POLITICAL PARTY
PROGRAMMING GUIDENational Democratic InstituteThe National Democratic Institute (NDI) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, nongovernmental organization that responds to the aspirations of people around the world to live in democratic societies that recognize and promote basic human rights.
Since its founding in 1983, NDI and its local partners have worked to support and strengthen democratic institutions and practices by strengthening political parties, civic organizations
and parliaments, safeguarding elections, and promoting citizen participation, openness andaccountability in government.
With staff members and volunteer political practitioners from more than 100 nations, NDI
brings together individuals and groups to share ideas, knowledge, experiences and expertise.
Partners receive broad exposure to best practices in international democratic developmentthat can be adapted to the needs of their own countries. NDI’s multinational approach reinforces the message that while there is no single democratic model, certain core principles areshared by all democracies.
The Institute’s work upholds the principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It also promotes the development of institutionalized channels of communications among citizens, political institutions and elected officials, and strengthens their ability to improve the quality of life for all citizens. For more information about NDI, please visit
www.ndi.org.
Copyright © National Democratic Institute (NDI) 2014. All rights reserved. Portions of thiswork may be reproduced and/or translated for noncommercial purposes provided NDI is acknowledged as the source of the material and is sent copies of any translation. Printed in the
United States of America.

455 Massachusetts Ave, NW
8th Floor
Washington, DC 20001
Telephone: 202-728-5500
Fax: 202-728-5520

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 iACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The National Democratic Institute (NDI) is indebted to all the individuals who helped bringthis document to fruition. NDI’s Sefakor Ashiagbor and Nicholas Benson developed this publication. The following made various contributions to the guide: Thomas Carothers of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Anna Larson, Shannon O’Connell, Kristen Sample
and Sam Van der Staak of the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance,
Bjarte Tørå of The Oslo Center for Peace and Human Rights, and the following NDI staff: Ancuta
Abrudan, Aaron Azelton, Francesca Binda, Tina Byenkya, Michael Fedynsky, Kent Fogg, Rebecca Feeley, Susan King, Lauren Kunis, Susan Markham, Erin Mathews, Lisa McLean, Alison Miranda, Daniel Mitov, Melissa Muscio, Alison Paul DeSchryver, Ana Radicevic, Linda Stern andPhilippa Wood. In addition, this guide draws extensively on a number of resources developedby the Institute’s Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning team. It also builds upon previous NDI
projects implemented with assistance from Bryon Gillespie and Steve Powell.
In October 2013, a number of NDI field and headquarters staff met in Washington D.C. to discuss global challenges in monitoring and evaluating political party assistance programs. The
results of that discussion helped inform portions of this guide. The Institute would like to thankthe following staff for their participation in that event: Sara Barker, Olena Botsko, Tina Byenkya,
Miguel Castilla, Asya Kislyuk, Amy Kroll, Alison Miranda, Mufaddal Moiz, Philippa Morgan,
Laura Nissley, Catalina Nuta, Victor Salcedo, Sara Sapon, Asif Shah, and Binny Subba.
The Institute gratefully acknowledges the support of the National Endowment for Democracy,
which provided funding for this project.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 iiPREFACE
Political party assistance is undergoing a transition. In recent years, a growing number of implementers have become involved in party assistance, and donors who had previously been reluctant to support these programs have expressed a new interest in the sector. These developments present challenges as well as opportunities. Broader recognition of party development
as a critical element of democracy support is long overdue. However, it has been tempered byconcerns about poor public perceptions of political parties in both emerging and establisheddemocracies, the need to better demonstrate results, and frustration over the slow pace of party reform in many countries. Simply put, while party assistance has greater legitimacy in the
democracy support community, there is also increased awareness of, and concern about someof the challenges involved in supporting party reform. At the same time, the increased variety
and interest in the party assistance community creates greater opportunities for dialogue regarding emerging trends, lessons learned, and challenges facing the sector. The Political Party
Peer Network – an informal network of party assistance providers and donors – is serving as
one forum for some of these discussions.
For more than 30 years, NDI has worked with democratic parties in over 90 countries aroundthe world to create more open political environments in which citizens can actively participate
in the democratic process. While party assistance has always been at the core of its mandate,over the years the Institute has adapted the assistance it provides based on new trends in party
organizing, shifting political landscapes, the needs of its partners, and an ever increasing bodyof knowledge and expertise. Today, more complex programs, increasingly diverse operating
contexts and approaches, and the quest to improve monitoring and evaluation require assistance providers to update the tools and frameworks they once used to design and evaluate theirwork. Similar efforts are underway across various sectors in international development.
The Will, Space, Capacity Framework is part of NDI’s efforts to meet the challenges of a new era
in party assistance. The framework is designed to help donors, assistance providers and evaluators consider how formal and informal rules and institutions, the general political environment, and other factors influence political will and opportunities for party reform in different
contexts. This has implications for how theories of change are framed, program strategies aredeveloped, expectations are set about the likely pace and type of reforms in different operating
environments, and program successes and shortcomings are analyzed. While the framework
does not offer instant solutions to the various complexities of party assistance, it should help
readers gain new insights into the obstacles to and possible approaches for supporting the development of more effective and inclusive parties.
The Institute is grateful to those who helped bring the framework to fruition.
Kenneth Wollack
President

Ivan Doherty
Senior Associate
Director of Political Party Programs

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 iii

Finally after decades of international assistance forpolitical party development, here is a guide to thesubject well-informed by the lessons of extensive
practical experience, the recognized need for better
contextual analysis, and attention to the rigors ofmonitoring and evaluation. Certain to be usefulto practitioners and party activists everywhere
engaged in this challenging but vital enterprise.
—Thomas Carothers
Vice President for Studies
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 ivTABLE OF CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

ii

PREFACE iii

INTRODUCTION 

2

THE WILL, SPACE, CAPACITY FRAMEWORK 

6Functions 

8Party Attributes 

9Principles 

10Competencies 

12Key Drivers of Party Behavior 

13

Political Space 

13

Political Will 

14Capacity 

15

DESIGNING AND MANAGING POLITICAL PARTY PROGRAMS 
Laying the Groundwork 

17
17

Step 1: Political Context 18

Step 2: Party Functioning 

18

Step 3: Problem Analysis 

19Developing a Strategy 

24Stakeholder Analysis 

25

Program Goals, Objectives and Theories of Change 30Choosing Activities 37

Measuring Change 

49

Indicators 

50

Data Collection and Analysis 53

M&E During Program Implementation 

59

Ongoing Reflection and Analysis 60Managing Relationships 

61

Selecting Which Parties to Work With 

62Managing Relationships with Political Parties 63

Working with External Stakeholders 

70

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 vAPPENDICES 

72

Appendix 1: Common Challenges in Various Party Systems 

72Appendix 2: Problem Tree Analysis 

75Appendix 3: Stakeholder Analysis 76Appendix 4: Risk Analysis 

79Appendix 5: Randomized Control Trials and Political Party
Programming ~ Issues to Consider 

81

Appendix 6: Polling for Monitoring and Evaluation ~ Issues to Consider 

83

Appendix 7: Using Indices for Monitoring and Evaluationof Party Programs ~ Issues to Consider 

85

Appendix 8: Outcome Map 

88

Appendix 9: Force Field Analysis 

90

REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY 91

FIGURES
Figure 1: How Parties Contribute to Representative Governance 

7

Figure 2: The Will, Space, Capacity Framework 

8Figure 3: Party Functions 

8

Figure 4: Party Attributes 

9Figure 5: Key Drivers of Party Behavior 

13Figure 6: Context Analysis 

17

Figure 7: Sample Problem Tree 

22

Figure 8: Putting Change in Perspective 

32

Figure 9: The Political Cycle 

33

Figure 10: Party Strategy Map 36

Figure 11: Results Framework Example 1 

52Figure 12: Results Framework Example 2 

53National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 viTABLES
Table 1: Cause and Effect Analysis Using the Will, Space, Capacity Framework  23
Table 2: Engaging Different Program Stakeholders 

27

Table 3: Stakeholder Analysis for a Policy Development Program 

29

Table 4: Addressing Space, Will and Capacity 

31

Table 5: Analyzing Risks and Developing Mitigation Strategies 

35

Table 6: Skills-Building Activities 

38

Table 7: Organizational Systems and Processes Activities 

41

Table 8: Dialogue Activities 

43

Table 9: Data Collection Methods 

54

Table 10: Data Collection and Analysis 

58

Table 11: Party Assistance Tiers 

64Table 12: Stakeholder Analysis Tool A 

77

Table 13: Stakeholder Analysis Tool B 

78

Table 14: Risk Analysis – Results Framework 

80

TEXTBOXES
Textbox 1: NDI‘s Approach 

4Textbox 2: Democratic Principles 

9Textbox 3: M inimum Standards for the
Democratic Functioning of Political Parties 

11

Textbox 4: Burkina Faso - Mobilizing Civil Society for Political Change 

26

Textbox 5: Peru - Organizational Capacity 

39

Textbox 6: Pakistan- FATA Multiparty Dialogues 

42

Textbox 7: Public Opinion Research 

45

Textbox 8: Iraq - How Public Opinion Research Can Help
Make the Case for Party Reform 

47

Textbox 9: Common Challenges Associated with Data Collection 

56

Textbox 10: Some Potential Solutions to Problems with Data Collection 

57

Textbox 11: Party Memoranda of Understanding 

67

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 vii

POLITICAL PARTY
PROGRAMMING GUIDENational Democratic Institute                 1INTRODUCTION
In every region of the world, public opinion polls show widespread support for democracy as
the best form a government. People want the ability to participate in government and publicaffairs and to choose their political leaders. They also want to benefit from accountability ingovernment, respect for human rights and equality of treatment. To be successful and maintainpopular support, however, democracies must also produce visible improvements in citizens’
quality of life, a key factor in preventing autocratic regimes and anti-system movements fromgaining ground.
In democratic systems, final authority lies with the people. Political parties are one of the
primary avenues through which citizens can exercise that authority and participate in politicallife. When citizens join political parties, donate money or time, help to shape party policies, orstand for office under a party ticket, they are exercising some of the basic rights that are partand parcel of democracy. Democracy is more likely to develop and endure when all segmentsof a society are free to participate and influence political outcomes without suffering bias or
reprisal. How political parties define, engage and mobilize their constituents has implications
for the extent to which citizens feel included in public affairs, represented by political leaders,and able to hold their leaders to account.
Political parties contribute to democratic governance by aggregating and representing theinterests of their constituents. They play that role through certain key functions. Parties
propose policies that are representative of their members. They campaign on those policies andstrive to implement them when in power. When in opposition, parties help hold governments
accountable by contributing to oversight of the executive and critiquing or presenting
alternatives to ruling party policy proposals. This competition of ideas encourages each party
to refine its own proposals and seek common ground with others; it can also result in better
outcomes for the public. Thus, parties provide citizens with a space to express their policy
preferences, opportunities to influence the direction of their government, and a means to holdthat government accountable at election time. Moreover, how parties formulate and seek toadvance their policy proposals has implications for the extent to which governments are able
to improve public welfare.
In healthy multiparty systems, there is sufficient party competition to allow the electoratea meaningful choice: too many parties may cause the political landscape to be fragmented
and unstable, whereas too few may lead to a highly polarized political environment. Parties
in vibrant democratic systems embrace civil competition but are also capable of the debate,dialogue and compromise required for government to function.1
While civic groups have key roles to play in developing and sustaining democracy, vibrant politicalparties are equally necessary. Civil society without effective parties and political institutions
creates a void, giving opportunities to demagogues and extremists who undermine democratic
governance. While there are parties without democracy, there can be no democracy without
political parties. Parties in many countries may be flawed, but they are also indispensable indemocratic governance.
For more than 30 years, NDI has worked with democratic parties in over 80 countries aroundthe world to create more open political environments in which citizens can actively participate
in the democratic process. The Institute shares tools, strategies and techniques that parties canuse to develop stronger connections to the public, mount competitive electoral campaigns,
and perform more effectively in the legislature. The Institute’s multi-partisan programs seek
1. Peter Burnell, Building Better Democracies: Why Political Parties Matter (London: Westminster Foundation for
Democracy, 2004), 5.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 2to foster vibrant, competitive, and sustainable multiparty systems rather than to promoteparticular parties or ideologies.
In recent years, the international community has shown an increased interest in supporting
political party development as a component of democracy assistance. A growing number of
implementers have become involved in party assistance, and donors who had previously beenreluctant to fund these programs have expressed a new interest in the sector. The nature of party
assistance has also changed. Implementers now work with parties in a broader range of contexts
than in the past. Although trends vary from one region to another, recent years have also seen
longer-term funding for political party programs, enabling implementers to move beyond anelections focus and to engage parties in organizing and outreach outside campaign periods. In
addition, assistance has moved beyond basic capacity building to attempts to support reform
both in individual parties and at the party system level. While support to parties in closed politicalenvironments is hardly new, a renewed wave of pushbacks – often more sophisticated and moreaggressive than in the past – is challenging assistance providers to explore new strategies.
As party assistance has evolved, questions have arisen about how programming can be better
tailored to different operating contexts, take into greater account some of the underlying factorsthat shape party behavior, and be more effectively monitored and evaluated. Simultaneously,
the changing nature of relations between political parties and citizens, and widespreaddisenchantment with party politics in many established democracies, has spurred debate about
whether party assistance is based on models of party organizing that are unrealistic or obsolete.
For instance, given that many political parties in established democracies face declining
membership numbers, some have questioned whether the mass-based party is a 20th century
institution and whether assistance providers promote idealized versions of party organizing.2
In recent years, there has been substantial debate within the party assistance community
regarding these and other new developments, emerging trends, and lessons learned. This has
led to the emergence of the Political Party Peer (PPPeer) Network, which serves as a forum
where assistance providers discuss these and other issues affecting their field.3
More complex programs, increasingly diverse operating contexts, and the quest for improved
monitoring and evaluation require assistance providers to update the tools and frameworks
they use to design and evaluate their work. This guide and its companion Context Analysis Toolare designed to help meet that challenge. They recognize the need for:• Conceptual frameworks that can be applied to a wide range of environments;• Context analyses that more explicitly consider the incentive structures that influence party
behavior;• Program design that is informed by more insightful context analyses;• More explicit theories of change; and• Improved monitoring and evaluation.
The guide includes two main sections. The first section describes the Will, Space, Capacity
Framework, which defines the key functions through which political parties fulfill theirrepresentative role in democracies: proposing policies, competing in elections, and participatingin governance. The framework goes on to outline the attributes, in the form of key principles andcompetencies, which enable political parties to fulfill this role effectively and democratically. It
recognizes that while parties’ core functions remain constant in democracies, how they define
2. Tom Carothers, Confronting the Weakest Link: Aiding Political Parties in New Democracies (Washington, DC: Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, 2006), 214.
3. The informal network includes European and American party institutes as well as a variety of donors interested in party
assistance. Periodically, member organizations meet to discuss issues of common interest. A “core group” comprising
IDEA, NDI, the Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy, the Swedish International Liberal Center, the Danish
Institute for Parties and Democracy, the Oslo Center, the International Republican Institute, and the European Network of
Political Foundations sets the agenda for the broader network.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 3their constituencies, and how they interpret and perform these functions, evolves over timeand varies from country to country and from party to party. Finally, the framework outlines
three key drivers of party behavior – political space, political will, and capacity – and discusses
the components of each. The framework is designed for use by program staff, donors, andevaluators who seek a greater understanding of issues to consider in designing, managing andevaluating party assistance.
The second section provides guidance on designing more strategic and effective party
programs using the Will, Space, Capacity Framework. It is primarily targeted to assistanceproviders but may also be of interest to others in the assistance community. The second sectionloosely follows the lifecycle of a typical program. “Laying the Groundwork” discusses research
and analysis that should be conducted prior to designing a program. (Context Analysis Toolthat serves as a companion to this guide provides further details on how to assess operating
environments based on key concepts outlined in the framework.) “Developing a Strategy”
raises issues to consider in determining program goals, objectives, and theories of change,
and in choosing activities. “Measuring Change” outlines common challenges in monitoringand evaluating political party programs, and some potential solutions. Finally, the section
discusses “Managing Relationships,” and includes guidance on selecting parties for assistanceand working with program stakeholders.
While the publication is primarily based on NDI principles, there are numerous approaches toparty assistance. (A summary of the Institute’s approach is included in Textbox 1.) For instance,
while the Institute employs a multipartisan approach with the long-term goal of fostering
competitive multiparty systems, some party institutes focus assistance on like-minded – orso-called fraternal – parties. As a result, some of the specific approaches outlined may not be
relevant for all users; nonetheless, many of the ideas discussed can be applied to a broad rangeof party and democracy assistance programs.

Textbox 1: NDI’s Approach
The Institute seeks to help parties improve the quality of political representation byhelping them to propose policies, compete, govern more effectively, or contributeconstructively in opposition, through the development of organizing skills and astrengthened commitment to democratic principles. In addition, NDI works with parties
and other democratic actors to improve the overall party system.
Multipartisan: NDI takes a multipartisan approach to political party assistance, seeking tofoster competitive party systems where citizens are offered a meaningful choice between
political parties with contrasting policy proposals. As a result, in a given country, rather
than seeking to advance a particular ideological position, NDI typically works with a broad
range of democratically-oriented political parties that represent different political views.
Peer-to-Peer Engagement: Political parties learn best from peers that understandtheir strengths, weaknesses and sensibilities. Founded as a political party institute, NDI
maintains a loose affiliation with the United States Democratic Party but takes no position
on U.S. elections or political issues. In its political party development programs aroundthe world, NDI works closely with the international groupings of political parties. It is the
only organization to have official standing in the three largest international groupings ofpolitical parties representing social democratic, liberal, and centrist democrat ideologies.
The Institute’s relationships also extend to European party groups, as well as to a rangeof political parties in established and emerging democracies. As a member of the global
club (both formal and informal) of democratic parties and party institutes, NDI is able
to facilitate the sharing of experiences and lessons learned on a wide range of sensitive

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 4topics with high-level politicians who have undergone transitions or reforms in their own
countries or parties. This engagement between peers can strengthen the motivation ofparties to adopt reforms that reflect international democratic norms.
Respect for Party Confidences: While parties perform many unique and vital functions indemocratic systems, given their competitive nature, they have strong interests in keeping
certain information confidential. In some cases, this impulse is reasonable and necessary
for healthy competition. NDI’s work is most effective when partners trust the Instituteenough to openly share their concerns and operational challenges. The Institute respects
party confidences, given that this is often a prerequisite for working with partners on
sensitive organizational and strategic changes.
Day-to-Day Work With Parties: The vast majority of the Institute’s political party programs
are implemented by staff based in program countries. This approach allows the Institute
to combine formal technical assistance activities with ongoing, hands-on, informal support
and consultations as political parties/activists put new techniques, skills and knowledge touse. Staff based in program countries can also: develop a broader range of relationships
within parties and among other democratic actors and are better placed to identify andrapidly respond to new opportunities for, or challenges to, political party support.
Tailored Assistance: Even within one country, there are often significant differences inparties’ needs and priorities. In addition to adapting programming to each country context,
the Institute tailors its assistance to each partner’s specific situation and interests. This may
involve party-specific assistance within the context of a program that engages multiple
parties.
30-Day Rule: Regardless of legally-defined campaign periods, NDI normally suspends
partisan assistance to political parties and candidates for the last 30 days leading up toan election. Partisan activities include those that are primarily designed to help parties orcandidates enhance their competitiveness in elections. Specifically, prohibited activities
within this period include but are not limited to assistance with outreach strategies orplanning, platform or message development, and “get out the vote” activities. Activities
permissible within the 30-day window include party pollwatcher trainings, multiparty
forums designed to promote peaceful and legitimate elections, and multiparty debates
organized to raise voter awareness. The primary purpose of this long-standing internal
policy is to minimize or avoid the perception of direct involvement in campaigns. A
number of donors, including the National Endowment for Democracy and the UnitedStates Agency for International Development, have similar guidelines.
Material Assistance: NDI is primarily a provider of technical assistance and does not provide
direct material assistance – in the form of grants, reimbursement of costs for organizing
party activities, or in-kind donations of equipment or services – to political parties orcandidates. In many cases, domestic law prohibits these types of foreign assistance topolitical parties even when provided in a multipartisan fashion. The following are generally
not considered as material assistance to political parties or candidates: subsidizing travel
costs for party activists’ participation in NDI activities; providing general training materials
as part of the Institute’s programming; and hosting resource centers where parties canaccess libraries, the internet, and group meeting spaces. In extremely rare circumstances
and in particularly difficult environments, NDI has made exceptions to its material assistancerule when the funding allows recipient parties to better apply broader technical assistance.
These exceptions have also included strict prohibitions on funding for direct campaign
activities by candidates, parties, or coalitions of candidates/parties.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 5THE WILL, SPACE, CAPACITY FRAMEWORKIn democratic systems, the primary role of a political party is to aggregate and represent citizen
interests. A range of local factors, such as social norms, history and individual incentives,influence how parties interpret this role and what citizens expect of them. For instance, overthe past few decades, political parties in Western Europe have seen drastic declines in party
membership. The number of voters registered as members of a political party has taken asimilar dip in the United States. Increased individualism and social mobility, higher levels of
education, developments in communications technology, and lack of confidence in politicians
have contributed to this decline.4 How political parties in the West will respond to thesechallenges remains to be seen. However, many are adopting new forms of organizing andoutreach, and are reinterpreting their longstanding values in a changing world. In emerging
democracies, different sets of contextual factors shape party behavior. Political parties in suchenvironments will also have to respond to challenges resulting from changing landscapes andevolving citizen expectations. For instance, in Tunisia, where political debate was severely
restricted until President Zine El-Abadine Ben Ali was ousted in 2011, fledgling parties had toquickly establish internal structures, form coalitions, and compete in elections. At the sametime, they began responding to demands for increased women’s participation by forming new
women’s wings, conducting outreach, and in one case, implementing an internal quota.
As societies and citizens’ expectations of their parties and governments evolve, so too dodefinitions of what it means to be participatory, inclusive and accountable. If parties are toremain representative, they must evolve in response to their political environments. Regardlessof the political context or operating environment, parties can strengthen their contributions
to a vibrant multiparty democracy by striving to encourage more participation and conduct
better outreach – even as standards change. Further, over time, party methods for conducting
outreach, policy research, and other activities may change to reflect new organizational
approaches and technological tools.
Given the varied nature of political parties and their environments, there is no ideal model forpolitical parties in developing democracies to emulate. Nevertheless, there is consensus thatparties must meet certain basic standards of openness and accountability. Efforts to articulatebroadly-accepted guiding principles for democratic parties include NDI’s Minimum Standards
for the Democratic Functioning of Political Parties5 and the Council of Europe’s Code of Good
Practice for Political Parties.6 Further, despite significant differences in operating environments,
there is a long tradition of party-to-party exchanges for sharing effective organizing practices.

4. “Lonely at the top: Is the mass political party on its way out? And does it matter?” The Economist, August 4, 2012, http://
www.economist.com/node/21559901.
5. NDI, Minimum Standards for the Democratic Functioning of Political Parties (Washington, DC: NDI, 2008).
6. Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly, Resolution 1546, “Code of good practice for political parties,” April 17, 2007,
http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta07/ERES1546.htm.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 6Figure 1: How Parties Contribute to Representative Governance

Representation
Functions• Propose Policies• Compete in Elections• Govern

Attributes
Competencies:• Organizational
Processes• Outreach• Policy Formulation

Principles:• Participation• Accountability• Inclusion
The Will, Space, Capacity Framework outlined below focuses on the key functions through which
political parties aggregate and represent the interests of their constituents. Rather than putting
forward a rigid set of criteria or benchmarks for party functioning, it outlines core principles
and competencies that parties require in order to effectively perform their representative
functions. Figure 1 illustrates how party attributes and functions contribute to representation.
Parties attempt to represent citizen interests by carrying out certain core functions. Parties’
attributes – the principles and competencies they employ in their performance of thosefunctions – impact how well they aggregate and represent those interests, if at all. Because it
addresses each of these elements separately, the Will, Space, Capacity Framework is flexible
enough to be applied in diverse environments and to political parties of varying size, ideology,
membership base, and age. In addition, it incorporates contextual factors and key drivers that
influence party behavior.
The Will, Space, Capacity Framework outlined in Figure 2 has three levels that build on one
another to outline:• The functions through which parties represent the interests of their constituencies,
including proposing policies, competing in elections, and governing;• The attributes, including competencies (technical skills and resources) and principles(values), that parties require in order to effectively fulfill their functions; and• Three key influences or drivers – political space, political will, and capacity – that shape
party behavior.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 7Figure 2: The Will, Space, Capacity Framework

Functions
Attributes

Drivers

The functions are the mechanisms by which parties represent their constituents within thelarger democratic system. In order to be effective and truly aggregate citizen interests, parties
must approach the functions with the goal of representing their constituents, and withan understanding of their concerns. The extent to which this is the case is based on theircommitment to democratic principles and their access to technical skills and resources. The
drivers outline the underlying factors that lead parties to behave the way they do. Loosely, thesethree concepts relate to what parties do, how they do it, and why they behave the way they do.
The levels of the framework, along with their subcomponents, are described in greater detailbelow.

FUNCTIONS
Figure 3: Party Functions

Functions• Propose Policies• Compete in Elections• Govern

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 8In democratic systems, political parties represent their constituencies by performing threemain functions (shown in Figure 3).
1. Propose Policies: Political parties propose public policies regarding how the country
should be governed;
2. Compete in Elections: They compete for power through elections, ideally by promoting
the policies they formulate; and3. Govern: Both ruling and opposition parties are critical to democratic governance.
When in power, political parties are responsible for the direction of their government;
in opposition, they help hold government accountable by voicing credible alternative
policies. Parties should try to implement their policy proposals while in government, or
advocate for them when in opposition.
Ideally, these three actions are related: parties should propose policies that they believe to be in
the best interest of their constituencies, compete in elections based on those policy positions,and implement them once in government or advocate for them in opposition. All of the actions
a party undertakes contribute in one way or another to these three core functions. For instance,
when parties recruit and train candidates, they improve their chances of winning at election
time and enhance their ability to implement their policy proposals in government. Similarly,
parties enter into parliamentary coalitions in order to participate in government and gain theopportunity to implement portions of their policy agenda.

PARTY ATTRIBUTES
Figure 4: Party Attributes

Competencies:• Organizational• Participation
Processes• Accountability• Outreach• Inclusion• Policy Formulation

Principles:

Attributes

The extent to which a party embodies principles of participation, accountability andinclusiveness indicates its commitment to democratic practices. But parties also require
certain core technical skills and capacities in order to function and properly aggregate
constituent interests. Together, these attributes contribute to how effectively parties aggregate
and represent citizen interests in carrying out their functions. Figure 4 outlines key attributes
for effective and democratic functioning. Each is described in further detail below.

