Succession plan identifies young leaders
This criterion assesses whether the organization has developed a formal succession plan that specifically identifies individuals under 35 years of age for future leadership roles. It evaluates the organization's commitment to generational renewal, leadership continuity, and intentional development of young talent. The under‑35 focus is implemented as Equality Act 2010 positive action to address age under‑representation; it does not confer automatic preference at appointment. All appointments remain merit‑based (qawiyy & amīn) and within the charity’s governing document and trustee recruitment rules. Covers trustees (including chair), CEO/senior leadership, and heads of key functions.
- How does the organization identify potential future leaders from younger generations?
- Is there a formal, documented succession plan that specifically addresses the identification and development of young leaders (e.g., under 35)?
- How does the charity apply Equality Act positive action (s.158/s.159) to widen the under‑35 pipeline while keeping appointments merit-based?
- What in the governing document determines who can appoint/elect trustees and how is this reflected in the succession pathway?
- What personal data is held for pipeline members, what is the lawful basis, and how are retention/access managed (GDPR)?
- What specific development programs, mentorship opportunities, or training are provided to the identified young leaders?
- How is the effectiveness of the youth leadership development program measured (e.g., readiness movement, IDP completion)?
- Has the emergency succession protocol for key roles been tested in the last 12 months? What were the results?
- Can you provide examples of how the succession plan has ensured leadership continuity with talent developed from within the organization's younger cohort?
- Documented Succession Plan with a dedicated section on emerging/young leaders.
- Key Roles Register + Readiness Matrix (with defined levels).
- Minutes of leadership or board meetings where youth succession is discussed.
- Individual Development Plans (IDPs) for identified young leaders.
- Succession pipeline privacy notice + RoPA entry + retention schedule.
- Trustee/senior manager eligibility declarations (automatic disqualification) and conflict-of-interest forms.
- Emergency succession test report (scenario, actions, time-to-decision, lessons learned).
- Records of mentorship programs or training courses attended by these individuals.
- Organizational charts or internal announcements showing promotions of individuals who were part of the youth succession pipeline.
| Level | Rating | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | 5/5 | Comprehensive succession plan with 3+ qualified under-35 leaders. ≥75% key roles have an under‑35 successor (R2+); dashboard with readiness and EDI by age reviewed quarterly. ≥1 evidenced progression outcome in last 24 months (e.g., appointment, handover, or external placement) OR documented rationale (no vacancies) plus completed readiness improvements for ≥2 candidates. Emergency succession plan tested in last 12 months; full GDPR compliance. |
| 4 | 4/5 | Good succession plan with at least 2 under-35 leaders and appropriate development support. ≥50% role coverage; IDPs and mentors assigned; privacy notice issued to candidates; annual review evidenced in board minutes. |
| 3 | 3/5 | Basic succession plan with 2 under-35 leaders but limited development components. Documented plan naming ≥2 under‑35s; baseline readiness assessment completed; basic pathways; limited delivery evidence. |
| 2 | 2/5 | Succession planning with fewer than 2 under-35 leaders identified or plan lacks youth provisions. |
| 1 | 1/5 | No succession plan or no young leaders identified. |
Related Criteria
Discussion (1)
📋 **Version updated: 1.0.0 → 2.9.7** **Changes:** Updated islamic_references from mizan-297.json
Sign in to post a comment.