NO ONE LEFT BEHIND

••
Equity and gender need to be embedded in policy
and programmes with decision makers, civil society
organizations and researchers arguing for better and
more data to support the rights that addressing equity
and gender implicitly suggest.
••
If a country doesn’t have a properly established national
evaluation system, how can we further discuss
evaluating in a gender-responsive manner? Having a
sound national evaluation system will be critical issue.
Challenges
••
Focus and locus problem: It is a challenge, especially
with most developing countries that do not have a
department responsible for M&E. Also, there is need
to sensitize the various players at local levels; this
also includes the gender context of that country.
••
Structure and financial obligations: M&E structuring
in the government and the civil society organizations
in many countries is either missing or very minimal.
When there is one, it is heavily focused on financial
monitoring by government agencies.
••
Indicator development: For example, the challenge
of documenting transgender people in the context
of disaster. It is also problematic developing genderresponsive
indicators.
••
Government structural weaknesses: Various
governments and their weakness in embracing
gender-responsive programmes and their understanding
of gender indicators, baselines and targets.
••
VOPE policy influence challenge: VOPEs decisionmaking
influence is very limited, as they don’t have
the power of influencing decision making in the
government.
••
Lack of political will: There is very low will of decision
makers and project managers to move towards
budgeting for gender sensitive issues. Just conducting
training won’t be effective if there is no political
will or an enabling environment to carry out genderresponsive
evaluation, such as government policies,
circulars, guidelines, systems, officer willingness,
knowledge, etc.
••
Conceptualization challenge: There is a problem of
mastery of concepts and therefore ownership. It is a
lack of training on these issues. In many situations,
the perception of gender concepts and assessment
seems not to be controlled. Projects are not developed
in a logic of gender equality, so that they lack
indicators for the objective assessment of the results
of the changes observed in assessment missions.
Methodologies
••
Systematic training: There seem to be only few appropriate
methods, lacking evaluation capacity and
willingness, too little systematic training and scant
resources for this type of endeavour.
••
Reliable measurements: There is a need to focus on
reliable methods of measurement of social inclusion
and human development with a further focus also on
the girl child. In order to do this, we need to continue
to work for national production of more diversified
and disaggregated data and improved and relevant
indicators.
••
Socio-cultural contexts: The kind of evaluation capacity
development needed would be shaped by:
socio-cultural beliefs and practices, methodological
appropriateness and strategies used, power differentials—entrenched
vested interest due to status quo,
and would capture non-discrimination.
• • Appropriate indicators: There need to be specific
indicators that will show whether or not progress
is being made towards targets. We need to ask
ourselves: what do we intend to achieve through
gender-responsive and equity-focused national evaluation
systems? What targets do we set for ourselves
over time? What are the indicators that will show us
that we are on the right track? Of particular importance,
what will be the beacon to show us that we
have finally attained our goal of a gender-responsive
and equity-focused national evaluation system?
Evaluating the Sustainable Development Goals with
an Equity-focused and Gender-responsive Lens 41