2026 Research proposal · Internal · Board review
Our first annual report — The State of Peacemaking in the U.S. Built for media, partners, and donors. Produced in 60 days for ~$2,000. The fastest, cheapest path to authority a new nonprofit has ever had.
The thesis
Never been wanted more. Never been more misunderstood.
— Proposed report headline, 2026
Why now
People want better conversations at the dinner table. They want to disagree without losing a friendship. They want to feel less anxious in rooms with people unlike them. They want their kids to grow up able to navigate hard moments. They want to repair the relationship they cut off three years ago.
What they don't have is a clear answer to how. What skills does peacemaking actually require? What do you practice on Monday morning? Where do you learn? Who teaches? What works, what doesn't, and how would you even know?
The country knows what it wants. It does not know how to do it. That gap — between aspiration and capability — is the opportunity this report names.
What the data will show us.
The Perception Survey tells us how Americans currently think about peacemaking — what they assume it is, what they think it requires, and whether the word itself helps or hurts.
The Pathways Survey tells us what people have actually tried when they wanted to make peace in their own lives — what worked, what failed, what they wish had existed. Together, the two surveys answer the only question that matters for Peacemakers: what skills are people looking for, and how can we help them get there?
What's inside
We are launching with the data only Peacemakers can credibly produce — a national perception survey and a first-of-its-kind pathways survey. Both are original. Both are publishable. Together they make the case.
1,000+ U.S. respondents, census-proportionate. Tests how Americans see the word peacemaker — its connotations, who claims it, who rejects it, where it polls religious or political, and where the rebrand opportunity lives. This is the section that delivers the headline statistic.
300–500 active seekers — people who have tried to resolve a real conflict in the last 24 months. What they tried, what worked, what failed, what they wish had existed. This is the on-ramps data — and it is data no one else has. It positions Peacemakers as the org that knows what people actually need.
Future research opportunities — held for the 2027 and 2028 reports. Once the annual is established, the report expands to include The Field Map (a taxonomy of organizations doing this work), The Lexicon (definitions of peacemaking, bridging, dialogue, restorative justice, and adjacent terms), The Practitioners (who is doing the work — demographics, burnout, what they wish funders understood), and The Forecast (AI, generational shifts, the workplace as the new peacemaking frontier). Launching narrow in 2026 lets us prove the model, build the audience, and earn the right to expand.
Why it matters
No organization currently owns the State of Peacemaking. The first to publish it credibly will be cited for years.
For Peacemakers
An annual report establishes us as the voice for the field. It generates leads, attracts partners, justifies funder conversations, and produces twelve months of derivative content.
For media
Journalists are tired of polarization stats. We give them the response side — fresh numbers, a sharp thesis, and a clean headline statistic to lead with.
For funders & donors
Foundations, family offices, and major donors underwrite credibility. A published, citable national report — produced fast and lean — opens doors that weeks of cold outreach cannot.
For the public
The report reaches people who feel the need but don't have the word. It hands them a vocabulary, a community, and a way in — Peacemakers becomes the on-ramp.
For peer organizations
Other orgs — Braver Angels, More in Common, USIP, Search for Common Ground — get a landscape document they can use. We become the connective tissue, not a competitor.
The multiplier
A flagship like this isn't a single artifact — it's an engine. Here is what the same research yields when distributed properly.
1
Flagship web report + PDF
1
Launch op-ed (NYT, Atlantic, NPR, or RNS)
5–7
Embargoed press placements
1
Keynote / TEDx talk pitch
6
Podcast appearances
12
Short-form video assets
4
Webinar conversations
52
Weeks of newsletter content
100+
Shareable social cards & quote graphics
2
Partner co-publications
1
Baseline for the 2028 report
∞
Citations & secondary references
The asymmetry
The only true outlay is respondent incentives on Prolific. Research design, statistical analysis, editorial writing, brand-quality design, distribution, and the 18,000-person launch audience are already in-house. What other nonprofits pay professional fees for, Peacemakers already owns.
$50–85K
Typical cost of a flagship research report
~$2K
Our total cost — respondent incentives only
This is the distinct advantage. It lets a brand-new nonprofit publish work that, in any other context, only a well-funded institution could afford. We don't have to fundraise for this. We don't have to wait for the budget. We start now.
The targets
1,500+
Total survey respondents
200+
Organizations mapped
50M+
Earned media impressions
What it costs
Because the in-house talent and audience are already in place, the entire production budget for the 2026 report is respondent incentives on Prolific.
1,000+ respondents · Prolific panel · census-proportionate
~$1,500
300–500 screened active seekers · longer instrument · higher per-respondent rate
~$500
Research design, analysis, writing, design, distribution, audience reach
In-house
Total request
~$2,000
What this means. We do not need to raise money before we publish. We do not need a fiscal sponsor, an underwriter, or a foundation grant to begin. The report can be funded out of the Year 1 Strategic Development & Research line and produced before the 501(c)(3) is even formally granted.
Timeline
A compressed sprint that mirrors how a small, talented team actually works — and lands the report during the late-year window when division, reconciliation, and end-of-year reflection are already top of mind for media and readers.
Oct 1–10
Finalize both survey instruments. Pre-test on a small pilot group. Lock the thesis questions.
Oct 11–25
Launch both surveys on Prolific. Live monitoring of response quality and demographic balance.
Oct 26 – Nov 9
Coding open-ends, statistical analysis, headline findings. Confirm or correct the thesis.
Nov 10–24
Editorial write-through, brand-system design, embargoed press outreach to 3–5 outlets.
Nov 25 – Dec 1
Public release. Op-ed runs day-of. Social rollout to the 18,000-person audience begins.
The ask
There is no Phase 1, no tier selection, no underwriter conversation to wait on. The cost is small enough to start this week — the only thing to decide is whether to do it.
Decision 1
Approve ~$2,000 from Year 1 Strategic Development & Research for respondent incentives.
Decision 2
Authorize the 60-day sprint to begin October 1, targeting an early-December launch.
Decision 3
Designate a board sign-off contact to review the draft headline findings before public release.
If we are right about the thesis, this report becomes the document the field cites for a decade. If we are wrong, we learn what is actually true — and that finding is just as valuable.