In 2006, the EC and UNDP strengthened and formalized their de facto partnership in the field of international electoral assistance with the signature of the Electoral Assistance Guidelines. The Guidelines were renewed in 2008 and most recently in April 2016, when they were officially endorsed and signed by the UNDP Administrator Helen Clark and the Commissioner Neven Mimica (watch the video of the event).
The Guidelines set parameters for cooperation between the two organizations on issues such as project formulation, recruitment, visibility and operational support to the ongoing projects and troubleshooting. They also establish the EC-UNDP Joint Task Force on Electoral Assistance (JTF), a Brussels-based coordination mechanism that has the aim of increasing the overall efficiency and adherence of the projects to the common EC-UNDP strategic approach.
The JTF, composed of the EU and UNDP experts, has been expanded in 2016 to include representatives from the European External Action Service (EEAS) and UN’s Department of Political Affairs/Electoral Assistance Division (DPA/EAD), as well as relevant geographical desk representatives from both organizations.
JTF supports all current and upcoming joint EC-UNDP electoral assistance projects world-wide by organizing kick-off trainings at the inception of each project (for both EU Delegation and UNDP Country Office staff), enhancing project’s visibility and information sharing (by maintaining project websites and publishing joint monthly reports), assisting with reporting (financial and narrative), troubleshooting, etc.….
To find out more or to request assistance please consult JTF website.
The purpose is to increase the understanding of the different models and sub-models of results management systems and facilitate the selection of the most appropriate RMS option specific to the country context and also the one most likely to be accepted by stakeholders on the ground.
This is a guide to support electoral administrators and practitioners to evaluate RMS options, benefits and challenges.It offers a description of the main options of Result Management Systems (RMS). The various chapters aim to shed some light on the various models of results management systems currently in use, highlighting advantages and disadvantages of each.
The purpose is to increase the understanding of the different models and sub-models of results management systems and facilitate the selection of the most appropriate RMS option specific to the country context and also the one most likely to be accepted by stakeholders on the ground.
This is a guide to support electoral administrators and practitioners to evaluate RMS options, benefits and challenges.It offers a description of the main options of Result Management Systems (RMS). The various chapters aim to shed some light on the various models of results management systems currently in use, highlighting advantages and disadvantages of each.
This publication is the Summary report of the discussion held at the conference titled ’Reinforcing the credibility and acceptance of electoral processes: The role of electoral stakeholders and electoral administrations’.
The aim of the conference was to expand discussion of electoral processes allowing for a more in-depth focus on the involvement and approach of the full range of stakeholders, including political parties and candidates, the media, domestic and international observers, civil society, electoral justice, other state institutions and the international community.
Bld du Régent, 37 – 1000 Brussels
+32 (0)2 513 53 73
info@ec-undp-electoralassistance.org