TWP Community of Practice meeting, Washington DC, 29 February 2016

Agenda: Thinking and Working Politically Community of Practice . Feb 29, 2016

Hosted by: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036


Time Title Description
9:00-9:10 Welcome and quick round the table introductions
9:10-10:40 Agency / organisation updates Report from USAID on their Feb 3 PEA workshop.

DFAT’s recent experience of TWP in large mainstream programs

Then a quick round-table with members of the CoP highlighting initiatives, breakthroughs, setbacks, innovations or general points of interest to other CoPpers

10:40-11:00 Pacific Research Informal mediation in Urban PNG: an institutional approach to TWP

Three dimensions of institutional capability are considered, i) efficiency (accessibility, affordability, timeliness and sustainability), ii) power and authority, and iii) outcomes and legitimacy

11:00-11:30 Tea, coffee
11:30-1:00 WDR 2017 Law and Governance How is the WDR planning to frame governance, PEA and the TWP / DDD / PDIA ‘movement’?
1:00-2:00 Lunch
2:00-3.00 Plan for Sailboats, not Trains: Designing and Evaluating Adaptive, Power-Savvy Interventions Adaptive Programming

How to open space in the programming process for its staff to design and manage programs in more adaptive and flexible ways.

3:00-3:45 TWP and FC&V (1) How TWP/DDD is being applied across large statebuilding or service delivery programs in fragile and conflict-affected states – and where are the critical gaps in current practice and policy

(2) Need to draw fragility-conflict policy people into TWP discussions, particularly at the policy level

(3) Challenges with PSG1 (legitimate politics) implementation, and the dilemmas of pursuing overtly political goals

3:45 – 4:30 AoB



Jairo Acuna-Alfaro, UNDP New York

Saku Akmeemana, World Bank

Patrick Barron, ODI

 Taylor Brown, Palladium

Thomas Carothers, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Sam Chittick, World Bank

Bill Cole, The Asia Foundation

 Larry Garber, USAID / NDU

Aditi Hate, UNDP New York

 Alan Hudson, Global Integrity

Debbie Isser, World Bank

Rachel Kleinfeld, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

 Bryony Lau, The Asia Foundation

Neil Levine, USAID

Heather Marquette, University of Birmingham / Developmental Leadership Program

 Alina Rocha-Menocal, University of Birmingham / Developmental Leadership Program

 Tom Parks, DFAT Bangkok

Doug Porter, World Bank

 Mark Robinson, World Resources Institute

 Steve Rood, The Asia Foundation

 Mark Segal, DFID

 Matt Stephens, World Bank

Graham Teskey, Abt JTA Australia

George Varughese, The Asia Foundation

Leni Wild, ODI

 Lisa Williams, USAID

Michael Wilson, DFAT Canberra




OECD TWP Workshop, Paris, December 2015

Summary (to be added)


Tuesday, 8th December 2015

The main purpose of this workshop will be:

  • To introduce the concept and the rationale for thinking and working more politically within development
  • To explore what it means in practice, highlighting the benefits and challenges of the approach
  • To identify future research and evidence needs for taking this approach forward
10.30 – 10.45 1. Opening and Welcome

  • Brenda Killen, Deputy Director, Development Cooperation Directorate, OECD
  • David Yang (USAID) & Kirsten Bishop (DFAT, Australia), Co-Chairs of the Governance Network
10.45 – 12.00 2. Why Politics Matters! Doing Development Differently

A growing body of evidence tells us that development programmes focused exclusively on providing financial and technical solutions to problems often fail to deliver development results because the programme did not take sufficient account of political dynamics. This session will make the case for why it is important for practitioners to take better account of political factors in partner countries be they fragile or non-fragile. It will also outline what this means in practice: undertaking political economic analysis; initiating more flexible, problem-driven and adaptive programming that responds to changing political-economic contexts, and conducting programming that explicitly challenges existing power relationships in the political and economic spheres.


