CARE USA Report on Gender Policy Implementation and Accountability

Submitted March 22, 2011

Internal report submitted to the CARE International Executive Committee

Fulfilling requirements of the CARE International Gender Policy

By

Doris Bartel, Director, Gender Unit, CARE USA and Allison Burden, Senior Advisor, Gender Equity and Diversity, CARE USA

with support from Justine Freeman, Stephanie Baric, Leah Berkowitz, Maliha Khan, and the Gender Equity and Diversity Steering Committee

1

Table of Contents

List of Acronyms

Executive Summary

Acknowledgements

Introduction

Chapter 1: Progress towards Implementing the CI Gender Policy

Chapter 2: Main challenges

Chapter 3: Lessons Learned and Key Recommendations

Chapter 4: Future plans

List of Acronyms

AA Access Africa

AAP Affirmative Action Plan

AOP Annual Operating Plan

CI CARE International

CIGN CARE International Gender Network

CO Country Office

EEO Equal Employment Opportunity

EMT Executive Management Team

FY Financial Year

GBV Gender Based Violence

GED Gender Equity and Diversity

GWG Gender Working Group

HQ Headquarters

LAC Latin America and the Caribbean

MDG Millennium Develop Goal

PAU Policy and Advocacy Unit

Pi Program Impact

PLA Participatory Learning and Action

PQAT Program Quality Assessment Tool

PQI Program Quality and Impact

PSEA Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse

RMU Regional Management Units

SII Strategic Impact Inquiry

SLT Senior Leadership Team

SRH Sexual and Reproductive Health

STAP Strategic Talent Advisory and Planning

TA Technical Assistance

USG United States Government

WEIMI Women’s Empowerment Impact Measurement Initiative

Executive Summary

This report summarizes successes and challenges to CARE USA’s implementation and accountability to the CI Gender Policy since its adoption in 2009. As a first report it also serves as a baseline description for CARE USA’s capacity for implementing CARE’s Gender Policy against which future reports might be measured.

Some of the efforts that CARE USA has put into place to ensure coherence and accountability for gender integration include: (1) establishing a gender unit in the Program Quality and Impact division in 2010 to provide support and leadership for integration of gender considerations into all components of our programmatic work; (2) establishing a Gender Equity and Diversity (GED) strategy, with a funded Senior Advisor for GED; (3) funding an initiative to establish coherence in measures for women’s empowerment. The organization’s efforts to promote the program shift have shown evidence that CARE Country offices are increasingly focusing on women and girls as impact groups, but this has not always shown a consistent focus on gender analysis and integration of strategies to address underlying gender factors contributing to poverty. A review of activities funded through restricted grants has shown that CARE USA’s support for COs’ initiative’s to address and measure gendered program results is promising, but overall, the institutionalization of gender into programming practice and impact measurement is still a challenge for CARE USA. The demand for technical assistance (TA) far exceeds CARE USA’s current capacity to respond and the prioritization of gender in the budget wavers in the current uncertain funding environment.

CARE USA has made considerable progress around human resources policies and practices, including approval of the Gender Policy, creation of a distinct Diversity Policy, a Code of Conduct, and approval of CI’s Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA) Policy. However, challenges still exist for implementation and monitoring of these policies, including tracking gender data, recruitment and orientation, and training. CARE USA’s marketing and branding materials focus on women and girls’ empowerment but do not always fully reflect the depth or scope of the successes in our gender programming. Our policy and advocacy work often highlights issues and challenges of women’s empowerment; chapter 1 highlights some of the recent public documents and online resources developed by CARE USA that report on CARE’s work.

The information about the feedback mechanisms and public reporting to the public on CARE’s work in gender at a regional or CO-level are much more difficult to quantify because of CARE’s decentralized systems; however, the information from an analysis of the Program Quality Assessment Tool (PQAT) data is encouraging: 66% of 44 long-term programs reporting in 2010 confirmed having specific mechanisms or processes to hold CARE accountable to impact groups (25% made no mention and 9% had none). When asked who completed the PQAT, 32% of the long-term programs mentioned partner organizations, but none had included program participants.

This report shows that, apart from UBORA, CARE USA has little capability to routinely collect, analyze and report gender-specific data. However, CARE USA anticipates future progress through the development of systems such as the Program Directory and Pamodzi that can provide more consistent data from all CARE USA COs, regions and HQ, for analysis and reporting purposes.

1

Acknowledgements

Various CARE USA staff contributed the information in this report, including staff in the Program Quality and Impact (PQI), the Global Support Services, the Global Operations, Global Advocacy and External Relations, and the Finance Divisions. The process for drafting the report consisted of data gathering, creating a first draft, circulating the draft among the CARE USA Gender Equity and Diversity Steering Committee (which includes three members of the Executive Management Team) and revised based on their input. For questions about the content, please contact Doris Bartel, Director of the Gender Unit () or Allison Burden, Senior Advisor for Gender Equity and Diversity ().

