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 feedback, voice and improvement, accessibility, privacy, safety and responsible governance; they are not an endorsement of the named Rotary Future Vision Forum, a finding that it suits any club or approval of its local design.
Primary references consulted
Engage emerging leaders(Rotary International) Used for: Rotary encourages clubs to ask members what they want, take suggestions seriously, assess club health, support new leaders and use deliberate planning to improve the member experience.
Community Engagement Charter Tool - Types of Engagement - Workshops(PlanSA, Government of South Australia) Used for: Well-designed workshops use clear objectives, skilled facilitation, structured participation, outcome records and a feedback route that explains how input affected decisions.
Hosting accessible and inclusive in-person meetings and events(Australian Human Rights Commission) Used for: Inclusive events require accessible invitations, venues, transport, formats, technology, activities, adjustments and a clear contact for participant requirements.
Chapter 3: APP 3 Collection of solicited personal information(Office of the Australian Information Commissioner) Used for: Personal-information collection should be lawful, fair, proportionate and minimised, with additional controls for sensitive information; clubs must confirm how privacy law applies to them.
Candidate District material
No candidate local guide was used for this version. The current initiative identity and the attributed primary references remain separate.
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
Engage Emerging Leaders Supports: Member-centred discovery, mentoring, feedback, emerging-leader support and club-health review principles during renewal. Does not establish: That a person is ready for office, should be selected, has consented to a role or that a proposed renewal pathway will work locally.
Community Engagement Charter Tool - Types of Engagement - Workshops 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: The club's local need, legal position, capability, cost, safety, accessibility, suitability, likely effectiveness, authority to act or approval of the initiative.
Hosting accessible and inclusive in-person meetings and events Supports: The 71 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.
Chapter 3: APP 3 Collection of solicited personal information Supports: Data-minimisation, collection-purpose, proportionality and consent safeguards where the Privacy Act and APP 3 apply. Does not establish: Whether a particular Rotary club is an APP entity or whether a proposed renewal survey, diagnostic or member record is lawful in its actual circumstances.
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 Theme 2 index establishes this current code and title. No post-E-100 candidate record or unverified crosswalk has been used as delivery evidence for this draft.
No newly added or publicly writable Drive material has been used in this record. Existing Drive candidates remain attributed, unapproved and held from controlled-source status until integrity, ownership, crosswalk and human approval are resolved.
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: scenarios are not forecasts and must not be presented as official Rotary positions.
Formal human review has not started. Rotary Future Vision Forum remains an internal initiative-specific draft until the full corpus reaches 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?
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: The people whose experience the club needs to understand, especially voices that are not often heard.
Could this work in our club?
Consider Rotary Future Vision Forum when feedback is collected informally, repeatedly raised or rarely followed by a clear response.
A club where a defined member or volunteer experience question is genuinely open to change and the club can respond visibly within 30 days.
A club able to resource a scenario forum exploring how community, membership and service may change, name accountable owners and act on a scenario set, signposts and owned near-term experiments.
A 90-day trial of Rotary Future Vision Forum with a starting point, participant choices, practical controls and a scheduled continue, change or stop decision.
Before you start
A board-approved brief naming which future assumptions and no-regret actions will inform planning, what is open or fixed, the local authority, resource ceiling and decision date.
A participant and access plan suited to a scenario forum exploring how community, membership and service may change, with plain-language information, voluntary choices and a non-digital or alternative route where needed.
Named delivery, evidence and governance owners, including a person authorised to pause Rotary Future Vision Forum when the boundary or a safety control is not met.
A proportionate privacy, records, conflict, safeguarding, work-health-and-safety and referral check for the actual local design rather than an assumption that the initiative is low risk.
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 Future Vision Forum 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
Rotary Future Vision Forum Decision and Scope Brief
Define the question, authority, evidence and response before asking for input.
