GENDER AND EMPOWERMENT
IN PROJECT DESIGNS:
A Meta-Assessment of 32 CARE Project Proposals
Lead Author/Analyst1:
Mary Picard
Consultant
J une 2005
The views and findings contained in this document are supported in their entirety by the Impact
Measurement and Learning Team.
1
T a b l e o f C o n te n ts
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
iii
I. Background and Methodology
1
II. Analysis, Measurement and Empowerment Relating to Gender
1
III. Overlay of Gender Analysis, Measurement, and Empowerment
3
IV. Dimensions of Empowerment
5
V. Exploring Sub-Dimensions of Empowerment
6
VI.. Observations and Conclusions
8
Annexes
1. Correlating Empowerment Scores with Analysis and Measurement
2. Gender and Empowerment Score Details
3. Capsule Overview: Women’s Empowerment Global Research Framework
ii
Executive Summary
The first phase of CARE’s strategic impact inquiry (SII) into women’s empowerment
comprised six different methodologies:
1. Original field research in four project sites (Bangladesh, Yemen, India, and Ecuador);
2. Global literature reviews of women’s empowerment research;
3. Proposal analysis of a randomly selected sample of 32 CARE International projects
from fiscal years 2003 and 2004;
4. Analysis of data from the fiscal year 2004 CARE program information network (CPIN)
survey;
5. Meta-evaluation of a convenience sample of 35 CARE project evaluations;
6. A gender mapping exercise conducted in Asia region2; and
This report presents findings from method three, the proposal analysis.3 All other individual
reports, a global summary, and other background documents are available on the CARE
portal. IMLT also has CD-ROMs containing important documents from the FY05 impact
assessment process. Please forward requests for the CD-ROM to Clark Efaw
(efaw@care.org).
Analysis of proposals might seem an odd component of an impact assessment initiative.
After all, proposals tell us nothing about impact. The purpose of this analysis was to
complement impact research – which looks at the past, at projects implemented and actions
completed – with a method that helps us determine if the current generation of CARE
programs are well positioned to have an impact on women’s empowerment in the future.
Such analysis provides indications of whether past successes/shortcomings – identified
through the other methods listed above – are being reproduced in CARE’s current efforts.
More specifically, the proposal analysis component aimed to:
1. identify how projects define and conceptualize women’s empowerment or
empowerment related to gender equity;
2. uncover how empowerment is being measured; and
3. discover what kinds of gender and power analysis are being deployed in order to
design projects
The proposals included in this analysis were chosen through random sampling. Sampling
parameters were a) projects had to have been funded after 1 April 2003, b) budgets equal to
or greater than USD 500,000, and c) emergency projects were excluded. In addition to the
32 project proposals, in a small number of cases, country office strategic plans were
reviewed in order to better understand the program thinking/strategy that lay behind the
proposals.4
This proposal review used as its starting point the global research framework development
for the Strategic Impact Inquiry (SII) on women’s empowerment (see Annex 3 for a capsule
overview of this). The women’s empowerment research framework is based on a theory of
empowerment that suggests that for empowerment to be sustainable gains must come in
three broad dimensions: agency, structure, and relationships. That theory was used to
derive analytical categories, approaches, scalings and to drive particular analytical
procedures.
We constructed a gender and empowerment rating scale with which we analyzed the extent
to which the project explicitly addressed gender inequity and women’s empowerment. The
application of this scale showed that 12.5 percent of proposals made no mention of gender,
2
This analysis will be available in December 2005.
We would like to express our deep gratitude to CARE UK for conceiving of this method and for funding the lion’s share of the
consultant’s terms of reference under a much broader research goal of assessing the incorporation of rights-based approaches
in design.
4
For detail of the global SII research methodology, see Kent Glenzer, “Of Structures and Scraped Coconuts: Findings from the
Meta-Evaluation Component of the Strategic Impact Inquiry on Women’s Empowerment,” August 2005. It can be found on the
CARE Portal or obtained through request. Contact either Clark Efaw (efaw@care.org) or Kent (kglenzer@care.org).
3
iii
31.3 percent made scant reference to women’s empowerment (or gender issues), 34.4
percent showed ‘moderate’ evidence of addressing gender inequities, and 21.9 percent
made visible efforts to address a gender imbalance with effects on more than one outcome
category – agency, structure, and relations. We found few examples of gender equity carried
forward into project design and while most proposals pointed to the importance of gender
issues (cross cutting theme or in principle) there was little depth or holistic understanding of
gendered structures of power or the relevance of them for project design. Only a very small
number of projects articulated empowerment goals with a clear strategy backing them up.
We found a rather clear correlation between the empowerment ratings of proposals and the
empowerment theory upon which the SII is founded. In the 31% of proposals with low
empowerment scores, we found little or no gender analysis and a fundamentally inclusive
approach to gender that assumes that the same strategies, interventions, forms of
sensitization, participation and inclusion work for men and women. This set of proposals
showed a diversity of empowerment outcomes across the three dimensions but with a
somewhat higher frequency of agency-focused outcomes. The 34% of proposals with
moderate and 21.9 percent with high scores exhibited a palpable struggle over how to
include women in new and distinct ways; common in these proposals were plans to bring in
organizations or experts to train in gender sensitivity or to conduct a study on gender after
start up. Both groupings showed interventions and intended outcomes that span all three
empowerment dimensions but those assessed as “high” sought more impact in the
dimensions of structure and relations – but with no less impact at the level of individual
agency – than the “moderate” grouping.
The 32 proposals reveal that the current generation of CARE projects – at least those funded
in 2003-2004 with budgets of at least USD 500,000 – are more confident and forthright in
addressing the ‘agency’ dimension of empowerment and retain a considerable emphasis on