Introduction

In January 2009, the CI Gender Policy was approved by all CI members. This policy, drafted by gender advisors and other CI stakeholders, outlines CI’s commitments to promote gender equality both within our organization and in program quality efforts. According to the policy, CI lead members together with CARE Member Partners are responsible for the organizational and programmatic components of the policy and to provide technical and financial resources at Headquarter (HQ), Regional Management Unit (RMU) and Country Office (CO) level. Reporting on progress towards the commitments in the policy is mandated every two years to the CI Executive Committee. The specific measures for quality programming and organizational commitment in the Gender Policy, as recommended by the CI Gender Network (CIGN) in 2010, include:

  1. Gender and Power Analysis are incorporated in Program Design and as operational feature
  2. Gender sensitive Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation systems in place
  3. Ensure sufficient funding to meet the gender policy commitments and formulate staff work plans and budgets accordingly
  4. Human resources policies and practices will adequately address gender equality
  5. CARE executive and senior management staff report regularly to beneficiaries, donors and the public on progress on gender equality in CARE´s work through appropriate reporting channels
  6. CI Members have assessed and enhanced accordingly their organizational capacity for the implementation of the policy.

By and large, CARE USA has relatively decentralized systems for program coherence, quality and accountability, and the systems for ensuring coherence with the Gender Policy are no different. Thus, there are few opportunities in CARE USA for systematic data collection or tracking the six indicators shown above, whether at HQ, regional or at CO levels. Thus the information in this first report relies heavily on reporting by HQ staff who are responsible for supporting program quality or for finance, human resources, compliance, and global operations. Much of the information in this report was generated by calling key staff and asking them to provide summary data. One consistent data tracking and management system used for all CARE USA COs is UBORA, which was helpful in contributing some key data points, as shown in Chapter 1.

Chapter 1: Progress towards Implementing the CI Gender Policy

a. Incorporating gender analysis in program design and as an operational feature

CARE’s current capacity to understand and address gender power dynamics, social norms, and gender bias and discrimination are inherently shaped by CARE USA’s past investment in the Strategic Impact Inquiry (SII), which from 2004-2008 promoted a wider understanding of Women’s Empowerment specifically in countries across the globe. While this has shaped staff understanding and program frameworks, the practical implementation of strategies still lags behind. One indicator of CARE’s commitment to gender equality, as suggested by the Gender Policy, is a measure ofhow frequently CARE programs utilize a gender and power analysis as part of program design and operation. Unfortunately, this indicator is difficult to measure due to the decentralized processes currently used for reporting programming quality and results.

Data from the PQAT

One proxy measure of how often CARE implements a gender and power analysis can by found by analyzing the information submitted in July 2010. CARE USA analyzed PQAT responses of 44 long-term programs[1] submitted in 2010. The large number of programs featuring women and girls as impact groups was encouraging. However, even though over 70% of CARE programs analyzed at that time had women, girls and marginalized people listed as impact groups[2], only 46% of these programs cited any gender quality issues that arose in relation to their impact groups, analysis or theory of change. Please see Box A for data points from the PQAT review.

While the analysis of the PQAT shows mixed results, CARE USA is making progress on support systems and measures to help staff in COs incorporate issues of gender discrimination into program design and implementation. For example, CARE USA, with extensive input and participation from the CI Gender Network, will launch the CARE Gender Toolkit in early 2011. This web-based compendium of tools will help COs and others find gender analysis tools from across CARE and beyond. The toolkit can be found at CARE USA’s aim with developing the website in collaboration with other CI members was to help overcome conflicting or mismatched guidance on gender tools and approaches from various CI members to a country office.

Utilizing Transformative Gender Approaches with Men and Boys

The lessons from the SII reminded us[3] that we cannot oversimplify gender as simply “empowering women and girls” or engaging men as “the authority” or “the partner” or even “the oppressor.” Such oversimplifications undermine the possibility of lasting change. Since the end of the SII, we have seen slow but increasing attention to strategically incorporating gender transformative approaches to men’s and boys’ attitudes and behavior, as well as the systems, policies and structures that inhibit change, in accordance with one of the key lessons from the SII. Some examples of this include programming to proactively promote attitude, behavior and normative changes of men and boys in CARE Burundi and in Northwest Balkans and in the ARSHI project in Bangladesh. Other CARE country offices are taking steps to learn from these and other examples. Nevertheless, as seen from the PQAT analysis above, this remains a gap for most CARE USA country offices and long-term programs. Through the Men and Boys’ working group, CARE has begun documenting these program examples to help disseminate lessons (see website CARE USA has also formally joined the MenEngage Alliance that promotes greater contributions of men and boys to gender equality, and shares membership responsibilities with CARE Norge.

