CC.3.4 Proportion of women and men in decision-making entities who report meaningful participation

CC.3.4 Proportion of women and men in decision-making entities who report meaningful participation

VERSION

V3.0 - 2026.03 — Existing

INDICATOR CODE

CC.3.4

TECHNICAL OWNER

GPI Unit

INDICATOR TYPE

Country Level Cross-cutting Indicator

Priority Area: Empowering women and girls, and advancing equality

INDICATOR CLASSIFICATION

Mandatory

INDICATOR SCOPE

Programme specific

APPLICABILITY

This indicator is applicable at CSP activity level: and mandatory to all CSPs with activities targeting Tier one and Tier two beneficiaries who have entities and/or committees, regardless of the modality of assistance.

This indicator does not apply to activities (and entities) implemented by governments.

This indicator applies to WFP-supported decision-making entities at the community level as defined above. It does not apply to WFP internal decision-making entities, such as recruitment, procurement, audit and contract committees.

UNIT OF MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS

Unit of measurement: Percentage of women and men

Unit of analysis: Community level (tier 1 and tier 2 WFP beneficiaries who are members or participants in WFP decision making entities)

DEFINITION

This indicator looks at equitable and inclusive engagement in decision-making, as the equal exercise of power is the fundamental indicator for gender equality.

Participatory processes create opportunities for women, men, girls, and boys to be meaningfully and equitably involved in WFP's work. Creating lasting change requires meaningful participation. A sense of, and actual ownership, is created through participation – whether being a member of a community committee, distributing food, joining a climate change or health education initiative, or preparing for emergencies (among other possible scenarios). Enabling participation is also a means of raising awareness, to educate and empower diverse women, men, girls, and boys.

The Beijing Platform for Action (page 79) recognizes that without the active participation of women and the incorporation of women’s perspective at all levels of decision-making, the goals of equality, development and peace cannot be achieved (Critical Area of Concern G, paragraph 181).

This indicator seeks to measure the extent to which women, men, girls, and boys influence in decision-making processes (meaningful participation), beyond their mere presence at meetings. This indicator contributes to measuring progress in the achievement of:

• WFP’s corporate cross-cutting priority Empowering women and girls, and advancing equality.

• The second objective of the WFP Gender Policy (2022), “Address the root causes of gender inequalities that affect food security and nutrition.”

• The second priority of the WFP Gender Policy (2022), that seeks to strengthen leadership and decision-making. WFP supports self-determination such that all people have increased power to take up leadership roles and make decisions about their personal, household, community and societal food system, food security and nutrition needs and experiences.

• SDG 5, Target 5.5 – “Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic and public life.”

Below are some key definitions for this indicator:

Decision-making entity: Any formal body at the community level, supported directly by WFP or indirectly by cooperating partners, through which a group of appointed or elected individuals serve a particular function and make decisions on behalf of themselves and/or other persons. A decision-making entity – which may be a committee, board, team, cooperative, association, group of representatives, council, taskforce, assembly, delegation etc. – will typically (but may not) have (formal or informal) terms of reference (or equivalent) which define roles, responsibilities, and procedures. These may include but are not limited to, project management committees, food distribution committees, community nutrition volunteers, farmer group representatives (associations), school parents and teachers’ associations, climate change councils, and disaster risk reduction committees, etc… Names might vary depending on the activities and countries.

Meaningful participation: results in situations where participants are able to use their power to encourage specific actions by influencing the outcomes of decisions taken. Based on Sherry Arnstein's (1969) scale of participation, those considered in WFP’s context are:

1. Informing: Inform women, men and marginalized groups about rights, responsibilities, and options. Mainly, based on unidirectional communication. Symbolic and non-effective participation.

2. Consultation: Consult women, men and marginalized groups through interviews, surveys, or meetings. Put the focus on the number of people in these meetings.

The two first levels lack the power to ensure that their opinions are taken into consideration by the decision-makers.

3. Placation: Women, men and marginalized groups hold more influence and participation is allowed but the decision-making is still within the power classes.

4. Partnership: Power is redistributed through negotiations between participants and power holders. Decision-making is shared out through structures such as planning commissions. This participation can be more effective if there are social organizations at neighbourhood level, where there are recognised and respected leaders whose activity is remunerated and supported by local experts, also recruited by the grassroots social organization.

5. Delegated power: Negotiations between decision-makers or holders can result in a tipping of the balance in favour of participants through increased decision-making. Women, men, and marginalized groups have sufficient responsibility to ensure the viability of the programme. Thus, decision-makers will have to negotiate with these groups / people to carry out the project, initiative, intervention…

6. One model of delegated power would be the one when there is a veto option available if it is impossible to settle the negotiation.

7. Participants‘ control: Participants demand the degree of power necessary to ensure that the control carried out in an organization is accompanied by the necessary management tools. In WFP’s context, it is equivalent to a leadership position.

Meaningful participation for the indicator includes the levels of partnership, delegated power or citizen’s control.

