Box 12.

GAD checklist for designing and evaluating education project

Title of Project: Genderized Lane of School Canteen

Date of Implementation: August 2022

Dimension and question Response Score for Result or

(col. 1 ) (col. 2) the item/ comment
No Partly Yes element (col. 4)
(2a) yes (2c) (col. 3)
(2b)
Project identification and planning
1.0 Participation of women and men in project 2.0
identification (max score: 2; for each item or
question, 0.67)
1.1 Has the project consulted and involved /
women in the problem or issue that the
intervention must solve and in the
development of the solution? (possible
scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)
1.2 Have women’s inputs been considered in the /
design of the project? (possible scores: 0,
0.33, 0.67)
1.3 Are both women and men seen as /
stakeholders, partners, or agents of change?
(possible scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)
2.0 Collection of sex-disaggregated data and / 2.0
gender related information prior to project
design (possible scores: 0, 1.0, 2.0)
Has the project tapped sex-disaggregated data
and gender-related information from secondary
and primary sources at the project identification
stage? OR, does the project document include
sex-disaggregated and gender information in the
analysis of the development issue or problem?
3.0 Conduct of gender analysis and / 2.0
identification of gender issues (see box 3)
(possible scores: 0, 1.0, 2.0)
Has a gender analysis been done to identify
gender issues prior to project design? OR, does
the discussion of development issues in the
project document include gender gaps that the
project must address?
Project design
4.0 Gender equality goals, outcomes, and 2.0
outputs (max score: 2; for each item, 1)
4.1 Do project objectives explicitly refer to /
women and men as students, parents, teachers,
or administrators? (possible scores: 0, 0.5,
1.0)
4.2 Does the project have gender equality /
outputs or outcomes? (see text for examples)
(possible scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0)
5.0 Matching of strategies with gender issues / 2.0
(possible scores: 0, 1.0, 2.0)
Do the strategies match the gender issues and
gender equality goals identified? That is, will the
activities or interventions reduce gender gaps
and inequalities?
 Box 12. GAD checklist for designing and evaluating education project

Dimension and question Response Score for Result or

(col. 1 ) (col. 2) the item/ comment
No Partly Yes element (col. 4)
(2a) yes (2c) (col. 3)
(2b)
6.0 Gender analysis of the designed project 1.54
(max score: 2)

6.1 Gender division of labor (max score: 0.67;

for each question, 0.22)
6.1.1 Are families in the target community /
reliant on the work of girls or boys for
income? IF SO: Will flexible education
schedules help females or males fit in their
other tasks? (possible scores: 0, 0.11, 0.22)
6.1.2 Does the project offer opportunities /
(through curricula, instructional materials,
role models) for expanding roles of women
and men, girls and boys, at home and in the
community, economy, and society? (possible
scores: 0, 0.11, 0.22)
6.1.3 Has an assessment been made of the /
education and training needs of both females
and males? (possible scores: 0, 0.11, 0.22)
6.2 Access to and control of resources (max
score: 0.67; for each question, 0.22)
6.2.1 Does the project ensure that /
opportunities for training and scholarships
that may be provided are equally accessible
to women and men, girls and boys? To
different categories of females and males
(rural/urban, ethnic groups)? (possible scores:
0, 0.11, 0.22)
6.2.2 Is information about educational /
opportunities readily available to females and
males? (possible scores: 0, 0.11, 0.22)
6.2.3 Have all methods of education delivery /
been considered? (possible scores: 0, 0.11,
0.22)
6.3 Constraints (max score: 0.67; for each item,
0.33)
6.3.1 Has the project addressed any time and /
distance constraint so that girls and boys
could attend class? (possible scores: 0, 0.17,
0.33)
6.3.2 Has the project considered the financial /
costs of participation that may restrict
attendance of females or males? (possible
scores: 0, 0.17, 0.33)
7.0 Monitoring targets and indicators (possible / 1.0
scores: 0, 1.0, 2.0)
Does the project include gender equality targets
and indicators for welfare, access, consciousness
raising, participation, and control? Examples of
gender differences that may be monitored:
– Net enrolment or school participation rate
– Passing rate for female and male students (NEAT, NSAT, HSRT)
– Participation in training and similar project activities, by type of training
 Box 12. GAD checklist for designing and evaluating education project

