Public Policy Masterclass Training Course

Duration 10 days 19 modules · 65 contact hours
Level Advanced Certificate on completion
Who attends Policy Directors, Senior Policy Advisers and others
Fee from USD 2,200 KSh 190,000 for Kenyan organisations
Where 52 cities + online See dates by city
Next start 9 Nov 2026 Course code SD-PP-004

Before you join: Participants should have substantial experience in government, regulation, public services, international development, corporate public affairs or a related policy-facing role.

Dates & prices

Two start dates a month in every city, and live online on weekdays or weekends. Fees are per participant; classroom fees include tuition, materials, lunch and refreshments, and the certificate.

Suggest a date or city

Showing the next six months. Later dates, other cities and private deliveries for your team are available on request.

Course overview

Senior public-sector leaders are expected to turn contested issues into decisions that are lawful, affordable, politically workable and capable of delivery. That task is rarely linear. Ministers may seek rapid action while evidence is incomplete; departments may disagree on priorities; implementation capacity may be limited; and affected groups may challenge both the problem definition and the proposed response. Poorly framed policy can produce costly programmes, weak compliance, unintended distributional effects and loss of public trust.

This masterclass examines the full chain from strategic problem framing to policy design, approval, implementation, evaluation and renewal. Participants apply systems mapping, political-economy analysis, evidence appraisal, theory of change, options appraisal, cost-benefit analysis, distributional assessment, regulatory impact assessment, stakeholder mapping and monitoring design. They learn to distinguish policy intent from operational mechanisms, construct a defensible case for intervention, compare options against explicit criteria, prepare ministerial advice, and establish governance arrangements that sustain delivery.

Teaching combines focused faculty briefings with public-policy cases, facilitated peer challenge, decision simulations and structured application to a live or realistic policy issue. From the first week, participants develop components of a policy package and test them against evidence, fiscal constraints, legal duties, political feasibility and implementation risk. They leave with a complete policy design and submission pack, including a problem statement, theory of change, options appraisal, implementation plan, monitoring framework and senior decision-maker briefing.

The course is best suited to experienced officials and advisers who shape, sponsor, review or deliver significant public policy initiatives. It is also relevant to leaders in regulators, development institutions, public-service providers and corporate public-affairs functions working with government policy.

What you will be able to do

  • Frame complex public problems using systems maps, causal analysis and distributional evidence
  • Assess policy evidence through source appraisal, synthesis methods and uncertainty statements
  • Construct theories of change linking interventions, assumptions, outputs and intended outcomes
  • Appraise policy options using cost-benefit analysis, multi-criteria decision analysis and risk assessment
  • Draft ministerial submissions that present decisions, trade-offs, recommendations and delivery implications
  • Design implementation arrangements covering governance, legislation, financing, procurement and accountability
  • Build monitoring and evaluation frameworks with indicators, baselines, targets and learning loops
  • Present a complete policy proposal that withstands senior review and stakeholder challenge

Benefits of attending

For you

  • Produce senior-ready policy submissions with explicit recommendations and trade-offs
  • Challenge weak problem statements before resources commit to ineffective interventions
  • Defend preferred options using evidence, fiscal analysis and transparent decision criteria
  • Lead cross-agency policy discussions with clearer governance and accountability structures
  • Build a credible portfolio-quality policy proposal for immediate workplace use

For your organisation

  • Improves quality and consistency of policy advice reaching senior decision-makers
  • Reduces avoidable delivery failure through earlier implementation and capacity analysis
  • Makes spending proposals more defensible through documented options and appraisal assumptions
  • Strengthens accountability with measurable outcomes, ownership and review arrangements
  • Creates reusable policy templates for teams handling complex public issues

Course modules

19 modules over 10 days

Participants can position a policy issue within formal decision rights, institutional mandates and political priorities.

  • Policy cycle stages and their limits in contested decision environments
  • Cabinet, ministerial and departmental decision rights mapped explicitly
  • Mandates, statutory duties and administrative discretion distinguished clearly
  • Decision gateways linked to evidence, funding and implementation commitments
  • Policy portfolios balanced between immediate pressures and long-term outcomes
  • Senior sponsor roles, accountabilities and escalation routes defined

Participants can construct precise problem definitions that identify causes, affected groups and policy consequences.

