Goal Quality Self-Assessment Rubric • Sharpen Strategy

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G
1	GOAL QUALITY SELF-ASSESSMENT RUBRIC
2	#	Criterion	What you’re checking	0 = Missing / Off‑track	1 = Needs work	2 = Solid	3 = Model example

3	1	Mission & strategy alignment	Does it progress toward the longer term plan (or theory of change (ToC) / strategy)?—why this, why now?	No clear link to long-term plan/strategy or broader context of organization's mission.	General link to long-term plan/strategy or general relevance to the organization's mission.	Clear and obvious link to long-term plan/strategy (any team member could explain the connection).	Strong, strategic fit with clear rationale; directly advances the long-term plan/ strategy and includes a compelling “why now.”
4	2	Clarity of the outcome	Is it clear what success looks like? Could a stranger picture the end‑state without follow‑up questions?	Vague (“improve awareness”) or multi‑idea jumble.	Clear/specific verbs but undefined nouns/adjectives; jargon (“political effectiveness”) or multiple results mashed together.	One concrete, plainly worded (or defined) result; single idea.	Laser‑specific, concrete language a layperson can visualise instantly.
5	3	Meaningful markers of progress	How will you know if you've been successful? Are you looking at markers of strategic progress, not just activity? (Markers could include indicators, metrics, qualitative information, or others, depending on your approach.)	No clear method to observe progress or success, or uses a number that can grow without real impact (e.g., follower or impression counts).	Has a marker(s) of success, but tracks easy‑to‑count activity rather than real change; unclear whether hitting the target actually moves the mission.	Uses outcome‑focused markers of success that signal real change, but targets, baselines, or a learning plan are only partly defined.	Mission‑linked markers of success (quantitative and/or qualitative) with baseline + target that give a clear, actionable picture of progress and drive regular reflection and decisions.
6	4	Audience specificity	Exactly whose behavior, condition, or decision must change? (This might not always be a human — e.g., "Change menus at four restaurants")	Target group missing or “the public.”	Broad group only (“leaders,” “policymakers”).	Group narrowed by segment or geography (e.g., “school nutrition directors in California's Central Valley”).	Exact, countable group + why they matter (e.g., “All 22 nutrition directors in that region (they choose menus for 400k meals/day so changing their minds changes a lot of lunches)").
7	5	Actionability	Would a team know how to act on it, and would their actions align with the goal-setter’s intent?	No clear path to action; team members would interpret it in inconsistent or contradictory ways.	Some direction is implied, but multiple interpretations still possible; requires guesswork.	Most team members would understand how to move forward and act in line with the goal.	Obvious, clear next steps; teams can act efficiently and consistently without extra guidance.
8	6	Timeframe	Does it have a clear timeframe that is appropriate for the scope and urgency of the work?	No timeframe is given or timeframe is completely unrealistic.	A timeframe is included but it's vague, overly ambitious, or too open-ended to drive planning.	Clear timeframe that matches the scope of the goal and supports effective planning.	Strategic, motivating deadline, aligned to broader context (campaign, funding cycle, external milestone). May include interim checkpoints.
9	7	Inspiration & Motivation	Is this challenging but still within reach? Will staff and key partners feel unified and excited by the goal?	Value is unclear; raises “so what?” questions.	Resonates with insiders, but may confuse or fail to inspire others.	Clearly meaningful to core team and stakeholders; conveys shared purpose.	Broad audiences and internal team feel energized by common 'north star'; goal tells a compelling story.
10		Sample goal		Increase plant-based food in schools.	Increase plant-based food options in schools during the next school year by getting 500 petition signatures.	By December 2025, secure commitments from three large urban school districts to increase plant-based meals. This will set an example and build momentum for other districts to follow.	By December 2025, secure written commitments from 3 NYC school districts to shift at least 25% of meals served to plant-based by 2026—impacting over 850,000 daily meals and modeling large-scale institutional change for other districts. [Bonus] The goal above is a stretch goal. We feel highly certain that at least 1 district will commit and that commitments will be for at least 5% of meals. Failure = 0 commitments.
11
12		* After reviewing each goal individually against the rubric, remember to review the whole list of goals together for strategic link, prioritization, and preventing over-extension
13
14
15
16	Bonus Extras — these might not be built into the wording of the goal itself, but are useful to define somewhere (in a strategic plan or similar doc)
17	8	Resourcing	Scope, budget, and staff hours match reality.	Impossible with known resources; more like a wish‑list.	Big stretch; resource needs unknown.	Stated resources are sufficient to tackle the goal.	Resources are sufficient to tackle the goal and includes contingency/slack.
18	9	Ownership & accountability	Who drives it and how is progress surfaced?	Nobody named as owner.	Team named but no review rhythm.	Single owner (or co‑owners) + review cadence.	Owner + transparent method for tracking progress (e.g., dashboard) + review check‑ins on calendar.
19	10	Learning loop	Pre‑planned audits, pivots, or criteria for stopping.	“Set it and forget it.”	“We’ll look at it later” but no trigger or date.	Review trigger defined (e.g., after pilot or at Q3).	Scheduled reviews + criteria to pivot/expand/stop.
20
21