IFAD’s Gender and Targeting Webinar Series - Monitoring and impact indicators Follow webcast 17 June, 9.30: http://webcasting.ifad.org/genderwebinar

1. IFAD’s Gender and Targeting Webinar Series
Purpose of the webinar series
Webinar programme
29 April – Livelihoods and gender analysis
20 May – Targeting and gender strategies
17 June – Monitoring and impact indicators
2 July – Gender marker

2. Practical tips on gender-sensitive
monitoring and impact indicators
Structure
I. Indicators in project cycle
II. Overview of indicators
III. Logframe*
IV. Impact indicators*
* Opportunity for contributions
Links
IFAD Asia and Pacific Region e-
learning on M&E (to be launched
soon)
Gender in Agriculture Sourcebook
(WB, FAO and IFAD)
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EX
TERNAL/TOPICS/EXTARD/EXTGEN
AGRLIVSOUBOOK/0,,contentMDK:2
1348334~pagePK:64168427~piPK:64
168435~theSitePK:3817359,00.html
Women’s Empowerment in
Agriculture Index (WEAI)
http://www.ifpri.org/book-
9075/ourwork/program/weai-
resource-center

3. I. Indicators in project cycle

4. Targeting and gender process
Rural livelihoods
Project design + indicators
Gender strategyTargeting strategy
Project implementation + M&E
Project impact
Gender analysisSocio-economic analysis
Target group profile

5. II. Overview of indicators
Technical
change
Increased
productivity
Increased
income
and/or food
access
Better life
Output Outcome and impact

6. III. Logframe
Narrative summary Indicators Means of
verification
Assumptions/
risks
Goal
Purpose
(development
objectives)
Outcomes
Outputs
• Logical results chain?
• Address gender and
poverty?
Disaggregate “people” (e.g. by sex, age, relevant variables).
Do indicators consider qualitative as well as quantitative aspects?
Beyond “numbers” of women and men.
Perceived/felt impact? Changes in attitude? Behaviour?
(particularly Outcome/development objective/goal levels)
• What measures verify whether project benefits accrue to women
and men?
• Different types of women and men engaged in, or impacted by
the project?
• Consider socio-economic, ability, age variables.
• Think beyond “economic” benefits to consider benefits related to
social relations, labour, time, etc.)?

7. Formulating gender-sensitive indicators
• Yes, SMART, but also:
• Address diversity
- disaggregate by sex, age, socio-economic group, etc.
• Is GE, WE being measured? (reference IFAD Policy)
• Anchor in agreed conventions, rights (e.g. CEDAW)
• Suitable? Consult stakeholders in formulating, choosing
indicators
• Clarify concepts, definitions
• Mix of quantitative and qualitative
• Prioritize

8. What do these indicators tell us?
1. 60% of targeted farmers increased
adoption of soil and water conservation
practices
2. No. and % of women experiencing
improved livelihoods
3. # of women and men with increased access
to income-earning opportunities over
baseline
4. # of households having increased income
over baseline
• Disaggregate
• Dig deeper re: other impacts,
unintended results?
• Felt/perceived impact?
• How does this compare to men?
• What more information do we
need?
• How do women define
“improved livelihoods?”
• What more do we need to
know?
• Who is benefiting from those
income-earning opportunities?
• Is someone reallocating labour?
What impacts?
• Doesn’t tell us anything about felt
impact/benefit within HH
• Consider unintended impacts
(labour/time?).

9. Tell us more: Participatory GSI identification
1. % men and women reporting meaningful participation of women in
household decision-making about income expenditure.
2. % men and women reporting ability of women to effectively control
productive assets
3. % men and women with changed attitudes toward women’s control
over productive assets.
Need clear definitions,
participatory identification

10. Sex- versus gender-disaggregated data
Women Men Interpretation Opportunities
Sex
disaggre.
25 women trained 40 men trained
Gender
disaggre.
Of 25 women, 80%
headed their own
households
All men were from
married
households
Women’s
attendance
increased when
training was held in
afternoons
Men’s attendance
was constant
All participants were
literate
All participants
were literate
Of 25 women, only
20% held leadership
positions in
community
Of 40 men, 75%
held leadership
positions in
community
Reduce fee for spouse
attendance
Provide food and child care
facilities
Select time of training to
suit women’s work
schedule
Provide literacy classes to
increase outreach
Increase women’s
representation in leadership
positions in community
decision-making bodies
More men attended ‘farming as a
business’ entrepreneurship training than
women.
Married women were less able to attend
training than their husbands or women
heading their own households.
Reasons: burden of household duties;
perception that entrepreneurship training
is more relevant to men (a view held by
both men and women in MHHs); a
reluctance to pay fees for wives to attend.
Women were occupied during the
morning with household duties (e.g. child
care and food preparation); men had
fewer constraints on their time.
Low literacy rates among women in
community hindered illiterates from
participating.
Male-dominated leadership meant that
women’s considerations regarding timing
and selection of training venue received
little attention.

11. IV. Impact indicators: WEAI
Five domains of
empowerment (90%
of index)
Women’s
empowerment in five
dimensions
Gender parity index
(10%)
Women’s
achievement’s
relative to the
primary male in hh
Women’s
Empowerment in
Agriculture Index
(WEAI)
Index range from zero to one:
higher values = greater empowermentIdentifies HOW
women are/ aren't
empowered -can
support project
design
Identifies WHO is
empowered:
relative/relational
empowerment of
women within HH
WEAI measures absolute and relative levels of women’s empowerment
Link to IFPRI/USAID/OPHI website

12. IFAD questionnaire – what changes?
5 dimensions of
empowerment
Indicators Weight Links to objectives of IFAD
Policy on Gender Equality
and Women’s
Empowerment
PRODUCTION 1.Input in productive decisions 1/10
2.Autonomy in production 1/10
RESOURCES 3.Ownership of asset 1/15
4.Purchase, sale, or transfer of
assets
1/15
5.Access to and decisions on
credit
1/15
INCOME 6.Control over use of income 1/5
LEADERSHIP 7.Group member 1/10
8.Speaking in public 1/10
TIME 9.Workload 1/10
10.Leisure 1/10
Economic empowerment
Decision-making and
representation
Equitable workload balance

13. A woman who achieved the standard of "adequate" with 80% or
more of weighted indicators – Lillian is empowered
Example – Lilian in Uganda

14. How to conduct the questionnaire
1. Gender questionnaire conducted
after RIMS questionnaire in the
same household
2. Information is collected at
individual level (rather than
household level) interviewing
separately primary man and
woman within same household
3. Define a household:
monogamous, polygamous, etc.

15. V. Conclusion
Webinar programme
29 April – Livelihoods and gender analysis
20 May – Targeting and gender strategies
17 June – Monitoring and impact indicators
2 July – Gender marker
Recap
I. Indicators in project cycle
II. Overview of indicators
III. Logframe
IV. Impact indicators