COMPOSITION

STRONG

1

SATISFACTORY

2

WEAK

3

Please Indicate Your Assessment

(1, 2 or 3)

9-11 members

7-9 members

Less than 7 members

More than 15

There has been a clear and transparent process to confirm whether each founding board member should transition to the governing board.

There is recognition that there needs to be a process for deciding who from the founding group should continue on as a governing board member.

There are founders that need to transition off and no one is aware of this or ready to take on the challenge of doing this.

No staff on the board.

Clarity about parent role.

The board is actively engaged in determining the role of parents on the board.

More than 50% parents or teachers on the board.

There is a target profile of expertise and perspective needed on Board which sets current and future recruitment priorities.

There is a clear board expansion plan and timeline.

Current board recruitment priorities have been determined, but there isn’t an overall target profile – or a process for determining priorities in the future.

There is a board expansion plan but it could be more targeted.

Board recruitment is a random process or the board is not prepared to expand.

There is strong expertise in key fields

Finances, Legal, Facilities, Fundraising

Education—but not too narrow a focus

PR, HR and ideally some bench strength in key areas (especially finance).

Board has expertise in most fields but needs to recruit additional members with specific qualifications.

Significant gaps in expertise exist and there is no plan to fill them.

50% or more of the board has previous governance experience.

30% the board has previous governance experience.

0-1 one the board members have previous governance experience.

There are no real or perceived conflicts of interest among board members.

There were conflicts of interest that have been discussed by the board and the situation rectified with the appropriate board members stepping down.

There are close familial ties on among board members and/or among the board and school leadership and faculty.

Board has diversity relevant to community & school population.

More community perspective on the Board would be beneficial.

Little or no community representation on the Board.

There is a well-written nominating policy and process understood by the entire board

There are strong nominating tools – chart detailing prioritized skills, interview questions, ranking form, etc.

There is a nominating process and policy but it is not always followed or understood by all board members.

No nominating process or policy.

Defined orientation process for new board members.

Informal orientation process.

No specific orientation.

GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

&

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

STRONG

1

SATISFACTORY

2

WEAK

3

Please Indicate Your Assessment

(1, 2 or 3)

The bylaws are comprehensive, include reasonable term limits, and the full board understands them and their implications.

The bylaws are ok but could use some modification.

The bylaws were copied from another entity and are not understood by the board.

There is a written job description for the board of trustees, individual performance expectations for individual trustees and all board members have pledged to uphold these standards.

There is a general understanding of roles and responsibilities but documentation needs to occur.

There is confusion/tension about the responsibilities of Board members.

The board chair has the requisite skills, demeanor and facilitation capabilities to effectively serve as the board chair.

The chair has potential but needs coaching.

The chair is clearly the wrong person.

The board has all 4 officers, chair, vice-chair, treasurer and secretary. There are written job descriptions for these positions and they are clear about their roles and responsibilities.

The board has officers in name, but they have varying levels of understanding about their roles and responsibilities.

The board only has one or two officers.

If the board is using a charter management organization, the full board understands their contractual arrangements and there has been sufficient dialogue and documentation about who gets to decide on key issues.

The board is in the process of delineating roles and responsibilities and decision-making authority with their charter management organization.

The board is accepting in good faith that everything will be fine with their charter management organization.

The board has a few well-functioning committees.

The board understands that they need to develop committees and have a plan to transition to substantive committee work in between board meetings.

Need to clarify the role of the committees in relation to the Board.

The board wants to do everything as a committee of the whole and anticipates operating this way indefinitely.

GOVERNANCE- MANAGEMENT

STRONG

1

SATISFACTORY

2

WEAK

3

Please Indicate Your Assessment

(1, 2 or 3)

The board actively discusses which elements of key decisions are governance vs. management.

The board understands they need to be aware of governance v. management, but are unclear about where to draw the line.

The board is actively engaged in managing and has no plan to transition out of this founding role.

The school leader demonstrates a strong understanding of their role vis-à-vis effective governance.

The school leader is willing to play a role in governance but needs coaching.

The school leader sees little role for themselves in governance and is reluctant to devote any time to it.

The full board understands their relationship in developing, supporting and evaluating the School Leader.

The board is working towards clarifying their role in supporting and evaluating the School Leader.

The Board is unclear about their role in supporting and evaluating the School Leader.