Dimension and question Response Score for Result or

(col. 1 ) (col. 2) the item/ comment
No Partly Yes element (col. 4)
(2a) yes (2c) (col. 3)
(2b)
or activity
– Employment generated by the project
8.0 Sex-disaggregated database (possible / 2.0
scores: 0, 1.0, 2.0)
Does the proposed project monitoring
framework or plan include the collection of sex-
disaggregated data?
9.0 Resources (max score: 2; for each item, 1) 2.0

9.1 Is the budget allotted by the project /

sufficient for gender equality promotion or
integration? (possible scores: 0, 0.5, 1.0)
9.2 Does the project have the expertise to /
integrate GAD or promote gender equality and
women’s empowerment? OR, is the project
committed to investing project staff time in
building capacity for integrating GAD or
promoting gender equality? (possible scores: 0,
0.5, 1.0)
10.0 Relationship with the agency’s GAD 2.0
efforts (max score: 2; for each item or question,
0.67
10.1 Will the project build on or strengthen the /
agency/ PCW/ government’s commitment to the
advancement of women? (possible scores: 0,
0.33, 0.67)
10.2 Does the project have an exit plan that will /
ensure the sustainability of GAD efforts and
benefits? (possible scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)
10.3 Will the project build on the initiatives or /
actions of other organizations in the area?
(possible scores: 0, 0.33, 0.67)
TOTAL GAD SCORE – PROJECT IDENTIFICATION AND DESIGN
STAGES 18.54

Prepared: GARRY C. CRUEL

GAD Coordinator

Project Implementer: MARCIAL M. ACHA, JR.

Position: Principal II
Contact Number: 0977-801-2138
Email: [email protected]
 Box 12. GAD checklist for designing and evaluating education project

INTERPRETATION OF SCORES
In HGDG Handbook In JC No. 2012-01
0% or no
amount of the
GAD is invisible in GAD is invisible in program
the project Below the project budget for the
0 – 3.9
(Proposal to be 4.0 (Proposal to be year may be
returned). returned). attributed to
the GAD
budget

Proposed project
has promising
GAD prospects
(proposal earns a
“conditional pass,”
pending
identification of 25% of the
Proposed project
gender issues budget for the
has promising
and strategies year of the
4.0 – 7.9 4.0 – 7.9 GAD prospects
and activities to program may
( “conditional
address these, be attributed
pass”)
and inclusion of to GAD
the collection of Budget
sex-
disaggregated
data in the
monitoring and
evaluation plan).

50% of the
Proposed project budget for the
is Gender- year of the
8.0 – 8.0 – Proposed project
14.9
sensitive 14.9
program may
is Gender-
(proposal passes be attributed
sensitive
the GAD test). to GAD
Budget
75% of the
Proposed project budget for the
is Gender- year of the
15.0 – 15.0- Proposed project
20.0
responsive 19.9
program may
is Gender-
(proponent is be attributed
responsive
commended). to GAD
Budget
100% of the
budget for the
year of the
Fully gender-
20.0 program may
responsive
be attributed
to GAD
Budget

GUIDE FOR ACCOMPLISHING THE CHECKLIST

 Box 12. GAD checklist for designing and evaluating education project

Box 12 lists the ten elements or requirements for a gender-responsive education project.

Each requirement is generally accompanied by a set of guide questions. The scoring system
is the same as that in boxes 5 and 6, while the interpretation of the total score is the same as
that in box 7. The guide for accomplishing the checklist and the interpretation of the total GAD
rating are reproduced below for easy reference.

