i
STRATEGIC REVIEW AND LEARNING 
EVENT REPORT
Bringing Unity, Integrity, and Legitimacy to 
Democracy (BUILD) in Somalia
August 2018
This publication was prepared independently by Maribel Díaz and Joakim Gundel of Social Impact, 
Inc. It was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. 
ii
STRATEGIC REVIEW AND LEARNING EVENT 
REPORT
Bringing Unity, Integrity, and Legitimacy to Democracy 
(BUILD) in Somalia
USAID Kenya and East Africa
Task Order No. AID-OAA-M-13-00011
Contract No. GS-10F-0294V
Prepared as part of the Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance—Learning, Evaluation, and 
Research (DRG-LER) Activity
CONTACT
Social Impact, Inc.
2300 Clarendon Blvd., Suite 1000 
Arlington, VA 22201
Catherine Caligan
ccaligan@socialimpact.com
+1 703.465.1884 ext. 337
DISCLAIMER
The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States 
Agency for International Development or the United States Government.
iii
CONTENTS
STRATEGIC REVIEW OBJECTIVES AND QUESTIONS 1
METHODOLOGY 1
1. HAS THE ACTIVITY’S TOC AND KEY ASSUMPTIONS HELD OVER THE LIFE OF THE 
ACTIVITY SO FAR? 3
2. HOW HAS BUILD ADAPTED? 5
3. WHAT FUTURE ADAPTATIONS ARE REQUIRED IN RESPONSE TO CHANGES IN THE 
CONTEXT? 6
4. WHAT CLA SYSTEMS ARE REQUIRED TO ENSURE FUTURE ADAPTATIONS? 9
ANNEXES 12
ANNEX 1: STATEMENT OF WORK 12
ANNEX II: STRATEGIC REVIEW AND LEARNING EVENT AGENDA 18
ANNEX III: LIST OF KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS 25
ANNEX IV: STRATEGIC REVIEW AND LEARNING EVENT SUMMARY NOTES 26
i
TABLES
Table 1: Original Theory of Change.............................................................................................................3
Table 2: Revised Theory of Change .............................................................................................................7
Table 3: ToC developed by BUILD ........................................................................................................... 38
Table 4: Action Planning............................................................................................................................... 44
FIGURES
Figure 1: Scenario Trajectory.........................................................................................................................8
Figure 2: Roadmap of the Learning Event ................................................................................................ 18
Figure 3: Scenario Trajectory...................................................................................................................... 41
Figure 4: Developing a Learning Agenda .................................................................................................. 45
ii
ACRONYMS
ADS Automated Directives System
AMELP Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan
AMISOM African Union Mission in Somalia 
AOR Agreement Officer Representative 
ASWL Association of Somali Women Lawyers
BBC British Broadcasting Corporation 
BUILD Bringing Unity, Integrity, and Legitimacy to Democracy
CLA Collaborating, Learning and Adapting
COP Chief of Party 
CPA Centre for Policy Analysis
CS Civil Society 
CSO Civil Society Organization 
DCOP Deputy Chief of Party 
DFID Department for International Development (UK) 
DRG Democracy, Human Rights and Governance 
DRG-LER Democracy, Human Rights and Governance - Learning, Evaluation and 
Research
EISA Electoral Institute for Sustainable Democracy in Africa 
EMB Election Management Bodies
FGS Federal Government of Somalia 
FMS Federal Member States
IESG Integrated Electoral Support Group
IP Implementing Partner 
IRI International Republican Institute 
MEL Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning
MoIFAR Ministry of Interior, Federal Affairs, and Reconciliation 
MP Member of Parliament 
NEC National Electoral Commission (Somaliland) 
NIEC National Independent Electoral Commission 
OPOV One Person One Vote
PEA Political Economy Analysis
RACI Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed
SI Social Impact 
SL Somaliland 
SME Subject Matter Expert 
SPSS Somalia Program Support Services 
SR Strategic Review
ToC Theory of Change 
UN United Nations 
UNDP United Nations Development Program 
USAID United States Agency for International Development 
iii
USG United States Government 
VR Voter Registration
1
INTRODUCTION
In response to the Democracy, Human Rights and Governance – Learning Evaluation and Research (DRG￾LER) tasking S023, Social Impact (SI) conducted a Midterm Strategic Review of the Bringing Unity, Integrity, 
and Legitimacy to Democracy (BUILD) activity in Somalia. BUILD is a $29 million initiative implemented 
by Creative Associates, begun in 2016 with three focal areas: (1) encouraging citizen participation in 
political and electoral processes through civil society and media organization capacity building; (2) 
developing the capacity of election management bodies; and (3) supporting Somali political parties to be 
more organized, inclusive and issue-based. 
The BUILD activity is being implemented in a very complex and fluid country context with significant 
security concerns. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) contracted SI to
implement a strategic review in order to guide the remaining three years of the BUILD initiative to ensure 
that the program design and implementation adapt based on ongoing learning. This strategic review and 
learning report provides an analysis of data gathered through a literature review, Key Informant Interviews 
and the strategic review and learning event and offers recommendations to inform programmatic decision 
making.
STRATEGIC REVIEW OBJECTIVES AND QUESTIONS
The strategic review was structured to a) inform the next three years of program design and 
implementation and b) understand how the BUILD activity can incorporate learning and respond to a 
highly political and operational context, by answering the following strategic review questions:
• Have the activity’s Theory of Change (ToC) and key assumptions held over the life of the activity 
so far?
• To what extent has the activity adapted in response to learning and changes in context? What has 
enabled or hindered that? 
• How have the Activity’s management and operational structures performed and adapted within 
Somalia's challenging programming environment?
• Looking forward, how best can the Activity respond to changes in the context (for example, delays 
to the electoral framework or the lack of decision on key constitutional issues that will impact on 
elections) and to key assumptions to be more adaptive?
• What kind of learning and analytical activities and/or capacities are most important for ensuring 
the activity can contribute to desired political and technical changes?
• What managerial or organizational changes may be necessary to achieve this?
METHODOLOGY
SI implemented a three-part methodology composed of an initial desk review, key informant interviews, 
and a Strategic Review and Learning Event to address the strategic review questions:
• Desk Review: SI reviewed BUILD’s quarterly and annual reports, its Activity Monitoring, 
Evaluation and Learning Plan, and additional contextual documents. 
• Key informant interviews (KIIs): The strategic review team conducted a total of 16 in -person 
and virtual interviews with BUILD stakeholders, including USAID technical staff, BUILD field and 
2
headquarters staff, the National Independent Electoral Commission (NIEC), representatives of 
civil society organizations, Members of Parliament (MPs), the United Nations (UN) Integrated 
Electoral Support Group (IESG) and other donors. See Annex III for a list of KII’s. 
• Strategic Review and Learning Event: The learning event was informed by data collected 
from key informant interviews, consultations with USAID/Somalia leadership and guidance from 
Automated Directives System 201. Outcomes include an action plan by objective, learning 
questions to integrate into BUILD’s Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Plan and 
a revised draft of the its ToC. These outputs will guide BUILD to adaptively manage its 
implementation moving forward. 
Approaches that facilitate learning and the generation of practical solutions to contextual 
challenges and current findings were used throughout the engagement. USAID-endorsed learning 
tools that were employed during the review included the development of learning questions and 
a learning plan, review of the activity ToC, and the identification of opportunities to track 
contextual changes through scenario surveillance.
3
STRATEGIC REVIEW FINDINGS AND 
CONCLUS1ONS 
1. HAS THE ACTIVITY’S TOC AND KEY ASSUMPTIONS HELD OVER THE LIFE OF THE 
ACTIVITY SO FAR?
The original ToC is presented in Table 1. The ToC included a number of assumptions about legislative 
progress, political party development, civil society development, partners in Electoral Management Bodies 
(EMB) and security conditions that have not held up well over time. Challenges in these areas pose a risk 
to the BUILD initiative’s ability to achieve its stated objective of building trust and participation in political 
and electoral processes and require an adaptive approach. We discuss how each of these assumptions did 
not match realities on the ground in the paragraphs that follow. 
Table 1: Original Theory of Change
IF… THEN… THEREFORE…
Citizens are more aware, engaged, and 
confident in political/electoral processes;
Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) facilitate 
engagement between citizens and government 
on constitutional and legislative processes 
pertaining to elections;
Electoral Management Bodies are supported to 
develop better operational systems;
Political party representatives understand the 
electoral legal framework AND have increased 
skills in poll watching, voter outreach, 
campaigning and developing issue-based 
platforms
Objective 1: Citizens’ 
participation in local, state, and 
national political/electoral 
processes will increase.
Objective 2: Election 
Management Bodies will have 
better systems to administer 
and manage elections 
effectively.
Objective 3: Political parties 
will be able to compete in 
elections in a way that 
contributes to a free and fair 
electoral process and appeals 
to a range of citizens, including 
women and youth.
Trust and 
participation in 
political and 
electoral 
processes by 
Somalis will 
increase.
Lack of a legal framework: A legal framework outlining the electoral rules is required for parties to 
develop and EMB to prepare for and conduct elections in Somalia. To date, the legal framework for 
Somalia’s elections are yet to be developed (This was not an issue for Somaliland). Without this 
precondition, BUILD has not been able to make progress on many planned activities, including supporting 
the NIEC in developing a voter registration system, preparing for planned elections in 2020, supporting 
political parties, and building societal trust and participation. 
Weak political parties: Under Objective 3, BUILD is to support political parties to allow them to 
become more competitive, inclusive and representative of citizens’ interests. However, Somalia’s political 
4
parties are only now able to register temporarily, and for the most part are shells without organizational 
structures, influence on their members, a coherent ideology, or grassroots support. Even in the more 
politically developed Somaliland, MPs have no ongoing or sustained relationship with their parties between 
elections and there are no party caucuses. While BUILD has provided support to some political parties, 
the lack of party development has limited progress in this area. 
Weak civil society: Similarly, civil society remains weak, and many organizations have emerged more as 
contractors than as legitimate civil society organizations. Efforts to diversify outreach to additional actors
of civil society, such as traditional leaders, community-based organizations and village committees have
been limited. As a result, BUILD has made limited progress toward its Objective 1, building CSO capacity 
to inform citizens and monitor political processes.
Non-cooperative partners in Somalia’s EMB: BUILD was successful in working with Somaliland’s 
National Electoral Commission (NEC) despite initial difficulties; BUILD is still developing its relationship 
with Somalia’s National Independent Electoral Commission (NIEC). The Commission is dominated by one 
key individual who in many stakeholders’ views has emerged as an obstacle to progress. The NIEC has 
limited experience and capacity and yet has not always been receptive to BUILD support. The primary 
source of conflict currently is the lack of BUILD support for a NIEC proposed robust and expensive bio￾metric voter registration system, which is viewed by BUILD and others as premature at this time. This 
poor individual relationship has undermined efforts under Objective 2, to build the capacity of NIEC to 
design, administer and manage transparent, credible and accepted elections and political processes, with 
effective public outreach and is a key factor inhibiting BUILD’s other activities from moving forward. 
Poor security environment: The security environment in Somalia has not improved as was expected, 
and according to several interviewees it has worsened. As a result, Creative Associates has not been able 
to visit its local partners or project locations in Mogadishu due to security restrictions. Attacks on targeted 
institutions threaten to disrupt efforts to register voters and to hold future elections. The poor security 
situation has restrained BUILD’s efforts to achieve all three of its objectives. 