  • Graham Teskey, Principal Technical Lead – Governance, Abt JTA


  • David Booth, Senior Research Fellow, Overseas Development Institute (ODI)
  • Heather Marquette, Director of the Development Leadership Programme, University of Birmingham
12.30 -14.00   Lunch and networking
14.00 – 15.30 3. Looking at the Evidence: Understanding the Benefits and Challenges of Thinking and Working Politically

This session will hear from a range of experts and practitioners on their experiences of putting ‘Thinking and Working Politically’ into action. It will seek to explore what benefits this approach has delivered in terms of programming impact and effectiveness across different sectors and across different types of countries and what challenges practitioners faced when adopting this approach.

Moderator: Kirsten Bishop (DFAT, Australia)


  • Laure-Helene Piron (DFID) on the emerging findings of DFID’s on-going review on political economy analysis
  • Verena Fritz, Senior Public Sector Governance Specialist, World Bank
  • Debra Ladner, Director, Program Strategy, Innovation and Learning, The Asia Foundation
15.30 – 15.45 4. Coffee Break
15.45 –


5. Doing and using everyday Political Analysis

At present most development administrations undertake country-level political analysis on an annual basis, outlining the major political trends in their partner countries. In addition, when projects start to fail or get into difficulties programme managers tend to carry out some sort of problem-driven political analysis. However, currently there is no tool for undertaking quick and easy political analysis on a more regular basis in order to get real-time information. This session unpacks what an everyday political analysis toolkit would look like, how it incorporates economic analysis, and how it can be used in practice.


  • Sam Waldock, DFID governance advisor (TBC)
  • David Hudson, Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science, UCL and Deputy Director of the Developmental Leadership Programme, University of Birmingham
16.15 – 17.10 6. Putting Political Analysis into Practice

Participants will breakout into discussion groups and undertake an exercise in which they will seek to apply the ‘every day political analysis tool kit’ to a programme case study. The session will seek to identify what kind of question advisors need to start asking? Who do you need to be talking to? And, what changes are required to donors’ internal administrations to enable this approach to programming? How do we stop this becoming too clinical and keep it practical for programme management and action?

The session will finish with reflections donors’ experience of putting political analysis into practice.


  • Per Nordlund, Lead Policy Specialist, Democracy and Human Right, SIDA
  • Meghan Watkinson, Deputy Director, FATD, Canada (TBC)
17.10 – 18.00 7. Moving Forward: Research and Evidence Needs

Can we prove   that it works, and how do we convince others that TWP can make a difference?   What evidence do we need and how should we get it?

Moderator:Graham Teskey, Principal Technical Lead – Governance, Abt JTA


  • Heather Marquette – Development Leadership Programme’s research plans
  • David Booth – Overseas Development Institute’s research plans
  • Pablo Yanguas – Effective States and Inclusive Development (ESID) research centres plans (TBC by skype) 

Documentation and presentations

Working Politically in Practice: The Asia Foundation’s Experience – Debra Ladner

Thinking and Working Politically: A story of seven propositions – David Booth

World Bank Experience with Political Economy Analysis – Verena Fritz

TWP Community of Practice, Bangkok, June 2015


Summary of meeting Bangkok June 2015


Day 1: Monday 15th June
8:00 – 8:30 Pre workshop coffee/tea
8:30 – 9:10 Welcome and introduction: Graham Teskey, DFAT

9:10 – 9:40



9:40 – 10:00



10:00 – 10:20

Agenda item 1: Setting the scene Chair: Sandra Kraushaar, DFAT

(a) What is TWP? Tom Parks, DFAT

Politically-smart, iterative programming in practice: revisiting and reflecting on the core principles of the TWP agenda – strong political analysis, insight and understanding; detailed appreciation of and response to the local context; and flexibility and adaptability in program design and implementation.

(b) Why are we bringing gender into the TWP agenda? Sally Moyle, DFAT

A brief exploration of gender and power, experience and practice from the women’s movement, and how this might inform and enhance TWP concepts and approaches.

Open discussion/Q&A

Session outcome: Shared understanding of the meeting objectives (i.e. exploring the practicalities of working within donor development programs, testing assumptions about how to do this, and extending the knowledge base of what is currently working in different geographical regions), as well as key TWP and gender concepts and issues, as a basis for discussions over the two days.

