Volleyball England AGM 2026: Your questions answered 

It is an important date at which members vote on key matters and ask questions directly to the Board. Some members have taken the opportunity to ask questions in advance.  

Full answers to those questions can be found below:  

 

AGM Documentation 

1. Where can I find the AGM paperwork? 

The AGM pack can be accessed here. 

 

Elected Director Recruitment Process 

1. The process wasn’t compliant with the Volleyball England Articles, Nominations Committee ToR and Code for Sports Governance. 

The Board and Nominations Committee are satisfied that the recruitment process was conducted in accordance with Volleyball England's Articles, Framework Document and the principles of the Sport England Code for Sports Governance. 

The vacancies were publicly advertised, supported by a Board Recruitment Pack setting out the role requirements, person specification, diversity commitments and recruitment timetable. All candidates were required to complete the same application process, and all shortlisted candidates were interviewed by the Nominations Committee. 

The Nominations Committee reviewed the Board Skills Matrix before commencing recruitment and identified the skills, experience and knowledge required to support the future effectiveness of the Board. Candidates were assessed consistently against those requirements through application review, interview and subsequent due diligence checks. 

Recommendations to members were based on merit, the needs of the organisation and the skills and experience required on the Board. The process was therefore open, transparent, competency-based and aligned with the governance framework under which Volleyball England operates. 

 

2. You advertised for two vacancies but put forward three candidates. 

At the commencement of the recruitment process, Volleyball England had two elected Board vacancies and these were advertised accordingly. 

During the recruitment process, a further elected Director notified the Board of their intention to resign, creating an additional vacancy before the recruitment exercise had concluded. 

The Nominations Committee carefully considered how best to respond to this change in circumstances. Having already undertaken an open recruitment exercise, received applications, conducted interviews and assessed candidates against the agreed criteria, the Committee concluded that it was appropriate and proportionate to utilise the existing recruitment process to fill the additional vacancy. 

Importantly, no candidate received preferential treatment, and no additional candidate entered the process after recruitment had commenced. Every applicant was assessed through the same application, interview and evaluation process against the same published criteria. 

The Committee's decision was based on three factors: 

• A genuine vacancy had arisen during the recruitment process. 

• A sufficiently strong field of candidates had already been identified through an open and transparent recruitment exercise. 

• Filling the vacancy through the existing process supported Board continuity and ensured that the Board retained the breadth of skills and experience identified through the Skills Matrix. 

The Committee therefore considered that using the existing recruitment process was fair, transparent, proportionate and in the best interests of Volleyball England. 

 

3. The Board is becoming gender imbalanced. 

Volleyball England is committed to diversity and inclusion in accordance with its Diversity and Inclusion Action Plan, Articles of Association and the Sport England Code for Sports Governance. 

The Board Recruitment Pack made clear that Volleyball England welcomes applications from all backgrounds and actively encourages applications from underrepresented groups. Diversity considerations formed part of the overall recruitment approach, alongside skills, experience and the needs identified through the Board Skills Matrix. 

The recruitment process was conducted on merit. Candidates were assessed against the published role description, person specification and the skills required by the organisation. Recommendations were made based on the candidates best able to meet those requirements. 

The outcome of the process reflects the quality and composition of the applicant pool. Of the six applications received, four were from women and two were from men. The Nominations Committee assessed all candidates consistently against the same criteria. 

While the Board would comprise a female majority if the recommended candidates are elected, Volleyball England considers diversity across the wider governance structure as well as the Board itself. Across the organisation's Sub-Groups and Working Groups there is significant male representation, demonstrating that participation in governance and decision-making is not concentrated within any single demographic group. 

Volleyball England remains committed to ensuring that all governance appointments are made fairly, openly and on merit while continuing to encourage applications from a broad and diverse range of candidates. 

Finally, it is worth noting that the Code for Sports Governance does not require gender parity. It requires organisations to take diversity seriously and recruit through fair, open and merit-based processes. The recommended candidates emerged from an open recruitment process and were selected because the Nominations Committee concluded they were the strongest candidates against the Board's identified needs 

 

4. How could candidates be assessed against a Skills Matrix that members never saw? 

The Board Skills Matrix is an internal governance tool used by the Nominations Committee to identify the collective skills, experience, knowledge and attributes required to support the effective operation of the Board. 

Neither the Articles of Association, the Framework Document nor the Sport England Code for Sports Governance require the Skills Matrix itself to be published as part of a recruitment exercise. Rather, they require that appointments are made through a formal, rigorous and transparent process and that candidates are assessed against the needs of the organisation. 

Prior to commencing recruitment, the Nominations Committee reviewed the Board Skills Matrix and identified areas where additional expertise and experience would strengthen the Board. Those requirements were then reflected in the recruitment materials, which clearly set out the skills, experience and knowledge being sought from applicants. 

