Council plan crosswalk

From Council plans to design and practical checks

Integration path · Question register · Source library

AI-generated analysis · 21 October 2026. The source column paraphrases documented arrangements. The design and check columns are proposed applications for the Aura Disaster Resilience project. The public plans establish those arrangements; actual equipment condition, service performance, appointments and interfaces are confirmed through their own evidence.

M means the supplied Local Disaster Management Plan, version 1.2, December 2025. R means the supplied 2016 Disaster Recovery Plan. Locations below show printed page / PDF page. M has a one-page offset. R usually places two printed pages on one PDF sheet, so use the stated PDF location rather than assuming an offset. Edition and currentness checks explain the recovery review and additional Alfred plans.

Management and community capability

Source and documented arrangement	Proposed design connection	Evidence or comparison to bring back
M §1.1.9, p.17 / PDF18: continuous improvement includes research, innovation, emerging trends and learning with agencies, business and communities.	Use the wiki's comparison and review records to carry a useful idea through evidence, professional findings, a decision and a retest. GOV-02, TEST-06, TWIN-06.	One improvement traced from an observed problem to an implemented, measured change, including unresolved differences.
M §3.5.1, p.57 / PDF58: the community service-provider resilience framework connects local providers and disaster management through the Human and Social Recovery Group.	Develop the proposed Ready S.E.T. Co-op role around useful two-way local information, assistance pathways, learning and resource visibility. GOV-01, OPS-05, ECO-04.	A community service journey and proposed responsibilities that the relevant provider and Council reviewers can inspect. Actual mandate and participation are recorded when agreed.
M §§3.2.11–19, pp.53–54 / PDF54–55; §6.2.3, p.73 / PDF74: formal coordination roles, trained staff and liaison arrangements support the LDMG and LDCC.	Map who proposes, reviews, publishes, allocates, responds and hands over. Distinguish the project's organising groups from Council's statutory and operational groups. GOV-01, GOV-06, WRK-01.	A role and delegation map showing actual appointments and the proposed interface. A personal Aura or AI/SI tool has its own task permissions.
M §§3.4.1–12, pp.54–56 / PDF55–57: meetings include deputies, remote member participation, written status reports, resolutions, correspondence and minutes.	Map the working-together model to these useful record types. XR and Auras can support preparation, access and navigation. WRK-03, WRK-04.	A meeting pack and human-confirmed record. The plan's remote-attendance provisions concern actual members; AI representation or voting would need its own applicable rules and authority.

Information, tasking and continuity

Source and documented arrangement	Proposed design connection	Evidence or comparison to bring back
M §6.2.4, p.74 / PDF75; §6.2.26, p.85 / PDF86: Guardian IMS holds operational information; prolonged power/software failure has a paper fallback with later scanning. Guardian is described as cloud-based and internet-dependent, with continuity support by other councils through agreements.	Compare a locally available digital capture and reconciliation layer with the documented fallback. Begin with a supervised handover or export. SW-02, SW-06, DAT-04, COM-04.	Preserve identifiers, dates, responsible people, actions, locations and attachments across link loss and reconnection. Confirm supported formats and permissions; the plan supplies no API or automatic synchronisation contract.
M §6.2.8, p.75 / PDF76: Guardian already records task, commencement/completion, responsible agency/officer, actions, comments and mapped location, with reporting including situation reports.	Concentrate added value on disconnected community intake, accessible explanations, duplicate handling and dependable transfer to the responsible desk. OPS-05, SW-06, COM-01.	A request changes from locally saved to received, accepted, assigned and completed only when each event is evidenced. Compare relief handovers and unresolved work.
M §§6.2.5–6, p.74 / PDF75: operational intelligence includes impacts, needs, imagery, communications, telemetry and human experience; the LDC owns situation reporting.	Auras and AI/SI could organise dated observations, identify conflicting accounts and draft a source-linked report for the responsible reviewer. COM-06, COM-08, TWIN-01, DAT-06.	Compare omissions, corrections, time and reviewer effort using the same inputs. Retain uncertainty and distinguish observation, inference, simulation and official information.
M §§6.2.1–2, pp.71–72 / PDF72–73: the chairperson/deputy controls activation, with progression possible directly to higher readiness.	Keep official activation separate from kiosk mode, connection, power and source age. OPS-03, OPS-04, ENE-05, SW-10.	Test combinations such as official Stand Up with a disconnected kiosk, and ordinary community service with a failed power supply. Preserve the actual activation issuer.
M §§6.2.16–20, pp.77–82 / PDF78–83: warnings have different responsible issuers and several communication routes, including dashboard, radio, telephone, digital channels and direct outreach.	Build a source/authority matrix. Preserve original warning meaning, area, time and call to action alongside labelled explanations and reviewed accessible versions. DAT-01, DAT-02, DAT-03, COM-05, AUR-03.	Replay updates, cancellations, stale copies, conflicting observations and a lost connection. Check that the public view distinguishes an official warning from community information and AI explanation.
M §6.2.9 and §6.2.11, p.75 / PDF76: district requests for assistance follow prescribed escalation when local capacity is exhausted; isolated-community resupply follows the relevant Queensland arrangements.	Separate a resident's request, a local provider's acceptance and an official district request. Model shortages and transport dependencies without promising an unconfirmed delivery. OPS-05, OPS-07, ECO-03, ECO-04.	Two disconnected locations seek one scarce item. Demonstrate reconciliation, an accountable allocation, the remaining need and a reviewed escalation pack.

