In External Reviews of Governance and strategic governance training across multi-academy trusts and the maintained sector, I encounter the same pattern. The board has received compliance reports. It has approved an estate strategy. It believes it is doing what the estate requires of it. What it has not done is design a governance structure that would allow it to know whether that belief is well founded. The DfE Estate Management Standards are precise about what the board must be able to demonstrate. The Standards require the board to sign off strategic estate documents, include estates expertise in the annual skills assessment, and maintain oversight of compliance and risk. At Level 3 (fully effective), the board must have scheduled strategic reviews and an active climate action plan in place. At Level 4, there should be a dedicated board member for the estate. The board's role is oversight and accountability, not operational management, but that oversight must be structured and evidenced.
What the Governing Body's Role in Estate Management Actually Is
A governing body or board of trustees is not the estates team. Its role is strategic oversight, accountability, and assurance. It appoints people, signs off documents, and asks the right questions. What it does not do, and should not do, is manage the estate operationally.
The distinction that matters in governance is between receiving reports and receiving assurance. A board that receives a compliance report once a year has oversight in name. A board that has designed its governance calendar around the estate, that has verified the skills its members bring, and that has built an escalation pathway for risk, has assurance. The Standards require the latter.
The annual return, which Responsible Bodies (the trust, governing body, or proprietor accountable for the estate) will complete through the DfE's annual return portal (MYEE) from autumn 2026, will ask the board to confirm it is meeting the Standards. That confirmation is not a procedural formality. It is an accountability question. The board will need to point to evidence, not assert compliance.
The Estate Management Standards describe what good looks like at four maturity levels. At each level, the requirements for the board are specific and demonstrable. They are not aspirational targets. They are the governance conditions the responsible body must be able to show it has met.
What the Board Must Demonstrate at Level 1
Level 1 is baseline. At this level, the Standards require three things of the governing body or board of trustees.
First, a governing board is in place and maintains oversight of the estate. This is an active requirement, not an assumed one. The board must be demonstrably engaged with the estate as part of its governance responsibilities.
Second, the annual governors' or trustees' skills assessment must include detail of skills and expertise in estates management. This is not optional. The skills assessment is the mechanism by which the board demonstrates it has considered whether it has the right people to fulfil its estate governance role. An estates strategy signed off by a board that has never asked whether any of its members understand estate management is a governance gap, not a governance achievement.
Third, the governing body, trustees, or landowners must review, approve, and sign off the estate strategy, asset management plan, and associated governance documents. At Level 1, the board must be able to demonstrate that these documents exist and that the board has formally considered and approved them.
What Changes at Level 2
The shift from Level 1 to Level 2 is a governance shift, not an operational one. At Level 2 (Transitioning), the Standards require that the board is aware of its role and responsibilities towards the estate and has the necessary skills to fulfil its role.
At Level 1, the board maintains oversight. At Level 2, the board understands its role and has demonstrably developed the skills to fulfil it. This is a meaningful distinction. The skills assessment at Level 2 is not a box-ticking exercise. It is evidence that the board has engaged with what the estate actually requires, identified where skills gaps exist, and taken steps to address them. Co-option of expertise, training, or specialist adviser engagement are all appropriate responses to a skills gap, provided the gap has been named and a response identified.
What the Board Must Demonstrate at Level 3
At Level 3 (Fully Effective), the board moves from oversight to proactive governance. Two specific requirements come into scope.
Regular strategic reviews of the estate must be scheduled, not triggered by problems, but built into the governance calendar. This is a governance design requirement. The board has made the estate part of its annual governance cycle, with scheduled points at which it actively considers estate performance, strategy, and risk.
A climate action plan must also be in place. As a strategic document, this requires board sign-off. The board that signs off a climate action plan has demonstrated it is thinking about the estate over a long time horizon, not just in response to immediate compliance requirements.
The distinction at Level 3 is between a board that responds to the estate and a board that plans for it. Scheduled strategic reviews are the governance mechanism that makes that distinction visible.
What Level 4 Requires of the Board
At Level 4 (Advanced), the Standards describe a board with structural accountability for the estate. Three requirements are specific to the board.
A dedicated board member must be in place to oversee the effective management of the estate. This is not an operational appointment. It is a governance design requirement: a named individual at board level who carries specific accountability for estate oversight.
The asset management plan and estate vision must align with the budget management cycle. This requires the board to understand the full cost of occupying the estate, not just the annual maintenance budget, but the capital investment profile, the condition liability, and the relationship between estate decisions and educational delivery. At Level 4, the Estate Management Competency Framework describes leading on governance rules and procedures, assigning roles and levels of authority, and reporting to the board. The Level 4 board member with estate oversight responsibility should understand what that accountability structure looks like in practice.
The board uses performance data to challenge as well as receive. At Level 4, the board is not a passive recipient of estate reports. It has the information, the expertise, and the governance architecture to ask whether the estate is performing and whether it represents value for money.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does "demonstrate" mean in practice?
The annual return will ask the Responsible Body to confirm it is meeting the Standards. For the board, demonstration means being able to point to specific evidence: the skills assessment showing that estates expertise was considered, the signed estate strategy and asset management plan, the minutes recording that strategic reviews took place, and at Level 4, the named board member with estate oversight responsibility. Evidence, not assertion. A board that cannot produce these documents cannot demonstrate compliance, regardless of how much estate activity has taken place.
What is the difference between oversight and assurance?
Oversight means the board receives information about the estate. Assurance means the board has a governance structure that allows it to know whether compliance is genuine and risks are managed. A board that receives a compliance report once a year has oversight. A board with scheduled strategic reviews, an estates-skilled member, and a clear escalation pathway has assurance. The Standards require the latter from Level 3. In External Reviews of Governance and strategic governance training, the pattern encountered most often is a board that has mistaken the first for the second.
Does the board need a specific person for estates at Level 1?
The Standards require a named individual responsible for estate management, but that is an operational role, not a board role. What Level 1 requires of the board is that oversight is maintained and the governing body has included estates expertise in the annual skills assessment. A dedicated board member is a Level 4 requirement. At Level 1, the board must be engaged and informed, not necessarily specialised.
How should we structure our skills assessment to include estates?
Use the Estate Management Competency Framework as the reference. The framework describes the seven functions of estate management and the skills required at each competency level. Map the board's existing skills against the functions most relevant to its governance role: strategic estate management, planning and organising estate resources, and performance management. Where gaps exist, name them and consider co-option, training, or specialist adviser engagement as appropriate. The skills assessment is not a question of whether someone on the board has worked in property. It is a structured consideration of whether the board has the governance capability the estate requires.
Mel Stokes leads the Governance Architecture domain at The Estates Strategy Partnership.