Other challenges to achieving BUILD’s objectives include the following: 
• To date the main guiding principle in Somalia politics has been the 4.5 power sharing formula, 
named because it provides equal representation to the main four clans and half a share of 
representation to the remaining clans. Most stakeholders agree that an end to the 4.5 system is 
necessary, but the foundations for elections discussed above are lacking. Official discourse 
supports the concept of “one person, one vote” (OPOV); however, there are major obstacles to 
achieving OPOV. This could result in a scenario whereby key political actors push for an end to 
the 4.5 arrangement but without a substitute in place. At the same time political actors benefiting 
from the 4.5 system may resist OPOV if it does not appear beneficial to them.
• There are strained relations within Parliament, between Parliament and the Executive branch of 
government, between competing Ministries within the executive, between the MPs and the 
President, and between the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) and Federal Member States 
(FMS). This hinders progress in developing a political and electoral framework. 
• While Somalia politics is often viewed as clan-based, there are political and business networks that 
cross clan groups with ties to Islamic groups and external interests. In addition, project work risks 
being undermined by rent-seeking behavior and corruption, including in civil society. 
5
2. HOW HAS BUILD ADAPTED? 
The BUILD program began with an early adaptation. While it had always been planned that BUILD would 
operate in Somaliland, the withdrawal of support for the NEC in Somaliland by another donor resulted in 
a USAID request to quickly ramp up activities in Somaliland. As a result, early BUILD activities focused on 
Somaliland. This was a reasonable adaptation and it allowed for some early progress. As mentioned above, 
BUILD developed a productive relationship with Somaliland’s NEC and was able to add value through 
support for voter card distribution, elections management, warehouse management, operational planning
and procurement. There was good cooperation with managers and heads of department, and BUILD 
provided financial support for election equipment voter card printing, and paper ballot printing. 
Towards the end of 2017, BUILD moved their office and main operations to Mogadishu and increased its 
focus on Somalia.1 This marked a major shift in the operational context of the program, which require a 
comprehensive ability to adapt to a vastly different, new context. Perhaps unexpectedly, the BUILD 
program partners realized that their experiences and lessons learned from Somaliland were not 
immediately transferrable to Somalia.2 Several of the interviewed Implementing Partners (IPs) described 
BUILD as a de-facto “two country program.”3 A second, and apparently inadvertent adaptation was a shift 
in focus from achieving the stated goal of “increased trust and participation” to achieving the goal of 
OPOV. Given the limited progress towards OPOV and potential lack of consensus around universal 
suffrage, it appears that this was a problematic adaptation that is being reconsidered. 
While BUILD has attempted to mitigate the challenges and threats to the ToC discussed above, it has not 
been able to develop effective solutions to the lack of progress in developing a legal framework, inadequate 
political party and civil society consolidation and capacity, and a non-cooperative NIEC. The worsening 
security situation is a factor largely out of the hands of BUILD, limiting their options for adaption, and 
prompts the need for finding creative work around solutions. BUILD has also been confronted with several 
management related challenges to effectively adapt. These include: 
Staff Turnover: The program was affected by key staff turnover in the Electoral Institute for Sustainable 
Democracy in Africa (EISA) and the International Republican Institute (IRI) and delays in finding 
replacements. This stalled the civil society sub-grant component and the political parties work because a 
replacement for a key local staff member had to be found after the program moved offices to Mogadishu. 
It was also mentioned that changes in key decision makers at Creative Associates from mid-2017 caused 
some confusion and discontinuity of the program.
Coordination challenges within BUILD: Reporting lines between field (Mogadishu), Nairobi, and DC 
have been too long and complicated, leading to delays and a lack of consensus. KII’s mentioned a need 
for improved coordination of activities on a daily basis, and between the implementing partners (IPs)
involved directly in Objectives 1 & 2, and Objectives 2 & 3 respectively.
Coordination challenges between BUILD and USAID: The processing of small grants and approval 
of program changes has been lengthy with complex back and forth communication between Mogadishu 
(BUILD IPs), Washington, DC (Creative Associates HQs) and Nairobi (USAID). In addition, there appears
to have been uncertainty about the extent to which BUILD could move activities forward on their own
and what USAID needs to approve under the cooperative agreement. USAID on the other hand felt that 
1 BUILD Annual Report 2017
2 KII’s
3 Ibid.
6
the BUILD partners could and should have developed their own solutions to bridge the challenges faced 
in the Somalia context and presented them to USAID. In addition, there was disagreement over the extent 
to which USAID should be providing political leverage in building support for BUILD among Somalia 
political actors. 
While program adaptation has proven difficult in Somalia, there have been a number of observations and 
lessons to be learned that could lay the groundwork for future adaptation. For example, in respect to
working with civil society, KII's offered the following considerations:
• Avoid basing activities around CSOs based in the capital city as they may not be respected or 
trusted in the provinces.
• Given the limits to Somalia’s formal civil society organizations, other approaches to civic 
engagement, including participatory action methods and outreach to traditional leaders and 
community-based organizations, should be explored.
• The CSO grants system needs to include risk mitigation efforts to avoid creating a new form of 
patronage and attracting rent-seeking sub-grantees. 
• Activities need to reflect the realities on the ground. For example, awareness campaigns should 
not be implemented for the sake of meeting output goals, but rather they should only be held 
once it is clear what the election system looks like and what the campaign should focus on. 
3. WHAT FUTURE ADAPTATIONS ARE REQUIRED IN RESPONSE TO CHANGES IN 
THE CONTEXT? 
Through the Strategic Review and Learning Event, BUILD stakeholders discussed a number of potential 
future adaptations. In this section we discuss, (1) revisions to BUILD’s ToC, (2) short and medium-term 
efforts to adapt to Somalia’s complex reality, and (3) the results of a scenario planning exercise to identify 
triggers to further adaption. 
Revised ToC: Given the limitations of the original ToC and several assumptions that were not proving 
to be true (e.g., weaker than expected political parties, opposition from NIEC), BUILD stakeholders
recognized that it was important to revisit the theory and assumptions. While still subject to assumptions 
that might not be born out, the BUILD team developed a revised theory of change better reflective of the 
Somali reality presented in Table 2. The ToC reflects a renewed commitment to the overarching goal of 
trust and participation, rather than OPOV per se. It is recommended that BUILD continue to define the 
assumptions and mitigation strategies in this revised ToC in in consultation with the Program Office and 
the AOR.
7
Table 2: Revised Theory of Change
Short-term adaptation: In addition, several short-term adaptations were identified consistent with this 
revised ToC. These are presented by objective in Table 4 under Action Planning in Annex IV and will 
require further refinement by the BUILD team. In the area of civil society, stakeholders discussed the 
need to conduct community-driven action research to map civil society and determine potential partners. 
Media has been a neglected area of BUILD, and the team will explore providing training to journalists and 
plans to engage BBC Media Action, the British Broadcasting Corporation’s development organization, in 
providing support. Recognizing the need promote the creation of a legal framework and to work with 
Somalia’s nascent political parties, stakeholders proposed conducting an influence mapping exercise and 
developing a strategy to influence key decision-makers identified. 
Scenario planning and triggers: As part of the strategic review, BUILD stakeholders reviewed
potential scenarios developed prior to the event and identified triggers to indicate a transition from one 
scenario to the next. The purpose of this exercise was to create dialogue around critical trends that 
threaten achievement of project goals and to identify and build tangible triggers that will signal the need 
IF… THEN… THEREFORE…
Citizens are more aware of key constitutional 
and electoral concepts, and engage with 
decision makers on participatory processes 
toward one-person, one-vote elections;
Civil society including NGOs, traditional and 
religious leaders, private sector and businesses 
facilitate engagement between citizens and 
government on constitutional and legislative 
processes;
Decision makers are supported to develop 
appropriate and applicable legal framework;
Journalists are equipped with skills and 
knowledge to cover political processes in a 
balanced, accurate, and impartial manner;
Electoral Management Bodies including NIEC 
and other government bodies are supported 
to develop operational systems;
Political parties are established and functioning
 Decisions makers are held 
accountable to developing a 
constitution, legal and 
operational frameworks for 
OPOV elections 
 Media informs the public on 
electoral and constitutional 
matters, so the public can 
hold political actors 
accountable
 By the end of the project, 
government bodies and NIEC 
will have key systems to 
administer elections 
effectively
 Political parties will be able 
to compete in a way that 
leads to participatory 
processes and appeals to a 
range of citizens, including 
women and youth
Trust and 
participation in 
political and 
electoral 
processes by 
Somalis will 
increase
8
to adapt BUILD’s approach. Figure 1 lays 
out a Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting 
(CLA) tool called scenario trajectory. 
BUILD stakeholders identified the triggers 
that would indicate a shift to a
“Shaky/Managed Incremental Change” 
(Scenario II) to “It Gets Worse” (Scenario 
III) in the near-to-medium context of 
preparations for the planned elections in 
2020. Potential trends and triggers were
discussed at the event to indicate when the 
project should adjust to the rapidly-changing 
environment:
 Scenario 1: Voter registration 
problem: The national ID process starts 
and is designed so that the database can also 
be used for voter registration. However, the process moves slowly and there is a risk that it will 
not be ready for 2020 elections. The trigger will be inadequate progress in reaching milestones 
towards a National ID database. This will then trigger a “Plan B” that includes identifying and 
prioritizing roadblocks to address, citizen outreach, recruiting volunteers or other groups to help 
increase engagement for the ID process by citizens
 Scenario 2: Stalled legal reforms: A bill that provides the legal framework for federal elections 
is developed and submitted to the Council of Ministers by the Ministry of Interior, Federal Affairs, 
and Reconciliation (MoIFAR). There is resistance by various political actors to provisions of the 
bill and progress comes to a stop for months while the National Security Council attempts to 
negotiate the political issues. The trigger would be the delay of the framework that would be 
verified by consulting other international donors. Plan B, once triggered will include supporting 
the drafting of the legal framework through working with MPs and proactively supporting the 
process, coordinating and engaging activist civil society groups and other influential relevant 
actors. 
 Scenario 3: Fallout of no election: In 2019, more and more politicians and pundits begin saying 
that holding one-person-one-vote elections in 2020 is simply not technically feasible, but a 
transition of power is needed. There is still no electoral law and many constitutional provisions 
remain undecided. These politicians say that there should be an expansion of the 2016 electoral 
process. The trigger will be inadequate progress in reaching set elections milestones. Plan B entails
examining how to develop and help establish future activities and systems to facilitate the 2024 
electoral process. 
 Scenario 4: NIEC funding shortfall: NIEC does not receive enough government funding to 
hire the number of staff needed to conduct the election in the FGS budget for 2020. This would 
be triggered by government budget refusal or an excessively long approval process and would 
result in pressuring the international donor community to fill funding gaps. Plan B entails training 
and technical assistance to NIEC on the essential components of a budget in order to meet 
government standards and mitigate approval delays. 
Figure 1: Scenario Trajectory
9
As discussed in the next question response, in order for this adaptation to be institutionalized within 
BUILD, it is essential that a robust CLA system be put in place. 
4. WHAT CLA SYSTEMS ARE REQUIRED TO ENSURE FUTURE ADAPTATIONS? 
Amendment of activity MEL Plan with a focus on CLA Plan refinement. While the CLA Plan4
represents BUILD’s general CLA approach, including potential learning questions and mechanisms for 
collaboration (Learning Networks), it should be refined throughout the life of the activity. BUILD can now 
incorporate pause and reflect moments, learning questions and collaborative processes that aid both staff 
and implementing partners in practical and utilization-focused CLA applications that will lead to deeper 
coordination and integration, evidence-based knowledge that incorporates input from an increasingly 
diverse set of stakeholders, and management processes that affords flexibility and agile corrective actions.
