DRAFT

ILO Participatory Gender Audit Report

UNESCO 19 – 30 NOVEMBER 2012, Paris

ILO Audit Facilitation Team:

Mr Federico Blanco AllaisProgramme for the Elimination of Child Labour

Mr Raphael CroweBureau for Gender Equality

Ms Alexia Deleligne Management Support Unit of the Employment Sector

Ms Susan MaybudTeam Coordinator

Bureau for Gender Equality

1

Contents

Acknowledgements...............................................................................................................................3

Executive Summary...............................................................................................................................4

Introduction...........................................................................................................................................9

Methodology.......................................................................................................................................10

A. Structural mechanisms for delivery of Priority Gender Equality.............................................11

B. Gender in UNESCO’s objectives and programming cycle (programming, monitoring and evaluation)..............................................................................................................................17

C. Selection of working partners on gender................................................................................21

D. Information and knowledge management within the Organisation, and gender equality as reflected in its products and public image..............................................................................26

E. Gender issues relevant to the technical areas, existing gender expertise..............................31

F. Staffing, human resources policies and organizational culture...............................................39

G. UNESCO staff’s perception of achievement on gender equality.............................................46Annexes...............................................................................................................................................47

Annex 1: Feedback Session 30 November 2012..............................................................................47Annex 2: List of people interviewed and workshop participants.....................................................48Annex 3: List of documents reviewed.............................................................................................54Annex 4: Record of workshop exercises..........................................................................................60Annex 5: Pictures of the workshops................................................................................................64

2

Acknowledgements

A participatory exercise can only succeed with the active contribution of all involved. During the Participatory Gender Audit (PGA) of UNESCO, the Organization’s management and staff across the sectors and operational units as well as selected in field offices and external partners contributed their time and views. The Audit Facilitation Team wishes to record its appreciation to these women and men who took part in the interviews, focus groups and workshops, and who trusted the team with their openness, constructiveness and valuable insights. We have done our best to capture these – and the helpful suggestions that were raised during the audit activities – in the following report. We would also like to note that we were entirely satisfied that we were given a representative sample of officials (and their functions) to contact by IOS and ODG/GE. On our side, every effort was made to follow-up on additional contacts for more information and opinions that were raised in the course of our interactions.

A special mention of thanks goes to Mr Bert Keuppens, Director of IOS and Ms Gülser Corat, Director of ODG/GE, for their commitment to the PGA process. The Team also wishes to acknowledge and sincerely thank Ms Barbara Torggler, Principal Evaluation Specialist and our Audit Focal Point for her indefatigable support of the process, as well as Ms Sharon Vartürk and Ms Anna Tolstyko-Wang of IOS for their help on all administrative and logistical matters related to the PGA.

3

Executive Summary

UNESCO’s Gender Equality Action Plan (GEAP) is in its last biennium which is a most opportune period to review the progress achieved and the challenges encountered. Its evaluation has therefore been deemed necessary in view of the forthcoming development of the new Medium Term Strategy. Furthermore, in the September 2012 session of the Ad Hoc Preparatory Group of the Executive Board of UNESCO1, a number of delegates expressed their regret for the absence of an evaluation of Priority Gender Equality.2 Within this context, the ILO was requested by UNESCO’s Internal Oversight Service (IOS) to conduct a Participatory Gender Audit (PGA) and summarize key findings, identify good practices and provide recommendations for future action while fulfilling stringent requirements for independence and objectivity. The findings will contribute to a new action plan to take UNESCO’s global Priority Gender Equality forward. In addition, the PGA will be folded into an overall IOS Evaluation of Priority Gender Equality and will be complemented by further work by an external consultant.

A review of the structural mechanisms for the delivery of Priority Gender Equality revealed contradictory views. ODG/GE’s role was seen as contributing positively in terms of being “at the table” at highest levels of decision-making in the Organization. Some saw the move of the unit to ODG as politically astute in positioning gender as having the highest support. Others felt that gender mainstreaming into UNESCO programme and planning was better served when the sub-unit was part of BSP. There was an impression that the principal connection to the programmatic cycle had become lost with the transfer and that the natural fit that had previously existed was either absent or strained.

ODG/GE is also perceived as effective in promoting UNESCO’s visibility on gender issues both internally and especially externally, giving a strong message to the outside world that gender was seen as a key priority. Conversely, ODG/GE was also viewed as not contributing enough to shaping higher level strategy or planning on gender mainstreaming, nor as providing the necessary support and guidance on gender issues to senior management. The elevation of the gender unit to the level of ODG was seen as being “above the line” in the organizational chart/structure. There was a strong impression iterated at different levels in the Organization and by some external sources that ODG/GE spent a lot of time on external representation and that the work on gender issues got neglected internally at the expense of external visibility. It was felt that the internal advisory role of the unit was by far the more important of ODG/GE’s mandate and that serving as “an ambassador for gender” externally was secondary. There was a general disquiet about the elevation of the unit’s Director post from a P5 to a D2 in the span of two years when in fact the job description had not changed dramatically and the unit was small.3 This was seen as an attempt to attach even more importance to gender equality mainstreaming, but it seemed to have had a perverse effect in antagonizing the perceptions of many UNESCO officials who believed this pointed to “a bureaucratic malfunction.” ODG/GE has stated that the position was upgraded in order to align the Division with all central offices and bureaux at Headquarters, which are headed by D2 level officials

1 UNESCO: Report of the Ad Hoc Preparatory Group, 17-21 September 2012, 190EX/INF.24, 2 October 2012, Paris.2 Such an evaluation had been foreseen by UNESCO’s Internal Oversight Service but due to financial constraints it had been put on hold. 3 Ivory Note (DG/Note/11/15 Director of the Division for Gender Equality in the Office of the Director-General

4

The Audit Facilitation Team notes a sharp disconnect between the “visibility” mandate of ODGE/GE and the secretariat’s strong expectation from ODG/GE of the fulfillment of UNESCO’s internal mandate for guidance and support on mainstreaming gender. When gender expertise was closer to the planning function in BSP this was perceived as more accessible. The credibility of ODG/GE is threatened in reconciling the two divergent views above and in paying attention to the internal views expressed.

A number of options were proposed by interviewees about how UNESCO can better fulfill its Priority Gender Equality mandate. A centralized ODG/GE could be maintained. However, it would be important that more emphasis be placed on the delivery of internal services, especially in terms of guidance and advice to UNESCO senior management and giving more of the time and focus of ODG/GE management to internal needs. However, this does not resolve the concerns of centralizing guidance at a high level in the Organization and the lack of proximity to the programming functions in BSP.

The majority of those interviewed preferred a structural adjustment and a change in the current architecture. It was suggested that one or two officials, including management, be retained in ODG/GE for the purposes of coordination and representation, that one official be returned to BSP not only to provide direct programming assistance but also to serve as a liaison with other operations units (HRM, ERI etc). This would allow for seeding other ODG/GE officials in selected Sectors where their assistance is most needed and where they could contribute in a more concerted manner. Proportionate amounts of ODG/GEs budget would need to be re-allocated to the receiving units should a mainstreamed structure be considered.

The suggestion to re-assign some ODG/GE officials is also linked to the finding that some Sectors – Education in particular – have a number of gender experts who are not necessarily integrated into the gender network and whose expertise is not maximized. Therefore should re-assignment be considered, Sectors where less expertise is present should be targeted first. Further recommendations include a mapping of gender expertise in UNESCO at all levels, both at Headquarter and the field. This mapping would reveal a great deal of capability that is currently either hidden or loosely tapped. Working on gender issues lends itself to working across silos. Even if gender specialists are not centralized at ODG/GE, arrangements could be made to call upon specialists in the different Sectors to work on cross-cutting areas.

Work on gender issues in the field at regional and national levels was a crucial part of UNESCO’s delivery and visibility on gender. Performance on gender ranged across a wide spectrum and was dependent on the inter-play between the active backing of field directors, programming at the field level, the capacity and expertise of the field Gender Focal Points and the level of demand from UNESCO constituents. There is an opportunity to influence the proposed Field Reform Package to consider the possibility of creating positions in the field for gender specialists. Financial considerations notwithstanding, this would be a most important contribution to UNESCO’s Priority Gender Equality. In the meantime, officials from Headquarters with gender expertise either from the different Sectors or from ODG/GE could be (voluntarily) rotated to serve in the field, with the costs shared. For example, links could be created with Priority Africa to first service this region on gender issues, thus benefitting two Global priorities for UNESCO.

While a GFP network has existed in UNESCO for many years, the network was further defined by key criteria and institutionalized.4 Noticeable weaknesses in the GFP system were also pointed to by GFPs themselves and their managers and colleagues alike. Above all, GFPs have their own

4 DG Ivory Note Priority Gender Equality – Improvement of the Gender Focal Point (GFP) Network DG/Note/11/05rev 28 March 2011.

5

demanding professional tasks, so they do not really have much time to devote to gender. Recommendations included increased capacity-building for GFPs and encouraging more male officials to serve in this capacity. In terms of UNESCO’s entire programming cycle (programming, monitoring, reporting and evaluation), many officials did not consider 2008 Gender Equality Action Plan (GEAP) 2008-13 as a programming document but rather a “results-based road map” to translate the policy Priority Gender Equality into strategic actions. Gender equality will remain a Priority in UNESCO’s next medium-term strategy, and the work on drafting a new Gender Equality Action Plan 2014-17 will start next year. Regular analyses of work plans conducted by ODG/GE demonstrate how inadequately gender equality is included in programming and there is an absence of mechanisms for monitoring results (except self-monitoring through SISTER5) or for evaluating if there has been any impact. Similar observations were made regarding budgetary allocations and the inability to track financial resources allocated to the promotion of gender equality and “guesstimates” of budgetary allocations indicate minimal budget allocations. The lack of capacity in ODG/GE during work plan revisions created a choke-point, as there are over 1500 work plans to review within one week. It is recommended that gender be mainstreamed into the entire programming cycle from programming through evaluation. This effort needs to be undertaken rapidly so as to avoid a similar recommendation having to be made in a few years. BSP and IOS should be in the lead in this exercise, with ODG/GE working closely with these units to ensure gender mainstreaming throughout the programme management cycle by, among others, ensuring that gender concerns are adequately reflected in BSP and IOS guidelines and the templates and in terms of reference for evaluations. Awareness-raising on results-based management and the formulation of benchmark performance indicators as in 36 C/5 should be stressed, emphasizing that accountability on gender mainstreaming is key. It is not only a question of reporting on gender, but monitoring the improvements made through mainstreaming and gender-specific actions.

In working with partners, UNESCO has a strong comparative advantage in positioning itself as a key player on global aspirations to achieve gender equality. It has a broad mandate covering major issues of universal relevance, and it has the gravitas and credibility to speak authoritatively to these issues. The UNESCO «brand» generates myriads of possibilities of working with multiple partners; therefore the inclusion of gender equality is a natural fit in work planned with partners. This would entail vigilance at the planning stages but will go a long way when gender issues are mainstreamed. An area that has been reported by many as being a good practice in terms of successful inclusion of gender equality is the UNESCO Participation Programmes. The full potential of the Global Network of UNESCO Chairs on Gender could be explored by proposing common research themes that could be subsequently compiled and disseminated by UNESCO.

Constituents recognized the Education Sector as having systematically mainstreamed work on gender and in having gender-specific tools. It was mentioned that other than the creation of ODG/GE, constituents did not have much sense for recent accomplishments on gender at sectoral or field levels; in particular, linkages between Priority Gender Equality and Priority Africa were not visible. There was a sense that there was some “mission creep” with UN Women, and that UNESCO should stick to its own mandates. Some were openly critical of ODG/GE’s emphasis on representing UNESCO in international fora and commented that time and money should be spent more on the needs within the Organization. There was also a sense that at times UNESCO was not bold enough on gender, and did not tackle the difficult, sensitive issues. Given the moral authority it had been entrusted with, UNESCO could take more risks on promoting gender equality. Links to Priority Africa should be strengthened in a concerted manner to show that results on both priorities could be achieved through cooperation.

5 SISTER- System of Information and Strategies, Tasks and Evaluation of Results

6

With current global financial constraints and in light of UNESCO's particular recent funding issues, maximizing the impact of regular budgets and raising extra-budgetary resources is even more important than ever. There are divergent views on the ease of fund-raising for gender equality. Some UNESCO staff members feel that gender equality is a universally recognized and politically safe issue to promote. Others think that gender equality is a culturally charged issue that is not an easy sell to donors especially as respect for culture is part of UNESCO’s overall mandate. Nonetheless, constituents had the expectation that ODG/GE would spear-head fund-raising for gender. ODG/GE could present a plan for fund-raising on gender issues for discussion with constituents and donors. This could include approaching gender-responsive bi-lateral donors or designing an appeal for voluntary contributions from multiple donors. Creative and pragmatic ways of overcoming resistance from other donors could be found. Much work can be accomplished on gender equality by addressing the issues in different ways, such as embedding gender in poverty alleviation, education and capacity-building.

Information and knowledge management on gender issues is built on good information flow, and therefore if a premium is not placed on information sharing and knowledge management then gender will suffer as well. There was a sense both from within ODG/GE and outside that information flow needed to be systematic and institutionalized. Other Headquarters units and Field offices did not systematically communicate their work on gender to ODG/GE nor did they share interesting information on gender issues within their areas of expertise with ODG/GE. Web-sites are excellent ways to promote work on gender in any organization as it is inexpensive and provides myriads of opportunities for creating linkages and contexts. The public UNESCO entry page always has professional and gender-sensitive news features. It was suggested that a visible and frequently updated “gender corner” be created on the UNESCO home page so as to immediately position gender as a key organizational priority. As UNESCO is moving to one common content management system for internet, intra-net, and extra-net, proposals were made to take advantage of this opportunity to share more knowledge and information on gender equality. The Culture Sector would stand to strongly benefit in showcasing its work on gender issues in a systematic way on its web-site by creating a dedicated web-page and by paying attention to increase its visibility on gender.

ERI is an important internal partner and its management and staff are committed to championing gender equality both within and outside the Organization. The information and promotional material that is developed by this unit is gender inclusive. There is a close collaboration with ODG/GE including on publications; for example, ODG/GE prepared a short but informative set of Gender Mainstreaming Guidelines for distribution to authors as well as a list of resources for further information. However, author units complained that waiting for approvals on gender content often took a long time and bottlenecks were created at the levels of GFP and/or ODG/GE. On the other hand GFPs complained of the enormous workload that this process has generated.

The PGA explored gender issues relevant to the technical areas, existing gender expertise and capacity-building and aimed to review the gap between the actual achievements and the goals on gender equality. The role of ODG/GE is unclear regarding substantive, technical support internally. Management of the different Sectors recognized that they and their staff needed to learn how to better mainstream gender. There was a sense that no one was really obstructing gender anymore, but that it is more that people did not quite know how to mainstream. The need to continue with women-specific initiatives was accepted; however gender issues are still equated with women’s issues and areas concerning men and masculinities are largely overlooked. Much substantive, technical work has been delivered both in the Sectors and in the Field and there was a wealth of good practices in terms of publications, events and partnerships developed throughout UNESCO. Some samples have been selected in the full Report.

7

Contradictory views on capacity building on gender were expressed. Responsibility for gender mainstreaming training has been centralized in ODG/GE, which has been seen as offering value added and developing capacity for those who followed the courses. Some interlocutors felt that HRM could also potentially have a role and that a strengthened collaboration between ODG/GE and HRM would enhance delivery. ODG/GE and others stressed that units themselves should be proactive in seeking expertise and should not only rely on ODG/GE to offer training. One effective way is to provide training workshops on gender mainstreaming for the entire staff of “natural” units, from the director positions to professional and support service staff alike in order to reach a maximum number of staff in an optimum fashion.

Concerning staffing and human resources UNESCO has achieved sex balance at the ADG and D2 levels which is good practice. The D1 level is skewed towards men which throws the overall figures for parity at the Director level off balance. At the professional levels, there is good sex parity in P3 to P5, but an over-steering towards women at P1-P2 levels. The imbalance at D1 levels can be addressed by considering and developing the skills of female candidates until such time as balance is achieved. Recruiting more men at the P1-P2 levels will restore balance at entry level positions and consideration should be given to recruiting more men at G levels as well.

UNESCO has in place gender-sensitive human resources policies. HRM information sessions to all staff on the rules, regulations and policies that govern all forms of leave, working hours, overtime, and work/family balance modalities would be welcome. A serious area of concern regarding maternity leave is the discriminatory behaviour against women and their family obligations. Certain managers had pointed to a lack of professional commitment of female staff members when they had become pregnant and had taken maternity leave. Comments regarding work and family balance had also been raised. In some of these cases the staff member’s career advancement had been put into question. It should be noted that female managers were responsible for these behaviours as well. This issue of maternity (and even paternity) leave has generated concern from management’s perspective as well, especially in the light of the immutable and cyclical nature of UNESCO’s work and deliveries. With staff members on maternity leaves and looming deadlines, managers felt most pressed. It is recommended that in order to ensure the proper functioning of a work unit during an official’s absence on maternity leave that HRM offer a minimum compensatory allowance to the unit that would allow for the recruitment of short-term staff to fully or partially handle the official’s work load. HRM could study such standard practice in other UN agencies many of which offer a 3-month allowance to a work unit in order to recruit a short-term staff member. Even under current financial constraints, this investment would be seen as extremely helpful by work units and would be a solid contribution towards gender equity.

The Ethics Office is responsible for providing confidential advice on ethics and standards of conduct and raises awareness through training, communication, policy development and liaison. As many of the areas of unethical behaviour or wrongdoing have very clear gender dimensions, the PGA has also covered this function. The number of requests made to the Ethics Office has a gender dimension. In 2011, the breakdown of requests by sex revealed that 63 per cent of the requests were made by women. An important sexual harassment case was handled by the Ethics Office. It is recommended that the recruitment of a female advisor or officer be foreseen in the future in order to create sex balance in an important team dealing with sensitive issues and in the meantime to engage the female social work officer in sensitive meetings.

8

Introduction

UNESCO’s Gender Equality Action Plan (GEAP) is in its last biennium which is a most opportune period to review the progress achieved and the challenges encountered. Its evaluation has therefore been deemed necessary in view of the forthcoming development of the new Medium Term Strategy. Furthermore, in the September 2012 session of the Ad Hoc Preparatory Group of the Executive Board of UNESCO6, a number of delegates expressed their regret for the absence of an evaluation of Priority Gender Equality.7 Within this context, the ILO was requested by UNESCO’s Internal Oversight Service (IOS) to conduct a Participatory Gender Audit (PGA) and summarize key findings, identify good practices and provide recommendations for future action while fulfilling stringent requirements for independence and objectivity. The findings will thus contribute to a new action plan to take UNESCO’s global Priority Gender Equality forward. In addition, the PGA will be folded into an overall IOS Evaluation of Priority Gender Equality and will be complemented by further work by an external consultant.