Guide for accomplishing box 12

1. Put a check in the appropriate column (2a to 2c) under “Response” to signify the
degree to which a project proponent has complied with the GAD element: under col.
2a if nothing has been done; under col. 2b if an element, item, or question has been
partly answered; and under col. 2c if an element, item, or question has been fully
complied with.
2. A partial and a full yes may be distinguished as follows.
a. For Element 1.0, a “partly yes” to Question 1.1 (or Q1.1) means meeting with
male officials and only a woman or a few women who also happen to be
officials in the proponent or partner agency or organization; or with male and
female officials and some male beneficiaries. In contrast, full compliance
involves meeting with female and male officials and consulting other
stakeholders, including women and men that may be affected positively or
negatively by the proposed project. A “partly yes” to Q1.2 means inputs or
suggestions may have been sought from woman and man beneficiaries but
are not considered at all in designing project activities, choosing and locating
facilities, and selecting types of capacity development activities. A “partly yes”
to Q1.3 means only certain groups of women and men are viewed as
stakeholders and agents of change.
b. For Element 2.0, “partly yes” means some information has been classified by
sex but may not be key to helping identify key gender issues that a planned
project must address. In contrast, a full “yes” implies that qualitative and
quantitative data are cited in the analysis of the development issue or project.
c. For Element 3.0, a “partly yes” means a superficial or partial analysis has
been done by focusing on only one or two of the concerns (gender roles,
needs, perspectives, or access to and control of resources).
d. For Element 4.0, “partly yes” means women are identified in the project
objectives but only in connection with traditional roles or economic activities
(Q4.1); or the project has token gender equality outputs or outcomes (Q4.2).
A full “yes” to Q4.1 signifies that women’s nontraditional roles are also
recognized, while a full “yes” to Q4.2 denotes that gender equality outcomes
and outputs are consistently pursued in the log frame.
e. For Element 5.0, “partly yes” means having gender equality strategies or
activities but no stated gender issues to match the activities, while a full “yes”
means there is an identified gender issue and there are activities seeking to
address these issues.
f. For Element 6.0, a “partly yes” response to any of the items and questions is
associated with superficial or partial effort to address a specific issue or
question. In contrast, a full “yes” involves a coherent, if not a comprehensive,
response to the question.
g. For Element 7.0, “partly yes” means the project monitoring plan includes
indicators that are sex-disaggregated but no qualitative indicator of
empowerment or status change.
h. For Element 8.0, “partly yes” means the project requires the collection of
some sex disaggregated data or information but not all the information that
will track the gender differentiated effects of the project. A full “yes” means all
sex-disaggregated data and qualitative information will be collected to help
monitor GAD outcomes and outputs.
i. For Element 9.0, “partly yes” means there is a budget for GAD-related
activities but this is insufficient to ensure that the project will address relevant
gender issues (Q9.1), or build GAD capacities among project staff or the
project agency or tap external GAD expertise (Q9.2).
 Box 12. GAD checklist for designing and evaluating education project

j. For Element 10.0, a “partly yes” response to Q10.1 means there is a mention
of the agency’s GAD plan but no direct connection is made to incorporate the
project’s GAD efforts into the plan; to Q10.2 means there is a mention of
other GAD initiatives in the project coverage but no indication of how the
project will build on these initiatives; and to Q10.3 means the project has a
sustainability plan for its GAD efforts but makes no mention of how these
may be institutionalized within the implementing agency or its partners.
3. After ascertaining whether a GAD requirement has been done or not, enter the
appropriate score for an element or item under column 3. a. To ascertain the score
for a GAD element, a three-point rating scale is provided: “0” when the proponent has
not accomplished any of the activities or questions listed under an element or
requirement; a score that is less than the stated maximum when compliance is only
partial; and “2” (for the element or requirement), or the maximum score for an item or
question, when the proponent has done all the required activities. b. The scores for
“partly yes” differ by element. For instance, the score for “partly yes” for Elements 2.0,
3.0, 5.0, 7.0, and 8.0 is “1.” For elements with two or more items or questions (such
as Element 1.0), the rating for a “partial yes” is the sum of the scores of the items or
questions that falls short of the maximum “2.” c. For Element 9.0, which has two items
(9.1 and 9.2), the maximum score for each item is pegged at “1.0” and “partly yes” is
“0.5.” Hence, if a project scores a full “1.0” in one question but “0” in the other, or if a
project scores “partly yes” (or “0.5”) in each of the two items, the total rating for
Element 9.0 will be “partly yes” with a score of “1.0.” If a project will be “0.5.” d. For
Elements 6.0 and 10.0, which has three items each, the maximum score for each
item is pegged at “0.67” and “partly yes” is “0.33.” The rating for the element will be
“partly yes” if the total score of the three items is positive but less than “2.0,” the
maximum for the element.
4. For an element (col. 1) with more than one item or question, add the score for the
items and enter the sum in the thickly bordered cell for the element.
5. Add the scores in the thickly bordered cells under column 3 to come up with the GAD
score for the project identification stage.
6. Under the last column, indicate the key gender issues identified (for proponents) or
comments on the proponent’s compliance with the requirement (for evaluators).