The Governance MOT: Why Every Board Needs a Check-Up
What is an External Review of Governance (ERG)?
According to the Department of Education (DfE) website, an external review of governance ‘examines the effectiveness of the board’. The review will examine the governance structure, operation and performance across the governing board, impact of decision making and support provided to the board, and compliance.
In short, a review should provide reassurance that the governing board is fit for purpose, compliant and effective.
.png)
Who Should Commission a Review, and When?
It is usually a board decision to commission any external review, but there is no reason why a review could not be recommended by the CEO, the chair, an external advisor or anyone else involved in governance. We have seen Ofsted inspectors suggesting external review to develop governance; it is important to see them as a developmental process and in many ways an extension of self-evaluation process that exist and are expected of governance.
DfE’s non-statutory guidance does not offer a prescribed timetable but recommends trusts to consider the process every three years, drawing on both the Charity Governance Code and the Academy Trust Governance Code. In our experience, trusts and schools should reflect on their effectiveness on an ongoing basis, and as part of that self-evaluation consider whether the board would benefit from an independent and objective view.
Why External Reviews Matter for Every School Type
Many leaders believe ERGs are just for academy trusts, however, effective governance applies to all schools, regardless of structure. This is reflected in sector demand, as annual governance reviews Judicium has undertaken are split evenly between Multi-Academy Trusts, Single Academy Trusts, and maintained schools.
While official DfE guidance notes there is no statutory requirement for reviews in maintained schools or academies, a voluntary review helps any board identify priorities, access targeted support, and improve effectiveness. For academy trusts, the DfE’s focus on Trust Standards means a recent external review is essential evidence not only to support growth decisions, but also to prepare for systemic trust-level evaluations. Ultimately, whether unlocking expansion for an academy or elevating standards for a maintained school, good governance remains universal.
How to Pick the Right Reviewer
Once a board decides to commission an ERG, the next step is selecting the right provider. Official DfE guidance states that reviews should be conducted by an independent governance expert. This recommendation serves as a clear decision-making framework. To satisfy these requirements, boards should carefully evaluate a prospective reviewer across three core pillars:
- A Proven Track Record: Boards should expect evidence detailing exactly how many external reviews the individual has successfully conducted to verify their practical experience
- Deep Sector Knowledge: Expert status should stem from firsthand experience as a trustee, governor, or governance professional across different educational phases and school sectors
- Strict Independence: Objectivity is vital to protecting the review’s integrity, meaning there must be no prior relationship or conflict of interest; reviewers must be external, even stepping aside if providing past training or advice to the school could make the final report look biased
Academy trusts can also maximise the value of this process by aligning it with their broader oversight goals. Since an external review naturally complements a trust’s internal scrutiny program, boards and audit committees can use these exact standards of expertise and independence to ensure the review delivers deep, meaningful assurance that strengthens the entire organisation.
.png)
What to Expect from ERGs
Once a provider is chosen, the entire review process typically takes four to six weeks considering processes are being followed, governors and trustees are available for interview and the ease of access to governance documents. To ensure a collaborative approach focused on improvement rather than inspection, a standard review generally follows a structure that would typically include:
- Initial scoping session with HT/CEO and Chair
- Arm’s-length (i.e. Remote) scrutiny of governance documentation (Scheme of Delegation, minutes, terms of reference, website content etc)
- Interviews (informed by documentation scrutiny) with Chair, vice, HT/CEO, SBM/CGO, a selection of governors/trustees and the clerk/GP
- Compiling a report detailing summary, key findings, recommendations and an action plan
Common Themes Found in Reviews
When the final report is delivered, the findings almost always highlight development areas across three core categories:
- Compliance: Serving as the structural backbone, reviews often uncover procedural issues like incomplete background checks in maintained schools or missed internal scrutiny steps in academy trusts
- Consistency: Ensuring school data matches across all public registries keeps information transparent, while checking that meeting minutes directly reflect the responsibilities outlined in committee terms of reference
- Effectiveness: Rooted deeply in both compliance and consistency, overall impact relies on minutes actively recording governors challenging and holding school leaders to account
Once the final report is formally submitted, the full report should be shared with the entire board to ensure total transparency. Then, the board should collectively agree on specific actions to take and set a strict timeline for implementation based on the reviewer’s recommendations. Progress against these targets should be reported back at subsequent meetings and leaders should consider a further review in the future in line with the aim of making governance better.
How Judicium can help...
You can find information regarding our Governance and Clerking service here.
Whether it's governance advice, clerking, training, or bespoke school suspensions and permanent exclusions guidance, our expert governance support, compliance guidance, and governing body development help schools and trusts build strong leadership, effective decision-making, and full regulatory compliance, ensuring a well-structured, accountable, and high-performing governance framework.
If you require any support in any of these steps or would like to talk to someone about some support for your school, please do not hesitate to call us on 0345 548 7000 or email enquiries@judicium.com.
Follow us on Twitter: @JudiciumEDU.
© This content is the exclusive property of Judicium Education. The works are intended to provide an overview of the sofa session you attend and/or to be a learning aid to assist you and your school. However, any redistribution or reproduction of part or all of the contents in any form is prohibited. You may not, except with our express written permission, distribute or exploit the content. Failure to follow this guidance may result in Judicium either preventing you from accessing our sessions and/or follow-up content.
Related content
(1).png)
Quieter campuses introduce unmonitored compliance gaps, complex safeguarding crossovers, and reduced leadership oversight. Learn how to bridge these operational gaps to ensure a seamless transition into the new term.
(1).png)
Prepare your school or MAT for upcoming statutory updates. Discover key shifts across online safety, mental health, and more.
(4)(2)(1)(2)(1)(1)(1).png)
In this blog, we consider how the new protections and obligations for employers under the ERA will impact schools/trusts using fixed-term contracts, zero-hours arrangements and casual worker agreements, and how to prepare for the forthcoming changes.
Sofa Sessions | H&S