There is a strong working relationship between School Leader and Board Chair.

There is a good working relationship between School Leader and Board Chair.

There is confusion/tension about the responsibilities of Board members in relation to School management.

STRONG

1

SATISFACTORY

2

WEAK

3

Please Indicate Your Assessment

(1, 2 or 3)

GOVERNANCE

EFFECTIVENESS

GOVERNING FOR WHAT MATTERS

The board has a clear action plan that delineates the key decisions they need to make by the time the doors open.

The board has a fairly good sense of what they need to be doing between now and the doors opening.

The board is very reactive and has no system in place to prepare for opening.

The board has established clear evaluation metrics for the School Leader.

The board is working on a plan to hold the School Leader accountable.

There is no plan to develop an evaluation process.

All board members have read and fully understand the critical components of the charter/key charter promises.

All board members have a general knowledge of critical components of the charter/key charter promises.

Only some of the board members are knowledgeable about critical components of the charter/charter promises.

The full board is equipped to execute their fiduciary responsibility. The full board understands the annual budget and is knowledgeable about the short and long-term financial outlook of the school.

A few key board members have a firm grasp of the school’s budget and longer-term financial projections.

The board seems unclear about the budget and the longer-term financial projections.

The board has a comprehensive plan to conduct oversight of the academic program.

The board is working on a plan to conduct oversight of the academic program.

The board has no plan to conduct oversight of the academic program.

MEETINGS

STRONG

1

SATISFACTORY

2

WEAK

3

Please Indicate Your Assessment

(1, 2 or 3)

The board is meeting regularly—1 to 2 times a month—but not so much that they are wearing out the board members—and the majority of board members are present at each meeting.

Board is meeting frequently but attendance is spotty.

The board has a hard time meeting consistently.

The board plans to meet once a month once the doors open.

The board is unclear how often they will meet once the school is open.

The board plans to meet every other month.

Board meetings do not last for more than 2 hours.

Board meetings are schedule for 2 hours but run over by 30 minutes or so.

Board meetings are open ended and tend to drag on.

There is a clear written agenda for each meeting that is strategic in nature and the time allotments are adhered to.

There is an agenda for the meeting, but it is not targeted enough.

There is no agenda for the meetings.

Information is always sent out ahead of time to frame board meeting discussions.

Advanced material is occasionally sent out.

Advanced materials are never sent out and a great deal of board meeting time is wasted by board members reading documents.

The meetings are well facilitated –the chair exhibits strong group process skills and a command of Robert’s Rules of Order.

The meetings are mostly well-facilitated, but the chair could use some coaching.

The meetings are poorly facilitated.

The board always meets in compliance with the Open Meeting Law and every board member understands it’s intent and implementation.

The board is mostly in compliance with the Open Meeting Law, but all board members don’t understand how to comply with the law.

The board is not in compliance and doesn’t understand the law

Meetings held in location convenient to public

Some, but not all meetings held in location convenient to public

Meetings located for Board Members rather than public convenience

Minutes and record of attendance are maintained for all meetings

Minutes and record of attendance are maintained for all meetings.

No one has responsibility for  recording of minutes

Typical expectations of trustees on governing boards

Your self-evaluation

1.     Demonstrate belief in and actively advocate for the values, mission and vision of the school.

·       Please give an example.

2.     Work cooperatively with fellow trustees to fulfill obligations of trusteeship articulated in Board job description and in these performance expectations.

·       Please give an example.

3.     Act in ways that contribute to the effective operation of the Board of Trustees, including but not limited to: focus on what’s good for the school not your personal opinion or agenda and support board decisions once made.

·       Please give an example.

4.     Prepare for and regularly attend and participate in board meetings.

5.     Serve on a committee, prepare for and regularly attend and participate in committee meetings.

6.     Participate in additional school start-up activities such student recruitment events, community meetings, and other ambassadorial events.

Typical expectations of trustees on governing boards

Your self-evaluation

7.     Reach out to diverse constituencies and help identify and cultivate relationships to support the school as donors, volunteers and advocates.

·       Please give an example.

8.     Use your personal and professional contacts and expertise for the benefit of the school.

·       Please give an example.

9.     Give an annual financial contribution to the best of your personal ability.

10.  Inform the school’s Board of any potential conflicts of interest that you may have, whether real or perceived, and abide by the decision of the Board related to this situation.