Executive Director/CEO Goals and timeline

Board Input Regarding Timeline:

• LA: Read evaluation prior to meeting. Make notes and ask questions along the way, throughout the year for the evaluation & evaluation.
• SH: Agree with Larry; we the board would like to see and give input to the evaluator for consideration.
• WH: Board member input is critical, even if they aren't an evaluator. 
• SF: Giving suggestions has been done in the past as well.
• SH: If Executive Director/CEO has major performance issue, I wouldn't feel comfortable adding something negative, as board is supposed to be the highest court. Consider comments, but no need to add them to evaluation.
• WH: Performance issues would be known long before, the board would need to know as it is their duty.
• SF: Does authorizing superintendent know avenue to voice concerns? Evaluator, Executive Director/CEO?
• WH: Currently Kurt is the point of contact. We would need to establish the new point of contact, but it should go to the Board President. Process needs to be set to respect CEO.
• SF: Would it go to closed session?
• WH: We would need to establish that.
• HG: I would be happy to set up a procedure and introduction to President Hall.
• MH: Agree, Board President would be involved in closed session, discuss issues if they come up. Want to encourage board members to be an evaluator to know Executive Director/CEO and school more. Bi-monthly review of evaluation process would be plenty.

Board Input on Executive Director/CEO Goals:

• SF: I like Goal #2 in delegating to your team. It's hard to do, but it's a great thing to do.
• SH: These are aggressive goals and time consuming, but I believe Heidi is up to the challenge.
• LA: I like that the Goals are data driven. I don't like the 100% staff retention as there are things that are beyond your control. 95% is a great goal, 100% may not be attainable.
• MH: Agree with Larry; Heidi, you hone things down to make it a workable piece. Great effort.
• WH: The one constant you have in your job is change. So alter Goal in regards to staff retention.

Board input on Board Goals:

• LA: Beneficial to add who would step in (Executive Director or Board Members) in unforeseeable situations. 
• WH: Succession or substitution process is important to create. A policy needs to be established.
• MH: I think Heidi would know who would be her designee in her absence; good idea to let them know and identify them.
• WH: Also need a process to identify the board.
• SF: All depends on how the school is set up.

Board Input on Evaluation template:

• WH: One caution; the danger on giving input at any time, is that the CEO may be prone to running around trying to satisfy all input given. Better to have input given at a board meeting.
• LA: Agreed.
• MH: Agreed, you may open up yourself for a war with disagreeing board members.
• SH: Isn't this the responsibility of the Board President, to wrangle in the board members?
• SF: Agreed on WH comment.

Evaluator Selection:

• SH: I like the two-person committee; I think we should have considered that a few months ago.
• LA: Two-person committee is working.
• SF: What we're currently doing is working (two-person).
• MH: This process works. I'm a willing participant, but would like to share this with anyone else. It was a great experience in the past. Having the Board president in the process is important.
• SF: Agreed, president can also designate anyone.
• WH: I volunteer - unless someone else would like to.
• LA: I have an interest in volunteering
• WH: Susan and Steve would not be part of this group. Decision: LA and WH.