The Board Recruitment Pack specifically highlighted areas of expertise that would be valuable to Volleyball England, including public affairs and government advocacy, education and youth work, and wider strategic leadership experience. Candidates were assessed against these requirements through a competency-based process. 

The purpose of the Skills Matrix is not to determine election outcomes in isolation, but to help ensure that the Board as a whole possesses an appropriate balance of skills and experience. The recommendations made by the Nominations Committee reflected that assessment and were subsequently put before the membership for election in accordance with Volleyball England's governance arrangements. 

Members therefore retained the ultimate decision-making authority through the election process, while the Nominations Committee fulfilled its responsibility to evaluate candidates against the Board's identified needs. 

 

5. There were candidates that completed the recruitment process inline with 4.12 of the Framework Document who haven’t been recommended to Members, why is this? 

Clause 4.12 of the Framework Document does not require that every individual who submits an application is automatically put forward to the membership for election. 

The recruitment process established by the Framework Document is a process led by the Nominations Committee. Its purpose is to assess candidates against the requirements of the organisation, including the skills, experience, behaviours and attributes needed on the Board. 

Clause 4.12 specifically provides that candidates must both complete the recruitment process and meet the relevant requirements. Those requirements are assessed through the recruitment process itself. 

This interpretation is reinforced by clauses 4.10 and 4.11, which clearly contemplate that not all candidates will progress. The Framework Document expressly provides for candidates who do not meet the relevant requirements to be informed before publication of the candidate list and refers separately to those candidates who are progressed through the process. 

The role of the Nominations Committee is therefore not simply to verify eligibility. It is to undertake a formal assessment and determine which candidates meet the requirements identified by the organisation through its governance framework and Board Skills Matrix. 

Following that assessment, recommendations are then made to the membership for election. 

Accordingly, the process is not intended to operate as an unrestricted election of all applicants. It is a skills-based recruitment and assessment process followed by a member election on those candidates who have successfully met the required criteria. 

 

6. Even if you complied with the rules, the process wasn't sufficiently open or transparent, and trust in the Board is lost as a result. 

Volleyball England recognises that openness, transparency and trust are fundamental principles of good governance and are essential to maintaining the confidence of members. 

The Board and Nominations Committee were mindful of these principles throughout the recruitment process and took a number of steps to ensure that the process was fair, transparent, consistent and on this occasion, all candidates that applied were given an opportunity to present their candidature to Directors'.  

The vacancies were publicly advertised through a published recruitment pack which set out the role requirements, person specification, diversity commitments, recruitment timetable and assessment process. All candidates were subject to the same application, interview and assessment process and were evaluated against the same criteria. 

The Nominations Committee documented its discussions and decisions, undertook due diligence checks, provided feedback to unsuccessful candidates and ensured that the membership received the information required to make an informed decision at the AGM. 

Transparency does not require every internal discussion, assessment score or governance tool to be published. Good governance requires that decisions are made through a clear, objective and accountable process. The role of the Nominations Committee is specifically to exercise independent judgement on behalf of the organisation and to make recommendations based on the needs of Volleyball England and the requirements of the governance framework. 

Ultimately, the process was not designed to predetermine an outcome but to identify candidates who best met the current needs of the organisation and then place those recommendations before the membership for election. Members retain the final decision through the AGM voting process. 

The Board recognises that members may hold differing views regarding individual decisions made during the process. However, differing views do not of themselves indicate a lack of transparency or fairness. The Board remains satisfied that the recruitment process was conducted openly, consistently and in accordance with the governance framework approved by the membership.

 

7. The process undertaken was undemocratic?  

Volleyball England's governance arrangements are designed to balance democratic accountability with the need to ensure that the Board possesses the skills, experience and diversity required to govern the organisation effectively. 

The organisation does not operate a system whereby any individual can automatically stand for election without assessment. Instead, the Framework Document establishes a competency-based recruitment process led by the Nominations Committee, followed by election by the membership. 

This is an intentional governance model and reflects both the Sport England Code for Sports Governance and modern governance practice across many national governing bodies, charities and membership organisations. 

The role of the Nominations Committee is to assess candidates against the needs of the organisation, including the skills, experience, behaviours and attributes required on the Board. Following that assessment, candidates who meet the relevant requirements are recommended to the membership for election. 

Importantly, the process contains a number of democratic safeguards. Elected Directors cannot be appointed solely by the Board or Nominations Committee and must be elected by the membership through the AGM process. Members retain the right to vote on those candidates put forward for election and therefore have the final decision on whether a recommended candidate joins the Board. In addition, the Board remains accountable to members through the Articles of Association, the AGM process, member questions and the wider governance arrangements of the organisation. 

