May 2, 2014
DSC 0061

BRIDGE workshop on voter information in Madagascar

Twenty-three representatives from the Malagasy Electoral Commission
March 20, 2014
New Picture 2

Crossing the gender BRIDGE in Nigeria

World over, women have always been marginalized in decision making processes.
November 30, 2011

TtF Learning Outcomes and Assessment Criteria

Trainees will be assessed against a set of assessment criteria outlined for each learning outcome. It is a requirement of the accreditation program that trainees need to achieve all the learning outcomes. The means of assessment used during the program includes facilitator observations and feedback, role-plays, problem-solving activities, small and large group discussions / reports, case studies and scenarios, peer and self-assessment. 1.Encourage all participants of BRIDGE to work effectively in teams Assessment Criteria: Identifies and organises appropriate groups to work together Establishes and monitors group rules for working and learning together Conducts small and large group activities Provides strategies for effective teamwork Provides opportunities for participants to give positive and constructive feedback to others Provides opportunities for participants to receive and act on feedback in a positive way Seeks and acknowledges the contribution of all participants Identifies and manages potential conflicts in groups 2.Facilitate BRIDGE using a range of adult learning and participatory teaching methods Assessment Criteria Identifies participant expectations and concerns Seeks and uses participants’ knowledge, ideas and experiences Clarifies the roles and responsibilities of facilitators and participants Clarifies workshop objectives and learning outcomes Uses a range of activities and resources that are culturally sensitive and allow for the different ways that people learn Presents in a clear structured way with an introduction, body and conclusion Seeks and provides constructive feedback and encouragement Uses questions appropriately, in particular “open” questions Adapts facilitation style based on feedback from participants and their learning needs Debriefs and reflects on learning activities Monitors and reflects on the achievement of objectives and learning outcomes 3.Promote and foster a positive learning environment Assessment Criteria Seeks and listens to participant ideas Establish and monitors group rules for working and learning together Develops mutual trust and respect with participants Displays energy and enthusiasm Acknowledges and recognises the contributions of participants Provides opportunities for participants to take risks and to learn from mistakes Demonstrates gender awareness Organises groups to encourage equal participation from all members 4.Plan and organise the effective delivery of BRIDGE Assessment Criteria: Consults with stakeholders on workshop organisation, delivery, module and participant selection Identifies the needs of participants and their organisations in preparation for the workshop Describes the key relevant characteristics of the culture in which BRIDGE is to be facilitated Selects appropriate modules, activities and resources for BRIDGE Establishes a timetable and program for the BRIDGE workshop including pre-workshop planning steps Compiles participant profiles, incorporating input and materials from participants 5.Communicate effectively the key understandings of BRIDGE in a cross-cultural environment Assessment Criteria: Outlines module purposes and the key understandings to be explored in the identified modules of BRIDGE Uses a range of activities and resources to explore and communicate each of the key understandings, in ways that meet the cultural and learning needs of the participants Gathers from and gives to participants, feedback on their knowledge and application of each of the key understandings in the identified modules 6.Monitor the progress of participants during workshop activities Assessment Criteria: Gathers regular feedback from participants on the effectiveness of the training program Seeks from and provides to participants, feedback on a regular basis Observes and records the work of all participants on a regular basis Provides all participants with the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge and skills 7.Apply a variety of evaluation techniques Assessment Criteria: Clarifies the criteria against which participants will be evaluated Identifies and uses strategies for evaluation Makes recommendations about the program based on participant and stakeholder feedback 8.Adapt the BRIDGE materials to meet the specific needs of the participants of BRIDGE workshops Assessment Criteria: Selects appropriate modules, activities and resources for BRIDGE Adapts learning activities based on participant feedback and self- assessment Identifies post-workshop work and steps for follow-up as required and/or requested Identifies the steps involved in proposing and implementing a BRIDGE […]
October 18, 2011

test

[…]
October 18, 2011
ObservationHQ

Electoral Observation

This is a central point for all information relating to the Electoral Observation module. The objectives of the Electoral Observation module are: To explore the principles of electoral observation (why have observers? who should they be? what should they do?). To consider electoral observation assessment guidelines and instruments. To design a code of conduct for observers. To design a plan for managing observers. Synopsis Click [here] for a synopsis of the Electoral Observation module. Facilitator Only Access You will need to be logged in to the website with facilitator access to be able to see these materials. Primary Curriculum Files The primary curriculum files for this module include documents for the Facilitators Handbook (OHPs, HOs, FRs) and the Participants Handbook (PNs) as well as PPT and AV documents where relevant. Key Understandings & Learning Outcomes The Key Understandings document outlines all the key understandings, learning outcomes and assessment criteria for this module. Agenda Library The agenda library includes the sample agendas listed in the Facilitators Notes as well as real agendas from Electoral Observation module workshops that have been run around the world, submitted by BRIDGE […]
October 18, 2011
DisputeHQ

Electoral Dispute Resolution

This is a central point for all information relating to the Electoral Dispute Resolution module. The objectives of the Electoral Dispute Resolution module are: To consider the bodies responsible for managing election conflicts and disputes To consider some of the mechanisms used and their advantages and disadvantages To consider accepted standards and principles for dealing with conflicts and disputes To practise some of the skills used in best practice in informal conflict management To explain a typical court process and its advantages and disadvantages in dispute resolution Synopsis Click [here] for a synopsis of the Electoral Dispute Resolution module. Facilitator Only Access You will need to be logged in to the website with facilitator access to be able to see these materials. Primary Curriculum Files The primary curriculum files for this module include documents for the Facilitators Handbook (OHPs, HOs, FRs) and the Participants Handbook (PNs) as well as PPT and AV documents where relevant. Key Understandings & Learning Outcomes The Key Understandings document outlines all the key understandings, learning outcomes and assessment criteria for this module. Agenda Library The agenda library includes the sample agendas listed in the Facilitators Notes as well as real agendas from Electoral Dispute Resolution module workshops that have been run around the world, submitted by BRIDGE […]
October 18, 2011
GenderHQ

Gender and Elections

This is a central point for all information relating to the Gender & Elections module. The objectives of the Gender & Elections module are: To introduce and examine the standards, principles and management techniques that are fundamental to good electoral practice; To serve as a foundation module for further deepening study of elections in the specialised modules of the BRIDGE curriculum. Synopsis Click [here] for a synopsis of the Gender & Elections module. Facilitator Only Access You will need to be logged in to the website with facilitator access to be able to see these materials. Primary Curriculum Files The primary curriculum files for this module include documents for the Facilitators Handbook (OHPs, HOs, FRs) and the Participants Handbook (PNs) as well as PPT and AV documents where relevant. Key Understandings & Learning Outcomes The Key Understandings document outlines all the key understandings, learning outcomes and assessment criteria for this module. Agenda Library The agenda library includes the sample agendas listed in the Facilitators Notes as well as real agendas from Gender & Elections module workshops that have been run around the world, submitted by BRIDGE […]
October 18, 2011
AccessHQ

Access to the Electoral Process

This is a central point for all information relating to the Access to the Electoral Process module. The objectives of the Access to the Electoral Process module are: Identify areas of the electoral process where access may be an issue – what access problems, what parts of the population are affected, and what solutions exist Provide a networking opportunity for advocacy groups, as well as specific tools to analyse the electoral structures and procedures and develop strategies to promote access. Emphasise the importance of consultation processes throughout the electoral cycle – from post-election analysis through design of materials and procedures – in order to affect real improvement of access. Synopsis Click [here] for a synopsis of the Access to the Electoral Process module. Facilitator Only Access You will need to be logged in to the website with facilitator access to be able to see these materials. Primary Curriculum Files The primary curriculum files for this module include documents for the Facilitators Handbook (OHPs, HOs, FRs) and the Participants Handbook (PNs) as well as PPT and AV documents where relevant. Key Understandings & Learning Outcomes The Key Understandings document outlines all the key understandings, learning outcomes and assessment criteria for this module. Agenda Library The agenda library includes the sample agendas listed in the Facilitators Notes as well as real agendas from Access to the Electoral Process module workshops that have been run around the world, submitted by BRIDGE […]
October 18, 2011
FinanceHQ

Political Financing

This is a central point for all information relating to the Political Financing module. The objectives of the Political Financing module are: To introduce the main principles, structures and institutions underlying a credible and workable political financing regulatory framework To encourage participants to identify, explore, and seek resolution to significant political financing issues and stumbling blocks in their immediate environment To allow participants the opportunity to reflect on how their learning apply to the specific work tasks, and, where possible, to experience political financing tasks and enhance skills to support the professional and political work of participants Synopsis Click [here] for a synopsis of the Political Financing module. Facilitator Only Access You will need to be logged in to the website with facilitator access to be able to see these materials. Primary Curriculum Files The primary curriculum files for this module include documents for the Facilitators Handbook (OHPs, HOs, FRs) and the Participants Handbook (PNs) as well as PPT and AV documents where relevant. Key Understandings & Learning Outcomes The Key Understandings document outlines all the key understandings, learning outcomes and assessment criteria for this module. Agenda Library The agenda library includes the sample agendas listed in the Facilitators Notes as well as real agendas from Political Financing module workshops that have been run around the world, submitted by BRIDGE […]
October 11, 2010
Photo_Member_of_Parliament

BRIDGE workshop for MPs discuss quotas and reserved seats for Vanuatu

Countries of the Pacific region have the lowest levels of women’s representation in parliaments in the world.
August 4, 2010

Facilitator Category Accreditation Forms

The forms below are to be completed when a facilitator has gained enough experience to change their facilitator category. Semi Accredited Facilitator – Template: Template to Add Semi Accredited Facilitators – To be completed by facilitator(s) conducting a Train the Facilitator (TtF). At the completion of a TtF facilitator(s) responsible for running it must use this template to notify the BRIDGE Office of approved ‘semi accredited’ facilitators.  The BRIDGE Office will use this template to upload the new facilitators to the database and send them an email congratulating them on becoming BRIDGE facilitators and notifying them of the access details to the BRIDGE website. Participants must attend the entire TtF workshop and participate fully in all activities, including the delivery of two BRIDGE activities themselves, and the customisation/writing of one activity. Click here for more detail on the requirements to approve Semi Accredited facilitator. Workshop Facilitator – Form: Accreditation form to move to the ‘Workshop’ facilitator category – To be completed by an ‘Accrediting’ or ‘Expert’ Facilitator who has observed facilitator conduct BRIDGE Semi-accredited Facilitators are ready to plan and facilitate modules under the supervision of accredited facilitators. Some facilitators will be advanced enough to be accredited at their first workshop, but others will require several workshops to complete their accreditation. Click here for more detail on the requirements to change category to an Workshop facilitator. Accrediting Facilitator – Form: Form to move to the ‘Accrediting’ facilitator category: – To be completed by the ‘Workshop’ facilitator who wants to change category. To be approved it will need to be supported by the nominated ‘Expert’ or ‘Accrediting’ facilitator and all of the Partner Representatives. Workshop Facilitators who have made the decision to become Accrediting Facilitators should be mentoring facilitators with less experience, and being mentored themselves in the accreditation process by Accrediting or Expert Facilitators. They should already be doing tasks such as liaising with the BRIDGE Office and submitting reports and data relating to the workshops they facilitate. Click here for more detail on the requirements to change category to an Accrediting facilitator. Expert Facilitator – Form: Form to move to the ‘Expert’ facilitator category – To be completed by the ‘Accrediting’ facilitator who wants to change category.  To be approved it will need to be supported by the nominated ‘Expert’ facilitator and all of the Partner Representatives. To become an Expert Facilitator, an Accrediting Facilitator must be mentored in other implementation tasks such as needs assessments and scoping missions, and looking at a BRIDGE program more holistically than just the workshop components. Click here for more detail on the requirements to change category to an Expert […]
May 21, 2010

What is the recommended salary of a BRIDGE facilitator?

The BRIDGE office does not intervene in the setting or negotiation of consultancy fees.  This is a matter which can only be determined between the facilitator concerned and the employing […]
May 11, 2010
psalogo

BRIDGE Wins United Nations Public Service Award

BRIDGE has won the 2010 United Nations Public Service Award in the category "Improving the delivery of public services".
February 15, 2010

BRIDGE Work in Moldova

BRIDGE accrediting facilitators - There are currently two short-time assignments related to the BRIDGE Strategic and Financial Planning module course to be held in Moldova in early March.
December 9, 2009

BRIDGE has a new Website and Logo

In November the BRIDGE Office launched a new BRIDGE website.  Essentially this has meant that we have upgraded the Content Management System (CMS) that the site uses as well as changing the design of the site. 
December 9, 2009

Political Finance Module Development Update

Since 2007, with generous support from the United Nations Democracy Fund (UNDEF), IFES has been working on a project aimed at a broad-based, results-oriented dialogue on global standards and best practices in political finance.
November 30, 2009

Guide to Downloading Curriculum Files

Log in to the site (You must have registered to the website) Click the ‘Curriculum’ menu at the top of the homepage Click the ‘Curriculum Files’ button under the ‘More’ menu Navigate to the folder or files that you want to download Place a tick next to these folders or files (Do not download more than 30 megabytes at a time) Click the ‘create zip’ link on the right side of the page Review the screen that lists all the files you have selected Click the ‘Download Now’ button at the bottom of the screen Click save and download the file Unzip files to a directory using a program like […]
November 13, 2009

About BRIDGE

In December 1999, a group of prominent electoral experts from around the world met in Canberra, Australia to discuss the potential structure and content if a short capacity-building program for electoral administrators. They were asked to reflect on everything which, with the benefit of hindsight, they wished they had known when starting work on their first election. The knowledge they identified formed the basis for what has become the BRIDGE curriculum.BRIDGE stands for Building Resources in Democracy, Governance and Elections. It is a modular professional development program with a particular focus on electoral processes. BRIDGE represents a unique initiative where five leading organisations in the democracy and governance field have jointly committed to developing, implementing and maintaining the most comprehensive curriculum and workshop package available, designed to be used as a tool within a broader capacity development framework. The five BRIDGE partners are the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), International IDEA, International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Electoral Assistance Division […]
September 17, 2009

Curriculum Files

Elections BRIDGE and DG BRIDGE Curriculum Files. To access the Elections BRIDGE curriculum you must be either a BRIDGE facilitator or employee of the BRIDGE Partner organisations. To access  DG BRIDGE curriculum you must be a facilitator.  Occasionally access is provided to particular people that one of the partner organisations recommends. If you want to access the DG BRIDGE curriculum, please contact the DG BRIDGE Team. Note – Downloading more than 30 megabytes at one time will produce a memory error.  If downloading many files at once, it is recommended that you only download one module’s documents at a time. Click here for a step by step guide how to download the curriculum […]
September 17, 2009