Using the PGA methodology in UNESCO will8: • Generate understanding of the extent to which gender mainstreaming has been internalized and acted upon by staff; • Assess the extent of gender mainstreaming in terms of the development and delivery of gender-sensitive products and services; • Identify and share information on mechanisms, practices and attitudes that have made a positive contribution to mainstreaming gender in the Organization; • Assess the level of programming commitment and resources allocated and spent on gender mainstreaming and gender activities; • Examine the extent to which human resources policies are gender-sensitive; • Assess how the staff balance has impacted Priority Gender Equality; • Set up the initial baseline of performance on gender mainstreaming in the Organization with a view to introducing an ongoing process of programmatic benchmarking to measure progress in promoting gender equality ; • Measure progress in implementing action plans on gender mainstreaming and recommend revisions as needed; and •Identify room for improvement, make recommendation and suggest possible strategies for better implementation of Priority Gender Equality.

Using a participatory self-assessment methodology, PGAs take into account objective data and staff perceptions of the achievement of gender equality in an organization or work unit. The balance between the two feeds into a better understanding of the inter-play between factual elements and unsubstantiated observations and interpretations.

6 UNESCO: Report of the Ad Hoc Preparatory Group, 17-21 September 2012, 190EX/INF.24, 2 October 2012, Paris.7 Such an evaluation had been foreseen by UNESCO’s Internal Oversight Service but due to financial constraints it had been put on hold. 8 As per the proposed terms of reference for the UNESCO PGA sent 10 October 2012 to IOS.

9

Methodology

An extensive desk review was conducted and over 50 documents were analysed from a gender perspective to assess to what extent gender equality is routinely and adequately considered and addressed. These included General Conference and Executive Board reports, High-level evaluations, DG Ivory Notes, a selection of UNESCO activities, projects, and programmes where gender is mainstreamed or where gender-specific interventions are conducted, substantive reports from different sectors prepared at Headquarters and in the Field and Institutes, Human Resources reports and policies, and promotional material and web-sites. Assessment of the gender equality programmatic, policy and institutional framework, and how it translates into UNESCO’s Result Based Management approach and systems were covered, such as policy and programmatic activities of the two previous biennia (2008-2009 and 2010-2011), in particular the GEAP and the Medium-Term Strategy of UNESCO (34C/4) as well as on the Bi-annual Programme and Budget (34C/5, 35C/5 and 36C/5). (For a list of documents, see Annex 3).

Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with staff at all hierarchical levels were conducted over a two-week period. These interviews and focus groups were an extremely important part of the PGA process. They provided the opportunity to explore individual perceptions in a safe space and to amass a wealth of information to complement the findings from the UNESCO desk review. A sample of UNESCO Ambassadors and members of the Executive Board, Field offices, Institutes and UN and other partner organizations were also interviewed, many by phone. Over 80 persons representing diverse backgrounds, responsibilities, functions and grades contributed to the interviews and focus groups (48 women, 32 men). While the Audit Facilitation Team discussed with, wherever possible, all those whom IOS in consultation with ODG/GENDER suggested, the PGA process allows for additional names to be added as the audit progresses. The officials who were interviewed were reminded of this opportunity and those in focus groups were additionally reminded that they could follow up with the Audit Facilitation Team should they have further thoughts or issues of a confidential nature to communicate. Additional names were also provided by the Director of ODG/GE.

Two collective workshops were held with staff members, most of who had not been interviewed. The desk review and the interviews provided a great deal of insight into the dynamics and the issues that needed further probing. Based on these findings, the workshops were designed to bring key issues to the surface, thus serving as control groups to corroborate or dispute the findings or to tease out additional information. One half- day workshop for support staff (12 women) and one full-day session for professional staff (11 women, 4 men) were held on 26 and 27 November 2012 respectively. A feedback session on the preliminary findings of the PGA was held on 30 November for UNESCO staff. This session generated an animated discussion which provided additional elements for the Audit Facilitation Team to consider (see Annex 1). The annexes to this Report contain the list of individuals interviewed and those who attended the workshops, as well as a list of documents reviewed.

10

In total 115 UNESCO staff members, constituents, and partners contributed to the findings of the PGA.

A. Structural mechanisms for delivery of Priority Gender Equality

How an organization structures its mechanisms for delivery has a strong bearing on successful gender mainstreaming. There is no one size fits all solution as so many variables come into play that go beyond organizational charts and reporting lines.

Key findings

In order to fully understand the mechanisms for organization-wide work on gender equality, the current structure for delivery needs to be studied. Up to April 2010, a sub-unit on gender issues was located in the Bureau for Strategic Planning (BSP). In order to highlight the DG’s support for gender issues and to give effect to the recommendation from Task Force III9 the DG Ivory Note Transfer of the Division for Gender Equality to the Office of the Director-General10 elaborated “… and in line with the Gender Equality Action Plan (2008-2013), on ways and means to reinforce the Gender Equality priority within UNESCO’s programmes at all stages of programme planning, monitoring and evaluation…and improve the overall accountability of staff at all levels, including the Assistant Directors-General” and that the Division for Gender Equality be created within the Office of the Director General (ODG/GE). ODG/GE became responsible for ensuring the promotion of gender equality in the secretariat and in the Field Offices11 and to support improved monitoring and evaluation on gender equality issues by guiding and coordinating the process, as well as by providing advice on monitoring and evaluation specific to gender equality and on gender-responsive budgeting12. The Division’s mandate encompasses five major aspects: (i) providing policy advice to the Secretariat and to Member States; (ii) raising awareness and fostering political commitment to gender equality; (iii) supporting capacity development within UNESCO by conducting training and developing guidelines and tools in close collaboration with the sectors; and (iv) coordinating cutting-edge policy and action research; and (v) developing partnerships13.

This is an ambitious mandate. ODG/GE currently has a Director at D2 level and four Professional staff (1 P5, 2 P4s, and 1 P3). There is one support staff (G5), one Associate Expert and two interns. For the biennium 2012-13 the unit has an operational budget of $80,000, a staff budget of about $1.5 million and additional extra-budgetary funds of $0.8 million.14

ODG/GE’s role is seen as contributing positively in terms of being “at the table” at highest levels of decision-making in the Organization. Some saw the move of the unit to ODG as politically astute in positioning gender as having the highest support. Others felt that gender mainstreaming into UNESCO programme and planning had been better served when the sub-unit was part of BSP. There was an impression that the principal connection to the programmatic cycle had become lost with the transfer and that the natural fit that had previously existed was either absent or strained.

9 UNESCO Task Force III: Delivering the UNESCO Priority for Gender Equality: Increasing impact, effectiveness and visibility, 26 February 2010.10 DG /Note/10/17 28 April, 2010 Transfer of the Division for Gender Equality to the Office of the Director-General11 At the 185th session of the Executive Board in October 2010, the Independent External Evaluation team presented a synthesis report (185 EX/18) as well as the full evaluation report (185 EX/18 Add.).ODG/GE website (consulted 8 October, 2012) 12 181 EX/4 Part I Add.2-page1713 http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/themes/gender-equality/ (consulted 8 October, 2012). For the full mandate please consult 36 C/5 Approved Programme and Budget 2012-13, Chapter 2 “Coordination and monitoring of action to benefit gender equality” pp 266-271.14 Consultation of SISTER with BSP, 29 November 2012.

11

ODG/GE is also perceived as effective in promoting UNESCO’s visibility on gender issues both internally and especially externally, giving a strong message to the outside world that gender was a key priority.

Conversely, ODG/GE was also viewed as not contributing enough to shaping higher level strategy or planning on gender mainstreaming, nor as providing the necessary support and guidance on gender issues to senior management. Some high level officials commented that there was no discussion of gender issues at SMT meetings while others expressed the sentiments that ADGs and EOs did not feel ownership of gender issues in their sectors anymore since the elevation of the gender unit to the level of ODG, where it was seen as “above the line” in the organizational chart/structure. There was a strong impression iterated at different levels in the Organization and by some external sources that ODG/GE spent too much time on external representation and that the work on gender issues got neglected internally at the expense of external visibility. It was felt that the internal advisory role of the unit was by far the more important of ODG/GE’s mandate and that serving as “an ambassador for gender” externally was secondary.

There was a general disquiet about the change of the unit’s Director post first from a P5 to a D1 and then from a D1 to a D2 in the span of two years when it was perceived that the job description had not changed a great deal and the unit was small.15 This was seen as an attempt to attach even more importance to gender equality mainstreaming, but it seemed to have had a perverse effect in antagonizing the perceptions of many UNESCO officials who believed this pointed to “a bureaucratic malfunction.” ODG/GE has pointed out that the Division was in the Cabinet in the late 1990s until it was transferred to BSP in 2001. The Division had been headed by a D1 level until 2002. Then the Division became a Section and was headed by a P4 interim manager. When gender equality was designated as one of two global priorities in 2008 the Section became a Division once again with the post of D1. The subsequent upgrade was made in order to align the Division with all central offices and bureaux at Headquarters, which are headed by D2 level officials. The issues surrounding external representation needs to be put in context. The above-mentioned DG Ivory Note of April 2010 clearly states that ODG/GE is to “…Increase the visibility of UNESCO’s actions in this area” (Gender Equality). Therefore the Audit Facilitation Team notes a sharp disconnect between the “visibility” mandate of ODG/GE and the House’s strong expectation from ODG/GE of the fulfillment of UNESCO’s internal mandate for guidance and support on mainstreaming gender. When gender expertise was closer to the planning function in BSP this was perceived as more accessible. The credibility of ODG/GE is in jeopardy in reconciling the two divergent views above and in tending to the internal views expressed.

ODG/GE’s function in providing a coordinating and consolidating mechanism was welcomed as a service, and its limited staff assisted as best it could in providing information and guidance. There was recognition that the function was needed in the organization to serve as a clearing-house for all that was being achieved on gender so that this could be packaged for maximum impact. However, it was also felt that this had been achieved at the cost of providing support at the Sectoral level on gender issues. It was noted that SHS lost its gender expertise to ODG/GE when the position and the official were moved to the central level.16 A number of officials in other sectors expressed the view

15 Ivory Note (DG/Note/11/15 Director of the Division for Gender Equality in the Office of the Director-General states in paragraph 4 “In view of the enhanced importance of the Division, as well as its direct reporting line to me, I have decided to reclassify the post of Director of the Division for Gender Equality from the D-1 to the D-2 level, and to promote Ms Saniye Gülser Corat, the current incumbent of the post to the D-2 level.”16 A Memo of December 2009 from BSP/GE “Preliminary analysis of 35 C/5 Workplans for Priority Gender Equality” states that “It is surprising that the (SHS) Sector dealing with issues such as migration, sustainable development, ethics and youth does not have a more visible commitment to gender equality.” Subsequently a gender specialist was recruited by the SHS Sector, but the post and the official were recently moved to

12

that gender expertise would be more preferable at their sectoral level than in a centralized unit, where linkages to the specific, technical work were lost and expertise was diluted to more generic advice.

Options proposed by interviewees:

A number of options were raised for consideration to better place UNESCO in fulfilling its Priority Gender Equality mandate:

A centralized ODG/GE could be maintained, but with more emphasis placed on the delivery of internal services, especially in terms of guidance and advice to UNESCO senior management and in more of the time and focus of ODG/GE spent on internal needs. However, this option, it was felt, does not resolve the concerns relating to centralizing guidance at a high level in the Organization and the lack of proximity to the programming functions in BSP.

The majority of those interviewed preferred a structural adjustment and a change in the current “architecture”. It was suggested that one or two officials, including management, be retained in ODG/GE for the purposes of coordination and representation, that one official be returned to BSP to not only provide direct programming assistance but also to serve as a liaison with other operations units (HRM, ERI etc). This would allow for seeding other ODG/GE officials in selected Sectors where their assistance is most needed and where they could contribute in a more concerted manner. Proportionate amounts of ODG/GE budget would need to be re-allocated to the receiving units should such a mainstreamed structure be considered.

The suggestion to re-assign some ODG/GE officials is also linked to the finding that some Sectors – Education in particular – have a number of gender experts who are not necessarily integrated into the gender network and whose expertise is not maximized. While informally they are known to the House and are informally consulted by fellow colleagues, their knowledge and expertise is not recognized at an institutional level and included into the gender network. Therefore should re-assignment be considered, Sectors where less current expertise is present should be targeted first. As previously mentioned, many in the SHS Sector and in the field felt that losing the gender specialist there had set their work back considerably on gender.

Recommendations:

A mapping of gender expertise in UNESCO is called for at all levels, both at Headquarter and the field. This mapping would reveal a great deal of capability that is currently either hidden or loosely tapped and would strengthen the work of the Gender Focal Points as well. Support staff should be included in this survey, as the Audit Facilitation Team found many officials who were knowledgeable and were eager to contribute.

Working on gender issues lend itself to working across silos. Even if gender specialists are not centralized at ODG/GE, arrangements could be made to call upon specialists in the different Sectors to work on cross-cutting areas. For example, gender specialists from different Sectors could be called upon to assist in delivering a capacity-building training on gender, provided they are willing and their managers approve. This type of inter-sectoral cooperation on gender reconciles the need to have certain centralized activities while also ensuring gender expertise in the Sectors where it is needed. It could also improve the sharing of knowledge and good practices.

ODG/GE.

13

Work on Gender issues in the Field:

Key findings

There was general consensus in telephone interviews conducted with field interlocutors and with Headquarters staff members that work on gender issues at regional and national levels was a crucial part of UNESCO’s delivery and visibility on gender. Performance on gender ranged across a wide spectrum and was dependent on the inter-play between the:

1) active backing of field directors and the “air cover” they provided;2) capacity and expertise of the field Gender Focal Points; and3) level of demand from UNESCO constituents.

Given that funds for gender mainstreaming are not ear-marked, the support from management was seen as primordial and experience had shown that when the commitment was present then performance on gender issues was recognized and show-cased (for example in the Regional Office in Bangkok). The level of enthusiasm and expertise of Gender Focal Points was also a key factor (see page 16, especially the recent capacity-building course for Gender Focal Points). It is interesting to note however that demand on gender is not always explicit on the part of the constituents, yet when ideas and activities on gender issues are proposed, the constituents are keen to benefit from these.

Nevertheless, a major gap in delivering on gender in the field is the lack of designated gender specialists in different regions. Gender specialists in the field who would have as their dedicated task to mainstream gender into the work being delivered by UNESCO in a particular region and who would be available to offer policy guidance and capacity-building directly to the constituents on gender issues should be considered. Creating these positions would be very different from the current Gender Focal Point network in which officials have their own professional responsibilities and tangentially work on gender issues in a less systematic way. The Audit Facilitation Team was informed that a proposal to create positions in the field had been on the table but had been removed due to the current financial constraints. Concerns were voiced however that “We need something happening on the ground where gender equality is most needed.” Another proposal was the possibility to cost-share a gender specialist among UNCT members in a given country. As resources are scarce, this was seen as a viable option that UNESCO could actively pursue with other agencies.

Another problem that was mentioned was that many of the guidelines and training materials on gender are only available in English. For example, the Regional Office in Havana offered to serve as a liaison for distributing materials in Spanish to the national offices under their supervision.

Recommendations: There is an opportunity to influence the proposed Field Reform Package to consider the

possibility of creating positions in the field for gender specialists. Financial considerations notwithstanding, this would be a most important contribution to UNESCO’s Priority Gender Equality. Interviewees mentioned the catalyst role of the Regional Offices with the National Offices under their supervision, and therefore a multiplier effect could be generated on gender.

In the meantime, other measures could be taken to service the field more actively. Officials from Headquarters with gender expertise either from the different Sectors or from ODG/GE could be (voluntarily) rotated to serve in the field, with the costs shared. For example, links

14

could be created with Priority Africa to first service this region on gender issues, thus benefitting two Global Priorities for UNESCO.

Another proposal, with little cost for UNESCO, would be to review the mandate of Associate Experts dedicated to ODG/GE to include a “twinning” element in their terms of reference so that they spend half of their contract at Headquarters and the other half in the field. This construct has worked extremely well in other UN agencies, whereby an Associate Expert gains both headquarters and on-the-ground experience, and the organization benefits in the cross-fertilization and sharing of the resources.

Explore the possibilities of cost-sharing gender specialists with other agencies represented in UNCTs in a given country.

Translate gender guidelines and materials in order to secure the active participation of the field and take into account the accessibility of materials for maximum impact.

The Gender Focal Point (GFP) Network

Key findings

While a GFP network has existed in UNESCO for many years, the network was defined by key criteria and institutionalized through the DG Ivory Note Priority Gender Equality – Improvement of the Gender Focal Point (GFP) Network.17 The network was thus strengthened by defining a structure in both Headquarters and the Field and by giving responsibility to committed, experienced officials who were interested in gender issues in their own technical areas. Management was made responsible for ensuring that 20% of the official’s work load was to be dedicated to the GFP tasks. In some Sectors, the EOs played an important coordinating role, for example in SHS, and in others, for example in ED, a gender Coordinator was appointed for the whole Sector who spent part of her time on supporting the GFP and other officials. Seemingly, much of the work of GFPs was to provide support in mainstreaming gender into work plans. The vast majority of GFP were women.

Noticeable weaknesses in the GFP system were also pointed to by GFPs themselves and their managers and colleagues alike. Above all, GFPs have their own demanding professional tasks, so they do not have much time to devote to gender. And although management had responsibility to recognize that 20% of GFP work was to be dedicated to gender, this recognition was patchy and did not always appear in the GFP performance appraisals. The Audit Facilitation Team also noted that the ratio between the size of a unit structure and its work load and the number of GFPs was an area that needed to be explored, as some larger units would probably need more than one GFP. For example in UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) there is only one GFP with responsibility for all the sectors. Such broad coverage is unrealistic despite the GFPs strong personal commitment. As a result and in agreement with her supervisor, she is focusing her efforts on the Education Sector.

