governance good practice guide

board self-assessment: process and cycle

what is board self-assessment and why do we do it?

Further education college boards are accountable to various external agencies for the use of public funds. Complying with the requirements of these regulatory bodies tells us how governance in the college looks from the outside – whether or not it is meeting external priorities and requirements.

Self-assessment gives an opportunity to reflect on how it feels from the inside: are members satisfied with how they operate; are there changes they would like to make?

If board members are dissatisfied – e.g. with how their meetings are run, or their lack of apparent impact on the learner experience – then members need to analyse why and agree how to change things.

The board's self-assessment and improvement process should be:

• appropriate to the individual board and its position in terms of performance
• led and managed effectively
• an integral part of the college's leadership, management and governance.

the role of governors in self-assessment

While college governors and managers have a shared role in leading college self-assessment and improvement, governors have two distinct roles:

1. reviewing the college's self-assessment and monitoring the resulting Quality Improvement Plan (QIP)
2. being involved in self-assessment of the board.

The governing board, therefore, needs to take ownership of its own self-assessment and of the quality of the board's performance, as well as monitoring the performance of the college.

There are many ways in which governors may do this.

For example, by:

• ensuring there is a framework for systematically collecting and analysing issues and views from all areas of the college (learners, employers, staff) and brought together with college data in the Self-Assessment Report (SAR) and QIP
• reviewing the self-assessment process and draft self-assessment report as a board through a committee
• using a small group of governors in a task group
• one or more governors sitting on a college SAR validation panel
• reviewing the results of surveys of staff, students, employers; observations of teaching and learning; inspection grades
• monitoring progress against the QIP (as a board or through a committee) and ensuring that real improvement is taking place.

The governing board must approve the SAR before it is submitted to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) and the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted).

different frameworks for board self-assessment and improvement

There is no one right way to self-assess.

Boards should select the framework, against which they measure and improve their performance, that best suits their needs. This will vary according to the current stage of board performance.

For example, it is a core requirement that governing boards should comply with regulations regarding their role and responsibilities. If this is not the case, they should make it a priority to ensure that they are compliant. Once they are, they can build on this and travel beyond compliance.

Such a board might use as the most appropriate frameworks against which to self-assess and improve:

• the Self-Assessment Report Questionnaire (SARQ)
• Regularity Audit Questionnaires
• Governance Health Check
• issues arising from Annual Internal Audit of Corporate Governance.

The more mature a board is in terms of maintaining compliance, the more it will look for more creative, developmental approaches to broaden its review of its own performance – moving from satisfactory to good, from good to excellent, but never losing sight of compliance as its firm foundation.

Many boards use the Common Inspection Framework (CIF) key question 5 to judge and improve their performance: 'How effective are leadership and management in raising achievement and supporting all learners?'

Using CIF key question 5 gives the board members the opportunity to assess themselves in terms of Ofsted's criteria for inspection, which provide national benchmark references of quality and effectiveness.

In addition to question 5, boards can benefit from looking at the other four key questions of the CIF. It helps them understand the bigger college picture and can highlight gaps in their knowledge about the college's overall performance.

Go to the page on the Common Inspection Framework

Some college boards measure their performance against the Further Education National Training Organisation (FENTO) National Standards for Governance. Others may look outside the FE college sector to other frameworks, such as the:

• Housing Corporation's Treading the Boards
  
• Audit Commission's Self-Assessment Framework
  
• Good Governance Standards for Public Services (GGSPS)
  Click here for information on GGSPS
• Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) Local Government Code of Practice (which is based on the GGSPS).

different approaches to board self-assessment and improvement

In addition to using frameworks against which to measure and improve governance performance, boards will also use a variety of different methods for analysing and improving the way they operate.

For example, a mature board can benefit from a 'back to basics' approach that looks creatively at value-added questions, with prompts and group work tailored to the individual board's stage of development.

This can help to identify qualitative issues for improvement relating to effectiveness and leadership, and to clarify roles. Questionnaires or discussion points may be sent out in advance of any group activity, along with an analysis of in-year self-assessment of board and committee meetings, and so on, to help inform discussion.

Another approach could be to use a different model of governance – e.g. the Carver model or the Learning Board as a lens through which to establish whether the current way of working needs to change in order to improve effectiveness. These help pinpoint areas of concern and possible solutions without the need for wholesale change.

Download more information about the Carver model (PDF document)

Download more information about the Learning Board (PDF document)

Involving the entire board in self-assessment provides a rare opportunity for reflection. It provides a focus on the board itself rather than on the college, and can result in a useful team-building session – with an honest and productive discussion on how members feel the board is performing and how it could improve.

The clerk may record the outcomes and actions from such a board working session, draft the governance section of the SAR and QIP, and/or lead some or all of the session. But it is board members themselves who provide the input and the ideas. It is essential that board members are proactive (rather than reactive) in this respect, if they are to take ownership of their own performance and its improvement.

The following links reveal some of the resources boards may use for self-assessment.

Go to the page on models of governance in the roles and responsibilities section

Go to the page on modes of governance in the roles and responsibilities section

conclusion

In reality, most colleges will use a number of frameworks and approaches for developmental and compliance purposes, and these may change as the board matures. But it is important to review the appropriateness of the frameworks periodically to see how they are helping the board to move towards excellence.

board self-assessment process