The Constitution (rule 2.4) and the Strategic Plan both commit to Te Tiriti, and the Plan names two actions, but neither says what that means for the Board. The Governance Policy lists a separate Te Tiriti o Waitangi Commitment document, which we were not given. We saw no record of who holds the Treaty Partner (iwi) place. Bringing values and tikanga into governance was one of the two lowest-scoring survey items.

Without agreed steps, the Board has little to act on or check its Te Tiriti commitment against. The Board already means to honour Te Tiriti, and the Deputy Chair leads the Board on tikanga, so the plan has a starting point. Six months allows time to talk with Ngāti Waewae before the Board agrees the plan.

The commitment to Te Tiriti referenced in the Constitution and the Strategic Plan can become a plan the whole Board can own, follow and review. The whole Board shares the work, with the Deputy Chair leading it.

• Consider asking the Deputy Chair to bring a first draft of the one-page, three-year Te Tiriti plan to a meeting. It could cover things such as pepeha for trustees, local history, karakia and the relationship with Arahura Marae.
• Consider a conversation with Ngāti Waewae about its recently released education policy, and how Buller REAP's own policies fit alongside it.
• Decide what the Treaty Partner position on the Board (set aside for an iwi representative) actually means for Buller REAP, as part of the Constitution update.
• Put a Tiriti-related learning opportunity into the Board's annual calendar each year.

• The Board's commitment to Te Tiriti, in its Constitution and Strategic Plan, remains with no agreed steps that we could see.
• Progress depends on invitations from partners such as Arahura Marae and on the Deputy Chair, and can stall if either changes.
• Māori and Te Tiriti perspectives at the Board rest mainly on the Deputy Chair, and could be lost if he leaves.

The Constitution cites the Incorporated Societies Act 1908, which the 2022 Act has replaced, and its review date passed in October 2025. Some clauses contradict each other, and rule 5.6 on Board size is garbled. The August 2026 agenda names seven Board members, one of them as an apology. We saw no record of who holds the places reserved for a Buller Māori Community representative and a Treaty Partner.

The Constitution is the Board's main source of authority, so it needs to be current and consistent. The Board may already be calling a Special General Meeting to change its financial year, and these amendments could go to the same meeting. Six months also gives time to write the three-year Te Tiriti plan this dashboard recommends, and use it to decide what the Treaty Partner position is for.

The founding documents match current law and how the Board works today. The Board also makes a deliberate, recorded decision about the two positions the Constitution reserves for a Buller Māori Community representative and a Treaty Partner.

• Consider asking two Board members to check the Constitution against the Incorporated Societies Act 2022, the law that now governs incorporated societies. They can also use the list of inconsistencies in our review of the Constitution, under Tuhinga | Document Review.
• Take the Constitution amendments to a Special General Meeting (a meeting of members outside the AGM). The Risk and Audit Committee's 5 August 2026 minutes say the proposed change of financial year would go to a special meeting, so the amendments could go to the same one. Rule 6.8 already lets an AGM set a different year-end, so the accountant could confirm which route is simpler.
• At the same time, update the Governance Policy's list of laws, as some have since been replaced. Update its list of related documents too. Consider bringing its July 2027 review date forward.
• Put the two reserved positions (for a Buller Māori Community representative and a Treaty Partner) on a Board agenda as a decision. The options could be to:
  • invite nominations for them, as rules 5.9 and 6.6 provide
  • ask Ngāti Waewae whom it would put forward as the Treaty Partner
  • record why they stay open, and revisit them at the next election
• Add conflicts of interest, trustee indemnity (protection for trustees against personal liability) and an expenses clause to the list of amendments.

• The Māori Community and Treaty Partner positions stay with no holder on record, and no recorded decision on either.
• In a dispute, a Constitution that cites the 1908 Act and contradicts itself is harder to rely on.
• With no one recorded in the Treaty Partner position, the Board's Treaty partnerships goal has no iwi voice formally at the table.

Conflicts of interest were on the July and August 2026 Board agendas, with a register of interests. The Constitution does not mention conflicts, indemnity or trustees' expenses, and no document we received says what a trustee does when they have one. Your Board Documents Checklist (the list of Board documents rated for this review) rates a Conflicts of Interest Policy and an expenses policy as in place.

A written policy protects the Board's decisions from challenge, and protects trustees when a conflict arises. Conflicts are handled well today, so the policy can come after more urgent work, within the next twelve months. The clauses on trustee protection and expenses could go to the same general meeting as the other Constitution updates.

