A strategic communications needs assessment for a community-based mental health organization
The situation
A community-based mental health organization wanted to make its services clearer, more accessible and easier to navigate for people and families.
The engagement was designed to create an evidence base for communications planning, Board discussions, future accreditation-related work and broader organizational improvement.
It also reflected the organization’s commitment to equity, diversity and inclusion. Leaders wanted to understand where language, accessibility, geography and system-navigation barriers could make it harder for people and families to find information or access support.
The organization had strong relationships and committed employees. However, too much service knowledge depended on individual employees explaining programs and processes in real time. Public information did not always answer the practical questions people, families and referral sources needed.
The organization needed evidence, not assumptions, to guide its next steps.
My role
I led the overall engagement, strategic communications direction and client relationship.
Recognizing that a credible strategy required deeper research and engagement expertise, I brought in a specialist partner to strengthen that part of the work. I set the engagement direction, oversaw delivery and remained accountable for integrating the research, operational information and communications analysis into a clear set of findings and priorities.
My partner led specific research and engagement activities. My role was to ensure that the evidence answered the organization’s strategic questions and could be translated into practical direction for leaders and the Board.
My work included:
-
Defining the engagement direction and priority questions
-
Assembling and leading the project team
-
Overseeing the research and engagement approach
-
Reviewing communications, service information and digital channels
-
Connecting findings to organizational and governance priorities
-
Identifying communications, accessibility and service-navigation gaps
-
Integrating evidence from multiple sources into a coherent strategic narrative
-
Developing Board-ready themes, implications and recommendations
-
Presenting the findings and proposed direction
-
Connecting the work to future communications planning and accreditation-related evidence needs
What the assessment found
The work identified an important distinction between being trusted by people who knew the organization and being understood by the broader community.
Most community partners surveyed had referred people or families to the organization. However, only one in five said its services and eligibility requirements were completely clear.
Questions remained about:
-
Which services were available
-
Who was eligible
-
How to make a referral
-
What happened after a referral
-
What people and families should expect while waiting
-
What accessibility and language support was available
-
What happened when another service was a better fit
The most significant communications friction appeared around referrals, waitlists and the transition into service.
The assessment also showed that accessibility, language and inclusion needs were often addressed by committed employees through case-by-case problem-solving. This responsiveness was a strength, but it created uneven experiences and made available supports difficult to see in advance.
The strategic approach
I positioned communications as part of service access and organizational quality, not simply promotion.
The findings were organized around the questions people and families needed answered throughout the service journey. This shifted the focus from increasing awareness in general to improving clarity where confusion could delay access, weaken referrals or create unnecessary stress.
The assessment also helped distinguish communications issues from broader system-capacity pressures. This gave leaders a more realistic basis for action and reduced the risk of treating every service challenge as a marketing problem.
The organization’s commitment to equity, diversity and inclusion was treated as a practical service consideration. The question was not only whether inclusive values appeared in organizational language, but whether people and families could experience those commitments when seeking information and support.
The recommendations focused on:
-
Creating a reliable source of service information
-
Clarifying services, eligibility and referral pathways
-
Improving communications across the service journey
-
Making accessibility and language support more visible
-
Reducing reliance on informal employee explanations
-
Strengthening communications with referral sources
-
Building more consistent feedback and engagement practices
The impact
The engagement gave the Board and leadership team a data-informed view of how communications affected access, trust, inclusion and organizational quality.
Rather than relying on anecdotal impressions, leaders had findings drawn from employees, community partners, referral sources, operational information and a review of the organization’s existing communications.
The work:
-
Brought multiple sources of evidence into one strategic assessment
-
Identified service-navigation and accessibility gaps
-
Connected equity, diversity and inclusion commitments to practical improvements
-
Gave the Board a clearer basis for oversight and priority-setting
-
Established a baseline for future communications and engagement work
-
Generated findings that could inform accreditation-related evidence and planning
-
Created a foundation for future service-navigation tools and communications strategy
Most importantly, the work reframed communications as part of the care journey.
The organization left the assessment with credible evidence, clearer strategic priorities and a stronger understanding of what people and families needed from its communications.