There were limited cross-Sectoral activities in which GFPs participated, other than the training in 2011. Inter-Sectoral GFP meetings were not held to explore commonalities and synergies. However, Brown Bag Lunches were organized by ODG/GE” on relevant topics aiming to facilitate exchange between the Gender Focal Points, and to offer learning opportunities on burning issues, recent developments or relevant work from other entities to all interested colleagues” 18. There has been a proposal to create a Community of Practice which will connect the GFPs with a view to better exchange information. This has not been implemented yet and there are doubts whether it will be 17 DG/Note/11/05rev 28 March 201118 The three sessions organized in this first half of the year focused on "Mainstreaming Gender Equality in Work Plans", "RIO+20: Outcomes from a Gender Equality Perspective" and "Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI)", with the participation of OECD colleagues as presenters. 190 EX/4 Part 1 Annex Report: SISTER 36 C/5 - Monitoring of Programme Implementation for Regular Programme and Extrabudgetary Resources as at 30/06/20121

15

utilized. As mentioned earlier, expertise in the Organization on gender went far beyond the GFP network and yet it was felt that the link between this expertise and the network was not sufficiently exploited. GFPs were of the opinion that they were not necessarily “considered as a gender expert by colleagues, but as a watch-dog.” Some managers echoed that the GFP network is “a phone-book list” and that GFPs are a conduit of information to and from ODG/GE. “They serve as a letter-box.” Other managers saw the time devoted to gender issues by GFPs as a distraction from their regular work and as putting unnecessary pressure on these officials.

Some officials referred to structural problems with the GFP system, noting that prior gender expertise and a grade of P3 and above were required, which they found too stringent. There was a sentiment that “being interested and willing to take on GFP responsibilities is not enough. It is a club, and you can be turned down.” It was mentioned by several interlocutors that there was a form of “favouritism “by ODG/GE in selecting GFPs and that even experienced people were ruled out.

ODG/GE recognizes many of these weaknesses but also has explanations for the rationale behind the issues. For example, the condition of having gender expertise and a grade of P3 was to counter-balance a previous practice by some managers of appointing junior staff who had either no interest or minimum expertise on gender issues. Similarly, ODG/GE stressed that the selection of GFPs and approval by the DG was a fair process intended to indicate the importance attached to the network and to encourage a feeling of belonging to a structure of consequence.

Good practice:

A capacity-building training course was offered by ODG/GE for Headquarters and Field GFPs at the end of 2011. This course, which was reported as having a budget of $500,000, was well received by those GFP interviewed. They mentioned that the presentations were useful and interesting and that the course was a good networking opportunity with other GFPs. They also felt more empowered to discuss gender issues with colleagues. An assessment by ODG/GE noted that “some of the work plans prepared by and with the support of the GFPs who attended the training by ODG/GE in November-December 2011 show a significant improvement in quality, a good indicator of the usefulness of this session.” Other colleagues corroborated this finding and appreciated the GFP assistance. “The GFPs are really trying hard to promote gender in their units and to give advice.”

Recommendations:

Clearly, the demand for increased capacity-building for GFPs exists and continuous training efforts would be appreciated. However, this investment would need to be justified in ensuring that GFP responsibilities are recognized and that the impact of their contributions to their unit’s work is evaluated. At the same time, capacity-building on gender issues needs to be offered to all staff, so that individual officials mainstream gender into their own areas of influence (see page 38) and do not solely rely on GFPs.

The number of male GFPs should be increased by encouraging more male officials to serve in this capacity. All too often gender issues are equated with women’s issues, and this notion needs to be dispelled.

Cross-sectoral activities on gender issues should be encouraged and supported. Gender is an issue which helps break the silos in which UNESCO Sectors often operate, and the opportunities for cross-fertilization and cooperation could thus be explored. As this is also something that constituents and donors endorse, adopting a cross-sectoral approach may

16

assist UNESCO when this is highlighted in project proposals. GFP meetings across sectors could be organized by ODG/GE for information sharing and exploring opportunities.

Strengthen the work of the GFPs by encouraging linkages with other officials who have gender expertise. The mapping exercise would reveal these additional resources for delivering on gender mainstreaming.

B. Gender in UNESCO’s objectives and programming cycle (programming, monitoring and evaluation)

The PGA methodology probes practical ways of incorporating gender concerns into programming and budgeting. Engendering programming from the initial stages of formulation will directly affect outcomes and results throughout the cycle, which can then be followed through reporting, monitoring and evaluation. Mechanisms to budget for gender are another consideration. These key criteria are at a concrete level and feed into UNESCO’s responsibility to create coherence in programming.

Key Findings:

At the crux of programming for gender equality in UNESCO is the 2008 Gender Equality Action Plan (GEAP) 2008-13. This was an important contribution and the first time that UNESCO had formulated such a plan. However, many officials did not consider it a programming document but rather a “results-based road map” to translate the policy Priority Gender Equality into strategic actions, expected outcomes and performance indicators by programme sectors. Sector officials had been consulted on its formulation, but felt that their inputs had been provided hastily and without enough internal consultation with their own staff members. As a result, they felt that there was a lack of ownership. Many officials were not aware that there was a longer version of the document. In the PGA Workshops, some participants commented that this was the first time that they had seen the short version that had been left on the tables for consultation. Principal elements of accountability, monitoring, evaluation, and reporting are implicitly in place, as are the institutional mechanisms 19. It is important to note that Gender equality will remain a Priority in UNESCO’s next medium-term strategy 2014-2022, and the work on drafting a new Gender Equality Action Plan 2014-17 will start in 2013. Expected results at the end of Biennium 2012-13 are reflected in the Approved Programme and Budget 2012-2013.

The Executive Board’s request for the evaluation of Priority Gender Equality is therefore very timely. While Priority Gender Equality and the GEAP have not been formally evaluated, the impact of gender mainstreaming has been assessed through, for example, the evaluation of Strategic Programme Objectives in their respective areas of analysis. The conclusions of these exercises are consistent with those of the Task Force III (TF III) on Priority Gender Equality organized by the DG in 2010 and reported on in the synthesis Report on the Independent External Evaluation of UNESECO (185 EX/18 and 185 EX/18 Add.) which found that “strategic priorities, gender equality in particular, were unevenly managed and not sufficiently prioritized.” The Task Force had concluded that there was little evidence of the use of gender-sensitive frameworks or gender analyses for programming. In addition, the Audit Facilitation Team found that evaluation TORs are not thoroughly gender mainstreamed. Some evaluation TORs mention knowledge of gender equality as a required skill for

19 SEC 181 EX/4 Part 1. Add 2. Item 4. Report by the Director-General on the Execution of the Programme Adopted by the General Conference. UNESCO Priority Gender Equality Action Plan 2008-2013. March 2009

17

the evaluation core teams and the need for a gender balanced team. However, the set of questions under each evaluation criteria does not include gender equality. There is also an attempt in including gender in evaluation reports by including some sex-disaggregated data or having a stand-alone section on gender equality in the report.

Interlocutors felt that it was artificial and difficult to work with the GEAP because it was not aligned with the Sectors’ programmes and did not cover all of UNESCO’s work, especially on operational levels. Since the existing objectives were not linked to the GEAP this meant that budgets were not linked to delivery on gender mainstreaming either. A number of officials referred to previous recommendations from UNESCO evaluations and the findings of TFIII and wondered why these had not been acted upon.

The Audit Facilitation Team also found that detailed analyses and thoughtful comments have been provided to the Sectors over the years by BSP/WGE and ODG/GE through the biennial process of preparing the Preliminary Assessment of Work plans. However, an area of contention between the Sectors and ODG/GE that was raised in a number of interviews and focus groups was the negative feedback given by ODG/GE in work plan preparation. Technical officials felt that they were “chastised” and that they did not receive constructive comments on how to improve the content of their work plans. “It is very artificial to ask someone to support a Sectors’ work plan if the person is not involved in programming and implementation of the activities.” “ODG/GE does well on certain areas of activities, but when it comes to programming, they should leave this with the sectors.” Complaints were also raised concerning ODG/GE having a different priority to the officials in the Sectors. “They helped me define the targets that suited them, but not me.” Still others voiced concern that even with the mainstreamed work plans, they were at a loss in how to convince that they have been successful in gender mainstreaming. In Programming and Implementation, TFIII found that staff members were aware of the necessity to take gender into account when programming, but they lacked the understanding of the relevance of gender analysis in some areas of their work and of how gender can be practically integrated. T he former BSP/GE could only analyze work plans and not the substantive activities of the Sector, which meant that a deeper review of accomplished activities met with difficulties.20 The same problem holds true for ODG/GE, as checking all the work plans is not feasible. At the planning level, the ‘gender tick box’ was not enough and could even be construed counter-productive, as results were invisible.

In terms of monitoring and evaluation, TFIII found that despite the identification by Sectors of strategic gender equality directions, expected outcomes and performance indicators, monitoring and evaluation to ensure consistency and follow up was lacking due to a lack of precise indicators to monitor and show progress. TFIII had recommended that Sectors set gender equality objectives and transform these into baselines, performance indicators and targets that could be monitored and evaluated in a timely fashion.

In ODG/GE’s preliminary thoughts for Draft 37/C421 it is mentioned that “despite genuine efforts on the part of many staff, programming and implementation did not show real progress in gender mainstreaming”. Regular analyses of work plans conducted by ODG/GE demonstrate how inadequately gender equality is included in programming and there is almost a total absence of mechanisms for monitoring results (except self-monitoring through SISTER22) or for evaluating if there has been any impact. Similar observations were made regarding budgetary allocations and the

20 It was mentioned that BSP/GE had concluded that in 2010 only 12% of work plans had a gender perspective.21 Draft 37 C/4 Preliminary Thoughts on Priority Gender Equality Drafted by: DIR/ODG/GE, 30 July 201222 SISTER- System of Information and Strategies, Tasks and Evaluation of Results

18

inability to track financial resources allocated to the promotion of gender equality and “guesstimates” of budgetary allocations indicate minimal budget allocations – ranging from 5 to 20 per cent to gender. “If ‘global priority’ means a significant portion of resources are to be allocated, gender equality does not qualify as a global priority on the basis of any type of analysis.” Again, the almost a total absence of mechanisms for monitoring results (except self-monitoring through SISTER) or for evaluating was raised.

By and large the Audit Facilitation Team has concluded that the observations above still hold at the end of 2012. Strengths were also uncovered on the programming cycle when conducting the PGA. The SISTER software does allow for a modicum of tracking on gender and can generate reports on gender equality (MLA). There were also some good monitoring and evaluation practices in joint programmes in the field that covered gender issues, notably UNESCO’s work in Tanzania under the One UN framework. UNESCO was part of UN joint programmes which mainstreamed gender equality; good practices on monitoring and evaluation emerged from that experience. The Audit Facilitation Team was interested to learn that many units in fact had good gender mainstreaming examples (as well as in the Field); but they did not report these to ODG/GE or to the HQ sectoral GFP. This impacts ODG/GE’s ability to capture, consolidate and report back on Organization-wide delivery on gender. One interviewee asked why in-house successes on gender were not sufficiently promoted. Similarly, the need to sharpen knowledge management and to get officials to share and feed their experience into programming cycles was voiced.

It has been pointed out that BSP and IOS are fully aware of the recommendations above and are currently discussing ways to improve gender mainstreaming throughout the programming cycle. For example, the two units have released a joint memo Evaluation of Projects Financed with Extra-budgetary Resources23, as well as companion Guidance Note and template to inform the process. This set of documents can also be used to set the stage for the identification of gender entry points and their subsequent assessment. The Guidance may also be applied to ODG/GE which has an extra-budgetary portfolio of $0.8 million; therefore “a self-evaluation with validation by an external expert” could be in order.

However, in reviewing documents, in conducting interviews and holding the Professional staff workshop the same short-comings were systematically raised concerning the programming and implementation cycle. For example, from the Ideal Organization exercise, the need for better focus in programming and prioritization and improved monitoring and evaluation and reporting processes were raised. Increased inter-Sectoral cooperation in gender specific programming, and meaningful information sharing across sectors were also highlighted.

There were many laments about SISTER and “just ticking the boxes” but that there was no accountability or description of the work required. There were suggestions that “ODG/GE could use SISTER to better ensure more finer/analytical reporting.” However, this would entail more engagement from ODG/GE on the programmatic side with the Sectors, a solution which also had its detractors (see below).

Some officials reported that the Sectors were weak on results-based management (RBM) and there is limited gender analysis and sex-disaggregated data. Few performance indicators mainstreamed gender, and gender mainstreaming targets were not defined in many Sectors (although some gender-specific target did exist). There was a systematic lack of funding allocation for monitoring and evaluation and therefore the capacity to show-case results was missing. There was also a sense that

23 The document recommends that a percentage be earmarked above and beyond what is required as part of the framework agreement with donors. For example, this will allow cluster evaluations of a larger sample of projects.

19

UNESCO could strengthen its monitoring mechanisms and that monitoring was sometimes mistaken for reporting. There was a singular absence of focus on gender equality in evaluation, and impact assessment mechanisms were weak. In addition, Sectors officials were not sure where to turn to for support to ensure gender-sensitive monitoring and evaluation, as their management was unsure as well.

The lack of capacity in ODG/GE during work plan revisions created a choke-point , as there are over 1500 work plans to review within one week. “Having the work plans reviewed by ODG/GE causes us delays and doesn’t add any value.” This created difficulties for the GFPs as well who felt that they spent a great deal of their time on programming and work plans and reporting to ODG/GE rather than on mainstreaming gender into the technical areas. Issues concerning monitoring were also raised. “We are very weak on monitoring; we think it is only about reporting.” References were made to when “GE” was part of BSP, and that “things worked better on the programming side.” (see options on page 13 above).

Recommendations:

This PGA reconfirms and reinforces the assessments made by previous evaluations and of TFIII and recommends that gender be mainstreamed into the entire programming cycle. This effort needs to be undertaken rapidly so as to avoid a similar recommendation having to be made in a few years.

BSP and IOS should be in the lead in this exercise, with ODG/GE working closely with these units to ensure gender mainstreaming throughout the programme management cycle including:

• Ensure that gender concerns are adequately reflected in the above-mentioned BSP/IOS Guidelines and the templates so that units have clear advice on the gender elements to consider. Evaluators need to receive terms of reference that are gender mainstreamed as well;

• Build capacity and disseminate advice, guidance and awareness-raising to integrate gender into Sectoral programmes and Field counterparts. ODG/GE’s biennial documents Preliminary Analysis of Work Plans have provided guidance for the Sectors. However, if these are not being utilized, consideration could also be given to the decentralization of the analysis of workplans to the Sectors in order for these to take ownership of their contributions to Priority Gender Equality. This would avoid bottlenecks at ODG/GE as well;

• Formulate benchmark performance indicators (as in 36 –C75 p. 270) and develop a system for collecting and analyzing sex-disaggregated data. Regularly monitor delivery. Evaluate result on gender equality and monitor the implementation of recommendations emerging from evaluations;

• Identify good practices and lessons learnt on mainstreaming gender equality through monitoring and evaluation;

• Disseminate and encourage knowledge sharing on good practices and lessons learnt on gender equality to improve future programming to build the foundation for programming and build a learning organization;

• Strengthen Result-based management knowledge and practice for gender mainstreaming;

• Link the next GEAP more specifically with the P&B and the Organization’s strategy (C4 and C5). Emphasize that accountability on gender mainstreaming is key. It is not a question of reporting on gender, but monitoring the improvements made through mainstreaming and gender specific actions so as to demonstrate UNESCO’s added value (and value for money) to donors and external partners.

20

Actions on gender mainstreaming need to be specified in SISTER in the appropriate space that is reserved for elaboration after the tick box. Modalities for explicitly including reference to gender in budgeting also needs to be explored so as to give programming some “teeth”. A recommendation from ODG/GE has been the “creation of a Gender Equality Fund and the establishment of an internal gender equality Committee with house-wide representation. This fund would be used to allocate resources to projects and activities which pursue gender specific objectives, as a means to ensure increase in allocation for activities contributing to Priority GE across the organization.”24 While this idea has merit, the Audit Facilitation Team cautions that this will once again centralize funds and reinforces work on gender-specific projects as opposed to mainstreaming. This modality may also risk strengthening the view that decisions on gender are taken by a very few at the top.

C. Selection of working partners on gender

The selection of gender-responsive working partners brings home a strategic aspect of gender impact. Usually a range of institutions are key partners of an organization, and these partnerships present a tremendous opportunity to promote gender equality. Boosting expertise and cooperation on gender issues through ongoing partnerships is needed as part of a long term strategy. The PGA also explores whether consideration has been given to working with international organizations and other UN agencies, academia and with public and private sector donors.

Key findings:International organizationsUNESCO has a strong comparative advantage in positioning itself as a key player on global aspirations to achieve gender equality. It has a broad mandate covering major issues of universal relevance, and it has the gravitas and credibility to speak authoritatively to these issues. The UNESCO «brand» generates myriads of possibilities of working with multiple partners; therefore the inclusion of gender issues into its areas of work is a natural fit. UNESCO officials are fully aware of this, and the 2010 Independent External Evaluation of UNESCO recommended the organization to increase its focus, strengthen its participation in the United Nations System, and develop a Partnership Strategy.

The Audit Facilitation Team has noted a number of active UN partnerships with or within the context of gender, notably:

• UNDP• UN WOMEN• ILO• UN Girls’ Education Initiative (UNGEI) • UN Inter-Agency Network on Women and Gender Equality (IANWGE) and it Task Team on

the Gender Dimensions of Climate Change• Inter-Agency Task Force on Adolescent Girls • UN Development Group (UNDG) Task Team on Gender Equality• UNAIDS

24 An internal Committee would decide on allocation of funding on a competitive basis for proposals received from across the organization. The Committee would also provide general oversight and ensure the continuing visibility and relevance of Priority GE within UNESCO.Draft 37 C/4 - Preliminary Thoughts on Priority Gender Equality Drafted by: DIR/ODG/GE, 30 July 2012

21

In particular, cooperation with UN Women has resulted in a letter of cooperation signed by the Heads of both agencies in Paris in May 2012 listing main areas of current and future collaboration, especially stipulating that education is a primary area of cooperation. It should be stressed that under the UN System-wide Action Plan (UN SWAP)25, UNESCO has a responsibility to report on the implementation on gender equality in its programmes and activities. In the context of its participation on the UNDG Task Team on Gender Equality, UNESCO has contributed to the preparation of a gender equality marker system that tracks and reports on allocations and expenditures for gender equality and women's and girls' empowerment with agreed upon parameters and standards inside the UN system.

External partners praised UNESCO’s DG for raising the profile of gender equality within the Organization itself and within its mandate. It was felt that her highly visible support for gender was an encouragement for all UN agencies and attaching the gender unit in UNESCO to her office was a visible show of support. It was also noted that apart from the DG the only “face of gender” that was known was that of the Director of ODG/GE and the Organization was cautioned not to limit its representation to “public show women.” Other UNESCO officials could be included with different areas of gender expertise in international fora so as to create more opportunities for collaboration. In terms of partnerships and attending different events, ODG/GE is clear that these are part of the unit’s responsibilities and that it is important to represent UNESCO so as to ensure that its mandate is visible. In some interviews with partner organizations regarding working with ODG/GE, good collaboration and general satisfaction were noted in terms of responsiveness and relevance. However, again it was pointed out that some partners would also appreciate being linked to the technical Sectors by ODG/GE and that the collaboration would benefit from more technical input. There were examples of partners directly contacting the Sectors on gender issues as they were unfamiliar with or uncertain of the role of ODG/GE. The GEAP, when known, was perceived as slightly vague and unconvincing. Some partners found it difficult to find areas for collaboration because they were not familiar with UNESCO’s strategy on gender equality. “UNESCO has done some stellar work and this should be show-cased so as to gain traction on gender.” The significant work on education and life skills was singled out as having particular resonance from a gender angle, and one to be pursued once again.26 Similarly partners pointed to using gender mainstreamed technical materials produced by UNESCO on a regular basis, which is a very positive finding.

