board-pack-summarizer

Board Pack Summarizer

Board and management packs routinely run 40 to 150 pages: CEO narrative, finance section, KPI dashboards, project updates, risk register extracts, and committee papers. Directors and executives need the signal, not the volume. This skill turns a long pack into a single skimmable page organised around four questions a board actually asks: what are we being asked to decide, how is the business performing, what could go wrong, and who owes what by when. It is built for FP&A analysts, finance business partners, chiefs of staff, board secretaries, and CFO office teams who assemble pre-reads or write up minutes-adjacent action logs. It summarizes only the document the user provides; it does not invent numbers or fetch external data.

When to use this

• A user shares a board pack, management accounts pack, or board deck (PDF or pasted text) and asks for a summary, pre-read, or "TL;DR".
• Preparing a one-page cover note so directors can read the pack faster.
• Producing a post-meeting decisions-and-actions log from the papers tabled.
• Comparing this month's pack against last month's to highlight what changed.
• Briefing a new non-executive director or an executive who could not attend.

Do not use this to give an opinion on whether a proposed decision is correct, to forecast, or to opine on accounting treatment. It organises and condenses what the pack says.

Inputs

Provide one of:

• A board or management pack as a PDF (read it page by page) or as pasted/extracted text.
• For a multi-period view, the current pack plus the prior-period pack.

Useful but optional context: the entity name and reporting period, the meeting date, the names/roles of attendees (to attribute actions), and any house style (currency, units, date format).

A bundled synthetic sample, samples/sample-board-pack.md, contains a fictional one-page extract for Aurora Components Ltd. Use it to see the expected input shape and to dry-run the methodology.

How to do it

Work strictly from the source. If a figure or owner is not in the pack, mark it [not stated] rather than guessing. Never reconcile or recompute figures the pack does not show; if the pack's own subtotals look inconsistent, flag it as a check, do not silently "fix" it.

1. Map the pack. Skim the contents/agenda first. Identify the standard sections: cover/agenda, minutes/matters arising, CEO or executive report, finance/management accounts, KPIs, functional updates (sales, ops, people, product), risk, and any decision papers (often titled "for approval", "for decision", "recommendation", or "the Board is asked to"). Note page ranges so every claim can be traced.

2. Extract decisions sought. Scan for explicit decision language: "approve", "recommend", "the Board is asked to", "for approval", "ratify", "authorise", "delegate". For each, capture: the decision title, the recommendation as written, the sponsor, the financial magnitude (capex/opex/headcount/limit), and any condition or approval threshold referenced (e.g. spend above a delegated-authority limit). Distinguish decisions (a vote is sought) from items for noting (information only). This separation is the single most valuable output.

3. Extract financial highlights and movements. From the finance section pull the headline measures the pack itself emphasises, typically: revenue, gross margin, EBITDA or operating profit, net profit, cash/liquidity, and net debt. For each, record actual, the comparator the pack uses (budget, prior period, prior year, or forecast), and the variance. Compute variance only from numbers explicitly present: absolute variance = actual minus comparator; percentage variance = absolute variance / comparator (state the denominator). Label favourable/adverse from a P&L perspective (higher revenue favourable; higher cost adverse). Surface the two or three movements management calls out as drivers; do not editorialise causes the pack does not give. Apply a materiality lens so the summary stays to one page: prioritise the largest absolute variances and anything breaching a stated covenant, budget, or threshold.

4. Extract risks and issues. Capture risks named in the CEO report, risk register extract, or any "key risks" callout. For each: a short title, direction (new / increasing / stable / decreasing if the pack states it), and any mitigation or owner mentioned. Treat covenant headroom, going-concern language, litigation, regulatory matters, and liquidity warnings as high priority and never drop them for space.

5. Extract open actions and owners. Pull from "matters arising", action logs, and any "next steps". For each action capture: description, owner (person or function as named), due date, and status (open / in progress / done / overdue) if stated. If an action has no owner or date in the pack, record the action and mark the gap [owner not stated] / [due date not stated] - visible gaps are useful to the board.

