Docstoc

The-main mechanism through which accountability is being

Document Sample
The-main mechanism through which accountability is being Powered By Docstoc
					From Checklists to Scorecards: Review of UNDG Members’ Accountability Mechanisms for Gender Equality

Synthesis Report

By Tony Beck - April 2006 for UNDG Task Force on Gender Equality

Executive Summary 1. Background and purpose
This review follows from the 59th Session of the UN General Assembly, where Member States, in adopting the Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review (TCPR) of Operational Activities for Development of the United Nations System (UN 2005c: 13) called on all organizations of the UN system to: mainstream gender and to pursue gender equality in their country programmes, planning instruments and sector-wide programmes and to articulate specific country-level goals and targets in this field in accordance with the national development strategies (A/RES/59/250, Op. 86). The review was managed by the UN Development Group (UNDG) Task Force on Gender Equality. It had two objectives: 1. To analyze the Multi-Year Funding Frameworks (MYFFs), policy and programming documents, programme manuals, monitoring and evaluation frameworks, and performance assessment tools of select UNDG agencies to determine the extent to which gender equality perspectives are reflected and mainstreamed in these. 2. To identify accountability mechanisms in place for implementing gender mainstreaming strategies, and assess to what extent they are promoting a coordinated operational strategy in support of gender equality, within programming frameworks and monitoring and evaluation systems.

2. Method
The review was carried out between October 2005 and February 2006. It focused on five agencies – UNICEF, UNDP, UNFPA, WFP and ILO – and included an extensive document review, two meetings with the Task Force in New York, and contact with gender focal points in the agencies involved. Accountability mechanisms reviewed included: gender equality and other policies, e.g. the extent to which these policies include gender-related targets and indicators; reporting to the Executive Boards and ECOSOC on key strategy documents, such as the MYFF; reporting functions for the agency as a whole; evaluation and audit functions; staff appraisal and Performance Appraisal and Development or its equivalent; and budget functions. The review also included an analysis of a number of indicator systems and scorecards currently in use, both those specific to gender equality, and to other areas. This complemented the assessment of individual agency attempts to develop internal accountability systems, which are reviewed throughout this report.

i

3. Accountability in the UN context
As the Secretary-General has noted, accountability functions and practice in the UN need strengthening. There are multiple accountability functions and processes, at different levels, for example – programme review, results-based reporting, evaluations, audits, reports of the Executive Director to Boards and ECOSOC, and reports to donors. These are often not coordinated either within or between agencies. The potential for establishing accountability for gender equality needs to be viewed in the context of a system which is striving for greater coherence on this issue; this will offer opportunities to promote greater accountability for gender mainstreaming as a core strategy within the overall UN context. One main focus of UN reform linked to establishing accountability has been the introduction of Results Based Management (RBM). Most attention to development of RBM has been to developing results frameworks and measures. However, there is consistency in agency RBM frameworks on what accountability means. Under RBM, the main area which agencies and staff are being held accountable for is managing for results, rather than for the development results themselves. Development results are seen as the responsibility of many partners, in particular government. Units and staff can therefore be held accountable for the processes underpinning achievement of gender equality – including gender mainstreaming – but not gender equality results. There are two main lessons related to establishing an accountability framework for gender mainstreaming in the current RBM climate:  Attempts to develop an accountability framework need to take into account the slow uptake of RBM.  There should be a focus on managing for results, as this is the current main area where accountability is being located. A common understanding of how to apply gender mainstreaming in UN operational activities is needed. This is because if there is no agreement on what constitutes a minimum level of actions to support gender equality, how will it be possible to hold agencies and UN Country Teams accountable for this? Reaching agreement across agencies on what constitutes a minimally acceptable performance to support gender equality, through an agreed set of indicators, would contribute to stronger guidance and accountability. This should build on current good practice in agencies, for example as highlighted in the Table below.

Section Gender Equality Policies and Strategies Strategic Planning documents

Good practice  UNDP’s adoption of a Gender Action Plan and scorecard  WFP’s adoption of a Gender Policy outlining specific agency-wide commitments, areas of implementation and an implementation schedule, and allocation of responsibility  Integration of gender equality as a cross-cutting theme in the UNFPA Multi-Year Funding Framework 2004-2007  Strong introductory statement on the importance of gender mainstreaming and the promotion of gender equality in the

ii

Section

Programme guidance

Oversight functions

Good practice UNICEF Medium-Term Strategic Plan 2006-2009  Disaggregation of key terms in the ILO Programme and Budget 2006-2007  UNFPA, UNICEF and WFP policy and programme manuals include a strong statement in the introductory sections in support of gender mainstreaming.  The UNICEF Programme Policy and Procedure Manual includes a dedicated section on gender mainstreaming, including three accountability tools  Detailed reporting on gender mainstreaming in the UNDP and UNFPA MYFF reports  A proactive approach by the WFP audit office to gender mainstreaming through the inclusion five audit ‘indicators’ for assessment of mainstreaming by country offices

4. Accountability and gender equality policies
There is great diversity in the focus and format for gender equality policies, and also limited communication and documentation as to which strategies within policies have been more successful. Better evidence and exchange about which strategies have been successful in strengthening accountability in which areas could support the objective of bringing greater coherence to the UN system. Four of the five agencies have included some accountability elements in their gender equality policies, with UNDP and WFP having perhaps the more comprehensive approaches to date. UNDP, WFP and ILO all note who will be accountable for implementation of their gender equality policies; and all agencies except UNFPA include a focus on assessing staff performance. Some gaps in the policies include: details on consequences for poor performance on gender equality; delineation of the programme approval processes; and financial tracking. With regard to the policies reviewed, the most promising practice appear to be the inclusion of an implementation plan and schedule, with allocation, in the cases of WFP and UNDP. An overall lesson is that policies which do not include detailed and realistic follow-up plans are less likely to be implemented as intended.

5. Mainstreaming in strategic planning documents
Comparative analysis suggests that mainstreaming of gender is adequate or close to adequate in strategic planning documents in terms of: highlighting gender equality as an issue in the introduction/preamble and tying this to CEDAW , the Beijing Platform for Action, and the Millennium Development Goals; ensuring gender equality cross-cuts strategic priorities; and including gender equality and the empowerment of women as an area of strategic focus. There are however very different levels of attention to gender equality in agency planning documents. This illustrates the importance of establishing minimum standards for gender mainstreaming centered around a common UN approach.. Without these standards there are no agreed methods for either assessing strategic planning

iii

documents, or assessing performance of agencies in applying mainstreaming as a strategy, nor is there a way to assess the overall contribution of the UN in this field. There are four areas where agreement on minimum standards should be reached: 1. Introductory statements/preamble to make it clear that leadership is unswerving in its commitment to achieving gender equality. 2. Disaggregation of key terms to clarify for staff any conceptual confusion about terminology, and as a reminder that development is never gender-neutral. 3. Disaggregation of a minimum number of results statements and indicators to ensure that agencies meet their commitment to support countries to achieve gender equality. 4. Sex-disaggregation of key data to provide an evidence base for strategies chosen to address gender inequality.

6. Programme guidance
UNFPA, UNICEF and WFP policy and programme manuals include a strong statement in the introductory sections in support of gender equality. Much of the remainder of the manuals of all agencies is ‘technical’ in focus, with emphasis on planning issues. There is inadequate attention to linking these technical details, such as how to develop results statements, or how to monitor and evaluate, to gender mainstreaming. There is also a need for more gender equality related examples, and reiteration of the importance of using sex-disaggregated data, and gender analysis. RBM guidance is also mainly technical, for example focusing on the results-chain and how to formulate results statements and indicators. Given that RBM is the main agency accountability framework, greater emphasis should be placed on mainstreaming gender into RBM guidance, e.g. how to: carry out gender analysis, and why this is important; how to develop gender-sensitive results statements and indicators; how to measure results in a gender-sensitive fashion; and the need for sex-disaggregated data. New software has allowed estimates to be made of expenditures for the promotion of gender equality - an advance over previous practice. However, current software is not set up to capture cross-cutting themes, including gender equality, because it captures only the main focus of each project. Use of current software will therefore make tracking funds to promotion of gender equality difficult, and agencies are likely to underestimate contributions to gender equality. It will be important to remain in dialogue with the managers of computing systems so as to ensure that in future expenditure on promotion of gender equality is fully captured.

7. Oversight functions: reporting, evaluation, audit and competencies
Reporting to the Executive Board or ECOSOC on gender equality, at the level of the strategic plan, differs between agencies. For example, there is greater emphasis on this in UNFPAMYFF reporting than in UNICEF reporting on its Medium-Term Strategic Plan.

iv

As the present report shows, there are also a number of examples where indicators are sex-disaggregated in the central planning document but not in reporting, and where indicators are not systematically tracked. There are areas where all agencies could strengthen their reporting on promotion of gender equality so as to ensure tracking of results related to this strategic priority. Gender equality and the empowerment of women are currently poorly covered in agency evaluations. Of the five agencies, WFP and ILO have evaluation policies in place, neither of which refer to gender. For UNICEF and UNFPA evaluation is guided by their policy and programme manual, but attention to gender in the relevant sections is limited. Monitoring and evaluation guidelines could pay further attention to gender. In UNICEF, UNDP, ILO and UNFPA, audit focuses mainly on the existence and correct functioning of management systems. In WFP a more proactive approach to gender mainstreaming has been taken, and five audit indicators (see Section 8.3) have been introduced for assessment of mainstreaming of country offices. The main method of assessing individual staff performance is through competencies. In the UNICEF gender policy, accountability mechanisms have a focus on competencies. For UNFPA, attention to gender is included in some competencies, along with the other two UNFPA strategic priorities, but there is no systematic focus in the competencies on gender mainstreaming. UNDP’s Gender Action Plan and ILO’s Action Plan on Gender Mainstreaming for Gender Equality both include a focus to support gender equality competencies. The WFP Gender Policy notes that managers will be held accountable through assessment for progress made on the Enhanced Commitments to Women. Part of staff assessment against competencies is to determine whether work plans have been completed adequately. Because under the RBM regime agency staff and units are to be held accountable through their work plans, in particular for managing for results, competencies are perhaps the main means in agencies through which accountability will function in future, thus, requiring competencies in gender equality and women’s empowerment programming and policy-setting will be a key means of ensuring accountability.