Overview of Curriculum

The BRIDGE Curriculum The BRIDGE curriculum is comprehensive, representing the most ambitious attempt ever undertaken to cover the spectrum of electoral processes and their effective administration. Written by a large international team of experienced democracy professionals associated with the partner organisations, the BRIDGE curriculum includes major sections on stakeholders in the electoral process, coverage of cross cutting issues (such as gender, integrity and access), and in-depth exploration of complex issues relating to credibility, ethics and institutional culture. The BRIDGE curriculum concentrates on the principles underlying all properly run elections, while drawing examples of different practical approaches from many countries. It does not seek to prescribe any one model for implementing those principles, but rather encourages participants to learn from the diverse examples presented. In some of the modules the aim is to develop skills in areas that are important in an electoral administrator’s day-to-day work, with an emphasis on understanding the relationships between tasks in order to meet tight deadlines effectively. In other modules the main focus is exploring structural, ethical or social issues. Each module includes examples of activities, literature, case studies, election materials, websites, and audio-visual aids as workshop resources. It provides access to and draws from resources such as the ACE Electoral Knowledge Network (http://www.aceproject.org). IDEA handbooks and EC (European Commission) /UNDP manuals. It also offers access to regional and global electoral networks. Download the BRIDGE Curriculum Framework […]
September 17, 2009

Workshop Photos

Workshop Photos Please upload your BRIDGE photos […]
September 16, 2009

Forum Intro

[…]
September 14, 2009

Events

BRIDGE Rule #1: All BRIDGE activities must be approved by the BRIDGE Partners. Approval is obtained through the BRIDGE Office. Therefore BRIDGE implementers must advise the BRIDGE Office as soon as they can legitimately do so, of forthcoming BRIDGE activities. BRIDGE Facilitators / Implementers – click here to go to the online notification form to add events to the BRIDGE […]
September 9, 2009

Registration

    Thank you for submitting your details.  Please make sure that you fill in the mandatory fields and enter the security code at the top of the form.  The BRIDGE Office will review your registration and notify you about the progress of your […]
September 9, 2009

RSS

BRIDGE Project RSS Feed To subscribe to the BRIDGE Project news feed click here. What is RSS? RSS (Rich Site Summary) is a format for delivering regularly changing web content. Many news-related sites, weblogs and other online publishers syndicate their content as an RSS Feed to whoever wants it. Why RSS? Benefits and Reasons for using RSS RSS solves a problem for people who regularly use the web. It allows you to easily stay informed by retrieving the latest content from the sites you are interested in. You save time by not needing to visit each site individually. You ensure your privacy, by not needing to join each site’s email newsletter. […]
September 9, 2009

Sitemap

An overview of the available content on this […]
September 8, 2009

Logo’s

[…]
September 8, 2009

View Videos

View videos of BRIDGE workshops on the BRIDGE Youtube channel read […]
September 8, 2009

Follow Us

Youtube kr t […]
September 8, 2009

Welcome to BRIDGE

Welcome to BRIDGE – A Course in Electoral Processes BRIDGE stands for Building Resources in Democracy, Governance and Elections. It is a modular professional development program with a particular focus on electoral processes. BRIDGE represents a unique initiative where five leading organisations in the democracy and governance field have jointly committed to developing, implementing and maintaining the most comprehensive curriculum and workshop package available, designed to be used as a tool within a broader capacity development […]
September 3, 2009

Home

Ut bibendum, purus nec nonummy ullamcorper, sapien est luctus sem, ut interdum dolor lorem at leo. Etiam malesuada pharetra tellus. Vivamus condimentum. Nullam auctor enim non orci lacinia bibendum. Proin sodales orci eleifend lectus. Phasellus semper ipsum at nisl adipiscing facilisis. Praesent id dolor a velit posuere accumsan. Aenean a orci vitae tortor sollicitudin pellentesque. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Donec nisl. Donec pharetra. Praesent placerat scelerisque nulla. Vivamus feugiat, ligula vel fringilla consequat, diam arcu sodales risus, vel aliquet lacus leo vitae justo. Sed convallis dictum […]
September 3, 2009

Overview

In December 1999, a group of prominent electoral experts from around the world met in Canberra, Australia to discuss the potential structure and contentof a short capacity-building program for electoral administrators. They were asked to reflect on everything which, with the benefit of hindsight, they wished they had known when starting work on their first election. The knowledge they identified formed the basis for what has become the BRIDGE curriculum.
September 3, 2009

How do I become a BRIDGE facilitator and what is the process for accreditation?

BRIDGE facilitators are usually identified as part of a greater BRIDGE program, and organisations will look to their own staff or within their networks for potential facilitators. They will be looking for people with the requirements listed below. If you are not connected with an organisation planning a BRIDGE program, you may still be able to attend a TtF workshop. TtF workshops being run by other organisations or regions are often open to external participants. Check the BRIDGE website to see what BRIDGE TtF workshops are coming up and contact the organisers to find out if places are available for external participants. You will usually have to pay your own attendance costs.  It should also be noted that it is strongly recommended that you attend a BRIDGE module workshop before attending a TtF. Accreditation to become a BRIDGE facilitator involves three steps: Participation in a BRIDGE workshop as a participant. This is to familiarise the candidate with the BRIDGE methodology, and to ensure that they know what being a BRIDGE facilitator involves and whether it is definitely a path they want to follow. Completion of a BRIDGE ‘Train the Facilitator’ workshop. This is a two-week workshop focusing on teaching trainers how to deliver BRIDGE using the BRIDGE methodology. Completion of sufficient supervised facilitation of BRIDGE workshops in the […]
September 3, 2009

What are the criteria for becoming a BRIDGE facilitator?

What are the criteria for becoming a BRIDGE facilitator?
September 2, 2009

View Photos

Read more click […]
September 2, 2009

Curriculum

Read more click […]
September 2, 2009

Implementation

Guide for Organisations (1.5 Mb) & Implementation Manual (2.2 Mb) Learn more about how to Implement BRIDGE Read more >>click […]
September 2, 2009

BRIDGE Forum

Discuss @ Bridge Forum click […]
September 2, 2009

Events List

View the Bridge events list click […]
September 2, 2009

Democracy and Governance BRIDGE (DG BRIDGE)

Read more     […]
August 31, 2009

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the process for becoming a BRIDGE facilitator? Accreditation to become a BRIDGE facilitator involves three steps: Participation in a BRIDGE workshop as a participant.  This is to familiarise the candidate with the BRIDGE methodology, and to ensure that they know what being a BRIDGE facilitator involves and whether it is definitely a path they want to follow. Completion of a BRIDGE ‘Train the Facilitator’ workshop.  This is a two-week workshop focusing on teaching trainers how to deliver BRIDGE using the BRIDGE methodology. Completion of sufficient supervised facilitation of BRIDGE workshops in the […]
August 18, 2009

Annex 1: BRIDGE Training Components

Module Workshops BRIDGE is the most comprehensive professional development curriculum available in election administration. It improves the skills, knowledge, and confidence both of election professionals and of key stakeholders in the electoral process such as members of the media, political parties, and electoral observers.The 23 modules can be conducted/modified in several ways: running modules as they are customising modules, e.g. shorter versions, mixing modules, plus new tailored modules using BRIDGE methodology· mixing BRIDGE methodology with operational training and/or other courses Using BRIDGE for a specific purpose outside professional development training (e.g. as a conference tool) Length of workshops: There are 23 modules on all aspects of election administration, grouped thematically: Electoral Architecture Working with Electoral Stakeholders Electoral Operations Each module varies in duration from one day to one week (average being three days). The modules contain in-built flexibility – providing a menu of topics and activities to be tailored to suit the audience and time available.Intended audience: A broad range of electoral administrators at the middle to senior levels of management can benefit from taking part in BRIDGE. The primary target groups of the workshop are:· practising election administrators from developing democracies· electoral administrators in more established democracies who may need a refresher or a team building exercise in this areaPre-requisites for attendance: Ideally participants should have some prior or current experience in the electoral field, or be about to take part in election-related activities if they are electoral stakeholders. Remember that the intention of the workshop is to enhance professional skills, rather than create those skills. Participants will get most benefit from the workshop when they are: motivated individuals, committed to the democratic process; willing to share information, and to assist in the setting up of national training programs; and are willing to participate in the evaluation and further design of the program. Implementation Workshop The purpose of this 3-day workshop is to provide guidance to individuals and organisations responsible for designing and setting up training programs that use material taken from the BRIDGE curriculum. It aims to familiarise participants with what BRIDGE is (its scope and flexibility), and how to best implement it.Length of workshop: This is designed as a three-day program, but could also be conducted in two days, or four days, depending on the audience.Intended audience: Participants should ideally be people who will be the implementers of BRIDGE programs – those who will be administrating and managing the programs and workshops.Pre-requisites for attendance: It is strongly recommended that as a prerequisite participants have participated in the BRIDGE Introduction module. If they have not, it is highly recommended that the one-day showcase be included as the first day of this Implementation Workshop Train the Facilitator This 10-day intensive program, which is integral to the BRIDGE program, uses a ‘train the trainer’ model and aims at accrediting a core group of local trainers as BRIDGE facilitators, for in-country workshops. It aims to give practical skills and knowledge about BRIDGE module workshops to potential facilitators of BRIDGE workshops. National TtF workshops are conducted in the country where a sizeable BRIDGE program is planned (where a corps of facilitators would need to be employed). International TtF workshops are conducted on at least an annual basis, in different regions of the world where there is interest in BRIDGE or programs are underway.Length of workshop: This is a 10-day workshop (spread over two weeks). Intended audience: The TtF workshop targets experienced trainers, preferably with a background in curriculum development. In addition to meeting these criteria, facilitators will ideally have a solid grounding in the methodologies and approaches of BRIDGE and capacity development.For International TtFs, facilitators should be selected who have demonstrated an ability to work in a cross-cultural environment.Pre-requisites for attendance: As the TtF workshop targets experienced trainers, preferably with a background in curriculum development – it is highly desirable that participants are qualified and experienced adult trainers. It is also an advantage to have worked in election administration.In addition to this, facilitators will ideally have a solid grounding in the methodologies and approaches of BRIDGE and capacity development – i.e. they should have already been a participant in a BRIDGE module […]
August 18, 2009

Annex 9: Key Documents for Translation

Annex 9: Key Documents for Translation Whether translating BRIDGE before customisation and design, or translating an already customised program, it is essential to translate some documents first to assist those in the customisation and design team if they are not fluent in English or whatever language their source BRIDGE documents are in. The principle is to translate general guidelines, outlines and summaries first – this not only allows the customisation and design team to have these reference documents available from the beginning of the process, but also serves as an introduction to BRIDGE to those translating. Key documents to translate at the beginning of a program BRIDGE brochure – The most recent version of this is available on the BRIDGE website. It is useful for introducing key stakeholders and decision-makers to BRIDGE. Module summaries – These are provided in 8.3 Annex 3: BRIDGE Modules at a Glance . They are brief summaries of each module, based on the module objectives of each. This document assists the program design team to identify which modules will be most useful for meeting their program objectives. Implementation Manual – This manual is an essential document for the program team. Optional documents Complete KU LO AC Document – This is available on the website and lists every Key Understanding, Learning Outcome and Assessment Criteria for every module. It is a lengthy document and of limited use early in the program (when stakeholders will not be familiar with the terminology and methodology) but it can be useful in later stages of program customisation and design, and can also be an impressive visual aid to demonstrate to stakeholders the depth of the curriculum. FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) – These are available on the website and give more detailed information than the brochure. It might be useful to translate an appropriate selection of these for more detailed queries about BRIDGE. Key documents for the customisation process Facilitators Notes – the Facilitators Notes (FN) for the modules that have been selected for the program should be the first documents translated. From here the customisation team can work out which activities will best meet their objectives, and which associated resources they will need for those activities. If the whole module is being translated, it will help the customisation team prioritise which documents should be translated first. Activity resources – In general the customisation team should be able to get a good idea of their program from the FN, but they may need certain activity resources translated early Key documents for workshops After customisation and the confirmation of an agenda for a workshop, select all items required – FRs, HOs, OHPs, PDFs and PPTs. These documents should then be translated and reviewed before printing to makeup the base Facilitators Folder Similarly, after customisation and the confirmation of an agenda for a workshop, select all items required – PNs and any facilitator documents it has been decided would be helpful to participants. These documents should then be translated and reviewed before printing to makeup the base Participants […]
August 18, 2009

Annex 8: Criteria for Progression – Facilitator Categories

Annex 8: Criteria for Progression – Facilitator Categories Category Criteria for progression Semi-accredited To successfully complete the prerequisites to be considered a Semi-accredited Facilitator: Has attended a BRIDGE module workshop as a participant Has attended all 10 days of the BRIDGE Train the Facilitator (TtF) workshop Has been assessed as satisfactory by the lead facilitator of the TtF against all TtF Learning Outcomes. Reference documents: TtF.3.2 Learning Outcomes and Assessment Criteria – PN TtF.7.5 Assessment Criteria Pro Forma – FR TtF.10.4 Individual Recommendations – FR Workshop To complete accreditation to become a Workshop Facilitator: A minimum of 30 hours of supervised customisation, preparation and facilitation of BRIDGE module workshops in the field. Facilitation of only modules (and not TtFs or Implementation Workshops) to enable the facilitator to gain experience and confidence in using and modifying the BRIDGE curriculum documents, and to become conversant with the content of BRIDGE modules. Again be assessed as satisfactory by the supervising Accrediting or Expert Facilitator against all TtF Learning Outcomes. Reference documents: TtF.3.2 Learning Outcomes and Assessment Criteria – PN TtF.7.5 Assessment Criteria Pro Forma – FR TtF.10.4 Individual Recommendations – FR Accrediting To become an Accrediting Facilitator: A minimum of 150 hours of customisation, preparation and facilitation of BRIDGE workshops in the field, a minimum of 75% of which are module workshops (and not TtFs or Implementation Workshops) to enable the facilitator to gain experience and confidence in using and modifying the BRIDGE curriculum documents, and to become conversant with the content of BRIDGE modules Lead facilitation in at least one module workshop Provide BRIDGE Office with reports on BRIDGE activities undertaken Support and mentor facilitators with less experience Expert To become an Expert Facilitator: A minimum of 300 hours of customisation, preparation and facilitation of BRIDGE activities in the field, including at least one TtF. At least 50% should be facilitating modules (and not TtFs or Implementation Workshops) Work with an Expert Facilitator on at least one BRIDGE scoping or needs assessment […]
August 18, 2009

Annex 7: Summary of Facilitator Categories

Annex 7: Summary of Facilitator Categories Semi-accredited Facilitator Workshop Facilitator Accrediting Facilitator Expert Facilitator Accreditation Semi-accredited Accredited Accredited Accredited Who accredits? An Accrediting or Expert Facilitator An Accrediting or Expert Facilitator An Accrediting or Expert Facilitator An Expert Facilitator How many hours should be facilitated to reach this level? N/a A minimum of 30 hours supervised, module workshops only A minimum of 150 hours, at least 75% of which are module workshops A minimum of 300 hours, at least 50% of which are module workshops Can this category facilitate a module? Yes, supervised by an accredited facilitator. If unsupervised, the workshop cannot be called BRIDGE. Yes (less experienced facilitators should be mentored) Yes Yes Can this category customise a module? Yes, supervised Yes (less experienced facilitators should be mentored) Yes Yes Can this level facilitate a Train the Facilitator? No Yes, but not as lead facilitator Yes Yes Can this category facilitate an Implementation Workshop? No Yes, but not as lead facilitator Yes Yes Can this category conduct a needs assessment or scoping mission? No No Yes, but not as head of mission Yes Can this category assess someone as having successfully completed a TtF? No No Yes Yes Can this category accredit someone as a Workshop Facilitator? No No Yes Yes Can this category accredit someone as an Accrediting Facilitator No No Yes Yes Can this category accredit someone as an Expert Facilitator No No No Yes * Semi-accredited Facilitators who completed their TtF more than three years prior will be made Semi-accredited – […]
August 18, 2009

