7. The outcome and indicator assessment is based on a range of data sources – project team reports and interviews, interviews with other stakeholders, and documentation (e.g. policies, tools, gender profiles). The level of progress has been divided according to: no progress, little progress, moderate progress and significant progress. Specific criteria apply to each of these levels, which draw from the definitions provided in the stocktake reports. In addition, the level of evidence and contribution from PGEP has been noted. The following table details the criteria used to assess progress, evidence and contribution. Scores were given to each country, and then averaged to provide an overall progress rating. In some instances, there has not been data to make an assessment. These countries have been marked with ‘DD’ and have been excluded from the overall regional assessment. Icon Meaning Significant progress Moderate progress Little progress No progress Score 3 2 1 0 Outcome Attitude or awareness change Attitude or awareness Attitude or awareness No attitude or 1 criteria among NSO and/or NWM plus changes among NSO changes among awareness changes other agencies and/or NWM individuals Outcome Presence of gender champions 2-3 criteria met 1 criteria met 0 criteria met 2 Existing gender policy criteria Other policies mentioning gender Implementation of policies/ programs Outcome Capacity demonstrated by Capacity demonstrated Capacity demonstrated No progress on capacity 3 criteria individuals in NWM, NSO, and by individuals in 2 by individuals in 1 other agencies agencies agency Outcome Gender-responsive HR policies 2-3 criteria met 1 criteria met 0 criteria met 4 criteria Tools to support gender integration Sex-disaggregated data Gender balance at all levels Outcome Gender mentioned in NDP, Gender mentioned in Gender mentioned in Gender not mentioned 5 criteria with clear strategies and with NDP with either NDP without clear in NDP resourcing strategies or resourcing strategies or resourcing Outcome Coordination by NSOs with 2 criteria met 1 criteria met 0 criteria met 6 criteria other agencies/devt partners Coordination by NWMs with others Coordination by SPC with others Coordination by other GM partners Indicators 67-100% of PICs have 34-66% of PICs have 1-33% of PICs have 0% of PICs have demonstrated progress on the demonstrated progress demonstrated progress demonstrated progress indicator on the indicator on the indicator on the indicator Rich documentation: identified by 3 type of data sources (team notes/interviews, other stakeholder interviews, documentation) Indication: identified by 2 types of data sources Limited: identified by 1 type of data source
7. The outcome and indicator assessment is based on a range of data sources – project team reports and interviews, interviews with other stakeholders, and documentation (e.g. policies, tools, gender profiles). The level of progress has been divided according to: no progress, little progress, moderate progress and significant progress. Specific criteria apply to each of these levels, which draw from the definitions provided in the stocktake reports. In addition, the level of evidence and contribution from PGEP has been noted. The following table details the criteria used to assess progress, evidence and contribution. Scores were given to each country, and then averaged to provide an overall progress rating. In some instances, there has not been data to make an assessment. These countries have been marked with ‘DD’ and have been excluded from the overall regional assessment. Icon Meaning Significant progress Moderate progress Little progress No progress Score 3 2 1 0 Outcome 1 criteria Attitude or awareness change among NSO and/or NWM plus other agencies Attitude or awareness changes among NSO and/or NWM Attitude or awareness changes among individuals No attitude or awareness changes Outcome 2 criteria Presence of gender champions Existing gender policy Other policies mentioning gender Implementation of policies/ programs 2-3 criteria met 1 criteria met 0 criteria met Outcome 3 criteria Capacity demonstrated by individuals in NWM, NSO, and other agencies Capacity demonstrated by individuals in 2 agencies Capacity demonstrated by individuals in 1 agency No progress on capacity Outcome 4 criteria Gender-responsive HR policies Tools to support gender integration Sex-disaggregated data Gender balance at all levels 2-3 criteria met 1 criteria met 0 criteria met Outcome 5 criteria Gender mentioned in NDP, with clear strategies and with resourcing Gender mentioned in NDP with either strategies or resourcing Gender mentioned in NDP without clear strategies or resourcing Gender not mentioned in NDP Outcome 6 criteria Coordination by NSOs with other agencies/devt partners Coordination by NWMs with others Coordination by SPC with others Coordination by other GM partners 2 criteria met 1 criteria met 0 criteria met Indicators 67-100% of PICs have demonstrated progress on the indicator 34-66% of PICs have demonstrated progress on the indicator 1-33% of PICs have demonstrated progress on the indicator 0% of PICs have demonstrated progress on the indicator Rich documentation: identified by 3 type of data sources (team notes/interviews, other stakeholder interviews, documentation) Indication: identified by 2 types of data sources Limited: identified by 1 type of data source
progressing-gender-equality-pacific-project-mid-term-evaluation.docx