Textbox 2: Democratic Principles
The principles outlined under party attributes – accountability, participation and inclusion– stem from certain underlying rights and freedoms that, taken together, form the basis forrepresentative democracy. Many of these values are captured in the Universal Declarationon Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948. Central to these values is theprecept that all citizens are free to contribute to the direction of governments. One of themeans by which citizens shape government is by joining political parties, participating

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 9in party activities, and standing for office. When they are accountable, participatory andinclusive, political parties play an important role in promoting rights that are fundamental
to democracy. Parties that do not espouse these principles weaken or jeopardize
democratic governance. Core democratic freedoms and rights include the following:• Right to participate in government: Citizens must have the right to participate in theirgovernment by voting, standing for elective office, or taking part in public service. A
democratic government should have representative institutions at every level. It should
be formed on the basis of a universal secret ballot. Elections must be regulated fairly
and impartially, and must avoid intimidation by state or non-state actors.
• Freedoms of expression and association: Democracy requires due legal process;the rights of free expression, assembly and association; and a free and impartial
media. Citizens should be free to hold opinions and express them, and to form
economic, social or political associations to advocate for them.
• Accountability: Elected officials are held accountable to the public through free andfair elections.
• Rule of law: The law must apply to all citizens equally, and the power of all public
officials must be defined by law and interpreted by an independent and impartial
judiciary.
• Tolerance of diversity: Citizens and governments should accept diverse opinions,cultures and identities. All citizens must have the right to participate on equal terms,
regardless of race, gender, language, religion, national or ethnic origin, politicalopinions, or socioeconomic class.
• Informed citizenry: A democratic society must be committed to educating its citizens
so they have the capacity, resources and information to effectively participate ingovernment.

Principles
Every society and community comprises different interests, views, values and ideas. Becauseof this diversity, it is generally impossible for a particular party or leader to represent an entire
society. Some may seek to represent certain socioeconomic groups such as workers, farmers
or business owners, or may organize around specific issues like the environment or internet
freedom, while others may identify with regional, ethnic or gender groups. When parties areaccountable to their constituencies, and promote inclusion and participation, they become an
important space for citizens to participate in the political process and hold their government
accountable. Moreover, when political parties apply these principles in their interactions withother democratic actors, they promote democratic competition and participation in the party
system as a whole. These principles flow from certain core tenets that underpin democracy,such as the right to participate in government, freedom of expression, and accountability.
Textbox 2 summarizes some of these broader principles.7,8

7. David Beetham, “Democracy: Key Principles, Institutions, and Problems,” in Democracy: Its Principles and Achievements,
ed. Inter-Parliamentary Union, (Geneva: Inter-Parliamentary Union, 1998), 28-29, http://ipu.org/PDF/publications/
DEMOCRACY_PR_E.pdf.
8.  Inter-Parliamentary Union, “Universal Declaration on Democracy,” in Democracy: Its Principles and Achievements, III-VIII.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 10

1. Participation: Political parties contribute to political participation by recruiting andtraining members, seeking donations, and engaging voters in political discussions. In
addition to providing their supporters with opportunities to shape the decisions that
affect their lives, political parties should respect the rights of all citizens to join and form
parties of their choice, and to recruit and mobilize support. This includes rejecting theuse of violence.
2. Accountability: Political parties should be accountable to their members as they develop
their policy proposals, manage their finances, and select leaders and candidates. They
should act responsibly, both in opposition and in government. Moreover, they should
support processes and institutions that allow citizens to hold their governments
accountable, including an independent media, a vibrant society, and free and fairelections.
3. Inclusion: Regardless of how they define their constituency, parties should not barothers from participating in political processes as candidates, activists or voters becauseof age, disability, gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or race. They should
promote inclusive participation in the political process and ensure that all citizens
have access to the necessary institutions, processes and information for meaningfulpolitical participation.
Textbox 3 summarizes the norms outlined in NDI’s Minimum Standards for the Democratic
Functioning of Political Parties.9

Textbox 3: Minimum Standards for the Democratic Functioning of
Political Parties• At the most fundamental level, all democratic parties benefit from, and should
support, the rights guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
• Democratic political parties agree to accept the will of the people as expressed
through legitimate elections as the basis for government.
• Parties should respect the chosen electoral procedures, including voter registration
laws, polling station regulations, and vote certification processes.
• All democratic parties have a right to expect that they and their supporters
may freely express their opinions; governing parties and state institutions havean obligation to protect these rights, and to safeguard the environment of freecompetition.
• Democratic parties in democratic systems reject the use of violence as a political tool.
• Parties should communicate their principles, policy proposals, and accomplishmentswith party members, party supporters, and other citizens.
• Parties benefit themselves as well as the broader democratic society when they
foster political participation. Efforts to cultivate participation by historically excluded
or underrepresented groups – including women and ethnic or other minorities – canoften benefit parties by broadening their support. Simultaneously, they can enhance
the legitimacy of the political system within which the parties compete.
• Parties that win a mandate to govern alone or in coalition should govern responsibly.
9. NDI, Minimum Standards.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 11• Parties may use their statutes to establish their legal name and to specify who may
use the party label.
• Party rules should define membership eligibility requirements and spell out members’
rights, roles and responsibilities.
• Party statutes can clarify lines of communication, authority and accountability
between a party’s various layers.
• Party statutes should anticipate conflicts and should provide frameworks forfostering, but also for containing, healthy internal debate.
• Parties benefit from having clear rules about the regular selection (and possible
de-selection) of party leaders and party candidates. In order to minimize internal
wrangling, and to enhance the legitimacy of those selected, parties should strive toestablish clear rules well in advance of each contest.
• Party officials and employees should adhere to party rules for making decisions,
including selection decisions for candidates and leaders.
• Political parties should keep sound and proper financial records, which serve togenerate confidence, enhance credibility, and encourage contributions to financeparty operations. In addition, officeholders and party units need to be internallyaccountable for party finances within their domains.
• Parties should take responsibility for their officeholders and other leaders who abuse
their positions for personal gain.
The full set of Minimum Standards for the Democratic Functioning of Political Parties isavailable on the NDI website.

Competencies
Regardless of their democratic intentions, if parties are not competent in certain core areas,
they are unlikely to be effective in aggregating citizen interests or performing their functions.
The core competencies that political parties require can be broken into the following three
categories.
1. Organizational Processes: Political parties need systems to organize themselvesinternally, including clear by-laws and mechanisms for making decisions, managing
resources, and tracking members and activists.
2. Outreach: Parties require channels of communication with their members, supporters
and citizens. These include mechanisms for gathering input about member concernsand policy priorities, as well as for disseminating party policies and campaign messages
to the general public.
3. Policy Formulation: In order to fulfill their role in proposing policies, political parties
need the capacity and resources to define policy issues, research them, and identify
possible solutions.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 12

KEY DRIVERS OF PARTY BEHAVIOR
Political parties are products of their operating environment. The contextual factors that shape
party behavior can be grouped into three sets of drivers: political space, political will, andcapacity. Political space describes the environment in which political parties operate and how
they interact with it; political will refers to the incentives that influence political parties and theindividual actors within them; and capacity refers to the “nuts and bolts” of party organizing andactivity. As Figure 5 demonstrates, there is significant overlap between space, will and capacity.
For instance, while history and social context shape the political space in which parties andcitizens interact, they may also impact the way political leaders respond to proposed reforms,
thus impacting political will. Key questions to consider for assessing each driver are includedin the section below on laying the groundwork, and are discussed in more detail in the Context
Analysis Tool developed as a companion to this guide.

Figure 5: Key Drivers of Party Behavior

Will

Drivers

Space

Party
Behavior
Capacity

Political Space
Political space refers to the ecosystem within which political parties operate, and the freedomthat organizations, groups and individuals have to participate in the democratic process.
At the systemic level, this includes the freedom with which parties are able to perform theircore functions: proposing policies, competing for office, and participating in governance. In
addition, it refers to the nature of interparty relations and interactions between political parties
on the one hand, and between parties and other institutions and individual actors on the other.
There are a number of common impediments to political space. At the most extreme,
authoritarian governments may use force, intimidation, or legal measures to restrict theactivities of opposition parties. In other cases, the restrictions may be softer: ruling parties may
use state resources or misuse power to obstruct competition. In conflict situations, citizens
may be afraid to be associated with a party for fear of retribution, or the environment may
be too dangerous or restricted for them to conduct or participate in political activities. Where
patronage is prevalent in politics, citizens may see parties primarily as distributors of money,
jobs and benefits, rather than as a space for meaningful political participation.
While political parties require an open environment in order to perform their basic functions,they should, in turn, provide a space for citizens to voice their public policy interests andinfluence the direction of their government. Parties contribute to the space available for groups
and individuals to participate in democratic processes. When they are inclusive, transparent
and internally democratic, political parties provide important avenues for individuals toparticipate in public life. When political space is limited within parties, individual members or
particular groups may be sidelined in party processes as well as in democracy more broadly.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 13Key Components of Political SpaceFormal Institutional Context: This refers to the “written” or official rules that govern politicalparties, as well as how democracy works, citizens are represented, and winners are chosen ina given country or region. These may include constitutional provisions, electoral and politicalparty regulations, and parliamentary rules and procedures. However, formal rules may be
enforced selectively, not at all, or may be trumped by informal social customs, norms, ortraditional power structures. For instance, a legislature may pass a gender quota law, but if it is
not enforced, parties may choose not to comply.
Informal Institutional Context: This refers to the “unwritten” rules of the game. Whereas theformal institutional context may be thought of as the theoretical regulations governing party
behavior, the informal context refers to day-to-day practices. Traditional power structures, suchas religious institutions or clan politics, may play important if unofficial roles in the way parties
relate to one another and to citizens. Political culture – the operating norms that determine
how various political actors interact with one another in the political system, and within parties
themselves – is also an important component of the informal institutional context. Additionally,
there may be practices, such as patronage networks, that are simply not reflected in the official
rules. The informal institutional context may be equally important in shaping political space as
the formal one, or even more so.
Historical Context: A country’s history and the origins of individual political parties may also
play an important role in how they behave and are received by the public. Many parties emerge
from social movements, and so they will naturally have an allegiance to certain social groups.
In other cases, political parties may emerge from opposing sides in an armed conflict, leading
to tense interparty relations. Similarly, citizens’ perceptions of political parties are likely to be
influenced by their shared experiences.
Social Context: Social attitudes regarding gender, class, or other social cleavages may contributeto the shape of party structures and the opportunities available to different groups within them.
Certain parties may have developed over time to represent certain social, regional or religious
groups. Even where that is not the case, ethnic or regional differences may exist within party
structures or affect where they can draw support. Societal attitudes toward gender equality
and the inclusion of marginalized groups are also likely to impact how parties approach thoseissues.

Political Will
The term “political will” has been used by development professionals to describe a variety ofrelated concepts referring to the desire of political leaders to engage in a particular proposed
reform. For the purposes of this manual, the term is used more broadly. Political will refers
simply to the motivations of various stakeholders, including political leaders, activists, andgroups, which influence their behavior in one way or another. Political will may be shaped by amultitude of factors, many of which are discussed below. They include values, culture, personal
history, a desire for financial gain or power, or personal perceptions of the political landscapeand its risks and opportunities. So political will may refer to a desire for democratic reforms, thecontinuation of a non-democratic status quo, or even the passage of changes that would hinder
democratic development. Just as political space can favor or hinder democracy, and capacity
can enhance or restrict a party’s ability to aggregate and represent citizen interests through its
performance of the functions, so too political will may be for or against democratic interests.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 14Key Components of Political Will
Individual Values and Interests: Each actor within a political party will be driven by a distinct,
often complex, set of incentives and disincentives. For instance, party leaders may be motivatedby a desire to see the party succeed, while also wanting to maintain their position within theorganization. They may be reluctant to implement reforms that could give the party a competitive
advantage if they are concerned that those changes could also weaken their stature. Party leaders,
staff and activists may be motivated by personal ambition and access to resources, their values,
or even a desire to be socially accepted. Perception may also shape political will. For instance,
opposition leaders in single party dominant or authoritarian systems may have little motivation
to try new campaign techniques if they feel elections are a foregone conclusion.
Organizational Priorities and Values: Political parties are competitive organizations and aremost likely to undertake actions that they feel will provide them with a competitive advantage
at election time. Several of the external factors outlined above as components of political space
also impact institutional incentives. For instance, the political calendar can play a major rolein determining where parties decide to focus their attention at different times. Internal factors
may also shape institutional incentives. For instance, a party’s history and ideology is likely tohave an impact on how it approaches its functions.

Capacity
The competencies outlined in the section on party attributes – organizational management,outreach, and policy formulation – describe the types of technical expertise that parties requirein order to fulfill their functions. Capacity refers more specifically to the skills, information,systems, relationships, and financial resources that parties need to conduct outreach, manage
an organization, and formulate policies. For instance, party staff and activists need certain
skills to perform their day-to-day duties. However, even the best trained staff cannot operate
effectively if there are no functional structures in place. Effective organizational systems forinternal communication, administration, and financial management are equally critical topolitical parties’ overall effectiveness. Finally, in order to function, parties also need resources
to organize activities, hire staff, pay rent, and cover other operating expenses.

Key Components of Capacity
Individual Skills: Political parties require skilled leaders, staff and activists in order to carryout their functions. Party staff should have a range of knowledge and skills which roughly
correspond to the competencies outlined in the previous chapter: organizational processes,
outreach, and policy formulation. In other words, party staff, collectively, should have theeducation, skills, information and experience required to do several things: conduct outreach,
which includes disseminating the party’s message and soliciting feedback from the public onpolicy concerns; develop policy proposals, including managing the policy development process
as well as having enough expertise in the required topic area to respond to public concerns;
and administer the party’s organization, which includes managing staff and finances, anddeveloping and maintaining internal communications systems.
Organizational Management: The individual skillsets of party staff and activists contribute to
overall organizational capacity. However, the structures a political party has in place to put thoseskills to use are equally important. For instance, effective constituency outreach conducted at
the local level is only useful if the party’s message is consistent and feedback received fromconstituents is communicated to the appropriate party units in a structured way. As with anyorganization, administrative practices such as accounting, finance, and human resourcesmanagement are also critical components of a party’s day-to-day operations. Additionally, someNational Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 15parties rely heavily on volunteers and members to conduct outreach and other party activities,
so the ability to recruit, retain and manage volunteer activists is an important component oforganizational management.
Strategic Connections: Power and power relations are at the heart of politics. Regular accessto elected officials and other influential actors such as election management bodies, thebusiness community, the military, civic groups, and the international community can be an
important component of party capacity. These types of connections can improve parties’ability to advocate for their policy positions, position them to play a greater role in informal
negotiations that take place outside of formal governance processes, and provide increased
access to information, allowing them to respond to new issues in a timely manner. Smaller ornewer parties may have less access to those formal power structures.
Access to Financial Resources: Political parties need funds in order to pay rent; purchaseairtime or space for advertising on television, radio, and in print; and train and pay their staff.
While the use of volunteers can reduce the need for skilled, paid staff, an individual party’s
access to resources is likely to have a direct effect on its ability to carry out its representative
functions and may be affected by a number of systemic and organizational factors. How parties
fund their activities can vary greatly, even within a country. Some parties may rely on wealthy
candidates, leaders, or other domestic or international benefactors; others may rely on publicfunding or may operate largely using funds collected in the form of membership dues.

SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS
Will, Space, Capacity Framework
The Will, Space, Capacity Framework provides a structure for analyzing how political parties fulfill their representative role. It outlines a series of building blocks for assessing whatparties do, how they do it, and why they behave the way they do, using three key concepts:
party functions, attributes, and key drivers of party behavior.
• Party functions: Parties represent the interests of their constituencies by proposing
policies, competing in elections and contributing to governance.
• Party attributes: Political parties require key competencies in organizational management, outreach and policy formulation in order to perform their functions effectively. To contribute to representative governance, they must adhere to democratic
principles of participation, accountability and inclusion.
• Key drivers of party behavior: Contextual factors that shape party behavior can bedivided into three categories: political space; political will; and party capacity.
This framework that can be applied to a wide range of environments, helping practitionersto:• Conduct context analyses that more explicitly consider the incentive structures andenvironmental factors that influence party behavior; and in turn
• Develop better informed programs, set more realistic objectives, articulate more explicit theories of change and improve monitoring and evaluation efforts.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 16

DESIGNING AND MANAGING
POLITICAL PARTY PROGRAMSThis chapter outlines how the Will, Space, Capacity Framework outlined above can be used todesign and manage their programs.

LAYING THE GROUNDWORKThis section focuses on the context analysis that should be conducted to inform programming.
Context analysis can be broken into three stages: political context, party functioning, andproblem analysis. Ideally, it should be performed prior to designing a program strategy or
selecting activities. However, most party assistance programs take place in fluid environments
and the political context may change over time. In many cases, it will be helpful to revisit theseanalyses at various points during the life of a program. The section on ongoing reflection
and analysis provides more detail and additional resources for monitoring programs during
implementation.
In addition, as a supplement to this guide, NDI created a Context Analysis Tool for politicalparty assistance programs. The tool provides key assessment questions, as well as guidance on
conducting desk research, key informant and stakeholder interviews, and data analysis. Ideally,
every party assistance program would be informed by a thorough context analysis. In practice,political events, limited funding, and grant schedules may limit the timeframe or resources
available for conducting assessments. For instance, unexpected political breakthroughs, as in
the case of the Arab Spring, may require implementers to respond quickly without the benefitof an in-depth context analysis. The companion tool recognizes these challenges by proposing
an approach that can be adapted depending on the time and financial resources available to a
program.
Regardless of whether a rapid or a more in-depth approach to context analysis is chosen, theapproach outlined in the Will, Space, Capacity Framework and the companion tool can help
practitioners develop a more complete understanding of party behavior by connecting what
happens within the party and the party system to the environment in which they are situated.
Based on a context analysis informed by the Will, Space, Capacity Framework, users should
be in a better position to identify the specific changes they seek to create and some of thechallenges or opportunities their strategy should seek to address.

Figure 6: Context Analysis
1. Political Context
Examine the broadpolitical context,
including the extent
to which parties
propose policies,
compete in elections
and contribute togovernance.

2. Party Functioning
Assess the internalfunctioning ofpolitical parties.

3. Problem Analysis
Analyze the root
causes of democratic
deficits identified in
Steps 1 & 2.
Consider the extent
to which political will
space and capacity
influence party
behavior.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 17The Context Analysis Tool outlines three main steps in analyzing a given context. Figure 6
summarizes these steps. Additional details on each of these steps follow in the next sections.
(For additional information on data collection, please see the Context Analysis Tool.)

Step 1: Political Context
The first step in conducting a context analysis is to assess the general political environment,
including the extent to which parties are able to carry out their functions. Various types of politicalcontexts may have different implications in terms of how parties behave, the challenges they
face, and the options for political party support. It may be helpful to first identify how the party
system could be categorized. The following loose categories may be helpful in grouping systems
that exhibit certain similarities: authoritarian/semi-authoritarian; single party dominant; andmultiparty competitive. The focus here is on identifying different types of party systems with aview to highlighting the challenges and opportunities that each commonly poses for politicalparty development. In addition to identifying three broad categories of party systems, thisloose typology highlights three crosscutting themes: fragile, conflict/conflict prone parties
play peripheral roles in governance. Additional information on each of the contexts and crosscutting themes is available in the Context Analysis Tool. Further details are also provided inAppendix 1.
Below are some broad questions that should be considered in analyzing a political context.
The companion Context Analysis Tool discusses these questions in further detail and provides
guidance on data collection.
• What is the general political environment and what roles do parties play in politics?
• To what extent are interparty relations and relationships between political parties andother state institutions or actors conducive to democratic governance?
• What are the most significant weaknesses in the party system and what are the common
challenges that parties face?
If problems in the party system exist or are perceived to exist, they will arise at this stage in theanalysis. Problems internal to parties themselves will likely surface later.

Step 2: Party Functioning
Having assessed the political context, the next step is to examine the political parties themselves,
their internal functioning, and how they relate to one another. Where the first step focuses on thepolitical environment, party system, and functions, the second step focuses on party attributes.
Below is a list of broad questions that should be considered in assessing party organizations. The
companion Context Analysis Tool discusses these questions in further detail.

Principles• How do political parties interpret their roles and to what extent do they:»» Propose policies that are representative of their members’ interests?
»» Have mechanisms that allow members or supporters to hold their leaders to account?
»» Provide opportunities for member/supporter participation in party decision-making
processes?
»» Accept all citizens who wish to participate in their activities as members, activists andcandidates?

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 18Competencies• To what extent do individual parties have:»» The rules and systems in place for sustaining an organization?
»» The organizational structures and systems in place to conduct outreach and campaign
effectively?
»» The expertise required to research and formulate policy proposals?
This analysis will lead to more detailed conclusions about specific weaknesses in each of
the areas identified above, some of the underlying causes, and the possible implications for
programming. For example, if a number of branch-level respondents within a party talk about
the lack of information available to them about party activities at headquarters level, then it
will be necessary to explore the reasons for this weak connection (as given by respondents
and as found through secondary data). Similarly, if there are structural issues with the party
system that are preventing parties from consolidating their support bases in parliament, it isimportant to identify the reasons for the persistence of these problems.

Step 3: Problem Analysis
Political party programming should be designed to address specific democracy problems. How
implementers prioritize which problems to address varies on a case-by-case basis and may be
influenced by a wide range of factors, including:• Institutional approaches and comparative advantages;• Contextual factors;• Donor priorities; and• Funding levels.
While representational problems can typically be identified using the functions and attributes,
uncovering their underlying causes often requires further examination. Although every
situation differs, most commonly the causes of these problems stem from one of the drivers: ashortage of political space, will or capacity. Once a specific problem(s) has been identified, thenext step involves considering what specific aspects of political space, will and capacity could
be the underlying causes. Below are some broad questions that can be adapted dependingon the specific problem that assistance providers choose to focus on. Additional details areprovided in the Context Analysis Tool that serves as a companion to this guide.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 19Questions for Assessing the Impact of Political SpaceTo what extent is the problem caused by environmental factors? Consider the following:• What formal rules govern and influence party behavior? These may include the electoral
system, legal and constitutional provisions, and parliamentary rules.
• How does the political calendar, including factors like election frequency, conventions, orother political timetables, impact party behavior?
• What informal rules or customs influence party behavior? For instance, is there a historyof patronage or clientelism? Do tribal, religious, or other traditional power structures playsignificant roles in national or regional politics?
• What is the current security environment and how does it affect parties?
• What are the prevailing gender norms and attitudes toward religion? Are there historicethnic or regional tensions, and what is their current state?
• Are there any legal barriers that prevent certain groups from voting, running for, or holding
office? For instance, are there any age restrictions that prevent young people from holding
certain positions?

Questions for Assessing the Impact of Political Will
To what extent is the problem caused by a lack of political will? Consider the following:• What motivates influential party actors? Are they primarily driven by:»» Financial ambitions;»» A desire to advance within party structures and build their personal influence; or»» Ideological or specific policy interests?
• Who controls party decision-making and finances, and what does this say about the party’s
organizational culture, including values and priorities? For instance:»» To what extent are mid-level officials, and rank and file party members, able to participate
in party decisions?
»» How are party policies and platforms developed and approved?
»» How and with what frequency are party leaders and candidates selected?

Questions for Assessing the Impact of Party Capacity
To what extent is the problem caused by a lack of capacity? More specifically:• Do elected officials, party staff, and activists understand their roles and have skills in suchareas as outreach and policy development?
• Does the party have effective internal communications structures, organizational andmember management, and policies?
• Are parties state-funded, and if so, how are those funds allocated?
• Are there any restrictions on a party’s ability to raise funds?
• How is the party placed in terms of access to information, and does it have relationships
with influential groups and individuals?

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 20A “problem tree” analysis is a common approach to reaching consensus on core problems
and distinguishing between their causes and effects. The process involves using a visual
representation of a tree, with participants identifying elements of the problem as branches(effects/symptoms) or roots (causes). As factors are identified as roots and branches, they aresubsequently rearranged on the chart, forming new sub-roots and branches on the problem
tree. The discussion and debate generated during this process is an important component of theprocess. The dialogue is likely to generate ideas and insights on additional problems, concerns,
possible risk factors, and solutions, and can help participants come to a shared understandingof the problem. The process can be repeated for however many problems a program plans toaddress. Elements of the resulting problem trees can be adapted for different components of aprogram’s results framework.
A sample problem tree, Figure 7, is taken from a recent NDI proposal. The core problem it
analyzes is, “Political parties are not well managed and do not provide clear choices forthe electorate, nor do they effectively represent the policy positions of a strong grassroots
constituency.” The effects, arranged above the problem, reflect a combination of the functions
and attributes. The causes, arranged below the problem, can be tied to one or more of thedrivers – specifically, a lack of space, will or capacity.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 21Figure 7: Sample Problem Tree

candidates have
 Partylimited opportunity to be

Citizens believe mostcandidates will “promise
anything” to get elected
and deliver little thereafter.

trained on campaigning,party organization or policy.

 Citizens have very limited

EFFECTS Campaigns are characterised byinformation about parties(mainly basic party ID but
not “what they stand for”).

opportunistic bidding by candidates
to “fund” local development projects
and individual problems.

 Parties do not consult with

 The very few staff that parties havemembers, supporters orvoters when developing
their manifesto.

nationally or at constituency and districtlevel are poorly trained and not valued.

 Parties do not use

 Citizens’ electoral choices

policy platforms toengage citizens.

are limited by the lack ofpolicy alternatives.

Core Problem:
Political parties are not well managed and do not provide
clear choices for the electorate nor the effectively represent
the policy positions of a strong grassroots constituency.

 Poverty drives a significant

CAUSES

minority (20-30 percent)to demand personal favors.

have very limited funds
 Parties
between election periods to sustain

between Period
electoral contests.

 Parliamentarians believe

they must respond to citizen
demand for personal goods.

national or local party offices.

 There are very few sanctions (except

bankruptcy), incentives or role models
as an alternate to clientilistic politics.

 MPs are neither beholden to theparty nor believe that echoing a“party” line will them support.

is very limited information
 Thereor opportunity for citizens to
influence MPs/parties.

 Collective actions - legislative/

reallocation of budgets or
responses - take time and sufferfrom impletention failures.

leadership is often Partyabsorbed in intraparty
factionalism at a national level.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 22

Table 1 below takes a few of the effects and causes from the problem tree above and illustrates
how they relate to different components of the Will, Space, Capacity Framework.