Annex 6: Post-workshop Evaluation Sheets

Annex 6: Post-workshop Evaluation Sheets Post-Workshop Evaluation Sheet for EMB’s (to be sent to EMB training contact officer approximately 6-8 weeks after the workshop) Your feedback will help the BRIDGE partners improve the BRIDGE workshop. Qualitative questions: What knowledge did the participants learn? What skills did the participants develop? What attitudes did the participants form? OR Can you state whether there was a measurable change in behaviour and attitudes (eg willingness to try to apply new knowledge and/or skills in the workplace) of the participants who attended the workshop? What were the participants’ reactions to the workshop? What were the facilitators’ reactions to the workshop? Quantitative questions: Prior to Training How many people expressed an interest in the workshop? How many people actually signed up to the workshop? After the training How many people attended the workshop? What was the degree of participant satisfaction? How many people have expressed an interest in the workshop as a result of referrals by the first workshop attendees? Would you recommend this workshop to others? Why? Did the workshop meet your expectations? Post-Workshop Evaluation Sheet for Participants (to be sent to participants approximately 6-8 weeks after attending the workshop) Your feedback will help the BRIDGE partners improve the BRIDGE workshop. Qualitative questions: In your view, what were the 3 most important weaknesses of the workshop? In your view, what were the 3 most important strengths of the workshop? What are the principles that underline the best practice of an election? What are the values that underline the best practice of an EMB? What skills does an electoral administrator need? What are the rules and regulations for running elections in your country? What type of training courses would benefit you most in your current role in the EMB? How have you applied your learnings/understandings/skills from the BRIDGE program into your work? Can you describe the main objective of this workshop? Quantitative questions: Did the workshop meet your expectations? What did you get out of the BRIDGE program Would you recommend this workshop to others? Why? Are you applying new knowledge and skills to your work as a result of attending the workshop? What difficulties have you experienced in trying to apply new knowledge and skills in your workplace? Have you networked with any of the participants from the BRIDGE workshop that you attended? […]
August 18, 2009

Annex 5: BRIDGE Evaluation Cycle

Annex 5: BRIDGE Evaluation Cycle Phase 1: Before the Workshop – Assessment Trying to ascertain: Will the selected BRIDGE format (type of BRIDGE program/workshop) and delivery (methodology) result in the stated Learning Outcomes (and stated skills and knowledge needed by the client)? Do the teaching methods conform to the preferences and learning styles of the participants? What are the expectations of the participants? The client? Tools to help: Pre-workshop assessment sheet for participants Pre-workshop assessment sheet for the client/EMB Summary report of pre-workshop assessment (completed by workshop organisers) Participant profile (completed by participants) Scoping reports, training needs assessment reports Logical framework Phase 2: During the Workshop – Monitoring Trying to ascertain: Effectiveness/appropriateness of facilitators (flexible? willing and able to adapt?) Effectiveness/appropriateness of venue and facilities e.g. equipment Effectiveness/appropriateness of teaching materials (aids, workshop materials, etc) Tools to help: Facilitator meetings/daily briefings and de-briefings, peer and self appraisal (and subsequent Facilitator’ Reports/Recommendations) Evaluation Sheets (completed daily by participants) Informal evaluation and feedback methods (during activities, at the completion of activities, and at the completion of the day) Logical framework Phase 3: After the Workshop – Evaluation Trying to ascertain: Client satisfaction with workshop (met expectations/objectives) Participant satisfaction with workshop (met expectations/objectives) Facilitator/Workshop organiser satisfaction with workshop (met expectations/objectives) Recommendations for improving the workshop (from clients, participants and facilitators and organisers) Tools to help: Post-workshop evaluation sheet for participants Post-workshop evaluation sheet for the client/EMB Post-workshop evaluation report, completed by facilitators/workshop organisers, which includes information provided in the collated evaluation sheets from during the workshop and post-workshop. Logical framework […]
August 18, 2009

Annex 4: Potential Cost Items of a BRIDGE Program

Annex 4: Potential Cost Items of a BRIDGE Program Below is a list of possible costs to consider when planning a BRIDGE program. Not all costs will be relevant, depending on the context of the program, and there may also be other items not listed here that will need to be considered. This list is not definitive or exhaustive, and is meant as a guide only. Needs assessment costs BRIDGE expert costs (items may include fees; travel and accommodation; etc.) Communications costs (items may include telephone calls; email/internet setup; postage and freight costs; video-conferencing; etc.) Venue hire and catering (items may include meeting rooms; video-conferencing; refreshments; projectors and screens; internet access fees; etc.) Research costs (items may include: client data collection; country briefings; etc.) Interpretation costs (items may include: interpreter fees; interpreter briefings; etc.) Planning and overall program development team costs Program development team costs (items may include: salaries; benefits; expenses; etc.) Office accommodation costs (items may include: office rental; running costs such as water and electricity; security costs; furniture; cleaning costs; etc.) Office expenses (items may include: stationery; office equipment; computers and printers; photocopiers and faxes; etc.) Communications costs (items may include telephone calls; email/internet setup; postage and freight costs; video-conferencing etc.) Research costs (items may include: pre-workshop assessment surveys; gathering of local data for use in program; etc.) BRIDGE expert costs (items may include fees; travel and accommodation; etc.) Customisation costs Customisation team costs (items may include fees; travel and accommodation; etc.) Communications costs (items may include telephone calls; email/internet setup; postage and freight costs; video-conferencing; etc.) Venue hire and catering (items may include: meeting rooms; video-conferencing; refreshments; projectors and screens; internet access fees; etc.) Research costs (items may include: gathering of local data for use in program; analysis of pre-workshop assessments; stakeholder liaison costs; etc.) Translation costs (items may include: translator fees; document preparation; document transportation; proofreading costs; backup in case of poor quality translation; etc.) Artwork and printing (items may include: designer fees; document preparation; document transportation; proofreading costs; printer fees; etc.) Workshop costs BRIDGE facilitator costs – a fully accredited lead facilitator plus supporting accredited facilitators (items may include: fees for both preparation and delivery time; travel and accommodation; etc.) Administrative and program management support costs (items may include salaries; expenses; travel and accommodation; short-term administrative help; overtime; etc.) Interpretation costs (items may include: interpreter fees; interpreter briefings; etc.) Invited expert expenses (items may include: expert fees; briefings; travel and accommodation; thank you gifts; etc.) Participant costs (items may include: travel and accommodation; application processing; etc.) Venue hire and catering (items may include: workshop rooms; break-out rooms; video-conferencing; refreshments and meals; projectors and screens; television and DVD; computer/laptop; etc.) Workshop materials costs (items may include: notepads; poster paper; markers and pens; tape; string; freight and transport; etc.) BRIDGE materials (items may include: Facilitator and Participant Handbooks; photocopying and printing; collation; certificates and nametags; freight and transport; etc.) Communications costs (items may include: telephone calls; email/internet setup; postage and freight costs; video-conferencing; etc.) Official hospitality costs (items may include: official dinner; ‘welcome’ event such as cocktails, meet and greet; gifts; etc.) Information and promotional costs (items may include: BRIDGE posters; workshop banners; BRIDGE brochures; stakeholder brochures; freight and transport; etc.) Evaluation and reporting costs Program development team costs (items may include: salaries; benefits; expenses; etc.) Evaluation consultancy costs (items may include fees; travel and accommodation; etc.) Communications costs (items may include: telephone calls; email/internet setup; postage and freight costs; video-conferencing; etc.) Research costs (items may include: analysis of evaluation data such as pre-workshop assessments and monitoring data; follow-up research such as surveys and interviews; stakeholder liaison costs; etc.) Reporting costs (items may include: document preparation; document transportation; document publication; etc.) Costs to consider relating to travel (at various stages) Transport costs (items may include: flights; train or coach tickets; car hire; petrol costs; driver costs; transfers between airports/stations to accommodation; taxi costs; etc.) Accommodation costs (items may include: room hire; breakfast costs; cancellation costs; etc.) Medical costs (items may include: immunisations for travellers; emergency medical costs; first aid kit; etc.) Per diem costs (items may include: incidental per diem; meal costs; etc.) Other travel costs (items may include: visa processing fees; transit visas; passport fees; departure and other travel taxes; etc.) […]
August 18, 2009

Annex 2: Version 1 Curriculum Framework

Annex 2: Version 1 Curriculum Framework Module 1: An Introduction to Electoral Administration Module 6: Contestants Module 2: Electoral Systems Module 7: Preparation for the Electoral Event Module 3: Public Outreach Module 8: Polling and Counting Module 4: Boundary Delimitation Module 9: Electoral Observers Module 5: Voter Registration Module 10: Strategies for […]
August 18, 2009

Maintaining and Sustaining BRIDGE Programs

One of the key messages of this manual is to consider, plan and implement BRIDGE programs in a sustainable, meaningful manner. This section will summarise and reiterate the key points that relate to sustainable BRIDGE programming, and will look at the post-election period of the electoral cycle as a particularly important part of the electoral cycle from a sustainability point of view. For BRIDGE partners or implementing organisations, a process rather than event (workshop/election) driven approach assumes continuing dialogue with the client even as a program comes to a close, for example by working through recommendations of a BRIDGE program evaluation report. Program planners need to ask whether future interventions are desirable, given the priority which BRIDGE places on empowering clients to internalise BRIDGE as a sustainable professional development tool. Instead of further interventions, routine follow up visits could be considered as part of an overall networking approach. These assumptions could be spelled out in maintenance and sustainability plans, for incorporation into the client organisation’s professional development and planning cycle. When it comes to designing BRIDGE programs post-election environment, experience has shown that immediately after an electoral event there is the likelihood of the withdrawal of both attention and funding whether by government or donor funds. This is often coupled with staff reduction and the loss of internal and external expertise. This post-election period can be seen as a moment of opportunity to implement a capacity development or sustainability plan however, allowing for a focus on planning and working with core or permanent staff in a way that the operational imperatives of the pre-election period does not permit . A post-election evaluation process can be used as an opportunity to bring together stakeholders and repair differences by looking forward and seeking to improve the electoral process. BRIDGE can be an ideal vehicle for designing workshops to serve both these purposes. In maintaining and sustaining BRIDGE programs, continuity of staff is desirable and yet the ability of the client organisation to attract and retain capable facilitators may be out of the control of program planners. Nevertheless, the key personnel, even if not permanent, which could drive, own, implement and administer any future program should be identified and included in any maintenance and planning process. The departure of one key BRIDGE-trained person in an organisation may, after all, be the link that breaks the chain of sustainability. Continuing and increasing the number of networks and partners after a program is complete is a core component of any sustainability plan. Organisations could look to other organisations – national and international – to continue the identified work. The following table is a summary of the points made in the manual related to good practice in implementing sustainable, high quality and relevant BRIDGE programs : Stages Measures enhancing sustainability Before program Participatory needs assessment reviewing in details existing capacities (three layers: individual, organisational, systemic) Showcase BRIDGE Encourage dialogue inside beneficiary institution on professional development and relevance of BRIDGE Official demand for BRIDGE comes from beneficiary Include beneficiary in needs assessment or scoping mission team Identify most relevant unit inside institution to become anchor of BRIDGE program and involve it in all aspects of scoping mission and program definition. In most cases, this would be an existing training unit Design with beneficiary a flexible and customised program with realistic program objectives that answer priority needs. If beneficiary has strategic plan, ensure that BRIDGE program contributes to its achievement Allocate sufficient time to program – think long-term Develop monitoring and evaluation indicators and methods for the program as a whole and agreed upon the choice of each workshop with beneficiary Secure long-term financial resources, including from beneficiary institution, to support sustainability plan Tailor planned number of facilitators (TtF) to objectives defined Establish Steering Committee to supervise implementation and measure impact Project implementation team includes training unit Capacity-based selection of potential local facilitators. Must include personnel from training unit (if it exists) Use existing training resources in BRIDGE workshop resources (customisation process). During program Coordinate closely with senior management, relevant technical units and other providers of capacity development (e.g. BRIDGE partners) – if applicable – to apply outcomes of workshop activities to on-going and planned change processes Negotiate criteria for selection of participants (target group, level, gender, diversity, capacity) and strive to participate in selection process Ensure visibility of workshops and their outcomes inside institution with wider stakeholder community Involve training unit in a meaningful fashion in each step of preparing, delivering and evaluating workshops Accredit local pool of facilitators (according to needs identified to serve long-term strategy) Choose workshop activities that allow participants to apply skills and knowledge for addressing concrete institutional needs Analyse workshop (schedule, activities, trainers, resources) and results of participants evaluations with training unit after each workshop Involve training unit in writing workshop report Assist training unit in presenting workshop results to Steering Committee Jointly monitor (BRIDGE partner + training unit + relevant technical unit) workshop impact After program Support beneficiary institution to plan for continued implementation of professional development program, including financial needs. This could involve advising institution about reforming training unit into a full-blown capacity development unit Support fund-raising from national budget and donors for continued implementation of professional development program Advise human resources unit to incorporate professional development as part of induction and incentive strategy Support training unit in compiling, finalising and archiving training resources based on lessons learnt during program Final ‘lessons learnt’ workshop with institution and joint drafting of final report Present final report to Steering Committee with recommendations for sustainability Disseminate final report with recommendations to wider electoral stakeholder community Periodically evaluate the program impact on institution according to pre-agreed schedule and indicators (see evaluation plan). In particular, wherever workshops triggered change processes inside institution, document and evaluate the outcomes of these Coordinate with providers of long-term technical assistance to support implementation of change processes and policy development identified during program Help secure support to networks of electoral stakeholders that might have appeared during […]
August 18, 2009

