VUP Gender Equity Assessment Report.final

Final Report

REPUBLIC OF RWANDA

Rwanda Local Development Support

Fund (RLDSF)

Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme

(VUP) Gender Equity Assessment

Prepared by:

Kigali, Rwanda

Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme Gender Equity Assessment

i

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS CIDA Canadian International Development Agency (now DFATD)

DFID Development Fund for international Development (UK)

DIP Decentralisation Implementation Programme

DS Direct Support

EDPRS Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy

EICV3 Enqute Intgrale sur les Conditions de Vie des Mnages EU European Union FGD Focus Group Discussion

FS Financial Services

GBV Gender-Based Violence

GoR Government of Rwanda

HH Household

HIMO/LIPW Haute Intensit de Main duvre/Labour Intensive Public Works

HIV/AIDS Human Immune Virus /Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

IGA Income Generating Activities

JADF Joint Action Development Forum

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MDG Millennium development Goals

MINAGRI Ministry of Agriculture

MINALOC Ministry of Local Government

MINECOFIN PLHA

Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning People Living with HIV and AIDS

PW Public Works

RLDSF Rwanda Local Development Support Fund

SACCO Savings and Credit Cooperative SIDA Swedish International Development Agency SLG Savings and Loans Groups UNICEF United Nations Childrens Funds

VSLA Village Savings and Loans Associations

VUP Vision 2020 Umurenge Program


ii

DEFINITIONS AND KEY TERMS

- Gender: Refers to the responsibilities, rights, opportunities, respect and value a person receives from society in accordance with his/her sex, and which is likely to change in relation to time, culture and other criteria.1

- Gender-Based Analysis: A process that assesses the differential impact of proposed and/or existing policies, programs and legislation on women and men.2

- Gender Blind: Describes policies, strategies and programmes that do not explicitly recognize existing gender differences, including in the productive and reproductive roles of men and women. This approach does not distinguish between men and women, and results in bias towards existing gender relations.3

- Gender Disaggregated Data: Data that clearly show the differences in the status of women in relation to men in the various socio-economic spheres and why.4

- Gender Equality: A situation where women and men fully enjoy the same opportunities in fulfilling their human rights and achieving their potential, gain access to equal participation in all developmental activities from a political, economic, social and cultural perspective, and benefit equally from results.5

Equality of opportunity: Women should have equal rights to human, social, economic and cultural development, and an equal voice in civic and political life.6

Equity of outcomes: The exercise of rights leads to outcomes which are fair and just.7

- Gender Mainstreaming in Development Programmes: A process aimed at sensitizing all organizations to recognize gender and address gaps in development programmes.8

- Gender Neutral: Describes policies or strategies that use the current gender context to overcome bias, through targeting and benefiting practical gender needs. Despite appearing neutral, these policies may actually impact men and women differently and reinforce existing gender inequalities.9

- Practical Gender Needs: The daily and immediate needs of survival, income and livelihoods, which arise from the conditions men and women experience as a result of their gender roles in society. Strategies or policies addressing practical gender needs do not aim to change existing gender roles or relationships, but rather focus on providing goods and services based on the differential needs and experiences of men and women in the current context.10

1 Republic of Rwanda, Gender Monitoring Office Strategic Plan 2011-2016, Kigali: 2011. 2 Status of Women Canada, Gender-Based Analysis: A guide for policy-making, Ottawa: 1998, p. 4. 3 International Labour Organization, A Manual For Gender Audit Facilitators: The ILO Participatory Gender Audit Methodology, Geneva: 2007, p. 129. 4 Economic Commission for Africa, African Centre for Gender and Development, Monitoring and Evaluation Programme of the African Plan of Action to Accelerate the Implementation of the Dakar and Beijing Platforms for Action, A Guide to Data Collection for Impact Evaluation of Gender Mainstreaming on the Status of Women in Africa, p. vii. 5 Ibid. 6 Department for International Development, Gender Manual: A Practical Guide for Development Policy Makers and Practitioners, London: April 2002, p. 7. 7 Ibid., p. 7. 8 Republic of Rwanda, Gender Monitoring Office Strategic Plan 2011-2016, 2011. 9 International Labour Organization, p. 131. 10 Ibid., p. 62, 124.


iii

- Productive Roles: Include income generating work done by men or women to produce goods and services.11

- Reproductive Roles: Refer to activities carried out as part of caring for the household, its members and the community. It may include child bearing and rearing, collecting water and fuel, cooking, cleaning, and care for elderly or disabled family members.12

- Strategic Gender Needs/Interests: The desired changes in roles, relationships and responsibilities of men and women. Strategies or policies addressing strategic gender interests focus on institutional, organizational and personal change. They relate to womens empowerment and rights.13

11 International Labour Organization, p. 133. 12 Ibid., p. 133. 13 Ibid., p. 62, 137.

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................ i DEFINITIONS AND KEY TERMS .................................................................................................... ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... vi 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE GENDER EQUITY ASSESSMENT ................................................... 1 1.2 REPORT OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................ 2

2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND BACKGROUND .................................................................... 2 2.1 GENDER AND POVERTY IN RWANDA ................................................................................ 2 2.2 GENDER AND SOCIAL PROTECTION ................................................................................. 3 2.3 NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK ....................................................................................... 5 2.4 RLDSF and VUP .......................................................................................................................... 6

3. ASSESSMENT APPROACH ..................................................................................................... 7 4. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................... 7

4.1 METHODS AND TOOLS ........................................................................................................... 8 4.2 ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................. 11 4.3 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND CONSTRAINTS......................................................... 11

5. PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS ............................................................................................. 12 6. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS: VUP DESIGN ............................................................................ 12

6.1 PROGRAMME GENDER ANALYSIS AND INTEGRATION ............................................... 13 6.2 M&E, DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING .................................................................. 14 6.3 HUMAN RESOURCES AND CAPACITY BUILDING ........................................................... 15 6.4 PARTNERSHIPS ....................................................................................................................... 16 6.5 GENDER RESPONSIVE BUDGETING ................................................................................. 16

7. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS: VUP DELIVERY ....................................................................... 16 7.1 TARGETING .............................................................................................................................. 17 7.2 PARTICIPATION IN PROGRAMME COMPONENTS (DS, PW, FS) ................................. 22 7.3 ACCOUNT HOLDER ............................................................................................................... 30 7.4 TRAINING AND SENSITIZATION ........................................................................................ 31 7.5 GRADUATION AND EXIT ..................................................................................................... 33 7.6 APPEALS AND COMPLAINTS MECHANISM ..................................................................... 35

8. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS: VUP IMPACT ........................................................................... 36 8.1 INCOME AND HOUSEHOLD POVERTY ............................................................................ 37 8.2 FOOD SECURITY AND ACCESS TO MARKET ................................................................... 38 8.3 LABOUR SUBSTITUTION ...................................................................................................... 39 8.4 HOUSEHOLD ACTIVITIES.................................................................................................... 39 8.5 HOUSEHOLD DECISION-MAKING ..................................................................................... 40 8.6 HOUSEHOLD RELATIONSHIPS ........................................................................................... 41 8.7 COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION ........................................................................................... 42 8.8 ACCESS TO PUBLIC SERVICES ............................................................................................ 42

9. BEST PRACTICES .................................................................................................................. 43 10. RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................ 44

10.1 VUP DESIGN ........................................................................................................................... 45 10.2 VUP DELIVERY ...................................................................................................................... 47 10.3 VUP IMPACT ........................................................................................................................... 48

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 49


v

TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1: Percentage of FHH Living in Poverty Compared to National Average ............................ 3

Table 2: Districts and Sectors Selected for FGDs and Household Surveys .................................... 7

Table 3: Desk Review and Gender Analysis Documents ................................................................ 8

Table 4: Document Gender Analysis Description ........................................................................... 8

Table 5: KII Participants and Questions ......................................................................................... 9

Table 6: FGD Question Topics ....................................................................................................... 9

Table 7: Household Survey Question Topics ................................................................................. 10

Table 8: Case Study Topics and Participants ................................................................................. 11

Table 9: Household Survey Respondents Profile ........................................................................... 12