Operationalize and socialize “Pause and Reflect” within BUILD organizational processes. As 
an intentional process, CLA for BUILD will require that Creative Associates consider adjusting 
organizational and management processes in order to create space for Pause and Reflect so that evidence￾based decision making is agile and responsive to the fluid context of Somalia. 
Develop and execute a Learning Plan in order to mitigate gaps in knowledge that may impact activity 
implementation approaches. During this activity, the team identified critical gaps in knowledge and learning 
questions that can bridge those gaps and facilitate informed decision-making. See Annex IV for Learning 
questions.
Refine Plan Bs and triggers. The fluid and changing political dynamics shaping Somalia’s elections 
context requires systematic surveillance of key trends to inform adaptive management. To mitigate the 
risks associated with picking a single trajectory given the uncertainty regarding whether elections will be 
held in 2020, USAID and the BUILD team developed a range of scenarios that could unfold over the 
remainder of the activity, and how BUILD’s implementation would notionally adjust. Through a 
participatory exercise during the Strategic Review, the team predicated its implementation around the “as 
is” activity implementation characterized as “Shaky/Managed Incremental Change”; otherwise understood 
as Plan A. The team’s reflection on current dynamics with NIEC, support for OPOV and the utilization of 
media to effectively promote the right of citizens to vote has led to a more concerted focus on the forces 
and trends that may signal a shift from “Shaky/Managed Incremental Change” (Scenario II) to “It Gets 
Worse” (Scenario III) in the near-to-medium context of preparations for the planned elections in 2020. 
While the learning event was used to “Plan B’s” through these activities and triggers identified, it will be 
important to more formally flush out these plans, clearly specify these triggers, and ensure internal 
consensus around its approach. 
Prepare for ongoing scenario surveillance: To operationalize a structured and periodic “where are 
we on the scenario trajectory” learning and adaptation process, it is recommended that BUILD develop a 
baseline for Scenario II / III matrix of common, contemporaneous, and revelatory trend indicators that 
would supplement quarterly reporting against the activity MEL plan. For example, monitoring the decision 
around national ID and voter registration, the development of a legal framework, the likelihood of one￾4 The CLA plan is part of the Activity MEL plan, titled "Learning" in the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan 
(AMELP)
10
person-one-vote elections taking place in 2020 and funding, taken together, may signal an emerging and 
demonstrative scenario shift for activity implementation. The intent of this surveillance tool is to bring 
360 degree objectively curated trend information into timely deliberation on the status of scenarios and 
implication for programming adaptation. Integrating quarterly scenario ‘pause and reflect’ sessions into 
program reporting will help BUILD better understand how exogenous dynamics are influencing the 
attainment (or lack thereof) of 2020 elections. Moreover, seismic shifts in unique scenario trends may 
actuate follow-on analysis that leads to activity-specific adaptation based on information beyond the BUILD 
activity.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This Strategic Review and Learning Event afforded an opportunity for reflection by BUILD stakeholders 
and resulted in consensus around several important course corrections. More importantly, building on 
the CLA methodology, an approach was developed to facilitate ongoing learning and adaptation. This will 
help address the major challenge for BUILD: how to avoid program paralysis and ensure meaningful 
progress towards building trust and participation even when core assumptions do not hold. The key 
conclusions of the event were: 
• Recognizing the limits of the original ToC, the BUILD team developed a new ToC, which will lay 
the foundation for an adaptive approach and enable them to specify new programming options in 
their newly revised workplan and Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (AMELP). This 
should be formalized to inform next year’s planning. 
• For Objective 2, focused on the NIEC, BUILD will flush out the details of a “Plan B” in case key 
assumptions, such as passage of an Electoral Framework and other supporting legislations (e.g., 
citizen law), does not materialize or if technical systems, such as effective voter registration, are 
not put in place. This should be done in the short-term, and BUILD should adopt quarterly
scenario scanning as part of its CLA processes.
• Given that the poor relationship with the NIEC poses a key obstacle to the success of the 
intervention, efforts are required to engage and obtain the support of other key influencers in the 
Somali polity and higher-level US government diplomatic engagement with NIEC is needed to help 
rebuild and repair this relationship. These engagement efforts should be outlined as part of the 
upcoming year’s implementation plan. 
• Under Objective 1, focus on civil society and the media, and Objective 3, focus on political parties, 
BUILD will develop alternative approaches to engagement with targeted groups that are not 
overly-dependent on unrealistic assumptions and tailored to the weaknesses of these three 
groups. By working to increase democratic culture, BUILD can still have a positive impact even if 
progress towards OVOP stalls. These alternatives should be identified for inclusion in the 
upcoming year’s implementation plan. 
• The event also laid the foundations for a more robust CLA approach that will allow for ongoing 
learning and adaptation. BUILD stakeholders identified learning questions and gaps in information, 
and BUILD’s AMELP should be amended to address these gaps. In addition, BUILD stakeholders 
identified likely scenarios, Plan B’s to address those scenarios, and triggers to initiate these Plans; 
however, these will require further refinement and incorporation of regular Pause and Reflect 
moments to consider potential scenarios and refine plans and triggers. This more robust CLA 
approach should be refined as part of next year’s planning.
11
• In order to engender adaptive management practices, consider a more decentralized cooperative 
agreement management system, whereby the BUILD team in Kenya and Somalia has primary 
decision-making responsibility. Actions to mitigate the risks of such an approach should be further 
explored, including the development of alternative mechanisms for engaging CSOs outside of grant 
awards.
12
ANNEXES
ANNEX 1: STATEMENT OF WORK
STATEMENT OF WORK
MID-TERM STRATEGIC REVIEW
BRINGING UNITY, INTEGRITY, AND LEGITIMACY TO DEMOCRACY (BUILD) IN SOMALIA 
I. PURPOSE OF THE ACTIVITY
USAID Somalia seeks the services of a Contractor to conduct a mid-term Strategic Review to 
inform the next three years of the Bringing Unity, Integrity, and Legitimacy to Democracy 
(BUILD) activity, which supports elections and political processes in Somalia. The focus of the 
review will be on understanding how the activity can incorporate learning and respond to a 
highly fluid political and operational context. As such, the Strategic Review should incorporate 
the principles of USAID’s Collaborating, Learning and Adapting (CLA) Framework.
Description of the Intervention to be reviewed
The BUILD activity is a 5-year Cooperative Agreement (AID-623-A-16-00001) awarded in March 
2016 to Creative Associates International, with the International Republican Institute (IRI), the 
Electoral Institute for Sustainable Democracy in Africa (EISA), Forcier Consulting, and Tacforce 
International as sub-partners. The total estimated amount of the award was increased in 2017 
to almost $29 million.
BUILD’s goal is to increase participation and trust in political processes among Somali citizens. 
The project works with a range of institutions and organizations in Somalia and Somaliland to 
incrementally increase awareness of civic rights and responsibilities while establishing and 
strengthening key political structures to facilitate and support citizen participation. 
The Activity will reach its overall goal of increasing participation and trust in political processes 
among Somali citizens by: 
1) Encouraging citizens’ participation in political and electoral processes through building civil 
society organizations’ capacity to inform citizens and monitor elections and political processes 
and improving media capacity to cover and disseminate information on these processes; 
2) Developing the capacity of Election Management Bodies (EMBs) and other relevant 
government bodies to manage elections legitimately and effectively and design and administer 
credible political processes; and 
13
3) Supporting Somali political parties to be more organized, inclusive and issue-based as they 
compete peacefully in the electoral and political process. 
II. STRATEGIC REVIEW QUESTIONS
Questions focus on key Activity areas and are directly linked to the purpose of the review and 
its expected use. The contractor will refine the questions based on the desk review and KIIs and
must review and finalize questions in collaboration with USAID prior to the Strategic Review 
and Learning Event. USAID’s suggested questions are as follows:
1. Have the activity’s ToC and key assumptions held over the life of the activity so far?
2. To what extent has the activity adapted in response to learning and changes in 
context? What has enabled or hindered that? 
3. How have the Activity’s management and operational structures performed and 
adapted within Somalia's challenging programming environment?
4. Looking forward, how best can the Activity respond to changes in the context (for 
example, delays to the electoral framework or the lack of decision on key constitutional 
issues that will impact on elections) and to key assumptions to be more adaptive? 
5. What kind of learning and analytical activities and/or capacities are most important 
for ensuring the activity can contribute to desired political and technical changes? 
6. What managerial or organizational changes may be necessary to achieve this?
III. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
USAID/Somalia seeks the methodological approach that is appropriate to answer the strategic 
review questions. At a minimum, the following data collection methods must be used: 
a. Desk Review
A desk review that allows the Contractor to understand the BUILD activity in the context of 
Somalia’s changing political context and USG priorities in order to inform the Strategic Review 
process. The desk review included the following documents, among other articles and sources:
● USAID/Somalia Strategic Framework
● USAID/Somalia Inclusive Governance Project Appraisal Document
● USAID/Somalia BUILD Activity Program Description
14
● Other BUILD Activity Materials: Annual and Quarterly Reports; Annual Implementation 
Plans, including annual risk assessment and strategy for inclusion of marginalized 
populations; Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan (AMELP); political 
economy analysis documents; survey baseline report; other relevant SPSS reports 
related to BUILD
● USAID/Somalia Citizen Perception Survey reports
● Federal Government of Somalia National Development Plan
● A Macro-Level Analysis of Conflict Drivers and Dynamics in Somalia by the Somalia 
Stability Fund
● State-level political and conflict analyses conducted by Forcier
● Key research and analysis documents on the progress of constitutional review and 
elections planning in Somalia
b. Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)
Interviews must be held with a range of BUILD stakeholders in order to inform and refine the 
strategic review questions. The list of KIIs will be approved by USAID. Ten to twelve KIIs must be 
held with stakeholders including USAID technical staff, BUILD field and headquarters staff, the 
National Independent Electoral Commission, representatives of political parties and 
associations, civil society organizations, the UN Integrated Electoral Support Group, other 
donors, and potentially other observers. 
c. Strategic Review and Learning Event
The Contractor will organize a three-day Strategic Review and Learning Event in Nairobi, to 
include participation from USAID Somalia, BUILD, and IP home office. The planned dates are 
July 16-18. Other stakeholders and experts may participate in some sections of the event as 
panelists or participants. The purpose of the event is to provide a space for USAID and BUILD 
staff to discuss the successes and challenges of the activity to this point, work together to 
address the review questions, and discuss how USAID and IP staff can work together to 
adaptively manage the activity for success. The event should incorporate the concepts of 
USAID’s Collaborating, Learning and Adapting Framework; a module on CLA should be included 
in the event.
The first two days of the event should include the full team. The third day will bring together 
USAID and BUILD management to discuss the results of the first two days and discuss next 
steps.
The Contractor is expected to provide all the logistics including a note-taker for the event and 
to deliver a report that incorporates the key learnings and action points from the strategic
review.
IV. DELIVERABLES AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Strategic Review Schedule: Within 2 weeks of the award of the contract, the Contractor 
shall complete and present a draft schedule for the strategic review to the Contracting 
15
Officer’s Representative (COR). 
2. Strategic Review Design: Within 1 week of approval of the schedule, the Strategic Review 
(SR) team must submit a SR design to the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) (which 
will become an annex to the final report). 