Transition: Reporting, Documenting and Updating BRIDGE

BRIDGE can be particularly useful and successful as a capacity development tool because it aims to systematically transfer ownership and responsibility for the conduct of BRIDGE to the client organisation or country. Ideally this occurs throughout the first two or three years of the rollout of BRIDGE. The aim is to have the client organisation or the country develop and implement a professional or community development strategy which is taken up and institutionalised. Commitment from senior managers and a pool of accredited facilitators will be necessary so that control of BRIDGE is transferred from international donors or funders. Transition marks the completion of a program to the satisfaction of the client. On this occasion, program records and documentation are completed and relevant sections delivered to the client. A transfer document is drafted. The purpose of the transfer procedure is to ensure the following: contractual conditions have been satisfied delivered outputs conform with specifications the program is integrated into the ongoing business legal and psychological ownership is transferred all accounts are paid Transition also marks the point at which the program team’s responsibility for development ends and the end user is fully capable of taking on whatever the project produced. Purely at a practical level, this requires certain adjustments by both parties. However, there is also an important psychological element in transition that program managers ignore at their peril. Capacity building and the transition process for handing over responsibilities to counterparts should begin at the start of the intervention. In transferring responsibility for a program, program managers should prepare a transition strategy, which includes sustainability strategies, and should also include close consultation with the clients. The transition comprises three main elements the: documentation process closing of programs and workshops – through some sort of celebration sustainability planning process (dealt with in Part 10) Documentation All projects generate many documents. Provided the project’s logical framework has been followed, the preparation, dissemination and filing of all documents should be a straightforward process. Archiving of BRIDGE documentation is a responsibility of the BRIDGE Office. It is the responsibility of the implementing organisation to get all the correct documents to BRIDGE Office securely and within reasonable time frames. All relevant documentation should be emailed (or sent) to the BRIDGE Office. Progress or summary reports should also be supplied to provide material for inclusion into the quarterly BRIDGE newsletters. Program reports To ensure that BRIDGE partners are informed of BRIDGE events the office requires a descriptive article about the workshop or event. In addition to this article please send the following files, reports or documents: Scoping or needs assessment report Workshop report including Names of facilitation team Implementing organisation details Donor details Participant profile Workshop content Lessons learned Workshop agenda Participant list Group photo and other workshop photos Participant evaluation report Facilitator evaluation report Any feedback on the module/s run (suggested improvements, criticisms, compliments) Lead facilitator report Media coverage All of the above reports will be archived in the BRIDGE Office as a repository of information on past BRIDGE events. TtF Reports Lead facilitators usually bear the responsibility of writing and sending the TtF report to the implementing organisation and the BRIDGE office. The information in these reports may vary from organisation to organisation, but in general there are common features that should be included in every TtF report. In general, a TtF Report could include: scope of work short overview of the TtF selection of materials material’s production facilitation team participants and quality of participation venue evaluation summary by participants recommendations by facilitators (for future TtFs, for TtF Facilitators Notes) media coverage general observations and conclusions Also, a TtF report for the BRIDGE website could include: a short summary of the TtF context in terms of the broader BRIDGE program summary of facilitators and participants (where they come from) a group photo a short summary of evaluations BRIDGE Office role The BRIDGE Office will publish all news articles written for the website with the related photos of the event. The remaining reports or documents will be archived in the BRIDGE Office. One of the challenges of creating such a comprehensive curriculum on electoral administration is keeping it up to date and relevant. For this reason, the curriculum has been designed to be an active document that can be updated as new information becomes available, and is open to improvements and innovations from those who facilitate and participate in BRIDGE workshops. The curriculum is updated annually. In between updates the BRIDGE Office collects feedback, suggestions and new material from facilitators and other stakeholders which can be incorporated at each update. Facilitators who are registered on the website will be notified of updates by email. Updating BRIDGE Content Reporting and documentation is also important to BRIDGE because it is through feedback from facilitators and implementers in the field that the BRIDGE Office is able to improve and update the BRIDGE curriculum. The BRIDGE Office actively seeks feedback and suggestions from facilitators who have used the curriculum, in order to improve the content and make it easier to use. Facilitators and other stakeholders using the curriculum are encouraged to give feedback in various ways: Where they have created a new activity, submitting it for inclusion in the curriculum Where they have had problems running an activity, whether due to clarity, complexity or other reasons, letting the BRIDGE Office know, and providing any amendments or suggestions on improving the activity for easier use Giving general feedback on how they found the different activities or modules Giving general suggestions for improvements Identifying potential resources for use or reference in the curriculum Identifying any outdated content or documents that should be updated or removed Identifying any numbering or typographical errors The most up-to-date version of the curriculum is the one that is available on the website. With each update, only a fraction of the total documents will be changed, so a system has been put in place to keep track of updates and make it easy to understand for facilitators and implementers. More information can be found on the update section of the BRIDGE website. For facilitators and implementers working from a previous download, a hard copy or a DVD copy, this update section should be a first place to look for assistance on working out what has changed since the version they hold, and whether or not they need to substitute any of the updated documents. Translators will also want to work from the most up-to-date version of the curriculum and should also refer to the website. Version 2 introduced many new modules to the curriculum, expanding in response to demand. However, the BRIDGE partners are open to the inclusion of additional modules outside of the 23 Version 2 modules, should there be a demonstrated need. Ideas, suggestions and content can be sent to the BRIDGE Office to be kept on file for possible new modules to be introduced in the […]
August 18, 2009

Evaluating BRIDGE

Although evaluation happens at the end of an event or program, it should have already been considered from the very first stages of planning. 2.5 Planning for Evaluation gives an introduction to evaluation and outlines the steps taken in planning for evaluation at the beginning of a program. A good evaluation process is built on strong foundations set at the beginning. Refer to: 8.6 Annex 6: Post-workshop Evaluation Sheets for questions to both client organisation and participants after BRIDGE workshops and 8.5 Annex 5: BRIDGE Evaluation Cycle for a summary of the main elements of evaluation, and things to consider when designing an evaluation process for BRIDGE. Evaluation by the client organisation This would normally be achieved by collating the workshop evaluation sheets (daily, landmark, or end of workshop or program) and creating a written report which summarises the strengths and weaknesses of the program, and makes recommendations based on these findings. The report would normally be prepared by the program organisers. End-of-workshop evaluation sheets, in which participants rate facilitators and contents, give an indication of how participants felt at the end of the workshop. But participants cannot, at the end of a workshop, tell the full story of whether they have benefited from the training, because they have not had time yet to put into practice what they have learned. It is therefore useful also to distribute evaluation sheets several weeks later and ask participants how they are using in their work environment the skills and information they gained from the workshop; how easy or difficult it is for them to apply new knowledge and skills; and what would make the program more effective. One should remember that the reason for training is not to improve how participants perform in the training room, but how they perform outside it. Care should be taken when designing surveys: both open and closed questions should be asked. Open-ended questions are questions where there is not one definite answer. These can be useful, but the drawback is that they can sometimes be hard to interpret. Closed questions have a restricted set of answers from which the respondent chooses (one choice may be ‘other’). It is easy to gather data from these types of questions. A report of these collated sheets would need to be prepared by the program organisers. Evaluation reports should not be so lengthy that decision-makers don’t bother to read them. To make an impact, and increase the likelihood that decision-makers read reports, evaluation reports should be broken up into easy-to-consume ‘chunks’ of information, for example ‘Issues’, ‘Evidence’ and ‘Recommendations’. If client organisations wish to evaluate the participants of a BRIDGE workshop (separate from the workshop organisers), using tests, they may do so. Formal tests of participant learning could be used some time after the workshop has been completed, ensuring that Learning Outcomes are matched with the test content. Clients may also wish to assess the level of program stakeholder satisfaction (e.g. donors, sponsors) after a program. Evaluation by and of the facilitators (and the program team) If a client wishes to evaluate the facilitators of a BRIDGE workshop, they may do so. The BRIDGE partners have a process of ‘quality control’ of all accredited facilitators, which can draw on information from workshop evaluation reports. Facilitators themselves are encouraged to engage in self-appraisal and peer appraisal during the in-workshop monitoring (a self-evaluation form is included as a Facilitators Resource in every module). They are also encouraged to conduct post-workshop facilitator evaluations as part of their end of workshop debrief. They may also be responsible for preparing post-workshop evaluations on behalf of the program organisers or partner organisations. Results of these meetings could also be included in the final reports of the program. In order for evaluations to reflect BRIDGE’s capacity development philosophy and values, beneficiaries should not simply provide input or render opinions about activities or interventions; they should be participants who are involved in the evaluation process right from the start. The BRIDGE partners recommend that an ’empowerment’ or ‘participatory’ evaluation approach be adopted where possible. In this approach, which is fundamentally democratic, the entire group – not just an evaluator – is responsible for conducting the evaluation (of a program) and assessing their own achievements. Evaluators are co-equal – with the client, beneficiaries or stakeholders – so that the whole process is a shared and collaborative one. This derives from the partners’ acknowledgement and respect for people’s capacity to create knowledge about, and solutions to, their own experiences. Post-program evaluation tasks Post-program evaluations can usefully be spread over three stages, the first of which seeks to assess the immediate impacts, the second of which focuses on mid-term organisational impacts and the third which looks at longer-term organisational impacts. Tasks to be performed at each stage are summarised in the tables below. Table 5: Short-term evaluation Who is being evaluated? Immediate post-workshop evaluation (to be conducted as soon as possible after the end of the program) Product of evaluation BRIDGE partners and country client Project history and outcomes can be collated Donor reports Other reports (including archived information) Project team and counterpart training unit Debriefing of facilitator Post-program assessment Constructive forward planning Standard evaluation process Standard report format Briefing of country client Collated project information/history Recommendations on future BRIDGE opportunities (standard format) Facilitators Workshop evaluation End of training evaluation Participants Application of learning (if operational-related) Improved work plans Expanded view of job Personal enrichment (measurement) Table 6: Medium-term evaluation Who is being evaluated? Organisational impact (to be assessed on the occasion of the next electoral event or before the end of a six-month period, whichever occurs first) Product of evaluation BRIDGE partners and country client Stakeholder surveys Collation of information Report to donors Report to country client Proposal for future work/continuity Agreement on further country client strategy Strategy for future training/capacity development Project team and counterpart training unit Input into impact assessment Report to BRIDGE partners on process Facilitators Input into impact assessment Increased skill levels Bigger pool of experience Participants Interviews Improved work plans Changed operations More positive work environment Table 7: Long-term Evaluation Who is being evaluated? Organisational impact (to be assessed after at least a year) Product of evaluation BRIDGE partners and country client Stakeholder surveys Collation of information Report to donors Report to country client Proposal for future work/continuity Agreement on further country client strategy Strategy for future training/capacity development Project team and counterpart training unit Input into impact assessment Report to BRIDGE partners on process Facilitators Input into impact assessment Increased skill levels Bigger pool of experience Participants Interviews Improved work plans Changed operations More positive work environment Evaluation reports The program organisers would be responsible for preparing the reports associated with workshops and the program. These reports may be tailored according to the audience, which may include a client such as an EMB, donors, or other stakeholders. The program report should: Be clearly dated Include the clearly stated purpose of the report Specify the training events being evaluated and the time period during which they took place Include an appropriate amount of detail for the needs of the intended audience Include information that is presented in an interesting and understandable way, with graphics that help to make the findings clear Not contain unnecessary information Also, it should be clear who the audience for the report is, and the evaluators should have clear expectations for how it will be used by that audience. An evaluation report should include the following components: Executive Summary Details of the training event(s) being evaluated time span number of times conducted number of participants number and names of facilitators (and accreditation status) purpose and objectives of the training event(s) key content areas Methodology composition of evaluation team objectives of evaluation selection of sample (size, characteristics) number and location of sites visited Analysis of findings Interpretation Recommendations (for changes in or maintenance of training, organisational systems and procedures, and environmental factors) Annexes/Appendices that could include data […]
August 18, 2009