Table 10: DS FGD Respondents Profile ......................................................................................... 12

Table 11: PW FGD Respondents .................................................................................................... 12

Table 12: VUP Impact by Cohort 1 and 4 Sectors .......................................................................... 36

Table 13: VUP Impact for Male and Female Headed Households ............................................... 37

Table 14: Wall Type Reported by Sex of Respondent .................................................................... 38

Figure 1: Types of PW projects reported by household survey respondents ................................. 20

Figure 2: PW Participation Days for Male and Female Participants ............................................ 23

Figure 3: Household Survey Response to "Who Selected the Account Holder of VUP?" ........... 30

Figure 4: Sensitisation Topics Reported by Household Survey Respondents ............................... 31

Figure 5: Asset Ownership by Sex of Household Head ................................................................ 37

Figure 6: VUP Income Use by Sex of Respondent ........................................................................ 38

Figure 7: Ability to Make Decisions About VUP Funds by Sex of Respondent ........................... 40

Figure 8: Household Relationship before VUP by Sex of Respondent .......................................... 41

Figure 9: Household Relationships After VUP by Sex of Respondent ......................................... 42

Figure 10: Ability to Pay School Fees or Materials by Sex of Respondent .................................... 43


vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Rwandas Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP) is the national programme for social protection of the poorest households in Rwanda. It aims to accelerate the reduction of extreme poverty in targeted VUP sectors. The main components of VUP are:

- Direct Support: targets the extreme poor who are unable to work - Public Works: targets the extreme poor who are able to work - Financial Services: complements the other two components by offering loans to

individuals, groups or cooperatives.

VUP employs the Ubudehe social categorisation mechanism to identify the poorest households and potential beneficiaries. It is managed by the Social Protection Division of the Rwanda Local Development Support Fund (RLDSF). RLDSF decided to undertake a Gender Equity Assessment of the Programme to ensure that VUP is using effective gender responsive measures. This Assessment provides an analysis of the gender issues in VUP, identifies factors supporting and constraining gender equity, and provides recommendations to improve programming. The Assessment used quantitative and qualitative methods, including a desk review of literature and key documents, a document gender analysis, key informant interviews, focus group discussions and case studies of the programme components. A limited household survey was also carried out to complement qualitative findings. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS The VUP Gender Equity Assessment identified positive findings, including in the design, delivery and impact of VUP. There were best practices implemented at the local level in the selected sectors for this study. There are also some important areas requiring improvement, including revision of policy and programme documents and implementation of key measures to improve gender responsiveness. VUP documents contain some gender sensitive elements, including specific measures, such as equal participation of men and women required for PW and incentives to foster womens participation in FS. However, there is scope to improve the integration of gender responsiveness into the core values and practices of VUP. Further, programme documents lack in-depth gender analysis of the differential needs, vulnerabilities, challenges and opportunities for men, women, girls and boys in impoverished households, gender responsive targets and gender sensitive indicators. Monitoring and evaluation and reporting requirements were limited in their consideration of gender, and programme documents related to staffing, including performance and capacity did not sufficiently require or support the building of knowledge and expertise in gender analysis and integration. In practice, there is limited recognition of the gender barriers to womens participation, which has an impact on selection and targeting, and results in the unequal participation of women. This is particularly related to the gender-based division of productive and reproductive labour at the household level. Women face invisible barriers to participation, particularly related to their domestic and childcare related responsibilities. The extra reproductive responsibilities of women results in a poverty of time, which is more significant for single female headed households.


vii

PW projects are of limited diversity, which also impacts on eligibility and effectiveness of participation. Although some gender responsive mechanisms have been developed, there is also inconsistent application across VUP sectors. VUP has not yet developed a comprehensive skills building and training program as a mechanism for improving employability of beneficiaries or income generating opportunities. According to this assessment VUP has improved income generation at the household and has increased access to the market. Most respondents also indicated an improvement in the sharing of household decision making and identified improvement in equity in household relationships due to VUP. There was some acknowledgement among participants of a positive improvement in womens participation at the community level. ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATIONS VUP documents require revision to more strongly integrate gender equality in the objectives and operational processes. Recognition of the gender barriers that currently limit the effective equal access and participation of beneficiaries is required, along with specific measures to address these barriers. To ensure the enhancement of VUP results and impacts from a gender perspective, the establishment of a VUP gender working group and high level gender focal points are highly recommended, as is the inclusion of gender-related results in staff performance contracts and assessments. VUP targeting could be improved through revision of VUP component criteria to improve gender responsiveness. VUP should aim to adequately address the added barriers to participation that women face as a direct result of their gendered roles. A more formal response to the reproductive and childcare related challenges identified is required, particularly to ensure the effective participation of women and men with small children, and pregnant or lactating women. In order to achieve more sustainable and equitable impacts, PW projects should be diversified to ensure participation of different groups, particularly those with specific vulnerabilities. While this assessment found that VUP is having a positive impact, more gender responsive measures to address power dynamics and sharing of household roles and responsibilities are required for a more transformative result. Sensitization should ensure inclusion of gender equality issues. Skills-related training to improve longer-term employability should also be considered, either delivered through VUP or in partnership with other agencies. Improved coordination between VUP and other programmes would enhance the consistency and comprehensiveness of programming. The decision to undertake this study and the willingness of all participants is a positive indication of the desire to improve the gender responsiveness of VUP. In order to increase its effectiveness and impact on poverty reduction, VUP should explicitly aim at contributing to gender equality and womens empowerment, assuming a more transformative role and designing objectives in relation to existing gender inequalities.


1

Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme Objectives:

Contributing to the reduction of extreme poverty

Stimulating changes in the effectiveness of poverty eradication

Ensuring that economic growth is pro-poor

Ensuring that the majority of the population have improved their living conditions as a result of GDP growth.

1. INTRODUCTION Rwandas Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP) began as a flagship programme of the 5-year Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy, EDPRS, which is a strategy towards achieving the national Vision 2020. Vision 2020 was launched in 2007 and aims to ensure a better quality of life for all Rwandans through the reduction of extreme income poverty. VUP is managed through the Rwanda Local Development Support Fund (RLDSF), which was established by law no 41/2010 of 25/11/2010. VUP is under the Social Protection Division of RLDSF and operates in all 30 Districts of Rwanda.14

The main components of VUP are:

Direct Support, which targets the extreme poor who are unable to work

Public Works, which targets the extreme poor who are able to work

Financial Services, which complements the other two components by offering loans to individuals, groups or cooperatives.

VUP uses the Ubudehe social targeting mechanism to identify the poorest households, and covers Ubudehe categories 1 and 2.15 Through these components, VUP aims to facilitate the graduation of beneficiaries, achieving a decrease in poverty levels. 1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE GENDER EQUITY ASSESSMENT

Previous VUP household surveys indicated possible gender differences in the impact of VUP on beneficiaries. Therefore, RLDSF decided to undertake a gender equity assessment for VUP. The overall objectives of the assessment are to:

1. Provide an analysis of the gender issues in VUP outcomes looking at:

the 3 types of poverty16 considered in VUP impact analysis

institutional, political, social and economic factors, particularly at district, sector, imidugudu and household level, that contribute to gender inequality.

2. Identify both what is supporting gender equity and the constraints to gender equity in VUP outcomes and provide recommendations for VUP to improve future programming.

14 Stephen Devereaux, 3rd Annual Review of DFID Support to the Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP), Rwanda, January 2012, p. 3. 15 Financial Services may be accessed by Ubudehe categories 1, 2 and 3 or by other Ubudehe categories if partnered with participants from Ubudehe categories 1 and 2. 16 VUP uses three different poverty measures: 1) Social poverty (Ubudehe) as determined by communities; 2) Income poverty measured using proxy indicators, and 3) Human poverty, a multi-dimensional measure of poverty including the dimensions of income, education, health, food/nutrition, water/sanitation, labour, housing, access to productive assets, access to markets and services and social participation.