Table 1: Cause and Effect Analysis Using the Will, Space, Capacity Framework
EFFECTSFUNCTIONS & ATTRIBUTES

Parties do not consult withmembers, supporters orvoters when developing their
manifesto.

Participation Principle: Parties do not wish to give supporters or
members a say in the policy development process.
Outreach Competency: Parties may not know how to reach out tomembers and incorporate their feedback into the policy development process.
Functions: The lack of party capacity and willingness to involve
members in policy development are affecting the extent to which
parties propose policies and how they compete in elections.

Citizens believe most candidates will “promise anything”
to get elected, and deliver little
thereafter.

Accountability Principle: Parties are not accountable to their supporters and, in turn, fail to hold the government accountable.

Party candidates have limited
opportunity to be trained incampaigning, party organization, or policy.

Organizational Process Competency: If candidates are poorly
trained across the board, this is symptomatic of organizationally
weak parties.

CAUSESDRIVERS

Parties have very limited funds
between election periods tosustain national or local party
offices.

Capacity: Parties have limited access to financial resources.

Parliamentarians believe theymust respond to citizen demands for personal goods

Political Space: A history of patronage impacts candidates’ interestin campaigning on policy positions, and citizens do not expect parties to propose policies or to fulfill their promises.

Functions: Governance is not based on party policy proposals or
parties’ ability to deliver on campaign promises.

Functions: Poorly prepared candidates negatively impact the competiveness of elections. If poorly-prepared or unqualified candidates are elected, this could also affect the quality of governance.

Will: Candidates feel they will be less likely to win elected office ifthey do not respond to citizen demands for personal or materialfavors.
Party leadership is often absorbed in intraparty factionalism at a national level.

Political Will: Political leaders are primarily motivated by the desire
to control party resources, and policy is not a priority.

Tools to Assist with Problem Analysis• Problem Analysis: A short guide to problem analysis developed by NDI’s in-house
Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning team is included as Appendix 2.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 23SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS
Laying the Groundwork
Party assistance programs take place in complex environments. The local context and political environment should be carefully considered when assessing democracy problems
and designing program activities. The Will, Space, Capacity Framework can be used as atool to assist in analyzing the overall context that parties operate in, how they operate within that system, and the underlying factors that influence party behavior.
Step 1 - Political Context: An analysis of the political landscape, using the functions as a
guide, can help uncover representational shortcomings. If there are problems in the party
system, they are likely to surface at this stage.
 tep 2 - Party Functioning: This step focuses on using the party attributes to analyze
Sparty organizing: it will inform more detailed conclusions about specific weaknesses within individual political parties.
Step 3 - Problem Analysis: Based on the deficits identified in steps 1 and 2, it should bepossible to identify deficits in the overall political environment (space) and party functioning(attributes). They should then examine the extent to which these problems and their effects
are caused by broad environmental factors, lack of capacity, or issues of political will. Whilemost of the effects of a particular problem are likely to be observed in how parties fulfill theirfunctions and in internal party attributes, causes are most likely to be found in the drivers.

DEVELOPING A STRATEGYThis section discusses how the information from the context analysis and the Will, Space,
Capacity Framework can be used to develop a program strategy. This includes conducting a
stakeholder analysis; developing program goals, objectives and development hypotheses; andselecting activities. This publication uses the following definitions:• Goal: The widespread, societal aim to which the program or project will contribute.
• Objective: The result that the program or project will achieve by the end of the life of the
program.
• Theory of Change: A set of beliefs or principles about how change happens, which informs
program design.
• Development Hypothesis: An explicit statement about the relationship between the
proposed development intervention and the expected change in the development problem.
If-then statements are used to describe the development hypothesis.
The context analysis should lead to a better understanding of the operating environment, including
not only how parties behave but the underlying factors that influence that behavior. Through aproblem analysis, the causes and effects of the specific problem(s) chosen to be addressed will
have been mapped. Before deciding on a strategy, however, stakeholder perspectives need to be
examined in order to identify potential participants and/or implementing partners, as well as todetermine what issues to consider in engaging these groups and individuals.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 24

Stakeholder Analysis
A wide range of actors have the potential to influence a program as implementers, decisionmakers, direct participants, or donors. Additionally, each actor is likely to have a unique interestin the program’s outcomes. Understanding these interests can help inform the identification of
appropriate entry points and implementing partners, strategies for engaging different actors,
and possible internal and external impediments to program goals. The sections below focus on
two types of stakeholders: political parties and external groups.
Party Stakeholders. Within each party, the people with whom the assistance community may
interact can be loosely grouped into three categories.
• Party Leadership: Each party includes a group of individuals responsible for setting theoverall direction of the organization. Typically, they are party executives, controllinginformation and resources. While some program activities involve direct work with party
executives, in the vast majority of cases most direct participants in program activities will
be drawn from other organizational layers.
• Direct Participants: This group refers to the individuals who may become the primary targets
of programming. Depending on the program context, scope and focus, this may include elected
officials, candidates, branch or mid-level officials, or members/activists from marginalizedgroups. In some cases, a program’s direct participants will be pre-determined by the specificproblem. In others, a program may have the flexibility to choose which intraparty group(s) toengage as direct participants, requiring that staff consider which party unit(s) would be themost strategic partner, given the various interests at play within the organization.
• Informal Party Contacts: These may include participants from past activities or othercontacts who have no direct involvement in the program but can help provide valuable
insights into the political context and help them make the case for changes in party
practices. Depending on the range of relationships cultivated, they may exist at any levelwithin a party. In some cases, the most influential individuals in a particular party may
hold no official position whatsoever, but wield significant authority due to their personal
influence, financial support, or history with a party.
External Stakeholders. In addition, the party assistance community may interact with a rangeof external stakeholders. These include a variety of interested organizations and individuals
outside political parties that the assistance community may need to engage through the courseof a program. These may include civil society groups, election management bodies, the media,
the academic community, and international partners. These groups and individuals may be
involved in programming to varying degrees. For instance, in certain cases, NDI has provided
technical assistance to civil society groups advocating for a gender quota, while simultaneously
working with political parties to prepare them for implementation of the new requirements.
The case study on Burkina Faso, included in Textbox 4, outlines an example of this approach.
Through an analysis of each of these groups, users will be better placed to determine withwhom to work and how, including what issues they should take into account when developing
their engagement strategies. Table 2 summarizes some of the common types of participants
and implementing partners for political party programs, and outlines some issues that should
be considered in determining whether and how to engage them.
For each group of stakeholders or potential contacts within a political party, and for external
stakeholders, the following questions should be considered, taking into account issues ofspace, will and capacity.10

10. NDI Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Team, “Stakeholder Analysis” (Unpublished Internal Report, NDI, 2013).

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 25Textbox 4: Burkina Faso - Mobilizing Civil Society
for Political Change
Women in Burkina Faso are adversely affected by gender stereotypes and are particularly
disenfranchised within Burkinabe political parties. There is little training for aspiring female
leaders and a dearth of opportunities for women to demonstrate their leadership potential.
To address this marginalization, NDI collaborated with an informal group of Burkinabe civic
groups, most of which had little or no experience advocating for legislation at the National
Assembly, in advocating for the adoption of a gender quota on party candidate lists.
NDI helped to guide the groups in developing strategies for sensitizing political parties
and other authorities, and in preparing advocacy strategies. In particular, the National
Assembly’s gender caucus requested technical assistance to allow these civic groups todevelop draft legislation on a 30 percent quota, which was subsequently enacted into law
in April 2009. Once passed, the law stipulated that parties that do not respect the quota
would lose half of their allocated public election campaign funding.
After the law passed, NDI hosted forums for the Burkinabe Coalition for Women’s Rights(CBDF), a network of 13 organizations working to promote women’s participation within
Burkinabe parties and the government. During these forums, CBDF discussed various
challenges in implementing and enforcing the quota, and sent their recommendations
to government ministries, political parties, the election commission, and other groups.
The Institute also helped 11 political parties to evaluate the status of women within theirrespective structures and to develop action plan to promote female participation. Working
with party leadership, NDI held sessions that led parties through self-assessment exercises
to analyze their success in attracting women members and fielding them as candidates.
Parties identified specific practices and perceptions that, if altered, would enable theparties to better support, recruit and retain women as leaders, developing strategic planson how to better integrate women into leadership and decision-making positions.   
As a final push for greater implementation of the quota law, prior to voter registration andthe campaign period in 2012, the Coalition for the Implementation of the Quota Law –comprising eight civil society organizations and three political parties – was formed, withsupport from the Institute. In June, the coalition convened members of political parties,
the election commission, government ministries, and the National Assembly to evaluate
the technical challenges of applying the provisions of the quota law in the upcoming
elections. As a result of this forum, the Ministry of Interior worked with the Ministry of
Women’s Affairs to clarify guidelines for the implementation of the law, exemplifying thepossibility that outside actors can influence the space in which parties operate, and thusincrease political will.
The 2012 elections were the first opportunity to test the new quota law. The new
Burkinabe National Assembly now includes 24 women MPs, a 3.6 percent increase overthe previous legislature. Many political parties satisfied the basic requirements of thelaw, with certain parties employing strategies to elect women that could be duplicated.
For example, a woman could gain an elected position when a successful male candidate
vacates his seat to return to a ministerial post. Additionally, out of the 11 parties thatworked with NDI, nine respected the quota for the legislative elections and all 11 respected
the quota for the municipal elections. Challenges were also identified, including women’splacement on the lists, which was often too low for the spirit of the quota law to berespected. This could be overcome, however, if election lists alternated female and malecandidates.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 26

• Interest: What is their potential interest in the project? How might they be affected
negatively or positively by this project?
• Influence: What is their potential influence on the project’s ultimate success or failure?
What are their relations with other stakeholders (conflictual, cooperative, etc.)?
• Participation: What is their capacity or motivation to participate in the design or
implementation of the project? When, how and where should this participation take place?
Within each group, there are likely to be different interests at play. As such, different trends withineach group should be identified in order to develop appropriate strategies. Since even nascentpolitical parties can be complex organizations that bring together disparate individuals, eachmotivated by a combination of influences, it should not be expected or assumed that politicalparties and the different groups within them are monolithic.
Bearing in mind the resources available to a program – such as time, money and people –implementing partners and direct participants should be identified as well as appropriate
strategies for engaging other stakeholders as needed. Some stakeholders will only need to be
kept informed of program developments through periodic written or verbal communications.
Others may need to be consulted more actively and regularly so that their input can be factored
into program decision-making. Table 3 summarizes the stakeholder analysis and engagement
strategy developed for a policymaking program.

Table 2: Engaging Different Program Stakeholders
PROGRAMPARTICIPANTS &STAKEHOLDERSREASONS FORENGAGEMENTISSUES TO CONSIDER

Party Leadership& Management• Securing high-level
program buy-in.

• Could party leaders perceive proposed reforms asa threat to their power base?

• Improving
organizational systems
and processes.

• How might skeptical party leaders be persuaded
to embrace reforms?

• Strengthening interparty
dialogue to reduce
interparty tensions or
to promote consensus
on regulatory reforms(party law, electoralrules, etc.).
Wings – forYouth, Women,
LGBT Individuals,
or OtherMarginalizedGroups• Who are the key influencers – formal and informal– within the party?
• Given the prevailing political, economic and social
trends, how much can the program influenceinterparty relations?

• Increasing the capacityand participation of
marginalized groups.

• What factors, aside from capacity, limit theparticipation of marginalized groups and how
might they be addressed?

• Mobilizing agents/
constituencies forreform within or acrossparty lines.

• What disincentives might exist for change agentsto promote reform, and how might they be
addressed?
• What current or past efforts have been made topromote participation (e.g. wings) and what are/were their strengths and weaknesses?

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 27PROGRAMPARTICIPANTS &STAKEHOLDERSREASONS FORENGAGEMENT

Members of
Parliament/Local
Councilors• Improving parliamentarygroup organizing andfunctioning.
• Policy development andimplementation.

Party Training
Units• How might formal and informal parliamentary andparty rules and functioning influence MP/local
councilor behavior and prospects for reform?
• What is the primary basis for engagement
between MPs/local councilors and voters, andhow might this shape prospects for reform?

• Leadershipdevelopment.

• What opportunities exist for trained party
members to take on increased responsibilities
and/or how might these be created?
• Do parties have the resources, support and will toinvest in building sustainable organizations?

• Mobilizing or
empowering grassroots
party structures.

• What opportunities exist for trained party
members to take on increased responsibilities,
and/or how might these be created?

• Leadershipdevelopment.

• What factors, aside from capacity, limit grassroots
participation in party life, and how might they be
addressed?

• Increasing directcontact between parties
and citizens.
Civil Society• What is the nature of relations between elected
officials and other party officials?

• Strengthening
communication between
citizens and elected
representatives.

• Increasing prospects
for sustainable skills
development.
Party Branches

ISSUES TO CONSIDER• Promoting more
inclusive or
representative policy
development.
• Raising citizen
awareness about party
policies.

ElectionManagement
Bodies (EMBs)& Other
Enforcement
Agencies• Increasing thelegitimacy of electoral
processes.

Media• Raising citizen
awareness of party
positions and activities.

• Improving regulatory
systems that affectparties.

• What is the primary basis for engagement
between parties and members/voters, and how
might this shape prospects for reform?
• To what extent does civil society have thecapacity and interest to engage parties aroundpolicy issues?
• How does civil society interact with parties, andwhat implications does this have for reform?
• Do parties have the capacity and interest to
engage civil society?
• To what extent is there will on different sides toimprove political processes?
• What mechanisms or opportunities for regular
engagement – across party lines and between
parties and EMBs/enforcements agencies –already exist, and what are their strengths andweaknesses?
• To what extent is the media independent, and how
might this affect their interest in the program?

• Reducing politicaltension.
• Mobilizing
constituencies forreform.
Other Groups
Implementing
Party Programs• Coordination in order toavoid duplication.

• To what extent are the organization’s goals andphilosophy compatible with NDI’s?

• Collaboration to
maximize impact.

• How is the organization perceived by politicalparties?

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 28

Table 3: Stakeholder Analysis for a Policy Development Program

Stakeholders

Stakeholder Interestin the Project

Risk of Weak
Engagementby Stakeholder

Engagement Strategy/Risk Mitigation

1. Political party
leadership

Desire for party to beviewed as responsive
to, and representativeof citizens, in order toenhance popularityof party and its
leaders.

Medium(varies byparty)• Initial focus group research todemonstrate need for and valueof project, followed by regularconsultations to provide updates on
progress of party’s research, policy
development, and outreach branches.

2. Research,
policydevelopment,
and outreachstructures
within parties

Desire todemonstrate valueadded to others
in party, advance
personal politicalcareers, and maketheir parties more
responsive tocitizens and morecompetitive inupcoming elections.

Medium• Baseline assessment to better
understand party strengths andweaknesses.

3. Youth andother party
volunteers

Desire to contributeto party activities,
advance personal
political careers, andhelp parties better
understand concernsof citizens like them.

Low

4. Civic groups
and issue
experts

Desire to shareexpertise with parties– institutions capableof implementing
policy change –and advance theirpositions in thenational policy
conversation.

Low• Exposing parties to international bestpractices and providing technicalassistance in identifying points in policy
processes where outside expertiseis needed; reaching out to relevant
civic leaders and/or issue experts,
and integrating their ideas into policy
development process.

5. Citizens

Desire to shapepolicy outcomes tomore closely match
their needs andconcerns.

Low• Training for research and outreachcoordinators, as well as volunteers, in
effective methods for engaging withcitizens, particularly given widespread
suspicions and/or disenchantment
toward political parties.

• Direct technical assistance and ongoing support to advance individual andorganizational capacity, and streamline
processes in line with international bestpractices.
• Exposure to international examples tounderstand long-term value of suchpractices beyond electoral periods.
• Assistance to parties to recruit and train
volunteers for research initiatives.
• Engage parties in analysis of findings,
development of responsive policies, anddissemination of policy messages so thatthey see the value of their contribution
from start to finish and maintain interest.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 29Tools to Help with Stakeholder Analysis
The short guide to stakeholder analysis included in Appendix 3 outlines how to identify andassess project stakeholders around five criteria: interest, influence, relationships, participation
and resources is included in Appendix 3. Two accompanying templates are designed to help
staff map each stakeholder along these five criteria and to determine when and how eachstakeholder should be engaged at different stages in the project.
The Alignment, Interest and Influence Matrix allows groups or individuals to map the extent
to which different stakeholders are aligned with or support a particular idea, are interested init or view it as a priority, and have the influence to implement it. Originally designed for use in
advocacy and policy work, it can be adapted for use in mapping different intraparty interestsand developing strategies for building momentum for change. For more information, see ODI’s
The Alignment, Interest and Influence Matrix, A Guidance Note.11

Program Goals, Objectives and Theories of Change
Based on the Will, Space, Capacity Framework presented earlier in this publication, successfulpolitical parties need to exhibit certain key attributes in their work to fulfill their democratic
functions. At the party system level, political parties need space in which to operate. In addition,
how parties interact with each other and with other institutions may affect the extent to which a
multiparty system can be perceived as democratic. Further, party behavior is shaped by politicalspace, will and capacity. Thus, in the absence of political will to implement new organizing
practices, skills-building alone is unlikely to change political party behavior. Similarly, even
if a political party has the will, skills and resources to adopt new practices in citizen outreach,widespread insecurity may limit their ability to put these new ideas into practice.
If the role of political parties in a democratic system is to represent the interests of theirconstituencies, party programming aims to help parties better fulfill their representativerole. Given the emphasis that this guide places on issues of political will, it is worth saying
a few words about ownership. In democracies, final authority rests with the people. Politicalparties are one of the institutions through which citizens exercise that authority. In most of theenvironments where party assistance programs unfold, given nascent and/or weak democratic
institutions, political leaders have significant and disproportionate influence over theirorganizations and how the party system functions. Without their buy-in, party development
programs are far less likely to succeed. At the same time, the goals of party assistance, which
include promoting global democratic norms in party functioning, often seek to shift power
relations by increasing participation, inclusiveness and accountability. Thus, they may run
counter to the personal interests of individual leaders, who seek to centralize power in thehands of a few. Ideally, political leaders express or develop a commitment to reforms. However,even when party leaders are resistant to change, local ownership of reform efforts may derivefrom reformers or grassroots activists within individual parties, marginalized groups who seek
to play a greater role in their country’s politics, or civil society and media groups who seek
to improve democratic governance in their country. In some cases, programming may eveninvolve broadening the decision-making process to include political leaders. For instance,
during Somalia’s constitution-drafting process, NDI brought party leaders together to consider
different options for electoral system design and party regulation, and to formulate commentson the draft document.
Since assistance should be designed to address the root causes of weaknesses in party systems
and party functioning, programs will usually seek to change party behavior by addressing
political space, will and/or capacity. For example, a party assistance program may be working
with two parties in the same country that are at similar stages of development, with the goal of
11.  Enrique Mendizabal, The Alignment, Interest and Influence Matrix (AIIM), (London: Overseas Development Institute,2010).

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 30increasing member participation in the policy development process. In one case, party leaders
may have requested assistance in improving their policy development processes. Here, change
may be as simple as facilitating one-on-one consulting to help the party amend its statutes
and make the corresponding changes to its organizational processes, along with conducting acomprehensive training program to ensure that party staff and activists have the required skills
to carry out the new processes. In this case, political will for change exists and the program’srole is to help build the capacity to create change. Unfortunately, things are rarely so simple.
The other party’s leadership may be reticent to involve more members in policymaking, andit may be necessary to seek pressure points to build the case for reform or create political will.
Working with civil society groups and the media to increase advocacy and reporting on qualityof life issues, or to organize debates, may build external pressure on party leaders and increase
incentives for them to place greater emphasis on policy development. In addition, identifying
short-term experts from countries or parties that program participants view as role models,
who can help make the case for reform may be helpful.

Table 4: Addressing Space, Will and Capacity
Strategies for Building
Political Will

Addressing Issues
with Political SpaceStrengthening
Capacity• Mobilizing internal agents ofchange and creating opportunities for them to engage on
proposed reforms.

• Creating opportunities for
dialogue.

• Training workshops and consultations.

• Supporting regulatory reforms
to level the playing field andimprove electoral integrity.

• Hands on support and assistance as parties apply new
skills and knowledge.

• Improving access to media.

• Producing resource materials(e.g. party agent forms, campaign handbooks).

• Drawing upon international
norms or the influence of peers
to make the case for reform.
• Using public opinion researchto highlight citizens’ expectations of political parties.
• Supporting indigenous efforts
to introduce new legal requirements for parties.
• Working with citizen or mediagroups to strengthen monitoring of, advocacy toward, or
coverage of political parties.

• Working with parties to explore alternate methods of outreach when they face security
constraints or repression.

• Introducing new or enhanced
tools (e.g. party databases).
• Providing information thatparties may otherwise havedifficulty accessing on theirown.
• Establishing mentoring relationships.

• Making the case for how
reforms can help individuals
or political parties meet theirgoals.
• Working to counter erroneous
information about reforms.

Table 4 outlines some strategies for addressing political space, will and capacity. In addition,
Appendix 1 outlines some of the common challenges associated with different types of party
systems and presents possible strategies for working with them. Not all programs can or should
be required to address space, will and capacity. However, the Space, Will, Capacity Framework canbe used to more purposefully identify: the type of change that might be expected from various
activities; the risks programs may face; and the assumptions that should be reflected in program
design documents. A short-term program may legitimately focus on skills-building. For example,
Figure 8 outlines a program based on skills-building for individuals. In order for change to occur
at a systemic level, the targeted individuals must first increase their skills, then change their own
behavior and work to precipitate reforms in party practices. These developments may eventually
result in system-level change. However, only increases in individual skills fall within the direct

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 31

influence of the program. All other levels of change can only be indirectly or remotely influenced
by the program. Other factors will also play a role in shaping prospects for wider change. Thus,
understandably, in most cases, the results framework for short-term programs focused on skillsbuilding should not outline transformational change as one of the anticipated outcomes.

Figure 8: Putting Change in Perspective

Directcontrol:

DirectInfluence:

Indirect
Influence:

Training
seminars &workshops.

Increase
individual
skills.

Individual
behavioral
change.

Activities

Outputs

RemoteInfluence:
Changesin partypractices.

Outcomes

Improveddemocracy &governance.

ImpactEven for longer-term programs that include strategies for increasing political will or spacefor new organizing practices, it is important to resist the temptation to underestimate thedisincentives for reform. Institutionalizing new organizing practices often requires a much
longer timeframe than is possible during the average grant. Often, it also involves changes inpolitical will. As Thomas Carothers notes, “Laments about top-down resistance to change are
the most common complaint that party aid workers express about their work.”12 Indeed, there
are often powerful interests and overarching political events and trends that affect how politicalparties behave. Several of these factors – some of which were highlighted in the section on key
drivers of party behavior – fall outside the control of the average program. They include thegeneral security environment, foreign policy issues that affect political processes, party relations
with international actors, entrenched patronage networks, election results, and party access toresources. However, because they can play powerful roles in shaping party behavior, by being
more conscious of these factors, it should be possible to develop more strategic activities andset more realistic program objectives. The political calendar may also be an important factor
in deciding where political parties choose to focus their attentions. Figure 9, below, outlines
key stages of the political calendar and possible ramifications for party programs. There may
be internal and/or external pressure to promise transformational change. However, given thatcreating institutional change in political parties involves a combination of space, will andcapacity to embrace and implement new organizing practices at multiple organizational levels,
it may be helpful to think about the extent to which direct participants in program activities
have the space, will and capacity to change organizational practices, and to distinguish between
the short-term and long-term outcomes anticipated under the program.

12. Carothers, Confronting the Weakest Link, 177.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 32Figure 9: The Political Cycle
Pre-Election Period

Post-Election Period

Naturally, as elections draw near, parties increasingly
turn their attention to campaign details. International
standards require that the legal framework for elections
be finalized at least one year before the polls. Where
this benchmark has not been met or finer details about
election procedures are still under discussion, dialogues
between parties and election management bodies
may help clarify the rules of engagement, facilitateconsensus and reduce tensions. Ideally, parties will
have spent the preceding years laying the groundwork for the campaign. In many cases, there will bea scramble to develop a platform and put together
campaign teams and strategy. Often, this is also thetime when candidates are officially selected. However,even before official selection takes place, informal
deals may have been cut. This close to the election,changes in nomination procedures and other significant
organizational reforms are likely to be disruptive.

Elections are the ultimate test of a party’s organizational
capacities and the appeal of its candidates andmessaging. Even in the absence of a level playing field,
aspects of electoral organizing can provide democratic
opposition forces opportunities to test and strengthen
their organizational capacities. Whether a party wins orloses, this is a great time to engage parties on strengths
and weaknesses that came to light during the campaign.
Such a post mortem with each party can help lay theground for a long-term plan to capitalize on strengths
and address identified weaknesses. Parties who lose anelection and are willing to take a critical look at theirperformance may be more open to internal reforms.
Successful parties may face challenges of their own,
particularly if their best qualified officials and activists
all end up in government leaving party structures in thehands of less capable members. With the campaign now
behind them, parties’ attention is likely to shift to thelegislative and executive branches as these structures
are more likely to play lead roles in shaping policy
agendas and the party image.

Campaign & Election Day(NDI 30 day rule limits on party assistance)

Pre-Election• Coalition-Building(Electoral Alliances);

Post-Election Period• Campaign Strategy
and Skills Training;• Party-Specific Reviewsof Electoral Performanceand Results (Can set thestage for organizational
reforms, especially withunsuccessful parties), &• Part Pollwatching;• Non-Partisan Elections
Observation;• Electoral Codes of Conduct;• Coalition-Building(Government Formation).

• Debates & Voter Guides; &• Multiparty and Party Electoral Management Body
Dialogues About Electoral
Processes

Midterm• Platform Development; &• Internal Organizational Reforms(including candidate selection and other changes to party rules).

Midterm

Post-Election/Midterm

When taken seriously, platform development is a longterm process that includes identifying major policy
challenges, researching options for addressing themand consulting various stakeholders on viable options
before finally settling on a particular solution. These
efforts can be informed by several month’s experience ingovernment or in opposition. While many parties leaveplatform development till the last few months before anelection, beginning the process around midterm in thepolitical cycle allows parties sufficient time for researchand consultation. As a result, by the immediate lead
up to the election, their platforms are close to being
finalized and can help inform campaign messaging. In
many cases, these activities can also help parties tobegin strengthening their image long before election
day. At this point, organizational changes are less likely
to be disruptive, since there will be sufficient time forthe dust to settle before the campaign.