10:20 – 10.35 Tea / Coffee
10:35 – 11:30 Agenda item 2: Is TWP really gender blind? Chair: Heather Marquette, DLP

We will investigate TWP approaches, with and without gender analysis, opening discussion on the merits and pitfalls of not including gender in political and economic power analytics. We will consider how TWP approaches might help gender focused programs and reform efforts have more impact. What are the entry points? And why is this so hard?

Reflections: Nadine Ragonjan, TAF and Saku Akmeemana, World Bank (7 minutes each)

Session outcome: Consideration of whether TWP actually is gender blind and, if so, why, and what can we do about it.

11:30 – 12:30 Agenda item 3: What does a gendered TWP approach look like in action? Chair: Sarah Goulding, DFAT

In this session, we will consider how programming might look different with a gendered TWP approach, with consideration of both gender focused programs/activities and programs where gender is mainstreamed.

Case studies on what a gendered TWP approach looks like in reality (7 minutes for each)

1)     Peni Tawake, Pacific Leadership Program/ Michael O’Keefe, La Trobe University

2)     Tam O’Neil, ODI

3)     Gillian Fletcher, DLP

4)     Nicola Nixon/ Vanya Abuthan/ Andini Mulyawati, DFAT Jakarta Post

Session outcome: Common principles applicable to TWP and gender-sensitive approaches identified.

12:30 – 13:30 Lunch
13:30 – 14:30 Agenda item 3 contd.
14:30 – 14:40 Tea / Coffee (short break!)
14:40 – 16:30 Agenda item 4: Mapping gender dynamics across the TWP narrative and aid programming cycle
Chair: Chris Roche, DLPIn this session we will investigate the practical implications of ‘genderising’ TWP, including what revisions may be necessary to the TWP narrative to include gender power analysis, and how a gendered TWP approach might be applied across the aid programming cycle.(Break out groups, 10-12 per group, mixing TWP COP and DFAT programmers)Session outcome: TWP narrative revisited and practical options for donor policy and programs identified.
16:30 – 17:00 Rounding off the day: where have we got to and next steps Chair: Alan Whaites, OECD

1)     Policy leadership – OECD GovNET/GenderNET/INCAF: Sally Moyle, DFAT (10 minutes)

2)     Programming for TWP and Gender Equality: Aislin Baker, DFID (10 minutes)

Day2: Tuesday 16th June
8:00 – 8:30 Pre workshop coffee/tea
08:30 – 9:00 Recap on day 1: David Hudson, DLP
9:00 – 9:30 Setting the scene: Graham Teskey, DFAT

COP Discussion to date has been focused on smaller more agile programs that are able to adapt and reflect current realities.   However, large, complex, logframe and outputs-oriented programs constitute the majority of donor programming for various reasons (efficiencies, risk and financial management, etc.). How can we use TWP principles and lessons in these programs?

9:30 – 11:00 Agenda item 5: Can large, traditional aid programs be politically smart and adaptive?

Chair: Kirsten Bishop, DFAT

1)     Presentation and case study examples on how some DFAT rural development programs have become more adaptive and politically smart: Tom Parks/ Mark Taylor DFAT (15 minutes)

2)     Other donor experiences: Saku Akmeemana, World Bank (10 minutes)

3)     Challenge from a non-donor perspective on the major obstacles to TWP in large programs:
Gerry Fox, Pyoe Pin and Jaime Faustino, TAF (10 minutes)

4)     Open discussion.

Session outcome: Major obstacles for large programs to be more politically smart and adaptive identified; consideration of some useful examples of large programs that have managed this efficiently.

11:00 – 11:20 Tea / Coffee
11:20 – 13:00 Agenda item 6: How can we move large programs in the evolutionary direction?

Chair: Richard Butterworth, DFID

In this session we will explore the following key questions: What are the major structural/policy impediments to greater adoption of flexible, politically smart programming in large aid programs? What would progress look like? What can be done within donors to make progress in this area? How can implementing partners and researchers encourage greater use of TWP in large programs?