2

This gender equity assessment focuses on the gender responsiveness of the design and delivery of VUP and the gendered impact on beneficiaries. Access to and participation in VUP, and experience of benefits are assessed to determine key challenges, opportunities and constraints to gender equality and present recommendations. 1.2 REPORT OVERVIEW

The report is divided into the following 10 sections. Section 1: Introduction Section 2: Overview of the literature on gender and social protection and background

information Section 3: Approach to the assessment Section 4: Methodology, including the methods and tools, sampling and selection and ethics

and constraints Section 5: Overview of the districts and participants in the assessment Section 6: Findings of the gender assessment of the programme design Section 7: Findings of the gender assessment of the programme delivery Section 8: Findings of the gender assessment of the programme impact Section 9: Gender responsive best practices in VUP Section 10: Recommendations for improving gender responsiveness of VUP

2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND BACKGROUND

2.1 GENDER AND POVERTY IN RWANDA

EICV3 conducted in 2011 shows that poverty has declined significantly in Rwanda. The proportion of the population living below the poverty line was 56.7% in 2006 and decreased to 44.9% by 2010/2011 (the VUP target is 46% by 2012). The proportion of the population living below the extreme poverty line was 36.9% in 2006 and decreased to 24% in 2010/2011.17 In 2009, the VUP Household Survey found that female headed households were Ubudehe poorer, indicating they experienced social poverty more than male headed households.18 The survey also found that women were more numerous in Direct Support, with female headed households making up 62.8% of Direct Support beneficiaries.19 In terms of human poverty, the VUP Annual Report 2009/10 further stated, female-headed households are disproportionately represented among the extreme poor in Rwandafemale-headed households perform worst against almost all human poverty indicators than male-headed households.20 While these findings were from 2009/10, more recent EICV3 findings suggest that the gender difference in poverty reduction is reducing. While the EICV2 survey in 2005-2006 found that female headed households were more likely to be poor than male headed households, by the time EICV3 was conducted, there was a positive indication of reduction in income poverty for men and women in Rwanda. 21

17 Republic of Rwanda, National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda, EICV3 Thematic Report: Social Protection, Kigali: 2012, p. 2. 18 Louis-Marie Asselin, VUP Targeting and Poverty Surveys 2009, November 2010, p. 7. 19 Ibid., p. 27. Devereaux also found that DS households are almost twice as likely to be female headed. Devereaux, p. 15. This may suggest that female headed households are more likely to be classified as unable to work due to age, ability or the type of work offered in Public Works. 20 Rwanda Local Development Support Fund, Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme, Annual Report 2009/10, p. 41. 21 EICV3 Thematic Report: Social Protection, p. 4.


3

Protection, Prevention, Promotion and Transformation

1. Protective measures provide essential support to those living in poverty and involve cash transfers through VUP.

2. Preventive measures provide a safety net to support people in danger of falling into poverty, through VUP cash transfers and support for access to health and education.

3. Promotion measures support poor peoples investments to move them out of poverty, for example through microfinance initiatives as well as VUP transfers.

4. Transformative measures aim to improve the social status and rights of marginalized people, and include cash transfers through VUP, legislative changes and sensitization to change behaviour and attitudes.

Table 1: Percentage of FHH Living in Poverty Compared to National Average22

HH living in poverty FHH living in poverty

EICV1 60.4% 66.3%

EICV2 56.9% 60.2%

EICV3 44.9% 47%

Further investigation, however, presents interesting gender dynamics.

Given the overall achievements in poverty reduction, VUP has an important opportunity to promote gender equality as a key component of its programming moving forward. 2.2 GENDER AND SOCIAL PROTECTION

Social protection is a mechanism to provide protection for the poor against social and economic risks and to improve the welfare of the population.23 Social protection generally aims to include universal protection through coverage of certain expenses for all individuals, social assistance through ensuring that each individual has a minimum income, and social security through preventing the loss of income. This is achieved through transfers of cash or assets, grants to the vulnerable, labour market regulations and social insurance programs.24 Social protection interventions may aim towards protection, prevention, promotion, and transformation.25 Social protection in Rwanda incorporates these four principles:26

22 Republic of Rwanda, National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda, EICV3 Thematic Report: Gender, Kigali: 2012, p. 10. 23 Republic of Rwanda, Ministry of Local Government, National Social Protection Policy in Rwanda, Kigali: 2005, p. 4. 24 Ibid., p. 8. 25 Stephen Devereaux, and Rachel Sabates-Wheeler, Transformative Social Protection, IDS Working Paper 232. Institute of Development Studies. Brighton: October 2004, p. 9-11. 26 Government of Rwanda, EDPRS2 Social Protection Strategy, Kigali: July 2013, p. 3, 16-17.

In Rwanda, female headed households are determined as those with no adult male present, either permanently, or in practice. Of the permanently female headed households, 70% of the household heads are widows, and 24% are over 65 years old (compared with 9% of male headed households). A further 6% of households are de facto headed by females, as the male household head is absent more than three months in the year. While permanently female headed households are only slightly poorer than male headed households (47% are poor, compared with 44.9% of male headed households), de facto female headed households have a higher poverty rate at 51%. Female headed households own less durable assets than male-headed households, and 86% of female heads of household work in agriculture, compared to 62% of male heads of household. Similarly, female headed households rely more on public and private transfers for their income.

EICV3 Gender Thematic Report


4

In terms of gender and social protection, the differential needs and experiences of women and men must be considered at the level of risks faced and design and delivery of interventions. The global literature suggests that social protection mechanisms to date have largely been gender blind, meaning that they have assumed that if measures are generally available to all, they will be equitable in access and participation.27 This is not the case, as women and men face different social and economic risks due to biology and the social roles of care giving and household labour, usually assigned to women.28 Women also tend to be more often employed in the informal sector, including in agriculture, facing risks related to insecure employment and lower wages.29

Social protection mechanisms may have differential gender impacts depending on how they are designed and implemented, particularly depending on intra-household decision-making and resource allocation.30 Gender norms related to the division of labour in the household and the community are also relevant in terms of programme delivery, including the kinds of activities suitable for women and men and the economic benefits ascribed to different kinds of work (informal versus formal, skilled versus unskilled, reproductive versus productive).31 Finally, benefits may not be equally experienced, for example in the case of cash transfers they may depend on how the resources are transferred and to whom, and in the case of cash for work, that time for work may be extended to ensure the completion of other responsibilities or other reproductive tasks must also covered, such as child care, can actually be detrimental for the beneficiary.32

Evidence on social protection programmes does not indicate that they automatically improve womens decision-making roles in the household, or transform gender relations.33 In some cases, beneficiaries have experienced no change, or even an increase in household tensions.34 As a result, social protection programmes are rarely gender neutral, and many exacerbate or contribute to inequalities.35 Ensuring a gender perspective in both the design and delivery of

27 Rebecca Holmes and Nicola Jones, Rethinking social protection using a gender lens, Working Paper 320. Overseas Development Institute, London: October 2010, p 1. 28 Cecilia Luttrell and Caroline Moser, Gender and Social Protection, Overseas Development Institute, London: 2004, p. 6. 29 Sarojini Ganju Thakur, Catherine Arnold and Tina Johnson, Gender and Social Protection, Promoting Pro-Poor Growth: Social Protection, OECD, Paris: 2009, p. 169. 30 Holmes and Jones, p. 8. 31 Luttrell and Moser, p. 8. 32 Holmes and Jones, p 21-22. 33 Ibid., p 24. 34 Ibid., p 23. 35 Luttrell and Moser, p. 11.

In Rwanda, at the same time as there has been a decrease in the number of men employed in the agricultural sector, there has been an increase in the number of women in that sector. According to EICV3 data, this shows that males have benefited much more from the growth in non-farm jobs observed since 2005/06.1 The informal nature of the agricultural sector and the resulting challenges for income security lead to persisting gender disparities.


In Rwanda, a gender analysis of the findings of EICV3 found that women spend on average 20 hours per week on domestic tasks, compared with 9 hours for men.