Focus On: Progression in Facilitator Accreditation and Categories

In the early stages of BRIDGE, and leading up to the launch of Version 2 and the new Implementation Manual, the facilitator accreditation and progression process was necessarily flexible to build up facilitator numbers and consolidate the program. However, BRIDGE is now well-established. Facilitators and potential facilitators need clear guidelines to operate within.  Facilitator categories Facilitator categories have been designed to clarify what each facilitator can do, and has experience in doing in the various stages of a BRIDGE program. Each category of accredited facilitator reflects a key skill set, each of which plays a valuable role in any BRIDGE program. Workshop Facilitators focus on the main element of a BRIDGE program – the module workshops. They possess (or are in the process of developing) strong customisation and facilitation skills. Accrediting Facilitators are experienced in workshop facilitation, but also have an understanding of how to accredit and mentor less experienced facilitators.  They are essential to capacity development in a BRIDGE program. Expert Facilitators focus on not only facilitation of the different components of a BRIDGE program, but they are also involved in broader aspects of BRIDGE implementation. There is a fourth category to cover potential, unaccredited facilitators: Semi-accredited Facilitators have the basic skills and knowledge to facilitate BRIDGE as learned in the TtF workshop, but do not yet have the experience in the field. Refer to: 8.7 Annex 7: Summary of Facilitator Categories for a breakdown of each category and their responsibilities and 8.8 Annex 8: Criteria for Progression – Facilitator Categories for the criteria required to be considered in each category.   Facilitator progression While there is a progression from one category to another, this progression is not necessarily guaranteed, nor needed. Indeed, some facilitators will find their own skills and experience lend themselves to one category more than another. Those with strong customisation and facilitation skills who want to focus on workshop facilitation are best suited to the Workshop Facilitator category. Those with strengths in mentoring and education will be excellent Accreditation Facilitators. Those who wish to become more broadly involved in BRIDGE implementation and have the skills and experience to successfully do this are sought as Expert Facilitators. All BRIDGE facilitators begin in the Semi-accredited Facilitator category, which is achieved by successfully completing a TtF workshop and attending a BRIDGE module workshop as a participant. Semi-accredited facilitators are not accredited as BRIDGE facilitators, but will have gained from the TtF workshop the basic skills and knowledge to deliver the BRIDGE curriculum using the BRIDGE methodology. What they will lack is BRIDGE experience, and they can gain this by becoming involved in customising, preparing and facilitating BRIDGE module workshops in the field under the supervision of more experienced facilitators. This step is vital to giving potential facilitators a solid foundation in facilitating BRIDGE, and the support they need. Once a Semi-accredited Facilitator has gained sufficient experience and has achieved the TtF Learning Outcomes to a satisfactory level in the field, they progress to the Workshop Facilitation category, and should they choose to take on other BRIDGE responsibilities, and have the skills to do so, they may want to consider progressing to either Accrediting or Expert Facilitator categories. Process for accreditation and progression Refer to: 8.8 Annex 8: Criteria for Progression – Facilitator Categories to see the criteria mentioned for each category   Becoming a Semi-accredited Facilitator There are two steps to becoming a Semi-accredited Facilitator – attend a BRIDGE module workshop as a participant to experience the BRIDGE methodology and content, and if then interested in becoming a BRIDGE facilitator, attend a TtF workshop. Participants must attend the entire TtF workshop and participate fully in all activities, including the delivery of two BRIDGE activities themselves, and the customisation/writing of one activity. At the end of the workshop, the TtF facilitators will assess whether each participant has fulfilled the criteria to be considered Semi-accredited Facilitators, and will offer each participant verbal feedback. A TtF workshop is always run by a lead Accrediting or Expert Facilitator who is responsible for deciding whether or not each participant qualifies as a Semi-accredited Facilitator, with support from their co-facilitators who may be other Accrediting or Expert Facilitators, or very experienced Workshop Facilitators. The lead facilitator is also responsible for informing the BRIDGE Office who has become a Semi-accredited Facilitator, including an assessment of how ready each participant is to be accredited as a Workshop Facilitator once they have had the opportunity to gain field experience. The BRIDGE Office then updates its databases to reflect the new Semi-accredited Facilitators. New Semi-accredited Facilitators will receive a certificate at the TtF and should register to the BRIDGE website where they will be given facilitator access to the BRIDGE curriculum, newsletters and discussion forums. Becoming a Workshop Facilitator Semi-accredited Facilitators are ready to plan and facilitate modules under the supervision of accredited facilitators. Some facilitators will be advanced enough to be accredited at their first workshop, but others will require several workshops to complete their accreditation. It is possible for Semi-accredited Facilitators to work with Workshop Facilitators to gain supported experience, but they will need to work with an Accrediting or Expert Facilitator to be formally accredited. Semi-accredited Facilitators are also able to use the BRIDGE curriculum unsupervised, in which case their workshops would not be BRIDGE, however this is not recommended as the support and mentoring that comes from working with a supervising facilitator are important to successful development of facilitation skills and capacity development. A Semi-accredited Facilitator must be involved in not only the preparation and delivery of a workshop module, but also the customisation process, in order for the accrediting facilitator to be able to assess them against the criteria for accreditation. The minimum number of hours of planning and facilitation to be completed for assessment is 30 hours, which may be achieved in one workshop or over several. A Semi-accredited Facilitator may also feel they need more than 30 hours. The 30 hour minimum must be of engaged planning and facilitation – for example, if somebody else is running an activity, and a facilitator is sitting in the back of the room and not paying attention, but doing non-relevant work or resting, this would not count as engaged facilitation. However, if they were listening, supporting the person running the activity, helping participants when required etc., then although they themselves are not running the activity, they are still actively facilitating. If the Semi-accredited Facilitator fulfils the criteria, the Accrediting or Expert Facilitator is responsible for informing the BRIDGE Office that they have progressed to become a Workshop Facilitator. New Workshop Facilitators are ready to lead BRIDGE module workshops themselves, but it is always recommended that less experienced facilitators work with more experienced facilitators who can mentor and support them. A newly accredited facilitator should get as much experience facilitating module workshops as possible, and should not facilitate other kinds of BRIDGE workshops until their facilitation skills are well established. A Workshop Facilitator may choose to focus on workshop facilitation only and the most experienced Workshop Facilitators are extremely valuable to any BRIDGE program. Alternatively, a Workshop Facilitator may want to take on broader BRIDGE responsibilities once they have gained sufficient experience in the customisation and facilitation phases, and in this case should consider becoming an Accrediting Facilitator. Becoming an Accrediting Facilitator Workshop Facilitators who have made the decision to become Accrediting Facilitators should begin by taking responsibility for mentoring facilitators with less experience, and being mentored themselves in the accreditation process by Accrediting or Expert Facilitators. They should already be doing tasks such as liaising with the BRIDGE Office and submitting reports and data relating to the workshops they facilitate. In addition to this, they must be experienced, with a minimum of 150 hours engaged customisation, preparation and facilitation of BRIDGE workshops, at least 75% of which are module workshops, required for progression from Workshop Facilitator. However, some facilitators may want to increase their experience as a Workshop Facilitator before they feel ready to progress. If a facilitator feels they qualify to become an Accrediting Facilitator, they need to submit an application to the BRIDGE Office using the relevant application form, outlining their experience and workshops facilitated. They also require a reference from an Accrediting or Expert Facilitator they have worked with who is able to assess whether or not the facilitator meets the criteria to progress. The BRIDGE Office will verify the information provided and submit the facilitator’s name to the BRIDGE partners for approval, and if successful, they will be updated on the BRIDGE database as Accrediting Facilitators. An Accrediting Facilitator then focuses on more of a mentoring and accrediting role as well as customisation and facilitation. This category of facilitator is crucial to capacity development within a BRIDGE program. However, if an Accrediting Facilitator wishes to be involved in broader program responsibilities, such as needs assessment and evaluation tasks; they should consider progression to Expert Facilitator. Becoming an Expert Facilitator As before, not all facilitators will want to become Expert Facilitators or will have the skills to do so. However, there are some facilitators who build up vast experience in BRIDGE facilitation and become involved in implementing BRIDGE at a much deeper level. Their role is critical to BRIDGE as a whole as well as to individual programs. To become an Expert Facilitator, an Accrediting Facilitator must be mentored in other implementation tasks such as needs assessments and scoping missions, and looking at a BRIDGE program more holistically than just the workshop components. In addition to this, they must be experienced, with a minimum of 300 hours engaged customisation, preparation and facilitation of BRIDGE workshops, at least 50% of which are module workshops, required for progression from Workshop Facilitator.  Again, some facilitators may want to increase their experience as an Accrediting Facilitator before they feel ready to progress. Once they feel they have fulfilled the criteria and are confident that they could operate as an Expert Facilitator, they must submit the relevant application form to the BRIDGE Office, including a full outline of their BRIDGE experience, how they meet each criteria, and provide a reference and recommendation for advancement from an Expert Facilitator. The BRIDGE Office in turn will verify their application and submit their name to the BRIDGE partners for approval to progress. On approval, their records are updated and their name included in the Expert Facilitator pool.  Expert Facilitators are often called on by new BRIDGE programs to accredit and […]
August 18, 2009

Train the Facilitator (TtF) workshop

This workshop, which is integral to BRIDGE, uses a ‘train the trainer’ model. The 10-day workshop is designed to give potential BRIDGE facilitators practical skills and knowledge about BRIDGE modules and workshops. The aims and objectives of the TtF workshop are: Aim: To provide experience of BRIDGE materials and methodology to potential BRIDGE facilitators. Objectives: To train selected trainees in existing content and content development and methodology of BRIDGE To provide the trainees with supported experience in conducting BRIDGE facilitation To provide trainees with the opportunity to modify existing and develop new BRIDGE materials To provide a mechanism for assessing the trainees’ capacity to facilitate BRIDGE module workshops and activities to the required standard National TtF workshops are conducted in the country where a sizeable BRIDGE program is planned (where a corps of facilitators would need to be employed). International TtF workshops are conducted on at least an annual basis, in different regions of the world where there is BRIDGE interest or programs underway. The TtF workshop targets experienced trainers, preferably with a background in curriculum development and elections. Trainees should have been a participant in a BRIDGE module workshop before the TtF workshop. In addition to meeting these criteria, trainees will ideally have a solid grounding in the methodologies and approaches of BRIDGE and capacity development. For International TtFs, facilitators should be selected who have demonstrated an ability to work in a cross-cultural environment. A TtF should always be considered as part of a wider BRIDGE plan, and not an ends in itself. Within a TtF workshop the emphasis put on facilitation aspects or electoral aspects will vary with the groups being targeted. For example, if dealing with a group of trainees already used to participative training techniques but new to the field of election management, facilitators will need to focus on the content of the workshop materials. If working with a group of experienced electoral managers who are unfamiliar with BRIDGE – type training methodology, priority will have to be given to explaining and demonstrating BRIDGE training tools. Participants Participant selection is of utmost importance in a TtF, both for the success of the workshop and the sustainability of the wider project. Participants who have the right skills and interests will not only enrich the TtF itself, but of course produce a higher quality result in the overall BRIDGE plan as modules will be facilitated well, received better, and therefore have greater effect. It is important to make clear what a TtF is – a common misconception is that a TtF is like a normal BRIDGE module and will provide the participant with electoral knowledge. The point should be made that a TtF is essentially a Train the Trainer workshop with the aim of teaching facilitation skills, not electoral knowledge. There is an inherent risk in a TtF for it to be seen as a ‘better’ or ‘more important’ workshop than the standard BRIDGE modules, and therefore for people to want to complete it for the wrong reasons. This is not the case, as a TtF is not a higher level workshop than the standard modules, but rather a workshop with a very different objective. Ideal participants for a TtF are rarely those in senior positions, but rather those with a training role in their organisation who are likely to be released when necessary. Selection criteria for TtF participation include: Training background (essential). Does this person have the base skills to become a facilitator? It is also highly desirable that at least some of the person’s training experience include the use of interactive methodology. Strategic availability (essential). Once trained, will this person be available to conduct training, e.g. if they are employed by an electoral or other body, will there be opportunities for their release to facilitate? Is their employer supportive of their role as a BRIDGE facilitator? Understanding of BRIDGE (essential). Has this person been exposed to BRIDGE by attending a BRIDGE module workshop as a participant? Have they had the opportunity to see the BRIDGE methodology first hand and make an informed decision about whether they want to become a BRIDGE facilitator? Elections experience (desirable). While it is often helpful for facilitators to have electoral knowledge and experience, their skills in training and facilitation are more important. Cross-cultural skills (desirable). Particularly important for international TtFs where facilitators are likely to be working outside their region. Ideally the TtF implementer should request applications for attendance in a TtF, asking participants to address the selection criteria above. However, implementers should also be open to nominations and recommendations of participants who may not otherwise have knowledge or interest in participating, but has the right skills, recognised by a third […]
August 18, 2009

Facilitator categories

The facilitator category structure has been developed to provide a supportive framework in which facilitators can practise, improve and broaden their BRIDGE skills. The categories also aim to ensure the quality and consistency of the BRIDGE product, and also to assist those implementing BRIDGE to select facilitators with the right skill sets. All categories of facilitators are important to BRIDGE. In order to move from one facilitator category to another, certain criteria need to be met by the facilitator and this needs to be formally acknowledged by a partner organisation. There is no expectation that a facilitator has to progress from one category to another. This will be based on the personal choice of individual facilitators and their ability to meet the criteria for progression. Some things to keep in mind regarding facilitator categories: Does the facilitator have the right skill set to run this workshop? Should I have a more experienced facilitator to support any less experienced facilitators? Is there an opportunity for mentoring of less experienced facilitators by more experienced facilitators? Is this an opportunity to accredit any facilitators in the organisation or region? Should there be an accrediting or expert facilitator to complete this accreditation? A quick summary of facilitator categories is in Table 3 below. Table 3: Facilitator Categories Semi-accredited facilitator Workshop facilitator Accrediting facilitator Expert facilitator Key focus Commitment to capacity development in elections Facilitation of BRIDGE module workshops An accrediting and educative role A broad leadership role in the development of BRIDGE policy, facilitators and materials Experience Module workshop participant Successful completion of TtF A minimum of 30 hours of supervised module workshop facilitation Supervised preparation and customisation A minimum of 150 hours of module workshop facilitation Assessed by an accrediting or expert facilitator as possessing the following skills: Mentoring Leadership Organisational skills Advocacy A minimum of 300 hours of module workshop facilitation Electoral experience Assessed by an expert facilitator as possessing the following skills: Mentoring Leadership Organisational skills Advocacy Scoping Responsibilities Supervised module workshop facilitation Customise, translate, prepare and facilitate module workshops Customise, translate, prepare and facilitate module workshops Mentor other facilitators Accredit workshop and accrediting facilitators Prepare and facilitate TtF and Implementation Workshops Customise, translate, prepare and facilitate module workshops Mentor other facilitators Accredit all categories or facilitators Prepare and facilitate TtF and Implementation workshops Needs assessments and scoping missions Contributing to BRIDGE policy and curriculum There is also an additional category of Semi-accredited – Inactive facilitators. This is to recognise that in the decade BRIDGE has been around, there are many facilitators who have completed their TtF but are unlikely to complete their accreditation and who may no longer be involved in BRIDGE. Semi-accredited – Inactive facilitators are those who completed their TtF more than three years prior, but who have not gained their full accreditation. This will make it easier for the BRIDGE Office and BRIDGE implementers to identify active facilitators and also recognise that it may be difficult for people who completed their TtF more than three years ago to recall their facilitator training. Semi-accredited – Inactive facilitators who become involved in BRIDGE after being made inactive can contact the BRIDGE Office to be made active. For more information on progression in facilitator categories, see 5.4 Focus On: Progression in Facilitator Accreditation and Categories. […]
August 18, 2009

Facilitators in BRIDGE

Facilitators are key players in BRIDGE – the success of BRIDGE relies on the quality of its facilitators, and the use of the right facilitation teams. Facilitators should be involved at all steps of the BRIDGE program – from providing advice at the beginning, to the customisation process, to running the workshops themselves and contributing to the evaluation process, and ideally, continuing to be involved in a sustainable program. For this reason, it is important that a client organisation has access to a pool of potential facilitators (including regional/international) to contribute to various stages of a BRIDGE program, allowing for availability, diversity and different skills and strengths. For sustainability reasons, a strong pool of local facilitators is essential for any extensive BRIDGE program. It is up to the program team to evaluate how many local facilitators need to be trained, and whether there is potential for this to be done within the client organisation, or whether the program team needs to look more broadly at partnering with regional or international organisations to train facilitators. Facilitators should refer to 6.3 Running a BRIDGE Workshop and the Facilitation Manual for further information on facilitating a workshop. Choosing and employing facilitators and facilitation teams The importance of the BRIDGE facilitator to a BRIDGE program means that attention must be paid to getting the appropriate facilitators for the program as they will be involved in high-level decisions on workshop customisation, selecting the right mix of materials and understanding the profile of participants. In addition to being qualified professionals, facilitators must also be good team players. An informal mechanism operates for selecting accredited facilitators from the regularly updated database of fully and partially accredited facilitators. The responsible BRIDGE partner can decide or advise on the choice of international facilitators. Intuitive judgments need to be made about the right mix of facilitators for any given workshop, and for this reason program teams are advised to contact the BRIDGE Office for advice on this matter. A facilitation team should be a minimum of two facilitators, and several things should be considered when putting the team together. A team approach to facilitation is best, and a workshop should not be run if an appropriate team is not available. The process of selecting a facilitation team should consider the following: Priority should be given to using local facilitators in the context of building capacity and contextualising the program. A facilitation team should have a gender balance, with at least one male and one female on any facilitation team, to model gender awareness and provide balance. Particularly where participants may be of diverse language groups, or perhaps speak a dialect, it is useful to consider using facilitators who can communicate in the languages of the participants, if that is not the primary language being used in the workshop itself. Different facilitators will have different strengths, and different modules will also require different sorts of facilitators. A facilitation team should consist of facilitators who complement each other and who can each contribute a different quality to the facilitation. It is good practice to select facilitators with relevant expertise in the module to be delivered, particularly with the more technical modules such as Electoral Systems and Boundary Delimitation. While a good facilitator will be able to deliver any of the BRIDGE content, having experience in the area of the module provides credibility and clarity. A combination of expertise can also benefit a facilitation team. While local facilitators should be prioritised, it can also be beneficial to include non-local facilitators, or facilitators from different backgrounds, who can bring an alternative perspective to the facilitation team. If possible, issues of conflicting or complementary personalities should be taken into account, as the way a facilitation team works together is of vital importance to the success of the workshop. There are some forms of BRIDGE that can only be run by certain categories of facilitator, such as the TtF or Implementation Workshop. Determining facilitator numbers Different programs will have different facilitator requirements, and program organisers will need to decide early on how many local facilitators they will need to train to support a sustainable program. Questions the program team should ask are: How big is the program? How many staff are to be trained? What length of training would be ideal or preferred? What length of training is proposed (and funded)? Is there a dedicated training department? Other things to consider include: Availability – how much time will potential local facilitators be able to commit to the program? An organisation which could dedicate a few training staff would need fewer than an organisation which trained operational staff as facilitators who would not be able to be released as often to conduct program activities. Stability – are the people being considered as facilitators likely to stay with the organisation, or is there a culture of turnover? In a very stable organisation which can identify key permanent staff who will be committed to a long-term project, there may not be a need for as many facilitators to be trained. Diversity – can people from different parts of the organisation, different backgrounds, different levels be trained as facilitators? Because the make-up of a facilitation team is so vital, having a diverse group of facilitators to select from helps in creating a workshop that will fit varying objectives. Support – are there enough facilitators, so that the responsibility does not fall on just the same people all the time? Facilitation work should be shared and rotated, to allow all facilitators to be involved and to develop their skills, and to also allow them to take a break or have a backup. A larger pool of facilitators is better than relying on a core group who end up taking all the […]
August 18, 2009