It is difficult to gauge however whether and how these partnerships are performing in terms of meeting gender equality objectives. Certain interlocutors felt that many of these were loose affiliations that were partnerships only in name but that they did not collaborate in terms of projects, funds and deliveries. Questions were raised about the value-added of attending partnership meetings on gender in times of financial austerity, and that these could be construed as “preaching to the choir.” Additional questions were raised about the Global Partnership for Girls’ and Women’s Education which was launched by the DG in May 2011 and celebrated on its first anniversary in May 2012. The high level events are positioned as important in generating interest with new private partners to participate through funding projects under the Partnership and in expanding the support offered by existing ones. The principle of raising awareness and mobilizing support for girls’ and women’s education with a specific focus on adult literacy and secondary education was well recognized, but the benefits of the partnership on top of what the Education Sector was already delivering was not clear. Furthermore, there was a sense that much of the work was being done by the Education Sector, and that ODG/GE did not seem to add value.

25 The ECOSOC 2012 resolution requests the United Nations system to continue working collaboratively to enhance gender mainstreaming within the United Nations system.26 Delors, J. et al: Learning: The Treasure Within, Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century, UNESCO, Paris, 1996.

22

On a broader note the TFIII report stated that relationships between UNESCO and other implementing partners did not systematically take gender on board in “to ensure gender responsive implementation.” This is an area that would need to be explored as there are more partnerships other than those on gender, and gender mainstreaming would add value to these.

Recommendations:

• Evaluate the impact of partnerships on gender so as to ascertain whether these generated synergies and economies of scale in delivering on gender or whether they were more aspirational in capturing the spirit of partnership and fulfilling political needs. This would require an overview of the partnerships, analyzing the resources dedicated to these partnerships and importantly, whether any common deliveries have been achieved.

• Systematically include gender issues in work planned with partners, irrespective of whether these are specific partnerships on gender. This would entail vigilance at the planning stages but will go a long way when gender issues are mainstreamed.

• Communicate UNESCO’s strategy on gender equality clearly to partners so that areas for cooperation can be sought. ODG/GE could serve as a gateway for further contacts.

UNESCO National Participation Programmes

An area that has been reported by many as being a good practice in terms of successful inclusion of gender issues is the UNESCO Participation Programmes; gender equality perspectives were integrated in more than 300 requests submitted.27 Much of this success is attributable to a clear process and good collaboration between the External Relations and Public Information Sector (ERI) and ODG/GE. The invitation to submit projects proposals are clear and indicate the inclusion of gender issues as necessary in the proposals where applicable. The Proposal Forms which include gender elements are subsequently reviewed by ERI and ODG/GE; for example, in the latest exercise approximately 140 proposals were reviewed. Should the proposals be unclear or lacking detail, then requests for additional information are made in order to strengthen the gender components.

Recommendation:

• While this will require additional dedication of time and effort on the part of ODG/GE, it may be worthwhile to go through all the proposals retained to identify good practices and missed opportunities in gender mainstreaming and to request additional input from the National Commissions. The process in and of itself will serve as an awareness-raising exercise to encourage proposal authors to think about incorporating gender issues at the earliest stages of proposal design.

Global network of UNESCO Chairs on Gender

The Global Network of UNESCO Chairs on Gender was created collaboratively in 2010 by UNESCO and the UNESCO Regional Chair Women, Science and Technology in Latin America. 28 It currently brings together 12 UNESCO Chairs developing gender research, training and advocacy in different 27 190 EX/4 Part 1 Annex Report: SISTER 36 C/5 - Monitoring of Programme Implementation for Regular Programme and Extrabudgetary Resources as at 30/06/20121 190 EX/4 Part 1 Annex Report: SISTER 36 C/5 - Monitoring of Programme Implementation for Regular Programme and Extrabudgetary Resources as at 30/06/2012128 It was launched during the International Conference "Gender Equity Policies - A Prospective View: New Scenarios, Actors and Articulations", which took place on 9-12 November 2010 in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

23

fields around the world. Universities, research centres, NGOs, donors and cooperation agencies, regional and international organizations working on gender equality are also invited to join this Network. According to the Global Network Newsletter29, it is aligned with UNESCO's priorities expressed in the Medium Term Strategy for 2008-2013, as well as with the UNESCO Priority Gender Equality Action Plan 2008-2013. The recent innovation is that the Chairs are now part of a network rather than working “independently and rather disconnected from one another” which did not take advantage of current ways of producing and disseminating knowledge.

Constituents mentioned the Network as having the potential to create excellent synergies in terms of conducting research and events that would create win-win situations for the Chairs and for UNESCO. It was also mentioned that using the Chairs’ intellectual power and contacts would alleviate UNESCO’s current funding shortages by entrusting research to the Chairs, as this research could be subsequently be publicized and given visibility through UNESCO. Chairs could also provide expertise and advice as well they could contribute to UNESCO events, public forums, conferences etc. Inter-regional research for comparative analyses would be another advantage.

Recommendation:

• Explore the full potential of the Global Network of UNESCO Chairs on Gender by, for instance, proposing common research themes that could be subsequently compiled and disseminated by UNESCO.

Constituents:

“Our member States are literally part of us.” Given its unique structure of national ambassadors attached to the Organization, this statement is more relevant for UNESCO than most other UN agencies. This construct has its benefits in constituents’ providing close guidance to the Organization; it also has its perceived detractions in that the Organization’s work is scrutinized in an on-going way (“micro management”).

The evaluation of Priority Gender Equality was a constituent demand-driven request so that both UNESCO priorities (Africa and Gender Equality) would be evaluated within a similar time period. Constituents recognized the Education Sector as having systematically mainstreamed work on gender and in having gender-specific tools. It was mentioned that other than the creation of ODG/GE , constituents did not have much sense for recent accomplishments on gender. In the words of one interlocutor, “we want results on the ground.” Of particular importance, linkages between Priority Gender Equality and Priority Africa were not visible. There was a sense that there was some “mission creep” with UN Women, and that UNESCO should stick to its own mandates. Some were critical of ODG/GE’s emphasis on representing UNESCO in international fora and commented that time and money should be spent more on the needs within the Organization.

There was also a sense that at times UNESCO was not “bold enough on gender, and did not tackle the difficult sensitive issues.” Given the moral authority it had been entrusted with, UNESCO could take more risks on promoting gender equality. The example of highlighting the attack on Malala was used; the request for an activity was proposed by the Government of Pakistan and not by UNESCO although the Organization subsequently organized the successful event.

UNESCO staff members were cognizant of the view of constituents and felt that constituents were in a position to shape more impact on gender. «The problem is our governance system. Member states

29 http://www.catunescomujer.org/globalnetwork/

24

say gender is a priority at one level, and the same representatives are on Committees (of Conventions) where they do not support gender issues as being relevant.” Constituents could also demand mainstreaming of gender into the programmatic cycles and could recommend more transparency on gender budgeting.

Recommendations:

Encourage dialogue with UNESCO Ambassadors on specific areas of concern for governance on gender. Seeking their guidance could be enriching in probing areas for improvement and securing buy-in on new proposals. This dialogue would be further enriched once the recommendations on the mapping exercises on gender expertise of officials within the Organization (see p. 13) and of the gender-specific and mainstreamed work of the different Sectors and field offices (see p. 32) are conducted.

Explore the links to Priority Africa in a concerted manner to show how that results on both priorities could be achieved through cooperation.

Donors:

Constituents and donors are often embodied by the same representatives but of course donor agencies have their own structures and priorities. With current global financial constraints and in light of UNESCO´s particular recent funding issues, maximizing the impact of regular budgets and raising extra-budgetary resources is even more important than ever. There are divergent views on the ease of fund-raising for gender equality. Some UNESCO staff members feel that gender equality is a universally recognized and politically safe issue to promote. Nordic and like-minded countries are extremely supportive of the gender cause and are known to fund a number of excellent projects across agencies and through their own aid assistance mechanisms. Others think that gender equality is a culturally charged issue that is not an easy sell to donors, particularly in regions where religious and cultural sensitivities are recognized. Nonetheless, constituents had the expectation that ODG/GE would spear-head fund-raising for gender as insufficient funds is seen as an issue. They also felt that fund-raising was not being pursued in a systematic manner by the unit and wanted to see more efforts in this direction. ODG/GE has indicated that BSP was the responsible unit for fund-raising, but that ODG/GE had been instrumental in raising significant funds from the EU, Japanese-funds-in trust, UN Women, UNAIDS, and the private sector for programme sectors and field offices.30 ODG/GE indicates that a fund-raising plan was prepared in collaboration with BSP and that it is under BSP’s remit.

Recommendations:

• ODG/GE should present, through the relevant UNESCO mechanism, a plan for fund-raising on gender issues for discussion with constituents and donors. This could include approaching gender-responsive bi-lateral donors or designing an appeal for voluntary contributions from multiple donors.

• Find creative and pragmatic ways of overcoming resistance from other donors. Much work can be accomplished on gender equality by addressing the issues in different creative ways, such as embedding gender in poverty alleviation, education and capacity-building.

Private sector donors:

UNESCO has a number of initiatives with private sector donors on gender issues which have contributed a great deal on raising visibility with the general public. These are well recognized and have been a source of pride for the Organization. 30 The Audit Facilitation Team had not received any of these fund-raising documents for the PGA desk review.

25

Good practices:

Perhaps the most visible of the Organization’s efforts on promoting gender equality is the UNESCO - L’Oréal Partnership for Women in Science. Since it was established in 1998 it has gained momentum for its pioneering recognition of outstanding female scientists around the world and support for promising young scientists. The Awards have recognized 64 laureates from 30 countries; two of them have gone on to receive the Nobel Prize.” The partnership has inspired regional replication, for example in the Arab region where regional award ceremonies have been held over the past years in UAE, Lebanon, and Egypt31.

UNESCO and the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour Partnership represented the first time that UNESCO partnered with a professional sports league for the promotion of gender equality. It was hailed as “a landmark global partnership” and attracted celebrity spokespersons in order to enhance visibility.

The World Library of Science is an open online learning resource that offers high-quality educational materials in the life and physical sciences in secondary school and university students and their educators around the world. A joint venture between UNESCO and Nature Publishing Group, the World Library of Science is designed to address the lack of scientific literacy, especially in the developing world. Roche is the enabling sponsor for this innovative global learning resource, which will launch in 2013.

Recommendation:

Continue to build on the successes of private partnerships to promote visibility for gender issues and the work of UNESCO.

Compile these initiatives (past and current) into a promotional piece. Not only will this recognize contributing partners but it may serve to attract new partners as well.

D. Information and knowledge management within the Organisation, and gender equality as reflected in its products and public image

Information and knowledge management on gender issues

Most organizations have established modalities for formal information sharing (meetings, e-mail exchanges, reports) and these provide excellent venues for mainstreaming gender. Gender theme groups are also popular vehicles for information sharing with a wider circle, especially if information is then passed to the different stakeholders and partners. Informal channels and networking are also studied. PGAs tease out both formal and informal means for information and knowledge sharing, especially focusing on promoting institutional aspects of communication. Gender equality initiatives as reflected in products and public image of a work unit are also important to consider within the context of the PGA. Visibility and advocacy on gender issues among constituents and the general public is essential, so that these issues are not perceived by partners and the public as being the domain of only one or two units. The use of language that is gender inclusive in promotional material is important. Visual depictions of both men and women and girls and boys in pictures and graphics– especially in atypical stereotype roles –contribute to gender equality messages.

Key Findings:

Internal communications:

31 The Audit Facilitation Team was informed that the event had been planned for December 2012, but it notes that it has been successfully held in February 2013.

26

Communicating on gender is built on good information flow in general, and therefore if a premium is not placed on information sharing and knowledge management then gender will suffer as well. A number of interlocutors appreciated the flow of communication on overall issues of interest from ODG/GE and felt that they were kept informed, in particular by the Director. Similarly, they felt that their direct requests for information were met in a timely fashion. However, there was also a sense both from within the unit and outside that information flow from ODG/GE was not systematic or institutionalized. There was an impression that there was a selective communication flow on information of particular interest to certain individuals. It may be that this was purposefully done so as to target relevant recipients, but it had the adverse effect of not being inclusive and of leaving the determination of whether a piece of information was useful or not to a broader group of interested recipients. It was noted that most information was selectively shared only with GFPs whereas other technical experts may benefit from receiving the information as well. This was meant to put the responsibility on GFPs to subsequently share information with interested officials, but in reality that sometimes created bottle-necks for the GFPs. Creating platforms and plones had been proposed by ODG/GE but funding was not available and UNESCO IT services did not currently have the capacity to develop this.

Similarly, other Headquarters units and Field offices did not systematically communicate their work on gender to ODG/GE nor did they share interesting information on gender issues within their areas of expertise with ODG/GE. For example, the Audit Facilitation Team learned of some excellent work on gender in Havana but the project had not been communicated to ODG/GE. So communication and information flow with ODG/GE was sporadic at best.

Recommendation: Institutionalize regular information flow from and to ODG/GE. Facilitating information flow is

one of the primary responsibilities of gender units within organizations, and experience has shown this to be an extremely motivating factor that often leads to more cooperation. Experience has also shown that platforms and plones do not often work successfully, as these have to be updated and managed. In many cases, these wither on the vine. The Audit Facilitation Team’s recommendation is a low-tech but systematic solution for information sharing that has been tried and tested successfully. Elements of particular interest can be forwarded by email to an official, whether P or G staff, who then collects the material and sends the information on a weekly basis by email to all GFPs and technical specialists interested in gender. Officials in this broader gender network can scour the email for elements of interest and relevance; if they do not have time one week they can simply delete it. However, the onus is on the receiver to determine whether the information is interesting or not, and not on the sender. Information can also be solicited from the gender network for dissemination as well. Again, experience has shown that a two-way flow of information is created as officials increasingly share their office’s achievements on gender or other interesting elements of information. This is a simple and effective solution.

Web-sites: key information and advocacy tools

Web-sites are an excellent way to promote work on gender in any organization as it is inexpensive and provides myriads of opportunities for creating linkages and contexts. The public UNESCO entry page always has professional and gender-sensitive pictures featuring both women and men in different life and livelihood situations and positions of authority. News features, such as Stories of hope and horror regarding girls’ education presented at the high‐level panel discussion at the “Stand up for Malala” advocacy event at UNESCO headquarters on 10 December, Human Rights Day are

27

right on the “front page”. The entry page also has a permanent drop down link to gender equality under the heading “themes”, which then links to the ODG/GE web-site.

The ODG/GE web-page offers links to pages of interest as well as resources and events. For example, it highlighted UNESCO’s International Women Leaders’ Conference on “Science, Technology and Innovation: Education and Training for Women and Girls” which was a high profile event that resulted in the Haifa Declaration32 on the importance of equal access to education. Another example is the video of Dr Kimmel, a leading expert on men and masculinities.33

However many UNESCO colleagues including ODG/GE staff themselves felt that the web-site was too “static” and is not updated frequently enough. Current information is often not posted in a timely manner. The capacity-building web-site links to the Gender Equality eLearning Programme which is outdated; references are not made to other training courses that have been recently offered. As a result, the ODG/GE web-site does not become the “one-stop window” that it could be for internal officials on capacity-building on gender, and many doubt that it provides that service for external users either.There are resource materials that can be accessed from the ODG/GE page. The Gender Mainstreaming Tools links to UNESCO Gender Lenses:1. Baseline definitions of key gender-related concepts 2. UNESCO Gender Lens for project design and review 3. UNESCO Gender Lens for measuring performance: guide for developing gender sensitive

indicators 4. UNESCO Gender Lens for developing terms of reference (TORs) of surveys & research 5. UNESCO Gender Lens for planning and execution of programme evaluations 6. UNESCO Gender Lens for meetings workshops and conferences 7. UNESCO Gender Lens for organizing and running trainings 8. Guidelines on Gender neutral Language 9. Key elements for programming with the CEDAW

These practical 2-page guides provide simple and useful information to assist in mainstreaming gender, Many of these were updated in 2003, and others in 2007, while the Gender Division was still in BSP. Although useful and short, the sheets are somewhat generic. These guides do not illustrate with examples from different sectors and units and therefore fall short of encouraging users to apply the guidance. The Guidelines on Gender Neutral Language date to 1999, and while still helpful, the document does not reflect changes in terminology and application of gender concepts.

Importantly, the ODG/GE web-site also provides links to Sector web-pages on gender themes on which each of the Sectors is working upon. Some have pointed that gender is not immediately visible, but others feel that the drop down menus are appropriate enough: In SHS, the themes are Globalization and Women’s Rights, Gender, Peace and Conflict, Preventing Gender-based violence, with each theme having further information and links. It also promotes news items on gender with links that are updated;In Education, the focus is on Teacher Education, Literacy, Policy and Plans, HIV/AIDS, Education for Sustainable Development, Gender-based violence. While the themes are not necessarily gender-specific, the material presented is most often gender-mainstreamed. A further good practice is the

32 Please see http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/BSP/GENDER/PDF/Haifa%20Declaration%20paper%20head_COMPLETE.pdf33 http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/themes/gender-equality/themes/

28

link to the UNESCO Bangkok web-site on gender and education, including the promotion of Gender and Education Network in Asia (GENIA) and its Tool-kit. Again, news and updated items are on this web-site.

In Natural Sciences, the main themes that are featured for drop-down menus are Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy and Gender, Gender and Disaster Risk Reduction, Women and Local Knowledge, Gender mainstreaming in marine science, For Women in Science Programme. The 2007 International Report on Science, Technology and Gender is highlighted as key product.

The Communication and Information Sector also has a dedicated web-page to Gender and Media, which comprises Women Make the News, Gender Sensitive Indicators in Media, and International Programme for the Development of Communication (IPDC) projects on gender.

