**

> Of the 36 students who took both reading checks, 26 read more words correctly at the end of September than at the start. It’s one month, scored by the tutors, so we read it as an encouraging early sign.

### The finished update

**Subject:** How September went in the reading program

Hi Morgan,

You asked how the September reading sessions went. 42 students came to at least one of the six sessions, and 31 came to four or more.

At the start and end of the month, tutors ran the program’s one-minute reading check, which counts the words a student reads correctly. Of the 36 students who took both, 26 read more words correctly at the end. One month is short, and the tutors scored the checks themselves, so we read this as an encouraging early sign rather than a settled result. The program team will run the same check in December.

Something the tutors recorded stood out to me. In the third week, students started asking to take books home, so the tutors set up a sign-out sheet. By the end of September it had 58 entries. I’ve attached a photo of the shelf they borrow from.

Thank you for supporting the reading program. I’ll send you the December results by January 16.

Best,
Amina

The findings trace to the register, reading checks and sign-out sheet. The photo is cleared, the interpretation is labeled as the team’s reading, and the next result has an agreed schedule.

### Send the program lead a draft and three questions

> Hi Ben,
>
> Morgan asked how September went. My draft is below. Before I send it, could you check three things?
>
> 1. “26 of 36”: is that students whose end-of-month score was higher than their start score, among those who took both checks?
> 2. Did tutors score their own students’ checks?
> 3. Your note says confidence jumped. Did tutors record anything specific, such as students volunteering to read aloud? If not, I’ll leave confidence out.
>
> I’ve left out the story about the boy in week four. It isn’t in the log, and we’d need his family’s permission. I’m using the shelf photo only.
>
> Please correct anything that goes further than the records. Could you reply by October 9?
>
> [Draft]
>
> Amina

Ben can answer in a few minutes: he has a draft to mark up, three specific questions and a date. Keep participant records and personal details where your team already controls access.

### If the result isn’t ready

Suppose the second round of checks is still being scored. The update still has the attendance, the sign-out sheet and the photo. Say what is coming and when:

> **Subject:** How September went in the reading program
>
> Hi Morgan,
>
> You asked how the September reading sessions went. 42 students came to at least one of the six sessions, and 31 came to four or more.
>
> In the third week, students started asking to take books home, so the tutors set up a sign-out sheet. By the end of September it had 58 entries.
>
> Tutors also ran a short reading check at the start and end of the month. They’re still scoring the second round, so I don’t have results yet. I’ll send them by October 18, or tell you then what is still outstanding.
>
> Thank you for supporting the reading program.
>
> Best,
> Amina

If you promised news about one participant, program news doesn’t fulfill it. Say so:

> I’m still waiting for the individual update I promised. In the meantime, here is the program news we have verified. I’ll check again on [date] and let you know where things stand.

### If someone proposes a participant’s story

Suppose the boy’s family later agrees to his story appearing in a donor update, and communications then wants it for the public appeal as well. Each new audience, version or channel is a fresh question for the family. Prepare the replacement before you ask. The update above is that replacement: approved, ready and dependent on nobody’s personal story. With it in hand, the family can say no without leaving a gap.

Give whoever publishes one record: the approved version, where it may appear, what isn’t approved and who to contact about a change. The family’s reasons stay with the staff contact. The field notes [A backup makes “no” possible](https://gratona.com/atlas/reading?source=storytelling-consent&page=case) work through a completed record for an event film.

```text
STORY USE RECORD

Story owner, and who consented for them if they are a minor:
Staff contact:
Final version and date reviewed:
Approved use:
Not approved:
Anything else they haven’t agreed to, such as being named or pictured:
Change requests go to:
Publishing or production owner:
Replacement: approved version that fits the same slot or space
After use: where it appeared; anything taken down
```

### Write your version

```text
Subject: [Program] — [reporting period]

Hi [name],

[The question they asked or the update you promised, if either.]

[Verified activity, with a number that shows depth as well as reach.]

[One result, how it was measured and one sentence on how sure you are.]

[One recorded detail that makes the work visible.]

[What remains open, if anything, and when you’ll write again.]

Thank you for [accurate description of their support].

[Name]
```

Delete any line you can’t support. Attendance and one good recorded detail still make an update worth sending.

### Finish the handoff

| Work | Person responsible | Finish condition |
|---|---|---|
| Check the figures, the check description and the photo | Ben, program lead | Draft corrected and records linked by October 9. |
| Send the update | Amina, Morgan’s contact | Final version and send date saved by October 11; delivery checked. |
| December reading check | Amina, with Ben | Check with Ben on January 12; results to Morgan by January 16. |

Sending the update answers Morgan’s September question. The December results are a new promise with their own date.

*Further reading: [Jenna Watanabe and Maria Bryan on storytelling and consent](https://www.mariabryan.com/podcast/episode-56). The teaching case, messages and records here are original Gratona examples.*