Help the club make an evidence-based choice to strengthen, transfer, pause or close each existing project.
Where this idea came from
Playbook entry
CR-064 · Project Stop-or-Strengthen Review
Theme
Theme 6: Club Renewal · Subtheme 6: Service Portfolio Renewal
Source material
New Club Renewal index draft plus an internally authored detailed-guide draft
Initiative-specific development wave
How this draft was developed
These sources support general principles for whole-club renewal, accessibility, privacy, safety, systems or responsible governance; they are not an endorsement of Project Stop-or-Strengthen Review, a finding that it suits any club or approval of its local design.
Primary references consulted
Rotary guidance for enhancing project impact(Rotary International - My Rotary) Used for: Rotary provides project-planning resources to help clubs design and manage effective projects, find partners, share practice and improve impact.
Grants(Rotary International) Used for: Rotary Foundation grants support humanitarian activities with different purposes, scales, timeframes and eligibility requirements, including sustainable and measurable outcomes for global grants.
Volunteers - WHS duties(Safe Work Australia) Used for: Volunteer activities can create work-health-and-safety duties depending on the organisation and work, so local responsibilities and risks must be checked rather than assumed.
Governance for good: A guide for Responsible People(Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission) Used for: Good governance requires understood roles, authorised decision processes, checks and balances, appropriate delegations, written decisions and oversight of finances and operations.
Candidate District material
No candidate local guide was used for this version. The current initiative identity and the attributed primary references remain separate.
Theme 6 source-assurance wave
What has been checked
4 current primary pages used by this guide were reopened on 9 August 2026.
4 attributed source claim(s) were mapped to their bounded use in this initiative.
Candidate District material remains separate and does not establish this result.
See each source's scope and limit
Rotary service-project impact resources Supports: The availability of Rotary project-planning, collaboration and impact-support resources for service-led renewal. Does not establish: That a project is feasible, authorised, funded, locally suitable, sustainable or demonstrably effective.
Grants Supports: A high-level distinction between Rotary Foundation grant types, purposes, scales and outcome expectations for renewal-related service opportunities. Does not establish: Eligibility, funding availability, approval, compliance, project quality or the suitability of a particular grant proposal.
Volunteers - WHS duties Supports: The need to identify the organisation's actual WHS position and manage volunteer physical and psychological safety proportionately during renewal activity. Does not establish: Whether WHS law applies to a particular club, who holds a duty, which jurisdictional rule applies or whether a proposed control is sufficient.
Governance for good: A guide for Responsible People Supports: Good-governance principles for renewal decisions, roles, delegation, records, accountability, financial oversight and organisational purpose. Does not establish: That a Rotary club is an ACNC-registered charity, that ACNC duties apply or that a renewal decision complies with the club's governing documents.
What still needs a person to confirm
Confirm the club's governing documents, bylaws, membership rules, decision authority, financial position and reserved decisions before changing its operating model.
Confirm which incorporated-association, charity, work health and safety, privacy, safeguarding and other duties apply to the club and this renewal design.
Test the need, accessibility, belonging, workload and alternative participation routes with current, former and prospective members rather than inferring support from the guide.
Confirm every local fact, starting point, measure, cost, owner, community need, capability claim and stopping condition before the club decides to proceed.
Resolve any candidate District-source provenance and approval decision without treating the candidate as controlled authority.
The source-verification release gate remains closed.
Checks still on hold
The controlled current Theme 6 catalogue establishes the code, title and renewal framing; the delivery content remains an internally authored draft pending full-corpus human review.
The connected Drive refresh returned an internal error on 9 August 2026. No unseen file was inferred or promoted; the 7 August intake, duplicate decisions, quarantines, rights boundaries and public-write permission hold remain in force and no sharing was changed.
Before local delivery, the club must approve the decision, participant choices, access arrangements, privacy and records plan, role boundaries, referral or escalation routes, resource limit and the specific control for this boundary: enthusiasm cannot override community evidence, partner authority, volunteer capacity, safeguarding, budget or exit planning.
Formal human review has not started. Project Stop-or-Strengthen Review remains an internal initiative-specific draft until all 1,000 initiatives reach the Full-Corpus Review Build and every source, editorial, local-suitability, accessibility and governance gate is resolved.
Still an internal draft: source interpretation, local suitability, accessibility, governance and editorial approval remain open checks.
What could this idea change?
The work is designed to produce a dated findings summary that separates facts, experience, assumptions and unanswered questions; the central local boundary is that enthusiasm cannot override community evidence, partner authority, volunteer capacity, safeguarding, budget or exit planning.
Could this work in our club?
Use when the club has accumulated projects, cannot explain their current value or lacks capacity for new community priorities. Project Stop-or-Strengthen Review is most useful when the club is prepared to act on what it learns.
A club where the club can make one honest, authorised change at a time from a shared diagnosis, visible evidence and a scheduled continue, adapt or stop decision.
A club with a real need for a focused sustainable service portfolio and capacity to support a bounded evidence review with defined inputs, participation gaps and interpretation limits.
A 90-day trial of Project Stop-or-Strengthen Review with a starting point, named participants, a resource ceiling and a scheduled continue, adapt or stop decision.
Before you start
A board-approved brief naming which project should stop, strengthen, combine or move into a bounded trial, the local authority, people affected, fixed constraints, resource ceiling, decision date and stop conditions.
A starting-point record and participant plan suited to a bounded evidence review with defined inputs, participation gaps and interpretation limits, with accessible information, voluntary choices and a supported alternative route where needed.
Named delivery, evidence and decision owners, including a person authorised to pause Project Stop-or-Strengthen Review when a safeguard, permission or boundary is not met.
A proportionate check of governing documents, privacy, information security, accessibility, conflicts, safeguarding, work health and safety, records, finance and referral duties for the actual local design.
At the end: At the 90-day review, compare the recorded measures with the starting point, resolve the listed governance holds and tell participants whether Project Stop-or-Strengthen Review will change, continue or stop.
Made for this initiative
Tailored supporting documents
These working documents use the decisions, safeguards and evidence needs of this initiative. Complete them with the people affected and keep the agreed version with the club's project record.