The membership therefore retains a central democratic role. However, that democratic process operates within a governance framework designed to ensure that candidates have first demonstrated the capability required to fulfil the responsibilities of a Board Director. 

The purpose of this approach is not to restrict democracy but to balance member choice with objective assessment of competence. This helps ensure that Volleyball England remains accountable to its members whilst also maintaining the skills, experience and governance standards required to lead and develop the sport effectively. 

 

Junior Volleyball Five-year Vision 

1. A consultation on the vision was launched in September 2025. Has the vision been refined following the consultation? 

Yes. Feedback received through the consultation has helped inform the ongoing development of the vision and its implementation priorities. While the overall strategic direction remains unchanged, a number of areas have been refined to reflect stakeholder feedback and emerging priorities. 

One area currently under development is the proposed Regional Junior Development Network, which is intended to support greater collaboration between regions through regular meetings, shared resources, development updates, and the sharing of best practice. We had originally hoped to progress this work sooner; however, timelines have been adjusted while we await the outcome of a CEV Solidarity Funding application. If successful, this funding would provide additional resource to support delivery and allow greater focus on identified priority areas. 

As work progresses, further updates on refinements to the vision and implementation plans will be shared with stakeholders. 

 

2. When does / did year one of the vision start? 

The vision was launched for consultation in September 2025, with feedback and implementation planning continuing throughout the 2025-26 season. As a result, the first year of delivery should be viewed as the 2025-26 period, during which consultation feedback has been reviewed, priorities identified, and implementation plans developed. 

Some initiatives are already underway, while others, including the proposed Regional Junior Development Network, are dependent on additional resource and external funding decisions before they can be fully implemented. 

 

3. The current Volley4s rotational / positional rules are unclear. The version of the vision circulated for consultation didn't mention a work item to refine these for U15 Tier 2. If the vision has been refined: Is work to clarify the rules planned? 

The consultation version of the vision did not include a specific work item relating to the refinement of Volley4s rotational or positional rules for U15 Tier 2. 

However, feedback regarding the clarity and application of these rules has been noted. As part of the ongoing review and implementation process, we will consider whether further guidance, clarification, or rule refinements are required to support consistent understanding and application across the game. 

Any proposed changes would be developed in consultation with relevant stakeholders and communicated through the appropriate competition and development channels. 

 

Facilities 

A series of questions (listed below) have been posed asking for greater transparency and action on a facilities strategy, particularly regarding the UK Department for Education's School Rebuilding Programme (SRP).

The questions have been asked in the context that many new school sports hall designs do not adequately support volleyball and risk creating long-term barriers to participation.

The questions focus on governance, advocacy, monitoring of school rebuilding projects, community engagement, facilities guidance updates, and equipment standards.

 

Summary response 

Facilities are fundamental to the future growth of volleyball. The majority of volleyball activity takes place in facilities that Volleyball clubs do not own or directly control, making partnership working, advocacy and influence critical parts of our role as the National Governing Body. 

Over recent years, Volleyball England has worked with clubs, local authorities, leisure operators, schools, colleges, universities and other partners to help secure and retain access to facilities across the country. This has included supporting clubs facing facility challenges, helping identify new facility opportunities and using our national relationships to influence decision-making where appropriate. 

Volleyball England has also been involved in a number of facility development projects. These include supporting the development of new beach volleyball facilities and most recently working alongside Leicester Athena, Huncote Leisure Centre and a range of local and national partners to transform an under-utilised facility into a dedicated volleyball and sitting volleyball venue. This work has included supporting funding applications, securing investment and helping create a sustainable long-term home for volleyball in the area. 

At a national level, Volleyball England continues to engage with organisations including Sport England, the Sport and Recreation Alliance and fellow National Governing Bodies on issues relating to facility provision, planning policy and sports infrastructure. Following concerns raised regarding aspects of the School Rebuilding Programme, Volleyball England has raised the issue with sector partners and the matter is being discussed through the NGB Coalition, providing an opportunity for sports to work collectively in engaging with Government departments and other stakeholders. 

To strengthen our future work in this area, the Board is considering the establishment of a Facilities Working Group aligned to the Get.Keep.Grow programme. Subject to Board approval, the group will help shape Volleyball England's future approach to facility development, facility guidance, stakeholder engagement, advocacy, funding support and the monitoring of emerging facility projects and programmes. 

 

1. Are any of the candidates up for election to the Volleyball England Board, or directors who will be continuing, qualified and willing to take on the role of a "Facilities Champion"? If not, can the Board advertise a position and co-opt expertise? 