5

social protection interventions is necessary for improving the gender equality of the programme outcomes and the overall benefits for men and women.36 In the context of Rwanda, this requires a comprehensive understanding of the social risks faced by men and women and the barriers and opportunities for advancing gender equality. An assessment of VUP from a gender perspective is necessary to generate a more in-depth understanding of the gender differential experiences of poverty and social risk, the gender responsiveness of the programme design and delivery, and the different impacts of the programme on men and women. 2.3 NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK Rwanda has signed key international conventions and declarations on gender equality and poverty reduction.37 Rwanda adopted the Millennium Development Goals in 2000, towards improving social and economic conditions in the world's poorest countries. Poverty reduction is an important national development objective, embodied in Vision 2020, and the EDPRS.38 Vision 2020 is a long-term development framework from 2000 to 2020. To achieve Vision 2020, the Government of Rwanda established the Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS). EDPRSII was confirmed in May 2013 and includes the thematic areas of Economic Transformation, Rural Development, Productivity and Youth Employment, and Accountable Governance.39 In both Vision 2020 and the EDPRS, gender is a cross-cutting issue in all development-related policies, programmes and plans and in all sectors. 40 To achieve sustainable development and coordinate social protection interventions, the National Social Protection Policy of Rwanda, formulated through the Ministry of Local Government, was developed. The Social Protection Policy specifically identifies the need to reinforce womens participation in production and calls for reinforcement of measures to fight domestic and sexual violence and increase access, quality and use of health and family planning services.41 Finally, the policy notes the need to improve the social status of rural women by encouraging their participation in decision-making.42 The 2011 National Social Protection Strategy includes a social safety net through cash transfers to provide a minimum income and access to core essential services, and increased participation of the informal sector in social security programmes.43 The Strategy states that All programmes will actively seek to promote gender equity and womens empowerment. All monitoring data will be disaggregated by gender we will undertake regular gender audits of our programmesEach programme will be required to set out how it will support the goals of gender equity and womens empowerment.44 The Social Protection sector has recently revised

36 Thakur, Arnold and Johnson, p. 178. 37 These include the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against women (CEDAW), the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Millennium Development Goals, New Partnership for Africas Development (NEPAD), and the Solemn

Declaration on Gender Equality in Africa. 38 Republic of Rwanda, National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda, Millennium Development Goals: Towards sustainable social and economic growth, Country Report 2007, Kigali: 2007, p. 14. 39 Republic of Rwanda, Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy 2013-2018: Shaping Our Development, p. 12. 40 Republic of Rwanda, Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS) 2008-2012, Kigali: 2007, p. 47; Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy 2013-2018: Shaping Our Development, p. 85. 41 National Social Protection Policy in Rwanda, p. 11-13. 42 Ibid., p 16. 43 Republic of Rwanda, Ministry of Local Government, National Social Protection Strategy, Kigali: 2011, p. 29. 44 Ibid., p. 34.


6

the Strategy to include the aim of being transformative, towards improving the social status of marginalized groups and promoting equity and non-discrimination.45 The Government of Rwanda attaches great importance to the promotion of gender equality and equity as a prerequisite for sustainable development. This is a fundamental principle within the Constitution of the Republic of Rwanda, 2003, and is further elaborated through the National Gender Policy.46 The National Gender Policy and Strategic Plan recognize the need for equal opportunities for women and men, boys and girls and calls for gender integration in all areas of development. The National Gender Policy also calls for the creation of an environment conducive to the promotion of social security to all groups within the population.47 2.4 RLDSF and VUP The Rwanda Local Development Support Fund (RLDSF) was created on 1 June 2011, with 4 divisions: Corporate Services, Social Protection, Local Economic Development and Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation. The Social Protection Division manages the Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP) and the Ubudehe Programme.48 The Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP) was started to target poor geographical areas and extremely poor households for social protection. VUP also considers particular vulnerable groups, including the elderly, people with disabilities, child-headed households, genocide survivors and historically marginalized groups.49 VUP seeks to address income poverty, and also considers social poverty and human poverty. Income poverty is a measure of household income, considering the value of food consumption and other basic expenditures. Social poverty is the community perception of poverty and is measured through the six Ubudehe categories. Human poverty is an extended concept of poverty that includes indicators such as assets, durables, level of education, food consumption, water and sanitation, number of adults able to work in a household, housing quality, access to land and livestock and participation in the community.50 VUP operates in all 30 districts in Rwanda. Within districts, sectors are ranked according to poverty level, including consideration of food security, access to potable water, distance to education, distance to health centre and level of village settlement.51 Households are then categorized through the Ubudehe social targeting process, and are put into an Ubudehe category depending on their level of household poverty, including income and access to services.52 Ubudehe categories 1 and 2 are eligible for VUP. VUP is divided into three components: Direct Support (DS), Public Works (PW), and Financial Services (FS). Direct Support implementation began in January 2009, and provides unconditional cash transfers to extremely poor households without adult labour. The amount transferred is increased depending on the number of household members.53 Public Works implementation started in 2008, and provides paid employment for extremely poor households who have at least one adult able to work. Financial Services began in 2010 and complements DS and PW to help

45 EDPRS2 Social Protection Strategy, Kigali: July 2013, p. 3. 46 Republic of Rwanda, Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion, National Gender Policy, Kigali: 2010, p. 7. 47 Ibid., p. 15. 48 Devereux, p. 22. 49 Annual Report 2009/10, p. 12. 50 Asselin, p 1-4. 51 Ibid., p. 18. 52 Ibid., p. 18. 53 Annual Report 2009/10, p. 10.


7

households graduate out of poverty. Financial Services provides a form of microcredit to individuals, groups or cooperatives through loans under the Ubudehe Credit Scheme.54 VUP is managed through RLDSF staff at national and decentralized levels. The Social Protection Division of RLDSF includes VUP and Ubudehe departments.55 VUP is jointly financed by the Government of Rwanda and development partners. VUP offers a unique opportunity to advance gender equity in Rwanda, given its wide reach across the country.

3. ASSESSMENT APPROACH

The VUP Gender Equity Assessment used an approach developed by the Gender Monitoring Office of the Government of Rwanda for participatory gender audits, as well as gender sensitive research approaches and gender mainstreaming approaches developed by CIDA and DFID. This included a review of Paper, Process and People. Paper refers to formal programme strategies, operational plans, logframes (objectives, outcomes, outputs and activities), and included a gender assessment of key VUP documents. Process refers to procedures and implementation of programme interventions and included a review of the implementation of the programme, monitoring and evaluation framework and reporting, and the programme budget. People refers to the differential needs and experiences of men and women beneficiaries, and the impacts of the programme on their livelihoods. It also included a review of training materials and capacity building plans.56 To achieve the objectives of this Assessment, the following elements have been considered:

1. The current gender equality profile of VUP: o Equality of access and opportunities and equity of outcomes for beneficiaries. o Gender differences based on age, ability and HIV status or chronic illness.

2. Current opportunities and constraints to achieving gender equality and equity.

4. METHODOLOGY For this Assessment, the poorest District in each Province was selected, as shown in Table 1. Table 2: Districts and Sectors Selected for FGDs and Household Surveys

PROVINCE DISTRICT SECTOR (VUP Cohorts 1 and 4)

KIGALI/MVK GASABO

1.Gikomero

4.Jali

SOUTHERN NYAMAGABE

1.Kibumbwe

4.Mugano

WESTERN NYAMASHEKE

1.Mahembe

4.Rangiro

NORTHERN GAKENKE

1.Minazi

4.Cyabingo

EASTERN BUGESERA 1.Kamabuye

4.Nyarugenge

54 Annual Report 2009/10, p.16. 55 Devereaux, p. 22. 56 Republic of Rwanda, Gender Monitoring Office.


8

4.1 METHODS AND TOOLS

The methods used in the Assessment included a desk review of relevant literature and documents, a document gender analysis, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, a limited household survey, and case studies of the programme components.57 4.1.1 DESK REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND DOCUMENTS

Relevant documents were reviewed to provide background information and context for the Assessment. Key VUP documents were also assessed to determine gender integration. Table 3: Desk Review and Gender Analysis Documents