6. Note period-over-period changes (if a prior pack was provided). Flag what is new, what closed, and any KPI that crossed a target or covenant line since last period.

7. Self-check before output. Confirm every decision, number, risk, and action is traceable to a page or section. Confirm decisions-sought are separated from noting items. Confirm no external facts were introduced.

Keep the language plain and neutral. The board reads tone; do not advocate.

Output

Produce a single Markdown one-pager titled with the entity and period, in this fixed order so it is skimmable across meetings:

1. Header line - Entity | Period | Meeting date | "Source: , pages".
2. At a glance (3-5 bullets) - the most decision-relevant takeaways.
3. Decisions sought - a table: # | Decision | Recommendation | Sponsor | Financial impact | Page. List only items where a vote/approval is requested.
4. For noting - short bullets of information-only items the board should be aware of.
5. Financial highlights - a table: Metric | Actual | Comparator (basis) | Variance | Var % | F/A | Page. Below it, 2-3 driver bullets quoting management's stated reasons.
6. Key risks - a table: Risk | Direction | Mitigation / Owner | Page.
7. Open actions - a table: Action | Owner | Due | Status | Page.
8. Changes since last period - only if a prior pack was supplied.
9. Traceability note - one line confirming all items are sourced to the pack and listing any [not stated] gaps.

If the user prefers, also offer the decisions table and actions table as standalone CSVs. Keep the whole brief to roughly one printed page; push detail into the tables, not prose.

Quality checks

• Every figure, decision, risk, and action traces to a specific page/section; no orphan claims.
• Decisions requiring a vote are clearly separated from noting items - the most common and most costly error is burying an approval inside narrative.
• Variances state their comparator basis (vs budget, vs prior year, vs forecast) and the favourable/adverse direction; the denominator for any percentage is explicit.
• No invented numbers, causes, owners, or dates. Gaps are shown as [not stated], never filled.
• Pack subtotals that do not add up are flagged as a check, not silently corrected.
• High-stakes items (covenant breach, going-concern, litigation, liquidity, regulatory) are never dropped to save space.
• Currency, units (thousands/millions), and date format are consistent and stated once in the header.
• Tone is neutral; the brief reports what the pack says and does not recommend how to vote.

Worked example

Using samples/sample-board-pack.md (Aurora Components Ltd, May 2026):

• Decisions sought: Approve GBP 1.2m capex for the Line 3 automation upgrade (Sponsor: COO; payback stated as 2.4 years) - this exceeds the GBP 500k delegated-authority limit noted on the agenda, so it correctly requires a board vote.
• For noting: Refinancing of the revolving credit facility completed; new banking covenant set at net debt / EBITDA <= 3.0x.
• Financial highlights: Revenue GBP 4.80m vs budget GBP 5.10m -> variance GBP (0.30)m, -5.9%, Adverse; EBITDA GBP 0.62m vs budget GBP 0.75m -> GBP (0.13)m, -17.3%, Adverse. Driver per CEO report: a key customer delayed an order into June.
• Key risks: Customer concentration (top customer ~28% of revenue) - increasing; covenant headroom - stable at 2.6x net debt / EBITDA vs the 3.0x limit.
• Open actions: "Finalise Q3 hiring plan" - Owner: CFO - Due: 2026-06-20 - In progress; "Resolve supplier dispute (Northwind Trading BV)" - Owner: COO - Due: [not stated] - Open.
• Traceability note: All items sourced to the sample extract; one due date not stated.

The result is a one-pager a director can absorb in two minutes and use to run the meeting.

Disclaimer

Disclaimer: This skill is a drafting and analysis aid, not professional advice. It does not provide accounting, audit, tax, investment, or legal advice. All output must be reviewed and approved by a qualified professional before use or reliance.

---

Part of LedgerSkills - security-vetted Claude Code skills for finance teams. New skills scanned and tested weekly; subscribe on the site.