GUIDANCE NOTE
Gender Equality Marker
Tracking of Resource Allocations and Expenditure for Gender Equality Results
16 September 2010
Policy and Practice, New York
United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Background 3
II. Purpose of the Guidance Note 3
III. The Methodology 4
IV. Instructions for Rating 4
V. Important Issues to Consider when Rating Intermediate Results 7
VI. The Rating Process 8
VII. Monitoring and Reporting 9
Annex 1. Examples of Gender Equality Marker in Practice 10
I. Background
UNICEF is fully committed to promoting gender equality and the empowerment of girls and women. Based on the recommendations of the Evaluation of Gender Policy Implementation in UNICEF (2008), and the Executive Board decision 2008/10 to receive a management response, UNICEF developed a one-year plan contained in the Follow-up to Evaluation of Gender Policy Implementation in 2009. As part of the plan, UNICEF committed to identifying best practices and develop an improved system and tools to track its resource allocations and expenditure for gender equality results. It also committed to exploring ways of doing so in VISION, one of the on-going key improvement initiatives aimed at consolidating the organizational information system into a One ERP Application System. A 2009 review of partner practices showed that the Gender Equality Marker (GEM), as developed by OECD/DAC, refined by UNDP, CIDA and piloted by the IASC in emergency contexts offers a sound financial tracking system for resource allocation and expenditures for gender equality results. The GEM will measure the extent to which these results contribute to the promotion of gender equality and/or the empowerment of girls and women.
The UNICEF GEM:
· Provides UNICEF with an improved system of tracking resource allocations and expenditures that are made to advance gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women.
· Is expected to sensitize planning teams to develop results that, to the greatest extent possible, advance gender equality and empower girls and women.
· Will be applied at all levels of the organization, i.e., country, regional and HQ locations.
· Is expected to have an attribute in ProMS 9.1 and subsequently in VISION. The attribute will be placed at the level of intermediate results where the GEM will be scored.
· Will be applied to programme results that receive an allocation of programme funds.
It is expected that offices, as part of normal practice, would have supported the strengthening of gender analysis within situation analyses and other assessments that form the basis of the formulation of intermediate results. Programme support intermediate results (formerly referred to as programme management results), should not be rated in ProMS 9.1.
II. Purpose of the Guidance Note
This note is intended to guide UNICEF staff on how to assess result statements on their expected contribution to gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women. All offices will apply the GEM as they adopt the revised results structure and develop their intermediate results. The note has been developed collaboratively by Samuel Momanyi; Rekiya Adamu-Atta, Programme Officer; Noreen Khan, Gender Specialist; and Mita Gupta, Gender Specialist.
III. The Methodology
The Gender Equality Marker rates the expected contribution of a result to advancing gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women. This involves rating every intermediate result against a four-category scale that ranges from 0 (not expected to contribute to gender equality in any noticeable way) to 3 (advancing gender equality as a principal objective of the result).
The rating is mandatory for all intermediate results and will be available in the Operating Systems starting with ProMS 9.
IV. Instructions for Rating
Each intermediate result must be rated with 3, 2, 1 or 0. Intermediate results:
§ Whose principal objectives are to advance gender equality and/ or empower girls and women should be rated “3”
§ That are expected to make a significant contribution to advancing gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women should be rated “2”
§ That are expected to make a marginal contribution to advancing gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women should be rated “1”
§ That are not expected to make a noticeable contribution to advancing gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women should be rated “0”
Note: Interventions for boys [where they are disadvantaged] may contribute to gender equality but not necessarily to the empowerment of girls and women. In such situations, specific interventions for boys (or even men) may be considered to contribute to gender equality, and thus could receive a “principal” or “significant” rating.
Table 1 below provides examples of intermediate results and indicates how they could be rated. Additional examples are provided in Annex I.
Table 1: Examples of intermediate results and ratings
Rating / Description /Category 3: Intermediate results that have advancing gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women as a principal objective / Gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women is a principal objective of the intermediate result and one of the main reasons the result was formulated. The result has corresponding indicators to measure how gender equality will be advanced.
Example of an intermediate result that is rated 3 / Intermediate Result: Legal and policy frameworks protect girls from FGM/C
Indicators:
Ø Prevalence (percent) of FGM/C among adolescent girls
Ø Number of survivors of FGM/C receiving services
Ø Number of cases of FGM/C prosecuted
Ø Per cent of reported cases of FGM/C prosecuted
Ø Number of court decisions on FGM/C implemented
Rationale for rating: The main objective of the intermediate result is to address a harmful traditional practice targeted at girls and women. The indicators measure the extent to which the issue of FGM/C is being addressed through legal and policy frameworks.
Category 2: Intermediate results that make a significant contribution to advancing gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women / Gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women is not the main objective of the intermediate result. However, it is a secondary objective expected to make a significant contribution to advancing gender equality, with corresponding indicators to measure how gender equality will be advanced.
Example of intermediate result that is rated 2 / Intermediate Result: Increased access to safe water supply, adequate sanitation and hygiene facilities for children in 500 primary schools
Indicator:
Ø Percent of schools with separate, lockable, safe water supply, adequate sanitation and hygiene facilities for girls
Rationale for rating:
The main objective of this intermediate result is to increase access to water supply, sanitation and hygiene facilities for children in general in the 500 schools – there is no mention of addressing any gender gaps. However, the indicator measures the extent to which girls have access to these facilities – especially to separate, lockable facilities, which can be an important factor in girls’ attendance in school, particularly in the case of adolescent girls. While promoting gender equality is not the main objective of this result, it is a secondary objective in that it addresses what is often a barrier to girls’ education.
