Community Facility Inclusive Use Questions Checklist

Write down every group you can name that uses the facility at present, and note beside each one roughly who makes it up.

A committee usually knows the bookings but not the people in them, and the difference is where the gaps in use become visible.

List the parts of the local community you would expect to see here and do not, and resist explaining any of it away at this stage.

The explanations arrive quickly and are usually wrong; the list of absences is more useful to a designer than the reasons attached to it.

Note who asked for this project and who was present when it was discussed, because that shapes what ends up being built.

A facility reflects the people who turned up to meetings, and naming that early is what allows the group to correct for it.

Record whether one activity has gradually taken over the facility, and note what stopped happening there as that took place.

Displacement happens slowly through repeated bookings rather than by decision, so it is rarely discussed unless somebody writes it down.

Note any group that used the site before and no longer does, and ask them directly why rather than guessing on their behalf.

Former users give the clearest account of what stopped working, and they are the group least likely to be consulted.

Ask local organisations who they work with that never appears here, and keep their answers in the form they gave them.

Organisations already in contact with people you are not reaching are the shortest route to knowing what the facility is missing.

Decide how you would reach people who never come to meetings, and note which of those routes the group has not actually tried.

Consultation that only reaches meeting-goers returns the views of the committee back to itself in a slightly different form.

Keep what people tell you in their own words instead of summarising it into the wording the committee is comfortable with.

Summaries lose the specific detail that a designer can act on, and they tend to smooth away the requests that are inconvenient.

Ask carers, parents and support workers what would make attending possible, and record their answers separately from the users they support.

Attendance often depends on whether the person accompanying somebody can also be there comfortably, which nobody thinks to ask about.

Note requests the project cannot meet, and keep them on the record anyway so the reason remains visible later on.

Unrecorded requests come back as complaints, while recorded ones show that the group heard the point and can explain what happened to it.

Record who was asked and who was not, since the gaps in a consultation shape the outcome more than the answers received do.

A designer reading the consultation needs to know its edges, otherwise silence gets read as agreement rather than absence.

Ask existing users what they think stops other people joining, since they usually notice it well before the committee does.

Regulars see who arrives, hesitates at the gate and leaves again, which is the moment nobody on a committee ever witnesses.

Walk the route people take from the nearest stop, car park or housing, and note where it becomes unclear, uneven or unpleasant.

The approach is nobody's responsibility on most projects, which is why it goes unexamined even when it decides who turns up.

Note where somebody would be set down from a vehicle, and whether a vehicle can stop there without blocking the way in.

Anything involving a public road, a crossing or stopping arrangements is for the local authority and qualified professionals to establish.

Record how the gate opens and what a person carrying kit, pushing a buggy or using a wheelchair would have to do to get through it.

Whether a gate, threshold or route suits a particular user is established by qualified professionals, and cannot be judged from a walk round.

Note which parts of the approach are lit and overlooked, and record which stretches feel unwelcoming once the light has gone.

People decide whether to attend an evening session based on the walk there, not on the facility itself, and they rarely say so.

Record whether people already cut across grass or a boundary to reach the site, since that shows where the route really wants to be.

Worn lines across grass are the users voting with their feet, and building the formal route somewhere else simply keeps the worn line.

Note where cycles, scooters, buggies and bags end up at present, and whether they are left blocking the way in for everyone else.

Anything without a place ends up in the entrance, and the entrance is where it causes the most difficulty for the most people.

Record whether a toilet is available during use, and ask what providing or opening one at this site would involve.

What provision is expected here, and what form it must take, is confirmed with the local authority and qualified professionals rather than assumed.

Note whether anybody can get out of rain or strong sun while waiting, and record where people currently stand when it is wet.

Where people shelter now shows exactly where shelter is needed, and it is usually a doorway belonging to somebody else.

Record where somebody not taking part would sit, because carers, parents and older users stay only if there is somewhere to be.

A facility with nowhere to sit quietly excludes everybody who comes with a participant rather than as one.

Note whether drinking water is available during use and what people currently do about it when it is warm.

Groups routinely solve this privately, and the solution disappears with whoever was bringing it along each session.

Ask the user groups what changing arrangements they actually need, and record their answers rather than assuming what is usual elsewhere.

Needs vary sharply between activities and age groups, and the assumption made in a meeting is rarely the one users would give.

Record where a bag, a pram or a bicycle would be left during a session, and whether such a place currently exists at all.

People who cannot leave their belongings anywhere either carry them or stop coming, and both outcomes go unmentioned.

Write down which times each group holds at present, and note how those slots were originally allocated to them.

Long standing allocations are usually historic rather than considered, and nobody re-examines them until a project forces the question.

Record which times are genuinely unused, since those are what a new or smaller group could realistically be offered.

Groups often say the facility is full when only the popular times are, and the distinction changes what is possible.

Note whether any group has asked for a quieter or less crowded time, and record what happened to that request.

Requests of this kind are frequently refused informally and never recorded, so the pattern of who is being turned away stays invisible.

Decide whether some use should be open to anyone turning up, and write down which times those would be.

Fully booked facilities exclude anyone who cannot commit in advance, which is a large part of most communities.

Record whether booking depends on internet access, membership or knowing somebody, and note who each of those leaves out.

The booking arrangement is often the single biggest barrier at a facility that is otherwise open to everyone.

Note who decides allocation when two groups want the same time, and whether users regard that person as neutral.

Allocation disputes turn into withdrawal rather than argument, so a group simply stops appearing and nobody records why.

Read the existing notice as somebody who has never been here before, and record everything it fails to tell that person.

Notices are written by people who already know how the site works, so they answer questions nobody outside the group is asking.

Note whether any notice says how to join or book, or whether it only lists what is not allowed.

A sign made entirely of prohibitions reads as a closed facility even when the group intends it to be open to all.

Record which languages are spoken locally and ask the user groups whether the current wording works for the people they know.

Asking the groups themselves avoids both guessing and tokenism, and it gives the committee something specific to act on.

Note whether the photographs and names used to promote the facility show only one kind of user.

People decide whether a place is for them from the pictures long before they read anything written underneath them.

Record where information about the facility currently sits, and whether somebody without a smartphone would ever come across it.

Information held only in one social feed reaches the people already connected to the group and nobody else at all.

Ask whether wording about who the facility is for has discouraged anyone, and keep the answers you are given.

Terms that feel neutral inside a club can read as membership requirements to everybody standing outside it.

Treat every question about access requirements as one for qualified professionals and the local authority, and write it down as a question.

What access requirements apply at this facility is established by qualified professionals and the local authority; nothing here determines any of it.

Ask the relevant governing body what it sets out about inclusive participation for the activities that take place here.

Guidance on participation for a given activity comes from the relevant governing body, and it differs between activities and levels of play.

Ask a qualified professional what information they need from you about your users before any design work is done.

Professionals can only respond to what they are told about the people using a site, and most groups supply far less than is useful.

Record any advice received along with who gave it and when, and never treat an informal comment as a settled answer.

Informal comment from anybody, including an officer, is not a decision; ask what would have to be confirmed formally and record the reply.

Note which user requests you cannot judge yourself, and pass that list to the professional in full rather than filtering it first.

Filtering by what the committee thinks is reasonable removes exactly the requests a professional would have known how to handle.

Ask what has to be confirmed locally before the facility is opened to groups beyond its current users.

Whether wider use changes what applies at this site is for the local authority and the landowner to establish before any commitment is made.