Desk Review Documents Gender Analysis Documents

- EDPRSII

- National Social Protection Policy, Strategy 2013, and Implementation Plan

- National Gender Policy and Strategic Plan

- EDPRS I Social Protection Self-Assessment

- EICV3 Social Protection and Gender Thematic Reports

- RLDSF (draft) Strategic Plan

- RLDSF Capacity Building Plan

- RLDSF VUP Annual Reports and Action Plans (2009/10; 2010/11; 2011/12; 2012/13)

- VUP Intermediate Impact Assessment 2008-2011

- VUP Household Poverty Survey 2008

- Annual Review of DFID Support to the Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP), 2010/11

- Public Works, Direct Support and Financial Services Operations Manuals

- Community Sensitisation Manual

- VUP Staff job descriptions

- VUP Staff Capacity Building Plan

- VUP Annual Reports and Action Plans

- VUP Targeting and Graduation Guidelines and Listing Forms

- VUP Household Poverty Surveys

The document assessment also reviewed the existence and effectiveness of mechanisms to ensure gender equity in access, participation and impact. The key elements reviewed included: Table 4: Document Gender Analysis Description

Key Elements Description of gender analysis conducted

Programme strategy

Review of gender responsiveness of programme strategy, operational plan, objectives and logical framework

Gender Analysis

Programme situational gender analysis of social risks

Gender analysis of proposed programme interventions and consideration of gender-specific interventions

Gender analysis of programme interventions, including gender-specific interventions

Programme interventions

Identification of programme gender gaps

Assessment of programme targeting, access, participation and benefits for men and women

Data Collection and Analysis

Availability, collection, management and use of sex disaggregated data

Gender responsiveness of baseline data, indicators and targets

M&E, Budgeting and Reporting

Gender responsiveness of programme budget

Gender responsiveness of monitoring and evaluation framework and tools, including gender sensitive indicators

Sex disaggregation of programme results and gender integration in programme reporting

57 All tools and guides are available in the VUP Gender Equity Assessment: Annexes document.


9

Capacity building

Gender integration in capacity building and training plan

Capacity of staff and management for gender analysis and mainstreaming

4.1.2 KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS (KIIs)

Key informant interviews were conducted at the central and district levels, with 10 central level key informant interviews with RLDSF staff and management and key stakeholders and 5 district officials, 1 in each of the selected districts. Informants and question topics included: Table 5: KII Participants and Questions

KII Participants KII Question Topics

District Officials:

Gasabo

Nyamagabe,

Nyamasheke

Gakenke

Bugesera

Programme consideration of the differential needs and experiences of men and women, girls and boys

Effectiveness of mechanisms for engaging male and female beneficiaries in planning

Effectiveness of mechanisms to ensure equal access for male and female beneficiaries

Adoption of measures to address practical and strategic gender needs

Programme staff and partners knowledge and experience in gender analysis

Measures to improve the contribution to gender equity of the Programme

Gaps, barriers and challenges in addressing gender inequality with the Programme

Development Partners:

UNICEF, DFID, World Bank RLDSF:

DS, FS, PW Officers

Director, VUP

DDG Social Protection

DDG Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Government of Rwanda:

MINALOC, MIGEPROF

4.1.3 FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS (FGDs)

20 Focus Group Discussions were held with female and male beneficiaries in the poorest sector (VUP Cohort 1) in each of the selected districts. Each FGD included 6-8 participants, who were from all VUP components within the sector. The FGDs with beneficiaries were as follows:

5 with female beneficiaries in PW 5 with male beneficiaries in PW

5 with female beneficiaries in DS 5 with male beneficiaries in DS

As FS is a complementary component, within each of these FGDs, approximately 1/3 of the respondents were participants in Financial Services and were asked the relevant questions. In each district, one focus group was also planned with sector officials from Cohort 1 and 4 sectors and VUP staff from the sector and district, for 5 total FGDs with officials and staff. However due to challenges with the availability of the officials and the distance from the sectors to the district office, a total of 11 FGDs were conducted with staff and officials. The FGDs assessed: Table 6: FGD Question Topics

FGDs with Beneficiaries FGDs with VUP Staff and Local Officials

- Gender differences in access to VUP, participation in VUP and impacts of VUP

- Barriers to access or participation due to sex, age, ability, HIV status, and reproductive status

- Design and delivery/implementation of VUP components at the sector level

- Programme components, targeting, appeals and complaints and M&E

- Ubudehe selection process opportunities and


10

- Targeting and selection processes; criteria for determination of Ubudehe category and programme component participation

- Programme components, targeting, appeals and complaints and monitoring and evaluation

- Outcomes of VUP related to income, access to markets, food security, decision-making and community participation

challenges

- Social, cultural, physical, and structural barriers to participation

- Outcomes of VUP related to income, access to markets, food security, decision-making and community participation

All Focus Group Discussions were 2 hours and were audio recorded for accuracy, with the consent of participants. The Focus Group Discussion Guides are Annexes 5-7. 4.1.4 HOUSEHOLD SURVEY

Household surveys were conducted in the 5 selected districts with two sectors selected per district (10 sectors total). The sectors in each District were from VUP cohort 1 and cohort 4. In each sector, 8 women and 8 men were interviewed, as outlined in the following table.

3 women in PW 3 men in PW

3 women in DS 3 men in DS

1 woman in PW and FS 1 man in PW and FS

1 woman in DS and FS 1 man in DS and FS

There were therefore 16 participants per sector, all from different households, for a total of 32 surveys per District, and 160 household respondents overall. With this sample size, the findings have a 95% confidence level, with a +/- 7 confidence interval, based on the household population size in the VUP 2011/2012 Annual Report.58 Given the small sample size, the findings are not intended to be representative, rather they are meant to complement the qualitative information gathered through other methods in this assessment. The participants also in FS were asked the relevant questions for PW or DS, and had the FS questions added to their interviews. The respondents for the household survey were randomly selected from the VUP targeting list provided by VUP staff in the concerned sectors. The survey questionnaire was translated into Kinyarwanda and conducted by enumerators, one male and one female, who interviewed women and men respectively, at participants homes. The survey was conducted with the VUP participant, who was often, but not always, the head of household. The Household Surveys incorporated assessment elements such as disability, age, HIV status, number and age of children, and sex of household head. The Household Surveys assessed: Table 7: Household Survey Question Topics

Household Survey Topics

- Access and participation in VUP components - Barriers to participation for men and women - VUP programme implementation for male and female beneficiaries - Differences in experience based on sex, age, HIV status, reproductive status and ability - Family dynamics, equity of outcomes within the household, decision-making - Impact of VUP on time use - Impacts of VUP on male and female beneficiary lives and livelihoods

58 Rwanda Local Development Support Fund, RLDSF Annual Activity Report 2011/12, p. 5.


11

4.1.5 CASE STUDIES

Four programme component related case studies have been developed, 1 for each VUP component and the Ubudehe targeting mechanism. The case studies illustrate in more depth the experiences of individual VUP participants and the impact that the program has had on their livelihoods. They were carried out in four sectors, three rural and one urban and focused on the experiences of participants and their description of the gender responsiveness of the programme design and delivery, and the impact of the programme component on gender equality for beneficiaries.

Case studies were developed through interviews with participants, and also illustrated specific areas of interest, as follows: Table 8: Case Study Topics and Participants

Specific Areas of Interest Participants

HIV+ Male FS beneficiary who is living with HIV in Minazi Sector

Disability Female DS beneficiary who is disabled in Mahembe Sector

Pregnancy Female PW beneficiary who is 7 months pregnant in Gikomero Sector

Children under 5 years old Female VUP beneficiary with 3 small children under 5 years who is in Ubudehe category 1 in Kamabuye Sector.

