Think Tank and Policy Organization Presentation Template

Think tanks and policy institutes exist to translate research into influence. The presentations they build must do something unusual: communicate complex, evidence-based analysis to audiences who range from subject-matter experts to elected officials with thirty-second attention spans. A research briefing for a Senate committee staff director must be structured differently than a funder pitch to a program officer at a major foundation — even if the underlying work is the same.

This template covers the four presentations policy organizations use most.

Research Briefing

Used when presenting findings to policymakers, legislative staff, agency officials, or media. The goal is to move the audience from uninformed to ready-to-act — not to demonstrate the depth of your research process.

Slide 1: The Policy Problem

Open with the specific problem in terms that a non-specialist can understand. Quantify the stakes: how many people are affected, what the economic cost is, how the situation has changed over time. Policymakers need to understand why this problem is urgent before they will engage with analysis about it.

Slide 2: The Evidence Base

Summarize the research methodology and data sources in two to three sentences. Who conducted the research, how large was the sample, over what period, using what methodology? This is not the place for a detailed methods section — it is the place to establish that the findings are credible and the sample is relevant.

Slide 3: Key Findings

Present three to five findings as clear declarative statements. Each finding should be supported by a single data point or visualization. Avoid technical jargon and statistical notation unless your audience is composed entirely of specialists.

Do not bury the most important finding in the middle of a list. Lead with what matters most.

Slide 4: Implications

What do the findings mean for current policy? Where is existing policy misaligned with the evidence? What are the highest-leverage intervention points? This section requires genuine analytical judgment — do not simply repeat the findings with slightly different phrasing.

Slide 5: Policy Options

Present two or three specific policy options with tradeoffs. For each option: what it does, who it would affect, what the evidence suggests about its likely impact, and what its political feasibility constraints are.

This section should be non-partisan in framing while being clear-eyed about the evidence. The strongest policy briefings make the case for what the research shows without pretending that political realities do not exist.

Slide 6: Recommended Action

State your recommendation clearly. If your institution takes a formal policy position, state it here. If you present options without a recommendation, be explicit about why.

---

Funder Proposal

Used when presenting a research agenda or program to a foundation, major donor, or government grant program.

Slide 1: The Problem You Are Addressing

Why does this research or program need to exist? What is the gap in the evidence base, or where is current policy flying blind? Funders need to understand the problem before they can evaluate whether your proposed solution is the right one.

Slide 2: Your Organization's Approach

What is your methodology? What makes your approach more rigorous, more credible, or better positioned than existing work on this question? This is the place to distinguish your research model from others working in the space.

Slide 3: The Proposed Work

What specifically will you produce, by when, and for whom? Define the outputs: research reports, policy briefs, testimony, convenings, data products. Define the audiences who will use them. Define the specific policy windows you are targeting.

Slide 4: Expected Impact

What changes if this work is successful? Which specific policy outcomes are plausible, and what is the evidence that research like this influences those outcomes? The strongest funder proposals draw a clear line from the research output to a specific change in law, regulation, or practice.

Slide 5: Organization and Team

Who will conduct this work? What are the relevant qualifications, track record, and institutional relationships? List previous policy wins that your research contributed to — testimony cited in legislative reports, research referenced in regulatory rulemakings, reports adopted by government agencies.

Slide 6: Budget and Timeline

A clear project budget and work plan timeline. Funders scrutinize indirect cost rates — be prepared to explain yours.

---

Congressional Testimony Preparation

Used internally to prepare researchers for congressional or agency testimony. This is not a public-facing document; it is a preparation tool.

Testimony Summary: The key points the witness will make, in order, with the supporting evidence for each.

Anticipated Questions: A list of the questions most likely to come from members on both sides, with recommended answers.

Data Points to Memorize: The three to five statistics most likely to be cited or challenged, with sources.

Red Lines: Topics that are outside the scope of the research, where the witness should acknowledge the limits of their expertise and redirect.

Framing Guidance: How to present findings in terms that resonate with the specific committee's priorities without misrepresenting the research.

---

Policy Recommendation Deck

Used for broader stakeholder engagement — coalition partners, state and local officials, advocacy organizations, or the media.

The Problem: A brief, accessible framing of the issue.

What the Evidence Shows: Three to five findings, translated for a general audience.

What Works: Evidence-based interventions that have demonstrated impact in comparable contexts.

The Policy Recommendation: A specific, actionable recommendation — not a general principle.

Who Needs to Act: Which decision-makers have the authority to implement this recommendation, and what specifically would they need to do.

How to Engage: Concrete ways the audience can support the policy change — contacting their representative, participating in a comment period, amplifying the research.

---

Common Think Tank Presentation Mistakes

Burying the recommendation. Policy organizations sometimes hesitate to be direct about their recommendations, presenting findings in exhaustive detail before arriving at an implication. Decision-makers with limited time will not wait. Lead with what you want them to do.

Specialist language for generalist audiences. A research briefing for a Senate aide is not the place for confidence intervals and regression tables. Know your audience and translate accordingly.

Failing to address political feasibility. A recommendation that ignores the political context in which it will land is not a policy recommendation — it is a research conclusion. Effective policy presentations engage with feasibility constraints.

No ask. Every presentation should end with a specific request: vote for this amendment, include this provision in the authorization bill, direct your agency to issue a request for information. Vague calls for "awareness" produce no change.

---

Create your policy and research presentations with slide-deck.io — built for the high-stakes briefings that turn evidence into action. Apply your institution's brand and export to PowerPoint for distribution to policymakers and funders.