• Parliamentary Orientation• Parliamentary Group Rules and Assignments• Legislative Agenda Development• Review and Reform of Legal Frameworks(party law, party finance)• Strategic Planning• Communications Between Elected Officials
and Other Party Officials/Members• Constituent Outreach (party branches canplay a role)• Long-term Branch Development (as part of asustained effort to increase electoral competition)• Recruitment and Development of Future Leaders(including potential future candidates)

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 33A recent review of results frameworks from a variety of organizations involved in politicalparty development noted the following common problems: “flimsy” indicators, leaps of logic,
confusion between outputs and outcomes, and unrealistic goals. It noted:“A common trend found among numerous frameworks is an assumed
causal relationship between outputs and outcomes where none exists…One
fundamental unstated assumption is often made: that target parties have thepolitical will for reform. Capacity building initiatives may translate to actualreform if the leadership is committed to strengthening the party and is willingto assume the risk to do so. Few frameworks state such assumptions, let alone
programme specifically to foster political will.”13
Some of these challenges can be limited by using the Space, Will, Capacity Framework to develop
more explicit theories of change, and to clarify the types of activities they should implement
and the results they hope to achieve. Following are some questions to consider.
• What does the program aim to change?14 Consider the extent to which political space, will
and capacity are required to achieve the desired change. Which of these should and can the
program target? What implications does this have for the program’s goal and objectives?
• What are the specific objectives required to achieve this change? Does the objective reflecta realistic assessment of the political space, will and capacity required to address the
problem? Does the objective seem achievable during the program timeframe?
• How will change be precipitated? What changes in space, will and/or capacity will the
program create and how?
• What are the assumptions on which the program design is based? Are the assumptions
reasonable? In addition to broad statements about the overall political context – e.g.
elections take place as scheduled, civil war does not resume – consider any assumptions
involving political space, will or capacity that may affect the program.
• What risks does the program need to address? What strategies could be used to manage
them? A combination of risks deriving from the operating environment as well as how
information about the program will be communicated should be considered. For
instance, program strategies may need to be tailored to ensure that certain groups are notinadvertently excluded from selection as program participants. Table 5 illustrates some of
the risks and mitigating strategies identified for a policy development program.

Tools to Help with Program Strategy• Party Strategy Maps: Combine elements of force field analyses with the development ofstrategies for formal program activities, informal strategies to build support for reforms,
and, where relevant, complementary activities with external stakeholders such as themedia and civil society. A partially completed party strategy map is included in Figure
10. The data included in the diagram was collected using key informant interviews andfacilitated discussions with party activists and civil society actors. It reflects the strategy fora single party rather than for the party system as a whole.

13. Oren Ipp, Study on Results Frameworks: Political Party Assistance (Copenhagen: Danish Institute for Parties and
Democracy, 2013), 6-7. The study, commissioned by the Danish Institute for Parties and Democracy, examined theexperiences of various members of the PPPeer Network. It is one example of the self-reflection that party foundations are
conducting as part of ongoing efforts to improve the effectiveness of party assistance.
14. Scott G Chaplowe, Monitoring and Evaluation Planning: Guidelines and Tools (Baltimore: Catholic Relief Services;
Washington, DC: American Red Cross, 2008), http://www.stoptb.org/assets/documents/countries/acsm/ME_Planning_
CRS.pdf.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 34

• Risk Analysis: A short five-step guide to identifying, prioritizing and developing plans
for risk mitigation is included in Appendix 4. The accompanying template can be used tooutline mitigation plans.

Table 5: Analyzing Risks and Developing Mitigation Strategies
Risk

Likelihood

Impact1. Party leaderschoose not to
accept external
technical assistance.

MediumHigh

How the risk will be monitored, possible mitigating
actions, and by whom• Assessment to select parties to be targeted based on
capacity and interest.
• Preliminary consultations with party leaders to securebuy-in and present initial focus group findings as a tangible example of what the project can offer.
• Regular check-ins with participating parties to monitor
continued interest in program, combined with assessments of new interest from non-participating parties.
• Tailor assistance to individual parties as needed, allowing
each party to focus on one or more of the following:
research, policy development, and outreach. In somecases, assistance could target youth wings, as this canbe perceived as less threatening to the status quo.

2. Parties are notable or willing to
dedicate necessary resourcesto new citizen
research, policy
development, oroutreach initiatives.

Medium

3. The government
constrains theability of assistance provider
or participating
parties to freely
conduct research on issuesof concern tocitizens.

Low

4. The government
partially or fully
blocks assistance provider
from conducting
party strengthening activities
in the country.

Low

Medium• Monitor risk in consultation with party liaisons.
• Meet regularly with party leadership to reinforce thevalue of the initiative.
• Assist parties in identifying low-cost options for assessing citizens’ views and conducting outreach.
• Where applicable – e.g. in the event of a presidential
election – adjust program to assist with campaign platform development. This would involve helping parties
develop many of the same skills and would provide afoundation for post-election work.

High• Monitor risk in consultation with participating parties.
• Engage national or local government officials on thenature and purpose of the research. If necessary, party
leaders and other allies could intercede.
• As needed, adapt project plans – for example, by omitting initial focus group research and instead starting
immediately to assist parties in improving their own
research capacities.

High• Monitor risk with input from parties.
• Engage national or local government officials on natureand purpose of the technical assistance being offeredto parties, and/or appeal to party leaders and otherallies to intercede if needed.
• In the event of significant reductions in political space,adjust programming by, for instance, relying exclusively
on nationals for in-country activities or holding offshore
events for party members.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 35Figure 10: Party Strategy Map
In the diagram below, internal and external factors affecting prospects for change are listed on
the left and right, respectively. Plus, minus and zero symbols indicate whether particular factors
are expected to help, hinder or be neutral in attaining program objectives. This diagram outlines
the strategy for engaging a particular party included in a policy development program.

Internal Incentives+ Retaining/acquiring talent:
Most talented members in
govt., party has been drainedof capacity.
+ Managing growth & internal
complexity: Largest party,
yet structures for gatheringand sharing information are
inadequate. Want a Policy
Unit.
+ Competitive advantage:
Aware that local engagement
is important for maintaining
supporter base.
+ Internal dissatisfaction: Local
members feel that party
organization prevents themfrom working effectively at
the local level.
- Leadership: Accustomed
to complete control; also
unlikely to see added value
to of consultation, given timepressures.

External Incentives
Overall: party is very
interested in receiving
external assistance.
It has identified thefollowing areas:+ Legislative change: Changes
to electoral law a concern,though it is unclear whether
the party has a response
strategy.

1. Strengthen policy
development skills:
High performing
members now ingovernment roles.
Need to increase
the skills of people
in the party, as
well as attract new
talent.

+ EU Integration: Party is eager
to present itself as a modern
European party.

2. Improve skills in
local engagement:
Party headquarters
is preparing amanual to instructlocal councilors
on how to engage
locals; want help
from NDI on this.

0 Interparty rivalry: Party
is dominant and does notappear to worry about otherparties posing a competitive
threat.
- Civic groups: Not regarded
as capable of exerting strong
demands on policymaking orproviding useful policy insight.
- Media coverage: Not holding
leaders to account or exertingpressure on party activity.
- Local communities: Becoming
less interested in engagement.

- Cultural: Autocratic culture
makes members reluctant tomake contributions.

Activities
Informal Engagement with
Intraparty Groups
3. Engage leadership on how
re-organization can improve
efficiency.
4. Assist local leaders in making
the case for changes to theirleadership.
5. Encourage contacts makethe case for changes in how
decision making is organized.

Formal Direct Support
1. Training on policy analysis& development: Instill bestpractices for producing
representative policy backed
by evidence.
2. Training on consulting
external stakeholders:
Assist party efforts directed
to strengthen local level
activities.

Planned Interventions with
External Stakeholders
1. Strengthen civic groups: Holdparties to account.
2. Collaborate with media
development: Strengthenreporting in the media on
political issues.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 36

Choosing Activities
Based on the program strategy, the next step is to choose appropriate activities. This section
outlines three broad categories of activities: skills-building, organizational systems andprocesses, and dialogue. It provides overviews of each of the approaches, highlighting common
tools and techniques for each. A fourth category captures cross-cutting interventions such as
public opinion research, study missions, and resource centers that can be used to support
skills-building, organizational systems development, and dialogue.
Broadly speaking, change happens at four levels: individual, group, organizational and systemic.
As a general rule, change at the lower levels may, but will not necessarily impact behavior at
the higher levels. However, change at the higher level will almost always impact behavior at
the lower levels. For instance, increasing the skill set of party activists using new technologies
for constituency outreach has the potential to contribute to more responsive parties, but isunlikely to do so in isolation. On the other hand, changes at the systemic level – for instance, achange in the electoral law – is likely to impact parties’ organizational behavior, as well as the
behavior of individual activists. The categories of program activities roughly correspond to thelevels of change:• Skills-building primarily promotes change at the individual and small group level;• Organizational systems and processes includes assistance designed to create change at
the group and organizational level; and• Dialogues typically try to affect change at the organizational or systemic levels, seeking to
influence the political space where parties operate or the space within the party for smallergroups to participate.
While these categories are a useful way to think about the many options for assistance providers
in working with parties, they rarely exist in isolation. Facilitated dialogues may bring parties
together to agree on changes to legal regulations that impact the political space in which they
operate, but they are unlikely to succeed if the parties participating do not have the requisite
negotiation skills or if they have not agreed on an organizational strategy before entering into
the dialogue. Similarly, a program working to help a political party implement a new approachto gathering citizen feedback on policy concerns would likely include a component on outreachskills.

Skills-building
Skills-building programs focus on developing the competency of individual party officials,
activists or members. These types of programs most directly affect party capacity, but may also
be designed to impact incentive structures and thus serve to influence political will or politicalspace within the party. For instance, a program to train women activists in fundraising may
also help create an incentive for party leaders to provide opportunities for them once they seethat those skills can be broadly beneficial to the party. In other cases, multiparty initiatives may
contribute to promoting interparty dialogue by bringing opposing party members together
and helping them to create informal working relationships. For instance, NDI multiparty skillsbuilding sessions in Guinea and Mali have helped reduce cross-party tensions during election
periods. However, as discussed above, skills-building alone is unlikely to lead to transformativechange at the organizational level. Developing individual capacity in discrete areas is only useful
if those skills are in demand within the party, trainees will have the opportunity to put their new
skills to use, and the resulting increase in party capacity contributes to broader program goals.
While there are many different types of skills-building programs, certain common elements
bear specific discussion.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 37

Skills-building should usually be considered part of a larger program. While some smaller
programs may seek to improve the capacity of political parties or activists in discrete areas,
more often party assistance programs seek to build skills in areas that will contribute to larger
structural changes. For instance, a program might seek to help party staff develop better
constituency outreach skills as part of a larger program aiming to help political parties develop
more responsive policy positions. Therefore, in addition to ensuring that the participants are
the people who will be conducting the outreach, it is important to take steps to ensure thatthe participants have the opportunity to put their new skills to use and that the trainings arepart of a broader effort in which parties are encouraged to increase outreach and incorporate
the resulting feedback into their processes. For instance, over the course of 10 years, NDI’s
Latin America and Caribbean Political Leadership Program trained young political leaders
representing more than 56 parties across the region in leadership, strategic planning, internal
democracy, and outreach. The program used a competitive application process and included
a requirement that participants implement projects to strengthen their parties. The projects
allowed participants to apply newly-acquired skills, thereby reinforcing learning and also
helping to demonstrate to party leaders how these young activists could contribute to party
goals if given the chance. Several program graduates took on new leadership responsibilities
within their parties in part as a result of their training. The section on working with program
stakeholders includes additional information on some issues to consider in selecting program
participants and working with them to apply newly-acquired skills. Table 6 outlines somecommon approaches to skills-building and associated activities.

Table 6: Skills-Building Activities
Approach

Activities

Instructor-led group sessions:
The most common approach toskills-building includes activities
such as workshops and academies.

Workshops: 1-3 day training on a specific skill or topic, mostuseful for teaching stand-alone technical skills such as new
software applications or organizing techniques. Can be run as aseries or spread out to allow participants to put the skills to use
in between sessions.
Academies: Held over a longer period of time, academies takeon broader topic areas such as campaign planning and management, or general party administration. In other cases, they may
be used to help activists develop less defined personal skills suchas leadership, negotiation or communication.

Guided Practice: Trainees are provided with opportunities to put newtechniques, skills and knowledge touse, often conducted in tandem withskills-building sessions describedabove.

Experiential Learning: Trainings may be structured so that they
coincide with party needs and the political calendar. Trainees will
immediately be able to put their knowledge to use. For instance,
participants trained in outreach methods might immediately besent to regional offices to develop and implement a local-level
outreach plan. This approach can help reinforce skills developedin a workshop setting, but requires that participants be in a position to put their skills to use.
Active Engagement: Allows practitioners to provide ongoing
feedback and support to trainees as they apply new skills andknowledge in their day-to-day work.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 38Distance Learning: Distance learning can help providers extend theirreach and connect with politicalparties and activists where there
may otherwise be no access, due
to a lack of political space, physical distance, or limited access toresources.

Material distribution: Websites and other web platforms canserve as repositories for information on best practices, allowing
motivated activists to access information even when they are
not able to attend a workshop or visit a physical resource center.
Distributing materials remotely can expand a program’s reach,but tracking who is accessing the resources and how they areusing them can be difficult.
Online Courses: Can help party assistance providers extend theirreach to otherwise unavailable audiences. Because of their interactive nature, they may be more effective teaching tools than an
online library. They also make it possible to track progress andtest participants’ knowledge retention with intermittent tests andquizzes. However, they require good internet connectivity, and insome environments, users may be hesitant to participate for fearof government monitoring.
Online Forums: The online medium has great potential for connecting activists from different regions, countries or even continents. Activists can share experiences through traditional internet
forums, or attend online video lectures and other live exchanges.

Organizational Systems and Processes
Party assistance often involves helping political parties design and implement organizationaland structural changes to improve their organizational capacity or democratic practices. In
some cases, practitioners may work with established parties to reform historic approaches toorganizing. In others, they might work with new parties to set up basic nascent organizational
systems. For instance, in Libya, where political parties were outlawed for 42 years under Gaddafi’srule, fledgling parties sought NDI’s help at the earliest stages of setting up their organizations.

Textbox 5: Peru - Organizational Capacity
Much of NDI’s work with parties focuses on improving their internal organizational
capacity, a difficult process that requires long-term buy-in and is critical to the effective
implementation of policy. Internal reforms are more likely to be successful when party
leaders perceive them to be in their party’s interests.
In Peru, NDI worked with parties to develop cost-effective means to engage members andcitizens nationwide. The Institute designed party websites to help regions that included
underrepresented sectors such as ethnic minorities or had limited access to party material
to obtain information on political ideas, issues and proposals. The sites have two primary
components. On the first component, the public platform, parties can post news clips,
information on issues they are currently debating, and party documents that outline theirpolicy positions. The second component is accessible only to party members and serves
as a forum where they can internally debate their views on legislation. As Lima tends todominate the national political discourse, these sites provided a mechanism for involving
different party bases – particularly those outside of the capital – into policy discussions.
The use of web-based video, commentary, and videoconferencing features helps bridge
the geographic divide between Lima and the interior of Peru that makes intra-party
communication and coordination difficult.
Initially, NDI worked with five parties – including APRA Party (Partido Asprista Perunao),
Popular Action Party (AP – Acción Popular), and Popular Christian Party (PPC - Partido
Popular Cristiano) – tailoring its assistance to the unique needs of each. The Institute has

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 39

had ongoing relationships with many of these parties since 2000, working with them toorganize skills-building workshops. This relationship meant that NDI had some knowledgeof the parties’ institutional capacity and use of information and communication technology(ICT) to promote their image on social networking sites and party websites. The Peru team
met with interested party liaisons to explore how they could further use ICTs to improvetheir internal communication capacity and outreach. Through these bilateral meetings, NDI
further assessed each party’s needs and interests.
To help ensure buy-in from party leaders, whose support was essential for long-term
participation, the Institute gave presentations on how new website features could help
improve party outreach. Buy-in from parties was essential to ensure the sustainability of
the new platform, as they would be responsible for updating and managing the platform
once all the trainings were complete. Once the web platforms were set up, the Institutemaintained contact with those parties that continued to update and utilize the platform,
focusing its efforts on the partners who demonstrated their commitment and willingness
to continue the planned activities. For instance, Lourdes Flores, the leader of the PPC
Party, recently used her party’s platform to conduct a “Google Hangout” with party
members in the department of Junín. Participants discussed economic issues and theimportance of investment in infrastructure. However, even with party buy-in, unforeseen
events, costs, and time restrictions can mean that some partners are unable to continue
with long-term projects. In Peru, parties that were unable to utilize the platform effectively
are still involved in other NDI activities and maintain a relationship with the Institute.

Organizational change is difficult at the best of times and is unlikely to take hold withoutleadership buy-in. For this reason, it is particularly important that political parties, andspecifically party leaders, perceive any proposed changes as being in their interest. In addition,
while many of the skills-building activities described above can easily be conducted in a
multiparty setting, these types of interventions are usually conducted one-on-one. This isbecause issues of organizational processes and systems often involve strategic questions thatpolitical parties will want to keep confidential. Working with political parties on organizational
systems and processes is a highly individualized process which varies widely depending oneach party’s needs and the nature of the program. In most cases, there are three components
to implementing structural changes in political parties: some kind of assessment, formal orinformal, of the political party’s needs; agreement with the political party regarding the changes
to be implemented; and finally, technical assistance to the political party on the implementationof the agreed upon changes. The assessment and agreement stages are an important opportunity
to establish relationships and build trust with key players in the political parties; they present
an important opportunity to build political will in favor of proposed democratic reforms withsenior party leadership. Ensuring that senior political party staff are involved in, and sign off
on the needs assessments and action plans is important to ensure that the internal political
will exists for the proposed changes. Table 7 outlines some common strategies for working with
political parties on organizational systems and processes.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 40Table 7: Organizational Systems and Processes Activities
Approach

Description

Strategic Planning

Strategic planning can help parties implement organizational changes or develop long-term strategies. While there are many approaches to strategic planning, almost all should include the following three elements:• Goal Setting: Identifying the organizational problem or long-term strategic
goal.
• Planning: Plans include a timeline with incremental steps or milestones thatwill collectively lead to the goal.
• Implementation: Plans are implemented with regular check-ins to assess
progress against the initial timeline and, where necessary, reassess.

Deploying New ICTs

New ICTs can help parties improve organizational capacity to conduct outreach,manage data, fundraise, and conduct internal and external communications.
A strategic approach is required to ensure that ICTs are appropriate to: theparty’s needs; the skill set of party staff responsible for deploying the ICTs; andthe technological infrastructure environment. Similar to the strategic planning
process, ICT assistance should begin by:• Identifying the problems they wish to address;• Developing strategies for tackling those problems; and• Choosing the appropriate technological tools.
Textbox 5 summarizes an NDI program in Peru involving the use of ICTs to improve party communications.

Consultations

Many assistance programs include some level of one-on-one consultation withpartner parties. Typically, this type of support complements another type ofactivity. For instance, practitioners may:• Consult with parties to help them develop strategies for incorporating new
ICTs at the organizational level;• Conduct assessments to determine organizational needs and identify strategies for improvement/growth; or• Review and provide feedback on draft party bylaws or strategy documents.
For instance, in Iraq, NDI conducted organizational assessments of individual
parties, presenting party leaders with customized memos outlining findings andrecommendations for improvement. This process can also help develop relationships and trust with party leaders and demonstrate that meaningful efforts
have been made to understand the party’s operations and challenges.

Dialogues
While competition between political parties, the candidates who represent them, and thepolicies they propose are central features of democracy, dialogue is an equally importantfeature. Dialogues may occur formally or informally among political parties, or between politicalparties and civic groups or other democratic actors. Whether public or private, dialogues mostoften seek to influence or shape the political space in which political parties operate. While
competitive elections provide the means to determine the direction of government, for thosepolls to be considered legitimate there must be consensus on the rules governing the process.
Dialogues allow for a civil exchange of views which can improve the overall political environment,
promote national cohesion, and allow compromise. They may be used to facilitate consensus
and promote legal reforms that improve the regulatory environment in which political parties
operate, or to help reduce tensions, thus creating a more serene environment. For instance, inPakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), the Institute brought together politicalparties, civic groups, and other regional representatives to discuss, and subsequently advocate
successfully for reforms. Textbox 6 provides additional information on the effort. Dialogues may

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 41also bring together individuals or factions within a party.15 For instance, intraparty dialogues
may be designed to increase space for women, minorities, or other historically disadvantaged
groups to participate in party activities. In addition, when dialogues facilitate communication
between party leaders and voters – for instance, through candidate forums – they can help createa more informed electorate, helping to focus campaigns on issues rather than personalities,
and strengthen the relationship between leaders and their constituents. Table 8 outlines somecommon dialogue activities, along with their potential benefits.

Textbox 6: Pakistan - FATA Multiparty Dialogues
Originally formed by the British colonial administrators in the 19th century, the Federally
Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) make up a semi-autonomous region in Northwestern
Pakistan. Unlike the rest of the country, this region has lived under a set of laws called theFrontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) that deny the creation of, or participation in, politicalparties. Those living in FATA were unable to vote and had no representation in Pakistan’sParliament until 1996, when the government granted adults the right to vote for their own
representatives. However, political parties were still not allowed to be organized until 2011.
The FCR is an example of a regulatory barrier to political space, which has led to stunted
party development.
Beginning in 2008 and with support from NDI in partnership with the Shaheed Bhutto
Foundation (SBF), more than 300 tribal representatives participated in regionalroundtables in FATA that culminated in an agreement on reform priorities, including theextension of the Political Parties Order to the region. An SBF report on the meetings’
findings, prepared with NDI support, concluded that unrest in tribal areas posed athreat to global security and underscored the urgency of establishing a democratic andconstitutional system of governance there. The report also documented a broad consensus
among tribal area leaders that development, democracy and rule of law were imperative
to achieving peace and stability in the region. In January 2009, more than 100 of these
tribal representatives presented their recommendations directly to President Zardari.
Additional meetings in March and June of 2009 contributed to an announcement inAugust 2009, by President of a FATA reforms package, which received widespread
support from FATA residents and a broad cross-section of political parties. To help sustain
the momentum for change, NDI supported ongoing dialogue that led to the creation of
the Political Parties Joint Committee on FATA Reforms. The committee discussed the
proposed reforms and continued to call on the president to implement them. These efforts
were ultimately successful, and in August 2011, President Zardari signed the reforms. They
included amendments to the FCR for the first time since 1901, as well as the extensionof the Political Parties Order of 2002 to FATA, which allowed political parties to operate
in the region. These changes challenged the perception that the antiquated regulations
could never be altered and inspired hope for further meaningful reform.
As a result, candidates in FATA were allowed to run as members of a political party in the
May 2013 elections. Almost every major party fielded a candidate and turnout was notably
higher than the 2008 election. However, while the president signed onto the reforms,
not all were adopted; in June 2013, the Political Parties Joint Committee reviewed andapproved the Citizens’ Declaration for FATA Reforms and developed their own reform
priorities. The Citizens’ Declaration asked the president to implement the other reforms hesigned in 2011 with further updates.

15. Brechtje Kemp et al., Political Party Dialogue: A Facilitator’s Guide (Oslo: International IDEA; NIMD; Oslo Center for
Peace and Human Rights, 2013), 100.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 42When designing programs that aim to expand political space, it is important to rememberthat it is a delicate, gradual and long-term process. As such, NDI’s FATA program has
continued working to encourage the government to follow through on the promised
reforms. The FATA multiparty dialogues and later the Political Parties Joint Committee
on FATA Reforms are concrete examples of how programs can partner with local groups
to expand political space, but also demonstrate some of the common frustrations andthe often languid pace of real change. Long-term programs such as this require a large
investment of resources; a long timeframe should be incorporated into the program froman early stage.

Table 8: Dialogue Activities16
Approach

Description

Roundtables:

Roundtables are generally closed meetings between parties, or parties and outside
actors such as civic groups, election management bodies, or other government actors.
They offer participants an opportunity to discuss unresolved conflicts, common problems, or upcoming political events in a private setting. Roundtables may be used in avariety of situations, often in tandem with one of the dialogue approaches listed below.
Roundtables may help:• Bring feuding parties together and begin to open lines of communication, or initiate
dialogue around smaller, less contentious issues as a way of establishing contact andtrust;• Parties organize around a common interest – for instance, in Libya, NDI convened political parties to discuss their role in influencing the design of the electoral framework,
agree on a core set of principles, and explore ways to jointly advocate for them; or• Ensure that parties and activists have access to accurate information. For instance, inJune 2009, NDI facilitated a roundtable discussion between Kenya’s electoral management body and the country’s political parties. Discussions at this meeting helped
inform the establishment of the Political Parties Liaison Committee comprising representatives from the electoral management body, political parties and the Office of theRegistrar of Political Parties (ORPP). With continued support from the Institute, thePPLC became the primary mechanism for dialogue between political parties, the electoral management body and the (ORPP). Under the auspices of the PPLC, stakeholders in the electoral process resolved issues surrounding procedures for party agent
deployment, amendment of the Political Parties Act, among other things. Given the
PPLC’s role in improving communication and reducing suspicion between parties andelection management bodies, similar structures were established at the county level.
In 2011, national and county level PPLCs were entrenched into Kenya’s legal framework. In the lead-up to Kenya’s 2013 elections, PPLC meetings helped keep politicalparties informed of new regulations on candidate nomination, electoral management
procedures, and other issues at a time of significant change and confusion.

16. “Debates International: A global resource on candidate debates.” www.debatesinternational.org

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 43

Codes of
Conduct(COCs):

COCs are formal agreements among political parties to establish rules that govern
political party behavior, usually during an election campaign. By promoting inter-party dialogue, tolerance and cooperation in the period leading up to elections, codes ofconduct can prove a critical step in reducing political tensions, addressing recurring or
anticipated electoral problems and, ultimately, building public confidence in the overall
electoral process. In agreeing to the code, individual parties, from leaders to local activists, make a public commitment to each other and to the general public to uphold theprinciples outlines in the code. Depending on the context, code provisions can address
any number of electoral issues including:• Prohibiting vote-buying;• Mandating cooperation with election officials; and• Banning intimidation against political opponents.
The process leading to the validation of the code by the various signatories is as important as the documents itself. In addition:• Public awareness lies at the heart of a code’s power: voters should be able to evaluate
the commitments parties have made and then decide the penalties attendant on parties that violate those commitments, including withdrawing their electoral support.
• Active monitoring of party adherence to the code, and the establishment of a mechanisms for filing and resolving disputes over compliance with code provisions are critical to ensure that parties know they are being held to and judged by their compliancewith their commitments.
For instance, in Macedonia, over the course of multiple elections, NDI has organizedcode of conduct initiatives encouraging political parties and their candidates to respect
democratic norms during campaign period. The code of conduct initiative in the lead
up to the 2009 elections featured an extensive media campaign that included billboards, posters, leaflets and campaign buttons that many candidates, broadcasters andmembers of the international community wore, indicating their support for the codes
provisions. In addition, the Institute organized over 730 meetings around the country on
the code. Violations of the code in 2009 were far less significant than they had been in
the 2008 elections.