4.2 ANALYSIS The documents for the gender analysis were reviewed using an assessment tool and findings are synthesized in the following section of this report. Quantitative data (from the household survey) was analysed using excel and SPSS. Qualitative data (FGD and KIIs) was recorded into a data entry tool and assessed according to the themes of the discussions. Case studies have been developed into narratives reported alongside the quantitative and qualitative findings. 4.3 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND CONSTRAINTS

In the preparation for the field work, enumerators were trained on research ethics, gender sensitivity and proper conduct. All tools and forms were translated into Kinyarwanda. Respondents were informed that participation was voluntary and their identity would be anonymous in the final report. Each of the FGD, KII and household survey participants signed consent forms prior to their participation and were provided with an explanatory letter of the assessment in Kinyarwanda.59 The major constraint during data collection was distance between sectors and imidugudu in the selected districts, which led to delays in the field work. To remedy this challenge for the household survey, the initial pre-selected household was interviewed, and other respondents were then selected based on eligibility and proximity to the first randomly selected household. For the FGDs, the distance and busy schedules of the participants made it difficult for targeted officials to assemble at the district office. FGDs were instead conducted in each sector with officials connected to VUP, explaining the additional FGDs conducted in the assessment. The other major constraint was in Nyarugenge Sector, Bugesera District, where beneficiaries had not yet participated in a Public Works community project. The survey was conducted with eligible beneficiaries but some questions were not applicable.

59 All participation was voluntary. Only those consenting to participate were included, as consent forms were received prior to the interview, FGD or survey. Participants were also informed that they had the right to end the interview at any time, or to retract their consent at a later date. There were no instances of refusal to participate.


12

5. PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS There were 160 respondents in the household survey. The average age of respondents was 55 years; 54 years for female respondents and 55 years for male respondents. Of the female respondents, 11 percent reported having a disability, compared to 8 percent of the male respondents. Overall, about a third of households indicated they were female headed, and these were households where no male adult was present. Table 9: Household Survey Respondents Profile

General Profile Female Headed Households Male Headed Households

Head of Household 34% 66%

How designated head of household

All female headed households had no adult male present

Male headed households had an adult male present

Average number of children 2 3

Children under 5 years 29% 32%

Children with a disability 5 households 5 households

There were 76 DS beneficiaries who participated in the FGDs, 33 men and 43 women. 7 female DS beneficiaries were also in FS, and 7 male beneficiaries were also in FS. Table 10: DS FGD Respondents Profile

DS FGD General Profile Women Men

Average age: 69.6 years 72.7 years 65.4 years

Average level of education: 1.2 years Less than 1 year (0.1 years) 2.7 years

Average number of children: 5.2 5.1 5.3

Children under 5 years: 17.2% 18.6% 15.6%

Although respondents were not asked about whether they had a disability or their HIV status, 6.7 percent of respondents reported that they have a disability, and 2 participants, 1 man and 1 woman, disclosed that they are HIV positive. There were 77 PW FGD participants, 37 men and 40 women. 37 of the participants were also in FS, with 20 of the women in the FGDs in FS, compared to 17 of the men. Table 11: PW FGD Respondents

PW FGD General Profile Women Men

Average age: 42.7 years 40.5 years 45.2 years

Average level of education: 4.2 years 4.1 years 4.2 years

Average number of children: 3.9 3.4 4.5

Children under 5 years: 48% 27.5% 64.8%

2.5 percent of participants reported having a disability, although this was not asked of participants, and those in the PW FGDs reporting a disability were female. Further, 1 female PW respondent disclosed that she is HIV positive.

6. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS: VUP DESIGN VUP design was assessed through the gender analysis of key programme documents. The assessment found that programme documents, including annual plans, reports, monitoring and evaluation frameworks and implementation manuals contain limited gender sensitive elements. While VUP is intended to accelerate poverty reduction, it is clear that in order to do so, the


13

differential experiences of poverty among men, women, boys and girls needs to be understood and a gender sensitive approach from the design of the programme is required. This section is focused on the assessment of the programme design, including: Gender analysis and integration; Gender sensitive data collection, monitoring and evaluation, and reporting; Human resources; Partnerships; and Gender-responsive budgeting. Assessment of the programme implementation is in the following section. 6.1 PROGRAMME GENDER ANALYSIS AND INTEGRATION

In VUP, the gender analysis of the background context and programme design has to date been limited. In particular, programme documents lack in-depth gender analysis of the differential needs, vulnerabilities, challenges and opportunities for men, women, girls and boys in impoverished households. Although the 2010/2011 Annual Report recognizes the concentration of poverty impacts in female-headed households, subsequent reports do not elaborate gender analysis or gender responsiveness of interventions. The Public Works, Direct Support, and Financial Services Manuals do contain some measures or targets to improve gender equity target, but there are no include explicit gender equality objectives.60 There are some gender responsive measures in the PW Manual, including the target of 50% of participants in PW being women.61 There is also some reference to gender-related barriers to womens participation and possible ways to overcome them in the PW Manual,62 as well as the need to balance work teams in terms of gender, age skills and strength.63 There are no apparent gender-based criteria for selection of PW projects.64 Training for PW beneficiaries is intended to enable promotion out of poverty through new skills development and mindset change.65 While there is no specific gender related training planned in the PW Manual,66 the logical framework states that training and sensitization will include public messages on health and education and on cross-cutting issues such as gender equality.67 The Direct Support Manual also includes reference to trainings concerning gender equity. However, the description of the modalities of DS in the Manual does not mention gender issues and there are no practical steps outlined to integrate gender equality in programme initiatives. The FS Manual does not mention provide gender analysis of financial exclusion or mention the different needs and experiences of men and women borrowers. However, there have been some measures to address gender equality in Financial Services, including an increased loan amount for groups or cooperatives that have more than 70% female members (they receive 85,000 Rwf each instead of 75,000 Rwf), as outlined in the VUP Financial Services Manual. Nonetheless, the limited aspect of these measures was recognized by a key informant, who stated:

60 Republic of Rwanda, Ministry of Local Government, Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP), Public Works Operational Framework and Procedure Manual, Kigali: 2009; Republic of Rwanda, Ministry of Local Government, Vision 2020 Umurenge Programme (VUP), Direct Support Operational Framework and Procedure Manual, Kigali: 2009. 61 Public Works Operational Framework and Procedure Manual, p. 12. Proposed changes to the VUP logical framework are included in the VUP Gender Equity Assessment: Annexes document. 62 These include having work sites close to beneficiary households, providing crche facilities or supporting pregnant and breastfeeding women.62 63 Public Works Operational Framework and Procedure Manual, p. 21. 64 Ibid., p. 13. 65 Ibid., p. 5-6. 66 Ibid., p. 15. 67 Ibid., p. 24.


14

Although the 2012 HIMO/LIPW Revised Strategy does not include analysis of the needs and gaps between men and women, or gender-related barriers that may prevent womens active participation, it does make reference to objectives of gender equality and womens empowerment. These objectives include creating skills and capacities of women and youth for off-farm jobs.68 There is also some reference to gender equality in sensitization activities.69 The strategy also recommends diversification of PW projects to further enable engagement of different groups, including women. This is important as the limited diversity of the PW projects currently means that they do not necessarily result in skills-building or engagement of individuals with capacity to work but who cannot do heavy labour. The recently developed Community Sensitization Manual includes analysis of womens roles and responsibilities and the gender barriers they face, but there is limited analysis of the roles played by men and boys or the need for their engagement in supporting household activities. However, the Manual does describe some gender responsive interventions, such as recognition in selection criteria of labour availability as broader than physical ability. It also includes modules on gender equality, womens rights, family planning and girls education. There is also a recommendation of early childcare centres as a potential source of employment for Public Works. Despite some progress in more recently developed documents and tools, key informants agreed that VUP and its components only partly consider gender differential needs, vulnerabilities and experiences. A District level key informant stated:

Recommendations for improving the gender integration in the objectives and planned interventions of programme documents are in section 10. 6.2 M&E, DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING

The M&E Manual does include some gender sensitive indicators on male and female beneficiaries and targets for inclusion of women in Public Works and Financial Services. The M&E Manual includes sex disaggregated data for PW and DS beneficiaries in terms of participating households. Sex disaggregated data is also collected on households through the VUP Household Poverty Survey, but is not necessarily applied to outcome-level indicators to determine gender differentials in impact. The Targeting, Exit and Graduation guidelines do not mention gender sensitive data collection. In terms of monitoring and evaluation, these guidelines do mention that targeting should be monitored to determine whether the programme is equitably reaching hard-to-reach groups such as families with members with disabilities, children-headed households, women headed households.70 Further, the guidelines indicate that monitoring of the Exit mechanism should be

68 Republic of Rwanda, Ministry of Local Government, National Labour Intensive Public Works (HIMO/LIPW) Strategy, Kigali: September 2012, p. 9, 14, 18, 20, 23. 69 Ibid., p. 19, 22. 70 Republic of Rwanda, Rwanda Local Development Support Fund, Guidelines on VUP Targeting, Exit and Graduation, Kigali: September 2012, p. 16.

