Transcript Evaluation Priorities and Challenges

EVALUATION OF
GENDER MAINSTREAMING IN
UNDP
Presentation to the Informal Session of the Executive Board
UNDP Evaluation Office
15 December 2005
Focus of Evaluation
 Take stock of UNDP’s gender mainstreaming
policies and their implementation
 Not a detailed description of everything UNDP has
done
 Assessment of policies and programmes
institutional measures
 Suggest practical steps towards gendering UNDP’s
mainstream development activities to contribute to
gender equality and human development
Evaluation Questions
 Which results has UNDP achieved in promoting
gender equality?
 How effectively has UNDP used partnerships?
 To what extent has Gender Mainstreaming been
institutionalized in UNDP?
 How effective are the approaches used by UNDP?
Methods



Team of 7 international and 14 national experts led by
Dr Nafis Sadik
Desk review of documents
14 Country Studies




Bolivia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Cameroon, Egypt, El Salvador, India,
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Morocco, the Philippines, Rwanda,
Senegal, South Africa and Swaziland
and 1 pilot study (Trinidad & Tobago)
Electronic survey among all COs (98 of 166 responses)
Semi-structured interviews with key informants (UNDP HQ,
COs, UNIFEM, Executive Board members; and UN
agencies, donors, government, civil society in the field)
Consultation with Stakeholders
 Country reports sent to country offices
 Preliminary findings presented to UNDP
Executive Team & Gender Task Force ( 28 July)
 Preliminary findings presented to the Executive
Boards (13 June 2005)
 Findings and full report presented to UNDP
senior management (12 October 2005)
Main Findings:
1. Policies and Priorities
 1987: Gender in Development
Programme within BDP to promote
gender equality and the
empowerment of women in UNDP,
provide guidance on gender policy,
and advance gender as a cross-cutting
theme
 1992: Gender located in Bureau for
Policy Development (BDP)
 1994: Gender Balance in Management
Policy (1995-1997)
 1996: Administrator’s Direct Line 11 to
all Resident Representatives directed
10% of global programming and 20%
of regional programming to GM and
the advancement of women
 1998: Gender Balance in Management
Policy Phase 2 (1998-2001)
 2000: Gender becomes a strategic goal
within UNDP’s Strategic Results
Framework (SRF) and a cross-cutting
issue in the five practice areas
 2001: UNIFEM Executive Director
designated champion of gender equality
in UNDP
 2003: Gender Balance in Management
Policy
 2004 :gender equality becomes a driver
of development effectiveness as well as
a service line within the strategic goal of
achieving the MDGs and reducing human
poverty (MYFF 2004-2007)
 2004: UNDP institutes Gender and
Diversity Scorecard to measure and
monitor the effectiveness of UNDP’s
gender balance in personnel policy
 June 2005: Executive Board adopts the
UNDP Corporate Gender Strategy and
Action Plan
Main Findings:
2. UNDP’s Capacity & Institutional Structure for
Gender Mainstreaming
 UNDP management changed gender mainstreaming structures,
allocated insufficient staff and financial resources creating ambiguity
and decreased visibility e.g. Gender unit in BDP 2000 - 2004
 In spite of the relocation of the Gender Unit under the Director of BDP
in 2004, the position does not provide the opportunity and authority to
oversee gender mainstreaming UNDP-wide