Integrating Gender across COs, Sectors and in Signature Programs

The program quality division in CARE USA is supporting action research focusing on overcoming underlying gender factors in their implementation and evaluation of poverty alleviation programs, such as those highlighted below in at least 34 out of 47, or 72% of CARE USA’s COs. For example, CARE USA’s Policy and Advocacy Unit (PAU) supported research and advocacy through an initiative funded by Gates Foundation called “LIFT UP” where women's empowerment and/orgender werecross-cutting elementsin most of the eightLIFT UP research projects. In 2009, CARE USA’s HIV/AIDS unit published Standing Together, Reducing Risks: The Power of Groups, a key report of the results of a study funded by a $500,000 Ford Foundation grant examining the relationship between women’s empowerment and women’s vulnerabilities to HIV and AIDS. Additionally, CARE USA’s new Pathways program is supporting a five-year initiative that explores the empowerment of women smallholder farmers and their contributions to achieving secure and resilient livelihoods, sustainable futures for their households, communities and beyond in six countries.

CARE’s Signature Programs also incorporate gender. CARE USA’s Mothers Matter program – found in 17 CARE USA COs and 6 non-CARE USA COs - is informed by research on linkages of gender factors such as women’s mobility, son preference, early marriage, domestic violence and household power dynamics with healthy self-care behaviors and health outcomes. Examples include the Inner Spaces, Outer Faces Initiative in India ($450,000); the Results Initiative in three countries ($1.8 million), a new initiative beginning in Mali supported by the Google Foundation ($1.4 million); and a Nike Foundation grant ($1.7 million) to study the gender factors affecting success of savings and loans programs for adolescent girls. At the same time, Access Africa’s (AA) Financial Sector Policy aims to increase women’s access to financial services and address gender exclusion, social protection, and food security. Access Africa currently supports programming in 38 countries across Africa. 21 out of 38 of these (55%) are CARE USA-led countries. CARE’s Power Within program also supports research and program initiatives in 18 countries including exploration of daily time and sexual division of labor in the home, leadership and self-efficacy for girls, and gender-equitable behaviors of boys.

Integrating Components that Address GBV

CARE USA has invested in a Gender Based Violence (GBV) mapping exercise to show where COs are prioritizing implementation of strategies to address GBV in 2010. There is some evidence that COs are increasingly incorporating components that address GBV into their planning and implementation of projects and programs. The report from August 2010 shows that CARE International has 77 projects in 33 countries that address GBV. Of these, 27 countries are CARE USA-led (81%). CARE’s GBV projects are often integrated with other programmatic sectors, most commonly with health (47%), economic development (39%), and education (18%).

b. Gender sensitive monitoring and evaluation

One critical indicator of success for an organization that is committed to women’s empowerment is the degree to which the organization is incorporating gender into its measures for results and success. The CARE International Gender Policy calls for CARE’s programs to: “include relevant and feasible gender sensitive indicators for every stage of planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, for results to explicitly state gender equality results, and to based on data disaggregated by sex, age and other relevant diversity factors such as ethnicity, religion, or caste.” CARE USA has made some progress in the past two years in its ability to routinely measure the results of its work on women’s empowerment and gender equality, but lags behind in simple metrics such as consistent disaggregation of data by sex. In the past year CARE USA (Pi, PAU and Communications) has produced a document for external audiences which states CARE’s position and experience with programming in women’s empowerment, called “Strong Women, Strong Communities: CARE’s holistic approach to empowering women and girls in the fight against poverty.” CARE’s Program Impact (Pi) Team, with input from throughout CARE USA and CARE International, has developed a new CARE-wide Program and Project Directory (“the Directory”) that began collecting data in 2010. The directory contains basic information about all of CARE’s programs and projects (disaggregated by sex where available) that can be filtered by women, men, girls and/or boys as a primary impact group or where gender issues are specifically noted.

Another new initiative by Pi, funded through Net Assets, focuses on Program Impact indicators for women’s empowerment. The Women’s Empowerment Impact Measurement Initiative (WEIMI) will be implemented in 6 pilot COs across all the regions and builds on the Strategic Impact Inquiry on Women’s Empowerment and work undertaken by CARE USA, CARE Norway, CARE Austria and several COs to consolidate key impact and outcome indicators which emerged from the SII process. WEIMI will support the development and use of impact measurement guidance for systems and processes (including data collection and analysis) which will result in improving CARE’s ability to report on our results with respect to women’s empowerment, and the contributions that this makes toward poverty eradication. The Gender Toolkit (see section 1a) will include guidance on monitoring, evaluation and impact measurement, increasing the availability of standard approaches to CARE COs and HQ Units.