Benchmarks / DeckBench / Wrenfield Borough Council

Measured by Spring Prompt

Gemini 4 Hydrogen: Library services: choosing how to save £350,000

For the council's cabinet (elected members), meeting in public. The decision it supports: which of three options to adopt to save £350,000 a year from libraries.

Verdict: Not presentable
Deck rating: 1,147
Slides: 6 (brief: 5-8)
Design quality: 67%

Why it is not presentable

Layout defect: something off the slide, colliding, too small or too faint to read
Drew a conclusion from a figure without its caveat

In detail

Caveat missing: respondents were mostly weekly users (82%, against 21% of card holders), not representative of residents.
Slide 2: 2 text boxes set at 9.5 pt, too small to read
Slide 3: 2 text boxes set at 9.5 pt, too small to read
Slide 4: 2 text boxes set at 9.5 pt, too small to read
Slide 5: A text box set at 9.5 pt, too small to read

Slide 1Download slide imagePolished Subtitle wraps and leaves the single word '2027' orphaned on its own line; widen the text box or rebalance the line break
Slide 2Download slide imageAcceptable The recommendation panel is text-heavy, with long bullet lines that take time to scan.Lower 'Why officers recommend' panel has a large empty area below the three bullets, so the panel looks oversized
Slide 3Download slide imagePolished
Slide 4Download slide imageAcceptable The table and chart repeat the cost-per-visit figures without visually highlighting the two libraries named in the headline.Table repeats the cost-per-visit data already shown in the bar chart
Slide 5Download slide imageAcceptable The comparison relies on dense, wrapped bullet text rather than aligned comparison rows, slowing cross-option scanning.Roughly the bottom third of each option card is empty
Slide 6Download slide imageAcceptable The title, recommendation banner and three cards repeat much of the same information, increasing reading load.The three reason cards are about half empty below the text