> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://oecd-media-support-principles.gfmd.info/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://oecd-media-support-principles.gfmd.info/toolkit/role/programme-and-project-managers/applying-the-oecd-principles-in-practice.md). # Applying the OECD Principles in Practice ### Principle 1: Ensure support does no harm **In practice:**\ Programme decisions can shape risk exposure, trust, and market dynamics. **Risk awareness needs to be integrated across the full programme cycle**, rather than treated as a one-off safeguard at design stage. **Do** * Conduct context and political economy analysis to understand the operating environment * Assess risks to partners and beneficiaries, including legal, digital, and physical safety * Use risk assessments that are context-specific and regularly updated during implementation * Share risk analysis and insights with other donors where possible, particularly in high-risk environments * Include safety-related costs (legal support, digital security, psychosocial support) in programme budgets * Build flexibility into visibility and communication requirements, adapted to context * Reassess risks throughout implementation as conditions evolve **Avoid** * Applying standardised approaches to risk without adapting to context * Visibility or communication requirements that could increase exposure of partners in sensitive environments * Assuming that media support is neutral in politically contested contexts * Designing programmes without considering sustainability or what happens when support ends **Consider** * How visibility interacts with political sensitivities in the specific context * Whether funding or programme design could unintentionally distort local media markets * How risks identified by different donors could be shared or jointly managed ### Principle 2: Increase financial and other forms of support **In practice:**\ The effectiveness of support depends not only on the volume of funding, but on how it is structured. **Rigid or short-term funding can limit impact, particularly where organisations require stability to operate and adapt.** **Do** * Use multi-year funding where possible to support continuity and sustainability * Include core or institutional support alongside project-based funding where appropriate * Align funding with the real cost structures of media organisations * Combine financial support with capacity strengthening and organisational development * Explore pooled funding or joint mechanisms with other donors **Avoid** * Funding approaches that prevent partners from planning beyond short grant cycles * Budget structures that limit the ability to adapt activities or reallocate resources during implementation * Funding models that prioritise administrative simplicity over effectiveness * Applying the same funding approach to all partners regardless of context or capacity **Consider** * How funding structures influence long-term sustainability of supported organisations * Trade-offs between flexibility and accountability requirements (e.g. reporting and compliance obligations) * How funding approaches affect the ability of smaller or local actors to access support ### Principle 3: Take a whole-of-system approach **In practice:**\ Supporting individual outlets or isolated activities is rarely sufficient. **Interventions are more effective when they reflect how media and information ecosystems function as interconnected systems.** **Do** * Base programme design on media ecosystem analysis * Support a mix of actors across the ecosystem, including content producers, support organisations, and enabling environment actors * Combine support for content, organisational sustainability, and the broader enabling environment * Identify and address systemic gaps such as revenue models, distribution, or trust **Avoid** * Isolated, single-actor interventions without consideration of the wider ecosystem * Focusing only on content production without addressing sustainability factors * Treating media support as separate from related areas such as governance or digital developments * Replicating standard programme models across different contexts without adaptation **Consider** * Which parts of the ecosystem are underserved or missing * How the programme interacts with existing actors, incentives, and market dynamics * Whether the intervention strengthens or fragments the overall ecosystem ### Principle 4: Strengthen local leadership and ownership **In practice:**\ Locally led approaches improve relevance, sustainability, and legitimacy. However, **enabling meaningful participation often requires adapting donor processes and reducing barriers to access** ([*see case study 6: local leadership and adapting compliance frameworks*](/toolkit/case-studies-and-field-insights/case-study-6-local-leadership-and-adapting-compliance-frameworks.md))**.** **Do** * Involve local actors early in programme design and priority-setting * Use mechanisms such as regranting or partnerships to reach smaller or less-resourced organisations * Simplify application and compliance requirements where possible * Invest in organisational and financial capacity of partners * Support priorities identified by local actors and informed by needs assessments **Avoid** * Designing programmes without meaningful input from local stakeholders * Over-reliance on international intermediaries where local capacity exists * Requirements that unintentionally exclude smaller or emerging organisations * Assuming that limited access to funding reflects lack of expertise **Consider** * Who is currently unable to access funding, and what barriers exist * Trade-offs between inclusiveness and fiduciary or compliance requirements * How decision-making can progressively shift closer to local actors over time ### Principle 5: Improve coordination of support **In practice:**\ Fragmentation reduces impact and increases burden on partners ([*see case study 7: coordination challenges and joint responses in crisis contexts*](/toolkit/case-studies-and-field-insights/case-study-7-coordination-challenges-and-joint-responses-in-crisis-contexts.md)). **While coordination is widely recognised as important, it is often not systematically implemented.** **Do** * Map other donor interventions and actors before designing programmes * Share information on programmes, priorities, and lessons learned * Participate in formal or informal coordination mechanisms * Align, where possible, on indicators and reporting approaches * Explore opportunities for joint programming or co-funding **Avoid** * Designing programmes in isolation from other donors and actors * Duplicating existing interventions due to lack of information-sharing * Relying solely on informal or personality-driven coordination * Creating parallel systems that increase administrative burden on partners **Consider** * What coordination structures exist and how effective they are in practice * Whether coordination could reduce duplication and burden on partners * Trade-offs between donor visibility or ownership and joint approaches ### Principle 6: Invest in knowledge, research, and learning **In practice:**\ Limited data and shared learning continue to constrain programme effectiveness. **Learning is most effective when it is built into programme design and implementation,** rather than treated as a reporting requirement. **Do** * Conduct baseline assessments of media and information ecosystems * Use available data on audiences and information consumption where possible * Design monitoring, evaluation, and learning approaches that reflect the complexity of media support * Allocate time and resources for learning and adaptation, in addition to reporting requirements * Share findings and insights with other donors and stakeholders **Avoid** * Applying standard monitoring and evaluation approaches that do not capture media-specific outcomes * Treating reporting primarily as a compliance exercise * Underinvesting in research and data collection * Keeping lessons learned internal to individual programmes **Consider** * What success looks like beyond easily measurable outputs * How to capture changes in trust, resilience, or information integrity * How learning can inform future programming, not only current reporting