9.3 Tools of Analysis and the Gender-Responsive Project Proposal
Key Takeaways
- TOS competencies G.2.3, G.2.4 and G.2.5 require candidates to discuss and demonstrate tools of analysis and to produce a project proposal using the Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines.
- The Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines are the Philippine instrument for assessing and designing gender-responsive programmes and projects.
- A gender analysis examines the sexual division of labour, access to and control over resources, and participation in decision-making.
- Gender-responsive design distinguishes practical gender needs from strategic gender interests and addresses both.
- The standard social welfare project proposal has ten parts, from title and rationale through to monitoring, evaluation and sustainability.
9.3 Tools of Analysis and the Gender-Responsive Project Proposal
Blueprint anchor. TOS competencies G.2.3 ("discuss the importance of tools of analysis in implementing project development and management"), G.2.4 ("demonstrate use of the tools of analysis") and G.2.5 ("based on identified needs and problems, analyze the community using the Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines in coming up with a Project Proposal") close Topic G. The explicit naming of the Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines makes it directly examinable.
1. Tools of Analysis in Project Work
| Tool | What it produces | Best used at |
|---|---|---|
| Problem tree / objective tree | Cause-effect map converted into an objectives hierarchy | Identification |
| Stakeholder analysis | Map of interest, influence and required involvement | Identification and design |
| SWOT analysis | Internal strengths and weaknesses; external opportunities and threats | Design and appraisal |
| Force field analysis | Driving and restraining forces around a proposed change | Design and implementation |
| Logical framework | Objectives, indicators, verification and assumptions matrix | Design |
| Gantt chart / work and financial plan | Schedule and disbursement plan | Design and implementation |
| Risk matrix | Likelihood and severity of risks with mitigation | Appraisal |
| Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis | Value comparison between options | Appraisal |
| Gender analysis frameworks | Sex-disaggregated picture of labour, resources and decisions | Throughout |
| Participatory appraisal tools | Community-generated maps, calendars, diagrams | Identification and monitoring |
The importance of these tools is not the diagram; it is that each forces an explicit statement of something otherwise assumed: the causal chain, the risks, the losers, the schedule, and the gendered distribution of burden and benefit.
2. Gender Analysis
A gender analysis asks four questions of any community and any proposed project:
- Who does what? The sexual division of labour across productive work, reproductive and care work, and community work. Care work is the category most often uncounted.
- Who has what? Access to resources — land, credit, tools, training, information, services.
- Who decides? Control over resources and over decisions in the household, the organisation and the barangay.
- Who benefits, and who bears the cost? The distribution of a project's gains and burdens.
Practical Needs and Strategic Interests
| Practical gender needs | Strategic gender interests | |
|---|---|---|
| Address | Immediate conditions | Underlying position |
| Examples | Water nearer the house, health services, livelihood income | Control over income, freedom from violence, representation in decision bodies |
| Effect if addressed alone | Improves daily life; may increase workload without shifting power | Changes relations, but may be resisted if daily conditions are ignored |
| Good design | Meets practical needs as a route to strategic interests |
3. The Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines
The Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines (HGDG) are the Philippine government's harmonised instrument for integrating gender and development into programmes and projects. Their essential features for examination purposes:
- They provide checklists used at each stage of the project cycle — identification and design, implementation and management, and monitoring and evaluation.
- They yield a score that classifies a project's gender-responsiveness along a scale running from gender-blind, through gender-sensitive attempts, to gender-responsive designs.
- They are applied by the agency proposing the project and are used in attributing expenditure to the mandated gender and development budget.
- Their design logic requires sex-disaggregated data, an explicit gender issue statement, gender-responsive objectives and indicators, and a budget that funds the gender elements rather than merely mentioning them.
[!IMPORTANT] The examinable distinction. A project is not gender-responsive because women are the majority of participants. A livelihood project that enrols only women but leaves income control with husbands, adds hours to an already double workload, and gives women no role in project governance is gender-blind in design and gender-exploitative in effect. Counting participants by sex is the beginning of gender analysis, never its conclusion.
Common Gender Categories in Design
| Category | Description |
|---|---|
| Gender-blind | Ignores gender differences; assumes a neutral beneficiary |
| Gender-neutral | Recognises differences but does not change the distribution |
| Gender-sensitive | Recognises and accommodates differences in delivery |
| Gender-responsive | Actively addresses gender issues in objectives, activities, indicators and budget |
| Gender-transformative | Seeks change in the underlying relations and norms |
4. Structure of a Social Welfare Project Proposal
| Part | Contents |
|---|---|
| 1. Title | Names the intervention, target group and location |
| 2. Background and rationale | Situational analysis, evidence of need, gender issue identified |
| 3. Objectives | Goal, outcome and outputs stated as SMART objectives |
| 4. Target participants | Number, selection criteria, sex-disaggregated |
| 5. Strategy and activities | What will be done, in what sequence, by whom |
| 6. Work and financial plan | Schedule and line-item budget, including gender-responsive items |
| 7. Organisation and management | Staffing, roles, partners, community role in governance |
| 8. Monitoring and evaluation plan | Indicators, means of verification, frequency, who collects |
| 9. Sustainability plan | Institutional home, continuing resources, maintenance, exit strategy |
| 10. Risks and assumptions | What could derail it and how it will be managed |
Annexes typically include the logframe, the Gantt chart, the detailed budget, the HGDG checklist result, and the community endorsement or resolution.
5. Worked Practice Application
Situation. In a fishing barangay, women process and sell dried fish. Income is handed to husbands, who control expenditure. Processing takes place at home, adding six hours to days already occupied by care work. The barangay development council has no woman member. The office proposes a solar dryer project.
Gender analysis using the four questions.
- Who does what? Women process and market; men catch. Women additionally carry all care work.
- Who has what? Men own boats and gear; women own no productive asset and have no credit access.
- Who decides? Husbands control income; the barangay development council is entirely male.
- Who benefits? A dryer alone would raise output and therefore women's working hours, while control of the resulting income would remain unchanged.
Gender-blind version of the project. Build one solar dryer; count 60 women beneficiaries; report success.
Gender-responsive redesign.
| Element | Design |
|---|---|
| Gender issue statement | Women perform the processing and marketing labour but hold neither the productive asset nor control over the income it generates |
| Objective | Increase women processors' income and their control over it |
| Ownership | Dryer titled to the registered women processors' association, not to individual households or the barangay |
| Financial control | Association bank account; enterprise income distributed to members directly |
| Workload | Shared facility with scheduled shifts to reduce individual hours; child-minding corner during processing shifts |
| Capability | Financial literacy, costing and pricing, and organisational management training |
| Representation | Association accreditation so that it can occupy a seat on the barangay development council |
| Indicators | Sex-disaggregated income; proportion of members reporting sole or joint control over enterprise income; number of women in local decision bodies; hours spent processing per member |
| Budget | Gender-responsive items funded, not merely listed |
Assessment. The blind version meets a practical need and may worsen the strategic position. The redesign meets the practical need through an arrangement that shifts control, representation and workload — which is precisely what applying the Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines to a project proposal is intended to produce.
A livelihood project enrols only women, but income is controlled by husbands, participants' working hours increase, and women hold no role in project governance. How should this project be classified?
Which of these is a strategic gender interest rather than a practical gender need?
What is the primary function of the Harmonized Gender and Development Guidelines in project work?