Places, people, power and learning

Source and documented arrangement	Proposed design connection	Evidence or comparison to bring back
M p.37 / PDF38; §5.2.12, p.69 / PDF70; §6.2.12, p.76 / PDF77: the plan describes generator-supported primary evacuation centres, operational readiness and fatigue management.	Extend the readiness record through connection, commissioning, load testing, replenishment, access, qualified local cover and relief. ENE-07, ENE-08, ENE-09, OPS-06, ECO-05.	A physically checked asset and roster, with the test configuration and date. Luke's firsthand Alfred account motivates the scenario; the plan's general generator statement neither proves a site's readiness nor establishes a particular failure.
M §6.2.22, p.83 / PDF84; §6.2.23, p.84 / PDF85: centres and places of refuge have activation/closure arrangements; Neighbourhood Safer Places are a last-resort bushfire option.	Give each kiosk host its own status and permitted service. Display a centre's confirmed opening and purpose rather than inferring them from a map. OPS-02, OPS-08, PHY-02.	Test a closed host, an unconfirmed alternate and a stale location record. Direct people using the responsible service's current information and preserve uncertainty.
M §4.1.7, p.60 / PDF61; §§6.2.24–25, pp.84–85 / PDF85–86: community education, Champions, recognised volunteer organisations and donations processes contribute capacity.	Develop approved task learning, availability and referral records with the relevant organisations. OPS-06, AUR-04, GOV-05.	An authorised learner finds the right task edition, rehearses, works within their competence and records the observed result. Keep optional C-Hours separate from qualifications, deployment acceptance, paid work and machine time.
M §§5.2.2–7, pp.65–67 / PDF66–68: training and tabletop, functional and field exercises include communications, equipment and information handling; exercise evaluation includes immediate and later debriefs.	Compare baseline and Aura-assisted methods through the service demonstration, including XR practice and independent observations. TEST-01, TEST-02, TEST-03, TEST-04, TEST-05, TWIN-02.	Plan two to three days of practical testing. Digital-twin simulations can cover any chosen time span. Record simulated duration, computer runtime, bench measurements and field evidence separately; endurance claims use the relevant measured evidence.
M §§6.2.13–14, pp.76–77 / PDF77–78: operational debriefs, After-Activation Review and a post-operation report feed an action plan monitored by the Disaster Management Unit.	Link each lesson to evidence, an owner, a decision and a successful retest. TEST-06, TWIN-06, WRK-02.	Keep exercise and operational review schedules distinct: the plan describes an exercise cold debrief within one month and an operational post-event debrief within two weeks. Confirm the applicable procedure for the actual activity.

