3.1 GEM Scales

The Guidance Note on Coding Definitions for GEMs (2018) recommends the use of a 4-point-scale. As Table x illustrates, the scales in most use by UN entities and multi-partner pooled funds are the 0, 1, 2, 3 or the 0, 1, 2a, 2b scales, with 0 making no contribution, 1 limited contribution, 2/2a significant objective and 3/2b principal objective. Each value denotes the degree to which a project, output or activity contributes to gender equality and the empowerment of women (See Section 2.2). 

Entities have the discretion to select a coding scale which is appropriate for their institutional setting as long as the values distinguish between “no”, “limited”, “significant” or “principal” contribution and it is possible to map their scales to this four-point-scale. 

Some entities have opted for the 2a and 2b codes over the 2 and 3 codes to underscore that a significant contribution to gender equality (2/2a) is of equal merit to a principal (or primary) objective to gender equality (3/2b). Both scores are desirable as they reflect the twin-track approach to gender mainstreaming, which combines both dedicated/targeted interventions and integrated ones to achieve the goal of gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls. 

Table 1: On Different Numbering Systems:  GEM Four-point scale

3.2 GEM Coding Definitions

Aligning to a four-point scale has enabled the development of some coherence in coding definitions as well as data comparability of GEM scores across entities. See Table 2

Table 2: Common Elements in Gender Equality Marker Definitions

Source: Coding definitions for Gender Equality Markers. Guidance Note (2018)

3.3 Levels and Timing of Coding

What is being coded?

Source: UNDG Guidance note (2013)

The UNDG Guidance Note (2018) recommends applying the gender equality marker at the most granular level (i.e., activity level) to allow for greater accuracy in coding and in calculating financial expenditures.  However, because of the different planning, results-based management systems, including terminology in use across the UN system, the UNDG Guidance has given each UN entity the flexibility to determine the appropriate level of disaggregation to apply the marker. 

Table 3 compares the different levels of coding where the gender equality marker can be applied, providing the strengths and shortcomings of each choice. 

Table 3: Levels of coding

Source: Coding definitions for Gender Equality Markers. Guidance Note (2018)

The “unit of analysis” – or what is being coded – therefore differs from one UN entity to another.   For example, UNFPA applies the gender equality marker at the workplan activity level; UNDP codes at the output/project level; and UNICEF, being the first agency to do so, codes at both the intermediate result (output) level and the activity level. 

Pooled Funds & Gender Equality Markers

In parallel with UN entities, pooled funds have also taken important steps to embed the gender equality marker as part of program design, including in results and budgetary frameworks, as well as in project approval requirements. The gender equality marker is used as a programming tool – to strengthen the integration of gender equality considerations in project proposals and across the larger portfolio – as well as a financial tracking tool to monitor fund allocations to gender equality and the empowerment of women. Pooled funds to date do not track financial expenditures.

Coding is implemented at the project level, with one GEM code assigned for the whole proposal.  To guide applicants, pooled funds have developed a set of criteria for each gender marker code that applicants use as a checklist to assess their project and to determine the correct score. Each proposal is assessed on the degree to which it has integrated gender equality in eight areas: gendered conflict analysis; project objective; project outcomes and the theory of change; implementation/activities; target population; budget; risk analysis and results framework. These criteria help to clarify the difference between the gender marker codes in terms of how gender equality and the empowerment of women is addressed in the various elements of the project. 

3.4 When to Apply the Code?

Source: UNDG Guidance note (2013)

Applying a gender equality marker at the planning/budgetary cycle stage is mandatory for many UN entities. The gender equality marker, at this stage, adds the most value by enabling conversations about the integration of gender equality during the early stages of project design and when there is scope for further strengthening the gender equality dimensions of the intervention. 

Coding can also take place at different points in the programme / project life cycle:   

• Ex-ante coding in the planning phase of a project/programme allows for modifications to be made that strengthen the gender-responsiveness of the intervention and to ensure adequate budgetary allocations to support the achievement of gender equality results.  
• Coding in the planning and closing phase enables a comparison between budget allocations and financial expenditures as well as assessment of the gender equality results of an intervention. 
• Ex-post coding tracks expenditures at the end of a project and enables a more accurate measure of actual funds spent on gender equality. It does not, however, offer any opportunities to strengthen the gender equality dimensions of an intervention or to make any course corrections during project implementation. 
• “Real-time” scoring allows for ongoing monitoring and adjustments in coding scores throughout the cycle and in keeping with actual expenditures. Also, a change in the direction towards a better impact on GEWE can be made. Entry points include midterm reviews and/or gender audits.

Ideally, coding would occur as a dynamic exercise allowing for adjustments in gender marker scores throughout the programme/project cycle to reflect actual expenditures. There are positive shifts in this direction being taken by some entities as part of a quality assurance process. See Module 6

3.5 Linking Coding to Budget Allocations

Source: UNDG Guidance note (2013)

To track financial investments to gender equality and the empowerment of women, ensuring that the gender equality marker is linked both to outputs/activities and to financial information is important.  Alongside the coding definitions described in Section 2.2, entities and multi-partner pooled funds that tag at a more aggregated level, such as the output or project level, have defined budget allocation thresholds to guide and aid in the assignment of a gender marker code. For example, determining whether an intervention merits a GEM 1 or 2a score can often be challenging; but an analysis of the budget and the allocations that have been made to gender-related activities or outputs can help determine the most adequate gender marker code.

As table 4 illustrates, these allocation thresholds differ by UN entity and are established in relation to each institution’s mandate, areas of work, procedures and financial systems. 
 
Table 4 Allocation thresholds

3.6 Financial Resource Tracking

Implementing a financial resource tracking mechanism is a key performance indicator (PI 9) under the UN-SWAP 2.0. Financial resource tracking mechanisms in the United Nations system are intended to translate several resolutions of the UN Economic and Social Council on tracking gender-related resource allocation and expenditure, including through the promotion of the use of gender markers. 

As a financial resource tracking tool, the gender equality marker enables each UN entity to track its financial support for gender equality (both mainstreamed and targeted), to encourage increased discussion of how to improve the gender responsiveness across a range of projects and programs, and eventually to establish an iterative process whereby planning and implementation are linked.   It will also facilitate the setting of a financial target (See Module 7). 

To serve as a financial tracking mechanism, it is critical that the gender equality marker be linked or embedded in an entity’s Enterprise Resource Planning system (ERP). Inclusion in these systems is an important indicator of institutional ownership and facilitates the manageability of the data. 

3.7 System-wide Reporting

The Finance and Budget Network of the High-level Committee on Management of the UN Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB), in acknowledging the significance of financial tracking and allocations, adopted the GEM as a UN Data Standard for system-wide reporting of financial data in its 39th session in November 2022.This standard is being applied system-wide with a transitionary period of three years.

Throughout the transition period from 2023 to 2025 for GEM as a UN Data Standard, the Finance and Budget Network (FBN) is committed to creating a framework for reporting on the UN's financial contributions towards gender equality and the empowerment of women. This framework will include detailed guidelines for calculating these contributions, utilizing the gender equality marker as a key tool in this process.

Beginning in 2026, each the UN entity will be expected to report annually on:

• Financial investment on gender equality and the empowerment of women – percentages by each GEM code.
• Progress towards meeting corporate financial targets towards gender equality and women’s rights