At a minimum, the design will include: 
1. Data collection approach/ method
2. Draft questionnaires and other data collection instruments; 
3. List of potential interviewees and sites to be visited; and
4. Draft Agenda for the Strategic Review and Learning Event.
3. In-briefing: After submission of the SR design, the SR team will have an in-briefing with USAID 
Somalia for introductions and to discuss the team’s understanding of the assignment, initial 
assumptions, strategic review questions, initial list of interviewees, draft questionnaires, and 
draft agenda for the Strategic Review and Learning Event. 
4. Mid-term Briefing: The SR team is expected to hold a briefing with USAID Somalia staff after 
the desk review and KIIs and before the Strategic Review and Learning Event. The purpose 
of this mid-term briefing will be to provide initial feedback from the desk review and KIIs, to 
discuss proposed changes to the SR questions, and to finalize the agenda of the Strategic 
Review and Learning Event. The team will also provide the COR with periodic briefings and 
feedback on the team’s findings, as agreed upon during the in-briefing. 
5. Final Report: The contractor will provide a draft final report that incorporates the key 
findings and recommendations of the Strategic Review and Learning Event within one week 
after the end of the event. The report will address each of the questions identified in the 
SOW and any other issues the team considers to have a bearing on the objectives of the 
review. Any such issues will be included in the report only after consultation with USAID 
Somalia. Once the initial draft report is submitted, the COR/AOR will have 10 business days
in which to review and comment on the initial draft, after which point the COR/AOR will 
submit the consolidated comments to the SR team. The review team will then be asked to 
submit a revised final draft report within 7 business days hence, and again the COR/AOR will 
review and send comments on this final draft report within 7 business days of its 
submission. The final report will be no longer than 10 pages, exclusive of annexes. 
For this Task Order, one payment will be made that will be tied to the satisfactory delivery 
of the final report.
V. STRATEGIC REVIEW TEAM COMPOSITION
The contractor must provide a strong team composition based on the proposed methodology. 
Key personnel must have demonstrated relevant prior experiences in Somalia, particularly in 
16
the area of democratization and political development, and prior assessment and facilitation 
experience. 
The contractor must provide information about the SR team members, including their CVs, and 
explain how they meet the requirements in the strategic review SOW. Submissions of writing 
samples or links to past assessments or evaluation reports and related deliverables composed 
by proposed team members are highly desirable. All team members are required to provide to 
USAID a signed statement attesting to a lack of conflict of interest in relation to the activity 
being evaluated (a COI form).
Proposed personnel are expected to be the people who execute the work of this contract. Any 
substitutes to the proposed team must be vetted and approved by the Strategic Review COR 
before they begin work. The recruitment of local Somali speaking team members is highly 
encouraged. 
The following key personnel positions are required:
1. Somalia Political Expert (Political Expert):
The Political Expert is ultimately responsible for the overall management of the Strategic 
Review and the final products. The Political Expert will serve as a co-facilitator of the Strategic 
Review and Learning Event that is the centerpiece of this activity. The Political Expert is 
expected to have deep knowledge of the political context and political development in Somalia, 
and to be able to bring that knowledge to bear at the event and in the final report. S/he will 
ensure high quality analysis and written reports. S/he is also responsible for quality assurance 
and timeliness of all deliverables. 
Required Qualifications: 
 Twelve to fifteen years’ experience in working on research, development activities, or 
other relevant work in Somalia;
 Minimum of seven years working on issues related to political development, including 
elections, constitutional development, and civic engagement, preferably with a 
significant part of this experience in Somalia;
 Experience in assessment or evaluation design, management, and implementation;
 Understanding of USAID’s cross-cutting program priorities, such as gender equality and 
women’s empowerment. 
 Appropriate and relevant educational degree.
2. Collaborating, Learning and Adapting Lead and Facilitator (CLA Lead)
The CLA Lead will take on the main responsibility for planning and facilitating the Strategic 
Review and Learning Event. 
17
Required Qualifications: 
 Significant experience in facilitation of learning events;
 Experience in assessment and evaluation design, methods, management, and 
implementation;
 Good understanding of USAID’s Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting Framework; 
 Appropriate and relevant educational degree.
VI. OTHER REQUIREMENTS 
All modifications to the required elements of the SOW, whether in technical requirements, SR 
questions, team composition, methodology, or timeline, need to be agreed upon in writing by 
the COR. Any revisions should be updated in the SOW that is included as an annex to the 
strategic review Report. 
VII. LIST OF ANNEXES
Herein attached is a list of the secondary data sources and other relevant materials that will 
help the strategic review team effectively respond to the RTOP proposal. This includes: 
● USAID/Somalia Strategic Framework
● USAID/Somalia Inclusive Governance Project Appraisal Document
● USAID/Somalia BUILD Activity Program Description
● Other BUILD Activity Materials: Annual and Quarterly Reports; Annual Implementation 
Plans, including annual risk assessment and strategy for inclusion of marginalized 
populations; Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan (AMELP); political 
economy analysis documents; survey baseline report
● Fact Sheet: Collaborating, Learning and Adapting at USAID
● USAID/Somalia Citizen Perception Survey reports
● Federal Government of Somalia National Development Plan
● A Macro-Level Analysis of Conflict Drivers and Dynamics in Somalia by the Somalia 
Stability Fund
● State-level political and conflict analyses conducted by Forcier
● Key research and analysis documents on the progress of constitutional review and 
elections planning in Somalia
18
ANNEX II: STRATEGIC REVIEW AND LEARNING EVENT AGENDA
LEARNING EVENT DESIGN
This learning event will build on data collected from key informant interviews, consultations with 
USAID/Somalia leadership and guidance from Automated Directives System 201. The expected outcomes 
are an action plan with prioritized activities to adaptively manage BUILD, including its ToC. 
During this learning event, participants will be engaged through participatory activities that build on adult 
learning principles and are grounded in the USAID Program Cycle guidance. Given expected outcomes by 
USAID/Somalia, participants will reflect on key events during the life of the activity and learn about how 
Adaptive Management is at the core of Collaborating, Learning and Adapting.
Tools that will facilitate learning and the generation of practical solutions to contextual challenges and 
current findings will be used throughout the engagement. USAID-endorsed learning tools include the 
development of learning questions and a learning plan, reviewing the activity ToC, and the identification 
of opportunities to track contextual changes through scenario surveillance. 
The following is a roadmap of the learning event. 
Figure 2: Roadmap of the Learning Event
Phase I: 
Context 
Setting 
Phase 2: 
Clarify & 
Analyze
Phase 3: 
Results & 
Solutions
• Introductions
• Changing Environment
• What are we learning?
• Obstacles, Opportunities & the 
Way forward
• Learning Activities
• Scenario Surveillance
• Operationalizing the Way 
Forward 
• Trade off Analysis
• Action Plan
19
STRATEGIC REVIEW AND LEARNING EVENT AGENDA
Day 1: INTRODUCTION
Focal Areas Facilitator Notes Product/Results
Introduction/opening USAID/Somalia Leadership Introduction
Articulation of what leadership envisions as final 
product. Recognition of activity as opportunity to 
pause and reflect to adapt as BUILD moves forward in 
its implementation
Expected outcomes
Objectives
Ground Rules
Overview of objectives with group. Ask for participants 
to write on post its, their learning expectations. If they 
are outside of USAID/Somalia expectations for event, 
include in bike rack flip chart. (Bike rack is the same as 
parking lot in concept).
Ground Rules regarding cooperation and safe space in 
addition to process for next few days
Group understanding of 
event process 
Introduction to CLA 
as an approach
Walk through graphic to identify components of 
learning and continuous improvement and its 
connection with ToC.
Explain: USAID’s new development paradigm, as 
articulated in USAID Forward and the Automated 
Directives System (ADS) 201 promotes adaptive 
management as part of the new program cycle 
components of Collaborating, Learning and Adapting. 
Adaptive management increases efficiencies through 
the adoption of incremental changes during 
implementation based on data and its analysis. Rather 
than previous assumptions of activity implementation 
as a linear process, adaptive management promotes 
flexibility to respond to changes in results and context. 
Plenary Presentation
Overview of BUILD Overview of BUILD by Creative Associates to provide 
context and to assure that the audience is working 
with the same information. 
Presentation by Creative 
Associates
20
Focal Areas Facilitator Notes Product/Results
Group Exercise: 
Wall of Wonder
How has the Somali 
environment 
changed since 
activity design?
Explain Directions: The Wall of Wonder is an exercise 
in which the team identifies key events, both internal 
and external, during the past 2-3 years (or more) that 
may have had an impact on BUILD. Team members will 
place these events along a timeline. Group encouraged 
to reflect on events. 
Timeline and events that 
may have had impact on 
implementation to refer to 
during the learning event
Unpacking Lessons 
Learned
Lessons Learned from Key Informant Interviews: 
Joakim Gundel
Lessons Learned so far for BUILD: Creative Associates
Note: Remind participants that the objective is to 
identify the lessons. Analysis of Lessons will take place 
during the 5 WHY’s exercise in the afternoon
KII lessons
Findings from BUILD’s 
reflections on 
implementation to date
Observations on 
BUILD support of 
elections and 
constitutional review
Tom Bridle
Observations on elections and constitutional review 
for pause and reflect 
Plenary presentation
Unpacking Learning 
from Key Informant 
Interviews 
Continued
Unpack sessions:
• Shifting and complex political context
• Operational and management experience
• Non-IP perspectives
Q&A and discussion regarding KIIs and desk review 
information
Information from KIIs, other 
monitoring and secondary 
data
Wrap-up Remind participants to use plus/delta to 
receive feedback
21
Day 2: OBSTACLES, OPPORTUNTIES AND THE WAY FORWARD
Focal Areas Facilitator Notes Product/Results
Recap: What have we 
learned so far? 
Review of Agenda for 
Day 2 Theme
Review previous day’s outcomes. Assign to a 
select or group of participants on day 1
Pause and Reflect
Has the activity’s 
ToC and key 
assumptions held 
over the life of the 
activity so far?
• Walk through ToC Slide
• Review ToC-what we’re trying to achieve 
and how you think you will achieve it
• Use the ToC to identify existing 
knowledge, evidence, analysis as well as 
gaps and key assumptions embedded in 
our technical approach, as well as those 
that may come from the context in which 
the project we are designing will be 
implemented. Based on analysis of ToC, 
teams will generate learning questions, 
and suggested changes in the ToC based 
on data/information provided. 
• Terminology clarification: Learning 
Questions and Learning Plan, Adaptive 
Management
Learning questions, Suggested changes/adaptation 
to ToC
ToC analysis for modification
Learning questions
Wall of Wonder: Part 
2
What are potential key events moving forward 
through the end of BUILD that may have an 
impact on implementation?
Teams to create timeline and potential 
events/activities
Map of how BUILD will like to 
move forward through the rest 
of activity
Exercise: Map of 
Trends and Triggers
What are obstacles 
to learning and 
adapting in 
environment? 
Introduction of Trends and Triggers
Table Teams to develop Maps/Outlines of Trends
and Triggers
Trends/Triggers Map
22
Focal Areas Facilitator Notes Product/Results
Scenario Surveillance: 
What is the process 
and trend 
information needed 
to periodically pause 
and reflect, and 
consider scenario 
changes for adaptive 
management?
Walk through Scenario Surveillance Process with 
slide. Review the possible scenarios to track: 1-
Same, 2-Shaky, incremental changes, 3-worse, 4-
worst ever
Have table teams identify scenario indicators that 
qualify for each scenario using Field Trip around the 
Room technique. Teams move around the room 
every 10 minutes to discuss and add 
information/indicators for each scenario on the 4 
flip charts.
