Communication regarding the mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Cooperative Research Units Program (CRU) can take many forms, yet clear and concise messaging for various audiences is critical to highlight program accomplishments and increase visibility. Before the work described in this report, CRU did not have a communication strategy; therefore, CRU leadership supported a structured decision-making (SDM) workshop to develop a comprehensive strategy for multiple audiences. The workshop was conducted in November 2024, in Nebraska City, Nebraska. The working group for this SDM process included CRU Program leadership, the CRU Communications Team lead, Unit scientists, a Unit administrative assistant, a representative of the Wildlife Management Institute (WMI), a member of the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area (EMA), Office of Communications and Publishing (OCAP) team, and the team lead for the CRU Program strategic planning process, as well as three facilitators who were also unit scientists as well as experts in SDM. Over the course of a week, the SDM team followed the PrOACT framework which identified the problem, objectives, alternatives, consequences, and tradeoffs to guide us toward a strategy for implementation of a set of actions for CRU communications. Results of the SDM workshop included the development of a problem statement, an objectives hierarchy, a suite of alternatives that were evaluated using a consequences table and a clear process for assessing tradeoffs among alternative communication actions and strategies. Through the evaluation of consequences of each action or campaign, the team developed both the assessment tool (for the future) and an immediate plan for communication product development and distribution. The consequences table for this problem was meant to be flexible to accommodate changes in CRU thematic priorities and can be easily updated with new objectives, measures, and alternatives. In addition, the weight placed on objectives may change as the Team moves forward; the ranking and scoring system used in the workshop can be easily updated. Overall, the working group identified three different actions or campaigns—Fact Sheets, Who Are We Campaign, and Alumni Campaign—that scored high in the prototype decision framework. However, the tradeoffs analysis indicated that each action(s) performed better on some objectives than others. The working group identified a need to therefore develop an implementation plan that is composed of individual actions that each target different objectives to potentially create a holistic and feasible communications strategy that performs well for all objectives. In addition, the SDM prototype developed a scalable, objective-based framework for effectively communication of the value and accomplishments of the CRU program.