INTEGRATING GENDER AND SOCIAL INCLUSION ISSUES IN NATIONAL MONITORING & EVALUATION OF POLICY AND DECISION MAKING FOR ENHANCED NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Francesca Pobee-Hayford, Senior Gender AdvisorCIDA - Program Support Unit (PSU)

1

OUTLINE• Gender Equality (GE)

• Some GE Issues, Policies and Programmes in Ghana

• Social Exclusion (SE) and Social Inclusion (SI)

• Some SI Issues, Policies and Programmes in Ghana

• How they have been Monitored and Evaluated in Programmes for Evidenced Based Decision Making and Policy Formulation

• What Could Be Improved

• GE and SI Implications for National Development

• Conclusion

2

GENDERStrategy used in Ghana - Gender Mainstreaming

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 social spheres so that women and men benefit equally and inequality is not perpetuated.

3

4

GENDERApproach - two pronged usually adopted

Women specific and gender and development policies and programmes GAD –

Focus has been on men and women and unequal gender relations;

The goal has been on empowerment, emancipation and equality; the strategy has been to achieve sustainable development e.g. women and girls rights, their access to and control over resources and benefits and participation in decision making

5

SOME GE POLICIES/PROGRAMMES• Implementation of Domestic Violence National Policy and

Plan of Action (NPPA)

• Bridging the gender gap in access to education – girl friendly schools, female teacher role models, no tolerance for sexual harassment etc.

• Economic empowerment programs for women – business support services, access to credit etc.

• Monitor gender mainstreaming and gender responsive budgeting across sectors

6

SOME GE POLICIES/PROGRAMMES• Affirmative action policy guidelines and programs for increasing women’s participation in decision making

• Maternal health programs

• Provision of safe, portable and affordable water

7

SOCIAL EXCLUSION

•Social exclusion (SE) is the outcome of multiple deprivations that prevent individuals or groups of people from participating fully in the economic, social, and political life of the society in which they live.

8

SOCIAL INCLUSION

•Social inclusion (SI) is achieved when ALL (i.e. including excluded individuals or groups of people) have the necessary opportunities and resources to participate fully in economic, social, cultural and political activities which are considered the societal norm

9

10

WHO ARE THE SOCIALLY EXCLUDED?Some Examples

• People living below the poverty line ‘poor’• Some Children, Aged or Elderly• Majority of People Living with Disabilities• Majority of People living with HIV/AIDS• Majority of Marginalized Tribal groups• People branded as witches, wizards etc• Some women, widows, widowers, orphans etc.

11

HOW TO ADDRESS SE ISSUESDesign and implement policies and programs to address

issue of limited access to

Financial Capital – earnings, wealth, income sharing etc.

Human Capital – education, skills, credentials, recognition

Social Capital – family, friends, community life, political empowerment or ‘voicelessness’

Physical Capital – housing, infrastructure and geographical location

12

SOME NATIONAL INCLUSION POLICIES /PROGRMS• Scaling up of Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty

(LEAP)

• Scaling up National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) registration for the indigent

• Improve access to quality education for People with Disability (PWD).

• School feeding programs, free uniforms and text books

13

IMPLEMENTATION - CHALLENGES

• Policy/program implementation have not always been informed by a good GE or SI analysis

• Implementation has not always been consistent, some times ad hoc, no focus on all components of policy/programs

• Resources for implementation have been limited and not consistent

14

HOW MONITORED & EVALUATED?• Activity reports, (format lack basic ingredients e.g. checklists) e.g. LEAP

• Quarterly reports (collation difficulties) - e.g. LEAP

• Annual reports (same as above) – e.g. GLSS, DHS, MICS

• Evaluations or

• Impact assessments have been rare e.g. LEAP

15

LIMITATIONS

• Policies and programs for the most part has been based on weak baselines or no baselines

• Some have been conceived without the appropriate supporting monitoring and evaluation frameworks

• Overall M & E capacity weak even more so for GE and SI

• Lack of/poor GE and SI components as part of overall M & E frameworks/plans at all levels – now being established by NDPC

16

LIMITATIONS

• Linkages between GE and SI programs, projects, activities and outputs has been weak

• Linkages between GE/SI outputs, outcomes has been weak

• Linkages to a performance management framework indicating baselines, targets, performance indicators, means of verifications, data sources and responsible agencies etc. has been weak

17

LIMITATIONS• Inadequate budgetary allocations for M & E

• Limited or non existence of periodic evaluations

• Impact assessments – no follow through of recommendations

• Participatory M & E including implicated beneficiaries i.e. – women and disadvantaged groups, not a common feature

18

WHAT COULD BE IMPROVED• GE/SI analysis informed by the collection and analysis of disaggregated (age, sex, locality –i.e. urban and rural) data is critical

• Other social statistical information on exclusion e.g. PWD, aged, PLWHA etc.

• Policy formulation and program design based on the above and sound statistical analysis

• A clear M & E plan to monitor and evaluate SI/GE with emhasis on the following

19

WHAT COULD BE IMPROVED• A proper evidence based decision making framework clearly linking activities, outputs with outcomes

• Linkages to a Performance Management Framework (PMF) indicating baselines, targets and performance indicators, means of verifications, data sources and responsible agencies etc.

• Making M and E participatory to enhance ownership

• Periodic evaluations and impact assessments

20

SOME BENEFITS OF GE • Equalizing access to agric inputs would increase output

by 2-4%

• Eliminating employment segregation would increase productivity by 3-25%

• Women’s control of household earnings changes spending in favour of children

• Educated women invest more in children thereby enhancing human capital for national development.

Source: World Development Report, 2012

21

IMPLICATIONS OF GE FOR NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT• Enhanced human capacity for national development.

• Closing earnings and productivity gaps between men and women.

• Increasing women’s voice in decision making.

• Limiting gender inequality across generations.

Source: World Development Report, 2012

22

COST OF SOCIAL EXCLUSION

•Loss of potential human capital for national development

• Inter generational poverty

•Can potentially lead to social upheaval and crime

23

IMPLICATIONS OF SI FOR NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT• Promotes their independence and livelihoods

• Enhanced human capacity for national development

• Closing earnings and productivity gaps between the advantaged and disadvantaged

• Increasing their voice in decision making

• Protects the poor from worst destitution and from destitution when faced with an economic shock and limits social exclusion across generations

24

25

CONCLUSION•As a Middle Income Country (MIC) there is the need to improve M & E of GE and SI programmes and policies among others to demonstrate commitment towards moving toward a more egalitarian society.

26

Thank you.

27