How the Baseline Review works

A structured engagement that takes your school from "we have AI showing up everywhere" to a board-ready governance package — in about five weeks, with one school-owned Living Policy draft, ready for legal review.

~5 weeks
Baseline Review
12
Deliverables
5
Stakeholder groups consulted
1
School-owned Living Policy draft
Honest about where we are. AIP is a new service. The Baseline Review is where we ask schools to start, designed to deliver a complete board-ready package in about five weeks at a fixed fee. It is the methodology, and it is not yet anchored to a completed engagement. No before/after figures are published anywhere in this material, because there are none to publish. When the first programme completes and the school agrees to be named, that case will appear here with its name on it. As pilot schools complete the engagement, real cases will be added here with their permission.

Two questions, measured together, answered to your board.

A Baseline Review is not a multi-month transformation. It is a focused, fixed-fee engagement that measures where a school actually stands and produces a governance package it can hand to its board, its counsel and its community — in about five weeks.

It measures two things, and never one without the other. Readiness — can your people use AI well: are staff and students equipped, is access fair, is any of it improving teaching. Governance — can the institution be responsible for it: who decides, who is accountable, what happens when something goes wrong. The finding is the quadrant the two make together, not either score alone. A school strong on one and weak on the other has a specific problem with a specific answer, and from the inside the two are hard to tell apart.

The deliverables are concrete: both axis scores reported separately and never averaged, a Living AI Policy draft that is jurisdiction-aware, a risk register prioritised by likelihood and impact, an opportunity register naming what already works, a values and fear map, a governance model with decision rights, a 12-month operating cadence, and the communications needed to roll it out.

What it is not: a multi-year consulting contract, a software platform, a certification, or a substitute for legal counsel. You should have the policy draft reviewed by an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction before adopting it — we do not provide one, and nothing we produce is legal advice. The instruments have not been externally validated or psychometrically tested; they support a defensible management conversation, not a compliance claim.

Weeks 1–2Measure

Where you actually stand

Six questionnaires go to staff, students, leadership, IT and parents. In parallel we run the tool inventory — the one that finds AI features switched on inside software you already licence, and apps staff authorised with school accounts. Both usually surface tools nobody in the room knew about.

Then we review your evidence rather than take your word for it. For each control the school believes it has, we record whether it was produced on request and when we asked. A school cannot credibly audit its own evidence — that is a conflict of interest, not a skill gap, and it is the single most common source of a finding.

Week 3Interpret

What it means, said out loud first

A facilitated session surfaces what staff and the community actually fear. Nobody internal can run a session about staff fear of leadership.

Both axes are scored, the quadrant is named, and every red flag is confirmed with leadership privately before a word is written down. Nobody should learn a finding about their own school by reading it in a finished document.

Weeks 4–5Deliver

Documents, and someone to answer for them

The policy draft, governance model, registers, cadence and communications are written from what your measurement actually found — every clause traceable to a finding. A clause that answers nothing gets cut.

Then we present to your board. A subordinate cannot deliver a finding about a missing control to the person responsible for that control. The briefing covers what was found, what is already working, and what remains open — a briefing that reports only good news is not believed.

📊

Baseline Readiness Report

Two axes scored separately and never averaged — Readiness and Governance across 15 dimensions — plus a Practice measure of whether AI is serving learning yet.

⚠️

Risk Register

Top risks scored (L × I), mitigations named, owners assigned.

🗺

Values & Fear Map

Anonymized stakeholder voices across 5 groups.

⚖️

Living AI Policy

v1.0 draft, jurisdiction-aware, ready for legal review.

🏛

Governance Model

Panel structure, RACI matrix, version-control protocol.

🧪

Pilot Framework

8-week Go/No-Go scoring with 8 criteria.

🎓

Training Plan

Role-based curriculum, 5 ISTE-aligned assessments.

📅

Operating Cadence

12-month calendar, standing meetings, review cycle.

🎨

Activity Guides

5 grade-band cards for student engagement.

✉️

Communications Kit

Parent letters, staff memo, board briefing, newsletter.

💰

Budget Worksheet

Country-localized cost estimate with grant offsets.

🤝

Handover Document

What your school owns, what's next, what to monitor.

It's for you if

  • You're a head of school, superintendent, board chair, or IT/data lead.
  • AI is already happening in your school — formally or informally — and you don't yet have a written policy.
  • You face a near-term moment (board meeting, parent complaint, state deadline, vendor decision) where a defensible written governance package matters.
  • You want a structured outside perspective that hands you back ownership.

It's not for you if

  • You're shopping for a multi-year consulting relationship (we don't sell that yet).
  • You need legal advice — we draft, your attorney reviews. We don't replace counsel.
  • You want a software platform — AIP is a methodology, not a SaaS.
  • You already have a mature AI governance program with named owners, an approved policy, and an active review cycle.

📐 Blueprint

Every deliverable above exists as a blank template. If you want to see the structure of what we produce — and try filling it in yourself — start there.

Open Blueprint →

🎯 Framework

The 9-component philosophy that drives every Baseline Review. Read this first if you want to know what we believe before you decide what to buy.

See Framework →

Talk to us about a Baseline Review.

A 30-minute conversation tells us both whether this is the right place for your school to start right now. No pressure, no script.

Email info@togno.co →