  • Problem statements separate symptoms, causes, consequences and value judgments
  • Causal trees identify proximate drivers and structural determinants
  • Systems maps reveal feedback loops, delays and unintended effects
  • Distributional analysis identifies who benefits, pays or bears risk
  • Baseline trends establish scale, trajectory and geographic variation
  • Counterfactual reasoning tests whether government action is justified

Participants can use systems methods to identify intervention points and anticipate system-wide effects.

  • Rich pictures expose competing perspectives, boundaries and hidden assumptions
  • Causal loop diagrams distinguish reinforcing and balancing feedback
  • Stock-and-flow logic identifies accumulation, depletion and service bottlenecks
  • System boundary choices shape accountability and policy ownership
  • Intervention points ranked by feasibility, influence and timing
  • Unintended consequences traced through behavioural and institutional responses

Participants can assess how interests, incentives and institutions affect policy feasibility and adoption.

  • Political-economy analysis maps actors, interests, incentives and influence
  • Formal rules compared with informal norms and patronage arrangements
  • Stakeholder power-interest matrices identify engagement and resistance patterns
  • Veto players and coalition opportunities assessed before option selection
  • Institutional capacity tested across authority, capability and coordination
  • Reform sequencing reflects windows, alliances and political risk

Participants can assess evidence quality and make proportionate claims under uncertainty.

  • Evidence hierarchies applied without dismissing operational and lived knowledge
  • Source appraisal tests validity, relevance, bias and transferability
  • Systematic review findings interpreted alongside local administrative data
  • Triangulation combines quantitative, qualitative and practitioner evidence
  • Uncertainty statements distinguish known facts, estimates and assumptions
  • Evidence gaps converted into targeted research and piloting questions

Participants can define measurable policy objectives and construct a testable theory of change.

  • Outcome statements specify population, change, timeframe and intended direction
  • Theory of Change links activities, outputs, outcomes and impacts
  • Assumptions documented alongside external factors and implementation conditions
  • Causal pathways tested against evidence, incentives and operational capacity
  • SMART indicators selected for outcome tracking and management decisions
  • Equity objectives incorporated into policy goals and success criteria

Participants can create credible intervention options using an appropriate mix of policy instruments.

  • Policy instrument typologies cover regulation, spending, information and service provision
  • Option longlists generated before early preferences narrow the field
  • Behavioural insights identify friction, defaults, norms and salience
  • Non-regulatory alternatives tested against intervention and enforcement requirements
  • Policy mixes assessed for coherence, duplication and conflicting incentives
  • Do-nothing and do-minimum comparators establish a disciplined baseline

Participants can appraise policy choices using proportionate economic analysis and explicit assumptions.

  • Cost-benefit analysis identifies monetised costs, benefits and externalities
  • Discounting applies social time preference to future costs and benefits
  • Cost-effectiveness analysis compares outcomes where valuation remains unsuitable
  • Sensitivity analysis tests key assumptions, ranges and switching values
  • Distributional weights examine impacts on income groups and regions
  • Value-for-money cases connect economy, efficiency, effectiveness and equity

Participants can compare policy options transparently where monetary valuation alone is insufficient.

  • Multi-criteria decision analysis structures choices with explicit weighted criteria
  • Criteria include effectiveness, legality, equity, feasibility and fiscal impact
  • Scoring scales define evidence thresholds before options receive ratings
  • Weighting methods expose senior preferences and strategic priorities
  • Sensitivity tests show whether rankings survive reasonable weight changes
  • Decision records explain rejected options and residual trade-offs

Participants can design proportionate regulatory interventions and prepare a defensible impact assessment.

  • Regulatory impact assessment defines the failure, intervention and affected parties
  • Risk-based regulation targets inspection and enforcement resources proportionately
  • Compliance-cost mapping identifies reporting, licensing and administrative burdens
  • Enforcement pyramids sequence advice, warnings, sanctions and prosecution
  • Sunset clauses and review triggers prevent obsolete regulatory requirements
  • Regulatory independence, accountability and appeal mechanisms assessed carefully

Participants can test proposed policies against legal duties, rights and ethical obligations.