However, the Culture Sector does not have a dedicated page to gender equality and as a result does not have the drop-down menus to themes and products. Gender issues were not visible at first glance either. For example, the 2012 publication Managing Natural World Heritage is a recent comprehensive and well-researched guide, but it has only scant reference to gender issues. Another example is the 4th World Heritage Youth Forum in June 2012 refers to 46 young people but does not give an indication of sex. External partners have also commented that there were many gender angles to be explored in preserving natural and cultural heritage sites and that was an area that needed to be focused upon by both ODG/GE and the Culture Sector.

Recommendations: It was suggested that a visible and frequently updated “gender corner” be created on the

UNESCO home page so as to immediately position gender as a key organizational priority. As UNESCO is moving to one common content management system for internet, intra-net, and extra-net, proposals were made to take advantage of this opportunity to share more knowledge and information on gender equality. This portal could then lead to a frequently updated ODG/GE web-site on which a number of interesting features could be placed:

o Post an open list of UNESCO contacts on the web-site for both internal and external consultation (GFP, officials with experience and expertise – please see the need for a gender mapping exercise);

o Upload statistics on male/female UNESCO staff at different levels in Headquarters and the Field, thereby showing that sex parity is of importance to the Organization. Similarly, post participation at important meetings by sex to highlight the monitoring of these statistics;

o Develop a “gender watch” or «veille stratégique» on thematic areas which highlighted current issues being examined in different sectors;

o Update the ODG/GE Gender Lens guidance to reflect more recent thinking, and including practical examples of mainstreamed UNESCO work as good practices and examples.

o Similarly, update the guidance on gender neutral language to highlight the importance of gender-responsive principles;

o Provide linkages to previous training courses and future offerings so that officials can get a sense for what is being offered;

o Hyper-links to ODG/GE web-site and relevant documents A number of proposals were made for better use of the Organization’s intra-net:

o Posting relevant mission reports from ODG/GE and other sectors and upload additional tools and guidance;

29

o Creating an IOS data-base of evaluation reports which could be searched to identify gender related information (gender-inclusive terms of reference, good practices, and lessons learned)

o Posting gender equality resources for each sector. The Culture Sector would stand to strongly benefit in showcasing its work on gender issues

in a systematic way on its web-site by creating a dedicated web-page and by paying attention to increase its visibility on gender.

External Relations and Public Information (ERI)

Good practices:ERI is an important internal partner and its management and staff are committed to championing gender equality both within and outside the Organization. ODG/GE officials fell that “ERI’s staff ‘get’ gender and they do not have difficulties with the concept of mainstreaming.” The information and promotional material that is developed by this unit is gender inclusive and there is a close collaboration with ODG/GE. There was a positive regard for ERI’s work on gender. The 2011 issue of The UNESCO Courier: Women conquering new expanses of freedom was a notable example of the promotion of gender issues. Another area of cooperation is the evaluation of Partnership Programme proposals (see p. 23) on which ODG/GE is systematically consulted.

The two units also work together in promoting gender mainstreaming in UNESCO publications. The Publication Submission Proposal Form has questions that prompt authors and lead units to include gender issues at the inception phase so as to avoid a retroactive plugging in of gender issues at later stages. In order to assist with the mainstreaming process, ODG/GE prepared a short but informative set of Gender Mainstreaming Guidelines for distribution to authors as well as a list of resources for further information. These Guidelines are supplemented by a Priority Gender Equality Check-list for publications, which stimulate authors to consider key gender issues from multiple angles. These Forms and check-list are first shared with the GFP of lead units to seek their guidance and approval. They are subsequently sent to ODG/GE prior to review with ERI for the final approvals. However, author units complained that waiting for approvals often took a long time and bottlenecks were created at the levels of GFP and/or ODG/GE. On the other hand GFPs complained at the enormous workload that this process has generated.

One area for ERI improvement is the inclusion of ODG/GE in presentations and meetings with Member States and National Commissions. This is raised in the Ivory Note UNESCO Programme on Capacity Development and Training for Gender Equality.34

Recommendation for ERI: Provide systematically the opportunity for ODG/GE to brief Member States and National

Commissions on the UNESCO’s work on gender equality which in turn could lead to areas for greater cooperation.

Recommendations for ODG/GE regarding the publications check-list: Speed up the approval processes for the Publication Submission Proposal Form and the

Check-list. The Form and the Check-list are useful tools for monitoring the inclusion of gender issues into UNESCO publications, both at the preparation and reviewing stages. As it is a new procedure, it is expected that the process will become smoother over time. GFPs should be consulted during the planning stages of publication.

Provide helpful comments to improve a publication if it is not sufficiently gender mainstreamed. Originating author units commented that at times documents were not

34 DG/Note/11/04

30

approved by ODG/GE, but constructive assistance was not given on how to improve the “rejected” manuscript.

E. Gender issues relevant to the technical areas, existing gender expertise

Changes in the roles of women and men, their relations with each other, and the nature of the households, markets and societies in which they live continue to accelerate in a globalized world. Gender equality cannot be achieved when biases remain embedded in economic and social institutions and in development processes. It often remains unaddressed or is addressed in an uneven manner. Shifting boundaries and values create tensions that are sometimes magnified by rapid globalization and men and women may experience the day-to-day manifestations of these strains differently. While some may benefit from new opportunities, many may continue with traditional gender roles and suffer from increased burdens and stress. The PGA explored the current international gender issues and gender debate affecting UNESCO’s technical areas of work and the practical implementation of gender equality measures and women’s empowerment. Bridging the gap between the actual achievements and the over-arching goals on gender equality is an organizational challenge.

Key findingsThere was widespread recognition that UNESCO officials could do much more gender mainstreaming. This recognition was raised both by individual officials about their own roles (“Admittedly, I haven’t done enough myself.”) and collectively (“My sector needs to learn how to mainstream gender”) and was voiced in focus groups as well as in the PGA workshops. Interest in gender issues was recognized, and there was a shared sentiment that “no one is really obstructing gender now, as in the past. It is more that people don’t quite know what more to do.” This progress, compared to the past lack of interest in gender equality was seen as a positive development and the perception that more “how-to” knowledge was needed could be addressed by capacity-building. Despite the mandate set out in the DG’s Ivory Note Transfer of the Division for Gender Equality to the Office of the Director-General, the Role of ODG/GE seemed to be unclear regarding the substantive support it could provide internally to UNESCO Sectors and field offices. As a result, officials from some sectors were disappointed that they could not get substantive input on their deliveries from ODG/GE, while others did not contact ODG/GE because they did not expect any input. ODG/GE, while conscious of the possible frustration, made the important point emphasized that the substantive gender issues were the responsibility of the Sectors themselves. ODG/GE did not have staff or capacity to contribute to all Sectors on substantive matters.

Good Practice:Identifying a knowledge gap, ODG/GE has worked on issues concerning gender and HIV and AIDS and contributed to this important debate through publications such as The Implications of HIV and AIDS on Women’s Unpaid Labour Burden and Globalization and Women Vulnerabilities to HIV and AIDS.

Another key finding is that gender issues are still largely equated with women’s issues in UNESCO. Many interlocutors were of the view that women-specific initiatives were an important part of the Organization’s delivery on gender and examples of successful women-specific work were given across Sectors and regions. This approach is understandable and one that is accepted, however there is also a shared sentiment that men and masculinities issues have been largely overlooked. The topic and UNESCO’s approach was raised in the focus groups and workshops and generated lively

31

discussions. Some good practices in the area may be pointed to, notably the work on masculinities in the Havana Office, or the presentation made by Dr Michael Kimmel on “men and gender equality: resistance or support?”35, but the overall sentiment is that more can be done.

Recommendations:

Conduct a comprehensive mapping of women- and gender-specific work as well as gender mainstreamed work in Headquarters and in the Field. The Audit Facilitation Team noted a tremendous amount of work accomplished in both, and yet there was no overall sense of what the Organization was delivering on gender. Conducting such a mapping goes beyond the remit of this PGA, and would be an important accomplishment by ODG/GE. In such a manner, recognition could be given where due, and gaps/misunderstandings could be noted and addressed. Once the first mapping is conducted, subsequent updates could be achieved with less effort. This is linked to the mapping of gender expertise across the Organization, as proposed in the section above on structural mechanisms for delivery.

Clarify the support that can or cannot be offered by ODG/GE on technical substantive issues and its role in disseminating and promoting substantive work undertaken in the Sectors.

Improve understanding around men and masculinities and promote more work around the topic. For example, the Audit Facilitation Team noted that SHS was involved in delivering at an Inter-Ministerial Meeting on youth violence in 2013, a topic which speaks to men and masculinities and is an example of cooperation with ODG/GE.

The DG’s Ivory Note Transfer of the Division for Gender Equality to the Office of the Director-General36 not only addressed the structural mechanisms for delivery on gender but also referred to the substantive issues, asking for “…concrete proposals, building on the conclusions of the Task Force on Gender Equality…” Based on the experience of Task Force III members, the TF III Report indicated that the Gender Equality Action Plan (GEAP) was rather abstract and did not practically lay out what measures needed to be taken to advance the mainstreaming of gender issues. The Report noted that the Plan “does not reflect actions taken by UNESCO and concrete results and outcomes to ensure pursuit of women’s empowerment in programming.”

This TF III finding was corroborated by the Audit Facilitation Team in numerous interviews of both internal staff as well as external partners, and was further confirmed in the collective workshops. However, while the GEAP may not have provided a road-map for mainstreaming, ODG/GE has made many efforts to facilitate discussion and activity around key substantive issues. For example the Discussion Paper Gender Equality and Sustainable Development offers a number of entry points.

It is important to report that much substantive, technical work of top professional quality has been delivered both in the Sectors and in the Field. Below are a few selected samples worthy of note, bearing in mind that this short list is by no means exhaustive:

Selected Good Practices in Technical Areas

Good Practices Education Sector:

World Atlas of Gender Equality in Education: The publication in itself is a major contribution to the goal of gender equality. The Atlas features over 120 maps with a wide range of sex-disaggregated data and gender indicators from the UNESCO Institute for Statistics. It also illustrates the extent to which gender disparities in education have changed since 1970 and are shaped by factors such as national wealth, geographic location, investment in education and fields of study. OECD partners

35 mms://telesto.unesco.org/vod/kimmel_en.wmv36 DG/Note/10/17 28 April, 2010

32

mentioned frequently turning to this publication in their own work as it provided comparative analysis on gender equality in education between countries.

• EFA Global Monitoring Report: Youth and Skills, Putting Education to Work: This publication consistently features sex-disaggregated data. In the Executive Summary there are still opportunities to bring gender to the fore; however generally in the body of the text, the gender analysis is well done to a high level of analytical quality.

• The Gender in Education Network in Asia-Pacific (GENIA) created in 2002 by UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education, is a network of gender focal points in ministries of education across Asia which are designated to share information and lessons on gender and education and speak with one voice on complex and sometimes controversial issues of gender. The broad intent of GENIA has been to promote a pro-active regional association of education professionals and stakeholders, who, in turn, to strengthen the capacity of national education systems to advocate, inform and apply lessons with respect to creating a more gender equal educational and social culture.

• GENIA Toolkit for Promoting Gender Equality in Education37: This Toolkit was designed to be a cluster of resources for use by Education planners and implementers to incorporate gender equality into their work. The GENIA Toolkit was recently updated and includes up to 25 tools / publications divided in 3 parts: Part 1: Tools for Raising Gender-Awareness; Part 2: Tools for a Gender-Responsive Educational Environment and; Part 3: Tools for Gender-Responsive Educational Management.

• Over the years, the Bangkok Office stands out for its commitment to quality gender products.38 It has produced an Advocacy and Policy Brief Series analyzing key thematic topics in education from the gender perspective, to cite a few:

• Empowering Girls and Women through Physical Education and Sport

• Gender responsive Budgeting in Education

• Gender Issues in Higher Education

• Gender Issues in Counseling and Guidance in Post-Primary Education - Advocacy Brief

• Gender-Responsive Life Skills-Based Education

• Strong Foundations for Gender Equality in Early Childhood Care and Education

• Providing Education to Girls from Remote and Rural Areas

• Role of Men and Boys in Promoting Gender Equality

Also from Asia:

• Gender-based violence: A study of three universities in Afghanistan

• Guidelines for Mainstreaming Gender in Literacy Materials (Islamabad)

From IIEP on Education:

37 http://www.unescobkk.org/education/gender/resources/genia-toolkit/ 38 For additional materials please see: http://www.unescobkk.org/education/gender/resources/research-manual-and-studies/

33

• The IIEP has currently two gender specific projects: “Gender equality in learning achievement” and “Gender equality in educational leadership and management” which are giving high visibility to the topics.

• In 2012 they published “Stories behind gender differences in student achievement”, aimed at investigating the underlying reasons for the presence and/or absence of gender differences in learning achievement. The research uses a comprehensive range of determinants of gender differences including: how teachers are trained, school resources available, school management issues, teachers’ attitudes, among others. The specific areas to be examined are selected by Ministries of Education and other country partners in which the research is conducted. A new large research project on Gender equality in educational leadership and management (conducted in Argentina, Kenya and Vietnam) explores how leadership issues are dealt within Ministries of Education by analyzing a wide range of factors such as school staffing by sex; ministry of education officers by sex; and ministerial appointments among other structural variables which are critical in the perpetuation of gender inequalities.

• The Barefoot College in India has joined UNESCO’s Global Partnership for Girls’ and Women’s Education. In a cross-regional effort of exemplary quality, it has trained 300 older African women as solar engineers and thus provided electricity for over 1000 villages. UNESCO cooperates with the Barefoot College to offer technical support for establishing environmentally sound Community Empowerment Centres in villages around the world, using rural electronic workshops as learning hubs for literacy and skills training. These centres promote girls’ and women’s education, vocational skills, women’s entrepreneurship, literacy and lifelong learning.

Good Practices CI Sector

Gender Lens for Review of CI Work plans and Related Programmatic Actions including EXB projects: This simple and practical guidance offers users the basic elements to consider when mainstreaming gender.

Getting the Balance Right: Gender equality in Journalism: This resource guide for journalists evolved out of a desire to equip all journalists with more information and understanding of gender issues in their work. It is addressed to media organizations, professional associations and journalists’ unions seeking to contribute to the goal of gender equality.

Media Development Indicators: a framework for assessing media development. This paper defines indicators of media development in line with the priority areas of the International Programme for the Development of Communication (IPDC). While not thoroughly mainstreamed, it does have a section on making indicators gender-sensitive and pro-poor.

Intégration de l'approche "genre" dans la formation au journalisme des pays du Maghreb : This document serves as a strategic guideline to journalists of North Africa in how to mainstreaming gender issues into the coverage of journalists and their portrayal of gender issues.

UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity: This was prepared during the 1st UN Inter-Agency Meeting on this issue with UNESCO in the lead and was endorsed by the UN CEB in April 2012. It includes gender equality as one of its principles and explicitly addresses female journalists and violence against women. It emphasizes the need for systematic inclusion of women as beneficiaries in training courses, with a minimum of 40 per cent women’s participation. This has been used as an example of the effectiveness of senior management leadership in promoting gender issues.

34

Increasing access to and participation in the development of free and open source software (FOSS) and open standards” is witness to the strong effort made to take into account gender equality considerations both in the implementation strategy and in the expected results matrix39.

Good Practices Natural Sciences Sector

Annual L’ORÉAL-UNESCO Awards for Women in Science. Every year, UNESCO and L’Oréal promote scientific careers and identify outstanding women scientists. For the past four years the partnership programme has given recognition to over a thousand women scientists, providing visibility and encouragement for the exceptional quality of their work.

UNESCO-L'OREAL International Fellowships Programme for Young Women in Life Sciences (2013). This partnership aims at promoting the contribution of young women - from all over the world – in research developments in the field of life sciences. It identifies and rewards fifteen deserving, committed and talented young women scientists, from all over the world, active in the field of life sciences. With a view to ensuring that a balanced geographical representation is made, a maximum of three young women, from each of the five geo-cultural regions of the world, will be awarded fellowships.

The UN World Water Development Report40 is a joint publication within the UN system. Gender equality is mainstreamed throughout the report.

Good Practices Social and Human Sciences Sector

International Network of Women Philosophers is an information portal available to all philosophers throughout the world. Its aim is to create genuine links within the philosophical community at national, regional and international levels and to keep a directory of women philosophers working in different countries. However, SHS does not have a great deal of funding or human resources to provide more support, but it supported the November 2011 publication of the Women Philosophers’ Journal.

Research Centre on sexual and gender-based violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: This innovative programme links research to policy development with the production and validation of new teaching modules on gender equality and violence prevention which are now being taught in universities in the North and South Kivu Regions. These programmes are to be adopted at national level and promoted by the Ministry for Education.

SHS is keen to mainstream gender into its work on monitoring patterns of vulnerability in class systems, migration etc. Some inroads have been made in this regard, but there is recognition that more needs to be done.

Women, gender and sports is another area in which SHS wishes to become more active in terms of discrimination against women and LGBT rights as well as the promotion of health and anti-doping for female athletes

The 2010 World Social Science Report: Knowledge Divides is positioned as a key scientific reference for the advancement of social sciences in responding to global challenges. It has a number of gender mainstreamed articles

2011 Manuel d’Apprentisage de la Démocratie pour le Jeunes en Tunisie. This document is well mainstreamed and also contains a specific information section on women, political parties and elections. This guide has been followed up by an extensive survey on the civic engagement of young Tunisian women, carried out together with the Centre of Arab Women for Training and Research (CAWTAR) with support of the Netherlands.

39 See ODG/GE Memo Preliminary Analysis of 36 C/5 Workplans for Priority Gender Equality of January 201240 http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002156/215644e.pdf

35

Diversities Journal (on-line: Volume 14 (No. 1 2012) covered an important gender issue, The Invisibility of Family in Studies of Skilled Migration and Brain Drain . A previous issue was completely devoted to “Female Migration Outcomes: Human Rights Perspectives” (Volume 13, No. 1, 2011).

Good Practices Culture Sector

The Havana Office organized activities at the national level in the context of the UN campaign UNiTE to prevent and eliminate violence against women and girls in all parts of the world (“Yo digo no” http://endviolence.un.org/). Activities included the production of awareness-raising materials, leaflets, posters and the organization of a communication campaign with artists and public personalities to raise awareness on the issue of VaW and girls. Awareness raising activities included the distribution of information materials in urban and rural areas. This was done in close collaboration with other sister UN entities.

One really interesting initiative is the systematic collaboration of the Havana Office with the Red de Masculinidades de Cuba (part or the Red Iberoamericana y Africana de Masculinidades RIAM). They were involved in the launching of the UNiTE campaign. UNESCO Havana has also been successful in contributing to gender mainstreaming in UNDAFs.

Other Good Practices

UNESCO celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Pan-African Women's Organization is a very good example of cross-fertilization between priority Africa and Priority Gender Equality. Both departments worked in tandem to organize the event.