Session outcome: Strategies and key reforms needed for donors to expand the space for large programs to use TWP approaches identified; ideas developed for the CoP to collectively encourage more TWP approaches in large programs; consideration of what ‘results’ at a country level might look like.

13:00 – 14:00 Lunch
14:00 – 16:00 Agenda item 7: How to apply TWP across a country-level development portfolio

Chair: Heather Marquette, DLP

In this session we will compare typical, conventional approaches to development with a TWP approach to a country portfolio. TWP approaches are more likely to be effective in smaller, more flexible programs that can adapt quickly.   The morning sessions focused on the challenges of working with large donor programs using TWP approaches.   This session looks at how to apply TWP approaches across a country portfolio, attempting to answer some questions about what would this look like, what would you spend your money on, how would you measure results?

Case studies (10 minutes each)

1)     DFAT’s approach in Indonesia: Nicola Nixon, DFAT Jakarta

2)     DFAT’s Philippines portfolio and Coalitions for Change: Geoff King and Paul Hutchcroft, DFAT Manila

3)     Open discussion

Session outcome: Challenges and strategies to apply TWP to country portfolios identified.

  Tea / Coffee
16:00 – 17:00 TWP – key gaps/the big challenges…

Chair: Graham Teskey, DFAT

·       Results and evidence

·       Donor internal incentives

·       Embracing and managing risk

Documentation from the event.

Graham Teskey’s Day one intro

Graham Teskey’s Day two intro

Graham Teskey’s closing remarks

Rakhine Fisheries Partnership Short Documentary Film

David Hudson’s DLP presentation


Photos from top left. (1) L to R. Saku Akmeemana, Lisa Denney, Nadine Ragonjan. (2) Jaime Faustino, Charlotte Blundell, Dilhara Goonewardena. (3) Graham Teskey. (4+5) Michael O’Keefe, Peni Tawake, Sarah Goulding, Nicola Nixon, Gillian Fletcher, Tam O’Neil. (6) Jennifer Kalpokas. (7) Graham Teskey, David Hudson. (8) Suda Perera, Alan Whaites, Clyde Hamilton. (9) Clyde Hamilton, Heather Lyne de Ver, Declan Magee. (10) Sally Moyle, Alan Whaites, Aislin Baker.

Photography by Siân Herbert


TWP Community of Practice, London, September 2014

Summary of meeting London Sept 2014



Monday 15th September
8:30 – 9:00 Pre workshop coffee/tea
9:00 – 9.30 Welcome and introduction. Graham Teskey, DFAT

Introduction of participants

Summary of November Delhi and January London meetings; TWP vs traditional approaches

Rules of the game: no repetition, hesitation or deviation

Agenda and Objectives for this workshop

1.     What do we all want from the TWP agenda?

In short – a summary of where each agency is and where they aspire to going

2.     Defining the essence of TWP

Clarifying the questions and moving toward some sort of template for TWP

3.     Strategy for taking TWP forward

09:30 – 11:00


Agenda item (1) What do we all want from the TWP agenda?

·       Donors (WB, DFID, DFAT, USAID, UNDP, DANIDA)

·       Think tanks, researchers, consultants (OECD, TAF, ECDPM, UoB, ODI, OPM, October Gallery)

Session structure: Chair: Tom Parks

Discussion: each participant summarizes what they want from this agenda: picking up one or two key issues from the following:

·       What makes a program politically savvy?

·       What constitutes success in a TWP approach?

·       What does a TWP approach say about the ToC?

·       How do we know if accounts of TWP are spin and stories, or a real break from traditional practice?

·       What are the factors behind any success in your organisations (risk-takers, mavericks or something more systematic?

Some of this will be about flexibility, non-linearity, and shaping the modalities and incentives for aid programs. But an essential part of this will be about strategy and sophistication in terms of understanding the context, orientation to political forces, and theory of change.

Each agency come prepared to say clearly what they have been doing with TWP in their own agencies, what they want from this meeting, and what their thinking is on next steps (session 3 tomorrow).

Short (4-5 min) statements, bullet points, no presentations. It would be excellent if colleagues could come with a one pager for circulation answering these questions.