VUP aims at reducing the poverty level of a household and community as a whole and does not provide specific attention to gender related issues.

District Key Informant Interview

FS provides more support to stimulate women's participation but does not take into account limitations linked to reproductive work.

RLDSF Central Level Key Informant Interview


15

done to give information about whether there are differences in poverty change by household

type, gender and geographical area.71 The PW Manual includes baseline sex disaggregated data in terms of household composition, and reference is made to the marital status of household members.72 The PW Manual indicates that data collection and analysis will refer to income allocation at the household level, in terms of how resources are spent, but this is not connected to decision-making processes.73 There is no further explicit reference made to gender-related data collection and analysis. In some cases, such as the participation of beneficiaries in PW, sex-disaggregated data is not available or adequately collected, and where is it collected it is not sufficiently analysed.74 The HIMO/LIPW strategy does not include gender sensitive data collection and analysis, gender sensitive targets or indicators There is no reference to gender sensitive data collection or M&E in the DS Manual and there is limited gender sensitivity in the Routine Monitoring Template and Impact Evaluation components of the FS Manual. The FS implementation Manual does require collection of sex disaggregated data related to borrowers, but there are no mechanisms for collection of sex disaggregated data in the Ubudehe Credit Scheme Manual. Key informants agreed that gender related information is mainly collected through data disaggregated for men and women.75 A District key informant stated:

The reporting in the Annual Reports is not gender sensitive, and there is very little sex disaggregation of programme results and output level data reported. Although PW beneficiary data is sex disaggregated in Annual Report, FS and DS data is not, and no other sex-disaggregated data is provided. There is also no reference to requirements for gender sensitive reporting in the PW, DS or FS Manuals, nor in the Targeting, Exit and Graduation Guidelines. There is also a lack of reporting on gender impacts at outcome level in the M&E Manual and no reference to gender sensitive reporting in the HIMO/LIPW Strategy. 6.3 HUMAN RESOURCES AND CAPACITY BUILDING

Gender responsive staffing, human resources and capacity building is not mentioned in programme component manuals and guidelines, and there is no mention of efforts to improve gender equality in the Annual Reports. VUP job descriptions do not have requirements for staff to carry out gender analysis or mainstreaming. Despite recognition by key informants of the lack of gender-related requirements for staffing, capacity and performance, there have been limited initiatives to improve gender responsiveness within VUP.

71 Ibid., p.16. 72 Public Works Operational Framework and Procedure Manual, p. 23. 73 Ibid., p. 17. 74 In the case of PW, participants register according to the name or the household representative, even if this is not the person carrying out the work. Because registration at the worksite is under the name of the beneficiary initially identified by the community (usually the household head), actual data on who is participating and for how many days in the work, as well as their needs and experiences, is limited. 75 District Key Informant Interview

The data collected is by specification of criteria, there is gender data collected of a household, there are type of vulnerabilities of household head and other specification. It is enough so far but should be improved by doing it frequently.



16

Gender related capacity building is not sufficiently included in the Staffing and Capacity Building plan.76 Central level respondents generally indicated that VUP staff had limited gender related knowledge and skills, resulting in a key gap in improving the gender responsiveness of VUP. Further, most of the training and capacity building received to date has not been provided through RLDSF, rather respondents who had received training received it through other employment or due to a personal association with other organizations. A central level respondent indicated:

The engagement of organizations with gender expertise is positive, but the reliance on other organizations to provide training independently and the ad hoc nature of the trainings does not guarantee gender capacity building for all VUP actors. The development of the Community Sensitization Manual is a positive tool to improving VUP capacity building on gender, and the process of dissemination and implementation is a key next step. 6.4 PARTNERSHIPS

References to collaboration or partnerships on gender do not appear in the Targeting, Exit and Graduation guidelines, the PW or DS Manuals or Annual reports. However, the HIMO/LIPW strategy calls for the development of collaboration with the National Gender Machinery. It includes MIGEPROF in the National Steering Committee and notes that MIGEPROF and NWC will provide technical support.77 The Community Sensitization Manual also includes action points and references related to the National Gender Machinery and other womens civil society organizations. 6.5 GENDER RESPONSIVE BUDGETING

Although RLDSF produces a gender budget statement, the application of gender responsive budgeting (GRB) to VUP was unclear, and no requirements or guidelines for integrating GRB were included in the key programme documents. Fund allocation for VUP components is explained in the VUP Guidelines, but there is no reference to gender responsive budgeting.78

Although RLDSF provides a gender budget statement for its overall programmes and the districts have gender budget statements, there is no requirement for gender budgeting for VUP at either level, indicating a gap in setting gender specific targets or programming.

7. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS: VUP DELIVERY VUP delivery includes the implementation of the targeting mechanism, access to and participation in VUP components, sensitization programming, graduation and exit mechanisms

76 Republic of Rwanda, Final Draft VUP Staffing Strategy and Capacity Building Plan, Kigali: December 2012, p. 2. 77 National Labour Intensive Public Works (HIMO/LIPW) Strategy, p. 24-25. 78 Guidelines on VUP Targeting, Exit and Graduation, p. 6.

VUP staff at the central level has more training on technical issues but not on gender sensitive/gender-related issues. VUP staff at the local level receive more training on gender through NGOs.

Government of Rwanda Central Level Key Informant Interview

There is no specific gender budgeting in the VUP budget. The budget provided is for general use and for beneficiaries. Gender responsive budgeting is only included in the general budget of the district.



17

i) selection of sectors for participation in VUP

ii) selection of households for inclusion in VUP based on Ubudehe status

iii) selection of VUP households for including in programme components

and the Appeals and Complaints mechanisms. This section considers the differential experiences of accessing and participating in VUP delivery and existing gender barriers. 7.1 TARGETING

VUP targeting includes three phases of selection:

Of most interest to this assessment is the selection of VUP households for the programme components, which will receive the greatest focus in this report. As detailed in the introduction, the selection of sectors was initially done considering the poverty status of the sector, with the poorest sector in each district selected. There was consistency among FGDs with officials in explaining how sectors were selected for inclusion in VUP, although consideration of gender inequality was not part of the targeting approach. 7.1.1 UBUDEHE TARGETING Ubudehe categorization is a system of social poverty mapping done at the community level which VUP uses as part of its targeting framework. Ubudehe Categorization focuses on consideration of social poverty of households, and criteria are the same for men and women. Some district officials did note the consideration of special cases within a household, including disability of female or child-headed households, for determination of Ubudehe category.79 Thus, there is some recognition of gender elements, but limited use of gender analysis in criteria development and application in targeting. Key informants agreed that the definition and application of VUP eligibility criteria should be improved in order to be more gender sensitive and allow more effective selection of beneficiaries: Ubudehe categorization should be less subjective and standardized at the national level; it should also take into account disabilities.80 7.1.2 VUP TARGETING

There was overall agreement among officials and beneficiaries that the targeting mechanism provides equal access. However, there was some concern about the mechanism, in terms of ensuring consideration of specialized groups or individuals within households. While most key informants agreed that VUP considers vulnerable households, primarily through Ubudehe categorization and the availability of the labour force in the household, VUP remains limited in its consideration of specific vulnerabilities experienced by men and women. As a measure to improve the gender responsiveness of the targeting process, key informants at the central level suggested that beneficiaries should be targeted using a more comprehensive approach, including by carrying out an improved assessment of household members differential needs and skills.81 While VUP targets households living in extreme poverty, there should be improved measures to ensure the targeting of vulnerable households which may experience poverty more deeply.

