Smart Chart: Strategy, Planning and Evaluation
One of the most important things foundations can do to help grantees create and implement
strong programs is to fund strategy. All too often -- especially when it comes to communications
-- groups rush to tactics – releasing reports, planning press conferences, etc. Yet, without a
solid strategy, they end up with no yardstick by which to measure the progress of their efforts.
Before you invest in important communications activities, you can ensure they will support the
grantees’ goals – and yours -- by using the steps outlined in the Spitfire Strategies Smart Chart
for Communications Planning (www.smartchart.org). This free resource – available in a print
and online format – was designed with two goals in mind:
1. To help nonprofit organizations make smart choices and develop high-impact
communications plans; and
2. To help foundations evaluate proposals and identify successful strategies– or provide
necessary feedback to potential grantees so that they can improve the core components
of their proposal.
Once grantees have completed the Smart Chart, they can easily spot gaps in the strategy or
inconsistencies between their strategy and tactics. The Smart Chart can help grantees maintain
clear, reliable choices as they plan various stages of their work. As they work through their
various choices, each decision must be supported by a clear rationale. This allows groups to
make decisions based on the best information they have, and ensures that those choices drive
subsequent steps in the planning process.
Review proposals with an eye to strategy. The Smart Chart – when completed properly – is
am important tool to help you evaluate a plan and gauge its potential impact. With this tool, you
can trace key decisions made by grantees to support solid strategy, and easily spot potential
problems -- positioning you to work with grantees to fill in the gaps and ensure success. When
you receive a proposal, you can use the Smart Chart criteria to evaluate the three most
important elements of strategy:
1. The proposal should describe a goal-driven strategy – not just a series of connected tactics.
The logic and activities outlined in the proposal should create a clear progression toward a
clear, quantified, achievable goal.
2. The strategy should be targeted and consistent. If the organization is targeting, for example,
young people in one element of their plan, and elected officials in another, and plans to use the
same communications messages and tactics to reach both groups, you’ve got major
inconsistencies on your hands and the applicants should be encouraged to do some further
thinking.
3. The strategy must take into account the realities of the organization and the environment in
which they are operating. A clear accounting of capacity, opposition or competition,
relationships and real world events should all be reflected in the strategy articulated in the
proposal.
Smart Chart Step by Step: Program Officer’s Checklist
□ In step 1, Program Decisions:
Is there a measurable/doable goal (with a timeline under 24 months.)
□
□
□
□
YES
NO
Do they have a clear sense of how change is going to happen? Does the chosen
decision-maker have both the power to give them what they want and influence to sway
other potential decision makers (if appropriate.)
YES
NO
Do they have OUTCOMES -- not just outputs -- as measurements so they can see that
the strategy is connecting?
YES
□
NO
□
□ In step 2, Context:
Do they have a clear sense about where the debate is?
□
□
□
□
YES
NO
Have they assessed what is going on to inform and influence their efforts?
YES
NO
Are they able to make a case for why their strategy is sound, based on internal and
external issues?
YES
□
NO
□
□ In step 3, Strategic Choices:
Do they have a clear audience target (not the general public?)
□
□
□
□
□
□
YES
NO
Do they have messages that are tailored to this audience based on a value the audience
holds?
YES
NO
Do they have a clear and distinctive theme that will drive their communications?
YES
NO
If they are tailoring to a specific audience value, do they have a sense of what
challenges this will mean for the organization as they select language and make other
choices, such as spokespeople?
YES
□
NO
□
□ In step 4, Communications Objectives:
Do the objectives seem like the best ways to get messages to audience targets?
□
□
YES
NO
Do the objectives seem appropriately scaled to the goal and audience? Does the plan
match the scope of the problem?
YES
□
NO
□
In step 5, Tactics:
For tactics, do they have a clear sense of cost and time this will take?
YES
□
NO
□
Watch for common mistakes. The Smart Chart can also help you spot the mistakes made by
many nonprofit organizations as they engage in advocacy and communications around their
issues. This checklist can help you head them off at the pass:
□ A goal of “raising public awareness” – this is too expensive to measure, and too broad to be
meaningful.
□ The general public as a target audience. Targeting everyone means you reach no one.
□Media as an audience target is also to be avoided (media relations objectives are fine.)
□” Framing” well-worn issues. If the issue is already in the public mind, it’s more likely that the
organization needs to take that into account and shape their efforts accordingly – they can
reframe if they don’t like where the current frame takes them, but remember that will take time
and money.
□ Plan doesn’t reflect an understanding of state of present debate – this often signals that the
group has not been sufficiently rigorous in their study of the context for their work.
Review proposals with an eye to capacity. Every communications effort will demand time
and resources, and you can help your grantees evaluate their capacity in the following
areas:
 Money – does this proposal reflect the entire budget for their communications effort,
or will they need to secure additional funding?
 Staff time and expertise – does the grantee have the internal ability to execute their
strategy, or will they need to call on outside help?
 Intellectual knowledge – is there a basis of research that the grantee has generated
or can draw upon to support their case?
 Reputation – does the organization presently enjoy a strong reputation among the
targeted audiences, or will that take time to develop?
 Spokespeople – does the organization have access to spokespeople who can
connect with their intended audiences, or will they need to cultivate new
spokespeople (which can take time, effort and training)?
 Allies/Coalitions – are there strategic alliances in place (if needed) to help them
advance toward their goal?