For more than a decade, we have partnered with nonprofit boards and executive leaders to strengthen governance and leadership.

Our approach to Executive Director Performance Assessment is grounded in:

• Deep nonprofit governance expertise – We understand the unique responsibilities and dynamics between Boards and Executive Directors.

• Structured, best-practice evaluation frameworks – Our assessment model reflects established leadership domains and sound governance principles.

• Independent administration and disciplined process management – Ensuring objectivity, confidentiality, and clarity throughout the review.

Most importantly, we recognize that an Executive Director review is not just procedural – it is deeply relational. We design our process to support accountability while preserving trust and enabling constructive leadership dialogue.

Investing in people has always been central to our work.

The Executive Director Performance Assessment evaluates leadership effectiveness across core governance-aligned domains.

EDPA is intentionally a governance evaluation tool. It is designed to surface structured insight that informs the Board’s Executive Director performance conversation.

It is not designed to assess organization-specific operational metrics, program performance data, or replace the Board’s independent goal-setting, compensation, or strategic planning processes.

The assessment provides structured input to support sound governance - not a comprehensive organizational audit or implementation plan.

The EDPA assessment framework and survey questions are standardized across defined Executive Director leadership domains to support consistent and comparable feedback across assessments.

At this time, survey questions cannot be added or customized for individual organizations. While the survey framework is standardized, the analysis and resulting EDPA Report reflect the unique feedback patterns, leadership dynamics, and organizational context.

The Executive Director Performance Assessment focuses on leadership performance during the previous twelve-month period, allowing participants to provide feedback based on recent experience and the organization’s current context.

As a result, the assessment is generally best suited for organizations whose Executive Director has served in the role for approximately one year or longer.

When an Executive Director has been in the role for less than a year, the volume and depth of available feedback may be limited. In those situations, boards may benefit first from a goal-setting or onboarding review process before conducting a formal performance assessment.

The Board Chair and Executive Director collaborate during onboarding to confirm participant lists.

Board Members: All board members - including the Board Chair - are invited to complete the survey. We recommend participation from members who have served for at least four months to ensure meaningful feedback.

Executive Director: Currently, the Executive Director does not complete a self-assessment as part of the process.

Staff: Staff participation is typically included to provide additional perspective on Executive Director leadership. During onboarding, the Executive Director identifies staff participants and the Board Chair confirms the final participant list.

• If fewer than three staff are employed, staff will not be invited to participate.

• If three or more staff are employed, staff will be invited to complete the survey.

• Staff feedback is included in the final report only if at least three responses are received to preserve anonymity.

• For organizations with more than 25 staff, the Executive Director is advised to include direct reports and those with the most direct working relationship.

This structure ensures confidentiality while providing a meaningful perspective.

Some organizations operate with co-chairs or shared board leadership. To ensure clear communication and efficient coordination, we work with one designated Board Chair (or designated liaison) throughout the assessment process.

Organizations with co-chairs are simply asked to identify one individual who will serve as the primary point of contact with our team.

Strong participation supports representative and meaningful insights. We provide structured reminders throughout the survey period and partner with the Board Chair (or authorized liaison) to steward participation internally.

While we actively manage communications and follow-up, final participation levels remain within the organization’s control.

Yes. All survey responses are aggregated and anonymized. Individual comments are never attributed to specific participants.

Raw survey data is never shared. Feedback is included in reporting only when anonymity thresholds are met.

We aggregate responses to preserve confidentiality while synthesizing themes that provide sufficient context for meaningful interpretation.

In small response groups, findings are carefully framed to protect anonymity while maintaining clarity. EDPA is designed to surface patterns and themes - not attribute feedback to individuals.

The assessment typically requires 8-10 weeks from formal engagement launch to final report delivery, assuming timely submission of required materials and participant responses.

Formal engagement begins after the Board Chair has signed the user agreement and payment is received.

The Executive Director Performance Assessment typically requires 8-10 weeks from engagement launch to final report delivery, assuming timely participation from participants.

Many organizations align the review with their fiscal year-end. We encourage boards to plan ahead based on when they intend to hold their Executive Director performance discussion.

Common planning examples:

• June 30 fiscal year end – Early April launch

• December 31 fiscal year end – Early September launch

The EDPA process is designed to minimize administrative burden on board leadership. Most Board Chairs spend only a few hours throughout the engagement completing onboarding forms, confirming participant lists, and communicating with board members.

The Board Chair receives the full Executive Director Performance Assessment Report.

We advise that the report be used as a facilitation tool for the Board Chair to lead the performance discussion with the Executive Director. While the Board determines how materials are ultimately shared, we do not recommend distributing the full report verbatim. Boards may choose to share a summary or key themes as appropriate.

The EDPA Report is delivered exclusively to the Board Chair and is typically treated as confidential board governance material. The Board Chair determines how the report is used within the organization and whether insights from the assessment are shared more broadly with board leadership or the Executive Director. Staff participants do not receive the EDPA Report. Any broader sharing is determined by the Board Chair and/or board leadership.

No. The Board retains responsibility for performance conclusions, goal setting, and compensation decisions. The assessment provides structured input to inform that conversation.

The assessment provides structured guidance for facilitating the performance conversation and identifying priority areas. Ongoing action planning, goal development, or implementation support may be pursued separately if desired.

Yes. The assessment is designed to support consistent, year-over-year performance reviews and may be used as part of an ongoing leadership dialogue and governance practice.

EDPA is primarily an evaluative governance tool designed to support the Board’s formal assessment of Executive Director performance.

At the same time, a well-structured evaluation can provide valuable insights that support leadership growth and alignment for the year ahead.

We provide structured facilitation guidance grounded in governance best practices to help Board Chairs navigate difficult conversations constructively and professionally.