Capacity-building

The PGA aims to find whether gender expertise, competence and efforts at capacity building exist within the Organization and are being fostered. One frequent lament heard in PGAs is that officials would be happy to mainstream gender issues into their work, but they simply do not know how to do so. A stock-taking of gender expertise is useful, and if from that stock-taking it is determined that there is indeed a lack of basic knowledge on gender mainstreaming among officials then corrective measures such as training and technical assistance could be considered.

Key findingsContradictory views on capacity building on gender were expressed. On the one hand, responsibilityfor gender mainstreaming training has been centralized in ODG/GE, which has been seen as offering value added and developing capacity for those who followed the courses. Some interlocutors felt that HRM could also potentially have a role and that a strengthened collaboration between ODG/GE and HRM would enhance delivery. On the other hand, ODG/GE and others stressed that units themselves should be proactive in seeking expertise. “The policy is everyone’s responsibility, and we shouldn’t only rely on ODG/GE to offer training.” There were a number of officials who pointed to the difficulties of capacity-building in creating a shared vision in the different mandates and with people of such diverse backgrounds. Some people who followed trainings mentioned that they returned to their units with their newly gained knowledge but that nevertheless it was difficult to have much impact as others had not followed the training. There was no critical mass to initiate or sustain change in the whole unit.

36

The DG Ivory note41 UNESCO Programme on Capacity Development and Training for Priority Gender Equality reinforced the important decision that training was mandatory for UNESCO staff from P1 to the D2 levels as of 2005, with a target of having all professionals trained by the end of 2013. The Ivory Note further stated that customized UNESCO training would be provided to all sectors, central services, field offices and institutes. However, such training would be provided “upon receipt of a request”; all structures were “invited” to arrange training sessions, and staff were “strongly encouraged” to attend. While the process is clear, the mandatory nature of following the training courses is somewhat diluted and accountability of managers to request training or of staff for attendance is not spelled out. The fact that this discretion exists has been confirmed by both ODG/GE and representatives of the multiple units interviewed. The Audit Facilitation Team noticed that The Ivory Note on training was not well known by UNESCO staff members nor much of management, and therefore the obligation to attend training on gender equality appeared to be missing.

The Ivory Note also refers to the on-line gender equality training tool 42. However, ODG/GE has indicated that it does not have a sense of how many officials have taken the on-line course as HRM which administers the offer has not tracked the numbers. As a result, it is not possible to gauge the uptake on this tool, which is an unfortunate missed opportunity for gender capacity-building. The AFT was told by some officials that they do not think that many staff members have taken any or all of the seven modules on offer.

Cognizant of the need to prioritize capacity-building, ODG/GE conducted a number of gender “clinics” to assist Headquarters and Field offices and Institutes on formulating work plans. It has been reported that ten sessions took place since April 2012, involving colleagues from Headquarters, Field Offices and Institutes (CLT, SC, CI, IBE, and Field offices in Amman, Apia, Harare, Lima and Quito). The support was provided face-to-face, by email or via videoconference and telephone in order to adapt to the needs of the concerned colleagues and limit costs to the organization. The Gender Equality Clinics enabled colleagues to incorporate gender-responsive implementation strategies into their work plans and key documents, expected results and performance indicators, and thus indirectly contributed to the capacity building of Sectors and field offices in gender equality.43 These were seen as successful initiatives, albeit more focused on the programmatic side of mainstreaming. The delivery for field offices (Amman, Apia, Harare, Lima, Quito) and was done via video conferencing, and although not as effective as face-to-face clinics, these were nevertheless positive developments and well received.

Three Occasional Brown Bag lunches on gender issues were held in 2012. These were positioned as both information sessions and capacity-building events. Many staff members interviewed had not been aware that these events were taking place.

External partners too were aware of capacity-building for ODGE/GE staff as well as other in-house gender experts. There was mention that it was important to expose staff members to external events, and for them to represent UNESCO and to strengthen their skills. This view was corroborated by internal UNESCO staff members as well.

Good practices on capacity-building:

Targeted initiatives for various Sectors have been undertaken by ODG/GE, with officials attending on a voluntary basis. In 2011 a gender mainstreaming training was conducted for Education Sector staff

41 DG/Note/11/04 28 March 201142 See http://www.unesco.org/new/index.php?id=3459243190 EX/4 Part 1 Annex Report: SISTER 36 C/5 - Monitoring of Programme Implementation for Regular Programme and Extrabudgetary Resources as at 30/06/2012

37

and in 2012 for SHS Sector staff who had expressed interest. This was seen as helpful in providing basic training and in stimulating staff members to mainstream gender into their work plans. ODG/GE is to monitor the impact of the training to see whether gender was indeed included in more work plans.The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) is a prime example of the “multiplier effect” possibilities of training. The GFP of IOC attended the ODG/GE capacity-building end 2011, and following this training she delivered a comprehensive presentation on key gender concepts and concerns and mainstreaming into IOC areas of activities. The presentation was well received by colleagues and contributed to a broader understanding of gender and of mainstreaming into activities.

Recommendations: Reinforce capacity-building efforts to reach a maximum number of staff in an optimum

fashion. One effective way is to provide training workshops on gender mainstreaming for the entire staff of “natural” units, from the director positions to professional and support service staff alike. This approach would create a common language and understanding of gender issues and have a concerted impact on the overall mainstreaming into the work of the unit. It would also assist in building in mechanisms that would help to steer away from tokenistic messages on gender, and would assist managers in ensuring that a critical mass of staff has practical skills on gender mainstreaming. This holistic approach alleviates pressures on GFPs, who can then assist colleagues without carrying the full responsibility of mainstreaming gender into the work of a given unit.

Collect and analyze UNESCO good practices on gender equality from different Sectors, field offices, institutes etc. ODG/GE already references many good practices on gender issues in its reporting to the Executive Board. These could be further disseminated internally or presented in brown bag lunches and workshops; concrete examples may become practical case studies in gender training courses.

Offer a short module on gender to new staff members in UNESCO. This could be organized together with HRM and could be opened up to short term staff and consultants.

Link to HRM to liaise on training delivery on gender mainstreaming as part of overall HRM capacity-building of staff. This formalizes the recognition of having followed the training and fulfils the requirement laid out in the DG Ivory Note.

Link with HRM for the inclusion in UNESCO performance appraisals of staff members’ participation in gender mainstreaming training. This would also give formal recognition to the fact that officials have been sensitized to gender issues and have gained an understanding on mainstreaming. While some officials will need to further pursue in-depth training in order to fully gain gender mainstreaming know-how, the acknowledgement that the entry level course has been taken will nevertheless contribute to increased accountability.

Ensure that events such as brown bag lunches and other events of interest to gender are well publicized through the gender network and to all UNESCO staff. Very often officials are too busy to attend all the events that are staged at Headquarters, but sometimes they are more amenable with the additional incentive of being solicited directly.

Propose and coordinate training schedules well in advance in order to secure future impact. “If we want improvement on gender mainstreaming by 2014, we should train now!”

Match training delivery to programme cycles on mainstreaming gender into work plans. Building capacity on substantive gender issues can be conducted throughout the biennium as these will benefit officials in their daily work. However, short refreshers given either by ODG/GE or GFPs at peak cycle times will keep gender on the programming agenda.

Offer ODG/GE staff and other gender experts in the different sectors the possibility to increase their skills and to represent UNESCO in external events or deal with external

38

entities on work items. Not only does this contribute to capacity-building but also increases UNESCO’s credibility in show-casing broader expertise.

F. Staffing, human resources policies and organizational culture

Staffing and human resources concerning sex balance Staffing and human resources concerning sex balance and gender-sensitive policies are key areas to explore. In the context of PGAs, these criteria are vital to determine whether the importance of sex parity in an organization is understood and appreciated.44

HRM supports the GEAP though recruitment, policies and sex balance of professional staff. It has its own Gender Action Plan and has a responsibility to report to the Executive Board on sex parity and its evolution and does so on a regular basis. As demonstrated in the tables below, UNESCO has good sex balance at the ADG and D2 levels which is very positive. The D1 level is skewed towards men which throws the overall figures for parity at the Director level off balance. D1 and D2 positions are advertised internally and externally and are open for competition. Geographic priorities are also taken into consideration.

At the professional levels, there is good sex parity in P3 to P5, but an over-representation towards women at P1-P2 levels. This is not an uncommon phenomenon in international organizations, as women seem to dominate entry level positions. However the aim is to promote internal staff and to offer capacity-building so as to reach targets through career development as well as recruitment. Up to P5 levels posts are first offered to internal candidates.

Report by the Director-General on the Follow-up to the Decisions and Resolutions Adopted by the Executive Board and the General Conference at their Previous Sessions, Part IV, Human Resources Issues, August 2012 190 EX/5 Part IV – page 34, Table 4

44 There is increasing international acceptance of sex “parity” in organizations referring to a range of 60% to 40% representation for either sex. It is not always possible to achieve 50%-50%, and 60%-40% provides a critical mass for either men or women. The key is the active participation of both women and men in promoting gender equality, and not just a “head count” of women or men.

39

Report by the Director-General on the Follow-up to the Decisions and Resolutions Adopted by the Executive Board and the General Conference at their Previous Sessions, Part IV, Human Resources Issues, August 2012 190 EX/5 Part IV – page 34, Table 5.

Recommendations: Address the imbalance at D1 levels by considering and developing the skills of female

candidates until such time as balance is achieved. The Audit Facilitation Team hastens to add that all recruitment, retention and promotion efforts should be merit-based.

Recruit more men at the P1-P2 levels in order to restore balance at entry level positions. In this fashion sex balance will not be askew as officials move up the echelons. Similarly, facilitate the recruitment of male support staff as well.

It is clear that UNESCO has been facing other serious challenges with its current financial concerns and that the atmosphere had been tense with fears of job losses. However a commitment was made to staff by the DG and although the situation has been difficult no one lost their jobs. The DG launched a 75 per cent hiring freeze, with the “aim” of 100 per cent freeze, but it was simply not possible to completely eliminate recruitment. A voluntary separation programme resulted in 45 early departures. This programme was amiable and smooth and involved the Staff Associations as well. Gender was not a consideration in the process nor did it need to be; requests were evaluated based on the needs of the individuals and the priorities of the units. In better times these posts will be filled again, giving an opportunity for improved sex and geographic distribution.

Gender-sensitive human resources policiesKey findingsOrganizations recognize that it is important to put in place and adhere to gender-sensitive human resources (HR) policies. It is an achievement to mainstream gender into the technical and substantive areas of work but it is also essential to be aware of the gender impact of an organization’s policies on staff’s work and family balance and other areas of well-being. In other

40

words, organizations need to “walk the talk” when it comes to implementing measures that respect the productive and reproductive roles of female and male officials.

Adoption leave is granted for eight weeks for a parent of either sex, with flexible work schedules also provided. Parental leave is another gender-responsive entitlement which provides for “special leave without pay to allow staff members to take time off to take care of children immediately following maternity, paternity or adoption leave, or during early childhood to primary school age.” Reintegration into their previous post or following an absence of more than a year, into a comparable post is guaranteed.

UNESCO officials have the possibility to opt to work part-time, although HRM indicates that its uptake is not that prevalent. There are no policies for flexi-time. The idea of a tele-work policy was not supported by management. A pilot was conducted by HRM and it was not satisfactory. Although not explicitly stated, there was a sense that perhaps such mechanisms may be oversubscribed by employees and that productivity gains may be lost. Therefore HRM postponed its launch but reviews tele-work requests and grants approvals on a case-by-case basis. The participants in the PGA workshop for professional staff also raised the point that there was no compensatory time given for Ps travelling on week-ends for official business, which impacted on work/family balance.

Good practice:UNESCO’s Family Leave Policy45 provides for standard practice in such leave (death, injury or illness of close relatives) and household emergencies such as major damage). It also provides for the “breakdown in parental obligations, child care or educational arrangements that may occur during normal working hours”. While many organizations informally accommodate staff members in these situations, it is commendable that UNESCO has codified this allowance. This certainly contributes to the often tenuous juggling act of employees with family responsibilities. Seven days of family leave on full pay is also worth noting, and additional days are granted for households with two children and for extreme emergencies.

Maternity and Paternity LeavesSome other key policies are generating discomforts that need to be addressed. UNESCO’s Maternity Leave Policy covers a period of sixteen weeks, which is on par with other UN agencies and standard international practice. Provisions for when this leave can be taken are clearly spelled out. There is, however, some tension over the provisions for extended maternity leave for breastfeeding which grants four weeks of additional paid leave for the purposes of breastfeeding.46 HRM felt that this provision was being taken for granted and being treated as an entitlement by officials as part of maternity leave, which effectively brought maternity leave to five months. This was being looked at again in order to align with general practice; it was meant to be applied to special cases where additional breast-feeding was preferable. HRM indicated that it was working closely with the Chief Medical Officer in reviewing and ascertaining the need for these requests and in providing approvals.

Paternity leave is guaranteed for one month, which is also on par with standard international practice. It is not mandatory but is granted upon request of staff members. One additional positive element of the policy is that paternity leave can be combined with part-time work. The issue of the length of paternity and maternity leaves was the subject of much debate in the PGA workshops and in the feed-back session of 30 November. Some staff members voiced concern about the discrepancy between the length of maternity and paternity leaves. They stated that in the interest of true equality both women and men should have four months leave, and that men had just as much

45 2009: UNESCO HR Manual, Item 6.7 Family leave46 2009: UNESCO HR Manual, Chapter 6, Item 6.4 E.

41

right to a longer leave. Furthermore, if both had the same length of leave, then that would eliminate the possibility of maternity being perceived as a discriminatory factor and remove the bias against hiring women officials.

The Audit Facilitation Team noted that the biological need for women to recover from child-bearing and child-birth, compounded with the mother and infant’s need for proximity for breast-feeding justified the length of maternity leave. The important and increasingly recognized role of fathers and their need to bond with their infants was valued; however the physiological needs are not the same and are not compelling for additional leave. The ILO is at the forefront of labour rights but is also cognizant of the realistic balance that has to be struck between the needs of employers, workers and regulatory bodies. The social costs of increasing the length of paternity leave would not be the answer; rather, the goal is the indisputable recognition of women workers’ maternity rights and employers’ obligations to honour these rights. Contrary to the perception that these entitlements might lead to discrimination in recruitment, it is clear that UNESCO has not curtailed the recruitment of women. As noted above, P1 and P2 positions are held by 67 per cent women as opposed to 33 per cent men. Presumably these are younger women who are in their reproductive primes.

On another level, the discussions above shed light on an additional particular – and serious - area of concern regarding maternity leave that has been singled out as discriminatory behaviour against women and their family obligations. The Audit Facilitation Team was told on several occasions that certain managers had pointed to the lack of professional commitment of female staff members when they had become pregnant and had taken maternity leave. Comments regarding work and family balance had also been raised. In some of these cases the staff member’s career advancement had been put into question. It should be noted that female managers were responsible for these behaviours as well. This issue of maternity (and even paternity) leave has generated concern from management’s perspective as well, especially in the light of the immutable and cyclical nature of UNESCO’s work and deliveries. With staff members on maternity leaves and looming deadlines, managers felt most pressed. It is clear that UNESCO should not tolerate management discrimination against female staff in terms of begrudging maternity leave or by carrying prejudice regarding their responsibilities and promotions. However, it is imperative that management should also receive assistance from HRM in order to cope with the prolonged absences of staff members on maternity and paternity leave.

Family reunification and considerations for transfers during the scholastic year:Issues were raised concerning field assignments that separate UNESCO officials from their families. Recent efforts by UNESCO to address the problem were recognized but it was felt that more could be done. Some officials had been separated from their families for a number of years, and wished for more support from HRM in facilitating transfers to assignments closer to their families. It was mentioned that HRM needed to accommodate officials who accepted field assignments by making transitions easier. For example, it was disruptive to expect officials with children to move during the school year. “We are the organization that deals with education, so it would be appropriate that the education of our children is given a priority by our own management decisions.”

Recommendations:

In order to ensure the proper functioning of a work unit during an official’s absence on maternity leave, the Audit Facilitation Team strongly recommends that HRM offer a minimum compensatory allowance to the unit that would allow for the recruitment of short-term staff to fully or partially handle the official’s work load. HRM could study such standard practice already institutionalized in other UN agencies; to cite, the ILO example a 3-month allowance is offered to a work unit in order to recruit a short-term replacement staff member so that the unit is not under stress to deliver. Even in the context of current

42

financial constraints, such an investment would be seen as extremely helpful by work units and would be a solid contribution towards gender equity.

HRM should provide information sessions to all staff on the rules, regulations and policies that govern all forms of leave, working hours, overtime, and work/family balance modalities. Beyond disseminating factual information, these sessions would allow for clearing the air on a number of issues by creating transparency and generating a constructive dialogue. UNESCO Staff Associations could also be involved as partners in these information sessions.

HRM, together with management, could explore flexi-time and tele-work possibilities once again. In the current age of technology and changing patterns of work, much could be gained by considering these options. It is important however that such policies take into account the over-arching needs of work units and the cyclical nature of work and deliveries.

Programme field assignments for officials with family responsibilities in order to better plan transition phases and family reunification. This should be done through dialogue between HRM and the official in question while accommodating the needs of the Organization.

Organizational culture and its impact on gender equalityOrganizational culture refers to the often intangible set of collective behaviour and assumptions that loosely guide an organization. This culture may be formed by the shared values, beliefs, visions, norms, habits, systems, and symbols. Particular organizational cultures, which can have positive or negative aspects, often determine how individuals and groups interact with each other and with external parties. Work units (for example a headquarters department or a field office) can have shared characteristics with the broader organizational culture, while also having their own particular culture which might co-exist or even be in conflict with the broader collective. These differences are often due to management styles, including the importance placed on gender issues.

Key FindingsBeing the House of Culture, UNESCO Headquarters is a busy and bustling place for cultural and social events. Seemingly not a day goes by without a major activity of some nature, yet staff members stressed that they simply could not make the time to attend many of these due to their own work constraints. Many of the events have clear gender angles, especially regarding women, such as the empowerment of girls in education or violence against women. Within units, there seemed to be a good esprit de corps in terms of marking birthdays and celebrating occasions but this depended more on the dynamics of individual units. The Audit Facilitation Team noted an undercurrent of rigid hierarchy that seemed to permeate the overall organizational culture. Support staff in particular felt that the culture limited possibilities for growth; this seemed to go beyond the structural constraints in any bureaucracy. Impunity regarding sexual harassment was raised (see p XX) but there was also recognition that the Organization was addressing this.

Good practice: The PGA workshops revealed that Staff Day had been much appreciated by UNESCO colleagues and there was regret that it was no longer organized in the same fashion. “This is the only day where we are all equal.”

