← Back to the pack
Artefact 04 of 05 · The Checklist

Governing Body Scrutiny Checklist

One page of A4. Use it whenever the complaints reports reach the board: every term with the termly summary, and once a year with the annual review. Print, mark, sign. The Clerk records the responses in the minutes as evidence of scrutiny.

A board's job on complaints work is to scrutinise, not to handle. The questions below give the Chair and Clerk a structured set to work through whenever the complaints reports come to the board: every term with the light termly summary, and once a year with the deeper annual review. Use it as a paper at FGB or the relevant committee, or as a checklist for the Chair's preparation. The one-page version below is designed to print cleanly to A4 portrait.

Where this fits. This checklist is designed for Stage 3 schools onwards, where the board engages with complaints work formally: every term alongside the termly summary, and once a year alongside the annual review. Schools at Stage 1 or 2 do not need to run it yet. See the four stages on the pack page.

Governance scrutiny · Complaints & Concerns

Governing Body Scrutiny Checklist

For use alongside the school's complaints reports (termly summary and annual review). Issued by the School Governance Assurance Framework as part of the free Culture of Resolution resource pack.

Register hygiene

Establish that the data being summarised is real.
  • Is every concern raised in the period covered logged in the register, however small?
  • Is the register held centrally, with one named owner, and reviewed termly by SLT?
  • Are anonymous concerns considered alongside named ones, where their substance is credible?
  • Has the Headteacher signed off the register before this report was produced?
  • Are the subject categories and theme tags applied consistently across the period?

Trends and response

Test that the school is learning, not only filing.
  • What are the top themes in this report, and over the last twelve months?
  • For each theme, what has the school changed in response? Is the action dated, owned, and status-tracked?
  • Where a family or stakeholder appears in the register more than once, has the underlying issue been addressed structurally as well as individually?
  • Are resolution times getting faster or slower compared to the previous reporting period, and is the school's response appropriate?
  • Are there any repeat themes appearing in three or more of the last four terms? If so, what is the plan?

Governance posture

Test the board's own conduct on this work.
  • Where does the complaints summary sit in the FGB papers, and is it a standing item?
  • Has the published complaints procedure been reviewed within the last two to three years (DfE best practice)?
  • Is there evidence the board has scrutinised this work, not only received it? (Recorded questions and responses in the minutes are the evidence.)
  • Where a governor is named in a concern or complaint, has that governor correctly recused from related discussions?
  • Is there a designated link governor for stakeholder voice who maintains the working relationship with the register's owner between meetings?

Serial and unreasonable complaints

A specific check, when relevant.
  • Has any case been marked under the DfE model policy for managing serial and unreasonable complaints during the period covered?
  • If so, was the board informed at the next meeting, and is the underlying record sufficient to defend that decision?
  • Is the serial-marked decision held by the Headteacher in line with the published policy, with the board's awareness rather than the board's vote?

Year-on-year posture

The longest-horizon question.
  • Compared to twelve months ago, is the school more confident, less confident, or unchanged in its ability to describe what stakeholders are telling it and what it has done in response?
Signed off by Chair
Date
Recorded in minutes by Clerk