Volleyball England recognises the importance of facilities to the future growth and sustainability of the sport. Rather than assigning responsibility to a single individual, the Board is currently considering the establishment of a Facilities Working Group to provide greater focus and expertise on facility-related matters with appropriate Board oversight. 

Subject to Board approval, the group will support Volleyball England's work on facility development, facility standards, stakeholder engagement, advocacy and strategic priorities. It will also provide an opportunity to bring together specialist expertise from within and beyond the volleyball community through membership, co-option or advisory support where appropriate. 

One of the group's early priorities would be to consider how Volleyball England can most effectively engage with national programmes such as the School Rebuilding Programme and support the wider volleyball community on facility-related matters. 

 

2. Has any work started to update the Implementation Plan and allocate significant resources to help Sport England refresh its sports halls guidance and help the Department for Education secure best value from School Rebuilding Programme investments? 

Volleyball England has already raised concerns regarding sports hall design and the impact that facility specifications can have on volleyball participation and community use. 

Following discussions with members and clubs, these concerns have been raised with Sport England, the Sport and Recreation Alliance and fellow National Governing Bodies including basketball, badminton and netball. The matter is also being discussed through the NGB Coalition, providing an opportunity for sports to engage collectively with Government departments and other stakeholders. 

In addition, the Volleyball England Chair has arranged a number of conversations with national partners and Multi-Academy Trusts to raise awareness and seek local solutions. 

It is worth noting that Sport England is likely to be removed as a statutory planning consultee which will make it harder for any sport to respond to or be aware of planning decisions at an overview level, which will elevate the need for clubs, county associations etc to engage proactively with their local schools and leisure facilities, supported where appropriate by Volleyball England nationally.' 

 

3. Has any work started to systematically monitor School Rebuilding Programme projects from inclusion in the programme through to completion and community use? 

Volleyball England does not currently operate a formal national monitoring system for School Rebuilding Programme projects. 

However, concerns and examples relating to facility design are regularly identified through engagement with clubs, members and partners. These conversations provide valuable intelligence about emerging opportunities and challenges across the facility landscape. 

The proposed Facilities Working Group will consider how facility intelligence can be gathered more systematically to help Volleyball England identify trends, understand where issues arise within development processes and better inform future engagement with stakeholders.

 

4. Has any work started to support local communities in influencing facility developments and securing facilities that meet volleyball's needs? 

Yes. Volleyball England has already supported clubs and partners in discussions with local authorities, leisure operators, schools and facility providers to help secure and retain access to facilities and influence local decision-making where appropriate. 

The Board also recognises that there is an opportunity to provide more structured support to clubs, volunteers and local advocates. Subject to available resources and priorities, the proposed Facilities Working Group will consider what practical guidance, case studies, resources and advocacy tools could be developed to support the volleyball community in engaging with facility developments at a local level. 

The work undertaken at Huncote Leisure Centre alongside Leicester Athena demonstrates how collaborative working between clubs, facility operators, funding partners and Volleyball England can help create sustainable, volleyball-friendly facilities that meet both current and future needs. 

 

5. Is refreshing Volleyball England's facilities guidance part of any ongoing work covered under The Game Plan's commitment to engage more proactively with facility providers and local authorities? 

Volleyball England acknowledges that existing facilities guidance predates a number of developments in facility design, participation formats and delivery models. 

The Board agrees that guidance should remain relevant and reflect current practice wherever possible. Reviewing existing facilities guidance and identifying priorities is part of our 2026/27 Operational Plan and will include consideration of sports hall layouts, court markings, socket positioning, training configurations and the requirements of different formats of the game. 

 

6. What progress has been made towards updating equipment guidance and will alternative equipment solutions be considered? 

Volleyball England's partnership with Universal Services provides valuable technical expertise and support in the development of equipment-related guidance. 

Volleyball England is aware that a range of equipment solutions exist within the marketplace and recognises that facility operators may have differing priorities relating to installation, maintenance, durability and lifecycle costs. Our objective is to ensure that any future guidance supports informed decision-making and reflects the practical needs of clubs, facility operators and the wider volleyball community. 

 

7. Has Volleyball England considered socket positions and lightweight net systems that support multiple volleyball formats and maximise flexibility within sports halls? 

Volleyball England recognises the importance of flexible facility designs that support a range of volleyball formats, including Volley2s, Volley3s, Volley4s, sitting volleyball and the full game. 

Consideration of net systems, socket positioning and equipment configurations that enable efficient use of shared sports halls is consistent with Volleyball England's objective of supporting participation growth and maximising facility usage. 

As facility guidance is reviewed, the proposed Facilities Working Group will provide a forum for considering how facility and equipment recommendations can best support the full range of formats played across the volleyball community, while balancing practicality, affordability and facility operator requirements.