8. Implications for field-based programming and the UNCT
Corporate-level policies and strategies on gender equality and women’s empowerment – and the extent to which these are mainstreamed into policy and practice related to RBM, evaluation, audit and strategic planning documents – have a significant effect on programming at the country and regional levels. With different UN organizations assigning distinct levels of importance and accountability to gender equality and women’s empowerment, attempts to foster a coordinated approach at the level of the UN Country Team might encounter difficulties. There are a few – but increasing – numbers of examples of UNCTs that are developing their own gender equality policies and gender mainstreaming strategies for the UNCT. 1

1

Resource Guide for Gender Theme Groups (2005) produced by the CCA/UNDAF Task Force of the Interagency Network on Women and Gender Equality comprised of UNIFEM, UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF and DAW.

v

The UNDG Gender Equality Task Force commissioned the organizational review of corporate policies with a view, ultimately, toward providing guidance on how to strengthen UNCT performance on gender equality. A key next step is to take the organization-wide scorecard that is proposed as a key recommendation emerging from this review and, based on consultations, adapt it to a UNCT-level scorecard that can strengthen guidance for UNCTs on expectations regarding their performance on gender equality and women’s empowerment, as well as provide regular and progressive data on how UNCTs are doing. This will assist in identifying areas of capacity that need to be strengthened across the whole UN operational system, as well as provide important data for reporting on progress in implementing the Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review resolution.

9. Recommendations
9.1 A gender equality scorecard This Section sets out a framework for developing a gender equality scorecard,. The aim is to develop a common understanding of what gender mainstreaming means in practice, and a minimum set of requirements for adequate support to gender equality programmes. Guiding principles for development of the scorecard were:  Promotion of gender equality should be visible in agency planning and programming.  The scorecard should be credible in terms of its method (e.g. if a rating system is used it should make sense).  The scorecard should be easy to understand and use.  Data should be accessible.  There should be buy-in and preferably participation of those being assessed. On the last point, any attempt to introduce a scorecard should do so within the context of the slow implementation of RBM within most agencies. Establishing a scorecard will do much to overcome the confusion about gender mainstreaming, but it will not overcome resistance to gender equality and women’s empowerment; in order to overcome the latter the process of introducing a scorecard is as important as the make-up of the scorecard itself. For this reason potential processes are also discussed. Following are potential thematic areas for a gender equality scorecard. The following are prioritized in order of importance to establishing accountability, potential for achieving change, cost, and political viability. Thematic areas 1. Gender equality policy and implementation plan Scorecard indicators
1.1 Policy updated in the last five years. 1.2 Policy includes: i. implementation plan

vi

Thematic areas

Scorecard indicators
ii. time frame iii. resources needed for implementation iv. accountability of different levels of staff (from senior management down). 1.3 Realistic monitoring and evaluation of the policy/action plan is included. 1.4 Monitoring taking place as planned. 1.5 Evaluation taking place as planned. 1.6 Results of m&e are fed back into agency programming.

2. Staff assessment

2.1 Work plans clearly set out expected gender mainstreaming accomplishments toward support of gender equality. 2.2 HR system of performance management in place that rewards good performance on gender equality, and sets out realistic penalties for poor performance. 2.3 HR system operating as planned.

3. Mainstreaming in RBM guides and training

3.1 Clear guidance on how to carry out a gender analysis included. 3.2 Clear guidance on how to develop gender-sensitive results statements included. 3.3 Clear guidance on how to develop gender-sensitive indicators included. 3.4 Clear guidance on how to measure gender-sensitive results statements included. 3.5 Requirements for inclusion of sex-disaggregated data made clear.

4. Audit

4.1 Audit examines whether HQ gender unit is properly set up and adequately resourced. 4.2 Audit examines whether a system for implementing the gender policy is in place and functioning. 4.3 Audit examines whether a system for measuring/reporting gender equality achievements against results has been formulated and implemented.

5. Strategic planning documents

5.1 Clear statement in support of gender equality in the introductory sections. 5.2 One third or more of results statements integrate the promotion of gender equality. 5.3 Indicators are gender-sensitive where relevant.

vii

Thematic areas

Scorecard indicators
5.4 Systematic sex-disaggregation (all data disaggregated unless there is a reason for not doing so). 5.5 Key terms (‘poor’, ‘farmers’, ‘workers’, ‘children’) disaggregated.

7. Reporting

7.1 Reporting to the Executive Board on strategic planning is gender-sensitive, e.g. reporting on gender equality as a thematic area, and as a cross-cutting theme; data is systematically disaggregated by sex; gender-sensitive results statements in the strategic plan are systematically tracked. 7.2 Guidelines for reports from Country Offices require gendersensitivity, e.g. reporting on gender equality as a thematic area, and cross-cutting theme; requirement for sex-disaggregated data. 7.3 Country Office reports are gender-sensitive and follow guidelines as in 7.2.

8. Evaluation

8.1 Evaluation guidance is gender-sensitive, e.g. includes background on gender analysis, gender-related examples, and stresses the requirement for sex-disaggregated data. 8.2 Evaluations carry out gender analysis. 8.3 Evaluations report on gender equality as both a thematic area and cross-cutting theme, and data is systematically sexdisaggregated.

9. Budgeting

9.1 System in place for tracking financial resources invested in the promotion of gender equality. 9.2 Regular reporting on resources invested in the promotion of gender equality.

10. Policy and programme manual

10.1 Clear statement in support of gender equality in the introductory sections. 10.2 Requirement for gender analysis set out, and gender analysis defined and explained. 10.3 Requirement for sex-disaggregated data set out.

The relative weights to be placed on thematic areas, as well as the scoring system within thematic areas, will need to be discussed by agencies. Additional columns with a scoring system, responsibility for follow-up and mechanisms for tracking progress, could be added (see example in Section 9).

viii

9.2 Recommendations on process The Task Force will need to decide if the process of developing the gender mainstreaming scorecard should be internal, or if external support is required. Internal processes are preferred because intra- and inter-agency work on this issue will likely increase ownership. The Task Force needs to decide if there are currently the required resources – in particular in terms of staff time – to develop the scorecard in a participatory way. If these exist the Task Force should facilitate the following:  The five agencies under review (and/or others if interested) should initiate a dialogue between the gender unit and concerned units for each of the scorecard areas, about the make-up, potential scoring, responsibility and mechanisms for tracking progress. Alternatively each agency could work on two of the ten thematic areas.  In September/October the results of this process should be brought together in a workshop, the objective of which would be to complete the scorecard. The scorecard could then be rolled out with 2007 as the baseline year, and could be applied to all UN agencies as relevant.

ix

Acknowledgements
Thanks are due to the UN Development Group Task Force on Gender Equality and in particular Kristen Timothy, Joanne Sandler (UNIFEM) and Aminata Toure (UNFPA) provided many useful insights. Noreen Khan (UNICEF) provided useful background information on UNICEF. Aster Zaoude (UNDP), Giorgia Testolin (WFP), and Geir Tonstol (ILO) all provided support. Thanks to all. Tony Beck

x

Table of contents
1. Background and purpose 2. Method 3. Accountability in the UN context
3.1 The move to greater accountability 3.2 Who is accountable? 3.3 What is the potential for strengthening accountability for gender mainstreaming within current RBM practices?

4. Conceptual confusion about gender mainstreaming 5. Accountability and gender equality policies 6. Mainstreaming in strategic planning documents 7. Programme guidance
7.1 Gender mainstreaming in policy and programme manuals 7.2 Results Based Management guidance 7.3 Budgeting

8. Oversight functions: reporting, evaluation, audit and competencies
8.1 Reporting 8.2 Evaluation 8.3 Audit 8.4 Competencies

9. Recommendations
9.1 A gender equality scorecard 9.2 Process Bibliography Annexes: Annex 1 Annex 2 Annex 3 ILO case study UNDP case study UNFPA case study Annex 4 Annex 5 UNICEF case study WFP case study

Table 1: Main agency documents analysed Table 2: Responsibility for results at the agency level Table 3: Accountability mechanisms in agency gender equality policies Table 4: Mainstreaming in strategic planning documents Table 5: Gender mainstreaming in RBM guidance Table 6: Agency expenditure on strategic priorities Table 7: Gender equality scorecard Box 1: Sex-disaggregation of under-5 mortality data – is it important?

xi

Acronyms
ALNAP CEDAW ExCom IANWGE MTSP MYFF RBM SP TCPR UNCT UNDG U5MR Action Learning Network on Accountability and Participation Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women Executive Committee Inter-Agency Network on Women and Gender Equality Medium-Term Strategic Plan Multi-Year Funding Framework Results Based Management Strategic Plan Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review UN Country Team UN Development Group Under-5 Mortality Rate

xii

1. Background and purpose
At the 59th Session of the UN General Assembly, Member States, in adopting the Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review (TCPR) of Operational Activities for Development of the United Nations System (UN 2005c: 13) called on all organizations of the UN system to: mainstream gender and to pursue gender equality in their country programmes, planning instruments and sector-wide programmes and to articulate specific country-level goals and targets in this field in accordance with the national development strategies (A/RES/59/250, Op. 86). Further, ECOSOC Resolution 2004/4 - Review of Economic and Social Council agreed conclusions 1997/2 on mainstreaming the gender perspective into all policies and programmes in the United Nations system requested: ‘the Secretary-General to ensure that all United Nations entities develop action plans with time lines for implementing the agreed conclusions 1997/2, which address the gap between policy and practice identified in the Secretary-General’s report, with a view to strengthening commitment and accountability at the highest levels within the United Nations system as well as to establishing mechanisms to ensure accountability, systematic monitoring and reporting on progress in implementation.’ As a direct follow-up to the TCPR, and to ensure a comprehensive response to many of its recommendations, the UN Development Group (UNDG) created a Task Force on Gender Equality as a sub-group of the UNDG Programme Group. The goals of the Task Force are: a) to support more consistent and coherent action among UNDG member agencies to mainstream gender equality and promote women’s empowerment at the country level; and b) to ensure that gender equality and women’s empowerment are mainstreamed into the wide range of tools and processes that emerge from the UNDG for use by UN Country Teams (UNCTs). UNFPA and UNIFEM were designated by the Task Force to lead its: ‘Review of UNDG members’ gender policies, strategies and accountability mechanisms for gender mainstreaming at the field level.’ This review had two objectives: 1. To analyze the Multi-Year Funding Frameworks (MYFFs), policy and programming documents, programme manuals, monitoring and evaluation frameworks, and performance assessment tools of the ExCom agencies and ILO, to determine the extent to which gender equality perspectives are reflected and mainstreamed. 2. To identify accountability mechanisms in place for implementing gender mainstreaming strategies, and assess to what extent they are promoting a coordinated operational strategy in support of gender equality, within programming frameworks and monitoring and evaluation systems. The definition of gender mainstreaming in this report is the widely used ECOSOC definition (ECOSOC 1997: 28):

1

Mainstreaming a gender perspective is the process of assessing the implications for women and men of any planned action, including legislation, policies or programmes, in all areas and at all levels. It is a strategy for making women's as well as men's concerns and experiences an integral dimension of the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies and programmes in all political, economic and societal spheres so that women and men benefit equally and inequality is not perpetuated. The ultimate goal is to achieve gender equality. The main recommendation of this report is that the Task Force should develop a minimum set of standards, or scorecards, against which support toward achieving gender equality at the agency and Un Country Team (UNCT) level can be assessed. The agency-level scorecard is discussed throughout the report, and a draft set of standards, and a process for completing these standards, is included in Section 9. In the current UN accountability era the time has come for moving from checklists to scorecards, against which agencies can be held accountable. This would be a proactive approach, instituting a series of standards across the UN against which key documents and processes would be reviewed. Since the taskforce is ultimately focused on improving UNCT performance, it is recommended that the information garnered through this review and the results of the parallel review of gender analysis and gender mainstreaming in Common Country Programming be considered together to develop a related UNCT scorecard.