The Board's practice of declaring conflicts at every meeting will be written into policy, so it continues when members change. Trustees will also know what protection from personal liability, and what expenses, they are entitled to.

• Ask the Manager for the existing conflicts of interest and expenses policies. If they are thin, consider writing two paragraphs on how conflicts are handled. Adopt the paragraphs and the 2026 Declarations of Interest form together as one policy.
• Confirm with the insurer what cover Board members hold, and include an indemnity clause (protection against personal liability) in the Constitution update this dashboard recommends.

A new member may declare an interest but not know whether to leave the room or stay out of the vote.

We did not see written delegations for the Chair or the Manager, the Financial Limitations Procedure or the Risk and Audit Committee's Terms of Reference. Your Board Documents Checklist (the list of Board documents rated for this review) rates all but the Procedure as in place, and 5 of 6 survey respondents said financial delegations are documented. The Constitution does not say which decisions need the full Board.

Written delegations protect the Board and the people who act for it, because everyone can check who may approve what. Today the rules work in practice, though 4 of 6 survey respondents were not sure whether the Risk and Audit Committee has Terms of Reference. Six months allows time to find the Financial Limitations Procedure and the Risk and Audit Committee's Terms of Reference, and then adopt a schedule.

Every trustee can see who decides what, in one place. The Board's rules stay the same when the Chair, the Manager or the committee members change.

• Ask the Manager for the Financial Limitations Procedure and the Risk and Audit Committee's Terms of Reference, bring them to the next meeting, and file them in BoardPro where every trustee can find them.
• Consider a half-page delegations schedule (a list of who may approve what, and up to what amount) covering the Chair, the Manager, the committee and the full Board. Use the dollar levels that apply in practice today, and have the Board adopt it.
• Agree the five most common kinds of Board decision and the approval each needs, and record them in the Board Meeting Procedures that the Constitution refers to.
• Consider a standing five-minute slot at each Board meeting for the Risk and Audit Committee to report what it did.

• Unwritten rules can be lost when the Chair or the Manager changes.
• A large purchase, loan or property decision could skip the full Board, because no rule we saw says which decisions need it.
• If the Risk and Audit Committee's Terms of Reference cannot be found, what it signs off rests on unwritten authority.

In the survey, 2 of 6 respondents said an executive decision-making group operates. This is a small group, such as the Chair and the Manager, that makes some decisions outside Board meetings. One respondent was not always comfortable with how decisions are reached, and two said they would like to contribute more. The Risk and Audit Committee is the Board's only committee, and trustees do not hold portfolios.

Boards decide better when every member contributes, and this Board already works well together. Six months gives newer trustees time to settle in before they take on a portfolio of their own (an area of the Board's work to follow and report on). Support for the Chair matters because much of the Board's work now goes through the Chair.

The governance work and the speaking time are shared across the whole Board, so decisions draw on everyone's knowledge. The Chair also gets a development plan and regular support from the Deputy Chair.

• Consider offering each trustee one small portfolio (an area to follow and report on) that matches their experience. Examples are rural communities, youth, tikanga, community reporting or Board development. Give each portfolio a two-line brief and a report slot on the annual calendar.
• Agree a round-the-table practice on decision items, so each trustee speaks before the vote.
• Consider a short trustee-only slot at each meeting (time without the Manager and staff in the room), so no one has to ask for it.
• Consider a standing check-in between the Chair and the Deputy Chair before each meeting.
• Consider writing the Chair's own development goals into a Board development plan, with an external governance mentor for the Chair for a year.

• Trustees who want to contribute more, as two survey answers say, have no set way to do it.
• Many decisions rest with the Chair and the Deputy Chair, as one survey answer says, so progress depends on two people.
• Decisions draw on fewer viewpoints than the Board has at the table.

Board papers go out before meetings, but in the August 2026 pack the AI policy came for decision with four sample policies, and no cover paper with a recommendation or draft resolution. The proposed change of financial year, which the agenda says would need a Constitution change, came as a discussion item with no paper attached. In the survey, 2 of the 5 respondents who answered asked for stronger minute-taking.

A board decides better when it sees the options and a recommendation before it votes, and a clear record lets it follow up what it agreed. Decision papers and fuller minutes can start at the next meeting.

Trustees can decide with confidence at the meeting, without putting decisions off. The Board's record also shows who is doing what, and by when.