1. Identify scenario indicators to inform 
country surveillance (focus environmental 
scan on scenarios; observe trends; 
consider country context indicators)
2. Develop 1-2-page indicator trend matrix 
(to be updated during P&R moments)
3. Recommend that team review and discuss 
as part of Data and Strategy Reviews 
(administrative / strategic)
4. What significant changes may warrant 
further P&R, and other analysis for 
adaptive management?
Scenario Surveillance Process 
including indicators
Brainstorm/discussion
What opportunities 
exist during the 
program cycle for 
P&R? What other 
P&R opportunities 
should be built in for 
context monitoring 
and scenario 
surveillance? 
Table team discussion followed by group 
discussion
Provide slide with Program Cycle P&R 
opportunities. Ask teams to add additional 
opportunities based on USAID/Somalia operations 
and recommend other to incorporate these 
sessions into operations and for more frequent 
context monitoring
P&R schedule
Plenary and Group 
Activity
What process can we 
use to communicate 
to adapt: RACI 
Matrix
RACI-Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, 
Informed. This matrix is a tool promoted by 
USAID to enhance role clarification and 
ownership of key business processes. To find 
opportunities for more efficient and effective 
collaboration, it’s helpful to first differentiate who 
does what, when, and why
RACI Matrix
23
Focal Areas Facilitator Notes Product/Results
This process will assist IP and USAID with 
clarifying roles around the adaptive management 
process in order to increase efficiencies in 
responding to context. Teams will address 
different decision-making processes based on 
scenario surveillance. 
Exercise: 
Developing a 
Learning Plan
What kind of learning 
and analytical 
activities are needed 
to support learning, 
adaptation, and the 
desired political and 
technical changes?
Walk through slide of learning tools endorsed 
through the CLA framework in addition to tools 
that may facilitate learning and CLA. Remind team 
on ADS requirements regarding learning from 
evaluations, learning plan and opportunities for 
learning within the Program Cycle
Table teams to take learning questions, Activity 
Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (AMELP) and 
work by IRI to develop components of learning 
plan
Learning Plan to add to AMELP
Wrap-up Remind participants to provide feedback 
24
Day 3: OPERATIONALIZING THE WAY FORWARD
Focal Areas Facilitator Notes Product/Results
Recap: What have we 
learned so far? 
Review of Agenda for 
Day 3 Theme
Review previous day’s outcomes. Assign to 
participants on Day 1
What adaptations can 
we make to our 
activities?
Using information from KIIs, Root Cause 
Analysis, ToC review, learning questions, 
scenario surveillance and Wall of Wonder 
exercises, teams will brainstorm on 
recommended changes. 
Criteria for changes to be established with 
USAID and team. 
Teams divided by Objective.
Gallery Walk of ideas on flip charts followed by 
group voting
Draft list of activities to adapt 
and solutions/changes to 
implement
Trade off Analysis Trade off Analysis: This is a decision-making tool 
in which you define your own criteria to evaluate 
the options. This tool is useful when there are 
multiple options, multiple stakeholders and when 
there are factors beyond cost to consider. 
The group will use the Tradeoff Analysis criteria 
to review ideas and potential activities and 
identify those that best meet Trade off Analysis 
criteria. 
Trade off Analysis 
Finalize Action Plan Based on Trade off Analysis, group will develop 
Action Plan with tangible steps/tasks, responsible 
parties identified and timeframe
Action Plan Draft
Next Steps Based on action plan, BUILD and USAID will 
identify next steps for follow-up to the Learning 
Event
Closing Remarks USAID and BUILD provide closing remarks and 
reflection on activity
25
ANNEX III: LIST OF KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS
If distributed more broadly than key BUILD stakeholders, this annex should be deleted.
Individual Position/Organization Location
Chedomir Flego Chief of Party (COP) of BUILD Mogadishu
Muhammad Al Musbeh BUILD Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP) Mogadishu
Ahmed Awil Mohamed, Program Officer Mogadishu
Tihana Bartulac Blanc and DC based 
Creative staff
Creative Associates Washington, 
DC
Sa’eed Osman NEC Head of Ops Hargeisa
Dr. Nur Hersi Chief Strategist, Office of the President, 
FGS
Mogadishu
Maria Gaheir Centre for Policy Analysis (CPA) Hargeysa
Habiba Jimale & Alloyce Association of Somali Women Lawyers 
(ASWL)
Mogadishu
Hussein Sheikh Mohamud Senator Mogadishu
Naphtaly Saekamong O1 Lead (EISA sub) Mogadishu
Johanna Wilkie, Victoria Ayer USAID: AOR, A-AOR, Democracy, Rights, 
and Governance (DRG) Office Chief
Nairobi
Micol Martini UK Department for International 
Development (DFID)
Nairobi
Hama Munyikwa Former EISA lead for BUILD Mogadishu
Mohamed A. Sh. Osman Upper House Nairobi
Marc Dickinson & Mary Cummins United Nations Development Program 
(UNDP)/IESG
Nairobi
Halima Ismail Ibrahim, and Sayid Ali Sh. 
Mahamed
Chair and Deputy Chair, NIEC – Somalia Nairobi
Ten interviews were carried out remotely using Skype of which eight were in Mogadishu and two in 
Hargeysa; this included eleven persons of which five were from the IP’s and six were non-IPs. Face to face
interviews were carried out with one respondent in Washington DC and eight individuals (in five 
interviews) in Nairobi, including two from USAID and six non-IPs. Seven requested KII’s did not 
materialize, including one non-IP interview request that was rejected, one from a political party, one from 
a donor that was not available, and four non-responders (one from a political party and three other non￾IPs). The interviews were carried out by the SI Somalia expert, except for the one in Washington that 
was carried out by the SI Team Leader, who also accompanied the interviews in Nairobi.
26
ANNEX IV: STRATEGIC REVIEW AND LEARNING EVENT SUMMARY NOTES
Insightful discussions among this group proved valuable to BUILD and USAID. The following is a process 
report with session information, outputs from the group and descriptions of tools employed throughout
the 2.5-day event.
WHAT IS COLLABORATING, LEARNING AND ADAPTING?
USAID’s new development paradigm, as articulated in USAID Forward and the Automated Directives 
System (ADS) 201 promotes adaptive management as part of the new program cycle components of 
Collaborating, Learning and Adapting. Adaptive management increases efficiencies through the adoption 
of incremental changes during implementation based on data and its analysis. Rather than previous 
assumptions of activity implementation as a linear process, adaptive management promotes flexibility to 
respond to changes in results and context. 
Development rarely happens in a straight line, but we often plan and implement our activities as if we can 
draw a straight So, if the actual path of development is a lot less straightforward, how can we make sense 
of where to go?
Development is not a science. There is an assumption that activity implementation is linear, however, 
through the process of Collaborating, Learning and Adapting, those assumptions are checked, 
learning from what we see on the ground, from the monitoring results collected and adapting our actions 
to make for the most effective development. Collaborating, learning and adapting is not an add-on; it’s 
an approach to carrying out our daily work and it can significantly increase the impact of what we do.
OVERVIEW: BRINGING UNITY, INTEGRITY AND LEGITIMACY TO DEMOCRACY 
(PRESENTATION BY BUILD)
Presentation Summary
• Introduction to BUILD project
• BUILD Progress vs Targets
• Challenges and Obstacles 
• M&E Recommendations 
Project Overview
• Build electoral systems, strengthen civil society and encourage civic participation in Somalia, with 
a particular focus on women, youth and other marginalized groups.
• Duration: March 31, 2016 – March 30, 2021
• Budget: ~$29 million
• Implementer: Creative Associates 
• Partners: IRI, EISA, Forcier Consulting
• Location: Somalia (Somaliland)
Immediate Challenges
• Political instability; insecure and corrupt environment
• Frequent timeframe changes by Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) on political decisions
• Delay of legal framework to endorse the 2020 election 
27
• Limited FGS coordination with Federal Member States (FMS) & between participating 
stakeholders
• Lack of technical capacity in political processes
• Limited citizen knowledge & awareness of One-Person One-Vote election, as in traditional clan 
structures 
Towards Inclusive OPOV by 2020/BUILD:
• Is cognizant of and re-evaluates incentives of the primary stakeholder groups
• Has developed an approach that focuses on incrementally shifting the incentives
• Uses civic education efforts to incentivize political elites to seek broad-based popular mandates
• Is focused on gaining support and mobilizing citizens to participate in the political process
• Encourages FGS, civil society, and political parties to build on existing structures and political 
traditions, and engage traditional leaders and other stakeholders to promote acceptance of the 
transition
Build Objectives
Objective 1: Enhance citizens' understanding of political and electoral processes
1.1 Build CSO capacity to inform citizens and monitor political processes
1.2 Build Media capacity to cover and disseminate information on electoral and political processes
Objective 2: Build the capacity of NIEC and other relevant government bodies to design, administer and 
manage transparent, credible and accepted elections and political processes, with effective public outreach
Objective 3: Develop political parties; competitive, inclusive and representative of citizens' interests, and 
support enabling legal/regulatory framework for participation in elections
Key Components of Program
• Conduct public outreach, voter registration, and civic education and inform citizens to freely 
influence public policies and participate in the One -Person-One Vote election
• Build and enhance capacity of political parties, registration with the authorities
• Develop processes to empower minority groups, women, and youth to participate in the 
electoral process
• Build capacity of civil society and an independent media to ensure citizens are well informed 
about the electoral process and encourage participation
• BUILD completed program supporting Somaliland election.
Key Progress Made
• 3,644 election officials of both Somalia and Somaliland were trained
• 8 procedures and administrative policies were developed for both NIEC and NEC
• 100% of local CSOs receiving United States Government (USG) assistance improved capacity to 
promote political participation and awareness
• 6 clear and transparent procedures were developed by Somaliland political parties
• 94% of political party polling agents trained observed presidential election
• With USG assistance, three (3) political parties implemented initiatives to increase number of 
candidates or members from marginalized groups
• With USG assistance, eight (8) women and youth obtained a formal role in their party/campaign 
teams in 2017
28
Monitoring & Evaluation 
• Project M&E manager validates data on a quarterly basis. Indicators are disaggregated by gender
• Beneficiaries level database is maintained, but can be improved
• Project team analyzes M&E data quarterly to identify trends and anomalies and changes, that may 
be required in program activities. These are reported to USAID
• M&E Plan is aligned with the workplan
M&E Challenges
• Lack of pre-verification meeting – Somalia Program Support Services (SPSS) team 
• SPSS mainly relying on annual implementation plan
• Lack of M&E focal point from NIEC, NEC and local CSOs
Strategic Recommendations
• Facilitate legislative legal framework as a higher priority
• Strengthen operational capacity of Somalia National Independent Electoral Commission
• Conduct sustainable civic/voter registration, and/or districting and census 
• Continue development & building of political parties 
• Conduct extensive civic awareness and activism amongst women, youth, and minority groups
WARM UP EXERCISE: WALL OF WONDER (LED BY MARIBEL DIAZ)
The Wall of Wonder is an exercise in which the team identifies key events, both internal and external, 
during the past 2-3 years (or more) that may have had an impact on BUILD and project out into the 
future. Its purpose is the following:
• Interact with colleagues who have different perspectives on USAID/Somalia’s DRG environment 
over the life of project
• Develop a shared understanding of key events that have led to the BUILD activity “starting point” 
today
• Work together to identify key events and forces that will affect BUILD and USAID in the remaining 
years of the activity
Key take-aways from the activity that focused on retrospective events include: 
• Important strides were made in the process leading to the election in Somaliland; Flexibility to 
pivot during elections and successful grant implementation. However, USAID Somalia raised a 
concern on the need to be aware of the CSO’s and other groups who are better placed and more 
appropriate to channel the smaller grants; they would be more responsive to local needs. In 
addition, they were concerned that CSO’s needed to adhere to their standard indicators and
report on those, which can be challenging. The recommendation is to consider a participatory 
and conversational grant implementation process, rather than a controlling
• The date of the election was postponed from March to November 2017. Funding increased in 
response to this delay and the closure of BUILD’s Somaliland office delayed.