2. Method
The review was carried out between October 2005 and February 2006. It included an extensive document review, two meetings with the Task Force in New York, and contact with gender focal points in the agencies involved. Given resources available, the Task Force decided to select the four Executive Committee (ExCom) agencies – UNDP, UNICEF, UNFPA, and WFP - for review. In addition, a review of ILO was included, because of the important work carried out in its programme budget process, and its innovative Gender Audit. An Annex with reports for each agency is included. In addition, it was decided that, given other ongoing work being managed by the Task Force at the UN Country Team level, the focus of the review would be at HQ level. Accountability mechanisms reviewed included:  Gender equality and other policies, e.g. the extent to which these policies include gender-related targets and indicators;  Reporting to the Executive Boards and ECOSOC on key strategy documents, such as the MYFF;  Reporting functions for the agency as a whole;  Evaluation and audit functions;  Staff Appraisal and Performance Appraisal and Development or its equivalents; and 2

 Budget functions. This report builds on earlier work by the Inter-Agency Network on Women and Gender Equality (IANWGE) on Mainstreaming Gender Perspectives in Programme Budget Processes Within the United Nations System, which examined the interaction between Results Based Management (RBM) and gender mainstreaming throughout the UN (IANWGE 2003). All five agencies included in the current review were also included in the IANWGE project, and data from the earlier review has been used as a baseline against which to assess progress, in particular in gender mainstreaming in strategic planning documents.2 On the next page, Table 1 provides details on the main agency documents analysed.

2

The IANWGE project involved an overall assessment of gender mainstreaming across 53 UN agencies and an intensive review of 14 UN entities, between 1999 and 2003. It was led by the same author of this report.

3

Table 1: Main agency documents analysed3 ILO UNDP
(2003) UNDP Policy Note. Gender Equality

UNFPA
(2005) Policy For UNFPA Support To Sexual And Reproductive Health, Population And Development, And Gender Not present

UNICEF
(1994) Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women and Girls: a policy review

WFP
(2002) Policy Issues: Gender Policy (20032007), Enhanced Commitments to Women to Ensure Food Security Included in gender policy

Gender equality policy

No separate gender equality policy

Gender equality strategy or action plan

(1999) Gender equality and mainstreaming in the International Labour Office. Circular No. 564, DirectorGeneral’s Announcements. (2001) ILO Action Plan on Gender Mainstreaming for Gender Equality (2004) Strategic Policy Framework (2006-09) (2005) Programme and budget for the biennium 2006-07

(2005) Gender Action Plan 2006-2007

Not present

Organizations’ main strategy and planning documents

(2003) Second multiyear funding framework 2004-2007

(2001) Report for the Executive Director for 2000: The Multi-Year Funding Framework 2000-2003 (2004) The Multi-Year Funding Framework 2004-2007. Report of the Executive Director

(2005) The UNICEF Medium-term Strategic Plan, 20062009. Investing in Children: the UNICEF contribution to poverty reduction and the Millennium Summit Agenda

(2003) Policy Issues: Strategic Plan (20042007) (2004) Policy Issues: Strategic Plan 20062009

3

For full references see the agency reports, included as Annexes.

4

ILO

UNDP
(1999-2004) UNDP Programming Manual

UNFPA
(2005) Polices and Procedures Manual

UNICEF
(2005) Programme Policy and Procedure Manual

WFP
(2005) Programme Guidance Manual

Programme manual

RBM guidance

Reporting to Executive Board/ECOSOC

(2002) ILO Programme Planning Handbook for Unit Chiefs and Programmers (2002) ILO Programme Planning Handbook for Unit Chiefs and Programmers (2003) Report on programme implementation in 2002 (2005) 2004-05 Implementation Report

(nd) Results management

(2000) UNFPA Policy Statement on Results Based Management

(2005) Understanding Results Based Programme Planning and Management (2005) Report of the Executive Director of the United Nations Children‟s Fund: Annual Report to the Economic and Social Council (2005) United Nations Children‟s Fund, Report on the MidTerm Review of the UNICEF MediumTerm strategic plan (2002-2005) (2005) United Nations Children‟s Fund, Report of the Executive Director: Results Achieved for Children in 2004 in support of the Medium-Term Strategic Plan

(2003) Result based management orientation guide

(2005) Multi-year funding framework report on UNDP performance and results for 2004 (2005) Progress report on the implementation of the 2005 Gender Action Plan (2002) ResultsOriented Annual Report 2001

(2005) Report of the Executive Director for 2004: Progress in Implementing the Multi-Year Funding Framework, 20042007 (2000) Multi-Year Funding Framework, 2000-2003, Report of the Executive Director

(2004) Annual Reports: Annual Performance Report for 2004

5

ILO

UNDP
(2001) Development Effectiveness. Review of Evaluative Evidence (2005) Management response to the evaluation of gender mainstreaming in UNDP (2005) Annual Report of the Administrator on Evaluation (2006) Evaluation of gender mainstreaming in UNDP

UNFPA
(2004) Programme Manager‟s Planning Monitoring and Evaluation Toolkit (2004) Periodic Report on Evaluation

UNICEF
(2003) The Quality of evaluations supported by UNICEF Country Offices, 2001-2002 (2004) Proposed Plan of Action to Strengthen Evaluation in UNICEF 20042006. Background document for GMT (2005) United Nations Children‟s Fund, Summary of Midterm Reviews of Major Evaluations of Country Programmes

WFP
(nd) Monitoring and Evaluation in WFP (2002) Information Notes: Summary of Evaluation Recommendations and Management Response - Thematic Evaluation of WFP‟s Commitment to Women, 1996-2001 (2002) Evaluation Reports: Summary Report of the Evaluation Recommendations and Thematic Evaluation of WFP‟s Commitment to Women, 1996-2001 (2002) Summary of Evaluation Recommendations and Management Response—Thematic Evaluation of WFP‟s Commitment to Women, 1996-2001 (2005) Implementation of the Gender Policy 2003-

Evaluation

(2002) ILO Gender Audit 2001-02 (2005a) A new policy and strategic framework for evaluation at the ILO

6

ILO

UNDP

UNFPA

UNICEF

WFP
2007, Enhanced Commitment to Women, Full Report (2005) Policy Issues: Information Note on the Progress of Implementation of the WFP Gender Policy (2003-2007) (2005) Policy Issues: Report on the Management of Evaluation (2005) Executive Director‟s Circular: Terms of Reference for the WFP Audit Committee (2005) Resource, Financial and Budgetary Matters: WFP Biennial Management Plan (2006-2007)

Audit

(2005) Report of the Chief Internal Auditor for the year ended 31 December 2004 -

(2005) Internal audit and oversight. Report of the Administrator

(2005) UNFPA Internal Audit and Oversight Activities in 2004 (2003) Competency Framework (2003) Performance Appraisal and Guidance. Guide Book

(2005) Internal audit activities in 2004 annual report to the Executive Board (2004) United Nations Children‟s Fund, Analysis of the use of regular and other resources by country and by aggregate for each priority area of the UNICEF medium strategic plan during 2002-2003

Other

-

7

The review also included an analysis of a number of indicator systems and scorecards, both those specific to gender equality, and to other areas. This complemented the assessment of individual agency attempts to develop internal accountability systems and/or the equivalent of scorecards. There are a large number of scorecards currently in use, so the review was selective and focused on the following that appeared most relevant to strengthening the strategy of gender mainstreaming:  DFID’s review of the effectiveness of 23 multilateral agencies, which included assessment against eight key focus areas (DFID 2004, 2004a, b).  The UN Joint Investigation Unit report on results based management in the UN, which established nine RBM benchmarks (JIU 2004).  The OECD-DAC Sourcebook on Managing for Results (OECD-DAC 2005), which provides overall guidance on establishing results based measures.  The DFID gender equality country audit in Malawi (DFID 2004c), which includes a gender scorecard.  The ALNAP Quality Proforma, used for assessment of the quality of evaluations of humanitarian action (ALNAP 2005).  The OECD-DAC (1997) policy marker on gender equality. Like much evaluative theory, scorecards evolved in the private sector, in particular in relation to audit functions, and are currently being transferred to the public sector in a number of ways. Guidance on using scorecards is given in Section 9.

3. Accountability in the UN context
‘Where there is accountability we will progress; where there is none we will underperform.’ UN Secretary-General, In Larger Freedom (UN 2005: 7). 3.1 The move to greater accountability Accountability has been a central feature of UN reform. A review of agency Results Based Management (RBM) documents and Secretary-General reports (including UN 2005, 2005a, 2003, 2003a, 2002) suggests there are currently two main understandings of accountability in the UN system:  Accountability for performance.  Financial accountability. One main focus of UN reform linked to establishing accountability has been the introduction, from around the mid-1990s, of RBM. RBM is about developing results statements and measuring if these have been met, linking results and resources, and decentralizing responsibility to managers. A second focus across the UN, linked to RBM, has been strengthened oversight, including monitoring, evaluation and audit.

8

As the Secretary-General has noted, accountability functions and practice in the UN need strengthening. There are multiple accountability functions and processes, at different levels, for example – programme review, results-based reporting, evaluations, audits, reports of the Executive Director to Boards and ECOSOC, and reports to donors. These are often not coordinated either within or between agencies. The potential for establishing accountability for gender equality needs to be viewed in the context of a system which is striving for greater coherence on this issue, and which will offer opportunities to promote greater accountability for gender mainstreaming. 3.2 Who is accountable? In all the agencies under review, strategic planning documents lay out the importance of improving accountability, but are short on specifics. At the agency level, policy and program guidance states that agencies are responsible – rather than accountable - for achieving outputs which then feed into outcomes and goals for which all development partners are responsible. 4 However, policy and program guidance is not always internally consistent as to where responsibility lies, and there are also some differences between agencies, as Table 2 reveals. Table 2: Responsibility for results at the agency level
UNFPA (2005) Polices and Procedures Manual WFP (2005) Programme Guidance Manual UNICEF (2005) Programme Policy and Procedure Manual Government authority is responsible for overall success of the country programme. UNFPA is responsible for outputs. Implementing partners are responsible for activities. WFP is responsible for outputs. Head of Country Office and joint government/UNICEF responsibility for results. Not specific as to whether UNICEF is responsible for outputs or outcomes - reference is to ‘organizational targets’. The government [is]… responsible for the overall achievement of results of UNDP support in the country. … A single institution is designated to manage each UNDP-supported programme or project. Its main responsibility is to achieve the results expected from the programme or project, and in particular to ensure that the outputs are produced through effective process management and use of UNDP funds. Unclear where responsibility for results lies.