UNDP’s six regional gender advisors active but have little authority or
control over follow-up.
 Gender focal points (GFPs) have no clear job description, are often
junior-level staff and have other responsibilities.
 While modules exists, training has been sporadic and not
comprehensive
 No benchmarks and poor monitoring of results
 Islands of good practice exist, but success depends on individual
interest and effort rather than on systematic approach
Main Findings:
4. Leadership and Accountability
 Lack of pro-active leadership expressing clear commitment in systematic
explicit way
 Lack of clear and sustained commitment on gender mainstreaming at all
levels and no accountability system, e.g., senior management not
evaluated in performance reviews or otherwise held accountable for
achieving GM
 Poorly articulated strategy, lack of visibility of gender and muted
advocacy
 Lack of explicit, targeted and visible resources for gender has signaled
limited commitment at the top (except Japan WID fund, and recent
Dutch contribution to Gender Trust Fund)
Main Findings:
5. Gender Mainstreaming in Practice
Areas
 In general, uneven results - no clear definition or articulation of GM
strategy and gender analyses in all Practice Areas
 GM not clearly articulated in most Practice Notes, CCFs and project
document
 GM most evident during PRSP formulation, MDGs, NHDRs, but
gender expertise in poverty limited ; little evidence of effective GM
within poverty area except where there are women focused projects
 In governance, GM evident in support to women’s national
machineries, gender sensitive budgeting, capacity building for
women to access political power, constitutional reform to incorporate
gender concerns, strengthening women’s role in local governance,
strengthening of ombudsman’s office
Main Findings:
6. Resources and Monitoring
Resource Allocation
 Large dependency on resource mobilization and non-core
resources for GM; resource allocation to GM from core
resources has been limited, partly due to lack of priority in
programmatic work
 Not possible to make firm estimates of financial resource
allocation to GM due to lack of data and systems
Monitoring and Reporting
 Monitoring and evaluation at country and programme level
generally do not provide much in-depth information on GM
Main Findings:
7. Advocacy and Partnerships
Partnership with UNIFEM
 The majority of COs in survey rated partnership with
UNIFEM as “effective” or “very effective”.
 Country studies recorded mixed experience varying
from strong to little cooperation with UNIFEM.
 Sometimes confusion about roles and responsibilities
of UNDP and UNIFEM, also among stakeholders, and
sometimes competition and tensions.
Main Findings:
7. Advocacy and Partnerships (con’t)
Partnerships: UN System
 The Resident Coordinator (RC) system is not fully
utilized as an opportunity to strengthen partnerships
within UN agencies on GM.
 In some of the countries visited, the Gender Thematic
Groups have ceased to exist and UNDP has not taken
action to revive them.
Lessons Learnt
Key Shortcomings
 Gender mainstreaming has not been visible and explicit
 Until recently UNDP had no corporate strategic plan on how
to operationalise its gender mainstreaming policy; many
country offices still lack a gender mainstreaming strategy
and action plans.
 Steps taken have been too simplistic and too mechanistic,
reflecting a lack of understanding and capacity about
gender mainstreaming.
 As an institution, UNDP has not acted on previous
assessments identifying similar shortcomings and has given
UNDP staff and partners mixed signals about its
commitment to gender mainstreaming and what it expects
of them.
Lessons Learnt (con’t)
Criteria for Success
 Strong commitment and leadership from management
 A clear and proactive strategy and policy for gender
mainstreaming
 Qualified senior gender expertise to advise on gender
mainstreaming in the country programme
 Awareness of gender mainstreaming as a collective
organization al responsibility
 Systematic training on gender mainstreaming concepts,
tools and thematic issues
 Dedicated financial resources for gender mainstreaming
Conclusions
UNDP needs:
 Pro-active leadership and clear commitment to gender mainstreaming
with accountability and incentives
 Clear articulation of what UNDP’s gender mainstreaming mandate
means
 Enhanced capacities for gender mainstreaming, across the board
 Stable, core financial commitments for gender mainstreaming
 UNDP and UNIFEM have different roles in achieving the goal of gender
equality. UNDP is responsible for GM in all its activities; UNIFEM can be
an important partner and resource in this respect but can not
substitute for UNDP efforts. Strengthening partnerships and
clarification of the relationship between UNDP and UNIFEM
 An institutional structure to ensure all of the above
Recommendations
1. Senior Management should provide proactive
leadership and reaffirm UNDP’s commitment to
Gender mainstreaming:

top management to reaffirm commitment and
importance of GM

all senior management to provide leadership, set
targets for office & individual work plans and be held
accountable for results

