Philanthropic Advocacy Readiness Checklist
A practical checklist for philanthropists and not-for-profits to assess whether an organisation is ready for strategic, evidence-informed government advocacy.
By Neil Pharaoh, Co-Founder + Director at Tanck Government Engagement
Funding advocacy without foundations risks wasted effort, reputational exposure and limited policy impact. We’ve developed the below checklist to identify whether an organisation has built these foundations—evaluating the strength of their government engagement function. Funding organisations that meet these criteria strengthens democratic processes by ensuring civil society engages government in a way that is disciplined, evidence-informed and durable.
This is where philanthropic capital has its highest leverage: not amplifying noise, but underwriting readiness, credibility and long-term influence.
This is a checklist for philanthropists to evaluate whether an organisation is ready to deploy funding in its advocacy efforts. Equally, not-for-profits can use this list to see how they would rate in the eyes of a potential philanthropic investor.
Take a look at the questions below and give each one a “yes” or a “no” answer
1. Electorate awareness
Does the organisation actively map its inputs (volunteer, donors, staff etc), outputs (services, programs etc), outcomes and stakeholders to specific state and federal electorates, rather than treating government as abstract or distant?
2. Full parliamentary engagement over time
Has the organisation made at least one direct contact with every relevant State and Federal Member of Parliament across an election cycle, signalling seriousness and non-partisanship?
3. Comprehensive stakeholder mapping
Does the organisation maintain an up-to-date stakeholder map covering all five government groups?
• Ministers and Shadow Ministers
• Members of Parliament and candidates
• Central agencies
• Political parties
• Policy departments
4. Local and portfolio-level engagement
Has the organisation engaged both local MPs (upper and lower houses) and relevant portfolio Ministers and Shadow Ministers in the past 12 months?
5. Deliberate engagement cadence
Does the organisation intentionally use social media and its organisational calendar to engage each government stakeholder group at least three times per year?
6. Politically literate messaging
Does the organisation have two concise, two-page political overviews ready to deploy:
• one framed conservatively
• one framed progressively
7. Formal policy participation
Has the organisation contributed to budget submissions and/or parliamentary inquiries in the past 12 months?
8. Consistent engagement discipline
Does the organisation have a written, active quarterly engagement rhythm that clearly sets out the five things it always does in relation to government engagement?
9. Political party policy engagement
Has the organisation met with Labor or Liberal policy committees, equity groups or party branches in the past year?
10. Portfolio-aligned proof points
Does the organisation have tailored case studies aligned to each relevant Federal and State portfolio and electorate, rather than relying on generic examples?
Scoring and interpretation: Two points for each yes answer, zero points for each no.
Maximum score: 20
How to read the score
• 0–6 → Low engagement and limited visibility with government
• 8–12 → Developing capability; activity without full strategy
• 14–18 → Strong, consistent and politically literate engagement
• 20 → High influence and genuine readiness to engage government constructively
This article was written as part of the development of Tanck's 2026 whitepaper together with Perpetual Wealth.
Tanck offers advisory services in government engagement, advocacy, stakeholder strategy, and communications.
We share our political expertise and government experience so you can achieve your funding and policy goals.
