|
|
|
| Target Plans
Funders start with traditional proposal formats—need statements, scope of work, goals and objectives, etc. Investors start with three questions:
1. What is the result for those served?
2. What are the chances that result will be achieved?
3. Is this, given all opportunities before us, the best possible use of our money?
They then ask respondents to give them information responsive to those questions. Here are examples of the key differences to proposal logic: |
Shift from emphasis on mission, vision, history and values to focus on core know how and past achievement. While mission and vision are important, they tend to define aspirations more than reality. Core know-how that gives comparative advantage to a group and clarity on past achievements (not awards received but success for those served) are more powerful predictors of success.
Shift from Goals and objectives to clear and verifiable targets—which are the results from activities (like counseling) and from outputs (like plans or other documents). The investor wants a very clear statement of what constitutes project success and how the implementer will know when it has been achieved.
Shift from workplan (what implementers will do) to milestones (the key steps for participants that get them from where they now are to the target set). Milestone management is the outcome equivalent to workplan compliance—and much more predictive of achievement. |