resident coordinator strengthen leadership on GM
within UN Country Team

RC assessment and capacity building measures to
assess and train for gender competencies
Recommendations
2. Establish accountability and incentives for
gender mainstreaming
 criteria/targets in performance assessments
 establish rewards system e.g. “Gender
Challenge Award”
Recommendations
3. Retain gender mainstreaming approach
complemented by gender-specific programs
 cross-cutting driver backed up with monitorable
targets and accountability
 continued need for specific gender equality
programmes
 gender analysis to be incorporated in policies
and programmes
Recommendations
4. Strengthen the institutional framework for
GM at HQ

establish Corporate Gender Development Office at
highest level within the Associate or Administrator’s
Office responsible for agenda setting, oversight and
monitoring at corporate level

strengthen capacity and responsibility in all Regional
Bureaux

Strengthen technical gender specialists for every
practice area, gender expertise in Regional Bureaux,
etc.
Role of Gender Development
Office
 The new Corporate Gender Development Office
would be responsible for:
 Ensuring the visibility of gender mainstreaming within and outside the
organization and support UNDP’s advocacy on gender equality
 Ensuring that gender mainstreaming is taken seriously by UNDP at the highest
levels
 Overseeing further development and implementation of UNDP’s corporate
gender mainstreaming strategy and action plan;
 Setting targets and performance standards, and tracking performance on the
drivers
 Reviewing country programmes and reporting to the Administrator
 Monitoring the implementation of policies and action plans
 Strengthening UNDP’s partnerships to promote gender equality, with UNIFEM,
the DAW, UNFPA, and other UN agencies and treaty bodies such as CEDAW
 Initiating a task force to develop a UNDP gender budgeting process (see
below)
 Developing positive incentives for staff and offices
 Reporting as requested to the Executive Board, through the Administrator
Recommendations
5. Strengthen gender expertise in Country
Offices
 senior Gender Development Specialists in COs
or Resident Coordinator Offices (with other UN
agencies)
 revitalize the Gender Focal Point system
 utilize local gender networks and expertise
Recommendations
6. Strengthen GM capacities

Knowledge of gender should be made a required
competence in the recruitment of new staff

Incorporation of gender perspectives in training
modules

Training must be targeted, systematic and continuous

Systematic training with focus on learning by doing

Improve management of knowledge (documentation,
ensuring easy access and sharing of experiences on
GM)
Recommendations
7. Make adequate financial resources
available for Gender Mainstreaming

From both core and non-core funds and programme
& administrative funds should allocate resources to
address gender inequality

undertake Corporate Gender Budget Exercise

develop guidelines for estimating proportion of nongender targeted expenditures contributing to GM

Review and upgrade Atlas system to ensure it can
effectively record & track gender allocations and
expenditures
Recommendations
8. Define and clarify relationship between
UNDP and UNIFEM and strengthen
collaboration
 develop specific modalities for cooperating with
UNIFEM for mutual benefit and to clarify
current confusion on roles and responsibilities
 appoint a small external working group to
undertake and complete above task by June
2006
Recommendations
9. Strengthen advocacy and partnerships
 UN reform, MDGs and UNDAFs and good entry points
to strengthen GM cooperation within UN system at
country level
 RRs as RCs should be pro-active in reviving gender
thematic groups, joint gender programmes
 UNDP should establish and strengthen networks with
governments, civil society, and donors and build
capacity to reach out , partner with and tap into local
networks and gender expertise
Recommendations
10. The Executive Board should promote
accountability for gender mainstreaming in
UNDP

closely monitor extent and quality of attention to GM
in UNDP programs and administrative budgets and
act appropriately

monitor follow-up to this evaluation. UNDP should
review progress towards gender mainstreaming by
2008 and report to Board
Utility of Evaluation
 For senior management to design and refine
gender mainstreaming strategy and action plan
 For UNDP staff, to build on what has worked
 For Executive Board to provide strategic direction
to UNDP in order to make a real difference to
gender-responsive human development