In 2006, in the wake of a spending scandal involving a former president, American University's Board of Trustees made several broad changes in its procedures to, among other things, become more active in overseeing the president. Observers of university governance expected trustees at other institutions to follow suit. But despite the attention those reforms received, a good quarter of college governing boards have chosen not to follow American's lead. According to The Chronicle's survey of trustees at four-year colleges, at least one in four boards takes a relatively disengaged approach to reviewing presidential performance, participating in hiring presidents, and overseeing presidential compensation. Three-quarters of trustees said their boards assessed presidential performance each year. Nearly the same percentage conducted an annual review of presidential compensation. When it comes to evaluating presidents, trustees overwhelmingly put trust and shared vision over performance issues like raising money or balancing budgets. Trustees said they were extremely satisfied with their working relationships with presidents. In the survey, trustees were asked the most important question they would pose to a candidate for president of their college. The most common question concerned the candidate's understanding of and commitment to the institution's mission. Questions about fund-raising skills or other qualifications were at the bottom of the list.