• NIEC changed its primary engagement from BUILD to IESG. The voter registration process is still 
undecided. 
Future key events projected for 2018, 2019 and 2020 include the following:
• The passing of a citizenship law, parliament leaders join political parties, 
29
• Civic and voter education activities will take place through grants to media and civil society groups
• While the team projected OPOV in 2020, others projected a delay in elections and a revision of 
the OPOV process. 
• Female participation is anticipated to increase from 25% in 2016 to 50% in 2020
UNPACKING LEARNING: LESSONS LEARNED, KIIS (LED BY JOAKIM GUNDEL)
30
Unpacking learning themes based on the Key Informant Interviews and Desk Review
Overview of Key Lessons Learned
• Somaliland (SL) experience is not immediately transferrable to Somalia
• Insufficient action in Somalia so far to generate lessons learned
• Most valuable experience used now is work with civil society in SL 
• Media component not implemented in SL
• NEC had previous learning experience and capable of acknowledging mistakes 
• Experienced disconnects between MPs and political parties in SL 
• Program flexibility in terms of activities, i.e. postponement when there was a drought
 
Objective 1: Civil Society, Awareness and Media) Lessons Learned
• Need to put things on hold or change gears as the situation changes.
• There are some similarities between CSs in SL and Somalia, but there are greater challenges in 
Somalia. 
• Voter registration, education and awareness activities, now carried on in the south through small 
grants.
• Civic education to increase participation of women and youth (new call of grants in Somalia)
• Activities should go beyond the needs of CSOs to also include traditional leaders, community￾based organizations, grassroots organizations and district and village communities.
• Use the identified existing structures instead of Hargeysa based NGOs going straight to villages.
Objective 2: NEC (Somaliland) on Lessons Learned with BUILD
• NEC reports a positive experience
• Value added in voter card distribution, elections management, warehouse management and
operational plan. 
• Good cooperation with managers and head of departments. 
• Financial support for acquisition of election equipment, three different contracts, Voter card
printing, election material, paper ballot printing ballot 
• Procurement support and adoption of USAID system for the procurement. 
 
Objective 3: Political Parties
• Disconnect between MPs and political parties in Somaliland
• MPs had no ongoing sustained relationship of belonging to their political parties
• No political party caucuses
• No sustained communications between MPs with their party after elections
 
Observations in relation to the ToC
• KIs feel ToC need to be revised 
• ToC is not clear to the KIs and not influencing day-to-day work 
• ToC not adequately adopted for the Somalia context 
• Civil Society (CS) awareness raising may have potential
• Doubts about the prospects of working with political parties 
• EMB do not seem capable or able to progress in the medium-term
SHIFTING AND COMPLEX CONTEXT
31
Unpacking Themes from KIIs and Desk Review
• Society in Somalia is more complex than in Somaliland
• Political dynamics are also more complex and more difficult to predict
• Challenge for BUILD is determining how to deal with:
o Legal and electoral framework that is not in place
o Authorities that are not institutionalized
o Partners (i.e., NIEC) that are blocking agreement
o Political parties that are not consolidated
o Lack of civil society
Political Situation & Dynamics
• Political Dynamics complicated and unpredictable: main guiding principle has been the 4.5
• Strained relations within Parliament, between Parliament and Executive, within Executive
• between competing Ministries, and between Members of Parliament (MPs) and President
• Not just clan-politics, but also political/business networks related to various Islamic groups and 
external interests
• Strained federal-regional dynamics and strained internal-regional dynamics
• Rent-seeking and corruption undermine projects
• Most agree an end to 4.5 is necessary, but road to universal suffrage may take longer as 
foundations such as civil society, political party, understanding, and reconciliation still are missing
• Some progress on Road Map, but Parliament is still waiting for the basic electoral laws from the 
MoIFAR and NIEC
• Constitutional Review set to be finalized by end of this year (!?)
Security Restrictions
• Attacks can disrupt process: Polling stations, NIEC, Political Parties, Local, Reg and Federal 
Governments, CS awareness campaigners, Targeted assassinations
• Full elections can only take place where there is sufficient security
• Lack of security also restricts taxation (Non-IP perspective)
• Security has not improved. It is getting worse. President/Government is not tackling 
Al Shabaab (Non-IP perspective)
• The new Security framework risks dividing Somalia even more (Non-IP perspective)
• National army should be led by Executive, but now states have forces. To create a 
national army, need a basic agreement between clans/reconciliation. 
Working with civic society (CS)
• Because it is not clear what CS in a stateless society is, it may be a challenge working with this 
sector, without stronger clarity in what and who CS its.
• Work with CS on election awareness is limited without a defined elections system 
• Programs risk creating a pocket or network of patronage with the CSOs contracted through 
grants.
• Advocacy of elections is limited without a Somali mindset ready for democracy
• Local Somali CSO’s tend to select their organizational missions and activities based on available 
funding by the international donor community 
• Money on advocacy and creating new institutions or umbrella organizations risk being dead ends
Working with political parties
32
• Contrary to assumptions political parties today are just shells; there are no important or major 
parties
• We have to understand the party process and consider future scenarios: will they disappear? Will 
they form coalitions? Will they develop a political ideology? 
• If they start coalescing and merging. Will they do so along clan lines? Who will support them 
financially?
Working with NIEC and EMB Support
• NIEC Chairman appears to block progress 
o NIEC is mostly a one person show with no experience or capacity 
o Hard build a program when dependent on a one-person entity
• Issue of contention is the choice of voter registration system.
o NIEC wants expensive full bio-metric system and is unhappy with BUILD’s suggestions to 
select a more practical system that is more appropriate to the voting population profile,
such as a conducting voter registration manually
o Competition with National ID project, which could be used for voter registration
• NIEC has no experience, and no learning curve so far.
• NIEC is hiring staff but appears to be along clan/family/interest lines rather than qualifications.
• NIEC appears unrealistic about what it takes to prepare elections 
• NIEC independence may be jeopardized due to its composition and rent-seeking behavior
• Coordination and collaboration with IESG in regard to NIEC need to be improved
• Government funding of NIEC is important to show that there is political will, and it is not just a 
rent-seeking project.
• Can the NIEC contribute to the legal framework for elections?
o Need to work with the National Federal Technical Committee etc., to move the legal 
electoral frameworks forward.
OPERATIONAL & MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE (UNPACKING THEMES 2)
Staff Discontinuity
• Staff turnover causing discontinuity (EISA). EISA does not manage the sub-grant process
• Delays due to late arrival of objective 1 lead from EISA, took time find replacement. 
• Several and changing number of decision makers
Coordination
• Day to day coordination challenges
Long Reporting Lines and Grant Process
• Reporting lines between field (BUILD/Mogadishu), (USAID/Nairobi) and (Creative HQ/ 
Washington DC) are too long and complicated, 
• Reporting and communication among the IPs also need to be improved
• The grants process has to go between Mogadsihu, Washington and Nairobi and can be lengthy. 
• It is important to be able to respond when the context changes rapidly
Security of Operations
33
• Security conditions makes work more complicated; movement is restricted; dependence on 
security partner whenever movement is necessary
Ability to face challenges with local stakeholders
• Challenges working with a beneficiary that is not cooperative 
• Authorities want to get funds directly
• Who is in a better position to address roadblocks with the local political actors and stakeholders? 
USAID, State Department, or the BUILD partners: Creative, IRI & EISA? The answer is the key 
to removing roadblocks for implementation
• USAID is trying to help to work with the NIEC, and tell them that this support needs to be 
structured and balanced in their efforts
NON-IP PERSPECTIVES (UNPACKING THEMES 3)
These are perspectives and key points from non-implementing partner KII’s, presented by themes that 
emerged from the interviews.
On the political electoral process:
The non-IP KIIs found that the political process is still uncertain and emphasized that the Government(s) 
are not working together, and there is confusion. Factors that need to be considered include:
• Lack of clarity of the constituencies.
• Taxation is potentially unpopular.
• Population statistics are uncertain. There is no national census to date.
• The definition of citizenship needs to be clarified for the voter registration process. This may 
cause delays and if so, an extension will cause a major political crisis.
The following statements stood out as relevant:
“The consultative process on the constitution is not sufficiently inclusive but we think they (the FGS) are 
doing their best. In 2016 it was clear that one man and one vote was not possible, but are we able to do 
that now? Everything depends on how the politicians agree.”
“The Somali people are ready to go through what is necessary for democratization, but the government(s) 
must not misuse that trust. People are very skeptical about the process now, and the talk is that the 
government is looking for extension, but no one will ever accept that.”
“Everything depends on how people see the electoral system and how they can trust it. They should come 
out with a system that can be accepted by the both the regional powers, and the political parties. There 
needs to be more dialogue and reconciliation.” 
“Financial and human resources are crucial. But are they (FGS) ready to raise the funds? Then they say we 
need the political will to provide. They claim they can handle it, with help from the international 
community.” 
34
“Mogadishu (Banaadir region) is also the only main source of revenue today and should be part of process. 
But, some people want to exclude Banaadir from the elections.” 
“The capacitation of parties and civil society is crucial. But, people need to learn how they can participate, 
have access to parties, and can reach the politicians they want. Hence, the focus needs to be more on 
having people to participate in process, and not just about how to vote. In general, it is important that 
people get equal political opportunities.”
On political parties:
The following statements and points on political parties stood out: 
“Political parties don’t really make sense, and the process towards parties now doesn’t make any sense, 
because they are not based on common interests or ideas.”
“Now MPs have to be member of party because they have to. So, they are forced to make coalitions.” 
“Politics today is not based on any common program, or position. Instead it is all fragmented and comes 
down to individual interests.” 
“People will not be looking at parties’ programs but elements such as clan, personality, political heavy 
weights etc.” 
“The political party process risks fragmenting the Somali society even more.” 
“Do Somalis accept political parties because they need it, or because they think it is something EU want.” 
“The process towards a political party system is new to Somalia. We need to know about how to run 
political parties. As an MP, I am confused about which one to join, or maybe I need to establish my own.” 
“BUILD could provide training / workshop with MPs about political parties, to understand the concept of 
parties and how to manage this.” 
“What we really need, is to know much more about election process management, including how political 
parties should do their job. Today, no single party has experience to plan and manage elections campaigns.”
“Not sure we can avoid clan-based politics. Somalis will still be considering the clan issue. Parties will need 
members from all Somali communities, and seats in every region of Somalia. But it will be a long way, 
maybe in 2030-40, realistically clan politics will continue with these elections.” 
Perspectives on Voter Registration System:
“Contention is about grabbing the particular system for reasons of control, resort and intelligence.” 
“The voter registration system from Pakistan will not be accepted by ‘people’, because they think the 
person behind it will make money through the ID system, they will think it is his business and he will own 
it.” 
35
“People in the regions would not trust someone from Mogadishu to register them, they would only trust 
someone local from their community to register.”