Focus on: Training Units

The most sustainable way to use BRIDGE is to incorporate (and adapt) the resources, trained facilitators, and methodology into the training unit of a client organisation. Such a unit may have to be created, or may benefit from being strengthened or restructured. Working with an existing training unit A Training Plan is vital. If such a plan already exists, it may be possible to tie BRIDGE into the existing plan. It may also be necessary to conduct a Training Needs Assessment. If this was already performed prior to the BRIDGE training, it may need to be reviewed, in the light of the training. It may also be necessary to assist in the identification, development or strengthening of a training culture. Identifying a training ‘champion’ – who should be fostered and encouraged – could assist if there is a relatively weak training culture within the client organisation. Transforming an agency with deeply ingrained beliefs, values and behaviour is a daunting proposition. Whatever the training culture, close collaboration with the key personnel responsible for training should occur at this stage. Collaborative relationships with host country agencies, and other stakeholders, are a critical link to the success of training efforts. Where a training unit exists, a program of development or strengthening must be planned in conjunction with the relevant staff. It needs to be acknowledged that training, like many forms of education, can have intangible results (such as psychological, social and spiritual dimensions and effects). This fact needs to be kept in mind when building arguments for the strengthening or reforming of training units. Decision-makers often rely on tangible, easy-to-measure indicators – and base budgets on this sort of data. Training advocates need to be convincing in their arguments of the benefits and importance of training. Creation of a training unit A training department’s establishment from scratch will mean working with an organisational champion in senior management and authority, and liaising with the human resources department regarding the organisational structure. The creation and continued relevance or maintenance of a training unit may be dependent on organisational priorities, stability and change, change in leadership, and larger transformation issues at governmental, political and regional levels. These things may well be out of the control of program planners and reformers. As well, all the above considerations relating to working with existing training units would apply. Continued work with a training unit is a natural part of a sustainability process or plan following a BRIDGE projects, enabling the program organisers to work with the client in working through the recommendations of the evaluation report, further create rapport, trust and the continuance of good […]
August 18, 2009

Communication Planning

Considering effective communication with all stakeholders is absolutely fundamental to a project’s success, the development of a communication plan is often among the first tasks to be dealt with. A BRIDGE program management plan would always include such a plan – which documents all aspects of communicating with stakeholders during the life of the program. Keeping in contact with relevant organisations, both formally and informally, is necessary for any BRIDGE program. The reporting requirements will often be spelt out in a written agreement. Informal exchanges of views are also important to maintain goodwill between organisations. Stakeholders need to be ‘kept in the picture’; they need a copy of the product and should be invited to the opening and closing of the workshop. They should be sent newsletters or progress reports including regular updates on developments, successes, evaluations, feedback, recommendations, and changes to the program. While they may not always require formal written reports, they will still need to be kept informed on a regular basis. Formal meetings are one important aspect of communication and can, if not correctly managed, result in a waste of time, money and energy. Certain meetings play a structural or process role in projects, for example, the inaugural meeting that is required at project launch. Other meetings include design reviews and periodic progress reviews. The project manager should know what meetings are required, when they are required and how they should be conducted. Ultimately, the client organisation, donors and implementers need a record of the process, spelling out outcomes and achievements. They should, therefore, be provided with written reports on an agreed regular basis (weekly, monthly or at particular milestones). Such reports should always be honest and accurate, covering both positive achievements and developments, and any significant challenges. There may be sponsors who are not directly involved in the conduct of the workshops, but who need to be kept informed and given progress reports. This would probably happen automatically, but should be the regular initiative of the organisers of the program or the program manager. Similarly, clients need to be regularly kept abreast of developments, with written reports and updates. Information management and documentation Because programs generate and absorb significant quantities of information, it is important that an effective information management system be in place. The purpose of such a system is to manage the means that allow information to be effectively acquired, stored, processed, accessed, communicated, and archived. There should be a valid audit trail of this communication process. Generally, computer-based technology can significantly impact the effective management of information. Ensuring that a comprehensive, valuable information systems plan is available for the program as a whole should be an important responsibility of the program manager. Information distribution involves making needed information available to program stakeholders in a timely manner. It includes implementing communication management plans as well as responding to unexpected requests for information. BRIDGE Office Apart from formal written progress reports, information management of a general nature is a core role for the organisers of a BRIDGE program. As emphasised throughout this manual, it is strongly recommended that all documentation be forwarded to the BRIDGE Office. It is also recommended that all electronic data relating to the BRIDGE program be periodically backed-up and files emailed (or sent) to the BRIDGE Office. Also refer to 7.2 Transition: Reporting, Documenting and Updating BRIDGE for guidelines as to what documents should be sent. Media liaison Where a media campaign is launched to publicise a specific BRIDGE program, all stakeholders should be consulted to ensure coordination of efforts, which, in turn, would translate into consistency of messages. Any media interviews should preferably be undertaken by local facilitators or participants. Journalists in most countries are trained to write stories in an ‘inverted pyramid’ style, starting with a lead paragraph that conveys the essence and essential facts of the story, which is then developed in detail in subsequent paragraphs. Aside from making it clear to the reader from the outset what the story is about, this also allows the item to be cut from the bottom upwards, without losing its essence. Such a technique should, as a whole, also be used when drafting press […]
August 17, 2009

Project Management Structure and Plan

The conduct of a BRIDGE project will typically require a significant investment of time, money and human resources from a range of stakeholders, including participants, EMBs, facilitators, implementing agencies, as well as donors in some cases. The success of the program will depend on the stakeholders sharing a common understanding of, and commitment to, its scope and nature. Formation of a Steering Committee and Program Team A steering committee or advisory group, consisting of representatives of stakeholders (including, of course, the client organisation), facilitators and the program team, should be set up. Depending on the size of the program, such representatives should reflect the different levels of implementation (regional, national, local). The role of a steering committee is to: Review and endorse project plans Monitor the different phases of the project Take re-directive actions Build consensus when needed Carry out final evaluations Establish an exit strategy that takes into account: delays and rescheduling amendment of plans and formal agreements cancellation of project It would be the responsibility of both the steering committee and the program team to collaborate with one another. The program team are the people developing and implementing the BRIDGE program. This team will already be beginning to take shape once the program is initiated. At this point, an experienced BRIDGE facilitator (or someone very conversant in BRIDGE) should already be involved, preferably as part of the program development team. At this point also, the administrative support to the program team and facilitators needs to be considered. If possible, administrative support staff should be part of the program team from its inception. It is also useful to start identifying facilitators who are appropriate and available for the proposed program. It will also help to decide whether or not a program should involve developing local facilitators. Because BRIDGE is an activity-based curriculum, its successful implementation is highly dependent on the quality and experience of the facilitators who conduct it. More information on consideration of facilitators can be found in 5. BRIDGE Facilitators, and 6.1 Preparing for a BRIDGE Module Workshop. Project Management Plan Once an agreement has been signed and the type of BRIDGE program has been chosen, it is time to develop a detailed project management plan, which will be the main tool for allocating resources, assigning activities, monitoring developments and evaluating achievements. A detailed project management plan should include the following: Project summary, including contextual issues Background Scope, goal, objectives, outputs, and key capacity development performance indicators Project stakeholders: client, donors and implementation agency hierarchy, links and reporting lines steering committee Agreement summary and contractual responsibilities Budget Log frame Work schedules and phases, time frame, activities and tasks Appraisal, monitoring and evaluation strategies Reporting requirements, communication and information management plan for: project stakeholders project partners communication with BRIDGE partners and BRIDGE Office Risk management plan Logistics and procurement plan Security plan (for staff and assets) Public relations (media, fund-raising, and networking) Final evaluation Sustainability & Maintenance plan Sustainability Plan A sustainability plan should: be built into any BRIDGE program from the beginning detail all relevant measures, actions and standards that need to apply at various stages of the implementation process to serve the purpose of sustainability of the BRIDGE impact in the long run be based on past experience, evaluation reports, contextual analysis and projected future development/events articulate a clear vision based on organisational priorities include both long-term and short-term strategies, with the longer term ones based on a 3 to 5 year plan, from one election to the next, using the election calendar as the milestone ‘cycle’ be budgeted in broad terms to secure funds ahead of time have no more than 5 key focus areas for the next period/cycle ensure that skills development is tied to job descriptions (if formalised), though at the same time it must be recognised that business needs most likely override individual […]
August 17, 2009

Financial Planning & Formal Agreements

The completion of any project within its budget is a central objective of project management. Budgeting is the process of estimating as accurately as possible, against a clear baseline, the costs that one may reasonably expect to incur, understanding how and why they do actually occur, and ensuring whatever prompt response is required to keep them within the agreed budget. In order to be successful, cost management needs to be forward-looking. A BRIDGE program, which includes a management component and a series of workshops, will have to be broken down into its constituent elements. Refer to: 8.4 Annex 4: Potential Cost Items of a BRIDGE Program for a comprehensive list Typical budgetary management includes establishing estimates and forecasts; obtaining and recording commitments or accruals; measuring work accomplished and value earned, including treatment of changes (change control) and claims; and checking cash flow. Should there be funding problems, cuts may have to be considered and credits reallocated or alternative financing sought, with the agreement of the donor(s). The issue of payments to facilitators (and participants) can be quite a complex one. It is therefore essential that the terms and conditions of any financial support be clearly defined from the outset. Because payments may often be made in different ways, with rates varying between people, explaining their delivery models and rationale is necessary. The following specific issues would require consideration: appropriate salary scale for facilitators (including a decision on payment at international salary or local salary levels) payment of any allowances on top of salary terms and modalities of payment (currency; method – cash, electronically, other; frequency) body or officials responsible for payments Agreements There should be some form of written agreement, for example, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), Record of Understanding (RoU) or exchange of letters, to finalise the details agreed upon between the main stakeholders – typically, donors, project team and clients. All stakeholders should be involved in its development. Such an agreement should specify clear outcomes and deliverables, and determine the responsibilities of the implementing agency, the donors, any consultants, and the client organisation. The following elements could be included: personnel definitions duration responsibilities scope of services preamble (introduction) suspension or termination fees, payment audit and financial records taxes, duties and charges intellectual property relationship with foreign government delivery models anti-corruption agreement to adhere to BRIDGE rules and policies reporting requirements budget variation/revision log frame confidentiality and public comment provisions for amendments and extensions outcomes […]
August 17, 2009

Focus On: Showcasing BRIDGE

What is a BRIDGE showcase? BRIDGE uses the word ‘showcase’ to refer to the use of a specially customised BRIDGE workshop to demonstrate the BRIDGE methodology to potential clients or stakeholders. That stakeholders understand BRIDGE is vital to the success of any BRIDGE program, as is assists with expectation management, appropriate objective setting and appropriate program design. One of the potential obstacles in establishing a BRIDGE program is misconceptions as to what BRIDGE is and what it can do. Having people actually participate in a BRIDGE workshop is the best way to deal with these misconceptions. Showcase workshops will usually be run at the beginning of a program, to allow for familiarisation and buy-in. There may be reasons to run showcases at later stages in the program as well (such as new stakeholders becoming involved, or new staff) but the showcase is essentially to demonstrate BRIDGE to those who are unfamiliar with it. It is not usually run with the intention of contributing to the objectives of a BRIDGE program (e.g. to provide training in certain areas of the electoral process), but rather to consolidate understanding and support for the program as a whole. Once a program is established, this should be less of an issue. It is important to involve experienced BRIDGE facilitators in the showcase workshop as they will be able to answer questions that might arise, and will also ensure that a quality workshop is delivered. Experienced facilitators will also have the knowledge to choose the right mix of materials and to understand how to deal with the cultural make-up of the participants. It might also be beneficial to involve any less experienced local facilitators, if they exist, to both provide a local perspective in the facilitation team, and also give them experience in their own context (as it is likely that they will be involved in the rollout of any program). Using BRIDGE modules in the showcase A showcase is usually based around the Introduction to Electoral Administration module, which is designed to be a good, broad summary of electoral principles and key areas. It gives a taste of each of the different thematic groups, has a good range of approaches within the BRIDGE methodology, and establishes the appropriate pedagogical and ethical framework for the rest of the program. However, depending on the audience, it is possible that another module is more appropriate, or a mixture of activities from different modules. For example, if a potential client organisation was considering running a program based on a more specialised area, such as boundary delimitation, and the stakeholder audience is experienced in boundary issues, it might be more worthwhile to demonstrate the rigour of the content and run a showcase based on the Boundary Delimitation module. Showcasing for decision makers Those people making the decision as to whether or not to use BRIDGE, or the direction of a BRIDGE program, should be familiar and comfortable with what BRIDGE is. A showcase is the best way to quickly familiarise decision makers, and encourage their buy-in. Showcasing for potential facilitators and implementers Another reason for running a showcase is to familiarise those who will be involved in the delivery of any BRIDGE program – the facilitators and implementers. It is particularly important for both of these groups to have a good understanding of BRIDGE before they either begin training as a facilitator (at a BRIDGE TtF) or organising programs. Key points to consider for showcasing However, some critical points need to be borne in mind. These include: A key consideration in showcasing is to ensure that the strengths of BRIDGE are highlighted, while handling (explicitly or implicitly) the concerns regarding its use that may be in the minds of the audience. Such concerns may be that BRIDGE: threatens hierarchy cuts across operational priorities does not tackle real operational needs relies on a non-traditional, activity-based teaching methodology On the other hand, BRIDGE’s strengths lie in the fact that it is: based on a state-of-the art methodology that is likely to become standard practice an instrument for professional development contributing to the motivation of staff regularly updated by experts modular and adaptable to the audiences a shell, a tool, or a framework to be owned by the implementing and client agencies built upon the principles of modern management – learning, changing, liberating opinions, empowering individuals, respecting diversity (gender, age), and acknowledging merit Those responsible for planning such showcasing, particularly where activities are to be demonstrated, should constantly keep in mind the following requirements to: think carefully about the target audience (taking account of levels of seniority, and perspectives) and tailor arguments to be as effective as possible, bearing in mind that the less they know the audience, the more cautious they should be choose the language accordingly establish credibility, notably by stressing the serious and substantial nature of BRIDGE pick a local circumstance and select a related activity that demonstrates relevance focus on the key essentials, choosing the most complex subject (for example boundary delimitation) and the least dynamic methodology – things that are too generic or simple should not be showcased refrain from starting with an ‘ice-breaker’ activity stress that the point of motivated self-learning is to reach the learning outcome through personal discovery – BRIDGE activities are designed to be memorable and […]
August 17, 2009

