Good governance

1. A REGIONAL CARE
ORGANISATION'S COMMITMENT
TO GOOD GOVERNANCE
OCTOBER 2019
CASE STUDY
www.governanceevaluator.com
solutions@governanceevaluator.com
0488 525 460

2. 02
INTRODUCTION
Our client is a medium sized care organisation in regional Victoria that has
provided services to a diverse community for almost 15 years.
A new industry framework and accreditation process prompted our client to
focus on its governance in order to identify opportunities to improve
performance and to better demonstrate their compliance.
www.governanceevaluator.com
METHOD
In January 2019, the board and CEO
completed the online Governance
Evaluator board evaluation.
Governance Evaluator then facilitated a
robust and healthy discussion in which
the evaluation results for both the whole
board and those of individual directors
were explored and also compared to the
CEO’s evaluation results.
Comparison of
individual director and
CEO evaluation results
was key for this client

3. 03
HIGHEST PERFORMING GOVERNANCE AREAS
All participants (including directors & CEO) were satisfied that their board
displays good governance in relation to its size, legal structure, the role of
the chair and the quality of its meeting minutes.
All participants were also satisfied with their processes around CEO review,
conflict of interest and financial oversight, and its understanding of the
distinction between governance and management.
96% of participants were satisfied that staff are appropriately credentialed
and supported to deliver safe, quality care within the context of the
organisation’s safety and quality processes.
www.governanceevaluator.com
KEY FINDINGS
0 25 50 75 100
Board size
Governance vs management
Conflict of interest
Chair role
Financial planning
CEO review
Meeting minutes
Legal structure
Staff who deliver safe care
FIG 1: HIGHEST PERFORMING GOVERNANCE AREAS
% participants satisfied with the board's performance

4. 03
Only 11% of participants (including directors & CEO) were satisfied with the
board’s governance performance in relation to its statement of risk appetite
and risk tolerances.
Less than a quarter of participants were satisfied with their processes
around director induction & board review, their understanding of trends and
issues in their industry and how the organisation’s strategic direction
addresses these factors.
44% of participants were satisfied with the board’s documents to guide
their key roles and responsibilities such as governance policies, strategic
plan and board calendar, the structure of board committees and the way
information acquired through stakeholder engagement informs strategic
planning and review processes.
And only 52% of participants were satisfied with the way the board
genuinely engages with its consumers in relation to its care, particularly in
terms of the board reviewing consumer experience surveys, complaints and
their resolution processes, and allocating time in meeting agendas to hear
the voice of consumers, their families and carers.
www.governanceevaluator.com
LOWEST PERFORMING GOVERNANCE AREAS
FIG 2: LOWEST PERFORMING GOVERNANCE AREAS
% participants satisfied with the board's performance
0 20 40 60
Risk appetite
Industry trends
Strategic insight
Director induction
Board review
Strategic formulation
Stakeholder influence
Governance policy
Board calendar
Committees structure
Partnering with consumers

5. When the CEO’s responses were compared to those of the board directors, it
became evident that the CEO was not satisfied with the board’s performance in
genuinely partnering with consumers, communicating with a wide range of
stakeholders on key initiatives and plans, and understanding the trends and
issues in their industry, while the average response of directors was partial or
full satisfaction with their performance in those areas.
On average, directors were satisfied with the board’s performance in
overseeing the organisation’s strategic direction, leading a safe and quality
culture with appropriate systems, their understanding of their roles &
responsibilities and their relationship with the CEO, while the CEO was only
partially satisfied with these areas.
03
www.governanceevaluator.com
CEO RESPONSE VS DIRECTOR RESPONSES
FIG 3: CEO VS DIRECTOR RESPONSES - AREAS WITH GREATEST
VARIATIONS IN SATISFACTION
Satisfied
Partially
satisfied
Not
satisfied

6. 04
OUTCOMES
With the support and guidance of Governance
Evaluator, the board developed an action plan to
address the key governance gaps and to improve the
alignment between CEO and directors.
Resources provided by Governance Evaluator were
linked to the action plan to assist the board and
executive in implementing each action. This was all
completed within Governance Evaluator's innovative
online platform.
Work is now in progress on a number of strategies to
strengthen the organisation’s governance
performance, including:
Review and development of a new strategic plan
Review of board subcommittees structure
Update of risk framework inclusive of risk appetite
statement, register and risk plan
Review of director induction material and process
Development of an annual board calendar
Review of governance policies and procedures
Development of genuine partnerships with
consumers through establishment of a consumer
reference group, provision of minutes of the
consumer reference group in the board pack and
space within the agenda to reflect on the consumer
experience.
www.governanceevaluator.com
Actions set by the client
aim to improve the
alignment between the
CEO and directors of the
board.

7. 07
NEXT STEPS
KEY BENEFITS ACHIEVED BY OUR CLIENT
BY ENGAGING IN THIS PROCESS
Our client found the Governance Evaluator process
invaluable in highlighting their governance strengths
and areas for improvement, and as importantly, giving
them the information and tools to set realistic,
achievable actions to improve their governance
performance.
The process also raised awareness of the board in
regard to areas of disconnect between directors and
the CEO. These have been constructively addressed,
leading to a more cohesive and positive culture.
Our client looks forward to completing the online
assessment again in the coming months to measure
their improved governance performance from the
commencement of this journey, and would have no
hesitation in recommending Governance Evaluator to
other boards.
www.governanceevaluator.com
The process has allowed our
client to constructively
address disconnects and in
doing so driving a more
cohesive and positive
culture.

8. 08
GET IN TOUCH
www.governanceevaluator.com
solutions@governanceevaluator.com
0488 525 460
HERE'S WHAT SOME OF OUR
OTHER CLIENTS HAVE TO SAY?
"Governance Evaluator
really understand
governance issues, the
need for accountability
and professionalism, and
are really helpful to our
organisation".
"A great process for any
board aspiring to
excellence to undertake"
"Governance Evaluator
has opened up areas of
improvement that our
board had not envisioned
before"
"All boards need to
evaluate their
performance. Governance
Evaluator provides them
with a focussed way to do
this without undue
workload on the voluntary
board"
"As part of my ongoing
directorship role the
Governance Evaluator
assists me in keeping a
focus on strategic and
governance issues and
maintaining the
separation of board and
operational issues"
"The Board Evaluation
system together with the
ongoing educational
programs are highly
valuable to boards
pursuing excellence in
governance"
Source: 2019 Governance Evaluator NPS Survey