UNDP (1999-2004) UNDP Programming Manual

ILO (2002) ILO Programme Planning Handbook for Unit Chiefs and Programmers

The ways in which outputs are framed by agencies can differ; for example, in UNFPA many outputs are framed as strategic input into the policy-making process, while in WFP outputs are more ‘results’ oriented, for example: ‘Timely provision of food in sufficient quantity for targeted children, adolescent girls and adults to improve access to education in schools and nonformal education centers.’ This is despite the UNDG agreement to harmonize results based terminology. 5
4

For UN results based terminology, go to http://www.undg.org/content.cfm?id=823. Outputs are defined as: ‘The products and services which result from the completion of activities within a development intervention.’ 5 http://www.undg.org/content.cfm?id=823

9

At the level of the unit and individual staff, there is consistency in agency RBM frameworks on what accountability means. Under RBM, the main area for which staff are being held accountable is managing for results, rather than development results. Development results are seen as the responsibility of many partners, in particular government. Units and staff can therefore be held accountable for the process of gender mainstreaming, but not gender equality results. What does ‘managing for results’ mean? It means that agencies have to institute and use effective planning and reporting systems. RBM theory says that if an organisation is organised on RBM principles, then it is likely to achieve the results it sets. This was the theory for example behind DFID’s evaluation of organizational effectiveness of 23 multilateral agencies (DFID 2004). The DFID assessment talks about ‘enabling conditions’ that are necessary for the achievement of results. Thus there is an assumed link between these enabling conditions and actual results. So there is a paradoxical situation where all planning is about achieving results, and accountability is about managing for results. It’s clear why this has come about – in the public sector it’s hard to hold individual staff accountable for achieving results. The WFP RBM Orientation Guide deals with this issue (WFP 2003: 25, italics added): RBM does contribute to a greater sense of accountability for results up and down the organization. … Holding employees directly accountable for achieving a defined result is often not only unrealistic – because many different factors may have contributed to that result – but also can discourage the kind of open and honest approach to planning and performance measurement that is so essential to RBM. A better approach is to hold employees accountable for managing for results – for applying RBM processes and principles diligently and skillfully to understand performance and adjust strategies and operations to improve performance. In UNFPA the RBM policy (2000: 2) notes that RBM is about: ‘Delegating authority and empowering managers and, at the same time, holding managers accountable for results.’ However, in the UNFPA competencies framework, competencies are mainly at the level of managing for results, rather than the results themselves – e.g. accepting responsibility for personal performance and performance of staff (UNFPA 2003); although there is also a suggestion that managers will be held responsible for development results in some cases. The UNICEF Policy and Programme Manual appears to agree on this point: (UNICEF 2005: 42): ‘RBM rests on clearly defined accountability for results, and requires monitoring and self-assessment of progress towards results, and reporting on performance. The manager of a project is responsible for directing the project with a focus on the results to be achieved and planning, monitoring and facilitating learning towards this end. How does this focus on managing for results play out in practice? Here are four of the 11 ‘lead indicators’ which UNFPA established in its MYFF reporting against which it will be held accountable:  Proportion of country offices with a country programme that have baseline data for at least 75 per cent of their output indicators.

10

 Proportion of country offices with a country programme that have implemented at least 75 per cent of their field visit monitoring plans.  Proportion of country offices with a country programme rating their professional staff as proficient in results-based management.  Proportion of country offices with a country programme reporting that national professional staff completed at least 75 per cent of activities in their annual staff development plan. The focus in these indicators is clearly on managing for results, rather than the results themselves. 3.2 What is the potential for strengthening accountability for gender mainstreaming within current RBM practices? Most development agencies have evidenced a halting uptake of RBM. For example the World Bank Annual Review of Development Effectiveness (2005: 11-12) notes failure to institutionalize RBM, and the need for a new incentive structure: The Bank has attempted, but not yet succeeded, in identifying measures of Bank performance and of the Bank contribution to development outcomes for which staff can be held accountable. The Bank tried to develop a Corporate Scorecard, which identified measures of organizational effectiveness (mainly inputs) directly within the Bank’s control and for which staff could be held accountable, and measures of development effectiveness (outputs and outcomes) not fully within the Bank’s control, but to which the Bank contributes. This effort has been ended, and no review has been undertaken to document and learn from the experience. ….Overall, the slow progress in adopting measures of organizational effectiveness and Bank performance and defining more precisely how the Bank’s contribution to development outcomes would be measured contributes to a lack of clarity about what staff are held accountable for. The lesson emerging from international experience is that managing for results can be achieved only with profound changes of organizational culture and incentives, and that changing mental models is the central challenge. Aid organizations must shift toward creating an organizational culture that values lesson learning and an incentive framework that promotes managing for results. 6 An accountability focus leads to a discussion on penalties and incentives. As the UNDP evaluation of gender mainstreaming says (2006: 72): ‘ Accountability usually involves penalties for failure to perform.’ But there’s a hesitancy to talk about penalties for nonperformance in the public sector (see Section 5 on agency gender policies). There are two lessons to be learned from the above analysis related to establishing an accountability framework for gender mainstreaming:

6

Further issues in donors and other public sector organizations vis-à-vis introduction of RBM can be found in Eyben (2005) and Mayne (2005).

11

 Attempts to develop an accountability framework need to take into account the slow uptake of RBM in agencies.  There should be a focus on managing for results, as this is the current main area where accountability is being located. In other words key RBM documents, such as MYFFs and RBM guides should include or require adequate gender analysis, sex-disaggregated data, gender-sensitive results statements and gendersensitive indicators.

4. Conceptual confusion about gender mainstreaming
‘We recognize the importance of gender mainstreaming as a tool for achieving gender equality. To that end, we undertake to actively promote the mainstreaming of a gender perspective in the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies and programmes in all political, economic and social spheres, and further undertake to strengthen the capabilities of the United Nations system in the area of gender.’ (2005 World Summit Outcome A/RES/60/1 Para. 59) A further issue related to gender mainstreaming and accountability is that there is limited agreement on what gender mainstreaming means. Although the ECOSOC definition quoted in Section 1 is widely accepted and used, a gap remains as to how the ECOSOC definition should be translated into practice. There is conceptual confusion on two levels. First, there is a tendency to equate gender mainstreaming with gender balance, although these are two different issues. The issue of gender balance should remain, largely, within the remit of personnel offices, but substantive gender units and gender equality specialists inevitably get drawn into policy discussions related to it. Second – as the recent evaluation of gender mainstreaming in UNDP (2006) demonstrated – even where a gender mainstreaming policy exists, staff tend to label any programme with women as targets or beneficiaries as gender mainstreaming. This conceptual confusion is further exacerbated by divergence in definitions and policies across agencies. A comprehensive picture and common understanding of how to apply gender mainstreaming in UN operational activities is therefore needed. If there is no agreement on what constitutes a minimum level of gender mainstreaming, how will it be possible to hold agencies accountable for this? This paper proposes an agreed set of indicators, to contribute to stronger guidance and accountability. The rest of this report deals with this issue.

12

5. Accountability and gender equality policies
Four agencies - UNDP, UNFPA, WFP and UNICEF - have a gender equality policy; and UNDP has a separate strategy for follow up to the policy. ILO does not have a gender equality policy, but does have an Action Plan on Gender Mainstreaming for Gender Equality, and promotion of gender equality was also included in a Circular sent from the Director-General. All of these documents are reviewed in Table 3. As illustrated in Table 3, agencies have taken different approaches concerning accountability requirements,. There appears to be limited consistency concerning the focus and format of gender equality policies, and also limited communication as to which strategies within policies have been more successful. There is potential for greater exchange of information concerning strategies for accountability.

13

Table 3: Accountability mechanisms in agency gender equality policies Policies in place ILO
Gender Equality and Mainstreaming in the International Labour Office (Circular No. 564)(1999) Action Plan on Gender Mainstreaming for Gender Equality. (2001)*

UNDP
Policy Note on Gender Equality. (2002) Gender Action Plan 2006-2007. (2005) (nb UNDP accountability mechanisms are mainly expressed as indicators) The Executive Director of UNIFEM and the Director of the Bureau for Development Policy UNDP jointly chair the UNDP Senior Gender Task Force, and both are members of the Senior Management Team lead by the Administrator. The Gender Action Plan notes the

UNFPA7
Policy For UNFPA Support To Sexual And Reproductive Health, Population And Development, And Gender. (2005)

UNICEF
Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women and Girls: a policy review. (1994)

WFP
Gender Policy. Enhanced Commitments to Women to Ensure Gender Equality (2003-2007). (2002)

At individual performance level
How are different levels of staff accountable for mainstreaming gender equality? Circular notes: ‘The implementation of this gender equality and mainstreaming policy requires the unfailing commitment, participation and contribution of each staff member. The responsibility and accountability for its successful implementation rests with the senior managers, the Not noted (16) While the responsibility and accountability for policy implementation will rest with the UNICEF representative in the country office, the integration of gender and development in UNICEF programmes will be the responsibility of all professional staff. … (24) Divisional, Regional and Country Directors will be responsible for implementing the ECW; technical support will be provided from gender focal teams of male and female staff, in divisions, regional bureaux, country and sub-offices, who liaise with regional-and country-

7

UNFPA, while not identifying accountability mechanisms explicitly in its policy statement, has in place procedures designed to hold staff at different levels responsible for demonstrating gender sensitivity and addressing gender issues in programming. These modalities are discussed in the agency report on UNFPA in Annex 3.

14

Policies in place

ILO
regional directors and the programme managers. Gender specialists and focal points will have a special role to play as catalysts.’ In the Action Plan Responsible Units for each output and activity are detailed, from the DirectorGeneral and Senior Management down.

UNDP
following are responsible for followup but does not assign direct responsibility for particular results: Office of the Administrator; Office of Human Resources (OHR); BDP/gender unit; Bureau of Management (BOM); Senior managers in UNDP; Resident Coordinators/Residen t Representatives Regional Bureaux; Learning Resources Centre (LRC)/BDP; Communications Office of the Administrator (COA); Practice Directors; Bureau Directors; All managers; Operations Support Group (OSG); BDP gender unit

UNFPA7

UNICEF
a focal point will be designated in each office to assist in this task. … Similarly, the regional adviser (gender and development), or a designated senior staff member in regional offices, will provide technical support to the country offices, as required. At headquarters, the Director of the Programme Division has overall responsibility for ensuring policy implementation and accelerating the achievement of gender equality and empowerment of girls and women. The various sections of the Programme Division will share the responsibility for the integration of gender, concerns in their sectoral programmes.

WFP
level gender theme groups. Regional- and country-level targets will be reflected in the work plans of regional bureau and country office managers, who will be responsible for reflecting them in office and staff work plans. Country Directors will be responsible for reflecting gender considerations in their participation in PRSP, CCA/UNDAF and CAP processes.

What are the

The activities

‘Gender compact’

Not noted

(16-17) Gender

(24) Global targets of

15

Policies in place
measures/indicators used to assess accountability?

ILO
included in the Action Plan can be read as indicators, eg ‘Undertake biennial gender audits on ILO programmes and report results to the Governing Body.’

