---
name: preparing-board-materials
language: en
description: Creates board presentation materials with strategic analysis, financial performance, and transaction recommendations. Use when preparing board decks, creating governance presentations, or summarizing strategic options.
tags:
  - preparation
  - investment-banking
metadata:
  author: casemark
  practice_areas:
    - Investment Banking
    - Mergers and Acquisitions
    - Corporate Finance
  document_types:
    - Preparation Document
  skill_modes:
    - Preparation
---
# Preparing Board Materials

## When To Use

- Preparing a board deck for a strategic alternatives review, M&A transaction approval, or capital markets decision
- Creating quarterly or special-meeting presentations summarizing financial performance and outlook
- Assembling materials for a board vote on a specific transaction (sale, acquisition, financing, dividend, buyback)
- Drafting governance-focused presentations on committee updates, risk oversight, or management succession
- Building a fairness opinion summary or banker recommendation slide set for director review

## Inputs To Gather

- **Meeting context**: Type of board meeting (regular quarterly, special session, committee), date, attendees, and agenda items
- **Company financials**: Recent income statement, balance sheet, cash flow statement; budget vs. actuals; LTM and NTM projections
- **Transaction details** (if applicable): Deal structure, valuation range, key terms, counterparty information, timeline, and conditions
- **Market data**: Comparable company trading multiples, precedent transaction multiples, sector indices, relevant benchmarks
- **Strategic alternatives considered**: Options evaluated (status quo, sale, merger, recapitalization, IPO) with pros/cons for each
- **Prior board materials**: Previous deck for continuity of format, numbering, and narrative arc
- **Confidentiality designation**: Project code name, distribution restrictions, and watermark requirements
- **Fairness opinion or valuation work**: DCF, LBO, sum-of-parts, or other analyses supporting the recommendation

## Workflow

1. **Confirm scope and format**
   - Identify the specific board action required (informational update, resolution to approve, advisory vote)
   - Determine page/slide count target and whether the format is a slide deck, memo, or hybrid
   - Confirm whether a fairness opinion summary, management presentation, or both are needed

2. **Structure the deck**
   - **Cover slide**: Project code name, "Confidential — Board of Directors," date, bank/advisor logo
   - **Executive summary**: 1–2 slides with situation overview, recommendation, and key decision points
   - **Strategic context**: Market landscape, competitive positioning, rationale for exploring alternatives
   - **Financial overview**: Historical performance (3–5 years), projections, key KPIs (revenue growth, EBITDA margin, leverage)
   - **Valuation analysis**: Summary of DCF, comparable companies, precedent transactions — present as football field or waterfall chart
   - **Transaction overview** (if applicable): Structure, pricing, key terms, synergies, pro forma impact
   - **Strategic alternatives comparison**: Matrix or side-by-side of options with financial and strategic scoring
   - **Risk factors**: Execution risk, regulatory/antitrust, financing contingencies, market timing
   - **Recommended next steps**: Timeline, required approvals, open items
   - **Appendix**: Detailed financial models, backup schedules, sensitivity tables, disclaimers

3. **Draft content slide by slide**
   - Use concise bullet points — directors scan, not read; aim for 5–7 bullets per slide maximum
   - Present all dollar figures consistently (millions vs. billions, rounded) with clear period labels
   - Label every chart and table with source and date; mark projections as "Management Estimates" or "Consensus"
   - Flag any figures not yet confirmed with [VERIFY]
   - Use neutral, balanced language when presenting alternatives — avoid advocacy before the recommendation slide

4. **Build the recommendation section**
   - State the recommended course of action clearly and the specific board resolution language needed
   - Summarize the basis for the recommendation (valuation support, strategic fit, shareholder value creation)
   - Address likely director questions: "Why now?", "Why this counterparty?", "What if we wait?"
   - If a fairness opinion is involved, include a summary of the opinion basis and key assumptions

5. **Review and finalize**
   - Cross-check all financial figures against source models — verify totals, percentages, and period labels
   - Ensure consistent formatting: fonts, colors, decimal places, chart styles across all slides
   - Confirm all pages carry the confidentiality legend and project code name
   - Verify the deck tells a coherent narrative from executive summary through recommendation

## Output

A board presentation package containing:

- **Slide deck** (typically 20–40 slides) with executive summary, strategic context, financials, valuation, transaction details, alternatives analysis, risk factors, and recommendation
- **Appendix** with detailed backup: sensitivity analyses, full comparable/precedent tables, pro forma financial statements
- **Board resolution language** (draft) if a specific approval is being sought
- All pages marked confidential with appropriate project code name and distribution restrictions

## Quality Checks

- [ ] Every financial figure ties to the source model or filing — no orphaned numbers
- [ ] Valuation ranges are internally consistent (DCF, comps, and precedents don't contradict without explanation)
- [ ] Projections are clearly labeled with source (management case, street consensus, bank case)
- [ ] Recommendation is supported by the analysis presented — no logical gaps
- [ ] Confidentiality markings appear on every page; project code name used throughout (no real names if code-named)
- [ ] Formatting is uniform: consistent fonts, number formatting, chart color scheme, slide layout
- [ ] [VERIFY] tags remain on any data points not confirmed against primary sources
- [ ] Deck reads as a standalone document — a director who missed the pre-read can follow the narrative
- [ ] No stale data from prior versions left in slides or appendix
- [ ] Regulatory and antitrust risk factors reflect current [VERIFY] jurisdiction-specific filing thresholds and timelines