  • Legality tests confirm authority, jurisdiction and delegated powers
  • Proportionality analysis assesses necessity, suitability and least-restrictive means
  • Human rights assessments identify affected rights and justified limitations
  • Administrative justice considers fairness, reasons, appeals and procedural safeguards
  • Data protection principles shape information collection, sharing and retention
  • Ethical review identifies dignity, consent, stigma and foreseeable harm

Participants can design stakeholder engagement that improves evidence, legitimacy and implementation readiness.

  • Stakeholder segmentation distinguishes rights-holders, beneficiaries, intermediaries and opponents
  • Consultation objectives specify decisions influenced, evidence sought and constraints
  • Participation ladders match engagement methods to decision authority
  • Deliberative methods handle contested values beyond simple preference surveys
  • Consultation analysis records themes, dissenting views and policy responses
  • Feedback loops show contributors how input affected final decisions

Participants can prepare concise decision documents for ministers, executives and governing bodies.

  • Ministerial submissions lead with decision required and recommended action
  • Briefing structures separate facts, analysis, options, risks and asks
  • Narrative framing explains public value without overstating certainty
  • Visual decision aids present trade-offs, timelines and implementation dependencies
  • Lines to take prepare consistent responses for scrutiny and media
  • Dissent and minority advice handled through clear escalation protocols

Participants can convert an approved policy into a sequenced, resourced and accountable delivery plan.

  • Delivery chains connect policy decisions to frontline operational changes
  • Implementation readiness assessments test capability, authority, systems and funding
  • Critical path plans sequence legislation, procurement, recruitment and communications
  • RACI matrices assign decision, delivery, assurance and escalation responsibilities
  • Dependency mapping identifies partner actions and external approval points
  • Mobilisation plans establish early milestones, controls and reporting cadence

Participants can establish governance and assurance arrangements that support accountable policy delivery.

  • Governance boards define remit, membership, decisions and meeting cadence
  • Business cases connect strategic rationale, affordability and delivery confidence
  • Funding profiles align capital, operating costs and contingency provisions
  • Risk registers distinguish strategic, delivery, fiscal and reputational exposures
  • Risk appetite statements guide escalation, mitigation and acceptance decisions
  • Assurance maps coordinate internal audit, evaluation and independent review

Participants can design performance and evaluation systems that inform timely policy adjustment.

  • Results frameworks link indicators to policy objectives and causal pathways
  • Baselines, targets and data disaggregation support meaningful performance interpretation
  • Process evaluation investigates fidelity, reach, capability and delivery barriers
  • Impact evaluation designs use counterfactuals, comparison groups and contribution analysis
  • Evaluation questions prioritise decisions rather than generic reporting requirements
  • Adaptive management cycles convert monitoring evidence into documented policy changes

Participants can diagnose failing policies and plan responsible correction, closure or replacement.

  • Failure modes include flawed assumptions, weak delivery and perverse incentives
  • Pre-mortem analysis identifies plausible breakdowns before implementation begins
  • Early warning indicators trigger review before harm becomes entrenched
  • Crisis decision protocols balance speed, evidence, authority and accountability
  • Policy termination criteria address sunk costs and political resistance
  • Learning reviews capture transferable findings without allocating premature blame

Participants can coordinate policy across agencies and adapt national intent to local conditions.

  • Joined-up government arrangements clarify shared outcomes and departmental contributions
  • Interagency compacts specify commitments, data sharing and dispute resolution
  • Place-based analysis combines local assets, constraints and service patterns
  • Fiscal federalism considerations assign functions, funding and accountability appropriately
  • Local adaptation rules preserve intent while allowing contextual flexibility
  • Coordination costs assessed against expected gains from integrated action

Participants can build, review and present a complete, evidence-based policy proposal for senior decision.

