LIBERIA CAP: GENDER MARKER

Presented by: Ayoo Osen Odicoh-Inter-Agency Gender Advisor

Email: ODICOH@unhcr.org

SESSION OVERVIEW1. History of the IASC Gender Marker (GM)2. Purpose of the GM3. GM Coding4. Performance of clusters in the 2011 roll-out5. Examples of coding6. Successes and challenges7. Monitoring GM use8. Next steps for 2012

HISTORY OF THE IASC GENDER MARKER

PURPOSE OF THE GENDER MARKER

A SIMPLE and PRACTICAL tool; To measure/track inclusion of gender

and GBV; To enable/to build capacity of

humanitarian teams to be able to design their projects so women, girls, boys and men benefit.

A MORE ACCURATE NAME FOR THE GM MIGHT BE THE “WHO BENEFITS MARKER”

GENDER MARKER CODING

Gender Mainstreaming: the different needs of women, girls, boys and men are analyzed. This analysis is reflected in project activities and outcomes

Targeted Actions: assisting women, girls, boys or men who suffer discrimination and building gender- specific services

GENDER MARKER CODING GENDER CODE DESCRIPTION

0Gender is not reflected anywhere in the project sheet

May not contribute to gender equality

1The project includes gender equality in the needs assessment, in an activity or in an outcome

Contributes in a limited way to gender equality 2aGENDER

MAINSTREAMING

Project’s needs assessment includes a gender analysis and the gender analysis is reflected in the project’s activities and outcomes.

Contributes significantly to gender equality

2bTARGETED

ACTION

Project is targeted based on gender analysis

The principal purpose is to advance gender equality.

APPLYING A GENDER CODE: WHO AND HOW?

Self-assessment tool for clusters Gender Marker Focal Point(s) Importance of including gender and GBV in selection

and prioritization criteria

NEEDS ACTIVITIES OUTCOMES

GENDER MARKER APPEAL INSTRUMENTS AND COUNTRIES

CAPs: Chad, Haiti, Kenya, Niger, oPt, Somalia, south Sudan, Yemen and Zimbabwe.

Pooled funds: DRC and Ethiopia.

Flood Response Plan: Pakistan

CLUSTERS’ PERFORMANCE IN CAP 2011(CHANGE IN GM CODES FROM CAP 2010 TO CAP 2011 IN SIX CAP COUNTRIES)

G

% OF PROJECTS CODE 0 CODE 1 CODE 2A CODE 2BCLUSTER 2010 2011 2010 2011 2010 2011 2010 2011

Agriculture 54% 18% 30% 39% 11% 36% 6% 7%

Coord & Support 60% 39% 26% 24% 5% 37% 10% 0%

E. Recovery 54% 10% 24% 21% 12% 64% 10% 5%

Education 35% 3% 27% 28% 38% 65% 0% 5%

Food Sec./Aid 29% 28% 54% 28% 14% 44% 4% 0%

Health 38% 12% 31% 28% 13% 51% 18% 10%

Multi-Sector - Refs 44% 0% 52% 41% 4% 53% 0% 6%

Nutrition 45% 29% 39% 32% 14% 35% 2% 3%

Protection 44% 8% 19% 19% 25% 57% 13% 16%

Shelter/NFI/CCCM 40% 7% 50% 41% 10% 37% 0% 15%

WASH 57% 12% 30% 50% 12% 34% 1% 3%

Totals 45% 15% 35% 32% 14% 47% 6% 6%

Liberia-EHAP and Gender Marker Outlook[Handout]

THE SUCCESSES

Strong leadership and gender and GM champions Establishing minimum commitments Use of Tip-Sheets and other practical tools From the abstract to the practical: Being able to

measure Positive and constructive engagement Donor engagement

THE CHALLENGES

Monitoring - good articulation Vs. good programming? Collective action SADD Improving coding consistency and clearing up coding

confusion (esp. RH, nutrition and GBV) Continued and increased donor engagement

NEXT STEPS FOR 2012

Momentum generated by introducing the GM can be sustained provided these conditions exist:

There is ongoing active facilitation by competent gender specialists.

There is meaningful recognition for efforts made by sector teams.

The vetting teams at sector level has been sufficiently e.

Practical, manageable monitoring can be put in place to help ensure that the gender code reflected in design is also reflected in implementation.

Donors fund projects that address gender equality (Codes 2a‐2b) and let Implementing Partners (IPs) know that the gender code is a factor in their funding decisions.

Thank You! Questions and Comments?