RATIONALE

Refer to the relevant corporate strategy/policy commitment this indicator is linked to (e.g. reduce undernutrition and growing overweight, obesity and other diet-related non-communicable diseases/ investment in first 1000 days of life/other).

DATA COLLECTION TOOL

As culturally appropriate/necessary and preferred, women enumerators should interview women, and male enumerators should interview men. In Survey Designer (under the technical basic module) there is information about the sex of the interviewer.

NB1: The different entities’ names in the formulation of the question are country specific, hence each country office should update the list according to its context and remove those ones that do not apply.
NB2: RESPGenEntityDate Questions- This question aims to help people place themselves back in time.

SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS

The sampling strategy might vary depending on the number and type of entities and how widely scattered they are.

While a random sample would be recommended stratified by districts, type of entity or CRF activity; and second sampling stage might be needed following a purposeful sampling approach, based on feasibility to collect data and/or selecting cases strategically, ensuring reach to women, men, boy and girls and people living with disabilities and other marginalized groups. Detailed guidance on sampling options is available here.

The sample size will depend on the frequency of monitoring which will be established by the country office.

The inclusion criteria will be:

• Women, men, boys and girls and people living with disabilities that are members and/or participate in WFP food assistance decision-making entities.

• Effort should be made to reach an equal number of men and women. Where this is not possible, a short explanation of the specific context will be provided.

INDICATOR CALCULATION FOR REPORTING

This indicator is calculated by summing the total number of people reporting meaningful participation in decision-making entities and dividing it by the total number of people who confirm they are members of decision-making entities, expressed as a percentage (and calculated by sex and disability status).

Meaningful participation:

Question RESPGenEntityNeg = 1 (Yes) or

Question RESPGenEntityDel = 1 (Yes) or

Question RESPGenEntityDM = 1 (Yes)

Decision makers / Leadership position:

Question RESPGenEntityDM = 1 (Yes)

People with disabilities:

Washington Group Questions= 3 or 4

i = number of women who confirm they are members of or participants in decision-making entities

j = number of men who confirm they are members of or participants in decision-making entities

m= number of women living with disabilities who confirm they are members of or participants in decision-making entities

p= number of men living with disabilities who confirm they are members of or participants in decision-making entities

G1 = women reporting meaningful participation in decision-making entities

G2 = men reporting meaningful participation in decision-making entities

G3 = women living with disabilities reporting meaningful participation in decision-making entities

G4 = men living with disabilities reporting meaningful participation in decision-making entities

G5= women reporting being the decision maker in decision-making entities

G6= men reporting being the decision maker in decision-making entities

Proportion of women in decision-making entities who report a meaningful participation in year k =

Proportion of women living with disabilities in decision-making entities who report a meaningful participation in year k =

Proportion of men in decision-making entities who report a meaningful participation in year k =

Proportion of men with disabilities in decision-making entities who report a meaningful participation in year k =

Proportion of women in decision-making entities who report being the decision maker

Proportion of men in decision-making entities who report being the decision maker =

DATA ENTRY AND DISAGGREGATION IN CORPORATE SYSTEMS

Data is entered at activity level.

where

BASELINE

New CSP/CSP activities: No pre-assistance baseline data is required. Values from the first data collection will make up the baseline.

Note: For the first reporting year, and if a Country Office intends to collect data annually, they must input the first collected value as the baseline in COMET.

Ongoing CSP/CSP activities: First monitoring value for the CSP serves as baseline. Every subsequent year, the CO then enters only a follow up value in COMET.

TARGET SETTING

Annual target:

• The annual target should be determined based on the gender analysis that defined the operational context and informed the programme’s / project’s / intervention’s objectives and design.

• The target should be ambitious but realistic and include an expected percentage increase per year.

• The targets should be set in a participatory and inclusive manner, engaging key stakeholders (WFP, partners, beneficiaries etc.).

End of CSP targets:

50%

If data are not available, Country Offices should report using the « No Data » Function in COMET Guideline, in accordance with the related guidance.

FREQUENCY OF DATA COLLECTION

Data for this indicator should be collected and reported annually.

It is recommended to include this survey in distribution monitoring and/or activity implementation monitoring.

INTERPRETATION

This indicator will provide evidence of the different experiences of women and men who report meaningful participation in decision-making. The higher the percentage, the greater the number of beneficiaries meaningfully involved in WFP’s work.

In addition, although the indicator looks at the differences in the proportion of women and men reporting meaningful participation in WFP food decision-making entities, data could also provide information on the different levels of participation or engagement of groups / people in WFP food assistance decision-making entities. In this sense:

REPORTING EXAMPLE(S)

The data could be presented in a table, followed by a narrative description and analysis. If available, information on age bracket and disability should be included in data notes.

An indicator table or relevant visualization should be followed by narrative that:

• explains the data contained in the table and/or graphs, and

• elaborates with qualitative information; as provided in the following example.

Reporting example

In the country X, WFP supports three decision making entities, food distribution committees, farmers groups and parents and teacher associations (PTA) in schools.