Output: Collective awareness of different agendas

11:00 – 11:20 Tea / Coffee
11:20 – 13:00 Agenda item (2) Defining the essence of TWP

This session should attempt to answer the question “how have TWP projects been structured in practice?”


  • What were the critical elements within the TWP approach – flexibility, adaptiveness, non-prescription, partners, alignment with political forces, etc. etc.? In other words, what made the program different from traditional programs working on the same issues?
  • Were the TWP elements designed from the outset (i.e., explicitly built into), or did they emerge organically?
  • Does the program demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of political dynamics in the local context, and appropriate strategies that reflect this understanding in order to maximize impact?
  • Was the ToC (explicit or implicit) based on a sound understanding of plausible change scenarios?

(b)    Then some questions on MANAGING TWP PROGRAMS?

  • What role did the donor play……hands-on or arm’s length?
  • How were results described ex ante? Was there adequate flexibility to allow for unexpected outcomes?
  • How prescriptive were inputs and expected outputs?
  • How was risk managed? What risks were identified?
  • What was the overall management regime …… how did the donor know when to push and when to pull back? What admin arrangements were in place?
  • How did the donor respond when stuff happened and program direction changed?

Session structure: Chair: Neil McCulloch

Introduction from Tom Parks (introducing the above framing – power point)

Short 2-3 minute reflections from USAID (tbd), DFID (tbd), WB (Verena Fritz/Deryck Brown), NORAD / DANIDA (tbd) and DFAT (Graham Teskey), approach and interpretation of the above.


Output: Agreement on critical features of what it means to be TWP

13:00 – 14:00 Lunch
14:00 – 15:45 Agenda item (2) Defining the essence of TWP (cont)

This session will consider what we are learning from current action research and other initiatives

Chair: Michael O’Keefe

Presentation: Sue Unsworth (October Gallery): ‘Politically smart, locally led development’ and Heather Marquette,(DLP) Action Research


Output: Agreement on next steps

15:45 – 16:00 Tea / Coffee
16:00 – 17:00 Agenda item (2) Defining the essence of TWP (cont)

This session will discuss the proposed guidance ‘template’

Chair Alan Whaites

Introduction from Sue Unsworth / Graham Teskey


Output: Agreement on outline format for guidance and next steps

17:00 – 17:15 Rounding off the day: where have we got to?

Chair: Tom Wingfield

Tuesday 16th September
09:00 – 09:30 TWP: “Flagship” Proposal: Neil McCulloch (OPM)


Outputs: decision on if / how to proceed

09:30 – 11:00 Agenda item (3): Strategy for taking TWP forward

The purpose of this session is to consider ways to persuade the 95% of donor agency staff that have no interest in, or incentive to, TWP, as well as how to frame the issue for skeptical and hard-to-change donor organisations.

Chair: Heather Marquette

Presentation of thoughts and reflections: WB, DFID, DFAT, UNDP, DAC

11:00 – 11:15 Tea / Coffee
11:15 – 12:30 Open discussion: where next for the CoP?

Chair: Graham Teskey


TWP Community of Practice meeting, London, January 2014

Summary of meeting (to be added)


9:00 – 9:30 Welcome by Steve Hogg/Graham Teskey

Summary and highlights of November Delhi meeting

The primary objective of 2nd workshop is to discuss and develop the CoP work-program

Introduce Proposed Work-program (Steve Hogg/Jaime Faustino)

Work-stream 1: Historical case studies of TWP

Work-stream 2: Current/future portfolio of TWP programs

Work- stream 3: Mentoring, Training & Advocacy

Short discussion:

·       Donors and partners, time frame, program goal, expected outputs useful to the CoP

9:30 – 10:15


Politically Smart Programming: Key programming phases: Operational and Practical Issues (Chair/Introduction: Tom Wingfield)

  1. Phase 1: Political and context analysis;
  2. Phase 2: Decision on entry points for assistance;
  3. Phase 3: Program design and modality including:
    1. How TWP projects can shape a portfolio;
    2. How to incorporate TWP approaches into standard program designs and modalities
    3. Local and international workforce
  4. Phase 4: Program Management and implementation;
  5. Phase 5: Results/Value – for – money.