UNDP
concluded between Administrator and Bureau heads and between Regional Bureau heads and Resident Representatives/ Resident Coordinators on specific annual programmatic and management deliverables.

UNFPA7

UNICEF
awareness should be adopted as a criterion in the appointment and promotion of staff and in the selection of consultants.

WFP
ECW will be mainstreamed into annual divisional and regional work plans, with regular monitoring of achievements. Country-level targets will be identified according to the results of baseline studies and integrated into contingency plans, Country Strategy Outlines and Country Programme documents, with country-level budget requirements mainstreamed and systems in place for monitoring progress and results. Managers will be held accountable through their MAPs for progress made on the ECW.

When, how and by whom will accountability be assessed?

One activity in the Action Plan is: ‘Review and adapt selection, job classification and performance appraisal procedures and develop an incentive system to

Performance monitored at institutional and management levels: results in multi-year funding framework (MYFF) reports and results and competency assessments of

Not noted

(17) The assessment of the staff member's performance related to the integration of gender concerns should be included as part of the guidelines of the annual performance evaluation report of

16

Policies in place

ILO
ensure gender equity.’ Not noted

UNDP
managers and staff. Not noted

UNFPA7

UNICEF
all professional staff.

WFP

What are the consequences of poor performance on gender equality?

Not noted

Not noted

Not noted

At programming level
How are programmes assessed and approved based on gender equality content? Two activities in the Action Plan read; ‘Apply gender analysis systematically in the design, planning, implementation and evaluation of ILO programmes involving research, promotion of standards, technical cooperation and dissemination of information.’ ‘Introduce procedures, including gender impact analysis, to ensure that technical cooperation programmes and projects are gendersensitive and genderresponsive, particularly in relation to identification of Gender analysis becomes a precondition for programme approval by all project appraisal committees. Not noted Not noted Not noted

17

Policies in place

ILO
objectives, outputs, activities and indicators.’ One activity in the Action Plan is: ‘Develop gender mainstreaming indicators for monitoring and evaluation, as well as methodologies for gender impact assessment.’ Not noted

UNDP

UNFPA7

UNICEF

WFP

How are programmes monitored and evaluated for gender equality content?

Not noted

Not noted

(16) Reviews of annual and other reports from the field will be expanded and technical support will be strengthened in the programme preparation process.

Not noted

How are financial resources invested in gender equality tracked?

Atlas-based system in place for tracking core and non-core investments in gender equality and women’s empowerment programmes Annual report on gender in UNDP programme and management performance to be institutionalized. Performance monitored at institutional and management levels: results in multi-year funding framework (MYFF) reports and

Not noted

Not noted

Not noted

At the level of the gender policy
What are the planned mechanisms for follow-up and review? One activity is ‘Undertake biennial gender audits on ILO programmes and report results to the Governing Body’ Not noted Institutional mechanisms and resources for the coordination and monitoring of policy implementation will be established and strengthened at all levels, as needed. The mechanism for this purpose will be a steering committee or a task force at UNICEF offices and (26) Reports on progress and achievements made in implementation of the Gender Policy and the ECW provided to the Executive Board at implementation midterm point (2005) and after the end-of-term evaluation (2007).

18

Policies in place

ILO

UNDP
results and competency assessments of managers and staff. Roll-out of the gender score card: baseline and benchmarks established. Specific performance indicators established based on effective compliance with the ‘gender driver’ in the MYFF. Clear reporting guidelines on the ‘gender driver’ in MYFF developed and implemented. Consistent progress recorded in line with the corporate score card and the Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review (TCPR) Monitoring results from the MYFF database for continued reporting See above for list of

UNFPA7

UNICEF
in the Programme Division at headquarters.

WFP

Who has oversight

The Gender Audit is

Not noted

See above

(24) Continued

19

Policies in place
for monitoring implementation of the gender policy?

ILO
the responsibility of the Gender Bureau, Gender Advisory Team, and Bureau of Programming and Management

UNDP
units

UNFPA7

UNICEF

WFP
guidance and implementation monitoring will be provided from a higher managementlevel task force on policy implementation. Not noted but presumably the end of term-evaluation in 2007 will feed into this process.

What process is in place for reviewing and revising the gender equality policy?

Not noted but presumably this will be part of ongoing Gender Audits.

Not noted

Not noted

Not noted

*The full version of the ILO Action Plan on Gender Mainstreaming for Gender Equality is an internal document, so an abbreviated version in ILO (2002) was used.

20

Four of the five agencies have included some accountability elements in the gender equality policies, with UNDP and WFP having perhaps the more comprehensive approaches. All note who will be accountable for implementation of their gender equality policies; and all agencies except UNFPA include a focus on using assessments of staff performance. Perhaps the key lesson in the development of policies, based on the WFP and UNDP experiences, is that policies need to be accompanied by a realistic implementation plan, which should include timetables, allocation of responsibility and accountability mechanisms, and budgets required for implementation. Policies which do not include detailed and realistic follow-up plans are less likely to be implemented as intended. Some gaps in the policies include:  consequences for poor performance on gender equality;  delineation of the programme approval processes;  financial tracking; and  processes for reviewing and revising policies. Proposed minimum requirements for a gender equality policy, based on current practice, are included in Section 9.

6. Mainstreaming in strategic planning documents
The main strategic planning documents that were reviewed were Multi-Year Funding Frameworks or their equivalent. These are the central planning documents in agencies as agreed between Executive Boards and the head of agency, and thus provide overall guidance on strategic direction. Gender mainstreaming in these documents is therefore imperative. The documents reviewed are listed in Table 1. Comparative analysis suggests that mainstreaming of gender is adequate or close to adequate in strategic planning documents in terms of: highlighting gender equality as an issue in the introduction/preamble and tying this in to CEDAW and the Millennium Development Goals; ensuring gender equality cross-cuts strategic priorities; and including gender equality and the empowerment of women as an area of strategic focus. This is captured in Table 4. Further details are provided in individual agency reports in the Annexes. However, the key deficits lie in:  lack of systematic attention to promotion of gender equality in preambles, results statements and indicators;  gender-related results statements and indicators not adequately related to each other;  inconsistent use of gender-sensitive indicators; and  lack of disaggregation of key data and terms. 21

Table 4: Mainstreaming in strategic planning documents Sample introductory statements in preamble
MYFF 2004-07: (10) ‘Achieving reproductive health and rights is not possible without addressing the underlying social values and cultural practices that can form barriers to equity and equality, including gender discrimination.’

Agency UNFPA

Overview
UNFPA’s MYFF 20002003 includes extensive discussion of the likely contributions of UNFPA to gender equality and the empowerment of women, both as an individual area of focus and a crosscutting theme. The same holds true for the MYFF 2004-2007, where the same goals as the previous MYFF are included. Gender equality is integrated in discussions of all three goals. WFP has progressed from a focus on women in one part of its Strategic and Financial Plan (20002003) (SFP), to a situation where the agency’s commitment to women is strategically addressed throughout the SFP (2002-2005). For example, commitments to women are addressed in the introduction and at key points throughout the latter document, and there is also a separate section on ‘gender’. The main programming related objectives also focus on providing food aid to women and empowering women. This focus has been maintained in the Strategic Plan (20042007) (SP) and the SP (2006-2009), where two of the five Strategic Priorities have a direct focus on women, and to a certain extent gender.

Analysis of results statements
MYFF2004-07 There are three goals, one each in the areas of reproductive health, population and development, and gender equality and women’s empowerment. There are six outcomes, four of which are at the policy/institutional level and do not deal specifically with gender. Two outcomes deal directly with gender (sexdisaggregated population data, and promotion of gender equality).

WFP

Strategic Plan 2006-2009 No specific comments on promotion of gender equality, however, there is discussion of gender equality issues, e.g. (7) ‘WFP has made substantial progress in integrating gender concerns into its work, and the new Gender Policy continues and strengthens this commitment.’

Strategic Plan 2006-2009 The five Strategic Priorities (SP) are: SP1 Save lives in crisis situations. SP2 Protect livelihoods in crisis situations and enhance resilience to shocks. SP3 Support the improved nutrition and health status of children, mothers and other vulnerable people. SP4 Support access to gender disparity in access to education and skills training. SP5 Help governments establish and manage national foodassistance programmes. As can be seen, only SP4 reflects a gender perspective, while SP3 includes attention to women. For SP1 there are two outcomes and one output, with no attention to gender perspectives. For SP2 there is one outcome and one output with no attention to gender perspectives. For SP3 there are five outcomes, two of which refer to women, and

22

Agency

Overview

Sample introductory statements in preamble

Analysis of results statements
two outputs, neither of which refer to women. For SP4 one of two outputs refers to girls, and of four outcomes, three refer to boys and girls, and one to ‘Reduced gender disparity between boys and girls in WFP assisted primary and secondary schools and skills training,’ This is the first mention in the Strategic Plan of gender equality (as opposed to women and girls). For SP5 no outputs/outcomes are gender-sensitive. There is one outcome and one output.

UNICEF

Overall statements in the Medium-Term Strategic Plan (2006-2009) are strong in support of gender mainstreaming and the promotion of gender equality. As well as clear overarching statements, there is discussion of gender equality and rights and there is discussion under focus area 2 of the need to challenge gender stereotyping and promote the rights of the girl child to education. The first of five cross-cutting supporting strategies also covers gender equality in considerable detail. On the other hand there is little sense of how individual areas of focus will support gender equality.

MTSP 2006-2009 (3031): ‘UNICEF is also fully committed to Millennium Development Goal 3 for the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women, and recognizes that achieving gender equality is not only an important goal in itself, but is essential for the achievement of other goals. The status of girls and women and their empowerment to exercise their rights is central to UNICEF cooperation, as a means to ensure the full and effective participation of women as change agents for development. Women’s full and equal participation in political, civil, economic, social and cultural life, at all levels, is integral to development. … UNICEF recognizes

The MTSP 2006-2009 includes five focus areas: 1. Young child survival and development. 2. Basic education and gender equality. 3. HIV/AIDS and children. 4. Child protection from violence, exploitation and abuse. 5. Policy advocacy and partnerships for children’s rights. Focus area 1 has 12 organizational targets, one of which refers to ‘mothers’. Focus area 2 has 11 organizational targets, four of which deal with gender disparity. Focus area 3 has 9 organizational targets, one of which covers mothers and one proportionality in HIV/AIDS treatment. Focus area 4 has 17 organizational targets, four deal with gender sensitive programming, one with gender disparities. Focus area 5 has 8 organizational targets, four of which cover gender

23

Agency

Overview

Sample introductory statements in preamble
that a focus on girls, including in the earliest years and in relation to access to basic education, provides a major starting point for the promotion of gender equality in the longer term. In all MTSP focus areas, UNICEF will provide evidence and analysis on the situation of women, men, girls and boys, and will advocate for policies and support programmes that contribute to gender equality and women’s empowerment. ‘

Analysis of results statements
equality at the policy level.

