What Governors Should Be Asking About Compliance

Introduction

Governance has become more demanding across education in recent years. Boards and Trusts are responsible for overseeing large estates, diverse staffing structures and complex statutory duties. Fire, water, gas, electrical safety, asbestos, climate action, emergency planning and countless operational checks all sit beneath the same question: are we safe, compliant and well managed? Governors do not need to know every technical detail, but they do need confidence that everything required is being done, checked and evidenced. As new expectations emerge, such as Climate Action Plans from September 2025 and the phased introduction of Martyn’s Law, this need for structured oversight becomes even clearer. Effective governance relies on clarity, visibility and assurance.

The Changing Compliance Landscape

Compliance expectations for education providers have expanded significantly. Statutory duties across fire, water hygiene, asbestos, electrical and gas remain essential, but new areas of responsibility now require board oversight. Climate Action Plans introduce governance-linked reporting on energy, risk and sustainability. Martyn’s Law will require responsible persons to formalise emergency procedures, training and evidence of review. At the same time, internal audits increasingly expect to see clear, consistent and centrally accessible evidence. The organisations that cope best with these pressures are those that adopt structured approaches that connect site-level activity to trust-level assurance. As seen in St Clare CMAT’s audit experience, confidence increases when auditors can access evidence directly through a centralised system. Boards now need clarity not only on what must be done, but also on how visibility is being achieved.

Five Questions Every Board Should Ask

These five questions give governors a practical way to understand compliance without drowning in technical detail.

1. Do we have full visibility of statutory and best-practice tasks across every site?

Many organisations rely on spreadsheets or shared drives that evolve differently at each school. This creates version confusion, inconsistent expectations and risk blind spots. A structured framework that captures all statutory and recommended tasks – from fire alarm testing to climate risk assessments – provides the baseline for oversight. The Education Compliance Framework, built from over 700 mapped tasks across 37 categories, is one example of how clarity and consistency can be created at scale.

2. How do we know when something becomes overdue?

Risk often emerges quietly, not through large gaps but through small delays that compound over time. A live system can highlight overdue checks, emerging patterns and workload pressures. Dashboards that group by site or category help governors see trends rather than isolated incidents. This visibility supports earlier intervention and calmer discussions, avoiding the end-of-term rush that often accompanies audit preparation.

3. What evidence do we see, and how is it stored?

Most compliance failures are not due to work not being done, but because evidence is scattered or inaccessible. Boards should expect to see clear, version-controlled evidence for statutory checks such as gas servicing, fire safety and water hygiene. St Clare CMAT’s audit showed the benefits of allowing auditors direct access to certificates and task evidence through a central system, reducing stress for site teams and giving the board stronger assurance.

4. Are we confident in the accuracy and consistency of our data?

When each school uses its own documents or processes, inconsistency becomes inevitable. Governors should ask how tasks, frequencies and forms are standardised and whether configuration reflects the real structure of the estate. A well-designed framework, supported by tailored configuration as outlined in your Implementation Guide, ensures consistency without overwhelming teams.

5. How are we preparing for emerging responsibilities such as Climate Action Plans and Martyn’s Law?

Boards need assurance that new duties are understood, planned for and embedded into the compliance cycle. Climate Action Plans introduce new governance reporting and annual review expectations. Martyn’s Law will require responsible persons to formalise emergency procedures, training records and evidence of review. These areas should sit alongside established estates compliance duties, not separate from them. A central framework that incorporates new requirements avoids fragmented, ad hoc responses.

Turning Answers into Action

Once these questions have been explored, governors need mechanisms that turn insight into ongoing assurance. A single compliance dashboard gives a trust-level view of every site, category and overdue task. This moves the conversation from anecdotal updates to objective data. Monthly or termly reporting cycles create routine rather than reactive governance. The Implementation Guide describes how consistent configuration, ongoing review and task monitoring embed this visibility into daily operations. Boards that adopt structured reporting find that discussions become calmer, more focused and more supportive because everyone is working from the same picture.

The Board’s Role in Building a Compliance Culture

Governance is not only about oversight. It also shapes culture. As described in The Quiet Foundation of Safety, compliance succeeds when leadership connects tasks to purpose, values and care. Governors can reinforce this culture by asking questions that focus on learning rather than blame. Recognising the effort behind routine checks, understanding the workload pressures faced by estates teams and supporting resource decisions all contribute to stronger, safer compliance practices. When boards demonstrate that compliance is about protecting people rather than avoiding criticism, staff engagement increases significantly.

Summary

Governors play a crucial role in sustaining safe, compliant and well managed estates. By asking clear, structured questions about visibility, evidence, consistency and emerging duties, boards gain the assurance they need without becoming lost in technical detail. A strong framework, clear configuration and live reporting turn compliance from a collection of spreadsheets into a manageable, transparent system. Effective governance creates confidence not only at the board table but across every site, helping staff feel supported and recognised.