Skip to Content
TS-BGS-08 Trust & Stewardship Board Governance & Strategy CORE Compliance v2.9.7

Shūrā decisions formally minuted with rationale, dissent, and timely approval

Assessing whether the organization documents its decision-making processes, particularly those involving consultation (shūrā), through formal minutes that record the rationale, diverse perspectives (adab al-ikhtilāf), and final resolve (azm). Rooted in the Islamic principles of amānah (trust) and ḥifẓ al-ḥuqūq (preservation of rights), this rigorous documentation safeguards institutional integrity. It ensures that decisions are traceable, compliant with regulatory standards, and preserved for accountability before both stakeholders and the Divine.

Assessment Questions
  1. Does the Board have an approved 'Schedule of Matters Reserved' and materiality thresholds to define which decisions must be formally minuted?
  2. Do minutes explicitly evidence 'reasonable care and skill' by linking decisions to organizational objects, risks, and beneficiary impact?
  3. Is there a strict approval workflow (Draft -> Circulate -> Approve -> Adopt) with version control?
  4. Are 'dissent' and 'challenge' recorded objectively, focusing on evidence rather than personal attributes (adab al-ikhtilāf)?
  5. Is there a single Action Register linked to minutes with owners, due dates, and escalation rules for overdue items?
  6. How are out-of-meeting decisions (emails/written resolutions) captured in a formal Decision Log and ratified?
  7. What data protection controls (classification, retention, access) are applied to minutes, and how are SARs handled?
  8. Are redacted summaries of key decisions published for members/public to ensure transparency?
  9. Does the organization conduct a periodic quality audit of minutes against a compliance checklist?
  10. How are conflicts of interest, recusals, and safeguarding escalations recorded and managed?
Evidence Requirements
  • Board-approved 'Schedule of Matters Reserved' and Delegations Matrix.
  • Samples of minutes showing 'reasonable care and skill' (rationale, options, risks).
  • Evidence of approval workflow (e.g., email trails, e-signatures, version controlled drafts).
  • Action Register showing owners, dates, and status updates.
  • Decision Log for out-of-meeting resolutions.
  • Data Protection Policy for records (classification labels, retention schedule).
  • Redacted 'Key Decisions' summaries prepared for publication.
  • Completed quality audit checklists for minute compliance.
  • Conflict of Interest Register and corresponding minute extracts.
  • DPIA for audio recording (if applicable).
Scoring Guidelines
LevelRatingDescription
5 5/5 100% compliance with template and Schedule of Matters Reserved; minutes indexed/tagged for strategy review; 95%+ circulated within 10 days; Action Register fully operational with <10% overdue; annual review of decision quality.
4 4/5 ≥ 90% minuted; Schedule of Matters Reserved exists; approval workflow followed; Action Register in place; most minutes include full rationale and dissent.
3 3/5 ≥ 75% minuted; template used but rationale/dissent sometimes generic; Action Register exists but not linked to all minutes; timeliness varies.
2 2/5 < 75% minuted; no formal Schedule of Matters Reserved; rare recording of rationale/dissent; no formal action tracking.
1 1/5 No formal minutes or severe deficiencies in documentation.

Related Criteria

TS-BGS-01 Trustee board meetings are scheduled, quorate, and minuted TS-BGS-02 Trustees set direction & strategy TS-BGS-03 Trustees meet statutory reporting TS-BGS-04 Finance represented in decisions TS-BGS-05 Annual board and executive skills-gap analysis conducted and actioned
Version
2.9.7 2025-11-05

Discussion (1)

Administrator 2026-03-07 11:07:41.292778

📋 **Version updated: 1.0.0 → 2.9.7** **Changes:** Updated islamic_references from mizan-297.json

Sign in to post a comment.

Back to Criteria