UNDP

In its MYFF 2004-2007, gender equality has been dropped as a goal of UNDP and has instead become one of six development drivers. The implications of this for attention to gender equality in UNDP are unclear, but it is likely that there will be limited attention paid to gender equality in future planning documents.

No substantial reflection of gender equality or advancement of women in the introductory sections. The following is all that is included in the introductory sections of the MYFF: 10-11: ‘Recognizing that gender equality and women’s empowerment are integral to the development process, UNDP will continue to accord high priority to the gender dimension in all its programmes. Furthermore, it is increasingly clear from evaluative studies and feedback from country programmes that this challenge can best be met by mainstreaming gender throughout the MYFF goals.’ Programme and Budget 2006-07

There are five MYFF practice areas: a) Achieving the MDGs and reducing human poverty; (b) Fostering democratic governance; (c) Managing energy and environment for sustainable development; (d) Supporting crisis prevention and recovery; and (e) Responding to HIV/AIDS. Each of these has a number of service lines. Gender mainstreaming is included as a service line in goal 1 as one of nine service lines. No results statements are included in the MYFF 20042007 below the goal level.

ILO

ILO has increased its attention to gender

ILO has four strategic objectives:

24

Agency

Overview
equality since the Programme and Budget (P&B) 2000-01. For the P&B 2004-05 and P&B 2006-07, there is an extensive discussion of gender equality under the section on ‘Shared policy objectives.’ There is also some mainstreaming in the four strategic objectives, but this is not systematic.

Sample introductory statements in preamble
Director General’s introduction includes reference to employment for women under the summary of Strategic Objective 2; gender equality is included in discussion of crosscutting themes. No specific comment supporting promotion of gender equality. Promotion of gender equality is one of six ‘shared policy objectives’ or cross-cutting themes.

Analysis of results statements
1. Promote and realize standards and fundamental principles and rights at work 2. Create greater opportunities for women and men to secure decent employment and income 3. Enhance the coverage and effectiveness of social protection for all 4. Strengthen tripartism and social dialogue. Of the 15 outcomes tied to these indicators, 4 are either gendersensitive or refer to women.

The different levels of attention to gender equality in agency planning documents illustrates a central issue in relation to accountability for gender mainstreaming: there are currently no minimum standards for gender mainstreaming. Therefore there are no agreed methods for either assessing strategic planning documents, or assessing comparative performance of agencies in mainstreaming. There are four areas where agreement on minimum standards should be reached: 1. Leadership commitment expressed in introductory statements/preamble Heads of agencies need to send a clear message to all staff that promotion of gender equality is central to their mandate. One means of doing this is to include a strong statement on this in the introduction to the agency’s central planning document. As can be seen from Table 4, the UNICEF Medium-Term Strategic Plan (2006-2009) includes a detailed account of the agency’s support to gender equality, so this could be taken as a norm. On the other hand, while WFP’s Strategic Plan (2006-2009) includes few details on support to gender equality in the preamble, much of the document is gender mainstreamed, so it might be argued that there is no need for a strong introductory statement. However, if visible attention to gender perspectives is sought, MYFFs and their equivalent should include an introductory statement on the importance of gender mainstreaming. 2. Disaggregation of key terms In the ILO Programme and Budget 2006-2007 there is systematic reference to ‘women and men’, while in the other agency documents there tends to be a focus at a generic level (the ‘poor’, the ‘hungry’, ‘children’). The latter gender-neutral approach hides the fact that women are food providers, farmers, participate in civil society movements, and play other roles, many of which are different from those of men. The ILO approach is preferred because it ensures that gender perspectives are visible. It is also important to disaggregate children into boys and girls, given systematic discrimination against girls in

25

many countries (and see Box 1 on the implications of lack of disaggregation of under-5 mortality figures). 3. Disaggregation of results statements and indicators This is likely to prove the most challenging but critical area on which to reach interagency agreement. If greater accountability for gender equality is the goal, however – and if the UNCTs are to retain a comparative advantage for supporting countries to achieve their commitments to the MDGs – there needs to be much more attention paid to incorporating gender equality and women’s empowerment in results statement and indicators. As can be seen from Table 4, there is some variation in agency practice. A rough breakdown of the three agencies using outcome results statements is as follows8: Total number of outcomes 6 13 15 Total number of outcomes reflecting a gender perspective 2 5 4

Agency UNFPA WFP ILO

Between about one quarter and one third of outcomes reflect a gender perspective. However, what represents an adequate reflection of a gender perspective in a results statement needs to be determined; many results statements refer to ‘men and women’, or to women, rather than to gender equality. If there were a requirement that results statements refer to the promotion of gender equality, almost no agency results statements would currently meet this. For example as noted in Table 4, only one of WFP’s outcome statements refers to gender equality, although in total five refer to men and women, or girls and boys. Related to this, a decision also has to be made as to how many of the total results statements should reflect gender perspectives. If the mandate of the UN is support to achieve the MDGs, which highlights achievement of gender equality and womens’ empowerment, results statements should reflect this. So a target for UN agencies, based on current practice, could be that one third to one quarter of results statements at the outcome level or its equivalent specify gender equality and/or women’s empowerment. This would require agencies to delineate between a focus on including ‘women and men’ or ‘women’ in results statements and a focus on gender equality, both of which are key to the MDGs. 4. Sex disaggregation of key data While this has improved over the last decade, there is still a need for more systematic sex-disaggregation of key data; and mechanisms need to be in place to ensure that reporting on key indicators is also sex-disaggregated (see individual agency reports for further details). Sex-disaggregation for all data is noted as required in the UNICEF Medium-Term Strategic Plan (2006-2009), but this document does not meet its own standards. The importance of sex-disaggregation of key indicators can be seen in Box 1, which deals with under-5 mortality rates. A potential minimum standard here is that all data should be sex-disaggregated, unless there is a reason for not doing so.

8

The UNICEF Medium Term Strategic Plan includes organizational targets – of the 57 targets 12 include a gender perspective, but these targets may not be directly comparable to outcomes. In the UNDP MYFF 2004-2007 there are no results statements below the goal level.

26

Box 1: Sex-disaggregation of under-5 mortality data – is it important? Millennium Development Goal 4 is to: ‘Reduce by two-thirds, between 1990 and 2015, the underfive mortality rate (U5MR)’ with corresponding indicators: ‘Under-five mortality rate, infant mortality rate, proportion of one-year-old children immunized against measles.’ The State of the World‟s Children 2005 (UNICEF 2005a: 141) notes that: ‘the U5MR [under-5 mortality rate] is chosen by UNICEF as its single most important indicator of the state of a nation’s children.’ The under-5 mortality rate is also used as one of three indicators to allocate regular resources to UNICEF Country Offices, and is a key indicator for UNFPA. Under-5 mortality is clearly seen as a central indicator of children’s and human development. Is there disparity in the mortality of under-5 girls and boys? There is a lack of data on this issue, but the data that exists demonstrates that there are disparities. For the infant mortality rate (deaths under age 12 months per 1,000 live births), World Bank (2005) presents sex-disaggregated data for 50 countries which illustrates that the rate is almost always higher for boys than girls. One explanation for this is that at birth girls are biologically stronger than boys. However, the ratio of girls to boys dying under 12 months varies between countries, suggesting there are social factors at play here as well. For the age range 1-4, there is more scattered data, but evidence points to a higher rate of 1-4 mortality for girls. UN (1997: 140) notes: ‘In many developing countries, more girls than boys die between the ages of 1 and 4, indicating sex-biased treatment of children. This is in contrast with developed countries, where deaths of boys typically surpass those of girls by 25 per cent. In 17 of 38 developing counties where death rates were disaggregated, girls experienced a higher mortality than boys between ages 1 and 4….In some countries or areas the mortality rates for girls are higher than for boys by 20 per cent (north-eastern Brazil, Cameroon and Togo), by 40 per cent (Egypt) or by as much as 60 per cent.’ Similar and more up to date evidence is available from India and Nepal (see the UNICEF report, Annex 4). However, there is no sex-disaggregated analysis of under 5 mortality data in the Interim Report on MDG to the UN Secretary General (Freedman et al 2004). And there does not appear to be any sex-disaggregated planning or reporting on under 5 mortality in key UNICEF documents such as the Executive Director’s report to the board, or the MTSP itself, or in UNFPA reporting. Gender advocates need to look closely at sex-disaggregation of under 5 mortality figures. If they do not it may be that the MDG goal is met while gender equality worsens, because improvement in the survival rates of boys and girls may differ. Sex-disaggregated data is now available in some of the MDG progress reports, which are available at: http://www.undg.org/content.cfm?id=79&page=6&num=10&sort=Country&view=basic&archives=0 Given the importance of reducing under five mortality as an MDG this area requires more systematic attention and gathering and production of data.

7. Programme guidance
7.1 Gender mainstreaming in policy and programme manuals UNFPA, UNICEF and WFP policy and programme manuals include a strong statement in the introductory sections in support of gender mainstreaming. Much of the remainder of the manuals of all agencies appears to be ‘technical’ in focus, with emphasis on planning issues, and reference to gender mainstreaming mainly in passing. There is

27

inadequate attention to linking these technical details, such as how to develop results statements or how to monitor and evaluate, to gender mainstreaming. There is also a need for more gender equality related examples, and reiteration of the importance of using sex-disaggregated data, and gender analysis. The UNICEF Programme Policy and Procedure Manual includes a dedicated section on gender mainstreaming, including three accountability tools which may be of interest to other agencies, and that are intended to be used to assist country offices in assessing and monitoring the extent of gender mainstreaming in the supported programme, against a yardstick of known commitments and good practices. The three tools are:  Document Review Checklist, to ensure that cumulative and comparable data are derived from the reviews of available programme documentation.  Focus-Group Discussion Checklist. This tool helps the Review and Assessment Team to tabulate issues in consultation with small groups of staff.  Gender Mainstreaming Capacity Self Assessment Checklist, to assess one’s own or one’s unit’s level of gender competency. 7.2 Results Based Management guidance RBM guidance is mainly ‘technical’ in nature, for example focusing on the results-chain and how to formulate results statements and indicators, as can be seen in Table 5. Table 5: Gender mainstreaming in RBM guidance UNFPA
UNFPA Policy Statement on Results-Based Management (December 2000) mentions in passing the issue of gender equality and women’s empowerment as one key area of UNFPA’s strategy, but otherwise includes no details on gender mainstreaming strategies. Results based management orientation guide (2003).There is no discussion of either gender equality or women. Examples are not sex-disaggregated (eg ‘number and percentage of farmers in target communities who use improved seed’). This is a largely technical document – e.g. on how to develop a logframe. Examples are not sex-disaggregated (eg numbers of people sleeping under bednets; 90% of young people 12- 18 know how to protect themselves against HIV/AIDS). Results Management (2005) Assessment of substantive performance at the Country Office level is based on annual targets (outcomes) set for each country /regional programme. This will also include reporting on the gender driver against the following four questions developed for assessment of progress on this driver:   Have efforts in this area utilized gender needs analyses in development policy or programming? Have efforts in this area incorporated gender considerations into national policy frameworks, legislation and MDG processes?