Debates:

Debates are public events, often broadcast via television or radio, where competing candidates come together to present their ideas to the public. Civic activists in countries inall parts of the world have begun to make debates a centerpiece of their elections. To
date, debates have been held in more than 60 countries to:• Help voters make an informed choice at the ballot box;• Encourage candidates to focus on public policy issues;• Promote comity among candidates, reducing the potential for violence in countries
where campaign rallies are often used to vilify opponents; and• Hold elected officials accountable to their campaign promises.
Debates also help candidates get their message out in places where one political force
dominates the media environment. Despite the many benefits, debate initiatives in somecountries have failed when sponsors could not overcome various challenges, including
allaying fears that organizers may have a political bias; convincing reluctant candidates
to participate; negotiating with competing media outlines; and producing live national
television and radio broadcasts, among other issues. NDI and the United States Commission for Presidential Debates have partnered to help debate sponsoring organizations overcome these challenges. These efforts include the development of a practical
web-based debate resource center and a comparative guide to organizing debates.16

16. “Debates International: A global resource on candidate debates.” www.debatesinternational.org

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 44Forums:

Forums are public meetings held between political parties, candidates, or government
representatives, and the general public. They help bring political parties and citizens together to discuss issues of common concern, and are a relatively easy and low-cost way
to strengthen ties between political parties and the electorate. Forums may be a useful
method for parties to stay in touch with citizen concerns when public opinion research
is not possible. Forums provide:• An opportunity for parties to informally gauge citizen concerns;• An opportunity for citizens to provide input to political parties on issues of concern;and• A relatively low-cost way for parties to increase their presence at the local level.

Cross-Cutting Approaches
The following programming tools do not fit neatly into any one of the three program types
outlined above; they may be used to enhance many different types of activities.
Public Opinion Research: Qualitative and quantitative public opinion can be used to help
political parties better understand and prioritize citizen concerns, and to identify potential
supporters and develop strategies to target them. This contributes to capacity building but
can also help influence political will by illustrating to party leaders how reforms may improvetheir standing among voters. Despite its potential as a powerful programming tool, public
opinion research can cause more harm than good if conducted improperly. To help ensure thevalidity of findings and analysis, public opinion research should always be conducted by anindependent and properly qualified firm or group. Given the potential for biased findings andanalysis, parties should not conduct their own polls or focus groups. Informal surveys – suchas activist-administered door- to-door surveys – and party-facilitated forums, where members
help raise a party’s profile in targeted neighborhoods, can provide helpful feedback on party
positions, but lack the scientific validity of professionally-conducted research.
Textbox 7, below, summarizes how professional public opinion research might be used toaddress a series of party problems. In addition, Textbox 8 describes how NDI used public
opinion research in Iraq.

Textbox 7: Public Opinion Research
Public opinion research can be used to:• Help party and civil society leaders identify citizen concerns and prioritize campaign
issues;• Make a case for party leaders to address issues of public concern;• Provide political parties with information about the differing priorities of various
segments of the population;• Assist political parties in developing improved targeting, message development, and“get out the vote” strategies;• Illustrate the value of research and the need for improved communication methods
and direct voter contact; andNational Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 45• Improve party assistance providers’ understanding of the problems they hope toaddress and, in turn, inform programming.
There are two main types of public opinion research: qualitative and quantitative.
Quantitative research – also known as or polling or surveys – employ objective, statisticalmethods to generate percentages and make extrapolations about public opinion. Surveys
involve asking a carefully selected, statistical sample of individuals an identical set ofquestions. When done properly, the responses of the sample are representative of thelarge population.
Qualitative findings cannot be projected to a larger population. Instead, qualitative
research is marked by observations – words which describe the issue in question.
Examples include focus groups and interviews. Focus groups are small, targeted
discussions typically compromising six to 10 people with common demographic traits.
Using a guide, a skilled moderator leads the group through a discussion that explores
participant attitudes and opinions. Focus groups reveal not just what people think,
but also why they think that way, how they formulate opinions and how strongly these
opinions are held. They are especially helpful in understanding the language people use
when discussing particular ideas or concepts.

Study Missions: Study missions can help foster democratic practices in a variety of ways.
They can enable activists from emerging democracies to learn from other countries that have
faced similar challenges and help them develop innovative solutions, or they may provide an
opportunity for party leaders and activists to interact with counterparts from other countries
who have faced and overcome similar challenges. In some cases, study missions provide
leaders and activists with opportunities to observe new organizing approaches in practice andto interact with a range of host country groups and individuals who can share their perspectives
on the advantages of reform.
Study missions can also foster free and productive discussions in a neutral setting, which
may be critical in countries where the government severely restricts political space, or whereinterparty tensions are high. Past study missions have shown that political opponents are more
likely to interact and express themselves freely in neutral spaces outside their own borders,
where they feel less scrutinized by partisan observers. When carefully structured to focus ontargeted issues, they have proven effective at facilitating agreement around contentious issues.
For instance, in 1995, NDI organized a study mission that helped South African legislators fromseven parties reach the consensus needed to develop and implement a parliamentary ethics
code. Prior to the study mission, all but one of the parties had opposed establishing an ethics
code. However, drawing on Irish and British experiences, study mission participants worked
to reach consensus on a code that was eventually adopted with support from six of the sevenparties. Legislators identified the study mission as a turning point in their efforts to pass thecode.
Study missions can also help consolidate democratic practices by exposing political party
officials to effective, alternative ways of managing their disagreements, thereby improving
relations between opposing parties. For instance, following the Good Friday Agreementof 1998 that established the Northern Ireland Assembly, ending 25 years of direct rule from
London, NDI sponsored a consultative visit of a 10-member delegation to South Africa. The
visit helped Northern Ireland’s political leaders learn from the experience of their South Africancounterparts who had also undergone a transition from sectarian politics with limited selfgovernance, and allowed them discuss how political trust had been strengthened while politicalinstitutions were being built and tested.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 46Textbox 8: Iraq - How Public Opinion Research Can Help Make theCase for Party Reform
Public opinion research can be a helpful tool for promoting reforms to increase thestrength and democratic success of a given party. Initially, polling and focus groupdata may simply allow curious party leaders and decision-makers to gauge how they
are perceived, their level of support, citizen policy priorities and other basic findings.
Ultimately, this interest may give assistance providers an entry point to engage leaders
on organizational reforms. Nevertheless, party leaders may simply dismiss or refuse tobelieve the results of research with which they disagree, until repeated bad press ora disappointing string of elections forces party leadership to engage in serious selfassessment. Implementing significant change remains dependent upon a party’s own
assessment of its needs.
The Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI) suffered losses in Iraq’s 2009 provincial
council elections and the 2010 national election; these losses convinced party leaders toreposition ISCI as a moderate Shia alternative to more extremist parties. NDI shared public
opinion research with ISCI, which demonstrated that Iraqi citizens favored issue-based
policy platforms. As a result, party leaders rolled out a series of provincial-level policy
initiatives and focused their campaign messages on cooperation across party and ethnosectarian lines. Though ISCI risked failing to distinguish itself from its rivals by steppingaway from its religious message, the strategy succeeded in attracting a significant share ofvoters who had grown weary of Iraq’s repeated political crises.
ISCI was particularly cooperative and eager for NDI’s assistance for several reasons: party
members were seeking explanations in the wake of a failed election, a recent switch inparty leadership had brought in a younger candidate who looked favorably upon reform,
and ISCI leaders understood the need for accurate public opinion research but did notpreviously have the necessary skills or funding to undertake it. On this occasion, Institutesponsored public opinion research proved valuable to the party and served as a timely aid
to guide party reform.

Resource Centers: Resource centers can be established at national or regional levels. They may
be located in dedicated rental spaces or with an appropriate neutral implementing partnersuch as a civil society organization. They typically provide a library and central repository forparty development documents and resources. Some also include printing and video facilities.
Resource centers can provide a neutral space for parties to meet, and a place for parties andassistance providers to host trainings for party staff and activists. For instance, NDI’s Sierra
Leone resource center hosted weekly roundtables for party leaders and prominent speakers
on a variety of topics. In a sensitive post-conflict environment, the resource center helped
keep interparty dialogue and communication between parties, the election commission, thegovernment, and the international community alive. In Afghanistan, master trainers were
taught at the Kabul center and dispatched to the regional resource centers where they wereable to provide ongoing support to parties at the provincial level.
Increasingly, some of the functions traditionally filled by physical resource centers can be
carried out online. For instance, NDI has developed an extensive online library of political party
resources in Arabic, which can be accessed by parties around the world. Similarly, the Institute’s
Red Innovación, which targets political and civic activists in Latin America and Caribbean, hostsa variety of online resources, as well as events promoting discussion between party activists andcivic innovators. While these online formats can reach a broader audience, and even promotedialogue up to a point, there is a trade-off in terms of the potential to create a safe space for
dialogue where practitioners can develop relationships and build trust with party partners.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 47SUMMARY OF KEY POINTSDeveloping a Strategy
Party assistance programs should be designed to address specific democracy problems.
Through preliminary analysis, the root causes of representational problems should beclearer; programs may be designed to improve parties’ functioning or their operating environment by addressing political space, political will and/or party capacity. However, in
the absence of political will to implement newly found skills or knowledge, behavior isunlikely to change. In addition, even when they wish to do so, political parties may beunable to apply new organizing skills in closed or insecure environments. Therefore, indesigning programs, staff should consider the potential impact of incentive structures andother contextual factors that shape party behavior and prospects for change.

Key considerations in developing a program strategy include:• Identifying goals that are realistic to the program’s political environment (including
incentive structures and other contextual factors), funding levels, and timeframe;• Defining a development hypothesis that clearly spells out the type of change(s) the
program hopes to achieve (bearing in mind issues of space, will and/or capacity) andhow the various program outputs contribute to it; and• Selecting program activities that are appropriate for stated anticipated outcomes, theenvironment, partner capacity, and organizational culture.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 48MEASURING CHANGE
Efforts to monitor party assistance programs face a number of unique challenges. For instance,as Krishna Kumar notes, most democracy assistance takes place in fluid environments. This
increases the chance that indicators, targets and activities outlined during intervention design
may not remain relevant throughout the duration of a program. Further, since democracy
programs often aim to alter power relations, they are likely to face resistance from vested interests
who benefit from the status quo. Moreover, given the complexities involved in institution
building – including the wide range of factors that have the potential to affect outcomes –program results are often not visible in the short-term, while long-term consequences areoften unforeseeable.17 In some cases, the relative scale and scope of particular interventions
may make large-scale change unrealistic. More specifically, in the case of party assistance, awide range of confounding or independent factors – new legislation, the emergence of newparties, or assistance from other groups, to name a few – help shape party behavior, making
it difficult to assess impact, particularly at higher levels of change. (Randomized control trials
can help control confounding factors, but have limited application for political party programs.
Additional information is provided in Appendix 5.) Additionally, given the competitive natureof political parties and the trust-based relationships required to work with them on sensitive
issues, some party-specific information must be treated as confidential. This sometimes limits
the extent to which evaluation data can be made public or ascribed to a particular party or
individual.
Given some of the challenges associated with monitoring and evaluating democracy andgovernance programs, some have argued that the sector is not well suited to the logicalframework approach.18 But while some implementers and donors are experimenting withalternative approaches, the vast majority of donors and implementers currently use approaches
that are based – in one way or another – on the logical framework. As a result, the suggestions inthis publication assume the use of the logical framework approach.
All programs incorporate some type of system for M&E. These systems vary considerably fromprogram to program depending on the size, scale, country context, donor, and other variables.
Nevertheless, common to all M&E systems is the need to:
1. Identify program goals and objectives;
2. Develop indicators that help to measure whether or to what extent these goals andobjectives are being met; and3. Develop a research methodology that will facilitate data collection in a manner
appropriate to the context.
This section touches upon various aspects of the second and third points above. However, it
does not aim to provide comprehensive guidance on M&E. For instance, it does not provide
detailed guidance on how to set up a performance, monitoring and evaluation system at thestart, or how to conduct evaluation design. Rather it highlights some specific M&E issues thatare likely to arise in a political party program. It is intended to be used in conjunction withmore comprehensive materials and guidance on M&E. Further, while it does not provide a
detailed roadmap for all party programs, it outlines some general principles to consider whendeveloping indicators and selecting research methods.

17.  Krishna Kumar, Evaluating Democracy Assistance (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2012), 2-5.
18. Ipp, Study on Results Frameworks, 11-12; Gordon Crawford, “Evaluating Democracy and Governance Assistance,”
ESCOR Research Report, no. 7894 (December 2001); Anne Garbutt and Oliver Bakewell, The Use and Abuse of the Logical
Framework Approach (Stockholm: SIDA, 2005).

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 49Ultimately, an M&E system should be designed to achieve the following:• Strengthen program management by providing real-time information that allows
implementers to adjust activities and strategies as necessary to improve program quality,
mitigate unanticipated risks, and leverage emerging opportunities.
• Inform reporting and enhance accountability by providing quality data that can be used
to demonstrate due diligence in managing donor funds and to publicize an implementer’swork.
• Contribute to organizational learning by shedding greater light on what strategies aremost effective – including in what contexts and why – that can inform more successfulprogramming.
The publication uses the following definitions:• Intermediate Results: In some cases, program results frameworks include intermediate
results. These are the mid-project intermediate effects of outputs on “targets” or“beneficiaries.” They are the results that must occur by a project’s midlife to address theroot causes of the problem in question. They contribute to the achievement of the objective.
• Indicator: A qualitative or quantitative factor or variable that provides a simple and reliablemeans to measure change connected to an intervention. Indicators should be SMART(specific, measurable, attainable/achievable, relevant and time-bound).

Indicators
The indicators for any evaluation will depend first and foremost on the specific objectivesof a program. Indicators can be qualitative or quantitative. However, using a combinationof qualitative and quantitative data – that is, mixed methods – often yields much richer
information about a program. While statistics can be useful for donor reports, backing themup with qualitative materials helps contextualize numbers, giving them greater meaning. In
addition, programs may focus on individuals, political parties as organizations, or the party
system as a whole. Where change at one level is expected to spur change at another level, theseripple effects should be reflected in program indicators and monitoring and evaluation efforts.
For instance, indicators for a youth program designed to spur change in individual parties or
the party system as a whole should be designed to measure whether the targeted youth are
improving their skills, but it should also examine the extent to which they take steps to spurchange and whether they are successful.
Program activities do not take place in a vacuum: external influences may impact a program’sability to meet its objectives or the validity of its indicators. While some of these influences
may be hard to anticipate, others can be identified in the early stages of program design. The
following should be considered: the assumptions being made about those outside influences,the possible impact of external forces on program results and indicators, and possible risks tothe program if those assumptions do not hold true. Being more explicit and more deliberate
about these influences and how they might affect a program can contribute to better defined
objectives, indicators, critical assumptions, and more strategic interventions. For instance, theresults framework excerpt in Figure 11 shows two intermediate results (IR) and an objectivefrom a recent NDI program designed to enhance women’s participation, along with theircorresponding indicators. IR 1 describes a change in the capacity of women to fill leadershiproles. IR 2 describes an organizational change that is heavily reliant on a shift in political will
within the party – specifically, the extent to which the party is open to supporting women in
leadership. Together, these IRs should contribute to the objective – that women leaders more
fully represent the interests of women. (The original logical framework included additional
intermediate results and indicators designed to contribute to this objective and other aspects

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 50of the program goal. For illustrative purpose, only selected objectives and IRs are used below.)
In each case, there are external factors that affect the program’s ability to achieve the results
and/or influence the validity of the indicators. The boxes in the bottom row highlight someof the assumptions the program made regarding those external influences. Staff should makethese assumptions explicit in program documents.
In some cases, assistance providers may be required to set specific targets for each indicator
in its results framework. In a given country, there are often significant differences in parties’organizational capacities, as well as in their levels of interest in various program components.
The different needs and capacities of partner parties should be considered when setting
indicators and targets. For example, staff designing training of trainers programs, which requireparties to send their trainers out to conduct subsequent trainings at the local or regional
level, should consider whether partner parties have the resources to independently conductsubsequent trainings. Similarly, for parties with limited branch structures and communication
systems, planning a program based on a limited rather than a nationwide deployment of party
agents would be more strategic and appropriate.
Figure 12 outlines selected indicators drawn from different levels of a results framework. The
program aims to strengthen political party pollwatcher efforts by training party master trainers.
Subsequently, master trainers are expected to conduct follow-on trainings around the country.
These trainings and the deployment of pollwatchers are to be carried out independently of
the assistance provider. The indicators appear in the cells on the left. On the right are briefcomments on each indicator. In some cases, the comments indicate potential challenges withdata collection. In others, they point out implicit assumptions that should be made explicit orthat should be critically examined before setting any program targets.
For instance, one of the higher-level outcome indicators is the number of party pollwatchers
deployed. As the comments note, this will largely depend on parties having the necessary
resources and the political will to commit them in recruiting, training and deploying capable
party agents. For example, political parties that have limited or weak structures and poorly
defined constituencies often find it difficult to recruit reliable party agents and to put in place
the systems required to manage a pollwatcher effort. Thus, even when equipped with mastertrainers who can help train agents, database software and database management skills, someparties may not have the internal communication systems and other capacities required tomake use of that assistance. Particularly when party agent assistance is provided as part of ashort-term program, there may not be sufficient time to help these parties develop the systems
and capacities requried to benefit from such support. A simpler program may therefore be more
appropriate. Concerns about absorptive capacity aside, there may also be issues of politicalwill. Party pollwatching costs money. All political parties make decisions about how to allocate
their resources. In environments where elections are not particularly competitive, parties may
feel that spending money on party pollwatching is not a strategic use of limited resources, since
it is unlikely to make the difference between electoral success and defeat.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 51Figure 11: Results Framework Example 1
Objective: Women leaders more fully
represent the interests of women.

IR 1: Capacity ofwomen leadersstrengthened

Objective Indicator:
Increase in percentage
over baseline of
public who perceivethat women leaders
are actively pursuing
initiatives that address
gender inequalities

IR 2 Indicator: Numberof parties participatingin national forum on
women’s participationin politics

IR 1 Indicator:
Increased percentage
over baseline ofwomen running for
local and national
officeThis indicator isdependent on parties
selecting women as
candidates; it assumes
that there is spacewithin each party for
women to compete.
Therefore, the extent
to which there is anincrease in the numberof women runningfor office may be
dependent on the
success of activities
under IR 1, and/or thepassage of the quotalaw.

IR 2: Political parties
support women in
leadership positions

Depending on thescale of the program,change might not
be fast or significant
enough to be reflectedin public opinion.
Further, public opinion
may be swayed bymyriad factors outsideof the program’scontrol. This indicator
assumes that thepress or other public
information outlets will
cover the initiatives
that women leaders are
pursuing. If the public
is not aware of thoseinitiatives, then thisindicator is unlikely toreflect actual change.

The IR describes achange in political will.
While participation in
the national forum may
indicate that a party
is willing to support
women in leadership
postions, additional
indicators would be
required to determine
how effective theforums had beenin promoting that
support. The forum
is only one of several
activities designed
to encourage parties
to promote women’s
participation. The
indicator assumes thata new quota law will
be passed, providing
an additional incentive
for party leaders
who might otherwise
have little interest inpromoting women’s
participation.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 52Figure 12: Results Framework Example 2
Objective: Political Parties Deploy Trained Party Pollwatchers% of pollwatchers
conducting
themselvesprofessionally atpolling stations• While relevant to the objective, data is likely to be difficult to gather.

• The scale of deployment will vary per party depending on resources,
political will, and the condition of party structures.
• Assumes that election management bodies, security forces, andothers respect the right of parties to field agents, and that security
conditions do not hamper party efforts.

# of pollwatchers
deployed• Numbers may be dificult to track if the parties themselves do nothave good internal communication systems to track this data. Whileelection management bodies and other observers may track thisinformation, accessing their data may not be realistc or efficient.

% of pollwatchers
demonstratingknowledgeof votingprocedures% of mastertrainers
demonstrating
the ability to train
party pollwatchers• Assumes political parties have the the resources, systems, andwillingness to recruit and train party agents.
• Could be challenging to track the impact of the training on
participants without significant commitment and resources from theparties to collect and share evaluation information with NDI.

• Could be measured through pre- and post- tests of master trainers,
and spot checks of step-down trainings.

Following is a summary of key questions that should be considered.
• Do the indicators reflect measurement at realistic levels of change?
• What information will be collected?
• Does the data need to be disaggregated by age, ethnicity, gender or other characteristics?
• If targets must be set for each indicator, do the targets reflect the different needs, capacities,
and interests of beneficiary parties/groups?

Data Collection and Analysis
Consultations or interviews with political party members or officials are one of the mostcommon data collection methods listed for program indicators. Interviews can be valuable
sources of information and there are several ways to structure them. However, in some cases,
other types of data collection – for instance, written questionnaires or tests, may be more
helpful in addressing participants’ knowledge at baseline and after training. The data needs
will help determine what type of data collection method is most appropriate, as well as which
format to apply in using the selected method. Table 9 outlines some common data collection
methods and summarizes their respective advantages and limitations. In addition, Appendix 6
outlines some issues to consider before using public opinion polls to measure program impact.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 53Table 9: Data Collection Methods
Review of Party Documents or Media Reports
Possible Uses

Common Challenges

Most useful for gathering information about a very
specific change that is likely to be clearly reflectedin party documents (e.g. by-laws, policy documents). Can also be used where the nature or extent of media coverage of an activity is a measureof program impact. For instance:• Parties may be reluctant to share certain internal
documents.

• A program engaging policy working groups may
review policy proposals submitted to the party
executive.
• A review of media reports may help determine
whether a code of conduct attracted significant
media coverage.

• Party documents may be inaccurate or may
not contain sufficient information for M&E. For
instance, even when parties have consideredpublic opinion research during their policy development processes, it may be difficult to see it
directly reflected in policy documents.
• There may be significant lag time between
program activities and when they are reflectedin party documents. For instance, a decision tochange party procedures or structures may not
be reflected in party rules until the next party
congress.

Direct Observation of Party Activities
Possible Uses

Common Challenges

This approach can be used to gather data about
the scope, attendance and quality of various party
activities. Since program staff and evaluators arecollecting the data themselves, they have significant control over the quality of data gathered. May
be particularly useful for:• Parties may be reluctant to have “outsiders”
observe certain activities.

• Assessing whether master trainers apply specifictraining skills and cover appropriate content instep-down trainings.

• The presence of “outsiders” may impact participant behavior.
• Deploying people to multiple locations may
prove expensive or present other logisticalchallenges. As a result, it may only be possible toobserve a sampling of party activities.

• Spot checking data provided by parties on follow-on activities, such as step-down trainings or
town hall meetings.

Focus Groups and Facilitated Discussions
Possible Uses

Common Challenges

May be helpful in situations where it is importantto have a group discuss, reach agreement on, andprioritize challenges and successes. May also be
useful where sharing experiences can foster relationship-building among a group, or when it is important for participants to exchange perspectives
on a specific issue or challenge. For instance:• In a group setting, participants may be reluctant
to speak as frankly as they would in confidential
one-on-one interviews. Convening groups ofpeers can help limit these risks.

• A facilitated discussion among party officials
could shed some light on and help prioritize
party challenges, opportunities, needs, and areas
where international assistance has been mosthelpful.
• A facilitated discussion among participants ina leadership program could elicit informationon common challenges and success stories,
and provide feedback to help improve future
programs.

• In multiparty settings, participants may seek tooverstate their respective parties’ strengths andminimize their weaknesses.
• The quality of the data will depend on the skillof the moderator. Skilled facilitators may be able
to make relevant observations about the groupdynamic, or follow up on unexpected comments
for more information. Inexperienced moderators
may miss those opportunities, or even allow theirown bias to affect the conduct or outcome ofthe discussions.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 54Individual Interviews
Possible Uses

Common Challenges

Individual interviews are most useful when assessing complex party processes or in situations where
nuance or confidentiality may be required. For
instance:• Interviews can be time consuming. Similarly, it
may be difficult to schedule sufficient time withsome stakeholders, particularly senior party
actors.

• Semi-structured interviews may be used todevelop an understanding of party procedures,such as policy development or candidate andleadership selection. This format can provide
insights into actual practices and how they
compare to what is formally laid out in party
documents.

• Individual interviews may result in a large
amount of qualitative data that may be difficult
to sort and analyze.

• One-on-one interviews may also be helpful inassessing political will within the party and the
motivations of various stakeholders, including
how they might help or hinder the program’s
objectives.

• While stakeholders are more likely to be candid
in a one-on-one setting, some may still be reluctant to share sensitive information or express
viewpoints that they feel will reflect badly on theparty. Establishing trust with interviewees andemphasizing that conversations are confidential
may help reassure participants. Securing theapproval from party officials prior to conducting interviews often helps informants feel more
comfortable.

Written Questionnaires
Possible Uses

Common Challenges

Questionnaires can be used to gather basic information about specific program activities and theirimpact. For instance:• Respondents tend to be concise when filling out
written forms. As such, this format is generally not recommended where the information
requested is complex, nuanced, or may require
some explanation or detail.

• Questionnaires distributed before and after askills-building session can help document changes in knowledge.
• They can also be used to gather basic feedbackon an activity, including what worked, what did
not, and how the event might be improved infuture iterations.

• Response rates may be low, particularly in cases
when party contacts are relied upon to distributethe questionnaire and gather responses. This isless common in cases where program staff andevaluators are on hand to gather responses fromparticipants – for instance, before and after askills training session.
• Party officials and activists may be reluctant toprovide sensitive party information in writing,due to concerns about confidentiality and how
the information will be used.

