Nonprofit Board Self‐Assessment Matrix: Improving the Board's Performance

Indicator Poor Average Good Distinctive Comments Goal setting for the board as a follow‐on to strategic planning No specific goals exist for the board Board translates strategic plan into goals in an ad‐hoc manner and does not assign responsibilities to board committees Board translates strategic plan into goals only in certain categories like fundraising Board translates the strategic plan for the organization into a set of concrete goals for the board and board committees, including timelines and required staff support Evaluation of board performance against goals No evaluation is conducted by the board on its performance against the goals Board informally evaluates its performance on major objectives Board formally evaluates its performance on major goals but no feedback mechanism exists to improve board functioning Board evaluates its performance against the goals and uses the lessons learned to develop plans to improve board effectiveness Process for evaluating individual directors No process in place for individual member performance Evaluations of individual directors occur informally as part of re‐nomination process. Evaluations are light touch and board seems to have a lot of “dead wood” Board committee in place to evaluate individual director performance jointly with director at time of renomination; most board members are seen as valuable contributors to organization governance Board committee in place to evaluate individual director performance periodically and jointly discusses how to help a director give his/her best to the organization; little collective tolerance for directors who are not active in organization governance and support Developing a plan for improving board performance over time Board discussion of its own performance is very limited and largely unstructured Informal process for evaluating board performance is largely CEO/chair driven and plan for improvement is not widely known by directors Board organizes to review performance every several years; board leadership generally seen to have a plan for improving performance Formal process (e.g., annual self‐assessment) results in a clear plan for improvement; board collectively owns the topic of improving its value to the organization Source: McKinsey & Company Nonprofit Board Self‐Assessment Tool—Long Form