the household as the arena of change. A a minimum 44 percent of these projects are
struggling mightily with gender and power analysis, with the identification of strong
approaches and strategies for affecting sustainable improvements in women’s empowerment
or gender inequity more widely, and with paying little more than lip service to this as a result.
Another 34.4 percent of projects, it can be said, recognize these challenges and are at least
planning in project implementation to try to build skills and knowledge to overcome them.
And in the final, impressive, 21.9 percent of projects funded in 2003-2005, fairly good gender
and power analysis informs design but a different set of challenges is visible. Addressing
gendered structures of power requires locally-specific, culturally-sensitive approaches to
breaking through barriers that perpetuate women’s social positions and engagement with
more stakeholders and power brokers beyond the household whose attitudes and opinions
must be affected. There is little evidence in the proposals, however, of these approaches or
strategies.
More challenging than this: we find even in the high-end proposals a discrepancy between
intended outcomes (agency, structure, and relational) and the measurement of these
outcomes. Without measurement there is no accountability and no possibility for assessing
the change process. Even proposals that spell out empowerment aims need to show
measurement of changes in representation, influence, accountability, cooperation,
inclusivity, rights fulfillment, fair treatment, and so on – aspects of power relations and equity.
These may be difficult to measure but are not impossible and will rely more on perceptions
and local expressions of empowerment. The common practice of devising numerical targets
for indicators (# of groups or # of meetings) will need to be abandoned in favor of more
qualitative measures that can still be quantified (indices, rating scales, etc.). As well, highly
technical interventions for health or agriculture projects, for instance, need to broaden their
measurement frame to include change in social position rather than change in human
conditions exclusively.
iv
I. Background and Methodology
As part of a desk review of 32 randomly-selected proposals globally to assess the extent to
which CARE projects are incorporating rights-based approaches in design, questions around
women’s empowerment were included as a subset of rights-based programming issues.
This was intended to support the FY05 strategic impact inquiry (SII) on the impact of CARE’s
work in women’s empowerment. The gender and empowerment section of the desk review is
one of 13 categories of information collected and analyzed.
This piece of the study examined the various ways that projects are defining and
conceptualizing women’s empowerment or empowerment related to gender equity, how
empowerment is being measured, and the nature of the analysis behind the intent to address
gender issues.
In each of the 32 cases, proposal documents were read and reviewed. This included
annexes, the logical framework or measurement system, when available, and in fewer
instances, a review of CO strategic plans.
II. Analysis, Measurement and Empowerment Relating to Gender
Three rating scales were constructed to categorize
proposals according to the extent of gender analysis,
reflection of gender issues in measurement systems,
and level of evidence of empowerment relating to
gender in the design. This categorization was not predetermined but emerged from the review of the
proposals.
.0
3.0
1 2.5%
2 1.9%
1.0
3 1.3%
2.0
3 4.4%
To the right is a chart showing the scores for the
gender and empowerment variable only. As indicated,
12.5 percent of proposals made no mention of gender,
31.3 percent made scant reference to women’s
Figure 1. Results for Gender and
empowerment (or gender issues), 34.4 percent showed
Empowerment Scores – 0, 1, 2, 3
‘moderate’ evidence of addressing gender inequities, and
21.9 percent made visible efforts to address a gender imbalance with effects on more than
one outcome category – agency, structure, and relations.
Please see next page for rating scales (figure 2) and bar charts (figure 3) showing results for
all three variables – analysis, empowerment and measurement.
1
Figure 2. Rating Scales
Rating Scale for Gender Analysis
1
2
Scant
Moderate
0
Absent
no gender analysis and
no mention of gender
equity issues. Perhaps a
passing mention of
gender or women but no
apparent effect on design.
Scant attention to gender
equity issues, as in one
paragraph in background
or problem analysis
section. But no apparent
effect on design.
3
Good
Moderate attention to
gender and partial or
limited elaboration of
gender inequity issues.
Affects design partially.
Good attention to gender
equity issues, fairly
consistent throughout
proposal. Clear effect on
design.
Rating Scale for Gender and Empowerment
No mention of gender or
intent to address gender
issues that would appear
to be relevant to the
project context (otherwise
it would be a case of “not
applicable”)
No gender
disaggregation.
No attention to gender
issues in measurement
system
Makes reference to
Goes beyond idea of
participation or inclusion
participation and has
of women in the project.
some evidence of how the
No apparent strategy for
project might address
this or assumes an
gender issues (e.g., thru
inclusive approach. Any
awareness raising). Intent
empowerment focus is not to devise a strategy but
gender-sensitive. (More
vagueness around this
lip service, politically
and around empowerment
correct)
aims related to gender.
Rating Scale for Gender in Measurement
Intent to disaggregate but
Partial disaggregation of
not reflected in logframe.
indicators (not consistent);
If all women project, does
not disaggregate women
Intentionally seeks to
address some aspects of
empowerment linked to a
gender inequity or
imbalance and specifies
some level of action to be
taken to confront the
inequity. More explicit in
intended outcomes for
gender equity.
Includes some targeting
of groups based on
gender and/or clear intent
to apply gender as cross
cutting issue, as
mentioned in proposal,
but not explicitly reflected
in hierarchy of objectives
Gender issues appear at
objective and/or goal
level;
At least some
measurement of
empowerment related to
gender.
Some inclusion of gender
breakdown in output or
activity statements;
Measures are not womenempowerment-focused.
Good disaggregation of
indicators.
Figure 3. Frequencies for Scores (0 to 3) by Variable – Gender Analysis, Empower, and
Measure
12
11
11
10
10
10
10
8
7
7
6
6
4
Frequency
4
4
4
3
2
2
1
0
.0
GENDER ANALYSIS
N=32
1.0
2.0
3.0
.0
1.0
2.0
GENDER EMPOWER
3.0
.0
.5
GENDER MEASURE
N=32
N=27
2
1.0
1.5
1
2.0
2.5
3.0
Analysis of Results:




