Brazil CO intro to MDG C

1
GENDERNET session onMeasuring and tracking
aid what we know and what is possible28
February 2008
Presentation on Tracking gender-related
investments in UNDP Anna Fälth UNDP Gender
Team, Bureau for Development Policy
2
Presentation Outline

• Current tracking system and its challenges
• UNDP pilots in four country offices
• Findings and recommendations

3
Challenges with the current system

• Challenges
• Tracking mainstream sectoral activities which
  incorporate gender perspectives
• Measuring the impact of such activities on
  development results (gender equality)

• UNDPs financial system allows, to some extent,
  for tracking gender equality interventions.

4
Background

• In January 2006, the UNDP Executive Board
  requested UNDP to track both allocations and
  expenditure for gender equality results.
• In response, UNDP commissioned pilot case
  studies in 4 countries.

5
UNDPs current classfication system
CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL TRACKING
ACTIVITY TYPE FOR GENDER EQUALITY
GENDER TRUST FUNDS

• Thus, the current classification system is very
  limited.
• In 2006, the current system indicated that 110
  m were spent on targeted gender equality
  interventions.

6
UNDP pilots

• Assessment (WHAT)
• Current practices in determining allocations and
  expenditures on gender equality
• Whether the system be configured to track both
  earmarked/targeted activities AND mainstreamed
  allocations and expenditures
• Method (HOW)
• Develop a format to improve tracking of resource
  allocations and expenditures for both targeted
  and gender mainstreaming activities
• Goals (WHY)
• Introduce a simple way of recording and
  monitoring contributions to gender equality
  across all activities and all offices
• Enhance country office capacity to analyze
  budgets from a gender perspective.

7
Methodology

• Use of two classification schemes
• DAC Gender Marker allowing every activity to be
  rated from 0 (no gender impact), to 2 (gender as
  a significant objective).
• Percentage-based Approach allowing every
  activity type to be coded as a percentage, e.g.
  X gender equality and Y another component, with
  the total for all types of activities summing
  up to 100.

8
Participating Countries
Pilot Countries
Criteria for Country Selection

• Regional distribution
• Country offices with either relatively large or
  limited resources allocated to gender equality
• Country offices with different types of resource
  allocations e.g. use of the gender trust funds
• Country offices who volunteered

• South Africa
• Turkey
• Venezuela

• Albania
• India
• Morocco

9
DAC Gender Marker
DAC Gender Marker each activity is assessed by
either 0, 1 or 2.
2 Activities with gender equality as a
principal objective. 1 Activities with gender
equality as a significant objective. 0
Activities that not expected to contribute
significantly to gender equality.
2
1
0
Weight 25
Weight 75
10
Percentage-based approach

• Each activity is assigned multiple activity type
  codes.
• Percentage allocation is used to reflect the
  extent to which the budget for each activity
  would contribute to the different aspects.

Activity Type Learning and Evaluation 65
ACTIVITY 100
Activity Type Gender Equality 35
11
Findings of DAC-like approach
The DAC Gender Marker suggests 2 13 of
activities have gender equality as a principal
objective. These activities account for 5 of
budget and 8 of expenditures. 1 25 of
activities contribute in a significantly to
gender equality, accounting for 26 of the budget
and 30 of expenditures. 0 62 of activities (69
of budget, and 62 of expenditure) making no
significant contribution to gender equality.
12
Findings of percentage-based approach
The percentage-based approach suggests Increased
numbers of activities with some percentage
related to gender equality (from 14 to 121
activities) Improved tracking of allocations in
budget and expenditures for gender equality
Comparison of results using the standard and
modified percentage-based approach to activity
type coding.
13
Country Office Experiences

1. The process in itself was a great learning
   experience  starting off with a discussion about
   how every activity does have gender implications.
   We are planning to integrate elements of this in
   financial planning for 2008.
2. This exercise is not something that can be left
   to financial or administrative staff.
3. Difficulties in understanding the real meaning
   of gender equality in each activity.
4. DAC Gender marker is straightforward. However,
   the three-point scale (0-2) does not give enough
   scope to capture smaller gender contributions.
   Suggestions were made to enlarge the rating scale
   to 0-5.
5. The percentage-based approach was good but
   introduced a lot of subjectivity.

14
Conclusion and recommendations

1. DAC Gender Marker is better and less subjective
   than the percentage-based approach. It can
   survive across changes in the organization.
2. A four-point scale (with an additional code for
   some contribution). This would avoid
   subjectivity and introduce some level of
   flexibility in rating.
3. The rating excersice should be assigned to
   project managers with substantive knowledge on
   the gender dimension of project activities.
4. Clear guidelines with examples needs to be
   developed.
5. The pilots can be expanded to additional
   countries