Gender-responsive monitoring and evaluation for health systems

Bibliographic Data

ID16763145
AuthorsRosemary Morgan (0000-0001-5009-8470, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205, corresponding author), Anna Kalbarczyk (0000-0002-6143-8634, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205), Michele R Decker (0000-0002-7085-7080, Johns Hopkins University), Michele Decker (Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205), Shatha Elnakib (0000-0003-2316-4211, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205), Takeru Igusa (0000-0002-3632-2867, Johns Hopkins University), Tak Igusa (Department of Civil and Systems Engineering, Johns Hopkins Whiting School of Engineering , 3400 N Charles St, Baltimore, MD 21218), Amy Luo (0000-0002-4466-375X, Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205), Ayoyemi Toheeb Oladimeji (Department of Civil and Systems Engineering, Johns Hopkins Whiting School of Engineering , 3400 N Charles St, Baltimore, MD 21218), Milly Nakatabira (Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205), David H Peters (0000-0001-8377-3444, York University), Indira Prihartono (0000-0002-7110-9666, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205), Anju Malhotra (0000-0003-0155-3531, Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health , 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205)
Year2024
Volume39
Issue9
Pages1000-1005
Publication date2024-10-15
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueHealth Policy and Planning (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0268-1080 • E-ISSN: 1460-2237
PublisherOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/heapol/czae073
PMID39167472
OpenAlexW4401792621
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited14

Gender-responsive monitoring and evaluation (M&E) for health and health systems interventions and programs is vital to improve health, health systems, and gender equality outcomes. It can be used to identify and address gender disparities in program participation, outcomes and benefits, as well as ensure that programs are designed and implemented in a way that is inclusive and accessible for all. While gender-responsive M&E is most effective when interventions and programs intentionally integrate a gender lens, it is relevant for all health systems programs and interventions. Within the literature, gender-responsive M&E is defined in different and diverse ways, making it difficult to operationalize. This is compounded by the complexity and multi-faceted nature of gender. Within this methodological musing, we present our evolving approach to gender-responsive M&E which we are operationalizing within the Monitoring for Gender and Equity project. We define gender-responsive M&E as intentionally integrating the needs, rights, preferences of, and power relations among, women and girls, men and boys, and gender minority individuals, as well as across social, political, economic, and health systems in M&E processes. This is done through the integration of different types of gender data and indicators, including: sex- or gender-specific, sex- or gender-disaggregated, sex- or gender-specific/disaggregated which incorporate needs, rights and preferences, and gender power relations and systems indicators. Examples of each of these are included within the paper. Active approaches can also enhance the gender-responsiveness of any M&E activities, including incorporating an intersectional lens and tailoring the types of data and indicators included and processes used to the specific context. Incorporating gender into the programmatic cycle, including M&E, can lead to more fit-for-purpose, effective and equitable programs and interventions. The framework presented in this paper provides an outline of how to do this, enabling the uptake of gender-responsive M&E

Environmental health · Equity (law) · Gender analysis · Gender equity · Health equity · Monitoring and evaluation · Operationalization · Political science · Population · Psychological intervention · Public health · Reproductive health · Sociology · Child and Adolescent Health · Diversity and Career in Medicine · Gender Studies · Medicine · Nursing · Psychology · Sex and Gender in Healthcare

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access