Across all three variables, about a third of the proposals are doing moderately well.
Gender analysis in proposals is highly variable and far too few instances probe issues
of gender equity that carry forward into the design. Most proposals are able to either
point to the importance of gender issues (cross cutting theme or in principle) but without
the depth or holistic understanding of the gender imbalance and its relevance to the
project design. A small number go so far as to analyze root causes of the gender
inequity.
On scores for gender and empowerment or women’s empowerment, some proposals
aim only at meeting basic needs (not strategic), some have good intentions to empower
women or address a gender inequity but prove unclear about how to do so beyond
statements of including women, and a small number articulate empowerment goals with
a strategy to back them.
Measurement of empowerment as it relates to gender owes its higher scores to
disaggregation of gender rather than carefully articulated measures and methods. This
is the weakest area of all three variables. However, it is also accepted that the proposal
phase is often too preliminary for elaborating the measurement system and the start up
is a better stage at which to make this assessment.
III. Overlay of Gender Analysis, Measurement, and Empowerment
The following figure illustrates the overlay of gender analysis and gender measurement;
empowerment is represented by the size of the bubble (small to large = low to high scores).
Five proposals which did not have sufficient information on measurement are not displayed.
(See also annex 1 for table with correlated scores.)
Figure 4. An Integrated View of Gender Analysis, Measure and Empowerment Scores
Gender Measurement Scores
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Gender Analysis Scores
3
2.5
3
3.5
N=27
Proposals With Gender Empowerment Score of 0
 12 percent of the proposals
Weaknesses:

The absence of the gender variable in design is remarkable for the four sectors –
peacebuilding or ethnic reconciliation, sexual reproductive health, vocational training,
and food security. It begs the question – are there any areas of development work for
which gender equity is not relevant? When is a gender-blind approach acceptable?
Proposals With Gender Empowerment Score of 1
 31 percent of the proposals
Weaknesses:




Very limited gender analysis and poor substantiation of gender breakdown
Good at naming principles but little follow up action
Presumes an inclusive approach that does not take account of how gender
differences may require different strategies, interventions, or forms of sensitization to
ensure social acceptance (of female participation), success in reaching women who
are disadvantaged, and proper identification of problems that may be different for
women than for men.
Half of the proposals in this grouping are in the HIV/AIDS sector which suggests that
more attention to gender equity in this sector is needed.
Proposals With Gender Empowerment Score of 2
 34 percent of the proposals
Weaknesses:



Tendency in some to err on the side of addressing immediate causes of poverty with
emphasis on technical interventions and indicators for these (even in women-focused
projects)
In some, no coherency in addressing a gender inequity or empowerment issue in the
hierarchy of objectives
A palpable struggle in many proposals with how to include women in ways that will be
socially or culturally acceptable and effective, thus, the reference to bringing in
organizations or experts to train in gender sensitivity or to conduct a study on gender
after start up (but at least the awareness of the issues, potential benefits and
potential harms is present)
Proposals With Gender Empowerment Score of 3
 21 percent of the proposals
Weaknesses:

Despite the greater confidence around intended outcomes relating to gender equity,
many proposals lack the commensurate measurement to reflect the commitment to
this. Good gender disaggregation is not sufficient.
4

Greater clarity is still needed in the strategies to bring about the intended
empowerment results. Forms of associating for women is a prevalent approach but
unmatched in its use and prominence to address gender imbalances.
IV. Dimensions of Empowerment
This section examines the relationship between the groupings of proposals by empowerment
score and intended and/or implicit outcomes that are agency-, structure-, or relational-based.
It should be noted that the four proposals with a gender empowerment score of 0 are not
represented here. Please see annex 2 for details of empowerment outcomes for each
grouping of proposals.
Proposals With Gender Empowerment Score of 0
All proposals in this grouping have empowerment outcomes in each of the three categories.
The sectors represented by this set of proposals include peacebuilding, sexual reproductive
health (which is a research study), vocational training, and food security. Both the
peacebuilding project and the sexual reproductive health pilot exemplify a rights-based
approach but this demonstrates that gender equity is not always captured by projects with an
empowerment focus.
Proposals With Gender Empowerment Score of 1
Figure 5. Intended and/or Implicit Outcomes (shaded areas)
No.
1
2
ID
No.
4
5
3
4
5
6
7
8
7
15
25
32
Sector
Infra Rehab
HIV/AIDS
Food
Security
Education
HIV/AIDS
Health
HIV/AIDS
8
9
10
12
13
11
HIV/AIDS
HIV/AIDS
Health
Agency
Structure
This set of proposals has a sprinkling of
empowerment outcomes across the three
dimensions but none of the projects in this
grouping gender-differentiate the
empowerment dimensions. For example,
protecting one’s body against harm or stigma in
the HIV/AIDS projects pertains to males and
females alike and is targeted at orphans or
other vulnerable groups. Other characteristics
of this grouping are greater sparsity in
empowerment outcomes relative to the
groupings that follow and a somewhat higher
preponderance of agency-based outcomes, as
compared with structure or relation.
Relation
Note: shading indicates at least 1 type of outcome.
Comparing Proposals With Gender Empowerment Score of 2 and of 3
The reader is referred again to the annex 2 that details the empowerment sub-dimensions for
each proposal.
Both groupings – with score of 2 and score of 3 – span the spectrum of empowerment
dimensions. In other words, all the cells would be shaded (with only two gaps in the first
grouping). But they distinguish themselves in the following ways:

The score-3 grouping seeks more impact in the dimensions of structure and relation
than the score-2 grouping, without fewer outcomes in the agency dimension. Within
these dimensions, the emphasis on equity (equitable services, more inclusive
systems) is much more discernible. In the ‘relational’ category, the notion of
accountability and responsibility of “others,” – state actors, service providers, the
public, or an array of stakeholders – features more prominently and goes beyond
5


