Project/Program Design Analysis on Gender

  • Objective: To understand the extent to which CARE projects incorporate rights-based approaches – with a focus on women’s empowerment - in design.
  • Materials/Preparation: Randomly selected project proposals from across CARE.
  • Participants:  –

 

Steps

A reviewer randomly selects project proposals from the given office or may select all proposals from a country office funded over the past few years, depending on the interest and aim of the study.

To analyze proposals, the reviewer looks at the extent to which proposals discuss:

  • Gender analysis
  • Gender issues and Empowerment
  • Gender in Measurement in terms of disaggregation of indicator measurement as well as the presence of gender issues in the measurement system.

For each area, proposals are rated in line with the following scale:

Rating Scale for Gender Analysis

0
Absent

1
Scant

2
Moderate

3
Good
No gender analysis and no mention of gender equity issues. Perhaps a passing mention of gender or women but no apparent effect on design. Scant attention to gender equity issues, as in one paragraph in background or problem analysis section. But no apparent effect on design. Moderate attention to gender and partial or limited elaboration of gender inequity issues. Affects design partially. Good attention to gender equity issues, fairly consistent throughout proposal. Clear effect on design.

 

Rating Scale for Gender and Empowerment

0
Absent

1
Scant

2
Moderate

3
Good
No mention of gender or intent to address gender issues that would appear to be relevant to the project context (otherwise it would be a case of “not applicable”). Makes reference to participation or inclusion of women in the project. No apparent strategy for this or assumes an inclusive approach. Any empowerment focus is not gender-sensitive. (More lip service, politically correct). Goes beyond idea of participation and has some evidence of how the project might address gender issues (e.g., thru awareness raising). Intent to devise a strategy but vagueness around this and around empowerment aims related to gender. Intentionally seeks to address some aspects of empowerment linked to a gender inequity or imbalance and specifies some level of action to be taken to confront the inequity. More explicit in intended outcomes for gender equity.

 

Rating Scale for Gender in Measurement

0
Absent

1
Scant

2
Moderate

3
Good
No gender disaggregation.

No attention to gender issues in measurement system.

 Intent to disaggregate but not reflected in logframe.

Includes some targeting of groups based on gender and/or clear intent to apply gender as cross cutting issue, as mentioned in proposal, but not explicitly reflected in hierarchy of objectives.

 Partial disaggregation of indicators (not consistent). If all women project, does not disaggregate women.

Some inclusion of gender breakdown in output or activity statements. Measures are not women-empowerment-focused.

 Good disaggregation of indicators.

Gender issues appear at objective and/or goal level. At least some measurement of empowerment related to gender.

 

The reviewer then analyses across proposals to extract key patterns around each area of project proposals.

Variation

Oxfam’s Gender Handbook on Emergencies also asks teams to screen project proposals through the following questions:

Goals and Objectives

  • Do proposals discuss gender balance?
  • If outcomes include terms like ‘empowerment’ or ‘sustainability’, how are they defined?

Planning

  • Which situation is the proposal intended to improve? Who will this benefit?
  • Who is affected by this situation? Only men? Women and men? Only women? Are young people particularly affected?
  • Were both men and women asked how they see the problem, and are their opinions apparent
  • What potential do the various sub-groups have to act?
  • Is the target group described precisely and broken down in detail?
  • Are women’s multiple roles considered?
  • What arrangements are made to accommodate them?
  • Are the objectives, major results and activities planned in line with interest and needs of men and women?
  • What evidence is there to show that both men and women will actively participate?
  • Who will make decisions about access to the project and its benefits?
  • How does the project foster men’s and women’s capacity to take action / make decisions on issues affecting them?
    • How does it promote knowledge and capacity to negotiate for their rights?
    • How does it foster women’s and men’s capacity to sustain project results beyond the intervention
    • How are present opportunities for / barriers to change integrated into the plan?

Evaluation

  • Do indicators consider social/gender roles?
  • How will gender specific impacts be measured?
  • What are likely gender specific impacts of n the proposal?

Based on the screening, it may be helpful to conduct gender-differentiated situational analysis exercises and consider how gendered relations may play into the proposed intervention and consider ways to adapt the project to be more gender-sensitive. Further teams should screen partner organizations on their capabilities in implementing the project, their attitudes toward gender and skills needed in the field.

 

Resources