Board Evaluation

Periodic assessments of a board’s effectiveness is a requirement of the Jersey Financial Services Commission’s (JFSC) Code of Practice. In addition, there are clear benefits for boards of financial services firms and regulated client entities to undertake evaluations as part of good governance and continuous improvement processes. 

As recognized experts in governance, risk and compliance, Duff & Phelps assists boards to enhance their effectiveness. We offer:

• A robust board evaluation approach in-line with generally accepted corporate governance standards, including fitness and proprietary obligations.
• An independent perspective benchmarked against industry practice and focused on performance improvement, not only compliance and operational issues.
• Extensive performance improvement, financial services and review expertise, including appointment as a Reporting Professional initiated by the JFSC.
• An experienced senior team, consisting of managing directors who are board and committee members, subject matter and industry experts. 

Core evaluation areas

Tailored to our client’s business context, our evaluation explores nine areas vital to a board’s effectiveness:

1. Role of the board
2. Board composition
3. Board dynamic
4. Governance framework
5. Engagement with stakeholders
6. Board operating framework
7. Reporting and information 
8. Learning and development
9. Evaluation

Our robust approach

Our Board Evaluation approach provides boards with clear insights and practical recommendations for improvement.

Phase 1: Project set-up

• Inception meeting to discuss the business context and agree the review scope and objectives. 

Phase 2: Document review

• Review the adequacy of board documentation, policies, procedures and management information. 

Phase 3: Online survey

• 75 questions, completed by all board members and stakeholders (as agreed upon) who interact with the board such as committee chairs and management.

Phase 4: Interviews

• Interviews with preferably all board directors; at a minimum, the chairman, senior independent director, chairs of board committees and CEO.

Phase 5: Gap analysis

• Corroborate findings and proposed recommendations, to discuss with the chairman/senior independent director.

Phase 6: Reporting

• Finalize report and present key findings and recommendations to the board. 

We can also incorporate the following optional methods and support:

• Observation of the board in action
• Process walk-throughs and case studies of key issues, escalation routes and approval process
• Workshop facilitation to establish the action plan
• Project management of action plan
• Advice and remediation support for action plan projects