mutual appreciation (between men and women) within the household or the
community.
Food security projects drop out when it comes to the score-3 grouping. This may
relate to an inherent or implicit focus on self-reliance as the response to meeting
immediate needs.
The use of women’s group formation in the score-3 grouping has more depth and
complexity in its dimensions of empowerment than in the score-2 grouping. Two of
three examples that use women’s groups in the score-3 grouping are explicit in
creating an opportunity for women to participate in political life and influence
decisions that affect their communities.
V. Exploring Sub-Dimensions of Empowerment
As a reminder, only proposals that fell into score-2 and score-3 groupings displayed
dimensions of women’s empowerment or empowerment specific to gender. These constitute
56 percent of all proposals. The tables below show the percentages for this set proposals
separately (labeled gender emp) from the percentages of proposals that addressed
empowerment in general. The spiderweb diagrams illustrate the spread of sub-dimensions
for empowerment generally (N=32).
Exploring Sub-Dimensions Under Agency
Legend
No.
Sub-Dimension
1
leadership skills
2
GENDER
EMP
% of
N=32 Freq.
EMPOWER
% of
N=32
Freq.
9.4%
3
12.5%
4
15.6%
5
28.1%
9
9.4%
3
15.6%
5
12.5%
4
25.0%
8
5
rights awareness raising
self esteem and emotional well
being
protecting one's body or self from
harm
control over decisions in
household (finance and
childrearing)
21.9%
7
31.3%
10
6
control over assets and resources
21.9%
7
28.1%
9
7
improved productive capacity
12.5%
4
15.6%
5
8
educational attainment
choice to learn non-traditional
skills
6.3%
2
9.4%
3
6.3%
2
6.3%
2
10
mobility in public space
3.1%
1
6.3%
2
11
group membership
25.0%
8
34.4%
11
12
access to information and skills
15.6%
5
31.3%
10
3
4
9
6
1
12
11
40.0%
2
30.0%
3
20.0%
10.0%
10
0.0%
4
9
5
8
6
7
Figure 6. Sub-Dimensions on Agency as a
Percentage of the Total Proposals
Exploring Sub-Dimensions Under Structure
Legend
No.
GENDER
EMP
% of
N=32
Freq.
Sub-Dimension
EMPOWER
% of
N=32
Freq.
1
Access to services
(e.g., health)
5
16%
13
41%
2
density of civil society
1
3%
2
6%
2
6%
3
9%
4
inclusive and equitable
notions of citizenship
representation in
community and local
structures
7
22%
8
25%
5
market accessibility
5
16%
6
19%
6
reform of services
enforcing rights based
on laws
Influence public opinion
or enabling
environment
1
3%
2
6%
1
3%
1
3%
2
6%
7
22%
3
7
8
1
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
8
7
2
3
6
4
5
Figure 7. Sub-Dimensions on Structure as a Percentage of
the Total Proposals
Exploring Sub-Dimensions Under ‘Relational’
Legend
GENDER
EMPOWER
No.
Sub-Dimension
% of
N=32
Freq.
EMPOWER
% of
N=32
Figure 8. Sub-Dimensions on ‘Relational’ as a
Percentage of the Total Proposals
Freq.
1
50%
1
Coalition building
Linking women and the
state
1
3%
2
6%
5
16%
5
16%
2
6%
4
13%
4
ability to negotiate
accountability and
interdependence within a
group
3
9%
3
9%
5
creating a network
3
9%
4
13%
3
9%
3
9%
2
3
10
2
40%
30%
20%
9
3
10%
0%
8
8
building social capital and
social formation
mutual appreciation
between men and women
in household or in a
community
increasing responsibility
of others for vulnerable
groups
9
group formation or use of
women's groups
6
7
10
Addressing conflict
4
7
5
6
9
28%
11
34%
6
19%
10
31%
10
31%
13
41%
1
3%
2
6%
7
VI. Observations and Conclusions
These observations and conclusions reflect on how project designs will be expected to
progress in the coming years, if improvements in addressing and measuring women’s
empowerment are sought.

CARE projects operate in a more concentrated fashion in the ‘agency’ dimension of
empowerment with considerable emphasis on the household as the arena of change. As
livelihood security projects expand their framework to incorporate elements of rightsbased approaches, one would expect to see more intended outcomes in the dimensions
of structural and relational change. It is interesting that rights awareness raising, a subdimension of agency, is gaining greater prominence in project designs but have not yet
moved much beyond awareness to application of the concepts.

Some projects that are increasingly focused on issues of equity and inclusion seem to fall
into the trap of trading off excluded groups; if women were considered a target group
before, they have been replaced with another target group – the disabled, migrants,
people living with AIDS, orphans, etc. Perhaps this speaks to a more general risk
involved with targeting strategies, i.e., that they run the risk of excluding other groups in
the process. It is important that gender as a cross-cutting variable remain operational in
the design rather than be laid to rest in the background section of a proposal.

Indeed, the score-3 grouping seems more focused on gender mainstreaming as opposed
to targeting strategies but this presents a greater challenge as well. It requires locallyspecific, culturally-sensitive approaches to breaking through barriers that perpetuate
women’s social position in the particular culture. It also requires engagement with more
stakeholders and power brokers beyond the household whose attitudes and opinions
must be affected. The proposals on the high end will eventually generate more
outcomes in the ‘relational’ dimension of empowerment to include increased
accountability of other actors, negotiation, coalition building and advocacy (pressure
groups), amongst others.

In order for women’s empowerment to be effectively addressed in any of the groupings,
deeper analysis of underlying causes of their condition, a more fine-tuned understanding
of the gender inequities, and a well-articulated pathway (strategy) for achieving this will
also begin to manifest in project designs. This cannot wait until a project is launched; it
will need to affect the design of interventions.

The strategy of collective action to empower women will likely continue as a pivotal
strategy, however, the low-end proposals will need to move beyond women’s groups for
the purpose of implementing activities and the high-end proposals should begin to apply
collective action to raising women’s voice and participation in civic and political life.
Most importantly, measurement of women’s empowerment (or gender and empowerment) - 

