M-T1-CP-20-SD-01 — Forum Facilitation Guide

F07 configured review derivative

Status: REVIEW - configured working derivative; not approved for participant use or delivery Theme: Attraction and Visibility Sub-theme: Community Presence and Visibility

1. Controlled identity and migration metadata

2. Instructions and control rule

1. Complete every local blank from an approved initiative brief, venue and access record, participant plan, safeguarding plan, roster or named owner.
2. Keep the exact code, derivative title, source initiative, disposition, canonical parent and migration route unchanged.
3. Mark a control Not applicable only with a reason, accepting owner and date; never silently delete a safety, access, privacy or authority control.
4. Read every public script aloud, test all contribution routes and rehearse the difficult-conversation, safeguarding and emergency handoffs.
5. Do not infer decision authority, confidentiality, access provision, participant need, recording permission, safeguarding route or follow-up promise.
6. Promotion and delivery remain blocked until the preparation gate, role acceptance and final review gate are complete.
7. This is operational facilitation guidance, not clinical, legal, investigative, security or safeguarding advice. Use authorised roles and current local procedures.

Review key: [ ] open; [x] complete and evidenced; N/A accepted with reason, owner and date.

3. Controlled session fields

4. Exact configured master overlay

Purpose: Convene leaders from government, business and community organisations for constructive dialogue on a scoped local issue.

Audience: Invited leaders, subject-matter contributors and approved observers or public participants.

Recommended 90-minute forum flow:

• Welcome, neutrality, purpose, scope, authority, conduct and access — 8 minutes
• Verified context from the approved briefing — 7 minutes
• Contributor perspectives under equal time rules — 24 minutes
• Facilitated cross-questioning — 20 minutes
• Participant questions through the approved moderation route — 15 minutes
• Synthesis: agreement, disagreement, evidence gaps and options — 8 minutes
• Next-step ownership and close — 8 minutes

Moderator controls:

• disclose the selection and question method;
• give equivalent time and comparable prompts;
• distinguish evidence, experience and opinion;
• reject personal attack without suppressing challenge;
• do not imply Rotary endorsement of a speaker or position;
• use the hostile/disruptive behaviour protocol consistently; and
• close on time with an accurate account of authority.

Output: A neutral summary of perspectives, evidence gaps, options and owned next steps. Do not manufacture consensus.

5. Roles and responsibility

No one may expand scope, promise an outcome, diagnose a participant, attribute comments against the approved method or add people to unrelated promotion.

6. Preparation and go gate

Gate decision: Ready / Ready with conditions / Not ready Decision owner, date and conditions: ________________________________________________

7. Configured agenda and run sheet

Configured timing note: 90 minutes. Apply the exact timing supplied in Section 4 and record any approved deviation: ______________________________

8. Opening and closing scripts

Configured opening

Welcome to [SESSION OR ACTIVATION NAME]. I am [LEAD FACILITATOR], and [HOST ENTITY] has invited invited leaders, subject-matter contributors and approved observers or public participants. for one clear purpose: Convene government, business and community leaders for constructive dialogue on a scoped local issue under the Civic Leadership Dialogues architecture.

By the end, we aim to a neutral record distinguishes perspectives, verified evidence, disagreement, evidence gaps, options and owned next steps without manufacturing consensus.

We can discuss the approved civic issue, relevant evidence, differing perspectives, practical options and the authority for any next dialogue. We cannot decide, promise or resolve rotary endorsement of a speaker or position, partisan campaigning, personal attack, fabricated consensus or decisions outside the approved forum authority. The forum convenes dialogue and records outputs; only the named authorised body may make a decision, recommendation or commitment.

You may contribute by speaking, writing, using the approved assisted method or passing. You may pause or leave. Confirmed access and support arrangements are [INSERT ONLY APPROVED PROVISIONS].

Our working agreement is to challenge ideas without attacking people, allow others to finish and make room for voices not yet heard. The capture boundary is: Neutral perspectives, evidence, disagreement, options and owned actions; no false consensus or implied endorsement [ADD APPROVED ATTRIBUTION, ACCESS AND RETENTION WORDING].

If a safety or safeguarding concern arises, we will use the named approved route rather than investigate it in this group. What clarification would help you participate?

Configured close

Thank you for the care you brought to [SESSION OR ACTIVATION NAME].

We have recorded the output under the authority stated at the start, distinguishing insight, questions, options, recommendations, decisions and actions. The next step is: Publish or circulate the approved neutral summary and transfer each owned action to M-T1-CL-01 Civic Leadership Dialogues.

[NEXT-STEP OWNER] owns it, due or reviewed by [DATE]. Parked items will receive a disposition, not an automatic promise of action. Participants will receive the approved update by [FOLLOW-UP DATE] through [TESTED ROUTE].

Feedback is available through [EVALUATION ROUTE AND ALTERNATIVE]. Private access, conduct or safeguarding matters go to the named access or safeguarding route. Thank you; the formal interaction is now closed.

9. Public-engagement scripts

Use these only when the configured format involves optional brief public contact. Never block movement, pursue a decline or collect details before explaining purpose and choice.

15-second permission opener

Hello - I am with [HOST ENTITY]. We are here to convene government, business and community leaders for constructive dialogue on a scoped local issue under the Civic Leadership Dialogues architecture. May I ask one quick question about the approved civic issue, relevant evidence, differing perspectives, practical options and the authority for any next dialogue?

If no: Of course. Thank you, and enjoy your day.

45-second conversation

Hello - I am with [HOST ENTITY]. We are speaking with invited leaders, subject-matter contributors and approved observers or public participants. because convene government, business and community leaders for constructive dialogue on a scoped local issue under the Civic Leadership Dialogues architecture.

What evidence and lived experience should inform this issue?