Category 1: Intermediate results that make a marginal contribution to advancing gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women / Gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women is not an objective of this intermediate result. At least one indicator refers to gender in some way (e.g., the indicator is disaggregated by sex, measures the engagement of women, girls, boys, men, etc.), but none of the indicators show how gender equality will be advanced.
Example of an intermediate result that is rated 1 / Intermediate Result: By the end of 2014, ministries, institutions and civil society organizations systematically monitor child rights to influence the implementation of national strategies, plans and programmes addressing poverty and exclusion of children and families
Indicator:
Ø Statistical agencies at all levels and Ministries provide data, updated and disaggregated by sex, on the situation of children and young people, in line with the EU statistical framework and national strategies
Rationale for rating:
The intermediate result aims to monitor child rights overall, and to address poverty and exclusion of children and families – children are mentioned as a group and without reference to girls and boys and any gender disparities to be addressed. The indicator calls for statistical agencies to provide data disaggregated by sex on the situation of children and young people. However, it is neither clear what gender disparities will be analyzed or monitored with this disaggregated data in relation to the result, nor how the data will be used to promote gender equality.
Category 0: Intermediate results that are not expected to make a noticeable contribution to advancing gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women / The intermediate result is not expected to contribute to gender equality in any noticeable way. There are no indicators that are disaggregated by sex, measure the engagement of women, girls, boys, men, etc., nor do any of the indicators show how gender equality will be advanced.
Example of an intermediate result that is rated 0 / Intermediate Result: By the end of 2013, the percentage of children from 60 prioritized municipalities who have not completed their primary education has been reduced by 6 percentage points
Indicators:
Ø Per cent of children who complete their primary education in prioritized municipalities
Ø Per cent of children passing their primary grades
Rationale for rating:
The intermediate result relates to the reduction of the percentage of children who have not completed their primary education – children are referred to as a group, and there is no mention of any targeted action for girls or boys who might be at a greater disadvantage. The indicators also monitor children as a group, not calling for disaggregated data to look at any differences in school completion or achievement between girls and boys.
V. Important Issues to Consider When Rating Intermediate Results
Intermediate results that target women and/or girls may not necessarily contribute to promoting gender equality. For example, an intermediate result that focuses on ensuring that only women have increased knowledge of child care practices, not recognizing men’s shared responsibilities in this area, reinforces the perception that only women are responsible for caring for children. However, intermediate results addressing maternal health, which also target only women, do address gender inequality. Some communities maintain patriarchal cultural norms and values which place lower value and status on women and girls. In these communities, lack of prioritization of maternal health contributes to maternal mortality, a global concern which gender inequality underlies.
Ratings 3 and 2 require a focus on gender equality and/ or the empowerment of girls and women as an objective of the intermediate result. The related indicators should not just make a token reference to gender (such as the collection of sex-disaggregated data without making clear how this will be analyzed and used; involving women’s groups/promoting women’s participation without indicating how their inputs will be utilized in the context of the result, etc.) but should measure how gender equality will be advanced.
If an intermediate result mentions gender equality, but there are no corresponding indicators measuring progress in addressing gender inequality/disparities related to the result, it would need to be rated 0. Gender equality merely being among the objectives of a result is not sufficient – indicators must be formulated to monitor progress against this objective of the result.
The financial amount allocated to an intermediate result should not influence the rating. The rating is based on the nature of the intermediate result, not on the amount of financial resources allocated to it.
The aim of the exercise is to give an honest and accurate reflection of the likely contribution of an intermediate result to promoting gender equality. A secondary aim of the exercise is to build awareness among UNICEF staff on gender equality and the need to mainstream gender equality in all programme areas.
VI. The Rating Process
The programme specialist or manager responsible for supporting implementation of a given intermediate result will be responsible for its rating. The rating process suggested is intended to facilitate the easy application of the marker. However, in those cases where it is felt that additional assistance is required, it is recommended that the gender focal point/gender coordination team is consulted in the rating process. Where offices do not have the necessary expertise, an external gender specialist (e.g. UN Women, RO/HQ, gender consultant, etc.) can be consulted.
The rating will be done when the intermediate result is being developed. It is expected that the rating process will sensitize the planning team to take into account gender equality considerations.
Quality assurance: The Deputy Representative or her/his designate will be responsible for quality assurance. The Regional Office and Gender and Rights Unit in Policy and Practice in New York will monitor and provide second-line support and quality assurance. The Office of Internal Audit is expected to conduct spot checks and include the application of the GEM in programme performance assessments. The Evaluation Office is also expected to incorporate the use of the GEM in evaluations conducted.
VII. Monitoring and Reporting
There are benchmarks in relation to the GEM in the Strategic Priority Action Plan for Gender Equality (2010-2012):
· Percentage of UNICEF expenditure that contributes to gender equality results (those results rated 3 and 2). Target: 75% by 2012.
· Percentage of UNICEF Intermediate Results with at least a significant gender equality focus (those results rated 3 and 2). Target: 50% by 2012,
Information from ProMS will be captured in the Business Intelligence Reports (BIR) and displayed as part of the Office Management Reports. These benchmarks will be monitored through the BIR.
In reporting, results that are funded exclusively by support budget and private fundraising and partnerships budget (zero programme budget allocation) are not required to be rated and will be excluded from the GEM-related reports. GEM-related reports by MTSP Focus Area will be generated using the Organizational Target code at the intermediate result level.