Gender disaggregation of data will perhaps be better reflected in the measurement
system and indicators rather than a principle in the proposal’s background section. More
consistency in disaggregating indicators is related to better conceptualizing gender
issues in the design as a whole. As it is now, gender disaggregation of indicators,
activities, and results seems to be done almost ‘ad hoc’ in a large number of proposals
that span the spectrum on the gender empowerment continuum. While this is not an
argument for wholesale gender-disaggregation (of everything), it calls for more thought
behind why some interventions and/or indicators need to be gender-differentiated and
others not.
An equally big gap lies in the discrepancy between intended outcomes (agency,
structure, and relational) and the measurement of these outcomes. Without
measurement there is no accountability and no possibility for assessing the change
8
process. Even the high-end proposals that spell out empowerment aims, much more
progress is needed to show measurement of changes in representation, influence,
accountability, cooperation, inclusivity, rights fulfillment, fair treatment, and so on –
aspects of power relations and equity. These may be difficult to measure but are not
impossible and will rely more on perceptions and local expressions of empowerment.
The common practice of devising numerical targets for indicators (# of groups or # of
meetings) will need to be abandoned in favor of more qualitative measures that can still
be quantified (indices, rating scales, etc.). As well, highly technical interventions for
health or agriculture projects, for instance, need to broaden their measurement frame to
include change in social position rather than change in human conditions exclusively.
9
ANNEX 1
Correlating Empowerment Scores with Analysis and Measurement
Score on
Empower
.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
Total
ID No.
2
16
19
28
4
4
5
7
8
11
12
13
15
25
32
10
1
6
9
17
20
21
22
23
24
29
31
11
3
10
14
18
26
27
30
7
32
Event
1
2
3
4
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Total
N
N
N
N
N
Score on
Analysis
.0
.0
.0
.0
4
.0
.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10
2.0
.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
3.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
2.0
11
3.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
7
32
Score on
Measure
.0
.0
.0
.0
4
.5
.5
.5
.
.
2.0
2.0
.5
.5
1.0
8
2.0
2.0
.
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.5
.
1.5
.5
2.5
9
2.5
.
2.0
2.0
1.0
3.0
2.0
6
27
10
ANNEX 2
Gender and Empowerment Score Details
Proposals With a Gender and Empowerment Score of 0
ID No.
Sector
Agency
Structure
Relation
2
Peacebuilding
Improved productive
capacity;
Communities’ control over
their future;
Group membership
(dialogue groups);
Control over assets
(livelihoods);
Leadership skills;
Rights awareness raising
Increased access to
services to meet basic
needs;
Creating more favorable
enabling environment for
minority groups
16
Sexual
Reproductive
Health
Rights awareness raising
Equitable access to health
services
19
Vocational
Training
(Education)
Food Security
Access to skills (amongst
teachers);
Educational attainment
Control over assets and
resources;
Control over decisions
affecting one’s life;
Group membership (credit
and savings);
Access to skills and info on
agric and water
Education reform
28
Market accessibility (credit
and inputs);
Access to services (ag, food,
water)
11
Mutual interdependence
between different ethnic
groups;
Improved relations among
ethnicities (overcoming
conflict);
New social forms (of
cooperating);
Group formation (dialogue
groups);
Creation of networks;
Links with municipal
structures (for
accountability)
Increasing accountability of
dutybearers
Increase cooperation
between Ministry, schools
and employers
Group formation (savings
and loans)
Comments
Strong focus on relationships – the
nexus of the change process;
No mention of gender but does not
mean the project excludes women’s
groups or voices
Aimed at excluded groups (mentally
and physically disabled) but no
mention of gender as cross cutting;
this is a pilot research study
Gender-blind
Does mention that it will target
PLWHA and has a SO on orphaned
and vulnerable children; Has one
para on gender mainstreaming and 2
mentions of FHH
Proposals With a Gender and Empowerment Score of 1
ID No.
Sector
Agency
4
Infra/Rehab
5
HIV/AIDS
Protecting one’s own body
8
Food Security
Access to info and skills
7
Education
Children’s self esteem;
Rights awareness
15
HIV AIDS
25
Health
Protecting one’s own body;
Access to info on HIV/AIDS
Rights awareness
32
HIV/AIDS
12
HIV/AIDS
13
HIV/AIDS
11
Health
Protecting oneself against
harm and stigma;
Group membership (selfhelp groups)
Access to info and skills (life
skills);
Control over decisions
affecting one’s life;
Increase in economic power
Building self-esteem;
Protecting one’s self against
harm
Structure
Relation
Men and women will have
infrastructure needs met
Not gender specific
Access to services relating
to HIV/AIDS prevention and
care
Influence attitudes on ethnic
discrimination (better
enabling env’t)
Comments
Mutual appreciation
amongst children
Gender training;
Not consistent
Not gender specific
Also targets girls but not exclusively
Representation of poor in
planning;
More equitable health
services;
More inclusive civic
participation
Access to more equitable
and better quality services;
Reducing stigma of PLWHA
Alliance building and
advocacy;
Improving responsibility of
others towards poor
Not gender specific; focus is on poor
groups;
Will include gender awareness
training
Group formation
Not gender specific though some
passing mention of women and
orphans as target groups
Access to treatment, advice,
support;
Creating more supportive
environment for orphans
with HIV/AIDS;
Reducing discrimination
Ability to negotiate with
partners
Focused on orphans, not genderspecific
Density of civil society to
respond to needs of
PLWHA;
More supportive
environment; reducing
discrimination
Equitable access to health
insurance
Ability to negotiate with
partners
Will gender disaggregate but no
indication of gender sensitivity in
design
Improving accountability of
others (govt)
Not gender sensitive though says it
will disagg. Focus on migrants,
indigenous people.
12
Proposals With a Gender and Empowerment Score of 2
ID No.
6
Sector
MCH
24
Civil society
development
29
Food security
20
Livelihood
security
22
NRM
1
Food security
Agency
Structure
Access to information about
health services
work through women’s
groups;
Access to info about PRSP
Access to services in health
Control over decisions in
hshold (childcare);
Control over labor (free up
time for women partly);
Access to credit;
Group membership (for
credit)
Group membership in
women’s groups for
livestock rearing and for
savings and loans
Control over assets
(livestock) and over finances
Protect women from sexual
assault (while gathering
firewood);
Control over labor (reduce
labor intensity);
Group membership (for
project activities)
Relation
Comments
Improve responsiveness of
state actors
 implicitly, improve
women’s relationship to the
state;
use of women’s groups
Very technical interventions and
measures
Will include women’s groups and
seek representation of women’s
priorities but not specified how
(inclusive)
Mutual appreciation between
women and communities;
Group formation (credit)
No strategies and concerned with
how women will become involved in
local institutions; more concerned
with ethnic inequity;
Inconsistent in concerns over
women’s position
more inclusiveness and
balance on CSO
committees, particularly in
savings and loans CBOs
(political representation at
community level)
Formation of women’s
groups for livestock rearing
and for savings and loans;
mutual appreciation
between women’and
community structures
Vagueness around how it will
address gender imbalance; refers to
use of gender analytical tools
Representation of men and
women on committees
Mutual appreciation of men
and women in planning
activities;
Group formation (for project
activities)
About protecting natural resources as
result of refugee camps
Not clear on strategies and not
consistent in addressing gender
issues
Market accessibility;
NGO capacity;
Representation of
community groups by NGOs
Increasing accountability of
NGOs vis a vis
constituencies;
Aware of gender and ethnic
inequities but will do a gender
strategy at start up
political representation
(representing women’s
issues in CSOs and in
government planning)
density of civil society (not
gender specific)
transparency in
information (about the PRS)
inclusive and equitable
notions of citizenship
Representation of women in
community and municipal