Listen without interrupting, then say: What I heard is [NEUTRAL REFLECTION]. Have I reflected that accurately? Explain the approved capture boundary. If useful, offer: Publish or circulate the approved neutral summary and transfer each owned action to M-T1-CL-01 Civic Leadership Dialogues.

Two-minute conversation

State the purpose and boundary. Ask no more than three approved questions. Reflect the main point without turning it into agreement. Offer the configured next step only if wanted. End with thanks and no further pursuit.

• [ ] Visible opt-in posture and respectful disengagement are rehearsed.
• [ ] Paths, exits, mobility access and neighbouring activities remain clear.
• [ ] Long or private enquiries transfer to the approved side area and trained role.
• [ ] Child, safeguarding, conduct and emergency routes are briefed.
• [ ] Contact details use the private approved F05 route where applicable.

10. Configured discussion-question plan

For every selected question:

• [ ] It asks one thing in familiar words and serves the desired outcome.
• [ ] It does not presume need, failure, agreement or willingness.
• [ ] It does not require personal, traumatic, health, family or identity disclosure.
• [ ] Passing and at least one non-spoken response method are genuine.
• [ ] Probes seek useful examples, not unnecessary personal detail.
• [ ] The scribe knows whether the output is a theme, question, option, recommendation or action.

Useful probes: What leads you to that view? What is the practical effect? Who else is affected? What assumption should we test? Have I reflected your point accurately?

11. Inclusive participation and airtime controls

Interventions to rehearse:

• Repeated interruption: I am pausing us so the speaker can finish. I will come to you next.
• Dominant voice: Thank you. I am holding that point while we invite people not yet heard.
• Silence: Take a moment. You may speak, write, use the approved alternative or pass.
• Group generalisation: Let us keep to what we know directly and not ask one person to represent a community.
• Facilitator error: I framed that poorly. I will correct it and ask more neutrally.

12. Difficult-conversation, safety and safeguarding protocol

Dissent includes challenge, criticism, frustration, emotion and refusal. Facilitate it. Disruption is observable conduct that prevents safe participation, such as repeated interruption after redirection, personal attack, discriminatory abuse, threat, intimidation or targeted harassment.

1. Pause and name the observable behaviour.
2. Restate the conduct boundary and invite a reset.
3. Limit the floor or take a short break.
4. Use a private sidebar with two authorised team members where practical.
5. End participation through the approved route when behaviour continues.
6. Stop facilitation and use the emergency route for immediate danger.

• [ ] Do not infer motive, diagnosis or character.
• [ ] Do not physically intervene outside training and authority.
• [ ] Protect a person targeted by abuse without requiring public explanation.
• [ ] Record factual observations, times, action and owner only in the approved incident route.

If a safeguarding concern is disclosed or observed:

1. Listen without pressing for detail.
2. Thank the person for raising it.
3. Do not promise secrecy.
4. Explain that the approved safeguarding route must be used.
5. Ask only what is needed for immediate participation or safe departure.
6. Record the minimum factual information separately from session notes.
7. Report promptly to the named safeguarding lead.
8. Use the alternate route if the primary contact is unavailable or involved.

Response wording: Thank you for telling me. I will not ask you to repeat more than is needed now. I cannot promise to keep this only between us; I must use the approved safeguarding route so the authorised person can respond. What do you need now to participate, pause or leave safely?

13. Capture, decision and parking-lot records

Live capture rules:

• Show the category: theme, question, option, recommendation, decision, action or parked item.
• Ask whether a paraphrase is accurate.
• Remove names unless attribution is approved and necessary.
• Keep safeguarding, health, access, complaints and sensitive personal information out of shared notes.
• Record disagreement rather than forcing consensus.
• Confirm authority before labelling a decision.
• Read back actions with owner and date.

A parked item receives a disposition, not a promise that it will be adopted.

14. Handoff matrix

15. Follow-up, evaluation and debrief

Same day

• [ ] Secure attendance, notes, decisions and actions in approved locations.
• [ ] Transfer urgent safety, safeguarding, incident and access matters immediately.
• [ ] Separate and restrict sensitive records; remove test and informal copies.

Within 24 hours

• [ ] Facilitator and session owner validate themes, dissent, decisions and actions.
• [ ] Each action has authority, owner and due date.
• [ ] Factual errors are corrected before distribution.
• [ ] Thanks are sent only where planned and permitted.

By the promised follow-up date

• [ ] Participants receive what was heard at the promised level.
• [ ] Decisions, open items, parked-item dispositions and next actions are accurately stated.
• [ ] Resources and response routes work and are accessible.
• [ ] Raw notes are not published when a thematic summary was promised.
• [ ] Names and organisations are not disclosed without permission.

Participant pulse:

1. I understood the purpose and what this interaction could influence.
2. I had a workable way to participate.
3. I understand what happens next and when.
4. What should be kept?
5. What should change?

16. Change control, sign-off and release gate

• [ ] Exact code, title, source, disposition, canonical parent and migration route match index v1.1.
• [ ] Purpose, audience, outcome, scope and authority are unambiguous.
• [ ] Every role, handoff and escalation route is named and accepted.
• [ ] Agenda protects access, participation, synthesis, actions and close.
• [ ] Opening, public-interaction and closing scripts sound natural when spoken.
• [ ] Passing and more than one contribution method are genuine.
• [ ] Privacy, safeguarding, disruption and emergency boundaries are rehearsed.
• [ ] Outputs are accurately labelled and every action has owner and date.
• [ ] All local controlled fields are complete or formally accepted as N/A.
• [ ] Editable and accessible distribution copies carry matching version data.
• [ ] Final export is structurally checked and visually reviewed before release.
• [ ] Release evidence and checksum exist before Status changes from REVIEW.

Review decision and comments: ____________________________________________________________