Gender Statistics and Budgeting Training Course

Participants can apply structured gender analysis to a public policy issue.

• Harvard Analytical Framework applied to activities, resources and decision-making
• Moser Gender Planning Framework distinguishes practical and strategic needs
• Problem trees identify gendered causes, effects and institutional constraints
• Stakeholder mapping reveals influence, exclusion and accountability relationships
• Intersectional analysis considers age, disability, location, income and ethnicity
• Policy objectives reformulated from gender evidence and identified barriers

Participants can define the statistical concepts needed for credible gender evidence.

• Sex, gender, gender identity and gender expression defined carefully
• Units of analysis selected for people, households and institutions
• Disaggregation variables specified beyond sex for distributional analysis
• Rates, ratios, shares and gaps calculated for gender comparison
• Denominators checked before interpreting service coverage or participation rates
• Small numbers, suppression and disclosure risks handled in published statistics

Participants can select appropriate data sources for gender-related budget questions.

• Population censuses provide demographic baselines and geographic disaggregation
• Household surveys measure income, time use and service access
• Administrative data tracks users, transactions, staffing and programme delivery
• Civil registration data supports analysis of births, deaths and marriages
• Data source assessment compares coverage, periodicity, definitions and bias
• Triangulation tests findings using multiple administrative and survey sources

Participants can assess gender data quality and manage ethical data risks.

• Quality dimensions assessed through relevance, accuracy, timeliness and coherence
• Missing data patterns examined before producing gender disaggregation
• Metadata documents definitions, collection methods, revisions and limitations
• Informed consent and confidentiality govern sensitive personal data collection
• Gender-based violence data requires survivor-centred safeguarding protocols
• Data governance assigns ownership, access controls and retention responsibilities

Participants can specify gender indicators with clear calculation and reporting rules.

• Indicator reference sheets define purpose, formula, source and frequency
• SDG gender indicators linked to national planning and budget priorities
• Output, outcome and impact indicators distinguished through results chains
• Baselines, targets and milestones set using credible historical evidence
• Disaggregation matrices specify required categories for every performance indicator
• Proxy indicators tested against validity, feasibility and decision usefulness

Participants can interpret gender data without drawing unsupported conclusions.

• Cross-tabulations compare service use by sex and relevant characteristics
• Trend analysis separates sustained change from short-term variation
• Gender gap calculations quantify absolute and relative differences
• Data visualisations select appropriate charts, labels, scales and annotations
• Correlation, causation and confounding distinguished in policy interpretation
• Evidence briefs state findings, limitations, implications and recommended action

Participants can distinguish the main approaches used in gender-responsive budgeting.

• Gender-responsive budgeting defined as analysis, planning and accountability practice
• Expenditure incidence analysis examines who benefits from public spending
• Revenue incidence analysis examines differentiated effects of taxation
• Gender-aware policy appraisal tests objectives, assumptions and expected distribution
• Gender budget statements connect commitments, allocations and performance measures
• Participatory budgeting channels community priorities into local fiscal decisions

Participants can map gender objectives to budget classifications and tagging systems.

• Administrative, economic, functional and programme classifications compared for analysis
• COFOG classification supports functional comparison of public expenditure
• Gender budget tagging criteria distinguish targeted, mainstreamed and neutral spending
• Tagging scorecards document objectives, beneficiaries, indicators and evidence
• Chart of accounts fields assessed for gender coding feasibility
• Classification crosswalks link policy actions to budget lines and programmes

Participants can identify gender gaps and response options within a sector programme.

• Programme theory of change maps inputs, outputs and gender outcomes
• Service delivery pathways identify barriers from access through completion
• Beneficiary profiles compare needs, uptake, quality and results
• Health programmes assess maternal care, workforce and financial barriers
• Education programmes examine enrolment, retention, safety and learning outcomes
• Transport programmes assess mobility patterns, safety and time burdens

Participants can prepare gender-responsive inputs for budget formulation and negotiation.