Neil McCulloch (DFAT)

10:15 – 11:00 Work-stream 1: Historical case studies of TWP (Chair: TBA)

·       Options identified and discussed briefly by participants (confirm from Delhi)

·       To be followed up and coordinated by DLP through 2014.

11:00 – 11:30 Morning tea
11:30 – 13:00 Work-stream 2: Current Portfolio Politically Smart Programming (Chair: Steve Hogg)

Short presentations:

DFID(Richard Butterworth)

USAID (Larry Garber)

DFAT (Neil McCulloch)

DFAT Pacific (Tracey Newbury)

Oxfam (Duncan Green)


·       Alina Rocha Menacol (ODI)

13:00 – 14:00 Lunch
14:00 – 15:00 Work-stream 2: ‘Action Research’ Methodology (Chair: David Hudson)

1.     DLP Proposed Approach (Heather Marquette)

2.     TAF/ODI Approach (David Booth)


·       Tom Carothers

·       Diana Cammack (USAID)

·       Stefan Kossoff (DFID)

15:00 – 15:45 Work-stream 2: Structure & Coordination (Small Group discussion)

·       TAF/DFID/World Bank/DFAT: how to structure and coordinate the 12-15 programs

15:45 – 16:15 Coffee Break
16:15 – 16:30 Work-stream 3: Mentoring, Training & Advocacy (Jaime Faustino)

·       Initial thoughts on pilot approach and possible mechanism

16.30 –17:00 Next Steps (Graham Teskey/Steve Hogg/Jaime Faustino)

·       Developing the work-program and outputs

·       Mechanisms to share knowledge and cross-linkage within CoP

·       Way forward on communication strategy

·       Next meeting: Manila 2014


TWP Community of Practice initial meeting, Delhi, November 2013

Summary of meeting Delhi Nov 2013


Thursday, 21 November 2013 

Time Topic
9:00 – 9:30 Welcome

Introduction: why are we here, what gave rise to this meeting and what do we hope to get out of it?

Jaime Faustino/Steve Hogg and Graham Teskey

9:30 – 11.00 Scene Setting: What are the elements of ‘Thinking and Working Politically’?

Chair: Graham Teskey

Round table: all participants have an opportunity to contribute. Short-sharp answers; no more than two or three minutes each, summarizing their personal ‘take’ on TWP

Possible questions for respondents to address:

·       When you say ‘TWP’ what are you thinking individually? What comes to your mind? What does it mean to you: what analytical methods, approaches, modalities and instruments do you imagine?

·       What does TWP look like at different points of the so-called project or program cycle? How does TWP differ across the cycle?

11:00 – 11:20 Break
11:20 – 12:45 What is the current state of play on TWP in our respective development organisations?

·       Doug Porter (WB)

·       Chrys Pycroft (DFID)

·       Diana Cammack (USAID)

·       Andrew Egan (DFAT, Australia)

·       Arndt Husar (UNDP)

·       Alan Whaites (OECD DAC)

Chair: Tom Parks

Speakers invited to summarise where they judge their respective organisations are on the TWP agenda. Seven – eight minute summaries only; no power points. Followed by discussion.

Possible issues or questions to consider (please be selective!):

·       What do you judge your organization understands by TWP?

·       What level of support is there within donor agencies and others to support T&WP approaches? Is it growing? Where is the support concentrated? Who are the detractors and what is their rationale?

·       How do you make the case for T&WP in your agency?

·       How do major policy imperatives for donor agencies (e.g. results & evidence, fragile states, value-for-money, country ownership, joined-up approaches etc.) work for or against thinking and working politically? In short what are the most promising points of entry for institutionalizing a TWP approach?

·       Will a stronger evidence base help to broaden support for T&WP?

·       What type of evidence is most effective / persuasive?

·       What space is there within your agency’s processes, incentives, and rules for broadening T&WP approaches? How to expand this space?

·       How do you negotiate the sensitivities of host governments?

·       What role is there for PEA? How do you move from formal PEA to politically agile programming?