“We have to come up with a system everyone can accept. NIEC may be viewed similarly. There should 
be some sort of acceptance from each and all groups on how to do this.” 
“We are in a very fragile situation and pushing the systems and elections too hard through risks making 
everything fall apart.” 
“Voter registration can be a political risk too, as it could change the real power balance between clans. 
Need to accept a system that shows we are moving forward.” 
“National ID is an interesting option, but I am not sure. People would have confidence if registration is 
done with local administrations, but not sure about their capacity to do this. I think, they need local help 
to do it. They need local administrations to do the enrollment, and to feed into the centralized database. 
Some will want NIEC to do it, because if National ID goes wrong, then they will have that at least”.
“NIEC’s wish to only register voters for the 2020 elections is not realistic. NIEC do not buy the National 
ID idea, because it came to them as a surprise! NIEC wants to protect the independence of the registry 
and are afraid of manipulation by government. MOIFAR and the federal states also compete for control 
of registration.”
Perspectives on BUILDs working relationship with NIEC: 
“They had someone that NIEC liked, who really sat down with them. They don’t feel like that they have 
it anymore. Needs to have a conversation on what you need to help bolster technical capacity to broker 
that space and have that conversation.” 
“BUILD is in a tricky position. BUILD needs to create further client relationships with NIEC. UN can’t 
create the critical friend role with NIEC. Not sure that they are transparent about their choices.”
WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED SO FAR? 
• Participants were asked to reflect on discussions during Day 1 and any new or significant 
discoveries for themselves individually. Comments include: 
o Grants program and possibility of different methodologies.
o CLA is a new concept to BUILD and its IPs. CLA is still trickling down from Missions to 
IPs across USAID programming. 
o Reflection and adjustment on how the project sees itself versus how others see BUILD.
o How to connect with Economic Growth group and their clients. Recognition that we 
are siloed.
o CSOs perceptions. Ideas and thinking of how to balance new ideas and risks associated 
with doing things differently
o Good to hear others’ perceptions.
o Awareness of need to look/examine politics of Somalia (need to be more advanced in 
understanding)
o Good to hear that USAID is open to adjustments.
36
o We may need to consider our Plan B.
o What do we need to do differently?
o Hear from the field/program
o What makes/does not make sense
o To what degree do we work towards other items e.g., election management body for 
2024
o We haven’t discussed media- how to we use their strengths and to address our needs?
PAUSE AND REFLECT: HAVE THE ACTIVITY’S TOC AND KEY ASSUMPTIONS HELD OVER 
THE LIFE OF THE ACTIVITY SO FAR?
During Day 2, participants reviewed the BUILD ToC to 
identify gaps and key assumptions embedded in the 
technical approach and context in which BUILD is 
operating. and assumptions section. As part of Learning 
and Adaptive Management, it’s important to adjust (or 
update) their Activity MEL plan through this validation 
process of their ToC. 
During this exercise, table teams were asked to identify 
key questions that can serve to highlight knowledge gaps 
and contextual uncertainties, and that uncover priority 
learning themes and topics for BUILD to research, conduct studies or undertake other analysis. This 
information will likely influence the ability of BUILD to redirect activities to achieve its purpose, and/or 
mitigate risks that might undermine their success.
USAID/Somalia acknowledged assumptions made during activity design have changed, particularly due to 
influencing factors, such as lack of political will to carry through required legislations and constitutional 
review, and security setbacks. The Wall of Wonder captured key events that influenced activity 
implementation. 
Key Assumptions and knowledge gaps include the following:
Legal Framework: The legal framework lays the foundation and provides direction for the development 
of systems and processes, participating institutions and other structural activities needed in order to build 
up to elections. To date, the legal framework for Somalia’s elections is yet to be developed. 
One Person, One Vote (OPOV): The assumption that citizens and decision-makers demand and 
support OPOV is an uncertain assumption discussed by donors and implementing organizations. Gaps 
regarding OPOV include: 
• Who are the forces willing to advocate for OPOV?
• What mechanisms do they have to advocate for OPOV?
• What tools do they have to facilitate this process?
• How are people organizing around interests?
37
• External knowledge gaps such as corruption (who benefits, other actors)?
• CSOs/Media (need to change assumption) based on their capacity and trust needed to influence.
• Is there political will for OPOV?
• What is political party in Somalia?
Political Parties/Context: BUILD’s work with political parties under Objective 3: 
• ID/Voter Registration (VR) process doesn’t exist? Is this an assumption?
• Political Parties are more competitive, inclusive and representative of citizens’ interests. One 
important assumption/knowledge gap is the question: Who is a citizen?
Contextual knowledge gaps include:
• Who is in charge?
• How are decisions made? They are opaque, and the decision-making process appears ad hoc. 
• The delay in decision-making is a distraction
• Who/what are the Legal drafting bodies?
• Political Party Advisors (including FTWC) are unknown
• Technical –NIEC-selection?
• Legal framework
• Financial-donor support gov’t
• Don’t know when legal framework will pass/capacity of those developing drafts?
• IP/donor involvement in drafting/timing
• EMBs
• What will govt contribute?
Which assumptions still hold? 
• Political parties
• Legislation exists.
• Local stakeholders-assistance-still holds
• $=yes, Money /Funding= yes
• Technical Assistance = mostly yes+ + parties yes
• Reform perspective?
• Political parties-still yes
• Advisors
• NEC=yes
Additional Knowledge Gaps
• Legal drafting bodies 
• Political party advisors
• National ID
• Capacity of existing EMBs
• Human Resources
• NIEC selection criteria
• Legal framework
• Financial-donor support of government
• Don’t know when legal framework will be developed
38
• Potential role of IP/donor involvement in drafting/timing
• Better understanding of contextual factors
• (Some missing)
Citizen Safety
• To what extent does citizen safety exist? 
• Partial security is good in some hotels and hosting events in gov’t areas
Knowledge gaps? - threats? 
• Threats unknown
• Will citizens be able to assemble/rally?
• Who are citizens?
• What will security needs be/look like?
• Who is carrying out killings? No prosecution
Contextual factors
• Approximately 100 people assassinated since 2016- people are blackmailed/threatened to comply 
(won’t answer phone calls from unknowns)
• Date of drawdown of African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM)
• External/internal security actors
• Advice provided to FGS/FMS on security and coordination.
• Hotline? NIEC structure
As a result of this exercise, BUILD developed a ToC that reflects current reality and current assumptions. 
Discussions were considered during this process. 
On Day 3, BUILD presented this draft to the group:
Table 3: ToC developed by BUILD
If… Then… Therefore…
• Citizens are more aware of key 
constitutional and electoral 
concepts, and engage with 
decision makers on participatory 
processes toward one-person, 
one-vote elections
• Civil society including NGOs, 
traditional and religious leaders, 
private sector and businesses 
• Decision-makers are 
held accountable to 
developing a 
constitution, legal and 
operational 
frameworks for 
OPOV elections
• Media informs the 
public on electoral 
Trust and participation in 
political and electoral processes 
by Somalis will increase
39
facilitate engagement between 
citizens and government on 
constitutional and legislative 
processes
• Decision-makers are supported to 
develop appropriate and applicable 
legal framework
• Journalists are equipped with skills 
and knowledge to cover political 
processes in a balanced, accurate 
and impartial manner
• Electoral Management Bodies 
including NIEC and other 
government bodies are supported 
to develop operational systems
• Political parties are established 
and functioning
and constitutional 
matters, so the public 
can hold political 
actors accountable
• By the end of the 
project, government 
bodies and NIEC will 
have key systems to 
administer elections 
effectively
• Political parties will 
be able to compete in 
a way that leads to 
participatory 
processes and appeals 
to a range of citizens, 
including women and 
youth
This first draft is commended by the group; however, it is recommended that assumptions identified are 
grounded in plausible expectations from the external environment. It is recognized that assumptions are 
outside of the locus of control for BUILD, however, the group from USAID would like this to reflect the 
ToC and assumptions that are expected to hold. 
EXERCISE : TRENDS AND TRIGGERS 
What is the process and trend information needed to periodically pause and reflect, and consider scenario 
changes for adaptive management?
During this exercise, the BUILD team identified overarching potential areas for greater examination and 
that may have impact on the activity. The purpose of this exercise is to create dialogue around critical 
trends that threatened achievement of project goals and to identify tangible triggers that will signal the 
need to adapt the approach. Pause and reflect moments will be used to asses these trends and if any of 
these triggers have been switched. 
1. LEGAL PROCESSES
2. MEDIA
3. SECURITY+ CONFLICT
4. POLITICAL DECISION MAKING
5. STATE FEDERAL RELATIONSHIPS
6. VOTER REGISTRATION
40
1.LEGAL PROCESSES
OPOV
Trends Triggers
• Lack of political leadership and/understanding 
of roles
• Slowness
• Problematic laws are passed.
• No electoral law passed by end 2018
2. MEDIA
Trends Triggers
• Security
• Low capacity
• Inaccuracy
• Norms
• Little pay
• Security threats against the media
• Repressive government action against media
• Fake news/intentional misinterpretation of 
BUILD work
3.STATE-FEDERAL RELATIONSHIP
Trends Triggers
• Disagreement on FGS proposal on elections 
(e.g., one state refuses to adopt Dec. 2020)
Tense /dialogue process
• A threat to pull out of the engagement.
4. NIEC-STATE RELATIONSHIP
Trends Triggers
Delay in clarifying processes & responsibilities Unsure
5. VOTER REGISTRATION
Trends Triggers
• Inability to function • Elections postponed
• Elections cancelled
41
• Systems failure
6.SECURITY
Trends Triggers
• Geographical control (Status quo to losses)
• Al Shabab attacks continue
• Candidates, delegates, media vulnerable to 
threats/assassinations 
• Gov’t starts negotiations with Al Shabaab
• AMISOM withdraws
• Partners and/or BUILD staff are targeted
SCENARIO SURVEILLANCE AND SCENARIO PLANNING: IDENTIFYING TRENDS, 
TRIGGERS, INDICATORS AND PLAN B
This is a 360-degree’ Process in which participants are asked to reflect on how the country scenario 
should inform the BUILD activity’s CLA Plan? In this process, teams are asked to identify:
• What are the key triggers, ‘trip-wires,’ indicators originally contemplated in the scenario? 
• Are the scenario quadrant concepts, descriptions, and movement still valid? Identify modifications 
/ changes to scenario quadrants 
• How should we survey the country context to forewarn game-changers, trip wires, trigger events?
• How should we support adaptive decision-making? Define notional process and roles.
The forces and trends identified in this 
exercise will allow BUILD to anticipate 
adaptation to activities through those 
indicators that may signal a shift from 
“Shaky/Managed Incremental Change” 
(identified as Scenario II in Figure 3) to “It 
Gets Worse” (Scenario III) in the near-to￾medium context of preparations for the 
planned elections in 2020. 
BUILD identified Scenario 1 as Plan A in 
which minimal changes would facilitate 
implementation as planned. In response to 
triggers that would shift the activity into 
“Shaky/Managed Incremental Change,”
groups identified what they call Plan B. This 
is BUILD’s response to these trends and 
triggers based on indicators identified in the exercise. 
The following four possible scenarios were discussed by table teams. Triggers and context monitoring 
indicators were proposed for surveillance. We discuss each in turn. 
Figure 3: Scenario Trajectory
42
Scenario 1: Voter registration problem
The national ID process starts and is designed so that the database can also be used for voter registration. 
However, the process moves slowly and by mid-2019, we understand that the database will not be 
complete until at least 2022.