An over-riding issue raised by UNESCO staff members in both PGA workshops and in the interviews was a perceived culture of over-work and long hours. Staff members expressed dismay in pointing to the long hours in the office. “We have a culture of overwork and I feel guilty if I leave on time!” A number of female officials mentioned that striking a balance was extremely difficult. Discussions revealed that the culture of over-work was not imposed by management but was rather auto-regulated or more due to the expectations of peers. Commuting times were lengthy in the Parisian metropolitan area as well, adding to the hours away from home. An interesting example was

43

reported by IOS of staff members in Mapping of the workload of the World Heritage Centre for 2008. It was pointed out that a 22.5 per cent reduction in human resources had placed a heavier workload on the existing staff members, leading to an average overtime of 40 days for P staff and 33 days for G staff per annum.

Managers were sympathetic. “We have reduced staff and even more work, so understandably remaining staff members are expected to work long hours.” However, they pointed to an understanding that starting and ending hours were not rigid, and that those officials with family responsibilities were good at protecting their needs to leave earlier. However, the PGA workshops revealed a perception of some managers’ negative attitudes towards staff with family responsibilities, which contradicts the overall intention in the GE Action Plan to raise the gender balance in decision making, senior positions and career advancement generally. Both management and staff recognized long hours as part of the current realities of workplaces.

Recommendation: Key aspects of organizational culture could be addressed by generating dialogue and by

reviewing the perceptions and matching these to the realities. HRM should remind management and staff that, as UN officials, there is an obligation to respect and treat staff equally. Open fora for discussion could be moderated by HRM and the Staff Associations. These discussions could be integrated into the information sessions on HRM policies and implementation.

The Ethics Office

Key findingsIn 2009 the Office of the Ethics Advisor was established, reporting directly to the DG, who states that “Ethics lies at heart of my mandate as UNESCO Director-General” and that it was important to have the right rules, regulations and policy frameworks in place. The Ethics Office is responsible for providing confidential advice on ethics and standards of conduct and raises awareness through training, communication, policy development and liaison. It aims to resolve allegations of unethical behaviour or wrongdoing entrusted to receive requests for advice and complaints concerning conflict of interest, financial issues, abuse of power, physical and moral and sexual harassment and discrimination. As many of these areas have clear gender dimensions, the PGA has also covered this function. Gender equality is listed as a core principle of the Organization on the Ethics Office web-site along with integrity, professionalism and respect for diversity.47

The number of requests made to the Ethics Office also has a gender dimension that needs to be explored. In 2011, the breakdown of requests by sex revealed that 63 per cent of the requests were made by women and 35 per cent by men, with 2 per cent made collectively or unknown. There was an even split of 42 per cent between requests from Headquarters and the Field. The majority of requests were for advice (51 per cent) with 7 per cent of requests resulting in formal complaints. The Ethics Office works closely with the Office of the Mediators, and when formal investigations need to be launched the Ethics Office collaborate with IOS which then takes over the investigative process. Since 2010, about 750 requests for advice or complaints have been received (178 in 2010, 348 in 2011, and 225 in 2012,) half of which have been resolved through informal channels. Overall, 28 formal complaints have gone to IOS investigators and 3 sexual harassment cases have been investigated. Interestingly, in the first month of the Office’s creation, about 20 sexual harassment incidents were reported. Recently two requests were received regarding discrimination in recruitment, one with a man being favoured over a woman.

47 http://www.unesco.org/new/en/ethics-office/core-principles/

44

The focus on awareness raising and training has been a major part of the ethics mandate. The flagship training workshop is the Training on Ethics, and this is complemented by an in-depth training named “Positive and productive workplaces to strengthen UNESCO by keeping us free of harassment.” Examples on diversity and gender issues are given in these sessions. To date, 2762 officials with various types of contracts have participated in the information sessions at Headquarters and the Field and Institutes. Some interlocutors mentioned that the training delivery and examples used could have been more gender sensitive.

Both the Ethics Advisor and the Ethics Officer are men, which has been pointed out by some female officials as a barrier to freely discussing cases of a sensitive nature. While the Ethics officials assure that all requests for advice and complaints are handled “confidentially and with tact,” it is understandable that discomfort may be caused to women in going over the details of their cases. Another element that was pointed to by female officials was the pervasive nature of the “old boys’ network” and the insecurity that some female staff members felt in disclosing their cases to a team of two men. Whether these fears founded or not, it is important to note that the perceptions in themselves may be impediments to full disclosure and smooth functioning. Both the Ethics Office and other interlocutors mentioned that there was a social image that women were responsible for provoking men. When referencing sexual harassment, “the first question that is asked in this Organization is ‘what did the woman do?’” However, judging from the statistics and the fact that the majority of requests for advice and complaints are lodged by women, these issues do not seem to have deterred a large number of them. It should be noted that the Ethics Office does not take action unless the person expressly requests this or if his or her health and safety is in danger. The level of confidentiality is defined together with the official formulating the complaint, and if there is a formal complaint the Ethics Office has to talk to the alleged harasser.

Good practices:A new Whistle blowing and Anti-Retaliation Policy were formulated and implemented. Importantly for gender issues, the Anti-Harassment Policy has been updated, promoting a zero tolerance approach for cases of sexual and moral harassment.

One of the sexual harassment cases that was received by the Ethics Office and investigated by IOS resulted in the dismissal of the official concerned with the involvement and full support of the ADG. This has been hailed as a break-through in UNESCO and was raised in the collective PGA workshops as well; Yet comments were made that it had taken a long time for action to be taken 10 years and the Ethics Office discovered that a large number (21) women had been the victims of the male official. Today there is more confidence across the Organization regarding complaints about harassment, and it appears that in the future, complaints would be lodged less fearfully.

Recommendations:• Foresee the recruitment of a female Ethics Advisor or Ethics Officer in the future in order to

create sex balance in this important team dealing with sensitive issues. • In the meantime, discuss the possibility of including the female social work officer in

sensitive interviews with female staff so as to generate a degree of comfort. Should the social work officer be amenable, she would need to have a proper training by the Ethics Office on handling such cases.

• Pay careful attention to the selection of examples and usage of language in future training opportunities.

45

G. UNESCO staff’s perception of achievement on gender equalityThe PGA places as much importance on perceptions of staff members and partners as it does on the facts and figures. This emphasis on perceptions of achievement on gender equality brings to light successes and disappointments along a continuum of efforts made over the years, and so place equality gains and gaps in perspective. It is perceptions that are often the difference between motivated or disheartened champions of gender equality. Therefore a more accurate evaluation may emerge, for example progress in sex imbalance in staffing may be celebrated but a lack of systematic gender mainstreaming in substantive areas will temper the sense of overall accomplishment.

When staff members were apprised of the good practices and individual efforts that were tallied across the units, there was a sense that much work had indeed been undertaken on gender issues over the years. The PGA itself was a helpful reminder of what had been accomplished and where improvements could be made. What the Audit Facilitation Team also noted in general was a genuine desire to do better on gender issues, but at the same time a frustration emerged that somehow it was never enough.

The prevailing perception in UNESCO is that much has been achieved on gender equality since the current DG took office, especially on visibility on gender issues externally. Resistance to working on gender equality issues, as had been assumed in the past, is waning. This is a proud achievement of Priority Gender Equality. “The barricades can come down now – no one is really opposing gender!” Rather, systematic capacity building and sharing of specific information and know-how seem to be the over-arching needs so as to avoid the impression that gender mainstreaming adds considerable more work to already heavy loads.

46

Annexes

Annex 1: Feedback Session 30 November 2012

A comprehensive PowerPoint presentation was delivered at the Feedback session by the Audit Facilitation Team, highlighting the main findings, good practices and recommendations in the three key areas of Structure, Substance and Staffing (3S’s). The electronic version of the presentation was subsequently distributed by IOS to UNESCO officials who had participated in the PGA.

Summary of points raised during the questions and answers session

The IOS Director elaborated that the PGA is one component of the evaluation of Priority Gender Equality requested by the UNECSO Board and thanked ILO for its support.

A comment was made that the presentation went into detail on gender mainstreaming but not as much on gender specific actions; the AFT explained that these would be included in the report. Queries were made regarding mainstreaming gender into the programming cycle at both ends of planning and evaluation (BSP and IOS) and it was felt that enough effort was already spent work plans and reporting. There was uncertainty on how to raise extra budgetary resources to advance Priority Gender Equality, especially for country level activities. It was noted that gender equality is in CAP, that a whole team is dedicated to working on gender issues, and that there is room to elaborate on gender in the programmes of the Sectors as well.

It was pointed out that the role of the Gender Equality Action Plan and its ownership by the Sectors and the Organization as a whole was seen to be crucial when preparing for the drafting of a new Action Plan. This was seen as something to be done as a collective responsibility, not just on paper but in reality.

Regarding mainstreaming gender into research, ERI noted that the ODG/GE drafted the guidance and also reviewed proposals. ERI commented that the national participation programme was doing well on gender mainstreaming as proposals were reviewed with a gender lens.

The AFT was requested to highlight the issues surrounding maternity and paternity leave in the report. Managers had used the lack of funding to cover staff during their leave to pressure staff. On the other hand, one manager gave an example of have three staff members on maternity and paternity leave at the same time and having to fundraise to pay for their leave. More work had to be absorbed by remaining staff as well. Therefore the discontent on both the part of managers and staff regarding the leaves needed to be recognized and redressed. An HRM representative pointed out that they were already looking into the matter and exploring funding modalities to replace staff members on maternity/paternity leave. A question was asked about the reduction of paternity leave from 8 weeks to 4 weeks; HRD explained this was in keeping with the UN Common System practice. HRM also clarified that UNESCO subscribes to a crèche from 13:00 to15:00 on Wednesdays.

A general question was raised regarding why it was mostly women making complaints to Ethics office.

47

Annex 2: List of people interviewed and workshop participants

Family Name First Name Sector Job Title Interview Sex1 Abakova Margarita IOS Intern, Internal Oversight Service Interview F2 Abu-Hijleh Khaled SC Assistant Programme Specialist - Bioethics Team, SC Workshop - P M

3 Adoua Jean-Marie Delegation Ambassador, Republic of Congo Interview M4 Alvarez-Laso Pilar SHS Assistant Director General, Office of the Assistant

Director-General for Social and Human SciencesInterview F

5 Amani Abou FO Officer-in-Charge, Nairobi Interview M6 Amounane Souad HRM Senior HR Assistant - Recruitment and Classification

SectionWorkshop - G F

7 Asgharzadeh Atieh CLT Administrative Assistant - Cultural Heritage Protection Treaties Section

Workshop - G F

8 Banda Julius SHS Chief of Section, Social and Human Sciences Sector Interview M

9 Bandarin Francesco CLT The Assistant Director-General for Culture Interview M10 Bella Nicole ED Programme Specialist - EFA Global Monitoring Report

TeamInterview F

11 Bird Lyndsay IIEP IIEP Interview F12 Bista Min Bahadur FO Chief of Section ED - UNESCO Office in Bangkok and

Regional Bureau for EducationInterview M

13 Bouquet Olfa BFM Finance and Administrative Officer, Sector for External Relations and Public Information

Interview F

14 Brooks L. Anathea SC Programme Specialist - Programme Coordination and Evaluation Unit

Interview F

15 Brunner Jennifer HRM Assistant to the Chief of Section - Training and Career Development Section

Workshop - G F

16 Callegari Sara ODG Associate Expert - Division for Gender Equality Interview/Workshop - P F

48

17 Cerise Somali OECD Gender project Coordinator, OECD Interview F18 Chavatzia Theophania ED Programme Specialist - Programming, Monitoring and

Coordination UnitInterview F

19 Chetty Dhianaraj ED Programme Specialist - Section of HIV and Health Education

Interview M

20 Clemitson Dawn IOS Auditor, Internal Oversight Service Interview F21 Conhye-Soobrayen Jaya ED Programme Specialist - Programming, Monitoring and

Coordination UnitInterview F

22 Conhye-Soobrayen Jaya ED Programme Specialist - Programming, Monitoring and Coordination Unit

Workshop - P F

23 Corat Gulser ODG Director, Division for Gender Equality Interview F24 Coulibaly Sidiki AIPU Staff Association - President Interview M25 Crowley John SHS Team Leader, Global Environmental Change Team Interview & phone

interviewM

26 Cruz Moreira Flavia SHS Secretary - Social and Human Sciences Sector Workshop - G F27 De Souich Othilie BSP Programme Planning Officer, Team for Knowledge

and Programme Management Issues and SupportInterview F

28 Descamps Mona ODG Senior Administrative Assistant, Executive Office of the Director-General

Interview F

29 Detzel Sabine ED Programme Specialist - Education for All (EFA) Global Partnerships Team

Interview F

30 Diallo Kadidia AIPU Staff Association Interview F31 Duvelle Cecile CLT Chief os Section - Intangible Cultural Heritage Section Interview F

32 Falt Eric ERI The Assistant Director-General for External Relations and Public Information

Interview M

33 Fernandez Leire FO Project Coordinator - Havana Office Interview F34 Ford Neil ERI Director, Division of Public Information Interview M35 Freedman Jane ODG Programme Specialist, Division for Gender Equality Interview F

49

36 Garcia Calderon Rosario UIS Education Programme Specialist - UNESCO UIS Interview F

37 Gavillot Yann SC Assistant Programme Spesialist - Global Earth Observations Section

Interview M

38 Geurts Geoffrey IOS Principal Evaluation Specialist, Internal Oversight Service

Interview M

39 Gholam Ghada FO Officer-in-Charge, Cairo Office Interview F40 Gillet Astrid ED Chief os Section, Programming, Monitoring and

Coordination UnitInterview F

41 Gobina Georgette SC Secretarial Assistant - Water and Sustainable Development Section

Workshop - G F

42 Godonou Alain CLT Director - Division of Thematic Programmes for Diversity, Development and Dialogue

Interview M

43 Gonzalez Lea AIPU Staff Association Interview F44 Granier Daniel CI Consultant, Internal Oversight Service Interview M45 Grizzle Alton CLT Chief of Section, Section for Media and Society Interview M46 Guérin Urlike CLT Programme Specialist - Cultural Heritage Protection

Treaties SectionWorkshop - P M

47 Hasan Mary Lynn BSP Executive Officer - Office of the Assistant Director-General for Strategic Planning

Workshop - P F

49 Hayashikawa Maki ED Chief of section, Section for Basic Education Interview F50 Iglesias-Morel Ana SHS Senior Secretary - Division of Ethics and Global

ChangeWorkshop - G F

51 Ilapavuluri V.Subbarao ED Chief of section, Section for Literacy and Non-Formal Education

Interview M

52 Karklins Janis CI The Assistant Director-General for Communication and Information

Interview M

53 Karliyeva-Mekaouar Anya HRM Assistant Administrative Officer - Policy and Compensation Section

Workshop - P F

54 Keuppens Bert IOS Director, Internal Oversight Office Interview M55 Khodabux Imteyaz SC Director, Science Education Interview M56 Lacoeuilhe Vera Delegation Chair AdHoc Preparatory Group at Executive Board - Interview F

50

Delegation of St.Lucia57 Le Saux Jean-Yves BSP Director, Division for Programme and Budget Interview M58 Leicht Alexander ED Chief of section, Section of Education for Sustainable

DevelopmentInterview M

59 Liouliou Maria CI Assistant programme specialist, Section for Universal Access and Preservation

Interview F

60 Loli-Pflucker Marita CLT Secretary - Museums Section Workshop - G F61 Madriz Cortez Gloria SC Assistant to Team Leader - Bioethics Team Workshop - G F62 Majlöf Anna Maria ODG Programme Specialist, Division for Gender Equality Interview F

63 Malpede Diana SC Programme Specialist - Division of Science Policy and Capacity-Building

Interview F

64 Marana Maider CLT Associate Expert - Europe and North America Unit Interview F

65 Minasyan Anahit CLT Programme Specialist, Diversity of Cultural Expressions Section

Interview F

66 Monthy Nidza HRM Training Officer - Training and Career Development Section

Workshop - P F

67 Morohashi Jun ED Programme Specialist- Section of Education for Peace and Human Rights

Interview F

68 Moussa-Iye Ali CLT Chief of Section - History and Memory for Dialogue Section

Interview M

69 Nair-Bedouelle Shamila AFR Chief of Unit, Special Programmes and Intersectoral Coordination Team

Interview F

70 Ngandeu Ngatta Hugue BSP Assistant Programme Specialist - Unit for the Intersectoral Platform on a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence

Workshop - P M

71 Ong Eunice BFM Senior Administrative Assistant - Administration Manuel

Workshop - G F

72 Patchett Lynne CLT Chief of Executive Office - Culture Sector Interview F73 Perottin Gregory ODG Assistant Finance and Administrative Officer,

Executive Office of the Director-GeneralInterview M

51

74 Piric Amir , IOS Head of Evaluation, Internal Oversight Service Interview M75 Pise Sameer IOS Principal Auditor, Internal Oversight Service Interview M76 Preckler Myriam ED Intern - Section for Technical and Vocational

Education and TrainingWorkshop - P F

77 Proulx Jean-Paul ETHICS Ethics Advisor Interview M78 Quinio Farice ETHICS Ethics Officer Interview M79 Rahman Sayeeda ED Programme Specialist - Section for Literacy and Non-

Formal EducationInterview F

80 Ramos Guadalupe HRM Senior Recruitement and Staffing Officer - Recruitment and Classification Section

Workshop - P F

81 Rao Kishore CLT Director - UNESCO World Heritage Centre Interview M82 Rathner Martina IOS Principal Evaluation Specialist, Internal Oversight

ServiceInterview F

83 Rondon Fuentes Krishanthi CI Chief of Section, Communication and Information Sector

Interview F

84 Rossler Mechtild CLT Chief of section, Policy and Statutory Meetings Section

Interview F

85 Ruotsalainen Mikko IOS Investigator a.i., Internal Oversight Service Interview M86 Ruprecht Lydia ED Chief of Unit a.i. - Knowledge Management Services Workshop - P F

87 Saad Zoi Souria SHS Programme Specialist - Youth-Led Social Innovation Team

Workshop - P F

88 Saito Julie ED Programme Specialist - Section of Education for Sustainable Development

Workshop - P F

89 Saito Mioko IIEP IIEP Interview F90 Salinas Aurore BSP Assistant - Division for Programme and Budget, BSP Workshop - G F

91 Santoro Francesca SC Programme Specialist - Tsunami Unit Interview F92 Schischlik Alexander SHS Chief of section, Anti-Doping and Sport Team Interview M93 Sediakina Ekaterina IOS Associate Evaluation Specialist, Internal Oversight

