10 FAH-1 H-040
PUBLIC DIPLOMACY STRATEGIC PLANNING, REPORTING AND
EVALUATiONS
(CT:ASH-5; 11-16-2018)
(Office of Origin: R/PPR)
10 FAH-1 H-041 INTRODUCTION
(CT:ASH-5; 11-16-2018)
a. Strategic planning, reporting, and evaluation are
essential components of effective public diplomacy. Since an embassy public
affairs section plays a key role in all three of these components, Rs Office
of Policy, Planning, and Resources (R/PPR) has developed a series of online
tools to assist posts in developing strategic plans, and created the Mission
Activity Tracker, a web-based database to facilitate planning, reporting and
capturing results of PD activities. R/PPR also established a Research and
Evaluation Unit to lead, manage, and coordinate audience research, performance
monitoring and evaluation of key programs and projects funded by the Under
Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs (R).
b. The following provides guidance to posts on all
three components of the process: strategic planning, reporting and evaluation.
(1) Strategic Planning:
Strategic Planning is the essential first
component of any successful public diplomacy campaign or activity. Strategic
planning at Post begins with the Integrated Country Strategy (ICS) and
continues with the Public Diplomacy Country Context (PDCC) and the annual
Public Diplomacy Implementation Plan (PDIP).
(a) The ICS is the Mission-wide strategic planning
document prepared on a triennial basis. Each Public Affairs Section (PAS) is
responsible for including public diplomacy goals in the ICS.
(b) The Public Diplomacy Country Context, a triennial
document, collects from posts a view of country-specific information related to
public outreach and engagement including demographics and analysis. It is
designed to give interested stakeholders an immediate understanding of the
societal, political, economic, and cultural environments that exist within a
country and of the key audiences the post is trying to reach. This document is
critical in preparing both the ICS and the PDIP. It also can streamline
preparation for Principal Officer visits, desk officer briefing papers and
interagency planning efforts.
(c) The Public Diplomacy Implementation Plan (PDIP) is
an annual strategic planning document that assists posts by clearly linking
public diplomacy programs with the Missions priorities as articulated in the
ICS. Each Posts PAS crafts a PDIP using the PDIP online tool to outline
significant PD initiatives and activities in support of Mission goals. For
each activity, the Public Affairs section will identify primary target audience
sectors; ECA, IIP, and other PD program tools that will be used to advance the
objective; the relevant themes; and the expected outcomes.
(d) A well-conceived PDIP strengthens the PAOs ability
to clearly document to Mission and Department leadership the connection between
PD programs and Mission priorities. A PDIP conceived and created in close
coordination with the Front Office and the regional bureau PD office informs
the PAOs chain of command of the actions the PAS plans to take to support
policy goals and provides a basis for prioritizing new emerging mandates. The
Diplopedia PD Strategic Planning site provides detailed resources to assist
PAOs in forming their strategic plans.
(2) Reporting:
The key reporting tool for the Public Diplomacy
Section is the Mission Activity Tracker (MAT), an online system for reporting
public diplomacy programs and activities. MAT is the sole source of
comprehensive data on global public diplomacy activities, and serves as an
archive for future research. Posts enter brief narratives on each activity and
identify themes, audiences, mission goals and results. The PDS may also wish
to submit a longer front-channel reporting cable for particularly significant
programs or activities, or initiatives with multiple activities. Such a report
would enable the PDS to provide a fuller description of the initiative and
could result in wider readership. MAT and other forms of reporting play a
critical role in monitoring the performance of PD programs.
(3) Research and Evaluation:
Evaluations are increasingly important for all
State Department programs, including public diplomacy. As 18 FAM states: The
Department of State is committed to using performance management best
practices, including evaluation, to achieve the most effective U.S. foreign
policy outcomes and greater accountability. Evaluations enable the Department
to monitor performance, measure results, and inform policy, planning and budget
decisions.
The R/PPR Research and Evaluation Unit (REU)
improves the effectiveness of U.S. mission public diplomacy activities
worldwide through research to better target audiences and evaluation in order
to understand how PD programs meet their objectives.
(a) REU/Research:
(i) The Research Unit provides PAOs and other PD
practitioners with the same type of research that political campaigns,
marketing campaigns, and other communications campaigns use: research that
helps its users maximize the impact of their limited communications resources
that helps PAOs get the biggest bang for their PD buck.
(ii) To achieve that mission, R/PPR Research produces
several original product lines and also provides informal consultation to PD
practitioners who want to do their own research.
(b) REU/Evaluation:
(i) The Evaluation Unit coordinates performance
monitoring of public diplomacy activities and conducts rigorous evaluations of
key public diplomacy programs and projects. It supports PD practitioners in the
pursuit of useful program evaluation, and such evaluation yields evidence on
which to base decisions about program design and resource allocation. REU
Evaluation conducts program evaluations using rigorous data collection methods
and innovative analytic approaches. In addition to conducting evaluations,
REU/Evaluation provides instruction and consulting on all aspects of evaluation
design to help Post implement performance monitoring and evaluation abroad.
(ii) Purpose of Evaluations: Evaluations help PD
practitioners understand whether programs operate effectively and what outcomes
result from programming efforts. This information enables them to make
informed decisions on budgets, programming, and effective application of public
diplomacy tools.
(iii) REU/Evaluation evaluates PD programs, projects,
products, and initiatives.
(iv) REU/Evaluation conducts evaluations as needed,
primarily focused on program outcomes. The subjects of such evaluations are
selected in consultation with bureaus and posts.
(v) REU/Evaluation supports PD practitioners by
providing instruction and close consultation in program evaluation and
performance monitoring.
(vi) REU/Evaluation also offers resources such as
brainstorming, program research, consultations, a toolkit, and workshops to PD
practitioners upon request.
(vii) REU/Evaluation chairs the PD Evaluation Working
Group, a community of PD practitioners whose mission is to tackle
administrative policies that pose a challenge to effective research of PD
programs; to periodically review and revise the PD Evaluation Policy; and to
support each other in advancing the craft of PD evaluation.
(viii) REU/Evaluation encourages the use of the MAT and
other reporting tools as the foundation for performance monitoring and
evaluations. Other bureaus (including the Regional Bureaus, ECA or IIP) may
also use MAT and other reporting messages from posts to design evaluations.
Evaluations of PD programs draw data from many sourcesa major one being the
MAT.