In all the three entities, a higher proportion of men reported meaningful participation, being PTAs the ones with the greatest differences between gender (85% of men against 20% of women).

The differences between gender when reporting leadership positions is even higher than in the previous case. While farmer groups are the one with the smaller gender gap (45% of men against 40% of women) reporting being a decision maker, PTAs are the ones with the greatest gender gap (60% of men against 10% of women). This could be because in several schools visited the school’s director chairs the PTA, while women are the cooks and members of the PTA only during the time that the kids are students at the school. In one school visited a mother member of the PTA reported that ¨they informed us about the progress in the construction of the new school´s kitchen and they asked us to look for local farmers to sells the food to the school¨.

Analysis of quotes written by women:

1. Collaboration and consultation: Women in the committee emphasize the importance of collaboration and consultation among members, with a focus on equal rights and expression of ideas.

2. Decision-making power: Women in the committee are involved in decision-making processes related to food recipes and building design, but there is no indication that they hold decision-making power in specific areas.

3. Responsibility and accountability: Women in the committee are responsible for preparing food, distributing and storing it, and maintaining hygiene. They also observe and report on student food preferences and are informed of their responsibilities in supporting school feeding activity.

Analysis of quotes written by men:

1. Decision-making power: Men in the committee hold decision-making power in areas, such as supplier selection and building design.

2. Leadership and influence: Men in the committee hold leadership positions and possess influence over committee decisions.

3. Responsibility and accountability: Men in the committee are responsible for monitoring overall activities of the SFC, and are informed of their responsibilities in preparing food, maintaining hygiene, and supporting school feeding activity.

Overall, the quotes suggest that women in the committee emphasize collaboration and consultation, while men in the committee hold decision-making power and possess influence over committee decisions. Both men and women in the committee share responsibilities and are accountable for ensuring the success of the school feeding program

(Data and the narrative have been made up with the purpose of illustrating how this indicator could be reported including the qualitative answers).

INDICATORS COLLECTED & ANALYSED AT THE SAME TIME

N/A

COMPLEMENTARY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Implementation of key informant interviews and whenever possible, direct observation is highly recommended.

A key informant interview (KII) protocol to strengthen and complement this indicator can be downloaded in the links below:

• The methodological notes

• A Key informant interview tool

The purpose of the KII tool is to understand the nature and barriers of the members participation in WFP-supported decision-making entities.

In particular, the KII tool looks at the following attributes of meaningful participation: i) process and influence in decision making entities (transparency, accountability, inclusiveness, fairness, connectivity...); ii) members ‘satisfaction with decisions made in the entities; and iii) transformative leadership.

In addition, the qualitative tool supports to overcome sampling bias derived from the quantitative method.

DECISIONS DATA CAN INFORM

When used along with other quantitative and qualitative data, the information obtained through this indicator can inform the design, implementation, and revision of WFP interventions (programmes, projects, operations etc.), such that they enhance meaningful participation and decision-making in WFP’s work.

In addition, the indicator is useful for providing baseline and endline data on women and other marginalized groups' participation, influence, and leadership within programme entities.

This indicator is also useful for reporting the influence of women and men in decision-making entities, allowing transparency and accountability; and visibility in showcasing WFP’s efforts to increase meaningful participation by women and men and to address unequal forms of power.

VISUALIZATION

Results can be shown in multiple ways*:

1. Disaggregated by sex and type of WFP decision making entities.

   

2. Stacked bar to show the level of participation in a specific type of WFP decision making entity, by sex

   

3. 100% stacked column disaggregated by sex

   

4. Clustered bar to inform meaningful participation by sex and other intersectionality components

   

5. Using an infographic (particularly for communication and advocacy products)

It is recommended that gender equality staff in each country office assesses the most relevant visualization according to the CSP’s priorities and needs.

As a cross-cutting indicator, it is also recommended that the different technical units use this indicator to report WFP beneficiaries ‘meaningful participation in their respective WFP decision making entities (as seen in the graph 4B).

LIMITATIONS

Reaching a representative number of entities and their members requires effective coordination between M&E teams and cooperating partners to ensure equal (where possible) representation from women, men and people living with disabilities.

In order to avoid bias in the understanding of the meaning of ¨level of engagement¨ and ¨meaningful participation¨, each level of participation has been formulated in a simple way. However, options are limited and do not capture whether the meaningful participation was indeed effective and real.

To overcome sampling issues and ensure full understanding of the responses and reality of participation levels, it is highly recommended to complement the above questions with a qualitative assessment method (e.g. FGDs) to deepen the results of the indicator.

FURTHER INFORMATION

More information on Gender and Participation in the Programme Guidance Manual:

Chapter 2.2 Programming: Gender & Participation (sharepoint.com)

Detailed guidance on sampling options is available here and here

FGD guidance is available here and a template here.

« No Data » Function in COMET Guideline

Qualitative Research Guidance for WFP Monitoring