WFP

UNICEF Understanding Results Based Programme Planning and Management (May 2005).

UNDP

28




Have efforts in this area facilitated women’s increased representation and participation to influence policy decisions and resource allocation? Have efforts in this area led to specific policies and programmes that benefit women in the form of dedicated interventions, financial commitments and other forms of resource allocation?

Elsewhere gender equality is mentioned a few times as a driver, but the Guide is mainly technical.

ILO

ILO Programme Planning Manual (2002) (this includes ILO guidance on RBM) There are a few references to the importance of paying attention to gender perspectives, for example in terms of monitoring and evaluation. One of the examples of a good results statement focuses on gender equality. There is also discussion of the importance of gender equality as a cross-cutting theme, and a section on the Gender Audit.

Given that RBM is the main accountability function in agencies, greater emphasis should be placed on mainstreaming gender into RBM guidance, e.g. how to: carry out gender analysis and why this is important; how to develop gender-sensitive results statements and indicators; how to measure results in a gender-sensitive fashion; and the requirement for sex-disaggregated data. 7.3 Budgeting The introduction of new software has allowed estimates to be made of expenditures to the promotion of gender equality (Table 6). This is an advance over previous practice. Table 6: Agency expenditure on strategic priorities Agency UNFPA Area of focus and percentage of budget allocated or disbursed
Reproductive health: 63 Population and development: 21 Gender: 6 Programme coordination and assistance: 10 Save lives in crisis situations: 28 Protect livelihoods in crisis situations and enhance vulnerability to shocks: 35.6 Support improved nutrition and health status of children, mothers and other vulnerable people: 19.1 Support access to education and reduce gender disparity in access to education and skills training: 16.3 Help governments establish and manage national food-assistance programmes: 0.7 Young child survival and development: 52 Global Campaign on HIV/AIDS and children: 14 Basic education and gender equality: 18 Child protection: 9 Policy advocacy and partnerships: 6 Support activities: 1 Not currently assessing expenditures to the promotion of gender equality, but plans to do so in future. Expenditure by cross-cutting theme is not included in the Programme and Budget 2000-07.

WFP

UNICEF

UNDP ILO

29

One constraint of current software is that it has difficulties dealing with cross-cutting themes, including gender equality. As UNFPA’s report on its MYFF 2004-2007 comments (UNFPA 2005), reporting only captures the main focus of each project, so that the actual expenditures for gender are higher but difficult to assess, as gender issues have been mainstreamed in other areas. In this case a substantial part of the population and development, and reproductive health programming, has a gender equality or women’s component, but this is not captured, and there is only a 6 per cent allocation to gender equality. As the IANWGE (2003) project found, agencies consistently underestimate contributions to gender equality. It will be important to remain in dialogue with the managers of computing systems so as to ensure that in future expenditure on promotion of gender equality is fully captured. Agencies need to have in place a system for tracking financial resources invested in the promotion of gender equality, and to report regularly on resources invested in the promotion of gender equality. The OECD-DAC policy marker for gender equality could be adapted for this purpose, after a review of experience of using the policy marker.

8. Oversight functions: reporting, evaluation, audit and competencies
‘The current system to evaluate the impact of our activities is inadequate….The existing systems for reporting and evaluating the performance of programmes have no practical impact on future plans and resource allocation decisions.’ Secretary-General Strengthening of the United Nations: an agenda for further change (UN 2002: 27).9 All oversight functions are likely to become more important given the current focus on accountability, and all offer potential for improving attention to gender mainstreaming 8.1 Reporting Reporting to the Executive Board or ECOSOC on gender mainstreaming, at the level of the strategic plan, differs between agencies. In UNFPA reporting on its MYFF (UNFPA 2005), the context section includes a discussion of the links between poverty reduction and gender equality in the context of the MDGs. There is a separate section on the outcomes related to gender equality and women’s empowerment, and in addition discussion of gender equality is well integrated into other sections of the report, including discussion of the other two Fund strategic priorities). For UNICEF the report on the 2004 Medium-Term Strategic Plan includes a focus on emergencies, but no discussion of gender perspectives, surprising given the protection needs of women and girls after the tsunami and in the response to Darfur, which are the two main emergencies discussed. The Executive Director’s Report also includes a discussion of results by priority area; gender analysis and sex-disaggregation of data is however limited, except in relation to education (UNICEF2005b). The WFP Annual Performance Report includes no details on gender in the introduction, very limited gender related information in the overview of delivery modes, and some sex-disaggregation of overall beneficiaries. However, there is a detailed discussion of WFP’s progress against the results established in its gender policy (WFP 2004). UNDP reporting on gender mainstreaming and promotion of gender equality is also detailed throughout its MYFF reporting.

9

Eurostep (2005) also found donor reporting on gender mainstreaming to be weak.

30

There are also a number of examples where indicators are sex-disaggregated in the central planning document but not in reporting, and where indicators are not systematically tracked. There are areas where all agencies could strengthen their reporting on promotion of gender equality so as to ensure tracking of results related to this strategic priority. Indicators related to this are included in Section 9. 8.2 Evaluation Attention to evaluation and in some cases audit, findings and recommendations in the UN has been weak (UN 2005a). The General Assembly Resolution on the Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review of Operational Activities for Development of the United Nations System (UN 2005: 11) contains recommendations on evaluation, including the following need to: optimize the linking of evaluation to performance in the achievement of development goals, and encourages the United Nations development system to strengthen its evaluation activities, with particular focus on development results, including through the effective use of the results matrix of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework, the systematic use of monitoring and evaluation approaches at the system-wide level and the promotion of collaborative approaches to the evaluation, including joint evaluations… The UN Evaluation Group has developed norms and standards for evaluation across the UN (UN 2005b). Gender perspectives are covered in these standards in for example requirements for methodology, in relation to evaluator bias, and as a separate standard. The last standard reads: ‘The evaluation report should indicate the extent to which gender issues and relevant human rights considerations were incorporated where applicable.’ Individual agencies are also developing evaluation standards (eg UNICEF 2004) which also pay attention to gender equality. 10 WFP and ILO have evaluation policies in place, neither of which refer to gender. For UNICEF and UNFPA evaluation is guided by their policy and programme manual, and attention to gender in the relevant sections is limited. 11 Gender equality and the empowerment of women are currently poorly covered in agency evaluations. The UNICEF (2003) meta-evaluation found this to be among the weakest of UNICEF evaluation areas, and the draft UNFPA meta-evaluation reported similar findings. Follow up to recommendations is problematic, including any recommendations related to gender mainstreaming. Monitoring and evaluation guidelines could pay further attention to gender. On the other hand there is considerable attention to gender equality in WFP evaluations, particularly in comparison to other UN agencies and other humanitarian organizations, mainly as a result of the introduction of WFP’s gender policy.

10 11

UNFPA and UNDP are considering developing evaluation standards. UNDP’s evaluation policy is currently in draft form.

31

8.3 Audit In UNICEF, UNDP, ILO and UNFPA audit functions mainly focus on the existence and correct functioning of management systems. In WFP a more proactive approach to gender mainstreaming has been taken, and five audit ‘indicators’ have been introduced for assessment of mainstreaming by country offices which it would be useful for other agencies to follow (WFP 2005):  Unit for gender issues properly set up in each country office and adequately resourced.  System for implementing gender policies in place in each country office.  Designated staff have received adequate training in gender issues.  System for measuring/reporting achievements against objectives have been formulated and implemented throughout the programme.  Gender-sensitive and responsive human resources system in line with ECW [Enhanced Commitments to Women] VIII has been put in place. 8.4 Competencies The main method of assessing individual staff performance is through competencies. In the UNICEF gender policy, accountability mechanisms have a focus on competencies, as follows (and as noted in Table 3, UNICEF 1994: 16-17):  Gender awareness should be adopted as a criterion in the appointment and promotion of staff and in the selection of consultants; and  The assessment of the staff member's performance related to the integration of gender concerns should be included as part of the guidelines of the annual performance evaluation report of all professional staff. For UNFPA, attention to ‘gender’ is included in some competencies along with the other two UNFPA strategic priorities, but there is no systematic focus on gender mainstreaming. UNDP’s Gender Action Plan and ILO’s Action Plan on Gender Mainstreaming for Gender Equality both include a focus on gender mainstreaming in competencies. The WFP Gender Policy notes that managers will be held accountable through assessment for progress made on the Enhanced Commitments to Women. Part of staff assessment against competencies is to determine whether workplans have been completed adequately. Because under the RBM regime agency staff and units are to be held accountable through their workplans, in particular for managing for results, competencies are perhaps the main means in agencies through which accountability will function in future, so competencies will also be a key means of ensuring accountability for gender mainstreaming. .

32

9. Recommendations 9.1 A gender equality scorecard This Section sets out the framework for developing a gender equality scorecard, based on literature analysed (see Section 2), and drawing on indicators already in use in the agencies under review. The aim is to develop a common understanding of what mainstreaming gender equality means in practice, and a minimum set of requirements for adequate support toward achieving gender equality. Guiding principles for development of the scorecard were:  Promotion of gender equality should be visible in agency planning and programming.  The scorecard should be credible in terms of its method (e.g. if a rating system is used it should make sense).  The scorecard should be easy to understand and use.  Data should be accessible.  There should be buy-in and preferably participation of those being assessed. On the last point, any attempt to introduce a scorecard should do so within the context of the slow implementation of RBM within most agencies. The lesson from the discussion in Section 3 is that enforcing compliance in the public sector requires considerable buyin from stakeholders. Establishing a scorecard will do much to overcome the confusion about gender mainstreaming outlined in Section 4, but it will not overcome resistance to gender mainstreaming; in order to overcome the latter the process of introducing a scorecard is as important as the make-up of the scorecard itself. For this reason potential processes are discussed in Section 9.2. Following are potential thematic areas for a gender equality scorecard. The following are prioritized in order of importance to establishing accountability, potential for achieving change, cost, and political viability. Table 7: Gender equality scorecard Thematic areas 1. Gender equality policy and implementation plan Scorecard indicators
1.1 Policy updated in the last five years. 1.2 Policy includes: i. implementation plan ii. time frame iii. resources needed for implementation, iv. accountability of different levels of staff (from senior management down). 1.3 Realistic M&E of the policy/action plan is included. 1.4 Monitoring taking place as planned.

