The Board Pack That Hid the Loss
At the quarterly board meeting of Pwani Savings and Credit Co-operative, the CEO presents a board pack showing a surplus of KES 3.2m for the nine months to 30 September 2025. The chair later learns from the internal auditor that the pack excluded a KES 9.5m provision for a loan to a director's transport business that has not paid for eight months. The CEO says the provision is 'premature' because the director has promised to pay after a government contract is settled. The audit committee had not met for two quarters because its chair resigned and was not replaced. The board pack was circulated 24 hours before the meeting, and minutes of the previous meeting record that the chair asked for 'positive numbers' to support a dividend proposal. The Sacco's regulator requires quarterly prudential returns signed by the CEO and chair.
1. Identify the governance failures in this scenario and explain how each undermines board effectiveness.
Read the worked answer
Several distinct failures compound each other:
- Misleading financial reporting to the board. Excluding a known KES 9.5m provision overstates the surplus by roughly 9.5m, turning a likely deficit of about KES 6.3m into a reported surplus of KES 3.2m. Directors cannot discharge their duty of care on inaccurate information; the pack is materially misleading.
- Related-party conflict. The loan is to a director's business and is in arrears. The director should have declared the interest and been excluded from discussions; the CEO's advocacy for non-provisioning on the basis of a promise suggests the conflict was not managed.
- Audit committee dormancy. Two quarters without a meeting and without a replacement chair means the key oversight control was absent. The committee should have escalated the arrears and the provisioning judgement.
- Inadequate meeting process. A 24-hour circulation period prevents proper preparation and challenge. Best practice is at least five working days for substantive papers.
- Tone at the top. The chair's recorded request for 'positive numbers' to support a dividend links reporting to an outcome, creating pressure to suppress bad news. This is a culture and integrity issue, not just a process lapse.
- Regulatory exposure. Prudential returns signed by the CEO and chair would be inaccurate if based on the same figures, exposing both to regulatory sanction.
Each failure individually weakens oversight; together they show a board that cannot challenge management.
2. Recommend the corrective actions the board should take, in priority order, and explain how the chair should handle the CEO and the conflicted director.
Read the worked answer
Priority order:
- Immediate correction of the numbers. Instruct the CEO to restate the nine-month results with the KES 9.5m provision, and suspend the dividend proposal until restated figures are approved. Reassess the loan's classification (likely non-performing) and any regulator notification.
- Convene the audit committee. Appoint an interim chair, hold a meeting within 14 days, and require the internal auditor to report directly to the committee. Review all related-party loans.
- Related-party review. Obtain a register of directors' interests, review all loans to directors and connected parties for arrears and provisioning, and refer the director's loan to an independent committee excluding the conflicted director.
- Process reforms. Set a minimum five-working-day paper circulation rule, require a standard board pack template with reconciliations to the general ledger, and minute dissents and requests for information.
- Regulatory disclosure. Assess whether prior prudential returns were misstated and take legal advice on voluntary disclosure to the regulator.
Handling individuals:
- The chair should meet the CEO privately, set out the expectation that board information is complete and neutral, and require a written explanation for the omission. If the explanation is unsatisfactory, initiate the disciplinary process under the CEO's contract and inform the regulator if required.
- The conflicted director should be asked to declare the interest formally, recuse themselves from all related discussions, and provide a repayment plan. The board should consider whether continued board membership is compatible with the Sacco's fit-and-proper requirements.
- The chair should also reflect on the 'positive numbers' remark and correct the record in the next minutes.