  • Problem definition integrates systems evidence, equity impacts and institutional context
  • Theory of Change states causal pathways, assumptions and measurable outcomes
  • Options appraisal compares costs, benefits, feasibility, risks and rights
  • Implementation plan specifies governance, funding, milestones and delivery dependencies
  • Monitoring framework sets indicators, baselines, evaluation questions and review triggers
  • Senior presentation defends recommendation under structured peer and faculty challenge

Exercises and examples are adapted to each cohort's sectors and roles.

What you take back to work

  1. Policy problem-framing template
  2. Theory of Change model
  3. Policy options appraisal matrix
  4. Ministerial submission template
  5. Implementation readiness checklist
  6. Monitoring and evaluation framework

Who should attend

  • Policy Directors — require defensible methods for setting direction and advising senior leaders
  • Senior Policy Advisers — need stronger analysis, options papers and ministerial submissions
  • Programme Directors — must translate approved policy into funded, accountable delivery arrangements
  • Regulatory Leaders — need proportionate intervention choices and credible impact assessment
  • Government Relations Directors — need to interpret policy formation and prepare evidence-based positions
  • Development Programme Managers — must design public interventions with measurable results and local legitimacy

Skills and tools covered

Policy problem framingEvidence appraisalOptions appraisalPolitical economy analysisImplementation designPolicy evaluation

Tools and standards

Theory of Change, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, Regulatory Impact Assessment, Cost-Benefit Analysis

How the course runs

Training methodology

Faculty-led briefings introduce methods before participants apply them to public-policy cases and their own priority issues. Case work examines decisions involving fiscal pressure, regulation, service reform and contested stakeholder interests. Small-group exercises test assumptions, compare options and challenge briefing recommendations. Simulations place participants in senior review, consultation and delivery-governance settings. Facilitators provide structured feedback on each policy component, while application planning connects course outputs to participants’ current mandates, decision cycles and institutional processes.

Requirements and prerequisites

Participants should have substantial experience in government, regulation, public services, international development, corporate public affairs or a related policy-facing role. They should be familiar with the basic stages of policy development and able to read briefing papers, budgets and performance data. Experience drafting advice for senior decision-makers is useful. The course assumes confidence discussing real institutional constraints and competing interests. It does not require economics qualifications, advanced statistics, legal training, specialist modelling software or prior use of formal appraisal methods.

A typical training day

08:30 – 10:30First session
10:30 – 10:45Refreshment break
10:45 – 12:30Second session
12:30 – 13:30Lunch and networking
13:30 – 15:00Third session
15:00 – 15:15Refreshment break
15:15 – 16:30Workshop and daily review

Live online deliveries follow the same structure in East Africa Time, with shorter screen blocks and longer breaks.

What the fee includes

  • Instruction by a practitioner facilitator
  • Full course workbook and materials
  • Exercise files, templates and case studies
  • Refreshments and lunch on classroom deliveries
  • Certificate of completion
  • Post-course application plan

Frequently asked questions

This is an advanced course for experienced practitioners who already work with public policy, regulation, public programmes or government-facing issues. Participants should understand basic policy processes, but no formal economics, law or evaluation qualification is required.

Participants should bring a current policy issue, programme proposal or regulatory question where possible. Relevant briefing papers, strategy documents, available data and organisational templates will help them tailor the course outputs.

It is designed for senior policy advisers, policy directors, programme leaders, regulatory managers and government-relations professionals. It is less suitable for participants seeking an introductory explanation of how government works.

The course concentrates on making and defending policy choices before and during delivery. It addresses problem framing, evidence, intervention design, political feasibility, appraisal and ministerial advice rather than general administration or project-control techniques.

Participants develop reusable components for a live or realistic policy proposal throughout the programme. The templates can be adapted for cabinet papers, business cases, regulatory impact assessments, implementation plans and evaluation briefs.

The first week builds a policy proposal from problem definition through options appraisal and decision advice. The second week concentrates on legal and ethical tests, engagement, delivery, governance, evaluation, renewal and the final capstone presentation.

Questions about this course?

Ask about dates, fees, group bookings or running it for your team. Our training team replies by email.

Ask on WhatsApp info@skillsetdevelopment.com

Related courses in Public Policy