Through the relationships they develop with political parties, party assistance providers
often have access to internal party information. However, political parties may be reluctant
or unable to share certain types of information due to the political sensitivities involved or
because of limited organizational capacity. These potential risks should be considered inorder to determine what information can be collected and how. Textbox 9 outlines some of
the common challenges that NDI has faced with data collection. Textbox 10 proposes somepotential solutions for the most common problems.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 55Textbox 9: Common Challenges Associated with Data Collection
Here are some of the common challenges associated with data collection for politicalparty programs, as identified by a cross section of NDI monitoring and evaluation staff
working in different regions of the world. Most of the challenges reflect issues withaccessing valid and complete data in a timely fashion. Political parties may not beinterested in the data that NDI is collecting or understand why it is requested by theInstitute.
• Parties may not want to share sensitive information about their membership or
structures. In challenging political contexts, it may be especially difficult to accessthis information.
• Political parties may have different priorities from NDI, making it difficult to receive
information in a timely manner. For instance, political party leaders or members may
not be accessible during campaign periods.
• Data collected indirectly – where NDI has less control – is often late and/or
incomplete. Additionally, secondhand data may not be broken out by gender, age,
ethnicity, or other relevant characteristics, leading to a shortage of information on
how the program affected different groups.
• An over-reliance on a single source within each party can make data collectiondifficult. For instance, NDI points of contact may not have sufficient power orauthority to release information. Further, changes in party leadership can negatively
affect NDI’s ability to collect data consistently.
• A party’s internal culture can affect the willingness of its members or officials toshare information. For instance, in some cases, lower level members simply repeat
the instructions of their leaders, making it difficult to gain different perspectives onorganizational dynamics.
• When a party is wary of engaging with NDI, it can be very difficult to gain anunderstanding of the organization’s internal dynamics. This, in turn, can make it
more difficult to identify needs, develop appropriate program strategies, and collectindicator data.
• Political party members may report valuable information from meetings orconversations within and between parties. However, this can be difficult to verify,
since parties do not always document these interactions or have observers present.
• Parties may provide inaccurate or inflated information about their current practices
or accomplishments out of a desire to impress or please. In particular, due to theircompetitive nature, parties may be reluctant to share information honestly in front ofother parties.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 56TEXTBOX 10: SOME POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMSWITH DATA COLLECTION
For the most common problems, the following solutions were identified to emphasize theneed for staff charged with implementing activities to work closely with monitoring andevaluation staff.
Problem

M&E Staff Roles

Program Staff Roles

Party agendas
and activities takepriority over NDI
activities and datacollection.

• Develop an M&E
calendar for use infollowing up with
program staff.

• Gather information about political party agendas/
schedules and ensure that the M&E calendar reflects parties’ availability.

Data collected bypolitical parties orintermediaries isof poor quality orlate.

• Develop and train
program staff on
simple, user-friendly
data collection tools.

• Help political parties or intermediaries understandthe importance of collecting data, and assist themin adopting the user-friendly tools.

Parties provide
inaccurate or inflated information.

• Assess data quality
risks and develop triangulation protocols
to gather data frommultiple sources.

• Collect data from different sources and triangulate.

• Simplify data collection tools.

• Spot check the datafor quality.

• Follow up with political parties using the M&E
calendar and share information with M&E staff
about party activities on a regular basis so that thecalendar is updated as appropriate.

• Help party officials understand that accurate data
is important and that this data is not a competition
or comparison of the parties.
• Assess feasibility of data collection in party-specific settings, and implement where possible.

Party assistance providers work with political parties on the basis of trust. This requires keeping
sensitive party information confidential. Breaches of party confidentiality would jeopardizepractitioners’ ability to conduct their work and violate research ethics. The party assistancecommunity should also be sensitive to the fact that some party-specific information, if madepublic, could be used by other parties to their competitive advantage. While donors are theprimary audience, grant documents – and any sensitive party information they contain – canbecome public. In addition, taken out of context, certain types of information could create
perceptions of preferential treatment or bias, damaging in-country relationships and theInstitute’s reputation worldwide.
For these reasons, it is particularly important to maintain ethical standards when gatheringand reporting on data. These include the need for informed consent of those participating inevaluation, honoring promises of confidentiality, and doing no harm (as well as taking proactive
steps to avoid or minimize any unnecessary harms that might affect stakeholder interests).19
Informed consent requires that participants not only choose whether or not to participate but
also understand the potential benefits and risks of participation. For instance, while numericalindices are used for some citizen participation and legislative programs, NDI has only usedthem in limited cases for party work, given the risk of the ratings being misinterpreted as
19. American Evaluation Association, American Evaluation Association Guiding Principles for Evaluators (Washington,
DC: American Evaluation Association, 2004), accessed February 10, 2014, http://www.eval.org/p/cm/ld/fid=51; Wilder
Research, Obtaining Informed Consent (St. Paul, MN: The Wilder Foundation, August 2009) accessed February 10, 2014,
http://www.evaluatod.org/resources/evaluation-guides/InformedConsent_8-09.pdf; Paul Oliver, The Student’s Guide to
Research Ethics, 2nd ed. (Maidenhead: The Open University Press, 2010); Alan Bryman et al., “On Ethics and Politics,” inSocial Research Methods, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008); Elisabeth Jean Wood, “The Ethical Challengesof Field Research in Conflict Zones,” Qualitative Sociology, 29, (2006): 373-386. Relevant perhaps to a few NDI party
programs and a really good grounding in the do no harm principle.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 57approval ratings, or otherwise damaging relationships with political parties. More recently, a
few programs have experimented with indices with mixed results. Appendix 7 outlines some of
the lessons learned from programs that have experimented with indices.
Understandably, the political calendar in each program country affects the types of activities
in which political parties will be interested at different points in the program. It also has
implications for data collection and analysis. For instance, the political calendar can affect theavailability of political party officials upon whom the assistance community may be dependent
for information. In addition, while baseline information is typically collected during program
start up, it may not always be effective to collect all such information at that time. For aprogram that begins mid-way through the political calendar, collecting baseline information
on campaign practices two years after the last election may not be strategic. Given these issues,
some programs have used a rolling calendar to conduct their baseline assessments.
Data can be analyzed in different ways. By thinking through how information will be analyzed
early in the process – that is, before data is actually collected – data collection tools can be
designed accordingly, leading to more strategic and efficient information-gathering efforts.
Even for simple surveys or interviews, and in the absence of indices, thinking through how data
will be analyzed can lead to more meaningful insights about a program. Table 10 summarizes
the research questions, data collection systems, analysis methods, and indicators used toevaluate a policy development program at end-line.
The following should be considered:• How might data be collected in a manner that takes into account the complexities of thepolitical context and adheres to ethical research principles?
• Do plans for data collection and reporting reflect a realistic assessment of how quickly data
can be collected and analyzed?
• Do data analysis and reporting protocols provide necessary protections for sensitive party
or individual information that may need to be kept confidential?

Table 10: Data Collection and Analysis
The table below illustrates the research questions and indicators used to evaluate the impact ofa policy development program. The evaluation report clearly outlines the research questions,the data collection method (semi-structured interviews), the number of respondents per party,
the limitations and risks associated with the chosen approach, and how the data would beanalyzed. For instance, given that initially positive reactions from direct program participants
do not necessarily translate into changed attitudes or behavior at higher levels within apolitical party, the evaluator chose to distinguish between short-term or immediate indicators,
and evidence of movement towards sustainable change in political parties. Each interview wastranscribed and coded according to the five themes/research questions and the indicators.
During the semi-structured interviews, participants were given time to discuss the training
they underwent. Instances in which respondents referenced changes in their parties as a resultof training and without direct prompting from the interviewer were given greater weight in theanalysis. This is reflected in a number of indicators below.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 58Research
QuestionsShort-term/
Immediate Indicators

Long-term/
Sustainability Indicators

To what extent
have there beenchanges in thecapacity of parties
to develop policy
agendas thatreflect citizenpriorities?

• # of parties with at least x respondents referencing changes in party attitudes or methods
toward including citizen feedback (e.g. plan
to use focus groups again or emphasize people’s needs as important).

• # of parties with at least x
respondents referencing structural change (e.g. the formation of a new committee orgroup) in the party to improve
the policy making process forthe future.

Have the agendasof MPs been influenced by party
policy issues?

• # of parties with at least x respondents referencing MPs becoming more responsive toparty priorities.

What is the commitment of MPs tocontinue attending
outreach events?

• # of parties with at least x respondents describing, of their own accord, MPs’ renewed
commitment to the party and/or indicating
the likelihood of MPs attending anotherevent.

• # of parties with at least x respondents referencing, of their own accord, the importanceof citizen feedback.

• # of parties with at least x respondents referencing the MPs’ speeches at the outreach
event or in parliament corresponding tostated party priorities.

• # of parties with at least x
respondents referencing a newpolicy made since the end of
the training, following methods
learned from NDI.
• # of parties with at least x
respondents referencing new
mechanisms within the party
to ensure more regular contact
with MPs in the future.

• # of parties with respondent
talking about a future datearranged with the MP(s) toattend another outreach event.

• # of respondents from parties whose leaders
are NOT MPs talking about the MPs attending, performing well, and giving positive
feedback about the outreach event.
Have the agendasof MPs been influenced by party
policy issues?

• # of parties with at least x respondents referencing the process of connecting findings
from research to policy.

• # of parties with at least x
respondents talking about party’s plan to incorporate public
opinion into future policy.

To what extent
does internal party
debate in the policy development
process take placenow?

• # of parties with mid-level respondents describing, of their own accord, taking an activerole in party discussions following the end of
training.

• # of participants promoted tohigher positions or given moreauthority in the party as aresult of NDI training.

• # of parties with greater awareness of andaccess to decision-making, described acrossall levels.

• # of parties providing evidence
of internal structural chances
to incorporate more discussionin policy.

M&E During Program Implementation
In most cases, even though a preliminary results framework and program strategy will havebeen included in proposals, activities and indicators will need to be further refined based on
additional consultations with program stakeholders during program start up and once baseline
data has been collected.
Collecting baseline data at program start up and making preliminary contact with program
stakeholders also provides an opportunity to review the stakeholder analysis and assumptions
compiled during program design. If conducted properly, they can provide a more realistic
assessment of the operating environment, party needs, priorities, and existing capacity.
Hopefully, most of the assumptions and analyses will hold true, but adjustments may be

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 59required to reflect additional information or the latest developments. In addition to providing
information against which change over time can be measured, baseline activities can allow
teams to assess the feasibility of their proposed data collection and analysis methods.
For medium or longer-term programs, provisions may be made for a midterm evaluation. The
results of a midterm assessment can be especially helpful in highlighting program successes
and challenges, as well as unanticipated results. Where necessary, program strategies andactivities can be adjusted in response to midterm evaluation findings, thereby increasing thechances of program success by end-line.

Ongoing Reflection and Analysis
Most, if not all, programs take place in fluid political environments. The conditions prevalentat the time a program is designed may not remain throughout its duration. Assumptions may
not hold true and unanticipated events may create unforeseeable opportunities or risks. In
some cases, changes in the overall political environment, or within a particular party or
implementing partner, will be so significant and dramatic that they cannot be missed andtheir impact on the program will be obvious. In other instances, developments can be more
subtle, yet still have important programmatic ramifications, including changed relationships
with particular stakeholders or an altered ability to focus on results. By regularly setting aside
time to reflect on program successes, challenges, risks and opportunities, it should be possible
to capture different stakeholder perspectives while they are still relatively fresh. Throughongoing reflection and analysis, opportunities and risks can be better identified and analyzed
as programs unfold, strategies and activities can be adjusted accordingly, and this information
can be better documented for monitoring and evaluation, reporting, and organizational
learning purposes.

Tools to Help with Staff Reflection and Analysis• The Outcome Map: A simple, collaborative and effective tool for capturing the ideas
and insights of multiple stakeholders and that helps participants differentiate between
a program’s short-term change (program processes), medium-term change (program
outcomes), and long-term change (downstream impacts). For more information, see
Appendix 8.
• Force Field Analyses: These can be helpful in identifying different factors that could
influence their program and develop strategies to capitalize on helpful forces and mitigate
potentially harmful ones. While they can be used during program design or start up, they
can also be used midway through a project to ensure that program teams update theirstrategies to account for changes in their operating environment. For more information,
see Appendix 9.
Monitoring and evaluation strategies and activities throughout the project cycle – that is, atdesign, baseline, during implementation, and at end-line – should help answer the following
questions:• To what extent has the project contributed to its longer term goals? Why or why not?
• What unanticipated positive or negative consequences did the project have? Why did theyarise? Did the program’s impact on different groups vary?
• What changes have occurred as a result of the outputs and to what extent are these likely tocontribute to the project’s purpose and desired impact?
• Has the project achieved the changes for which it can realistically be held accountable?

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 60

SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS
Measuring Change
The goals of M&E are to provide real-time information to inform program management
and reporting, enhance accountability, and shed light on which strategies are most effective and why. Efforts to monitor party assistance programs face a number of unique challenges. Legislative changes, the emergence of new parties, the fragmentation or dissolution of established ones, and assistance from other groups may influence party behavior
and make it difficult to assess a program’s impact. Further, given the competitive natureof political parties, some types of information must be treated as confidential, which may
limit the type of evaluation data that can be made public or restrict how information canbe used.
• Party programs try to influence political space, will or capacity to create changes inparty behavior, so indicators should typically attempt to measure change in one ofthose dimensions. Clearly identifying which dimension the program plans to address
can be helpful in developing appropriate and realistic indicators.
• Gathering data from political parties may present specific challenges. For instance,
parties may be reluctant to share sensitive information, may not be interested in gathering the type of data M&E officers require, or may provide inaccurate or inflated information. A realistic assessment of data reliability should be conducted including how
quickly data can be collected and analyzed. Data collection needs will vary according
to each program and its specific indicators, and collection methods should be tailoredaccordingly.
• Political party programs are particularly susceptible to shifts in the political landscape.
Even a subtle change in public perception or local power structures may significantly
impact program goals. Ongoing reflection and analysis can help identify new opportunities and risks as they arise, so that program strategies and activities can be adjusted
accordingly.
• Finally, it is important to adhere to ethical research principles, such as respecting commitments made regarding party/informant confidentiality. Because political partiesare competitive organizations, establishing trust with party counterparts can be critical to achieving program goals. Maintaining confidentiality is crucial in building thoserelationships.

MANAGING RELATIONSHIPSManaging relationships with a range of stakeholders – including program participants,
implementing partners, and donors – is a key element of program management. While donors
are undoubtedly an important part of the equation, this section will focus on relationships
with political parties and external stakeholders who may be involved in, or affected by program
activities. Relationship building strengthens programs by broadening implementers’ access toa range of stakeholders, and deepening understanding between assistance providers and theirprogram partners.
Reputation: Program-specific relationships are obviously important in how an organization
carries out its work in a given country, but they also affect how an organization is perceived
internationally. Through a combination of country-specific and international relationships, in
multiparty systems, NDI has developed a reputation as a neutral and trusted actor capable ofproviding relevant assistance and drawing upon a range of political party experiences. Given
the Institute’s official standing with the world’s largest networks of political parties, politicalleaders often perceive the Institute as a peer that understands their challenges and sensitivities.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 61This reputation is key to NDI’s work around the world and is the basis of its ability to convenegroups who might find it difficult to come together in the absence of trusted partner.
Access: Relationships with political parties and external stakeholders around the world provide
NDI with access to information. Through access to comparative party and country experiences,the Institute is able to identify and provide a range of examples that can help inform the workof partner political parties. When NDI has access to sensitive internal party information, theInstitute is better positioned to work with political parties on issues of strategy and to engage
them on the case for reform. Through relationships with a range of stakeholders, NDI is able toaccess and provide political parties with information about developments in their own country
that may affect how they operate.
Understanding: Relationships foster understanding. While NDI will not always agree with its
partners, cultivating a number and variety of relationships at different levels within each party– including with reform elements within parties – and with external stakeholders allows theInstitute to gather better information about party systems and individual parties – including
the conditions that shape behavior – that can be used to improve programming. Engaging
political parties and external stakeholders on their priorities and the anticipated outcomesof NDI’s programs can yield helpful insights about potential risks to, and opportunities for
programming; it can also improve their buy-in to program activities and expand options formonitoring and evaluation.

Selecting Which Parties to Work With
Although NDI works with parties across the political spectrum, it is rarely in a position towork with all the parties in a program country. By working with too many parties, assistanceproviders risk spreading resources so thinly that it fails to achieve any meaningful impact.
Further, some parties may not have the capacity to absorb the assistance or apply the skills
and lessons learned that assistance providers share with them. At the same time, working with
too few parties can undermine an assistance provider’s reputation or limit its ability to engage
willing partners.
At a minimum, NDI does not work with parties that advocate or carry out violence. In emerging
democracies and democratic systems, the Institute seeks to work with a broad range of parties
that are committed to democratic processes. In non-democratic environments, NDI may choose
to work solely with democratic parties or coalitions of democratic parties. In most countries
additional criteria are developed to keep the number of NDI partners manageable. These
criteria should be objective and easy to explain. They should also allow the Institute to workwith the most significant political parties in a given context. While a party’s “significance” may
be interpreted relative to its level of support, in some environments, a party’s significance may
be defined by its representation of marginalized groups, or, in highly polarized environments,
its potential to help form a “democratic middle” or to serve as a coalition partner.
Since partner selection is highly context specific, NDI has no universal detailed criteria for
determining with whom to work. However, common requirements include the ability toabsorb assistance, geographic reach, a significant base of popular support, and representationof specific minority or marginalized groups. In highly fluid environments – post-conflict andtransition countries, for example – applying clear selection criteria can be difficult. In thesesituations, the Institute often engages a relatively wide range of parties until a more settled
environment makes greater selectivity possible. Additionally, in some cases, programs
establish different tiers of assistance with some parties receiving more intensive and more
tailored assistance than others. Table 11 outlines the criteria for different tiers of political party
partners and their respective levels of assistance, used in two separate programs.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 62On occasion, exceptions to normal NDI practice may be warranted. Program teams that decideto work with a party that would not normally be eligible for assistance – or to exclude a party
that normally would qualify for assistance – should have clear institutional justification for
doing so. In all cases, the medium- to long-term impact of decisions about partner selection
should be considered. Political party fortunes change over time. Large parties may lose theirsupport and outsider parties can quickly become part of the mainstream. In addition, a party
may refuse assistance, but channels of communication should be maintained with thesegroups as a way of demonstrating openness.
While programming in a given country should be tailored to the individual needs of specificparties, assistance should be – and seen to be – provided on an equitable basis. Inevitably,some parties will be more receptive to external assistance than others. However it is important
to develop and balance relationships across the political spectrum. As such, any allegations ofbias should be discussed and addressed promptly.
While the Institute cannot – and in many cases should not – work with all parties, there are often
ways to keep lines of communication open and to share advice or materials with a broad rangeof political parties. Gestures that do not require significant investments of resources – sharingof materials, occasional informational meetings, and inclusion of a wide range of parties in
multiparty events – can go a long way to foster good will. Fringe or fledgling parties that join
the mainstream may remember these gestures when they become influential members of thepolitical class.

Managing Relationships with Political Parties
As indicated above, with each party that a program is in contact with, the assistance community
may interact with party leadership, direct participants in program activities, and informal
contacts. A network of contacts within each party and with external stakeholders should
provide better insights into the dynamics within and between parties, and help with planning
program activities and relationship management. For instance, over the course of its programs,
NDI often engages with marginalized groups and agents for reform, working with them to build
momentum for change within their political parties or in the party system as whole. In these
efforts, the Institute needs to strike a delicate balance. Pushing too hard can lead to a loss ofthe trust and support of party leaders who may be concerned that program activities seek
to undermine them. Further, it may unwittingly damage the relationships and reputation ofinternal change agents, or create unreasonable expectations about the potential for, and paceof reform. However, by striking the right balance, program teams can enhance prospects for
program success while maintaining relationships with key contacts.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 63

Table 11: PARTY ASSISTANCE TIERSExample 1
Tier Criteria
A

Assistance• Registration as a political party;• A physical national office with a functional secretariat;• Multiparty and single-party
support.

• Presence outside of the capital (branch organizations);• Minimum 10 MPs; and• Commitment to democratic principles, nonviolence, andthe objectives of the program.

B• Registration as a political party;• A physical national office with a functional secretariat;• Some presence outside the capital (branch organizations);• A presence in parliament; andC• Multiparty training program forpotential candidates;• Ad-hoc multiparty forums todiscuss major reform issues;and• Commitment to democratic principles, nonviolence, andthe objectives of the program.

• Multiparty training of trainers.

• All registered political parties.

• Dialogue events with election
management body; and• Party agent training.

Example 2
Tier

A

Criteria

AssistanceAt least three of the following characteristics:• Structured trainings at boththe national and branch level
wherever possible;• Commitment to the development of a vibrant multiparty
democracy;• Broad base of support in numerous geographic areas of
the country;• Commitment to include women in most, if not all, aspects
of operations; and• Demonstrated ability to be competitive at the national
level.

B

Several of the following:• Commitment to the development of a vibrant multiparty
democracy;• Broad base of support in at least one area of the country;• Commitment to include women in most, if not all, aspects
of operations; and• Demonstrated ability to be competitive at a regional levelor to be a potential coalition partner at the national level.

C• Demonstrated desire to work with NDI and play a constructive role in the development of a multiparty democracy.

• Individual party consultations
and strategic planning advice
at all levels of party development; and• The primary developmental
goals for each party will correspond to the targeted needs ofthe parties involved.
• Little or no direct consultation
but offered single-specifictrainings on a broad range ofgeneral party assistance topics,
such as volunteer recruitment,
voter contact, strategic planning, and constituency service;and• Inclusion in multiparty trainings
on a periodic basis on the major elements of party organization, candidate training, andparty outreach.
• No direct consultations; occasional inclusion in multiparty
workshops and distribution of
written training materials.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 64As NDI notes in “A Guide to Political Party Development”:“Having a core group advocating for NDI’s assistance can be an excellent way
to gain greater support for activities. While the leadership is important, staff
should also build relationships with activists on different party levels (local,
regional, headquarters) or within specific organs/units (e.g. parliamentarygroup, youth, or women’s wings). These individuals often have a goodunderstanding of how assistance can improve operations and be effective inappealing to party leaders.”20
Similarly, it may be necessary to balance relationships with political parties and external
stakeholders. In some cases, program stakeholders will have some pre-existing knowledge of, or
relationship with, various party assistance organizations, and initial interactions will be shapedby previous experiences, whether negative or positive. In other instances, it may be necessary
to develop new relationships that require providing basic information about the organizationand its work around the world. Based on the stakeholder analysis conducted during program
design, a strategy should be developed for managing relationships with different groups as
programs are implemented.

Engaging Party Leaders
Even when programs do not directly involve party headquarters or national officials, getting
their support for program activities is critical. By virtue of the influence they wield and theresources they control within their respective organizations, party leaders can play determiningroles in a program’s success by approving the release of internal party information, encouraging
their members to participate in program activities, and mobilizing any resources or political
will that may be required for party activists to apply newly-acquired skills or information. In an
ideal world, party leaders would issue sweeping instructions to all party members and officials
and make any necessary resources available to advance reforms. However, in practice, aspectsof the assistance programs could be perceived by tightly-controlled party organizations as achallenge to the status quo and, thus, party leaders’ authority.
Party leaders may not be direct about their true perceptions of assistance providers or theirprogramming. Even at the highest level within each organization, party leaders may be conflicted
over engagement with assistance providers. This may result in mixed signals from party leadershipor the rank and file. Depending on their own priorities, interests and style, party leaders may
endorse participation in some activities while blocking others, or simply take steps to sideline
officials or activists they perceive as threats to their objectives. More typically, they may invest
varying degrees of effort into different program activities. For instance, they may approve plans
for a training of trainers but fail to make the resource available for step-down trainings; or they
may sign a pledge to increase women’s political participation that is not properly implemented.
They may even purposefully identify individuals who are committed to the status quo andunlikely to implement new approaches to organizing as participants for program activities.
Party programming is most effective when partners trust assistance providers enough to
openly share their concerns and operational challenges. When assistance providers work withparties that compete against each other, they should assure partners that their conversations
and any strategy documents they share will not be passed to other parties or organizations.
Program details should be discussed with party leaders – particularly during the initial stagesof a project. These can include:• Program goals and the benefits they can expect to see;
• The limits of NDI’s assistance and partnership;
20. NDI, A Guide to Political Party Development (Washington, DC: NDI, 2008), 5, https://www.ndi.org/files/2297_
handbook_PoliticalPartyDev_pdfen_041108.pdf.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 65