Developing a program framework

Once the program objectives are in place and parameters identified, implementers can begin to look at the BRIDGE components and workshop sequencing to determine which are most likely to address the set objectives. The best way to build support is to co-design the intended BRIDGE program with the clients themselves. This approach has proven far more effective than the ‘cold start’ approach where BRIDGE facilitators come into a country to facilitate with little or no face to face consultation with the client organisation. Workshop components and scale The key questions here are: How extensive is this program to be? What will best achieve the objectives? E.g. a BRIDGE showcase, an implementation workshop, an introductory module workshops, a TtF, module workshops. Determining the program components and scale can be difficult unless a very experienced BRIDGE facilitator and/or implementer is providing guidance. The size of a program could be as small or as large as you need it to be (or as funding permits). Initially, the following questions should be answered to try to ascertain the scope/size of the program: How many people in the organisation do you want to have (BRIDGE Project) trained? What length of training should they ideally have? What length of training can realistically be given to the recipients of the trainings? Once determined – then ask: How many facilitators will be needed to deliver the training to the intended audience? (More information on this can be found in 5. BRIDGE Facilitators.) A recommended sequence of events for an extensive BRIDGE program is as follows: Showcase Description: The Showcase is a useful tool for exposing decision-makers to relevant aspects of the resources, materials and method of delivery of BRIDGE. It will help to give them a better and more informed understanding of the benefits they can derive from BRIDGE, and if it is suitable for their needs. It is highly recommended to use the Introduction to Electoral Administration module as the Showcase workshop, as this module showcases the BRIDGE methodology and establishes the appropriate pedagogical and ethical framework for the rest of the program. Alternatively, a customised showcase module using BRIDGE material from any of the 23 modules (as best fits the needs of the audience) could be used. Intended audience: Decision-makers. It is also useful for potential facilitators or implementers to attend. Who can deliver it: Fully accredited facilitators. Attention needs to be focussed on obtaining the ‘right’ type of facilitators, because high-level decisions need to be made on program tailoring, choosing the right mix of materials, and understanding the cultural make-up of participants. Conduct first module workshops Description: One or two workshops to allow a broader range of stakeholders to become familiar with BRIDGE. Intended audience: Client organisation staff, those who may become facilitators or implementers and other stakeholders. Who can deliver it: Fully accredited facilitators. Attention needs to be focussed on obtaining the ‘right’ type of facilitators, because high-level decisions need to be made on program tailoring, choosing the right mix of materials, and understanding the cultural make-up of participants. Begin the process of accrediting local BRIDGE facilitators at a Train the Facilitator workshop Description: Project partners should assess the appropriateness of conducting this workshop as the accreditation of local facilitators constitutes an important contribution to capacity building. The 10-day Train the Facilitator (TtF) workshop is designed to give practical skills and knowledge about BRIDGE modules to potential facilitators of BRIDGE, and to prepare them to deliver the workshops in the program. The successful completion of a TtF workshop is one step towards gaining full accreditation as a BRIDGE facilitator – the second is attending a module workshop as a participant. The final step towards accreditation as a Workshop Facilitator is facilitating a module in the field under supervision, and it would be expected that this stage would be completed within the module phase of the sequence. For more information on TtFs and accreditation, refer to 5. BRIDGE Facilitators. Intended audience: Experienced trainers, preferably with a background in curriculum development. Ideally participants will have a solid grounding in the methodologies and approaches of BRIDGE and capacity development. It is strongly recommended that a prerequisite for the TtF is participation in at least one BRIDGE module. Who can deliver it: Experienced accredited facilitators, with an Accrediting or Expert Facilitator as lead. Conduct Implementation Workshop Description: The objective of the workshop is to help local stakeholders in BRIDGE make best use of this Manual. Where a BRIDGE program is extensive and the intention is for local staff to continue its implementation, this workshop is highly recommended. Intended audience: Implementers, managers and administrators of the BRIDGE program. It is highly recommended that participants in the Implementation Workshop have participated in the BRIDGE Introduction module, or a showcase. If not, it is highly recommended that a one-day showcase be incorporated into the beginning of the Implementation Workshop. Who can deliver it: A minimum of two very experienced BRIDGE facilitators, preferably Expert Facilitators. Ideally, one facilitator should be very experienced in facilitation and the other should have extensive experience in implementing or administrating a BRIDGE program. Conduct bulk of module workshops Description: This is the main bulk of the program. Intended audience: The client organisation and other stakeholders who can benefit from taking part. Ideally they should have some prior or current experience in the electoral field, or be about to take part in election-related activities. They should be motivated individuals, committed to the democratic process, and willing to share information and to assist in the setting up of national training programs. They should also be willing to participate in the evaluation and further design of the program. Who can deliver it: Fully accredited BRIDGE facilitators. Attention should be focused on obtaining the ‘right’ type of facilitator and the right team. It is recommended that at least one facilitator is ‘local’. Other considerations to keep in mind are gender balance, hierarchical balance, geographical balance and balance of electoral and/or training experience. Initial identification of modules that meet program objectives When the components and scope of a program have been identified (e.g. module workshops, Train the Facilitator and Implementation Workshops, and roll-out of more modules), the next step is the identification of the modules that would be most appropriate to meet the program objectives, and the time allocation/schedule of the program. Again, an experienced BRIDGE facilitator is recommended to assist in this process – as detailed familiarity with all the modules is needed at this stage to identify those parts of the modules which will be most appropriate. This is the initial stage of ‘customising’ a BRIDGE program: identifying the relevant objectives, Key Understandings and Learning Outcomes, activities from the 23 modules. An appropriate workshop agenda is then built and resources made accordingly. More information on the customisation process is in 4. Designing and Customising BRIDGE Workshops. Refer to: 8.3 Annex 3: BRIDGE Modules at a Glance for a brief outline of each of the 23 […]
August 17, 2009

Focus on: the Electoral Cycle

Understanding the election cycle and the operational capability of an EMB is critical to creating a strong program. In giving consideration to timing, the program organiser could look at using BRIDGE as a pre-election planning tool, or using post-election evaluation as part of the planning component. Program developers should identify the most appropriate time to conduct module workshops that align with organisational priorities (and that don’t interfere with operational imperatives). Some modules would be most appropriately scheduled just prior to the relevant election cycle event (e.g. the Voter Registration module some time prior to the voter registration phase), others would be appropriate at all or any stages of the process. Immediately after an electoral event there is the likelihood of the withdrawal of donor funds and international technical assistance and attention from some countries. This is often coupled with staff reduction and the loss of expertise. However, this allows for a focus on planning and working with core or permanent staff. In roughly chronological order, this table provides guidelines on recommended minimum timeframe for running different BRIDGE modules. For example, Legal Framework should be run a minimum of 3-6 months before legislative reform, if not earlier. Module Timing Access to Electoral Processes At all stages of the process Gender and Elections At all stages of the process Civic Education At all stages of the process Electoral Assistance 2-3 years before E-Day Legal Framework 3-6 months before legislative reform Electoral Systems 3-6 months before ES reform Boundary Delimitation 3-6 months before BD process Electoral Management Design 3-6 months before EMB reform Electoral Dispute Resolution 1 month before party registration Electoral Technology 1 month before needs assessment or launching a tender Voter Registration 6-12 months before registration Pre-election Activities 12 months before E-day Electoral Security 6-12 months before E-Day Polling, Counting and Results 6 months before E-Day Electoral Training 6 months before E-Day Media and Elections 1 month before registration or at least 3 months before E-Day Electoral Contestants 12-24 months before an E-Day External Voting 12 months before E-Day Electoral Dispute Resolution 1 month before party registration Electoral Observation 1 month before registration This electoral cycle approach is a theoretical model to support planning and encourage long term thinking rather than any kind of reflection of reality. In the ‘real world’ where BRIDGE programs are being implemented, changes to the existing political culture, power structures or legal framework will likely be the rule rather than the exception. For example, new appointments to the EMB can have an impact on relationships with government and stakeholders and on the culture of transparency and on their professional needs. The reduction of institutional memory of electoral processes may affect the speed of implementation of the electoral calendar. Legislative amendments can have a huge impact on the timeline and rules of the game. New census data and new boundary delimitation can create tensions between parties, and a push to register previously unregistered voters may tilt delicate power […]
August 17, 2009

Setting BRIDGE program objectives

The first task of a program implementing team is to determine the overall program aims and objectives, by asking ‘what are you hoping to achieve with this program? Sample BRIDGE program objectives: Increasing organisation staff knowledge on boundary delimitation Increasing gender awareness of an organisation Improving the ability of the organisation to plan strategically Building an electoral culture within an organisation Building of teams within an organisation To give insights into the principles, skills and challenges in the conduct of properly run elections While BRIDGE will have been identified at this point as appropriate, it is important that objectives are identified independently of the BRIDGE curriculum. Types of Objectives Below is a quick summary of the implementation process, focusing on the objectives that should run through the BRIDGE program: Indicators BRIDGE program objectives, should be checked against appropriate indicators to measure capacity development3. Within a given context, the particulars of capacity development should be broken down into a number of performance indicators covering certain core functions appropriate to the program. Examples might include: awareness and knowledge institutional coordination and cooperation between stakeholders information management mobilisation of electoral principles in decision-making technology skill transfer negotiation and leadership skills institutional management and performance (Based on ‘Good Governance – Guiding Principles for Implementation’, issued by the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) in […]
August 17, 2009

Implementing BRIDGE Programs – A Quick Look

A BRIDGE program should always be seen as a long-term capacity development effort, not a short-term quick-fix.  It should involve: identification of needs and broad objectives and careful consideration of whether BRIDGE is an appropriate tool for addressing these formulating and adopting a grass-roots strategy and plan for training, in consultation with the key stakeholders ensuring that the plan is driven by a local agenda, with stakeholders defining their own needs identification of program objectives through consultation and contextualisation thoughtful and appropriate program design consideration of an evaluation framework comprehensive logistic planning well-organised execution of the program well-planned and useful evaluation clear reporting and documentation strategies for sustaining the program and its impacts, such as the creation of an internalised professional development strategy so local trainers can sustain BRIDGE and passing ownership to the client organisation at the completion of the program. This manual explains each of these steps in detail. Sample timeline A timeline of events in the implementation process might look like this: Year 1 January – Needs assessment done by client organisation, broad needs identified relating to better electoral administration.  Broad objectives to address these needs identified.  Evaluation framework structured to measure the impact of the objectives. March – BRIDGE identified as possible tool in wider program to address client organisation needs. April – Scoping mission conducted by BRIDGE expert to evaluate appropriateness of BRIDGE. Showcase conducted. BRIDGE is deemed appropriate. June – Introduction to Electoral Administration module workshop run for key stakeholders and decision-makers in client organisation to familiarise them with BRIDGE. August – Program team in place and beginning to design program, identify objectives and audiences.  Customisation process begins. October – Introduction to Electoral Administration and Strategic and Financial Planning module workshops (or other relevant to program objectives) run for a wider audience within the client organisation, including potential local facilitators. December – Potential local facilitators identified and partially accredited at a Train the Facilitator workshop. Implementation Workshop held. Year 2 January – March – First set of customised module workshops addressing program objectives rolled out to client organisation staff and selected external stakeholders, facilitated by an Accrediting Facilitator and local facilitators who have just completed the TtF. April – May – Evaluation and reporting of module workshops just completed.  Adjustments made to program design if necessary. June-August – Second set of customised module workshops rolled out with as much or as little support from external, more experienced BRIDGE facilitators as needed.  Local facilitators may feel ready to run these modules independently by this stage, or may ask for minimal assistance from an external, more experienced BRIDGE facilitator. September – Further evaluation and reporting, including another stage of evaluation of the first set of workshops. October onwards – Local facilitators and program team develop their professional development plan. Example of East Timor In East Timor a year-long electoral capacity building program was developed in collaboration with the EMB, other key actors in the broader electoral field including UNDP; the Australian donor organisation – AusAID – and the delivery organisation – the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC). The program was devised to take into account the electoral cycle; the needs of the staff of the East Timorese EMB; the timing and effect of other electoral programs; the availability of staff; and the legislative and political climate in a post-conflict country. Several BRIDGE workshops were delivered to the same group of staff – a mixture of operational and head office staff – over the course of a year. A work placement program had also been planned for two members of the East Timor EMB staff to visit the Northern Territory in Australia on three occasions over a period of several months to shadow preparations and delivery of a local government election. Dates, legislative change, availability of staff, etc in both countries and an offer of shared funding from UNDP led to a reworking of the program over the period of a couple of weeks to take up the obvious benefits to all being offered by the previously unforseen opportunity. East Timor was planning municipal elections for the first time and the Northern Territory was about to hold municipal and shire elections, also for the first time. The obvious parallels of experience highlighted multiple opportunities too good to miss. Funds previously identified for a further BRIDGE workshop and the work placement program previously described, were joined with travel funding provided by UNDP. The subsequent hastily reworked program resulted in sixteen East Timorese EMB staff visiting Darwin for a couple of weeks. Two EMB representatives were also able to accompany an AEC mobile polling team to remote communities and islands to conduct early voting. Many similar challenges were being faced by the two EMBs. The program incorporated a week of election operational training and observation followed by a four day Voter Information BRIDGE workshop. The flexibility on all parts and commitment to meet changing needs rather than continue with an existing program, resulted in an extremely valuable experience and development opportunity for a much larger group of East Timorese EMB staff and a further relationship building opportunity, with implications for further opportunities in the future, with an EMB in another country facing some of the same […]
August 17, 2009

BRIDGE as a Professional Development Tool

An election is the largest and most complex logistical operation that a country ever undertakes in peacetime. This is often not well understood, and indeed, the better an election is run, the simpler it looks. Committed, ethical, professional and confident people are the key to increasing the prospects of running a good election, in both emerging and more established democracies. Electoral assistance providers recognise that the building of a strong and stable electoral culture in-country is more important than providing ad hoc electoral assistance from outside. Two of the largest, UNDP and European Commission, have specifically recommended incorporating an electoral cycle approach and focussing on capacity development in their electoral assistance programming (see Electoral Assistance Manuals from the respective organisations). UNDP defines capacity development as the process through which individuals, organisations and societies obtain, strengthen and maintain the capabilities to set and achieve their own development objectives over time. Ideally, BRIDGE should be one component of an integrated package of broader electoral assistance or of a wider and longer-term capacity development strategy that incorporates other interventions such as technical assistance, operational training, and mentoring. BRIDGE is not a ‘fix-all’, a ‘stop gap’, and a ‘stand-alone’ product that can meet all needs. BRIDGE can neither deliver a total electoral assistance package nor take complete responsibility for capacity development. Designing and implementing BRIDGE programs as multi-partner initiatives goes a long way to maximising BRIDGE’s institutional development potential. BRIDGE partner organisations are well placed for such cooperation. BRIDGE as a professional development tool primarily affects participants at the individual level. The BRIDGE activity based workshops use an activity based approach that maximises retention of knowledge and skills learned in a workshop. In addition, the workshops are designed to promote or reinforce professional confidence, ethics, understanding of principles of best electoral practice, and access to networks of peers. BRIDGE has the potential to trigger change on the organisational level: broader understanding of the organisation, morale, and cohesion within the organisation. Workshops encourage participants to reflect on their organisation, providing comparative examples and alternative approaches, generating blueprints or support for organisational reform. BRIDGE has the potential to impact change also on the environmental level. As a dialogue tool, the content, methodology, and non-threatening environment can contribute to a shared understanding of the challenges ahead and improved relationships between disparate stakeholders. By practicing skills such as analysis of alternative approaches, advocacy, and legislation drafting participants are well placed to affect change on a broader level. BRIDGE programs have resulted in networks of professionals within institutions, regionally and internationally that have provided peer support and served as triggers for reform long after the end of the formal […]
August 17, 2009

