Local decision making: tracking commitments

Executive summary

An internal proposal for maintaining a clear connection between community priorities, organisational decisions and follow-through.

Local Decision Making should be judged by whether community priorities influence real programs, services and decisions.

Context and evidence

The register is a recommendation, not evidence of existing commitments. Before recording a response as agreed, the responsible organisation should confirm its wording. An unanswered request remains open; it should not be described as acceptance or support.

Proposed response

IRAAC should propose a simple commitments register with a responsible owner, an agreed action, supporting records and a next review date. Staff should distinguish matters within IRAAC’s authority from matters requiring another body’s decision. Any public update should accurately reflect the status of that decision.

Purpose and intended audience

This iraac edition is prepared for iraac board and authorised program staff. Support decisions, assign responsibilities and identify the evidence needed for a reliable update. It should be read alongside the other audience editions, which consider the same issue from different responsibilities. The proposed destination does not establish that anyone received, endorsed or approved this report.

What a useful next update would show

The next edition should identify which proposed actions were accepted, what was actually completed and what still needs attention. Supporting records should be checked before any result is reported. If evidence remains limited, the report should say so rather than infer progress from activity alone.

The next internal step is to nominate an owner, confirm the source material and take any proposed decision through the appropriate review process. This publicly viewable demonstration edition contains no private operational records and does not confer approval or authority to act.