33

Thematic areas

Scorecard indicators
1.5 Evaluation taking place as planned. 1.6 Results of M&E are fed back into agency programming. 2.1 Work plans clearly set out expected gender mainstreaming accomplishments. 2.2 HR system of performance management in place that rewards good performance on gender mainstreaming, and sets out realistic penalties for poor performance. 2.3 HR system operating as planned. 3.1 Clear guidance on how to carry out a gender analysis included. 3.2 Clear guidance on how to develop gender-sensitive results statements included. 3.3 Clear guidance on how to develop gender-sensitive indicators included. 3.4 Clear guidance on how to measure gender-sensitive results statements included. 3.5 Requirements for inclusion of sex-disaggregated data made clear. 4.1 Audit examines whether HQ gender unit is properly set up and adequately resourced. 4.2 Audit examines whether a system for implementing the gender policy is in place and functioning. 4.3 Audit examines whether a system for measuring/reporting gender mainstreaming achievements against objectives has been formulated and implemented. 5.1 Clear statement in support of gender equality in the introductory sections. 5.2 One third or more of results statements integrate the promotion of gender equality. 5.3 Indicators are gender-sensitive where relevant. 5.4 Systematic sex-disaggregation (all data disaggregated unless there is a reason for not doing so). 5.5 Key terms (‘poor’, ‘farmers’, ‘workers’, ‘children’) disaggregated. 6.1 Programmes assessed and reviewed based on gender equality content – gender equality explicitly promoted, gender analysis carried 12 out, and gender analysis incorporated into programme design. 6.2 Programmes monitored and evaluation for gender equality content. 7.1 Reporting to the Executive Board on strategic planning is gender-

2. Staff assessment

3. Mainstreaming in RBM guides and training

4. Audit

5. Strategic planning documents

6. Programme review

7. Reporting
12

The OECD-DAC (1997) policy marker includes a number of sub-categories for programme review.

34

Thematic areas

Scorecard indicators
sensitive, e.g. reporting on gender equality as a thematic area, and as a cross-cutting theme; data is systematically disaggregated by sex; gender-sensitive results statements in the strategic plan are systematically tracked. 7.2 Guidelines for reports from Country Offices require gendersensitivity, e.g. reporting on gender equality as a thematic area, and cross-cutting theme; requirement for sex-disaggregated data. 7.3 Country Office reports are gender-sensitive and follow guidelines as in 7.2. 8.1 Evaluation guidance is gender-sensitive, e.g. includes background on gender analysis, gender-related examples, and stresses the requirement for sex-disaggregated data. 8.2 Evaluations carry out gender analysis. 8.3 Evaluations report on gender as both a thematic area and crosscutting theme, and data is systematically sex-disaggregated. 9.1 System in place for tracking financial resources invested in the promotion of gender equality. 9.2 Regular reporting on resources invested in the promotion of gender equality. 10.1 Clear statement in support of gender equality in the introductory sections. 10.2 Requirement for gender analysis set out, and gender analysis defined and explained. 10.3 Requirement for sex-disaggregated data set out.

8. Evaluation

9 Budgeting

10. Policy and programme manual

The relative weights to be placed on thematic areas, as well as the scoring system within thematic areas, will need to be discussed by agencies. Additional columns with a scoring system, responsibility for follow-up and mechanisms for tracking progress, could be added, for example on the thematic area of gender equality policies:

35

Thematic Indicators area
Gender equality policy Has the policy been updated in the last five years? 1.2 Policy includes: i. actionable areas ii. time frame iii. resources needed for implementation, iv. accountability of different levels of staff (from senior management down). 1.3 Realistic monitoring and evaluation of the policy/action plan is included. 1.4 Monitoring taking place as planned. 1.5 Evaluation taking place as planned. 1.6 Results of M&E are fed back into agency programming.

Scoring system
If updated: 4 points

Responsibility & mechanisms for tracking progress

Actionable areas: 4 points Timeframe: 4 points Resources: 4 points Accountability: 12 points Penalties for nonperformance: 12 points Monitoring: 4 points Evaluation: 4 points

Fully: 6 points Partly: 2 point Fully: 6 points Partly: 2 point Fully: 8 points Partly: 4 points

A minimum score required for adequate performance could be set, for example 80%. 9.2 Recommendations on process The Task Force will need to decide if the process of developing the gender equality scorecard should be internal, or if external support is required. Internal processes are preferred because intra- and inter-agency work on this issue will likely increase ownership. The Task Force needs to decide if there are currently the required resources – in particular in terms of staff time – to develop the scorecard in a participatory way. If these exist the Task Force should facilitate the following:  The five agencies under review (and/or others if interested) should initiate a dialogue between the gender unit and concerned units for each of the scorecard areas, about the make-up, potential scoring, responsibility and mechanisms for tracking progress. Alternatively each agency could work on two of the ten thematic areas.  Agencies should review or report back on progress every three months through Task Force meetings.

36

 At the end of nine months the results of this process should be brought together in a workshop, the objective of which would be to complete the scorecard.  The scorecard could then be rolled out with 2007 as the baseline year, and could be applied to all UN agencies as relevant. Corporate-level policies and strategies on gender equality and women’s empowerment – and the extent to which these are mainstreamed into policy and practice related to RBM, evaluation, audit and strategic planning documents – have a significant effect on programming at the country and regional levels. With different UN organizations assigning distinct levels of importance and accountability to gender equality and women’s empowerment, attempts to foster a coordinated approach at the level of the UNCT might encounter difficulties. There are a few – but increasing – numbers of examples of UNCTs that are developing their own gender equality policies and gender mainstreaming strategies for the UNCT. 13 The UNDG Gender Equality Task Force commissioned the organizational review of corporate policies with a view, ultimately, toward providing guidance on how to strengthen UNCT performance on gender equality. A key next step is to take the organization-wide scorecard that is proposed as a key recommendation emerging from this review and, based on consultations, adapt it to a UNCT-level scorecard that can strengthen guidance for UNCTs on expectations regarding their performance on gender equality and women’s empowerment, as well as provide regular and progressive data on how UNCTs are doing. This will assist in identifying areas of capacity that need to be strengthened across the whole UN operational system, as well as provide important data for reporting on progress in implementing the Triennial Comprehensive Policy Review resolution.

13

Resource Guide for Gender Theme Groups (2005) produced by the CCA/UNDAF Task Force of the Interagency Network on Women and Gender Equality comprised of UNIFEM, UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF and DAW.

37

Bibliography
ALNAP (2005) Review of Humanitarian Action. London: Overseas Development Institute. DFID (2004) Assessing Multilateral Effectiveness. London: DFID International Division, mimeo. DFID (2004a) The „MEFF‟ Methodology: A Review of DFID‟s Multilateral Effectiveness Framework. London: DID International Division, mimeo. DFID (2004b) DFID‟s Assessment of Multilateral Organisational Effectiveness: An Overview of Results. London: DID International Division, mimeo. DFID (2004c) DFID Malawi Gender Audit: Evaporated, invisibilised or resisted? London: DFID, mimeo. ECOSOC (1997) Report of the Economic and Social Council for 1997. New York: A/52/3. Eurostep (2005) Accountability upside down. Gender equality in a partnership for poverty eradication. Brussels: Eurostep. Eyben, R. (2005) ‘Donors’ Learning Difficulties: Results, Relationships and Responsibilities’. IDS Bulletin 36 (3), 98-107. Freedman, L., M. Wirth, R. Waldman, M. Chowdhury and A. Rosenfeld (2004) Millennium Project Task force 4. Child Health and Maternal Health Interim Report. New York: United Nations. IANWGE (2003) Mainstreaming Gender Perspectives in Programme Budget Processes within the United Nations System. Final Report and Synthesis. New York: Inter-Agency Network on Women and Gender Equality. ILO (2002) ILO Gender Audit 2001-02. Final Report. Geneva: Bureau for Gender Equality. JIU (2004) Implementation of Results-Based Management in the United Nations Organizations. Part 1. Geneva: Joint Inspection Unit JIU/REP/2004/6. Mayne, J. (2005) ‘Challenges and Lessons in Results-Based Management.’ Mimeo. Moser, C. (2005) An Introduction to Gender Audit Methodology: Its design and implementation in DFID Malawi. London: Overseas Development Institute. OECD-DAC (2005) Managing for Development Results. Principles in Action: Sourcebook on Emerging Good Practices. Paris: OECD-DAC. OECD-DAC (1997) Reporting on the Policy Objectives of Aid. Paris: OECD-DAC, DCD/DAC/STAT(97)

38

UN (2005) In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all: Report of the Secretary-General. New York: UN A/59/2005. UN (2005a) Measures to strengthen accountability at the United Nations. Report of the Secretary-General. New York: UN A/60/312. UN (2005b) Standards for Evaluation in the UN System. New York: United Nations Evaluation Group. UN (2005c) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly. 59/250. Triennial comprehensive policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system. New York: A/RES/59/250. UN (2003) Status of implementation of actions described in the report of the SecretaryGeneral entitled “Strengthening of the United Nations: an agenda for further change.” Report of the Secretary-General. UN: New York A/58/351. UN (2003a) Strengthening of the United Nations: an agenda for further change. Improvements to the current process of planning and budgeting. Report of the Secretary-General. UN: New York A/58/395. UN (2002) Strengthening of the United Nations: an agenda for further change. Report of the Secretary-General. UN: New York A/57/387. UN (1997) Handbook for Producing National Statistical Reports on Women and Men. New York: UN Social Statistics and Indicators, Series K, No. 14. UNDP (2006) Evaluation of gender mainstreaming in UNDP. New York: UNDP. UNDP (2005) Measuring Capacities: An Illustrative Catalogue to Benchmarks and Indicators. New York: Capacity Development Group, Bureau for Development Policy. UNFPA (2005) Report of the Executive Director for 2004: Progress in Implementing the Multi-Year Funding Framework, 2004-2007. New York: UNFPA DP/FPA/2005/7 (Part 1) UNFPA (2003) Competency Framework. New York :UNFPA Office of Human Resources. UNFPA (2000) UNFPA policy statement on results-based management. Mimeo. UNICEF (2005) Programme Policy and Procedure Manual. New York: UNICEF, May version. UNICEF (2005a) State of the World‟s Children. New York: UNICEF. UNICEF(2005b) Report of the Executive Director of the United Nations Children‟s Fund: Annual Report to the Economic and Social Council. New York. E/2005/6-E/ICEF2005/3. UNICEF (2004) UNICEF Evaluation Report Standards. New York: UNICEF.

39

UNICEF (2003) The Quality of evaluations supported by UNICEF Country Offices, 20012002. New York: UNICEF. UNICEF(1994) Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women and Girls: a policy review. Addendum: recommendations of the Executive Director. New York. E/ICEF/1994/L.5/Add.1 WFP (2005) Implementation of the Gender Policy 2003-2007, Enhanced Commitment to Women, Full Report. Rome: WFP Policy, Strategy and Programme Support Division/Gender Unit. WFP (2004) Annual Reports: Annual Performance Report for 2004. Rome: WFP/EB.A/2005/4. WFP (2003) Result based management orientation guide. Rome: WFP. World Bank (2005) World Development Report. Washington D.C.: World Bank. World Bank (2005a) 2004 Annual Report on Operations Evaluation. Washington D.C.: World Bank.

40


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Stats:
views:31
posted:11/28/2009
language:English
pages:53
Description: The-main mechanism through which accountability is being