• Consider a one-page decision paper template, and use it for the next two decisions on the agenda.
• Agree a minutes template that records each decision, who owns it and when it is due.
• Under the agenda's existing 'Actions from Previous Meetings' item, list each action, its owner and its due date, and have the Chair read through the list at each meeting.
• Confirm who provides the Board's secretarial services, which rule 5.7.4 of the Constitution asks the Board to arrange through the Manager: who takes the minutes and keeps the Board's records, and how much time this needs. Many boards choose a minute-taker who is not also presenting reports at the same meeting, so the record stays independent.
• Te Whare Hukahuka can provide decision paper and minutes templates.

• The Board's minutes stay brief, and it is harder to look back on why a decision was made.
• Trustees decide without a recommendation in front of them, and risk putting decisions off while they catch up.

The July 2026 minutes say the Board's Annual Work Plan is attached in BoardPro, and your Board Documents Checklist (the list of Board documents rated for this review) rates it as well used. It is not in the August 2026 pack, and we have not seen it. The August 2026 agenda and the July 2026 minutes both end with no date set for the next meeting. The August 2026 pack ran to 52 pages for a one-hour meeting.

A board that can see its year ahead can plan its work, prepare for each meeting and give each item enough time. Meetings already run reasonably well, so these are small changes that can start at the next meeting.

Trustees will see the Board's year ahead and know when they next meet. Each meeting will be long enough for the decisions its pack asks of the Board.

• Put the Annual Work Plan on page one of every board pack, with the current meeting highlighted.
• Set the next two meeting dates now, and keep a rolling calendar.
• Consider a standing call between the Chair and the Manager two weeks before each meeting to set the agenda.
• Consider moving policy reviews and the Annual Work Plan to one dedicated session each year, so neither is squeezed into a five-minute agenda slot.

• Trustees who do not open the Annual Work Plan in BoardPro cannot easily see which decisions and reports are coming up.
• With no date set when a meeting closes, the next one has to be arranged afterwards, and fewer trustees may be able to attend.

The Strategic Plan we received has four focused goals, no date, and never names the district, the education sectors or learners. It lists no barriers (what could stop it reaching its goals). The three actions under the Sustainability goal are all environmental, although its objective also names organisational sustainability. One respondent said the last review was light and could be more thorough.

A plan whose goals are not specific, and that names no measures, communities or time period, is hard to check progress against. Contract funding, named in 2 of the 3 survey answers about current risks, is not yet part of the strategy. Starting the refresh soon would help other recommendations, such as Board-level indicators, get under way, and it could use the SOAR conversation proposed on the August 2026 agenda.

The Board will be able to check progress against a plan that names its target communities, its time period and its main barriers. The plan's Sustainability goal will also cover the organisation's financial future.

• Consider running the SOAR exercise proposed on the August 2026 agenda, and use it to name the three or four biggest barriers to the Strategic Plan's goals, and write them into the plan.
• Give the Strategic Plan a title block on its first page with the organisation's name, the district, the sectors and the plan period.
• Add at least one action on financial and organisational sustainability to the Sustainability goal.
• Set a strategy review point every six months in the Annual Work Plan.
• Te Whare Hukahuka can guide the Board through a clear, yet robust, Strategy Refresh process.

• A reader cannot tell from the Strategic Plan which organisation it belongs to or where it works.
• Contract funding, named in 2 of the 3 survey answers about current risks, stays outside the strategy.

The Strategic Plan we received sets four goals with actions, and no targets, owners or review date. Your Board Documents Checklist (the list of Board documents rated for this review) rates an Annual Plan and Organisation KPIs as in place, which we did not receive. Nothing in the August 2026 pack reports against the strategic goals. Only 1 of 6 survey respondents said the Board has a clear set of KPIs that it uses.

Without agreed measures, the Board has no shared way to judge whether its strategy is working. In the survey, both respondents who answered the question on support asked for help with Board KPIs, so the Board is ready to start. A first short list can be agreed at one Board session, and a measure for each strategic goal can follow the Strategic Plan refresh.

A short list of measures gives trustees a regular, shared check on whether the Board and the organisation are making progress.

• Consider starting with three measures of the Board's own progress that came up in this Aromatawai: the share of actions agreed at Board meetings that are closed on time, the trustee training completed, and one gathering of the whole Board outside meetings each year. Each can be counted from the Board's own records. Then add one more measure for each of the four strategic goals.
• Note the measures at the top of the Manager's report and in the Annual Work Plan, so trustees see them at every meeting.
• Review the measures once a year alongside the Board's self-review survey, and talk through the results together.
• Te Whare Hukahuka can guide your Board in developing and refining a set of effective, Board-ready indicators.