79 FGD with Officials and VUP Staff in Mugano Sector, Nyamagabe District, 25 July 2013; Minazi Sector, Gakenke District 31 July 2013; Jali Sector, Gasabo District, 29 July 2013; Cyabingo Sector, Gakenke District, 31 July 2013. 80 Development Partner Central Level Key Informant Interview 81 Development Partner Central Level Key Informant Interview; RLDSF Central Level Key Informant Interview


18

7.1.2 VUP COMPONENT TARGETING (DS, PW, FS)

Direct Support is for those who are poor and vulnerable and unable to work. Public Works supports the poor through providing work where they are paid a daily wage, and Financial Services encourages beneficiaries to take loans and develop income generating projects.82 DIRECT SUPPORT The selection process for DS includes households whose members live in extreme poverty but are physically unable to work. FGD participants indicated that the community selects the beneficiaries and community leaders approve the list. Beneficiaries stated that selection for DS is done by consideration of physical ability to work as those unable to do physical labour, who are also in Ubudehe categories 1 and 2, are placed in DS. Officials in Mahembe clarified that The beneficiaries for Direct Support are mainly old people who are vulnerable and not able to work. We also include orphans living alone and widows.83 Similarly, officials in Rangiro indicated that elderly men and women are prioritized for DS.84 In some cases, where the household is de facto female headed, particularly where the husband is in prison or adult children are students, the labour force of the household is considered less available.85 However, according to beneficiaries in FGDs, currently households are primarily considered a single entity, rather than considering the special needs of the individuals within the household. This means that, except in special circumstances, communities assume that the needs of the members of the household are the same, and that these needs will be looked after by the household head.86 Unfortunately, this is not always the reality. Women in DS in Minazi identified a woman who was left out of DS:

This FGD also said that older people can be left out of VUP if they have someone at home who can work, but there is not necessarily any evidence that that person provides support.87 The limited consideration of household dynamics in the selection process reduces the overall effectiveness of the programme, particularly in terms of effective categorization in the programme components. More consideration of household dynamics, particularly in term of who is contributing to the households is required. To achieve this, more direction for communities about consideration of availability of labour in a household that goes beyond physical capacity is needed.88 PUBLIC WORKS In Public Works, households are selected based on the ability of an adult member to work. These households are not guaranteed VUP funds, rather this depends on the availability of community projects for them to be assigned to work. Funds are paid based on days of work by an individual, and the amount is not scaled up based on the number of individuals in the household. Officials in Minazi explained, The beneficiaries are paid a daily wage but it is transferred through their account at the SACCO. Only 1 person per household is allowed to

82 District Key Informant Interview 83 FGD with Officials and VUP Staff in Mahembe Sector, Nyamasheke District, 22 July 2013. 84 FGD with Officials and VUP Staff in Rangiro Sector, Nyamasheke District, 22 July 2013. 85 FGD with Female Direct Support Beneficiaries in Kibumbwe Sector, Nyamagabe District, 24 July 2013. 86 FGD with Female Direct Support Beneficiaries in Gikomero Sector, Gasabo District, 26 July 2013. 87 FGD with Female Direct Support Beneficiaries in Minazi Sector, Gakenke District, 30 July 2013. 88 Some direction is provided in the Community Mobilization Manual and this is an important starting point for addressing this issue.

She has people at home who can do the work, but those people dont help her. They all leave in the morning and come back in the evenings but never provide any help to her.

FGD with Female DS Beneficiaries in Minazi Sector


19

work.89 Households are identified at the project site by the name of the household head, which is usually a man. For, example a woman in Gikomero in PW stated:

Despite her being the one participating in the income generation, her husband is still considered the household head. Because households are not guaranteed participation, selection has an additional step. As there is usually not sufficient work for all PW households targeted, once there is a project being carried out in a community, the community identifies who on the list of initially selected PW households will participate. Men in PW in Minazi stated, As sometimes they need fewer people to work, we look at someone who really needs the money to survive and we put them forward, but they should be on the list of categories of Ubudehe 1 or 2.90 This was also explained by officials in Minazi, The target list is prepared from the selection list done by the community. When there is a project to be done, an announcement is made in the Umudugudu for those who are eligible and want to work.91 Despite being targeted for PW in the initial phase, in some communities, those without sufficient physical ability to do the work may simply not be selected for the particular project. Women in PW in Kibumbwe stated that selection sometimes depends on the kind of project. They select according to who has strength and sometimes they leave behind people due to a lack of strength.92 Other potential barriers to participation include womens reproductive responsibilities, such as child care. One key informant recognized these challenges, stating:

However, this recognition has not yet resulted in the elaboration and inclusion of gender sensitive criteria to ensure the adequate consideration of these constraints in the targeting of beneficiaries. Improving the gender responsiveness of the design and implementation is required, including the development and implementation of gender sensitive criteria for targeting, to address the particular constraints experienced by women. PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS The type of PW project being carried out in the community, determines the kind of work required, and the number of beneficiaries who will participate. Officials in Minazi explained that projects are approved by the Umudugudu officials with the Ubudehe officer, and the Cell Executive Secretary also approves. This is followed by appraisal and approval at the sector level.93 Most of the projects are related to sector infrastructure or agriculture development, and have included radical terraces, road construction and rehabilitation, building of schools and

89 FGD with Officials and VUP Staff in Minazi Sector, Gakenke District, 31 July 2013. 90 FGD with Male Public Works Beneficiaries in Minazi Sector, Gakenke District, 30 July 2013. 91 FGD with Officials and VUP Staff in Minazi Sector, Gakenke District, 31 July 2013. 92 FGD with Female Public Works Beneficiaries in Kibumbwe Sector, Nyamagabe District, 24 July 2013. 93 FGD with Officials and VUP Staff in Minazi Sector, Gakenke District, 31 July 2013.

My husband is disabled but he was put on the selection list as the household head but I am the one who works in his name.

FGD with Female PW Beneficiaries in Gikomero Sector

In theory everybody is equally eligible for PW but women face more constraints. RLDSF Central Level Key Informant Interview


20

76% 74% 92%

74% 74%

1%

14%

49% 42%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Ditches Health Centre Radicalterraces

Roadconstruction

Schoolconstruction

Women Men

health centres.94 The types of PW projects that survey respondents participated in are included in Figure 1. Figure 1: Types of PW projects reported by household survey respondents

Although survey respondents and beneficiaries participating in FGDs indicated that the projects benefit the community, there was recognition at the central level that the PW projects should be diversified to ensure participation of different groups, particularly those with specific vulnerabilities. According to a central level key informant:

This acknowledgement of the limitations of PW projects and selection mechanisms creates space for improving participation, which is discussed further in this report. FINANCIAL SERVICES Selection for Financial Services is a different process from Public Works and Direct Support, due to the complementary nature of this component. To be selected, beneficiaries prepare an income generation project, file the forms with the authorities and present the project. According to officials in Minazi, Interested beneficiaries have to prepare their projects (mostly farming projects and small businesses). They have to present the application form at the Umudugudu for a signature at the cell then at the sector. Once the projects are approved, the beneficiaries get the loan through the SACCO.95 FS beneficiaries can include individuals, groups, or cooperatives. The primary criteria considered for selection, beyond being in Ubudehe category 1 and 2, included having assets as security for the loan and a well-developed project. However, other factors may also be considered. According to officials in Kibumbwe, At the Umudugudu level, they look at the personality of the person who is asking for financial services. At the sector level, they look at the feasibility of the project, and the availability of funds.96 In this regard, personal history and community knowledge of the individual requesting the loan may be considered. Women in Kamabuye stated:

94 FGD with Officials and VUP Staff in Mugano Sector, Nyamagake District, 25 July 2013; FGD with Officials and VUP Staff in Gikomero Sector, Gasabo District, 29 July 2013. 95 FGD with Officials and VUP Staff in Minazi Sector, Gakenke District,31 July 2013. 96 FGD with Officials and VUP Staff in Kibumbwe Sector, Nyamagabe District, 24 July 2013.

In theory the new Social Protection Strategy calls for

VUP Gender Equity Assessment Report.final

Documents

Transcript of VUP Gender Equity Assessment Report.final