Current playbook index title and category plus an internally authored detailed-guide draft
Initiative-specific development wave
How this draft was developed
These sources support general principles for community-informed projects, evaluation, lessons, privacy and Indigenous authority; they are not an endorsement of the named Rotary Impact Map, verification of any local outcome or authority to publish a place, person, partner, cultural knowledge or impact claim.
Primary references consulted
Develop projects(Rotary International) Used for: Rotary's project lifecycle connects community-informed design, goal tracking, implementation, evaluation, promotion and sharing lessons learned.
Four questions about community assessments(Rotary International) Used for: Community assessment can reveal priorities different from a club's initial assumptions and can materially change project design; this is contextual evidence, not approval of a local map.
De-identification and the Privacy Act(Office of the Australian Information Commissioner) Used for: De-identification is contextual and requires the risk of re-identification to be very low in the relevant release or access environment.
AIATSIS Guide to applying the Code of Ethics(Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies) Used for: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people must lead decisions involving their knowledge, communities and cultural material, including how information is represented and shared.
Candidate District material consulted
These records remain draft evidence and still need a human source decision.
Club Playbook - Theme 2 Related candidate records 71 Member Milestone Map, 75 Service in Action Reel and 86 Rotary Through My Eyes Gallery concern visualising people, service and experience. None is a literal Rotary Impact Map record or supplies this guide's community-priority, outcome-evidence, attribution, sensitive-location, partner-authority and planning-decision controls.
Theme 2 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
Develop projects Supports: The 5 attributed Theme 2 claims attached to this source, limited to the implementation elements and supporting documents named in each initiative-level claim mapping. Does not establish: That the initiative is endorsed by Rotary International or District 9510, that it is permitted by the club's governing documents, that members want it, that it suits the local club, or that it will achieve the intended outcome.
Rotary Community Corps Supports: The 11 attributed Theme 2 claims attached to this source, limited to the implementation elements and supporting documents named in each initiative-level claim mapping. Does not establish: That the initiative is endorsed by Rotary International or District 9510, that it is permitted by the club's governing documents, that members want it, that it suits the local club, or that it will achieve the intended outcome.
De-identification and the Privacy Act Supports: The 4 attributed Theme 2 claims attached to this source, limited to the implementation elements and supporting documents named in each initiative-level claim mapping. Does not establish: Whether the Privacy Act or another duty applies to this club, whether consent is informed and valid, whether collection or publication is authorised, or whether the proposed safeguards are sufficient in the actual circumstances.
AIATSIS Guide to applying the Code of Ethics Supports: The 8 attributed Theme 2 claims attached to this source, limited to the implementation elements and supporting documents named in each initiative-level claim mapping. Does not establish: Accessibility or inclusion conformance, the needs or preferences of any person or community, cultural authority to act, the suitability of a format or venue, or local approval.
What still needs a person to confirm
Confirm the member, prospective-member, past-member and community needs, preferences and consent that the local design assumes.
Confirm which privacy, safeguarding, incorporated-association, charity, work health and safety, food, liquor, copyright, licensing, screening and other duties apply to the club and the activity.
Test accessibility, cultural safety, belonging, language and alternative participation routes with affected people and recognise First Nations cultural authority rather than inferring suitability from the guide.
Confirm every local fact, starting point, cost, role, current service contact, measure, stopping condition and platform capability before the club decides to proceed.
Confirm the authority and current scope of each primary source, resolve login-gated or moved-page references and keep any candidate District material attributed and unapproved until its source decision is made.
The source-verification release gate remains closed.
Checks still on hold
The board must approve the map's decision purpose, definitions, evidence scale, sensitive-data rules, partner-authority process, public formats and update owner.
No grant, finance, beneficiary, safeguarding, health, cultural, security or personal information may be exposed through a point, image, filter, download or linked source.
Partners and communities must be able to correct or decline their representation, and contested claims must not be simplified into a promotional map entry.
The map must not be represented as an evaluation by Rotary International or as proof of causation beyond the evidence and attribution recorded.
Still an internal draft: source interpretation, local suitability, accessibility, governance and editorial approval remain open checks.
What could this idea change?
It helps more people feel known, valued and able to take part in ways that work for them.
It may suit: Members at the relevant stage of their club experience, including people who may not yet feel fully connected.
Could this work in our club?
Consider Rotary Impact Map when the club's identity is unclear, contested or expressed more strongly in words than in member experience.
A club with service records spread across reports, photographs and members' memories and no clear view of how projects connect over time.
A map built with community partners that distinguishes need, activity, contribution, outcome, evidence confidence and continuing responsibility.
A club ready to let missing, mixed or inconvenient evidence shape priorities instead of using the map only to promote success.
Before you start
A named decision the map must support, a defined time period and geography, and a data dictionary separating activity, output, outcome, contribution and evidence confidence.
A project inventory linked to original plans, budgets, monitoring, evaluations, partner records and follow-up commitments rather than reconstructed from publicity alone.
Partner authority to validate descriptions and public use, with a cultural and privacy screen for locations, people, images and community knowledge.
An accessible non-map alternative, an evidence and corrections route, a responsible data custodian and board agreement on publication and review boundaries.
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 Rotary Impact Map 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.
01
Impact Map Purpose and Data Standard
Define the decision, evidence threshold and publication limits before mapping begins.