• The Board keeps making decisions without its own measures, and cannot easily show the community or funders how the Board is going.
• The Board has no agreed measures to check progress on its own priorities, such as forecasting and trustee training.
• Agreed actions are harder to follow up, because the August 2026 agenda's 'Actions from Previous Meetings' item lists no actions, owners or due dates.

The 2026 budget summary shows one column for the whole organisation, with no view by contract and no list of contracts confirmed for 2027. Two income lines (contract funding and funding through REAP Aotearoa) make up 96% of budgeted income. On 5 August 2026 the Risk and Audit Committee noted that forecasting by contract would be highly beneficial, and 4 of 6 survey respondents raised forecasting.

Contract funding, including funding through REAP Aotearoa, makes up 96% of budgeted income, so the Board's main financial risk is a contract that costs more than its funding, or is not renewed. Today the full Board hears how each contract is tracking mainly when the Manager talks it through. A first one-page forecast can come to the next Board meeting, well before the next contracts renew.

Every trustee can easily see how each contract is tracking. The Board can then ask questions and make plans from a set of written figures that everyone has access to.

• Ask the Manager and the Finance Officer for a one-page table reported at meetings. It can be one row for each contract, showing months passed, amount spent, amount left and the likely financial position when the contract ends.
• Consider adding a status for each contract (confirmed, renewal pending, or at risk) and its end date, updated each quarter.
• Ask the organisation's external accountant whether using the 'tracking categories' feature in Xero, the accounting software, could produce the same one-page view of each contract for the 2027 budget.
• Have the Risk and Audit Committee consider whether the organisation needs more accounting support.

• Without a written forecast, the Board may not see that a contract will cost more than its funding until the money is spent.
• Detailed knowledge of each contract stays mainly with the Manager, which leaves the Board exposed if the Manager leaves suddenly.
• Without early warning, the Board has little time to cut costs, cover a shortfall from other income or seek more funding.

In the survey, three of the five respondents who answered named financial skills as the thing to strengthen. Two other answers pointed to financial expertise already on the Board that could be used more. The August 2026 pack included a Budget Variance Report with written notes from the Finance Officer.

Trustees share responsibility for decisions about money, so each of them needs to understand the figures. When only a few people are confident with the reports, oversight depends on those people. Training would then enable the trustees to utilise the one-page contract forecasts that this dashboard also recommends.

Every trustee can read the organisation's finance reports and ask informed questions about them. The Board makes full use of the financial skills it already has.

• Consider one facilitated session each year on reading Buller REAP's own finance reports, held locally or online, and repeat it whenever a new trustee joins.
• Run a short round at a Board meeting where each member says the skills they bring.
• Consider giving the trustees with a financial background a defined role, such as on the Risk and Audit Committee or reviewing the finance report before each meeting.
• Ask the Finance Officer to add a short summary box to the top of the Budget Variance Report. It could show how many months the organisation could run on its cash, the surplus or deficit against the budget for the months so far, and reserves.
• Consider making 'trustee training completed' one of the measures of progress that the Board tracks.

• Trustees approve figures that some of them say, in the survey, they want to understand better.
• The Board could pay for outside financial skills while some of what it needs already sits among its members.
• The Risk and Audit Committee keeps depending on the Manager to talk it through the figures.

The 2026 budget plans a $25,198 deficit with no note on why or how it is funded. An $8,000 repairs cost entered twice makes up about a third of it. There is no line for contingency (money set aside for the unexpected), capital (building and repair work) or reserves. The Balance Sheet shows $400,000 in term investments, and $42,615 was spent on a classroom the budget does not include.

When the budget leaves out reserves and capital works, the Board approves only part of the financial plan, and decisions about reserves and building work are made outside it. Building the 2027 budget is the natural point to make the change. Trustees will use the new lines more easily after training in reading the finance reports, which this dashboard also recommends.

The Board will see the whole financial plan on one page, including what it holds in reserve and what it plans to build or repair. Any planned deficit, such as the $25,198 in the 2026 budget, will come with its reason.

