--- file_id: TLRI-COMMUNITY-BRIEFING-STARTER version: 0.1 timestamp: 2026-09-19 status: DRAFT_REVIEW_CANDIDATE checksum_hint: sha256-body:14e2031f80c4e59c5255de071e6b5e75ddcedaed9494741740e461edd1ba8d62 --- # [One clear public question] **DRAFT — complete the evidence and human review before sharing.** Briefing ID and version: [ ] Publisher: [name and accurate independent or authorized status] Published: [date, time, time zone] Important current claims checked together through: [date, time, time zone — only after the complete check] Next review: [date or event, with named owner] Corrections: [named person and tested public contact route] > [One sentence saying what this briefing explains.] ## Start here [Write about 100–175 words: what the issue is; why it matters now; who is affected; what is known; who can decide; and what a reader can responsibly do next. Do not add unsupported claims in the introduction.] ## The current picture ### Known - [Exact supported statement, source ID/link, date, relevant limit.] ### Developing - [Changing or partial information, source, uncertainty, next check.] ### Unresolved - [Missing or disputed answer; what would establish it; who can answer. Do not offer an action that assumes the answer.] [For a simple single-status notice, use a shorter format if these headings add no understanding. Record that decision in working notes.] ## Who can answer, decide, or act? | Actor / office | Role supported by evidence | What this does not establish | Checked source or contact | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | [ ] | [Know / decide / carry out / correct / authorize] | [Limits] | [ ] | ## What this means [Explain interpretation separately from facts. Describe relevant options and trade-offs. Do not present a proposal as a decision already made.] ## What happened and what comes next [Use this timeline only if it makes the issue easier to understand.] | Date | Event or expected step | Status and source | | --- | --- | --- | | [ ] | [ ] | [ ] | ## A useful next step [One proportionate action, the responsible person or office, and the checked contact route. State what they can answer and what to do if the route fails. If the public job is understanding alone, say so rather than inventing an action.] ### A question you can use “I’m trying to understand [specific issue]. The public notice says [supported statement], but I could not confirm [missing detail]. Does your office decide this, or can you identify who does? Where can I find the current written information?” [Adapt or replace the script to fit the issue. Do not ask readers to send private cases to the publisher.] ## Sources, limits, and corrections | ID | Public source and owner | Checked date, time, zone | Supports / does not establish | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | [S01] | [Title and URL] | [ ] | [ ] | - What this briefing cannot settle: [ ] - Correction owner and route: [ ] - How corrections are handled and any response limits: [ ] - Version history: [version/date; what changed and why; preserved earlier version] --- # Working notes — keep private material out of public copies ## Audience and scope - Public job and intended readers: [ ] - Canonical publication location and channels: [ ] - Publisher’s authority and explicit limits: [ ] - Children, caregivers, or classrooms considered: [ ] - Separate family explanation needed? [reason and planned output, or alternative access] - Dashboard / timeline / comparison needed? [reason] - Practical field tool needed? [reason] ## Evidence before prose Give every important claim an ID, including claims in the headline, introduction, diagrams, and scripts. | Claim ID / location | Exact claim or unknown | Type | Source IDs | Support, uncertainty, next check | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | [C01] | [ ] | [Fact / interpretation / option / open question] | [S01] | [ ] | | Source ID | Title / owner / URL | Source status | Checked by / date, time, zone | Lawful evidence record / limit | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | [S01] | [ ] | [Officially verified / supplied public flyer / directly reported / public community post / conflicting / awaiting confirmation / archived] | [ ] | [ ] | Preserve only lawful, appropriate source evidence. Access to internal, family, cultural, or case material does not make it public. Record what was excluded and why: [ ]. ## Reader layers and fidelity - Short introduction: [version] - Status display when useful: [version] - Fuller supporting explanation: [version, public or internal] - Children/family explanation when needed: [version] - Field tool when an action is promised: [version] - Actual released channels: [website / print / email / social / live] - Comparison evidence: [same claims, sources, certainty, authority limits, privacy decisions, next step, and correction route across every layer] A family explanation should use people, places, choices, care, and what happens next. Preserve uncertainty, avoid false reassurance, and do not transfer adult responsibilities to children. Do not claim a tested reading level without reader evidence. ## Review and human decision - Second reader and date: [ ] - Read-back: [reader’s account of claim, uncertainty, who decides, next step, correction route] - Repairs and observed recheck: [ ] - Qualified review needed for consequential legal, medical, child, safety, eligibility, allegation, Tribal/band, or protected-context claims: [who, scope, evidence, unresolved limits] - Exact output versions reviewed: [ ] - Named human decision: [share / repair / hold; reasons and evidence] A completed checklist does not establish that a check was performed. Keep the record that supports each decision. ## Maintenance and correction - Important current claims checked as a set through: [date/time/zone, or incomplete] - File edited: [separate date] - Review trigger / next calendar check / owner / backup: [ ] - If a needed check is late or unavailable: [show the stale condition; reduce certainty; remove dependent action or pause the current route] - Correction exercise or actual correction: [change, reason, every affected output, owner, result] - Prior versions and source record preserved at: [ ] - Handoff instructions another person can use: [ ] ## About this starter Draft guide companion, prepared 19 September 2026 from the Community Briefing Template and Protocol v1.1 candidate and Community Briefing Language and Output Audit v1.0, both dated 11 September 2026. The full protocol remains a candidate: adoption requires a worked briefing, a correction exercise, a second-operator handoff, and a named owner decision. This shorter starter does not replace the full controls or establish that those exercises have passed. This new starter has not completed reader testing.