• Budget circular requirements translated into gender analysis and submission tasks
• Ceiling scenarios test priorities under constrained fiscal space
• Programme objectives rewritten with specific gender equality results
• Budget bids link evidence, activities, costs and performance measures
• Gender focal points and finance units assign review responsibilities
• Negotiation briefs defend proposed allocations using evidence and cost assumptions

Participants can cost gender-responsive interventions using transparent assumptions.

• Cost drivers identify staffing, commodities, facilities, outreach and transfers
• Unit costs calculated from quantities, prices and implementation assumptions
• Target populations estimated using eligibility rules and coverage targets
• Incremental costing separates new expenditure from existing programme resources
• Scenario analysis compares minimum, standard and expanded service packages
• Costed workplans sequence activities, funding sources and expenditure timing

Participants can assess gender implications of selected revenue policy measures.

• Tax incidence concepts distinguish legal liability from economic burden
• Personal income tax provisions assessed for household and labour effects
• Value-added tax exemptions examined through consumption and poverty data
• User fees assessed for affordability, access and unpaid care consequences
• Tax expenditures reviewed for beneficiaries, costs and gender distribution
• Revenue proposals document assumptions, data gaps and mitigation options

Participants can identify gender-responsive measures in procurement and public employment.

• Procurement plans identify supplier diversity and market access barriers
• Tender requirements assess feasible social criteria and verification methods
• Contract management tracks gender-related deliverables, employment and compliance
• Public employment data examines recruitment, pay, promotion and retention
• Gender pay gap analysis separates composition effects from pay differentials
• Workplace policies address care responsibilities, safety and harassment prevention

Participants can build a gender-sensitive performance framework for a budget programme.

• Results frameworks align activities, outputs, outcomes and impact indicators
• Gender-sensitive indicators measure access, quality, agency and institutional change
• Performance information systems define collection, validation and reporting processes
• Targets disaggregated by group prevent averages masking unequal outcomes
• Data review meetings link performance evidence to corrective management action
• Annual performance reports explain variances, lessons and planned adjustments

Participants can monitor whether approved gender commitments are funded and delivered.

• Commitment, obligation and payment data track execution of gender allocations
• Variance analysis compares approved budgets, releases, spending and outputs
• Cash release patterns examined for implementation delays and service effects
• Budget execution dashboards combine financial, output and beneficiary information
• Gender budget reports present allocations, execution, results and outstanding gaps
• Corrective actions assign owners, deadlines and escalation routes

Participants can design accountability arrangements for gender budget commitments.

• Legislative scrutiny questions test evidence, allocations and reported results
• Supreme audit institutions assess economy, efficiency and effectiveness claims
• Gender audit criteria assess systems, evidence, implementation and results
• Civil society budget analysis strengthens external accountability and feedback
• Public participation methods include underrepresented groups in budget consultation
• Management responses convert audit findings into tracked improvement actions

Participants can plan institutional arrangements that sustain gender-responsive budgeting.

• Legal mandates establish authority for gender budgeting requirements
• Institutional assessments identify incentives, capacities, processes and data constraints
• Roles matrices assign responsibilities across finance, planning and sector agencies
• Capacity development plans address technical skills and leadership accountability
• Budget calendar integration places gender reviews at decision points
• Change management plans address resistance, communication and early wins

Participants can communicate gender budget findings to technical and non-technical audiences.

• Executive summaries state fiscal issue, evidence, recommendation and decision required
• Policy briefs combine gender statistics with budget and programme evidence
• Data storytelling links charts, lived experience and fiscal choices
• Visual design highlights disparities without misleading scales or comparisons
• Briefing presentations anticipate questions from finance and sector leaders
• Recommendation matrices rank actions by impact, cost, feasibility and ownership

Participants can build, review and present a complete gender-responsive budget analysis and implementation package for a selected public programme.

• Programme scope defines policy problem, population, service and budget context
• Gender evidence profile documents gaps, sources, limitations and priority groups
• Budget analysis identifies allocation gaps, execution risks and response options
• Costed intervention package specifies activities, assumptions and funding requirements
• Performance framework sets indicators, baselines, targets and reporting responsibilities
• Implementation plan assigns actions, milestones, risks and accountability arrangements
• Peer review tests evidence chains, feasibility and presentation clarity