• Add three lines to the 2027 budget: a contingency fund, capital works (building and repair work), and transfers to or from reserves. Show reserves at the start and end of the year on the same page.
• Add a two-sentence note explaining any planned surplus or deficit.
• Correct the $8,000 office repairs cost that is entered twice in the 2026 budget, so it appears once, and split General Expenses and Workshop / Course programmes into their main parts.
• In the 2027 budget, add a column of the previous year's actual or forecast figures beside each line.

• The Board approves a deficit with no written note on why it is planned or how it will be funded.
• Decisions on reserves and capital works are made outside the budget the Board signs off.

The Balance Sheet in the August 2026 pack is titled 2025 and dated 31 December 2026, for figures that appear to be at 31 July. The Budget Variance Report sets seven months of actuals against the full-year budget and highlights no lines. Wages show 28% under the full-year budget, but run about 23% above budget for seven months. REAP Aotearoa funding shows 31% under, and the Finance Officer's note says it is on track.

Trustees trust reports more when the dates and titles are right, and they can act sooner when the important figures stand out. The fixes are small, and the Finance Officer can make them before the next board pack.

Trustees will be able to trust the finance reports on first reading. The lines that need a decision will stand out from the many that do not.

• Ask the Finance Officer to correct the Balance Sheet's title and date, which do not match the period its figures cover.
• Correct the $8,000 office repairs cost that is entered twice in the 2026 budget, so it appears once.
• Add a short summary box of the key figures to the Budget Variance Report (the report comparing spending with the budget), with a coloured mark beside any line more than 20% off the budget for the months so far.
• Keep a one-page list of all Board policies in the board pack, with the date each was last reviewed and when it is next due.

• Errors in dates and titles give trustees reason to doubt the financial reports.
• The few figures that need the Board's attention are hard to find among the many that do not.

The Manager has led Buller REAP for 5 years, after 10 years on the Board, and holds much of the contract knowledge. Your Board Documents Checklist (the list of Board documents rated for this review) rates succession and induction processes as up to date, while your Risk Register lists both as still to do, and we did not receive either. 4 of 6 survey respondents had no plan yet for succession in their role.

A small organisation that relies on one person's knowledge is exposed if that person leaves, and cover for leave is a good start. We saw no written plan for longer-term Manager succession, or for bringing new trustees up to speed. A one-page plan for the Manager's role can start at the next Board meeting, and a Board succession and induction plan can follow within six months.

Ensuring the organisation can keep running if the Manager steps away, with the whole Board knowing the plan. Each new trustee has a mentor to support them, and an induction pack.

• At the next Board meeting, ask the Manager and the Chair to prepare a one-page plan for Manager role succession. It can start by writing down the acting-Manager arrangement already used during leave, so the whole Board knows it.
• Have Board and Manager succession as a topic to discuss annually on the Board's Annual Work Plan.
• Consider pairing every new trustee with a named mentor for their first six months. Each would meet their mentor once before their first Board meeting, and have a short walk-through of BoardPro (the Board's online document system).
• Consider undertaking a board skills matrix (one-page stocktake of skills and representation) for board members before the next election round. Te Whare Hukahuka can provide a template.

• Fifteen years of organisational knowledge could leave with the Manager, and the Board would have to rebuild it quickly.
• New trustees can take more than a year to find their feet, as one survey answer says, and contribute less in that time.
• With no skills matrix (your Checklist rates it as not in place), the Board cannot show which skills to seek when a place opens.

In the survey, telling stakeholders about the Board's decisions and direction was one of the two lowest-scoring items. Apart from the annual report at the AGM (annual general meeting), the Board does not regularly report its decisions back to the community. The Strategic Plan we received also never names Buller, the district, the sectors or learners.

Members and funders who hear what the Board decides are more likely to trust it and to offer support. Reporting back also makes the Board accountable to the communities it serves. A short note after each meeting asks little of anyone, so it can start after the next meeting.

Members, partners and the community hear what the Board decided and where it is heading. People also know who to talk to about the organisation's direction.

• After each meeting, consider sending the society's members and partners a five-line note on what the Board decided, and posting it on the organisation's own channels.
• Add a short Board section to the annual report, beyond the Chair's address, on what the Board set out to do, what it did and what comes next.
• Consider one structured way each year to ask the community what it wants, such as a short survey or a hui in each rural centre.
• When the Strategic Plan is next refreshed, name the district, the sectors and the communities Buller REAP serves on its first page.

• The community sees the programmes but rarely the Board, and may not know who to talk to about direction.
• Members of the society hear a whole year of decisions at once, at the AGM.
• The Board hears communities in many ways, but has no set point each year to ask what they want for its direction.