The congruence and responsiveness models we have estimated paint a relatively homogeneous picture of representation in the region: although the quality of representation, as measured by the levels of both congruence and responsiveness, appears to be generally high during the period of study, there are systematic differences across institutional arrangements. These differences tend to be consistent across dimensions of the representation space: for legislatures, permissive systems tend to show high levels of both congruence and responsiveness, and the same is true for the strongest, restrictive constellations of electoral rules – a tendency that results in a U-shape relationship between electoral system strength and quality of representation. Executives, in turn, appear to be most congruent when they are elected under the least permissive rules, a pattern that results in a linear relationship between strength and congruence of all types.