• Their party’s responsibilities; and• How success will be measured.
In addition to discussing program details with party leaders at program start up, it is bestpractice to establish formal channels or periodic meetings where party leaders can be briefed
on activities implemented, as well as on successes and challenges. These meetings should also
provide party leaders with opportunities for input on program direction and content, and canbolster the leader buy-in that is often crucial for programming to be successful.
Particularly for programs involving one-on-one assistance to political parties, a preliminary
assessment process can be an opportunity to develop relationships and trust with party
leaders. Presenting leaders with a balanced analysis of their party’s strengths and weaknesses,
and specific suggestions for improvement, can help demonstrate that time and effort havebeen invested in understanding the party and the challenges they face, as well as in identifying
individualized solutions. Further, party leaders and senior members may be more invested in
activities if they can see how those efforts will contribute to the accomplishment of program
goals.
NDI programs in several countries, including Bosnia-Herzegovina, Colombia, the Democratic
Republic of Congo, and Tanzania have used Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) with
political party officials to clarify expectations for programming. While the contents varyfrom one program to the other, Textbox 11 describes some typical MOU provisions and somerecommendations for using them effectively. Despite the advantages of a written documentthat spells out roles and responsibilities, reaching agreement with a party on an MOU cantake time. Thus, the benefits must be weighed against the time that may be required to finalize
the document. In addition, MOUs should supplement, not replace, a strategy for developinga variety of formal and informal relationships within each partner party, and with otherstakeholders.
NDI staff and evaluators have used a combination of interviews and facilitated discussions – inthe form of strategic planning sessions and force field analyses, for instance – to gather insights
into political party priorities, perceptions of program objectives, and the opportunities andrisks that programs may face in meeting their objectives. For instance, in Nicaragua, NDI staff
used the force field analysis approach to engage party representatives on:• Organizational objectives;• Various factors that were negatively or positively affecting their ability to achieve theirgoals;• The extent to which previous NDI assistance had improved the party’s capacity to address
or mitigate hindering forces and to capitalize on positive forces; and• Which additional strategies could be used to address the results of the force field analysis.
The session took place shortly after seriously flawed municipal elections that considerablychanged the political environment in which the program was operating. Participants identified
a number of new technical assistance needs, including outreach strategies for youth, databasecreation, use of Short Message Service (SMS) to improve outreach, continued technicalassistance to the Women’s Network, and capacity building for local level leaders. Based on the
results of the session, NDI adapted its Nicaragua program activities and strategy.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 66Textbox 11: Party Memoranda of Understanding
A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) lays out the agreements and obligations madebetween a political party and NDI, clarifying a shared understanding and commitment
to program activities. It presents an opportunity for partner parties and the Institute topursue deeper interactions and more strategic relationships.
Common Provisions
While the MOU’s content will vary depending on the program context, common provisions
include:• An outline of the technical assistance the Institute plans to provide;• Guarantees to NDI of access to the information required to design, monitor andevaluate programming;• Assurances that NDI will keep sensitive party information confidential;• Criteria for identifying political party participants;• Costs to be covered by the political party;• Party leaders’ commitment to encouraging active participation by their members;and• The dates during which the MOU will be in effect.
Recommendations• Carefully consider whether an MOU is appropriate in the program context;»» The benefits of a signed document clarifying the program scope, roles andresponsibilities should be weighed against the time it can take to reach agreement
on an MOU.
»» MOUs may not be appropriate at the very early stages of a relationship between
NDI and a political party, as they may put things on an overly formal setting. Party
willingness to sign an MOU may also depend on the socio-cultural context; some
cultures place a greater emphasis on signed documents than others.
• Treat the document as a goodwill gesture, not as a legally enforceable document thatwill expose the party to sanctions;• Introduce and discuss the idea verbally before developing or sharing a draft;• Use clear, simple language; and• Allow for some flexibility and changes in the ongoing relationship.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 67Working with Direct Participants
Political party programs work directly with a wide range of party leaders and members,
including party executives, members of parliament, local elected officials, branch activists, andrepresentatives of marginalized groups. Engagement strategies will obviously be informed by
the types of participants, the program strategies and activities envisaged.
Party assistance programs sometimes provide allowances to help participants cover travel
expenses – including transport, accommodation and meals – incurred while attending
events. While these disbursements may make it possible for disadvantaged groups to participate
in program activities, they should never be designed to compensate or reward participants fortheir time. In some cases, depending on the amounts involved and local conditions, individuals
may feign interest in program activities, primarily to benefit from these allowances. Parties
may even have the resources to cover program activities but simply choose to prioritize otherexpenses. As such, assistance providers should carefully negotiate what costs will be covered by
the program and what expenses parties will be expected to bear.
Some NDI programs have found that the allowances other organizations provide may raise
participant expectations about the types and level of payments to be provided. While every
situation is different, warning signs to look for include groups or individuals who threaten to
boycott activities unless they receive a certain level of financial support, or oversubscriptionof events by individuals whose identity and affiliation cannot be verified. These limits can be
mitigated by researching typical costs for transportation and other expenses in order to establish
reasonable allowances. Working with party officials to obtain and confirm participant names
ahead of time can also help minimize these problems. Even when participants do not have photo
identification, matching the names they provide against the list given by their parties, or calling
party liaisons to confirm last minute changes in their participant lists, can help. Further, where
program activities are publicly advertised, staff should also avoid drawing undue attention to any
allowances.
For some types of programs, questions may arise about how to select participants. In manycases, party leaders will play some role in selecting these individuals. Assistance providers
should be clear with party leaders or other points of contact about the types of participants
they feel would benefit most from the program, as well as about selection criteria and anyother requirements (e.g. a particular number or percentage of individuals from marginalizedgroups such as women or youth). Providing advance notice of the types of individuals to betargeted, the time and resource commitments involved, the proposed activity timeline, andany follow-on activities that participants may be expected to implement can increase thechances that political parties will identify appropriate participants. In some cases, it may be
worth considering and conducting additional, targeted outreach to ensure that certain groups
that might otherwise be excluded are invited to participate. For instance, NDI’s Nicaragua
team reached out to LGBT and disabled people’s organizations in advance of the new cyclesof their leadership program. While these groups had previously been underrepresented in the
program, targeted outreach efforts led to an increase in successful applications from membersof those groups.
In some cases, it may be possible to more directly influence the selection of program participants
through an open application and selection process, for instance. Any nomination or application
procedures should be tailored to the program context. Particularly in the case of programs thatinvolve significant time and resources in individual party members or officials, some teams haveused a competitive selection process. Although the selection process can take time, it can provide
programs greater flexibility in choosing participants than relying completely on party leaders.
At the same time, without the support of their party’s leadership, trained activists or officials arelikely to face significant constraints in applying the skills they have just learned. Steps should
be taken to ensure that trainees are in a position to advocate for putting new methods into
practice, and/or that they have the support of more senior party members who are. As a result,

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 68

some program teams have requested that participants submitting applications for competitive
selection processes include a letter of support from a senior level party official. For many years,
this was the approach used by the NDI’s Latin America and Caribbean Youth Leadership Program.
In addition, the authors of the letters of support were often called upon to mentor participantsin leadership programs. A second option sometimes used for training of trainer programs is tohave party leaders or points of contact identify or pre-select a pool of individuals from which asmaller group of participants can be selected. For instance, for some training of trainer programs,
practitioners have organized selection events where short-listed participants can be interviewed,
receive some introductory training, and perform workshop exercises. Based on their performance,
staff then selected a smaller group to complete the full course of training of trainer sessions.
In selecting topics, it is important to consider how best to strike a balance between the topics
or skills that participants are interested in for their own growth, and those that are in highest
demand by their parties.
Cultural or other practices, including sensitivity to dietary restrictions or breaks that participants
may need for prayer should be considered and provisions made for them. In designing activities,
the following should be considered:• How activities should be planned to minimize disruptions to participant schedules;• Whether separating participants by party, gender, age or other criteria would allow them toparticipate more freely; or• If additional time should be built into the schedule to allow for participants to get used
to working together. For instance, in polarized contexts, bringing together political party
representatives who are not used to civil interparty dialogue may require preparatory workin single party settings or additional time in the schedule for the airing of past grievances.
Direct participants should be briefed on the program’s purpose, the assistance to be provided,and anticipated results. They should also engage participants on their perceptions of the risks
and opportunities that the program may encounter, as well as participants’ own perceptionsof what success might look like. Checking in with program participants in between events andafter activities have concluded helps with data gathering about program outcomes, in addition
to strengthening relationships and helping to inform follow-on activities. Where check-ins
with program participants have a monitoring and evaluation purpose, a pre-identified list ofquestions that can be repeated with all participants should be considered. Where skills-building
programs include a series of modules or events that are spread out over time, each session can
begin with a brief discussion of how participants have been applying any new skills, as well as
successes and challenges.
For the leadership component of the Nicaragua program, based on program indicators andinput from implementing partners and local staff, NDI developed a scale outlining different
levels of participation in political life, including belonging to a civic or political organization,
holding a leadership position, and participating in a political campaign. Through participatory
discussion, program graduates identified their levels of political and civic participation sinceparticipating in the program, the obstacles and challenges that they face in engaging politically,
the tools from the program that had been most beneficial in increasing or improving their
participation, and how the program could be improved. Based on the exercise, NDI madea number of changes to improve future cycles of training, including reducing class sizes tofacilitate learning, placing greater emphasis on practical rather than theoretical learning, andusing social networking to facilitate interaction between program graduates.
Providing direct participants with an opportunity to showcase their newly-acquired skills or
knowledge can be empowering for them, while it simultaneously raises awareness among party
leaders about what these individuals can contribute if given the chance. Some of the strategies

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 69used by program teams include inviting party leaders to attend workshop sessions where theyobserve their members applying new skills, working with participants to apply new knowledge
in implementing program activities, and organizing “graduation” or “certificate” ceremonies
that feature party leaders and/or other honored guests. For instance, NDI’s Georgia’s Future
Women Leaders Program culminates with a certificate ceremony where participants arerecognized for completing a one-year course on such topics as leadership, public speaking,campaign management, and project oversight.

Developing Informal Contacts
By definition, many of the interactions between assistance providers and informal party contacts
will take place outside formal structured program activities. However, these individuals canbring insightful perspectives on intraparty dynamics and the party system as a whole that canbe incredibly valuable for program managers. In some cases, these informal relationships may
be the only contact practitioners have with a particular party. Over time, as programs change,these relationships may form the basis for new partnerships. Over coffee, dinner, sporting
events, or myriad social activities with informal contacts, assistance providers have been able
to identify agents for change, gain a better understanding of program risks and opportunities,
strengthen perceptions of the Institute and its work, and identify resource persons for future
programming.

Working with External Stakeholders
Relationships between assistance providers and external stakeholders will vary based on the
program’s scope and context. Often, the Institute’s role is to foster constructive engagement
between parties and other democratic actors or institutions. This may include making the casefor political parties to be included or consulted in the drafting of legislation or constitutions, orbringing together political parties and civil society groups to discuss policy issues. Or it may be
a case of maintaining separate relationships with parties on the one hand, and civil society orother stakeholders on the other. In all cases, staff should consider the following:• How could relationships with external stakeholders be perceived by political parties, andhow should they be presented? Similarly, how might external stakeholders perceive theimplementers’ relationships with political parties?
• Can relationships with both external stakeholders and political parties be used to benefit
the political party system, and if so, how?

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 70

SUMMARY OF KEY POINTSManaging Relationships
Relationships are a key aspect of program management. Good relationships with politicalparties and external stakeholders strengthen party support, improve the assistance community’s access to a range of stakeholders, and enhance understanding between development partners and the groups they seek to assist. Party assistance providers have contact
with a number of groups over the course of a program, including:Party leaders: Understandably, party leaders wield significant influence over their organization and thus play a critical role in shaping prospects for program success. Regardlessof their primary entry points within each party, program details should be discussed withparty leaders early on and contact should be maintained with them over the life of the
program. This should include establishing clear expectations regarding program goals andbenefits, as well as the limits to the assistance being provided, and engage them on respective responsibilities and how success will be determined.
Program participants: This group may include party leaders, parliamentarians, local officials, branch activists, or representatives of marginalized groups. Participants should be
carefully selected to ensure that they are appropriate for the activity and for the program’s
goals. They should be briefed on the program purpose and anticipated changes, including
how any information and skills provided will be put to use.
External stakeholders: Relationships with external stakeholders vary according to the typeof program and its context. In some cases, programs may engage with democratic institutions or actors in order to facilitate constructive engagement with political parties as apart of the program’s goals. In others, assistance provider may be working simultaneouslywith parties and other groups on separate programs. The assistance community should
consider how relationships with non-party actors might be perceived by political parties,
and vice versa.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 71

APPENDICES
Appendix 1:  COMMON CHALLENGES IN VARIOUS PARTY SYSTEMS
Context

Common Challenges

Possible Strategies

Authoritarian/Semi-Authoritarian
Political parties face significant formal and/or informal
restrictions to their operations,
including but not limited tounreasonably high thresholds
for registration, and intimidation or harassment of party
officials and activists and theirpartners (including assistanceproviders). Elections – if they
do occur – repeatedly featurewidespread fraud and produce
overwhelmingly large majorities
for the ruling party/incumbent
president. Additional democracy deficits may include formal
and informal restrictions on
freedom of expression, association and movement, including
major limits on press freedoms.

• Fear of intimidation or
government reprisals
may deter parties fromoutreach and may also
discourage citizens fromparticipation.
• Parties may have a heavy
focus on the challenges of
their overall operating environment, finding it moredifficult to confront andaddress their own internal
weaknesses.
• Depending on how
repressive the regime is,
implementers may facedecisions about whether
and how to engage theruling party or whether towork only with democratic
groups.
• Harassment of program
participants and implementers may raise concerns about security.

• Work with parties to identify andutilize untapped and/or secure spaces within the system that could be
used to increase outreach.
• Work with civil society to document
and raise awareness about electoral
fraud and other abuses.
• Support efforts to raise internationalawareness (e.g. in partnership withparty internationals and other networks of democrats) and mobilize
international support for democratic
reform.
• Consider options for third-country
programming as needed.
• In the absence of competitiveness asa significant incentive for changes inparty practices, reforms are likely tooccur much more slowly and assistance should focus on more modest
gains that are realistic, given theconstraints parties face.
• Support the efforts of the democratic forces (e.g. political parties
and civil society) to coordinate joint
action.

Single Party Dominant
Political parties face no significant formal or informal
restrictions in their operations
and a wide range of democratic freedoms are generally
observed. Even in the absenceof significant fraud, elections
repeatedly return the same
party to power and there islittle prospect of another party
forming government in the nearto medium-term future. Due tothe overwhelming majority heldby the ruling party, opposition
parties rarely have the influence to hold the government toaccount.

• Ruling party may see novalue added in engaging
with assistance providers.
• Significant disparities exist
in the needs and interestsof ruling and opposition
parties.
• Parties may see limited
value in organizational
or internal reforms as ameans to increasing theircompetitiveness.

• Consider ways to diversify program
scope to include forms of assistancethat could appeal to both ruling andopposition parties.
• Place particular emphasis on tailoring assistance to the respective
needs of ruling and opposition
parties.
• Limit the use of multiparty sessions.
• Identify and engage reform-minded
elements in the ruling party.
• Seek opportunities to institutionalize
opposition rights.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 72Context

Common Challenges

Possible Strategies

Multiparty Competitive
Elections are frequently competitive, with some history or
short- to medium-term prospect of power transitioning
from one party to another.
Depending on the context,
there may be two or more
major parties and a number of
medium or smaller parties that
contest elections and shapepolitical discourse. A range of
freedoms – including association and expression – are observed, allowing citizens accessto information about different
political parties and leaders.

• The most significant
parties may be locked into
similar patterns that provide few opportunities or
incentives for reform.

• The desire for a competitive edge
may create incentives for parties toimprove outreach, invest in building
more sustainable structures, or engage in other reforms. Offer equitable but differentiated assistance thatis adapted to meet the unique needsof each party and work with each toincrease its competitive advantage.
• Engage second tier/medium-sizedparties who may be more open to
new organizing practices (perhaps
providing assistance that is less intensive than that given to the largest
parties).
• Support civil society and media efforts to hold parties accountable.

FragileThe political landscape may becharacterized by multiple parties, with highly volatile basesof support. Party splits may
be common and leaders may
frequently reinvent themselves
under new party names. Theremay be significant and unresolved questions over major
framework issues, including theelectoral system and how parties should be regulated. These
environments are also marked
by uncertainty over the party
system and include backsliding
or breakthrough contexts.

• Frequent party splits anda fluid political landscape
may create disincentives
for party leaders to invest
in developing sustainable
party structures.
• The legal framework may
be under development orrevision, or is contested.
• In breakthrough environments, citizen expectations of change may bevery high, while politicalleaders may be primarily
focused on the struggle
for power.

• Assistance may need to engage abroader range of parties than in other environments due to high levelsof political uncertainly.
• Support efforts to reach agreementon the legal framework.
• In backsliding environments, consider strategies (e.g. assessment ormonitoring efforts) that could help
raise “early warning signs” both
domestic and internationally.
• In breakthrough environments, support efforts to help ensure successful reforms.
• Support mechanisms for dialogue.

• Political party weaknesses
may create openings for
populist or radical movements to gain support.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 73Context

Common Challenges

Possible Strategies

Conflict/Conflict-Prone
Due to high levels of polarization, recent and/or historicalconflict, there is a significant
risk of a breakout or resumption of violence. This may belimited to particular parts of thecountry, or the pattern may begeographically diverse.

• Political leaders may be
primarily focused on the
struggle for power, placing
less emphasis on quality oflife issues.
• Security conditions may
impact parties’ ability to
conduct outreach andaffect citizens’ willingness
to participate in publicpolitical activities.
• Parties’ role in conflict may
affect citizen perceptionsof political parties andtheir role in governance,
creating attitudes that canbe difficult to change.

• Use public opinion research toengage political leaders on the gap
between their priorities and citizens’
main concerns.
• Support mechanisms for dialogue atdifferent levels (e.g. local, national,
among women, youth) and acrossdifferent societal groups/layers (e.g.
political leaders and citizens, different ethnic groups).
• Work with the international community to support peace efforts.

• Spoilers may threaten toderail efforts to secure
peace.

Parties Play Peripheral Roles in Governance
Political parties are allowed tooperate to some extent but only
play peripheral roles in politicalprocesses. The center of power
for may lie with the military, aroyal family, or another structure or institution.

• Given their limited role ingovernment, political parties may see few benefits
in citizen outreach.
• Citizens aware of parties’
peripheral role may see
limited point in engaging
political parties.

• Support party and other stakeholder
efforts to negotiate a broader role ingovernance for parties.
• Assist parties in identifying untapped opportunities to engage citizens and contribute to governance.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 74

Appendix 2:  PROBLEM TREE ANALYSIS
From NDI’s Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Team’s “Tips and Tools”
What?
A tool to collaboratively
analyze the root causes &consequences of a core
problem.

Democracy and governance problems are rarely discrete,straightforward challenges, but are nested within interconnectedwebs of problems specific to a society’s history, geography,
peoples and resources. Before designing an intervention it isessential to:a. Clarify the core problem the program will address; andb. Distinguish between the causes and effects of the core
problem.

Why?
To design a program that
addresses the root causes of acore problem.
When?
Before the program isdesigned and objectives set.
How?
Collaboratively in a small
group.
Who?
Key stakeholders involved inprogram design.
Contribution to Evaluation?
Evaluations not only assess
program performances, butchange the core problem theintervention was intended toaddress. If the intervention
addresses the root cause of aproblem, then changes in thenegative effects provide us
with indicators or change inthe core problem.
Prepare:Prep Time: 30 minutes
Implementation Time:
1–2 hours
Materials:• Flip chart with tree diagram• Pink and green sticky notes• A blue paper sheet• Blue/black pens

The Problem Tree is one simple tool that can assist in thiscomplex analysis.
1. I dentify the core problem the program will address: The
first step is to identify a core problem or “focal” problem.
Core problems are identified in numerous ways – throughfield assessments, donor-sponsored studies, secondary data
analysis and/or academic research. Once participants agree
on the core problem, write it on blue paper and place at thetrunk of a tree image (see Figure 7: Sample Problem Tree).
2. As a group, brainstorm causes and effects related tothe core problem: Participants generally find it easier tobrainstorm effects first, but you can begin with either causes
or effects. You can also jump from causes to effects andback throughout the brainstorming process.
3. Write the causes on pink sticky notes and place them inthe tree’s roots: The root causes are the underlying reasonsfor the core problem. Although your intervention will not
address all root causes, the group should list as many as
possible. To draw out the root causes the team should ask:a. Why has this problem occurred?
b. What factors cause the problem?
4. Write the effects on green sticky notes and place them inthe tree’s leaves: The effects are the symptoms of the root
causes. We do not design programs around negative effects,
but they are important to identify in relationship to the root
causes. Ask the group to brainstorm on the “symptoms” of
the core problem and its root causes.
5. D
 raw lines between causes and their related effects: By
drawing physical lines connecting causes and effects, teams
can easily see their relationships on the tree. Note that acause can contribute to multiple effects, just as one effectcan have more than one cause.
6. I dentify one to two root causes your program will address:
In choosing root causes the group should consider thefollowing:a. Which root causes are the most important to address?
b. Which root causes are the most realistic for the program
to address?
c. How much funding and time is available?
7. R epeat steps 2-6 for the remaining core problems yourprogram will address.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 75

Appendix 3:  STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
From NDI’s Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Team’s “Tips and Tools”
Stakeholders exert influence and/or are influenced by the project. Stakeholders mustbe identified and analyzed during the program design, to develop the most effective,
relevant intervention. There are many ways to conduct an analysis of stakeholders. These
tips represent just one way and should be tailored to the unique needs of each program.

Why?
To survey all the people
who have a stake in the
project and analyze theirrelationship with it.
When?
Before the problem andobjective analysis during
program design.
How?
Collaboratively in agroup.
Who?
Program implementers.
Contribution to
Evaluation?
The baseline, midterm
and final assessments
will require information
and/or data from thestakeholders noted. The
analysis of stakeholders
is useful throughout
program design andevaluation.
Prepare:Prep Time: 45-60
minutes
Implementation Time:

Particip.

A tool to identify andassess all stakeholders
around five criteria.

1. C onvene the implementation team: Those who will be
implementing the program should convene to analyze program
stakeholders. Table 12: The Stakeholder Analysis Tool A, outlines
one example of how this can be organized, using a flipchart toidentify different stakeholders’ interests, influence, resources, etc.

Implem.

What?

Stakeholder
youth
politicians

Interest

Influence Relationship Particip. Resources

NDI

2. I dentify stakeholders: As a group, brainstorm stakeholders ona blank sheet of a flipchart. Group the stakeholders into thefollowing categories and place them on Table 12: The Stakeholder
Analysis Tool A. Some may fall into more than one category andadditional categories may need to be added due to the uniquenessof each program and operating environment:• Participants: target groups, people, parties or institutions
participating in program activities.

» e.g. youth in specific districts, the six major political parties,etc.

• Implementers: persons or organizations implementing
activities.

» e.g. NDI, subgrantees, external trainers, etc.
• Decision-makers: people who will make decisions that affectthe program.

» e.g. senior leadership, political leaders, etc.
• Donors: the people or institutions financing the project.

» e.g. SIDA, USAID, etc.
3. Analyze stakeholders: Analyze how each stakeholder relates to theprogram along the five criteria below. The facilitator might wantto provide participants with sticky note pads to post or remove
from the Stakeholder Analysis Tool A as they brainstorm and shareideas.
• Interest: What is their interest in this project? How might they
be affected, negatively or positively, by this project?

1–2 hours• Influence: What is their potential influence on the project’s
success or failure?

Materials:• Relationships: What are their relations with other stakeholders?

• Flip chart• Markers• Stakeholder Analysis
Tool A• Stakeholder Analysis
Tool B• Sticky notepads in fivecolors• Participation: What is their capacity or motivation toparticipate in the design of this project? When, how and whereshould this participation take place?
4. U
 se the analysis: The assistance providers should return to thestakeholder analysis throughout the project cycle, for example, when
they design the baseline assessment. Table 13: Stakeholder Analysis
Tool B can be used to further break down the program, identifying
stakeholders around key events throughout the project cycle.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 76

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 77STAKEHOLDERS

INTEREST

What is their interestin this project? How
might they be affected,
negatively or positively,by this project?

Table 12: Stakeholder Analysis Tool A

PARTICIPANTS

IMPLEMENTERSDECISION-MAKERSDONORSINFLUENCE

What is their potential
influence on the project’s
ultimate success andfailure?
RELATIONSHIP

What are their relations
with other stakeholders(conflictualual orcooperative)?
PARTICIPATION

What is their cappacity
or motivation toparticipate in the designof the project? (When,how, where should thisparticipation take place?)

STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS (FOR PROJECT DESIGN)RESOURCES

What are the practicalresource requirements(time, people, money) to
involve this stakeholder?

Table 13: Stakeholder Analysis Tool B
This stakeholder tool is organized by project cycle phase. To complete this, it may help
to have a completed Table 12: Stakeholder Analysis Tool A.
What?
A tool to identify
and assess all
stakeholders
around key
project cycle
events.

Type ofstakeholder
participation Æ

Who needs to
be informed?

Who needs tobe consulted?

Who needs
to work in
partnership?

Who needs
to manage
this stage?

Definitions ÆConsulted:
stakeholder isInformed:
more actively
stakeholder issolicited
kept abreast
for input
through copies(information,of reports,knowledge,
e-mails or other decisions,communications. etc.).

In
Partnership:
stakeholder
is actively
involvedwith astrong voicein decisionmaking.

Manage:stakeholder
isresponsibleforperformance– getting
things done.

Why?
To survey all
the people whohave a stake inthe project andanalyze theirrelationship with
it at different
points in the
project cycle.

Concept Note

When?

II. PROJECT START UP

Before theproblem andobjective
analysis, andupdatedthroughout the
project cycle.

Detailed
planning/
work plan

I. PROJECT DESIGN

Project Design
Analyses
ProposalWriting

Baseline
M&E System
Setup

How?

III. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND REPORTING

Fill in cells of thetable througha participatory
process.

Activity
Implementation
Reporting
Midterm
Assessment

Who?
The program
implementation
team.

IV. PROJECT EVALUATION
Final
Evaluation
Close-out

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 78Appendix 4:  RISK ANALYSIS
From NDI’s Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Team’s “Tips and Tools”
Instructions:What?
A risk analysis chart is aparticipatory tool to assess
the risks to a proposed
program.

1. S
 et up the risk analysis chart: Use the diagram below tocreate a flipchart and hang it on the wall for all participants
to see.
High
Risk

Why?
To assess the likelihood ofrisks and negative impact on a
program; to develop a plan for
mitigating risks.
When?
During program design andperiodically throughout thelife of a program.

Low
ImpactHigh
ImpactHow?
A group brainstorm andanalysis of risks, using a risk
analysis chart.
Who?
The program implementers
analyze the risks with an M&E
facilitator.
Contribution to Evaluation?
Risks should be part of aprogram’s ongoing monitoring
plan. When changes tocritical assumptions and risks
are well documented overtime they provide evaluatorswith contextual informationthat not only serve to justifychanges in a program’s
strategy, but provide evidence
for how contextual factors
have impacted the results ofthe program.
Prepare:Prep Time: 1 hour
Implementation Time:
1-2 hours
Materials:• Risk analysis chart(flipchart)• Notes on risks• Sticky notes in two colors• Markers

Low
Risk
2. Review critical assumptions: The facilitator and participants
review critical assumptions that must hold true at eachlevel of the logframe for the program to achieve the desired
results.
3. Brainstorm risks: Participants receive sticky notes in twocolors; the first color represents risks to critical assumptions
at a lower level, for example: delays in funding; lack of humanresources; or partners unwilling to sign and Memorandumof Understanding; etc. The second color represents risks tocritical assumptions at a higher level, for example: politicalrepression of partners; delays in elections; a violent coupd’état; etc.
4. Assess risks: The facilitator will read the risks to participants,
asking: “what is the potential impact of this risk?” for eachone. If the impact is high, the facilitator moves the sticky
note to the far right of the horizontal line (see image above).
The facilitator then asks: “what is the likelihood this risk will
occur?”. If participants believe it is highly likely the risk will
occur then the facilitator will place the risk high along thevertical axis. This activity helps participants distinguishbetween four kinds of risks: low impact/low risk; low impact/high risk; high impact/low risk; and high impact/high risk.
The group then creates strategies to mitigate risks for thelast category – high impact/high risk.
5. Plan to mitigate risks: Once participants identify the priority
risks, they are asked to identify steps the program can taketo mitigate the risks. These steps should be integrated into
the program’s risk mitigation and contingency plans.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 79

Table 14: Risk Analysis – Results Framework
Data Source& Collection
Methods

Critical Assumptions

Evaluate

Intermediate
Results
Outputs
Activities
InputsResults
Statements

Indicatorsof change

Data Source& Collection
Methods

Critical Assumptions

PMEP[not applicable to M&E]

[not applicable to M&E]

Goal
Objective 1Intermediate
Results
Outputs
Activities
InputsMonitorObjective 1

Evaluate

Outcomes

Indicatorsof change

Goal“Development
Hypothesis”

Processes

Results
Statements

Monitor

Processes

Outcomes“Development
Hypothesis”

PMEP

RESULTS FRAMEWORKNational Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 80Appendix 5: R
 ANDOMIZED CONTROL TRIALS AND POLITICAL PARTY
PROGRAMMING ~ ISSUES TO CONSIDERIn randomized control trials (RCTs) – also known as experimental design or impact
evaluation – a group is randomly selected to receive assistance. To evaluate the impact of theintervention, program participants are compared with those who did not receive assistance.
Quasi-experimental design refers to instances where participants are not randomly selected.
However, they still involve comparing program participants’ outcomes with those of groups orindividuals who have not benefited from assistance. In recent years, RCTs have been describedas the “gold standard” for evaluation. However, monitoring and evaluating the impact of party
assistance through the use of RCTs poses a number of challenges.
According to the National Research Council’s study on Evaluating Democracy Assistance, RCTs
are most effective under the following conditions:• The intervention is discrete, with immediate, measurable causal effects;• The sample size is relatively large;• The cases within the sample are similar enough to be compared (or adjustments to theresearch design can compensate for differences);• The program design is relatively stable; and• Beneficiaries can be selected either randomly or through similar processes.21
When entire parties are considered the unit of analysis, the sample size is often too small to makethe use of RCTs effective. The extent to which individual parties operating within a particularcountry are similar enough to be compared is also debatable. Further, excluding entire parties
from assistance for purposes of an RCT is neither ethically nor politically feasible in mostcases. This approach may be more appropriate when the units of analysis are individuals (e.g.
participants in a leadership program) or subnational units, thus creating a larger sample size.
Even where random selection of participants is not possible in these cases, options may
exist for comparing program beneficiaries with groups or individuals who have not received
assistance. This approach could be used in situations where a leadership program receives more
applicants than it can accommodate, or where only a certain number of branches are targetedor assistance is rolled out in phases. For instance, a USAID-funded leadership program in the
Dominican Republic used a lottery system to select participants for training (the number ofapplicants exceeded the number of people the program could accommodate). A quota systemhelped ensure balanced representation of the country’s political parties in the program. The
RCT evaluation compared the skills and activities of participants with those whom the program
could not accommodate.22
In Cambodia, NDI used an RCT to evaluate the impact of constituency dialogues on individual
citizens. While some citizens participated in dialogue events alone, others participated indeliberative sessions before attending dialogue events. In addition, a control group wasestablished. Through the evaluation, NDI was able to capture the differences between the twogroups (those who participated in the constituency dialogues alone and those who participatedin deliberative sessions before attending the constituency dialogues) and to compare thesegroups with a control group (individuals who had not attended a deliberative session or aconstituency dialogue).

