Bill presented an update on the strategic plan.  Sherriff asked about resource contention and how that was impacting this work.  Bill explained that priorities that were "owned" by a senior level leader (e.g., Talent work led by Wendy; academic work led by Jess) were progressing well.  Bill said that his capacity did impact what work was getting done in the alumni supports, and fundraising goals, and regional landscape goals because he was leading those and there were competing priorities. 

Sherriff asked how we would know if we were making progress.  E.g., funding - where do we want to go?  What does good actually look like?  This will help us orient our conversation.  Bill said this is something that is not as clear for goals that are focused on planning (funding, alumni supports), while they are more clear for goals that are more specific (talent, academics.). He said this is something he and the board would need to get more clear on as it progresses.
 

Bill shared the draft ED strategic priorities.

Sherriff noted that he and Bill have discussed that it is important for Bill to drive these goals.

Bob asked about the purpose of an advisory board.  He noted that he’s seen these seen in two ways - (1) to build a pipeline of funders and to give the school some additional status and (2) to have a panel of experts.  He shared that it would be hard in his view to blend these two purposes.  

Bill shared that creating an advisory board is not necessarily a priority but that building and broadening the school's base of support is a priority.  He said this might be done with a goal to engage a certain number of people with the school by the end of the year.  

Donna suggested that instead of creating an advisory board, the board should support Bill's effort to meet with more people externally, and that they should be aware of how this focus may impact the way he's serving in his role currently.   

Bob suggested that Bill seek to join a board that is supportive of state and national charter school efforts.  He endorsed the idea of devoting more time to this purpose.

Bill shared the rationale for revising the job description.  Donna shared that she did this recently at her organization and this was really helpful.  It provided an opportunity for her to share what she viewed the role to be as it had evolved and align with the board.

Sherriff asked how we should think of this as it relates to the organizational goals.  

Sarah suggested that this could be something that helps Bill and the board think about how much of his time is devoted to what -- i.e., a greater amount on strategic priorities or the ongoing organizational goals?

Bill will make updates to these goals based on the committee's feedback.  The governance committee will report out on this conversation at the next board meeting.
 

Bill asked if people had ideas for generating strong leads.  Donna suggested the OnBoard matching event.  Bill will plan to sign up for that event.

Sherriff suggested really thinking about our needs so we could be really targeted in our outreach. 

The committee discussed current needs, including the possibility of bringing on someone with high school and/or higher education experience and someone else with legal expeirence.

Bill and the Committee will continue to network with these roles in mind.