The same question three times is a design fault.

Repeated queries are data about something upstream that is not working.

When four families ask the same thing in a fortnight, the natural response is to answer four times and feel mildly irritated. The more useful response is to treat it as a finding. Four askers usually means a much larger number who wondered, did not ask, and either guessed or disengaged. The question is not why they cannot read; it is where the information was, whether it was findable, and whether it said what people needed in the words they would use.

Common causes are dull and fixable. The information went out once, weeks early, in a message about something else. It sits in a document nobody opens. It is written in institutional language that assumes knowledge the reader does not have. It answers the question the institution wanted to answer rather than the one families actually have, which is usually about time, cost or what their child specifically has to do.

Fixing the source is a real time saving rather than a theoretical one, and it is also better for the people who never asked. Keep a light record of repeat questions over a term, because memory will not hold them. The pattern will show you exactly where the upstream gap is, and one clear rewrite in the right place can remove a recurring stream of individual replies for good.