Recovery as a continuing service

Source and documented arrangement	Proposed design connection	Evidence or comparison to bring back
R pp.6–7 / PDF8–9: recovery principles include community context, participation, strengths, coordination and effective two-way communication. M §§7.4–5, pp.88–90 / PDF89–91 also supports community-led recovery.	Keep everyday notices, learning, services and community participation useful during recovery. Offer accessible, repeated information through several channels and a route for people to correct the account. OPS-01, ECO-01, ECO-02.	Residents can find a current service and explain their next step; their feedback changes the next information release or proposed action. Include visitors and people using assisted channels.
R p.9 / PDF10: four local recovery functions cover human-social, infrastructure, environment and economy; its historical state structure separates buildings from roads/transport.	Make recovery views useful to each function while sharing the permitted common picture. ECO-04, ECO-05, ECO-06, ECO-07.	Map present-day agencies and actual owners rather than importing 2016 names unchanged. Keep the local four-function model distinct from the state structure described in that edition.
R p.12 / PDF11; pp.15–16 / PDF13: recovery can prepare early; formal activation, impact/needs assessment and event-specific action plans assign priorities, owners and timeframes.	Record what happened, what someone needs, urgency, local/external capacity and the responsible action as related but distinct records. OPS-04, OPS-05, OPS-07, DAT-04.	An impact record becomes a reviewed need, accepted referral and updated action plan. AI/SI can propose priorities with reasons; the responsible people confirm allocation and action.
R pp.18–19 / PDF14–15; p.23 / PDF17: offers, volunteers, donated goods and their logistics require registration, coordination and supervision; Guardian is named for recording offers.	Connect offers to actual needs and custodians. Support the revised food/Shared Table connection through agreed referrals and availability. OPS-07, ECO-04, GOV-05.	Trace one accepted offer through condition, storage, transport and delivery, with an unresolved need visible. Confirm the current receiving process and system interface. C-Hours retain their no-price, no-sale and no-transfer rules.
R pp.43–44 / PDF27; pp.45–50 / PDF28–30; p.51 / PDF31: accessible help, private interview areas, secure documents, centre records and organised outreach support people beyond a central venue.	Separate public information from personal requests. Provide authorised private assistance, interpreter routes and consent-based outreach with actual staff, safety, transport and referral arrangements. DAT-05, AUR-01, PHY-03, OPS-06.	Test a guest, a person needing an interpreter, a sensitive referral and an outreach handover using fictional records. Assess current privacy, security and cultural permissions for the actual data flow; the older plan is not a complete contemporary digital-data design.
R pp.8–9 / PDF9–10; p.21 / PDF16; p.25 / PDF18: recovery transitions include continuing needs, changed roles, service handover, reporting and evaluation.	Keep unresolved needs and ownership visible when official response stands down or temporary services close. OPS-04, TEST-06, TWIN-06, WRK-02.	Handover to a continuing service identifies its actual acceptance, resources and next review. An event's end date does not silently mark every household's recovery complete.

Questions to resolve with the relevant source owners

The next review should establish current subsidiary plans, relevant Alfred actions, the replacement recovery-plan edition, actual service owners, data-sharing conditions, supported Guardian exchange and the observed baseline. Detailed procedures may sit outside these two public documents. An unlisted specification is a design question, rather than evidence that Council lacks the capability.

Guardian IMS and QIT Plus examines public product and company information, existing named integrations, the vendor's scoped offline claim and a proposed Council–supplier–community partnership path for personal Auras. It distinguishes supplier-wide descriptions from the plan's documented local arrangements.

For a twin or AI explanation, retain source dates. M's risk summary at §2.3.3, printed p.45 / PDF46, explicitly uses a previous plan; demographic material also retains its census/estimate dates. Keep those editions distinct from new observations and modelled futures.

Use current legal and professional review for the actual proposed action, including privacy and records duties. Your Relevance, P4A Legal RAG and Australian Legal Engine help trace sources; applicable law, operative dates and the responsible review remain explicit.

Return the result through the integration evidence template, professional-review method and Council integration path.