You are an expert in gender equality and social inclusion in M&E. Score the GESI integration of the deliverable I have attached or pasted using the rubric below. The deliverable may be a MEL plan, evaluation ToR, inception report, evaluation report, indicator framework, survey, FGD/KII protocol, sampling plan, or any deliverable requiring GESI integration.
SCORING RUBRIC - Gender Equality and Social Inclusion
Score each dimension 1-5 using these criteria:
DIMENSION 1: Gender Analysis Integration
| 5 | All four elements present. Gender analysis informs design choices, indicators, and decisions (not buried in a background section). Differential outcomes for women, men, and gender minorities are explicitly assessed. Gender analysis is updated as findings emerge (not static at design stage). Gender analysis influences the recommendations or actions in a traceable way. |
|---|---|
| 4 | At least three of four elements present. Gender analysis informs design and assesses differential outcomes; updating or traceability to recommendations partial. |
| 3 | Gender analysis is present but sits in a background section without driving design choices. Differential outcomes named but not assessed in depth. |
| 2 | Gender analysis is referenced but not conducted. No differential outcome assessment, no influence on design. |
| 1 | No gender analysis present. |
DIMENSION 2: Disaggregation and Inclusive Indicators
| 5 | All four elements present. Sex disaggregation is present at all relevant indicator and data levels. Age, disability, and other context-relevant identity disaggregations are included. At least one gender-sensitive or GESI-specific indicator is included (not only disaggregation of existing indicators). Sample size and methods support disaggregation (not undermined by underpowered sub-samples). |
|---|---|
| 4 | At least three of four elements present. Sex and at least one other disaggregation in place; GESI-specific indicator or sample design partial. |
| 3 | Sex disaggregation present at headline indicators only. Limited additional disaggregation. No GESI-specific indicators. |
| 2 | Disaggregation mentioned but not consistently applied. No GESI-specific indicators. Sample undermines disaggregation. |
| 1 | No disaggregation or GESI-sensitive indicators. |
DIMENSION 3: Inclusive Participation and Voice
| 5 | All four elements present. Marginalized and vulnerable groups are represented in consultation and data collection. Accommodations are made for participation (language, accessibility, time, location, mode). Voices of marginalized groups are preserved in findings (not aggregated away into headline numbers). Consultation timing and mode are inclusive, not just convenient for elites or available stakeholders. |
|---|---|
| 4 | At least three of four elements present. Marginalized groups represented and accommodations made; voice preservation or inclusive timing partial. |
| 3 | Some marginalized groups consulted but accommodations are limited. Voices appear in narrative but are aggregated in findings. |
| 2 | Consultation skewed toward available or convenient stakeholders. Accommodations absent. Marginalized voices missing from findings. |
| 1 | No inclusive participation or voice considerations. |
DIMENSION 4: Power Dynamics and Intersectionality
| 5 | All four elements present. Intersecting identities are explicitly considered (not gender alone, not disability alone). Power dynamics between groups (for example, women refugees vs male host community) are addressed. Dominant voices are not allowed to drown out marginalized voices in data interpretation. Researcher or evaluator GESI positionality is acknowledged. |
|---|---|
| 4 | At least three of four elements present. Intersectionality and power dynamics addressed; voice protection in interpretation or positionality partial. |
| 3 | Single-axis treatment of identity (gender alone, or disability alone). Power dynamics noted but not operationalized. |
| 2 | Identity treated as a single category. No power dynamics. No positionality. |
| 1 | No intersectionality, power, or positionality consideration. |
DIMENSION 5: GESI-Responsive Action and Accountability
| 5 | All four elements present. Recommendations are GESI-responsive (target specific groups, address documented inequities). Resource allocation to GESI work is named (budget, staff time, technical assistance). Accountability mechanisms include marginalized groups (feedback loops, complaints procedures accessible to those groups). GESI commitments are tracked over time, not stated once at design and forgotten. |
|---|---|
| 4 | At least three of four elements present. GESI-responsive recommendations and resource allocation named; accountability mechanisms or tracking partial. |
| 3 | Recommendations mention GESI in general terms without targeting groups or addressing documented inequities. Resource allocation vague. |
| 2 | Recommendations are gender-blind. No resources named. No accountability mechanism reaches marginalized groups. |
| 1 | No GESI-responsive action or accountability described. |
OUTPUT FORMAT:
Return your assessment as a table followed by a summary:
| Dimension | Score (1-5) | Evidence from Document | Priority Revision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender Analysis Integration | |||
| Disaggregation and Inclusive Indicators | |||
| Inclusive Participation and Voice | |||
| Power Dynamics and Intersectionality | |||
| GESI-Responsive Action and Accountability |
Total: X/25 Band: Strong (22-25) / Adequate (17-21) / Needs Revision (11-16) / Substantial Revision (5-10) Single Most Important Revision: [One specific sentence]
For any dimension scored 1 or 2, add a brief explanation and a concrete revision example.
DOCUMENT TO SCORE:
(See the attached or pasted document.)
Document to review: Attached, or pasted below. Base everything above on it and do not invent details that are not in it.