Focus On: Rules of BRIDGE

BRIDGE is a Partnership. This Partnership gives strength to BRIDGE, but at the same time it brings with it some obligations for the implementers and facilitators of BRIDGE. The rules and guidelines of BRIDGE are designed to ensure its integrity as well as continuing to maintain the synergy between the BRIDGE Partners and other BRIDGE implementers. All BRIDGE activities must be approved by the BRIDGE Partners. Approval is obtained through the BRIDGE Office. Therefore BRIDGE implementers must advise the BRIDGE Office as soon as they can legitimately do so, of forthcoming BRIDGE activities. BRIDGE workshops must be conducted by accredited facilitators. The BRIDGE facilitation process has been designed to ensure that facilitators have an adequate understanding of the BRIDGE content and methodologies. This is to ensure quality of outcomes and consistency of approach in the delivery of BRIDGE training. BRIDGE must acknowledge the BRIDGE Partners. Part of the strength and credibility of BRIDGE comes from the Partnership, therefore it is important to give due recognition. Copyright of the BRIDGE materials must be respected. In this context, it must be emphasised that the translation of materials does not change the underlying intellectual property. Any translations of BRIDGE materials must be approved by the BRIDGE Office. Approval is obtained through the BRIDGE Office. Therefore BRIDGE translators must advise the BRIDGE Office before commencing translation work. BRIDGE facilitators and implementers must provide additional activities and resources, translations, evaluations and program reports to the BRIDGE website, via the BRIDGE Office. This ensures that lessons are learnt, and that the curriculum is improved on an ongoing basis. Please note that workshops, programs and translations which are funded or implemented by a BRIDGE Partner or EMB are automatically approved. Implementers and translators from the BRIDGE Partners or EMBs must still inform the BRIDGE Office, but approval will be assumed in these cases. When is it BRIDGE? A training workshop is BRIDGE when all of the following apply: Workshops have the knowledge and approval of the BRIDGE Partners Workshops are conducted by accredited BRIDGE facilitators BRIDGE methodology and activities (including its focus on a capacity-development approach) are used The integrity of the curriculum methodology is maintained including Key Understandings and Learning Outcomes of modules/activities are addressed and met, and the adult learning methodology is applied Programs are conducted in compliance with the rules above When is it not BRIDGE? If the rules of BRIDGE are not followed If the BRIDGE curriculum is used by non-accredited facilitators. It may be used by non-accredited facilitators, but they cannot call it BRIDGE If the integrity of the curriculum methodology is not […]
August 17, 2009

The BRIDGE Partnership and Structure

The BRIDGE partners are all committed to the following values: The spirit of collaboration and cooperation, and establishing a true partnership. Regular and honest communication between all Partners, and between the BRIDGE Office and all Partners. Maintaining a strong relationship between Partners, including teamwork and collaborative communication in the field. A commitment to supporting BRIDGE in a way that is most appropriate to each Partner, which may include staff time, financial resources or providing expertise. Sharing of resources, expertise, staff, information. Modelling of good BRIDGE implementation practices where Partners are implementing BRIDGE themselves Mainstreaming of BRIDGE workshops and methodology within Partner organisations Governance of BRIDGE As outlined in the previous section, BRIDGE is administered from the BRIDGE Office, which is based in AEC National Office, Australia and funded and hosted by the AEC. BRIDGE Communication and Decision Making The BRIDGE Office is the designated hub for information from Partners, and undertakes to keep Partners fully informed of BRIDGE activities at all levels. Communication takes the form of regular Partner newsletters, the BRIDGE website and regular email correspondence between the BRIDGE Office and the designated focal points at each Partner organisation. A Partner Committee Meeting, which brings together the BRIDGE Office and the focal points of each Partner organisation, takes place annually. This meeting provides an opportunity for Partners to discuss the challenges, directions and strategies of BRIDGE. It is also used as a forum to make high-level decisions that cannot be made at the BRIDGE Office level alone. Where possible, the Partner Committee Meeting also invites key BRIDGE practitioners to attend, and can be used as an opportunity for practitioners to network and provide feedback to the […]
August 17, 2009

Explaining BRIDGE

1.1 Explaining BRIDGE BRIDGE stands for Building Resources in Democracy, Governance and Elections, a modular professional development program with a particular focus on electoral processes. BRIDGE represents a unique initiative where five leading organisations in the democracy and governance field have jointly committed to developing, implementing and maintaining the most comprehensive curriculum and workshop package available, designed to be used as a tool within a broader, capacity development framework. The BRIDGE partners are: Australian Electoral Commission – founding and hosting partner International Institute of Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) &- founding partner United Nations Election Assistance Division (UNEAD) – founding partner International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) The BRIDGE Partner commitment reflects a wider common purpose, namely to enhance the sustainability and credibility of electoral processes through the encouragement of capable and professional democracy practitioners. Inherent in this are a set of key underpinning values. The BRIDGE partners value and seek to model the following: local ownership and empowerment sustainability cooperation participation inclusiveness transparency commitment to ethical behaviour flexibility non-prescriptive approaches rigorous and comprehensive content commitment to democracy The objectives of BRIDGE as it is currently structured are: to enhance the skills and confidence of stakeholders in the electoral process to increase the awareness of tools and resources available/necessary to build and maintain a sustainable electoral culture to develop a support network for stakeholders in electoral processes and encourage a culture of sharing information and experiences to promote internationally accepted principles of democracy and good electoral practice. The BRIDGE Curriculum The BRIDGE curriculum is comprehensive, representing the most ambitious attempt to cover the spectrum of electoral processes and their effective administration ever undertaken. Written by a large international team of experienced democracy professionals associated with the partner organisations, the BRIDGE curriculum includes major sections on stakeholders in the electoral process, coverage of cross cutting issues (such as gender, integrity and access), and in-depth exploration of complex issues relating to institutional culture, credibility and ethics. The BRIDGE curriculum concentrates on the principles underlying all properly run elections, while drawing examples of different practical approaches from many different countries.  It does not seek to prescribe any one model for implementing those principles, but rather encourages participants to learn from the diverse examples presented. In some of the modules the aim is to develop skills in areas that are important in an electoral administrator’s day-to-day work, with an emphasis on understanding the relationships between tasks in order to meet tight deadlines effectively. In other modules exploring structural, ethical or social issues is the main focus. Each module includes examples of activities, literature, case studies, election materials, websites, and audio-visual aids as workshop resources. It provides access to and draws from resources such as the IDEA handbooks, EC/UNDP manuals and the ACE Website. It also offers access to networks including regional and global electoral networks and the ACE Electoral Knowledge Network. The current version of BRIDGE is Version 2, launched in March 2008, consists of the following modules: The BRIDGE curriculum’s 24 modules (Political Financing was added in 2009) include two foundation modules. These are Introduction to Electoral Administration and Strategic and Financial Planning, which respectively emphasise the ethical and planning dimensions that underpin a professional approach to electoral administration. The other 21 modules are divided into three thematic groups. Electoral Architecture contains the modules that provide the structure on which any electoral process rests, such as Electoral Systems, Electoral Management Design, and Legal Framework. These modules have a strong academic underpinning, and are best run with ‘experts’ in the respective subjects as part of a facilitation team. They are appropriate in particular to designers and policy makers in an electoral reform or institutional planning phase. However, they also offer an excellent opportunity for the professional development of electoral administrators and other stakeholders in the process. Electoral Stakeholders focuses on groups such as political parties, observer groups, advocacy groups, the media, voters and the international community and the important role each plays in a robust and credible electoral environment. Modules such as Access to Electoral Processes, Electoral Contestants or Civic Education are designed to serve a dual function; both empowering key stakeholders to understand, engage in and improve electoral processes, and promoting understanding among EMBs of stakeholder needs. They also aim to provide the tools and skills to meet those needs. In addition, a workshop with a mixed stakeholder/electoral administrator composition of participants can be designed to serve as a forum for constructive dialogue between the different groups. Unique networking opportunities are also created when stakeholders from different regions are invited to a workshop (for example, women’s advocacy groups from different countries attending a Gender and Elections workshop). The Electoral Operations thematic group illustrates a cyclical, rather than ‘event driven’, approach to the running of elections, reflected in modules ranging from Voter Registration and Pre-Election Activities, through Electoral Security, Polling, Counting and Results, to Post-Election Activities. These modules are particularly effective as professional development tools for mid-management electoral administrators at the national and sub-national levels. However, they may also be conducted for other stakeholder groups to foster a better understanding of electoral operations. Refer to: 8.2 Annex 2: Version 1 Curriculum Framework to see the framework for Version 1 of BRIDGE. Refer to: Annex 3: BRIDGE Modules at a Glance for more detailed summaries of the 24 modules. BRIDGE Methodology The BRIDGE methodology combines participatory adult education techniques with a distinctive values based approach. Rather than relying heavily on traditional lecturing, BRIDGE is focused on practical issues and is activity-based, with each module offering a range of activities designed to convey clearly identified Key Understandings, and to achieve specified Learning Outcomes. It reflects the insight that people learn best when they take responsibility for their own learning, and are faced with material that is relevant to them and presented in a memorable and innovative way. The BRIDGE methodology is based on the following principles. BRIDGE: acknowledges the importance of building local electoral administrative capacity in participant countries acknowledges and values diversity of experiences and operational environments encourages dialogue, sharing of knowledge and participation to identify excellence in electoral administration is supportive, rather than prescriptive, in building individual participants’ skills and expertise encourages participants to be responsible for their own learning encourages local ownership of the curriculum so that client groups eventually gain the ability to conduct BRIDGE for themselves The BRIDGE package is flexible and adaptable. Currently, BRIDGE programs are developed to match specific needs and requests internal or external to the partner organisations. This means that BRIDGE programs when run are extremely diverse, depending on the client, circumstances, timing in the electoral cycle, funding, participant needs, as well as regional and cultural contexts (see examples at www.bridge-project.org). BRIDGE workshops are run at the national level, for participants from across a region, or for international participants. Workshops using BRIDGE curriculum materials have been conducted materials have been conducted in countries as diverse as Afghanistan, Armenia, Australia, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, East Timor, Egypt, Fiji, Ghana, Guam, Indonesia, Jordan, Liberia, Mozambique, Nepal, the Palestine Territories, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, the Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sweden, USA, Vanuatu, And Yemen (for a comprehensive list see the BRIDGE website). In addition to the BRIDGE Partner organisations, implementing partners have include the Independent Electoral Commission of South Africa, the Electoral Institute of Southern Africa, the University of South Pacific, as well as the electoral authorities in a wide range of countries. Nationals of over 60 countries have taken part in BRIDGE workshops. A classic BRIDGE workshop is based on one or more of the BRIDGE modules: often shortening or extending modules, combining various modules or including new materials and activities using BRIDGE methodology. Another model is to run BRIDGE in combination with operational or other sorts of training, by mixing BRIDGE methodology and modules, operational training and/or elements of other workshops or programs in a way that matches the operational imperative of the client organisation. Conferences where there are representatives from a number of different EMBs (or organisations involved in elections) are excellent places where BRIDGE methodology can be showcased. The more lecture and presentation oriented methods can be combined with activity based sessions to share large amounts of information in a participative manner. BRIDGE can be used as a problem-solving mechanism or dialogue tool to bring disparate parts of an organisation, staff from different organisations, or different stakeholders together so they better understand their roles in the election process. The key is to create an atmosphere of trust and openness. BRIDGE can be conducted by a BRIDGE partner organisation or other organisations or even individuals as long as they comply with the rules of BRIDGE (see 1.3 Focus On: Rules of BRIDGE). For best impact, BRIDGE should be systematically conducted in conjunction with any existing electoral assistance or professional development programs as part of an integrated package. A carefully constructed customisation process is the key to a successful program. The first and most important requirement is a committed and competent team of BRIDGE facilitators, equipped with the time, resources, and appropriate information about the participants’ needs and expectations. BRIDGE Program & Components A BRIDGE program is a customised series of workshops that help to achieve a specific set of program objectives. There are three main types of workshops included in most extensive BRIDGE programs: MODULE WORKSHOPS Description: customised workshop based on one or more of the 23 modules which cover all aspects of the electoral process, tailored to the needs of the participants. Duration: 1-5 days Number of participants: 20-25 people Typical participants: Dependent on module, but EMB staff of all levels, other electoral stakeholders (such as contestants, media, donors). Training  Components IMPLEMENTATION WORKSHOP Description: Workshop designed for implementers of BRIDGE modules and TtF workshops. Duration: 2 – 3 days Number of participants: 20 people Typical participants: Project managers, administrative support to the training unit of an EMB, Donor Agencies and Implementing Partners. TRAIN THE FACILITATOR WORKSHOP Description: Workshop to train facilitators in BRIDGE methodology, facilitation techniques, and customisation.  Duration: 10 days Number of participants: maximum 20 Typical participants: Training unit of an EMB, key EMB staff with training skills, provincial EMB staff with training skills, teacher trainers, civil service, international and national electoral assistance providers, electoral training consultants, personnel from the BRIDGE partner organisations.   Refer to: 8.1 Annex 1: BRIDGE Training Components for more detailed descriptions. Further information can also be found in 5. BRIDGE Facilitators and 6.1 Preparing for a BRIDGE Module Workshop […]
August 4, 2009

Overview of Modules

BRIDGE Version 2 comprises of three thematic groups: Electoral Architecture, Working with Electoral Stakeholders and Electoral Operations, and within these thematic groups there are 24 modules, including two Foundation modules. The Foundation modules cover the standards and principles that underpin elections and the knowledge, skills and attitudes needed for effective administration. Foundation Modules Introduction to Electoral Administration Strategic and Financial Planning   Thematic Groups for all other modules Electoral Architecture  Working with Electoral Stakeholders Electoral Operations Legal Framework Access to Electoral Processes Voter Registration Boundary Delimitation Gender and Elections Pre-election Activities Electoral Systems Electoral Contestants Electoral Training Electoral Management Design Electoral Observation Polling, Counting and Results Electoral Technology Media and Elections Post-election Activities Political Financing Electoral Assistance External Voting   Electoral Dispute Resolution Electoral Security   Voter Information     Civic Education           Note: words in bold are the short title of each module […]

Registration

Forgotten Password?