21. National Research Council, Improving Democracy Assistance: Building Knowledge Through Evaluations and Research(Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2008) http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12164.
22.  Scott Morgenstern et al., Evaluation Approaches for Political Party Assistance: Methodologies and Tools (Pittsburgh:
University of Pittsburgh, 2011), 20-21.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 81

Even in cases where party programs can accommodate RCT-like evaluation designs, thefollowing should be considered:• The potential for spillover (when program participants/beneficiaries share knowledge withothers) and its effect on the comparison of participants with a control group;• The level of technical expertise required to effectively design and implement an impact
evaluation;• The costs associated with implementing RCT-like evaluation designs, including thetechnical expertise referenced above, as well as the staff time required to manage theprocess from the planning stages of the evaluation to the final report;• How any changes in program design or conditions could impact RCT-like evaluations; and• Other evaluation methods that can be used to supplement RCT findings, giving themgreater meaning.23 24
NDI experiences with RCTs in Cambodia, Sudan and Uganda led to the following conclusion:“[G]iven the high level of effort, cost, and complexity of impact evaluations,
RCTs need to be used strategically. However, NDI has found partnerships
with academic researchers to be a highly effective strategy in navigating thesometimes perilous cost of experimental design.”25

SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS
RCTs and Political Party Programming
RCTs have been described as the “gold standard” for evaluation. However, the use of RCTs
to monitor and evaluate the impact of party assistance is often challenging when entire
parties are considered the unit of analysis. RCTs may be more feasible when individuals
or sub-national party units (e.g. party branches) are considered the unit of analysis.
Nonetheless, it is important to carefully consider the type of intervention, the evaluationquestion, the resources available, and their operating context to determine whether theapproach is appropriate for evaluating the impact of their program.

23. Kumar, Evaluating Democracy Assistance, 102-113.
24. Morgenstern, Evaluation Approaches, 19-27.
25. Kumar, Evaluating Democracy Assistance, 113.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 82Appendix 6: P OLLING FOR MONITORING AND EVALUATION~ ISSUES TO CONSIDERIn democratic systems, political parties provide a means for citizens to influence the direction of
government. For this reason, some have suggested the use of polling as a high level indicator ofchange in party behavior. This is based on the theory that citizens are well placed to determine
whether political parties are fulfilling their representative role more effectively.26 While citizen
perceptions do provide some indication of party performance, the following should be inconsidered in determining whether polling is an effective way of assessing program impact.
What is the research question?
The first step in determining whether polling may be effective is clarifying the researchquestion. Understandably, a program that is designed to improve internal communication
will not lend itself as easily to monitoring and evaluation through polling as a program on
citizen outreach. Even for citizen outreach programs, questions that are so broad that they
may give no indication of impact should be avoided. For instance, in emerging and establisheddemocracies alike, citizens rank political parties among the least trusted institutions.27 Trustand perceptions of representativeness are complex issues. While relatively few studies haveattempted to pinpoint the determinants of low levels of trust in political parties, it is likelythat they are varied.28 General questions about the degree of citizen trust in political parties,
or perceptions of parties’ representativeness, are thus typically too broad to capture the typesof change that most programs can realistically be expected to create. The more closely pollingquestions are related to a program’s specific interventions, the more likely they are to generate
helpful information about a program.
Given the scale of the program, are changes in party behavior likely to be reflected
in a poll?
Depending on the scale and focus of a particular intervention, it may be unreasonable toexpect changes that are significant enough – or in some cases, rapid enough – to affect citizen
perceptions of political parties as measured in a poll.29 A realistic assessment of scale of change
anticipated should be conducted including whether citizen perceptions of political parties – asindicated in a poll – are likely to change as a result of the program.
What other factors could affect polling results?
Political parties change their behavior in response to a wide range of stimuli, including changes
in the legal framework, the emergence of new competitors, political events, and economic
conditions. Citizen perceptions of political parties are also shaped by a wide range of factors,
such as political scandals, economic crises, media coverage, and access to information about
party activities. Many of these factors fall outside a program’s control, yet may be more likely
to shift polling results than the average party assistance program. Further, historical attitudes
26. Tim Meisburger, “An Alternative Approach to Party Assistance in Developing Democracies,” The Asia
Foundation: Occasional Paper, No. 7 (The Asia Foundation, 2011) http://asiafoundation.org/resources/pdfs/
AnAlternativeApproachtoPartyAssistance.pdf. Miesburger presents surveys as an effective if indirect means of assessingchanges in party functioning and the extent to which constituents feel they are able to influence political parties andgovernment.
27. World Value Research, “Confidence: The Political Parties,” World Values Survey, 2004-2008, http://www.wvsevsdb.
com/wvs/WVSAnalizeQuestion.jsp. (February 19, 2014). To illustrate, in the 2005/2008 wave of the World Values survey,
less than 25 percent of respondents in France, Germany, Guatemala, Moldova, New Zealand, and Thailand rated theirconfidence in parties at “a great deal” or “quite a lot”.  While the numbers for these countries ranged from 11.7 percent in
Guatemala to 23.3 percent in Thailand, in the same wave, over 93 percent of respondents in Vietnam, over 35 percent in
Mali and over 87 percent in China expressed “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in their parties.
28.  For instance, one attempt to pinpoint the determinants of low trust in political parties in Latin America identified thelevel of belief in the legitimacy of the system of government, government performance (service delivery) at local andnational levels, and general interest in politics or affiliation with parties as some of the major factors.
29. Morgenstern, Evaluation Approaches, 15-16.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 83

towards political parties can be difficult to shake, regardless of the scale of change. Other factorsthat could affect polling results and possible mitigation strategies should be considered.
When might polling make sense and what are some alternatives?
As indicated above, the more closely polling questions are related to a program’s specificinterventions, the more likely they are to generate helpful information about a program.
Hypothetically, for a program that uses polling data to improve party outreach to “persuadable”
voters, follow-on polling to assess whether “persuadables” changed their minds and why
could give both political parties and assistance providers helpful information on whether the
campaign strategies were effective. For a program that includes debates, focus groups or surveys
among people who watched the debates could give some indication of whether the debate
helped raise awareness about candidate positions or helped voters make informed decisions
about whom to support. For additional information on different data collection methods, see
Page 68 in this guide.

SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS
Polling for Monitoring and Evaluation
Citizen perceptions of political parties are shaped by a wide range of factors and canbe very difficult to change. Further, the size and scope of most political party programs
is rarely significant enough to noticeably shift national-level views of political parties.
For these reasons, the use of public opinion research to monitor and evaluate party
assistance should be approached with extreme caution. The type and scale of the
program and the evaluation questions should be carefully considered in order todetermine which research methods are most likely to generate relevant data on program
impact.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 84

Appendix 7: USING INDICES FOR MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF
PARTY PROGRAMS ~ ISSUES TO CONSIDER
An index is a statistical measure used to compare group or individual performance according
to selected indicators. For example, the Human Development Index ranks countries based on
socioeconomic indicators such as life expectancy, levels of education, and income. In the caseof political parties, there is no single widely-used index. However, a few NDI programs havedeveloped program-specific indices for measuring party performance, with mixed results.
Based on those experiences, here are some questions that should be considered in determining
whether an index is an appropriate method for measuring program impact.
How can the political sensitivities involved in comparing or ranking political parties
be managed?
As indicated elsewhere in this guide, sensitive party information, if made public, can be usedby political opponents to their competitive advantage. For ethical reasons, sensitive party
information must be treated as confidential. Further, attempts to rank or compare parties
could become public. Taken out of context, this information could be misinterpreted, creating
perceptions of bias and affecting assistance providers’ ability to engage political parties. Given
the program’s operating context, focus and indicators, the following questions should beconsidered:• How sensitive or public is the information that the index will reflect?
• How would parties react if index ratings became public and what implications could thishave for the implementer?
• What steps can be taken to preserve party confidentiality while presenting the data in ameaningful way?
In Example 1, below, a number of steps were taken to address these sensitivities. First, theindex was developed to measure whether parties were meeting specific benchmarks tied to theprogram’s policy development cycle. As such, it did not provide a general assessment of parties’
performance. This helped limit the potential for any ratings – if leaked – to be perceived as an
approval rating of parties. Second, internal controls were established, restricting access to data
within the NDI office. Data files were password-protected and only selected staff could accessthem. (As an additional layer of security, the parties being scored in the index could be coded
to preserve anonymity.) Third, program reports only provided cumulative ratings; parties were
not compared to each other, and no party-specific ratings were listed.
What dimensions and ratings should be included in the index?
Previous attempts at indices have used a variety of dimensions. Those who have framed
their dimensions in terms of broad organizational performance and change – see Example 1,
below – have struggled to capture change. Those who have used dimensions and ratings thatare simpler, more narrowly-defined, more directly within the program’s influence, and more
realistic within the program timeframe – see Example 2, below, for instance – have had greater
success with indices. As much as possible, teams should avoid dimensions or ratings that rankcompeting parties.
What data will the ratings be based on and how will it be collected and analyzed?
As with all indicators, it is important to consider what information will be used to determine
the ratings and how the information will be processed. (See the section on Measuring Change
in this guide for additional information on data collection for political party programs.) In

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 85the case of Example 1, below, for instance, the ratings were based on data collected via direct
observation by NDI staff (captured on checklists) and interviews with program participants. In
Example 2, the ratings were based on data collected through semi-structured interviews.
Does the scale of the program warrant the level of effort required to manage theindex?
Given the variety of approaches to party organizing and differences in program foci, program
teams have generally developed grant-specific indices. Depending on the program scope andfocus, developing an index and thinking through how to collect and analyze (and in some cases
secure) the information can be time consuming. It is important to consider whether an index isappropriate, given the level of effort that may be required and the program scope or resources
available.
What are some alternatives?
Depending on the program context, developing profiles may be an option. Like indices, theyassess party performance and progress in targeted areas using dimensions that are customized
to a program. However, instead of comparing parties to each other, they compare a party’s
performance at baseline and post-intervention in selected areas. Party profiles can bepresented in narrative prose or can feature checklists comparing party capacity before andafter program interventions (see Example 3, below, for instance). Regardless of the approach
used, teams should be as specific as possible when framing their dimensions and recording
data at baseline, midterm and end-line.
The following examples are excerpts from indices and party profiles that were used to monitor
and evaluate three separate NDI programs.

Example 1: Party Policy Drafting Scale
Policy draft is defined as policies in any form prior to being sent to leadership. The completionof a policy draft is defined as the drafts being formally presented to leadership (e.g. sending all
the policy drafts to the party leader). Once the policies are sent to leadership for review, they are
considered complete by the Policy Working Group (PWG), but are still pending approval by the
party. If the leadership chooses to accept the policies, in part or wholly, into their manifestos orother party platforms (e.g. bills), this will be considered incorporation.
Scale 1-3 deals with the drafting process. Scale 4-5 deals with completed policy drafts. A draft isconsidered complete when it has been sent to party leadership.
1=
PWG does not attempt to draft any policy documents for any of its priority issues(actual conversion rate is 0%)
2 = PWG attempts to draft a policy document for at least one of its priority issues, but has notcompleted them (actual conversion rate is 1-30%)
3 = PWG attempts to draft a policy document for at least two of its priority issues, but has notcompleted them (actual conversion rate is 31-60%)
4 = PWG completes policy drafts for three of its priority issues (actual conversion rate is 61%90%)
5 = PWG completes policy documents for three of its priority issues and sends them to party
leadership (actual conversion rate is >90%)

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 86Example 2: P arty Index Dimension on Representation of Women & Youthin Leadership and Decision-making
1 = The party has structures for women and youth (women and youth branches)
2 = Women and youth structures are represented in party decision-making bodies
3 = Women and youth participate in party decisions and compete for leadership posts
4 = Women and youth are part of candidate lists, parties establishes minimum quotas for
women and youth candidates on the lists, and women and youth hold significant party
offices
5 = Policies that favorably impact women and youth are part of the party program, not just thatof the women and youth forums

Example 3: Party Profile Dimension on Parliamentary Group Meetings
In this case, the party profile included various aspects of parliamentary group functioning,
including one on caucus meetings. For each question, in addition to the option of checking“yes” or “no” where appropriate, comments could be added. The profile was completed atbaseline, midterm and end-line.
• How regularly are caucus meetings held?
• Is there an established time and place for caucus meetings?
• Are there written rules of procedure for the conduct of meetings, quorum, and the taking
of decisions?
• Is there an agenda and is it followed?
• Is it circulated before meetings?
• Is there an opportunity for input on the agenda from caucus members?
• Is there an opportunity for all members to contribute at meetings?

SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS
Using Indices for Monitoring and Evaluation of Party Programs  
Using indices to monitor and evaluate political party programming is highly sensitive
because of the risk that the scores – if they inadvertently become public – could be takenout of context. Parties may perceive them as approval ratings or view them as violationsof their confidentiality agreements with NDI. The resultant accusations of bias andbreach of trust could damage the Institute’s reputation and relationships globally. Teams
that choose to use them should have a clear rationale for adopting them and should takeappropriate steps to limit any potential damage to NDI.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 87Appendix 8:  OUTCOME MAP
From NDI’s Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Team’s “Tips and Tools”
What?
A tool to help program
stakeholders reflect on andrecord a program’s emerging
outcomes and impacts.
Why?

Effectively capturing the processes, outcomes and impacts
of a program requires more than tallying up indicator data forreports. It requires those who know the program best – program
implementers and partners – to periodically reflect on theirprogram’s process in a structured way. The outcome map is a
simple, collaborative and effective tool for capturing the ideas andinsights of multiple stakeholders in the run-up to the reporting
deadline. It helps participants differentiate between a program’s:a. short-term change (program processes);

To provide an informed andstructured analysis for thereporting process.
When?
After data has been compiled
and in preparation for reportwriting.
How?
Participatory process in the fieldusing an Outcome Mapping
exercise.

b. medium-term change (program outcomes); andc. long-term change (downstream impacts).
The outcome map can help a team structure their discussion to
track the program’s logical framework or results chain. The resultsof the discussion can be captured on sticky notes and on a laptop.
Steps:
1. Compile program data and information: The first step isto have the M&E facilitator compile all relevant indicator
data for the reporting period into a user-friendly format.
This should include any other relevant information, such asactivity summaries and/or major achievements. The data andinformation should be distributed in summary form to theparticipants at least one day before this session.

Who?
M&E facilitator, and the program’s
field staff and partners (optional).

Outputs from
implementer’s
activities

Contribution to Evaluation?
Holding ongoing staff reflection
and analysis sessions not only
helps create more meaningful
reports, but also contributes
to building a strong body ofevidence for midterm and final
evaluations. By documentingchange, and analyzing change as
it emerges, it is easier to build aplausible case for the program’scontribution in the promotion of
democracy in a given context.
Prepare:Prep Time: 45-60 min
Implementation Time:
1-2 hours
Materials:• Flip chart diagram of theoutcome map

Outcomes
for theprogram’s
beneficiaries

Long-term
impacts towhich theprogram incontributing

2. Create an outcome map: On two large flipcharts (turned
sideways) draw three concentric ovals as shown in the
diagram above. Each oval should be large enough to hold themultiple sticky notes that will be generated in each category.
Post the outcome map at the front of the room and placea blank, colored sticky note on the corresponding area as avisual clue for participants.
3. Createsmall groups: If the group is small (e.g. 2-4 people)
and they are working on similar parts of the program it
may make sense to keep them together. If they work on
different aspects of the program or if your session includes
partners, then it will make sense to break them into smaller
brainstorming groups. This will help to capture informationand insights from different aspects of the program.
4. Brainstorm: Give each group a set of colored sticky notes
and ask the following questions:•

What were the immediate OUTPUTS of your activities
during this reporting period?

• 2 colors of medium sized sticky
notepads•

What were the OUTCOMES for the program’s
beneficiaries?

• Stakeholder•

What are the long-term IMPACTS to which the program iscontributing? After each question, have each small groupbrainstorm and write their answers on SEPARATE sticky
notes. Then have each group present their ideas to thelarger group, before moving on to the next question.

•

made, holding true about the change that is happening?

• Markers• Enumerator form
• Enumerator• Laptop

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 88

5. Large group discussion: After the groups fill the outcome map, open the discussion up for ananalysis on the links between the progress made this quarter, and the emerging outcomes andimpacts. Prompting questions include:•

What are the links between the different levels of change?

•

What was the most significant change in each of the areas of the map and why?

•

Have there been any unexpected results – either positive or negative?

•

What opportunities and risks have there been in the operating environment this period?

•

Are the critical assumptions made holding true about the change that is happening?

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 89

Appendix 9:  FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS
From NDI’s Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Team’s “Tips and Tools”

A tool to identify the hindering andhelping forces influencing a project.

To design an action plan tostrengthen the helping forces andmitigate the impact of hindering
ones.
When?
Midway through a project.
How?
Through a group brainstorm
captured on a Force Field Analysis
Framework.
Who?
The program’s implementers and an
M&E facilitator.
Contribution to Evaluation?
The force field analysis can help
you determine how to improve yourprogram’s probability of success by1) increasing the impact of helping
forces, or 2) decreasing the impactof hindering forces. It is a useful
tool for planning and risk mitigation.
Prepare:Prep Time: 5 min
Implementation Time:
1-2 hours
Materials:• Flip chart with the Force Field
Analysis Framework.
• Color-coding circle labels(stickers).

Objective:
lll
lll
l lll
ll
lll llllll
lllllllllllllll
lllllllllll
llllllHindering Forces

Why?

1. Create a force field analysis framework: Paste
together two flipchart sheets to create the diagram
below.

Helping Forces

What?

2. Describe the desired outcome at the center: At the
top write the program’s objective if you are using thisas a program planning tool. If this is for an evaluationor other event, then write a statement describing thedesired outcome.
3. Identify the helping forces in the column at the right:
Ask participants to share aloud forces that help movethe team toward the objective. The facilitator should
record all participant input on the column at the left.
4. Identify the hindering forces in the columns at theleft: Participants share aloud the forces that hinder theteam in reaching the desired objective. The facilitator
records all the participants’ ideas in the column at theright.
5. Participants rank and identify most important
helping forces: Provide participants with two setsof 10 color-coding circle labels (a total of 20 labels).
Tell participants that they must choose the three
helping forces that they individually believe are mostimportant to leverage in achieving the objective.
Participants divide 10 of their labels among those
three forces, giving more labels to the ones they
believe are more important. For example, a participant
may choose to give force #1 two labels, force #2 fivelabels, and force #3 three labels. Participants may
choose to allocate their labels to any three forces of
their choosing. Remind participants that their choices
should be made independently and do not have to be
the same as everyone else’s.
6. Participants rank and identify the most important
hindering forces: Participants individually choose
and rank three hindering forces that are the mostimportant to mitigate for achieving the objective using
the remaining 10 labels.

7. Aggregate staff rankings to identify group rankings: Count the number of labels participants
gave each of the forces. Circle the three helping forces with the greatest number of labels. Circle
the three hindering forces with the greatest number of labels.
8. Categorize risks and create an action plan: Use the risk analysis tool to categorize the risks andthen identify strategies for mitigating the highest risks. You may choose not to conduct a risk
analysis, but make sure to create an action plan for mitigating the risks identified in this process
and taking advantage of the helping forces.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 90

REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Evaluation Association. “American Evaluation Association Guiding Principles for
Evaluators.” Washington, DC: American Evaluation Association, 2004. Accessed February 10,
2014. http://www.eval.org/p/cm/ld/fid=51.
Beetham, David. “Democracy: Key Principles, Institutions and Problems.” In Democracy:
Its Principles and Achievements, edited by Inter-Parliamentary Union, 21-30. Geneva: InterParliamentary Union, 1998. Accessed April 10, 2014. http://ipu.org/PDF/publications/
DEMOCRACY_PR_E.pdf.
British Geological Survey. Stakeholder Consultation. London: Department for International
Development, 2003.
Bryman, Alan et al. Social Research Methods. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
Chapter 6 “On Ethics and Politics.”
Burnell, Peter. Building Better Democracies: Why Political Parties Matter. London: Westminster
Foundation for Democracy, 2004.
Carothers, Thomas. Confronting the Weakest Link: Aiding Political Parties in New Democracies.
Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2006.“Cause-and-EffectAnalysis.” USAID. Accessed February 10, 2014.
https://www.usaidassist.org/resources/cause-and-effect-analysis
Chaplowe, Scott G. Monitoring and Evaluation Planning: Guidelines and Tools. Baltimore:
Catholic Relief Services; Washington, DC: American Red Cross 2008. http://www.stoptb.org/
assets/documents/countries/acsm/ME_Planning_CRS.pdf“Confidence: The Political Parties.” World Values Survey, (2004-2008): accessed
February 10, 2014. Online. http://www.wvsevsdb.com/wvs/WVSAnalizeQuestion.jsp
Council of Europe. Parliamentary Assembly. Code of good practice for political parties.
Resolution 1546. Strasbourg, 2007.
Crawford, Gordon. “Evaluating Democracy and Governance Assistance.” ESCOR Research
Report, No. 7894, December 2001.
“Force Field Analysis: Analyzing the Pressures For and Against Change.” Mind Tools.
Accessed February 10, 2014. http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTED_06.htm“Force Field Analysis.” NDI: Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Team.
Accessed February 10, 2014.
Garbutt, Anne and Oliver Bakewell. The Use and Abuse of the Logical Framework Approach.
Stockholm: SIDA, 2005.
Hovland, Ingie. Successful Communication: A Toolkit for Researchers and Civil Society
Organizations. London: Overseas Development Institute, 2005.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 91Inter-Parliamentary Union. “Universal declaration on democracy.” In Democracy: Its
Principles and Achievements, edited by Inter-Parliamentary Union, III-VIII. Geneva: InterParliamentary Union, 1998. Accessed April 10, 2014. http://ipu.org/PDF/publications/
DEMOCRACY_PR_E.pdf
International Center for Research on Women; Cooperative for Assistance and Relief
Everywhere. ISOFI Toolkit: Tools for learning and action on gender and sexuality.
Washington, DC: ICRW, CARE, 2007.
Ipp, Oren. Study on Results Frameworks: Political Party Assistance. Copenhagen: Danish
Institute for Parties and Democracy, 2013.
Kumar, Krishna. Evaluating Democracy Assistance. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2012.
“Lonely at the top: Is the mass political party on its way out? And does it matter?”
The Economist, August 4, 2012. http://www.economist.com/node/21559901
Meisburger, Tim. An Alternative Approach to Party Assistance in Developing Democracies.
The Asia Foundation, Occasional Paper No. 7 (September 2011).
Mendizabal, Enrique. “The Alignment, Interest and Influence Matrix (AIIM).” London:
Overseas Development Institute, 2010.
Morgenstern, Scott, Steve Finkel, Andrew Green, and Jeremy Horowitz. Evaluation Approaches
for Political Party Assistance: Methodologies and Tools. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh,
2011.
The National Research Council. Improving Democracy Assistance: Building Knowledge
Through Evaluations and Research. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, 2008.
NDI. A Guide to Political Party Development. Washington, DC: NDI, 2008.
NDI. Minimum Standards for the Democratic Functioning of Political Parties.
Washington, DC: NDI, 2008.
“Obtaining Informed Consent.” Wilder Research. Accessed February 10, 2014.
http://www.evaluatod.org/resources/evaluation-guides/InformedConsent_8-09.pdf
Oliver, Paul. The Student’s Guide to Research Ethics. 2nd ed. Maidenhead: The Open University
Press, 2010.
“The Problem Tree.” NDI: Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Team.
Accessed February 10, 2014. https://portal.ndi.org/web/monitoring-and-evaluation/step-3“Reflection, Analysis and Decision-Making (RAD).” NDI: Monitoring, Evaluation, andLearning Team. Accessed February 10, 2014.
https://portal.ndi.org/web/monitoring-and-evaluation/reflection-analysis-decision-making(RAD)“Stakeholder Analysis.” NDI: Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Team. Accessed February
10, 2014. https://portal.ndi.org/web/monitoring-and-evaluation/step-2
Wood, Elisabeth J. “The Ethical Challenges of Field Research in Conflict Zones,” Qualitative
Sociology, 29, (2006): 373-386.

National Democratic Institute • Political Party Programming Guide                 92

National Democratic Institute
455 Massachusetts Ave, NW, 8th Floor
Washington DC 20001
Tel: 202-728-5500
Fax: 888-875-2887
Website: www.ndi.org/wscf