ServiceWorkshop - P F

94 Sigamoney Rovani SC Assistant programme Specialist - UNESCO Engineering Interview F

52

Initiative 95 Ssereo Florence ED Programme Specialist - Section for Teacher

Development and Education PoliciesInterview F

96 Sudders Matthiew Delegation Ambassador, UK Interview M97 Tang Qian ED The Assistant Director-General for Education Interview M98 Thompson-Flores Ana Luiza HRM Director - Bureau of Human Resources Management Interview F

99 Tolstyko-Wang Anna IOS Junior Office Assistant, Internal Oversight Service Interview/Workshop - G F

100 Torggler Barbara IOS Principal Evaluation Specialist, Internal Oversight Service

Interview F

101 Vaessen Jozef IOS Evaluation Specialist, Internal Oversight Service Interview M102 Valanchon Nathalie CLT Administrative Assistant - Special Projects Unit Workshop - G F103 Vaurette Vincent STU Staff Association Interview M104 Viehöfer Julia ED Associate Expert - Section of Education for

Sustainable DevelopmentInterview F

105 Villegas Tatiana FO Culture Specialist - Havana Office Interview F106 Wanjiru Lucy UNDP Programme Specialist Gender and Environment Interview F107 Wozencroft Nutan BFM Chief Financial Officer, Bureau of Financial

ManagementInterview F

108 Zandaryaa Sarantuyaa SC Programme Specialist - Urban Water Systems Section Interview F

109 Ziadah Mohamed CLT Programme Specialist - History and Memory for Dialogue Section

Workshop - P M

110 Mehotra Aparna UNWomen UNW contact person Phone interview F

111 Guegen Lucie HRM Asst. Legal Officer Phone interview F112 Fleming Brona HRM Executive Assistant Phone interview F113 Ampar Alla Moscow SHS Officer & GFP Phone interview F114 Paolini Anna Amman Head of Office & GFP Phone interview F115 Jara Alvaro Delegation Dep Permanent Delegate Chile Phone interview M

53

Annex 3: List of documents reviewed

Categories Title YearEvaluation/References evaluation FAO Executive Summary (for ref) Feb 2011Evaluation UNEG Handbook on human rights and gender equality in evaluations (for ref) March2011Evaluation 185 EX/18 IEE Add – Full evaluation report Aug 2010Evaluation 185 EX/18 IEE Synthesis Aug 2010Evaluation Evaluation priority Africa Sept 2012Evaluation IFCD Final evaluation report Sept 2012Evaluation TOR Evaluation of UNESCO Priority Gender Equality Mar 2012Evaluation Guidance note on the evaluation of UNESCO’s extrabudgetary activities ndEvaluation Template Final Narrative Report ndEvaluation Independent external evaluation of the Global Initiative for Quality Assurance Capacity (GIGAC),

Phase 1, Final Report – Volumes I & II (World Bank and UNESCO)2012

Executive Board I Report by the DG on the execution of the programme adopted by the general conference –180 EX/4 Sept 2008Executive Board I Report by the DG on the implementation of the P&B (33 C/5) and on results achieved in the previous

biennium (2006-2007) (draft 35 C/3) 179 EX/4 Rev.March2008

Executive Board I Report by the DG on the execution of the programme adopted by the general conference – 181 EX/4

March 2009

Executive Board II Report by the DG on the execution of the programme adopted by the general conference – 182 EX/4 Aug 2009

Executive Board Report by UNESCO actions promoting women’s empowerment and gender equality Annex A B to 35 C/INF.21

2009

Executive Board II Report by the DG on the Implementation of the P&B (34 C/5) and on results achieved in the previous biennium (2008-2009) (Draft 36 C/3) 184 EX/4 - 184 EX/4

March 2009

Executive Board II Report by the DG on the implementation of the programme adopted by the general conference – 185 EX/4

Aug 2010

Executive Board III Report by the DG on the implementation of the programme adopted by the general conference 186 EX/4

April 2011

Executive Board III Report by the DG on the implementation of the programme adopted by the general conference 187 Aug 2011

54

EX/4Executive Board III Report by the DG on the Implementation of the P&B and on results achieved in the previous

biennium (2010-2011 – 35 C/5)(Draft 37 C/3) 189 EX/4Feb2012

Executive Board IV 190 EX/4 Part 1 - Annex Report:Sister 36 C/5 – Monitoring of programme implementation for regular programme and extra-budgetary resources as at 30/06/2012

2012

Executive Board IV 190 EX/4 Part I - Report by the DG on the implementation of the programme adopted by the general conference

Sept 2012

Executive Board IV Report by the DG on the Implementation of the P&B and on results achieved in the previous biennium (2010-2011 – 35 C/6) Draft 37 C/3) 181 EX/4

Feb2012

General Conference General Conference 2009 GEGeneral Conference Post 2015 GE challenges Sept 2011

Governance/DG & Ivory Notes DG Note: strengthening gender focal point network March 2011Governance/ DG & Ivory Notes DG Note: Capacity Development and Training for Priority Gender Equality March 2011Governance/ DG & Ivory Notes DG Note: Director of division for gender equality May2011Governance/ DG & Ivory Notes DG Note: Transfer of GE Division to the office of the DG April 2010Governance GE Action Plan 181 EX4, part I, add 2 March 2009Governance Medium Term Strategy 2008-2013 2008

P&B Approved P&B 2006-2007 2006P&B Approved P&B 2004-2005 2003P&B Approved P&B 2008-2009 2008P&B Approved P&B 2010-2011 2010P&B Draft P&B (Resolutions) 2012-13 2011

ODG/GE Draft 37 C/4 - Preliminary Thoughts on Priority Gender Equality July 2012ODG/GE Draft 37 C/5 – ODG-GE Contribution July 2012ODG/GE Discussion Paper: Gender Equality and sustainable development -ODG/GE Guidelines on gender-neutral language 1999ODG/GE Post 2015 GE challenges March 2012

55

ODG/GE Priority Gender Equality Action Plan 2008-2013ODG/GE DG Report on women’s empowerment and GE 2009

REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL's TASK FORCE ON PRIORITY GENDER EQUALITY Oct 2009Supplied by ODG/GE TASK FORCE III - Delivering the UNESCO Priority for Gender Equality: Increasing impact, effectiveness

and visibility Feb 2010

ODG/GE Preliminary Assessment of 2006-2007 Workplans for Gender Mainstreaming 2005ODG/GE Priority Gender Equality Preliminary Assessment of 2008-2009 Workplans 2007ODG/GE Memo: Preliminary analysis of 35 C/5 Workplans for Priority Gender Equality 2009ODG/GE Memo to DG from ADG/BSP: Analysis of 35 C5 Workplans 2009ODG/GE Gender and Climate Forum 2009ODG/GE Gender Equality: The Missing Link? Rethinking the Internationally Agreed Development Goals

beyond 20152010

ODG/GE The Implications of HIV and AIDS on Women’s Unpaid Labour Burden 2010ODG/GE Globalization and Women Vulnerabilities to HIV and AIDS 2010 ODG/GE Gender, Conflict and Peace-building: On the Margins of Development 2011ODG/GE Preliminary Analysis of 36 C/5 Workplans for Priority Gender Equality 2012ODG/GE UNESCO Message: International Day for the Elimination of violence Against Women 25.11.12

HRM UNESCO HR Manual May 2012HRM 186 EX/6 Part X on GE in the secretariat Apr 2011HRM 187 EX/6 Part IX and X on gender and HR Aug2011HRM 190 EX/5 Part IV on HR issues Sept 2012HRM UNESCO Organigram Oct 2012HRM Organigrams from all Sectors Oct 2012

Ethics Office Ethics Office Annual Report Oct 2009- Dec 2010

Ethics Office Ethics Office Annual Report 2011

ERI The UNESCO Courier 2011ERI The UNESCO Courier: Women conquering new expanses of freedom April-June

2011

56

ERI The UNESCO Courier: Rebirth for Haiti 2010ERI UNESCO Promotional Brochure 2011ERI Speaking for the voiceless: Five women in action

(special issue of the Courier)March 2011

ERI Partnership Programme Proposal Form ndERI The Publication Submission Proposal Form ndERI Gender Mainstreaming Guidelines for research authors ndERI Priority Gender Equality Check-list for publications nd

SHS Female Migration Outcomes: Human Rights Perspective 2011SHS The World Social Science Report: Knowledge Divides 2010SHS Manuel d’Apprentissage de la Démocratie pour le Jeunes en Tunisie 2011SHS Diversities Journal (on-line: Volume 14 (No. 1) The Invisibility of Family in Studies of Skilled Migration

and Brain Drain2012

SHS Diversities Journal (on-line (Volume 13, No. 1,) “Female Migration Outcomes: Human Rights Perspectives”

2011

SHS Women's Philosopher Journal: Squaring the circle 2011

CI Getting the Balance Right: Gender equality in Journalism (also French) 2009CI Media Development Indicators: a framework for assessing media development 2008CI Integration de l'approche "genre" dans la formation au journalisme des pays du Maghreb.

Adaptation de la version francophone des Modeles de cursus de l'UNESCO pour la formation au journalisme

2012

UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity ndCI Gender Lens for Review of CI Work plans and Related Programmatic Actions including EXB projects 2011CI Activity: Strengthening gender equality in media (SISTER – 35 C/5 Substance Report) at 14.11.12CI Femmes et Médias au Maghreb Rabat, 2011CI Gender-Sensitive Indicators for Media: Framework of Indicators to Gauge Gender Sensitivity in

Media Operations and Content 2012

57

NS UN World Water Development Report: Managing Water under Uncertainty and Risk 2012NS Gender indicators in Science, Engineering and Technology: An information Toolkit 2007NS Gender equality and Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) activities: Powerpoint (F.

Santoro)Feb 2012

ED World Atlas of Gender Equality in Education 2012ED From Gender Studies to Gender IN Studies, UNESCO-CEPES Bucharest,

2011ED Gender and social exclusion 2010ED Depicting Diversities, UNESCO and Max Planck Institute (Germany) 2010ED Gender Issues in Higher Education Bangkok, 2010ED Removing Gender Barriers to Literacy for Women and Girls in Asia and the Pacific Bangkok, 2012ED Gender Issues in Counselling and Guidance in Post-Primary Education Bangkok, 2009ED Gender responsive budgeting in education Bangkok, 2010ED Reorienting Teacher Education to Address Sustainable Development: Guidelines and Tools. Gender

SensitizingBangkok, 2010

ED Gender based violence: A study of three universities in Afghanistan (Gender Studies Institute, Kabul University, UNDP and UNESCO,

2010

ED Guidelines for Mainstreaming Gender in Literacy Materials Islamabad, Pakistan, 2010

ED UNESCO’s Short guide to THE Essential Characteristics of Effective HIV Prevention 2010ED Human Rights Protections for Sexual Minorities in Insular Southeast Asia: Issues and Implications for

Effective HIV PreventionBangkok, 2011

ED IIEP Brief for Planners. HIV and AIDS: Challenges and Approaches within the Education Sector 2008ED Measuring Gender Equality in Education: A Micro Study of Learning Environment at Home and

School Through the Perspective of Gender EqualityKathmandu, 2008

ED Promoting Gender Equality in Education. Gender in Education Network in Asia-Pacific (GENIA) Toolkit Bangkok, 2009ED “The Fourth Wave: An Assault on Women” Gender, Culture and HIV/AIDS in the 21st Century. How

and why is the response to the HIV epidemic failing women?2008

ED Women and the Teaching Profession Exploring the Feminisation Debate Commonwealth Secretariat 2011

58

and UNESCOED EFA Global Monitoring Report: Youth and Skills, Putting Education to Work 2012ED Empowering Girls and Women through Physical Education and Sport Bangkok 2012ED Gender-Responsive Life Skills-Based Education Bangkok2008ED Strong Foundations for Gender Equality in Early Childhood Care and Education Bangkok2007ED Role of Men and Boys in Promoting Gender Equality Bangkok 2004ED Guidelines for Mainstreaming Gender in Literacy Materials IslamabadED 2012 “Stories behind gender differences in student achievement 2012ED Gender equality in educational leadership and management (Argentina, Kenya and Vietnam) 2011

Global Partnership for girls’ and women’s education

Fact sheet on Ethiopia – final layout 2012

Global Partnership for girls’ and women’s education

Global partnership for girls and women’s education - Concept Note

Global Partnership for girls’ and women’s education

Fact sheet on Kenya – final layout 2012

Global Partnership for girls’ and women’s education

Fact sheet on Lesotho – final layout 2012

Global Partnership for girls’ and women’s education

Fact sheet on Senegal – final layout 2012

Global Partnership for girls’ and women’s education

Fact sheet on Tanzania – final layout 2012

59

Annex 4: Record of workshop exercises

Hofstede’s Onion:

Layer 1: Symbols & ArtefactsSymbols of the organization mostly cited were the UNESCO logo, the UNESCO staff and the world patrimony.

UNESCO logo iiiFunctionaries iiWorld patrimony iiWorldSymbolic GlobeFieldMelting potGlobeUnited nationsUNExperts

DG WomanInternationalSharing platformCultural dialogueEducationScienceParisMultilinguismPeace iiCultureMir’o

Uniting human beingsHeritageValuesPatrimonyDerivePrivilegeOrganizationReorganizationMy second home

Layer 2: Champions, Leaders, Heroes & HeroinesMost cited champions were Stéphane Hessel, Federico Mayor, Martin Luther King, Gandhi and Malala. These heroes are predominantly males. Interestingly two former DG were cited but not the current female DG.

Stéphane Hessel iiFederico Mayor iiLuther King iiGandhi iiMalala iiDalaï LamaMandela

Koffi AnanNelson MandelaMuhamad YanusGodRené MaheuMarie Sklodouska CurieM’Bow

Rene ZapataClaudia MaresiaMy motherG staffThe man who walks, Giacometti

Layer 3: RitualsThe most typical ritual was the staff day. Participants to the workshop explained it to be a day when everyone is equal. The felt very attached to the ritual. The staff party and the staff meetings were also cited as ritual of the organization.

Staff Day iiiiiStaff party iiStaff meetings iiChildren Christmas PartyDeparture drinksRio +

Coffee cigarette in the morningBirthdaysUNES’GOInformation MeetingsPhilosophy DayConferences

General ConferenceLife around the GCUNESCO publications pouch abroad (DHL)Work medalEnd of year drinks with tombola

Layer 4: Values

60

The values most associated to the organization were respect and tolerance. These are very positive values. These values were balanced by some negative values such as narcism, ‘piston’, egoism, egocentrism among others.

61

Respect iiiTolerance iiiEthicsIdealismDiversityNarcismAmbitionPistonHierarchy

DévouementMulticulturalismMulticulturalCultural mixityCultural diversityFreedomAnticipationCommitmentEgoism

EgocentricityRealismWorkCompetencyArrogancePressureHonestyBuild peace in the mind of people

SWOT Analysis:

The participants were split into three groups. Findings of the group work are compiled in the SWOT matrix below:

Strengths Weaknesses Gender equality is a global priority in United

Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization some good examples of gender-specific programmes across sectors and gender-mainstreamed ones

Good publications/guidelines/tools Sharing of information through focal point

network Priority gender equality: mainstreaming of

gender equality in the C/4 and C/5 (programming/policy level)

Gender focal points within programme sectors

The existence of specific indicators for measuring gender equality

HR policies in place (e.g. family friendly measures)

Recruitment policies (e.g. gender balance) Training of female managers Female DG and 50% ADGs

Priority gender equality lacks resources and capacity to be implemented

Training of knowledge on existence and usefulness of tools

Need for more tools to support mainstreaming (to do it)

Perception that gender is an ‘add-on’ (gender lens and burden)

No trickle-down effect on what the priority really means and also on our interpersonal relations and oragnizational culture

Gender mainstreaming limited to ticking a box in SISTER and adding ‘girls and women’ in workplans

Gender equality not applicable to all programmes and activities

Political/social constraints (negotiation with local stakeholders)

Visibility both internal and external The impossibility for ODG/GE to oversee and

provide appropriate comments in all activities Gender equality sometimes used as cosmetic

element in project activities Short listing in recruitment not always reflects

gender equality Insensitivity of managers Lack of communication Collaboration on gender equality does not go

beyond sharing of information Colleagues don’t know the responsibilities of

gender focal point, other colleagues to be integrated

Gender focal points are not held accountable Training is not sufficient

62

Opportunities Threats Make better use of existing tools (SISTER:

space for how gender is mainstreamed) More specific focus on training needed

especially on how to mainstream gender Improve cooperation with other UN

agencies working on gender equality (UNHCR)

More participatory process defining gender equality priorities and ER within the organization

Improving the reporting process To encourage more women to apply to

UNESCO vacancies Advocate to members New C4/C5 to improve Focal point network could be useful for

learning and cooperation

In-house resistance, lack of understanding Refusal to admit lack of how-to Incomprehension of gender concepts Social transformations Conflicts Poor reporting process Current UNESCO budget constraints Other staff don’t feel responsible for gender

issues

Ideal Organisation:

Participants were split in two sub-groups to reflect on the current practice of the organization on gender equality and to define what the ideal organization would do to improve gender mainstreaming. Below are the results of these two groups:

Current Ideal Organizational culture:

insensitivity and un-receptivity of managers

Gender Champions: DG, ODG/GENDER

Affirmative actions (discourse and policy level)

Gender parity among all staff Equal opportunity Gender mainstreaming is a reality in all programmes Cutting edge thinking and practices in gender and UNESCO fields

of competence Intellectual leadership in gender and our fields Better visibility in all fields related to gender equality Increased inter-sectoriality in gender specific programming Learning organization in gender: lateral cooperation Better understanding of gender issues More and better adapted training Better use of existing expertise on gender equality through HQ

and field offices. Expertise to be valued and shared Training: sectoral expertise, induction, field expertise, tools and

guidelines Monitoring and evaluation Need to prioritize: better focus in programming

Current Ideal

63

Staff don’t have an understanding of gender We have policies for example on

harassment Acceptance on gender issue Gender parity at ADG level Lots of information sharing Gender problems in consultants contracts

and geographical mobility

All staff know concepts and how to apply them Must ensure that policies are applied and

supported Staff feel safe to report cases of harassment Proactive facilitation of gender equality in work

place and programmes Gender parity at all levels Meaningful information sharing across sectors

64

Annex 5: Pictures of the workshops

UNESCO PGA WORKSHOPS 26-27 NOVEMBER 2012SAMPLES FLIP-CHARTS

HOFSTEDE’S ONION:

65

CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS

66

CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS

67

CONCEPTS AND DEFINITIONS

68

SWOT ANALYSIS

SWOT ANALYSIS

69

SWOT ANALYSIS

70

IDEAL ORGANIZATION

71

IDEAL ORGANIZATION

72