My “Home-Made” Evaluation Tools to Avoid Gender (and Equity) Blindness by Sara Vaca

Hey there! I’m Sara Vaca (evaluation consultant) and here is my monthly Saturday post. I want to share how I try to introduce Gender perspective in every evaluation (regardless of the Terms of Reference (ToRs) mentioning it or not).

Lessons Learned: I heard during my Masters in Evaluation that many evaluations are gender-blind, and that term got stuck in my head as something I would definitely try to avoid. But how? After having conducted numerous evaluations, here are the practical tools I use for now:

Hot Tip: Always introduce Gender and Equity as evaluation criteria. Even if it is not in the ToRs, or the other criteria include some gender questions, I suggest we make it a stand-out one, to make sure we honor it properly and we talk about it in at least a very specific section of the report. Clients have never said no, quite the opposite.

I start the evaluation, and the questions about Gender and Equity help me consistently ask about these issues (usually details about how the programme was differently responding to and affecting different groups – women, men, children, displaced or host populations, rural or urban, different ethnicities, religions, wealth groups, sexual orientation, abilities, etc.), mainstreamed in every method and with all the stakeholders.

Cool Trick: Then I use the only gender-specific tool I had used so far was what I called Gender Analysis, where I gather all the data collected and I summarize and analyze how the crisis (or the programme) differently affected women (and girls) and men (and boys). Here are examples:

Analysis of how men and women are affected by the decentralization
of Mother to Child HIV transmission prevention services in Equatorial Guinea

Gender analysis of Livelihoods projects in rural Iraq

Rad Resource: But it has always felt like a rudimentary approach, and I want to upgrade my Gender skillsets. So I was excited to see the new UN Women’s manual: Inclusive Systemic Evaluation for Gender equality, Environments and Marginalized voices (ISE4GEMs): A new approach for the SDG era.

I have not finished exploring it, but I have made this infographic summarizing some extra tools and frameworks:

(Here complete).

Lessons Learned:  Going through this very useful tool, I realized 3 things:

  1. The only tool I use (my so-called Gender analysis) is an adaptation of the first framework in the manual.
  2. The other tools, though interesting, seem to be more focused on situation analysis and identifying root problems than to serve as data collection or data analysis methods.
  3. One challenge for me is how to introduce out of the scope issues like inequity root causes into discussions without generating awkward situations (or worse, losing my contracts!). In my long-ish term goal of becoming a feminist evaluator who tries to use evaluation as a transformational tool instead of just technical, I’m still in search of practical tools or ways to contribute make my evaluations more impactful.

Comments, ideas and tips are always welcome :-).

Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on theaea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

6 thoughts on “My “Home-Made” Evaluation Tools to Avoid Gender (and Equity) Blindness by Sara Vaca”

  1. Hello,
    I was very interested in your article on gender and equity blindness. Being a self proclaimed strong women with a daughter who is equally as strong I am very aware of situations that do not seem to meet the needs of women as well as they do men. Working in a school I notice many of these events taking place daily. The sad part about this is that most equity issues are not done consciously, it is the unconscious bias that happens without awareness. Unless staff actively collect and analyze data collaboratively being intentional to look for inequities in gender, race, socio-economic areas etc… we fail to see them. It is often hard to admit that these equity issues still exist, and often will be immediately addressed by those who chose to look for them I am interested if there is an evaluation protocol that you are aware of that can easily be utilized by schools?

    I feel that I see more of the equity issues happening within economic bias where I work. Where students abilities or accessibility to interventions are limited because staff may believe that if parents aren’t making themselves available to help at home that there is no sense in the school providing consistent interventions. Or ski trips are planned yearly that are not an option for our students whose families have lower economic situations. Or books are not sent home because of the fear that they may not come back, maybe there are preconceived beliefs that students with not any lunch or not very good lunches have mothers who “don’t care”. I appreciate you writing about this in your blog, it reiterates the importance of being intentional about looking at equity.

  2. I enjoyed reading Sara Vaca’s discussion of evaluation tools and reporting formats for gender-related observations. However, reading further, I wondered whether there can be such a thing as a “feminist evaluator”–or is this an oxymoron? While I am a passionate advocate of my own and other women’s right to self-determination, and I have generated my share of awkward situations in advocating my position, it has not been in my role as an evaluator.

    I think of evaluators as filling a descriptive rather than a prescriptive role in knowledge management. I would not be surprised that the author’s discussions of “inequality root causes” has generated awkward situations if she spoke as an advocate rather than as a reporter. “Impactful” findings should be the result of careful and precise data collection rather than the desire to instigate social change.

    1. Thanks Gwenn. This is in fact a deep, key debate. I totally understand your point (as a matter of fact that is my present attitude towards it), but I am intrigued and fascinated by the transformative paradigm and experienced authors (such as Donna Mertens and many others) who say (not literally) that if evaluation is not used to change reality then is “part of the problem”… To be continued. Thanks!

  3. Thank you for this. I am interested to know about the tools the evaluation community uses for On-grid power projects, both renewable and non-renewable.

    Thanks

Leave a Reply to Olivia Perea Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.