·       What kind of people (skill sets, experience) are needed for T&WP approaches to work? What can be done to expand the pool of effective development practitioners?

12:5 – 1: 45 Lunch
1:45 – 3:00 The evidence base: views from outside looking in (commentators and researchers)

 ·       Duncan Green (Oxfam)

·       Jaime Faustino (TAF, Coalitions for Change)

·       Bill Cole (TAF)

·       Heather Marquette (DLP/GSDRC)

·       Alina Rocha Menocal (ODI)

·       Jan Vanheukelom (ECDPM)

Chair: Alan Whaites

Speakers invited to summarise how they see the TWP playing out. Seven – eight minute summaries only; no power points. Followed by discussion.

Possible issues or questions to consider:

 ·       What has your work taught you about TWP?

·       What kind of people (skill sets, experience) are needed for T&WP approaches to work? What can be done to expand the pool of effective development practitioners? Is this something that almost by definition public servants are bad at?

·       What does your research tell you about the possibility of institutionalizing TWP? What are the major lessons development organisations and practitioners need to learn?

·       What sorts of approaches / methods have / have not worked?

·       Do we need greater conceptual clarity, in a way that moves beyond semantics and makes a real difference in both research and practice? (e.g. power, leadership, local, etc.)

·       Are there ways in which academics can develop a greater understanding for the day-to-day challenges of donor staff? (e.g. staff exchange, increased donor openness etc.)

·       Where are the typical gaps, both in the literature and methodologically for research in T&WP?

·       Does a lack of useful research, a lack of political analysis/PEA, or a lack of training/expertise present a real barrier to T&WP? Or is the issue something else? (e.g. a lack of resources, time, support etc.)

3:00 – 3:30 Break
3:30 – 5:00 Issues and challenges in implementation: what does TWP imply for approaches, modalities and instruments?

·       Alina Rocha Menocal (ODI)

·       Saku Akmeemama (WB)

·       Chris Pycroft(DFID)

·       Tom Parks (DFAT, Australia)

·       Matthew Arnold (TAF)

Chair: Diana Cammack

Possible issues or questions to consider:

·       What evidence do you (or your organization) have to test the assumption that T&WP is more effective for delivering results? What types of evidence could be obtained with additional investment and incentives?

·       What is the most effective way of structuring the donor-recipient (or donor-intermediary) relationship to allow for T&WP?

·       How do we reconcile the demand for specificity in outcome prescription with the need for flexibility?

·       So what do we need to change?

·       What have we learned about funding modalities, partnership models and program designs? What works (& does not) for T&WP?

·       How can large, mainstream programs work more politically?

Friday, 22 November 2013

Time Topic
9:00 – 10.00 Summary of previous day

Graham Teskey / Steve Hogg


·       What we understand by TWP

·       Where organisations are at

·       The evidence base

·       Implications for implementation

·       Other


Chair: Graham Teskey

10:00 – 10.30 Designing a TWP work stream

Ideas presented by Steve Hogg, Jaime Faustino and Tom Parks

Chair: Alina Rocha Menocal (ODI)

1030 – 11.00 Break
11.00 – 12.15 Brainstorming on TWP work program

In (say) four groups; one facilitator and one rapporteur per group required


1.     Political analysis and knowledge

2.     Incorporating local political and social aspects into program design and implementation

3.     Program and Project Modalities for T&WP

4.     Workforce issues related to T&WP

5.     Realistic and VFM ‘results’ concerning TWP

6.     The political economy of donors and the implications of T&WP

7.     Working with Foreign Ministries

Contributions to CoP

1.     What can people commit to contribute to the T&WP CoP?

2.     What kinds of outputs and activities will help the international development and donor community more effectively incorporate T&WP into their everyday practice?

3.     What isn’t being done but should be done?

12: 15 – 1:30 Lunch
1:30 – 3:30 pm Continuation of Brainstorming group work
3:30 – 3:45 Break
3:45 – 4:30 pm Plenary: presentations of ideas: draft work program based on brainstorming sessions

Chair: Heather Marquette

4:30 – 5:00 Summary and Proposed Next Steps

Graham Teskey and Steve Hogg