institutions
Address social conflict in
communities
13
ID No.
Sector
Agency
17
Food security
Group membership in
savings and loans groups to
overcome women’s lack of
economic independence;
Improve women’s control
over decisions and
resources;
promote male participation
in traditionally female arenas
(children’s nutrition) –
breaking with male and
female traditional roles;
access to info and skills
on agriculture, nutrition, etc.
31
Food security;
women only
Self esteem, self image;
group membership;
owning material assets;
information and skills
(building capacity and skills
in food security, agric,
nutrition, water systems;
training in planning and
problem analysis);
probably mobility in public
space too (not indicated)
Empowerment is about
making it possible for girls to
have access to education
(supported by awareness
raising on children’s rights);
Giving women as parents
a say in children’s education
(control over decisions)
Rights awareness (tenure);
Control over assets;
Control over decision
making;
Access to info (on policies)
women’s access to credit
and other inputs
control over assets and
resources;
improved productive
9
Education
21
NRM
23
AG/NRM
Structure
Relation
Will seek greater
representation of women in
project activities
Comments
Formation of women’s
groups, e.g., to grow
vegetables;
relationship with state is
mediated by representative
CSOs;
 improve appreciation for
women (involvement) in
community affairs
Other strategies not yet articulated
and unsure what to do about social
acceptance of women in decision
making roles
Cooperation and new
social forms that will lead to
a network of women’s
associations.
Group formation amongst
women for project activities
Mutual appreciation and
interdependence between
men and women in
household
Seeks to address immediate needs
and is more about female
participation in project activities.
Women’s empowerment aims are not
well articulated.
Access to services
(education);
recruiting female teachers
for girls’ schools (were girls
always taught by females
only?)
increasing responsibility of
others for education of girls
and boys
Will select schools with high girls’
enrollment;
No specific intended impacts on
gender equity
Political representation
Mutual appreciation between
men and women
Lot of caveats about gender power
relations but no answers;
Will hire organizations with gender
expertise
representation in
community structures and in
various organizations to be
created
mutual appreciation
between women and
communities and between
men and women in
household;
Plans to do a participatory gender
study at start up; will train
organizations in GED; will use
women’s groups
14
ID No.
Sector
Agency
Structure
Relation
capacity;
access to info and skills in
ag and NRM
Comments
formation of women’s
committees on productive
initiatives
Proposals With a Gender and Empowerment Score of 3
ID No.
Sector
Agency
Structure
Relation
Comments
26
Child Survival
Will provide leadership
and empowerment training
to women leaders
particularly for the female
volunteers;
decisions over child
rearing, particularly in health
Access to services
(health) through capacity of
local NGOs and network of
female community health
volunteers to deliver health
services
Accountability – linked
service providers to
government
 increasing responsibility
of others, inc. persons of
influence (e.g. men in
hshold)
The main target group is women and
children for this project.
14
Child
Trafficking
educational attainiment;
improved productive
capacity;
empowering children to
protect themselves
(human/body);
leadership training for
women on management
committees;
awareness of rights of the
child;
girls can choose nontraditional practical skills
(reduce stereotypes)
changing the education
system to offer children at
risk and trafficked children
more opportunity;
enforcing rights of laws on
the child (juridical and
changes in public opinion;
enhancing gender equity
in access, retention, and
quality of formal and
nonformal education;
greater and more
equitable access to services
for child protection
coalition building (around
rights of child and antitrafficking);
increase responsibility of
others towards children at
risk
credit & savings groups
for mothers of children in
school
Has an activity to develop recruiting
and mentoring strategies to increase
girls’ enrollment (i.e., evidence of a
strategy)
18
HIV/AIDS
protecting oneself against
infection and control over
own bodies (women and
youth). This includes
women’s ability to refuse
husbands or protect
themselves if husband is
thought to have an infection;
rights awareness
 increased availability of
gender equitable services
(related to STIs and HIV
AIDS prevention and care)
and specific services for
women (mother-to-child
transmission, STIs)
A presumption that the wide
array of stakeholders to
receive training in gender,
human rights and on HIV
AIDS will raise gender
sensitivity in programs and
services on HIV AIDS.
increase responsibility of
others for care and
prevention;
Big emphasis on gender training of
various stakeholders.
15
ID No.
Sector
Agency
Structure
Relation
Rehab but also
education
increased protection of
girls as heads of CHH;
improved self-esteem
improved productive
capacity and emotional
wellbeing (not just for girls);
access to social capital
(support system)
improved support system
for CHH (including girls)
mainly through development
of community mentors;
influence public opinion
through advocacy strategy
to prevent exploitation of
girls
Urban
livelihoods
Empowerment is mainly
through agency (collective
action and organizing and
building their social capital);
Leadership training
improved control over
assets;
Group membership
access to micro-credit;
more representation in
local structures
more inclusive citizenship
or public participation;
better access to social
capital and economic
resources for these social
categories;
Inclusive municipal periurban plans reflects the
community interest (inc.
those broken down by
gender)
10
Micro finance;
women
creation of a service not
otherwise available to them;
marketability (access to
credit)
27
Women
builds women's selfesteem as she succeeds in
the program;
increase in women’s
control over financial
decision making and income
generation;
group membership (in
solidarity groups)
group membership;
 control over HH finances
and decision making
improved productive
capacity (through
agriculture)
access to skills and info
on agricultural techniques,
nutrition, law;
30
3
more political or civic
representation;
obtaining external credit
(access to mainstream) for
better off women's groups
16
women negotiate with
men on decisions affecting
their bodies
increased ability of girls to
negotiate
Comments
Power is about raising awareness
and protection of girls as CHH. Main
strategy is development of
community mentors to support
CHHs.
Forms of associating are
very important (access to
credit);
solidarity groups will be
used to offer women more
training in leadership and
conflict resolution.
building social capital
mutual appreciation
between women or women’s
groups and their
communities;
increasing responsibility of
others towards inclusion of
gender and age groups
Accountability and interdependence amongst
women in solidarity groups;
formation of new social
groups
This proposal is aimed at addressing
the exclusion from prior phases of the
project of specific social groups
based on age and gender and seeks
to replicate age- and gendersensitive models for service delivery.
Forming women’s credit
and savings groups;
accountability,
interdependence, and
negotiation within the group.
Forming a network of
groups that can participate
or influence community
decisions and structures;
All women focus with central
intervention on finance.
All women focus with central
intervention on finance
ID No.
Sector
Agency
Structure
Relation
awareness raising on
rights (basic rights –
participation, nutrition, educ)
inclusion of extremely
vulnerable women in credit
and savings groups
 building social capital
 mutual appreciation/
interdependence between
men and women in
household
17
Comments
Annex 3
Capsule Overview
Women’s Empowerment Global Research Framework:5
Introduction
The Strategic Impact Inquiry (SII) mechanism, in general, is an attempt to better answer the critical question,
“are CARE programs impacting the underlying causes of poverty and rights denial, and if so, how?” CARE has
recognized gender inequality as a root cause of poverty across the communities we serve, in particular through
its impact on the capabilities of women. Therefore, in this SII we focus on the theme of CARE’s contribution to
women’s empowerment and gender equity.
The SII on women’s empowerment explores two broad questions:

What impacts (positive and negative) have CARE programs had, if any, on the empowerment of
women and the advancement of gender equity?

What evidence (pro and con) exists regarding the link between CAREs approaches, principles, and
internal dynamics (staff, structure, policies, reward systems, culture, management, etc.) and the
empowerment of women and the advancement of gender equity?
Both of these questions require definitional clarity, of course, but for the purposes of this document – the intent
of which is to give you, the volunteer analyst of a CARE evaluation or two – we will focus on the first question.
What do we mean by women’s empowerment? How are we defining it in the context of this year’s SII
research?
Defining Women’s Empowerment: Agency, Structure, Relationships
One of the key underlying causes of poverty is the construction in different contexts of what it means to be a
man, or a woman. Gender is, in this sense, one manifestation of a general model of power which holds that
individual and group behaviors produce social structures (ideologies, rules, institutions) which, in turn, reinforce
and “normalize” those behaviors to the point where they are seen as common sense, as the “normal” order of
things. Identities, roles, and relationships are, in this view of things, socially constructed, as are the constraints
and opportunities that certain actors face regarding control of, access to, and use of tangible and intangible
resources. Gendered forms of power come into play in the social construction of identities, roles, relationships
and distribution of resources, all of which are intimately related to women’s human rights and the question of
poverty. These gendered “rules of the game” are not always perfectly obvious to women and men who live by
them but can be surfaced, discussed, and challenged through personal and collective consciousness and actions.
In this way, women and men contest the flow of resources, agendas and ideologies.
Empowerment has been theorized from many perspectives – including those founded in a more “zero-sum”
notion of power and those that take a more expansive notion of power. For the purpose of this study, we focus
on those discussions of empowerment that take place within a feminist, gendered perspective. Empowerment is
defined broadly as “the expansion of assets and capabilities of poor people to participate in, negotiate with,
influence, control, and hold accountable the institutions that affect their lives.” 6 Notable in this definition is the
recognition of empowerment as a process of building capability (and not simply the material outcomes visible in
CARE’s impact frameworks to date), and of the importance of structure as represented by the institutions
affecting people’s lives.
This broad conception can be further grounded in a feminist theory as “the expansion in people’s ability to
make strategic life choices in a context where this ability was previously denied to them.”7 This definition is
5
There are minor differences between this summary and the June 2005 revision of the global research
framework. The global framework is a work constantly in progress: as we learn, we modify our lenses/mental
models and, indeed, our very theory upon which the global research framework rests.
6
Deepa Narayan ed, Empowerment and Poverty Reduction: A Sourcebook. Washington, DC: World Bank,
2001.
7
Naila Kabeer, “The Conditions and Consequences of Choice: Reflections on the Measurement of Women’s
Empowerment.” UNRISD Discussion Paper 108. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development,
Geneva, 1999.
18
notable in its focus on choice, which Kabeer defines as comprising three critical elements: agency (power
within/to), operationalized in reference to resources (power to/over), and made visible in its resulting
beneficial/valued achievements. And finally, agency is exercised, in this conception of empowerment, in
opposition to a prior condition of subordination in important (strategic) arenas of life. Strategic interests, in
gender and development theory, differ from “practical gender needs,” in that they go beyond the basic
functions/capacities which allow people to fulfill the gender roles assigned to them, and aim to open new
gendered spaces of ideology, action and opportunity. In this sense, empowerment is importantly tied to impact
on the structural underpinnings of women’s subordinate status and well-being.
With this conceptualization of power and social change, empowerment should be conceived of as both process
and outcome that comprises three dimensions—agency, structure, and relationships. These three dimensions
are intimately related, structuring and influencing one another as the graphic below implies:
Agency
Structure
Relations
AGENCY: Carrying out our own analyses, making our own decisions, and taking our own actions. Every
person has agency, every person analyses, decides, and acts. Agency is a continuum, from less to more.
Empowerment involves a journey through which poor women increase their agency.
STRUCTURE: Routines, patterns of relationships and interaction, and conventions that lead to taken-forgranted behavior; institutions that establish agreed-upon meanings, accepted (“normal”) forms of domination
(who “naturally” has power over what or whom), and agreed criteria for legitimizing the social order.
Individual agents both produce and are, in important ways, produced by structure. Structures can be both
tangible and intangible; they are composed of both behavioral patterns that can be observed and counted but also
the ideologies that underpin why some behaviors – or thoughts – are socially acceptable (acceptable to whom?).
Examples include kinship, economic markets, religion, castes and other forms of social hierarchies, educational
systems, political culture, resource control/ownership dynamics, forms of organization, and many, many more.
RELATIONSHIPS: Both agency and structure are mediated through relationships between and among social
actors while, at the same time, forms and patterns of relationships are deeply influenced – frequently in hidden
ways – by agency and structure. Empowerment, in part, consists in individual women building relationships,
joint efforts, coalitions, and mutual support, in order to claim and expand agency, alter inequitable structures,
and so realize rights and livelihood security.
Women’s Empowerment: Sub-Dimensions
Women’s empowerment differs from culture to culture and context to context. It cannot be applied uniformly
across the developing world. In all field research sites this year – Bangladesh, Yemen, and Ecuador – one of the
very first steps of impact research has been to uncover local women’s own definitions and indicators of their
empowerment. But this process has been informed by a conceptual framework that asks researchers to at least
consider the relevance of 23 sub-dimensions of agency, structure, and relationships. We selected these subdimensions because they have, in fact, been shown to be widely relevant to women’s empowerment across a
great many studies and across numerous social, economic, cultural, historical, and political contexts. In other
words, a wide variety of studies have shown an apparent positive relationship between increases/improvements
in the sub-dimensions and women’s empowerment. In asking staff to at least consider these sub-dimensions we
are not pre-determining local meanings of women’s empowerment, nor the indicators that are most relevant to
decide if CARE is having an impact or not, but rather trying to inform staff of important results that already are
found in the rather wide literature on women’s empowerment so that we don’t reinvent the wheel at every site.
These 23 sub-dimensions are briefly defined below:
19
Dimension
Specific Sub-Dimensions
Self-Image; Self Esteem
Legal & Rights
Awareness
Information & Skills
Education
A
G
E
N
C
Y
Employment/Control of
Own Labor
Mobility in Public Space
Decision Influence in
Household
Group Membership &
Activism
Material Assets Owned
Body Health & Bodily
Integrity
Marriage & Kinship
Rules, Norms, Processes
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
R
E
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
H
I
P
S
Laws and Practices of
Citizenship
Information and Access
to Services
Access to justice
(enforceability of rights)
Market Accessibility
Political representation
State budgeting practices
Civil Society
Representation
Consciousness of Self and
Others as Interdependent
Negotiation &
Accommodation Habits
Alliance & Coalition
Habits
Pursuit & Acceptance of
Accountability
New Social Forms
Definition of Sub-Dimension
Positive images of self, belief in one’s abilities, feelings of selfefficacy
Knowledge of laws around issues of women’s social positions,
status, equality, etc.
Access to information and skills that a woman deems helpful or
necessary; awareness that such information/skills even exist
Access to and ability to deploy formal and informal forms of
education
Fair and equitable access to employment opportunities; fair and
equitable working conditions; freedom to chose forms of labor
Freedom to circulate in public spaces
Kinds of decisions that women can make over household resources,
processes, people, investments, etc.
This sub-dimension certainly overlaps with the element below,
Relationships. Here, at the level of agency, we are looking at the
degree to which women are free to join groups as a result of their
own wishes to do so
The kinds of material assets (land, goods, animals, crops, money)
women have the power to control
Access to core health services of acceptable quality; freedom to
make decisions over what happens to a woman’s own body; a right
to bodily well being and pleasure
Degree of freedom and control of marital resources; equitable
inheritance, divorce, and family law more generally; control of
one’s own body
Degree of inclusiveness and equity of laws and practices around
what it means to be a citizen
Degree to which duty bearers ensure that women have the chance to
know what they’re due, how they can access this, and what to do in
the event that they are denied information or services
Enforceability of basic human rights as well as specially designed
laws and programs to promote gender equity
Equitable access to work, credit, inputs, fair prices
Extent of women elected and appointed to public office – in the
formal and informal spheres – and their degree of influence once
there
Allocations the state offers for important services, guarantees, and
enforcement mechanisms around issues central to gender equity
The density and quality of civil society organizations that address
gender inequity and social exclusion
Social connections, outreach; seeing the value of joint actions both
for self but for a larger group
Ability and interest in engaging duty bearers, the powerful, but also
other marginalized social actors in dialogue
Extent to which women and women’s groups form larger alliances
and coalitions and seek collective gains
Skills, confidence, and knowledge to hold duty bearers and the
powerful accountable; recognition that human rights bring, also,
forms of accountability to every individual
Generation of new kinds of organizing, new or altered relationships,
new kinds of behaviors.
20
To summarize, we understand impact on women’s empowerment to be reflected in three inter-connecting
aspects of social change. The first, driven by the actor-centered notion of “agency,” is in the aspirations,
resources, capabilities, attitudes, and achievements of women themselves. The second is in the broader social
structures that are both socially produced by people but that also, once produced and “normalized,” condition
women’s choices and chances. And the third is in the character of the social relationships through which
women negotiate their needs and rights with other social actors. The 23 sub-dimensions written above may or
may not be important in a particular social context and the concrete indicators that would show improvement
along one of the sub-dimensions may well differ from place to place, era to era in the same place, or even from
group to group of women in the same place and time. Nonetheless, we are interested in whether and how CARE
programs purporting to focus on gender and/or women’s empowerment are targeting these sub-dimensions as
they appear so frequently in the gender and women’s empowerment literature.
21