Assumption-a credible election process
• Trust & participation
• Can national ID contribute and serve as indication or both?
• T+P=OPOV- causal link
What are the Triggers and Trends for entering into Plan B?
• Inadequate progress in achieving milestones towards a National ID database
Plan B
• Guidance on same day voter registration. 
• Can lead to other scenarios-Those who think Somalia isn’t ready for Plan B (Can be used to their 
advantage)
• Facilitate dialogue- have NIEC involved.
Scenario 2: Stalled legal reforms
A bill that provides the legal framework for federal elections is developed and submitted to the Council 
of Ministers by MoIFAR. There is resistance by various political actors to provisions of the bill and progress 
comes to a stop for months while the National Security Council attempts to negotiate the political issues. 
Trigger
• Bill is submitted to council of ministers
• Progress being made by taking to congress & passing
• Individuals & behind the scenes work involved
Indicator to identify trigger
• NSC council is locked away
Plan B
• Support interest groups on what is considered a good bill
• Pressure/Influence
• Engage international stakeholders to advocate
• Staff to engage with those in government who may be blocking process
Scenario 3: Fallout of no election
In 2019, more and more politicians and pundits begin saying that holding one-person-one-vote elections 
in 2020 is simply not technically feasible, but a transition of power is needed. There is still no electoral 
43
law and many constitutional provisions remain undecided. These politicians say that there should be an 
expansion of the 2016 electoral process.
Trigger
Identify and track progress in reaching milestones to OPOV to anticipate actual trigger. (Caution; can be 
used against OPOV)
Plan B
• Messaging to Donors- campaign
• Help NIEC on how explain feasibility of elections.
• Help anyone on electoral law & other provisions.
• Engage CSOs to message
Scenario 4: NIEC funding shortfall
NIEC does not receive enough government funding to hire the number of staff needed to conduct the 
election in the FGS budget for 2020.
Trigger
• Govt doesn’t accept budget proposed.
• Agree but doesn’t have legal approval process-too long
Indicators to identify trigger
• Government dispute w/ NIEC
• Direct communication
• Other stakeholders
• Strategic plan tracking
Plan B
• Discuss w/ Somalia leaders.
• Early budget formulation.
• Assistance on what is a government budget? Its elements/process
• Prepare NIEC leader to help her with a communications strategy
44
ACTION PLANNING
In addition to scenario planning, participants identified more immediate actions and adaptations to take in 
the short and medium term. These are summarized in Table 4. 
Table 4: Action Planning
Objective Sub-objectives and 
Activities
Actions and Adaptations
Objective 1: Civic 
Engagement -CSOs
CSOs capacity to inform 
citizens and monitor political 
processes increased
Conduct community-driven action research 
oriented to CSO mapping to determine 
potential partners and establish which are 
engaged with which donors.
Media Media capacity to cover and 
disseminate information on 
political process increased
Consider training journalists on now to 
conduct journalistic research, including 
ethical training. 
Engage British Broadcasting Corporation
(BBC) in providing strategic communications
support
Objective 2: Support 
to Election Bodies and 
Management Bodies
• Events to increase 
dialogue and knowledge
• To support registration￾meet registration 
requirements.
• Technical assistance￾Basic (all given chance) 
Advanced- on selected 
programs-focus on 
what’s important to 
manage resources.
Map decision makers and identify a strategy 
of influence. Research and identify a strategy 
for influencing key decision makers.
ISSUE-BASED PATTERNS
• Identify issues of priority/represent￾Become relevant influential.
• Conduct citizen outreach
• Internal comm. And decision making
• Recruitment; member/volunteer 
engagement
INFLUENCERS
• Work with MPs
• Work with party members
• Help MPs to join a party (required by 
end of 2018)
CHANGES
• Need to understand how the Somali 
informal political system works
• Find a niche-join/support a party
45
• If a party is influential/individual-buy in for
O-P-O-V
Objective 3: Political 
parties are more 
competitive, inclusive, 
and representative of 
citizens’ interests
• Coordinate with other donors and 
international development partners to 
influence and ensure complementary 
approaches. 
• Understand & support the drafting of the 
legal framework. This requires the above 
noted mapping of influencers. Work with 
influential MPs, civil society activities, and 
others to advance legislation. 
• Provide operational planning and 
assistance to drafting a realistic budget at 
the state level.
• Ensure coordination with IESG on 
support to NIEC on compliance and 
public accountability.
46
LEARNING QUESTIONS FOR INCORPORATION INTO BUILD ACTIVITY MEL PLAN
Based on gaps and learning questions 
BUILD will design learning activities that 
best suit each learning question, in terms 
of rigor, data availability, number and types 
of perspectives required, and/or timing, in 
terms of what we find out. The nature and 
scope of activities might be focused on 
accessing, analyzing and utilizing 
monitoring data, or investing in 
evaluations. Or a better fit might be to 
pursue a research activity, an assessment 
or focused analysis - such as a lit review -
or structured peer learning. As with 
analysis during the design phase, the ‘right 
fit’ is key to matching learning activity to 
learning question. Finally, learning 
priorities need to consider utilization -- how, when, by whom will the learning be used? To share with 
stakeholders, partners, future project designers? And/or to inform iterative design throughout 
implementation? To refine the ToC or add a new intervention where gaps in the implementation plan 
might appear? 
During the Theory of Change activity during Day 2, participants developed the following potential 
questions
1. What is a political party in Somalia? Who are the people behind these parties?
2. Who is a citizen?
3. ID/VR process doesn’t exist. Is this an assumption?
4. The composition of the NIEC Board and the selection process of its membership unknown. Do we know 
what criteria was applied for selection?
5. Who will be able to assemble /rally?
6. EMBs - what will govt contribute?
Additional Learning Questions 
• Who are the influencers or decision makers learning on political matters?
• How can we best influence these influencers?
• Which community should we target to identify how to best engage citizens? 
• Who are players in the legal framework at national & state levels?
• Map influential individual re; political parties (network/association/business networks)?
• Who are these members of parties to be recruited?
• Who are the people in the political parties?
• What may be the limitations of parties outside of Mogadishu?
• What are people’s perceptions on political parties?
Figure 4: Developing a Learning Agenda
47
FACILITATOR AFTER-ACTION REVIEW
After-Action Reviews are an important retrospective tool for learning. It is a tool and process that is 
endorsed by USAID as a helpful CLA Tool. 
As part of Social Impact’s process, After Action Reviews were conducted by the in-country SI team in 
order to reflect on what was planned, what transpired and what lessons regarding process that can be 
learned. Given the innovative nature of this activity and its vision of being a more timely and participatory 
process than mid-term evaluations, the facilitation team reflected on the process, dynamics and learning 
for future utilization of such events.
Day 1: After Action Review
What was supposed to happen?
• Opening to remind group on “safe space”
• Follow our agenda to reflect on what’s happened so far
• Wall of wonder to identify key events both internal and external to BUILD that may have had an 
impact on the activity. 
• Unpacking Lessons Learned from KIIs and BUILD 
• KII information
• Observations on elections and constitutional review
What actually happened? 
• USAID provided appropriate tone for openness and frank discussions
• USAID open and frank on asking important questions for consideration and potential ways to 
conduct activity/ granting that is beyond traditional granting. Can there be other mechanisms for 
engaging CS?
• BUILD presentation on results was a reflection of their latest quarterly report. Didn’t reflect the 
objective of the activity. No discussion on the complexity and learning from their environment. 
Was an exercise in trying to demonstrate results.
• Wall of Wonder was helpful in providing context 
• Lessons learned. Civil society-correcting that civil society was actually from the regions to balance 
out participation. KIIs reflected that this was SI perception
• USAID openly describing impression of BUILD during retreat in February
• BUILD field team providing their impressions/agreements/disagreements regarding KII 
information. Did it hold true for them?
• Needed to use “step up, step back” approach to allow field office to provide insights
• BUILD staff holding back on contributing to discussions. Perhaps misunderstanding of safe space 
with field and IP and HQ?
• Lots of questions from Creative HQ, but less from field. 
• Lots of sharing of impressions and questioning from Non-Agreement Officer Representative 
(AOR) staff/outside of the immediate BUILD activity. Limited to higher level impressions.
48
KII’s defensiveness:
• Conversation on overlap among partners met with defensiveness.
• Justification/defensiveness regarding Political Economy Analysis (PEA) memo information
• Disagreement on grant process and delays
• Disagreement regarding perception of NIEC leadership; not accepting current viewpoints by 
interviewees
• Belief that sample of KIIs did not capture activity accurately (not enough #s)
• February team building/reflection activity. Referenced memo regarding perceptions on BUILD by 
USAID.
• During interviews, team members were not engaged with the Theory of Change, but at the same 
time, they all agreed that TOC should be changed
• TOC concept is unknown generally; lack of thinking that agency to change is possible. 
What lessons can we learn? 
• Focus future discussion on BUILD staff and their on-the-ground insights
• Remind team that this is an opportunity to think of things differently
• Trying to help team to “feel free” to think of things differently. How to do this? 
• Split groups into “Field and USAID AOR” and “HQ and other USAID”
• Trying to keep people to agenda. Participants passionate about answering their own particular 
questions. 
• The group can benefit from the insights of the Subject Matter Expert (SME); sometimes this ends 
up taking more time than anticipated
Understanding and socializing that changing TOC is possible. This may be a reflection of how the 
participants have operated in development overall. How to convey that behaviors regarding the non￾linear approach to development is still yet to be socialized. 
Day 2: After Action Review
What was supposed to happen?
• ToC analysis
• Learning Questions and Learning Plan
• Scenario Surveillance presentation
• Future Wall of Wonder
• Trends and Triggers
What actually happened?
• Technology still a problem
• Agenda adjustments due to technology delays
• Additional conversations to break down definitions-Use of word “Nuances”
• Use of scenarios to identify Triggers, Indicators and Plan B
• Skipped exercises: 5 why’s, identifying Pause and Reflect moments, developing a learning plan
• Delayed RACI Matrix
49
• Challenge: different versions of the ToC. Client and donor didn’t know which one to work from. 
• Discussion on what the goal should be: Trust and Participation and not One Person one vote. 
This indicates that both client and IP were unclear about their actual ToC/Development Objective. 
SI asked about the Strategy document and which is described as the goal. In this document it is 
Trust and Participation
• Engagement of SME-observed good reflection. 
• Tendency of USAID actors being too dominant
• BRIDGE people still holding back
• Technical people-M&E and Grants. Although these were topics of discussion, these staff were 
disengaged. 
What lessons can we learn?
• Groups who were not BUILD field team went through assumptions regarding ToC from their 
perspective and sometimes utilizing experiences/information from outside the context 
• USAID staff dominated discussion
• Limit/structure donor participation
• Don’t invite staff from outside of the office/activity if their role is undefined and review not 
understood.
Proactive engagement of office leadership demonstrating interest is a motivating factor for IP 
openness and participation.
Day 3: After Action Review
What was supposed to happen?
• Action Planning
• RACI Matrix
What actually happened?
• BUILD presented amended ToC
• Learning Plan review and additional learning questions based on What is New and What new 
activities to propose.
• RACI Matrix
There was a great breakthrough in the Action Planning Session. Since the ToC was amended and 
presented, in addition to discussion on what is different, Action Planning resulted in thinking creatively. 
For example, the team for Objective 1 decided to look at the grants process differently and perhaps not 
provide grants but engage CSO’s in a different way. 
50
U.S. Agency for International Development
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20004