E-095 · Theme 2 · Intergenerational & Life Stage Support
Life Stage Check-In Survey
Use Life Stage Check-In Survey to keep participation realistic as members move through different work, family, health and life stages.
Developed further: this summary now draws on an initiative-specific internal editorial draft and attributed references. Human review has not started and will open only at the Full-Corpus Review Build.
What could this idea change?
It gives the club a clearer view of people's experiences before decisions are made, including feedback that informal conversations can miss.
It may suit: Members who may welcome support or renewed contact, and the trusted club members following up.
A simple way to start
- Define the club decisions and support offers the survey can inform and remove any question that has no authorised response or requires a private explanation. Who could lead it: Club board sponsor and privacy contact
- Draft preference and condition questions, separate anonymous and identified routes and test wording, accessibility and re-identification risk with members. Who could lead it: Survey lead and member reference group
- Publish the purpose, choices, confidentiality limits, response timetable and deletion date and provide a private non-survey contact for complex or urgent matters. Who could lead it: Survey lead
- Collect responses for a short period, restrict access and acknowledge identified contact or adjustment requests without seeking reasons. Who could lead it: Privacy custodian and response owners
- Agree individual operational changes privately and analyse only safely aggregated themes for club-wide design decisions. Who could lead it: Response owners and club board sponsor
What should we look for?
- After 90 days, review Life Stage Check-In Survey. Look for members choosing workable forms of participation and staying connected without pressure to disclose private circumstances.
- Every field linked to an authorised club decision or member-requested response.
- Identified requests acknowledged and closed within the published service standard.
- Club changes reported through safely aggregated themes with no unnecessary attribution.
- Raw and identifiable data deleted on schedule and not reused for recognition, leadership or retention scoring.
Before we say yes
- Does it fit a real local need?
- Can people take part safely and fairly?
- Are the facts, permissions and Rotary branding right?
- Who will lead it, and when will we review it?